A Richness of Detail: Sangs rgyas gling pa and the Padma bka’ thang
A Richness of Detail: Sangs rgyas gling pa and the Padma bka’ thang
overstated. His popularity crosses both sectarian and he importance of Padmasambhava in Tibet can hardly be cultural boundaries, and generations of Tibetans revere him as “the second Buddha” (sangs rgyas gnyis pa). He is held to have converted Tibet to Buddhism in the eighth century. His religious biography has thus exerted a huge influence in Tibetan cultural areas. The earliest example of this important genre is the Zangs gling ma (henceforth ZL) by Nyang ral Nyima odzer (1124–1192). This biography has been fundamental to many Tibetans’ sense of geographical identity, since it ties Tibet closely to the Indian subcontinent where Buddhism was born and where Padmasambhava manifested, became the adopted son of the king of Uḍḍiyāna and subsequently carried out tantric practices before being invited to Tibet. ZL thus offers significant insights into the history of Tibetan depictions of South Asia.
Nyang ral Nyi ma ’od zer’s works gained extraordinary popularity, and their shared narratives provided the archetypes for later Tibetan historians writing on Tibet’s place in the world and its predestined relationship to Buddhism. Tibetan historians drew on these narratives in the fourteenth century, following the fall of the Yuan dynasty (1271–1368), and again in the seventeenth century the Fifth Dalai Lama (1617–1682) deployed the same fundamental myths in his formation of the pre-modern Tibetan state. In this sense, Nyang ral may be seen as forging together the earlier Tibetan ideas of Indic lands to the south as part of an enduring and influential narrative, one that was expanded and redacted by successive generations of Tibetan scholars to suit the changing requirements of its readership.
The narratives focused on here were not filled out with citations, as in other phases of this historiographical tradition, but with poetic descriptions seemingly intended to fix a vivid reimagining of a bygone age in the minds of their audiences—an increasing “richness of detail.” This article is a text-critical prolegomenon to an analysis of the fourteenth-century transformation of the image of Padmasambhava in the bka’ thang (“testament”) genre of his biography. This genre consists of narrative accounts that are traditionally held to have been compiled in the eighth century and buried in some form, as “treasure” (gter), to be revealed during a later age. This article will address the problem of the acknowledged redaction of the Padma bka’(i) thang (yig), also known as the bKa’ thang Shel brag ma (henceforth PKT), said to have been revealed by the famed treasure revealer (gter ston) named O rgyan gling pa (b. 1323). As a partial solution to this problem, it proposes recourse to a recently discovered exemplar of PKT differing from the most popular recension, and three other early examples of the bka’ thang genre predating the changes wrought on PKT in the sixteenth century. These works are attributed to the famed treasure revealers Sangs rgyas gling pa (1340– 1396), rDo rje gling pa (1346–1405?) and Padma gling pa (1450– 1521). The main focus of this article is the bKa’ thang gSer phreng (henceforth SP) attributed to Sangs rgyas gling pa. It discusses the exemplars of this work so far published, as well as those microfilmed between 1982 and 1997 by the Nepal-German Manuscript Preservation Project and catalogued by the Nepal-German Manuscript Cataloguing Project (henceforth NGMCP). It then compares how these SP exemplars set the scene for Padmasambhava’s emanation in Uḍḍiyāna with the narrative given in PKT, the accounts attributed to rDo rje gling pa and Padma gling pa and the different recensions of ZL. This should show:
1. The general homogeneity of the SP tradition, despite minor transmissional or redactional affiliations among its exemplars;
2. The benefits and limitations of using other works as indirect witnesses to the “original” fourteenth-century PKT;
3. The light that all of these traditions may in the future shed on the transformations that Padmasambhava’s image underwent between the twelfth and sixteenth century.
1. Witnesses to the “Original” Padma bka’ thang?
We can be sure that ZL was incorporated in some form into the two fourteenth-century biographies of Padmasambhava, PKT and SP. Yet all extant editions of PKT appear to stem from a text that Za hor Mi dbang bSod nams stobs rgyal (16th century) redacted in line with some version of ZL. He himself acknowledges such alteration in his printing colophon. It is clear that the Padma bka’ thang caused problems at the time of its creation, and its final form is still quite unlike ZL. Nonetheless, we do not know exactly what was changed during the sixteenth century, prior to the Fifth Dalai Lama’s printing of the work in 1676, in the 1730s at sDe dge or in the 1755 “corrected” print of daguoshi lCang skya Khutugtu Rol pa’i rdo rje (1717–1786). The popularity of the dGa’ ldan phun tshogs gling and sDe dge editions seemingly made all earlier, “mixed-quality” versions of PKT scarce.
I consulted a handful of editions of this work, with and without printing colophons, and they all seem to tell the same narrative; perhaps they are all ultimately based on the same sixteenth-century print. I have not begun to thoroughly study the PKT exemplars in the NGMCP collection, but Robert Mayer has kindly shared a very interesting manuscript exemplar with me (henceforth PKT 2013).11 It differs from the published and Beijing editions in a way that suggests another recension of PKT has survived. When I speak simply of “PKT” below, I am refering to the shared traits, style and content of all these exemplars. In addition to PKT itself, we are fortunate to possess the witness of Rig ’dzin Sangs rgyas gling pa’s fourteenth-century prose and poetry SP. I shall discuss the exemplars below, but the scholarly consensus is that, to quote Anne-Marie Blondeau, “[t]he gSer-phreng...often seems to be an interpretative gloss on the Shel-brag-ma [i.e. PKT], from which it nevertheless differs on a number of points.” One of mentioned a PKT circulating with glosses attached (gter ma’i thang yig tshig sna ring ba; ibid.: 143).
11 According to Robert Mayer (personal communications, July 1 2015), Ngawang Tsepag of the Audio Visual Unit, Śāntaraksiṭa Library, Central University for Tibetan Studies, photographed this PKT exemplar in the village of Sangs rgyas gling, Tawang, Arunachal Pradesh, in the summer of 2013. It was photographed as part of a University of Oxford digitisation program titled The Ancient Tantra Collection from Sangyeling (Sangs rgyas gling rNying ma’i rgyud ’bum), directed by Cathy Cantwell and Robert Mayer (with an award from the John Fell OUP Research Fund). Ngawang Tsepag found this PKT exemplar among the volumes of the rNying ma’i rgyud ’bum (which follows the Bhutanese 46-volume recension) and fortunately decided to photograph it also.
the main differences between SP and PKT is the inclusion of narratives from the longer, interpolated ZL recension, ZL1, in the former, which are missing from the latter (see footnote 6 above). Another is that it comprises 117 chapters.14 The posited foundation of SP upon PKT and ZL1 stands in contrast to the approach employed in another Padmasambhava biography attributed to Sangs rgyas gling pa, found in his famous Bla ma dgongs ’dus cycle. 15 This work condenses ZL3, including some of its telltale details and none of the extra detail included in either ZL1 or the much larger PKT, before moving on to its own narrative.16 So, if we are to continue to attribute both works to Sangs rgyas gling pa,17 it seems we could hypothesise that ZL1 and PKT were not available to him at the time of compiling the biography in the Bla ma dgongs ’dus, and/or he did not feel the need to be consistent across his oeuvre of Padma-vitas. We also have access to two works, attributed to later treasure revealers, that resemble PKT and are likewise written solely in verse. The first is the Lo tsha’i ’gyur byang rnam thar attributed to gTer chen Rig ’dzin rDo rje gling pa (henceforth LTGB). This treasure biography of Padmasambhava, preserved at O rgyan chos gling in Bumthang,
rgyan gling pa while the latter does not mention Sangs rgyas gling pa, is not strictly sound. This is because SP (2007: 382) also mentions O rgyan Padma gling pa who, if our dates are correct, was not born until fifty years after Sangs rgyas gling pa died. This raises the further problem of later interpolations into SP, which cannot be properly addressed here.
