Mirror of the Buddha: Early Portraits from Tibet.pdf

David Jackson

Traditional Tibetan art is largely the fruit of Buddhism; it is meant to convey spiritual truths.In their art, Tibetans aimed at faithfully transmitting and preserving Buddhism as a spiritual discipline as they had learned it from Indian Buddhist teachers. Each thangka painting was a small contribution to the larger cause of keeping Buddhism alive and radiant. In this third volume in the Masterworks of Tibetan Painting Series, David Jackson and Christian Luczanits investigates painted portraits of early Tibetan teachers. Images of these eminent personages embodied Buddhist ideals in human form. In creating these depictions, Tibetan painters of the 12th through the 14th centuries imitated the artistic conventions developed in Pala- and Sensa-ruled eastern India (Bengal). This style, called Sharri, spread from India to many parts of Asia, but its classic Indian forms, delicate colors, and intricate decorative details were emulated most faithfully by the Tibetans. Contributions by Christian Luczanits.

This catalog is published in conjunction with an exhibition organized and presented by the Rubin Museum of Art, New York, October 7, 2011 , through February 27, 2012, and curated by David P. Jackson and Christian Luczanits. The Mirror of the Buddha is the third volume in the Masterworks ()(Tibetan Painting Series by David P. Jackson, published by the Rubin Museum of Art, New York, and distributed by the University of Washington Press, Seaule and London. Copyright © 201 I by Rubin Museum of Art All rights reserved. This book may not be reproduced in whole or in any part, in any form (beyond the copying permiued by Sections 107 and 108 of the U.S. Copyright Law and except by reviewers for the public press) without permission from the Rubin Museum of Art. ISBN 978-0-9845190-2-6 (hardcover) ISBN 978-0-9845190-3-3 (softcover) Project Director. Helen Abbou Project Assistant, Helen Chen Designed by Phil Kovacevich Maps by Anandaroop Roy Printed and bound in Iceland All photographs by Bruce M. White, unless otherwise noted Front cover: detail of Fig. 5.2 Back cover: detail of Fig. 4.1 J Frontispiece: detail of Fig. 5.4 p. vi: detail of Fig. 322 p. viii: Fig. 53 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Jackson, David Paul. Mirror of the Buddha: early portraits from Tibet from the Masterworks of Tibetan painting series I David P. Jackson. p. em. - (Masterworks of Tibetan painting ; 3) Published in conjunction with an exhibition held at the Rubin Museum of Art. New York, Oct. 7, 201 1- Feb. 27. 2012. Includes bibliographical references. ISBN-13: 978-0-9845190-2-6 (hardcover) ISBN-10: 0-9845190-2-5 (hardcover) ISBN-13: 978-0-9845 I90-3-3 (softcover) ISBN- I 0: 0-9845 J90-3-3 (softcover) I. Buddhist saints in art--Exhibitions. 2. Buddhist painting--Tibet Region-Exhibitions. 3. Tankas (Tibetan scrolls) I. Rubin Museum of Art (New York, N.Y.) II. Title. ill. Title: Early portraits from Tibet from the Masterworks of Tibetan painting series. ND 1432.T55J33 20 II 755' .9436109515- dc23 2011030047 CONTENTS VII FOUNDER'S STATEMENT lX FOREWORD x PREFACE 1 CHAPTER I: Introduction 35 CHAPTER 2: Human Types in Tibetan Iconography: Essential Distinctions 67 CHAPTER 3: Paintings ofEarly Teachers ofTibetan Buddhist Schools 105 CHAPTER 4: Early Taklung Kagyii Paintings and Their Lineage Conventions 13 3 CHAPTER 5: Reflections of Enlightenment in Three Early Portraits 171 CHAPTER 6: Siddhas, Hierarchs, and Lineages: Three Examples for Dating Tibetan Art BY CHRISTIAN LUCZANITS APPENDICES: Inscriptions on FourThangkas, Transcribed by Christian Luczanits 194 APPENDIX A: Inscriptions on a Painting of Six Indian and Tibetan Gurus 198 APPENDIX B: Inscriptions on a Painting ofSanggye Onpo 200 APPENDIX C: Inscriptions on a Painting ofPhagmotrupa with His Previous Lives 202 APPENDIX D: Inscriptions on a Painting ofTaklungthangpa Chenpo 204 Notes 219 Bibliography 224 Index FouNDER's STATEMENT DONALD RuBIN, Co-FOUNDER RuBIN MuSEUM OF ART for many reasons- to honor and remember a loved one, to immortalize a great leader, to capture the beauty of youth at its moment of perfection. The list goes on. I have a portrait in my office of my father, a great American labor leader, that was painted by the important American artist Rafael Soyer, and every day it reminds me of my father 's influence on my life, and the lives of many others. When we look at the portraits of teachers presented in this catalog, Mirror ofthe Buddha, the third in the series " Masterpieces of Tibetan Painting " by David Jackson, we feel that we know them because of the human features depicted- balding heads, peculiar facial hair, or protruding teeth. They look like people we might have met just yesterday. And in feeling that connection, we receive the inspiration they offer us- great saints all of themPORTRAITS ARE PAINTED reaching across time and space. Buddhist devotees in Tibet would respond to these images in much the same way that we Americans respond to the portraits of our great secular heroes that hang in the National Portrait Gallery in Washington. The pictures of presidents and activists who stood for the ideals and values of our society inspire us to embody those values ourselves. This is the common character of excellent portraits of great human beings- they humanize the ideals we hold most dear, be they rei igious truths or, as in my father's case, secular progressive justice. I hope that visitors to the exhibition and readers of this catalog will benefit from David Jackson 's incisive scholarship and his insights into the lives of these venerated men, and will be touched by this art in a way similar to the way that I am reminded of my father each time I look at Soyer's portrait. LOANS TO THE EXHIBITION ARE FROM THE FOLLOWING ESTEEMED COLLECTORS AND COLLECTIONS: Brooklyn Museum Stephen and Sharon Davies Collection The John and Be1the Ford Collection at The Walters Art Museum, Baltimore The Kronos Collections, New York Navin Kumar Collection, New York Collection Mimi Lipton Michael J. and Beata McCormick, New York The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York Musee Guimet, Paris Nyingjei Lam Collection Phoenix Art Museum Pritzker Colleciton Private Collection Private Collection. Switzerland Private USA Family Collection Collection R.R.E. Virginia Museum of Fine Arts Yixi Pingcuo Zimmerman Fan1ily Collection, New York This publication is supported by a generous grant from The Henry Luce Foundation. MIRROR OF THE BUDDH A Vll FoREW ORD ] AN VAN ALPHEN, CHIEF CuRATOR R uBIN MuSEUM OF ART received their first models for Buddhist art from India, the county of the religion's origins. Over time, painting and sculpture styles were mediated by the Newar artists of the Kathmandu Valley, Chinese influences were incorporated, and Tibetan Buddhist art evolved, while maintaining the TIBETAN ARTISTS general iconography and hierarchies established by those primary Indian models. In this third book in his masterly series of eight on Tibetan painting styles. David Jackson goes back in time from the subjects of his first two books to explore works painted in an early style, one that is clearly derived from eastern India, that is Bengal , under Plila and Sena rule. This old Tibetan painting style was called the Sharri (shar meaning "eastern" and ris meaning "painting"). It flourished from around the eleventh to the mid-fourteenth century, when the Beri style became universally practiced in Tibet. Jackson as a historian exan1ines individual paintings, comparing their styles, especially the Sharri and Beri, and checki ng their inscriptions and the lineages they portray, in many cases using this information to date the works. Jackson is one among a small group of noted scholars in the field of the art history of Tibet, and he offers us a summary and learned critique of those few others who have attempted portray early Buddhist teachers, some of whom are rendered with remarkable individuality revealing their great humanity. Their faces tell us a human story, just as their robes and attributes tell us a saintly one. The title of the book and the exhibition it accompanies, Mirror of the Buddha.: Early Portra.ils from Tibet, derives from the notion that students and followers of great lamas worshiped their teachers as fu lly enlightened buddhas and so might commission paintings that portrayed them as such. Jackson fully explores this notion of guru worship and its artistic outcomes, noting the conflicting tendencies present in such paintings- depicting the idealized saint and the recognizable human teacher at the same time. In the final chapter in the book Christian Luczanits discusses murals at AI chi in which the teacher was understood to be equal to a buddha and proposes that the Alchi murals are even more explicit in that regard than in depictions of teachers in paintings on cloth from central Tibet. Together David Jackson and Christian Luczanits present us with a rich and interesting investigation of an early Tibetan painting style and the lives of those early teachers portrayed so vividly. to analyze the works of art presented here. He also shows us that the paintings can be enjoyed simply for their subject matter and the quality of their workmanship. Most of these pai ntings MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA IX PREFACE D AVID j ACKS O N ALTHOUGH Tibetan scroll paintings (thangkas) can entrance the viewer with their intricacy and grandeur, beneath it the most faithfully. When looking at early thangkas in this style, we can sometimes get the eerie feeling that we stylistic distinctions and summarize previous research on the Sharri style. Chapter 2 explains essential distinctions that striking surface resides a realm of deeper meani ng. Traditional Tibetan art are looking at the last phases of Indian Buddhist art. Tibetan Sharri-sty le thangkas from the twelfth century, in all their among human types in Tibetan iconography. Chapter 3 presents examples of early paintings of teachers from the glorious detail , may be the c losest we will ever get to seeing what large-forn1at Indian paintings once looked like. Kadam, Karma Kagyii, Sai-:ya, and Geluk Schools of Buddhism practiced in Tibet. Chapter 4 investigates how The eastern-Indian-ins pired Sharri painting style was initially patronized in Tibet most zealously by early masters of lineage conventions were used in early Taklung KagyO paintings, especially as they survi ved at the monastery of the Kadam School of Buddhism. Within a few generations, masters of many other traditions also commissioned paintings in this sty le, w hich became the dominant Riwoche in eastern Tibet. Chapter 5 explores visual reflections of Buddhist enlightenment in early paintings of three Dakpo KagyO founding masters. In style in 0 Provi nce of central Tibet from about 11 50 to 1300. The seeds for the eventual abandonment of the Sharri sty le were sown with the destruction of the chapter 6 Christian Luczanits presents his in-depth study of three noteworthy examples for the dating of early Tibetan great Buddhist monasteries (vihiiras) in northern lndia in 120 I, after which the Indic sister style, the Beri, came more I was happy to present a summary of chapter 4 at the University of California in Berkeley on March II , and more to the fore. Among Sharri-style paintings of Tibet, we wi ll concentrate in the present 20 I0, in a Khyentse Foundation Lecture in Tibetan Buddhism and to benefit from Christian Luczanits's remarks during the publ ication mainly on depictions of saints. Paintings of holy men are some of the most typical forms of Tibetan following workshop. A few weeks later I also had the privi lege to spend several weeks at the International College for art. They embody an essential aspect of Vajrayana mysticism: guru devotion. These paintings were commissioned as objects for worship. As sacred icons, Postgraduate Buddhist Studies, Tokyo, at the invitation of Dr. Florin Deleanu, where I presented a synopsis of chapter 5 in a pub! ic lecture. At the RMA I am very grateful to is the frui t of Buddh ism; it is meant to convey spi ritual truths or to facilitate practices that lead to such truths. In their art, Tibetans aimed at faithfully transmitting and preserving Buddhism as a spiritual discipline as they had learned it from their Indian Buddhist teachers, either directly from them or through a transmission that included carl y Tibetan teachers. Each thangka painting was a small contribution to the larger cause of keeping Buddhism alive and aglow. Within the wide expanse of Tibetan Buddhist art, I would like to investigate in the present book e.arly painted portraits of saints. Images of saints embodied Buddhist ideals in concrete human form . To depict them, painters used artistic conventions that \vere developed in India and intensively emulated by Tibetans, especially from the eleventh to the thirteenth century. The main sty le presented in this catalog, the Sharri (shar ris) or Gyagar Sharri (1gya gar shar ris) style, is an early one among major Tibetan painting styles. It derived from the painting traditions of eastern India from the time of the Piila and Sena dynasties. Except for a few illuminated manuscripts, examples of other types of painting do not survive in India. The Sharri style spread from India not o nly to Tibet but also to many other parts of Asia; however, the Tibetans emulated X PREFACE such portraits of saints were highly sty Iized, and yet the faces were usually based on realistic renderings made during the life of the master depicted. This catalog comprises six chapters. In the first I introduce some key paintings. Helen Abbott for weaving together again with consummate skill and patience the sometimes rough and uneven threads making up this catalog. She was supported by the expert editorial help of Helen Chen, Neil Liebman, and Kim Riback and the design of Phil Kovacevich, a true artist with books. Christian Luczanits was a great help, generously sharing his deep expertise by commenting on the manuscript and contributing useful ideas to the related exhibition. Karl Debreczeny gave much appreciated support at various stages, as did Jan van Alphen and Tracey Friedman. Many others at the Rubin Museum of Art must be acknowledged for contributions large and small: Vincent Baker, Kavie Barnes, Michelle Bennett, Martin Brauen, Amy Bsdak, Andrew Buttennilch, Marilena Christodoulou, Alisha Ferrin, Cate Griffin, Zachary Harper, Jonathan Kuhr, Ashley Mask, Tim McHenry, Alexis McCormack, John Monaco, Shane Murray, Anne-Marie Nolin, Andrea Pemberton, Alanna Schindewolf, Patrick Sears, Marcos Stafne, Taline Toutounjian, David Townsend, and David Wilburn. Early Tibetan paintings in the lndic Sharri style have always been for me one of the most challenging and impenetrable areas of Tibetan art history. They still are. Nevertheless, ancient painted portraits of saints are certainly worthy of being included within this series of catalogs. I therefore decided to present in this volume the results of my own preliminary forays into this field. The gap of just a year between this and the previous catalog did not leave much time for investigating individual paintings. A number of puzzles remain unsolved. Still, I am glad to invite the reader to join me now in exploring these works of rare magnificence and mystery. NOTE TO THE READER in captions to figures, we may assume that all thangkas were painted with distemper on TO AVOID REDUNDANCIES cotton and created in the Tibetan cultural region, un less otherwise specified. When the text refers to HAR (Himalayan Art Resources), the reader is invited to find more information about a work of art at himalayanart.org. using the number given after HAR. Some terms and nan1es are given in transliterated Tibetan on the first occurrence in the text. These terms will also be found in the index. Diacritical marks are not provided for words of Sanskrit origin if they are familiar to English readers. ln the main body of the text, Tibetan proper nouns are rendered phonetically, accompanied by Wy lie Romanization on the first occurrence. When appropriate, names quoted from inscriptions or lists of names remain in transliteration. In endnotes, appendices, and footnotes , Tibetan names are Romani zed. Some common Sanskrit terms or names with the character ca have been spelled as if it were aspirated, i.e., as cha: Vairocana = Vairochana M IRR OR OF THE BUDDHA XI . : 90' E .. ..i .' .ii .l .................... . .' ("'' ' '' ' ' ' ' ' '' ' ' ' '' ' -: I MONGOLIA ~ ... ,Tur«M ~<Q. ~ :> .•......... . . .. . .. • • • • • • • • ,. • • • • t • • • • • • • • .. • • • ••• . .~Ounbua.ng ..... ... .. . , . •• • • • • • ' · " . .. ' ' ... ...... .. ..... . ........ . ~ . . .." . 1 .. • • • + " . .. .. rca-Jom<t k • • CHINA ........ ... ...... Lanzhou0 :. .. ... ·~ •• TIBET •• "'-"<, ........ .. ~. . . . .. ~ TS(I 0 TSANG ........ • .. ~ Jleotj,.,. • ··::r ' ..Taklung• ... ' ... . , .. .. . .. • • · · · · ' · ' · · : o,. ~ Chengdu 0 """"'" """ .. :;... ... . ...... ,ChaMdo New Oelh'cr ' Dmmll - ASSAM Satnath .d. Varanast (Benares) •Sanc:li Nal.&nda YUNNAN :Ra'gif 8odhgaya • *K~har M<Jgadho """"""" BURMA INDIA 10' H ._' .. ... ..... .... ORISSA . ...., .. . ... ·:. ........ . .. .. LEGEND . . . ' .. ' . . .. . . . . . .. . .. . . . . .. . . ... .... ·: .... ' ' .. .... ..... ... ... ... .... . Capital {:( • Moroastt'f)' DJJtdct 0 ~or monument STATE/PROVINCE 200 ml 0 ~---------L----~~ km 0 ( Xll MA P S ... ' ..... . ~ ll'N .. . ... ..... .... .........................,.-, gfE.:.·· • • : 88"E .. . ... .. -' .. ... .... ......' . . . . . . .. -. ... ' . . -... .. ...... .. . . .... ._..,.. . .. . ... ' TsoNgon ; N.a.kchu • TIBET Nom T.so TSANG Oamshung Mt. Nye:nchen Tanglha.., faklul'lg • Yangpac_heft• •Uyuk LatO • lhatse : . sakya Shekar Dlngri ·- Nanang. 'Chumig • Shalu Jhundrup _origunQ ,Meldro Gung:ka.r Phenpo ~lendra •l~hu .Hamling · . mang Puntsold~ng.~ l ashilhunpo!>Sh1gatse • Gand~• Tolu:ng Oe<hen• Nyemo, ,Rlnpung Chusar, V Kongpo • Taktse lhasa Lhokho ~mye . oensatil :Tsethang Gongbr• Dranang • ttorathang Hedong E Lhagyarf Choouo.._.• .Yartung • .. ,.,,• Yaung Dakpo l'umoYtUSO ARUNACHAL PRADESH ' ..... .. .. " .. .."' .. .. .......... . . --··· •• •• •• ... J ~ LEGEND NEPAL ~Capital , Town 4 District INDIA Mountcun STA TE/PRDVINCE lOOmi 0 0 lOOkm MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA Xlll C HAPTER I Introduction THIS BOOK AIMS to investigate early Tibetan paintings of Buddhist saints, focusing mainly on thangkas that were painted in the Sharri (shar ris) style and are datable to the twelfth through fourteenth century. Originating in Piila- and Sena-ruled eastern India (I 050-1230), paintings in that style have virtually disappeared from their place of birth, except for a number of illuminated manuscripts and a few severely damaged murals. Not a single painting on cloth from northeastern India in the " Pala" style is known to survive, so its surviving Tibetan manifestations in thangka paintings are all the more precious. 1 TIBETAN NAME FOR THE SHARRI STYLE In this catalog, I have used the name " Sharri style" for the old Tibetan painting style that derived from Pal a- and Sena-ruled eastern India. That name is made up of two parts: shar (eastern [Indian]) and ris (painting), and it thus seems to specify the origin of the style as eastern India, i.e., Bengal. Though Sharri as a term is clear enough within the context of traditional Tibetan histories oflndian Buddhist art, for contemporary art historians in Tibet it could easily become ambiguous, since it does not specify which country's eastern part is meant. Thus, as a term of Tibetan and not Indian art history, we should actually use the full form Gyagar Sharri (Painting of Eastern India, rgya gar shar bris) Dernil of Fig. 1.2 In previous catalogs I called the san1e style the "Eastern- Indian style'>2 or the "(Tibetan) Pala style." 3 According to the Tibetan historian of Indian Buddhism Jonang Taranatha ( 1575- 1634) and the later authority on art Kongtriil Lotro Thaye (Kong sprul Blo gros mtha' yas, 1813- 1899), who followed his account, there existed distinct artistic traditions in the Indian provinces of Magadha (Tib. dbus, roughly equivalent to modern Bihar) and Bengal (Tib. shar) during the time that Buddhism still flourished there 4 Those Tibetan authorities used the term Sharri to designate the painting of both Magadha (the Buddhist heartland) and Bengal (eastern India) in the Pala and Sena periods. For instance, Kongtriil in his passage on art in his Shes bya kun khyab encyclopedia follov.'S Taranatha in distinguishing the " painting of Eastern India (or Bengal)" (shar ris) from the "painting style ofMagadha" (dbus J.yi ri mo), mentioning that the Magadha School followed the tradition of an outstanding artist who was also the father of an artist, while to the east a tradition was established that followed the style of his son. 5 The son's tradition, the shar ris style, is said to have grown in scope and later covered not just eastern India (Bengal) but also Magadha. 6 Taranatha and Kongtriil refer with the term Sharri (eastern painting) to paintings that were made in India, as a term oflndian art history. In this book I use it to designate the corresponding painting style that it inspired in Tibet. Though it is not a widely established term like Beri (Bal ris) or Menri (sMan ris), at least one key Tibetan authority alluded to it when surveying Tibetan painting styles. The eighteenth-century eastern-Tibetan authority on art Deumar Geshe Tendzin Phiintshok (De' u dmar dGe bshes bsTan ' dzin phun tshogs) devoted a few words to Tibetan paintings that originated from types of Eastern [Indian] Art (shar phyogs b=o ), treating such paintings as a Tibetan stylistic subtype. He briefly mentioned it just after his three terse verses describing what he called "the sacred painting tradition oflndia, the Exalted Land" (rgya gar 'phags yullha ris lugs). 7 The element shar (eastern [Indian]) occurs in several related Tibetan terms for art. We find it, for instance, in shar gyi bzo, a blanket term for easternIndian Pala-Sena art. Shar li is another example; it denotes bronzes (/i = lima) of eastern (shar = Pala-Sena India, i.e., Bengal), though it usually refers to Indian bronzes surviving in Tibet, not Tibetan statues in that style. 8 If we wish to use Tibetan terminology, we should differentiate lugs or b=o as general words for (artistic) "tradition" and " workmanship," from /ha " [sculpted] deity," /i " bronze," and ris " painting," thus distinguishing the terms that denote statues from those denoting paintings. CoNTRASTING PoRTRAITS rN Two STYLES Though my main subject is portraits painted in the Sharri style, a few other painted portraits that represent the Beri MIRROR OF THE B U DDHA I style-the second main lndic style of Tibetan painting and the successor style to the Sharri- will also be studied in this book. To highlight the differences between the Sharri and the Nepaleseinspi red Beri style, it is good to learn here at the beginning some of the key stylistic features that distinguish them. In paintings of peaceful deities, early works in the Sharri style can usually be distinguished from early Beri paintings by: I. Multicolor borders of inlaid jewels (unlike the thin gold or yellow outer borders of the Beri) 2. Thicker multicolor head nimbuses of the main figures 3. Decorative arches behind a main peaceful figure that feature fabulous animals (such a geese or makara), whose tails become a stylized series of alternating blue and red bumps, which serve as an outer head nimbus 4. Triangular (not tear-shaped) jewel settings in crowns of peaceful deities or human royalty One of the most effective ways to contrast styles can be to compare two paintings of the same subject Let us compare Figures 1.1 and 1.2, which both depict the Indian saint Siikya5ribhadra ( 1140s-1225) with episodes from his life. Figure 1.1 portrays the great Indian saint in the Sharri style. Typical Sharri features include its multicolor border and the head nimbus of the main figure. The main figure sits within a classic Indian temple, which features Sharristyle decorations such as on the tips of plinths and other horizontal architectural members. (See Fig. 1.9.) The painting depicts episodes from Sak-ya5ribhadra's life in the series of alternating red and blue rectangles around the outer borders, which were typical of narrative paintings of the fourteenth century. Crucial for dating this painting is the brieflineage below the main figure, 2. CHAPTER 1 which show-s a subsequent lineage of monastic ordination founded by the great teacher. The lineal gurus include a Tibetan learned monk wearing a red pundit hat, who is probably Sakya Pandita (Sa skya Pa•~Qita, 1182-125 1). Based on his presence, we can deduce that the patron flourished in about the early fourteenth century. Figure 1.2 is the second portrait of Siik-ya5ribhadra with episodes from his life. It portrays roughly the same subject as Figure 1.1a, but here depicting him (on the left) as one of two eminent monks. It is painted not in the Sharri style but rather in the Beri style. It uses the thin gold borders and dividing strips typical of the Beri style and the main figures have a simpler fiG. 1.1 Siikyasribhadra with His life Episodes and lineage Ca. early 14th century 33 x 25 \4 in. (83.8 x 64.3 em) Private Collection literature: G. Tucci 1949, pp. 334-39 and pl. 6-7; P. Pal 1984, no. 5; and P. Pal1997, no. 22. fiG. I.2 SaJ.:ya~ribhadra with His Life Episodes and Disciple Ca. mid to late 14th cenrury 28 -Y.. x 32 lA in. (72 x 82 em) Private Collection Literarure: A. Heller 1999, p. 85f., no. 64; and D. Jackson 2010, fig. 7.4. MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA 3 fiG. I.IA, DETAIL head nimbus than that of the Sharri style. (Compare the border and nimbus details in Figs. 1.1 a and 1.2a.) The two main figures represent two gurus from an important ordination Iin, eage: the Kashmiri abbot Sakyasribhadra and probably one of his Tibetan disciples. ll1e surrounding squares depict episodes from the first master's life in India, before he came to Tibet in 1203. Except for the main figures, no internal evidence can be used to date the painting more precisely, other than the fact that it must postdate its main subjects, the first of w hom died in 1225. The painting is considered one of the oldest extant biographical paintings and is roughly contemporaneous with the other depiction of Siil-')'a4ribhadra 9 But I believe it to be a generation or two later than Figure !.Ia. Though both portraits lack inscriptions, the Sharri version is somewhat easier to date as the final guru in its lineage can be roughly dated with the he! p of iconography. 4 CHAPTER 1 Another rare pair of paintings, Figures 1.3 and 1.4, can serve as a good comparison because both depict the Tibetan lama Yazang Choje (g.Ya' bzang Chos rje Chos smon lam, 1169- 1233), founder ofYazang Monastery, with lineages. 10 They are quite similar at first glance not only in iconography but also in coloring. Yet if we closely examine the first, Figure 1.3, it reveals itself to be in the Sharri style. We can make this assessment by noting just two key hallmarks of the style: the typical Sharri bejeweled outer border and colorful head nimbuses. The second portrait of that lama, Figure 1.4, is obviously very similar, though considerably smaller. When we examine its stylistic details, especially its outer border and central head nimbus, we note key stylistic differences. It possesses the gold border strips and simpler head nimbus typical of the Beriu (Compare the details of the borders and nimbuses in Figs. 1.3a and 1.4a.) This pair of paintings is otherwise unusually similar for works painted in two FIG. I.2A, DETAIL difrerent styles. The similarity may be because the artist of the Beri painting copied a Sharri original. 12 Both Figures l.la and 1.3a possess the typical multicolor border of inlaid jewels of the Sharri. That border is found in most paintings in that style, the main exception being paintings whose backgrmmd is a stylized mountain cave that reaches all the way to the edge. For an example, the reader may also compare Figure 3.6, a painting of the bodhisattva Sac;lak~ara Avalokite5vara as main subject. 13 We shall also see that background later in such painted portraits as Figure 3.1. In both Sharri and Beri styles, minor figures may be placed in the background in roundels formed by long lotus vines that grow up from below (as in Fig. 1.20). Most early Sharri paintings do not depict a ganrda (a mythical part bird, part human) at the center top, though we do find one in Figure 1.3a. Nor are the mythical animals ' tails in the Sharri FtC. 1.3 Yazang Choje with His Two Lineages in the Sharri Style Early w m.id-13th cenrury 19% x 13 ~in. {49.1 x 35 em) Private Collection Literature: A. Mignucci 2001, fig. 4. MIRRO R OF THE BUDDH A 5 Ftc. r.4 Yazang Choje with His Lineages in the Beri Sryle Second half of the 13th cenrury '13 Y. x 10 in. (33.3 x 25.5 em) Privare Collection Lirerarure: A. Mignucci 2001, fig. 7; D. jackson 2010, fig. 5.2. 6 CHAPTER 1 as intricately voluted as in both Beri examples (Figs. 1.2a and 1.4a). PREVIOUS RESEARCH ON SHARRI-STYLE PAINTINGS OF TIBET Giuseppe Tucci. 1949 The first Western scholar to publish Tibetan paintings in the Sharri style was Giuseppe Tucci, though in his Tibetan Painted Scrolls of 1949 he did not use that name. He considered the style to have been transmitted ftom India to Tibet through Nepal and hence did not clearly distinguish it from the Beri style. 14 Figure 1.5 was publ.ished by Tucci as thangka no. I (Plate E), which he described as "a splendid specimen of that hieratic art, faithful to India's classical traditions, which Nepalese schools introduced into Tibet." John Huntington, 1968 FIG. I.3A, DETAIL FIG. I.4J\, DETAIL In 1968 in Los Angeles John Huntington submitted a doctoral dissertation entitled "The Styles and Stylistic Sources of Tibetan Painting," which he began with the observation that the Pala period (about 750-1150) of!ndian art "provided much of the stylistic basis for the formal characteristics of later Buddhist art throughout most of Asia. Its infl uences ranged from Java to Kashn1ir, through Nepal and Tibet, on to northern China." As he later explained, "To call the art of the Pala and Sena empires of eastern India the only precedents for the art of Tibet would be to ignore the important additions of other groups and regions. They are, however, the primary sources for Tibetan Buddhist styles." In the absence of surviving large-format paintings ftom India, Huntington's main source for the PalaSena style was illuminated manuscripts, which he considered, in comparison with other larger Pala forms of art, to be of secondary importance. Among them, MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA 7 several representative works in the Pal a style of eastern India, including paintings discovered at Khara-Khoto and Dunhuang whose style and iconography were clearly inspired by Indian Piila art The avai lable Tibetan material basically comprised four thangkas known to Tucci (pp. 47- 58) and murals at four temples in Tsang visited by Tucci (pp. 58-65). Huntington corrected Tucci's mistaken attribution of these four thangkas to Nepal (G. Tucci 1949, plates E, F, and I). 16 He postulated a chronological sequence tor those paintings (p. 52f.) and also discussed Pala crowns and streamers (p.53f.). Gilles Btfguin et al., 1977 In his 1977 exhibition at the Musee National des Artes Asiatiques Guimet in Paris, Gilles Seguin included just two early paintings of the Sharri style. He classified them as the products of eastern-Indian influence and raised the question of whether that influence had come via Nepal (as Tucci believed) or directly from India to Tibet While still leaving the question open, he referred cautiously to the chronology of the two paintings as proposed by Huntington, who considered them to be of direct Indian inspiration. 17 FIG. I. 5 Buddha Rarnasambhava 12th century 36 'A x 26 lls in. (92.7 x 68.3 em) Los Angeles County Museum of Art Nasli and Alice Heeramaneck Collection (M.78.9.2) Literature: Tucci 1949, vol. 2, p. 331 and vol. 2, pl. E; J. Rosenfield et al., 1966 Museum of Fine Arts, Boston, p. 110; G. Seguin et al. 1977, p. 75; D. KlimburgSalter 1982, pl. 109; P. Pal1983, pl. 8 (P2); and D. Klimburg-Salter 1998, fig. 1. 8 C HAPTER 1 he tentatively discerned three distinct schools oflndian manuscript painting, all of which fall within the main Pala-Sena traditions (one represented by his Nalanda group of manuscripts, and the other two exemplified by a single or a pair of manuscripts then in private collections). 15 Concerning early art that survived in Tibet (Chapter III, p. 42ff.), Huntington first discussed Manang (pp. 42-44 ), an early western-Tibetan site previously described by Giuseppe Tucci. Huntington described Tibetan Sharri-style paintings in Part II, "The Indian Style." There he identified Deborah Klimburg-Saller, 1982 In her catalog The Silk Route and the Diamond Path: Esoteric Buddhist Art on the Trans-Himalayan Trade Routes, Deborah Klimburg-Salter addressed the Sharri style in her discussion of arthistorical problems. Noting the difficulty of attributing certain thangkas to specific centers of art on the basis of style alone, she mentioned a previous mistaken attribution of several Sharri-style thangkas: 18 An entire group of early western Himalayan t 'ang-kas, several of which are exhibited here (Pl. 112), have been previously attributed to Nepalese artists. This overevaluation of the impact of Nepalese artists began in a period when the majority of early Esoteric Buddhist art was, in fact, Nepalese. The tem1s "Nepali style" and "TibetoNepalese" (H. Karmay 1975: 12) were used to describe a variety of paintings, ranging from the eighth to ninth century images preserved at Dunhuang to Himalayan t 'angkas made in the thirteenth to fourteenth centuries. There is no longer any justification for the use of these terms (D. Snellgrove 1977: 16-17). Snellgrove and Tucci have more correctly employed the term " lndoTibetan" to describe the amalgam of northwest Indian and Tibetan cultural influences which we have been discussing here. ClassifYing the style in general as western Tibetan, Klimburg-Salter again postulated that Figure 1.5, a classic Sharri-style thangka of Buddha Ratnasambhava first published by Tucci, was, in fact, oflndian rather than Nepalese influence. 19 Although this painting has been associated with Nepal (Tucci 1949: 11 331 and II pL E; Musemn afFine Arts, Boston 1966: 110), more recent scholarship recognizes that this style found in Nepal, Central Asia, and the western Himalayas must derive from a common Indian antecedent (Musee Guimet 1977: 75). Pratapaditya Pal, 1983 In his catalog of Tibetan art for the Los Angeles ColUlty Musemn, Pal employed the term Pala-Tibetan Style, classifYing paintings from two stylistically different groups as "Pala-Tibetan."20 The first was the lUliversally recognized Sharri style, while the second was a transitional Beri style of western Tibet. 21 (As an exan1ple of the second group, see Fig. 1.7.) Pra.tapaditya Pal, 1984 In a s ubsequent book, Tibetan Paintings, Pratapaditya Pal repeated that Pala-Sena India was the main origin of the Sharri style and stressed that it had been first transmitted to Tibet by the Kadam SchooL Indeed, he proposed calling the style the " Kadampa Style."22 The Kadam School of Buddhism was founded by the Tibetan followers of the Bengali lmninary Atisa (982-l 054 ), and certainly the lamas of that sect avidly commissioned works in the Sharri style for many generations. Nevertheless, not a single painting presented by Pal in his third chapter, "The Kadampa Style," could be linked unequivocally with the Kadam SchooL (The most striking example, a painting ofTarJ in the Ford collection, was discussed by Pal only in an appendix.) All identifiable masters represented in the other paintings have turned out to be from schools other than the Kadam or to represent esoteric traditions that the Kadam never practiced. Pal justified his new name: 23 The primary reason ... to designate this style as Kadampa is its consistent association with early establishments of that order. The vestiges of the style may be observed in the murals of !wang, Samada, Nethang, Nenying, Chasa [Bya sa] and in the Jokhang in Lhasa. All of these establishments were closely associated with the Kadampa order during the period. Yet among the six monasteries that Pal listed, only one, Nethang (Nyethang, Nye thang), was actually a Kadam establishment. Two were early royal establishments and two or three were establishments of the Eastern Vinaya communities. The Eastern Vinaya sites are well known for their Central Asian eclectic styles of sculptural art, though their few documented paintings seem comparatively more lndic in origin. Even so, they are not convincing examples of the Sharri style. His other source was a confused reference in a Chinese publication to a monastery called in Chinese "Ladong," which he guessed might be Langthang (Giang thang) Monastery in Phenyul (' Phan yul) of 0 Province. The paintings turned out to be from an old Kadam monastery in Tsang Province, Narthang (sNar thang, not to be confused with Nyethang in 0 Province) 24 Pal's second subtype of PalaTibetan style (for which his main exan1ple was Fig. 1.6, his plate 17) turned out to be western-Tibetan transitional examples of the Beri style 25 Pal did not always differentiate the Nepalese Beri style from the Sharri "Kadan1pa," si nce he also classified the murals of Shalu (Zhwa lu) Monastery from the period of Biiton (Bu stan Rin chen grub 1290-1364), the eleventh abbot of that monastery, as examples of his " Kadampa" style.26 Thus at this stage scholars had trouble differentiating consistently Sharri from Beri paintings, and their difficulties were worst when confronted with art from western Tibet, the home of several regional styles. Whereas the previous example in this chapter (Fig. 1.5) represented a fairly orthodox central Tibetan Sharri art of the twelfth century, Figure 1.6 (the Vajrasattva with Consort) represents the local art of the Western Himalayas in the early fourteenth century, with its local synthesis of Sharri and Beri styles. Gilles Beguin and Lionel Fournier, 1986187 Gi lles Seguin and Lionel Fournier devoted an article to a poorly known sanctuary in the Alch i region of Ladakh, which touched on the post-Pala international style. They defined five subgroups (p. 380), the latest of which dated as late as the fifteenth century and one of which was eclectic. They noted that MIRROR OF THE B U DDHA 9 F tc. 1.6 Vajrasattva with Consorr Western Tibet; early 14th century 14 Y, x 12 -!4 in. (36.8 x 32.5 em) Zimmerman Family Collection Literature: P. Pal 1984, pl. 17; S. Huntington a nd J. Huntington 1990, no. 116; P. Pal 1991, no. 82; and D. Jackson 2010, fig. 6.31. Tucci and LoBue had confused Nepali and " post-Pala" images 27 Susan Huntington and John Huntington , 1990 Susan and John Huntington devoted a major exhibition catalog to the Pal a style oflndia and its international ranlifications. Entitled Leaves from the Bodhi Tree: The Art of Piila India (8th- I 2th centuries) and Its International Legacy, the extensive catalog included three main parts, the first two of which were written by Susan Huntington: Part I: The Pilla Period (pp. 73-194); and Part II: The Pala Legacy Abroad: The Transmission to Southeast Asia and South China (pp. 195- 248). John Huntington treated Pilla or Sharri painting in Tibet in Part III: The Pala Legacy IO C HAPTER 1 Abroad: The Transmission to Nepal, Tibet and China (pp. 249- 528). His detailed discussion began with a section entitled " Introduction to Tibet and China," of which pages 281 through 307 were devoted to Tibetan (and SinoTibetan) developments. He explained at the outset six major difficulties that beset the study of Tibetan art history. In his discourse he took into account the traditional Tibetan stylistic categories, his three main topics being the traditional Tibetan understanding of art history (pp. 283- 89), a modern historical perspective and introduction to the traditional stylistic definitions (pp. 289- 30 I), and the role of sectarianism in detennining the style of a painting (pp. 30 1-05). John Huntington asserted that the starting point for a history of Tibetan painting " can only be the Shar mthun bris [Sharri] School (p. 293)." By following the later trends, " it is possible to sort out the complex schools of Tibetan art." He called the Tibetan Sharri painting style shar mthun bris and strongly criticized Pal's term " Kadampa Style" (p. 311 ). ln his "Catalogue of Tibetan and Sino-Tibetan Objects" (p. 309ff.), he identified five examples of early Sharri-style paintings (his figs. 105- 9). Of these, none depicted a human teacher as its main subject, ~nile one depicted a classic representation of Tara (F ig. 3.1 ). One of John Huntington's most intriguing examples was his figure 105 (F ig. I .28), a painting that depicts Vajrasattva with a row ofNyingma masters above and remains one of the earliest thanglw paintings with a guru lineage. Huntington transcribed and discussed at length the inscriptions below each master (p. 309), concluding that the painting could confidently be dated to between about 1065 and I II 0, or to roughly 1075 (p. 311 ). The style of the painting is probably early Sharri, but it is not identical to the typical style that is familiar to us through the Kadam/Kagyii connections, since it also possesses Beri-like plinth ends, solid border stripes in places, and monochrome strips of colors in the inner head nimbus (though it does include a Sharri-style animaltail brackrest top). lie discussed the old Indian origins of the colorful strips of red and blue geometric shapes, which were typical of the Sharri style, explaining them as sty Iized jewels that could be traced to Indian mural examples (p. 312). The paintings that John Huntington identified as examples of the Sharri style (his Figs. I05-15) have stood up very well though relatively few early paintings of a pure Sharri style were accessible to him. One could suggest that painting no. I06 (Fig. I.7), would be better classified as transitional Sharri style, since it lacks the typical Sharri multicolor strips of inlaid jewels in the throne base and borders. Still, it is not a straightforward case.28 Huntington demonstrated the presence of several key Nepalese elements in one of his images, Figure 1.8 (his Fig. 113). He clearly illustrated the key differences between the ends of plinths in the throne backs of the central figures, while still classifYing that painting as in a transitional Sharri style (Fig. 1. 9). He distinguished fairly consistently early Beri-style paintings from those in the early Sharri style. He stressed (p. 293) that no early Sharristyle paintings were then available that could confidently be attributed to either 0 Province of central Tibet or Kham Province in the east (p. 293). (That lacuna would be filled in the 1990s thanks to later discoveries.) twelfth century that depicted a bodhisattva (her Fig. I0), which then still survived at Jokhang Temple, Lhasa. She also discussed two of the better-known Sharri-style thangkas (her Figs. II and 12), referring to their probable " lndoNepalese" sources yet acknowledging their likely Indian and Piila origins. Marvlin . Rltie. 1991 Jane Casey Singer, 1994 Marylin Rhie summarized the history ofTibetan art in the introduction to the catalog she coauthored with Robert Thurman: Wisdom and Compassion: The Sacred Art of1ibet, including painting in central Tibet from the eleventh through thirteenth century (pp. 4 7-9). She noted the existence of a very rare wall painting dating to the late eleventh or early In her 1994 article, Jane Casey Singer sketched the history of paintings in central Tibet dating to about 950 to 1400, based on more than two hundred F1c. L7 VaJradhliru Vairocana 12th or 13th cenrury 2 1 x 17 in. (53.4 x 43.2 em) Col lection of Michael]. and Beata McCormick Collection Lirerarure: S. Hunringron and J. Huntington 1990, no. I 06; D. Weldon and J. Casey Singer 2003, no. 17. early paintings (including illustrated manuscripts and book covers) that had become accessible in the previous decade. (By contrast, G. Tucci 1949 had MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA II \:...__(_ _ __ Nepali Convention Pala Convention FIG. 1.9 A comparison of Sharri and Nepalese (Beri) architecrural details FIG. r.8 Green larii Ca. 1260- 1290 20 'h x 16 lis in. (52.1 x 43 em) The Cleveland Museum of Arr. Purchase from the]. H. Wade fund by exchange, from the Doris Wiener Gallery (1970.156) Lirerarure: P. Pal1984, pl. 18; S. Humington and J. Huntington 1990, no. 113; S. Kossak and J. Casey Singer 1998, no. 37; and D. Jackson 2010, fig. 5.13. I2 CHAPTER 1 access to fewer than six such early paintings, and P Pal 1984 knew fewer than twenty.) She allowed for the possibility that a few of those paintings may have been Indian. Alone among scholars, she avoided stylistic names. She saw a great diversity of styles, which seemed to defY "sound designations of schools or ateliers" at that stage.19 Adding that a universally recognized taxonomy for Tibetan paintings had yet to be established (p. 88), she evidently was rei uctant to employ the terms of either Pal 1984 or J. Huntington 1990. She rejected as misleading the use of sectarian names for paintings styles, for example, "Kadampa" style (p. 88t). Casey Singer grouped paintings not according to style but according to main historical periods, " each corresponding to a discernible aesthetic phase." She discerned four periods: I. circa 630-950; 2. circa 950-1400; 3. circa 1400-1650; and 4. circa 1650-1 950. 30 For her main subject, the period from 950 to 1400, she attempted to establish a relative chronology of paintings for the first time. She was not completely unaware of the S harri as a main style, since she did specifY that "central Tibetan paintings can be described as initially indebted to eastern Indian medieval art" (p.88). Her treatment of regional distinctions was unusually good, mentioning all five provinces of Tibet, including within central Tibet both D and Tsang Provinces, and adopting the three districts of westem Tibet (mNga' ris skor gsum), rather than just Ladakh and Guge. Though concentrating on chronology, Casey Singer admitted that a precise chronology for Tibetan paintings before 1400 remained elusive, due to the scarcity and ambiguity of available evidence (p. 89). No painting could be firmly dated, she stressed, and she did not adopt some of the datings proposed by her predecessors (such as S. Huntington and J. Huntington 1990, fig. I 05). She mentioned two potential weaknesses of inscriptions as historical sources: that a single name could refer to two or more historical figures who lived centuries apart and that the dating of the individuals mentioned by inscriptions did not necessarily indicate the dating of the painting. Still, she argued for employing a method based on a consistent and logical use of all available evidence (p. 90). Heather Stoddard, 1996 After similarly studying many thangkas between about 1986 and 1996, Heather Stoddard proposed a system of six major styles in Tibetan painting before 1500.31 Among these, the second oldest was the Indian (Sharri) style, to which she devoted three pages. Admitting that Atisa was partly responsible for its development,32 she still rejected Pal 's term "Kadampa Style" for Sharri-style paintings and stressed that many other religious schools had commissioned works in that style. Her main examples of the style were two paintings in Cleveland: her Figure 16, Buddha with lama on head; and my Figure 5.10 (her Fig. 18), Tlvo facing masters. She considered an early version of the Sharri to be found at Alchi in Lhakhang Soma Monastery and also thought the Taklungl Riwoche group of paintings had been consecrated at Taklung by Onpo Pal ( 1251- 1296) at the same time 33 Jane Casey Singer, 1997 Jane Casey Singer wrote her 1997 article in part as a corrective to some scholars who had begun calling the Taklungl Riwoche corpus of paintings a school or distinctive style. 34 Though still avoiding sty! istic nomenclature, she asserted that there had existed a coherent tradition of painting at Taklung for !50 years between about 1200 and 135035She clearly denied that the Taklung paintings were stylistically distinctive in comparison to paintings from other religious schools of the period, thus also taking into account paintings from outside her Taklung corpus36 (Her concentration on paintings of Taklung patronage did not lead to doubtful provenance-derived or sect-derived nomenclature as in P. Pal 1984.)>1 Steven Kossak. 1997 Steven Kossak contributed a relevant article in 1997, "Sakya Patrons and Nepalese Artists in Thirteenth-Century Tibet." 38 Working with a relatively small corpus of paintings, most of which lacked inscriptions, he was able to specify reliable grounds for distinguishing Sharri-style paintings from Early Beri-style paintings, while also referring to some contemporaneous Nepalese paintings. Deborah Klimburg-Salter, 1998 The Pala style of India and its international ramifications were also the subject of a conference panel, whose proceedings were pub! ished in 1998. Deborah Klimburg-Salter introduced those proceeilings, summarizing previous research on the theme, though barely mentioning the contributions of Susan and John Huntington 1990 39 Responding to Pratapaditya Pal 's stylistic name "Kadampa Style," Klimburg-Salter replied that such Kadam patronage was then still "essentially hypothetical," adding that no painting was yet known to contain Kadam 1ineal masters that were identified by contemporaneous inscriptions.40 Noting a possible confusion in F1c. 1. ro Am itabha 13rh cenrury Privare Collecrion Afrer D. Klimburg-Salrer 1998, fig. 2. the iconography of the Kadam founding gurus, she provided an early example of two key Kadam gurus with inscriptions from about the thirteenth century (her Fig. 3, a Detail from her Fig. 2, a thangka from Spiti). She also stressed the need to establish the special features of Kadam paintings to see whether they are identical with Kagyii paintings of FIG. I.II Row of Inscribed Gurus Afrer D. Klimburg-Salrer 1998, fig. 3. MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA I3 the same place and time if we are going to seriously consider the existence of a " Kadampa Style.'" ' Claudine Baut:e-Picron. 1998 Claudine Bautze-Picron devoted several articles to early Tibetan painting. With her detailed knowledge of EasternIndian style art, she identified Indian decorative motifs and tracked their development within similar styles in the countries to which they spread, including Tibet and Burma. She was impatient with such vague terms as Pala style, preferring art historians (of Tibetan and Bunnese art) to use more precise expressions appropriate to Indian art history and to refer to the Indian sites in question. Her articles provide a valuable orientation to the most relevant decorative motifs. The two main Tibetan examples that Bautze-Picron 1998 chose (her Figs. I and 2) were paintings of Buddha ' that were created precisely Sak")'amlmi at the moment between the end of Indian Buddhist painting and the beginning ofTibetan Sharri art, so precisely, in fact, that she had trouble referring to them as ''Tibetan." She described the first painting (Fig. 1.12; her Fig. I) as being related to paintings produced in Bihar during Mahipiila's and Nayapala's reigns (first half of the eleventh century}, though it bears a Tibetan inscription mentioning Sang.,crye O npo of Riwoche. She believed that, in comparison with Bunnese artists of the eleventh through thirteenth century, Tibetans were more conservative and copied their Indian originals very closely (p. 42). In her article of 1998, BautzePicron builds upon a still earlier article (Bautze-Picron 1995/96), in which she studied depictions ofSaJ,")'amuni in eastem India and Tibet from the eleventh to the thi rteenth century, taking as her main subjects three paintings of the Buddha. In that earlier article, she investigated the same Figures I and 2, as her first 14 CHAPTER 1 two main points of comparison. ln yet another article (C. Baulze-Picron 1995), she studied minor figures carved on stone slabs. She devoted five pages (pp. 6~4) to human characters in the art of eastern India from the Piila and pre-Piila periods. Among depictions of monks, she distinguished earlier depictions, which were shown with shaved heads and holding incense, from later ones, which were shown wearing a pointed or peaked (pundi t) hat and holding a mjra and bell. FIG. I. !2 Buddha Siikyamuni 13th cenrury 7 'Is x 11 in. (19.5 x 28 em) Private Swiss Collection After: C. Bau ne-Picron 1998, fig. 1. Steven Kossak, 1998 Pratapaditya Pal's scenario of the Kadam sect as a main source and inspiration for the Sharri style (or Sena-period Bengal-inspired style) in central Tibet from about I050 to II SO was not as purely hypothetical as was first thought. In his catalog of 1998, Steven Kossak presented eastern India as the origin of the most important painting tradition in Tibet in the eleventh through thirteenth century.42 Within eastern Indian art, he pointed out that there had been no single monolithic Piila-Se na style rather, in ill um inated manuscripts two distinc t styles had existed: those of Bihar and Benga1° Here he based his claim on the findings of J. Losty, who distinguished two different conventions of depicting backgro unds in paintings.•• Those . from Bihar showed seated deities sitting before a throne back, and not seated in a shrine (except for the Buddha, who was shown withi n a shrine), whereas in Bengal it was possible to depict deities other than the Buddha in a shrine. A manuscript from VikramaSila, a monastery that lay in the borderland between Bihar and Bengal, included both motifs: it depicted the deities with both a throne back and surrounding shrine.45 In one passage Kossak described several defining features of the Tibetan artistic tradition, such as "the mountain staffs of precious jewels and the use of bhadra-type shrines for the principal deities, with three- or five-lobed arched openings and crowned by tiered roofs wi th upturned architectural devices In the revised edition of the Smith's introduction, the passage with shar mthzm has been translated as "a style like the Eastern Indian (Shar), i.e., the Piila Style.''52 ln any case, shar ris is the correct spelling of that traditional name, or flags." 48 and not shar mthtm ris.n Some Western art hi storians a~sert that during the period in question, the Sena-ruled eleventh and twelfth centuries, Bengal became a center of art in its own right; it was at an artistic peak when Tibetans were most avidly borrowing Piila-Se na art models. 54 So would it be correct to call this art the " Bengalinspired Tibetan (Piila) painting style" as WESTE RN ScHOL ARS ON THE NAME Of' THE SJ-IARRI STYLE Some scholars who did not read Tibetan tended to discount the value of Tibetan Iiterary sources on art, saying, for instance, that they provide little help in defining taxonomic structures for paintings dating before I500 and never contain illustrations.49 The definition of the Tibetan terms used for art created prior to the fifteenth century was held to be even more problematic, and the traditional stylistic terms found within Tibetan written sources and inscriptions were believed to be "essentially without a clear definition.'o;o But those difficulties should not deter us from usino tradi"' tiona! terms. including names for early styles when appropriate. Such terms of traditional connoisseurship will probably Sharri style,06 referring to it a bit later as the " Bengali -inspired Tibetan style in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries."47 I Ie also identified a strong connection between this Bengali style and the Kadam School, a religious tradition that had been founded in Tibet by a Bengali pundit ln his most recent book (S. Kossak 20 I0), he amassed still more evidence to support that thesis and become more, not less, important as Tibetan art history progresses. Thus it is odd that John Huntington's detailed discussion and use of traditional Tibetan style names in his 1990 catalog found Iittle resonance among scholars. To be sure, even as late as the m id-1 990s, most scholars believed that it was impossible to classifY surviving works of art using the descriptions of art styles given by the rare Tibetan works that do discuss art.s' KongtrO I's Tibetan name for the Sharri painting style was misunderstood by several early Western scholars. ln updated several previous contributions. There he asserts that "features of the Bengali style predominate over those of the Bihari one, in the 12"'-century Tibetan thanka tradition," adding that the connect ion with Bengal is proven by certain pictorial motifs unique to Bengali his 1970 pioneering translation of the art-historical passage from Kongtriil 's encyclopedia, E. Gene Smith left the descriptive phrase shar mthun (literal ly, " like the Eastern") untrans lated. Severa l later scholars took that phrase to be Kongtriil 's name for the style. Kossak did? Not every historian asserts a strong Bengali artistic influence in this period. To the contrary, Bautze-Picron explicitly underscores the domina nce of Bihar in the Buddhist world of the eleventh through thirteenth century, mention ing such key sites as Nalandii, Lakhi Sarai, and Bodh Gayii, whi le counting sites in northern Bengal as peripheraJ.SS Kongtrill and Tiiraniitha employ such establis hed terms as shar ris and shar gyi b=o, to denote late Piila-Se na art. The terms have the advantage of being more precise in the ir reference than simply " lndian style" as lndia is a vast subcontinent. Yet if Bengal did not dominate artistically, the term Sharri may have been misleading, though it remains the best term for Tibetan art inspired by those traditions. While rejectin g the term Kadarnpa Style, Heather Stoddard suggested another Tibetan name for the Sharri painting style of Tibet: rgya lugs (Indian Tradition), basing her assertion on the colophon of an old book cover. 56 I have not come across the term rg)'O lugs in art-historical Tibetan sources. The word does exist in Tibetan, but it usually means "Chinese tradition or Chinese custom." lbe problem is that rgya alone is ambivalent and can mean either China or lndia. The parallel term for painting, rgya bris or rgya ris, already has the MIRROR OF T>l £ 8 U DD>IA I5 established meaning "Chinese painting." To avoid ambiguity, the tenn rgya lugs should not be used alone but as rgya gar lugs (Indian tradition). When Stoddard presents her results in more detail ' quoting the entire text of the colophon, we see that her main Tibetan source did not use the ambiguous tenn rgya lugs. but rather rg}'G gar gyi ri mo (Painting oflndia), which is clearer.57 Moreover• there is no ambiguity in the tenn used by the great savant and connoisseur Deumar Geshe, who in his account of Tibetan painting devoted three verses to " the sacred painting tradition of India, the Exalted Land" (rgya gar 'phags y ul lha ris lugs).58 WF.R£ TIBETAN P ORTRAITS REALISTIC? One question that has piqued the curiosity of most Western scholars was to what extent Tibetan portraits were based on observation from real life. Is there any justification for calling them portraits in the usual European sense of the word? Were they, at the very least. later copies of earlier realistic renderings? ln 1949 Tucci maintained, in general, that later depictions of masters were based on portraits made during the Iives of their subjects. In his Tibetan Painted Scrolls ( 1949), he said about Tibetan portraiture:59 The typica l features of each single master had early been established by art istic schools and handed down most faithfu lly. Hence, while the schematic drawing and hieratic fixity of these figures are such that they cannot be spoken of as portraits, undoubtedly the most representative figures of Tibet's religious history have become inalterable types, and if other suggestions, like votive inscript ions, were lacking, it would not be difficult to recognize them. 16 C BArTER I Tsong kha pa, the fifth Dalai Lama, the PaQ chen dPal !dan ye shes... have so \\'ell-defined an individuality that it is impossible not to recognize them. These types nearly always go back to portraits (sku 'bag) made in the times of the personages themselves, [types) which later became models for successive artists. We know, for instance, that this was the case for Tsongkhapa(1357- 141 9). Seven effigies of him were objects of veneration, painted from life and recognized by him as good likenesses known Iiterall y as ' Like me, ' Ngadrama (nga. 'dra. ma). Tucci then cited a work by the scholar Sherab Gyatsho (A khu Ching Shes rab rgya mtsho, 1803-1875) that discusses several famous images of the great saint Tsongkhapa (which will be discussed in chapter 2). He also quoted a passage from the autobiography of the Fifth Dalai Lama ( 1617- 1682), referring to a realistic painting made during his lifetime, including his hand prints and footprints. ln her 1995 article on early Tibetan portraiture, Casey Singer investigated two paintings of the saint Phagmotrupa. She compared the painting from the Newar artist Jivarama's notebook of 1435 (Fig. 1.13) with an inscribed mural painting of Phagmotrupa depicted as a lineal g uru in Alchi that dates to the early thirteenth century (Fig. 1.14) and found little resemblance. This and other similar cases led her to conclude that "accurate physiognomic likeness was not crucial to Tibetan portraiture of this period.''60 For depictions of Phagrnotrupa, Casey Singer's conclusions were based on too few relevant examples and hence were inconclusive. The Alchi mural was a bad comparison since it does not transmit the typical appearances of those Iineage masters. To use a Newar sketchbook as the second ofjust two examples is also Ftc. 1.1 3 T ibetan Monks Page from the sketchbook of JTvariima, a Newar artist working in Ti bet, dated 1435 Ink on paper Each page 9 x 5 •;, in. (23.2 x 13 em) S. K. Neotia Collection, Calcutta After: j ohn Lowry 1977, A7; J. Casey Singer 1995, fig. 11; H. Stoddard 2003, fig. 10. problematic if we wish to draw broad conclusions about Tibetan portraits. She did not realize that Figure 1.15 (her Figure 18) also portrayed Phagmotrupa. That portrait would have served as a better starting point for comparison with Jivarc1111a's notebook and would have had a better chance of confirming any lingering physiognomic accuracy. Casey Singer summarized her account of portraiture in 1998.6 1 While repeating Tucci's assertion that Tibetan portraits were based on depictions made whi le their subjects still lived, she believed that too Iittle was known about early portraits to determine whether that held true for portraits dating to before the fi fleenth century. Stoddard did not want to overemphasize the question ofthe portraits' real ism at the expense of all else. ·'Especially vexing for most Western scholars who have talten an interest in the subj ect is whether or not they are ' real life' portraits- that is, a study of an individual taken from real life. Yet there are many other equally perplexing questions." 