Tibet Journal Proceedings 2009 - 2010

The Tibet Journal A publication for the study of Tibet Lobsang Shastri Yeshi Dhondup EDITOR-IN-CHIEF MANAGING EDITOR Vol. XXXIV, No. 3 & 4 / Vol. XXXV, No.1 & 2 Autumn & Winter 2009/ Spring & Summer 2010 Special Issue in memory of Gyatsho Tshering, founder and erstwhile Director of LTWA THE EARTH OX PAPERS Proceedings of the “International Seminar on Tibetan and Himalayan Studies” Held at the Library of Tibetan Works and Archives Dharamsala September 2009 on the Occasion of the “Thank you India” Year edited by Roberto Vitali List of Contents Editorial .......................................................................................... vii Philosophy and Practice Helmut Tauscher Remarks on Phya pa Chos kyi seng ge and his Madhyamaka Treatises .............................................................. 1 Sonam Tsering Ngulphu Rab gnas: Shift in Religious and Soteriological Significance in Tibetan Tradition ................................................................... 37 Amy Heller Two Early Tibetan Ritual Diagrams for Cakra Meditations .............. 59 Religious History Henk Blezer Greatly Perfected, in Space and Time: Historicities of the Bon Aural Transmission from Zhang zhung ............ 71 Roberto Vitali In the Presence of the “Diamond Throne”: Tibetans at rDo rje gdan (Last Quarter of the 12th Century to Year 1300) ................................ 161 Jose Cabezon The Life and Lives of ’Khon ston dpal ’byor lhun grub ................ 209 David Templeman ‘South of the Border’: Tāranātha’s Perceptions of India ....................... 231 Agata Bareja-Starzyn«ska The Mongolian Incarnation of Jo nang pa Tāranātha Kun dga’ snying po: Öndör Gegeen Zanabazar Blo bzang bstan pa’i rgyal mtshan ............. 243 History of Material Culture Wô-ÆÅ-z=-ÁÛÅ-±ï-¼ÛP.ü zôh-hP-W-«GÅ-q-hP-ºƒï¾-zºÛ-VÛG-¾z-fÞP-PÞ.ü ............................................. 263 Elliot Sperling Some Preliminary Remarks on Influx of New World Silver into Tibet during China’s “Silver Century” (1550-1650) ..................................... 299 Secular History Peter Schwieger Significance of Ming Titles Conferred upon the Phag mo gru Rulers: A Reevaluation of Chinese-Tibetan Relation during the Ming Dynasty ... John Bray Krishnakanta Basu, Rammohan Ray and Early 19th Century British Contacts with Bhutan and Tibet .................................................. Jampa Samten Notes on the Thirteenth Dalai Lama’s Confidential Letter to the Tsar of Russia ....................................... 313 329 357 Cultural Geography Bettina Zeisler East of the Moon and West of the Sun? Approaches to a Land with Many Names, North of Ancient India and South of Khotan .................. 371 Laxman S. Thakur Sculptural Production during the bstan pa phyi dar and its Stylistic Nomenclature: Some Examples from Khu nu of Rong Chung ......... 465 Matthew Akester The Rediscovery of dNgos grub sdings, Notes on the Fate of Some Vajrayana Relics of Indian Origin Preserved in Two Ancient Temples in the Lower sTod lung Valley ..... 483 Franz-Karl Ehrhard A ‘Hidden Land’ at the Border of ’Ol-kha and Dvags-po ............... 493 Ethno-Anthropology and Linguistics Katia Buffetrille “May the New Emerge from the Ancient! May the Ancient Serve the Present!” The Gesar Festival of Rma chen (A mdo 2002) ........................................ 523 Andrea Loseries Wind Horse, Love Play and Wisdom Playing and Gambling: A Phenomenon of Tibetan Culture ............................................... 555 Sangye Tandar Naga Some Reflections on the Mysterious Nature of Tibetan Language ......... 561 Sonam B. Wangyal The Walung-ngas: A Disappearing Tibetan Tribe ................................. 569 Editorial Earth ox 2009 has been a year of introspection for the diaspora Tibetans after a hectic 2008. Although a fifty year anniversary is not counted in traditional Tibet, the fact that half a century has elapsed since fleeing their land to exile has had a profound mental and emotional impact upon the Tibetans and everyone who sides with them. Its significance has been felt to the extent that several activities during the earth ox year were conceived with a wish to pause and think once again where life for the Tibetans on both sides of the border stands now. It does not come as a surprise then that the Library of Tibetan Works and Archives (Gangchen Kyishong), the most eminent Tibetan cultural institution in the diaspora, decided, under the dynamic directorhip of Geshe Lhakdor, to hold an International Seminar of Tibetan and Himalayan Studies, a rare event in its history. This activity was conceived in order to thank India for the Noble Land’s hospitality to the Tibetans in exile. With this move the Library somewhat meant to reaffirm its role of augustÑalthough unofficialÑalma mater for a staggering number of scholars, especially those who are now senior. The Library houses the best collection of Tibetan literature in the free world. Despite its remote location in the Himalayan hills and the fashionable availability of online documents, whereby the noble ordeal of striving hard to get the chance to access a rare or distant text has given way to cultural consumerism, the Library exercises even now an irresistible attraction for those who treasure the wisdom of the ancient written page. Scholars come to learn because they come to read. In the history of the publication of documents that have become available for research, the diaspora has had a seminal role in laying down the foundations of modern Tibetan studies, with the LTWA having a major part in this. Credit for the publication of a great number of fundamentals of the ancient Tibetan literature during several previous decades goes to the Tibetans in exile. Even those living under the Chinese have, in many instances, reprinted this crucial, ancient material. They have made other sources accessible to the world of scholars, but the studies are still based on the foundations laid by the diaspora. I see many of the present day publications by Tibetan scholars, both in exile and occupied Tibet, as atypical secondary sources inasmuch as, like the Western scholars, they base their output upon the essential literary works published by the diaspora. It is beautiful that, at least in the name of a common interest in culture and its literary expressions, the wall of oppression that separates Tibetan brothers and sisters has been smashed. There is still wide scope for the diffusion of many textual rarities, veritable cultural milestones, crucial for viii opening up and deepening the knowledge of Tibetan culture. It is my hope that the the LTWA will continue to exercise its historical role as central driving force to further the studies of the written knowledge of Tibet. *** I was asked to convene the seminar quite lateÑtwo months before the date fixed for it. I took the place of the original convener who could not work on its organisation. I thought I had to steer the seminar towards a more monographic and topical theme (“High Asia and the Noble Land”) in line with the 2009 concept of “Thank you India”, but obviously I felt it was too late to change its subject. I nonetheless realised that the broad theme of the seminar fit well into the sense of introspection which was brought by the fiftieth anniversary of the Lhasa Revolt. In line with the aspiration for freedom of the Tibetans, I thought the seminar should be, before anything else, an expression of free thinking and a token of Tibetan indebtness to their Indian friends for their hospitality and help in preserving their individuality. This mkhas pa’i dga’ ston was organised with these concepts in mind. My main aim was to communicate to the presenters a sense of openess without constrictions and to provide an opportunity to sit around the same table for several days to exchange knowledge and viewpoints. I wished that, within the time limitation of a three day gathering, the small group of participants would feel they could present their work without the temporal and conceptual constraints of a wider congress. I have tried to transfer the same attitude to the preparation of the proceedings. We all together agreed when the contributions were bound to be submitted and, although several scholars, as it normally happens, were late with sending their paper, they submitted their work within a reasonable lapse of time, so that I was spared from pressurising them. Again in line with the approach of encouraging personal freedom, I left carte blanche in terms of the length and style of the articles. The readers will see that there are some long pieces, beyond what is considered a classical length for contributions to proceedings, which remind meÑto paraphrase the bSam yas council of the 8 th centuryÑof the views formulated by the proponents of the gradualist way, and others whose contributions are quite short, so that they fall into the category of contributions by cig char ba-s. Some articles are utterly original, others reflect, in the best tradition of congresses, research that will appear in fully-fledged form in the forthcoming scholarly output of some participants. Please note that authors’ idiosyncrasies—such as the the way footnotes, bibiography, spellings or italics are conceived—have not been standardized to respect their style. *** ix In the course of the seminar my thoughts went in particular to Gyatsho Tshering, the founder and erstwhile Director of the Library of Tibetan Works and Archives, who passed away two months before the gathering. He founded the Library to be a place of learning for Tibetan, Indian and foreign scholars from everywhere in the world and I think he would have been pleased to observe the seminar. He was ideally with us. My personal sentiment is to dedicate these proceedings to his memory. With these lines I wish to express my appreciation to Geshe Lhakdor, the LTWA Director, and Ngawang Yeshi, the LTWA General Secretary, for their backing while I was putting together the seminar. A special thank you goes to Tenzin Lhawang, the LTWA Computer Officer, who has helped in many ways in the course of the preparations. Without his continuous support I would have gone nowhere. I am also grateful to the “task force” chosen to work with me in the last steps of the preparations: Tenzin Gyaltsen, Norzom Tsering, Tsering Dhondup, Namgay Phuntshog and Chemi Wangmo. I am equally obliged to Karma Kedhup who opened the LTWA Visual and Audio Archives for me to choose rarities for the entertainment of the scholars, and to Palmo Tsering for archival research. Indraprastha Press as well as Yeshi Dhondup, Managing Editor of Tibet Journal, and Tenzin Lhawang should be commended for undertaking the arduous task of preparing the layout of this volume. I ask forgiveness to the reader for my ungracious manner of making family matters public, but I also wish to thank my wife, Bianca Visconti, who was precious in lots of ways during every stage of the work. Finally I am indebted to the participants in the seminar, friends of the Library. They came from nearby and all over the globe at very short notice to make their support and love for this institution felt. They again proved their dedication to the Library by sending in the contributions published in this volume. Thanks for their care and knowledge. R.V. Dharamsala June 2010 Remarks on Phya pa Chos kyi seng ge and his Madhyamaka Treatises Helmut Tauscher Vienna In 1995 Leonard van der Kuijp made a photocopy of a manuscript of Phya pa1 Chos kyi seng ge’s dBu ma shar gsum kyi stong thun available in the West. It was the first text by Phya pa ever seen outside of Tibet, and quite a sensation within Tibetan studies; an edition of this text was published in 1999.2 Meanwhile a number of texts by Phya pa – though most probably not his complete oeuvre – have been discovered in the Fifth Dalai Lama’s library at Drepung, and facsimile editions thereof are available in the bKa’ gdams gsung ’bum, volumes 6-9, published in 2006. In recent years, this fact led to an increasing interest in Phya pa’s works among both Tibetan and western scholars. Nevertheless, no major study on Phya pa’s Madhyamaka interpretation has been published yet;3 to the best of my knowledge, the excellent work by Kevin Vose, Resurrecting Candrakīrti. Disputes in the Tibetan Creation of Prāsagika,4 although it does not deal with Phya pa exclusively, is up to now the only scholarly work that discusses and analyses greater parts of the Shar gsum; it does, however, not take into consideration Phya pa’s other treatises. Earlier publications dealing with or touching upon Phya pa5 concentrate on his contribution to Tibetan logic and epistemology, which was known from quotations and references by other authors, in particular by Shākya mchog ldan (1428–1507), and also more recent works6 focus on this topic. One short article (in Japanese) deals with Phya pa’s interpretation of the Ratnagotravibhāga.7 Several scholars, however, are recently working on Phya pa’s Madhyamaka or have presented papers at conferences on 1 2 3 4 5 Alternative spellings of this name are “Phywa pa” and “Cha pa”. TAUSCHER 1999a. See TAUSCHER 1999b, 2003. VOSE 2009. See e.g. KUIJP 1978, 1983; JACKSON 1987; TILLEMANS 1989; ONODA 1986, 1992; KELLNER1997. 6 See several chapters in Hugon 2008a, Hugon 2008b, 2009 and forthcoming a, b, c; STOLTZ 2007and forthcoming. 7 KANO 2003. or Kazuo Kano. it also shows Phya pa’s (direct or indirect) impact on later – in particular dGe lugs pa – Madhyamaka exegesis. See KUIJP 1978: 355. It does not touch upon subtle philosophical issues and problems. See ONODA 1989: 205f. without claiming to provide answers – why Phya pa as an Mādhyamika has been practically forgotten by the tradition itself. • For 18 years he presided at gSang phu sNe’u thog as abbot. i. the studies of his Madhyamaka treatises have not yet advanced to a degree that would allow for a comprehensive survey of his Madhyamaka position.10 Thus he represents – via Khyung Rin chen grags pa and rGya dmar pa – the third generation in the transmission lineage of rNgog Blo ldan shes rab (1059-1109) who is considered as the founder of the Svātatrika tradition in Tibet. one decade after the first publication of the Shar gsum – only preliminary remarks.4.11 • At the age of twenty he acted as a tutor of important hierarchs like the First Karma pa. • In the fields of his particular expertise. See TAUSCHER 1995. Padma dkar po even states that he was best of rGya dmar pa’s students. for several centuries the center of monastic scholarship. like Thomas Doctor. personal communication. Although Phya pa Chos kyi seng ge (1109-1169) was arguably one of the leading scholar of his time. Phya pa Chos kyi seng ge was a disciple of rGya dmar pa Byang chub grags. and whether the critique voiced against Phya pa by later dGe lugs pa authors is justified. James Blumenthal. and Dorji Wangchuk. 190b. Madhyamaka and Pramāa. It also raises the questions – however. n. Byams pa kun dga’ ’byung gnas in his gSang phu gdan rabs even relates a 35–year period of abbotship. Ritsu Akahane. and it is restricted to basic topics and general observations in connection with the Shar gsum stong thun and the bDen gnyis ’grel ba. Padma chos ’byung. Pascale Hugon. Jongbok Yi.8 Still. Therefore this paper presents – still. a commentary to Jñānagarbha’s Satyadvaya-vibhaga (SDV)..2 Helmut Tauscher this topic. as Phya pa passed away at 8 9 10 11 12 This information I owe to Pascale Hugon.g. Kevin Vose. Dus gsum mkhyen pa. and Phag mo gru pa at gSang phu sNe’u thog.e. e. only a little biographical data9 is known apart from the years of his birth and death. . Based on the two texts mentioned. Others are touching upon Phya pa in papers dealing with early bKa’ gdams pa.12 However. and bSod nams rtse mo. rNgog Jo sras ra mo. • Phya pa Chos kyi seng ge was renowned as a great philosopher and scholar. “the three who attained spiritual realisation” (grub thob): Dus gsum mkhyen pa dPal chos kyi grags pa. already ’Gos lotsāva gZhon nu dpal (1392-1481) in his Deb ther sngon po admits that some of them he had not seen personally. Bru sha bSod nams seng ge. However. Tshad ma’i Yid kyi mun sel with commentary. rMa bya rTsod pa’i seng ge (= rMa bya Byang chub brtson ’grus). Shākya mchog ldan (1428-1507) mentions a commentary on the Pramāa-vārttika among Phya pa’s works. Satyadvaya-vibhaga. a Phyi nang gi grub mtha’ bsdus pa and a Shes bya gzhi lnga’i bshad pa. this would mean that he was appointed abbot at the age of 25. Myang bran Chos kyi seng ge. 14 Tshad ma’i byung tshul: 12. the second Sa skya pa hierarch. a long and a short summary of the Madhyamaka system (dBu ma bsdus pa che chung). All of Phya pa’s works had been missing for several centuries. Phag mo gru pa and gSal sto sho sgom. “the four Jo sras”: ’Khon Jo sras rtse mo. rTsags dBang phyug seng ge (a teacher of Sa skya Paita). which seems rather unlikely. but only heard about. lDan ma dKon mchog seng ge and gNyal pa Yon tan seng ge.14 However. he is never mentioned as a particular great and kind-hearted religious leader. He lists the following works: Commentaries on the Five Treatises of Maitreya. unseen by ’Gos lotsāva.Phya pa Chos kyi seng ge and his Madhyamaka Treatises 3 the age of 60. When listing the works ascribed to Phya pa. 13 In addition. Madhyamakālakāra. Pramāaviniścaya. Lho pa sGog zan and Bar pu pa. “and other texts”. but also to the Tibetan Buddhist tradition. Madhyamakāloka. although Phya 13 Blue Annals: 332f. Yid kyi mun sel without commentary. They were unknown not only to western scholarly research. and. Bodhicāryāvatāra. as well as the respective abridged summaries (bsdus pa). Kong po ’Jag chung. . in particular he was and still is well known for his achievements in logic and for his contributions to the development of bsdus grwa. • Among his disciples we find renowned scholars and teachers like “the eight mighty lions” (seng chen): gTsang nag pa brTson ’grus seng ge. Khu Jo sras ne tso and gNyos Jo sras dpal le. Dan bag pa sMra ba’i seng ge. “the four wise ones” (shes rab can): ’Gar dBang grub. 6-533. Cf. Nos. purification of the mind. 18 w h i c h L o k e s h C h a n d r a c a l l s a n “ a u t o c h t h o n bibliography of books which were already rare or of extraordinary value in the Tibetan world”.2. Madhyamakāloka. one cannot avoid the impression that missing texts.: 637-677. a “long” and a “short summary of Madhyamaka” (dBu ma bsdus pa che chung). in the section of logic and epistemology (rnam ’grel gyi skor): a commentary on the Pramāaviniścaya.5 folios from the Shar gsum stong thun and refutes it in detail. Don gnyer yid kyi kunda bzhad pa’i zla ’od ’bum gyi snye ma. Kuijp 1978: 357. By the 19 th century they were apparently known only from hearsay. are equally included. a Tshad ma’i bsdus pa Yid kyi mun sel together with an auto-commentary.17 Of course. See Lokesh Chandra 1963: 637ff. 11910.6. Phya pa’s works must have been extant during the 17th century. from references like the one in the Deb ther sgon po. a Tshad bsdus Yid kyi mun sel alone (rkyang pa). Lung rigs rgya mtsho rgya mtsho 14: 518. 20 15 16 17 18 One verse is quoted in Shar gsum.15 it remains doubtful whether he really did write a commentary on it. 19 However. i. in the Madhyamaka section: commentaries on the Satyadvayavibhaga. as their manuscripts were discovered in the Fifth Dalai Lama’s library. 91. Shākya mchog ldan seems to be the last Tibetan master who probably knew – and read – Phya pa Chos kyi seng ge. in the Prajñāpāramitā section: a Prajñāpāramitā commentary (phar phyin ikka). 19 Lokesh Chandra 1963: 629.” (lam rim blo sbyong sogs kyi skor): a commentary on the Bodhicāryāvatāra.e.5–522. in the siddhānta section: a Phyi nang gi grub mtha’i rnam bzhag bsdus pa. desiderata. n. he quotes a passage of some 3. see Tauscher 1999. but there is no evidence as to whether or not they were actually read and studied.4 Helmut Tauscher pa apparently knew the Pramāa-vārttika. dPe rgyun dkon pa ’ga’ zhig gi tho yig. . 11317-11321. etc. 522. cit. The texts listed are – with only minor deviations – the same that already ’Gos lotsāva had mentioned: In the section of “stages of the path.. 11473. and a Shes bya gzhi lnga’i bshad pa. 20 Op. Madhyamakālakāra and Uttaratantra.16 Nevertheless. 11803-11806. A khu Rin po che Shes rab rgya mtsho (1803-1875) includes Phya pa’s works in h i s T h o y i g . 11076. dBu ma rgyan gyi ’grel ba / dBu ma rgyan gyi ’grel pa rgya cher bshad pa./ bSlab pa kun las btus pa’i don bsdus pa. Theg pa chen po rgyud bla ma’i bsdus (pa’i) don. 6. 10. Tshad ma yid kyi mun sel. 3. Tshad ma rnam par nges pa’i ’grel ba / Tshad ma rnam par g e s pa’i ’grel bshad yi ge dang rigs pa’i gnad la ’jug pa’i shes rab kyi ’od zer. dBu ma’i de kho na nyid bsdus pa / dBu ma de kho na nyid kyi snying po. --. the shorter version. sPyod ’jug bsdus don / Byang chub sems dpa’i spyod pa la ’jug pa’i don bsdus pa. 11. Theg (pa) chen (po) mdo sde rgyan gyi lus rnam bshag. 12. these are given between brackets. bDe bar gshegs pa dang phyi rol pa’i gzhung rnam par ’byed pa. 2. 8. 15. 6: 185 – vol. Tshad ma rnam par nges pa’i bsdus don. consisting in a structural outline (sa bcad) of the same text. 9. dBu ma snang ba’i ’grel ba / dBu ma snang ba’i gzhung gi don rigs pa’i tshul dang myi ’gal zhing blo chung bas kyang bde blag du rtogs pa byis pa’i ’jug ngos su sbyar ba. Theg chen mdo sde rgyan gyi legs bshad yang rgyan nyi ’od gsal ba / mDo sde rgyan gyi bshad pa. a fragment of 13 lines. 21 The titles are quoted in the form in which they appear in the catalogue (dkar chag) of the bKa’ gdams gsung ’bum and the volume-dkar chag. Most probably this treatise represents the longer version of the dBu ma bsdus pa che chung mentioned by ’Gos lotsāva and A khu Rinpoche. on the other hand. 13. 7. 14. dBu ma bden gnyis kyi ’grel ba / dBu ma bden pa gnyis rnam par bshad pa yi ge nyung ngus gzhung gsal bar byed pa. In cases where the difference between dkar chag and colophon consist in merely a few additional syllables. might have been a “summary” (bsdus don / don bsdus pa). . The alternative – and apparently more “popular” – title dBu ma shar gsum gyi stong thun is given on the title page. 5. Alternative titles given in the colophons are separated from the first entry by an oblique. 9: 598) not all the texts are included which are listed above.Phya pa Chos kyi seng ge and his Madhyamaka Treatises 5 In the bKa’ gdams gsung ’bum (vol. 4. ---/ dBu ma bden pa gnyis kyi don bsdus pa. Theg pa chen po rgyud bla ma’i bstan bcos (kyi tshig dang don gyi) rgya cher bsnyad pa phra ba’i don gsal ba. which is not extant. a number of works are contained which are not mentioned in later sources:21 1. Zla ba’i bstan bcos kyi tshig don gnyis ka la dgag pa’i rnam grangs shin tu mang po yod pa’i bstan bcas mdzad. 22 23 24 25 Cf. So thar mdo’i ’grel ba. would mean mere speculation. usually one thinks of this distinction as Tsong kha pa and the dGe lugs pa school make it. the Shes bya gzhi lnga’i bshad pa. the Yid kyi mun sel without auto-commentary and the Tshad ma rnam par nges pa’i bsdus don have most probably not to be counted as separate works. 17. As a Mādhyamika. the Yid kyi mun sel. the Tshad ma rnam par nges pa’i ’grel ba. and it was restricted to the methodological question whether a prasaga or svatantra type of reasoning should be used to prove non-substantiality. However. see TAUSCHER 2003. 18. and one commentary on Dharmakīrti’s Pramāaviniścaya.. the dBu ma de kho na nyid kyi snying po or dBu ma shar gsum gyi stong thun. Blue Annals: 334. The ontological and epistemological implications22 were not yet thought of. this question still has to be clarified in detailed analysis. I am only pointing out this fact. In fact. A third one. dGe tshul rnams kyi bslab pa’i rim pa ston pa’i rnam bshad / Thams cad yod par smra ba’i dge tshul rnams kyi bslab pa’i rim pa ston pa’i rnam par bshad pa. as this. there are only two texts extant: one independant treatise. His only independent Madhyamaka treatise. ’Od ldan zhes bya ba’i mikk tshig don rab gsal (ba). Phya pa chos kyi seng ge is generally considered to be a strict Svātantrika. ’Gos lotsāva states that Phya pa “wrote many refutations of the works of the ācārya Candrakīrti”.6 Helmut Tauscher 16.25 The exegetical tradition that Phya pa follows is clear already from the titles of the works. when using the terms “Prāsagika” and “Svātantrika”.6: .23 At the present stage of research. there are strikingly few works on this topic. During Phya pa’s lifetime. Taking into consideration that Phya pa chos kyi seng ge is renowned mainly for his achievments in the field of logic and epistemology. dBu ma’i byung tshul: 234. without any attempt to interpeting it. who put great emphasis on this issue and its ontological and epistemological implication. in general terms. it is not clear at all whether Phya pa is actually to be classified as a Svātantrika even according to the dGe lugs pa interpretation of the term. it only started to develop. . is apparently known only from hearsay.24 and a similar statement is made also by Shākya mchog ldan. TAUSCHER 1995: 122f. at the present stage. and even the definitions of prasaga and svatantra were not the same as in later centuries.. Whatever the results of this analysis will be. On this topic. the explanation of Tshig mdzod chen mo: gnad don stong phrag du ma thun thun du bsdus pa ste spyi don. the ‘Prāsagikas’] system” (gzhan kyi lugs dgod pa). Mahāyāna practice. 26 On the term stong thun. and buddhabhūmi. and Madhyamakāloka. The overal structure of this text seems to be influenced by Jñānagarbha’s Satyadvayavibhaga. cf. 27 See TAUSCHER 1999b: n. consisting of a “Refutation of the object of negation being negated by prasaga” (dgag bya thal ’gyur gyis ’gog pa sun dbyung ba) and a presentation “How an [independent] syllogism negates discursive development” (rjes dpag gis spros pa ’gog pa’i tshul). The first one.e. is a discussion of the two realities (bden pa gnyis). meaning “summary of the crucial points”. The second sub-section presents mainly a detailed discussion of the independent syllogism suited to proving all-pervading emptiness. covering some 85% of the entire text. In another explanation. the Shar gsum stong thun. . Phya pa equals. YOSHIMIZU 1996: 7. i. the greater part of his main Madhyamaka treatise.27 Exactly on these texts Phya pa composed his Madhyamaka commentaries. is dedicated to demonstrating the importance of reasoning by means of an independent syllogism (svatantra) and to explaining this syllogism. them in this respect. the expression dbu ma shar gsum refers to the main works of these masters. It consists of two parts: “Distinction (dbye ba)” and “Definition/ characteristics (mtshan nyid) of the two realities”. Accordingly. or even exceeds. Śāntarakita and Kamalaśīla. and a short presentation of Phya pa’s own system (rang gi lugs rnam par gzhag pa).Phya pa Chos kyi seng ge and his Madhyamaka Treatises 7 the “Summary of the crucial points 26 (in the teachings) of the three (Svātantrika) Madhyamaka (masters) from the East” (dbu ma [rang rgyud pa] shar gsum). Madhyamakālakāra. These Indian masters are known to strongly emphasise the strict method of independent syllogism (svātantrānumāna) in accordance with the tradition of Dignāga and Dharmakīrti within Madhyamaka argumentation. the Satyadvayavibhaga. The greatest part of this latter section on mtshan ñid is dedicated to the “Negation of true(ly established) entities” (yang dag pa’i dngos po dgag pa). The first of these sub-sections comprises as main topics an “Exposition of the opponent’s [i.e. 2 and 3. discussions why “It is not correct not to accept the use of svatantra” (rang rgyud kyi sbyor ba khas mi len pa mi ’thad pa) and why “A prasaga is unable to negate a realistic position” (thal ’gyur gyis dngos por smra ba ’gog mi nus pa). follows the tradition of Jñānagarbha. it consists of three main sections: “Ascertainment of the objects of cognition” (shes bya nges bar bya ba). vgl. the respective prasagavparyaya of the Indian pramāa tradition. sādhya. 29 SNS 3. three of which imply a svatantra of “own type” (rang rigs).” Shar gsum stong thun does not state the type of the prasaga: “Consequently. hetu. five of which do not imply a svatantra as a contra-position. 29 Phya pa reformulates the consequences stated in the sūtra in the form of a prasaga . Under the assumption that the conditioned and the absolute are different (in nature). someone who understands emptiness does not eliminate the imputation (samāropa) of an (ultimately) real nature on appearing phenomena. and ten a svatantra of “heterogeneous type” (gzhan rigs). . it follows: 1) “Suchness (tathatā) would not negate the proliferation (prapañca) of appearing phenomena. it can be taken as a prasaga (with the logical reason) of non-perception of the pervading property (khyab byed mi dmigs pa. he classifies the prasaga into 18 types. This classification is taken over by Sa skya Paita Kun dga’ rgyal mtshan (1182-1251) in a slightly extended form.” In analogy to the second consequence. vyāpakānupalabdhi). one of the favourite topics of Phya pa Chos kyi seng ge – apparently it could almost be called an obsession – is the classification of prasaga and the svatantra implied by them (rang rgyud ’phangs pa). As related by Shākya mchog ldan. In most of the cases Shar gsum stong thun and in bDen gnyis ’grel ba agree. 3-5. In general. 28 In both the Shar gsum stong thun and the bDen gnyis ’grel ba. but in two cases there is a significant divergence. which is handed down by Shākya mchog ldan and Go ram pa bSod nams seng ge (1429-1489). 28 See ONODA 1986: 81f. based on the passage of the Sadhinirmocanasūtra which teaches four unacceptable consequences – though technically speaking not in the form of prasaga – implied by each of the alternatives in the position that “the characteristic of the conditioned and the characteristic of the ultimate are non-different or different” (’du byed kyi mtshan nyid dang | don dam pa’i mtshan nyid tha dad pa ma yin pa’am | tha dad pa zhes zer ba).8 Helmut Tauscher structured according to its individual parts: dharmin. and 1992 85f. For a discussion of the respective passage in the Shar gsum thong thun see TAUSCHER 2003: 213-218. Phya pa refers to this classification in the context of discussing the relation of the two realities. because he does not understand their nature. and he gives the respective implied svatantra or prasagaviparyaya in each case. pak adharmatā and vyāpti. For the type of prasaga and implied svatantra. [understanding the absolute] is not understanding something different from the conventional.”30 Basically the same prasaga is formulated slightly differently in bDen gnyis ’grel ba. see KAJIYAMA 1998: 133 and 83. svabhāva): “He (who understands emptiness) understands their substance [by understanding emptiness].1 (plus insertion in the margin): don dam pa stong pa nyid du ’jal ba des kun rdzob pa ’di dngos por yod pa’i sgro ’dogs la myi gnod par ’gyur te | kun rdzob kyi bden pa las gzhan ’jal ba’i phyir … kun rdzob la sgro ’dogs la gnod pas kun rdzob las gzhan ’jal ma yin.” “Because [imputation of an ultimately real nature] is removed by establishing [emptiness] as true property [of appearing phenomena] through inference.” Here.. 31 bDen gnyis ’grel ba: 195. again. because he removes imputation [of an ultimately real nature] on appearing phenomena through [its] removal by the experience establishing imputation [of an ultimately real nature] as being removed.. vyāpakaviruddha-[upalabdhi]): “Because [by understanding the absolute] the imputation [of an ultimately real nature] on the conventional is devaluated. . Shar gsum stong thun names a prasaga (with the logical reason) of non-perception of the pervading property (khyab byed mi dmigs pa’i thal ba) and. sgro ’dogs sel bar grub pa’i myong bas bsal bas snang ba la sgro ’dogs sel bas de’i rdzas ’jal lo.2-7: stong nyid … ’jal ba po des snang ba la bden pa’i dngos po’i sgro ’dogs mi gcod par thal te snang ba’i bdag nyid mi ’jal ba’i phyir .Phya pa Chos kyi seng ge and his Madhyamaka Treatises 9 It implies a svatantra with the logical reason of essential property (rang bzhin. i t w o u l d n o t b e t h e t r u e p r o p e r t y ( c h o s n y i d) o f appearing phenomena. because something different from the conventional is understood. and its origins in Indian Buddhist philosophy. viruddhavyāptopalabdhi): “The understanding of the absolute as emptiness would not devaluate the imputation of the conventional being of (ultimately) real nature. 30 Shar gsum stong thun: 6.” It implies a svatantra with the logical reason of [perception of] what is incompatible with the pervading property (khyab byed ’gal ba [dmigs pa]. but classified as a prasaga with (the logical reason) of perception of what is pervaded by the incompatible (’gal bas khyab pa dmigs pa. gives the implied svatantra with the logical reason of essential property (rang bzhin gyi rtags): “Because emptiness did not consist in the nature of appearing p h e n o m e n a .”31 2) “Emptiness would not be suited to being suchness (de bzhin nyid). .10 Helmut Tauscher therefore. because these two are mutually exclusive. The type given in bDen gnyis ’grel ba appears. *vyāpakaviruddhasvabhvopalabdhi) – implied svatantra with the logical reason of perception of what is pervaded by something incompatible with the essential 32 Shar gsum stong thun: 6. freedom from proliferation would not be the true property of the conventional.10-13: stong pa nyid snang ba’i ngo bor mi gnas pas snang ba’i chos nyid ma yin par ’gyur te . In Shākya mchog ldan’s list.” “Because [mutal exclusion] is invalidated by ascertaining through inference that [freedom from proliferation] is the true property [of the conventional].”33 The type of prasaga and implied svatantra mentioned by Shar gsum stong thun in these two cases correspond to the fourth (according to Shākya mchog ldan. 33 bDen gnyis ’grel ba: 195. there is no obvious essential difference from Shar gsum stong thun: “Consequently. 2: spros bral kun rdzob pa’i chos nyid ma yin par thal te | de gnyis phan tshun spangs pa’i phyir . No 13 in Go ram pa’s list) of Sa skya Paita’s “prasagas implying an heterogeneous svātantra (rang rigs ’phen pa)”. apart from the different classification.. slightly modified. chos nyid du rjes dpag gis nges pas gnod pas chos nyid yin pas phan tshun spang ma yin. as it is the true property. insertion in the margin. [emptiness] is the nature of appearing phenomena’.”32 bDen gnyis ’grel ba. *vyāpakaviruddhasvabhāvopalabdhi). rjes dpag gis chos nyid du grub pas bsal bas chos nyid yin pas snang ba’i ngo bo yin no. we find two pairs that could – possibly – be referred to: No 5: prasaga with the logical reason of perception of what is pervaded by something incompatible with the essential property (rang bzhin dang ’gal ba’i khyab bya dmigs pa. gives the same set of a prasaga with (the logical reason) of perception of what is pervaded by the incompatible (’gal bas khyab pa dmigs pa) and an implied svatantra with the logical reason of [perception of] what is incompatible with the pervading property (khyab byed ’gal ba [dmigs pa]) as in the previous case. . too.. No 13: prasaga with the logical reason of perception of the essential property being incompatible with the pervading property (khyab byed dang ’gal ba’i rang bzhin dmigs pa.. svabhāvaviruddhavyāptopalabdhi) – implied svatantra with the logical reason of perception of the essential property being incompatible with the pervading property (khyab byed dang ’gal ba’i rang bzhin dmigs pa. (these two) are not mutually exclusive. Again. only in Go ram pa’s accout (No 12: ’gal ba’i khyab bya dmigs pa – khyab byed dang ’gal ba de dmigs pa). they include the categories of cause and effect. in the light of which my previous attempts to hypothetically reconstruct the original message of the text36 do not apply any more. but both of them are listed by Go ram pa separately (Nos 3 and 9). 22. 38 Cf. svabhāvaviruddhavyāptopalabdhi). 10. 32. the problem remains that it is called “a prasaga refuting an affirmed pervasion with the logical reason ascertained by valid cognition” (khyab pa khas blangs pa rtags tshad mas nges pa’i sun ’byin pa’i thal ba).” This consequence poses some problems.16 ma yin. they are not taken into account here. 34 According to the formulation. which represents a different manuscript. The type of implied svatantra 34 The translation of the terms follows largely Kajiyama 1998: 84. However. where a prasaga of nonperception of the pervading property is given. similar to the expression “conventionally proving” (tha snyad sgrub pa) in the same context. just as above. however. TAUSCHER 2003: 214.38 The implied svatantra. provides a variant reading. n. which do not apply in the context of the relation between the absolute and the conventional. which is missing here. the addition “ascertained by valid cognition” would be a general rather than a distinctive description of the logical reason.” 37 However. 15). The text of Shar gsum stong thun appears to be incomplete in the manuscript edited in Tauscher 1999a as well as in the bKa’ gdams gsung ’bum.Phya pa Chos kyi seng ge and his Madhyamaka Treatises 11 p r o p e r t y ( r a n g bzhin dang ’gal ba’i khyab bya dmigs pa. would have to operate with the logical reason of essential property. The prasaga can now be read as: “This mere negation of person (pudgala) and entity (dharma) for the conditioned would not be suchness. 3) “For appearing phenomena the mere negation of a real thing would not be suited to being the essential property (svabhāva). Shākya mchog ldan lists three more types of prasaga which bDen gnyis ’grel ba could theoretically refer to (Nos 9. No 5 might be closer to bDen gnyis ’grel ba than No 13. 36 See TAUSCHER 2003: 215. thus. * 6. 37 Shar gsum stong thun: 6. Tauscher 2003: 218. 35 Specialists in the field of logic and epistemology will have to decide this question. 35 Cf.: ’du byed la gang zag dang chos khegs pa tsam de de bzhin nyid ma yin par ’gyur te ’du byed las gzhan yin* pa’i phyir. The latter. It would also agree with bDen gnyis ’grel ba. . Could this be a paraphrase of the technical term “non-perception of the pervading property” (khyab byed mi dmigs pa)? In this case. ma is deleded in bKa’ gdams gsung ’bum: 7.15f. because [suchness] is different from the conditioned. so that an identification of bDen gnyis ’grel ba with either of them does not seem to be justified.2. 4f. 40 Shar gsum stong thun states explicitly only the type of the implied svatantra. kun nas nyon mongs pa dang rnam byang rgyud cig la dus cig du ldan par ’gyur te | bden pa’i dngos por yang zhen la stong pa nyid kyang mthong ba’i phyir ro ||… lung gis gnod pas sangs rgyas la kun nas nyon mongs dang rnam byang dus cig tu myed pas ’du byed dang stong pa nyid so sor gzigs pa myed. because it embraces a ‘real thing’ as well as perceives emptiness. No 14 of Go ram pa): “Defilement and purification would occur simultaneously in one mental continuum. but. Shar gsum stong thun and bDen gnyis ’grel ba agree in all four cases. therefore the conditioned and emptiness are not seen separately. because this is invalidated by authoritative scripture. svabhāva) which implies a svatantra with the logical reason of non-perception of the pervading property (khyab byed mi dmigs pa.” “Defilement and purification do not occur simultaneously for the Buddha.” and 4) “It would not be necessary to seek emptiness in a way other than through 39 bDen gnyis ’grel ba: 195. vyāvtti]). because they are non-different from emptiness with regard to the characteristic distinction.e.42 With regard to the unacceptable consequences of the assumption that the absolute and the conventional are not different (with regard to the characteristic distinction [ldog pa. 42 bDen gnyis ’grel ba: 195.12 Helmut Tauscher is not mentioned.” In this case Shar gsum stong thun and bDen gnyis ’grel ba agree on a different type of prasaga. as related by Shākya mchog ldan. Shar gsum stong thun: 12.” they both give a prasaga with the logical reason of the essential property (rang bzhin. implying a svatantra of non-perception of the pervading property (No 2 of Sa skya Paita’s list.3-8: .1-8. 41 Shar gsum stong thun: 7. the one with the logical reason of essential property.: spros bral legs par gzigs pas rnam byang du’ang ’gyur la | kun rdzob spros bral gyis dben pa’i spros bcas gzigs pas kun nas nyon mongs su’ang ’gyur bas | kun nas nyon mongs dang rnam byang dus cig du’ang ’gyur dus cig tu myed par lung nas bshad pas de gnyis phan tshun spangs par ma gzigs. it should be one with the logical reason of essential property.2-4. . again..40 i.. 43 No 2 in in Sa skya Paita’s list of prasagas implying a heterogeneous svatantra. 43 For consequence 3) “Also physical (rūpin) and non-physical phenomena would be without divisions. For consequence 1) “Emptiness would be suited to being cognized by direct perception of ordinary beings.39 4) “The gnosis of the Buddha would be defiled and pure at the same time.”41 bDen gnyis ’grel ba formulates a very similar prasaga and implied svatantra.” and 2) “Emptiness would be a support (ālambana) for the obstructions (āvaraa). vyāpakānupalabdhi). Phya pa Chos kyi seng ge and his Madhyamaka Treatises 13 seeing and hearing. there is no “proof” for this – admittedly rather personal and speculative – assumption.. Here. the section “Refuting the application of (the term paramārthasatya) to a conceptual basis of characteristics. .9-15. several examples are known within the Tibetan tradition. of course. it would by no means be a unique situation. e. through contemplative endeavor.44 The diverging classification of the prasaga for the consequences 1) and 2) of the position that the absolute and the conventional are different in nature could reflect a development in Phya pa’s prasaga classification – nothing is known about the relative chronology of his works.7-196. see above and n. presumably of the bDen gnyis ’grel ba. because it is nondifferent from appearing phenomena with regard to the characteristic distinction. In general. Within the commentary on SDV 6. The colophons of both the bDen gnyis ’grel ba and its bsDus don say: “composed by the logician monk Chos kyi seng ge” (rig(s) par smra ba’i dge slong Chos kyi seng ges sbyar pa).31. cf.3f. it might have some significance. the reference to this classification in a context. The specific classification of the prasaga can serve as one evidence for this assumption.: yang stong pa nyid snang ba dang ldog pa tha mi dad pas sgrib pa’i dmigs par ’gyur zhes pa{’i} [rang bzhin gyi] thal ba dang sgrib pa’i dmigs pa ma yin pas snang ba dang ldog pa tha mi dad ma yin zhes pa{’i/’nag rang bzhin gyi thal bas} khyab byed mi dmigs pa’i rang rgyud ’phen pa’o || {…} to be deleted. 44 Shar gsum stong thun: 12.6-8 as well as in the bKa’ gdams gsung ’bum vol. In the discussion of the second consequence. one can conclude nothing from this fact.e. bDen gnyis ’grel ba:196. i. and nevertheless the text is transmitted under the authorship of the master.2. For the type of pransaga and implied svatantra. it could also represent an error of the actual “author” of either text.1. 40. vyāpakaviruddhopalabdhi). an affirming bDen gnyis ’grel ba: 195. there is some evidence that evokes the impression that one of the texts or both are lecture-notes taken by some pupils rather than Phya pa’s own writing.. […] to be amended. Nevertheless. but only if it is viewed in combination with others. If it is correct.g. the text of Shar gsum stong thun is corrupt in TAUSCHER 1999a: 12.2-4 (reads khyab byed ’gal ba instead of khyab byed ’gal ba dmigs pa). where it is obviously out of place. and an implied svatantra with the logical reason of perception of what is incompatible with the pervading property (khyab byed ’gal ba dmigs pa.The specification khyab byed mi dmigs pa for the implied svatantra of the first consequence is missing in bDen gnyis ’grel ba: 196. 7: 26. However. TAUSCHER 2003: n. however. viruddhavyāptopalabdhi). viz.” both texts state a prasaga with the logical reason of the perception of what is pervaded by the incompatible (’gal bas khyab pa dmigs pa. where the explanations of a master were actually written down by a student. and he strictly defines the objects of cognition as the basis for distinction (dbye gzhi) of the two realities (1. in turn. In fact it is a discussion on the Yogācāra concept of self-perception (rang rig. and the discussion is exactly on the question whether ’ga’ yang should be understood as “anything (i.46 This section. ‘Because they are not of different substance. “Scriptural authority”.] zhes gsungs te | rnam pa gtad pa’i phyir myong bya myong byed rdzas tha dad par thal zhes rang bzhin gyi rtags kyi thal ba yin la | rdzas tha dad myed pas rnam pa gtad sa myed ces pa khyab byed mi dmyigs pa’i rang rgyud yin no. ‘Because of the projection of aspects it follows that the object of experience and the experiencing subject are of different substance’ is a prasaga with the logical reason of essential property.2. svasamvedana).8.29f. see also below). On the other hand. has a very short sub-section entitled “The prasaga implying [a svatantra] proving pakcadharmatā in the (syllogism mentioned before)” (de’i phyogs chos sgrub byed ’phen pa’i thal ba).e. there is no place for a projection of aspects’ is a svatantra (with the logical reason) of nonperception of the pervading property. and the name the particular type of prasaga and implied svatantra: “To the objection that (cognition) is not established without the projection of aspects. everything whatsoever)” or “something particular”. in this case.29f.14 Helmut Tauscher negation” (de mtshan gzhi snang bcas ma yin dgag la ’jug pa dgag pa)45 has a sub-division: “Proof of pak adharmatā” (phyogs chos sgrub pa). It consists of nothing but the identification of the passage in SDVV commented on. and understands it in the strict sense of everything whatsoever”. Like Jñānagarbha. At the present stage.: (gnyis pa ni) rnam pa ma gtad par ma grub po zhe na rang snang par khas len na [SDVV 157.17).1f.17-2. 47 bDen gnyis ’grel ba: 204. 46 This discussion poses a general problem.” 47 This is definitely not the topic here. refers to a quotation from the Dharmasagītisūtra: “Not seeing anything/something particular is seeing reality” (’ga’ yang mthong med pa ni de kho na mthong ba’o).5-213. we find a sub-section “Proof by logical argumentation in the case of a different understanding of the meaning of the scriptural authority” (lung gi don gzhan du rtog pa la rigs pas bsgrub pa). and the sa bcad heading is equally misplaced in the given context as dealing with the prasaga classification 45 bDen gnyis ’grel ba: 202. . I am unable to offer a solution for this seeming contradiction.7-22.]. which interprets ’ga’ yang as referring to parakaliptasvabhāva only. it is replied: ‘If one assumes that it [perceives] its own picture …’ [SDVV 157. he dedicates much space in his Shar gsum stong thun to refuting the position that the absolute reality is not an object of cognition (don dam bden pa shes bya ma yin) (18. also Phya pa opposes the Yogācāra position. Within that. The ’Grel ba does not mention any division for the chapter “Proof by logical argumentation in the case of a different understanding of the meaning of the scriptural authority” (lung gi don gzhan du rtog pa la rigs pas bsgrub pa) as such. but it suggests itself to imagine the concrete “classroom” situation: Phya pa. this judgement is based on a personal impression. . in the course of discussing the given topic. notes down exactly this as the crucial point. It starts with stating the Yogācāra position. points out that here. Unfortunately. and the specific approach to the question might not be particularely “scholarly”. Of course. that ’ga’ yang mthong ba med pa means “not seeing parakalpita” – indicated as “[bstan pa]” in the chart below –. but not in the other. it is the case of a prasaga of this and that kind (which they might have talked about the previous day).Phya pa Chos kyi seng ge and his Madhyamaka Treatises 15 in general. etc. to Phya pa’s explanations of of this text. or rather. and it structures only its refutation. one of the more essential divergences occurs exactly at this particular section commenting on verse 6 of the SDV. it is by no means sure that it is also the structural outline of that bDen gnyis ’grel ba wich is extant among Phya pa’s writings. and diverting titles of the sections. which consists of three parts: “The opponent’s position” (gzhan lugs). “It’s refutation” (de sun dbyung pa) and “The own position” (rang lugs). As the example below will demonstrate. it agrees with the sa bcad of the bDen gnyis ’grel ba. but there are also considerable divergences: sub-divisions mentioned in one text. Fortunately. again. and the student. it provides no help at all with the question whether the sa bcad section “de’i phyogs chos sgrub byed ’phen pa’i thal ba” is authentic. knowing the master’s obsession. the bDen gnyis bsdus don provides an opportunity to scrutinize suspicions with regard to the overall structure of the bDen gnyis ’grel ba. To a large degree. The bsDus don is nothing but the structural outline (sa bcad) of the SDV(V) according to the interpretation of Phya pa Chos kyi seng ge. neither from SDV nor from SDVV.16 Helmut Tauscher Abbreviated sa bcad of the chapter lung gi don gzhan du rtog pa la rigs pas bsgrub pa in the bDen gnyis bsdus don and bDen gnyis ’grel ba (Figures in round brackets after the section-titles denote the number of subsections mentioned in the text. the entry “none” denotes that no pratīka is given for the respective section.) . amendments to the text are given in square brackets. figures in separated columns indicate the verses from SDV used as pratīka (pratīkas from SDVV are not mentioned). one or both of them represent lecture notes by students taken on the occasion of two different lectures of Phya pa on the same topic. and they do not necessarily represent an evidence against Phya pa’s direct authorship of the text. it covers the same passages of SDVV as bsDus don 132. represented by the first sub-section. too. the sa bcad of the bDen gnyis ’grel ba show features that would not – again in a personal and unscholarly judgment – be expected with an analytical mind like Phya pa Chos kyi seng ge: The sections de sun ’byin pa ([B]) and de sun dbyung ba ([B] 2) denote exactly the same part of the discussion. For this fact. de dgag pa ([B] 133) serves largely the same purpose. but are considerably divergent with regard to the detailed structure of the text/ lecture. Apart from that. two possible explanations are self-suggesting. “Dispute” (rgol ba). In the Shar gsum stong thun.24).. All these details show that the two sa bcad do agree basically. e.3 in bsDus don) is not subdivided in ’Grel ba. and also .g. However. a) They do not refer to the same lecture. coming back to the same passages (+ pratīkas) several times. A third theoretically possible alternative need not be taken into consideration: the two texts are based on different lectures. inconsistencies within a sa bcad are to be found elsewhere. That means that the initial part containing the presentation and refutation of the opponent’s position in the ’Grel ba is included in the first main section of the bsDus don. This is – at least – clumsy. However. In this case it can be ruled out that both of them are based on an actual “text” composed by Phya pa. This correspondence between “Dispute” in bsDus don and “Its refutation” (de sun ’byin pa) and “Opponent’s position” (gzhan gyi lugs) in ’Grel ba is attested by the use of the same pratīkas of SDV(V) in both texts. and “Refutation of [the assumption] that paratantra belongs to the absolute” (gzhan dbang don dam nyid la dgag pa) (ad SDV 6d). b) They do refer to the same lecture.31 to 132.. 312. 132. together with the first sub-section of the following “It’s refutation” (de sun dbyung ba.. 312.332. The section “Proof of pervasion” (khyab pa bsgrub pa. and confusion about the structure occurs in addition. the sections . his students arrived at different opinions on the actual strucure of the lecture.23 in ’Grel ba. according to the pratīkas quoted. but due to the fact that Phya pa’s explanations on this section are quite sophisticated and given from various points of view.Phya pa Chos kyi seng ge and his Madhyamaka Treatises 17 This third section consists of the two main parts mentioned in the bsDus don as the two divisions of the entire chapter: “Refutation of seeing paratantra and parini panna” (gzhan dbang dang yongs grub gzigs pa dgag pa) (ad SDV 6a-c). 6 “Avoiding the mistake. On several occasions. sub and sub-sub-divisions. and the third of two. immediately after the announcement of four subsections of the particular chapter. and the question arises. the second of which. the respective doubts could be extended to the Shar gsum stong thun as well. that the position of the two realities identical in nature (implies) an absolute(ly real) nature” (bden pa gnyis dngos po gcig pa’i phyogs la don dam pa’i dngos po grub par thal ba’i skyon spang ba ) are. contains three further divisions. 48 This system is described in detail in HUGON 2009: 52ff. there was no politically motivated ban of his works. in particular within longer enumerations of divisions. but it is not known – at least not to me – in any other text of the Tibetan exegetical tradition. in turn. who had developed his own individual style of writing sa bcad. as was the case with the writings of some Sa skya authors like sTag tshang lotsāva etc. Of course. Irrelevance. only in the last fifteen years they keep re-appearing. As for Phya pa’s oeuvre in general. the small fragment of the bSlab btus bsdus don and also in the rGyud bla ma’i bsdus don. the “recursive sa bcad” has to be seen as reflecting a caprice of Phya pa Chos kyi seng ge himself. Here. All the “summaries” (bsdus don) contained in the bKa’ gdams gsung ’bum under the authorship of Phya pa show an interesting peculiarity. however.3 “Negation of (the position that the two realities) are non-different with regard to the characteristic distinction (ldog pa ta dad myed pd dgag pa). a list of nine headings would follow: x la bzhi | (1) … dang | (21) … dang | (22) … dang | (23) … kyis/pas | (2) … dang | (31) … dang | (32) … kyis/pas | (3) … dang | (4) … |. Unless we want to assume that all these bsdus don texts were written down by the same student – I wonder who that might have been – of Phya pa’s. rather than sections on the same level. sub-divisions of 112. why this might have been so? To the best of my knowledge. . and 112. too.18 Helmut Tauscher 112. 112. the “recursive sa bcad”.4 “Presentation of the own system” (rang gi lugs rnam par gzhag pa).48 This particular style of sa bcad writing appears in the bDen gynis bsdus don as well as in the rNam nges bsdus don. for centuries all of his works have been considered lost. but the evidence is certaily not significant enough to justify this. or treatises that propagated the gzhan stong theory. the sPyod ’jug bsdus don. the titles of the subordinate sections are listed – in a rather unique manner – before the superior one. E. in fact. a sa bcad in “normal” style would read: x la bzhi | (1)… dang | (2) … dang | (3) … dang | (4) … | gnyis pa la gsum | (21) … dang | (22) … dang | (23) … | gsum pa la gnyis | (31) … dang | (32) … |.5 “Avoiding the (unacceptable) consequence taught in the autoritative scriptures in this (context) (de la lung nas gsungs pa’i thal pa spang ba).. in the hypothetical case of a section consisting of four sub-sections..g. ”49 A note to this passage refers to two chapters in JACKSON 1987.”50 Regardless of whether Sa skya Paita or Shākya mchog ldan evaluated Phya pa in this way. and as a support he quoted many passages from authoritative scriptures. Instead. which was the kiss of death for Chapa’s proposals. in particular the dGe lugs pa. why was his work forgotten by the local tradition? As stated initially. which he arranged [according to his intentions]. so he established many tenets with regard to Madhyamaka and Yogācāra. + n. Pramāa and bsdus grwa traditions is well attested and has been studied by various scholars. he went back to the word of the Conqueror. lCang skya Rol pa’i rdo rje (1717-1780) says: “Thus. 170f. – The question remains. that were previously unknown. Sûtra and Tantra. and a very similar statement Shâkya mchog ldan make also about Tsong kha pa: “The rin po che Blo bzang … made his own analyses with the argumentations of a logician. possibly in a direct response to this accusation of Shākya mchog ldan’s.”51 Accordingly. 20. Phya pa seems to have influenced also the development of Tibetan Madhyamaka exegesis. which reads: “That reasoning of Phya pa … ignores all the excellent expositions in the basic treatises and merely puts together with great zeal what had not been expounded.5: gang yang phya pa’i rigs pa ni || … || de yis gzhung nas legs bchad nas || kun la yid rton med byas nas || ma bshad nan gyis sbyor bar zad ||. although they did not fit.19-304. text and translation of JACKSON 1987: vol 1. however. 50 Rigs gter rnam bshad: 473.2: rin po che Blo bzang pas … khong rang gi rtog ge’i rigs pas rnam par dpyad cing |rgyab rten du mi ’grig bzhin du bsgrig pa’i lung mang po drangs nas dbu sems dang | mdo sngags kyi grub pa’i mtha sngon chad ma grags pa’i rnam grangs ches shin du mang po dag ’jog par mdzad do. Phya pa’s influence on the development of the Tibetan. in addition. provides an answer: “Because of his contrarious [!] disposition. Chapa’s ideas were cited later by Sakya Paita as the preeminent expression of Tibetan doctrinal innovation. Ronald Davidson. but they do not contain any statement by Sa skya Paita that could be interpereted in this way.6-342. 52 mDzes rgyan 303. Accusations of that kind were rather frequent at that time. there is a quotation of Shākya mchog ldan’s Rigs gter rnam bshad. when praising the achievements of Tsong kha pa. Similarly.”52 49 DAVIDSON 2005: 280. but his Pramāa works shared the fate of his other writings. this venerable one [Tsong-khapa] … was never tainted by the fault of oversimplification and fabrication.4: des na rje btsun ’di nyid kyis … bla chos dang rang bzo’i nyes pas nam yang ma gos par rang rang gi srol ’byed pa po’i . he went back to the thought of each of the founding scholars and adepts and.Phya pa Chos kyi seng ge and his Madhyamaka Treatises 19 can hardly have been the reason. it certainly did not mean “the kiss of death” for his proposals. the present paper does not claim to answer this question. 51 Shākya rnam thar 341. 55 In dGe lugs pa literature Tsong kha pa (1357-1409) and mKhas grub rje dGe legs dpal bzang (1385-1438) refer to Phya pa. • Tsong kha pa: “Phya pa chos kyi seng ge and other Tibetan scholars also said that a svatantra was inappropriate in the case of a [nonexistent] subject imputed by non-Buddhists.: Cha pa la sogs pa bod kyi mkhas pa rnams kyis kyang | gzhan gyis btags pa’i chos can la rang rgyud mi rung bar ’chad do ||. 170. translation of LOPEZ 1987: 269. which discuss why it is not justified not to accept an independent proof and refute the validity of a prasaga in refuting a realistic position. 54 He also quotes and refutes two chapters of Shar gsum stong thun. with regard to explaining the Buddha’s perception of the conventional. Generally. Apparently. However. Nevertheless. although he is respected for his achievments on the “path of reasoning”. dBu ma rgyan gyi zin bris: 77b5f.. e. It is not by chance that here Tsong kha pa is chosen as an example. both of them were apparently in opposition to the mainstream interpretations of their times. the former being a declared Prāsagika.. the great minds of all times were – naturally – innovative. JACKSON 1987: Vol. text and translation of TILLEMANS 1984: 383 and 365.g. Of course. there are many divergences. He and Phya pa seem to be contrary in their views. See above. Usually they all do so in rather vague formulations like “somebody like …” (… la sogs pa. 17. in particular with the Indian masters. and both of them were innovative. concrete references to Phya pa’s Madhyamaka position are primarily to be found within the writings of Shākya mchog ldan. n. Besides. the latter an inveterate Svātantrika. See VOSE 2009: 57.20 Helmut Tauscher Unlike contemporary western universities.”56 53 54 55 56 pa grub rnams kyi dgongs pa la gtugs shing de yang rgyal ba’i bka’ dang legs par gtugs te ….g. . However.53 but also agreements on basic questions. … lta bu). 1. e. Exegesis had to be an explanation of the Buddha’s word and in harmony with the expositions of the teachers of the old days. middle age Tibetan Buddhist tradition did not appreciate this idea at all. The following survey does not claim completeness. where “innovation” is a magic word which opens many doors – to fundings. among others –. See. later authors mention his name only in identifying opponents (kha cig) in Tsong kha pa’s writings. most probably they are very much alike in many ways. Phya pa is viewed as somebody who represents wrong positions. the dGe lugs pa tradition does not share the opinion that there might be similarities between Phya pa and Tsong kha pa in their Madhyamaka interpretations. 3f. but he might refer to Phya pa Chos kyi seng ge (see below). • A kyā yongs ’dzin (1740-1827) mentions Phya pa as a representative of a definition of the object of negation (dgag bya) which is too wide.”60 Tsong kha pa’s reference to Phya pa would certainly not represent a major issue of controversy. which leads to taking conventional reality (savtisatya) as inexistent. but could not understand the essence of Madhyamaka with “Phya pa etc. cf.57 • ’Jams dbyangs bshad pa’i rdo rje Ngag dbang brtson ’grus (1648– 1721) more or less repeats mKhas grub rje’s statement.Phya pa Chos kyi seng ge and his Madhyamaka Treatises 21 • mKhas grub rje states that “somebody like Phya pa” takes “unreal” (bden med) as “established in reality” (bden grub). TAUSCHER 1995: 165.: ..2f. cf.2f. The same misunderstanding..: de kho na nyid dpyod pa’i rigs pas dpyad bzod dang rigs pas grub pa gnyis ma phye pa’i dbang gis sngon dus kyi mkhen porNgog lo lta bu yang don dam bden pa shes bya ma yin par bzhed pa dang | Cha pa lta bu yang bden med bden grub tu smra ba la sogs pa’i nor pa chen pa rnams byung ba yin no. 59 Lam rim brda bkrol 167. it is definitely the case. he says. is also the reason for rNgog lotsāva’s position that absolute reality is not an object of cognition (don dam bden pa shes bya ma yin). 7: gzhung lugs mang thos rigs pa’i lam du yang | | ngal ba med [corr. identify “those who untiringly adhered to the path of reasoning” (rigs lam). Drang nges dka’ ’grel 7. He does not give a name here. commenting on verse 7 of Tso kha pa’s rTen ’brel bstod pa legs bśad sñi po. See CABEZÓN 1992: 143. rigs lam la ngal ba mang du bsten pa Phya pa chos seng sogs sang chen brgyad du grags pa dang …. : mang] bsten mngon par rtogs pa yi || yon tan tshogs kyis mi dman du mas kyang | | ’bad kyang rtogs par ma gyur gnas de ni ||Drang nges yang snying 421..58 When discussing various unacceptable identifications of the basis of distinction (dbye gzhi) of the two realities. their “accusations” become increasingly vague. with his predecessors. The suspicion seems to be justified that they merely repeated standard opinions that were never questioned. 60 rTen ’brel bstod pa legs bœad sñi po: v.6ff. the later the authors are.5. 58 mChan bzhi: 283. in fact. and very strong doubt arises as to whether they really knew Phya pa. because he does not distinguish between “fit to withstand investigation by logical analysis which investigates the absolute” (de kho na nyid dpyod pa’i rigs pas dpyad bzod) and “established by logical argumentation” (rigs pas grub pa). 57 sTong thun chen mo 145.59 • Gung thang dKon mchog bstan pa’i sgron me (1762-1823) and Blo gros rgya mtsho (1851-1930 ?). ’Jams dbyangs bshad pa mentions “objects that are not imputed” (sgro ma brtags pa’i yul). . his evaluation of Phya pa does not appears not to be clearly and fundamentally negative. and. see TAUSCHER 1995: 166f. However. One chapter is entitled “Refutation of (the position) that the object of negation [which is substantiality propagated by realistic systems] is negated by a prasaga” (dgag bya thal ’gyur gyis ’gog pa sun dbyung ba) 61 . within the same two lines of the manuscript. The position that a svatantra is in-appropriate for doing so is dealt with in the sub-section “Formulation of the opponent’s system” (gzhan gyi lugs dgod pa) 62 within that chapter.20. Op.9-64. that both methods have to be applied.: 58.15 (61. Op.7..15. He even states that a prasaga is “utterly incapable of refuting the object of negation” (dgag bya gtan dgag mi nus pa) 63 .4. In the course of discussing the second consequence mentioned in SNS to result from the assumption that the conventional and the absolute are different in nature. 67 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 Shar gsum stong thun: 58.22 Helmut Tauscher What does Phya pa Chos kyi seng ge himself say on these points? Ts o n g k h a p a ’s r e m a r k t h a t P h y a w o u l d h o l d a s v a t a n t r a a s “inappropriate in the case of a [non-existent] subject imputed by nonBuddhists” can certainly not be verified.7-77. 65 This would indicate an agreement with Kamalaśīla’s position as it is pointed out by Tsong kha pa in his dBu ma rgyan gyi zin bris. In his Shar gsum stong thun he takes great pains to demonstrate exactly the opposite.: 70. However.14). dBu ma rgyan gyi zin bris: 78b1ff.cit.cit.4-62. 519. it reads: “The mutual exclusion (of the conventional and the absolute) is invalidated by the prasaga … and the thereby implied svatantra …” (… thal ba dang | de la … rang rgyud ’phangs pas phan tshun spangs pa la gnod do). See above and n.. 31 and 33. Op. Lung rigs rgya mtsho:14. viz. in the context of the first consequence. 66 One passage in the bDen gnyis ’grel ba points to the same direction. 64 Shākya mchog ldan quotes with an amendment “. the chapter title “Inadmissibility/impossibility of refuting the realists by prasaga” (thal ’gyur gyis dngos por smra ba ’gog pa mi ’thad/nus pa). apparently the svatantra (alone?) refutes the faulty view: “The svatantra … implied by the prasaga … implicitly negates the difference (of the absolute) from the conventional” (… thal bas … rang rgyud ’phangs pas kun rdzob las gzhan yin pa shugs la khegs ste).cit. by prasaga alone (thal ’gyur rkyang pas …)”. . see TILLEMANS 1984: 384 and 367.1-72. On the other hand.: 70. n. but basically he continues the tradition of the Indian masters mentioned above. and this sūtra passage became the locus classicus for this kind of discussion in later centuries.3-5. they both do not propagate the same Madhyamaka exegesis. Śāntarakita and Kamalaśīla.. the discussion of the four possible kinds of difference between the two realities.Phya pa Chos kyi seng ge and his Madhyamaka Treatises 23 In the context of this paper it would lead too far to discuss in detail Phya pa’s understanding of concepts like “fit to withstand investigation by logical analysis which investigates the absolute” (de kho na nyid dpyod pa’i rigs pas dpyad bzod) and “established by logical argumentation” (rigs pas grub pa). For the time being. which were only recently introduced to Tibet. and his exact definition of the object of negation. up to the present time. his innovations can be seen on two levels. However. Regardless of whether or not Davidson’s judgment quoted above (see above. an evaluation of his doctrinal innovations are not yet . Phya pa bases his discussion of whether the two realities are the same or different in nature or with regard to their to the characteristic distinction (ldog pa. and of rNgog lotsāva. to some extent Phya pa is certainly innovative. let us return to the question of Phya pa’s innovations. vyāvtti) on SNS 3. i. His combining Madhyamaka and Pramāa methods and ideas. but they are certainly very close with regard to basic ideas. just as Tsong kha pa is. In his very basic approach. a) The overall structure of the discussion of the two realities (bden pa gnyis) that Phya pa set out in his Shar gsum stong thun became the model for all later Tibetan – in particular dGe lugs pa – treatises on this topic: Distinction of the 2 realities (bden pa gnyis kyi dbye ba) Basis of distinction (dbye ba’i gzhi) Mode of distinction (dbye ba’i don).e. He might exceed his predecessors in this respect. Of course. a) structural and b) doctrinal. In this context. and strictly rejecting the works and the tradition of Candrakīrti. too. One would rather call him “conservative” in maintaining the exegetical tradition of Jñānagarbha. no justification for the respective evaluations by mKhas grub rje and A kyā yongs ’dzin is evident in Phya pa’s writings. is nothing “new”. Ascertainment of the number of realities (grangs nges pa) Meaning of the terms (ming gi don) Characteristics of the two realities (bden pa gnyis kyi mtshan nyid). and they both stress the same or similar topics and problems. accordingly. 49) is to the point. Phya pa Chos kyi seng ge is not innovative at all. a detailed analysis of Phya pa’s doctrinal position and. At the present stage. b) As already stated. Later discuss in a more or less detailed way what could be taken. Again. “mere entities that are differentiated by means of different sorts of cognition” • cognition as such (blo tsam) – Sa skya Paita.68 2) Identification of the object of negation (dgag bya): In Tsong kha pa’s exegesis. it is a crucial ontological issue. They might appear to be merely formal issues. it is of doctrinal relevance.cit. and does not only interpret it as a particular way of viewing reality. denoting everything that is opposed to absolute reality and the cognition thereof. paramārthasatya) is an object of cognition (shes bya). and actually is taken. .1ff. this paper will concentrate only on very basic concepts. It is not clear whether this position is to be counted as an “innovation”. 1) Absolute reality (don dam bden pa. but each of these topics deals with an essential aspect of a complex ontological system. Phya pa was the first one to introduce this category into Madhyamaka exegesis. this expression turned from a general and neutral term (“that which is to be negated”. Go ram pa • reality/truth as such (bden pa tsam) 68 69 70 71 See TAUSCHER 1995: 326-341.69 In Phya pa’s usage of the term. Op. This topic touches a major ontological issue. Thus. as a basis of distinguishing the two realities. 3) Basis of distinction (dbye gzhi) of the two realities: Apparently.: 73-177. prati edhya) into a technical term. each of them could serve as a complete description of the system. It has to be properly identified in order to arrive at a correct understanding of emptiness (śūnyatā). as it counts the absolute among the “existing things”.24 Helmut Tauscher possible. and focuses on the same doctrinal essence. although this point has already been mentiond under the “structural innovations” of Phya pa. but it certainly is in strict opposition to rNgog lotsāva and probably other contemporaries of Phya pa. See TAUSCHER 1995: 181ff. It is not clear in all cases who’s position is actually referred to:70 • appearance as such (snang ba tsam) – ascribed to rNgog lotsāva by ’Jam dbyangs bzhad pa71 • the nature of (all entities) from matter to omniscience (gzugs nas rnam mkhyen bar gyi ngo bo) • objects that are not imputed (sgro ma brtags pa’i yul) – Phya pa (?) • objects of cognition that are not investigated and analysed (ma brtags ma dpyad pa’i shes bya). and. we find first traces of this development. This question is of major importance also in Tsong kha pa’s writings. dBu ’jug mtha’ dpyod: 514. implies all the other topics. after taking the mere basis of definition (i. not justified to credit Phya pa with the introduction of the dbye bzhi debate into Madhyamaka exegesis.. the basis of distinction is “the basis of definition as such” (mtshan gzhi tsam). all objects of cognition. respectively. but not in detail. i. It argues that “object of cognition” (shes bya) and “existent” (yod pa) have the same range of meaning. Tsong kha pa If ’Jam dbyangs bzhad pa and Go ram pa are right in ascribing such position to rNgog lotsāva and.6ff.e. as ontological and not as epistemological categories. we have to ask the question: what does Phya pa really say on that topic? For him. i. 73 Lung rigs rgya mtsho: 15. whereas conventional reality (savtisatya) is not necessarily existent. that) which is signified as object of cognition. the the object of cognition (shes bya) or the object of valid cognition (tshad ma’i gzhal bya). Further.. to Pa tshab Nyi ma grags. Tsong kha pa’s position has to be stressed in particular.e. This is the basis for taking both satyas as “conventually existent” (tha sñad du yod pa). of course. as the basis. However. because.. as the characteristic distinction (ldog pa. i. 374. .e. it is. nevertheless it is suiting as the basis of distinction of the two realities. from Śākya mchog ldan’s critique on the interpretation of the basis of distinction as “the objects of cognition as such”. the respective statements might be correct in essence. vyāvtti) of an object of valid cognition (tshad ma’i gzhal bya) is an implying negation. This fact becomes clear. and to Pa tshab Nyi ma grags (*1055) by Go ram pa to. all the others are mainly epistemological.. it is only conventional reality. the two satyas should cover everything existent. TAUSCHER 1995: n. In the Shar gsum stong thun he says: “It is suitable to take as the realm of mind (blo’i yul) that nature (of things) which is constituted after abolishing its opposite by valid cognition. in other words. only the one of Phya pa (if he is really referred to in this case) and of Tsong kha pa operate with ontological categories. see TAUSCHER 1990: 42f. it is doubtful whether these two older masters really did operate with these categories. In his exegesis this is an important point.g.Phya pa Chos kyi seng ge and his Madhyamaka Treatises 25 • dependently originated things as such (rten ’brel tsam) • objects of cognition as such (shes bya tsam) – ascribed to “some (masters) of the old days” (snga rabs pa ’ga’ zhig) by Rong ston Shes bya kun rig (1357-1449). therefore. with all its implications. the ultimate and the conventional reality have to be distinguished.73 Again. in his view. or.72 Among these positions. e. 3. because the basis of 72 Cf.e. “that which is charcterized as an object of cognition”. 5f. only in their aspect of the “appearing object” (snang yul). in the bDen gnyis ’grel ba. the meaning of the two realities shall be ascertained correctly by logical argumentation.17ff.e. 247ff. 76 “Objects that are not imputed” (sgro ma brtags pa’i yul) are not mentioned. however.”75 Similarly. the basis of distinction is defined as “an object of cognition”. the conceptual object would be excluded from being an object 74 Shar gsum stong thun: 1.12f. in a slightly different context: “As no base of the objects of cognition does exceed the two realities.”74 In the introduction to this passage he even uses the same reason that Tsong kha pa gives for taking “objects of cognition as such” (shes bya tsam) as the basis of distinction. not as a “conceptual object” (zhen yul). taking into consideration Phya pa’s definition as it is related by Shākya mchog ldan: “(Valid cognition) is pervaded by being a non-erroneous mode of cognition and by being able to eliminate (erroneous) imputation”77 this is implied. 75 Op. however. a basis of definition which is suiting as a support for the conventional designation “definiendum” (mtshon bya) or “object of cognition” (shes bya) (… mtshon bya shes bya’i tha snyad rten du rung ba’i mtshan gzhi shes bya).26 Helmut Tauscher definition which is an object of valid cognition pervades all nonimplying and implying negations. He argues that in this case also mirage and magical appearance would not fall under “imputed by defective sense faculties”.. i. only the appearing object would be excluded from being imputed by defective sense-faculties.: 1.e. 78 See TAUSCHER 1995: 116. 76 bDen gnyis ’grel ba: 194.cit. . i. as such they would be non-existent. the ability to eliminate imputation. 77–78. 77 See KUIJP 1983. Of course. Taking this differentiation into consideration. ’Jam dbyangs bshad pa is not of this opinion. by Phya pa’s condition for “valid cognition”. 78 According to dGe lugs pa position they are conventional reality. but that does not put it into contradiction with Tsong kha pa’s position.: tshad mas ’gal zla bsal nas rnam par gzhag pa’i ngo bo blo’i yul du byar rung bas shes byar mtshon pa’i mtshan gzhi tsam gzhir byas nas … don dam pa’i bden pa dang … kun rdzob kyi bden pa gnyis su dbye’o || de’ang tshad ma’i gzhal bya’i ldog pa ni ma yin dgag yin pas kun rdzob kyi bden pa kho na yin yang tshad ma’i gzhal bya’i mtshan gzhi ni med dgag dang ma yin dgag mtha’ dag gi khyab byed yin pas bden gnyis kyi dbye ba’i gzhir ’thad do.: shes bya’i sa thams cad bden pa gnyis las ma ’das pas bden gnyis kyi don phyin ci ma log par rigs pas nges par bya ba ste. 82 Shar gsum stong thun : 3.14f..: 145.82 Although Phya pa propagates this kind of relation in the context of the three kāya of the Buddha. he does not. discussing the same topic in the Lam rim chung ba (300b1ff. or we have here a case of real inconsistency. as it sounds like a tautology. Tsong kha pa.18.80 It implies the difference of two things. • “identity in nature and difference with regard to the distinguishing characteristics” (ngo bog cig la ldog pa tha dad pa). thereby. 84 Op. like “pot” and “cloth”. which means that the one does not have the same nature (bdag nyid) as the other.cit. if he would argue in that way. he distinguishes between correct and wrong conventional reality.15-9. TAUSCHER 1995: 188ff. one of which is unreal.: 2.3ff.17. 81 bKa’ bsdu v. formally. like “real” and “unreal”. 83 Op. The “difference of negated identity” poses a problem. . 12-14b (366.6-367. 4) The difference between the two realities. • pseudo-difference (tha dad lta bu). even though they have no distinct functional efficiencies.2). mirage etc.) mentions only the first three alternatives.84 His main arguments are that under the condition that emptiness and the conventional reality were not identical in nature: 79 Shar gsum stong thun: 2. however. indeed. and it means that they are “undeterminable as being the same or different” (de nyid dang gzhan du brjod du med pa. Phya pa would be in total harmony with Tsong kha pa.Phya pa Chos kyi seng ge and his Madhyamaka Treatises 27 of valid cognition and. • the “difference of negated identity” (gcig pa bkag pa’i tha dad pa). a shortcoming of a not yet fully developed system.cit. and the actual meaning of the term is still unclear. This explanation is given by Dal po pa She rab rgyal mtshan (1292-1361). from being classified as basis of distinction.83 he strictly opposes it with regard to the two realities and Phya pa refutes at length. So. The relation between the two realities could be: • Different things (dngos po tha dad pa) with a distinct functional efficiency each. ’Jam dbyangs bshad pa’s critique is correct: with Phya pa’s definition of the basis of distinction being valid.79 The first and the last alternative are merely theoretical and need not be discussed in detail. as it is the case with synonyms. tattvānyatvābhyām anirvacanīya).81 and he might also be the opponent who uses this definition as an argument. 80 Cf. should not depend on “imputation by defective sense faculties”. Either Phya pa uses the term “imputation” in a narrower sense than the dGe lugs pa tradition does. In Svātantrika manner. That means. . • An emptiness that was of the same nature as the appearing things could not be their ultimate reality (ngo bo gcig pa’i stong pa ñid don dam pa’i bden pa ma yin pa).28 Helmut Tauscher • śūnyatā [as a synonym of ultimate reality] and conventional reality would not be of identical nature (stong pa ñid dang kun rdzob ngo bo gcig ma yin pa). leaves room for various interpretations. . like the “difference of negated identity” (gcig pa bkag pa’i tha dad) between the two realities. Phya pa Chos kyi seng ge and Tsong kha agree: the two realities are “identical in nature. 85 Cf. 6-10) and need not be repeated here. TAUSCHER 1995: 191. or ultimate reality would not exist at all. to be noted that SNS speaks only of a position that “the characteristic of the conditioned and the characteristic of the ultimate are non-different or different” (’du byed kyi mtshan nyid dang | don dam pa’i mtshan nyid tha dad pa ma yin pa’am | tha dad pa zhes zer ba). The passage of SNS. liberation would be impossible. Phya pa and the dGe lugs pa authors interpret “non-different” as “non-different with regard to the characteristic distinction” (ldog pa tha dad med pa) and “different” as “different in nature” (ngo bo tha dad). too. But why has he been neglect for centuries? Is it possible that the Mādhyamika Phya pa Chos kyi seng ge was ignored by the later tradition merely because of his “bad reputation” as a strict Svātantrika (even if this reputation might not be fully justified)? Most probably. With regard to their own position. That would mean that things are established as ultimately real. this question will never be answered. but different with regard to the characteristic distinction” (ngo bo gcig la ldog pa tha dad pa). much more research work is needed to fully understand it..g. Tsong kha pa. however. However. because they were essentially different from their emptiness and there was no connection between these two. the realisation of ultimate reality would not be opposed to the concept of and the clinging to ultimately real things. These consequences have already been dealt with (see above pp. he does not actually refute it. e. In this case. Phya pa and most of the later dGe lugs pa authors – though not Tsong kha pa – base the respective discussion on the four unacceptable consequences taught in SNS 3.85 These few examples might suffice to show that Phya pa did have some impact on the Tibetan Madhyamaka exegese. however. but accepts it as the position of some “masters of the old days” (snga rabs pa). discusses this kind of difference in some detail. In later centuries it was used as a scriptural evidence for other positions as well. however. 3-5 for the assuption that the ultimate and the conventional are nondifferent and for the assumption that they are different. or the two realities being “identical or different in no way whatsoever” (gcig tha dad gang yang ma yin pa). It has. A pedagogical presentation of Rje Tsokha-pa’s Legs bśad sñi po by Mkhan-po Blo gros-rgya-mtsho of Bkra-śis-’khyil.1. Ronald M. 1970 mChan bzhi see Jam dbyangs bzhad pa’i rdo rje (et. New York: Columbia University Press Deb ther sngon po see R OERICH 1949 bDen gnyis ’grel ba see Phya pa Chos kyi seng ge. dBu ma bden gnyis kyi don bsdus pa mDzes rgyan see lCang skya Rol pa’i rdo rje. Ed.al. mNyam med rje btsun Tsong kha pa chen pos mdzad pa’i Byang chub lam rim chen mo’i dka’ ba’i gnad rnams mchan bu bzhi’i sgo nas legs par bshad pa Theg chen lam gyi gsal sgron D AVIDSON .). Delhi 1982 Blue Annals see ROERICH 1949 dBu ’jug mtha’ dpyod ’ see ’Jam dbyangs bzhad pa’i rdo rje.). Grub pa’i mtha’i rnam par bzhag pa gsal bar bshad pa thub bstan lhun po’i mdzes rgyan Drang nges dka’ ’grel see Blo gros rgya mtsho. Tantric Buddhism in the Rebirth of Tibetan Culture.). Tibetan Renaissance. Kesang Thabkhes (ed.. Lama Guru Deva (ed. New Delhi 1971.Phya pa Chos kyi seng ge and his Madhyamaka Treatises 29 Bibliography A kyā yongs ’dzin. Byang chub lam gyi rim pa chen mo las byung ba’i brda bkrol nyer mkho bsdus pa. Sarnath: Pleasure of Elegant Sayings Printing Press. The Collected Works of A-kya Yos ’dzin. dBu ma’i byung tshul rnam par bshad pa’i gtam yid bzhin lhun po zhes bya ba’i bstan bcos lCang skya Rol pa’i rdo rje. 78-175 Blo gros rgya mtsho. Drang ba dang nges pa’i don rnam par ’byed pa’i bstan bcos legs bshad snying pa’i dka’ ‘grel Rin chen sgron me .. Vol. dBu ma bden gnyis kyi ’grel ba bDen gnyis bsdus don see Phya pa Chos kyi seng ge. Grub pa’i mtha’i rnam par bzhag pa gsal bar bshad pa thub bstan lhun po’i mdzes rgyan. dBu ma la ’jug pa’i mtha’ dpyod Lung rigs gter mdzod zab don kun gsal skal bzang ’jug ngos dBu ma’i byung tshul see Shākya mchog ldan. 2005. Drang ba dang nges pa’i don rnam par ’byed pa’i bstan bcos legs bshad snying pa’i dka’ ’grel Rin chen sgron me. A n E i g h t C e n t u r y Handbook of Madhyamaka Philosophy. bKa’ bsdu bzhi pa’i gtan tshigs chen po. 403-723 rGyud bla ma’i bsdus don see Phya pa Chos kyi seng ge. Ngawang Gelek Demo (ed. The Collected Works (gSu ’bum) of Kunmkhyen Dol-po-pa śes-rab-rgyal-mtshan. Pascale. Theg pa chen po rgyud bla ma’i bsdus (pa’i) don Hugon. Sa skya Pa.1. The Collected Works of Gu-tha Dkonmchog-bstan-pa’i sgron-me. Trésors du raisonnement.). Jñānagarbha’s Commentary on the D i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n t h e Tw o Tr u t h s . New Delhi 1972. 2. Malcolm David. 363-417 E CKEL . Delhi 1984. 1987. Drang nges rnam ’byed kyi dka’ ’grel rtsom ’phro Legs bshad snying po’i yang snying. Vol. Albany: State University of New York Press Gung thang dKon mchog bstan pa’i sgron me.30 Helmut Tauscher Drang nges yang snying see Gung thang dKon mchog bstan pa’i sgron me. 2008a. Vol. Lama Mgodrup and Sherap Drimay (eds). Drang nges rnam ’byed kyi dka’ ’grel rtsom ’phro Legs bshad snying po’i yang snying Dol po pa. Argumentation 22.” E.1.” E. Vose (eds. “The Origin of the Theory of Definition and its Place in Phya pa Chos kyi seng ge’s Epistemological System. “Phya pa Chos kyi seng ge’s Views on Perception. Sanskrit Manuscripts in China. Edition et traduction annotée du quatrième chapitre et d’une section du dixième chapitre du Tshad ma rigs pa’i gter.). B. Tillemans (eds. Qing. Proceedings of a panel at the 2008 Beijing Seminar on Tibetan Studies.) Proceedings of the 4th International Dharmakīrti Conference (Vienna.).ita et ses prédécesseurs tibétains sur les modes de fonctionnement de la pensée et le fondement de l’inférence. Dreyfus. D. Krasser and H. H.” P.). Franco. Beijing: China Tibetology Publishing House. 2005) forthcoming b. “Phya pa Chos kyi seng ge’s Synoptic Table of the Pramāaviniścaya. Steinkellner. August 23-27. October 13 to 17. 47-88 forthcoming a. Hugon and K. H. Kellner. Krasser (eds. Wien: Arbeitskreis für Tibetische und Buddhistische Studien 2008b. T. 93-114 2009.” G. Lasic (eds. “Arguments by Parallels in the Epistemological Works of Phya pa Chos kyi seng ge. Tibetan Scholasticism in the 11th and 12th Centuries -Contributions to a panel at the XVth Congress of the International . September 1-5. Japan. David P. Journal of Indian Philosophy Jackson. 23-28 June 2008. Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies 32 forthcoming c.. Sa-skya Pa. 2009). “Is Dharmakīrti Grabbing the Rabbit by the Horns? A Reassessment of the Scope of prameya in Dharmakīrtian Epistemology. 1987.Phya pa Chos kyi seng ge and his Madhyamaka Treatises 31 Association of Buddhist Studies.” Proceedings of the Philosophy Panel of the 14 th World Sanskrit Conference (Kyoto. Atlanta. The Entrance Gate for the Wise (Section III). Vol. Yuichi. dBu ma la ’jug pa’i mtha’ dpyod Lung rigs gter mdzod zab don kun gsal skal bzang ’jug ngos. Ngawang Gelek Demo (ed. Jam-dbyangs-bzhad-pa’i rdo-rje. [A Study of Commentaries on the Ratnagotravibhāga (I) – Phywa pa’s Interpretation on Ratnagotravibhāga I. 2003. 1998.” Indogaku Bukkyogaku Kenkyu 51-2. New Delhi 1972 bKa’ gdams gsung ’bum phyogs bsgrigs.). 2 vols. Kazuo. “Hōshōron chūkenkyū (I) – Phywa pa ni yo ru Hōshōron I. Sde-drug Mkhan-chen Ngagdbang-rab-brtan. The Collected Works of ’Jam-dbyas-bźad-pa’irdo-rje. An Annotated Translation of the Tarkabhā yā of Mok ākaragupta.al. Ed. Chos-’phel-legs-ldan (ed. mNyam med rje btsun Tsong kha pa chen pos mdzad pa’i Byang chub lam rim chen mo’i dka’ ba’i gnad rnams mchan bu bzhi’i sgo nas legs par bshad pa Theg chen lam gyi gsal sgron. Reprint.).– sTong thun chen mo of mKhas-grub Dge-legs-dpal-bzang and other Texts on Madhyamika . and Bra-sti Dge-bshes Rin-chen-don-grub.9 ’Jam dbyangs bzhad pa’i rdo rje (et. Ed. With the interlineal notes of Ba-so Chos-kyi-rgyal-mtshan. An Introduction to Buddhist Philosophy.). The Lam rim chen mo of the Incomparable Tsong-kha-pa.26 kaishaku. 91 vols. New Delhi 1973.26]. Si khron mi rigs dpe skrun khang 2006-2009 bKa’ gdams gsung ’bum phyogs bsgrigs thengs dang po’i dkar chag. Si khron mi rigs dpe skrun khang 2006 Kajiyama. Zab mo stong pa nyid kyi de kho na nyid rab tu gsal bar byed pa’i bstan bcos sKal bzang mig ’byed.ita on Indian and Tibetan Traditions of Pramāa and Philosophical Debate. Karma bde legs. (109)-(111) [924-922] mKhas grub rje. dPal brtsegs bod yig dpe rnying zhib ’jug khang. Wien: Arbeitskreis für Tibetische und Buddhistische Studien Kano. Wien: Arbeitskreis für Tibetische und Buddhistische Studien ’Jam dbyangs bzhad pa’i rdo rje. Birgit. Reprint Kyoto: Rinsen Book Co.J. Materials for a History of Tibetan Literature. Donald S. “Phya–pa Chos–kyi seng–ge’s Impact on Tibetan Epistemological Theory. Tibetan Studies. 1997. 1987. Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner Verlag Lam rim brda bkrol see A kyā yongs ’dzin. Tauscher (eds. bKa’ bsdu bzhi pa’i gtan tshigs chen po Kellner. 1-512 bKa’ bsdu see Dol po pa. H. lHa-mkhar yongs-dzin bstanpa rgyal mtshan. 1986. Wien: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. Krasser. 1983. E. Contribution to the Development of Tibetan Buddhist Epistemology. “Types of Incompatibility (’gal ba) and Types of Noncognition (ma/mi dmigs pa) in Early Tibetan tshad ma-Literature. M. 203–213 1992. Monastic Debate in Tibet. 65-85 1989. sKyes bu gsum gyi nyams su blang ba’i byang chub lam gyi rim pa Lokesh Chandra. dBu ma rnam par nges pa’i chos kyi bang mdzod lung dang rigs pa’i rgya mtsho rNam nges bsdus don see Phya pa Chos kyi seng ge. Leonard W. Vol.32 Helmut Tauscher Philosophy.. Much. Proceedings of the 7 th Seminar of the International Association for Tibetan Studies. Byang chub lam gyi rim pa chen mo las byung ba’i brda bkrol nyer mkho bsdus pa Lam rim chung ba see Tsong kha pa. Shunzo. 2 vols. 1981 Lopez. 1978. Ed.).. Graz 1995. Wien: Arbeitskreis für Tibetische und Buddhistische Studien . New Delhi 1972. T. Tshad ma rnam par nges pa’i bsdus don Onoda. 1.” H.” Journal of Indian Philosophy 5. Part 1-3. New York: Snow Lion Publications Lung rigs rgya mtsho see Shākya mchog ldan. “Phya pa Chos kyi seng ge’s Classification of Thal ’gyur.” Berliner Indologische Studien 2.” Wiener Zeitschrift für die Kunde Südasiens 33. Steinkellner. A Study of Svātantrika. 355–369. 495-510 van der Kuijp. 1963. “The Chronology of the Abbatial Succession of the gSa phu sNe’u thog Monastery. New Delhi: International Academy of Indian Culture. Phya pa Chos kyi seng ge and his Madhyamaka Treatises 33 Padma chos ’byung Padma dkar po, Chos ’byung bstan pa’i padma rgyas pa’i nyin byed. Lokesh Chandra (ed.), Tibetan Chronicle of Padma-dkar-po. New Delhi 1968 Phya pa Chos kyi seng ge, sPyod ’jug bsdus don / Byang chub sems dpa’i spyod pa la ’jug pa’i don bsdus pa. – bKa’ gdams gsung ’bum, vol. 7. 131-143 dBu ma bden gnyis kyi ’grel ba / dBu ma bden pa gnyis rnam par bshad pa yi ge nyung ngus gzhung gsal bar byed pa. – bKa’ gdams gsung ’bum, vol. 6. 186-250 dBu ma bden pa gnyis kyi don bsdus pa. – bKa’ gdams gsung ’bum, vol. 6. 251-257 dBu ma shar gsum gyi stong thun = dBu ma’i de kho na nyid bsdus pa / dBu ma de kho na nyid kyi snying po. Tauscher 1999a, and bKa’ gdams gsung ’bum, vol. 7. 15-129 Theg pa chen po rgyud bla ma’i bsdus (pa’i) don. – bKa’ gdams gsung ’bum, vol. 7. 146-156 Tshad ma rnam par nges pa’i bsdus don. – bKa’ gdams gsung ’bum, vol. 8. 4-28 bSlab pa kun las btus pa’i don bsdus pa. – bKa’ gdams gsung ’bum, vol. 7. 143-144 sPyod ’jug bsdus don see Phya pa Chos kyi seng ge, sPyod ’jug bsdus don / Byang chub sems dpa’i spyod pa la ’jug pa’i don bsdus pa Rigs gter rnam bshad see Shākya mchog ldan, Tshad ma rigs pa’i gter gyi rnam bshad pa sde bdun ngag gi rol mtsho Roerich, George N., 1949. The Blue Annals. Calcutta, reprint Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass 1979 SDV Jñānagarbha, Satyadvayavibhaga SDVV Jñānagarbha, Satyadvayavibhagavti see ECKEL 1987 see ECKEL 1987 Shar gsum stong thun see Phya pa Chos kyi seng ge, dBu ma śar gsum gyi sto thun Shākya mchog ldan, dBu ma’i byung tshul rnam par bshad pa’i gtam yid bzhin lhun po zhes bya ba’i bstan bcos. The Collected Works (Gsu ’bum) of Gser-mdog Pa-chen Śākya-mchog-ldan. Ed. Kun-zang Topgey, Thimphu 1975. Vol. 4, 249-373 34 Helmut Tauscher dBu ma rnam par nges pa’i chos kyi bang mdzod lung dang rigs pa’i rgya mtsho – The Collected Works (Gsu ’bum) of Gser-mdog Pachen Śākya-mchog-ldan. Ed. Kun-zang Topgey, Thimphu 1975. Vol. 14, 341-647, vol. 15, 1-695 Tshad ma rigs pa’i gter gyi rnam bshad pa sde bdun ngag gi rol mtsho – The Complete Works (Gsu ’bum) of Gser-mdog Pa-chen Śākyamchog-ldan. Ed. Kunzang Tobgey, Thimphu 1975. Vol. 19, 447-749 Tshad ma’i mdo dang bstan bcos kyi shing rta’i srol rnams ji ltar byung ba’i tshul gtam bya ba nyin mor byed pa’i snang bas dpyod ldan mtha’ dag dga’ bar byed pa – The Complete Works (Gsu ’bum) of Gser-mdog Pa-chen Śākya-mchog-ldan. Ed. Kunzang Tobgey, Thimphu 1975. Vol. 19, 1-137 bSlab btus bsdus don see Phya pa Chos kyi seng ge, bSlab pa kun las btus pa’i don bsdus pa SNS Sadhinirmocanasūtra. L’Explication des Mystères. Éd. et trad. par É. Lamotte, Louvain, Paris: Bureaux du Recueil 1935 Stoltz, Jonathan, 2007. “Gettier and Factivity in Indo-Tibetan Epistemology”. The Philosophical Quarterly 57.228. 394-415 forthcoming. “Phywa pa’s Argumentative Analogy Between Factive Assessment (yid dpyod) and Conceptual Thought (rtog pa) ”. P. Hugon et K. Vose (eds.), Tibetan Scholasticism in the 11th and 12th Centuries – Contributions to a panel at the XVth Congress of the International Association of Buddhist Studies, Atlanta, 23-28 June 2008. Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies 32 Tauscher, Helmut, 1990. “Savti bei Tso kha pa” [part 1]. Wiener Zeitschrift für die Kunde Südasiens 34. 227-254 1995. Die Lehre von den zwei Wirklichkeiten in Tso kha pas Madhyamaka-Werken. Wien: Arbeitskreis für Tibetische und Buddhistische Studien 1999a. Phya pa Chos kyi se ge, dBu ma śar gsum gyi sto thun. Wien: Arbeitskreis für Tibetische und Buddhistische Studien 1999 B . “Phya pa Chos kyi seng ge’s Opinion on prasaga.” Dharmakīrti’s Thought and Its Impact on Indian and Tibetan Philosophy. Proceedings of the Third International Dharmakīrti Conference, Hiroshima, November 4-6, 1997. Wien: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. 387-393 Phya pa Chos kyi seng ge and his Madhyamaka Treatises 35 2003. “Phya pa chos kyi se ge as a Svātantrika.” The vātantrikaPrāsagika Distinction. Ed. Georges B. J. Dreyfus & Sara L. McClintock. Boston: Wisdom Publications. 207-255 Tillemans, Tom J. F., 1984. “Two Tibetan texts on the «neither one nor many» argument for śūnyatā.” Journal of Indian Philosophy 12, 357-388 1989. “Formal and Semantic Aspects of Tibetan Buddhist Debate Logic.” Journal of Indian Philosophy 17. 265–297 sTong thun chen mo see mKhas grub rje, Zab mo stong pa nyid kyi de kho na nyid rab tu gsal bar byed pa’i bstan bcos sKal bzang mig ’byed Tshad ma’i byung tshul see Shākya mchog ldan, Tshad ma’i mdo dang bstan bcos kyi shing rta’i srol rnams ji ltar byung ba’i tshul gtam bya ba nyin mor byed pa’i snang bas dpyod ldan mtha’ dag dga’ bar byed pa Tshig mdzod chen mo Bod rgya tshig mdzod chen mo. 3 vols, Beijing: Mi rigs dpe sgrun khang 1985, reprint in 2 vols. 1993 Tsong kha pa, sKyes bu gsum gyi nyams su blang ba’i byang chub lam gyi rim pa [Lam rim chung ba]. The Tibetan Tripitaka. Peking Edition, Tokyo-Kyoto 1958. No 6002 dBu ma rgyan gyi zin bris. D. T. Suzuki (ed.), The Tibetan Tripitaka. Peking Edition, Tokyo-Kyoto 1958. No 6141 rTen ’brel bstod pa Legs bshad snying po. Gyaltsen Namdol [and] Ngawang Samten (ed. and transl.), Pratītyasamutpādastutisubhā itahdayam of Ācarya Tsokhāpā. Sarnath 1982 Vose, Kevin, 2009. Resurrecting Candrakīrti. Disputes in the Tibetan Creation of Prāsagika. Boston: Wisdom Publications Yoshimizu, Chizuko, 1996. Die Erkenntnislehre des PrāsagikaMadhyamaka nach dem Tshig gsal sto thun gyi tshad ma’i rnam bœad des ’Jam dbyas bźad pa’i rdo rje. Wien: Arbeitskreis für Tibetische und Buddhistische Studien Rab gnas: Shift in Religious and Soteriological Significance in Tibetan Tradition Sonam Tsering Ngulphu Dharamsala Introduction Our study on the topic of Rab gnas naturally prods us to look into the historical and teleological background to Buddhist consecration in general and its application within the Tibetan tradition. From a Buddhist perspective, Rab gnas or consecration is a complex assortment and interplay of rituals intended to bring about a mystical transformation of an object d’art into a powerful source of blessings. Are such transformations objective? Or are they subjective? Do consecration rituals based on devotional faith alone bring about an actual psycho-physical transformation on the object; or is it a mere cultic expression built upon falsely conjured ideas? Are semiotic representations innate in consecrated objects waiting only to be unraveled by someone truly devout; or is it an exquisite liturgical yarn spun by the well-versed liturgists? Do images and stupas serve as a physical base for a Buddha that is ritualistically called upon to return? Or are these merely an assimilation of the pre-Buddhist post-funerary practice, where gathering and worshipping of ashes and bodily remains, and even mummifying the whole or part of the body, whereby members reconcile with the loss of a beloved one, who has left once and forever? Is it meant to be a psychological tool to emulate “presence” of an “absence” itself, as studied by modern scholars. More than providing a comprehensive solution or a finite answer, our study on the topic only elicits more such questions. Yet, in all Buddhist communities, consecration forms an important part of their religious life, for it is one of the few practices that bring one to a greater proximity with the Buddha and his semiotic representations that strongly govern their religious and spiritual life. For many, it is the consecration practice that differentiates a sutra gracing a family altar and the one sitting way below the height of our waistline in an antique store waiting for a prospective taker. 38 Sonam Tsering Ngulphu Etymology and its Applied Meaning Pratihā, the Sanskrit original for Tibetan word Rab gnas, is composed of two root components—pra, an emphatic adverbial or adjectival prefix meaning ‘well’, and tihād, meaning ‘to stand, remain or abide’, thus together pratihā means ‘to stand, remain or abide’ or ‘consecration or dedication (of a monument or of an idol or of a temple)’ (Sir Monier Williams, 671). Supratihā, a widely used synonym of pratihā hardly makes any difference despite the double emphatic prefixes su and pra, as both are commonly rendered as Rab gnas or Rab tu gnas pa in Tibetan. Acharya Krishna defines pratihā as prakāśananādi-pratihā, which translates to mchog tu gnas pas rab gnas zhes bya’o, meaning ‘Partishta is thus called, because it exists in an excellent way’, both in terms of time and manner of transformation (Rab gnas kyi cho ga’i tshul, NYA f.280b). However, ridden off its Tantric baggage and the later Anglican etymological connotations surrounding its English equivalent “consecration”, the term Rab gnas or pratihā originally, literally and simply means to “abide well” or “abide for long”. As concerning the textual classification, Rab gnas, as a genre, is mostly categorized in the section of Vidhi (cho ga) or liturgy. Yet it equally qualifies for Rgyud (Tantra) or Rgyud ’grel (Tantric commentary) given its contents, including the opening expression of homage mostly extended to Buddha Vajradhara or other Tantric deities. Later commentators, however, have sometimes blurred the issue of classification by paying homage to “Buddhas and Bodhisattvas”, which according to early conventions of textual classification based on early Tibetan translation norms places the texts within the Mdo sde (Sūtrapitaka, Collections of Sutras). Of Sutra and Tantra In the most relevant of Mahayana Sutras on the study of Buddha’s Mahaparinirvana and the cult of images and stupas such as Lalitavistāra, Vi m a l a k ī r t i - n i rd e ś a , L a  k ā v a t a r a , S a d d h a d h a r m a p u ā r i k a , Samdhinirmocana, and Mahāparinirvā a-nāma-mahāyana-sūtra, the expression Rab tu gnas pa, and rarely Rab gnas, applies to a whole range of Sanskrit words tīsha, pratīsha, supratīsha, samsthīta, vastita, susthita, all equally meaning ‘to sustain, abide, or remain’, and none implying consecration as we understand from the Tantric or even the Theravada perspective. Such allusions are also made by Tibetan masters including the First Dalai Lama Gedun Drub (1391-1474/5), who mentions that Paramita literatures make no mentioning of consecration in spite of the emphases laid on the creation and worshipping of images for sake of merits (Gedun Drub, Rab gnas in Tibetan Tradition 39 Dpal gsang ba ’dus pa’i rab gnas kyi cho ga mdor bsdus, f.2). In a much similar tone, the First Panchen Lama Lobsang Choekyi Gyaltsen (15701662) hints on the absence of anything having to do with consecration in ’Dul ba lung, despite all its exhortations in making and worshipping of images (Lobsang Choekyi Gyaltsen, Rab gnas dge legs rgya mtsho’i char ’bebs, f.2). Unlike the Theravada Buddhism, for Tibetan Buddhist tradition, given its incorporation of the entire gamut of Indian Buddhist Tantric rituals and practices, the rituals of consecration, which employ Tantric means of accomplishment (Sadhana) and formulaic spell (mantra), easily fall into the system of Tantra. For Tibetan Buddhism, a strictly Mahayana affiliate, consecration rituals followed today were mostly drawn from Tantra, supplied with many dispensable components from the Sutra as well. No early Tibetan masters prescribe consecration according to non-Sutra in all its exclusivity, as is followed in the Theravada tradition. Presence of two unique characteristics of Tantra help determine consecration as a strictly Tantric ritual in Tibetan Buddhism. Firstly, the inseparable experience of bliss and emptiness (bde stong dbyer med) through the mergence of wisdom and skillful means (thabs shes zung ’brel). And secondly, the Deity Yoga (lha’i rnal ’byor), a form of Yogic meditation where one’s body is visualized in the aspects of the Form Buddha (Dalai Lama 1985, 27) and generates Buddhalike attitudes, in particular the ‘divine pride’ (lha’i nga rgyal). In keeping with Tantrayana classifications, Tibetan masters have devised consecrations of four types—Action (kriya), Performance (cārya), Yoga (yoga) and Highest Yoga (anuttara-yoga), a division mostly made from the point of view of their field of emphasis, whether to external, internal or yogic practices, and the levels of deities invoked as the central figure during consecration. Rab gnas in the Early Days Two important yet overlooked events from the life of the Buddha might shed some light on the role and significance of imagery and symbolic representation in filling the absence of the Buddha, and gaining a better understanding of the subsequent spread of consecration rituals. The first concerns the legendary creation of the earliest Buddha image by King Udayana, as recounted in the Chinese version of Anguttara-nikāya (3rd cent. CE), which also finds a parallel Theravada narrative in the Kosalabima-vanana (c. 13th cent. CE) that ascribes the creation of the first Buddha image to King Pasenadi of Koshala. According to the former, followed by Tibetan Buddhists, when Buddha departed for the Heaven of the Thirtythree Gods (Trayatrimsa-devabhūmi) to impart teachings to his biological 40 Sonam Tsering Ngulphu mother Mahamaya as a token of gratitude, King Udayana expresses panic over Buddha’s imminent absence. To ease King Udayana’s vehement obsession to the Buddha, the latter commissions the creation of his own image. The second event concerns the episode surrounding the Buddha’s preparation for Mahaparinirvana and the post-funerary distribution of relics. Buddha consents to the building of reliquary stupa for his followers to worship ensuring that “whoever lays wreaths or puts sweet perfumes and colors there with a devout heart, will reap benefit and happiness for a long time” (Maurice Walshe, 264). Though the Buddha initially advised that his remains be enshrined in a Stupa that is rightful for a fully enlightened being, an Arhat, a disciple of the Buddha or a Universal Monarch (Maurice Walshe, 264), he finally makes his preference for a funeral and the posthumous installation of stupa rightfully deserved for a Universal Monarch. References of Emperor Ashoka (304-232 BCE) making obeisance to the Stupa of the eonic Buddha Kanakamuni have been found in early Indian and Sri Lankan historical writings (Strong, p.14). It however compels us to think whether these references to early stupa allude to any forms of consecration or to an Indic religious tradition that predates and serves as a model for the cult of the stupa and images, and of consecration in particular. The extensive liturgies on consecration rites found in the Mahayana Tantric literature and the widespread of consecration practices followed in the Theravada tradition reminds us of the prominent role consecration have played from a relatively early period. In Tibet, consecrations were held to have been conducted as early as 7th century during the time of King Songtsen Gampo (617-650). For example, early historians and hagiographers mention of Buddhas and Bodhisattvas appearing from amidst the sky, whereby both Trulnang and Ramoche temples were said to have been consecrated, both miraculously and simultaneously, in circa 645. (Sakyapa Sonam Gyaltsen, 183-185). The same century witnessed the coming of the statues of Akshobhaya and Maitreya, consecrated by Buddha Shakyamuni and Buddha Kashyapa, and later a statue of Jowo Shakymuni, consecrated by Buddha Shakyamuni, both brought as bridal gifts by princesses Bhrikuti Devi and Wencheng Gongzhu respectively (Sakyapa Sonam Gyaltsen, 145). Historical accounts on the consecration of Samye, probably in circa 775-779, provides a detailed picture, mostly of the pre- and post-consecration phases and nothing on the nature of consecration per se or the rites then performed. Post-consecration festivities observed for 12 long years receives more detailed description as to what song each influential member of the cleric and royalty sung at the gatherings (Ba Selnang, 57, Sakyapa Sonam Gyaltsen, 242-247). Even the Fifth Dalai Lama, a great scholar and ritualist himself, hardly looks into the form of rituals practiced in those early days. Rab gnas in Tibetan Tradition 41 The consecration of Samye by Guru Padmasambhava (Terton Ogyen Lingpa, KHA, 195) or by Acharya Shantarakshita (Ba Selnang, 58), or else together (Troru Tsenam, 23) and the lighting of Samye during the consecration of a stupa at Byams pa gling, whereupon the stupa acquired the name Chšten Woebar finds mentioning in several texts (e.g. Terton Ogyen Lingpa, KHA, 223). In both the above cases, more descriptions relates to post-consecration festivities than the consecration itself (Terton Ogyen Lingpa, KHA, 227). Buddhist consecration was first known to Tibet through the translation of Tantric scriptures and liturgical works of Indian masters, all made possible through the collaboration of at least one Indian Pandita and one Tibetan translator, the earliest including Vajrapāni and Maben Choebar (Dpal ’khor lo sdom pa’i rab gnas); Krishna Pandita and Goe Khugpa Lhatse (Rab gnas kyi cho ga’i tshul); Kanakavarman and Patsab Nyima Drakpa (Rab gnas kyi cho ga mdor bsdus pa); Kashmir Pandita Jñana-vajra, Dro Sherab Drakpa (Rab tu gnas pa mdor bsdus pa’i rgyud) and a few others. The ritual exegeses and manuals studied in Tibetan Buddhism can all be traced to either these early Tantric scriptures or the later liturgical works by Indian masters, most prominent and earliest being Sadhuputra, Abhayakara a.k.a. Abhayadatta, Bhanucandra, [Su]Candraprabha, Krishna, Mahasiddha Sagara, Shantigarbha [a contemporary of Goe Khugpa Lhatse] and Praj–avalita. On “Absence and “Presence” From a general perspective, fundamental questions concerning the effectiveness of representations and the unsure outcome of consecration ritual in Buddhism rest on the notion of “absence” and “presence” in relation to its founder the Buddha Shakyamuni, and their ontological veracity. Much has been discussed on the issue of whether images of Buddha are characterized by the “absence” of the historical and the eonic Buddhas or the “presence” of a force either of indexical, numinous or corporeal nature. Discussion so far is not on whether Buddhist images, like images of any religious traditions, bear an indexical reference to the life and deeds of a referred being. It rather rests on question of whether indexical or referential value alone is what a devout Buddhist looks for when worshipping an image of the Buddha. Texts and daily experiences have taught us how all Buddhists despite their geographical remoteness expect something beyond mere references to exist within their object of worship, especially those created in the supposed conventional form and appearance of the Buddha and later consecrated by a qualified priest. Conversely, the question of whether something exists beyond the indexical sphere largely rests on how Buddhists understand and interpret this highly popular ritual of consecration. 42 Sonam Tsering Ngulphu The question on the absence or presence of the Buddha, in general, sheds light on a broader fundamental difference in the philosophical viewpoints of the Theravada and the Mahayana traditions, and also poses questions to the Tibetan liturgists in particular. From the Theravada perspective, an enlightened being does not remain in this world once he enters Parinirvana, while Mahayana believes in multifarious forms of Buddha, not to mention Tibetans and their predilection for Sprul skus, who aside from those that merely prove a psycho-physical connection to their predecessor are all said to have their origin in enlightened Buddhas. A single Sambhogakaya Buddha in the Pure Land is held to manifest infinite Buddhas perpetually to assist beings in the alleviation of suffering. The hermeneutical differences thus suggest different ways of treating the issue of absence and presence based on the fundamental difference in viewpoint concerning a Buddha’s post-Nirvanic state. All early Indian Buddhist scholars unequivocally agree that Shakyamuni left this world in 5th cen. BCE, thereby heralding the period of absence of the Buddha. This period of absence of the Buddha coincides with the beginning of the period of presence of the Buddha in a different form. According to the Theravada tradition, this presence is seen in a statue or a stupa in the form of blessings transferred from a relic of the Buddha, or image, or a source that can be traced back to the historical Buddha Shakyamuni, all by means of consecration. For Mahayana tradition, however, the presence is marked by the transformation of a statue, a stupa or even a tree into an enlightened Buddha (Gdugs la sogs pa rab tu gnas pa dang rnying pa ’byin pa’i cho ga, 260b) through meditation, and hence considered no lesser than the real Buddha. Among modern Buddhist scholars, Richard Gombrich holds that Theravada Buddhists, especially in Sri Lanka, know “cognitively” that Buddha is not present in images yet “affectively” presume it to be existent therein (Gombrich, 1971). Any devout Tantric practitioner may read this as reflecting Gombrich’s preconceived notion of Buddha’s absence in Stupas or the limitation of our ordinary cognitive senses in detecting changes taking place on an unnatural, non-corporeal and non-substantial level. However, there are references to a consecrated images as being mere reflections of the Buddha’s Emanated Body, yet to be looked upon as the Emanated Buddha himself in this aeon of degeneration (Rab tu gnas pa’i cho ga rab gnas kyi rgyal po, KU, 187v). Nonetheless, this do not lay Tantrayana, particular the Tibetan way of consecration, immune from the Theravada critiques. There are yet other scholars, such as Kinnard, who believe the Buddha image as more than mere idols, for its potential in drawing the gaze of a believer into a new and unforeseen ontological dimension (Kinnard, 1999:34-42), though the state and nature of said ontological dimension remains as evasive. Similar Rab gnas in Tibetan Tradition 43 views are found in Tibetan Buddhist community, where a “great majority of Tibetan monastics and lay people do not consider themselves capable of apprehending the exact nature of that which is embodied in a receptacle after consecration, they do possess some intuition that there is something sacred present there.” (Cabezon and Geshe Thubten Tendar, 138) Donald Swearer observes that though modern Buddhologists such as “Eckel, Trainor and Kinnard do not definitively clarify the meaning of the claim that the Buddha is present in relics, images and other material signs, none interprets presence in a literal, physical sense” (Swearer, 2004: 113). For Tibetan Buddhists, the issue of presence and absence does not rest with the question of the presence of indexical or referential value in an object, but rather rests on the question of whether or not deities in a nonrevelatory and non-physical form exist in the representational object. This further rests on the issue of whether the Wisdom Being (ye shes pa, jñānasattva), earlier caused to merge with the Commitment Being (dam tshig pa, samāyasattva), is escorted back to their place through a farewell ritual (gshegs su gsol ba) at the end of the consecration. What Constitutes Consecration Consecration in Tibetan Mahayana Buddhism does not stand as a single distinctive ritual entity, but a complex matrix of many independent rituals of both dispensable and indispensable nature. Consecration exists in various forms and renditions, with different enumerations and classifications, ranging from 20 or more distinct rituals (Taranatha, Rab gnas kyi cho ga ’gro phan rgyas byed, 616) to the five essential rites (Bentor 1996, 291-2). In this brief study of consecration in Tibetan Buddhist tradition, I have outlined five mandatory rites, slightly different from the enumeration of the earlier scholars, yet partly drawn from their close and sincere study on the subject. The five mandatory rites are entirely unrelated to the Theravada consecration, which mainly composed of four distinct salient features: Recollection of the life and deeds of the Buddha, Reenactment of the events surrounding Buddha’s enlightenment, teachings and demise; Transmitting of blessings through a chain of statues beginning with the one consecrated by Buddha himself, and Opening the eyes of the statues. The five mandatory rites in Mahayana consecration are: Sadhana involving visualization of the Commitment Being and invocation of the Wisdom Being; mergence of the visualized image and the invoked image; [Visualization of the receptacle as Commitment Being;] mergence of visualized image and the invoked image/Entry of a visualized being into the receptacle; and sealing the mergence and/or escorting the visualized being back to its original place in heaven. 44 Sonam Tsering Ngulphu The others are ancillary components that may either fall into two categoriesÑthe essentials and the electives, with their length depending on the elaborateness of the ritual ceremony. The components, according to their sequence of occurrence during consecration, are: Preliminary Stages (Sngon ’gro’i rim pa) SETTING A FAVORABLE DATE (TSHES DANG SGYU SKAR BRTAG PA ): This involves conducting an astrology calculation to set a suitable date for consecration. INITIATORY RETREAT (BSNYEN PA): A pre-requisite for Rab gnas is that it can be undertaken without any formal supplication from either a student or patron. This include the practice of reciting mantras of the principal deity for certain number of times, the least being 108, or until one sees either internal or external mystical signs. SITE PURIFICATION (GNAS YONGS SU SBYONG PA/SA CHOG): An extensive sitecleansing ritual involving appeasing the Earth goddesses and other local guardians, which when conducted on an elaborate scale, is marked by Sa gar (site-seeking ritual dance). C REATION OF M ANDALA (D KYIL ’ KHOR CHO GA ): Creating Mandala in the form of sand, strings, and paintings, or through mental visualization. It also involves subsequent blessing of the Mandala. Duration of the ritual depends on the rendition of the liturgy and types of deity or deities associated with the Mandala. O FFERING OF R ITUAL CAKE / RANSOM (G TOR MA ): An offering entreating malignant spirits to leave the ritual site peacefully by partaking a ritual cake, or face the dire consequence of having their heads split into a hundred tit bits. HOMA-RITES (S BYIN SREG): A fire ritual ranging anywhere from burning a handful of white mustard on pyre set upon three stones to observing an elaborate fire ritual marked by its four variant factorsÑpeacefulness, increase, power and force. The fire ritual and the ritual cake offerings do not follow a strict order of occurrence. PRELIMINARY OFFERINGS (MCHOD PA): An extension of this practice can as much include the elaborate ways of making offerings as outlined in the Prayer of the Exalted Samantabhadra (Ārya-bhadracaryā-pranidhāna-rāja) together with other ritual ingredients prescribed for the involved deity or deities. GRAND FEAST (TSHOGS ’KHOR): Mostly observed in elaborate consecrations, grand ritual feasts are meant to appease the Dakas and Dakinis, and seek their assistance in the accumulation of merit and purification of negative Karma. BLESSING OF VASE (BUM PA SGRUB PA): Unless when condensed rituals are preferred, this involves blessing vases filled with cleansing herbs and ingredients, and setting it overnight for ablution at the next dawn. This stage this stage involve extensive creation of both the contrived abode and the deities. one visualizes a replica of the same descending from amidst the limitless space. P URIFYING THE BASES OF VISUALIZATION (R TEN SBYANG BA ): This phase generally follows the preliminaries such as setting ritual objects. and hence called the Commitment Being. the lack of an inherent ontological form of existence in phenomena. an essential feature of Tantra. INVOKING THE WISDOM BEING (YE SHES DGUG PA): Having created a splendid and extensive Mandala filled with all its magnificent features and inhabited by the deities of a particular Tantric tradition followed for the consecration. 148r). the 100-syllable Vajradhara Mantra and visualization. incantation of vase mantra. ABLUTION (KHRUS GSOL): This ritual includes bathing the objects in scented water and later massaging it with pure massage oils and lotions. PURIFICATION OF MIND (DAG SBYANG): Meditation on emptiness. This is follwed by an intricate interplay of syllables. It involves an extended phase of meditation aimed at purifying one’s body. and understanding of Śunyata. sounds and deities that help construct the field of visualization and make it complete. mental distraction and wrong understanding through real and contrived water of discipline (śīla). to prepare oneself for the self-visualization. speech and mind and preparing a proper base for the creation of the Commitment Being. Rituals such as Ushnisha-vijaya vase ritual can be relatively extensive. laziness. visualizing oneself as a deity and blessing the vase. seeks to simulate the physical. anger. Actual Stages (Dngos gzhi’i rim pa) I NVOKING THE COMMITMENT BEING (RTEN DAM TSHIG PAR DGUG PA): Unlike the visualizations at earlier stages. . which are both mentally created through the power of one’s spiritual commitments (Samaya). The ablution practice is held to wash away all stains of non-virtues and negativities such as moral transgressions. SELF-VISUALIZATION (BDAG BSKYED): Self-visualization.Rab gnas in Tibetan Tradition 45 involves visualization of four or ten wrathful deities for the sake of purifying the water in the vase through a detailed thread ritual. cleansing the site. This Commitment Being later serves as a receptacle for the Wisdom Being. verbal and mental states of the Buddha. which is visualized as coming from above. either directly or on their reflection on a mirror (Rab tu gnas pa mdor bsdus pa’i rgyud. patience (kānti). effort (vīrya). meditative stabilization (samādhi) and wisdom (prajña) respectively. It involves assigning major roles to the five Buddhas of the major lineages and the accompanying deities. Each self-visualization begins a powerful cultivation of Bodhicitta or a state of mind aspiring for enlightenment to serve others. which is built one the basis of one’s insight into the empty nature pervading all phenomena. the lifting of the blindfold or head shroud. the creation and mergence of the Wisdom Being and the initiation to constitute the actual consecration. and in other cases the opening of the eyes is followed by offering of toothbrush. Rab gnas kyi cho ga ’gro phan rgyas byed. In its extensive version. . “the image becomes the person and the story of Shakyamuni Buddha” (Swearer. Ritual masters have considered the creation of the Commitment Body. combing hair and so on. like water poured into water. (Rab tu gnas pa’i cho ga rab gnas kyi rgyal po. much in the manner of enacting the partaking of food. 2004: 109) with sheer absence paving way to an absolute presence. Bodhisattvas.46 Sonam Tsering Ngulphu The Wisdom Being eventually joins with the Commitment Being and become one and inseparable in nature and entity. and secret initiations. TANTRIC INITIATION (DBANG): This phase involves carrying out various forms of Vase Initiation such as water. spiritual consorts. and so forth. this part mostly follows the Spyan dbye (eye-opening ritual). This stage constitutes a chain of initiations conducted to restore the supramundane status and power of the Buddhas. Amitabha. Vajra. crown. (Taranatha. From this point onwards. or sometimes a head-shroud that cover the entire face itself. Through the mergence of the Wisdom Being. In many traditions. 282r). this event is marked by applying of collyrium on the eyelashes (Rab gnas kyi cho ga’i tshul. In other cases. thereby enhancing its power and efficacy in the later stages of the consecration. 186r). The lifting of the blindfold. This involves reflecting on the physical and mental attributes of the deities and offering the dresses according to the color of the deities and their seed syllables. the Commitment Being is alleged to be infused with divine energy. Tantric scriptures further add other ancillary forms of openings. OPENING OF THE EYES (SPYAN DBYE): This stage involves either removing of blindfold or beeswax that earlier covered the eyes of the statue. Amogasiddhi and Vairocana. bell. 640) ACTUAL OFFERINGS (MCHOD PA): After a series of initiations. Ratnasambhava. like the final jigsaw piece. rinsing your mouth. associated with the five principal BuddhasÑAkshobhaya. the monks conducting the consecration. enables one to grasp a complete picture of consecrated image for the first time. is considered a sign of opening the five unique eyes of the Buddha (spyan lnga). a special homa-rite is conducted at this point. such as the opening of the auditory. name. In other words. wrathful deities and others celestial beings visualized inside the Mandala. arranges another set of offerings including the dress and other exquisite accessories. goddesses. the transformation of representational objects for consecration or infusion of power in them takes places during these three stages. haircomb. In many rituals. olfactory and gustatory sense-organs. in Tibetan rituals. Ngaggi Wangchug. At this point. this ritual of confession employs meditational-incantations of Vajrasattva (Rdo rje sems pa’i sgom bzlas) or in the least recitation of the 100-syllable Vajrasattva (yig brgya).Rab gnas in Tibetan Tradition 47 OFFERING OF SPECIAL FOODS (MNGA’ ’BUL): This stage includes offering of special offerings. Given that most Tibetan consecration rituals are devoted to Vajrasattva. the position of the consecrated objects may change or remain intact depending on the types of rituals conducted. Concluding Stages (Rjes kyi rim pa) Expression of apology for any shortcomings on the part of the priest encountered during the course of the ritual. such as the master of the ritual rather than the sculptor or the monks attending the ceremony. A follow-up to the earlier ritual. I NSTRUCTIONS TO THE PATRON (YON BDAG BSGO BA. as may be reflected from the expression of homage in the beginning of the liturgical writings. protector. LONG-LIFE CEREMONY (BRTAN BZHUGS ): This includes chanting of prayers and supplicating the Buddha to remain for as long as “the representational base is not destroyed by either. this portion sets things clear on who enjoys the rights to offerings made for the consecration. and offering of Gtor mas as offerings unlike the earlier part that involves mild exorcism.” In elaborate or extensive consecration ceremonies. if the consecration ritual were not followed by a farewell ritual (gshegs su gsol ba). 246r) . SUPPLICATION (GSOL BTAB): Here the Buddhas and Bodhisattvas are called upon to dwell in the images in perpetuum. and support…. this an excessively blow-up version of a farewell banquet and also serves as the moment that marks the signing of a covenant with the Dharma Protectors in ensuring constant protection to consecrated representational bases. earth or fire or water or wind”. (Rab tu gnas pa mdor bsdus pa’i rgyud. 150r. Praying that “the august gathering of Buddhas and deities assume the forms of the representational bases of the enlightened body speech and mind” and “after having abided firmly in these bases. REQUEST FOR FORGIVENESS O FFERINGS (BZOD GSOL ): TO THE DIRECTIONAL DEITIES (P HYOGS SKYONG MCHOD PA ): Appeasement to the directional guardians. to continue to remain as benefactor. which however is not seen in the Mahayana rituals. FAREWELL RITUAL (GSHEGS SU GSOL BA): Dissolution of the visualized deities. YON ’BUL): Like handing a instructional or how-to manuals regarding worshipping of the image. the most prominent being the offering of a rice gruel in Theravada tradition. and praying for swift return to protect the receptacle until the Samsara’s end. this may include a day-long ceremony for longevity (brtan bzhugs). Tibetan priest mostly recite the same prayer. heavenly deities.48 Sonam Tsering Ngulphu GENERATING AUSPICIOUSNESS (BKRA SHIS): Praying to the representation of the Buddha. 156v). or to create a conducive atmosphere for the visualization of Dam tshig sems dpa’ and Ye shes sems dpa’ (Rab gnas kyi cho ga’i tshul. which includes ritual for ground-breaking ceremony. drawn from Tantras (Dpal ’khor lo sdom pa’i rab gnas. initiations and incantations. 281r). seeking approval of local deities. magnetizing (dbang) and subjugating (drag po)Ñconsecration rituals at this point engage the homa-rites of enriching alone. Ritual Determinatives Various views are expressed regarding the point or climax of the actual consecration. his teachings and his spiritual community for auspiciousness in the form of wealth and happiness of the twelve major events highlighting the greatness of Buddha’s life. enriching (rgyas pa). the monks prepare for the dissolution of the Mandalas. a fire ritual that entails a series of visualization and supplication of blessings through burning sacred ingredients. The rites for dissolution of Mandalas are as extensive as the rituals conducted during the initial phases of Mandala construction. SUBSEQUENT DISSOLUTION (RJES BSDU): Once the celestial gods. and so forth. 185r). While some express the chanting of Dzā-hu. 156r). and Dharma protectors are seen off and the prayer of auspiciousness draws to an end. HOMA-RITES (S BYIN SREG): The sequence of consecration rituals finally concludes with homa-rite. This is sometimes conducted immediately before the opening of the eyes (Rab tu gnas pa’i cho ga rab gnas kyi rgyal po. beginning with the line Phun sum tshogs pa mnga’ ba gser gyi ri bo ’dra…. From within the four types of homa-ritesÑof pacifying (zhi ba). which serve as the foundational basis for a series of extensive visualizations. after the ablution (Dpal ’khor lo sdom pa’i rab gnas. laying of foundation. ba. a means of empowering the base. beginning with the lines Ye dharma hetu prabhāva…. as determining the point of actual consecration. Yet for some the mergence together with the initiation forms the actual stages of consecration. Rab gnas kyi cho ga ’gro phan rgyas byed. for the Theravada tradition. and the all other rituals are merely deemed complementary (Taranatha. 640). and others look at the chanting of the line Om-supratiavajraye-svāha immediately following the Long-life prayers as the ritual determinative. While for some a consecration is deemed complete after the . Some consider reciting of the Mantra of Essence of Dependent-arising. Similarly. others consider initiation. but it is just one of the supplemental phases to the actual consecration.-ho. marking the mergence of the Commitment Being and the Wisdom Being. the eye-opening ritual may be crucial. The Theravada tradition also employs the ritual of transferring blessings from a statue or water that serves as a carrier of blessings of the Buddha himself. Not consecrating a finished image is held to produce similar negative effects (Buton Rinchen Drub. Shifts and Changes in Tibetan Buddhism Soteriological value: historical versus ahistorical Theravada consecration ceremony is. to a great extent. who are associated with Tantrayana.Rab gnas in Tibetan Tradition 49 invoked images of deities are well placed within the structure. Buton writes how an unconsecrated image is ‘like a corpse. a ritual for blessing the statues of the Buddha through mimetic reenactment of events from the life of the Buddha (Swearer. and failure to relish the fruits of fire rituals’ (Rab tu gnas pa mdor bsdus pa’i rgyud. It is disrespectful for Buddhists that people dealing in statues and religious artifacts have a few images gracing a heavily designed altar. Fundamental rules versus exceptions Regardless of the Buddhist refuge-taking precepts discouraging discrimination of the images on the basis of their make. while dozens of similar images lie in the basement or storehouses with other merchandise. the actual enlightenment. 4). also Buton Rinchen Drub. . 3). Moreover. Dus ’khor rab gnas. 146v. loss of Mantric power. TA149a). shape and so forth. loc cit. and the place of enlightenment through offering of a milk-dish. for other completion is marked by a farewell ritual that escorts deities back to their heavenly abode (Rab tu gnas pa mdor bsdus pa’i cho ga. Such acts either accrue to the violation of the basic refuge-taking precept. 2004:79) such as the Sujata’s offering of sweetened milk-dish after his six-year penance. the night on the eve of enlightenment. a great degree of uninhibited tendency to “discriminate for a greater spiritual purpose” is ubiquitously found all over Tibet. and constructing the space of enlightenment (bodhimada) respectively. which determines your admission or exclusion from the Buddhist community. Buddhas visualized in the Mahayana consecration are mostly the five principal Buddhas. subsequently clearing the beeswax. where most lines capture the mystical and ahistorical events surrounding the Buddhas. or to the sincere abidance to the Tantric dictum that worshipping an unconsecrated image incurs ‘violation of Tantric commitments. Such reenactments of the historical events of the Buddha Shakyamuni hardly find emphasis in Tibetan Mahayana rites.. unworthy of our worship that can lead to untoward happenings’. covering the eyes of the statues with beeswax. the question whether a vehicle qualifies for consecration opens an entirely new scope for discussion. sporadic eruption of venomous scorpions from the ground. meteorites and static shocks. which according to the Buddhist presentation of enlightened bodies qualify as Bzo’i sprul sku. which involved changing the form of the Emanated Buddha (sprul sku. stem from the realm of unwritten rules. . striking of lightning. This custom has extended to the consecration of one’s house. trees. but also to monastic and personal properties including vehicles. computers etc.50 Sonam Tsering Ngulphu Unwritten versus written rules In refutation to the critiques against Je Tsongkhapa’s consecration of Jowo Shakyamuni. Such incidents may reflect the overextension of Byin ’bebs. even amongst renowned practitioners. such practices are presented as an extension of the receptacles of Buddha’s body. as not only enlightened beings are deified in forms of humans. earlier performed under the pretext of having Rab gnas of the shrine or image within. Such matters of uncertainty. Lobsang Thinlay Namgyal. Rab gnas has thus come a long way to becoming an essential ritual that transforms not only representations. This has not only extended to the practice of consecrating commercial buildings and shops. ponds. lists all the charges levied against his master by leading Tibetan Lamas such as the Seventh Karmapa Chodrak Gyamtso and Terton Pema Lingpa. tilting of the horizon. sambhogakāya) by offering the 13 lay attires and ornaments and fixing the nails on the statue to secure these ornaments. Spiritual degeneration versus extension into temporality Consecration in Tibetan Mahayana Buddhism takes one further from today’s study of anthropomorphization. 260). eclipses of the Sun and Moon. stirring of the world by earthquakes and typhoons. trees. which in the Sutras have not been confined to stupas and statues alone but but to pillars. one of the many ritual components of consecration. springs. thunderbolt. but also as stupas. stations. wells. nirmāakāya) into a Buddha of Perfect Resources (longs sku. They include “a cubit and finger-span plummeting of both the Sun and the Moon towards earth. but also irreverent and sometimes profane substances into sacred objects of worship. For many Tibetan ritualists. and archways as well. This practice today has become futher diluted. wells or lakes (Gdugs la sogs rab gnas. appearance of the ominous shooting star. canopies. Despite harsh criticism. and sporadic spread of internal strife” (Lobsang Trinlay Namgyel. one of Tsongkhapa’s disciples. the emanation in form of arts. temples. 344). f. it is a ritual that involves omitting the preliminaries and abridging both the actual and the concluding rite (Rab gnas kyi cho ga’i tshul. and still render it incomplete or sullied for technical reasons.282r). creating a legible impression of the Mantra of the Essence of Dependent-arising (Pratītyasamutpāda-hrdayamantra) 1 on a representational object of worship suffices. share no correspondence with Tantric phasal division of generation and completion stages. abiding and dissolving within the central psychic channel and the resultant experience of bliss through gaining an insightful wisdom seeing ultimate nature of all phenomena. It is clear that the stages of the consecration. today an instant ritual includes a brief consecration prayer from one of the Tantric 1 Ye dharmā hetu prabhavā / hetu teām tathāgatah hyavadat/ teām ca yo nirodha / eva vādī mahāśramaah / . where the evening of the first night marks the blessing of the precious vase and the next dawn the conferment of Tantric initiation.Rab gnas in Tibetan Tradition 51 Forced mapping of Tantra Furthermore. f. for others. Tibetan rituals boast to have produced abridged rituals such as Horseback Consecration (Rab gnas rta thog ma). While on the one hand. much in the sense of enacting the conferring of Abhishekh and ablution on Buddha Shakyamuni by Devi Tilottamma. while on the other a consecration may continue for three days or more. most recommend at least two days. for some. one-day consecration is an observance of all rites conducted in the more elaborate three-day rituals. a ritual compact enough to be conducted from a horseback. given its ambiguity surrounding its order and composition. Sizes and renditions Consecration as a ritual hardly withstands any finite definition given the ambiguity surrounding the question on what constitutes consecration. This naturally arises from the view that in Tantra all things are correlated. While on the one hand. While. exclusive of the preparatory rites.112). since the two stages of visualization and dissolution are not divided on the basis of the subtle winds entering. a few Tibetan masters have developed a new scheme equating the creation and dissolution of the field of visualizations in the consecration ritual to the generation (skye rim) and completion stages of (rdzogs rim) the Tantra. However. excluding the seven or more days required for blessing the stuffing (Ngawang Lobsang Choeden. 3 Phun sum tshogs pa mnga’ ba gser gyi ri bo ’dra / ’jig rten gsum gyi mgon po dri ma gsum spangs pa / sangs rgyas pad ma rgyas pa ’dab dra’i spyan mnga’ ba / de ni ’jig rten dge ba’i bkra shis dang po’o / de yis nye bar bstan pa’i mchog rab mi g. Bu ston 2 Ji ltar sangs rgyas thams cad ni … de nyid du ni bzhugs par rigs (Rab tu gnas pa mdor bsdus pa’i rgyud. the mantra of dependent-arising and a prayers of auspiciousness 3. This issue. 3). Times and timings The Tanric literature warns of ‘consecration not being auspicious all the time’ (Rab tu gnas pa mdor bsdus pa’i rgyud.270v). Ordained v/s well trained While texts mention that anyone “trained in the ten ritual practices and possessing the characteristics of a spiritual master” can preside over a consecration ritual (Rab tu gnas pa mdor bsdus pa’i rgyud. 182b). Ji ltar sangs rgyas thams cad kyi … me tog la sogs ’di bzhes shig / (Rab gnas kyi cho ga. Ji ltar sangs rgyas thams cad kyis … de nyid du ni bzhugs par rigs /(Rab tu gnas pa’i cho ga rab gnas kyi rgyal po. has been raised by Tibetan masters including the First Panchen Lama (Lobsang Choekyi Gyaltsen. who preside over grand consecrations.244v). However. TA. leaving all the intricate and complex rituals to those preferring an extensive ritual. creating controversy over the hierarchical status between Sprul skus and ordained monks. or Rdzogs sangs rgyas kun dga’ ldan dang … me tog la sogs ’di rnams bzhes / (Rab gnas kyi cho ga mdor bsdus.147r-v). the latter regarded as unparelled in the Buddhist Sangha. other Tantric literature strictly calls for ordained to oversee the rituals. alluding to consecration of early temples by non-ordained members. Dus ’khor rab gnas. 146b. 146b) and thereby suggests auspicious dates such as “the sixth lunar month … and so forth”. KU. KU. However. Tibetan ritualists following Vibhutichandra’s Bde mchog dkyil ’khor maintain that any day is good (Bu ston.yo ba / ’jig rten gsum na grags shing lha dang mis mchod pa / chos kyi dam pa skye sgu rnams la gzhi byed pa / de ni ’jig rten dge ba’i bkra shis gnyis pa’o / dge ’dun dam pa chos ldan thos pa’i bkra shis phyug / mi dang lha dang lha ma yin gyi mchod pa’i gnas / tshogs kyi mchog rab ngo tsha shes dang dpal gyi gzhi/ de ni ’jig rten dge ba’i bkra shis gsum pa’o / .2). f. even forbidding non-ordained from conducting consecration in the presence of ordained members of the Sangha (Dus ’khor rtsa rgyud). f. Rab tu gnas pa’i cho ga rab gnas kyi rgyal po. PU f. The same concern may also apply to non-ordained. f. f.184r-v).52 Sonam Tsering Ngulphu scriptures 2 . “wearing robes ornamented with many precious stones”. Dus ’khor. Though early Indian texts mentions re-consecration only after a reparation or renovation of an image or temple (Gdugs la sogs pa rab tu gnas pa dang rnying pa ’byon pa’i cho ga. and Krishna in striking the mergence of the Wisdom Being into the representational base with supplication to remain in the base ad infinitum. Sucandraprabha. Mahasiddha Sagara. the question on the degree of soteriological value in an object rests on whether or not an invoked Wisdom Being dwells in a consecrated object. while masters including the First Dalai Lama follow Bhanucandra. 3) As for the number of consecrations that can be conducted on a particular religious object. Drogon Choegyal Phagpa. However. Vagishvara. Dus ’khor rab gnas. Prajnavalita. Yet another text mentions Acharya Shantarakshita consecrating Samye eight times (Ba Selnang. They fall under two groups from the point of what enters. physical or other. Bhanucandra. Though all Indian masters including Sadhuputra. whether numinous. 280r) as against collective consecration poses yet another issue of contention in Tibetan Buddhism. as both equally serve as reference to the historical Buddha Shakyamuni or an event in his life. 112). Abhayakara. 12). Tibetan ritualists such as Taranatha. books on Tibetan history mentions Guru Padmasambhava. (Bu ston. Krishna. and the later ones agree on the invocation of the Wisdom Being and extending offerings (Buton Rinchen Drub. or at least for as long as the base remains. they however fall under different categories from the point of view of whether a Wisdom Being invoked during the initial visualization is caused to merge with the Commitment Being or the receptacle itself. .Rab gnas in Tibetan Tradition 53 mentions that only those wielding power to counter adverse forces or perceive things with an eye of wisdom seeing ultimate reality should dare to override the rule concerning times and timings. Sakyapa Ngawang Lodoe Nyingpo and others follow Sadhuputra and Shraddhakara in accordance with Tantric texts (Rab tu gnas pa’i cho ga rab gnas kyi rgyal po) and see the deities off to their place. Conclusion Not much is disputed about the presence of historical or indexical value in a consecrated or even an unconsecrated image. ’Khrul spong nyin mor byed pa’i snying po. 242-247). Tibetan masters have recommended re-consecration for the sake re-sacralizing the image (Jamyang Zhadpa. 260r-261v). Tibetan masters also fall under two groups. Sucandraprabha. performing seven times the wondrous consecration ceremony of the shrine of Samye and its surrounding buildings and revealing himself as a manifestation-being (Sakyapa Sonam Gyaltsen. The need for conducting one consecration each for every single image in a temple (Rab gnas kyi cho ga’i tshul. This image may also serve as an object for undertaking the practices of meditative recollection (Rjes dran). 57). Advayavajra. the shift uncovers the undisclosed tension between a need for unity versus diversity. alteration of liturgical manuals. It may reflect an unwelcomed extension of religion into temporality.54 Sonam Tsering Ngulphu In general. use of religious rituals as commodity etc. and within their respective sub-schools. Dpal ’khor lo sdom pa’i rab gnas (Śrī-cakrasa. within the Buddhist tradition. In brief. shift in consecration practice in the Tibetan Buddhist tradition sheds light on a broader fundamental difference in the philosophical viewpoints of the Theravada and the Mahayana traditions. References Advayavajra. dilution of scriptural proposition. CA. Lopez.57 Bentor. Consecration of Images and Stupas in Indo-Tibetan Tantric Buddhism. Tibetan Literature: Studies in Genre.ZHA. Edited by Johannes Bronkhorst. Ithaca: Snow Lion Publications. “The Horseback Consecration Ritual. p. Edited by Lhundup Sopa. Keith.154b-159a Ba Selnang. Cabezón. José Ignacio and Geshe Thubten Tendar. ed. Leiden: E. 1996 Terton Ogyen Lingpa. Snow Lion. Sba bzhed ces bya ba las sba gsal snang gi bzhed pa. Edited by Carole Elchert. Trans. Princeton University Press. 1997 –––––. The Sacred Life of Tibet. ff. 415pp. Yael. 133-138 Dowman. Ed.vārapratiha). Acharya Vajrapani and Lo tsa’ ba Rma ban chos ’bar. “Literature on Consecration (Rab gnas)”. Vol. 1976 Buton Rinchen Drub.J. Thorsons: London. Paro: Ngodrub. 12ff. Mi rigs dpe skrun khang.1487. “The Tangka According to Tradition. 1996. José Ignacio Cabezón. 1982. Dpal ’khor lo sdom pa’i rab gnas (Śri-cakrasa. –––––. pp.” Religions of Tibet in Practices. Toh. Bka’ thang sde lnga. 324pp. Edited by Donald S. and Roger Reid Jackson. Dpal dus kyi ’khor lo’i rab tu gnas pa’i cho ga bkra shis dpal ’bar. 1997. by Mgon po rgyal mtshan. 1990. Brill.” White Lotus: An Introduction to Tibetan Culture. Dpal gsang ba ’dus pa’i sgo nas rab tu gnas par byed pa’i cho ga mdor bsdus.117 (PHA).vara-sūpratihā). Pandita Vajrapani and Lo tswa ba Rma ban chos ’bar. . ff. Trans. Vol. 2ff. Rgyud. ff. ZHA.154v-159r Dus kyi ’khor lo’i rab tu gnas pa’i cho ga (Kālacakra-sūpratihāvidhi).25b-29b Gedun Drub. Bka’ ’gyur. First Dalai Lama. Toh.1453. Vol. 155 (ZI). Bstan ’gyur. 635ff. Jacob. Vol. Gzungs gzhug dang gnod sbyin ’khor lo sogs rab gnas bya tsul phun tsogs char ’bebs zhes bya ba. Khyab bdag rje btzun bla ma dam pa thub dbang rdo rje ’chad dang ngo bo dbyer ma mchis pa ’jam mgon chos kyi rgyal po tzong kha pa chen po’i rnam par thar ba thub bstan mdzes pa’i rgyan gcig ngo mtsar nor bu’i ’phreng ba (= Tson gkha pa’i rnam thar thub stan mdzes pa’i rgyan gcig nor bu’i phreng ba).1646. Toh. PU. Vol. ff.155-112 Ngawang Lobsang Gyatso. Rab gnas kyi cho ga. Trans. 2006 (Made available as a digitally transmitted document for students and scholars of Tibetan and Buddhist through their kindness). Imaging Wisdom: Seeing and Knowing in the Art of Indian Buddhism. Precept and Practice: Traditional Buddhism in the Rural Highland of Ceylon. The Fifteenth Karmapa. 1971 Gyatso. New Delhi. Tibskrit Philology. “Healing Burns with Fire: The Facilitations of Experience in Tibetan Buddhism” in Journal of the American Academy of Religion 67(1).813-894 Martin. also Dpyid kyi rgyal mo’i glu dbyangs). Vagishvara. 1999 Lobsang Trinlay Namgyel. N. Pandita Don yod rdo rje and Khams ba Lo tswa ba Ba ri. pp. by Alexander Cherniak. pp. Lobsang Choekyi Gyaltsen. Gzungs ’jug ’khrul spong nyin mor byed pa’i snying po.NGA. 1981 (reprint). Oxford: Clarendon. Rab tu gnas pa’i cho ga lag len du dril ba dge legs rgya mtsho’i char ’bebs (= Rab gnas dge legs char ’bebs). ff.245-257 Kinnard. 1974. Paro: Lama Ngodrub. Gangs can yul gyi sa la spyod pa’i mtho ris kyi rgyal blon gtso bor brjod pa’i bod kyi deb ther rdzogs ldan gzhon nu’i dga’ ston dpyid kyi rgyal mo’i glu dbyangs (=Rdzogs ldan gzhon nu’i dga’ ston. ff. . First Pa chen Bla ma. Janet. Richard F. Dan. Ed. pp.Rab gnas in Tibetan Tradition 55 Gdugs la sogs pa rab tu gnas pa dang rnying pa ’byon pa’i cho ga (Chattrādipratihājrodbhāva-vidhi). I. pp. Version: March 10.486-509 Khakhyab Dorje. Rgyud.260a-261b Gombrich.244r-246r Ngawang Lobsang Choedhen. London: Curzon. 1999.113-147 Jamyang Zhadpa. The Fifth Dalai Lama. Vol. Bla ma dgongs pa ’dus pa’i rab gnas kyi cho ga bkra shis brtsegs pa nyin gcig ma’i ’don zin mdor bsdus. Collected Works of PaG chen Blo bzang chos kyi rgyal mtshan. Rab gnas. Collected works of ’Jam dbyangs bzhad pa. 1988.” Eastern Buddhist. Bhadracarîpraidhâna. Rgyud. Vol. Rab gnas dpal ’byor rgya mtsho mar grags pa’i lag len dang ngag ’don gyi rim pa mtho ris legs byas kyi rdzing ring zhes bya ba. Toh. Toh.244-246 Rab gnas kyi cho ga’i tshul zhes bya ba (Pratia-vidhi-nāma). Vol.1095. Bka’ ’gyur. Idzumi. Rgyud sde Kun btus. ’Jam dbyang Blo gter dbang po.3131.HA.1257 Vol NYA ff. Toh. ff. pp. ff.WAM.262-266. A History of Tibet by the Fifth Dalai Lama of Tibet. with the Sanskrit Text. pp. Delhi. Vol.480-576 ’Phags pa bzang po spyod pa’i smon lam gyi rgyal po (Ārya-bhadracāryapranidhāna-rāja). Rab gnas kyi cho ga (Pratiha-vidhi).280-282 Rab tu gnas pa mdor bsdus pa’i rgyud (Supratia-tantra-sa. Bloomington.IV (April 1930). 1971. ed. Also see Zahiruddin Ahmad. “The Hymn on the Life and Vows of Samantabhadra.226-247. Derge Kanjur.56 Sonam Tsering Ngulphu Mi rigs dpe skrun khang. Indiana University 1995) Ngawang Lodoe Nyingpo Zhanphan Thaye. Vol.PU. Also see H. No. 1985. Acharya J–anavajra and Lo tsa’ ba ’Bro Dge slong Shes rab grags pa. ff. ff. ff. Toh: 3672. Trans. Snow Lion Publications: New York. Rab gnas kyi cho ga mdor bsdus pa zhes bya ba (Pratihavidhi-sa.2528. Dharamsala.3662. Rgyud. Library of Tibetan Works & Archives.graha).2. Rgyud. 1987 Shraddhasambhava Verma. The Clear Mirror: A Traditional Account of Tibet’s Golden Age.10. Toh. 1996 Sherpa Tulku and Michael Perrot. Toh.KU.182b-188a Sakyapa Sonam Gyaltsen. Vol.34-45 –––––. “The Ritual of Consecration. Rgyud. Vol. Tr.” The Tibet Journal.146v-150r Rab tu gnas pa’i cho ga rab gnas kyi rgyal po (Supratia-vidhi-pratiarājanāma). pp. Vol.KU.85 (TA). McComas Taylor and Lama Choedak Yuthok.188a Rnal ’byor gyi rgyud kyi rab tu gnas pa’i cho ga rab gnas kyi rgyal po zhes bya ba (Yoga-tantra-supratia-vidhi-pratiarāja-nāma). Vol. A Manual of Ritual Fire Offerings. Toh.epta).270a-272b .JU. Bka’ ’gyur. (in verse) Trans. ff. Vol. Rgyud. Acharya Kanakavarma and Lo tswa ba Pa tshab Nyi ma grags.2646. Collected Works of Taranatah from blocks preserved at Rtag brtan phun tshogs gling. Mi rigs dpe skrun khang. Bzang po yongs bzung gi rab gnas kyi Tika. Bsod nams rtse mo’i gsung ’bum. 16ff. No. in Gangs can rig brgya’i sgo ’byed lde mig ces bya ba Series.tbrc. 3.org/5/ sparham.613-658). Toh. Vol. 263-280. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Rab gnas kyi cho ga ’gro phan rgyas byed kyi lhan thabs. pp.556. Donald K.13. Walshe. Vol. Also available at www. Vol. J.htm accessed on 24 August 2009) Strong. Toh. (http://www. 1995.12. “Notes Apropos of the Transmission of the Sarva-durgati-parœodhana-tantra in Tibet.34. 1995 . Thus Have I Heard: The Long Discourses of the Buddha (Digha Nikāya).). 2004 Swearer. Vol. “Hypostasizing the Buddha: Buddha Image Consecration in Northern Thailand. John S.13.” Studien zur Indologie und Iranistik 16/17 (1992).org (Accessed on March 27. ff.557. “Consecration of Images and Stupas in Indo-Tibetan Tantric Buddhism by Yael Bentor”. Sakyapa. Relics of the Buddha. 512pp Troru Tsenam.tbrc. pp.org (Accessed on March 27. Vol. Taranatha.”The Great Passing” (Mahāparinirvā a-sūtra). Trans and ed. Leonard W.buddhistethics. The Kalachakra Tantra: Rite of Initiation. 2008) –––––.Rab gnas in Tibetan Tradition 57 Sonam Tsemo.109-125. pp.220-226 Sparham. –––––“An Early Tibetan View of the Soteriology of Buddhist Epistemology. Gangs ljongs rgyal bstan yongs rdzogs kyi phyi mo snga ’gyur rnying ma’i lugs kyi lta sgom spyod gsum gyi rnam gzhag mdo tsam brjod pa tshes pa’i zla b zhes bya ba. London: Wisdom Publications. Becoming the Buddha: The Ritual of Image Consecration in Thailand. by Jeffrey Hopkins.” History of Religions: Image and Ritual in Buddhism. Collected Works of Taranatah from blocks preserved at Rtag brtan phun tshogs gling. Maurice (trans. Boston: Wisdom Publication. The Dalai Lama.” Journal of Indian Philosophy 15 (1987). 23 ff (pp.GA. Also available at www. 2004 –––––. 2008) Tenzin Gyatso.57-70. 1985. Rab gnas kyi cho ga ’gro phan rgyas byed. Gareth. van der Kuijp. Princeton: Princeton University Press. ge-Pu. 2007. the knee-cap perfectly spherical. with broad almond-shaped eyes. the art-historical significance of these drawings was emphasized in relation to works of art attributed to the school of Kashmiri artists in western Tibet ca 1000-1100. Pratapaditya. may this research be viewed as a gesture of homage to the countless Indian artists and paitas who travelled to the Land of Snows in the dawn of the previous millennium and the profound impact of their work on Tibetan civilisation. they are painted on the recto and verso of a single sheet of paper with accompanying ritual indications in Tibetan and mantra in Sanskrit. This article proposes to bring to the attention of tibetologists two drawings which have recently been published in relation to the history of Kashmiri painting by Pratapaditya Pal. Asia Society and 5 Continents Editions. As the content of the historical and ritual inscriptions in Tibetan and Sanskrit was not discussed in detail. Chino Roncoroni. these two drawings illustrate the Abhidharmic universe. The Arts of Kashmir. painting on both sides. a “rose-bud” mouth.” The diagram of the anthropomorphic deity has the facial characteristics typical of the Kashmiri school of art in Tibet. 105-106. eleventh century. Mr and Mrs. 1 When first studied. their adaptation and translation while a brief and enigmatic historical inscription appears to indicate their transmission within the royal family of the kingdoms of Gu. New York and Milano.Two Early Tibetan Ritual Diagrams for Cakra Meditations Amy Heller Nyon In the context of the seminar organized by the Library of Tibetan Works and Archives in recognition of India’s generosity in the 20th century. here we propose to present these inscriptions in their context and attempt their analysis. 1 Pal. tiny nose. These diagrams reflect the introduction to Tibet of these Indic materials. paper. The sheet of paper has been subject to radio-carbon analysis yielding a firm date of 11th century. this early date appears to be corroborated by the style of the painting which relates to early schools of Kashmiri style art in western Tibet and by archaic orthography present in the inscriptions. intriguingly naming Zhi ba ’od.hrang. curator emeritus of Asian Art at the Norton Simon Foundation. . 80 x 30 cm. Stemming from ancient Indian systems of yoga. illustrated as figure 116. represented in symbols and as cakras of the human body in an anatomical chart of an anthropomorphic cosmic being. “Cosmic Vajravarahi Dakini. while the knees are rendered in a particular stiff mode. Paris. omission of shad) or single shad or double shad. WSTB.60 Amy Heller These factors indicate that the drawings and their ritual instructions were co-eval with the vast program of translation and diffusion of Indian tantric texts. cakra has the specific meaning of the psycho-physiological energy centers conceived as vortices which facilitate the circulation of the winds and energies within the body organized into a coherent system by Patanjali in the Yogasutra. Editions du CNRS. the bast. with slight striations. there is no instance of da drag. Yoshiro. and semi-smooth. It is a light beige color. to slightly coarse. by extension. 70. Paul. . 4 Meyer. Physical Description The page measures 80 x 30 cm. vol. gi gu log is infrequent. there is total absence of punctuation at the beginning of phrases. I. Kellner et al. The punctuation is somewhat erratic: around the diagrams.e.4 One side of this paper 2 Imaeda. Buddhist and Hindu. circle. 3 Harrison. “Notes on some West Tibetan manuscript folios in the Los Angeles County Museum of Art” in B. Fernand. Gso ba rig pa. Vienna. There is no page number or any binding holes traced on the sheet to indicate that it formerly was part of a manuscript. in the Land of Snows. “Papermaking in Bhutan”. 1981. XLIII(2-3). The diagrams The term cakra is the Sanskrit word for “wheel. The plant composition of the paper has not been subject to analysis but the color and consistency of the paper conform to Tibetan and Himalayan paper made of the white inner bark. there is the superabundant a chung (bde’ ba chen po’i tsa kra). 2007: 229-245.3 The inscriptions at the center of the cakra are written in dbu can.2 The color and surface texture of the paper resemble leaves of manuscripts collected at the Tholing monastery by Giuseppe Tucci. Arbeitskreis fur Tibetische und Buddhistische Studien. II. glazed. now conserved in the Tucci archives of IsIAO library. 409-414 (1989). it is therefore understood to be conceived as an independent leaf. Acta Orient. there is either no indication (i. Frequently. or disc”. Papers dedicated to Ernst Steinkellner of the occasion of his 70th birthday. It is evenly cut but at present there are small tears along the edges. le système medical tibétain. the ritual inscriptions surrounding the cakra diagrams are written in dbu med as is the historical inscription. there is no indication which side of the sheet is to be read first. at the end of phrases. Hung. 61 passim.1. the thickness varies slightly. however. (eds) Pramāakīrti. Roma and the Los Angeles County Museum: thick. of the shrub daphne. in Indian vedic medical systems. black and white. Boston. center syllable: bam (the summit of the vajra palace) 4) a black viśva-vajra. white. Wisdom Publications. Elizabeth. surrounded by a red outline with 4 red petals at the cardinal points and 4 blue petals at the intermediary points (emptiness. At present. the white representing semen and the red blood. and yellow. this series of identifications is primarily based on the work of Elizabeth English who studied similar diagrams in the context of 5 English. bam at center 6) 7 concentric circles in blue. The two discs represent the polarity of male and female. the vowel greng bu is slightly effaced but legible. I thank Dan Martin for this reference.Two Early Tibetan Ritual Diagrams for Cakra Meditations 61 presents a drawing with eleven geometric shapes and symbols. center syllables: a li ( the heavens : the moon disc) 2) a red circle. p.” . the syllable sum (Mount Sumeru) 7) 4 successive squares. there is a mantra syllable. at the center. outlines in red. at the centre of each. yielding the syllable E. at the apex of the triangle. rituals and forms. the syllable yam (the wind element) 11) a red triangle with the letter a clearly visible at center. above. The main correlations of shapes of the component elements of the universe are indicated from top to bottom: 1) a white circle. center syllables: ka li (the heavens: the sun disc)6 3) a black vajra. green. These shapes and mantra are specifically related to the cosmos in the Abhidharmic universe5 which is extrapolated in microcosm as the cakra system within the human body illustrated on the diagram of anthropormorphic shape drawn on the other side of this paper (see below). 