14 Guiseppe Tucci (1949: 110–15) already noted the different number of chapters in PKT and SP, but also suggested the existence of a longer PKT (ibid.:
15 This work is titled the Yid ches shing khungs btsun pa'i lo rgyus shel gyi me long gsal ba, found among other places in the Bla ma dgongs ’dus published in 1972 (W18978), vol. 4 (nga), 683–763, which I cite below. Erik Pema Kunsang (1999: 229) identifies it as a Padma-vita, though without noting this work’s debt to ZL.
16 Kunsang (1999: 96; 219, n. 33; 246) coincidently gives one indication of this dependence on ZL3 in the description of the Sems smad bco brgyad or “Eighteen Marvels of Mind” attributed to Master Vairocana (Bla ma dgongs ’dus vol 4, 726.2; see also Doney 2014: 24–25, n. 13; 49, n. 58). Another clear sign is the placement of Uḍḍiyāna to/in the south of India rather than the west (Bla ma dgongs ’dus vol 4, 687.4), corresponding to inter alia ZLh of the ZL3 recension that I quote in section 3 of this article, below (see also Doney 2014: 29 and 72). Sangs rgyas gling pa begins to diverge from ZL3 at about page 732, when recounting Padmasambhava’s advice and prophecies to the court and Ye shes mtsho rgyal.
17 There seems no reason to doubt this biography’s link to Sangs rgyas gling pa. It is found in his most famous work, attributes it to him as treasure revealer in the colophon (Bla ma dgongs ’dus vol 4, 763.1), and contains Padmasambhava’s prophecy to Sangs rgyas gling pa’s claimed pre-incarnation Dam ’dzin (Mu rug btsan po). This prophecy states that he will be reborn in a city named “Kong” (ibid.: 152.6), i.e. Kong po where Sangs rgyas gling pa was born (see Dargyay 1979: 133).
Bhutan, follows PKT verbatim in the majority of its narrative.18 The work comprises only 100 chapters, but ends with a brief interment formula and treasure revealer’s colophon in keeping with other works of the bka’ thang genre.19 rDo rje gling pa appears to have been a slightly younger contemporary of Sangs rgyas gling pa, also born in dBus and active in the Lhasa area; he is famed as one of the five great treasure revealer-kings (gter rgyal) and a discoverer of Bon treasure. rDo rje gling pa visited Bhutan and discovered much treasure there; today O rgyan chos gling in Bumthang (where this manuscript was preserved) is still the main seat of his descendants.
Another work, attributed to the even later gTer rgyal Rig ’dzin O rgyan Padma gling pa, very closely resembles LTGB. This is the Sangs rgyas bstan pa’i chos ’byung mun sel sgron me (henceforth MSGM), comprising 105 or 106 chapters. MSGM is more widely known than LTGB among Tibetologists and has often been compared to PKT, yet I shall show below that it more closely resembles LTGB.
18 On the 21-volume series of rDo rje gling pa’s works, of which this forms the first volume, and on other rare texts held at the O rgyan chos gling Monastery, see Karmay 2003. This publication is catalogued in Karmay 2003: 138, entry A.343–1.
19 LTGB: 191a2–6 reads: dbyangs can sprul pa ye shes mtsho rgyal gyis / mi brjed gzungs thob ma ’ongs phyi rabs don / pad ma bka’i thang yig zhes kyang bya rnam thar skyes rabs rgyas pa zhes kyang bya / khri srong sde (=lde) btsan bka’ chems zhes kyang bya / lo pan skar (=dkar) chag chos kyi ’gyur byang ’di / yi ger stab (=btab) nas rin chen gter du sbas / skal ldan las ’phro can dang ’phrad par shog / sa ma ya / rgya rgya rgya / / gter rgya / sbas rgya / gsang rgya / zab rgya gtad rgya’o / rgya rgya rgya (then, in smaller letters:) rin po che rdo rje gling pas gnam lcags srin phug pa nas gdan drangs so’o /. If the attributions of these two works and the dates of their attributed authors are correct, then most likely LTGB influenced MSGM. Yet, until we can text-critically confirm dependence of one upon the other, the direction of influence between the pair LTGB-MSGM will have to remain open. I have yet to find either work within the NGMCP collection.
In the future, “triangulating” between these three sources, with the help of PKT 2013, could shed light on the fourteenth-century PKT. Their divergences from PKT may also allow us to see the variety and possible areas of tension within the fourteenth to sixteenth-century tradition of Padmasambhava vita. Given that SP appears to borrow and quote from a different recension of ZL (ZL1) from the rest (ZL3), further investigation could then lead to insights into the redaction of that first full-length biography of Padmasambhava.
2. Exemplars of the gSer phreng
In my previous work, I consulted the SP 2007 book edition as a representative and easily available version of Sangs rgyas gling pa’s narrative. Leonard van der Kuijp has recently identified this edition, by means of the printing colophon it reproduces, as stemming from Bhutanese Punakha (sPung thang) blocks via a printery in Ngo mtshar lhun grub zil gnon rje ‘bum temple. Franz-Karl Ehrhard and Marta Sernesi have been able to supply me with a likely site for this temple, in the Blo gsal gling college of ’Bras spungs Monastery near Lhasa. The Tibetan Buddhist Resource Center (TBRC) also holds an undated SP xylograph (W1PD89340) taken from Lhasa blocks, which were in turn based on the Punakha blocks. The Lhasa blocks also formed the basis for the SP edition published by His Holiness bDud ’joms ’jigs bral ye shes rdo rje (1904–1987) in 1970, in Kalimpong (SP 1970).28 Lastly, a copy published in 1985 by the National Library of Bhutan (henceforth SP 1985a) is also “[r]eproduced from a clear print from the early 17th century (sic) blocks from Punakha (sPungsthang).”29 Therefore all of these exemplars form a group dating from seventeenth-century blocks, which I shall call SP1.
More recently, Dan Hirshberg generously shared with me copies of SP exemplars that he acquired from the National Archives in Kathmandu, microfilmed in 1982, 1988, 1990, and 1992. Franz-Karl Ehrhard then made me aware of another exemplar, on which he had previously published based on his own photographs. I subsequently found another copy of that same exemplar, photographed in 1983, among the NGMCP microfilms held in the Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin, and discovered there five more exemplars of SP, one complete and four in partial form. Of these, SP 1982 and 1992 are also descended from the Punakha blocks, with only minor differences. SP 1982 is identical to the undated Lhasa xylograph—including the two folios numbered bdun gong and bdun ’og and the missing folios 91–95.30 SP 1992 is almost identical to the Bhutanese edition SP 1985a. Yet it diverges in a few minor but interesting ways.31 Therefore both belong to the group SP1.
the Lhasa edition, said to consist of 365 folios, exists in the Istituto Italiano per l’Africa e l’Oriente (IsIAO; see de Rossi Filibeck 2003: 336, no. 673), though it remains to be seen whether it is missing folios 91–95.
28 This edition displays the same layout, wording and accompanying images as the Lhasa edition. In his preface to this text, John Reynolds states (SP 1970: 4, col. 1): “The original of the text is in the possession of H. H. Dudjom Rinpoche and His Holiness has graciously arranged for new blocks to be made at Varanasi for the printing of this edition.”
29 This is according to the descriptor on the boards (SP 1985a: i). Though the colophon does not mention sPungs thang directly, the names of the compiler (rNam rgyal ’brug pa) and overseer of the printing (Ngag gi dbang po; 1580– 1639) accord with those of other works clearly stated to have been produced at sPung thang.
30 The doubled folio number 7 and the five missing folios are noted in the card catalogue entry for SP 1982. For this reason, the work is described there as consisting of 361 folios. The only difference between these two exemplars is that the microfilm copy of SP 1982 omits folios 3b–4a.