62 FIG. I. I4 Phagmotrupa with a Disciple Early 13th century Mural, entrance wall, second upper story, Sunusek (Three-tiered Temple), Alchi. Photograph courtesy of Jaroslav Poncar and Roger Goepper Literature: J. Casey Singer 1995, fig. 12; R. Goepper 1996, Alchi, p. 216. Ftc. I.I5 (DETAJL FROM Ftc. s.ro) Portrait of Phagmotrupa Literature:]. Casey Singer 1995, fig. 18. Most paintings of founding masters of schools probably are based on early portraits made during their lifetime or soon thereafter. The early paintings (those from the twelfth through fifteenth century) had not yet reached the stage of excessively standardized portraits to which Stoddard alluded in connection with later paintings of the sequential Dalai Lamas or ofTsongkhapa with his two main disciples.63 lf the portrayed teacher was a monk, the main elements of the painting that allowed for any sense of real ism were his face and hair (if he did not wear a hat). The rest of the image including his hands, feet, and robes, was usually painted in a highly standardized way. For ordained lamas their ceremonial hats might be more or less distinctive (as those of the First Panchen Rinpoche or the Situ Trulkus.) Portraits of lay masters could be much less generic. For instance, the hair and robes in the realistic image of the great Tibetan adept ThangtongGyalpo(l36l?-1485) in Figure 1.16 are very distinctive. This statue bears the inscription: grub thob thang stong rgyal po 'i sku1je rang nyid gyi phyag nas b=hugs so (This image of the adept Thangtong Gyalpo contains [consecration] barley from the lord's own hand)M It is an example of a realistic portrait that dates to the master 's lifetime. The great adept is famed in Tibet for constructing nwnerous iron chain bridges, wooden bridges, stupas, and monasteries in many parts of Tibet and the Himalayan borderlands. He also fmmded the first Tibetan drama troupe, and created a wide variety of sacred objects, including hundreds of statues from unusual and precious substances, such as turquoise, amber, and coral, which were unheard of in his day. 65 The present statue has an unusual technical touch a plate bolted to the base by four sturdy rivets. In many portraits, the artist seems to have wanted to capture his subject with as many distinctive details as possible. But with monks, only faces and hair (if the hair was not covered by a hat) could be depicted in ways specific to the individuaL Figure 1.17, a portrait of Ngorchen's guru Sazang Phakpa Shonnu Lotro (Sa bzang ' Phags pa Gzhon nu blo gros, 1358- 1412), is such an attempt at FIG. I.I6 Thangtong Gyalpo 15th century Copper alloy with polychromy Height: 5 Ys in. (13.1 em) Nyingjei Lam Collection Lirerarure: D. Weldon and J Casey Singer 1999, p. 185; H. Stoddard 2003, fig. 18b; C. Stearns 2007, fig. l. MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA 17 come across a more realistic painting of that great lama. The only evidence for identifying him is given by the inscription written beneath his throne: g;hon nur rab byung dam pas 1jes su b=zmg/1 blo gros khang b=angs rgyud sde 'i nor bus gang// dbang b=hi 'i rgyun gyis 'gro kun tshim par md::ad/1 chos rje 'phags pa 'i =habs Ia phyag "tshallo/1. "Homage to the lord ftG. 1.17 Sazang Phakpa Ca. 1420-1450 20 Y, x 18 Y, in. (52.1 x 47 em) Private Collecrion After: Sotheby's Indian and Southeast Asian Art, NY Nov. 30, 1994, no. 114. 18 C HAPTER 1 distinctive representation. 66 Its commissioning patron was probably one of the subject's disciples. Note the ti ny monk who is depicted in a respectful posture below, before the throne base on the left. Since Sazang Phakpa's tradition of the Vajravali collection of mandalas was not as commonly transmitted by later lamas of the Ngorpa tradition as some other lineages, that may account for the rarity of his portrait 67 This is the first that I recall seeing. This painting was overlooked Lmtil now, its subject having been mistaken as the more famous Phakpa of Tibetan history. But it is a worthy example of a ne.:'lrly contemporaneous portrait of a fifteenth-century master that included several distinguishing features, such as a white pointed beard, white hair, and balding head. I doubt that we wi ll ever of Dharma Phakpa, who, ordaining as a youth, WdS kindly befriended by noble [gurus], whose palace of intelligence was fi lled with the jewels of the tantras, and who satisfied all li ving beings through the river of the four empowerments! " Here to properly identify him, we have to recognize the elements of his ordination name, Shonnu and Lotr6, hidden within the verse of praise. With Sazang Phakpa's portrait (Fig. I. 17), we have the luxury of a verse of praise carefully written below the main figure. What a great help that insc ription is. Yet in Figure 1.18, no label names the main figure, and so he wi ll likely remain unidentified, unless a very similar portrait with labeling inscriptions turns up some day. Note the distinctive points of the ear flaps of the figure's pundit hat We can compare this painting with Figure 1.17 as a roughly contemporaneous portrait with a similar Chinese-inspired ornate throne backrest (We will see a similar backrest again in Fig. 3.22.) One outstanding lama of the Sakya tradition who WdS the subject of much portraiture was Sazang Phakpa's disciple Ngorchen Kunga Zangpo. Usually he wa~ shown wearing a red pundit hat,68 but he could also be depicted without a hat Indeed, on such occasions he often was shown with a very distinctive bald spot on the crest of his head, as in Figure 1. 19.69 The painting depicts Ngorchen's bald spot in a prominent way. It is remarkable for its fi ne Beri artistry and for its detailed inscriptions, which allows was s urrounded by the [lineages of] vidyiidharas and bodhisattvas, possesses the consecration by lord lama Miipa Chenpo Sanggye Rinchen. (fib: rgyal ba rdo rje 'chang chen po mzm [=ktm] dga' b=ang po 'i sku 'di Ia/ rig 'd=in dang byang sems bskor ba 'i bris sku 'di Ia rje bla ma mus pa chen po sangs rgyas rin chen gyi rab gnas b=hugs). The Miipa Chenpo Sanggye Rinchen ( 1453-1524) referred to by the inscription was Lhachok Sengge's predecessor as abbot ofNgor, whose abbatial tenure was from 1513 to 1516. Since he died in 1524, he could not have consecrated the painting in 1532.70 In paintings that lack inscriptions, distinctive physical traits can sometimes be precious clues for identi:f)ring the lama portrayed. In Figure 1.20, for example, all four lamas are depicted without hats, and the first figure is shovm with a bald spot. Si nce his iconography and face otherwise agree closely with other early paintings ofNgorchen, this can be accepted as his depiction. In this case, the physical similarities (includi ng one highly distinctive FIG. t.r8 Unidentified Master Ca. early to mid-15th century Pigments on cloth 7 'Ax 6 JA in. (18.4 x 17.1 em) C2006.45.1 (HAR 65705) it to be dated to the ye.:lr 1520. On the bottom of the front is a long inscription that ends: "This, the above-mentioned painting, WdS erected by the holder of tantric knowledge (vidyiidhara) Lhachok Sengge in the dragon year. I dedicate its merit to the great awakening." (Tib: ces pa 'di rig pa 'd::in pa lha mchog seng ges 'brug lo bzhengs/ dge ba byang chub chen por bsngo/1.) Assuming that trait) are enough to determine his identity. Ngorchen's bald spot, however distinctive, was not a feature shown in all of his depictions. In another earlier painting ofNgorchen and his main disciples and successor Miichen (Fig. 1.21 ), we find no trace of baldness. It must be admitted that Ngorchen is shovm here looking quite young, which may have had somethi ng to do with his still possessing a full head of black hair. Lhachok Sengge commissioned it during his abbacy ( 1516- 1534), the dragon year mentioned could be the iron-dragon THE IMPORTANCE OF ( 1520) or water-dragon year ( 1532). INSCRIPTIONS On the reverse side is another inscription. As we saw in the portrait of Sazang Phakpa (Fig. I . 17) and those of Ngorchen (Figs. 1.19 and 1.21 ), the ll1is image of the Conqueror presence of an inscription can be deci- Yajradhara Kunga Zangpo, which sive for identifying the main subject. MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA I,9 Frc. 1.19 Ngorchen with His Lineage By Lobo Gelong Chopal Sonam (?} Cemra l 1ibet, Tsang region, Ngor Monastery; 1520 63 'h x 51 'h in. (161.3 x 131.1 em) Navin Kumar Collection, New York Phorograph courtesy Navin Kumar Literature: P. Pa l 2003, no. 165. 20 CHAPTER 1 This is true of many sumptuous Tibetan portraits. In recent decades, and especially after the destructive "Great Cultural Revolution" in the 1960s and 1970s, many portable works of an in Tibet became chaotically dispersed. Since such works often lacked inscriptions or a known provenance, many historians of Tibetan art would prefer to use paintings on architectural monuments because they have more rei iable chronological contexts.71 But while pai nted monuments can often help, they arc not relevant for central-Tibetan Sharri-stylc painting si nce almost none are known to survive in 0 Province. One rare exception is the murals in the Sekhar Guthok (Sras mkhan dgu thog) tower in Lhodrak (Lho brag), as shown in Figurcs I .22 and 1.23.12 Thus we must make the most of whatever an lends itself to being documented in detail, whether portable or not. Single thangka paintings without contemporaneous inscriptions are indeed hard to document and date. But similar problems also exist for individual chapels or murals in a large site, if they lack inscriptions. As we shall see below with Figure 5. 1 (and again with Fig. 6.1), Christian Luczanits 's "Rinchen Zangpo" from Alchi, even specific murals, despite their obvious location within a roughly datable complex of structures, may require a lot of further el ucidation to be dated convi ncingly.73 One way to lend more hi storical weight to portable objects is to group them with other paintings that come from the same tradition and have the same iconographic content. If we can ascertain the contents and origins of one painting within a group, we can draw much surer conclusions about the rest. With any luck, a large group of iconographically similar thangkas will contain at least one or two with adequate inscriptions. lienee even portable objects, including not just thangkos, but also book covers, illuminated manuscripts, and initiation cards (tsakli) , if documented with the aid of detailed and reliable inscriptions, can become indispensable for comparing to other paintings. For studying Sharri-style thangkas in central Tibet, we have no choice but Fl C. I.l.O Ngorchen and Three Successors Ulre 15 rh cenrury 22 ~ x 19 -lA in. (57.8 x 50.2 em) Philadelphia Museum of An: Stella Kramrisch Collection, 1994 1994-148-639 (HAR 87086) to use them. The ideal starting point would be paintings with inscriptions that record details about their dedication or consecration and hence reveal their history. Dedicatory and consecratory inscriptions are two of four main types:74 I. Labeling inscriptions-i.e., those that identify the individual figures depicted, the subject of a whole set of paintings, and the place of this painting within it 2. Dedicatory inscriptions-i.e .. those MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA 21 F1c. 1.:1.1 Ngorchen and Muchen as Culmination of Their Ordination Lineage Mid-15th century Distemper on conon 34 ~ x 3 1 ~ in. (87.6 x 80 em) Stephen and Sharon Davies Collection Literature: P. Pal 1991, p. 155, no. 87; D. Jackson 20 I 0, figs. 2.12 and 8.9. 7.7. CHAPTER I vows" or thugs dam, and may be passed on from generation to generation.... Certain thangkas bear the name of the lamas who carried out the consecrations. Normally this would have taken place at the time of completion of the painting (or sculpture)... . During this whole period [the eleventh to fourteenth century], the vast majority of inscriptions on the back of thangkas take the form of a stupa, corresponding exactly to the size of the central figure on the front of the painting. FIG. 1.22 FIG. 1.23 Marpa tbe Translator 13th cenrury Mural, Sekhar Guthok rower, Lhodrak Photograph by Helmut Neumann Literature: H. Stoddard 2003, p. 43, fig. 25a. Milarepa 13th cemury Mural, Sekhar Guthok rower, Lhodrak Photograph by Helmut Neumann Literature: H. Stoddard 2003, p. 43, fig. 25b. that name the patron and his guru, the occasion for its commission, sometimes including a prayer for blessings 3. Those that record consecrations 4. Color codes One scholar who long emphasized the need to study portraits together with lineages, inscriptions, and styles is Heather Stoddard 75 In 1996, looking back over two hundred thangkas that she had examined, she observed the presence of a wide variety of religious schools, while noting only a few Kadam paintings. She differentiated the more individual renderings of main figures from the smaller depictions of lineage masters, which she called "a series of miniature idealized representations." Surviving large portraits included images of such important teachers as Ati5a, Marpa, Milarepa, the early abbots ofTaklung, Drigungpa Rinchen Pal (i.e., Jigten Gonpo), Shangton Chokyi Lama, Nyo Lotsawa, and Khache Panchen. As she described them: 76 These vary from convincing and sensitive portraits to ideal images adorned with gold. Most often the central figure is not identified (being too obviously well kno\\11 at the time of painting), whereas all those surrounding him often are. The dating depends largely, of course, on the latest historical person represented. Although this only gives an approximate limit, we are now in a better position to judge from the style as well. Other inscriptions allow us an approximate upward date limit. For example, the name of the lama to whom the thangka belonged in a special religious sense is given in writing that is clearly a later addition. Such objects are called "mind Stoddard described the typical fonn and content of inscriptions, adding that pious vows, dedications by the donor, and other verses may be added, depending on the origin of the painting. While stressing the importance of such inscriptions, she also enumerated several other obstacles to understanding a painting's history, including obscure provenance, sometimes compounded by the secretiveness of art dealers: It is the Cultural Revolution that destroyed the history ofTibetan art, and indeed almost the whole civilization, whereas the dealers have saved a considerable quantity of rare and precious objects over the last couple of decades [circa I 976-1996). In this way tradition, money and politics combine to obscure what little historicity is left. Stoddard mentioned previous neglect of inscriptions with understandable exasperation, since she had already stressed their vital role in the clearest possible terms twenty years earlier. 77 Too many books on Tibetan art are published where the inscriptions are vaguely referred to or just completely ignored. Although it is rdfe, but not unknown, to find the MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA 2.3 name of the artist in an inscription, names of donors are very common and these, as Tibetan history becomes better known, may make an important contribution to the dating of images and thangkas and thus to the establishment of criteria for judging stylistic development. Inscriptions do present problems themselves, as they appear often to have been written by artists who were unlettered and are full of spelling mistakes. In the case of language problems, learned Tibetan scholars, who are available in sufficient numbers nowadays, should be consulted. In the description of an image, its inscriptions should be both transliterated and translated, and the provenance given wherever known. Although it is realized that an object may be appreciated for its intrinsic beauty, surely the author of a book on Tibetan art does injustice not only to himself and to his readers, but also to the objects them selves if he ignores the dedicatory inscriptions that record the names of the people for whom the images were made, or even the names of the divinities or human teachers that are portrayed. Painted portraits of lamas thus can be difficult to date without an inscription that identifies the patron or his guru. Without one it is hard to know whether the painting was made during or after the I ife of the person portrayed. The length of a lineage and the identities and life dates of its latest members provide important clues: the la~t lineage holder depicted may be asswned to have been alive or recently deceased at the time of painting if the lineage is complete. If inscriptions and datable gurus are lacking, then connoisseurship of styles must guide our judgment about whether the painting dates to the lifetime of the main 24 C HAPTER 1 figure it portrays 7 8 But we should not give up on lineages or inscriptions too soon. Quite a few well-known masterpieces have still not had their inscriptions carefully read. PRE-SHARRI DEPICTIONS OF lAMAS WITH UNUSUAL HATS By way of introduction to early painted portraits, we should note that depictions of somewhat obscure early Tibetan lamas have been identified in paintings that date to slightly before the founding of the Kadam order (examples of which we will see in chapter 3 ). Though those lamas are not painted as central figures, they are depicted as I ineal lamas in the upper register and as patrons below. If Steven Kossak's dating of Figure 1.24 to the eleventh century is correct, it may exemplify Tibetan art as it was commissioned in non-Kadam circles during or even slightly before Atisa's visit.79 One noteworthy aspect of human iconography relevant to very early portraits is the unusual hats worn by early gurus and donors, as in Figure 1.24. This painting of Amitayus, possibly dating to the eleventl1 century, depicts its most prominent hwnan figures wearing atypical flat hats. The only internal chronological clues that I could find in this painting (F ig. 1.24) are indeed those flat hats, which are worn by six out of seven hwnan figures (probably gurus) in the top register. We can assume that they represent seven generations of teachers and that the last teacher was the gum of the monk-patron below. The normal conventions of Tibetan Buddhist painting allow for minor human figures to be placed in a painting for only two reasons: above, as a guru of the lineage, and below, usually in a corner, as a patron!practitioner/officiant.80 It would be highly irregular to depict in the place reserved for gurus or deities " some type of court or clan assembly.'>&I Nor can the figure in the red robe be accepted as their leader, witllout additional proof The black discs that are shown below, next to the patrons, wh ich at first glance seem to be shields are another round object that served a ritual function. Notice that one is shown near the monk- patron, who as a monk is unlikely to have had a shield or weapons of war. We find similar discs in a Kadam painting of Tara (F ig. 2.11 ). They also turn up on early painted objects such as the Kadam book cover of the. Metropolitan Museum of Art. 32 Dan Martin identified these shieldlike objects as mirrors, noting that such mirrors are occasionally present in patron scenes.83 But according to Christian Luczanits, the dark discs actually represent ritually laid out mandalas. This is clear from earlier Dunhuang representations and from the fact that they always forrn part of the ritual paraphernalia of a priest. Blossoms on them usually indicate the seat of the deities. They were widely portrayed in the eleventh and twelfth centuries, Alchi in Ladakh being a prominent example.114 The wide hat in Figure 1.24 was not common for Tibetan monks in central Tibet in the twelfth century and later. It resembles a common Chinese or East-Asian hat type (1 have seen contemporary Japanese monks wearing similar hats). 85 Another wide-brimmed hat is worn by the patron in another Tibetan painting dating to about the same period, Figure 1.25. Several hw11an figures (probably gurus and patrons) are present, though in this case tlley occupy the bottom register. The figure in the corner, a monk beneath a parasol, is preswnably the patron. The figure to his left is either his teacher or a second patron. Three figures in the middle of the bottom register seem to be Indian adepts (siddhas). It would have been Lmusual in later periods to place siddhas, in their role as gurus, beneath the tutelary deities (yi dam), tllough the top register F1c. 1.4 Amit<iyus 11 rh cenrury 54 !-i x 41 ~in. (138.4 x 106.l em) The Metrop oliran Museum of Art, New York, 1\TV, U.S.A. Rogers Fund, 1989 (1989.284) ART412742 €:> The Metrop olitan Museu m of Art I Art Resource, NY Literature: S. Kossak and J. Casey Singer ·1998, no. 1; S. Kossak 20"10, no. 11. ~IIRROR OF THE BUDDH A 2.5 associated with universal emperors.86 in the case of buddha images, the parasol can be traced back to the earliest buddha images, in particular, to the so-called "Bhik~u BaJa's Bodhisattva" in Sarnath that dates to year four of the Kushana area (circa A.D. 123).87 In that standing statue the parasol represents heaven, since it has the signs of the zodiac on it. Thus the parasol is an integral part of the standing buddha image from very early on, with the post holding it representing the axis mundi. 88 In Tibet, the "white parasol" was one of the eight auspicious symbols (bkra shis rtags brgyad). Jigme Ch6kyi Dorje in his iconographic encyclopedia explains that such white umbrellas (gdugs dkar) were a means for showino , respectful service to (Indian) kings of old when they were traveling and that such a parasol was held above the Buddha's head by gods when he first taught the Dharma (at Sarnath). Since many auspicious things occurred when pious kings and donors also held up such umbrellas over the Buddha's head on other occasions, the Buddha formal ly recognized the white parasol as an auspicious object. According to its traditional symbolism, its handle stood for the activities of teaching and practicing the Dhan11a, whi le the shade that it cast symbolized protection from gross and subtle suffering.89 F IG. 1.2.5 Cakrasamvara Mandala Ca. 1100 33 x 23 in. (83.3 x 58.5 em) Private Collection Literature: S. Kossak and J. Casey Singer 1998, no. 2 is drawn to a larger scale, which may account for it. In early paintings, the rules of hierarchical placement may Palace that resembles statues found in India at Kurkihar (Gaya district, Bihar). ing of Atisa that was commissioned by The parasol has been worked inconspicuously into a complicated decorative 3; see Fig. 3.7). Parasols (Tib. gdugs) also occur above the heads of buddhas, saints, or their footprints (cf. Figs. 1.24, top register; 2.5 and 4.2), though rarely after about the thirteenth century. Royal parasols (chattra) were an o ld Indian motif CHAPTER 1 period sculptures,90 as exemplified by Figure 1.26, a statue now in Potala not have been so rigidly applied, as we know from the example of a large painthis devoted Tibetan translator, Nagtsho Lotsawa (as will be described in chapter 2.6 Parasols occur often in ?ala- throne-back scheme that incl udes a bodhi tree within the head nimbus , an elaborate cushion backrest, and a pair of stupas resting on a bar above it. Some paintings oftvvelfth- and thirteenth-century Tibet continued to use the parasol motif. Figure 1.27 depicts a venerable Tibetan teacher in a relatively FIG. 1.2.6 Buddha Sakyamuni beneath a Parasol 9th to 1Oth cenrury Brass Height: 61-2 in. (16.5 em) Potala Palace, Lima Lhakhang (Bronze Chapel), inventor)' no. 544. After: Ulrich von Schroeder 2002, vol. 1, pl. 68a. modest Wdy, seated on a simple clothcovered mat and without an elaborate backrest For lack of identifying inscriptions, the lama's identity remains a mystery. His sanctity is indicated by the lion pedestal, head and body nimbuses, and, of course, by the parasol. Note the unusual upturned robes at his knees. THE EARLIEST DEPICTIONS OF LINEAGES To understand the development of early Tibetan painted portraits, we should try to locate and date the earliest depictions of lineages. Kossak dates the nrst surviving true painted 1ineages to the early thirteenth century, asserting: 91 The earliest Kadampa portraits to survive, from the late eleventh century, were probably personal objects of veneration and include no lineages. They are followed by paintings in which an incipient lineage begins to be manifest in a top border, but it is not until the early thirteenth century, particularly among the Kagylipas, that a tradition of 1ineage painting emerges. FIG. 1.2.7 Tibetan Lama beneath a Parasol Ca. 13th century 6 x 5 in. (15.2 x 12.7 em) Courtesy Michael J. and Beara McCormick Collection For example, one still earlier painting from eleventh-century central Tibet that was published in a recent Japanese exhibition catalog portrays a standing bodhisattva with two Tibetan patrons MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA 27 I 2 ~ .) 4 5 6 7 d3 d2 dl d4 d6 28 CHAPTER 1 d7 d5 d8 d9 dlO dll p FJG. 1.2.8 Vajrasattva and Consort Ca. late 11th to 12th cenrury Opaque watercolor on cloth 23% x 14 in. (60.4 x 35.6 em) Virginia Museum of Fine Arts, Richmond. Nasli and Alice Heeramaneck Collection, Gifr of Paul Mellon (68.8.11.5) Photograph by Katherine We12el © Virginia Museum of Fine Arts Literature: G. Tucci 1 949, vol. 2, p. 331f; P. Pal1987, "Tibetan Religious Paintings in rhe Virginia Museum of Fine Arts, " Arts in Virgi11ia, nos. 1-3, pp. 46-9, figs. 2-3; and S. Huntington and J. Huntington 1990, no. 105. below but no lineal gurus. 92 True lin- A teacher named Nyang Sherab Drakpa Pal (gNyos Grags pa dpal, eages were those that traced the lineage Chok (Nyang Shes rab mchog) is also II 06-1165/ 11 82).98 He was a Tibetan lay- back to its earliest roots.93 Few complete painted lineages- including a primordial listed as a lineal guru in the Mahiiyoga lineage.95 A closely related lineage is man who played important religious and political roles in Lhasa in the mid-twelfth buddha-have been found in paintings attested by the record of teachings of the century, and he is called in an inscrip- dating to the twelfth century or earlier. Fifth Dalai Lama, namely for the com- tion "the great teacher, father of the Nyo, By the eleventh century, a whole upper row of twelve gurus could be depicted in mentary ofViliisavajra (sGeg pa'i rdo rje) on the twenty-second c hapter of the Drakpa" (slob dpon chen po gnyos yab drags pa). 99 The painting may date to the a painting, as attested by the description Guhyagarbha Tanh·a. Here the presumed generation of his son or main spiritual ofNagtsho Lotsawa's early large-scale portrait of Atisa (see Fig. 3.7). But they patron of the painting, Lama Shiikya Zangpo, appears as number thirty-three, heirs, i.e., to the mid- or late twelfth century. The inscriptions establish that lacked a beginning buddha and did not Len Shiikya Zangpo (Glan Shiikya the lineage on the left (gums l through 14 constitute a sequential lineage. The top row of the eleventh-century Amitiiyus bzang po), while the last lama depicted in the lineage is number twenty-nine% in diagram [B]) is that ofGuhyasamiija. (They also account for the anomalous (Fig. 1.24) must also be viewed as an A similar Nyingma lineage is attested Tibetan monks, above the Indian lineal incipient and incomplete lineage. by the Record of Teachings Received of masters, who are actually meant to be One of the earliest Tibetan paintings with a complete lineage may be Figure Indians.) This painting is important as it is one of the first to show a full lineage, 1.28, a Nyingma painting ofVajrasattva Gongkar Dorjedenpa Kunga Namgyal (Gong dkar rDo rje gdan pa Kun dga' mam rgyal, 1432- 1496), though complete with primordial buddhas, Indian with spouse that has been dated to the second half of the eleventh century by it passes through Zurchung's son, Drophukpa Shiikya Sengge (sGro phug teachers, and later Tibetan lamas. In fact, it shows two lineages. John Huntington. If his dating to "circa l 065- l 085" is accurate even to within a pa Shiikya seng ge). 97 generation or two, that would still make it one of the earliest-known thangkas this painting somewhat tentative is that Shiikya and Zangpo are common name recorded in some detail in the Blue Annals-'00 That lineage is also confinned with a guru lineage. The dating depends elements. From its sty le, moreover, the by the Fifth Dalai Lama in his record on whether the patron, Lama Shiikya Changchub (Bla ma Shiikya byang chub), thangka would probably not be dated by every expert on Tibetan art to the of teachings received, which notes among the several transmissions of whose nan1e is given by an inscrip- late eleventh century. That being the Guhyasamiija Mai'ijuvajra a fifth trans- tion, can be identified as Len Shiikya case, scholars who consider the late mission, this very lineage of the Nyo Changchub (Glan Shiikya byang chub) of the histories and Iineage records.94 eleventh century too early will have to explicit! y deny that the patron was tradition (gNyos lugs): 101 Huntington's identification of the The first lineage, that of the Nyo tradition of the Guhyasamiija, was One thing that makes the dating of I. ' Jan1 dpal dbyangs (Mafijugho~ii; but in the Blue Annals: ' Jam pa'i rdo rje, Mafijuvajra) 2. Sangs rgyas ye shes zhabs (Buddhaji'iiina) 3. Mar me mdzad Len Shiikya Zangpo, giving stylistic patron as one of the main disciples of Surchung Sherab Drakpa (Zur chung counter-evidence. Another well -known early Shes rab grags pa, l 0 14-l 074) seems painted portrait (for which, however, no reasonable. We can therefore tentatively accept the dating to about I060 to II 00. photograph was furnished for publication) depicts as its main subject Nyo The painting's (Fig. 1.28) structure is shown in diagran1 [A]. The inscriptions beneath the Iineal 4 gurus: I. 'Bhi ma Ia (Vimala) 5 3. Gye re mChog skyong 7 8 9 4. Rin chen gzhon nu 10 5. rGyal ba yon tan 6. sNubs Sangs rgyas ye shes dl 2. Lo tsii ba Rin chen mchog 3 2 12 II l lb 2b 3b 4b 13 6? 5b 14 6b 7b 8b d2 d3 d4 d5 7. Nya [illegible] ... mchog MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA 29 4. ' Jam dpal grags pa According to Per Sorensen, portrayed an Indian monk-scholar and 5. dPal bde ba Bhairava was a favorite specialty of Indian adepts in the very same painting. 6. Dri med sbas pa. [Down to no. 6. Vi ma Ia gupta the Ny6 family. Both Guhyasamaja and Yamari tantras had been transmit- The presence of inscriptions explains the anomalous position of the Tibetan (Dri med sbas pa), the lineage ted to Nyo Lotsawa Yonten Drak and monks above Indian Iineal masters: they is the same as that recorded for his clan line via Balin, based on the were supposed to be Indians. the Ra tradition (Rwa lugs); then begins the Ny6 tradition proper:] 7. Yi ge' i rNal ' byor pa exegetical school of Jnanapada. Several lineage histories assert that Ny6 Lotsawa In addition to the previous two thangkas with guru lineages datable received not only the nine- and thirteen- to before 1200, a pair of Indian stone 8. Kahna pa (Kfu).ha?) 9. Badzra shri (Vajrasri) deity Bhairava cycle, but also the thirteen-deity Black Yamantaka (K~~I)a carvings ofTibetan lamas has survived, dating to around the late twelfth century I0. Ba lingta A tsarya Yamfui) Drakpa Pal 's son Lhanangpa (Figs. 1.29 and 1.30). Both of the stone II. gNyos Lo tsa ba Yon tan grags 12. gNyos rOo rje bla ma (The Fifth (!Ha nang pa) disseminated the cycle through an uncle-nephew succession carvings portray lineages that start with Vajrasattva and end with the main figure. Dalai Lama notes that he thought of teachers, as also noted by nun1erous that the absence of this name in records of teachings received. 106 Indian stele carved out of mudstone (an the lineage record ofGongkar Dorjedenpa was probably due to The painting's contents would have been impossible to clarity without the inscriptionsw 7 ln Drakpa Pal's indurated shale) a Tibetan lama with lineal gurus. It is one of the earliest-known examples of a complete Iineage in a time, laymen still dominated in many family-transmitted lineages, and here is statue. The structure of the stele is as shown in diagram [C]. Who are the indi- a prominent example. The edge of the vidual lamas? Though their features and central figure 's long hair is indicated other details could just barely be made as Sangs rgyas Ras chen, rGyal ba Lha snang pa, Tsa ri Ras chen, and by a series of bumps or waves. His hair extends a little beyond his scalp line. In out, enough information is discemable to say that they seem to be a lineage of dPyal kha Chos rje) the minor figures, the presence of long teachers of the Dakpo Kagyu School, namely: 10 a an accidental omission.)' 02 13. gNyos dPalle 14. gNyos Grags pa dpal (1106-1165/1182) 15. gNyos gZi brjid dpal (also known 16. sTon mo lung pa Ye shes mkhar 17. Kun mkhyen Chos sku ' od zer hair is shown by similar wavy edges of hair that extend beyond the line of 18. ' Phags ' od Yon tan rgya mtsho their scalps. The shorter hair of monks, 19. The omniscient But6n (Bu ston by contrast, is also painted solid black, Thams cad mkhyen pa) but its edge strictly follows the line of the monk 's scalp. Among the inner After Buton the lineage continues as minor figures we find repeated twice a before in the Iineage records. Other Nyo transmissions are documented in the layman wearing exactly the same robes as the central figure: once accompany- main records of teachings received, for ing a Tibetan lay master and the second example, that of a certain protector (Trag shad).'o3 time with an Indian pundit teacher, who wears exactly the same robes and The second lineage on the thangka Figure 1.29 depicts in a small l. Vajrasattva (where we usually see Vajrddhara) 2. Tilopa 3. Naropa 4. Marpa (lay Tibetan wearing a robe with long sleeves) 5. Milarepa 6. Gampopa 7. Kagyu lama 8. Kagyu lama hat that Atisa normally wears. Their (gurus I b through 8b in diagram [B]) identical dress is misleading: they depict Note that none of the figures is shown in depicts the Nyo transmission for Yamantaka ('Jigs byed). This is con- two of the central figures' illustrious descendants. partial profile. Guru 8, the central figure, was probably the teacher of the patron, fimled by an inscription on the back Judging by their Tibetan vests, while guru 7 was that lama's teacher. in a different hand, which has been pub! ished as: ' dina mar kyi 'di tshe "jig byed rgyud pa. 1GI Despite the somewhat we could deduce that the three monks to the left in the top register must be Neither guru can be easily recognized from his facial features or iconogmphy. Tibetan. But the inscriptions establish Three of the last four lamas hold their unclear wording, the main point is clear: that they were meant to depict three hands folded on their laps in the gesture the gurus on the right side represent the lineage for Yamantaka of the Ny6 early Indian gurus of the Guhyasamaja. The vests must have been an icono- of meditative concentration. They thus represent masters from a contemplative transmission. 105 graphic mistake, since the artist correctly tradition. Since guru number 6 died in JO C HAPTER 1 f i G. 1.2.9 7 2 4 3 8 5 6 Kagyii Lama with His Lineage Gurus India, Bengal, commissioned for a Tibetan parr on Mudstone with polychrome and gold Late 12th or early 13th century 5 X 3 'A X 1% in. (12.7 X 8.3 X 4.1 em) Inscribed on back: "om ah hum" The Phoenix Art Museum, Gift of !so bel Steele (1992.45.A) Literature: S. Kossak and]. Casey Singer 1998, p. 34, fig. 17, "miniature stele with a lama." MIRROR OF THE B U DDHA }1 Frc. I.3o Kagyi.i Lama with His Lineage and Deities India, Bengal, commissioned for a Tibetan patron Late 12th to early 13th century Stone (possibly phyllite) Height: 5 in. (12.8 em) Potala Palace, Li ma Lha khang, inventory no. 1552. Literature: U. von Schroeder 2001, vol. 1, p. 383, pl. 1220. 1153, we can estimate that his student, number 7, flourished in the II 50s through II 70s, while the main figure (8) probably flourished in the nex1 two or three decades. A dating of the stele to the II 90s would fit those estimates. The stele was presumably carved before the main Buddhist centers ofMagadha were destroyed in 120 I. Though that first stele (Fig. 1.29) must be very rare, it is even more gratifying to learn that a sister stele, Figure 1.30, now surv ives in Tibet The second, slightly larger piece also depicts a Tibetan monk as its main figure. It was carved not of mudstone, but of phyllite, a foliated rock that is intermediate in composition and texture between slate and schist. 109 The second stele survives in the Statue Chapel (Li rna Lha khang) of Potala Palace. 110 Its lineal sequence seems to be the same as that of Figure 1.29, though two deities have been added below (d I and d2), as shown in diagram (D]. As in Figure 1.29, this statue portrays a main figure with his lineage of 7 Kagyu teachers, nan1ely: 2 I. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 32 Vajrasattva (instead ofVajradhara) Tilopa 3 Naropa 5 Marpa Milarepa dl Gampopa Kagyli lama Kagyli lama CHAPTER 1 4 8 6 d2 Here the last four Tibetan lamas hold their hands in the gesture of meditation. The lineage may possibly be that of the Drugpa Kagyil, who propitiated the Four-Handed Mahiikala (dl , Mgon po Phyag bzhi pa), though several other traditions also propitiated that protector. 111 In that case, guru nwnber 7 would be Phagmotrupa and guru 8, the main figure, his disciple Ling Repa. However, neither corresponds with his usual later depiction. (The principal figure here resembles through his hand gesture and hair line some early statues of Drigung Kyoppa, as seen for instance in Figure 5.26.) Whoever their main figures turn out to be, both steles establish the existence of full lineages in art dating to about the last decade of the twelfth century. They also confirm the existence oflnd ian-made portrait statues of lamas in Tibet. 112 MIRROR OF THE B U DDHA 33 C H APTER 2 Human Types in Tibetan Iconography: Essential Distinctions early Tibetan paintings and the major and minor figures that they depict, we need to know the guidelines governing their depictions of humans. If we overlook or confuse the decisive distinctions of Buddhist culture and their visual expression, we will not be able to accurately identifY depictions of humans in Tibetan art. We will be iconographically blind, at least partially, and unable to tell, for example, a monk from a layman or an Indian from a Tibetan. Even reputable sc holars confuse some of the basic human iconographic types-" 3 Such errors and the lack of a few less common ones. If we can identify them on sight, we can start reading the beginnings of several of the most common lineages, even without inscriptions. Most human iconographic types are determined by the categories implicit in these six questions: succinct summary of the essential guidelines for identifYing human figures have prompted me to present here a sketch of the main human types. Although we might glean a little about the iconography of certain human types by carefully studying published pantheons of Tibetan Buddhism, we will not learn much if we do not already know what to look for. (Humans are not a highly significant part of most pantheons. ) 114 What follows, then, is my attempt to analyze the basic human iconographic types according to the underlying religious and cultural categories, high! ighting the essential distinctions that are at stake and illustrating the main types. 1. Gender TO UNDERSTAND TYPES OF HUMANS Among human gurus, there are about a dozen iconographic types, including a Derail of Fig. 2.10 them as such. Monks and laymen were usually painted very differently: the telltale signs are their hair length, the presence or absence of sleeves on their robes, the cut and color of their robes, and the use or absence of wide belts. 3. Etlmic Origins I. Is the figure male or female? 2. Did he or she take mona~tic or lay ordination? 3. Is he or she Tibetan? 4. Is he or she a scholar (pundit)? 5. Is he or she an ascetic or adept? 6. Is he or she royalty? The vast majority of saints or lineal gurus portrayed were male, and most of my examples are accordingly of males. But I will also take into account several types offemales for which I could find examples. 2. Monastic Ordination Whether a great teacher was monastically ordained determines his or her status within the rules of Buddhist vows and, to some extent, within Tibetan Buddhist culture. (Every Buddhist has taken some sort of vow, beginning with the most fundamental vow of refuge.) From about the thirteenth century on, most Tibetan lamas or saints were either novice monks or fully ordained monks. But some, especially in the eleventh and twelfth centuries and within fami ly lineages, took the vows of Buddhist lay followers, and it is essential to recognize Most non-Tibetan masters depicted in thangkas were Indian, but now and then a Newar, Mongol, Chinese, Tangut, or person from some little·known area of the Tibetan borderlands could appear. So, if the master was not a true ethnic Tibetan-or at least someone from an area of traditional Tibetan Buddhist religion and dress- what Wds his ethnic identity? In depictions of lineage masters, we encounter many Indians, going back to the great Indian founder of Buddhism, the great lord of sages, Siikyamuni. It is essential to recognize them as Indians. Monks and laymen from India are normally shown dressed differently from their Tibetan counterparts. Skin color could also be a determining factor in identifying ethnic origins: Indians were often depicted with darker skin. Yogis from South Indian (Dravidians) could be shown with skin that was very dark brown or even deep blue. 4. Scholarly Attainment The mark of a highly learned teacher among both Indians and Tibetans was the pundit's hat, usually red or yellow, with its characteristic long ear flaps. An ordinary monk or nonscholar is show11 MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA 35 iconographically without that particular hat The vast majority of pundits were monks. But a few Indian laymen (e.g., Gayadhara) were accomplished enough as scholars to wear a pundit's hat 5. Status as Ascetic, Yogi, or Adept In Tibet, the marks of ascetic practice included a single white robe worn by the "cotton-clad yogis" (Repa =ras pa) in the Kagyii Schools. There also existed a special meditation hat (sgom =hwa) sometimes worn by lamas of those same contemplative schools. Long hair piled up on the head, as with the Tibetan mad yogis Thangtong Gyalpo (see Fig. 1.16) or Tsangnyon Heruka (gTsang smyon He m ka, 1452- 1507), could also be the sign of a great Tibetan meditator (sgom chen), yogi, or adept Among Indian masters, most tautric adepts were shown as yogis, wearing minimal lay dress, and hence can be recognized from their appearance. But not all adepts demonstrated thei r inner spiritual attainments through their dress. A few, Nagarjuna for example, retained their original outer garb as monks, while some other adepts were outwardly depicted as layman kings, sti ll wearing their royal robes and jewels. Mi nimal.ly clothed female ascetics or yogiQTs are an established female type among both Indians and Tibetans. Nonnally clad ordinary laywomen, often female consorts, form another female type for both cultures. 6. Royalty Royalty turns out to be a surprisingly diverse and widely attested category. Kings were not depicted frequently, but their clothing and jewelry were. The sumptuous and idealized images of Indian universal emperors (ca/o·avartin, Tib. 'khor los sgyw· ba) are the basis for the iconography of sambhogakiiya buddhas and male peaceful deities such as great bodhisattvas (like 36 C HAPTER 2 AvalokiteS\Iara). Their elaborate Indian ornamentation became standardized into eight traditional types of bejeweled gold ornaments. 11 5 And Central Asian or Chinese warrior-kings are the prototype for the four guardians of the directions (lokapiila) commonly known as the four great kings (rgyal po chen po b=hi). Royalty can be a subtype of laymen of any country. (Royal monks were typically shown as monks of their respective countries.) Among Indian laymen, a few were kings. The great tantric adept Indrabhiiti was a king not oflndia but ofO<;I<;Iiyana (Tib. 0 rgyan or U rgyan) to the northeast oflndia, the same origi n as the famous Indian tantric sorcerer Padmasambhava beloved of the Nyingma SchooL Among Tibetan laymen, too, the ancient Tibetan kings occasionally appear, wearing their distinctive red turbans. The mythical kings of Shambhala and the related Shambhala Kalkin rulers (Tib. Rigs ldan) were very similarly portrayed. Among later outstanding patrons of Buddhism or sponsors of specific Tibetan lamas, Mongol khans and Chinese emperors may also be depicted. Still later, at least o ne Chinese emperor of the Ching (Manchu) dynasty- the Qianlong Emperor-was sometimes pictured as the main figure of a thangka, like a great lama and as an emanation of MaiijusrT. 116 the eight most common male types being ordinary Tibetan monks, Tibetan monk-scholars, ordinary Tibetan laymen, Tibetan ascetics, Indian monk-scholars, ordinary Indian monks, ordinary Indian laymen, and Indian lay ascetics. Among females, the most common were ordinary Indian and Tibetan laywomen. SHORTHAND TERMS Some Iineage records use shorthand tenns to specify, presumably tor the benefit of painters or commissioners of paintings, the iconographic type and hence the appearance of each master. We occasionally find these abbreviated tem1s, for example, in the record of teachings of the Fifth Dalai Lama. 11 8 The terms include a few additional specifications of hair length, hair color (whether gray), and age. Indian ordained pundit (pan ser) Indian lay pundit (pan dkar) Indian pundit-adept who is a monk (pan grub rab 'byung) Tibetan monk (bod btsun) Gray-haired lay Tibetan tantrist (sngags pa se bo) Gray-haired monk (rab 'byung se bo) White-robed lay Tibetan tantrist (sngags dkar, i.e., sngags pa gos dkar) White-robed lay Tibetan tantrist with long hair (sngags dkar Ieang lo can) SUMMARY Ignoring, for the moment, asceticism and royalty as special categories, we can focus on the four key iconographic attributes: a. gender, b. status of ordination, c. country, d. scholarly attainment Those tour can, in theory, be combined to make six1een subtypes. 117 In practice, most of the female combinations are very rare and some are not depicted at all in art (such a~ scholar-nuns and scholarlaywomen). The combinations that have been observed nwnber about a dozen, White-robed lay Tibetan tantrist with short hair (sngags dkar co breg can) Lay Tibetan tantrist with short hair (sngags pa co reg mgo) Young lay Tibetan tantrist (sngags g=hon) 1. An Ordinary Ttbetan Monk Figure 2.1 depicts an ordinary (i.e., nonscholarly) monk from Tibet. How can we know? His Tibetan origin is given away by his distinctive vest. Tibetan monks dressed, in general, similarly to Indian monastics, but they wore a typical Tibetan lama's vest or waistcoat (Tib stod gos or stod ·gag). I lis bare head indicates that he is not a scholar, or at least that he is not explicitly depicted as one. The subject of this painting would thus seem to be fairly straightforward. Yet in a previous publication, its main figure was confused with the great Indian pundit Ati5a119 That publication acknowledged that "this early portrait differs from the usual later ones in which the master has an Ind ian style red abbot's hat and has a stupa and travel mg sack behind him." 120 But what is relevant to compare here is not Ati5a's later depiction but his early ones, which show him almost exclusively as a learned Indian monic Generally, if no inscription speaks to the contrary, the basic features of iconography should be dec isive in identifYing a human figure's type. We cannot suddenly tum a Tibetan (wearing a lama's vest) monk into an Indian guru, or vice versa. Was there a reason for ignoring the basic iconography here? The same authors explained: That this may be Ati5a is indicated by the fact that the donor is an ordained lay person who is holding up an offering lamp. I lis long hair indicates that he is a layman, while his robes show him to be ordained (ordained laity being allowed to wear such robes on certain occasions.)121 Thus it was the iconography of the patron, not the main figure, that was highly unusual, if not unique. lie was depicted as a Tibetan monk-patron with long hair. That oddity led those authors to speculate that he might have been Dromttin Gyalway Jungnay (' Brom ston rGyal ba'i 'byunggnas, 1005-1064), evidently not J..'llowing that Dromttin was a standard figure in early Kadam painting, with a fixed iconography as a long-haired layman. It is incorrect to show Dromttin wearing monk 's robes (as the patron of Fig. 2. 1 is), just as it is wrong to depict Ati5a as a Tibetan monk. Those authors evidently sensed that something was amiss because they ultimately described the painting as depicting a "Lama (possibly Ati5a or an Early Kadam Lama)." It is true that longhaired monks arc a self-contradicting and confusing anomaly in Tibetan iconography. This is the only case that I remember seeing, but this figure's presence here Frc. 2..r Tibetan Monk 12th or '13th century Watercolors on cotton 13 ~X 10 ~in. (35.3 X 27.4) Collection of Mr. and Mrs. John Gilmore Ford Photograph C The Walters Arr Museum, Baltimore F. 1 I I Lirerarure: M. Rhie and R. Thurman 1991, no. 95. MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA 37 but they wear a typical Tibetan lama's vest as an upper garment Both of their shoulders are usually covered by robes, but if not, then the lama's vest is usually visible on the uncovered side. It would have been almost unheard of for a Tibetan monk of this period (the twelfth century) to wear a scholar's hat, since that custom was not introduced in Tibet unti l the following century. 123 The main subject ofF igure 2.3 has the iconography of an ordinary Tibetan monk. Nothing can be deduced about his school affiliations without inscriptional or other evidence in the painting. A previous scholar tentatively identified the main figure as the Drigung School founder Drigung Kyoppa Jigten Gonpo, pictured below as Fig. 5.21 ,) based on similar iconography in the two paintings.'24 But the main figure here FIG. 2.2. 1ibetan Monk Late 1 hh to 12th cenntr)' 18 '.4 x 14 '.4 in. (46.4 x 36.2 em) The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, NY, U.S.A . Purchase, Friends of Asian Art, 1991 (1991.152) ART348437 © The Metropolitan Museum of Art I Art Resource, NY Literature: J. Casey Singer 1994, fig. 17a; S. Kossak and]. Casey Singer 1998, no. 5; and S. Kossak 2010, p. 26, fig. 13 "port rait of a lama, probably Dromton." 38 CHAPTER 2 should not become a springboard for other impossible identifications. Figure 2.2 depicts an ordinary Tibetan monk. He presumably was an early master of the Kadam order, and he cannot depict Dromton, as Steven Kossak suggested. As a lay follower Dromt6n was not allowed to wear monk's robes. Kossak's suggestion goes back to a mistaken suggestion by Jane Casey Singer. 122 She recognized the master to be wearing Tibetan monastic garb, though evidently she did not know that Dromt6n was a layman and therefore normally shown dressed in non-monastic garb. As mentioned above, Tibetan monks dress similarly to Indian monks, is more likely to be a master from the Kadam School, since Kadam lineages appear behind him. Many masters possess a very similar iconography, and so one of the key clues for identifying the main figure and his religious school are the lineages shown, which in this case do not include the Kagyil founders and do seem to include Atisa and Dromton. (This complicated painting is an instance of two or even three lineages being depicted.) 2. Tibetan Monk-Scholars Figure 2.4 depicts a Tibetan monkscholar. In fact, it shows the first Tibetan to bear the title of"all-around scholar" (Skt. paw!ita, or «pundit"): Sakya Pandita ( 1182- 1251), here as a detail from Figure 3.15, a painting depicting Drakpa Gyaltshen and Sakya Pandita as two lineal lamas. Sakya Pandita completed his scholastic and Sanskrit literary studies in about the 1220s and then presumably began to wear a pundit's hat- which was red in color and with a rmmded top. In early Sakya paintings (from about the late thirteenth or early fourteenth centuries), he may be the FIC. 2.3 Kadam Master wirh His Lineages Ca. 1200 37 318 x 28 ~in. (95 x 73 em) Collection R.R.E. Lirerarure: A. Heller 1999, no. 62; and P. Pal er al. 2003, no. 120. MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA 39 only Iineal master show11 wearing such identification with the Sa-skya-pa a hat. But by the mid-fourteenth century, hierarchs, who acted as Di shi everyone in a lineage may be shown wearing them. (See Fig. 3.22, also illus- (Imperial Preceptors) in the Yuan court, is suggested. These monks ... trated as Fig. 1.21.) were c ustomarily represented Figure 2.5 depicts three Tibetan FIG. 2.4 (derail from Fig. 3.15) Sakya Pandita, a Learned Tibetan Monk Frc. 2. 5 Three Monks Ca. 1100 Distemper on wood (wooden manuscript cover) 4 Ys x 14 Ys in. (10.5 x 35.9 em) The Metropolitan Museum of Arr, New York, NY, U.S.A. Gift of The Kronos Collections, 1995 (1995.569.4b} © The Metropolitan Museum of Art I Arr Resource, NY Lirerarure: S. Kossak 2010, fig. 25b. 40 C HAPTER 2 without any special attributes and monks, including a learned monk in the center. Since he wears a Tibetan monk's bare-headed .... The distinctive garment worn vest, the central ngure can hardly be Atisa, as previously suggested. m by the monk in the Jisha woodcut Without inscriptions, the iconogra- is his waistcoat, called sTod-gos or sTod- ·gag in Tibetan. It has deeply phy should be the decisive factor in cut away armholes, with a strip of determining the identity of a figure, and here, unless the published illustration is cloth projecting over the shoulders. The sTod-gos is not mentioned in somehow inaccurate, the iconography the Indian vinaya [monastic rules] indicates a monk from Tibet. and does not seem to be known Figure 2.6 depicts a print from Chinese wood blocks dating to about in China, where the monks wore robes with long sleeves. 130 I . Heather Stoddard, when describing this example of Sino-Tibetan art thirty-five years ago, specified the iconography of the Tibetan and Indian monks. She described the special distinguishing garment as the "lama vest" (stod gos or stod 'gags), calling it a monk 's "waistcoat" with deeply cut away armholes and a strip of cloth projecting over the shoulders. As she explained: 126 A further more important detail, which indicates the Tibetan origins of the series appears in one of the items of clothing of the figure on the left. This figure, who is Stoddard named and described the nine garments of a Tibetan monk: I. skirt (sham thabs) 2. underskirt (smad g.yogs) 3. sash (rked rags) 4. waistcoat (stod gos) already described 5. long, wide shawl (g;:an) 6. boots (/ham) 7. large, heavy pleated cloak (=Ia gam) worn as protection from cold 8. civara (chos gos), a pleated upper robe worn by fully ordained monks 9. pointed red or yellow hat (rtse =hwa) conversing with a Buddha, is without any doubt a representation of a Tibetan monk. A tentative Figure 2.7 depicts four figures who all prominently wear the typical vests FIG. 2..6 Sakyamuni and a Tibetan Monk Hanzhou; ca. 130 I Woodcm illustrations from Qisha Tripiraka, cha prer 3 of the G uhyasamiiia Tantra 11 ~ x 4 ~ in. (30 x 12 em) TI1e British Museum, OMPB Or. 80.d.2.5. Afrer: CAUM no. 277, Arts of China, p. 220; H. (Stoddard) Karmay197.5, pl. 29; W. Zwalf ed. 198.5, pl. 306; and J. Casey Singer 1995, fig. 13. FIG. 2..8 (detail from Fig. 3.15) Drakpa Gyalrshcn, a Tibetan Layman FIG. 2. 7 Four Tibetan Teachers Wearing Lama Vests 13th century 17 x 13 ~in. (43.2 x 34.3 em) Counesy of Michael ]. and Beata McCormick Collection of Tibetan lan1as. Though they seem to be Kagyo lamas, in the absence of inscriptions they cannot be individually identified. Their physiognomy and dress are also not distinctive enough to identity them. The way that they wear thei r vests, uncovered on one side by a shawl or pleated upper robe, is not typical of portraits of the Taklung Kagyll (compare Fig. 5. 10), though I have seen something similar in the main figure of one Drigung Kagyii portrait (Fig. 5.25). MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA 41 FIG. 2 .9 Sachen wirh His Lineage Gurus 17rh century 115 .Y8 x 76 in. (293 x 190 em) Zimmerman Family Collection Photograph by john Bigelow Ta)'lor, . Y.C., 1997 Literature: G. Seguin 1977, no. 123; D. Jackson 20 I 0, fig. 3.2. 42 CHAPTER 2 Ftc. 1..1o .Marpa the Translator Early to mid-14th century 23 5116 x 20 L/16 in. (60 x 51 em) Pritzker Collection Literature: J. Casey Singer 1994, fig. 48: P. Pal 2003, no. 127; A. Heller 2003, p. 291. MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA 43 3. Ordinary Ttbetan U1ymen Figure 2.8 depicts the Tibetan lay master Jetsun Drakpa Gyaltshen of Saky a as one of two main lineal lamas. His long hair, long-sleeved robes, and garments colored white or green are typical physical mark s of a layman. (Precisely the long hair and those cloth ing colors and types were forbidden to monks by the Yinaya rule s, which aime d at setting the monk apart from ordinary worldly life.) Figure 2.9 depicts the grea t patriarch Sac hen, four of his early successors, and gurus of one of the lineages that he transmitted. Immediately to his right and left sit two of his sons (Sonam Tsemo and DralqJa Gya ltshe n), w-hile beneath them are depicted a grandson (Sak ya Pandita) and a great-grandson (Phakpa). Tho se five masters are called the five great founders (gong rna lnga) of Sal·:y a, wilo are commonly dtvided into two groups according to a prominent colo r of their dress: the Thre e Whi te Ones (dkar po rnam gsum ) and the Two Red One s (dmar po rnam gnyis). From their hair and robes with long sleeves, we can recognize the principal figure of Figure 2.9 and the two gurus nearest his shou lders to have been laymen. Note the whitish or crea my colo r of their oute r robes and the broad whitish belts at their wais ts. Sim ilarl y, the red- robed and red- hatted minor masters nearest Sach en's knees can be recognized at a glance to have been monks, if only from the red and oran ge colo rs of their robe s. Saky a Pandita and Phak pa are recognizably Tibetan since they wear lama 's vest s and both are marked as a learned mon k by their pund it's hats . Figure 2.10 also prominentl y depicts a Tibe tan lay master, Marpa the Translator (Ma r pha Lo tsa ba Cho s kyi blo gros, 1012- 1096 ), as its main figure. This thangka is unusual amo ng early Tibetan paintings in that it is almost completely dominated by laymen and two conspicuously dressed long-haired 44 CHA rTER 2. figures at the bottom left. Only one monastically ordained master is present, in the bottom register. Similarly, we find only one cotton-clad yogi (ras pa)- coul d he be Milarepa (Mi Ia Ras pa, 104Q 1123)? The predominance oflayme n can be explained, in part, if the painting depicts a family lineage dominated by laym en (such as the rNgo g family transmission) . Ano ther consideration is that in the time ofM arpa the ordination of monks was infre quen t Acc ordi ng to the inscription on the back , the patrons were two local rulers in Kham named Sonam Dorje (bSo d nam s rdo rje) and the youn g divine ruler {Lhabu) Akh ar (with wife and son). 127 It was commissioned with prayers for the ir longevity and increased wealth and secular pow er. Nothing mor e is know n to me about them. A family named Akh ar was prominent in Kyura (sKy u ra) distr ict ofK ham (northeast of Riwoche near Jyek undo ) in the late twelfth century, but I doub t they were relevant here . Som e Kham dialects formed personal nan1es beginning with " A," such as A mgo n, and Akh ar may have been such a nam e, especiall y since it stan ds after the title Lha bu (Divine son) . Lha (deity) was a title usually reserved for the old Tibetan Yarlung royalty, and this family might have claimed descent from them , just as Sanggye Onp o's main disciple and monastic succ esso r at Riwoche ( Lha A zhang) did. (The sam e patron com missioned Fig. 4 .12.) Figure 2. 11 depicts the godd ess Gree n Tara as transmitted by a Kadam tradition. It exemplifies once again (see also Figs. 3.1 , 3.1a, and 3.1 b) how the Tibetan lay Bud dhis t (Dro mton) and his Indian guru (Ati5a) were depicted in early paintings of the Kadam lineage. AtiSa is portrayed with his hands in a gesture of teach ing, and his simp le red Indian mon k's robe s leaves one shou lder exposed. The flaps of his pointed yellow pundit's hat fall to his shou lders or behind them . DromtOn is depicted here holding one hand up and the othe r to his heart. He wears a red long-sleeved robe that is tied at his waist with a light-colored belt. II is outer cloak covers his back up to the nape of his neck and is copi ous enou gh to cove r both knees. His long hair is indicated by a series of bum ps alon g the crow n of his head . In the Kadam transmission for Tara, Dromton is present, unlike in the Kadam Iineage for Avalokitesvara. 