6 Ibid. center syllable: ram (the fire element) 10) a blue bow with red ribbon streamers. center syllable: lam (the earth element) 8) 2 concentric circles. 2002: 144 -151. Vajrayogini Her visualizations. the air element). five staves emerge from the rings. …. a white circle with the syllable bam at center. center syllable: bam (the water element) 9) a red triangle. further English notes that at certain stages in the meditations “ the sun disc and moon disc should be seen to mingle. hum inscribed at the extremity of the 4 points (the base of the vajra palace) 5) a yellow circle surrounded by 8 red petals. underneath the circles. a red circle surrounding a white circle. with flames at edges.152.a simulacrum of sexual union…giv(ing) rise to great bliss. This identification is corroborated by the presence of the name Buddhaākini in some of the mantra on the chart. While the cakra correspond to those of the human body. Mandala. 1973. The genital cakra is not shown as a disc but instead is represented by a triangle shape. p. 8 See Hindu representations of the Mahapuruśa from India illustrated by Rawson. Rubin Museum of Art.8 On the opposite side of the paper. The Art of Tantra. white for male energy (semen) and red for female energy (blood). 155 passim). Surendra Bahadur. For similar symbolic representations of the universe see Martin Brauen’s discussions on the analogy between the person and the cosmos in relation to Kalachakra (Brauen. The mantra along the sides of the triangle are individual syllables. Martin. 151. Inner Traditions. Rätsch. the “Great Being” of ancient India. the “air” element or the “emptiness” from which all arises. Sacred Circle in Tibetan Buddhism. on which the letter E is clearly legible. not totally legible but along the outer edge of the circle on can read Om Om Om Sarva Buddha dakini Ye 7 Ibid. whether Vajrayogini or Kalachakra. it is nonetheless certain that this series of shapes corresponds to a representation of the cosmos as found also on Hindu examples of the Mahapuruśa. Shamanism and Tantra in the Himalayas. Christian. the inscriptions near the circles on the drawing of the human body describe five cakra positions and provide the name of the body part associated with each cakra. Claudia. London. it is the diagram of the human body with inscriptions describing the ritual function of the cakra and drawings of the cakra. 2002: 115-117. In this diagram. Rochester. 134-136. who is herself an aspect of Vajrayogini. Careful observation by Dan Martin reveals that the snake’s mouth is clamping the main veins. these are respectively the main veins. hitherto not documented for Buddhist tantra9. Philip. a Mahapuruśa from Nepal illustrated in Müller-Ebeling. The hip cakra is represented by the bow which is the “wind” element. New York. . Shahi. Above this is the circle for the next cakra which has a yellow snake in-between two long red and white curving elements.7 While it has not yet been possible to correlate this series of the syllables and all shapes with a specific text. The two veins and the snake are positioned on a triangle which is partially covering a red swastika. 145 and p. January 2005. figs. personal communication. Thames and Hudson. the presence of a head of a boar emerging from the human head is an immediate clue to the identification of this figure as a form of Vajravarahi. 9 Dan Martin. as Buddhaākini is yet another name of Vajrayogini. This corresponds to the base level of the cosmos in the preceding diagram. which is an element of Hindu tantra. the syllable yam is visible in between the red bowstring and the limb of the bow.62 Amy Heller Vajrayogini meditations. 2009. see diagrams on p. upon reconstruction. Giacomella. To the right of the neck. It is to be noted that there are 49 squares. the mantras are reduced to a simple code which preserves precisely the mantra and at the same time 10 Mayer. At left the inscription reads: phyi g. Robert.2: 612-628. the “cakra of the whirling turquoise (exoteric)”. “the cakra of the assembly of letters of the exoteric ritual”. 7 x 7 in the diagram. p. rather than give names for each cakra as in an anatomical system. The Phur-pa bcu-gnyis. The Institute for Comparative Research on Human Culture. Oxford. the inscription refers to the mantra syllables grouped in the square above the deity’s head. and at right the inscription reads lte (?lto) ba ye shes kyi ’khor lo. adorned by the emblem of the red swastika. to borrow the expression of Robert Meyer. a mantra which. Observations on a simile found in the Kalachakra Literature” in P. the inscription reads. This is the mantroddhara (sngags btu-bu) as defined by Robert Mayer. which is raised so that the right hand appears to hold the cakra over the heart. 11 Above the boar’s head. There are eight petals surrounding the heart cakra. but a “ Tibetan reformulation of Indic materials” whereby certain Hindu elements were incorporated with the Buddhist tantric ritual. the heart”. hum. 1994: vol. wherein. Kiscadale publications. At the throat cakra. snying ga chos kyi ca kra . “the circle of wisdom of the belly” or “circle of wisdom of the navel”.10 Henceforth. following the standard Indic convention. “the cakra of Dharma. the inscription reads phyi gtor ma’i ca kra. Vajrapani.Two Early Tibetan Ritual Diagrams for Cakra Meditations 63 Bazdraā pani ye bee ro tsa ni ye hum hum phat phat phat sva ha. A Scripture of the Ancient Tantra Collection. among which Om Buddha dakini ye svaha …. 135. not only transmission and translation of Indian texts in Tibet. phyi mchod pa’i ca kra. there is the red triangle where at present only a few mantra syllables can be read. I thank Dan Martin for this reference. da. in this diagram. mirror-like wisdom” which appears to refer to the disc (i. a letter may be seen: shri. Oslo. refer to Vajrayogini. the cakra are associated with different ritual phases.e. To the left of the neck. among the syllables of the heart cakra mantra. a ki li ki la ya (the mantra to Vajrakila) but at present not all is may be discerned. .yu ru ’khyil pa’i ca kra. and on each red petal. “the cakra of the exoteric offering”. and Vairocana. “ Divination with Mirrors. the mirror) held in the right hand. To the right of the heart cakra.Bee ro tsa na hum hum phat phat svaha. In the center of the heart cakra there are two red inversed triangles and the syllable hri at center. 1996. The implication here is that there has been. me long yees (> ye shes) dpung gi ca kra. the cakra of the exoteric gtor ma offering. “the cakra of the arm. phyi yi gi btu’ ba’i ca kra. Beside the right elbow. 11 See Orofino. Kvaerne (ed) Tibetan Studies. rdo (?). op. op. in the future. At right (inscription 1b): (line 1) lus gnas yin ’gos rgyus pa’i ’bye zhi ni shud pu zhi ba ’od gi bu shud pu ser skya ma de de bzhin (line 2) bshegs pa ’od srungs gi drung du mdo sde sde snod ma lus slabs nas rgya kar shar nub na pra dang tshad ma (line 3) nga bas ’khas na med/ shud bu zhi ba ’od tshe’i dus byas ’chi yang bu khyod ’gra’ (’grab?) yod pas lta In this transcription of the inscription. “ cakra of great joy”. which immediately recalls the name of the prince of Guge Pho brang Zhi ba ’od who was a monk and translator. anatomie. which is beyond the scope of the present study. 14 Blondeau.152. and Anne-Marie Blondeau.64 Amy Heller conceals it. 136-139. p. all consuming great bliss. Paris. 2002. Volume 1. whose studies of rituals as well as previous studies in Tibetan hippiatric medicine and Tibetan medical terminology render her advice most precious. Tsenshab Rinpoche. cit. L’homme. “ to the sexual soteriology of the higher and highest tantras where emptiness is described experientially as the ecstatic. already the imbrication of Hindu and Buddhist elements is salient and warrants attention by scholars familiar with both. To thoroughly understand this diagram. the tantric metaphor for which is orgasm.cit. p. Along the left edge of the paper. in the words of Elizabeth English. Dakpa. This is may be an allusion to the Sukhavati paradise of Amitabha Buddha called Land of Joy. in the opinion of Ven.”13 However. These diagrams and inscriptions have been discussed with Ven. to be re-assessed in the light of future research. fonctions motrices et viscérales. a dge lugs pa specialist in ritual born in 1935. there are elements of historic significance due to the name Zhi ba ’od. 13 English. Tsenshab Rinpoche. The historical inscription is on the page with the diagrams of shapes. the 49 squares of letters in combination with the expression bde ba can evoke the 49 days of the bardo period.12 On the other side of the square of letters. op. l’Harmattan. . as well as Dan Martin. Fernand (eds) Dictionnaire thématique français-tibétain du tibétain parlé langue standard. Yet. the inscription reads bde’ ba chen po’i ca kra. Ngwang. and tr. p. Geneva. it would be essential to have definitive readings of all the mantra and correlate with specific texts. bde ba can. in Tibetan.cit. See the triangular configuration for the mantroddhara for Vajrayogini in English. The interpretations proposed here below remain tentative.14 The 12 Mayer. 1972. 149. Meyer. which implies possibly a post-mortem ritual. or.): Matériaux pour l’etude de l’hippologie et de l’hippiatrie tibétaines (à partir des manuscrits de Touen-houang). Anne-Marie Blondeau (ed. 54 and the explanation of the organization of the alphabet on p. Librairie Droz. the one line inscription (inscription 1a) reads: rgya’ (rgyal?) slong dgan pas pro mo spyad pa’i bleng bzhis brgyud ’pa’ lus rgyus. at left. Anne-Marie. the proposed interpretation is that at left. N. His lineage continued at the Thig phyi monastery in Lho brag (see www. 2009: CD of prefaces) 16 See Samten Karmay. Shud is also a clan name listed among the donors in the Praj–aparamita volumes of gNas gsar dgon pa. ( see Carnahan. the paternal clan (rus) of the royal monk Zhi ba ’od is lha. But it is far more likely that Shud bu/pu is a clan name here. Tibetan manuscripts.” would seem to refer to the person who is talking in the following three lines. Tsenshab Rinpoche is of the Shud khud family of rTa nag.16 The expression in the first line rgya’ (rgyal?) slong dgan pa. N. 1980. But his title pho brang is not present here. by extension.e. Dolpo: N. 1995). Shud bu might. Hidden Treasures of the Himalayas. In the Presence of my Enemies. This is known as a name of an ancient Tibetan clan in central Tibet as of the 8th century. Sumner and Lama Kunga Rinpoche. Shud kye clan in N. paintings and sculptures of Dolpo. Although possibly the term may be used here literally. there is the explanation that this is the account or the diagram made by the aged royal monk and in the right inscription. (see A. here understood to mean “aged royal monk. 171. 314. “An Open Letter by Pho-brang Zhi ba ’od”. Clear Light Publishers. Byi cher village. As far as I have been able to determine. 15 Ven. This clan is well known in ancient Tibetan historical accounts. active in Lho brag in 12th century. N. nor any other titles which he used. This raises problems as to the identification of the person Zhi ba ’od in this inscription. Chicago. means to “copy a text”. such as bod kyi dpal lha btsan po or dge slong bla ma. The Tibet Journal. 239. This could certainly apply to Zhi ba ’od in the sense of his personal religious studies and functions as royal monk in Guge during the 11th century. among which were some of the 25 disciples of Padmasambhava15. Santa Fe. i. Memoirs of Tibetan Nobleman Tsipon Shuguba. gTsang. 108. not Shud bu. of divine descent. N. be a diminutive expression to refer to a person who copies religious texts.org). who is named Zhi ba ’od. bod kyi rgyal po pho brang Zhi ba ’od. 188. Heller. However. vol 3: 1-28. there is the explanation of what is the content of this account or diagram. Serindia Publications. literally. N. Shud pa. However.tbrc. it has not been previously recorded that Zhi ba ’od and the Guge royal family were in matrimonial alliance with this clan. shakya dge slong lha bla ma. I thank Roberto Vitali for the information that Shud phu is the family line of Lho brag mkhan chen Nam mkha’ Sen ge. it does not seem likely.306. To summarize the inscription. 354. which are titles used to refer to him in texts he translated. discussed as a preparation for rituals to be made following an imminent death of an aged person named Shud bu Zhi ba ’od. the monastic name Zhi ba ’od was exclusively used by the royal monk of Guge after his ordination.Two Early Tibetan Ritual Diagrams for Cakra Meditations 65 term which precedes Zhi ba ’od is Shud pu or Shud bu. . The Kingdoms of Gu. thus> sro mo dpyad pa. 18 Vitali.66 Amy Heller In the left inscription.” The interpretation and rectified transliteration of the three line inscription at right is as follows: Lus gnas (gnad) yin ’gos rgyus pa’i >bskyus pa’i ’bye zhi > byung bzhis ni shud bu zhi ba ’od gi bu shud bu ser skya ma de/ de bzhin bshegs (>gshegs) pa ’od srungs gi drung du mdo sde sde snod ma lus slabs byas rgya kar >gar shar nub na pra dang tshad ma nga bas ’khas (>mkhas) na med/ shud bu zhi ba ’od tshe’i dus byas/ ’chi yang bu khyod ’gra’ (’grab?) yod pas lta The person speaking is Zhi ba ’od. understand that it is the essential points of the body. made by the aged royal monk.ba’i rjes dran. account: possibly sro mo (heat) instead of pro mo. thus he could have 17 ’gra’ yod pa is possibly to be read ’grab for grabs “to be close. spyad pa > dpyad ma. (now) I also die. which would give “Tendons/ or nerves of the body. Blondeau for this reference. Rinpoche suggested the interpretation and rectification of transcription as follows: rgyal slong rgan pas pra mo spyad pa’i byung bzhis bskus pa’i lus rgyus: “the body clues (marks/signs) painted (to indicate) the basis of the mirror divination practice.khang lo gcig. the aged royal monk. reading lus rgyus as tendons/or nerves of the body. in all of India east and west there is none more knowledgeable than me in mirror divination and logic” (pra dang tshad> pra mo and tshad ma). made/written(?) by the aged royal monk” Mme. The implication is that this person Zhi ba ’od is telling his son to look at the diagram to prepare for post-mortem rituals for himself as he is nearing the end of his life. grabs yod pa is given in the Tshig mdzod chen mo ( vol. she suggested different interpretations of the rest. Dharamsala.hrang. I studied all the sutra and piaka in front of the (teacher who is like) Buddha Kāśyapa. talking to his son. son of Shud pu Zhi ba ’od. 1: 396. bleng bzhis> gleng bzhis. col 1) with the example “to be close to death” (’chi grabs yod pa). I thank Mme.mdzad sgo’i go. to be near”.chung. However. “Concerning the basis of the painted (diagram). Blondeau agreed rgyal slong rgan pas was a probable reading for the initial section. Is this indeed the scion of the kingdom of Guge? The royal monk Zhi ba ’od (1016-1111) was ordained as a monk in 1056 at age 4118.ling gtsug.lag.sgrig tshogs. because I am close to dying17. You Shud bu ser skya ma. Tho. the transcription of the first line is as follows: rgya (rgyal?) slong dgan pas pro mo spyad pa’i bleng bzhis brgyud ’pa’ lus rgyus.stong ’khor.ge Pu. account of the examination of heat. look (at this diagram)! Having spent my life (as) Shud bu Zhi ba ’od. Roberto. having accomplished vast studies in religious topics. 1996: 296 . personal communication. these elegant diagrams are visually quite simple yet extremely sophisticated in their ritual significance. The question remains: is the person Zhi ba ’od in this text indeed the royal monk Zhi ba ’od? If so. to Tibet. Blondeau. in which some of the content relates to aspects of the charts on this page. albeit correcting the spelling somewhat. although the text in question is not specific to Vajrayogini. However. January 2005. Sahajamaalatryāloka (lhan cig skyes pa’I dkyil ’khor gsum gsal bar byed pa). cit. I am indebted to Dan Martin for the information that among the numerous texts he requested and translated was a text of a mandala obtained from a Kashmiri master. 66-67 for Tibetan text and pp. both Buddhist and Hindu. op. those he translated and those he practiced. . 19-29 for the discussion of the different royal titles used by Zhi ba ’od in his translations.both Sanskrit language and logic . she agreed with the gist of the proposed translation of the discourse of Zhi ba ’od to his son.cit. additional translations with other masters and his translation of tantric work as well. ibid. op. 119-120 for translation of the text of the mNga’ ris rgyal rabs which describes Zhi ba ’od and Atisha’s collaboration on translation as well as his translations of texts on tshad ma. 145. which might be construed to refer to the diagrams of the mandala of the body. 21 Dan Martin. Their inscriptions raise multiple questions about the process of introduction of Indic materials. these inscriptions raise questions about the teachings transmitted by Zhi ba ’od. if Zhi ba ’od’s studies in religious topics . for the rest.were well known and he translated many texts for many Indian paitas during their visits to Guge. J–ā–aśrī (Ye shes dpal). The names of any spouse or offspring have not been preserved in history as far as I know. 19 See full list of the names of all royal family members in Vitali.Two Early Tibetan Ritual Diagrams for Cakra Meditations 67 married and had children prior to his vows. such as the essential points of the body (lus gnas> lus gnad)”.20 In the interpretation of Mme. 20 See Vitali.19 However. The text is the Toh. who then translated it: lhan cig skyes pa’i dkyil ’khor gsum gsal bar byed pa zhes bya ba mkhas pa chen po dznya na shris mdzad pa rdzogs so // bod kyi rgyal po pho brang zhi ba ’od kyis gsol ba btab nas bsgyur ba’o. “As for the distinction of the tendons/ nerves. See also Samten Karmay. 21 To conclude. and how these Indic materials were adopted and eventually reformulated during the initial periods of their transmission and practice in Tibet. pp. there is no text on divination or cakra meditations per se attributed to his patronage or his translation as far as I have been able to determine. p. written by the Kashmiri J–ā–aśrī at the request of Zhi ba ’od. No 1539. it is possible to reconstruct less and stay closer to the actual grammar of the text. their transmission in Tibet and perhaps within the royal family of Guge. For the first sentence of the second inscription she suggested. 68 Amy Heller Diagram for Cakra Meditations (recto) . Two Early Tibetan Ritual Diagrams for Cakra Meditations Diagram for Cakra Meditations (verso) 69 . Inscription 1b Inscription 1a 70 Amy Heller . If one would have much invested in securing historical traces. A ‘convention of a-temporality’ renders the markedly insulated explications of (partly even ‘transcendent’) space and time in lineage documents of the ZZNG Bon Great Perfection particularly useful for understanding the clash of historicities that occurs when we try to read such materials as chronologies. who most likely first codified the ZZNG. maxims and teaching devices. There is a curiously insulated and timeless quality to these materials.. and for appreciating the sensibilities from which ‘historicising’ teaching documents of that ilk are designed. when we do so. it is notoriously difficult to put a handle on dates of lineage Lamas of the ZZNG traditions before Yang ston chen po (the late 11th c. AD).Greatly Perfected. trope-like events. history. Yet. their conspicuous absence could almost suggest conscious efforts to cover the tracks. we look at an interesting but also somewhat remote Bon representative: complementary materials on lineage. sacred places. Three crucial links in the ZZNG lineages promise to be particularly revealing: . while at the same time being replete with stencilled. From the great wealth and variety of Tibetan historical literature available. for this paper. evocative.. which of course adumbrates the prominent Great Perfection view and its rhetoric of transcendence. The ZZNG mainly contains tantric and Great Perfection teachings. This raises interesting questions about implicit historicities. Early ZZNG lineage stories appear almost entirely depleted of verifiable names and dates. names. we customarily refer to Tibetan historical sources. and cosmology that developed as a legitimising adjunct to the Aural Transmission of Zhang zhung (Zhang zhung snyan (b)rgyud ZZNG). both the referent and the exact definition of the category ‘history’ often tend to move a bit out of focus—whether that is considered convenient or not . Indeed. Much of the frustration about what may appear to be historical obscurantism might actually relate to a clash of historicities and does not necessarily put the integrity of the underlying ZZNG Bon historicities into question. in Space and Time: Historicities of the Bon Aural Transmission from Zhang zhung Henk Blezer Leiden Summary In Tibetan Studies. AD and is said to have recorded the Four Cycles of the Oral Tradition (bKa’ (b)rgyud skor bzhi) in writing. The great Yang ngal teacher is a crucial figure for the eventual codification of the ZZNG and its narratives (he and his teacher ’Or sgom kun ’dul apparently were the first to produce notes on the Nyams (b)rgyud or Experiential Transmission). who is placed in the 8th c. AD. 3) Yang ston chen po Shes rab rgyal mtshan probably is the only historical figure in this exalted company. 2) The equally legendary dPon chen btsan po. we will pay particular attention to the manner of construction the religious persona of the first two figures: to the way their hagiographical narratives gradually emerge from legendary materials. Since ‘the type of historicity’ of Yang ston chen po seems the least problematic. His dates start somewhere in the last quarter of the 11th c. AD. In this study we will take a closer look at some of these Masters of the ZZNG. in accordance with convention (and philosophical view). who. . by context. Later tradition believes him to be the Master where the teachings emerge from a Zhang zhung cultural sphere into the Tibetan world. He is believed to have lived for 1600 years (and thus ought to be still alive as we speak).72 Henk Blezer 1) The legendary Gu rib Gyer spungs sNang bzher lod po. is ‘dated’ to around the 10th c. Karmay (1998:2) 73 .Historicities of the Bon Aural Transmission from Zhang zhung ZZNG Lineage Thangka in a German collection 15th c.?. 74 Henk Blezer . Historicities of the Bon Aural Transmission from Zhang zhung ?? 75 . 76 or 8th Henk Blezer . Historicities of the Bon Aural Transmission from Zhang zhung 77 . implicitly. traditionally. mythic or legendary parts are projected from.Henk Blezer 78 The ZZNG Lineage Revisited11 First we need to revisit briefly the whole of the ZZNG lineage. The lineage comes to us broken up into more or less homogeneous groups. for carefully reading and improving the redaction of this article. born from heat (drod skyes ’chi med tsug phud nas brgyud pa bcu bdun). The deities are followed by two main oral or aural lineages of superhuman and human adepts (grub thob snyan khung gi rgyud pa gnyis): rGyud pa ’khrug can gsum ‘The Interrupted Lineage’ The ‘Interrupted’ (rgyud pa ’khrug can gsum). 11 Many thanks go to Gerd Manusch. The narrative paradigms of individual masters within groups are predictably similar and appear stencilled. which I partly discussed earlier (IATS 2003). a bit like the nye rgyud. It consists of three sub-groups. which obviously is out of space and time. transmitted through ’Chi med tsug phud. hatched from an egg (sgong skyes ye gshen tsug phud nas brgyud pa brgyad). Interestingly. the name also indicates awareness of the remote temporal order that these divine. transmitted through Ye gshen tsug phud. It starts with the elusive intentional or mind transmission of the nine conquerors (rgyal ba dgongs pa’i rgyud pa dgu). in a way. There evidently is no intention to deceive but rather to inform one about the type of historicity of this part of the lineage. The first major division is into a ‘far’ and ‘near’ transmission: ring rgyud and nye rgyud. developed with the familiar predictability of Bön and Buddhist mnemonic classifications. ‘nearness’ here of course refers to the immediacy (and perceived reliability) of the visionary encounter of sNang bzher lod po with Ta pi hri tsa. Then a lineage of eight Masters. ring rgyud and nye rgyud here de facto function as indicators of the underlying historicity. Those that produced the texts. The lineage of seventeen Masters. But. . excercising the main mythical figures: 1. implies that the transmission occasionally was interrupted by visionary revelation. mythic and legendary parts are called ‘far transmission’ (ring rgyud). transmitted over a long lineage. But. took care to inform their audience that this is written from a more remote historicity. which may deviate from usual or other sensibilities. which are believed to be more or less consecutive. mostly groupwise. The historicities vary slightly. Ring rgyud Mythic & Legendary Time The first divine. 2. The overall heading of these four probably is to be emended to: mngal skyes sprul pa’i ston pa gshen rab [nas brgyud pa]. the so-called ‘near transmission’ are the six great adepts from Zhang zhung smar. And a lineage of nine Masters. But all Masters—legendary or divine—are entirely beyond verification. for instance. A brief. Following the three other births mentioned before. . They look more like obligatory references in accordance with later dominant narratives about western origins of Bon. and 4. One would not even feel inclined to try. they do not look convincingly ‘Zhang zhung’. And Mythic & Legendary Time it Is! The first of these adepts also are divine or in any case superhuman. rGyud pa ’khrug med (bzhi) ‘The Uninterrupted Lineage’ The ‘Uninterrupted Transmission’ lists 24 masters divided into four groups (rgyud pa ’khrug med nyi su rtsa bzhi): 1. it is called ‘near’ because sNang bzher lod po directly receives these teachings from Ta pi hri tsa. miraculously born (rdzus skyes gsang ba ’dus pa nas brgyud pa dgu). in visions. the headings for the first two categories of the ‘Uninterrupted’ lineage. His conspicuous absence underlines once more how disparate early Bon traditions are. the lineage crosses from mythic to legendary. Transmission through the ear(hole) of nine ordinary persons (gang zag snyan khung gi rgyud pa dgu). As said. Nye rgyud Zhang zhung smar gyi grub chen drug: Legendary & Human Time The next major subdivision. AD?). 2. 3. In this section. they are extremely brief and are lacking in personal detail. historical-looking beacon appears at Ra sangs khri ne khod. Compare. If descriptions appear at all. Transmission of the awareness of six so-called wisdom holders (rig ’dzin rig pa’i rgyud pa drug). Ubiquitous are toponyms such as Zhang zhung—even sTag gzig occurs. This is one of the few occasions in these texts that sTon pa gShen rab makes an appearance. But exactly because of their generic nature. Transmission through four scholar-translators (mkhas pa lo pa gyi rgyud pa bzhi).Historicities of the Bon Aural Transmission from Zhang zhung 79 3. but looks fictional. transmitted through gSang ba ’dus pa. The five transcendent lamas (la zla ba’i bla ma lnga (sems dpa’ brda’i rgyud pa)). who supposedly is a contemporary of emperor sTag ri gnyan gzigs (5th/6th c. hidden or overtly. .80 Henk Blezer This subdivision is where the lineage emerges from Zhang zhung into Tibet. This leg in of the link preserves memories of orally transmitted commentary by Masters of the ZZNG. they also indicate the legendary nature of the type of historicity. they split into an upper and a lower transmission. The somewhat unimaginative dMu names serve to underline their ancient Zhang zhung provenance. who is the receptacle of all the previous teachings. ’Or sgom kun ’dul. at its last Master. extreme longevity apparently does not preclude humanity: they are not treated very differently from later figures who are closer to the historical memory of the first codifiers of the traditions. accrued and codified over time. the first of the next subsection. Naturally. is said to have recorded the bKa’ brgyud skor bzhi. sMad lugs kyi bla ma lnga: Nyams rgyud When the teachings supposedly enter the Tibetan part of the lineage. in the 8th c. also happened to preserve the stories. Again. perhaps of a more verifiably human part of the lineage. here it appears an artificial entity. But this is also the approximate point in the lineage. it is also at this turning point that the stories start to assume body and authors care to elaborate. The descriptions in the ‘lower’ lineage part are more elaborate. which is well-known to be associated with Zhang zhung and with the founder of Bon. AD. The last person of this lineage. Yet. such brief intimations of the approximate type of historicity involved are often apparent from the texts. sTod lugs kyi bla ma drug: bKa’ brgyud The six Lamas of the upper transmission only transmitted the fourfold oral cycle (bka’ brgyud skor bzhi). which may indeed be a historical fact. the 7th–8th c. which may relate to the fact that Yang ston chen po. are said to have recorded the experiential transmission. dPon chen btsan po. At this point the lineage splits into two: The lower (smad lugs) and upper transmission (stod lugs). there were only names and very brief pro forma descriptions. which in fact very much turns out to be a systematic doctrinal issue. who codified the nyams rgyud. which may relate to the fact that this part is projected into a time that Tibet came ‘on record’. toward its very end. but. where it emerges into verifiable human memory. before that. supposedly written down by sNang bzher lod po. AD. The dMu/gShen clan is a well known old family name. It looks like this lineage segment was conceived as a new start. together with his student. The five Lamas of the lower transmission only delivered the experiential transmission (nyams rgyud). However. It thus mediates to later Masters the heritage of sNang bzher lod po. Yang ston chen po Shes rab rgyal mtshan. and is the focal point and narrative centre of gravity of the ZZNG. The preternatural lives of these Masters first of all seem to adorn their accomplished saintly stature. covertly. starting approx. These are on relatively firm historical ground. overall. various more or less vague antecedents come together in one figure. The organising principle is clearly moral.Historicities of the Bon Aural Transmission from Zhang zhung 81 Both sub-lineages again lead up to a focal point: Yang ston chen po. such as of the early ’dul ba lineages and the like. The law of karma adds a touch of determinism. most feature a culminating figure that reveals its reconstruction. probably particularly in reference to ‘Great Perfection’ rhetoric. Within one world cycle. The Southern Transmission became better known than Northern one (Karmay1988:xix). Bjerken 2001). Emerging Bon. major lineage segments appear. Here too. Still. It is interesting that in all this the lineage histories themselves show some awareness that the narratives. we see a third possible starting point of the lineage. At Yang ston chen po. This appears somewhat teleological: things are supposed or bound to fulfil their destiny in certain ways (cf. who is the starting point of their known dissemination and of a new leg in the line. 12 Forthcoming in Oxford & Bonn PIATS. Within this cyclic succession a somewhat pessimistic outlook on history presupposes a moral ‘law of entropy’: virtue and primeval order decrease (and chaos thus increases) with time. pertain to diverging historicities and they give that construction away. that of verifiable historical Masters in Tibet. capture and link the signs of time properly in his narrative. the general temporal framework usually differs radically. Yang ston chen po. Cyclical Time and Moral Causalities The conventional task of the Bon historian is to read. Time is a factor involved in moral precedence and authority rather than purely in chronology. each combining both doctrinal corpora. one which can actually be related to historical records. perhaps most tangible in the ubiquitous prophetic revelation (lung bstan). rather than causal. At least four consecutive. the lineage splits into two once more: the Northern and Southern transmission. . the Aural Transmission lineages show remarkably few signs of editing and cosmetic surgery. things can only get worse. Divergences in historical sensibilities are also apparent. Again. Tibetan/Bön historiographical conventions are distinctive. Time is realised as a cyclical succession of world periods. mostly group or sub-group wise. Bonn 2010. Time and space generally are viewed as relative (because dualistic) categories. Certainly when compared to more fanciful reconstructions. who combines these two disparate teaching lineages. And here too we seem to enter a slightly different type of historicity. Some Preliminary Conclusions of Oxford 200312 Considering the leverage of religious historiographical paradigms. Emphasis on ordinary details. with my sincere apologies for the lack of elegance to quote myself. at least in its quantitative aspects. beyond noting that traditional Tibetan materials often do not quite match academic genres. the lineage accounts also allow us insights into the conventions of the bonpo historian’s (often family) craft better. This raises fundamental questions regarding: 1) The wide inner variety of the Tibetan literatures that we deem historical and 2) The applicability of academic historiographical methods (and of the category history to begin with) to those widely diverse Tibetan literatures. ordinary places. Important Points to Retain There seem to be traditional conventions and codes in place that indicate which type of historicity is engaged in a particular lineage segment. and personal vicissitudes of life indicate human historical dimensions. we rarely pause and think how exactly what we perceive as Tibetan historical genres relates to academic historical writing. multi-farious and functionally diverse varieties of Tibetan historical writing that have largely been taken for granted and up until now remain poorly understood”14 (at least in any systematic sense) do query the historicities that they emerge 13 For an overview of historical genres see Vostrikov 1962 and van der Kuijp 2005. Ad 1) The first issue clearly is beyond the scope of any single study. Thus. in a qualitative sense. Zhang zhung snyan brgyud Historicities In Tibetan Studies.Henk Blezer 82 Such are the temporal framework and (some of) the general parameters within which Bon narrative strategies function. clan or kin. and ‘causality’ or some other meaningful connection (e. .g. of a moral order). 14 See Blezer 2006:436. For all these historicities there is an interesting gliding scale. Preternatural lives and an exuberance of magical powers indicate a legendary frame. In the following we will take a closer look at the construction of some of the narratives. 3) The issue of commensurability alo requires fundamental reflection on underlying historicities: such as. Divine figures indicate mythic time. This also indicates that they are rarely perceived as clashing. time. on the intellectual and existential sensibilities from which the literary documents are produced: for example. “those puzzling. located in ‘high’ antiquity (while the present is visualised below). But first I will need to introduce the ZZNG and the main sources for its lineage that I used for this study. the implied visualisation of space.13 Yet. such as parents. ” . histories are meaningful . After all. usually prioritise the expression of particular structures and potentials for meaning over historical fact (and religious historical narratives only more so). to which they at the same time contribute... at least in the humanities.Historicities of the Bon Aural Transmission from Zhang zhung 83 from and thus this first issue partakes in the second point as well. The basic descriptive pattern sought for is “this then that”. Historical narratives. Ad 2) Academic study of ‘Tibetan historical literature’ necessarily involves well-familiar paradoxes of transfer (of knowledge between epistemes). the cultural proclivities that lead to a certain historical consciousness within which . when data become part of a new knowledge system. 1984 on duality of structure). Data only become knowledge when they are incorporated into a system of knowledge. the ‘understanding’ of which often implies causality with hindsight: “that because of this”. chronology merely is one element. they do not exist in that new manner separate from the system that defines them. which is the culturally particular methodology of how the past may be written or otherwise expressed.15 But when we reframe ‘Tibetan historical data’ (which originally often were implicated in religious narrative and moral causalities) within current academic historicities (which usually prioritise chronology and temporal causality over narrative and morality). I leave that to scholars of modern en postmodern historicities. I define the term historicity as “cultural schema[ta] and subjective attitudes that make the past meaningful ... Thus. at best. when understanding Tibetan history. Ad 3) Less well-known is how this prioritisation of meaning is implemented and from which systems of knowledge and which understandings of space.. but without attempting to engage in deeper reflection on the receiving epistemes. There. This study attempts a modest contribution toward understanding the latter. on the other hand. ‘understanding’ basically involves reframing the unfamiliar within the familiar.. attempting to reveal temporal causalities of events. historicising data is a preferred mode of ‘understanding’. and. following general custom. of a grander ideological design. at times beyond recognition. When historians turn to ‘Tibetan historical literature’. After all. then they are instantly transformed into something else. Yet. Historicity thus encompasses historiography. they may appear a different entity altogether. we customarily frame or reframe what we perceive as Tibetan history in more familiar academic historical paradigms or historicities. by their very inclusion. Giddens. Thus. data also come to constitute the very knowledge system that makes them ‘known’ (cf. I here rephrase historical sensibility or consciousness as historicity. Following Neil Whitehead (2003:xi). The procedure entails at least two inescapable circularities. ideological or moral lessons. time 15 To avoid the problematic term “paradigm”. they mostly look for chronologies and temporal causalities of events and try to ‘get past’ religious or mythic narrative content and its religious. be it grand or small. sometimes for several millennia. Let me give one example. non-Buddhist Tibetan ritualistic documents from Dunhuang from before the early of mid-11th c. On the risk of sounding like a culture relativist. are stories worth considering.16 These recitations of ritual antecedents clearly are continuous with later orderings of similar legitimising narratives in the form of lineage histories. not incidentally. but others. we find not just one. which morally towers above an ever more depraved present. . in some ways is the reverse of popular positivist understandings of linear progression in time: it prioritises ‘high’ antiquity instead. These are genres that. continuities from early. such as precipitated the present credit crunch). Academic prioritisation of chronology (and its implied temporal causality) over religious or mythic narrative (and its evoked meanings) produces demonstrable blind spots in our understanding non-modern Tibetan historical traditions and leaves major resources of Tibetan knowledge systems unused. naive belief in progress. naturally. much like positivist history is. also radically prioritise ‘meaningful coincidence’ over geographical or chronological fact. in most interesting ways. but many different historicities. temporality is not the only factor of continuity. purely chronological systems are of course also extant from the earliest layers of Dunhuang documents (e.84 Henk Blezer and ‘causality’ it proceeds. I might add that history.g. AD (such as PT1285. Indeed. such as Indian cosmological ideas of cyclical time. The grand cosmological scheme basically is also just a story. non-chronological—in fact. Examples of such non-chronological orderings are ritual recitations of legitimising precedents and persons. The Indian model of four yugas. Examples of the latter are systems that organise events according to moral causalities (such as ‘karmic’ connections) or teleologies (such as the fulfilment of ancient prophecies or ripening of saintly aspirations). Among ‘Tibetan historical literature’. recited prior to ritual procedures and recorded in ancient. things can only go down-hill from there. instead often spatial—orderings of Tibetan narratives into lineage histories have been completely overlooked. the so-called Catalogues of Principalities and the like). greed-driven. and that stories that have allowed people to live well. and the like (Bjerken 2001). typically joined with the moral cosmological notion of straying from early divine or pristine perfection into later decadence. We may occasionally also find different (and not necessarily coherent) architectures or framings of ‘history’. for instance in such genres as transmission lineages that often accompany and authenticate important teaching texts.. which are more explicitly chronological. nor even one coherent group. The organising principle here is clearly moral and not causal (put that against amoral. the texts discussed in this study mostly pertain to. the Old Tibetan Annals). cf. in a conventional sense. due to a fixation on text types that reveal chronology. obviously is someone’s story. incidentally. Some are mainly concerned with chronology and temporal causality. 16 Early. structurally. history. Takeuchi et al. and Kapstein 2000. Bonpos go about it in revealingly different ways.18 Before the 10th c. such as we find in the relatively late Dunhuang source called the Old Tibetan chronicle (PT1287 and IOL1284). cosmologies. and coincides with the extremely interesting trans-formation of the Imperial Tibetan legacy into the grand origin narratives of Buddhist Tibet. Moreover. 2009. in Tibet. the earliest samples of beginning narrativisation. .Historicities of the Bon Aural Transmission from Zhang zhung 85 but also the basic fact of organising and systematising data into temporal or spatial sequences. the antecedents of the teaching lineages soon disappear into the mists of legend. AD—roughly coincide with the inception of the genre per se in Tibet. 20 But cf. Walter.19 annals and chronicles. fully narrativised histories—perhaps starting the 11 or 12th c. we will here look at one example from a revealing but also somewhat remote. We should not lose sight of the fact that the first extant. notably of the so-called Old Sect of Buddhism within wider Tibet. already shortly before their date of composition 17 See e.. 21 See the comparative symposium and publication project on Framing Discourse and the Special Case of ‘Nativism’ in Buddhist Environments. the dBa’ bzhed. Beckwith 1987 and 2009. amongst others. indeed. 18 Cf. and cosmology that developed as a legitimising adjunct to the Aural Transmission of Zhang zhung (Zhang zhung snyan (b)rgyud ZZNG). be they Buddhist. which.g. etc. it mainly refers to itself or to anonymous generic doctrines.. e. There is a curiously insulated and timeless quality to these materials.21 The Aural Transmission from Zhang zhung From the great wealth and variety of Tibetan historical literature available. China. Its curriculum is markedly self-contained. for a tentative chronology. The ZZNG mainly contains tantric and Great Perfection teachings. Richardson 1998 and Li and South Coblin 1987. and historicities from India. in fact.17 This period follows a truly momentous epistemic clash of influx of foreign Buddhist culture. subdominant Bon religious corner: complementary materials on lineage.g. are strongly reminiscent of other subaltern or subdominant forms of discourse. see Martin 1997. but all of which predate phyi dar Buddhism and Bon-as-we-know-it. an island unto itself. usually with limited ‘religious’ import. we mostly find historical genres of a simpler kind. AD. forthcoming 2009. not only Tibetan Buddhists but also bonpos start framing (subdominant) historical discourses in religious narratives. Around that time. 19 Cf..20 or brief recitations of ritual antecedents of unclear date and provenance. In its discourses. such as inscriptions. Bon or otherwise. which of course adumbrates the prominent Great Perfection view and its rhetoric of transcendence. 22 These stories about places seem to have played a major role in establishing (so not merely recording) a sacred geography. A Clash of Historicities?—Three Major Time Nodes in Composition This clash of historicities renders the curiously insulated explications of space and time that are contained in those somewhat excentric lineage documents of the Great Perfection ZZNG exceptionally useful for understanding the meeting of underlying historicities better. their conspicuous absence could almost suggest conscious efforts to cover the tracks. . Yet. trope-like events. This clash of historicities becomes particularly poignant. AD). In short. sacred places. there need not be any intentionality to that apparent timelessness. Three links in the ZZNG lineages promise to be particularly revealing: 1) (Gu rib) Gyer spungs sNang bzher lod po is said to have recorded the Four Cycles of the Oral Tradition.22 maxims and other teaching devices. Especially the early parts of the ZZNG lineage histories are curiously depleted of verifiable names and dates. but rather with our own flawed appreciation of Tibetan literary genres. at the same time. when we try to read ZZNG lineage materials as chronologies. This does not leave the conscientious chronicler with much to go by. it is notoriously difficult to put a handle on dates of lineage Lamas of the ZZNG traditions before Yang ston chen po (late 11th c. Indeed. from academic perspectives. We are most likely not facing ‘failed histories’ here. The main problem is our act of reframing Tibetan historicities. If one would have much invested in securing historical traces. and the ideological role of a cultivated discourse of timelessness. they are replete with stencilled.Henk Blezer 86 (which is roughly the period of inception of narrativised history writing). names. A-temporality may be part of conventions for projecting time and space in Great Perfection traditions: in keeping with its own distinctive philosophy and cosmology. evocative. albeit. but only in our understanding of them. and not necessarily the integrity of the knowledge system that we study. Much of the frustration about what may appear as obscurantism might actually relate to a clash of historicities and does not necessarily put the integrity of the underlying Bon historicities into question. but. in writing. of course. A Convention of A-Temporality? This convention of a-temporality reveals the construction of the narratives and of their historical legitimisation. It is this historicity that I am interested to explore in this study. the bKa’ brgyud (skor bzhi). It raises interesting questions about the historicities that are implied. perhaps there is nothing wrong or lacking in these lineage documents per se. by means of three scribes they recorded what ’Or sgom kun ’dul taught.1.4).2.23 and Gu ge Shes rab blo ldan. by way of mnemonic notes.55.1.2–40.6–56. which sNang bzher lop po also is said to hail from.38.1).562.1.1. YST.46. some of which are late and all of which post-date at least the 11th c. Also for his person there is no corroborative evidence for his existence outside ZZNG narratives themselves.5. AD (Yang ston chen po). AD.4ff (cf. ’Or sgom kun ’dul. two men from Khams visited. there is no corroborative evidence for his existence outside recorded ZZNG narratives. he is to be dated to the 8th c.5.Historicities of the Bon Aural Transmission from Zhang zhung 87 Because of his position in the narratives. He and his teacher. of the sNyel clan from Gu ge Nang khongs in Western Tibet. Eventually. AD (his narrative invokes Khri Srong lde’u btsan’s reign). 24 See N. He is a figure of paramount importance for the codification of the ZZNG and its narratives. of the Khyung po clan.74. whatever that may be.5. p.6. on Yang ston chen po’s request.1. Later in his teacher’s life.5. Sh. 3) Yang ston chen po Shes rab rgyal mtshan probably is the only historical figure in this exalted company.25 Yang ston chen 23 See N.2.574. He is believed to live for 1600 years (and thus ought to be still alive today). 2) The equally legendary dPon chen btsan po is believed to be the link where teachings emerged from the Zhang zhung cultural sphere of the six Siddha’s from sMar into the Tibetan world (and he is considered responsible for transmitting separately the oral from the experiential teachings): the six Lamas of the Upper Transmission (bKa’ brgyud) and the five lamas of the Lower Transmission. dPon chen btsan po is from that supposedly Zhang zhung clan called Gu rib or Gu rub. His position in the lineage suggests a date somewhere in the 9th or 10th c. to Tibetan. 25 See Sh.6ff and YST. let alone for his supposed codification of the ZZNG bKa’ rgyud.576. from Ra ring country. and within 20 days produced 120 folios of 13 lines (exact amount of text is only mentioned in N. but his early biographies do not mention or even hint at the fact. were the first to write things down from the Nyams rgyud.2. Interestingly. this crucial position is only implicit in the biographies of his Tibetan students. Yet. who were interested in acquiring the text of the teachings.24 It is mainly on these grounds that bonpo sholars (such as Lopon Tenzin Namdak) and those who go by his lights (such as John Myrdhin Reynolds) presently assume that in the transmission from dPon chen btsan po the language shifted from Zhang zhung. some of which are late and all of which post-date at least the 11th c. dPon chen lHun grub mu thur. AD.2–5: dgung lo brgyad cu bgrangs pa dang /mdo khams kyi khams pa gnyis kyis gdams ngag zhus nas/ don thams cad rdzogs pa dang / da dpe gnang bar zhus pas/ sgros ’dogs gcod pa don gyi rgyud pa la/ yig chung gi lhad ma zhugs pa zhig dgos pa yin/ nga la yi ge ka tsam zhig yod re gsungs nas . and Sh. Cf. They seem essential to the outlook of their section of the lineage. . A-Temporal Explications of Time Because of their perceived importance. such as epic concentration. AD and looks like a historical figure. pp. this may in fact be the first time that anything has been preserved in writing. these figures are featured in more detail or occasionally may indeed have been ‘documented’ relatively better.6: sku tshe’i gzhug la mdo khams kyi khams pa gnyis kyis dpe zhu byas pas/ bla ma’i zhal nas sgros ’dogs gcod pa don gyi rgyud pa la/ yig chung gyi lhad ma zhugs pa yin pas/ bla yi ge ’bri ru med pa la/ yang ston gyis zhu ba phul nas/ nged gnyis kyis brjed tho bkod pa ma yin pa’i/ nga la yi ge khyi lce tsam gcig yod re gsungs nas/ dbu bsnyung bzhes pas/ de la khams pa yid ches nas/ ’bris mkhan gsum gyis bla ma’i thugs nas bris [55] pas! zhag nyi shu’i khongs su gsum btub ma bcu gsum ’phring/ shog gu brgya nyi shu tsam byung / de man ched dpon sras rnams kyis kyang / brje tho yig chung than thun zhus so/. they therefore may be significantly more out of focus than the size and detail of their life stories might suggest. because he most likely is a historical figure. Yang ston chen po seems the least problematic figure. It probably will not surprise anyone that major nodes in the lineage and major differences between the paradigms of groups of Masters relate to its manner of codification. Perhaps in some cases even the point of projection or development of the rest of the group. All these figures relate to codification of the ZZNG somehow. They appear as culminating figures and representative of their group. dbu bsnyung bzhes/ phyis yang ston gyis yi ger ’debs par zhu ba phul/ nan bskyed nas yang yang zhus pas/ ’bri mkhan gsum gyi bla ma’i thugs la bris pas zhag nyi shu’i khongs su ’bri rgyu byung / de nas dbu bzung nas dpon sras rnams kyis kyang / brjed tho than thun yig chung du zhus nas bkod pa yang gda’o/. seem to have grown significantly by centripetal narratological forces. We will study the manner in which their hagiographical narratives emerge from names and legendary materials. They indeed often mark the transition to another historicity and at times in fact the point where a new type of lineage and historicity starts.5–55. sNang bzher lod po thus gradually grew into a major Bon ZZNG culture hero. The biographies of the first and third.54. N.1.Henk Blezer 88 po is to be dated starting the last quarter of the 11th c. In spite of the copious narratives on the legendary sNang bzher lod po. but particularly of Gyer spungs sNang bzher lod po. This explains why in the surviving records only figures close to Yang ston chen po look anywhere near historical. in accordance with historiographical convention and philosophical view. and relative to briefer narratives. These Masters of epic stature seem to have accrued much of their characteristics through epic concentration. In the following we will pay particular attention to the manner of construction the religious persona of the two ‘earlier’ figures. According to Bru rGyal ba g-yung drung. on pp.1. indeed point to a long.26 The same appears.1) may serve as a starting point: gang zag mdzad nas bzhag pa’i bon skor la/ bla ma yang ston chen pos mdzad pa’i rnam thar rgyas ’bring sdus gsum/ sras po ’bum rje ’od kyis mzad pa’i rgyud dbang brgyas ’bring sdus gsum! gcung po klu brag pas mdzad pa’i [15] rgyud phyag brgyas ’bring gsum/ gnyag ston ri pas mdzad pa’i/ sgron ma ’grel ba nyi ’od brgyan/ brgyal ba [Bru rgyal] rin po ches mdzad pa’i sgron ma’i dgongs don dang / snyan rgyud phyag khrid lag len dmar khrid kyi bskor/ don ldan zhang ston bsod rin gyi mdzad pa’i man ngag dmar khrid kyi bdams pa drug bya ba yod do/ de rnams snyan rgyud stod lugs kyi bon skor la rtogs pa’o/ Earliest Sources of Lineage Histories Yang ston chen po Shes rab rgyal mtshan The earliest records.2. which are now lost. beginning lineage part of the sNyan rgyud brgyas bshad chen mo (YST. like the one by Yang ston dPal bzang. amongst others.5–29.4. He also studied with Ba ri lo tsā ba (1040.Historicities of the Bon Aural Transmission from Zhang zhung 89 In this study we will take a closer look mainly at two earlier Masters of the ZZNG.: lo gnyis shu’i dus su bru la stod pa dang / mkhu ston dbang phyug la thug nas shes rgyud grol ba dang / g yas bru ston rje btsun/ rme’u ston lha ri gnyan po rnams la thug nas dus tshod de’i gra thog la mkhas zer ba byas/ ba ri lo tsa ba la tshad ma dbu ma sher gsum gyi rig pa mkhas par bslabs/ .8–15.2. ..28. (YST. 28 That puts him in the last quarter of the 11 th c. A brief overview of historical sources on the ZZNG lineage masters.575.1/K.1) below.2: (gnyis pa ’grol byed kyi khrid la gnyis ste/) lo rgyus byung khungs/ dngos [29] gzhi’i gdam pa gnyis so// dang po ni/ rnam thar rgyas bsdus gang rung tshar gcig bshad/ gnyis pa dngos po’i gdam pa la gnyis ste/ bka’ rgyud dang nyams rgyud do/. 26 But cf.III. 28 Sh. who was still active in 1103). AD.101. in sPa btsun bsTan rgyal seng ge dpal bzang po’s 1419 AD text and also in an occasional later ‘Chad thabs.14.27 Bru rgyal ba g yung drung (1242– 90) only mentions non-descript earlier sources. medium and short version of rnam thar by Yang ston chen po Shes rab rgyal mtshan. that appears in Yang ston dPal bzang’s rDzogs pa chen po zhang zhung snyan rgyud kyi rtsis byang.5)? 27 See sPa btsun bsTan rgyal seng ge dpal bzang po’s (Zhang zhung snyan rgyud kyi) brGyud pa’i bla ma’i rnam thar (N.1ff.. p. Yang ston chen po was a disciple of Bru sha rJe btsun (1040–) and rMe’u ston Lha ri gnyen po (1024–91). at different points in the lineage. and the rDzogs pa chen po zhang zhung snyan rgyud kyi bka’ rgyud skor bzhi’i ‘chad thabs. the colophon to Bru rgyal ba g yung drung’s text in Sh. but it does not indicate where this sNyan rgyud dbang originates.15. this is ’Or sgom ’Dul ba rin chen. It indicates that it is now in the hands of Yang ston dpal bzang.): gong ma rim par rgyud nas/ rtogs ldan dad shes/ rtogs ldan [432] bsams rtan [bsam gtan] rin chen/ khyung sgom tshul ’od [i.16).411. medium and short version of a rGyud dbang. but I am aware of references and secondary materials based on it.14. Khyung btsun tshul khrims ’od zer]/ gur sgom tshul rgyal! hor sgom ’dul rin [do not confuse with an earlier figure. ’Or sgom Kun ’dul. aka mTshan ldan ’dul ba. also .9ff. sNyan rgyud dbang gi yig chung yig phran cha tshang cha lag cha rkyen dang bcas pa (YST.?. p. There is no real colophon. pp. there are datable 29 Cf. but there is some information included (inserted?) after the first concluding benedictions: deng gsang yang ston dpal bzang bdag gi dngos grub yin. The sNyan rgyud dbang gi yig chung (YST. Yang ston dpal bzang wrote this to clarify and and rearrange. for easier understanding.431. produced a long. what appears in the long middle and short versions prepared by ‘Bum rje ‘od. See also sNyan rgyud brda dbang (YST. Karmay (1998:29 & 43) ’Bum rje ’od Yang ston chen po’s son ’Bum rje ’od apparently.29 Fortunately.90 Henk Blezer Yang ston chen po Shes rab rgyal mtshan ’Bum rje ’od Details of a Lineage Thangka in a German collection 15th c.e.. I have not seen those texts. the 9 th abbot of g Yas ru dben sa kha]/ de la bdag yang ston dpal bzang gis zhus/ ? yang rgyud pa gcig la/ chig chod dad shes/ bru rgyal ba g yung drung / des rtogs ldan kun ’od/ des ri pa sher blo/ des hor sgom de la bdag gis zhus sho/ ’bum rje ’od kyis mdzad pa’i dbang rgyas ’bring sdus pa gsum yod pa la/ gsal zhing go bde’ bar khrigs su/ yang ston dpal bzang bdag gis zhal zhes yan chad yi ge bris/ ghal [’gal] ‘khrul ci mchis bon skyong rnams la bshags dge’ bas bdag gzhan smin grol thob par shog/ sā mā yā/ dg[e]’o/ / dge’o// kra shis ..6). 8f] rtogs ldan dad shes bya bral gzhon tshul rnams nas rim par rgyud nas/ deng sang yang ston dpal bzang bdag gi dngos grub du babs s-ho/ dge’o .9 and 11). the section leading up to the colophon: snyan rgyud kyi skor ‘di rnams kyang / snyan rgyud chen mo’i skor ‘di/ skyes bu’i lus dang ‘dra ba yin/ sgron gzer ma bu cha lags dang bcas pa ‘di/ nang gi don lnga dang ‘dra ste/ med thabs med pa’i man ngag gi skor/ lha khrid dang bshad srol las sogs ni/ lus kyi gos sam mgo’i zhva’am/ rkang pa’i lham mam/ bcings pa’i ske rag lta bu gang la gang dgos kyi gdams par rtogs la/ de dag kyang sngar gyi grub chen gong ma rnams kyi dus su/ bka’ skyong dang mi ma yin la’ang / gang dga’ ci bder ba ma tshud pa dang / snod ldan yang dkon par byung bas/ rgyas bsdus ’bring po rdzogs par ma bstan/ gdams pa skor res kyang gang zag gi mgo thon pa ltar mkhyen nas/ skor re skor re phye nas bstan pas/ da lta kha ‘thor ba ltar gyur pa yang de’i gnad yin/ da lta yang thams cad rdzogs par tshogs na yang rab/ de min skor re kyang mgo thon pa ltar snang ngo / .Historicities of the Bon Aural Transmission from Zhang zhung 91 figures in ’Bum rje ’od’s environment: his younger brother Yang ston bKra shis rgyal mtshan’s teachers in gTsang were gShen chen Ye shes blo gros and ’Gro mgon sMan sgong.5f. founded the gtsug lha khang Dar lding gser sgo in 1173. ’Gro mgon sMan sgong ba is the same person as Mar ston rgyal legs. N.. 30 His biography is omitted from Sh. 31 Cf. p.2–6. That puts him in gTsang somewhat later in the 12th century and he may have lived until the early 13th c.2.1. the reference may have a different function in these contexts (completeness?). ’Gro mgon Klu brag pa. medium and short version of a rGyud phyag (see YST.31 followed the same path. according to mKhan chen Nyi ma bstan ’dzin’s dKar chag. bKra shis rgyal mtshan is also known as ’Gro mgon Klu brag pa. the use use in Sh.III.: dgung lo sum cu so gcig lon pa dang / ston pa’i zhabs kyis bcags g yas ru gtsang du gshegs so/ snyi mo bzang ri’i grva sar zhang bar thang ba sum ston [Zhang ston bSod nams dpal and Sum ston lHa ‘bum] rnam gnyis kyi drung du/ rgyud sde bshad nyan bslabs/ gshen chen ye shes blo gros kyi drung du/ so sor thar pa’i sdom pa mnos/ ’gro ba’i mgon po sman gong pa’i drung du dbang bzhi rdzogs par zhus/ khyad par gcen po ‘bum rje ’od kyi drung du/ rdzogs pa chen po snyan rgyud kyi gdams ngag zhus nas/ theg pa gsum ldan gyi bon la dka’ ba spyad nas grub pa thob pa lags so/.1/K. from rTogs ldan dad shes to Yang ston dpal bzang: [436..30 Ye shes blo gros.588. in turn. who was born in 1123 AD.1. the founder of Klu brag monastery (the community is studied extensively by Charles Ramble). AD. Yang ston bKra shis rgyal mtshan ’Bum rje ’od’s younger brother (Yang ston) bKra shis rgyal mtshan. medium and short.1. p. apparently composed a long.2.101.86. One naturally wonders about the veracity of the recurrent division into long. 4] ’di dag rgyud pa’i khungs ni/ sangs rgyas dgongs rgyud dgu’i thugs rgyud/ gang zag nyi shu rtsa bzhi’i snyan rgyud sprul pa’i sku yis las can gnyis la bstan nas/ de nas bzung nas zhang zhung smar gyi grub thob bdun [drug?] la rgyud/ des rtogs [16] ldan ’khrul zhig drug la!/ des bod kyi grub thob bzhi/ des bla ma yang ston chen po/ ya ngal gong khra ba/ des klu brag pa/ des rtogs ldan dbon po/ des [Yang ston] brgyal mtshan rin chen/ des lnga brgya’i skyes gcig rtogs ldan dad sho/ des mnyam med brgyal ba rin chen [=Bru sgom]/ des rtogs ldan kun ’od/ des ri pa shes rab blo gros/ des hor sgom ’dul rin/ des yang ston dpal bzang bdag la gnang ngo/ gnam lo brgyal po sa mo glang gi dbyar zla tha chungs kyi tshe bco brgyad la sil pa phug du bris pa bkra shis/ dge’o Yang ston bKra shis rgyal mtshan Bru chen rGyal ba g-yung drung Details of a Lineage Thangka in a German collection 15th c.?. Bru sgom indicates to rely on various scattered earlier sources. but does not specify which exactly: [588.7–16.6] bdag .B. Yang ston dPal bzang attributes the sGron ma ’grel ba nyi ’od rgyan to gNyag ston ri pa sher tshul and not to his student U ri bsod nams rgyal mtshan.92 Henk Blezer N.1/ K. Karmay (1998:57 & 61) Bru chen rGyal ba g-yung drung (1242–90) The next earliest source is the (rDzogs pa chen po zhang zhung snyan rgyud kyi) Lo rgyus rnam thar dang bcas (Sh. by Bru rGyal ba g yung drung (1242–90)..III.1). The attribution of the rDzogs pa chen po zhang zhung snyan rgyud kyi rtsis byang to Yang ston dPal bzang is clear from its colophon: [15.101.2. 34 g Yung drung tshul khrims in his catalogue of 18761880 also speaks of a rNam thar rgyas pa. lineage) this texts is attributed to the unnamed Khyung po Rang grol bla ma rgyal mtshan (b. is the (rDzogs pa chen po zhang zhung snyan rgyud kyis) Bla ma’i rnam thar lo rgyus rnams rgyas pa (KII. Then there is the sNyan rgyud brgyas bshad chen mo (YST. which may be this Bla ma’i rnam thar lo rgyus rnams rgyas pa.5.32 The author’s lineage appears at the end. Martin 2003:512f. lemma 127. for its traditional dating to or 1328. on f. probably including the next text that appears in the arrangement of the ZZNG Bon skor.33 Kun grol grags pa (b. which he indeed attributes to Rang grol bla ma rgyal mtshan. Khyung po Rang grol bla ma rgyal mtshan (b. see mKhan chen Nyi ma bstan ‘dzin and Kvaerne 1974.1328 or 1364) Close to that text. 34 KGKC:222. .6). see Vitali (1996:482). It in fact looks like a short version of YST. Karmay (1998:7) attributes it to Yang ston dpal bzang.5: rtogs ldan dad shes! rin chen rgyal ba! rtogs ldan gun ’od [kun ’od]/ rtogs ldan ri pa gshen rab [shes rab] blo gros! de la bdag gis zhus so/ / Rin chen rgyal ba here refers to mNyam med rGyal ba rin chen.35 32 See Martin 1997. This text may have to be dated after Bru sgom: names up to and including Yang ston chen po appear in the list.4: rnam thar chen mo? rnam thar chung ba/ (mTsho sngon 1993) 35 YTKC:1159: rnam thar rgyas pa rang grol bla ma rgyal mtshan yan/ (in Bon bKa’ ‘gyur II).1701) refers to a rnam thar chen mo.4). but up to and including Bru sgom in the detailed discussion.5). both in time and content.1).110.42r.48v. the author of the rDzogs pa chen po zhang zhung snyan rgyud kyi rtsis byang. For the dating of Rang grol bla ma’s birth to 1364 rather than 1304. By implication (v.Historicities of the Bon Aural Transmission from Zhang zhung 93 gis gdams pa khyad par can ’di/ kha ’thor ba la brten nas zhu ba la nyer len dang rtsol ba/ dka’ tshogs mang po byas pas/ gzhug [589] la spros pa chod pa byung ba ni/ grub chen gong ma rnams la mos gus byas pa’i thugs rje’o/ rdzogs pa chen po snyan rgyud kyi rnam thar lo rgyus dang bcas pa ’di ni/ phyi rabs dag snang bskyed pa’i phyir du/ sngar gyi rnam thar las go bde zhing / sgong dril nas g yas ru’i bru sgom rgyal ba g-yung drung la sprul sku rkyang ’phags chen po’i thugs sras/ las can gyi bshes gnyen dam pa/ thogs med sku mched gnyis kyis nye bar bskul te/ thang lha gangs kyi mar zur/ nam ra gangs kyi g-yas zur/ sho mon mdzoms ra’i mdun zhol/ khams dbus gnyis kyi so mtshams/ sgrom mdzod dpal gyi dben dgon zhes bya bar/ byi ba’i lo dbyar zla tha chung la sbyar ba’o/ /sarba mangga la/ dge’o/. both based on dPal ldan tshul khrims. aka Bru chen rGyal ba g yung drung (see f. the rGyud pa ’khrugs can (YST.1328 or 1364). 33 Cf. a fellow student with Kar tsa bSod nams blo gros: [129. AD. sPa btsun should know. no word of the independent survival of this text has reached me so far. In any case. Kar tsa bSod nams blo gros. probably in the late 14th early 15th c. also transmitted an extensive teaching (rgyas bshad) on the ZZNG lineage. because he was a student of Kar tsa bSod nams blo gros. It is based on earlier oral communications (zhal rgyun). sPa btsun bsTan rgyal seng ge dpal bzang po Influential and much used is the lineage history written by sPa btsun bsTan rgyal seng ge dpal bzang po in 1419: the (Zhang zhung snyan rgyud kyi) brGyud pa’i bla ma’i rnam thar (N. Karmay (1998:45 & 53) Kar tsa bSod nams blo gros According to the colophon of the (Zhang zhung snyan rgyud kyi) brGyud pa’i bla ma’i rnam thar by (N. such as. It is not clear from the wording whether these ever were compiled in written form.1) sPa btsun bsTan rgyal seng ge dpal bzang po.94 Henk Blezer Khyung po Rang grol bla ma rgyal mtshan Kar tsa bSod nams blo gros Details of a Lineage Thangka in a German collection.1). which formed an important source for his compilation. the extensive teaching (rgyas bshad) of his teacher Kar tsa bSod nams blo gros and communications by rGya sgom bstan bzang.6] //zhang zhung snyan rgyud kyi bla ma brgyud pa’i rnam thar lo rgyus ’di/ sngar kyi [emend: gyi] rnam thar rgyas ’bring bsdus gsum . 15th c. ?. See the colophon of the next text. particularly. dge bas ’gro rnams theg chen don rtogs shog. The sNyan rgyud ’bring po sor bzhag sngon gro (T. by Yang ston chen po. the colophon to Bru rgyal ba g yung drung’s text in Sh. perhaps. It is well possible that shortly before that time only names and listings of groups of Masters existed together with various narratives and narremes. and continues through ’Khrul zhig g Yung drung tshul khrims. All may depend on Yang ston chen po’s texts. AD. late 11th c.III.156. The earliest texts. these are not extant anymore (but cf. The earliest source we still have is by Bru chen rGyal ba g yung drung (1242–90). This lineage history starts close to where sPa btsun’s leaves off. 36 The ones by Yang ston chen po. directly or indirectly.1.III.156. except.5. By all appearances (records).2.22) also contains useful lineage information.10) by sKyang sprul Nam mkha’ rgyal mtshan. The extant sources heavily depend on each other.sarba mangga la// // Furthermore we have the Bla ma rgyud pa’i rnam thar (T. some of which later made it into the hagiography.5) may be the first to systematise the individual biographies into a five-fold classification.29.Historicities of the Bon Aural Transmission from Zhang zhung 95 mang du ’dug pas/36 / bla ma gang zag ’ga’ zung gi zhal rgyun bdud rtsi’i thigs pa dang / khyad par slob dpon [130] bsod nams blo gros rgyas bshad dang / rgya sgom bstan bzang de gnyis las sogs te/ thos pa phyogs med kun la dris brda’ bskor cing gtugs nas/ sa mo phag gi lo/ zla ba bcu pa’i tshes bcu/ skar ma bya bzhug la/ dpal ri khud yang dben bde chen sgang gi pho brang dkar po ru/ spa btsun bstan rgyal seng ge dpal bzang bdag gis ni/ phyi rabs gang zag mos ’dun byed pa’i phyir/ the tshom blo mun bsal phyir ru/ sgros ’dogs bskur ’debs med par/ mos ’dun dad pas bkod pa re zhig tshar ro/ sems can thams cad rgyud pa’i bla ma rnams kyi thugs rjes zin par gyur cig. See. written in the late 13th c. and the rDzogs pa chen po zhang zhung snyan rgyud kyi bka’ rgyud skor bzhi’i ’chad thabs. with Kar tsa bSod names blo gros.1. beginning of YST. Overall Time Frame Clearly the testimonies that we presently have are relatively late. AD.1/K.III.101. p. YST. A Convenient Model for the Construction of the Narratives Five-fold Classification Yang ston dPal bzang (sNyan rgyud rgyas bshad chen mo. AD. amongst others also Yang ston dPal bzang’s rDzogs pa chen po zhang zhung snyan rgyud kyi rtsis byang above. . these narratives were recorded or construed starting the late 11th c. are now lost. for the brief lineage in sNyan rgyud rgyas bshad chen mo (YST. by Yang ston dpal bzang?).5?). distinguish the tantric miracle worker from the preferred Great Perfection adept. because of his ripened karma and good fortune (las ’phro dang skal ba yod pas [63] grub thob kyi bla ma dang ji ltar mjal ba’i lo rgyus dang gnyis/) Third. clan and a place of birth. AD. the signs of attainment (miracles) at ordinary occasions (thun mong gnas skabs kyi grub rtags dang bzhi/). the story of how he met his Lama. While it does put some flesh on the bones of the narratives. This is clearly not for everyone and reveals a deeply elitist perspective. but his arrangement of narrative content is very similar.9–63. the story of his sojourn at special places and his lifespan (sa gnas khyad par can du rten pa’i tshe du bzhugs pa’i lo rgyus dang gsum/) Fourth. Yang ston dPal bzang and others implement it for those narratives that have sufficient substance. A Brief Outline of a Saintly Person? This classification is revealing for the manner of construction of such hagiographies and biographies. The extraordinary accomplishments. Lastly. These are basic sociological realities.Henk Blezer 96 Yet. Many authors after Yang ston follow the scheme. a saintly person is defined by his ordinary and extraordinary accomplishments. All further particulars are often trope-like or fantastic embellishments. • • • What defines an ordinary person are: parents. alternatively. PP. • • • • • YST. within these epistemes. The explicit scheme seems to have started after the 13th c. .5.3 First. A religious person is moreover defined by his karmic connection to a teacher (2) and by the leisure allowing him or her to engage the teachings (3). the story of his father and mother and the attainment of a pure human body (dang po rtsang [gtsang] ma mi lus thob pa yab dang yum gyi lo rgyus dang /) Second. how to construe one. SNYAN RGYUD RGYAS BSHAD CHEN MO. and in that implicit form may be older. the arrangement of information in earlier sources prefigures the classification as such. Post-hoc it reveals what exactly. The places of practice incidentally chart out or perhaps also establish a sacred geography. constitutes a human saintly person. such as Khyung po rang grol and bsTan rgyal seng ge dpal bzang po.62. usually starting at around sNang bzher lod po. Fifth. Bru chen rGyal ba g-yung drung does not mention the classification yet. it is mainly cardboard content. or. factionally rhetorically. the extraordinary qualities that manifest his realisation (rtogs pa mngon gyur thun mong ma yin pa’i yon tan dang lnga’o/). from sNang bzher lod po up to approximately Yang ston chen po. What Yang ston dPal bzang here made explicit may well also be the basic narrative paradigm according to which lists of names are reworked and elaborated. the first group from the ‘near’ transmission. Two Samples 1. 2. it is also somewhere in these Lower and Upper lineages that the first historical and remembered. before sNang bzher lod po. The detail of matters spiritual and the ‘inner biography’ stand in no comparison to the practical details of their lives. This does not preclude that some of them are historical names. The design of individual lineage groups becomes immediately apparent when we look at two intermediate groups. Standard phraseology in the last two or three categories. figures appear. Ad 1) The four scholars barely are more than names in a lineage. . historically. which form the last group of the ‘uninterrupted’ lineage. in the ‘far’ transmission. one step further on the way from a mere name to a plausiblelooking hagiography. Immediately before sNang bzher lod po (bottom right) we find the four scholars and translator-pundits (mkhas pa lo pa). which. needless to say. Ad 2) The six adepts equally have most of their weight in the descriptions of their presumed accomplishments. in tabular format. stencilled-looking stories. Yet. with only very brief testimonies of their accomplishments attached. as if nobody cared to carve individual features to go with the names. rather than narrated and literary. Immediately following sNang bzher lod po we find the six adepts from lower Zhang zhung (zhang zhung smar gyi grub chen drug). Most of the stories of the six Masters of Zhang zhung smar and many among the Lower and Upper tradition.Historicities of the Bon Aural Transmission from Zhang zhung 97 A Model & Saving Grace of Lineage Lamas? Generic descriptions of the earlier Masters. particularly make up much of the substance of these minimal. strongly suggest that they were first transmitted in the form of names mainly. A tell-tale sign is that most of their excellent qualities are in fact shared! They very much have a group identity. receive most of their body from the classification itself and not from independent narratives. are totally nondescript. being unhindered such as. and the extraordinary accomplishment of awakening after having manifested the total freedom of conceptual thought.e. ring rgyud Don kun grub pa — — — — Ra sangs ’Phan rgyal — — — — Gu rib gSas dga’ — — — — Zla ba rgyal mtshan — — — — realised the (great Perfection) view that is without fixed reference point (rtsa bral gyi lta ba rtogs) mastered the contemplation of clarity and emptiness (gsal stong gi sgom pa la mnga’bsnyems) guarded his practice of one taste (ro snyoms pa skyongs) held to reality as it is in its original state (bon nyid rang sa zin) Henk Blezer Also. based on sPa btsun’s lineage history. who are like a crown. riding a boulder as if it were a horse. diverting the course of a river uphill. unless indicated otherwise mKhas pa lo pa gyi rgyud pa rgyud pa ’khrug med.Parents Teacher Age Place Accomplishments 98 Master NB. manifested the ordinary accomplishments. these four lamas. flying in the sky. (dbu rgyan gyi bla ma bzhi po de yang / thun mong gi dngos grub chu la mi bying pa dang / mkha’ la ’phur ba dang / pha bong rtar gzhon pa dang / chu bo gyen la bzlog pa las sogs la thogs pa med/ mchog gi dngos grub rtog med chen po mngon du ’gyur nas sangs rgyas so/) .. not sinking in water (i. ‘walking on water’). he became equal to an awakened one Gu rib clan. and after having manifested direct realisation. to the left face of Nyi ma lung the signs of his manifest accomplishments were beyond imagination. unless indicated otherwise Zhang zhung smar gyi grub chen drug. AD. he cut the root of life & death. unerringly. nye rgyud Pha ba rGyal gzigs gsas chung son of (yab) Ya ngal gSas rgyal and (yum) Thod dkar sMan skyid ‘bodyguard’ (sku srung) to king Ral pa can (805-?) elaborations elaborations abbreviated paraphrase teacher Gyer spungs 317 snang bzher lo po. Having reached realisation after one month. (yum) sNya mo lcam gcig. After one year he realised not to have great hope for awakening up high nor burning fear for living beings below 171 Pha wa stag slag can he became equal to his teacher. based on sPa btsun’s lineage history. nephew dMu tsog ge 99 dMu Tsog ge Gu rib clan. After 17 days. taught at 19 paternal uncle dMu Shod tram chen po Historicities of the Bon Aural Transmission from Zhang zhung Master . taught at age 73 Me rgyud dkar nag [developed all kinds of good personal qualities—long description]. son of (yab) spotted at 3by Gyer Gu rib Gyer rgyung and spungs chen po. son of (yab) tram chen po Gu rib Khro rgyal and (yum) Ra mo lu gu.Parents or Contemporaries Teacher (=previous) Age Place practice Accomplishments [(extra) ordinary] NB. renounced samsara and internalised the realisation of an awakened one dMu Tso stangs taught at 47 113 Shangs shel rong he mastered both the ordinary and highest accomplishments. son of (yab) Gu rib sTon pa rgyung nge and (yum) Rog shud Za a lo sman dMu Shod Gu rib clan. in the 8th c. he was liberated renunciation at 40 117 Pha bong ngar ba in Gangs sta rgo. he gained confidence. After five months. nb. all three arose. After seven days realisation arose. [He was a bit (contains elaborations slow.1 can sta rgo early in life in Rog he gained the mastery of lcag phug and later in exceedingly many Zang zang lha brag feats.Gu rub clan. 100 dMur Gyal ba blo gros . only after more than two on his practice and feats) years of struggle] he understood that mind & body do not touch the level of samsara & nirvana anywhere.renunciation at 220< 45. son of a pauper (yab) Gu rub Tsu gu shepherd. as needed). he was indistinguishable from an emanation. meets dMu Shod Sh. he became equal in realisation to an awakened one dPon chen bTsan po Thog lha clan. and faith and pride in accomplishment. son of (yab) sKu gshen Thog lha rTse mo and (yum) Mang wer Za rgyan chung main Da rog gi brag ri met master at 12 in Zang zang lha brag g-Yas ru shangs kyi ri rtse (contains elaborations on his practice and accomplishments) 1600 Henk Blezer (he is a rig ’dzin who has power over his life and has the power to be born for the benefit of others. he gained mastery of various signs of accomplishment like that. Because the impurities of body and birth were exhausted he needed no physical nourishment and he transformed himself into a turquoise cuckoo and went to rTag gzigs and he suppressed demons in the south-west. tram chen po at Gangs 2. personalities are usually concentrated in a few crucial figures. in comparison to what came immediately before and after. it also was too much trouble to infuse each and every figure with individuality afterwards. And. etc. This confirms our earlier conjecture that early parts of the lineage are created from mere names in a lineage and do not derive from independent story traditions. systematic efforts at providing a semblance of an ordinary and religious persona are also noticeable. Identity here preferably is epically concentrated in a few crucial figures. Also the inordinate length of the hagiography of sNang bzher lod po. Conclusions What these texts apparently are mainly concerned to deliver are: • • • Respectable names in a extensive lineage that inspire faith. that more or less represent the group. implicit or explicit.Historicities of the Bon Aural Transmission from Zhang zhung 101 The Golden Goose Comparison of these two groups—one immediately before sNang bzher lod po and one immediately after—reveals a relevant divide in the lay-out of the narratives. Up until dPon chen btsan po. the earliest descriptions and hagiographies generally are nondescript. Apparently. From a concrete historical point of view. sNang bzher lod po clearly is a watershed figure in the construction of the lineage and in the narrative framework in general. . Note also his preponderant presence in the Bon ma nub pa’i gtan tshigs. usually at the beginning or end of a lineage group. after sNang bzher lod po. between mere names in a lineage and mini-hagiographies. certainly up until dPon chen btsan po but also for some parts leading to Yang ston chen po. This may underline orality at some stage in its creation or transmission. The source texts again give clear clues. The exemplary saintly persona of the lineage holders. the Ta pi hri tsa’i lung bstan. is conspicuous. regarding what constitutes a recognisable person and thus about the way a persona of a lineage Master might be constituted and construed. 29. it looks like a short version of YST.4–31. ?.1–2: gu rib snang zher lod po.62.159.5) This well-known lineage history is by sPa btsun bsTan rgyal seng ge dpal bzang po (written in 1419). cf.27. .101.6.5. also the following text in the arrangement.4.5. This text is to be dated after Bru sgom: names up to and including Yang ston chen po appear in the list.B.) Cf.102 Henk Blezer Gyer spungs sNang bzher lod po dPon chen Ta pi hri tsa Details of a Lineage Thangka in a German collection 15th c.5. YST.5–30.1) This lineage history is attributed to Bru chen rGyal ba g yung drung (1242–90). cf.5 esp. The narrative of revenge appears at the general and incidental spiritual qualities and signs accomplishment of sNang bzher lod po (p.35.5ff.5). N.27.1.1328 or 1364).1.5ff (: gyer spungs chen po snang bzher lod po) (rDzogs pa chen po zhang zhung snyan rgyud kyi) Lo rgyus rnam thar dang bcas (Sh. the rGyud pa ’khrugs can.542. Karmay (1998:7) attributes it to Yang ston dpal bzang.6: dpon chen gu rib snang zher lod po. Karmay (1998:15 & 14) sNang bzher lod po ma hor stag gzig dang gu rib shing slag can dang zhang zhung bkra shis rgyal mtshan dang tshe spungs zla ba rgyal mtshan gyi slob ma gyer spungs chen po snang bzher lod po 27. AD.62.) By implication (lineage) this texts is attributed to the unnamed Khyung po Rang grol bla ma rgyal mtshan (b.110.2.4ff.542. YST.4–31. the narrative of sNang bzher lod po’s dbu yogs also appears in: [N.4–31.46. (rDzogs pa chen po zhang zhung snyan rgyud kyis) Bla ma’i rnam thar lo rgyus rnams rgyas par (KII.5.260–67.63. sNyan rgyud brgyas bshad chen mo (YST. up to and including Bru sgom in the detailed discussion. the present redaction of which post-dates the 14th–15th c. (Zhang zhung snyan rgyud kyi) brGyud pa’i bla ma’i rnam thar (N. Sh.5. SGK.4ff. YST.4] {{pa}} //rDzogs pa chen po zhang zhung snyan brgyud kyi bon ma nub pa’i gtan tshigs bzhugs so//.3: gyer spungs chen po snang zher lod po. K.2.III. p.. Historicities of the Bon Aural Transmission from Zhang zhung 103 . 104 Henk Blezer . Historicities of the Bon Aural Transmission from Zhang zhung 105 . 106 Henk Blezer . Historicities of the Bon Aural Transmission from Zhang zhung 107 . 108 Henk Blezer . Historicities of the Bon Aural Transmission from Zhang zhung 109 . 110 Henk Blezer . Historicities of the Bon Aural Transmission from Zhang zhung 111 . 112 Henk Blezer . Historicities of the Bon Aural Transmission from Zhang zhung 113 . 114 Henk Blezer . Historicities of the Bon Aural Transmission from Zhang zhung 115 . 116 Henk Blezer . Historicities of the Bon Aural Transmission from Zhang zhung 117 . 118 Henk Blezer . Historicities of the Bon Aural Transmission from Zhang zhung 119 . The conclusion of a possibly late redaction is partly based on a reference to the Kha byang or. Bru sgom (13th c. AD) has incorporated by far the longest narrative. As is known. less likely. like in the Bon ma nub pa’i gtan tshigs.120 Henk Blezer The Grand Master (Narrative) Now let us have a closer look at the main focus of epic concentration in the early lineage: Gyer spungs sNang bzher lod po. which turns out to be the well-known Kha byang: the Srid pa rgyud kyi kha byang chen mo. according to tradition. This particular inclusion by sPa btsun does not appear in the other extant earlier lineage histories. the Kha byang rgyas pa. He even has included the lengthy Bon ma nub pa’i gtan tshigs narrative. in the near transmission or nye rgyud. and thus is his immediate source of the bKa’ brgyud skor bzhi teachings. The Bon ma nub pa’i gtan tshigs I have discussed at great length elsewhere. Zhe sa dgu phrug. forthcoming. It makes up a large part of the total volume of the hagiography. Interestingly. Ta pi hri tsa is the transcendent Master and immediate source of sNang bzher lod po. an ascetic episode of sNang bzher lod po with his student at Da rog Lake. it is plausible that he included that part of the narrative in 1419 based on narratives similar to those that still appear in the Ta pi hri tsa’i lung bstan. particularly if one would include its secondary impact on narratives of other masters. gives the reasons why Bon did not decline. The localising intro is also similar. AD or later. His narrative body. Extractions & Inclusions Another major addition appears in sPa btsun’s 1419 lineage history. comparatively speaking. . is huge. mJal thebs bar ma. 37 Paris 2008 conference on “Publishing and Editing: The Evolution and Future of Writing in Tibet”. also was instrumental in the revelation and codification of the bKa’ brgyud skor bzhi. It therefore probably also depends on the Srid pa rgyud kyi kha byang chen mo. Perhaps these texts are even from the same workshop? This suggests to consider a date after 1310 AD for the inclusion of this story as well. He is the pivot of many ZZNG narratives and.37 Important to mention is that its present redaction is 14th c. which. in a long digress. also in the Ta pi hri tsa’i lung bstan we find a reference to a Kha byang. when apparently a surge in literary activity on Ta pi hri tsa and sNang bzher lod po is attested. AD. late-looking. Both narratives appear to be rather late in their current redaction at least. and appear in the ZZNG since. but they do not provide much in terms of down to earth historical data or verifiable information. Parts of the bon ma nub pa-theme have been around in Bon narratives since at least the 11th-12th c. Can we Conclude on an Older Core Story? The late additional materials moreover mostly deal with quite intractable details of inner experience. in the 15th c. To eventually ornate versions with disproportionally large digresses on inner religious experience and historical apologetic detail. AD. There is a faint suggestion that the Da rog-narrative in its present form may post-date the Kha byang chen mo (1310). complex descriptions of persons—ordinary. To stencilled. separate text. as the truly paradigmatic narrative on why Bon did not decline. elaborations on his inner experience. One would therefore feel inclined to speculate that in the 13th c. at least. sPa btsun. This suggests a next step in the way these stories grew: • • • From lists of names in a lineage with added inner experience. • • First.. religious and saintly—in a five-fold classification. AD (the Gab ’’grel). All of this may have started with a name ‘remembered’ from a lineage . Bru chen started the inclusion of the bon ma nub pa-theme (others have included only brief indications of this theme: his skill in making gold bombs). AD..Historicities of the Bon Aural Transmission from Zhang zhung 121 Late Embellishments? Important to keep in mind is that major swaths of digressing narrative on sNang bzher lod po were included and occasionally (Bon ma nub pa’i gtan tshigs) even appear as an important. otherwise reserved for more esoteric types of rnam thar. started the inclusion of the Da rog-narrative. one would then retain a story that structurally is very similar to the other brief accounts. If one were to remove from the hagiography what look like later embellishments. . Secondly. the 13th c. 122 Henk Blezer . Historicities of the Bon Aural Transmission from Zhang zhung 123 . 124 Henk Blezer . Historicities of the Bon Aural Transmission from Zhang zhung 125 . 126 Henk Blezer . Historicities of the Bon Aural Transmission from Zhang zhung 127 . 128 Henk Blezer . Historicities of the Bon Aural Transmission from Zhang zhung 129 . 130 Henk Blezer . Historicities of the Bon Aural Transmission from Zhang zhung 131 . Gu ge Shes rab blo ldan. both as a focal point of group identity and as a lineage figure. He is said to hail from the same Gu rib/rub clan—supposedly from Zhang zhung—that sNang bzher lod po also is from. But he never gained the momentum of sNang bzher lod po. . In the lineage thangka of the ZZNG kept in a German collection (perhaps 15th c. in biographies of his Tibetan students: 1. In fact.73). much narration on him appears in narratives of his students.132 Henk Blezer dPon chen bTsan po: The Cultural Translator No More Heroes Anymore dPon chen bTsan po almost is an example for the opposite. of the sNyel clan from Gu ge Nang khongs in Western Tibet. with a special status. his crucial position between Zhang zhung and Tibetan cultural spheres is only implicit. dPon chen bTsan po’s hagiography instead basically reads like a slightly more elaborate version of the usual paradigm. and he did not attract the mass of the latter’s ‘inner’ hagiographical narration nor of his momentous historical involvement. dPon chen lHun grub mu thur. Here we may have a contrasting and illuminating sample where later reconstruction and embellish-ment of narratives did not take place. from Ra ring country. of the Khyung po clan. He too is an important link in the chain of transmission. dPon chen btsan po. is believed to be the link where teachings emerge from the Zhang zhung cultural sphere of the six adepts from sMar into the Tibetan world (and also for transmitting separately the oral from the experiential teachings.) and reproduced in Karmay (1998:12) (see above p. to the six Lamas of the Upper Transmission (bKa’ brgyud) and the five lamas of the Lower one (sNyan brgyud). dPon chen bTsan po appears in row five from above. numbered 41 in Karmay’s book. Interestingly. the third from the left. 2. Historicities of the Bon Aural Transmission from Zhang zhung 133 . 134 Henk Blezer . Historicities of the Bon Aural Transmission from Zhang zhung 135 . 136 Henk Blezer . Historicities of the Bon Aural Transmission from Zhang zhung 137 . 138 Henk Blezer . Historicities of the Bon Aural Transmission from Zhang zhung 139 . Henk Blezer 140 Concluding Remarks Ideology & Convention Both ideologically and conventionally, there are diverging historicities involved, which often shift between major groups within the lineage. Ideologically, the groups may in fact be viewed as carriers & examples of historicities, as graded steps in construed antecedents. They bridge the gap, almost cosmologically, from transcend-dent origins: via mythic figures, and legendary saints, to emanation in known humans. The cosmological parts of the ZZNG Great perfection discourse neatly match this old conundrum of crossing over from transcendent origins, beyond existence & non-existence, to existence in space and time. ZZNG cosmology, such as appears in the ’Khor lo bzhi sbrag & sGron ma drug, matches the epistemologically phrased process of straying from primordial state, but it deviates considerably from mDzod. mDzod cosmology and theogony involve relatively unique narratives on primordial eggs and mythic episodes of darkness & light (Blezer 2000). E.g., in texts such as the Srid pa’i mdzod phug, Bon mDzod 1-0-1, the rTsa rgyud gsang ba bsen thub or the rTsa rgyud nyi zer sgron ma (similar). Conventions & Family Traditions The life-stories of the ZZNG Masters probably first appeared in written form with Yang ston chen po, at the turn of the 11th c. AD. Before that time, only a few Masters were remembered, the rest was received wisdom, in the form of lists of names and narrative traditions. The early Masters come in homogeneous groups, they often reveal somewhat similar naming conventions and share many characteristics and a group identity, with divine/mythic, legendary and human segments. Conventionally, early groups often feature exemplary figures at the beginning or end, who more or less carry group identity. They are lineage types. The whole trajectory from primeval awareness to codified teachings in space and time thus is dramatically enacted by surprisingly few ‘persons’. The rest, approximately until the time of recording, appears a literary construct, that may or may not have a historical basis; who can tell. This localised convention or craft of laying out a lineage reveals a certain mnemonic efficiency peculiar to story traditions, whole lineage groups are recreated or invented based on very sparse traditional data. Zhang zhung & Yar lung Conventions The mnemonic structure of lineages from the ZZNG workshops is reminiscent of similar constructs in Tibetan mnemonic culture. Historicities of the Bon Aural Transmission from Zhang zhung 141 A very well-known example is the post-hoc design, re-creation and inter-polation of earlier Yar lung dynastic groups (such as in Haarh, 1969, and Linnenborn, 2004), in workshops of other Tibetan historical craftsmen. There too, more or less discrete segments are visible, which cross the gap between the human and the divine: divine descent & mythic ancestors; legendary figures; and finally human-looking or historical figures. Especially in the early parts structurally similar collectives appear, also with equally unimaginative, collective names (the seven Khri, the six Legs, lDe &c.). There, groups also concentrate narration and characteristics in a few epic bearers of identity, e.g. gNya’ khri btsan po or Gri gum btsan po. This does not preclude that early figures would be based on people that existed in space and time, also beyond narratives, but it reveals that there is a certain logic to the conventions of the construction of lineages that surpasses local workshops and relates to mnemonic, possibly oral cultures. More on Structure Structurally, early life stories, hinge on only a few unverifiable names, on famous clans and places, but mainly on nondescript details of ‘inner experience’ and accom-plishments, rather than on historical detail. Place names seem to play a major role in mapping out or establishing a sacred geography, nunc pro tunc (it may be more creative than merely recording received wisdom). Catalogues of places often are a hidden backbone of mythic hagiography. They would typically be inserted with hindsight and thus mostly relate to time and sensibilities of the period of composition. There are at least three phases leading up to the life stories of (probably) historical persons, which all show traces of recent textual codification, starting the 11th or 12th c. AD: 1. Mere names in a lineage plus emblematic saintly ‘experience’. 2. Five-fold elaboration scheme, incidentally defining 3 person types. 3. Epic concentration: inclusion of lengthy and late digresses on the greatest hits on ‘inner experience’, only for a few, select, ‘epic’ figures. These culture heroes usually are figures with a high citation-index, more often than not Masters involved in textual codification. Note on Narrative & Chronology As said, in history, chronology usually implies temporal causality. The basic descriptive pattern sought for “this then that”, which often implies causality with hindsight. Narrative rather prioritises structures and potentials for meanings. 142 Henk Blezer Academic prioritisation of chronology over religious/mythic narrative has produced demonstrable blind spots in our understanding of non-modern Tibetan historicities and thus leaves major resources of Tibetan knowledge systems unused. The topic at hand is a telling example for this resulting mismatch. But there also are some very surprising continuities, from early, nonchronological—in fact, instead often spatial—orderings of Tibetan narratives, right into lineage histories. Due to a fixation on text types that reveal chronology and temporal causalities, atypical ones have been almost completely overlooked. Early, purely chronological systems are of course also extant, since the earliest layers of Dunhuang documents (such as the Old Tibetan Annals). Time, Narrative, Chronology and Order As discussed above, examples of non-chronological orderings are ritual recitations of legitimising precedents and persons, recited prior to ritual procedures. Some of those were recorded already very early-on, in ancient, non-Buddhist Tibetan ritualistic documents from Dunhuang from before the early or mid-11th c. AD (e.g. PT1285, cf. the so-called Catalogues of Principalities and the like). While these narratives all are in time, they are not necessarily ordered chronologically but, e.g., spatially, or according to ritual necessity. Old recitations of ritual antecedents clearly are continuous with later orderings of similar legitimising narratives, as they appear in transmission histories that usually are more explicitly chronological. For example, the ubiquitous transmission lineages (brgyud rim), which, as here, often accompany and authenticate important teaching texts. As we saw, these also often involve cataloguing of sacred space. Temporality is certainly not the only convention of continuity. There also is the very basic fact of systematising data, be that into spatial, ritualistic, ideological, or, indeed, temporal sequences. Bar snang khu byug One of the ordinary (!) powers of dPon chen btsan po also was to manifest as a Cuckoo. Detail of a Lineage Thangka in a German collection; 15th c. ?, Karmay (1998:4) Historicities of the Bon Aural Transmission from Zhang zhung 143 Appendix on mNang When Gyer spungs chen po sNang bzher lod po receives his ZZNG transmissions—here consciously rendered in the Present Tense—from the last lineage holder(s) of each of the three interrupted lineages and the uninterrupted one: to wit, from sTag wer Shing slag can, Zhang zhung bKra shis rgyal mtshan, and Ma hor sTag gzig (rgyud pa ’khrug can), and from Tshe spungs Zla ba rgyal mtshan (rgyud pa ’khrug med), YST.5.63f—that is, the sNyan rgyud rgyas bshad chen mo—usually phrases that as follows: [some previous Master] gyis bdams pa mn[a]ng. The first and most logical solution would be to read mnang as an odd alternative spelling for gnang: to give, grant, bestow, etc.49 Also, mnang here clearly is not an isolated spelling mistake: it appears three times in the passage. The use of bdams pa for gdams pa is of course well within the range of the orthographical variance that one would expect for these texts and does not worry me too much. The alteration gnang/mnang is certainly not as common a variant as is the pair gdams pa and bdams pa. The exchange of a sngon ’jug “ma” by a “’a”, for instance in Bon MSs from Dolpo, is very common indeed; as in mtshan and ‘tshan (which in fact occurred in the above-mentioned name Tshe spungs Zla ba rgyal mtshan, in YST.5). The alteration of sngon ’jug “ma” instead of “ga”—in my recollection at least—is not common. In fact, at the moment I do not recall any other instance, except gnang/mnang. So, I think we well ought to be careful here and would need additional evidence to be sure. mNang The word mnang has been recorded with different meanings, for instance: 1) Ives Waldo: mnang med pa—hell of waves of torment (one of the {sems can dmyal ba brgyad} eight hot hells) [IW]. 49 Theoretically, mnng could of course also be a bsdud tshig for a two-syllable word, something in the manner of man n...ng (cf. man ngag?). But man ngag could only be erroneously rendered as mnng. But then it is the only two-syllable word that I could think of that would make much sense in this context (assuming that people do make mistakes with abbreviations and granting that this would also make the sentence very elliptic, verb etc. missing). Needless to say, I certainly did not want suggest that man ngag could properly be abbreviated that way. But it is a good thing that you warn people, who perhaps are less familiar with the logic of Tibetan abbreviations, about that: my shorthand might cause confusion and lead people to make unwarranted assumptions. Henk Blezer 144 But here mnang med pa looks like a variant for the more regular phrase mnar med pa, or aviici hell, the waveless or incessant (maximum torture) one. Well, if mnar ba means torture then mnar med doesn’t seem to add up here ...; but let’s not go into that now. Anyway, I have a hunch that the alternative spelling of the word in this context implies “no escape”. Considering the narratives about that very nasty ‘loka’, that would certainly be an understandable variant. There is an illuminating passage in the mKha’ ’ gro rin chen ’phreng ba’i rgyud, on p.87. Purportedly, this text was translated from Sanskrit. The gter ston Lung ston Lha gnyan is said to have received it from Ri khrod pa Tshe dbang rig ’dzin. Karmay, in his Catalogue, on p.11, dates Lung ston Lha gnyan to 1088–1124 or 1112–1148. The mKha’ ’gro rin chen ’phreng ba’i rgyud is included in the Ye khri mtha’ sel, the so-called Indian cycle of rdzogs chen, which, as is well known, is likewise considered to have Indian roots. In section 34, which strives to ascertain the proper spelling of words (heard), on p.86f. there appears an interesting series of paired words, which all sound or look fairly similar, yet are very different (in meaning). Fortunately, for us, each entry comes with a brief defining context. This section is preceded by chapters on the proper manner of reading mantras (32) and the pronunciation of mantras in the bKa’ ’gyur (33). In short, apart from the rituals pertaining to the mandala and the like, this text also has a lot of other interesting things to offer, such as materials on phonetics and other linguistic matters. I really would need to spend more time with this text—significantly more than I presently have—to be sure about anything. This text certainly deserves closer study; but since it is only tangential to our present concern, for now, I will merely quote a small representative sample: ... sa phyogs dma’ dang lus kyi rma/ byin gyis brlabs dang chu dar rlabs/ bros dor mnang dang mi bu mna’/ ... For our purposes, that passage turns out to be very helpful. Here (too?) mnang seems to relate to something like escaping (bros) or abandoning (dor). I don’t think that the meaning that is recorded in this passage is necessarily very relevant to our particular context of use, but it may relate to what Ives Waldo has recorded as an alternative rendering for avÎci hell. In any case, mnang, however infrequent it may be, is an existing word after all, and that may go some distance to explain the likelihood of orthographical confusion, somewhere down the line. 2) There is an on-line verb dictionary the Verbinator 200050 that includes mnang and mnangs as different aspects of the same verb and has an interesting array of meanings: 50 See: http://tendrel.net/tibetan/dictionary_wylie.xml. Historicities of the Bon Aural Transmission from Zhang zhung 145 mnang: Present: mnang DK. Past: mnangs DK. Future: mnang DK. Imperative: mnangs DK. Meaning: To satisfy, to be satisfied, to be possible DK. Its authorship and origins are unknown to me and I have no idea which sources or data it is based on (apart from other such works, as referenced in the document; legenda?). 3) Tsanlha: mnang bar bzhag pa (legs su brgyan pa < brDa yig blo gsal mgrin rgyan). 4) In translations from Sanskrit mnangs translates Skt bhoga 5) In the Li shi’i gur khang we find nor pa’am srid. All five semantic fields of mnang do not seem to apply to the ZZNG context. This should encourage us to pursue the option of an alternative spelling for gnang after all. We therefore need an occurrence of mnang in a context similar to the one found in the ZZNG, meaning gnang. By stroke of luck, in several bsGrags pa gling grags editions, I found a passage that has exactly what I was looking for, evidence for mnang and gnang, as variants, in a similar context of: giving, bestowing or granting. This is a passage where the sPu rgyal King sTag ri gnyan gzigs bestows various honours upon his sku gshen (which Samten-la so nicely translated as “body guard”). The name of his sku gshen is Ra sangs kyi bon po Khri ne khod (cf. Khyung po Ra sangs rje rgyal, elsewhere). As you will know, sTag ri gnyan gzigs is said to be the great-grandson of lHa tho tho ri gnyan btsan and the grandfather of Khri Srong btsan (sgam po); so about that time (the late sixth to early seventh century AD). In this passage he bestows honours on his sku gshen for rescuing him from prison, when he was in dire straits, captured by the King of lHo brag. Dolanji, Khedup Gyatso (reportedly based on the ‘Oslo MS’): p.87.5ff: (… bon gyi gsas mkhar yang mang bar bzhengs so/ ) drin lan dang che thabs su bon gshen la [p.88] rtsigs byin pas/ gral g yas gral rtse la sku gshen de ’jog bal po’i gdan khri dang za ’og gi gdan/ yig tshang du gser gyi phud bu gnang ngo / bKa’ brten, Vol.72: p.53.3ff: (… bon gyi gsas mkhar yang bzhengs so/ ) drin len dang che thabs su bon gyi sku gshen la gtsigs byin pa/ Henk Blezer 146 gral g-yas gral gyi rtse la sku gshen de ’jog ba so’i khri dang za ’og gi gdan bting / yig tshang du gser gyi phud bu gnang ngo / An edition that Per Kvaerne styles ‘Nagchu MS’ and that tends to be more verbose, reads the last part as: ... yig tshang gser gyis phud bu dang ’thing gis bum pa yang mnang / A MS that Dondrup Lhagyal has edited (styled ‘sNyan(g) rong MS’ in Bellezza), which reportedly is very close to the ‘Nagchu MS’—and may be even more verbose than that one already is—has: f.35.3ff: (… bon gyis gsas mkhar mang po yang bzhengs so/ ) drin lan dang che thabs su/ sku gshen la rtsig phul ba/ g yas gral gyi rtse la sku gshen ’jogba so’i gdan khri dang za ’og gis gdan gnang / yig tshang du gser gyis phud bu dang ’thing gis bum pa yang mnang / This passage is in fact part of a very involved story with a long and complex history, more about this will follow at another occasion. I assumed that in this context mnang is simply represents a different way of spelling a more familiar word, such as, perhaps, gnang. Thus, the phrase probably will have to be emended to: [some previous Master] gyis gdams pa gnang. I have a hunch that we would be well advised to separate our query for the meaning of mnang from that for mnangs, because in their real occurrences seem to tend into rather different semantic directions. In the following I shall gather some occurrences and semantical deliberations on mnangs. mNangs In ‘OT’ documents. One meaning at least (mnangs su bcad see PT128751 and PT0016 & ITJ0751)52, roughly seems to relate to the mnangs/bhoga semantic field mentioned in 5 and 6; in this case: appropriating livestock or property, as booty or something like that? I therefore did not mention that again. I presume that the mnangs su bcad pa that bTsan lha rendered as bdag gir bzung ba relates to such occurrences. An occurrence of mnangs in the Ge khod lha la rten mkhar gzugs (KT.242:357-461; supposedly a gter ma text, but as of yet of unclear origins) seems perfectly in line with the ‘OT’ occurrences. 51 52 See: http://otdo.aa.tufs.ac.jp/archives.cgi?p=Pt_1287&k=mnangs. See: http://otdo.aa.tufs.ac.jp/archives.cgi?p=ITJ_0751&k=mnangs. Historicities of the Bon Aural Transmission from Zhang zhung 147 Nathan Hill in The Old Tibetan Chronicle, Chapter I, in RET 10,53 p.98, n.4, has some interesting references for mnangs as well: “Uray (1966: 245 n. 21) tentatively suggests that mnangs is the past tense of a verb ‘to kill’ and related as the causative to the verb nongs ‘to die.’ Zhang (1985) defines the word as ‘wealth.’”54 Sigla dBra GS K.I K.II K.III KII.110 N N2 NT NyR Nyams rgyud rgyal ba’i phyag khrid, ’by’ Bru chen rGyal ba gyung drung (N.B. contains sPa bsTan rgyal dpal bzang po’s lineage history!), published by mKhan po dBra tsa bsTan ’dzin dar rgyas, Kathmandu 2002, NB. deb gzugs; cf. Sh rDzogs pa chen po zhang zhung snyan rgyud bka’ rgyud skor bzhi, in rGyal gshen gSung rabs Nyams zhib dPe skrun Khang, Vajra Publications: Kathmandu 2006, NB. deb gzugs bKa’ ’gyur, ‘first’ edition, see AYKC bKa’ ’gyur, ‘second’ edition bKa’ ’gyur, Mongyal Lhasay Rinpoche, ‘third’ edition, Sichuan 1996 Zhang zhung snyan rgyud, contained in volume 110 of the ’second’ edition of the bKa’ ’gyur (K.II), this is the edition that is followed in Kvaerne et al. (2003) History and Doctrine of Bon-po Ni.spanna-Yoga, published by Lokesh Chandra and Tenzin Namdak, New Delhi 1968, NB. deb gzugs rDzogs pa chen po zhang zhung snyan rgyud kyi gsung pod, published by Yongs ’dzin Sangs rgyas bstan ’dzin, New Delhi n.d., NB. dpe cha rDzogs pa chen po zhang zhung snyan rgyud bka’ rgyud skor bzhi gsung pod, in Zhang Bod Shes rig dPe tshogs (Zhang Bod Educational and Cultu<t>ral Texts), arranged by sNang mtha’ bsTan ’dzin nyi ma, 770 pp., 2005 Tibet Autonomous Region, NB. deb gzugs Zhang zhung snyan brgyud kyi bon skor bka’ brgyud skor bzhi, blockprint from Nyag rong, printed by Nyag rong ba bya btang 53 See: http://himalaya.socanth.cam.ac.uk/collections/journals/ret/pdf/ret_10_05.pdf. 54 Cf. bhoga, points 5 and 6 above. References (as in Hill): Uray (1966). “’Greng, the alleged old Tibetan equivalent for the ethnic name Ch’iang.” Acta Orientalia Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 19. 245-256. Zhang Yisun (1985). Bod rgya tshig mdzod chen mo / Zhang Han Da Cidian. Beijing: Mi rigs dpe skrun kang / Minzu chubanshe. Henk Blezer 148 Sg Sh.2 Snell T.III TNL YST mChog sprul Tshe dbang ’gyur med, the dPe rtsis is by Shar rdza bKra shis rgyal mtshan (1859–1934), NB. dpe cha Zhang zhung snyan brgyud kyi bon skor, manuscript from bSam gling, Dol po, NB. dpe cha Zhang zhung snyan rgyud skor, published by Sherab Wangyal together with the sNyan rgyud nam mkha’ ’phrul mdzod nges skor, Dolanji 1972, NB. deb gzugs; cf. dBra Zhang zhung snyan brgyud bka’ brgyud skor bzhi, microfilm of blockprint of D.L. Snellgrove, JOLM/3/471 (filmed by J. Briggs 9-Oct-1962), NB. dpe cha bka’ brten, published by Sokde Tenpai Nyima Rinpoche, Lhasa 1996; this edition came out together with the third edition of the bka’ ‘gyur by Mongyal Lhasay Rinpoche but is actually the first edition, it corresponds to the Osaka/Kathmandu catalogue rDzogs pa chen po zhang zhung snyan rgyud bka’ rgyud skor bzhi’i gsung pod, Triten Norbutse Library, 2002, NB. dpe cha Zhang zhung snyan rgyud bon skor, published by Yongs ’dzin Sangs rgyas bstan ’dzin, Dolanji 1974, NB. deb gzugs Works and References Bacot, Th., & Toussaint, G.Ch. (1940–46), Documents de Touen-Houang relatifs à l’histoire du Tibet, in Annales du Musée Guimet, Bibliothèque des études, Vol.LI, Paris 1940–46. Bal, M. (1999), Narratology: Introduction to the Theory of Narrative, Toronto, Buffalo & London 1999; — (2002), Travelling Concepts in the Humanities: A Rough Guide, Toronto 2002. Beckwith, Ch.L. (1987), The Tibetan Empire in Central Asia, Princeton 1987; — (forthc.), “On Zhangzhung and Bon”, in Emerging Bon, PIATS 2006, ed. by H. Blezer, forthc. Halle. Benjamin, W. (1966), Illuminationen, Ausgewählte Schriften 1, Frankfurt am Main 1977 (1966); — (1966a), Angelus Novus, Ausgewählte Schriften 2, Frankfurt am Main 1988 (1966). Bentley, M. (1999), Modern Historiography, An Introduction, London & New York, 2000 (1999). Bhabha, H.K. (1994), Location of Culture, London 2003 (1994). Historicities of the Bon Aural Transmission from Zhang zhung 149 Bjerken, Z. (2001), The Mirrorwork of Tibetan Religious Historians: A Comparison of Buddhist and Bon Historiography, UMI Dissertation Services, unpublished Ph.D. thesis 2001. Blezer, H.W.A. (2000), “The ’Bon’ dBal mo Nyer bdun(/brgyad) and the Buddhist dBang phyug ma Nyer brgyad, a Brief Comparison”, in New Horizons in Bon Studies, pp.117–78, Osaka 2000. — (2008), “sTon pa gShen rab, Six Marriages and Many More Funerals”, in Revue d’Etudes Tibétaines (RET) 15, pp.412–79, Paris 2008; — (2008), “Heaven my Blanket, Earth my Pillow—Wherever Rin po che Lays his Head down to Rest is the Original Place of Bon”, in Acta Orientalia, Vol.68 (2007), pp.75–112, Havniae: Munksgaard; — (in press 2010), “William of Ockham, Jan van Gorp and Tibetan Studies: Some Notes on Dating the mDo ’dus”, in ... edited by Jean-Luc Achard, forthcoming Paris 2010; — (forthc. 2010), “Creation of a Myth: The Zhang zhung Empire of the Bon po-s: Khyung lung dngul mkhar” in Emerging Bon (PIATS 2006), forthcoming Bonn 2010; — (forthc. 2010), “The Bon of Bon: Forever Old”, in PIATS 2003: Tibetan Studies: Proceedings of the International Association for Tibetan Studies, Oxford 2003, forthcoming Bonn 2010; — (forthc. 2010), Breaking the Paradigm: Emerging Religions, Leiden: Brill 2010; — (forthc. 2010), Framing Identity Discourse in Buddhist Environments, And the Special Case of Nativist Strategies, Leiden: Brill 2010; — (forthc.), The Three Pillars of Bon: Doctrine, ’Location’ & Founder, Volume II, Part I: Location of Origin and Part II: Apparatus, in Brill’s Tibetan Studies Library; volume two of a series of three, forthcoming Leiden; — (forthc.), The Three Pillars of Bon: Doctrine, ’Location’ & Founder, Volume I: Doctrine, Part I: Antecedents of Bon Religion in Tibet and Part II: Tibetan Texts, in BTSL; volume one of three, forthcoming Leiden; — (forthc.), “‘Light’ on the Human Body; The Coarse Physical Body and its Functions in the Aural Transmission from Zhang zhung on the Six Lamps”, in the Proceedings of the ICTAM VII (IASTAM) conference on “Asian Medicine: Cultivating Traditions and the Challenges Of Globalisation”, Institute of Traditional Medicine Services, Thimphu Bhutan, September 7th–11th, 2009. Blondeau, A.M. (1980), “Analysis of the Biographies of Padmasambhava according to Tibetan Tradition: Classification of Sources”, in Tibetan 150 Henk Blezer Studies in Honour of Hugh Richardson, Proceedings of the International Seminar on Tibetan Studies Oxford 1979, edited by M. Aris and San Suu Kyi Aung, pp.45–52, Warminster 1980; — (1985), “mKhyen-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, Serie Orientale Roma, Vol.LVI, 1, pp.111–58, Roma 1985; — (1990), “Identification de la tradition appelée bsGrags pa Bon lugs”, in Indo-Tibetan Studies, Papers in Honour and Appreciation of Professor David L. Snellgrove’s Contribution to Indo-Tibetan Studies, edited by T. Skorupski, pp.37–54 (= Acta Orientalia Hungarica, Vol.43, no.2– 3 (1989), Tring 1990; — See also many relevant reports in the EPHE Annuaire series, esp. from 1975-1985. Bourdieu, P. (1977), Outline of a Theory of Practice, in the Cambridge Studies in Social and Cultural Anthropology, Cambridge 1977; — (1990), Reproduction in Education, Society and Culture, Los Angeles etc. 1990; — (1990a), Homo Academicus, Palo Alto 1990; — (1992), The Logic of Practice, Cambridge 1992; — (1992a), Language and Symbolic Power, Cambridge 1992; — (1993), The Field of Cultural Production: Essays on Art and Literature, Cambridge 1993; — (1998), Practical Reason: On the Theory of Action, Cambridge 1998; Breisach, E. (1987), Historiography: Ancient, Medieval, and Modern, Chicago and London 1994 (1987); — (2003), On the Future of History: The Postmodernist Challenge and Its Aftermath, in Studies in Communication, Media, and Public Opinion, Chicago and London 2003. Brunner, A. (1961), Geschichtlichkeit, Bern & München 1961. Cabezón, J.I. (1994), Buddhism and Language, A Study of Indo-Tibetan Scholasticism, New York 1994; — (1998), Scholasticism, Cross-Cultural and Comparative Perspectives, New York 1998. Cech, K. (1986), “The History, Teaching and Practice of Dialectics according to the Bon Tradition”, in Tibet Journal, Vol.XI, No.2 (Summer 1986); pp.3–28. edited by Helmut Eimer and David Germano. Vol. Boston. Jahrhunderts. “Récents traveaux sur Touen-houang”. K. Volume Two: Reference Material. Über die Zeit. Oxford 1999 (1983). G. Everding. in Monumenta Tibetica Historica. (1915). New York 2004.1–95. Literary Theory. Dudjom Rinpoche (1991). and Hazod. Volume One: The Translations. see Pasang Wangdu and Diemberger.Historicities of the Bon Aural Transmission from Zhang zhung 151 Connerton. P. (1970). Elias. pp. I: Scriptores. . London & New York 1993. (1984). — (1993). The Old Tibetan Annals: An Annotated Translation of Tibet’s First History. Its Fundamentals and History. Tantric Buddhism in the Rebirth of Tibetan Culture. P. Present State and Future Tasks. Arbeiten zur Wissenssoziologie II. A Social History of the Tantric Movement. 2009). in Brill’s Tibetan Studies Library. (1989). two volumes. Davidson. R. (1989). H. rGyal Rab Bon kyi Jung-nas. Gray Texts. Leiden 2000. — (2002a). Bonn 2000. Frankfurt am Main 1988 (1984). The Creation of Orthodoxy. with an annotated cartographical survey by Guntram Hazod. P. Wien 2009. Das Königreich Mang yul Gung thang: Königtum und Herrschaftsgewalt im Tibet des 13. London & New York 1988. Vol. Oxford 2003 (1989).H. Scripture in World Religions.LVI (1970). (1988). S. Farewell to Reason.M. Band 6. Leiden 2002. Pre-Industrial Societies. Feyerabend. in Kanjur and Tanjur Studies. Anatomy of the Pre-Modern World. How Societies Remember. Eagleton.2. Teil 1: Das Gung thang rgyal rabs in Edition und Übersetzung. Boston 2000 (1988). in T’oung Pao. Indian Esoteric Buddhism. (forthc.-17. P. Coward. Tibetan Renaissance.Ch. Cambridge 2003 (1989). The Nyingma School of Tibetan Buddhism.. B. Das. translated and edited by Gyurme Dorje with the collaboration of Matthew Kapstein. (1983). Demiéville. pp. Calcutta 1915. Diemberger. (2000).10. (2002). T. “Gsar ma Apocrypha. (1988). in Themes in Social Sciences. Proceedings of the 9th Seminar of the International Association for Tibetan Studies. and the New Revelation”. Massachusetts 1991. — (2004). Abt. Teil 2: Studien zur Gründung und historischen Entwicklung des Reiches. New York 2002.203–24. Against Method. An Introduction. Crone. Dotson. A Short Introduction. N. Hoernle. Akademie der Wissenschaften und der Literatur. Y. . The Invention of Tradition. (1969) The Yar-lu Dynasty. Modernity and Self-identity: Self and Society in the Late Modern Age. The Archaeology of Knowledge & The Discourse on Language. Philosophy and the Making of Modernity (1650–1750). (1916). A study with special regards to the contribution by myths and legends to the history of Ancient Tibet and the origin and nature of its kings. Cambridge 1991. Cambridge 2003 (1983). (1970). Sheridan Smith.und Sozialwissensch.48. H.122–444. Klasse.. Israel. J. & Ranger. Vom Ursprung und Ziel der Geschichte. Radical Enlightenment. translated from Les Mots et les Choses. 1950. Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft. An Inquiry into the Origins of Cultural Change. Tibetan and Chinese with transcripts. The Condition of Postmodernity. D. Vol. K. Manuscript remains of Buddhist literature found in eastern Turkestan.M. with critical introductions and vocabularies. Oxford 2001. see Sørensen. The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration. (1984).4. Hazod. (1978). P.. Modernity. A. H. Harvey. Kuchean. der Geistes. pp. The Order of Things. Giroux. Jaspers. Khotanese. Abh. Philosophy. New York 1994 (1970). Camebridge 1984. “Quellen zur Geschichte der tibetischen Bon-Religion”. (1984). E. Zürich 1949. translated from L’archéologie du savoir & L’ordre du discours by A. (1949). — (1950).XCIV.K. København 1969. (1983). Hoffmann. and the Emancipation of Man 1670–1752. The Consequences of Modernity. New York 1972. I: (parts I and II) Manuscripts in Sanskrit. Enlightenment Contested. Philadelphia 1984. — (1972). Delhi 1988 (Oxford 1916). Cambridge 1991. G. in Bibliotheca Indo-Buddhica Series. Imaeda. Leipzig 1940. A. facsimiles of manuscripts in Sanskrit. — (1991a).A. Tibetan and Chinese. see Macdonald. (1940). Culture and the Process of Schooling. Giddens. (1990). “Zur Literatur der Bon-po”. — (2006).152 Henk Blezer Foucault. Haarh. — (1991). eds. (2007). pp..R. (2001). Hobsbawm.I. Ideology. No. Khotanese. Oxford 2006. Vol.F. translations and notes edited in conjunction with other scholars. Kuchean. Malden 2000 (1990).169–88. M. E. T. 18–56. Vol. Chicago and London 1996 (1962). London & New York. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. — (1998a). — (2003). Paris 1939. The Tibetan Transformation of Buddhism. (1972) ed. M. J. 33.II: “Index of the Canon”. Vergleich und Transfer: Zum Stand der Komparatistik in den Geistes. L. 2003 (1991).Historicities of the Bon Aural Transmission from Zhang zhung 153 Jenkins. Kearny. Kuhn. (2000). (1971). Kerby. 2003 and 2003a). — (1975). Studies in History. Tokyo 1977. On Stories. Narrative and the Self. Conservés à la Bibliothèque Nationale (Fonds Pelliot tibétain nos. Contestation and Memory. Yasuhiko & Martin.G. Lalou. Bangkok 1998. pp. Knorr Cetina. 1849). London 1972. Ithaca 1996. A Catalogue of Bonpo Publications.26. Thinking in Action. Karmay. Geshe Sopa Felicitation Volume.XVI. pt. Vol.203–82. pt. (1991). Oxford 2000. London Oriental Series. H. see Nagano. (1962).39-56. The Toyo Bunko. — (1998). “Tibetan Historiography”. see Nagano. & Savigny. in Indo-Iranian Journal. — (2001. Cambridge 1999. R.96–144. London & New York 2002. pp.W. reprint Kathmandu 2001. Havniæ 1971. Inventaire des Manuscrits Tibétains de Touen-houang. The Arrow and the Spindle. E. pp.I: “Introduction”.. and Schriewer. Kathmandu 1998.. Kaelble.T. 2003. Kværne.P. & trsl. van der (1996).R. Jackson.. “The Canon of the Bonpos”.und Sozialwissenschaften. “A Chronological Table of the Bon po the bsTan rtsis of Ñi ma bstan ’jin”. A. Rethinking History. — Schatzki. Kuijp. D. The Little Luminous Boy. Memoirs of the Toyo Bunko. K. pp. P. Bloomington 1991. Cabezón and R. pp. (2003). Vol.J. K. (1999). Samten. in Tibetan Literature.P. Conversion.172–218. .XXXIII. Yasuhiko & Karmay. edited by J. Th. Rituals and Beliefs in Tibet.S. von (2000) eds. M. The Treasury of Good Sayings. — (1975). — (1977). Myths. Studies in Genre. Epistemic Cultures: How the Sciences Make Knowledge. (2002). The Practice Turn in Contemporary Theory. Th. (main editor). S. “A General Introduction to the History and Doctrines of Bon”. A Tibetan History of Bon. Acta Orientalia. (1939). Frankfurt: Campus. (1991). London 2000. Kapstein.. 189–217. Philosophy of History. 1038.G. Nagano. Paris 1958. — (1976).313–53. The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge. Vol. Latour. Minneapolis 1984. Bon Studies 2. Chicago 1983 (New York 1976). pp. Vol. — (1965). Paris 1953. in the New Critical Idiom. (1993). pp. edited by Garrett G. “Une lecture des Pelliot Tibétain 1286. Wiesbaden. B. 1287. Structural Anthropology. Levitt. We have Never been Modern. (1984). M. Lévi-Strauss. Die frühen Könige von Tibet und ihre Konstruktion in den religiösen Überlieferungen. Ch.259–86. “Catalogue des Principautés du Tibet Ancien”.-F. Linnenborn. C. poisons et guérisseurs”. pp. De Constructie van het Verleden. by S. N. pp. in Journal Asiatique. Lhagyal. “Bonpo Family Lineages in Central Tibet”. translated from Le différend.CCXLVI.171–212.157–201. — (1958). — (1955). essai sur la formation et l’emploi des mythes politiques . “Fiefs. 1047. Lemon. Vol.429–508. in Journal Asiatique. translated from Anthropologie structurale deux. translated from Anthropologie structurale. in Journal Asiatique. A. “Revendications des fonctionnaires du grand Tibet au VIIIe siècle”. pp. Vol. pp. London & New York 2004 (1998). Loombia. Minneapolis 1988. Een Inleiding in de Theorie van de Geschiedenis.CCXLIII.C. (1971). J. Lorenz. Karmay & Y. in Theory and History of Literature. ed. Dondrup (2000).154 Henk Blezer — (1953b). Amsterdam 1987. Structural Anthropology.CCXLI. (2003). (2004). MacDonald. in Archaeological Fantasies: How Pseudoarchaeology Misrepresents the Past and Misleads the Public. A. Cambridge 2003. (2006). Paris 1965. Senri Ethnological Reports 15. “The Colonisation of the Past and the Pedagogy of the Future”. Vol. translated from La condition postmoderne: rapport sur le savoir. et 1290. Les textes bouddhiques au temps du roi Khri-sro-lde-bcan. 2004.46. H. Essai d’anthropologie symétrique. (1987). volume 2. in Journal Asiatique.CCLIII. Fagan. in Asiatische Forschungen Band 147. Osaka 2000. (1963). Paris 1955. Lyotard. Colonialism/Postcolonialism. London 2006. London & New York 2003. (1998). — The Differend: Phrases in Dispute. in New Horizons in Bon Studies. New York 1963. translated from Nous n’avons jamais été modernes. A Guide for Students. & Karmay. P. D. Senri Ethnological Reports 40. Paris 1978f.42. Les routes de la region de Turfan sous le T’ang. P.P. — (1932). and Kværne. Pelliot. in Oeuvres posthumes de Paul Pelliot V.G. W. in Études tibétaines dédiées à la mémoire de Marcelle Lalou. and Imaeda. — (2003a). No. Paris 1971. main editor A Catalogue of the Bon Kanjur. in Oeuvres posthumes de Paul Pelliot I. Paris 2002. Paris 1961. Obermiller. Bon Studies 8. Life and Contested Legacy of a Tibetan Scripture Revealer. A. — Martin. Osaka 2003. Histoire secrète des Mongols. in Bibliotheca Indo-Buddhica Series. — (2002). London & New York 2006 (1997). 1991. . in Bibliotheca Indo-Buddhica Series.26. Tibetan Histories. (main editor). Indiana Un.P. Delhi 1999 (Heidelberg 1932). Senri Ethnological Reports 24–25 (indices). Leiden 2001. The History of Buddhism in India and Tibet. two volumes. (1949). Choix de documents tibétains conservés à la Bibliothèque Nationale. Harlow 2002. The Jewelry of Scripture.Historicities of the Bon Aural Transmission from Zhang zhung 155 dans la religion royale de Sro-bcan sgam-po”. A Survey of Bonpo Monasteries and Temples in Tibet and the Himalaya. edited by Jean-Pierre Drège. Per (2003). (1978f). D. see Nagano. (2001). Osaka 2001. two volumes. — (1997). Delhi 1998 (Heidelberg 1931). The Emergence of Bon and the Polemical Tradition in Tibet. S.190–391. Bon Studies 3–4 (indices). (1988). — (2003). Human Body Good Thought and the Revelation of the Secret Mother Tantras of Bon. pp. (1931). Deconstructing History. two volumes. suivi de l’histoire et la géographie anciennes de l’asie centrale dans Innermost Asia. Yasuhiko and Kværne. Bon Studies 7. A Catalogue of the New Collection of Bonpo Katen Texts. — (1994) trsl. — (1961). No. Paris 1949.D. London 1988. Y. Senri Ethnological Reports 38. Ong. Y. Munslow. A. Orality and Literacy. — (2001). The History of Buddhism in India and Tibet. by Bu-ston. A Bibliography of Tibetan-Language Historical Works. Unearthing Bon Treasures. Osaka 2003. Martin. — Spanien (Macdonald). UMI Ph. (1997). A Catalogue of the Bon Kanjur. Thesis. Wiesbaden 1994. The New History. by Bu-ston. Histoire ancienne du Tibet.. — (2002). (2003a). Restitution du texte mongol et traduction française des chapitres I à VI. (1991 unpublished). London 1997. E. Mandala Cosmogony. Nagano.J. W. Richardson H. Orientalism. Roma 1988 (1968). Buddhism in Tibetan Societies. P. Milan 1997. “La struttura des ms.229–59.G. Calcutta 1939. two volumes bound in one. Vol. in Tibetan Studies. Leiden 2000.2. edited by S. see Snellgrove & Richardson (1968). pp. . Volume II. London & New York 2002 (1959). Forlong Series. E. “Further Fragments from Dunhuang”. Ricoeur.. Cambridge 1990. in High Peaks Pure Earth.1–19. — (1993).N. — (1968). in Brill’s Tibetan Studies Library. Tib. New York 1978. Evanston 1965. Historical Introduction”. in New Horizons in Bon Studies. History and Truth. — (2004). Nagano. London 1998 (1969). — (1969). G. — (1997).E. transl.651–70. Fagernes 1992.II. Memory. (1949) trsl. History Forgetting. l’histoire. Samuel. (1939). Said. Popper. Civilized Shamans. edited by D. (1957). pp. “The Indus Civilization and Early Tibet”. two volumes. The Poverty of Historicism. — (1994). — (1959). pp. in Tibetan Studies. “Western Tibet. l’oubli. from La mémoire. — (2002). in Northwestern University Studies in Phenomenology & Existential Philosophy.E.156 Henk Blezer Petech. No. London & New York 2002 (1957). Body and Culture: Anthropology and the Biological Interface. (1965). L. Leiden 2002. pp. pp. in Selected Papers on Asian History. G. edited by Henk Blezer and Abel Zadoks.649–59. WashingtonLondon 1993. in Tabo a Lamp for the Kingdom. Religion and Secular Culture in Tibet. Vol. “Buddhism and the State in the Eighth Century in Tibet”. (1990). three volumes.2. edited by Per Kværne. Time and Narrative. (1978). (1968). K. in James G. — (1985). A Study on the Chronicles of Ladakh (Indian Tibet).XXIX. A Corpus of Early Tibetan Inscriptions. Proceedings of the 9th Seminar of the International Association for Tibetan Studies. “The Disintegration of the Tibetan Kingdom”. Chicago 2006 (2004). The Blue Annals. Klimburg-Salter. Delhi 1988 (Calcutta 1949). translated from Histoire et Verité. Chicago and London 1983–85. Bon Studies 2. The Logic of Scientific Discovery. Karmay and Y. translated from Temps et récit. Mind. Osaka 2000. Roerich. 309–12. Oslo 1994. — (1983–85). — (2000). Pelliot 1267”. Proceedings of the 6th Seminar of the International Association for Tibetan Studies. Senri Ethnological Reports 15. London 1985. Wien 2007. E. Schiwy. pp. H. G.Ch. IL. Thundering Falcon. (2001). Kultur und Sprache der Völker Ost. München 1969.. D. Band CCCLXXVIII. (2000). Smith. 1988. Indian Buddhists and their Tibetan Successors. An Inquiry into the History and Cult of Khra-’brug Tibet’s First Buddhist Temple. in Imagining Religion: From Babylon to Jonestown.165– 85. Spivak. — Hazod. (1977). . (1969). p. Urbana. K. Excerpts from gZi-brjid. Rulers of the Celestial Plain. J. K.Z. London 1987. (1990). A Cultural History of Tibet. Snellgrove. (1988). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. in Wege der Forschung.K. & Gräubig. (1982). Essays in Memory of Turrell V.G.und Zentralasiens. Wiesbaden 1994. “Can the Subaltern Speak?”. The Mirror Illuminating the Royal Genealogies—An Annotated Translation of the XIVth Century Tibetan Chronicle “rGyal-rabs gsal-ba’i me-long”. see Knorr Cetina.. & trl. London Oriental Series. K.E. Theorieprobleme der Geschichtswissenschaft. Lewiston 1990. Boston 2001. A Study of Tshal Gung-Thang. — (1987).Historicities of the Bon Aural Transmission from Zhang zhung 157 Savigny. Tibetan Buddhist Historiography. Among Tibetan texts.L.L. 1982. History & Literature of the Himalayan Plateau. Oxford 1957. edited by L.. Spanien (1978). South Coblin. W. Indo-Tibetan Buddhism. Th. ed. in Asiatische Forschungen. Buddhist Himalaya. Schaeffer. (1994). in Reflections on Tibetan Culture. — and Hazod. D. Wien 2005. Th. London 1967. Band 128 edited by W. Boston 1968. 271–313. see Knorr Cetina. Smith.. 2 Vols. Darmstadt 1977. G. Schatzki.. Sherburne.R. Der französische Strukturalismus. in Marxism and the Interpretation of Culture edited by Cary Nelson and Lawrence Grossberg. “In Comparison a Magic Dwells”. Monographienreihe zur Geschichte. Epstein and R. Snellgrove. “A Re-examination of the Second Edict of Khrisrong-lde-btsan”. G. Heissig et al. E. (2000). and Tsering Gyalbo (2005). Wylie. K. P. (1968). The nine Ways of Bon. G. ed. Schieder. (2007).. Sørensen. (1957). — (1967) ed. Ecclesiastic and Secular Hegemony in Medieval Tibet. Volume 18. & Richardson. see Macdonald. Vol. — Imaeda. Paris 1959. sBa-bśed. C. Steward.1. Part II: L’usage de metaphors pour distinctions honorifiques à l’époque des rois tibétains (1984:257–72). J. Thompson. Part III: A propos du mot gcug lag et la religion indigène (1985:83– 133). Postmodernism and History.A. in Études tibétaines dédiées à la mémoire de Marcelle Lalou. “Du récit au rituel dans les manuscrits tibétains de Touenhouang”. . La civilisation tibétaine. section des sciences religieuses. 1957–58. Part I: Les deux vocabulaires des traductions indo-tibétaine et sino-tibétaine dans les manuscripts de Touen-Houang (1983:149–236).XLIV. in Publications de l’institut des hautes études chinoises. — (1962).479–547. Methods & New Directions in the Study of Modern History.1–15. (1990). Textes et documents I. Vol. (1997–98). Vol. The Pursuit of History. Aims. Bu ston’s History of Buddhism in Tibet. — (1957). Paris 1947–50. Recherches sur l’épopée et le barde au Tibet. — (1983–92). Tosh. Paris 1981 (Paris 1962). Vols LXXII–V. Paris 1971. Tokyo 2001. — (1959a). London & New York 1991 (1984). Part IV: la tradition relative au début du bouddhisme au Tibet (1986:169–96). Wien 1990.158 Henk Blezer Stein.IV. R. Paris 1983–92. in Theory and History. Hampshire & New York 2004. “Les K’iang des marches sino-tibétaines. pp..XIII. Paris 1961. Y. — (1971). pp. T. R. exemple de continuité de la tradition”. Une chronique ancienne de bSam-yas. Part VI: Maximes confucianistes dans deux manuscripts de Touen-houang (1992:9–17). (2001a). — (1959). et al. (1984). LXXIX. Les tribus anciennes des marches sino-tibétaines. in Annuaire de École pratique des hautes etudes. Takeuchi. in Bibliothèque de l’Institut des Hautes Etudes Chinoises. (1947–50).223–65. Old Tibetan manuscripts from East Turkestan in the Stein Collection of the British Library. géographie historique et legends ancestrales”. Tokyo 1997–98. Paris 1959. (2004). in Bulletin de l’école française d’extrême orient. pp. in Bulletin de l’école française d’extrême orient. Szerb. Syncretism/Anti-Syncretism: The Politics of Religious Synthesis. (1994).. Choix de documents tibétains conservés à la Bibliothèque Nationale. Part V: La religion indigène et les bon-po dans les manuscrits de Touen Huang (1988:27–56). “Mi-ñag et si-hia. Paris 1957. — (1961) facs. three volumes. W. corpus syllabique. “Tibetica Antiqua I–VI. LXXVII. London & New York 2005 (1994). & Shaw. J. pa. in Bibliothèque de l’institut des hautes études chinoises. Madison 1985.M. Turetzky. translated from the Russian (Bibliotheca Buddhica. edited by Cadonna et al. (2006). Tibetan Painted Scrolls. pp. pp. (1949). A. Glo-bo and Gung-thang from the 11th to the 15th Century”. in Turfan and Tunhuang Studies.XXXII) by H. Oral Tradition as History. p. in Cosmogony and the Origins.hrang according to the mNga’. A Historical Overview of Their Interaction in Gro-shod. Paris 1995. XIX. Vansina. Florence 1992. J. pp.129. — (1999) Records of Tho. — (2008).I.XXV. (2000). in Beihefte zur Zeitschrift .15.16 (Spring 2003). — (2004). (1996). Wien 1997. Le credit à Dunhuang.123–43.ge. Proceedings of the 7th Seminar of the International Association for Tibetan Studies. (= Soviet Indology Series Vol. (1985). Vol. edited by E.. ’Brong-pa. Dharamsala1996. The Kingdoms of Gu. Ph.chen Ngag. in RET. — (1997).rabs by Gu. Vol.Historicities of the Bon Aural Transmission from Zhang zhung 159 Trombert. (1998). R.ge mkhan. Vitali. Budapest 1968. Vol.ge Pu.47). in Warfare in Chinese History edited by Hans van de Ven (=Sinica Leidensia.106–79. Twitchett.5–38. Roma 1949. Vostrikov. Tibetan Historical Literature. Calcutta 1970 (Moskva 1962). A.ris rgyal. Vol. Leiden 2000. Uray. — (1972). Gupta. London & New York 2000 (1998). in Tibetan Studies. Tom. — (1992) “The Structure and Genesis of the Old Tibetan Chronicle”.379–419. in Acta Orientalia Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae.37–63. pp. 2008. as Treated in the Texts Collectively Called the Khungs chen po bzhi”.dbang. Dharamsala 2004. Lungta. É. “Queen Sad-mar-kar’s Songs in the Old Tibetan Chronicle”. D. pp. pp. Tom. Vol. pp. Vol.XXI.ling. Budapest 1972. Primäre und sekundäre Religion als Kategorie der Religionsgeschichte des Alten Testaments.II. Time.C. “Tibet in Tang’s Grand Strategy”. in Acta Orientalia Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae. “A tentative classification of the bya ru can kings of Zhang zhung”. “Nomads of Byang and Mnga’-ris-smad.grags.1023–36. A Literary and Visual Reconstruction of the “Mother” Monastery in Gu. (1962). Steinkellner.289–99. Graz 1995.4). esp. Tucci. in The Problems of Philosophy.. “Tribes which populated the Tibetan Plateau. Ed. Dharamsala 1999. (1968). Wagner. “Notes on a Chronological Problem in the Old Tibetan Chronicle”. vie matérielle et société en Chine médiévale. G. (1995). G. — (1999). White. (1977–87). Z. The Royal Narrative Concerning the Bringing of Buddha’s Doctrine to Tibet. M. H. Berlin. — (2000). in Hacket Readings in Philosophy. Yamaguchi. Buddhism and Empire. The Content of the Form: Narrative Discourse and Historical Representation. — (1986). H. — (1987). Pasang Wangdu and Diemberger. dBa’ bzhed.L. forthcoming Leiden 2009. Wien 1996. J.. et al. . (forthc. History of the White Crystal.L. ed. Baltimore & London 1986. 1993. Walter. Baltimore & London 1987. N. Westphal. A Catalogue of the Tibetan Manuscripts Collected by Sir Aurel Stein. 2006. (1993). (1975). ed. Shel Dkar Chos Byung. and Levenson. 2009). Tropics of Discourse: Essays in Cultural Criticism. Time. (2003). Vol. Whitehead. Indianapolis &c. Wien 2000.160 Henk Blezer für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 364. Lincoln 2003. Baltimore & London 1999. The Political and Religious Culture of Early Tibet. New York: Walter de Gruyter. Histories and Historicities in Amazonia. Figural Realism: Studies in the Mimesis Effect. Baltimore & London 1975.I-XII. (1996). Metahistory: The Historical Imagination in NineteenthCentury Europe. C. Tokyo 1977–88. This stereotype. at least seven masters journeyed to and sojourned at rDo rje gdan during the same period from the end of the 12th century to the end of the 13th. at a time when the Noble Religion suffered its major setback in the Gangetic region. that stand out to show how much the people of the plateau are indebted to the Noble Land for its role of source of knowledge and civilisation. They were:        dPyal Chos [kyi] bzang [po] (1163-1230). Thar pa lo tsa ba Nyi ma rgyal mtshan (?-?). 1 The year of Man lung pa’s birth was either earth pig 1239. * This article is dedicated to the memory of A rgya rGya mtsho tshe ring. Fewer are those episodes where the reverse was done and yet fewer are those episodes where an exchange for mutual benefit occurred. as the opening lines of his biography state (Man lung pa’i rnam thar f. Man lung pa bSod nams dpal (1235 or 1239-?).3a line 1) (see below . during which a fate of destruction was befalling these holy sites.1 and U rgyan pa Rin chen dpal (1230-1309). dByil ston Khyung rgod rtsal (1235-?). Among these latter especially rare cases of Tibetan interaction with rGya gar I single out a complex chapter in the history of the plateau during which Tibetans contributed to the survival of the holiest place of Indian Buddhism. lasting for at least a millennium and a half. In this steady stream of exchanges one perceives a concern reminiscent of the contribution of contemporary India to the survival of the traditional Tibetan way of life. popular among the scholarship of the past. should be rejected outright. Leaving aside Chag lo tsa ba. dPyal A mo gha (?-?). At the outset one should ascertain whether the stereotype of the uniqueness of Chag lo tsa ba Chos rje dpal’s (1197-1264) adventure that led him to rDo rje gdan during the peak of iconoclastic pressure upon Ma ga dha stands up in the light of historical cross-checking. Chag dgra bcom pa (1153-1216).In the Presence of the “Diamond Throne”: Tibetans at rDo rje gdan (Last Quarter of the 12th Century to Year 1300)* Roberto Vitali Dharamsala There are many episodes in the relationship between Tibet and India. 47). 52 and 53). Fortunately these masters are recorded in little known documents which are resurfacing in recent years.       n. which indicates that they may have been there:   mChims Nam mkha’ grags (1210-1267 or 1285 or 1289).45a line 3). Two more masters should be mentioned. and a number of disciples of Man lung pa.30). f. or wood sheep 1235 according to a passage elsewhere in his rnam thar (ibid.50a line 1). Their place in posterity is often influenced by cultural and political dominance which is instrumental to the marginalisation of events or historical actors. who stayed at rDo rje gdan.162 Roberto Vitali Two of themÑU rgyan pa and Man lung paÑwent to rDo rje gdan on more than one occasion. who figure marginally in the decriptions of their master’s feats in India. Both are credited with restorations in its temple complex. entitled simply mChims Nam mkha’ grags kyi rnam thar bzhugsÑand also known as rNam thar yon tan bsngags pa’i phreng ba to the colophon of the same work (f. Their work bears signs of familiarity with Bodhgayā. The formulation of the latter sentence indicates that Man lung pa’s biographer was aware of the controversy concerning the master’s year of birth. f.2 and bcom ldan Rig pa’i ral gri (1228-1305). His life span is thus remarkably shortened or prolonged on the basis of these contradictory reckonings. Then it says that mChims lived for five more years (ibid. having reached the age of sixty-five at that time on account of one [of the calculations based on his birth date]”). A text that supports the date 1289 is his dbu can biography in fifty folios.40).44b line 3). Less prominent Tibetans of the same period. the rnam thar first mentions some religious activities undertaken by mChims Nam mkha’ grags for the bird year 1285 whenÑthe text saysÑhe was already aged over seventy (ibid. and thus their recognition in Tibetan history is secured.40. rTag (spelled so) tshal Bya grong pa (n. . were: mGon po rgyal mtshan. 2 Sources have erratic assessments of the death date of mChims Nam mkha’ grags. The reasons why all these masters are less popular with Western scholarship (U rgyan pa excepted) may be traced to the imponderable fate that peopleÑand documents focusing on themÑface with the passage of time. a little-known monk who had a different kind of involvement with the centre of the Buddhist world from the others. dBus lCang bsar (spelled so) ba Byang chub mgon (n. 11b lines 3-4: “In earth male pig 1299 he returned to Tibet. It was written by sMon lam tshul khrims at sNar thang. They were: slob dpon Byang chub dpal (see below n.50). In order to compute the death date 1289. dBus pa Byang chub ’bum (n. 63)Ñwhere he resided until around 1242. The Biography of Dharmaswamin p. Chag lo tsa ba’s visit to the holy places of Ma ga dha fell at the peak of one of the marauders’ pillages. upon Chag lo tsa ba’s arrival there.56).51 and 52).51) and two more (n.62). the years of Chag lo tsa ba’s stay in Ma ga dha. in 1232. p. At the time Yangs pa can and rDo rje gdan were attacked by iconoclastic marauders. he formally proclaimed his intention to proceed to rGya gar. it was in ruins when Chag lo tsa ba reached the locality (ibid. Chag lo tsa ba spent eight years in the Kathmandu Valley (1225-1232) and about eleven years in Ma ga dha (1232-1242) (mainly at rDo rje gdan and Nālandā. given his notoriety. . which lasted from wood bird 1225 until around water tiger 1242. I deal with him briefly. Vikramaśilā still existed during the time of Chag dgra bcom pa and dPyal lo tsa ba (about them see below). Chag lo tsa ba’ i rnam thar tells that. During his long journey. the inhabitants of Yangs pa can had just fled for fear of the Du ru ka approaching (ibid. upon the death of his uncle Chag dgra bcom pa in fire rat 1216. without returning to Tibet in the meantime. but it still took him ten years before he could actually do so (ibid. He left for Bal po in 1225.50. and slob dpon Rin bsod (n. p. Zhang bSod nams dar (n.105) records that fourteen and a half years had elapsed in the dragon year 1256 after Chag lo tsa ba returned from rGya gar. Hence.40 and 52). Two prior phases go back to bstan pa 3 Chag lo tsa ba’i rnam thar (Roerich.52). At rDo rje gdan the monks had run for their lives after plastering closed the door of the temple’s sanctum. where he spent eight years (1225-1232) (ibid p. p.52). 53 and 57). but also at other holy places). Tibetans at Bodhgayā during the early decades of the phase under study Chag lo tsa ba Chos rje dpal A conceptual rather than historical starting point to the exploration of the literary accounts dedicated to the Tibetans who dared to travel to rDo rje gdan during the 13th century is Chag lo tsa ba Chos rje dpal. only four remained behind (ibid.64). Earlier. p. other unidentified seven (n.64). His biography outlines the political situation of 1232-1242. my focus being reserved to the above mentioned masters.Tibetans at rDo rje gdan     163 lo tsa ba Grags pa rgyal mtshan (n. p. which helps to fix the end of his Indian sojourn to around 1242. 51. he proceeded to Ma ga dhaÑsaid to be across the Gangga coming from the north (ibid.3 He was not the initiator of the Tibetan custom of journeying to Ma ga dha and receiving teachings locally. forthcoming). dPyal lo tsa ba Chos bzang was younger than Chag dgra bcom pa by some ten years (for their respective dates see above). This was not so. 300 line 17)Ñand bstan pa phyi darÑassociated with lo chen Rin chen bzang po. after studying sngags rnying ma. Chag dgra bcom pa travelled with dPyal lo tsa ba Chos bzang. excerpted from A mes zhabs’s Nag po chen po’i chos ’byung. which endangered the survival of the Buddhist heartland. and one could be led to think that he was initiated by his older companion in the practice of proceeding to rGya gar. during the reign of Khri srong lde btsan (Bai ro tsa na’i rnam thar ’dra ’bag chen mo p. the earliest of several masters of this period.194 line 3-p. one of the early masters from dBus gTsang who. so as to obtain teachings from the cradle of Buddhism (see Vitali. who went to the Gangetic plain at the inception of bstan pa phyi dar in dBus gTsang. Se tsa dMar ru. a master little known but nonetheless of great importance (see my “The Manjusri mountain and the Buddha tree: a history of the dPyal clan (7th-14th century)”. which he had learned from his master.5 His successors in the dPyal clan followed his example. forthcoming. see Vitali. upon the advice of his teacher Kha che Shraddha ka ra warma.199 line 4). 292 line 8-p. in particular. This new phase was inaugurated around the time when alien pressure was applied upon the land between the Gangga and Yamuna. “The Manjusri mountain and the Buddha tree: a history of the dPyal clan (7th-14th century)”. ibid.164 Roberto Vitali snga darÑassociated with Bai ro tsa na. forthcoming). went to the rDo rje gdan cemetery in the south-west and to the local mgon khang. The dPyal clan had a consistent tradition of journeying to Bal po and rGya gar.4 Chag lo tsa ba was not even the originator of a third phase to which he should be assigned. 5 On Se tsa dMa ru. . describesÑwith some variants from the originalÑthe well known account of the mission assigned to Rin chen bzang po by Ye shes ’od (ibid. Lo chen. He was entrusted with the task of bringing a suitable chos skyong for the mNga’ ri skor gsum kingdom. an event that contributed to the establishment of bstan pa phyi dar in Central Tibet. who went to the Noble Land for their studies.. 4 The Rin chen bzang po’i rnam thar entitled ’Jig rten mi gyur Lo chen Rin chen bzang po’i rnam thar bsdus pa. p. dPyal lo tsa ba Chos bzang and Chag dgra bcom pa It is well known that Chag lo tsa ba’s uncle Chag dgra bcom pa preceded him to Ma ga dha. begun by one of their members. He was able to summon Gur mGon po to Upper West Tibet by means of the practice of this deity. went to India in order to receive sngags gsar ma. Yu brag pa records at some length the circumstances surrounding his teacher’s death. p. This is 6 For a brief account of the activity of rTsa mi lo tsa ba and for a much longer one concerning his disciple rGa/rGwa lo tsa ba gZhon nu dpal (entitled dPal gyi rnam thar) in which the former narrative is embedded see Zhang g.6 along with his disciples rGa/rGwa lo gZhon nu dpal (or rGa lo. bDe mchog rtsa rgyud. 7 ’Gos lo tsa ba gZhon nu dpal (Deb ther sngon po p. Chag dgra bcom pa was a disciple of sTengs lo tsa ba under whom he studied Dus ’khor. given that rGa lo gZhon nu dpal’s disciple Zhang g. cannot be assimilated to those of the dPyal family members.Tibetans at rDo rje gdan 165 Tsa/rTsa mi lo tsa ba Sangs rgyas grags pa (?-?). Sanskrit and the art of translating (Deb ther sngon po p.1054-1055). 530 lines 3-22). The life example of his teacher influenced Chag dgra bcom pa but. dKar rgyud kyi rnam thar (p.7 preceded the earliest Tibetans at rDo rje gdan. Despite their significance. However. She comes to 1110/1114-1198/1202 (“Le Dhānyaka aka de Man-lungs guru” p. it is probable that the leading force in the implementation of the plan to travel to Ma ga dha was the younger dPyal Chos bzang. Indeed elsewhere in his work dPa’ bo gtsug lag ’phreng ba says that Tsa mi was born at Mi nyag Gha (ibid. 391 line 2). This master was from Byang Mi nyag. before 1105/1106-d. the elder) (b. with whom I deal in this paper. Ar. “Rtsa mi Lo-tsā-ba Sangs-rgyas grags-pa and the Tangut Background of Early Mongol-Tibetan Relations”. before 1193-1194) and sTengs lo tsa ba Tshul khrims ’byung gnas (11071190). The experiences of Tsa/rTsa mi. an apt terminus ante quem for the passing of rGa lo the elder is the date of the former’s demise (1193 or 1194).1226 lines 12-15. 360 line 3p. dPa’ bo gtsug lag ’phreng ba’s statement that Tsa/rTsa mi was a native of Khams Mi nyag has been dismissed by Sperling. Macdonald attempts an approximation of his dates. The former masters sojourned in Ma ga dha for a long time and received pure teachings at the heart of the Noble Land one generation before the latter ones (see the Addendum below). They were the expression of individual endeavours rather than the collective aim of a family tradition. 801. and thus a Tangut. also see mKhas pa’i dga’ ston (p.Yu brag pa brTson ’grus grags pa. . rGa lo the elder and sTengs at Bodhgayā are among the most meaningful in the history of the Tibetan frequentation of this locality. 932 line 9) says that rGa lo the elder lived for eithty-nine years. the nature of these adventures. 177 and Sperling “Rtsa-mi lo-tsā-ba Sangs-rgyas grags-pa and the Tangut Background of Early Mongol-Tibetan Relations” p. A succinct biography of sTengs lo tsa ba is found in Deb ther sngon po (see the Addendum below). given the dPyal family tradition. nonetheless. basing them on those of his rebirth rGa lo the younger (born in water pig 1203). who mentions her reckoning). Blue Annals p. This material is assessed in Sperling. 1498 line 8). A few people (i. They said they would hurt. altogether two. it is then hardly possible to prefer one of the two versions given the meagre clues provided by dPyal gyi gdung rabs Gangga’i chu rgyun and Deb ther sngon po. Instead. If this hypothesis is dismissed. having been attacked at the bank of the Gangga by the Shi skyid brigands. some lamented. do it (i. Conspicuously.8 The journey brought dPyal Chos bzang and Chag dga bcom pa first to the Kathmandu Valley. dGe ’dun chos ’phel and Roerich (transls. It is unlikely that the two companions.9 lines 4-5): “dPyal lo tsa ba Chos kyi bzang po dang rGya gar du dus mtshungs pa’i grogs po dam pa//”. They went to rGya gar at the same time”. [Chag dgra bcom pa] stared at them. A sign of shared experiences is that the gdung rabs-s of the dPyal clan assign to dPyal Chos bzang the same great Indian masterÑKha che pan chen Shakya shri bhadraÑwho is attributed to Chag dgra bcom pa by ’Gos gZhon nu dpal.1227 lines 13-15. thus showing they were travelling in a group) fainted. on the way to Bodhgayā. if indeed they traveled back to Tibet together. both the main sources on his clan say that dPyal Chos bzang took vows from Kha che pan chen.9 Deb ther sngon po assigns this episode to Chag dgra bcom pa’s return to Tibet.13 line 3): “They (i. too.11 The dPyal clan members’ extended visits to Bal po and rGya gar continued uninterruptedly from bstan pa phyi dar until when dPyal lo tsa 8 Chag lo tsa ba’i rnam thar (p. Some cried. although their versions do not correspond.e. and the brigands became stiff”. Blue Annals p. one should be brave at heart. were stripped naked. The biography of dPyal Chos bzang says that. He told [the bandits]: “I happen to consider this terrifying experience as not painful. His noble companion sNyel (spelled so) gyi Chag lo tsa ba and he. would have been in Gangetic India for the same period. the text does not say that Chag dgra bcom pa went to India accompanied by dPyal Chos bzang despite being a document of the Chag family. beat and kill them.1055): “On the way back to Tibet in the company of dPyal lo [tsa ba]. 10 ’Gos lo tsa ba gZhon nu dpal. strip.e.13) that three troubling occasions occurred in the same area. Deb ther sngon po (p. go ahead with your harassment)!”. dPyal Chos bzang and Chag dgra bcom pa) left and crossed the town of Tira hu ti.).e. Chag dgra bcom pa. 9 dPyal gyi gdung rabs Gangga’i chu rgyun (p. which would imply that they traveled together back to the plateau. Even if some companions are breathless. They had not even reached the bank of the Gang gā (p. 11 For instance.10 Given that dPyal Chos bzang spent twelve years in rGya gar (see below).166 Roberto Vitali confirmed by a passage in the biography of Chag lo tsa ba Chos rje dpal that deals with the activities of Chag dgra bcom pa.12 line 35-p. Bandits appeared then at the bank of the Gang gā. . “[Chag dgra bcom pa was] the noble companion of dPyal lo tsa ba Chos kyi bzang po. were robbed at the bank of the Gangga both on the way in and out of Ma ga dha. the two companions were robbed by brigands on the banks of the Gangga. It is significant that dPyal lo tsa ba was made the abbot for an unspecified number of years of major hermitages and monasteries including ’Jam dbyangs chos kyi grags pa. but by the changed local conditions. As for other activities of Kha che pan chen at Bodhgayā. realisations were born [in him].10 lines 4-6). Dung dkar rin po che Blo bzang ’phrin las (Tshig mdzod chen mo p. He stayed in this land for twelve years from not later than fire horse 1186 to not later than fire snake 1197 (Vitali. dPyal lo tsa ba Chos bzang was in Ma ga dha for a longer time than Chag lo tsa ba Chos rje dpal. dPyal pa’i lo rgyus kyi yi ge (p. Chag [dgra bcom pa] recited las chog (i. there was the little known Sum pa dPal mchog dbang po’i rdo rje. ’Gos lo tsa ba gZhon nu dpal. Deb ther sngon po (p. Having received their oral transmission. Blue Annals (p.209 lines 21-22). on account of the Muslim takeover of the region. the dPal mchog rdo rje of Bu ston Rin chen grub’s chos ’byung (p. mKhas pa’i dga’ ston (p. “The Manjusri mountain and the Buddha tree: a history of the dPyal clan (7th-14th century)”.Tibetans at rDo rje gdan 167 ba was in Ma ga dha in the eighties of the 12th century (Vitali. He would have extracted those dates from the Bodhi tree at rDo rje gdan. He thus witnessed the first iconoclastic and particularly destructive Muslim wave during his prolonged sojourn in Ma ga dha.e. 12 Among the Tibetans not belonging to the dPyal clan. . forthcoming).1228 lines 3-5) mentions an episode of the interaction of Chag dgra bcom pa with Kha chen pan chen: “While Kha che pan chen was bestowing the bsnyen rdzogs vow to others.427b lines 13-20) says that bDe mchog mkha’ ’gro rgya mtsho was translated by rGya gar pandi ta rGyal ba’i sde and Bod kyi lo tsa ba Darma yon tan at U rud kyi gtsug lag khang in Bal yul during the 11th century (see sDe dge bKa’ ’gyur in the rGyud (kha) section). 411 lines 3-4) reads: “[dPyal Chos bzang] took the rab tu byung vow from Kha che pan che Shakya shri at rDo rje gdan”. 13 line 20) says: “He received the dge tshul vow from the Kha che pan chen who bore the name of Shakya”. ibid.531 lines 4-6): “Sum bha (spelled so) dPal mchog dbang po’i rdo rje studied sGrol ma and Phag mo at rDo rje gdan. dPyal gyi gdung rabs Gangga’i chu rgyun (p. a curious tale recounts the miraculous circumstances surrounding his famous calculation of the Buddha nirvana. The pan chen was pleased”. the ritual for confering the so so thar pa vow) in Sanskrit.1056).). which was customary by then.12 Hence the third phase of Tibetans at Bodhgayā is not so much defined by the presence of his fellow dPyal clan members at rDo rje gdan.). These circumstances are defined as spurious by the famous astrologer Phug pa lHun grub rgya mtsho (see Pad dkar zhal lung p. Also see dGe ’dun chos ’phel and Roerich (transls. who were at Bodhgayā before dPyal Chos bzang. The main work he brought back [to Tibet] was bDe mchog mkha’ ’gro rgya mtsho”. I am led to think that his appointment happened before the first iconoclastic takeover. the latter situated in the northwest of Nālandā in a treeless spot. the holy place of Ka sa pa ni (spelled so for Ka sar pa ni). p. The rnam thar (ibid. . If Deb ther sgnon po is correct in its assessment of the journeys to and from Tibet (see above and n. pushed to this destination by the advance of Muslim invaders. dPyal pa’i lo rgyus kyi yi ge (p. He offered to the bla ma five holy places including Go sa la. situated inside the boundaries (lcags ri) [of his kingdom].14) at whatever locality many extraordinary meditation traditions were. dPyal gyi gdung rabs Gangga’i chu rgyun (p. He worked there for a few years”. as being north of Nālandā and bSil ba’i tshal.168 Roberto Vitali Pu la ha ri (of Nā ro pa’s fame) and O dan ta pu ri. Chag lo tsa ba’ i rnam thar (Roerich. Having attained mastery of miracles. A tan pu ri (spelled so for O dan ta pu ri) and Phu la ha ri.93-94) records that Odantapurī was under Muslim pressure at the time of the visit of Chag lo tsa ba. 15 bSod nams dpal bzang po. Inside its boundaries (lcags ri). Kha che pan chen gyi rnam thar (p. He offered them to the bla ma and appointed him to be the great protector of the northern door of rDo rje gdan. 14 dPyal gyi gdung rabs Gangga’i chu rgyun (p. such as at the extraordinary meditation places of slob dpon Klu sgrub and grub chen Nag po spyod pa”.15 dPyal lo tsa ba and Chag dgra bcom pa’s personal experiences in Ma ga dha were at the cusp of a major turning point marking a second period 13 ’Jam dbyangs chos kyi grags pa. and thus that this choice was made in recognition of his importance rather than in haste owing to an emergency. He had the vision that rgyal po Hari tsandra and his court had gone to the sky[. such as Go sa la. to rGya mtsho khrab can.9b) lines 25-27) says that he fled to the east guided by the compassion of sGrol ma.29 (= f.13 lines 30-31): “[dPyal Chos bzang] was invited to Ma ga dha by the king who bowed to his feet with his crown.13 line 29-p.14 Subsequently his teacher Kha che pan chen followed the same route to flee to the plateau. Moreover he gave offerings (p. and from there he returned to Tibet. O dan tu (spelled so) and Pu la ha ri. Chag dgra bcom pa. Hari tsandra. Nā ro pa’s hermitage in Ma ga dha. [dPyal Chos bzang] was the gdan sa of Pu la ha ri for three years”. dPyal lo tsa ba eventually left Ma ga dha for East India. he made offerings to rNam par snang mdzad gang chen mtsho at the external ocean.85) gives the location of Phu la ha ri. given to him by the local lord. would have followed the same itinerary in order to return to the plateau.411 lines 56): “The king of the land of Ma ga dha invited [dPyal Chos bzang] to the Dze ba na ga ra palace and placed him upon his crown. The Biography of Dharmaswamin p. there are five holy places. having travelled together with dPyal Chos bzang. surrounded by a thick forest.14 line 1): “[dPyal Chos bzang] then went to east rGya gar.10). 