31 Two stand out: First, SP 1992 has a different title page from the Bhutanese edition SP 1985a, but the same title: U rgyan gu ru padma ’byung gnas kyi rnam thar rgyas pa gser gyi phreng ba thar lam gsal byed. Second, though SP 1992 is then identical to SP 1985a up to folio 394a, its folio 394b appears to repeat exactly the same text as SP 1985a 394b but condensed onto five of the six lines (whereas the Bhutan edition spreads this text over the whole six lines). The sixth and final line of SP 1992, i.e. 394b6, is the beginning of the secondary colophon covering 394b6–97a4. This colophon is also recorded in SP 1985a: 395a1–97a4, but it is quite different to the printing colophons above. Because of the misalignment on folio 394b, the two SP 1988 and SP 1990a are more interesting. SP 1988 is a microfilm of an illustrated xylograph from Drumba in Jomsom, in the possession of a mTshams pa Ngag dbang. The work originally consisted of 282 folios but at the time of microfilming had lost 54 folios, reducing its usefulness for comparison with other exemplars.32 This xylograph is written with “treasure punctuation” (gter shad) throughout and illustrated with twelve images, eight opening the work and four closing it. The copy that was microfilmed has been heavily damaged, especially its opening folios. The treasure revealer’s colophon ends by describing the work as originally a scroll written in “Sanskrit,” then stating that Sangs rgyas gling pa retrieved it from the great Pu ri cave (perhaps on the border of Assam).33 In contrast, all of the above exemplars stemming ultimately from the Punakha blocks relate the scroll’s discovery first, before stating that it was written in Sanskrit. This order is in agreement with the published and Beijing editions of PKT. So, it is perhaps interesting to note that PKT 2013 also reverses the order of its account of its own revelation in the same way as SP 1988 (see footnote 12, above). The final folios of SP 1988 are damaged and also misprinted, but contain a unique secondary colophon that would reward further study. The final line of this colophon states: “this Biography Catalogue, Clarifying the Path to Liberation, was composed by Shākya’i btsun pa dBang phyug rgyal mtshan, at gSang sngags rNying ma’i dgon chen chos lung.”34 The next exemplar, SP 1990a, was photographed in Dzaden, Helambu. It is a manuscript rather than a xylograph and contains no secondary colophon. It includes only one image and lacks treasure punctuation throughout.35 Interestingly, SP 1988 and SP 1990a both
versions do not match line-for-line until folio 396a1 nas ma ’ongs lnga brgya par /… after which the shared colophon mentions the Punakha editor rNam rgyal ’brug pa (396b2).
32 The largest of these gaps appears after SP 1988: 161a. The narrative corresponding to SP 2007: 280.2–372.16 (most of chapter 70, all of chapters 71–107 and half of chapter 108) is then missing. Oddly, folio 161b begins in the middle of chapter 108 and the next folio is numbered 214a.
33 SP 1988: 276b6–7 (corresponding to e.g. SP 2007: 485.12–14) is rather difficult to read (uncertain readings are given in brackets), but appears to run: rgya rgya rgya / sh[og] hril gi cig yod / yi ge sang kri ta’i yi ger ’dug / ma dag pa tshig gcig kyang med par bsgyur yod / pu ri [ph]ug [mo] che shel [gy]i brag phug nas / [gu] ru sangs rgyas gling pas gter nas bton pa’o / e baṃ / [ornamentation] /.
34 The final line (282a7) appears to read: snam (=rnam) thar gyi kar chags (=(d)kar chag) thar lam gsal byed ’di nyid / shākya’i btsun pa dbang phyug rgyal mtshan gyis gsang sngags rnying ma’i dgon chen chos lung du sbyar ba’o / / e baṃ / manghalaṃ bha rba ntu (?) /.
35 Folios 162 and 163 are misplaced in the manuscript as it was photographed for the NGMCP microfilm. These folios are found between folios 62 and 63, perhaps omit the Uḍḍiyāna script included at the end of chapters in the SP1 exemplars above (though they both give the Uḍḍiyāna language title on folio 1b1). This binds these two exemplars closer together against the Punakha group.36 The treasure revealer’s colophon of SP 1990a also agrees with SP 1988 against the SP1 exemplars, in first describing the work as a scroll written in “Sanskrit,” then describing its recovery by Sangs rgyas gling pa from Pu ri cave.37 As will become clear below, these two versions also agree with each other against the SP1 versions in many readings within the main body of the work, and so I designate them SP2 for now. The testimony of these two versions confirms the general faithfulness of the Punakha blockprint group SP1, while highlighting some of its divergences where SP 1988 and 1990a agree against the Punakha group.
Franz-Karl Ehrhard has already discussed another printing of the gSer phreng, completed in 1535 at the Byams pa sprin lha khang, or Royal Temple (because of its associations with Srong btsan sgam po), in Mang yul Gung thang.38 Ehrhard points out that the apparently earliest printing of both SP and PKT (that I discussed above) took place around the same time, and suggests that the choice to go to all the expense of cutting blocks of SP “may indicate that this tradition of the life-story of the ‘Precious One from O-rgyan’ was the one prevalent in Mang-yul Gung-thang.” 39 Ehrhard was able to photograph the colophon of a 378-folio manuscript copy of the sixteenth-century blockprint SP, held in a private collection.40 I have since identified a 1983 microfilm of that manuscript, and find it generally similar to the SP1 exemplars derived from the Punakha
because the brgya, written in red ink, has become faded and so was not noticed by whoever re-ordered the folios.
36 SP 2007 does not reproduce this script at the end of chapters either, but perhaps this is an editorial decision due to the difficulty of reproducing the script.
37 SP 1990a: 526a6–27a1 reads: rgya rgya rgya / shog hril gcig yod / yi ge sang kri ta’i yi ger ’dug / ma dag pa tshig gcig kyang med par brgyur (=bsgyur) yod / bu ri phug mo che shel gyi brag phug phrag nas / gu ru sangs rgyas gling pas gter nas bton pa’o / ē baṃ / [ornamentation] /.
38 Ehrhard 2000: 16. See also Ehrhard forthcoming: Section 5 and Appendix, where he transliterates and translates the printing colophon.
39 Ehrhard 2000: 16. Note that the Maṇi bka’ ’bum Royal Print was made not much earlier, in 1521 (see Ehrhard 2013). Ehrhard (2004: 91) also reports that a further edition of SP was also printed in 1789 by Brag dkar rta so sPrul sku Chos kyi dbang phyug (1775–1837) and his brother, Kun bzang ’Phrin las dbang phyug (1772–1812), after the demise of their teacher, Rig ’dzin ’Phrin las bdud ’joms (1726–1789).
40 Ehrhard 2000: 16, n. 12. blockprints. However, some minor divergences agree with SP 1988 and SP 1990a, as will be evident from the transliteration of the description of Uḍḍiyāna in section 3, below. The early date of the creation of the blockprint on which this manuscript purports to rely suggests it should be categorised for the time being within its own group, SP3. The last of the complete exemplars available to me is SP 1997, a 313-folio manuscript from Thamé in Solokhumbu. It is a beautiful production, its opening folios covered in silk and replete with silver (?) ink on dark paper as well as images of celestial deities and Padmasambhava together with his consorts. This exemplar shares the use of Uḍḍiyāna language after chapter colophons and the order of phrases in its colophon with SP1 and SP3 against SP2. Between these two, SP 1997 most resembles the Royal manuscript SP 1983 (SP3), as can also be seen in the short excerpt quoted below. However, I hestitate to definitively assign it to SP3 just yet.