123 In Figure 2.11 , the top row of buddhas actually exem plifies the two ways in whic h a budd ha coul d wea r his monk 's robe s in early times: with one shou lder left uncovered and with both shou lders covered, leaving only head , hands, and feet exposed. Traditionally, the Buddha cove red both shoulders whi le teaching. (Not e the mandala disks that seem to float in spac e to the right and left of Tara's head nimbus, in front of her body nimb us.) A wonderful statue depicting Dromton with long hair and a robe with long sleeves survives in Potala Palace in Tibe t lllus trated here as Figure 2.12, it bears the inscription "Ho mag e to Dromton Gyalway Jungnay! " ( 'brom ston rgyal ba 'i 'byung gnas Ia na moll) . It is carved in fine-grained yellowish beige ston e wiili a grayish patina that may be phyllite. The statu e gives us the rare chan ce to see not just the front but also the back side of a lay Tibe tan's hair and clothing. Dromton's hai.r hangs straight dow n, endi ng in a series of tight curl s near his shoulders. Figure 2.13 depicts as its second lineal master (top row, second from the left) the Tibetan laym an Dromton, who here wears typical lay dress. Dromton 's hair, dark and wavy (bumpy-looking), seems to extend slightly abov e his scalp. llis outer robe is a light color-perhaps tan, though certainly not orange or yellow. This painting is unusual for showing (between the head nimbuses of the main figures, as guru num ber 5 in FIG. 1.1 I Green larii with AtiSa and Dromton G. 1100 64 ~ x 16 in. (64 x 42 ern) Private Collection, Switzerland literature: Paled. 2003, no. 116. ~ MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA 45 conical fur-brimmed hat. The brims of those flamboyant hats have fuzzy edges, and the tip of each one holds a tuft of hair or feathers and each tip extends beyond the edge of its wearer's head nimbus. Figure 2.16a depicts Ling Repa as a lineal master (top row, fifth from the right) in a painting of a Drukpa Kagyli master. His identity has been repeatedly mistaken, even though he is a Tibetan repa yogi.133 With his dark skin and lack of a normal lama's monastic robe, he is commonly confused with a darkskinned white- robed Indian yogi like Phadampa.':w An even better depiction of Ling Repa can be found in the murals of the main temple or Tsuklagkhang Ftc. :t.n Dromton 'Tibet; 12th ro 13th century Stone (possibly phyllite) Height: 4 '.4 in. ( I 0 em) Porala Palace, Ltma Lhakhang (Bronze Chapel), inventory no. 1548. After: U. von Schroeder 200 I, vol. 2, pl. 213C-D. The background of Figure 2.13 is noteworthy for placing two shrine niches (within which the main figures sit) before a fringe of trees or at least (Gtsug lag khang) at Gyantse, where he is depicted at the end of the series of eighty-four great adepts, together with an additional Indian pundit.U; rudimentary tree tops that may represent the bodhi tree. 5./ndian Monk-Scholars 4. Tibetan Ascetics or Yogis Figure 2.14 illustrates an early portrait diagram (A]) a master who wears neither typical monastic nor lay robes. His inner robe is red, long-sleeved, and closed at the waist by a v.rhite belt. I believe that he represents a Kadam Iineal master who never took full ordination and who is thus shown as neither fully lay nor monastic. (Such an in-between ordination status seems to have been more common in the eleventh and twelfth centuries than it was later.)129 We may have to work from the iconography back to the historical record if we want to identify this figure. The gurus in the top row may depict two lineages, with guru number I b representing the beginning of one of them. Ati5a, number I, wears his plain red Indian monk 's robes and does not leave one shou lder bare. See the structure as sketched in diagram [A]. 46 C HAPTER ~ Indian monk-scholars dress similarly to the monk-scholars of Tibet, except that of Milarepa, the most famous Tibetan they do not wear a lama's vest and their right shoulders are typically left uncov- ascetic yogi, who meditated in frigid caves with nothing more to cover him- ered. Figure 2. 17 depicts the great Indian master Ati5a dressed in Indian monk 's self than a white cotton cloth. 130 Though robes. He wears a yellow pointed hat, the mark of an Indian Buddhist scholar, the flaps of which hang down on the sides as far as hi s s houlders. Note the extensively repainted, the painting's iconographic plan is unchanged and identify it as art of the Drigung Kagyo from the thirteenth century. Its arrangement follows a tradition prescribed by the Drigtmg founder and his early successors, and it is the same as that ofF igure 5 .2 1. Note the vines growing from the vase at the bottom center and the two niiga kings supporting the main throne on the right and left.131 Another example of Milarepa as the prototypical cotton-clad (repa-style) Tibetan yogi is Figure 2.1sm Note that he here wears a meditation strap (sgom thag), one of the special accouterments of a Tibetan yogi. His four standing repa disciples all wear a peculiar white sma ll Indian palm-leaf manuscript (pustaka) of sacred scripture that he holds in his left hand. l110ugh in many cases Indian monk 's robes are unifonnly red , in this case Atisa is shown wearing a vcrm iIion upper robe and purple skirt (sham thabs). (See also Fig. 3.2.) Figure 2.18 clearly illustrates the dress of both an Indian fXIJ)qita and a buddha in a Sino-Tibetan woodcut. Again Lhc Indian pundit wears robes that leave one shoulder bare, and the flaps of his pundit's hat fall to just below his shoulders. Here both figures wear the pleated upper robe (chos gos) of a full monk. 2 lb 3 4 5 7 6 P(8) d l d2 d3 Frc. 2.r3 Two Kadam Masters wirh Their Lineages 12th century 21 x 15 'h in. (53.3 x 39.4 em) Private Collenion Literature: S. Kossak and]. Casey Singer 1998, 00. 11. d4 MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA 47 F IG. 2.. 14 F IG. 2..I5 Milarepa 13th century 21 '14 x 18 ~in. (55.2 x 47 em) Rubin Museum of An C2002.24.5 (HAR 65121) Milarepa Ca. 17th century 46 x 40 ~in. (116.8 x 102.9 em) Rubin Museum of Art C2002.24.4 (HAR 65120) 48 CHAPTER 2 f tG. 2.16 F IG. 2..I6A, DETAIL Drukpa Kagyii Master Ca. 1280-1310 30 1A x 23 \11 iu. (77 x 59.7 em) The Metropolita n Museum of An, New York, NY, U.S.A. Purchase, Miriam and Ira D. Wallach Philanthropic Fund Gift, 1991 (1991.304) © The Metropolitan Museum of Art I Art Reso urce, NY Literature: S. Kossak and J. Casey Singer 1998, no. 30; D. Jackson 2010, figs. 4.13 a nd 5.3. Ling Repa and Tsangpo Gyare M I RROR OF THE BUDDHA 49 F1c. :t. r7 {derail from Fig. 3.2) A tiS:! Early ro mid-12t h cenrury Distemp er on cotton 19 !h x 13 *in. (49.5 x 35.5 em) The Metropo litan Museum of Art, New York, l\'Y, U.S.A. Gifr of rhc Kronos Collecrio ns, 1993 (1993.479) ©The M etropoli tan Museum of Arr I Arr Resourc e, NY Photogr aph by John Bigelow Taylor Lirerarure: J. Casey Singer 1994, fig. 16; H. Stoddar d 1996, fig. 1; and S. Kossak 20 I 0, fig. 14. below. The one above depicts the great monasti c abbot Sakya5ribhadra, wearing a pointed red pWldit's hat. Below him is one of his Tibetan disciples dressed as a learned monk and wearing a rounded yellow pundit's hat. These two , each with slightly different dress, mark the boWldary in the lineage where Indian transmission reaches Tibet ln this painting, two different pundits hats are shown: a pointed red one for Indians and a yellow one with a flatter cresi, which seems almost square in comparison, for F1G.2.18 Slikyam uni and an Indian Pa~dita Hanzhou ; ca. 1301 Woodcu t illustra tions from chapter 3 of rhe Gub)'asamiija Tantra, jisbaum g 11 x 1 7 in. {30 x 43.1 em) J.-P. Dubose Collection Afrer: H. Karmay 1975, plares 30 * The main subject of Figure 2.19 is again an Indian monk-scholar, in this case Vanaratna, one of the last Indian pw1dits to visit Tibet, coming as he did over two centuries after the destruction of the main Buddhist monasteries of Magadha. (We shall meet him again in Figure3 .20.) LikeAt isa in Figure2 .17 (and 3.2), he holds a Sanskrit manuscript (pustaka) of scriptures in his left hand. He is shown with the flaps of his orange pw1dit's hat folded and tucked up. His right shoulder is bare. The sole slight concession to Tibetan monastic dress is the color of his upper robe, which is not the usual Indian solid red. (Perhaps he actually wore such an upper robe while Tibetans. Figure 2.21 depicts Atisa as an Indian monk-scholar. He is shown at the bottom left as third of four main figures, and his identity is clearly confirmed by a caption. But here the artist depicted him wearing a Tibetan lama's vest In some still later painting traditions, Ati5a and a fellow eastern- Indian abbot who preceded him to Tibet by nearly three centuries, San~ita, are regularly shown wearing a white upper inner garment resembling a sleeveless Wldershirt. Atisa is portrayed in a Tibetan vest and brocaded robes in the portrait of the Kadam master Shangton ofNarth ang, though I cannot account for it, except as an iconographic mistake . 136 in Tibet.) Figure 2.20 depicts a pair of monkscholars, an Indian above and a Tibetan 50 CHAPTE R 2. F1c. 2..r9 (detail from Fig. 1.21) Indian and Tibetan Monk-Scholar (demil of Fig. 1.21) Demil from Fig. 1.15 Two Monk-Scholars FIG. 2.2.0 F IG. 2.21 Atisa as Third Early Guru of a Kadam Lineage Ca. mid-15th century 31 V. x 18 'h in. (81 x 46.5 em) Private Collection Photograph Counesy of Sotheby's, Inc. © 2006 Literature: H. Kreijger 2001, no. 22; Sotheby's The Jucker Collection of Himalayan Paintings, New York, March 28, 2006, no. 55; D. Jackson 2010, fig. 2.4. 52 CHAPTER 2 Frc. 2.2.2 (detail from Fig. 1.2) Sakyasnohadra of Kashmir 6. Ordinary (Nonscholarly) Indian Monks Ftc. 2..22A (detail from Fig. 1.2) Probably one of Sat:yasribhadra's maio 1ibetan disciples. Ordinary Indian monks dress the same as Indian monk-scholars, except that they lack pundit's hats. They are typically depicted wearing uniformly red (not orange or yellow) monk's robes and with one shoulder left bare. (The base color is solid vermilion, while textile designs are sometimes added atop that color.) Figure 2.22 (detail from Fig. 1.2) depicts the Indian monk Sakyasribhadra of Kashmir as its main figure on the left. He was famed for his strict adherence to vinaya rules. He is wearing only the robes that were allowed to Buddhist fiG. 2.23 Buddha Sakyamuni Ca. 12th to 13th century Distemper on cotton 7 x 5 in. (17.8 x 12.7 em) Courtesy of Michael]. and Beata McCormick Collection monks, and nothing more. He holds a Sanskrit manuscript in his right hand and the monk's begging bowl, which he used daily, in the palm of his left hand. The second main figure in Figure 1.2 makes an interesting contrast. He probably depicts one of Siikyasribhadra's main Tibetan disciples, one of the masters who introduced his tradition of strict MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA 53 FIG. 2.2.4 (demil from Fig. 4.19) Niigarjuna adherence to vinaya practice to Tibet. His face looks Tibetan, as do his robes, which cover both of his shoulders and have a yellow lining. But he is without a Tibetan lama's vest, indicating that he belongs to yet another monk subtype among Tibetans: those who followed Sakya5ribhadra in strictly observing the dress rules of the original Indian vinaya. • Buddha Sakyamuni was the prototype of the properly dressed ordinary Indian Buddhist monk. In Figure 2.23 he is shown as the central figure, wearing the three kinds of robes that he prescribed to his own monastic followers. His robes are the typical red color of an Indian monk's robes, but they have been executed more to Tibetan taste by adding 54 C H A PTER 2. a simple golden brocade design. Tassels of two different colors and types seem to hang rrom the broad flat parasol of honor above his head, wafted in different directions by gusts of wind. Behind him, partly covered by his body nimbus, are two other buddhas. Perhaps they portray the buddhas of past and future, in which case the painting would depict • Sakyamw1i as buddha of the present age, and so the buddhas of the three times would be depicted. Figure 2. 17a depicts two Indian monks in a portrait of AtiSa (Fig. 2.17), in which they appear as minor figures at the top right and left. From their position above Atisa, we can deduce that they portray outstanding Indian monastics with whom Atisa was closely connected, such as two of his chief gurus. But they wear ordinary robes (vermilion in color with yellow li ning or under-robe) and neither is distinguished by a pWldit's hat. One may be Atisa's main guru, DharmakTrti of Swnatra, under whom he studied for twelve years. Though a Sumatran, that teacher was probably depicted as an Indian master. Figure 2.24 depicts the Indian guru NagiirjWla as one of the eight great adepts (mahasiddhas, grub chen brgyad). Though a tantric adept, he is shown here wearing the robes of an Indian ordinary monk. Thus he maintained the outer appearance and deportment of a monk, just as many other later Indian masters did (including AtiSa), and his spiritual status as adept has not been overtly marked by his iconography. He wears Ftc. 2..2.7A (derail from Fig. 2.27) Ftc. 2..2.78 (demil from Fig. 2.2 7) vennilion upper robes with a thin border and seems to wear an orange skirt (sham thabs). Though lacking a head protuberance, he has a hood of cobra heads behind his normal human head, another trad itional special attribute of his. As depicted in Figure 2.27a, NagiirjWla is sometimes sho\\11 with a head protuberance that resembled that of FIG. 2..25 (derail from Fig. 4.15) The Sixreen Arhars a Chinese Tradition" (gnas brtan rgya nag ma), i.e., the sixteen arhats portrayed according to the visual traditions of China. Some early Tibetan traditions of the Six1een Arhats go back to such famous examples as the one brought to Yerpa (Yer pa) by Lume Dromchung (Klu mes ' Brom chung, fl. tenth or early eleventh century). 137 Though the arhats are understood to be Indian, their manner of dress has become Chinese, and their thrones and the landscapes behind them may also be of Chinese inspiration. Tibetan sources occasionally mention a different tradition, one coming from India, the Sill.'teen Elders (or Arhats) in an Indian tradition (gnas brian rgya gar ma), i.e., who are depicted in Indian robes. (S uch an Indian tradition is said to have been introduced by from India by Atisa, though it is rarely if ever seen in paintingsm) In the Indian tradition the F IG. 2.2.6 Maftjusri Late 11th to early 12th century 18 '.4 x 13 l/3 in. (46 x 33.7 em) Private Collection Literature: S. Kossak and J. Casey Singer 1998, no.7. a buddha. Such a protuberance should not be confused with the similar sadhustyle top knots of Indian lay adepts (as in Fig. 2.27b). 7. Indian Monks in Chinese Robes Another type of venerable Indian senior monk or elder (Tib. gnas brtan, sthavira) is the group of Sixteen Arhats, who are depicted dressed in Chinese long-sleeved robes, as in Figure 2.25. Arhat's robes may be blue or other colors not normally worn by Indian monks. This tradition of the Sixteen Arhats was introduced into Tibet from China and is technically called the " Sixteen Elders in two final minor figures of the Chinese set- numbers seventeen and eighteen, Dharmatala and Hashang- are missing. The Khampa pilgrim Kathok Situ noted seeing at Tshurphu a wonderful (and probably very rare) set of arhats in the Indian tradi tion that had been painted by the Khyenri painter Apowa (A po ba) of Kongpo (Kong po). 139 Tucci, following the writings of the Fifth Dalai Lama, mentioned three manners of representing the arhats: Indian, C hinese, and Tibetan. 140 He also finally admitted that it \-Vas impossibleamong his mostly late examples, at least- to tell the traditions apart. 141 Rob Linrothe, for his part, differentiated two alternative modes of arhat portraiture: " idealized but natural," 142 ie., as dignified though ordinary Chinese or Tibetan mo nks, or with their supernatural nature emphasized by grotesque and sometimes caricatured appearance. Figure 2.25 depicts the complete group of Sill.'teen Arhats as minor figures in a Riwoche painting. Even from these small figures we can easily see the MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA 55 FIC. 2..2.7 Six Early liberan and Indian Masters 1 3rh century Disremper on corron 8 it. x 7 Y. in. (22.5 x 18 em) Rubin Museum of An C2006.42.4 (HAR 89141) Lirerarure: Hugo Kreijger 2001, p. 67; D. Jackson 2009, no. 3.1. 56 CHAPTER 1. presence of robes not in the tradition of an Indian monk. Figure 2.26 depicts the bodhisattva Mailjusri accompanied by five buddhas above and four groups ofbodhisattvas, humans, and divinities in the side columns and bottom register. Though painted basically in an early Sharri style, it shows to the right of the main figure five monks (sriil'aka. Tib. nyan tlzos) who wear long-sleeved Chinese robes, though they were not Chinese arhats. Still, such robes with sleeves remained an incursion of Chinese Buddhist iconography, in this case probably by way of the eclectic Central Asian style that preceded the Sharri style in central Tibet in the eleventh century. The painting contains elements unknown in Pala-Sena India and possesses clear links with eleventh-century Tibet and its Central Asian artistic traditions and probably did not originate in India. 141 M. Rhie discerned five different sculptural variations of this style in eleventh-century Tsang Province.,.. But, with a few exceptions such as monks wearing long-sleeved robes, the mural paintings of those early temples seem to have been more uniformly lndic. The Central Asian painting styles are known from the temples founded in central Tibet (0 and Tsang) in the tenth and eleventh centuries by the Eastern Vinaya masters, especially as they survive at Shalu and Drathang Monasteries. 145 8. Ordinary Indian Laymen Indian laymen do not wear monk's robes. Often their garments are skimpy dhotis that leave most of their bodies uncovered, as would be suitable for the warm climates of India. Several of the eighty-four great adepts (mahiisiddhas) are portrayed as ordinary laymen when they are dressed for their normal lives and are not overtly practicing tantra. They have long hair, unlike monks: often a bundle or thick knot of hair is depicted tied on the top of their heads. Figure 2.27b depicts a peaceful Indian lay yogi who wears no special clothes or hat, only his normal attire: a red dhoti and four gold ornaments: earrings, a necklace, bracelets, and anklets. The series of white dots in his hair, however, may represent bone ornaments worn by tantric yogis. (For a detailed chart showing all inscriptions on the back of Fig. 2.27, see Appendix A.) Frc. :z..:z.8 (derail from Fig. 4.19) Jiianatapa 9. Indian Lay Yogis or Ascetics Most Indian lay yogis who are depicted in paintings are ascetics who are involved in the various aspects of tantric practice. One prominent group is the Eight Great Adepts (mahiisiddha, grub chen), v.ho are often shown in charnel grounds of certain mandalas, possibly Fr c . z..z.7c (detail from Fig. 2.27) MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA 57 F1G. 2..2.70 (derail from Fig. 2.27) 2.2.9 Gayadhara Lare 16rh cenrury 31 X 26 in. (78.8 X 66 em) Zimmer man Family Collection Lirerarure: M. Rhie and R. Thurma n 1991 , 110. 64. fiG. holding special tantric ritual imple-ments such as a skull cup. Like ordinary Indian laymen, they have long hair, not the shaved head of a monk. Their hair is often shown tied up in a sort of thick top-kno t. Figure 2.27c depicts an Indian yogi with long. kinky black hair, a mustache, and a beard. 1-le has wrapped himself from the waist down in a white blanket of sorts. His dark-bl ue skin could be the mark of a very dark-skinned Indian. lie holds a small golden cup, presumably for drinking alcohol or nectar. All these elements togethe r evoke the image of an Indian yogic mendicant or adept. JO.lndian Layman Scholars Figures 2.27d, 2.28, and 2.29 illustrate 58 CHAPTE R 2 the rare case of Indian laymen who wear a scholar 's hat. Figure 2.27d depicts a learned Indian layman as a minor figure. His dress as an Indian layman (red dhoti and gold ornaments) are the same as Figure 2.27b, an ordinary Indian layman. In Figure 2.27d he wears a beard, and , as a mark of scholarly distinction, a pundit's hat. Figure 2.28 depicts a learned lay yogi, namely the Indian adept Jnanatapa As an Indian tantric adept, he wears bone, not gold, ornaments. His yellow pundit's hat is of a kind that Padmasambhava is sometimes shown weanng. Another example of a learned Indian layman is Gayadhara, who is pictured in Figure 2.29. He was the Indian guru who brought the Path with the Fruit instructions to Tibet, teaching them to Orokmi Lotsawa (992?- 1072?). His biographies reveal that he was a householder. Thus he is typically shown wearing a white upper robe and a pundit's hat. Such relatively uncommon garb stands out among Indian adepts and can help us identify the traditions he and Orokmi transmitted, even in the absence of inscriptions. 146 11 a. indian Laywomen Indian laywomen are rarely depicted , but one does occasionall y come across them. Some Indian laywomen, especially Frc. 2.30 Queen MayiidevTGiving Binb to the Buddha Western Tibet; 14th century Ink and pigment on cotton 32 1;.\ x 26 .Y. in. (82 x 67 em) Private Colle.c tion Literature: P. Pal 2003, no. 101. MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA 59 Ftc. 2.31 Padmasambhava wi!:h Indian and 1ibetan Consorts 14th cenrury Distemper on cotton 41 x 31 Jls in. (104 x 79.5 em) After: M. Rhie and R. Thurman 1991, no. 46. 60 CHAPTER 2 royalty, are shown in rich attire that features the jeweled ornaments also worn by the female consorts of the five tathagatas buddhas) often included in Yogatantra mandalas. A classic example of an [ndian laywoman is Queen MayiidevT, the mother of the Buddha, as shown in Figure 2.30. MayadevT is shown grasping the bough of a sal tree in the Lumbini garden in the midst of the miraculous birth of ' her son, the future Buddha Siikyamuni. She wears an Indian dress of the same type that her two female attendants do, and s he wears bejeweled gold jewelry befitting her status as royalty. The Ftc. z..31A Mandarava, Consort of Padmasambhava FIG. 2..3Jll f i G. 2..32. Padmasambhava with Consons, Mandiirava and Yesbe Tshogyal Late 14th ro early 15th century Distemper on c.orron 19 Ys x 16 'h in. (48.6 x 41.9 em) Photograph Courtesy of Sorheby's, Inc. © 2007 Literature: Sotheby's Indian and Southeast Asian Art, New York, March 20, 1997, no. 76. two figures to her left who receive the newborn child could be male Indian royalty, except for the multiple heads that identity one as a god. They are the foremost gods lndra (who is yellow, standing closer to Miiyiidevi) and Brahma (who is white, with three of his four heads showing, holding a wheel and fly whisk). The iconographic point here is that Indian royalty and gods dressed alike. Figure 2.3 la depicts Mandiiravii, the Indian female Jay consort of Padmasambhava, one of his two consorts (shown as a detail from Fig. 2.31 ). This figure and Figure 2.32 illustrate a conception of Jay Indian women in harmony with classical Indian (here Piila-Sena) models of dress and ornamentation. In the first example, the woman is dressed virtually Iike an Indian goddess. But that purely Indian Yeshe Tshogyal, Consort of Padmasambhava FIG. 2..IOA Tibetan Laymen MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA 61 F1G. 1.33 (derail from Fig. 4.3) Vajraviiriihi version was gradually recast in later paintings according to Tibetan taste. In Figure 2.32, an otherwise similar depiction of Padmasambhava with consorts, Mandiiravii's dress is still primarily Indian. But she is clad slightly more modestly thanks to the addition of a shawl that covers her shoulders. The modesty granted by the shawl was a Tibetan preference. 11 b. Indian Female Lay Meditators Ln India, a female meditator or tantric practitioner is called a yogil)i (female for yogi). Some tantric goddesses, or diikiuls. . . have the term as part of their name, as for example VajrayogiQi. Figure 2.33 pictures Vajraviiriihi, a yogi1~T, here as she wou ld appear as a tantric goddess at the center of her mandala. ller name means "Vajra Sow," and she can be differentiated from other yogi!) is by the small head of a sow that grows from the side of her head. The yellow-hatted Indian pundit and Tibetan lay master (a translator?) at the top (seen in Fig. 4.2) have yet to be identified, but they can be assumed to be key lineal gurus in the transmission of this yogiQi's tradition from India to Tibet. 61 C HAPTER 1 12a. Tibetan Laywoman Tibetan laywomen can be depicted as noblewomen (royalty) or as highly realized female practitioners (yogiJ)i). Yeshe Tshogyal (Ye shes mtsho rgyal), the Tibetan consort of Padmasambhava, is said to have been a Tibetan queen before becoming his consort. Her long white robe with a broad red fringe on the front may be a mark of Tibetan royalty. She is portrayed very similarly in Figure 2.31b and in another published version of nearly the same painting (Fig. 2.32). 147 Tibetan laywomen appear frequently in depictions of donors. But they can be confused with young, long-haired male nobility, at least when they are seen in poor digital images. In Figure 2.10a, one long-haired blue-robed FIG. 2..34 Majig Labdron Early 14th cenrury I 1 % x 13 y, in. (29 x 34 em) l>rivare Collection After: A. Heller 1999, no. 65. figure was dressed so distinctively that I took it at first sight to be a laywoman and to belong to the lineal gurus. If the subject of the painting is Marpa with his disciples and their followers in one of the later transmitted traditions, it might make sense to show his wife and consort, Dakmema (bDag med rna), among his disciples. But who was the second similarly dressed figure immediately below? The figure must depict FIG. 2-35 Medicine Buddha with His Lineage 1410-1425 28 x 24 in. {71 x 61 em) Courtesy of Michael J. and Beata McCormick Colleccion (HAR 68869) literature: D. Jackson 2009, no. 3.50; D. Jackson 2010, fig. 7.11. MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA 63 Frc. 2.35A Three Lineal Gurus from 1ibetan Royalty Frc. 2.36 (derail from Fig. 3.15) Six Kings of Shambhala or Kalkins the sponsor of the painting, based on its position in the bottom-left comer, seated before the offerings. Both wear similar dark-blue robes with long sleeves and belts, and both have long black hair that falls down their backs. But were they women, or just distinctively dressed long-haired laymen? In this case an inscription on the back reveal s that the two patrons were two rich, powerful local rulers in Kham named Sonam Dorje and Akhar. Thus the two apparent women tum out to be male patrons, one pictured above the other. (This is supported by the depiction of the similar looking single patron in Fig. 4.12, a painting that the same patrons commissioned.) 12b. Tibetan YogiiJT Figure 2.34 portrays the Tibetan yogiQI Majig Labdron (I 062- 1158), dressed as an Indian yogi1~L She is a prototypical example of an early Tibetan yogiQI (Tib. rna/ 'byor ma), and she is shown using the ritual accouterments of her Severance (gcod) practice, a thigh-bone trumpet and skull-cup drum (cjamaru). She was the disciple of the Indian guru Phadampa, who is sho>vn as a small figure to the right of her head. As founder of the Severence tradition she appears in many paintings in that role. Laywomen are rarely portrayed as gurus, though a few did become prominent teachers. For instance, Shugseb Ani Lochen ( 1865- 195 I) was a well-known laywoman teacher active in c-entral Tibet in the l940s. 148 She taught many prominent lamas, including Chogye Trichen Rinpoche of Nalendra Monastery (1919- 2007). It 64 CHAPTER 2 is conceivable that she will one day be goddesses), 2. sem iwrathful (rna inly painted in a lineage as a guru. tantric tutelary deities), and 3. wrathful 13. Tibetan or Shambhala Royalty (mainly protective deities). Human gurus thus generally belong to the peaceful Tibetan kings from the ancient Yarlung dynasty are a fairly obscure topic for religious paintings, I would have thought. But they are depicted in paintings surprisingly often. They occur, for instance, among the twenty-five disciples of Padmasam bhava and as gurus of the Medicine Buddha lineage. One early king is also associated with some traditions ofAvalokitesvara practice in Tibet The ancient Tibetan kings wore distinctive red turbans as royal headdresses, as did the kings ofShambhala in the tradition illustrated by Figure 2.35a. I therefore treat the Shambhala rulers as an iconographic sub-type ofTibetan royalty. Figure 2.35a depicts three members of the ancient Tibetan royalty of the Yarlung dynasty. They function here class, as do most other humans. But some humans also manifested semiwrathful (seerlike) moods. (Among the three founding masters of the Geluk Order, for example, Khedrup is said to be correctly portrayed with a semjwrathful me in, with large eyes, unlike his peaceful guru Tsongkhapa and hjghly pacific senior disciple, Gyaltshab Je.) 150A few lamas have been portrayed in a downright wrathful aspect whi le subjugating harmfu l spirits. Guru Ri npoche Padmasambhava is an example of a human master who a lso manifests himself in overtly nonpeaccful forms. Such semiwrathful emotions are often only indicated by red eyes, as one frequently finds in depictions of Padmasambhava. 151 as lineal gurus of the Medicine Buddha tradition. This teaching was believed to have been transmitted for many generations exclusively by a branch of the western-Tibetan roy alty. I have documented the painting and its lineage in more detail elsewhere.' 49 Figure 2.36 depicts several kings CONCLUSIONS We depend upon the basic distinctions of iconography for orientation when studying Tibetan art. If v.'e do not observe them carefully, we could quickly lose our way, and Tibetan art would become ofShambhala or related ka/kin (rigs /dan) rulers of that mystic pure land. a confusing maze. lfwe must depart Note their red-turbaned royal head let us do so knowingly, with good reason. Every iconographic rule may have gear, which they share with the Yarlung dynasty of Tibetan roya lty. from the usual iconographic guidelines, its exception. If we have confronted one, let us c learly say so. ICONOGRAPHIC CLASSES ACCORDING TO MOOD In this chapter, I have briefly described the human types most relevant in Tibetan art. In addition to divine types, Tibetan authors on art traditionally classified sacred figures according to which iconographic class they belonged, as determined by their predominant mood. The three main classes are: I. peaceful (buddhas, gurus, bodhisattvas, some MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA 65 ... .. r· ._, - • . CHAPTER 3 Paintings of Early Teachers of Tibetan Buddhist Schools PORTRAITS OF HUMAN TEA C HERS are some of the most intriguing types of Tibetan art. Portraits of saints in the two lndic styles ofTibetan painting, the Sharri and Beri, form one of the most prominent genres of Tibetan painting in the twelfth through fifteenth century. In this chapter, a few outstanding representatives will be introduced. Each Tibetan Buddhist school produced portraits of its own founding masters, both lndian and Tibetan, early on. The most poorly documented tradition is the non-Buddhist Bon School, but there is no reason to think that its followers did not commission such portraits.' 52 Chapters 4 and 5 wi II concentrate on paintings from two Kagyi.i sub-schools, the Taklung and Drigung Kagyi.i, mainly because more early paintings from those schools are now accessible. But in this chapter, early portraiture from other schools, including the Kadam, Karma Kagyi.i, Sakya, and Geluk, will be introduced. /.Paintings of Teachers from the Kadam School Followers of the Kadam commissioned depictions of gurus from the time of their school's founding. One of the earliest examples is a monumental painting of lara (Fig. 3.1). Though its main subject is a goddess, it includes among its minor figures three humans: AtiS!l and Dromton (see Figs. 3.1a and 3.1b) above Tiira, and the ordained monk who sponsored the painting at the bottom left. Its style is Detail of Fig. 3.5 the Eastern-Indian inspired Sharri style, though here with a landscape background of the main figure's head are Ati5a and Dromton (' Brom ston). The inscription and hence without the multicolor Sharri border. However, two strips of inlaid jewels are found above the bottom register of the painting beneath the main on the back states: figure. The head nimbus of the main figure is the typical Sharri ornate multicolor bejeweled nimbus with prominent jewels twa sgnmg ba 'i /hal bya brtson 'grus 'od kyi thugs dam/ se spyil p/111 ba 'i (mchad kha ba 'i) rab gnas b=fmgs/ spyi I p/111 ba ·; chos skyong Ia grad do/ of alternating colors, backed by the progressively smaller bumps of a mythical animal 's taiL The deity of him ofReting Monastery. It was a holy object for the personal practice of Cha All known early Kadam portraits are in the Sharri style. 153 This is hardly surprising given the school 's close Tsondri.i 0. It retains the consecrational blessing ofSe Jilphuw-a (Se sPyil phu ba) ([and] ofChekhawa). links through its Indian founder with Yikramasila Monastery in eastern Bihar. Through him they were also linked with The image was entrusted to the Dharma-protector deities of Jilphuwa. his homeland, Sena-ruled Bengal, which was a vibrant center of art in the eleventh and twelfth centuries. IS< (The Sena dynasty succeeded the Pal a dynasty in the late eleventh century and ruled until the early thirteenth century.) There is a large kernel of historical truth that justifies associating the Tibetan Sharri style This inscription can be understood as making four assertions, some of which are phrased using special terms: I. " It is the deity of him of Reting." This line may refer to the fact that its main deity, Tara, was one of with the Kadam School, since that style seems to have received its strongest patronage early on among the Kadam the main deities transmitted by DromtOn to his early Kadam followers. That would be correct if lamas of central Tibet. Still, it is going too fur to call the Tibetan Sharri style the "Kadampa Style''; most historians have Rwa sgreng ba refers to Dromton avoided that name because all Tibetan Buddhist schools commissioned works in the style. 155 Figure 3.1 possesses internal evidence tor its dat ing in the form of both inscriptions and historical figures identifiable through their iconography. The small figures to the left and right as founder of Reting Monastery. The four deities were later called the "four deities of the Kadam" (bka 'gdams pa ·; /ha b=hi). 156 They formed part of a group or rubric called the "Seven Deities and Dharma Teaching of the Kadam" (bka 'gdams lha chos bdun), which consisted of four deities (lha b:hi) and three teachings (chos gsum). MIRR O R OF THE BUDDHA 67 3.1A-B Atisa and Dromton as Gurus fiG. the basis of their shared clan. I translated the technical term thugs dam as "holy object for the personal practice." I see no reason to render it as "high aspi ration," FIG. 3-I Green Tara Ca. 1150- 1175 Pigments on conon 48 x 31 ~ in. (122 x 80 em) The John and Benhe Ford Collection Phorograph ©The Wa lters Art Museum, Baltimore F.112 Literature: Pal 1984, appendix; S. Huntington and J. Huntington 1990, pp. 318-20; M. Rhie and R. Thurman 1991, pp. 128-32;]. Casey Singer 1994; Eva Allinger 1995; and S. Kossak and]. Casey Singer 1998, no. 3. 68 CHAPTER 3 2. "It was a holy object for the personal practice of Cha Tsondru 0 (Bya brTson ' grus 'od)." The inscription implies that the monkdonor in the lower register was a certain Cha Tsondru 0. (Cha [Bya] was his clan name and Tsondrii 0 his personal ordination nan1e.) He was not a well-known historical figure and should not be identified with Cha Chekhawa (Bya mChad kha ba) merely on though aspi ration is the first of four meanings ascribed to the word in one major dictionary. 157 Two of the other meanings of thugs dam are honorific terms for "meditative prdctice" (nyams b=hes) and "tantric tutelary deity" (yi dam). Here I think the word would best be explained as meaning "sacred object for one's practice" (thugs dam gyi rten) or "deity for one's practice" (thugs dam gyi /ha). 158 fiG. 3-~ AtiSa Early ro mid-12th cenrury Distemper on cotton 19 'lz x 13 -)4 in. (49.5 x 35.5 em) The Metropolitan Museum of An, New York, NY, U.S.A. Gift of the Kronos Collections, 1993 (1993.479) © The Mcrropolim n Museum of Arr I Arr Resource, NY Phorograph by john Bigelow Taylor Lirerarure: J. Casey Singer 1994, fig. 16; H. Sroddard 1996, fig. 1; and S. Kossak 2010, fig. 14. MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA 69 3. " It retains the consecrational blessing ofSe Jilphuwa (Se sPyil phu ba)- ([and) ofChekhawa)." This refers primarily to the consecration of the image by the Kadam lama Se Jilphuwa (Se sPyil phu ba Chos kyi rgyal mtshan, 1121-1189), who presumably consecrated it at his monastery of Jilphu (sPyiJ phu). The phrase "([and) ofChekhawa)'' was a later insertion, which added that the painting was also consecrated by Cha Chekhawa (Bya mChad kha ba Ye shes rdo rje, 1101-1175), a famous Kadam master who was Jilphuwa's teacher1 ; 9 If the addition about Chekawa 's consecration is correct, then the painting must date to before his death in 1175. 4. "The image was entrusted to the Dharma-protector deities of Jilphuwa." This refers to the painting being entrusted at Jilphu (sPyil phu) Monastery to its guardian deities, perhaps to deter people from taking it away. The group of five deities in the bottom register have not yet been identified. Guhyasamiija Manjuvajra and four goddesses are one possibility; yet what connection they had with the early Kadam remains to be discovered. 16() Though no painting of a guru as a main figure survives from the first generation after Atisa's visit to Tibet (i.e., from about the mid- to late eleventh century), a few Kadam portraits can be dated to about the twelfth century. They include Figure 3.2, a striking painting of the great Bengali founder, AtiSa. He is depicted as a learned Indian monk wearing a yellow pundit hat, with two Indian monks, probably two of his teachers, placed as minor figures above him. 70 C HAPTER 3 This painting is another example of the Sharri style, with its multicolor nimbus around the head of the main figure. The nimbus proper is backed by another decorative element that almost becomes a second nimbus: a series of stylized bumps of a mythical animal 's tails (here a makara. or sea monster) that form the upper fringe of the backrest The tips of the plinth ends and body nimbus are of the Sharri rainbow type, and the min or figures float in the sky before it. The painting bears the inscription: 16 1 a ti sha/ rin chen sgang ba Ia s[t} on pa dar bios phul bal rab gnas mang du b=hugsl g=ims kyi /hall. AtiSa. Given to him of Rinchengang (Rin chen sgang) by the teacher Darlo. Many consecrations exist. Deity of the sleeping [quarters?]. Both the recipient of the painting, Kadan1 geshe (dge ba 'i bshes gnyen) Rinchengangpa Chenpo (Rin chen sgang pa chen po), and its giver, Darlo (Dar blo) ofTolung (Stod lungs pa Dar blo), were among the outstanding disciples of the early Kadan1 master Neu Zurpa (I 042- 1118). 162 Darlo was probably a contraction of the ordination name Darma Lotro (Dar ma blo gros). Without any further information, it might be reasonable to estimate that both teachers flourished in the last half ofNe' u Zurpa's life, about 1080 to 1120. But the title " Great Master of Rinchengang" must refer to the illustrious founder of that monastery, a lama who is otherwise known as Gyer Gompa Shonnu Trakpa (Dgyer Sgom pa Gzhon nu grags pa, I090-1171 ). Gyer Gompa was a disciple of both Neu Zurpa and Chayulwa (Bya yul ba), and he was two generations (48 years) younger than Neu Zurpa. 163 It seems Iikely that Darlo would have given him the painting in the second half of his life, sometime between the 1130s and the l I60s, when he was an eminent master presiding over a community of some three hundred monks at Rinchengang. Figure 3.3 portrays a venerable Tibetan monk who can be identified as Jennga Tshultrim Bar, a teacher of the Kadam order. It and the previous portrait of AtiSa (Fig. 3.2) are noteworthy for their relative simplicity. The main figures do not even sit upon a lotus throne, which would become an almost universal feature of saintly portraits in later centuries. The dress of the main figure is that of a monk, which would exclude the possibility that he could be DromtOn, a lay master whose iconography was fuirly fixed. 164 The painting was said to be "one of two known early Tibetan portraits in which the lama is portrayed as a deified being.''16; However, even though the subject of this painting is a revered guru, he was not exalted to the degree of being deified, as he is depicted sitting on a throne base that Jacks a lotus seat and his hands are not marked with wheels This painting exemplifies the Sharri style, with its colorful outer border of inlaid jewels and head nimbus of the main figure that is accompanied by the usual decorative upper fringe of the throne back adjoining it. Here the artist has repeated the second element in the outer fringe of arch beneath which the main figure sits. The throne back's upper edge continues as a series of colorful jewel-like bumps the tails of geese (hamsa), whi.le the arch fringe above it continues the tails of makaras. The two bodhisattvas at the top of the painting, Maiijusri and Maitreya, are strongly reminiscent of the same pair of bodhisattvas as they were seen by Atisa in a vision. (I describe that vision later in this chapter with my references to early Kadam paintings from Tibetan histories. 166) The thangka contains an important inscription, which was mentioned but not quoted by Kossak. 167 As quoted by Decleer, it reads:168 Frc. 3·3 Jennga Tshulrrim Bar Late 11th to early 12th century 18 'Ax 14 'A in. (46.4 x 36.2 an) The Metropolitan Museum of An, New York, NY, U.S.A. Purchase, Friends of Asian Art Gifts, 1991 (1991.152) ©The Mcrropoliran Musewn of Arc I Art Resource, NY Literature: J. Casey Singer 1994, fig. 17a; S. Kossak and J. Casey Singer 1998, no. 5; and S. Kossak 2010, p. 26, fig. 13 "portrait of a lama, probably Dromron." MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA 71 spyan snga tshul khrims 'bar gyis phyag nas ma.... g=im chung shar ma 'i lha ri mo sdug ma 'o/. was blessed by the grain [of a particu- The painting exemplifies the Sharri lar teacher]." Thus, the phrase marks style, with the typical bejeweled outer a painting or statue as "a sacred object consecrated and blessed by the teacher border and head nimbus with decorative throne-back fringe of a sty I ized bird tail The inscription on the back is writ- so-and-so himsel£." 171 This term is well behind the main figure. The main figure ten in two lines in orange ink, with three known in Tibetan literature, though like sits on a lotus seat, not the simple throne long spaces that divide up the text into three main blocks. As I could read from many terms of art connoisseurship, it has yet to be defined in any dictionary. 112 of the previous two paintings (Figs. 3.2 and 3.3), both of which lacked lotuses. the photographs that Christian Luczanits Here the inscription is slightly ungram- kindly shared with me, it actually states: matical. It should say that this is the "self-blessed" sacred image of(read: painting, Figure 3.5 portrays a youthfullooking Kadam master as its central gyi) the lama Jengnga (sPyan snga) and not by (Tib. gyis) him. The historical figure, surrounded by seventeen bud- spyan snga tshul khrim 'bar gyis sku phyag nas ma 'o g=im chung shar ma 'i lha me sdug ma 'ol It is a sacred object consecrated by Jengnga Tshultrim Bar. A deity of the eastem residence room (g=im chung shar ma} , it is an image that withstood fire. implication is tllat the painting dates to the life of its subject. It is commonsensi- As a final example of early Kadam dhas, lineal gurus, and oilier deities. The top register of seven buddhas (B l-B7) may all be medicine buddhas, since tile cal to expect that it dated to the second central one (B4) is the Medicine Buddha half of his life, when he was greatly revered as a teacher, i.e., to between Bhai¥tjyagum (sMan gyi bla). Its structure can be shown as diagram [A]. about I073 and II 08. The phrase "eastem residence" at The lineage features two long- the end of tile inscription specifies the haired lay masters at its end ( 6a and 6b), which may be depictions of the same Tshultrim Bar (sPyan snga Tshul khrims room or section of a large monastery lama twice. The main figure (5) can be ' bar, 1038-1108) as the person who con- where til is painting WdS formerly kept. estimated to have lived roughly in the secrated the portrait, and it also implies that this was his portrait. The main figure (I could not find out whether Reting Monastery had such a residence.) generation of Gampopa (sGam po pa bSod nams rin chen, 1079-1153), and The first phrase specifies Jengnga \>Vas a Tibetan monk, and not his (lay- The final phrase of the inscrip- depending on whetller 6a and 6b are the ordained) guru, Dromt6n. 169 Jengnga (sPyan snga) was his title, deriving from the fact that he served as a lama 's "per- tion (me sdug ma 'o) asserts that the painting had survived a fire. The correct same or two successive gurus, the patron flourished seven or eight lineal genera- spelling is me brdugs ma (or me rdugs tions after Ati5a (gum I), i.e., in about sonal attendant." (In later centuries it ma) , which the historian Pawo Tsuglak the late twelfth century. If he is just one becan1e a common title for a lama from a noble family, the most fiunous examples Trengwa uses when referring to many statues, paintings, scriptures and stu- teacher, he may be tile same mysterious lay master who formed part of a Kadam of which were the noble monks of the pas of Reting that had survived one or lineage in a thangka from westem Tibet Phagn1otrupa ruling family in tile fourteenth and fifteentl1 centuries.) two major fires over the centuries. 173 A related and more common technical term for a "fire-resistant image" or "fire-proof now in Los Angeles. 175 One clue for identifying the lineage is its first deity, the four-handed need to understand the technical term phyag nas ma, which Steven Kossak image" was me thub ma. Figure 3.4 depicts an ordinary Avalokite5vara, who sits in the position of the original guru. (He could have translated as " placed by the hand." 110 monk from Tibet, probably a teacher been counted as the first lineal guru Phyag nas alone (without ma) is the honorific word for "grain" (Tib. 'bru or nas), and it can often be translated as of the Kadam order. He should not be confused with Atisa or any other Indian pundit, as some have done. 174 The deities instead of as the first deity, dl.) Witllin the tradition of Four Kadam Deities, Avalokite5vara with four hands stands "sacred barley grain, "-usually denoting that accompany him are those typical of near the beginning as the second lineal barley that had been used by a lama to consecrate a painting or statue and was tile Kadan1 order. As no lineage gurus are depicted, there is no reason to think guru. That is the lineage of practical instructions of Avalokitesvara widely therefore considered sacred. the painting might have been commis- know11 in Tibet as the tradition of sioned by a KagyD lama. The patron at Kyergang, which the Fifth Dalai Lama that was scattered by a lama during a consecration ceremony, the whole term the bottom has unusually long hair for a monk, which has been discussed above records as beginning as follows: 176 phyag nas ma means literally "one that (re: Fig. 2.1). To interpret tile inscription, we If phyag nas denotes sacred grain 72 CHAPTER 3 Ftc. 3·4 Tibetan Monk Ca. 12th centur y 13 *X 10 '%in. (35.3 X 27.4) Collection of John and Bertha Ford Photo graph ©The Walters Art Museum, Baltimore F.lll Literature: M. Rhie and R. Thurm an 199 1, no. 95. MIRRO R OF T>IE BUOO >IA 73 A. Sangs rgyas sNang ba mtha' yas (Buddha Amitabha) B. ' Phags pa Thugs rje chen po (Avalokitesvara) C. Ra hu Ia gupta badzra (Rahulaguptavajra) 1. Jo bo chen po Lha gcig (Atisa) 2. Nag tsho Tshul khrims rgyal ba 3. Rong pa Phyag sor ba 4. Ba yuba Shes rab tshul khrims, who had two disciples: Sa. mNga ' ris pa Shes rab rgyal mtshan and Sb. ICe sgom Shes rab rdo rje. From those two: 6. Grub thob sKyer sgang pa. Then the lineage continued: 7. Sangs rgyas gNyen ston The 1ineage of the painting could thus be a Kadan1 lineage of Sat;lak~ara Avalokitesvara, a tradition also known from the murals of Shalu Monastery. m Note that the Tibetan lay disciple of Atisa would not be Dromton here, though his iconography is similar. If he is not Dromton, then I suspect that our mysterious later lay lineage master(s) (6a and 6b) could be number 6 of that lineage record: the adept (grub thob) Kyergangpa (sKyer sgang pa) of the Shangpa (Shangs pa) tradition. He flourished in the late twelfth century, and as an adept, he could have worn nonmonastic garb. One of his main disciples was also known as a " hidden yogi" (sbas pa 'i rna/ 'byor pa), which also would be in harmony with layman status. 3·5 Kadam Master with Buddhas and His Lineage Ca. 1180- 1220 45 x 30 in. (114.4 x 76.3 em) Courtesy of Michael J. and Beata McCormick Collection f i C. 74 CHAPTER 3 Bl 82 B8 .} 810 812 814 816 6a p d2 83 ~ B4 Dl 85 2 86 4 dS d6 5 d3 d4 B7 B9 BIt Bl3 BIS Bl7 6b d7 Yet without inscriptions, it is hard to completely rule out that a more usual Kadam lineage that was transmitted through DromtOn is portrayed here. Note the second Tibetan teacher, who conspicuously grasps a staff in his right hand. The same Kadam lama bearing a staff appears in Figure 2.13, likewise as guru number three. They both seem to depict Dromton's disciple Potowa, who is said in some sources to have walked with a staff 178 That would speak for a normal Kadarn linege transmitted by Dromton, instead of the lineage through Kyergangpa. The painting depicts most figures with white head nimbuses and red body nimbuses, though it pleasantly contrasts those with six figures who have red head nimbuses and white body nimbuses. It also uses to good effect a strip of stylized stones as a support for the main figure's pedestal and to delineate the top of the bottom register. In the lower register sit five charming offering goddesses (d3 through d7), each one worshiping with her ovvn special object of offering, the same that the patron himself is using. The petals of the lotus seat beneath the main figure are similar to those Lmder the main figures in Figure 2.13, and the big rowldels in the brocade designs of the main figure's robe would support a dating to the late twelfth or early thirteenth century. history of Buddhism. Here Pawo tells of how Atisa near the end of his Iife had a vision, which he was compelled to sketch and order a painting made in India after his sketch: 179 ll1e Lord Maitreya and Manjusri appeared in the sky in front of me and conversed about the Mallayana Dharma. VajrapiiQi [was there, and he] protected from obstacles. Minor deities [devaputras,180 were also present, who] took notes of what was said," [Atisa said]. [Afterward,] saying "Now I want to draw that," Atisa made a drawing. He sent a message to VikramasTia Monastery, in which he wrote, " Please paint and send back to me three paintings: The first painting [should be Iike] this [vision], because I saw one like this. The second sho uld be of Mahabodhi of Bodh Gaya " in the city (puri) manner" ( Byang chub chen po pu rima). The third should portray ~ac;lak~ara (Four-Armed) Avalokitesvara, in a rocky-mountain cave setting (yi ge dmg pa brag rima)." [In India] they called a learned Buddhist pW1dit [to come] from Bengal, and that pundit painted them and sent them back, and it is said they were [later kept] at Nyethang, [Atisa 's residence at his death]. REFERENCES TO EARLY l<ADAM PAINTINGS FRO M TIBETAN HISTORIES I would like to present several references to early Kadarn paintings from Tibetan historical sources to augment the history of those paintings. The histories of the Kadam sect often refer to paintings of early gurus. One such reference is fow1d in a biography of AtiSa Dipru11karasrTjnana (ca. 982-ca. I054) written by the KagyD historian Pawo Tsuklak Trengwa (dPa' bo gTsug Jag phreng ba, 1504- 1566) in his expansive Atisa thus commissioned these paintings at his prior monastic seat, YikrarnasTia Monastery, which is believed to have been located near modern Antichak in eastern Bihar. The first painting-that of the Great Mallabodhi- probably depicted more than just the fumous stupa at Bodh Gaya. One possibility that occured to me was that it showed a seated Buddha . Sakyarnuni making the earth-witnessing gesture, as when attaining enlightenment in Bodh Gaya, and accompanied by the two great bodhisattvas Maitreya and ManjusrT to his right and left as standing attendants. 181 That scene was often called just "Mahabodhi" (Byang chub chen po), though in later iconography it was also referred to as "The M uni at the Yajrasana" (Tib. Thub pa rdo rje gdru1 pa). 182 But here we find the further specification of the image as a "pu rima," an otherwise Wlknown terrn. Pu ri only exists in Tibetan as a Sanskrit loan word meaning "city" (Tib. grong khyer)," and hence pu rima must be a rare variant name for a statue type usually called in Tibetan Thub pa grong khyer ma (or even Thub pa grong gshegs). " Buddha Siikyrununi Going to the City" referred to old Indian statues of the Buddha in a particular standing posture. 183 It was a standing buddha image with right hand down in gesture of givi ng and left hand raised to the left shoulder, grasping the hem of his monastic robe. We know what Atisa's "Sac;lak~ara Avalokite5vara in a rock moWltain cave setting" probably looked like. It was the same composition as Figure 3.6 and was presumably painted in a similar Sharri style. 184 Kadarn histories record the creation of several other early paintings, including some depicting gurus. Tibetan histories refer to the existence of murals portraying Atisa in India, an10ng other Buddhist saints on the walls of a temple at VikramasTia Monastery. 185 As Pawo Tsuklak Trengwa described in his Iife of Atisa, the wall paintings of him were made w hen the master was at the peak of his glory in India. S hortl y before the episode mentioning the painting, Atisa had decided that there was no higher spiritual practice than to cultivate the altruistic thought of awakening (bodhicitta), and he resolved to take Avalokitesvara as his personal deity and to cultivate that. He visited a temple of AmiUibha west of the Mahabodhi in Bodh Gaya, where he had a vision of Avalokitesvara, who predicted that he would go to Tibet in the north. Then King Mahipala MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA 75 [After leaving Thangpoche and before reaching Samye,] Atisa and his retinue went to Wok Lhakhang Keru ('Og Lha khang Ke ru), where they stayed a month. They painted an image of him on the wall of the temple that even in the later times [i.e., the times of Go Lotsawa] was still reverently worshiped by people. 188 Another important early painting in Tibet was a huge portrait of Atisa commissioned soon after his death by Nagtsho Lotsawa Tshultrim Gyalwa (Nag tsho Lo tsa ba Tshul khrims rgyal ba, b. I0 II ) and painted in Nepal or western Tibet by an Indian artist named }(r~l)a. 1 89 The episode describing it begins after Nagtsho ha~ left Ati5a for the last time, at Atisa's insistence. Pawo recmmted how Ati5a sent a message to Nagtsho Lotsawa, his close disciple and translator, instructing him to paint a life-size painting of him. Ati5a promised Nagtsho Lotsawa that he would come back (after his death) 3.6 $agaksara Avalokitesvara with Arrendants Ca. late 12th m 13rlt century Pigments on corron 34 x 29 in. (86.4 x 74.6 em) The John and Berthe Ford Collection, Pborograph © The Wa lters An Museum, Baltimore F.120 Literature: P. Pal2001, no. 132; and D. Jackson 2010, fig. 6.21. f i G. invited Atisa to Vikramasna Monastery, where he was esteemed as the greatest religious scholar among fifty-seven pundits, the one whom people would approach with their most difficult doctrinal or philosophical conundrums. Some esteemed him almost as a second Nagarj Lma (Nagarjuna, the founder of 76 C HAPTER 3 the Madhyamaka, had one of the sharpest minds and deepest insights among Buddhist philosophers): 186 Though on the one side [of a temple] were painted great scholars (pa{lqitas), and on the other side tantric adepts, they had Ati5a painted o n both sides, [among both scholars and adepts]. At the head of the line (snga gdong) on the right side they painted Nagarjuna, while on the left, they painted Atisa. People said, " They treated him the same as Nagarj una!" Murals depicting Ati5a were also painted in Tibet during his Iifetime. As Go Lotsawa reiates: 187 from the Tu~ita heavens for the consecration of the painting 190 Pawo Tsuklang Trengwa briefly described Nagtsho Lotsawa's painting, together with other objects commissioned in commemoration of Ati5a's passing away by his other students. 191 Dan Martin has gathered and compared several earlier versions of the story, including one from the history by Lechen KLmga Gyaltshen (Las chen Kun dga' rgyal mtshan), who wrote the most detailed history of the Kadam School in 1494,'92 which Martin quoted and transJated.193 Even before that long passage about the large painting, an earlier passage mentions a much smaller image of Atisa that Nagtsho Lotsawa painted: Nagtsho Lotsawa painted an image of Atisa about the size of his thumb on a piece of acacia wood. He inserted it into a reliquary box which he (wore) attached to his shoulder. He was extremely fond of it. 191 A still older biography of Ati5a by Chim Namkha Drak (mChims Narn mkha grags, d. 1289), an abbot ofNarthang, tells the same story of Nagtsho's large paintings. 19s According to that version: 1:: 0 !- Geshe Lotsawa (i.e., Nagtsho Lotsawa), (after parting from Atisa in Nyethang (sNye thang)) , commissioned a skilled Indian painter named }(r~!Ja to paint [a large image of his teacher, Atisa,] on a cotton support that meas ured fourteen cubits in length. In the "' -..."' ..J DIETIES 2 CUBITS GURUS 2 CUB ITS < 1' AriS<i \'? < Q 0 z z ••• ~ ~ r r != < >a: 0 8 !- ..."'"'. .J --~ TIBETAN DISCIPLES PATRON 2 CUB ITS top register of the painting, he had Ati5a's tutelary deities portrayed and beneath them, in a second register, the master 's twelve gurus.'96 Below them, he had painted a lifesize [central] image of AtiSa, basing the cubit measure of the image on the length of the master 's actual cubit (the distance from his e lbow to the top of his fist). A pair of attendants was depicted to his right and left, inclining toward Ati5a. To the right and left of those central figures, the main events of the master's Iife \Vere portrayed. Below them, the important Tibetan teachers, including Khuton (Khu ston), DromtOn (1005- 1064) and Ngok Lekpay Sherab (rNgog Legs pa' i s hes rab), were shown as if study- I4 himself. People say that this is the holiest image in all three districts of western Tibet. It is taught that the painting now exists in the temple of The version of the story by Namkha Drak thus added that the painting was in his time (i.e., the thirteenth century) still to be seen in the temple ofYangthok, which probably was a place in or near Nagtsho 's homeland, Gungthang (Gung thang). 19s Certainly the presence of the deities above and the gurus be low make the composition archaic (See Fig. 3. 7). The Cak:rasamvara mandala (Fig. 1.25) has a similar composition, with deities above and gurus in the lower register, something that would be almost unheard of later. Another passage of the Kadam Nagtsho Lotsawa wrote [his] eulogy of Ati5a in eighty verses.197 The master AtiSa promised that when the Volume (Kadam Legbam) collection briefly mentions the making of two other early Kadam paintings. evidently in Nepal. 