13 Going by the sequence of episodes in his biography. He received his blessing and offered his prayers. killed by the Muslims]. the experience of Chag lo tsa ba belongs to the same existential situation. the cousin of the great dPyal lo tsa ba. rTsa mi lo tsa ba was made abbot of Bodhgayā in a time when Buddhism prospered whereas dPyal A mo gha was the mkhan po of Bodhgayā for three years during a dangerous time for the existence of the Noble Religion and inimical to his personal safety. the former held the gdan sa of Bodhgayā for a similar term of three years. It was no more the traditional search for teachings in a free and conducive environment. when the holy site was depleted of monastic activity. 16 The reference in dPyal gyi gdung rabs Gangga’i chu rgyun (p. They still came for obtaining Buddhist teachings but they added a new dimension that would have been unimaginable before.18) to Thar pa Nyi ma rgyal mtshan’s three year activity as mkhan po of rDo rje gdan helps to fix the length of his predecessor A mo gha’s tenure of the same monastic throne. It is well known that rTsa mi/Tsa mi lo tsa ba Sangs rgyas grags pa was abbot of Bodhgayā before him (see above n.20 lines 1316. Their appointments could not have been more different. His heroics are proverbial (he stayed a long time in difficult conditions). although fully assimilated to Tibetan culture. He was granted an even more prestigious abbatial chair than his great relative.16 dPyal A mo gha’s appointment has the aura of an intervention to save the holy site from decay and oblivion. Given that Myang chos ’byung (p. dByil ston Khyung rgod rtsal. but he apparently did not take on official responsibilities in defence of the local Buddhist establishment. dPyal A mo gha dPyal A mo gha. . to my knowledge. The dPyal clan members and their associates revised the sense of their coming to Bodhgayā. forced upon him by the unsettled conditions of Ma ga dha.142 lines 4-5) attributes six years of abbotship to A mo gha and Thar pa Nyi ma rgyal mtshan cumulatively. dByil ston Khyung rgod rtsal Another episode belonging to the phase characterised by Tibetans journeying to Bodhgayā despite the troubled situation is the peculiar ’das log travelogue of the Bon po gter ston. He did indeed venture to the Gangetic plain infested by armies hostile to Buddhism. which was different from his family tradition. On a smaller scale though. He was. However rTsa mi was not a Tibetan but a Tangut. one of the earliest among the few Tibetans to become abbot of rDo rje gdan.7). a post he held for three years. represents this change of perspective. see below n.Tibetans at rDo rje gdan 169 in the same phase. an attitude. After seemingly returning to earth. the rnam thar records his visit to territories from Gar zhwa to rDo rje gdan in the same terms. establishing a hazy boundary between dreams and reality. Thar pa lo tsa ba Nyi ma rgyal mtshan Despite the unsettled conditions in Ma ga dha. He too was made abbot of Bodhgayā and. . Unlike dPyal A mo gha who remained a somewhat obscure master. Annuaire de l’Ecole Pratiques des Hautes Etudes. who stayed in rGya gar for fourteen long years.266 lines 2-3): “Having crossed [unspecified territories defined as “barren lands of India”]. Tibetan religious personalities continued to obtain teachings in Gangetic India. After spending fourteen years in rGya gar he returned to Tibet and set many sentient beings on the path of liberation”. He was the gdan sa of bcom ldan ’das Thub pa chen po at Mang (sic) ga dha rDo rje’i gdan for three years. Thar pa Nyi ma rgyal mtshan reconciled in his activities the newly acquired dPyal pa role of protectors of Buddhism. 18 dPyal gyi gdung rabs Gangga’i chu rgyun (p.170 Roberto Vitali His biography says that. the white man who had participated in the judgement of Khyung rgod rtsal’s soul during his ’das log ordeal) appeared from nowhere. [Khyung rgod rtsal] arrived at rDo rje gdan. He is celebrated for his heroics during that troubled period. While he was offering prostrations and circumambulations. He is reputed for his erudition in Sanskrit which he taught to his disciples. with that of a brilliant master of the doctrine. [teachers] of the masters of West and East rGya gar.107-114 and “Identification de la tradition appelée bsGrags-pa Bon-lugs”). 1984-1985 p. having crossed Byang thang in earth horse 1258.e. he went to the lands of Zhang zhung described as paradises. He averted the attacks of the heretics.17 rDo rje gdan would be a destination somewhat incongrous for a Bon po. Exemplary is the case of Thar pa Nyi ma rgyal mtshan. and has a gan ’dzira and golden streamers.20 lines 13-16): “[Thar pa lo tsa ba Nyi ma rgyal mtshan] went to rGya gar. were it not that this master also had a career as a Buddhist gter ma rediscoverer (see Anne-Marie Blondeau. he became a major teacher 17 Khyung rgod rtsal gyi rnam thar (p. remarkably.”. He obtained the fame of a unique Tibetan monk. the white man of before (i. whose temple is built with bricks. induced by the destruction of the Noble Religion in Ma ga dha. He said: “What are you doing here? Let’s go”. he became the great master of the masters. for the same number of years as dPyal A mo gha. the source of knowledge. in front of a tree (the Bodhi tree?) is a statue of sGrol ma. At its foot. another of the masters associated with the dPyal. Having attended upon many pandi ta.18 An obvious questionÑunfortunately without answer for no clue is offered at least in the Tibetan literatureÑis whether this was a fixed tenure of the throne of Bodhgayā during the period. 415 lines 4-7): “At Rong. dBus pa Blo gsal. Cultural imports from rDo rje gdan during this period are exemplified by the work of mChims Nam mkha’ grags. kun mkhyen Shes rab ral gri and mkhan chen Shes rab ’od zer”. too. obsolete historical perspective that the journey of Chag lo tsa ba is unique. He made the mask portrait of his bla ma for the ’Bum khang chen mo. dPyal pa’i lo rgyus kyi yi ge (p. La stod Shes rab bzang po.20 mChims Nam mkha’ grags There is a tenuous sign that links rDo rje gdan to mChims Nam mkha’ grags. the bla . Such evidence of their endeavours south of the plateau is crucial in order to widen the above mentioned. ’Dul ’dzin Tshul khrims gzhon nu. bla chen Kun rdor ba.19 Ripples in Tibet The consistency of the prolonged visits to rGya gar by members of the dPyal family was a major impetus for other Tibetans. the gtsug lag khang was similar in look to rDo rje gdan and the big golden statue was similar in style to [that of] Ma ha bo dhi. the new structure of Thar pa gling was actually styled after rDo rje gdan.e. author of the most important bKa’ gdams pa biographies including 19 dPyal gyi gdung rabs Gangga’i chu rgyun (p. bcom ldan Rig pa’i ral gri and also dPyal Padmo can’s expansion of the dPyal’s hermitage of Thar pa gling. He imparted upon Bu ston rin po che and other disciples instructions on Dus ’khor and sByor drug. In Bal po he accomplished a great achievement by completing its rgyab yol (torana) at the same time [as the statue was made at Rong].e.Tibetans at rDo rje gdan 171 of his day once he was back to Tibet. linked with the dPyal clan and their teachers from Ma ga dha. such as dPyal lo tsa ba Rin chen dpal bzang and dPyal ston A rya shri. linguistics) and the essence of sByor drug. brought notions about Bodhgayā to Tibet. a second Byang chub chen po statue like that of rDo rje gdan). Moreover [Thar pa lo tsa ba] gathered [around him] savants and siddha-s. When he performed an extensive consecration. Having brought the statue and the rgyab yol here (at Thar pa gling). Many relics [belonging to the chos sku category] were installed inside it and many relics appeared (bstams spelled so for ltams) from both the Thub pa chen po statue and the remains of the bla ma. [dPyal Padmo can] made sku tshab Byang chub chen po (i. Unlike the stereotype of temples ideally shaped after Bodhgayā. Most of the masters who then went to Ma ga dha during this period were directly or indirectly associated with members of the dPyal clan. These masters.20 lines 17-21): “In particular the outstanding Bu ston thams cad mkhyen pa went [to see Thar pa lo tsa ba] all the time to get inner wisdom by means of the knowledge (sic) of sGra (i. Sa skya pa bla ma mnyam med chen po bDe rgyas pa Don yod dpal ba. 20 ’Jam dbyangs chos kyi grags pa. which establishes the paternity of this major biography of Jo bo rje. (containing a fraction of the whole text) p.21 This sign.926 lines 16-20) reads: “[Rang byung rdo rje] .31 line 2): “Here [at sNar thang] there are two different models of the temple complex [of Bodhgayā] including the rDo rje gdan gandho la. brought from China”. although of entirely different nature from those left by the masters I deal with here in my article. p. taken by Rāhula Sānkityāyana who shared political ideas and travel with dGe ’dun chos ’phel in Tibet and India. records a limited amount of details concerning his life. and a model of rDo rje gdan in sandalwood according to the design by mChims Nam mkha’ grags. 21 See. it became popularly known as the black stone [brought from] gSil ba tshal (Sitavana). is mentioned by dGe ’dun chos ’phel in both his Guidebook to India and gTam rgyud gser gyi thang ma. although branded a rnam thar. which are extraordinary. brought from rGya gar. dGe ’dun chos ’phel records the tradition which holds that mChims Nam mkha’ grags was the author of a model of Bodhgayā for the well known miniature tridimensional replicas of the monastic complex. [On the account of] the type of stone. is well known. peculiar spiritual experiences were born in him”.172 Roberto Vitali A ti sha’i rnam thar rgyas pa. 22 dGe ’dun chos ’phel. U rgyan pa also gave him a model of Bodhgayā.323 and n.30 line 18-p.31) It is said that the one in sandalwood was made in China. rather more a gsan yig (see above n. rGya gar gyi lam yig (p. for instance.22 His model was still in use during the Yung-lo period in metropolitan China. dGe ’dun chos ’phel. gTam rgyud gser gyi thang ma (Varanasi ed. ma in mKha’ spyod and the dkyil ’khor of the deities manifested and gave blessings. remained the standard for models in the following centuries.42 lines 7-10): “At sNar thang dgon pa there is a black stone model of rDo rje gdan. The picture of this sNar thang model. Since then. This shows not only that Tibetans were masters of the conception of these models but also that the rDo rje gdan complex. It is said that the one in stone was brought from rGya gar. as known to them during the 13th century and to mChims Nam mkha’ grags in particular.2). mKhas pa’i dga’ ston (Rang byung rdo rje’i rnam thar ibid. (p.23 No literary reference exists that mChims Nam mkha’ grags went to Bodhgayā. A rather long record of his life (sMon lam tshul khrims’s mChims Nam mkha’ grags kyi rnam thar) which is. It has appeared in a plethora of publications. 23 Von Schroeder (Buddhist Sculptures in Tibet. based on the model designed by mChims Nam mkha’ grags”. One is made of black stone and the other of white sandalwood.228) says that the sNar thang model (probably destroyed) bore an inscription linking it with the Yung-lo emperor. the colophon of Jo bo dpal ldan A ti sha’i rnam thar rgyas pa (f. vol. One: India and Nepal p.170a lines 4-6) of the dbu can manuscript edition of the biography contained in the 170 folio collection of bKa’ gdams pa bla ma-s’s rnam thar-s from lHa sa. In water snake 1293 when grub chen U rgyan pa met a young Rang byung rdo rje and formally recognised him as the third Karma Zhwa na gpa. the model of Bodhgayā given by U rgyan pa to the child Rang byung rdo rje may also have been an Indian work. . and gave him teachings [by means of] a speech on the Noble Religion [based on] his knowledge”. Is his model just an imitation. Or else. This suggests that the model given by U rgyan pa to the third Karma pa may have been styled after the one designed by mChims Nam mkha’ grags. one wonders how mChims Nam mkha’ grags could have designed a model of Bodhgayā of such remarkable accuracy if he did not know the complex thoroughly. collected by the grub chen during his sojourn in Ma ga dha. following his passing in 1289. offered him a model of rDo rje gdan. Influenced by the went to see jo btsun O rgyan pa of La stod [lHo]. He said [U rgyan pa] gave him a speech on east and west rGya gar.Tibetans at rDo rje gdan 173 mChims Nam mnkha’ grags’s model of Bodhgayā (from R. Sānkityāyana. and the attribution recorded by dGe ’dun chos ’phel sheer flattery? bCom ldan Rig pa’i ral gri The case of mChims Nam mka’ grags was not an isolated one. JBORS 1937) In the absence of clues. for it reflected a cultural trend popular in his monastic milieu. This would imply that mChims’ model was already popular in his days and soon after. having frequented rDo rje gdan personally. 174 Roberto Vitali dPyal clan from nearby sMan lung and Thar pa gling. In the days of dPyal lo [tsa ba] the mchod rten-s with images were 260”. These were 260 for the record.24 and the sNar thang pa inasmuch as he was a disciple of mChims Nam mkha’ grags.27). which had close links. stupas and statues as to let one presume a thorough familiarity with the place. bcom ldan Rig pa’i ral gri.    At sNar thang.254 lines 4-7): “Likewise. 25 The colophon of the work reads as follows (bCom ldan Rig pa’i ral gri. “The Transmission of Buddhist Canonical Literature in Tibet” p. the dPyal clan associate. It indeed mentions the interaction between Rig pa’i ral gri and Thar pa Nyi ma rgyal mtshan. and preached the Pradīpodyotana and the Ratnāvalī in the house of Shud-ke. 27 Deb ther sngon po 24 Rig pa’i ral gri and Chag lo tsa ba had an interaction recorded in Chag lo tsa ba’i rnam thar (Roerich (transl. Rig pa’i ral gri wrote a guidebook to rDo rje gdan (the famous but not too commonly available rDo rje gdan rnam bshad rgyan gyi me tog) so detailed in its description of the location of temples. is [here] completed. and the Dharmaswāmin gave them to him”). written at dpal sNar thang. 26 The biography of Rig pa’i ral gri holds that the Thar pa gling pa master was instrumental in giving Rig pa’i ral gri access to the ancient Indian manuscripts kept at bSam yas. 26 The Thar pa gling abbot bestowed the bsnyen rdzogs vow upon Rig pa’i ral gri (bCom ldan Rig pa’i ral gri’i rnam thar (p. Among the masters active at sNar thang.25 The short biography of bcom ldan Rig pa’i ral gri written by bSam gtan bzang poÑand published by Khams sprul rin po che bSod nams lhun grub in his gSung ’bumÑhas no reference to a journey of his to Ma ga dha and a stay at rDo rje gdan. [This work]. sNar thang and neighbouring Chu mig.). In the last lines of the work he gives brief statistics of the number of mchod rten-s with statues at rDo rje gdan according to dPyal lo [tsa ba Chos bzang].109) interprets it as follows: “In winter the Darmaswāmin proceeded to Thang-po-che. The Biography of Dharmaswamin (p. was exposed to notions about rDo rje gdan through a multifarious channel: the dPyal family and their associates (in particular dPyal lo tsa ba Chos bzang and Thar pa Nyi ma rgyal mtshan). Chag lo tsa ba Chos rje dpal. The kalyana-mitra Rig-ral made a request for these books. inter alia. famous for his edition of bKa’ ’gyur and bsTan ’gyur (see. rDo rje gdan rnam bshad rgyan gyi me tog p. Lobsang Shastri. . their reckoning manifestly being calculated at the time of the presence of this master in loco. shared an interest in Ma ga dha.11b lines 23-27): “rDo rje gdan rnam par bshad pa rgyan gyi me tog was composed by the learned monk bcom ldan Ral gri. who based his assessments of Bodhgayā on the third. The relationship between mChims Nam mkha’ grags. who had been an abbot of rDo rje gdan and on dPyal Chos bzang for the statistics? Or was dPyal Chos bzang responsible for a report of unspecified nature on rDo rje gdan before the ravages caused by the iconoclast invaders. should the anonymous rDo rje gdan gyi dkar chag dang lam yig. The . mkhan chen mChims as las chog. sKyos ston (1219-1299) as gsang ston. [Rig pa’i ral gri] was bestowed the bsnyen rdzogs vow at dGa’ ba gdong”). 28 Rig pa’i ral gri received many mDo sNgags doctrines from Chag lo tsa ba. once these four are compared. Did Rig pa’i ral gri rely for his guidebook on Thar pa lo tsa ba.Tibetans at rDo rje gdan 175 (p.31 lines 2-4) who says: “It is as if these [models of Bodhgayā (see above n. Rig pa’i ral gri’i rnam thar (p. be attributed to a member of the dPyal clan (perhaps dPyal Chos bzang). included in the latter’s biography. were made by the same person”.409 lines 12-13) says that Rig pa’i ral gri originally belonged to the monastic division of mChod rten dkar po at bSam yas before moving to sNar thang. entitled gSang rnying sgrub pa rgyan gyi nyi ’od”.). 27 bSam gtan bzang po.255 line 28-p. bcom ldan pa [Rig pa’i ral gri]’s rGyan gyi me tog and Chag lo tsa ba’s Lam yig. given the statistics of mchod rten-s he mentions? Alternatively. which could a sign of his familiarity with the documents kept in this chos skor’s premises. The first of these three was the teacher of the second. The biography of Chag lo tsa ba contains the above mentioned long section which indeed is a gnas bshad of rDo rje gdan (Roerich (transl. 28 The interdependence of the material on rDo rje gdan produced in the period under study is hinted at in a brief statement by dGe ’dun chos ’phel (gTam rgyud gser gyi thang ma Varanasi ed. (p. the actual rDo rje gdan.256 line 1): “Thar [pa] lo [tsa ba] Nyi ma rgyal mtshan sent from bSam yas the Indian manuscripts on gsang rnying for [Rig pa’i ral gri] to investigate.22)]. presently in the premises of the Bihar Research Institute (Patna).256) [Rig pa’i ral gri’s study] resulted in the excellent composition written by him. such as the dbang and rgyud ’grel of gSang ’dus. With dByar (sic for dPyal) Nyi ma [rgyal mtshan] acting as mkhan po. (containing a fraction of the whole work) p. Rig pa’i ral gri and Thar pa lo tsa ba Nyi ma rgyal mtshan in the name of rDo rje gdan remains to be ascertained. given that he had studied with him? Finally. to one of their associates (perhaps Thar pa lo tsa ba Nyi ma rgyal mtshan) or to Chag lo tsa ba Chos rje dpal? Only a close scrutiny of this text to detect traces could validate any claim. did Rig pa’i ral gri base himself on the description of Bodhgayā by Chag lo tsa ba. . Bran ston mTha’ bral. the lord of yogi-s. I give Man lung pa some prominence.2a lines 6-8) records two generations in the family before Man lung pa: “The king of the realised sages. Contrary to Ar. It is unclear whether dGe ’dun chos ’phel’s allusion to Chag lo tsa ba’s Lam yig refers to his biography. no. However he also was his grandson (see immediately below n. kept at Patna. MacDonald (“Le Dhānyakaaka de Man-lungs guru” p.1510. Ibid. Jackson (The ‘Miscellaneous Series’ of Tibetan Texts in the Bihar Research Society. His grandfather. the adventures of two Tibetans are better described in their biographies.65 line 22-p. Unfortunately another work about himÑMan lung pa’s travelogue to India that was celebrated in antiquityÑis not available to me. Man lung pa was born at sTag lung in the Bran ka family to Bran ka Shes rab seng ge and ma gcig Padma rin chen. altogether two”.183) says that Man lung pa was the rebirth of Bran ka mTha’ bral but did not have any blood relation with him. Ibid. where exertions to reach Gangetic India were accompanied by the reality of negotiating a hostile territory and travelling difficulties.2b line 8): “[Man lung pa] was the son born to ma gcig Pad ma rin chen [and Bran rton Shes rab seng ge].30). 590 p.2a line 8): “The one with clairvoyance that enabled him to see the future was rin po che Tran (spelled so for Bran) rton (spelled so) Shes rab seng ge”. MacDonald’s understanding that he did not belong to 29 it. (f.223) to think that the anonymous rDo rje gdan gyi dkar chag dang lam yig. compassion and knowledge. This rnam thar exceeds the length of the biographical notes of most masters studied in my article. He learned many religious systems and was a master of teaching. is another work by the same author. B. debate and composition.73 line 22). he had great devotion. One of the two was Man lung pa bSod nams dpal (also known as Man lung gu ru). He was born in the lineage bearing great qualities of wisdom”. given the section dedicated to the description of rDo rje gdan. among other episodes of his life. because little more about him is found in a twelve folio dbu med biography (entitled simply Man lung pa’i rnam thar) which briefly records his adventures in India.176 Roberto Vitali Two better documented frequentations of rDo rje gdan Man lung pa bSod nams dpal Returning now to a more mundane plane. became well known under the name of Tran/Bran (spelled both ways in the text) ston mTha’ bral. A Handlist catalogue entry n. (f. was a master of some importance. 29 Ar. Man lung pa is indeed considered the rebirth of this member of the Bran ka family. 30 Man lung pa’i rnam thar (f. who had a significant presence in Ma ga dha during the same period. This may have led D. Foremost.30 Biography of Dharmaswamin p. who lived in the time of Khri srong lde btsan. having inseminated [a woman] by secret means. [Shes rab seng ge] took care of that and. then Bran chung pa and finally Bran ston mTha’ bral. Those mentioned are Bran ka Mu ru ti Sangs rgyas gsang ba. The g.32 Further training in the ’Bri gung pa tradition included Na ro’i chos drug at the main monastery of this bKa’ brgyud pa Ibid. He was given the name bSod nams dpal”. active during the reign of Khri Ral pa. the note on p.31 lines 4-8) reads: “mTha’ bral’s son Bran Shes rab seng ge received from his father the following order: “sTag rtse is the dwelling place of an extraordinary mkha’ ’gro ma and also of monks and nuns.31 He studied various texts based on the system of Ye shes zhabs and gSin rje gshed according to the system of gNyos lHa nang pa (1164-1224) under the latter’s nephew.Yung. Myang chos ’byung records in a note the names of a few Bran kha family members (see ibid. the lHa pa master Rin chen rgyal po. When bla ma lHa rin po che Rin chen rgyal mtsho (sic for rgyal po) and many dge ba’i bshes gnyen of the monks (dge ’dun-s) were invited” ….30 lines 10-18).e. where Man lung pa received these teachings. the cho ga of sems bskyed of the excellent enlightment according to the system of Ye shes zhabs. [Man lung pa] received the rab tu byung vow in the evening session (dgongs thun) during the last month of spring of fire female sheep 1247. Man lung gu ru was born at sTag lung dgon pa in the upper part of g. gNyos [lHa nang pa?]). In fulfilment of his words. hence [you] should see that my rebirth will come to take care of it”. Ral pa can’s slained chief minister-monk. Rin chen rgyal mtshan (sic for Rin chen rgyal po) acting as slob dpon. the dbang of the nine deities of gShin rje gshed according to the system of sMyos (i. (f. Ban chen po and dPal gyi yon tan. and with precious monks provided with faith leading the ceremony.3a line 1): “He was born at rTag (spelled so) lung dgon pa on an auspicious day and month of earth female pig 1239”.Tibetans at rDo rje gdan 177 The Bran ka family owes its fame to the great Bran ka dPal gyi yon tan. instructions on Tantric commentaries and additional teachings on rdzogs rim according to the system of Ye shes zhabs”. 32 Man lung pa’i rnam thar (f.3b line 2): “Then. 31 Man lung pa’i rnam thar (f. (f. A note in Myang chos ’byung (p.3a line 8-f. Man lung pa received the rab tu byung vow in fire sheep 1247. founder of Gye re lha khang (lHo rong chos ’byung p.426 line 11). together with the rin po che. to whose wandering spirit legends attribute the role of architect of the various kheng log that sealed the fate of the lha sras btsan po order. (ibid.3a lines 4-5): “He performed the funerary rites for the death of his father. .3b) [Man lung pa] went to Gye re dgon pa of dBus and received all systems of the so sor thar pa [vow]. lines 5-7): “in the presence of those who led the ceremony with dge ba’i bshes gnyen Nyag pa bKra shis seng ge acting as mkhan po.Yung ba saw this as an auspicious circumstance”. such as the ’khrid of Na ro’i chos drug.70 lines 4-5) confirms that Man lung pa was a disciple of Rong pa rGa lo: “Principally [Rong pa rGa lo] preached the cycle of [gShin rje] gshed and Dus kyi ’khor lo.4a line 6-f. on the throne of ’Bri gung in 1255). sPyod ’jug and Tshad ma”.3b lines 2-4): “[Man lung pa] received secret instructions of the ’Gri (spelled so for ’Bri) gung pa without omissions. given that he had heard about the masterly fame of rGa lo [the younger].30 line 1) says: “The monastery of bla ma Bran [ston mTha’ bral].4b line 2): “As for the preaching of the first part of rdzogs rim.372 line 21-p.34 He also was a disciple of the Phag mo gru pa abbot bCu gnyis pa Rin chen rdo rje (1218-1280) (lHo rong chos ’byung p. and sgrub bka’-s consisting of secret instructions on sByor drug. 35 The branch monastery of Man lung pa’s Bran ka family at sTag tshal in Myang smad. formerly held by the 33 Man lung pa’i rnam thar (f. gShin rje gshed bla rgyud chos ’byung (p. such as teachings (stan sic for bstan) on the dbang and grub thabs of bcom ldan ’das Dus kyi ’khor lo. 35 Another note in Myang chos ’byung (p. Moreover he met ’Jig rten gsum gyi mgon po bChung (spelled so) rin po che at ’Gri (spelled so) gung and received many ’khrid and gdams ngag”. its ’grel chen and abridged dbang. the bla ma of Rong dBen dmar. the dBen dmar family of Rong. Moreover he received rjes gnang-s of many Tantra and Tantric grub thabs. (p. called sKyid khud. having stayed there. in order to ask about how to grasp its meaning. He received bshad bka’-s.29 line 21-p. such as gShin rje gshed nag po skor gsum according to the system of Ra (spelled so for Rwa lo) and gShin rje gshed dmar po of the dPyal pa.373 line 1). 34 Man lung pa’i rnam thar (f. he went there to learn the rgyud ’grel of Dus ’khor belonging to the Tantric class. ’Chi med kyi rtsa ba and their practice. and many further teachings such as Byams pa’i chos lnga.3b line 8). .30) is situated near a hot water spring below which. he went to Rong. Myang chos ’byung says that the seat of Bran ston mTha’ bral in Nying ro of Myang stod was sKyid khud. His sons—disciples who became masters—rje Man lung gu ru and lHo pa Grub seng were among the many followers who became savants and accomplished masters”. Indeed his biography says that. plus gShin rje gshed nag po according to the system of Rwa lo tsa ba and gShin rje gshed dmar po according to the system of dPyal lo tsa ba Chos bzang. Rong pa rGa lo the younger imparted upon him teachings on Dus ’khor and sByor drug.33 His education also encompassed the system of the dPyal clan masters and their associates.178 Roberto Vitali school. his meditation blossomed”. after his appointment to the abbatial chair of Man lung (Man lung pa’i rnam thar f. where he met gCung rin po che rDo rje grags (1210-1278. having learned some of it. ’Khon ston dPal ’byor lhun grub. two in all. The site is ancient. he obtained a Po ta la’i lam yig and extensively established the practice of the accumulation [of merit]. sTod lung rGya dmar ba and Rong mNgon pa.Yu ston and Phug ston Ye shes yon tan. gTsang pa rGya ras. . 38 But the rationale for the appellative Man lung pa given to bSod nams dpal is unaccounted for in these passages of Myang chos ’byung. on Man lung pa ripening the thought of going to India should not be underestimated. who belonged to the junior group of disciples of ā tsarya Ye shes dbang po. an older contemporary of Mi tra dzo gi (in Tibet 1198-1199) and Khro phu lo tsa ba Byams pa dpal (1173-1225). it is called Man lung”. and Man lung pa bSod nams dpal. The next morning a messenger was sent to him. Man lung gu ru. he had the vision of Nā ro pa coming [to see him] in his dreams. Bran ston mTha’ bral received a Po ta la’i lam yig during his interaction with Khro phu lo tsa ba.e. Some of these masters were Ting nge ’dzin bzang po. Byams sems Zla ba rgyal mtshan’s disciple Nyi phug pa Chos kyi grags pa.39 Under this light Man 36 Myang chos ’byung (p. belonging to a great being such as Bran ston. His successive rebirth (i. However the influence exercised by Bran ston mTha’ bral. A number of important masters graced sTag tshal with their activity. The monastery called Man lung.116 line 10): “The earlier birth of Man lung gu ru. Chag lo tsa ba Chos rje dpal. Man lung pa) held the dgon pa of Man lung and proceeded to Po ta la. was its abbot. Possessing unhindered clairvoyance. a disciple of Lo ston rDo rje dbang phyug”.31 lines 1-4): “Nowadays the descendance of Bran ston mTha’ bral is at [a place in] sTag rtse (i. bSod nams dpal. who met pandi ta Dā na śri there. Zangs dkar lo tsa ba’s disciple sMon gro lo tsa ba Mar pa rDo ye. 37 The Man lung monastery should not to be confused with sMan lung.37 owing to the greatness of the grandson. gTsang rong Mes ston chen po. They received blessings and secret instructions. sTag tshal was the birth place of rGya brTson seng and the three Yol brothers.Tibetans at rDo rje gdan 179 lineage of Lo ston rDo rje dbang phyug. 38 Myang chos ’byung (p. On that occasion.115 lines 17-21): “As for Man lung dgon pa. the seat of the dPyal clan.36 was known as Man lung.e.116) gnyen chen po Bran ston mTha’ bral attained great knowledge and the highest spiritual experiences. sTag tshal). Man lung was held by Mon btsun g. Both the father and son went to see rje Mi tra chen po upon his arrival at Tsong ’dus mgur mo. at the very beginning. Myang stod sTag tshal’s Man lung pa bshes (p. despite being both in Myang.115 line 21-p. Becoming learned in the doctrinal system of the dPyal clan members may have been a stimulus to follow in their footsteps. Brag (sic for Bran) ston also went to meet Khro phu lo tsa ba Byams pa dpal. for it goes back to the time of the chos rgyal mes dbon rnams gsum. and its estates are owned by Bran ston’s descendants”. 39 Myang chos ’byung (p. On account of the fact that Bran ston mTha’ bral’s rebirth. namely Man lung. On the way. and [went] to Chu mig ring mo to gather [his companions].42 40 Man lung pa’i rnam thar (f. He definitely had a protracted stay at rDo rje gdan during the first two journeys. (f.  First journey (1264-1268) The first time.7a line 2): “[Man lung pa] left for the Kathmandu Valley. when he was performing meditation at sDing chen. “If so. i. altogether two. (f. April to June) of earth male dragon (’grug sic for ’brug) 1268. the master and disciples. 41 Man lung pa’i rnam thar (f. [Man lung pa] entrusted the community (lit.6b line 8-f. During the period of his circumambulations. confiscated whatever wealth was available [to give it to the Tibetan master]. he went to Chu mig ring mo to gather his travel companions. “those rising smokes”) to slob dpon Rin bsod. He stopped at sKyid grong on the way and. for he performed rituals that led his wife to beget a son.40 and returned in earth dragon 1268. stay here”.6a lines 4-6): “In wood male rat 1264. left for rGya gar”.6a lines 4-6). aged twenty-six. His biography does not record his presence at Bodhgayā during the third. at ’Phags pa Wa ti lha khang. when the ruler of the Bong ’chog castle. In Bal po he pleased the ruler of the ’Bong chong castle. but it is reasonable to think that he again visited this holy place. Man lung pa left Tibet in wood rat 1264. After calling upon (gdongs) slob dpon Byang chub dpal and dBus lCang bsar (spelled so) ba Byang chub mgon.41 Before leaving to cross the Himalayan range. altogether four (sic. 42 Man lung pa’i rnam thar (f. the sKyid grong Jo bo statue spoke to him.180 Roberto Vitali lung pa’s pilgrimage to the Po ta la abode of sPyan ras gzigs assumes the features of a fulfilment of his family destiny (see below). [Man lung pa] rendered service to him and performed meditation”.6a lines 3-4): “[Man lung pa] decided to go to a few noble lands of rGya gar”. the ruler developed faith in him and asked for teachings. this being another sign of contacts between this monastery and rGya gar. Man lung pa went thrice to the lands south of the plateau.e. [Man lung pa] said: “I do not need many (sic!) wordly possessions. one missing).8a lines 4-6): “Then during the hot months (sos. [The ruler] ordered to give him boiled rice porridge. Ibid. the master and disciples went [there]”. so that this princely lineage was not interrupted.7a) I came on pilgrimage to the holy receptacles of the Kathmandu Valley”. in order to [fulfill] his wish that a successor should be born [to him]. . sending him contradictory omens which pointed at the complex duality of phenomenal existence and aspiration to enlightment (Man lung pa’i rnam thar f. in accordance with his acceptance [of the request to return to Tibet]. all the locals experienced non-conceptual samadhi for a long time”. the two Kathmandu Valley brother statues of ’Phags pa Wa ti at sKyid grong and ’Phags pa Lokeshwara presently in the Po ta la. Other miraculous omens occurred when he visited ’Phags pa ’Ja ma li (White Machendranath) and U khang ’Phags pa (Red Machendranath). he was garlanded by the local monkeys. An absence of details about his next move makes it seem apparently irrational. without any 43 Man lung pa’i rnam thar (f. The Biography of Dharmaswamin p.57-58). While having sight of ’Phags pa ’Ja ma li (White Machendranath). 44 He was prevented from proceeding farther south because Ti ra hu ti was sieged by the Muslims. on the way back to ’Phags pa Gom pa gang rtse. He stayed at the place of the local man A ma ra tsan ti. The Biography of Dharmaswamin p. when he was at ’Phags pa shing kun. Upon worshipping [the mchod rten]. while he was around..54-55).100) adds that the capital of Ti ra hu ti was Patā (i.45 The Muslims’ attack against the territory north of rDo rje gdan. He went to perform worship on the stone stairs of ’Phags pa shing kun.Tibetans at rDo rje gdan 181 He had a prolonged stay in Bal po amidst miraculous events. The biography abruptly says that he diverted to Ya rtse. . Is this a case of legendary appropriation by the biography of one of the two? 45 Man lung pa’i rnam thar (f. and it was wondrous that they set ablaze spontaneously. was a kingdom encompassing a wide region centred around present-day Muzzarfarpur in Bihar. 44 Similar marvelous events also occurred when Chag lo tsa ba left Bhu khang (the temple of Red Machendranath) on the way back to Gom pa gang rtse. a loud Hum sound uttered in the sky which continued for a long time. Upon worshipping U khang ’Phags pa (Red Machendranath). the site of Ti ra hu ti. and during his worhip inside Hum ka ra’i lha khang (see Roerich transl. The same biography (ibid. such as that the earth shook and ’Phags pa [shing kun] vacillated. north of Ma ga dha and west of Yangs pa can. it was wondrous that a rainbow-like tent covered it. in the days of Chag lo tsa ba.7a lines 2-7): “[Man lung pa] then left and reached the town of Patan.78 for an assessment of the chronology of the activities of Man lung pa during those years). see Chag lo tsa ba’i rnam thar Roerich transl.7b line 1): “At the time the Ti ra hu ti pa-s and the Muslims (Sog po) were at war and [the situation] was not peaceful”. Patalā) and that. He went to Bhu khang and. the dkon gnyer gave him butter lamps which were not ignited (?) (bteng). also known as A seng lde. Ti ra hu ti (south of Bal po. Upon worhipping inside Hum ka ra’i lha khang. where he met the local king A sog lde. The monkeys welcomed him and offered him flower garlands. its raja was Rāmasiha. in the days of Man lung pa should be assigned to soon after wood rat 1264 (see below n.. 43 The biography of Man lung pa claims that. special signs occurred. and that the earth shook and made the mchod rten vacillate. p.e. It is well known that. [something] wondrous happened. but he refused and went to rDo rje gdan. but Man lung pa refused. and Man lung pa felt obliged to join them. 47 Here Man lung pa’i rnam thar (f.7b lines 2-3) has two skeletal sentences before the relevant statement: “[Man lung pa] gave lavish offerings and performed meditation.46 It is probable that Man lung pa was in Ya rtse for a while because he acted as the officiating bla ma of A sog lde.42). Was the MuslimTi ra hu ti war over? At Bodhgayā he left an indelible imprint of his presence. he did not stay and ’Jad pa Nam ye remained behind as substitute. Man lung pa] went to Ya rtse. and spent the above mentioned three years in meditation at Phug rdzogs (1268-1270) (see immediately below n.7b lines 1-2): “On the way back [from there.49). in Bal po he went to meet his sbyin bdag of some time before. This was the first direct and personal involvement of a Tibetan bla ma in a building activity at rDo rje gdan within the framework of Tibetan efforts to resuscitate Bodhgayā from devastation. manifestly on account of improved traveling conditions. He indeed was back in Man lung the next year. promising he would return to his monastery one year later. They were the lHa pa. In Bal po he performed meditation based on the system of the dPyal. 48 here he was joined by disciples who had come from his monastery. Back in Man lung in earth 46 Man lung pa’i rnam thar (f. dBen dmar pa and sKar lung pa. There. 48 A first attempt to summon Man lung pa back to Tibet was undertaken by fellow Tibetans when he returned to Bal po at the same ’Bong chong castle of his sbyin bdag of some time before (see n. too. It is well known that he was honoured as the most outstanding of the officiating religious masters. The king tried to convince him to remain in Ya rtse for good. to the north-west of it. The episode is interesting because it mentions the acquaintances of his fellow Man lung pa. dBus pa Byang chub ’bum died here. . He proceeded to rDo rje gdan”. Chos rgyal A sog lde became positively impressed [by him]. a sign of his dedication to the practice of this family’s teachings and hisÑat least indirectÑlinks with the clan.182 Roberto Vitali reference to the lands he crossed to reach this kingdom at a remarkable distance from Ti ra hu ti. [Man lung pa] restored bDud ’joms lha khang”. The gathering with his disciples in Bal po occurred in fire hare 1267. 47 a remarkable achievement vis-à-vis the widespread destruction. earth dragon 1268. Retracing his steps towards the plateau. The passage describing these events provides the first chronological reference after 1264. having restored bDud ’joms lha khang. Another delegation composed by some elders reached sKyid grong. All his deeds after he had left Tibet were contained in the span of those four years. These elders asked him to go back to Tibet. The chos rgyal of his earlier [sojourn] and his eldest brother pandi ta Rad na rakshi ta held him as the jewel of their crown. On one occasion. 50 Man lung pa’i rnam thar (f. Then.e. came to rDo rje gdan .8a lines lines 4-6): “Then during the hot months (sos. altogether six.ge Pu.50 whose name helps to confirm that the ethnic stock of the royal dynasty of the time was not Tibetan. The brothers indeed belonged to the Calla genealogy. he told [the disciples]: “You cannot be struck by illness. Man lung pa left behind a disciple entrusted with the task and proceeded to rDo rje gdan. He gave them guidance. went to rDo rje gdan. i. You should go to Byang chub gling and take residence there. The Kingdoms of Gu. He first returned to Ya rtse. He offered worship. expands the length of this king’s rule). nine men.hrang p. In response to their request.467). The dates of Man lung pa’s two travels to Ya rtse during the reign of A sog lde. The Ya rtse episodes in the biography of Man lung pa have significant implications for the history of this kingdom. such as lo tsa ba Grags pa rgyal mtshan and Zhang bSod nams dar. which lasted from iron horse 1270 to fire rat 1276. help to assign his reign to the period from before 1264 to at least 1270 (but see below for epigraphic evidence that. he went to stay at Ya tse (spelled so).51 49 Man lung pa’i rnam thar (f. He spent three years in meditation at Phug rdzogs”. he met the bla ma-s of dBus gTsang.8b lines 1-5): “In iron horse (lcags lta sic for lcags rta) 1270. Having again refused to become their officiating bla ma. in accordance with his acceptance [of the request to return to Tibet].”. In water monkey 1272 he was joined at Bodhgayā by two of his disciples from Tibet. such as rTag (spelled so) tshal Bya grong pa and lo tsa ba Grags pa. The master and disciples. as instructed [by him].9a line 2): “Then [his disciples] went back. the master and disciples went [there]. he went to see the Jo bo in dBus and offered his worship. separated as they are by a few years. 49  Second journey (1270-1276) During the second journey to the south of the plateau. the monkey year 1272. and the bla ma remained behind to perform meditation. A sog lde being its last ruler (see Vitali. April to June) of earth male dragon (’grug sic for ’brug) 1268. on one occasion. following the recommendation of [mGon po] Zhal bzhi [pa]. while supporting this reckoning. Moreover.8b line 7-f.Tibetans at rDo rje gdan 183 dragon 1268. [Man lung pa] met all his disciples. The next year. where he met A sog lde and his elder brother pandi ta Rad na rakshi ta. he spent the following three years in meditation at Phug rdzogs (1268-1270). Man lung pa had a sojourn of several years at Bodhgayā. You should meditate there for twelve years”. he left sNar [thang] pa Byang ye as officiating bla ma. 51 Man lung pa’i rnam thar (f. performed circumambulations and meditation in an extremely strict manner. namely lo tsa ba Grags pa rgyal mtshan and Zhang bSod nams dar. Hence he would have made good use of the Po ta la’i lam yig in his family’s possession (see above).9a lines 3-8). So it became known as Byang chub dgon pa”. is useful to locate his visit to South India to a fraction of water monkey 1272 and a good amount of water bird 1273. . two in all. Having received [this plea]. They left for rGya gar”. [disciples]. A speech of his. he returned to the south accompanied by two Indian disciples in the autumn of 1273. I will be staying there until the winter of the bird year 1273”.47).9a lines 2-3): “Zhang [bSod nams dar] died in rGya gar. They met Man (f. Concerning his feats during the period.9b) a statement he left in a bka’ shog. Tsandra pandi ta and Mu ka ti mai tri. (f.52 Man lung pa also traveled to South India around the same time. 53 Man lung pa’i rnam thar (f. such as bla ma Byang chub dpal. so I cannot accept. [these Tibetans] founded Thar pa dgon pa at the border of Bal Bod in accordance with the words of their bla ma. Despite the local pandi ta-s’ supplications to stay on. Zhang bSod nams dar was one of the two disciples of Man lung pa. 52 Man lung pa’i rnam thar (f. had spiritual realisations. despite the request [to remain at rDo rje gdan] by rgyal po Bhu dha se na. [Man lung pa] related the cause [of his death] to slob dpon Byang chub dpal and sent [him] to Man lung with slob dpon Rin bsod. accompanied by a gift of gold”. For the record. who died in rGya gar (the other was dBus pa Byang chub ’bum. he said: “I will do in accordance with the request of the Tibetans. he left to the south on the eighth of the month (sic) of water female bird 1273.51).9b line 5): “At that time. Accompanied as guides by pandi ta Go tam shrā bha dra from Ma ga rda (spelled so) and Tsandra ghi rti from East India who was btsun pa Dze ta ri bha dra from Zla ba gling.184 Roberto Vitali They were among several of Man lung pa’s followers who proceeded to Ma ga dha. see above n. a legend in his biography (picked up by Deb ther sngon po) holds that he visited the Po ta la abode of sPyan ras gzigs. in which he declined to accept the petition of his fellow monastery members to return to Tibet (see above n. [Man lung pa] did not consider it convenient to postpone [his departure]. who bestowed blessings upon him (Man lung pa’i rnam thar f. The Man lung pa granted him twenty-seven srang of gold which they sent with three men.9a) lung pa and begged him to go back [to Tibet]. which was arranged [by the Tibetans] in an extensive way. His path brought him back to rDo rje gdan.53 given that winds of destruction from Tibet. He requested: “I have to go to shri rDa na ka ta ka.9a line 8-f. Perhaps the gold was given to finance Man lung pa’s journey to South India (see the next note). By staying here. He exclaimed: “This should be said: an offering in gold must be made!”. either to accompany him in his wanderings or to plead with him to return to his monastery in Tibet (for their list see above). After leaving. On the twenty-sixth of that month the Tibetans joined [him]. such as bla ma Byang chub dpal and lo tsa ba Grags pa. or Ye shes [in Tibetan].55 These activities led him to exclaim with considerable understatement that he went thrice to South India seeking the blessings of sPyan ras gzigs in order to develop a Bodhisattvic attitude which he thought he never attained. he gave teachings on Dus ’khor.10a lines 1-8).10a line 4). for it has a statue placed in the water. the great being.56 Ibid. To that region he went. such as ri bo Bya rkang can and mchod rten rNam dag. took him to South India where he gave teachings to the local Buddhists. [the place] known as the unbrella-bearer of non-sectarian knowledge. He is credited with outstanding realisations (Man lung pa’i rnam thar f. [He told] Dza ya su (f.Tibetans at rDo rje gdan 185 were again blowing in Ma ga dha.10a) he strenuously performed prostrations and circumambulations. 54 Man lung pa’i rnam thar (f. or else twelve.e. Extraordinary visions occurred to him including that of the land of sTag gzig (ibid. altogether three.10b) ri to introduce a community of monks belonging to Theg pa chen po. gSang ’dus.9b line 6-f. known as the [locality] with a murti (sku can). [in order to get] the wisdom coming from the water of sPyan ras gzigs’s feet. [proceeded] towards the southern direction. Macdonald. such as mkhan po Surdi bha dra. one of his two [Indian] disciples.000 stanzas”) and devote time to [give] instructions related [to these teachings] by making use of Indian examples. He obtained the power of transforming his body into rainbow and the ability to fly (ibid. and gave offerings”.10a line 6). visited most of the four great holy places of ’Dzam bu gling.10a line 8-f.10b lines 3-7): “Then taking along Dze ta ri bha dra. 56 Man lung pa’i rnam thar (f. Owing to the fact that the Man lung pa and Sa skya pa again sent him gifts for his sustenance. introduce Pha rol du phyin pa’i stong phrag brgya pa (i. It is well known that most people of this area were exposed to a mix of Theg pa chen po”. (f. f.11a lines 4-6): “[Man lung pa said]: “I myself. he went to Dznya na ka. he established a [religious] community. Although I went . Having gone there. he went to Bam pa ka ya in the south.10b line 2): “At that time he told pandi ta Gau tam shri bha dra to go to Tibet. bDe mchog and dGyes rdor to many fortunate beings. grub thob chen po Man lung pa. Given that he then stayed at the mchod rten of dpal ’Bras spungs (Dha na ko ta in Andhra Pradesh. He finally reached Tibet in 1276. The master and disciples. “Le Dhānyakaaka de Man-lungs guru”). Then. 55 Man lung pa’i rnam thar (f. or else eight. These deeds are described in a work by pandi ta Bi ma la shri. f. see Ar. Some 300 monks were gathered there”.10a line 1): “Then. He then went up to dpal ldan ’Bras spungs. (f.10a lines 7-8). entited Chos ’byung rab gzigs (ibid.54  Third journey (?-1299) The third journey. went [to develop] the behaviour of a Byang chub sems dpa’. the departure year of which is not recorded in his rnam thar. f. Paramita in “100. He returned to Tibet in fire male rat 1276. equally in the south. on account of a concentration of a great [number of] weapons during a strife. having heard the account [of his deeds]. made a translation. he gave [the history of his life] as parting gift to Man lung”. At Man lung gtsug lag khang. who urged him to have his experiences written down. 57 Man lung pa’i rnam thar (f. this was not given [to me].57 Among those who urged him to authorise his story to be written down. 58 Man lung pa’i rnam thar (f. btsun pa bSod nams bzang po completed its composition with devotion”. He first operated within a ’Bri gung pa milieu and. The last part of his biography finds him at Ri bo rtse lnga. sNar thang pa bcom ldan Rig ral. the son of Rong pa rGa lo the younger and an expert of Dus ’khor associated with the dPyal masters. Dze ta ri bzang po (sic). They translated it after they put it together into a single work. and [masters]. attracted the attention of the Sa skya pa.12a line 7-f. and the bshes gnyen from Tibet. On account of the bka’ shog that the history of the teacher and disciples should be translated and put into written form. Later the yogin from rGya gar.11b lines 4-5): “He went to the place of Thar pa lo tsa ba mkhan po Nyi ma rgyal mtshan. later completed by the Man lung pa monk bSod nams bzang po.58 Tharpa lo tsa ba Nyi ma rgyal mtshan personally drafted a preliminary version of his biography. diffused them in an extensive manner”. to whom the rnam thar is ascribed. with lo tsa ba Grags pa. You visited [the localities] known as the four or eight holy places of ’Dzam bu gling”. Rong pa Dus ’khor ba Shes rab seng ge providing sustenance. after his last sojourn in India. another destination he considered crucial for his there thrice taking you along. It seems that. his follower slob dpon bSod nams mgon po. Grags pa rgyal mtshan. Man lung pa received the recognition of his contemporaries and his endeavours were celebrated by masters who had similar experiences or showed an interest in the Noble Land.12b line 3): “Those who heard [the account of his feats] on that occasion were the pandi ta from rGya gar. worked [in favour of] his teachings in gTsang and dBus. His earlier acquaintances and the later ones help to assess Man lung pa’s religious orbit. ’Jam dbyangs rin rgyal from Sa skya. .186 Roberto Vitali Back in Tibet in earth pig 1299.11b lines 6-8): “Having then heard his history. more generally. 59 Man lung pa’i rnam thar (f.12b) and the Tibetan lo tsa ba. he met Thar pa Nyi ma rgyal mtshan and other major masters of his day. such as lo tsa ba bShad sgrub. who were its translators after having earlier received his words. Thar pa gling pa Nyi ma rgyal mtshan. These included his disciples bcom ldan Rig pa’i ral gri and Rong pa Shes rab seng ge.59 Man lung pa did not stay long in Tibet and continued his wandering life despite approaching old age. Gau tam shrā and (f. and one is left wondering whether he met his end in China. Ma ga dha and South India was depicted on the walls of the temple of sKyid khud according to an art style dominant in 13th-14th century gTsang. original Bal [po] painting style”. They are in an extremely pure. It is well known that everyone saw him staying there for many years”. Man lung pa’i rnam thar (f. Myang chos ’byung (p. are those of the Dus gsum Sangs rgyas.105 line 11). consecrated by Bran ston mTha’ bral. about one floor high. MacDonald understands (“Le Dhānyakaaka de Man-lungs guru”p.e. the mountain of ’Jam dpal dbyangs. The deeds of Man lung pa were not only transmitted to posterity in a biography. he went to Bodhgayā twice. Next to them are the life size statues of Bran ston mTha’ bral and his rebirth Man lung gu ru. . They bestow great blessings and are yearly recipients of great circumambulatory [activity]. He had to disentangle his work from difficulties induced by the situation in Tibet and the continuing unsettled status of Gangetic India.30 lines 19-24).11b lines 5-6): “After staying [at Man lung] for two months. Owing to former karma.Tibetans at rDo rje gdan 187 religious practice. Ya rtse.66 line 16-p. the outcome of both occasions was that he contributed to the restoration of rDo rje gdan with funds from Tibet.11a line 6): “You should go to Ri bo rtse lnga in the future. nowadays known as the Jo bo-s of sKyid khud. U rgyan pa’i rnam thar rgyas pa p.61 The rnam thar loses his traces at this point.60 where he was seen for several years. i. Away from Ma ga dha. The passage means to say that the depiction of Man lung pa’s rnam thar in the temple’s murals was in the Newar style of the Kathmandu Valley.1. Already a legend for negotiating the journey to Udiyana (bSod nams ’od zer.183-184 n.”. “…. 62 The murals at sKyid khud depicting the life of Man lung pa did not portray the mountains of Bal po. (p. as I will show below. you must become a follower of rje btsun ’Jam dpal dbyangs”. as Ar.62 U rgyan pa Rin chen dpal No other extensive stays in rDo rje gdan and activity in favour of the holiest Buddhist place by a Tibetan were more influenced by the political evolution on the plateau than U rgyan pa Rin chen dpal’s experience. a pilgrimage he recommended to one of his Indian disciples. Bal po. the main statues.29 line 21) says: “Inside the lha hang …. 60 He construed that his life-time mission was not complete without a visit to Ri bo rtse lnga. “Bal [po] ris”). His wondrous life in Tibet. The murals are detailed depictions of the life of Man lung gu ru who went as far as the Po ta la. he went to [Ri bo] rtse lnga. 61 Man lung pa’i rnam thar (f. where she is misled by the reading “Bal ri” rather than the correct “Bal ris”. As soon as she warned him: “If you do not prostrate. he covered the image with a woollen robe and rode on it saying: “Khyu khyu” and added: “If a disease will come [to me]. He said: “I took part in the festival to which the king was invited. jumped on his palanquin.168 lines 3-4).135 line 3-p. [U rgyan pa] urinated in a leather (ko) bowl he had and . [the procession] moved. and cried. The king comes here for his worship. If you do not do it. This being a behaviour supremely unruly. [The dkon gnyer] said: “There is no one who is not afraid of getting killed”. the rje grub chen rin po che. He went on alone …. Karma Kam tshang gi gser ’phreng p. [U rgyan pa] went to rDo rje gdan.137 line 2): “[Ram shing]. bSod nams ’od zer. the next morning one dkon gnyer came and said: “You did such things in the lha khang.136): “Prostrate to the god”. but he retorted: “I will not prostrate”.188 Roberto Vitali Soon after the death of his teacher rGod tshang pa mGon po rdo rje (1187-1258). the king [of Ti ra hu ti]. I have [achieved] the feats of someone successful in his activities” and sang a song that said: “I led Ram shing rgyal po with a stick”.733 line 5): “When he was thirty-two in the bird year 1261. He relinquished [there] his big smell and smelly water. the king will come to kill you”. was invited to a festival by his senior minister. take this one”. [U rgyan pa] sang a song which said that he rode on the neck of Ma ha de va sha ra (spelled so). He visited Go ta wa ri. The king sat on the throne. the great ’Brug pa master appeared to U rgyan pa in a vision and told him to go to rDo rje gdan in a bird year. The rje grub chen rin po che having dropped the stick. He then went to another Hindu temple and halted [there]. [U rgyan pa first] jumped (’phyongs sic for mchongs) on the king. one of the twenty-four places [of the bDe mchog mandala].733) On the way he sent back nye gnas Sher rin. He then went to a Hindu temple housing a stone image of god Shiva. (p. so you must clean it yourself. On the way south. and upon the king exclaiming: “A madman has come”. If you are afraid to be killed.63 On the former occasion 63 lHo rong chos ’byung (p. She said: “He is doing this to my image!”. The dkon gnyer ma (“woman keeper”?) said (p. snatched a stick from the hand of a minister and said: “Go away”. U rgyan pa’i rnam thar rgyas pa (p. a disease will come to you”. [U rgyan pa] replied: “I am not afraid to be killed. he went to the Kathmandu Valley. His palanquin could not move because many people surrounded it. while the rje grub chen rin po che was asked [to sit] at the corner of the throne. clean it yourself”. At that time. This happened in the next useful bird year (iron bird 1261) (Si tu pan chen Chos kyi ’byung gnas. The people said: “This is the behaviour of a dzo gi who is bestowing protection”. While the ministers carrying various kinds of weapons in their hands were telling people to move away. sojourned at Go da wa ri and proceeded to Ti ra hu ti where he behaved like a Tibetan-style madman with the local king and in Hindu temples.732 line 21-p. He took the route to Ye rang and then reached Ti ra hu ti”. grabbing the moment. to qualify him as a full-fledged smyon ba like several illustrious countrymen. lHo rong chos ’byung (p. there was a black man with four arms and red eyeballs. this isolated case in the life of U rgyan pa does not allow one. p.”. His behaviour in Ti ra hu ti was supremely controversial. Ganesha appeared to him in front of the tree and vowed to support his endeavours. [U rgyan pa] said that the [dkon gnyer] was the one who cleaned. Four rnal ’byor pa like you will cooperate as if they are one”. in my view. for nowhere else and under no other circumstances did he resort to trespassing the boundaries of his highly individual personality. The Du ru kha are creating an obstacle in rDo rje gdan”. The dkon gnyer said: “You are someone who is not afraid to be killed. He said he sang a song which told that (p. U rgyan pa avoided punishment owing to the local belief that his behaviour was somewhat auspicious.235 lines 8-9) do not have the style of smyon ba performances but of a refusal of authority. This appeared to be an auspicious omen because he scattered [seeds] from his hand.733 lines 1-4): “[U rgyan pa] said he had a notion that. . He said: “The Du ru ka troops will be coming to rDo rje gdan. The thought of enlightment manifested overwhelmingly in him. Go there quickly to repulse them with your prayers. On several occasions in his life U rgyan pa was not intimidated by situations which could have dire consequences. at Bal mo thal dkar. On an important occasion. but always behaved within the limits of a sensible demeanour. but they will come to kill me. In the northern area of the sacred complex he made arrangements for the making of a statue of Sangs rgyas and had a vision poured it on the head of a statue.137) he poured urine on the head of god Shiva”. but it was so freakish that it may have been influenced by local (non-described) factors. On the latter occasion he desecrated the murti-s of two temples. U rgyan pa’s sitting on the royal throne at Ti ra hu ti and taking the liberty to sit on a couch without Se chen rgyal po’s permission at the Mongol court of China (ibid. to the outrage and desperation of their keepers. a black man smeared with white ashes and four hands pulled him with two hands. [U rgyan pa] said: “This was chos skyong Ye shes mGon po”. was invited by his senior minister. Ram Shing.Tibetans at rDo rje gdan 189 he disrupted a ceremony to which the local ruler. said to be to the west of the main gandho la. saying: “Visit it quickly. U rgyan pa’i rnam thar rgyas pa (p. Again he went scot-free because these pujari-s were too worried to patch up his misdeeds to report him to the authorities.64 Unusual events occurred when U rgyan pa was in front of the Bodhi tree. Although having all the features typical of the practice. lHo rong chos ’byung says that U rgyan pa was urged to rush from Bal po to rDo rje gdan by mGon po on account of an impending risk of a new attack by iconoclastic raiders. Go away”. 64 bSod nams ’od zer.133 lines 13-19): “Then at the palace of Bal po called Tha bga’ me. [you will] be called rgyal po Rin byang. U rgyan pa made lavish offerings to the image of the Buddha at rDo rje gdan and interacted with the saints who were bold enough to sit under the Bodhi tree in those risky circumstances. he went to Ma ga ta (spelled so). There bCom ldan ’das ma gave him many prophecies: “You are the incarnation of Ras chung pa who resides in lCang lo can. He travelled from sKyid grong to Bal po rdzong. given that rGa lo the elder. In order to fulfil the supplications of four local mastersÑone of them being Dznya na garbhaÑin the same 1261 he averted Gar log troops advancing to Bodhgayā (on all these episodes see. and is credited with the same activity useful to ward off the threat of Muslim attacks.67 He was invited to head a tshogs ’khor (ganacakra) in which 500 yogi took part (ibid. including Dznya na garbe (spelled so). U rgyan pa gave a display of his siddhi of not sinking into water (ibid. he sent much wealth to Bodhgayā from sKyid grong for a first restoration sponsored by him. having become rGya sbyin. Four [practitoners]. 65 mKhas pa’i dga’ ston (p. p. In his abridged biography. p. After that. Was levitating upon water a skill that great masters developed in Ma ga dha (perhaps at rDo rje gan).e Shakya Thub pa)”. After that.735 line 2): “From Mang yul he went to sKyid grong.g.170 line 1). Si tu pan chen Chos kyi ’byung gnas.736 lines 19-21): “Having crossed the Gang ga. [U rgyan pa] stayed three years at rDo rje gdan”.65 He was thus able to give some respite to the local practitioners. you will serve the master (i. e.915 lines 7-10): “[U rgyan pa] went to rGya gar rDo rje gdan. gave abundant demontrations of this miraculous ability (see below)? Upon his return to Tibet.190 Roberto Vitali of his teacher rGod tshang pa among deities in the sky.66 U rgyan pa returned to rDo rje gdan soon after iron horse 1270. [you will be] a ’khor lo gyur ba’i rgyal po (çakravārtin). Si tu pan chen Chos kyi ’byung gnas says that. 66 lHo rong chos ’byung p. . via the mountain Ma ha par ba ta at the border between Bal po and rGya gar. Tshogs bdag (Ganesha) offered him the essence of his life.. pleaded him with a prayer and. which I think refers to the outskirts of the Kathmandu Valley. He was offered Bang dkar dgon pa.e. Karma Kam tshang gi gser ’phreng p. (p.735) The amount of wealth which came into his hands was sent for the renovation of rDo rje gdan”. he repulsed troops of the Gar log. dPa’ bo gtsug lag ’phreng ba says that U rgyan pa spent three years at rDor je gdan (1261-1263). being likewise urged by mGon po.172 lines 6-7). He gave uncountable offerings to Byang chub chen po at rDo rje gdan and payed his respects to those dwelling by the tree at the bank of the Na ra dza ra (i.169 lines 4-7). 67 lHo rong chos ’byung (p. on the way back to Tibet. too. After that. headed by Indra.734 line 18-p. the river of Bodhgayā)”. the dates of the latter’s inscriptions encompassing Gu ge Grags pa lde’s reign (Vitali.46 and 50). On the way back from his second visit.166 line 17-p. the king of Ya rtse and the rje grub chen (p. p. where Ya rtse was located. Ganesha transformed into a white horse and came to welcome him (lHo rong chos ’byung p. From then on until the end of the world.Tibetans at rDo rje gdan 191 On the way back. While the first of these epigraphs is too early to be linked to the activity of U rgyan pa at rDo rje gdan (1255 predates his first journey to Ma ga dha). the king of Zangs ling.hrang p. . The Kingdoms of Gu. this is used to restore the decay of rDo rje gdan gtsug lag khang and its images”.167) rin po che having provided (skur sic for bkur) much wealth [to repair it].449-450). ibid.736 line 5). This apparently is contradictory because the same text records an advance by the Gu ge king Grags pa lde into the territories to its south. he had to handle brigands attacking travelers on the bank of the river (ibid.ge Pu. given that the boundary wall [of rDo rje gdan] had been destroyed by Sog po troops. the second inscription may refer to the restoration undertaken in collaboration with the Tibetan master. occurred sometime after 1270 and thus quite close to Man lung pa’s second visit the former kingdom. Indeed A sog lde signed two inscriptions at Bodhgayā which date to 1255 and 1278 (Vitali.449).68 This is whyÑthe biographies of U rgyan pa sayÑthe northern gate of rDo rje gdan is known as the gate of Tibet. at the bank of the Gangga. destroyed in the havoc caused by the Muslim marauders. U rgyan pa’s restoration of the rDo rje gdan boundary wall.167 line 6): “At that time. p. rDo rje gdan’s northern gate is known as the gate of Tibet. This is something two other prominent Tibetan bla ma-s in the 68 bSod nams ’od zer. He and the kings of Sri Lanka and Ya rtse restored one side of the wall each. He was a contemporary of A sog lde.736 lines 5-6 and lines 22-23) and. U rgyan pa’i rnam thar rgyas pa (p. A sog lde’s expansion of his dominions and the inscriptions he left at Bodhgayā may indicate that he turned his attention towards the lowlands as a consequence of a contraction of his dominions on the highlands. shared with the kings of Ya rtse and Zangs gling. whatever wealth exists. they restored one side each. One may speculate whether this ruler of Ya rtse was the same A sog lde who hosted Man lung pa soon after wood rat 1264 and again around iron horse 1270 (see above n. The second time U rgyan pa provided funds for rDo rje gdan was when he contributed to the renovation of its boundary wall. like dPyal Chos bzang and Chag dgra bcom pa before him (see above). A sog lde is credited by mNga’ ris rgyal rabs with major successes in extending his dominions. U rgyan pa relieved a large number of Tibetans from the harassments of the local authorities in Bal po. such as gold and silver. At that time.192 Roberto Vitali Kathmandu Valley did not do. Eventually he could not convince the Newar authorities to give up tormenting his countrymen. The rje grub chen rin po che retorted: “It is excellent (go bcad) that you are not crazy. when they will go back to Tibet. hence. He visited ri bo chen po A yang ka. do not be the head of these Tibetans”. (p. 69 bSod nams ’od zer. Going by U rgyan pa’s reply to Bho ta pandi ta. The Tibetans did follow suit. a holy place frequented by all the [spiritual] princes who have been liberated. in the land of Bal po there were many thousands of Tibetans. these Tibetans had left the plateau owing to a drought. The Bal po [authorities] requested the rje grub chen rin po che: “Bla ma. (p. that winter. each of them will stand (bzhug) [responsible] for this crime”. Provisions for the journey were given to the Tibetans amounting to fourteen pham of rice for each of them. exposed to tropical diseases and the harassment of the local authorities. if they hold them up. and pleaded with him: “Those two will not help us with [our] appeal to [the Bal po bha ro-s]. There are a few implications in this episode I wish to explore. Hence the grub chen rin po che said: “All of you. the bla ma. to intercede with the Bal po’i bha ro-s. We beg [you]. it would seem that the latter questioned the sanity of taking the Tibetans back to the plateau. It is said that the Sa skya pa dge bshes exclaimed: “These bad Tibetans came here to evade the taxation by the Sa skya pa. The Tibetans went to see the rje btsun rin po che. a proSa skya stronghold. and carry a [walking] stick (rgyug pa) one ’dom long [for the journey to Tibet]. the Tibetans requested the rje grub chen rin po che. So he led those Tibetans back to the plateau. Bho ta pandi ta and a Sa skya pa dge bshes. If you stay here the next season. they will die. All these Tibetans will leave during the hot season. Now.177) altogether three.178) Rice was sent along with the 200 attendants of the rje grub chen rin po che as much as they could carry”. but [the problem] was not sorted out because the various [bha ro] denigrated one another (phar skur tshur skur). must gather at Bod thang (i.e.178 line 3): “[U rgyan pa] comfortably reached Bal po ’thil. they will beat them”. Whoever will be holding up [skyil ba] here will be killed”. Tibetans. you will catch a fever and die. This was an obvious solution after U rgyan pa’s attempt to have a parley with the local dignitaries failed on account of the impossibility . which is not commendable. so you should prevent them from catching fever along the way”.] catching fever.176 line 14-p. At Bal po ’thil the sufferance of the Tibetans was relieved. Afflictions of other [Tibetans] came to an end at Zab mo’i sgang. 69 According to the literature dedicated to U rgyan pa. there was a crop failure in Tibet. He pleaded with the bha ro-s. It said that Bho ta pandi ta exclaimed: “This crazy U rgyan pa will not be useful to us”. Remembering all the kinds of misdeeds [they had to bear]. to help us plead with [the bha ro-s]”. U rgyan pa pointed out that it was even worse to oblige them to stay in the Kathmandu Valley. The locals say that. Thundikel in Kathmandu). [Otherwise. U rgyan pa’i rnam thar rgyas pa (p. He replied: “I am not the head of these Tibetans. These [offerings] were handed over to him [and reached] without obstacles on the way”. princes and many mi chen (“dignitaries”). completely ornamented with the nobility of excellence. Bho ta pandi ta is a mysterious and intriguing character. is the emperor Ol bya (spelled so for Ol ja du). owing to U rgyan pa’s great fame. 71 bSod nams ’od zer. He sent to rDo rje gdan the gold and silver given to him by Ol ja du for another reconstruction campaign. also because he was known by the name used by the non-Tibetan people of the Himalaya to identify the inhabitants of the plateau. As for the remarkable quantity of rice carried on the way by U rgyan pa’s attendants. pertains to the sphere of the resistance put up by Tibetans who resented the authority of the Mongol/ Sa skya alliance. He refused their gifts. he granted two bre chen of gold. Having heard the fame of the rje grub chen rin po che. U rgyan pa’i rnam thar rgyas pa (p.70 despite his overt antipathy towards them. raised by the Sa skya pa dge bshes. this must have happened between wood horse 1294 and fire sheep 1307. The rnam thar provides evidence that the term Bhota was already in use at least during the early 14th century when this biography of U rgyan pa was written. U rgyan pa organised dissent against the Mongols’ representatives and brought this dissent to the plateau in order to engage them. the princesses. Being an active and uncompromising opponent of foreign rule in Tibet and of the alliance. having in mind the survival of Bodhgayā. (p. Jaipur) offered him the relic [consisting] of the top (?) thumb knuckle of sTon pa’s (i.71 In the absence of a specific date. and truly striving to make offerings to the precious teachings.254) firm in his faith for the precious teachings of the bDe bar gshegs pa-s.253 line 18-p.Tibetans at rDo rje gdan 193 U rgyan pa’s legend grew considerably in the eyes of the Mongol emperors of China who gave him lavish gifts. Moreover. His sentiments led him to reject their patronage. The way he spoke to U rgyan pa gives the impression that he was a Tibetan settled premanently in the Kathmandu Valley. The other issue. Shakyamuni’s) right hand”.915 lines 20-21): “The king of Dza ye pur (i.e. it seems it was meant to cope temporarily with the necessities of the people the expedition met on the way. of finding any local authority who would have been reliable enough to deal with the matter. in turn. but once he did accept.e. entusted to gser yig pa dPag (sic for pag) shi Grags pa rgyal mtshan.254 line 10): “The august lord of the land. . 70 A case of a wondrous gift. the Tibetan reckoning of Ol ja du’s regnal years. by an Indian ruler rather than financial support by a Mongol emperor is recorded in mKhas pa’i dga’ ston (p. twelve bre chen of silver and an extensive offering to the rje grub chen rin po che in order to restore all the decaying lha khang-s and statues of Ma ga ta rDo rje gdan. sent presents and a letter. vied for the throne. Tibetan masters ventured to Ma ga dha for other reasons.5a lines 1-2): “In particular. the evolving political status of the plateau. He must have had a protracted stay in Bodhgayā because he is known in the biographies of U rgyan pa under the appellative of rDo rje gdan pa. after the death of Mong gor rgyal po. Bitter internecine rivalries dominated the scenario of dBus gTsang in expectation of the takeover of Tibet by the Mongols. the people of Tibet were oppressed (mnar ba)”. conducted under iconoclast pressure. On the other hand.254 lines 17-19) records a significant episode in gTsang: “[Rig pa’i ral gri] argued against the . U rgyan pa’i rnam thar rgyas pa (p. the protagonists of this adventureÑmembers of the dPyal clanÑfollowed a consolidated family tradition to receive teachings from masters of Ma ga dha and led othersÑmembers of the Chag clanÑto share these experiences.73 influenced the adoption of new perspectives concerning the importance of the journey to rDo rje gdan. Also see lHo rong chos ’byung (p.74 Man 72 bSod nams ’od zer. in particular its central regions. On the one hand. Owing to the different political conditions. 74 An episode in bcom ldan Rig pa’i ral gri’i rnam thar shows that the Tibetan political arena was fragmented during the feud between Se chen rgyal po and A ri bho ga who. The situation in Ma ga dha was consistently bad. The passage implies that the status of mGon po rgyal mtshan was that of a monk. A great service was rendered [by restoring its temples]”.194 Roberto Vitali The biographies of U rgyan pa mention an unsung Tibetan hero. mGon po rgyal mtshan. This was a state of affairs also indicated by the rows between Tibetans at the Mongol court. The context The motivations that led the masters I deal with to proceed to the centre of the Buddhist world changed during the course of those 100 years or more with the modification of the political conditions affecting north-central India and Tibet. being ruled by the Hor.72 He should be classified side by side with the religious masters.746 lines 12-14). The matter at stake was the race to become the interlocutors of the upcoming overlords. brought these [funds] to rDo rje gdan. bCom ldan Rig pa’i ral gri’i rnam thar (p.254 lines 10-13): “Many meditators who were renunciate. At the beginning of this phase. headed by rDo rje gdan pa mGon po rgyal mtshan. who was the head of the latter restoration project. protagonists of the phase of Tibetan activity at rDo rje gdan. the unsettled situation of Gangetic India under Muslim pressure remained substantially unchanged for the rest of the period under study. 73 Man lung pa’i rnam thar (f. subdivided into sPu [and] lTol (spelled so). and there was internal discord”). were the most prominent authority in gTsang. [The dispute] concerned the religious functions [to be held] as a commemorative liturgy for Sa skya lo tsa ba (i. The reason to fall into the lower realms increased exponentially”. for it mixes events attributed to the fifties of the 13th century with those a few decades later (i.75 Monastic life was shattered. The event should be attributed to earth horse 1258 Ñhence before Go pe la became Se chen rgyal poÑbecause. including [the performance of] religious ceremonies for the enthronement of Go pe la”. were among the principal contenders in dBus. who fought against the ’Bri gung pa. The slightly later Deb ther dmar po. in our own house (lit. 76 Ta’i si tu Byang chub rgyal mtshan.123 lines 3). 75 Man lung pa’i rnam thar (f. despite the assertion in the letter written some time before by Sa skya pandi ta to the Tibetans that the Tibetans were a single lot. the political situation on the plateau continued to be widely fragmented. explains in his own words the etymology of the name Chags sdang (Si tu bka’ chems in Rlangs kyi po ti bse ru p. p.Tibetans at rDo rje gdan 195 lung pa’i rnam thar shows that the fate of the country was not only decided at the Mongol court. the passage under study is nonetheless precious. but a term (literally meaning “love and hate”) applied to the controversy between rival factions among the Phag mo gru pa (see Deb ther dmar po p. Sa skya pandi ta Kun dga’ rgyal mtshan) and various religious rites [to be held] at Chu mig ring mo.117 lines 4-5): “Sometimes. The Sa skya pa. opposers of Bo dong rin po che’s numerous entourage. there is a reference to this year. the most eminent Phag mo gru pa of the successive period. “nest”) the chags sdang (“love and hate”) [controversy] prevailed among the monks. It should be noted that Chags sdang is not a proper name referring to an otherwise unknown Tibetan party or family. These [strifes] were like fire burning. marked by a transition from a dimension that did not transcend regional boundaries to one in which dBus and gTsang were antagonist. but also reflected local realities. which explains the historical orgin of these factions among the Phag mo gru pa monks. The Sa skya pa quarreled with the Chags sdang. The lHa pa. spells sPu for sPu rtogs and lDol for lDol bu (ibid p. . as the famous letter of Sa skya pandi ta to the Tibetans would lead one to believe. It echoes the political dynamics of Central Tibet. It also shows that.123 lines 2-3). soon below in the text (ibid.e. who clashed against the Chags sdang.122 line 23p.254 line 21).5a lines 3-4) reads: “In particular there was an internal strife between the lHa pa and the ’Gri (spelled so) gung pa.e. ContendantsÑMan lung pa’i rnam thar saysÑvied for supremacy in Central Tibet. the Chags sdang controversy).76 Although historically inaccurate. He would leave Tibet only several years later.40). 78 Man lung pa’i rnam thar (f. 77 Despite an attempt by the lHa clan member Rin chen rgyal po (1201-1263) to send him back to Man lung by assigning him (again) to his gdan sa.5b line 2): “Having thought to go to holy places.6a lines 3-4): “He decided to go to a few noble lands of rGya gar”.5a line 7-f. Religious fervour.196 Roberto Vitali A retrospective calculation of events in the life of Man lung pa helps to assign these local struggles for supremacy to obtain a position of preeminence in Tibet vis-à-vis the surging Mongol power to somewhere within the fifties of the 13th century (see below n. and U rgyan pa. The unsettled times led Man lung pa to move south.5b). who did not enjoy the favour of the new Sa skya pa overlords.78). He stayed on to perform meditation for a few years at Brag ra and sDings chen”. slob dpon Byang chug dpal and Shag rin (f. where he was stopped by lHa pa troops sent to take him back. the master and disciples. This was the case of Man lung pa. following a protracted disappearance from the scene of central Tibet.6a lines 4-6. with the latter’s passing. see above n. he made the decision in wood rat 1264 that the time was ripe to proceed to rGya gar (Man lung pa’i rnam thar f.e. altogether four. . After being stopped by the lHa pa troops sent in pursuit and eventually managing to get on a spiritual retreat that lasted for almost five years. known as bdag lo. held a consultation. led some masters to leave the plateau. 78 Man lung pa’s departure for India in 1264 coincides too closely with the death of lHa Rin chen rgyal po in water pig 1263 not to have been influenced by the fact that. but the men of the lHa pa sent after them caught them at Gro mo. [Man lung pa] went to see lHa Rin chen rgyal po at Phag ri Rin chen sgang. The bla ma rin po che (i. whose activity was hindered by the lHa pa family. political and religious 77 Man lung pa’i rnam thar (f. to perform meditation that bestows spiritual attainments in a single lifetime and with a single body. the outcome of which was that Zhang made a verbal request (’phrin bzhag spelled so for gzhag) on behalf of all of them.5b lines 4-5): “For four years and seven and a half months [Man lung pa] performed meditation leading to liberation”. Man lung pa) dissuaded them [from taking them away]. Man lung pa continued his progress towards the lowlands in the south. Zhang bSod nams dar. Initially the lHa pa were able to prevent him from proceeding to India. He asked [lHa Rin chen rgyal po permission] to meditate for one [year]. This helps to gauge approximately the above mentioned outbreak of hostilities in dBus gTsang to sometime in the fifties of the 13th centuries (1264 minus some five years plus some intervening time). such as Tsa ri. who bestowed Man lung upon him. Man lung pa’i rnam thar (f. combined with difficult local conditions. while he was on a tour to visit holy places and lands. ’Jigs byed and bDe mchog plus Grol thig. Their chieftain Du mur was convinced to desist from further action in dBus by the sTag lung abbot Sang rgyas yar byon (1203-1272) and the latter’s emissary Zhang btsun. ’Bri khung pa’i chos drug gsar rnying. sKog chos and Tshin rta ma ni). He exercised secular duties. On him also see Deb ther dmar po (p. [led by] Du mur.79 Foreseeing gloomy days ahead in Central Tibet.276 lines 813): “After a while.9b line 2-f. bCu chos. A member of the lHa. He was ordained to the monastic vow at sKyor mo lung. that harm would be inflicted upon many sentient beings. Sangs rgyas yar byon gave gifts to Zhang btsun and sent him to the . gSang ’dus. Sum chos. reputed for bestowing the purest ordinations to monastic observance. disciples and sponsors. 81 sTag lung chos ’byung (Sangs rgyas yar byon gyi rnam thar p. Tshe gsum. One duodenary cycle after the foundation of Gye re dgon pa he established Gye re lha khang and Phag ri Rin chen sgang in water hare 1243. having given advice to monks who were devoted to him. and was the phyi dpon of dBus gTsang for nineteen years from the snake year 1245 to the pig year 1263. 80 A note in Myang chos ’byung (p. a large army of Hor troops. The latter was completed in wood dragon 1244.426 lines 9-14). He was active at this monastery for a number of years. Those monks did not listen to him. The son of sngags ’chang Grags pa ’bum and rGyu ’phrul ma. Man lung pa sent out warnings. he left for rGya gar. which were ignored. He is remembered in the literature for his contribution to save the peace of the lands in dBus because. he was able to dissuade the Mongol officer Du se ta ba dur. he belonged to the gNyos family of Kha rag. lHa Rin chen rgyal po (1201-1263) was a religious master of some importance on the scene of Central Tibet during the first sixty years of the 13th century.80 Indeed in the same 1264 when he set out to cross the Himalayan range. together with his nye gnas ’Dam pa ri pa. he was considered the last of the twelve rebirths of Mu tig btsan po. Tshig bsdus. In fire pig 1227 at the age of twenty-one he was chosen to be the abbot of lHa Rin chen thel. in iron pig 1251.81 79 A brief biography of lHa rin chen rgyal po is found in gNyos Kha rag gi gdung rabs khyad par ‘phags pa (f. disseminating teachings (Bang mdzod.10a line 9) which I summarise here. too.126 lines 2-11) and lHo rong chos ’byung (p. such as the Rwa lung pa. Later.31 lines 8-12) reads: “When he was twentyfive years old (1263/1264). when he founded Gye re dgon pa. bDun chos. [Man lung pa] said. he returned to rGya gar and proceeded to Po ta la [on his second visit]”. and decided to go to India. He gave teachings at this monastery for four years until iron hare 1231. Knowing that [this would happen] for sure. Mongol troops advanced to Central Tibet in order to prepare the way for ’gro mgon ’Phags pa’s return to Sa skya. from causing a further blood bath. came to Tibet. who had invaded dBus on the eve of Mong gor rgyal po’s ascension to the throne of the Mongols.Tibetans at rDo rje gdan 197 pressure upon him was lifted. 83 See. They became subdued. The case mentioned here is proverbial. with a grain of political acumen. famines are indicative of troubled political and social conditions. a paper read at the International Conference “Exploring Tibet’s History and Culture”. upon returning from his second sojourn at rDo rje gdan at an unspecified time after iron horse 1270. but they actually fled due to the heavy taxation imposed by Sa skya.82 an event the master had foretold with his clairvoyance according to his biographies. held at Delhi University in November 2009). However. who numbered in the thousands. should theoretically be considered so in the case they affect the rich and poor indiscriminately. 84 Rather than earthquakes which.737 lines 18-21): “Then. Drought was accompanied by excessive taxation imposed by the Mongol/Sa skya pa authorities. dpon chen Kun dga’ bzang po burned down U rgyan pa’s monastery of sBud skra/sBu tra. 82 lHo rong chos ’byung (p. The fire of sBu tra has the garb of a rehearsal for the destruction of ’Bri gung in the gling log of iron tiger 1290. They officially took shelter in the Kathmandu Valley. due to the fact that there was a one night halt on the way. owing to a drought in Tibet. As mentioned above. They made prostrations”. . [U rgyan pa] went then to sBu tra and restored the gzim khang with rgyal bu A rog che acting as sponsor”. they affect only the poor. given his tense relations with the Sa skya pa. the men who carried [Zhang btsun’]s residential tent (gzims gur) on their head had the vision that Thug rje chen po was sitting [on their heads]. he gave a prophecy that it will be destroyed”. He rolled up [a bunch of] prayers [as gifts for them]. U rgyan pa’i rnam thar rgyas pa (p. as said by a dge bshes of this school who was in Kathmandu at the time (see above n. U rgyan pa became the head of the Tibetans exiled in Bal po. dpon chen Kun dga’ bzang po destroyed sBu tra’ (spelled as) mchod khang.84 encampment of the Hor. dpon chen Kun dga’ zang po in particular. This helps to fix the destruction of the sBu tra “palace”/mchod khang to 1272 and the restoration of sBu tra to 1276 (see my “Grub chen U rgyan pa and the Mongols of China”. I would say. more often than not in the Tibetan tradition are wondrous but improbable signs that accompany extraordinary events in the life of great religious personalities and at the time of their death. On the occasion of travelling to the encampment of the Hor. by [my] definition.83 or. Famines. In water monkey 1272. for instance. and so their evil minds were pacified.69). in most cases. Droughts assume proportions that lead to famines often owing to causes engendered by partisan human contributions that turn natural conditions to the worse. having listened to the calumny of others. and thus when the Mongol law had already been enforced in Tibet.198 Roberto Vitali For his part U rgyan pa had to bear the brunt of Sa skya pa hostility.170 line 11-12): “When the palace at dpal ldan sBud skra was under construction. bSod nams ’od zer. Their occurrence on the plateau should be the topic of historical and anthropological research. This did not happen but they did come close to meeting. When the situation became unbearable in Ma ga dha on account of renewed lethal attacks by the Muslims on the Buddhist centres of learning. especially in the case of their Dus ’khor training. ~pressure by the Sa skya/Mongol alliance (U rgyan pa). the symbol of Tibetans taking the road to exile? All one can say is that. rDo rje gdan became. U rgyan pa received Tshad ma’i lung from bcom ldan Rig pa’i ral gri. the evidence arising from linking their individual stories seems to indicate that these masters formed a kind of collateral (or unofficial) cultural movement. Man lun pa’s reluctance to go back to the plateau. 86 These masters went to Bodhgayā because of: ~their own’s clan consolidated tradition of getting teachings from the Noble Land (dPyal members).737 lines 6-7): “[U rgyan pa’s visit to rDo rje gdan] coincided with [the presence of] Byang chub dpal. I add here that U rgyan pa received Dus ’khor based on the systems of Tsa/rTsa mi Sangs rgyas grags pa and Chag lo tsa ba Chos rje dpal from Bo dong Rin chen rtse mo (?-?). and also studied it under rGod tshang pa.174 line 2). owing to persistent religious zeal and changed political conditions in Tibet. U rgyan pa saw Man lung pa’s nye gnas at Bodhgayā. 85 lHo rong chos ’byung (p. in most cases. Man lung pa preferred to proceed to South India than to return to Tibet. One wonders whether their paths crossed. as U rgyan pa had. ranging from a family tradition and personal motivation to political dissent and the need to go into exile. by common training (especially Dus ’khor and sByor rgyud). . the way to rDo rje gdan was frequented by Tibetan masters during a time of destruction of Gangetic Buddhism as much as when Ma ga dha was peaceful. ~the significance of the enterprise (the Chag uncle and nephew). 87 I have briefly documented in the present article the existence of common grounds between some of these masters.86 these masters were linked. called sNar thang Rig ral by Si tu pan chen Chos kyi ’byung gnas in the passage that deals with this interaction (Karma Kam tshang gi gser ’phreng p. shared values. the nye gnas of grub chen Man lung pa who had gone to lHo dPal gyi ri to offer his prayers”. As for his relationship with at least one master belonging to the phase under study. despite the uneasy situation in Ma ga dha.87 Although in the extant literature they have been examined separately. in some instances. from earlier being a proverbial destination of Tibetan pilgrimage.Tibetans at rDo rje gdan 199 Man lung pa took a different direction from U rgyan pa’s temporary exile. Driven to rDo rje gdan by various reasons.85 Can one then think that. ~internal dissent in Tibet (Man lung pa). is palpable in the rnam thar. personal interactions and similar activities. while the latter’s master was away from rDo rje gdan for one of his Indian pilgrimages. 89 rGa lo. since the presence of Tibetans at rDo rje gdan at the time was circumscribed to disciples of A bhayā kā ra and their disciples. .1495 lines 18-20) preserves the names of other visitors to Bodhgayā.1497 line 13). 89 dPa’ bo gtsug lag ’phreng ba confirms the evidence of the colophons of the religious works. most of them obscure pilgrims active in the period immediately preceding the phase dealt with in this paper: sPong zho gSal ba grags.200 Roberto Vitali Addendum The immediate precursors (first. mKhas pa’i dga’ ston (p. Kher gang ’Khor lo grags.88 In his biographical notes on the South Indian master A bhayā kā ra [gupta] who was mainly active in Ma ga dha. The        88 This gNyan lo tsa ba cannot have been the famous gNyan lo tsa ba Darma grags who attented the 1076 Tho ling chos ’khor and was allegedly assassinated by Rwa lo tsa ba (1016-?). comparable to the one under study in this article. These practitioners were another wave of Tibetans in search of teachings at the cradle of Buddhist world.1496 line 1-p. too. they did not form a fully fledged phase. that this Indian master was the teacher of Tsa/rTsa mi lo tsa ba (mKhas pa’i dga’ ston p. or else he would have been assigned in this passage of dPa’ bo gtsug lag ’phreng ba’s work to one generation too late. in which A bhayā kā ra is mentioned. rGa lo the elder and sTengs lo tsa ba cannot be placed into a precise span of years. Rong gling lo tsa [ba]. rGa lo tsa ba gZhon nu dpal and sTengs Tshul khrims ’byung gnas. In my view. The frequentation of rDo rje gdan by Tsa/rTsa mi. dPa’ bo gtsug lag ’phreng ba says that he was a teacher of Tsa mi/rTsa mi and all of them. lDi ri Chos grags and Tre bo Shes rab dpal. second and third quarter of the 12th century) Tsa/rTsa mi lo tsa ba and his disciples The influx of other Tibetans at rDo rje gdan was not marginal during the days of Tsa/rTsa mi lo tsa ba Sangs rgyas grags pa. along with two better known Buddhist proponents: She’u lo tsa [ba] and gNyan lo [tsa ba] (the younger?). This goes against the statement in the biography of rGa lo tsa ba gZhon nu dpal penned by Zhang g. this perhaps being a sign that the latter was in Bodhgayā after the Indian master’s demise. is included among A bhayā kā ra’s disciples but not sTengs.Yu brag pa that Tsa/rTsa mi was the teacher and A bhayā kā ra his disciple. and then reached rDo rje gdan.360 lines 5-7).171). My understanding is that his family originally was from Mi nyag Gha (also spelled in several other manners). those of rGa lo are approximate (see above and n. rGa lo gZhon nu dpal’s life activities: a synopsis I dedicate a few more lines to rGa lo tsa ba gZhon nu dpal owing to the existence of a rnam thar recording his deeds. He met the great A bhayā  90 ’Gos lo tsa ba says that A bhayā kā ra was a disciple of Nā ro pa (Deb ther sngon po p.90 Consequently the activity of Tsa/rTsa mi and rGa lo the elder at Bodhgayā may be provisionally assigned to before the end of the first quarter of the 12th century and an unspecifiable number of years thereafter.Yu brag pa (1123-1193 or 1194).362 lines 1-4).931 lines 18-19.Tibetans at rDo rje gdan 201 dates of Tsa/rTsa mi are not known. I summarise here the main facts in his life. the clan name rGa probably being indicative of this provenance. another and perhaps more reliable is iron dragon 1040. he is called ’Khams (spelled so) pa rGa lo a few times in his biography. This biography is marginally more articulated on the issue of the years spent by rGa lo the elder in Ma ga dha than the longer periods he was in Tibet. Despite being a native of A mdo. An earlier one is fire hare 1027. p. namely The’u chung of rTsong ka (a beautiful. His early years He was born to rGa’ (spelled so) Shes rab rtse and Nyang bza’ Tshe sprul at a place south of dByar mo thang in A mdo. also Tshe tan zhab drung. p.  rGya gar After rather undescribed studies in his youth. Indeed the alleged birth date of A bhayā kā ra in 1005 (d. bsTan rtsis kun las btus pa p. also see Ar.177). where he searched for a true teacher (ibid. The bstan rtsis of Sum pa mkhan po’s dPag bsam ljon bzang says that A bhayā kā ra died in wood snake 1125 at the remarkable age of 121 (ibid. 1125 at the age of 121) would have allowed him to meet Nā ro pa in both the cases of the latter’s death in 1027 or 1040.839. Macdonald. . he left Tibet for rGya gar aged thirty (ibid. penned by his disciple bla ma Zhang g. Having collected gold in sTod lung phu.361 line 4). he stayed in Bal po on the way. archaic spelling) (dPal gyi rnam thar p. Is ’Gos lo tsa ba’s statement that A bhayā kā ra had a long life an attempt to accommodate his claim that he was a disciple of Nā ro pa with the fact that he met and gave teachings to Tsa/rTsa mi and rGa lo the elder? The year of Nā ro pa’s death is controversial.6). “Le Dhānyakaaka de Man-lungs guru” p. p. 372 lines 2-3). He is credited by his biography to have defeated unspecified Du ru kha troops (ibid. p.371 line 7-p.363 line 4. Shing rta can.362 lines 4-5.376 line 7)). dead    91 In order to calculate the number of years spent by rGa lo in Ma ga dha one needs to collate the indications in various passages of dPal gyi rnam thar (p.365 lines 1-2.372 line 7). p. he was a yogin and great performer of miracles.91 Being a disciple of Tsa/rTsa mi and Abhayā kā ra.370 line 2 and line 6.365 lines 4-7. or his bringing down.365 line 4. p. p. p.365 lines 4-7. p. p.371 line 2). p. This synopsis of the biography does not do justice to the many details mentioned by Zhang g.371 line 2.Yu brag pa about rGa lo’s prolonged sojourn in Ma ga dha.369 line 2). to become his mchod gnas despite Hindu resistance (ibid. p. He had spiritual powersÑespecially the siddhi-s he attained at bSil ba’i tshal. ~miracles he performedÑthe recurring one was that he sat in the lotus posture levitating over water. p. ibid. ~monasteriesÑBho/Gho sa kra ma at the outskirts of Na len tra (ibid. p. was that there was no point in coming to rGya gar to end up studying under a Tibetan (ibid.366 line 1. p. p. his taking the aspect of a snake to scare away Hindu-s.375 line 3).362 lines 3-4. practising the system of Tsa/rTsa mi (ibid. In Ma ga dha he engaged in strict religious practiceÑmostly penance and meditation (ibid. p. p. Nya tro ta (ibid. p.372 line 1) and Nag po chen po (ibid. p. p. The biography mentions: ~holy sitesÑrDo rje gdan (ibid. p. and p.372 line 7). ~statuesÑShiva at Nya tro ta (ibid.369 line 2. p. p. His mental argumentation. p. ~templesÑSangs rgyas gdam bzhi’i lha khang (ibid.374 line 7).366 line 2-p. but this is anachronistic. . p. He eventually chose Tsa/rTsa mi owing to this master’s greatness (ibid. Kho kha rag pa.362 line 4-p. p. p.373 lines 5-p.364 line 1). but he was reluctant to follow this advice.202 Roberto Vitali kā ra who recommended Tsa/rTsa mi lo tsa ba.375 line 2).365 lines 1-2.372 line 7)Ñbut was also invited by the local ruler.363 line 4.365 lines 1-2. p. for which he is famous. ~buildingsÑthe three floor high residence of Tsa/rTsa mi (ibid.363 line 3).371 line 7) and Bya rgod phung po’i ri (ibid.376 line 4). Na len tra (spelled so.376 line 6) at Na len tra (ibid. p.374 line 3). p. p. He spent at least thirteen years and nine months in rGya gar. p. gSil ba’i tshal (ibid. especially those religious.364 line 3-7). a sign of yoga practice.366 line 1.370 line 3). p. for the troops of Islam had not yet advanced to the Gangetic plain in his days. which deserve an extensive study. p.366 line 2-p. p. sPyan ras gzigs on the left side of Nya tro ta (ibid.365 line 4. he became an expert of Dus ’khor and sByor drugÑlike most of the masters I deal with in this study. Tibetans at rDo rje gdan 203 on the ground. He then proceeded to Sog (in Nag chu kha). p. sPyan ras gzigs. Khams and Nag shod Having proceeded to Eastern Tibet. where. dBus gTsang and eastern Byang thang Back to Tibet (ibid.381 lines 2-4). p.377 line 6-p. p. In all these localities he performed miracles and had extraordinary visions.371 lines 3-4. North of dBus. p. p.364 line 1) and gDug spu re ba (ibid. He went back to his native place in A mdo. ’Od zer can (ibid. his sponsor from the ru ba of Sog. ~Indian religious mastersÑA bhayā kā ra (ibid. p. where he found that his parents had died in the meantime (ibid. p.378 line 4p.375 lines 4-5).372 lines 12).379 line 7-p. p. p. including its island Se mo do.364 line 3). Back to Khams. donated much gold to him (ibid. mGon po phyag gnyis pa and phyag bzhi pa. where he defeated a chos log pa who practised a system called Ma cig ma rje cig ma lha cig ma (ibid. he witnessed the destruction of monasteries in Khams sgang. p.365 lines 2-3. p. p. p. lHa bzangs.380 line 4).380 line 5-p. then in g.380 lines 1-4). p. p. and also ~visionsÑsGrol ma.362 lines 34.378 line 2) and then went to dBus (ibid.363 line 7-p. He gave teachings at Gyang dmar of Nag shod Dral (spelled so) ’khar (ibid. he was in La stod (lHo or Byang?).379 line 2). and the zhing skyong of the cemetery bSil ba’i tshal. Ba gi shwa ra from U rgyan (ibid.363 lines 6-7.377 line 6). at Nam (spelled so) shod Grab ’khar (ibid. p.381 lines 5-6).380 line 1). p. a big bird by means of a single glance (this happened upon leaving Bya rgod phung po’i ri.382 line 1). where he had the vision of Don yod grub pa (ibid. he rebuilt them (ibid. p.373 line 5).379 line 2). p. He reopened paths in the flooded gorges of the Nag chu by performing the miracle of splitting the water asunder (ibid.379 line 7). p. He spent one year in Byang (ibid. p. ~Indian rulersÑShing [rta] can and Ra ma phala (ibid. again in La stod (lHo or Byang?) and at ’Gor rdzong brag (in La stod?) (ibid. p. he stayed at gNam mtsho for five years.365 lines 6-7).383 line 2) and then returned to dBus. p.363 lines 6-7.380 line 5).Yo ru (ibid. an allusion to this holy place where he stayed for three months?) (ibid. At that time he received an invitation by the Chinese emperor but run away from it (ibid. p.378 lines 2-4). p. p.382 line 6-p.381 line 7-p. p.363 lines 2-3.    . who transformed into a snake slithering from the roots of a tree. he spent seven years at Kam po sNas (spelled so) snang (ibid.   A mdo.381 line 2). 386 line 1). in whose vicinities he received a grant from a Bon po of Rab rgang. p. A legend holds that the statue miraculously crossed the Ganggā by itself. he is the only one who passed away in India without returning to TibetÑbut this information does not help to establish an approximate date for his demise. The number of years of his interaction with Tsa/rTsa mi may define the length of his first sojourn in India. p.386 line 7). p.385 line 1-p. p.1224 lines 15-17).1226 line 9). He interacted with his disciples in dBus (ibid.384 line 5) and then went to Yer pa. He put his training to good profit. the biography comes to an end with a long description of the circumstances leading to his death and the ensuing funerary rites (ibid. and stayed there for three years (ibid.   sTengs lo tsa ba sTengs lo tsa ba Tshul khrims ’byung gnas went thrice to rGya gar (for a brief biography of this master see Deb ther sngon po p.386 line 7-p. This prompted him to recollect an earlier encounter with bandits in the latter area (in La stod?) (ibid. p. sTengs stayed in Ma ga dha for five years and studied under quite a few teachers (ibid.e.243 lines 14-18) says that Ma yo gom nag (i.204 Roberto Vitali Again he displayed his wondrous capacities and had extraordinary visions at several of the above mentioned localities.1223 line 14-p. may be assigned to the period around the last quarter of the 12th century. The presence at rDo rje gdan of Ma yo sgom nag. After announcing his demise during the followingÑunspecifiedÑyear (ibid. Once again some of these events were accompanied by an extraordinary performance. the black meditator”?)—included among the “eighteen close disciples” of sTag lung thang pa bKra shis dpal (1142-1210) and said to have been a mkhan po of rDo rje gdan—made a statue of his teacher at Bodhgayā and donated it to his monastery in Tibet.1225 lines 8-18). . p. whose ethnicity is unclear. “Ma [ha] yo [gi]. p. for he engaged.Yu ’brang of dBu ru he performed his trademark miracle of levitating over water for the sake of bKa’ gdams pa practitioners who did not have faith in him (ibid. in the translation of several religious texts. but none of his three visits can be dated. dBus (again) In Kyu ru g. He spent ten years in Ma ga dha with Tsa/rTsa mi lo tsa ba (ibid. It was chosen as the main image of Li ma lha khang at sTag lung. When sTengs reached Ma ga dha the second time. He returned to rDo rje gdan a third time. he found out that Tsa/ rTsa mi had died in the meantimeÑamong the masters I deal with in this study.92 92 sTag lung chos ’byung (p.383 line 6-p.1225 lines 18-19).391 line 2). p. back to Tibet.383 lines 2-4). Tibetans at rDo rje gdan 205 Bibliography Tibetan sources Si tu Chos kyi ’byung gnas.. Khams-sprul Don-brgyud nyima (ed. Mi rigs dpe skrun khang. Library of Tibetan Works and Archives.Yu brag pa brTson ’grus grags pa. dPon sras kyi rnam thar.). Kha che pan chen gyi rnam thar.1). Kha rag gNyos kyi gdung rabs: Anonymous. Two Biographies of Shakyashribhadra: Then Eulogy by Khrophu lo-tsā-ba and its “Commentary” by bSod-nams-dpal-bzang-po.Gyaltsan and Kesang Legshay eds. Lopon Tenzin Namdak (ed. dKar rgyud kyi rnam thar in Zhang rin-po-che’i bka’-’bum. rDo rje rgyal po (ed. dGe ’dun chos ’phel. Chag lo tsa ba Chos rje dpal gyi rnam thar bla ma’i gsung dri ma med pa bsgrigs pa. in D. Dam pa chos kyi ’khor lo bsgyur ba rnams kyi byung ba gsal bar byed pa mkhas pa’i dga’ ston. Huber (ed.). Tibetan Bonpo Monastic Centre. The Guide to India. Jackson (ed.). Franz Steiner Verlag. 50 folio dbu can manuscript. Chag lo tsa ba’i rnam thar: Chos dpal dar dbyangs. Karma Kam tshang gser ’phreng (completed by ’Be lo Tshe dbang kun khyab): Si tu Chos kyi ’byung gnas. bSod nams dpal bzang po. mChims Nam mkha’ grags kyi rnam thar: sMon lam tshul khrims. Pe cin 1986.Yu-brag-pa brTson-’grus grags-pa.). handcopy by bKra shis tshe ring after an original in the library of ’Ba’ nyag A teng gDan sa pa. Palampur 1972.). pan chen ’Os sprul (ed. Khyung rgod rtsal gyi rnam thar: Dol po Shud kye drang srong rGyal mtshan tshul khrims. Dharamsala 2000. Stuttgart 1990. . A History of the Karma bKa’ brgyud pa Sect (vol. Zhang g. Sungrab Nyamso Gyunpel Parkhang. D.). Kha rag gNyos kyi rgyud pa byon tshul mdor bsdus. rGya gar gnas yig. Dolanji 1972. mKhas pa’i dga’ ston: dPa’ bo gTsug lag phreng ba. mChims nam mkha’ grags kyi rnam thar bzhugs. bsGrub rgyud Karma Kam tshang brgyud pa rin po che’i rnam par thar pa rab ’byams nor bu zla ba chus shel gyi ’phreng ba. in Sources for the History of Bon: a Collection of Rare Manuscripts from the bSamgling Monastery in Dol-po. A Tibetan Account by Amdo Gendun Chöphel. Varanasi 1963. Writings (bKa’ thor bu) of Zhang g. New Delhi 1972. in T. Bai ro tsa na’i rnam thar ’dra ’bag chen mo: g. Si khron mi rigs dpe skrun khang. gTam rgyud gser gyi thang ma (abridged version): mKhas dbang dGe ’dun chos ’phel gyis mdzad pa’i gTam rgyud gser gyi thang ma zhes bya ba bzhugs so. reprint 1993. in Collected Bibliographical Material about Rin chen bzang po and his Subsequent Re-embodiments. Phug pa lHun grub rgya mtsho and mkhas grub Nor bzang rgya mtsho. Chengdu 1995. Kargyud Sungrab Nyamso Khang. in Ri dkar po’i brjid sgra. . Bod ljongs Bod yig dpe rnying dpe skrun khang.Yu sgra snying po and others. Deb ther sngon po: ’Gos lo tsa ba gZhon nu dpal. Deb ther dmar po: Tshal pa Kun dga’ rdo rje. dPyal pa’i lo rgyus kyi yi ge: third ’Brug chen ’Jam dbyangs chos kyi grags pa. Central Institute of Higher Tibetan Studies. Deb ther sngon po. computer version in thiry-three pages. Darjeeling 1985.206 Roberto Vitali mChims Nam mkha’ grags: Jo bo dpal ldan A ti sha’i rnam thar rgyas pa.22. Chab spel Tshe brtan phun tshogs ed. rDo je gdan rnam bshad rgyan gyi me tog. Deb ther dmar po rnams kyi dang po Hu lan deb ther. lHa sa 1992. Bu ston chos ’byung: Bu ston Rin chen grub.1.). Gangs can rig mdzod vol. Blo bzang nor bu Shastri (ed. Bai ro’i rnam thar ’dra ’bag chen mo. Pe cin. Mi rigs dpe skrun khang. Students’ Education Committee. bCom ldan Rig pa’i ral gri. sTag lung chos ’byung: Ngag dbang rnam rgyal. Si khron mi rigs dpe skrun khang. Delhi 1977. Bla chen dPyal gyi gdung rabs rin po che’i za ra tshags zhes bya ba dang/ gDung rabs Gangga’i chu rgyun gnyis gleg bam gcig tu bris pa las/ kun gsal me long che ba bcud ldan bzhugs so. dPyal gyi gDung rabs Gangga’i chu rgyun: bya btang pa Padma rdo rje.). dPyal pa’i lo rgyus kyi yi ge bzhugs so. Rin chen bzang po’i rnam thar: ’Jig rten mig gyur Rin chen bzang po’i rnam thar bsdus pa in Gur mGon po chos ’byung. Pad dkar zhal lung: Legs par bshad pa Padma dkar po’i zhal gyi lung zhes bya ba bzgugs so.. Chengdu 1984. dbu can manuscript in 50 folios. Mi rigs dpe skrun khang. Bu ston chos ’byung gsung rab rin po che’i mdzod. Rajpur 2006 n. Zi ling 1988. Varanasi 1986. Dorje Tsetan (ed. dGe ’dun chos ’phel. Sakya College. Krung go Bod kyi shes rig dpe skrun khang. sTag lung chos ’byung. Pe cin 2002. Chab spel Tshe brtan phun tshogs (ed. rTa mgrin tshe dbang (ed. Bod ljongs mi dmans dpe skrun khang. Tshig mdzod chen mo. no place and year of publication.. The Biography of Dharmaswamin (Chag lo tsa ba Chos rje dpal). Pe cin 2002. K.. 1984-1985. Bod ljongs Bod yig dpe rnying dpe skrun khang. lHa sa 1986. Krung go’i Bod rig pa dpe skrun khang. Gangs can rig mdzod n. lHo rong chos ’byung: rTa tshag Tshe dbang rgyal.). Bulletin d’École Française d’Êtreme Orient vol..). Indo-Tibetan Studies.1. 57 1970.). Patna 1959. Annuaire de l’Ecole Pratiques des Hautes Etudes.M.). tome XCIII. U rgyan pa’i rnam thar rgyas pa: bSod nams ’od zer.Skorupski (ed. “Identification de la tradition appelée bsGrags-pa Bon-lugs”.32.). Myang chos ’byung: Anonymous. lHa sa 1995. (transl. Blondeau A..Tibetans at rDo rje gdan 207 Man lung pa’i rnam thar: bSod nams bzang po. Steiner Verlag. Roerich G. Si tu bKa’ chems in Rlangs kyi po ti bse ru. Ta’i si tu Byang chub rgyal mtshan.26. Buddhica Britannica II. “Le Dhānyakaaka de Man-lungs guru”. Dung dkar rin po che. Tring: 1990. Bod ljongs mi dmangs dpe skrun khang. Jackson D. Dam pa’i chos kyi byung ba’i legs bshad lHo rong chos ’byung ngam rTa tshag chos ’byung zhes rtsom pa’i yul ming du chags pa’i ngo mtshar zhing dkon pa’i dbe khyad par can bzhugs so. Grub chen U rgyan pa’i rnam thar. Stuttgart 1989. . A Handlist. Macdonald Ar. The ‘Miscellaneous Series’ of Tibetan Texts in the Bihar Research Society. Secondary sources Blondeau A. lHa sa 1997. Myang yul stod smad bar gsum gyi ngo mtshar gtam gyi legs bshad mkhas pa’i ’jug ngogs zhes bya ba bzhugs so. Khams sprul bSod nams don grub’s gSung ’bum. Ve Section. in Legs par bshad gtam gyi tshogs Utpala sngon po’i do shal shes ldan dgyes pa’i mgul rgyan. bSod nams ’od zer. Rig pa’i ral gri’i rnam thar: bSam gtan bzang po. in T. Jayaswal Research Institute.P. Bod ljongs mi dmangs dpe skrun khang. lHag pa tshe ring (ed. bCom ldan Rig pa’i ral gri dad pa’i ljon shing. Man lung pa’i rnam thar bzhugs. Gangs can rig mdzod vol. Gangs can rig mdzod vol.M. dbu med manuscript in twelve folios. lHa sa 1983. in P. The Institute for Comparative Research in Human Culture.lag. .ge Pu. Oslo 1994.sgrig tshogs. Buddhist Sculptures in Tibet.208 Roberto Vitali von Schroeder U. Vitali. “Rtsa-mi lo-tsā-ba Sangs-rgyas grags-pa and the Tangut Background of Early Mongol-Tibetan Relations”. a paper read at the International Conference “Exploring Tibet’s History and Culture”.II. Visual Dharma. One: India and Nepal.stong ’khor. “Grub chen U rgyan pa and the Mongols of China”. “The Transmission of Buddhist Canonical Literature in Tibet”.gcig.. Vitali R.ling gtsug. jointly hosted by University of Delhi and Central University of Tibetan Studies Sarnath. Lobsang Shastri.khang lo.Kwaerne. vol.mdzad sgo’i go. XXXIII n. Tibet Journal vol.3 Autumn 2007..ba’i rjes dran. “The Manjusri mountain and the Buddha tree: a history of the dPyal clan (7th to 14th century)”. Tho. The Kingdoms of Gu..chung publishers. forthcoming. Hong Kong 2001. Dharamsala 1996.. Proceedings of the 6th International Association for Tibetan Studies vol.hrang. Tibetan Studies. Delhi November 2009. Vitali R. Sperling E. Meditation on the Nature of Mind (Boston: Wisdom Publications. eight years after’Khon ston . found in the Fifth Dalai Lama’s Gsung’bum (Collected Works). where the title of the text is instead Lta ba spyi khyab tu ngo sprod pa’i tshul gsal bar byed pa snyan brgyud yid bzhin nor bu. Khöntön Pelnjor Lhundrub. The work piqued my interest for a number of reasons. combining as it does Rdzogs chen.The Life and Lives of ’Khon ston dpal ’byor lhun grub José Ignacio Cabezón Santa Barbara In 2007. 2 The work is being published in His Holiness the Dalai Lama. One other thing piqued my interest: it was written by the fifteenth abbot of the Byes College of Sera. I have since translated the work. the reader will find an 1 Snyan brgyud yid bzhin nor bu lta ba spyi khyab tu ngo sprod pa’i khrid yig. I came across a short practice text called The Wish-Fulfilling Jewel of the Oral Tradition 1 written by ’Khon ston dpal ’byor lhun grub (1561-1637). in a manner that is at once easily accessible and philosophically interesting. 2005). the text was written in 1645. 609-696 (hereafter Shing rta). in Sngags rdzogs dbu ma’i skor gyi dpe dkon thor bu’i rigs phyogs bsgrigs (Gser ljongs bla ma rung lnga rig nang bstan slob grwa chen mo. this essay focuses on the author of The Wish-Fulfilling Jewel. both theoretical reflections on the nature of mind and practical instructions for engaging in this type of meditation. forthcoming). chiefly the biography written by his most famous student. and Madhyamaka approaches to the view (lta ba). It is based on the few Tibetan sources on ’Khon ston Rinpoche’s life available to us. 3 At the end of the paper. I found the work’s nonsectarian approach especially intriguing. it manages to combine. nya. The title of the text in the modern edition is slightly different from that found in the Fifth Dalai Lama’s list of “Teachings Received” (thob yig). Instead. and José Ignacio Cabezón. pp. 3 Ngag dbang blo bzang rgya mtsho. Khyab bdag’khor lo’i dbang phyug dpal’byor lhun grub kyi rnam thar skal bzang dad pa’i shing rta. This paper provides readers with a short biography of this interesting scholar. Lucidly written. the Fifth Dalai Lama. Little has been written in Western languages about ’Khon ston Rinpoche. 2 and so will not dwell on it here. Mahāmudrā. while reading through a collection of Tibetan texts published several years earlier in eastern Tibet. vol. entry 196. the ancient Tibetan clan whose members include the founders Rinpoche’s death. 794-796 (hereafter Bla brgyud). A short modern biography of’Khon ston pa is to be found in Sgo mang ngag dbang lung rtogs’foreward to’Khon ston pa’s History of the Yamāntaka Lineage. pp. he explains the clan’s connections to the deity Mañjuśr ī. 1. pp. the’Jam dpal gzhin rje gshed skor gyi bla ma brgyud pa’i chos’byung gdul bya’i re’dod skong ba yid bzhin nor bu’i phreng ba. Rulers of the Celestial Plain: Ecclesiastical and Secular Hegemony in Medieval Tibet. 1990).5af. 245. * * * ’Khon ston dpal ’byor lhun grub was born in 1561 into the famous ’Khon4 clan. p. 2005). Lam rim bla ma brgyud pa’i rnam thar (Bod ljongs mi dmangs dpe skrun khang. vol. translated in The Rnying ma School of Tibetan Buddhism (Boston: Wisdom Publications. 167-8. pp. 795.’Khon ston Rinpoche is also briefly mentioned as the teacher of G. The earliest Rnying ma biography of ’Khon ston Rinpoche known to me is found in the Guru bkra shis chos’byung. Gangs can mkhas grub rim byon ming mdzod [hereafter Ming mdzod] (Sichuan: Kan su’u mi rigs dpe skrun khang. Guru bkra shis ngag dbang blo gros. For references to’Khon ston Rinpoche in other Tibetan works. 1990). calls this the Mañju śrī ’Khon lineage (’Jam dbyangs’khon gyi rigs). pp. 2004). 4 ’Khon. Gubkra’i chos’byung (Mtsho sngon: Krung go’i bod kyi shes rig dpe skrung khang. Bla brgyud.yul las rgyal ba’i rnga bo che’i sgra dbyangs (Bound book. f. I have also consulted the entry for’Khon ston dpal’byor lhun grub in Yongs’dzin ye shes rgyal mtshan (1713-1793). Elsewhere in the work. 299300. in collaboration with Yael Bentor. A brief mention of’Khon ston pa is found in Ko shul grags pa’byung gnas and Rgyal ba blo bzang mkhas grub. with Tsering Gyalbo. hereafter Gu bkra. Guru bkrashis’s text appears to be the chief source for Dudjom Rinpoche’s biography. Tibetan Histories: A Bibliography of Tibetanlanguage Historical Works (London: Serindia. Gangs jongs rgyal bstan yongs rdzogs kyi phyi mo 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 g. 1990). . p. The Fifth Dalai Lama gives a long explanation of the’Khon clan’s history in Shing rta. and 768n10. a Study of Tshal Gung-thang (Vienna: Verlag des Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. as do most of the other biographies. this work was written between 1807 and 1813. vol. which relies. pp. found in Bdud’joms’jigs bral ye shes rdo rje. 336-339. 2007). 235-237. 677-78. on the Fifth Dalai Lama’s work. 1997). and in Bstan’dzin lung rtogs nyi ma’s Rdozgs chen chos byung chen mo (Beijing: Krung go’i bod rig pa dpe skrun khang. pp.yul rgyal nor bu (1550?-1607) in Per Sørensen and Guntram Hazod. see Dan Martin. hereafter Bdud’joms. 99. no bibliographical information other than the date. 1992). II. hereafter Gzhin rje gshed chos’byung (Dharamsala: Library of Tibetan Works and Archives.210 José Ignacio Cabezón appendix listing the masters in ’Khon ston pa’s incarnation linages (sku phreng). 1991). pp. f. ’Khon ston pa was born in the village of Skyong gar in the region of E. gives a fairly lengthy biography of Sgro phug pa. ’Khon ston Rinpoche himself came to be considered one of the major figures in the transmission of this Tantra. Ming mdzod’s “Tsewang Norbu. traces the lineage of the Guhyabargbha from the fourth Zhwa dmar chos grags ye shes (1453-1524) to the 18th abbot of’Bri gung. also state that he received from Nyi zla sangs rgyas (15th-16th centuries) various other Rnying ma teachings. Gu bkra. 337. pp. including the lineage of the “Seminal Essence of the Clear Expanse” (Klong gsal snying thig).The Life and Lives of ’Khon ston dpal ’byor lhun grub 211 and present-day throne holders of the Sakya school. 299-300.’Bri gung rin chen phun tshogs (1509-1557) to Nyi zla sang rgyas (see below) to’Khon ston Rinpoche’s father. As already mentioned. Shing rta.9 ’Khon 5 In Klong rdol bla ma’s Rgya bod du byon pa’i bstan’dzin gyi skyes bu dam pa rnams kyi mtshan tho. Ph. 299. f. ref. a work that is unfortunately no longer extant. 8 Gu bkra. and he came to be considered one of the lineage masters in the Dge lugs school’s transmission of the “stages of the path” or lam rim. f. S6552E_T. p. 274-314. 1987. he was the fifteenth abbot of the Byes College of Sera. we find an Homage to the Lineage of the Great Perfection Seminal Essence of the Clear Expanse (Rdzogs pa chen po klong gsal snying thig gi brgyud’debs). Dissertation. . and the Appendix.5 His father. Bdud’joms. 6 was an important figure in the transmission lineage of the Magical Net Tantra. 6b. Rgya bod du byon pa’i bstan’dzin. 336-37.D. pp. The Fifth Dalai Lama explains that the region where’Khon ston Rinpoche was born is called E because it has the shape of the Tibetan letter “E”.7 one of the most important tantric systems of the Rnying ma school. see Klong rdol bla ma. the son of the great Zur chung pa.8 ’Khon ston pa also played an important role in the history of the Dge lugs school. University of London. 7 The Magical Net (Sgyu’phrul drwa ba) or Secret Nucleus (Guhyagarbha. pp. 299 and Bdud’joms. 385a. Gsang ba snying po) Tantra is the chief tantra of the Mahā yoga division of the ” nine vehicles ” of the Rnying ma. he is called E pa Dpal’byor lhun grub. Both the Rnying ma and Dge lugs schools eventually came to consider him a reincarnation of the great Rnying ma scholar-saint Sgro phug pa. Asian Classics Input Project (ACIP) digital text. among the works of ’Khon ston Rinpoche mentioned by the Fifth Dalai Lama. Gu bkra. 9 See Gu bkra. p. See Gyurme Dorje. 1403-1479). an important Great Perfection tradition revealed by Ratna Lingpa (Ratna gling pa. belonged to the late 11th and early 12th century. Tshe dbang nor rgyas. no. 399a. 6 All of the old sources give Tshe dbang nor rgyas as the father’s name. This important master. Both Sgro phug pa and ’Khon ston Rinpoche are also found in the incarnation lineage of the famous Dge lugs master Lcang skya rol pa’i rdo rje (1717-1786). The Guhyagarbhatattvavini ś cayamā tantra and its XIVth Century Tibetan Commentary: Phyogs bcu mun sel. And in fact.” is therefore almost certainly an error. and Michael J. and Dge lugs schools. Jackson. pp. p. Samten Karmay. Mind Training: The Great Collection (Boston: Wisdom Publications. pp. Rgyal mo ’dzom. he saw the suffering being experienced by a dog. 13 Some sources state that he also took lay vows from the Third Dalai Lama at this time. Bsod nams rgya mtsho (1543-1588). 2005). Sweet. and Bdud ’joms. Our sources describe him as an unusual child. In 1570. as a child. p.” in José I. a teacher who had an attitude of “impartiality with respect to both the Ancient and New schools. f. 7b. ’Khon ston pa’s parents took him to receive teachings on refuge and the altruistic mind from the third Dalai Lama. 1993). 244-260. at the age of ten. “Mental Purification (Blo sbyong): A Native Tibetan Genre of Religious Literature. 11 On this genre of Tibetan literature. 197. But the Fifth Dalai Lama 15 tells us that ’Khon ston Rinpoche received lay vows from the Third Dalai Lama around age 10 gsar rnying rim med. we are told that he could recite the seed syllable of the deity Mañjuśrī from the time he was an infant.212 José Ignacio Cabezón ston pa therefore had close ties to the Sa skya. 9a. and that instead of playing ordinary children’s games. 14 Gu bkra. ’Khon ston pa was the eldest of the three. As the Wish -Fulfilling Jewel demonstrates. 15 Shing rta. As is typical of the hagiographical sources.12 His biographers also tell us that a sense of compassion for sentient beings never left him from the time when. 1999). and also by later scholars like Sum pa mkhan po ye shes dpal’byor (1704-1788). states that’Khon ston Rinpoche first met the Fifth Dalai Lama when the latter was 19 years of age.14 receiving the name Bsod nams rnam rgyal. f.. he also had a deep and profound knowledge of the teachings of the Bka’ brgyud school. 13 On the Third Dalai Lama. see Tibetan Chronological Tables of Jam-dbyas bźad-pa and Sum-pa mkhanpo. see Martin Brauen. p. and that it was’Khon ston Rinpoche . 12 Shing rta.”10 ’Khon ston Rinpoche’s mother’s. The Rnying ma School. 299. tr. Tibetan Literature: Studies in Genre (Ithaca: Snow Lion. 1996).” At the age of seven he is said to have developed a sense of renunciation as the result of secretly reading his teacher’s “mind training” (blo sbyong)11 texts during breaks between classes. by Alaka Chattopadhyaya and Sanjit Kumar Sadhukhan (Sarnath: Central Institute of Higher Tibetan Studies. Rnying ma. see Thubten Jinpa. It is not surprising. Secret Visions of the Fith Dalai Lama (London: Serindia. The Dalai Lamas: A Visual History (London: Serindia Publications. that ’Khon ston pa should be described in a variety of sources as a ris med master. This is how he is known in his biographies. Cabezón and Roger R. he would pretend to give teachings and empowerments to his peers. 3.. gave birth to three children. p. 53-59. 336 (Dudjom Rinpoche. therefore. tr. The boy learned to read and write “simply from being shown the written letters. at age ten. p. 2005). eds. 677) state that’Khon ston Rinpoche was ordained (rab tu byung) by the Third Dalai Lama at this point in his life: that is. 16 17 18 19 who was responsible for initiating the Fifth Dali Lama into the Great Perfection and other Rnying ma teachings. 388b. gsang phur mthong smon grwa tshang btsugs pa da lta dwags po grwa tshang du grags pa’di yin.18 a Dge lugs monastery. and states that in his day there were 300 monks studying there. he would have a profound influence on his student. This was a teaching institution in southeastern Tibet founded by a student of Tsongkhapa. f. who “founded the Mthong smon grwa tshang at Gsang phu.17 Rgyal ba bsod nams rgya mtsho would remain in Mongolia and in the Kokonor region of northeastern Tibet.The Life and Lives of ’Khon ston dpal ’byor lhun grub 213 seventeen. f. preaching the doctrine and establishing monasteries for most of the rest of his life. If this is true. adding that his great predecessor picked the boy out of a large group of children brought before him and asked that the boy be “ordained. . lists this figure as one of the abbots of the monastery. enroll in the monastery at this time. See Sde srid sangs rgyas rgya mtsho. however. On the date of his first visit to Dwags po. rather than Ming mdzod. p. however. Rgya bod du byon pa’i bstan’dzin. In 1574. This “ordination ” may be a reference to what has come to be known as bar ma rab byung. Dga’ldan chos’byung bai urya ser po (Mtsho sngon: Mi rigs dpe skrung khang 1991). See Zahiruddin Ahmad. p. p. including Rnying ma teachings. Rje blo gros bstan pa or Blo gros rgya mtsho in 1473. which claims that he entered the College at age 10. since we know from the Dalai Lama’s biography that’Khon ston Rinpoche did not receive formal novice vows until later in his life. Sino-Tibetan Relations in the Seventeenth Century (Rome: IsMEO. 197.197-198. 19 He did not. 1578ff. 8a: d[w]ags po grwa tshang gi slob dpon skal bzang rgya mtsho. who held the abbacy between E pa dge’dun lhun grub and E’i te’u ra pa dge’dun bsam grub. Shing rta. founder of Rgyud smad. Sde srid also lists the textbooks used at the college. a level of ordination between lay and novice. Bai urya ser po. ’Khon ston Rinpoche’s father took him for a visit to Dwags po College. who left Tibet the following year (1578) to become the spiritual preceptor (mchog gnas) of the Mongolian ruler Altan Khan. I follow Shing rta. This may be an error. Sde srid. Skal bzang rgya mtsho. from the master of the College. at age of thirteen or fourteen. where the boy received a number of long-life empowerments and some teachings. 1970). f. 131. spurring in him an interest in the tantric teachings of the Ancient School that would last throughout the Fifth Dalai Lama’s entire life. it means that although Dpal’byor Lhun grub only served as the Dalai Lama’s tutor for two years. states in his Gzhin rje gshed chos’byung. that it was Rje shes rab seng ge (1383-1445). pp. lists’Khon ston Rinpoche as one of the great scholars who hailed from Dwags po College. which today is known as Dwags po grwa tshang”.’Khon ston pa.”16 This may be the last time that ’Khon ston Rinpoche would ever see the Third Dalai Lama. Klong rdol bla ma. 8a. vol. 205). chiefly mentions three subjects: Perfection of Wisdom (phar phyin). ’Khon ston Rinpoche’s teen years were spent mostly devoted to Rnying ma tantric studies. p. ’Khon ston Rinpoche began to devote himself to Dge lugs scholastic studies. 21 For a list of these teachings. whose authorship ’Khon ston Rinpoche initially concealed. 23 Bla brgyud. 23 ’Khon ston Rinpoche began to write his own works during this time. He was a student of’Bri gung zur pa rin chen phun tshogs (1509-1557). See Dudjom Rinpoche. . 9b-10a. In his seventeenth year (1578) ’Khon ston Rinpoche met his other main Rnying ma tutor.21 In this way. was remarkably well received. Sumpa khenpo (Tibetan Chronological Tables. f. also known as Sna tshogs rang grol. ’Khon ston pa was appointed to an administrative position at his old home monastery 20 He was a lineage master in the Northern Treasures (Byang gter) tradition. Middle Way (dbu ma) and Logic (tshad ma). but the Fifth Dalai Lama’s Shing rta. states that’Khon ston Rinpoche entered Dwags po College in 1580.214 José Ignacio Cabezón Instead. 794. mentioned above. as well as other instructions of both the scriptural and “treasure” (gter ma) genres. 11b. where he was tutored by his father. The Rnying ma School. The Fifth Dalai Lama tell us that this short text. and one of the major lineage figures in the transmission of the Magical Net Tantra of the Rnying ma school. It does later mention his study of Monastic Discipline and Abhidharma (’dul mdzod) at Dwags po. states that he completed all of his studies of the five classical subjects of the monastic curriculum at Dwags po. the boy continued to live at home. but almost as an afterthought. 12a. see Shing rta. Over the next two years ’Khon ston Dpal ’byor lhun grub received from this famous master “introduction to the nature of mind. He officially entered Dwags po College in 1580. Not long after the death of his father. Over the next several years Tshe dbang nor rgyas imparted to his son various important Rnying ma lineages. but the earlier Shing rta. informs us that this is when the work was written. perhaps out of humility. p. pp.” a variety of teachings on the Great Perfection. This text is no longer available. including the empowerment and teachings on the Magical Net Tantra. his Teaching on the Middle Way View (Dbu ma lta khrid)24 was written in his twenty-second year while he was still studying at Dwags po. Since’Khon ston Rinpoche did not receive full ordination until much later in his life. 1. 24 Dbu ma lta khrid. 22 ’Ol kha blo bzang rgya mtsho. which occured when he was nineteen or twenty years old. 676-677. 15th/16th century)20 one of his father’s own masters. it would be a bit unusual (though not impossible) that he would have studied Vinaya at this point. 12a. f. taking novice ordination at age twenty under the abbot of that institution. Shortly after completing his initial studies at Dwags po. For example. ff.f. Nyi zla sangs rgyas (b.22 Under this same teacher he also began his studies of the various subjects of the scholastic curriculum. Blo bzang rgya mtsho. Not long after arriving at Sera he did the traditional monastic “debate rounds” within the monastery. who hailed from Brag dkar. Harvard University. one of three colleges of Sera Monastery. Bai urya ser po. Born into the Zur clan. He also received various Tantric initiations and teachings form his master during the breaks between the formal teaching periods. In fact. ’Khon ston pa nonetheless decided to travel to Lhasa to enroll in the Byes College of Sera. Dpal’byor Bsod nams lhun grub is an interesting figure in his own right. 26 The Fifth Dalai Lama’s biography sees this as confirmation of his past-life connections to Sera. and then went into retreat for a short time. of course. he served as abbot of the Byes College before’Phrin las lhun grub. Lives and Lineage: Jetsun Chökyi Gyaltsen’s Ascension and the Secret Biography of Khedrup Geleg Pelzang.The Life and Lives of ’Khon ston dpal ’byor lhun grub 215 of E ri sgo chos sde. “Logic.” Doctoral Dissertation. 27 the founder of Sera Monastery. When he returned to Dwags po. ’Khon ston Rinpoche deepened his knowledge of the Indian texts under the tutelage of Dpal ’byor bsod nams lhun grub 29 and ’Phrin las lhun grub. . 795. Finishing his initial studies at Dagpo College. see the following note. p. 13a: ’gyangs med du gling bs[r]e grub. and already quite advanced in his knowledge of the classical Indian texts. texts like the four additional works of Maitreya. 15th century). f. He founded Sera in 1419. 32 obtaining the title of rab ’byams pa. 204. 1553). 30 This figure. ’Khon ston Rinpoche sat for an additional set of examinations covering this broader corpus of literature at Rtse thang Monastery. 32 Shing rta. 26 This is.” Shing rta. Shortly after completing the study of these additional texts. See Sde srid. p. preceded ’Khon ston Rinpoche as abbot of Sera Byes. Bla bryud. f. chap. At Sera.30 basing his studies on the textbooks of Rje btsun pa. 31 This did not bring an end to his studies.” 25 The monastery was founded by Gtsang pa ngag dbang bkra shis. 28 the writer of the Sera Byes yig cha. 29 Dpal’byor bsod nams lhun grub (b. 33 “master of myriad treatises. 28 Se ra rje btsun chos kyi rgyal mtshan (1469-1544). he began to teach. for he continued to receive teachings from ’Phrin las lhun grub on various texts not normally covered in the standard Dge lugs curriculum (at least today). 2007.25 He served in this capacity for a year. however. 13b. 31 This is one of the types of dge bshes “degrees. or textbooks. 27 Byams chen chos rje sh ākya ye shes (1354-1435). and was awarded the gling bsre degree. only mentions that he did the monastic rounds. 3. but also of Rje btsun chos kyi rgyal mtshan (or Rje btsun pa). On the life of this important figure see Elijah Saevan Ary. The Byes College was founded by Kun mkhyen blo gros rin chen seng ge (b. and does not mention any degree. the Great Fifth informs us that various events that occured much later confirmed ’Khon ston Rinpoche to be the reincarnation not only of Byams chen chos rje. “What will help to eliminate these interferences [to my lifespan]?” During a dream he had at dawn. 16th century). 34 He was the twenty-fourth holder of the throne of Dga’ldan. The Great Treatise on the Stages of the Path to Enlightenment (Ithaca: Snow Lion.” The Fifth Dalai Lama records an interesting episode in ’Khon ston Rinpoche’s life that occured while while he was studying under Spyan snga pa. by Joshua Cutler et al. One day. she replied. the candidate for this degree must show extraordinary knowledge of a wide variety of texts. 35 Lam rim chen mo. 20012004). She said. From this renowned master he received instruction on Tsongkapa’s Great Treatise on the Stages of the Path 35 and on a wide range of topics of both sūtra and tantra.” Fearing that there were obstacles to accomplishing his many religious goals. 37 Shing rta. see Tsong Khapa. to the time of the First Dalai Lama. he went to Skyid shod to study lam rim under Dga’ ldan chos rje byams pa rgya mtsho (1516-1590). and prayed again. ’Khon ston pa began to travel and to take teachings from some of the more famous scholars in the region. The master told his young student that he should engage in the practice of Lhamo Shra ma na 36 so as to receive this information through his own dreams. but rather by another institution. The lineage of dream prognostication based on this deity goes back. in the Dge lugs school at least. 34 He also spent considerable time at Lhas ltag Monastery. he became worried. where he studied under Spyan snga chos dpal bzang po (b. 14b: srod kyi mnal lam du bud med cig byung nas khyod la lo bdun gyi tshe las med zer nas/ chos ldan gyi dgos pa du ma sgrub pa’i gegs su gyur gyi dogs nas thugs’dzangs bar byung bas/ slar smon lam btabs/ bar gcod sel byed la ci phan dris pas/ tho rangs kha’i mnal lam du yod la/ tshe dpag med dang sgrol dkar kyi sku brgyad bzhengs na lo bdun cu don bdun thub/de nas bi byas kyang mi phan zer ba/. It is interesting to note that the degree was not awarded by his home monastery of Sera. Rtse thang. f. you will be able [to live to the age] 33 A degree higher than the gling bsre. The fifth Dalai Lama records what transpired.216 José Ignacio Cabezón After completing his formal scholastic studies. Candidates for the rab’byams pa degree had to submit to examinations outside their home institution to receive this title. His biographers tell us that he devoted himself to single-pointed contemplation on these texts until “he made realizations appear.. 3 vols. tr. For example. 36 This goddess is considered to be an emanation of Tārā. Dge’dub grub (1391-1474). ’Khon ston Rinpoche asked his teacher to engage in a prognostication to determine how long he (’Khon ston pa) would live. .37 A woman appeared to him [’Khon ston pa] in his dream at dusk. “You only have seven more years to live. asking her. “If you have eight statues of Amitābha and White Tārā built. and had ascended to the throne of Tsong kha pa a few years prior to ordaining’Khon ston Rinpoche. But there is nothing you can do [to lengthen your lifespan] beyond that.” ’Khon ston Rinpoche commissioned these statues on a yearly basis. p. He also lists there all of the teachings he received. when he was 34 years old. Dpal ’byor lhun grub. He was hencefroth known under his new ordination name.. p. In his History of the lineage. where he studied for four years under the renowned Mkhas grub rnam rgyal dpal bzang 38 He was the eleventh abbot of Sera Byes. these are also listed in the Fifth Dalai Lama’s Shing rta. 40 He was a student of Sgom sde pa who succeeded his master to the throne of Sera Byes as its twelfth abbot. and he lived to the precise age of seventy-seven. Tibetan Histories.e. 41 He was the 25th holder of the Dga’ldan throne and was a teacher of Gomdepa. . See also ’Khon ston pa’s remarks on Sgom sde pa in his Gzhin rje gshed chos’byung. The Fifth Dalai Lama states that ’Khon ston Rinpoche studied under this master in the water dragon year (1592). 99. 39 ’Khon ston Rinpoche would in fact write a history of the masters in the Yamāntaka lineage entitled’Jam dpal gzhin rje gshed skor gyi bla ma brgyud pa’i chos’byung gdul bya’i re’dod skong ba yid bzhin nor bu’i phreng ba. 16th century) 40 at Pha bong kha Hermitage. 42 He was the 28th holder of the throne of Dga’ldan. 138-9. Shing rta.” that is. i. 1599) as ordaining abbot and Dge ’dun rgyal mtshan42 (1532-1605/07) as “secret preceptor” at Dga’ ldan in 1594.The Life and Lives of ’Khon ston dpal ’byor lhun grub 217 of seventy-seven. He then entered Rgyud smad. 38 from whom he received the empowerment and instructions on the generation and completion stages of the deity Yamāntaka. entry 196. a work that is still extant and that has been recently published by the Library of Tibetan Works and Archives in Dharamsala. mentioned earlier. 43 ’Khon stonp a himself tells us that he studied at Rgyud smad for four years beginning in the “sheep year. pp. see the previous note.43 the Tantric College of Lower Lhasa. 1595: bdag gis lug lo nas lo bzhir chos grwa’grims. He became Dga’ldan khri pa in 1582. and 143-7. f. 15a. It may have been due to Sgom sde pa’s passing that ’Khon ston Rinpoche went to study under this master. see also Martin. ’Khon ston pa’s other teachers during this somewhat peripatetic period of his life include the great Sgom sde nam mkha’ rgyal mtshan (1532-1592). 16b-17a. ’Khon ston Rinpoche received full ordination from Dpal ’byor rgya mtsho41 (d. during the last year of Sgom sde Rinpoche’s life. 160. Gzhin rje gshed chos’byung.’Khon ston pa mentions that he himself received the Yamāntaka teachings from Sgom sde pa. 39 He also studied under Chos rje rin chen bshes gnyen (b. f. 20af. During breaks in his studies at the Tanric College he would often go to other monasteries. was brought to ’Bras spungs. p. 45 See Shing rta. ’Khon ston Rinpoche continued tanric studies at Sera under Dpal ’byor Bsod nams lhun grub. whom he calls Rdo rje’chang rnam rgyal dpal bzang. of the Nyi ma thang College of Gsang phu Monastery. though it is unclear when this might have been. 148. f. ’Phrin las lhun grub. ’Khon ston Rinpoche gives a short biography of his master. 47 These are mentioned in Shing rta. a student of Tsong kha pa. Throughout this entire time he continued to study both tantric and exoteric scholastic subjects under a variety of different masters. Blo bzang rgya mtsho (b. states that he was abbot at Nyi ma thang for only a year before becoming abbot of Sera Byes. 18b-19a. for an account of ’Khon ston Rinpoche’s reception at ’Phyong rgyas. for example. He also turned his attention to poetics and prosody. Baiurya Ser po. He learned that she had passed away while he was staying at ’Phyong rgyas. ’Khon ston pa was appointed chief teacher.48 He held this position for five years. Nyang bran rin chen tshal pa. In 1603 the young Fourth Dalai Lama. also mentions that he was also a scholar at Rtses/d thang Monastery earlier in this life.46 on the road to E. Four years into ’Khon ston Rinpoche’s term at Nyi ma thang. 1590). 48 This was a Dge lugs teaching college of Gsang phu Monastery founded by Gnyal rgod rin chen bsam grub (14th-15th century). During this period he accumulated 100. 678.000 circumambulations of Lhasa’s most famous temple.45 In 1599. Dudjom Rinpoche. p. for other tantric teachings and to engage in retreat. Yon tan rgya mtsho (1589-1616). 157-162. One of ’Khon ston Rinpoche’s own students. vol. although much later.218 José Ignacio Cabezón (1541-1602). who had been born in Mongolia. also held the seat of Nyi ma thang. placing’Khon ston Rinpoche between Rtses dang ba dgnos grub rgya mtsho and Gung ru kun dga’rin chen. Because 44 He was also known as Rgyud pa or Rgyud chen nam mkha’dpal bzang. On his return to Lhasa. the Jokhang. where a variety of masters and teachings are mentioned. f. 17bff. He continued his journey home to perform his mother’s funerary rituals. he got word that his mother had taken seriously ill and he went home to see her. 49 The timing of these appointments is a bit uncertain. and engaged in a variety of other merit-making practices on behalf of a patron.47 In 1601. or master (slob dpon). given novice vows. ff. The Rnying ma School. the abbot of the Byes College of Sera and ’Khon ston Rinpoche’s teacher. 1. ’Khon ston pa continued his practice and his fame as a scholar and practitioner began to spread. and installed in his seat. Sde srid. pp. at the age of 40. the Dga’ ldan pho brang. Bla brgyud. 46 See Shing rta. . lists the masters of this college. in Gzhin rje gzhed chos’byung. Despite several illnesses.49 became gravely ill.44 mastering all of the major tantric texts and rites of the Dge lugs tantric tradition. like Dga’ ldan and ’Bras spungs. ” Logic. 155. 25b. 57 See Shing rta. see the passage from Thu’u kwan blo bzang chos kyi nyi ma’s biography of Lcang skya Rinpoche cited by His Holiness the Dalai Lama (October 1977).com/page.53 one of the greatest scholars of the day. whenever possible. to meet and to study under the greatest teachers of other schools of Tibetan Buddhism: Jo nang pa. ff. and also f. “although he already possessed a great wealth of erudition. Lives and Lineage. f. in his teacher’s words. . and even prophecying him as later ascending to the position of “Lord of Pha bong kha. 22a. The monks followed their master’s advice. but more importantly. 140. 21a: khyad par byes pa’i grub mtha’i dka’gna ng [d] thams cad la’dris par yod pas. in 1611 he went to ’Bras spungs to take teachings on the Vajra Garland 52 and other tantras under Pa chen blo bzang chos kyi rgyal mtshan (1570-1662). 56 Shing rta.”56 So as to make it clear that his teacher was not only a textual scholar but also a great practitioner. 53 ’Khon ston pa mentions him briefly in his Gzhin rje gshed chos’byung. On a miraculous footprint said to have been left at Ganden by’Khon ston pa.dalailama.” 54 During his years as master of the Byes College. 55 See Shing rta. pronouncing him to be an extremely learned and holy being.51 Even during his time as Byes abbot. f. the explanatory tantra (bshad rgyud) of the Guhyasam ā ja cycle. 51 On the fact that early abbot of Sera were usually appointed by their predecessors. praised him profusely.”50 ’Phrin las lhun grub instructed the monks of the College to appoint ’Khon ston Rinpoche as his successor. The date (lcags phag) is mentioned by the Fith Dalai Lama in Shing rta. 148-152.The Life and Lives of ’Khon ston dpal ’byor lhun grub 219 of ’Khon ston Rinpoche’s great learning. ” p. 54 Shing rta.htm. 52 Rdo rje phreng ba. see Ary. For example. 24a-b. it is mentioned by’Khon ston pa himself in Gzhin rje gshed chos’byung. Sa skya pa and Bka’ brgyud pa.” http://www. pp. “he was familiar with all of the difficult points of the philosophical tradition of the Byes College. f.57 50 Shing rta. it is said. and because. online in “Concerning Dholgyal with reference to the views of past masters and other related matters. who. 39a. 25a: thos nor mang yang chog shes ngom pa med. 55As the Fifth Dalai Lama states. and installed ’Khon ston pa as the fifteenth abbot of Sera Byes in 1605.155. f. ’Khon ston Rinpoche continued. the “Great Fifth” mentions many miraculous events that took place during the rituals that ’Khon ston Rinpoche presided over at the Byes College. ’Khon ston pa continued to receive instructions from the famous masters of the Dge lugs tradition. p. ’Khon ston Rinpoche developed a close relationship with the Pa chen bla ma. his thirst for knowledge could never be quenched. were not from within the walls of the monastery. the Rin spungs pa. 27b-28a. p. p. the very year that’Khon ston Rinpoche became master of the Byes College. Yon tan rgya mtsho.60 Since the Gtsang pa rulers were supporters of the Karma Bka’ brgyud school. in conjunction with 58 See Shing rta. p.61 The monks of these two Dge lugs institutions. See Ahmad. 59 The initial shift of power from the Rin spungs to the Gtsang kings took place in 1565. Rulers of the Celestial Plain. The comparison must have seemed especially appriopriate to the Great Fifth because he considered’Khon ston Rinpoche a reincarnation of that very translator. in 1605.101. p. had gradually lost power. The Fifth Dalai Lama mentions some petty opposition that ’Khon ston Rinpoche faced from his fellow monks during his tenure as head of the Byes College. 101. however. where a certain Rong pa rab’byams pa is specifically mentioned as someone who found every opportunity to oppose’Khon ston Rinpoche. In 1616 the Fourth Dalai Lama. or perhaps in 1607. Despite being nominally in control of central Tibet. resentful of being under the control of the Gtsang king. See also Tibetan Chronological Tables. Sometimes the gdan sas enjoyed a great deal of freedom under the Gtsang pas.58 The greatest challenges that ’Khon ston pa faced. 55. Ahmad. the rulers (sde srid) of Gtsang. Sino-Tibetan Relations. Over the previous decades the former rulers of Tibet. the Pa chen Rinpoche became titular head of Sera and ’Bras spungs. Sino-Tibetan Relations. 60 For example. began to plan. 220. Baiurya ser po. and Sørensen and Hazod. SinoTibetan Relations.220 José Ignacio Cabezón Life as an abbot of Sera in the early seventeenth century was far from easy. died.59 By the time that ’Khon ston Rinpoche ascended to the abbacy of Sera Byes. The Fifth Dalai Lama compares this to the opposition that the translator Ska ba dpal rtsegs (9th century) faced at the hands of jealous ministers at the time that he invited the Indian master Vimalamitra to Tibet. . The following year. 61 See Sde srid. 94. p. were under the control of the Gtsang pa and Bka’ brgyud hierarchs. the Gtsang kings were also aware of the threat posed by the presence of Mongolian troops in the capital. when Karma tshe brtan rdo rje seized Gzhi ka rtse from the Rin spungs pa. But the final turning point in this political transition probably did not take place 1612. f. had substantial control of central and western Tibet. Gtsang pa troops put down a revolt by the Phag mo gru pa-s in Skyi shod. p. and had to turn their armies back at least once (in 1610) in their invasions of central Tibet. and took control of Gtsang. a reminder that the the great Dge lugs seats of learning were not immune from internal squables. this meant that all of the monasteries of Lhasa. the new political force. including the great Dge lugs gdan sa. at which point the armies of Gtsang had conquered all of northern and western Tibet as well as Rgyal rtse and Sne’u gdong. but from the outside world of Tibetan realpolitik. 132. but at other times those freedoms were curtailed. see Ahmad. at the age of 58. 36. Eventually. which the Fifth Dalai Lama sees as referring to ’Khon ston . f. p. See Tibetan Chronological Tables. ’Khon ston Rinpoche tried his best to restore order to the institution. the Dge lugs monks were allowed to return to their monasteries. tried his best to keep Sera monks from taking part in this uprising.63 The Pa chen Rinpoche himself fled to Mnga’ ris64 in northwestern Tibet. See Ahmad.66 both internal and external to Sera.The Life and Lives of ’Khon ston dpal ’byor lhun grub 221 Khalkha Mongolian troops. but that in fact the master simply knew that the time to step down had arrived. 67 Pha bong kha is located about two miles west of Sera. the Dge lugs monks and their Mongolian supporters proved no match for the Gtsang pa troops under the leadership of Karma bstan skyong dbang po (d. It was as a result of his long stay at Pabongkha that ’Khon ston Rinpoche is also known under the title Pha bong kha pa. ff. the Fifth Dalai Lama tells us. It was probably as a result of these political problems. that he is unable to write a portion of his history because the required text “was destroyed in the war”: dpe cha dmag gi dus thor bas ’bri ma nus/. ’Khon ston Rinpoche stepped down as master of the Byes College.67 where he decided to devote himself to more intensive 62 63 64 65 He was the son of Karma phun tshogs dbang rgyal. but the task was a mammoth one. Bde chen snying po was identified in his lifetime as the reincarnation of a minor abbot (mkhan sprul). 29b-30a. 103-104. Sino-Tibetan Relations. but rather meditated for a period of time at the nearby hermitage of Rtags brtan sgrub phug. On a prophecy found in the Rgyal po bka ’thang mentioning a certain Pha bong kha pa. It was the Lcang skya Lamas (see Appendix) who were considered the reincarnations of ’Khon ston pa. he moved from Sera to the nearby hermitage of Pha bong kha. fearing that he might have to become a refugee in Mongolia. this is a misunderstanding. states that outwardly ’Khon ston Rinpoche appeared to come to this decision after doing some divinations. ’Khon ston Rinpoche. after teaching at the monastery for about 14 years. and ’Khon ston Rinpoche himself returned from Yer pa. He in fact never lived at Pha bong kha. that. who had advocated a policy of non-confrontation from the start. but Sera had been sacked and was in chaos. and ’Khon ston Rinpoche. northeast of Lhasa. Although some contemporary scholars have claimed that the controversial Pha bong kha pa bde chen snying po (1878-1941) was ’Khon ston pa’s reincarnation. See Shing rta. and especially from resorting to violence. an armed attack against the Gtsang pa forces stationed in Lhasa.’Khon ston pa mentions in passing in his Gzhin rje gshed chos ’byung . 221.65 The situation must have been especially disheartening to ’Khon ston pa. but his pleas were ignored. In their revolt of 1618. 28a. and those that managed to avoid being massacred had to flee to Stag lung tshe. In 1619. pp. 1642). p.62 Many monks were killed. 66 Shing rta. went to Yer pa to wait as events unfolded. See Tibetan Chronological Tables. p. 223. For instance. that Zurchen was able to defend Rnying ma tantric exegesis at Tsetang Monastery during lectures he gave there in 1624. On the teachings’Khon ston Rinpoche gave to Zurchen. f. 2006). It was due to his training under’Khon ston Rinpoche. 678). See also the Fifth Dalai Lama’s remarks about the hermitage in Shing rta. Rulers of the Celestial Plain. f. Gu bkra. Zurchen studied under’Khon ston Rinpoche from 1621 to 1637. ’Khon ston Rinpoche devoted himself chiefly to meditation. see Shing rta. http:/ www. 55. p.’Khon ston pa’s Gzhin rje gshed chos’byung (pp.68 In this ancient retreat.222 José Ignacio Cabezón practice. both state that’Khon ston Rinpoche taught Yungtonpa’s (G. make clear. the Dge lugs pa institutions in central Tibet regained much of their previous power and property. p. this might already have been something of an established tradition.70 Shortly after moving to Pha bong kha. But the political tension between Gtsang and Central Tibet would continue for another two decades. the Chos kyi rgyal po srong btsan sgam po’i sgrub gnas pha bong kha byang chub shing gi nags khrod kyi dkar chag. 71 who would 68 69 70 71 Rinpoche. just southeast of’Bras spungs. f. f. 300. Shing rta.yung ston rdo rje dpal ba. which seems to have been available to the author of (and incorporated into) a modern-day inventory of the Monastery. p. The Hermitages of Sera (Charlottesville: Tibetan and Himalayan Digital Library. 141. The Rnying ma School. often receiving two daily teaching sessions from his master. p. 69 ’Khon ston Rinpoche made Pha bong kha his base of operations for most of the rest of his life. The war spread to Lhasa. 31a. . 338 (Dudjom Rinpoche. 4b. For a list of some of his main practices during this period. our sources tell us. the Mongolian troops were supported by Skyid shod pa and other pro-Dge lugs pa Tibetan forces. Zurchen is also considered the next lineage lama following’Khon ston Rinpoche in the Dge lugs lineage of masters of the Lamrim tradition. Interestingly. 147) makes it clear that at least two other individuals—Bde legs nyi ma and Sgom sde nam mkha’rgyal mtshan—retired to Pabongkha after their terms as abbot of the Byes College.thdl.org/collections/cultgeo/mons/sera/ hermitages/pdfs sera_herm_pabongkha. see Shing rta. f. staying mostly in his retreat throughout one of the most turbulent periods of Tibetan history. ’Khon ston Rinpoche began to teach Zur chen chos dbyings rang grol (or Zur dpal ’byor phrin las rab rgyas. and Bdud’joms.’Khon ston Rinpoche penned a small history or “inventory” of the Pha bong kha hermitage. 30a: de nas sgrub pa’ba’zhig la thugs gzhol. By the time of’Khon ston pa. He was an important holder of many Rnying ma lineages who was himself one of the teachers of the Fifth Dalai Lama. 30aff. see José Ignacio Cabezón.pdf. see Shing rta. therefore. Mongolian and Gtsang pa troops fought at Skyang thang sgang. 33a. 1604-1669). in 1620 or 1621. As Sørensen and Hazod. The Mongol supporters of the Dge lugs pas seized the city and drove out the forces of Gtsang. 1284-1365) commentary on the Guhyagarbha as well as the Seminal Essence instructions to Zurchen. a truce that saved many Gtsang pa troops from slaughter at the hands of the Mongols. Under a truce negotiated by the Pa chen Rinpoche. 35b. tells us that the Dalai Lama repeatedly told him that ’Khon ston Rinpoche and the latter’s student. 73 With the enthronement of the Great Fifth at Drepung.74 The Fifth Dalai Lama’s regent. When his disciples showed concern. at ’Bras spungs Monastery. See Ahmad. After recovering. the so-called Palace of Ganden. was acknowledged as a major lineage holder in both the Rnying ma and Dge lugs traditions. Although he did not travel much while at Pha bong kha. 384: sku tshe’i stod kyi yongs’dzin gyi gtso bo yin zhes yang yang gsung. like his own teacher. As on previous occasions. ’Khon ston pa did receive many visitors.The Life and Lives of ’Khon ston dpal ’byor lhun grub 223 later become one of the greatest masters of his day—a figure that. In 1632 ’Khon ston pa became very ill. They include practices of both the Ancient and New schools. he told them that there was nothing to fear. Sde srid sang rgyas rgya mtsho (1635-1705). he traveled the following year (1633) to the residence of the Fifth Dalai Lama. imparting empowerments and instructions to an entire generation of young incarnate lamas and ordinary monks. f. many Mongolian pilgrims began to arrive in Lhasa. p. given the events of the previous year. 382. and different rituals were done on his behalf at various institutions in and around Lhasa. “were his two chief tutors during the early part of his life. reassuring them that he still had about five years left to live. 38a. Sino-Tibetan Relations. Zur chen. Baiurya ser po. 109. The large numbers of Mongolians in Lhasa worried the king of Tsang. even during his own lifetime there were many individuals who described his 72 See Sde srid. There he gave his new student a variety of empowerments and instructions.76 The Fifth Dalai Lama also adds that “because of his great knowledge of the non-sectarian tradition. In the following year (1635). to the point where tears would well up in his eyes at the thought that the political turmoil of his day might lead to the decline of Tsong kha pa’s tradition. saw these foreigners as a threat. . p. 74 These are listed in Shing rta. another year of great political upheaval in Tibet. Baiurya ser po.72 He took novice vows two years later. and teachings from ’Khon ston pa on a variety of subjects of both the Ancient and New traditions. and ’Khon ston Rinpoche interpreted this as an omen of bad things to come. oral transmissions. the Fifth Dalai Lama spent a fortnights at Pha bong kha receiving empowerments. who.”75 In 1634 ’Khon ston Rinpoche once again became quite ill. 75 Sde srid. indicating the prestige that he had achieved by this point.73 In 1628 there was a lunar eclipse. p. 76 Shing rta. he recovered. In a very personal portion of ’Khon ston Rinpoche’s biography. In 1622 the young Fifth Dalai Lama was enthroned in the seat of the Dalai Lamas. the young Dalai Lama also tells us first-hand of the great reverence that ’Khon ston Rinpoche had for the teachings of Tsong kha pa. f. ” But the Dalai Lama goes on to defend the works. Shing rta. 38b: rje’di zhal bzhugs skabs/ ris med chos la mkhyen pa che bas grub mtha’mi gtsang bar gleng mkhan mang po yod de/ grub mtha’gtsang gtsang mo tshos [tshod] kyang/ rgyal ba tsong kha pa’i bstan pa la thugs zhen bcos min rje’di pa tsam dga’bar mchis/.e. and. explains that the two works were controversial treatises that were seen “by some as words that had The’u rang demons as their source. “did I hear him say anything that was motivated by the three mental poisons [anger. The Fifth Dalai Lama. came to understand and to have faith in the texts of the omniscient Blo bzang grags pa (i.” “However. empirically. “the measure of having a really pure philosophical view is whether or not one respects this very master [’Khon ston Rinpoche. Tsong kha pa). idle 77 Shing rta. an individual] who had authentic respect for the teachings of the victor Tsong kha pa. and his explanations were always flanked by the oral traditions of the lineage of the elders.” “Never.” he adds. as true based on the political events that happened after 1629. 79 This is especially significant since’Khon ston pa authored two texts (it seems in 1628) that predicted future events: (1) Five Prophecies that Explain the Sequence of What Will Happen in the Future (Ma’ongs’byung’gyur gyi rim pa bshad pa lung bstan lnga pa).. though born into the Mañjuśrī ’Khon lineage of the glorious Sa skya pas. and that he was capable of predicting the future. as practices that had many precedents in Tibetan history.”77 ’Khon ston pa’s great faith in Tsong kha pa is attested to in his own works.” 78 In addition to defending his teacher’s doctrinal understanding. that he had perfected the generation stage of Tantra. he cites examples to show that ’Khon ston Rinpoche had great compassion for others. ’Khon ston Rinpoche refers to himself as “Dpal ’byor Lhun grub. the Dalai Lama states that he witnessed many instances that confirmed for him ’Khon ston pa’s level of realization.79 The Dalai Lama also expresses great admiration for his master’s method of teaching: “In between the sessions of formal teachings. and (2) A Source of Happiness: Rituals to Bring About the Happiness of the Country as a Whole (Yangs pa’i rgyal khams bde thabs kyi sku rim pa phan bde’byung gnas). nor did he ever engage in stupid. who. and by others as sheer arrogance. a ’Khon monk. . For instance. that his divinations were always accurate.224 José Ignacio Cabezón philosophical position as impure. 195. f. 78 Gzhin rje gshed chos’byung. For example. desire and ignorance]. seeing them as examples of the clairvoyance of his master. 35b. f.” he continues. his conversations always consisted of historical anecdotes of the great events of the past. p. Despite the fact that his teacher always tried to hide his realization. in the final lines of his History of the Yamāntaka Lineage. the Dalai Lama also recounts several anecdotes to confirm the depth of ’Khon ston Rinpoche’s spiritual attainments. ’Khon stonpa managed to give his student many special instructions during this time. The master replied that if he had any choice in the matter. f. and the Fifth Dalai Lama and his entourage took refuge at the Rgyal lha khang in ’Phan yul.”80 At the end of his two-week stay. Various bad weather omens. the Dalai Lama returned to the capital. Mongolia.”83 The young Dalai Lama asked his teacher where he would be reborn. 