Since the next section of this article focuses on the earlier chapters of SP, there are four partial exemplars of SP that, though important, can only be mentioned here. The most noteworthy of these, SP 1990b, is an dbu can manuscript of the second volume of SP. This volume contains images, including of Sangs rgyas gling pa and Legs ldan on folio 296. Most importantly for any future research, its treasure revealer’s colophon resembles that of group SP2. Parts of SP were also evidently popular and distributed as independent texts at some unspecified time, at least in southern Tibet. Two manuscripts held in Nepal contain the same excerpt from SP’s chapter 104, detailing the benefits of reciting oṃ maṇi padme hūṃ. The first was microfilmed in 1985 (SP 1985b) and is titled “The benefits of the [[[oṃ]]] ma ṇi [[[padme]] hūṃ mantra], from the gSer phreng extensive [Padmasambhva biography]” (rGyas pa gser phreng las ma ṇi phan yon). It also contains Padmasambhava’s advice about Mahākāruṇika Avalokiteśvara.45 The second manuscript was published in 1991 and is slightly shorter. The existence of these two exemplars is important, since Anne-Marie Blondeau believed that fourteenth-century bka’ thangs omit ZL’s speeches on this mantra and its benefits. Not only is this claim contradicted by the inclusion of such a speech in SP (and PKT 2013, see again footnote 12), these stand-alone works suggest the popularity of this portion of the work as an independently circulating text. Finally, another stand-alone text was microfilmed in 1996, this bha wa / he tun te ṣān ta thā ga to / hya ba dad te shā ñtsa yo ni ro dha e baṃ bha ti ma hā shrā ma ṇa / oṃ sarba bidyā svāhā / oṃ su pra tiṣthā badzra ye svāhā / shu bhaṃ / / / / zhus dgo.
45 This section corresponds to SP 2007: 453.21–57.8. SP 1985b contains an adapted chapter colophon from SP’s chapter 104, used perhaps to indicate its provenance (SP 1985b: 6b5–6 reads: orgyan gu ru padma ’byung gnas kyi skyes rabs rnam thar rgyas pa gser phreng ba zhal chems bzhag pa’i le’u te brgya dad (=dang) bzhi pa’o / / sarba manga laṃ / / / /. The chapter colophon at the end of SP’s chapter 104 (SP 2007: 458.15–17) reads: o rgyan gu ru padma ’byung gnas kyi skyes rabs rnam thar rgyas par bkod pa las / bod kyi rgyal po dang btsun mo rnams la zhal chems bzhags pa’i le’u ste brgya dang bzhi pa’o /). SP 1985b’s manuscript follows this work with another text on Padmasambhva’s mantra (folio 7a1–20b6), which is titled: “The benefits of the vajra guru [[[mantra]]] together with its results” (7a1: / badzra gu ru’i phan yon ’bras bu ’brel). According to the online NGMCP catalogue, this work was held in Baudhnath by a Tashi Dorje. time containing a narrative on Mandārava that it claims is excerpted from SP. Ehrhard’s above-quoted remarks on the popularity of SP in Mang yul Gung thang in the sixteenth century are perhaps important in this regard. Despite the influence of PKT throughout Tibet, it seems that SP was not without its own following, evidence of which remains from the Himalayan region and Nepal today. 3. A Comparison of Descriptions of Uḍḍiyāna
The opening section of ZL follows a short prologue, both paying homage to the three kāyas—Amitābha, Avalokiteśvara and Padmasambhava—and also promising to tell the life-story of the latter while detailing his qualities. ZL chapter one and the main narrative begins this task by setting the scene surrounding King Indrabodhi (or Indrabhūti; the former seems more common below) of Uḍḍiyāna, who lacks a son. Recension ZL1 (exemplars ZLa–e) reads:
As for that [life-story: in/to] the west of India, [in] the country named “ŚrīUḍḍiyāna,” in the city named “Blazing Jewel,” there was a palace named ”Beryl” (baiḍūrya), ornamented with all sorts of jewels. Inside that [palace], on top of a great throne blazing with jewels, sat the Dharma-protecting king named Indrabodhi, ruling over the land of Uḍḍiyāna surrounded by 108 queens, outer ministers, inner ministers, intermediate ministers and an innumerable retinue. [The king] had no son [to be] prince… .
So begins the narrative of how the king comes to adopt Padmasambhava. Recension ZL2 and ZL3 (exemplars ZLf–g and ZLh–l) give a somewhat different description (here I shall quote from ZLh, with ZLf in angle brackets):
As for that [life-story]: first of all, [in/to] the south <west> of India, [in] the country named “Śrī Uḍḍiyāna,” in the city of “Blazing Jewel,” [lived] <the son of King Dza,> named “King Indrabodhi” The <that> dharma-protecting king ruled the kingdom of Uḍḍiyāna. Inside the so-named “Palace of Beryl” that blazed with the light of jewels and was <not> obscured without inside or outside, resided <there was> an innumerable retinue, including 108 queens and outer, inner and intermediate ministers. Since [the king] had no son [to be] prince… .
For lack of space, I shall focus on the same scene set in the sources outlined above, PKT, LTGB, MSGM and finally SP, attributed to O rgyan gling pa, rDo rje gling pa, Padma gling pa and Sangs rgyas gling pa respectively. My reason for dealing with SP last is that LTGB and MSGM corroborate PKT 2013 and so should directly follow its unique witness. SP then confirms the early existence of a PKT chapter not included in either LTGB and MSGM. The prologue from ZL is neither used at the outset nor integrated into the narrative of any of these bka’ thangs. They all also add around eleven chapters of preceding narrative before turning to King Indrabodhi. Yet ZL’s opening narrative on the king’s search for a son can be found, though greatly expanded, in most versions of PKT from chapter twelve to eighteen, PKT 2013 from towards the end of chapter eleven to the end of chapter seventeen, and LTGB, MSGM and SP from towards the end of chapter eleven to the end of chapter fifteen. Most PKTs’ chapter eleven ends with this aphorism:
Many different forms of dharma do not arise and [[[Dharma]]] is not connected with a lot of self-aggrandizement or famous names (snyan ming). This is the eleventh chapter… .
PKT 2013 instead continues and ends its eleventh chapter with a description of Uḍḍiyāna and King Indrabodhi. It states:
Many different forms of dharma do not arise and [[[Dharma]]] is not connected with a lot of self-aggrandizement or famous men (snyan mi; or perhaps snyan ming intended, as above).
At this time, [in] the western country, Uḍḍiyāna,
There was a precious/bejewelled nine-turreted palace.
In [that palace], blazing with light rays of beryl,
[The king] who was empowered over all the lands of Uḍḍiyāna,
Was named “King Blind Rich,”
Also named “Dharmarāja Prajñākīrti,”
Also named “Mahārāja Gaulaśa (?),”
Also named “King Dhanapāla,”
Also named “King Inḍrabhoti (sic).”
This is the eleventh chapter… .
All versions of PKT then provide a twelfth chapter describing
Uḍḍiyāna in detail. The chapter (with divergences of PKT 2013 given in braces) begins:
At this time, [regarding] the western country, Uḍḍiyāna,
{inserts: As for an explanation of the background (lit. “lineage”) of the country of Uḍḍiyāna:}
To Uḍḍiyāna belonged two-thirds of the continent,
It gave the appearance of a pair of face-down {gem-coated} cymbals,
[It contained] five great regions and twenty-one “island” regions, 270,000,000 {290,000,000} great districts, [And] 96 great cities.
In the centre of the great region, Dhanakośa,
There were twenty-two great cities {twenty-one great palaces};
The great[est] city/capital (?) was named “Beautiful.”56
In the centre of that was “Nine-Towered,”
[And/i.e.] the precious/bejewelled palace, “Beryl,”
Majestic with blazing light, on the four corners golden turrets [And] turquoise beam-ends endowed with hangings.
That [palace] had a courtyard and four gates,
Surrounded by a rampart and beautiful parapet.
Inside sat King Indrabodhi {In tra bho ti},
Surrounded by 100 inner ministers and 1,000 outer ministers, {PKT 2013: vacat}
Married to Queen ’Od ’chang ma {’Od chang ma}.
{inserts: Many beings/phenomena spontaneously appeared without being born.}
In the centre of “Nine-Towered” was a self-arisen
Temple that was the stūpa of a heruka/Cakrasaṃvara.