199 Nagtsho Lotsawa commissioned a large painting that depicted as its main figures, facing each other, Atisa and Upasika. In addition:200 no different than the master (Ati5a] CUBITS Ftc. 3·7 Plan for the Large Painting of Atisa Yangthok (Yang thog). ing in a religious class. In front of them, Nagtsho Lotsawa had himself painted in a pose of reverent sup pi ication. On the back of the thangka painting was consecrated he would come from the T~ita heavens. Hence this painting is taught to be CUBITS Upasika sketched and planned various wonderful images such as a large image of AtiSa with the royal Guge monk (Lha btsun pa Byang chub ' od) and Nagtsho Lotsawa as respectful atlendants, which was sent off(from Nepal to Tibet) with an official escort sent by the king of Nepal and which received upon arriva l a formal respectful reception from the people of the three districts of western Tibet. I believed at first that the " Upasika" mentioned above referred to Ati5a's Tibetan disciple Dromton, who is well known for having taken only lay vows. But two Indian attendants of Atisa who accompanied him to Nepal also bore that title. According to Hubert Dec leer, the Upasika referred to here was Upasika Sa' i sang ga, and the painting was presented to the Kathmandu MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA 77 monastery ofTham Vihara at its consecration201There would have been no point in showing an ordinary Indian attendant in a painting at the same level as A tisa. If he was depicted there, he must have been an important Buddhist teacher in his own right 202 The earlier sources on the Kadam tradition (from which the above accounts probably also derived) may contain sti ll more traditional references to early paintings of Atisa and his disciples. Lhiindrub Chophel (Lhun grub chos ' phel) in his Guide to Reting mentions that there were three main early images of Atisa, but that the most important was the " [large] thangka painting of Ati5a with a bent or tilted head" (a ti sha dbu yon ma thang ka)-"101 As Stoddard translated :104 According to Langri Thangpa ( 1054- 1123}-a Kadam master who was born the year of Ati5a's deaththe most important of the three images of the Bengali master made during or immediately after his lifetime was the "large" Uyonma ["with a ti lted head," dbu yon ma] thangka portrait: 'There was no difference between the portrait and Atisa himself" Painted by Atisa's disciple Dromt6npa ( 1005- 1064) as a portrait of the master "practicing the Sodhi mind." Atisa WdS ex'tremely pleased by it, saying, " So I am just like that!" Atisa consecrated it many times, until it "shone with the splendor of his blessings." No doubt it was commissioned by Dromt6n and not actually painted by him, unless what was meant was a preliminary sketch. Another painting ofAtisa from late in his life was made in more unusual circumstances, using the blood of the master's nosebleed. As Stoddard translated: 20 ; 78 C HAPTER 3 When Atisa was thinking of going to Nyethang for the sake of all beings, he confided in his disciple, Nagtsho Lotsawa, asking him to go to India to visit Bodh Gaya and other holy sites, and to take gold and letters for the gurus there. Nagtsho hesitated because Ati5a was getting on in years. He feared that he would never meet him again, so Atisa assured him: "To please the lama is the best of realizations; to be free of illness is the best of happiness; to be able to open one's mind is the best in friendship. Now you go to India. Wherever you are, I am blessing you. Remember me." As he said this, his nose bled. With the blood he drew an outline and gave it to an artist, who added the canopy and throne that were missing. The mandala was meant to be green, but the artist made it golden green. Otherwise it is said that it was just as the ' Lord' [Atisa] had painted it The same guide to Reting Monastery also describes a painting of Tiirii Who Protected? from the Eight Dangers, which was believed to have been the personal object of worship of Lord Atisa:206 This painting of Tara Who Protected from the Eight Dangers that was painted for Atisa: Naljorpa Chenpo (rNal ' byor pa chen po Byang chub rin chen, 1015-1 078) was sent to India to have it made, and [the latter in India had] the expert great being [ot] Bengal [shar phyogs] make the Dharma Tara; and he [acquired] a spontaneously arisen Tara statue at Nalanda, and in Magadha in the presence of the Mahabodhi stupa he had the eighth stupa made 207 Then [Naljorpa] went back [to Tibet]. When he returned, Ati5a was staying at Nyethang, and the great master performed a hw1dred and eight consecrations for those images, and suppi icated [the painting and statue ofTiira]. Reacting to Atisa's prayers, the Tara [of the painting came to lite and] taught the Noble Dharma to Atisa, and hence is an image that spoke. Atisa gave it to Dromt6n, telling him such things as, " Pray to this image and all the ends you desire will be achieved." [l-Ienee] it is renowned for possessing blessings. Phenpo, or PhenyUI (Phan yul), Val ley was the residence of many early Kadam lamas, and indeed contemporaneous sources record that Kadam paintings were commissioned there. For instance, Go Lotsawa mentions in passing in his Blue Annals that in 1149 an artist named Drenka Lhabso Lutsen Trak (Bran ka Lha bzo Klu btsan grags) painted in lower Phenyiil a thangka of Tarii according to the system of Reverend Lord (Atisa) for a young woman patron 2 08 Furthermore, footprints of Atisa were made at the request ofNagtsho Lotsawa, according to the Guide to Reting Monastety (Rwa sgreng dkar chag)2 09 Pawo Tsuklag Trengwa, summing up his brief account of Reting within his extensive history of Buddhism, stated that among the countless sacred objects that once were said to have existed at Reting Monastery, there were 3,600 thangkas that possessed spiritual power or blessings (thang sku byin brlabs can).110 He added that by the time of his writing [in the sixteenth century], Reting Monastery had been damaged by fires once or twice, and it still possessed many firedamaged sacred objects of all kinds, including images, scriptures, and stupas. Another early portrait of a Kadam master is recorded to have been made at the scholastic Kadam branch based at Sangphu Monastery. There the son ofSachen, Sonam Tsemo, went to 0 Province in the II 60s to attend a scholastic seminary. lie painted a portrait of his revered teacher, Chapa Chokyi Sengge (Phywa pa Chos kyi seng ge. II 09-1169), of the Ngogpa (rNgog pa) or Sangphu (gSang phu) branch of the Kadam. Not all Tibetan art made in these times derived from or was inspired by eastern India or Magadha. In the far west, the source for Buddhist art was Kashmir. Ati5a 's Tibetan contemporary and senior student, Rinchen Zangpo (958?-1 055), for instance, commissioned an image ofAvalokitesvara in Kashmir on the occasion of his father 's death. He laboriously brought back the image, which was the same size as his father, to western Tibet by transporting it on a wooden cart. 211 2. Eor~v Portraits of Masters ofthe Karma Kagyii Patrons of the Karma Kagyu, like those of the other schools, started to commission paintings of their founders very early on. The earliest paintings were simple, sometimes little more than two footprints surrounded by minimal decoration. With each passing generation, the paintings seem to have gained in artistic inscriptions. The following three examples can be identified thanks to that hat, and they can be roughly dated by counting the number of black-hatted Karmapas who were depicted. sophistication and iconographic complexity. Stylisticall y, the known early examples belong to the Sharri style. Figure 3.8 exemplifies the simplest and probably earliest-known painting of a Karma Kagyii master. It was meant to The Karma Kagyo lamas, like members of other Kagyo School s, presumably adopted the Sharri style as part of their pay respect to the black-hatted master shown above the footprints, who is probably the First Karmapa, Diisum Khyenpa partial Kadam heritage. It may also have become the most popular style in 0 Province by the mid-twelfth century. ( Ill 0-1193). The painting is simply executed with thin washes of color on silk, so it Jacks most of the expected In the Karma Kagyo tradition one distinctive iconographic feature was Sharri features of a fully colored painting.112 StiJI, it does represent one form of devotional painting that was common in the special black hat that the school's greatest lamas, the Karmapas, wore. The presence of this hat makes the identification of the portraits of lamas of the school possible even without that period, here based on reverence to the lama's footprints. The painting also pays homage to the master by means of the broad parasol Frc. 3.8 Early Karmapa with His Foorprims Central Tibet; late 12th century to early 13th cenrury Silk 21 ~ x 19 in . (54.6 x 48.3 em) Rubin Museum of Art Ft 997.32.2 {HAR 5081 Literature: K. Selig Brown 2004, pl. 27; and D. Jackson 2009, fig. 3.2. above and the auspicious objects that were placed within the undulating vine that grows from below. The parasol is an ancient Indian Buddhist iconographic element that we saw above as smaller motifs in twelfth-century Tibetan paintings and atop a Piila-period statue (see Figs. 1.26 and 1.27)m MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA 79 3·9 Karma Pakshi with His Lineage 13th century 12 x 19 m. (30.5 x 48.3 em) Courtesy of Mtchael J. and Beata McCormtck Collection Literature: D. Jackson 2009, fig. 4.1. fiG. 80 CHAPTER 3 Ftc. 3.10 The Third Karmapa with His Foorprinrs and Lineage Mid-14!:h cenrury 22 V. x 15 -!18 in. (58 x 39 em) Photograph © Christie's 2011 Literature: J. Casey Singer 1994, fig. 32; Art of Tibet, Selected Articles from Orientations 1981-1997, n.p. (near end of publication), "Foorprims of !:he Third Karmapa;" and D. Jackson 2009, fig. 4.6. A second painting from the Kanna KagyU School is Figure 3.9. Depicting the Second Kannapa, Kanna Paksh.i ( 1206- 1283) with his lineage, it dates to a subsequent stage of Karma KagyU art, as proven by the presence of the second black-hatted lama. The painting's bejeweled outer borders, the main figure's head nimbuse with decorative throne-back fringe of a stylized makara tai l behind it, and rainbow outer nimbus all mark it as a work in the Sharri style. The minor figures are placed within roundels fonned by undulating lotus vines that grow from the vase standing on a crossed vajra (ritual scepter) at the bottom center. A somewhat later example of Kanna KagyU portraiture is Figure 3. 10, which depicts the Third Kannapa, Rangjung Dorje (Rang ' byung rdo rje, 1284-1339), as the main figure, above the golden footprints that dominate the center of the painting. The painting portrays three Karmapas, each wearing the san1e black ceremonial hat. 214 It includes the complete Karma KagyU lineage beginning with Vajradhara and here continuing down to the Third Karmapa. 115 In the first register, to the right of Vajradhara, are Buddha Sakyamuni (8 I) and the five Tathagatas (buddhas) of the mandala (82 through 86). It is remarkable that though white Vairocana (84) is placed in the center of the group offive buddhas, blue A~obhya (83) actually occupies the central axis of the painting and is the primary buddha of I 2 81 3 82 7(k I ) 83 12(k3) 84 85 I O(k2) 4 6? 9? dl d3 d5 86 5 8? II d6 d7 d8 d9 d2 d4 P(I3?) MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA 81 the constntction 2 16 That is only fitting, since that buddha is also the lord of the lineage (rigs bdag) of the Karmapasm This painting can be dated to the midfourteenth century, based on the dates of the latest historical figure depicted. The composition is shown schematically in diagram [B], noting that the order for numbers 6, 8, and 9 is hypothetical. Twelve gums are shown in all, including the first three Karmapas. The patron pictured in the bottom register (P) is probably a disciple of the Third Karmapa ( 12). This painting, too, clearly represents the Sharri style, though its main subject is a pair of golden footprints, not a lama. As in Figure 3. 9, the minor figures are placed within roundels that are formed by undulating lotus vines growing from the vase standing below it on a crossed vajra. Lamas of the Kanna Kagyu School commissioned paintings in the Sharri style from about the mid- or late twelfth century until the style died out in about the mid-fourteenth century, presumably within a generation of the time that the previous painting (Fig. 3.9) was made. T he Karma Kagyii and Taklung Kagyu were sister schools within the Kagyu tradition that enjoyed cordial relations, and early on both commissioned works in the same styles. Still, the art that Karma Kagyli lamas commissioned at such monasteries as Tshurphu and Karma was independent of that in Taklung and Riwoche, which will be investigated in more detail in chapters 4 and 5. The Karma Kagyti hierarchs, the Kannapas, knew and maintained relations with Riwoche Monastery and its abbots in western Kham. This was to be expected, given the proximity of Kan11a Monastery to Riwoche. 218 3. Portraits ofthe Sa/..:ya School Another Tibetan Buddhist school whose lamas commissioned noteworthy 82 C HAPTER 3 portraits of its founders was the Sakya. Writings from this school record the existence of portraiture as early as the twelfth century, and we know that such art continued to flourish until the fifteenth century and the time ofNgorchen and his successors at Ngor Monastery. 219 Several examples of noteworthy later portraiture originated from that Ngorpa sub-school of the Sakya. Stylistically, most of the known Sakya portraits were in the Beri style, not in the Sharri style. Sakya sources record, for instance, the existence of early realistic portraits (yin thang) of their founder, Sac hen One was painted by the mid-twelfth century at Sakya Monastery or nearby in western Tsang as described in a later written description of the painting by the Mustangi scholar Lowo Khenchen. Like the Kadam School, whose lineal gurus began with the layman Dromt6n immediately following Atisa, the iconography of the early founders of Sakya could be easily recognized thanks to the presence of laymen. Among the minor figures of a thangka, the presence of three laymen- some or all wearing white robes- was a telltale sign that this lineage was transmitted by Sac hen and his two most eminent sons.220 In larger depictions, the hair and face of Sachen, the first among the five great early patriarchs of Sak.-ya, could also be distinctive. The earliest painted portrayal of a Sakya founding teacher as main figure presented here, Figure 3. II , is a generation or two later than the last Kanna Kagyii painting discussed (Fig. 3.1 0). It seems to have been commissioned in the late fourteenth century by Ngorchen 's teacher Sharchen Yeshe Gyaltshen (d. 1406). It portrays Sachen Kunga Ny ingpo (Sa chen Kun dga' snying po, 1092- 1158) surrounded by his lineage tbr the explication of the text of the Hevajra basic tantra (Miilatantra). This painting belongs to the Beri style, as can be seen from its simple golden border strips (not the colorful Sharri border of stylized inlaid jewels) and the simple head nimbuses of the main figure. One prominent Jndic feature that it shares with the Sharri style is the framing of the minor figures within roundels formed by undulating lotus vines growing from a va~e that stands upon a crossed vajra. This painting of Sachen, which has been known in the West for several decades, was fi rst exhibited at Paris in 1977.22 1 Though considerably smaller than Ngorchen's set of lineal guru portraits (see Fig. 3. 12), it is very similar in subject, style, and composition. Indeed, if we examine how Lowo Khenchen (G io bo mKhan chen) described the sixth painting in Ngorchen 's set, we find that it, too, portrayed Sachen as its sole main figure, with Maitreya and Manjusri as attendants to his right and left. Yet when we compare Figure 3.11 in more detail, we note a few differences. Here the lineage around the main figure is that of the exposition of the Hevajra basic tantra (Tib. rGyud brtag pa gnyis pa) and not of the other tantras of the Hevajra cycle. In the Path with the Fruit thangkas commissioned by Ngorchen Ktmga Zangpo (Ngor chen Kun dga' bzang po, 1382- 1456), however, the lineage depicted around Sachen was the main Commentatorial Tradition ( 'grel pa lugs) of the Hevajra tantras, a lineage that complemented the so-called Tradition of Practical Instructions (man ngag lugs), which was the meditative tradition of the Sakya Schools's Path with the Fruit instmctions. The two lines ofHevajra exposition can be easily confused; the lineage of the main Commentatorial Tradition is identical to that of the exposition of the Hevajra basic tantra alone, except for gurus number 18, 19, and 20. The arrangement of the figures in the pai nting is shown in diagram [C], in which M indicates the main figure. The name of each figure is given by inscriptions. 222 In the last row of Frc. ).II Sachen wirh His Lineages Ca. late 14rh cenrury Distemper on cotton 15 -\4 x 13 in. (40 x 33 em) Private Collection Courtesy Carlton Rochell Asian An Literature: G. Beguu1 et al. 1977, no. 122. deities are: d l Vajrapfu)i (Phyag na rdo rje), d2 Avalokitesvara (Spyan ras gzigs), d3 Mahakiila (Ma ha ka Ia), d4 Re rna ti, d5 Simhaniida (Seng ge sgra) and d6 Acala (Mi g. yo ba). (Those six deities were absent from the thangka commissioned by Ngorchen.) The corresponding painting in Ngorchen 's series as described by Lowo Khenchen contained small figures of Pal den Tshultrim and Sharchen. Like Figure 3.12, this work depicts a lineage received by Ngorchen. Judging from the identity of the last identifiable member of the lineage, Palden Tshultrim (dPalldan tshul khrims), it probably dates to the mid- or late fourteenth century, a generation before Ngorchen's time. This is confirmed by the inscriptions, which mention Sharchen Yeshe Gyaltshen (Ye shes rgyal mtshan) as the patron. Another early Sakya portrait is Figure 3.12. It depicts not Sachen but his two most eminent sons and successors, Sonam Tsemo (bSod nams rtse mo, 1I 42- 1182) and Drakpa Gyaltshen (Grags pa rgyal mtshan, 1147- 12 16), surrounded by a teaching lineage of Cakrasamvara. This thangka was exhibited (like Fig. 3. I I ) in the Paris exhibition of 1977.123 That Paris exhibition catalog described it as depicting two lamas of the Sakyapa order and tentatively dated it to the sixteenth century224 This painting is in the Beri style, as can be seen from its simple border stri ps (not the bejeweled Sharri type). The simple head nimbuses of the main figures are also typical of the Beri. It continues the prominent Lndic feature l 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 dl 2 3 dl 4 5 6 7 12c *?* 9 d2 l2b *?* II 13 M d2 *bl* *b2* d3 d4 d5 15 17 19 21 d6 MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA 83 fiG. 3 .12 Two Sakya Masters, Sonam Tsemo and Drakpa Gyalrshen 1429- 1956 32 % x 30 ~ in. (83.2 x 76.8 em) Museum of Fine Arts, Boston, Gift of John Goelet 67.831 {HAR 87230) Literature: D. Jackson 1986; G. Beguin et al. 1977, no. 121; P. Pal and Hsien-ch'i Tseng 1969, no. 24; and D. Jackson 1996, p. 81, fig. 24. fulfill the wishes of his deceased teacher Buddhashri ( 1339-1419). The set's main subjects are the teachers of the Path with the Fmit Iineage226 ln several of these paintings, the l 9 ll 13 15 17 19 21 23 2 *dl * 24 ~ .) 4 5 *d2* 25 26 (which is shared with the Sharri style) of placing its minor figures within roundels formed by undulating lotus vines that grow from a vase standing below on a crossed vajra. Indispensable help in understanding the contents of this set of paintings is given by the great Mustangi scholar Lowo Khenchen Sonarn Lhundrup (Glo bo mkhan chen bSod nams !hun grub, 1456-1532), who wrote a detailed 84 C HAPTER 3 6 27 28 7 *d3* 29 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 *d4* description of it, which survives in his collected writings. His work entitled "Written Description of the Gums of the Path with the Fmit, together with Lineages,"215 described the famous set of thangkas commissioned and consecrated by Ngorchen Kunga Zangpo, a treasure of religious art that was also prominently mentioned by Sanggye Phiintshok (Sangs rgyas phun tshogs) in his history ofNgor. Ngorchen commissioned it to main figures were framed by teachers of another lineage that Ngorchen had received. Lowo Khenchen noted the arrangement of these major and minor figures while viewing the original paintings at Ngor in the late fifteenth or early six1eenth century. ln so doing, he wanted to ascertain tor himself the arrangements of the figures and help other adherents of the tradition arrange such compositions correctly. According to Lowo Khenchen, the complete set of eleven paintings depicted: L Vajradhara (rOo rje 'chang), with standing Vajragarbha (rOo rje snying po) and Nairatmya (bDag rued rna) to his right and left 2. Viriipa (Birwa pa) and Kr~•)apada (Nag po pa) 3. J;>amarupa and Avadhiitipa 4. Gayadhara and Drokmi Lotsawa ('Brog miLo tsa ba, 992?- 1072?) 5. Seton Kunrik (Se ston Kun rig) and Shangton Chobar (Zhang ston Chos ' bar) 6. Sachen Kunga Nyingpo (Sa chen Kun dga' snying po, 1092- 1158), with standing bodhisattvas Maitreya and MaiijusrT to his right and left 7. Lobpon Sonam Tsemo (Slob dpon bSod nams rtse mo, 1142- 1182) and Jetslin Drakpa Gyaltshen ( rJe btsun Grags pa rgyal mtshan, 1147-1216) 8. Sakya Pru~<;lita ( 1182- 1251 ) and Chogyal Phakpa (Chos rgyal ' Phags pa, 1235- 1280) 9. Shangton (Zhang ston, b. 1240) and Choje Drakphukpa (Chos rje Brag phug pa, 1277- 1352) I0. Lotro Tenpa (Bio gros brtan pa, 1316-1358) and Palden Tshultrim ( 1333- 1399) II. BuddhashrT with standing Avalokitesvara and Maitreya to his right and left In addition to those main figures, Lowo Khenchen also names a few minor ones. The many minor figures that he does not name individually he at least identifies in general, so that we can recognize them if we know the relevant iconography. His description thus gives an invaluable overview of the set, which survives today only in fragments. As Lowo Khenchen informs us, the minor figures portrayed are various main tantric deities, along with accompanying deities from their mandalas, the eightyfour adepts, and gurus of other Iineages. He highly appreciated the fact that the great master Kunga Zangpo, who was thought of as Vajradhara in person, had designed and used these paintings tor his spiritual practice. The painting of Sachen's two sons is thus the seventh in this series. Lowo Khenchen describes the painting: In the seventh painting, the two reverend brothers sit facing each other. Over the center of the ornamental roof above them, is Samvaroddhaya, to his right is Samvara [in the] Kfu_Jha (Nag po pa) [tradition], and to the left, Samvara [in the] Luhipa [tradition]. At the end of the lineage is Lord of the Tent (Gur kyi mgon po). The lineage of the Sakyapa tradition of Samvara in the Kfu_Jha tradition, which surrounds the above mentioned figures on all sides, is the following. The guru lineage that Lowo Khenchen then enumerates is that of the Sakya tradition (sa lugs) of the lineage of initiations for Cakrasrunvara descending through the adept (siddha) Kfu_Jha or Kr~1.1acarin (Nag po pa in Tibetan), a lineage that Ngorchen had received from Sharchen Yeshe Gyaltshen. 217 Ngorchen 's record of teachings duly lists the same lineage.228 The arrangement of the minor figures is shown in diagram [D]. Since the last generation of teachers portrayed, represented by gum number 29, belongs to the early fifteenth century, the lineage alone would indicate a date of at least the mid-fifteenth century, even if we had no references to Ngorchen commissioning it. (He probably ordered it painted during his years at Ngor, between 1429 and 1456.) A major painting commissioned later at Ngor would normally have reflected its later dating through the inclusion of subsequent masters who transmitted the lineage, most notably, by including their great founder, Ngorchen. Another painting that depicts distinctive physical features is Figure 3.13, which portrays Sachen in partial profile, paying close attention to the minutest detail of his face and hair. Most of the crest of his head, especially in the front, is bald, though the hairless spot is partly bordered by thin strips of white hair that protrude forward on the right and left. From each side of his head, above either ear, a thin, conical point of translucent hair pokes out. A thin white beard lines the bottom of his chin, while a moustache and goutee encircle his kindly smiling lips. This painting (I ike Figs. 3 .II and 3.12), exemplifies the Beri style, with its simple monochrome borders and head and body nimbuses. It is a good exrunple of a painting in which the Iineage stops at the time of the main figure. The arrangement of the minor figures in this painting is at first sight deceptive, if we assume they are lineal gurus. In this case, however, many teachers from the same generation are depicted above the head of the central figure. Thus, no si ngle lineage is portrayed. It depicts Sachen with several Iineal and personal teachers. The structure of the painting's minor figures is shown in diagram [E]. The figures portrayed, according to the inscriptions, are: I. rOo rje gdan pa 2. Bo ra rgyal? 3. Bal po Dznyana badzra (Kha che'i Pa1~<;li ta Jiianavajra a.k.a. Kha che Ye shes rdo rje, the collaborator of ' Bro Lo tsa baShes rab grags) 4. Pu rang Lo chung ( Pu rang Lo chung Grags mchog shes rab) 5. rNgog Lo tsa ba (Bio ldru1 shes rab, 1059- 1109) 6. Brang sti Dar rna snying po 7. Khyung Rin chen grags 8. Lang dkon pa 9 Mai'ijusrf ('Jam dpal) 10. Ba ri Lo tsa ba II. Viriipa ('Bir ba pa) 12. mKhon sGyi chu ba 13. sNam Kha' u pa 14. mKhon dKon mchog rgyal po 15. Se mKhar chung ba 16. MalLo tsa ba I7. Byang chub sems dpa' {Zia ba rgyal mtshan?) 18. Mes Lha(ng) tshe Numbers I through 3 and 5 are Sachen's lineal gurus, while the rest (except perhaps for number 8) are his direct teachers. He received the initiation tor the Kriya tantras from number 4, Purang Lochung, in the transmission of nwnber 3 229 Even Maiijusrf and Virupa, nun1bers 9 ru1d II, can be counted as Sachen's MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA 85 FIG. 3-13 Sachen wirh Several Lineages and Direct Teachers 15th cenrury 45 x 37 in. (114.3 x 94 em) Private Collection Literature: M. Rhie and R. Thurman 1991, p. 201 , no. 61; S. Kossak and J. Casey Singer 1998, no. 51; and D. jackson 2010, Fig. 3.6. 86 CHAPTER 3 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10 12 9 II 13 14 15 16 17 18 direct teachers of a special kind, since both taught him in visions. A later traditional depiction of Sachen is Figure 3.14, which portrays him as a single main figure. II ere he has been portrayed frontally, with a more usual bald pate, without the tiny details of Figure 3.13. It, too, exemplifies the Beri style, though the painting lacks internal clues such as datable lineal guru or inscriptions and there fore can be dated only by stylistic comparison. Its main figure has the simple outer borders and head nimbuses typical of the Beri style. Note also its Beri-style pillars, arches, and Newar scroll work designs (calledpa ta ri mo by Tibetans), all beneath the arch and in the dark-blue background. Figure 3.15 depicts the two Sakya founders Drakpa Gyaltsen and Sak')'a PaQdita as lineal lamas, surrounded by the kings ofShambhala. It portrays Drakpa Gyaltshen as a layman, carefully depicting not only a thin gray beard below his chin but also a second strip of thin gray hair that begins at the end of his moustache and continues until his car. (Note the similar treatment of his facial hair in HAR 203.) It is a Sakya painting basically in the Beri style, but several obvious Sharri elements have crept in. Note especially the head nimbuses and rainbow body nimbus, both in the Sharri style. This painting is frustrating for its lack of chronological clues, besides its style, which possibly dates it to about the fifteenth or early sb,-teenth century. However, its mixed style makes it a rarity as most Sai-')'a paintings were executed in a more orthodox Beri style. 4. Geluk: Early Porlraill of Tsongkhapa The Geluk Order was the last major Tibetan Buddhist tradition to be established. Its illustrious founder, Tsongkhapa Losang Drakpa (Tsong kha pa Blo bzang grags pa. 1357-1419), founded its mother monastery, Ganden, in 1409, a decade before his death. His direct students and Geluk patrons from the following generation commissioned a number of striking portraits of him in the 1420s to 1450s. Many paintings showed him surrounded by the lineal masters of his Stages of the Path (Lam rim) transmissions, like most of the paintings discussed here. The earliest portraits ofTsongkhapa were painted in several iterations of the Beri style, which then dominated Tibet. As examples of portraits ofTsongkhapa with his lineages, four predominately FIG. 3 ·14 Sachen Kunga Nyingpo Ca. 15th to early 16th cenrury 13 1.4 x 9 .)4 in. (33.7 x 24.8 em) Collection of Shelley and Donald Rubin P2000.4.2 (HAR 944 ) Literature: D. Jackson 2010, fig. 1.18. MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA 87 theocracy in the mid- seventeenth century, the same unaltered types were repeated over and over. Later sculptures and paintings ofTsongkhapa were mass produced to such an extent that, as one scholar observed, "The face turned into a perfectly un-individualized mask.... It is as if scholasticism nourished the intellect but not the artistic sensibility. '>230 Yet even those idealized later likenesses ofTsongkhapa were no doubt based ultimately on early realistic portraits. Indeed, several images served as original models for later copies.231 Among earlier paintings we still have a chance to find images that were not highly stereotyped m The four paintings of Tsongkhapa presented here (F igs. 3.163. t 9) have certainly not yet fallen into the rut of purely formalized repetition. Later Geluk scholars could list as many as seven likenesses ofTsongkhapa made during his lifetime. They are enumerated by the nineteenth-century Amdo scholar Akhu Chi ng Sherab Gyatsho (I 803- 1875) in his description of brief histories of several sacred portraits of Tsongkhapa and others.233 The first such painting ofTsongkhapa that Akhu Ching listed was painted in 1415, when he had f iG. 3.15 (also discussed as Figs. 2.4 a nd 2.8) Drakpa Gyalrshen and Sakya Paocj.ira as Two Lineal Lamas Ca. 15rh century 31 'h x 27 in. (80 x 68.6 em) Rubin Museum of An F1997.45.4 (HAR 580) Lirerarure: D. Jackson 2010, fig. 1.9. 88 C HAPTER 3 red-palette Beri paintings are presented, though with interesting stylistic variations. Among them, Figures 3.16 and 3.17 are two of the most interesting paintings to compare with other early portraits of that saint. That the four examples are basically in the Beri style should not be a surprise, since that style had become the universal style of Tibet in about 1360 (and remained so until about 1460). Many adherents of the Gandenpa (Dga' !dan pa) or Geluk saw themselves as reformists and, in particular, as revivers of the Kadam Order. Some paintings expressed this by the prominent use of elements seen in old Kadan1 paintings. Tsongkhapa became the most widely portrayed Tibetan teacher. Especially after the establishment of the Geluk-dominated Ganden Phodrang been invited to teach at On ('On) by the ruler Drakpa Gyaltshen (the san1e year that Tsongkhapa composed his middlelength version of the Stages of the Path). At that time he expounded the six yogas ofNaropa to the royal monk Nyernyi Rinpoche Sonam Gyaltshen (Nyer gnyis Rin po che sPyan snga bSod nams rgyal mtshan) of the ruling Phagmotrupa family. Among the noteworthy students who were present was Panchen Champa Lingpa Sonam Namgyal, who is said to have painted on the side of the teaching throne an image ofTsongkhapa surrounded by his Lam rim lineages. Many of the later paintings ofTsongkhapa with these Iineages may refer back to that original 234 In tater depictions Tsongkhapa was normally presented as the main figure FIG. ).!6 Tsongkhapa with Two Kadam Lineages and Episodes Western Tibet; ca. 1480s 33 x 27 'h in. (83.8 x 69.8 em) Virginia Museum of Fine Arts, The Nasli a nd Alice Heeramaneck Collection, Gift of Paul Mellon, 1968 (68.8.117) Photograph ©Virginia Museum of Fine Arts Literature: G. Tucci 1 949, p. 339ff., no. 10, plates 8-12; P. Pal1987, fig. 1; P. Pal 1997, no. 26; and D. Jackson 2010, fig. 7.34. 7 8 9 10 6 5 4 ~ .) 2 I 2b 3b 4b 5b 6b II 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 27 28 21 29 22 23 24 25 26 d2 dl 23b 22b 21b 7b 8b 9b lOb lib 12b 13b 14b 15b 16b 17b 18b 19b 20b MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA 89 f iG. 3.17 Tsongkhapa with Two Kadam Lineages Ca. 1420s- 1460s 25 x 31 in. (63.5 x 78.7 em) Rubin Museum of Art F1997.31.14 (HAR 595) literature: M. Rhie and R. Thurman 1999, no. 123; and D. Jackson 2010, fig. 7.35. 6 7 5 4 3 2 I 2b 3b 4b 5b 6b 8 9 10 II 12 13 14 15 20 90 CHAPTER 3 25 26 16 17 21 22 27 18 23 19 24 20b 19b 25b 24b 18b 23b l7b 22b 7b 8b 9b lOb lib 12b 13b 14b 15b 16b 21b in the standard Geluk trio of founding saints called "The Lord and His Two Spiritual Sons" (rJe yab sras gsum). 235 Some Western scholars have accepted later Geluk identification of the two main disciples pictured at Tsongkhapa's side as Gyaltshab and Khedrub. But there existed an earlier tradition of depicting Tsongkhapa with Dulwa Dzinpa Drakpa Gyaltshen and Gyaltshab Darma Rinchen as his two main attendants and closest disciples, which some later Geluk adherents seem to have forgotten. Khedrup was portrayed as the second main disciple at a later date 236 Figure 3.16 shows Tsongkhapa surrounded by his two main lineages and episodes from his inner spiritual life (gsang ba 'i rnam thar). 237 He is shown as the culmination of two lengthy IndoTibetan religious lineages, whose gurus are depicted around the outer border of the painting, as shown in diagram [F]. What is striking about the great master is that he wears a red hat. Within a generation or two, he and his tradition would be so strongly identified with the typical yellow hat of the Geluk, a school which had the nickname " Yellow-Hat" Sect, that a painting showing him wearing the old red hat of the Sakyapa would have been almost unthinkable. The sequence of the two lineages follows established tradition. The painting portrays two distinct Indian lineages, which united and became a single one when brought to Tibet by Ati5a, though they continued to be depicted in most paintings as separate lineages. 238 This painting is in a Beri style, characterized by its classic Newar backrest arch and the com pi icated scrollwork patterns in Tsongkhapa's dark-blue backrest. Its style would date it to approximately the first half of the fifteenth century and place its origin in central Tibet But the painting is said to have been preserved in western Tibet, which makes it more difficult to assess, though one thing is clear There is nothing distinctively western Tibetan about this painting. 239 We can deduce from the odd color ofTsongkapa's hat that in the time and place of this painting's commission, the distinction between yellow and red hat had not yet become highly divisive. It calls to mind an early portrdit ofNgorchen in which two of his three depictions are shown wearing yellow, not red, hats140 Figure 3.17, too, portrays the great teacher Tsongkhapa with his two main Kadam lineages, though here he wears his typical pointed yellow hat. The painting lacks the previously shown episodes from his spiritual life. I estimate the painting's date to the mid-fifteenth century, within a generation or two of its main subject's life. Its structure is sketched in diagram [G). Some traditional Beri elements such as the scrollwork to beautify the dark-blue backrests of smaller figures can be found. Yet a Sharri atmosphere is evoked by the simple three-lobed arch, which doubles as a rainbow body nimbus, behind the main figure and his two disciples. True, it is supported to the right and left by traditional Newar threepart pillars with a vase at their bases, but that is the only Beri arch element present (The red background of the central arch is tilled with a complicated pattern ofrepeated lotuses.) Just as striking as the body nimbus is the head nimbus of the main figure. Here the painter has depicted an ancient Sharri halo of the early Kadam tradition (something we also saw in one of the Sakya portraits, Fig. 3.15). 241 The distinctive head nimbus suggests here that this second painting ofTsongkhapa is an example of Beri art in which neo-Kadam or neo-Sharri elements have been consciously reintroduced, presumably as artistic confirmation that Tsongkhapa was the founder of the New Kadam (bKa' gdams gsar ma) Order. There is good reason to cal I the Geluk Order the New Kadam, since Tsongkhapa traced his basic Stages of the Path (Lam rim) teachings back to Atisa and the saintly early Kadam masters, even while emphasizing a new scholastically refined interpretation ofMadhyamaka and (unlike the Old Kadam) intensively practicing the Anuttarayoga tantra. Figure 3.18 is another striking portrayal ofTsongkhapa with his two main Indian Mahayana lineages. Stylistically this painting, too, has a neo-Sharri (New Kadam) flavor, with colorful Sharri-style bejeweled head nimbuses and threeand five-lobed rainbow body nimbuses surrounding the three main figures. Maitreya's robes seem more classically Indian than is usual for this period, and the convoluted decorations behind the head nimbuses of both bodhisattvas lend their own archaic flavor. Tsongkhapa, and not Atisa, is evidently shown in this painting as the one who unites the lineages. The structure of the painting thus differs greatly from the previous two paintings ofTsongkhapa. See diagram [H]. Note the repetition of the great bodhisattvas Maitreya and Mafijusrr (I , I b, Ic, and Id). Altogether in the composition, six proportions were used. Moreover, Niigiirj una appears twice, the second time in a place where we may expect to find gurus, to the right and left ofTsongkhapa's knees. There Niigiirjuna is both gum 2 and Indian teacher so I, the first of the standard group of six ornaments and two supremes (solso8).242 Only five Tibetan lineage lamas intervene between the Tibetan founding master of the Kadam, Dromt6n, (7) and Tsongkhapa ( 13). Among the minor figures, two still smaller lamas ( 14 and 15) are shown beneath the two main bodhisattvas. Though previously not taken into account by scholars, they may be significant for interpreting the structure of the lineage. They presumably indicate either two ofTsongkhapa's main students or two successive generations of I ineal teachers, either before or after Tsongkhapa. (Their slightly smaller size and their position sitting below the lineal gurus suggest that they may depict his followers-)243 If they are students, the dating will be later. The smaller size ofTsongkhapa does not suggest his less-exalted status, as once supposed. His prominent central placement above the other figues disproves that Moreover, it was not Tsongkhapa's greatest achievement to synthesize the two systems.244 Such a synthesis had al.ready been achieved by Atisa, the main founder of this I ineage as fur as the Tibetans were concerned. (AtiSa is shown at least once, as guru 6, the sixih figure in the right column, the fourth yellow-hatted Indian pundit, just above Dromt6n.) What is odd about the first two portraits ofTsongkhapa with his Stages of the Path lineages (F igs. 3. 16 and 3. 17) is that they laboriously portray the two Iines from Atisa down to Tsongkhapa as separate lineages. This painting, however, is rare for not doing that and hence represents a special tradition. Figure 3.19 also portrays Tsongkhapa but in a very different style in comparison with Figures 3.17 and 3.18. The painting ha~ been dated to about 1500 or early sixteenth century, but I would place it one or two generations earlier (to about 1440-1470). Possible internal clues supporting such an earlier dating are the additional six Tibetan masters in the inner field (I c-6c) in diagram [I], v.if1o may continue the MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA _91 ftG. 3.18 T.~ongkhapa with Madhyamaka and Yogiicara Lineages Ca. 1420- 1450 32 x 28 in. (81.3 x 71.1 em) Zimmerman Family Collection Literature: P. Pal 2003, no. 151. 92 CHAPTER 3 lb 2b 3b 4b 5b 6b 7b 8b 9b lOb lib 12b 81 B2 so I so2 so5 so6 so3 so7 I3 ld lc so4 so8 I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 II 14? 15? 12 Frc. 3.19 Tsongkhapa with Srages of the Parh Lineage Mid ro lare 15rh cemury 36 x 29 V, in. (91.5 x 75 em) Cleveland Museum of An, Departmem of Indian and Somb Easr Asian An Purchase from the J. H. Wade Fw1d, Accession No. 1981.33 Lirerarure: J. Humingron and D. Bangdel 2003, no. 37. lineage for six lineal generations after Tsongkhapa. The two higher o nes are smaller, and the lower four are larger. (If they are Iineal gurus o ne could count them as gurus 20 through 25.) One noteworthy stylistic feature of the pai nting is the blue field suggesting a rudimentary blue sky behi nd the mai n figure. Another interesting feature is a backrest cushion that is draped with an offering scarf (kha rtags) and reaches about halfway up Tsongkhapa's back. (Such a backrest was not indicative of classical Beri throne backs, but in a larger form it became standard in many later painti ngs in the Menri style.) Both head a nd body nimbuses are broader tha n is usual for the Beri; they are gold set with la rge round jewels of blue, red, and green. Though not classic Sharri nimbuses, they are more colorful than those usual in the Beri style. T he painti ng's structure has been sketched in diagram [I]. According to it, Tsongkhapa is the nineteenth guru of the right lineage and the twenty-fourth guru of the left. Yet another of the painting's noteworthy features is its nearly sq uare dimensions, with eleven lineal masters o n all sides. PoRTRAITS WITHOUT STRAITFORWARD lNSCRIPTIONS The documentation of a painting is not complete unti l we have carefully read its inscriptions and convi ncingly fit their contents into the wider context of Tibetan Buddh ist history. I would 6b 7b 8b 9b lOb I Ib 12b 13b 14b ISb 16b Sb 4b 3b 2b 2 4 3 dl 5 d2 lc 3c Sc 2c 4c 19 6c dS d7 d6 d8 d3 d4 17b 18b 19b 20b 2 1b 22b 23b 18 17 6 7 8 9 10 Il 12 13 14 IS 16 MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA .93 like to end this chapter with a number of portraits of unusual interest, several of which lack straightforwdrd labeling inscriptions. Figure 3.20 is a masterful portrait of a teacher who did not belong to the previously discussed schools. For many years his identity •.vas Lmknown. The painting's date and provenance could only be determined by carefully identifying its lineal gurus. I was able to read these inscriptions: I. rDo rje ' chang (Vajradhara) 2. [Vajrayogi•~i] 3. A bha ya (Abhaya) 4. ' Dren zhabs? (Nayakapada, ' Dren pa'i zhabs) 5. sT[..]s? [Lmclear] cu dpal (sTobs bcu dpal) 6. rNam ' brang? (Vikhyatadeva) 7. dPal bzang (S ribhadra) 8. Rol pa' i rdo rje (Lal itavajra) 9. Chos sbas (Dharmagupta) I0. Rin ' byung (Ratnakara) II. Padma rdo rje (Padmavaj ra) 12. Rin grags (Ratnakirti) 13. Sangs rgyas dbyangs (Buddhagho~a) 14a. [illegible]. .. tna (Vanaratna) 15. Chos lnga Rin po che (Dharmaraja Grags pa ' byung gnas) 16. Gan gang ba [or: Gan sang ba?] (I did not find inscriptions under 2, 14b, 17 or 18.) It has been asserted that more than one lineage is represented by the lineal gurus 245 But the painting portrays a single lineage, as sketched in diagram [J]. The central figure ( 14b) and guru number 14a are both the final lnd ian masters and both wear their pundit's hats in distinctive ways, with the ear flaps or "tails" tucked in. When I read the end of the inscription of number 14a, I could make out only the end ( ...tna). After some thought it occurred to me that he could be Vanaratna (1384-1468) ofChittagong, the last Indian pundit to 94 CHAPTER 3 visit Tibet and widely teach 246 If so, the central figure could also be him, and this would be another case of a central figure whose nan1e was not provided by any inscription. In the first publication of the painting, Jane Casey Singer suggested that the main figure might be Atisa, and she pointed out some possible stylistic parallels at Gyantse.m In its second publication, Heather Stoddard identified the main figure as Vanaratna, but with no explanation. She followed Casey Singer in suspecting a link with Gyantse and its great lords, who did invite Vanaratna to their domains. Stoddard even asserted that Vanaratna had been portrdyed in the Gyantse stupa, among the Kalacakra gurus 248 His image does not appear there, though in his Gyantse Revisited LoBue discusses Vanaratna's life at some length for other reasons. 249 Gyantse was by no means the only place that Vanaratna received reverent patronage in Tibet. Indeed, for this painting, his patron can1e not from Tsang but from D Province and belonged to no less than the court of the Phagmotrupa government. Vanaratna was supported by the highest members of that court in the 1430s, including the ruler. A link to the ruler is proven by the name ofVanaratna's disciple in the lineage, guru number 15, who is called Precious One of the Five Dharmas (Chos lnga Rinpoche ). That was one title given to the Phagmotrupa ruler Drakpa Jungnay (Grags pa ' byung gnas, 1414-1445)250 His identity is also confirmed by the Fifth Dalai Lama, who in his record of teachings noted another distinguished lineage whose lineal masters included that ruler: the Sakyapa tradition of the initiation for Red Tara of Power (Dbang gi sgrol ma), a tradition ofBari Lotsawa (Ba ri Lo tsa ba Rin chen grags pa, I040-111 I) and Sachenm The main figure, Vanaratna ( 13b), occurs a second time in the painting as a small lineal guru ( 13a). Though I could recognize many lineage masters and at least one recent Tibetan master, the Iineage structure of the last few generations remains somewhat unclear because three Tibetan teachers (16, 17, and 18) remain unidentified. On one occasion Vanaratna gave the initiations for Abhaya's Vajriivali collection to Drakpa Jungnay, ruler of Tibet. This was recorded prominently by Go Lotsawa Shonnu Pal (' Gos Lo tsa ba gZhon nu dpal, 1392- 1481 ) in his Blue Annals, in his brief biography of Vanaratna, whose direct disciple he was 252 Remarkably, Go Lotsawa provides exactly the same lineage, confirming some names that were only partially legible in the painting: 253 I. 2. 3. 4. rDo rje 'chang (Vaj radhard) Badzra yo gi ni (VajrayogiQI) A bha ya ka ra (Abhayakaragupta) Na ya ka bu da (Nayakapada, ' Dren pa'i zhabs) 5. Da sha ba Ia shri (Dasabalasri, sTobs bcu dpal) 6. Bi khya ta de bah (Vikhyatadeva) 7. Shri bha dra (Sribhadra, dPal bzang po) 8. La Ii ta badzra (La Iitavajra, possibly the master of this name who was also known as rDo rje gdan pa ' bring po, the middle master of Vajrasana) 9. Dharma gupta (Dharmagupta) I0. Ratna ka ra (Ratnakara) II . Padma badzra (Padmavajra) 12. Ratna kirti (Ratnakirti) 13. Sangs rgyas dbyangs (Buddhagho~a) 14. Chos kyi rje PaQ chen Rin po che ("Lord of Dharma, the Precious Great Pundit" =Vanaratna) IS. Chos kyi rgyal po chen po ("The great King of Dharma," = Drakpa Jungnay) That Vanaratna taught Drakpa Jungnay from 1435 to 1436 is also recorded by other sources, including a longer biography of Vanaratna. 254 F IC. 3-2.0 The Indian Pundit Vanaratna with Vajriivali Lineage 15th ccnrury Distemper on cotton 40 \4 x 34 V.. in. (I 02.2 x 87.6 em) Kronos Collections Photograph by john Bigelow Taylor, N.Y.C. Literarure: S. Kossak and]. Casey Singer I 998, fig. 55; H. Stoddard 2003, fig. 14. 8 6 10 17? 4 2 3 5 7 9 18? II 12 13 14a 15 14b 16 dl d2 d3 d4 d5 d6 d7 d8 d8 diO d II p dl3 dl4 diS dl6 dl7 dl2 dl8 dl9 MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA 95 FIG. ).2.1 Vanararna Ca. 1468 Copper alloy wi[b gilding and polycbromy 9 X 6 Vz X 5 >.fs in. (23 X 16.7 X 14.4 em) Oliver Hoare Collection Li£eramre: R. Prau; 2000, no. 176; D. Dinwiddie ed. 2003, no. 99, p. 340. 96 CHAPTER 3 Stoddard asserted that the artist of the painting WdS no doubt a member of the team of artists who worked on the Palkor Chode and Stupa in Gyantse. She also mentioned the presence of highly stylized Ming blue and green landscape paintings in the thangka, observing that "all these elements are found in glorious, endless variation" in the I08 chapels of the Gyantse stupa. But the brilliant Chinese landscapes in the painting should have been a warning flag that Gyantse of the 1420s and 1430s would have been an unlikely provenance for it. As Lo Bue observed, the penetration of Chinese elements was very lim ited at Gyantse. 255 If we were to suggest a possible link with the wall paintings of a great Tibetan stupa, I would suggest one that dated a generation or so later and which stood in 0 Province: the Champaling (Byams pa gling) Stupa in Lhokha. Founded in 1472, four years after Vanaratna's death, by Champalingpa Sonam Gyaltshen (Byams pa gling pa bSod nams rgyal mtshan, 1401 - 1475) and Lochen Sonam Gyatsho (Lo chen bSod nams rgya mtsho, 1424-1482)156 This would bring us up to the time of the revolutionary introduction of Chinese landscape into the backgrounds of paintings and the innovative styles practiced by such outstanding painting masters as Menthangpa (sMan thang pa) and Khyentse Chenmo (mKhyen brtse chen mo}. Stronger Chinese elements were probably found in the murals of the stupa, some of which are said to have been painted by Khyentse Chenmo, though none of those murals survived the Cultural Revolution. 257 Khyentse was noted for the realism of his paintings. The painting could well date to about the 1450s and 1460s. It depicts two lineal gurus after Vanaratna, who gave the relevant teachings in the mid-1430s. Under the patron (P} is an inscription identifying him as such, but not furnishing his name or title. He must have been an influential cleric as he is depicted with a retinue of no fewer than ten attendant monks. He wears a pundit's hat with tails tucked inside, and not the typical meditation hat (sgom .:hwa) of the Phagmotrupa noble monks (jengnga. spyan snga) and many other prominent Dakpo K.agyii lamas. He seems to have been a prominent lama of southern D (Lhokha) in that period, if not from Nedongtse (sNe gdong rte) or The!, then from the circles of lamas who flourished nearby such as Lochen Sonam Gyatsho, Champalingpa, or Gongkar Dorjedenpa. We could get a better idea of the patron's identity if we could decipher the name of his probable guru (16). Another striking portrait from the same circle is the gi lt-copper ~1atue illustrated by Figures 3.21 , 3.2 l a, and3.2Ib. It bears an inscription armmd its base that is detailed but obscure:258 Frc. 3. 2.1A Vanarama Lirerarure: D. Dinwiddie ed. 2003, no. 99, p. 341. Al l maintaining of doctrinal assertions is released if reality arises, and hence we should reverently study under the teacher known as "Assertions Released." [This statue] Wds ordered to be made by the full monk Dripa (sGri pa), the Great Attendant (nye gnas chen po), to fulfill the wishes of the deceased great pundit and as a sacred object for the practice of the Great Translator. It was made by the artist Rokpa Tsawa Namkha Gyaltshen (Rog pa rTsa ba Nam mkha ' rgyal mtshan). May it be virtuous! phyogs su 'd.:in paji snyed pall de nyid mthong na grol ba 'i phyir/1 phyogs grol .:hes bya 'i b/a rna nil/ gus pa yis ni bsten par gyis/1 pa(! chen gyi dgongs rci=ogs dang /o chen gyi thugs dam du nye gnas chen po sgri pa dge slong gis b.:hengs ba 'i [=pa't]/ha g.:o [=b.:o] rog pa rtsa pa nam mkha 'rgyal mtshan gyis bgyis dgel FJG. J.2.IB Vanarama Lirerarure: D. Dinwiddie ed. 2003, no. 99, p. 332. MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA 97 Thus the main subject, an Indian pwldit, is identified as the master named Muktipak~a (Phyogs grol), a name otherwise known only from a few occurrences in lineages transmitted by Vanaratna.m In the available Blue Annals translation, the same name, Phyogs grol, has been translated once (p. 800) as Muktip~a and a second time (p. 803) as Dirimuka_u.o Without any other evidence, we could identifY this statue as depicting the obscure master with that name who lived roughly seven guru generations before Vanaratna. Another of the few occurrences of the name Phyogs grol that I have come across is as the name of the eighth lineal guru of the lineage for the text transmission for the benefits of the Mafijusrinamasamgiti from the record of teachings of Gongkar Dorjedenpa, who received it directly from Vanaratna 261 Yet when we compare this statue with the similar painted Indian pW1dit in Figure 3.20, a striking si milarity is obvious 262 Based on that strong likeness, we can also suggest his identity as Vanaratna and interpret the inscription as referring to his death. (i.e., in about 1468). We also can conclude that it Wds made to be used in the personal worship of his student the Great Translator (Lo chen), probably Lochen Sonam Gyatsho. It is very odd that even with such a long and detailed inscription, the identity of the portrait's subject could not be ascertained in a straightforward way, and it still puzzles me that he was not simply called Vanaratna. SAKYA LOTSAWA AND HIS TEACHER Lowo I<HENCHEN As the last painted portrait in this chapter, let us examine Figure 3.22, a striking monochrome gold painting of an eminent lama. Here the main figure bears no label ing inscription at all. In a previous catalog the painting was called simply Sakya Master. The minor figures are identified: 98 CHAPTER 3 I. [Vaj radhara] 2. rJe dKon mchog ' phel (Konchok Phel) 3. bDag chen Chos [rje] 4. ' Jam dbyangs shes rab rin chen 5. Grub chen Phyag rdor ba 6. 'Khml zhig Tshul khrims rgyal mtshan 7. mKhan chen Kw1 blo ba 8. rJe ...... dge ba 9. sNgags ' chang...... dpal bzang 10. Shiik)'a seng [ge] II . Chos rje Yon tan pa 12. gDong skyes pa 13. Ser chen Chos bzangs pa 14. PID;l chen Grags pa rdo rje 15. Lowo Khenchen If, and only if, you know the history of the relevant tradition, can you begin to recognize the pattern that these names embody. The main figure is shown surrounded by his twelve teachers and the Buddha Vajradhara. The arrangement of figures is shown in diagram [K]: The golden painting is sumptuous, befitting its subject, who appears to have been a throne-holder of Sakya. But which one? The identities of the minor figures lead me to conclude that its central figure is the great sixteenth-centW)' master Sakya Lotsawa Jamyang Kunga Sonam (Sa skya Lo tsa ba ' Jam dbyangs kWl dga ' bsod nams, 1485-1533) of the Ducho (Dus mchod) Palace of Sakya. As twenty-third throne holder of Sakya, his tenure was from 1496 to 1533. The rendering of Sakya Lotsawa (or Salo for short) seems to have a few distinctive features, but not many. Note the classic Chinese throne back, which we saw in Figures 1.17 and 1.18. So, as in Figure 3.13, the lamas behind the main figure do not constitute a lineage. As a young boy, Sakya Lotsawa's first two main tutors were ( 14) Minyak Pru~<;lita Drakpa Dorje (Mi nyag PID;l<;l ita Grags pa rdo rje, d. 1491 ) ru1d ( IS) Lowo Khenchen, who are portrayed as youthful lamas to his right and left. I assume that this exquisite gold thangka was commissioned in the great lama's honor by one of his main students either in the last decades of his life or soon after he died, in 1533, at the age of forty-eight Paintings that depict a great master surroWlded by his teachers are rare. Yet their occasional occurrence does not indicate any diminishing of the importrulce of complete lineages. A minor figure who is of interest here is his revered teacher Lowo Khenchen, who was allotted a fairly good place in the painting among the other minor figures, being depicted larger and to the right-hand side of the main figure. An outstanding scholar and princely monk of Lo Mustang, Lowo Khenchen was one of the most important spiritual tutors of the young masters of Sakya and Ngor Monasteries in the early six1eenth century, as this painting also bears witness. The paintings of Sakya Lotsawa's gurus are disappointingly plain. Among them, the depiction of Lowo Khenchen also seems undistinguished: he is an attentive yoWlg lama with attractive features, but nothing strikes us as special. Since Lowo Khenchen had reached a venerable age by then, we can only sunnise that the painter had no clear idea of his actual physical appearance, or at least made no effort to show it. I have heard that sometimes older masters were purposefully depicted as young and vital, with prayers for their longevity (wri tten or just mentally intoned), though I have no reason to believe that the person who commissioned this painting had that in mind. This was the only painted depiction of Lowo Khenchen that I remember seei ng. Paintings of him did exist in Mustang, such as a large thangka that once existed at Gelung Monastery in southern Mustang. According to an informru1t, it was stolen in the late 1990s. Previously preserved at Pal FIG. 3·22 Sakya Lotsawa with His Twelve Teachers and Buddha Vajradhara 16th century Distemper (gold and pigments) on cloth 35 .Y. x 27 'h in. (90 x 70 em) Rubin Museum of Art C2006.42.5 (HAR 89148) Literature: H. Kreijger 2001, p. 78, no. 24. 4 2 8 I 7 6 10 12 14 ' .) 5 9 1I 16 13 15 MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA 99 Sanger Tashi Choling Monastery in Gelung Village, it was about t\vo and a half meters (8 feet) long, including its cloth frame. It depicted Lowo Khenchen with episodes from his life story.263 I have not found mention of paintings or statues of Lowo Khenchen in contemporaneous or later sources. The only surviving painting of Lowo Khenchen that I have learned of is one that portrays him surrounded by details of his saintly life; it was sold twice at auction.264 Yet when it comes to statues depicting Lowo Khenchen, the situation is different. Many statues have survived that date to his lifetime. Because of the increasing commercial demand for Tibetan art, other negative circumstances such as the Khampa guerrilla camps in Mustang in the 1960s and early 1970s, and some instances of local neglect, many statues of Lowo Khenchen were taken from monasteries in Mustang. However regrettable the losses, those numerous surviving statues provide us with a rare chance to compare several statues of a single lama. We can hope that the more skillfully rendered images show us how he actually looked, and any shared similarities would confirm those features. Most of the statues were probably made in his native land of Mustang. (Metal inlay such as distinctive silver eyes marks many of them.) Either the artists had seen him or they had access to other already existing reali stic images. The large number of statues contrasts sadly with the almost complete lack of accessible painted image nowadays, though a few paintings may eventually tum up. This first statue depicting Lowo Khenchen (Fig. 3.23) conveys at a glance the kind personality of the great Mustangi savant. It is unusually colorful for a Tibetan bronze, thanks to its inlayed copper, silver, and turquoise. Such inlays are hallmarks of many statues cast in Mustang in about his time. His receding hairline with a thin strip of hair still 100 C HAPT ER 3 extending part of the way down his pate and his slightly portly build are typical of many statues depicting him, and they are in keeping with his status as a venerable noble monk in late middle age. As a symbol of his great ·wisdom and insight, he holds the Manju5n hand emblemssword and sacred Pe1jection of Wisdom (Prajiiiiparamitii) scripture}-which rest upon little lotuses whose stems he holds. A flaming jewel stands atop the palm of his left hand, and he holds his right hand in the gesture of giving. The statue was previously identified correctly as the Sakya Lan1a Sonam Lhlindrub by Marylin Rhie and Robert Thunnan in their 1991 catalog, Wisdom and Compassion. It was commissioned by a noble patron named Pondrung Drolma, with his wife and retinue, as recorded by an inscription. I could read from a photograph: 0111 Slva sti siddhaltV ·gro ba 'i mgon po bsod nams /hun 'grub Ia/ dpon dnmg sgrolma ... yab )'1UII 'khor bcas mams/ sgo gsum dgus [ gus) pa chen po 'i [ pos] skyabs sumchi/ mchog dang th1m mong dngos grub ... [brtsal tu gson] (Pondrung Drolma, together with his wife and retinue take refuge in the protector ofl iving beings, Sonam Lhilndrup, and they pray that he may grant them the highest and ordinary spiri- tual attainments [siddh1]).265 I assume that the patrons were devoted noble disciples of his from Mustang from approximately the last three decades of his life. Figure 3.24 probably also depicts Lowo Khenchen, smiling with calm benificence. He can be recognized tllanks to his similarity with Figure 3.23, especially the distinctive hairline tllat tlley share. Here the lama appears a decade or two younger and holds his right hand in the gesture of teaching. lie holds a jewel emblem in his lap, which clearly includes not one but three j ewels. He holds a mjra and bell in the place of the Manjusri hand emblems (sword and sacred Perfection of Wisdom scripture) tllat tile previous statue possesses. Frc. 3.2.3 Lowo Khenchen SOnam Lhundrup Mustang, northwestern Nepal; first hall of the 16th cenrury Brass, with copper, silver, and rurquoise rnlay Height: 7 *in. (20 em) Ztmmerman Family Collection Ltrerarure: G. Beguin et al. 1977, no. 152; and M. Rhie and R. Thurman 1991, p. 205, no. 63 "Sakya Lama Sonam Lhiindrub. n The lama is depicted wearing a colorful lama's vest, whose red fringe was executed through copper inlay. He was previously unidentified for lack of labeling inscriptions. Weldon and Casey Singer in their 2003 catalog, Faces of Tibet, called him just Lama, but they recognized him to be possibly a high lama of the Sakya Order, referring to a similar unidentified image now in Basel.266 The statue in Switzerland that they referred to turns out to be another statue of Lowo Khenchen with the typical Mustangi inlay of silver in the eyes. 267 Figure 3.25 is a mysterious case. Iconographically he is identical to Figure 3.24, as a venerable monk holding a three-jewel emblem on his lap and a 1·ajra and bell in the place of the Maiijusri hand emblems. Though its subject is in many respects very similar to Figure 3.24, he possesses a beard. His hairl inc is also quite different from that of both Figures 3.23 and 3.24. Luckily, the statue has an inscription. But just how luck}' are we? The verse inscribed around its base refers to three important occurrences in the subject's life: he studied under noble teachers for t\venty years; thanks to the blessings of his guru, unfavorable conditions turned into friendly ones; and he attained sigr15 of a saint ( 'phag pa, iirya) through the power of his prayerful aspirations. These episodes could be construed to fit the life of Lowo Khenchen.261 The inscription reads: 0111 Sll'O sri/ dam pa 'i =habs bcu phrag gnyis Ia brten/1 bla ma 'i thugs ljes rkyen ngan grogs su shari/ smon lam stabs kyis phags pa 'i mtshan rna thob/1 bo dhi dhi tsha 'i =habs Ia phyag 'tshallo (Homage to the venerable Bodhi dhitsha, who attended upon noble preceptors for twenty years, for whom, thanks to the compassion of his guru, adverse conditions turned favorable, and who, through the power of his prayerful aspirations, attai ned signs of sainthood). The Sanskrit name in the inscription ("Bo dhi dhi tsha" =Tib. Byang chub ....) does not correspond to the known nan1es of Lowo Khenchen or any well known lama. Since the statue's depiction of the lama's hair is different and it Jacks the typical Mustangi workmansh ip (especially metall ic inlay), we have no choice but to leave him unidentified. Thus, even when it possesses a full dedicatory inscription, not every portrait can be identified at o nce. FIG. 3·24 Lowo Khenchen Sonam Lhundrup Musrang, nonhwesrern Nepa~ ca. 1490- 1540 Meral wirh inlay 9 ~in. (24.2 em) Rubin Museum of An C2004.14.7 (HAR 65359) Lirerarure: D. Weldon and]. Casey Singer 2003, no. 37, "Lama." FIG. 3 -25 Lama Mid-16rh cenrury Bronze 7 X 5 ~X 4 \4 in. (17.8 X 14 X 10.8 em) Rubin Musewn of An C2002.3.5 (HAR 65049) I02 CHAPTER 3 CHAPTER 4 Early Taklung Kagyu Paintings and Their Lineage Conventions Tibetan painting lends itself to the same detailed investigation, one essential step when studying a thangka is to examine iL~ lineage, if one is portrayed.169 Painted portraits in particular commonly feature minor human figures, who often tum out to be the lineal gurus of the main figures. Understanding such lineages not only enhances the documentation, in general, but also can be, under the right circumstances, a powerful tool for dating the painting. However, unti I we study lineages in detail, we cannot predict where the analyses wi ll lead or even to what extent a given group of paintings followed the known conventions of lineal descent. In early Tibetan painted portraits in the Sharri style, for example, were the same conventions followed uniformly? The only way to find out is to investigate the structures and lineage depictions of early paintings, preferably not as single paintings but as groups of religiously and iconographically rel ated ones. For the Sharri style in Tibet, the largest and most promisi ng corpus is a group of early (circa thirteenth and fourteenth centuries) paintings from the Taklung Kagyu School. As many as eighty or ninety early Taklung Kagyu paintings survived in a cache of early and later Sharri-style thangkas and were sold outside Tibet.110 The earliest ones originated with masters of the mother monastery, Taklung, while the later ones were commissioned in the largest monastery of the Taklung Kagyu in Kham. THOUGH NOT EVERY Detail of Fig. 4.2 Together, this group provides a chance to study for the first time central and eastern Tibetan Sharri-syle paintings in a systematic way.271 HISTORICAL BACKGROUND The Taklung Kagyu tradition was one of the most influential branches of the Dakpo Kagyii tradition during the late twelfth and thirteenth centuries. m Its main monastic seat, Taklung, was founded in 1185 by Taklungthangpa Tashi Pal ( 1142-121 0), one of the chief disciples of Phagmotrupa Dorje Gyalpo (Phag mo gru pa rOo rje rgyal po, I ll 01170), a very charismatic Kagyo mystic. It became on occasion prominent enough to even arouse the envy of other rich and powerful monasteries. During the seventeenth or eighteenth century it was for some reason confiscated by the Ganden Phodrang central government, who appointed their own administrative abbot to run it. l1l The early Taklung masters were known not only for their contemplative excellence but also their diplomatic skill. They avoided conflict with the Sakya rulers during the late thirteenth and early fourteenth centuries, the time of Sakya/ Yiian rule. Taklung and Riwoche lamas acknowledged for many generations the friendly ties their founding master's guru, Phagrnotrupa, had enjoyed with Sakya. This contrasts with the more confrontational history of Drigung, the old Kagyo rival ofTaklung, in the late thirteenth century. In 1287 or 1290, Drigungjoined forces with soldiers of the Chagatai Khanate, a western Mongol faction with which it historically had enjoyed close Iinks, and rose up against the Sakya/Yuan government with disastrous results: Yuan soldiers razed Drigung Monastery to the ground. According to the biography ofSanggye Onpo written by Taklung Ngawang Namgyal, the Taklung Kagyil 's spiritual forefather, Phagrnotrupa, enjoyed cordial relations with Sac hen Kunga Nyingpo as one of his highly favored disciples. Phagrnotrupa received the Path with the Frui t (lam "bras) instructions from him and took notes-he was evidently the first ofSachen's disciples to do so.m (Other sources record that Phagrnotrupa continued to venerate Sachen even after studying under Gampopa and traveled to see Sachen at Sakya one last time shortly before his death in I I 58.) The biography ofSanggye Onpo also reports that Phagrnotrupa's disciple the Taklung founder, Taklungthangpa Tashi Pal, maintained a cordial connection with Sachen 's son, Drakpa Gyaltshen, albeit from a distance. In the late twelfth or early thirteenth century, Takl ungthangpa sent him a lener along with the ritual • scull-cup of Santa~ ita as a gift, after which Drakpa Gyaltshen appeared to Takiungthangpa in a dream, giving him extraordinary rei igious instructions and later actually sending him "nectar pills" and other presents.275 Once again there was evidence of direct contact between Sakya and Taklung masters for several generations during the period of the imperial MIRR O R OF THE BUDDHA 105 preceptor Phakpa ( 1235- 1280), who visited Taklung on his way back from the Yuan court in 1265. By then Phakpa was ruler of Tibet, and it would have been highly impolitic for the Taklung lamas to avoid meeting him personal ly 276 The venerable third abbot, Sanggye Yarjon ( 1203- 1272), came out of retreat to greet Phakpa cordially and requested him to look after Taklung, its teachers, headed by his nephew Ta~hi Lama (Bkra shis bla ma, l23l-1297), and its patrons. Phakpa promised to do som In 1273 Phakpa supported the appointment ofTashi Lama, the nephew of the second abbot, Kuyalwa, as the fourth abbot ofTaklung. This meant that Sanggye Yarjon's other main disciple and successor, Sanggye Onpo, was not chosen as abbot. 