83 Shing rta. 40a: rang dbang’dus pa zhig dka’bar’dug kyang/ rgya hor dbus gtsang sogs su skye ba len’dod ni med ces bka’phebs/ de yang thugs dbang mi’dus pa sogs ni dgongs pa can du nges shing/. In 1636 war once again broke out in Lhasa. and I don’t know how much longer I will live. of course. 82 See Ahmad. 40b-41a. and rituals had to be done on Arslang’s behalf. since eventually the Lcang skya lamas would come to be recognized as the reincarnations of ’Khon ston dpal ’byor lhun grub. He also warned him of his own (i.e. it would not be long 80 Shing rta.The Life and Lives of ’Khon ston dpal ’byor lhun grub 225 chatter. ff. f. happened a few years later in 1638..81 This. Although the Dalai Lama had planned to spend a few months receiving teachings from ’Khon ston Rinpoche at the hermitage. in fact. circumstances did not allow him to remain for more than ten days. In the seventh Tibetan month of 1636. Arslang visited ’Khon ston Rinpoche as part of his tour of the city. f. 84 Shing rta. central or western Tibet. occured during Arslang’s visit to Pha bong kha. the Dalai Lama assures us that his teacher’s words should not be taken literally. ’Khon ston Rinpoche told his student that the time for him to take full ordination was at hand. Nonetheless. 85 These events are recounted in Shing rta. is significant. stopping at Pha bong kha on the way back to his residence at ’Bras spungs. in fact.84 This.82 Once the threat had subsided. of ’Khon stonpa’s) impending death: “I am now 76 years old. 39a: bka’chos kyi’tshams la gsung’phros kyi rigs sngon’byon gyi lo rgyus/ rgan rabs kyi ngag sgros kyis mtha’brten pa ma gtogs rgyu mtshan dang mi’brel ba’i dug gsum gyis kun nas bslang pa’i long gtam gsung ba ni ma thos/. including hail. Arslang asked ’Khon ston Rinpoche whether a reconciliation between him and his estranged father was possible. as the young Dalai Lama was about to take leave of his teacher. he would not be reborn in China. Lest the reader assume from this response that ’Khon ston Rinpoche had seen too much strife on the Tibetan plateau. and that he should invite the Pa chen Rinpoche to serve as his abbot. . that serious obstacles still remained. 114-115. 40a.85 And. Sino-Tibetan Relations. The master replied that it was not. 81 Shing rta. and was ready to leave the Tibetan world behind him. pp. f. the victorious Khalkha Mongolian general Arslang arrived in Lhasa. 39a. On the 8th day of the 8th Tibetan month. however. the Fifth Dalai Lama built a silver funerary stupa at Pha bong kha to house 86 Shing rta. A canopy of rainbow light took shape in a clear sky. The Dalai Lama tells us that what was transpiring. and so.” 87 The funeral services were then performed. 42b. who was responsible for the final triumph of the Dge lugs pas over their Gtsang pa and Bka’brgyud rivals a few years later. 1637. was traveling. gives the exact date of his death as August 30. Se ra pa’jam dbyangs grags pa. Sde srid’s Baiurya ser po. unelaborated state of the clear-light dharma-body on the evening of the 11th. would order the murder of his own son for having betrayed him. f. ’Khon ston Rinpoche became slightly ill. The Rnying ma School. Various miraculous signs appeared. The monks’ rainy season retreat was observed. a sign that often accompanies the passing of a master of the Great Perfection. at the conclusion of the rainy season retreat. “missed the opportunity to see [’Khon ston Rinpoche] make his passage to the pure land. Tsogtu Taiji. who was twenty-one years old at the time. p. 90 Gushri Khan. By 1637 life at Pha bong kha returned to normal. he then recounts. but he maintained a joyful attitude. 89 Dudjom Rinpoche. 41b: de la dgongs gzhi che ba yod tshod du’dug kyang’di zhes brjod pa’i yul las’das. 88 For a precise description of these services. “actualized the profound. his expression one of utter joy. Mkhan ngag dbang bstan’dzin. peaceful. His conditioned worsened. and the traditional ritual cycles were performed. 679. he did have the chance to see his teacher’s body in meditative equipoise. eight days after he stopped breathing. ’Khon ston Rinpoche’s body emitted a pleasant fragrance and a glow that would not dissipate. 144.226 José Ignacio Cabezón before Arslang’s father. was secretly visiting Lhasa at the time.89 With offerings made by the Mongolian ruler Gushri Khan90 and others. On the 19th. is beyond anyone’s ability to put into words. and Smad bla zur blo bzang don grub. 87 Shing rta.88 As foretold in his dream by the goddess Shra ma na decades earlier. vol. 42a:’chi ba’od gsal chos kyi sku las bar do longs spyod rdzogs skur bzhengs pa’i rtags su thugs dam grol. the two “drops. f.” Two days later. p. f. in his words.” one white and one red. the leader of the Koshot Mongols. 1. even smiling and greeting visitors who came to see him. But then various bad omens began to appear. “although of great significance. indicating that ’Khon ston Rinpoche had passed from “the clear light of death of the dharma body into the enjoyment body of the intermediate state. ’Khon ston Rinpoche died at the age of 77.” 86 ’Khon ston Rinpoche. see Shing rta. appeared from the great master’s nostrils. The Fifth Dalai .” The Fifth Dalai Lama. On the 9th and 10th he took to looking repeatedly into space and laughing. lists four abbots of Pha bong kha after’Khon ston Rinpoche: Zhal snga nas dpal’byor rab rgyas. 2004). 417. his most famous student. 1-19. as well as Sørensen and Hazod. Sde srid. Sangs rgyas snang ba mtha’ yas (Buddha Amitābha). . and he commissioned a life-size statue of ’Khon stonpa for the hermitage. as I have argued in my Hermitages of Sera. Gene Smith.93 ’Khon ston Dpal ’byor Lhun grub is considered one of the principal holders of the Dge lugs “Stages of the Path” or lam rim tradition. p. the Dalai Lama also expanded the Pha bong kha retreat center. (2) the list of Lcang skya incarnations found in the introduction (par du bskrun pa’i sngon gleng) of the Collected Works of Lcang skya rol pa’i rdo rje. 16. a pivotal figure in the Sera hermitage tradition. ’Khon ston Rinpoche’s most extensive biography is the one written by the Dalai Lama. f. Rgya bod du byon pa’i bstan’dzin. 2003). Lcang skya rol pa’i rdo rje ye shes bstan pa’i sgron me’i gsung ’bum (Dharamsala: Library of Tibetan Works and Archives.” (http: www. As a tribute to his teacher. passing on this lineage chiefly to his student Zur chen. This list is based on several sources: (1) the list of the former lives of ’Khon ston Rinpoche’s found in Shing rta. Zur dpal’byor phrin las rab rgyas (1604-1669).91 Various magical signs occured on the day the body was finally placed inside the stupa-reliquary. Michael Henss. Baiurya ser po. pastures and livestock. and also Bla brgyud. (3) the incarnations of the Lcang skya bla mas found in Klong rdol bla ma. 44 et passim. Rulers of the Celestial Plain. 146. 2001). f. 44b. Among’Khon ston Rinpoche’s other Dge lugs students was Drung pa brtson’grus rgyal mtshan (17th century). This work. 399a.The Life and Lives of ’Khon ston dpal ’byor lhun grub 227 his teacher’s remains. p. This is not found in Shing rta. 796ff. pp. Baiurya ser po. 3aff. Among Tibetan Texts: History and Literature of the Himalayan Plateau (Boston: Wisdom Publications. See above. “Rölpai Dorje—Teacher of the Empire. and (4) E.asianartgallery. But the statue (sman sku) of’Khon ston Rinpoche is only mentioned by Sde srid. ka. f. seems to incorporate into its early sections portions of ’Khon ston Rinpoche’s own inventory of the hermitage. p. as mentioned above. 91 92 93 94 95 Lama tells us that the Koshot ruler witnessed’Khon ston Rinpoche’s body in equipoise after he stopped breathing. lists the various ways in which the Fifth Dalai Lama endowed Pha bong kha after his teacher’s death. Pha bong kha’i dkar chag (hand-copy of an “inventory” of the hermitage made available to me in Lhasa. and generously endowed it with fields.” both intellectually and spiritually. The Dalai Lama himself speaks of commissioning the stupa.94 Appendix The Incarnation Lineage of ’Khon ston dpal ’byor lhun grub95 1. 417. p. vol. who himself later became a teacher of the Fifth Dalai Lama. p. 92 An important influence on the “Great Fifth. p. for which he was fined 500 dngul srang by the Mongolian ruler. mentions that he believed that Lha bzang khan’s candidate for the reincarnation of the Sixth Dalai Lama was in actuality a reincarnation of’Khon ston Rinpoche. As an aside. The Zhwa dmar Rinpoche believed and publically proclaimed that Tshangs dbyangs rgya mtsho was the true reincarnation of the Fifth Dalai Lama (rje tshangs dbyang rgya mtsho ni lnga pa’i yang srid yin). in Ta’i si tu pa kun mkhyen chos kyi’byung gnas bstan pa’i nyin byed kyi bka’bum (Delhi: Palpung Sungrab Nyamso Khang. suggesting that these Dge lugs monks too were also opposed to Lha bzang’s choice of candidate. 2. vol.228 José Ignacio Cabezón 02. See also Tashi Densapa. 7-14. Rje btsun thams cad mkhyen pa lcang skya rol pa’i rdo rje’i khrung rab kyi phreng ba gtam du brjod pa ngo mtshar dad pa’i ljong shing. Gsang sngags rnying ma’i grub chen sgro phug pa (b. . The monks of Sera and ’Bras spungs. 04. and a lineage holder of the latter’s Guhyasamāja teachings. but is not mentioned in Shing rta. He is said to be a disciple of Nāgārjuna. helped him to pay this fine through their generous gifts. Klu sgrub spyan sngar shākya bshes gnyen (Śākyamitra). the eighth Zhwa dmar Rinpoche. pp. 06. na. He was one of the most famous Tibetan translator of the early dissemination period. I have Tashi Tsering of the Amnye Machen Institute to thank for this reference. no.uk/research/current. p. 03. 05. co. The comment is found in the Bka’rgyud gser phreng. The statement also suggests that in the early eighteenth century. Gaden Sung-rab Mi-nyam Gyunphel Series no. 11th century). nor is he found in ’Khon ston Rinpoche’s own History of the Yamāntaka Lineage. “A Short Biography of’Gromgon Chos-rgyal’Phags-pa” Bulletin of Tibetology. 360. He is identified as an Indian Yamāntaka yogi. Gshin rje gshed grub pa darban ātsarya (Darpaa Ācārya). dngul srang lnga brgya bsgrub dgos byung yang ser’bras kyi grwa tshang rnams nas gnang cha ches pas bde blags tu’grig pa byung. he states. 1971). when the Zhwa dmar pa was writing. 22 (New Delhi: Ngawang Gelek Demo. ’Khon ston Rinpoche states that Zur mda’ tsha hor po (1074-1134) “is probably the Lord Dropugpa”. Dpal chen chos kyi don grub (1695-1732). vol. New Series. 1990). He is believed to be a disciple of Śākyamuni. 49-50. in The Collected Works of Dkon-mchog’jigs med dbangpo. Bzhin rje gshed chus ’byung.’Khon ston’s reincarnations had yet to be identified with the Lcang skya line. Lo tsā ba ska ba dpal brtsegs (8th century).php) has also compiled a list based on one found in Dkon mchog’jigs med dbang po. Shākya thub pa’i spyan sngar dgra bcom pa tsunda (Arhat Chunda). 3 (1977): pp. that Byams chen chos rje was born 21 years before the death of the previous incarnation in this list. pp. 10. f. Grags pa ’od zer served as abbot of Dgon lung from 1630 to 1633. Chos rgyal ’phags pa. Sa skya pa blo gros rgyal mtshan (1235-1280). E. Shing rta. Se ra rje btsun chos kyi rgyal mtsan (1469-1544). 161. this master.e.96 96 See Smith. 12. 11. Spyan ras gzigs dbang si si ri pa. the nephew of Sa skya pa ita. I follow Shing rta. Bla ma dam pa bsod nams rgyal mtshan (1312-1375). 0 9. and was an accomplished Avalokiteśvara yogi. 0 8. He is not mentioned in Shing rta. ’Khon ston dpal ’byor (1561-1637) 14. who made Dgon lung byams pa gling his seat. Ming mdzod. 13. d. .The Life and Lives of ’Khon ston dpal ’byor lhun grub 229 07. He was the writer of the textbooks (yig cha) of the Byes College of Sera. clearly a reduplication of the previous entry. the teacher to Kublai Khan. lived a long life. f. Byams chen chos rje shākya ye shes (1354-1435). On ’Khon ston pa’s recognition as the reincarnation of this master. 1641). and the first viceroy of Tibet under the Mongols. 4a. f.. Gene Smith and Michael Henss identify this figure as Se ston ri pa. Although the date of his birth are not known. He was. Here. 26a. 3b. Among Tibetan Texts. p. Mkhas grub (or Lcang skya) grags pa ’od zer (d. Bka’ gdams pa glang ri thang pa rdo rje seng ge (1054-1123). He must therefore have been born substantially before ’Khon ston Rinpoche died. but the dates of this figure do not fit with the present scheme. 526-27. 1233. see Shing rta. nor do his dates fit into the present scheme. however. He was a disciple of Tsong kha pa and the founder of Sera Monastery. where we find the next incarnation after ’Phags pa is ’Gro mgon bsod nams pa (also called Bla ma bdag nyid chen po bzang po dpal). but Glang ri thang pa is found in Dkon mchog ’jigs med dbang po’s list. Bla ma dam pa. It should be noted. i. Klong rdol bla ma lists here Sa skya pa ’gro mgon chos rgyal ’phags pa. states that he hailed from the region of E. of course. he was the second Changkya incarnation. Lcang skya ye shes bstan pa’i sgron me (1717-1786). 18. Harvard University. He presently studies at the Sgo mang College of ’Bras spungs in India. He served as abbot of Dgon lung from 1688 to 1690. Lcang skya blo bzang dpal ldan bstan pa’i sgron me (b. the first97 Lcang skya incarnation. See also Smith. Among Tibetan Texts. 20. He served as abbot of Dgon lung from 1763/4 to 1769/70. 2002).” PhD Dissertation. p. 101 See Kevin Garratt. 164. 99 17. chap. 97 In some enumerations. See also Smith. 21. “Tibetan Buddhism at the Court of Qing: The Life and Work of lCang-skya Rol-pa’i-rdo rje. and the Tibetan diaspora: voices of difference. and one of the greatest scholars of the Dge lugs school. Tibet. Among Tibetan Texts. “Biography by Installment: Tibetan Language Reportage on the Lives of Reincarnate Lamas. 527-29.101 22. and by the authors of the Wikipedia entry. p. 146). see Xiangyun Wang. Lcang skya ye shes bstan pa’i nyi ma (1849-1859/75). by Smith (Among Tibetan Texts. 1871-1890/91). and p. Lcang skya ye shes bstan pa’i rgyal mtshan (1787-1846). Christian Klieger. the third Lcang skya Rinpoche. He was identified at age 18 by His Holiness the Dalai Lama. self. 89. Lcang skya blo bzang ye shes bstan pa’i rgya mtsho (1860/78-1870/88). pp. Lcang skya chos dbyings ye shes rdo rje (1891-1957/8). the eighth and present Lcang skya incarnation. “lCang-skya Khtukhtu” at http:/ en. 99 On his life and works. Mkhas grub grags pa’od zer is considered the first Lcang skya Lama. respectively. the different dates correspond to those suggested. the fifth Lcang skya incarnation. n. Among Tibetan Texts. Lcang skya ngag dbang blo bzang chos ldan (1642-1714).98 16. 1995. in which case all of the following would be increased by one. Lcang skya don yod rgya mtsho (b. circa 1980). who ordained him in 2004.100 the fourth Lcang skya lama. also known as Lcang skya rol pa’i rdo rje. Proceedings of the International Association for Tibetan Studies 2000 (Leiden: Brill. 472. the seventh Lcang skya incarnation. the sixth Lcang skya Rinpoche. and Ming mdzod. and Ming mdzod. 98 See Smith.org/ wiki/LCang-skya_Khutukhtu. 19.. 11. wikipedia.230 José Ignacio Cabezón 15. who apparently died in Taiwan. 100 For this and the next two figure in the lineage. ed. 529-530. 1995-99. . 170.” in P. It suggests that rather than possessing an accurate and intimate image of India. I see it as belonging to the larger series of projects which work towards redefining Tibetan knowledge about India and more broadly. is as its reputation suggests. we might be forgiven for imagining that his so-called Origins of the Dharma in India. somehow ‘accidentally’ born in gTsang. Translations are: Vasil’ev (1869).’ These studies are exemplified by the recent researches of scholars such as Aris (1995) and Huber (2008). Chimpa (1990) . especially in his earlier years. the Tibetan re-visioning process of knowledge concerning the ‘outside world. one shaped and vivified both by his intimate Indian informants and by his own aspirations. a monument of scholarly accuracy. which he is renowned for possessing. that instead Tāranātha created in his mind an idealized form of that land.1 This optimistic assessment might in part 1 Text is TARA6. This view was reinforced in his last writings too. the rGya gar chos ’byung 1608). In this small paper which attempts to understand something of Tāranātha’s ideas about his past and future roles in India.’ This has been based upon evidence which shows that. It looks at the model of India which Tāranātha believed he was part of. Problems of History In terms of Tāranātha’s understanding of Indian religious history. Rather. Schiefner (1868/1869). I am not suggesting that such research is limited to the person of Tāranātha alone. This paper takes a somewhat different approach. indeed his understanding of the entity ‘India’ itself.‘South of the Border’: Tāranātha’s Perceptions of India David Templeman Melbourne Introductory In several previous presentations I have discussed Tāranātha’s fascination with India and his literary recreation of himself as a ‘Virtual Indian. Tāranātha envisaged himself as an Indian. who. rJe btsun sgrol ma’i rgyud kyi ’byung khungs (TARA5. written 1632). that is 16th -17th centuries. Especially in his discussion of the otherwise completely unknown topic of Buddhism’s rise after its post-Pāla decline in the 11-12th centuries. according to Tāranātha. is an almost uncritical acceptance of the timeless and inexhaustible arc of Indian Buddhist siddhas. his apparently authoritative statements about Buddhism’s existence merely demonstrate the kind of wishful thinking which Tāranātha engaged in when imagining India and the state of its religions. especially in these later works. These were combined with relatively commonplace observations about Buddhism which Tāranātha felt constituted an accurate description of its trajectory. 2 These features include a prima facie coherent narrative as well as a strong reliance on earlier accounts as their basis for authority. geography. sLob dpon spyod ’chang dbang po’i rnam thar (TARA7. written 1600). written 1604). 2 These works include: bKa’ babs bdun ldan (TARA1. a surface familiarity with some dynastic events and names.232 David Templeman be due to its spectacular passage through Tibetan. There has been sufficient research to suggest that this is not at all the case. Perhaps it is for these reasons that Tāranātha’s Origins of the Dharma in India. Indeed if one examines Tāranātha’s other so-called ‘historical’ works with the same critical faculties. precisely the same sorts of flaws may be discovered in those works too. It comprised at best.’ Much of what purports to be an accurate summary of India’s Buddhist history is in fact a wildly inaccurate and at other times. even the assumption that there existed such a thing as ‘Buddhism’ in India at that very late period is utterly undemonstrable. quite unfoundedly speculative in nature. Added to this. Indian and European written histories of Indian Buddhism. . When examining Tāranātha’s writings on the extreme later period of Buddhism. we find not only historically unverifiable ‘facts’ but a wholesale adoption of spurious accounts transmitted to him by what I refer to as Indian ‘semisiddhas. was only rarely quoted by Tibetan historians who perceived its faults too clearly. Instead. Instead we find that Tāranātha’s knowledge about India was in fact quite thin. where it has often been employed as an apparently unimpeachable source. Nevertheless its coherent and sequential narrative style and the apparent depth of its content give an impression of solidity and trustworthiness. still peopled India in the 16-17th centuries. Those works which were written over some 30 years of Tāranātha’s adult life reflect the same sort of preoccupation with certain historical features. and a basic but often unrealistic. although being accorded such great reverence by Tibetans for its massive and synoptic overview. Among the specific important events and persons in Buddhist history in which he locates himself are: — as a close confidante of the Buddha Vipaśyi. He had belonged to Indian yogic groups before. 4. Moreover throughout his large Autobiography. 5. demonstrate to the reader that: 1. 3. Bodhgāya to where he is transported in visions upon the sight of Indian yogis. He wrote about these intimate involvements when he was 37 years of age in the second section of his Secret Autobiography (TARA4). 2. . the Buddha prior to Śākyamūni. In childhood visions he discovers that his innermost nature is identical and inseparable from that of Cakrasa vara. like many other Tibetan prelates.Tāranātha’s Perceptions of India 233 Tāranātha and his sense of ‘Indian-ness’ As a means of legitimating his sense of being Indian. Tāranātha makes it quite clear that he was indeed Indian in spirit. — being a student of Jo bo Atīśa The claim to have been in such notable locations and situations served to authenticate Tāranātha’s claims to ‘know’ India intimately. Tāranātha deliberately locates himself at certain epochal moments in Indian Buddhist history. 37 and 44. His true ‘home’ was in the very heart of Buddhist India. written at 59 years of age. he reaffirms that the languages of India were his natural preserve. — being present as an auditor when the Buddha preached the Great Drum Sūtra (Mahābheri Sūtra) — being the King Arvanti of Li yul (Khotan) — actually being the Mahāsiddha Kācārya one of the 84 Mahāsiddhas — as priest to the founder of Nālandā Mahāvihāra — as a friend of Abhayākaragupta. demonstrated through his strong desire to emulate their lives in his youth. His life was saved by Indian yogis and their blessing made his life firm. if not in body. and in his tripartite Secret Autobiographies written when he was aged 24. In his ability to converse easily with Indian yogis as a natural speaker of various Indian vernaculars. A series of life-incidents which he records and which will not be dealt with in detail here. Incident 3 on p. but the site of their isolated fortress at Bandogarh shows not even a single trace of Buddhism. Core to understanding Tāranātha’s mental re-creation of India is the relationship between the patrons of his Indian master Buddhaguptanātha and that siddha’s own guru. including Kabīr. Śāntigupta is said by Tāranātha to have been linked to the Baghela rulers of northern India for several decades in the role of court priest. idealized and idiosyncratic vision vision of India which was both flawed and yet touchingly human. 21. a ‘bad attitude’ to other authority and remained independednt far past their use-by date. Tāranātha never did. Instead he built up a personal. 3 These incidents occur in TARA 3. the Baghelas were merely doing what Indian kings had done for centuries—that is.) . According to Tāranātha. He tells us over and over that his relationship with Āryavarta ran through the very core of his being.17. 21.20. However. Incident 4 on p. However they had what might be called thesedays. Without doubt these patrons of Buddhaguptanātha and Śāntigupta were minor players when measured against among the other independent rulers of Akbar’s time. reinforcing their rule by seeking blessing from the widest possible range of religious means. lines 1-2 and p. Śāntigupta was the major religious player for the Baghela rulers. It was these people who are said to have transmitted to him the very latest tantric technologies. Opposed to this and running counter to Tāranātha’s exuberant claims of the Baghelas being strong in their commitment to Buddhism are the considerable number of Vainava and Śaivite images and shrines extending to the year 1597 when the Baghelas were relocated to the town of Rewa closer to Akbar’s authority. were renowned warriors and curried favour with a wide range of religious figures. The Baghela Rājas and Buddhism in the Vindhya Hills. lines 1-3. Incident 2 on p. 37. Among the events which shaped Tāranātha’s ideas about what constituted ‘India’ were his meetings with certain Indian siddhas. We know that in their process of ‘collecting’ representatives of a wide range of religions as their court priests.3 All this was not merely some sort of Indophilic affectation. line 6ff.234 David Templeman generally regarded as the consummate Anuttārayoga deity in Indian tantric practice. lines 4-6. (Incident 1 on p. unlike other masters of earlier periods who had actually visited Āryavarta. lines 2-6. The Baghelas were extraordinarily wealthy. Incident 5 on page 54. line 6ff. Śāntigupta. there was said to have been on-going Royal support and extraordinarily liberal handouts for 5000 yogis for 3 years thereafter. for Tāranātha such a sober assessment would not have done justice to what he regarded as the Baghela’s true role as the renewers of Buddhism in India. was that those siddhas were at the vanguard of this revival. This involved the ordaining of over 2000 monks from all over south-east Asia. The setting for this Buddhist revival as recorded by Tāranātha in his Origins of Buddhism in India was that the Baghela king.Tāranātha’s Perceptions of India 235 The case could be made that the Baghela patronage of Buddhism alongside a wide range of other religious traditions. much of which was vicariously reflected back upon him through his master and his master’s guru’s involvement. or more accurately a resurrection.) Betraying a sense of uncertainty about what sort of Buddhism was actually being followed in the Vindhya Hills. a role which he magnified out of all proportion. But the questions must be asked: ‘What form of Buddhism was actually being patronized by the Baghelas? What sort of Buddhism was it which they favoured…if any?’ What Tāranātha tells us of the Baghela patronage of the two siddhas referred to above suggests that they would have been more likely to have shown an inclination towards tantric forms of Buddhism. In his written histories Tāranātha shows only a partial awareness of the actual demise of Buddhism. or at least the ritual and ceremonial aspects of it. (If the calculations are performed with the exclusion of the cost of clothing. Tāranātha enumerates the people whom he says were present at the gathering without apparently . patronized as they were by the Baghelas. then the amount must be reckoned as vast: 6000 tolas of silver daily for 3 years. For Tāranātha the enormity of the situation. had initiated what Tāranātha refers to as the greatest assembly of Buddhists in 500 years at the cave site of Indraśīlaguha near Rājagha. was for the 16 year old Tāranātha a sign that Buddhism was still alive and well in India. and potentially of a far wider importance. Indian patronage extended towards Buddhism. he regarded the Baghela patronage as leading to a revitalizing. of the entire edifice of Indian Buddhism itself from the state of utter despondency it had fallen into. However. After the departure of the 3000 fully ordained monks and the huge number of lay people who were all supported there for 3 years. However Tāranātha believed that something quite different. Indeed as is evidenced in Tāranātha’s vision of Indian Buddhism in that late period. plus 4 silver srang for each of the 5000 yogis for 36 months and 10 gold mohur for each of the 5000 on 6 other occasions. Rāmacandra. was no more than an opportunistic flirtation with Buddhism rather than a serious commitment to it. Hearing of this supposedly liberal. was being patronized. but doubtlessly exaggerated. 4 Tāranātha’s response to this letter referred to the Rājā and what Tāranātha perceived as his singlehanded revival of Buddhism in the Vindhyas. mahāpaitas. paits. yogins. his master’s master. Perhaps 4 TARA3. . 102. ācāryas. through his direct connections with Santigupta. skilfully ‘embedded’ himself directly into the heart of what he believed to be a still vital Indian Buddhism. the ‘north of the border’ relationship might have represented for him the possibility of cultivating of new business ventures with a reputedly ambitious and potentially wealthy Tibetan patron. In this respect Tāranātha was doing exactly what other Tibetan prelates had done for many years—that is.’5 For Tāranātha. He went on to say that he had heard that ‘…all of the students of the Mahāsiddha Śāntigupta acted as court tantric practitioners for the King. siddhas. 5 TARA3. A more intimate involvement of self and Buddhism in India as recreated by Tāranātha would be hard to imagine. a place where Buddhism had never ever truly died out and where royal patrons were still extraordinarily generous in their support of it. p 102. Tāranātha tells us that in 1601 he received a letter from the Rājā Bālabhadra in which the ruler reminded the lad of their connection through the person of Śāntigupta. Such a marvellously implausible presentation tells us much about Tāranātha’s envisioning of India. For the Rāja Bālabhadra on the other hand. yoginīs etc. The letter mentioned that both he. lines 1-4. As far as we know from Bālabhadra’s letter to Tāranātha. upāsakas and upāsikas. Tāranātha had. Most importantly it suggests that in describing such an optimistic outlook for Buddhism. these hopes resided largely in what Tāranātha could do for them. These included fully ordained monks. comprised representatives from almost every conceivable Buddhist tradition and reflects Tāranātha’s idealized wish rather than any plausible reality. the ruler and Tāranātha had been bonded together throughout previous births through the ministrations of certain other siddhas. lines 5-6. p. enhancing their prestige by linking their lineage or their teachings to a unique person or teaching. part of the attraction in a ‘south of the border’ relationship might have been the access it afforded him to even more and ‘better’ Indian siddhas and paits to whom he had taken a clear liking and who added to his reputation as a Tibetan Indophile and as an inheritor of cutting edge Indian teachings. In other words this quite disparate and sometimes inimical range of Buddhist practitioners.236 David Templeman considering the problems inherent in the potentially volatile mixture of religious figures. In Tāranātha’s eyes this was the real India. he seems convinced that they were a still viable and considerable force in 16-17th century India. ‘Spuren Tāranātha’s und seiner Präexistenzen: Malereien aus der Jo nang pa.Tāranātha’s Perceptions of India 237 they hoped for a personal relationship with Tāranātha himself. This certainly casts some doubt onto their veracity. D. Hamburg: Museum für Völkerkunde. This relationship would quite likely have been achieved through the agency of gosains or other mendicant-traders. For example. The life span of such texts appears to have been brief however.Schule des tibetsichen Buddhismus’. almost as if they were abandoned perhaps when it was realized that they were somehow not genuine. recorded the titles of some of the sādhanas which he had been taught by his Indian master. Tāranātha’s India was still a land where Buddhism was still a vital force.. 2005. he remained a celibate Jo nang monk in gTsang.. Siddhas. written when he was 27 years old and still to an extent besotted by his meeting with his master 10 years previously.6 The attraction of the ‘new’ had no doubt been encouraged and inflamed by Indian mendicants in their relationship with curious Tibetans over the centuries. In Die Welt des tibetischen Buddhismus. In Tāranātha’s case it appears that several of the tantric sādhanas which were ‘newly brought to Tibet from India’ might in fact have been spurious. such texts were not used by other Tibetan lamas. until his later years. Tāranātha in his hagiography of Buddhaguptanātha. we see him depicted seated at the centre of a group of Indian yogis as if he were actually one of their cohort. Indeed. . so complete was Tāranātha’s notion of a tantric India that in his own perception he referred to his visions of himself as actually being an Indian ascetic while.had not been previously known in the region known as the Land of Snows.’ Yet. but as we have no direct evidence of this actually occurring it must remain purely speculative. Sometimes these yogis are in the form of portraits of Tāranātha himself in previous lives.. Moreover.. It is known that semi-Buddhist treatises with a subcurrent of haha yoga praxis were employed by Nāth mendicants in their attempts to gain the favour and patronage of various Indian Rājas. In several of the paintings of Tāranātha’s life. despite their supposed rarity we find no examples of their further expansion or employment in Tāranātha’s later writings. but it seems more likely to me that they were more probably interested in accessing the vast wealth of the sDe pa of gTsang through his good offices. He notes that they ‘. yogis and newly-arrived tantric teachings As we have seen. In the various examples of their activities which he cites in his so-called ‘historical’ works. or even adjudged as being 6 Jackson. a place peopled by super-generous kings and ascetic wonder-workers. My preliminary examination has revealed that many of those works which might have been expected to reveal something significantly new according to Tāranātha. such as the Vajrasumārga (known in Tibetan as the Grub chen Zhi bas bas pa’i thugs bcud bka’ babs bdun ldan gyi gzhung rdo rje’i lam bzang po) and the bKa’ babs drug ldan khrid yig ’phags yul grub pa’i zhal lung show nothing of any later developments in Buddhist understanding at all. This might demonstrate precisely what these ‘new’ materials were comprised of. many of which dealt with precisely those siddhas and yogis in his Indian lineage were given scant attention by his contemporaries. He said: ‘I believe that I had extraordinary good fortune in being the (only ???) person in this part of the world (phyogs ’dir ) who was able to draw on the essence-knowledge (thugs bcud) from all the learned Indian scholars. 7 TARA3. eye-witness details. he had little access to authentic. ‘How realistic was Tāranātha’s vision of himself as the inheritor of a genuine. His Indian siddha visitors gave him what they said were indeed accounts of the very latest events in Buddhism’s trajectory in the land of its birth. lines 1-3. 8 Since the Conference at which this paper was presented. . other than to note how difficult they were for him to understand. Tāranātha was firmly convinced of the veracity of these latest teachings from India. and that I have gained all the extraordinary secret words (teachings) whose meaning adhered to me right from the outset. I have translated the Vajrasumārga and the Yogasakepa and find prima facie what appears to be recycled haha yoga physiology and elements of Mahāmudra. A task yet to be undertaken is a complete examination of Tāranātha’s Collected Works for examples of texts purporting to have come from India in this later period.238 David Templeman at all important.’7 And yet we must ask the difficult question. Even Tāranātha’s historical writings. 8 We must assume that Tāranātha’s monastic education had imparted to him a solid grounding in the details of the major events and trends in Indian Buddhism. viable Indian tantric Buddhist series of teachings vouchsafed to him alone’? Having referred to them as ‘new doctrines’ Tāranātha is not particularly forthcoming about the details of these developments. But like so many Tibetans in the centuries after the major period of pilgrimage from Tibet to India which had effectively ceased by the mid14 th century. p 123. again placing himself at the centre of an India which he had never visited. . In other words. and who would give him the same sort of largesse that he believed the Baghela Rājās had bestowed on Śāntigupta. lines 6-7.’ Although I was willing to start work on those manuals immediately. which gave him cachet and potential futures with his new gTsang patrons. something which would set him apart from other ambitious priests and which would make his position virtually unassailable. I did nothing much about it. In other words. For Tāranātha it was his intimate knowledge of India and his contacts with siddhas. a Buddhist ‘gimmick. there was a clear need to develop something unique. p. He says. you should make a synopsis and an outline (sa bcad) for all of them. thus! Tibetan Patrons and Patronage In Tāranātha’s turbulent world of gTsang many old aristocratic families were no longer in positions of power. provoked by my own laziness and due to the requirements of my own cycle of daily prayers. and therefore were no longer able to act as generous patrons. It could not be permitted to display any stumbling blocks whatsoever. I composed an outline for each of those texts. Tāranātha was made aware of the urgent need for infallible patrons of his own. patrons whose star was in the ascendent. And it is upon these same bases that much of what he wrote is basically flawed. compartments. when he was 28 years old) because I recalled his words of encouragement to do so.Tāranātha’s Perceptions of India 239 It is upon this basis that Tāranātha’s somewhat sentimentalized historical works were created. for Tāranātha. In the Hare year (1603.124. For an ambitious young prelate whose lineage was open to some doubt. Tāranātha’s close proprietorial control over the teachings he had been given by his Indian masters is evident in an incident he records in his large Autobiography. for others an authentically impeccable lineage. Buddhism had to be neat. who were supposedly the very last in India. for example. almost watertight. The Eminence of sTag lung (monastery) said ‘Because it is hard to understand all the vast numbers of scriptures for these new doctrines which have arisen in India. In fact. Buddhism never has been and hopefully never will be. logical and unmessy. Events and trends had to flow seamlessly into one another in this wondrous land of India. the neatly defined periods into which he crammed Buddhism show that he held the almost Orientalist view that Buddhist history had to be categorized into neat. Tāranātha’s accounts of.9 9 TARA3.’ For some prelates this unique facet might have been specific ritual knowledge. Finale This paper has raised more questions than might have been expected from its relatively basic title. patrons. From the very fact of the rin po che’s request. that is until writing his Autobiography very late in his life? — Why did his very last work. these ‘new doctrines’ required a series of commentaries for them to become useable. his Autobiography become the locus classicus for all his reminiscences about India and for some of his strongest assertions of his intimacy with it? . it is clear that there was nobody else with Tāranātha’s specific ‘Indian knowledge’ who was able to explicate those new materials. Clearly Tāranātha was attempting to create something of a ‘niche market’ for himself here. His delay in responding to the request of sTag lung rin po che for his assistance in explicating these ‘new’ materials suggests that Tāranātha might well have wished to maintain some control over their dissemination. despite his protestations of his inherently lazy nature and his overwork to the contrary. The major question which dominates all others is this: — How realistic was Tāranātha’s vision of India and did he really believe that he had a role in Buddhism’s regrowth there? From this arise several other leading questions all of which are of considerable importance. We must acknowledge here that what he calls his ability to write the various sa bcad outlines for them provides some evidence that there might indeed have been certain new developments to which he had been privy through his Indian contacts. and possibly other. This proprietorial control over such works added further to Tāranātha’s power. We also note that he he maintained some keenly guarded ‘proprietorial rights’ over them too. Were Tāranātha to have written the manuals promptly as he had been requested by sTag lung rin po che.240 David Templeman As noted by sTag lung rin po che. his delay in writing about them serving such a purpose. charisma and made him a far more desirable ‘commodity’ for his own. he would have thereby weakened his position of control over them. Some of these are: — With his claimed Indian sensibility why did Tāranātha avoid almost all further reference to his Indian links between the ages of 21 and 59. and Tāranātha claimed to have inherited this key to them from his Indian visitors through his specific knowledge of the works. (2000) Tāranātha. Leh. (1575-1634). Mass. In Vol. Cambridge. thereby ensuring their ongoing munificence as well as their concern to maintain his lineage after his passing? These will only be resolved with far more detailed and nuanced readings of Tāranāthas many writings. (2000) Tāranātha (1575-1634). (1575-1634) Slob dpon chen po spyod ’chang dbang po’i rnam thar ngo mtshar snyan pa’i sgra dbyangs and the Supplement to the text. gSang ba’ i rnam thar. sGrol ma’i rgyud kyi byung khungs gsal bar byed pa’i lo rgyus gser gyi phreng ba. 16 of the Phun-tshogs-gliñ Edition of The Collected Works of Jo-Nañ Rje-Btsun Tāranātha. 12 of the Dzamthang Edition of rJe btsun Tā ra nā thai gsung bum. a task which I hope attracts other scholars interested in creating a more realistic view of this complex and sometimes contradictory figure. Namgyal and Tsewang Taru. Tibetan Buddhist Resource Centre. TARA5. Cambridge. (2000) Tāranātha. C.. (1575-1634) Dam pa’i chos rin po che ’phags pa’i yul du ji ltar dar ba’i tshul gsal bar ston pa dgos ’dod kun ’byung. 17 of the Dzamthang Edition of rJe btsun Tā ra nā thai gsung bum. Cambridge. (2000) Tāranātha. Translated as Templeman (1995) TARA6. Tibetan Buddhist Resource Centre. Translated as Templeman (1989) . 17 of the Dzamthang Edition of rJe btsun Tā ra nā thai gsung bum. Ladakh. Tibetan Buddhist Resource Centre. Cambridge. Bibliography Tibetan Language Texts TARA1.Tāranātha’s Perceptions of India 241 — Was Tāranātha’s resurrection of his visions of India towards the end of his life a means of reinforcing his unique nature to his patrons the gTsang sDe pa. In Vol. TARA7. In Vol. Translated as Templeman (1983) TARA4. Mass. Smanrtsis Shesrig Dpemzod. In Vol. Mass. 1 of the Dzamthang Edition of rJe btsun Tā ra nā thai gsung bum. In Vol. Mass. Tibetan Buddhist Resource Centre. (2000) Tāranātha (1575-1634) bKa’ babs bdun ldan gyi brgyud pa’i rnam thar ngo mtshar rmad du byung ba rin po che’i khungs lta bu’i gtam. Series IX) Chimpa. Dharamsala. (1983) Tāranātha’s bKa’babs bdun ldan. D. ———— (1869) Tāranātha’s Geschichte des Buddhismus in Indien. Templeman. ———— (1989) Tāranātha’s Life of K ācārya/Kāha. (Studia Philologica Buddhica. D. St. Tokyo. Eggers et Co. Hamburg: Museum für Völkerkunde. Vasil’ev. (1995) ’Jigs-med-gling-pa’s “Discourse on India” of 1789. Istoriya I Literaturo. Dharamsala. Schiefner. Indii. (1868) Tāranāthae De Doctrinae Buddhicae In India Propagatione. 2005. Petropoli (St. St. Huber. Lama and Chattopadhyaya. Petersburg). A Critical Edition and Annotated Translation of the lHo–phyogs– rgya–gar–gyi gtam brtag–pa brgyad–kyi me long. A. Sochinenie Daranaty. T.) Tāranātha’s The Origin of Tārā Tantra. ———— (1995) (First published 1981. (1990) Tāranātha’s History of Buddhism in India. Imp. Part III. Library of Tibetan Works and Archives. Dharamsala.’ In Die Welt des tibetischen Buddhismus. Library of Tibetan Works and Archives. Petersburg. Petersburg. Chicago. Istoriya Buddizma v.P. University of Chicago Press. Occasional Paper. N.242 David Templeman European language Texts Aris. M. International Institute of Buddhist Studies. Motilal Banarsidass. Library of Tibetan Works and Archives. (2008) The Holy Land Reborn: Pilgrimage and the Tibetan Reinvention of India. (1869) Buddizm: Ego Dogmaty. Academia Scientarium Petropolitanae. The Seven Instruction Lineages by Jonang Tāranātha.Schule des tibetsichen Buddhismus. Delhi. A. Commissionäire der Kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften. . ‘Spuren Tāranātha’s und seiner Präexistenzen: Malereien aus der Jo nang pa. Jackson. 12. Bira 1980. Schulemann 1958. For more discussion about sources on Zanabazar’s life see Bareja-Starzyn«ska (b. Khürelbaatar 1996. 1995. The biography was translated into Modern Mongolian by Sh. but on the whole situation of Tibeto-Mongolian relations of that time. Byambaa 2004.2 About the Mongolian incarnation it says the following:3 1 Pozdneyev 1879-80. 1982. his enthronement and his early years developed. Kaplonski 2004. . in Modern Mongolian Luvsanprinlei. not only on Zanabazar. in Sanskrit Jñānavajra. 16421715) entitled: Blo bzang bstan pa’i rgyal mtshan dpal bzang po’i khrungs rabs bco lnga’i rnam thar seems to be the most reliable source. Miyawaki 1992.The Mongolian Incarnation of Jo nang pa Tāranātha Kun dga’ snying po: Öndör Gegeen Zanabazar Blo bzang bstan pa’i rgyal mtshan (1635-1723) A case study of the Tibeto-Mongolian Relationship Agata Bareja-Starzyn«ska Warsaw The paper investigates the appearance of the Mongolian line of incarnations of the Jonangpa Jetsundampa. pp. 1982. Bira (1995). Zanabazar. 1575-1634) his reincarnation was found among the Mongols in the son of the powerful Khalkha Tüshiyetü Khan Gombodorji. pronounced by the Mongols as Zanabazar. Soninbayar 1995. Bira (1980) p. 2 I agree in this respect with Sh. 1998. The biography completed by 1702 by Zanabazar’s disciple Zaya Pandita Lobsang Phrinlei (Blo bzang ’phrin las. All references to this biography in the present article are made to this edition. Though the subject was studied by many eminent scholars. Ichinnorov 2005 and many others. Lokesh Chandra 1963. in print): “Biographies of the First Jetsundampa Öndör Gegeen Zanabazar Blo bzang bstan po’i rgyal mtshan (1635-1723)—Brief Survey of Sources” submitted for the Felicitation Volume dedicated to Veronika Veit. 1994. Somlai 1988. 3 According to the Lokesh Chandra bilingual Tibeto-Mongolian edition of the biography. 421-422. It is interesting to see what was written about Tāranātha Kunga Nyingpo’s recognition in Khalkha in the biography of his incarnation. After passing away of Tāranātha Kunga Nyingpo (kun dga’ snying po.1 nevertheless it seems valuable to look once again at the sources and investigate how the information about the first Khalkha reincarnation called in Tibetan Yeshe Dorje (ye shes rdo rje). 1896-98. Bawden 1961. However. term is a translation of another Tibetan expression: nges par ’byung ba. 423-2: dben sa sprul pa’i sku. When he was five years old. 8r. pravrājaka. 423-1: mkhas grub sangs rgyas ye shes sku’i skye ba. p. i. Byams pa gling may refer to different Maitreya temples. 6 P. Mong. Later tradition used this expression to denote that he was ‘summoned by the four tribes of the Khalkha to the throne’ (Bawden 1961. as it was reported. 5 However.e. see Smith 1969. 422-3: khri ’don mdzad. . Skt. he recited the “Chanting the Names [of Mañjuśrī]” (Mañjuśrī-Nāmasagītī)6 about two times a day as it was reported. Mong. 8. though it was winter. 12. p.244 Agata Bareja-Starzyn«ska “…He (i. 422-1: Tib. 8 P. Zanabazar) was born with many propitious omens on the morning of the 25th day of the ninth hor month in the year of Wooden Pig shing phag (1635). p. the information about hair-cutting is missing in the Mongolian version of the biography and in the Modern Mongolian translation by Bira 1985. More information further in this paper and in Smith 1969 p. The second reincarnation was Blo bzang bstan ’dzin rgya mtsho (1605-1643 or 1644). Buddhist theory of causality. it seems that it meant his enthronement as an ordained reincarnation. The Mong. interdependence. 11 P. 423-2: rab byung. p. Jampa Ling Nomon Khan4 was invited to take part in his hair-cutting [ceremony]5 and to renounce his vows of a lay follower genyen. 7 Owing to [his enthronement] auspicious circumstances 8 were connected properly and the second reincarnation of Kedub Sangye Yeshe 9 called Bensa Tulku10 acted as his preceptor of ordination. At first at the age of four. 7 P. 1175a. jamba ling nomon qa an. Skt. beautiful flowers appeared. When he was three years old. Lessing 1982.11 He bestowed him the name: Lobsang Tenpe 4 P. p. he was enthroned. Mong. 12. 9 P. About the growth of the religious authority of Jetsundampa see Bareja-Starzyn«ska 2008 and 2009. byams pa gling no mon khang. 423-1: rten ’brel—in full: rten cing ’brel bar ’byung ba. f. mergen sidatu budda zana-yin gegen-ü qoyitu töröl.146). namaa sanggiri. 422-3: mtshan brjod. Mong. Full Tibetan title: ’jam dpal gyi mtshan yang dag par brjod pa bstod pa glur blangs pa’i rgyud. In the empty place left after moving the tent in which the Lord had been born.e. pratityāsamutpāda—‘dependent origination’. siregen-e arun. though previously not learnt [by him] by heart. 10 P. ma ad qar(a)qui. see more discussion further in this paper. that during his ordination ceremony he was enthroned. Mong. 44) or even ‘enthroned as the leader of Buddhism in Khalkha Mongolia’ (Kaplonski 2004. This fragment was not commented by Bira 1995 (p. 8). 424-1: bka’ gdams glegs bam pha chos bu chos—‘Scriptures of the Kadampas. Tāranātha is mentioned by his name in another fragment of the biography by Zaya Pandita:17 12 P. missing in the Zaya Pandita’s blockprint edition (Lokesh Chandra ed. IV.16 He reminded [Jetsundampa] to study and practice and gave him the grand empowerment (abhieka) of Vajrabhairava [Yamantaka] and many other teachings. that in the 23rd chapter of bKa’ gdams glegs bam pha chos bu chos there should have been a fragment referring to the miracles performed by Zanabazar. Collected Teachings and Stories of Lord Atiśa and His Disciples on the Precious Practice for the Kadampa Buddhism’ [RY]. Zanabazar’s) tutor [since] he was the one who prophesied from the bKa’ gdams glegs bam. The Mong. It is well understandable that Zaya Pandita who was educated in Tibet in the Gelugpa order could omit those facts in the biography of his teacher which were not convenient for the Gelugpa tradition. Explanation about the term yab sras follows further in the text of the present article. 424-1: rje btsun dam pa. However. sumadi sajÿin-u duvaza.14 Namkha Sönam Drakpa.e.” There is no mention about Tāranātha or Jonangpa in this part of the biography. vol.15 the master of Tantric [college] at the Drepung monastery was invited to become his (i. that he was aware of the fact. Mongolian scholar Ngawang Tshultrim Gyatso (ngag dbang tshul khrims rgya mtsho.e. There is an obvious mistake in the Buryat manuscript which adds rgyal pa between bstan pa’i and rgyal mtshan. wrote in his short biography of Zanabazar connected with the history of Baruun Khüree monastery. 127-2). 128. Lokesh Chandra 1981. translated into Modern Mongolian by Soninbayar (1995. 423-3: rgyal ba yab sras kyi sku gzhogs su zhus pa. f. 10). Father and Sons. p. Agvaantsultemjamts 1880-1938). 63v. 14 P. the Victorious Father and Son (i. 13 P. See more details further in this paper. nga. p. edition vol. In Mong. 15 P. though he was not able to confirm it. p. xyl. p. 16 P. 424-1: nam mkha’ bsod nams grags pa. 423-2: blo bzang bstan pa’i rgyal pa’i rgyal mtshan. . 17 Lokesh Chandra 1982. translation reads: bo da dalai blam-a-yin gegen tan-a ayiladqa san: ‘[it was] reported to the reincarnation of the Dalai Lama’.The Mongolian Incarnation of Jo nang pa Tāranātha 245 Gyeltsen 12 and gave him Mahākāla’s empowerment (rjes gnang) and explained it [to him]. the Dalai Lama and his regent)13 and [they] identified [Zanabazar] as the reincarnation of Jetsundampa. And then [it was] reported to the masters. 1982. 430-431. This is the point made by Junko Miyawaki in her article (1994). p. The Mong. Stearns 1999. 5a4.20 that Tüshiyetü Khan’s son was regarded as the reincarnation of Jamyang Chöje (’jam dbyangs chos rje. who repeated that the story about Zanabazar as the reincarnation of Jamyang Chöje was made up later by the Gelugpas..18 Actually. f. p.22 However. The biography was entitled: Khyab bdag ’khor lo’i mgon po rje btsun dam pa blo bzang bstan pa’i rgyal mtshan gyi rnam thar bskal bzang dang pa’i shing rta. p. first (or rather fourth) Panchen Lama (b. 51) where she identified ’jam dbyangs as Mañjuśrī and where she also stated that the recognition was made several years later. biography (1859) mentions that he received valuable religious texts (such as Prajñāpāramita in 10 000 verses) and images of Maitreya. such as Cyrus Stearns (1999. p. 1. 309. when Zanabazar traveled to Tibet. and writings of the regent Desi Sangye Gyatso (sde srid sangs rgyas rgya mtsho. Avalokiteśvara and Tāra. in print).e. p. p.khong pa ’jam dbyangs chos rje’i sku skye’i dbang du btang ba . 21 pa chen blo bzang chos kyi rgyal mtshan dang | kun gzigs lnga pa chen po gnyis kyis zhal mthun par rje ba’i nyid la ’jam dbyangs sprul pa’i sku zhes pa’i mtshan gsol bar mdzad pa . 51-54. Byambaa 2006 ed. Stearns maintained that by calling Zanabazar the incarnation of Jamyang Chöje the Gelugpa hierarchs could make their claims over Tāranātha’s estate. Bawden 1961.71. 53). 1379-1449). Junko Miyawaki in her article (1994.. in the Gelugpa writings contemporary to Zanabazar he is referred to as Jamyang Tulku (’jam dbyangs sprul sku). 20 Alias Ngag dbang ye shes thub bstan rab ‘byams pa according to Dungkar 2002. from the monasteries built by his previous incarnations.. .. DL5. On this biography see Bareja-Starzyn« ska (b. the son of Tüshiyetü Khan is called only by the name of the emanation of Jamyang.. 19 khal kha thu shi ye thu rgyal po’i sras ’jam dbyangs sprul sku . 71. the monastery Dakden Damcho Ling (rtag brtan phun tshogs gling) 18 P.246 Agata Bareja-Starzyn«ska “All-knowing Panchen [Lama] confirmed that he was the reincarnation of the Lord Tāranātha”. pp. p.1570-1662). 267. i. Stearns 1999. p. but it may well refer to Jamyang Chöje. that Zanabazar was called Jamyang Tulku in the contemporary Tibetan Gelugpa sources.21 The problem of Zanabazar’s recognition was raised by the Japanese Mongolist. 22 Miyawaki 1994..... that Zanabazar traveled to the monasteries of Jonangpa while visiting Tibet is a mere speculation. It seems also that the idea of Miyawaki (1994. Agvantüvden Ravjamba). 45.1653-1705). f. It was explained by the fifth Dalai Lama19 and quoted in the later biography of Zanabazar written in 1839 by Ngaggi Wangpo (in Modern Mong. 309. 71) argued that there was no controversy about the fact.. In the autobiography of the fifth Dalai Lama (b.1617-1682). who was the founder of the Drepung monastery. And this was followed by Atwood 2004. vol. other scholars. b. 8v. 430-2: pa chen thams cad mkhyen pas rje tāranātha’i sku skye yin gsung ba. p. 1290-1364) rather than to Gelugpa. 278. in those late biographies written in 1839 and 1847 and followed by others.. however. quotation from Ngag gi dbang po (Lokesh Chandra edition 1982) p. In both texts it is explained that the reason why the name Yeshe Dorje was given to Tüshiyetü Khan’s son was the result of the divination based on the Kālacakratantra.. 72. 72) in which he mentions his dream that he be wearing a yellow hat. 25 Biography by Ngag gi dbang po (1839). contemporary to the events described and hence more reliable. Byambaa 2006. enabling the Geluk establishment to eliminate the possibility of a Tāranātha rebirth as the new leader of the Jonang tradition”. which is called sKyabs mgon sku gong ma’i rnam thar (the biography of the previous refuge lord) there is a statement of Tāranātha that “he will spread the doctrine of Lord Tsongkhapa in a barbarian borderland”. the passage is taken from the late biography of Zanabazar written by Ngaggi Wangpo (footnote 20) in 1839 which contains legendary materials. f. . 7a4-6: dus kyi ’khor lo’i rgyud las | lhan gcig skyes pa’i dga’ ba las ni ye shes rdo rje la sogs ’byung bar byed | ces grub chen nag po spyod pa’i lung bstan gyi rjes su byung ba dang | rje nyid gyi mtshan sgra gsol bar thon pas rje de’i lung bstan yin par mkhan chen paau siddhi sogs kyi gsung las byung ba ltar | rgyal bas lung bstan pa’i skyabs mgon rdo rje ’char rang byung ye shes rdo rje zhes . During the divination the name Yeshe Dorje appeared together with the name Nagpo Chöpa (Nag po spyod pa). 7a1-2. 24 However. 24 Stearns 1999. The Mongolian author claimed that in one of his sources. is not included in the biography of Zanabazar written by Zaya Pandita. p. f. Biography by Ngag dbang blo bzang don grub (1847). 23 Stearns wrote: “Clearly the reasons for his (Zanabazar’s) recognition as the reincarnation of Tāranātha were political.25 Nag po spyod pa or Krishnacarin. Then Stearns presents a passage from Zanabazar ’s biography to rationalize his rebirth as Tāranātha. p. However. It seems that this is a legendary material which was included in later biographies of Zanabazar to justify his embodiment as Tāranātha’s incarnation. and which actually refers to Budon (bu ston. there is no such statement in the biography of Zanabazar written by Zaya Pandita. f.The Mongolian Incarnation of Jo nang pa Tāranātha 247 justified. Another interesting information is provided. Also the quotation from the secret biography of Tāranātha (Stearns 1999. Krishnacarya 23 About the monastery see TBRC G390. The biography of Ngawang Lobsang Dondub (1847) places this event in the fourth year of Zanabazar’s life. 20b1-2: de nas dgung lo bzhi pa ’bru mang po zhes pa sa stag lo na | khal kha’i yul phul te dznyā na badzra’am ye shes rdo rje zhes dus rgyud du | nag po spyod pa dang lhan du lung bstan pa ltar mtshan gsol bar mdzad | Texts of both biographies reprinted in Byambaa 2006. . He then returned to Mongolia to become one of its leading teachers of the early nineteenth century”.27 It has not been specified in either of the biographies who performed divination based on the Kālacakratantra and gave the name Yeshe Dorje to Tüshiyetü Khan’s son. in the Mongolian version of the biography of Zaya Pandita this expression is translated only as ‘the Dalai Lama’ (p. He received his final ordination in the presence of the eighth Dalai Lama. The term yab sras may refer to different bodies in a different context.28 Junko Miyawaki elaborated. as well. 438).248 Agata Bareja-Starzyn«ska (Ka-cārya) was one of the eighty four mahāsiddhas. who was mentioned in the biography by Ngaggi Wangpo (1839. when Zanabazar visited Tibet in 164951 and 1655 (p. Perhaps Pau Siddhi. was born in Mongolia in 1779. upon the recognition of Zanabazar by both the Dalai Lama and Panchen Lama. 423-3). p. 20b5-6—21a1 pa chen thams cad mkhyen pa chen po dang kun gzigs lnga pa chen sogs bla ma rnams dang la mo chos skyong rnams su zhig gsal gyi lung bstan khus zhugs btsug par | rje btsun tāranātha’i sprul skur ngos ’dzin mdzad de | ’jam dbyangs sprul pa’i sku zhes snyan pa’i rol mos nor ’dzin kun tu khyab par gyur to|. f. 29 Personal communication. TBRC P3299. “later known as the Twelfth Abbot Wagindra Patu Siddhi. began his monastic education at Tashi Gomang College at Urga and completed his Rabjampa Geshe degree at Drepung in Central Tibet. She translated the expression rgyal ba yab sras—‘Victorious Father and Son’ used in his biography of Zanabazar by Zaya Pandita (p. According to the explanation by Christoph Cüppers29 the expression rgyal ba yab sras in this context should be understood as ‘the Dalai Lama and his regent’ and not the Panchen Lama. 49). Byambaa 2006 ed. 28 Lama Ngawang Khedrub (Ngag dbang mkhas grub). The biography of Ngaggi Wangpo (1839) adds that when Zanabazar was 10 years old the official letter by the fifth Dalai Lama was sent along 26 Seventeenth on the list of the eighty four mahāsiddhas prepared by Abhayadattaśrī and Vīraprakāśa. 424-1) as the ‘Dalai Lama and Panchen Lama’ (Miyawaki 1994.26 Tāranātha was regarded by his own teacher as the reincarnation of this mahāsiddha. 27 F. According to Ladner 2000. 7a5) was responsible for bringing the information about divination to the author of the biography. 81. However. Again it is explained in the biography of 1847 and stressed that at the same time he was regarded both as the reincarnation of Tāranātha and as the reincarnation of Jamyang [Chöje] by the Omniscent Panchen and the all-knowing and allseeing Great Fifth [Dalai Lama]. 430. p. This is why the young son of Tüshiyetü Khan was treated in turn as the reincarnation of Tāranātha and called by the title Jetsundampa. The Panchen Lama is mentioned later in the biography. The cleavages often followed provincial boundaries. and repeated by the following biographies. 31 The expression which was eagerly used by the fifth Dalai Lama.e. on. It glorifies the Ganden Phodrang.e. died. It is registered in TBRC under the number W20448. which was 1647.. p. We should remember that there were Tibetan Gelugpa teachers securing Zanabazar’s proper Buddhist education. note 37. 228: ’jam dbyangs sprul skur tshigs bcad kyi ’phrin yig bsrings. vol. nevertheless it may reflect the actual sequence of events and the fact that the Khalkha Mongols received confirmation from the Tibetan Gelugpa establishment about the prince’s recognition in the form of a letter from the fifth Dalai Lama. p. See Ahmad 1995. .. There was. 3 of the Introduction to Smith 1969. however. indeed considerable factionalism within the Gelugpa church itself.The Mongolian Incarnation of Jo nang pa Tāranātha 249 with his confirmation of the recognition of Zanabazar as Jamyang Tulku and embodiment of Kunga Nyingpo i. 32 The letter has been preserved under the heading: ’jam dbyangs chos rje bkra shis dpal ldan pa’i skye bar grags pa jo nang sprul sku kun dga’ snying po’i yang srid khar kha thu she ye thu rgyal po’i bu byung ba la springs pa rdo rje’i rna bar ’thul ba’i ma la ya’i dri. p. 33 DL5. The biography says: [11a3] “when he was 10 years old 30 from the all knowing Great Fifth [Dalai Lama] the message was sent that the incarnation of Jamyang Chöje was born as the reincarnation of Kunga Nyingpo in the [body] of the son of Tüshiyetü Khan and an official letter called ‘the scent of Malaya31 to be spread to the Vajra ear’ (rdo rje’i rna bar ’thul ba’i ma la ya’i dri) was sent upon the request”. It was pointed out by Gene Smith already in 1969 that: “The recognition of Tāranātha’s incarnation as the son of the Tüshiyetü Khan represents an extremely complicated bit of political manoeuvering on the part of the First Panchen’s disciple.. who was probably the most important representative of the Gelugpa interests in the region. Mkhas-grub III Blo-bzang-bstan-’dzin-rgya-mtsho (i.”34 30 It should be 1644 because later the Iron Pig year is mentioned. 209. I would like to thank Christoph Cüppers for making this letter available and for his valuable comments. rule of the fifth Dalai Lama. Tāranātha.32 In the autobiography of the fifth Dalai Lama it is noted that the versified letter was sent to Jamyang Tulku. 3. Also if Zanabazar was born in 1635 his 10th year would be 1644. 34 Footnote 9. p. Bensa Tulku).33 Though the information which dated the letter is given only in the late biography of Zanabazar. And in 1643 or 1644 Bensa Tulku. The letter is not dated. Not all of the great Gelugpa churchmen shared the 5th Dalai Lama’s hostility to Tāranātha. 1. 250 Agata Bareja-Starzyn«ska It seems that scholars who worked on Zanabazar’s biographies earlier did not particularly pay attention to the Tibetans who accompanied Zanabazar in his childhood. the first part. there is no mention about the travel of Könchok Chöphel to the Khalkha lands or about any contacts with Tüshiyetü Khan and his son. Then he said that if he was the true incarnation of pa chen Byams pa gling pa. p. The title ‘Nomon Khan’. The enigmatic person called Jampa Ling Nomon Khan was invited to give Zanabazar his first vows as genyen. who was a tutor (yongs ’dzin) of the fifth Dalai Lama and became the 35th Throne Holder (khri pa) of Ganden monastery (1626-1637). due to the great distance and his advanced age it was decided that he should not go (f. 16r3). However. 1. vol.38 It would be quite impossible for such a high personality as the tutor of the Dalai Lama to travel to the Khalkha Mongols in his late age. I would like to thank Ganzorig Davaaochir for turning my attention to this person and his possible identification with Byams pa gling pa. was called the incarnation of Pachen Jampa Lingpa (pa chen byams pa gling pa’i skye ba)36 since he was regarded an incarnation of Pachen Jampa Linpa Sönam Namgyal (pa chen byams pa gling pa bsod nams rnam rgyal. 268. however. Vaidurya Serpo (history of Gelugpa written by Desi Sangye Gyatso) p. 36 Dungkar. In the biography there is a mention of a discussion that dKong mchog chos ’phel should visit the seat (gdan sa) of Byams pa gling pa. 38 My best thanks go to Christoph Cüppers for making the text of the biography of dKon mchoh chos ’phel available to me and for his help in finding the right passages in the Vaidurya Serpo. 1573-1646). 13. 87. As to the name Jampa Ling Nomon Khan. 90. Vaidurya Serpo. 90. See also TBRC P2565. 422-1) means ‘the temple of Maitreya’ and may refer to several monasteries. Könchok Chöphel (dkon mchog35 chos ’phel. 254 and 504. I would like to thank Christoph Cüppers for his kind assistance in locating the passages. 37 Mentioned in the mchod sdong ’dzam gling rgyan gcig gi dkar chag p. 17v5-6). which may be rendered as chos kyi rgyal po in Tibetan. p. The fact that he was recognized as the incarnation of Byams pa gling pa was proved when dKong mchog chos ’phel went to the Lhokha country and was faced with great drought there. nya of the Collected Works (gsung ’bum) of the fifth Dalai Lama (19 folios). Tib. 1401-1475). byams pa gling (p. In this biography.37 There is a biography of Könchok Chöphel composed by the fifth Dalai Lama entitled ’Jam dpal dbyangs chos kyi rje dkon mchog chos ’phel gyi rtogs brjod mkhas pa’i rna rgyan (TBRC W181) in vol. 363. . see TBRC P993. was a title widely spread in Mongolia and given to lay people as well as to clergy. he should be able to cause rain and great rains followed (f. p. 35 Written as cog according to the autobiography of the fifth Dalai Lama (DL5). However. In the biography it is said that a household official (gsol dpon) of the incarnation of Jampa Lingpa was sent along with them. 42 It would be quite probable therefore. However. He conferred upon the boy his name gegen keüken. Soninbayar 1995. 43 P. p. 433-3—434-1 byams pa gling pa’i yin sku skye gsol dpon. 7v. If the name referred to a monastery. such as: Chab mdo byams pa gling. i. translation on p. According to the autobiography of the fifth Dalai Lama he was sent as a residential monk bla mchod to the Khalkha khan Sechen (Sholoi). Tashi Dondub (bkra shis don grub. since this master was famed among the Khalkha Mongols as erdene tsorj Tashi Dondub and not as jambaling nomun khan the identification still requires more evidence. .43 In the Modern Mongolian translation of the biography of Zanabazar composed in Tibetan in 1912 by Shartsorj Dagvajantsan (shar chos rje grags pa rgya mtsho. 41 Sku ’bum gdan rabs. it might be the case that another person was also called Jampa Lingpa. occupied the throne (khri chen) between 1638 and 1642. DL5. dGon lung byams pa gling and sKu ’bum byams pa gling—the latter two being famous Gelugpa monasteries in Amdo. making connection to Je Tsongkhapa (rje tsong kha pa. p. 1. 1357-1419). f. called also rgyal ba chos rje bkra shis don grub). Brilliant Child. 1855-1927) entitled rJe btsun dam pa rin po che’i 39 Dashbadrakh 2001.e.40 The same was repeated in the Sku ’bum gdan rabs.41 And Sechen Khan was the one who was convinced about extraordinary qualities of the son of Tüshiyetü Khan upon his birth and that he was an incarnation of a Buddhist master. there were several sites bearing such a name. 9. note 96. According to the Mongolian scholar Dashbadrakh the person mentioned in the biography was “a famous master from the Jambaling monastery in Amdo”. 43. 39 The sixth abbot of Sku ’bum monastery. 40 It says: se chen rgyal po’i bla mchod du sku ’bum chos rje bkra shis don grub brdzangs. 228. in his translation of the biography of Zanabazar of 1915. p. Soninbayar translated this fragment of the biography by Shartsorj (1912) into Modern Mongolian as “the incarnation of Jambaaling Nomun Khan was sent as soivon” (soivond Jambaalingiiin khuvilgaan).The Mongolian Incarnation of Jo nang pa Tāranātha 251 Thus. The name Jampa Lingpa is mentioned again in the biography of Zanabazar composed by Zaya Pandita when he describes the return of the first Jetsundampa from Tibet accompanied by 50 monastic specialists sent by the fifth Dalai Lama in order to help him to establish properly the monastery in Khalkha. that he sent his chaplain to take first vows of Tüshiyetü Khan’s son. 52: rgyal dbang gi bka’ bzhin se chen rgyal po’i bla mchod mdzad cing phyir phebs nas gdan sa ’dir bzhugs. vol. TBRC P4463. I would like to thank Elliot Sperling for providing a copy of the text. 42 Bawden 1961. p. 96. . Jampa Lingpa was mentioned as: ÿjimbalid nom-un qa an blama. see Bawden 1961. a Tibetan master from a monastery in Amdo. vol. p. and not ‘Jambalid Nomon Khan of Khalkha’. p. in print) esp.. “Lama Nomon Khan of Jimbalid”.e. 424-1: ’bras spungs sngags pa’i bla ma. 21. who was active mainly among the Oirat Mongols. 5. 1. However.. The biography depicts him as ‘the lama of the Tantric college at Drepung’. The same expression was used by Ichinnorov (2005) in his monographic study about Zanabazar. 3 refers to him as: ‘a close disciple of the fifth Dalai Lama’.47 Summing up. 47 The fifth Dalai Lama mentions Tsagaan Nomon Khan in his autobiography on several occasions. p. elaborated further on in this paper.e. It will be. 1.44 In the Mongolian biography composed probably in 1859. however. Terbish. 48 P.. 44. f.45 Dashbadrakh. though never as Byams pa gling Nomon Khan.252 Agata Bareja-Starzyn«ska rnam thar bstod tsig skal bzang dad gsos the Tibetan master was called mergen toin Jambaalin Nomun khan i. for the present moment it was impossible to identify with full certainty the incarnation of Jampa Lingpa who visited Khalkha in 1638 and who gave genyen vows to the young prince. p. 8r6. the founder of that monastery. came to spread Buddhism among the Khalkha and later Oirat Mongols. however. 49 DL5. 46 Dashbadrakh 1995.. who translated it into Modern Mongolian explained46 that Jampa Lingpa Nomon Khan.48 The same is said in the autobiography of the fifth Dalai Lama. that the Tibetan teacher who was brought to Mongolia to be a tutor to Zanabazar was Namkha Sönam Drakpa from the Gelugpa tradition. unfortunately. There is no doubt. i. this statement does not seem to be correct. See also serious doubts of another Mongolian scholar. critical edition of the page with information about Byams pa gling pa where the phrase qalqayin ÿjimbalid nom-un qa an blama should be emended with vajÿartu on the basis of other manuscripts: qalqa-yin ajÿartu jÿimbalid nom-un qa an blama. – ‘in the Khalkha [lands] Jambalid Nomon Khan’. 44 Soninbayar 1995. note 25 on p. He was a teacher both of Zanabazar and of his biographer. p..49 Perhaps the choice of a lama from the Drepung monastery as the tutor of Zanabazar also stressed his connection with Jamyang Chöje. 228: ’bras spungs sngags pa gnyal gung snang chos rje ’jam dbyangs sprul sku’i yongs ’dzin du ’byon. who did not see any evidence that Tsagaan Nomon Khan had ever visited Khalkha lands (Terbish 2008. p. see Bareja-Starzyn«ska (b. “the wise monk (of aristocratic origin) Jampa Ling Nomon Khan”. quite safe to conclude that he was a Buddhist master of the Gelugpa order. Also Soninbayar 1998.. 68). 44. . He suggested that he might be identified with the master called ‘Tsagaan Nomon Khan’. 45 Bawden 1961. Zaya Pandita Lobsang Phrinlei. According to TBRC [P 4511] Namkha Sönam Drakpa’s main seat was the Tashilhunpo monastery. 52 F. p. Bensa Tulku is called there Inzan Qutugtu. . 10b4: mkhas grub sangs rgyas ye shes kyi sku’i skye ba dpe nas sprul sku rin po che blo bzang bstan ’dzin rgya mtsho. And what also became significant. famed as the Oirat Zaya Pandita Namkhai Gyatso (nam mkha’i rgya mtsho. According to TBRC P8858 born in 1605. 10b4). 55 In chapter 4 of the biography of the Oirat Zaya Pandita according to Hidehiro Okada and Junko Miyawaki-Okada 2008.. f. was that after his death he was embodied by an Oirat Galdan Boshogtu (1644-1697). I would like to thank Magda Szpindler for providing this information. 39.55 It shows that Bensa Tulku Lobsang Tenzin Gyatso kept contacts and perhaps played Gelugpa policy among different Mongolian tribes. 1599-1662). who probably was the mastermind of the recognition of Zanabazar. In his biography the Oirat Zaya Pandita is styled as ‘the lama of the Seven-Banner (Khalkha) Mongols and the Four Oirats altogether’. p. called also gnyal pa chos rje bsod nams grags pa and dka’ chen bsod nams grags pa. as well as by his name Lobsang Tenzin Gyatso52 and the title of Bensa Tulku. died in 1643 or 1644. 33. 12. Khedub Sangye Yeshe (mkhas grub sangs rgyas ye shes) (1525-1590). The very person of Bensa Tulku. 51 Lung rigs . 7. 3. 53 Gene Smith in the Appendixes to the autobiography of the first Panchen Lama gave the list of incarnations of Bensa Tulku. Hidehiro Okada and Junko Miyawaki-Okada 2008. 2000. 424-1: bka’ gdams glegs bam nas lung bstan.The Mongolian Incarnation of Jo nang pa Tāranātha 253 In the biography of Zanabazar by Zaya Pandita it was mentioned that Namkha Sönam Drakpa was the one famed for making prophecies from the Bka’ gdams glegs bam. p. Yeshe Gyatso (ye shes rgya mtsho) (1592-1604)..): 1. is mentioned both in the biography written by Zaya Pandita and in the biography written in 1839 as the incarnation of Khedub Sangye Yeshe. consisting of 3 names. Lobsang Tenzin Gyatso (blo bzang bstan ’dzin rgya mtsho) (1605-1643 or 1644)..50 He was a learned scholar known for his commentaries and illustrations (dper brjod) to the Kāvyādarśa. Zanabazar is mentioned as his only disciple. Lobsang Tenzin Gyatso is mentioned as the last one (Smith.54 Bensa Tulku bestowed in 1639 also the title of rab ’byam pa Qutugtu on an important Buddhist scholar and missionary from the Western Mongolian tribes (otherwise known as Jungars). 54 Tashi Tsering informed in February 2007 that presently only the first two Bensa Tulkus are recognized as such (personal communication). 53 Ngag gi dbang po (1839) adds rin po che (Byambaa 2006 ed.51 The title dka’ chen refers to the geshe degree at the Tashilhunpo monastery. 2. p. who was a grandson of Güüshi Khan 50 P. 1969. He went back home in 1666. 60 Bawden 1961. He was given the title of Khung-taiji (viceroy) and in 1678 the title Boshogtu ‘Khan (‘Khan with the Mandate’) by the fifth Dalai Lama. 1582-1655). He went to Tibet in 1656. 44. though not identical. texts and religious ceremonies are distorted by Mongolian pronunciation to such an extent that not all of them were properly understood by researchers. 50-51.254 Agata Bareja-Starzyn«ska (or Gushri Khan. he renounced his vows. became a disciple of the first/fourth Panchen Lama and then the fifth Dalai Lama. names of Tibetan persons. it led to a large scale war between the Eastern and Western Mongols. in the Mongolian biography. . p. About manuscripts of this biography and the text itself see Bareja-Starzyn«ska (b. f. that Zanabazar was surrounded from his early childhood by masters connected with the Gelugpa tradition. The recognition and the title of Jetsundamba are referred to in this biography only during Zanabazar’s visit in Tibet. monasteries. Hidehiro Okada and Junko Miyawaki-Okada 2008.58 In comparison with the Zaya Pandita’s account written in 1702 it includes many stories and legends which arose by the time of its composition.56 This identification had further ideological consequences since Galdan Boshogtu felt superior to Zanabazar. In the Mongolian biography there is no mention about Zanabazar as the incarnation of Jamyang Chöje. in which the Manchu emperor took part. 57 In the last quarter of the 17th century Zanabazar was building up his position among Eastern Mongols and Galdan Boshogtu among Western Mongols. However. Since Eastern and Western Mongols for the last two hundred years fought for supremacy over all the Mongols. 58 Bawden 1961. upon his visit in Tibet. 12. however. p. It eventually brought Galdan’s death and the Manchu dominance over the Khalkha Mongols. note 11. p. Through careful reading of the biographies written in Tibetan by Zaya Pandita (1702).60 This fact might have also contributed to the opinion of the Mongolists. as well. 8v.57 The biography of Zanabazar best known to the Mongols and Mongolists was written in Mongolian probably in 1859. More about the Oirat-Khalkha conflict of 1686-88 and the involvement of Buddhist rhetoric in Bareja-Starzyn«ska (c. Perhaps this is also the reason why scholars like Junko Miyawaki59 insisted that Zanabazar was recognized as Tāranātha and educated as Jonangpa and only later. did he become the follower of the Gelugpa order. Atwood 2004. Ngaggi Wangpo (1839) and Ngawang Lobsang Dondub (1847) it becomes clear. such 56 See Smith 1969. in print). places. but when his brother was assassinated. the clash was inevitable. The narrative is much closer to the late Tibetan biographies of Zanabazar composed in 1839 and 1847. 193-4. Miyawaki 1994. See also footnote 22. When the conflict ripened in 1686-1688. in print). 59 Though she used some Tibetan sources. however. p. In the light of the writings of the fifth Dalai Lama. until he went to Tibet. Inc. one may observe how the present ninth embodiment of the Khalkha Jetsundampa (b. note 8). which is known to us from the Tibetan and Mongolian Buddhist hagiographies (rnam thar). at the same time. Indiana University. however. 45. that Schulemann wrote (p.e. right from the very beginning of his genyen vows and prior to his travel to Tibet.02. by the fourteenth Dalai Lama.. .e. is told from the perspective of the Gelugpa tradition. Schulemann also “dismisses the identification of the Jebtsundamba Qutugtu with the historian Tāranātha and says that Tāranātha is an epithet of Maitreya”. Interview by Agata Bareja-Starzyn«ska. P. ATWOOD.The Mongolian Incarnation of Jo nang pa Tāranātha 255 as Bensa Tulku Lobsang Tenzin Gyatso and educated by Namkha Sönam Drakpa. 2004. the most authoritative hierarch of the Gelugpa order. Research Institute for Inner Asian Studies. we can be sure that Zanabazar was regarded as the incarnation of both. Zanabazar) was the reincarnation of the Maidari (i. that the incarnation of the Jonangpa scholar Tāranātha was recognized in the body of a Mongolian prince and accepted by the Gelugpa hierarchs who secured his Gelugpa education. 219-220) that the first Qutugtu (i. 4. Comparison of the sources seems to make it possible to conclude that there is no indication that Zanabazar ever received teachings other than from the Gelugpa teachers. Z. Ch..2007. Encyclopedia of Mongolia and Mongol Empire. A History of Tibet by the Fifth Dalai Lama of Tibet translated by . especially the Jonangpa Kālacakra. Indiana. Maitreya) Qutugtu. Conclusions The life story of the first Jetsundampa. Facts on File. 1995. 1932) educated in the Gelugpa environment was made responsible for preserving the Jonangpa tradition. 61 Bibliography AHMAD.. Bawden mentions (p.. However. 61 He was enthroned as the right incarnation of the ninth Jetsundampa in 1991. who died in 1635. Indiana University Oriental Series. He received the Jonangpa teachings mainly in his late age from Kalu Rinpoche. Someone may regard as strange and inaccurate the fact.. Bloomington. New York. Jamyang Chöje (not Mañjuśrī and not Maitreya) and of Jetsundampa Tāranātha Kunga Nyingpo. “Tibeto-Mongolian Conflict of 1686-88 with focus on the role of the Mongolian Jetsundampa Blo bzang bstan pa‘i rgyal mtshan—re-examination of sources”. BAREJA-STARZYN« SKA. in print). Text. BAREJA-STARZYN« SKA. in print). J. vol. Öndör gegeeniin namtruud orshvoi (Biographies of Öndör gegeen).. Prof.256 Agata Bareja-Starzyn«ska « SKA. (a. pp. Ulaanbaatar. “The Clear Mirror by Zaya-Paita Blo-bzan« ’Phrinlas”. 7-16 (reprinted in the collected works by Bira. A. Mongolo-Tibetica Pragensia. 2. Veronika Veit. pp. Lubsangdorji on his 70th birthday”. “Mongolian Biography of Zanabazar (1635-1723). pp... Sh. (b. . In: “Altaica et Tibetica. In: Biographies of Eminent Mongol Buddhists. BAWDEN. Culture and Historiography. London. Band 9. Sh. 2009. Studies in the Mongolian History. BAREJA-STARZYN« SKA. Wiesbaden. A.. BAREJA-STARZYN« SKA. Königswinter 2006.. Mongolian-English Dictionary. BIRA. Kegan Paul International. 2008. 1961.. 1997. ed. Proceedings of the Seminar on “Exploring Tibet’s History and Culture” held in Delhi. J. A. A. The Jebtsundamba Khutukhtus of Urga. BAWDEN. In: “Special Commemorative Issue in Honour of Assoc. in print). Otto Harrassowitz.. Asiatische Forschungen. In: Felicitation Volume for Prof. the First Mongolian Jetsundampa – A Preliminary Study of the Manuscript from the Kotwicz Collection”. Rocznik Orientalistyczny. by Elverskog. Compiled by…. pp. Tomus XXXIV (1-3). “The growth of the religious authority BAREJA-STARZYN of the First Jetsundampa of Mongolia (1635-1723)”. 63 (1).. Sh. (c. Selected Papers. Biographies of the First Jetsundampa Öndör Gegeen Zanabazar Blo bzang bstan po‘i rgyal mtshan – Brief Survey of Sources. Ch. Halle. 49-57. Anniversary Volume dedicated to Stanislaw Godzin« ski on His Seventieth Birthday”. 2009. In: Acta Orientalia Academiae Hung. 1980. 7-18.. PIATS 2006: Tibetan Studies: Proceedings of the Eleventh Seminar of the International Association for Tibetan Studies. Translation and Notes. “The ‘Spiritual Sons’ of the first Mongolian Jetsundampa Zanabazar (1635-1723) on the basis of his biographies”. Tokyo 1994. 1980. IITBS.. 246-254) BIRA. A. Ch. 1995.. Vol.. Ngag dbang blo bzang rgya mtsho. History and Politics in Mongolia.) 1989. R. Biographie des 1. Ngag dbang blo bzang rgya mtsho’i rnam thar. Jivzun Darnatyn Gegeenii deed khuvilgaan Agvaanluvsanchoijinyamdanzanvanchügbalsanbogiin dür khiigeed tüükhend yalguulsad beer boshog üzüülsen ba khaany ugsaany yosyg todruulan üildsen endüürelt üzegdliig mashid arilgagch. BYAMBAA. Mongol Bilig Series. Surkhan. Ulaanbaatar. Re-edition. Biographies of Eminent Mongol Buddhists. ELVERSKOG. 1-3. Mongol Uls Shinjlekh Ukhaany Akademi Tüükhiin Khüreelen.R.. DEMBEREL. 15. 2006. 2001. vol. 1981. IITBS. Truth. Agvaanprinleijamts. Mongol Bilig Series. The Collected Biographies of Jebzundampa Khutugtus of Khalkha. Ulaanbaatar. Ulaanbaatar. In: Zentralasiatische Studien. 1. 331-382. 2005. R.. 2004. Halle. rJe bcun dam pa . (ed).Qutuqtu Öndür gegen (1635-1723) verfasst von ag gi dba po 1839”. “Sayin qubitan-u süsüg-ün terge (The [spiritual] vehicle of devotion of the one who is of great merits). Krung go’i bod rig pa dpe skrun khang. bogd naryn namtar. Ulaanbaatar. No. H. pp. 13. 2008. 1981. Ch. The Memory of Heroes. DASHBADRAKH. 1993. Beijing.. The Bibliographical Guide of Mongolian Writers in the Tibetan Language and the Mongolian Translators. Routledge Curzon.). London and New York. khaad. Mi rigs dpe skrun khang (Beijing ed. Ch.. Königswinter 2006. 2002. Ulaanbaatar.). PIATS 2006: Tibetan Studies: Proceedings of the Eleventh Seminar of the International Association for Tibetan Studies. 1979. Mkhas dbang Dung dkar blo bzang ’phrin las mchog gis mdzad pa’i bod rig pa’i tshig mdzod chen mo shes bya rab gsal zhes bya ba bzhugs so (Great Encyclopaedia of Tibetan Studies Called Elucidation of Knowledge Composed by Eminent Great Scholar Dung dkar blo bzang ’phrin las). 2004. Mönkhiin Üseg. (trans. pp.The Mongolian Incarnation of Jo nang pa Tāranātha 257 BYAMBAA. Agvalluvsandondov. ICHINNOROV S. J. I. shashin töriin naran saran khosolsny gerliin gegee khemeegdekh orshiv. (ed. DUNGKAR. Öndör Gegeen Zanabazar. Namtar. Some Questions Concerning [His] Biography and Work). DL5. 93-139 and No. KAPLONSKI. (trans.). . KÄMPFE. buteeliin zarim asuudal (Öndör Gegeen Zanabazar. Mongolyn soyolyn tüükhet dursgaluud. vol..) 1982 SMITH.. Mtsho sngon mi rigs dpe skrun khang (Xining ed. Petersburg. Central Institute of Higher Tibetan Studies. Blo gsal yid ’phrog dri za’i tambura’i sgra dbyangs. 1994.. LOKESH CHANDRA. L. Mongol Uls Shinjlekh Ukhaany Akademiin Khel Zokhiolyn Khüürelen. 1961. 1879-80.). Lung rigs smra ba dka’ chen mi pham rdo rjes mdazd pa’i snyan ngag le’u gnyis pa’i dper brjod.. New Delhi. 1896-98. ŚataPiaka Series. Sku ’bum byams pa gling gi gdan rabs don ldan tshangs pa’i dbyangs snyan. vol. Petersburg. “Tibeto-Mongolian Relations in the Time of the F i r s t R j e b t s u n d a m p a Q u t u t u ” . New Delhi. Geschichte der Dalai-Lamas. Śata-Piaka Series. New Delhi. Śata-Piaka Series. Wisdom Publications. LOKESH CHANDRA. 1981. The Mongolia Society. Gser tog blo bzang tshul khrims rgya mtsho. vol. LOKESH CHANDRA. pp. I-IV. POZDNEYEV. Mongoliya i Mongoly.. Sku ’bum gdan rabs. L. 1958. Ogtorguin tsagaan gardi. SCHULEMANN. Inc. 16. LESSING. Lung rigs. 1969. 28-30.. vol.258 Agata Bareja-Starzyn«ska KHÜRELBAATAR. “How legends developed about the First Jebtsundamba: In Reference to the Khalkha Mongol Submission to the Manchus in the Seventeenth Century”. 1982. A. The Authobiography of the First Panchen Lama Blobzang-chos-kyi-rgyal-mtshan edited by Ngawang Gelek Demo with . LOKESH CHANDRA. MIYAWAKI. Indiana.. Part 2. Works of Jaya-pandita Blo-bzang-’phrin-las.) Leipzig. 45-67.. (2nd ed. 1996. A. Proceedings of the 5th International Seminar on Tibetan Studies in Narita. 294. Life and Works of Jebtsundampa I. F.). vol. Varanasi. G.. Mongolian-English Dictionary (corrected reprinting). M. Śata-Piaka Series. Bloomington. 2000. J. G. M. I n : Ti b e t a n St u d i e s . St. Somerville. D. In: Memoires of the Research Department of the Toyo Bunko. No 52. POZDNEYEV. The wheel of great compassion. New Delhi. Ihara Shōren and Yamaguchi Zuihō (eds. LADNER. 278-281. Materials for a History of Tibetan Literature. 2000. Japan 1989.. St. Urginskiye Khutukhty. Narita. 1982. MIYAWAKI. Sarnath. 1963. (ed. J. Eminent Tibetan Polymaths of Mongolia. 1994. “The Lineage of Tāranātha According to Klong-rdol bla-ma”. . Gedan Sungrab Minyam Gyuphel Series. Ulaanbaatar. Avralt itgelt Bogd Jivzündambyn khiid Baruun Khüreenii garsan yosyg tovch ögüülsen shudarga orshigchdyn chikhnii chimeg khemeekh orshvoi. 12. Ulaanbaatar.. No 1. 1991). STEARNS. H. New Delhi. In: Lavain egshig. The Buddha from Dolpo. 2008.org) .. Agvaantsültemjamts. Mongolyn burkhan shashny töv Gandantegchinlin khiid Öndör gegeenii neremjit Shashny deed surguul’. Internet sources Nitartha—Tibetan-English online dictionary (http://www. Krung go’i bod kyi shes rig dpe skrun khang (Beijing 1989. In: Tibetan Studies.org/ dictionary) RY—Rangjung Yeshe Tibetan-English Dictionary TBRC—The Tibetan Buddhist Resource Center (http://www. vol. Proceedings of the 4th Seminar of the International Association for Tibetan Studies. Sh..tbrc. SOMLAI. Sh. 1998. SONINBAYAR.nitartha. 1988.. Oiradyn Burkhany shashny tovch tüükh (Short History of Buddhism of Oirats). C. State University of New York Press. L. “Öndör gegeen Zanabazaryn tovch namtar”.. 1999. Uebach and Jampa Panglung (eds.The Mongolian Incarnation of Jo nang pa Tāranātha 259 an English introduction by . Sde srid sangs rgyas rgya mtsho. München. Dga’ ldan chos ’byung Bai ūrya ser po.). G. TERBISH.. SONINBAYAR. A Study of the Life and Thought of the Tibetan Master Dolpopa Sherab Gyaltsen. Vaidurya Serpo. 1995. Gandan Tegchenlin khiid. Bibliotheca Oiratica [Series]. Suny Series in Buddhist Studies.. (photo by the author) . close to the birth place of Zanabazar (photo by the author) Modern statue of the first Khalkha Jetsundampa Zanabazar inside the temple of Yisün Züilt in Övörkhangai.260 Agata Bareja-Starzyn«ska Modern thangka depicting the first Khalkha Jetsundampa Zanabazar (1635-1723) inside the temple of Yisün Züilt in Övörkhangai. The Mongolian Incarnation of Jo nang pa Tāranātha 261 Lake Shireet Tsagaan Nuur (‘The White Lake of [Zanabazar’s] enthronement’) where the first Khalkha Jetsundampa Zanabazar received the vow in 1639 (photo by the author) Alleged place where the first Khalkha Jetsundampa Zanabazar received his genyen vows and where his hair cutting ceremony took place at Yisün Züilt in Övörkhangai (photo by the author) The ninth Khalkha Jetsundampa Jampal Namdol Chokye Gyeltsen (b. photo by the author) . 1932) in his residence Takten House in Dharamsala (February 2007. (-q-w$-c.(n! N√c-xr-zdCn-[r-! V´-Nƒ^e !h! h-v$-fz#-aen-a! Nƒ]-N‘! z(-f-[r-fhfn-c*-dg·rxr-dnC*n-]n-dq(v-R#-x([! t*n-dC#n-z[^e! zdCn-Nå≈#-D√(]-y*]-nc.Okakura Tenshin (‒) l^-d-w(r-]n. salt. Dover Publication.1906 v(c-u-[*d-df-uz#-dNø]-dt(n.tv-n*-zd*v. The leaves were steamed.(T-nNø#! d[*-v*en-n$-R^c-t#e !i#-m(r-e#-dC#n-zd$c-d.Sir Charles Bell R#-sXe-[*d-d([-W#-f#-[frn-l*n-az# Kakuzo Okakura.  (?) pp. and boiled together with rice.)! !d([-[r-u-Nƒ≈en-a-[r-zdC*v-dz#-y#e-vd-p$r-r$-! u(-nCn-dqC-b#n-h° -c#r-! )! !.The Book of Tea l*n-az#-sXe-[*d-fj[-]n-d. NY. The prets of the southern dynasties have left some fragments of their fervent adoration of the “froth of the liquid jade” then emperors used to bestow some rare preparation of the leaves on their high ministers as a reward for eminent services yet the method of drinking tea at this stage was primitive in the extreme. .Okakura Kakuzo zf! xr-]-. spices.(-q-w$-c. .o*]-b#]. made into a cake.q-q^-j·. The Book of Tea.$r-sX-# ‰Xv-x$v-eC^c-dXn-Ë*n-[r-eCen-y*]-[^-dÌ‹-dc-dX*[! w(re#-u-[*d-]r-! [^n-cdn-dl#-a-[r-V®-az#-Nœdn-Vøc-d([-[r-n(e-a(z#-h·-a-fr-a(n-[*r-nrxr-u-v(-[*-[r-p(e-c√rn-dg·n-d‰Xd! [*-]n-eo^]-w$r-]r-Ô·e ![*-Ë*n-q*q.(-dq([-N´≈&-Ìv-l#d-zu$efwn-y*]-. evidently a corruption of the classic T’ou. crushed in a mortar. On The Tea Cultivation in Western Szeuch’uan and the tea trade with Tibet via .” Anonymous.(Cake) Vøcd. who make a curious syrup of these ingredients. ginger. milk and sometimes with onions! The custom obtains at the present day among the Thibetans and various Mongolian tribes. “By the fourth and fifth centuries Tea became a favourite beverage among the inhabitants of the modern ideograph ch’a was coined. orange peel. ‘Tibetan tea’ (Letter). P. IA. “Song-tsen Gam-po’s grandson introduced tea from China. pl. -.” Tea. Zhang Junde. . . -. pp. . Chengtu. ‘A note on the Tibetan method of computing distance by means of tea-cups’. bricks of. (First printed in ). China Review. .. Journal of the (Royal) Asiatic Society. Jin Fei. Bombay. . Horne Charles. XII. . Chinese. Roy Sarat Chandra. . III. ‘Tea in Tibet’. Calcutta Branch (Asiatic Society of Bengal). Royal Geographical Society. -. p. . /.. the first Indian to taste Tibetan tea’. p. .  fig. New York. Tibetan Review. Chakrabarty. -. . . . Baber Edward Colborne. Hutchinson James. B. -. Mitra Sarat Chandra. Bianzheng gonglun (Frontier Affairs). ‘Tea-drinking Custom in Xikang and Tibet’. Calcutta. Tea in the sourthern frontier region and Xikang-Tibet. . -. XXII. Meng-Zang yuebao. Journal of the Anthropological Society of Bombay. Bhutan and Tartary’.  Sir Charles Bell. Tibetan Review. . Oxford University Press. ‘Tea trade between Sichuan and Tibet during the Qing Dynasty. . Indian Brick Tea For Tibet. Lumsden G. A report on a mission to Szu-chuan. (The Continent Magazine) Taipei. Tenzin Trinley (Sherpa Rinpochi) ‘Tibetan Tea’ (Letter). Tibetan Review. XLV. . ‘Atisha Dipankar. XXXII. . London. Supplementary Papers. November . August . . ‘Investigation on the trade of tea between Sichuan and Tibet’. ‘Notes on a Tibet Teapot and on the Tea Used therein’. . V. VI..u(-nCn-dqC-b#n-h° -c#r-! 264 ]r-vzr-! nC(r-dg]-N´f-a(z#-Nœ^-hz#-Nœ^-[^n-n$-u-]#-‰X-]e-]n-d([-[^-[c-ze(-h$en! d([-‰Xvwd-W#-do^r-dXz#-eg·-d(c-R^c-]n-i#]-c*c-u-s(c-n$f-t$-]n-d[^]-t$z#-dc-zp$r-dc-dX*[! t*n-en$rn! Tachienlu. cauldrons of. Published (?) ‘A paper on the consumption of tea in Tibet. Dalu zazhi’. XIV. Nirmal C. The People of Tibet. ‘Report on the progress of the culture of the China tea plant in the Himalayas’. at monks’ sports. January . . p. I. ‘On the Chinese tea trade with Tibet’. M. Huang Kangxiang. and this has become the national beverage of the Tibetans. . Edkins J. . Thomas Manning. Ba (Sichuan)/ Nanking. ceremony of offering to gods before . . . X. Yu Chuan. . -. . . . Sinha. who drink from thirty to seventy cups of it every day. Kang dao yuekan. -. Asia (and the Americas) Magazine. ‘Where salt and tea are money’. -. .86 . With an introduction to the manuscripts by Tashi Tsering. By Sn ˙ ags-’Chan ˙ Hum-Ka-Ra-Dza-Ya. . .16 Nø([-yc-dX(]-]f-NIf-az#-fr-[^-p(n-az#-[e*-N√(r-dqz-dl#-zj‹]-a-mΩ&=-q-c-d#j-x. . . introduced into Tibet.(‒) W#-lv-N√(d-E√#r-Nƒ]-dqCzd$f-an-fj[-az#-‰X^[-dl#z#-[qz-zeC*v-vn! “u-]#! ‰X-]e-e#-Nœ[-[^-„Ω-l*n-dË([! [*-. preferred by Tibetans to Indian tea. substitutes for.  Brtag Thabs Padma Dkar Po’i ’Chun Po.uq^]-e. . -.(mΩ&=-fj[-‰Xv-d-) zf! fwn-a-wfn-Nø(]-R#n-s(-dCr-y*]-a(-N‘*-e[(r-Ì°z#-eg$e-vewr-e#-elv-xn-wr-[^-N∂≈c-dz#-v*en-db[-a{ƒ-[qc-a(z#-zy$]-a(-vn! “[r-a(-u-x#-E√*rel#-dX^r-h$v-]#! N®(]-R#-y(n-‰Xv-dXr-y$d-n*fn-[az-[*n! !s(-dCr-Nø*r-[^-dl^en-az#-[^n-b#e]! dX-et#e-e#n-b#r-v(-t#e-s$v-dz#-h°! !lv-[^-en(v-dn-c(-dX^r-V“]-ac-dX^r-! ![*z#-sX#c-]-dXl*n-eCen-a-x#]!” l*n-[r-! dX. Dolanji. . five. kinds of.#en-n#-o^-aû-y*]-y(n-W#-zdX^r-e]n. as medium of exchange.d([-[r-u-Nƒ≈en-a-[r-zdC*v-dz#-y#e-vd-p$r-r$-! 265 [^n-cdn. consumption of. . . .*c-d-x#]! u-z[#-[r-a(-fp(-c#n-Vµ-x$v-[^-x([-ac-eCen! e]f-]ndX-h° -c#r-e#n-v(-z[d-zdCn-d$-sd-a-vn-dc-N‘r-]n-et#e-.e-Nø*-‰X-]e-Nø(r-w$]-‰Xva(z#-nCn-h[-a-dNI^]-az#-ar-[^-Vµ^r-dn-‰X-Ë*n-er-x#]-]#-f-f∑*]-Wr-e]f-R#-Vµn-e]rd-x#]-a-z[}-dnf-]n-v(-f-lv-[^-s$v-dn-h-d(-][-vn-eC(v-dc-R^c! wc-fXr-dn-dC(-deating. . .$cye-an-d([-[^-u-l*n-. . . . .  b(e-eCrn. import of. preparation of. Published by Tashi Dorji. r-! ‰X^[-W#-dqz-N´ç&d-[}r-nC(r-dqC-b#n-[av-d.1400 vn! “Nœ(f-R#-fy(e-o^-b(r-[qc-Ì° -f(-z[#-N®c-dl(n-p(e-e#-z(-fc-r(n-zj‹]-Wr-r(-d(-uz#-Ì° -f([*r-nr-a#-t#r-Nå^-uc-eCen-a-[*-fy(e” t*n-env-d-v$r-z[}*]-z[#-Nƒ]-a-dn([-]fn-[dr-f(ven-]n-zh·v-eC(en-e]r-dX^r-! b*v-e(r-b*v-sC*r-! [*z$-[fc-dNø]-zj‹]-s$]-h·en-W#ndÌfn! d([-el^r-Nƒ]-Ì‹n-wr-! {µ-cf-n-v! 2009 b(e-eCrn.177 N“*-nC#[-nrn-‰Xn-‰X-fh·n-fj[-a! en(-d-c#e-az#-dNø]-dt(n-Nƒ]-D√z#[e(rn-‰X]-‰X^[-dl#z#-env-dX*[-dÃùZ^c-N®(]-a(z#-fV√#-qz#-sC*r-d-vn-[^f-d$-dl#-a-sX#-f-‰X^[-W#’f-db[-t*n-dX-d-dl^en-n(! !d([-el^r-Nƒ]-Ì‹n-wr-! {µ-cf-n-v! 1994 b(e-eCrn.r-e#n-fj[-a! d([-W#Nƒ]-Ì#n-y*[-Ì(f-sX(en-dN“^n! d([-cr-Nœ≈(r-V¨(rn-Nƒ]-Ì#n-wr-e#n-dÌfn! d([-V¨(rn-f#[frn-[a*-Nœç&]-wr-! 1986 b(e-eCrn.#en! dXr-a-dqC-b#n-[av-d.226 v-e.87–91 .#en-Wr-[*-v-[(-N‘r-f-fj[! [-[^r-i#-f-w-bn-W#-c#r-l(ena-i#-f-bc-fhfn-n$-dX-[*-z(r-]n-N®(]-f-Vøc-dX*[-a-dg]-a(n-e.#en-a-[r-p*-h·f-Nœ≈*no*-dØe-l#d-dXn-a-]! b#r-[*-]#-d([-[^-f*[-az#-b#r-l#e-x#]-a-[r-[*-x#-v(-fz#-Ì° -]n-sC]d$-l#e-lv-[^-dt$e-an-lv-Nœ(f-a-n(n! do^r-dz#-fy(e-t#e-x#]-a-f∑*]-]n-D√(]-a(’fn-v-b#r-[*-x#-c#en-n-e]n-er-[^-x([-f*[-zh·v-[e(n-a-[r-! È*[-]-dX-[ezen(v-cn-y*]-a(-e]r-‰X^-x#]-en$rn! D√(]-zdrn-fr-y*-dn-n-e]n-fr-a(c-zh·v-[^ e(-zu(-[dr-z[^n! en(-d-c#e-az#-h‹e-fj·[-ex$-p(e-[e(rn-‰X]! a*-t#r-f#-c#en-[a*-Nœç&]-wr-! 1983 b(e-eCrn.1434 v(cfj[-az#-‰X-d([-x#e-hr-fwn-a-[ez-dX*[-vn! “dg]-a(-z[^n-nC(r-fr-a(-Ë*-dNI^]-el#[}e-a(-l#e-e#n-p*dn-az#-[^n-n$-Nœdn-[*c-x([-az#-Nƒ]-a-h·n-Nƒ]-Nødn-d[*-gf-vnel]-[e-f-b*n-az#-ŒX*]-R#n-[}e-Nœ≈*[-f-dX^r-! i#]-l#e-s(-dC r-e#-a$-b^z#-.266 u(-nCn-dqC-b#n-h° -c#r-! xr-y*-dn-zdCn-d$-nc-dod-a-v-Nœ≈*n-]n-[r-a(-‰X-]e-x$v-[^-zs*v-dc-db[-[(!” !l*n-[r-! d([-[^-u-p(e-fc-dX^r-dz#-v(-‰X^n-exn-c$-Nøe-hr-a-[av-zdX(c-d.r-a(n.$c-[^-N®c-fp(rf-fX(r-dz#-dX-x#[-[^-z(r-d-l#e-e#-w-]-b#r-d$-v(-z[d-[r-dtn-a-l#e-∑*c-]n-Nœ[-NI]ac-N´ç(en-a-dg]-a(n-e. d([-[r-u-Nƒ≈en-a-[r-zdC*v-dz#-y#e-vd-p$r-r$-! 267 sX#]-Wr-f-È*[! ‰Xv-a(-vn-el]-dnf-‰X^-f*[-az#-D√(]-a(-et#e-d([-W#-n-e]n-pfnt[-[^-dgv-dc-n(r-xr-f-È*[! fpc-‰X-]e-e#-fpz-fhfn-]en-en*d-Nø^e-a(-Nƒ^ep#r-r*c-dN“[-a-l#e-o^-N√*dn-o*-dnfn-ac! ]en-en*d-‰X-y*]-a(-z[#-z[}z#-en*d-]-b#r[*-c#en-x([-ac-pe-y([-dnfn-]n-sX#]-an-y$-y*]-a(-l#e-v-p$e-Nø*-zeC(-f-]^n! Nœdn[*c-i-y*]-a(-l#e-w(z#-z„#n-[*-]n-y$-]r-[^-l^en-o*-n(r-d-fp(r-Nø*-dnf-ac! y$-z[#-wl*r-y*-d-f-eo(en-eo#r-c#r-a(-cr-f*[-z[}-NIf-Nø*-y$-[*-d›v-]n-sX#]-an-s-c(v-R#]en-en*d-[*c-N√*dn! ]en-en*d-[*z#-b#r-sv-y*-d-]#-dXn-∑*c-x(r-dz#-b#r-[*-cr-x#]ac-fp(r-]n-[ez-pe-y([-[*-b#r-[*-]n-‰Xd-w$c-et#e-dÂn! xr-dnf-f](-l#e-zw(cdc-‰Xv-a(-dNI^]-el#-[˚rn-a-v-]#-z[#-gf-R#n-y(e-ac-z[^e !n-pe-c#r-a(-z[#-z[}cN√*dn-]n-b#r-‰Xd-w$c-et#e-vn-∑*c-‰X^-f*[-]-i^r-[}en-pe-y([-an! r-v-wv-f-et#e[*[-‰X^-x([-]-xe-a(-e-z[}-f-c*[-[f-dnf-az#-f$-v-E√(-d$c-[^-b-d-x$-f(-et#e-f#-vzu#en-N‘r-f*[-ac-w(z#-zeCf-[*c-N√*dn-dX^r-dn! b-d-x$-f(-z[#-v-wv-dqv-y(e-a-xrnC#[-NIf-]n-dqv-dz#-eCdn-dXn-an! b#r-[*-]n-b-dz#-wv-‰Xd-et#e-v(rn-a-b-d-vdqv! cr-i#[-W#n-‰Xd-et#e-∑*c-]n-z(r-Nø*-‰Xv-a(z#-s(-dC r-fp(r-nc-f-N√*dn-dc-[^-bd-[*n-∑*c-eC(en-dXn! u-b#r-[*-’fn-‰Xv-a(-v-s$v-dn-‰Xv-a(z#-dNI^]-el#-x(rn-n$[˚rn-]n-D√(]-a(-[*-v-dX-[ez-z[([-a-h‹fn-a-e]r-l#r-! [*n-ŒX*]-dXn-]n-d([-v-u-[qcd.r-a(n-dÌfn! ‰X-d([-x#e-hr-y*]-f(! n#-„(]f#-c#en-[a*-Nœ]&ç -wr-! 2000 b(e-eCrn.172–174 dc-vn! “‰Xv-a(.$c-]! dX-x#[-[^-z(r-d! N®c-f-fp(r-a-et#e-e#-w-]! b#rd$-v(-z[d-[r-i^r-bn-b#e-∑*c-]n! Nœ[-NI]-ac-N´e(ç -e#-z[^e-a! ‰Xv-a(n-e.(z[^n-nCr( -fr-a(-Ë*-c√r^ -]fzsCv^ -R#-‰Xv-a(-) z[#z-# [^n-n$! d([-]! N®c-f*[-az#-u-[r-! [qc-x(v-dXr^ -dz#-v(-‰Xn^ -x([-a! ‰Xn-acel]-[^-Vø-l#r-! .#en-]zr-! N®]-f-y*[- .(-‰X^z#-p$en-dnf-zw(c-” l*n-env!  [^r-[qc-h‹e-fj·[-y*]-f(! qCr^ -e(z-# d([-c#e-a-[a*-Nœ]&ç -wr-! 2002 b(e-eCrn.$c-gf-dNø]-a-]#-[^n-]f-l#e !‰Xv-a(-NIr^ -[}e-a(-l#e-e#n-p*dn-az#-[^n-n$! d([-]! Nƒ]-Nå[≈ -el^r-dl#]-b*n-a-]#-f*[! .(-v-dØ*]-a-gf-x([-an! Nœ-^ zhfndc-dl^en-x([-az#-]r-]n-s(-dCr-e#-a$-b^-.869 [^r-[qc-c#]-a(y*n-v$r-[}rn-nz#-h#e-el#-[r(n-]#! [av-zdXc( -d.n-[r-! Nå[(≈ -vf! c#en-d. z-do^r-]#-er-xr-f#-z[([! dXn-∑*c-dz#b#r-d$-z[#-]#! do^r-dz#-fy(e-v$n-W#-en(n! ][-W#-Nƒ]-[^-z[^e-an! r-v-E√-( d-i*-d-’fn-W#n! b#rz[#-Vø-d$-ec-z[^e-Wr-h·v-dX]( -t#e !dX-[ez-y*]-a(-dX[* -[(-en$rn-a-[r-! D√]( -zdrn-dX]# -a(n! d([x$v-R#-n-y-Nø[( -Nƒ[-pfn-t[-dgv-xr-f-È*[! D√]( -a(! ‰Xv-a(-vn-dnf-‰X-^ f*[-az#! E√-( d-i*-b(nb#e-e#n! d([-W#-n-fpz-z∑fn-z∑fn-an! ‰X-]e-zp$d-a(! Nƒe^ -v#r-r*-d-fp(r-a-et#e-o^-N√d* Nø!* s-q#-z[}-dz#-en*d-]! b#r-[*-r*n-ac-x([-[f-NIf-]n! eo[-sX]# -an! ]en-[*z-# h$c-c(v-]! y$y*]-a(-et#e-z[^e-an! y$-v-]#-zeC-( f-]^n! b#r-[*-]#-]en-en*d-]-x([-ac-r*n-c#e-Nø!* ‰Xv-a(-x#[v-n*fn-W#]-dN“[-g-]! [c-t#e-]n-i-y*]-a(-l#e-w(z-# p[-[*-]n-y$-[*-v-l^en-n(r-d-[r-! y$-w-l*ry*-d-f-eo(en! eo#r-v-f#-]^d-ac-z[^e-an! n*fn-[ez-Nø!* [*z-# Ë*n-v-d›v-sX]# -]n! ]enen*d-o^-N√d* -a-[r-! ]en-f-]#-sv-y*-d! dXn-∑*c-dz#-b#r-[*-ŒXr-[^-z[^e-an! r-]#-d-e#-Ë*-d(-r*nac-Nœ-^ Vøn-ac-zR^c-c(-NIf-az#-[ez-Nå-(ç [r-dtn-]n! b#r-[*-z[}-d-‰Xd-et#e-Ân! xr-dnf-f](sX-# f-v! ‰Xv-a(-NIr^ -d-[rn-a-v-]#! z[#-s]-r*n! n-pe-c#r-dc-z[^e-an! [-v]! zw$c-dz#-eCe( nnf! wv-a-et#e-x([-]-dnf! z[([-a-Nœn*≈ -az#-[^n-[*c! [-q#-f*[-az#-b-d-f(-et#e-f#-zj°f-acÌ-c$-N√d* n-dXr^ -an! z[#-z[}-v-wv-dqv-c$r-azr-nC[# -[f-NIf-]n-eCdn-dXn-an! u#-Vøc-z[([-adl#]-dXc-dXr^ -]n! b#r-[*-]n! b-dz#-wv-‰Xd-et#e-[r-! w(-cr-e#-‰Xd-et#e-w$c-x(r-dn! vf-le.√-dz#-dc-v-n(r-]zr-! b-dn-Wr-w$c-]n! d([-‰Xv-a(z-# s(-dCr-fp(r-nc-dNœv≈ -v(! ![*-]n-eCe( ndqe-Nø!* ‰Xv-a(z-# Nå]≈ -N®c-s$v-dn! b#]-o^-[R*n-[ez-]n! dX-[ez-y*]-a(zr-dXn! dNIr^ -n(n-a-vxr-s]-a(-dXr^ -Nœ[! [*-Ø#r-! ‰Xv-a(z-# lv-]n-z[#-]#-do^r-dz#-fy(e-o^-z[^e” t*n-env! ‰X-d([-x#e-hr-y*]-f(! b(e-eCrn.240 .268 u(-nCn-dqC-b#n-h° -c#r-! ‰X-d([-x#e-hr-fwn-a-[ez-dX*[-]r-dl^en-az#! x(-fc-‰X-u-d.r-r]-dØen-az#-dNø]dt(n-d[^[-Ì‹z#-‰X-fh·-vn-Wr-! “d([-‰Xv-z[^n-nC(r-fr-a(-Ë*! !c√^r-]f-zsC^v-R#-‰Xv-a(z#[^n! !N®c-f*[-Vµz#-d[^[-Ì‹-dl#]! !u-[r-[qc-x(v-dX^r-a-x#]! !eo]-h‹en-‰Xv-cdn-[e-]env!” l*n-env!  ei*c-f-fj[! nr-N‘rn-Wr-! i#-f-bc-fhfn-n$! [*-dl#]-q-dX[* -W#-z[^e-a-[r-! ‰Xv-a(zr-p*-h·fNœn*≈ -o*! dVøn-]n! b#r-[*-’fn-v! dl#e-fv-dt$e-an! N®c-f*[-W#-b#r-[^-z[^e-t#r-! b#r-[*-x#-N‘-f(et#e-lv-o^-dt$e-]n! dC-( d-fXr-an! lv-Nœf*≈ -a-n(n! do^r-dz#-fy(e-o^-fr(]-]n! [-∑*[-D√]( zdrn-’fn-i(]-t#e !r-]-dz#-Nœdn-z[#c! el]-R#-d. Reel no.(-‰X]-R#n! u-zp$r-re-z[(]-h‹en-dt[! fh·-N®(]-fr-h·en-N´≈&-Ìv! 1985 (1) b(e-eCrn.(-‰X]-y(n-zs*v-R#n-dÌfn-dN´≈&c-u-x#-dNø]-dt(n-vnWr-! “eof-‰X^[-z[#-Vø-d$-‰X-]e-e#-v(-‰X^n-p(e-x]-o#-'*]-]^r-]n-u-È*[-az#-e]z-eof  Nepal-German Manuscript Preservation Project.32 u-yr-Vµ-f(z#-dNø]-dt(n! d([-V¨(rn-f#-[frn-[a*-Nœç&]-wr-! 2000 b(e-eCrn. Running no.1754 v(c-fj[-[f-NIf-az#-u-yr-Vµ-f(z#-dNø]-dt(nvn! “g‹-]z#-x$v-[^-Nœ≈*n-]n! [r-a(c-‰Xz#-‰Xv-a(-y*]-a(-.“u-db[-” t*n-a-v*en-ac-db[-a-a{ƒ[qc-a(z#-zy$]-a(z#-]r-x([-a-vn! “d([-z[#-Nøe-b#r-b(c-c*z#-[^n-n$-dX^r-!” l*n-z[([-h$vf#-et#e-a-l#e-en$r-z[^e sv-y*c-d(]-eC(r-]n-h° -dØ]-R#n. L / b(e-V“*dn.23 zsen-a-Nœ≈dn-W#n-dN“^n! d([-W#-u-db[! fh·-N®(]-fr-h·en-N´≈&-Ìv! 1983 (2) b(e-eCrn57–59!12 [q(]-fy(e-h° -dØ]-R#n-dN“^n! u-dNø([-re-e#-[v-zdd! fh·-N®(]-fr-h·en-N´≈&-Ìv! 1984 (2) b(e-eCrn.1–3 .76 .91 .$r-m*]-p]-q(]-][-W#n-eg°n-acpdn-er-e#n-Wr-f-s]-az#-Nœdn-zuf-[av-Nåç&v-az#-z[d-yen-x#[-[^-z(r-d-]n-uz#v(-f-et#e-∑*c-o*-‰Xv-a(z#-ar-[^-dNœ≈&c-]n-v(-f-z[#z#-w$-d-en(v-]-∑*[-][-vn-eC(v-h$vn(en-v$r-dNø]-an-[*-[(]-‰Xv-a(n-en(v-f-pe-NI^]-vn-eC(v! Â-d(-y*-[r-t(r-y*]-a(d”^rn! [c-y*]-a(-zsXc-dn-frz-zdrn-[*c-z[^n-a-’fn-v-v(-fz#-y*-d-[r-v(-‰X^n’fn-en$rn-]n-x(]-o]-[*-Vøc-V“]-az#-z[d-V“]-R#-V¨(]-b#r-n$-x#n-È*[-a-v-dX-[ez-Nø*cl*n-n(en-dqz-dN´(n! [*-[(]-zh·v-dc-sX#]-an-Nœv-V“]-vn-zsC(-t]-v-È*[-an-eg‹eny*c-fj[! fr-u-f-c*[-i^r-u-c*[! !‰X-]e-‰Xv-a(z#-en(v-u-c*[! !t*n-az#-eof-‰X^[-WrNœdn-[*c-dX^r-!” l*n-env-v(!! [^n-sX#n-v#-pr-h·-en$f-a(z#-Vøe-.d([-[r-u-Nƒ≈en-a-[r-zdC*v-dz#-y#e-vd-p$r-r$-! 269 hv-a-q^]-[ez-”(-Ë*n-fj[-ac-z[([-az#. L.(-‰X]-R#n-dN´≈&c! u-zp$r-Nœdn-fif-zu(e-dX*[-[e(n-a-d[^]! fh·-N®(]-fr-h·en-N´≈&-Ìv! 1984 (1) b(e-eCrn. October . “A Chinese Bogeyman: Fear of Indian Tea and the Failure of British India to Break the Chinese Tea Monopoly in Tibet”.    Vøe-.(-Nørn! ](c-N“*! ](c-E√#r-d([-W#-c#e-el^r-et*n-Nœ≈(r-wr-! 2003 sX-# .64 [az-d(-eg$e-ve-sC*r-dn-dÌfn-a! y(n-zdX^r-fwn-az#-[ez-Nø(]! Nø([-y! !f#-c#en-[a*-Nœç&]wr-! 1986 b(e-eCrn.“‰X-u-h·r-a-v-n(en-h·r-a-V®-” l*n-env-dc-el#en-]dg]-a(-nC(r-dg]-R#-N®-[^n-nf-t#-h[-sX#-]zr-Nœ^-[^n-n$-‰X-u-d([-v-h·r-zeC*fn-dX*[-W#x([-a-fr(]-env-[([-a(-c*[! xr-v#-pr-Vøe-. Paris.(‒) Nœ^[^n-[^n-cdn-d[^]-az#-]r. The Golden Jubilee Conference of the Namgyal Institute of Tibetology. Patrick Booz.(‒) dÌfn-az#! y(n-dX^r-fwn-az#-[ez-Nø(]-]r-! dg]-a(-nC(r-dg]-N´f-a(z#.u(-nCn-dqC-b#n-h° -c#r-! 270 vn-zsC(n-a-Vøc-'*]-]^r-Ë*-[r-z[^n-nC(r-Ë*-ei#n-a(-][-W#n-f]c-dz#-Nœdn-n$-u-x#-v(-f.189 u-x#-dNø]-dt(n-l*n-dX-d-dl^en-n(! !b(e-eCrn. Buddhist Himalaya: Studies in Religion. History and Culture.12 b(e-eCrn.6 Patrick Booz.60 . September . The Second International Seminar of Young Tibetologists. “How the Tibetans Got Their Tea: Desperate Coolies and Clever Women”.(-‰X]-y(n-zs*v-R#n-dÌfn! u-x#-dNø]-dt(n-l*n-dX-d-dl^en-n(! !f#-c#en-[a*-Nœç&]wr-! 2005 b(e-eCrn. Gangtok.√.n-]n-][-[˚rn-dz#-v(-‰X^n-el#-fp$]-R#-dË([-NI#r-eg·-d(-v-u-z[#-Nƒ]-[^-dÌ‹n-az#-[(]l#e-env-a(c-Ø(en!” l*n-env-d-t#n-f#-d[*]! d([-[^-u-dX^r-h$v-[r(n-x([-e]n-h$v-]#-[az-d(-eg$e-ve-sC*r-dn.(-‰X]-y(n-zs*v-R#n-dÌfn-az#-u-x#dNø]-dt(n-vn-Wr-! “ern-c#-c-dn-dNœ(c-dz#-l#r-wfn-z[#-c$-u-[c-]n-v(-r(-i#n-Nø(rVµe-o^-sX#]-n(r-]zr-[*d-p*c-pc-p(c-c$-dq([-a-]#-v(-r(-et#e-Nø(r-Vµe-gf-vn-f*[!” t*n-[r-! xr-! “aZ-'%z$-]n-c#f-ac-y*]-[r-Vµe-ac-m]-‰Xv-cdn-W#-Nœdn-n$-d([-x$veC^-we-o^-u-p(e-f-[c-o*-c#f-az#-v(-cdn-[^-f-l#e-]n-d([-bc-Vµ(z#-sX(en-]n-u-v(-x#do^r-dX*[-[*-d([-]^d-dXr-e#-sX(en-x(rn-n$-c#f-az#-[c-zs*v-n(r-dz#-db[-a-x([-[(! !prd([-W#-u-d. (dC*-dt(-V®-) gf-Nåç([[e(n-h$v-[qc-ye-]r-env! xr-x(-fc-‰X-u-d.66 [^r-[qc-h‹e-fj·[-y*]-f(! b(e-eCrn.177 .(‒) x#]-]f-[aX[! E√#r-Ë*-e*-nc-‰Xv-a(z#-Ø(en-dË([-vn-‰X-]e-u-Ô·r-zd*dn-a-dl^en! l*n-az#-]r[f#en-dnv-u-x#-Nœ(c-sv-y*c-er-xr-f-env! [*z#-]r-h‹e-N‘-[a*c-]! “r-.-dn*-x$v-R#z[}*-x#]! !‰X-]e-a(z#-u-exr-rn-zsCe( !u-b#r-fr-xr-u-w$-f#-z[^e-.62 u-x#-dNø]-dt(n-l*n-dX-d-dl^en-n(! !b(e-eCrn.-dn*n-w$c-v*f#-c#e-[(!” !l*n-[r-! “‰X-]e-a(z#-zd([-az#-feC(]-y*]-v! !u-z[}*]-s*dn-l^-f#-z(r-v*! !dX     u-x#-dNø]-dt(n-l*n-dX-d-dl^en-n(! !b(e-eCrn.*c-d-vn-Ø-u-h·r-c-l*n-f#-zd([-[(!” !t*nen$rn-n(!! u-[r-Øz#-dc-R#-c#]-pr-e#-h[-el#-env-dc-db[-az#-x#e-y-[-s]-f-fp(r-xr-! 1729–1744 dc-N“*-[e*z#-dqz-zR^c-[r-dNø]-zR^c-Nåc-dNœç&]-dX*[-Nœdn! u-[r-zdC^z#-dË*zh·r-e#-c#]-pr-]#-u-N∂e-y$r-et#e-v-zdC^-wv-et#e-[r-l(-en$f.*c! !.r-r]-dØen-az#-dNø]-dt(n-d[^[-Ì‹z#-‰X-fh·-vn! “u-i(-d-[r-uh(r-[r-! !u-zp$r-Nœ≈*-d(-fr-R^c-Wr-! !u-Nå≈[-m-br-[*-d-fwn!” l*n-env-d-z[#-]#-‰X-]epr-‰Xv-cdn-Nœdn-W#-zjf-E√#r-p(e-u-x#-dNø]-dt(n-p(e-fc-fj[-fw]-u-x#-fw]-a(v$z$-x$n.244 [d$-f*[-dC#n-f-b(e-eCrn.870 ‰X-d([-x#e-hr-y*]-f(! b(e-eCrn.“Ø-uz#-h·r-vf-l*n-xr-]-Ø-uz#-h·r-c-l*n-a-z[#-e]z-d(-d([-‰X-f#-c#enei#n-W#n-s]-h$]-h·r-vn-dX*[-az#-Nœdn-n$-dX^r-dz#-f#r-l#e-x#]! f#r-z[#-z[}-[*-‰X-]ee#-x$v-[^-dX^r-d-vn-d([-x$v-[^-f#r-z[#-Vøc-f*[-[*! d([-an-‰X-]e-e#-x$v-[^-p(]-az#-uv(-d([-x$v-[^-z[}*]-an-‰X-u-i(-h·r-l*n-.d([-[r-u-Nƒ≈en-a-[r-zdC*v-dz#-y#e-vd-p$r-r$-! 271 ‰Xv-cdn-W#-Nœdn-n$-[*-dn-[c-∑d-n(r-]n-d([-‰X-dc-[^-Ø-u-h·r-c-l*n-Nœ[-eCen-t][r-[e(n-a-y*-dz#-h·r-c-Nø(dn-y*-l#e-yen-a-Vøc! d([-[^-p(e-f-u-[c-dz#-[^n-h·[-[*e]z-d(-x#-‰Xv-wd-aZ-'%z$-]n-x#]-l#r-c#f-az#-[c-‰Xn-n$-n(r-x([!” t*n-[r-! xr-f$fp$[-]n. $-x$v-wfn-dt(-d‰X[-[*! !zR([-f*[-∑([-v-Nåç([- Vøe-.206 .$c-[^-sX^r-az(!!  [d$-f*[-dC#n-f-b(e-eCrn.u(-nCn-dqC-b#n-h° -c#r-! 272 y*]-pr-Vµ^r-t#-z[}-c*[! !f#-z[([-feC(]-zd([-t#-z[}-c*[! !u-z[}*]-e[]-l^-v-f(-b(e” !t*n[r-! “‰X-]e-a(-l#r-y*]-dt(-d‰X[-W#! !u-z$-.(-‰X]-y(n-zs*v-R#n-dÌfn! u-x#-dNø]-dt(n-l*n-dX-d-dl^en-n(!! f#-c#en-[a*-Nœç&]-wr-! 2005 b(e-eCrn.55 vn-. √-z([-el(]-]^-p(e-fcfuv-Nœdn-u-n#e-[^f-et#e-s$v-]n-p$en-dNœ≈*[-an-h·en-Ô·en-a-[r-! l#-dX*[-[f-aN´(f-Nƒ(]-R#n-f-Nœv-d-t]-v-u-s(c-a-er-e]r-dn-[dr-dNœ^c-d-[r-a(-x#]-en$rn-[(]dl#]-[^-do^r-dn-D√-f-[r-Ø(en-a-fif-a-[r-! f[(-N®en-dNø]-az#-d[e-a(-Ë*-g·r-w-ay*]-a(-xd-nCn-zw(c-dtn-W#n-Nœ^-zh·-dz#-Nœ≈*fn-fy([-[f-ac-dØ*]-az#-v(-‰X^n-fr-d-f.d([-[r-u-Nƒ≈en-a-[r-zdC*v-dz#-y#e-vd-p$r-r$-! 273 ‰X^-dX*[!” t*n-[r-! “‰X-d([-z[^]-f-x(r-d-[r-! !u-z$-.#-eo*c-w-d”(v-dc-b(e” !t*n-a-Vød$-vn-er-xr-f-env-v(!! N®(]-dX(]-Nœ≈*-d$-[f-az#-’f-pc-]r-vzr-u-[r-zdC*v-dz#-Ì-y*z#-r(-fhc-t]-R#-v(-‰X^n-vfh·]-]zr-u-yr-Vµ-f(z#-dNø]-dt(n-vn! “[*-Ë*n-d([-z[#c-‰Xv-a(z#-Nœ≈*fn-n$-dNœ^c-]n-[Vøz#-dc-fy([-N∂≈#]-R#-zeC(-[(]-‰X-y*-[ae-f*[-[^-dXn-a-n(en-c*-c*-]n-l^n-an-f#-vrnWr-c*-ei#n-l^n-]! ‰Xv-d-ei#n-a-[av-V“]-fc-f*-fj[-y*]-a(n-d([-W#-do^r-d-∑[-act]-n(en-dN®en-dË([-l#d-ac-fj[-a-[r-! [av-se-eC^n-Ë*-.23–24 dc-env! .$r-rf-er-Vøc-d([-f#n[e(]-N“*-y*-sCc-fr-u-zd$v-nC(v-[-dc-x([! fr-u-zd$v-Nœdn-u-fzf-ve-d[*-dz#-dNø]dt(n-xr-[^n-N®-h[-]n-x([-a-[a*c-]-d[*-eb*en-se-eC^-”(-Ë*-‰Xv-a(n.*z[^e” !t*n-env! y(n-zw(c-dnf-xn-[^n-cdn-d‰X[-az#-]r-sXe-dod-]n-d.299 e(r-env-v$r-z[}*]-’fn-.(‒) [^n   [d$-f*[-dC#n-f-b(e-eCrn.[! D√-f-[e*-z[^]-eC^d-p(d-‰Xv-D√(]-n(en-dNø]-a-c#]-a(-y*-zj‹]-Nœ≈(r-Nå*v-en$f-v-cr[dr-zdX(c-a-[r-! el]-xr-y(n-dl#]-Nå≈([-a-Nå≈#-N´(n-y*-sC-hr-fz#-Nœ^-Nø(dn-[r-Nœ^-h° -zs*vd-[r-! dNI*]-dNœ^c-v(rn-Nå≈([-n(en-W#-eg·-d(c-r-b*n-cd-N´ç(v-f-f*[-]-f*[-pdn-.-fX*n-Ï-y*]-d([-W#-c#e-el^r-l#dzu$e-wr-e#-vn-dX*[-Nœ^-ldn-yd-r(fn-dNø]-a-ei#-f-ven-vn-zhv-eC(en-e]r-dcp$en-Ë*-y*-l^z!( ! u-yr-Vµ-f(z#-dNø]-dt(n! b(e-eCrn.248 [d$-f*[-dC#n-f-b(e-eCrn. Dan Martin) ven-]n-e]r-dX^r-d-p$en-Ë*-y*-l^z!( ! .332–344 z[#z#-‰X^n-Nø(]-.“i#]-Vøc-l(en-az#-vn-[r-a(-]#-c(-d‰Xz#-dt$[-W#n-sX^e-az#-u-nC^d-f-[r-upr-s(c-er-zp$r-d-[*n-d([-f#z#-∑#f-hr-e#-i#]-enc-a-[*-ze(-h$en-a-x#]!” “d([-f#-sv-f(-y*n-Nœ^-feC(]-v-en(v-u-s$v-Nœdn-ve-ei#n-W#n-s$v-o*-e^n-v$enfh·]-a-dX*[-W#-x([! feC(]-a(n-Wr-N∂≈#]-d[e-e#n-s$v-]-el#-]n-zp$r-d-vn-cr-ze^vR#n-u-s(c-v*]-]n-zp$r-nC(v-f*[-t#r-! zp$r-[^n-Wr-wf-y$r-r$-zez-zp$r-d-vn-wf-erv-ldn-oe-‰Xe-nC(v-x*-]n-f*[!” en(v-u-z[}*]-v$en-xr-v*en-ac-db[-a-a{ƒ-[qc-a(z#-zy$]-a(-vn! “en(v-u-z[}*]v$en-fj°n-az#-egr-N´ç-t]! !x#[-z(r-[*-x#-zR#r-z[}*dn-v*en-dXn-]n! !u-n$]-m-tr-f#-y*    [^n-en$f-nrn-‰Xn-pfn-t[-W#-p$en-Ë*z#-’f-c(v-[av-V“]-se-eC^-”(-Ë*-‰Xv-a(-fy(e-e#en$r-zd$f-c#]-a(-y*-E√*en-df-ei#n-a-dl^en-n(!! Published by Khenpo Shedup Tenzin & Lama Thinley Namgyal.17 d([-x$v-R#-u-vn-dX^r-dz#-eof! Når-‰X]-f*-o(e 2004 (3) [dX#]-u#z#-b(e-eCrn.274 u(-nCn-dqC-b#n-h° -c#r-! cdn.23 .*c-nCv( -x([! sX-# v(en-n$-rv-Ì·v-v-zeC-( d-[r-! ‰Xr-c#r-[^zeCv^ -[^-p(]-Nœdn-u-w$e !h-w$e !fc-w$e-z[*r-r*n-z∑*c-R#-x([!” d([-f#z#.fc-õ#].23 ebf-env-v$r-z[}*]-we-v-w-dN´≈&c-sC]-d$-c*-dXn-x([! d([-x$v-R#-u-vn-dX^r-dz#-eof! Når-‰X]-f*-o(e 2004 (3) [dX#]-u#z#-b(e-eCrn.(z(-ven-W#n-dC#n! d([-x$v-R#-u-vn-dX^r-dz#-eof! Når-‰X]-f*-o(e 2004 (3) [dX#]-u#z#-b(eeCrn.(Dr. Kathmandu.  [dX#]-u#z#-b(eeCrn.#]-Nødn-uz#-ifn-dl*n-[r-z[^-b*n-zj‹]Nørn-Nœ(c-b#]-o^-cen-dN“^n-b#e-l^n-[dr-[^-dor-]! “d([-∑#f-[^-u-yr-s$]-n$f-h·en-]-d[*-Nœ≈#[-W#-zh·-dz#-fh·]-Øen-x#]-o*-’f-q^]-re„([-[^-Nœ[#≈ -a(-u-yr-Nåv* -f-l*n-.12 ze(-Nø([-]n-fj[-a. Shri Gautam Buddha Vihara.-c#z#-d([-c#e-a-fwn-[dr-Nœ^-ldn-ù*].“ve-d[*z#-dNø]-dt(n-f-c#e-f$]-n*v-N´ç(]-f*-” l*n-dXdzr-dl^en! d([-f#-u-[r-zdC*v-]n-v(-r(-i#n-Nø(r-gf-n(r-. Dolanji.#en-zhv! .132–136 dc-]r-en(v-uz#-Nœc( -xr-e.$-h$en-W#nz[}*]!” “ ‰X-u-]#-.r-x([! r(-b*n-b#e-∑#f-v-x(r-az#-h° -u-s(cazf! [qc-x(v-er-zp$r-]-er-zp$r-[eC-vzr-f#-dX*[-t*n! [(-zf! en$f-.-]*-Nœ^-eb*en-y(n-Nœ≈#[-[*-xr-[*-Vøc-x#]-a-[-Vøzr-Vµr-r*c-[}]! fpz-]-i#]-le-sC^en-et#e-e#-[^n-h·[-[f-y$-h·[-dÌ‹-Nørn-xr-u-[r-zdC*v-]n-dX*[-a[a*c-].c-R#vf-sCr-[r-¤^]-ue-yc-c√^r-v-f-zj°fn-ac-v*-[dc-Nø(r-sCe-zez-x#-vf-d$-]n-f#-fj·-Ø[}*v-dl#n-zeC^v-b^v-dXn-o*-u-[d(c-z[}*]-dX*[-[e(n-ac-dØ*]-d([-f#-zez-l#e-e#n-u-zp$r]-N“#e-a-x([-ac-dÌ‹n-]n-[qc-y$-f-eo(en-f#-zp$r-fw]-xr-x(r-! y$r-[^n-[}]-p(e-vr(n-W#-.d([-[r-u-Nƒ≈en-a-[r-zdC*v-dz#-y#e-vd-p$r-r$-! 275 f#-y$r-a! ![^n-[r-e]n-Nœdn-f#-c#en-N∂≈c-v-[}rn! !zp$r-az#-f#-c#rn-[qc-x(v-R#! !zj‹]-v$en-ve-Nødn-N∂≈c-d-[r-! !zsC(n-az#-eof-n(en-y(n-[r-zu#e-Ø*]-R#! ![^n-[re]n-Nœdn-N∂≈c-d-b*n-ac-dX! !Nœ≈*n-u-nC*[-a-’fn-W#-ifn-v*]-fj·[!” t*n-env! eC(r-en*d-df! v$r-h]-s]-h$]-]n-r(-b*n-z[}#n-t]-p$e-a-[r-! vn-[(]-et([-ac-x(r-ax#]-]-Nƒç(n-t#-[e(n! fpz-]-e]n-dNœ(c-d-[r-! vf-](c-]n-x(r-a-x#]-]zr-w-Nø(r-ac-feo(r-l*n-u-zf! yr-[r-Ìf-a-N∂≈#]-az#-nC(v-d.87 d([-W#-nC[# -[(]-‰Xv-cdn! l˚-N´d-a-[dr-sXe^ -d[*-V“]-R#n-N∂c≈ -dz(! !E√e* n-df-[r-a(! q-D√]( -N∂e^ l˚-N´d-be 1976 b(e-eCrn. With an introduction to the manuscripts by Tashi Tsering.   [dX#]-u#z#-b(e-eCrn. By Sn ˙ ags-’Chan ˙ Hum-Ka-Ra-Dza-Ya.1904 b#r-zdC^e-[dX#]-[fe-y$-f#e-eb(rn-q(c-zpd-ve-zsC([-Nœdn-lv-r(-y$b^c-h° -dØ]-[dr-sX^e-[fe-n-[*c-c(z#-[W#v-]n-pc-o*-f#e-e#n-fp(r-dz#-e]n-v$en Brtag Thabs Padma Dkar Po’i 'Chun Po.#-„(]-exe-Â-]n-u-Øz#-h·r-vf-R#-Nœ≈#-exz-dz#-eC(e-c(r-[r-Ô-c(r-exr-e. Published by Tashi Dorji.53 n-e(r-[dr-z[^n-W#n-dÌfn! d([-f#z-# x$v-nCv( -e(fn-eb#n! 100 f#-c#en-[a*-Nœ]&ç -wr-! 2003 b(e-eCrn. (n-n(r-!” l*n-a-Vøc-c(!! uz#-y*-d-dË([-a-[r-s]-x(]-xr-! u-yr-Vµ-f(z#-dNø]-dt(n-vn! “el(]-f-b*n-cd-N´ç(v-fr-! !zuf-[av-el(]-]^n-dX#]-dc√dn-]n! !fmΩ-g‹-]z#-x$v-[^-z„%rn! !v(-fn-zeC(-[(]-‰X-y*dX[* ! ![aX#[-en$f-s$[-W#-v(-f-[*! !e(r-f-fy([-x(]-v-n(en-az#! !D√-[a(]-y*-›^z#-Nå≈([-x$vR^c! !Nœ^-e.-c(e-wfn-ac-p(d! !f[(e-[qc-c(-dt$[-V“]-a-[r-! !rc-zh$d-y*-d-[*-vn-dX^r-! ∑[-ac-D√-f-[e*-z[^]-’fn! !fi*n-az#-fy([-Nåç#]-r-vn-f*[! !r-x#-Nœ≈*fn-en(v-c#e-a-[˚rn! !b*n-cd-zs*v-l#r-[e*-N∂≈(c-dÌ·]! !r-y(n-fj[-x(rn-W#nC(e-Ì-x#]! !eo#-f$e-zu(fn-az#-p(-d-x#]! !v*-v(-et([-az#-Nø-eC#-x#]! !N‘^f-de-z[(]-az#le-h‹-x#]! !dNœv-ac-dn([-]fn-f-dnen-]! !do^r-d-[}^e-[r-zsC[-a-[qz! [qz-dgf-R#n-[q(]-a-x#]! ![q(]-an-c#]-pr-v(n-Wr-y*!” l*n-[r-! v*en-ac-db[-a-a{ƒ[qc-a(z#-zy$]-a(-vn! “x(]-o]-dN®en-a-dË([-a-z[#-Vø-Nø*! !u-x#-f#r-t]-x-cdn-dN“^na-]#! !Nø(dn-V“]-f#-v-l^-dz#-fuv-d”-d! !z[^]-f-dqz-eC(n-E√*r-dz#-x#-e*-fw]! !f#-∑[cd-zdC#r-zdX*[-az#-V“*-f#e-f#! we-z„#n-][-v-s]-az#-Nƒ]-Nå≈[-fw]! !rv-[^d-if-r-f*[az#-Nœ≈(-c(en-a(! ![e*-z[^]-y(n-Nå≈([-N´ç&d-az#-dXr-z[}*]-a! ![*-sX#c-x(]-o]-[^-f-[r-V“]-sX#c!   d([-W#-nC[# -[(]-‰Xv-cdn! l˚-N´d-a-[dr-sXe^ -d[*-V“]-R#n-N∂c≈ -dz(! !E√e* n-df-ei#n-a! q-D√]( -N∂e^ l˚-N´d-be 1976 b(e-eCrn.6–8 .#-dË#[-y*-d-[*-]n-dX^r-! ![dXc-en$f-v(-z[d-‰Xn-a-[*! w(r-Nœ≈-n*c-dX#rn-W#Nœ≈*fn-fy(e-x#]! !c(-dt$[-V“]-an-Nœ≈#[-h·c-l#r-! !l([-zuen-[}e-Ì%d-z[([-a-y$r-! !Nø(]en$f-v(-fz#-Ì-d-[*! !zdC*v-fh$rn-.276 u(-nCn-dqC-b#n-h° -c#r-! h‹e-p(-vn! “rn-b#-Ô%-dXn-o*-d([-[fe-b#-Ïn-[r-fif-[^-iv-dN“[-a! u-x$]-V®-[}^e-gfR#-c#r-f*-f[z#-N´ç-f-ye-ac-dN“[-n(r-! f*-f[z#-N´ç-ye-fhfn-[dX#]-u#z#-[fe-f#-fr-a(-f*f[z#-Ì° -v-eC#-dN´c-]n-d([-[fe-b#-d-[r-! f-b#-d-[dX*-zdX*[-dX*[-ac-N√*dn-]n-rz#-‰Xd-o^f*-[fz#-Ì° -eC#-l#e-dg$en-dX^r-d-rn-[d$en-dN“fn-]n-dN“[-a-x#]! Nø([-N´v-v-Ï-l#ed.116 u-yr-Vµ-f(z#-dNø]-dt(n! b(e-eCrn. pp.86–87 zu#e-Ø*]-Q√^-[dr-fz#-õ#Ω-q-dl^en! (u-fy([-) Vµ-[dr-D√(-eC(n-W#n-fj[-a! ’Brug pa’i khyad chos man ngag skor phyogs gcig tu sgrigs pa. pp.-o#-b.370–372 q*z$-hr-Nåç&v-Nœ^-D√(-d.r-a(z-# en$r-zd$f-t-a-dl^en-n(!! Ë*dg$]-pfn-t[-f∑*]-az#-en$r-p(c-d$-vn-u-fy([-z[}]* -a-fif-f*[-f-Ì-zeCv* -dl^en-n(-) fwn-eC^d-qÏ-yen-f*[-W#-en$r-! u-fy([-ec-[dr-fz#-. - 1 Ë*-dg$]-pfn-t[-f∑*]-a-[e*-z[^]-‰X-fh·-[av-d.#]-dC#n-dl^en-n(!  fy(e-x#]!  Brtag Thabs Padma Dkar Po’i 'Chun Po. . Delhi.3 pfn-t[-f∑*]-a-7e(r-n-V®-a-y*]-a(z#-en$r-zd$f-a([-d-a! u-fy([-W#-c#f-a-dt$[fy(e-]f-fwz-fj·[-W#-[ez-Nø(]! b(e-V“*d.6 s$]-h·en-z[([-[e^-f-n(en-u-fy([-W#Nœ(c! b(e-V“*dn. ( 2 3 4 5 6 .r-zuf-[dXrn-Nƒ(]-vf-R#-en$r-zd$f! a([-ei#n-a! u-fy([-z[([Published by Library of Tibetan Works & Archives. Dharamsala. By Sn ˙ ags-’Chan ˙ Hum-Ka-Ra-Dza-Ya. -.d([-[r-u-Nƒ≈en-a-[r-zdC*v-dz#-y#e-vd-p$r-r$-! 277 ![#r-nr-‰X-d([-q^]-R#-z[([-x(]-fy(e” !t*n-env! d([-f#z#-u-d.   [dX#]-u#z#-b(e-eCrn.531– c-N´ç*r-. Thimphu. With an introduction to the manuscripts by Tashi Tsering. Vol  b(e-eC rn. . Published by Tashi Dorji.3 Published by Sikkim Research Institute of Tibetology. #-dX#]-f! b(e-eCrn.445–446 aû-y*]-pfn-t[-f∑*]-a-Ë*-dg$]-D√(-d. Dharamsala. Delhi.u(-nCn-dqC-b#n-h° -c#r-! 278 u(-d(-.571–589 u-fy([-zeC*va-v*en-db[-](c-d$z#-sC*r-d! ([e*-z[^]-‰X-fh·z#-en$r-u-fy([-z[}*]-a-fif-f*[-fz#-) z[#z#-fu$e-dXr-]r-[*-Vøc-u-d([-[^-dX^r-dz#-v(-‰X^n-[r-! fj[-a-a(z#-w$rn-[r-! uz#-x(]-o]dË([-az#-Nœ(c-’fn-n$-h‹e-c*-ei#n-W#-e(-c#f-dN´≈&c-d-gf-f-eo(en-‰X^[-y*]-nrn-‰Xn‰X-fh·z#-zeC*v-a-]r-dl#]-[r-! N®en-[r-zdC*v-dz#-[f#en-c#f-[r-h‹e-e#-zdC^-e](]Nœdn-[e*-z[^]-‰X-fh·z#-[(]-zeC*v-R#-[e(rn-a-el#-dXn-o*-nrn-‰Xn-‰X-fh·z#-zeC*v-h‹ev-dN´≈&c-ze([-t$r-.:–: pfn-t[-f∑*]-a-[r$v-y$-{µÏ-Dµ-[}z#-en$r-zd$f-a([-w-a-dl^en-n(!! Published by Champa Oser.264– u-fy([-„#[x#e-f]-re-env-N´ç(]! b(e-eCrn.*c-d-x#]-en$rn-a-]! z[#-v-u-.r-h$v-„#fn-[av-d.437–443 u-fy([-cr-v$n-‰Xv-d-f! b(e-eCrn.r-p$d-dNø]-y(n-W#-i#-f-[e*-v*en-’f-‰Xv-[av- .(zdC(r-Ì° -x(rn-zj‹]-) en$r-zd$f! [*d-ei#na! Published by Chophel Legdan.-ve-b-dNø]-[c-Vµ-cfn-az#-en$r-zd$f! E√*en-df-[r-a(! Published by Lama Guru Deva.  b(e-eCrn.-o#-b-p(e-fc-frz-c#n-n$-s*dn-Nœdn-w(r-v-en(v-u-l^n-ac! u(-d(z#-lv-]n! do^r-d-z[#z#-f#r-t#-.443–445 u-fy([-dn([]fn-e.35– Ë*-dg$]-D√(-d.472–479 fwn-az#-[dr-a(-.431–437 eC˚-hr-p(n-dnf-E√#r-e#-u-fy([-ern-t]-fz#-zeC*v-a! b(eeCrn.  b(e-eC rn.r-a(z#.[-c*-dR#n-b#r-‰X-]e-o^-dX^r-dz#-v(-‰X^n-[r-[f#en-Nœ(c-sX#-f-enc-[^dN“*dn-w$v-R#n-u-fy([-zeC*v-a-](c-d$z#-sC*r-d-l*n-dX-d-Ô·en-n(! !l*n-env! [d*]-e]n-h° -fy(e-dnf-eo]-E√#r-e#-y(n-Nå≈([-W#-c#f-a-zez-l#e-sX(en-et#e-o^-dq([a-‰Xv-dz#-el^r-vf-l*n-dX-d-dl^en-n(! !V“#-v#z#-Nåc-enc! u-fy([-cr-Vµ-env! b(eeCrn. New Delhi.*c-ven-b#r-d([-W#-cd-dX^r-d-’fnW#-do^r-d-ven-l*n-l^n-an! u(-d(z#-lv-]n! d([-W#-cd-dX^r-d-’fn-W#-dn([-]fn-vn7 8 9 10 11 ›^z#-fy(e-N©·v! Published by Library of Tibetan Works & Archives.  fwz-Nå≈([-fz#-u-fy([! b(e-eC rn.  u-fy([-z[}*]-a-fif-f*[-fz#-zeC*v-a! b(e-eCrn. New Delhi. 12 h°n.3 ‰Xv-fy(e-Nœ^-sC*r-d[^]-a-dNœv-d.2 h°n.142– m(c-.√.√.18 ‰Xv-fy(e-Nœ^-sC*r-d‰X[-a-zuf-[av-‰X-fh·z#-Nœ^-fy([! m(c-.√.3 h°n.8 ‰Xv-fy(e-Nœ^-sC*r-dl#-a-x(]-o]-‰X-fh·z#-Nœ^-fy([-v! u-fy([! fp(r-d[(]-V“]! b(e-eCrn.√.√.r-feC#]-‰X]-l*n-dX-d-dl^en-n(! !‰X-ec-Nåc-enc-[a*-c#r-! m(c-.10 ‰Xv-fy(e-Nœ^-sC*r-[}^e-a-hrn-[dXrn-‰X-fh·z#-Nœ^-fy([-v! u-fy([! N®zR^c-p*e-a! b(e-eCrn.r-[ae-f*[! b(e-eCrn.5 ‰Xv-fy(e-Nœ^-sC*r-V®-a-y*]-a(z#-Nœ^-fy([! m(c-.12 h°n.r-a(z#-en$r-zd$f! t! [*d-dl#-a! Published by Vµ-fwc-x(rn-zj‹]-dNø]-a-‰Xv-fh]! New Delhi.r-! b(e-eCrn.r-’f-z[}]* ! b(e-eCrn.10 h°n.3 h°n.√.√.166– m(c-.√.√.16 ‰Xv-fy(e-Nœ^-sC*r-[e^-a-v$r-Ø(en-‰X-fh·z#-Nœ^-fy([-v! u-fy([! D√(-eC(nwr-d.299–200 13 [d$n-zR^c-y(n-N“*-y*]-a(-[av-V“]-zdCn-Nå^rn-h·en-y*]-[r-! [av-V“]-dqC-b#n-N´(-freC˚-hr-dtn-W#-h·en-z[(]-y(n-Nå≈([-W#-c#f-a-dNœv-d.629–631 12 y(n-eC˚-y*]-a(-dqC-b#n-Vµ^]-a(z#-zsen-h·en-z[^n-N“*-c#]-a(-y*z#-lv-z[(]-y(n-Nå≈([-cdenv-dl^en-n(! !‰X-ec-Nåc-enc-[a*-c#r-! b(e-eCrn.1 ‰Xv-fy(e-Nœ^-sC*r-dt$-a-h$v-„#fn-‰X-fh·z#-Nœ^-fy([-v! u-fy([! re-v[dr-zdX(c! b(e-eCrn.149– m(c-.140– m(c-.144– m(c-.8 ‰Xv-fy(e-Nœ^-sC*r-ei#n-a-[e*-z[^]-‰X-fh·z#-Nœ^-fy([-v! u-fy([! [e(nz[([-q^]-zdX^r-! b(e-eCrn.2 h°n.8 ‰Xv-fy(e-Nœ^-sC*r-en$f-a-dn([-]fn-‰X-fh·z#-Nœ^-fy([-v! u-fy([! dNœvd.169– .153– m(c-.2 h°n.r-‰X-fh·z#-Nœ^-fy([-v! u-fy([! dNœvd.9 h°n.d([-[r-u-Nƒ≈en-a-[r-zdC*v-dz#-y#e-vd-p$r-r$-! 279 d.  u-fy([! b(e-eC rn. √.174– e(r-env-zdCn-Nå^rn-N´(-fr-y(n-Nå≈([-]r-e#-ufy([-u#-x([-›]-l#r-eb*en-re-[dr-v$r-Ø(en-ven-]n-r(-Nåç([-e]r-dX^r-! zdCn-N´(-fr-fw]-.√.7–14 q^]-f∑*]-zuf-[dXrn-dl[-a-zu#en-f*[-[dr-a(z#-en$r-zd$f-[*d-d‰X[-a! V“#-v#! iec*-fw]-Nåç&v-re-[dr-[e*-v*en! 1971 u-fy([-W#-zeC*v-db[-](c-d$z#-sC*r-d! b(e-eCrn571–589 zuf-az#-[dXrn-fwn-[dr-nrn-‰Xn-”(-Ë*z#-en$r-zd$f-c#]-a(-y*-E√*en-df-en$f-adl^en-n(! !V“#-v#! .3 h°n.r-! b(e-eCrn.129–142 brn-a-dqz-d‰X^[-n(en-az#-N‘-h·en-E√*en-df-[r-a(! w-a! n-Nœ≈-‰Xv-x(rn-en$r-cdN√(d-ei*c-wr-! u-fy([-‰X-uz#-eo*c-Î-c√dn-ex(-dz#-[ez-Nø(]-l*n-dX-d-dl^en-n(!! 2007 .r-! 1985 u-fy([! b(e-eCrn.-tcX-db[-N´ç&d-dNø]-zj‹]! 1995 u-fy([-W#-qΩ-c#-qz#-[(]-f[(-gfdb[-a-[e*-v*en-W#-z[([-zu(-l*n-dX-d-dl^en-n(! !b(e-eCrn.25 ‰Xv-fy(e-Nœ^-sC*r-dt$-et#e-a-fwn-eC^d-‰X-fh·z#-Nœ^-fy([-v! u-fy([! re-e#-[dr-sXe^ !b(e-eCrn.20 ‰Xv-fy(e-Nœ^-sC*r-dt$-ei#n-a-zsC#]-vn-‰X-fh·z#-Nœ^-fy([-v! u-fy([! re-[dr-D√(-d.  b(e-eCrn.u(-nCn-dqC-b#n-h° -c#r-! 280 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 m(c-.247–248 7‰Xv-[dr-qÏ-a-fwz-∑d-”(-Ë*z#-dqz-zd$f-a([! s! V“#-v#! [r(n-eC^d-[r-b*n-cd-[}#-f*[! 1981 u-[r-a(! b(e-eCrn.12 h°n.667–676 ce-fe(-fy(e-Nåç&v-p$d-dNø]-db[-N´ç&d-‰X-fh·z#-en$r-zd$f! a([-dl#-a! V“#-v#! D√-f-Nœvd.$c-re-[dr-i#-fz#-en$r-zd$f! a([-y-a! d([-W#-c(-d‰X-[r-V“]-az#-uNIen-a-dqC-b#n-W#-r(-d(-[r-v(-‰X^n! Published by Lama Guru Deva.171– m(c-. New Delhi.343–349 N“*-el^r-zuf-[dXrn-q^]-[ez-dNø]-az#-i#-fz#-en$r-p(c-d$-sX(en-dN“^n-dl^en-n(! !d([W#-[a*-fj·[-wr-! {µ-cf-n-v! 2005 u-fy([-y*]-f(-[r-! s$[-fy([-[e(n-z[([-q^]-zdX^rdl^en-n(! !b(e-eCrn. d([-[r-u-Nƒ≈en-a-[r-zdC*v-dz#-y#e-vd-p$r-r$-! 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 281 b(e-eCrn.r-! b(e-eCrn.319–321 [av-V“]-qÏ-dqz-d‰X^[-W#-Ë*n-n$-zdC r-dz#-[e*-z[^]-’fn-W#-p%]-f(r-h·en-n$-lvz[(]-[^-dX-dz#-y(n-Nå≈([-W#-c#f-a-v*en-vf-cd-env-l*n-dX-dl^en-n(! ![av-Nå^rn-p%ddNø]-y(n-zw(c-E√#r-e#-Nåc-f! b(e-V“*dn.*c-R#-en$r-zd$f! V“-# v#! 1977 u-fy([-d[^[-Ì‹z#-Nåç#]-s$r-! b(eeCrn.*! V“#-v#! a{ƒ-](c-d$-c#]-a(-y*! 1985 ufy([-nrn-‰Xn-fX^c-zeC^d! b(e-eCrn.631–636 fwn-eC^d-nrn-‰Xn-x*-b*n-W#-dqz-zd$f-[r(n-eC^d-q^]-zdX^r-! [*d-ei#n-a! V“#-v#! [(]zeCd^ -”(-Ë*! 1976 u-fy([-d[*-y*]-q^]-d.463–467 eo*c-y*]-b*n-cd-z([-.302–304 Nƒ#]-E√#r-eo*c-y*]-c#e-zj‹]-zR^c-f*[-”(-Ë*z#-en$r-zd$f-a([-f-a! Clement Town fw(-y*]c#]-a(-y*! 1998 u-fy([-W#-c#f-a-q^]-d.279–281 u-fy([-q^]-d.397 fw]-a(-p$d-dNø]-dÌ·]-zeC^n-W#-en$r-zd$f-a([-. Volume  b(e-eC rn. Tezu.4–5 q^]-f∑*]-c#e-zj‹]-y*]-a(-y(n-W#-eCen-az#-en$r-zd$f-a([-r-a! V“#-v#! zdC#-e^r-dqzd‰X^[-dXr-y$d-y(n-E√#r-! 1999 u-fy([-eg$e-e#-](c-d$-dl^en-n(! !b(e-eCrn.r-fy([-Nåç#]-dl^en-n(! !b(e-eCrn. .85d2–87d2 dc! “[*-]n-u-e(r-e#-en(v-z[*dn[r-u-fy([-n(en-W#-Nœ(c-]#!” l*n-env! eo#r-Nœ≈*n-[e(]-dXr-a{ƒ-y(n-zs*v-R#-en$r-zd$f! Published by Ngawang Sonam.r-fy([-az#-[ez-Nø(]-dl^en-n(! ![[^r-a{ƒ-dq([-W#-u-fy([-d[^[-Ì‹z#-c(v-fh·! dqz-eo*c-W#-u-fy([! u-fy([-‰X-y*]-[dX#dnv*en-f-dtn-x([-Nœ[! z[#-’fn-]#-[a*c-fh·]-gf-x#]! [-[^r-ex$r-[}^r-d(]-[r-! n[e*-dqz-È#r-n(-n(z#-]r-vzr-u-fy([-N®-b(n-n$n-fj[-n(en-l#d-a-Ë*n-n(c-p$en-N‘rt]-h·n-w-Nœ(r-x(r-d-l^-ven! .1–6 ”(-[fc-ldn-[}^r-f#-zR^c-”(-Ë*z#-en$r-zd$f! V“#-v#! re-[dr-Nø(dn-‰Xn! 1981 u-fy([z[([-x(]-s$]-h·en! b(e-eCrn. #]-a-[r-! u-d$cz[}*]-az#-fe(-c$e-dXn-a-vn! u(-d(-v-d$c-[qc-eo(c-er-[}rn! [*-]n-frz-c#n-W#-eg·-d(-n$fa-dX-dn! [qc-x(v-zdC^e-‰Xd-en-ye-f*[-a-ce-ldn-dØ]-a(-c#r-‰Xr-a-dt$[-a! en*c-nCrV®-gf-c#-d-t#e-u-dg*fn-fc-R#n-dqr-]n! c#]-y*]-zdC^e-‰Xd-nCr-V®-c#-d-z[#c! !V†*-d[*-D√(env-zeC(-]-fR(en-a-x#! ![ae-dnf-b#r-e#-dt$[-[^-cd-[f#en-]n! !D√-f-∑*[-v-fy([-aczd$v-dc-dR#! l*n-en(v-d-[r-dqC-b#n-Ø*]-zdC*v-zj·f! w(-d(-v-f*-o(e-Wr-[-Vø-p(r-en$r-! [*c-eg·-d(-[}^e-a(n-y#dn-a-[qc-a(-fp(r-Nƒ(]-c√^r-eb(e-dX-d-Nø*r-[^-sX#]-]-b#r-Ø-z[}-d! ‰X^en-]c√^r-z[}-d! dVøn-]-f#e-w*rn-a! Ø-rr-a-en*c-V“]-[r-fh$rn-a-l#e-e#-[aCv-[^-ex$-”((e-et#e !en*c-N∂çf-et#e !f$-o#e-e#-[}-d-[}-sX*[-et#e-[*-’fn-doen-]n! fp$c-f[z-fe(-‰X]-v-xr-! c#]-a(-y*z#-‰X]-[^-f-v-E√r-a(-f-m*-Ø-fy(e-v-n(en-a-e.-o#-bz#-’f-pc-D√-fz#-x(]-o]-y(n-W#-zdX^r-e]n-n(en-dqze[fn-c#]-a(-y*z#-E√*en-df! zdC(f-Nø(]-R#n-en$rn! [ez-V“]-s$]-h·en-E√#r-e#-Nåc-f! b(eV“*dn! 161d5 vn! “[*-]n-zsen-a-b#r-q^]-o^-sXe-s*dn-a-[r-! [(n-[r-exe-wv-pfnt[-Wr-[*-]-dle-]n! [(n-pfn-t[-v-Ì‹e-a-dXn! Vµ-dg$]-az#-dn$-d-Ø-a-eg·-d(-f#-[}^e-Wr[*-]-N√*dn-]n! d([-W#-v$en-W#-u-pd-y*]-a(-[r-! e[]-R#-dq([-a-d.-o#-bz#-lv-]n! .#en-an-u(-d(-b#]-o^-fi*n-o*! [*-]n-u(-d(-.r-a(-dbfn-a-[r-! [qcx(v-v-n(en-a-N‘([-W#-dX#-[(c-[r-! ve-d[*-d[*-D√e-t]-fr-a(n-e^n-az#-z[([-en(v-dX*[-a[r-! dv-f(-el(]-]^-f-’fn-W#n-E√^-ec-R#n-fy([-a-[r-! zsen-a-b#r-q^]-Vø-dn-y(e-f#-b*na-v-n(en-a-x-fh]-t]-’fn-e.$en-W#n-d‰X]-a-et#e !Â-Â(e-pfnt[-v-xr-[c-w-[(e-N‘-V®-doen-a! y#dn-N´-[r-y#dn-Nø]-vzr-fj°n-az#-‰X]-[^-f-[r-zufl#r-zd(v-dz#-N´-ex(en-dor-d-fj[-]n! fp$c-f[z-[c-x$e-[qc-a(-t#e-v-dXn-o*! u(-d(z#sXe-o^-s$v! [*-]n-eg·-d(-el]-V®-a(n-Wr-[c-x$e-[qc-a(-c*-p*]! [*z#-[^n-n$-.-o#-b! oΩ-vz#dn#v-eC#d-v-e[]-fp(]-a(-dbfn-az#-e^r-v-dl^en! u(-d(z#-exn-n$-‰X-dÌ·]-n*r-e#n-[d$dR#n-o*-d([-a-’fn-W#n-N´ç#en! ex(]-[^-d#c X-g|“ç-v-n(en-‰X-ec-a-’fn-W#n-N´ç#en! [d$neCv-t#e-e#-ze(c! ‰Xv-a(-y*]-a(-nz#-n=-ez#-dl^en-„#-dbfn! eCv-v-zw([-.r-l*n-en$rn! uz#-x(]-o]-dË([-a-v-u(-d(-Ë*-x*c-a-Vµ-c#-NI#ra(z#-fe^v-[^-dl^en-[^n-n$-dN®en-a-fj[-h$v-]#! V†*-d[*-D√(-env-zeC(-]-fR(en! !d([dg$]-dn([-]fn-vn-z„%rn-az#! !‰X-u-l#f-a(-dNœ(v-v-b(e !t*n-en$rn-n(!!  u(-d(-Ë*-Vµ-et#e-[av-V“]-.282 u(-nCn-dqC-b#n-h° -c#r-! eC^d-az#-[r(n-a(-l#e-N‘r-. q.(zdC(f-Nø(]-) xd-nCn-ei#n-f#]-a-f*[-ac-dXn-o*! [q(]-fy(e-e#-[}^r-[^-fc-f*y*-v-d.r-a(-[*n-ŒX*]-dXn-a-v-dØ*]-]n! D√-fn-Q√(e-v$r-fj[-a-]! nC([-p(-crn-ei#n-v-‰XnzdC#r-dN“^n-en$f-nrn-W#-Q√(e-.$r-l(en-Vøc-[}^r-u-h$en-nC(v-x([! [*-xr-[}^ruz#-Nœ(c-er-b*n-dC#n-]! l(en-az#-y$-h·[.#]-a-dX^r-!” l*n-env! .r-d-dbfn! fy([-a-el]-pfn-t[-Wr-[r-d-z[}*]-ac-dXn-]n! u-n$f-]-f-c*-„(fd”^rn-dXn-”(c-y*]-a(-Nœ≈&c-b#]-o^-h·n-ac-dXn-b#r-! d$-cf-‰X-ec-f-”(e-a(-dt$-et#e-dt$-et#e[r-dN“*dn-]n! fe(]-a(-.9 .wfn-]n-D√-f-v[f#en-az#-y$-b*v-R#-[qc-x(v-[dX#dn-w-[(e-pfn-t[-zu#e-Ø*]-]-[q(]-a-t#e-o^-D√-f-v-u[}rn! [*-dl#]-[^-f*-b*v-R#-N“*c-f-w-zsXrn-W#-e.$en-dXn-a-[*z#-]r-[^-[^n-[^n-W#-.-o#-b-v-n$]-c*-[}rn! p(-c*rn-W#-[^n-n$-Nœ≈(-he-n*c-f-f#-Nœ≈*-d-lv-n$[(-[(-[}rn! [*z#-[^n-n$-rz#-Ø(e-a-v-z[#-NIf! D√-f-f#-dl^en-g-]-xr-! fy([-y-v-d.n-’fn[}rn! el]-xr-[qc-x(v-R#-ŒX*]-d$-[r$v-R#-Nœ≈(en-en*c-R#-E√r-a(-y*! [*-v-n(en-a-fy([-az[#-v*en-nf-NIf-a-’fn-s$v! r-cr-e#n-Wr-[*-]^d-Vµz#-yn-n$-l^en-]n! y-pfn-t[-]nD√-f-w(-]-fi*n-b#r-! p$en-zj‹]-s$]-n$f-h·en-a-fj[-a-[r-! D√-fz#-lv-]n-Wr-! z(e-f#]y(n-W#-s(-dCr-[r-fh$rn-en$rn-]n-b#]-o^-fi*n! [*-]n-D√-f-cr-dl#]-R#n-V¨en-d[*-d-[r-! u-d.#]-a-[r-e[-an-y$-h·[.d([-[r-u-Nƒ≈en-a-[r-zdC*v-dz#-y#e-vd-p$r-r$-! 283 el^r-n-[ez-V“]-s(-dCr-a-[d$-dÈ*n-]n-d.9 .#f-zee-dl#! vn-h]-a! Ì° -[}^r-[W^n-f! ’f-eC˚-en$r-dNœr-d! e[]-ei*c-[}^r-o(eØ*]-zdC*v-pfn-t[-b#]-o^-v*en! N‘([-z[#-[r-dt$[-z[#-ei#n-zj·f! do^r-d-z[#-v-t#-.z-c$-f#-i]! dg·n-]n-w$-d-zp$r-d-x#]! z[#-v-x(]-o]-fr-a(-x([-t*n-l^n-an! z[#-d([W#-cd-o^-dX^r-dz#-dn([-]fn-vn-eC^d-az#-[r(n-a(-t#e-N‘r-b#]-o^-s$]-n$f-h·en-en$r-!” l*n[r-! f$-fp$[-]n! b(e-V“*dn.√-d-en$f-v-i#-f-c#-Ì°c]^d-]n-r*[-cr.(d-a-x#]! D√-f-lv-dl^en-a-v-D√-f-fi*n-az#-fy([-y-dX*[-[e(n-NIf-]n-f[(.([}^r-u-) h$en! [}^r-dl*n-v-s*dn-fw]-Ì° -Nœ(c-b-Nøe-x#]-xr-! b([-Nœ(c-[r-[}^r-o(e-Nœ≈-d(-w-bn-Wr-x([! [}^r-dl*n-v-s*dn-fw]-[^n-‰X^]-Nœ^-dtc-Nå≈#-∑dfw]-a(-[r-! fw]-y*! fw]-y$r-! fh]-ldn-’f-a! b([-Nœ(c-s*dn-dXfn-ze(-a-c#f-dl#dtn-i#-z([-h·fn-y*]-]r-dl^en! sX#-c(v-zee-o^-Ì° -fw]-feC(]-y*-d-[r-! Ì° -feC(]-’f-a! e.#]-az#-o#r-o#rv]-[e^-d”^rn! [}^r-dl*n.178]4 vn! “v]-t#e-NI*-pr-[^-Nø(]-.*c-dx#]-en$r-! [*c-v(-G˙-d-]-c*! z[#-v-u-.*c-d-ven! d([-W#-cd-dX^r-’fn-W#-do^r-d-ven! z[#z#b#r-d. #en-e[(r-[*-cr-v-zp$r-[e(n! [*-ven(v-n*v-l*n-[(]-[^-[^e-f*[-t*n-l^n-a-x#]! fuv-w-x([-]-hr-fc-zdCn-n#v-eo(r-! [*dl#]-N∂^e-v-dl^en-fw]-fw]-N“*-y*-y$r-’fn-v-s*dn-c*n-l*n! l(-zdCn-[r-! Nå#]-o(e !Nœf-Nåçe !N´(c-d! Nåçe-.$r-yd-nC#[-v$r-dN´≈&c-R#-c#enn$-eo(en-ac-7e(r-n-7Nœ≈dn-fe(]-oΩ-vz#-D√-f-fy(e-e#-dqz-er-x([-feC(]-y*-]n-[}^ruz#-p(e-[(-d[e-n(-n(c-dqz-dN´≈&c-dor-e#-x([! [*-Nœdn-dqz-dN´≈&c-l^-fw]-h·n-veei#n-a$n-f(z#-p(e-dle-Nø*-N´^c-N´^c-dXn-N“([-[e(n! [*-dl#]-el^r-ldn-n*c-Nœ≈-sX(en-dNœ≈([p(]-fuv-[r-! h$c-zw(c-zdX(c-fuv-dtn-feC(]-y*c-fuv-[c-s$v-o*-l^n-a-[*n-zp$n! 7e(r-n-fy(e-v-NI]-n*r-l^-‰X^z#-c#en-[}^r-uz#-p(e-feC(]-y*c-NI]-en*r-l^-[e(n-a-[r-! feC(]-y*n-NI]-l^-’fn-dN‘fn-o*-i#-z([-h·fn-y*]-v-s*dn-]n-Nœ^-dtc-Nå≈#-∑d-fw]-a(d‰X^[-7e(r-n-y*]-a(c-NI]-en*r-l^-[e(n! fuv-w-x([-]-7e(r-n-fy(e-i#-z([-h·fn-y*]-v-y#dn-dN´≈&c-R#n-fuv-w-N©v! en(vuz#-[r$v-Vø#c-en(v-[a(]-y*]-f(z#-sXe-o^-s$v! en(v-[a(]-y*]-f(-el(]-an-.8 a! d([-cr-Nœ≈(r-V¨(rn-nC#[-eC(n-v(-‰X^n-c#e-e]n-[aX[- .284 u(-nCn-dqC-b#n-h° -c#r-! dtn-x([! en(v-u-[r-a(! en(v-[a(]-y*]-f(-el(]-an-7e(r-n-fy(e-e#-V¨en-Nƒ#]-en(vuz#-[r$v-Vø#c-dN‘fn-o*-s*dn-a-[*z#-Ë*n-n$-en(v-pd-’fn-dNøc-N´ç#e-e#n-dX#rn-v-z[}*]‰X^z#-[r$v-Vø#c-dN‘fn-o*-f[(-N∂^e-hr-fc-en(v-u-l^n! [*-Ë*n-[e(]-N“*-we-e#-D√-f-vn-N‘*[r-! el^r-ldn-n*c-Nœ≈z#-vn-h]-dNœ(-zp*]-n(en-v$en-.10 az#-o#r-o#r-”^r-a-[r-[}^r-u-eC(v-l#r-! hr-f-w$rn-n(n(z#-vn-w$rn-v-s*dn-W#-x([! [}^r-u-l*n-a-p(e-fc-ze(-h$en-Nørn-[*-N®-7e(r-n-y*]-a(z#-Nœ^-zw(c-ldn-l^-d-’fne[]-n-we-e#-[e*-db*n-n(en-x#]-l#r-! e[]-n-n(-n(c-i#]-c*c-h·en-y*]-v-fr-u-l*nen(v-u-fy([-lv-ei#n-dl*n-‰X^-x([-a-[*z#-hd-x#]-a-en$r-nC(v-z[^e  [av-V“]-Nœ^-N´*c-x#e-hr-e#-Nœ^-r(-dXfn-dNø]-ven-]n-e]n-h$v-fw(-z[(]-e]r-dX^r-ven! qÏ-y(n-[dXrn! Ì° -en(v-pd-W#-N´ç#e-el#-[r-dX*[-N´(z#-Nœ(c! d([-W#-v(-‰X^n-c#e-e]n-[aX[-el#z#‰X-^ y-d[fn-dN´ç#en! Nå≈#z#-z[(]-p*rn.]! dl*n-‰Xd-t*n-w$c-d-dtn-i#]-c*n-f(n-W#n-eo(r! [*-Ë*nen(v-u-ei#n-a-s*dn! y$-h·[.f-sCe-]nfy([-lv-do(]-a-[*-v-en(v-u-sC]-d$-e]r-d-e. rn-[qc! ec-l! Nå#-o#! w$-]^-n(en-[r-! dv-x$v-[r-d([-zdC*v-nw$v-q^]! Vµ(-f(]-zdC^e-[r-! bc-f(]! zdCn-V¨(rn-n(en-n$-d([-]n.#en-zhv! dqz-be-en(v-pd-Nœ(c-zh·v-‰X^-dN“[! [*-N®z#-d([-n-e]n-nC#[-el^r-e#-nC#[-zj‹]-N´ç#e-el#! db[-N´ç-[ez-V“]-[av-zdX(c-[r-! yd-h·fzy#-f*[-‰Xv-a(! nC*e-b#r-D√(-d.$-x(]-Vµ]-wr-e#n-Ì·f-N´ç#e-dXn-a! d([-W#-v(-‰X^n-c#e-e]n-[aX[-el#z#-‰X^-yd[fn-dN´ç#en! f#-c#en-[a*-Nœç&]-wr-! 1991 [dX#]-u#z#-b(e-eCrn.1642 v(c-el^r-[ez-V“]-s(-dC r-a-[d$-dÈ*n-a-]n-d.91–92 .58–59 d([-W#-nC#[-[(]-‰Xv-cdn! E√*en-df-[r-a(! b(e-eCrn.r-[(]-eC^d! d([-cr-Nœ≈(r-V¨(rn-nC#[-eC(n-v(-‰X^n-c#e-e]n-[aX[el#z#-‰X^-y-.$c-[^-x([! “u-h-vn-w$rn-[*z#-eg·-d(z#-vn-ze]-]#-h·r-c#en-we-e#nf[(-u-[r-x$]-]]-u-c#v! ‰X-ec-R#-u-c#v-dtn-z[(]-z[}*]-dXn-a-[*-[e-]n-]e-y$-[r-! Vµ-c#-ze( !zdC#-e^r-! se-c#-dtn-W#-n-zee-o^-u-„v-dN“^-[e(n-b#r-! se-c#c-[(-[f-Ô·rN“([-]n-et#e-V†(en-dX*[-a-s$[-[*-dX#rn-n-zee-we-v-n*c-Nœ≈-f#-N‘-dNœ(-Ô·r-e#n-u-‰Xdc*c-N´(-„v-dt$-ei#n-.$r-Ì° -sXe-vn-w$rn-]n-Nø([-frz  el#z#-‰X^-y-.$-x(]-Vµ]-wr-e#n-Ì·f-N´ç#e-dXn-a! f#-c#en-[a*-Nœç&]-wr-! 1986 b(e-eC rn148–195 dc-vzr-e.$c-c*-dN“^-v*]-dXn-az#-u-zdd-’fn-v(-Vøc-Ì° -’f-e]-[^-dqczu$e-l^-[e(n! ev-o*-h·r-c#en-we-]n-u-h-Vœ(e-z[}*]-R#-m*-de-p(]-E√*r-dX^r-]-[r(n-a(el^r-v*]-R#n-dX*[-zj·v-v-el#en-az#-i*n-a-et([-[e(n! [c-f[(-n(en-]n-u-n(]N´ç&d-z[(]-R#n-z[*dn-x$v-q(r-a(-[r-! dX-x$v! Nå(-Nƒ[! a[-f-dq([! Ô-x$v-n(en-c(r-nn-[}([-y*-v-dc√]-eb*c-x([-az#-c#-c(r-er-z(n-n$-p(e-fc-h·[-Vøz#-z[*dn-zj$en-xrxr-dXn-p(e-eC^d-zdCn-p(]-c*-x([-nc-rv-eC(]-zj°fn-f*[-W#n-‰X^]-dnC#r-z[*dnzj$en-dX*[-[e(n-az#-eo]-zd*dn-x([-a-dtn-c*[!” d([-]n-v-[˚en-[r-! .$r-Vµ-nc-u-h-vnw$rn-l*n-a-.1959 dc-u-h-h·rzeC*fn-dX*[-nC(v-x([! [*-c#en-N´(-„v-N‘*-n*v-vn! [*-f#]-h·r-„v! vf-„v! N´-( „v! w*zdd-W#-„v-n(en-Ì-d-]n-x([-a-f-c*[! [*-N®-sv-y*c-el^r-[ez-V“]-s(-dCr-a-yen-]n-d.d([-[r-u-Nƒ≈en-a-[r-zdC*v-dz#-y#e-vd-p$r-r$-! 285 sv-y*c. 15 dXr-a-h·-dl#- .2 xe-c-Vµ(-dXr-u-N´f.3 .4 sX(en-Nø([-Nƒ[-u-N´f.8 N√*-f#-dc-u-N´f.5 zdC#-dX#-d(]-c#-Nœ(ca-u-N´f.20 c$-[a(]-u-N´f.40 c$-p(c-h·a-u-N´f.286 u(-nCn-dqC-b#n-h° -c#r-! c#n-Nœ(c-en$f-w$v-el^r-h·r-l*n-v(-Vøc-frz-c#n-f#-n*c-v-i*c-fw(z#-Nå^n-u-h·r-zeC*fndX*[-nC(v-dX^r-z[^e ![*-xr-el^r-h·r-a-Vµ(-sX(en-]n-el#n-Ì° -d‰X^[-dNœ≈([-[*-frz-c#n-nw$v-f#-n*c-v-Nå^n-u-zeC*fn-h·r-dX*[! el^r-]n-v(-c*c-Nœ(c-en$f-f#-n*c-v-Nå^n-u-zeC*fnh·r-e#-eC rn-zd(c-w-env-f*[-Nødn-sXe-]r-f#-zeC(-n(-n(n-N´*c-u-zd(c-y*]-z∑*c-]nel^r-u-[r-fif-dnC*n-W#n-f#-n*c-v-y-en*n-zdf-h·r-Nå^n-dN´≈&c-dXn-an-f#-n*c-v-”dn#e-y*]-a(-dX^r-dn-Nœ(c-en$f-Ô·r-el#n-d‰X^[-el^r-nc-d[*-N“^e-NI]-l^-s$v-dc! f*-∑#1946 s]-nC#[-Nœ≈(r-dqz-Ìz#-[e(rn-[(]-[^-[*-v(-]n-Nœ(c-en$f-f#-n*c-„v-¤r-[r-! v*d-y*y$r-v-el#en-o*-Nå^n-u-y-en*n-eo]-zd*d-W#n-el^r-uz#-c#]-zdd-u#-dXn-ze([-zd$v1959 dc-l^n! xr-frz-c#n-N´c-[a(]-ei#n-enc-zdX(c-Nœdn-dqz-eo]-x([-c#en[a(]-we-[r-! [e(]-N“*! x$v-h·-n$-x#]-]n-dqz-eo]-w$rn-dg]-x([-f#]-v-el#en-]nõf-[qc-d‰X-]n-i#n-d‰X-dc-dqz-eo]-N´ç&d-zuen-l*n-zd$v-[e(n-a-f-.4 m(c-d‰X-au-de.40 dc-w-Ø-.#en-l#d-W#n-‰X^n-Nø(]-fj[-dX^r-dc-p$en-Ë*-y*-l^z!( ! 1946 f*-∑#-7-‰Xv-pf-dqz-Ìz#-[e(rn-[(]-dl#]-en*c-el^r-Nå^n-u! Nœ(c-en$f-el^r-N´*cy(n-dtn-v-Nå^n-u-y-en*n-p(-el^r! zdC(r-Nƒ[-Vµ(-v-u-N´f.2 g·-g·-[a(]-u-N´f.7 c$-p(c-dXr-f-uN´f.1 c$-p(e-el^r-N´*c-y(n-dtn-u-N´f.14 s]-dXr-u-N´f.8 [˚r-y$r-h·-a-u-N´f.$c-Nœ^-r(-el^r-a-f-fh]-∑^r-Vµ(eCen-a-’f-‰Xv-ven-]n-x#e-yc-e.14 N´*c-Ì° -Vµ(-dXr-u-N´f.35 n*v-s$e-a-u-N´f.17 n*r-zw(c-Vµ(-dXr-u-N´f.1 ]e-h-Nøe-f(-u-N´f.[! zd$vØz#-[([-õf-[}^e-t$-c*-zd$v-[e(n! pd-enc-Nå^n-dN´≈&c-l*n-x$v-h·-c*c-u-N´f-en$f-]ndl#-dc-Nå^n-dN´≈&c-dor-Nø*-[r(n-a(z#-v$en-fp$]-c#]-zdd-vn-V“d-fr-a(-dXn-o*-zdf-h·rNå^n-dN´≈&c-eo(r-v*]-dX-[e(n-db^-dl(e-vf-v$en-r]-azr-dX^r-fX(r-x([!!  e]n-h$v-z[#-’fn-[r-ebf-env-dtn-[d$n-egr-Nå≈#-.21 zdC(r-Nƒ[dXr-v-u-N´f.4 m(c-Når-c*-u-N´f 1 Nå^-'*r-h·-[}^e-el^r-N´*c-y(n-dtn-v-u-N´f.19 s]-Nå≈#-Vµ(-v-u-N´f.7 c#-l#-Vµ(-v-u-N´f.f-u-N´f8 Ì-m}*r-frz-ldn-u-N´f.f-hrh·-Nå≈#-u-N´f 3 m(c-Nå≈#-∑d-[eC-Vµ-u-N´f 2 m(c-e(r-‰X^[-u-N´f 3 m(c-Nø([-h·-a-u-N´f.7 zdC(r-Nø([-[a(]-v-u-N´f. 19 a! d([-cr-Nœ≈(r-V¨(rn-nC#[-eC(n-v(-‰X^n-c#e-e]n-[aX[-el#z#-‰X^-y.1 ‰X-Nƒ^e-u-N´f.14 el^r-n(-'^e-u-N´f.16 f[z-z(e-sX^e-hr-u-N´f.240 1932 v(c-n#-„(]-‰X-[r-d([-[dc-f*-fhfn-zu(e-nz#-n-fhfn-zdC#-y$-bc-]^d-dX*[-Nœdn-[r-! 1933 v(c-Nø([-‰Xzf-.“u-d[ec#e-zj‹]-”(-Ë*-” l^-d-z[^e-]-w(r-]n-[f#en-dqc-fren-az#-uz#-f#r-l#e-x#]-]f-NIf-[aX[! e(r-env-y#rn-[^f-z[#-ei#n-Nœ(c! fwn-[dr-Ì‹n-[a(]-l˚-N´d-a-[dr-sX^e-d[*-V“]-R#n-N∂≈cdz(! !d([-W#-nC#[-[(]-‰Xv-cdn! E√*en-df-ei#n-a! q-D√(]-N∂^e-l˚-N´d-be 1976 b(e-eCrn.3 dtn! D√(-d.#-d([-n-fhfn-y#rn-x#e-zu(e-Nœdn-ei#n-n$-dc-[ar-[^.5 n(e-Nø([-u-N´f.9 fc-’f-w(rn-u-N´f.3 [e*-‰Xn-u-N´f.33 f(]-h°c-u-N´f4 d‰X-b(e-u-N´f.4 y$-o#-[a(]-zdrnw(rn-u-N´f.301 .247–252 ‰X-d([-x#e-hr-y*]-f(! b(e-eCrn.10 n(e-Nƒ[-u-N´f.2 el^r-a-ffh]-u-N´f.$-x(]-Vµ]-wr-e#nÌ·f-N´ç#e-dXn-a! f#-c#en-[a*-Nœç&]-wr-! 1998 b(e-eCrn.1 q(c-Nƒ[-u-N´f.3 e-e-u-N´f.3 E√r-dt$-u-N´f.3 fc-f#e-u-N´f.1 s$-f! 2 f[z-f! 3 yc-f! 4 y$-f! 5 l#renc! 6 l#r-È#r-! 7 ebr-f! 8 V†-# f! 9 v$[-t]! 10 v$[-f*[! 11 Ì° -u! 12 dc-u! 13 h-z[^v! 14 eCr-z[^v! 15 Nƒ]# -a! 16 f-Nƒ]# -a-dtn-x([-Nœ(c-exn-c$-Nøe-hr-a-[av-zdX(c-d.d([-[r-u-Nƒ≈en-a-[r-zdC*v-dz#-y#e-vd-p$r-r$-! 287 [^n-cdn-dt(-V®-az#-]r-‰X-uz#-’f-eCrn.$-x(]-Vµ]-wr-e#n-Ì·f-N´ç#e-dXn-a! f#-c#en-[a*-Nœç&]-wr-! 1996 b(e-eCrn.“d([-f#n-u-v-f#rxr-N‘-fr-doen-az#-w(rn-‰X^n-frz-x([-a-w(-]c-xr-u-de-y$r-[r-t]-b*v! u-v*d! uc#v! n]-x! u-zdC^e-zw(c-y*]! n*r-V“*r-n*r-e*-f*-zdc! ](c-d$-f*-zdc! Ì° -y*]! a(-o-N“#c-u! zdC^-pr-! .38 zdC(r-Nø([-h·-en$f-[r-dCe-D√-dtn-u-N´f.r-s$]-h·en-W#n! Nø([-frz-c#n-Nœ(c-en$f-w$v-[*-N®-en*c-[a(]-[r-el^r-h·r-l*n-aeo(r-nC(v-R#-v(-‰X^n-Nœ(c! d([-W#-v(-‰X^n-c#e-e]n-[aX[-el#z#-‰X^-y-d[fn-dN´ç#en! Nå≈#z#-z[(]p*rn.3 f[za-y-ldn-u-N´f.20 a! d([-cr-Nœ≈(r-V¨(rn-nC#[-eC(n-v(-‰X^n-c#e-e]n-[aX[-el#z#-‰X^-y-.177–188 frz-c#n-n-e]n-nC#[-eC(nv(-‰X^n-Ì·f-zdC#-h·en-y$r-e#n! Ì-'*r-Ô·r-w(rn-W#-fpz-fhfn-v-N´(-we-v-[*-N®-sX#-sX(en-h·rvn-n(en-W#-zeC(-z(r-dX*[-nC(v-x([-az#-Nœ(c! d([-W#-v(-‰X^n-c#e-e]n-[aX[-el#z#-‰X^-y-d[fndN´ç#en! Nå≈#z#-z[(]-p*rn.10 dqCn-Nœ(c-Nƒ[-'#e-dN“(fn-u-N´f.13 fp(-V“#r-u-N´f.ra(n-fj[-az#-‰X-d([-x#e-hr-fwn-a-[ez-dX*[-]r-env! 1959 e(r.*c-q-sC-f(! o#e-e^ !c#]-y*-[}^e-w(c! c#e-zj‹]-”(-Ë*! ‰X-ec-u-c#v! q(r-Ì° -cv-a!   u-N´f.4 zdC#-dX#-u-N´f. (-Nørn-[r-zp$r-v$en-Wr[^-f-x([-an-f#-’fn-u-v-[˚rn-l*]-xr-u*-y*c-sX]# -x([!” e(n-y*]-fren-doen-]r-dl#]-u-xr-d([-W#-fp(-c#f-f#-N‘-Nø(dn-zdX(c-t]-[r-! h·ra-y*-we-e#-[f#en-dqc-f#r-Øen-t]-fren-nC(v-dX^r-z[^e-a-[a*c-].(-Vø-x([-a-[*-[e-uv(-N‘-h·en-zp$n-]n-n-[(r-]r-D√^en-]n-x$]-c#r-v$[-]r-dl#]-NIv-]n-[*-]n-se-N´ç(f-]rD√^en-o*-d.“f[(-u-[ez-V“]-t]-a-” l*n-az#-u [r.*c! cr-dl#]-d([-[d$n-sX(en-l#r-zdC(e-n-w$v-[^-n*r-u-[r-! n*-u! c$n-u-n(en-x([a-c*[! n*r-V“*r-b#r-[r-! n*-zdC^z#-f*-o(e-b#r-e#-Ì-d! [*-dl#]-n*r-V“*r-v(-f-[r-! c#-p(e-Når-u-.*c! n-se-Vø-d$z#-d.*c! c√^r-dt(n-[r-! e.*c-) jf-Dµ-Vµ! en*c-p#e-t].r-l]-Vø-d$z#-f#r-z[}-f#]-doen-]nvn-N‘(]-dX-Nørn-[r-h·r-e#-[}#v-dN´çen-[r-zdC*v-sv-y*c-b(e-a(-n*c-a(z#-Nø*r-x#-e*-[fc-a(-x#]a-[*-[r-! sX#-b(e-n*c-[qc-[r-! [fc-a(c-dN´ç#v-]n-eC^-dl#-n-se-]r-dl#]-x([-a-[*-z[}-dl#-c*fif-dN´ç#v-dXn-ac-u-de-we-et#e-.288 u(-nCn-dqC-b#n-h° -c#r-! zw(c-v(-Ì‹dn-d‰X[-n(en-uz#-c#en-b#]-o^-fr-d-dl#]-[^-u-d.19–20 „#-ldn-.*c! [(-a(-et#e-]r-de-y$r.1871 N®(]-Nœ^dtc-Nå≈#-∑d-fw]-a(-[av-V“]-[(]-eC^d-W#n-Wr.32 x([! de-y$r-f#r-z[}-f#]-w-bn-[}]-ac! u-](c-d$-f*-zdc.(n-a-[*c-a(-a(-c#-u-.$c-a-Nœ^-ldn-](c-d$-y(n-zs*v-ven-]n-dN©v-dz#-.*c-de-y$r-y*]-a(-et#e-x(r(fr-y*-dn-[*-d*[-Nå≈([-fr-d-dX*[-) u-zdC^-[r-.(z[#-Nå(f-f[z-hr-e#-y*[-fren-c*[-.*c-de-y$r-b#]-o^-f„*e-a(! f[(e-xe-a(-[fcf[rn-t]! fj[-eg·z#-en(v-u-[}^r-u-[r-ev-y*-Nœdn-d*[-Nå≈([-dX*[-a-c*[! [*-dNœ(v-Nœdn-vea-et#e-v-y$-eCr-f(-ic-]n-Nœ(v-x(r-Nœdn-vf-n*r-y$-eCr-f(-sC]-d$-c*-D√^en-o*-[*-z[}-v]-frdXn-Ë*n-u-f[(r-]r-h-a(-cr-f#]-ac-[v-a(c-nC^d-[e(n! eCr-f(-f-D√^en-ac-zw(v-]-u-]e-a(yen-x(r-.307 n(-n(c-e.#en-zhv! d([-x$v-R#-u-vn-dX^r-dz#-eof! Når-‰X]-f*-o(e 2004 (3) [dX#]-u#z#-b(e-eCrn.*cd-ei#n-fif-[^-i#]-bn-NIv-]n-u-d.$en-a(-Nœ≈(-a(cc$n-u-.*c-nC(v-x([-) n(e-a(-Nøez„#[.*c-d-c√^r-Nƒ]-Vø-d$c-eo(r-nC(v-x(r-!” l*n-env! .#]-dC#n-]r-! “d([-u-[d$n-egrw$v-v-[c-Ì° -f[(-n(en-d‰X^[-]n-p(]-az#-u-de-y$r-.(w-‰X^]-u](c-d$-f*-zdc-v-w$-d-f*[-]! f#-r-v-dn([-]fn-f*[-v*-c*[! t*n-.*c! de-y$r-]r-]n-et#e-do(]-ac-dl#-„#n-et#e-.(n-]n-Nœf-en*n-dor-]n-u-‰X^-d.(-Vø-d.([*z#-b(e-Nø*r-cen”^v-c#r-a(-l#e-zp*]-x([-) dqC-b#n-Øen-d‰X[! Nå≈]-b*v-u-n(d-. $-x(]-Vµ]-wr-! 1984 b(e-eCrn.“n(e-a(-Nøe-z„#[-” Vø-d$-x([! 7e(r-n-Nœ≈dn-fe(]-Nœ^-sC*r-dt$-en$f-az#.201–202 d([-x$v-R#-u-vn-dX^r-dz#-eof! Når-‰X]-f*-o(e 2004 (4) [dX#]-u#z#-b(e-eCrn.(–) Nœ^-h°z#-fu$e-o^-Vµ(-w-dX-x$vw$v-[^-u-b#r-dod-vn-h·[-dVø-fj[-fX(r-x([! e]z-d(z#-[e(]-a-]#-u-eC(]-y*-dc-m-vn-[e(n-a-h·[-[ae-dX*[-p$d! eC˚-a-Nø(r-sCe-zez-[rp-]-„#-sCe-e#-en(v-u-h·en-„(-y*]-a(-[*-[e-o^-dNœ(v-R#-x([! d([-W#-h·en-„(-y*-b(n-]#-c-nzsC^v-N‘r-eg$e-ve-wr-[^-x([-[*! N®-f(-Vµ-nz#-Nƒ(]-vf-y*]-f(-h·en-Nœdn-„#-en$f-v-i*dz#-[e*-z[^]-R#-fr-u-]#-sX(en-en$f-]n-s$v-R#-x([-v-fr-u-[*-[e-]#-u-dl^-d-eC˚-a-d‰XVµe-gf-R#n-sCe-Nø*r-[^-u-N‘([-.24 .$c-b]-w-d-zR^c-f*[-dn([-]fn-Nø(dn-‰Xn-W#n-dÌfn-a! q 21 N´*c-db[-N´ç-z(e-az#f#-cdn-zez-l#e-dX^r-h$v-v! l*n-az#-]r-env! fwn-fy(e-D√(-V“]! Vµ(-w-dX-x$v-w$v-[^-u-b#r-dod-az#-v(-‰X^n-p(c-d$! d([-W#-c#e-e]n-v(-‰X^n‰X-^ y-d[fn-dN´ç#en! z[(]-p*rn-en$f-a! d([-cr-Nœ≈(r-V¨(rn-yd-nC#[-eC(n-h·en-c#e-e]n-v(‰X^n-‰X^-y-l#d-zu$e-.d([-[r-u-Nƒ≈en-a-[r-zdC*v-dz#-y#e-vd-p$r-r$-! 289 Øen-x([-az#-f[(-u-fr-a(-el^r-e#-u-wr-y*]-f(c-dqc-zu$e-d‰Xd-az#- v(-‰X^n-x([-a[r-! Nå(f-f[z-hr-e#-y*[-fren.rn-W#-w(e-V“#c-y*]-a(-[e-dN‘fn-o*! eCv-dNøc-hc-[^[rc-v-[W#v-qC^r-[^-dl^en-az#-eCv-n$d-]n-s*dn-W#-x([!” “ d([-W#-yd-nC#[-zR^c-V“(e-x(-vrn-[r-! zh·-dz#-y$-h[-[r-h]-Ìv-R#-zs*v-‰Xn-u*-fp(czeC(-d-[r-ydn-t#e-d([-W#-uz#-N‘([-yn-vzr-zR^c-V“(e-r*n-t]-sX#]-x([! [*r-nr-el#nd([-W#-[e(]-ac-Vø-Nœ(c-v-zeC(-Nœdn! [e(]-a-y*-eCn-zec-õ(]-zez-bn-D√^e-p$d-az#-udNœ(v-nz#-h·en-„(-y*]-a(-[*-z[}-vn-z∑^c-l^n-o*-w$e-Nœ≈(e-o^-dle-x([! N®(]-f-pd-hr-]r[^-f[(r-f(-cen-b]-z([-zy*f-f*c-dN´ç#en-o*-∑#f-hr-e#-N´ç#e-yn-y*-eCn-n$-Ì‹-l#r-f#-’fnW#n-f[(r-f(-i(-Nœdn-Wr-[r-[([-y*]-a(-dX*[-W#-x([! [-Vø-]#-E√(e-f[(r-y$r-r$-l#e-e#n-f[(rf(-cen-b]-R#-hd-fh·]-dXn-eb#n! N®c-w(e-V“#c-[r-f*-w(e-Wr-Nå≈([-fw(-y*-l#r-[r-[([-y*“    dqz-. (-Nørn-W#’f-eCrn-[r-[dX*-d-u#-x([-fR(en-a(c-ve-v*]-[fc-„#[-d‰X^[-Nåç([-dX*[-azf! xr-]-x#ep(e-dq([-f-p$d-]-t#-fR(en-e(-v-et#e-zR^c.290 u(-nCn-dqC-b#n-h° -c#r-! d-zen-w(e-V“#c-R#-w*dn-et([-[r-fy$-dqe-v-en*c-[r$v-R#-he-t]-[*-z[}-Nå≈([-nC(vx([! z(]-Wr-[*r-[^n-u-[f-R#n-[*-[e-e#-hd-fh·]-dXn-o*-[r(n-a(-[*-[e-]#-È#r-.(-Nørn-[r-! N“*-[a(]-f#-[}e-[}^r-[W^n-f#-hr-! Vµ-nz#-Nƒ(]-vf-y*]-f(z#-Nœdn[r-eC˚-nz#-fr-dNœ(v! [*-f#]-frz-c#n-[d$n-egr-l#r-a-eC(r-en*d-a-[W^n-f-[r-! dXrzdC(e-w$v-R#-[^[-hr-[W^n-f! wfn-[r-.(Globalization) [r-! ]^d-sX(en d([-x$v-R#-u-vn-dX^r-dz#-eof! Når-‰X]-f*-o(e 2004 (3) [dX#]-u#z#-b(e-eCrn.(e-o^-R^c]n-zeC*fn-Nø(]-wr-[r-! [r(n-yn-È#r-az#-h·r-wr-]r-fj°n-‰X]-N´ç#e-yn-n$-R^c-x([! en(v-V†(e !u-s(c-„-dWe-t]-[r-Ôd-xz#-s(c-a-xr-∑#f-hr-e#-fj°n-‰X]-gf-[^-R^cz[^e” d([-y(v-en$f-]r-u-[r-zdC*v-dz#-E√^! dC(! eln! eof-[a*-n(en-fr-[e-x([-WrNœdn-el]-[^-b*n-ac-dXz!( ! Ë*n-x(r-N®(]-[}]-l^-‰X^-l#e-v-[*-N®-cr-c*-d([-W#-7Nœ≈dn-fe(]-Ì° -b([-[r-dqz-be-en(v-pdW#-en(v-u-d.-f[(z#-l#r-zdC(e-dtn-]r-en(v-u-d.23–24 . d([-[r-u-Nƒ≈en-a-[r-zdC*v-dz#-y#e-vd-p$r-r$-! 291 . 292 u(-nCn-dqC-b#n-h° -c#r-! . d([-[r-u-Nƒ≈en-a-[r-zdC*v-dz#-y#e-vd-p$r-r$-! 293 . 294 u(-nCn-dqC-b#n-h° -c#r-! . d([-[r-u-Nƒ≈en-a-[r-zdC*v-dz#-y#e-vd-p$r-r$-! 295 [r-[*r-[^n.-g-f! fpz-[(]-p$en-N‘r-env-z[*dn-l^-‰X^c! d([-f#n-sX#-‰Xv-Nœ^-feC(]-’f-ac-N‘*-v*]-l^-Nœdnve-ei#n-W#-u-s(c-s$v-d-[r-! en(v-u-l^-d-]#-e^n-ldn-fh·]-dX*[-x#]-R#n-d([-f#n-vea-et#e-e#n-[qc-x(v-[r-w(e-Vø#c-f#-p*e-a-e-v-x#]! [*-v$en-[e(rn-sX(en-f-](c-df∑*]-l^! dqC-b#n-d[*-v*en! (Westernization) d([-[r-u-Nƒ≈en-a-[r-zdC*v-dz#-y#e-vd-p$r-r$-z[#-zdC#-Nœdn-dl^en-N´c-d([-W#-[a*-fj·[wr-e#-d([-x#e-[a*-fj·[-N“*-h]-ze]-zj‹]-[a*-fj·[-b*n-V“]-dn([-Nø(dn-ven-[r-! p$ddNø]-s$]-h·en-ven! ](c-zj·fn-h° -c#r-ven-dtn-]n-[a*-w$rn-v$r-z[}*]-dVø-Q√(ey*[-[a*-[*d-u#-[e(n-fw(-z[(]-exc-N©(v-fp$]-zR^c-e]r-d-[r-! [aX[-Ì(f-z[#-qf-a$-õc]r-zu$e-f#-z[#-ez#-vn-dX-dn([-]fn-Vµ-f(-[r-! vn-dX-yd-r(fn-dNø]-a-i#-f-ven]n-ac-Ìc-l^-[e-p*rn-et#e-e]r-d-dtn-v-p$en-Ë*-y*-l^! dN®(-d! * dg]-dX(v-d([-el^r-[r-p(e-f#-y-[q(]-l#r-ve-zjrn-y*-N´r-d([-W#-d[*]-[(]-[r-y(n-c#ef#-ifn-N√c-en(z#-vn-ze^v-]r-w-l*-ei#n-f*[-dl^en-fw]-7f#-Ë*-dqz-D√(]-sXe-c(en. Director of the .1665 v(z#-zdCn-Nå^rn-[ez-V“]-s(-dCr-e#-Nåc-f-[a*-È#r-Ø(en-dË([[ae-dnf-z„#-b#r-Nœ[-ei#n-b]-N∂≈c-l*n-a.1998 v(c-Nåc-Nœç&]-l^-[^n-dN®(-Nƒ(]-y*[-[f#enebf-env-Vøc-l^n-a.$c-a! d([-W#-[a*-fj·[-wr-p(e-fc-zyc-el#-eo#r-fw]-eCn-[r-ve-dNøc-e]r-f#! fpcze]-zj‹]-sXe-N∂ç*v-[r-Nå≈#-∑d-ze]-zj‹]-f#-v(-i*c-d[^]-e]r-c#r-d([-W#-[a*-fj·[-wr-l*n* e^n-y$r-d([-W#-[a*-fj·[-wr-e#-c#e-el^r-ifn-l#d-a-[r-d([-x#e-Nåc-dNœç&]-N“*-h]-R#-[(-[f-aet#e-V†(en-l^-Nœdn.r-! . Gyatsho Tshering.This edition is dedicated to Mr.(Modernization) v-[r-[([-W#-zR^c-sX(en-Î-c√dn-„([eo]-dc√e-zeC(-‰X^-ie-t#e-c*[-ven! zsr-a-vzr-. Mr. . With an introduction to the manuscripts by Tashi Tsering.-‰X-‰X-fh·-h° -c#r.-g-f! ]f-fwz#-D√-f-[q(]-fy(e ![e(rn-b#e !e. The Book of Tea.#en-b#e !p$en-Ë*-f-y$r-! w$rn-v$r-er-vn-dt(v-dz#-[a*-p(! 1 2 Kakuzo Okakura. [r-! E√*r-dË([-]r-vzr-ebf-zw([-Vøc-l^n-a-x#]-ven! This volume is dedicated to the Library of Tibetan Works & Archives beloved director. Published by Tashi Dorji. NY. Oxford University Press. Dover Publication. The People of Tibet. by his many loving colleagues. Dolanji. (First printed in ) 3 Brtag Thabs Padma Dkar Po’i ’Chun Po.*rn-dNø([-f*[-ac! r(-[ez-wene-t]-v-dÌ‹-fp(r-dX*[-az#-[^n-r]-h°n-]n-y(n-zu#e-Ø*]-er-vzr-s]-N√*dn-f*[-acNå≈#-[(]-.  Library of Tibetan Works & Archives for over twenty seven years.-enc-y*-v-NI]-t(e-‰X-b(e-vn-nCdt#r-! sX#-pe-p$r-Nødn-Nå≈#-h‹n-dXn-a-t]-R#-f#c-r(-en(-e. in the year of his retirement.(-z[#-w$rn-f*[-az#-e]nn$-Vµ^r-z[#c-W*-f-W*-m^[! .[-p*dn-a! dVø-d.(f-dNœ≈&c-[r-‰X-z$dn-f#-z[^n-a! f#-. .(z#-y*[-[^-[aX[-Ì·f-p$r-r$-z[#-dN®(-dven-n(! !el]-[^-]-[*r-nr-Nå≈#-N´*c-D√-[a(]-hr-f-. Gyatsho Tshering.(//‒//) fy(e-e#n-fj[-a-sXec#n-t#-fy#n-v-Ë*n-[}]-e^n-do^[-[r-! dXn-a-[}#]-e.  Sir Charles Bell. By Sn˙ags-’Chan˙ Hum-Ka-Ra-Dza-Ya.u(-nCn-dqC-b#n-h° -c#r-! 296 zjf-d$-E√#r-z[#c-fh]-NI]-zdc-l#r-! d([-[a*-[r-sX#-‰Xv-Nœ[-x#e-p(e-]r-y(n-[r-d([zdC*v-[a*-[*d-W#-e]-fj·[-y*-b(n-n$-R^c-a-[r-! sX#-f#-]r-y(n-ifn-dl*n-n$-zu$e-a! sX#]r-fwn-[dr-fr-a(-zhc-v(r-dNœ≈*[-dnC#r-zdX^r-w$rn-W#-dNø#-e]n-n$-dq([-fw]-N∂nx$v-zdCn-f(-V¨(rn-a-. Shri Gautam Buddha Vihara.(z(-ven-W#n-dC#n! d([-x$v-R#-u-vn-dX^r-dz#-eof! Når-‰X]-f*-o(e 2004 (3) 14 d([-W#-nC#[-[(]-‰Xv-cdn! l˚-N´d-a-[dr-sX^e-d[*-V“]-R#n-N∂≈c-dz(! !E√*en-df-[r-a(! E√e* n-df-ei#n-a! q-D√(]-N∂^e-l˚-N´d-be 1976 15 u(-d(-Ë*-Vµ-et#e-[av-V“]-.-o#-bz#-’f-pc-D√-fz#-x(]-o]-y(n-W#-zdX^r-e]n-n(en- . Kathmandu.  13 .r-a(n-dÌfn! ‰X-d([-x#e-hr-y*]-f(! n#-„(]-f#-c#en-[a*-Nœç&]-wr-! 2000 9 u-yr-Vµ-f(z#-dNø]-dt(n! d([-V¨(rn-f#-[frn-[a*-Nœç&]-wr-! 2000 10 Vøe-.(-‰X]-y(n-zs*v-R#n-dÌfn! u-x#-dNø]-dt(n-l*n-dX-d-dl^en-n(! !f#-c#en-[a*Nœ]&ç -wr-! 2005 11 [az-d(-eg$e-ve-sC*r-dn-dÌfn-a! y(n-zdX^r-fwn-az#-[ez-Nø(]! Nø([-y! !f#c#en-[a*-Nœç&]-wr-! 1986 12 [^n-en$f-nrn-‰Xn-pfn-t[-W#-p$en-Ë*z#-’f-c(v-[av-V“]-se-eC^-”(-Ë*-‰Xv-a(fy(e-e#-en$r-zd$f-c#]-a(-y*-E√*en-df-ei#n-a-dl^en-n(!! Published by Khenpo Shedup Tenzin & Lama Thinley Namgyal.d([-[r-u-Nƒ≈en-a-[r-zdC*v-dz#-y#e-vd-p$r-r$-! 297 4 e(-zu(-[dr-z[^n! en(-d-c#e-az#-h‹e-fj·[-ex$-p(e-[e(rn-‰X]! a*-t#r-f#-c#en-[a*Nœç&]-wr-! 1983 5 N“*-nC#[-nrn-‰Xn-‰X-fh·n-fj[-a! en(-d-c#e-az#-dNø]-dt(n-Nƒ]-D√z#-[e(rn-‰X]‰X^[-dl#z#-env-dX*[-dÃùZ^c-N®(]-a(z#-fV√#-qz#-sC*r-d-vn-[^f-d$-dl#-a-sX#-f-‰X^[-W#-’fdb[-t*n-dX-d-dl^en-n(! !d([-el^r-Nƒ]-Ì‹n-wr-! {µ-cf-n-v! 1994 6 ‰X^[-W#-dqz-N´ç&d-[}r-nC(r-dqC-b#n-[av-d.r-e#n-fj[-a! d([-W#-Nƒ]-Ì#n-y*[-Ì(fsX(en-dN“^n! d([-cr-Nœ≈(r-V¨(rn-Nƒ]-Ì#n-wr-e#n-dÌfn! d([-V¨(rn-f#-[frn-[a*Nœç&]-wr-! 1986 7 [^r-[qc-h‹e-fj·[-y*]-f(! qC^r-e(z#-d([-c#e-a-[a*-Nœç&]-wr-! 2002 8 [av-zdX(c-d. $-x(]-Vµ]-wr-e#n-Ì·f-N´ç#e-dXn-a! d([-W#-v(-‰X^n-c#ee]n-[aX[-el#z#-‰X^-y-d[fn-dN´ç#en! f#-c#en-[a*-Nœç&]-wr-! 1991 17 dqz-.$c-b]-w-d-zR^c-f*[-dn([-]fn-Nø(dn-‰Xn-W#n-dÌfn-a! q 21 N´*c-db[-N´çz(e-az#-f#-cdn-zez-l#e-dX^r-h$v-v! z∑^e-dC#n! .298 u(-nCn-dqC-b#n-h° -c#r-! dqz-e[fn-c#]-a(-y*z#-E√*en-df! zdC(f-Nø(]-R#n-en$rn! [ez-V“]-s$]-h·en-E√#re#-Nåc-f! 16 [*-N®z#-d([-n-e]n-nC#[-el^r-e#-nC#[-zj‹]-N´ç#e-el#! db[-N´ç-[ez-V“]-[av-zdX(c-[r-! yd-h·f-zy#-f*[-‰Xv-a(! nC*e-b#r-D√(-d.r-[(]-eC^d! d([-cr-Nœ≈(r-V¨(rn-nC#[-eC(n-v(-‰X^nc#e-e]n-[aX[-el#z#-‰X^-y-. 1 With the Spanish occupation of the 1 Harry E. 1983. The Spanish took control of mines that had been producing silver before 1492 and began minting coins in the Americas. one must work with materials that are generally anecdotal where economic matters are concerned and draw what inferences may seem reasonable.” in J. pp. Cross. Richards (ed. as well as the resurgence of the Mi-nyag/Tangut population in Khams. The question.F. the main thrust of what I have to say is that Tibet has always been a part of the larger world. “South American bullion production and export 1550-1750. The significance of New World silver cannot be underestimated: from approximately 1550 to 1800. Much as I see the demographic center of gravity of Tibetans shifting to the east after the 13th and 14th centuries as a result of global forces (the decline of Buddhism in India and the resulting hazards of pilgrimage.). 397-398. but economically and culturally. This paper represents an opening of the subject—hence it is termed “preliminary.Some Preliminary Remarks on the Influx of New World Silver into Tibet during China’s “Silver Century” (1550-1650) Elliot Sperling Bloomington The economic history of Tibet is an excruciatingly difficult subject to deal with. is what the actual effects of this aspect of globalization had in Tibet. in large part because of the dearth of sources that directly deal with large economic issues. As a result. . so too I recognize a role for the effects of global trade in Tibet in the wake of the flood of silver into China after massive silver and gold deposits were discovered in the New World following the post-1492 Spanish exploration and colonization of the Americas. enhanced by the diaspora from the crushed Tangut state). Durham: Carolina Academic Press. This paper is intended as a preliminary attempt at understanding one element of Tibet’s place in the economy of the Post-Columbian world. Indeed. first in Mexico in 1535 and a few decades later in Peru. more than 80% of the world’s silver came from the Americas.” Ultimately it will be necessary to attempt to gather figures about the relative value of goods and metals in Tibet over the course of the 16th and 17th centuries before we can advance beyond what I see here as the mere broaching of the subject for research. Precious Metals in the Later Medieval and Early Modern Worlds. not simply physically. though. we have no Tibetan source materials from which to draw similar 2 3 4 5 John J. 398.5 None of this is to say that there was little or no silver in China prior to the 16th century. 1996. 113. Ibid. p. 435. cit. Richard von Glahn. post-Yuan China began a new monetization policy that ultimately made silver the monetary standard.” in J. We also find silver used in various forms of exchange and commerce well before the European discovery of the New World. Tepaske. Although I propose this at the outset. we have a rather opposite situation in Tibet.300 Elliot Sperling Philippines in 1565 large scale trade between Asia and the new world commenced almost immediately with this archipelago as its base. p. 1000-1700. a development that had a dramatic and unprecedented effect. pp. which discusses the varied interpretations of the silver influx into China. This Chinese desire did mitigate the relative value of the metal—there was not simply a deluge that no one knew how to handle. The percentage of New World silver that ended up in China was certainly enormous—it is variously estimated at a third or more4 —and there is no doubt that it affected tremendous changes in China’s economic life. . op. castile and the Philippines 1590-1800. for instance. Richards. Thus. Indeed it was not simply the desire for the China trade that produced this situation: internally. Japanese silver. indeed. Berkeley: University of California Press. and from anecdotal evidence in Tibetan materials. I must also tamp down excessive expectations of what may be proven here. op. a revolutionary one. 3-7. A disproportionate amount of that silver wound up in China where the foreign demand for Chinese goods was met by a Chinese demand for silver. But previous indigenous production was swamped by the amount that came from the Americas. “New World silver. which in this case are crucial. Whereas we have a certain amount of quantifiable data from which to estimate the circulation of silver in general and New World silver in particular in China. silver had been mined in Asia for millennia. But over a period of several decades there were a variety of studies that produced different interpretations of the situation.2 Precious metals mined in the Americas—generally in the form of minted coins3 —quickly became the primary items that Spanish traders used in trade with Asia and over the space of a few decades the transshipment of New World silver via the Philippines had a major effect on Asian trade. was also important during the Ming period. for that matter. Far from it. in China (though not without disagreements). we may note. p. cit.. Fountain of Fortune: Money and Monetary Policy in China. And Tibet could certainly not have been exempt from its effects. while it has been possible for scholars to estimate the relative value of silver vis-à-vis copper. or in Tibet. and during the period from approximately 1550 to 1650 the amount of silver in China grew with exceeding rapidity. Cross..F. where we are forced to make suppositions based on Chinese sources. e. had a long prior history of using silver in ways similar to its neighbors. January 28. 1968).. Given that the entry of silver from the Americas into Mughal India was related to trade with the Ottomans and with Persia. But before turning to the shilu we ought to look at the Ming huidian 明會典. New World Silver also entered Indian Ocean commerce via the overland route from the Ottoman Empire. it consequently took a longer time to develop as compared to its course in China. But here it should be borne in mind that India at this time was likely a lesser source for the increased supply.6 In attempting to gauge the frequency of silver being sent into Tibet it is useful to look at the various relevant transactions recorded in the Ming shilu 明 實錄.” In addition. this flow must certainly have affected the value and use of the precious metal on the Plateau through a process similar to what is found in China: as the supplies increased it would likely have become more commonly used. cit. there is the added issue of silver flowing into Tibet from another source: India. op. New World silver made its way to China much earlier. who paid “tribute. See the prefaces.. 1503. the important compendium of governmental statutes. We have restored the set ranks for lamas and Fan [i. The New World silver which entered India—most notably at Surat—was largely a result of the Indian Ocean trade. lay and secular. pp. Richards. which brought European ships around Africa from the metropole. 1510. For one thing. Those who arrive at the capital after being sent on from Sichuan are each to be given one lined multicolored satin robe (caiduan biaoli 綵段表裡) and a set of fine silk 6 7 Joseph J Brennig. The work was first completed in 1503. 478-482. “Silver in seventeenth-century Surat: Monetary circulation and the price revolution in Mughal India.e. All that we can say is that there was a definite increase in the flow of silver from China into Tibet in the period in question. and revised in 1510 and 1587. Within this compilation we find clearly articulated imperial regulations relating to presentations to Tibetan lamas: Xifan [i. Tibetan] monks. which can be dated respectively to January 8.” in J. due to the utility of the Philippines as a way-station. And while Tibet. 1-6.Tibet and New World Silver 301 inferences.7 The contents make it clear that the bulk of information in it reflects the situation before the effects of the “Silver Century” made themselves felt.F. like China. Dbus-Gtsang. 1587: Ming Huidian 明會典 (Taipei. In addition. Since the Hongwu 洪武 [1368-1398] and Yongle 永樂 [1403-1424] periods presentations have not been ranked. Most importantly these include the presentations made to Tibetans coming to court and to others presenting tribute. . and March 24. It is as a result of this excess that I believe we see the increased appearance of silver in presentations by the court to Tibetans. Tibetan areas in the West].. who remain at the border are to be similarly rewarded. Fawang 法王). otherwise unnamed wang. Chang Hexi 長河西.8 for the set of fine silk garments comprising two garments with one given with natural color. See Zhang Tingyu 張廷玉. the Fujiao wang 輔教王 (Stag-tshang Sa-skya-pa) and the Chanjiao wang 闡教王 (’Bri-gung-pa) who are mentioned in the Mingshi 明史 with several other. Rgyal-rong (Jinchuan 金川). Following the Zhengde正德 [1506-1521] period. one. Mdo-khams (Duo-Gansi 朵甘思). two dharmarāja violated the regulations in sending tribute and for many years sent as many as a thousand people. If the Fan violate the regulations and dispatch too many people. or three rolls of coarse silk. Each lama and Fan monk among those who arrive at the capital after being sent on from Taozhou 洮州 and Hezhou 河州 are to be given as their equivalent garments of one lined multi-colored robe (subsequently augmented by one inner and outer lining). All are to receive fifty jin of food and tea. The Fan monks. Those left behind on the frontier are to be rewarded similarly: for the multi-colored satin robes. three rolls of raw coarse silk. Mingshi (Beijing. Dongbuhanhu 董卜韓胡. In the sixth year of Jiajing嘉靖 [1526/1527] a memorial was accepted that effectively regularized the rewards for Fan [lay] people and monks from Dbus-Gtsang. For woolen serge and similar items the precedents have given no prices. Rdza-yul (Zayu 雜谷). boots and stockings equivalent to paper money valued at 50 ingots.9 And so the regulations were followed and rewards reduced. Those who came to the capital received a lined multi-colored satin robe and those left at the frontier received three rolls of coarse silk. and sixty jin of food and tea. Those who come and present middle-grade military horses are to receive for each horse one roll of fine silk and paper money worth 300 ingots. but to the two wang 王.302 Elliot Sperling (zhusi 紵絲) garments uniformly of natural color. or a reduction of the damask-lined garments. etc. This would appear to be a reference not to dharmarāja (Ch. For those who present local products the return presentations are four lined multicolored robes. two pieces of fine silk with damask added as lining (lingtie liyi 綾貼里衣). All are to be rewarded with fifty ingots worth of paper money.. and boots and stocking equivalent to paper money valued at 50 ingots. 1974) 331:8576. an extensive gift of four rolls of raw coarse silk (zhe yukuo shengjuan 折與闊生絹). for each person there is to be a reduction of two. . As an equivalent to the multi-colored satin robe they are to receive four rolls of raw coarse silk. as sending excessive numbers of people to court on tribute missions. the 8 9 Taiwan edition reads zhe kuo shengjuan 折闊生絹. They were escorted halfway. 1469. 674.000 rolls of coarse silk. 3. 1. one phoenix ribbon (luandai 鸞帶) belt. appointments were made which allowed the appointees to inherit the titles which had been held by their fathers. one crystal mālā. kept two pieces of crafted brocade work. The lamas received sixty ingots worth. Songpan 松潘. The areas named seem to be centered in the eastern Khams region.10 [For] rewards the Branch Ministry of Personnel (Xing Libu 行吏部) of the Ministry of Rites (Libu 禮部) requested the bestowal of letters patent. p. bringing with them ten others. See Ge Zucheng 顾祖成 et al.11 10 This was the result of a memorial from the Ministry of Rites and is alluded to in an entry in the Ming shilu.000 jin of food and tea. They exited the country at Lizhou 黎州 or Tianquan 天全.Tibet and New World Silver 303 Dasi man (“barbarians”) 達思蠻. the “Jiakewa” monastery 加渴瓦寺. with hands raised to receive it. All were given one set of Fan monks clothing. ten lined garments of fine silk. the horses would be calculated and the equivalence given. like the original lamas who had come asking for appointment. The Commissioner and Vice-Commissioner were each rewarded with eighty ingots worth of paper money. When they reached the Sichuan Provincial Administration Commission (Buzhengsi 布政司) it was delivered. Ming shilu Zangzu shiliao 明实录藏族史料 (Lhasa. 100 jin of food and tea. See Gu Zucheng op. Tao[zhou] and Min[zhou] 岷州 and other places and as the equivalent of a multi-colored satin robe all were given one roll [of silk]. A Commissioner and others were dispatched. In the 5th year of Chenghua 成化 [1469/1468] the Chanhua and Fujiao [Stag-tshang-pa] wang were appointed. and 100 jin of pepper.500 rolls of blue and red cotton. each a pair of boots and stockings. went out to the Fan region to confer the appointments. 10. carrying with them goods with which to secure safe passage: 25. 11 On February 7. two pairs of cymbals. As the equivalent for those who presented horses. The Chanhua wang 闡化王 [Phag-mo gru] and three other wang exited the country from Sichuan. one maṇḍala (mandala 滿 荅剌). A translator was dispatched with them. p. cit.. 1982). and a stick of sandalwood. Imperial orders were requested to have the the Daci’en Monastery 大慈恩寺 put forward two lamas as Commissioner and Vice-Commissioner (zheng-fushi 正副使). a set of kaṣāya (jiasha 袈裟) monk’s robes. 300 rolls of fine silk. 100 rolls of gauze. 982..000 strips of gold leaf. two white porcelain tea bowls. one pair each of boots and stockings. two pairs of bells and sticks. The Zanshan wang 贊善王 [Gling-tshang] was given his appointment. Each yamen 衙門 of the imperial storehouses. They. . He exited the country via Taozhou in Shaanxi 陜西. one high-peaked monk’s hat. Wang Lixiong 王力雄. All were given one set of fine silk clerical garments. For the presentation of serge and other such objects no value was assigned. three lined multi-colored satin robes.12 The Commissioner. The vice-commissioner and clerical supervisor (dugang 都綱) received 60 ingots worth of paper currency and one lined garment. Cf. “Shousuo neixiang de Mingchao—Xixang yu Zhongguo de lishi guanxi (3) 收缩内向的明朝—西藏与中国的历史关系 (3) . 1968) 112:2380-2381: 西番烏思藏、洪武永樂 以來、給賜不等。復定剌麻番僧人等、從四川起送來者、到京每人綵一表 裏、紵絲衣一套、俱本色。留邊賞同。其綵一表裏、折闊生絹四疋、紵絲 衣一套、內二件給本色衣、一件、折生絹三疋、俱賞鈔五十錠折靴襪鈔五 十錠、食茶六十斤。從洮河州起送來者、到京每人折衣綵一表裏、【 後加 一表裏】紵絲並綾貼裏衣二件。留邊賞同。其綵一表裏、折生絹四疋、俱食 茶五十斤。靴襪鈔五十錠。進過給軍中等馬、每匹紵絲一疋、鈔三百錠。氆 氌等物、例不給價。帶進方物、回賜綵四表裏○凡各番違例多差人數、每 人減絹二疋、或一疋、或三疋。或減綾貼裏衣。正德以後、二法王違例進 貢、多至千人。並從減賞。到京者、綵一表裏。留邊者絹三疋○嘉靖六年 題准、烏思藏、長河西、朵甘思、董卜韓胡、金川、雜谷、達思蠻、加渴瓦 寺、松潘洮岷等處番人番僧、正賞折衣綵俱與一疋折給。有進馬者、計馬數 與折○賜封、禮部行吏部請給 誥命。內府各衙門關造錦二、紵絲十表裏、 袈裟僧衣一套、高頂僧帽一頂、水晶數珠一串、響鈸二副、鈴杵二副、白瓷 茶鍾二箇、滿荅剌一箇連帶、鸞帶一條、靴襪各一雙、食茶一百斤、檀香一 炷。請敕、令大慈恩寺推剌麻二人為正副使、帶領剌麻十名、同原來請封剌 麻、齎奉前去番地授封。差通事一員、伴送至四川布政司交割。從黎州、 或天全出境。差去正副使、每人賞鈔八十錠。剌麻六十錠。俱與番僧衣一 套、靴襪各一雙。贊善王授封、從陜西洮州出境。闡化等三王、從四川出 境。成化五年、授封闡化輔教二王、差去正使人等、自帶買路物件、食茶 二萬五千斤、紵絲三百疋、羅一百疋、絹一千疋、青紅布三千五百疋、金 箔一萬貼、胡椒一百斤。十六年、賞授封闡化王。回還剌麻覺義等三十員 名、正使禪師覺義、每人鈔八十錠、綵三表裏、絹二疋。副使都綱、鈔六 十錠、二表裏。差去剌麻、每名鈔四十錠、一表裏。俱與紵絲番僧衣一套、 靴襪各一雙。帶去徒眾、每人鈔二十錠、一表裏。進過氆氌等物、不給價. I have cited here the Taiwan edition (a reprint of an earlier Shangwu yinshuguan 商務印書館 version originally printed on the mainland) of the Ming huidian. 13 Ming Huidian 明會典 (Taipei. etc. meditation master (chanshi 禪師) and Buddhist rectifier each received 80 ingots worth of paper money.. 753. Those bringing groups each received 20 ingots worth of paper currency and one lined garment. The electronic Siku chuanshu 四庫全 書 (Wenyuange 文淵閣 edition) has this passage (with significant omissions and differences) in juan 102 (102: 9a-11a). the passage is found in juan 111. p. cit. which places the passage in juan 卷 112. one pair of boots and stockings.304 Elliot Sperling In the 16th year [1480/1481] rewards were given to the Chanhua wang and to thirty returning appointees including a lama Buddhist rectifier (jueyi 覺義). See Gu Zuchengt op. and three rolls of coarse silk. Elsewhere.. The lamas who were dispatched each received 40 ingots worth of paper currency and one lined garment. 1480.13 12 This seems to refer to a mission from the Chanhua wang and others recorded in an entry in the Ming shilu for October 2. Again. What is striking and significant is that there is no silver included among the presentations described in the Ming huidian. Gold is also absent.shtml): “即 使对西藏地方一般喇嘛僧人前来进贡，也有规定的赏赐如下：“刺麻僧人等 从四川起送到京，每人彩缎一表里，苎丝衣一套，俱本色。留边听赏同。其 彩缎一表里，折合生绢四匹，苎丝衣一套，内二件给本色，衣一件折生绢 三匹。俱赏钞五十锭，折靴袜钞五十锭，食茶六十斤。从桃河起送来者， 到京每人折衣彩缎一表里，后加一表里，苎丝并竣贴里衣二件，留边听赏 同。其彩缎一表里折生绢四匹。俱食茶五十斤，靴袜钞五十锭。”