[It was] made from all sorts of precious ornaments,
[and] radiated many waves of light rays in the four directions.
This continues for the rest of chapter twelve, almost two folios worth of text in the Beijing edition. As we shall see below, SP, LTGB and
56 The published and Beijing exemplars of PKT give grong khyer chen po twice, meaning that the text could be read as either stating that the name for the twentytwo cities was “Beautiful Great Cit[ies]” or that the greatest city, i.e. the capital, was named “Beautiful.” PKT 2013 avoids this problem by giving pho brang for grong khyer in the first instance, thus only allowing for the second interpretation.
MSGM omit this chapter; yet SP retains some phrases similar to it at the end of its chapter eleven.
PKT 2013 then diverges from all other PKT exemplars again. The latter begin their thirteenth chapter with the description that ends the eleventh chapter of PKT 2013, and then continue with a stark contrast between the king’s possessions and lack:
In the precious/bejewelled, nine-turreted palace blazing with light rays of beryl,
[The king] who ruled over all the lands of Uḍḍiyāna,
Was named “King Blind Rich,”
Also named “Dharmarāja Prajñākīrti,”
Also named (/broadened to) “Mahārāja Gauśa (?),”
Also named “King Dhanapāla,”
Also named “King Indrabodhi.”
Then that king, “Blind Rich”
[Gained] great power and riches, but his two eyes were blind. He lacked a son. All his royal ministers were dispirited.
The first part (“…’Indrabodhi’”) was quoted above from the end of chapter eleven in PKT 2013. The last part (“Then that king…”) corresponds almost identically to the beginning of PKT 2013’s chapter fourteen. Chapter thirteen of PKT 2013, describing
Dhanakośa Lake, is chapter fourteen in the other exemplars of PKT. Since this chapter is not narrative and so does not “fit” anywhere necessarily, and because SP, LTGB and MSGM all lack the corresponding chapter, it is not possible to adjudicate between the two chapter orders at this point. Putting this small matter aside though, it is obvious that whereas PKT 2013 places its description of Uḍḍiyāna’s king just before its detailed chapter on Uḍḍiyana, the other PKT exemplars place it straight after that chapter. Which has the greater claim to be the “original” place of this description in PKT?
Interestingly, both LTGB attributed to rDo rje gling pa and MSGM attributed to Padma gling pa agree with PKT 2013 (as does, to a lesser extent, SP) against the other exemplars here. To quote from the end of the eleventh and beginning of the twelfth chapter in LTGB:
Many different forms of dharma do not arise, and
A lot of self-aggrandizement [and] famous names (snyan ming) are not necessary.
At this time, [in] the western country, Uḍḍiyāna,
In a precious/bejewelled, nine-turreted palace
Blazing with light rays of beryl,
[Sat] one who held dominion over the regions of Uḍḍiyāna,
Named “King Blind Rich,”
Also named “[[[King]]] Prajñākīrti,”
Also named “Ghaudeśa” (? gha’u dhe sha),
Also named “King Dharmapāla,” Also named “Uḍḍiyāna Indrabodhi.”
This is the eleventh chapter…[[[chapter]] colophon].
Then that king, “Blind Rich” [Gained] great power and riches, but his two eyes were blind. He lacked a son. All his royal ministers were dispirited.
LTGB here agrees in its wording with PKT, especially PKT 2013 in retaining the foot (rkang pa) “At this time, [in] the western country, Uḍḍiyāna.” MSGM concurs, except in a few minor details. Most importantly, they place the description of Uḍḍiyāna and Indrabodhi’s names at the end of their chapter eleven, like PKT 2013 but in contrast to the other PKT exemplars.
However, PKT’s chapter twelve is missing in both LTGB and MSGM. Could it be an interpolation into PKT? The witness of SP here becomes important, since it suggests that Sangs rgyas gling pa was aware of the content of this chapter and incorporated it into his prose description of Uḍḍiyāna. SP also ends its eleventh chapter with a description of Uḍḍiyāna and King Indrabodhi, but a longer one than that found in PKT 2013, LTGB and MSGM. SP’s description of Dhanakośa, its great city and the king’s palace and names closely resemble the end of PKT 2013’s chapter eleven and the first lines of PKT’s shared chapter twelve, albeit in a somewhat different order and with divergences. In this passage I translate the Lhasa xylograph SP, which agrees almost entirely with the Bhutanese edition SP 1985a and SP 2007, also from the SP1 group. I show divergences in SP2 in angle brackets and SP3 in braces. Correspondences with passages in PKT are underlined:
Many different forms of Dharma also do not arise, and the Dharma and two types of superior being have not arisen for the sake of false profundity, self-aggrandizement <self-aggrandizement, false profundity> or the desire for fame (snyan grags). [The dharma] is endowed with virtues as great as that [told above] and become the source of all dharma.
To the west of Bodhgaya (rDo rje gdan) in India, in the middle of that famous country named Uḍḍiyāna, in the great land named Dhanakośa, in the middle of a great city named “Beautiful,”65 “NineTowered” and also “Blazing Jewel,” there was a palace [named] “Blazing Light of Beryl.” And it was adorned with all sorts of precious substances such as four corners and four gates made from seven sorts of precious ornaments, golden turrets and turquoise <omits “turquoise”> beam-ends endowed with hangings.
kyang bya / rgyal po dharma (1977: dharmā) pa la zhes kyang bya / urgyan (1976: u rgyan; 1977: rgyal po) indra (1976: intra; 1977: inṭa) bo (1981: bho) dhi zhes kyang bya / chos rgyal de nyid ’jig rten kun tu grags / urgyan (1976: u rgyan; 1977: u rgyan ghu ru) padma ’byung gnas kyi / skyes rabs rnam thar rgyas par bkod (1977: dkod) pa las / (1977: / chos) khungs btsun par bstan pa’i le’u ste / bcu gcig pa’o / [ornamentation and Uḍḍiyāna script (1976: only Uḍḍiyāna script)] / de nas rgyal po spyan med (1976: mig) ’byor ldan de / longs spyod ’byor pa che ste mig gnyis long / sras med rgyal blon thams cad yid la bcags (1976: brtags; 1977: gcag; 1981: rtags) /. 65 The phrase grong khyer chen po is repeated after its names are given in all exemplars, which suggests that the first term “great city” may be part of the first name, i.e. “Beautiful Great City.”