278 The rejected abbatial candidate, Sanggye Onpo, also a nephew ofSanggye Yarjon, had also been led to believe by his uncle that he would become the nex't abbot (His uncle shortly before his death had personally handed over to him sacred objects of Taklung that he was never supposed to part from, as part of a formal recognition as successor, in order to assure the continuation and spreading of their spiritual tradition_)2 79 Unable to stay at Takltmg, and yet Lmable to abandon those objects, Sanggye Onpo left, traveling back to his native province, Kham, in 1273. He took many sacred objects with him. When later asked by an emissary from Sakya to return them, he refused, saying that as long as he still Iived, he would not entrust to anyone the sacred objects that he was not supposed to part from. 280 In Kham he founded the great mona~tery of Riwoche in 1276 2 8 1 Sanggye Onpo, too, cultivated contacts with the Sakyapa rulers and highest clergy. In about 1276 he received a visit from none other than Phakpa, who was passing through Kham on his way from the Yuan court to central Tibet and Sakya. The two lamas enjoyed a cordial meeting, and Sanggye Onpo reminded I06 CHAPTER 4 Phakpa of the previous links between Phagmotrupa and Takl ungthangpa on the one hand, and the great Sakya masters Sachen and Drakpa Gyaltshen on the other.m At this time Sanggye Onpo sat at the head of the rei igious convocations held in memory of the passing of the Sakya masters Sonam Tsemo (Sachen's son and Phakpa's great uncle) and Chakna (Phyag na, Phakpa's brother, d. 1267). Sanggye Onpo's successor at Riwoche was Choku Orgyen Gonpo (Chos sku 0 rgyan mgon po, 12931366). His father had served Phakpa as an attendant, and it was at about the time of this service that Chtiku Orgyen Gtinpo was conceived 2 83 At the mother monastery of Taklung it is recorded that the abbot Tashi Lama met with the Sakya successor Dharmapala on his way from Sakya to China2 u The Sakya-Taklung connection continued in the coming generations, eventually involving Lama Dampa Sonam Gyaltshen (B ia rna dan1 pa bSod nams rgyal mtshan, 1312- 1375) and the Taklung masters who were his disciples, through the fourteenth century at Taklung and Sakya. In Kham in the first decade of the fifteenth century, Thekchen Choje Kunga Tashi ( 1349-1425) of Lhakhang (Lha khang) Palace at Sakya visited Riwoche, either on his way to or while returning from the Ming imperial court 285 Still later, in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, the Taklw1g lamas remained aloof from the political conflicts between the Tsang rulers and 0 (dBus) nobles and the bitter "Red-hat versus Yellow-hat" sectarian struggles, at one time offering temporary refuge to a large body of Geluk monks who had been driven away from their mother monasteries in the early seventeenth century by the Tsang king. Though dan1aged by at least one major fire, the mother monastery of Taklung remained an in1portant repository of rei igious traditions, scriptures, and art in northern 0 Provi.nce2 86 The corpus of early Taklung KagyU paintings that mysteriously appeared in the West in the last two decades offers a rare chance to investigate the stylistic development of Tibetan painting in the thirteenth through mid-fourteenth century.287111ose paintings, however, did not come directly from Taklung in central Tibet, as was first supposed, but from a cache at its main branch monastery in eastern Tibet, Riwoche, which, as has been noted above, had been founded in the late thirteenth century in western Kham as a consequence of a disputed abbatial succession at Taklung. In that seemingly peaceful but still traumatic schism, the rejected candidate to the abbacy, Sanggye Onpo, carried off to Kham Province a large nun1ber of sacred objects, including no doubt some of the very paintings that form this corpus. Riwoche Monastery became almost immediately one of the richest and most imposing monasteries in Kham 2 88 (During the central government's direct administration ofTaklung Monastery in 0, Riwoche in Kham became the main center ofTaklung Kagyu teaching and practice-)2 89 It remained an important repository of old sacred art in Kham until the twentieth century, but it was damaged in the first decades of that century during fighting between Chinese and Tibetan armies. It was still in noticeable disrepair in 19 I8 when the learned Nyingma pilgrim Kathok Situ visited it.290 THE MAIN LINEAGE OF THE TAKLUNG l<AG¥0 ORDER The most important Iineage of the Taklung Kagyu is that for the central Dakpo Kagyo precepts of the Six Dhan11as ofNaropa (Nii ro chos dntg). This lineage runs:291 I. Vajradhara (rDo rje ' chang) 2. Tilopa 3. Naropa 4. MarpaLotsawa (l0 12- l096) Frc. 4· r Tak lung Monastery Photograph by Hugh Richardson Literature: H. Richardson 1998, pl. 55. all Taklrn1g lineage masters down to Sanggye Onpo, followed by one or more. She added: "The difficulty in providing an accurate date for some of these portraits lies in ... determining the identity (and therefore dates) of the last figures mentioned in the list of lineage holders.''296 Though the main way to 5. Milarepa (1040- 1123) 6. Gampopa or Dakpo Lhaje Sonam Rinchen (Dwags po Lha rje bSod nams rin chen, 1079- 11 53) 7. Phagmotrupa Dorje Gyalpo ( Ill 0-1 I70) 8. Taklungthangpa Tashi Pal (sTag lung thang pa Bkra shis dpal , 1142- 121 0), first abbot of Taklung292 9. Kuyal Rinchen Gon ( 1191- 1236), second abbot ofTaklung193 I 0. Choku Sanggye Yarjon Sherab Lama ( 1203-1272), third abbot of Taklung II. Choje Tashi Lama (Manggala Gum, 1231- 1297), fourth abbot ofTaklung. He became abbot in 1273, a year after his master 's passing. He enjoyed the support of Phakpa. 12. Nyamme Sanggye Palzang (rnNyam med Sangs rgyas dpal bzang, 1257- 13 I0 }, fifth abbot of Taklung 13. Choje Ratna Gum ( 1288-?), sixth abbot ofTakl ung 14. Trulku Ratniikara ( 1300- 1361 ), seventh abbot ofTaklw1g 15. Khedrup Namkha Palzang (mKhas grub Nam mkha' dpal bzang, 1333- 1379), eighth abbot ofTaklung (Continuation of the Taklung lineagei94 identify the last guru is, no doubt, a careful investigation of those consecration and other inscriptions, another tool for confirming to which generation the last lineal gum belonged is to analyze the lineal stmcture of the paintings, in other words, to count the gums. This is the shared Taklung lineage up to gum number ten. But with the eleventh masters we must distinguish between the lineage ofTaklung Monastery (through Tashi Lama) and the Riwoche Monastery Iineage (wh ich passes down through Sanggye Onpo, 1251-1296): 8 Taklungthangpa Tashi Pal (Bkra shis dpal) 9 Kuyal Rinchen Gon 10 Choku Sanggye Yarjon II b Sanggye Onpo 12a Sanggye Palzang 12b Orgyen Gonpo (0 rgyan mgon po) (Continuation of the Riwoche Iineage )195 In the followi ng pages, the diagran1s of the structure ofindividualthangkas assign each membe r of the lineage or lineages portrayed a nwnber following the list of abbots of the relevant monastery. When referring to a subgroup of later TakiLmg paintings that were probably from Riwoche, Jane Casey Singer mentioned the presence of consecratory inscriptions on the back that name FIVE STRUCTURAL TYPES Let us now examine several of the better-known or more accessible Taklung and Riwoche paintings, in order to clarify their lineages and structures. A few have already been published and described by others in some detail, which simplifies the task of lineage identification.297 If we order the paintings from the point of view of a starting point, they can be divided into two groups: those whose lineages begin in the upper-left corner and those beginning at the top center. If we classify them further, according to convention of lineal descent, they belong to five types: I. The classic lndic type, which starts at the top far left and goes straight across to the right298 2. The same, except with a gum or small group of gurus inserted in the middle of the top row199 3. Starting near the top center and go ing left, then returning to the top center and continuing righr-JOO 4. Double lineages, both of which start near the top center (a special M IRROR OF THE BUDDHA I07 structural convention not yet described in detail) 5. Beginning near the top center and alternating back and forth 301 Within each of those five types of lineal conventions, 1 group together paintings of similar iconographic subjects. For each painting, I chart the structure and count the number of generations of gurus portrayed down to the generation of the patron-practitioner (P). 302 For many paintings I could not directly consult the works themselves or read all their inscriptions systematically. That can be a serious drawback for paintings of the Taklung/Riwoche corpus, which often have important inscriptions on the backs. Instead I concentrate mainly on the readily observable structural and iconographic features, hoping in the future to consider more inscriptions as they become accessible. GROUP r: PAINTINGS WITH CLASSIC INDIC LINEAGES Figure 4.2 depicts Taklungthangpa Tashi Pal ( 1142- 121 0), the great founder of Taklung, with his lineage, golden footprints, and manifestations. Its lineage in the top register follows the old and uncomplicated convention: simply proceeding from (our) left to right in the top register. This portrait also depicts Taklungthangpa's painted footprints, symbols of his enduring spiritual presence. Footprints are rare in Taklung Kagyu paintings, and they may be evidence that this painting dates earlier than many in the corpus (i.e., to about the early thirteenth century). Presumably, they were copies ofTaklungthangpa's original footprints made by his disciples, following the tradition of Phagmotrupa. 303 The painting was previously dated to about 1200. That accords fairly well with its structure as mapped in diagram [A]. (F =footprints. ) I08 CHAPTER 4 The patron in Figure 4.2 belonged to the generation of Kuyal Rinchen Gon ( 1191-1236), second abbot ofTakiLmg. The painting (or its original, since it may be a later copy) was thus commissioned by a direct disciple ofTaklungthangpa, though written evidence to support this is lacking. (lfKuyalwa was the patron, then the painting must date to before his death in 1236.) The iconography and arrangement of the later standard portraits of Taklungthangpa are already anticipated here. As will also be confirmed by later copies of that portrait (Figs. 4.7, 4.11 , etc.), the main figure is accompanied by a fixed group of four deities ' in the side columns: Sakyanmni (d I), Avalokitesvara (d2), Cakrasamvara (d3), and VajravariihT (d4). Their presence relates to episodes in Taklungthangpa Tashi Pal's life in which his disciples saw their lama in these forms. 304 Here Cakrasamvara (d3) actually appears twice (d3- l and d3- 2), once as a main tlgure and once as one of a fixed group of four smaller figures. Guru number 8, Taklungthangpa, is represented three times in identical ways (8a, 8b, and 8c), even down to his moustache; there is presumably a historical reason for this threefold depiction, which may be another miracle in the Iife of the master. (Note that he alone of all human gurus is depicted frontally, which was a virtually unknown mode of representation for human teachers until about the time ofTaklw1gthangpa's guru Phagmotrupa.) Moreover, all seven divine figures or gurus shown in the conventionalized thatched hut (numbers 8a, 8b, 8c, d I, d2, d3, and d4) represent the same great fow1der ofTaklung. Some of the multiple images must reflect his ability, referred to in his hagiography, to manifest himself in multiple visible physical forms at the same time, which he did on many occasions. 305 The brief hagiography of Taklungthangpa in Go Lotsawa's Blue Annals records that Phagmotrupa told Taklungthangpa to make his own hut at The! out of willow (Tib. glangl blang ma, himalayan willow) twigs, no bigger than he could construct in one day. 306 This biography also stresses that TakiLmgthangpa was of the same nature or essence as both Phagmotrupa and lndrabhiiti. Phagmotrupa told him, "Of the three masters named Indrabhiiti who appeared in history, I an1 the earlier and the later. You are the middle one. A II three are of the same essence." His disciple Gomsam (sGom bsam) actually saw him manifesting in the fonn of Phagmotrupa. 307 In another instance ofTaklungthangpa's manifesting to a disciple as Phagmotrupa, even his voice sounded like Phagmotrupa's.308 When Taklungthangpa was about to die, he said, "I have never been apart from Phagmotrupa." When standing in Phagmotrupa's holy meditation hut, he said to his nephew and a handful of close attendants that people hadn 't understood his statement about not being apart from Phagmotrupa. He said that he was in fact Phagmotrupa.309 Go Lotsawa 's brief biography ofTaklungthangpa also mentions that Taklungthangpa stayed at Densa The! (Phagmotru) six years, studying under Phagmotrupa during what was then his tl rst of three visits to Phagmotru. He went to Taklung in 1180 and lived there (in a thatched meditation hut) thirty years in all. At the end of that period, nearly three thousand monks gathered at Taklung. He never forgot Densa The! Monastery, donating coLmtless manuscript copies of sacred sc riptures and also making donations to support the perpetual burning of 283 butter lamps in its shrines. He also insisted, in 1198, on building a great temple, or vihara, at Densa The! to house and protect the images of his late guru, a project that others helped him accomplish. 310 On his last visit to Densa The!, Taklungthangpa donated a large number FIG. 4.1 Takluogt:hangpa with His Footprints, Lineage, and Manifestations Ca. 1200 20 ~ x 13 in. (52 x 34 em) Musee des Ans Asiatiques-Guimer, Paris, France (MA 5176) Lionel Fournier donation Reunion des Musees Narionaux I Art Resource, NY Photograph by Gerard Blot ART418890 Literature: J. Casey Singer 1995, pl. 36; G. Beguin 1990, p. 20, pl. 2; G. Beguin 1995, cat. no. 143; and K. Selig Brown 2004, 6g. 17. 2 dl d3-l 8b p (=9?) 3 4 5 6 7 8a Fl F2 d3-2 diD d9 d8 d7 d6 lb d2 d4 8c dS MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA 109 of gilt and silver statues, 550 volwnes of scriptures written in ink, and many other costly treasures. Late in Iife he offered 700 black-page manuscripts with gold and silver letters, countless ordinary ink manuscripts, and many other costly objects. In 1209, when he heard that the scriptures of Densa Thel had been moved to Gampo (sGam po) by Drigung Kyoppa Jigten Gonpo ('Jig rten mgon po Rin chen dpal, 1143-1217), the news depressed him greatlym (That occurred in the second year ofDrakpa Jungnay 's abbacy.) The following spring and swnmer he did not teach much. On the sixteenth day of the eleventh lunar month (mgo nya,i.e. mgo =Ia ba) he gave the keys to his library to his nephew. He passed away on the nineteenth day of that month. After Phagmotrupa's death, Thel remained without an abbot for seven years. Even when Drigung Kyoppa served as abbot for two years ( 11771179), the monastery remained very poor. In 1179 Drigung Kyoppa had a vision ofPhagmotrupa, who instructed him to go toward Uru (dBu ru). He accordingly went to Drigung, where he founded his ow.n monastic seat. Then for twenty-eight years ( 1179 to 1207) Densa Thel was again without an abbot. But during that period, in 1198, Taklungthangpa, Drigung Kyoppa, and many others cooperated to build a large structure at The I to sheIter and enshrine the images of Phagmotrupa. Its contents were damaged during a time of war between two kings ofNgamshO (Ngams shod). Drigung Kyoppa also saw fit to use much of the wealth from Thel for the rebuilding of Samye. He also distributed some of the wealth to two warring kings as part of his peace-making effort.m During this period both Taklungthangpa and Drigung Kyoppa tried to maintain Densa Thel Monastery, but they were unable to prevent its decline. Its situation began to improve only later, some years after Drigung Kyoppa appointed Jennga Drakpa Jungnay as abbot in 1208. IIO CHAPTER 4 Ftc. 4·3 VajravariihT Mandala with Lineage Mid-13th century 27 Ih x 22 in. {70 x 56 em) Private Collection Literamre: j. Casey Singer 1994, pl. 26; ]. Casey Singer 1997, pl. 40; and S. Kossak and j. Casey Singer 1998, no. 20. 2 ~ .) 4 5 6 7 sl dl d2 d4 d6 d8 p ( 10?) [Mandala] diO d II dl2 dl3 dl4 8 9 s2 d3 d5 d7 d9 diS Figure 4.3 depicts a Vajraviirahi mandala with a guru lineage. It was previously dated to before 1210, though that seems a generation too early for the lineage it embodies. Its structure as presented in diagram [B] indicates that the patron belonged to generation I 0. As is typical in paintings of mandalas, the composition is sq uare, making space on the top row for another guru. Here teachers 2 through 4 face right, while gurus 5 through 8 face left (toward the center). I have not diagrammed the inner square dominated by the mandala. All inscription in gold at the bottom states: bla ma rin po che dpal gyi thugs dam lagsii"It is the sacred object of Bla rna Rin po che d.Pal [Sanggye Onpo]." The painting was commissioned by Sanggye Yarjon or one of his contemporaries, and later it came into the possession of Sanggye Yarjon 's disciple Sanggye Onpo. 313 At the end of the lama lineage one finds an Indian monk (m I) and an adept (siddha) wearing a golden crownlike head o rnament (sl). Sang,oye Onpo added a very interesting inscription on the back:lt< mtshungs med bla ma dam pa prad=nya ghu ru dang// bdag ghir ti shri ra smi bha tra 'bra/ med ci gsung bka ' bsgmb cing/1 rang sems 'khntl pa dag pa dang// 'gro ba'i 'dren pa nus par shog/1. Ftc. 4·4 VajravariihT Mandala with Lineage Late 12th to early 13th cenrury 16 ;4 x 13 V. in. (42.5 x 35.4 em) Collection of Lionel Fournier Literature: G. Seguin 1990, p. 173, pl. D. May I, Kirtisrfrasmibhadra, achieve whatever my matchless noble guru has commanded [me] not to separate myself from, may my own mind be purified of confusion, and may I be able to serve as a spiritual guide for living beings. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 d3 d4 d5 This inscription refers to Sanggye Onpo 's wish to carry out the com- [Mandala] mands of his guru Sanggye Yarjon, especially his command that Sanggye Onpo not part from certain holy objects p (9?) dl d2 at Taklung, including this and similar MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA III paintings. The inscription must date to the period ofSanggye Onpo's stay in Kham. (Similar inscriptions mentioning consecrations by Sanggye Onpo are commonly found on many of the Taklung-Riwoche paintings.) When discussing the inscriptions, Casey Singer correctly sunnised that the golden inscription on this painting was probably added later to an early painting that Sanggye Onpo inherited from his teachers. 315 The painting bears yet another inscription on the back, which is partly illegible. If the correct reading of the defaced number is " four" (b;;hi), that would imply that the author of the (later) inscription believed that the thangka was commissioned and first consecrated by chos Jfe rin po che (Taklungthangpa). But it is possible that the original inscription instead read: yab sras [gnyis]. The painting's structure, moreover, indicates that it was commissioned by a patron in Sanggye Yarjon's generation. It would therefore date to roughly the third quarter of the thirteenth century and not prior to 12 10. In general, it seems safer to base our conclusions on both the structure and the inscriptions. Here the I ineage should probably take precedence over later Lmclear inscriptions. Another early Taklung-Riwoche painting that is worth comparing with the previous mandala (Fig. 4.3) is Figure 4.4, which also depicts a thangka of Vajravarahi with lineage. Its series of gurus also follows the oldest (Indic) convention, as shown in diagram [C). This lineage, which ends with Ftc. 4· s Taklung Abbots Kuyalwa and Sanggye Yarjon with Their Lineage Late 13th century 16 ~ x 13 ~ in. (42.5 x 34.9 em) Collection of Shelley and Donald Rubin P1996.19.21 (HAR 319) Literature: D. Jackson 1999, p. 77, fig. 2; and M. Rhie and R. Thurman 1999, p. 315, no. 102. guru 8, would indicate a date of about 1200, a generation before Figure 4.3. I have not seen any inscriptions. The 2 composition of the mandala also seems earlier than in Figure 4.3, depicting the 3 4 81 5 7 8a 82 8b 9 cemeteries outside the mandala with 6 10 plenty of room and not yet forcing them into the later, more tightly arranged style of depiction. 316 II2 CHAPTER 4 P(ll) d6 d5 d4 d3 d2 dl Figure 4.5 depicts as its main s ubjects the second and third abbots of Taklung: Kuyal{wa) Rinchen Gon 11911236) and Sanggye Yarjon Sherab Lama (1203- 1272) with their lineage. We can therefore s urmise that the painti ng's patron belonged at least to the generation of Sanggye Onpo; it was possibly commissioned by Sanggye Onpo after he founded Ri woche. Its structure is shown in diagram [D]. The composition is interesting for its duplication of master 8 in the lineage: o nce at the e nd of the top register (8a) and again as a small central figure in the second register (8b) and as the immediate teacher ofKuyalwa. The small figure 8b stands out from the rest because of its central position and frontal depiction, which was reserved forTaklungthangpa. (Two partly hidden buddhas are B I and 82.) The o rder of the deities pictured in the bottom row is noteworthy: they proceed evidently from right to left, the reverse of the order of the gurus. This is indicated by the position of the protective deity (d6), who, like the patron, should occupy the lowest or last position, following the hierarchy of classes of deities.317 The patron (P) thus occupies the lowest position, at the hierarchically lowest end of the row. Figure 4.6 likewise depicts the Taklung abbots Kuyalwa and Sanggye Yarjoll with their lineage. It has been dated to about 1236 to 1273. Is that date in accordance with its composition? Its arrangement is shown in diagram [E). We should note the presence of the old [nd ian convention of I i11eal descent. This is the last among the paintings discussed in this chapter to use that convention. Here six out of seven gurus in the top register face in one direction: toward Vajradhara, the primordial buddha. According to my interpretation, Taklungthangpa appears three times. I cannot think of any other way to account for the other two tiny, half-hidden figures except as gurus 8b and 8c. What is Ftc. 4.6 Taklung Abb01s Kuyalwa and Sa nggye Yarjon with Their Lineage Late 13th century 10 Y. x 7 ~ in. (27 x 19.5 em) Private Collection Literature: J. Casey Singer 1997, pl. 38. 2 3 8b 4 6 7 8c 10 d4 d5 d6 8a 9 P(ll ?) 5 dl d2 d3 MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA IIJ doubly unexpected is that they are not s hown frontally, as was almost requisite for Taklungthangpa. In this painting, too, the patron is apparently from generation II, that of Sanggye Onpo. It would be reasonable to estimate that this painting was commissioned between the deaths of lineage masters 10 (d. 1272) and II (d. 1296) I see nothing to contradict that Sanggye Onpo commissioned or consecrated this painting in Kham in the last fifteen or twenty years of his life. GROUP 2: PAINTINGS WITH A SECOND TYPE OF LINEAGE Figure 4.7 is the first offour thangkas presented here that follow tl1e convention of descent in which the Iineage proceeds from left to right but then is interrupted in the middle. Here guru number 7 (Phagmotrupa, shown with a heavy beard), has been moved to a central position over the main figure. The structure of the painting is shown in diagram [F]. The painting basically follows the lineal structure of Figure 4.2, with the important difference that it adds two generations of gurus (9 and l 0) and om its the footprints. The patron therefore probably dates to generation II, Sanggye Onpo's generation, making the previously suggested date of about 1200 impossible. The last quarter of the thirteenth century would be more I ikely Though the style may seem a little more archaic, we cannot simply ignore the presence of two lineal generations (gurus 9 and I 0), especially when they appear in their standard forms that we Frc. 4·7 Taklungrhangpa with His Lineage, Manifesrations, and Two Successors Lasr quarter of the 13rh cenrury 18 Ih x 14% in. (47 x 37 em) Privare Collection Photograph by John Bigelow Taylor, N.Y.C. Lirerarure: J. Casey Singer 1994, pl. 25; ]. Casey Singer 1997, pl. 37; and S. Kossak and J. Casey Singer 1998, no. 18. know from Figures 4.5, 4.6, and 4.8. Guru 9 in particular is portrayed with subtle special facial features (long, thin sideburns) that are enough to identi fY him as distinct from guru I 0 and as the main Takl ung guru of his generation 318 Except for the main subject, Taklungthangpa (8a, 8b, and 8c) and his guru, Phagmotrupa (7), all other humans II4 CHAPTER 4 I dl d3 8b 9 P ( II ?) 2 3 7 4 5 6 d2 d4 Sa 8c 10 are depicted in partial relief Note that in this painting, too, all seven divine figures or gurus shown with the conventionalized grass-hut backrests represent Taklungthangpa or his emanations. At the bottom, four faces peer from windows in a monastic setting, no doubt Taklung Monastery (the centrdl one is clearly guru 8, Taklungthangpa) near the time of its foundation. The scene also includes depictions of two golden memorial stupas and a hut with a roof of cogon grass or a similar easily available local thatching material. I believe that it represents Taklungthangpa 's original modest residence at Taklung, a thatched meditation hut ('jag spyif), here shown with its base concealed behind a wdll 319 That hut became the kernel around which the later monastery of Taklung grew. Given Taklungthangpa's virtual spiritual identification with Phagmotrupa, it is perhaps less surprising that he, too, was closely identified with a similar meditation hut at his ow.n monastic seat. Figure 4.8 depicts the fir!>1 three abbots ofTaklung as its three main figures. Its structure is shown in diagram [G), which includes three tiny figures just below the top row. The presence of two teachers after the third main figure, Sangye Yarjon fiG. 4.8 The Taklung Abborrs Kuyalwa and Sangye (I 0), i.e., gurus II and 12, mark the Yarjon painting as having beell commissioned Mid-14th century 15 x 12 ¥sin. (38 x 32 em) Yixi Pingcuo ColleC£ion Literature: Kathleen Kalisra 2009, no. 15. in a period one generation after the time ofSanggye Onpo. Thjs painting is a case where one of the typically earlier lineal conventions was used in a later painting. Perhaps it was copied from an earlier example, adding gurus II and 12 below. Figure 4.9 depicts as its main subject Sanggye Onpo, here called Drakpa Bl Palwo, a shortened form of his ordination name, Drakpa Pal Woser Zangpo st I 2 ' .) 7 4 5 6 dl sl 8 (Grags pa dpal ' od zer bzang po). 320 9 He was the founder of Riwoche and "vas born the second child ofYondak Dorje Rjnchen (Yon bdag rOo rje rin P( 13?) 12 10 II d2 d '? .>. d4 dS d6 chen), the older brother of the third MIRROR OF T HE BUDDHA Il5 abbot ofTaklung. Sang.,oye Onpo is said to have served for one year as the temporary head ofTaklung Monastery after Sanggye Yarjon 's death, before he felt compelled to leave. Born in 1251 , he was twenty years younger than his cousin Tashi Lama (b. 1231 ), who became abbot ofTaklung. Because Sanggye Onpo's succession to the abbacy was only temporary, he is not counted among the genuine throneholders (khri pa) or s uccessive abbots (gdan rabs) ofTakl w1g: he merely served as interim abbot (khri mjug) , i.e., as acting abbot just after the prior abbot's death. His rejection at Taklung resulted in his founding ofRiwoche in Kham, where his own lineage continued.321 The composition of Figure 4. 9 includes a new convention. The lineage begins as shown in diagram [H]. Only guru 8, the great founder Taklungthangpa, has been given a full frontal depiction. The painting contains in position s I an adept (siddha) who can be identified as Ji'ii:inatapa, who is said to have been a previous incarnation of Sanggye Onpo. Two other possible siddhas (s2 and s3) are present. The first, s2, is a dark-skinned lndian yogi naked from the waist up (possibly Phadampa). The second, s3, is dressed as an Indian king, perhaps with a golden crown (possibly Padmasambhava). These figures are not the same as s 1 and s2 in Figure 4.3, namely an Indian monk (s 1) and a siddha wearing a golden grown (s2), both at the end of the lama 1ineage. In the right and left vertical colWllllS of Figure 4.9, eight other Indian yogic adepts are depicted who make up the fixed group known as the "eight great adepts" (grub chen brgyad) shown as ga l- ga8. The bottom row of three multi-handed Anuttarayoga tantra deities ( d3-d5) goes from left to right. Two such divinities also appear in the other thangkas depicting Sanggye Onpo, Figures 4.15 and 4.10, though in Figure 4.10 they appear in the top row of the painting. II6 CHAPTER 4 Frc. 4·9 Sanggye Onpo Lare 13rh cenrury 15 ¥s x 12 'A in. (39 x 31 em) Privare Collecrion Phorograph by John Eskenazi Lrd. Lireramre: j. Casey Singer 1997, pl. 41. I 2 sl s2 ga l ga3 gaS ga7 dl p ( 12?) d3 3 9 8 4 10 5 s3 6 7 ga2 ga4 bl lla b2 ga6 ga8 d4 dS d6 d7 d2 d8 Although Figure 4.9 was at one time dated to about !272 to !273, it is more likely to date to the last two decades of the life of its main subject, Sanggye Onpo ( 1251-1296)m It was probably commissioned by a disciple of Sanggye Onpo. Nothing indicates that it was made during his year as interim abbot at Taklung ( 1272-!273), when he and the other lamas at Taklung would probably have been fully occupied with carrying out various funerary duties s uch as building the memorial stupa for Sanggye Yarjon. Sanggye Onpo, moreover, was then young and just beginning to establish his reputation as a master. The painting, therefore, probably dates to Sanggye Onpo's years in Kham. It has an inscription recording its consecration by its subject, Sanggye Onpom Figure 4.10 depicts the Taklung abbots Kuyal and Sanggye Yarjon. P. Pal in his preface to the proceedings of a London conference on styles described it as a lineage thangka with two lamas from central Tibet, in the Kadam style, from Taklung. He dated it to the thirteenth century. Since the patron comes from Sanggye Onpo's generdtion, the painting should date to at least the late thirteenth century, and its provenance is probably Riwoche, not TakiLmg. Its struc- fiG. 4· ro ture is shown in diagram [1]. The Taklung Abbots Kuyalwa and Sanggye Yarjon Lare 13th century 15 'i's x 13 in. (40.3 x 33 em) Los Angeles Counry Museum of An (AC1994.47.1) Lirerarure: P. Pal 1997, preface to J. Casey Singer and P. Denwood 1997 eds., p. 8, pL iv. The composition incorporates an interesting further development, with gurus inserted above not once, as we have already seen, but twice. They are gurus 7 and 8 above the main figures (gurus 9 and 10), who interrupt the normal chronological sequence. They are the key gurus Phagmotrupa (7) and Taklungthangpa (8), whose importance is also signaled by their frontal depiction, unlike the other human teachers. Note the presence of five Anuttarayoga tantra tutelary deities ill the top two reg- dl and thus go against the nom1al rules of 2 d3 3 4 5 P (II) 8 d4 d6 6 d2 dS 9 isters (d l through dS), who seem a lmost to usurp the place of the lineage lamas 7 10 d7 d8 d9 d!O d II dl2 hierarchy. MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA 117 4-II Taklungthangpa Chenpo with His Lineage and Manifestations First half of the 13th century 12 'Is x 9 'Is in. (32 x 25 em) Counesy of Michael J. and Beata McCormick Collection Literature: M. Rhie and R. Thurman 1996, pl. 203 (84a); S. Kossak 2010, fig. 55. FIG. II8 CHAPTER 4 ~ .) dl d3 8b d5 p (9) 2 sl l 7 4 5 6 s2 d2 Sa d7 d8 d9 diO d 11 d4 8c d6 d l2 GRO UP 3 : PAIN TING S WITH A THTRD TYPE O F LINE AGE Figure 4.11 depicts again the standard portrait ofTa klun gthan gpa with his lineage and manifestations. His lineage exemplifies the seco nd main conv ention of a stani ng point, which is to begin in the center. It goes from Vajradham (seated just left of cente r) to the left, then returns to just right of cente r, and then goes right , before returning to the top cente r again. The cente r of the top register is reserved for the g um of the main figure. Here the bottom regis ter of six protectors is identical ~ith those in Figu res 4.2 and 4.12. The paint ing's stmc ture is show n in diagram [J]. As in Figure 4. 7, a standard grou p of four deities- Siikyamuni (d I), Avalokitesvam (d2), Cakr asam vara (d3), and Vajraviiriihi (d4} - acco mpan ies the main figure. Guru 8, Taklungthangpa, again appe ars three times , though in one case with a different hand gesture. Again, all seven guru s or deiti es who represent Taklungthangpa or his miraculous emanations are show n in the conventionalized cogon grass hut (8a, 8b, 8c, d I, d2, d3, and d4), no doub t the smal l residence hut ofTa klun gthan gpa on the plain ofTa klun g. Belo w the central figure is depicted a monastic cente r with a grass-thatch hut and two golde n memorial stupas (at Taklung after the death of its first two abbo ts?). Four figures with simil ar faces are show n peering out of windows (all wearing a yello w hat), while two monk s are seate d outsi de. The painting bears an inscription attesting to its consecration by Sang gye Onpo. Figure 4. 11 was at first dated on the basis of style to the first half of the thirteenth centu ry (i.e., to between 1200 and 1250). It cann ot date earli er than this, since this patron, too, belonged to generati on 9. S. Kossak has recently dated it to the last quarter of the thirteenth century. m Figure 4. 12 is another subsequen t copy of the classic portrait of Taklungthangpa with his lineage and emanations. It stands out visually from the others presented here because of the yellow hat that its main figure wear s. It follows the same convention oflin eal descent as in Figure 4.11 . Its lineage proceeds from Vajradhara (seated just left of center) left, then returns to just right of cente r, from where it proceeds right, before returning to the cente r again, v.ilere the guru of the main figure is placed. In addition, the Four Great Kings, or guardians, of the Four Directions (G IG4) are depicted, placed in such a way that they create a four-cornered field with a different sense of depth. Such a representation of the four guardians is an iconographic development that began in about the late thirteenth or early fourteenth century. Note also the body nimbuses of the wrathful figures in the bottom register, which do not appear unti l abou t the fourteenth century. Its stmcture is shown in diagram (K]. According to its structure, Figure 4. 12, too, would be at the earliest an early thirteenth-century painting. It was first dated to between 1350 and 1400 because of its similarity with Figure 4.15. J. Case y S inger notic ed that over time sty Iis tic subgroups developed at Taklung and Riwoche. 325 She classified this painting together with other later, obvio usly Riwoche, paintings, dating it to the second half of the fourteenth century.326 She dates this painting (her Fig. 44, Tashipel with the yello w hat) to between 1350 and 1400 "because the be a gene ration or two earlier, in keeping with my dating of the end of the Sharri style everywhere in Tibe t to about the 1350s or 1360s. If we can find hard evidence for dating this exam ple of the style to later than that, then we will also have to move forward the cessation of the style, at least in Kham . J. Casey Sing er's dating would mean that several generations have been omitted from the lineage. lfthi s painting did date two centuries later than the early portraits ofTa klung thang pa, one explanation would be that as this is a later copy of an early painting of the great founding master, Iineal masters subsequent to him were not thought necessary. It is interesting to note that the patron was a laym an with long black hair and a dark blue long-sleeved inner robe. He must be one of the two patrons mentioned in an inscription on the back, whic h identifies them as the local rulers Miw ang Sona m Dorje and (possibly his younger brother) Lhabu (divine son) Akba r, together with the latter 's wife and son. (Tho se patrons also comm issio ned Fig. 2.1o.pu Thou gh they have not yet been definitely identified , my first suspi cion was that they migh t have been local lords of the Gazi family who from their castl e (mk.har) were the main patro ns of Riwoche. (lf they Houri shed in the mid- fourteenth century, they would have been neph ews or great-nephews ofCh oku Orgyen Gonp o, who died in 1366.) The prese nce of that unusual element mkhar in one of the patro n's title or name (a mkhar) made me suspicious, style has developed considerably from that of the late thirteenth centu ry painting in the Muse e Guim et" ofOn po (Fig. 4.15)." 327 Then she assigns her Figu re 48 (Mar pa) to the same period because " it comp ares so close ly with this fourteenth- but it is not sufficient to I ink him with the Gazi famiJy_l-'9 Belo w the central figure, there is depicted again the monastic center of Taklung, but now it has become a jumb le of buildings. We can see three memorial stupas to the left (after the death of centu ry Tashipel portrait [Fig. 4.12, her Fig 44]." My datin g of both to abou t the early or mid-fourteenth centu ry woul d Tald ungth angpa and his first two successors) and we can still find the roof of the grass hut, if we know where to look. Seve ral faces similar to those in Figure MIRR OR OF THE BUDD HA II9 FIG.4.I2 Taklungthangpa with His Lineage and Emanations Ca. early ro mid-14th century 23 'Is x 21 Y. in. (60 x 51 em) Collection Mimi lipton Literature: J. Casey Singer 1997, pl. 44. I20 CHAPTER 4 3 Gl dl d3 8b G3 p (9) 2 sl 7 4 5 s2 Sa dS d6 d7 d8 d9 6 G2 d2 d4 8c G4 diO 4.11 are s hown peeri ng out of wi ndows, a ll topped by the same yellow hat (preswnably they represent Taklungthangpa manifesting himself miraculously). This painting deserves a closer study, which was not at fi rst possible from its tiny originally published ill ustration 330 Figure 4. 13 also portrays Taklungthangpa as main figure, repeating basically the same composition with vertical colwnns and horizontal registers of seven figures. Its overall s ize is about the same as Figure 4. 12. But it is larger than most of the other better-known paintings of this master. The portrait's arrangement is s hown in Diagram [L]. The thangka depicts the lineage only as far as Taklungthangpa, teacher nwnber 8. Its patron must accordingly date to the ninth generation, at the earliest. But it may have been a copy of a standard icon made a generat ion or two later than that. Its long inscription o n the rear in curs ive script includes, in the first line of the final section, the telltale li nes referring to Sanggye Onpo's command not to part from these sacred objects, beg inning with the words "mtshungs med bla ma." T he depiction of the patron is remarkable for the large space next to him that is fi lled with many offerings and implements. In the depiction ofTaklung Monastery complex, we can sti ll make out, beh ind a black wall, the white walls and golden roof of the founder's sacred F1c. 4- I3 Taklungrbangpa Tashi Pal Ca. ]are 13rh century 23 ¥s x 18 'Is in. (60 x 48 em) Privare Collection, Swirzerland meditation hut. Three golden memorial stupas are shown to the left. Figure 4.14 depicts once again the standard portrait ofTaklungthangpa with his lineage and miraculous emanations. It employs some of the same conven- 3 tions of composition seen in Figures Gl 4. 11 , 4. 12 , and 4. 13. T he lineage proceeds from Vaj radhara (seated just left of dl center) to the left, then it returns to j ust d3 8b right of center, from w here it goes right, G3 and returns to the center again. Its structure is mapped in d iagram [M]. P(9?) 2 sl? I 7 4 5 6 s2? G2 d2 d4 Sa 8c dS d6 d7 d8 d9 G4 di O MIRROR OF T HE BUDDHA 121 Once again, the Four Great Kings of the Four Directions (GI -G4) have been depicted in the peculiar four-cornered arrangement. As usual, Taklungthangpa appears three times, though once (8b) with a yellow meditation hat (sgom =lnva). Again he is also shown in four divine manifestations (d I, d2, d3, and d4 ), and all his manifestations appear within stylized grass-thatched huts (spyil bu). Two [ndian masters peek out as tiny figures (sl and s2}-perhaps they represent Taklungthangpa's earlier lives? In the depiction ofTaklung Monastery below we find him manifesting in several windows simultaneously. Three golden stupas are already present at the monastic center, and we can make out the white walls and decorated roof of the original thatched hut behind a colorful jumble of buildings to the right. Again it seems likely that this painting was a copy of a standard early portrait. Note that the row of protectors at the bottom is almost identical to that found in the previous three paintings, except that a seventh deity, Pal den Lhamo (dPalldan lha mo), has been added. It was previously dated to about 1272 to 1273. In its composition, it is quite similar to Figures 4.11 , 4 .12, and 4.13; however, its lineage continues one generation longer. If no generations are missing, then the patron would belong to the generation of Sanggye Yarjon, the last generation depicted. Though from the point of view of the lineage, one more generation of gurus would be needed to reach the generation of Sanggye Onpo, here we have a later copy of a fixed portrait, in which those rules were presumably not as strictly observed.m The lineages of gurus are just one of several important factors that must be taken into account, which also include the details of iconography (including depictions of sacred buildings) and inscriptions. Here an inscription on the back in large dbu can characters identifies the painting I22 CHAPTER 4 as having received consecration from Sangye Onpo. The last line in the cursive inscription includes the telltale lines "mtshungs med bla ma." Figure 4.15 is a magnificent painting that depicts Sang,aye Onpo with his main lineage and several groups of outstanding Indian Buddhist teachers. The iconography is very rich and is more com pi icated than that of most Taklungl Riwoche paintings. Its layout is s hown in diagram [N]. The painting is of iconographic interest for its depictions of standard iconographic groups such as the Eight Great Adepts (ga = great adepts, grub chen), the Six Ornaments, the Two Excellent Ones (so = six ornaments), and the Sixteen Arhats (or the Si>.1:een Elders) 332 (See also Fig. 2.25.) [n this painting, lineage master nwnber (I Oa), Sanggye Yarjon, is surrounded by four other smaller masters with whom he had some connection. Guru JOe looks like Padmasambhava and I Od, Phadampa. See diagram [0]. The patron (P) belongs to at least generation 12, and Sanggye Onpo ( 11) is the main and last guru depicted. The painting was first dated to the last quarter of the thirteenth century, but a more probable date is the first quarter of the fourteenth century, if not slightly later. In a recent publication S. Kossak moves the dating to possibly the second quarter of the fourteenth century. 333 According to an earlier study, after a threefold repetition of Sanggye Onpo's name in the inscription on the reverse, there appears on the back a final name: Ratnapraji'ias ribhadra 334 That was Sanskrit for Rinchen Sherab Pal Zangpo (Rin chen shes rab dpal bzang po), the ordination name of Choku Orgyen Gonpo, the abbot who succeeded Sanggye Onpo at Riwoche. 335 Yet as deciphered by Christian Luczanits (see the detailed chart in Appendix 8), the inscriptions on the back actually pay homage to a yet another master in the Taklung lineage. After repeating the prayers to Sangye Onpo (calling him Ghir ti sri ra sml bha tra) and invoking Ratnapraji'iasribhadra (Rin chen Shes rab dpal bzang po, the second abbot), the prayers mention a final name: Dharmasila, i.e., Chos kyi tshul khrims. This painting was thus probably commissioned roughly during the abbacy of the third abbot ofRiwoche, who served from 1366 to 1384. That abbot was best !mown as Khedrup Gyalwa (mKhas grub rGyal ba), though he was given a different name at his initial ordination: Lotro Gyaltshen Palzangpo (Blo gros rgyal mtshan dpal bzang po). His pub! ished biography does not specify his name at full ordination, which may have included the elements Cho (Chos) and Tshultrim (Tshul khrims) that appear in the prayer. In any case, a dating to between the mid-1360s to mid- 1380s means that the Sharri style may have continued to be employed in western Kham for a generation or so beyond the disappear.rnce of the style in central Tibet, where l estimate the Sharri ceased to be employed in around the 1350s or 1360s. It was not common for Tibetan monks of any period to receive Sanskrit names, though learned Tibetans usually knew (and sometimes employed in colophons or inscriptions) the Sanskrit equivalent of their Tibetan names336 During the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries and even later, Sanskrit probably lent sanctity or spiritual power to the names. GROUP 4: PAINTINGS WITH TRIPLE LINEAGES The next three paintings (F igs. 4.164.18) depict three lineages, though with some slight variations, an arrangement that was too complicated to be described in my introduction of I ineage structures in The Nepalese Legacy in Tibetan Painting. FIG.4.I4 Taklungthangpa with His Lineage and Emanations Ca. late 13th cenrury 15 -\4 x 12 'Is in. (40 x 32 em) Private Collection, Switzerland Literature: J. Casey Singer 1997, pl. 42. 3 2 7 4 sl 5 6 s2 GI G2 dl d2 Sa d3 d4 8b 9 8c G3 G4 P( I O) d5 d6 d7 d8 d9 d!O d II d l2 MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA 123 Frc.4.15 Sanggye 6npo with His Lineage and Groups of Outstanding Indian Teachers Early to mid-14th century 19 'Ia x 15 in. (50 x 38 em) Musee des Arts Asiatiques-Guimet, Paris, France (MA 6083) © Reunion des Musees Nationaux I An Resource, NY Phorograph by Richard Lambert ART154686 Literature: G. Beguin 1995, no. 416;]. Casey Singer 1997, pl. 43; and S. Kossak 2010, fig. 119. 4 5 gal ga3 ga5 ga7 so I so3 so5 so7 p (12) 3 b3 b7 124 CHAPTER 4 I lOa IOe B s2 d2 6 b5 7 8 b6 9 b8 ga2 ga4 ga6 ga8 so2 so4 so6 so8 d6 b2 11 dl !Od {lOa} sl bl JOe lOb 2 b4 d3 d4 d5 Frc. 4.r6 Taklung Abbot Kuyalwa with His Three Lineages Mid-13th cenrury 20 'h x 15 in. (52 x 38 em) CoUecrion of Gursbaran and Elvira Sidhu Literature: J. Casey Singer 1996, p. 194, pl. 12. Figure 4.16, which was previously dated to the late thirteenth century, depicts as its main subject the ninth master in the Taklung lineage, Kuyalwa. The structure of the painting has a new aspect in that it portrdys three separate lineages, which together constituted the two main rivers or currents (chu bo) of the Dakpo KagyD. The basic structural conventions of the first two lineages remain similar to the paintings in Group 3. Of the three lineages, one is on the left and begins with Vajradhara ( l ). The two remaining lineages are on the right and each begins with Buddha Sakyamuni (1 b), as their primordial guru. Siik.')'amuni is shown in the top row, to the right ofVajradhara. Both of the lineages on the right also share the gurus Ati5a (2b) and Dromton (3b). The structure of Figure 4. 16 is s hown in diagram [P], with the lineage on the left being the standard combined (=zmg 'jug) Mahamudra lineage through Naropa and Marpa. Demonstrating his importance, guru 8, Taklungthangpa, occupies the center of the top register. The bottom row of protectors is different from that in the earlier thanglws, and here an Anuttarayoga tantric deity is included (d4). 1 have interpreted the iconography of the Kadam gurus on the right side as showing not one but two lineages received by Gampopa. Strictly speaking, that is a historical oversimplification, since Gampopa received teachings from several Kadam teachers, including Shenyen Drepa (bShes gnyen sGre pa), Lhari Tsagyepa (Lha ri rTsa brgyad pa), 3 2 4 bl l 8 lb 2b 3b Bl 4b 5 5b 6 3c 4c 7 9 dl d2 P(IO) Sc d3 d4 dS d6 d7 d8 d9 and Naljorpa Chok.')'i Yungdrung (rNa! MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA 125 'byor pa Chos kyi g.yung drung), as documented by later records of teachings received. But the Kadam teachers who were considered the key transmitters by later Kagyu followers were: Chayulwa (Bya yul ba), Nyukrumpa (sNyug rum pa), and Gyat6n Jakri wa (rGya ston lCags ri ba). Gampopa's lineage for White Tara in the tradition transmitted to Tibet by Atisa (sgrol dkar jo bo lugs) was recorded to be: 337 Atisa Dromt6n Jenngawa Chayulwa Gan1popa (Dwags po Lha rje bSod nan1 s ri n chen) His lineage for the instructions on how to worship Buddha Sakyamuni (Fhub pa 'i dbang po 'i lha khrid) as one of the Four Kadam Deities, was:338 Atisa Dromt6n Potowa (Po to ba) Langri Thangpa Dorje Sengge (Giang ri thang pa rOo rje seng ge) Gyaton Jakriwa (Lcags ri ba) Gampopa (Dwags po Lha rje) Though several ofGampopa's other Kadam lineages are documented in the lineage records, I have not been able to trace transmissions to him from Ny ukrumpa TsondrO Gyaltshen (sNyug rum pa Brtson ' grus rgyal mtshan, 1042- 1109). (His name was also spelled sMyug rwn pa or even sMug rum pa.) Nyukrumpa was one of the main disciples ofMangra JWlgnay Gyaltshen (Mang ra ' Byung gnas rgyal mtshan) 339 Mangra was, in tum, a disciple of Naljorapa Chenpo (rNa! 'byor pa Byang chub 'byWlg gnas or Byang chub rin chen), who was a disciple of both Atisa and Dromt6n 340 I have provisionally reconstmcted that lineage as: I26 CHAPTER 4 Ati5a Dromt6n 341 Naljorpa Chenpo Mangra Jungnay Gyaltshen Nyukrumpa Gampopa (Dwdgs po Lha rje bSod nams rin chen) In Figure 4.16, the Kadam lineages pass through Atisa (2b) and Dromt6n (3b), both of w hom are easily identifiable thanks to their iconography. But the remaining lineages are uncertain. l asswne that the following two monks (4b and Sb) continue Gampopa's Kadam lineage down to Chayulwa. My working hypothesis is that the remaining three Kadam masters (3c-5c) represent Gampopa's Kadam lineage from Nyukrumpa as transmitted through Naljorpa Chenpo. According to the Blue Annals, Nyukrumpa spent a lot of time in meditation. Could that account tor the w1conventionalmudra of meditation, no shirt, open robe, and dark-skinned yogi appearance of guru Sc? l have Wlderstood that final guru (7) on that side to be a third teacher of number 6, Gampopa, in whom all three traditions were combined. Guru 3c, moreover, wears a distinctive small yellow skull cap. Could that cap mark him as Naljorpa Chenpo? lf not, then it identifies him as some other noteworthy early Kadam master, who is still w1identified. 342 The patron of this painting must have belonged to Sanggye Yarjon's generation (whose abbatial tenure was from 1236 to 1272), and thus the lineage as it stands most likely dates to at least the mid-thirteenth century. Of course, this could be a copy of a standard early portrait that was painted a generation or two later. Figure 4.17 is another example of the Taklung abbot Kuyalwa with the triple lineage. [twas previously dated to about 1275. It apparently depicts Kuyalwa as its main subject. lf it in fdct depicts his successor, then the lineage would be missing a generation, as shown in diagram [Ql In the previous painting, Figure 4.16, the top central figure (guru 8), was pictured as the teacher of the main figure. In Figure 4.17, three gurus have been moved to the center of the top register: with Gampopa (6) and Phagmotrupa (7) joining Taklungthangpa (8). Iconographically, gum number 8 is easily identified as Taklungthangpa because of his frontal portrayal and typical smooth hairline that rtms roughly parallel to the crest of his head. Who is the central figure (9)? Based on the strttcture, he carmot be identified as a master of generation l0, such as Sanggye Yarjon, as the main guru of the central figure would have been omitted. The second Kadam lineage (gurus 3c-Sc) I again take to be the lineage of Nyukrumpa from Naljorpa Chenpo. Both 3c and Scare distinctively dressed again: the first wears the same yellow skull cap and the second has a bare chest and his hands are folded in meditation. Guru number 6c appears for the first and only time (he was absent in Figs. 4.16 and 4.18). Was he another lay Kadam master of Gampopa (6)? Whoever he may be, all the traditions that are shown should be linked through Gampopa. Figure 4.18 is the third example of a triple lineage. Though its main figure looks the same as the previous painting (Fig. 4.17), according to its lineage it depicts as its main figure the third Taklung abbot, Sanggye Yarj6n. It has been dated to the last quarter of the thirteenth century, which seems accurate to me. Its structure, shown in diagram [R], is similar to that of Figure 4.17, though in some respects it is simpler. The overall arrangement of figures is unusual in that there is an even number of lineal masters (s ix) in the top register instead of the usual odd number (seven). Rhie and Thurman identified two lineages of minor human figures, FIG. 4· 17 Taklung Abbot Kuyalwa with His Three Lineages Mid-13th century Watercolors and gold on cotton 11 1A x 8 1h in. (28.6 x 21 em) Collection of Mr. and Mrs. John Gilmore Ford Photograph © The Walters Art Museum, Baltimore F.126 Literature: P. Pal1997, p. 50, pl. 25. I 2 Bl sl? 6 8 7 lb s2? ~ ~ 4 5 9 2b 3b 4b 5b 3c dl 4c d2 d3 5c P(IO) d4 d5 d6 d7 d8 6c d9 MIRROR OF T HE BUDDHA 127 F1G.4.I8 Sanggye Yarjon with His Three Lineages Late 13th century 9 x 7 Y, in. (23 x 18 em) Private U.S.A. Family Collection Literature: M. Rhie a nd R. Thurman 1996, pl. 204 (84b); and D. Weldon and J. Casey 2003, no. 3'1. 3 4 CHAPTER 4 I 9 2b d? dl d2 d? 5 6 7 8 P( 13?) 128 2 10 12(?) II (?) 3b 4b 5b 3c 4c 5c d3 namely of the Kagyu and Kadam traditions.343 They recorded an inscription that nan1ed the central figure, Sang,aye Yarj6n, and another inscription that records a consecration by masters of Taklung. Two other monks appear in the painting. I provisionally interpret them to be additional lineal g ums II(?) and 12(?). The Kadam lineages on the right side again end with three distinctive masters (3c to Sc), the last of whom I assume to be Nyukrumpa. GROUP 5: PAINTINGS WITH ALTERNATING LI NEAGES Figure 4.19 depicts JiUinatapa with six abbots ofTakltmg and Riwoche and the Eight Great Adepts. It is the only painting that foll ows the fifth convention of lineal descent, alternating to right and left 3 44 Its structure is shown schematically in diagram [S]. The lineage masters that Figure 4. 18 depicts are: 7. [Phagmotrupa] 8. Je Thangpa Chenpo (rJe Thang pa chen po) 9. Kuyalwd Rinpoche (sKu yal Rin po che) I 0. Je Sanggye Yarj6n (rJe Sangs rgyas yar byon) II. Je Sanggye On (rJe Sangs rgyas dbon) 12. Choku Orgyen Gonpo (Chos sku 0 rgyan mgon po) This painting may have been the second in a set of at least two. If my assumption is correct, the first thangka would have shown six lineage masters who fonn the beginning of the lineage from Vajradhara to Gampopa, followed Frc. 4- I 9 Jiianampa with Six Abhors and the Eight Grear Adepts Ca. mid- ro late 14th century 27 x 21 ¥z in. (68.5 x 54.6 em) The Metropolitan Museum of An, New York, NY, U.S.A Purchase, Friends of Asian Art Gifts 1987 (1987.144) © The Metropolitan Museum of Art I Art Resource, NY ART322101 Literamre: S. Kossak 1990; ]. Casey Singer 1994, pl. 28; ]. Casey Singer 1997, pl. 47; S. Kossak and J . Casey Singer 1998, fig. 33. 7 sl 8 9 10 II 12 s2 ga l ga3 gaS ga6 ga2 ga7 ga4 ga8 by eight other Indian Buddhist saints of a fixed iconographic group (possibly the Six Ornaments, rgyan drug mchog gnyis). If the lineage in the second paint- ing ends with guru 12 , Ch6ku Orgyen MIRROR O F THE BUDDHA I29 Gonpo (who died in 1366), then it prob- it came about that the older Taklung ably dates to the second or third quarter paintings were bro ught to Riwoche by of the fourteenth century. Casey S inger noticed the painting's Sanggye Onpo when he left Taklung after an unsuccessfi.1l bid for the abbacy. Within the corpus, we should try to unusual style, which was an important departure from the other Taklung distinguish as clearly as possible between paintings. When confronted with two stylistically very different paintings two groups of paintings: those painted for early Taklung masters that were from Riwoche, Figures 4.19 and 4.20, brought to Kham in the 1270s, where she proposed the existence of a second style patronized by the Taklung Kagyu they were preserved down to the present century, and those that were painted in that had arisen in the second half of the Kham for Sanggye Onpo and his succes- fourteenth century. Noting the indisputable origin of those later pai ntings from sors from the 1270s onward, which also survived at Riwoche. The vast majority Kham, she naturally suspected that oflater paintings and most of the earlier geography influenced the sty Ies, though ones are somehow linked with Sanggye she still asswned that most of those paintings were from Taklung and not Riwoche 345 I do not see why the painting of Marpa (Fig. 2.10; her Fig. 48) should be dated together with the stylistically very Frc. 4.20 Milarepa Riwoche; Ja[e 14[h century 11 -% x 14 -% in. (30 x 37.5 em) Priva[e Collec[ion Af[er Li[eramre: J. Casey Singer 1997, fig. 49. Onpo or his successors. Certainly those paintings with inscriptions mentioning a consecration by Sanggye Onpo have been preserved at Riwoche since the late thirteenth century. difterent paintings to the second half of the fourteenth century. (An inscription records that it was commissioned by the same patron as Fig. 4.12.) Ifwe move its date a half a century earlier ( 1300-1350), then the problem of two confl icting styles within the Taklung Kagyu School disappears. If the true Sharri style (and not some later imitation of it) survived in paintings for a generation longer at Riwoche than e lsewhere, we need to document such painti ngs as a discrete group through several concrete cases. than the late fourteenth century. The CoNCLUSIONS painting turns out to embody a later im itation Sharri style that dates to at least This small san1pli ng ofTakl ung Kagyil the fifteenth century and perhaps later. This dating is supported by Figure 4.21, a s ubsequently published example of a faux-Sharri style at Riwoche, which A. Heller has dated to the mid-sixteenth century on the basis of inscriptions. 346 Other cases offaux- archaic sty les are known in Tibetan painting. 347 The only evidence that Casey Si nger gave for dating Figure 4.20 was its style, though she did not specify TAKLUNG AND RIWOCHE: THE which firmly dated image she used as a Regarding the origin of the so-called Takl ung corpus, all evidence speaks to comparison. The Sharri style is believed to have died out in central Tibet in about the 1350s or 1360s, and so it should not EARLY AND lATER PROVENANCES Riwoche as its recent origin, as now paintings for the most part embodied the basic structural principles as I laid them out in a previous publication. 