(《明会 典》卷 111，礼部 69，给赐 2).com/news/gb/lianzai/2008/04/200804240245. relating to presentations made to Tibetan hierarchs. but not actual silver. what makes this particularly interesting is that when we begin to look more closely at actual records of valuables being presented and traded to Tibetans we do notice a change. Still. The number of such presentations is enormous. it is not that we don’t find silver mentioned in dealings with Tibetans during the first two centuries of the Ming. the sort of presentations that the Ming huidian discusses. most importantly the fact that silver was used in some presentations (not described here). The equivalent of silver ingots in paper money is mentioned. . Zeroing in with more precision. we may note. This is what I find when I looked at records of presentations similar to those recorded in the Ming huidian as they occur in the Ming shilu. To sum up what we have just seen. we must bear in mind the chronology of Spanish commerce between the Americas. In doing so. but a glance at those earlier in the dynasty bears out the impression given by the Ming huidian of the relative infrequency of silver presentations. having been part of the Chinese and Tibetan economies before the massive influx of New World silver. But it is far more infrequent than later. we can look at the figures from 1550 until the end of the dynasty.peacehall. the goods provided to Tibetans in the description in the Ming huidian are as follows: Boots and Stockings Coarse silk Cotton Cymbals and bells Fine silk Food and Tea Gauze Gold Leaf Mālā Maṇḍala Monastic robes and hats Paper Money Pepper Porcelain Ribbons Sandalwood Satin robes Various garments This list is naturally not exhaustive and a few caveats are in order.Tibet and New World Silver 305 This long passage is useful in that it allows us to understand at a glance the general types of items that were used in transactions between the Ming court and Tibetans. the Philip( http://www. . specifically. coarse silk. p. as when the Chanhua wang. or else feted at a banquet. Even just beginning in the crucial year 1565 there is little disbursement of silver. 435. Ibid. i. but it was matched by China’s need for silver. 1584.Elliot Sperling 306 pines. 1052 Ibid. Ibid. 1075.18 December 2. on August 17. p. 1562. we notice a dearth of silver presentations at first—and we do need to bear in mind the absence of silver in the Ming huidian statutes on prescribed gifts for Tibetans. silver and paper money. 1076. . 5. 1573: lined multi-colored satin robes. p.. The success of trade in the Philippines produced substantial profits: it is estimated that Spanish merchants based in the New World who sent out silver to buy Asian goods in Manila may have even quadrupled their initial outlays when the items purchased with that silver were brought and sold in the Americas.17 October 15. Ibid. 1572: satin. we find throughout a few shilu entries with no mention of specific return gifts. 1122.20 May 6. clothing. 16 When we do find indications of specific gifts. 1572: satin. But after a few years. and the Asian mainland. cit. If we begin looking at transactions from the 1550s (before the commerce in silver from the Americas burgeoned) of the sort just described. 1079. cit. coarse silk. p. 1572: the equivalent of satin. Ibid. p. 1572: satin. money.. p. p. p. Phag-mo-gru. is said to have presented particularly crude and awful (cu’e 粗惡) regional products. given as 542 liang 兩 of silver. 4. in an entry for January 2. silver liang. Tibetans offer a silver maṇḍala. the establishment of Spanish control over the Philippines in 1565 which turned Manila into the main entrepôt for the commerce in new World silver for Asian goods. ingots valued in paper money. 1078.e. silver and paper money. Some of these entries are interesting for their own sake.15 or when. Ibid. coarse silk. 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 July 22.21 Tepaske. op. 2. 1081. we note shilu entries describing the following gifts sent off with Tibetans (entries mentioning silver are in bold): 1. simply a note that visiting Tibetans were rewarded. Gu Zucheng op. Indeed. coarse silk. 3. paper money and silver liang.14 The incentive for shipping silver to Asia was enormous.19 December 26. Manila also came to support a substantial Chinese trading population as well. p. 9.22 October 29. coarse silk. Ibid. Ibid. 21. Ibid. 1596: satin.28 December 21. 1597: compensation for horses. 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 307 October 6. paper money and coins. 1190. coarse silk and ingots valued in paper money. 1104. p.33 April 9. 1110 1116. 20.31 July 8. 1082. Ibid. . Ibid. 16. the Ming huidian).39 February 15. Ibid. Ibid.38 April 14. 18.36 July 19. 1107. 1600: satin and silks. Ibid.37 February 26. Ibid. 1194. not silk. 25. 1576: coarse silk. p.35 February 18.27 June 9. 1573: coarse silk and paper money. 1578: silver.25 February 20. p. p. 1581: coarse silk and paper money.40 June 11. 13. Ibid. 10. 1185. 1594: coarse silk. 1095. p. 12. 1201. 1576: silver and money.23 December 6. Ibid. p.Tibet and New World Silver 6. p. 1082. 1125. 1576: silver and money. 1093. coarse silk and ingots valued in paper money. p.26 March 10. 1575: paper money and coarse silk.32 June 8. 1597: satin and paper money. 1180. silver and paper money. 1089. p. 1579: silver and coins. Ibid. p. Ibid. Ibid. 1574: coarse silk and paper money. 1598: multi-colored satin. 1573: satin. boots and stockings. p. 8. Ibid. 1596: clothing and compensation for horses (cf. 19. p. 1091. paper money and silver. p. 1198. Ibid.41 Ibid. 14. 1084. p. p. silver and paper money. Ibid. 7. 1192. 1588: multi-colored silk (caibi 綵幣). Ibid. p.24 November 18. rolls of coarse silk and ingots valued in paper money. 24. 1582: satin and paper money. Note here bi 幣 is used for coins. 1585: multi-colored satin and rolls of coarse silk. silver.29 July 27. 22. p. 1144. 15. 17. p. 23. p. Ibid.30 January 7.34 January 28. 11. 1611: boots and stockings.59 May 23. 1217. Ibid. 39. 1207. 1209. Ibid. 1231. 1611: paper money and coarse silk. Ibid. coarse silk. 1224. coarse silk and paper money. 40. boots and stockings. 1229.61 October 30. Ibid. Ibid.56 January 2. 1220. 1604: silver ingots and rolls of satin. 1225. Ibid. p.55 April 6. 1225. 38. 1233. coarse silk. Ibid. silver and coins. paper money.43 June 9. 1234. p. 33. p.50 July 9.51 March 20.60 May 8.48 February 21. p. p. 1609: satin and paper money. coarse silk. 1208. paper money. Ibid.46 March 13. silver and paper money. 1611: satin. p.47 March 18.42 March 25. 1222. 1225. 1617: coarse silk and paper money. 28. 1231. 1217.62 Ibid. 1608: coins and paper money. 37. 1610: satin. p. 1605: satin. p. 44. Ibid. paper money.44 July13. 1614: satin. 1614: silver liang valued in coarse silk.49 February 14. 1228. 29. 35. p. 1210. silver and paper money. food and tea. Ibid. 1206. .54 August 28. 1605: satin.53 July 14. 1222. Ibid. 41. 1605: food and tea. Ibid.45 October 13. 43. 34. 1229. Ibid. coarse silk. 1610: satin. 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 July 9. coarse silk and paper money. 1611: satin. 1614: rolls of coarse silk. p. 46. 45. Ibid. Ibid. 1608: satin and paper money. p. p. silver and paper money. 42. Ibid. p. 27. coarse silk.52 June 30. p. p. Ibid. 1615: satin rolls and silver liang. 36. 1603: satin. 31. Ibid.Elliot Sperling 308 26. silver and paper money. 32. Ibid. 1613: gold-brocade flowered silk (zhijin wenji 織錦文綺) and ingots valued in paper money. 30. 1617: compensation for horses in rolls of satin and silver liang. p. p. and food and tea. Ibid. p. p. silver liang valued in satin.58 December 21. p.57 April 27. p. op. 70 We have here a very interesting illustration. 51. So while there are intermittent references to silver in some of these entries. Ibid. considering its relative absence from the records before the middle of the sixteenth century must be considered to have acquired its place through the disproportionate amount of silver flowing into China. Ibid. ended up in China. 1237.. von Glahn. op. 52. 48. p.65 September 26. I think. 1237. 1397. illegal commerce in horses along the frontier. Ibid. Ibid.67 August 26. p. 50. p. Ibid.68 September 4. 309 December 1. 1236.72 From the Tibetan side we can adduce some unsystematized information. p.63 August 4. 1619: multi-colored silk. 1236. 1236. one third of that.66 October 2. 1619: multi-colored silk. p. 1236. 1618: rolls of satin and silver liang. The number of entries that have been omitted because no items (or only banquets) are specified is small. the issue is complex and the tea-horse trade is more difficult to analyze because of the prevalence (admitted in various shilu entries) of private. p. 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 Ibid.69 November 24. p. almost all of the other items for presentations are easily recognizable from the recorded statutes in the Ming huidian. cit. This difficulty in asserting government control over the tea-horse trade started quite early. see the Ming shilu entry for March 13. Ibid. 53. 64 August 10. 49. . Of the 54 recorded specific reciprocal presentations made to Tibetan hierarchs by the Ming court in the period after 1550. 106. 1619: multi-colored silk. is extremely prominent in the list just given. 54. 1618: satin and coarse silk. p. 113. p. Ibid. 1617: coarse silk and paper money. cit. 1618: silver liang valued in satin. In the same period for which we have looked at court presentations to Tibetans we have references to the trade in tea for horses which are less clear in indicating an influx of silver. Tea remained a viable commodity (and this continued into modern times). 1238. a portion that silver travelled further and ended up in Tibet. Among the rest. bemoaning the problem in Gu Zucheng. fully 22 can be said to have involved silver. more than 80% of the world’s silver came from the America’s in the period between 1550 and 1800.Tibet and New World Silver 47.. As already noted. 1234.71 Clearly. p. But silver. which is not mentioned there. 1618: satin and coarse silk. it is estimated. of the spread of New World silver into Tibet. among the presentations from the emperor recorded in a Ming shilu entry for February 2. Did these imports reach Tibet? Undoubtedly a certain amount did. However.D. Significant Indian imports of silver from the Americas really begin only at the beginning of the 17th century. quoted in Karl Debreczeny. Tā’i Si-tu-pa Kun-mkhyen Chos-kyi ’byung-gnas bstan-pa’i nyin-byed [=Si-tu paṇ-chen Chos-kyi ’byung-gnas]. Himachal Pradesh. Similarly. the most important entrepôt for it. Spain) and was an extension of European trade with the Ottoman Empire and Persia. although some did arrive via the trade with Southeast Asia as well. op. 1407. Dissertation. The explanation might just be as simple as that.310 Elliot Sperling When the 5th Karma-pa arrived at the Ming court in 1407. 300 and 342. Ph. 130. in Tā’i Si-tu-pa Kun-mkhyen Chos-kyi ’byung-gnas bstan-pa’i nyin-byed.73 In addition.e. As already noted.75 It is not unexpected for us to find ample silver at the disposal of the emperor for honored hierarchs who are specifically invited to court. there were recorded presentations of silver for members of his entourage as well. I would once again note that in the general statutes. not the Philippines. p. are one hundred liang of gold and one thousand liang of silver. University of Chicago. we know of presentations of silver for other hierarchs honored by the Ming emperor during this period. and the conclusions to be reached are limited. f. silver also likely reached Tibet via India. pp.. of course. 172a and 176a. Tā’i Si-tu-pa Kun-mkhyen Chos-kyi ’byung-gnas bstan-pa’i nyin-byed-kyi bka’-’bum (Sansal. various valuable gifts including 200 srang of silver and in ca 1640-1642 “much silver” in return for five days of ritual. anecdotal. Chos-dbyings rdo-rje (16041674). Of course. cit. This is. much of the silver reaching India came via Europe (i. in the presentations of silver by the king of ’Jang-sa-tham we may conjecture that by the 17th century what was previously a relatively luxurious gift was available to the extent that a petty king could make use of it.74 Similarly.. 75 Unpublished biography of Chos-dbyings rdo-rje from ff. vol 11. The Zla-ba chu-shel-gyi ’phreng-ba also mentions presentations during the same period (but not on the same day): seven bre of gold and thirty-seven bre of silver. . 229v. Silver shipped to Surat. But we are in fact looking at records from a time before the influx of New World silver and a time after it. came via Spain. we find that the 10th Karma-pa. yet later on that is indeed what we see. ordinary visiting clerics were not prescribed silver as presents. but we have little documentation with which to attack this 73 74 Gu Zucheng. 1990). Ethnicity and Power: Negotiating the Sino-Tibetan Synthesis in Ming Buddhist Painting. during his stay in ’Jang-sa-tham is the recipient of offerings from the king that included on one occasion in 1633. 2007. But the influx of New World silver came to India later than it did to China. If we move forward into the 17th century. Bsgrub-brgyud Karma kaṁ-tshang brgyud-pa rin-po-che’i rnam-par thar-pa rab-’byams zla-ba chu-shel-gyi phreng-ba. p. of course. . 76 Joseph J Brennig. since much earlier in the century Portuguese imports of copper had been one of the major sources for what was then the primary material used in Indian coinage. detailed journal of the Armenian merchant Hovhannes Joughayetsi.76 But Hovhannes’s daily living expenses in Tibet are recorded and measured in silver and indicate average daily expenses of 3. but it is important to understand that it was an active part of the world and of the world system whose creation was set in motion by the Columbian voyages.Tibet and New World Silver 311 question. We do have for the late 17th century the well-known. we still lack the sort of detailed information that will permit a substantive analysis of the discrepancy in daily expenses that might say something more about the relative cost of living in Tibet as compared to India. 478. tribute. Tibet was a part of the world. cit.79 grams of silver as opposed to 8. This is important. It is a considerable task. By the time of his trip silver is the common currency. and the actual circulation of silver inside Tibet. however. who travelled to Tibet to trade. whether these be incidents of commerce.18 grams when he was in India. but it should yield valuable information for the study of both Tibetan history and world history. or anything else. And then there is a need to undertake the difficult and painstaking work of examining Tibetan materials for the accounts of such incidents that they contain.77 This does demonstrate the ascent of silver as a currency in India. to carry the connection further. The basic elements explored here have only been examined in the most basic way possible. 168. by the expansion of Europe into the Americas. The fact that Hovhannes considered silver a common currency in Tibet underlines the observation that Tibet had been affected by the global trade in silver and.” Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal VIII (1966). Following from this it remains for us to expand upon this work and begin an analysis of all the Chinese data that we have about interchange and exchange between Tibet and post-Columbian China. op. 77 Levon Khachikian. It was never other than that. The present paper represents a very small step in elucidating the details of Tibet’s place in the post Columbian world. “The Ledger of the Merchant Hovhannes Joughayetsi. In brief. p. Significance of Ming Titles Conferred upon the Phag mo gru Rulers: A Reevaluation of Chinese-Tibetan Relations during the Ming Dynasty Peter Schwieger Bonn Introduction Although modern Chinese official history claims that in the Ming dynasty the Chinese policy towards Tibet merely continued that of the previous Yuan dynasty1. Chinese-Tibetan relations during the Yuan dynasty as reflected in official documents When Tibet was part of Khanat China and later of the Yuan empire the decrees issued by the Mongolian rulers or the imperial tutors do not 1 See for example Jin Hui 1995: 20. The question is whether the granting of such imperial favours had only significance for the Chinese-Tibetan relations or did these favours also have some importance to the internal Tibetan affairs. To my knowledge no Tibetan document demonstrating such an importance by showing one of the Ming seals and titles has been published so far. . We will look briefly at the differences between imperial decrees issued in favour of Tibetan hierarchs and rulers during the MongolYuan rule and the Ming dynasty. it is elsewhere generally accepted that ChineseTibetan relations underwent a total change from Yuan to Ming2. In my article I will try to reevaluate these views on the basis of Chinese-Tibetan diplomatics. And we will then inquire as to the importance of the seals bestowed and titles conferred upon Tibetan rulers by the Ming emperors from the Tibetan point of view. 2 See for example Sperling 1983: 194. Several Ming decrees concerning the conferment of titles upon Tibetan rulers and hierarchs have been made available. And of course I want to put the question whether the acceptance of the seals and titles implicates the acknowledgement of Ming sovereignty. at least until 1626. As pointed out by Shen Weirong: “These titles were mostly granted to Tibetan monks and headmen in Tibet just as an honour and not included in the civil official system of the Ming dynasty. Already in the fourth year of his reign the first Ming emperor Hongwu (1368-1398) started to recognize and reconfirm former Yuan status and titles of Tibetan hierarchs and headmen. Deng Ruiling 2003: 15. The Ming Shi reports still for the year 1579 the conferment of the title guanding guoshi chanhua wang to an otherwise unknown Phag mo gru administrator called bKra shis bzang po (Tucci 1949: 692-693). Furthermore the decrees from the period of the Mongolian rule over Tibet are all based on a formulary including a publicatio and a sanctio as essential elements. They were not regular governmental officials in strict sence. Schwieger 2007. . socage works and military services. 4 Shen 2007: 248. 23. For documents from the Ming dynasty see Sgrolkar 1995. 5 See Sgrolkar 1995: no. As gratitude the court expected the Tibetan barbarians to pledge their loyality to the 3 See the documents from the period of the Mongolian empire in Everding 2006a. Until now no such document from the Ming period has shown up. The publicatio mentions all the officials and leaders of different levels who have to respect the privileges granted to the destinator and the sanctio makes aware of the consequences to be feared if someone dares to contravene the disposition.” Therefore the Ming court implemented its so-called “Divide and Rule” policy towards Tibet mainly by granting official titles to everybody who came to the court.3 Imperial seals and titles for Tibetan rulers during the Ming Dynasty The Yuan dynasty was overthrown in 1368. Shen 2007: 254. Everding 2006b.5 However. The latest document known to me dates 1562 (see below). Sgrolkar 1995.314 Peter Schwieger only document the appointment of Tibetan clerics to official positions but also the affording of protection for specific monasteries and their properties and the granting of excemption from tax obligations.4 So far the oldest edict in this regard published in China is from 1373. Both elements indicating real authority are missing in the Ming documents issued in favour of Tibetan hierarchs. the titles and positions granted to Tibetan hierarchs by the Ming emperors played quite a different role than those granted by their predecessors. According to the Ming Shilu Tibetan tribute missions to the court went on afterwards as well .” And he adds that the “Motivation behind this kind of policy was to have these barbarian kings maintain peace and order in the frontier areas. 9 Later also the fourth administrator of Phag mo gru. reign since 1342) its administrator had inherited the political power of the Sa skya pa in Central Tibet. 262.8 This title had been first granted to the Sa skya abbot mkhas btsun Nam mkha’ legs pa’i rgyal mtshan (1305-1343. Following the chronicle of the fifth Dalai Lama the emperor sent him in regard to both titles two separate seals. 12 Sperling 1983: 158f. Tucci 1949: 691 note 255).12 6 Shen 2007: 261. only four years after the fall of the Yuan dynasty. in office 1325-1341?) in 1325 by the Yuan emperor Yesun Temur (reign 13231328). In 1372. Dung dkar 2002: 185. The gold seal is also confirmed by Dpal ’byor bzang po 1979: 174r. according to the Ming Shilu and the Ming Shi. Tucci 1949: 691 note 255. 265.11 In 1406 the Yongle emperor (reign 1403-1424) confirmed this title together with the conferment of the additional title of chanhua wang ( ).Significance of Ming Titles Conferred upon the Phag mo gru 315 court and to render services like the restoration of the postal stations to ease the court’s communication with the Tibetan areas.6 Ming titles conferred upon the Phag mo gru administrators Among the different monks and headmen of Central Tibet upon whom official titles were conferred by the Ming emperors was the administrator of Phag mo gru. bSod nams grags pa (reign 1381-1385). 8 Petech 1990: 137. by the Hongwu emperor (reign 13681398). However.1373). 9 Petech 1990: 82. 10 And in 1388. this title was also conferred upon the fifth administrator of Phag mo gru. 264. received an envoy of the first Ming emperor who conferred upon him the title of guanding guoshi ( )7 and sent him the jade seal. Grags pa rgyal mtshan (reign 1385-1432). 10 According to the Ming Shilu and the Ming Shi (Sperling 1983: 158. the “prince who spreads magical transformations” as Sperling translates or “the king who spreads the teaching of good conduct” as Ahmad translates. according to the Ming Shilu he “was presented with a jade seal with a dragon handle”. ag-dba Blo-bza rGya-mtsho 2008: 115. 11 Sperling 1983: 158. Phag mo gru was one of the alltogether thirteen myriarchies of the Yuan times’ administrative division of Central Tibet. Dung dkar 2002: 185. 7 For an explanation of the title see ag-dba Blo-bza rGya-mtsho 2008: 201 note 734. . received this title. the Phag gru sde srid. Śākya rgyal mtshan (reign 1364. a crystal and a gold one. Beginning with Byang chub rgyal mtshan (1302-1364. 194. the successor of Byang chub rgyal mtshan. 227 note 1162. 13 Regarding the later administrators of Phag mo gru the titles apparently have been confirmed by the respective emperor. 693 note 255q. 14 Bsod nams grags pa 1971: 219. Ibid. There is a gap of three years between the sixth and the seventh administrator. He lost most of his power over the area of gTsang to the Rin spungs rdzong dpon Nor bu bzang po. which here seems to be the abbreviation for the full title guanding guoshi chanhua wang. mentions for this year the death of Kun dga’ legs pa (Bsod nams grags pa 1971: 226). 220 also the conferment of the title dbang by the emperor is confirmed. 15 Bsod nams grags pa 1971: 226. At the age of 34 his son Rin chen rdo rje was appointed to the seat in rTsed thang. the seventh administrator Kun dga’ legs pa (1433-1483. the Deb ther dmar po gsar ma. Dung dkar (2002: 1522) mentions the year 1469 for the conferment of the title. 221. Dung dkar’s source. The chronicle of the fifth Dalai Lama as well as the Deb ther dmar po gsar ma mention the confirment for the title dbang. says this would be a seal granted to the Phag mo gru administrator Grags pa rgyal mtshan in 1406 by the Yongle emperor. The Deb ther dmar po gsar ma gives his death for 1457 (Bsod nams grags pa 1971: 222). The explanation given ibid. The Ming shi mentions as administrator for this period Sangs rgyas rgyal mtshan dpal bzang po (reign 1445-1448). 221. reign 1448-1454)15. Until now I haven’t seen any document showing the imprint of this seal. Ibid. Shakabpa (2010: 272) gives 1446 as the year of his enthronement. postum 13 Jin Hui 1995: 22. . The chronicle and the Deb ther dmar po gsar ma do not mention him in this position. Tucci 1949: 692. Dung dkar (2002: 2315) mentions erroniously the enthronement of Kun dga’ legs pa for the year 1483. Dung dkar (2002: 1524) gives for the conferment the year 1440. in regard to the sixth administrator Grags pa ’byung gnas (reign 1432-1445) 14 .316 Peter Schwieger Figure 1: Gold seal and its imprint showing the words chanhua wang. 222 also the conferment of the title dbang by the emperor is confirmed. See also ag-dba Blo-bza rGya-mtsho 2008: 229 note 1191. 18 Dung dkar rin po che states that in the year 1565 the Jiajing emperor (reign 1522-1567) still conferred the titles of chanhua wang and guanding guoshi upon bKra shis grags pa respectively Ngag dbang bkra shis grags pa rgyal mtshan.19 However. For the last one the chronicle quotes the full title guangding guoshi chanhua wang. reign 1454-1491)16 and finally to Ngag dbang bkra shis grags pa rgyal mtshan ( reign 14991564) 17. There exists a letters patent (gaoming ) issued by the Jiajing emperor in 1562 in favour of a man called Grags pa bkra shis rgyal mtshan. 22 ag-dba Blo-bza rGya-mtsho 2008: 123f. The chronicle of the fifth Dalai Lama does not know a son by this name.22 The chronicle is not very clear about the transitional period between both persons.21 According to the chronicle of the fifth Dalai Lama the latter was a grandson of the former one. . Bsod nams grags pa 1971: 224. based on the biography of the third Dalai Lama bSod nams rgya mtsho (1543-1588) Dung dkar rin po che also notes the death of Ngag dbang bkra shis grags pa for the year 1564. Dung dkar rin po che23 dates the inthronisation of Ngag dbang grags pa 1580 which would leave a considerable gap between their respective periods of office. He is mentioned in this position in the Ming Shi. 24 ag-dba Blo-bza rGya-mtsho 2008: 123f. 20 Dung dkar 2002: 2324. I have seen no hint that Grags pa bkra shis rgyal mtshan and Ngag dbang grags pa are one and the same person. 228.24 As actual successor on the seat in sNe’u gdong the chronicle lists his grandson Ngag dbang grags pa. So there was either another son of the ninth administrator or Grags pa bkra shis rgyal mtshan was one of the 16 ag-dba Blo-bza rGya-mtsho 2008: 119. 18 ag-dba Blo-bza rGya-mtsho 2008: 118-122. obviously based on Deb ther dmar po gsar ma (Bsod nams grags pa 1971: 230). 21 Zhang 1993: 1699. 17 Dung dkar (2002: 1525) gives for the cenferment the year 1512. Dung dkar 2004: 89.20 Presumably there is a confusion between two different persons because there existed several persons with similar names at that time in gNe gdong. specified as the son of Ngag gi dbang phyug bkra shis grags pa rgyal mtshan dpal bzang po. 19 Dung-dkar 1991: 61. Following the Tshig mdzod chen mo the Phag mo gru administrator Ngag dbang bkra shis grags pa rgyal mtshan was directly succeeded by zhabs drung Ngag dbang grags pa. 227. but mentions only two sons named ’Gro ba’i mgon po and Grags pa ’byung gnas. See above note 15.Significance of Ming Titles Conferred upon the Phag mo gru 317 to the eigth administrator Ngag gi dbang po (born 1439. 23 Dung dkar 2002: 2326. Here he is numbered as the 10th because in between there is listed as additional administrator Sangs rgyas rgyal mtshan. 27 Deng Ruiling 2003: 15-18. [Dispositio:] I order that you inherit the position of chanhua wang. fu ji nianlao you ji. [Final protocol:] Jiajiang. teming er xi shou chan hua wang zhi zhi er. Shakabpa 2010: 275.26 Figure 2: Letters patent issued in favour of Grags pa bkra shis rgyal mtshan. 41st year. [Intitulatio with proclamation noun:] the Emperor’s order states: [Inscriptio and Narratio:] You. follower of the Buddha. foshi zhi er dasiba dashi jiancan nai wusi cang pamuzhuba guanding daguoshi chanhua wang aji wangshu dashi daba jiancan bacangbu zhi nan. 25 The publication of the document only makes its Chinese text available. Transcription of the Chinese text: feng tian cheng yun huangdi zhi yue. Cf. 5th month. buneng guanshi. Since your father is old and sick he is not able to run things anymore. . but until now there turned up no later Ming document for a Tibetan recipient in general either. However. 20th day. 26 Jin Hui 1995: 22f. Grags pa bkra shis rgyal mtshan. jiajing si shi yi nian wu yue er shi ri. 2). also afterwards the Phag mo gru pa apparently kept on using the title chanhua wang and continued to send tribute missions to the Ming court.27 Later the regent (sde pa) of the Dalai Lama took possession of 25 Bsod nams grags pa 1971: 232f. Not only appears this decree to be the last preserved document issued by the Ming emperor in favour of the Phag mo gru pa. are the son of the Phag mo gru pa guanding daguoshi chanhua wang Ngag gi dbang phyug bkra shis grags pa rgyal mtshan dpal bzang po from dBus gtsang.318 Peter Schwieger halfbrothers of Ngag dbang grags pa mentioned by the chronicle and the Deb ther dmar po gsar ma without name. from the Tibetan translation we can just see a few syllables (Fig. Translated into English the document reads as follows: [Invocatio:] Having received from heaven the destination to the (imperial) succession. For more information on gaoming as well as on the Chinese-Tibetan relations during the reign of the Jiajing emperor (1522-1567) see Schwieger 2007. we find similar phrases. And also later.28 The use of Ming titles and seals in the office of the Phag mo gru administrators For the Yuan period we have quite a few documents issued by Tibetan officials which clearly refer to the emperor as their source of authority. “by the order of the emperor”. Fig. Finally in December 1693 sde srid Sangs rgyas rgya mtsho delivered the seal of the chanhua wang to the court. 3). They all start with the classical wording of authorisation rgyal po’i lung gis. 21f. for instance in the beginning of documents issued by Pho lha nas in 1744 and 1745 (cf. ID 1122: see Fig. In 1657 the Qing court regarded this as improper because the Phag mo gru pa were now under the rule of the Dalai Lama and the regent (sde pa). Furthermore we have numerous examples of documents issued by Tibetan rulers from the Sa skya-Yuan period and from the time of the dGa’ ldan pho brang government which demonstrate their use of titles and seals granted by Figure 3: Intitulatio of a decree issued by Pho lha nas in 1745 (ID 1122) 28 Ahmad 1970: 188f. 3). 295f. 29 There we read phrases like gong ma bdag po chen po’i lung gis. Bkra shis dbang ’dus 1989: 78. gnam bskos ’jam dbyangs gong ma bdag po chen po’i lung gis respectively ’jam mgon mi’i rnam rol gong ma chen po’i lung gis (Schuh 1981: 80. Deng Ruiling 2003: 18f. during the time of the Qing dynasty. .Significance of Ming Titles Conferred upon the Phag mo gru 319 the seal of the chanhua wang and sent tribute missions to the Qing court in the name of the chanhua wang.29 The few documents of Tibetan rulers I have seen from the time corresponding to period of the Ming dynasty do not show such a phrase. The Tibetan Archives identified him as the fifth Phag mo gru administrator Grags pa rgyal mtshan (reign 1385-1430) and are therefore mistaken in dating the documents. The Deb ther dmar po gsar ma confirms the conferment of the dbang title only for the year 1512. 4). 31 Bsod nams grags pa 1971: 230. Some are nowadays preserved by the Historical Relics Administration of the Tibetan Autonomous Region.31 Figure 4: Intitulatio of the decree issued by Ngag dbang bkra shis grags pa in 1508. fig. The other three were all issued by Ngag gi dbang phyug bkra shis grags pa rgyal mtshan dpal bzang po. 30 A reason for the wrong dating might have been the circumstance that in the document of 1508 the issuer already bears the title guanding guoshi chanhua wang. Not only from the name but also from hints in one of the document itself it is obvious that the issuer is identical with the ninth administrator Ngag dbang bkra shis grags pa (reign 1499-1564).9 (ID 989). I am not able to comprehend two of the attributions so far because the documents themselves do not have the name or title of the issuer. Among the documents we digitized in the Tibetan Archives in Lhasa I found five which had been attributed to Phag mo gru administrators by the staff of the Tibetan Archives. others by the Tibet Museum in Lhasa. Therefore the earth-dragon year given at the end of the document can only refer to the year 1508. Were they only of importance for the Tibetan-Chinese relations? The majestic seals are quite impressive. Cf. 30 1567 seems to be too late not only because it would be later than the reported death of Ngag dbang bkra shis grags pa (see above) but also because the third document would then be dated 1593 (provided the copy is correct in giving the full title guanding guoshi chanhua wang). . So I always wondered what the Tibetan administrators of the Ming period have done with the titles and seals received from the emperor in such a great number.320 Peter Schwieger the emperor or a Mongolian Khan. It is said in the document that the issuer reacted upon an intervention (zhu ngo) of Don yod rdo rje from Rin spungs (1462-1512). transcribed in Tibetan as kon ding gu shri chen hra wang (Fig. 32 In the oldest one he does not bear any title and in the latest Figure 5: Decree issued in 1502. Figure 6: Decree issued in 1533. 32 ID 1024 and ID 995. 5) and with some reservation 1533 (chu sbrul) (Fig.Significance of Ming Titles Conferred upon the Phag mo gru 321 The other two documents of the ninth Phag mo gru administrator should be dated 1502 (chu khyi) (Fig. 6). . He should be identical with the Grags pa bkra shis rgyal mtshan mentioned in the imperial edict of 1562. 35 However. The publicatio makes the decree known to all persons in charge in the area of dBus gtsang.322 Peter Schwieger one the whole beginning of the document is damaged so that the name or title of the issuer is missing. Both seals’ imprints have a Chinese ornamental lettering. 34 ID 989. 36 Namgyal 2001: 33. The text can be seen on an ivory seal with a dragon knob preserved by the Tibet Museum in Lhasa (Figs. 38 Zla-ba-tshe-ring 2000: 93. The document grants privileges like the exemption from tax obligations and socage works and the protection of the property to two families and their lineages. 37 Ou Chaogui 1991: 29. Grags pa rgyal mtshan is not to be confused with the fifth Pha mo gru administrator contemporanous with the Yongle emperor. . 35 For the full pictures see Zla-ba-tshe-ring 2000: 92-93. The commentaries in Chinese publications are a bit confusing. More interesting for our context is the document of 1508 (Figs. Alltogether the document shows four red imprints of a large square seal and one additional smaller red imprint below the text. 7). the measurements are not the same: According to catalogues published in China the sides of the seal have in its base a length of 4. Nevertheless I presume that the damaged document comes from the same issuer because the archives preserve a copy which shows in the beginning the full name Ngag gi dbang phyug bkra shis grags pa rgyal mtshan dpal bzang po together with the title guanding guoshi chanhua wang (Fig. also Namgyal 2001: 33. Zla-ba-tshe-ring 2000: 93. Regarding the small one I know no further reference. 8 and 34 9). The large one gives the full title of guanding guoshi chanhua wang bestowed by the Yongle emperor in 1406.33 It is strange that the year and month. In one of the Chinese publications38 it is said that the ivory seal was granted by the Jiajing emperor to Grags pa rgyal mtshan. 1237 and 13). but it is also the only document which shows the imprints of a Chinese seal.4 cm.36 The imprints on the document have a length of about 10 cm at each side. It not only has the full Chinese title in its original version.3 or 4. 10 and 11). Cf. given in the final protocol of the copied version are different: the 11th day of the first month of the wood-snake year instead of the 11th day of the third month of the water-snake year. but not the calendar date. Of course this leaves some doubts regarding the correctness of the copy. Furthermore there are small differences in the lines and the pattern between the imprint of the ivory seal and those on the decree of 1508 (Figs. In another 33 ID 994. 323 .Significance of Ming Titles Conferred upon the Phag mo gru Figure 7: Copy of the decree of 1533. 324 Peter Schwieger Figure 8: decree of 1508 (first part) Figure 9: decree of 1508 (second part) publication39 a black and white photograph of the same ivory seal has a caption saying this would be the gold (!) seal “granted by the Ming emperor Jia Jing to the Eleventh Phag-mogrub. The seal of the guanding guoshi chanhua wang seems to have been different in size and material depending on the respective emperor who had granted it.” This statement is obviously based on an alternative list of the Phag mo gru adminstrators to be found in the Tshig mdzod chen mo which has alltogether eleven administrators following upon eachother. according to these explanations the ivory seal was granted much later than 1508. 39 Dung-dkar 1991: See the plates in the beginning of the book. .pa Sde-srid. 40 Zhang 1993: 1699.40 However. Therefore Ngag dbang bkra shis grags pa must have been in the possession of a another version of that seal. Significance of Ming Titles Conferred upon the Phag mo gru 325 Figure 11: punch of the ivory seal Figure 10: ivory seal Figure 12: imprint of the ivory seal Figure 13: cutting of the decree of 1508 Conclusion From the material presented here I would draw the following conclusions: 1. Imperial titles together with the respective seals have been bestowed on the Phag mo gru administrators from the beginning until the very end of their rule in Central Tibet. . (= SOR XXIV). Beijing: Mi rigs dpe skrun khang. by G. Perhaps the Tibetan headmen were even more eager to ask for imperial seals than that the emperor was interested in granting them. Roma: Is. Z. Ed. The imperial titles and seals were not regarded by the Phag mo gru administrators as mere prestigous presents from the Ming emperor being nothing more than a side effect of the lucrative commercial relationship with the court. We can assume that during the whole Phag mo gru rule—that is to say even in the period when their power was reduced to nothing more than a shadow—imperial titles and seals had not lost their function to legitimize political rule and authority in the eyes of many Tibetan nobles and hierarchs. As long as we do not have any legal document demonstrating that Tibetan headmen were acting directly by order of the Ming emperor respectively were only carrying out imperial orders the mere acknowledgement of imperial suzerainty does not indicate a direct imperial influence on Tibetan affairs and by no means an effective Chinese rule in Tibet41. 5. 3. Sino-Tibetan Relations in the Seventeenth Century. Roma: Is. 41 This is for instance claimed in Wang Jiawei 2003: 33. Deb t’er dmar po gsar ma.M. 1970. the regent was eager to seize the seal of the chanhua wang. Bsod nams grags pa 1971.M. The other way round the Chinese emperor never would have accepted and used seals and titles of a foreign ruler.E. Until now there are no sources available proving a de facto Chinese control of Tibetan affairs during the Ming dynasty—neither a great nor a small one. I suppose that more examples will show up in the future. Bibliography Ahmad. Tibetan Chronicles.E. and transl. Bkra shis dbang ’dus 1989. Tucci. This seems also to be the reason why later. 4. The use of imperial titles and seals by a Tibetan headman with regard to legal acts implicates an acknowledgement of the emperor as the source of his own authority. Bod kyi lo rgyus yig tshags dang gzhung yig phyogs bsdus dwangs shes me long. I have presented a clear example of its use by the Phag mo gru administrators for legal acts in their dominion. and that is to say: an acknowledgement of the imperial suzerainty—without the use of any military force on the Chinese side and also without the expectation of effective military support on the Tibetan side. .O. under the rule of the dGa’ ldan pho brang. (= SOR XL).O.326 Peter Schwieger 2. Social History of Tibet. New Delhi: Internat. 15-23. The Story and Significance of Prince Chanhua Offering Tribute to and Requesting a New Title from the Qing Court in the Early Qing Period. Da drak and Sonam Wangden (eds) 2001.H. Dung dkar Blo bzang ’phrin las 2002. Namgyal. Beijing: China Intercontinental Press. Geistliche und Klöster. ID 1024: see URL. Jin Hui. Ahmad. Herrscherurkunden aus der Zeit des mongolischen Großreiches für tibetische Adelshäuser. Everding. The Merging of Religious and Secular Rule in Tibet. . Beijing: Foreign Languages Press. Beijing: China Tibetology Publishing House. China. ID 995: see URL. Documented and Illustrated. Beijing: Mi rigs dpe skrun khang (= mKhas dbang dung dkar blo bzang ’phrin las kyi gsung ’bum. Beijing: Encyclopedia of China Publishing House. Dung dkar Blo bzang ’phrin las 2004. vol. Dung dkar tshig mdzod chen mo.Significance of Ming Titles Conferred upon the Phag mo gru 327 Deng Ruiling 2003. Ma Yigang. Tibet Museum. The Song of the Queen of Spring or A History of Tibet. Bod kyi chos srid zung ’brel lam lugs skor bshad pa. Nga).. Halle (Saale): IITBS GmbH. Timphu 1979.1 September). rGya bod kyi yig tshang mkhas pa dga’ byed chen mo ’dzam gling gsal ba’i me long [1434].H. Herrscherurkunden aus der Zeit des mongolischen Großreiches für tibetische Adelshäuser. 2006b. of Indian Culture and Aditya Prakashan (= Sata-Pitaka Series. 2 vols. Dpal ’byor bzang po. Acad. Teil 1: Diplomata Mongolica. ID 989: see URL. T. China Tibetology 2003 (no. Dung-dkar blo-bzang ’phrim-las (!) 1991. K. ag-dba Blo-bza rGya-mtsho 2008. ID 994: see URL. vol. Geistliche und Klöster. Revised translation by Z. Halle (Saale): IITBS GmbH. Mittelmongolische Urkunden in ’Phags paSchrift. ID 1122: see URL. Everding. Die vierzehn Urkunden für die Tausendschaft Mus. Compiled by Tibet Museum. Ren Yinong and Ma Naihui (eds) 1995. g. K. 623).Yas ru sTag tshang rdzong pa 1979. Teil 2: Diplomata Tibetica. 2006a. de/tibdoc/index1. 3. Schwieger. Historical Relics of Tibet.328 Ou Chaogui ( Peter Schwieger ) et al. Lhasa: Xizang renmin chubanshe. D. Festschrift für Dieter Schuh zum 65. Tibetan Painted Scrolls. Maurer & P. G. Bod kyi lo rgyus yig tshags gces btus. Zla-ba-tshe-ring. Maurer & P. Suo Wenqing. Petech. Xizang lishi dang’an huicui. vol. Beijing: Wenwu chuban she (Cultural Relics Publishing House). One Hundred Thousand Moons. Sperling. E. A Collection of Historical Archives of Tibet. Tucci. Vodzer et al. 1990. Bod rgya tshig mdzod chen mo / Zang-Han da cidian. 209-226. Beijing: Mi rigs dpe skrun khang / Minzu chuban she.E. Eine Untersuchung über tibetische Siegelaufschriften in ’Phags pa Schrift. On the history of the Gling tshang Principality of mDo khams during Yuan and Ming Dynasties: Studies on Sources concerning Tibet in Ming Shilu (I). . Geburtstag.htm. An Advanced Political History of Tibet. In P. 2 vols. M. Early Ming Policy toward Tibet: An examination of the proposition that the early Ming emperors adopted a “divide and rule” policy toward Tibet. Schuh. Wang Jiawei and Nyima Gyaincain 2003. (eds) 1995. et al. P. Zhang. 1981. 1993 [1985]. 2007. Schwieger (eds) Tibetstudien. The Yüan–Sa-Skya Period of Tibetan History. Shen Weirong 2007.O. Leiden: Brill (= Brill’s Tibetan Studies Library. Historische Koordinaten Chinas Tibets. Festschrift für Dieter Schuh zum 65. 1991 (eds). 227-265. URL Digitized Tibetan Archives Material at Bonn University: http:// www. Geburtstag. 1. In P. Beijing: Morning Glory Publishers. Y. Schwieger (eds) Tibetstudien. 2000. Precious Deposits.unibonn. Roma: La Libreria dello Stato.5).dtab. Bonn: Bier’sche Verlagsanstalt. 1949. Sgrolkar. 1983. Xiao Shiling et al. Sankt Augustin: VGH Wissenschaftsverlag (=MTH 13 III. A Document of Chinese Diplomatic Relations with East Tibet during the Ming Dynasty. and annoted by Derek F. Central Tibet and the Mongols. Grundlagen tibetischer Siegelkunde. L. Shakabpa. vol. Bonn: Bier’sche Verlagsanstalt. Tsepon Wangchuk Deden 2010. Xiao Huaiyuan. vol. 1991. Roma: Is. 23). Maher. 2 vols. Serie Orientale Roma LXV. Transl. Beijing: China Intercontinental Press. Dissertation at Indiana University. Xizang lidai zang yin . but again in a somewhat peripheral manner. who were the main source of spiritual authority. or ‘Dharma Rajas’ in British parlance. In late 1814. If possible. the main military theatres of the 1814-1816 war with Nepal took place far to the west. and to place them in their wider political and cultural context. and had no further contact with Bhutan. and to assure him that the Company had no designs on his own country. The mission likewise appears in historical accounts of Bhutan such as Gupta (1974). and served for a defined period of years. they were to convey a similar message to the Tibetan authorities in Lhasa. he used his time to good effect by collecting information on the language and culture of Bhutan. 2 The Deb Rajas or ’Brug sDe srids were the senior lay officials of Bhutan during this period in contrast to the Zhabs drungs. Singh (1988). Rammohan Ray returned to India after delivering the initial message to the Deb Raja.g. The Deb Rajas typically were chosen from among the region’s ruling families. Although he had scant success in his diplomatic role. It is therefore mentioned in standard accounts of the war. In the event. Deb (1976) and Aris (1994).Krishnakanta Basu. Pemble (1971). the East India Company had declared war against the Gorkha state in Nepal: the task of the two emissaries was to brief Bhutan’s Deb Raja (’Brug sDe srid)2 on the background to the war. which was first published in 1825 1 In contemporary texts his name is transliterated as Kishen Kant Bose. The purpose of this paper is to bring the mission and its two main India protagonists to centre-stage. 3 E. 3 but in a peripheral manner. His literary legacy includes a detailed “Account of Bhútán”. but Krishnakanta Basu stayed on for more than a year. and the mission to Bhutan proved to be of no more than minor diplomatic significance. Lamb (1986). . In this paper I have chosen to stick to the term ‘Deb Raja’ as this was the term most used in contemporary British archival sources. Rammohan Ray and Early 19th Century British Contacts with Bhutan and Tibet John Bray Kumamoto In mid-1815 Krishnakanta Basu1 and Rammohan Ray—later famous as one of the leading figures of the 19th century Bengali renaissance—set out from Rangpur in northern Bengal on a sensitive diplomatic mission. Kashmiris and. The common themes include first a continuing sense of suspicion on the part of both Bhutan and Tibet concerning British ambitions in the region. as had already happened in Bengal. It is conceivable that still further records survive in Bhutan and in Rangpur.330 John Bray in Asiatic Researches. he arguably can be regarded as an early forerunner of modern Indian scholarship on Bhutan and Tibet. which is now in Bangladesh. 4 More detailed records may be available at the National Archives of India in New Delhi. The second part of the paper analyses the political circumstances of the 1815 mission to Bhutan in some detail. in due course. The leaders of both countries feared that the Company’s commercial expansion might serve as a prelude to political and military intervention. Indian intermediaries played an essential interpreting role to both sides. A second theme is the role played by Indian intermediaries. British diplomacy and Indian intermediaries The 1815 mission took place some 40 years after the opening of the first substantive British contacts with Bhutan and Tibet. and the challenges that Krishnakanta and Rammohan faced reflect the legacy of this period. The paper concludes with a discussion of Krishnakanta’s contributions to Western knowledge of the Himalaya. This paper draws on archival sources at the British Library’s Oriental and India Office Collection in London. with a particular focus on the Indian intermediaries who facilitated communications on both sides. . Hastings. 4 It begins with an introductory review of the Company’s relations with Bhutan in Tibet in the late 18th and early 19th centuries. and still more in the long intervals when no British official was able to visit either country. The Third Panchen Lama. No more than a handful of British emissaries were able to visit Bhutan and Tibet in person. During these visits. Although his main role was to serve as a Company official. the journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal. These intermediaries fell into three categories: Gosains. His struggles and achievements deserve to be more widely recognised. but I have not to date been able to consult them. Bogle and Purangir The first diplomatic opening came in 1774 when the Company intervened on behalf of the Maharaja of Cooch Behar in a conflict with Bhutan. as well as a manuscript “Grammar and Vocabulary of the Bhotan Language”. Blo bzang gpal ldan ye shes (1738-1780). the two Bengali officials that are the main subject of this paper. Governor-general Warren Hastings (1732-1818). Tho’ clad in the garb of poverty there are many of them possessed of considerable Wealth. His second. their accounts of unknown countries. and were of service to the Tibetans—as well as the British—as a source of knowledge and advice on developments on either side of the Himalaya. to Tashi Lhunpo] in great numbers. constituted a second group of Indian origin that was well-represented in Tashi Lhunpo. the Tibetan merchants of Tashi Lhunpo believed that the Kashmiris and Gosains had an advantage over them in that they were better suited to the Indian climate: 5 On the Gosains see in particular Cohn (1963). Their trade is confined to articles of great value and small bulk. Nepal. 7 On the Kashmiri network in Tibet see in particular Gaborieau (1973) and Bray (2010). Hastings had two broad strategic objectives.Cited in Sarcar (1931). procure them not only a ready admittance but great favours. more distant aspiration was to explore the possibilities of establishing communications via Tibet with China. As Bogle reported following his return from Tibet: The Gosseines. which had an extensive network of contacts on both sides of the Himalaya. . and above all their possession of high veneration for the Lamas. and Bengal right across Tibet as far as Xining and beyond.Krishnakanta Basu and Rammohan Ray 331 sought to mediate on Bhutan’s behalf. and remote Regions. many of whom had intermarried with Tibetans. 6 The Kashmiri community. It is carried on without noise or ostentation. took advantage of the opening to send George Bogle (17471781).e. Bogle’s main guide and mentor in Tibet was Purangir. Kashmiri traders operated an extensive personal and commercial network from Ladakh. The first was to develop a trade route from India via Bhutan to Tibet: this was to serve as a replacement for the hitherto more important route via Kathmandu which had been blocked as a result of the expansion of the Gorkha state under Prithvi Narayan (1723-1775). via Bhutan to Tashi Lhunpo where he was to make direct contact with the Panchen Lama. and holy character heightened by the merit of distant Pilgrimages. a young Scottish official. Their humble deportment. the Trading Pilgrims of India. and often by Paths unfrequented by other merchants. who combined regular pilgrimages with trade. a member of the north Indian Gosain community.7 According to Bogle. 5 The Gosains were religious devotees. 6 Bogle’s report of 1775-1776. resort hither [i. having been cut off by the mountains from the rest of the world. However. but that they could not.On the treaty see also Deb (1971).”11 As in Tibet. p. . and the country remained closed to European merchants. Bogle reported that: Foreign merchants have always been excluded [from Bhutan] except the Kashmiri houses who in consideration of a large sum of money are permitted to transfer otter skins.8 Bogle himself had to contend with suspicions that he had come to “spy out the nakedness of the land. and in due course for a new communications route with China. 8 Bogle’s journal. that they had heard from tradition that about eight hundred years ago the people of this country used to travel into Bengal. On Bogle see also Teltscher (2007) 9 Lamb (2002). Both he and Hastings hoped that these beginnings would prepare the way for an eventual expansion of British trade with Tibet. he did not reciprocate to the extent of allowing the Company to station its own vakil in Bhutan.”9 but he was nonetheless able to establish a warm personal relationship with the Panchen Lama. and the Deb Raja sent the first of a series of vakils (envoys) to represent his interests in Calcutta. 29 March 1775. p.332 John Bray They [the Tibetans] said that being born in this country they were afraid of going into a hot one. chank [conch shells] and a few other articles through the country. At the same time Bhutanese traders were to be allowed special privileges at an annual fair in Rangpur. 11 Ibid. 9 June 1775.238. 315. but that eight out of ten died before their return. p. The eventual compromise was that the Deb Raja agreed to allow Hindu and Muslim traders to pass and repass through his country between Bengal and Tibet.10 He added that. In Lamb (2002). 10 Bogle to Hastings. he opened negotiations with the Deb Raja of Bhutan on a possible trade agreement with the Company. that their people would die in Bengal. Cooch Behar. the Bhutanese were “averse from innovations and ignorant of all the advantages which flow from a free and extensive commerce. a major factor impeding the negotiations was the Deb Raja’s fear that the presence of British merchants in his country might turn out to be a precursor of military conquest. On Bogle’s return journey from Tashi Lhunpo. 260. that the Kashmiris and Gosains travelled into different countries. In Lamb (2002). who meanwhile had been appointed Collector of Rangpur. the Regent in Tashi Lhunpo sent two Kashmiris. and he was able to meet the infant Fourth Panchen Lama in Tashi Lhunpo. 422. who succeeded Hastings as Governor-General in 1786. who are charged with treachery against their generous patrons.13 Cornwallis’s slow and heavily-qualified response to Tibetan appeals for assistance had raised suspicions in Lhasa that the Company had actually supported the Gorkhas.14 12 Sarcar (1931). Bogle. Cornwallis was more preoccupied with developments in southern India than with the Himalaya. to carry letters to Cornwallis in Calcutta seeking British assistance to repulse a Gorkha assault on Tibet. A second. One factor was the demise of two of the most important personalities: in 1780 the Panchen Lama died of smallpox while on a visit to Peking (with Purangir in his entourage). 470.e. been proscribed their accustomed abode at Teshoo Loomboo. by becoming guides and spies to the enemy [i. p.Krishnakanta Basu and Rammohan Ray 333 The late 18th and early 19th centuries Despite these promising beginnings. Turner was greatly taken with the child’s dignity and composure but was unable to enter substantive diplomatic negotiations either with the new Panchen Lama or his regent.12 Cornwallis refused to intervene. died in a drowning accident the following year. it is said. and have in consequence. see also Engelhardt 2002. Lamb (2002). . and enjoyed particular favour and indulgence. 14 Turner 1800. making it all but impossible for Europeans to visit the country. p. The outcome of the 1788 and 1792 Gorkha wars with Tibet was a strengthening of Manchu authority over Lhasa. Mohammed Rajeb and Mohammed Wali. p. and his offer of mediation following a second Gorkha war with Tibet in 1792 came too late to be of practical assistance. On the diplomatic repercussions of the 1788 and 1792 conflicts between Nepal and Tibet. and may have missed diplomatic opportunities as a result. the British]. the Company’s relationship with Bhutan and Tibet did not develop as had been hoped. In 1788. In 1800 Turner wrote of Tibet that: A most violent prejudice prevails even against the Hindoo Goseins. and it seems that the Gosains were caught in the backlash against the British. Hastings sent Samuel Turner to Bhutan and Tibet in 1783. 13 The one exception was Thomas Manning who managed to visit Lhasa in 1811. and the tightening of border controls of the Himalayan passes. 126. where they had been ever patronised in great numbers by the Lama. even more serious factor was a shift in overall policy under Lord Cornwallis. 1830) see in particular White (1832) and Barooah (1970). I enquired the reason & find. Scott came from Dunninald. the main underlying reason is likely to have been fear of possible British military expansion. see in particular Potts (1967). 25 April 1796. 16 Hastings had tended to favour Bhutan in these disputes.334 John Bray Meanwhile. another David Scott (1746-1805) who had served in the East India Company and eventually became its Chairman. IN/16. On the Baptists in early 19th century Bengal. The younger David came to India in 1802 and served first in Gorakhpur and Purnea. 16 The Duars were lowland tracts analogous to the Nepali terai that were then under Bhutanese control. and David Scott who was successively Collector in Rangpur from 1814 to 1816. 57-69. they have suffered losses by thieves which have discouraged them from coming to the Fair. The annual fair in Rangpur continued to take place but was poorly attended. These 2 Persons were a Merchant and his servant. and then Commissioner in Cooch Behar. They were annexed by the British after the 1865 war with Bhutan. the Company’s relations with Bhutan fared little better. On the boundary disputes. Again. . see in particular Gupta (1974). near Montrose in the north-east of Scotland. Elephants’ Teeth etc for sale… 15 A further reason for poor relations was a series of disputes along the boundary between Bhutanese territory in the Duars and the princely state of Cooch Behar which had been under British protection since 1774. Baptist Missionary Society Papers. For example. John Digby. the Baptist missionary Dr John Thomas reported: I went to a great Fair… toward Bootan where the natives come down yearly & having found only two real Bootanese. Oxford. However. pp. The key protagonists in the early decades of the 19th century include: James Morgan. and frequently ruled against Bhutan. the frontline management of these boundary disputes fell to the Commissioners in Cooch Behar and the Collectors in Rangpur. perhaps taking the view that minor territorial concessions were worthwhile if they served the Company’s wider diplomatic and commercial interests. Regent’s Park College Archives.17 15 Thomas to the Society. Hastings’ successors and their local representatives tended to take a more legalistic view. and overall trade with India was limited in scale. 17 On David Scott (1786. who succeeded him from 1809 until 1814. British and Indian officials in Rangpur On the British side. By the time he reached Rangpur he was still only 28. His connection with India came via his uncle. who was Collector of Rangpur from 1807 to 1809. with woollen Blankets. in 1796. 23 In 1807 Morgan conducted an onthe-spot enquiry and decided in favour of Cooch Behar. received 18 August 1812. in Sen (1942) pp. 55-56. or that he continued to hold the title unofficially. initially as a private munshi (secretary) and then as temporary sar-ristadar (head clerk) of the Ramgarh Faujdari ’Adalat in northern Bihar. 23 Gupta (1974). letter from the Raja of Cooch Behar to the Commissioner. Bhagalpur (Bihar) and finally to Rangpur. received 9 May 1814. 8 February 1810. 63. F/4/810/21274. In November 1809 he wrote to the Board of Revenue describing Rammohan as a “man of very respectable family and excellent education” and seeking the Board’s approval of his appointment as his diwan. citing Rammohan’s excellent qualifications and references. and the Maharaja took possession of the territory two years later. the Board confirmed its original decision and reproved him for the style in which he had addressed them. When Digby sought to protest. p. p.21 Despite this setback. Digby evidently held Rammohan in high regard. 5 November 1809. and had entered Digby’s service in 1805. 41.19 He moved with Digby successively to Jessore (Bengal). In 1809 Digby confirmed Morgan’s ruling awarding Gird Maraghat to Cooch Behar.Krishnakanta Basu and Rammohan Ray 335 All three men were of course supported by an extensive Indian staff. in Sen (1942).18 and Rammohan Ray who first came with Digby to Rangpur in 1809. . arguing that Rammohan was insufficiently qualified. Among these were Krishnakanta Basu who joined government service as a junior official in the Rangpur Faujdari ’Adalat (criminal court) in 1807. some 25 miles from Jalpaiguri. In Chanda & Majumdar 1938. 20 However. Maraghat was awarded to Bhutan in the 1774 treaty with the Company. the Board rejected the appointment. Rammohan had been born into a wealthy Bengali family in 1774. 44 22 Letter from the Deb Raja. 17. 50. p. Rammohan remained in Rangpur. However the Raja of Cooch Behar claimed the southern part of the district. p. and this was confirmed by a Council at Dinajpur in 1777. Two Bengali-language letters from 1812 and 1814 refer to him as diwan. p. 18 The Petition of Kishun Kunt Bose inhabitant of Baluakoudee purgannah Kassinnuggur in Zillah Idalopore. 20 20 Digby to Board of Revenue.22 and it therefore appears either that he was reappointed to the post. OIOC. 19 Robertson 1995. which was known as Gird Maraghat. 21 Board of Revenue to Digby. The Maraghat boundary dispute The most important of the Bhutan/Cooch Behar boundary disputes in the period under review concerned the Maraghat district. p. In Chanda & Majumdar 1938. The first was to ensure that they either remained neutral or joined the Company’s cause. In Sen (1942). 50. a chief of Bhutan’. For example. the Commissioner of Cooch Behar. received May 1814. On the events leading to the war. Francis Rawdon Hastings (1754-1826). in 1811 a letter to the Company from ‘Penlow Sahib. appealed for assistance in resolving the dispute. see also Pemble (1971). 24 Similarly in 1812 a letter from the Deb Raja again referred to Maraghat. Stiller (1995) and Michael (1999). 48-49. In Sen (1942). p. However. 26 The Maraghat dispute was therefore far from being resolved in late 1814 when it was overtaken by the outbreak of the Company’s war with Nepal.28 24 Letter from ‘Penlow Sahib’. and the eventual success of Moira’s strategy. 25 In May 1814 the Maharaja of Cooch Behar appealed to Norman McLeod.336 John Bray The Bhutanese never accepted these decisions. complained that an officer of the Maharaja of Cooch Behar had been causing trouble over the boundary for the previous three years. At that point Maraghat became one factor in a much wider set of strategic calculations on the part of the British. See his account of the Nepal war in Prinsep (1825). who was then known as Lord Moira and from 1817 became the First Marquess of Hastings. 28 For Sikkim’s role in the war. and said that ‘Diwan Rammohan’ knew all the facts of the case. 58 27 This argument was in fact made by Henry Prinsep. Moira had two concerns with regard to Sikkim and Bhutan. Garhwal and the Himalayan foothills as far west as the river Sutlej. and it was these that in due course led to Krishnakanta’s and Rammohan’s mission to Bhutan. The Nepal war and the mission to Bhutan In the course of the 18th and early 19th centuries both the East India Company and the House of Gorkha had extended their control over vast new swathes of territory. 25 Letter from Deb Raja. In the Gorkha case these included much of Sikkim as well as Kumaon. received 26 November 1811. and expressed fears that war might ensue. 26 Raja of Cooch Behar to McLeod. The immediate cause of the Nepal war was a boundary dispute in northern Bihar. one of Moira’s senior officials. In Sen (1942). p. Sikkim was to be encouraged to join forces with the Company in the hope of regaining territory that had earlier been lost to the Gorkhas. asking him to arrange for the deployment of 50 sepoys to protect the Maraghat frontier from Bhutanese infringements. pp. the rival interests of these two expanding South Asian powers arguably were bound to lead to conflict sooner or later.27 British policy in the war was formulated in Calcutta by the GovernorGeneral. received 18 August 1812. see Bray (forthcoming) . 32 Latter to MacLeod. British officials in the north-east were primarily preoccupied with local concerns. 31 See Papers Respecting the Nepaul War (hereafter PRNW). . Eager to be of service. and the Company therefore had to find other means of making contact. See Mandhar (2004). the veterinary surgeon and explorer William Moorcroft (1770-1825) reviewed his own contacts at the outset of the war. Titalia.e. which since 1792 had claimed Nepal as a tributary. 410-412. pp. pp.31 Captain Barré Latter. 33 Ibid. One of its first tasks was therefore to review the sources that were in fact available. On Ahmed Ali.30 However. see Bray (2010). reported rumours that the Gorkhas had sent a vakil to incite the Deb Raja to join forces with them against the British. In early November 1814. See Bray (forthcoming) for an account of Latter’s part in the Nepal war and his alliance with Sikkim. Norman McLeod. The Company’s prospects of achieving these objectives were impeded by its weak diplomatic connections and poor intelligence sources for all the Himalayan kingdoms. 19th November 1814. to prevent our attempting to enter Nepaul [i. the British Commissioner in Cooch Behar. none of these traditional sources were available for Bhutan and Tibet. Moira was concerned about the potential conflict’s impact on British relations with China.33 Scott’s view from Rangpur was more balanced: on 28 November he wrote to Calcutta suggesting that the Deb Raja’s deployment of troops on the Western Passes might be “merely precautionary. the parts of Sikkim then controlled by the 29 Nepal’s quinquennial tribute missions to China continued until the early 20th century. who commanded the Company forces in the north-east.Krishnakanta Basu and Rammohan Ray 337 At a wider geostrategic level.29 He therefore hoped that it would be possible to send a message via either Sikkim or Bhutan to the Chinese authorities in Lhasa. expressed the “decided opinion that no time ought to be lost in preparing to repel the first aggression on the part of the Deb Raja. including Nepal as well as Bhutan and Tibet. emphasising that the Company’s quarrel was solely with Nepal. and that he was mobilising armed forces along his western frontier.”32 If he had possessed any firm information regarding the reported Bhutanese mobilisation. 30 For a far-ranging analysis of the Company’s intelligence limitations see Bayly (1996). 411-412. PRNW. Alarms in the north-east In the immediate aftermath of the outbreak of war. he would on his own initiative have occupied the Bhutanese post of Kyrantie. and these evidently included “fakirs” (Gosains) as well as a Kashmiri merchant named Ahmed Ali. the Secretary to the Government of India. Rangpur.”37 The conflict with Nepal made it all the more important to maintain good relations. friendly neighbouring chief. Monckton.”35 Two days later he reported that a party of Bhutanese merchants had arrived with horses and other products of the hills for sale. 36 Scott to Monckton. 38 Adam to Scott. A similar communication might also be conveyed to the Deb Raja. and the encouragement which it is proposed to afford to the Raja of Siccim.39 34 Scott to J. 6 December 1814. Rangpur. 39 Ibid. John Adam.e. and may lose. PRNW. PRNW. He had made secret enquiries but could not find any evidence of preparations of a warlike nature in Bhutanese territory. Fort William. . Papers relating to the Nepaul War (hereafter ‘PRNW’). p. the duars]. pp. 26 November 1814. and known at the same time to proceed from an English authority. will enable you to convey the communication in an authentic and satisfactory manner.338 John Bray Gorkhas] by the roads leading from Bhutan”. noting that Latter’s proposed occupation of Kyrantie might have involved the British Government “in a state of hostility with an unoffending. The deputation of a decent person to each court. 266. 37 Monckton to Scott.38 He added that the deputations to these countries need not be particularly grand: It is not necessary that either of these communications should assume the appearance of a regular mission. Acting Secretary to Government in the Political Department. 413. 35 Ibid. without an effort on the part of his enemy. in order to afford the means of conveying to the authorities there such an intimation of the origin and objects of our proceedings towards the Nepaulese. p.36 The British authorities in Calcutta ultimately agreed with Scott’s assessment. wrote to Scott requesting him to make contact with both Tibet and Bhutan: His Excellency [the Governor-General] further desires that you will be pleased to endeavour to open a channel of communication with the administration of Lassa. without the parade of a formal mission. p. 411-412. he thought that Bhutan’s lack of military capability rendered it “highly improbable that the Deb Raja should seriously think of engaging in a war. in which he can gain nothing. PRNW. 28th November 1814. and on 26th November 1814. as shall enable them to appreciate the justice and moderation of our conduct. furnished with the necessary information. 412. 30th November 1814.34 In any case. the whole his territories below the hills [i. pp. from not being able to find a person who could write it in the language of Tibet. nor appeared to me to be compatible with the dignity and views of the British Government. 41 To the Deb Raja.40 duly emphasised that: The utmost harmony and friendship have always subsisted between the British Government and you.44 While waiting for the Deb Raja’s response. p. pp. 45 On the status of Bijni see Deb (1972). 29th November 1814. Rangpur. and I am perfectly satisfied of your disposition to maintain those relations in the true spirit of cordiality. 10 January 1815. PRNW. 49-51.41 The letter went on to request the Deb Raja to refuse entry to any Gorkhas seeking to enter his country “for the purpose of exciting disturbance in the British territories. although it seems—as will be seen below—that the Deb Raja’s response was in Bengali. I however expect that a man who understands that dialect will arrive in the course of a few days.45 Meanwhile. a small territory on the borders of Bhutan.Krishnakanta Basu and Rammohan Ray 339 The letter to the Deb Raja.”42 Scott initially had difficulty in forwarding the letter. . and sending a person in disguise. 44 Ibid. 43 Scott to Adam. he had sent a message to Bhutan via the Raja of Bijni. PRNW. from his Excellency the Vice-President. he also reported difficulties in opening communications with Tibet: I have hitherto been prevented from forwarding a letter to the Court of Lassa. 414. On 10 January he reported that he had had to apply for permission to the Deb Raja for permission to send a person to his court because of the “jealousy of the Bootan government inducing it to refuse admission to strangers into the interior of the country. which was composed by the Government’s Persian Department. 430-431. 42 Ibid. and his Lordship may depend 40 Persian was still the main language of diplomatic exchange in South Asia. and the latter was a mode of procedure which was neither likely to prove agreeable to any person duly qualified for the duty in question.”43 He commented: The precautions taken to prevent the entrance of strangers into Bootan rendered it necessary for me to choose between making a formal application of this nature. Rangpur. as well as by the manners and impure habits of the people which are so repugnant to the customs of the Hindoos that few persons of the latter religion will venture into Bhootan from fear of losing their Caste. 430-431. PRNW. Krishnakanta himself described the background in an application for a pension (translated from Bengali by Scott) which he wrote in 1821. 8. However.” The Deb Raja eventually replied to Scott in a letter received on 20 March 1815. pp. p. it is interesting to note an echo of similar preoccupations in the case of early 20th century Newar traders returning from Tibet to Nepal. p.340 John Bray upon every precaution being taken to ensure its safe and speedy conveyance to that Capital. OIOC. he observed that the contrasting climates of the plains of India and the Himalaya presented a major obstacle: …. pp. the Climate of the hilly Country being from the snow and extreme cold exceedingly hostile to the Constitutions of the natives of Bengal… 48 Religious ritual concerns were another major factor. The Gosains evidently did not share these ritual concerns.46 Scott added that if the Deb Raja agreed to his request to send a person to his court. . Bengali Hindus were: …further deterred from proceeding into those Countries by the difficulty and occasional impossibility they experience in getting those articles of provision to which they are accustomed. 17. he referred to the continuing boundary disputes—which evidently were his own principal concern—and duly enclosed a passport for a trustworthy British representative to come to Bhutan so that both sides should be informed of each other’s affairs. 47 Sen 1942. and eventually decided on Krishnakanta Basu. 47 He insisted that there was no truth in the report that the Gorkhas had sent a request for military aid. 10 January 1815. then “the obstacles which at present oppose themselves to the journey to Lassa will be removed.no person at Rungpore could be found to undertake the duty. 60-61.49 46 Scott to Adam. Like Bogle’s Tibetan merchants. Selecting the messengers Scott now had the task of selecting a suitable representative. F/4/810/21274.. 48 The Petition of Kishun Kunt Bose inhabitant of Baluakoudee purgannah Kassinnuggur in Zillah Idalopore. At the same time. 49 Ibid. I can safely vouch. 14 per month as a ‘Mohurrer’ (a writer in local languages) to Rs. p. pp. 51 Ibid.” 50 Ibid. I sent another man to go along with him as far as Bhootan in case of the occurrence of such an accident. 12-13. not to say despairing of returning alive. 39-41 of the ‘supplementary notes’ by Biswas and Ganguly in Collet (1962). bound himself with the girdle of courage and regardless of the consequences. returnees were kept in ‘ritual quarantine’ for two weeks. 70 when he was in Bhutan. He adds: “The family kitchen and chapel were off-limits to them. At the end of the period. they performed a purification ceremony and invited their relatives and friends to a feast. Scott confirmed that Krishnakanta had not been exaggerating when he referred to the difficult of finding someone to undertake the journey: For the accuracy of such parts of his petition which relate to the unwillingness displayed by the natives at Rungpore to undertake the journey to Lhassa and the danger attending to it. agreed to undertake the journey.Krishnakanta Basu and Rammohan Ray 341 Krishnakanta nevertheless decided to take on the task. However.51 From the Deb Raja’s subsequent correspondence. 18).52 According to Taladhar (2004. it is clear that Rammohan Ray was this ‘other man’ and—particularly since he would have been senior to Krishnakanta—it is odd that Scott does not mention him by name. as no capable person but himself could be found to undertake the business and the risk from the climate at the particular season was such that thinking it not improbable that the petitioner who was ill at the time of his departure might die on the way. pp. 52 For a discussion of Rammohan’s status during this period see also pp.50 It seems that he received an immediate benefit in that his salary was raised from Rs. They had to get a note from the royal priest detailing the procedure they had to follow to cleanse themselves. They had only one meal a day and washed the dirty dishes themselves. Very speculatively. 18-19. one wonders whether this was because he was no longer in formal government service by the time he travelled to the Deb Raja’s court. and therefore had no official status. . partly for material reasons: Notwithstanding the above considerations your petitioner being grateful for the subsistence afforded by the Government and hopeful for future advancement and eventual benefit. In Sen (1942). The two emissaries had explained that one of them was to stay in Bhutan while the other—Rammohan Ray— was to return to Rangpur. In this jungle. The Deb Raja responded by sending a letter to Scott in Rangpur in which he acknowledged a present of five pieces of broadcloth. according to what he had learnt from Rammohan and Krishnakanta. 1865 edition. ‘Account of Bootan’. requesting that Scott either come to the frontier for a local enquiry. There he notes the Gorkhas had wronged the Company. He only refers to the Nepal war—which from Scott’s point of view was by far the most important matter at a hand—in a postscript.54 He said that Scott’s letter to the two representatives of China—presumably the two Ambans—had been forwarded to Lhasa. he had to pass through the Bhutanese Duars. pp. the degree to which they were cultivated. The rest of the letter is a clear indication of the Deb Raja’s priorities inasmuch as it mainly concerns his grievance over the continuing boundary disputes with Cooch Behar and Baikunthapur. the two men duly arrived in ‘Wandipoor’ (Wangdi Phodrang). 54 Deb Raja to Scott. 203. and presented their credentials. covered with these animals. Before reaching the hills. and he will therefore reject any Gorkha approaches in connection with the war. and he describes a series of perils in the jungles: The jungle is of such height that an elephant or rhinoceros cannot be seen in it when standing up. wherever it has been scratched by the grass. the heat is intolerable. five coats and a telescope. and when the sun ceases to shine a person cannot remain in it without a fire on account of innumerable musquitoes [sic] and other insects with which it is filled.342 John Bray Krishnakanta’s stay in Bhutan Krishnakanta gives a vivid description of the journey in his ‘Account of Bootan’. noting the various habitations that he encountered en route. p. and the extent to which the roads would be passable for horses or elephants. when the sun shines. and it is so full of leeches that a person cannot move a hundred yards without having his body. so that a single man cannot get rid of them without assistance. 64-65. 53 Kishen Kant Bose [Krishnakanta Basu]. He then returns to the boundary disputes. received 12 November 1815. or send Rammohan back with a clear decision in the matter. . At all events. 53 His account of the terrain once he reaches the hill is more matter-offact. OIOC. By early November British and Gorkha representatives were negotiating a draft treaty at Segauli. 59 Scott to Adam. Classic texts include Collet (1962). F/4/552. your petitioner also passed the time in a most disagreeable manner. In June 1816 Scott reported to his superiors that he was “now exceedingly desirous of returning home in consequence of continued and severe sickness”. 110. and Chanda & Majumdar (1938). thus bringing the conflict to an end. a practice which naturally limited his value as an intelligence source. 19-20. For a more recent study. and which they would probably communicate at any rate”. he went on to say that Krishnakanta’s diplomatic role was in any case limited by the fact that the Bhutanese watched him with “extreme jealousy”. and he therefore had “little opportunity of learning anything except what the Bootan Government wish him to know. and one of the leading Bengali intellectuals of his generation.Krishnakanta Basu and Rammohan Ray 343 In the event. . 56 OIOC. 58 Ibid. Rangpur 24 Sept 1816. Rangpur 24 Sept 1816. pp. and requested 55 There is of course an extensive literature on Rammohan’s subsequent career. 58 The Deb Raja had repeatedly prevented Krishnakanta from sending messengers to India. p. 60 For a detailed account of military developments in the war see Pemble 1971. the British General David Ochterlony had rather greater success in the second campaign which began in the autumn of 1815.59 While Krishnakanta was in Bhutan the main events of the Nepal war unfolded elsewhere. he as well as all the people who accompanied him. The Company’s armies met fierce Gorkha resistance in the first campaign which took place in late 1814 and early 1815. p.”57 However. see Robertson (1995). 55 Krishnakanta was therefore left to fulfil his role as the resident Company vakil in Bhutan as best he could. 112.56 Scott later noted that Krishnakanta did not seem to “possess all the discretion requisite for such an employment. 57 Scott to Adam. Krishnakanta spent all this time in Bhutan. remained almost constantly sick. Fighting briefly resumed in early 1816 before the treaty was signed and ratified in March. this was far from being a pleasant experience: During the period of your petitioner’s residence in Bhootan. and on account of the impure habits of the people and their hostility to the Hindoo Religion. According to his own account. rather than returning to Bhutan. F/4/810/21274. F/4/552. and one of the latter died from the cold and unhealthiness of the climate and owing to the want of their accustomed food. OIOC. Rammohan moved to Calcutta where he soon achieved prominence as the founder of the Brahmo Samaj. 60 However. the Government Secretary. Richardson (1973) and Manandhar (2004). 111. 196 ff. the Raja had appealed to China for assistance. 22 June 1816. and the information that Krishnakanta might be able to gather in Bhutan took on a new importance. Fu (1966). Scott to Adam. F/4/552. and he was still in Bhutan two months later. The Deb Raja’s reply was reportedly to the effect that “…his army consists of Bhotiahs who would die if they were sent into the plains. 618-619. 62 However.63 A Chinese army in Tibet By this time a new diplomatic crisis was beginning to unfold following news that a Chinese army led by Sai-Ch’ung-a. OIOC. explaining that Krishnakanta had now recovered from his illness. After Scott had sent a further message in August. duly replied that Krishnakanta could now return from Bhutan “agreeably to his own desire”. ‘Teo Chang Chan’ and ‘Thee Chanchan’. p. Since the roads were now impassable anyway because of the rains. 75-95. This episode is also discussed in Rose (1971). a senior Manchu official from Sichuan. 34-38.64 Lord Moira had been long feared that the conflict might lead to a dispute with China. The crisis therefore reinforced the need for accurate intelligence from the Himalayan states.61 John Adam. Having found himself unsuccessful. Rangpur.344 John Bray instructions as to how he should respond. which was sent via a Bhutanese official since it did not contain anything of consequence. and the commander of the Chinese army had in his turn called on Bhutan to provide aid. thus imperilling Britain’s growing economic interests in East Asia. which claimed Nepal as a tributary. Now it seemed as though his worst fears were about to be realised. p. p. The conversation was wide-ranging. p. He began with the ingratiating observation that “the Goorkha Raja was a Villain” who had “wantonly made war on the British Government”. and 61 62 63 64 Scott to Adam. it seems that the Deb Raja prevented Krishnakanta from receiving Scott’s message. British archival sources refer to Sai-Chung’a variously as ‘Sheo Chanchoon’. 115. Lamb (1986). pp. F/4/551 13382. 401-402 and pp. pp. he requested that Krishnakanta should stay a little longer until the Maraghat border dispute had been settled. Rangpur 24 Sept 1816. but selective in that—to echo Scott’s earlier observation—the brother was presumably telling Krishnakanta what he wanted the British to know. F/4/551 13382. OIOC. Krishnakanta’s main contribution was a detailed report of a conversation in September 1816 with the Deb Raja’s brother which touched on developments in Tibet. the Deb Raja responded on his own account. 10 June 1816. pp. 110. . Adam to Scott. OIOC. had arrived in Tibet with orders to investigate the outcome of the Nepal war. Playing the diplomat in his turn. The price is accordingly double what it was before. Indeed. . and he doubted that China really had designs 65 Translation of Enclosure in a letter from the Magistrate of Rungpore to the Political Department. he would appeal to the British for aid. F/4/552. Krishnakanta assured him that such aid would be forthcoming. for this place is supplied from Lassa.” According to his sources. Krishnakanta’s despatch also contained an amalgam of information on Chinese forces in Tibet compiled from various “persons of credit.67 If the Chinese tried to exact Bhutanese assistance by force. 67 Ibid. an army of about ten or twelve thousand men had already set out from Lhasa in the direction of Assam. Scott commented that there was no doubt that there had been a great increase in the strength of the Chinese army in Tibet. . the Deb Raja’s brother commented that: We will give not assistance at all for there is a close friendship between the Company and Dhurum Raja. Making the most of all available information. pp. 110. the Chinese had designs on both Calcutta and Assam. p. Tea has become scarce here.121-123. and the consumption there has been greatly increased.65 He went on to suggest to the Chinese general that “it is not proper to make war on the Company as many lives will be lost on either side.69 However.. Another army of nearly twenty thousand men had advanced towards Nepal. 128 69 Ibid. & as our country affords no supplies we are enabled to subsist only by means of the traffic carried on with the Company’s territories..” 66 In his own analysis. dated 24th September.68 In forwarding the report to Calcutta on 24 September. he rightly added the cautionary note that Krishnakanta’s accounts “do not appear to be probable or consistent” in all respects. From this circumstance I infer that the army is of considerable strength. OIOC. and that is therefore advisable for him to make peace.Krishnakanta Basu and Rammohan Ray 345 that his Country is quite destitute of supplies”. 66 Ibid. he concluded with an analysis of the military implications of local market prices: In consequence of the number of troops which have marched from Lassa to the westward. 123-124 68 Ibid. although it is highly unlikely that the Company would in fact have risked a confrontation with China over Bhutan. pp.p. 114-115. and in October 1816— no doubt much to his own relief—he was duly recalled. Latter to John Adam. The British were able to send a series of messages explaining their view of the war.73 At the same time.72 In those circumstances there was from the British perspective no further need for Krishnakanta to remain in Bhutan. 30 October 1816. which were not taken into account in 1809. OIOC. In 1816 the Deb Raja sent agents to Rangpur to explain the nature and ground of his claims to the territory. The enquiry was eventually carried out on the orders of Scott who by that time had succeeded McLeod as Commissioner. He nevertheless observed that there had recently been a dispute between the Dharma and Deb Rajas. 74 This relatively generous attitude may in part 70 71 72 73 74 Ibid. The settlement of the Maraghat dispute There remained the unfinished business of the Maraghat dispute. and there was still a risk that this would lead to civil war. Captain Latter had been able to report that he had received favourable news from Lhasa via Sikkim to the effect that the Gorkha envoys to Sai-chung’a had been put under constraint and were now in close confinement. 13 September 1816. pp. expressly stated that the territory belonged to Bhutan. Important government documents from the 1770s. Latter to Adam. F/4/552.346 John Bray in Assam. the British Commissioner in Cooch Behar to conduct an enquiry concerning his claims. Already on 13 September. p. and it was duly returned to the Deb Raja. OIOC F/4 552. In 1817 he decided the main part of the disputed territory had—with the exception of twentysix isolated and very inconsiderable villages—been in the undisturbed possession of Bhutan from 1780 to 1811. the authorities in Calcutta instructed Norman McLeod. and blamed them rather than the British for the outbreak of the conflict. Ibid. Titalia.70 Fortunately for all parties. 175 OIOC F/4/771/20906. If that happened: … it seems not improbable that that one or other of the parties may call in the Chinese to their assistance and that the authority of that Government may finally be established in Bootan to the same extent as it is at present in Thibet. and Saichung’a in due course responded that he was “perfectly satisfied” with the British response. the threat of Chinese intervention in both Nepal and Bhutan was soon averted.71 It seems that the Chinese general took a sceptical view of Gorkha claims. Titalia. . 77 Swinton to Scott. I have not been able to find Scott’s answer in the British Library archives but Gupta (1974. 15-16. However. as represented in Krishnakanta’s letter.77 The ‘Account of Bhutan’ Krishnakanta’s report gained a wider audience in 1825. Ibid. 76 Scott to George Swinton. and played a major role in the development of Western scholarship on the region. perhaps drawing on records available in India. says that the figure was Rs 2. the journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal. 130-131. 67-70. pp.75 Krishnakanta’s contribution to Himalayan studies Krishnakanta remained in the service of the East India Company until 1821. 68). F/4/810/ 21274.Krishnakanta Basu and Rammohan Ray 347 have been a reflection of the Company’s gratitude at Bhutan’s neutrality during the Nepal war. when it was published under the title “Some Account of the country of Bhútán” in Asiatic Researches. pp. Calcutta. 21 September 1821. 78 On the scholarly contributions of the Asiatic Society see Kejariwal (1988). The Asiatic Society was the leading learned society in India. 24 November 1821. These were his ‘Account of Bootan’. At this point he announced his desire to resign “on account of urgent private affairs” and. as noted above. and his ‘Grammar and Vocabulary of the Bootan Language’. The Governor-General in Council eventually decided that Krishnakanta’s length of service did not entitle him to a pension. which Scott had himself translated from Bengali. Cooch Behar. applied for a pension. . still working for Scott in his capacity as Commissioner in Cooch Behar. the Council nevertheless decided to present him with a “pecuniary donation” as a “recompense for his trouble” and “in consideration of the zeal and industry displayed by him in compiling the vocabulary and interesting account of Bhootan”. pp. In 1818 year Krishnakanta was given the task of staking out the new Maraghat boundary with bamboos and transferring the disputed land to a Bhutanese official. Scott was invited to state his opinion “as to the extent of the remuneration which it might be proper to grant him”. p. thus bringing the affair to a close. Scott’s accompanying letter vouched for the facts of the case.76 Scott duly forwarded Krishnakanta’s application to Calcutta along with two of the products of his stay in Bhutan. OIOC.78 The only previous published description of Bhutan in English had appeared in Turner’s Account of an Embassy to the Court of the Teshoo 75 Gupta (1974).000. and in the event of refusal a battle ensues. p. & c. the foundation of the Bhutanese state. and receive from the Soubahs and Pillos about 1. Krishnakanta’s Account on the other hand is a much more workaday document. he must. The lower ranks of the administration were unstable for similar reasons: When a person gets a good appointment he is not allowed to keep it long. and represents one of the earliest examples of Western romantic travel writing on the Himalayan region.348 John Bray Lama in Tibet. p. 80 ‘Account’ (1865). resign his place or risk the result of a civil war: on this account the Deb Raja strives. or by his remaining too long in his office.. The Deb Raja himself after a time is liable to be thrust out on some such a pretence as that of his having infringed established customs. are usually occasioned either by the Deb Raja doing something contrary to custom. these internal disputes at the top of the government made Bhutan potentially vulnerable to Chinese intervention. which so frequently occur in Bootan. assemble and require him to resign. but at the annual religious festivals frequent removals and arguments take place.80 As Scott had noted. and unless he have either Tongso or Paro Pillo on his side. and the Zhabdrung’s subsequent reincarnations. 196 . if required to do so. and are seen as people of high status: Kaiti are the Bengal and Persian Secretaries. in which case the Zimpens. The Account begins with a short summary of the arrival from Tibet of the first ‘Dhurma Raja’ (Zhabdrung). 192. They get each 2 lbs of rice and have each two Poes [described elsewhere as ‘fighting messengers’]. Turner’s book is written with a degree of literary flourish. together with their sources of income—information that would have been important to Krishnakanta in his official capacity. and also something for causes and liberty in the lowlands. The descriptions of the court summarise the roles of the main officials. which had come out in 1800.000 Rupees. Examples include the specialists who are responsible for the court’s external correspondence in Bengali and Persian. Pillos.79 Krishnakanta took a critical view of Bhutanese politics noting that: The intestine broils. by 79 ‘Account’ (1865). crammed with economic and political detail: it is more of a proto-gazetteer than a literary text. Overall. Krishnakanta naturally was interested in the country’s imports and exports: Bootan produces abundance of tangun horses. . made of copper and gilt. sandal. the Account naturally reflects the time at which it was written. red sandal. cloves. however. The Booteahs are full of fraud and intrigue…81 In his capacity as a Company official. asafoetida. 82 ‘Account’ (1865). and offer clarified butter to the gods by throwing it on the fire… The image of Laberem buche [Lama Rinpoche?] resembles that of Ram. nakhi and coarse cotton cloths. indigo. chowries or cow tails.Krishnakanta Basu and Rammohan Ray 349 removals and changes at the annual festivals. some 40 years after it was first composed. gold and embroidered silk goods… Besides the Officers of Government and their servants no person can trade with a foreign country. pp. In 1865. the Bootan deity is. and must be read with the particular political and religious preoccupations of the author in mind. of which they use a part in Bootan and send the rest to Lhassa. count their beads at prayers. blankets. to fill the principal offices with persons devoted to his interest.82 As discussed above. the manufacture of which is constantly going on in the palace. and together with the subsequent ceremonies. nutmegs. and he holds in his hands a bow and arrow. 201-203. nor can any of the inhabitants sell tangun mares without the Deb Raja’s permission. At the time. Krishnakanta felt that the Bhutanese lifestyle was incompatible with Hindu ritual requirements. but he nevertheless thought that he detected similarities with his own religion: The religion of the Booteahs assimilates in some points with that of the Hindoos. it was still considered to be of sufficient merit to justify republication under the slightly different title “Account of Bootan” in a collection of reports on Political Missions to Bootan. walnuts musk. There are also many images of deities with four arms. his countenance is similar. it represented a significant advance of Western knowledge of the Himalaya. p. oranges and manjeet (madder) which the inhabitants sell at Rungpore. they worship the images of the deities. silver. 198. pattus. and thence take back woollen cloth. occasion the chief expense of the government. and from the latter country they import tea. Clearly it needs to 81 ‘Account’ (1865). see Bray 2008. 85 Chattopadhyaya 1984. . rudimentary his researches may have been.350 John Bray be balanced by additional sources from Bhutan itself. The remainder list Tibetan words in Tibetan script with their equivalent in Bengali. Bhot Deshiya Bhashar Vyakarana O Shabda. they amounted to a work of true originality. 132-133. and may therefore still exist in the Indian National Archives.83 but it is still of value as an important historical record. and is in northern Bangladesh. and started work on a Tibetan dictionary. 21 September 1821. of which the first 40 are an introduction to the Tibetan alphabet and grammar. The original had been sent back to the Political Department in 1834. OIOC. Titalia is now known as Tetulia. However. iii. pp. 84 Scott to Swinton. 86 Swinton to Captain Lockett. 24 November 1821. F/4/810/21274. and consists of 216 pages. F/4/810/21274. Cooch Behar. 87 His main source was an earlier manuscript Tibetan-Italian dictionary prepared in Lhasa by the Capuchin missionary Orazio della Penna 83 For a study making use of such sources see Aris (1994). A bibliographic note at the library states that this version was a copy made under the superintendence of the Baptist missionary William Carey (1761-1834) in 1821/22. and Krishnakanta was studying the language entirely on his own. 87 On Schroeter and the Serampore dictionary. p. and the details that follow come from the same reference. pp. According to Scott. I have not myself been able to examine the manuscript.84 At the time Tibetan studies was in its infancy. A manuscript copy of the Grammar and Vocabulary survives in the National Library in Calcutta. The Grammar and Vocabulary of the Bootan Language Scott placed a high value on Krishnakanta’s Grammar and Vocabulary commenting that: The chief merit of the performance is the perfect accuracy with which the pronunciation of the Letters and words has been marked. Secretary to the Council of the College of Fort William. OIOC. being likely to be impaired by being transposed into the European Character by a person not conversant in such matters. I am grateful to Géza Bethlenfalvy for drawing this reference to my attention.86 Schroeter was a German Lutheran in the service of the Church Missionary Society (CMS) who studied Tibetan in Titalia from 1816 until his death in 1820. an earlier copy had been sent to Rev Friedrich Christian Gotthelf Schroeter. 13-14.85 It bears the title in Bengali. As a source of intelligence. Krishnakanta presented his own achievements in the self-effacing manner of a lowly supplicant seeking the munificence of his superiors. The Serampore dictionary is a composite work bearing the mark of at least four contributors: della Penna. It is entirely possible that at least some of Krishnakanta’s contributions may have found their way into the final text either via Schroeter or via Carey. it is clear that he deserves respect for—as he puts it—binding himself with the “girdle of courage” and travelling to territories that were then considered remote and inhospitable. or Boutan Language. Carey or Marshman. However. In placing him within this lineage. Krishnakanta was in many ways a successor to the 18th and early 19th century Gosains and Kashmiri . However. all of whom worked in India. Despite the apparent discomforts of his stay in Bhutan. it is appropriate to look both forward and back. The Governor-general in council appointed Carey to evaluate Schroeter’s draft: he duly recommended publication.Krishnakanta Basu and Rammohan Ray 351 (1680-1745). These definitions could scarcely have come from della Penna from his time in Lhasa. page 142 contains the definitions ‘Krishna’ for dgra po. A definitive answer can only come from a careful comparison of Krishnakanta’s manuscript with the Serampore dictionary. One feature of the Serampore dictionary is that it contains repeated references to the Hindu equivalents of Buddhist deities. Even if we take this humility at face value. he is perhaps the more likely candidate. Despite the title. Schroeter. and therefore presumably made use of Krishnakanta’s vocabulary. Conclusions In his 1821 pension application. At all events. ‘Indra’ for dgra mtshing ’dzin and ‘Ganesha’ for dgra lta can. After Schroeter’s death his unfinished manuscript came into the hands of the government. In 1826 the final version was published in Serampore with the title A Dictionary of the Bhotanta. He merits an honourable place in the lineage both of officials and of scholars who worked in the Himalayan region. it is clear that his pioneering linguistic researches deserve further study. since Krishnakanta was a devout Hindu. both of whom had copies of his manuscript. the work is explicitly a dictionary of Tibetan. To take a random example. he supplemented della Penna’s work with his own enquiries. and was given the task of revising the text for the press together with his younger colleague John Clark Marshman (1794-1877). which had paid his salary while he was working on the dictionary. he proved to be a keen and diligent observer. Carey and Marshman. It is possible that they might have been introduced by Schroeter. Remuneration to him on this account and for his Services in 1815/16. Asiatic Researches 15.352 John Bray merchants who travelled between India and Tibet. The Bengal Government sanction the claim of the Deb Raja of Bhutan to the district of Maraghat. OIOC. Kishen Kant [Krishnakanta Vasu]. Published primary sources Bose. References Archival sources British Library. pp. and provided news and information to officials. he contrasts with them in that he had no previous experience or personal contacts in the region.” Translated by D. Similarly. OIOC F/4/552. Esq. Oriental and India Office Collection (OIOC). Papers regarding the advance of a Chinese force towards Nepal. His Account. 1825. which had been occupied by the Raja of Cooch Behar. officials and missionaries were in the early stage of developing a more systematic understanding of other Asian languages. F/4/551/13382. traders and ordinary people on both sides of the Himalaya. addressed the kinds of question that a European observer would have asked. Like Rammohan Ray. “Some Account of the country of Bhútán. Scott. and was a full-time government servant. F/4/810/21274. he belonged to the first generation of Bengali intellectuals who were both influenced by and contributed to Western learning. IN/16. However. Baptist Missionary Society papers. In many respects. Letters to the Society from Dr John Thomas. 128-156. Records of the Board of Commissioners for the Affairs of India: Board’s Collections. Grammar and Vocabulary of the Bootan Language compiled by Kishun Kunt Bose. June 1814-November 1816. by Kishen Kant Bose. OIOC F/4/771/20906. his Grammar and Vocabulary was compiled at a time when Western scholars. Regent’s Park College. Oxford. Narrative of Proceedings connected with the advance of a Chinese force towards the frontier of Nepaul. . and was readily adapted to the purposes of the Asiatic Society. he was as much of an outsider in Bhutan as a British official would have been. though originally written in Bengali. 1825. Papers Respecting the Nepaul War [‘PRNW’ in footnotes] 1824. 2001. 2001. Rai Bahadur Ramaprasad & Majumdar. Records in Oriental Languages. Calcutta: Calcutta University Press. 1970.) 1942.: New Delhi: Asian Educational Services.. Nicol. Henry Thoby. Turner. Vol. Calcutta: Printed at the Bengal Secretariat Office. 1826. An Account of an Embassy to the Court of the Teshoo Lama in Tibet. 1802-1831. “Account of Bootan. reprint ed. and W. David Scott in North-East India. Kishen Kant [Krishnakanta Vasu]. Prinsep. Eds. Serampore. 1. Calcutta: Printed at the Baptist Mission Press. Comprising the Reports of the Hon’ble Ashley Eden etc. London: Messrs G. Prācinā Bāgālā Patra Sakalana. Adam. A Dictionary of the Bhotanta. . Sen. 1837.B. Esq. S. 1938 Selections from Official Letters and Documents relating to the Life of Raja Rammohun Roy. A Study in British Paternalism. Jatindra Kumar.N. Michael. White. 187-206. vol. A Collection of Old Bengali Letters.… pp. Capt. New Delhi: Asian Educational Services. 1. 1994. London. with Dr W. Secondary sources Aris. Calcutta: Bengal Secretariat Office. London: Serindia. Chanda. Printed in conformity to the resolution of the Court of Proprietors of East India Stock of 3rd March 1824. The Origins of Buddhist Monarchy in Bhutan. 1824. Barooah. New Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal. 1865. 1838. (Ed. Reprint ed. Samuel. Nirode K. Edited by Archibald Watson. Frederic Christian Gotthelf. Pemberton. With an introductory memoir. The Raven Crown. Calcutta: Calcutta Oriental Book Agency. Political Missions to Bootan.Griffith’s Journal and the Account by Baboo Kishen Kant Bose. 1791-1830. 1832.Krishnakanta Basu and Rammohan Ray 353 Bose. R. Comprising the reports of The Hon’ble Ashley Eden. 1865. Agent to the Governor General. 1800. Memoir of the Late David Scott. on the North-east Frontier of Bengal. Schroeter. History of the Political and Military Transactions in India during the Administration of the Marquess of Hastings. and Commissioner of Revenue and Circuit in Assam. or Boutan Language. London. 1864.” In Political Missions to Bootan. 1971. John. India and Bhutan. and Ronit YoeliTlalim (eds. Bray. Leiden: Brill.” In: Sarat Chandra Das. 3rd ed. 175-182. Trade through the Himalayas. . Bray. Bray. “Introduction. John. Forthcoming. pp.). Alaka.354 John Bray Bayly. Leiden: Brill. Intelligence Gathering and Social Communication in India.P. pp. A. Interactions along the Musk Routes. “Captain Barré Latter and British Engagement with Sikkim during the 1814-1816 Nepal War. Sophia Dobson. 1996.” Indian Economic and Social History Review 1.” In Tibet.” Zentralasiatische Studien 37. Isrun. Cohn. Aldershot: Ashgate. Arabinda.). Deb. 5-14. 1984. “The Role of the Gosains in the Economy of Eighteenth and Nineteenth Century Upper India. 1963-1964. Middleman or Spy? The Dilemmas of a Kashmiri Muslim in Early 19th Century Tibet. Calcutta: Sadharan Brahmo Samaj. 1-5 October 2008.” Bulletin of Tibetology 8. No. John. 1962 The Life and Letters of Raja Rammohun Roy. Edited by Henk Blezer. 2002. “George Bogle’s Treaty with Bhutan (1775).A. Sikkim. Chattopadhyaya. Past and Present. 249-270. Anna Akasoy. 1976. C. “Early Protestant Engagement with the Himalayan Region and Tibet. Collet. Proceedings of the Golden Jubilee Conference of the Namgyal Institute of Tibetology. Empire and Information. 2005. 1951. 34-75. Princeton: Princeton University Press. or Boutan Language. The Early British Attempts to Open Tibet. Charles Burnett. 2008. Delhi and Calcutta: K. “The Closing of the Gates: Tibetan-European Relations at the End of the Eighteenth Century. “Missionaries. Tibetan Studies. 2010. 229-245. “Trader. Bray. Deb. Edited by Alaka Chattopadhyaya.” In Islam and Tibet. John. pp. 1780-1870.1. Camman.” in Ladakhi Histories: Local and Regional Perspectives. pp. Edited by Dilip Kumar Biswas and Prabhat Chandra Ganguli. Edited by Alex McKay and Anna Balicki. Calcutta: Firma KLM Private Ltd. Schuyler. Gangtok: Namgyal Institute of Tibetology. Bernard S. Bagchi & Company. Engelhardt. Gangtok. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. A Study in Frontier Political Relations (1772-1865). John Bray (ed. Officials and the Making of the Dictionary of Bhotanta.” In Sikkim History. John. Raja Rammohan Ray.” Bengal Past and Present 41. 1999. Paris: Klincksieck. Bruce Carlisle. Shantiswarup. London: Serindia. 1. Sarcar. Strategy for Survival. “Ancient Trade Partners: Bhutan. 247-294. Asia Major 18 (1) 1973. Marc. Alastair. The Travels of George Bogle and Alexander Hamilton. 1996. 1766-1910. Jaipur: Panchsheel Prakashan. The Father of Modern India. New Delhi: Adroit Publishers. Pommeret. Delhi: Oxford University Press. Gaborieau. London and New York: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Richardson. British India and Tibet. The Asiatic Society of Bengal and the Discovery of India’s Past. The Invasion of Nepal. Lamb. 2004. Oxford: Oxford University Press.1973.E. Cooch Bihar and Assam (17th–19th centuries). C.Krishnakanta Basu and Rammohan Ray 355 Fu. pp. Récit d’un voyageur musulman au Tibet. 1998. pp. Kejariwal. Rose. 2nd ed. 2002.” Studies in Nepali History and Society 4. 1931. Leo. 79-87. H. Pemble. pp. Michael. Lo-Shu (ed). Nepal. No. High Peaks. Bhutan and Tibet. Hertingfordbury: Roxford. New Delhi: Oxford University Press. S. 2000. Francoise.1971. British Relations with Bhutan. 1774-1777. O. 2. Daniel. “Some Notes on the Intercourse of Bengal with Northern Countries in the Second Half of the Eighteenth Century. Potts. Michael Aris (ed. Tucson: University of Arizona Press. “A Ch’ing Missive to Tibet”.). 1988. Vijay Kumar.D.” Journal of Bhutan Studies 2. reprinted in: Hugh Richardson. John Company at War.P. E. “Statemaking and Space on the Margins of Empire: Rethinking the Anglo-Gorkha War of 1814-1816. 119-128. Alastair. Gupta. 1986. British Baptist Missionaries in India. 1967. . 1793-1837. A Comprehensive History of Nepal-China Relations up to 1955 A. Lamb. No. Mandhar. 1995. 1974. A Documentary Chronicle of Sino-Wesern Relations 1644-1820). Berkeley: University of California Press. 1973. Robertson. Bernardo A. 1971. Pure Earth. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. . 2007. Stiller. Newar Merchants of Kathmandu in Traditional Tibet. The Rise of the House of Gorkha. The High Road to China. . London: British Library. Caravan to Lhasa. 1988. 2nd ed. London: Bloomsbury. Kathmandu: Tuladhar family. 2004. Amar Kaur Jasbir. Teltscher.356 John Bray Singh. Himalayan Triangle. 1995. Sikkim and Bhutan. Ludwig. Tuladhar. A Historical Survey of British India’s Relations with Tibet. Kathmandu: Human Resources Development Research Center. Kamal. Kate. Dorzhiev entered Mongolia and concluded the Tibet-Mongol treaty of friendship on 11 January 1913.206. preserved in the M. N. and eds. popularly known by the Sokpo Tsansheb Ngawang Lobsang to the Tibetans.D. the Dalai Lama started his journey for Tibet from India on 24 June 1912 1. halted at Samding for three months and Choskhor Yangtse monastery in Chushur for four months. Dorzhiev again paid a short visit to Samding monastery in August 1912 and met the 13th Dalai Lama Thubten Gyatso for last time. and is proceeding to Samding monastery. India: Shakabpa House. 1991. They traveled together as far as Samding Dorjee Phagmo Monastery. Having spent some times in Lhasa. 1 Shakabpa sets the departure date to 10th day of the fifth lunar month of the Tibetan calendar in 1912 (Shakabpa.39. met the 13th Dalai Lama Thubten Gyatso at Phagri Dzong in 1912. Except for this letter under discussion. and was at Ralung on 15 July. before he finally returned to Lhasa on 17 January 1913. According to the testimony of Dorzhiev himself2. It was probably at this time that the Dalai Lama handed over the letter for the Russian Tsar and gave an additional credential letter to Dorzhiev and his associates authorizing them to execute any unrevealed tasks and negotiate with external powers for the sake of Buddha doctrine.). 2 Tubten J. Dorzhiev. the key person in the Russia-Tibet relations. The Dalai Lama. Buryatia. Bod kyi srid don rgyal rabs [=Political History of Tibet]. Ulan Ude. as mentioned in the letter. Dorjiev: Memoirs of a Tibetan Diplomat. Tokyo: Hokke Bunka Kenkyu. On his way back to Russia. Kalimpong.Notes on the Thirteenth Dalai Lama’s Confidential Letter to the Tsar of Russia Jampa Samten Sarnath This important piece of historical document is one of the 15 correspondences between the 13th Dalai Lama and Agvan Dorzhiev. p. Norbu and Dan Martin (trans. the Dalai Lama bestowed funds for the ongoing construction of a Buddhist temple (begun in 1910) at St. . Petersburg and some ritual objects for the interior of the temple during their meeting. all others are dated 1924 and 1925. 1976. p. when the latter was returning to Lhasa after his two years stay in Kalimpong. Though the letter itself carried no dispatch date. Russian Federation. According to a British Viceroy’s report to the Secretary of State. Khangalov History Museum of Buriatia. 2 Vols. W. 1918-1930’s..4 The letter in discussion can be the true copy (ngo bshus) of the 13th Dalai Lama’s original letter to Russian Emperor Nicolas II. the Dalai Lama). 3 Thereafter. these two powerful personalities remained in touch until the Dalai Lama died in 1933. was deluding himself. but there are two instances.57. the concluding of the Anglo-Russian Convention of 1907. In Samding. “true copy of the confidential and significant appeal note”) on its top flat. Buddhism in Russia: The Story of Agvan Dorzhiev. the Dalai Lama and Agvan Dorzhiev hardly supposed that they would never see each other again—yet this proved to be the case. 1993. 2003. as indicated by the letter itself. Shaftesbury: Element. However. 5 Shaumian. does not carry the author’s signature. However. the Dalai Lama found himself forced to reject Dorzhiev’s services as his political advisor—at least outwardly. Leiden: Brill. p.194-195. p. The letter. 4 Alexandre Andreyev.149. . of course. Rossiia I Tibet: Sbornik Russkikh Arkhivnykh Dokumentov. Lhasa’s Emissary to the Tsar. however lofty. John Snelling writes: Any British official. the Russian translation by Dorzhiev is a paraphrased summary of the letter.. which confirms the author of the letter. The letter bears the title “Nang gnad zhu zin ngo bshus” (Lit. believed that [the relationship between Dorzhiev and the Dalai Lama] could be easily terminated. which can be rendered as follow: 1. 2005. On the establishment of friendly relations between Tibet and England. 3 John Snelling. where references are made in the first person as “ngos ta la’i bla ma” (I. Though they never saw each other again. who. pp. et al.5 The essential content of the Russian translation by Dorzhiev and the letter in discussion are similar. and on the protection and acknowledgement of Tibetan independence by Russia and England. Vostochnaia Literatura. In view of increasing Chinese pressure on Tibet. The Russian translation of the Dalai Lama’s letter to the Russian Tsar by Agvan Dorzhiev preserved in the Archives of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Empire has been published in the collection of 122 Archival documents on Russo-Tibet relations and edited by Tatiana Shaumian. in a stricter sense. Tatiana. Soviet Russia and Tibet: The Debacle of Secret Diplomacy. and Tibetan interest in seeking British protection. Dorzhiev journeyed back to Russia with two letters of the 13th Dalai Lama addressed to the Tsar and the Russian Government.358 Jampa Samten A month later British authorities informed the 13th Dalai Lama through their trade agent at Gyantse Basil Gould that they would henceforth consider any contacts with Dorzhiev undesirable. 1900-1914 by Institut Vostokovedeniia (Rossiiskaia akademiia nauk). 3. for which the Dalai Lama and his Government are geared up not to leave any tasks unaccomplished. the letter expresses Tibet’s fear and suspicion that. 4. However. and on the swift resolution of these urgent issues. Tsannid Khanchen Agvan Dorzhiev. On the legalization of the status of our representative. Bhutan and Nepal. Support for the declaration of independence of Tibet. On permission to transport them through her territory and on her roads if for some reason the acquisition of arms in Russia will be found unacceptable. and on the establishment between them of lively trade and economic ties by means of a special treaty agreement. 3.The 13th Dalai Lama’s Letter to the Tsar of Russia 359 2. The letter expresses the Dalai Lama’s disappointment to British attitude of insisting the acceptance of Chinese suzerainty over Tibet. or. Proposal for conclusion of Russia-Tibet treaty that would guarantee the Russian protectorate over Tibet. if the institution of diplomatic representation in Tibet will be found to be impossible according to the terms set by the Anglo-Russian agreement of 1907. . or. on the preservation of eternally unshakeable friendly relations between Russia and Tibet. via negotiations with England or other world powers. 2. 5. I. then On finding other means for establishing new guarantees of Tibet’s inviolability and neutrality. On the increase of a loan from the Peking Department of the Russo-Asian Bank up to 1 million rubles. it is important to note that the Russian supports extended to the Dalai Lama during these periods of time are within the purview of its Tibet policy. The letter requests the Russia to discuss the Tibet’s issues with the British and guide Tibetan envoys for immediate declaration of the independence of Tibet. the British with an intention to conquer Tibet might create a military conflict by instigating China. On the dispatching of diplomatic representatives of Russia and England to Lhasa. remembering your former favor and protection. Furthermore. rely on Your Imperial Majesty. On the selling of arms and the command of military instructors. The letter in discussion expresses gratitude and appeals for the Russian support on following matters: 1. Expression of gratitude for Russian help extended particularly during the period of the Dalai Lama’s exile to Mongolia (from 1904-1906) due to the British military expedition and his second exile to India (from 1910-1912) due to the Tibet-Chinese military conflict. The appeal for assurance most probably alludes to the first article of the AngloRussian Treaty signed in 1907. because of the terms of the Anglo-Russia treaty. which states that “both British and Russia shall engage and respect territorial integrity of Tibet and abstain from all interferences in internal administration. Loan of one million dNgul (Rubles) in addition to the earlier loan of one hundred thousand dNgul. This is indicative of the emphasis the Dalai Lama has begun to lay on the need for a strong military force. prior to his return to Tibet from exile. Dalai Lama’s confirmation over his issuance of an additional credential letter to Dorzhiev and his associates authorizing them to execute the secret task and negotiate with external powers for the sake of Buddha doctrine. Thus the appeals made under points 6-9 in this appeal letter reflects the Dalai Lama’s strong concern over the militarily and strategically prone nature of the Tibetan plateau and the imminent foreign aggressions. Reasons cited primarily include scarcity of documented evidence and the authority of Dorzhiev. Permission for transport of weapons through Russian territory.360 Jampa Samten 4. 8. 10. The tenth point enumerated herein records the conferment of authority by Tibet’s spiritual . In 1912. His proclamation of 1913 also stresses the need for a strong military force to protect Tibet from any external aggressions. modern academicians and scholars have raised questions and held reservations over the legality of the Mongol-Tibetan Treaty signed in 1913. The letter suggests Russia to discuss with other countries such as Germany. For long. if it is inconvenient for Russia to do so. 9. 7. which is historically significant to both Mongolians and Tibetans. Japan etc. 5. Sending of military trainers from the Russian Buddhist communities. who are not bound by the treaty and persuade them to depute their representatives to Tibet. the signatory representing the Tibetan side. Implementation of Anglo-Russian treaty and for assurance that foreign countries would only help and support Tibet and refrain from taking over of the land and people of Tibet. This letter of appeal addressed by the 13th Dalai Lama to the Tsar of Russia serves as important evidence that sheds light over the Treaty. Opening of Russian and British office of representative in Lhasa.” 6. France. in case acquired from other Countries. the 13th Dalai Lama formally appointed and dispatched Tsarong Dasang Dadul as the Commander General of the Tibetan army to Lhasa. Sale of guns and ammunitions. Russia and China with conflicting interests in Tibet. particularly the second clause in 1906 treaty6 and a few clauses in 1907 treaty 7 with China and Russia respectively. Khalkha Mongols had proclaimed independence of Outer Mongolia and ceremonially enthroned Jetsun Dampa. which precludes her from interfering in Tibetan affair. About three months after Dorzhiev left Tibet for Russia via Mongolia. where he concluded a Mongol-Tibet agreement with the Autonomous Mongolian Government on 29 December 1912 and later signed by the representatives of both Countries on 11 January 1913. However. Background and Drift in Russia’s Tibet Policy The letter was written at a very significant time in 1912. Tibet’s future political status particularly in relation to China could only be settled with support of either Britain or Russia. the British has special interest in Tibet. However. both engages to respect territorial integrity of Tibet and to abstain from all interferences in internal administration and also both parties recognizing the suzerain rights of China in Tibet.The 13th Dalai Lama’s Letter to the Tsar of Russia 361 and temporal ruler. Britain. Nevertheless. 7 The Government of Great Britain and Russia. the Dalai Lama had set his foot on Indian soil on 24 February 1910 the British Government was not supportive and helpful to Tibet’s issue. the British Government accepted a Chinese declaration. The Dalai Lama and his government too geared up to declare the Independence of Tibet. However. the Dalai Lama was very skeptical and disappointed by the British’s Tibet policy. British government was theoretically bound by the terms of the treaty. the British Government maintained a policy of non-involvement in Tibetan affair. when the period of over two century Tibet and Mongol’s dependency on Manchu Chinese ended with the collapse of Manchu dynasty in February 1912. the Grand Lama of Urga. . as he mentions in the letter that the British continue to insist the acceptance of Chinese suzerainty over Tibet. the Dalai Lama. The Government of China also undertakes not to permit any other foreign State to interfere with the territory or internal administration of Tibet. from the point of view of India’s security in Northern frontiers. Since the day. as Mongolia’s sovereign ruler on 29 December 1911. which called 6 The Government of Great Britain engages not to annex Tibetan territory or to interfere in the administration of Tibet. Tibet being caught up in the ‘Great Game’ of Three Asian Powers. he reached Urga. On 25 February 1910. only 12 days following the Dalai Lama’s flight to India. to Dorzhiev in executing any secret tasks or negotiating with Russia and other countries. No. The Dalai Lama’s letters to Viceroy were re-routed and replied through a political officer in Sikkim. External Proceedings. 1911). the Chinese troops in Tibet faced internal unrest and defeat from Tibetans. On May 4.647 (Secretary of State to Viceroy.362 Jampa Samten for the deprivation of the Dalai Lama of both his title and position. In January 1911. the Dalai Lama was even told that his presence near the frontier would not be tolerated unless he commits himself to the cause of peace. the Anglo-Chinese Convention of 1906 and Anglo-Russian Convention of 1907 was to assure the territorial integrity of Tibet and safeguard her existence as a peaceful autonomous buffer state between the three Asiatic powers—Russia. No. It is also notable that after the Chinese declaration regarding “the removal of the Dalai Lama”. that “Government of Britain desires to see the internal autonomy of Tibet under the Chinese suzerainty maintained. but the British mediation suggested by both parties was turned down by the British policy makers. 9 Foreign Department Secret. In August 1910. . so long as the treaty obligation were performed and cordial relation preserved between Tibet and India. 1910 a telegraphic message transmitted by the Secretary of State to the Viceroy of India read: “definite information should now be communicated to the Dalai Lama that his Majesty’s Government cannot interfere between them and the Chinese Government”. 10 Foreign Department Secret. Britain had ignored the Dalai Lama and the Tibetan assembly’s declaration of independence of Tibet.10 Neither the Dalai Lama’s rejection of Chinese suzerainty over Tibet and declaration of independence of Tibet nor the Republic of China’s policy of considering Tibet a province of China suited the British. the Viceroy of India refused to communicate with the Dalai Lama. one way or the other or to take any responsibility”. The objective of concluding Anglo-Tibet Convention of Lhasa in 1904. India and China.9 After the downfall of Manchu Emperor in February 1912. The Indian government and the British foreign office concluded that the Dalai Lama’s return to Tibet with the consent of Chinese would be the best possible solution. without Chinese interference. 4 May.532 (Secretary of State to Viceroy.245.8 The British Minister in Peking also made it clear to Chinese that “the British Government would absolutely refuse to influence the Dalai Lama. External Proceedings. 1910). No. 17 January. External Proceedings.” 8 Foreign Department Secret. the Secretary of State again advised the Viceroy to inform the Dalai Lama that “His Majesty’s Government regrets that she is unable to interfere between the Dalai Lama and his suzerain”. and even informed the Dalai Lama on his return from India to Tibet in June 1912. such as the proclamation of independence of Outer Mongolia by the Khalkha Mongols on 1 December 1911 and ceremonially enthronement of Jetsun Dampa. but to place the hope of Tibet at the Russian Tsar and his Government. in one of the Dalai Lama’s earlier letter to Tsar (in between March 1911 and February 1912) the Dalai Lama expressed his disappointment over the British attitude and appeals for Russian support. and the viceroy. together with their escorts from the four main Khalkha Mongolian provinces took place. could not help in this matter. The response to this letter by Tsar Nicholas delivered by a Russian diplomatic agent Reveliotti to the Dalai Lama in Kalimpong was not good news either.53-54. the Russia’s Tibet policy particularly after October 1911 was not either in favor of Tibet. major political developments in Outer Mongolia. where I intend to lead a small entourage as soon as possible. they formulated the Mongolian agenda in 1911 and envisaged Russian diplomatic support to Khalkha Mongolia “within the framework of broad autonomy. expulsion of Chinese Ambans. . 2003. Leiden: Brill. 1918-1930’s. Soviet Russia and Tibet: The Debacle of Secret Diplomacy.The 13th Dalai Lama’s Letter to the Tsar of Russia 363 On the other hand. left the Dalai Lama with no choice. without breaking up from China. the Grand Lama of Urga. The part of the letter reads: Charles Bell informed me categorically that it was fruitless to refer the issue of Tibet to the British Government. as Mongolia’s sovereign ruler on 29th December of the same year. hoping for a similar support to Tibet too. The Tsar advised the Dalai Lama “to pursue a policy of good consent with the British government concerning the Tibetan affair”11 which is a clear reflection of Russian policy of not intervening in Tibetan affairs since the formulation of Mongolian agenda in 1911. Despite the Tsar’s refusal of support. too. 11 Alexandre Andreyev. as strongly insisted by the new leaders of the Mongolia. however. According to Andreyev. Though the Russian government did not advocate full independence of Mongolia. pp. Since it appears unlikely that our cause will be taken up by the British.” which perhaps prompted the Dalai Lama and his associate Dorzhiev to re-appeal the Russian. Despite of the Dalai Lama and Tibetan Government’s repeated request for support for declaration of the Independence of Tibet. British policy of non-involvement in Tibetan affair and continuous insistences on acceptance of Chinese suzerainty over Tibet. We are left with no choice but to place the hope of Tibet at the doorsteps of your palace. The Russian Tibet policy as T. then forwarded Dorzhiev’s ‘notes on Tibetan issue’ to Sazonov for his remark and suggestion. The Great Game and Tsarist Russia. 1912 which reads: We would regard as advantageous the conclusion of a direct agreement between the British and Dalai Lama. the head of the Council of Minister. . p. revision of Anglo-Russian treaty of 1907. New Delhi. provided it does not infringe on our Tibetan convention. Sazonov. and the Tibet as a British sphere of interest. that under Sazonov. 13 Shaumian. not aware of the fact. 2000. 1913. The terms of the agreement Russia recognized Outer Mongolia as an Autonomous State and engaged to help the country to maintain its self-sustained existence under Russian protection. Russian government concluded a treaty with the Mongolian leaders on 3 November 1912.364 Jampa Samten Was the Dalai Lama and Dorzhiev. Foreign minister of Russia wrote a letter to Russian ambassador in London on 16th December. the key person in Russia-Tibet relation. It also clearly indicates that the Russian will not interfere on any issues relating to the British sphere of interest. One month after the conclusion of Russo-Mongolian treaty of 3 November 1912.12 This supports the belief. Russia entering into friendly agreement with Tibet and the Dalai Lama’s letter with Russian translation to Kokovtsev. since such a treaty would establish parallelism vis-à-vis the Chinese government between the our stand on the Mongolian question and that of British on the question of Tibet. Petersburg. 1913 suggesting among many other things. the joint Russia-British protectorate over Tibet. as there was no way out other than this. 12 Ibid.59.. London acknowledged the Outer Mongolia as a sphere of Russian interest and St. Shaumian puts “lack of any wish intervene in Tibetan affairs and placing responsibility for these on the Great Britain”13 is clearly reflected in Sazonov’s letter to Kokovtsev. Tatiana. Kokovtsev. the head of the Council of Minister’ written on 25 April. Dorzhiev submitted his ‘notes on Tibetan issue’ dated April 6. Tibet. the Russian and British government had made a secret understanding regarding their special interest in Outer Mongolia and Tibet. that the Russian government had drifted away from Tibetan affairs as she now concentrates more on the Mongolian agenda after October 1911 and Tibet is no more interest sphere of Russia and adopted a policy of not interfering Tibetan affair? Or did the Dalai Lama consider it his last resort to placing the hope of Tibet at the hands of the Russian Tsar and his Government? There is more probability for the latter. In their correspondence.176. p. Leiden: Brill.If. Sazonov writes: In 1907 the Imperial government concluded a special agreement on Tibet with the British. Chamdo.60. who see in the Dalai Lama their spiritual leader.15 On 24 May 1912. Russia put a limit to British attempt to gain a foothold in Tibet.. would offer us a compensation in other regions. 1918-1930’s. p. Markham and some other areas in Kham. and both the Russia and England engaged themselves not to attempt to include Tibet into their sphere of influence. without sacrificing seriously any of her interests. while revising the 1907 agreement. then I would not certainly raise any objection to such a revision.The 13th Dalai Lama’s Letter to the Tsar of Russia 365 Regarding the Dorzhiev’s suggestion for joint Russia-British protectorate over Tibet. The British could agree to the revision only with a view to expanding their influence in Tibet and further restricting our possibilities of gaining influence there.. Soviet Russia and Tibet: The Debacle of Secret Diplomacy. But. however.14 Concerning the revision of Anglo-Russian treaty of 1907. even this purely religious concern should not be encouraged as might provoke separatist tendencies among the Russian Buddhists. Britain expressed her desire to see an autonomous Tibet lying in between the two powers—Britain and China. The British government was aware of the fact that Chinese attempts to exercise its rule in Tibet would excite Tibetan and cause disturbance on the 14 Alexandre Andreyev. In contrast to Russia. . Any revision this agreement in the direction desired by Dorzhiev is clearly impossible. the Buryats and Kalmyks. Drayab. The Chinese republican government paid no heed to the British protest against Chinese Tibet policy and the governor of Szechuan set out on a military expedition to Tibet under General Yin Ch’ang-heng and retook Batang. Britain through her Indian possessions is contiguous to Tibet. Thus. p.60. by the terms of which Tibet was recognized as a part of China. the British government. 2003. 15 Ibid. the British government protested against the Republic of China headed by Yuan Shih Kai’s declaration of Tibet as a province of China and further demanded that the status quo be maintained.. Sazonov writes: Russia has no interest in Tibet other than those of her Buddhist subjects. has long been trading with that country and had concluded a series of international acts with both the Tibet and Chinese government. On the other hand. the Dalai Lama wrote this letter to the Tsar with great hope and aspirations. this letter of appeal reveals a significant degree of suspicion and distrust the 13th Dalai Lama holds against the British. On the other hand. 1912 in Sino-Russian Declaration of 5th November. London. Tibet’s inclination towards Russia contributed to the deterioration of the AngloTibetan relationship. Charles Hardinge. China and Tibet were opened at Simla in 1913. thereby simultaneously disassociating and delinking Tibet from the Russians. . the Dalai Lama’s appeal letter to the Tsar of Russia remained unacknowledged. who terms the Anglo-Tibetan relationship as forming from merely the “geographical necessity” of the two parties. as neither any letter nor dispatch of envoys took place in the following years. but issued five point protest memorandum to Chinese government on August 17. By the year 1913. Such views were also shared by high Tibetan officials including the Commander General of Tibet Tsarong Dasang Dadul. Nevertheless. It was on the basis of this memorandum that negotiation between the British. This is also reflected from the Dalai Lama’s frequent contacts with Russia through his representative Dorzhiev. but that she meant to maintain the Tibet’s territorial integrity stipulated in AngloTibetan and Anglo-Chinese treaty of 1904 and 1906 respectively. To some extent. The British said to the Tibetan that she would not give support to any attempts to throw off Chinese suzerainty. the Viceroy of India. owing to the drift in the Russia’s Tibet Policy. Consequently. The memorandum clearly demands for the conclusion of a written agreement as a condition precedent to extending their recognition to the Chinese Republican Government. viewed that British recognition of the Republican Government of China should be conditioned on Chinese settlement of the Tibet question. 1913 and subsequent Kiakhta Tripartite Sino-Russo-Mongolian agreement of 1915 legitimized the Russia’s diplomatic victory over the Mongolian issue. both the Russian and British diplomats unanimously concluded that the future of Tibet depends solely on the agreement between the British and China. The Tripartite Simla agreement with the consent of the Russian Government was signed by the British and Tibetan representatives and initialed by the Chinese representative however was subsequently repudiated by the Peking government. still hesitant. in case of Outer Mongolia the new Chinese Republican government under President Yuan Shi-kai failed in her attempt to reclaim Outer Mongolia as integral part of China and confirm the Russo-Mongolian treaty of 3rd November. 1912 against the Chinese action in Tibet. This obviously marked the ending of the long and cordial relationship between the Tibet and the Tsarist Russia.366 Jampa Samten northern frontiers of India. the British strove to bind Tibet with China by employing the politically and legally vague concept of suzerainty. So. However. this attempt to solve Tibet issue too failed. Sostaviteli E. 16 The letter of Nicolas II was a reply to the Dalai Lama’s letter. Belov. 2005. the Dalai Lama’s flight to Mongolia due to the British invasion in Tibet. Sbornik russkikh arkhivnkh dokumentov 1900-1914. Bhutanese and [those in] other countries. l. Sviatestkaia. the full text of which is published in Rossiia i Tibet. Shaumian. Thus. 1912. armor and ammunition there is a danger that the British may find a pretext to unleash a conflict aimed at annexing [Tibet] by antagonizing the Chinese. during the period of my travel to Peking rendered me the assistance for which I am obliged and. . the most important.The 13th Dalai Lama’s Letter to the Tsar of Russia 367 Appendix-A Translation of the Letter [Title on the top flat] Copy of the confidential and significant appeal note I [hereby] submit before the Supreme Russian Emperor who peacefully governs the vast. 35-36. we have decided to draw up a treaty. helped with the advice about my subsequent movements. Kitaiskii stol. 100. In accord with the intention to assist Tibet expressed in the letter sent by the Emperor the past year of 190116. and to the Tibetan Government is to be recorded in the state annals and should subsequently be repaid. Moskva.A. rTsedrung Yeshi Gyatso and Drungyig Gedun Kalsang who were signatory of Tibet-Mongol treaty of 1913. Tsenshap Khenché [Agvan Dorzhiev] and other envoys19 have been dispatched with the specific purpose of seeking your advice on significant and confidential issues. 1448. Although we greatly wish to declare as soon as possible the independence of Tibet in consultation with you. the Dalai Lama.17 you had provided me with as many as possible armed guards. together with Dorzhiev as a representative of Tibet were the members of the envoy. is kept in Arkhiv Vneshnei Politiki Rossiiskoi Imperii (AVPRI).I. signed the treaty with the British about the help to Tibet. carried out the negotiations with the Chinese side during the period of my flight to India. p. Nepalese. 1901. F. great country about [the most] confidential and significant issues [relating to Tibet]. 18 From February. d. 17 The Younghusband military expedition in 1903-04. but the British continue to insist on the acceptance of Chinese suzerainty over Tibet. a commemoration of [your] gracious help to me. To firmly establish friendly relations between Russia and Tibet. 18 According to the general opinion of the high Government officials. during the period of my. doing thus an honor to me. Before Tibet possess sufficient troops. 19 Most probably rTsedron Ngawang Choezin. Russian Emperor’s reply dated by July 4. 1910 to June. O. T. France and Japan not bound by the treaty terms and persuade them to establish their representative [office] in Lhasa. If you would dispatch a few military instructors from the Buddhist communities. If it is difficult for Russia [to act on above stated request. and sent along with a Khatak and presents listed in the attached note. as it would facilitate us to act appropriately.368 Jampa Samten [We wish] the Russians to discuss [issues concerning Tibet] with the British and direct the envoys to immediately declare Tibet’s independence. The sale of some guns. . Russia may discuss [with other influential countries] such as Germany. It would be best if both Britain and Russia could establish the [office of their] representatives in Lhasa. because of the] terms of Anglo-Russia treaty. Nevertheless. The British is anxious and not in support of this act. Tibet is now Self-governed [independent] State. For the sake of future friendship between our countries. I would appreciate it if the current secrecy surrounding the Tibetan question could be made more open and transparent. The letter is written on an auspicious day and month [late 1912]. We request your permission to transport weapons through your territory [even] if they were procured from other countries. we [again] request for a loan of one million [silver coins]. Foreign countries are requested to render assistance in accordance with the Russo-British Treaty20. in addition to the credential letter previously issued to Tsenshapand his associates. Furthermore. granting them official status in your country. In addition to the earlier loan of hundred thousand silver coins. 20 Anglo-Russian convention of 1907. without causing harm to the people and the territories. a firm trade treaty needs to be signed without delay. another [credential letter] had been issued authorizing them to execute the secret task and negotiate with external powers for the sake of Buddha doctrine. we could provide them with salaries. sufficient armor and ammunitions by the Russian government [in the past] had been very useful. º-¤ô¾-GmP-Çeï-zôh-hÝ-¤Û-Ço-GbôP-Mã-hP.The 13th Dalai Lama’s Letter to the Tsar of Russia 369 Appendix-B Transcription of the Letter [D-ÁôG-ÇeïP-GÛ-D-‚P-ü] mP-Gmh-ŸÝ-¸Ûm-Pô-zÁÝÅü »PÅ-qºÛ-Å-Vïm-zhï-z¼-BôP-z-¼Þ-ÅÛ-&GôP-¤-M¾-qô-Vïm-¤ô-¤VôG-GÛ-iâP-hÝü mP-Gmh-Vïh-hÝ-GÅô¾-zü M¾-qô-Vïm-qô-mÅ-ºhÅ-¾ô.ü zôh&M¾DP-ÇKï¼-z®m-¸Ûm-q¼-xÛ-M¾-DG-mÅ-¼ôGÅ-wm-¾Å-Å-¤Û-ºyôG-zTô¤-¤Û-‚ïh-q-¼Þ-h‚Ûm-VÛP»ÛG-¿e¼-Åô¼-GmÅ-ˆÛ-¼ôGÅ-¤Gôm-fÞGÅ-Xï-Vï-z-ŸÝ-Mãü hï-D-&M¾-Dz-Vïm-qô-mÅ-¤ï-¤hºhI-VÅü ¿ËG-q¼-μÅ-¤hï¾-¤Û-ZÝP-z-ÇtäÅ-±ôP-hôm-ǨÛm-Åôm-qü h¤G-¯ÛÅ-ÇÀôz-¤Û-hGï-LmD-ÁÅ-mP-zÇem-VôÅ-‚ïh-DôPÅ-mÅ-GmP-zhï-»ôh-±ï-ºhÛ-G-mÅ-wôGÅ-fôz-ºzÞ¾-Mãü ÇSôm-ŸÝÅhPÞ¾-ÇeôP-yG-zM-Ç+ô¼-fôG-Å-»-GTÛG-¾ôm-q-G»¼-qô-»ôh-qü Gô-¾G-M¾-Dz-GŸm-mÅ- .ü hïP-Ç+zÅ-zôh-&M¾-DP-¼P-z®m-q-‚ïh-MãºÛ-fh-hGôPÅ-zÇeàm-ºy¾-hÝ-iÛ¾-zOGÅ-zHÛ-Åï¤ÅÁÛm-bà-Vï-»P-h‚Ûm-WÛºÛ-„Àô-wÞG-zôh-ºhÛ-xÛ-M-DôPÅ-hGôÅ-¾ÞGÅ-zXôh-¤ÞÅ-ÇezÅ-¼P-xôGÅ-¤G¤Û-hI-VÅ-wôGÅ-fôz-±GÅ-ÅÞ-¤-±ßh-GôP-h‚Ûm-WÛÅ-M-¤Û-hP.ôh-hï-¼Û¤-zŸÛm-Ç+Ý-iÛm-zÅz-Mã-&M¾-„Àôm-¤ô¾-zÇkݼ-¸Ûm-fôG-¼Þ-zôh-&M¾-Dz-wm-±ßm¤fÞm-ŸÛz-Zï-ºƒï¾-WÛ-ÆÛh-m¤-GmÅ-q¼-ºHã¼-¤ïh-¤²h-MãºÛ-VÛP-»ÛG-zŸG-Mã-fG-Vôh-q-hP.ü z.ü zôh-¿YôPÅ-zÇem-ÆÛh-¾-ÇS-xÛ¼-wm-qºÛ-z=Ûm-Vïm-qô-GmP-z-ljÛP-zTPÅ-ˆÛ-zôh-&M¾-DG-bà-hïz¾-z.º¤ô¾-fôG-mÅ-¤Û-Ço¼-»P-z.ü Gô¼-ºƒâG-GÛ-DôG-q¼-ŸÝGÅbï-zljh-ºhôGÅ-ºFâGÅ-¯ôh-¸-Åï¤Å-‚Å-hÐôGÅ-„Àô-G»ïPÅ-Vï-ÇezÅ-mP-Gmh-ÇÀôz-Çeôm-ŸÝ-z¼¤±m-ŸzÅ-¤Dm-Vï-hP.1901 ¾-z.ü ¤Û-Ço-Vïh-μôP-ŸÝ-hGôÅ-‚ãP-¾GÅ-m-hï-D-mÅ-h‚Ûm-M¾-hP.º-»ÛG-GmP-z¼-zôh¿YôPÅ-ÅÞ-wm-ºhôGÅ-¤²h-Mã-ºDôh-q-¿e¼-PôÅ-bØ-¾ºÛ-„À-¤-h‚Ûm-WÛ-qÅ-zôh-¾-º±ï¼-z¼-zdïmÅôG-»Þ¾-hÝ-zBôh-Ç+zÅ-G¸ïPÅ-Çeôh-TÛ-VïºÛ-ÆâP-h¤G-hP-ºIô-Çkôh-ˆÛ-ÇÀôz-Çeômü zôh-wm-HÛ¼Þ-h‚Ûm-VÛP-»ÛG-ºWôG-GmP.ü qÛ-TÛP-hÝ-zBôh-Ç+zÅ-G¸ïPÅ-ÅÞ-zÇeôh-qºÛ-¼ôGÅ-wmü ¿ËGq¼-M-G¼-xôGÅ-ÅÞ-zBôh-Ç+zÅ-M-xôGÅ-ÅÞ-z.º-ÇÀôz-ˆÛ-ºy¾-hÝ-zôh&M¾-DP-¼P-z®m-»Ûm-qºÛ-iÛ¾-OGÅ-fôG¿Ë-¼z-¼Þ-h‚Ûm-M¾-Dz-GZÛÅ-mÅ-¿Ë-ż-Ç+Ý-±z-ºWôG-GmP-»ôh-q-hP.ü hï-»P-¼Þ-h‚Ûm-VÛPzŸG-GÛÅ-¤²h-zhï-¤ïh-±ï-ÇKï¼-¤-mÛü È-Gô¾ü ZÛ-ÈôP-ÅôGÅ-VÛP-DôPÅ-¤-±ßh-qºÛ-M¾DG-ÁÝGÅ-mÝÅ-fôm-PïÅ-ÅÞ-¼Þ-ÅÞ-mÅ-z.º-¤ô¾-GmP-zÅ-¤±ôm-PôÅ-bØ-¾ºÛ-„À-¤-hP. ü xÛ-M¼-zÇem-hôm-Ç+ô¼-ºyôÅ-¤ô¾-VôG-qºÛ-¾G-ºEï¼-vh-q-¿e¼-h‚Ûm-WÛŤÛ-ºhôh-qºÛ-yG-hôG-ÁÛm-bà-Vï-¼ÞP-xÛm-Vh-zôh-hôm-Ç+ô¼-GÅP-z-¤Û-hGôÅ-q¼-¤Pôm-Vï-‚Å-ºfÞÅ‚ãP-m-‚ïh-zhï-»ôP-Gmh-¾-¼ôGÅ-wm-mm-bm-fÞGÅ-Xï-Vï-zü ÇÀh-mÅ-&M¾-Dz-GZÛÅ-¤fÞm¾¤-Vï-z-ŸÝ-Mã¼-±ôP-¸ôG-ºIâ¾-MG-ÅôGÅ-Gbm-hÝ-¤Û-ºHã¼-zºÛ-VÛP-»ÛG-¥ã¼-hÝ-zŸG-fÞz-qTÛÅ-ˆP-»ôh-q-¤Eñmü G¸ÛGÅ-dïm-¿Ë-GôÅ-hP.ü ºzÞ¾-dïm-fô-¸Þ¼-Gž-zTÅ-¹-±ïÅ-z¸Pqô¼-wÞ¾üü .º-ºFô¾-ŸÝ-Mã-¤-¸h-¤±mŸzÅ-Tm-M¾-Dz-bà-¤Û-Ço¼-Çkôh-MãºÛ-¾G-ºEï¼-ÇSôm-»ôh-fôG-mP-hôm-GÅP-V-hGôÅ-GÁÛÅ-ºw¼zÇoôm-GTÛG-hP.370 Jampa Samten Zô-Oæz-zHÛ-hGôÅ-±ï-&M¾-Dz-Vïm-qôºÛ-Å-fôG-ºhôm-ºiïm-VôG-qºÛ-z. what could fit better than a contribution concerning the region at the very junction of Tibet and India: Ladakh? Once a colony of the Tibetan empire. To Thomas Preiswerk and John E. Tibet. the privilege of being called Little or Lesser Tibet goes to Baltistan. References to this publication will be kept at a minimum. since his text served as a means of control against my own misconceptions as well as an incentive to improve my arguments wherever we disagree. Thomas Preiswerk was particularly helpful in explaining Chinese characters. independent for almost one millennium. Many thanks go also to John Bray for improving my English. where the present discussion will now be abridged. they cannot fully be avoided. Since I am not a Sinologist I had to rely on the help of Mingya Liu and Thomas Preiswerk for getting the transcriptions right. This 1 This article had originally been prepared as a chapter in a book on the ethnic composition of early Tibet and the history of Tibetan languages (Zeisler. by which designation most people understand something secondary. forthcoming).2). directly or indirectly. in the said publication. First of all. . I should further like to thank all those who. This perception is wrong in two ways. In the west. I am grateful to Roberto Vitali for the opportunity to present my findings on early Tibetan history to a more general audience. but since it provides the necessary cultural and historical background. Hill I am specifically grateful for a lot of background information in matters of Chinese history. Ladakh is also known as Little Tibet. her crown. a miniature replication of something more real. Chapter 2 § 1. forthcoming a. Ladakh is now part of India. and all notes concerning Chinese renderings are due to him. and I am much obliged. North of Ancient India and South of Khotan1 Bettina Zeisler Tübingen Introduction Commemorating 50 years of Indian hospitality towards the Tibetan people. at the same time shifting the balance somewhat back towards linguistics.East of the Moon and West of the Sun? Approaches to a Land with Many Names. as some politicians would say. contributed to this article with comments or critics. while Ladakh was known merely as Greater Tibet. Philip Denwood was kind enough to sent me his version of the story before publication (Denwood 2008. e. Central. 2 Cf. It is as if it never existed. such as Mt Meru. While there are ample studies (and good overview volumes) concerning Tibet’s neighbours or more broadly South. The situation for Ladakh and Baltistan is even worse. These names are used by Chinese historiographers and travellers in an all-too-often contradictory manner. R.and Siao-Yuezhi for the Tocharian tribes that moved to Bactria and those that remained in Gansu and in the Tarim Basin.2 it could be a more common. the use of the term Da. the Indian and Iranian influences.A. if an augmentation of nothingness is thinkable.. The term Greater would thus apply to territories further away from the reference point or to politically peripheral regions. at all. or Qin ‘China’ vs. bears a certain similarity with the Tibetan name Byaŋthaŋ (Changthang). etymologically related. prehistoric Tibet apparently lies in the blind angle of any such approach. unenlightened human being. cultural. Yangtong. In general. and many scholars believe that the two names are.372 Bettina Zeisler terminology reflects an ancient convention. Stein 1959: 304. regions that were secondarily acquired and colonialised. and East Asia. and Moluosuo (with its seemingly Tibetan equivalents Mard and Maryul) or Sanbohe. apart from the ‘nation’-building fictions of the royal genealogies. 45). Chinese.. one cannot avoid coming across the names Yangtong. This reference point could be a neighbouring state who applied the terminology from its own perspective. and as such their distinct linguistic.g. by which Lesser means Closer to a particular reference point. we do not know much about Tibetan prehistory and early history from independent sources. . and it could be the geographic or political Centre of the entity itself. and Tibetan nomenclature. Suvarṇagotra (Gold Clan/Family). then the name must be quite old and certainly not signifying ‘northern plain’ (a designation that only makes sense from the later Tibetan perspective). In this latter way the Tibetans applied the term Bod for Central Tibet and Bodchen for Amdo and Khams. and one may thus wonder whether these entities have any reality at all or whether they are just faeries or spiritual realms (like the Bonpo Ḥolmo Luŋriŋs) beyond the reach of an ordinary. Ladakh and Baltistan are commonly perceived as an intrinsic part already of Ancient Tibet. and if there is some etymological relation. and political history. have often been underestimated. n. in fact. Da-Qin ‘Ulterior China’ for the Roman Orient (cf. Nüguo (Women’s Dominion). Examining the early history of Ladakh as well as that of the more fabulous than historically traceable Žaŋžuŋ. The first name. pan-national reference point. the Central Asian axis mundi. There seems to be also a certain phonetical similarity between the designations Yangtong and Žaŋžuŋ. attested in Indian. Dotson 2009): short annalistic entries that may mention military campaigns. • The report by Xuanzang (玄奘.A. Fuchs 1938). Beal 1881–84). Rockhill 1891: 339–341. and the text can only be interpreted with the knowledge it implicitly presupposes.1 Sources The present study will be based mainly on the following sources: • Ptolemy (2nd c. however. Lindegger 1993): he gives precise coordinates that allow to draw maps relatively accurately. must have been based on the knowledge of real geopolitical facts. 3rd c. • The Ḥudūd-al-‘Ālam (ca. surprisingly. 640–764 CE. 5th c. • Kalhaṇa’s Rājataraṅgiṇī (12th c. IOL Tib J 750 (OTA) and OR 8212. ca. (or even later) Old Tibetan sources. (or even earlier) Chinese sources in a meaningful way with that of Žaŋžuŋ in the somewhat later 7th . • The Bṛhatsaṃhitā (ca. ca. Huei-ch’ao. ‘Persia’ (Tazig. • A Khotanese ‘prophesy’ in Tibetan. the Vimalaprabhāparipṛcchā or Drimamedpaḥiḥodkyis žuspa (ca. Fleet 1973): a very general geographical overview. Thomas 1935: 139–258): a rather confused and legendary narrative of limited historical value. CE.187 (OTA II. CE.9th c. the main stage. • The Old Tibetan Annals. 700 CE. unbelievable as they had appeared to many scholars. and that particularly the subdivisions could not be matched. It turned out. or her Bolorian borderland. or at least as bordering on. furthermore without any indication of relations in terms of direction between the various peoples or which people live in the mountains and which in the plains. Stein 1900): given its late composition. that. 10th c. ca. Staggzig). 640 CE. Pt 1288. Baltistan. but usually not the exact whereabouts. • Various Tang annals (7th c. Parāśaratantra. • The report by the Korean pilgrim Hyecho (chin. Hence it also turned out that phyidar and post-phyidar Bonpo references to a Žaŋžuŋ as being part of. unfortunately completely confounded in the northern sections. Huìchāo 慧超. and that. and even Hunza. does not lie in Guge but in various parts of Ladakh.North of Ancient India and South of Khotan 373 I started this research with the presumption that it would hardly be possible to correlate the designation Yangtong from the 6th-7th c. W.-G. CE onwards. the historical facts of earlier centuries are reported rather . Chavannes 1900 (1969) Pelliot 1963: 688–720). despite the contradictions in the sources. 0. based on the ca. Hsüan-tsang. CE. M. where the above mentioned entities come together. CE.W. the congruence is quite substantial. 730 CE. cf.G. Minorsky 1937): its geographical misconceptions in the spirit of the time hardly add to our knowledge. 47. p. from which to measure orientations and distances. The most precise descriptions come from two pilgrims. which still draws upon imperial sources. Sanskrit Suvarṇabhū) as well as the origin of the name Ladvags. note to i. Some fixed points are. the identification of Žaŋžuŋ and Maryul with the post-phyidar entities of the same name. the Chinese Xuanzang and the Korean Hyecho. Jālaṃdhara (and Kulu) in the south.1. Among all sources. that is. forthcoming a. the idea that the various geographical entities would be separate. Ladakh. commonly taken to refer to the ‘Tibetans’ in Ladakh and Baltistan (M. Chapter 4 § 1. text ed. Francke 1926). 0.A. although they are far from being consistent. Pandit 1935 [1968]: 43. there is not a single positive reference to Western Tibet. 312) cannot be identified with any precise location. which means that a particular place could be covered by a geometrical figure representing an entity whereto 3 At a closer look. or Baltistan (see Zeisler. I will also discuss the name that has erroneously be taken for the old name of Ladakh: Maryul (Old Tibetan Mard. basically of Qiang. naturally. 312–316. but the sources in the Chinese annals that Pelliot (1963) displays and discusses in great extent..4. not with Western Tibet. given. note to i. only very rough approximations. ca. the name Bhauṭṭa (var. . as well as on reports from travelling Chinese officials. Ladakh. Chinese Moluosuo. cf. It may be useful to envisage the previous conceptions schematically as follows. or Baltistan.2). and Bolor to the east of our unknown entity.374 Bettina Zeisler summarily following the stereotypes of the time. CE. 2. The inconsistencies can thus be reconciled to a certain extent with a rather small amount of interpretation. Since these geographical entities overlap with present-day Ladakh and Baltistan. must also have been based on reports from foreigners (merchants as well as ambassadors) questioned by the Chinese authorities. Tibeto-Burman origin. 17th c.3 • Some post-imperial and post-phyidar Tibetan sources (Buddhist or Bonpo). • The Ladvags Rgyalrabs (LDRR. the Chinese sources are the most concise and reliable. Furthermore. Stein 1900 I. albeit adjacent entities. however. Bhāṭṭa or Bhaṭṭa). The sketches are. CE. more particularly. Tucci 1956: 91). These are: Khotan in the north. the most important of which is Dpaḥbo Gtsuglag Ḥphreŋba’s Chosḥbyuŋ mkhaspaḥi dgaḥston (16th c. that the populations of the entities in question could be described as homogeneous groups or ‘nations’. 3.2 Visualisation of previous views Previous attempts to pinpoint the ancient geography of Yangtong or Žaŋžuŋ have been thwarted by basically three misconceptions: 1. CE) 375 .North of Ancient India and South of Khotan Map 1 Tibet (from Tournadre & Sangda Dorje 1998) Map 2 Ḥudūd-al-‘Ālam (10th c. his map 1. his map 4 p. 21.376 Bettina Zeisler Map 3 Hyecho’s perspective (ca. 730) Map 4 Philip Denwood (2008. for the dark shaded elements cf. ” for the ‘Changthang Corridor’ cf. p. 18) . North of Ancient India and South of Khotan 377 Note: all Chinese sources agree that Lesser Yangtong lies west of Greater Yangtong. based partly on Sato) Map 6 R. Map 5 Petech (1998. Stein (1981) .A. (1993) Transliteration style of the École Française d’Extrême Orient Ladvags Rgyalrabs. This will be adjusted in the detail maps. L’aire linguistique tibétaine). Gigaudaut for Tournadre and Sangda Dorje (1998: 6. will not represent the text in an unstructured flow of syllables (either separated by space. The scaled background map that will be used here and in the following was designed by Chr. The Wylie system.-G. I will add a non-scaled map from Albinia (2008: xii-xiii. while certainly justified in anthropological and related studies is unsuitable for the rendering of composite words as words. when no vowel sign does the job. Where necessary. not represented in Tibetan. Zhang et al. In the case of the Ḥudūd-al-‘Ālam (Map 2). I will use the old form whenever discussing Old Tibetan place names. BRGY EFEO LDRR KHAL Bod-Rgya tshigmdzod chenmo. Wade-Giles (= W.3 Conventions and abbreviations My perspective on Tibetan is that of a linguist (language-scientist) or a philologist (lover of the word) in the true sense. if necessary. the localisations are based on mere guessing.) forms and Chinese characters will be given only in cases of high relevance. otherwise I will use the modern forms. Chinese names will be transcribed in simple Pinyin. further when the written form corresponds to the modern pronunciation. the maps given in Stein 1981: 14–15 and 58–59. 0. Tibetan place names will be given either in their old (written Tibetan) or their modern form. hence I will have to take recourse to diacritic letters. namely possibly polysyllabic intonational units. hyphen. In the first case. It is merely a graphical device to help identifying the syllable core. Since the inherent vowel a. In transliterating Tibetan I. It should be noted that the left-most meridian is inclined by approximately 20°. but will represent ‘words’ as what they are. I will use the transliteration system with diacritics. is ‘transliterated’ by convention. The Tibetan tsheg (the dot between the graphic syllables) does not serve to separate isolated monosyllables.378 Bettina Zeisler the place definitely does not belong. nor does it necessarily mark a morpheme boundary. as used on maps etc. or dot). Map of the Indus Valley) for the adjacent western regions. however. there is absolutely no need to take recourse to a syllabic representation. Tibetan personal names and titles are only given in transliteration. Francke (1926) Narrations and information by meme Tondup Tsering from Khalatse . cf. therefore. pb). as in Ladakh. . Fuchs conjectures the first syllable as 婆 (thus Poboci. particularly in the West. but he apparently collected a great deal of information in Kashmir and Bolor. the people dwelling along the real upper course of the Indus4 must have acquired many Iranian cultural traits. Dotson (2009) Pelliot tibétain (manuscripts of the Pelliot collection) Transliteration style according to Wade & Giles 1 Western Tibet and the Changthang—an ethno-geographical puzzle The nomadic areas stretching along the northern steppes of Tibet must have seen an early Indo-European population.North of Ancient India and South of Khotan OTA Pt W. W. Petech 1947: 87). As Pelliot (1963: 709) states: “Although Nepal is well known in China as Nipo-lo (Nepāla). most probably did not reach present-day Ladakh or Baltistan.e.-G. The Korean pilgrim Hyecho. because he finds in the Yiqie jing yinyi the same name as 婆簸慈 (Poboci. Balpo. people continued to pour in from various regions of the Pamirs and beyond. According to him or his informants. believers. 大勃律. but P’o-po-tz’u is uncertain. Ta Po-lü. which gradually mixed with people of Hunnic and/or Mongolic stock. Buddhists. 5 Perhaps the western Sumpa: the Sobyi of the so-called prophesy of the Li country or the Supiya from the Central Asian Kharoṣṭhī documents (cf. So-po-tz’u)5 were all Hu (quasi Iranians) and. the people of Greater Bolor (Da-Bolü. and the section below the confluence of the Gilgit river with the Indus accordingly still bears the name Upper Indus Valley. a fact that has often been overlooked and has thus created quite some confusion. as well as those from the unidentifiable Suoboci (娑播慈. but even more so from the inhabitants of Tibet (Tufan guo. Po-lu-lo.” It is not very likely that the Tibetan name of Nepal should have been current in Kashmir. but with a different tone: pb). 