Furthermore, {from} inside the four gateways to the courtyard, which was surrounded by ramparts <{a rampart}>, sat a great dharma-king who held dominion over all the regions of Uḍḍiyāna <{from}> on the top of a big piled-up throne blazing with jewels. He was named “Dharma-protecting King Indrabhūti <{Indrabodhi}>,” “King with Nine-Topknots/Towers,” “King Blind Rich,” “King Prajñākīrti,” “King Ga’u sha na” and also “King Dharmapāla” (a reprise of his first epithet). From [where he sat], surrounded by 500 queens, 100 inner ministers, 1,000 outer ministers, and 1,000,000,000 subject-ministers <governing ministers>, [the dharma-king] excercised power over the 180,000,000 cities. This is the eleventh chapter… .66
Within group SP1, the Lhasa edition and Bhutanese SP 1985a are almost identical. The book edition SP 2007 differs only in that it
66 Below is a diplomatic edition of the SP Lhasa edition (identical with SP 1982): 39a4–39b4, here A, with references in parentheses to divergences in the Bhutanese SP 1985a (=SP 1992): 44a4–44b6 (here B), SP 2007: 51.16–52.9 (here C; all from group SP1), SP 1988: 30b1–7 (here D), SP 1990a: 60b4–61a8 (here E; both NGMCP texts from group SP2), SP 1997: 34b5–35a4 (F), SP 1983: 42b1–43a1 (G; the Royal manuscript from group SP3): chos lugs mi ’dra ba mang po yang mi ’byung zhing (D: the part of the text corresponding to chos lugs mi ’dra ba mang po yang mi ’byung zhing is illegible) / zab mdog dang / bzang ’dod dang / (DE: bzang ’dod dang / zab mdog dang /) snyan grags ’dod pa’i ched (F: tshad) du chos dang gang zag gnyis ka mi ’byung ba yin no / de lta bu’i che ba’i yon tan du ma dang ldan zhing chos thams cad kyi ’byung gnas su gyur pa rgya gar rdo rje gdan gyi (E: gi) nub phyogs dpal u (C: o) (D: text rje gdan gyi nub phyogs dpal u illegible) rgyan zhes bya bar grags pa’i yul / de’i dbus su yul chen po dha na ko sha bya ba na / grong khyer chen po mdzes ldan zhes kyang bya / thor cog (FG: thor chog) dgu ldan zhes kyang bya / rin chen ’bar ba zhes bya ba’i grong khyer chen po zhig yod pa’i dbus na / rgyal po’i pho brang baiḍūrya’i (E: bai’ du rya’i; FG: baidurya’i) ’od ’bar ba zhig (D: text baiḍūrya’i ’od ’bar ba zhig illegible) yod de / de yang rgyu rin po che sna bdun las grub pa gru bzhi sgo bzhi (G: text sgo bzhi vacat) gser gyi cog (B: lcog; F: tsog) dang g.yu’i (DE: omits g.yu’i) kha bad / dra ba dra phyed dang (E: dang /) ldan pa’i rin po che sna tshogs kyis brgyan pa / de yang khyams sgo khyud bzhi lcags ris bskor ba (DE: bskor ba cig; F: bskor ba gcig; G: skor ba gcig) yod pa’i nang na (FG: nas) / rin po che ’bar ba’i khri chen po brtsegs (EFG: rtsegs) pa’i steng (E: stengs) (D: text brtsegs pa’i steng illegible) du (DEFG: nas) / u (C: o) rgyan gyi yul khams thams cad la dbang bsgyur ba’i chos skyong rgyal po indra bhū ti (DE: intra bho ti; F: intra bho dhi G: inṭa bho dhi) zhes kyang bya / rgyal po thor tshugs (B: thog tsugs; F: thor tsug; G: thor cog) dgu pa (G: dgu ldan) zhes kyang bya / rgyal po spyan med
’byor ldan zhes kyang bya / rgyal po pradzñā girti (C: pradzñā kirti; DE: prañdza gir ti; FG: prañdza gir rti) zhes kyang bya / rgyal po ga’u sha na zhes kyang bya / rgyal po dharma (E: dha na) pha la (D: text po dharma pha la illegible) zhes kyang bya ba’i chos kyi (E: kyis) rgyal po chen po zhig (DFG: cig; E: gcig) bzhugs pa las / btsun mo lnga brgya / nang blon brgya / phyi blon stong / ’bangs (DE: dbang; FG: ’bang) blon khri ’bum gyi ’khor gyis bskor (FG: skor) nas / grong khyer bye ba bco (F: bcwo) brgyad la mnga’ mdzad cing bzhugs so / u (C: o) rgyan gu (F: ghu) ru padma (E: pad ma) ’byung gnas kyi (FG: kyis) skyes rabs rnam thar (D: text skyes rabs rnam thar illegible) rgyas par bkod pa las / khungs btsun (C: btsan) par bstan pa’i le’u ste bcu gcig pa’o /. contains some obvious mistakes (btsan for btsun) and editorial alterations (o rgyan for u rgyan), some of which may have already existed in its exemplar. These are uncovered by the witness of SP Lhasa edition where it agrees with the SP2 group. This latter group’s exemplars, SP 1988 and 1990a, agree in some spellings, ordering of phrases (bzang ’dod dang / zab mdog dang / for zab mdog dang / bzang ’dod dang /) and semantic divergences (dbang blon for ’bangs blon) against SP1. Finally, the Royal manuscript SP 1983 and SP 1997 agree most often with each other, and then are fairly well split between agreeing with SP1 and SP2. It may be then that both these exemplars belong to their own group, SP3.
The differences between the exemplars of SP are generally transmissional though, and relatively minor when compared to the larger divergences of SP from PKT, including PKT 2013. It appears that SP expands in prose the short description of Uḍḍiyāna and King Indrabodhi from PKT at the end of its chapter eleven (like PKT 2013). It incorporates parts of PKT’s shared chapter twelve in this description but does not include the chapter itself. Instead, SP simply moves on to its own chapter twelve, which opens with a description of the king’s wealth and blindness roughly mirroring the beginning of PKT 2013’s chapter fourteen and obviously lacking the description opening chapter thirteen of the other PKT exemplars. SP, in addition to incorporating details from PKT’s chapter twelve at the end of chapter eleven, also includes all of the information quoted above from ZL1, and in the latter’s order. The only exceptions are an increase in the number of queens from 108 to 500, and a lack of ZL1’s specification that the king’s retinue is innumerable. Of course, a great deal is added around this core description, but the contrast with the different ordering of the description in ZL2 and ZL3 is noteworthy. What do these excerpts tell us about PKT? SP agrees with PKT 2013 against the published and Beijing exemplars of PKT in the way that it structures its ending of chapter eleven and beginning of chapter twelve. However, PKT 2013 agrees with other exemplars of PKT against SP in its exact wording at the end of chapter eleven
(found at the beginning of chapter thirteen in all other exemplars of PKT), as well as in including a chapter twelve not present in SP but seemingly roughly borrowed from some version of PKT at the end of its eleventh chapter. If SP does base its description on PKT here, in its details it agrees less with PKT 2013 than with other PKT exemplars. For instance, it omits the rkang pa “As for an explanation of the background of the country of Uḍḍiyāna” and includes information on Indrabodhi’s ministers that PKT 2013 lacks (though perhaps only by scribal error). LTGB and MSGM shine another light on both SP and PKT. They omit some of SP’s odder unique elements, such as naming the king and his palace almost the same (here footnote 13’s caveat concerning possible interpolations into SP should be borne in mind). They also concur with PKT 2013 in their phrasing and placement of the short description at the end of chapter eleven. Overall, LTGB, MSGM and SP appear to corroborate the testimony of PKT 2013 against the Beijing and published exemplars of this work. PKT 2013 agrees more with SP, LTGB and MSGM in ending its chapter eleven with a short description of Uḍḍiyāna (now appearing after chapter twelve in other PKT exemplars), and agrees with all other PKT versions in containing a twelfth chapter on Uḍḍiyāna (now missing from LTGB and MSGM but partially precised in SP). This may reflect the “original” form of PKT, on which these other bka’ thangs are based.
Preliminary Conclusions
It is time now to return to the three intentions set out at the beginning of this article, regarding SP, PKT, and the Padma-vita tradition. First, I can tentatively affirm the general homogeneity of the SP tradition, while categorising the affiliations of its exemplars into three groups based upon transmissional divergences: SP1 (including the Lhasa edition and Bhutanese SP 1985a), SP2 (the two NGMCP manuscripts SP 1988 and 1990a) and SP3 (including the Royal manuscript SP 1983). However, there is no evidence yet to suggest which of these groups lies closer to the other bka’ thangs under discussion here. Second, comparing all these works sheds interesting light on PKT. Combined, LTGB and MSGM resemble SP in that they omit PKT’s chapter twelve and thus a long description of Uḍḍiyāna. This chapter is also found in PKT 2013 though, and its opening appears to be precised in SP chapter eleven. So the evidence indicates that LTGB and MSGM simply reflect a different editorial decision in their creation than SP does. However, PKT 2013 agrees with LTGB, MSGM and SP against other exemplars of PKT in placing the short description of Uḍḍiyāna at the end of chapter eleven. This suggests that an ancestor of the other PKT exemplars has been edited in order to place that description after chapter twelve.