349 The ordering of lineal gurus was here more varied than I first expected: at least five compositional types occur, including one (with triple lineages) that I had not described in detai l in that earlier publication. Comparing the Iineage structure of these available examples helped to differentiate earl ier and later conventions, even within this small group ofTaklung Kagyil paintings. It w1expectedly provided a clue for provisionally stratifying the paintings into roughl y earlier and later groups. Group I of the present chapter included several of the oldest be surprising if similar major stylistic seems obvious. 348 None of the paintings whose inscriptions have so far been pub- s hifts occurred also at Riwoche between about 1350 and 1400. lished branch off from the main Taklung recent. I asswne that groups 2, 3, and 4 fall chronologically in between. From just one exan1ple, Figure masters a ll belong to Sanggye Onpo 's tradition o r are linked to him in some 4.20, Casey Singer could not have way, and none refers to his cousin and known that a style that retained numerous Sharri elements but which was not a rival at Taklung, Tashi Lama (Manggala true S harri style arose in Riwoche later IJO CHAPTER 4 guru, 123 1-1297), fourth abbot of Taklung. We now know, after all, how paintings, whi le group 5 had the most The iconography of the Taklung portraits was more complicated than expected. Its conventions were, at fi rst sight, baffli ng: for example, the triple representations ofTaklungthangpa. To 4.2.1 Portrait of Jigten Wangchuk (1454-1532) 16th cemuty 14 'h x 12 'A in. (37 x 31 em) Collection R.R.E. literature: A. Heller 1999, pl. 104 fiG. of standard portraits of a great founder ofTaklung or his eminent early successors at Taklung or Riwoche, we cannot expect each painting to depict every lineal figure from great founder to the patron. But in every case we must at least check to see whether lineal gums start appearing again below the main figure portrayed. Above all, ~1ructural analysis should not be applied blindly, without understanding the other iconographic details of the painting and reading as many inscriptions as possible. Dating by si mply counting lineages wi ll work only if the lineage is complete (i.e., the gum of the patron is shown as the last lama) and there are no other anomalies. But few paintings in this chapter lend themselves to such a si mplistic treatment. understand them, we needed to learn more about the lives of the main masters portrayed, as would be the best strategy when exploring any poorly known corpus. To describe the stmcture through a complete diagram should be the standard procedure when thoroughly documenting any painting. Though it may seem troublesome at first, it has the advantage offorcing us to deal with unusual features that we might otherwise overlook. For instance, repeated or missing teachers of a lineage could not be passed over with no attempt at explanation. The presence of unknown or unexpected Indian masters (e.g., adepts or pundits), in particular, caused me initial difficulties. Furthermore, when divine figures such as buddhas and bodhisattvas appeared out of their normal hierarchical order, it was necessary to identify them and search for some explanation. For example, a group of four divine figures regularly appeared out of order in thangkas with Taklungthangpa as the main figure, though this could finally be explained by taking into consideration his life history. Concerning dating, in a few cases my datings based on lineage structure differed from those suggested by previous researchers by a generation or two. That reinforces the need to apply lineal analysis in tandem with other methods. The latest datable lineal master alwdys provides a useful terminus, and in every case we should cow1t and list as many lamas in the lineage as we can. In copies MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA IJI CHAPTER 5 Reflections ofEnlighte nment in Three Early Portraits Tibetan Buddhist schools disagree on some points of theory and practice, all agree that the spiritual teacher is paramount. In Vajrayana mysticism, in particular, disciples placed their faith first and foremost in the guru, who is considered the fourth and highest refuge.350 Worshiping and serving the master was thought to be both the necessary and the most efficient way to achieve spiritual purification. 351 Unquestioning faith in the guru temporarily suppressed negative selfish emotions and opened a path for the sincerely devout to come near to the goal of enl ightenment, wh ich otherwise remained virtually unapproachable.352 Many serious Tibetan disciples accordingly worshiped their guru as a fully enlightened buddha. Some Tibetan lamas. when portraying their gurus in paintings, exalted them as highly as possible. In the following pages, I would like to explore the artistic ramifications of such guru worship. How were such belief.; expressed when Tibetans portrayed saints? Did Tibetan patrons merely work the secondary iconographic elements that \"'e normally associate with buddhas into the background? Or did they take it to extremes, assigning to their gurus some of the main physical characteristics normally reserved for buddhas? ALTHOUGH THE VARIOUS PREVIOUS R ESEARCH The tendency to portray lamas as budd has was noted by most scholars who Detail of Fig. 5.20 investigated early Tibetan paintings. Jane Casey Singer, in a pioneering investigation of early painted portraits in central Tibet, found thirteenth-century paintings in which an eminent Kagyu lama had been visua lly identified in some respects with the Buddha.151 In a subsequent study, she concluded that in early paintings of masters, whatever the role of direct observation in portraiture might have been, the main goal of the artist \\'as to portray the master as an enlightened being. To that end, the artists borrowed iconographic conventions that had been deve loped in India to depict buddhas and bod hisattvas. Those main conventions were: I. physical marks (laksa11a, mtshan ma) of the Buddha, such as elongated earlobes and wheels on tbe palms and soles of the feet 2. throne setting 3. teaching gesture 4. generous application of gold What justified the employment of these elements was the Tibetans' perception of their great lamas as divinities or, indeed, as buddhas. 354 To what extent those paintings of saints were based on realistic originals could not be immediately answered by Casey Singer. Noting that Giuseppe Tucci believed that portraits executed during the lifetime of the subject served as models for later portraits, she was not sure whether that belief could be asserted about images dating to before the fifteenth century.m In western-Tibetan painting, Christian Luczanits observed that human gurus suddenly began to be portrayed as budd has in the early thirteenth century. One famous case was a small stupa at Alchi in Ladakh that promi nently portrays a lama (see Fig. 5.1 ). Unusual for western-Tibetan art of its time, it portrays a teacher (in three-quarter profile) flanked by two bodhisattvas. When compared with datable central-Tibetan paintings of the period, this mural could be linked with a new development in central-Tibetan painting. Luczanits concluded that in such murals the teacher was understood to be equal to a buddha. Regarding the presence of flank ing bodhisattvas, he found that the Alchi mural was more explicit in showing a lama as equal to a buddha than central-Tibetan portraits of the same time. In terms of frontal representation and the elevation of the historical personage, centralTibetan paintings were more explicit than the Alchi example.l56 Luczanits further concluded that in Alchi this triad of a lama flanked by bodhisattvas first appeared under Drigw1g Kagyo influence. (That would imply that the so-called Rinchen Sangpo could well be the founding lama of Drigung, as Luczan its later asserted more clearly.)m In such a triad, the central figure (an eminent Tibetan lama) can be taken to represent the Buddha or a personification of his teaching. (See also Luczanits's discussion of these murals in chapter 6 of the present catalog.) Luczanits further maintained that the perception of the contemporary MIRR O R OF THE BUDDHA IJJ THREE PoRTRAITS FIC. 5·1 Mural of the "Rinchen Zangpo" Small Chorten, Alchi, Ladakh Phorograph by Christian Luczanirs, courresy of rhe Western Himalayan Archive Vienna Lirerarure: A. Heller 2005, pl. 2; jiars01 heller_img2. Tibetan teacher as a buddha was estab1ished mainly in Kagyii circles in the second half of the twelfth century in central Tibet. This development, he believed, was most closely Iinked with the great Kagyii master Phagmotrupa and some of his major disciples, including the founders of Drigung and Taklung. 358 He thus interpreted the AI chi mural-together with a wel l-known Cleveland thangka that depicts a lama, probably Phagmotrupa, within the crown of its central buddha- to be explicit public religious and political statements that the teacher is a buddha or is equal to a buddha3 ;9 This convention was believed to have come to Ladakh from central Tibet, where most of the major Kagyu temples had been founded a few generations earlier, in the second half of the twelfth century. 134 CHAPTER j In the following pages I would like to investigate several early paintings of gurus from central or eastern Tibet, searching, in particular, for visual evidence of buddhahood, especially in the tradition of Phagmotrupa and his main disciples. I concentrate on three well documented classic portraits, whose original versions were probably painted between about 1150 and 1200 in 0 Province of central Tibet and for which numerous later copies survive. I try to identify in them traits of buddhahood or the status of a buddha. All three portraits were painted in the Sharri style and come from two branches of the Phagtru Kagyu (Phag gru bka' brgyud) tradition: the TakiLmg Kagyu and Drigung Kagyu. For each I have been able to find multiple copies or closely related paintings, proof that each represented a standard ponrait of their founding master, at least within the Taklung and Drigung Schools. The three portraits depict the masters Phagmotrupa, Taklungthangpa, and Drigung Kyoppa Jikten Gonpo. Their earliest prototypes were probably painted in the last decade of their subject's life or within a decade or two of his death. None of the original prototypes have survived, but we can study them indirectly through the numerous later copies or closely related paintings. Some of the Taklung Kagyu copies, in particular, may have been pai nted a century or more after the originals, and many may have been commissioned at Riwoche in Kham Province of eastern Tibet, as ex."Piained in chapter 4. To begin reconstructing the original ponraits, it helps to compare as many surviving copies as possible. Here it is only practicable to take into account five or six copies (or closely related paintings) for each portrait. I present one main exemplar of each, together with copies of the san1e or closely related compositions. In this v.'lly I hope to briefly survey these paintings. Eventually, every instance of each ponrait should be compared and their inscriptions systematically taken into account. 1. The Portrait of P!tagmotrupa with His Previous Lives The first of three main ponraits is Figure 5.2, which ponrays Phagmotrupa as its central figure.360 He is surrounded by minor figures that depict deities, his previous Iives, and what I assume to be episodes from his saintly life in the bottom register (el through e9). Its structure is presented in diagram [A]. (For a complete transcription of the inscriptions on the back of the painting, see Appendix C.) I presume that the prototype of this portrait v.'liS commissioned by one of his disciples either in the last twelve years ofPhagmotrupa 's life (when he lived in his willow-twig hut at Thel) or in the next decade or two. Judging by the survival of six or seven later copies in the Taklung Kagyu, Phagmotrupa v-1as one of the first gurus to have a standard portrait of this type that can so far be documented within any of the Dakpo Kagyli Schools. FIG. 5·2. Phagmorrupa wirh His Previous Lives and Episodes from His Saintly Career 13rh cenrury Disremper on cmron 12 V. x 10 in. (32.1 x 25.4 em) Rubin Museum of An C2005.16.38 (HAR 65461) Lirerarure: S. Kossak 2010, fig. 51. dl pll pl3 piS pl7 p19 pill p d2 d7 d3 6 d4 d5 d8 d6 pl2 pl4 7 pl6 piS pliO p112 el e2 e3 e4 e5 e6 e7 e8 e9 pi (previous lives); e (episodes from saintly life) MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA 135 The surviving copies of Phagmotrupa's portraits may actually represent an exclusively Taklung KagyU tradition. In that case, the later Phagmotrupa portraits of the Taklw1g Kagyu School must have derived from an important prototype that •.vas probably made very early in the history of that tradition, i.e., in the lifetime of its foWlder, who was a prominent and intimate disciple of Phagmotrupa. Taklungthangpa is said to have been the one to whom Phagmotrupa privately told the great collection of stories of his previous lives (Skyes robs chen mo), the tales of his twelve bodily eminations, and about the particulars of the Eight Great Adepts. He was also the one who personally petitioned his guru to teach many instructions that were later included in Phagmotrupa's collected writi ngsJ 6 1 (Besides that, I do not find anything in Figure 5 9 that links it unmistakably with the Taklung Kagyli.) It is true that when one compares the Phagmotrupa portraits with other portraits of about the twelfth century, namely the footprint painting of Dlisum Khyenpa (Fig. 3.8) and the portraits of Six Great Tibetan and Indian Masters (Fig. 2.27), the latter two can be seen to be very different in their conception and execution. The early footprint thangkas, in particular, seem to have often evolved into later more complicated standard portraits, as we see in paintings of the Karma Kagyu (Fig. 3.8), TaklWlg Kagyli (Fig. 4.2), and Drigung KagyU (Fig. 5.22). But footprints have not yet been docwnented in any of the known portraits of Phagmotrupa. Phagmotrupa himself had artistic talents. He painted well as a young monk, even without formal training3 62 His biography states that he made likenesses of his gurus Gampopa and Sachen, and also of the Indian adept Phadampa, who gave him teachings in a visionJ 63 I would hope that portraits of his own main gurus, especially of IJ6 CHAPTER 5 Gampopa, may eventually surface. Portraits of Phagmotrupa circulated widely during his lifetime. It was the sight of such a portrait that inspired Taklungthangpa as a young man of twenty-three to travel the long and difficult path from Kham to central Tibet to meet that master. 364 (Since Taklungthangpa was born in 1142, he must have arrived in central Tibet in about 1165, perhaps seven years after Phagmotrupa began living in his little hut) As Go Lotsawa relates: While [TakiWlgthangpa] was staying at Nyel (sNyel), an image of Phagmotrupa w·as sent to Lama Mog (rMog), who asked him, "Would you like to come and worship this image?" [Taklungthangpa] accordingly took the materials for making a butter lamp and brought it to where the statue was. [Seeing the image,] he decided that he must go and meet this teacher. 36 ; Soon after Phagmotrupa 's death, several important sculptural portraits were made of him, including two that became principal statues at Densa The!. Go Lotsawa knew that monastery personally, having lived and studied there as a young scholar-monk for five years (from 1425 to 1430).366 In his Blue Annals, he described these and later derivative statues in some detail: 367 The precious image of Phagmotrupa that exists in his willow-twig hut was erected by his disciples after his passing away, by mixing much of his cremation ashes with clay [to form a modeling paste], in which medicinal substances, precious substances and silk had also been mixed. It possessed a very strong blessing. It was even known to have spoken words many times. When rats dug a little earth from the side of the throne, Frc. 5·3 Phagmotrupa Ca. late 12th to early 13th century Coppe.r alloy with gold, silver, copper, and gems Height: 8 lh in. (21.5 em) The Cleveland Museum of Art, 1999, Purchase from the J. H. Wade Fund, 1993.160 Literature: D. Weldon and J. Casey Singer 1999, figs. 50 and 51. it spoke to the sacristan about that. Many images were then made by mixing in a little of the earth that was used to fi II the traces of the rat damage, which were called "ratearth statues" (byi sa ma). Those images that were made by mixing in a little of the excess image-building materials, i.e., earth trimmings, from the time of original making, were known as "trimmings-earth statues" (dras sa ma). The second main image at The!, the one on his teaching throne, was made at Manggar Gang (Mang ' gar sgang) by the artist named Marpa Lhanying (Mar pa Lha snying). When he had roughly finished it, a nWl who was unknown in the vicinity appeared and said, " My master was just like that Now don't change it." All were astonished at her words, and after that they brought the image to The! and enthroned it on the master 's teaching throne 3 68 In his history of Buddhism in Lhorong (Lho rong chos 'byung) Tatshak Tshewang Gyal (rTa tshag Tshe dbang rgyal) mentions the elaborate reliquary stupa (gdung rten) called the Tashi Obar (bKra shis ' od ' bar) that was made by Drigw1g Kyoppa in Phagmotrupa's memory as being the main sacred object of the monastery3 69 Kathok Situ visited Densa The! as a Nyingma pilgrim from Kham in the early 1920s, and he recorded seeing the sacred realistic statues ofPhagmotrupa there, including a large rat-earth statue (byi sa ma). 310 He mentions the four statues in the hut, which were known as "secret deities."371 He described (p. 254) the contents ofPhagmotrupa's holy "thatch hut" ('jag skyif) 372 Inside it were fifteen volwnes of manuscripts, including a book on the Path with the Fruit instructions that he erroneously called the "Book of the Black Treasury" (Lam 'bras md=od nag ma), by which he referred to the commentary by Phagmotrupa that is actually called the "volume from the library" (dpe md=od ma). Kathok Situ mistakenly described the main portrait in Phagmotrupa's hut as a realistic image from his lifetime (rang 'drama), not realizing that it had been made after his death. 373 He refers to an image of Phagmotrupa on a teaching throne, calling it " one of four realistic images" ( 'dra sku) and asserting that the later outstanding Nyingma scholar Ngari Panchen (mNga' ris Pal) chen Padma dbang rgyal, 1487- 1542) consecrated it. He noted seeing elsewhere in Thel, in an assembly hall called Phelgye Ling ('Phel rgyas gling), a large gilt-copper (gser =angs) statue of Phagmotrupa, also mentioning a lifesize rat-earth statue (byi sa ma). 314 Figure 5.3 may be one of the earliest surviving statues ofPhagmotrupa. I believe that it was commissioned within a generation or two of his life. No inscription identmed its subject explicitly as Phagmotrupa, and the Cleveland Musewn had identified it as "A Portrait of Lama Rinchen-Pel (1143- 1217), fOLmder of the Drigung Monastery." Still, I agree with Weldon and Casey Singer, that it more likely portrays Drigung Kyoppa Rinchen Pal's eminent guru, Phagmotrupa. 375 Weldon and Casey Singer summarize the distinctive features of the man portrayed as " heavy-set, with a bulbous nose, heavy beard and wide face." What is decisive for me are his facial features, especially IJ8 CHAPTER 5 the thicker lower I ip that hangs down slightly, revealing the tips of a few teeth, and the careful depiction of the beard and mustache encircling his mouth, which were rare among Tibetan lamas. The tiny details of the supporting throne, including auspicious symbols and offering goddesses, have been expertly executed with inlaid gold, silver, copper, and gems. An inscription is found at the rear of the statue's base, which is partly vis ible in Weldon and Casey Singer's Figure 50376 I translate it: "Homage to the guru! Through the spiritual power of the merit of commissioning this image of the precious guru by me, the Little Monk ofNgenlam, may the sufferings of the six classes of li ving beings be exhausted!" (na mo ghu rul ngan lam ban chung bdag gis nil/ bla ma rin chen sku b=hengs pa yi/1 bsod nams 'di yi byin br/abs kyis/1 ·gro drug sdug bsngal =ad par shog//.) 371 The patron, who thus referred to himself as " Little Monk ofNgenlam" (Ngan lam Ban chung), had himself depicted below in the center of the pedestal as a tiny kneeling monk, to the left of two silver deities. His expression for his teacher, "Lama Rinchen" (bla marin chen) or " Precious Guru," could conceivably apply to many revered Lamas; there is no need to interpret it as denoting Lama Rinchen Pal (i.e., Drigung Kyoppa). That expression may have been introduced into common usage by Phagmotrupa himself. 378 Countless images of Phagmotrupa were made by his later followers. For instance, Taklung Ngawang Namgyal in his Hist01y ofTaklung records that Trakpa Tashi Gyaltshen Pal Zangpo (Grags pa bkra shis rgyal mtshan dpal bzang po, 1376-1421) ofRiwoche dreamed in 14 18 of Phagmotrupa. Afterward he commissioned an image ofPhagmotrupa molded and sculpted from a papier-mache-like mixture that included precious silks and medicinal substances 3 1'1 Kathok Situ also saw at Thel thirteen wonderful thangkas in the Beri style that depicted the Lineal Gurus of the "Jennga Kagyii" (spyan snga bka · brgyud gser phreng), his name for the lineage ofPhagmotrupa royal monks from the time of the Phagmotrupa dynastyJso An important element that appears prominently in the top register of several examples of Phagmotrupa portraits are the main deities of the Guhyasamiija Maiijuvajra mandala (dl -d6). Those deities are described below in connection with Figure 5.1 0. A standard element that we find in all copies of his portrait is a series of his previous lives (pi in the diagram, Tib. 'khrung rabs or skyes rabs). Four brief writings address this topic. They prominently appear near the beginning of his collected works, together with two initial biographies (by dPal chen Chos kyi ye shes and Drigung Kyoppa Jigten Gonpo). 381 They are the third through sixth work in the first volume of the two accessible manuscripts of his collected works, such as the one that was published in 1976382 Several later summaries of Phagmotrupa's biography incorporated lists of these stories into their beginnings. These sources tell of his previous existences that include various buddhas, bodhisattvas, Indian and Tibetan teachers as well as Indian, Newar, Chinese, and Tibetan kings. The sixteenth-century historian Pawo Tsuklag Trengwa in his history of Buddhism added them at the end of Phagmotrupa's life, classifying his previous lives in four main groups, according to the higher or lower capacities of disciples: 383 I. The ordinary forms he manifested to people of low spiritual development, as told in the third work in Phagmotrupa 's collected writings (The Great Story of His Previous Lives, sKyes rabs chen mo). These s FIC. ·4 Phagmorrupa w1th His Previous Lives 13th cenrury Distemper on conon 15 ~ x 13 in. (40 x 33 em) Rubin Museum of Art C2002.24.3 CHAR 65 119) MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA 139 included his life as the monk Chokyi Pal (Dge slang Chos kyi dpal). 2. The forms he manifested to those of highest spiritual capacities, as told in the fifth work in his collected writings (Opening the Door to the Secret Treasury, gSang ba'i md::od sgo dbye ba). There he lists twelve such previous lives, based on a passage from the tantric work Lhan cig skyes grub (Achieving the Innately Arisen) and its commentary: 384 1. A seer or rishi (Ti b. drang srong) 2. named Drowa Ukj in ('Gro ba dbugs 'byin) of Oc)c)iyana VTravajra (dPa' bordo rje) (possibly a follower) Samayavajra (Dam tshig rdo rje) Padmavaj ra (Pad ma' i rdo rje) Sahajavajra (Lhan cig skyes pa' i rdo rje) Anandavajra, the weaver (Tha ga pa dGa' ba' i rdo rje) These included (a.) four royal incarnations, namely the Indian king Middle lndrabhiiti, the Chinese ruler Li ka then tse'o, the Nepalese king (Amsuvarman, 'Od zer go cha), and the Tibetan king Songtsen Gampo (Srong btsan sgam po); (b.) eight Indian great adepts and teachers: Pai'icapaJ)a, Saraha, Viriipa, Dignaga, Indrabhiiti, Asa11ga, Lawapa (or Kotalipa), and Padmaraja; and (c.) four further incamations, including Gayadhara. 3. Forms he manifested to those of middling capacity, revealing himself as a great tantric adept. These included the twelve simultaneous bodily manifestations he projected, as set forth by the sixth work in his collected writings. 4. Forms he manifested to those of absolutely the highest capacity, showing himself exclusively as a buddha, such as when he appeared as the previous buddha Khorwa Jig (' Khor ba 'jigs), the buddha of ' the present age (Sakyamuni), and the futme buddha Mikyo Menpay Gyalpo (Mi skyod sman pa'i rgyal po). What baffles me is that only the last gum, King Indrabhiiti, seems to be one of his usually acknowledged previous lives. The other masters constitute a Iineage of the Guhyasamaja Tantra, exactly as Go Lotsawd recorded it elsewhere in his Blue Annals.385 The transmission passes from one guru to the next, ending with King Indrabhiiti, who was believed to have been his previous lifeJ 86 This King Indrabhiiti may be the The twelve previous lives that are depicted in the portraits of Phagmotrupa are difficult to identify from Pawo's 1ists, though they must be treated somewhere within them. Similarly, I have a hard time finding them within the parallel passage in the brief life of Phagmotrupa given by Go Lotsawa in his Blue Annals. third of three similarly named tantric adepts; he is here identified as the same as Lawapa (Lwa ba pa, he who wears a blanket). 381 Elsewhere in his swnmary ofPhagmotrupa's life story, Go Lotsawa prominently mentions how when he was sixty years old (in 1169) Phagmotrupa miraculously manifested simultaneously twelve forms of his body. With the help 140 CHAPTER 5 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Vajrii, the brahmin woman (briimaJ)I, Tib. Bram ze mo rOo je) 8. Siddhavajra, the barber (' Breg mkhan Grub pa'i rdo rje) 9. Sarvajagannatha (dPal ldan kun ' gro mgon po) 10. Cittavajra (Thugs kyi rdo rje) 11 . Lady Lak~mTnkara, sister of Indrabhiiti 12. King Jndrabhiiti (rGyal po Indra buddhi), also known as Lawapa (La ba pa). of one aspect of his body, he was able to cover the whole region ofTaklung and bless its earth and water..>&& One historian who lists the previous existences of Phagmotrupa in a form that is easier to extmct is Taklung Ngawang Namgyal. Though in his religious history ofTaklung he follows in his biography of Phagmotrupa the same scheme of higher and lower spiritual capacities, he classifies the relevant list of twelve previous lives within the perceptions of people of middling spiritual capacities (p. 173f.). 389 From there we can derive the names: The householder Palgyi Khorlo, (Khyim bdag dPal gyi ' khor lo) 2. The monk Geway Lotro Chokyi Pal Zangpo (Dge slang dGe ba' i blo gros chos kyi dpal bzang po) 3. The monkey bodhisattva (sPre' u Byang chub sems dpa') 4. The prince 390 Drakpa Sengge (rGyal sras Grags pa seng ge) 5. The royal minister of King Conch (rGyal po Dung gi blon po) 6. Lhachen, king of nagas (Klu'i rgyal po Lha chen) 7. The teacher and great master Ludrub Nyingpo (Slob dpon bDag nyid chen po Klu sgrub snying po, who once emanated eight bodily forms simultaneously) 8. The bodhisattva Lotro Sengge (Byang chub sems dpa' Blo gros seng ge) 9. The bodhisattva Yeshe Senge (Byang chub sems dpa' Ye shes seng ge) 10. The pundit Jigme Drakpa (Pandita ' Jigs rued grags pa) II . Jennga Tshultrin1 Bar (sPyan snga Tshul kllrims ' bar, the Kadam master) 12. The " precious Sugata," (bDe bar gshegs pa Rin po che), i.e., Phagmotrupa Dorje Gyalpo himself fiG. 5·5 Phagmorrupa with His Previous Lives Ca. 13th century Distemper on cotton Private Col lection Lirerarure: S. Kossak 2010, fig. 53. side that refers to its consecration by Sanggye Onpo. Figure 5. 7 depicts the same portrait of Phagmo trupa, but it is much larger than the previous portraits presented here. For the first time, we see not tantric deities but a line of gurus in the top reg- I have not had the time to investigate these names further, though it should be possible to match th.is list with the existing paintings, o rienting ourselves from the iconographic ally more distinctive ones, such as number 3, the monkey ister, which is damaged. The portrait's lineal structure is shown in diagram [B). Figure 5.8 depicts a smaller number of minor figures than seen in Figure 5.7, although, like Figure 5.7, it is la rger than the others and begins wi th a Iineage bodhisattva. Figure 5.2 is a well-preserved portrait belonging to this group. The prototype of this painting was wide ly copied, in its top register. Its structure is shown in diagram [C). Figure 5.9 depicts Phagmotrup a surrounded mainly by his previous lives (p i) and episodes from his most recent life (e). It is only distantly related to the previous portrait, both stylistically and in the depiction of the details of as exemplified by Figures 5.4 through 5.8. Of them, the first three examples (Figs. 5.3-5.6) depict a row of tutelary deities in their top register, while the last two (Figs. 5. 7 and 5.8) depict a row of gurus in that position. Figure 5.4 has a typical Riwoche inscription on the top of its reverse his visage. For the first time we see Phagmotrup a as main figure wearing a yellow ceremonial hat (he had worn one ).6 Phagmorrupa with His Previous Lives Ca. 13th cenrury Distemper on canon 15 Y, x 11% in. (39 x 29.5 em) Private European Collection Literature: S. Kossak 2010, fig. 54. fiG. The thangka has been extensively repainted, and I assume that the details of its main figure's face were too damaged to be made o ut when it was repaired. It seems to preserve an authentic early tradition for portraying Phagmotrupa, here in an early Beri style. We find both major and minor figures depicted within gold-trimmed red body nimbuses and not within stylized caves framed by colorful pillars of stone. I am not sure where the 1\vo tiny adepts (siddhas. s I and s2) belong in its overall iconographic plan, which I have sketched in diagram [D). as a minor figure). ~f!RROR OF THE BUDDHA 141 FIG. 5·7 Phagmotrupa with His Previous Lives and Lineage Ca. 13th century Distemper on cotton 26 x 18 \-2 in. (66 x 47 em) Private Collection, Japan After: S. Kossak 2010, fig. 52. I pll pl3 piS pl7 pl9 e8? 2 dl 3 4 s 7 s d3 el S=stupa 142 6 Frc. 5.8 Phagmotrupa with His Previous Lives and Lineage Ca. 13rlt century Distemper on carton 26 ~ x 21 'A in. (68 x 54 em) Tamashige Collection After Literature: K. Tanaka andY. Tamashige eds. 2004, pl. 17. CHAPTER 5 e2 e3 e4 eS ?(illegible) d2 p12 pl4 pl6 pl8 pli O e9? e6 e7 3 pll p13 piS pl7 pl9 p 2 d7 6 s 4 d8 p12 pl4 7 pl6 pl8 pli O e l e2 e3 e4 eS e6 e7 e8 e9 Figure 5.10 is a classic of Tibetan portraiture, depicting Phagmotmpa and Taklungthangpa as main figures sitting formally upon a classic throne and surrounded by Sharri nimbuses and a stylized outer trim of rocks suggesting caves in a craggy mountain. It is noteworthy for depicting two of this chapter's three main subjects of portraiture as its main figures together and for doing so with skill and subtle attention to facial details. The painting (or at least its original) seems to have been commissioned by a patron who belonged to the generation of Sanggye Onpo. The structure of the painting is shown in diagram [E]. Again we find prominently in the top register five main deities of the Guhyasamaja (Maiij uvaj ra?) mandala (d l-d5). Perhaps these are from an ancient thirteen-deity tradition of Guhyasamaja taught in lndrabhuti's Jniinasiddhi (Ye shes grub pa) 391 They correspond roughly to the main deities of the thirty-two-deity Guhyasamaja Mafijuvajra mandala in the Ngor tradition. 392 What confuses me is that one of the five deities is blue, which is not found in the transmitted Maiijuvajra mandala~. (There, the central deity is a saffron in color, and none are blue.) Figure 5.11 depicts an Indian sculpture that portrays the Guhyasamaja Maiijuvajra mandala in stone. The sculpture depicts above the large central deity a mandala of five smaller deities, who in a painted mandala would also be differentiated through different body colors. The statue illustrates in three-dimensional form the deities with which Phagmotrupa most closely identified himself in his tantric practice. Since Casey Singer has decribed at great length a very similar sculpture, we can team there the detai.ls of this statue 's iconography. 393 Kathok Situ noted seeing statues of tl1e deities of Guhyasamaja Alqobhyavajra in The! Monastery. 394 Figure 5.12 depicts a pair of main teachers, the first of whom (guru 2a Frc. 5·9 Phagmotrupa with His Previous Lives Ca. 14th cenrury Distemper on corron 17 ;4 x 14 in. (45.1 x 35.6 em) Rubin Museum of Art F1998.17.4 (HAR 666) Bl pl3 p15 p17 pl9 p pi I sl 7? 6? p12 s2 7 el e2 e3 e4 B2 pl4 pl6 piS pll 0 e5 e6 MIRROR OF T HE BUDDHA 143 Frc. s.ro Phagmotrupa and Tak lungthangpa Chenpo Ca. late 13th cenrury Distemper on cotton 20 'Is x 15 'h in. (51 x 39.5 em) The Cleveland Museum of Art, John L. Severance Fund (1987.146) Literature: Jane Casey Singer 1995, fig. 17; Heather Stoddard 1996, fig. 18; S. Kossak and J. Casey Singer 1998, fig. 26; D. Weldon and J. Casey Singer 1999, p. 136, Fig. 52; and S. Kossak 2010, fig. 42. Bl sl dl d2 d3 dS I 0? 9? d6 s2 6 8 7 P( II?) d4 d7 d8 d9 diO Frc. s.rr Mandala of Maiijuvajra Eastern India; 11th cenrury Phyllite Height: 37 Y, in. (95 em) Rubin Museum of Arr C2005.7.1 (HAR 65391) 144 CHAPTER 5 in diagram [F]) is Phagrnotrupa, as can be recognized from his facial hair. The second main figure (3a) is one of his prominent disciples, possibly Taklungthangpa Tashi Pal, though this depiction Jacks the usual identifying characteristics known from other portraits. The guru seated between their head nimbuses (guru Ia) is probably Gampopa. The identities of the gurus in the top register are unclear; they Jack labeling inscriptions. I provisionally suggest that they represent Iineal teachers of two transmissions (gurus I b through 3b and Ic to 2c as indicated in the diagram). My numbering in diagram [F] reflects that asswnption. It may one day be possible to identify the distinctive dark-skinned (Indian?) master in a white robe (guru lc, who resembles Phadampa Sanggye) and his Tibetan Jay disciple (2c), if a painting of similar gurus with inscriptions becomes available. The lama in the bottom-left corner was the commissioning patron. His inscription on the back of the painting seems to say "Rin chen bzang [po]." Both Rin chen and bZang [po] were very common name elements; there is no reason to think that the famous early tr-.mslator with that name was meant here. The painting is noteworthy for its simple throne backs behind the two main figures and the prominent use of dark blue in the background. All in all, this is an intriguing painting whose iconographic details may reveal themselves further if we find simiJar inscribed paintings to compare. Figure 5.13 depicts four prominent Kagyii gurus as main figures, the second of whom can be identified as Phagmotrupa, based on his facial features. The white-haired teacher sitting before him is Gampopa (6 in the diagram), under whom he studied during the last year ofGampopa's life. Phagmotrupa is depicted looking younger than his guru, about in his forties. I have laid out the painting's structure in diagram [G]. The painting's 146 CHAPTER 5 Dakpo Kagyii lineage begins with Vajradhara (I), Tilopa (2) and Nampa (3). Some scholars have been misled by guru I b, the small central yellow-hatted figure between the heads of the two lower main figures ( I b), imagining that he might be Gampopa. But his robe and yellow pundit's hat clearly mark him as an Indian pundit. He probably represents Atisa as a Iineal guru but not as a direct teacher of anyone portrayed. The image of Marpa (4) should not be confused with AtiSa 's disciple Dromton, though both were Tibetan Jaymen.>95 Moreover, guru 5 is urunistakably Milarepa. Gampopa (6) was the first Tibetan monastic in this tradition to combine the lineages of both Milarepa (5) and Atisa (I b). The next three masters (7 through 9) are probably consecutive lamas in Gampopa's lineage. No.8 must be one of the illuStrious students ofPhagmotrupa, though probably not Taklungthangpa Tash i Pal ( 1142-121 0) or Drigung Kyoppa. At least they are not portrayed here with any of their usual characteristics known from portraits from their own Taklung or Drigung Kagyii Schools. The painting dates to about the mid-thirteenth century, as confirmed by Carbon 14 analysis, which dated the thangka to 1229, plus or minus 61 years. 396 That confirms that the patron (who was not depicted) was probably the disciple of the last main guru (9), a Dakpo Kagyii lama who flourished three lineal generations after Gampopa. 2. Portrait of Taklungtlumgpa Surrounded by His Lineage. Miraculous Emanations. Deities. and Episodes from His Life The second main portraits to be investigated in this chapter are those of Taklungthangpa. As shown by Figure 5.14, this composition depicts him surrounded by his Iineage, miraculous emanations, deities, and episodes from his life as shown in diagram [H]. Preswnably one of his students painted its prototype after he founded Taklung Monastery in the II 80s. We already know this portrait from chapter 4, where we saw four different copies (Figs. 4.7, 4.11 , 4.12, and 4.13). Among them, Figure 5.14 •.vas apparently one of the earliest. The five main examples of portraits ofTaklungthangpa to be compared in this chapter are Figures 5.14 through 5.19. Many details of this portrait's contents have been explained in chapter 4, in connection with Figures 4. 7, 4.11 , 4.12, 4.13, and 4.14. One additional example (Fig. 5.20) has an Indian temple, or gandhola, as its background, which evokes the spiritual status of Buddha Sakyamuni through visual association with Bodhgaya, the locus of his awakening. The inclusion of eight past and future buddhas in the register above likewise implies, visually, Taklungthangpa's status as buddha. If we compare the lineage of Figure 5.14 with that of the next five paintings, we find an earlier lineage convention in the first painting and a later convention in the next five. Regarding Figure 5.17, Christian Luczanits was able to establish that the inscriptions on its back give a series of ordination names in Sanskrit written in Tibetan cursive script that include the first three abbots ofTakltmg and end with Sangye Onpo and his successor, Orgyen Gonpo. (See the complete transcription in Appendix D.) Since Orgyen Gonpo received the name Rinchen Sherab Palzangpo at his preliminary ordination in 1304 at age eleven, the thangka must date to after that. Oddly enough, the inscription in its last lines repeats a verse that incorporates Sanggye Onpo's order not to separate from the sacred image.s: rje mtshungs med bla ma yab sras dangll bdag 'bra/ med ci gsung bka ' bsgrub cingll rang sems 'khrul pa dag pa dangll 'gro ba 'i 'dren pa nus par shogll. MIRROR OF T HE BUDDHA 147 F1c. 5.r 3 Gampopa, 1>hagmotrupa and Two Subsequent Masrers in Their Tradition -"iid-1 Jrh cenrur)' J I Y, x 21 % in. (80 x 55 em) Collecrion R. R. E. lnerarure: A. Heller 1999, no. 55; R. Emsr 2001, p. 904, fig. 2; and P. Pal2003, fig. 128. 148 C HAPTER 5 3 2 6 4 7 5 lb 8 9 I 2 3 7 4 5 6 dl d2 dJ d4 8b 9 p (It?) Sa 8c tO F1c. 5·!4 (also discussed as Fig. 4.7) Taklungrhangpa with His Lineage, Manifesrarions, and Two Successors Last quarter of the 13 th centu ry 18 ~ x 14% in. (47 x 37 em) Private Collection MIRR OR OF THE BUDD HA I49 F•c. 5.1 5 Taklungrhangpa Chenpo with His Lineage and Manifestations Ca. lare IJrh ro early 14th century 20 ~ x 17 ~in. (52.1 x 43.8 em) Collecrion of Shelley and Donald Rubin P2000.22.14 (HAR 1005) l 50 CHAPTER 5 fiG. 5.16 (also discussed as Fig. 4.11) Taklung~hangpa Chenpo with His Lineage and Manifestations First half of the 13th century 12 'h x 9 % in. (32 x 25 em) Courtesy of Michael]. and Beata McCormick Collection Literature: M. Rhie and R. Thurman 1996, pl. 203 {84a). MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA I5J 5·I7 Taklungthang pa Chenpo with His Lineage and Manifestation s Early to mid-14th cenrury 19 ¥ax 15 in. (49.9 x 38.1 em) Brooklyn Museum (1991 .86, Gift of the Asian An Council) (HAR 86901) FIG. Ij2 CHAPTER ) FIG. 5.r8 Taklungthangpa Chenpo with His Lineage a nd Manifestations Late 13rh to early 14th cenrury 28 3,4 x 23 3,4 in. (73 x 60.3 em) Private Collection Photograph Courtesy of Sotheby's, Inc. © 2006 Literature: Sotheby's Indian and Southeast Asian Art (Sotheby's NY), Sept 20, 2005, no. 14. FIG. 5.19 (also discussed as Fig. 4.12) Taklungthangpa with His Lineage and Emanations Early to mid-14th century 23 'Is x 21 Ys in. (60 x 51 em) CoUecrion Mimi Lipton Literature: J. Casey Singer 1997, pl. 44. M IRROR OF THE BUDDHA 153 F1c. 5.:to Taklungthangpa Chenpo with His Lineage and Mamfesmoons Easrem libet; early 14th century Distemper on cotton Privare Collection Lirerarure: S. Kossak 2010, fig. 56. l 54 CHAPTER 5 3. Portrait of Drigung Kyoppa Jikten Gonpo with His Lineage, the Eight Great Adepts, and Minor Deities Figure 5.21 exemplifies the third main portraiture subject of this chapter, Drigung Kyoppa Jikten Gonpo. This copy of a standard portrait depicts him surrounded by a guru lineage, the Eight Great Adepts (mahiisiddhas), and minor deities. I presume that its prototype was painted by one of llis disciples after he founded Drigung Monastery in 1166 but before his death in 1217. Another important prototype was a portrait depicting his sacred footprints, shown with surrounding minor deities, such as Figure 5.22. Several paintings represent the portrait of the foLmder of Drigung with the same fixed constellation of minor deities. These include Figures 5.21, 5.22, 5.23, and 5.24. That these and a nwnber of other paintings belong to a Drigung group was noted by Luczanits in connection with his study of the eight great adepts, who are regularly depicted (see ga 1-ga8 in diagram [I]) in these portrait~. 397 Figure 5.22 depicts a great lama's footprints surrounded by deities that have been painted with washes of dye or ink. It can be considered the Rosetta stone of this small Drigung Kagyii corpus. It unlocks the contents of this entire group ofthangkas, even naming its minor figures through inscriptions. The structure is unusual, reflecting a convention of guru succession that I have not seen before.398 lts structure is shown in diagram (J). In the second register we find six male deities and four female consorts of the Guhyasamiija Mai'ijuvajra mandala (d 1-d I 0). Deity d II , the niiga king Anavatapta (Ma dros pa), is the interlocutor of a SLrtra in the Tibetan canon, as is Siigara (Tib. Klu rgyal rGya mtsho). Though not one of the eight great niigas/ 99 Anavatapta is Iisted in the Mahiivyutpatti Tibetan-Sanskrit glossary among the niiga kings. 400 I cannot explain his presence here, instead of the usual long-lived niiga kings Nanda and FlG. 5.21 Drigung Kyoppa Jigten Gonpo with His lineage Mid-13th century Distemper on cotton 2 7 Yl x 19 3;.\ in. (70 x 50 em) Private Collection, Zurich literature: P. Pal et al. 2003 , no. 132; A. Heller 2005, pl. 1. I gal ga3 ga5 ga7 d3 d5 d7 d9 2 dl 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 8 diO d 11 (v) dl2 dl4 10 d2 Bl ga2 ga4 ga6 ga8 d4 d6 d8 dl5 MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA 155 FIG. 5·2.3 Foorprinr of Drigung Kyoppa Early 13th cenrury 23 'h x 19 lis in. (59.7 x 50.5 em) Prirzker Collection (HAR 58301) Lirerarure: K. Selig Brown 2003, pl. 6. I dl d2 2 .) ~ 6 d3 d4 dS 7 4 s sI d6 d7 d8 dl d9 8 ga l diO ga2 ga3 ga4 Fl gaS M F2 ga6 ga7 ga8 dII dl2 dl3 dl4 d i S dl6 (v) dl7 dl8 dl9 d20 MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA 157 Upananda. Perhaps the Drigung Kagyli masters desired a naga who was associated with a fan10us lake in the Mount Kailash area401The second naga king depicted here, d 12, is Apalala (Tib. Sog rna med). He is unknown to me, though he appears among the many naga kings listed in the Mahiivyutpatti glossary.402 The inscription at the base of Figure S.22 could be only partly deciphered.403lt mentions at the very begi nning a certain Gompa Rinchen Dorje (bsGom pa Rin chen rdo rje), who was evidently the devoted patron of the painting. It also names his teacher, the revered guru and lord of Dhanna Ri nchen Pal (Ri n chen dpal), as Jigten Gonpo was also knovm. That great teacher seems to have been mentioned as the lama who let his footprints be made, but the colophon becomes illegible before we can read much further. The footprints o n this thangka, like several other footpri nts on early Drigung Kagyti paintings (i ncluding Figs. S.23 and S.24), show the presence of a bunion-like condition.4().1 T hose distinctive shapes confi rm that they all derived from the feet of same lama, their highl y revered founding master, Drigung Kyoppa Jigten Gonpo. Figure S.23 presents another footprint thangka of the Drigung founder. It represents a subsequent stage of development within this group. See diagram [K]. Once agai n in the second register we find six male de ities and four female consorts of a Guhyasamaja mandala (di d I 0). The latest historical figure shown is Drigw1g Kyoppa Jigten Gonpo, (8). Figure S.24 again depicts a footprint thangka of the great founder of Drigung, and it closely resembles the plan of another pub!ished early Drigung pai nting.405 T he arrangement of its figures is shown in diagram (L]. Representations of holy footprints originated in India, where Buddha Sakyamuni's footprints were some of the earliest-known forms of Buddhist 158 CHAPTER 5 F lG. 5.24 Fomprint of Drigung Kyoppa Early 13th century 21 x 21 in. (53 x 53 em) Courtesy of Michael and Beata McCormick Collection literature: K. Selig Brown 2003, p. 40, pl. 7; HAR 81410 describes Selig Brown 2003, pl. 7. I dl ga l ga3 gaS ga7 dll dl3 d2 2 d3 3 d4 Fl 6 dS 7 8 4 s d6 d7 M Bl d8 F2 d9 sl d!O ga2 ga4 aa6 "'aa8 "'dl2 dl4 d i S d l6 dl7 dl8 dl9 art. In Tibet, that genre of paintings was very rare, though a few examples are known406 They were far outnumbered by paintings that depicted the footprints of great Tibetan lamas. Figure 5.25 differs from the preceding thangkas in that it does not depict Drigung Kyoppa Jigten Gonpo as its main subject As confirmed by its lineage, the main figure must have been a prominent disciple of Jigten Gonpo. He also looks different from his guru, with his own distinctly flatter hairline. Two structural aspects of this painting are unusuaL One is that the painting is nearly square. The second is the sequence of the proportions of its minor figures: small in the top row, mediwn in the middle, and large in the bottom row, which creates a slight illusion of depth. Amy Heller tentatively identified its main figure as the founder ofDrigung Monastery (as in Fig. 5.21) based on identical iconography 407 But the main figure here is one generation later in the Drigung lineage, so that suggestion can be ruled out The appearance ofDrigung Kyoppa Jigten Gonpo is confinned by numerous statues, including Figure 5.26, though his hand gesture is different there. We should note his lama's vest and the distinctive face and hairline of this great founder. Frc. 5.25 Disciple of Drigung Kyoppa Jigten Gonpo with His Lineage 13th century Distemper on cotton 23% x 22 ~in. (59.1 x 57.2 em) Pritzker Collection literature: S. Kossak and J. Casey Singer 1998, p. 89, no. 17; C. Luczanits 2006, fig. 4.9; and D. Jackson 2010, fig. 1.23. MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA 159 FIG. 5.2.6 Statue of Drigung Kyoppa Jigten Gonpo 13th century Brass, polychrome; 5 !h in. (14 em) Musee des Ans Asiatiques-Guimer, Paris, France (MA 6032) © Reunion des Musees Narionaux I Art Resource, NY Photograph by P. Pleynet ART412375 Literature: H. Stoddard 2003, fig. 4. I60 CHAPTER 5 CENTERS AND PERIPHERIES By comparing the groups of portraits of the three important lamas discussed above, we should be able to uncover not just visual traces of buddhahood but also other essential elements of early saintly portraiture in Tibet The paintings in all three groups include both a central zone inhabited by the main figure (gtso bo) and a rectangular frame of peripheral strips around it that is devoted to portraying minor figures ( "khor) or subsidiary subjects. To compare the paintings, we first need to distinguish centers from peripheries. COMPARING PERIPHERI ES If we compare the outer columns and registers in the three main groups of portraits, we find great differences. To begin with. in the portrait of Phagmotrupa (see Fig. 5.2a) we find in the periphery: a. Top: deities of a Guhyasamaja mandala and one centrally placed guru of the main figure b. Sides: previous lives of the main figure c. Bottom: a stupa (the patron appears in two instances) and possibly biographical episodes The last two early portraits of Phagmotrupa (Figs. 5. 7, and 5.8) represent a separate subgroup. Both have a new subject matter for their top register, a guru lineage. When we tum to the portrait of Taklungthangpa, we find in the periphery (see Fig. 5.14a): third main group of portraits, those of Drigung Kyoppa Jigten Gonpo (see Fig. 5.21 a), we find mostly difl'erent subjects: Frc. 5.>.A Periphery of a Portrait of Phagmorrupa a. Top: lineage and one centrally placed guru of the main figure b. Sides: eight great adepts, four deities, and two naga Icings c. Bottom: patron, minor deities, and vase atop a I'Gjra a. Top: Iineage and one centrally placed guru of the main figure b. Sides: emanations of the main CO.MMON PERIPH ERAL ELEMENTS figure c. Bottom: eight biographical episodes Turning to the periphery of our All three groups possess in their top register a common element, namely a centered guru of the main figure. The portraits ofTaglungthangpa, Drigung MIRR O R OF THE BUDDHA 161 THE THREE PoRTRAIT CENTERS To find other crucial elements of sacred portraiture, we must turn to the central zone inhabited by the main figure (gtso bo) of the painting, seated on his throne. When we compare all three groups of portraits, we find there a nwnber of elements common to all, inc! uding the throne, elaborate backrest, and head nimbuses. There we also begin to find traditional elements that evoke saintliness and are associated with buddhal10od. The elements shared by the great masters in the central zones include the positions of their hands and feet. We should also carefully note the way their limbs were colored and decorated and any special features of their eyes. 1. The Cenler of the Portrait of Phagmotrupa F IG. 5-I4A Periphery of a Portrait ofTaklungthangpa 162 CHAPTER 5 Jigten Gonpo, and two of Phagmotrupa (those in the second subgroup) also show lineage masters at the top. (As briefly described in chapter 4, the available examples ofTaglw1gthangpa actually include two different lineal conventions.) Moreover, two peripheral elements are shared by two out of three paintings and hence should be noted as important: I. episodes from lives shown at the bottom (as in the Phagmotrupa and Taklungthangpa portraits), and 2. patrons and minor deities at the bottom (as we found in the paintings of Phagmotrupa and Drigw1g Kyoppa Jigten Gonpo ). Figure 5.2b represents the image of Phagmotrupa that appears in the center of his portraits (here taken from Fig. 5.2). The other surviving versions quite faithfully follow this part of the classic composition. Although for the Drigung Kyoppa and Taklungthangpa portraits there exist versions both with and without footprints, I have never fmmd a painting of the footprints of Phagmotrupa. The disciples and successors of Phagmotrupa commonly referred to him using the title "bDe bar gshegs pa" (Sugata), i.e., "Buddha," suggesting that he was viewed as a buddha by his most spiritually advanced students. In his brief biogrdphy of Phagmotrupa, Go Lotsawd explicitly addresses this4os He says that, in addition to Phagmotrupa 's having been a spiritual adept (siddha) to people of middling spiritual Wlderstanding and an ordinary human to those of lower Wlderstanding, he was a buddha to those of excellent understanding409 Go Lotsawa had compiled his history and its biography of Phagmotrupa during the F IG. 5-2.1A Periphery of a Portrait of Drigung Kyoppa Jigren Gonpo late Phagmotrupa dynastic period, while Phagmotrupa's monastery ofDensa T hel served as the mother monastery of the royal tiuni ly. He was personally familiar with the monastery. To compare the various centers of Phagmotrupa 's portraits, let us take into account the six versions mentioned above as Figures 5.2 through 5.8. The central zone in each painting is defined by an outer boundary created by a thin strip ofmulticolor rock on the sides and bottom that turns into an arch of Iittle stylized crags (brag ri) on top. The arch of colorful stone pillars creates a cavelike opening, which Phagrnotrupa inhabits as the main figure. (This is one type of brag ri ma setting.)4 10 Phagmotrupa sits in partial profile, turn ing to the right He sits o n a lotus throne while holding his hands in agesture of teaching. He wears red and yellow inner monk's robes and orange outer ones. His seat consists of four layers stacked from bottom to top: a lotus pool, a throne base with lions and elephants (except one example, which has only lions), a lotus seat, and a moon disc. Behind Phagmotrupa's head is a nimbus of a Sharri type with the typical colorful outer fringe of the adjo ining backrest In two of them the tail bumps of the makara, a mythical aq uatic crocodile-like monster, are smooth and golden. In two other versions they are prom inent and colorfuL Behind Phagrnotrupa 's back is an elaborate backrest that features an arch of mythical animals, including elephants, leogryphs (antelopes with lion's paws), makaras, and a garuda (a divine creature with human torso and bird's wings and beak). 411 Most versions depict the edges of his backrest plain, while one, Figure 5.6, depicts a jewel ornament there. The upper edge of his throne back features a stri p of luminous rdinbow-like light that also defines the border of his upper body nimbus. The depictions of the backrest differ-in two versions, elephants stand on projecting pieces. ln one, the cave opening is more obviously five-.lobed. The edge of the lotus seat is different ill one, while in Figu re 5.7, no garuda is seen, though that last example may be damaged. In all versions, the heads and upper torsos of min or deities protrude into the right- and left-top comers. 2. The Center of the Portrait of Taklungthangpa T he centers ofTaklungthangpa's portraits resemble in most respects those of the portraits of Phagmotrupa. When we compare six of the accessible versions (Figs. 5.14 through 5.19) we fi nd that the central zone is again delimited by an outer boundary created by a thin strip of MIRROR OF T HE BUDDHA 163 Frc. p.B (derail) Center of a Ponrait of Phagmottupa multicolor rock on the sides and bottom, which turns into an arch of little stylized crags above. The central figure, Taklw1gthangpa, wears the same robes as Phagmotrupa. His hands, too, are in a gesture of teaching, but they are held more closely together. One striking difference is that Taklungthangpa is not portrayed in partial profile. He faces straight ahead I ike a buddha or deity, a posture which is rare among hwnans in early portraits. Taklungthangpa wears red and yellow inner robes and orange outer robes. His seat consists of three layers, from bottom to top: a throne base with lions and elephants (except for one example that has only lions), a lotus seat, and a moon disc. Behind his head is a nimbus of a Sharri type backed by the decorative 164 CHAPTER 5 outer fringe of the adjoining backrest. The outer fringe consists of makara tail bwnps that are prominent and colorfuL Behind his back is an elaborate backrest, which includes an arch of four mythical animals: elephant, leogryph, makara. and garuda. A minor deity emerges into the top-right and -left comers. One distinctive feature of this painting is the inner edge of its cave-like opening, which has been altered to remind us of a key locus ofTaklungthangpa's spiritual career. Between the rocks and the deep-blue cave we find, outside his outer body nimbus or rainbow aureole, a thin redtrimmed strip ofbWldled cogon grass, which represents the meditation hut in which TaklWlgthangpa lived while in Taklung, at the end of his saintly life. Somehow the grass hut at Takltmg had come to symbolize the essence ofTaklungthangpa's spiritual career, much like the willow-twig hut at The! had for Phagmotntpa, at least in the hagiographies. Frc. 5. r4B (derail) Center of a Porrrair of Taklungrhangpa Taklungthangpa's seat is like that in the paintings of Phagmotrupa. But its lowest level (which in Phagmotrupa's painting portrays a stylized lotus pool) is occupied here by a peripheral strip. Here we notice three distinct versions, one of which (F ig. 5.14b) shows just the base of a throne. Two versions (F igs. 5.16a and 5.18a) evidently portray episodes from Taklungthangpa's life. In the last version (Fig. 5.18a) both the lotus pool and hagiographical episodes are combined. 3. The Cenler of the Portrait of Drigung Kyoppa In Figure 5.21 b, the center of the Figure 5.21 , we find the great Drigung master looking to the right, holding his hands in the same teaching gesture as Taklungthangpa. Much of his body FIG. s.r6A (detail) Center of a Ponrait of Taklw1grhangpa nimbuses consists of luminous strips of rainbow colors, elements that we found only in the upper edges of the backrests of the previous two saints. Below the throne no bottom strip represents a lotus pool. Instead, in the middle of the bottom row a golden vase stands on a crossed ritual scepter (vajra). The vase contains water, from which long undulating lotus vines sprout. The portrait of Drigung Kyoppa is painted in a different Sharri style, here without the rocky crags and caves. This change in background limits the scope of comparisons with the other two portraits, which featured a stylized cave as background. The most striking iconographic departure from the previous two portraits is that, to the right and left of the great master, two bodhisattva attendants stand almost to his shoulders, partly covering the outer body nimbus of the main figure. Such attendants were w1known in the other portraits, but they strongly evoke the buddha-like status of the central figure, just as was the case in the Alchi stupa mural (F ig. 5.1). They are also found in Figure 5.25a, a closely related painting of the Drigung founder that features a different main figure. DIVINE OR HUMAN? Tibetan sacred portraits thus seem to embody two conflicting tendencies. One is the desire to idealize and identify the saint as enlightened, just as expected. The other is an opposing requirement that the saint be recognizable as the particular human being that he was. TI1e first tendency pulled the saint toward nirvana, whi le the other kept him rooted in samsara and the world 412 FlG. 5.r 8A (detail) Center of a Portrait of Taklungtbangpa In the above three representations of saints, which aspects indisputably expressed the ideal ofbuddhahood? The dress and the bodies of all three masters remain for the most part those of a human teacher, and each painting depicts Tibetan monks of a particular age and physical appearance. Yet three or four elements had been changed to invoke buddha-like sanctity. To begin with, their stances and bodies were idealized. Their hands were placed in formal symbolic gestures (mudriis) that evoke sainthood or divinity, if not buddhahood. Their feet were shown bare, while their palms and soles were further idealized through red coloration. Such deifying transformations made all three portraits less realistic and more like icons. The lotus seat, formal MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA 165 Frc. 5.2.rB (detail) Center of a Pomait of Drigung Kyoppa throne back, and nimbuses of the head and body evoked strong sacred associations, just as when they frame a buddha, bodhisattva, or goddess. A parasol overhead (as in Fig. 1.27) had a similar effect in other portraits. The portrait ofDrigung Kyoppa (Fig. 5.21) was echoed by another early Drigung sacred portrait, Figure 5.25a, that also framed its centml figure between prominent standing bodhisattvas, making it strongly evocative of • the great sage Siikyamuni at Vajrasana (Byang chub chen poor Thub pa rdo rje gdan pa) with Avalokitesvara and MafijusrT as accompanying bodhisattvas, or other buddhas with pairs of bodhisattvas. (This association with the Bodhgaya temple was more explicitly made in one of the rare Taklungthangpa versions, Fig. I66 CHAPTER 5 5.20). In early and strongly Indic paintings, ~nich some of the early Drigung paintings are, other associations with buddhas are made by including the two great bodhisattva naga kings as supporters of the central throne. 413 We ti nd them in both Figures 5.21 and 5.25. I assumed that these were the naga kings Nanda and Upananda (dGa' bo and Nyer dga'), the long-lived bodhisattvas whose important role is explained by Dungkar Losang Thrinlay (Dung dkar Blo bzang ' phrin las) in his dictionary. 414 But in the inscribed version of the Drigung footprints (Fig. 5.22), two other naga names are given, Anavatapta and Upalala, for which there may have been some doctrinal justification. Regarding the nimbus of luminous rainbow-like light (or rainbow aureole), one scholar has suggested that it signified that the master attained the " rainbow body" ( 'ja' Ius) at death 4 15 Such an aureole does indicate high spiritual attainment, but it is far too common to be restricted to the rainbow body Frc. 5.2.5A (detail) Drigung Master wirh Lineage (detail of center) of a lama- some buddhas have it, too, after all 4 16 In Figure 5.25a, a detail of a stunning Drigung portrait, it has been repeated three times, evoking an almost overwhelming sense of vibrant spiritual power. Another feature that lent increased sanctity and spiritual presence to the images was eyes of a special idealized type. These were the so-called bow eyes (g::hu spyan), as in Figure 5.27, which were also used for buddhas. 