土蕃國 ~ 吐蕃國. I will thus use the designations Gilgit-Indus and real Indus to discriminate between the ancient and modern understanding of Indus.-G. and So-p’o-tz’u (*Sâ-puâ-dz’i) is the reading of the only ancient Ms. Even after the Tibetan conquests in the West.-G. Or perhaps even a variant form of Spiti (due to a palatalisation of the second syllable)? In his note 3. which he takes to be equivalent with Nepal. the Tibetan name for Nepal is Balyul or. and even if so.. All three peoples are perceived as being clearly distinct not only from the people of Kashmir. W. the phonetic equivalence of *B’uâ-puâ-dz’i is far from satisfactory. after the invasions of the Yuezhi. Tuyuhun/Ḥaža. i. therefore. we may perhaps suppose that Hui-ch’ao heard its Tibetan name in Kashmir. 379 The Old Tibetan Annals. if only outwardly.-G. and Hephthalites/Hūṇa into Northern India and Afghanistan. travelling in India around 726/727. 4 In antiquity. At least. the Gilgit river was counted as the source of the Indus. Yang-t’ung). W. or P’u-lü) and Yangtong (羊同 . I do not see any necessity to question a cultural or linguistic Iranian influence in Žaŋžuŋ. and it appears that for Hui-ch’ao it applied generally to the Iranian populations.). . 444). Xianbi. for those of Caucasian appearance. which are usually counted among the aboriginal peoples of northern Tibet. Nevertheless. occasionally. While Molè (1970: 152f. one may be justified to take his ‘Hu’ as being similar to the Indo-European population of Khotan. but not exclusively. such as the Sumpa. Indians. however. The Tibetans are further described as having a very dark complexion (p. 392) states that Hu originally designated the Huns. the Pamirs. Turks. and the Hindukush. While Tucci (1977: 72) objects to the presence of Buddhism in Žaŋžuŋ. holds that Hu is a rather vague term used for northern and western peoples of non-Sinitic origin. and designated not only the T’u-yü-hun but also the population of the western lands (Hsi-yü). for the Xiongnu (who. but its use was rather loose.-G. particularly the contrast with the Turks. It was commonly used for people of Persian. Therefore. 444). note 1. The Tibetans are described as nomads living in felt tents like the Tujue (that is. The term Hu could thus well have referred to Xianbi tribes.380 Bettina Zeisler W. Kushans and even. p. especially not in its western parts or in the Changthang. usually. perhaps not even in the eyes of a Chinese traveller. which would fit perfectly well with the Dards of Ladakh (but not with the people of Žaṅ-žuṅ). who are described as non-believers and hence as comparatively less civilised (Fuchs 1938: 443f. J. the term Hu applied to the Iranians of Central Asia. While Dards and Iranians are not exactly the same. n. None of the regions in question is geographically well defined. T’u-fan kuo). Sogdian.E. According to the latter. both could have been comprised under the quite unspecific cover term Hu. given the context of Hyecho’s travels as well as the context of his statement.6 Petech (1977: 10) objects to the presence of Hu in this area. but in this epoch [618– 626] had come to mean barbarian in general. 443). alternatively also in caves dug out of the ground (p. Hill (2004. are usually clearly differentiated from the Hu).23). and Turkish origin. the 6 This is somewhat surprising in view of his earlier (Tucci 1956: 51–109) detailed discussion of the localisation Žaŋžuŋ. […] and thence down the valleys of the Dras and Indus” (Workman 1905: 246).retrobibliothek. The king of Greater Bolor had fled from the Tibetans 7 Occasionally. one may come across a commutation of Lesser and Greater Bolor. however. This would seemingly fit Hyecho’s indication that Greater Bolor lies 15 days to the north-east (Fuchs 1938: 443) and Lesser Bolor 7 days to the north-west of Kashmir (ibid. the indication of 7 days seems to be somewhat too optimistic.1 Baltistan and Bolor It had been commonly assumed that Baltistan is identical with the Greater Bolor of the Chinese sources. and Greater Yangtong. […] over the Zozi [!] La. on the other. http://www. the longer route. open the greater part of the year. and how can we explain the rather consistently conflicting data concerning these three names? • Are the names Mard and Maryul. . The short summer route took 12 days “up the Gilgit road to the Burzil Chowki and thence over the Deosai Plains”. The main problems are however: • Where exactly lies Greater Bolor or how can it be defined? • Where exactly are the north-western confines of Yangtong/Žaŋžuŋ? • Where exactly do we find the ‘Gold Race Country’ Suvarṇagotra. Hyecho describes both Bolors as being culturally and linguistically identical. the ‘Women’s Dominion’ (Strīrājya/Nüguo). and the distance given between Kashmir and Gilgit appears to be much too short. 444). led “in eighteen marches up the Sind valley. The correlation (if only partially) of Yangtong with ‘Grand’-Žaŋžuŋ or with the Changthang seems to be uncontroversial. to the route that went over Skardo.html?id=103901. Gilgit could possibly also have been reached by a shortcut via Gurez and the valley of Astor. but there is no consensus as to the exact location and extension. The only fixed points are that Lesser Bolor can be identified with Gilgit and/or Hunza (Bruža)7 and that some directions and distances are given with respect to the Tarim basin and the Pamirs.de/retrobib/ seite. alternatively.North of Ancient India and South of Khotan 381 identification of each depending in almost perfect circularity upon the exact definition of the boundaries of the neighbouring regions.8 This could imply that Lesser Bolor extended southwards along the Indus. p. This may refer to a route along the Indus or. and Moluosuo. Hyecho’s indication is not without oddities: Gilgit and Hunza lie due north of Srinagar. the distance from Srinagar to Skardo should have been either less or more than 15 days. related to each other? And where would this entity (or these entities) be located? 1. on the one hand. On the other hand. gives the distance between Srinagar and Gilgit as 22 daily marches. 8 Meyers Konversationslexikon 1885-1892. but even in this case. il est droit à l’ouest des T’ou-po (Tibétains). Chavannes (1900 (1969): 149f. had stayed in Greater Bolor (Fuchs 1938: 444). Sufushuolizhilini. in the west it is neighbouring the territory of Wuchang (Uḍḍiyāna) of Northern India.. Depuis la période wan-soei-t’ong-tien (696) jusqu’à la période k’ai-yuen (713-741). on arrive au campement du T’ou-po tsan-p’ou (le btsanpo de Tibet). except if we follow Denwood’s (2008: 15) suggestion that Lesser Bolor centred on the Yasin valley. à trois mille li à l’est tendant un peu vers le sud. But Lesser Bolor. 10 ‘Greater Bulü (Baltistan) is also called Bulu.. Le petit Pou-lu est à plus de neuf mille li de la capitale. Greater Bolor is further said to be straight west of Tibet. à cinq cents li au sud se trouve le Kou-che-mi (Cachemire). In the Tangshu it is stated that Greater Bolor was to the south-east of Lesser Bolor. however.): Le grand Pou-lu (Baltistan) est aussi appelé Poulou.] Il est assujetti aux T’oupo (Tibétains). it is straight west of the Tubo (Tibetans). à trois cents li au sud-est est le grand Pou-lu (Baltistan). en tout. celui-ci envoya deux fois de hauts dignitaires apporter en tribut les produits de son pays. à cinq cents li au nord. à huit cent li du côté de l’est. à sa mort. à l’ouest. [.. This seems to be corroborated by the much later MīrzāḤaidar. it sent three times ambassadors to render homage to the court. on conféra encore par brevet la succession royale à Sou-lin-t’o-i-tche (Sourendrâditya?). however. after .9 ce pays touche à Ou-tch’ang (Oudyâna). neither in the east nor in the west. il touche au petit Pou-lu.10 9 Chavannes takes this as an error for west. an indication that can by no means be reconciled with the location of Baltistan and thus necessarily refers to Chilas. [.] It is subject to the Tubo. Soufou-cho-li-tche-li-ni. Cf. see below. and Yasin.. The rest of the nobility. does not border on Swat. an indication that could point to Baltistan. The indication east could make sense. if Lesser Bolor also comprised (parts of) Chitral.382 Bettina Zeisler to Lesser Bolor where he had managed to install himself as ruler. Other Chinese sources are even more ambiguous. C’est pourquoi on conféra par brevet le titre de roi au prince de ce pays. Hunza-Nagar. It is because of this that one conferred per diploma the royal title to the prince of this country.. which fits better with Chilas than with Baltistan. il y a la ville de So-le du (pays de) Hou-mi (Wakhân).. if consisting only of Gilgit. it touches on Lesser Bulü. and that it bordered in the west to Wuchang (Uḍḍiyāna). il est voisin du territoire d’Ou-tch’ang (Oudyâna) de l’Inde du Nord. il envoya trois fois des ambassadeurs rendre hommage à la cour. Since the period Wansuitongtian (696) until the period Kaiyuan (713-741). The main argument. after 800 li on the eastern side [see note 9 above].11 Jettmar also disputes the strategic importance of Baltistan. 1977: 79. Hu Sanxing did not know of a politically distinct Baltistan. Greater Bolor can only be identified with the valleys of Chilas and Astor. altogether the latter sent two times high dignitaries who brought the products of his country as tribute. Correspondingly. see below. where its capital was located and its king based. as the main routes. 300 li to the south-east is Greater Bulü. after 3000 li to the east. 81–84). North of it there is little P’u-lü (emphasis added. are not to be found in this region (ibid. one arrives at the camp of the Tubo zanpu (the Tibetan emperor). —some kings of Skarrdo bore names that are not part of the tradition of Greater Bolor and because the capital of Greater Bolor is called either Hesalao or Pousalao in Chinese sources. BZ). and perhaps also the upper part of the Ishkoman valley to the northeast. Very likely the kingdom extended westwards to include the little-known but apparently fertile and populous Baushtaro Valley on the north side of the Gilgit/Ghizar River. which. 121f. 300 li to the north there is the town Suolei of (the country) Humi (Wakhān) …’ 11 The name may perhaps refer to a place in present-day Gilgit district. mentioned in the Hatun inscription and reconstructed as Pûsa[ta]ram by Gérard Fussman (Denwood 2008: 15). Evidently. having to the north little P’u-lü. . this land touches upon Wuchang.North of Ancient India and South of Khotan 383 According to Jettmar (1980: 120–122). Tucci concludes: This corresponds to the location of Chilas. p. somewhat towards the south. Lesser Bulü is more than 9000 li (away) from the capital.. Gilgit. subject to the Tibetans. reachable from Yasin by the easy Panji pass. authored by Hu Sanxing (1230–1302): The great P’u-lü […] is straight to the west of Tibet. according to him. including those from Western Tibet to Gilgit. particularly because—according to the bizarre narration of the Vimalaprabhāparipṛcchā. […] his death one conferred again per diploma the royal succession to Sulintuoyizhi (Surendrāditya?). stating that the core of Little Palūr at this time was the Yasin Valley. 500 li to the south one finds Gushimi (Kashmir). but see Tucci. which Jettmar receives from Tucci (1977: 80) is a passage in a comparatively late source. not with Baltistan. Denwood (2008: 15) takes Baltistan and Greater Bolor as two different political entities. could not be identical with Skardo. but being in the west of Baltistan. . and Gilgit” and “MīrzāḤaidar seems to 12 While Beal (1881–84: 177. rather than to Baltistan. Jettmar (1980). Ta-li-lo) as Darail (Darel). Greater Bolor should have extended to the south at least as far as Chilas. The 500 li could roughly correspond to the distance between Shatial and Gilgit (cf. this is hardly possible. Tangir lying west of Darel. Unfortunately it is all but clear from where this distance was counted: from Daliluo. Xuanzang describes the land as being extended from east to west and as narrow from north to south. south-west of Yarkand. Both valleys run parallel to the Swat valley. which is reached from a valley in the Pamirs by crossing a pass in the south (Beal 1881–84: 481). north and north-west of Kashmir. as Beal suggests.-G. 37) interprets the name Daliluo (W. or from their end at Sazin or Shatial. was part of (Lesser) Bolor. Pelliot (1959: 92) should have reached at a similar conclusion as Tucci. at least as far as […] the Gilgit/Indus confluence […] and extending down the Indus valley and/or across the Gilgit mountains to the Indus in Diamar. from the beginning of the Hanging Passages at Jalkot. Accord ing to Pelliot. after a march of 500 li (ca. somewhat above the Hanging Passages. The Darel valley could thus hardly have served as seat for the rulers of Swat.384 Bettina Zeisler Great Palūr must have been the valley of the Gilgit River below about Hatun. which fits the course of the Gilgit river as much as the east-to-western course of the Indus between Gor and Shatial. the Baluristan of MīrzāḤaidar is to be understood as “the mountainous tract south of Badahšan. According to MīrzāḤaidar (Elias 1895: 385). namely as far as Lamghán (modern Jalalabad) and Kabul (or perhaps rather: as far as the Kabul river). As the present-day sub-district of Diamar comprises Chilas.12 the ancient capital of Uḍḍiyāna. This should have referred to Lesser Bolor. n. Xuanzang further mentions a region Boluoluo (W. Bolor reached even further down south and west. that is to say the valleys of Chitral. Po-lo-lo). from the spot where he reached the Indus. Xuanzang describes Bolor as lying on the right side of the In dus.-G. west of Swat. 178). Most probably Xuanzang came through the valley of Kandia. the map given as frontispiece in Jettmar 2002). since the Darel and the Tangir river join the Indus above the Hanging Passages. their language [being] somewhat different” (Beal 1881–84: 177–179. If. 175 km). the confines of Bolor would lie somewhere between Shatial and Chilas. He reached there from Daliluo (Kandia?). and Denwood. This would mean that the whole valley of Chitral. The inhabitants of Bolor are said to use letters “nearly like those of India. west of Balti. the distance is reckoned from Daliluo or at least from the first approach to the Indus. Yassin. however. but constituted its core area. Elias 1895: 385. Zhimeng in 404 (p. This designation might perhaps refer not so much to a location as to a certain element of the population. but resuming earlier considerations (1977). . 78. the latter being part of Tibet (cf. Jettmar’s scenario is also not corroborated by the earlier Chinese sources including Xuanzang’s report..a however. to be directly controlled by a ruler of Gilgit. Either Little Bolor had been a vassal of Greater Bolor or the other way round (2002a [1993]: 122.” In striking contrast to his 1980 conclusions. MīrzāḤaidar is quite explicit in separating Bolor and Balti. by Balur and Badakhshán. or Balor. however.15 and the main problem with this assumption is that no inscriptions relating to the Palola dynasty are found in Baltistan. 119f. who writes: “Balti or Balti-yul. is called Palolo. 125). His arguments.e.g. 405. “the Palula (Paaluúlaa) speakers of Chitral trace their roots to Chilas.a Polôle.” 14 See note 17 below. are not without contradictions. d: T. Jettmar’s suggestion that Hunza (Bruža) might have originally been an independent kingdom and had acquired the designation Lesser Bolor on being conquered by Greater Bolor (p. b: Leitner 1889: 60. The following names have been attested: Hunza Balotza or B˄loc (Balói. and on the other hand.G. referring to ‘Tibet’). 118) or Song Yun 518-522 (p. 126f. 2 above). 119. and Skardo served as the seat of the Palola dynasty. c: Lorimer 1938 as cited by Bielmeier 1985: 14. Jettmar has to admit that several accounts of Bolor refer to a region that can only be identified with Hunza-Gilgit and the adjacent southern regions. which present the kingdom as a single unit. Jettmar (2002a [1993]) is more than convinced that Baltistan not only was part of Greater Bolor. and Nang-kod [i.a Chilas Palóye. the secondary territory that receives the designation Greater (see also p.a Gilgit Shina Palole. on the one hand. e.”13 But he goes on to say “that the localization may have been viewed differently by others at different dates”. here Bolor is described as a transit region to Swat). particularly p. In the case of the Palula speakers of Chitral. the other way round.) is against the ancient conventions in the use of the terms Lesser and Greater: it is typically the added. 13 In fact.d or P˄le’c (a: Leitner 1890s: 72. Ruth Leila Schmidt (email communication 04/2008) thinks that Chilas might have been only the centre of a larger unit Palula.). Naŋgoŋ14] by the Tibetans”. particularly the descriptions of the route by various Buddhist pilgrims. which could have migrated to Baltistan at some later time.b Pal. but not with Baltistan. I cannot quite understand Jettmar’s allegation that Xuanzang did not collect his information on the spot and remained rather vague (p. Bailey 1924: 155). 417): “Tibet is bounded in the north. because. by the Dards. Nagar Balots. 15 Jettmar has to admit that Baltistan was not well enough connected with Gilgit to keep direct control over it or.North of Ancient India and South of Khotan 385 leave Baltistan out of Baluristan. where it is called Balti. ‘Puluúlii’ … is still a nickname for a Burusho girl. referring to Cunningham (1854: 34). mentioning ‘conquests’ or raids in the west under Khri Dussroŋ (appearing as Guŋsroŋ or Ḥdusroŋ Ḥdurje in the LDRR): nub… | Sbaltiḥi sraŋgi Naŋgoŋ | smadkyi Šidkar tshunchad mŋaḥḥogtu bsduste ‘[In] the west. which never mentions Chilas and differentiates between Bruža/Gilgit. Naŋgoŋ (i. When Bolor split into two halves. from Šidkar of the lower areas hither [all] were subdued and’ A similar wording is found in the Mŋaḥris rgyalrabs (Vitali 1996: 29. as reflected in the LDRR. The problem may perhaps never be resolved. cf. The conventional use of the terms Lesser and Greater might indicate that Lesser Bolor was the core area of Bolor. shortly above the confluence of the Gilgit river and the Indus. such as Alam Bridge. part of Yangtong/ Žaŋžuŋ.) cites examples where Nepal is located west of Tibet. peripheral region. and it stands to reason to solve the problem in Pelliot’s manner or by suggesting that the Chinese commentator was using the name Tibet somewhat loosely. Cunningham also notes the . to the Kuṣāṇa Empire. 5 Naŋgod) and Naŋgoŋ might be due to copy errors. which is also in accordance with Faxian’s description of reaching ‘North India’ from Khotan in a (south)-western direction (Beal 1881–84: 15). it must have been. Yasin became the centre of Lesser Bolor.12–13): 16 This latter position. Skardo)17 on the road to Sbalti. LDRR 32. cf. and identifiable parts of Baltistan.. n. and India even north-west of the Onion-Range (Congling. on the one hand. albeit anachronistically. by necessity. and Chilas (and perhaps also Baltistan) constituted a secondary. One could even argue that the directions are not to be taken too seriously. Jettmar seems to preclude that the Palola dynasty may have had its (secondary) seat in Chilas. 17 The variation between Nangkot as in Cunningham (1854: 34.. after all. referring to the places that were under the power of the Tibetans at a certain moment. Bolor must thus have comprised a rather large area.6. but I would tend to interpret the data in a similar manner as Denwood. For unknown reasons.16 Such inclusion is certainly also at variance with the later Tibetan perspective. which seems to have comprised at least the upper parts of the Chitral-Kunar valley (having the Swat valley as its eastern neighbour). Thomas 1935: 271. errors in direction are unfortunately not so uncommon in Chinese sources: Pelliot (1963: 695f. and he brushes away the indications given by Xuanzang. thus if not part of one of the Bolors. Since Hyecho mentions no other country between the two Bolors and Yangtong/Žaŋžuŋ. may refer. A Baltistan being part of Žaŋžuŋ is certainly hard to swallow. Baltistan must have belonged to one of these. the Pamirs).386 Bettina Zeisler while there are several inscriptions in Chilas and neighbouring areas. on the other.e. however. the name appears in one of those later historiographic works that seem to draw upon relatively early sources. where Khotan (Ḥchimmam Li). At the time of Hyecho’s visit in Bolor. we cannot but accept that at least in terms of an international geography of the day. from Šiŋḥgar (Šidkar) of the lower areas hither [all] were subdued and’ The separate mentioning of Sbalti could well be a reinterpretation in terms of the actual geography at the time of composition (17th c.19 Given the fact that Hyecho’s Yangtong grows grapes.North of Ancient India and South of Khotan 387 nub… Sbalyulgyi Naŋgoŋ | smadkyi Šiŋḥgar [!] tshunchad mŋar bsduste. and Sbalti form one of the skor. and Maryul is still in the immediate neighbourhood of Purang and Zanskar. . there was a part of Žaŋžuŋ. Naŋgoŋ of the Sbal[ti] country. Naŋgoŋ is also a place name in Amdo. No mention of Ladakh is made. Bruža. now lost. which is commonly found in Indo-Aryan place names—Vigne (1842: 249). cf. 18 It might be possible that the term Li referred here only to some peripheral dependent territories of Khotan rather than to the oasis itself. Nevertheless.18 Gruža (!)..).s. The Vth Dalai Lama’s biography of Bsodnams Mchogldan Bstanpaḥi Rgyalmtshan contains an interesting division of Mŋaḥris (the successor in title to Žaŋžuŋ). an appendix of the Changthang: Lesser Žaŋžuŋ (West)—actually. A similar division is found in BRGY (sub Mnaḥris skorgsum). the Žaŋžuŋ stod of OTA (see name “Sagar-khoad” as a Ladakhi form given by Vigne (interpreted by Cunningham again as Skarkot ‘starry building’). it appears in an Old Tibetan report concerning the latter region (Thomas 1951: 146–148). if not an integral part of Yangtong anyhow. koṭ ‘fort’. and that grapes did grow in Lower. but not in Upper Ladakh (see below). one can at least definitely rule out the possibility that Bolor extended over Lower Ladakh. This might indicate that kot is the correct form. The preserved Old Tibetan documents refer only rather vaguely to Bruža and do not mention Baltistan at all. the origin of which we might perhaps have to seek in Central Asia. where the second skor (district or county) is defined as comprising Li. as it might be included in their notion of Žaŋžuŋ. ‘[In] the west. it is quite likely that Baltistan. so that we may assume that the sources from which the Vth Dalai Lama drew his information reflect the situation of the late Empire.. interprets the second part as khud ‘valley’. and Sbalte (Tucci 1956: 73). also Skr. Therefore. in the first skor. 19 A further variant is found in Blama Btsanpo’s Ḥdzamgliŋrgyasbšad (ed. was already integrated into the administrative entity of Žaŋžuŋ stod by the Tibetans. Wylie 1962: 3/56) with Ḥchiba for Khotan and Blaša for Bruša. and Lower Ladakh from the Kuṣāṇa period until the 8th c. the designation Žaŋžuŋ turns out to be highly ambiguous and therefore I should like to distinguish between: (a) ‘Grand-Žaŋžuŋ’ as a widely extended geographical term. but that their status remained undefined with alliances to all sides. as evidenced in many rockcarvings. Perhaps some of the confusion in Chinese geographic accounts could be solved.2 Žaŋžuŋ Like so many other place names. CE or later. Map 7 Greater and Lesser Bolor 1. Taking a diplomatic stance. Purik. if Lesser Žaŋžuŋ (West) is taken to be identical with Lesser Yangtong. or Gāndhārī type of Buddhism was practised in Baltistan. one could still argue that the borders between Bolor and Yangtong/Žaŋžuŋ may have been subject to changes and that the principali ties of Shi gar and Skardo might have temporarily been part of Greater Bolor under the rule of the Palola āhi (as seems to be suggested by von Hinüber 2004: 8) or even provinces of Khotan (as seems to be indicated by the Vi mala pra bhāpari pṛcchā. Kashmirian. yet see the discus sion below). Such a Lesser Žaŋžuŋ (West) populated by Hu could no longer be rejected by Petech and a Lesser Žaŋžuŋ (West) in which Buddhism is practised could likewise not be rejected by Tucci.388 Bettina Zeisler next section for the definition of the term). assumed to be synonymous with the Chinese designation Yangtong and covering most . that comprised Lower Ladakh and perhaps also Baltistan. That an Indian. is certainly uncontroversial (except perhaps for the exact dating of the artefacts) and does not need further elaboration here. ‘Žaŋžuŋ-West’ would be the exact counterpart of the Old Tibetan Žaŋžuŋ stod. It also corresponds to the distinction of Lesser and Greater Yangtong as well as to the much later distinctions of Little Tibet (Baltistan) and Greater Tibet (Ladakh). speaking Shintrat. i. (b) ‘Žaŋžuŋ Proper’. or. however. . or by which logic they were included under a merely geographical or even under a nostalgic notion of Žaŋžuŋ. ‘Local-Žaŋžuŋ’ is only one of the elements of one of the districts (skor) of Mŋaḥris. Kashmirian.21 these designations could perhaps be translated into ‘west’ (‘Persia’ or the Iranian borderland in the Pamirs). Middle and Outer Žaŋžuŋ. and ‘north-east’ (the rest of Grand-Žaŋžuŋ). ‘central’ (Žaŋžuŋ Proper). (c) ‘Local-Žaŋžuŋ’. or a perspective that is related to Mt Meru as the central axis of the world. or at least that region that continues to bear the name under the West Tibetan dynasty. For the latter identification we can cite Buddhist and Bonpo sources alike: Chilas is identified with ‘Persia’ in Orgyanpa’s itinerary (see also below). which parts.e. But when used in the Bonpo sources. the Shina language. as ‘Lesser Žaŋžuŋ (West)’. originally located in the Pamirs. to the Iranian borderlands along the Pamirs (Gilgit and Badakhshan) and the Dardic areas along the Hindukush and Indus (Chitral and Chilas). perhaps its core part. Chapter 2 § 3. According to Karmay (1998: 114). see below. and for how long these regions may have been part of the historical kingdom/confederacy of Žaŋžuŋ. (d) From ‘Žaŋžuŋ Proper’ I should like to distinguish the peripheral or outer provinces in the west. it seems to always refer to Iran and the whole of the Achaemenid empire. it seems to correspond to ‘Innermost Žaŋžuŋ’. according to Mkhaspa Ldeḥu (ed.3. the ‘Persian’ king is apparently a Kashmirian (at least he is called ‘Morba of Kashmir’).20 Bonpo tradition knows of an Inner. According to those traditions that localise Inner Žaŋžuŋ in ‘Persia’. which later became Baltistan and Ladakh. while the Bonpo text Drimedrtsabaḥirgyud (Dongrub Lhargyal 2000: 399) points to an identity of Ḥolmoluŋrings (in ‘Persia’) with Chitral (see Zeisler forthcoming a. 1987: 222). It is unclear whether. Outer 20 Actually. but the original references seem to be partly lost or of a merely speculative nature. a small province of the kingdom. I will refer to these areas. 21 Tazig or its etymologised form Staggzig (Tiger-Leopard) may have been originally be coined for the Arabs. more specifically. but again it is rather questionable whether the designation of the Old Tibetan sources applied to this region and only to this region. for the sake of convenience. and even Chinese perspective. This designation reflects a geography from a Iranian.5).North of Ancient India and South of Khotan 389 of the Changthang—whether the historical designation Žaŋžuŋ was ever applied in this sense is somewhat questionable. more or less identical with the later West Tibetan kingdoms of Guge and Purang (Spuhraŋs)—this follows the identification by the later Tibetan sources. they might have identified themselves. one would have to distinguish between Žaŋžuŋ Proper or Žaŋžuŋ chuŋuŋ.A. according to Iida 2003). 13). however. Stein many other scholars look for Žaŋžuŋ mainly in the area around Guge and Purang. His indications are. R. Unlike many other scholars. According to the historian Sonam Phuntsog (p. . Hunza. for lack of other alternatives. and Gilgit. but was located between them. (see also below). An interesting alternative division is transmitted in Ladakh. It seems to be questionable whether a political entity Žaŋžuŋ existed on Iranian territory and be it only at the borders. Lesser and Greater Yangtong. While these Rmu apparently participated in the Bonpo re-invention of the past during the phyidar. 58–59). if it were true that the Hephthalites or Hūṇa or one of their associated tribes had been based also in the Kailash region (cf. on the one hand. on the other as being confined by Suvarṇagotra or the Women’s Dominion (p.A. and the attempts to accommodate the latter’s descriptions to the current preconceptions add to the general confusion. the subsumption of present-day Western Tibet with regions in present-day Afghanistan under the same ‘national’ or rather geographical heading would not be too surprising. contradictory. Lesser and Greater Yangtong. Baltistan. On his map (p. and I cannot avoid the feeling that the association of Žaŋžuŋ with the Indo-Iranian Ḥolmo Luŋriŋs (i.c. which should lie between Yangtong and Gilgit and Hunza.3). with a former political entity Žaŋžuŋ. is not at all compatible with the Old Tibetan geography as presented by Dpaḥbo Gtsuglag.e. and more or less in the same area as Lesser Yangtong. Žaŋžuŋ lies south of Greater Yangtong. are. had been subsumed by the Tibetan administration under the designation Žaŋžuŋ (stod) after their conquest in the 7th or 8th c. and Gilgit. With R. while the middle one remains unidentified. On the other hand.4. rather nostalgic origin. re-designed as the homeland of the holy teacher Gšenrab Mibo—associated with the past glory of Achaemenid or Sasanian Persia. that some western areas. Zeisler forthcoming a. if not originally belonging to Žaŋžuŋ. known under the Tibetan appellation Rmu. which would have comprised Ladakh. created by immigrant Bactrians or people from the Pamirs. It might perhaps be even due to this ‘Hūṇa connection’.390 Bettina Zeisler Žaŋžuŋ would have comprised a huge area from Gilgit to the Namtsho and from Khotan to Chumig brgyadcu rtsagnyis (Mukhtinath. This perspective. Inner Žaŋžuŋ would have been ‘Persia’ (Staggzig).). and a ‘Greater’ Žaŋžuŋ or Žaŋžuŋ chenmo. This tradition might well reflect the addition of conquered areas under the administrative unit Žaŋžuŋ. Chapter 4 § 1. described as bordering on Khotan. Stein (1981: 13) thinks that Žaŋžuŋ was in no way identical with any of the two. the Oxus valley and/or Chitral) is of a secondary. however. located in Tibet. Although there might be other candidates around for the identification of Gugge (cf. and particularly in Dpaḥbo Gtsuglag. Gugge. 98). like anybody else. as cited by Tucci 1956: 91). Petech 1997: 252)’ (sic). we find the designations Žaŋžuŋ stod and smad. 3. at least not in Western Tibet. 4. Spyi-ti (~ Ci-de (= Spi-ti. According to Dpaḥbo Gtsuglag. n. although not exactly specifying which is used for which identification. stoŋbuchuŋ: Cidi. Yar-rtsang 5.North of Ancient India and South of Khotan 391 In a few Old Tibetan sources (cf. These identifications are vehemently rejected by Yamaguchi (1970: 98. Žaŋžuŋ stod would be the area of Ladakh. mentioned in OTA (l. Spyi[r]-rtsang {Sato 1978: south of Khyunglung} 4. It is thus extremely unlikely that the palatalised form ci should have occurred in an Old Tibetan document. which. he is unable to give any localisation. Rtsaŋ. 4. The two moieties are divided into the following districts (sde): Žaŋžuŋ stod: 1. Hazod (2009: 168) gives the districts of Žaŋžuŋ smad as “1. for which. 2. may be identical with an area between Guge and Spiti. 100. the two moieties are located at the boundary of Tibet and the Western Turks (Grugu for Drugu) and between Tibet and the Sumpa respectively (Ja 19 a. The same author associates the areas Spyirtsaŋ and Yarrtsaŋ (interpreted as Outer and Upper Rtsaŋ) of Žaŋžuŋ smad with Rtsaŋ (p. Sbyigtsaŋ. since the latter place name. Gug-ge 2. Žaŋžuŋ smad: 1. 64). Yargtsaŋ. Cogla. and his attempts to locate Rtsaŋ localities eventually leads him into Kham territory. should have correlated to west (stod) and east (smad). Takeuchi 2004: 54). Gñema. On the other hand. Gu[g]-cog (~Cog-la) {between Guge and Spiti} 3. Ḥoco. n. even more so as the other districts of Žaŋžuŋ smad can be associated with place names in the closer or farther neighbourhood. the various place names with gog as an element). who identifies Gugge in Žaŋžuŋ smad with present day Guge.22 22 The identification of Cide with Spyiti is highly problematic. possibly the -lcog in the combination Spyilcog. also Sp[y]i-lcog. there is actually nothing that contradicts the identification with the more common form Guge. 2. 3. according to a general convention. 17). Both regions are identified by Tucci (ibid. 1). Based on several sources. The second district Cogla. or part of. the first elements also show some similarity with Spiti and Yartse. Tsamo. and Žaŋžuŋ smad would be nothing more than Žaŋžuŋ Proper. never underwent palatalisation. Maŋma. this would mean that the form Spyiti was not found in the documents at hand. stoŋbuchuŋ: Baga. as suggested by Yamaguchi. Even if we admit that Dpaḥbo Gtsuglag wrote the name down from (Central Tibetan) hearsay. . modern pronunciation [pīti]. The second element in the name of the third and the fourth district: Sbyigtsaŋ and Yargtsaŋ (in Dpaḥbo Gtsuglag) may well indicate that they were somehow related to.) quite rashly with the Lob-Niya region and the region of Rgyalrong. while Gugge should be identical with Guran in Žims of Žaŋžuŋ. According to him (p. cf. it is grammatically quite possible that Ltaŋyo refers to a place. 25). yo might perhaps be related to yobyad ‘goods. The latter. it is quite unlikely that he should have referred to contemporaneous Drugu in the same breath. In the 7th c. a delegation went to the Drugu for negotiations. This is what apparently happened: in the year 675. went to Ltaŋyo in the land of the Drugu or went to the land of the Drugu for a (forced) ?trade agreement (ltaŋyo)24 (OTA. the term Drugu refers to the Western Turks (cf.). proposes to read the compound as ‘plunder’. etc’. 24). l. but not somewhere on the Tibetan plateau. after having proposed a campaign in the land of the Drugu in the previous year (which was postponed).. Beckwith (1987: 42. the Western Turks are found i. 24 ltaŋ means ‘bale of goods. Against Beckwith (ibid). carried out in a subjugated country mainly to integrate it into the Tibetan dominion. It seems that first troops were levied. Since the latter might have settled somewhere in Eastern Turkestan. in the year 687. the min23 According to Uebach (2003). and as these turned out unsatisfactory. followed by Dotson (2009: 91).. which must be drawn from some old documents. the minister Mgar Btsansña. furniture.c. the threat was made reality in the following year. 67f. . not possible that the place name contained the final -r as suggested by Thomas (1951: 268). 64). where a military campaign was conducted. Unlike the phalos. Beckwith 1987: 63f. in the following year. necessities. with that threat prepared. but it is. n. But since Dpaḥbo Gtsuglag lists a handful of obsolete place names in Žaŋžuŋ stod. after having carried out a registration (mkhos)23 of Žaŋžuŋ in Guran of Žims.) cautions that Dpaḥbo Gtsuglag might have referred to some contemporaneous Drugu. but this seems to be contradicted by the statement concerning the following year. areas that could be accessed from Tibet directly via the Pamirs and thus via western Žaŋžuŋ. possibly close to the border region. In OTA. By the mid 7th c. he led a military campaign into this area (OTA.a. the word ltaŋyor would refer either to a cattle disease or to an internal turmoil. n.392 Bettina Zeisler Helga Uebach (p. it would still follow from this reference that the boundary area between Tibet (proper) and the Drugu was at least Upper Ladakh and the western Changthang. but these two meanings can hardly be reconciled with the fact that the word should be in the absolutive and followed by a movement verb. l. they were not typically calls to arms. 56). in Ferghana and Sûryâb. half load’. n. where they replaced the Hephthalites. of course. household implements. According to Gñaḥgoŋ Dkonmchog Tshesbrtan (1995: 69. the Western Turks had moved into the areas west of the Altai and north of the Tienshan and further west into Western Turkestan and into Afghanistan. but in this case the military background is rather obvious. and should not have based himself on an Old Tibetan description of Žaŋžuŋ or on his knowledge as to where these places were to be located. mkhos were administrative measurements.. while the Eastern Turks mainly settled in present-day Mongolia and areas further to the south and east. actually settled also in Eastern Turkestan. They seem to have had dominated Kucha via Sāryāb once in a while. Tajikistan.e. Western Turkestan comprises the countries Kazakhstan. 197). while the meaning ‘campaign. this is geographically absurd. and after the enemies had been put to flight (lit. Unfortunately. 255). 68. 286).North of Ancient India and South of Khotan 393 ister Mgar Khriḥbriŋ led a campaign to the lands of the Drugu and Guchen: Drugu-Guzanyuldu draŋs. 127. . R. but since Kucha was also claimed by the Chinese. Kucha lies at the northern rim of the Tarim Basin. In 9 out of 11 cases (ll. l.25 25 Dotson (2009: 96) translates this as ‘the land of Kucha (Gu-zan-yul) in [Western] Turkestan’. or drama ḥdren (OTA. Kirghizstan. accepted them as) subjects. 97. 133. he is unable to specify. 135. Btsanbžer Mdolod from the Dbaḥs clan and others lead a campaign to [the region] from Mkhartshan upwards.’ For a detailed discussion of the collocation and its elliptic form see Uray (1962). rather than to Kucha. the collocation is typically shortened in OTA. the kings of the valleys from Nuŋkog downwards were brought under control. lead a campaign’ is usually expressed by a collocation: dmag ḥdren (cf. Apart from the fact that Guzan might refer to Guchen in the eastern Tienshan north of Turfan (cf. and thus in the region commonly known as East(ern) or Chinese Turkestan. and having overthrown eight fortified prefectures they made the Dorpo come forth and made them (lit. why should the Drugu be invited to this province by a Tibetan minister? And why to a province (yul) and not to a particular place in this province? Secondly. Thomas 1951: 282(ff. 276f. 97). in effect. and Uzbekistan. the Western Turks.) we find only the place name plus draŋs. 380–383: Sbraŋ Rgyalsgra Legzigskyis | stodphyogssu draŋste | Muyuŋsu g. l. 137. 94. Stein (1959: 293) rejects not only the former’s localisation of Guzan. the first element of which consists of a dvandva compound: (Drugu & Guzan)-yul. it seems to be unlikely that it was conceived of as a part of the Druguyul. R. Stein is mislead by his anger. Like Guchen. Guchen was at that time still under Chinese government (Thomas. western) regions. 274f. to which the Drugu would have been invited. First of all. ll.yul bzlognas | luŋgi rgyalpo Nuŋkog manchad ḥbaŋssu bsdus | Dbaḥs Btsanbžer Mdolodlastsogspas | mkhartshan yanchaddu draŋste | mkhar cupa brgyad phabnas | Dorpo bton te | ḥbaŋssu bžesso || ‘Rgyalsgra Legzigs from the Sbraŋ clan lead a campaign to the upper (i... after the battle field had been overthrown) in Muyuŋ. it is not possible to read an invitée into the place name. Similarly. and except perhaps in our case (l. In reaction to the all too often rash conclusions of Thomas. If Guzan lay in Tibet. where the ‘land of Guzan’ lay. ibid. p. There are similar examples in other Old Tibetan texts. apparently referring to an ordinary troop. In the period in question. recaptured several times. but the most illustrative might be found in the Old Tibetan Chronicle. I should thus suggest analysing the compound as a tatpuruṣa compound. OTA.A. but suggests that the verb ḥdren could equally mean ‘invite’. north of the Tienshan.A. we should have heard again of this province at some other occasion. and. Turkmenistan. If Guzan were not part of Tibet. apparently referring to an elite (drama) expedition corps.)). Kucha and Aksu (ibid). in the upper Kishenganga valley. due to its similarity in sound.). The mountainous regions of the Hindukush and the Pamirs were probably much more difficult to handle logistically. and so to rendezvous with the Turkish armies near Kashgar. Denwood forthcoming). may perhaps be the closest candidates for Guran. who abstains from guessing. particularly because much of this area was still independent in the beginning of the 8th c. The Palola ruler. however. In 660. I suggest looking for them in the west. below the confluence of the Astor river with the Indus. an eastern Žaŋžuŋ could by no means constitute the border area towards the Western Turks. certainly not a major force. I do not take the impressing title of the Palola ruler to be a conclusive sign of power or military invulnerability. does not believe in a Pamir route. but they had the advantage of being hidden and. the Tibetans sought such an arrangement with the ruler of Lesser Bolor (cf. n. then north and west along the course of the Tarim. moreover. Denwood. one might think that a *Gūrān. particularly as the routes were limited in number and certainly also surveyed. The Tibetans do not need to have subjugated all the areas in question. the Tibetans appear for the first time across the Pamirs. This route would avoid Azha armies as well as the Chinese-garrisoned cities of Khotan. Hazod 2009: 217. Thomas 1951: 268. grazing and supplies would be available in larger quantities than in the drier climate of today. Of course. Beckwith 1987: 42.. beyond Chinese dominance. the promise of sufficient profit for the respective rulers might have paved the way as well.26 We know that. at some later time. 23. 26 Unlike Denwood (ibid. could be found in the vicinity of Mīrān. in Kashgar (Denwood forthcoming). It would have been a simple matter to detach a small force and send it along the route south of the Tsaidam to the Charklik/Miran area (the old Shanshan kingdom on the southern silk route). . Gor in Chitral. We can observe with the later petty chiefdoms of Ladakh a certain inflation of royal titles. or Gurais (or Gurez). which mirrored only the insignificance of their bearers. linguistically as well as geographically.394 Bettina Zeisler The place names Guran and Žims are unidentified (cf. I do not think that such movements would have gone unchallenged by the Chinese. the Tibetans would have reached the Western Turks by a route from (eastern) Žaŋžuŋ via Shanshan or Mīān through the Tarim. Yarkand and Kashgar rivers. According to him. Nevertheless. who states that they should be found in Žaŋžuŋ). where water. for whom both places should be located in the region of Guge. may well have been compelled to concede border areas or rights of passage to a power he could not contain. and also presumably Ladakh” were not only independent of Tibet. to whom a bride was given in 671 (OTA. A more prominent figure is Muwer btsanpo (ibid. 387). a century or so later. cf. The name of the king is quite obviously related to the element Sñašur. Kashmir) and Turkestan’: Rgyagardaŋ Grugu nubphyogs | Gñažur rgyalpo-lasogspa btul. due to scholarly playfulness or neglect. Given the geographical setting. [of] the western regions. which allowed confounding or merging the two.North of Ancient India and South of Khotan 395 unless one assumes that Shanshan or Mīrān was Turk territory in the late 7th c. a principality comprising Mt Tise. the king of Persia is called Muwer (ibid. p. Gilgit. in one of several versions of the Four Border Kingdoms.27 In the Btsunmo bkaḥi thaŋyig. 259). the border regions of Žaŋžuŋ stod should have comprised at least present-day Lower Ladakh (with Nubra and Purik). At the time of Gnamri Sloŋmtshan. 406 and passim). Given the fact that no other region is mentioned . While this confusion may be the result of an overall fusion of themes related to the Universal Ruler. usually occupied by Persia (Staggzig..A. there is a similar confusion and anachronism in LDRR 30.28f. p. 53). it is even Mŋaḥris Skorgsum that takes the place assigned for Persia (ibid. Thus we find. but if “some or all of them may have been part of the Western Turk empire before 630” as Denwood (forthcoming) ponders. without. dealing with the same concept. the combination of Žaŋžuŋ and Grugu for the western realm. the Drugu (and Kashmirians) in question could at best have been tribes of Indo-Iranian descent settling in Žaŋžuŋ. again in Dpaḥbo Gtsuglag’s compendium. even more so if “Suvarnagotra. Stein 1959: 258). Geographically. however. Baltistan.e. 257).28 At the very height of their power in the west. 467). p. In another manuscript. a concept related with that of the Universal Ruler. when the Tibetans were also 27 Muwer is the name of a king of Žaŋžuŋ Khasgyor.yuŋdruŋ Bongyi bstanpaḥi byuŋkhuŋ ñuŋbsdu (Vitali 2008: 386. There seem to have been ethnic or political affinities between Žaŋžuŋ and Bactrian Turkestan (most probably dating from a time before the rise of the Turk empire).. and which is also found. giving any evidence for this line of reasoning. R.: during the time of Gnamri Sloŋmtshan. 28 We do not know from which time exactly the Dpaḥbo Gtsuglag’s description of Žaŋžuŋ stod actually dates. as the name of a commander of the Žaŋžuŋ stod stoŋsde Ḥotshopag ~ Ḥožopag and of the Rtsalmopag regiment (Thomas 1951: 454. clearly a Žaŋžuŋ appellation. appearing in the name of the Žaŋžuŋ king Lig Sñašur. India (i. l. the Tibetans would have ‘subdued king Gñažur etc. listed in Dkarru Grubdbaŋ Bstanḥdzin Rinchen’s Tiseḥi dkarchag and in Bstanḥdzin Rnamdag’s G. the border region between the Western Turks and Tibet was Baltistan and Gilgit. belong to Žaŋžuŋ smad. Ladakh simply does not exist. With Žaŋžuŋ stod consisting at least of (Lower) Ladakh. Khotan (Ḥchimmam Li).s ‘myriarchies’ by the 13th c. a term that seems to be an anachronism. particularly with respect to the second skor. and Zaŋskar form one skor.s. 1 and 3 of Žaŋžuŋ stod are attested in some Old Tibetan documents with the additional Iranian or Turkish element between Tibet and the Western Turks. Quite interestingly the first and the third skor refer to areas generally accepted to belong to Western Tibet: Puraŋs. It should be noted that the districts nos. Guge is not mentioned in either source. Maryul. c. it might be possible to identify Gñema (and the Ñimobag district of Ms M. they might have spoken of these areas not only as stodphyogs ‘western direction’ (cf. since his description of the three districts (skor) of Mŋaḥris differs from all later sources. in fact. Thomas 1951: 293) with Sñemo in Lower Ladakh. 29 As an administrative term. 220) but perhaps likewise as parts of Žaŋžuŋ stod. discussed in § 3 below. Yuan dynasty. One could thus argue that the Žaŋžuŋ smad of the Old Tibetan sources corresponded to what is taken as the ‘true’ Žaŋžuŋ kingdom. skor is not attested in Old Tibetan source. seems to indicate that Upper Ladakh did. Its usage may thus be related with the introduction of khriskor. Tāgh. It must thus be implied in the designation Maryul~Maŋyul (see also below § 2. he seems to have had access to much earlier sources. and Baltistan (Sbalte). iii 0019. That something like this happened is indicated by a comparatively late source. The linguistic evidence. Žaŋžuŋ [Proper] and Khrite stod and smad (third skor). but unfortunately the principality kept the administrative term and not its original name. A similar division is given in BRGY (sub Mŋaḥris skorgsum): Purang (Spuhreŋ). and Sbalti the last. Maŋyul. No reference is made to regions at the far eastern end of the Changthang.29 Nevertheless. the Vth Dalai Lama’s biography of Bsodnams Mchogldan Bstanpaḥi Rgyalmtshan (Tucci 1956: 73). while Žaŋžuŋ stod may have referred to the newly subdued regions further north and west.396 Bettina Zeisler in the possession of the Yasin valley and some outposts in the Pamirs. which everyone will answer according to his or her own preferences. already mentioned. Hunza (Gruža). . One of the thousand districts of Žaŋžuŋ stod or smad must have been based in Zanskar. when Baltistan and greater Bolor were already conquered. Žaŋžuŋ and Khrite stod and smad another. containing Khotan (Li). Whether Upper Ladakh was part of smad or stod may then remain an open question. The Vth Dalai Lama divides Old Mŋaḥris into three skor. it appears to be most likely that the description belongs to a rather late date.2). Bruža. OTA l. so that we hear of a kingdom (today only a village) of Θoŋδe (Stoŋsde). however. Zaŋsdkar (first skor). Strangely enough. . the name element -bag or -beg is nowhere attested in West or Western Tibet. Thomas 1951: 293: Ñimobag.North of Ancient India and South of Khotan 397 -pag (cf. Beg must then have been either a place in Bruža or a place in the immediate neighbourhood (it could well have been identical with the stoŋbu Baga). But if this would have been so. Das’s map: Huma Cho) further west again”. This localisation would further imply that Turks were already settling in the present-day Hor district of Nakchu. And surely. Should one thus assume that Turks settled further west throughout the Changthang? This is actually what Denwood (forthcoming in the present version) suggests. whereto the emperor went in 739 for a marriage arrangement with the previously subdued king of Bruža (OTA. 149) draws the attention to the fact that chief minister Mgar Stoŋrtsan performed a registration in Dugul of Žaŋžuŋ just after and just before staying in the Ḥaža country. and with the location Beg. 276f. p. without. pp. 281. but the spelling indicates an original -begs.: Ḥotshopag ~ Ḥožopag. 283f. Nevertheless. But then Gnamru could have equally been defined as bordering to the Turks. As far as I know. n. faces the problem that . this assumption. ll. as much as the suggestion that Žaŋžuŋ extended up to the Namtsho. 454. This might indicate that like Žaŋžuŋ stod. While more or less communis opinio. The only exception might be Mulbekh. which is most probably related to the designation Baga for the stoŋbu. A region near the Gnammtsho would be clearly east of the eastern-most parts of Žaŋžuŋ smad (defined as centring on Guge).). which would make it possible to identify Gñema or Ñimo with “the present county headquarters of Nyima directly westwards of Namru” and Ḥotsho with “‘O ma mtsho (Oma. One may easily conclude that this unknown place was not located in the west. 460f. the ‘Turks’ of Nakchu would have been part of Tibet. On the evidence of a further -phag name element in the district of Gnamruphag in the Central Horn (Dburu) Denwood (2008: 10) assumes that Ñimobag and Ḥo tsho pag ~ Ḥožopag were somehow linked with Gnamruphag. 467). Žaŋžuŋ smad could have been administratively enlarged far beyond the original boundaries so that it covered the whole northern Changthang up to the eastern-most end of the Kunlun range. where should we locate the Sumpa in order to have Žaŋžuŋ smad/Guge lying between them and Tibet? Is the latter indication simply an error as Denwood (2008: 12) suggests? By what evidence do we judge which of the statements is correct and which one not? By the contradictions that we have built up ourselves? Dotson (2009: 87. this identification does not take into account the notion of stod ‘west’. This is another indication that Žaŋžuŋ stod may have reached up to Hunza. a further name is Rtsalmopag. and we do not know when the village was founded or when it acquired its present name. This administrative enlargement could perhaps explain the localisation of Greater Yangtong by the Chinese envoy Liu Yuanding (see below). however giving any historical evidence for this claim. I do not want to rule out the possibility that the Bonpo reminiscence of a Žaŋžuŋ on Iranian territory or at least comprising Gilgit may be based on the ‘official’ notion of Žaŋžuŋ at the height of Tibet’s western-most extension. Yaŋlag (g)sum-paḥi ru is to be translated as ‘third additional horn’ and has nothing to do with the Sumpa tribe(s). but does not really lie between them. The expression Dmaḥ. if the former extended up to the Kunlun. but perhaps more cultural than political. The territories to its west should thus have belonged to the Right Horn. by contrast. occupying only a small territory along the Rtsaŋspo. is apparently used for a Sumpa region or an area between the Sumpa and Žaŋžuŋ Proper (Bellezza 2008: 284. it would equally have its value if we allow Žaŋžuŋ smad to extend into the said area.30 30 Yamaguchi (1970: 98) observes that the Yaŋlag (G)sumpaḥi ru “was established as though to hold Shaṅshuṅsmad between itself and Tibet proper. Denwood’s idea of an ancient trade route through what he calls the ‘Changthang Corridor’ (2008: 10 and 18. that the designation of Tibet’s western extension was actually based on an old. as lying between some Tibetan secondary entity (presumably in the north) and Central Tibet. But it is likewise possible. originally part of an old state of Žaŋžuŋ. according to Bonpo claims. which borders on the Sumpa as well as on Tibet. If all this territory was. they remain silent about a similar extension to the east. 593). and while even Buddhist sources acknowledge the westward extension of Žaŋžuŋ. albeit on a much smaller scale. the Tibetan administration does not seem to have treated it as such. While one can never preclude that the majority of Tibetan scholars all fell prey to the same error. notion of (Western) Žaŋžuŋ. there should have been an overlap with Žaŋžuŋ smad and the Sumpa Ru. Otherwise one would have to conclude that either the Right Horn was absolutely insignificant. Chapter 4 § 1. Similarly. Zeisler forthcoming a. The notions of high and low are likewise attested in Bonpo texts. referring again to western and eastern regions respectively.4. Many of the above mentioned contradictions could be avoided if we allow Žaŋžuŋ (stod) to extend up to the Pamirs. or to Gilgit at least. most probably because the Tibetans themselves identify the (G)sum-paḥi ru or Sumru with the Sumpa. except if we admit that Sumpa tribes were also roaming on the northern fringes of the Changthang. inherited from the Hephthalite-Hūṇa period (cf.3). it would be even more difficult to envisage Žaŋžuŋ smad.” For him. map 1) does not depend on the localisation of Žaŋžuŋ stod in the east. being little more than the Guge province plus some areas along the upper Brahmaputra. or perhaps merely of Žaŋžuŋ-ian ethnicity. or that the Right Horn overlapped with parts of Žaŋžuŋ smad. both . Mtho Žaŋžuŋ is used for the castle of Khyuŋluŋ and the region Khayug to its south.398 Bettina Zeisler the Namtsho and Gnamruphag belonged to the Central Horn. This might well refer to (parts of) the central Changthang. the Supi would have been. with n. Personally. Given this location and given a Žaŋžuŋ etymology. if the Sumru was established mainly in eastern Tibet. This epithet would well correspond to late Buddhist depictions of the Kailash area as the golden fundaments of earth and its identification with the axis mundi Sumeru (see below). Particularly.s of Mŋaḥris) east of it. where Sunba should be the Chinese transcription of Tibetan Sumpa. then how could a place supposed to be identical with present-day Guge lie in between the Sumru and Central Tibet? . 127. 114). In any case. Map 8 Žaŋžuŋ stod and smad (and the older skor. also Hummel 1974: 494). while the Sumpa or rather Supi tribes would have dwelled in the west (p. located west. But then the same Chinese sources are quoted as stating that the (allegedly western) Supi (or who else?) were named Sunba after the Tibetan conquest. it must be a ‘Golden Žaŋžuŋ’ not a ‘Lower Žaŋžuŋ’ as Hoffmann (2003 [1990]: 48) suggests (cf. and at least one text locates this in the area of Mt Tise and lake Maphaŋ (Bellezza 2008: 319).North of Ancient India and South of Khotan 399 Post-phyidar Bonpo sources also know of a Žaŋžuŋ smar. as his paper is full of minor and major mistakes and contradictions: his further discussion reveals that many. according to Chinese sources. while ready to sympathising with the nonconformist. the Sumru east of the Tomi. if not most of the place names associated with the Sumru should actually lie far in the east. the Tomi being a tribe in eastern Tibet. in the Khams region. I find difficulties in putting much weight on Yamaguchi’s argument. preserved in the Shijia fangzhi.3 Yangtong Chinese authors discriminate between Greater and Lesser Yangtong.400 Bettina Zeisler 1. Later it was applied to the northwestern region. It remains unclear which north-western region Petech refers to. while the name Lesser Yang-t’ung indicated originally the upper valley of the Tsangpo from the Mar-yum pass to Lha-rtse. by definition as much as by the localisation proposed. I am unable to imagine the reason for this inversion. commonly accepted as the core area of Žaŋžuŋ would no longer be in the centre. the discussion just above). rather variable. Basing himself on a 1981 article by H. Lesser Yangtong. except that Lesser Yangtong is always located west of Greater Yangtong. which after the “horns” (ru) reorganisation of the second half of the 8th century came to be known as Lower. allegedly from north-eastern Tibet to Nepal.). Eastern Zhang-zhung. Lesser Yangtong would no longer be closer to China (or Mt Meru) than Greater Yangtong. i. According to the conventions mentioned in the introduction. Petech (ibid. obviously calculated from her west ern-most extension in Turkestan (or adopting the viewpoint of its Iranian neighbours. but the localisation of each part seems to be. except perhaps. that it is based on a itinerary. cf. again. if it should be part of an eastern Žaŋžuŋ. these designations should have reflected the spatial relation to China.e.) states Greater Yang-t’ung corresponded to Upper Zhang-zhung. maintains that an “excessive extension eastwards is not acceptable” (1998: 230). which was completed in 650 (Pelliot 1963: 709f. while Guge. the eastern part. The east-west correlation is somewhat at variance with the identifications proposed by Japanese scholars as reported by Petech. Similarly the convention concerning . when both entities are mentioned. i. is here associated with Žaŋžuŋ smad/dmaḥ. But this assumption would contravene the conventions associated with the terminology of Lesser and Greater. centring on Mt Meru as the axis mundi) or it might have reflected the Žaŋžuŋ-ian perspective of a Centre in the west (Innermost Žaŋžuŋ). albeit described in most Chinese sources as the western part. but in the periphery of Greater Yangtong. Satō (and possibly also on the work of Yamaguchi. Denwood (2008: 12) would think that the localisation of Little Yangtong southwest of some part of Central Tibet and northeast of Nepal […] is geographically just about possible if the Chinese Little Yangtong is the same as Tibetan Lower Zhangzhung. who furthermore.e. Guge and Purang. The itinerary passes the frontier of the Tuyuhun. one would have reached the Rtsaŋspo at Shigatse in Myaŋ. as it seems to have been mixed up with at least a second one. and it seems impossible to make any sense of this itinerary as the original road map. As a result. one would have followed the Rtsaŋspo further up westwards to Guŋthaŋ or Maŋyul from where the route over Kyirong leads to Kathmandu in a roughly southern direction. one reaches the kingdom of Ni-po-lo (Nepal) of northern India. on crosses the Ta [?Chü]-ts’ang-ch’ü Barrier. one wonders how and where Yangtong could ever get into the way.North of Ancient India and South of Khotan 401 the terminology of stod and smad would be broken. the general direction from Amdo to Nepal. Given this general route. Then to the east. all Chinese graphs as well as phonetic reconstructions have been omitted). Both Žaŋžuŋ provinces would extend far into the east. the route would pass Yarḥbrog G. From that point onwards only the direction. to the south-east enters gorges (ku). although they never show up as such in the Old Tibetan documents. which would no longer relate to an east-west axis. roads made of boards fixed more or less high on the wall of a vertical cliff). containing a description of the Hanging Passages near Chilas. regardless of how one wants to define the Žaŋžuŋ/Yangtong entities. I am not aware of any such gorges in Central Tibet. Most likely.yumtsho and Gyantse (Rgyalrtse). and would overlap with Central Tibet. present-day Ladakh and Baltistan would have been discrete entities. with a slight turn towards the south-east. Then to the southwest. then. either south-east or south-west. according to Pelliot (1963: 709–710) starts in Hezhou. (Pelliot 1963: 710. If a more western route along the Gnammtsho were followed through Tibet. For me. From there a south-western route would have ended directly in Kathmandu. the unidentifiable kingdom of Kan. one crosses the Mo-shang-chia-san pi Barrier. which is. the kingdom of the Supi. crosses thirteen ‘flying ladders’ (fei-ti) and nineteen ‘plank-roads’ (chan-tao. reaches the kingdom of the Tomi. the itinerary does not constitute a reliable source. mainly south-west is given. e. slightly south. at least. snatching the creepers and grasping the lianas. This route was used by the . but to the north and the south. however. and until reaching the Kokonor directions as well as distances are given. which is the southern frontier of the T’u-fan. Southwest of Yarluŋs or Lhasa lies Sikkim. i. respectively. The itinerary. after marching in the wilderness for more than forty days. Then to the south-west on reaches the kingdom of ‘Lesser Yang-t’ung’. the western and north-western regions. of course. the kingdom of the Tufan. from where one could reach Nepal or Darjeeling. and then by the help of fl ying bridges and footways made of wood across the chasms and precipices. often quite as tiring.A. but they must have been still more numerous before the recent track was constructed M. after going 500 li or so we arrive at the country Bolüluo [Bolor] (Xuanzang. On nearing the edge. I have not counted all the climbs. There are seven hundred rock steps in all. (cf. CE traveller Faxian have been variously located somewhere near Gilgit. the river is crossed by a suspension bridge of ropes. The men of former times had cut away the rock to make a way down. and had placed ladders on the side of the rock. Sen Tansen 2002). . to be made again towards the river. Stein (1942) and Jettmar (2002b [1987]) the passage that fits best Faxian’s description is located at the foot of a spur of the Nanga Parbat between Sazin (near Shatial) and Jalkot. at the same time as this itinerary was documented. From the heights thus gained there were invariably descents. as rendered by Giles and cited by M. and wishing to advance. that is.A. the foot finds no resting place. in order to avoid impassable cliffs. the side of the mountain being like a stone wall ten thousand feet in height. each rising sometimes as much as 1000 feet or more above the river. named Indus. Below there is a river. [T]he party journeyed on in a south-westerly direction for fifteen days over a difficult. Beal 1881–84: 178). The infamous Hanging Passages as known from the early 5th c.A. […] Having crossed the river.402 Bettina Zeisler Chinese embassies to Nepal in the mid 7th c. On all the eleven trying marches […] there was daily a constant succession of tiring ascents to be made. neither flying ladders nor planks in the cliffs. On the Kyirong route. but. Stein 1942: 55). the eye becomes confused. but according to M. Nowhere was it possible to keep for any distance near to the river bank since masses of huge boulders line it wherever the river does not actually wash the foot of impassable rock walls. as far as I know. The track climbs up steeply ridge after ridge. and when these and the ladders have been negotiated. difficult enough to manage. sometimes in Hunza. precipitous and dangerous road. [W]e go up the course of the Sindu river. the pilgrims arrived in the country of Udyana (Swat) which lies due north of India (Faxian. and possibly all other routes. Stein 1942: 54). one would have to cross rope bridges. while the actual tracks have an approximate length of between 700 and 1100 km. However.North of Ancient India and South of Khotan 403 [T]he most dangerous part […] was practicable only because tree branches had been fixed in fissures on the rock supporting galleries. 300 km as the crow flies.). the name of its king. counting 20 to 30 km a day. 20) mentions a passage in uninhabited wilderness. Nüguo. particularly when covered by snow. In the Taiping huanyu ji (a geographical work. thus at most 300 km or 10 to 15 marches altogether (cf. steps had been carved out. before T’u-fan. It may well be possible that. if not even before those of To-mi and Su-p’i”. Greater Yangtong is defined as bordering in the east to Tibet. and. as the crow flies. relatively well to present-day Upper Ladakh (plus some parts of the Changthang). The statement reminds me of a description of a route through the Pamirs: M. But it remains quite astonishing that the straight westward route section along the Rtsaŋspo is omitted in the itinerary. ibid. in many places there were logs with notches to be used as ladders (Jettmar 2002b [1987]: 179). Apart from this. when the distance between Guŋthaŋ and Kyirong as well as that between Kyirong and Kathmandu is about 100 km each. roughly corresponding with the elimination of the Žaŋžuŋ king Lig Myirhya as attested in OTA. the dominion of Žaŋžuŋ (smad).) is likewise unable to make sense of this description. extending in the north towards Khotan. and perhaps before the kingdom of Kan.A. but this is just mere guessing. some 800 to 1200 km. that is. which Pelliot reconstructs as *Kyaŋkar > *Ki̯ang-kât. not so much due to its length. he is inclined to put back Lesser Yangtong “to an earlier stage. at the eve of its destruction. although for different reasons. at least. thus roughly 350 km extended from east to west (Pelliot 1963: 708)—this corresponds roughly to the localisation of Suvarṇagotra.A. after having crossed a territory to its southwest in a south-western direction. as due to the difficulty of the rugged terrain. but this event is described as having 31 The distance between Khotan and Rudok or Leh is ca. . extended over the whole area of Rtsaŋ and Myaŋ. completed 983). it is more than 1000 li. In the Tongdian (completed 801). Jiangge. which may need up to forty days to cross.31 Pelliot (ibid. the map in R. Given the localisation of the sources of the Yellow River in Greater Yangtong in the Xin Tangshu (completed 1060). it is hardly believable that one could err for more than forty days in the wilderness between Lesser Yangtong and Nepal. Stein 1981: 14–15). in the west on Lesser Yangtong. It is furthermore difficult to understand how one could reach the southern border of Tibet. ultimately. Greater Yangtong is identified with a kingdom that was conquered by the Tibetans in 649 (Pelliot. Stein (1932: 14. see also below. as the main competitor of the ‘Tibetans’ in Central Tibet. does not resemble any name of the Žaŋžuŋ kings as preserved in Tibetan sources. . is described in OTA. cannot have extended throughout all of the Changthang. al though likewise from later sources. Perhaps we have to understand the word ‘sale’ as a euphemism for ‘redistribution’. the one subdued by the Tibetans around 645 (or 649 accord ing to the Chinese sources). year 644 (l. turns out to be a forceful disappropriation and thus ‘redistribution’ from the perspective of the losing Žaŋžuŋ aristocracy and particularly their bondsmen. It is these mountains that border on Greater Yangtong (Herr mann 1910: 60). Whatever the reason for the apparent mismatches. Liu Yuanding. ibid.). 710). namely the Tibetan and the collaborating Žaŋžuŋ aristocracy. however. It is also possible that what looks as a ‘sale’ from the perspective of the winners and the agents involved. 21f. a fact corroborated by the subsequent statement concerning the fiscal governor. may have referred to a time shortly before the pre-imperial period. whereas all other descriptions. visited the sources of the Yellow River in 822 and located them in Greater Yangtong (Pelliot.404 Bettina Zeisler lead to severe destruction and a redistribution of the apparently nomadic people. testified as independent kingdom in Tibetan and Chinese sources. the Catalogue of the Ancient Principalities. the ‘historical’ kingdom of Greater Yangtong/Žaŋžuŋ. It may also be noted that the expedition took place comparatively late. This does not preclude the possibility that an ethnic. or cultural notion of Yangtong-ness might have overlapped with the Sumpa territories or that at some point in prehistory an unknown political entity encompassed both Žaŋžuŋ and Sumpa territo- . Pt 1286. Their subsequent embassies to the Chinese court would certainly have described the events in the most accusatory tone. The fall of Lig Myirhya. 7). as (most of) this region was at the same time occupied by the Sumpa. the great ‘sale’ of fields should have concerned territories of former Žaŋžuŋ. it referred more generally to the eastern Changthang and its various tribes. linguistic. l. and its report is found in the Xin Tangshu of even later date. One year after the conquest of Globo and Rtsaŋrhya (possibly former vassals of Žaŋžuŋ) in 652. his description reveals that 300 li south of the sources lie three mountains. p. Since the Rasaŋ(s)rje are known as a ministerial clan of Žaŋžuŋ (cf. More precisely. but it seems that in this case. 13) quite drastically with the verb brlag ‘was destroyed’. Certain authors shifted Yangtong further to the east: a Chinese envoy. a fact which—perhaps for ideological reasons—does not seem to be corroborated by Tibetan sources. We do not know the reason for locating Greater Yangtong so far east. said to be (part of) the Kunlun. there is mention of a great sale of fields (žiŋgi tshoŋchen) in cooperation with minister Ridstagrhya of [the] Rasaŋrje [clan] and of the installation of a new fiscal governor for Žaŋžuŋ (ll. resembling copper coins with flat bottoms. 24f. [then] the space is filled with pearls and jade. Such a scenario could perhaps explain the ‘wrong’ name of the king. the fact that various dates are given for a ‘complete conquest’. Bellezza’s (2008) documentation of the cultural remains of what could perhaps have been the precursor of historical Žaŋžuŋ points to Western Tibet as the core area and a possible extension of the same cultural features into the central Changthang. given on p. called Smar is most probably a phyidar invention. the five viscera are [taken out] by cutting open [the abdomen] and replaced with gold.33 no evidence of any kind of pre-Tibetan script has come into light in the area of Žaŋžuŋ proper (Bellezza 2008: 187). but a strange type of Tibetan with some parallels to the dbumed letters of a 10th to 12th c.North of Ancient India and South of Khotan 405 ries.34 The burial customs of Yangtong follow a Central Asian type: When chiefs die. The partial contradiction in the sources could indicate that the geographical or tribal entity in question was quite extended or scattered. despite the use of entièrement or complètement. The latter statement corresponds well with the fact that. despite respective Bonpo claims. However. . that no specimen of this script should have survived. The alleged ‘Persian’ script. while still envoys from Yangtong are registered at the Chinese court (cf. fig. 34 The specimen from the Gnammtsho. I do not want to preclude the possibility that the Bonpos actually refer to the Brāhmī manuscripts of Gilgit or to Kharoṣṭhī inscriptions in the same area and in Khotan. Denwood 2008: 9). only tallies and cords with knots were used. leaving some room for interpretation. the ‘unattested’ redistribution. based on the 10th or 11th Lañdza and Wartu(la) scripts originating from Nepal. 188. as in early Tibet. manuscript of Kyelang (a semi-circle-like ba and a similar ca with two ‘horns’ on top) as listed by Francke (1912: plate I-VII). 33 The Žaŋžuŋ script. 353 as an “archaic inscription” is definitively neither Kharoṣṭhī nor Brāhmī. [their skulls are cleft] and the brain scooped out. a false gold nose and [false] silver teeth [are put on]. comme celui de Yang-t’ong et les tribus des K’iang”) and only later of the annexation of several territories (Pelliot 1961: 9: “du Yang-t’ong. so that. called Spuŋs could possibly refer to a script used in the Pamirs. des Tang-hiang et des divers K’iang”) or of the submission of various Qiang tribes associated with Yangtong (Pelliot 1961: 89: “les K’iang Yang-t’ong et Tang-hiang”). men follow [the chiefs] in death (hsün). although it appears somewhat strange. while the political entities associated with the name were much smaller and more numerous than the division into two parts suggests. 32 The Tang annals speak more precisely first of the rendering of homage to the Tibetan Emperor (Pelliot 1961: 3 “Les royaumes voisins.32 (Greater) Yangtong is said to have been without script. and more generally. . p. and Yangtong.35 and the production of wine or rgunchaŋ ‘grape beer’ is known particularly from the Dardic areas further down the Indus. but not in Gandhāra and the countries of India (Fuchs 1938: 445). given by Hyecho. but even if grapes Map 9 Lesser and Greater Yangtong 35 Here. in Nurla or Saspol. is that grapes were grown Kashmir. but it is quite possible. the two Bolors. in a somewhat warmer climate. the cultivation area extended up to Bazgo and Sñemo. sometimes also as dried fruits. ewes and mares (ibid.406 Bettina Zeisler Having fixed by divination a propitious day. it is too cold for grapes further up the river. that more than thousand years ago. I have not heard about grapes being grown in Guge36 or the upper valley of the Brahmaputra. A further detail. According to the people of Khalatse. Grapes grow or have grown in a semi-wild manner in Lower Ladakh up to Khalatse. the grapes were consumed or sold only as fruits. that is. but so far apparently overlooked. and slaughter many cows. 708). they bury the body in the cave of some cliff.. The last plant was only recently removed to make place for a new house. in such a way that no other man should know about it. who may have heard the stories and legends from Indian. Their accounts. but like apple cultivation.A.2010).” . located unspecifically somewhere in the north of India. also a wild variety (Anju Saxena. however. but also. p. particularly since the Guge area was known to him as Suvarṇagotra. it is not just patriarchic world-view. transmitted the Indian notions of an Amazon utopia (or paradise).). Men’s horror scenario of uncontrolled women went the by the name Strīrājya in India. As Anju Saxena further explains (e-mail communication 18. perhaps also Iranian middlemen. mostly trivialised or lost in the subsequent literary processing. He also provides the name of this fruit in different ‘dialects’ of Kinnaur. more particularly. Lindegger 1993: 59f. There is. as neighbouring the two Bolors comprised Lower Ladakh and perhaps (parts of) Baltistan. to libertinism and. like other alternative conceptualisations of a better society. 1. the Altyn Tagh.c. This is mentioned abundantly in Alexander Gerard’s works. R. they seem to have been further idealised with respect to their society (cf. Such idealisation typically refers to an extraordinary quality of innocence and justness.). inverse social order: women free from the patriarchal yoke. women living without men. Nü-kuo). While the general parlance certainly permits that individual queens are rulers in a kingdom (which is generally ruled by kings). it seems more likely that Hyecho’s grape-growing Yangtong. 36 Commercial grapes are currently grown in Kinnaur. but according to the sources Ptolemy used. forbidden to the all-too-worldly Alexander (Pseudocallisthenes. Stein 1959: 277). the inhabitants of Uttarakuru were described (in Greek sources) as inhabiting an ideal country and together with other Northlanders. the various versions of the Alexander Romance. W. which corresponds exactly to the Chinese term Nüguo (女國 .North of Ancient India and South of Khotan 407 grow or have been growing in these regions. The common English translation as ‘Kingdom of Women’ is quite odd. women even as rulers (cf. and a female ruler would not be king. this might be a recent development. but completely illogical to call an institution kingdom when there are no kings at all or when male rulers appear only exceptionally. and the Nanshan (Richthofengebirge). some traditions must have identified it with the Kunlun. The Indian utopia was Uttarakuru.02. since it is not intended to signal that a king ruled over an exclusively female population. such as the Seres (the silk traders of the Tarim Basin). Like the Hyperboreans of the Greek. 25–26.-G. but queen. chap. also Albinia 2008: 262).4 The ‘Women’s Dominion’ The earliest rumours about Amazons in the Himalayas (or Pamirs) seem to have been brought to Europe by Alexander’s troops. “it seems that grapes have been grown in Kinnaur for a rather long time. . we are dealing with a country in real terms. 51).). I will use here the term Women’s Dominion. described in quite realistic terms. The fact that LalitādityaMuktāpīḍa is said to have erected a iva statue in this country (Rājataraṅgiṇī iv. the Massagete queen’s surrender to Alexander (for which cf. and Bharukacchas. but is otherwise. this should also be the main area. But one cannot preclude the possibility that a similar population was also found in Baltistan. and perhaps even in the Guge region. Denwood 2008) have rejected outright the idea of a Western Tibetan or Bolorian queendom as due to a confusion with a purely fictional and utopian Western Dominion of Women in the Far West.1991 and XII. Even more regrettably. while other Chinese sources point to a. II: 257). where one should look for the Strīrājya. many Sinologists (e. Stein 1900 I: 139).408 Bettina Zeisler In accordance with the usual German translation: Frauenreich. Stein 1900 I: 138). the country would be also mentioned in the Mahābhārata (III. There must have been more queendoms in the Indian or Iranian borderlands.g. 185. Tucci 1977: 49.g. Women’s Paradise) as the capital of a western province in Sindh (Watters 1904/1905. Laufer 1918) and other scholars (e.14) in connection with Kulūta and Tukhāra and in the Kāśyapa together with the Kosala. that is. By mischance. wherever its location and whatever its social structures might have been. Tucci (1956: 101) cites some additional Sanskrit sources. might perhaps point to the ḍākinī land in Uḍḍiyāna/Swat.4. M. the western Changthang. one in Eastern Tibet and one in Western Tibet or at the confines of the latter. A Strīrājya is mentioned unspecifically together with the wrongly assigned Kulūta and with the Tāla and Tukhāra in the north-western division of the Bṛhatsaṃhitā (Fleet 1973: 10f. Tucci 1977: 69f. as in the case of the submission of its queen to LalitādityaMuktāpīḍa (Kalhaṇa’s Rājataraṅgiṇī iv.A. More particularly.51. possibly only mythical. Hāla. The Nüguo of the Chinese sources seems to have inherited the utopian notion of libertinism and a possible association with the Uttarakuru-Kunlun. Taṅgana. Like the Greek notion of the Amazons. which continued to attract a religiously veiled erotic tourism throughout the centuries (cf. Women’s Dominion west of the Pamirs (Pelliot 1963: 679). since envoys and certain products are said to have arrived at the Chinese court. Ladakh.). in the Roman Orient (for a legendary association with ‘Rome’ or what the Chinese thought Rome . in striking contrast to the Indian myths. serving the typical male erotic projections. 173f. This seems to be a rather crude echo of Cleophis. the Indian descriptions of the Strīrājya can only be classified as phantasmagoria. Xuanzang mentions a Sutulisifalo (perhaps Strī-īśvara. which likewise point to a north-western direction: located between the Hūṇa and Taṅgana. M. the Chinese historians confounded two such queendoms.A. Since most of the associated peoples can be located in present-day Afghanistan. the interaction with the Dangxiang points to Eastern Tibet. lying in the reality on ground. and extended over clearly less than 300 km from east to west 37 Or perhaps even south of the Hindukush.). The notion of an ‘Eastern’ Women’s Dominion. This is located southwest of Chengdu and west of the Dangxiang. Parker (1905: 631) takes the Congling range to be idendentical with the Hindukush. Eberhard 1942: 90. . W. in Eastern Tibet (ibid. cf. there must be some specific reason for such confusion. but it is possible that parts of the adjacent chains could be subsumed under this name.-G. p. Tung-nü-kuo). Pelliot ibid.). one of the later Tangut tribes. Pelliot 1963: 694f. Stein 1959: 277). as this term was coined largely to distinguish this land from the legendary Western Women’s Dominion in the Far West. 38 The historian Zhang Shoujie gives the distance somewhat more precisely as 2700 li (ca. one can see that two distinct geographical entities have been entirely mixed up. mainly located in Khams. since the Chinese sources repeatedly give quite exact coordinates.. The passage in the Jiu Tangshu (completed 945) would. Pelliot 1963: 698). give the impression that there is only one Eastern Women’s Dominion. 699f. 20 days from north to south (cf. This position is indefensible.North of Ancient India and South of Khotan 409 to be. Dongnüguo (東女國 . The country extends 9 days from east to west. This cannot be merely due to a confusion. 870 km. 82). but on closer inspection.-G. in fact. also R. which lead us to Western Tibet or Bolor. According to Denwood (2008: 9) [i]t seems to have extended from the Gyarong area across Nyarong (Yalong valley) towards the Yangtse. The name Congling usually appears with reference to the Pamirs. It is thus not surprising that we hear of a second (?) Eastern Dominion of Women. 39 I will thus use the terms (more) eastern Dongnüguo and (more) western Dongnüguo in order to distinguish the two elements of the Eastern Women’s Dominion. According to the Suishu (completed 636) and Beishi (completed 659).39 A region north.A. is somewhat misleading. the Nüguo is located south of the Congling mountains (the Pamirs). While the location in relation to Khotan and the fights with India points to the ‘Upper Indus’ region in Pakistan and the adjacent eastern areas of Baltistan and Ladakh. It should thus be located at one of the great southwards bound rivers.37 according to the Suishu it lies 3000 li south of Khotan (this is the same distance as for Suvarṇagotra). p. Pelliot 1963: 699f. Tang-hsiang.38 It exports salt to India and frequently fights with India as well as with the Dangxiang (党项 . southwest of the kingdom of Fuguo and southeast of Sumpa. particularly the mountain tract west and south-west of Kashgar. or if so. W.and southwest of Chengdu (cf. which would lead us to Uḍḍiyāna/Swat.). cf. at the middle course of the . To the north it is conterminous with Yü-tien [=Khotan]. But it is not the case that the Jiu Tangshu locates this queendom only in the east as Denwood (2008: 9). Rockhill apparently also overlooks the fact that the country cannot at the same time border to the east on the Tibetans and to the west on the Rtsaŋspo. The only point where a region could border to the eastern shore of the Brahmaputra. which runs dead straight from west to east. From east to west it is a nine days’ journey. where it bends around the Himalayas. so this is called the eastern one. classified either as Tangut or. this could hardly have been the upper Rtsaŋspo. that is. The name Sanbohe does not refer to a river (see also note 75 below). another (south)-eastern tribe. also called Su-fa-la-na chü-chü-lo [=Suvarṇagotra]. Unfortunately. NNW of Chengdu]. and is ruled over by a woman who resides in the K’ang-yen valley. and 703). The ‘Jo River’ (Ruoshui) of the above statement is the notoriously peripatetic ‘Weak River’. as Yi). It is clear that the borders of the more western Dongnüguo (including her border with Tibet in the east) are mixed up with those of the more eastern Dongnüguo (bordering on. There is also in the far west (Hsi hai) a country ruled by women. is on its middle course. Rockhill does not give the Chinese characters for the place names. and to the southeast with Ya chou (in Ssu-ch’uan) [SW of Chengdu]. insinuates: The Eastern Kingdom of Women (Tung Nü kuo). omitting the conflicting statements. This is the area of Spobo or Poyul. Even if it had done so. but as indicated by Pelliot (1963: 707). the T’ang-hsiang [=Tanguts] and Mao chou [near the Min River. he must have been mistaken.g. identifications in square brackets added. a narrow precipitous gorge around which flows the Jo River in a southerly direction (Rockhill 1891: 340. also Pelliot 1963: 699f. and the eastern Dongnüguo would not have been all too far. the Lo-nu Man-tzu and the Pai-lang [‘White Wolves’] savages. from north to south twenty days’. Although a river bearing this name is located in Gansu. so that any particular country could only border on it either to the north or to the south. Tangut and Bailang. “north of the desert above Shensi”.410 Bettina Zeisler can hardly be identical with an area south of the Pamirs or south of Khotan. It has eighty towns. e.. assumed to lie within the borders of Tibet. To the east it borders on the T’u-fan. is a division of the Ch’iang. linguistically. To the west it touches the San-po-ho (Yaru tsangpo). understandably. Chapter 2 § 3. […] There is a person who […] dwells in a cave and is named ‘Queen Mother of the West’ (Loewe 2005 [1982]: 32f.North of Ancient India and South of Khotan 411 Yellow River (E. since the Ruoshui is also thought to flow in or around the latter: The 弱水 Jo-shui (“Weak River”) has two springs. which fl ow north of the Kingdom of Women and south of the A-nou-ta Mountain (Anavatapta). like in the description of the Tongnüguo.3. several regions have been conflated. the mythological connotations of the ‘Weak River’ take us further west.43 One could perhaps 40 The four rivers flowing from the Meru-Kailash are similarly said to encircle lake Anavatapta-Mapham seven times. arguably the ‘western-most end’ of the Kunlun. […] Below there are the depths of the Jo River which encircles the spot.41 and have their confluence in the Kingdom of Women (Pelliot 1963: 696 with further references). Mt Meru and Kailash (the competing axis mundi). South of the western lake. Pelliot (1963: 696–698) has discussed this legendary river42 at length without coming to any conclusion. According to some traditions. the river has its source in the Kunlun (which seems to be identical with Mt Meru and the Pamirs on a mythological level) and is associated with the paradise of the mythical Queen Mother of the West.4). with further references). The association with lake Anavatapta should lead us into the Pamirs.J. This mythical mountain goddess might not only be connected with the peris of the Pamirs. the only realistic explanation I can imagine is that the river in question had a very strong undercurrent or strong turbulences leading to a downward pull. Nothing could float on its surface. 10. Hill 2004. .40 but also with the Women’s Dominion. flowing in the cardinal directions (see also Zeisler forthcoming a. possessor of the elixir of immortality. n. with Mt Meru (or Sumeru) or at least to the present-day Kailash as the source of the four great rivers. with further references).2. If this rather fanciful idea had a natural basis (as most such ascriptions have). 41 Commonly identified with lake Mānasarowar/Mapham near Mt Kailash! 42 The notion ‘weak’ means that the water was perceived as being not able to carry even a swan’s down (Pelliot 1963: 697). everything would immediately sink. by the shores of the flowing sands. behind the Red River and before the Black River there is a great mountain called ‘The heights of K’un-lun’. since. and at least three of them can be linked up with the Kunlun of the geographers. but it does not match any other river system. Kunlun is given the name of Sumeru” (ibid. the word rma does not mean ‘peacock’ as commonly assumed. Chavannes. Chapter 4 § 2. accessed III/2010. the original Roof of the World. i. Even from the mythological perspective. the Weak River is explicitly identified with the Suoyi. Gilgit River (cf. although rather an incomplete one. One of the later Chinese sources explicitly connects the Kunlun with Mt Meru. with the Tarim. Chunag).J. It is quite possible that the mythology of a ‘weak’ river reached China from the west together with the mythology of libertine queens. Paul Kekai Manansala. n. All five rivers that are said to flow from the purely legendary mountain exist in reality. 44 For the localisation of the Nüguo of the Tang historiographies it plays no role that the earliest notes concerning the Ruoshui could not have referred to Bolor (cf. flowing in the four cardinal directions. Gilgit-Indus.45 the said Ruo River. Apart from the encircling river (see note 40 above). in which case the women’s dominion should be located at Qarqan). but is either a dialectal form for dmar. this description is approximately true for the Pamirs. 12.412 Bettina Zeisler think of the Gilgit-Indus and the ‘real’ Indus and their continuation after their confluence. included in the Jiu Tangsu.4). 1 k). the flowing sands might lead us into the Tarim basin west of Qarqan/Cherchen (cf. since all five rivers flow into a southern direction.44 Nevertheless. in the biography of Gao Xianshi. The ‘narrow precipitous gorge around which flows the Jo River in a southerly direction’ may well correspond to the frightening gorges in Chilas. Kaltenmark (1993: 238) thinks that “the mythical mountain of the west” called Kunlun “has nothing to do with the mountain known by geographers” and “is a purely legendary mountain”. particularly not that of the Kailash. the Yellow River (Rmachu). E. This is not exactly true. The latter feature corresponds to the nine tiers of the mountain in Ḥolmoluŋriŋs on which Gšenrab Mibo descends. ibid. while the five rivers of the mythical Kunlun (or at least some of them) lead us back to the real Kunlun and to Eastern Tibet and Gansu: the Red River (either the Chudmar.html. the mountain is described as having four gates opening in the four directions and a walled city of nine tiers (ibid. 45 Here.e. and Jaxartes flowing roughly towards the cardinal directions. . In fact. a southern tributary of the Yangzi Jiang. While the ‘original’ Mt Meru cannot be traced. n. The former feature corresponds to the four rivers of Mt Meru (or Sumeru). additionally also the Xiang River.blogspot. Hill 2009: 302f. p. Chavannes 1903: 153. 239). p.com/2007/02/kunlun-glossary. it does not seem 43 The Kunlun is elsewhere conceptualised as an axis mundi. the Black River (Etsingol.21. 154 n. or the Yunnan and Vietnamese Red River). stating that “in the western countries.). Žaŋžuŋ mar or smar ‘golden’ or refers to the Rma tribe (see Zeisler forthcoming a. Oxus. http://sambali. cf. one of the Tibetan sources of the Yangzi Jiang (Yangtze). 1). Even the legendary aspects can be localised. but for lack of better geographical knowledge the respective regions were located close to China. and if I were forced to decide which one was the real one. Bengal. a second Strīrājya. and the Yavanas (Bactrians or Indo-Greeks) in Laos and Vietnam (cf. and it is thus rather unlikely that the eastern Dongnüguo was meant. where they entered into a political alliance with the Hephthalites or Hūṇa of Gandhāra. n. cannot be correlated with either the eastern or the western country. 77). The main corroboration for the existence of a Women’s Dominion in the west comes from recorded history. 695).North of Ancient India and South of Khotan 413 possible to play off one of the two queendoms against the other and declare one of them as unreal or mere fiction. wine cultivation was observed in Bolor and Lesser Yangtong. rather indirectly. 82. But if there had been only a single Nüguo. Most probably. among other precious things. But there is no reason to assume that an envoy could not have reached the Chinese court via Khotan or even via Ladakh and the Ḥaža. in particular. and secondly. This is certainly not just a coincidence. as well. both are associated with the elite’s burial custom of removing the skin and keeping the bones. the wine vases were booty. pp. A decision for Eastern Tibet is thus rather arbitrary. I would opt for the western one. and Camp could be relocated in Yunnan. the Tuyuhun (Ḥaža) raided Khotan and some regions down the Indus. Pelliot. As mentioned above. The description of both queendoms is more or less the same. At an unknown time and for unknown reasons. golden wine vases of the Nüguo (Molè 1970: 10). the Nüguo must have been located somewhere on the route of this expedition.g. ibid. a custom which seems to have parallels in Swat . mixed with gold. The second historical fact. In 445 CE.. Given all the contradictions and the lack of material witnesses. 90. Assam. further to the north. In the same year. e. the appearance of an envoy of the Women’s Dominion at the Chinese court. but located at the borders of Western Tibet. and even Yunnan. not items of fair trade. they offered to the Chinese court. Parthia (Nangxi). If. ibid. Gandhāra. one could similarly come to the conclusion that there was only one Nüguo. Stein 1959: 308. the Nüguo were producing and consuming wine.. R. then one should not be all too surprised to find. That concepts relating to Mt Meru became connected with the eastern Kunlun might be a result of this general geographic transfer. The adversaries of a Western Tibetan or Bolorian Nüguo seem to conclude that such an envoy could have only come from the eastern region. in painted vases (Eberhard. From this note we learn two things: first of all. Both features link these Nüguo with the Dards or culturally like populations of the Pamirs and the Hindukush. To be not misunderstood: unlike my predecessors I do not want to categorically rule out the existence of a second Nüguo.A. p. the geographical template of the lands to the north-west of India was transferred to the northeast. the (Upper) Sutlej region under the names of (Mahā)-Cīna and Suvarṇabhūmi in Assam. one of which is from a quite recent date. indeed. . the Kidarites. 137. The hair style is copied by some of the Kuṣāṇa kings.. p. and Hephthalites. 137. see next section) with the Nüguo. ibid. also Jettmar (1961: 85f. matted.) for two types of tower-like structures in the Dardic area. 128. 79: KamnaskiresOrodes III. 47 But cf. which appears to be rather incompatible with the eastern region. 83: Ardashir V (I). fig. Alram (1996b): p. p. fig. The information of Xuanzang would have been “misplaced and smuggled into the New History of the T’ang”. 75: Dareios (?). n. and what might have been smuggled. 139. 82).. the more eastern Dongnüguo is said to use an Indic script (ibid.46 The queendoms are further associated with nine-storey stone houses (Eberhard. the tresses are also formed into a one or two hair balls. 96. fig. The latter statement points to a predominantly Iranian or Iranianised population. 71–74. fig. But Xuanzang is silent about the script. p. 86: Shapur I. in Ladakh (Francke 1914: 64f. and more precisely at the Kailash in the Harṣacarita (chapter v). 82. 695). 89: Narseh. which cannot be but the Kharoṣṭhī or Brāhmī. 85: Ardashir I. see also below). a feature that seems to be typical for the Miñag of Eastern Tibet.49 A braided coiffure is mentioned also for the inhabitants of Greater Yangtong (Pelliot 1963: 708). p. pp. p. cf. or braided tresses. Laufer’s somewhat harsh reaction is motivated by Francke’s (1912: 269) quite simplistic identification of the Nüguo with Guge.414 Bettina Zeisler and. ibid. 125: Vahram Kushanshah. but could correspond to the mentioning of Jaṭāsuras ‘Asura with matted or twisted hair’ in the north-eastern division of the Bṛhatsaṃhitā (Fleet 1973: 12). 73: Mithradates II. while it is said about the Nüguo that 46 See Haarh (1969: 347–348) for the various parallel quotations. 100. fig. could well refer to a particular Iranian hair style as found on many coins.48 and it is likewise said to celebrate New Year around the winter solstice (Pelliot ibid. p. The Hūṇa. 48 Laufer (1918: 41. 700. 90).47 Surprisingly. Quite often. The Suishu supplies the additional information that the people (of the more eastern Dongnüguo) venerate the asura and tree-gods (Pelliot. fig. 101. 132: Hephthalites. p. fig. fig. fig. the Hephthalites. as well as those presented by Nikitin (1996): p. 93. if not identical with. from the Arsakides to the Sassanians. Tucci 1973: 52f. 49 Cf. particularly in the later epoch.. which seem to be related to. 76: Artabanos II. but might still follow an ancient pattern. But the fact that up to ten followers were sacrificed points to Scythian or Central Asian traditions. fig 87: Ohrmazd I. fig. the coins presented by Alram (1996a): p. twisted. fig. 26) strictly opposes the possibility that an Indic script could have been found on (Western) Tibetan ground. were located in the northern division of the Bṛhatsaṃhitā (Fleet 1973: 11).). The hair style in question. 127: Kidarites. and with the hair ball: p. 95. is the identification of Suvarṇagotra (I. namely into Xuanzang’s report. fig. 97. 109: Gondophares. p.. p. and Yangtong. Francke’s (1912: 269) idea of a Women’s Dominion in Guge. p. If there was any relation at all between Nüguo. the women plaiting it and coiling it up (ibid. extending through the Changthang. the location of the Jaṭāsuras in the north-eastern section cannot be taken for granted. Suvarṇagotra. Map 10 The Women’s Dominions (East and West) .North of Ancient India and South of Khotan 415 either both men and women or only the men let their hair hang down. perhaps also with Lesser Yangtong. 1971a: 550) has possibly no other base than the non-discrimination between the three areas that have been associated. There should be no question that there was a Dongnüguo more to the west. Tibeto-Burman in the east) have been simply confounded because of their outstanding political features (or because of some mythological transfer) or whether the two originally formed a political or even ethnic unit. But as already mentioned. But the association of the Nüguo with Suvarṇagotra and even more so the identification of the latter with Greater Yangtong is more than questionable (see next section). 695). and were disrupted only at a later time. and it generally seems that all relevant references in the Bṛhatsaṃhitā end up on the ‘wrong’ side of the Indus in either Pakistan or Afghanistan. and thus with Lesser Bolor. with the designation Suvarṇagotra. It is thus an open question whether two different ethnic groups (IndoIranian or Burushaski in the west. rightly or wrongly. followed also by Tucci (1956: 105. it should have been with Suvarṇagotra III. ). the Hematāla (referring to the Hephthalites in western Badakhshan. refers to at least three distinct regions. Stein (1981: 14–15. on his map “L’habitat et les habitants”) identifies this land with present-day Ladakh or its central area around Leh. at all. so also in the case of the gold digging ants (1907: 12f. instead. and Chinese versions. but takes this as a gross misconception.5 The land of the ‘Gold Clan’ Like the designation Women’s Dominion. which referred to two distinct regions. CE in the form of Σουανναγούρα (Suannagura). had projected all references to neighbouring and not-so-neighbouring regions onto Ladakh. however. Tibetan. and the Tibetan plateau where gold could have been dug out of the ground or washed out of the rivers. and much better candidates than just Kargil. the designation Gold Clan. the region might be roughly identified with the upper Sutlej area or the 7th to 8th c. 223). the Kāśmīras and Darada. whereas according to Thomas (1935: 153) it would be identical with HunzaNagar. Beckwith’s rash identification is not much better: apart from the word gold. 164).416 Bettina Zeisler 1. does not talk about Suvarṇagotra. e. Fleet (1973: 12). What he does. basing himself on Herrmann 1938) shifts the country to “the Kargil area. While R. in a tone of utter conviction. According to Lindegger’s map I. cf.g. . one should better locate the Gold Clan in the Altai. the Himalaya. but the references tend to get mixed up.1 Suvarṇagotra I (the Indian perspective) The name Suvarṇagotra is already attested by Ptolemy in the 2nd c. Suvarṇagotra of the Chinese pilgrims (see below). the Pamirs. cf. and that all non-Indian countries and peoples of the three northern sections are to be sought in the north-western division. Kulūta. together with Brahmapura.51 The name of the country may 50 Herrmann (1938: 12). in its various Indian. 1. there is not much reason to associate the Gold Clan with the legendary gold-digging ants. alternatively also in Nubra. located at 145°30’/20°30’ (Lindegger 1993: 73.A. based on Ptolemy’s coordinates (p. There are many places in the Hindukush. among others. There is no reason for doing so. Khotanese.50 The Bṛhatsaṃhitā mentions a ‘Goldland’ (Suvarṇabhū) in the north-eastern [!] division. 208. between Skardo and Leh”.) has well noted that Herodotus refers to a place in Afghanistan. Beckwith (1977: 174. n. Greek. which are found in the north-western and north-eastern division. Denwood (2008: 9) locates it in the Rudok area. except that August Herrmann Francke. Herrmann (1938: 22f. is to identify Kargil with the place where the legendary ant’s gold were produced.5. or at least in the northern section as the Kulūta. veritable ‘Gold Mountains’. and. It will be useful to treat these regions separately. By the same kind of reasoning. Francke is not the kind of authority that one could rely upon. Grenet 2002: 214 with further references) of the northern division. Palola. 51 It is quite apparent that the geographical coordinates must have been confounded. Unfortunately. which would likewise lead us to the realms of Spiti or Guge.). turning towards the east (Fuchs 1938: 439). according to Hyecho. the country lies somewhat north of Brahmapura53 in the middle of the mountains (ed. is reached by a route from Jālaṃdhara across the Himalaya. all tracks leading through Lahul to Spiti or Guge. which is likewise in Uttarakand. 680 CE. but in the end. 195 km) south of Karghalik (Thomas 1935: 152). but 代 dai is apparently a mere mistake for the quite similar 伐 fa. n. Pelliot 1963: 703 has sufalanaqujuluo 蘇伐剌那具咀羅 . and Jālaṃdhara would be situated between the two. The distance between the two locations in question would be around 360 km. A crow flying almost straight southward from Karghalik could eventually reach Leh.1). Denwood (2008: 8) prefers Pelliot’s (1963: 699) reconstruction *Bâlahimapura or *Vârahimapura. 52 The name is transcribed as subanajudaluo (蘇跋那具怛羅) by Hyecho (Fuchs 1938: 439) and as sufalanaqudaluo by Xuanzang (Fuchs. Against this. 53 I was able to locate a Brahmapura in present-day Uttarakand. there would not be much difference. according to Xuanzang (or an interpolated source).North of Ancient India and South of Khotan 417 either refer to the idealised (and fictive) area around the Kailash-Sumeru (see § 2. Karghalik lies on the western rim of the Tarim basin. in the east to Tibet. 1. Laxman Thakur (p. and in the west to Sanbohe alias Moluosuo (see below. however. According to him. But the country is further specifi ed by Xuanzang as bordering in the north to Khotan. it would seem unlikely that the more eastern region (Suvarṇagotra in relation to Moluosuo) would be reached via the more western location (Brahmaur in relation to Jālaṃdhara). for the purpose of this paper. opposes that Brahmapura must be identical with Brahmaur in Himachalpradesh. 2. .52 This country. emended as 蘇伐剌那具呾羅 .2 Suvarṇagotra II (the Chinese perspective) A quite different location is 3000 li (ca. from as late as ca.5. 4 gives the transcription as sudailanaqudaluo 蘇代剌挐瞿怛羅. Beal 1881–84: 227). which he suggests to identify with modern Barkot north of Har(i)dwar. a little more to the east. a direction that would point to Spiti or Guge. It would thus be later than Xuanzang’s visit. after about 450 km (almost 4° of latitude) or very roughly 1500 li. 970 km) or merely 600 li (ca.2 below) or may (additionally) refer to the same entity that was known under the somewhat different name Suvarṇagotra. there is a foundation inscription clearly indicating the name Brahmapura. where 咀 ju is likewise a mere mistake for 呾 da). From this perspective. After about the same distance. Similarly. dating.c. our crow would reach the places in Northern India where both pilgrims obtained their information. ibid. Thus. and contracted from north to south” (which. Forsyth (1875. and from Leh to Yarkand between 584 and 839 miles (939.” . The indication of 600 li (193. also former Chief Engineer of the Jammu & Kashmir State. Xuanzang further mentions that the country “is extended from east to west. 667. along the Karakash river as 700 km and 891 km. due to their north-west to south-east direction).com/ moreroutes.ac.8 km) is more than questionable (leading into the middle of desert mountains). whether we locate the country along the Indus River (in which case.418 Bettina Zeisler The routes between Khotan and Ladakh are far from being easy to negotiate.8 to 1025 km). The distances are said to be taken “from an 1897 book called ‘Routes in Jammu and Kashmir’ written by Maj. Genl Le Marquis de Bourbel. if we were permitted to transfer the indication of 1000 li for the west-east extension of Greater Yangtong to Suvar ṇagotra. The direct distance (as the crow flies) between Khotan and Rudok appears to be the same as that between Khotan and Leh.2 km). although the actual route might then be somewhat shorter. http://bameduniya. His account had been summarised in the Shijia fangzhi with the additional note that Suvarṇagotra was “not within the boundaries of India and [was] also called the Kingdom of 大羊同 ‘Great Yang-t’ung’” (Pelliot 1963: 699). depending on the route chosen.e.jp/toyobunko/VIII–1-B–17. I: 249) gives the distance from Leh to Khotan as between 415 and 637 miles (i. but 3000 li corresponds fairly well to the longest route between Leh and Khotan or the shortest route between Leh and Yarkand according to Forsyth or rather to the longest route between Leh and Yarkand according to Ramsay. To be exact.nii. winter route via the Shayok river 520 miles (832 km). a journey straight south of Khotan would lead us to Rudok rather than to Leh. and the easiest but longest route 577 miles (923.2 km). would be as true as the opposite. The straightest route would possibly lead over the Saser Pass into the valley of the Nubra River and then over the Khardong Pass above Leh. 54 A reproduction can be found in the Digital Archive of Toyo Bunko Rare Books under http://dsr. other routes lead further east via the Changla and Sakti or even further east via the Pangong range. He believes that the country is identical with that of the ‘Eastern Women’s Dominion’. the distance of 325 km or more would almost cover the entire distance from the source to Leh) or whether we locate it more to the north in the Changthang. the distance would well cover both Leh and Rudok.54 Ramsay (1890: 185–188) gives the following distances between Leh and Yarkand: summer route via Saser pass 482 miles (771. It gives the distance from Leh to Ilchi and Kiria over the Pangong range. as accessed II/2009. if referring to Ladakh or the Changthang.8 to 1350 km).tripod.html. In the Tarim basin. Stang 1990: 172). n. there seem to be also texts in Chinese and Tibetan mentioning a ‘Gold Land’ or ‘Gold Family’ in Shazhou (R. The Khotanese Saka original Suvarṇagūttar. two closely related (if not identical) peoples that combined the anthropological feature of ‘golden’ hair with a tremendous mastery of working with gold: the Scythians and the Sakas. so far published. but the Khotanese Saka sources are rather reticent (cf. Lüders (as cited by Francke 1929: 148) has come across two kings of Kucha with the element suvarṇa as part of their name: Suvarṇapuṣpa and Suvarṇadeva. ysarrnai. Apart from the Khotanese texts. Something like this had happened with the designation Khrom for Rome when it was applied to mere ‘market places’ on the Rome route (cf. but one may also find Jinxing ‘Gold Surname’ or Jinben ‘Gold Origin’ (Pelliot 1963: 696.W. While Hazod (2009: 169) states “Gserrigs [it is registered as part of Tibet c. but also attested among the Xiongnu and Turks). clan. who takes Suvarṇagotra as the name of the ruling family of Suvarṇabhū. Quite apparently this form goes back to a mere conjecture.56 The Darada had been commonly associated 55 The designation Gserrigs is found so far only in one of the Khotanese ‘prophecies’. n. I am not able to find any only approximately similar term in the Old Tibetan indices. but apparently was not included in the Zhang-zhung stong-sde structure as it was probably never part of Zhang-zhung]”. ‘Golden’ could well have been an anthropological feature (the blond or reddish hair. Their fame might have been transferred to other groups when the Sakas moved to India.5. 699). Bailey 1985: 82–83). Or certain regions on a common trade route to the Scythians or Sakas might have been wrongly associated with them. the Vimalaprabhāparipṛcchā (see below). but to a people. 56 There are. although without indication of sources. nor does he specify his dating.W.A. 2.North of Ancient India and South of Khotan 419 1.W. not necessarily only among the IndoEuropean people.3 Suvarṇagotra III (the Khotanese perspective) Except for Tucci (1956: 98). nobody has as yet commented upon the fact that the Indian designation Suvarṇagotra and its Tibetan counterpart Gserrigs or Gserrabs55 do not refer so much to a landscape or a state. he does not give any reference for this ‘registration’. . The Chinese word used by Xuanzang is Jinshi ‘Gold Clan’. or ‘race’. family. the designation might have referred simply to certain people dealing with gold. 1). Thomas (1935: 152. which was accordingly also called the ‘Golden District’ (ysarrnai bāḍä) or with similar appellations (H. 726. H. of course. cf.or ysarnai rrvī gūttairi is used for a particular ‘golden royal family’. and 1949: 37). The people or the royal family were originally located in the Shazhou region (Dunhuang). Bailey 1940: 602f. Bailey 1964: 10). Stein 1951: 243f. unfortunately without further references). possibly in the sense ‘imperial’ the Khotanese also referred to their own kingdom (H. If this is not the reason for the name. With the same word. Gser-rabs is mentioned by Hoffmann (2003 [1990]: 48). which means that it must have been compiled before this date. the indication given by Ptolemy. we should perhaps look for the Gserrigs in the ‘Upper Indus Valley’. . as well as the indications by the two pilgrims. the Tibetan designation Gserrigs(gyi yul) ‘(Country of the) Gold Race’ seems to be found only in the Vimalaprabhāparipṛcchā (Drimamedpaḥiḥodkyis žus pa.A. as Jettmar (2002a [1993]: 149) suggests. not all of them referring to exactly the same situation. is hopelessly in disorder and partly contradictory. which may or may not have been originally belonging to the Darada or re lated tribes (see also Zeisler forthcoming a. The designation is used for an un iden tifiable region. perhaps. This is the area where we find the Darpa or Darma. It is thus impossible that the narrative refers to the period after the decline of the Tibetan empire and before Khotan became a Muslim state. However. some what periph eral to the main events. if historical at all.e. who is to be the king of Li (Khotan). shifts the Gold Country to Hunza and Nagar. Apart. lead us to the upper Sutlej valley. from the documents. Stein had alluded to. it might follow that the whole area from the Sutlej valley over Ladakh. Thomas 1935: 179–258).57 The king of Skarrdo. an amalgamation of various fragments of similar prophecies. Chapter 2 § 1. If they had.1). Chapter 2 § 1. The equation with the Strīrājya by Xuanzang would likewise point to this region. up to Khotan had been inhabited by Darada or related tribes. The his torical information given. procures gold from the 57 Some of the accounts would rather point to the conflicts between Lesser and Greater Bolor and the imminent Chinese Hindukush expedition in 747. The text is.1). which figure so prominently in all other prophecies. R. their mutual massacre. It is thus little surprising that Thomas (1935: 153). written and compiled not by Tibetan but by Kho tanese authors. quite certainly based on Indian testimonies. Baltistan. i. at that late period there would no longer have been any Ḥaža and Sumpa to threaten Khotan. the main historical situation hinted to in the text seems to be located around the first Tibetan occupation of Khotan in 665/670. Moreover.420 Bettina Zeisler with trade or tribute of large amounts of gold. their flight to Gandhāra. Hunza. their stay in Tibet. which is definitely connected with legends of a rich gold production (see also Zeisler forthcoming a. Nevertheless. most probably based on Indian sources. their expulsion from Tibet. in Gilgit or Hunza. basing himself on the fact that already the Greek authors associated the gold production solely with the Darada. the text is completely silent about the dramatic events around 740: the expulsion of the Buddhist community from Khotan. On the other hand. quite apparently. e. Stein 1961: 18. Or the official history.). the White Ldoŋ was the dominant clan of the Miñag and of Gliŋ in Khams (cf. A further possibility could be that the principality Skarrdo had been a part of the Khotanese territory or became so afterwards. 204. This Skarrdo does not necessarily have to be identical with the presentday Skardo/Iskardo in Baltistan. p. The colour term identifies a moiety or smaller segment. the king of Skarrdo proposing an alliance with the king of the Gold Race in order to unify all provinces of Li (ibid. the royal lineages of all three regions are presented as being closely related. most probably this was nothing than a tribal designation: Red Ldoŋ (the name appears also in the form Gdoŋ.59 Albinia (2008: 181) mentions a village Sikundro in Chitral near Bajaur which is understood to mean ‘Alexander Stopped’ in Pashto. R. like the text. From the Khotanese perspective (or from that of the Skarrdo usurper?).4. Thomas 1935: 77–136). 60 The prophecy mentions several times that the Skarrdo king should appropriate some of the gold for his own expenditure. 60 Both countries are understood as being essential parts of Li. This latter statement cannot easily be reconciled with the tradition that the royal lineage was unbroken (see also Xuanzang. see also Zeisler forthcoming a. R. Stein 1959 passim).North of Ancient India and South of Khotan 421 Gold Race in order to buy off Li from the Red Faces (Tibetans)58 and hence becomes king of Li.5). somehow accepted the usurper as legitimate member of the royal lineage. fol. Beal 1881–84: 490) and with the list of kings given in the Annals of Khotan (Liyulgyi lorgyus. Given the possible derivation of the name from an original Iskandria/Sikandria (that is. 58 Gdoŋdmar. all persons being styled as reincarnations of the royal family of Ajataśatru.. 59 Nevertheless. In any case. all male members bearing the name element Vijaya. .g. Chapter 2 § 2. the Gold Race Country seems to have been a vassal of Skarrdo or oth erwise obliged to share its riches with Skarrdo. Sdoŋ. 364a).A. pointing to the fact that parts of Baltistan had been associated in one way or another with Khotan. Later. and had nothing to do with the application of red colour on the face. Ḥdoŋ. This was performed by several Central Asian groups. This could at least have been an alternative candidate for the designation. the name might well have been transferred to the present location at a much later time. and hence not a distinctive feature. Possibly the prophesied usurpation did not last long enough to become official history. Alexandria. the Khapulu area is still referred to in Skardo folklore as Liyul (CDTDn). by the Ḥaža. 31ff.A. their changing loyalties. this refers to the practise to decorate the face with red circles. and finally even subdued Kashmir. whether this part has any historical value at all. 396a/b). perhaps. On another occasion it is merely stated that the Sumpa are threatening the Gold (Race) Country.). 62 Most probably. 410). the Ḥaža (/Aša/) are always mentioned in one breath with the Burusho and are thus conceived of as their immediate neighbours. 237. 385b. They seem to have had a greater impact in the region. the robbers and thieves (an allusion to some unruly. For an unknown reason. but can be averted (ibid. it is not clear whether these passages refer to a secondary lineage or to events one generation earlier or later). and even fights amongst them are mentioned several times. the Red Faces are alarmed. simply in order to keep the “Wild Men”. . These two designations are clearly borrowed from a common fairy tale. despite the official claim of Buddhist and family solidarity dominating the text. a custom common among several Central Asian tribes. killed its king and thousands of Khotanese people. in the same breath. In this connection they sent an ambassador to Emperor Wendi of the Liu Song with golden wine vases form the Women’s Dominion (Tong Tao 2008: 25f. being attacked by the Northern Wei. in Lower Ladakh. While it is said once that the Gold Race Country is in the firm grip of the Red-Faces who do not let it go. For Denwood (2008: 8) it follows from all this that an identification of this Gold Race Country with Žaŋžuŋ can definitely be ruled out: 61 According to the Weishu and the Beishi. the latter bearing the same name as the main hero. 384a/b. 63 Is the Gold Race Country perhaps occupied by the Tibetans? And could it thus be identified with Ladakh? But the undercover nature could also have something to do with the rivalries among the rulers of Bolor and.422 Bettina Zeisler Li had first been raided by the Sumpa and Ḥaža61 and is now occupied by the Red-Faces (=Tibetans). and a great battle seems to be imminent. The Chinese have made plans to invade the Gold (Race) Country.62 Sumpa and Red-Faces have destroyed many Buddhist buildings. 215. anarchic tribes) out of the game. 226–228. In the Padma thaŋyig Ḥaša (!) and Bruša are mentioned together in the neighbourhood of Khotan (cf. the Tuyuhun in 445. fol. it is also said that the Red-Faces are at a distance and do not approach to do harm (fol. The ‘Wild Men’. not only the Tibetans. although mostly in connection with the side-narration concerning the Do-Good and the Do-Evil (fol.63 At some time. pp. Toussaint 1933 [1994]: 105. overran Khotan. and similarly. turned westward. 384b ff. p. 364a—to the Gold Race Country or to Skarrdo?). except demonstrating indirectly that Skarrdo and Li must have had a long history of intense enmity. There is also the possibility that the affair had to be kept secret. die in a battle (ibid.). and it is questionable. the request for the gold and the alliance proposal must needs be kept secret (408a). the king of Skarrdo and his son. fol. Khotan or other neighbours. The legend speaks of a libertine queen who used to eliminate her lovers whenever 64 See also Jettmar (1961: 89) for ancient sexual rituals or ‘black masses’ in the context of the worship of female mountain deities.2 below). I would nevertheless think that the ambivalent description of the Gold Race Country as being in the firm grip of the Tibetans and the Tibetans only threatening it from far would allow for an identification with (parts of) Yangtong. but as I have shown (§ 1. True. it is clear that both Khotan and Suvarnagotra. the rākṣasī or devī Huša.2 above). A prominent case is mentioned in Kalhaṇa’s Rājataraṅgiṇī. peris. 4). 380ff. Zhangzhung or elements of it staged a final revolt in 678–9. one may perhaps also think of ivaitic cults and human sacrifices to the Devī. ibid. reflecting perhaps its ambivalent status until its final integration into the Tibetan Empire. Chapter 2 § 1. . Mihirakula’s son and successor. the story is to be connected with the Strīrājya of Swat/ Uḍḍiyāna (Thomas. despite its Singhalese clothing.1). Beal 1881–84: 106).North of Ancient India and South of Khotan 423 In 649 Zhangzhung had been “destroyed by the Tibetans. some time between 660 and 670. were independent of the Tibetans. from the perspective of Old Tibetan documents.). while Zhangzhung was not. n. the Gold Race Country is connected with the Gold Mountain. devouring them. rescued batch of merchants. tribal priestess managed to sacrifice king Baka. He also points to a late reflection of this story in Shigar (2002a [1993]: 151f. Stein 1900: 49).). At the time of the composition of the Inquiry of Vimalaprabhâ. together with almost all of his male descendants to the circle of goddesses (M.A.64 The name Huša may be related to the river name Wakhsh (Oxus). Ladakh was always a part of Žaŋžuŋ. While I would likewise expect the Gold Race Country of this narrative to be located more to the west. he also believes that Žaŋžuŋ ends southeast of Ladakh (see also § 2. rendered as Husha by Xuanzang with reference to the region on its upper course (cf. There is some likelihood that. but by then the Tibetans were firmly in control of Khotan. which should have been located in Hunza (see Zeisler forthcoming a. who with her following keeps a batch of 500 merchants as lovers. Denwood does not seem to take into account the distinction into Lesser and Greater Yangtong (it was the latter that is reported to be annihilated in 649). 224. as well as Skardo. among the Dards. that is. In a mythological side-narration (fol. Of course. The Gold Race originates from the offspring of the rākṣasī and a last. who divided the people and scattered them in adjacent lands”. 331–335. whenever a new batch arrives. This mountain is characterized by a female mountain spirit. Jettmar (2002c [1995]: 199) takes this Huša as “the ancestress of a dynasty in Gilgit”.e. i. were a sorceress. and by a legal marriage she would become a laughing stock. When a Persian prince insisted on a legal Islamic marriage. 254f. and it stood in close connection with Li. she objected that she was a deity.424 Bettina Zeisler a child was born. 415a) Map 11 Suvarṇagotra (SG) 65 At least as a country where financial exploitation can be veiled with Buddhist arguments. and Skarrdo. which was likewise killed. The confusion (or doubling) of the names of the participants. except if it was a girl. fol. . the sudden appearance of a second king of Skarrdo assisting the main hero in becoming king of Li (ibid pp. It seems thus that the Gold Race basically belonged to Hunza and its neighbourhood (as indicated via the reference to a Gold Mountain and the characterization as a Buddhist country65). the missing reference to a king from Skarrdo in the Khotanese Annals. on the other. on the one hand. Gruža. it seems to have kept close dynastic ties to both Bolor and Khotan (hence the close resemblance of the royal names). we would have the following separate entities from the west to the east: besides Bolor. According to his own arguments. and Baltistan. 3. I would also think that Rudok could not have been tributary to Skardo with an independent Ladakh in between. a Kingdom of Women in Eastern Tibet. Nüguo. 67 This is quite at variance with Denwood’s (2008: 9) conclusion “that Suvarṇagotra. After all. Greater Yangtong. 1. Furthermore.67 West of (parts of) Suvarṇagotra was 66 Note that the BRGY defines Bruža ~ Bruša as ‘an old name for a part of Uighur Xinjang’: Bruša | Šincaŋ Yugu rigs raŋskyoŋ ljoŋskhoŋskyi luŋpa-žiggi miŋ rñiŋ. 2. In any case. or Gruša). according to the narrative. 1.66 is counted not only as part of Khotan in the Khotanese Annals. Rudok = Suvarṇagotra. As the names of the Skarrdo kings do not correspond to those of the Palola dynasty. The difference in our interpretations of the same . more precisely a stretch of about 350 km. Karghalik. bordering in the north on Khotan. 1998 III: 65). apparently based on the Burushaski word bóṣo (Yasin) or buṣóoṣo (Hunza-Nagar) ‘calf’ (cf. and 3. right when he separates the more eastern Nüguo from Yangtong and Suvarṇagotra.). Suvarṇagotra. But he remains silent about the fact that the distance to Suvarṇagotra had also been calculated from western-most rim of Khotan. Žaŋžuŋ = Lesser/Greater Yangtong. one cannot simply dismiss Hyecho’s location of Yangtong as neighbouring Greater Bolor or his ‘omission’ of a separate Ladakh and Baltistan as mere error. whether identical with Baltistan or with (a region in) Chitral. Denwood is. Nor can the distances be ignored. West of Greater Yangtong was Lesser Yangtong (including at least Lower Ladakh). of course. but is associated with the legendary establishment of Khotan rulership. CE. Hyecho is the latest source. a dependency of Khotan. the Skarrdo principality. 428bf. and 4. 2. Thomas 1935: 100. seems to have been either independent or.6 Preliminary conclusion(s) Taking the evidences of the sources together. it appears that around the 7th to 8th c. According to him. and these areas are correctly described as being occupied by the Tibetans. the Eastern Women’s Kingdom and Zhangzhung/Yangtong were separate entities”. The corresponding narrative yields a folk-etymology for Ḥbrusoloña (cf. Bruša. Ḥbrušal. which was already occupied by the Tibetans. (Upper) Ladakh. Ladakh = Moluosuo/Sanbohe. Berger 1974: 135.North of Ancient India and South of Khotan 425 might perhaps point to Bolor as the main stage and a split or rivalry among its principalities even before the events related by Hyecho (Fuchs 1938: 444). the Gserrigs of the Vimalaprabhāparipṛcchā could not have referred to a place all to close to Žaŋžuŋ. It is noteworthy that the region Ḥbrusoloña. not just to the city of Khotan. fol. Denwood argues that the designation Khotan may have referred to a larger area extending eastwards. Ḥbružal. which is certainly to be connected with Bruža (var. was known in Chinese sources as 1. so that Rudok could have bordered on it. The error. The first row under each source specifies. dismissing all conflicting statements as errors or confusions. His silence on the political engagement of the Tibetans in the area is certainly not surprising. CE. BCE by the Yuezhi migration to Baktria. one can assume that there was a common ethnic substrate. 68 Given the fact that the name is known in India at least since the early 2nd c. Nevertheless. It is this latter area. The ethnic continuum between Suvar ṇa gotra III and Suvar ṇa gotra I could well have been disrupted in the course of various Central Asian large-scale migrations. Khotanese. seem to have referred to three different regions in different contexts. if it was one. The following table summarises the main sources for the localisation of Suvarṇagotra: Xuanzang. Chinese. which may have been Scythian (Sakean) in the beginning. I would certainly not want to claim that Yangtong. while I am ready to accept them as evidence for the non-discreteness of the entities in question. the row headed by “O” indicates the Tibetan occupation. could have been caused by the non-discrimination of Lesser and Greater Yangtong. Only Xuanzang gives the relations between the places in terms of orientation. since the more western Nüguo should probably not be associated with Greater Yangtong. but at best with Lesser Yangtong and more likely with neighbouring Bolor. where the Khotanese seem to have located their own Suvarṇagotra III. or rather Indian-based sources (Ptolemy and at least Hyecho).426 Bettina Zeisler Sanbohe/Moluosuo (on which below). and Nüguo were congruent. it might reflect the southward migration of one of the Saka tribes that was triggered off in the late 2nd c. attested from Indian. 68 but may have been overlaid with a Pamirian (Dardic and/or Burusho) population. the further association in the Chinese sources with (one of the) Nüguo or Greater Yangtong (that is Suvarṇagotra II) seems to be problematic. whether a place is mentioned at all (“M”). . and Tibetan equivalents. lest the identical name should be coincidental. the row headed by “V” specifies whether a place was visited in person. but they might have been overlapping considerably. facts or sources seems to be mainly due to his taking Sanbohe and Maryul as doubtlessly identifiable with present-day Ladakh and thus as a fixed corner stone. Vimalaprabhāparipṛcchā (VP). The name Suvarṇagotra and its Greek. Suvarṇagotra. and Hyecho in chronological order. While there is not much doubt about the location of Suvarṇagotra I. A further difference is his attempt to delimit discrete ethnic or political entities. Polulo/ (Gr. Ladakh. 85. Strīrājya 5. known in Persian and Hindustan as Kalan and Bara Thibet which means Great Tibet. steep. . ?=8 – W. cf. or Lhata-yul [Ladak]. on the west with Lesser Thibet or Baltistan. W.. of 3=4 3. while by the natives it is called Lhata-yul… Second Thibet. of Pamir valley. Tibet/Tufan E. Sanbohe 5=6. of ?Brahmapura 4. it borders in the North with the Kingdoms of Kaskar [Kashgar] and Yarkand. of 2. Lesser Bolor 9. E. Desideri’s account in his first book: We then found ourselves at the foot of a very high. of Tibet. in Hindustan Ciota [Chota] Thibet (both words bearing the same meaning) and called by the inhabitants “Baltistan” … A few days later we entered Second Thibet. Suvarṇagotra and its neighbourhood Name Xuanzang ~ 650 mentioning/location 1. of 3=4. is two month’s journey in length.e. N. W. 84. Soupoci 12. of 3=4 2.North of Ancient India and South of Khotan 427 Table 1. called in Persian Khoval [Kalan] Thibet.) Bolor 10. i. Baltistan. of (Gserrigs) 5=6. on whose summit is the boundary between Kascimir and Lesser Thibet. of Lahul 6. Moluosuo 7. Khotan N. and formidable mountain called Kantel.e. Suvarṇagotra 3=4. as we find it in early western sources. of Jālaṃdhara – – – – – – – – – + + – – + + + + – – – – + + – – + + The distinction between Lesser and Greater Yangtong appears to be pretty much in concordance with the distinction between ‘Little Tibet’. based on the corresponding Indian and Persian designations. editor’s additions in square brackets in the original). bank of Indus – – – V – + – – – + VP ~ 670 Hyecho ~ 730 M O M V O + / + – / + + + + – + ?± + – + NE. to the south with the kingdom of Collahor [Kulu?]. i. N. Bololo 8. S. Skarrdo (?) 11. Yangtong S. and ‘Great Tibet’. and on the east with the great Desert of Ngnari Giongar [Ngari Jungar] (Filippi 1937: 82f. It is possible that the Chinese name Yangtong reflects a designation underlying also the Tibetan designation Byaŋthaŋ. But the latter name can by no means have been the indigenous Tibetan name. forthcoming a. In all these cases. and now forms part of the Mogol Empire.428 Bettina Zeisler A slightly different description is given in the second book: Thibet consists of three distinct Kingdoms: The first is Lesser Thibet.. bordering on the South on Cascimir and on the East [North] with the Kingdom of Kaskar [Kashghar]. to be looked for in the Pamirs (see Zeisler. Rājataraṅgiṇī of rīvara with reference to contemporaneous events (III. on the Eastern the Great Desert of Ngnari Giongar [Hundes or Ngari Khorsum]… Third Thibet is called simply Thibet by Europeans and by Persians. I should thus argue that the distinction between Little and Great Tibet. not very far from Tiŋmozgaŋ where the Lower Ladakhi kingdom once had its base. ‘Closest’ refers to the ancient axis mundi. the notion of ‘Lesser’ or ‘Innermost’. or Baltistan. attested also in the 15th c. On the Western Frontier [North-North-Western] lies Lesser Thibet. it was once ruled by several Kinglets. but Hindustan-Mongolians call it Butant … The vast extend of this Third Thibet will be understood when I tell you that it takes more than six months of incessant travelling to go from the Western to the Eastern boundary. that is. reflected in the Chinese designations Lesser and Greater Yangtong and possibly also in the Bonpo classification of an Innermost.). chapter 2 § 2. also called Lhata-yul. that is from Cartoa to Sciling [Sining] (ibid. is based on an ancient tradition. editor’s additions in square brackets in the original). Mt Meru. Most probably the Tibetan name results from an attempt of etymologisation. since its etymology presupposes a southern centre in relation to which it is situated. takes two months to traverse from West to East. 129f. p.4). or rather Barons. Dhar 1994: 546f. Middle and Outer Žaŋžuŋ. this might well indicate that the boundaries of the Yangtong culture . If this is not just a linguistic accident (as is probably the case with the Yangthang in western Sikkim). iii 440–443. Second or Great Thibet.4.69 69 It might be worth mentioning the place Yangthang in Lower Ladakh. There is likewise a village Yangthang on the Spiti river in Kinnaur. although it is certainly possible that the border between the two areas had been subject to fluctuations or to a major change with the advent of the Rnamgyal dynasty. There are certain indications that the border between the two entities Greater and Lesser Yangtong as well as between the two Old Tibetan entities Žaŋžuŋ stod and smad could have been situated just below Leh (see also § 3 below). the one that is historically well testified.ng (=Žaŋžuŋ) in south-eastern Tibet in the Ḥudūd-al-‘Ālam (cf. Such situation could perhaps explain the strange location of the land R. but rather an amalgamation of various tribes that—due to similar economic and ecologic conditions—shared much of their material (and perhaps also linguistic) culture. to Swat/Uḍḍiyāna. Unfortunately. and narrow from north to south” (Beal 1881–84: 178). This ‘real’ Yangtong could thus have been identical with Grand-Žaŋžuŋ. and that a Greater Yangtong appears also in north-eastern Tibet indicates that neither the ‘Ladakh’entity nor Žaŋžuŋ Proper had a well-defined border. . The latter identification. he does not specify in which texts other than in Kauṭilya and in which context other than an enumeration of cloth exporting regions such ‘assimilation’ occurs.North of Ancient India and South of Khotan 429 As in the case of Little and Great Tibet. 70 Hunza and Nagar as well as the Indus around Chilas are the only narrow valleys that. and further to the south.ngr. see note 37 above. which is quite in accordance with Durand’s (1899: 199) measurement for ‘Dardistan’. an Indian designation. Map 2 above). which implies an ethnic and cultural continuum up to Chilas. and that there were no clearly distinguishable ethnic groups or political entities along the Changthang and its western and eastern extension. And this applies in general for the two Bolors. lie in a truly east-west direction. confidentially proposed by Francke (1912: 269) and Tucci (1956: 105). despite their possible different origins. Greater Bolor is described by Xuanzang as being “long from east to west. Tucci (1971a: 550) adds that Cīna ‘China’. not to speak of being identical. The same would hold true for the apparently more western aspect of Suvarṇagotra and the Strīrājya. that is. were absolutely fuzzy and that there was a more intricate connection between Ladakh and Žaŋžuŋ Proper. is no proof that these countries are really found in close vicinity.71 but most probably not to Guge. Hunza. the eastern parts of the Changthang. 71 This even more so. if the Congling range comprised also the Hindukush. and the Strīrājya were “often assimilated or quoted together”. The upper reaches of the Sutlej river likewise run in an almost exactly east-west direction. is based on the location of Suvarṇagotra I.70 and Chitral. possibly referring to Guge. the Bṛhatsaṃhitā exemplifies this clearly. it seems that there must have been a ‘third’ or ‘real’ Yangtong of much larger extension and possibly greater historical impact. i. The mentioning together of two countries in an Indian text. The fact that one of the Women’s Dominions is located in south-eastern Tibet. the two Bolors together as extending “roughly two hundred and fifty miles from east to west. in fact. but I find difficulties with a description of Guge as being “contracted from north to south”. and a hundred and fifty from north to south”.e. but ‘proto-Mongolian’ may mean nothing more that they lived for some time on Mongolian territory. Tong Tao 2008: 173f. They may or may not have been composed of quite different ethnic groups. 694. Michael Weiers’ script 4 Abrisse zur Geschichte innerasiatischer Völker: ‘Türken. 329. seem to be problematic. identified. could once have spread much further to the east. A further possible Iranian trait is the celebration of the 72 The Xianbi (also spelled Xianbei) are typically counted as a proto-Mongolian tribal confederation. The presence of ‘emancipated’ women among the prehistoric ruling elites of Žaŋžuŋ or perhaps more generally on the Tibetan plateau seems to be corroborated by the representation of a few Bonpo female deities as wearing armours and helmets like warriors. the two types of burial customs for Yangtong and Nüguo.PDF. 325. various other tribes. the latter certainly. perhaps wrongly. other cultural traits show that they must have had absorbed. on p. Given the identical coordinates with respect to Khotan.). or congruent with Greater Yangtong (corresponding to Upper Ladakh).zentralasienforschung. The use of an Indic script is perhaps the most prominent and most tangi ble feature. Furthermore. also refer to a Suvarṇagotra II within. The mixed ethnic composition of the northern belt of Tibet seems to have been dominated by the Supi(ya)/Sumpa and Tuyuhun. he rightly points to similarities with warrior-like women among the Scythians and Xiongnu).. . Cf. worn when they were observing battles (see Bellezza 2008: 241f. p.de/ Xianbi. and this could have caused the presumably wrong association with Greater Yangtong. the former only possibly of Xianbi origin..430 Bettina Zeisler Neither Francke nor Tucci realise that there might be a quite different Suvarṇagotra III further north-west. although showing Central Asian features. and by the Bonpo lore of particular helmets and armours for queens. 361. last accessed II/2010. most probably Dardic (or perhaps also Burusho) tribes. it must be this second Suvarṇagotra with which the Nüguo is. the queendom may nevertheless have stretched over (parts of) Lesser Yangtong or Lower Ladakh. some of which were part of the Indo-Iranian sphere.zentralasienforschung. fol lowed by the veneration of the Asuras. and that the Chinese sources. 325. the population associated with the queendom. other than Hyecho (who remains absolutely silent about women). or must have been influenced by.72 and while some of the characteristics of the Nüguo are typical of the Tuyuhun (and the later Tibetans). chapter 6) and the Tibetans. While these coordinates for the western Nüguo. Protomongolen. making her practically congruent with Greater Yangtong. rightly or wrongly. such as painting their faces (Pelliot ibid. n. which.de and http://www. und Prototibeter im Osten’ http://www. are both quite distinctive from those of the later Tuyuhun (for which see Tong Tao 2008. Whenever there is one grain of corn in it. like the celebration of New Year at the winter solstice. where [a diviner] makes incantations. borrowed from. ibid. If there is grain. Their custom is.73 The bird divination connected with this celebration seems to be likewise quite peculiar and has nothing to do with the bird divination of Old Tibetan sources. they go into the mountains. the Sogdians (Tong Tao 2008: 188). Suddenly a bird like a pheasant comes flying to the bosom of the diviner. 700). the year will be fruitful. no prehistoric inscriptions or writing systems have been reported from Eastern Tibet. the use of an Indic script is located only in the eastern part of the Women’s Dominion. When the sacrifice is over. when defining 73 As a rather minor trait.. The Jiu Tangshu notes: Our eleventh month is their first. additions in the original). he splits open the stomach and examines it. Strangely enough. 15–16). With great incantations he calls the birds. there will be calamities (ibid. Consequently. Women’s Dominion should be sought in the west.. A reverberation of this divination technique might perhaps be found in the Chaŋraps. from a (Lower) Ladakhi cycle of marriage songs: a cultural hero kills various birds and examines their stomach in search of the first grain. continued also among the Tibetans. as soon as the tenth month begins. A bird like a female pheasant comes and perches on the [diviner’s] hand. 695. in the so-called Upper Indus Valley. and of course further west. Laufer 1914). But we know of early inscriptions in Lower Ladakh. but if there is ‘hoarfrost and snow’ there will be calamities (Pelliot 1963: 700f. p. if sand and gravel. p. . the ‘genealogy of the beer’. finally barley is found in the stomach of a pigeon and disseminated for the first time (KHAL). it may perhaps also be of interest that the LDRR (35. the literate 6th to 7th c.) The description of the Suishu differs only slightly: At New Year they sacrifice men or monkeys […]. or shared with. to order a diviner to go into the mountains to make offerings of ch’u and to scatter in the air barley which has been steeped in wine. based solely on the birds’ utterances (cf. As far as I know. not to speak of an Indic script. one may also mention the extremely long sleeves (Pelliot. In connection with the seemingly far spread extension of all these tribes.North of Ancient India and South of Khotan 431 New Year at the winter solstice. the coming year will be fruitful. not in the east. who then splits its belly open and examines it. ). unfortunately quite problematic and contradictory coordinates are given. and the so far unidentifiable gserkha ḥgogpo (MS L: mgonpo). The reading of MS L as ‘protector’ is apparently based on the verb ḥgogs ~ ḥgegs. While the Tibetan dictionaries yield the meaning ‘ruined’ for gogpo. W. stop. bkog. Moluosuo 74 The alternative reading Moluopo (秣羅婆 ). Cf. this meaning being lost.e. however. among others. in the Hindukush. dmarpo ‘red’ (cf. But the name is also attested in the northeast: Gogchu. There are several place names bearing the element gog ~ gug. who wanted an equivalent for Tib. Uray 1990: 217).-G. in the north. dgog. n. inviting misinterpretations by western scholars. The apparent Tibetan etymology might be misleading. Tucci (1956: 94. however. opts for the merely emended form Moluopo. of course. when the Chinese general Byimpo appeared in Gogyul. is: in which language could we find a corresponding designation? 2 An old name of Ladakh? 2. first of all. khog ‘take away forcefully’. their inhabitants being reported to have fled. Molo-so) is the Chinese equivalent for Mard or Maryul. rendering Chinese Gouzhou. But the verb ḥgog. there remains the possibility that gog originally referred to the same entity as mkhar. . 4). interpreted as the Mālava. 10. the alleged old name of Ladakh. there are several place names ending in -gog or -mkhargog (Bellezza 2008: passim). The letters suo and po are apparently quite similar. and Uray (1990). mentions two gold mines. Pelliot (1963: 706f. The problem. Poboci. bkag.. cf. the name could either have been a tribal designation or a designation for special types of settlements. prevent’. i. a tribe of northern India!74 The country is mentioned only in Xuanzang’s report. each time in combination with the word ḥgog: gserkha ḥgog. 5 above. perhaps in the sense ‘exploit’ might be more appropriate. If not related to metals or mining. n. where. the actual meaning could perhaps have been derived from the dilapidated state of all places in question. in the east. Cunningham (1854: 4). near Dantig. In Western Tibet. Sahni and Francke 1908: 186) of Žaŋžuŋ smad. 1). of course. khog ‘hinder. however. the variant Kog appears in ll. is based on a mere conjecture by Cunningham. dgag. Gug(g)e (Goggadeśa in Jonarāja’s Rājataraṅgiṇī.432 Bettina Zeisler Maryul as inherited by Dpalgyimgon. Another Gog (or Kog) is mentioned together with Bruža in OTA II for the year 747 (l. near Demchok. apparently productively used in several compounds. Francke (1908). as could be observed also in the case of Suoboci vs. and that the compound mkhargog was thus a translational compound.1 Moluosuo alias Sanbohe There has been a certain consensus that Moluosuo (秣羅娑. a place so far not located. 71). *Sampāha (Pelliot 1963: 706). which he identifies with Mastuj in Chitral. takes San-bo-he for the Ladakhi name of the Indus. then it should have been reflected also in the Chinese transcription. Pelliot (1963: 706) arrives at a similar reconstruction. 75 In his highly speculative paper. and *Sampāka (Tucci 1977: 73). perhaps because he thinks that Sanbohe should be Ladakh or because Xuanzang refers to this place as Shangmi (Beal 1881–84: 479). Secondly. Upper Ladakh). There might be also a relation with the place name Saṃ(bhū/cū)t(ānnā/ mā) appearing in an inscription in Shigar (Hinüber 2004: 68f. and Shang-mi. It is likewise not very feasible that Sanbohe should have been the equivalent of a Kulu name and Moluosuo that of a Kashmirian name of one and the same ethnic or geographical entity as Pelliot (1963: 707) suggests. . if lying west of either Suvarṇagotra I (Upper Sutlej) or Suvarṇagotra III (Hunza-Gilgit). But if the retention of the initial should be the deciding fact. Moluosuo is said to lie west of Suvarṇagotra. Francke (1930: 67.-G. as we have seen (§ 1. quite obviously reflecting a pronunciation similar to that in modern Ladakhi. this idea does not account for the third syllable 訶 h. Gtsaŋspo. which already at his time was pronounced as /L. roughly located in the same direction (from the perspective of North India). this direction is taken as evidence for the identity of Moluosuo with Ladakh. Moluosuo is further identified with Sanbohe (三波訶 W. If the country should thus lie west of Suvarṇagotra II (Greater Yangtong. It is far more likely that Xuanzang or the interpolator mixed up the hearssay concerning two countries. 33A. and reachable only on difficult routes. no.5 above). there are three candidates. when arguing that this name did not refer to the Tibetan Rtsaŋspo. Francke further fully ignores the fact that the Brahmaputra as well as the western province through which it flows have been spelled Rtsaŋs(po) in Old Tibetan. known in Chinese sources also as Shê-mi or yāmī. although he ultimately rejects it. First of all. The name Sanbohe is reconstructed variously as *Sampaha (Beal 1881–84: 227 and Tucci 1956: 93). we would quite naturally have to search for it west of Upper Ladakh. Neglecting the distance. Tucci 1956: 94: Sāmbi). It could thus perhaps be identified with āmbī. in fact. for which. Beal 1884: 210f. which has only a phonetic value (based. and thus also with the Old Tibetan place name Mard. on the word 河 h for ‘river’). San-po-ho). a place in Chitral (Thomas 1935: 142. Francke’s main argument is that the initial consonant is still pronounced in Ladakh but not in Central Tibet.). p. following Cunningham (1854: 4).75 Moluosuo/Sanbohe cannot be Ladakh. tsaŋspo/ (~ / tsaŋspo/) in Leh and Lower Ladakh and as /Saŋpo/ or /Safo/ in Upper Ladakh. for which he suggests the Sanskrit equivalent Syāmāka. particularly not in Ladakh.North of Ancient India and South of Khotan 433 is said to lie about 2000 li north of Lahul (cf. Petech (1947: 89) differentiates between Shê-mi. according to http://www.net/english/leh. Moluosuo is the only possible rendering of an original B(u)ruso (Burušo.76 While the Chinese name Moluosuo could well render a Tibetan *Mars. Hinüber 2004: 75.htm gives the distance as 273 km. http:// hptdc. 155 km.78 Given the fact that this route is not particularly difficult and was constructed more or less along the ancient tracks.html gives the distance between Leh and Manali as 475 km.oktatabyebye. The vowel metathesis of the inscription is in agreement with the form ‘Hunza’ itself. Bruža). com/kullumanali/link7. the distance from Manali to Kyelong as 115 km. This name appears also as Kāñcudīya in the Hatun inscription and as Kakvā or Kajvā <Ka(ṃ)juā (gen. cf. as accessed in II/2009. namely merely 77 m.77 Moluosuo should be sought about 300 km further to the north (-west) of Leh.com/travel-directions/driving-directions-from-Manalito-Keylong. governor (viṣayapatti) of Saṃ(bhū/cū)t(ānnā/mā). 323 m. n. 360 km up to Kyelang (the district headquarters of Lahul-Spiti). n. the latter should not have been much longer. http://en.indovacations. 650 km. 77 A li measured 415. which is again much to short for the distance to Ladakh. 12). Pelliot 1961: 134f. when the historical works relevant for our topic were written.in/cir0401. Richardson 1971: 434. corresponding to ca.wikipedia. or.org/wiki/Leh%E2%80%93 Manali_Highway gives the distance from Leh to Manali as 479 km. which is not too far away from the attested Mard.. 78 http://www. the li was considerably shorter. If we take the indication 2000 li from Lahul to Molosuo to be correct. the parallel use of a transcriptional Mo for Ḥbal/Ḥbaḥ and Molu (沒盧) for Ḥbro (cf.org/wiki/Li_(length)# Changing_values. 76 The inscription mentions a king (nṛpatti) from a so far unidentified tribe or location Kuñjāna or Kuljāna. 120. 657. All sites have been last accessed in II/2010. In fact. since the distinction between (prenasalised) voiced oral and nasal stop consonants had been neutralised in Middle Chinese.indiaepostoffice. http://www. The spelling Kuñjāna is fairly close to the Burushaski name for Hunza: Kanjuút.) in connection with a ruler of what might be the Hunza area. it could also render Buruso. and the latter has thus added a “citation needed” tag in I/2010.nic.html even 129 km have to be subtracted for the distance between Manali and Kyelong. which would yield 830 km.) <Ka(ṃ)jua with omitted dental in a Saka itinerary (v.8 m in Han times. The distance from Leh to Lahul on the modern Manali highway is ca.c. contains a remark that during the dynasties of the Wei and the Western Qin.434 Bettina Zeisler 68f.). from which 115. pl.wikipedia. 73). http://en. 2000 li of 77m would yield ca. The same entry. perhaps even shorter (cutting the serpentines of the vehicular road at the Taglangla and the Baralachala). In Tang times. it measured ca. the difference being 360 km. . cf. Thomas Preiswerk and John E. but may nevertheless correspond to the almost equal distance between Kulu and Lahul (see below). and Petech 1994: 651.asp gives the distance as 358 km. Hill both think that this is unbelievable (p. The passage concerning these places. the 2000 li between Lahul and Moluosuo should then correspond to another 168. This conclusion seems to be corroborated by the indication of a distance of 1800 to 1900 li between Kulu and Lahul. One may perhaps even argue that Chitral and Hunza are not too much to the west. The biography of Xuanzang. If the 1800 to 1900 li correspond to the 160 km of the present distance between Kulu and Kyelang. His reason is that the place names are difficult to identify. while in all other cases such problems would not exist. rather than with Ladakh. One conclusion could be that all indications of distance are completely unreliable. But these apparent contradictions could certainly be the result of a later interpolation (see below). The question remains why the distances are so utterly wrong. and Moluosuo should be found. p. more likely. It is also somewhat problematic to conceive of a route from Jālaṃdhara/Brahmapura to Chitral or Hunza via Ladakh or Zanskar instead of a route along the southern slopes of the Himalaya and via Kashmir. This could be taken as an indication that Xuanzang did visit all the places questioned by Pelliot. nothing indicates that the ancient route should have been four times as long. however. Finally. must have been added later. the designations Moluosuo and Sanbohe might be nothing than hoaxes. one could have expected both countries to be mentioned again by both pilgrims in the context of the description of Bolor. This is not really a strong argument. and for an identification of Sanbohe with a place in Chitral.c. but remains silent about Lahul and Moluosuo (John E. and again. except the latter two. Pelliot (1963: 698f. to make the indication north of Lahul completely wrong (compared to other much less precise coordinates). which would correspond to 580 to 610 km if counted in Tang miles. Hill. following the road after the Rothang pass first westwards and then towards . in the middle of which the reference to Kulu. On the other hand. including that of Moluosuo with Ladakh.5 (or 178) km. Disregarding the problem of the distance. which would be simply arbitrary. In this case. whereas the biographer would have used the earlier report. Lahul. mentions Kulu. written by one of his disciples. which could lead us. but if he were right. or. it might be expedient to project the actual distance between Kulu and Lahul onto the almost equal distance given for Lahul to Moluosuo. even more than the indications of direction. by a different hand. one may wonder why the countries lying between Lahul and Chitral or Hunza were not mentioned.). The distance on the modern road is 160 km from Kulu to Kyelang (the district headquarter of Lahul). either by Xuanzang himself. Whatever the reason.) has questioned the whole passage concerning the route from Matipura up to Piluoshanna. one has to give up all kinds of identifications.North of Ancient India and South of Khotan 435 There are thus several points that could speak for an identification of Moluosuo with Hunza. It could then be identified with the Old Tibetan province of Mard. could then have been transferred to a non-existing neighbour of the former. 256) with reference to Mard. the second. one would have a choice of several routes towards the northeast. the whole distance of 3800 or 3900 li would yield 292 or 300 km from Kulu. given in brackets. only up to the Tsokar and thus to the western and southern confines of the ‘lake district’. or perhaps rather Smar-(sa). as the tracks were cutting the long serpentines on the passes. a li would be equal to 84.D. stopping short before Tashigang or Dem chok. a value that is astonishingly close to the above mentioned questionable measurement of 77 m per li. but given the triplication of its neighbour Suvarṇagotra. map 2) represent this as Mar-yul with the addition “(719 A.436 Bettina Zeisler the northeast and north. In the first case. Mars. The real distances on the ancient tracks were most probably somewhat shorter than the distances on the highway. is calculated on the base of 160 km corresponding to 1800 li. The ratio would match almost perfectly if based on 1900 li for a distance of 150 km (0. is 284 km from Kulu on the vehicular roads.80 the designation Maryul and its possible variant Maŋyul is not found as referring to present 79 Tabo. cf. If one would thus accept the ratio 1 li = 77 m. One could also follow the Spiti valley down towards the Sutlej. belonging to Bolor. due to a backseat driver’s intervention in Xuanzang’s original report. the location of Moluosuo would definitely be west of Suvarṇagotra I. as referring to a neighbour of the latter. 80 Since Uray’s (1990) paper. n. and Sanbohe. Hazod (2009: 166. which lies on a route towards the Changthang. The confusion could have been enhanced by a transfer of the mythic Maru(tse)/Maru(cīna) from Chitral to the neighbourhood of Kulu (see below). . This would bring us even closer to the supposed ratio. and the identification is typically uncritically cited.89 m.A. The first value is calculated on the base of 160 km corresponding to 1900 li. had been wrongly associated with the Guge area. One could thus have continued for another 45 (or 54) km from Tabo. Perhaps someone better acquainted with the area than me could find there an appropriate candidate for the mysterious Sanbohe.79 In these last cases. I can’t help feeling that at least the name Sanbohe. this assumption has become standard acceptance. in the second to 88.2 Mard or Maryul Although claimed to be the original name of Ladakh. If the name Moluosuo rendered an original Žaŋžuŋ-ian Mard.21 m. Dotson (2009: 111. 2. If one would turn eastwards after the Rothang pass and then again towards the north and northeast. which R. this could have led to a confusion with a similar rendering of Burus(h)o. The radius would be something like 45 km from Tabo.)”! at Leh.079). Stein has located just east of Spiti (see below). flowing through Maryul (clearly Ladakh and Baltistan). The biography of Orgyanpa Rinchen Seŋge Dpal (1230-1293) contains the travelogue of his pilgrimage to Orgyan (Uḍḍiyāna/Swat) which he undertook some time after 1260.North of Ancient India and South of Khotan 437 day Ladakh before the 11th c. as the alleged Chinese equivalent Moluosuo would suggest (Uray 1990: 220). Maryul is reached via Zaŋsdkar. namely together with Žaŋžuŋ. There he describes the river Sindhu (Indus) as arising from the Kailāsa. and only if the lineage extinguishes the Tibetans would elect a chief from among the *Ajāyul (Ḥaža.. 93). fol. 256) rightly states. It is interesting to note that in the earlier travelogue of Rgodtshaŋpa Mgonpo Rdorje (1189-1258).3). but the land of the Rma (or Rmu) clan or tribe (on this tribal name see Zeisler forthcoming a. The Muyūl tribe would provide the Tibetan kings (§ 11. also p. cf..rvān ~ T. possibly in the Kokonor area (Minorsky 1937: 258). 