It could be argued that, instead, PKT 2013 was the result of later editing of PKT, perhaps in order to bring it into line with LTGB or MSGM (though not with SP, which is in prose). However, then one would have to find the source for the poetic chapters of Padmasambhava’s advice, which are not found in LTGB or MSGM and are differently phrased in SP. The simplest solution at present is to say that PKT 2013 reflects another, perhaps earlier, recension of PKT that has survived the growth in popularity of the sixteenth, seventeenth and eighteenth-century editions.
Could we explain the divergence of the other PKT exemplars from PKT 2013 as due to the redaction to Za hor Mi dbang bSod nams stobs rgyal, or even to an earlier editor of PKT? The absence, in PKT exemplars other than PKT 2013, of such large blocks of text as Padmasambhava’s chapters of advice is almost certainly not due to the sixteenth-century alteration to which bSod nams stobs rgyal refers in his colophon. This is because these are also found in ZL, which bSod nams stobs rgyal claims to be following (as well as clearing up some minor incoherencies). So it is unlikely that he would remove parts of PKT that are also in ZL, as part of his explicit aim of bringing the former in line with the latter. Nor does it seem credible that he carried out such editing without acknowledging it, though this possibility cannot be absolutely ruled out. Perhaps in future though, PKT 2013 (if its recension is genuinely old) could help to assess what bSod nams stobs rgyal and others have altered.
The entry of ZL into these discussions bring us to the third theme of this article: the expansion of Padmasambhava’s vita between the twelfth and sixteenth century. The earliest stratum of narrative is almost certainly the shorter ZL3 rather than the longer ZL1 or ZL2. SP is still the only work that incorporates ZL1 into its narrative, whereas PKT 2013 contains no extra ZL1 narratives that could have been removed by bSod nams stobs rgyal. Even its many chapters relating Padmasambhava’s advice on leaving Tibet, not included in LTGB, MSGM or other exemplars of PKT, resemble ZL3 rather than ZL1 (see footnote 12 above)—whereas in SP they resemble ZL1.
For now, it seems clear that large portions of the ZL3 prose narrative were expanded and rendered into poetry to finally become included in PKT, LTGB and later MSGM. Then at some point, this poetry was re-rendered into prose and had elements of ZL1 added to ultimately form SP. Assessing such transformations of prose into poetry and vice versa requires a more detailed investigation of the bka’ thang genre, which would be rewarding not only for the Tibetan linguistic data that it may throw up but also for the insights it would provide into the constantly changing image of Padmasambhava created in these works. Nevertheless, these sources are already acting as valuable reminders to question the assumption that the published and Beijing editions of PKT fully represent the bka’ thang that O rgyan gling pa wrote and that SP, LTGB and MSGM are easily described by assessing to what extent each is an “interpretative gloss on” or “sticks closely to” those PKT exemplars.
These sources have yet to be properly disentangled. It may be that a more wide-angle approach that identifies the text included and omitted over the whole narrative arc of the works in question may uncover connections between them not identifiable by the above kind of micro-analysis. Here, I have at least set the scene, and pointed out some of the “richness of detail,” and attendant challenges, awaiting any future analysis of these important biographies. Moreover, if a strikingly different exemplar of any of the above bka’ thangs appears in the meantime, it can be quickly compared to the others, by means of the descriptions above, in order to assess the importance of its witness. In this way, we may work towards a better representation of the rich, complex and changing tradition of depicting Padmasambhava in Tibet.
Tibetan-Language Works
LTGB: Kunzang Tobgyel (ed.). 1984. Orgyan pad ma ’byung gnas kyi skyes rabs lo tsha’i ’gyur byang rnam thar rgyas par bkod pa. Thimphu: Druk Sherig Press. 191 folios; dbu med manuscript (Karmay 2003: entry A.343–1; W23642).
MSGM 1976: “O rgyan padma ’byung gnas kyi ’khrungs rabs sangs rgyas bstan pa’i chos ’byung mun sel sgron me.” In 1975-1976. Rig ’dzin padma gling pa’i zab gter chos mdzod rin po che, volume 21. Thimphu: Kunsang Tobgay. 456 folios; dbu can manuscript (W21727).
MSGM 1977: O rgyan padma ’byung gnas kyi ’khrungs rabs chen mo zhes bya ba sangs rgyas bstan pa’i byung khung mun sel sgron me las rnam thar don gsal me long. Gangtok: Gonpo Tseten. 2 volumes; 566 folios; dbu can manuscript (W00KG03746).
MSGM 1978: O rgyan padma ’byung gnas kyi ’khrungs rabs sangs rgyas bstan pa’i chos ’byung mun sel sgron me. Sumra, Himachal Pradesh: Urgyin Dorji. 2 volumes; 453 folios; dbu med manuscript (W21555).
MSGM 1981: O rgyan padma ’byung gnas kyi ’khrungs rabs sangs rgyas bstan pa’i chos ’byung mun sel sgron me. Thimphu: Drug Sherig Press. 2 volumes; 440 folios; dbu can manuscript (W1CZ3868).
PKT Beijing edition: lCang skya rol pa'i rdo rje (ed.) [1755]. Gu ru padma ’byung gnas kyi rnam par thar pa rgyas par bkod pa. 463 folios; dbu can xylograph (W1KG16912).
PKT book edition: 1987. Padma bka’ thang: gter chen o rgyan gling pas gter nas bton pa. Chengdu: Si khron mi rigs dpe khang. 792 pages; dbu can typeset text (W17320).
PKT 2013: Padma mthang (/ma thang) yid(?). Manuscript from Tawang, photographed by Ngawang Tsepag for Cathy Cantwell and Robert Mayer's University of Oxford project, The Ancient Tantra Collection from Sangyeling (2013). 281 folios; dbu can manuscript.
SP Lhasa edition: U rgyan gu ru padma ’byung gnas kyi rnam thar rgyas pa gser gyi phreng ba thar lam gsal byed. 361 folios; dbu can xylograph (W1PD89340).
SP 1970: Dudjom Rinpoché (ed.). 1970. O rgyan gu ru padma ’byung gnas kyi skyes rabs rnam par thar pa rgyas par bkod pa padma bka’i thang yig. Kalimpong: Eureka Printing Works. 361 folios; dbu can xylograph (W24062).
SP 1982: U rgyan gu ru padma ’byung gnas kyi rnam thar rgyas pa gser gyi phreng ba thar lam gsal byed. NGMCP 58493; reel E 1359/3 (1982). 361 folios; dbu can xylograph.
SP 1983: O rgyan chen po’i rnam thar rgyas pa / yid bzhin nor bu / dgos mdod (=’dod) kun ’byung / mthong ba kun grol / pod dmar ma chen mo mang ngag dud (=bdud) rtsi’i chu rgyun. NGMCP 62785; reel E 1755/3 (1983). 378 folios; dbu can manuscript.
SP 1985a: U rgyan gu ru padma ’byung gnas kyi rnam thar rgyas pa gser gyi phreng ba thar lam gsal byed. 1985. Thimpu: National Library of Bhutan. 397 folios; dbu can xylograph (W27933).
SP 1985b: rGyas pa gser phreng las ma ṇi phan yon. NGMCP 60284; reel E 1855/12 (1985). 6 folios; dbu can manuscript.
SP 1988: O rgyan gu ru padma ’byung gnas kyi rnam thar skyes rab gser gyi ’phreng ba zhes bya ba thar lam gsal byed. NGMCP 47019; reel L 205/8 (1988). 282 folios; dbu can xylograph.
SP 1990a: U rgyan gu ru rin po che’i rnam thar rgyas pa gser gyi phreng ba. NGMCP 47714; reel L 269/2 (1990). 526 folios; dbu can manuscript.
SP 1990b: [no title page, chapter colophon title: U rgyan pad ma ’byung gnas kyi skyes rabs rnam thar rgyas par bkod pa]. NGMCP 48039; reel L 300/2–301/1 (1990). Second volume (kha). 282 folios; dbu can manuscript.