417 Such eyes conveyed the attainment of deep meditative absorption (samiidhi, ting nge 'd::in). Figure 5.28 depicts the face of a buddha with the prescribed bow eyes and head protuberance, as drawn by a modem artist from 0 Province in central Tibet 418 Humans normally were portrayed with different (non-divine) proportions, z • • • t • I I Ftc. 5.2.7 Bow-shaped Eyes Modern ink drawing Literature: D. Jackson 1984, p. 138. • I • with a total measure of just 116 fingerwidths, as in Figure 5.29. They also possessed ordinary eyes, which artists call " grain eyes" (nas spyan), as depicted in Figure 5.30. Yet the sources on iconometry (i.e., on the systems of divine proportions, thig tshad) record that Drigung Kyoppa Jigten Gonpo taught that the g uru should be portrayed not with normal hwnan proportions but with those of a buddha. Here, then, was yet another aspect of sacred art that had been elevated to the highest possible level where the guru was concerned. We also find in numerous, but not all, early portraits "wheels of Dharma" (dharmacakra) painted in gold or red on the palms and soles. Call ed " hands and feet possessing the sign of wheels" (phyag =habs 'khor /o 'i mtshan /dan), these were counted as one of the thirtytwo marks of a buddha and are evidence of the radical idealization of these masters, who had been elevated by association to the level of a buddha.••• Casey Singer and Kossak both pointed out the presence of wheels on the soles of the feet ofTaklungthangpa, noting that it showed that he was an enlightened being•:w " Abbots are shown I Frc. 5.28 Buddha wirh Bow-shaped Eyes Modern ink drawing by Legdrup Gyarsho of Phenpo Nalcndra Lirerarurc: Thubren Legshay Gyatsho 1979, p. 62, fig. t 3. Ftc. 5.2.9 Proportions for a Monk D1sciple (~riivaka or Nyao rhos) of rhe Buddha Modem ink drawing by the a.rtisr Wa.odra.k of Shekar Lirerarure: D. Jackson t 984, p. 62. Frc. 5-30 Grain-shaped Eye Modern ink drawing Lirerarurc: D. Jackson 1984, p. 138. 0 0 seated on thrones reserved in the Indian tradition for deities and are sometimes MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA 167 with any buddha. All hand gestures are possible in portraits. Such buddha attributes as a head protuberance were not allowed for ordinary hwnans or even great human saints. 423 But in two exceptional cases we do find them: for the Indian sage Nagarjuna and in at lea~1 one case for the paintings of Sakya Pal)<;( ita, who is said to have developed a head protuberance shortly before his death. Figure 5.31 portrays what I asswne to be that Tibetan lama with a buddha's head protuberance, an otherwise impossible iconogrdphy. CONCLUSIONS FIG. 5·31 An Episode from me Life of Sakya P3J)gita Eastern Tibet; ca. 18th cenrury Distemper on corron Private Collection I68 CHAPTER 5 marked with auspicious signs on the palms of their hands and soles of their feet that have the same antecedent. " 421 Another si milar special chardcteristic of deities was elongated ear lobes, though they are not marks of buddhahood. Full frontal depiction (as Taklungthangpa was depicted) is usually associated with a deity, and his hand gesture, dharmacakra-mudrii was at first thought to be characteristic of the historic Buddha. '"22 But it would be wrong to associate that hand gesture exclusively From a wider Tibetan Buddhist cultural context, there was nothing unusual about applying the template of Buddha Sakyamuni to human gurus in Tibet Many traditional hagiographers did precise! y that when telling the I ife of a great Tibetan saint, recounting the correspondinc areat deed of the Buddha (follow''"'' ina the scheme of the Buddha's Twelve " Great Deeds, md=ad pa bcu gnyis). We find this, for example, in the religious biography of the Tibetan saint Rendawa (Red mda' ba, 1348- 1412).424 The three great masters whose portraits are compared in this chapter were each unusually charismatic and spiritually accomplished. They utterly convinced their intimate students of their attainment of buddhahood. It was natural that their devoted disciples would celebrate their buddhahood in portraits, too. Just to show the Tibetan lamas sitting on the thrones and lotus seats of buddhas and areat bodhisattvas- surrounded by "' the same traditional elements as nimbuses and throne backrests- was already a powerful association with the highest spiritual status possible in Buddhism. In their student's eyes, it was wholly deserved. Yet Tibetan disciples and their artists carried the process of visual elevation even further: they depicted lamas with the idealized hand gestures and foot positions of divinities. By placing the lamas between two standing attendant bodhisattvas (as we found in two Drigung Kagyi.i portraits, Figs. 5.21 and 5.25), they reminded the viewer in a striking way that this central seat was usually reserved for a buddha. But that was not all. They also had their lamas depicted with mystical eyes of meditative absorption. Finally, they commonly gave the gurus a mark that was reserved only for buddhas: wheels of Dharma on their hands and feet, either clearly drawn as such in gold or red, or simplified into little golden dots. To employ such a buddha attribute in a human portrait seems to me, at least, almost heretical. Yet exactly that expressed the degree to which Tibetan devotees were determined to pursue guru devotion. If the great masters' disciples worshiped them as buddhas, the divine attributes merely confirmed it. Yet one artistic practice held this almost Iimitless visual exaltation somewhat in check: the need to depict each guru recognizably. All three of the main portraits of this chapter retained distinctive features of face and hair of their subjects: the beard, chin, and teeth of Phagmotrupa and the hairlines of both Thaklungthangpa and Drigung Kyoppa. Thus, though such portraits aimed to depict their subjects as having reached Iiberation and buddhahood, the need to portray each guru convincingly as the particular human that they had been kept the icon, in that respect, tied to the ordinary world. MIRROR OF T HE BUDDHA 169 ' CHAPTER 6 Siddhas, Hierarchs, and Lineages: Three Examples for Dating Tibetan Art the art ofTibet, predominantly deriving from a Buddhist background, has made huge headway in the last two decades, and its recent progress can certainly be partly credited to the projects supported by the Rubin Foundation426 and the activity of the Rubin Museum of Art. However, despite this tremendous advance, this field of research is still in a developing stage. Among the many topics that can be studied concerning such works of art, their dating and general attribution have received particular attention and can be considered the most controversial. In the case of portable objects., th is is certai nly d ue to the market in Tibetan art, where the date of an object directly converts into market and insurance values. In fact, the majority of objects have been and are being published in a contex1 that is in one way or another linked to the art market. This is particularly apparent with early objects, about which the opinions of different connoisseurs and scholars vary considerably with regard to chronology.427 As a rule, an earlier date is favored THE STUDY OF whenever there is doubt. In addition, the reasons for attributing an object to a particular time and region are often given in a vague way, and the comparisons on which they are based are not questioned. Tibetan Buddhist art was obviously not created so that future connoisseurs and art historians could easily date it centuries later. No Tibetan artist-a figure who rarely is known as an individual-ever intended to create a painting or Detail of Fig. 2.27 and 6.8 sculpture clearly attributable to a certain time and region. If anyone wanted us to know about the creation of an artifact, it was the pious donor. llowever, he too was not interested in letting us know exactly when and where the artifact was made. What counted for him was the religious content that his commission depicted and that it was properly empowered. If he wanted his fellow citizens and successors- and with them us-to know anything at all, it was the intention of his commission. It is thus not surprising that few objects, even parts of a monument's decoration, can be securely dated. In the absence of secure historical data, dati ng a portable object or the furnishi ng of a monument has to rely largely on art historical methods or, in other v.rords, on an assessment of the iconography, composition, and, in particular, style.421 Of these, the analysis of style is certainly the most distinctive and least understood art historical method, because in practical terms it ranges from a general j udgment of sty Iistic features via the study of particular motifs to the distinction of minute details. As vague as these criteria may appear, if employed appropriately in a manner that is suitable for the case in question, they can deliver fairly secure attributions. Nevertheless, the principal chronology of the development ofTibetan Buddhist art has been worked out for some time now429 and has become more and more refined in the past two decades•m Thus, in most cases works of art can be attributed to a principal chronological range, commonly spanning several centuries, on the basis of a group of general criteria such as the composition of the piece, the relation of the figures to eac h other, the use of landscape and its detai ls, distinctive dress and ornamentation, color usage, and many more. The difficulty lies in a more exact attribution. In this essay, through a detailed analysis, I attempt to give exact attribution to three examples of early Tibetan Buddhist art. The first concerns related depictions in murals at three separate monuments at Alchi Monastery in Ladakh, India. Through a study of the adaptation process visible in motives and compositions adopted from central Tibetan thangka painting, it can be concluded that all three of these murals were painted in the early thirteenth century. The second example focuses on a single smallthangka painting that contains an overwhelming amount of information that, until now, could only be clarified in part. Still, an analysis of the information that has been coll ected seems sufficient to suggest a rdther narrow date for this pai nting. The third example is an examination of three thangka painti ngs from a set with comparative and complementary lineage depictions, which allow for a fairly precise attribution as well. Concerning monuments and their artistic decoration, the nature of the evidence that allows for a chronological attribution--comm only some relevant passages in historical tex1s rather than in situ inscriptions with historical information-still leaves considerable room for interpretation, especially witl1 regard to which sections of the decora- MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA I]I tion are actually to be linked to these texts. Although the work on monuments is often undertaken by universities, in some instances the date of their furnishing and decoration may be contested too, albeit for entirely different reasons. The attribution of the AI chi Sumtsek temple paintings at A! chi Monastery, for example, solely depends on whether one accepts that the lineage of the Drigungpa (' Bri gw1g pa) teachers in the lantern, or third story of the temple, is (roughly) contemporary with other decoration of the monument, a question that will be taken up in detail in the first example given here. In the case of single artifacts the nature of the evidence allowing for an attribution can be extremely varied. [n addition, not every method used for this purpose is in fact suitable, and some methods can deliver a more precise chronological attribution than others. What makes the dating of single artifacts particularly difficult is the fact that in most cases their attribution has to be based on a laborintensive and time-conswning evaluation of the different art historical methods for each case and a detailed study employing the method found to be most suitable for a particular object. A major factor that is hampering advancement in dating Tibetan art is the inaccessibility of many of the inscriptions and captions on these paintings. Usually these are either not published at all or are incomplete, making it impossible to verify the conclusions drawn from them 431 Furthem10re, published pictures alone cannot usually be considered as adequate docwnentation, since the details are not reproduced comprehensively. Here, the technology of Himalayan Art Resources (HAR) offers a remedy in that it makes the imageswhen allowed by the owner- available in such high resolution that inscriptions and identifying captions on the painting can literally be read online. In this article I differentiate inscriptions from captions, I72 CHAPTER 6 the former referring to any kind of text on the fi-ont or back of an art object and the latter to identifying texts written directly adjacent to the identified figure or object. Examples two and three, the small thangka and the group of three paintings, emphasize one particular method, name! y the usage of portraiture and lineages to date specific works of art. In both cases the infonnation that can be gained in this respect from the paintings is considerable, but the results are quite diverse. On the one hand, example two demonstrates a case in which even the extensive captioning of the depicted personages does not necessarily lead to a definiti ve reading of the painting. It appears that in this case we still know too little about the relevant historical context. The identifying captions on the front side and the consecratory inscriptions on the reverse of this painting are given in the appendix. On the other hand, in example three the Iineage depictions to be considered are found in three paintings of a set, allowing for a quite precise attribution of the paintings even without written identification. Although the historical personages involved in the commission of this set cannot be identified, the time fi-ame resulting fi-om the three Iineages is quite a narrow one. Obviously, such extensive and detailed studies as presented in the three examples chosen here can not usually be done for all objects of a broader project, such as a catalog of an exhibition or a large collection of artifacts. However, even then it is necessary to make the method on which an attribution is based fully transparent. EXAMPLE ONE: ALCHI AND ITS RELATIONSHIP TO CENTRAL-TIBETAN ART The most fascinating example demonstrati ng the possible results to be gained from a detailed analysis made with art historical methods concerns the early thirteenth-century Sumtsek temple paintings at A! chi Monastery in Ladakh, India. This example also shows the interrelationship of completely different painting styles brought together by historical circumstances. The following observations completely support Roger Goepper's dating of the Alchi monuments and actually prove-in my opinion beyond doubt- that his attribution of the Alchi Sumtsek (gSurn brtsegs) to the early thirteenth century is correct. 432 As tlle following analysis will also show, this conclusion is of major relevance for the history of central-Tibetan art in general, as it appears that the Swntsek murals were executed at a turning point in the history of Tibetan art. Goepper's attribution of the Sumtsek is based on a lineage represented on the third floor of the temple, w hich is an inaccessible lantern that tops tlle building. As he has sho\\11, tlle last person depicted in the lineage and identified by inscription is the founder of the Drigung ('Bri gung) School, Jigten Gonpo ('Jig rten mgon po, 1143- 121 7), abbot of Drigung Monastery from its founding in 1179 to 1217. The painting thus provided us witll an approximate date for the completion of the lineage, including its caption, namely sometime around 1217. Regardless of whether the lineage was painted and inscribed in Drigungpa's lifetime or shortly after, either one being a possibilitiy, the location of the depiction in the far western Himalayas as well as the depiction itself excludes tlle possibility tllat this happened much more than a decade before or after his deatll. The argwnent usually put forward against Goepper's reading is that eitller the captions or both the images and captions have been added at a later stage and are thus not relevant tor the attribution of the majority of the Sumtsek paintings. It is this argtm1ent that can be refuted by a careful art historical analysis of the paintings. FIG. 6. I General view of the lantern's entrance wall Oil the third floor of the Alchi Sumtsek with the relevant teaching lineage Oil the left panel Photograph by Jaroslav Pollcar r~; l~'~"~·ru·Z";;j~tf:: ~"·'~': FIG. 6.2. Vajrasattva and Tilopa holding a fish in his right hand Photograph by Jaroslav Pollcar In the early thirtheenth century the depiction of a teacher's Iineage at the top of a painting was still new in central Tibet. The Sumtsek example may be one of the earliest or even the earl iest in western-Himalayan art. 433 Nine portrdits, three rows of three, of Kagyii (bKa'brgyud) lineage teachers occupy the space to the left of the window on the lantern's entry wall. An equal number of teachers is represented on the right side of the window (Fig. 6.1). Only the Kagyii lineage is identified by inscription. In principle, the teachers on the two sides of the window are turned toward each other, except for the three Kagyii teach· ers represented immediately to the side of the window, who are facing the other teachers of their group, signifying that these teachers represent a Iineage succession rather than an assembly. The lineage figures are depicted in an unusual manner, especially when compared to other Kagyii Iineage depictions of comparable age. 434 The Kagyii lineage commences with a small figure of the blue Vajrasattva435 placed between the two adepts, Tilopa and Naropa (Fig. 6.2), who are dark-skinned and turned tov.'lird each other. Tilopa holds a fish and a skull cup (kapiila), and Naropa holds a hand drum (tfamaru). Between them is a ritual mandala with four skull cups placed around it. Marpa (Mar pa, I0 12- 1096) is dressed in white robes with a red cape holding a vajra and bell, a complementary pair of ritual implements indispensible for Buddhist tantric practice. Milarepa (Mi Ia ras pa, I0401113) is a naked white adept (siddha) holding a scarf. The detailing of the figures in the lineage displays a lack of tamil iarity with the topic, even though the quality of the paint and the painting are essentially the same as in other areas of the lantern. In addition, the framing of the images is consistent with that of the priests on the other side of the entrance window. This fact is particularly MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA 173 FIG. 6.3 The three bottom row teachers of the Alchi Sumtsek lineage, including Drigungpa on the right Photograph by Jaroslav Poncar Frc. 6.4 Three local teachers, detail of the right panel on the third florr of the Alchi Sumtsek Photograph by Jaroslav Poncar I74 CHAPTER 6 obvious concerning the teachers following Milarepa in the lineage, who are not individualized (Fig. 6.3) and differ considerably from other portrayals at Alchi (Fig. 64) These six teachers are white-skinned,436 perfonn various gestures common to images of a buddha (three of them display the teaching gesture, the dharmacakramudrii), sit on cushions covered with animal skins, and wear a two-piece patchwork monastic garment and a cape. It is the depiction of the clothing that seems somewhat clumsy, particularly the awkwardly drawn cape placed flat behind the body and terminating in points to its sides, giving the impression that one cape was placed above another. Such capes are not found anywhere else in the AI chi group of monuments nor on any roughly contemporaneous versions of this lineage elsewhere 437 If we compare the figures of the Kagyii Iineage depiction to those of local teachers common at Alchi, such as those found in the Sumtsek temple on the same wall just on the other side of the window (Fig. 6.4), it becomes clear that the capes that terminate in points have been copied from them. The local teachers, however, do not wear capes but rather light, transparent garments wrapped around the body covering al most all of their white robes tmdemeath. The teachers are shown as flesh-colored, often wear a characteristic conical hat, and sit cross-legged on cloth-covered cushions, their hands folded in meditation underneath the upper garment in which they are wrapped. In my interpretation, the appearance of the Kagyli lineage at the Sumtsek demonstrates the painters' problems in rendering a new subject in the absence of a proper visual model. However, they must have received detailed instructions regarding the types of figures to be depicted, some of their individual characteristics, and the teacher 's clothing. The cape possibly posed a particular problem ALCHI SPELLING NAME bcom !dan ' das rOo rje 'chang Vajradhara bla rna ' Dre lo pa Tilopa 988- 1069? bla rna Na ro pa Naropa 1016-1100 bla rna Mar pa lo tsa Marpa /otsaba Chokyilodro (Mar pa /o tsii ba Chos kyi blo gros) 1012- 1097 bla rna Myi Ia ras pa Milarepa (Mi Ia ras pa) 1052- 1135 bla rna Oags po chen po Gampopa (sGam po pa) = Dagpo /haje Sonam Rinchen (Dwags po /ha rje bSod nams rin chen) 1079-1153 bla rna Oags po on Dagpo-6n (Owags po dbon) = Dagpo Gomtshiil (Dwags po sGom tshul) = Gompa Tshiildrim Nyingpo (sGom pa Tshul khrims snying po) 1116-1169 15 bla rna Oags po on chung ba Dagpo-6nchung (Dwag po dBon chung) = Oagpo Gomchung Sherab Changchub (Owags po sGom chung Shes rab byang chub) 1130- 1173 16 DATES bla rna 'Phag mo bgrub Phagmodrupa Dorje Gyelpo (Phag mo pa gru pa rOo rje rgyal po) Ill 0-1170 bla rna ' Bri ' gung ba 1143- 1217 TAllt£ 1: The Drigungpa (' Bri gung pa) = Drigung skyobpa Jigten Gonpo (' Bri gung skyob pa ' Jig rten mgon po) Drigung lineage captions in the Ale hi Sumrsek as the hands performing the various gestures were not meant to be covered. That the lineage ill the Sumtsek temple is one of the earliest lineage representations of the Origung School, and probably of the Kagyu Schools in general, can also be concluded from the fact that it features hvo teachers who do not commonly appear in any Kagyii lineage (see Table I). These two teachers, whose presence naturally puzzled Roger Goepper, were later identified by David Jackson as the two re latives of Gampopa (sGam po pa) who succeeded him at his monastery Daglha Gampo (Dwags lha sgam po) 438 One is Oagpo Gomtshul (Dwags po sGom tshul),439 a nephew of Gam popa, and the other is Oagpo Gomchung (Dwags po sGom chung), his younger brother. 440 One can only speculate here as to why these two successive abbots of Oaglha Gampo monastery have been included into a lineage otherwise independent of references to that particular place. Since this exiended lineage is never depicted in other central-Tibetan paintings, we have yet another indication that the Sumtsek depiction and captions are a local variant of a transmission that was communicated there at that time. In the inscription that continues with the identifying captions, it is stated that the patron of the Sumtsek temple, the monk Tshiildrim-6 (Tshul khrims ' od), takes refuge in the teachers of the lineage 441 Since this, too, is consistent with the other information gained from the monument, there is no need to and no justification for asswning that the lineage or its accompanying inscription are later additions. MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA 175 Soon after the Sumtsek was built, two unusual stiipa, Buddhist reliquary monuments called chorten (mchod rten) in Tibetan, were erected within the monastic complex of Alchi: the well-known Great Stiipa,442 and another, smaller stiipa, which has remained largely unremarked Lmtil recently.443 Each can be entered and contains an inner sttipa with paintings on its interior walls. fn both monuments these paintings are dedicated to tour teachers: a crouching, naked great adept (mahiisiddha), depicted frontally; two local priests facing toward him on the side walls; and a teaching hierarch on the Wdll opposite the adept. While in the Great Stiipa only the teachers are shown, in the Small Stiipa they are accompanied by secondary figures. Given the new historical context that the Alchi monuments are to be seen in today, thanks to the Sumtsek lineage depiction, the identifications suggested in early publications444 can no longer be accepted. Instead, as will be seen below, the teaching hierarch must be identified as Drigw1gpa, the last teacher in the Sumtsek lineage. Much more puzzling is the identity of the naked dark-skinned adept, holding a flute and a twig and seated opposite Drigungpa. The adept is the on Iy figure shown frontally and thus it is Iikely to be understood that he is the teacher of the two local priests at the side walls looking toward him and probably also the teacher of Drigungpa. The identification as Phadampa Sangye (Pha dam pa Sangs rgyas) has been proposed for the adepts but not proven445 In the present context it suffices to focus on Drigungpa, whose depiction in the Small Stiipa provides a valuable comparison to and further development of his rendering in the Swnl~ek temple lineage 446 Whi le the painting style in general is still typical of Alchi, the way the figure is depicted clearly demonstrates that by this time the painters had become familiar with the way a major teacher is shown in contemporary cen- 176 CHAPTER 6 tral Tibetan painting.m The portrayal of Drigungpa here is generally much more harmonious and realistic. Note in particular the way the cape now envelops the figure, partly overlapping the upper arms and the knees, around which it falls in an elegant curve and then tucks under the crossed legs. Possibly the A! chi painters had by this point seen a visual model as a basis for the way the teacher was to be depicted. Again, the representation of Drigungpa is visually differentiated from that of the priests found on the side walls (F igs. 6.5 and 6.6).448 While teachers and priests retain their characteristic features as established in the Swntsek paintings- for example, the teachers are shown making the teaching gesture as opposed to the gesture of meditation, and they have white ski n color as opposed to flesh-colored skin-the priests now wear monastic patchwork robes with their hands and feet visible. Nevertheless, their depiction is distinct from that of the teaching hierach. The priests look odd, as the patchwork pattern of their robes flattens the figures and the pointed ends at the sides no longer make sense. The patchwork robes also differentiate them from the local monks depicted in the row below them, who are wearing the same clothing as the priests in the Sumtsek. The new artistic influence visible in these monuments at Alchi is even more obvious when one considers the context in which Drigungpa is shown in the extremely informative Small Stiipa (Fig. 6.5). The teacher is flanked by two standing bodbisattvas (Avalokitesvara and Mai'ijusrT) and two seated deities at the level of his head (Sa~ak~ara lokesvara and Green Tara). Above this tableau another unusual early Iineage of the KagyU School is depicted, here with an adept taking the place of the last teacher. To either side are nine other adepts, while seven protective deities occupy the bottom of the composition. The elements that make up this arrangement as well as the manner in which they are arranged are clearly reminiscent of central-Tibetan thangka paintings of that time, although it is executed without the strict divisions that are characteristic for central-Tibetan paintings••9 If one compares this Alchi mural with datable central-Tibetan paintings, one arrives at the surprising conclusion that the mural actually comes at the very beginning of a new development taking place at the same time in central Tibet. Drigungpa (Fig. 6.5) is shown teaching and flanked by two bodhisattvas. This composition makes it obvious that he is to be understood as being the equal of a buddha 450 ln this respect the Alchi mural is even more explicit than are the usual depictions of hierarchs on thangkas known from central Tibet, since teacher representations flanked by standing bodhisattvas are fairly rare 451 However, in contrast to a buddha, Drigungpa is not shown frontally but in three-quarter profile (Fig. 6.6). Most of the elements that compose this arrangement, e.g., the central teacher (with or without flanking bodhisattvas), the Iineage, the great adepts at the sides, the row of protectors, and the thangka-Iike composition, were not used earlier in western-Himalayan paintings, where teachers are usually depicted in assemblies,452 in a setting qualifYing them as ritual specialists (siidhaka), or in a devotional role, as is also the case with the local priests depicted on the side wal ls of the stftpa (Fig. 6.6). The priests, instead of being depicted as buddhas themselves, are surrounded by the five tathiigata buddhas headed by Vairocana, whi le underneath them is another row of local monastic figures. Among other new concepts, two are visible in the Alchi paintings that were previously unknown in the western Himalayas and that are of interest to us here: the Indian-derived teaching tradition shown as a lineage and the notion FIG. 6.5 Drigungpa in che Small Sriipa of Alchi in rhe cemer of a composirion derived &om Cemral Tiber FIG. 6.6 Local reacher on rhe Small Stiipa's side wall surrounded by che five Buddhas MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA 177 of the teacher as the equal of a buddha The foundation for the concept of an Indian-derived teaching tradition was established toward the end of the eighth century at the famous debate at Samye (bSam yas) and by the invitation of celebrated Indian teachers to Tibet, foremost among them the eminent scholar Ati5a (956-1054), who visited western and central Tibet in the middle of the eleventh century. The notion of the direct succession of a certain teaching tradition from person to person has its roots in the Tantric tradition, which prescribes initiation into a certain type of teaching. However, the systematic emphasis on such a derivation by means of a teacher 's lincage appears to have become prominent in Tibet only during the twelfth century within the new schooiS"51 and became extremely influential•54 Whatever the social and political circumstances were that supported such a change, the need to justify a teaching by its Iink to India, thus demonstrating its authoritative derivation, is evidenced by the prominent position given to the lineage in the literature and painting of that time. The perception of the contemporary Tibetan teacher as the equal of a buddha appears to have been established only in the second half of the twelfth century in central Tibet and mainly in a Kagyii context An exceptional thangka painting, today in the Cleveland Museum of Art, is extremely interesting in this regard (Fig. 6.7) 455 In this painting Mahavairocana, the supreme Buddha of the Yoga Tantras, is surrounded by six bodhisattvas; a lineage is represented at the top of the painting and a row of mainly protective figures appears at the bottom. The Iineage at the top is the usual Kagyii lineage, but its last figure is depicted in the crown of Mahavairocana, a position that is usually occupied by a superior manifestation. Accordingly, the teacher in the crown is depicted frontally and teaching like a buddha. Given its position in the lineage, the 178 CHAPTER 6 Frc. 6. 7 Vairocana with a Kagyu lineage on rop and Phagmodrupa in rhe crown Cemra11ibet; 1150-1200 Ink, color, and gold on canvas 43 ~ x 28 ~in. ( Ill x 43 em) Cleveland Museum of Art, Mr. and Mrs. William H. Marlarr Fund, 1989.104 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 figure must be identified as the famous piction in the Cleveland thangka can be to the situation described in the previous teacher Phagrnodrupa (Phag mo gru pa, read as rather explicit religious-political example and features some of the same Ill 0-1170; no. 7 on Fig. 6. 7/Diagram A) from whom eight Kagyu Schools public statements: " [this particular] teacher is [equal to] a buddha." In addi- personages. In addition, it is inscribed on the front and back, thereby providing derive, among them the Drigw1g (' Bri tion, the Cleveland thangka can be in- a wealth of information. Nevertheless, gung), Taglung (sTag IWlg) and the Ya- terpreted as docwnenting an experiment the puzzle of this painting can not yet zang (g.Ya' bzang), each founded by one of his pupils 4 ; 6 Phagmodrupa is said to with this new subject One may thus conclude that the Alchi and Cleveland be solved in its entirety, since not all the figures can be identified and the context have proclaimed himself as the buddha paintings docwnent the emergence of for placing such eminent personages of the present age.457 The painting is most likely posthwnous, as is indicated a new understanding of the teacher in Tibetan Buddhism, certainly within the together remains Wlclear. This painting thus provides an interesting example of by the presence of a practitioner, pos- Kagyu Schools. The teacher is no longer dating iconographically complex pieces. sibly a disciple of Phagrnodrupa, to one side ofVairocana's lotus (no. 8 on Fig. just a pious donor and able practitioner This small thangka (8 Ys x 7 Ys in., 22.5 x 18 em) has already been published 6. 7/Diagram A). This extreme religious- but an embodiment of a buddha and his sacred teaching. The footprints on the political statement of considering a paintings with TaglWlg Tashipal or the teacher as even higher than a buddha can therefore be attributed to the late twelfth Third Karmapa463 can also be understood in this way. This shift in the meaning of centwy at the earliest. a teacher, at least as a religious-political who focuses on the depiction of the First Karmapa.m In comparison to other Another prominent figure in promulgating the notion of the teachers as statement, most probably took place just at that time, i.e., in the late twelfth and thangkas, particularly the closely related thangkas of the Taglung School, this one the equal of a buddha is the foWlder of early thirteenth centuries 4 64 is unusual for a nwnber of reasons. It de- the Taglung School, TaglWlg Thangpa Taken together the facts that the by Hugo E. Kreijger in his catalog of the Tibetan paintings in the Jucker collection469 and recently by David Jackson, picts six main teachers, the central pair of Chenpo or Trashipal (sTag lung Thang pa chen poor bKra shis dpal , 1142- first relatively securely datable depictions of a teacher as a buddha are from which (two Indian adepts seated opposite each other) appears to be emphasized. 121 0; abbot of sTag lung 1180-121 0), the late twelfth and early thirteenth centuries,'6; that some of these examples Above and below tile central pair are four who is s hown frequently in exalted positions and frontally_4;s can be read as w1usually explicit reli- roughly contempordry eminent early Kagyupa teachers, making the reading of the gious-political statements, and that at the composition w1certain. A possible teach- the more usual three-quarter profile de- same time many new concepts become ing transmission is depicted at the top piction, as was also used for Drigungpa at Alchi, as slightly undem1ining the ex- established in old and new schools alike, one may wonder whether these early de- of the painting, but there is also a white image between the two upper teachers plicit statement made by the composition pictions were produced on the threshold that may signify anotller teaching trans- with two flanking bodhisattvas. While the Cleveland thangka remains unique, of a new development of Tibetan Buddhism in general. 466 Indeed, I think they m isson. At the sides are the eight great adepts, and a nwn ber of further historical the composition of the Alchi mural, with were 4 67 personages are represented in the bottom Seen in this light one can interpret bodhisattvas flanking the central teacher, is characteristic of early paintings associated with the Drigung School.m As far ExAMPLE Two: ing not only identify all figures but also as it has been possible to identify them AN UNUSUAL REPRESENTATION OF quote six verses of the conclusion of the to date, most of the compardble paintings depicting a lama at the center in a SIX EMINENT Pratimok$asiitra (Fig. 6.8a). In addition, the lineage depicted in tile top row represents an Wlusual early transmission line and may be continued with the figures in the center. Finally, the eight great adepts identified by captions at the sides of tile painting are an important source for the iconography oftllis group 471 Since no conclusive reading can yet be offered for the painting, tile following accoWlt not composition similar to that at Alchi can be attributed to the Drigung, TagiWlg, Yazang460 and Tshal 46 1 Schools- the first three deriving from Phagmodrupa- and thus set in a Kagyu contexi 462 The extant evidence can be summarized as follows: both the mural in the Small Sti.ipa at Alchi as well as the de- row Furthermore, the veneration verses for all figures on the back of tile paint- KAGYDPA TEACHERS Today the Rubin Museum of Art holds an extremely informative small thangka painting that once was part of the Jucker collection (F ig. 6.8) 4 68 The painting is certainly one of the most interesting with regard to the history of early Tibetan Buddhist schools, particularly of the interrelationship of the early Kagyu Schools. This painting is directly related MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA 179 only presents the most likely explanation of how the painting is to be read and who may be represented but also considers alternatives. The top row of the painting features an unusual teaching trdnsmission lineage consisting of seven figures, to be read from left to right. Possibly two of the eight great adepts depicted to the sides are to be considered part of this lineage (see below). Along with the veneration mantra on the back used for all figures in this painting, the lineage figures are also identified by captions on the front. These are written in black ink on the red border above each of the figures. (For trans)iterations of all inscriptions on this painting see the appendix.) The lineage has no direct comparison so far, and the teachings transmitted through it can not yet be identified. The closest transmission record to this representation found so tar is a lineage for sri Sahaja Hevajra (dpal dGyes pa rdo rje Ihan cig skyes pa) received by Zhang Yudragpa Tsondudragpa (Zhang g. Yu brag pa brTson ' grus grags pa; 1123-1 193), the founder of the Tshelpa Kagyu (Tshal pa bKa' brgyud) School, which is documented in his own writing. The lineage described in his short work entitled Diverse Lineages (rGyud pa sna 1shogs) is used here as a comparison.471 The lineage commences with • Buddha Sakyamuni at the moment of his en!ightenrnent; he is yellow and perfom1ing the earth-touching gesture (bhftmispariamudrii). He is followed of this group. The painting then reverses the order of the following two teachers in comparison with Zhang's accmmt: Anandavajra (dGa' ba'i rdo rje) is represented next, with both his hands in front of his chest, probably making the gesture of teaching (dharmacakramudrii) . He is followed by the bearded Amuigavajra (Yan lag med pa'i rdo rje),474 w ho also has his hands in front of his chest, possibly holding an object that hangs down (th is may also be a long necklace). The caption that follows, Vajrasana (rDo rje !dan pa), can actual ly refer to a number of personages who occupied the abbotship of Bodhgaya, the place where the Buddha achieved enlightenment and also refers to the seat of his enlightenment, or vajriisana. Possible canditates are Ratnakaragupta475 or Mallavajrasana (rOo rje !dan pa chen po),476 teacher of Abhayadatta..~rl and by Vajrddhara (rDo rje ' chang), who is predominantly bright blue but has a green face and right upper arm (possibly the color has not been properly filled in here). His hands are crossed in front of his chest. The beginning of the lineage, thus, differs considerably from iliat described in Zhang's text, in which the Buddha sri Hemka conforms to Hevaj ra, to whom his lineage is dedicated, and his second deity is clearly Vajrapal)i (Phyag na rdo rje). 473 ofLato Marpo (La stod dMar po), who brought Ratnakaragupta's teaching of Great Compassion to Tibet. 477 More likely, however, it refers to the Younger Vajrasana (rDo rje gdan chung ba), whose personal name was Amoghavajra (Don yod rdo rje) 478 He was pupil of Ratnakaragupta and teacher of the Bari lotsiiva Rinchendrag (Ba ri /o tsii ba Rin cen grdgs). 479 Recently, tile scholar Dan Marti n maintained that he may be identified with the Tan1,>ut Tsami lotsiiva 180 CHAPTER 6 The primary adept following the two deities is bearded, wears golden jewelry, and holds a bent and elongated golden object, most likely a noose, in his right hand. He is identified as Ratnamati (Rin chen blo gros). As alI tile oilier adepts in the row, he is directed toward Sakyamuni and Vajradhara, who are represented frontally. The next two adepts mentioned in Zhang's lineage, Saralla and Ghal)(apa, are not represented in tile lineage in the painting but are found among the eight great adepts (mahiisiddha) represented at the sides. Interestingly, the two adepts are placed on tile same level in ilie third row Mondrub Sherab (Mi nyag Tsa mi to tsii ba sMon grub shes rab), who translated the stories of the eighty-four great adepts with Abhayadattasrl. 480 A Vajrasana is also the author of the prayer dedicated to the eighty-four great adepts. ln the painting Vajrasana wears a white robe and holds his hands in front of his chest. The last figure in the upper-row lineage is Abhayakaragupta (A bhya ka ra), who is represented as a blue-skinned adept. Although this teacher is well known for having written the Vajriivalf trilogy, including the Ni~pannayogiivalf and numerous other works, only a few details from his Iife are known. Some scholars maintain that this teacher is identical to Abhayadattasrl, the narrator of The Legends of the Eighty-four Mahiisiddhas 4 8 1 Abhayakaragupta probably died in 1125,482 indicating that the li neage does not terminate with the top-row figure-s. Indeed, Zhang's Iineage text links the last teacher to the South Asian scholar Vai rocanavajra, ilie left figure of the central pair in the painting. Thus it is likely that the lineage contin ues with him, but it is unclear if and how the lineage continues an10ng the other central figures. Vairocanavajra, also known as Lama Gyagar (Bla rna rGya gar) Vairocana, is called noble (sri) Vajravairocana on the painting4 8' His religious career is relatively well documented by a short biography written by Zhang Yudragpa, who was one of his pupils 484 In this biography, Vairocanavajra is said to have received the teachings of the Manifestation ofHeruka (bDe mchog mngon 'byung) as well as the Cycle of Eulogies, Commentaries and Evocations for Vajra<;laka (rDo lje mkha' ·gro 'i bstod ·gret sgmb skor),485 both of which appear to be possible candidates for the teachings referred to on ilie Rubin Museum painting (Fig. 6.8). The Souililndian scholar appears to have been active in Tibet from the 1140s to the ll60s 4 86 He is also said to have taught the rites of Frc. 6.8. Six Early Tiberan and Indian Masters 13th century Distemper on cotton 8 'Is x 7 Y, in. {22.5 x 18 em) Rubin Museum of An C2006.42.4 {HAR 89141) MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA 181 FlG. 6.8A Back of the tbangka dedicated teachers 182 CHAPTER 6 to six the great protector Mahakala to the Fi rst Karmapa Dusw11 Khyenpa (Dus gsum mkhyen pa), who is likely represented as the teacher at the bottom right among the central group. According to the textual sources on Zhang's life, as summarized by David Jackson, Zhang was engaged in disputes with the Kagylipa masters.487 They were fi nail y brought to an end by Duswn Khyenpa. In the painting Vairocanavajra is shown as an adept wearing a pointed orange hat with a yellow or golden rim, jewels, and a brallmanic thread. He has a pointed black beard and black hair on his chest His hands perform a variant of the teach ing gesture (dharmacakramudrii},with the ring finger and thumb of the right hand joined and the palm of the left hand, with the fingers joined similarly, directed toward the viewer. This depiction contrasts with another in an early Tibetan thangka in the Kronos Collections, where Vairocana-vajra wears the same pointed hat and also wears a coat and holds a vajra and a bell 4 88 Here the painted lineage departs from the transmission recorded by Zhang, who received many of his teachings from Vairocanavajra, including the one he recorded in the transmission lineage used as a comparison above. The person continuing the lineage in the painting must therefore be an approximate contemporary of Zhang. In the painting, the adept sitting opposite Vairocanavajra possibly represents another famous Indian active in Tibet, Phadampa Sangye (Pha Dam pa Sangs rgyas). This teacher is venerated as "the little black Indian holy man" (Dampa Gyagar Nagchung; Dam pa rGya gar Nag chung), a name that Zhang possibly uses for a person of the late twelfth century4 39 The name "little black holy man" (dam pa nag chllllg) is also used elsewhere by Chaglo Chojepel (Chag lo Chos rje dpal, 1197- 1264) to refer to Phadampa Sangye 490 However, Phadampa Sangye, whose ordination name was apparently Kamalasri"9 1 lived considerably earlier than Vairocanavajra (The only certain biograph ical data regarding Phadampa Sangye seems to be his death in 1117.),' 92 and it is unclear from the sources surveyed so far if he had any relationship to Vairocanavajra at alL Equally unclear would be his relationship to the other Kagylipa teachers represented in this painting. Dampa Gyagar Nagchw1g is depicted as an adept wearing only a white robe with a golden rim and a stripe pattern around the legs. His hair has large curls, and he is bearded. The blue skin color, already used for Abhayakaragupta, signifies a dark-skinned Indian. 493 His right hand is raised at his side and holds a golden object while the left hand, held in front of his chest, has the index finger raised His appearance is quite si milar to representations of Phadampa Sangye in a mid-thirtheenth-century manuscript of his collected teachings, in which his hair also tails to the shoulder. One may assume that the golden object held in the adept's hand is meant to represent his " interdependence bag," which is seen in some of the comparative depictions, even though it would have been wrong in this case 4 9-1 Following the analysis of Dan Martin, this depiction would rather conform to the Pacification (=hijel=hi byed) type ofPhadampa, which contrasts wi th the more hieratic and active type represented in connection with the transmission of the "cutting" (cholgcod) teachings. Zhije and cho are sets of specific meditative practices promoted by Phadampa Sangye. It would indeed be tempting to interpret all of the frequent representations of the naked black adept in paintings from the late twelfth to the fourteenth century across the Himalayas as representing Phadampa in his diverse guises,495 even more so as they seem to have originated in the Tibetan tradition itself However, the Alchi great adept depiction and the one in this painting- if they are read as representing immediate teacher-pupil relationships--can also be taken as evidence that there must have been two different Indian teachers referred to by this name, the second one active in the second half of the twelfth century4 96 To complicate matters, direct teac her-pupil connections are also established through visions, and when it is said that a certain Dampa Gyagar has been the teacher of Phagmodrupa (Phag mo gru pa, l I I 0-1170) in visions only, 497 there is no reason why this should not refer to Phadampa also. The eminent Kagylipa teacher, Phagmodrupa, his ordination name being Vajraraja,' 98 is shown in the top left as a bearded lama (bla ma) performing the teac hing gesture.•99 His exalted position is also marked by additional mantras written on the back of the painting (see appendix). Opposite him is one of his most eminent pupils, Taglung Thangpa Chenpo Trashipel (Thang pa chen po bKra' shis dpal; MarigalasrT, 1142-1210; 1180- 121 0, abbot ofTaglung),;oo whose physical features are well known from other paintings. Usual ly he has a light beard arolllld the chin. Here, however, he is shown as a yollllg teacher without a beard. He also pertonns a variant of the teaching gesture, in which the left hand is bent down with the palm facing the viewer. 501 Between the top two teachers is a ti ny image of a white bodhisattva, preslll11ably Vajriisattva. He sits in a relaxed posture (lalitiisana), has his right hand in front of his chest and his left at the hip; however, his attributes are not recognizable.502 At the bottom left is Dlislllll Khyenpa (Dus gsum mkhyen pa, Ill 0-1193), whose ordination name was Dhanmkirti (Chos kyi grags pa)503 and who later became known as the First Kannapa 504 Dlisurn Khyenpa met Vairocanavajra (rGya gar Bai ro) when he was young and received teachings from him, particularly the siidhana of M IRROR OF THE BUDDHA 183 Mahakala (mOon po).;()5 From a disciple of Atisa,Yol Chowang (Yol Chos dbang),506 as well as from two of his disciples, Dilsum Khyenpa received Atisa's teachings on the SaJ]1vara cycle, Acala, and others.;()7 Like Phagmodrupa, he also practiced and studied under the guidance ofGampopa (1079- 1153) for years.s08 Later this Karmapa appears to have established a strong association with Phadan1pa Sangye, as several visions of Phadampa are related in his life story. 509 The depiction is revealing in this case as well. The First Karmapa was known as "gray headed" (dbu se) as he is said to have been born with gray hair, and in this depiction the feature is emphasized 510 We see a gray-haired, middle-aged monk performing a variant of the teaching gesture. He wears a dark-blue hat with a black upturned rim open at the front. The rim of the hat has golden edges, and red dots line its front and top edges. This is the first variant of the famous black hat of the Karmapa teachers, the hat bestowed on the First Kannapa due to his great spiritual attainments. The painting is evidence that this hat goes right back to the First Karmapa, as it is recorded in the earliest surviving history of the Karmapas by the First Kanna Thrinlaypa (Kanna phrin las pa Phyogs las rnams par rgyal ba' i lha, 1456-1539)_; 11 The hierarch at the bottom left is considerably younger than the First Karmapa. This teacher, perfomling the teaching gesture as well, is venerated under the ordination name Vajrakirtibodhi, a name for which no conclusive identification can be offered so far. 512 If we assUille that Oorjedrag (rOo rje grags) is also his personal name, possible identifications for this figure are Ra lotsava Oorjedrag (Rwa lo tsii ba rOo rje grags; I 0 16-1198?);513 Rechung Dorjedrag (Ras chung rOo rje grags; I085- 1161 );514 and Origung Cung Oorjedrag (' Bri gung gCw1g rOo rje grags pa515 ; 12101121 1- 1278/ 1279), the last 184 CHAPTER 6 being an unlikely candidate because of his relatively late date.s 16 The inscriptions on the reverse of the six main images all have the same composition. In large letters the consecration mantra om a hiim is written vertically (in the transcriptions given in the appendix, these are indicated by capital letters). The horizontal inscriptions beginning immediately under the om of the consecration mantra commence with Olfl san1avid sviihii, followed by a mantra dedicated to the respective guru: Olfl. a 'ghu ru [the consecration name of the respective gum] namo hum. Then follows the ye dharma verse and one of six verses taken from the Pratimo/cyasiitra or a copy of it. ll1e quoted verses begin with the most often cited "patience creed" (the first verse in the conclusion of the Priitimoksasiitra of the Mlilasarviistiviidavinaya), which is written at the back of Taglung Thangpa chenpo, in other words on the top left of the back side. The following five verses are added in the usual reading direction (left to right, top to bottom) except for the bottom row, where the right verse precedes the left in the textual transmission. I add here a transliteration and translation of the Tibetan verses according the ACIP (Asian Classic Input Project517) text edition of the Kanjur (bKa ' 'gyur). The inscribed verses deviate in a few significant ways from the Tibetan canonical text supplemented here, and a specialist on the development of the Tibetan canonical literature may be able to narrow dovm the possible sources for the inscribed verses (see inset text at right).s18 On the sides of the painting is a group of eight great adepts, who are frequently represented on early centralTibetan paintings. As shown elsewhere,S19 this group apparently has been introduced in a Kagyilpa environment among the pupils of Phagmodrupa, since the earliest datable examples for it can be attributed to this context. This thangka is one of three early representations of this group in which the adepts are actually identified, and thus it is an extremely important source for their early iconography. Since this group has already been examined in detail, it is sufficient here to summarize the iconography of the adepts as they appear on tl1is thangka. On the upper left, to the side of Phagmodrupa, the yellow king Indrabhiiti has a consort on his lap 5 10 Opposite him Nagarjuna is shown as a yellow teaching buddha, a depiction that conforms to his common name of "second buddha." 51 1 It is interesting to note that here the snake hood, later a regular part of his depiction that signifies his identification with his much earlier nan1esake of southern India, is not depicted. In the second row l)ombipa is easily identifiable by the tiger he is sitting on, while Liiyipa, on the opposite side, could not have been recognized without the identify ing mantra on tl1e back. He is light-skinned and appears to hold a vajra and a bell to his chest. In the third row Saraha stands frontally with his legs wide apart. He holds a bow, and some arrows are across his shoulders. The animal head on the right end of the bow emphasizes his identity as a hunter.511 The orange Ghal)!apa is represented dancing with a vajra in his raised right hand, but the bell we would expect to see in his left hand is not depicted. In the fourth row, green Kukkuripa hugs a white female dog, confonning to his common depiction. The bright-skinned Padmavajra on the opposite side has no clearly distinctive iconographic features. He holds his right hand at his side with the palm up and the left in front of his chest. 523 The bottom row of the painting features three more teachers. The one in the bottom-left corner is probably of Indian or Nepalese origin, as indicated by his patz4.ita hat. He is named padma on the front of the painting and, fairly clear- lb=od pa dka 'thub dam pa b=od pa nil Forbearance is supreme ascetic lmya ngan 'das pa mchog ces sangs practice, forbearance is supreme ninlii(W, say the Buddha[s}. rgyas gsungl lrab 111 byung ba g=han Ia gnod pa The renunciate who harms another and dang I who igzhan Ia 'tse ba dge sbyong ma yin injures another is no monk (srama(la). 524 noI ldmig /dan 'gro ba yod pa yisl lnyam nga ba dagji b=hin dui lmkhas pas 'tso ba 'i 'jig rten 'dirl lsdig pa dag ni yongs su spongl Like the ones endowed with sight [avoid] the dreadful the wise should avoid the evils in this world ofliving. lskur pa mi gdab gnod mi byal Iso sor thar pa 'ang bsdam par byal l=as kyi tshod Ayang rig par byal Ibas mtha 'i gnas su gnas par byal llhag pa 'i sems Ia yang dag sbyorl I 'di ni sangs rgyas bstan pa yin I Not abusing, not harming [others], resh·ained according the Pratimok,ra, moderate in eating, dwelling at a secluded place, adhering to meditation,525 this is the teaching ofthe Buddha[s}. Ui /tar bung ba me tog lasI lkha dog dri Ia mi gnod pari ikhu ba b=hibs nas 'phur ba /tar! Ide b=hin thub pa grong du rgyui As the bee undisturbed by colour and scent flies away from the flower after suclring the nectar so a sage should walk in a village. lbdag gis rigs dang mi rigs lal lbrtag par bya ste g::han mams kyil lmi mthun pa dang g=han dag gi I lbyas dang ma byas mams Ia mini Consider the own [acts and deeds] as appropriate or not, and not the unpleasant [acts] of others and the deeds and neglects ofothers. Ifhag pa 'i sems Ia bag bya stei Be attentive in meditation, as for the wise526 trained in sagehood tranquil and always mindjilf there is no sorrow. ithub pa 'i thub g::hi mams Ia bslabl lnyer =hi rtag tu dran /dan pa 'il lskyob pa mya ngan med pa yin I lsbyin pas bsod nams rab 111 'phell Ilegs bsdams dgra sogs mi 'gyur rol idge dang /dan pas sdig pa spongl lnyon mongs =ad pas mya ngan 'da 'I ly, pra ba ka ra instead of the expected padmiikara, in the mantra on the back. 527 In the latter interpolated form, the name could refer to the adept Padmakara, who is often identified with Padmasambhava and also depicted as such or the eleventh-century scholar Padrniikaravarma, By giving merit increases, engaged in good enmity does not arise. The virtuous one renounces [all] evil and by exhausting the defilements attains bliss. pupil of Atisa and teacher of Rinchen Zangpo? 528 Padmakaravarma seems possible since in the opposite corner, the lower right, Atisa is shown as a pa(ujita wearing an orange pointed hat and performing the teaching gesture. The third teacher in this row is a layman whose name is given as sa dha raja but who can not be identified at present. Despite the difficulty in identifying them, it is clear that these teachers are not part of the main teaching line but instead represent subsidiary transmissions. The bottom center is occupied by a group of three protectors, and all three are forms of Mahiikiila. In the center is the two-armed bird-headed Mahakiila (Mahiikala Kiikamukha; mGon po bya gdong). He is kneeling toward one side and holds a cleaver (kartrkii, gri gug) and a skull cup (kapiila, thod). To his right is the most common four-arn1ed form ofMahakiila. He sits in a posture of ease (lalitiisana) and wears a tigerskin dhotf. In his main arms he holds a cleaver and a skull cup, while his other two arms hold a sword and a tantric staff (kha.tvii1iga). The third standing four-armed fierce blue deity, to the Kiikamukha's left, is possibly another form of Mahiikiila but with unusual iconography. He is standing in pratyii/iqha (his right leg bent and the left one stretched), his main arms hold a trident and skull cup to his chest, v.iflile the other two are at his sides holding a yellow object- likely a drwn (qamam)- and a tantric staff (kha.tvii1iga). To conclude, despite the immense wealth of information this painting provides- its distinctive style, unique composition, and rare lineage- it raises more questions than it answers. As with the first example discussed here, the features noted in the previous sentence alone make it Iikely that this is a fairly early painting documenting an otherwise little known transmission lineage. Among the most striking and unusual features of this painting is its emphasis on the teaching transmissions received from the great adepts and their continuation in Tibet. The painting not only represents a rare instance of ten early adept depictions, but several of the personages in the lineage in the top row are associated with the Iiterature of the adepts, and MIRROR OF T HE BUDDHA 185 Vairocanavajra and Phadampa Sangye (or a later similarly influential Indian teacher) can be read as bringing this tradition to Tibet. Indeed, the addition of an adept similar to or identical with Phadampa in the depictions of the eighty-four great adepts on the dhoti of the AI chi Sumtsek Mai'ijusrP29 and elsewhere 530 documents the importance of this adept within the Kagyii Schools. In addition, the central grouping offers a unique perspective on the interrelations of some of the Kagyii Schools otherwise not documented in art at all. The uncertainties in identifying some of the figures in the painting, however, do not mean that the painting cannot be dated. Of those figures that can be identified, the latest is Taglung Thangpa chenpo Trashipel, who founded Taglung in 1180 and lived until 1210. The bottom-right figure, who could not be identified, may well postdate the First Karmapa, as is indicated by his age. This reading certainly goes against the conventions usually followed in Tibetan painting, but it appears possible as the relationship ofVairocanavajra and Phadampa would be the same if Phadampa were represented here. Even in such a case, the unidentified person at bottom right has to be an approximate contemporary ofTaglw1g Thangpa. Consequently, the painting very likely dates to the early thirteenth century at the latest. EXAMPLE THREE: A THANGI<A SET DEDICATED TO CAKRASAMVARA Lineages played a major role in making the dating of Sumtsek murals and the thangka discussed above possible, at least approximately. Further, the main function of such lineages has also been discussed. From the late twelfth century onward a huge variety of such lineages appeared in both literature and painting. More than twenty years ago David Jackson 531 tried to make scholars aware I86 CHAPTER 6 of the fact that many of the teaching traditions represented in the paintings were also recorded in literdture (the so-called records of teachings, gsan yig or thob yig). However, this literature is rarely consulted to help identify a lineage. Of course, in the absence of written identification of the figures in a painting, as is the case with those Jackson has studied, the effort to detennine the lineage is a time-consuming, difficult, and often somewhat unsatisfying task. However, as the Indian derivation of a teaching was an important matter to the Tibetans from the late twelfth century until at least the fifteenth century, lineage depictions in paintings from this period are relatively precise in the number of figures represented and thus often give a definitive clue to at least an approximate date, even if the lineage cannot be identified in its entirety. This is especially true if a thangka is studied not as an isolated painting but as part of a set, which it often was. The following example presents such a case and furthermore shows that a careful study of the lineages also helps us to understand the possible original purpose of a thangka set, even if it is only partially preserved. The three paintings under consideration here in this third example are all dedicated to Cakrasa11wara, or Khorlo Demchog ('Khor lo bde mchog), all have roughly the same measurements (about 51 1& x 28ll.a in., 80 x 73 em), and were all acquired by Giuseppe Tucci during his travels. Thangka I (Fig. 6.9), published by Tucci in 1949, eventually became part of the Robert Hatfield Ellsworth collection and is today in another private collection 532 Thangka 2 (Fig. 6.1 0) is housed in the Mll~eo Nazionale d' Arte Orientale in Rome. 533 Thangka 3 (Fig. 6.1 1), from another private collection, has been pub Iished in Sacred Vrsions.s34 Despite the somewhat different appearance of each thangka in the various pubIications, their dimensions, subject matter, and extremely similar stylistic features allow for the conclusion that these three paintings are part of a set executed by the same workshop or artist. All three paintings show the dominant central pair ofCakrasrupvara ('Khor lo bde mchog) embracing his partner, VajravarahT (rDo rje phag mo), surrounded by the sixty secondary deities of the mandala, six heroes (dpa ' bo or vira on the left), and six mothers (ma moor miitrkii on the right). The three paintings display the usual composition of thangka paintings: the two main figures at the center are surrounded by the secondary deities of their mandala, in the upper part a Iineage is represented, and in the lowest row are some additional protective deities and a depiction of the practitioner. 