410.zdān) province (§11.4. p. before reaching Orgyan (which should here be the Buner valley. Mahābhoṭa or Greater Tibet.4. By the mid 13th c. the latter being described as ‘Tibetan’ and thus not part of the kingdom of Ladakh (ibid. as Minorsky (ibid. 213) alludes to a province Mard. fol. The actual local pronunciation might well have been *Mars. (according to the traditional dating) and the early 13th c. 456. particularly since Muyūl is presented as a small town within a province within (Greater) Tibet. a name that appears in the 9th c. dating from some time between the early 11th c. 69. The name appears first in an inscription in Alchi. Quite apparently. and in connection with a phalos. then through Bruša on the north of Kashmir (which he describes as bordering on Zaŋsdkar and Purig) and Staggzig (here apparently referring to Chilas). p. 16b. 16b. “nothing to do with Mar-yul ‘the low country’ which in the Tārīkh-i Rashīdī [of Mīrzā Ḥaidar].zvān (or T.3). The Mayūl or Muyūl of the 10th c. has been argued for. But this is quite unlikely. which Denwood (2008: 8) identifies with Nubra. is applied to Ladak”.3. ed. the Muyūl is also not the land of the mothers (Minorsky. Tucci 1971b: 396 with n. The dating of the Alchi temple group into the late 12th to the early 13th c. and Muyūl to a small town of the unknown N.4). 6a. p. 61). Ḥudūd-al-‘Ālam (§ 11. Mayūl refers to a tribe. p. Aḫbār aṣ-in wa l-Hind. Minorsky 1937: 93) has. The Old Tibetan Annals mention neither Ladakh nor Maryul or Maŋyul. the reference to Ladakh and Baltistan must have been firmly established among the elites. a conscription or registration of the male population: Žaŋžuŋdaŋ Mardkyi phalos bkug. p. fol. despite Denwood’s (2008: 14) suggestion to the contrary. by Luczanits (2005: 73–78). § 11. among others. 29) suggest that M(u) yūl could be a mistake for Mabūd ~ Mābud ~ Mābd. pp. . 257: ma for ama). 417).7.2 and 2. Beckwith (1989: 68.3. cf. Chapter 4 §§ 2. 9). n. or even later. Only one single entry in OTA 719 (l. but which is located close to China (§5. i.4).438 Bettina Zeisler No further indication is given. he only gives the name Žaŋžuŋ (with the indication that the original spelling would be Žaŋžuŋ in contrast to Francke’s 1926 edition) without any epithet and without any remarks about its correct or incorrect spelling. the Rma (or Rmu). and this would make sense if it lay at the border to India. 13.A. . the epithet could perhaps be related to s/dmad ‘low’. see Zeisler forthcoming a. (b) Upper and Lower Ladakh. (c) The gold fields of Mānasarovar and/or Upper Ladakh plus some additional areas (Mard related to (s)mar ‘golden’). from where he has got this reading. however. who refers to Petech. (e) The area where the Rma (or Rmu) tribe(s) (or clan(s)) settled. In a more involved way. In this case. whose name is either related to the word smra ‘speak’ or to the ‘monkey ancestor’ of the Qiang (for these relations. but since locations are quite often enumerated from west to east. more likely. (d) The whole gold-producing area. This might imply that the northwestern part of Ladakh had been independent or. As the epithet Smar ~ Smra for 81 According to Petech (1947: 85). Unfortunately Petech does not say. Upper Ladakh should have been part of Žaŋžuŋ. it was probably an entity not yet fully incorporated into Žaŋžuŋ. starting with Mānasarovar. Nor did I. 1989 edition. Kansuḥu mirigs dpeskrunkhang. The designation Mard as much as Maryul could reflect the Žaŋžuŋ epithet smar ~ smra81 ‘golden’. the whole area between Žaŋžuŋ Proper and Baltistan. along the Indus and Shayok over Nubra and Baltistan to Hunza and then further down to Swat.g. Chapter 4 § 2. and announces to add “either in a foot note or in appendices the pieces supplied by this manuscript. R. The form rma is a further development of smra. in present-day Ladakh. The area could have passed as ‘low’ in reference to Žaŋžuŋ. however. but only remarks in note 8: “nell’edizione del Francke erroneamente sMra” (‘erroneously sMra in the edition of Francke’). Stein (1961: 50). the first part of which was not used by Francke. does not seem to have seen the London manuscript. Finally.e. The following possibilities are open to speculation: (a) Lower Ladakh (Mard related to s/dmad ‘low’). Since Mard is mentioned besides Žaŋžuŋ. The latter identification is also precluded for the reason that Ladakh was included in either Žaŋžuŋ stod or smad. also smu. The form smu is found. that are missing by Francke’s edition”. on p. It is quite conspicuous that the name does not reappear. Petech (1939: 2) mentions a London manuscript of the LDRR. e. it could refer to a tribal group. in the Bkaḥchems kakholma. one should be able to preclude a location to the west of Žaŋžuŋ. in which case Žaŋžuŋ no longer comprised any part of Ladakh. part of one of the two Bolors. . One could have seen here the Suvarṇabhū(mi) of the Indian sources or the Suvarṇagotra of the Chinese. (f) A fictive or idealised ‘Golden Land’ at the foot of the (transferred) axis mundi. n. I would have taken possibility (c) for the most likely one. at times alternatively or additionally referred to the gold fields ascribed to lake Mānasarovar. at least Lower Ladakh. with Maryul simply referring to the gold fields near Rudok and the adjacent areas. where it is argued that the geographical concept of the Kailash as the source of the four cardinal rivers must have been transferred from an original place in the Pamirs. Nevertheless. The smallest pieces are about the size of a lentil [adas] or a pea [mash]. Possibilities (a) and (b) are quite probably ruled out by the conventions of the Tibetan administration. but most probably also Upper Ladakh would have been a separate entity or separate entities. Chapter 2 § 2. and thus we should expect to find it in its core area. the Kailash. one could think of the mythic land of Maru(tse) or Maru(cīna). which Fuchs (1938: 439. At the time when I was settling the tribute upon Guga. possibility (a) has been suggested without any further comment by Hoffmann (2003 [1990]: 52). and in it gold is everywhere to be found. As we have seen.82 Again. which are attested as “the main centre of gold digging in the 19th century” (Petech 1998: 246). known to him under the Mongolian name Altunji ‘goldsmith’. 255. . As in case (c). Initially. But cf. p. But the gold production of Guge would have been even richer and unlimited: Again. the headman related to 82 See Zeisler (forthcoming a. and they say that sometimes [lumps] are found as large as a sheep’s liver.4. note 99). this group must have been constitutive for Žaŋžuŋ. “As early as the 15th century Guge appointed a ‘master of the gold fields’ (gser-dpon) in g. (g) Finally. the convention seems to have been followed also in Žaŋžuŋ. the name would have had nothing to do with present day Ladakh. MīrzāḤaidar (Elias 1895: 411) includes an enthusiastic remark concerning a goldfield in the Changthang. (This would approximately correspond to Denwood’s 2008: 9 localisation of Suvarṇagotra). Guga has two hundred forts and villages. by which the western areas were ‘Uplands’ stodphyogs by definition. It is three days’ journey in length.North of Ancient India and South of Khotan 439 Žaŋžuŋ signals. The main goldfields of Western Tibet probably lay north of the Kailash “in the region of modern Thok Jalung”. 4) locates north of lake Mānasarovar.4).Yas-ru Byang-pa” (ibid. It might have. the discussion in the last section. Where ever they dig up the earth and spread it on a cloth. they find gold. when his spade stuck fast […] Having removed the earth. and most of it finds its way to Kashmir and India. […] A body of men went to the spot and extracted it. but the existence of mines appears to be unknown. found in it 1. n.500 Tibetan mithkáls of pure [mohri] gold (a Tibetan mithkál is worth one-and-a-half ordinary mithkáls) and God has so created this soil that when the gold is taken from the ground it does not diminish…” (ibid. My informant from Gya in Upper Ladakh showed me pits about two metres deep. p. Peissel (1984: 73) could still observe traces of earlier digging activities along the road from Alchi to Khalatse. In many places remnants of masonry can still be seen in the earth. owing to political causes. but one may assume that this prohibition would hardly have been effective. having no other income. The existence of gold in the western provinces of Tibet is well known. The quality is said to be good. . As far as Ladakh is concerned. at least Elias (ibid.). the accounts vary. 83 In the early 1980s. unclean task.83 The Buddhist clergy had eventually prohibited gold digging under various spiritual pretexts (KHAL. 1) describes a more modest reality in the 19th c. p.. who came to Lower Ladakh to dig up the soil. Individual gold digging is also remembered by people of Ladakh. There has been a break in the digging for several years.. if large quantities of gold could still have been obtained. while according to an elder of Khalatse. The same may perhaps hold for Western Tibet. and having broken the stone. He similarly notes that Zanskaris and Ladakhis alike consider panning for gold as a “lowly. It looks as if the ground had been worked with huge ploughs. in the middle of which was gold. 412. where not too long ago villagers had dug for gold. According to Francke (1907: 15). one best left to the blacksmiths”. 411f. but the quantities found are very small and usually confined to dust—nuggets being seldom heard of. it was only poor Balti men. possibly these are Francke’s political causes). he saw that it was a stone.440 Bettina Zeisler me that a man was lately digging a piece of ground. there seems to have been some substantial gold digging in Lower Ladakh: I have travelled along the Indus from Saspola to Dartsig. a distance of over fifty miles. in his youth. and have seen but few parts of the ground which have remained untouched. the deposits in back waters and sand banks are carefully washed. surrounded by snow mountains or as a land surrounded by lakes. The untold profusion of the apricots and the quantity of gold which can be washed out of every stream. namely that Maryul/Mard referred to an area where the Rma tribe or clan settled. In fact. This description. 365) refers to the Rudok area. both variants of the name. is proposed by the Ladakhi scholar Bsodrnams Tshebrtan Yoseb Dgergan (1976: 184). Possibility (d) came into my mind when confronted with Tucci’s remarks concerning the gold-production in Swat and the necessity.North of Ancient India and South of Khotan 441 This may be contrasted with a contemporary description of Gilgit and Nagar: The Bagrot valley […] was further of interest in that about the best gold of the country is found in its bed. and a fair amount of gold. such an extension is not supported by any textual evidence. must have escaped Tucci’s attention. after the summer floods are over. Every petitioner or visitor. presented his little nazzar […] in gold dust (Durand 1899: 220). but perhaps also to more eastward areas (see also below). In some Ladakhi dialects locative postpositions are ambiguous and allow an ablative reading. as a rule. Every year. and in the Gilgit river below. p. is collected. so to speak. their tribal name happened to become the country’s name Rmayul (the author seems to imply that the Rma tribe or perhaps all three (!) tribes had settled in present-day Ladakh). Maryul and Maŋyul are related to an ancient East Tibetan tribe Rma in or from China. 84 As its members outnum bered the Meñag and Ltoŋ. all non-Ladakhi sources place Maryul in either Žaŋžuŋ Proper or in what we could roughly call Upper Ladakh. where the Bagrot stream runs in. otherwise it is not intelligible that he (1956: 98) claims “not [to] know that Hunza-Nagar was ever known as a country as rich in gold as Western Tibet”. . has gained the country among the Nagaris themselves the name of “the land of gold and apricots” (ibid. n. which according to Vitali (1996: 253. According to him. as far as the name Maryul is concerned. By and by the name changed into Maryul or Maŋyul (the latter form apparently as a reminiscence of the 84 Rgyaḥi-naŋna. Possibility (e). considering the rough methods and unskilled labour of the prospectors. The amount collected by the officials each year must have been considerable. However. Several post-phyidar sources describe Maryul as a land of lakes. When we first went to Gilgit pure gold was selling there at two-thirds the price in Srinagar […]. to deBolorise Baltistan. 143). 5). the country got the name Bladvags (Ladakh): deŋsaŋ Bladvags byabaḥi sa Rgyaḥi-naŋna sŋondussu Meñagdaŋ Ltoŋgi rusla gtogspaḥi mi ñuŋtsamdaŋ Rmaḥi ruslas chadpaḥi mi maŋtsam gnasstabskyis | ruskyi miŋ de yulmiŋdu šornas Rmayul thogspalas | rimgyis gyurnas Maryuldaŋ Maŋyuldu soŋ | phyissu de yaŋ medpar soŋnas Bladvags thogspar gyurto | That the Rma clan had some importance also in the western areas might be indicated by the place name Miru in Upper Ladakh.85 But given the complicated phonetic development.A. bšanpa Rmaru(rtse) ~ Rmeru-(rtse). According to the Chinese sources. sketched in Zeisler (forthcoming a Chapter 4 § 2. 43) was installed ruler in Tsoŋka.442 Bettina Zeisler outnumbering).). a further hint elsewhere (1959: 231). There is a direct parallel to the place name concerning a figure of the Gesar epic. As this tribe later on had become extinguished. In the early 11th c. Stein apparently did not accept that Maryul has anything to do with Ladakh.. a place name *Rmiru or *Rmaru could possibly also be connected with the mythic land Maru(tse) or Maru(cīna) (see below). the Jiaosiluo hailed from Wusanmi (EFEO Wou-san-mi) or Gaochang Moyu (EFEO Kao-tch’ang 85 Assimilation over two opening grades does not seem to be common in Ladakh (actually I know of no case). Tibetan Rgyalsras ?Skyignam Gliŋdbon. He does give. east of Spiti. ibid. R. . Khri Bkrašis Brtsegsdpal could establish himself in Lhartse in Rtsaŋstod and his descendants became rulers of small principalities in western Rtsaŋ. the latter being the elder brother of Skyidlde Ñimamgon. Stein 1959: 522 and passim for this figure)..4.c. which is pronounced with high tone /Mīru/ by its inhabitants. /simgul/ saḥgul ‘earth quake’ (Veronika Hein p. n. e.. p. The name thus represents a former *Rmiru. cf. the most important lineage being that of Maŋyul Guŋthaŋ (cf. Petech 1994: 655). it is not very obvious that the name of the landscape Mard could have been derived from the clan name Rma. It is quite unfortunate that he did not find the opportunity to expound his position. a grand-grandson of Khri Bkrašis Brtsegsdpal. but has been attested in Spiti. while the area around Leh is identified with Suvarṇagotra and the Women’s Dominion (West). R. cf. since on his map “L’habitat et les habitants” (1981: 14–15) we find Maryul in “Ngarikorsum”. R.A.g. Stein must have had an identification in mind that is close to possibility (f). however.. resulting from *Rmeru or directly from *Rmaru due to vertical vowel assimilation. He was claimed to be a descendant of the Tibetan imperial dynasty.A. Jiaosiluo Qinan Lingwen (EFEO Kio-sseu-lo K’i-nan-ling-wen. 239f. which is known in the Ladakhi version as Šankra Miru (cf. Furthermore. It would further also motivate the fact that Mard is mentioned only once. 86 This corresponds well with the fact that Maryul/Maŋyul is mentioned between Purang and Zans kar. 88 86 A Maŋnaŋ ‘Inner Maŋ’ of Guge is to be located to the south-east of Toling (Tucci 1971b: 377 with n. it should be identical with Maryul/Maŋyul. 87 It would probably also have included Spiti. It is. Zaŋsdkar. 5). Such a scenario would motivate the mentioning of Mard as a discrete entity.A. Maŋyul/Maryul is thus closely connected with the core part of Žaŋžuŋ and with Zanskar. and Sbalti. 3. Ḥchiba (=Khotan). Maŋyul. Maryul/Maŋyul thus lay between Purang and Zanskar in a south-(east) to north-(west) direc tion. according to which the first skor of Mŋaḥris contains Puraŋs. Wylie 1962: 3/55f. The location of Maryul in Guge or near Spiti is corroborated by the above-mentioned biography and the entry in BRGY. Spuraŋ. and Zaŋs dkar (see above). when the river is frozen). 2. Blaša (Bruša). Not being the crown prince of Maŋyul. not impossible that the lineage of Khri Bkrašis Brtsegsdpal played the same political game as the former in intentionally confounding the names Maŋyul and Maryul (in order to make claims of inheritance across the lineages). and also not merely triggered by alphabetic ordering as shown in the other two skor. In his Ḥdzam gliŋrgyas bšad Blama Btsanpo (ed. And it may also correspond to the suggested peripheral location of the Old Tibetan Mard. Stagmo (apparently in Baltistan or Purik) and Ladwags. this Maryul can by no means be identical with Ladakh. that is. 88 Given the close neighbourhood to India. however. Since Guge is not mentioned. . that Mard had special ties with India. Guge and Buhraŋ. it could well have been possible. Maryul or Maŋyul. which could have helped to escape Tibetan dominion a short while longer than Žaŋžuŋ. Ruthog. Stein (1959: 231) offers an interpretation in terms of Stodbyaŋ Maryul. The correct division. and most probably even not with the Maryul near Spiti. but only from the eastern and western extensions. ‘Maryul of the Northwest’. 3. For the latter designation R. would be 1. since the latter would belong to the lineage of Skyidlde Ñimamgon. 2. Ladwags. Žaŋžuŋ.) gives three alternative divisions of Mŋaḥris with 1. namely from Garža or from Purik. 3. If this should be correct. The enumera tion was cer tainly not arbitrary. A location between Zanskar and Guge or Purang would match well with the location suggested for Moluosuo (see above). however. but not with Central and Upper Ladakh. it is also conceivable that the Jiaosiluo was brought up at the court of his cousins in Guge or Purang. 2. but never again. Khrigse stod and smad.North of Ancient India and South of Khotan 443 Mo-yu). The second alternative is the one given by BRGY with slight variants in the names: 1. Maŋyul and Žaŋžuŋ. 87 It should be remembered that the main Zaŋskar valley cannot be accessed from Ladakh (except in mid-winter. Guge. the notion of gold or a golden land seems to be part of the mythologic or symbolic geography of the Kailash as a representative of Sumeru (these concepts may have been transferred to this area with all other spiritual concepts concerning the cosmic function of the axis mundi). it appears to me that possibility (f) might come closest to the truth. Dpalmgon. depending on the source. Rigmamgon) inherits Maryul (or Maŋyul) of Mŋaḥris.91 That the eldest son would split off from the main territory and set up a separate kingdom is rather unbelievable. The prince does not seem to have been much more than a puppet in the hands of some ambitious leaders. cf. Stein’s location. Whether or not the gold production was more substantial in prehistory than in the more recent past.444 Bettina Zeisler A location near the Kailash and more particularly in the vicinity of Guge and Spiti would also make sense in the context of Skyidlde Ñimamgon’s alleged division of his kingdom amongst his sons. Given R. inherits a central or otherwise important part and not some marginal border area in the periphery. LDRR 35. first of all. which could have been rather intentional in order to legitimate possible claims over Maŋyul in Western Tibet. Dpalgyi Lderig. I have some difficulties in accepting uncritically. or some regions classified as Mon countries. Tucci (1956: 51–63) for a synopsis of all the relevant sources. while the third son Ldegtsugmgon (var. Spiti. The golden fundament of earth (gsergyi sagži) arises in the cosmic waters. probably Lahul or perhaps parts further east towards Nepal. There is some variation in the share of his two younger brothers. Puraŋ. Sdebtsunmgon.. Bkrašis Ldemgon) inherits Purang (Spuhraŋs. Dpalgyimgon. 91 Cf. However. Phuraŋspa) and.4f. the scarcity (if not non-existence) of sources concerning early Ladakh seems to indicate that the area was much less important than even sceptics would believe. Sdegtsugmgon. who could well have ‘embellished’ his descent. The location would also make more sense in view of the ‘confusion’ between Maryul and Maŋyul. Dpalgyimgon (var. Dpallde Rigmgon. Dpallde Rigpamgon. upon this fundament the Sumeru comes 89 Although attested in various historical texts. it is even more unlikely that Skyidlde Ñimamgon himself divided the small empire he had just built up. that a legitimate heir of the Tibetan brtsanpo-s was adopted as son-in-law and main heir into a local ruling family at the periphery of the empire.A. Puroŋ. 90 Adherents of the Maryul-Ladakh identity would claim that Ladakh constituted an important trade thoroughfare. and Spilcogs. .89 where we could expect that the eldest son. ruled by the descendants of Skyidlde Ñimamgon’s younger brother. Even if the underlying political ambitions should have been based on real descent. Puhraŋs. but in general the second son Bkrašismgon (var. var.90 It is uncontested in the Tibetan sources that the eldest son. Ldebtsunmgon) inherits either Guge/Local-Žaŋžuŋ or Zanskar. also (parts of) Guge/Local-Žaŋžuŋ. The same spiritual concept seems to be reflected in a 17th c.North of Ancient India and South of Khotan 445 into being. . Descending from an Oxen’s Mouth (Sutlej).yaŋra Žaŋžuŋlhaḥi ljoŋs || Khyuŋrdzoŋs Spumtho Rinchen Lhunpoḥi ŋos || dgosḥdod ḥbyuŋ [! a syllable is missing] rinchen gsergyi gliŋ || . desteŋs dbaŋchen gsergyi sagži chags || desteŋs Rirab dpagtshad bžikhri chags || gsergyi ri bdun rol-paḥi mtshoyi [!] bskor || gliŋ bži gliŋḥphren [! for -phran or ḥphreŋ?] byeba-phrag brgyad chags || … ‘On that [maṇḍala of cosmic water]. fol. 170. 40 for the text). this statement evokes the concept of Meru). according to which a Tree of Discrimination (Dpagbsamšiŋ) is situated on the right side of lake Mānasarovar. The king of the mountains. Thereon the Sumeru. with a somewhat differing translation on p. The four continents and the eighty million islands arouse. n. 7) mentions a passage in the Dpagbsam ljonbzaŋ. [There is] the continent of gold [and] jewels [for whatever] needs and wishes arise. The seven golden mountains were surrounded by the ocean (lit. 1a. ‘Khye legs! Place where the feet of Rinchen Bzaŋpo have walked! Place where the teachings of Blobzaŋ Gragspa spread! [At] the shore [of] the slow flowing great river. n. 142 for the passage). such descriptions may go back to Abhidharmic concepts 92 Cf. measuring 40. Its fruits are said to turn into pure gold. n. the Height of the Spu [and] the castle of Khyuŋ[luŋ].. dedication sheet from Western Tibet: || kye legs || Rinchen Bzaŋpoḥi žabskyi lcagspaḥi [! for homophonous bcags-] gnas || Blobzaŋ Gragspaḥi stanpa darbaḥi gnas || chuchen dalḥbab Blaŋpo-Khaḥbab [!] ḥgram || Chaḥi-G. 42 on p. 140. magical lake). p.000 yojana arouse. arouse the golden fundament of the earth. …’ (Heller 2007: 140 with a differing translation. giving thus the base for the name of the southern continent (implicitly.6–7. Ultimately. [On] the side of the Precious Mountain of the Universe. text 1300. the cosmic mountain shone and was accompanied by (lit. when falling into the water. also the wording in two West Tibetan manuscripts: gsergyi sabži [! for -gži] ḥdalžiŋ khaŋmñam mdzespar bkod || rirgyal lhunpo brjidciŋ gliŋ bži gliŋbran [! for -phran] bcas… ‘[On] the golden fundament of the earth [the cosmic water or great flood dbaŋchen] got absorbed and together with houses [everything] was established nicely. [in] the great flood.. [In] the divine region [of] Chaḥi G. possessed) the four continents (and) the islands…’ (Heller 2007: 140 with a differing trans-lation. hereby also producing the sound ḥdzambu. …’ (de Rossi Filibeck 2007: p.92 A connected concept is that of a wish-fulfilling paradise: Vitali (2003: 44.yaŋra [in] Žaŋžuŋ. 168. emphasis mine). 21). Padmabkaḥi thaŋyig mentions a land Marutse between ‘Persia’ and Šambhala. south-east of Thiktse. with the extension of their power over Lower Ladakh.A. had been located in Chitral. Miru might have been named after the mythic land or the place name Miru could have served as catalyser. 47 with further references). If we understand 93 A relation between Maryul and Suvarṇagotra or Suvarṇabhūmi as western and south-western areas of Žaŋžuŋ has been suggested already by Hummel (1974: 491). If the Indians were responsible for this transfer. It might further throw some light on the processes underlying the apparent confusion or transfer. It’s foundation is ascribed to Rinchen Bzaŋpo. Consequently.93 The specifying element yul in the Ladakhi/Tibetan name Maryul itself is indicative of a non-Tibetan origin of the name. which speak of the Marucīna. The 14th c. . Myarma) monastery. this may well have given rise to a place name Mard ‘Gold(en)’. and whether the Tibetan imperial or post-imperial elites came across an already established designation or whether they were actually the agents of the transfer. and Myarma in Maryul simultaneously on the same day (Tucci 1988: 63.446 Bettina Zeisler (Vitali ibid. Stein 1959: 522. 531. derived from the Žaŋžuŋ epithet smar ‘Golden’ for the region around the Kailash-Sumeru (see above). the transfer might have been caused by the existence of a Smaryul or Mard. Tholing in Guge.94 although the latter is not in the immediate neighbourhood of Kulu. 94 Depending on when the transfer did take place. from where it was shifted into the neighbourhood of Kulu (R. who is said to have laid the fundaments of three monasteries.). also to the lower parts. n. A location of Maryul near or in Guge implies that the original designation had been shifted by the later self-styled ‘descendants’ of Dpalgyimgon from Spiti and its neighbourhood first to Upper Ladakh and. It is tempting to think of a connection between this Maru (or Rmaru in Tibetan etymologised spelling) and the place Miru (*Rmiru). a name that should have referred to the Mongolians. The concept of this land or rather a cemetery where the deity Begtse. Snellgrove & Skorupski 1980: 91. An association with the mythic land of Marutse/Marucīna (g) could help to establish the original location of Maryul or Mard in the vicinity of Kulu. that is ‘Chinese of the Deserts’. together with the land of Khotan or with the Ḥaša and Bruša and other north-western regions. however. but at least on the road from Kulu to the later Maryul. the guardian spirit of Khotan abides seems to go back to Indian sources. If the Tibetans were responsible. var. The land Maru. n. this might have happened because the goal area was already known under the names Cīna and/or Mahācīna. The first shift might have taken place with the construction of Nyerma (Ñarma. and this might in part also explain the Indian references to a Suvarṇabhū(mi) somewhere in the north. Khachar in Purang. . The internal division corresponds almost exactly to the ‘modern’ division into three skor. also the word rimo ‘drawing. to be dated to the end of the 10th c. as observed by Strachey (1853: 4). painting’). The description given for Rudok. bris (cf. it is interesting to observe that the above-mentioned large-scale division of Mŋaḥris into three skor.W. Strachey adds that “Ruduk is said to be encircled by lakes” (ibid.s seems to have been a projection. Skorgsum. based on the division of its central element. the West Tibetan provinces were given as a special fiefdom to a dependant . that is. however. the designation here refers to the act of writing or drawing. since only one generation later. the original Maryul and Zaŋsdkar of the three segments of the first or central skor had been replaced by Guge and Rudok. consists of “Ruduk on the N. Apparently. BRGY. n. the ‘first skor’ or Mŋaḥris Skorgsum. cf. as well. also Luczanits 2005: 70.E.. (Christian Luczanits and Holger Neuwirth. Classical Tibetan ḥbri. 25). associates the surrounding lakes with Zanskar—in striking ignorance of the geographic facts: sras gsum byuŋbaḥi cheba Dpallde Rigpamgongyis bzuŋbaḥi mŋaḥris Maŋyulte | Zaŋsdkar mtshoyis bskorbadaŋ | Bkrašis Ldemgongyis bzuŋbaḥi mŋaḥris Stagmoste | Spuhreŋ gaŋskyis bskorba | Ldegtsug Mgongyis bzuŋbaḥi mnaḥris Žaŋžuŋste | Guge g. assert that the plan of Nyerma corresponds well with the latest phase of Tabo. But it is perhaps even more likely that the pious legend was invented only to veil the fact that the three monasteries were not founded at about the same time—and not by the same person. Zeisler forthcoming c. as being encircled by lakes. Guge on the S. bris. is the same that one can found in post-phyidar descriptions of Maryul as a district of lakes (see above). n. Maryul would comprise Ladakh and Baltistan.c.” (p. respectively. the eldest of 95 The first attestation of the word mŋaḥris in Pt 0016. all parts of Mŋaḥris are again in the hand of a single branch. The latter describes the three provinces of Western Tibet as “Mangyul. 12).s.). the apparent correlation with the original districts of Mŋaḥris should rather preclude the location of the original monastery in Ladakh. p.. in an attempt to etymologise the apparently alternative appellation bskorgsum.North of Ancient India and South of Khotan 447 ‘on the same day’ as a close temporal connection. quite apparently refers to an official document that is executed by cutting off an identical half or a smaller part for the purpose of validation and identification. referring to their property as scrolls (cf. ‘Khorsum’. and Maryul”. Unlike in other cases. based on the root “ri. the two sons of the youngest (or middle) son: Sroŋŋe (Yešes Ḥod) and Ḥkhorre.yaḥyis bskorba bcas gsum | ‘The mŋaḥris95 seized by Dpallde Rigpamgon. Quite interestingly. In this context. The art historians. 73). Old Tibetan ḥdri. where such documents are called thaŋ or mŋaḥthaŋ. and Purang on the S. It appears that in an unknown period. Khorsum. Perhaps the tripartition of Mŋaḥris is a fiction. In local oral tradition the kings of the latter lineage. the administrative entitlement (in the above passage still visible) apparently turned into the very designation of the provinces. the mŋaḥris seized by Bkrašis Ldemgon. signalling that they were usurpers with no right to ruler over Upper Ladakh.448 Bettina Zeisler the three sons who had arisen. the attribute of the surrounding lakes was transferred from Rudok to Maryul and Zanskar. The chiefs of Rgya (the neighbouring village) seem to have had played a certain role in the power struggle within Upper Ladakh before and after the installation of the first dynasty (allegedly of the btsadpo or imperial lineage). comprising also Baltistan. which means that he considered himself the righteous king of Maryul (wherever this may have been located). Another (alternative or additional) vector for the transfer could have led through Miru. which became the name of a village and former kingdom in Zanskar. Maŋyul. Alternatively. Žaŋžuŋ. In the 17th c. which may or may not have been associated or even identical with the mythic Marucīna. the chief of Rgya told Azevedo that the Ladakhi king had dispossessed him (or his ancestors?) of the kingdom of Mariul (cf. like our colon. Spuhreŋ was surrounded by glaciers.’ This would indicate that the designation Maryul was first shifted to Rudok where it acquired the attribute of being surrounded by lakes. Stagmo. One may speculate that the chiefs of Rgya were descendants (perhaps of a side-lineage) of the original rulers of Maryul (Spiti-Guge) who managed to politically survive at some border area. separating a word or passage to be explained from the explanation. never forgetting their former rights. that is. the designation Maryul was transferred to Upper Ladakh before it was finally applied to the whole dominion of Ladakh. The background of this claim is all but evident. are referred to rather grudgingly as /māt gyafo/ smad rgyalpo ‘the lowland king(s)’. that is. After some time. particularly Seŋge Rnamrgyal. as soon and as long as this was part of the kingdom. At a later time. Guge was surrounded by slate [mountains]. It can often be found in commentaries. and their aspirations finally shattered when the Rnamrgyal dynasty from Lower Ladakh took over power. and this is what their Gandhāra-Turkic dynastic name Gyesar suggests. they might have ruler.96 Zanskar was surrounded by lakes. At an intermediate stage. that is. Apparently they were never strong enough to establish themselves as rulers of (Upper) Ladakh. 96 The lhagbcas morpheme {ste} after nouns has an introductory function. Something similar happened with the administrative unit stoŋsde. Hugues 1996: 189). and the mŋaḥris seized by Ldegtsug Mgon. . when Maryul was still known to have referred to Guge (Spiti) and Zanskar or when the geographic concept of Rudok and Maryul had completely merged. but before coming to the final section. apparently left its impact on the modern pronunciation(s). it might have been just their position as rulers of a fictive or actually existing Maryul that enabled them to compete with the Ladakhi kings. Map 12 Maryul (Moluosuo) 2.3 Lata (Ladvags) I have to leave the dynastic or political implications to the imagination of the reader. the Ladakhi kings. but somehow managed to transfer a prestigious land title to their own property. as the people of Zanskar typically call the Balti /Walti/. on their part.97 The Zanskari people as well as some 97 This is not so uncommon. but not to the original ethnonym. it should be briefly noted that the name of Ladakh. would have had a heightened interest in acquiring better legitimation by transferring the name Maryul to their own dominion. . If so. which. kalpaḥ has eventually become /skalpa/ in KHAL. Similarly the written Tibetan word bskalpa for Skr. spelled as Ladvags may go back merely to a learned etymology. a form that evidently goes back to the written representation as Sbalti. unlike in the case of other place names. In any case.North of Ancient India and South of Khotan 449 been newcomers in the area (like so many others). the form might represent an old tribal or local name. Since Lata is quite obviously identical with Desideri’s Lhata. Tucci 1971. but the same name had been used almost two hundred years earlier: Mīrzā Ḥaidar represents the name of one of the two Ladakhi chiefs as Lata Jughdán. while Ladag may be found in some recent Bonpo texts (Vitali 2008: 386. Lower Ladakh and Purik are not mentioned. This king is most probably identical with Lodros Chogdan (Blogros Mchogldan). Zanskar and Spiti). Lastag. is mentioned as only one among several kingdoms in the area: Šel in Maŋyul (the lineage of Rigpamgon). The 16th c. One could thus expect that the internal boundary reflects some important cultural. or rather: particularly. but even. Debther marpo of Bsodnams Gragspa (ed. Desideri arrived in Lhata in 1715. Nubraŋ (!). I have so far been unable to trace the origins of this name. 39a) has the form Lastag. Žaŋžuŋ stod and smad. Globa.g. We have already seen in the citation above that Desideri knew the region under the name of Lhata-yul. Lower and Upper Ladakh—a dialect boundary We have seen that the two Chinese regions of Lesser and Greater Yangtong and the Old Tibetan regions Žaŋžuŋ stod and smad match fairly well. 400). a Mongolian speaker could not have misperceived the vowels in such a dimension.450 Bettina Zeisler elderly people from Lower Ladakh (and the same might be true for the elder generation in Nubra) refer by the designation Ladak(s) only to the central region around Leh. However. Its capital appears under the very name Lhata (Filippi 1937: 84). The form Bladvags that is alternatively in use among scholars is not corroborated by the Kenhat pronunciation. which is low tone in Gya. 387. Since all the entities discussed overlap with at least parts of present-day Ladakh. The name might have appeared as /Loṭṣö’/ in Tibetan and as /Lotre/ in a Kenhat dialect (although it is all but granted that the cluster gr had already turned into /dr/). or geographic boundary. 3 Lesser and Greater Yangtong. the last Upper Ladakhi king before the takeover by the Lower Ladakhi lineage. According to the enumeration. Other variant spellings show that the scholarly form cannot be the original one. fol. in accordance with the above-mentioned local tradition. this entity might have been more towards the south-east than the apparently Central Ladakhi Maŋyul. economic. Leh and its surroundings are not especially famous for ‘high’ or ‘wild passes’. the Lastag of the Debther marpo. . Interestingly. and Zaŋsdkar. while the learned ‘etymology’ might have been generated on the basis of some West(ern) Tibetan dialects where the final cluster -gs is completely deleted (e. I should try to look for this boundary on Ladakhi ground. but also some features with the Central Tibetan dialects. and Nyamkat). by mother’). Corresponding dialectal boundaries are found between the Zanskar (Kenhat) dialects and Purik in the northwest. predominant farming (with double crops) and horticulture (cf. because the Leh speakers may well articulate final -s in other contexts. is that there is no gradual shift observable: grammatically. Upper Ladakh. To my opinion this grammatical dichotomy strongly speaks against a linguistic continuum between the two areas in prehistoric times and against a common linguistic inheritance. The Kenhat dialects are very closely related to Tibetan varieties spoken in Himachal Pradesh (Piti. the Purik dialect being intermediary between Balti and the Sham dialects. and Balti) and Kenhat (the dialects of Upper Ladakh and Zanskar).North of Ancient India and South of Khotan 451 As far as the Indus valley is concerned. and some Kenhat dialects make use of the syllabic form of the AGENT marker /-se/ equally for POSSESSORs (/amase/ ‘of. Zeisler forthcoming b § 1). and the Sham dialects spoken along the lower course of the Zanskar and in the Markha valley. /ame/ ‘mother’s’) and their nondistinction in the Kenhat dialects (/ame/ ‘of. being at the same time a boundary between different ecological zones and having served at least tempo- . The region of Western Tibet. Shamskat (the dialects of Lower Ladakh. For other differences see Zeisler (forthcoming b). Tot. including Nubra. The differences between the two dialect groups are thus not restricted to mere sound changes. particularly on the grammatical level. which probably points to a common history. but also pertain to elementary grammatical features. the Shamskat dialects show gradual transitions. notwithstanding some convergences due to the long lasting contact situation. They are somewhat less closely related to the varieties spoken in Western Tibet. It falls together with the dialect boundary between the two main dialect groups. the boundary between Lower and Upper Ladakh in the self-understanding of the Ladakhis today is to be found in the sandy hills between Snyemo and Leh. Likewise the Changthang dialects (as far as I could survey them) share many features with the Kenhat dialects. Purik. The most striking difference is the distinction of AGENTs and POSSESSORs in the Shamskat dialect (/amas/ ‘by mother’ vs. But they differ radically from the Kenhat dialects. by mother’). The dialect boundary in the Nubra valley is yet to be established. and it constitutes an important boundary between different climatic and thus economic zones: predominant nomadic pasturage and wool production vs. To me it appears that this dialect boundary. Similarly. and Zanskar seems to constitute a relatively well-definable linguistic area with gradual transitions from one dialect to the other. This is not merely a question of phonetics. Himachal Pradesh. but it must lie somewhere between the confluence of Nubra and Shayok and the bend of the Upper Shayok. What is perhaps more important. the dialects either belong to the Kenhat group or not. Peoples.. . Upper Ladakh and Leh might thus well have belonged to the ‘core area’ of Žaŋžuŋ. the people from Lower Ladakh apparently following (and trying to bypass) values of sharing known from Dard communities. Furthermore. claiming 50% taxes on all products (wool. Other significant differences may concern patterns of landholding and taxation: it is quite noteworthy that the people of Gya remember their lord Gyapa Co as a bloodsucker. reflects an older ethnic distinction. Spiti) and the affinity with the Western Tibetan varieties in general points to a common (pre)-history. may migrate over long distances. what most Tibetans (except the Bonpos) and most Westerners accept as the only possible Žaŋžuŋ. that is. In doing so they would sooner or later identify themselves with the new group and slowly forget (or even actively suppress) all memories of a different identity (and similar processes may happen in the way they are perceived by their neighbours). the tribes of the past were never homogenous ethnic groups but rather conglomerate entities. and what seems to be reflected by the Old Tibetan designation Žaŋžuŋ smad as well as by the Chinese designation Greater Yangtong. not to speak about political boundaries. meat. Lower Ladakh and Baltistan. such as languages and geographical or ethnic identities. grain). including cultural artefacts. nothing is permanent. Iranian Žaŋžuŋ from a Bonpo perspective. Their original neighbours. taking their original name along to their new abode. or clans. however. whereas the people of Khalatse do not remember any kind of substantial taxation by the king or by the monasteries (KHAL).g. may continue to refer to their ancient abode by the old ethnic name and thus transfer the name to a new incoming group. on the other hand. but which might have represented the ‘real’. Conclusion As we all know. which seems to be still reflected in subtle cultural differences and mutual prejudices among the two groups. another important difference. which from the common perspective appears as rather Un-Žaŋžuŋ-ian. that is. tribes. particularly the nomadic societies. would have belonged to Žaŋžuŋ stod. Even foreigners may realise different attitudes towards linguistic straightness (‘honesty’) or ‘crookedness’ (sarcasm and linguistic wit) between Kenhat and Shamskat speakers. This holds all the more for human artefacts. concerns different attitudes towards hunting. Names could also be adopted for political reasons. which would deserve further study.452 Bettina Zeisler rarily as a political boundary. The close affinity between the Kenhat dialects and the Western Tibetan varieties of Himachal Pradesh (e. the single elements of which could disband and regroup to form a new tribe or ‘nation’. perhaps also with respect to Baltistan this identification was also accepted by the neighbours. This makes the task of the historian to reconstruct the ‘real’ events almost impossible. while perhaps not fully congruent. Empires of the Indus.). and with the Women’s Dominion. most probably of Saka origin. rightly or wrongly. such as legends. did border on Bolor (Gilgit). Michael. The Old Tibetan administrators. to refer to regions even beyond Ladakh and Baltistan. Chr. did at least border on Achaemenid or Sassanian Persia. In: Wilfried Seipel (ed. used the term Žaŋžuŋ stod. most. so at least the way the events were perceived or interpreted. Bibliography Albinia. if not the events themselves. or inscriptions. and thus. The story of a river. most help comes from conflicting data. What is now called Ladakh (via an Urdu interpretation of the scholarly name Ladvags in the pronunciation of Purik as /Lada/. Die Geschichte Irans von den Achaimeniden bis zu den Arsakiden (550 v. Particularly the name Maryul turns out to be an old. the greatest fallacy in the case of conflicting data concerning peoples and their locations is to make a decision as to which data is correct and which one is to be discarded. as probably all previous names were. rightly or wrongly. Alram. Wien: Kunsthistorisches Museum Wien: 73–98. London: Murray. if not all of Ladakh was part of a greater geographical or tribal unit. because this makes it possible to reconstruct. On the other hand. I would think. at least. but certainly not the ancient name of the area. Chr. will always stress the notion of identity. in the perspective of the greater empires and the transmitted memory of their past glory. – 224 n. contain a kernel of truth. Alte Kulturen an der Seidenstraße. Alice. While one always needs independent witnesses. vague or exaggerated as they may be. chronicles. Parts of Ladakh were.) Weihrauch und Seide. hence the spelling Ladakh) is a misnomer. We can thus safely conclude that the overlapping entities Yangtong and Žaŋžuŋ. The peoples and the provinces of Western Tibet give the best proof. rather than to recognise that the contradictions may point to fluent and inhomogeneous identities. Although Žaŋžuŋ fell victim to the phyidar and post-phyidar reinvention of a glorious Bonpo past (much as Tibet fell victim to a reinvention of a glorious imperial and preimperial Buddhist past). but Žaŋžuŋ in Tibetan (and perhaps original Žaŋžuŋ-ian) sources.North of Ancient India and South of Khotan 453 Folk-lore as well as official history and its artefacts. . 2008. identified with the Gold Clan. 1996a. At least with respect to Lower Ladakh. where these regions were known as parts of (Lesser) Yangtong. called Yangtong in Chinese sources. it turns out that the Bonpo traditions. 454 Bettina Zeisler ——. 1996b. Die Geschichte Ostirans von den Griechenkönigen in Baktrien und Indien bis zu den iranischen Hunnen (250 v. Chr. – 700 n. Chr.). In: Wilfried Seipel (ed.) Weihrauch und Seide. Alte Kulturen an der Seidenstraße. Wien: Kunsthistorisches Museum Wien: 119–140. Bailey, Harold W. 1940. ‘Ttāgutta.’ BSOAS 10.3: 599–605. ——. 1949. A Khotanese text concerning the Turks in Kanṭṣou. Asia Major, New Series 1.1: 28–52. ——. 1964. Śrī Viśa̮ Śūra and the Ta-Uang. Asia Major, New Series 11.1: 1–26. ——. 1985. Indo-Scythian studies: being Khotanese texts. Vol. VII. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Bailey, Thomas Graham. 1924. Grammar of the Shina (Ṣiṇa) language, consisting of a full grammar, with texts and vocabularies of the main or Gilgit dialect and briefer grammars (with vocabularies and texts) of the Khohistani, Guresi and Drasi dialects. (Prize Publication Fund, 3.) London: Royal Asiatic Society. Beal, Samuel (transl.) 1881–1884. Si-yu-ki – Buddhist Records of the Western World. London: Trübner. Reprint/New edition 1958–1963 under the title Travels of Hiouen-Thsang, Calcutta: Susil Gupta. Beckwith, Christopher I. 1977. A study of the early medieval Chinese, Latin, and Tibetan historical sources on pre-imperial Tibet. PhD dissertation, Indiana University. ——. 1987. The Tibetan empire in Central Asia: a history of the struggle for great power among Tibetans, Turks, Arabs, and Chinese during the early Middle Ages. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. ——. 1989. The location and population of Tibet according to early Islamic sources. Acta Orientalia Scientarum Hungaricae 43.2-3: 163–170. Bellezza, John Vincent. 2008. Zhang zhung. Foundations of civilization in Tibet. A historical and ethnoarchaeological study of the monuments, rock art, texts and oral tradition of the ancient Tibetan upland. (Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, philosophischhistorische Klasse, Denkschriften, 368. Band, Beiträge zur Kultur- und Geistesgeschichte Asiens, 61.) Wien: Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften. Berger, Hermann. 1974. Das Yasin-Burushaski (Werchikwar). Grammatik, Texte, Wörterbuch. (Neuindische Studien, 3.) Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz. ——. 1998. Die Burushaski-Sprache von Hunza und Nager. Band III: Wörterbuch Burushaski - Deutsch, Deutsch Burushaski. (Neuindische Studien, 13.) Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz. Bielmeier, Roland. 1985. Das Märchen vom Prinzen Čobzaṅ. Eine tibetische Erzählung aus Baltistan. Text, Übersetzung, Grammatik und westtibetisch North of Ancient India and South of Khotan 455 vergleichendes Glossar. (Beiträge zur tibetischen Erzählforschung, 6.) St. Augustin: VGH Wissenschaftsverlag. Blama Btsanpo (a.k.a. Smingrol Nomonhan, †1839). Ed. Turrell V. Wylie. 1962. The Geography of Tibet according to the ’Dzam-gling-rgyasbshad. (Serie Orientale Roma, 25.) Roma: Istituto Italiano per il Medio ed Estremo Oriente. Bsodnams Gragspa (1478–1554). Ed. Giuseppe Tucci. 1971. Debther marpo gsarma. [The new red register.] (Serie Orientale Roma, 24.) Roma: Istituto Italiano per il Medio ed Estremo Oriente. Bsodnams Tshebrtan Yoseb Dgergan. 1976. Bladvags rgyalrabs ḥchimed gter [The eternal treasure, the genealogy of Ladakh]. Srinagar: S.S. Gergan. Chavannes, Edouard. 1900. Documents sur les Tou-kiue (Turcs) occidentaux: recueillis et commentés suivi de notes additionnelles. Paris: Librairie d’Amérique et d’Orient. Reprint 1969, Taipei: Ch’eng Wen. Cunningham, Alexander. 1854. Ladák, physical, statistical and historical, with notices of the surrounding countries. London: W.H. Allen and Co. Reprint 1970, New Delhi: Sagar. Denwood, Philip. 2008. The Tibetans in the west. Part I. Journal of Inner Asian Art & Archaeology 3: 7–21. ——. Forthcoming. The Tibetans in the west. Part II. Dhar, Kashi Nath. 1994. Srivara’s Zaina Rajatarangini. English translation and annotations. New Delhi: Indian Council of Historical Research and People’s Publishing House. Dongrub Lhargyal. 2000. Gšenrab Mibocheḥi mdzad rnambsdusmaḥi skorgleŋba [Discussion of the collection of the great Gšenrab Mibo’s deeds]. In: Henk Blezer (ed.) Religion and secular culture in Tibet: PIATS 2000: Proceedings of the Ninth Seminar of the International Association for Tibetan Studies, Leiden 2000. (Brill’s Tibetan studies library, 2/2.) Leiden, Köln: Brill: 379–401. Dotson, Brandon. 2009. The Old Tibetan Annals. An annotated translation of Tibet’s first history. With an annotated cartographical documentation by Guntram Hazod. (Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, philosophisch-historische Klasse, Denkschriften, 381.) Wien: Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften. Durand, Algernon. 1899. The making of a frontier. London: Murray. Reprint 1974 with an introduction by Garry Alder. (Quellen zur Entdeckungsgeschichte und Geographie Asiens, 5.) Graz: Akademische Druck- und Verlagsanstalt. Eberhard, Wolfram. 1942. Kultur und Siedlung der Randvölker Chinas. (T’oung Pao, suppl. au vol. 35.) Leiden: Brill. 456 Bettina Zeisler Elias, Ney (ed.) and Edward Denison Ross (transl.). 1895. The Tarikh-iRashidi of Mirza Muhammad Haidar, Dughlát: a history of the Moghuls of Central Asia. London. Reprint 1973, Patna: Academia Asiatica. Filippi, Filippo de. 1937. An account of Tibet. The travels of Ippolito Desideri 1712–1727. Rev. ed. London: Routledge. Reprint 2005, New Delhi: Rupa. Fleet, John F. 1973. The topographical list of the Brihat-Samhita. [Posthumous] edited by Kalyan Kumar Dasgupta. Calcutta: Semushi. Forsyth, Thomas Douglas, Sir. 1875. Report of a mission to Yarkund in 1873, under command of Sir T. D. Forsyth, K.C.S.I., C.B., Bengal Civil Service, with historical and geographical information regarding the possessions of the ameer of Yarkund. Vol. 1. Calcutta: Foreign Dept. Press. Francke, August Hermann. 1907. A history of Western Tibet. One of the unknown Empires. London: S.W. Patridge & Co. Reprint 1995, New Delhi, Madras: Asian Educational Services. ——. 1908. Note on Mo-lo-so. The Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland: 188–189. ——. 1912. The Tibetan alphabet. Epigraphia Indica 11.2: 266–272, plates I-VII. ——. 1914. Antiquities of Indian Tibet. Vol. I. Personal narrative. (Archaeological Survey of India, New Imperial Series, 38.) Calcutta: Superintendent Government Printing. Reprint 1992. New Delhi, Madras: Asian Educational Services. ——. 1926. Antiquities of Indian Tibet. Vol. II. The chronicles of Ladakh and minor chronicles. Text and translations, with notes and maps. (Archaeological Survey of India, New Imperial Series, 50.) Calcutta: Superintendent Government Printing. Reprint 1992. New Delhi, Madras: Asian Educational Services. ——. 1929. Notes on Khotan and Ladakh. (From a Tibetan point of view.) I-III. Indian Antiquary 58: 108–112, 147–152. ——. 1930. Notes on Khotan and Ladakh. (From a Tibetan point of view.) IV-VI. Indian Antiquary 59: 41–45, 65–72. Fuchs, Walter. 1938. Huei-ch’ao’s Pilgerreise durch Nordwest-Indien und Zentral-Asien um 726. Sonderausgabe aus den Sitzungsberichten der Preußischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, phil.-hist. Klasse XXX: 426–469. Gñaḥgoŋ Dkonmchog Tshesbrtan [=Tshebrtan]/ Gao Rui. 1995. Bodkyi brdarñiŋyigchabdamsbsgrigs/ Tufan wenxian xuandu [A selection of Tibetan documents in old orthography]. Pecin/ Beijing: Krungdbyan Mirigs Slobgrwa Chenmo/ Zhonyang minzu daxue chubanshe [Central Nationalities University]. North of Ancient India and South of Khotan 457 Grenet, Frantz. 2002. Regional interaction in Central Asia and Northwest India in the Kidarite and Hephthalite periods. In: Nicholas Sims-Williams (ed.), Indo-Iranian languages and peoples. (Proceedings of the British Academy, 116.) Oxford: Oxford University Press: 203–224. Haarh, Eric. 1969. The Yar-luṅ dynasty. A study with particular regard to the contribution by myths and legends to the history of Ancient Tibet and the origin and nature of its kings. København: Gad. Hazod, Guntram. 2009. Imperial Central Tibet. An annotated cartographical survey of its territorial divisions and key political sites. In: Brandon Dotson, The Old Tibetan Annals. An annotated translation of Tibet’s first history. With an annotated cartographical documentation by Guntram Hazod. (Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, philosophisch-historische Klasse, Denkschriften, 381.) Wien: Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften: 161–231. Heller, Amy. 2007. Preliminary Remarks on the manuscripts of Gnas gsar dgon pa in northern Dolpo (Nepal). In: Amy Heller and Giacomella Orofino (eds.), Discoveries in Western Tibet and the Western Himalaya: essays on history, literature, archaeology and art. PIATS 2003: Tibetan studies: Proceedings of the Tenth Seminar of the International Association for Tibetan Studies, Oxford. (Brill’s Tibetan studies library 10,8.) Leiden, etc: Brill: 129–149. Herrmann, Albert. 1910. Die alten Seidenstraßen zwischen China und Syrien. Beiträge zur alten Geographie Asiens. I. Abteilung. (Quellen und Forschungen zur alten Geschichte und Geographie, 21.) Berlin: Weidmannsche Buchhandlung. ——. 1938. Das Land der Seide und Tibet im Lichte der Antike. (Quellen und Forschungen zur Geschichte der Geographie und Völkerkunde, 1.) Leipzig: Koehlers Antiquarium. Hill, John E. 2004. The peoples of the West from the Weilue by Yu Huan. A third century Chinese account composed between 239 and 265 CE, quoted in zhuan 30 of the Sanguozhi, published in 429 CE. Draft version. http://depts. washington.edu/silkroad/texts/weilue/weilue.html (last accessed: X/2009). ——. 2009. Through the jade gate to Rome: a study of the silk routes during the Later Han Dynasty 1st to 2nd centuries CE; an annotated translation of the chronicle on the ‘Western Regions’ from the Hou Hanshu. Charleston, SC: BookSurge. Hinüber, Oskar von. 2004. Die Palola Ṣāhis. Ihre Steininschriften, Inschriften auf Bronzen, Handschriftenkolophone und Schutzzauber. Materialien zur Geschichte von Gilgit und Chilas. (Antiquities of Northern Pakistan, Reports and Studies, 5.) Mainz: von Zabern. Hoffmann, Helmut. 2003. Early and medieval Tibet. In: McKay (ed.), The history of Tibet. Vol. I.: The early period - to c. AD 850, the Yarlung 458 Bettina Zeisler dynasty. London: RoutledgeCurzon, 45–68. [Reprint from D. Sinor (ed.), The Cambridge history of early Inner Asia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990: 371–399, 490–492.] Hugues, Didier (ed). 1996. Les Portugais ou Tibet. Les premiers relations jesuites (1624-1635). 2nd ed., Paris: Editions Chandeigne. Hummel, Siegbert. 1974. Materialien zu einem Wörterbuch der Žaṅ-žuṅSprache. Monumenta Serica 31: 488–520. Iida, Hiroya. 2003. The study of Zhang Zhung: attempts at establishing a new discipline. (Paper of presentation given at the 10th International Conference of the International Association of Tibetan Studies, 6-12 September 2003, Oxford, UK.) http://www.questhimalaya.com/journal/zhang-zhung-01. htm, as accessed in IV/2010. Jettmar, Karl. 1961. Ethnological research in Dardistan 1958. Preliminary report. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 105.1: 79–97. ——. 1977. Bolor – A contribution to the political and ethnic geography of North Pakistan. Zentralasiatische Studien 11: 411–448. ——. 1980. Bolor – Zum Stand des Problems. Zentralasiatische Studien 14.2: 115–132. ——. 2002a [1993]. The Patolas, their govenors and their successors. In: Karl Jettmar, Beyond the gorges of the Indus. Archaeology before excavation. Ed. by Ellen Kattner. Oxford: Oxford University Press: 116–156. [Slightly revised version of the original publication in Antiquities of Northern Pakistan. Vol. 2. Ed. by Karl Jettmar. Mainz: von Zabern.] ——. 2002b [1987]. The Suspended Crossing, where and why? In: Karl Jettmar, Beyond the gorges of the Indus. Archaeology before excavation. Ed. by Ellen Kattner. Oxford: Oxford University Press: 174–181. [Slightly revised version of the original publication in India and the ancient world: history, trade and culture before A.D. 650. P.H.L. Eggermont jubilee volume presented on the occasion of his 70. birthday. Ed. by Gilbert Pollet. Leuven: Katholieke Univ. Leuven.] ——. 2002c [1995]. The Dards and connected problems. Giuseppe Tucci’s last contribution. In: Karl Jettmar, Beyond the gorges of the Indus. Archaeology before excavation. Ed. by Ellen Kattner. Oxford: Oxford University Press: 189–201. [Slightly revised version of the original publication in Giuseppe Tucci nel centenario della nascita: Roma, 7-8 giugno 1994. Ed. nel Beniamino Melasecchi. Roma: Istituto Italiano per il Medio ed Estremo Oriente.] Kaltenmark, Maxime. 1993. Sky and earth, sun and moon, stars, mountains and rivers, and the cardinal points in Ancient China. In: Yves Bonnefoy (ed.), Asian mythologies. Transl. under the direction of Wendy Doniger by Gerald Honigsblum et al. Chicago, London: University of Chicago Press: 236–241. North of Ancient India and South of Khotan 459 Karmay, Samten G. 1998. A general introduction to the history and doctrines of Bon. In Samten G. Karmay, The arrow and the spindle. Studies in history, myths, rituals and beliefs in Tibet. Kathmandu: Mandala Book Point: 104–156. Laufer, Berthold. 1914. Bird Divination among the Tibetans. (Notes on document Pelliot No. 3530, with a Study of Tibetan Phonology of the Ninth Century). T’oung Pao 15: 1–110. ——. 1918. Origin of Tibetan writing. Journal of the American Oriental Society 38: 34–46. Leitner, Gottlieb William. 1889. The Hunza and Nagyr handbook. Being an introduction to a knowledge of the language, race, and countries of Hunza, Nagyr, and a part of Yasin. Calcutta. ——. 1890s. Dardistan in 1866, 1886, and 1893. Being an account of the history, religions, customs, legends, fables, and songs of Gilgit, Ghilás, Kandiá (Gabriál) Yasin, Chitrál, Hunza, Nagyr, and other parts of the Hindukush, as also a supplement to the second edition of the Hunza and Nagyr handbook, and an epitome of part III of the author’s The languages and races of Dardistan. Woking: Oriental University Institute. Reprint 1978, New Delhi: Manjushri. Lindegger, Peter. 1993. Griechische und römische Quellen zum peripheren Tibet. Teil III: Zeugnisse von den Alexanderhistorikern bis zur Spätantike. (Die ‘Seidenstraßen’). (Opuscula Tibetana, 22.) Rikon/Zürich: Tibetan Monastic Institute. Loewe Michael. 1982. Chinese ideas of life and death: faith, myth and reason in the Han period (202 BC-AD 220). London, Boston: Allen & Unwin. Reprint 2005 under the title Faith, Myth and Reason in the Han Period (202BC-AD220), Indianapolis: Hackett. Luczanits, Christian. 2005. The early Buddhist heritage of Ladakh reconsidered. In: John Bray (ed.), Ladakhi histories: local and regional perspectives. (Brill’s Tibetan Studies Library, 9.) Leiden etc.: Brill: 65–96. Minorsky, Vladimir (ed.). 1937. Ḥudūd-al-‘Ālam. ‘The regions of the world’. A Persian geography 372 A.H. ––982 A.D. Translated and explained by V. Minorsky. With the preface by V.V. Barthold. London: University Press. Reprint 1993. (Publications of the Institute for the History of ‘Arabic-Islamic Science, Islamic Geography, 101.) Frankfurt am Main: Institute for the History of ‘Arabic-Islamic Science at the Johann Wolfgang Goethe University. Mkhaspa Ldeḥu (13th c.). Ed. Chabspel Tshebrtan Phuntshogs. 1987. RgyaBodkyi chosbyuŋ rgyaspa [The religious history of India and Tibet in extensio]. S.l. [Lhasa]: Bodljoŋs midmaŋs dpeskrunkhang [People of Tibet publishing house]. Molè, Gabriella. 1970. The T’u-yü-hun from the northern Wei to the Five dynasties. (Serie Orientale Roma, 41.) Roma: Istituto Italiano per il Medio ed Estremo Oriente. 460 Bettina Zeisler Nikitin, Alexander B. 1996: Iran zur Zeit der Sasaniden (224–652 n. Chr.). In: Wilfried Seipel (ed.) Weihrauch und Seide. Alte Kulturen an der Seidenstraße. Wien: Kunsthistorisches Museum Wien: 99–107. Pandit, Ranjit Sitaram. 1935. Kalhaṇa’s Rājataraṅgiṇī. The saga of the kings of Kaśmīr. Translated from the original Saṃskṛta and entitled the River of Kings with an introduction, annotations, appendices, index. Allahabad: Indian Press. Reprint 1968, New Delhi: Sahitya Akademi. Parker, E.H. 1905. China and the ancient Cabul valley. The English Historical Review 20.80: 625–636. Peissel, Michel. 1984. The ants’ gold. The discovery of the Greek El Dorado in the Himalayas. London: Harvill. Pelliot, Paul. 1959. Notes on Marco Polo, I, ouvrage posthume. Paris: Adrien-Maisonneuve. ——. 1961. Histoire ancienne du Tibet. (Oeuvres Posthumes de Paul Pelliot, 5.) Paris: Adrien-Maisonneuve. ——. 1963. Notes on Marco Polo, II, ouvrage posthume. Paris: Adrien-Maisonneuve. Petech, Luciano. 1939. A study on the chronicles of Ladakh (Indian Tibet). Calcutta: Calcutta Oriental Press. ——. 1947. Alcuni nomi geografi nel La dvags rgyal rabs. Rivista degli Studi Orientali 22: 82–91. ——. 1977. The kingdom of Ladakh c. 950–1842 A. D. (Serie Orientale Roma, 51.) Roma: Istituto Italiano per il Medio ed Estremo Oriente. ——. 1994. The Disintegration of the Tibetan Kingdom. In: Per Kværne (ed.) Tibetan Studies: proceedings of the 6th seminar of the International Association for Tibetan Studies, Fagernes 1992. (Occasional papers; Institute for Comparative Research in Human culture 1,1.) Oslo: The Institute for Comparative Research in Human Culture. ——. 1998. Western Tibet: historical introduction. In: Deborah E. KlimburgSalter (ed.), Tabo, a lamp for the kingdom. Early Indo-Tibetan Buddhist art in the western Himalaya. New York: Thames and Hundson: 229–255. Ramsay, Henry Lushington. 1890. Western Tibet: A practical dictionary of the language and customs of the districts included in the Ladák wazarat. Lahore: W. Ball & Co. Government Printers. Richardson, Hugh E. 1971. Who was Yum-brtan? Dans: Ariane Macdonald (éd.), Études tibétaines dédiées à la mémoire de Marcelle Lalou. Paris: Librairie d’Amérique et d’Orient: 433–439. Rockhill, William Woodville. 1891. The land of the lamas. Notes of a journey through China, Mongolia and Tibet. New York and London: The Century Company. Reprint 2005, Delhi: Winsome Books. North of Ancient India and South of Khotan 461 Rossi Filibeck, Elena de. 2007. Poetical prefaces of manuscripts from Western Tibet. In: Amy Heller and Giacomella Orofino (eds.), Discoveries in Western Tibet and the Western Himalaya: essays on history, literature, archaeology and art. PIATS 2003: Tibetan studies: Proceedings of the Tenth Seminar of the International Association for Tibetan Studies, Oxford. (Brill’s Tibetan studies library 10,8.) Leiden, etc: 151–172. Sahni, Pandit Daya Ram and August Herrmann Francke. 1908. References to the Bhottas or Bhauttas in the Rajatarangini of Kashmir. The Indian Antiquary: 181–192. Sen Tansen. 2002. ‘In search of longevity and good karma: Chinese diplomatic missions to Middle India in the seventh century.’ Journal of World History 12.1: 1–28. Snellgrove, David Llewellyn and Tadeusz Skorupski. 1980. The cultural heritage of Ladakh. Vol. 2. Zanskar and the cave temples of Ladakh. Warminster: Aris & Phillips. Stang, Haakon. 1990. Arabic sources on the Amdo and a note on Gesar of Gliṅ. Acta Orientalia Scientarum Hungaricae 44: 159–174. Stein, Marc Aurel. 1900. Kalhaṇa’s Rājataraṅgiṇī: a chronicle of the kings of Kaśmīr, translated, with an introduction, commentary, & appendices. Vol. I, Introduction, Books I-VII. Vol. II, Book VIII, notes, geographical memoir, index, maps. Westminster: A. Constable & Co. Reprint 1961. Delhi etc.: Motilal Banarsidass. ——. 1932. On ancient tracks past the Pamirs. Himalayan Journal 4: 1–26. ——. 1942. From Swat to the Gorges of the Indus. The Geographical Journal 100. 2: 49–56. Stein, Rolf Alfred. 1951. Mi-Ñag et Si-Hia. Bulletin de l’École Française d’Extrême-Orient 44.1: 223–265. ——. 1959. Recherches sur l’épopée et le barde au Tibet. (Bibliothèque de l’Institut des Hautes Études Chinoises, 13.) Paris: Presses Universitaires de France. ——. 1961. Les tribus anciennes des marches sino-tibétaines. Légendes, classifications et histoire. (Bibliothèque de l’Institut des Hautes Études Chinoises, 15.) Paris: Presses Universitaires de France. ——. 1981. La civilisation tibétaine. Rééd. rev. et augm. de l’éd. de 1962. Paris: Le Sycomore. Strachey, Henry. 1853. Physical geography of Western Tibet. Journal of the Royal Geographical Society of London 23: 1–69. Takeuchi, Tsuguhito. 2004. The Tibetan military system and its activities from Khotan to Lop-Nor. In: Susan Whitfield and Ursula Sims-Williams (eds.), The silk road. Trade, travel, war and faith. Chicago, Ill.: Serindica, 50–56. 462 Bettina Zeisler Thomas, Frederick William. 1935. Tibetan literary texts and documents concerning Chinese Turkestan. Part I: Literary texts. (Oriental Translation Fund, New Series, 32.) London: The Royal Asiatic Society. ——. 1951. Tibetan literary texts and documents concerning Chinese Turkestan. Part II: Documents. (Oriental Translation Fund, New Series, 37.) London: The Royal Asiatic Society. Thoussaint, Gustave-Charles. 1933. Le dict de Padma: Padma thang yig. Paris: Libraire Ernest Leroux. Reprint 1994: Le dict de Padma. Paris: Les Deux Océans. Tong Tao. 2008. The silk roads of the northern Tibetan plateau during the early middle ages (from the Han to the Tang dynasty) as reconstructed from archaeological and written sources. Tübingen: Univ. Diss. http://tobias-lib. ub.uni-tuebingen.de/volltexte/2008/3628, accessed XII/2008. Tournadre, Nicholas and Sangda Dorje. 1998. Manuel de tibétain standard, langue et civilisation. Bodkyi spyiskad slobdeb [Textbook of colloquial Tibetan]. Paris: Langues & Mondes/L’Asiathèque. Tucci, Giuseppe. 1956. Preliminary Report on two scientific expeditions in Nepal. (Serie Orientale Roma, 10, Materials for the study of Nepalese history and culture, 1.) Roma: Istituto Italiano per il Medio ed Estremo Oriente. ——. 1971a. Himalayan Cīna. Dans: Ariane Macdonald (éd.), Études tibétaines dédiées à la mémoire de Marcelle Lalou. Paris: Librairie d’Amérique et d’Orient: 548–552. ——. 1971b. Travels of Tibetan pilgrims in the Swat valley. In: Giuseppe Tucci, Opera Minora II. (Studi orientali, 6.) Roma: Bardi: 367–418. ——. 1973. Tibet. München: Nagel. ——. 1977. On Swāt. The Dards and connected problems. East and West 27.1–2: 9–103. ——. 1988. Rin-chen-bzaṅ-po and the renaissance of Buddhism in Tibet around the millennium. First draft translation by Nancy Kipp Smith. (Śatapiṭaka Series, Indo-Asian Literatures, 348.) New Delhi: Aditya Prakashan. Uebach, Helga. 2003. On the Tibetan expansion from seventh to mideight centuries and the administration (khö) of the countries subdued. In: Alex McKay (ed.), Tibet and her neighbours. A History. London: Mayer, 21–27. Uray, Géza. 1962. Old Tibetan dra-ma draṅs. Acta Orientalia Scientarum Hungaricae 14.2: 219–230. ——. 1990. The old name of Ladakh. Acta Orientalia Scientarum Hungaricae 44.1–2: 217–224. North of Ancient India and South of Khotan 463 Vigne, Godfrey Thomas. 1842. Travels in Kashmir, Ladak, Iskardo, the countries adjoining the mountain-course of the Indus, the Himalaya, north of the Panjab. With Map engraved by direction of the Hon. East India Company, and other illustrations. Vol. 2. London: Henry Colburn. Vitali, Roberto. 1996. The Kingdoms of Gu.ge Pu.hrang. According to mNga’.ris rgyal.rabs by Gu.ge mkhan.chen Ngag.dbang grags.pa. Dharamsala: Tho ling gtsug lag khang lo cig stong ’khor ba’i rjes dran mdzad sgo’i go sgrig tshogs chung. ——. 2003. Tribes which populated the Tibetan plateau, as treated in the texts collectively called the Khungs chen po bzhi. Lungta 16: 37–63. ——. 2008. A tentative classification of the bya ru can kings of Zhang zhung. Revue d’Études Tibétaines 15: 379–420. Watters, Thomas. 1904/1905. On Yuan Chwang’s travels in India (A.D. 629 - 645). Ed. after his death by T.W. Rhys Davids and S.W. Bushell. Vol. I, II. London: Royal Asiatic Society. Reprint in one volume, 1973, Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal. Workman, William Hunter. 1905. From Srinagar to the Sources of the Chogo Lungma Glacier. The Geographical Journal 25.3: 245–265. Yamaguchi, Zuihō. 1970. Su-p’i 蘇毗 or Sun-po 孫波. A historicogeographical study on the relation between rTsaṅ yul and Yan lag gsum paḥi ru. Acta Asiatica 19: 97–133. Zeisler, Bettina. Forthcoming a. Ethnic diversity, language contact, and the Old Tibetan lingua franca: early Tibetan history and the development of the modern Tibetan languages. ——. Forthcoming b. Kenhat, the dialects of Upper Ladakh and Zanskar. In: Mark Turin and Bettina Zeisler, eds., Himalayan Languages: Studies in phonology, semantics, morphology and syntax. Leiden etc.: Brill: 233–302. ——. Forthcoming c. For love of the word: a new translation of Pt 1287, the Old Tibetan Chronicle, chapter I. In: Imaeda, Yoshiro, Matthew T. Kapstein, and Tsuguhitu Takeuchi, eds., Studies on Old Tibetan Documents. (Old Tibetan Documents Online Monograph Series, 3.) Tokyo: Research Institute for Languages and Cultures of Asia and Africa, Tokyo University of Foreign Studies. Zhang, Yisun [Kraŋ Dbyisun] et. al. (eds.) 1993. Bod-Rgya tshigmdzod chenmo [The large Tibetan Chinese Dictionary]. Vol. 1–2. Pecin: Mirigs Dpeskrunkhaŋ [Beijing: Nationalities Press]. Sculptural Production during the bstan pa phyi dar and its Stylistic Nomenclature: Some Examples from Khu nu of Rong Chung Laxman S. Thakur Shimla Collecting material for writing a New Indo-Tibetica Series the present author has been conducting a village-to-village survey in Lahaul-Spiti and Kinnaur–two frontier districts of Himachal Pradesh. The present study focuses primarily on the Buddhist monastery of Ropa, and its astounding wooden and clay sculptural wealth (Figure 1). The village of Ropa (Tibetan: Ro-dpag, Ro-pag and, Ro-spag) is situated at a height of 2725 m in pargana Shuwa of tehsil Pooh in Kinnaur district, at a distance of 16 km from the national highway number 22 (Figure 2). With the exception of Gyawang village, which is bifurcated into two halves on either side of the Shyaso rivulet, the other four revenue villages in the Ropa valley are located on the left side of the river. The Ropa monastery has been also mentioned in the biographies of Rin-chen bzang-po (rDo-rje tshe-brtan 1977). It is indeed surprising that two early-twentieth century European explorers, namely, A. H. Francke and G. Tucci did not visit this monastery. The district census handbook of Kinnaur briefly says that the Bodh Labrang temple at Ropa is 210 years old (1982: pp. 52-3). The main purpose of this study is: 1) to test archaeologically whether architectural and sculptural remains preserved in this monastery belong to the time of Rin-chen bzang-po; 2) what could be the period of its construction, and other associated sculptural remains preserved in the monastery 3), and to situate this monastery in the overall Buddhist environment that prevailed in the kingdoms of Guge and Purang during the tenth and eleventh centuries. And, finally to assess the importance of the sculptural wealth preserved in this monastery for the study of Mahayana Buddhism during the bstan-pa phyi-dar has been highlighted. The Ropa monastery: an architectural evolution Most of the Buddhist monasteries constructed during the ‘second diffusion of Buddhism’ in a vast region from Ladakh to western Tibet embody certain architectural features that had been borrowed from diverse artistic sources (Thakur 2002: pp. 215-37). Influence of local architectural practices and from areas contiguous to Lahaul-Spiti and Kinnaur can also be traced to a considerable extent. Nako. There are many Tibetan inscriptions written on the eastern wall of the antechamber. The rectangular hall (’du-khang). Thakur The architectural survey of an east-oriented monastery at Ropa carried out in situ seems to suggest two possible phases of construction (Figure 3). The walls of the second phase consist of the alternate courses of wood and stone. Two clay Bodhisattvas (one each on either side at the entrance of the sanctum) are placed in lalitasana. Sculpted in the finest traditions of the ‘mNga’-ris style’. In the centre of the hall has been constructed an altar. The latter method of construction is very popular and considered to be of earthquake proof quality in the hills of Himachal Pradesh (Thakur 1996: chapter 4). Ribba. 72-6 and forthcoming). representing Vajrapani and Hayagriva. the stones used in the construction are not very well dressed as usually seen in the pent roofed temples in Himachal Pradesh. A total number of nine pillars (four are square and five round) support the ceiling and an upper storey of the temple. Charang. however. explained below and elsewhere (Thakur 2001: pp. This addition has been made in the original plans irrespective of the sectarian affiliation of the monastery. The sanctum (dri-gtsang-khang) enshrining five Tathagatas. . Pooh. measures 333 cm by 260 cm. The entrance into the hall is through a door facing east. is much larger and measures 709 cm by 280 cm. is placed a huge statue of Padmasambhava. Men and women can assemble in a wooden pavilion constructed in front of the door. The left corner is adorned by a dungyur (dung-phyur). The south wall has an entrance from where an adherent Buddhist of Kinnaur can enter into the antechamber and could rotate the prayer wheel for the welfare of the entire village and the sentient beings. Looking like a box-type pedestal (ht 78 cm). Five Tathagata Buddhas are enshrined on the raised pedestals in the sanctum. Two protective Bodhisattvas are fixed high up on the eastern wall of the hall. measuring 147 cm by 110 cm. The entrance into the sgo-khang (antechamber) is possible through a 134 cm wide-door. The main purpose of this altar was to keep oil-lamps burning and to keep other items of rituals and worship associated with the deities of the Vajradhatumandala. The ceiling of this pavilion rests on six wooden pillars. What is peculiar with the Buddhist monasteries constructed during the bstanpa phyi-dar is that no provision was originally made for the prayer wheel within the monastic precincts or in the gtsug-lag-khang. Lhalung and Gumrang. constructed on the right hand side. two wooden Bodhisattvas are standing against the south and north walls of the hall. the use of the horizontal logs of wood has been sparse. 21422. 2006: pp. partitioned into two halves by a 19 cm by 12 cm wooden pillar. Sculptural arrangement made during its original construction in the hall and the sanctum remains astonishingly undisturbed. Equally fascinating are other wooden and clay sculptures placed on the altar (Figure 4). Prayer wheels have been subsequently added at the monastic complex of Tabo (constructed on popular demand within the monastic complex along the eastern boundary wall as recently as 2001) Ropa.466 Laxman S. The walls of the monastery consist of the rubble masonry. 484 cm (west) and 252 cm (north) respectively. and it also prevented the penetration of direct sunlight in the sanctum. All early monasteries were provided this type of architectural device either in the mandapa or garbhagriha to allow sufficient amount of light in the sanctum. Sculptures in clay and wood The Ropa monastery preserves many exquisite pieces of sculptures. Amitabha clay 4. 406 cm and north wall 398 cm). There are also some clay sculptures of very recent period in the monastery. also see Indian Archaeology 1991-92.Sculptural Examples from Khu nu of Rong Chung 467 The external wall measurement also varies considerably (assembly hall: south wall. however. Vajrasattva wood Ht(cm) Width (cm) Colour 145 108 white 130 100 blue 124 85 red 132 90 yellow 132 90 green 186 86 white 170 70 white 180 50 red 155 30 blue 170 103 yellow 170 91 yellow Location sanctum sanctum sanctum sanctum sanctum hall hall hall hall hall hall . Vajrapani clay 10. 2) sculptures placed on the rectangular altar in the hall. antechamber: south wall. The same method was also used very efficiently at Tabo. The sanctum’s external walls measure 260 cm (south). It has a provision for ventilation in the centre of the roof. Hayagriva clay 9.A Review: p. About 50 cm wide additional support has been provided for the mandapa and garbhagriha. 284-5. It also prevented the leakage of water into the basement of monastery. Ratnasambhava clay 5. Akshobhya clay 3. Vairocana clay 2. For the sake of convenience they can be grouped into three categories: 1) sculptures placed in the sanctum and the hall. The wooden umbrella-type canopy covers the ventilation. Bodhisattva clay 8. Amoghasiddhi clay 6. 175). unfortunately the Archaeological Survey of India in September-October 1991 has removed the sifted clay walls originally provided around each temple (Thakur 2001: pp. Majority of these sculptures belong to the period of its foundation. Padmapani wood Avalokiteshvara 11. 467 cm. They can be divided into two material types: clay and wood. Bodhisattva clay 7. The main purpose of such support was to prevent the collapse of the structure during the winter months from the pressure of snow. Table 1: Sculptures in the sanctum and hall of the Ropa monastery Name Material 1. The following tables provide the exact description of each statue found in the sanctum and hall of the Ropa monastery. The roof of the monastery is flat. and 3) those in the sgo-khang. 513 cm. north wall. Avalokiteshvara wood 8. Tsarang or Charang (Kinnaur) and Tabo respectively. resting on the multi-petalled lotus-asanas.Avalokiteshvara wood 7. These wooden Bodhisattvas represent the finest woodcarving and sculptural traditions of the western-Himalayan region.Buddha clay 2.Ushnishavijaya wood 9. particularly the style and craftsmanship of number 10 and 11 listed above let me briefly introduce the second group of sculptures now placed on the rectangular altar. The eyes of these statues are open and looking . Padmapani Avalokiteshvara holds a long stalk of a fullblossomed lotus flower in his left hand whereas the right hand is in varadamudra (Figure 5). Thakur All these eleven sculptures are part of the architectural ensemble and each one of them has been assigned a particular position during the time of its construction.468 Laxman S.5 Colour yellow white yellow red green white white yellow blue Six wooden sculptures Two Standing Wooden Bodhisattvas Two massive Bodhisattvas made of polychrome wood are placed against the north and south walls of the mandapa. Before we assess the date.Vajrasattva clay 3.5 47 31.5 23.Unidentified deity wood Ht(cm) 29 35 51.5 69 84 60 91 Width (cm) 20 23 30 28 2 44 41. Jewel-studded triple-pointed crowns enshrine in their central part respective Buddha–the crown of Avalokiteshvara has Amitabha whereas that of Vajrasattva shows Akshobhya. Both Bodhisattvas are in sthanakamudra.5 37. Wooden sculptures of similar craftsmanship have also been found at Pooh. Table 2: Sculptures on the rectangular altar of the Ropa monastery Name Material 1.Amitabha clay 5. Four wooden sculptures (discussed below) placed on the rectangular altar are also part of the same sculptural tradition.Amoghasiddhi (?) clay 6. perhaps sculpted by craftsman at the workshop(s) in the Ropa valley. Vajrasattva however tightly grips the vajra in his right hand at the chest level and the left hand grasps the bell (Figure 4). Padmapani Avalokiteshvara and Vajrasattva both seem to have been carved by the same takshaka for they bear many common sculptural characteristics.Ushnishavijaya clay 4. They represent Padmapani Avalokiteshvara (ht 170 cm) and Vajrasattva (also ht 170 cm). Undoubtedly. Four wooden Bodhisattvas on the rectangular altar Four wooden sculptures along with later clay sculptures are placed on the altar. and other clay sculptures embellishing the sanctum and hall of the monastery. the middle hand is in vitarkamudra and the lowest in varadamudra. Such features are noticeable in the clay sculptures fixed on to the walls of the mandapa of the gtsug-lag-khang at Tabo (Thakur 2001: pp. They too deserve a detailed analysis for they represent the exquisite wooden sculptural traditions of the upper Sutlej valley during the beginning of the bstan-pa phyi-dar. Lahaul-Spiti and Kinnaur) during the tenth and eleventh centuries. Among the other items of decoration include stringed armlets. The long ear lobes are decorated with the karnaphulas (not ekavalis) and similar rosettes appear above the ears. wristlets and the beaded mekhala decorated with a tiny rosette at the centre.Sculptural Examples from Khu nu of Rong Chung 469 into the phenomenal world. as noticed at Tabo. Sitting on an exalted seat. One of the marked peculiarities of these sculptures is a long vanamala. The iconographic features of this type of Bodhisattva are very similar to Sugatisandarshana Lokeshvara with the exception that the abhayamudra is . This type of Avalokiteshvara figure was very popular in the western Himalaya (Ladakh. from top to bottom: a full blossomed flower. The famous marble statue enshrined in the Triloknatha temple at Tunde in Lahaul also bears the same iconographic features (Thakur 1996: pp. these handsomely sculpted figures were carved in situ along with four other wooden sculptures placed on the altar. it was not possible to bring them to Ropa from elsewhere in Kinnaur. The right hand at the top had mala. Was it possible to carve these sculptures elsewhere in the mNa’-ris bskorgsum or Khu-nu. and also their massive size. 38-139). snake and a kalasa. the six-armed Avalokiteshvara is shown in lalitasana (Figure 7). The identification becomes more precise from the effigy of Amitabha carved over the head. The round-shaped faces with almond type eyes can easily be perceived in these sculptures. now broken. which fall on to the shoulders in similar fashion. The question arises: whether these sculptures are part of the monastic complex or were collected from elsewhere in the western Himalaya? Before we provide answer to these questions it is necessary to evaluate their artistic impressiveness. He carries in the left hands. so often attributed to the Kashmiri origin. 57-8). and later transported to Ropa as imagined by some scholars? Considering the delicate craftsmanship displayed by the wood carvers in sculpting the statues. The facial details are serene–the Vajrasattva has an urna between the eyebrows (Figure 6). slung around the shoulders and it hangs down below the knees. Equally fascinating are the ringlets of hair. Six-armed Ushnishavijaya is carved in sthanakamudra supported by five bharaputras. Another common feature shared by these sculptures is a long vanamala slung over the shoulders. The left leg rests comfortably on a specially designed lotus-flower cushion. This is an indicative of a workshop where takshakas specialised in this delicate and sophisticated carving technique displaying respective Tathagatas on the crowns. He is bedecked with a single-beaded hara. She wears a coloured nether garment. Thakur replaced by the mudra that is peculiar to the western-Himalayan region. Two pleats of hair on either side falls on to the shoulders. and snake is not shown in the hand of Sugatisandarshana (Bhattacharryya 1968: p. Pooh and Tsarang bear a unique characteristic that the lobes of the diadem. 50. The standing acolyte is carved on either side of the oval-shaped aureole. looking like lion faces. It holds what looks like a snake. The jewel-studded diadem depicts a seated tiny figure of Amitabha in dhyanamudra. yellow and red colours. nupura and valaya. The nimbus and aureole are painted multi-coloured with a combination of black. sometimes central or occasionally all the three carry tiny images of respective Tathagatas. 53). A Bodhisattva sitting on peacock may perhaps represent Vajrapani (?) (Getty 1962: p. The attribute of left uppermost left hand is broken (it must be a bow). The wooden sculptures carved at Ropa. keyura. Apart from the Triloknatha marble and stone statues.470 Laxman S. The last sculpture in this group represents a blue-coloured Bodhisattva shown seated on peacock in lalitasana. Its exact identification remains somewhat controversial but he holds a mala between the tarjani finger and thumb in the right hand. Equally important is another sculpture of Bodhisattva Avalokiteshvara. we have noticed two more example of this type of Avalokiteshvara from Gandhola in Lahaul. the middle hand holds a visvavajra and the lower most is in varadamudra. 51b). 396). He holds the full-blossomed lotus flower at the level of the chest in the manner a standing wooden Bodhisattva holds at the lo-tsa-ba’s monastery at Pooh. shown seated in vajraparyankamudra on a multi-petelled lotus. A triple-pointed crown has been carved in the same manner discussed earlier in the case of two standing Bodhisattvas. The carver has shown a slight bend at the hip level and she displays the following laksanas and mudras: the uppermost right hand is raised and holds an arrow. . nupura and valaya. Similar statues have come to light from Kashmir (Pal 1975: figs. and a mural painted on the wall of the temple at Thangi in Kinnaur district. Ushnishavijaya is bedecked with numerous ornaments such as the round earrings. the middle holds a noose and the lower hand grips firmly the long stalk of the lotus. the left hand rests on the thigh of the left leg. that is Tibet) after spending ten years in Kashmir and eastern India. 258. another version of the Tibetan text of his biography now in Lokesh Chandra’s collection (Chandra. The possibility of this date has been arrived after making calculations of certain events and their chronological sequence given in different biographies that have come down to us in manuscript form. and a few dated Tibetan inscriptions from the times of Ye-shes-’od and Byang-chub-’od. His return to Guge and Purang cannot be imagined before AD 1002-3. 175. twelve years had passed. 5 emphatically records that (rDo-rje tshe-brtan: p. Three biographies differ in calculating the period of Rin-chen bzang-po’s stay in western Tibet (Guge and Purang) before he was again asked by his patron Ye-shes-’od to go to Kashmir to bring books (pe chas) and artists (lha bzos). that is AD 975 and returned to Guge (the actual word used in the manuscripts is bod. Seven versions of manuscripts reproduced in the Collected Biographical Material (hereafter CBM) are facsimile copies [italics ours] as clearly pointed out by its editor both in the sub-title and preface of the book.. line 2): rgya gar na bod du byon pa dang de bar la lo bcu gnyis song ba| Until now. What could be determinant for deciding the date of these sculptures is the possible date of the establishment of the Ropa monastery. All the six biographical accounts agree that he proceeded to Kashmir in the wood-hog (shing-phag). 6 reads (rDo-rje tshe-brtan: p. 6 mention ‘twelve years’ instead of ‘ten’. Text of his biography reproduced as CBM. et al. Rin-chen bzang-po’s immediate disciple named Guge khyi-thang-pa dPal-Ye-shes wrote one such biography. no. As pointed out earlier that Ropa has been listed among the ‘twenty-one’ smaller monasteries constructed in Guge and Purang after the completion of Rinchen bzang-po’s six-year ‘second sojourn’ in Kashmir. However. arriving from India to Tibet. 1988: p. line 2): der rgya gar nas bod du byon te lo bcu song ba dang | Then ten years had passed since he came from India to Tibet. No. It seems quite reasonable that Rin-chen bzang-po (AD 958-1055) spent roughly ten to twelve years in Tibet before he was asked to go to Kashmir . His return to Guge can be fixed in the woodbird year (shing bya). 113) and CBM. that is AD 985. metal and clay would help us to understand them better in art-historical contexts. No.Sculptural Examples from Khu nu of Rong Chung 471 Discussion and concluding remarks After discussing the artistic and iconographic peculiarities of six wooden sculptures a stylistic comparison with near contemporary sculptures in wood. The CBM. No. Majority of the clay and wooden sculptures are part of the originally conceptualised Vajradhatumandala that was so popular in the school of Rinchen bzang-po. CBM. and stayed in Kashmir for another six years. Kha-char. In that sentence the following monasteries are discussed in the following order (rDo-rje tshe-brtan. the foundation of the Ropa monastery could not have been laid before that date. ‘Ri-sag’ cannot be identified with Ropa with absolute certainty. table 1). Ngag-dbang grags-pa has certainly derived this information from the available biographies of Rin-chen bzang-po. Two names such as Ka-nam and sPu are taken from a sentence where the available biographies discuss the monasteries of the borderland areas (gzhan yang mtha’ ’dul gis gtsug lag khang). Ta-po. Snellgrove and Skorupski 1980: p. and later at Charang in Kinnaur. line 2. Therefore. This mandala at Ropa was not conceived on a grand scale as visually depicted at Tabo. They bear common iconographic characteristics that were popularised and efficiently practiced by the artists who were traversing to and fro between the western-Himalayan kingdoms in the west and western Tibet in the east during the tenth and eleventh centuries. AD 1002-3. All wooden sculptures preserved at the Ropa monastery bear sturdy anatomical features. Thakur for ten years period of stay in Tibet cannot be accepted for the simple season that in AD 996 he laid and supervised the construction of some monasteries in the mNga’-ris region. 44. Most likely.472 Laxman S. especially the two standing Bodhisattvas are carved . Ropa is mentioned in all the seven different versions checked by us (Thakur 2001: p. He seems to have returned with books and thirty-two artists in c. guiding the artists to use an appropriate Vajradhatumandala in decorating the walls of the monasteries. 3: p. Ka-nam and sPu (Vitali 1996: p. and also translating several sets of sutras (especially Prajnaparamita copies) and tantras for immediate use in the newly-constructed monastic establishments. The late fifteenth century chronicle mNga’-ris rgyal-rabs written by Ngag-dbang grags-pa has clubbed a monastery named ‘Ri-sag’ along with Nyarma. we would like to suggest that Rin-chen bzang-po perhaps returned to Kashmir not before AD 997. line 29): lho’i de gar| dpag| drug phag gi mon| nga ra’i ka nam| rong chung gi spu| The present author thinks that ‘Ri-sag gi mo-nang’ in the mNga’-ris rgyal-rabs is possibly a corruption of ‘drug phag gi mon’. The other two monasteries are only listed after providing the list of ‘twenty-one temples’ immediately above this sentence. At Ropa only five Buddhas. 110. Wooden sculptures discussed above formed part of the collection probably added one by one soon after the foundation of the monastery. guardian deities and some Bodhisattvas are depicted. 108. 95). normally shorter fold on the left leg of the statues (Henss 2002: 23-82. figs. From time to time they made new innovations according to the demands of the patrons and the availability of the material on which they worked. 5c. mudras and asanas. the later date is taken broadly because by that date Rin-chen bzang-po was eighty-five year old and did not travel widely as he used to do in his early . and other canons of proportions. High ornamental pedestals and thrones carved with multi-petalled lotus base (without showing the stamenoids) are evocative of similar types noticed on the pedestals of the metal bronzes attributed to the Kashmir style. 10 and 16). a feature also noticed in the clay sculptures of Avalokiteshvara and Mahasthamaprapta standing at the entrance of the sanctum in the gTsug-lag-khang at Tabo (Thakur 2001: pp. At the same time we do not know whether some of them settled in western Tibet or returned after decorating the monasteries. so fascinatingly shown by the Kashmiri and Chamba artists. Such compositional scheme reached the western Himalayan areas from Kashmir via Chamba and Kulu. It is not clear from any source for how long thirty-two artists brought by Rin-chen bzang-po from Kashmir around circa AD 1002-1003 remained in the regions of the mNga’-ris. 9. to one only. Varieties of aureoles and nimbus noticed here cannot be construed as if these sculptures have wide chronological gaps. Chamba and Kulu regions from the eighth century onward were familiar with the above-mentioned aesthetic and iconographic peculiarities. The group of artists working at Ropa created different types of prabhamandalas for four statues according to their sizes. Artists in Kashmir. One of the common features of sculptural decoration is the carving of rosettes above ears.Sculptural Examples from Khu nu of Rong Chung 473 from the huge deodar wooden logs. Who were their most notable novices? Archaeological remains examined in situ indicate that the Ropa monastery was constructed possibly between AD 1003 and 1042. Lahaul-Spiti and western Tibet showing uneven folds of the dhoti. All sculptures show open eyes that are looking into the phenomenal world. 7. Their facial features are exquisitely chiselled out and there is a slight bend at the hip level. Charang and Thangi respectively. One fold of the dhoti of the Bodhisattva remains higher than the other. Another favourite decorative predilection among the artists was to depict a long vanamala that hangs down below the knees. What is peculiar to notice is the use of the same colour scheme for decorating the plain areas in the nimbus section. 115-20). orange and red. 6. Three colours are used: blue. Round faces are so vigorously carved with plump cheeks and chins are carved out prominently. The nimbus section is always plain as so often seen in the stone and stucco sculptures from the Gandhara region. 8. There is a perceptible change from two bends. This feature has been noticed on the clay sculptures of the Vajradhatumandala in the gTsug-lag-khang at Tabo and also wooden and clay sculptures found at Pooh. There are a large number of clay and metal images from Ladakh. Surviving archaeological evidence preserved in situ presents fairly a broad understanding of prevalent Buddhist ideology propagated by the rulers of the western Tibet. Prajnaparamita and some Dharini texts along with necessary ceremonial items for performance of rituals and consecrations of Vajrayana divinities. 1980b: pp. 150-62. It is therefore quite reasonable to assign six wooden sculptures to the first half of the eleventh century. biographies and mahatmyas) cannot be fully trusted for many a time in them historical events are represented as fictitious occurrences. It was ensured that each monastery be provided with important Buddhist scriptures. Bonpos and already existing Buddhism. This style embedded the finest sculptural traditions of Kashmir. thus they would mark the beginning of a new aesthetic ideals in Asiatic plastic art what I have preferred to call the ‘mNga’-ris style’.474 Laxman S. 3-28 and 2009: forthcoming). including the copies of the mDo-mang (‘many sutras’). Notably two rulers of western Tibet (Ye-shes-’od and Zhi-ba-’od) issued ordinances (bka’-shogs) specifically denouncing such pernicious sacramental ceremonies involving the actual practice of sex in the career of celibate monks (Karmay 1980a: pp. The survival of the archaeological evidence in the monasteries constructed during the bstan-pa phyi-dar is of paramount concern for actually knowing the intricate processes and problems associated with the introduction of Buddhism in the region. The sculptural productions of the early period in the collection can clearly be distinguished from those made in later period when wall decorations were done afresh. They also financed the construction of monasteries and stupas along the most recognizable routes of communication across the kingdom. This chapter of Buddhist spread in the land of snows provides many vicissitudes of encounter with the local beliefs. The entire state became . Thakur days. It was ensured that each monastery must possess essential texts for daily recitation by the community of monks. Kulu and Madhyadesha. These rulers were very much concerned to check the spread of corrupt practices that had crept in the Anuttarayogatantras. Sustained collaborative efforts between Indian Buddhist Sanskritists and Buddhologists of Kashmir and eastern India and equally persuasive Tibetan pupils were made possible by stupendous financial liabilities undertaken by the rulers of Guge and Purang. Chamba. The rulers of western Tibet therefore adopted a multi-pronged strategy to check the spread of corrupt practices in the Anuttarayogatantra. The medieval Tibetan literary sources (chronicles. Wooden sculptures along with clay sculptures in situ at Ropa are splendid creation of both Kashmiri and Kashmiri-trained local artists. including Atisha. and to establish unadulterated Buddhism. from India (Kashmir and eastern India) to western Tibet to impart true knowledge of the sutras and tantras to Tibetans. They invited the most celebrated teachers of Indian Buddhism. Preservation of original copies of some Tibetan translations of sutra and tantra literature at Tabo. In the first instance. Tsarang. McKay 2003: pp. at Nako. 21-31). or Bonpo faiths. An analysis of extant artistic remains in the monastic complexes constructed during the bstan-pa phyi-dar makes it abundantly clear that for architectural and sculptural decorations the most popular text used was the Sarvatathagata tattva-sangraha (The Symposium of Truth). Tabo. Lhalung and Gumrang have used this mandala with minor variations. Vairocana is the main presiding deity in the mandala of the Sarva-tathagata tattva-sangraha. and AD 1042-1076. The first phase was dominated by Rin-chen bzang-po (AD 958-1055). Phases of Mahayana Buddhist thought during the eleventh century can be broadly divided into two periods: c AD 996-1042. and had played its assigned role by transforming the lives of nomadic and pastoral people through an alternative path that promised enlightenment and liberation as well as wisdom and compassion. and second by Dipankarashrijnana (AD 982-1054) and his disciples. 123-33). . The main interest of Rin-chen bzang-po was in the ‘Perfection of Wisdom’ literature (prajnaparamita) and the tantras. Tholing and a few other places in the mNga’-ris bskor-gsum. Each monastery became a lantern for the region in which it was constructed. to equip them with authentic Buddhist texts and also to decorate their interior with impressive statuary was a spirited challenge that Rin-chen bzang-po and his munificent patrons accomplished whilst effectively combating many problems that arose during the implementation of the Buddhist doctrine in the mNga’-ris region (Reugg 1984: pp. Entrance to these new centres of Buddhist faith was open to all people belonging to diverse ethnic and linguistic groups irrespective of their social and economic status. Lari. During these two phases Buddhist sutras and tantras were translated amass and many monastic centers established along the trade routes or places that were earlier established centres of local cults. Establishment of new gtsug-lag-khangs in every central and peripheral parts of the empire. a large number of ‘authentic’ texts were translated into Tibetan by establishing translation workshops at Nyarma. and some decades later. whereas Atisha devoted himself to the study of monastic vinaya as well as in tantras. 369-81.Sculptural Examples from Khu nu of Rong Chung 475 totally identified with the propagation of Buddhism. The sculptors at places such as Ropa. Tabo. Pooh and Charang (all located in Himachal Pradesh) seem to vindicate the statements of later literary works that Rin-chen bzang-po and his many Indian and Tibetan collaborators translated original ‘orthodox’ Buddhist texts from Sanskrit into Tibetan for discarding the practice of corrupt rites and malicious religious offering causing harm to both men and animals (Thakur 2008: pp. Shimla. Michael. Thakur Bibliographical References Bhattacharyya. D Seyfort. P. Tokyo. 1980a. 1996. pp. Bronzes of Kashmir. Munshiram Manoharlal. 10001500 A. Acta Indologia. Archaeological Survey of India.). XXVII (3-4). 1977. Vikas Publishing House. Indian Archaeology 1991-92–A Review. 23-82. Collected Biographical Material about Lo-chen Rinchen bzang-po and his Subsequent Reembodiments. Samten G. Michael and Aung San Suu Kyi (eds. 123-33. Samten G. Karmay. Ruegg. New Delhi. “The Ordinance of lHa Bla-ma Ye-shes-’od”. 2003. 1975. V (3). The Tibet Journal. 2008 (forthcoming). Pal. 2: Zangskar and the Cave Temples of Ladakh. D. Laxmi Printing Works. “Problems in the Transmission of Vajrayana Buddhism in the Western Himalaya About the Year 1000”. London and New York. 2002. RoutledgeCurzon. 1980b. Snellgrove. New Delhi. Stylistic Consideration and Modern Myths”. Alex (ed. Vikas Publishing House. rDo-rje tshe-brtan (ed. Samten G. 3-28. 150-62. Delhi. pp. Firma K L Mukhopadhyay. The Gods of Northern Buddhism. Tadeusz. Karmay.). vol. Director of Census Operations. 1980.476 Laxman S. Getty. Kinnaur District. Henss. . “Buddhist Metal Images of Western Tibet. 369-81. McKay. 1962. New Delhi. Tibetan Studies in Honour of Hugh Richardson. Calcutta. pp. VI. “More Edicts of Lha bla ma Yeshes-’od”. 15-18 April 2009. pp. The History of Tibet. 1982. rpt. Himachal Pradesh. in Aris. 1968. The Indian Buddhist Iconography. The Cultural Heritage of Ladakh. 1984. Simla. Karmay.). New Delhi.: Historical Evidence. a paper presented in the conference on ‘Cultural Flows across the Western Himalaya’. Census of India: 1981. Alice. “An Open Letter by Pho-brang Zhi-ba-’od to the Buddhists of Tibet”. II. District Census Handbook. David L and Skorupski. B. The Tibet Journal. pp. ca. Charles E Tuttle Company. Munshiram Manoharlal. Laxman S. pp. “The Emergence of the Tabo Avatamsakasutra: An Analysis of Ancient Tibetan Manuscripts and their Comprehensive Catalogue”. Dharamsala. 1988. 2002. in Studies in Sino-Tibetan Buddhist Arts. 2006.). Laxman S. Lokesh Chandra. forthcoming. 2008. New Delhi. Assimilation and Innovation in Western Himalayan Buddhist Architecture during the bstan-pa phyi-dar”.Sculptural Examples from Khu nu of Rong Chung 477 Thakur. New Delhi. National Mission for Manuscripts and Munshiram Manoharlal. 45-86. pp. New Delhi. Thakur. Laxman S. Vitali. Thakur. Orna (ed. Visualizing a Buddhist Sutra: Text and Figure in Himalayan Art. “Tradition. Laxman S. et al. Thakur. “Revered Words of the Buddha: Tibetan Manuscripts in Western Himalayan Buddhist Monasteries”. Contributions to Buddhist Literature. Kalyan Kumar (ed. Shimla: Indian Institute of Advanced Study. Rin-chen bzang-po and the Renaissance of Buddhism in Tibet around the Millenium (Indo-Tibetica II). Halle. Thakur. 1996. Buddhism in the Western Himalaya: A Study of the Tabo Monastery. “The Emergence of the ‘mNga’ ris Style’: Archaeological Perspectives”. Where Mortals and Mountain Gods Meet: Society and Culture in Himachal Pradesh. Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Tibetan Archaeology and Arts. in Almogi. Beijing. 2001. Aditya Prakashan. 21-31.). 16-20 October 2009. Laxman S.). 2008. Thakur. (eds. PIATS 2006: Tibetan Studies: Proceedings of the Eleventh Seminar of the International Association for Tibetan Studies. International Institute of Tibetan and Buddhist Studies. The Architectural Heritage of Himachal Pradesh: Origin and Development of Temple Styles. in Chakravarty. New Delhi. 215-37. Laxman S. Tattvabodha II: Essays from the Lecture Series of the National Mission for Manuscripts. New Delhi. The Kingdoms of Gu-ge Pu-hrang According to mNga’-ris rgyal-rabs by Gu-ge mkhan-chen Ngag-dbang grags-pa. Germany. Oxford University Press. Oxford University Press. Laxman S. pp. Tho ling gtsug lag khang lo cig stong ’khor ba’i rjes dran mdzad sgo’i go sgrig tshogs chung. Laxman S (ed. Tucci. . 1996. Königswinter 2006. Giuseppe. Thakur. Beiträge zur Zentralasienforschung Band 14. in Thakur.). Roberto. fig. A road leading to Ropa along the Shyaso rivulet. Note: All drawings and photographs are by Laxman S Thakur.478 Laxman S. 3. Avalokiteshvara in the lalitasana at the altar of the monastery. 6. 2. A standing wooden statue of Padmapani Avalokiteshvara (height 170 cm). 5. Himachal Pradesh. Thakur List of Figures 1. View of Ropa monastery with an umbrella canopy on the flat roof. Plan of the Ropa monastery showing the location of important clay sculptures in the sanctum and the hall. 4. 7. Kinnaur. A standing wooden statue of Vajrasattva (height 170 cm). Map of Kinnaur showing Ropa and other associated Buddhist monasteries in the adjoining areas.1 . 2 fig.3 479 .Sculptural Examples from Khu nu of Rong Chung fig. Thakur fig.4 Plan of the gTsug-lag-khang at Ropa .480 Laxman S. 6 fig.Sculptural Examples from Khu nu of Rong Chung 481 fig.7 .5 fig. The Rediscovery of dNgos grub sdings Notes on the Fate of Some Vajrayana Relics of Indian Origin Preserved in Two Ancient Temples in the Lower sTod lung Valley Matthew Akester Kathmandu In 1826.1 1 mKhas shing dngos grub brnyes pa ’i rdo rje slob dpon ’Jam dbyangs dgyes pa ’i blo gros mtsho skyes bshad pa ’i sgra dbyangs kyi rtogs brjod mdor bsdus pa sKal bzang mgul rgyan Shechen Publications. It had been founded. and a collection of authentic relics of great Indian Tantric Siddha-s.13334: ‘Among the three kinds of sacred symbols to be seen there are the central Phur pa used by the great O rgyan to perform the Phur pa ritual at Yang le shod in Nepal. who claimed descent from Bal po A su. the bone ornaments of the Dakini Usnisa. latterly known for their meteorological services to the lHa sa government (Ser srung). the snakeskin . the late 11th century Indian Mahamudra master. the gold Vajra which Slob dpon chen po hurled at Gangs dkar sha med. arranged as a Mandala in the temple. the ‘mother’ Phur pa and Phur pa-s of the ten wrathful deities (in Vajrakilaya’s retinue) and so on. which is a five-pronged Vajra. more than a forearm’s length and made of precious Dzhai kshim alloy. It is kept in a cloth-covered box with an inscription stating it’s origin. to find such treasures lying in obscurity. the complete skull of his son Grags pa seng ge. He was amazed to see elaborate Phur pa-s. which was revealed by Gu ru Jo tse at Zangs yag brag. revealed by Zhig po gling pa from the Khyung tshang brag cave. whom they identified. the staff of the Siddha Kukkuripa. by one Bal po sMon lam seng ge. while on pilgrimage in central Tibet. incorrectly. as well as the ‘son’ Phur pa. with hair which is as if still growing. they told the visiting Pandita. This was the ancestral temple of a lineage of sNgags pa ritualists. as is related in the (Padma) bka’ thang. unknown and unvisited. just outside the national capital. exclusively charged with blessing. the self-formed double conch trumpet of Naropa. the Zhe chen dbon sprul ’Gyur med mthu stobs rnam rgyal happened to visit a modest hermitage on the hillside overlooking the main road into lHa sa. as the son of A su. blinding her in one eye. Delhi 2005 p. It was astonishing. not to say dismaying. which had belonged to Guru Padma and later been revealed as gTer ma. a Jambhala figure naturally formed in the heart of Bal po A su’s son sMon lam seng ge. Although the place is close to lHa sa and has many sacred images of the greatest import. where historic shrines were to be found sunk in decay and neglect. on a hilltop in lower sTod lung is dNgos grub sdings. and many other wonderful symbols of body. ’Jam dbyangs mkhyen brtse’i dbang po.484 Matthew Akester The episode was typical of the experience of the so-called “Ris med” scholars of 18th and 19th century eastern Tibet.19 p. It is said to have been founded by Bal po sMon lam seng ge.a lot of the Phur pa-s from this revelation are still kept at dNgos grub sdings in lower sTod lung. such as a gilt copper Vajradhara. and in this spirit. the hand-held Vajra he used to subdue Gangs dkar sha med. three . sDe dge blockprint f. Bal po sMon lam seng ge. mKhyen brtse’s nephew and proto-disciple.’ The brief account of Guru jo tse in mKhyen brtse’s Gangs can gyi yul du byon pa’i lo pan rnams kyi mtshan tho (gSung ’bum vol. His list or ‘guidebook’ to the historic holy places of central Tibet became the authoritative reference for later pilgrims. made with the skin of a poisonous snake. and many extraordinarily special relics (Nang rten) are to be seen there. and bronze Stupa-s are to be seen there. 2 dBus gtsang gi gnas rten rags rim gyi mtshan byang mdor bsdus Dad pa’i sa bon. He met Ras chung pa. and it includes dNgos grub sdings as one of the discoveries made along the way. speech and mind. he said that he was astonished that no-one else seemed to have been there. who made a similar tour of dBus gtsang in 1918-20. His telling of such stories surely inspired one of his disciples. but long since desecrated by civil war and sectarianism.. 206) ends with the personal observation that ‘. came to central Tibet. the estate) is the hermitage of the hail guardians. and recorded it in far greater detail. a small meditation chamber of the hail-guardians. The recording and preservation of such traces of the noble past was characteristic of the “Ris med” outlook. dBon sprul wrote an inventory of the treasures of dNgos grub sdings. seeking out the last surviving teachers and blessings of the original “practice lineages” (sGrub brgyud). which has almost certainly been lost.501: ‘Above dNgos grub sdings (ie.’ 3 Gangs ljongs dbus gtsang gnas bskor lam yig Nor bu zla shel gyi se mo do. Saraha’s meditation belt and Naropa’s bone ornaments. such as the Phur pa used by Slob dpon rin po che to consecrate the ground at bSam yas. for whom the central province was a holy land blessed by the presence of the original masters. gSung rabs nyams gso rgyun ’phel par khang. and thus put a list of the contents into writing. In the hermitage he founded at the entrance of the sTod lung valley is the blessed image of Sri Vajrakilaya.. 3 This meditation belt of (a) Siddha.. copies of the Prajnaparamita-astasahasrika and Suvarnaprabhasutra. a disciple of rJe Naropa and of Pham mthing pa. Palampur 1972 p.25v: ‘Going down from dGa’ gdong.2 We also have the account of Ka thog si tu Chos kyi rgya mtsho. who travelled central Tibet extensively as a youth in the 1840s. Kukkuripa’s white sandalwood trident. wrathfulfaced (Phur pa-s) with long beaks. sMon lam seng ge’s skull. set of bone ornaments and preserved skull are variously attributed to Saraha. mKhyen brtse’s brief remarks soberly abstain from comment. but in the spirit handspans tall. made of very fine dark alloy (Dzhai kshim). but instructive. It is under the general management of the Blo gsal gling college at ’Bras spungs. which probably meant removed to some vault in the Potala palace for safekeeping. and just some fragments are left. nine-pointed and five fingers long. together with their stands. As for the temple’s history. Naropa’s conch trumpet called “Chos legs po”. sMon lam seng ge and Grags pa seng ge. for the disgraced Rva sgreng regent Ye shes tshul khrims belonged to the dNgos grub sdings family. reincarnations of so many gTer ston-s and Siddha-s of the past. were satisfied with the authenticity of this collection. two Dakini-s with vaguely remembered Sanskrit names. the contents of the relic chest had been “appropriated by the state”. the bone ornaments (given) to Bal po A su by the Dakini Padma wa ra. minus lower jaw. Kukkuripa’s meditation belt made of poisonous snake skin.4 Cynics will be amused to note that the identification of the relics differs in all three accounts: they agree on Guru Padma’s Vajra and Naropa’s conch trumpet. while Ka thog si tu’s version cheerfully confuses sMon lam seng ge with A su himself. these have been appropriated by the government. made of exceptionally fine bronze. sandalwood trident. Still.’ 4 Thanks to Tashi Tséring for this information. and the ten male and ten female wrathful attendants. Beyond that. dBon sprul was told only that the founder sMon lam seng ge was A su’s son. and in the place of the four gatekeepers (of the Mandala). but the meditation belt. if such discerning masters as these. and sMon lam seng ge’s meditation belt made of medicinal stone (rDo rgyus). Kukkuripa. the family descendants of sMon lam seng ge. which was of course dispossessed in 1959 and subsequently demolished. For local sacristans to give inconsistent accounts of long-sequestered relics to visitors decades apart is unsurprising. Naropa. which was a gTer ma revealed by Gu ru jo tse at Zangs yag brag. In the relic chest: the yellow alloy (Dzhai kshim) Vajra used by O rgyan rin po che to tame Gangs dkar sha med.The Rediscovery of dNgos grub sdings 485 discreetly mentions that in the meantime. there are the dNgos grub sdings pa (Lama-s). . This took place as a punishment by association following sDe srid bShad sgra’s 1862 coup d’état. In particular. It is surrounded by the consort to the left and son to the right. with two human heads back to back. in yellow bronze and a shortened forearm in height. there are almost no written sources concerning the lineage or the temple. in yellow bronze (Li). I think we can assume that the items in the relic chest (except the Vajra) really were the heirlooms of the lineage going as far back as Bal po A su. The descriptions of these learned visitors could be the last word on the matter. the Doha skor gsum (‘three cycles of mystic song’) to one dGe bshes Gru shul ba. who taught them to the founders of the Shug gseb bka’ brgyud school that preserved them for generations. probably because of the popularity of his biography in later times.228.77. one of the residences mentioned in Deb ther sngon po.5 and will not revisit the subject. 5 “Khyung tshang brag. Ras chung pa eventually found him at Sum ’phreng in ’Phan yul. until being reclaimed by Bon po revivalists from eastern Tibet in the 19th century. 7 rJe btsun Ras chung pa’i rnam thar rNam mkhyen thar lam gsal bar ston pa’i me long ye shes kyi snang ba. I have already written about this mountain elsewhere. . Despite the title “Bal po” (‘the Newar’). His youngest son Bal po ’Jig rten passed the most distinctive teachings of the lineage. mTsho sngon mi rigs dpe skrun khang 1992 p.1 6 The first example I have found of this identification of Shun gyi brag in the modern era is the visit of Shar rdza bKra shis rgyal mtshan in 1884. who settled in ’Phan yul. this paper will review what more research has yielded on the subject. Ras chung pa (b. to be told that he had moved on. the mention in Ras chung pa’s biography that he first came to lower sTod lung in search of the master. and had seven children. and he to sPar phu ba Blo gros seng ge. that it was repudiated for political reasons under dGa’ ldan pho brang rule. overlooking the confluence of the sTod lung and sKyid chu rivers.486 Matthew Akester of their quest. the ‘black demon peering’ at lHa sa”. First of all. a disciple of Vajrapani (rGya gar phyag na b. He can thus be counted as still another Ris med master from sDe dge participating in the modern rediscovery of ancient associations there. gNyan Lotsava. although he lived rather later than the above.1084) was the best-known Tibetan disciple. except to say that it’s sanctity apparently goes back to antiquity. rMa sgom Chos kyi shes rab etc. date his activity there to the late 11th century. His supposed interactions with sPa tshab Lotsava. the lineal successor was Grags pa seng ge. and subsequently honoured only by lHa sa’s Newar community. Krung go’i bod kyi shes rig dpe skrun khang 1990 p. recorded in dPal Shar rdza ba chen po bKra shis rgyal mtshan dpal bzang po’i rnam thar Ngo mtshar nor bu’i phreng ba thar ’dod mkhas pa’i mgul rgyan by dBra ston sKal bzang bstan pa’i rgyal mtshan. he was of Indian origin. married a lady of the ’Brom clan. Of his four sons.7 Knowledge of A su in Tibetan sources is limited to the brief account of him and his successors in the collected biographies of the “Phyag chen smad lugs” lineage in Deb ther sngon po. the location: the hermitage of the hail guardians was positioned on a western spur of the mountain known as Shun gyi brag.6 There is one very tenuous clue linking A su with the site. Tibet Journal 2001 no.1017). 10 One does not find many later references to the dNgos grub sdings pa either.8 This is confirmed by the appearance of sMon lam seng ge and his descendants in one of the transmissions of rGya zhang khrom’s revelations. Lumbini International Research Institute 2007 p. 10 Pandi ta chen po Shakya mchog ldan gyi rnam par thar pa zhib mo rnam par ’byed pa. known as rTa mgrin yang dag grub pa’ conferred a Hayagriva teaching on the infant Shakya mchog ldan. which identifies him as a disciple of the 9th throneholder of sKyor mo lung. it is mentioned that ‘an old sNgags pa Lama of the family lineage of Bal po A su from dNgos grub sdings dgon pa. and were still to be seen at the sNang rtse manor house in sTod lung in the 8 sKyor mo lung chos ’byung mkhan rabs rtogs brjod Ngo mtshar nor bu phreng mdzes (in Rare Texts from Tibet: seven sources for the ecclesiastic history of medieval Tibet. Since this took place in the early 1430s. They are mentioned cursorily in the 5th Ta la’i bla ma’s autobiography.s). Sanje Dorje.57). which he received from gYung ston rDo rje dpal (12841365). New Delhi 1974 p. the old Lama may have been sMon lam seng ge’s immediate successor. and the fact that he was remembered as A su’s son meant that the intervening lineage holders were no longer known. in gTer bdag gling pa’s list of teachings received. One clue is the fact that the Phur pa-s and other gTer ma objects revealed by Gu ru jo tse had been inherited by the sNang rtse gter ston Zhig po gling pa. Shes rab rdo rje (1294-1372). Sonam Dolma (ed. In rJe btsun Kun dga’ grol mchog’s biography of Pan chen Shakya mchog ldan.16 f.251. 9 Zab dang rgya che ba dam pa’i chos kyi thob yig rin chen ’byung gnas. and received the rTa mgrin initiation from the incumbent lineage holder. This passage also mentions another relic formerly kept at the hermitage. Kun dga’ grol mchog himself visited dNgos grub sdings a century later.The Rediscovery of dNgos grub sdings 487 Who then was the sMon lam seng ge whom the sNgags pa-s of dNgos grub sdings named as their ancestor and founder of the temple? We now have a partial answer to this question thanks to the recent publication of a sKyor mo lung chos ’byung.6r. Per Soerensen. . a two-faced statue of Vajrayogini self-formed in mKhan chen Shes rab rdo rje’s hand/arm. and it is possible that their role as ritual officiants of the dGa’ ldan pho brang state went back that far. which had flown out of his cremation pyre and landed in sMon lam seng ge’s lap. and describes him as the ‘Lama of dNgos grub sdings’. gSung ’bum vol. sMon lam seng ge’s title “Bal po” presumably signified descent from A su and had long ceased to have ethnic connotations. around the year 1658. and there is no sign of the continued transmission of any teachings peculiar to the original lineage since then.9 So it would seem that the lineage was re-established or sedentarised in lower sTod lung in the mid-14th century. They had apparently become rNying ma pa Mantrika-s in the meantime. Delhi 1974 p. which is quite possible. the “O rgyen bde ba chen po’i sku”.85. Darjiling 1978 p. This would hardly cover the more than five centuries since sMon lam seng ge’s re-establishment of the lineage.9 p. He also recalled that there had been a significant library of astrological texts at the dNgos grub sdings estate. none of the later accounts of the contents of the temple mentions the famous sKu tshab gter lnga representative image of Guru Padma revealed by Gu ru jo tse. and evidently these treasures were awarded to dNgos grub sdings in due course. It says that mThu stobs dbang phyug. Sata-pitaka series vol.14. Oral tradition holds that the dNgos grub sdings pa were appointed hail guardians with responsibility to protect the Nor bu gling ka gardens during the 7th Ta la’i bla ma’s reign (1720-57).11 The sNang rtse estate was of course appropriated by the new government in 1642. who died in 1996. Kun dga’ rig ’dzin (astrologer and nephew of the last Ser srung Rig ’dzin rnam rgyal) saw this image in the 1950s and describes it as 10 cm tall with a crystal in it’s navel. apparently from that time. who summoned the Ser srung to explain himself.” he explained. Rig ’dzin rnam rgyal. a lineage holder described as ‘qualified in both (astrology and) Dharma.” 13 dPal bSam yas mi ’gyur lhun gyis grub pa’i gtsug lag khang gi dkar chag. we are powerless. and supposedly later brought to dNgos grub sdings. this statue was once kept in the Li ma lha khang at gZhis ka rtse (bSam ’grub pho brang).12 We find that their responsibilities extended considerably further than this in bShad sgra dBang phyug rgyal po’s record of the 1850s renovation of bSam yas.. spilling not a drop. but this cannot be dated. The sieve held the water. “This is the power of our spells. According to Karma mi ’gyur dbang rgyal’s gTer bton chos ’byung (sTag lung rtse sprul rin po che.167). the dNgos 11 Zur thams cad mkhyen pa Chos dbyings rang grol gyi rnam thar Theg mchog bstan pa’i shing rta (Collected works of the Fifth Dalai Lama vol. which was destroyed along with the contents of the temple in 1959. as reported in the biography of Zur chen Chos dbyings rang grol. There was a second sKu tshab.488 Matthew Akester mid-17th century. p. Curiously. and it is said to have been duly reunited with the other treasures at dNgos grub sdings. which Zhig po gling pa (supposedly an emanation of Gu ru jo tse) discovered at Zangs yag brag in 1545 (made of red bronze).75. 13 The last surviving Ser srung of dNgos grub sdings. Until that time. and asked the Lama to pour water into it. “but if the collective merit if beings is insufficient. unless they all lived unusually long. 12 A story was told about them. the State astrologer and Mantradhara of dNgos grub sdings’ was summoned to perform re-consecration on that occasion..213). It is also curious that the boxed and labelled Vajra described by Zhe chen dbon sprul does not figure in Zhig po gling pa’s own account of the revelations at Khyung tshang brag. . that once a hailstorm devastated the Nor bu gling kha and killed the Dalai Lama’s flowers. said that his elder brother had been the 14th in line. The Ser srung held out a sieve. much like the three better known temples (“Byams pa phun gsum”) founded by rDo rje dbang phyug in ’Phan yul. and both inscriptions talk about the revival of Buddhism after a period of decline. but largely illegible. The rGyal rdo ring was of higher quality. and during the Maoist period.1 p. and entitled to collect a ‘hail tax’ (Ser khral) from the farmers in that area. is the ancient temple of Ra tshag. with a large statue of the deity.15 14 eg. dPa’ bo gTsug lag phreng ba. the history of Ra tshag is slightly better documented than that of dNgos grub sdings.534-9. It clearly identifies the site as an estate of the Se ’go family in imperial times. those by Ne’u pandita. The only surviving remnant of this temple is the inscribed rDo ring. There is a similar rDo ring at rGyal lha khang in ’Phan yul.The Rediscovery of dNgos grub sdings 489 grub sdings pa were responsible for protecting the fields of lower sTod lung. according to several histories of Buddhism in Tibet. ’Gos lo tsa ba. last resting place of another relic of the golden age of Indian Vajrayana. but it is hard to find confirmation of such things in the sources.44). in the name of ‘Scientific agriculture’. but apparently didn’t visit. which names the founder as Ban de Yon tan rgyal po of the Rva clan. in the Yab valley. . sNa nam rDo rje dbang phyug’s activity in sTod lung is further elaborated in Ne’u chos ’byung (Bod kyi lo rgyus deb ther khag lnga TAR Academy of Social Sciences 1990 p. dGe ’dun chos ’phel speculated that it could have been erected by the descendants of dPal ’khor btsan (rGyal khams rig pas bskor ba’i gtam rgyud gSer gyi thang ma. an extraordinary statue of Vajrayogini said to have belonged to Naropa himself. ‘hail guardians’ were singled out by Communist officials in Tibet after 1959 as a particular target of ridicule and symbol of the country’s backwardness.10-11). saying that the claim ‘should be investigated’. in dGe ’dun chos ’phel gyi gsung rtsom. Bu ston Rin chen grub. mKhar nag lo tsa ba etc. Pan chen bSod nams grags pa. it was normal practice to use explosives (for which communised villagers also had to pay) to disperse hail clouds. Ra tshag jo mo About 3 hours walk from dNgos grub sdings. mKhyen brtse rin po che noted this in his guidebook. including the south bank of the sKyid chu as far down as gSang mda’. My attempt to meet this challenge has been largely disappointed.14 The original temple was dedicated to Maitreya. TAR Academy of Social Sciences 1993 vol. which also fails to mention rDo rje dbang phyug. and indicates their patronage of the later temple. Briefly. Interestingly. some say before 1012. 15 See Richardson’s study in Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies (University of London) Volume LVIII 1995 p. It was founded by sNa nam rDo rje dbang phyug in the early 11th century. according to Richardson. a disciple of Lo Sems dpa’ chen po Blo gros rgyal mtshan. the bKa’ gdams chos ’byung chen mo of Las chen Kun dga’ rgyal mtshan and dGa’ ldan chos ’byung of mKhar nag lo tsa ba. which was most likely played up after the establishment of a dGe lugs pa lineage of ’Jigs byed practitioners there. 17 Chos ’byung mkhas pa’i dga’ ston. locally regarded as a holy place. and a teacher of Pan chen bSod nams grags pa and rGyal ba dGe ’dun rgya mtsho. Si khron mi rigs dpe skrun khang 1985 p.2 p. The earliest reference to be found confirming her presence at Ra tshag is in the biography of the first Zhva dmar karma pa Grags pa seng ge. are from blocks last re-carved in lHa sa in a Wood Pig year under the direction of La dvags sTag tshang sprul sku. written in 1434. supposedly made with residual material from the manufacture of the two Jo bo-s in the Buddha’s lifetime 18 and later entrusted to Naropa by the Dakini-s. but this is not confirmed by literary sources. The ’Jigs byed sgrub khang adjoining the temple’s courtyard dates to this period. 18 The antiquity of this notion at least is confirmed by it’s citation in rGya bod yig tshang (eg. including one in the LTWA collection (accession no. The fifth sTag tshang ras pa . One wonders whether these notions trace back to an unknown bKa’ brgyud pa phase in the temple’s history. or perhaps reformed. Las chen was a close contemporary of Sangs rgyas bzang po.51). of which Ra tshag subsequently became a branch. The singular rocky peak behind the temple is identified as a residence or gNas ri of bDe mchog. by gNas brtan Sangs rgyas bzang po. the anonymous 9-folia Ra tshag rje btsun Na ro mkha’ spyod ma’i chos ’byung lo rgyus which is the only surviving narrative. the very blessed statue of Vajrayogini supposed to have belonged to Naropa was enshrined here as an extraordinary object of worship. Mi rigs dpe skrun khang 1986 vol. both later throneholders of sKyor mo lung. The statue in this chapel is further associated either with rJe Tsong kha pa or his successor Zhva lu Legs pa rgyal mtshan. But the attempt to rediscover the history and significance of her presence here is fruitless: the printed guidebook to the statue. The Ra tshag jo mo is highly revered and described as one of the holiest treasures in all Tibet. who counted Yab among their estates. indeed still is. 19 tells a kind of 16 eg. and with the patronage of the gYu thog family. 19 Extant copies. and several exceptional features in the landscape are pointed out in the traditional description of the site (gNas bshad). 17 Ra tshag was. unless we accept the popular association with Rva lo tsa ba rDo rje grags.977. ‘where the Dakini-s gather’.16 when a dGe lugs pa monastic community was established. and much visited. who came to have Darshan of the statue in about 1330. drawing on a spurious interpretation of the temple’s name and of the rDo ring inscription.18874). Sometime in between these two phases.490 Matthew Akester Ra tshag next surfaces in literary sources in the late 15th century. In particular it relates how she refused the latter’s attempts to bring her to ’Bras incarnation Ngag dbang dge legs rgyal mtshan was born into the gYu thog house. but through clairvoyance.The Rediscovery of dNgos grub sdings 491 disjointed fairy story. especially as the only two historical figures mentioned there are rJe Tsong kha pa Blo bzang grags pa and the 5th Ta la’i bla ma Ngag dbang blo bzang rgya mtsho. The goddess then generated three magic ‘Acarya’ emanations who delivered the statue to Gyeltsen Sang in return for the gold dust he carried with him. according to local informants. The Chos mdzad/ sPyan gsal gling (sp.?) hermitage in the lower Yab valley was affiliated with Mog lcog ri khrod and much frequented by Mog lcog rin po che. but it is possible that there was an element of deliberate re-writing. 20 In fact. and her head tilted back to gaze longingly towards the Lama in the sky-goers’ realm of Khecari. landing seven times. the 3rd Ta la’i bla ma bSod nams rgya mtsho was born at Yab mda’ (Khang gsar gong gzhis ka. later the site of a shrine known as Khang gsar dmar po). the natural Cakrasamvaramandala in the Yab valley. but Ra tshag is nowhere mentioned in his biographies. 20 To summarise the narrative: the peculiar form of the statue is explained by saying that after Naropa’s death. Five years later he set out for India to fulfill his mission. She sent out emanations to search the three provinces of Tibet for someone to bring her there. . Perhaps this is the result of forgetfulness and creative re-telling over many centuries. and according to local informants there was a shrine room (gZim chung) dedicated to his memory on the upper storey of the former temple. the arm which held aloft a Kartari chopper fell by her side in grief. the other arm which held a skull bowl at her heart was thrust upwards. When he tired on the return journey the Naro Dakini flew over the Himalaya-s into Tibet. the Indian temple guardians got wind of the plan and tightened security around the statue to the maximum. but the final verses of aspiration are attributed to rMog lcog sprul sku Ye shes rgyal mtshan. she no longer wished to stay in India and determined to move to Tibet. and would therefore have been written one Rab byung later. The text goes on to describe the honours paid to the Ra tshag jo mo by rJe Tsong kha pa and the 5th Ta la’i bla ma. called ‘Gyeltsen Sang’. At that point. His involvement would suggest Wood Pig 1875. it is claimed. and leaving seven footprints before finding the place she had foreseen. speaking seven times. but in Kham they found a 10-year old boy with the requisite Karmic potential. from which historical circumstance and significance has been obliterated. and settling there. They had no luck in western or central Tibet. when they were confiscated by the Chinese government. insisting on being returned to her rightful place in the ‘lap’ of Cakrasamavara.1 p. 21 Her invitation by the 5th Ta la’i bla ma is corroborated by a brief passage in his Du ku la’i gos bzang autobiography (Bod ljongs mi dmangs dpe skrun khang 1991 vol.291): ‘rJe btsun Narotapa’s tutelary image of the Vajra queen was summoned from Ra tshag.’ .492 Matthew Akester spungs or the Potala palace. 21 The Ra tshag jo mo was among the precious relics saved by the 10th Pan chen rin po che during the chaos of the 1959 uprising. made prayers to encounter the beautiful face of Khecari directly. and I made one hundred fold offerings and. reciting the generation and completion stages of the profound Yoga. which remained with him until his downfall in 1964. I also composed verses of praise and a prayer. She has never been seen again. A ‘Hidden Land’ at the Border of ’Ol-kha and Dvags-po “Aux confins sud-est. le district caché du Triple Val. the triangular shaped monastery of the Second Dalai Bla-ma dGe-’dun rgya-mtsho (1475-1542) and the famous lake known as lHa-mo bla-mtsho.”1 According to the autobiography of dGe-’dun rgya-mtsho. le district caché de ’Brasmo. also known as Second Dalai Bla-ma. For modern descriptions of the routes leading to the “Plain of Flowers” (me tog thang). a monastery with the name Chos-’khor rgyal was established at Me-thog thang in the year 1509 after political tensions with the Karma bKa’-brgyud-pa school in the lHa-sa area made him accept an 1 See ’Jam-dbyangs mKhyen-brtse’i dbang-po: Ngo mtshar lung ston me long. Toussaint (1933: 339-399) Franz-Karl Ehrhard Munich Introduction Tibetan pilgrims travelling along the gTsang-po river used to visit a valley stretching to the north. a residence of rGyal ba dGe ’dun rgya mtsho. see Dowman (1988:255-261). the translation is the one of Ferrari (1958:48). 196. p. . aux confines nord-est.C. Chan (1994:634-641) and Gyurme Dorje (1996:286-287).” G. which was regarded as forming the border between the regions of ’Ol-kha and Dvags-po.18-20 (’ol dvags gnyis kyi mtshams su rgyal me tog thang zhes rgyal ba dge ’dun rgya mtsho’i gdan sa dang / rtser dmag zor ma’i bla mtsho mthong snang sna tshogs yod tshul sogs mang du yod). aux confins nord-ouest. le district caché Fougères. regarded as the life-supporting talisman of the incarnation lineage of the Dalai Bla-mas. and many other placs. and at the top [of the valley] the ‘life-power lake’ (bla mtsho) of dMag zor ma where different sorts of apparitions can be seen. The guide book of ’Jamdbyangs mKhyen-brtse dbang-po (1829-1892) gives the following details of the main sacred sites to be encountered there: “At the border between ’Ol kha and Dvags po lies rGyal me thog thang. The latter contribution contains also a reproduction of a mural showing a further lake. compare Heller (2005b:253-256). It is known from the mentioned autobiography that this female protective deity appeared to dGe-’dun rgyamtsho in a vision and helped him to identify the actual place of his future residence. A photograph of the so-called “vision lake” showing the reflecting qualities of the surface can be found.3 After the death of the Fifth Dalai Bla-ma it was especially the “Regent” (sde srid) Sangs-rgyas rgya-mtsho (1653-1705). the “Door Protecting Lake” (sgo srung gi mtsho). who produced literary 2 For the main events in the life of the Second Dalai Bla-ma and the foundation of the monastry of Chos-’khor rgyal in the year 1509. visited as well during the search for a new Dalai Bla-ma. Concerning the Fifth Dalai Bla-ma and his association with the monastery of Chos-’khor rgyal compare Heller (2005b:217).2 There exist also pictural representations of the physical landscape of Chos-’khor rgyal and lHa-mo bla-mtsho and it was especially the Third Dalai Bla-ma. especially with the form of Śrī Devī (dpal ldan lha mo) called “Queen armored for war” (dmag zor ma).Compare Shaw (2009157-164) for the importance of dPal-ldan lha-mo for the incarnation lineage of the Dalai Bla-mas. for example. . where he was blessed with a further vision which played a significant role for his spiritual life and made him a follower of Śrī Devī. in Batchelor (1987:38-39). The iconographic form of dPal-ldan lha-mo called dMag zor-ma and her cult are treated in NebeskyWojkowitz (1975:24-30).494 Franz-Karl Ehrhard invitation of the local ruler of ’Ol-kha. the main female protector of his incarnation lineage and of the dGe-lugs-pa school in general. the successor of dGe-’dun rgya-mtsho—and it is said that each member of this lineage paid at least one visit in his life to this site. see Heller (2005a:43-50). 3 The circumstances of the composition of the visionary scroll painting of lHamo bla-mtsho and its content in the context of depicting episodes from the life of the Third Dalai Bla-ma are sketched in Vitali (2001:93-97). Since that time that particular site is known as “lake of the life-force of the lHa-mo” (lha mo bla mtsho) and it is valued as a sacred place conducive to visions. who ordered a painted scroll in order to document the visions he saw in the lake. especially during the search for a proper candidate of the incarnation lineage of the Dalai Bla-mas. Concerning the visions of the Second Dalai Bla-ma and especially the one occuring at lHa-mo lha-mtsho. The Fifth Dalai Bla-ma Ngag-dbang Blo-bzang rgya-mtsho (1617-1682) paid repeated visits to the region as known from his autobiography and like his predeccesors he was deeply involved in the cult of dPal-ldan lha-mo. this happened during a visit to the area in the year 1555. Shortly afterwards he went to a nearby lake. The importance of the lake is connected with the cult of the protective deities of the Dalai Blamas. This monastery became closely associated with the incarnation lineage of the Dalai Bla-mas—which received this title only at the time of bSod-nams rgya-mtsho (1543-1588). For the activities of the Second Dalai Lama in propagating the tradition of the bKa’ gdams glegs bam. 5 See Sangs-rgyas rgya-mtsho: Baiūrya ser po’i me long. The treasure discoverer in this case is Las-’phro gling-pa alias ’Ja’-tshon snying-po (1585-1656).3 (chos ’khor rgyal legs bshad sgrog pa’i dga’tshal ni sbas yul dkar po longs . vol. compare Sørensen (2008:78). The Fifth Dalai Bla-ma lists in his records of teachings received five different persons bearing that name. 196. regarded as an incarnation of the Avalokiteśvara.” 5 4 The chapter on the person of the Second Dalai Bla-ma in sDe-srid Sangsrgyas rgya-mtsho’s continuation of the Fifth Dalai Bla-ma’s autobiography has already been translated by Mullin (1986:6-15) and Ahmad (1999: 202-210).A ‘Hidden Land’ at the Border of ’Ol-kha and Dvags-po 495 works with the aim of solidifying the lineage of his teacher. 93.6.25-197. the Bodhisattva of Great Compassion. The way of the prophecies concerning the site of this [name] and the person and so forth. These works mention also the sacred sites at the border of ’Ol-kha and Dvags-po and which specific monastic institutions developed there. the person in question is called Rig’dzin Las-’phro gling-pa. it is according to what has been told [in the section] on [the monastery of ’Bras-spungs above.4 In his treatment of the different monastic institutions of the dGe-lugs-pa school sDe-srid Sangs-rgyas rgya-mtsho presents Chos-’khor rgyal by refering to these prophecies as well—and directing the reader to the relevant sections of the biographical data of the Second Dalai Bla-ma as contained in the section of ’Bras-spungs monastery of which dGe-’dun rgya-mtshos became abbot in the year 1517—but in addition he mentions Chos-’khor rgyal under a name which associates the site with a particular “hidden land” (sbas yul): “The grove resounding with elegant sayings [called] Chos’khor rgyal: after he had seen the excellencies that the householders of this hidden land “White Valley” (dkar po ljongs) are born in [the realm of] the Thirty-three gods and the ordained ones in the Tuita [heaven] and so forth. the previous reincarnation of the noble teacher [= Ngag-dbang Blo-bzang rgya-mtsho]. mainly from different parts of the bKa’ gdams glegs bam. In his treatment of the life of the Second Dalai Bla-ma sDe-srid Sangs-rgyas rgya-mtsho highlights especially the themes of dGe’dun rgya-mtsho being the builder of Chos-’khor rgyal and the discoverer of the visionary lake. pp. it was founded by Mahāpaita dGe-’dun rgya-mtsho. this role is underlined with a number of propecies. Next to quotations from this collection one quotation from the work of a treasure discoverer of the rNying-ma-pa school is also to be found. 4. a treatise known for its importance in legitimating the lineage of the Dalai Lamas.3-101. In the same way he also documented the spread of the dGe-lugs-pa school in the various districts of Tibet under the regime of the centralized dGa’-ldan pho-brang government. pp. see Ngag-dbang Blo-bzang rgya-mtsho: Gangā’i chu rgyun. if for other [persons] virtuous actions exist here all the time in an equal way. it is [nevertheless] appropriate as a prophecy of rGyal Me-thog thang. the section on the latter monastery is introduced with the following words: “A division of the hidden land White Valley at the border of ’Ol[-kha] [and] D[v]ags[-po]. For the relevant prophecies in the mentioned chapter on ’Bras-spungs. [is] the grove properly called Victorious Plain of Flowers. At this [site]. they will proceed to Tuita. located in the valley to the west. [these] two. and thus all the householders [living] there will be born during all lives in godly realms. And in the sBas yul dkar po ljongs kyi gnas yig it is stated that [in this hidden land] all males are vīrās and all females vīrās. although it is identified [as the site known as] rGyal in ’Phan-yul. who strive [at that de’i khyim pa rnams sum cu rtsa gsum gyi lha dang rab tu byung rnams dga’ ldan du skye ba sogs khyad ’phags su gzigs nas rje bla ma’i yang srid gong ma pa chen dge ’dun rgya mtshos btab cing de’i gnas dang gang zag lung bstan tshul sogs gong du ’bras spungs kyi dus brjod zin par ltar ro). what can be said of those. pp.) and he was affiliated to the monastery of ’Ol-kha rDzing-phyi. successions of abbots and so forth. and the ordained ones will be born in Tuita in the presence of Lord Maitreya! Thus. a miraculous [statue] of Mi-pham mgon-po [= Maitreya] has been erected [there]. It is [also] said: ‘An emanation of Mi-pham mgon-po [= Maitreya] will be erected!’ because this statue of Maitreya [in the monastery of Chos-’khor rgyal] which resembles a mass of gold is a miracously produced one. In the chapter Lung bstan gsal ba’i sgron me of [the work] mDo sde gdams ngag ’bog pa [it is said]: ‘The vihāra called rGyal. where Chos-’khor rgyal had been erected. 108.25. This is another text dealing with the different monastic institutions of the dGe-lugs-pa school and providing historical information on the individual colleges.496 Franz-Karl Ehrhard The statement that the Second Dalai Bla-ma had been engaged in erecting his residence in a hidden land by the name of White Valley can be further documented by recurring to the literary source used by sDesrid Sangs-rgyas rgya-mtsho.. all the householders and the ordained ones.2-110. see ibid. The author of this work is known as mKhar-nag Lo-tsā-ba (15th /16th cent. the place of the gods!’ What is told of in this way. and their benefit being great. . ”6 Although the first quotation has not yet been verified. Maitreya. p. 244. A large image of Mi-pham mgon-po. see Martin (1997:96). 350. It is known that the works of mKharnag Lo-tsā-ba had been used by later masters of the dGe-lugs-pa school. It turns out that the valley at the border of ’Ol-kha and Dvags-po.A ‘Hidden Land’ at the Border of ’Ol-kha and Dvags-po 497 very place] for virtue? This is the way of excellency of this sacred site.e. In a second step the composite structure of the text is looked at in more detail and a reproduction of a dbu-can version is added to allow the reader first-hand knowledge of the text. fol. takes a prominent place in the group of hidden lands which offered the followers of Padmasambhava security and protection in troubled times. . 72a/ 4-b/3 (’ol dags [= dvags] gnyis kyi mtshams sbas yul dkar po ljongs kyi bye brag rgyal me thog thang legs par sgrog pa’i dga’ tshal ’di ni / mdo sde gdam [= gdams] ngag ’bog pa’i lung bstan gsal ba’i sgron me’i le’u las / rgyal zhes bya ba’i gtsug lag khang / mi pham mngon po’i sprul pa bzhengs / der ni khyim bdag thams cad dang / rab tu byung ba dga’ lha yi gnas su ’gro bar ’gyur / zhes gsungs pa ’di phan yul rgyal du ngos ’dzin kyang / rgyal me thog thang gi lung bstan du ’os te / mi pham ngon po’i sprul pa gzheng zhes pa byams pa’i sku gzugs gser gyi lhun po lta bu ’di bzo sprul sku yin pa’i phyir dang / sbas yul dkar po ljongs kyi gnas yig du [= tu] / pho skyes thams cad dpa’ bo dang mo skyes thams cad dpa’ mor gsungs pa bzhin / khyim pa der skyes thams cad lha yi gnas su skye ba dang rab tu byung ba rnams dga’ ldan du rje btsun byams pa’i drung du skye ba yin no / des na gzhan du nyin tshan sbra ba’i [= sbrel ba’i] dge ba las ’dir gtang [= btang] snyoms su sdod pa phan yon che na / dge la brsoms pa rnams la lta ci smos te gnas kyi khyad par ’phags tshul lo). see Dowman (1988:258). As this text has survived I will present in the following some materials on the background of this particular literary source which is regarded as a “treasure work” (gter ma). For the affiliation of mKhar-nag Lo-tsā-ba with the monastery of rDzing-phyi in ’Ol-kha. i. had been located in the Byams-pa lha-khang. see Tucci (1949:150). where the monastery of Chos-’khor rgyal had been erected—which housed a total of five different colleges—and at some distance from which the famous vision-lake of the incarnation lineage of the Dalai Bla-mas was located. the second quotation makes clear that the author must have had access to a text dealing with the hidden land White Valley and its spiritual qualities. p. dating from the foundation of the monastery of Chos-’khor rgyal. Compare in this respect Ngag-dbang Blo-bzang rgya-mtsho: Dngos grub rgya mtsho’i shing rta. These promises and the geographical remoteness of the area did nevertheless not prevent 6 See dPal-’byor rgya-mtsho: dPag bsam sdong po mkhas pa dga’ byed. and it has also been observed that the Fifth Dalai Bla-ma had relied on some of mKhar-nag Lo-tsā-ba’s biographical writings when composing his own works on the lives of the Third and the Fourth Dalai Bla-ma.2.6 and Nor bu’i phreng ba. a fact that is still witnessed in the original dbu-med version in which this work has survived. p. 13a/2-3]. but there was nothing missing nor to be added. 73b/174b/1.7 [= fol. fols. Concerning the different phases of destruction of Chos-’khor rgyal.13). It is also noted that the original manuscript was of no good handwriting.) for the study of the literature on hidden lands. The writer’s colophon states: “Written out in the meditation cave of [the one from] Orgyan. see Chan (1994:638). mNga’-ris grva-tshang. sGar-pa grva-tshang. It is said that it is “a work from the water cave.498 Franz-Karl Ehrhard intrusion from outside in later times and it is known that the monastery was destroyed on two occasions: in 1718 by Dzungar forces and in the 1960s at the time of the Chinese cultural revolution. pp. and Sangs-rgyas rgya-mtsho (as in note 5). Rig-’dzin rGod-ldem ’phru-can (1337-1406).19-200. The second reference stands here and in the following references for the dbu-can version reproduced in the appendix. 215. for example. 197. It was especially Gu-ru Tshe-brtan rgyal-mtshan’s work on the hidden land known as “Heavenly Gate of Half-Moon Form” (gnam sgo zla gam). An account of the development of the monastic organization of the five colleges up to the 20th century can be found in Nornang (1990:249). The letters were not well done. . see dPal-’byor rgya-mtsho (as in note 6). Unfortunately these latter details are too vague for identifying the locality or the benefactor in question. This is followed by a note on the place where the work had been copied and for whose benefit this was achieved.7 Treasure Finders of the 13th and 14th Centuries The final line of the work sBas yul dkar po ljongs kyi gnas yig gives the name of the treasure finder and the place from where it was recovered. located in the Tibetan-Nepalese borderlands—and corresponding to present-day Langthang to the north of the Kathmandu Valley—which initiated scholarly interest in his person and treasure 7 For the five colleges of the monastery Chos-’khor rgyal known as gZhi-pa grvatshang. 8 See Tshe-brtan rgyal-mtshan: sBas yul dkar po ljongs kyi gnas yig. Dvags-po grva-tshang. and rNam-rgyal grva-tshang. the treasure mine of Gu-ru Tshebrtan-pa” (gu ru tshe brtan pa’i gter kha chu phug mo). generally regarded as the most prolific writer of texts dealing with the routes and rituals for approaching these kind of sanctuaries. Properly petitioned to be made for the wish of the precious Drung.” (o rgyan sgrub phug tu bzhengs pa lags / yi ge legs po rang mi ’dug ste / lha (= lhag) chad par yod lags / drung rin po che’i thugs dgos (= dgongs) mdzad pa zhu zhu legs).8 Recent reasearch has already addressed the importance of the person of Gu-ru Tshe-brtan rgyal-mtshan (12th/13th cent. This is particularly true as this treasure finder of the rNying-ma-pa school predates. 10 See Kun-bzang Nges-don klong-yangs: Nor bu do shal. For this quotation compare also Schwieger (1985:xxxii) in the context of the biography of Rig-’dzin rGod-ldem phru-can. . these findings will first be updated in the light of the text now under investigation. the manifestation of his activities is Tshe-brtan rgyal-mtshan: these five [treasure finders] are Padmasambhava in person. [the manifestation of his] qualities is O-rgyan gling-pa. pp.18. see Gu-ru bKrashis: Ngo mtshar gtam gyi rol mtsho. In the historiographical literature of the rNying-ma-pa school Gu-ru Tshe-brtan rgyal-mtshan is thus known as the “treasure finder [who is] the manifestation of the activities of the Great One from O-rgyan” (o rgyan chen po’i ’phrin las kyi sprul pa’i gter ston). This version contains a more elaborate colophon stating that the text had also been passed on as part of the treasure works of Rig-’dzin rGod-ldem ’phru-can. Next to Nyang-ral Nyi-ma’i ’od-zer (1124-1192) and Gu-ru Chos-kyi dbang-phyug (1212-1270)—known as the “upper [and] lower treasure mines” (gter kha gong ’og)—we find in this reference the two names of O-rgyan gling-pa (1323-1360) and Gu-ru Tshe-brtan rgyal-mtshan.A ‘Hidden Land’ at the Border of ’Ol-kha and Dvags-po 499 works. L 290/2. A complete translation of the text can be found in Childs (1993:12-29).”10 9 For first evaluations of the person of Gu-ru Tshe-brtan rgyal-mtshan in the context of his work sBas yul gnam sgo zla gam gyi gnas yig lam byang gsal ba’i me long.5-146. the manifestation of his heart is rGod-kyi ldemphru. This quotation is interesting in regard to the fact that it occurs at the beginning of a biographical account of Rig-’dzin rGod-ldem ’phru-can and is used in order to underline his role as a treasure finder in a constellation with other important discoveres of treasures. The reference is attributed O-rgyan gling-pa himself and this points out that at least at the time of the later treasure finder the person of Gu-ru Tshe-brtan rgyal-mtshan was highly esteemed: “The manifestation of the body [of Padmasambhava] is Nyi-ma’i ’od-zer. The importance of this particular work of Gu-ru Tshe-brtan rgyal-mtshan as the earliest literary source on hidden lands has been highlighted in Childs (1999:137). the manifestation of his speech is Chos-kyi dbang-phyug. The dbu-can version of the text reproduced in Ehrhard (1997351359) is based on a manuscript filmed by the Nepal-German Manuscript Preservation Project (NGMPP) under reel-no.1 (rig ’dzin rgod ldem chen po ni / o rgyan gling pa’i lung bstan las / sku sprul nyi ma ’od zer yin : gsung sprul chos kyi dbang phyug yin: yon tan o rgyan gling pa yin: ’phrin las tshe brtan rgyal mtshan yin: ’di lnga padma ’byung gnas dngos). see Childs (1993:8-11) and Ehrhard (1997:351).9 In the historiographical literature of the rNying-ma-pa school a quotation is transmitted which groups together five treasure finders. p. it is the version published under the title sBas yul padma’i tshal gyi gnas yig kun tu gsal ba’i me long. all regarded as different “manifestations” (sprul pa) of the Precious Gu-ru Padmasambhava. 145. 463. e.500 Franz-Karl Ehrhard This connection between O-rgyan gling-pa and Gu-ru Tshe-brtan rgyalmtshan is noteworthy. the solitary place of the activity” (’phrin las kyi dban gnas mon kha seng ge rdzong). see Ehrhard (2003a:659 & 667).12 11 See Gu-ru bKra-shis: Ngo mtshar gtam gyi rol mtsho. The description of Gu-ru Tshe-brtan rgyal-mtshan’s activities in Bhutan according to the modern source and the correct identification of the treasure site can be found in dGe-bshes Bragphug-pa dGe-’dun rin-chen: Blo gsal rna ba’i rgyan. but let us first take a look at the paricular site from where the latter one extracted his findings and which of them continued to be of some influnence. see. The locus classicus for the fives sites is the Padma bka’ thang literature. 403. that particular cave was situated in sPa-gro and Gu-ru Tshebrtan rgyal-mtshan discovered there especially “cycles for the practice of the Gu-ru [i. i. chapter 95. 12 For the classificatory scheme of the five solitary places which is sometimes enlarged by a group of three further sites. O-rgyan gling-pa: Padma bka’i thang yig.e. According to the classificatory scheme of these sites as found in the biographical tradition of Padmasambhava the latter spot is known as “Mon-kha Seng-ge rdzong. p. Both texts devoted to the hidden lands in south-western and southeastern Tibet mention the Chu-mo cave as the place of discovery and report that this treasure site is said to have been located in the region of Mon. 142. the ones lacking judgement say that it is what is called Chu-phug dPal-gyi phug-ring rDo-rje rdzong. p. for example. When consulting the earlier historiographical writings it becomes clear that there were different opinions concerning the exact location of the cave and it seems that another place in Bhutan was favoured as well as the original treasure site: “Although there appear some different identifications concerning the treasure site [of this finding]. According to a modern work on the spread of the Buddhist traditions in ’Brug-yul. present-day Bhutan. 589.” 11 This latter toponym stands for one of the so-called “solitary places” (dben gnas) prophesied by Padmasambhava as spots for the spiritual exercises of his disciples and it espcially associated with Ye-shes mtsho-rgyal. . Padmasambhava] in his peaceful [and] wrathful form” (gu ru zhi drag sgrub skor rnams). compare Aris (1979:43 & 157). a part of Mon-kha Tshering Seng-ge rdzong.2-4 (de nas rab byung bzhi pa’i nang gu ru tshe brtan rgyal mtshan ces bya ba’i gter bton chen po de’ang spa gror byon / chu mo phu [= phug] gu ru zhi drag gi sgrub skor rnams dang / skye bdun dam rdzas sogs mang du bzhes te ’gro don mdzad).6-10 (’di’i gter gnas la ngos ’dzin mi ’dra ba ’ga’ re snang yang / shar zug pas [= sha gzur pas] / mon kha tshe ring seng ge rdzong gi ya gyal / chu phug dpal gyi phug ring ro rje rdzong zer ba de yin gsungs).3-7. p. who is said to have attained realization at that place. water and so forth.e. 568. The records of the Fifth Dalai Blama mention also a further treasure site of Gu-ru Tshe-brtsan rgyal-mtshan.4 & 119. The succession of these different forms of Padmasambhava and their iconographical representation are known to depict the spiritual career of the master and can be found mainly in his biographical tradition. including those of the “Eight Names” (mtshan brgyad). 3. see.14-569. see Ngag-dbang Blo-bzang rgya-mtsho: Gangā’i chu rgyun.5-115. fire. 13 The résumé of the findings of Gu-ru Tshe-brtan rgyal-mtshan as known in the 17th century is contained in the work of Karma Mi-’gyur rdo-rje dbanggi rgyal-po: Lo rgyus gter bton chos ’byung. vol. Padmasambhava] in his wrathful form” (gu ru drag po) and he refers in this respect especially to the “introductory scripture” (them yig) of Yeshes mtsho-rgyal.A ‘Hidden Land’ at the Border of ’Ol-kha and Dvags-po 501 As already noted it were mainly cycles devoted to the cult of Padmasambhava in his peaceful and wrathful aspect that were among the discoveries of Gu-ru Tshe-brtan rgyal-mtshan. pp. It is mainly the Padma bka’ thang literature which is regarded as the source for the description of the emanations of the master known as “Eight Names”. chapter 92. The rituals aimed at preventing these dangers seem to have survived in later times.4. as they are among the few treasure writings of Gu-ru Tshe-brtan rgyal-mtshan included in the massive collection of texts compiled by ’Jam-mgon Kongsprul Blo-gros mtha’-yas (1813-1899). One of the most detailed accounts of what had been transmitted up to that period from the treasures of Mon-kha Chu-mo phug can be found in the “records of teachings heard” (gsan yig) of the Fifth Dalai Bla-ma. see ibid. 110. pp.13 In the chapter by the Fifth Dalai Bla-ma on the treasures of Gu-ru Tshebrtan rgyal-mtshan a section dealing with the spiritual practice devoted to Ye-shes mtsho-rgyal is to be found and one encounters there different rituals for protection against natural calamities. In his treatment of that treasure tradition Ngag-dbang Blo-bzang rgya-mtsho makes it clear that he obtained in particular the cycles of “the teacher [i.2.1. pp. .5122. For the references in the Fifth Dalai Bla-ma’s records. for example. A historiographical source of the 17th century that elaborates on these teachings uncludes Gu ru bla sgrub.5-56. Klaus (1982:33-34). compare ibid. Tshe sgrub Padma dbang chen and Khro bo’i rgyal po rme brtsegs. In the detailed account of the actual teachings prominent place is then given to different form of Padmasambhava. The prophecy concerning the person of Gu-ru Tshe-brtan rgyal-mtshan and his treasures in Mon-kha chu-phug can be found in the same work. For the sections describing the different aspects of Padmasambhava..6-126. 