SP 1992: U rgyan gu ru padma ’byung gnas kyi rnam thar rgyas pa gser gyi phreng ba thar lam gsal byed. NGMCP 70523; reel AT 92/3 (1992). 394 folios; dbu can xylograph.
SP 1991: [bKa’ thang gser phreng las.] NGMCP 74344; reel AT 84/7 (1991). 5 folios; dbu med manuscript.
SP 1996: U rgyan gu ru pad ma 'byung gnas kyis skye rabs rnam thar rgyas par bkod pa'i nang nas/lha lcam man dha ra ba'i rnam thar khol du phyung ba le'u dgu pa. NGMCP 39287; reel L 757/2 (1996). 39 folios; dbu med manuscript.
SP 1997: U rgyan ghu ru padma ’byung gnas kyi rnam mthar (=thar) rgyas pa gser gyi phreng ba bzhes bya ba / pu ri phug mo che shel gyis (=gyi) brag phug nas/ghu ru sangs rgyas gling pas gter nas gdan drangs pas gzhan gyi bcos pa sna gcig kyang med pa’i gter ma. NGMCP 40435; reel L 888/1 (1997). 313 folios; dbu can manuscript.
SP 2007: U rgyan gu ru padma ’byung gnas kyi rnam thar rgyas pa gser gyi phreng ba thar lam gsal byed Lhasa: Bod ljongs mi dmangs dpe skrun khang. 488 pages; dbu can typeset text (W1PD83975).
ZLa: 1976. “Slob dpon padma ’byung gnas kyi skyes rabs chos ’byung nor bu’i phreng ba zhes bya ba bzhugs so/rnam thar zangs gling ma’o.” In Rin chen gter mdzod chen mo, edited by Ngodrup and Sherab Drimay, volume ka, 1–204. Paro: Ngodrup and Sherab Drimay. 102 folios; dbu can xylograph.
ZLf: U rgyan gu ru padma ’byung gnas kyi rnam thar ’bring po zangs gling mar grags pa. NGMCP 54683; reel AT 28/2 (1989). 148 folios; dbu can manuscript.
ZLh: Padma bka’ chems brgyas pa. NGMCP 61057; reel E 2703/10 (1992). 123 folios; dbu med manuscript.
Other-Language Works
Ardussi, John and Françoise Pommaret (eds.). 2007. Bhutan: Traditions and Changes. Proceedings of the Tenth Seminar of the International Association for Tibetan Studies, Oxford 2003. Volume 5. Brill’s Tibetan Studies Library, 10. Leiden: Brill.
Aris, Michael. 1979. Bhutan: The Early History of a Himalayan Kingdom. Warminster, England: Aris & Phillips.
Blondeau, Anne-Marie. 1977–1978. “Padmasambhava et Avalokiteśvara.” Annuaire de l’École Pratique des Hautes Études, Ve. section 87, 99–106.
———. 1980. “Analysis of the Biographies of Padmasambhava According to the Tibetan Tradition: Classification of Sources.” In Tibetan Studies in Honour of Hugh Richardson: Proceedings of the International Seminar on Tibetan Studies, Oxford 1979, edited by Michael Aris and Aung San Suu Kyi, 45–52. Warminster: Aris & Phillips.
Dargyay, Eva. 1979. The Rise of Esoteric Buddhism in Tibet. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.
Deroche, Marc-Henri. 2013. “History of the Forgotten MotherMonastery of the rNying ma School: dPal ri Monastery in the Tibetan ’Valley of the Emperors.’” Bulletin of Tibetology 49(1), 77– 111.
Doney, Lewis. 2014. The Zangs gling ma: The First Padmasambhava Biography. Two Exemplars of its Earliest Attested Recension. Series Monumenta Tibetica Historica, Abteilung 2 (Vitae), Band 3. Andiast: International Institute for Tibetan and Buddhist Studies.
Ehrhard, Franz-Karl. 2000. Early Buddhist Block Prints from Mang-yul Gung-thang. Lumbini International Research Institute Monograph Series, 2. Lumbini: Lumbini International Research Institute.
———. 2004. Die Statue und der Tempel des Ārya va-ti bzang po: Ein beitrag zu Geschichte und Geographie des tibetischen Buddhismus. Wiesbaden: Dr. Ludwig Reichert Verlag.
———. 2008. “Addressing Tibetan Rulers from the South: mChogldan mgon-po (1497-1531) in the Hidden Valleys of Bhutan.” In Chomolangma, Demawend and Kasbek: Festschrift für Roland Bielmeier zum 65. Geburtstag, vol. 1, edited by Brigitte Huber, 61–91. Beiträge zur Zentralasienforschung, 12:1. Halle: International Institute for Tibetan and Buddhist Studies.
———. 2013. “The Royal Print of the Maṇi bka’ ’bum: Its Catalogue and Colophon.” In Nepalica-Tibetica: Festgabe für Christoph Cüppers, Vol. 1, edited by Franz-Karl Ehrhard and Petra Maurer, 143–171. Beiträge zur Zentralasienforschung, 28. Andiast: International Institute for Tibetan and Buddhist Studies.
———. forthcoming. “Buddhist Hagiographies from the Borderlands: Further Prints from Mang yul Gung thang” In Manuscript and Xylograph Traditions in the Tibetan Cultural Sphere, edited by Orna Almogi. Indian and Tibetan Sudies Series. Hamburg: University of Hamburg Press.
Ginzburg, Carlo (A.C. and J. Tedeschi transl.). 2012 [2006]. Threads and Traces: True False Fictive. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Kapstein, Matthew T. 2000. The Tibetan Assimilation of Buddhism: Conversion, Contestation, and Memory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
———. “gTer-ma as Imperial Treasure: The 1755 Beijing Edition of the Padma bka’ thang.” Revue d'Études Tibétaines 31, 167–87.
Karmay, Samten Gyaltsen. 1988. The Great Perfection (Rdzogs Chen): A Philosophical and Meditative Teaching of Tibetan Buddhism. Leiden: Brill.
———. 2000. “Dorje Lingpa and His Rediscovery of the ‘Gold Needle’ in Bhutan.” Journal of Bhutan Studies 2(2), 1–34.
———. 2003. The Diamond Isle: A Catalogue of Buddhist Writings in the Library of Ogyen Chöling, Bhutan. Wien: Arbeitskreis für Tibetische und Buddhistische Studien, Universität Wien.
van der Kuijp, Leonard. 2010. “On the Edge of Myth and History: Za hor, its Place in the History of Early Indian Buddhist Tantra, and Dalai Lama V and the Genealogy of its Royal Family.” In Studies on Buddhist Myths: Texts, Pictures, Traditions and History, edited by Bangwei Wang et al., 114–64. Shanghai: Zhongxi Book Company.
Kunsang, Erik Pema. 1999. The Lotus-Born: The Life Story of Padmasambhava Composed by Yeshe Tsogyal, Revealed by Nyang Ral Nyima Öser. London: Shambhala.
Laufer, Berthold. 1911. Der Roman einer tibetischen Königin. Leipzig: Otto Harrassowitz.
Martin, Dan. 1997. Tibetan Histories: A Bibliography of Tibetan-Language Historical Works. London: Serindia.
Schlagintweit, Emil. 1899. “Die Lebensbeschreibung von Padma Sambhava, dem Begründer des Lamaismus 747 n. Chr., I. Teil: Die Vorgeschichte, enthaltend die Herkunft und die Familie des Buddha Śākyamuni.” Abhandlungen der philosophisch-philologischen Classe der Königlich Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften 21, 417–444.
Tucci, Giuseppe. 1949. Tibetan Painted Scrolls (2 vols.). Rome: Libreria dello Stato.
Vostrikov, A. I. (H. C. Gupta transl.). 1994 [completed 1936]. Tibetan Historical Literature. Surrey: Curzon Press.