113. including destruction by hail.2. In a final statement with regard to the find from the Chu-mo phug these damages are called “fear [due to] water” (chu’i ’jigs pa) and “fear [due to] fire” (me’i ’jigs pa). pp. 55. compare Klaus (1985:26-28 & 126-128). Ye-shes mtsho-rgyal]” (jo mo’i sgrub skor) see Ngag-dbang Blo-bzang rgya-mtsho: Gangā’i chu rgyun. who brought forth from this site—known as Bya mang-po—a treasure cycle with the title Kun bzang thugs gter ’khor ’das rang grol. The fact that the introductory list from Gu-ru Tshe-brtan rgyal-mtshan was the necessary condition for the treasure recovery of Bya-mang-po Byangchub gling-pa is also highlighted in the work of Gu-ru bkra-shis. see Schwieger (2009:177-178). 479. 122.4-6.15 This points to two factors which are important for contextualizing the work dealing with the hidden land of White Valley.5-6 (’di nas nub kyi phyogs shes na : g.14 Although there is no mention of works dealing with the routes and rituals of the hidden lands gNam-sgo zla-gam or dKar-po ljongs. 158. 3. The quotation from this work describes a further treasure site. 125. located in the eastern direction of “the king of Mang-yul [Gung-thang]” (mang yul rgyal po) and near a lake known as lHa-mo srin-mtsho in the upper part of the dPal-mo thang region in southwestern Tibet. fire and storm originally compiled by ’Bri-gung Rig-’dzin Chos-kyi grags-pa (1597-1659). one Byang-chub gling-pa (14th cent. a text with the title “Route Description. see his Ngo mtshar gtam gyi rol mtsho. a Certificate of the Real Meaning” (lam yig don byang) retrieved by Gu-ru Tshe-brtan rgyal-mtshan from Chu-mo phug is refered to in the records of the Fifth Dalai Bla-ma. 3. First. 15 For the quotation from the work Lam yig don byang in the records of the Fifth Dalai Bla-ma. These ritual texts have been included in the Rin chen gter mdzod collection under the titles “Protection from fear [due to] water” (chu’i ’jigs pa srung ba) and “Protection from fear [due to] fire” (me’i ’jigs pa srung ba). see Ngag-dbang Blo-bzang rgya-mtsho: Gangā’i chu rgyun. . for an edition and translation of these ritual texts. pp.502 Franz-Karl Ehrhard Rong-gi rdza lhang-mo by name. flood. In the historiographical literature of the rNying-ma-pa school it is noted that Byang-chub gling-pa was only able to retrieve this particular treasure after the introductory list of Gu-ru Tshe-brtan rgyal-mtshan had come into his hands. For the final teachings.8-480. individual texts 14 For the section describing the “cycle for the spiritual realization of the Lady [i. They are part of a collection of texts for the protection from fear of damage caused by earthquake. It is a prophecy addressed to a further treasure finder. vol. p.). vol. p.3-5.yas ru chu khung ’bab pa’i lho : mang yul rgyal po’i shar phyogs logs : dpal mo thang gi dkyil stod na : lha mo srin mtsho’i nub phyogs na: slob dpon padma’i dgongs pa’i bcud : nam mkha’i snying po’i thugs gter yod : lnga bcu khar la snyigs ma’i dus : rang gter blangs nas ’gro don byed : gsang sngags dar la ma smin dus : skal ldan kun gyi chos skal yin : dran par gyis shig pad bangs kun).9. but it is only stated that a treasure cycle was extracted from that site which contained rituals for the “turning back of military forces” (dmag bzlog). including those against natural calamities. p..e. compare ibid. It closes with the following admonition to the reader: “The means for offerings to the master of the territory [and] the means for opening the gate [to the hidden land] should be looked up in the great inventory!” (gzhi bdag mchod thabs sgor byed (= sgo ’byed) thabs rnams dkar chag chen mo’i nang du ltas). the author had the intention to produce further chapters.A ‘Hidden Land’ at the Border of ’Ol-kha and Dvags-po 503 from the treasures of Gu-ru Tshe-brtan rgyal-mtshan played a role for the corresponding activities of further treasure seekers. One gets the impression that in continuation of the first chapter. the topographical description of the area as to be found in this title is used alternatively with the general known name or sometimes the two designations are combined and the hidden land is called “White Valley of the three Regions” (lung gsum dkar po ljongs). While the first section is classified as an inventory or register. but was only able to complete a second one. this chapter has no title and is the final one as it closes with the formula of the sealing of the text. but it is possible to divide it into two main sections. but in the first lines it is said to be the actual “route description” (lam yig) providing details of the natural landscape and especially the different entry points to the sacred site. The two . Second.5 [= fols.1-208. The Hidden Land of White Valley The work published under the title “Description of the sacred site Hidden Land of White Valley” (sbas yul dkar po’i ljongs kyi gnas yig) is of a quite heterogenous character. as could be just seen in events surrounding the findings of Byang-chub gling-pa in the domain of the rulers of Mang-yul Gung-thang. In order to find out which other treasure finder is mentioned in connection with the hidden land at the border of ’Ol-kha and Dvags-po we have now to take a look at the text as such. bearing the title “the chapter on the subject matter of the hidden land” (sbas yul gling bzhi’i [= gleng gzhi’i] le’u).16 16 For the dkar chag and the lam yig of the hidden land of White Valley see the work of Tshe-brtan rgyal-mtshan. pp. 204. The first one is called “inventory of the Valley of the Three Regions” (lung gsum ljongs kyi dkar chag). As the second section refers to the first one it is obvious that the inventory was composed prior to the route description. which is characteristic of treasure works. 1b1/-6a/3]. the second section has no title proper. this seems to apply especially to works dealing with the cult of hidden lands as demonstrated in the latter case. individual texts from Gu-ru Tshe-brtan rgyal-mtshan’s discoveries were also transmitted by other treasure finders as known from Rig-’dzin rGod-ldem ’phru-can’s involvement with passing on the work on Nam-sgo zla-gam. This ‘Great Inventory’ seems to have been written out in some haste or without paying proper attention to the topical outline of the text proposed at the very beginning. 504 Franz-Karl Ehrhard The act of sealing is then attributed to the sacred site as such with the following words: “This fivefold sealed hidden land is the patrimony by O-rgyan gling-pa” (rgya lngas stab pa’i (= btab pa’i) sbas yul ’di : o rgyan gling pa’i pha phogs yin). see ibid. It should be noted that after the first reference the lord of the territory with the name Tshang-pa ’brug[-zhon] is mentioned. 17 The two references to O-rgyan gling-pa are contained in Tshe-brtan rgyalmtshan. 208. This mention of the treasure finder O-rgyan gling-pa in connection with the hidden land at the border of ’Ol-kha and Dvags-po brings us to the question if there are further details on the White Valley or the Valley of the Three Regions contained in his writings. Kong-po and E-yul and the narrative unfolds the story how Tshangs-pa ’brug-zhon. The introductory chapter is structured along three topics: “general” (spyi).. it is a hidden land having the form of a tripod.. 3a/5]. With related activities at lHa-sa. “the king of the masters of the territory” (gzhi bdag rgyal po).4 [= fol. The second topic is treated then as the third one. see Blondeau . 204. had been tamed by him. The first topic.. 205.4 [= fol.17 chapters of the inventory can be found ibid. It is in the chapter describing the journey of Padmasambhava to the regions of Byar. bSam-yas. this is in the context of the means for offerings to the master of the territory and those for opening the gate to the hidden land: “If this [sacred site] is obtained.2-7 [= fols. sBas yul dkar po ljongs kyi gnas yig. where a vihāra should be erected whose proper consecration would drive back foreign armies. 6a/2].1-205.. p. 209. 204. 205. Under the name White Valley of the Three Regions the site is in the same work localized at the border of ’Ol-kha and Dvags-po and said to be a place where the treasures of the Buddhist doctrine will be safeguarded. see ibid.4 [= fol.” (’di snyed dgra nub yar rje ’byung : o rgyan gling pa dgongs ma chung). If one consults the lHa ’dre’i bka’ thang— a treasure work of O-rgyan gling-pa from the collection known under the name bKa’ thang sde lnga—the hidden land is actually found at a quite prominent place of the text.2 [= fols. is to be found ibid. 2a/4-3b/4]. fol. It is also stated afterwards that this particular hidden land is during all its phases of occupation first and foremost in the hands of the “worldly gods [and] evil spirits” (lha ’dre). “special” (bye brag) and “in particular” (sgos). The chief of the masters of the territory seems to bear generally a name starting with the syllable Tshangs / ’Tsang / Tsang. p. which makes the third one—dealing with the hidden land of White Valley in particular— missing. 1b1/1-3a/1] and pp. Khra’brug and Lung-gsum ljongs these goals would be achieved and all the worldy gods and evil spirits pacified.5 [= fols.2-208. This is the small wish of O-rgyan gling-pa. Dvags-po. 6a/1] and p. dealing with hidden lands in general. 3a/1-6a/3]. The name of O-rgyan gling-pa turns up once again in the second—and final—chapter of this section of the work of Gu-ru Tshe-brtan rgyal-mtshan.2 [= fols. 1a/4-2b/4]. the enemies decline [and] the lord of Yar[-lung] arises.7-205. 208. pp. pp. A ‘Hidden Land’ at the Border of ’Ol-kha and Dvags-po 505 Looking again at the structure of the inventory it can be observed that a kind of appendix is added which seems to have been written when the author noticed that the topic of dealing with the Hidden Land of White Valley “in particular” (sgos) had been missing in the work. After stating that in general there exist many hidden lands he begins his treatment with a description of the way which leads to the sacred site and brings it thus in relation to Tibet’s first Buddhist vihāra: “Taking bSam-yas as the center, if one [then] proceeds for three days in the eastern direction…” (bsam yas dbus su bzhag pa’i shar phyogs na : nyin lam gsum phyin pa na). There follow the topographical details of eight “virtuous site” (dge gnas brgyad), each dominated by one master of the territory and the last one being characterized as a place where a treasure had been deposited. There is no colophon of any sort to be found at the end of this appendix.18 The second section of the text of Gu-ru Tshe-brtan rgyal-mtshan, i.e. the route description to the hidden land, opens with a hommage to the Bodhisattva Avalokiteśvara and lists afterwards the various situations which characterize Tibet at the time of a degenerate age and which bring the followers of Buddhist doctrine to this remote sanctuary. It contains once again a localization of White Valley to another sacred site, this time in relation to a hidden land: “E-ma! In the north-east of the Valley of Artemisia, the hidden land which liberates from armed forces, lies the hidden land called White Valley of the Three Regions. [It is] a sacred site similar to [these two:] (2008: 244). Concerning the different references to the hidden land at the border of ’Ol-kha and Dvags-po in the treasure work of O-rgyan gling-pa see his lHa ’dre’i bka’ thang in bKa’ thang sde lnga, pp. 67.3-68.16, 75.16, 80.18-81.2 & 81.12-16; compare the translations in Blondeau (1971:98-99, 109 & 114). For a chronological calculation on Lung-gsum dkar-po ljongs in the Lo pa bka’ thang corresponding to the year 1393, see also Blondeau (1971:98, note 253). This calculation which prophesises a famine in that very year has already been noted by Vostrikov (1970:4041); see Lo pa bka’i thang yig in bKa’ thang sde lnga, p. 408.18-19. 18 The appendix to the inventory is contained in the work of Tshe-brtan rgyalmtshan, p. 208.5-209.5 [= fols. 6a/3-7a/2]. In the second chapter of the inventory the hidden land is actually characterized as possessing this eight sacred sites; see ibid., p. 205.3 [=fol. 3a/4]: “As the Valley of the Three Regions at the border of ’Ol[-kha] [and] D[v]ags[-po] is one having eight virtuous sacred sites” (’ol dags mtshams kyi lung gsum ljongs : dge gnas brgyad kyi gcig yin pas). This specific attribute of virtuousness must have been responsible for the designation “White Valley” (dkar po ljongs). The second designation “Valley of the Three Regions” (lung gsum ljongs) points to the physical landscape of the central grassy plain, where three side valleys converge (and where later rGyal Me-thog thang had been erected in a triangular form); see Dowman (1988:257) and Chan (1994:638). 506 Franz-Karl Ehrhard the real mountain Potala[ka] and [the celestial realm] Abhirati!” (e ma dmag gi mi thar sbas pa’i yul : ’khan pa (= mkhan pa) ljongs kyi byang shar na : ri bo po ta la dngos dang ’dra ba’i gnas : mngon par dga’ ba dag dang mtshungs : lung gsum dkar po ljongs zhes sbas yul yod). This same geographical position of White Valley to the north-east of the Artemisia Valley—which is placed in the south-west—can be found in the biographical tradition of Padmasambhava as codified by O-rgyan glingpa. His version of the Padma bka’i thang yig contains a list of different “places of spiritual realization” (sgrub gnas), including a set of three “valleys” (ljongs). Two of them are called sBas-yul mKhan-pa ljongs and sBas-yul Lung-gsum ljongs respectively. The third one bears the name sBasyul ’Bras-mo ljongs and refers to the Rice Valley; i.e. present-day Sikkim; like the Artemisia Valley—which is located in eastern Nepal—this hidden land is named after the plant or crop to be found mainly in the remote region. It is thus obvious that the hidden land of White Valley had been familiar to O-rgyan gling-pa like the two other hidden lands which he inserted into his version of the Padma bka’i thang yig; these latter two sanctuaries are known mainly from the textual tradition of Rig-’dzin rGod-ldem ’phru-can.19 The main part of the second section of the text of Gu-ru Tshe-brtan rgyal-mtshan is devoted to the “gates” (sgo) to the hidden land of White Valley. The concept of ordering these entry points is a quite singular one as it follows the triad of Dharmakāya, Sa bhogakāya and Nirmāakāya; they correspond respectively to the northern gate, the eastern gate and the southern gate. An approach from the west, i.e. from ’Ol-kha, is thus missing and by implication also the geographical pattern of four gates, which provide a hidden land with the ideal status of the center of a maala to be approached by four entry points in the four cardinal directions. When giving a first overview of the topography as depicted in the Lam yig it should be mentioned that the landscape as to be seen by the approach from the northern gate is compared to the one of Gangs-dkar Ti-se, i.e. 19 For the quotation from the lam yig of Tshe-brtan rgyal-mtshan’s work, see p. 211.2-3 [= fol. 8b/1-2]. The set of three hidden lands as presented by O-rgyan gling-pa can be found in his Padma bka’i thang yig, chapter 95, pp. 589.14590.2 (lho nub mtshams na sbas yul ’bras mo ljongs : nub byang mtshams na sbas yul mkhan pa ljongs : byang shar mtshams na sbas yul lung gsum ljongs). Concerning the different textual traditions of the “guide to the sacred place” (gnas yig) associated with sBas-yul mKhan-pa ljongs, the predominant one being that of Rig-’dzin rGod-ldem ’phru-can, see Ehrhard (1997:335336). For the relevant texts of the same treasure finder concerning sBas-yul ’Bras-mo ljongs compare Ehhard (2003:13, note 8 & 15-16, note 11); see also Ehrhard (2005:19-20) for the movement of teachers of the rNying-mapa school to the latter hidden land in the 17th century. A ‘Hidden Land’ at the Border of ’Ol-kha and Dvags-po 507 Kailāśa, and La-phyi Chu-bar, while the approach from the eastern gate makes one see the landscape like the one of the sacred site of Tsā-ri[-tra]. By this means the hidden land of White Valley is identified with the three pilgrimage sites of Cakrasa vara’s body, speech and mind. The southern gate in turn is responsible for viewing the region like Potalaka, the residence of the Bodhisattva Avalokiteśvara; the landscape is in this case also characterized by the existence of different lakes. The final part of the route description refers to one lake in particular, known as lHa-lung Padma braggsum mtsho. It also provides the names of different sponsors and contains that very quotation about the spiritual qualifications of the male and female inhabitants of the sanctuary known from historiographical sources.20 Although not many of the writings of Gu-ru Tshe-brtan rgyal-mtshan have survived, it should have become clear that his works on hidden lands must have influenced further treasure finders involved in the propagation of the cult of these remote sanctuaries. The geographical concepts encountered in these works belong to a quite early stratum and thus provide insight into the formative stage of the literature sacralizing and spiritualizing the Tibetan landscape.21 The hidden land of White Valley, which is not situated in the Himalayan valleys to the south of the Tibetan plateau, but on the border of ’Ol-kha 20 The three descriptions of the triple approach to the hidden land according to what can be called a “trikāya model” are to be found in the work of Tshebrtan rgyal-mtshan, pp. 211.5-212.4 [= fols. 8b/5-9b/5], pp. 212.4-213.1 [= fols. 9b/5-10b/1] & pp. 213.1-214.2 [= fols. 10b/1-11b/2]. For the quotation as transmitted in the historiographical work of mKhar-nag Lo-tsā-ba, see note 6. The two lines occur in two identical versions in the Lam yig; see the work of Tshe-brtan rgyal-mtshan, p. 215.1 & p. 215.3-4 [= fol. 12a/5-6 & fol. 12b/ 2-3]: (pho skyes thams cad dpa’ bor shes par gyi : mo skyes thams cad dpa’ mor shes par gyi). In contrast to a trikāya model as applied in the text on dKar-po ljongs, the work of Gu-ru Tshe-brtan rgyal-mtshan dealing with gNam-sgo zla-gam employs a fourfold “maala model” when setting forth the entry points to the sacred site; compare Ehrhard (1997:344). 21 In the dKar chag of the hidden land of White Valley, Mount Sumeru is placed in the centre with Jambudvīpa and its satellite countries in the south; see the work of Tshe-brtan rgyal-mtshan, p. 204.2-7 [= fols. 1b/4-2b/4]. The author follows here a trend in Tibetan geographical conceptions which has been called “Indiocentric” in contrast to “Tibetocentric”—or “Kailashocentric”— see Martin (1994:520-521) and Huber (2008:77-83). In his presentation of the individual Buddhist countries he makes use of a scheme known as “shoulder-blade” geography. i.e. placing the individual countries on a “shoulder blade” (sog pa) in the form of a downward pointing triangle. This concept of the world can be found in both Bon and Buddhist literary sources and seems quite old; see Martin (1999:266 & 289, note 25). 508 Franz-Karl Ehrhard and Dvags-po is a quite outstanding case among the manifold sanctuaries known to us by now. This is especially true as it was at a certain point in time appropriated by the dGe-lugs-pa school and became associated with the lineage of the Dalai Bla-mas and its individual representatives. Tibetan Texts Karma Mi-’gyur dbang-gi rgyal-po (17th cent.) gTer bton brgya rtsa’i mtshan sdom gsol ’debs chos rgyal bkra shis stobs rgyal gyi mdzad pa’i ’grel pa [gter bton chos ’byung], 174 fols. Darjeeling: Taklung Tsetrul Rinpoche Pema Wangyal, 1978. Kun-bzang Nges-don klong-yangs, 6. Dog-sprul (b. 1814) Bod du byung ba’i gsang sngags snga ’gyur gyi bstan ’dzin skyes mchog rim byon gyi rnam thar [nor bu’i do shal], 186 fols. Dalhousie: Damchoe Sangpo, 1976. Gu-ru bKra-shis, sTag-sgang mkhas-mchog (18th/19th cent.) bsTan 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], 1076 pp. Hsining: mTsho-sngon mi-rigs par-khang, 1990. dGe-bshes Brag-phug-pa dGe-’dun rin-chen, 69th rJe mkhan-po (1926-1997) dPal ldan ’brug pa’i gdul zhing lho phyogs nags mo’i ljongs kyi chos ’byung [blo gsal rna ba’i rgyan], 216 fols. (xylograph). Ngag-dbang Blo-bzang rgya-mtsho, Fifth Dalai Bla-ma (1617-1682) ’Jig rten dbang phyug thams cad mkhyen pa yon tan rgya mtsho dpal bzang po’i rnam par thar pa [nor bu’i ’phreng ba], 52 fols. In “The Collected Works of the Vth Dalai Lama”, vol. 8. Gangtok: Namgyal Institute of Tibetology, 1992, pp. 247-350. ———— rJe btsun thams cad mkhyen pa bsod nams rgya mtsho’i rnam thar [dngos grub rgya mtsho], 109 fols. In “The Collected Works of the Vth Dalai Lama”, vol. 8. Gangtok: Namgyal Institute of Tibetology, 1992, pp. 31-245. ———— Zab pa dang rgya che ba’i dam pa’i chos kyi thob yig [gang’i chu rgyun], 4 vols. In “The Collected Works of the Vth Dalai Lama”, vols. 1-4. Gangtok: Namgyal Institute of Tibetology, 1991-1991. A ‘Hidden Land’ at the Border of ’Ol-kha and Dvags-po 509 ’Jam-dbyangs mKhyen-brtse’i dbang-po (1820-1892) lHa ldan sogs dbus ’gyur chos sde khag dang / yar klungs lho rgyud / gtsang stod / byang rva sgreng rgyal ba’i ’byung gnas sogs kyi rten gnas mang po’i gnas yig [ngo mtshar lung ston me long], 30, pp. In Bod kyi gnas yig bdams bsgrigs (= Gangs can rig mdzod, 37). Lhasa: Bod-ljongs bod-yig dpe-rnying dpe-skrun khang, 1995, pp. 186-216. dPal-’byor rgya-mtsho, mKhar-nag Lo-tsā-ba (16th/17th cent.) dGa’ ldan chos ’byung [dpag bsam sdong po mkhas pa dga’ byed], 102 fols. (manuscript). Tshe-brtan rgyal-mtshan, Gu-ru (12th/13th cent.) sBas yul dkar po ljongs kyi gnas yig, 6 fols. In “Tibetan Guides to Places of Pilgrimage: A Collection of Guidebooks (gnas yig) to Places of Buddhist Pilgrimage in Tibet and China from the Library of Burmiok Athing T.D. Densapa”. Dharamsala: Library of Tibetan Works and Archives, 1985, pp. 203-215. ———— sBas yul padma’i tshal gyi gnas yig kun tu gsal ba’i me long, 20. fols. Gangtok: Bla-ma Zla-ba and Sherab Gyaltsen, 1983. Sangs-rgyas rgya-mtsho, sDe-srid (1653-1705) dPal mnyam med ri bo dga’ ldan pa’i bstan pa zhva ser cod pan ’chang ba’i ring lugs chos thams cad kyi rtsa ba gsal bar byed pa [bai ūrya ser po’i me long], 523 pp. Peking: Khrung-go’i bod-kyi shes-rig dpe-skrun khang. 1989. O-rgyan gling-pa, gTer-chen (1329-1367) O rgyan gu ru padma ’byung gnas kyi skyes rabs rnam par thar pa rgyas par bkod pa [padma bka’i thang yig], 792 pp. Chengdu: Si-khron mi-rigs dpe-skrun khang, 1988. ———— bKa’ thang sde lnga, 539 pp. Chengdu: Si-khron mi-rigs dpekhrun khang, 1986. Western Literature Ahmad, Z. (1999). Sas-rGyas rGya-mTsho: Life of the Fifth Dalai Lama, Volume IV, Part I (= Śata-Pi aka Series, 392). New Delhi. Aris, M. (1979). Bhutan. The Early History of a Himalayan Kingdom. New Delhi. Batchelor, S. (1987). The Tibet Guide. London. 510 Franz-Karl Ehrhard Blondeau, A.M. (1971). “Le Lha-’dre bka’-tha.” In Études tibétaines dèdiées à la mémoire de Marcelle Lalou. Paris, pp. 29-126. ———— (2008). “Le Réseau des milles dieux-demons: mythes et classification.” Revue d’Etudes tibétaines, 15 (= Special Issue : Tibetan Studies in Honour of Samten Karmay, 2 : Buddhist & Bon-po Studies), pp. 199-250. Chan, V. Tibet Handbook : A Pilgrimage Guide. Chico, California. Childs, G.H. (1993). Journey to the Hidden Valley (Sbas-yul) of Gnamsgo zla-gam: Perspectives on the Tibetan Concept of Himalayan Refuges. Unpublished M.A. thesis. Indiana University. ———— (1999). “Refuge and Revitalization: Hidden Himalayan Sanctuaries (Sbas yul) and the Preservation of Tibet’s Imperial Lineage.” Acta Orientalia, 60, pp. 126-158. Dowman, K. (1988). The Power-Places of Central Tibet: The Pilgrim’s Guide. London. Ehrhard, F.-K. (1997). “A ‘Hidden Land’ in the Tibetan Nepalese Borderlands.” In Maala and Landscape (= Emerging Perspectives in Buddhist Studies, 6). New Delhi, pp. 335-364. ———— (2003a). “Political and Ritual Aspects of the Search for Himalayan Sacred Lands.” In The History of Tibet, Vol. II: The Medieval Period: c. 850-1895. The Development of Buddhist Paramountcy. London / New York, pp. 659-674. ———— (2003b). “Kathog pa bSod nams rgyal mtshan (1466-1540) and his activities in Sikkim and Bhutan.” Bulletin of Tibetology, 39:2 (= Special Issue: Contributions to Sikkimese History), pp. 9-26. ———— (2005). “The mNga’ bdag family and the tradition of Rig ’dzin Zhig po gling pa (1524-1583) in Sikkim.” Bulletin of Tibetology, 41:2 (= Special Issue: Tibetan Lamas in Sikkim), pp. 11-30. Ferrari, A. (1958). Mk’yen brtse’s Guide to the Holy Places of Central Tibet (= Serie Orientale Roma, 16). Rome. Gyurme Dorje (1996). Tibet Handbook with Bhutan. Bath. Heller, A. (2005a). “Der Zweite Dalai Lama Gendun Gyatso.” In Die Dalai Lamas: Tibets Reinkarnationen des Bodhisattva Avalokiteśvara. Stuttgart, pp. 42-51. ———— (2005b). “Die Schutzgottheiten der Dalai Lamas.” Ibid., pp. 212-229. A ‘Hidden Land’ at the Border of ’Ol-kha and Dvags-po 511 Huber, T. (2008). The Holy Land Reborn: Pilgrimage & the Tibetan Reinvention of Buddhist India (= Buddhism and Modernity, 3). Chicago and London. Klaus, C. (1982). Der aus dem Lotos Entstandene: Ein Beitrag zur Ikonographie und Ikonologie des Padmasambhava nach dem Rin chen gter mdzod (= Asiatische Studien, 85). Wiesbaden. ———— (1985). Schutz vor den Naturgefahren: Tibetische Ritualtexte aus dem Rin chen gter mdzod ediert, übersetzt und kommentiert (= Asiatische Forschungen, 97). Wiesbaden. Martin, D. (1994). “Tibet at the Center: A Historical Study of Some Tibetan Geographical Conceptions Based on Two Types of Country-Lists Found in Bon Histories.“ In Tibetan Studies, vol. 1 (= The Institute for Comparative Research in Human Culture, 1,1). Oslo, pp. 517-532. ———— (1997). Tibetan Histories: A Bibliography of Tibetan-Language Historical Works. London. ———— (1999). “’Ol-mo-lung-ring, the Original Holy Place.” In Sacred Spaces and Powerful Places in Tibetan Culture: A Collection of Essays. Dharamsala, pp. 258-301. Mullin, G.H. (1986). “De-si Sang-Gye Gya-Tsho’s The Life of the Second Dalai Lama.” The Tibet Journal 11:3, pp. 3-16. Nebesky-Wojkowitz (1956). Oracles and Demons of Tibet: The Cult and Iconography of the Tibetan Protective Deities. s’Gravenhage (reprint: Graz 1975). Nornang, N.L. (1990). “Monastic Organization and Economy of Dvags-po Bshad-grubgling.” In Reflections on Tibetan Culture: Essays in Memory of Turrel V. Wylie (=Studies in Asian Thought and Religions, 12). Lewistown/Queenstown/Lampeter, pp. 249-268. Schwieger, P. (1985). Tibetische Handschriften und Blockdrucke, Teil 9: Die Werksammlungen Kun-tu bza-po dgos-pa za-thal, Ka-dag ra-byu ra-śar and mKha’-’gro gsa-ba ye-shes kyi rgyud (= Verzeichnis der Orientalischen Handschriften in Deutschland, 11: 9). Stuttgart. ———— (2009). Tibetische Handschriften und Blockdrucke, Teil 13: Die mTshur-phu-Ausgabe der Sammlung Rin-chen gter-mdzod chen-mo, nach dem Exemplar der Orientabteilung, Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin — Preussischer Kulturbesitz, Hs or 778, Bände 40-52 (= Verzeichnis der Orientalischen Handschriften in Deutschland, 11: 13). Stuttgart. 512 Franz-Karl Ehrhard Shaw, M. (2009).”Palden Lhamo: Supreme Guardian Goddesss of the Dalai Lamas. In As Long as Pace Endures: Essays on the Kālacakra Tantra in Honor of H.H. The Dalai Lama. Ithaca, New York, pp. 153-167. Sørensen, P.K. (2008). “The Sacred Junipers of Reting: The Arboreal Origins behind the Dalai Lama Lineage.” Orientations, 39:6, pp. 74-79. Toussaint, G.C. (1933). Le Dict de Padma (Padma Thang yig). Paris. Tucci, G. (1949). Tibetan Painted Scrolls, 2 vols., Rome. Vitali, R. (2001). “A Note on the Third Dalai Lama bSod nams rgya mtsho and his Visionary Thang ka od lHa mo’i bla mtsho.” The Tibet Journal, 26:3-4 (= Special Issue: Contributions to the History of Tibetan Art), pp. 91-102. Vostrikov, A.I. (1970). Tibetan Historical Literature (= Soviet Indology Series, 4). Calcutta. A ‘Hidden Land’ at the Border of ’Ol-kha and Dvags-po 513 514 Franz-Karl Ehrhard A ‘Hidden Land’ at the Border of ’Ol-kha and Dvags-po 515 . 516 Franz-Karl Ehrhard . A ‘Hidden Land’ at the Border of ’Ol-kha and Dvags-po 517 . 518 Franz-Karl Ehrhard . A ‘Hidden Land’ at the Border of ’Ol-kha and Dvags-po 519 . 520 Franz-Karl Ehrhard . A ‘Hidden Land’ at the Border of ’Ol-kha and Dvags-po 521 . M.D. taking advantage of this opportunity to buy in various Chinese shops all the items they need for the daily life in their camp. many Tibetans were present in the city. the A myes rma chen mountain. Sperling who kindly corrected my English.000th Anniversary of the creation of the epic poem King Gesar (China)” which they planned to organize. I am also indebted to E.2 1 Chinese proverbs quoted by Trebinjac (2000: 306). Amdo. among them the magic sword from which the Mgo log say they get their strength (Rock 1956: 127). Even and R. But it was also one of the places elected for the celebration of the millennial year of the creation of the Gesar epic.unesco. 2 http://unesdoc. the importance of Kham and Amdo in the propagation of the epic is well known.“May the New Emerge from the Ancient! May the Ancient Serve the Present!” The Gesar Festival of Rma chen (A mdo 2002) 1 Katia Buffetrille Paris Located in the Mgo log Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture. Tibetan terms are in Wylie transliteration except for well-known toponyms like Kham. an area traditionally populated mainly by nomadic pastoralists.pdf. Rma chen being one of the gateways to the pilgrimage route. In 2002. and very common terms such as Rinpoche. the Chinese authorities through the permanent delegation of the PRC requested UNESCO to support the organization of the “1. (February 2010). I would like to gratefully acknowledge the stimulating comments of M.org/images/0012/001238/123885F. the main auspicious year in the twelve-year cycle of the Tibetan calendar when one is assured of receiving much more merits than in any other year if one does the pilgrimage circuit around A myes rma chen mountain (6282m). Akester. the hero of the epic to his protective deity. Moreover. . The reading of Fitzherbert’s Ph. the place hummed with activity: 2002 was a horse-year. a very appropriate choice in view of the peculiar relations that link Gesar.D (2007) as well some discussions with him make it possible to correct some errors in my article. The latter is known to be the keeper of Gesar’s treasures (Stein 1959: 124). Rma chen is one of those new cities that has experienced significant development since the beginning of the 1990s. But how did it happen that 2002 was declared the millennial year of the creation of the epic? On October 17th 2001. Hamayon. 4.524 Katia Buffetrille The Executive Board regarded the request as admissible according to the six selection criteria of which the 1st. similarly the anniversaries of military events will be excluded. namely that the anniversary marked a multiple centenary. The Tibetan epic King Gesar is known worldwide as the ‘Homer of the East’”4 It is thus by using one of the laudatory epithets (which is wrongly translated) awarded during the Maoist period (1949-1976). and more precisely that “King Gesar (Latin spelling) great epic poem created in old times by the Tibetan ethnic group [sic] has been transmitted orally from generation to generation and spread in all regions inhabited by Tibetans. 6. Each proposed anniversary should be indisputably linked to the Organization’s ideals and missions in the fields of education.3 The other criteria are: The request received a positive answer during the 161st session (April 21st 2001) of the Executive Board since it fulfilled two criteria. Parts of this epic poem have been translated into English. culture. tolerance.pdf (March 2010). 3rd and 5th are: 1. Commemorations of the birth. 5.org/anniversaries/en/Default. Japanese. historical empires and dynasties will not be eligible for consideration. Any anniversary proposal involving more than one state should be submitted by all. or a multiple thereof. 5 Maconi (2004: 391). The reader will notice that the Mongol versions have been omitted. social and human sciences and communication and should promote closer relations among peoples. Russian. cultural dialogue and mutual understanding among peoples. 3. .unesco.unesco. science. The anniversary should be the occasion for nationwide events already planned and for the Organization of which certain resources have been allocated to the Member State or group of Member States directly concerned. 4 unesdoc. Hindi and Finnish. French. a centenary. some flexibility should nevertheless be used in applying this criterion. the China Tibet Information Center. http://erc. the year of the 50th anniversary of the peaceful liberation 3 The other critieria are: 2. drew a parallel between this commemoration and another anniversary. German. the values. My translation.org/images/0012/001224/122473f. independence or institutional regime of a state. Soon after. The anniversary should concern personalities of genuinely universal stature and works or events of either genuinely worldwide or at least regional significance in order to reflect the ideals. The anniversary should be a fiftieth anniversary. 5 that the “Orient’s Homeric Epic” was included in the list of the anniversaries supported by the UNESCO.htm#Crit %C3%A8 res% 20et%20proc%C3%A9dures (April 2010). and the ideals of peace. the cultural diversity and the universality of the Organization. an official site. Writing that “In 2001. is proclaimed king and takes the name King Gesar. Together with his mother.6 In conformity with the criteria decided by UNESCO.The Gesar Festival of Rma chen (A mdo 2002) 525 of Tibet. his elder half brother whose mother is said to be Chinese. Gesar subdues the demons of the four directions and launches a series of conquests that ensure the prosperity of the kingdom of Gling. The winner is to be elected king and receive ’Brug mo as his queen. n°6.tibetinfor. 7 See China’s Tibet. 9 See Stein (1956) for a translation of the Gling manuscript that tells the prologue. a horse race in which all members of the tribe have the right to participate is organized by the Great Assembly of Gling. the birth and youth of Gesar and the horse-race that leads to his enthronement as the king of Gling. sometimes naughty but endowed with supernatural powers..htm. among them Rgya tsha zhal dkar.%5CTibetologyMagazine/2003120031215155030. and whose mother is an aquatic spirit in the subterranean world. Jo ru wins. Contrary to all expectations. .com. The first part of this article will attempt to interpret the poster designed 6 http://www.tibetinfor.8 While everything is going wrong on earth. http://www. Ma ne ne and assisted by the thirty knights (dpa ’thul) of Gling.9 Advised by his celestial guardian. he is called Jo ru. China succeeded in applying to the UNESCO for holding the International King Gesar Year in 2002 ». One day. half of it being dedicated to the millenary of the Epic. continue to appear in ever newer episodes? The beginning of the epic follows the ideal of Tibetan kingship in which the ruler reluctantly agrees to come from heaven at the request of the community.com/tibetzt/gesaer_en/doc/7000. passing through the different Tibetan cultural regions. it gave an explanation to what was may be the origin of the initial request in the year 2001. 8 Ramble (2008: 313-318). In his youth. Great Lion of the World. the publication of books) and cultural (the creation of a stamp and festivals. many events— artistic (the realization of documentaries. from Gilgit in the West to Mongolia in the East. vol. ugly. 2002. mischievous. the erection of Gesar statues. he is exiled by his paternal uncle to a place near A myes rma chen mountain. 13.7 But who was Gesar whose heroic deeds recounted by bards. the execution of paintings).htm for other manifestations (March 2010). Emphasis added. The first chapters recount the miraculous conception and birth of Gesar whose father is both a god and also a sacred mountain.cn/english/zt/Tibetology Magazine/ . men ask a god of heaven to send his son to earth. among them one in Rma chu and one in Rma chen)—were staged in 2002 to celebrate the millennium of the “longest epic of the world”. academic (national and international conferences. This intervention is undertaken in the form of a smoke offering of juniper (bsang) at a sacred mountain. The next two sections question the role assigned to the epic and its hero by the Chinese authorities on the one hand. He carries the flag of Gling and one spear and is followed by the knights of Gling (dpa’ thul) brandishing swords and spears. Gesar’s spouse. 13 See Kvaerne (1994: 166-185) and Trebinjac (2000) on this subject.10 This article is based on observations made during the festival and does not attempt to be an exhaustive study. with totally divergent interests— the Chinese authorities on one side. the Tibetans on the other—sought to reconstruct and to appropriate the epic and the image of its hero. the central figure is on horseback. in Rma country. but organized at the level of the prefecture. in a festival sponsored by an international organization. at the request of the central government. and the Tibetans on the other. UNESCO. My 1st pilgrimage had been done in 1990 and the 2nd in 1992.13 an analysis of this poster filled with heterogeneous components. all are evidently getting ready to leave for an expedition. The study tries to understand whether in the first case the use of the epic is a tool of propaganda. Gesar. my main goal when carrying out fieldwork was to do a third pilgrimage circuit around A myes rma chen mountain. can help us to progress in understanding the issues at stake in this festival. 12 Mgo log khul rma yul Gesar rigs gnas rgyu rtsal dus chen thengs dang po’i dran rten du. 11 See Buffetrille (1997: 75-132 et 2004: 319-363). . He greets with the right hand and holds a cup of beer (chang) in the left. wearing helmet and armour. Indeed.11 Nonetheless. The poster A poster had been executed by Bsod nams.526 Katia Buffetrille to commemorate this event and is followed by a description of the festival. The structure of the poster follows the traditional schematic divisions into three horizontal sectors (Kvaerne 1994: 168): Gesar. political and social change”. the purpose of the 3rd one was to observe the changes to it over a period of twelve years. The lower left section shows ’Brug mo. and in the second a “space for resistance”. a painter from the Reb gong Center for Artistic Research “in commemoration of the first artistic and cultural festival of Gesar [celebrated] for the first time in the Mgo log region. through the Gesar dances performed by monks at the festival. a conical white hat adorned with red fringes on her head accompanied by several other ladies and a man also wearing a white hat with red fringes but with a 10 I borrow this expression from Graezer-Bideau (2008: 58). it seems of some interest to demonstrate how the two main actors involved in the celebration.” 12 Since art is “an effective agent for ideological. The Gesar Festival of Rma chen (A mdo 2002) 527 slightly different shape. festive clothing common in the region. these people are dressed in sumptuous gowns (phyu ba) of brocade bordered with otter. the epic having been transmitted from Tibet to Mongolia.revues.d. 413). But while usual representations place Padmasambhava over Gesar19—who is said to be his incarnation in the epic (Stein 1959: 519)—here we have Rnam thos sras (Vai§ravaöa) with Spyan ras gzigs on his right and Sgrol 14 On Phying dkar and his hat. p. A Tibetan tent for reception and a Mongolian yurt decorated with a window (which shows the painter’s unfamiliarity with the Mongol world) are located side by side in the right corner of the poster. I would like to thank Étienne Bock for this reference. The viewer may suppose that they symbolize the harmony between Mongolians and Tibetans who have the epic of Gesar in common. following the tradition. its appellation Ar zhwa or phying zhwa rtse ring. It is also the hat of his medium. 19 See for example Macdonald (s. 15 http://www. X. also wears this kind of hat. beer (chang). 17 Karma smon lam and Skal bzang mkhas grub (2005: 9) confirm the existence of various forms of this hat in Amdo associated with different areas (mdo smad kyi sa khul khag tu zhwa ’di’i bzo dbyibs mi’dra ba re zung yod par gleng/). the native place of the painter. Both pieces of headgear remind that of Phying dkar ba. see Stein (1959: 348) and Nebesky-Wojkowitz (1975: 160-163 et Pl.html for pictures of this hat during the glu rol. 4. 17 Apart from their headgear. . The faces of all the protagonists are very white and highly sinicized. 18 Following the appeal by the Dalai-Lama to stop using the skins and furs of endangered species to adorn clothing. the territorial god of Reb gong. 16 http://emscat. Nevertheless.org/search/set. 14 Bya kyung. fruits and flowers. the cone covered with red fringes and with a ball at the top. identified by many Tibetans with A myes rma chen: a white hat with large brims. The eight auspicious symbols and various offerings are placed at the bottom center. In fact. Three deities occupy the upper part of the poster.cfm?setID=730 (April 2010) for the hat of Bya khyung. Tibetans in Amdo (mainly in Reb gong) publicly burnt them in 2006 and do not wear fur anymore (Tibetinfonet 10 February 2006). the mountain-deity of Rwa sgrengs.18 They carry various offerings for Gesar: ceremonial scarfs.org/index508.himalayanart. “felt hat with a long top” lets one imagine a taller hat. See also Buffetrille (1998 et 2009) on this festival. the god’s name derives from his white felt hat (phying zhwa) worn also by Amdo tribes (mainly the Mgo log). the villagers have a similar hat (without the ball and not so sharp).) thangkas 2. 15 During the glu rol festival 16 that takes place in some Reb gong villages. The twelve zodiac animals are displayed in the framework of the poster and the upper part is topped by the mantra Oµ a ba hèm dzra ma hŒ gu ru ma öi rŒ dza sarba siddhi pha la hèm. mounted upon one another and catching the fruit of the tree of life—familiar to Tibetans. but what seems to be a single flask in his right hand. a stag. monkey. a tantric practitioner and various animals fill the pastures. while two Tibetans prostrate themselves before a furnace for smoke offering of juniper. His various aspects of wealth-god. the most important mountain deity of Amdo. the traditional offering to sacred mountains and in this case. the warrior god who reigns in the north as king of the universe but also as a god of wealth (Stein 1959: 282-290). Yet. in the upper left corner of the poster stands Shou Lao. The upper right corner is occupied by the representation of “the four friends”—the elephant. 21 The festival The festival of the millennium of the epic took place from the 23rd to the 27th day of the 6th month (1st to 5th of August) in a grassland located eight kilometers west of Rma chen. and A myes rma chen. Above. especially Ger-mdzo. See Diemberger (2003: 109-134) . He does not hold his stick. seated under the tree of life. Snowy Mountains—the A myes rma chen Range?—and green hills delimit the horizon. surrounded by two cranes and by his mount. the aunt and celestial adviser of Gesar (Stein 1958: 248. seated on the snowlion. one of his fathers on earth. protector of the faith. represented in Chinese style. Stein 1987: 66-78). a sign of the privileged relations Gesar maintains with sacred mountains. 22 The Chinese Red Army was founded on August 1st 1927 by the CCP and later became the People’s Liberation Army. It is thus his “wealth god” aspect that is highlighted and not that of the reincarnation of Padmasambhava. “one of the characteristic elements which has contributed towards enhancing cultural unification among Tibetans is King Gesar’s worship of Mount Ger mdzo” (Karmay 1998a: 426). Rnam thos sras. 21 Not identified.528 Katia Buffetrille ma on his left. not the usual double gourd of the alchemists (Beer 2004: 96. hare and partridge. god of war and protector of the north make him close to Gesar. 1959: 445). The two vignettes can also be interpreted as eulogizing the freedom the minorities are supposed to enjoy in their practice of religion. 20 holds the mongoose which produces treasures in his left hand and a banner of victory in his right. Below. The choice of the first of August to start the festival is not neutral since it is People’s Liberation Army day22 but 20 The snow-lion is also the mount of Ma ne ne. the Chinese god of longevity. Possibly a mantra to Gesar. from where the peak of the A myes rma chen mountain can be seen. in the traditional way with a smoke offering of juniper (bsang) to A myes rma chen while the knights of Gling (dpa’ thul) did the circumambulation of the foyer on horseback calling down “luck” and power upon themselves. carrying swords (for men) and for another festival (naadam) celebrated in Henan Mongolian Autonomous County on August 1st 1984. A large crowd of Tibetans. Padma. This shows the confluence between the idea of modernity and the notion of cultural progress and economic development. Dga’ bde. schools and monks of the various monasteries performing episodes from the epic. leopard and otter) and covered with gold (or imitation) and silver jewelry. They accommodated members of various “work units” and were mainly for banquets. Rma chen and Rma stod participated in it. The rituals that were later enacted were far more political and in the traditional Chinese style: after the raising of the Chinese flag as well as the flag of Gling. Dar lag. a “musical instrument of impeccable ideological respectability” (Kvaerne 1994: 178) since it had become from the twenties on the “proletarian” instrument par excellence in the Soviet Union. embodied thanks to the Chinese Communist Party in the musical instrument of the proletariat. each of them paraded in a chariot—in fact. Gcig sgril. This tent monastery was built in adobe after 1913 (Gruschke 2001. was by Tibetans. TBRC G1746). its best dancers and a group of men and women dressed in long gowns embellished with fur (tiger. Wearing a helmet and sumptuously dressed. The six counties of the Mgo log prefecture. . Each county had delegated its best singers. The morning of the 23th day of the 6th month was devoted to the opening ceremony. a decorated truck—sometimes surrounded by the main personages from the episode to be performed. 23 Khra gling dgon pa (Thub bstan bshad sgrub nor bu’i dga’ tsal bkra shis ldan gling) is a rnying ma monastery. It began. Many people came for the festival as well as for the pilgrimage. there was a parade of all the work units. A monk from Khra gling monastery23 (Dar lag rdzong) held a guitar—a sure sign of modernity—another an accordion. It was founded in 1895. I: 83. amber necklaces (mostly fake) and corals. according to a Tibetan informant. The festival was organized by the Mgo log Autonomous Prefecture and the choreography. a branch of Kaú thog dgon pa. He preceded the monks of his monastery who were wearing their religious clothing or the costume of the character of the epic they played. One monk from each of the monasteries involved played the role of Gesar. monks and lay people.The Gesar Festival of Rma chen (A mdo 2002) 529 the dates of this celebration correspond also to the propitious days for festivals dedicated to sacred mountains (Stein 1959: 449) and to local deities such as the glu rol of the Reb gong area. thronged to attend the various festivities and many tents had been erected. See Morcom (2003: 205. paraded as modern knights. Prizes awarded on the last day rewarded the winners of each competition. as advertised in Chinese language and often in Amdo dialect (a mdo skad). stone lifting. The Chinese army was present in relatively large numbers. Such a display of jewels and fur that no Tibetan would have worn in such abundance before the Chinese occupation. that could pass either as proof of its ability to protect citizens or as a threat against those who might oppose it. who proceeded with great and slow strides. 24 For a study on the transformations the Tibetan dances have undergone since the 1990s. competitions in which various counties competed in horse racing. 25 in northwest Kham. was to show the supposed wealth of the population but also demonstrated the love of hunting. They were actually dances from Skye dgu mdo area (Ch Yushu). was proudly worn by the Tibetans. yak racing. went around the grassland preceded by snow lions—all symbols of Tibetan identity—to the sound of Chinese pop music. The “folk” dances24 were performed to pre-recorded music pouring from loudspeakers. All were Tibetans but they sung mostly in Chinese. Their songs were based on traditional musical themes but they were modernized and sinicized. which amounts to an “ethnic uniform” (Kvaerne 1994: 182). Many activities took place simultaneously during the five days of the festival. Gesar and ‘Brug mo. and not from the Mgo log region. see Morcom (2007). and also a modern version of a tug-of-war contest. Singers and dancers were dressed not in traditional clothes but in brightly colored “ethnic uniforms” that meet Han aesthetic standards for what is exotic. 25 This according to Tashi Tsering (AMI) to whom I showed the DVD of the festival that I bought shortly afterwards in Rma chen. . the language of “modernity” which gives them a wider audience. symbols of progress and wealth. the flag of Gling on the handlebars. mounted on their iron steeds. The festival ended on the 27th day of 6th month (August 5th): as if in a victory parade. It participated in the festival by giving a demonstration of its talents on the last day. and some had the sound of pop music. n. The singers followed one after the other. a fact reflecting the gradual disappearance of regional specificity.530 Katia Buffetrille reliquaries. standing in a chariot dominated by the A myes rma chen mountain. 54) on the characteristics of the Skye dgu mdo dances. in which women participated. and these can be divided into two main categories: performances by monks of some episodes of the Gesar epic (to which we shall return later). This costume. sometimes interrupted with folk dances and. What better way to control the formidable Tibetan than to represent him with an exotic but domesticated look (Said [1980] 2005: 77)? A large number of nomads on motorcycles. the various competitions and the performance of Gesar episodes are significant aspects of summer festivals associated with sacred mountains “whose environment is clearly the source of inspiration for numerous themes of [the] Gesar [epic]. should now be acknowledged” (Fitzherbert 2009: 173). 2004b. Stalin decided to celebrate the 500th anniversary of the Kalmyck epic in order to obtain the support of the Kalmycks. This was rejected. statements such as “The Chinese government has supported research on King Gesar for over 50 years.27 Moreover. in the year 2002-2003. a great celebration for the millennium of the epic of Geser (the version of the Ekhirit-Bulagat. 16. But if the Chinese authorities had focused their sights on a particular version. 27 See Hamayon (1994: 348.”26 Moreover. 302) for other examples of commemoration of epics among populations of Central Asia. 302). ‘the people’ could be seen to be actively appropriating the state style”. the smoke offering of juniper. if “the state is vigorously appropriating “popular” culture. it might have been more difficult for them to appropriate the epic for use on the international scene.The Gesar Festival of Rma chen (A mdo 2002) 531 Two main actors are involved in all of this. in July 1995. carried on largely in highland (’brog pa) communities with low rates of literacy. Indeed. “Its core ‘orality’ as a vernacular tradition. my translation. The results show that epics existed in China in ancient history and overturns the old Western belief that China had no epic poems”29 or “Gesar is a great contribution the 26 Stein (1959: 449). Gesar. the main Buryat tribe) was held in Ulan-Ude (Hamayon 2004a: 59 2004b: 295 and n. UNESCO was approached by the Buryat authorities who sought its support to commemorate the millennium of a particular version of their epic. 29 Tibet Daily Online 24/07/2002.28 This request and the refusal that followed may have been an additional incentive for the Chinese application since it freed the way for them to submit their own request. Already in 1940. although the antiquity of many of its themes (religious beliefs. as rightly noticed by Morcom (2003: 191). a tool of propaganda Assigning an important political function to an epic is not an innovation of the Chinese authorities. 28 However. 2002: 18. which was apparently the purpose of this anniversary. . folklore. We know that the dating of the epic is problematic. and the organizers were left very disappointed. ancient stories. Still Stein’s work showed that there is no textual trace of the epic before 1500 (Stein 1962 99-100). One would have thought that a particular version of the epic would have been selected in order to give more weight to the claim of a millennial anniversary. p. p.) is not in doubt. in 1991. etc. If the intrusion of Chinese values in the epic and its instrumentalization are obvious. 6. n. 13.532 Katia Buffetrille Chinese nation has made to human civilization. it is a kind of culture. .com/tibetzt/gesaer_en/doc/6701. but the first real studies on the subject date from the 1930s with a strong increase in interest in the period 1950-1960. 34 China Tibetology n°1. Today we are witnessing the creation of a cultural policy around Gesar the purpose of which is to propagate the epic at a popular level: Gesar is intended to educate since “Gesar is a great work of encyclopedic volume.mail communication. Its study. was officially resumed in 1978 and has since undergone very important developments. 31 For a detailed study of the vicissitudes experienced by the study of the epic in China. customs. http://www.htm (March 2010). a Chinese scholar who made the epic known in the late 1920s. Maconi (2004: 391-402). and modern times” (Jambian Gyamco–Zhou Aiming 2003: 4). This traditional collective dance very much valued by the Chinese has been taken over since the 1940s and integrated into the new revolutionary culture for use as a propaganda tool.tibetinfor. and http:// www. history. which shows clearly that the epic is being used as a propaganda tool. bards. communications. One cannot deny the—up and down—interest in the epic on the part of the Chinese authorities. serving research on ancient Tibetan society. Nowadays.32 the Tibetan epic was quickly appropriated as a propaganda tool. itinerant semi-religious singers often 30 Jambian Gyamco – Zhou Aiming 2003: 4. it is still described in Marxist and evolutionary terms. it was presented in Marxist terms in the introduction to Chinese publications as “the crystallization of the Tibetan People’s Wisdom”33 and is said to be “told today by the broad masses of Tibetan people” (Jambian Gyamco–Zhou Aiming 2003: 16). 2002: 1.cn/english/zt/Tibetology M a g a z i n e / .htm 35 China’s Tibet. Sperling (e. forbidden during the Cultural Revolution. see Li Lianrong (2001). The performances are given by amateur peasant artists at the New Year.”35 Traditionally. May 2010). Here one sees that the appropriation of the Tibetan epic is also a way to claim that Tibet is part of China since ancient times. habits and folk culture. vol. % 5 C Ti b e t o l o g y M a g a z i n e / .com. the feudal serfdom era.tibetinfor. . from the clan society and tribe union periods in late primitive society to slave society. The credit for the early work on Gesar is assigned to Ren Naiqiang.”30 appeared.31 Like other rituals or popular practices in China. n°6. In the 1980s. It adds luster to patriotism. national happiness and civilization. 33 Information E. 32 See Trebinjac (2000: 42-51 and 94ff) and Graezer-Bideau (2008: 52-60) concerning the yangge. moral concepts. in which there arises sequentially “a wide range of social stages. . a kind of spirit and a kind of symbol. religious beliefs.”34 “King Gesar is no longer a pure epic. % 5 C Ti b e t o l o g y M a g a z i n e / 2003120031216143852. ”39 Various episodes of the epic are told through illustrations where Gesar and the various protagonists have strongly sinicized features. is totally free of any religious content and the sinicization of the names in the captions is such that it is often difficult to trace the originals.41 The description given makes it clear from the outset that three minority nationalities (Tibetans.cctv. Emphasis is placed not only on the spread to the Chinese public but also to the outside world: one of the lavishly publications produced on the occasion of the millennium of the Gesar epic (Jambian Gyamco–Zhou Aiming 2003). Moreover. they fight with swords and bows and thus “refer to the past” (Hamayon 2004b: 299) without presenting any danger to the present. quite similar to a comic book. on another site. 2003 «Zangzu yingxiong shishi ‘Gesaer’ tangka» åU‘°‰p—Y•j0Ši(\0“‚aS Thangka Paintings: Tibetan Epic Gesar.cass. sometimes days in places to which they had been invited.36 songs. one learns that the exhibition presented in Beijing 13000 thangkas from the TAR http://www. plays. dance.40 The interest of the Chinese authorities in the epic is further confirmed by its inclusion in 2009 on the Representative List of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity under the title “The Gesar epic tradition” (China).youtube. films. Clad in armour and wearing helmets. for a largely foreign audience. The context has changed from that of a bard reciting some episodes in particular circumstances (before the hunt.php?pg=00011&RL=00204 (April 2010). 40 The second part of the book is dedicated to modern thangkas of Gesar and representations of some chapters of the epic.The Gesar Festival of Rma chen (A mdo 2002) 533 “inspired”. http:/ /iel. paintings37 and books.com/watch?v=A9lbje1dkvg at http:// www. 37 In 2002 there was launched in the district of Dar rtse mdo (Dkar mdzes Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture) a project to paint a thousand thangkas depicting the episodes of the epic. 38 Jiangbian Jiacuo ~ ‰ à ‘ and Zhou Aiming •ü1r– eds. It aims “to adapt classic works in light of popular forms.cultural-china. Mongols and Tu [or Monguor] share “this vast oral 36 See among others: http://www.youtube. recited the chapters of the epic they knew for hours. focusing on the epic hero. and therefore intended. ..shtml (April 2010). China Pictorial Publishing House (mail from L.html (March 2010).book. 41 http://www.org/culture/ich/index. in the latter case. an exhibition of 270 thangkas from this program was mounted in Beijing during the Olympic Games.asp?newsid=4219 (April 2010). Zhongguo huabao chubanshe • ‘ ‰ æ b • o ” Å • Ð Beijing. Maconi 31/3/2010). This version.cn/english/Detail.com/watch?v=cTs4xQR5PEI&feature=related (March 2010).unesco.com/program/journaldelaculture/ 20080731/103619. is published in both Chinese38 and English.com/books8. However. This recitation had a ritual and protective function that is now completely absent. 39 www. at funeral) to one in which we have a plethora of shows. Ugly in the first half of his life. making him a “politically correct” individual and a symbol of the unity between Tibetans and Chinese. It praises the role of Gesar.534 Katia Buffetrille history narrative known as ‘beads on a string’” [sic]. is emphasized.”42 But its pedagogical role in “history. his victory in the race gives him a glorious aspect. the protector of the weak. thus emphasizing the unity and harmony between them. Emphasis is placed on the influence of the epic in thangka painting. Tibet is nicknamed “the Ocean of songs and dances. customs. whose mother is said to be Chinese. In the same way that the epic itself is capable of multiple interpretations (Dreyfus 1998: 44). Nevertheless. the values defended by Gesar that lead to “social stability.46 Moreover. the question of whether it is the importance of the epic and its hero in the Tibetan world that lead the Chinese authorities to use it as a medium to convey certain messages remains unanswered.org/culture/ich/ index. economic development and happiness in everyday life. a people who “love to sing and dance” in a country called “Ocean of songs and dances. Samuel (2002) and Maconi (2004).” 43 http://www. thus highlighting the vision the Chinese have of the epic and of the Tibetans. 44 Emphasis added. morality and science” is not forgotten. 46 Geng Yufang quoted by Maconi (2004: 403). .htm puts it thus: “Tibetans like to sing and dance. religion. honor and courage while at the same time being a trickster and a magician. the Chinese god of war under the Qing dynasty. Gesar may appear to the Chinese more as a symbol of the regional rather than national identity. The importance of this work as a “major entertainment… in the religious and daily life of the community”.cn/fa-xizang/tibet3/gk25. certainly plays an important role as well.45 They noted how the profane aspect of the epic literature. half-brother of King Gesar.” have been put forward. Dreyfus (1998).china. a feeling that disappears when reading Article 2 of the conditions for registration in UNESCO’s list of “Intangible Heritage”43 which requires that this cultural heritage provides communities with a “sense of identity and continuity. Tibetan opera and other forms of art. 42 The site http://french.php?lg=FR&pg=00173#Critères_pour_inscription_sur_la_Liste_représentative (March 2010).org. Gesar too is a malleable figure: he is a non-Buddhist but also a Buddhist hero representing quite opposite values. The sense of “cultural identity and historic continuity” that the epic “imbues in audiences young and old” is stressed and may even seem surprising. And his identification with Guan Yu. the presence of Rgya tsha zhal dkar. thus promoting respect for cultural diversity44 and human creativity.” Several authors have examined the reasons for the support the Chinese authorities have given for the preservation and study of the epic. possessed of patriotism. conqueror of the mighty and the unifier of various tribes. Karmay (1998).unesco. 45 Among them. were not able to preserve the epic since they had no scriptures at the time of its creation (with the Tibetan script dated 7th century according to tradition).cri. such talk only serves to legitimize the “civilizing” project of the Chinese for whom their particular vision of cultural and economic development is the only valid one. the appointed heirs of the Intangible Cultural Heritage. uneducated and stupid. But the fact remains that the majority of Tibetans remain unmoved by this Sino-centric argument. It is then the turn of Jambian Gyamco—the author of the book cited above—to explain how the Han were able to protect their heritage thanks to their advance development. In a recent article (12/23/2009). The Gesar dances As stated previously. . Harrell calls a “stigmatized identity” (Eidheim 1969. Even if it is true that the epic was generally forbidden in the monasteries—where the learned persons lived—and looked down upon by the clergy. according to him.The Gesar Festival of Rma chen (A mdo 2002) 535 Sixty years of the Chinese “civilizing” mission has left some Tibetans with what S. Hsieh 1987. who ascribes the alleged Tibetan neglect for the epic before 1959 to the inferior status of bards in the days of traditional Tibet and contrasts that with their current status as “artists. and for them the epic remains a matter of national pride and a symbol of their “Tibetaness.” (the present day rank of those “bards”). many people with whom I spoke felt that it was a significant event that demonstrated the importance of the epic and the recognition of Tibetan culture by the Chinese authorities.htm (March 2010). cited by Harrell 1995: 6).47 a certain Wu Jia cites Nyima from the Tibetan Cultural Office. some episodes of Gesar were performed by monks from monasteries of the various counties of the Mgo log Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture. The way some Tibetans intellectuals speak of Tibetan attitudes to the epic indicates that they have internalized the Chinese perception of minorities as backward. The commemoration of the—supposed—millennial anniversary of the epic shows indeed the antiquity of Tibetan literature and its celebration recalls the glorious days of conquests and the defense of the country against the invaders. while Tibetans. I observed four such performances: 47 http://english. during this festival.” The festival of Gesar. “a space for resistance”? While a Tibetan intellectual encountered at the festival regarded it as a tool of Chinese propaganda.cn/4406/2009/12/23/1122s537565. Only the monks from Lung sngon dgon pa (Dga’ bde rdzong) opted for another chapter: the war against the Hor (Hor Gling g. 51 Tent camp monasteries were quite common before the 1950s in Amdo and Kham. etc. 49 A bzod dgon Dpal ri theg chen bshad sgrub ’phel rgyas gling is a rnying ma monastery of Khaú thog tradition (TBRC G1748).—thus denoting the secularization of these dances which are religious in origin. It was a Chinese opera-style dramatization of the epic to the sounds of pre-recorded songs sung by bards. 51 but his desire was to establish a permanent structure. During the parade on the first day. He justified his request to the authorities by his interest in the epic and willingness to maintain a group of monks to perform episodes from it. In an interview during the festival. In contrast. The choice to perform this episode can be easily explained by the fact that all the characters of the epic appear in it. tugs of war. another is a tent monastery in the Dkar mdzes Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture that Bstan ’dzin bde legs Rinpoche was accused to have converted into a permanent structure in 1997 by the Religious Affairs Bureau of the Prefecture (Wang Lixiong and Tsering Shakya 2009: 151). The knights of 48 Called also Gsang chen dngos grub dpal ’bar gling. those from the monastery of A bzod dgon pa (Gcig sgril rdzong)49 did the same episode. he explained to me that until 1986 Lung sngon dgon pa was a tent camp monastery. the 9th lineage holder of Lung sngon dgon thub bstan chos ’khor gling monastery50 was present at the festival. 52 He is also responsible for the construction of a replica of Bya rung kha shor near his monastery. The request was accepted which shows once again the interest of the authorities in propagating the epic. but with a real horse race that was received with enthusiasm by the spectators.536 Katia Buffetrille The monks of Khra gling dgon pa (Dar lag rdzong) together with those of Rdo grub chen (Padma rdzong) 48 chose to perform the horse race (rta rgyug) episode of which they did a pantomime. just like the actors playing Gesar in various plays. it was founded as a branch of Rdzogs chen dgon pa in 1880 by the 2nd Rdo grub chen Bla ma ’Jigs med phun tshogs ’byung gnas. It seems that there were still some in the recent years: Lung sngon dgon pa is one example. .yul gyed). Sku gsum gling pa (1934-2009). The awarding of a prize turned the race in a simple competition just like the others—horse and yak races. It is the seat of the lineage of reincarnations Rdo grub chen (Gruschke 2001 I: 90 and TBRC375). dressed in sumptuous costumes and wearing Chinese style make-up. the hierarch wearing a Heruka dress and a raven hat led the monks of his monastery. 50 This monastery was founded by Mdo mkhyen brtse Ye shes rdo rje (1800-1859) (Mgo log lo rgyus 1991: 230).52 The monks played both male and female roles. see Dudjom rinpoche (1991. in India (Lerner 1983) through the teaching of Tagtsang Norsang.The Gesar Festival of Rma chen (A mdo 2002) 537 Gling (dpa ’thul) from each monastery went around the area of the performance imitating the movements of men on horseback. accompanied by a very rhythmic music that all Tibetans. what? Were we witnessing the invention of a tradition or the revival of traditional performances—albeit modernized—that had been halted following the Chinese occupation? Written sources are not very abundant on the subject but the following. One of them has married Sa skyongs Mi pham. absolutely identical from one monastery to another. 60 My thanks go to Tashi Tsering for kindly providing me with a copy of the text.enemies” (dgra lha). But then.” a collection of song texts and dances centered on Gesar that was then performed in Rwa sgreng58 monastery under the patronage of the Regent. agreed to recognize as “Gesar music. The Gling bro has undergone a renaissance among exiles in Orissa. help to advance in the research: Stein (1959: 325: 336) reports a lay play in Kham with Gesar as the subject and a Gesar ’cham in the rdzogs chen monasteries of Kham in the 11th Tibetan month which ’Jam mgon Mi pham rgya mtsho (1846-1912). supplemented by various interviews.53 one of the most respected figures of the “Non Sectarian” Movement (ris med)54 would have authored. a monastery close to the palace of the Gling tshang kings. The text of Glin bro60 53 On Mi pham.” The acting of the monks-actors. These dances are usually performed by laypeople though Lerner’s informant (1983: 55). 58 Let’s recall that Phying dkar ba is the mountain deity of Rwa sgreng. 59 Namkha Rinpoche’s daughters are part of the Gling bro troupe (interview with Rinpoche in Kathmandu in October 2009). said to be the second reincarnation of Mi pham rgya mtsho. Its author is ’Gyur med thub bstan ’jam dbyangs grags pa. Namkha (Nam mkha’) Rinpoche59 continues this work. told her he had seen these dances performed by monks (Lerner 1983: 55). the music of great bliss. however. Mi pham. I: 859-868) and Smith (2001: 235-271). Khenpo Sherab Paldan (Mkhan po Shes rab dpal ldan). a heir of this movement developed by ’Jams dbyangs mkhyen brtse dbang po (1820-1892)55 and Kong sprul blo gros mtha’ yas (1813-1899). a son of Trungpa Rinpoche.56 is the author of over fifty invocatory and liturgical texts on Gesar” (Fitzherbert 2007: 208). from rDzong ’go. I: 869-880) and Smith (2001: 227234). 55 See Dudjom Rinpoche (1991. suggested a common origin. see Smith (2001: 227-272).57 He also worked to develop the cult of Gesar as a “god-who subdues. . 57 Fitzherbert (2007) shows that the version translated by Stein (1956) and worked on by Kornman (1997) has been wrongly attributed to Mi pham. “A dance of Gling. He is the author of the Gling bro bde chen rol pa. I: 849-858) 56 See Dudjom Rinpoche (1991. 54 On the ris med movement. 538 Katia Buffetrille does not give the narrative of the epic.tibetanlineages. 64 I am grateful to Tashi Tsering who brought this article to my attention. lus sgeg ’gying nyams ldan pa’i gar/ 2.”67 Through Nebesky-Wojkowitz (1997: 32). This group of personages is said to be composed mainly of dpa’ brtul. 65 Tshig mdzod chen mo (1993: 351). Also a mountain god plays a part in this ’chams : Gzhi bdag shva mdo. we learn that “in the part of the dance devoted to the Kesar legend there are usually thirty dancers on the scene. 62 Bstan ’dzin lung rtogs nyi ma (2004: 362). Bdud ’dul rdo rje (2008: 98) .org/biographies/view/203/9646. Rather unusual figures included in this dance are the so-called ‘wind-horse’ (rlung rta) and various mythical animals playing an important part in Tibetan astrology. I haven’t been able to get enough information to answer this question. a dance and a ’cham. Tashi Tsering 61 knows about two other performances of Gling bro dances in Tibet before 1959: one sponsored by the present Sogyal rinpoche’s family: A sdug la dkar tshang in Rong pa tsha.cn/html/king_gesar. 2.” Unfortunately. 63 Bstan ’dzin lung rtogs nyi ma (2004: 359-363). if the dance is performed on a bigger scale. 61 Information Tashi Tsering (Dharamsala. The biography of the 5th Rdzogs chen pa63 called them gar ’cham.org/index. and then to other monasteries in the region.tsadra. August 2009). dances that later spread in the various branches of Rdzogs chen monastery. http://www. but. their number may be increased to eighty. 66 1. (heroes). and defined by a modern dictionary65 as: 1. The biography states that Gesar’s knights as well as “the divine assembly of the dgra bla lung rta (dgra bla lung rta’i lha tshogs) participate in these dances. Thub bstan chos kyi rdo rje (18721935)62 was indeed the originator of Gesar dances which he created as a result of visions. Tre hor. two dancers don a horse-shaped dummy. To represent the ‘wind-horse’. The 5th Rdzogs chen Rinpoche. a graceful dance filled with dignity.html http:// rywiki.php/Dzogchen_Rinpoche_Thupten_Chokyi_Dorje http://www. it is a text of meditative practice and an offering of songs and dances. the stag-headed personification of a nearby mountain. But what exactly were these dances? To date. TBRC P701 .66 thus leaving us in total ignorance as to what exactly a gar ’cham is. a term repeated in a recent article by one Bdud’ dul rdo rje (2008: 97-101)64. the author does not give his sources. and another one at Rdzogs chen monastery.dzogchenmonastery. gar dang ’cham gnyis/ 67 “The title dgra lha is given to the four animals who occupy the four corners of the so-called rlung rta or ‘wind-horse’ flag” (Nebesky-Wojkowitz 1997: 32). . and was regarded as the emanation of both MahŒsiddha Dril bu pa (Gan Œpa)73 and Lha lung dpal gyi rdo rje.72 Las rab gling pa (1856-1926). the most important personages manifested a strong interest in Gesar. and Mkhan chen Padma badzra (1867-1934)70. This was the case with Mchog ’gyur gling pa (1829-1870). the inventor of Gesar dances.tsadra. wrote Gangs ri shel rdzong.org/index. as already said. Gling gi bro ra yid ’phrog pad dkar phreng mdzes. 69 Me ru rtse the ‘butcher’ was a minister of the Hor King that Gesar spared during the war and who became one of his faithful warriors (Stein 1959: 111. he was the master and the disciple of Mi pham. . 70 Also called Pad ma rdo rje. 71 I don’t have access to this book. one of his teachers. Both were major figures in the Non-Sectarian Movement (ris med).” The author ascribes another text to Padma badzra. “The war of Shan [pa Me ru rtse] and ’Dan [ma]. 72 Dee Dudjom Rinpoche (1991. TBRC P6744 (April 2010). who like Mi pham. ’Dan ma is one important General of Gesar. Everything leads us back to the circle of the “treasures-revealers” (gter ston) that constitutes the environment of inspiration for the epic (Stein 1959: 141). 521-522). of which. The 5th Rdzogs chen pa Thub bstan chos kyi rdo rje. and ’Jam dbyangs mkhyen rtse’i dbang po. 73 See Dowman (1988: 145-150). the 68 See http://rywiki.php/Patrul_Rinpoche (March 2010). I: 841-848). a prolific author of texts dedicated to the hero of the epic.”69 ’Ju Mi pham Rinpoche was. with Kong sprul blo gros mtha’ yas. the Non-Sectarian Movement (ris med) and the Rdzogs chen tradition. edited a printed version of the epic (Stein 1959: 226). as already mentioned.68 Shan ’dan nang ’khrug. also known as Padma gtum po.71 The “Gling dance space.The Gesar Festival of Rma chen (A mdo 2002) 539 Bdud ’dul rdo rje (2008: 98) notes that many great masters who have visited the monastery of Rdzogs chen showed great interest in Gesar: The founder of the monastery. a “treasures-revealer” (gter ston). centered around Rdzogs chen monastery.” Rdza dpal sprul Rinpoche (1808-1887). “Fortress of the wealth of Stag gzigs. the first Grub dbang Padma rig’ dzin (1625-1697) composed the episode Stag zigs nor rdzong. “The Crystal Fortress of the Snowy Mountain. But can there be a link between these dances and the ones performed at the festival? Sku gsum gling pa.” a text written “in the symbolic script of the ¶Œkin´ that he translated in order to make it accessible” (2008: 98-99). a beautiful string of white lotuses that delights the mind. Mkhyen brtse dbang po and Las rab gling pa were among his other disciples. was recognized as the reincarnation of the 4th Rdzogs chen rinpoche by ’Jams dbyangs mkhyen brtse dbang po who was. the 9th lineage holder of Lung sngon dgon pa was a tantric practitioner (sngags pa). The latter is the bodily reincarnation (sku’i sprul sku) of the great rnying ma scholar ’Jigs med gling pa (1730-1798)77 one of whose main disciples was the 1st Rdo grub chen ’Jigs med ’phrin las ’od zer (1745-1821)78.orgyendorjeden. “The History of the Mgo log culture”. The tradition of playing Gesar in this monastery didn’t exist before the Chinese occupation and started only in the 1980s. 30 et 33). 76 Gruschke (2001. in the late 19th century a lama from Rdzogs chen monastery (Dongcha lama?) came to Lung sngon dgon pa to spread the doctrine. in particular that of Gesar.org/announcements/ Dudjom%20Lingpa%20Wangs. The Mgo log rig gnas lo rgyus (1991: 235 and 237). 77 The incarnation of the mind aspect of ’Jigs med gling pa is ’Jam dbyangs mkhyen brtse dbang po (Smith 2001: 26).79 Note also that Dpal sprul Rinpoche was the reincarnations of the verbal aspect (gsung gi sprul sku) of ’Jigs med gling pa. . Sku gsum gling pa told me that the monks of his monastery had been trained in Gser rta in 1981 with a Tibetan dance group (composed of lay people and monks) which is in fact an actual organization called Gser rta rdzong rnam thar tshogs pa founded in 1980 by Theg lo Rinpoche. himself one of Mkhyen brtse Ye shes rdo rje’s masters. see Karmay (2003: 63-64). Hung dkar Rinpoche (1969-). and others. 80 Mail from May 14th 2010. Theg lo Rinpoche was helped by monks from Rdzogs chen monastery. n. I: 835-840). tells us that there was a college of biographical plays (rnam thar grwa tshang) called Rnam thar skal ldan mthong grol gling in Lung sngon dgon pa where the monks were taught six different plays (rnam thar zlos gar). 75 Moreover. The 5th Rdzogs chen pa and the 4th Rdo grub Rinpoche had prophesied his coming to earth. 75 A short English biography of Sku gsum gling pa (without any references) was given to me in 1999 by an American disciple of the sprul sku.81 the second son of Khrag thung bdud ’joms gling pa 74 On Lha lung dpal kyi rdo rje and his identification. On ’Jigs med gling pa. I: 83). They were performing what was called rnam thar. Sku gling gsum pa was accompanied by his son and successor. According to Hung dkar Rinpoche80. 78 Smith (2001: 21ff.540 Katia Buffetrille murderer of King Glang dar ma74 according to Tibetan sources. namely Gesar’s story but also those of Srong btsan sgam po and Dri med kun ldan. Theg lo Rinpoche was recognized by ’Jams dbyangs chos kyi blo gros (the reincarnation of ’Jams dbyangs mkhyen brtse dbang po) as the rebirth of Padma rdo rje. see Dudjom Rinpoche 1991. 76 During the festival. himself a reincarnation of Mdo mkhyen brtse Ye shes rdo rje (1800-1859).pdf (March 2010). 79 Bradburn (1995: 343). 81 TBRC P705 and http://www. 276. 82 Films83 shot in Gser rta by Chinese and Western disciples of ’Jigs med phun tshogs show that dances similar to those seen during the festival were held. 82 83 84 85 On ’Jigs med phun tshogs and Gser rta. the mighty general of Gesar and also as the reincarnation of the great “treasure-revealer” Las rab gling pa (1856-1926 )85 who stayed at Rdzogs chen monastery. the founder of Bla rung sgar. The son of one of the emanation of Bdud ’joms gling pa.org/tertonsogyalbio. Even if I am not able at the present time to assert that the dances performed at the festival were a modern revival of those created by the 5th Rdzogs chen pa. Schneider. http://www.The Gesar Festival of Rma chen (A mdo 2002) 541 (1835-1904). the son of ’Dan ma Byang khra. have ties with Rdzogs chen and Rdo grub chen monasteries and practice the Rdzogs chen tradition. all this shows that in modern times too the Amdo hierarchs involved in the Gesar dances: are “treasure-revealers”. He had many visions of Gesar during the Cultural Revolution and it was out of devotion that he vowed to him that he would not break his vows. Mkan po ’Jigs phun ascribed the performance of these dances to the need of eliminating karmic obstacles (in fact political obstacles) with the help of Gesar. a huge monastic camp in Gser rta. the monks of his monastery have been trained by those of Rdo grub chen only since the “Peaceful Liberation of Tibet. See Khenpo Sodarjey (s. among others. mainly those related to the life of ’Jigs med phun tshogs as ’Dan sras g.86 ’Jigs med phun tshogs was himself a great “treasure-revealer” and a major scholar of the Rdzogs chen tradition.d. I could see the films thanks to N. he studied at the monastery of Rdo grub chen. See TBRC P5970 . Moreover. on the advice of the great master ’Jigs med phun tshog. according to a sprul sku of Khra gling. ’Jams dbyangs chos kyi blo gros (18931959. one of the branches of Rdzogs chen monastery.tsadra. the 5th Rdzogs chen pa himself and the 3rd Grub chen ’Jigs med bstan pa’i nyi ma (1865-1926). see Germano (1998: 53-94). ’Jigs med phun tshogs (1933-2004) had likewise very strong connections with Mi pham and Gesar. The latter gave and received lessons to. but to the sound of a flute played by a monk.org/index.84 He was recognized as an emanation of ’Dan sras g. according to another informant. the monks in Gser rta performed episodes of the epic in the 6th Tibetan month. .html and http:/ /rywiki.Yu ’od ’bum med.” and that. the reincarnation of ’Jams dbyangs mkhyen brtse dbang po and a disciple of the 5th Rdzogs chen pa).php/Lerab_Lingpa_Tertön_Sogyal 86 TBRC P248 (April 2010).lotsawahouse.) et Germano (1998: 53-94). the 13th Dalai Lama.Yu ’od ’bum med and the Gesar dances based on the Gling bro bde chen rol pa composed by Mi pham. have close links with the great masters of the Non-Sectarian Movement. According to my informants. The theme was the same as that used in the modernized musical playback during the festival. It is said that contrary to the hopes of the Chinese authorities.542 Katia Buffetrille This hypothesis has been corroborated by information received very recently by mail from Hung dkar Rinpoche. Sku gsum gling pa was the first to have established a formal dance troupe in the Mgo log area. many traditions have been suppressed.87 Nevertheless. . is for the Tibetans a space of cultural expression if not a “space for resistance”. a niche where they rush to affirm their identity. the spread of the epic has strengthened the feeling of “Tibetaness” of the population (Dreyfus 1998: 46). he pointed to the fact that if the Rta rgyug chapter was based on the vision of the 5th Rdogs chen pa. Hung dkar Rinpoche added that when his father started the first dance troupe. used as a propaganda tool by the Chinese in their “civilizing” project. The millennial commemoration of the festival of the epic allows us to observe a relatively common phenomenon among oppressed people: on the one hand. Terrone and Tulku Sherdor for the help they gave me in getting in touch with Hung dkar Rinpoche. 88 Mail of May 14th 2010. The Gesar epic. the Hor gling episode they performed at the festival was based on their own choreography. Could this revitalization of the Gesar dances in the eastern provinces of Tibet—the traditional environment in which they were born—along with the interest in them shown by some major charismatic religious figures and the vitality they exude at present mean that the epic is used by Tibetans as a “space for resistance”? Conclusion Following the integration of Tibet into China. several lamas complained that it was inappropriate for monks to be dancing the Gesar story. The other monks were either trained in Lung sngon monastery or learned just by coming to watch. According to him. It is significant that Sku gsum gling pa got the authorization to build his monastery by promising that the monks would 87 I would like to thank A. the role of local cadres is not insignificant in the revival of some tradition. Those against it have now formed their own Gesar dance troupe. the people under domination reappropriate some discourse of their overlords. But others have been rebuilt by Tibetans who have had to adapt to the constraints imposed by the Chinese state and also to an ofttimes brutal confrontation with modernity and modernization. we know that ’Jigs med phun tshog was an examplary religious leader seeking to maintain Tibetan identity while avoiding conflict with the authorities (Germano 1998: 53-94). On the other hand.88 Besides this. as shown by Feuchtwang (2000) and Diemberger (2003). 2. Bibliography Bstan ’dzin lung rtogs nyi ma 2004 sNga ’gyur rdzogs chen chos ’byung chen mo Krung go’i bod rig pa dpe skrun khang. Buffetrille. K. Bod gzhung shes rig las khung. Crystal Mirror 11. 1997 The Great Pilgrimage of A myes rMa-chen : Written Traditions. Delhi. Vol.The Gesar Festival of Rma chen (A mdo 2002) 543 perform chapters of the epic.) Mandala and Landscape. Moreover such a festival offers a place where Tibetans can be found in large numbers without causing suspicion. imbued with religious meaning. Serindia Publications. “socially correct”. in A.chinaculture. (ed. for their part. R. L. Karma smon lam and Skal bzang mkhas grub 2005 Bod zhwa brgya yin go sprod. They try to empty it of any religious content and transform it into a tourist attraction. « Introduction à cent chapeaux tibétains ». This can explain the apparition of this new tradition in so many monasteries. have appropriated the Tibetan epic. China’s new presentation of the epic has made use of some local traditions from Kham placing Gesar’s birth in A phyug. the performances of Gesar dances by monks are. Bradburn.W. Living Realities. Even covered with Chinese make-up and dressed in colorful clothes.org/library/2008-01/10/content_47635. Dharma Press. 1991 Mgo log rig gnas lo rgyus. Mtsho sngon zhin hwa dpar khang. in a poor. The Chinese authorities.K.htm (March 2010). Pha yul phyogs bsgrigs deb phreng 16. 2004 The Encyclopedia of Tibetan Symbols and motifs. family of nomadic pastoralists.) 1995 Masters of the Nyingma Lineage. Dharamsala. Printworld: 75-132. . a village located in the former domains of the Kingdom of Lingtsang. Beijing. Chicago and London. supported by UNESCO. Berkeley. tourist trips have been organized as a quest for Gesar.90 This is now the pretext for travelling in the footsteps of the epic hero and for some years.89 The story even adds that Gesar was born on a Saturday. Macdonald (ed. Beer. D. for the Tibetans. 90 http://www1. 89 See Fitzherbert (2007) for a study of these traditions. 10 (9): 109-134. China’s Tibet. Serindia: 171-196. 2000 Religion as resistance. Prague: 13-66. Paris. vol. Automne 2004: 203-229. et al. Routledge : 161-177. Bulag (eds) The Mongolian-Tibeta Interface. Buffetrille. Études mongoles. Taiwan: 325-363. S. Conflict and Resistance. sibériennes. K. in Perry E. Dowman. Proceedings of the Xth Seminar of the IATS. 1988 Masters of Enchantment : the lives and legends of the Mahasiddhas. Germano.E. n°2. et C. centrasiatiques et tibétaines. 1998 Re-membering the dismembered Body of Tibet: Contemporary Tibetan Visionary Movements in the People’s Republic of China. C. 2004 The Evolution of a Tibetan Pilgrimage: the Pilgrimage to A myes rMa chen Mountain in the 21st Century. I. Selden (eds) Chinese Society: Change. Taipeh. Mongolo-Tibetica Pragensia ’08. 2009 The Tibetan Gesar Epic as Oral Literature. Dreyfus. Feuchtwang. Kapstein (eds) Buddhism in Contemporary Tibet : Religious revival and Cultural Identity: 53-94. Jikdrel Yeshe Dorje 1991 The Nyingma School of Tibetan Buddhism: Its Fundamentals and History. Opening new research terrains in Inner Asia. D. Ramble (eds) Tibétains 1959-1999: 40 ans de colonisation. London. S. Vol. and U. K.J. 2008 Some remarks on mediums: the case of the lha pa of the musical festival (glu rol) of Sog ru (A mdo). Inner Traditions International. . 2004 Jeu et rituel ou comment le jeu peut être un rituel: le glu/klu rol du sixième mois dans la région de Reb gong (A mdo). K. Dudjom Rinpoche. in Dotson B. 13. Fitz Herbert. 21st century Tibet Issue. Éditions Autrement: 21-57. Brill’s Tibetan Studies. Ltd. in Goldstein M. Boston. 1. H. Rochester. Proceedings of the First International Seminar of Young Tibetologists. Symposium on Contemporary Tibetan Studies. and M. Buffetrille. 2002 Diemberger. Collected Papers : Mongolian and Tibetan Affairs Commission. G. 1998 Le nationalisme : Entre mémoires glorifiées et identité collective in Buffetrille K. Wisdom Publications. n° 6. and M. Chicago. Contemporary Visions in Tibetan Studies. n° 35. 2003 Festivals and their leaders: The management of tradition in the Mongolian/Tibetan Borderlands. vol. K. G.544 Katia Buffetrille Buffetrille. Charles University. in Diemberger H. in Lopez D.) 1995 Cultural Encounters on China’s Ethnic Frontiers. . Harrell. Kathmandu. London. Kvaerne. VockinginVorm. Edition Hansjörg Mayer: 57-70. 1998a Mountain Cult and National Identity in Tibet. 1997 Gesar of Ling. Karmay. by Arnaud Versluys) 2001 Biography of H. and Shirin Akiner (eds) Resistance and reform in Tibet. King Lang Darma and his rule. R. Hurst & Company. Princeton University Press: 39-68. in Barnett R. Mandala Book point: 423-431. 2002 Emblem of Minority. 2004a The Dynamics of the Epic Genre in Buryat culture: a Grave for Shamanism. 1994 The ideological impact on Tibetan art. Hongkong Hua Xia Cultural Publishing House.H.) Tibet and its neighbours. Myths. vol. Jambian Gyamco and Zhou Aiming 2003 Thangka Paintings: An illustrated Manual of the Tibetan Epic Gesar. R. Hamayon. S. Myths. LIT Verlag: 53-65. S. 2003. S. Rituals and Beliefs in Tibet. bouddhisme. Senri Ethnological Studies 66: 293-305. Rituals and Beliefs in Tibet. Kathmandu. Karmay. The Arrow and the Spindle: Studies in History. héroïsme épique: quel support d’identité pour les Bouriates post-soviétiques. G. recomposition of Identities and « Heroic » Millenarianism in Post-Soviet Buryatia: A reappraisal. 2004b Construction of a National Emblem. A History. Substitute for Sovereignty: The Case of Buryatia. (ed. R. TSANTA # 13: 52-60. Diogène. The Arrow and the Spindle: Studies in History. University of Washington Press. n° 194. Utrecht. Seattle and London. McKay (ed. Heroic Narrative in the Oral Performance Traditions of Four Continents. Jr (ed. G.The Gesar Festival of Rma chen (A mdo 2002) 545 Graeder-Bideau. G. Khenpo Sodarjey (transl. Hamayon. China Pictorial Publishing House. 1998 Gesar: The Epic tradition of the Tibetan People. Hong Kong. R.S. Jigmey Phuntsok Dharmaraja. Mandala Book point: 465-471. 2008 L’instrumentalisation de la culture populaire: le cas de la danse Yangge en Chine. F. in A. Karmay. S. Princeton.) Religions of Tibet in practice. issue 2: 16-21. R. Études mongoles et sibériennes n° 27: 327-358. 49. London: 167-185. P. a Ground for Messianism in Jan Jansen and Henk Maier (eds) Epic Adventures. 1996 Chamanisme. Beijing. Hamayon. Hamayon. Kornman. IsMEO. héros épique tibétain. s. Bruxelles. A note in five Tibetan than kas of Ge-sar Epic. Richmond. en Chine (post-)maoïste. L. R. A. Nebesky-Wojkowitz. Sinndeutung un Überlieferung (Ein Symposium) Herausgegeben von Walther Heissig: 150-157. Delhi. Curzon: 178-188. Peter Lang: 371-419.S. Oxford-New York. VIII. Stein. C. A.546 Katia Buffetrille Lerner.) Religions of Tibet in practice.E. (ed. Akademische Druck-u. 2007 Contemporary Tibetan Literature from Shangri la: Literary life and activities in the Yunnan Tibetan Region (1959-2002). Arts asiatiques. R. Die Mongolischen Epen: Bezüge. 2004 Gesar de Pékin ? Le sort du roi Gesar de Gling. 1956 The Amnye Ma chen range and Adjacent Régions. Maconi. Oxford 2003: 43-85. Ramble. Jr (ed. Verlagsanstalt. vol. in Perry Benjamin (ed. 2002 The Epic and Nationalism in Tibet. Princeton University Press: 401-405. Graz. Stein.F. Samuel. in Steven J. Rock. P. Paris. Li Lianrong 2001 History and the Tibetan Epic Gesar. Oxford University Press. Venturino Contemporary Tibetan Literary Studies.d. n° 4: 50-57. 1983 Two Tibetan Rituals dances: A comparative study. Tibetan Studies: Proceedings of the Tenth Seminar of the International Association for Tibetan Studies. L. Paljor Publications. W. Nebesky-Wojkowitz. de [1956] 1975 Oracles and Demons of Tibet. PIATS 2003. Princeton. R. L.I. 2008 The Navel of the Demoness: Tibetan Buddhism and Civil religion in Highland Nepal.) Formes modernes de la poésie épique : nouvelles approches. Tibet Journal vol.) Religion and Biography in China and Tibet. The Cult and Iconography of the Tibetan Protective Deities. A Smoke Purification Song. 5: 244-271. 1956 L’épopée tibétaine de Gesar dans sa version lamaïque de Ling. NŒlanda Translation Committee 1997. 16/ 2: 317-342 Macdonald A. R. Oral Tradition. de 1997 Tibetan Religious dances. PUF. . Maconi. in Lopez D. 1958 Peintures tibétaines de la vie de Gesar. Roma. in Laberthe J. G. J. Société d’ethnologie. Tome I. Verso. A. Wang Lixion and Tsering Shakya 2009 The Struggle for Tibet. 1962 Une source ancienne pour l’histoire de l’épopée tibétaine: le Rlangs po ti bse ru.The Gesar Festival of Rma chen (A mdo 2002) 547 Stein. Paris. Stein Rolf A. R. Mémoires de la Société d’ethnologie V. Flammarion. 2000 Le pouvoir en chantant. S. 1959 Recherches sur l’épopée et le barde au Tibet. Trebinjac. Paris. Stein. Nanterre. . R. Journal Asiatique 250: 76-106. A. Imprimerie Nationale. 1987 Le monde en petit: Jardins en miniature et habitations dans la pensée religieuse d’Extrême-Orient. London/ New York. Katia Buffetrille The poster 548 . The Gesar Festival of Rma chen (A mdo 2002) Monks from Khra gling dgon pa A monk from Khra gling dgon pa 549 . 550 Katia Buffetrille Sku gsum gling pa Nomads on motorcycles . The Gesar Festival of Rma chen (A mdo 2002) Rdo grub chen: Gesar A bzod dgon pa: Jo ru 551 . 552 Katia Buffetrille Khra gling dgon pa: Dpa’ thul Rdo grub chen: Spyi dpon . The Gesar Festival of Rma chen (A mdo 2002) Lung sngon dgon pa A bzod dgon pa: the horse race 553 . 554 Katia Buffetrille Tug of war Final of the festival . without distinction between ‘play’ and ‘player’. Actually rtse ba – the root rtse emphazising the prefix ba – means ‘love’. ‘you’ and ‘me’. ‘affection’. It is also used to in lus rtsal.’ to take recreation’. ‘to go to the top’. ‘to reach the climax’ (rtse mor ’gro ba). ‘to frolic’. but ‘to love’. This term is used to denotes a wide range kinds of playful entertainment. Used as an adverb rtse in combination with the male affix po means ‘sharp’. ‘humor’ and ‘jokes’. the word ‘play’ (rtsal.‘toys’. the verb ‘to play’ is also written as rtse ba (short final) in the sense of ‘to play’. and ‘highest rank’. which differs from colloquial language by a more complex verb formation and sentence syntax. wisdom play of mind. which –depending on the context could also mean ‘to joke’. how can one understand this diverse range of meaning in the sociological context? . ‘summit’. ‘ physical exercise’. If the semantic scope of the word ‘play’ ranges in Tibetan from ‘gambling’ and ‘joking’ to ‘love’. The verbal form – as usual in Tibetan – is tautologically composed as ‘to play the play’ rTsed mo rtsed ba. The verbal root rtse actually means ‘point’. In written Tibetan. Sanskrit līla) is used for ‘energy’: the illusionary world of appearance is only a play. ‘peak’. And rTse ba rtse ba means not ‘to play’ (rtse mo rtse ba). In connection with the verb ‘to go’ ‘gro ba it translates as ‘to advance’. Love Play and Wisdom Playing and Gambling: A Phenomenon of Tibetan Culture Andrea Loseries Shantiniketan In colloquial Tibetan the noun ‘play’ is rendered by the word rtsed mo (pronounced Tse mo). With the affix mo the noun rtse gains a further meaning in the sense of ‘top point’. In the metaphysical context of the ‘Great Perfection’ (rDzogs pa chen po). a doctrinal system which relates to mind as such. In combination with the verb ‘to do’.Wind Horse. ‘to enjoy’. ‘orgasm’ and ‘wisdom play of mind’ and ‘sports’ (lus rtsal). including ‘games’. ‘to make’ (byed ba) the word has an erotic implication in the sense of ‘to make love’ (rtse bar byed pa). ‘top’. ‘gambling. ‘horny’. Actually the affix mo when placed after a noun indicates the female gender. the ‘yoghurt festival’ (sho ston) or the birthday of the Dalai Lama. speech and mind enhance the possibility of attaining enlightenment. the thought pattern of Tibetans is very much infiltrated by Buddhist ethical values. edited by Charles Ramble and Martin Brauen. a useless waste of time. the interdependent law of cause and effect as a combination of limitless factors. In ancient Tibet. among them also genteel ladies. Poker and Mahjong marathons dwarf even traditional folk dances and popular song competitions. Neither the old feudal system nor the communist ideology and certainly not the melodramatic survival in Indian exile could change this habit. particularly the notion of Karma. while unwholesome actions lead to deeper ignorance and suffering. in: Anthropology of Tibet and the Himalayas. and billiard tables found at every street corner. In 1994 I observed during a three days wedding celebration of a noble Tibetan cadre in Lhasa the throng of some thousand or more Tibetan and Chinese invited guests playing non-stop mahjong in huge gambling halls specially adapted for that purpose. 1 Although in the autocratic society of Tibet gambling is generally regarded as objectionable. as do the sleeping and drunk gamblers in the grass. Each individual has to make his own decision as to what constitutes a good or evil deed. which spoils the character and reduces all material and spiritual merits. When traveling over land it is not an uncommon sight to find Tibetans on the roadside halting for a picnic using the break for a gamble of dice in the shadow of their vehicle or truck. Zurich 1993: 30-38. before the final Chinese take over in 1959.556 Andrea Loseries Generally. Despite the continuous social criticism licensed and private casinos have an increasing demand and are well frequented by non-stop players. A good example for such ethical positioning is Tibetan attitude towards gambling. and empty bottles with the neck stuck into the ground speak of the duration of the gambling session. The winner gets a beer as prize. their monstrous ugliness matching the faceless concrete blocks of the mushrooming bank buildings. which determines all actions. The addiction to gambling and 1 On gambling in Tibetan society. . Wholesome actions of body. In Tibetan exile communities in Nepal and India gambling is a common entertainment of the refugees. In contemporary Chinese-ruled Tibet new casinos. Through the thick tobaccos smoke only the clattering of the gamble stones and scalding victory cries of ba and sho were heard. irrespective of their provenance. see Calkowski. which depends on relative factors since there is no absolute difference. Others indulged in gambling only during festivals such as the New Year (lo gsar). Tibetans are fanatical gamblers. gambling was the passion of aristocrats and rich merchants. karaoke bars and gambling arcades are opening all the time. Marcia: Contesting Hierarchy:On gambling as an Authoritive Resource in Tibetan Refugee Society. etc. money. as well as the possession or loss of ‘power’ makes gambling a serious matter with a strict etiquette. However. A ‘covetous’ person who can get his friends to give him cigarettes or drinks demonstrates ‘power’. In Tibetan society notions such as ‘merit’ (bsod rnams). . matches. The hope to get hold of the ‘wind horse’. Despite offering smoke sacrifices with juniper branches and mounting prayer flags on mountain passes to entice the ‘wind horse’ to bring good luck. ‘Luck’ on the other hand. deceit.’ power expresses itself through charisma. in an attempt to distract him. ‘Power’ (dbang thang) may be gained through meditating on deities. Love Play and Wisdom 557 drinking is therefore a popular subject of propaganda films on television. but a player who continuously wins in various games. A gambler who suddenly makes a large win demonstrates his ‘wind horse’. When I give him a cigarette. are forbidden. in Tibetan ‘wind horse’ (rlung rta). Hence the wind horse transcends ethical conduct as the only means for achieving a legitimate increase of social status. Such an action does not diminish but increases the ‘power’ of the winner. nor transfer it. my friend will win and I lose. ‘Merit’ (bsod rnams).’ As an informant mentioned: ‘if another player smokes my cigarettes. Anyone who wishes to frequent a casino in Tibet or in exile has to keep to the rules. Material success relies on dbang thang. is to be understood in the context of the ideological hierarchy and legitimacy of Tibetan society.’ A player may declare himself to be covetous (ham chen po) and ask his friends for all sorts of things. a drink. because a Tibetan proverb says: ‘A covetous thief will eat you up. The ‘wind rise’ moves from gods towards human beings who can neither accumulate. the protection of the Lamas. practices which jeopardize an advantageous good rebirth. or by overcoming mighty enemies. The fascination with gambling. just how and in which form this will manifest itself. ‘windhorse’) and ‘power’ (dbang thang) are used legitimize social status and upward mobility. mahjong and cards. and like the ‘wind horse. Only after when the gambling has come to end is it customary to share the winnings by giving out drinks. Since a lucky streak is infectious it can easily be passed on to others. ‘luck’ (rlung rta. even among friends.Wind Horse. remains unpredictable. in particular dice (sho). is unsystematic and unpredictable. smoking and drinking. a win secured through victory the ‘wind horse’ is more prestigious one obtained through ‘power’. This includes requests for cigarettes. Any requests from gamblers to other gamblers. which exhort the youth not to follow the hedonistic habits of their reactionary parents. which can only increase. he dominates me. proves his ‘power. the theologically sanctioned method for gaining status and open to all Buddhists is diminished by gambling because it is related to greed. if at all. ‘To give space’ to the play of life without becoming entangled in the eight categories of worldly distractions (gain and loss. the people play. vanity and hypocrisy. with their strict monastic rules and dogmas. and to ‘bring the play to summit’ denotes the climax. Culinary delicacies. to become ‘one’. beds. Therefore the celibate clergy. Drinking songs and step dance accompany the music. Life stories of saintly jesters. oral caresses and other external stimulation (‘hand work’) are regarded as tiresome and unnecessary. All sorts of household furniture and fixtures. as playful energy of five colored rainbows. What we call partying. During the warm summer months white festive canvas tents may be erected by the side of a river or in a courtyard or open space near a house. free of constraint. We have seen that play in all variations is a central part of Tibetan life and an expression of contentment and relaxation. is the art of living of the wise. It is the fool who hunts the ‘wind horse’ and prays: ‘Let me be a winner in this game’! . glass noodles. dance. and mutton stews are prepared in a separate kitchen. praise and blame. sing. easily excitable and fast in reaching ‘the summit’ of love play. at least seven days. In the Tantric context there is fluid borderline between eroticism and critique of religious personnel since in Yoga as much as in everyday life the final goal is to achieve a union. with their humorous and ambiguous sayings. eat and drink. Because the wise can see all appearance as play of the mind. unintentional. Last not least a Tibetan woman may become renowned for being hot. of painful entanglement. such as like steamed meat dumplings (mo mo). can the party be declared a success. while often enough entangled in corruption. Tibetan humor can be divided into two categories – there are primarily erotic jokes and those that involve a form of social criticism by poking fun at the clergy and monks. where for several weeks. it won’t diminish his enjoyment of humor and his ability to have a good time. such as like Drukpa Kunle. are a favorite target for jokes and hoaxes. Love techniques like kissing. Tibetans call ‘picnic’ or ‘garden plays’ (gling ka gtang). orgasm. natural just as it is. and sexual union is a powerful means to this end.558 Andrea Loseries However serious a Tibetan may pursue his passion for gambling. Tibetan love play aims to reach ‘the summit of the play’ as fast and directly as possible. Salted butter tea is brewed in giant barrels and a mildly fermented barley-drink (chang) as well as beer is served from morning till evening. The wise has dissolved the net of illusion. fame and shame). Play and jest are therefore found within the semantic field of ‘love’ and ‘affection’. joy and pain. and plays the play of life just for the sake of playing. and certainly the house shrine are carried into the tents. either played on traditional instruments or blaring large transistor radios. without ‘mine’ and ‘yours’. are treasured as masterpieces of Tibetan literature. Only when the last guest ‘has left the party ‘with his legs ahead’ or even better has fallen asleep in order to continue to party the next morning. carpets. tripe. Wind Horse. pointed. to compete. summit. joke rTsed mo rTse bam to joke. joke (Karmay) rTsed mo play. to go top. peak. toy. to divert. capacity. rTse mo (’gro ba). to rejoice of (Karmay) rTsed pa to play. top. wisdom play Lus rtsal sports . to play (also ritually) sTse ba = rol ba (stsen pa) to repose. horny rTsal skill. Love Play and Wisdom 559 Glossary sTsed game. gambling. to repose. to float rTse ba to play. ride (‘to take for a ride’). sTse mor ’gro ba to advance. to jest (‘to play hockey’) rTse point. to enjoy rTsen pa to abide. competition. to float (Karmay) sTse mo = rsten pa to amuse. highest rank. energy. to take pleasure in. to take recreation. humor. challenge. to frolic. to take part in jest. affection rTse rno po sharp. to reach climax rTse ba byed ba to make love rTse ba love. Thereafter. sa is read as na. I think this is a kind of mystery in Tibetan language. It has been translated by Yeshi Dhondup of LTWA and edited by my friend Dr. Tenzin Dorje . Given this opportunity to participate in this conference I have composed this piece of writing based on my hunch. A syllable without suffix (mtha’ med) is read as if it has the ma suffix. and then start reading and writing. What is the mystery in the different dialects of the Tibetan language? Allow me to highlight it first with some examples and then I will explain them subsequently. everyone who knows written Tibetan can speak all different Tibetan dialects just as the native people speak their own dialect. 5. Therefore. if we are able to discover the mystery prevailing in different dialects of the Tibetan language.Some Reflections on the Mysterious Nature of Tibetan Language* Sangye Tandar Naga Dharamsala If we learn properly. ba is read as ma. * The original of this article is in Tibetan. this array of dialectics could be a boon for one could speak different dialects without any problem. Just recently I had a hunch about the mystery of the Tibetan language despite my many years of teaching and writing Tibetan. we will be able to speak a language naturally as the native speakers do without much thought and effort. Once this mystery is uncovered through proper study of these dialects. This is possible if from the outset we learn proper pronunciation of words while listening to how native speakers speak their language. 2. ga is read as na. Although Tibetan writing is same. if we know the mystery in pronunciation and hearing in various Tibetan dialects. na is read as ma. one shall be able to see the change pattern in the pronunciation. While this may cause communication problem in understanding what has been said. we can understand any language in a short period of time. For example. 1. it is not necessary that we would know the pronunciation unique to all the Tibetan dialects. 3. Even if we know the syntactics of Tibetan language. Following this process. 4. Tibetans speak different dialects. one needs to learn the grammar and syntax of that language in a systematic manner from a teacher (klog slob dpon). and then one can very easily understand the differences in speaking and writing. ra superscribed of 2nd syllable in a disyllabic word is read as the suffix of the 1st syllable 18. 9. For example. u (ÍÝ. ra subjoined syllables are read as ya subjoined syllables. da is read as na. Vowel u (ÍÝ.) is read as ya. we say skyabs su ’gro. 22. zhib phra. However. bya (‚. This is what I call mystery in reading Tibetan language. 8. ’a is read as na. zhib. 10. Similarly. zhib ’jug as zhim ’jug. slob ’jug as slom ’jug. . The statement “ba is read as ma” does not mean that ba is always read as ma.’greng bu). 7. not slom ston. ka. in all these words—skyabs. zhabs ’dren as zhams ’dren. rab ’byams as ram ’byams. o (Íô. rab. Isn’t it a mystery to read ba character as ma? It is easy to speak and learn a language when we are familiar with such phonological intricacies of the language. ha is read as kha. but occasionally read as ma. 12. 14. not zhim phra. No Tibetans find flaw in this reading. 13.) is read as e (Íï. grub ’bras as grum ’bras. not skyams bcol gzhung. it is read as ma. slob and grub. zhabs brtan. not kyams su ’gro. kha and ga subjoined syllables are read as ca. cha and ja. The prefix of a 2nd syllable in a disyllabic word is read as the suffix of the 1st syllable 17. Western na and ra are read as la by Tibetans 1. we say skyab bcol gzhung. Vowel a (Í-) is read as vowel o (Íô-) 25. not grum thob. ba is read as ma. skyabs mgon as skyams mgon. Vowel o (Íô-) is read as vowel i (ÍÛ-) 24. zhabs. zhabs ’bring as zhams ’bring. 16. pha is read as ha. and so on. Therefore. skyabs ’jug as skyams ’jug. Let me give some more examples: we say skyabs ’gro as skyams ’gro. 19. The basic character of a 2nd syllable in a disyllabic word is read as the suffix of 1st syllable 21. in some special cases when ba is used as suffix. a (Í. 11. when ba is used as a prefix or a basic character it is never read as ma. zha is read as ya. slob ston. grub thob. However.) is read as vowel i (ÍÛ-) 23. not zhams brtan.) is read as oi (ÍôºÛ-).) is read as ui (ÍݺÛ-). suffix ba is not always.562 Sangye Tandar Naga 6. zhabs ’degs as zhams ’degs. In general ba is not read as ma even when it is used as suffix. The subjoined ra sta does not change the reading of basic character. 20. A syllable without suffix is read as if it has na suffix. 15. Thus the mystery is not uncovered completely. For example. as its latter syllable has the ma prefix. When I say that ga is read as na. 3. rten ’brel is being pronounced as rtem ’brel. It is very difficult to find the reason despite much thinking about it. rig ’dzin ’dus sde is never read as rin ’dzin ’dus sde. ma and ’a have different point of articulation (skye gnas). the suffix na is read as ma. In contrast. when we say dgra ’dul gnyen skyong. So what else is this if not a mystery of the language? If we claim that we call/ read dgra dul as dgram ’dul because dgra’ syllable has the ’a suffix. I call such phonological differences a mystery of Tibetan language. Similarly sha rus. the suffix ga is read as na. We may say that such phonemes are special cases because we do not seem to have a definitive explanation. dgra ’dul is spoken as dgram ’dul. in special cases. na is read as ma Here too I do not mean na is read as ma when na and ma are basic characters and suffixes. However. in special cases. 5. Even if we assume it has the suffix ’a. For example. rgyum ’bras. However. When I say sa is read as na. we never say dgram ’dul gnyen skyong. sha ’bras as sham ’bras. na tsha and snga ma are not spoken or read as sham rus. rten ’brel yan lag bcu gnyis is never said or read as rtem ’brel yan lag bcu gnyis. A syllable without suffix (mtha’ med) is read as if it has ma suffix. we say chon . for instance. in special cases.Some Reflections on the Mysterious Nature of Tibetan Language 563 What is this secret? In the above examples. It is surprising that a word without suffix is spoken as if it has suffix ma. For example. then why cannot we call/read dgra ’dul gnyen skyong as dgram ’dul gnyen skyong because dgra ’dul is spelled the same in both cases? Close observation suggests that this mystery is not solved yet. 2. However. where the former syllable has the suffix ba and the latter syllable has prefix ’a. 4. nam tsha and sngam ma respectively. rgyu ’gro. While the personal name rig ’dzin is always read as rin zin despite having suffix ga. neither do I mean when ga is used as prefix and basic character nor do I mean that ga is read as na in general. rig ’dzin is spoken as rin ’dzin. I do not mean that the basic character sa and the suffix sa are read as na. ga is read as na. a disyllabic word. na bza’ as nam bza’ and snga phyi as sngam phyi. the sound of ba turns into ma. rgyu ’bras as rgyum ’bras. However. In contrast. sa is read as na. As mystery would have it such phonemes are part of natural Tibetan pronunciation although literally such phonological differences are not feasible. this explanation is not applicable to words such as skyabs mgon. However. har phyin for phar pyhin. but it is clear that there is no na in the Tibetan spelling. chos pa. In short. although every zha character is not read as ya. the antonym of ’dug is mi ’dug. Take mi ’gyur as an example. we write them as Kanjur and Ganden. shen rab and gzhin chags. They hear a na suffix sound after bka’ and dga’ although these two syllables are without such suffixes. in special cases zha is read as ya. under special cases some words which have the suffix ’a are pronounced as na.564 Sangye Tandar Naga byor for chos ’byor. While I do not claim to have unlocked the mystery here nonetheless I find such phonological exceptions in spoken Tibetan interesting. zha is read as ya. A syllable without suffix is read as if it has na suffix. suffixless syllables are read as if there is suffix na. 6. My contention is that in certain special cases. then the suffix sa could be replaced by na. Tibetans read and say the word as if there is suffix na to mi as min ’gyur. For example: dga’ ldan is pronounced as dgan ldan and bka’ ’gyur is read as bkan ’gyur. chon ’phel for chos ’phel. Similarly. 8. when we write bka’ ’gyur and dga’ ldan in English phonetically. pha is read as ha. har ’gro for phar ’gro and so forth. as chon spyod. in certain special cases pha is read as ha. While pha in every case does not change its sound into ha. shes rab. This kind of phonetic rendering of Tibetan words in English is due to Westerners’ hearing of this word from a Tibetan. We put English “n” to Chonzom to represent a Tibetan “na”. we say ha rol for pha rol. For this reason. For this reason. a zhan g is spoken as a yang and la zhas is spoken as la yas. shen mkhan for shes mkhan and gzhin ’go for gzhis ’go. it is not read as na in general. . not min ’dug. ma hen for ma ’phen. we say chu min ’dug for chu mi ’dug. in a disyllabic word such as chos ’byor with sa suffix and ’a prefix or shes mkhan with ma prefix. If such a pattern exists then I may have unlocked some mystery in Tibetan language. 9. ’a is read as na Similarly. However. chon ’dzoms for chos ’dzoms. I am not making a general claim here that every syllable without suffix should be read as if there is suffix na. according to the Tibetan grammar. I do not mean that in all cases ’a is read as na when ’a is a prefix or basic character. where we can see that the suffix sa is replaced by suffix na. For example. when we write the Tibetan name Chos ’dzoms in English phonetics. Even when ’a is a suffix. 7. Though there is no suffix (na) to mi. chon pa. For examples. we write it as Chonzom. Similarly. However. we never read words like chos spyod. gzhis chags etc. the subjoined characters provide the main sound as in the case of bya. bang khog for brang khog and spe ’u for spre ’u. ra sta does not change the sound of the basic character. a (Í. ra sta. bkra shis is read as Tashi. The subjoined ra sta does not change the reading of a basic character. I have said that bya is read as ya but not always. da is read as na. bon. instead of the basic character. and rma bya as rma ya. ma byed as ma yed. However. bol and bos are read as boe (zôh-). la sta and wa zur or wa btags—in every monosyllabic word. sbra phub. It is difficult to say how. the sound of ka is changed into ta. suffix. However. la mgo.) is read as ya. However. Through close observation it is found that for most of the words the main sound comes from the basic character when prefix.” 14. and las (¾Å-).’greng bu). in special cases when da is used as a suffix. Hence the basic character is ba but the subjoined character is ya.) is read as oi (ÍôºÛ-) In general. and sbra nag zhol are spoken as sba chen. and boes (zôÅ-) . na. and sba nag zhol. when ka has subjoined ra sta. In general. bal (z¾-). it is read or pronounced as na. consonant. when a syllable has any of these four suffixes—da. bang rtsal for brang rtsal. sa mgo—are subjoined with characters—ya sta.Some Reflections on the Mysterious Nature of Tibetan Language 565 10. people from Central Tibet say dug sbang for dug sbrang. ngan (Pm-). It is clear from this example that for the purpose of pronunciation. for example: rgya bya is pronounced as rgya ya.) is read as e (Íï. if a syllable has any of the four suffixes—da. Because of such pronunciation. However. la and sa—it is read or pronounced as e (Íï. While I do not mean da is read as na when it is used as prefix or basic character. For example. For examples.)is not read or pronounced as e (Íï. with the rest of the suffixes. However. thus it has been written as skyin ’dzoms. la and sa. For example. bod.’greng bu) In general.) does not have an oi (ÍôºÛ-) pronunciation. phyogs spang for phyogs sprang. boen (zôm-). For example: dad (hh-). superscripts—ra mgo.) becomes oi (ÍôºÛ-). a (Í. in some situations. today. 12. o (Íô. the suffix da in skyid ’dzoms is replaced by suffix na.’greng bu). in some cases. we do not see any change in the pronunciation of vowel. bya (‚. boel (zô¾-). 11. na. the basic vowel na ro is being pronounced as if na ro or o (Íô. For example: sKyin ’dzoms for skyid ’dzoms. o (Íô. In special cases bya is read or pronounced as ya. a popular saying among Tibetans is “People from Central Tibet have no ra sta. when and why such changes in pronunciation have come into being. sba phub. The following examples sbra chen. 13. a mdo. khul. and khus are read as khuid (DÞh-). The ra subjoined syllables are read as ya subjoined syllables. In Kham and Amdo dialect. mgo mjug. mi rgan as mir gan.) is read as ui (ÍݺÛ-) In general. the first syllable is pronounced as if its suffix is the next syllable’s prefix. bzhi bcu. pha rgan as phar gan. zlam jug. kha mchu. nga rgyal as ngar gyal. bla rgan as blar gan. sab cad. phyi rgol as phyir gol. khun. kra bzsang. chum do. rgya mtsho. ra mda’. bcu bzhi. snga rgol as sngar gol. sgram do. ’o rtsam as ’or tsam. lo mchod. and go brda are pronounced as bdem chog. lnga bcu. and the second syllable has prefix either ma or ba. bco brgyad. 18. dgub cu. dgu bcu. blo rgod as blor god. In a disyllabic word where the first syllable is without suffix. ba rzi as bar dzi. bu rdzi as bur dzi. u (ÍÝ-) is not read as ui (ÍݺÛ-). This is unique to Tibetan pronunciation and it has no relevance to Sanskrit. 17. bya rgod as byar god. when a syllable has any of the four suffixes—da. chu mdog. krab zang. ram da’. sa bcad. For example. ral gyi for ral gri. bzhi mchod. sha mdog. pho rgod as phor god. la and sa—the basic character with a u (ÍÝ-) vowel is read as ui (ÍݺÛ-). am do. ya mtshan. rdo rje as rdor je. . lom chod. chu mdo. and gob rda respectively. bde mchog. khud. khuil (DÞ¾-) and khuis (DÞÅ-). For example. bla mchod. often ra subjoined syllables are read or pronounced as ya subjoined syllables. blam chod. dmu rgod as dmur god. For example. sgra mdo. chum dog. and the second syllable has ra superscribed. lo rgyus as lor gyus. kha rje as khar je. mgom jug. ma rtsa is pronounced as mar tsa. bzhim chod. kham chu. ra superscribed over the 2nd syllable in a disyllabic word is pronounced as the suffix of the 1st syllable In a disyllabic word where the first syllable is without suffix. ja mdog. sha khyi for sha khri and bya khyi for bya khri. lo mjug. bcub zhi. 16. lom jug. The prefix of a 2nd syllable in a disyllabic word is read as the suffix of 1st syllable. However.566 Sangye Tandar Naga 15. bcob rgyad. blo bzang. lngab cu. bzhib cu. zla mjug. mi rgod as mir god. bcu rgu as bcur gu. na. dge rgan as dger gan. jam dog. yam tshan. blob zang. sham dog. chu rtsed as chur tsed. lo rgan as lor gan. For instance. rgya rgan as rgyar gan. rgyam tsho. then the first syllable is read or spoken as if the second syllable’s ra superscribed is its suffix. khuin (DÞm-). tho rgod as thor god. u (ÍÝ. ha rgod as har god and khyi rgan as khyir gan. da ’gyo for da ’gro. 25. kha and ga subjoined syllables are read as ca. we say and even write khalka rje btsun dam pa for halha rje btsun dam pa. sgong tog for sgang tog. saying chi instead of chu. In general the reading of na and ra are not interchangeable with la. sometimes Western na and ra are pronounced as la in Tibetan reading. 21. the vowel a (Í-) is pronounced as vowel o (Íô-). Moreover in many old writings. For example. There is a story in connection with such a pronunciation. Tibetans pronounce ha as kha when it is Mongolian title. A person from Amdo visited Lhasa for the first time and asked for water. 22. due to dialectical differences in reading. ha is read as kha. gya and bya are similar in pronunciation. For example. they say chi.) as vowel i (ÍÛ-). people from Tsang and Amdo. The vowel a (Í-) is read as vowel o (Íô-) In Kham Trehor dialect. both chu (water) and khyi (dog) are pronounced as chi. For example. However. and vowel i has been pronounced as vowel u. 24. 20. they pronounce the vowel u (ÍÝ. Vowel o (Íô-) is read as vowel i (ÍÛ-) In the dialect of Labrang Tashi Khyil the vowel o (Íô-) is pronounced as i (ÍÛ-). For instance. Western na and ra are read as la by Tibetans. we find ’bru gung for ’bri gung. The vowel u (ÍÝ. songs rgyas for sangs rgyas. The Lhasan could not get what he was asking for. This is a natural hearing and pronunciation . In Amdo dialect. bla brang is read as blab rang and a bra as ab ra. The reason behind it is that khya has been pronounced as cha. kya. in the dialect of Tsang for bu sa they say bi sa and in the dialect of Amdo. they say dngis po for dngos po and sha ’tshis mi ’dug for sha ’tshos mi ’dug. Another example is go ’jo for go ’gyo. lca. 23. and ja. The basic character of a 2nd syllable in a disyllabic word is read as the suffix of the 1st syllable In disyllabic words. for chu.Some Reflections on the Mysterious Nature of Tibetan Language 567 19. pya and spya are similar in pronunciation.) is read as vowel i (ÍÛ-) To my understanding. the basic consonant of the next syllable is read as the suffix of the former syllable. rkya. khya and phya are similar in pronunciation. ca. cha and ja. they say rkong pa for rkang pa. ka. For instance. Professor Thubten Chogdrup has stated in his grammar that cha. In Amdo dialect khyi (dog) is pronounced as chi. And that is why Tibetans say lumber for number. Alternatively. With these words. I stated that it was wrong to pronounce chi for chu. However. for instance. later when the Tibetan language is taught to westerners. Basically. I also wrote a lengthy article on this issue. Many years before. there is more to learn about Kham dialect than. mo rang for kho rang. . such as those of America. the Tibetan language is the same across Tibet but is spoken differently to some extent as in Amke. Australia. Tibetan dialects are akin to spoken English in different accents. At meetings and during conversations Tibetans from different parts of Tibet speak one another in Chinese. Now I realize after considerable thinking that such practices are not wrong. What is also natural to the spoken language is that the same word is pronounced differently by speakers of different dialects. ’dug. because they do not have a common Tibetan dialect. thus. if we can unlock the mystery of Tibetan language something previously attempted to discuss in this paper. Much has been talked about the need for a Lingua Franca. red and yin had not been discussed in any Tibetan grammar book but learned through the process of familiarization with actual conversational practice. Some writers have argued that Lhasan dialect should be the Tibetan Lingua Franca but others have argued the same for the Amdo dialect. Whatever this could be. songs rgyas for sangs rgyas. the usage of terms like yod. if we could unlock the mystery of our language then we could be able to understand one another well despite our dialectical diversity. however. we need to pay closer attention to such unique features of our language. prior to 1959. The different dialects of the regions of Tibet are not like the different regional languages of India such as Hindi. What I have shared in this paper may not be new to the readers. We do not know the reason why. I conclude my short paper with the hope that I have contributed a little to a better understanding of the Tibetan language. Great Britain. latasha for natasha and lubber for rubber. In today’s world. more than Tibetan. Many useful and important writings on the issue have been published in books and journals. simply adding na ro to sangs rgyas as in songs rgyas. Khamke and Uke. Kanada and Punjabi. it is important for people of different languages to entertain effective intercultural communication. Gujarati. the usage of these words has been explained separately. India and elsewhere. one should hope that Tibetans could effectively communicate with one another across different dialects. These days the Chinese language is used extensively in Tibet. These practices simply represent the dialectics of different regions. Of course. I have labelled it as mystery in this paper. it would be good to have a common Tibetan dialect. It is wrong to say that words such as sangs rgyas should be spelled differently. The great linguist Nicholas Tournadre has explained this state of affairs as typical of Tibetan language and its unique features. Interestingly.568 Sangye Tandar Naga for Tibetans. In the case of learning Tibetan language and dialects. to use a crude analogy. linguist or an anthropologist. But then every good circus needs a joker or a freak and similarly a great conference like this also requires an equivalent in some form or other and so here I am. HH the Dalai Lama. when the lure is so great. in dealing with such a topic. My report is titled “Walung-ngas: a disappearing Tibetan tribe” and I am afraid that the study will expose my lack of training and the dearth of resources. Roberto Vitali I ‘googled’ the names immediately and reading about the high scholastic achievements of the participants I honestly felt that I would be a somewhat of a misfit at this Conference but the fascination of visiting Dharamsala and the possibility of having to see my pontiff. here I am and this is my report. and I apologize and confirm that the organizers of this seminar are not a party to it. and especially when it came dressed in those three wonderful words “all paid for”. After yesterday’s highly cerebral presentations by authorities on their specific subjects and after this morning’s analytical paper by Professor Peter anything I say will amount to. Before introducing myself I would like commence by making a couple of apologies. was too much of a temptation to relinquish.The Walung-ngas: A Disappearing Tibetan Tribe Sonam B. Bhutan. Anyway. Secondly my report may sound a bit political. for over thirty odd years. treating cases of diarrhea. malaria and typhoid fever but. I would like to apologize that I prefer to call my attempt a ‘report’ rather the lofty sounding word ‘paper’. along the southern borders of Bhutan. I know that I don’t belong here and that I would have been better off. a geographer. Neither am I a historian. The previous sentence should introduce me as a physician and I have been doctoring in the rapidly growing village of Jaigaon. at least in one case. So before I commence reading my simple report I would like to emphasize that I am not a scholar. On receiving the names of the speakers from Prof. a political examiner and least of all a Tibetologist. Wangyal Jaigaon With your permission I would like to introduce myself and then move on to my presentation. Firstly. my sense of reasoning and resistance failed me completely. and especially so because I come from a place that does not have to its credit even the smallest of a library. which shares borders with the town of Phuentsholing. . simply farting against thunder. even if it be from a distance. a geologist. let me honest. repeats the show in describing the people of eastern Nepal simply bracketing this and a few other tribes under a convenient. Uttaranchal Pradesh. and the list goes on with Shingsapas. they are either scattered or woefully inadequate. Lhomi and other unidentified tribes. 4 Even Sir Percival Landon. Oxford University Press. of Eastern Nepal. the hills of Darjeeling. or Olangchungay. political exigencies. For these Tibetan settlers social contacts. journals and the internet. “I do not know who are the Holange. locked up in their mountain fastness.” . Wangyal Introduction Along the western and southern frontiers of Tibet a grand variety of people of Tibetan origin can be found. 2 Walung in the short form. Himachal Pradesh. Ratna Pustak Bhandar. Macdonald’s comment. 149. p. alas. only the lightest shades of what they once were.”3 in reference to the Walung-ngas and Darjeeling’s master historian. Ngalong Drukpas etc. These people are variously called Lhadakis. or should I say inconvenient. But there are a few tribes about whom investigative materials are hard to come by and.1 of the Walungchung region. Monpas. the easternmost state of India. Tamangs.2 in short Walung. 4 Pradhan. when the materials are available. In the case of most of these tribes a good amount of researched literature can be found in books. 50. changes but there are a few people. Sherpas.570 Sonam B. Tangbas. 3 Macdonald. The mountainous regions of Lhadak. who has to his repute two large 1 Also infrequently called Walungbas and to the Nepalis they are Olangay. Kathmandu. 1991. and the nation states of Nepal and Bhutan have been home to successive generations of ancient Tibetan people. Walungchung Gola in the longer version and Olangchung Gola to the people of Nepal. Meraks. 1983. Holangay. the erstwhile kingdom of Sikkim. Saktens. Denzongpas. Thudambas. who have retained much of the Tibetan way of life while there are others who possess. Alexander W: Essays on the Ethnology of Nepal and South Asia. Brokpas. Professor Kumar Pradhan. etc. cluster of “other unidentified tribes”. Calcutta. Yolmos. and occasionally dramatic. Bhotiyas of Uttaranchal and Himachal Pradesh. trade compulsions. p. Arunachal Pradesh. “The cold and forested northern belt of Kirat with its eastern boundary extending to met those of Sikkim and Darjeeling is inhabited by Sherpas. cultural domination/ pollution and the inevitable effects of the vagaries of time have brought about numerous. Dolpos. Walung-ngas. if I may use that term. One such tribe awaiting a discovery is the Walung-ngas. The scantiness of work on this tribe is so immense that I was not surprised to read Alexander W. It is for such reasons that these people remain to be ‘discovered’. Kumar: The Gorkha Conquests. 1969. 206. only true as far as the history of the place and people is concerned for Hooker had written quite a lot on the terrain and vegetation. 10 Waddell. Vol. Bengal. Director of Public Instructions. 8 Das. L.”9 This is. 23. Ratna Pustak Bhandar. . to the Government of Bengal. 5 Landon. 213. Nevertheless.219. Sarat Chandra Das who was in Walung territory in 18798 and in this connection Sir Alfred Croft in his official letter commented that Das had “…explored. mountaineers and others who have visited the harsh and difficult terrain of the Walung region. in 1848. Sarat Chandra: AUTOBIOGRAPHY: Narrative of the Incidents of My Early Life. 1. military strength. Percival: Nepal. p. In fact. Then we have.5 The first European to pass through.Calcutta. 230.10 That has been the general trend with scholars. of which nothing was previously known. 7 Smythe.A: Among the Himalayas. governance. since also his masters at Darjeeling and Calcutta were. Indian Studies Past and Present. 218. more interested in the possible approaches to Tibet as well as the politics. Sir Alfred. Waddell’s book Among the Himalayas is a treasure house of information on the people and terrain of the eastern Himalayan region but when it comes to Walung and its society all one gets is a single page of sprinkled and poorly detailed information which is of no help in threading up a story let alone a history. Frank: The Kanchenjunga Adventure. Col. Kathmandu. 1. 238. Today and Tomorrow’s Printers & Publishers. after a gap of over 30 years. adventurers. 1987 (1928). and write something6 about the people and the region was Sir Joseph Dalton Hooker7 but being a biologist his academic grazing grounds did not encompass the fields of local culture and history. Pilgrims Publishing. 226. 1978 (1899). Lawrence A. AUTOBIOGRAPHY). Kathmandu. 1897 (1855). in the course of his travels. paragraph 196 (as quoted in Sarat Chandra Das. 1993 (1933). we cannot take them to task for each one had his own priority to pursue or a specific subject to study. p. p. the country north and north-west of Kanchan Junga. New Delhi. Varanasi. 37-42. A large bulk of what Das wrote did not concern the local way of life or history simply because he was. 1. economy and to some extent the history of that country. 374. Ratna Pustak Bhandar.The Walung-ngas: A Disappearing Tibetan Tribe 571 volumes on Nepal. has nothing on Walung and its people save what he has borrowed from Sarat Chandra Das’s and Sir Joseph Dalton Hooker’s writings. of course. 189. 210. 221. 27. 225. pp. 9 Croft. and 246. p. General Report on the Operations of the Survey of India. 18811882. Vol. 196. pp. Sir Alfred. 228. ignores the visit and writings of Joseph Dalton Hooker decades earlier. surprisingly. his only contribution is to be found in a footnote where he dismisses the region as “outer” Nepal. 6 Hooker: Joseph Dalton: Himalayan Journals: Notes of a Naturalist. 13 http://www. Wangyal Location The earliest recorded mention of the place is to be found in Hooker’s accounts where he found the area to be a very large village11 along the Tambur valley.html • 27° 41' 0" North. Walungchung lies approximately along the geographical coordinates of latitude 27º 40’ 60N and longitude 87º 47’E 14 at an altitude of about 3747m (12.org http://www. they are Tibetans and Lama Boodhists…” and he also found then to be “intolerably dirty Tibetans”. 202 and 201. 66% with Yolmo and 55% with Sherpa. S. “The Tibetan chiefly consumes barley.16 Sir Joseph in describing the Walung-ngas declared. as the Lepchas do over millet” in an obvious reference to the so called Tibetan beer or chang. The People The people of Walungchung region are of Tibetan extraction and their language/dialect is similar to the dialect of the Tingay District of Tibet and has 71% lexical similarity with the Lhasa Tibetan. the Tibetans make a drink by pouring boiling water over malt. .com/zp/np/800.tageo. 199. 2000 (1902). It has also been described as “a district in East Nepal inhabited by Tibetans. p.C: A Tibetan English Dictionary with Sanskrit Synonyms. “His drink is a sort of soup made from brick tea…Sometimes. “In appearance.ethnologue.asp?name=np.com/show_country. Languages of Nepal (68% with Dolpo.np/hiwn/ipgs (Himalayan Indigenous Women Network) 14 http://www. the five largest of which are named Walungchung.1062a.. It comprises of about a dozen villages. customs.com/index-e-np-v-00-dm1508227.13 The main village.199.fallingrain.com/photo/16585330) 15 http://www.800 according to Google Maps • 27° 40' 50. 205. J.maplandia.htm 16 http://www.com/world/NP/0/Walungchung_Gola. Lopa and Keyrong.hiwn.46" E (http://www.”12 The region lies partially to the northwest and largely to the west and south west of the Kanchenjunga. Gunsa.D: pp. wheat or buckwheat meal…” and on the drinks his comments were. Adarsh Enterprises. p. religion. Ethnologue Languages of the World.walung. 1.indexmundi.) 17 Hooker.htm • 27.30" N 87° 46' 37.683 87. 12 Das. Lelep and Lungthung. Yangma. but more rarely.com/nepal/ east/mechi/walungchung-gola/ and http://www. manners. and language. 87° 48' 0"E according to http://www.293ft) 15.panoramio. Delhi.572 Sonam B.. In general he was of the opinion that a “Tibetan household is very slovenly…” 17 Sarat Chandra Das is also of the opinion that these people 11 Hooker. Commenting on their food habits he wrote. Joseph Dalton: Vol. p. p. 374. to name a few. Oxford University Press. 20 Waddell. Oldfield. 19 L. 21 Pradhan. Asian Educational Services. 62.25 After the Chinese occupation of Tibet. at least in his days. 11. Kathmandu. Also A Tibetan English Dictionary. ISSN 1994-2664. Waddell: Among the Himalayas. pa people. . Cosmo Publications. 3.A: p. p. Dawa Norbu Sharpa. 1978 (1899). customs and languages. Sir Joseph Dalton Hooker (1905) and Christopher vonFurer Haimendorf (1975) have called these Sherpa people of upper Tamar and Gunsa region including the Walanchung as “ Bhotias” though Hooker (1905) also asserted that in the aspects of “appearance. 20 Professor Kumar Pradhan 21 Francis Buchanan Hamilton22 etc. New Delhi. manners. Asian Educational Services. Historical and Descriptive. 374. 2672 (Online).g. L. Waddell. Because of the region’s proximity to the Sherpa lands and possibly also because Walungchung lies even more east (or more shar) than SoluKhumbu there has been a tendency to refer to the Walung-ngas as Sharpas23 but neither the Sherpas themselves nor the Walung-ngas are inclined to accept this classification. 19 Oldfield. 23 Shar east. Laya Prasad: Cultural Ecology of the Highland Communities: Some Anthropological Observations from Eastern Nepal. 1062a. Dawa Sharpa (Hotel Yellow Pagoda) in Gangtok had similar reasons for the change in his title. 22 Hamilton. 58. 26. 1991. Calcutta.” 25 For reasons non-political I found several Walung-gnas calling themselves Sharpa e. p. a Walung-nga who climbed Nanda Devi with Nawang Gombu would never have made it as a mountaineer. Ratna Pustak Bhandar. p. Dhaulgiri Journal of Sociology and Anthropology.A. p. New Delhi.H: Sketches of Nepal. as a non-Sharpa. 1988 (1905). I quote Laya Prasad Uprety. they are Tibetans and Lama Boodhists. “…there is higher concentration of Bhotias (Sherpas) in Lelep and Walangchung VDCs. 1988 (1902). Sarat Chandra: Journey to Lhasa and Central Tibet. Mrs. Kathmandu. Francis Buchanan: An Account of the Kingdom of Nepal. 24 Despite the Walung-ngas’ dislike to being classified as Sharpas a good number of them have actually chosen to call themselves ‘Sherpa’ as a consequence of unfortunate political events. New Delhi.A.A. “It was 18 Das. Kumar: The Gorkha Conquests. especially as a Nepali national. Tibetan refugees began to pour into the Walung region and how this affected the Walung-nga identity. See also L. A. p. 1990 (1814). Cheten Sharpa (aka Kanchhi Didi) in the border town of Jaigaon (abutting south Bhutan) chose to call herself Sharpa simply because people did not know what or who were Walung-gnas and it also gave her the advantages of the community support of the local Sharpa people. inhabitants 24 Uprety.The Walung-ngas: A Disappearing Tibetan Tribe 573 are Tibetans 18 and this has been seconded by scholars H. religions. For every family with a telephone there would be about ten families without it.600 in Nepal of which it is stated that only 3500 are in the original area. Kathmandu. If we presume that each family had about seven members we would arrive at a figure of 1. .php page 3. 3.29 On the other hand the figures released (and updated as late as July 2009) by the Central Bureau of Statistics.574 Sonam B. 28 As to the head count of the Walung-ngas the website www.cbs. it is difficult to come to any reasonably accurate figure and further studies are called for. less than one fourth of the population own telephones (landlines) and the Telephone Directory of the Walung-gnas in Nepal published by the Walung Kiduk shows that at least 150 Walung-gna families connected with telephones.500 telephone-less families or 10.148 only (male 574 and female 574). a prominent citizen of Kalimpong (Darjeeling). In fact his house and compound is named ‘Holumba’ after ‘Holungba’.500 heads. returns the Nepali Walung-nga population at an impossible 1. As a consequence of it.550 Walung-gnas in Nepal.com gives the population to be around 15.”26 On the other hand. In an impoverished nation like Nepal. is not clear about where his ancestral roots lie but he believes they originated in Walung. the local Nepali Bhotias gradually began to identify themselves as Sherpas to eschew the administrative hassle for the acquisition of (Nepali) citizenship. 28 Karma Pempa Heshay.” 27 There are even some who think they could possibly be a Walung-nga and that their real ethnic identity has been blurred by years of extreme estrangement including several inter marriages with other communities. serial number 95. another term for Walung-gna 29 http://www. To this should we add the ones owning telephones (1050) the final count would come to 11.ethnologue. Several people I came into contact believe the total population 26 Uprety.050. Laya Prasad: p. based on Census Report of 1991. in almost a reversal of what has just been quoted.ethnologue.com/show_country. Such a situation would give us 1.gov.30 Consequently. One must also remember that there are several thousand Walung-ngas living outside Nepal for which there are no genuine estimates available. many have even managed to obtain papers as Tibetan refugees possibly because of easier access to education and also for smother and speedier immigration to the west as refugees.asp?name=np (Ethnologue report for Nepal) 30 http://www. Wangyal revealed from the key informants that the Bhotias living in the upper part of the Tamar and Gunsa Khola valleys had some difficulty in acquiring the (Nepali) citizenships because it was very difficult for the local administration to distinguish (between) the Tibetan refugees and the local inhabitants of the Tibetan origin due to their linguistic and cultural similarities. 27 Names are held back for obvious reasons.np/population_caste. 93 (quoting DJF Newell’s The Highlands of India. Dr.E. He was defeated by the Kirat confederation and he fled to Tibet to later become the head of Khampa Dzong under the vassalage of the powerful Tibetan king Srong Tshen Gampo. and between Tibet and India through Nepal. It is generally conceded that the people of Walung had inhabited the region for several centuries. those who remained behind. could have possibly been the nucleus of the future Walung-ngas.000 while others say it is much less. Saarbrücken and Fort Lauderdale: Breitenbach. Dhanalaxmi: British Attitude to Nepal’s Relations with Tibet and China (1814-1914).”36 Now keeping in mind that Walung was an important trading pass let us consider 31 It is believed that the name Morung is derived from Mao Rong. 94) . 1988. Prem R: Nepal-Tibet Relations 1850-1930. Harka Bahadur: Vignettes of Nepal. Kathmandu.The Walung-ngas: A Disappearing Tibetan Tribe 575 to be around 20. Firma K. 1981. or eastern Nepal. 33 Gurung. p. Years of Hopes. Calcutta. Sajha Prakashan. Mojumdar. Harka Bahadur Gurung (Vignettes of Nepal) traces the Walung settlement to approximately one thousand three hundred years ago. 1980. long before the Tibetans became politically powerful in the 7th century. which lies to the east of the city of Biratnagar. He later invaded the Kirat land. In the 7th century C. 44-45. Gurung. Heiko: Trading Pattern in the Nepal Himalayas. p. 4.L. enlightens us that throughout “the remote ages. Kathmandu. Kanchanmoy: Anglo-Nepalese Relations in the Nineteenth Century. 35 Uprety. 270. Ratna Pustak Bhandar. 32 Now corrupted to Rangeli.33 Professor Schrader also believes that the Walung people had migrated from Tibet and settled in the Tamur valley centuries ago.000 feet)” and one of the important passes was Walung. Bahri Publications Private Limited. a certain chief named Mao Rong Hang. Mukhopadhay. “There were trade links between Nepal and Tibet. Dr. Challenges and Frustrations. 1.35 Another historian goes even further by saying. with a large Tibetan force and after defeating the combined forces of the Kirat chiefs he established himself as the overlord. 36 Ravuri. History No one is exactly sure of when the Tibetans colonized this small patch of area and of the several villages which one was populated first is also unknown. p. Dr. The final word or figure is yet to be written. Upreti. ruled the Morang 31 plains of east Nepal and he built a fort at Rongli32 (Chief’s palace). pp.34 Nepali scholar. p. thereby leaves behind a broad hint that the Tibetan soldiers. 1973. 1862 p. 1980. Nepal and Tibet communicated with each other through the 24 passes (averaging 12. 34 Schrader. Chandigarh. As competition amongst these business houses became more intense they camped closer and closer and closer to Walung in order to be ahead of their trading rivals.C: Dictionary Das translates the place to mean “the fox-valley”. 55. Ukyab.576 Sonam B. no publisher mentioned. 32. Zonden: Walung Interlude. 2. p.38 Over the course of time others followed and subsequently the village of Yangma was born. Here the author says the name stands for “the place of wa” and explains wa to be “a wild animal which looks like jackle. Wangyal and old folklore. Yangma means ‘broad’ and so the name for this broad valley. 38). Previously quoted Das brings forth the oral history that the village was founded by Tibetans from Tashi-rabka. p. Ghoom. P a s a n g D h e n d u p ( S e c r e t a r y. Kumar: The Yakha Rais also have a similar claim and they say that the term ‘Yakha’ is derived from ‘Yakshah’. Dhongthog. Livestock. In another story a respondent told a researcher that sometime in the ancient past the people who were fleeing Tibet. It cites that Tibetan businessmen used to wait at various makeshift trading posts. 169b. 38 Das. for reasons unspecified.C: The New Light English-Tibetan Dictionary. p. p. While trying to figure out the direction to take they were met by a fox. 2001. 1995 (1973). Sarat Chandra: Journey to.37 Yangma village of Walung has its own story of how it was settled. The Yakha people became so called because they first came to the Kirat region in persuit of ‘lost yak’. states that even the Sherpas have a parallel legend where the Khambu land was discovered by a hunter pursuing a goat (or a sheep or at times even a musk deer). O . Barbara Brower in Sherpas of Khumbu: People. p. T. a frontier district of Tibet. Sakya Centre. 37 C a p t a i n L a m a . 39 Das. p. and Landscape. The legend has it that a Tibetan from Tashi-rabka while searching for his lost Yak entered the valley of Yangma and encouraged by the valley’s broad breadth and its comparatively fertile soil he decided to settle there. wa39 in the Tibetan language. Dehra Dun. 1997. along the Walung route to Tibet. Wa l u n g K i d u k . for the traders bringing goods to their country. got lost in the vicinity of the Kanchenjunga.” . The Limbus assert that they are called Yakthumba because they were the ones to defeat and dislodge the Yakhas. Kathmandu. 1062. and this fox led the refugees to a place suitable for profitable settlement. Darjeeling). Eventually this led to the Tibetans actually settling in Walung and its periphery and these early settlers would have probably gone even further south but for the unsuitability of the warmer terrain to their indispensible yaks and of course to themselves also. S. Incidentally. Pradhan. (OUP. P. Rajeshwar: Walung ra Walunga. H: p. 44 Thapa. This is unlikely because most Tibetans revere the shawa. Karwari. 375b. Rajeshwar: Walung ra Walunga. 73. 42 Jäschke. 1989 (1983). p. 80 b. 41 Jäschke. headman. 43 Yonden Ukyab Bhutia of Ghoom Monastery Road. also of Ghoom. an 80 year old male of Ghoom (Darjeeling) agreed that the earliest settlers were Tibetans who discovered this hidden valley but not because they were led there by a fox. Dhongthog. 43 Another researcher churns out the same story with a small twist where the Tibetans were hunting.C: Dictionary. chief. Goldstein and Ngawangthondup Narkyid’s English-Tibetan Dictionary of Modern Tibetan. a valley). Bichari. 549a (lung pa valley) Das. In the absence of any archeological evidence of a fort I would rather settle for lung chung/lung chen (small valley/large valley) as the source of that part of the name. Motilal Banarsdass Publishers Private Limited. p. Kathmandu. T. 566a (sha ba a hart. Thapa agrees to the seven families but gives the names as Ukewa. Dhondu Bhutia. S. magistrate”. Rabkhang. Karwari as “an agent or messenger. Kojapa and Uchunga . 73a. Yonden Ukyab Bhutia. 1992 (1881). 416 b. 1995 (1973). Ruit. Mr. Naikay. Thapa translates lung to mean something like a path/road/ direction shown. He claims that Tibetans searching for a large Tibetan stag bearing twelve points on its horns were eventually led by the stag to this new homeland. Sakya Centre. is an active senior member of the Walung Bhutia Association of Darjeeling. 7. for shawa and in the process discovered Walung. seconded the story.” c/ f Parasmani Pradhan: Thulo Nepali-Nepali-Angrazi Kosh. p. pp. Waruwa. Dharamsala. p. Rajeshwar: p. 27. Kalimpong. He also claims that the chung that is affixed to the name came about after a fort or dzong was built and the word was corrupted to chung. judge. Bichari. 5.The Walung-ngas: A Disappearing Tibetan Tribe 577 The place subsequently came to be called Walung40 (wa fox and lung a district or a valley). namely Ukyab. Gembo.41 My informant. and Naikay as “leader. Library of Tibetan Works and Archives.44 Yonden Bhutia questioned the latter story claiming that Tibetans could not possibly hunt a shawa simply they held the animal in deep veneration. Thapa. Bhagyamani Prakashan. overseer”. 322b respectively. a stag) also Melvyn C. Lhacha. Abhiman Prakashan.45 40 Thapa.G: The New Light English-Tibetan Dictionary. Revised Edition 1999 (1984). and not searching. p. translates as “arbitrator. H: A Tibetan Eaglish Dictionary. 1216a (lung pa a district. Darjeeling. 45 Three of these titles are definitely of Nepali origin and therefore a mutation of the Gorkha period. Dehra Dun. 2008. and Bara making the lay families and the Nupalabrang constituting the monastic family. The same informant also claimed that seven lay and one monastic families were the first to settle in this area. Delhi. The Tibetan term for this stag is shawa42 and the place was originally called Shawalung which was later clipped to Walung. Thumjama. were of the opinion that the Walung-nga were from Tibet and provided me with suggestions like Yonden Bhutia’s Bara. OUP. Heiko: p. and the majority people. J. Ruta. pp. Mrs Tashi Doma. the Limbus. The corpse was discovered after several days and a funeral service was held where the Tibetans were all invited. Wangduik Gelek Renalingpa. My informants also mentioned Bitsara family of Walung and I am tempted to relate that name with the Bichari family: could the Nepal authorities in conferring titles to various families in Walung found it convenient to substitute Bichari for Bitsara! 46 Hermanns. Strangely we do not come across any record. Sarat Chandra: Journey…. who supposedly governed the rest of the area. . Gangtok. p.578 Sonam B. written or orally transmitted. Subba. Schrader too admits to seven families but he calls them Ukyab.47 One would also expect there to be some amount of tension among the Tibetan settlers. Mutaka. 1997 1990.Khunchana and Tshusarpa. Warowa. p. 1999. Wangyal Most historians state that the area which the Tibetan settlers came to occupy fell under the once known state of Limbuana46 or the land of the Limbu people although in the upper reaches of the mountains the Magar community held sway in a few areas. I was informed that the Rabkhang family is related through matrimonial ties to an eminent family in Kochak. Thapa’s Waruwa and Schrader’s Warowa could have come from the Tibetan place name Baro and Barowa simply meant ‘people from Baro’. a Tibetan lady in her midseventies and her son. Lhatse.270. a senior officer in the Central Government (India). Similarly Thapa’s Lhacha could have roots in another place name. Bombay. Of the few that escaped took the tragic tale to Tibet and brought with them an army to wreck revenge upon the Magars who were eventually driven out. aka Dongonpa Chamjung la. 26-27. Yakthang Mundhum Saplopa. 48 The Sherpas in the west of Walung region are believed to have had conflicts with the Rai people who were the original inhabitants of that area (see James F. 1954. footnote number 3). p.L.48 I see three possible reasons for this: Schrader.R: The Limbus of the Eastern Himalayas with special reference to Sikkim. 187. K. of conflicts between the two peoples. Fernandez. Matthias: The Indo-Tibetans: The Indo-Tibetans and Mongoloid Problem in the Southern Himalaya and North-Northeast India. The Magar queen poisoned the drinks and killed most of the villagers while children and women who had not taken the poisoned potion were taken as prisoners. Oral history of Khangbachen village of Walung says that the Magar chief imposed such oppressive taxes on the settlers that he was murdered and his body hidden away. Kojapa has the possibility of being a corrupt form of Kochakpa after the place Kochak in Tibet.” 47 Das. Fr. Fisher:Sherpas: Reflection on Change in Himalayan Nepal. 115. 10. He defines Limbuan as area “East of Arun river to the West of the Teesta River. The Tibetan settlers could have paid a nominal rent/tribute/tax and the Limbus were happy with this arrangement for an area that was unpopulated and therefore monetarily unproductive. H. 1985 (1979). Professor Pradhan claims that the character of the mundhum “…was almost republican with comparatively unorthodox rules. The custom by which they adopted outsiders into their tribes was known as chokphungthim. Nuxalbari. 51 Risley. p. New Delhi.” H.N: SIKKIM.R.H: p.10. 1989 (1894). 115. John Claude: SIKKIM and BHUTAN Twenty Years on the NorthEast Frontier. Chhogyal Phuntshog Namgyal defined the new kingdom’s boundary in the west to stretch beyond Walung. p. 2. On the East Tagong La. Sikkim Nature Conservation Foundation. Risley: Gazetteer of Sikhim. and Tangla on the North. Yarlung and Tamar Chorten in the West. Yangmak. down to Maha Nodi. Of the new boundaries the manuscript states. 28. . Delhi. 56.H. the Chhogyal.The Walung-ngas: A Disappearing Tibetan Tribe 579 1.S: p.” Chopra: P. 50 Maharaja Phuntshog Namgyal and Maharani Yeshey Dolma: The History of Sikkim. 50 The people of Walung then became subjects of the kingdom of Sikkim. translated by Kazi Daosamdup. The mountainous areas where the Tibetans settled never drew the fancy of the Limbus and the hills where the Limbus lived were of no attraction to the Tibetans either. in manuscript. White does not talk of ‘losing hold’ but claims that Limbuan “was lost. Titalia in the South. 1887-1908.” To this revelation the learned Professor finally adds. Too distant from Kathmandu and too small a tribe to be heard in the corridors of power the area and the people were subjected to neglect and 49 Pradhan. S. Walung became a part of Nepal and has been so till today. By the time the third Chhogyal’s rule came to an end (1717-1734). Once adopted. Vivek Publishing House. Kumar: p.”49 Things changed when the first king of Sikkim. even including the Shingsa area. White. Gangtok. 15. down along Arun and Dudh Kosi Rivers. Subba. “This particular mode of adoption must have gone a long way in assimilating divergent ethnic groups into the Kirat (read Limbu) fold. “They were Dibdala in the North. Walung. J. 1971 (1909). p. In the Limbu scheme of administration there was a heavy reliance on their oral tradition called the mundhum. and 3. Khangchen. Shingsa Dag-pay. Chand & Company Ltd. was enthroned in 1641. Sikkim began to lose its hold over the Limbu people51 and when the Gorkha expansion consumed up the whole of the present day eastern Nepal. an outsider was considered a full-fledged Kirat (read Limbu) and was not made to suffer any differential treatment. and gradually. . 53 Thapa. 1998 to 1999 and 2000 to 2001 and again in 2006. despite zero assistance from any government. Kathmandu. Despite the Walung people being culturally Tibetan they are politically Nepalis simply because their homeland falls within the political boundaries of Nepal and all writers who have written about Walung strongly testify to this fact. 2008. the late Mr. 52 indirectly summarized the indifference suffered by the Walungngas in the past three centuries when he put his foot deep into his mouth by asking. Kathmandu. as their ancestors had done centuries ago.580 Sonam B. p. Today they are spread out to the four corners of the world and in several places where they find themselves in good numbers they keep their past alive in the form of kidug or welfare association. Girija Prasad Koirala. Abhiman Prakashan. My guess is that more migration will take place and more kidugs will follow because the academia does not know while the people wielding the levers of power are not interested to know about this small tribe that refuses to be written off or forgotten. except in the exercise of collecting taxes. Rajeshwar: Walung ra Walungna. Darjeeling and New York. 238. or any world body. Wangyal indifference. “Doesn’t the place lie within Tibet?”53 52 From 1991 to 1994. Walung Kidug survives in Walung. the modern Walung-ngas began to migrate out searching for less harsh and more profitable pastures. The record breaking four times Prime Minister of Nepal. and requested that the so far neglected and foreigners/tourists-restricted Walung region be opened to tourism in order to benefit the economically hard pressed people of the area. in Kathmandu. A high powered Walung delegation met the Nepal Prime Minister. NGOs. But something unbelievable happened in the year 2000. I end with a classic example of apathy rooted in extreme ignorance. Today.