535 When analyzed in detail, it emerges that the thangkas mainl y differ from one a11other in the lineages represented in the upper part, which are of varying length. Furthermore, the iconography of the main couple and the secondary deities varies slightly, and the number of protective deities is reduced when the lineage at the top is more extensive. Here I concentrate solely on the lineages, as they are most relevant for dating the set, although a detailed study of the iconogmphy may certainly refine our knowledge of the reiigious, historical, and cultural background of these paintings. As already pointed out in earlier studies of these paintings, the choice and quality of the colors and the style indicate a Sakyapa (Sa skya pa) context. This is further substantiated by the presence of three successive eminent Sakyapa masters, who are often ea~ily recognizable by their distinctive physical features and secular dress in each of the Iineages. These are Sac hen Kiinga Ny in gpo (Sa chen Kun dga' snying po, I092- 1158), depicted as an elderly man in lay dress with a bald head and white side locks standing on end; Sonam Tsemo (bSod nan1s rtse mo, 1142- 1182); and Dragpa Gyeltsen (Grags pa rgyal mtshan, FIG. 6.9. ThA>'IGKA I Cakrasaf!wara Second quarter of 15th century 57% x 28 'li in. {80 x 73 em) Private Collection After: M. Rhie and R. Thurman; 1991, llO. 69, pp. 216- 19. MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA I87 6. to, THANGKA 2. CakrasaJ1)vara Second quarter of 15th century 57 'l'a x 28 '!.in. (80 x 73 em) Museo Nazionale d' Ane Orientale 'Giuseppe Tucci' (MNAO), Rome MNAO Photographic Archive Photograph by Giampiero Casaceli Inv. 960 fiG. t88 CHAPTER 6 fiG. 6.II, THANGKA 3 Cakrasaqwara Ca. 1400 57 'l'a x 28 '!.in. (80 x 73 em) After: S. Kossak and J.C. Singer, 1998, no. 43, p. 156£ 1147-1216).The latter two are also wearing secular dress. Following Dragpa Gycltsen, a fourth Sakya master, Sakya Pa.l)dita KOnga Gyeltsen (Sa skya Pa.l)dita Kun dga' rgyal mtshan, 1182- 1251) can be identified in all three paintings by his rounded red hat and his most common attributes, a sword and a book placed on lotuses held in his hands, which are performing the teaching gesture. The teachings ofCakrasarpvara were handed down from India to Tibet by great adepts. Tibetan Sakyapa I iterature536 di fterentiates three major teaching traditions of Cakrasai'Jlvara, each named after the adept who initiall y received the individual teachings. The lineage of adepts and teachers in the upper part of Thangka 2 represents a variant of one such tradition, that of Liiyipa. The other traditions are ascribed to Ghrunapada (Dril bu pa) and KaQha, or K{~Qaciirin, mandala of Gha.l)tapada 's (Dri l bu pa) outer (phyi) tradition, which is usually represented, contains only five deities, (Nag po spyod pa). In addition, the Sakya tradition handed down numerous other variants as taught in different the qtiki!ii in the outer circles again having only two arms, while an inner (nang) tradition has sixty-two deities as we11.540 schools.m For each of these traditions a lineage is handed down, and for many of them a considerable number of variant In all three paintings under discussion here, the lineage commences at the center of the top row, reading from the inside outward beginning with the lefthand figure, and the succession continues, alternating from left to right, in the rows underneath that have figures at the edge of the painting. Compared in detail, none of the lineages in the texts used for this study are actually identical to those represented in the thangkas under discussion, but the descriptions do provide e nough information to identity most of the figures depicted and the principal teaching tradition. Thangka I most Iike Iy represents the inner or secret (nang) mandala of the Gha.l)tapiida (Dril bu pa) tradition-with Gha.l)tapiida identifiable as the first adept in the lineag~as it is a sixty-two-figure mandala assembly \\~th two-armed secondary deities. Although the iconography of the adepts is not always as expected, the number of adepts and teachers and the position of the identifiable Sakyapa hierarchs show that the transmission has been lineages, which arc again named after a prominent teacher, are differentiated. In a text dedicated to the lineages of the extensive Collection ofAll Tantras (rGyud sde lam bws),531 more than thirty transmission lineages (not inc luding further variations of many of them) of Cakrasai'Jlvara and VajravarahT a re listed, nine a lone from the tradition attributed to LOyipa. Twelve transmission lineages arc mentioned for the sixty-two-deity mandala.539 The main differences between the mandalas of these three traditions, at least in the Sa skya context I have surveyed, appear as follows: In the tradition of Liiy ipa the mandala has sixty-two deities, with the secondary deities being four-armed. According to the Klll)ha, or ~nacarin, (Nag po spyod pa) tradition, the mandala is the same, but the secondary deities are two-armed instead. The F1 c . 6.IoA (derail of Thangka 2) The adepr Liiyipa drinking from a cup; d erail of Fig. 6.10 handed down by Sak')'a Pa.l)dita KOnga Gyeltsen (Sa skya Par)dita Kun dga' rgyal mtshan, 1182-1251), hence it is called the sa-tradition (sa lugs). 541 Thangka 2 is closest to the Liiyipa tradition, handed down through /otsiim Marpa dO\~a ChOkyi Wangchug (/o tstsii ba Mar pa do ba Chos kyi dbang phyug, 1042- 1136»<2 and hence called mar do lugs. Thangka 3 is closest to the K{~Qacarin (Nag po spyod pa) tradition, again handed down via Sak.')'a PaiJdita KOnga Gyeltsen, and thus it is also called sa lugs. 543 The three lineages are detai led and compared in Table 2. With these three Iineages from the same set, it is interesting to note the iconographic similarities and differences in the depiction of individual adepts. Liiyipa, usually shown eating the entrails of a fish, for example in one case is depicted drinking from a skull cup (Thangka 2; Fig. 6. 10a), with his left arm resting on a stand. In two cases Ghantapada (Dril bu pa) is performing his usual huge leap in the air, holding a l'ajra and a bell in his outstretched MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA 189 I 5 THANGKA I: Gha!)tapiida, sa lugs Vajradhara(rOo lje 'chang) Vajraviiriibi (rOo rje phag mo) THANGKA 2: GhaQtapiida (Oril bu pa) ;4;[Rilbelzhab (Rus sbal zhabs)546 siddha Liiyipa Oeilgipa; 47 Lavapa I ndrabhiiti;;o Jatandhara (' Barba ' dzin) KarQapa (Nag po spyod pa);49 Guhyapa Liiyipa, mar do lugs Yajradhara (rOo lje ' chang) Ji'ianaqiikiQT (Ye shes mkha' ' gro rna) Katsalapa Namgyelzhab (rNam rgyal zhabs)] Gha!)\apiida (Oril bu pa) Riibelzhab (Rus sbal zhabs)m Tilopa Lanka ling pam 10 Niiropa Phamdingpa cen Jigme Oragpa Kr~Qiiciirin (Nag po spyod pa) (Pham mthing pa gcen ' Jigs med Igrags pa) [Phamdingpa] cung Ngagkyi Ku5alaniitha Wangchug (gcung Ngag kyi dbang I phyug) Tilopa Logkya Sherab tseg (klog skya Shes rab brtsegs) Niiropa Mal lotsiim Lodrodrag (Mal lotsiiba Blo gros grags) 15 rJe chen yab sras gsum [= Sa chen 555 Kun dga' snyina, po ( I092-1 158) slob dpon bSod names rtse mo ( 1142- 1182) tje btszm Grags pa rgyal mtshan ( 1147-1216)] chos rje Sa skya pal)qita ( 11821251) 7 other teachers and the practitio- Sa chen Kun dga' snyi ng po ( 1092- 1158) ner slob dpon bSod nams rtse mo ( 1142- 1182) 20 rje btsun Grags pa rgyal mtshan ( 1147-1 216) chos rje Sa sky a PaQqita Kun dga' rgya1 mtshan ( 1182- 1251) 7 other teachers and the practitionerm 25 3: Kr~Qaciirin, sa lugs Yajradhara (rOo rje ' chang) Yajrasattva (rOo rje sems dpa ' ) Saraha;44 THANGKA Niigiirjuna Savaripa;•s Liiyipa Oiirikapa;;, Gha!)\apiida (Dril bu pa) Riibelzhab (Rus sbal zhabs) Sri Jatandhara ('Barba ' dzin) Kr~Qiiciirin (Nag po spyod pa) Giihyapa;;• Namgyelzhab (rNam rgyal zhabs) ? Tilopa Niiropa Nepal Phan1thingpa (Bat po Pham mthing pa [gcen ' Jigs med grags pal) Ba1 po Pham mthing pa [gcung Ngag kyi dbang phyug] Logkya Sherab tseg Klog skya Shes rab brtsegs Mal /otsiiva Lodrodrag (Ma1lotsiiba Blo m-os grags);;6 Sa chen Kun dga' snying po (10921158) tje btsun sku mched [= rje btsun bSod nams rtse mo (1142- 1182)] [rje btszm Grags pa rgyal mtshan ( 1182-1 251 )l chos tje khu dpon [= Sa skya PaJ)c:Jita] ;; 8 [chos rgyal Phags pa] 6 other teachers and the practitioner TABLE 190 2: Three Sakya lineages of Cakrasa•11vara CHAPTER 6 hands, but in one case, in Thangka 3, he is seated with his arms crossed over his chest and presumably holds his attributes. In each example he is orange. Ri.ibelzhab (Rus sbal zhabs) is light-skinned and seated on a tortoise (rus sbal), and in one case he has one hand raised and one holding a scull cup (Fig. 6.1 Ob) while in the other case he holds prayer beads (miilii) in both hands and appears rather elderly (Thangka 3). In Thangka I, however, he is dark-skinned, sits on a tiger skin, and dri nks from a cup, indicating that a different convention was relevant for this depiction. This is also suggested by the depictions of Kfu)ha or K{~!)iicarin (Nag po spyod pa), the dark adept who is twice depicted as dark gray and blowing a long black hom. In Thangka I he is light-skinned and not individualized. In the case ofTilopa and Niiropa, one always holds prayer beads with both hands, wh ile the other holds a drinking hom or a scull c up as his attribute. In general the physical appearance of the same adept differs considerably from depiction to depiction, indicating that very few of them are actually ind ividualized5;9 F1c. 6. ros (derai l of Thangka 2) The adept Kfu)hapa or Kr~r:tacarin (Nag po spyod pa) Not surprisingly, an1ong the Tibetan teachers following the adepts only a few have distinctive recognizable features. In all three thangkas none of the teachers following Sakya Pal)~ ita can be identified with certainty. But clearly this set of paintings represents the different teaching traditions on CakrasaJ]wara within the Sakya School that were handed down to the practitioner represented at the bottom of each painting, who was most probably also the commissioner of this set It is further ev ident from these three paintings that the practitioner received two of these transmissions from the same teacher, a very distinctive lan1a with a net attached to the front of his pointed red hat (Fig. 6.1Oc).~0 Sadly, this teacher could not be identified so far. Despite all the uncertainties concerning detdils of the Iineage depictions, F1c. 6. roc (detail of Thangka 2) Distinctive lineage holder with a net attached to the front of his pointed red hat MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA 191 comparing the number of figures represented with those usually found in the written Iineages and their dates, these paintings can be dated quite accurately. Accordingly, the practitioner represented at the bottom of each painting is an approximate contemporary ofNgorchen Ngor chen Kiinga Zangpo (Kun dga' bzang po, 1382- 1456; abbot 1429- 1456), and the paintings can therefore be attributed to the second quarter of the fifteenth century at the earliest. 561 I believe that an iconographic analysis of this kind, even if it does not provide a solution to all the problems of identifYing the figures depicted, allows this set to be dated much more precisely than would currently be possible by means of a purely stylistic analysis. CoNCLUSION The three examples collected here all are concerned with lineages including adepts and Tibetan teachers and present them from distinct angles. They also present portraits of a number of eminent personages with distinct phys ical features. The first two examples belong to a period in which the iconographic conventions for depicting such lineages and historical personages were still being developed. The third example stems from a time when these conventions had already been established but were probably not adhered to very strictly. The lineage oftheAlchi Swntsek is particularly interesting, since it offers a glance at the adoption of the lineage concept by an artistic tradition that had never depicted that topic before. This lineage depiction is clearly different from what has been represented in earlier monuments but also distinctive from its presumed model, the centralTibetan lineage depiction. The portrait of Drigungpa consequently differs considerably from both the depiction of contemporary local teachers within the same monument and from the usual style 192 CHAPTER 6 of his portraiture in contemporaneous central-Tibetan painting. The second example demonstrates the problems one faces when an unusual arrangement of teachers is met with. In such a case only detailed research on the historical contex't of each of the figures depicted can shed Iight on their relationships. Neither the lineage succession nor the teaching transmitted has been identified so far, but tl1e unique arrangement and written identifications- the names written on the front and mantras of veneration including their names on the back--make this painting a very important historical source. Concerning the figures depicted, it offers few clues besides their names. The representations ofPhagmodrupa and Taglung Tashipel conform to their usual depiction, the latter appearing ymmger in this painting than in those dedicated to him as the main figure. The portrait of the First Karmapa Diisum Kyenpa is not only the earliest but also clearly renders distinct physical features and his peculiar hat. Since portraiture in Tibet is generally rarely concerned with physical likeness, these are astonishing details. Given the complex arrangement of the figures and the addition of the teachers at the bottom, we can be certain tl1at this painting is based on more than just one teaching transmission. The third example stems from a time when teaching transmissions were routinely depicted. The comparison of the three paintings in this set shows us how portraiture with adept and teacher depictions is dealt with within a specific context. There is a striking distinctiveness in the depiction of the adepts that appears to be at least partly random or to be following unusual conventions. There is, however, a certain consistency in the depiction of the main Sakya hierarchs, but few of the other teachers are individualized, except for the inlmediate teacher of the person who commissioned the painting. Such distinctions in por- traiture according to the importance of a person are fairly frequent. Within the general development of Tibetan painting, the first two examples are works on the verge of an era when the depiction of adepts and teachers, and thus the derivation of the teaching, becomes an important topic in art. This has consequences for the organization and composition of the paintings as well. While earlier paintings are freer in the arrangement of the figures, thangkas with lineages are imbued with a stronger sense of hierarchical relationship. Remarkably, the depiction of Drigungpa in the Small Stiipa at Alchi (Fig. 6.5) resists this central-Tibetan compartmentalization to some extent, although it does adhere to its conventions in terms of hierarchies. The strict order and compartmentalization are visual expressions of the Tibetan need to organize and systematize various Buddhist teachings received from India and the other neighbors. When considering Tibetan art as a whole we must not forget that we are looking at a huge variety of traditions (supported by different schools, both central and local) over a period of a thousand years. Only twenty years ago very little was known about the development of Tibetan art, and almost all of the knowledge then was based on Tucci's work of the 1930s to 1950s ln addition, many works of Tibetan art have only recently been made accessible to scholars through publication.561 The examples presented here also demonstrate that careful analysis of paintings will never be possible on the basis of print publications alone, as the iconographic details of the secondary figures are barely visible and inscriptions identifYing them are often not included. Even less attention is given to other inscriptions, such as the consecration mantras on the back of a thangka. This is, of course, a great pity because it means that much additional information concerning the painting is not made avai lable. In many cases such information is of interest o nly to the specialist, but its inclusion in an appendix would be sufficient and very helpfuJ.563 In addition, there are many early works, particularly less wellpreserved ones, which have not yet been pub! ished and are unlikely to ever be pub! ished in print Only comprehensive and publicly accessible publication or docwnentation that enables the scholar to extract all possible information from a painting or object will allow the present Iimitations in dating Tibetan art to be overcome. Only then will a comprehensive foundation for dating Tibetan art be established. 56-I Since many of these objects come onto the art market at some stage, it is to a large e>.ient in the hands of the auction houses and galleries to make this infonnation available to scholars and to accelerate the progress of our know! edge of Tibetan art and hence our ability to date Tibetan art more precisely. MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA 193 Inscriptions on a Painting of Six Indian and Tibetan Gurus APPENDIX A of the names and mantras on both sides of the painting (Figs. 6.8 and 6.8a) is a faithful copy of what is seen. The layout of the original has been copied as well as possible for the mantras and inscriptions on the back. Misspellings, abbreviations, and archaic spellings are copied as they are represented on the painting. A double underline marks uncertain readings, and brackets have been used in cases where letters have been completed based on the remaining traces. Generally a tsheg is found in front of the shad, which is indicated by the distance between the last letter and the shads65 THIS TRANSCRIPTION The siddha Ratnamati/Rin chen blo gros front caption: tje rin cen blo gros I back: OM A HOM Ol!l a ·ghu nJ rat na ma ti na mo hwtl 1 Capital letters are used for the vertical consecration mantra, which is often also written in larger letters. The siddha Anandavajra/dGa' ba'i rdo rje Upper Row (left to riglll) front caption: rje dga ' ba 'i rdo rje566 I Buddha with bhiimisparsamudrii back: front caption: OM ma ha bode I A back: OM HOM A 'ghu ru dga' ba 'i rdo 1je 0111 a HOM na mo [hum om mu ne m11 ne 11 ma ha mu ne y- svahal Vajradhara Amuigavajra!Yan Jag med pa'i rdo rje front caption: yan lag myed pa 'i rdoe front caption: rdo rj[e] 'chang I 1567 back: OM A HOM back: OM A HUM Of!l ana mo bha ga va te bad::ra dha ri huJtl I 194 APPENDICE S Olfl a 'ghu r11yan lag myed pa ·; {r}do r[je] na mo {hlllfl 11 OIJI dha m1a dhii Ill [garj bhe Sl'a II llolfl na tina mi: sa [r]m buddha nii111 I 0111 ii111 bhnO!I mum I dadya tha 0111 bhrwr1 II Vajriisana/rDo rje ldan pa front caption: rdoe gdan pa I back: Thangpa chenpo Trashipel/Thang pa chen po bKra' shis dpal or Ratna Mangala5rT(l142-1210): OM A OM HOM 0111 a 'ghu ru rdo rje gdan pa na mo lullfl I Abhayakaragupta/A bhya ka ra front caption: bla ma a pha ka I back: OM A HOM 0111 a 'glut ru a pya ka ra na mo hw11 I Vajrasattva and the Six Central Figures Since the intended reading and hierarchy between these six figures remains unclear, they are enumerated from top to bottom and left to right All figures are only identified on the back of the painting. Vajrasattva: Otfl bad=ra sva ha hii111568 01/1 a pra ti s!a bad=ra S\'ii ha I •om sa [rva] A byid s,·a ha I om a 'ghu ro rad na mmtl gha Ia shri na mo hwtl I ye dha rma he Ill pra bha bii HOM he tun te san ta tha ga to tyo ba dad I te ~·an tsa yo ni ro dha e bam ba cfi ma ha shra ma !Ia 'I b=od pa dka 'tlwb dam pa b=od pa ni I mya ngan 'das pa 'i mchog ces songs rgyas gstmg I rab du byung ba g::han/a gnod pa dang 1g::han II Ia 'tshe [ba] dge 'sbyong ma yin no II Gyagar Vairocana/rGya gar Vi ro tsa na: 0111 s rva byid A svii hii I om a · gh 11 r11 shri bad=ra vi ro tsa na na 1110 h11111 I ye dharma he tuHOM pra bha ba he tun [te sa}n ta tha ga to hyo ba dat I te {san tsa yo] ni ro dime ba111 ba cfi ma [ha shra jma {Ia 'IIJi /tar byung ba me tog [las] I [kha] dog dri Ia myi gnod par I khtt ba b=hibs nas phur ba /tar I de b=hin tlwb pa grong du rg11 I bdag gi rigs dang mi rigs Ia I brtag par bya ste g::han rnams kyi I myi mthun ha dang g=han II rnams kyi I byas dang ma byas mams Ia myin II Phagmodrupa!Phag mo gru pa or Ratna Vajraraja (Il l 0-1170): OM 0111 a su ti $/O bad=ra m1 hii I Ol/1 sa [n·a] A byid Sl'ii hii I Om a ·gJw ru rad na bad=ra ra5M ja na mo JwJfl II ye dha rmii he tu pra bha ba he tun te .yii HOM n ta thii ga to hyo ba dat I te san tsa yo ni ro dha e bmtl ba cfi ma ha shra ma {Ia 'llmyig /dan 'gro ba yod pa yis I nyam nga ba dagji b=lzin du l mkhas pas 'tsho ba 'i jig rten 'dir I sfd]ig pa dag ni yongs su spang II Phadampa Sangye/Pha Dam pa Sangs rgyas or Dampa Gyagar Nagchung/Dam pa rGya gar Nag chung: OM om sa n ·aA byid S\'ii hii I om a 'ghu r11 dam pas10 rgya gar na!og HOM ch1mg na 1110 hW/1 I ye dha nna he tu pra bha ba he tun te san ta thii ga to hyo ba dat 1 te ~·an tsa yo ni ro dha e baltl va cfi 111a [ha shra ma] 110 'I {skjur pa myi gdab gno[d m]i [bjya I s[o] sor thar ba '{I [bsdam par] bya I x 'kyi rshad kyang rig par bya I MIRR O R O F T HE B U DDHA 195 b # # x x 'gnas su gnas par bya Ifhag pa ·i sems Ia yang dag sbyor I 'di ni sangs rgyas bstan pa yin II Of!l dha rma dhii tu gar bhe svii ha II n •a [byi]d sva hii I Olfl aA 'ghu nt shri bad=ra 'ghir ti571 bote na mo humHOMII ye dha rma he tu pra bha bii he tun te san ta tha ga to hya ba dar 1 te san tsa yo ni ro dha e bam ba qi ma ha shra ma ~za · II /hag pa 'i sems Ia bag bya ste I thub pa'i thug g=hi rnams Ia bs/ab I nyer =hi rtag tu dran /dan pa 'i I s/,yob pa mya ngan myed pa yin Second left, Qombipa: bejeweled, seated on tiger, right hand raised toward center. OM A II First Kannapa Dusum Kyenpa/Dus gsum mkhyen pa (Ill 01193) OM om sa n >a byid sva hii I om a A ·ghu ru rat na dha rma kir ti na mo hum II ye HOM dha rma he tu te san ta pra bha ba he tun tha ga to hyo ba dat I te san tsa yo ni ro dha e bam va {cfi 111a ha shra ma !WTII spyin pas bsod [nam]s rab tu 'phell legs bsdams dgra ' bsogs myi 'gyur do I dge dang /dan bas stig pa spong lnyon mongs =ad pas mya ngan 'da II Ol!l a su ti stha bad=ra sva hii II Eight Siddhas The eight great adepts are read from left to right and top to bottom. They are only identified on the back. Top left, Indrabhuti: yellow with crown and long hair, consort on lap. OM APPENDICES HOM Of!l a 'gh u ru dortl bi na mo hw!l I Second right, Liiyipa: slightly bearded, hands with golden objects held as in a teaching gesture (dharmacakramudra) variant, upper hand object appears to be a bad=ra. OM A HOM OI!I a 'ghu ru klu yi pa na mo hulf! I Third row left, Saraha: long hair, standing with legs apart; bow decorated with a blue animal head held behind the head with both hands, two arrows in the left: OM A HOM om a 'ghu ru bra111 =e chen po sa ra ha na mo hwrr I Third row right, Ghar~!apa: 572 red, dar1cing, right hand raised with unrecognizable object: OM A A 'HOMghu ru in dra bode na mo hum I om su ti .r.ta bad=ra sva ha I HOM OJ!I a ·ghu ru rd.o rje dril bu pa na 1110 hum I Ol!l a 196 (dhar111acakramudra). OM A HOM Olfl a ·gfru ru a rya klu sgmb na 1110 hum I ortr su ti s!a bad=ra sva hii I Not yet identified teacher: oms Top right, Nagarjuna: Buddha performing the teaching gesture Fourth row left, Kukkuripa: green, white dog under left arm, right hand in front of chest Four-armed Mahakala back: OM OM A A HOM HOM Olfl a 'ghu ru ku ku ri pa na mo hum I omma haka Ia hw(l phat I Fourth row right, Padmavajra: offering a tiny object with the right hand, left in front of chest. Mahakala Kakamukha/mGon po bya gdong back: OM OM A A HOM HOM Olfl a 'ghu rupad ma bad..7a na mo hwn I Olfl ma ha 'ghu Bottom Row na hri ta hum 574 1 Protector (a fonn of Mahakiila?) back: OM In the bottom row there are additional captions on the front They are located on the border below the six figures. A HOM O/flll1a ha -ta x [hulfl] I Bearded monk with pointed orange hat with golden rim, teaching gesture (dharmacakramudrii). front caption: Atisa slob dpon pad ma front caption: jo bo rje a te sha I back: OM A H(J!yf Olfl a 'ghu pra ba ka ra na mo hum I Layman with beard and high hairline probably holds a bad=ra in the right hand. back: OM A HOM Ol!l a 'ghu ru ti pa11 ka ra jna na shri na mo hill!! I front caption: sa dhci 13 raja back: OM A HOM Olfl a 'ghu ru sa dha raja na mo hwtl I MIRROR OF T HE BUDDHA 197 APPENDIX B Inscriptions on a Painting of Sanggye Onpo THIS THANGKA FROM RIWOCHE (Figure 4.15), now at the Musee Ouimet in Paris depicts Sanggye Onpo flanked by two bodhisattvas, Mai'ijusrl and Vajrapa~i. On the back of the painting are the usual consecration mantras; however, their exact placement has not been recorded in detail. There is an extensive inscription written in gold in lines arranged in the shape of a stupa, the outlines of which are drawn with red ink. Thanks to the cooperation of the Ouimet and the responsible curator, Natalie Bazin, this inscription could be read directly from the painting and the readings confirmed from photographs taken on that occasion. Besides the usual mantras, it contains a series of ordination names in Sanskrit written in Tibetan cursive script referring to the abbots ofTaklung and Riwoche. Of these, the last teacher has not yet been identified. The insc.ription begins with the sarvavid mantra of Buddha Vairocana followed by one evoking Vajragarbha and by the invitation mantra. It then evokes the five Jinas beginning with Vairocana. Then follow the evocations of Vajradhara, Tilopa, Naropa, etc. and the whole lineage up to Sanggye Onpo, who is depicted on the front side and thus evoked three times. Between Sanggye Yarjon and Sanggye Onpo, the name Srrjnanavajra poses a problem, as does the second name after Sanggye Onpo, who cannot be identified among his successors at Riwoche. Then follows the Buddhist creed (ye dharma) and an evocation of four of the six deities in the bottom row of the painting: Yamantaka, Hevajra, Vajramahakala, and VaisravaJ~a . These mantras are followed by the patience creed. The final three strophes are spiritual aspirations that read (in a tentative translation): 198 APPENDICE S A body endowed with the wealth of fame, a speech tl1at emits the light of the noble Dharma, a mind that knows excellent absorptions, may there be good fortune of body, speech, and mind! May I, too, in all successive lives be satisfied with your nectar of the true meaning of the Great Vehicle and consequently become a treasury for the benefit of [all] beings! May there be the good fortune of a body immutable as Mount Meru, the good fortune of speech possessing all six good qualities, the good fortune of a mind tl1at is limitless and free from discursive thought, may there be the good fortune of the body, speech, and mind of the Tathagatas! Transcription: 0/f! sarba byid svti ha I om badzra gar bhai sva ha I om su pra ti $/a sva flii I 0 M 6111 bud dha bai ro tsa na om: om badr.ra sva tva 11171!1.' om rad na sam bha ba hram: om pad ma. dha ri hri om ke rma a mo gha si ti a: Olfl a## bha. ga ba te shri bad:ra 'hrig A hztlfl.' Olfl ana mo 'glur m pra.d d:nya pha Ia fu71!1 Olfl ana mo 'ghu ru dznya nasi ti h17m: om ana mo 'ghu ru dharmama ti 11171!11 Ol!l a na mo 'ghu ru bad:ra ke tu ham/ 61!1 a na mo rad na 'glw ru ma ti ghir ti lu71!11 HOM otrz ana mo rad na 'glw ru ba.d:ra ra d:a ham/ onz ana mo rad na 'ghu ru IMI!l gha la 'shri h17ml om ana mo ra.d na 'glm ru rad na nii tha ham 61!1 ana mo rad na 'glut ru pra.d d:nyii 'ghu ru ham I 61!1 ana mo 'ghu ru shri dw:ya na badr.ra lu7ml Of!l ana mo ra.d na 'ghu ru ghir ti shri ra smT bha tra lu71!11 0111 ana mo ra.d na. 'ghu ru ghir ti shri ra sml bha tra ham/ Ol!l a rw mo rad na 'ghu ru ghir ti shri ra smT bha tra lu7t!ll Olfl a na mo rad na 'glut ru rad na pra.d dznyii shri bha tra ham// Olfl ana mo 'ghu ru dha rmii shi Ia lziil!ll ye dharma he tu pra bha bii he tun te .ran ta tha ga to bya ba dad I te :)ii tsa yo ni ro dhe e bam bii ti mahii shra ma IJQ.I!Il om ya man fa kalu71!1 phat: om he ngahi pi tsu badzra 11171!1lll71!1 lu71!1 phat sviihil: om badzra ma hii ka Ia lu71!1 phat I Olfl bhai shvti. ra ma na ye ham sviiha: bz.od pa dka' thub b:od pa dam pa ni II myangan 'das pa'i mclwg ces sangs rgyas gsung II rab du byung ba gzlwn Ia gnod pa dang II gzlumla 'tshe' badge' sbyong ma yin no II grags pa'i dpal 'byor /dan pa'i skull dam clzos 'od :er 'plzro ba'i gswzg II ring 'd:in b:ang po rtogs pa'i thugs II sku gswzg thugs kyi bkra shis shog I I {b]dag kyang tshe rabs thmtz [ca]d du II khyed kyi theg chen sn.ying po'i don// bdud rtsi'i 'bud k.yis tshim byas nas II mi 'gyur /lum po slm'i 'gro Ia phan pa'i fer md:od shogl yan lag drug 'bu gsung gi bkra shis shogl mtha' bral spros med thugs kyi bkra shis slwgl bkra shis shog I sku gsung tlwgs kyi bkra shis shogl bder gshegs MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA 199 Inscriptions on a Painting of Phagmotrupa with His Previous Lives APPENDIX C of different inscriptions on the back of Figure 5.2, a painting of Phagmotrupa with his previous lives now in the collection of the Rubin Museum of Art. At THERE ARE A NUMBER the very top we find a formula that states that this painting was consecrated by Sanggye Onpo. That text was written in dbu can script and added to the painting sometime after the painting was completed, probably on the occasion of its consecration (or reconsecration): stag lung pa'i dbon po bla marin po che dpal gyi rab gnas b:hugs All other inscriptions on the back are written in cursive script. Besides the mantras for the single figures, we find a long inscription in the shape of a stiipa in the center. Every figure painted on the front has its consecration formula on the back. Besides the usual 5!J1 ii hO!J1 written vertically, there is also a mantra for each deity or teacher. In the center is: Olf! ana mo \ ghtt ru rad na \ ma ti ghir tilu71!1 For the six deities of the Guhyasamiija tantra in the top row, reading from left to right (right to left for the diety on the front side) : Of!l a dznya \ na dhri g \lull!! sva hii Ol!l a prad \ d:nyi dhrig I ig \ham sva hii I Olfl a \a ro Olfl a Ol!! jhi na \ 'jhig a\ badzra lull!! pha! \ sva hii dhrig \ luim svii hii I rad na \ 'dhrig Olfl a lllt/!1 svii hii ht71!1 svii /Iii On the backside of the Buddha with a group of six figures: Olfl a \ nw \ ne 11111 ne \ ma hii mu ne \ ye sv(J. hii At the back of the stOpa on the next level below, the flanking monkey and monk have their own mantras: 0111 sa rva \ by id svii hii In the bottom left corner, behind the officiant, or sti.dlzaka: 2.00 APPENDICE S om bad:ra \gar bha ham The following formula is used in all other cases and refers to Phagmotrupa directly using his ordination name. The use of his name behind these figures indicates that they represent him, either in his former lives or in his most recent life: Olfl ana mo glzu ru rad na bad:ra ra d:.a h/11!1 The stOpa-shaped inscription begins with the sarvavid mantra of Buddha Vairocana and is followed by the invitation mantra and the mantras evoking Vajragarbha. The invitation mantra is also written to the left and right of the umbrella to form the ribbons hanging from it. The sequence of the three mantras is repeated once more in full and followed by another sarvavid and invitation mantra. Then the mantra for Phagmotrupa mentioned above is repeated three times, followed by the first three abbots of Taklung Monastery, the last being Choku Sangye Yarjon (Chos sku Sangs rgyas yar byon, ordination name Shes rab bla ma/Prajiiaguru, 1203- 1272; abbot of Taklung 1236-1272) . It follows the ve dharma verse repeated twice and a series of mantras evoking different deities. In the mantra of CakrasaJ]wara, the Ia of jva.la has been forgotten (compare Willson and Brauen 2000: no. 457). It is followed by a series of mantras dedicated to Vajravariihr (compare Willson and Brauen 2000: no. 213) and one mantra to Hevajra (compare Willson and Brauen 2000: nos. 71 and 470). The following set of mantras evokes the protectors of the three fami lies- ManjusrT, Avalokite5vara, and Vajrapar:U - in that order. A final set of two mantras most likely refers in this context to a form of Acala (the same mantra is used for one of the fierce forms of Vajrapiil.li as well ; compare Willson and Brauen 2000: nos. 157.173- 175, and 177) . Here, at the beginning of the narrower bottom platform of the stiipa, the text changes into Tibetan language and begins with the forbearance verse. The last two verses then contain a prayer that, in the likely case that this painting was commissioned by Sanggye Onpo, refers to his predecessor Sangye Yarjon and possibly also to the sacred objects of Taklung entrusted to him by his teacher. A tentative translation of these verses reads: May I accomplish the command not to part from the noble master and his main spiritual successors, may the delusions of my mind be purified, and may I become able to guide living beings! Bless with spiritual power those [sacred objects) that have been erected of [the enlightened ones who possess] pure enlightened Buddha activities, body, speech and mind, and all vast good qualities without exception! May there come about the good fortune of the best sacred objects! OM A otrz sa rva byid svti H0M hii I Of!l su ti sta badzra svti hii I Ot!l badzra gar bhe svii hii om sa rva byid svii hti I 01!! Sl/ ti sta badzra sva 01\1 hii I 0111 bad:ra gar bhe sva luz I om sa rva byid Back of Fig. 5.2 svii hii I Olfl su ti ~a bad:ra svahaom om ana A mo glm m rad na bad:ra ra dza lull!! I om a na mo ghu ru rad na badzra ra dz.a h17ml om a 11a mo H 01\1 ghu ru rad na bad:ra ra ham I om ana mo 'glw ru rat lUI lila/!! ga Ia shri h17ml om a na mo rad 1m 'glw ru rad na na thii hlll!ll om a TUl mo 'glm ru rat na prad d:nya g/111 ru h17m I ye dha rmii he hi pra bha bl7 he hm te san ta tha ga to hya bti dad I te san tsa yo 11i ro dime bam bet Iii ma hti ira ma oa:l ye dha rmti he hi pra bha bii he hm te santa thii ga to hya ba dad I te setn tsa yo 11i ro dha e bmn bet tiima hii i ra ma oa:ll om irl bad:ra he hee ru ru kam hllr!l hz1111 phatl qa ki (ti dz:va sam bii ra ye svii hii II Olfl. sri : lm ha lu7m lu71!1 phatl om om Olfl sa rva buddha qa ki ~zi ye I bad:ra wa nw ni ye I bad:ra bai ro tsa 11i ye llu71!1 lu11!1 hanz plmt pha! phat svet hii II Of!l dhe wu pi tsu bad:ra hl7mlu7mlu71!1 phat sva ha I om a svti hii I Ol!zlu71!1 tri hrr a I onz bii ki shva ri mwrz I onz ma ~1i pad me ham I Olf! badzra pa ~1i svti hii II om blm71!1 svet hii I om tsa(l qa ma hti rosa na ham phaf.' b:od pa dka ' tlmb dam pa b:od pa ni II mya ngan 'das pa mchog ces sangs rgyas gsungs II rab hi byung ba gz.hanla gnod pa dang: gzlmn Ia 'tshe badge' sbyong ma. yin 110 II mtslumgs myed bla ma. dam pa yab sras dang II bdag 'bra/ med ci gsung bka' bsgmb cing II rang sems 'khrul pa dag pa dang II 'gro ba'i 'dren pa /IllS par slwg II II 'phrinlas rnam dag sku gswzg thugs II yon ten malus rgya che ba 'iII bzhengs pa nwms La byi11 kyis rlobs II ten mchog du gyur pa 'i b/..7a shis shag II MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA 201 APPENDIX D Inscriptions on a Painting of Taklungthangpa Chenpo THE INSCRIPTIONS ON THE BACK of Figure 5.17, a painting ofTaklungthangpa Chenpo from Riwoche in Kham now in the collection of the Brooklyn Museum, are all written Tashipel ofTaklung Plain understands karmic residues and Samsara, which are actually [insubstantial] like a city of kinnara spirits, in gold and thus fairly hard to read. Besides the consecration mantras, we find an extensive inscription written in lines primordially quiet and non-arising, to be the pure great bliss. arranged in the shape of a stupa that is outlined with red ink. ln addition to the usual mantras, it contains a series of ordination names in Sanskrit written in Tibetan cursive script referring to the abbots of Taklung and Riwoche up to Orgyen Gi:inpo, the successor of Sanggye bnpo and second abbot of Riwoche. The inscription begins with the sarvavid-mantra followed by one evoking Yajragarbha and the invitation mantra (suprafi$/ha) . It then evokes possibly the Buddha and then Yajradhara followed by the lineage holders Tilopa, Naropa, and so on, including the whole lineage. Taklungthangpa Chenpo is evoked tluee times in a row, supporting the identification of him as main subject of the painting. It continues with the successive abbots of Takllmg up to Sangye Onpo, who founded Riwoche in 1276. His successor is the last teacher evoked . Then follows the Buddhist creed (ye dharma) followed by an evocation of some deities, namely: I . The heart mantra of heart Hevajra: om deva picu-vajra. ... 2 . The near-heart mantra of heart Hevajra: Of/1 vajra-kartare hevajra ye . .. 3 . The heart mantra of body Hevajra: Olfl trai-lo/.tyiik.yepa ... 4 . The mantra of Sahaja Cakrasai]wara. Except for the last one, these mantras apparently do not refer directly to deities represented in the front of the painting, where Hevajra is not prominent. Instead on the front side we find Sahaja Cakrasa11wara and his consort Vajrayogi1~1 to the sides ofTaklungthangpa. These mantras are followed by the forbearance verse and the following two verses dedicated to Taklungthangpa Chenpo tentatively translated as follows: 2.02. APPENDICE S May I accomplish the command not to separate from him [faklungthangpa], the matchless lord, and his main spiritual successors, may the elusions of my own mind be purified, and may I be able to guide [all] living beings! The transcription: 0/fl a. 11111!1 0111 sa rva byid svii hii I 0111 bad:ra gar bhe sva ha I om s11 pra ti sta ba.dzra sva -ii hii I om ma hii ba hii I om re svii. ana OM mo bha ga ba ti shri badzra dhrig ham om a na 1110 'glm m prad d::.nya pha Ia. lu11!1 I om a na mo 'glw m d~11ya nasi ti ham/ 0111 ana mo 'glw ru dharma A ma. ti ham! om ana mo 'ghu m badzra ke tu lu11!1 I ti ghir ti ln71!11 om a Ol!! ana mo rad na glw m ma H 011:1 na mo rad na ham/ 0111 ana mo ra.d na 'ghu nt bad::.ra ra dza 'glw rumaltl gha Ia shri ham I 0111 ana mo rad na 'ghu rumam ga Ia shri ham/ 'g/111 ru I!IG/!1 gha Ia shri 11111!11 om ana mo rad na om ana mo rad na ghu m rad na nii. thii. hl7m I 0111 ana 1110 ra.d Ill! 'glw ru prad dmya gh11 ru lu71f! I om ana mo rad na glw ru ghir ti shri ra smr bha tra ham/ om a Ill! mo rad Ill! glw ru ra.d na prad d::.nya shri bha tra 1111111 I I ye dlmrma he tu pra blm bii he tun te .yiin ta thii ga to hya bii bii dad I te sanytsa yo ni ro dha e ba1rz bii ti malta shra ma ~~a.:ll om dhe rtsa pi ts11 bad::.ra-lu1111 lull!! 1111111 pha.t svii hii I 0111 badzra ka dim ri ne bad::.ra ? hl7m ham ham plmt svii hii I 0111 trii.i log kya kse pa fu11!1 lu71!1 lu11!l pha! svii. hill om hri: ha ha 1111111 hl71!! pilar svii hii I bzod pa dka' thub bzod pa dam pa ni II mya ngan 'das pa'i mchog ces sangs rgyas gs11ngs II rab du by11ng ba g::.hanla g1wd pa dang II gzhanla. 'tshe badge' sbyong ma yin 1w II bag chags 'khor ba dri za.'i grong II gdod nas zhi ::.hing ma skyes pall mam da.g bde' ba chen por mkhyenll stag l11ng thang pa'i bkrashis na II rje mtshungs med bla.ma yab sras dang II rang sems 'khrul pa dag pa dang II bdag 'bra/ med ci gsung bka' bsgrub cing II 'gro ba. 'i 'dren pa n11s par slwg II bkrashis ? gyurcig I MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA 203 NOTES inftuences from Knshnur were mninl} felt in western Tibet, also mentoontng (p. 33) the "inhabited vine scroll" mouf. He also examined Chinese sources (pp. 34-4 I). CHAPTER I 1 S. Kossak 2010, presents his no. 34, Mal!reya and MailjliSti in Discourse, as a poss1ble surviving, though extensively damaged, Ind1an scroll painting (pafa). ' D. Jackson 2009, p. 72 et passim. ' D. Jackson 2010,pa.rsim. Note ~1at the chart in ibid, Fig. 6. 1, shows the beginning of the "Pala" or Sharri style a century too early. ' Magadha was considered by Tibetan Buddhists to be central India, the area in "h1ch the Buddha lived. ~'Bengal" then was a much l8fller area of eastern lndill, includmg pr=nt Bangia Desh. • See Konglrtll (Kong sprul ), Theg pa ·, sgo l"m las btu.!l pa gs1mg rab ri11 pa che ·; md:od bslab pa gsum legs par stall pa ·, bstan bcos shes bya kun khyab. For his mam passage on an, see pp. 570.1-573.4 (vol. lltft. fols. 208a-209b). • This was pointed out by John Huntington long ago. See J. Huntington inS. Huntington and J. Huntington 1990, p. 287 and figure 38. ' For provisional translations of Deumnr Geshe's descriptions of both lndia-deri. ed Sl) les of Tibet, see D. Jackson 1996, p. 50. 1 All Tibetan names for painting Sl) les With foreign origins are some"hat nmb1guous, even the term ''Nepalese Sl) le" (bat m) can theoretically mean both the style that Tibetans established in imitation of Nepalese painting and the original paintings by Newar in Nepal. • A. Heller 1999, p. 85f. 10 D. Jackson 2010, figs. 5.1 and 5.2. Tsermg G)'lllpo, Gunuam Hazod, and Per K. Sorensen 2000 have studied the history ofYazang in their book Ci•·ili:attOII at the Foot ofMo1011 Sham-pa: The Royal Hau.!le of/flo Bug-paCa/1 Olld the History ofg.l\2 '·b:m1g: IIISioncol Texts from the .\1onastel)' ofg. Ia '·bang 111 Yar-stod (Central Tibet). 11 I have described the painting in more dctrul in D. Jackson 2010, fig. 5.2. " See also ibid., fig. 5.1. u See ibid., figs. 6.1 9 and 6.21. 16 J. Huntington 1968, p. 47. 11 G. Beguin et al. 1977, p. 75. 18 "'P. Pal 1983, p. 115. " S. Huntington and J. Huntmgton 1990, no. 116. D. KJimburg-Salter 1998, p. 3, noticed that Pal had also dealt "ith mo d1fferent groups in P. Pal 1984. See also D. Jackson 2010, fig. 6.31. " P. Pal 1984, p. 29fT. fbid., p. 32. " H. Stoddard 1996, p. 47, note 6. " See D. Jackson 20 I0, fig. 6.31 ; P. Pal 1984, pl. 17; S. Huntington and J. Huntington 1990, no. 116; and P. Pal 1991, no. 82. Pal 1984 considered two paintings (h1s fig. 10 and plate 18) to be combinations of P31a and Beri styles. Such difficulties \\ere understandable, given the fact that Ste,·en Kossak had )Ct to clearly demarcate the border bem cen the Pain and the early Beri in his article of 1997. "'P. Pal 1984, p. 32. Pal added that 11 was conceivable that AtiS& brought an1sts from Magadha to decorate some of these monuments. But that is never recorded in AliSa's biographies, which do refer to his and his d1sc1ples' commissioning other works of an, including paintings, by ordering them from India. " The synopsis of G. Begum and L. Fournier 1986/87 is mainly based on D. KlimburgSalter 1998, p. 2f. ,. D. Weldon and J. Casey Songer 2003, p. 40, howe' er, suppon an earher daling (to the twelfth or earl} thirteenth centUf)) and mention that another pamung from the same set is in the private McCorm1ck collecuon. "'J. Casey Singer 1994, p. 87. :1.04 NOTES ,. Ibid., p. 63. 37 Cf. D. Kl imburg-Salter 1998, p. 4. '8 In J. Casey Singer and P. Dcnwoocl eds. 1997, pp. 26-37. 39 D. Klimburg-Salter 1998, p. 2f "" Ibid., p. 4. Klimburg-Salter noted whru she belie•ed to be a complication arising from the fact that the schools founded by Ati5a and Marpa "ere both called KagyO in the early period, addmg that Kadam called themselves "bKa · brg)·ud bKa'gdoms pa... She must ha•e deri' ed thiS from G. Tucci 1980, The Religions af1ibel (Berkeley: University of California Press), p. 23. I could not find that phrase anested in T1betnn historical sources, though once or twice we do find the Kadam referred to as "Au5a's disciple lineage, the Kadampa" (Jo bo 'i slob brgyud bka 'gdams pa), a phrase that IS used in the rGya bod yig !Shang clrenmo history as a chapter heading. "1 Cf. D. Khmburg-Salter 1998, p. 3. ., S. Kossak 1998, p. 32. ... fbid., p. 31. ... J. loSl} 1989, p. 95. .u See also S, Kossak 2010 p. 28, fig. 15. ... S. Kossak 1998, p. 37. "' Ibid., pp. 38-40. ..., S. Kossak 20 I 0. p. 28. " 9 D. Klimburg-Salter 1998, p. I. "' Ibid., note 5. 51 H. Stoddard 1996, p. 30. "E. Gene Smuh 2001 , p. 254. 53 D. Jack.o;on 1996, p. 34. "'SeeS. Hunungton 2001, p. 388. 55 C. Bau12c-Picron 1998, p. 41. ... I would suggest 1450 as the end of period 2 and beginning of period 3. "' See H. Stoddard 1996, p. 37. '' H. Stoddard 1996, p. 30. "H. Stoddard 1998, p. 123. 32 "' See D. Jackson 1996, p. 50. " G. Tucci 1949, p. 331, plate E. '' J. Huntington 1968, p. 24. He also exammed (pp. 29-34) Kashmiri sources, kno\\1ng that » Ibid., p. 62. Deborah Kl imburg-Saltcr 1982, p. 155f. 19 Ibid .. p. 189, pl. 109. 2J "J. Ca.<:c) Smger 1997, p. 52. Ibid., p. 37. » Ibid., p. 27. "' G. Tucci 1949, p. 307f. "'1. Casey Singer 1995, p. 83. 85 " J. Casey Singer in 1. Casey Singer and S. Kossak 1998, p. 17. "H. Stoddard2003,p. 17. 63 Ibid., p. 4 I. Stoddard also believed (ibid.) thai paintings ofSapan and Phakpa, the two Mongol regents of Tibet, were sim ilarly generic, though with a more human aspect. "' C. Stearns 2007, fig. I, and p. 481, note 164. Cf 0. Weldon and J. Casey Singer 1999, p. 184, note 364, "... from his own hand." 86 " For the history of the VajrAvali cycle and Saz.ang Phakpa's crucial role in transmitting it, see Go Lotsawa, G. Roerich trans. 1949- 53, p. 1045f. 71 72 13 15 Christian luczanits, personal communication. 89 'J igsmedchoskyirdorje,p. 1192 . 23c. Khyung po dByig gi rdo rje. Among those three, 23b. Zhang taught: 90 See S. Huntington 200 I, fig. 18.16; and my Fig. 3.22, a buddha beneath a parasol. 25. So Ye shes dbang phyug 91 S. Kossak 2010, p. 3. 26. Ngab thung Byang chub rgyal mtshan 92 See H. Sofukawa et al. 2009, no. 41, which also contains a large round shieldlike object. 27. sKor !hung Shes rab ye shes 93 77 95 31. Zur po che SMkya 'byung gnas See Fifih Dalai lama, Record a/Teachings Received, vol. 2, p. 189b: sgyu 'phrul rrsa 2. rGyal ba rigs lnga (the Five taihAgatas of the mandala) "'S. Kossak 2010, fig. I I. "'1. Casey Singer 1995, p. 82, noted that according to the Maiijusrimulakolpa Tantra. the patron or officiant (sbJdll bdag) should be drawn according to nature, citing M. Lalou 1930, p. 15. Marcelle lalou I930, IC0110graphie des itoffes pei111es (pa[a) da11s le Maiijusritmllakalpa (Paris: Paul Geuthner). 81 See J. Huntington 1990, note 7, who cites Tarthang Trulku, ~A History of Buddha Dharma," Crysral Mirror 5 ( 1977), p. 325. C. luczanits has demonstated that in his treatment of that mural a~ his first main example in chapter 6 of this volume. "'Cf S. Kossak 1998, p. 26f Cf S. Kossak and J. Casey Singer I998, p. 50. ., SeeS. Kossak 2010, fig. 60. "' Dan Manin 200 I, p. 172, note I03. 29. Nyang Shes rab mchog 30. Nyang Ye shes 'byung gnas I. Kun tu bzang po (Samantabhadra) H. (Stoddard) Karmay I975, p. 30. 28. Rwa thung Ye. shes tshul khrims .., Zur chung is mentioned by Go Lol~wa, G. Roerich trans. 1949-1953, p. 120. See H. Stoddard 2003, Figs. 25a and 25b. ,. Ibid. 24. gN ubs Sangs rgyas ye shes Ibid., p. 72. Cf. D. Klimburg-Salter 1998, p. I. H. Stoddard 1996, p. 27. 23a. rJe dpal grags, S. Huntington 200 I, p. 86. rgyud gsang ba snying pa de kho na 11yid nges pa ·; rgyud rgyalle ·unyi shu rlsa gnyis pa 'i 'grel pa nfi Ianda ·i pa~ufi ra sgeg pa ·i rdo tjes md=ad [p.l 90a] pa ritt pa che ·;spar ba kab ces bya ba pa~ufi ra bi mfi Ia da11g Ia rsa ba rma rin cen m chag gis bsgyur ba ·i lung gi brgyud pa tti: " Adapted from 0 . Kl imburg-Salter 2004, p. 50. I have added the subtype of labeling (her "information"), i.e., inscriptions that identify which set the painting belongs to and which number a given painting is with the set. 22. Khyung po dByig 'od, who taught these three: 88 96 "' According to P. Pal 2003, the thangka supposedly belonged to a set painted by Lowo Gelong CMphal Sonarn, who v.>as told this by E. Gene Smith in a personal communication. 21. Tsu ru Rin cen gzhon nu. Both taught 23b. Zhang rGyal ba'i yon tan, and '" For three early portraits ofNgorcheo wearing a red hat, see 0 . Jackson 2010, figs. 8.2, 8.3 and 8.8. "'On that bald spot see also 0 . Jackson 1990, p. 142 and note 33. 20. sGye re Mchog skyong and "' Ibid., p. I50 f. .,; C. Stearns 2007, p. 44. '" 10rg Heimbel in a personal communication kindly clarified the dates of Sa bzang 'Phags pa. Based on that lama's biography by Ngorchen, he wa~ born in 1358 (sa pho khyi ·i Ia; vol. I, p. 170. I) and pa~sed away in I412 (chu pho brug gi lol.. . ; vol. I, p. I77.3), noting some discrepancies in the sources. 19. rMa Rin cen mchog, who had two disciples: Cf. S. Kossak 2010, p. 18. One could speculate that it be a tOken of the monastic tradition transmitted to Central Tibet by the Eastem Vinaya monks who retumed from Eastern Tibet in the late tenth century, but that similar haL~ are wom by monks is known from earlythirteenth century murals in Alchi in far westem Tibet. See C. luczanits 2003, fig. 2. 32. Zur chong Shes rab grags 33. Glan SMkya bzang po ., Gong dkar rOo rje gdan pa Kun dga' rnam rgyal, Record a/Teachings Recei••ed: sNubs Sangs rgyas ye s hes Khu lung Yon tan rgya mtsho Sras Ye shes rgya mtsho Nyang Shes rab mchog Nyang Ye shes 'byung gnas Zur po che Shak 'byung Zur chung pa a.k.a. bOe gshegs rGya bo ba 3.-5. Rigs g.~urn mgon po (the three great bodhisattva lords of the three lineages) 6. Ku ku ril dza his son, Sgro phug pa Shlil,ya seng ge 98 The painting has been published in Eva Allinger 200 I in H. Kreijgcr 200 I, p. 72f., no. 21 ; S. Kos_~k 2010, fig. 74; and Sotheby's The Jucker Collection of Himalayan Paintings, New York, March 28, 2006, no. 50. Sotheby's NY (who give the dime.nsion as: ''40 x 32 1!2 . '') . 10. 99 For Nyo Orakpa Pal's dates, see P. Soren.~n 2007, p. 385. Cf Eva Allinger 2001 in H. Kreij ger 2001, p. 72f, no. 21, who called him "Nyo Druppa Pal." 7. rGyal po dza 8. lndra bhil ti 9. Sidha r§ dza 10. Au para dza II. His daughter, Gomadevl (sras mo go ma dewT) 12. The la1er Ku~'U Rlija (ku ~'U ra dza phyi ma, 13. bOe ba'i dngos grub the Risen Corpse (Ro langs bOe ba'i dngos grub) 100 Go LoL~awa, G. Roerich trans. 1949-53, p. 372. 101 Fifih Dalai Lama, Record ojTeacltings Receired, vol. I, pp. 129b-130a: bka · babs 14. rOo rje bzhad pa 15. Prahasli, king of Zahor (Za hor gyi rgyal po Pra hasti) lnga pa gnyos lugs kyi brgyud pa ni. 102 Alternatively, from no. 12, gNyos rOo rje bla ma, the lineage continues: 16. Sangs rgya~ gsang ba 13. gNyos ston Grags pa dpal 17. l'al)qi ta Sgeg pa'i rdo rje 14. gNyos Lha snang ba 18. Vimalamitra (Bi m~ Ia mi tra) 15. Rin cen do pa "' C. Luczaniis, personal communication. M IRROR OF T H E BUDDHA 205 in descending Iine (mar) from the second figure and the entire lower register refer to scenes from the [Vajra-) Bhairava transmiSsion and cycle. 16. mDog stod ser rna 17. Gins pa dPon rOo rje tShul khrims 18. g. Yns ru bo rNgos ston Rin cen rgyal mtShan 19. Donn bo Grogs pa dpal bzang 20. Ma u Pan chen. (After him the same ns abo' e.) ,., Fofth Dalao Lama. Record of Teachings Rut'll·ed, •ol. I, p. 2 13a, records gN~ os uansnussoon for the protecti\ e deities bDud mgon Trag shad /cam dral with retinue: ' 011 14. la>man (a. male and b. Jay follower), c. non-Tibetan, d. scholar ' 09 110 I am grateful to Christian Luczanits, \\hose sharp eyes also concluded that a KagyO lineage was ponrayed by the two steles. U. von Schroeder 200 I, vol. I, p. 383. Von Schroeder, ibid., refers to C. Bautze-Picron 1995, for a treatment of the monk motif an PAia art. See U. von Schroeder 200 I, vol. I, p. 383, plate 1220. 111 7. Kha reg gi gNyos Lo tsll ba Yon tan grag.~ For an occurrence of that protective deity on a Sakya painting from about the 1180s, see 0 . Jackson 2010, fig. 6.3. 8. hos son, gNyos rOo rjc bla rna 112 9. gNyos dPal 'byung 10. gNyos dPal gya seng ge Katok Situ (2001 ed.), p. 83, mentions a realistic stone statue ofTaklungthangpa that was carved in India at Bodhgaya and brought to Tibet, crossing the Ganges miraculously. II. Yab gNyos nag Grogs pa dpal 12. Sangs rgyns Rns chen (a.k.a. rGyal bo Lha nang pa) 13. Bla rna Rin cen ®al po 14. Bla rna B~ang chub dar rgyns 15. 'Jam db)ang Ran cen 'b) ung gnas 16. mKhas pa Ye shes rin cen 17. Kun spangs Chos kyi rin cen CHAPTER2 10 See, for example. Figures 2.1, 22 and 2.5. "' See M. Willson and M. Brauen 2000, p. 602, "Type VI. Human," \\hich includes standong irfrrakas (two main human disciples of the Buddha), sitting frii•·akas (the Soxteen Arhats), lamas of the Geluk tradition, other humans: two Chinese auendants of the Sixteen Arhats, Upnsika Dhannatrlita and Hoshang. 18. dBu rna pa dPal Idan rin cen "' See G. Tucci 1949, p. 307. 19. Byang sems bSod nams rin cen 20. Brag dkar bn Serns dpa' chen po bSod nams rgyal rntshan "' See Y. lshihama 2005, D. Jackson 2009, fig. 1.22. 111 2 1. rOo rje 'chang Tshar chen Blo gsa I rgya mtsho '"' Per Soren.~en 2007, p. 388, note 48. I am grateful to have been able tO check the typed notes of Eva AI longer with the handwrincn corrections ofChnstian Luczanits." We should read brgj·o•d pa and I prefer tsho to tshe. "'' Per Sorensen 2007, p. 388: "'The figures of enure nght lateral column (except the top right figure) remain unidentified, but, signally, behmd the second figure (listed as no. 18 accordangto II. Kreijger's transliteration and E. AI longer's doagrom) an inseription (in dofTerent hand) appears to purpon "Herein [\\lthm the lha•rgka]the Bhaira'a (= 'Jig(s]b)ed) transmoss110n [hneage is embodied. a consecration secured] for this \e!) life(? 'di ISM= /She 'dt)." But the t.ext, evidentl) corrupt, may also be eonsuued differently, i.e. that the remamrng figures of the right column :Z.06 NOTES 12. 1ap,ornan(a. female and b. lay follower), c . Tibetan, d. scholar 13. monk (a. male and b. ordained). c. nonTibetan, d. scholar 4. rNal 'byor pa Ro zan de wa 6. Bla rna Ba lorn ta li. tsayra II . nun (a. female and b. ordained). c. Tibetan, d. scholar ,., C( Eva Allinger 200 I in H. Kreojger 200 I, p. 72(, no. 21, who called him "N)O Oruppa Pal." 3. Slob dpon Bram ze mChog sred 5. rNal 'byor rna bDc ster rna 10. I&) man (a. male and b. lay follower), c. Tibetan, d. scholar ,.. P. Sorensen 2007, p. 369. Sorerosen (p. 391) also speculates that the anist "most hkely word missing? have been a Tibetan tramed on the Newar tradition or a Newar arust homself," which is impossible. I. Yang dag par rdzogs pa'o sangs rgyas rOo rJe 'chang 2. Phyag na rdo rje 9. monk (a. male and b. ordained), c. Tibetan, d. scholar The six'leen theoretical combinations would be: 1. monk (a. male and b. ordained), c. Tibetan, d. non-scholar 2. layman (a. male and b. lay follower), c. Tibetan, d. non-scholar 3. nun (a. female and b. ordained), c. Tibetan, d. non-scholar 4. laywoman (a. female and b. lay foiiO\\er), c. Tibetan, d. non-scholar 5. monk (a. male and b. ordained), c. nonTibetan, d. non-scholar 6. layman (a. male and b. lay follo\\er), c. non-Tibetan, d. non-scholar 7. nun (a. female and b. ordained), c . nonTibetan, d. non-scholar 8. laywoman (a. female aod b. Ia) follo"er), c. non-Tibetan, d. non-scholar 15. nun (a. female and b. ordained), c. nonTibetan, d. scholar 16. laywoman (a. female and b. lay follower), c. non-Tibetan, d. scholar "" Pi f\h Dalai Lama, Record ofTeac!tings Receilwl, vol. I, p. liSa, er passim. ,. M. Rhic and R. Thurman 199 1, p. 264. "" Ibid. 111 Ibid. "' J . Casey Singer 1994, p. 113 (concerning her fig. 17a). "' A sam•lar misidentification was made regarding another previously published early painting depocting "Buddha with Anendants. ~ In it, the top-central lama \\as identified ns "probably Ati$3 (on the center) flanked by two abbots, both of\\hom \\ear monastic robes.~ SeeS. Kossak and J. Ca5e) Singer 1998, p. 73, re: no. 10. Although these three crucial figures were not Illustrated in that publication as an enlarged detail, one can nevertheless see that the central guru definitely wears Tibetan monastic robes, and not the usual Indian ones. There is no Indian yellow pundit's hat atop his head. All three gurus are, in faet, Tibetan lamas. If AtiSa \\ere present, the next in the lineage should have been the Tibetan layman Oromton. Compare the no.rmal iconography of that usual Kadam lineal sequence in Figure 3. 11, as also given in the detail of S. Kossak and J. Casey Singer 1998, no. II , on p. 76. '"' A. Heller 2005, p. 5. ou Cf. S. Kossak 2010, p. 43. ,,. II. Karmay 1975, p. 49. The lama's vest as a crueial ic.o nographic di!Terence was also noted by J. Casey Singer 1995, p. 83. "' A. Heller 2003, p. 291. A very similar inscription with the same names occurs on the back of Figure 4.12. It \\as decyphered by Amy Heller and helps correct many readings in the present painting's inscription. '"' Fofth Dalai Lama, Record ofTeachings Recei•·ed, 'ol. I, p. Ill b: tje btsWI ma sgrol ma 'tlha 'khnd bka 'gdams tjts dran lnga ·; 'klrnd thab pa ·; brgjlld pa nil tje biSwr sgrol ma/;o ba chen po a 11 slta/ ·bront ston po rgjYJI ba ·, 'byung gnas/ rdog legs pa ·;shes rob/ mnga · rtS pa shes rob tg)Yll mtslwnl pu cluurg po g:hon nu rgyal mtshanl kama ba rin cen rgyal mtshanl : hang ston dar ma rgyal mtslwnl 'brom byang chub b:ang pol stabs ka ba nam mkha ·rin cen/ 'brom g=lwn nu blo grosllho ba : ug /bla ma hrab phu bol mkhan chen [p. I I 2a] dgtt'lung pa dban po bsod nams 'otV bla ma hsod nttms b:ang pol hla ma dpal /dan pol 129 R. Davidson 2005 refers to lay-reiigious quasi monks in his third chapter, p. 85. 130 The excessive repainting of the thangkas is discLL~sed in R. Linrmhe et al. 2004, "Turning a Bl ind Eye," Orientations vol. 35, no. 5. 131 132 The Drigung connection was noticed by Christian Luczanits, in connection with the depictions of the eight great adepts. See C. Luczanits 2006, p. 82 and note 26. The painting has been extensively repainted, but I assume that its icononographic contents have nm been significantly changed. "' Cf. P. Pal I 983, plate 30, P27. Tibetan laymen and laywomen, both as saints and patrons, deserve a study in their own right. 1 " 1,. See D. Jackson 2009, no. 3.50; and D. Jackson 20JO, fig. 7.11. 1 "' SeeM. Willson and M. Brauen 2000, p. 602. 151 See U. von Schroeder 2006, plate 85. 13 • See D. Jackson 20 I0, fig. 2.22. 137 'Jigs med chos ~'Y i rdo rje 2001, p. 143, and D. Jackson 1996, p. 179, note 375. 138 139 See the early painting of a Bon master in P. Pal 2003, no. 135. 153 Among Kadam paintings, a painting in the Beri style is also known, though it does not portray a Buddhist saint as its main figure. See D. Jackson 2010, fig. 4.8, a book cover whose minor figures includes several gurus. 1 " On Bengal as an imponam center during this period, see also Susan Huntington 200 I, p. 388. 155 As H. Stoddard 1996, p. 27, and J. Huntington I990, p. 3 I I, both stressed. 1"' The four Kadam deities are listed by the Fifth Dalai Lama in his Record of Teachings Received, vol. I, p. II Oa: I. The Lord of Sages (Sakyamuni) with rwo attendant bodhisattva~ (stan pa tlzub po 'i dbang po gtso ·khor gsum), 2. Avalokitesvara with two attendant bodhisattva~ (thugs rje chen po spyan ras g:igs gtso [p. I JOb] 'klzor gsum), 3. BlueAcala (rje btsu11 mi g.yo mgon po), and 4. Green TArll wirh two attendant goddesses (rje btsun sgro/ nwljang g7t gtso 'khor gsum). ""' G. Tucci I 949, p. 562. 1 " R. Linrothe 2004, p. I 5. w Cf. S. Kossak I 998, p. 68. 157 1 "' SeeM. Rhie 1997. 1.15 On the Eastern Vinaya masters and their temples seeR. David~on 2005, p. 92ff. Davidson briefly refers to Tibetan painting of the eleventh and twelfth centuries on p. J9f. 1, . On Gayadhara, see C. Steams 200 I , p. 4 7ff. 147 Compare the Tibetan Female Conson, one of two consons of Padmasambhava, in Sothe by :r Indian and Southeast Asian Art, New York, March 20, 1997, no. 76. See also S. Kossak and J. Casey Singer I998, no. 8, where a woman, apparently a female patron, stands at the right in a published early book cover; she appears at first sight to be female royalty or high nobiliry of Tiber, and the two similar figures who accompany her wear not white but red outer cloaks. But as I was kindly informed by Christian Luczanits in a personal communication, the main female who is shown seated there actually represents "the merchant's daughter and her five hundre.d maidens" who accompanies the bodhisanva Sadaprarudita in his search for the Perfection of Wisdom. The early depictions of the dress oflndian and 3 152 D. Jackson 1996 p. 167, note 336, Kao thog Si tu, p. 109.5 (55a): mkhyen bris mkhas po kong po o po bas lo h: hi :Ia ha bdun bris pa tlwb dbang gnas brtan rgya gar ma 'gran bra/. Ibid., p. 563. Dromton." 1.., J. Casey Singer 1994, p. I 14, nore 86. See also S. Kossak and J. Casey Singer I998, p. 62. 166 The possibly Indian painting of .. Maitreya and Madju!rr in discourse" that S. Kossak 2010 published as his Figure 34 has a similar arrangement of those bodhisattvas, as do the late-eleventh-century murals of ·'Maitreya and MaiijuSrT in discourse'" at Drathang Monastery (published inS. Kossak 2010, Fig. 35). 167 S. Kossak and J. Casey Singer 1998, p. 62 and Christian Luczanits, personal communication. CHAPTER See 'Jigs med chos kyi rdo rje 2001 , p. 143. See also Loden Sherap Dagyab 1977, p. 62. 141 Cf S. Kossak 2010, p. 26, fig. 13, who described it as a "ponrait of a lama, probably 64, note I; and S. Kossak 20 I 0, p. 27. "" H. Decleer 2005, note 31. "' On paintings ofPhadampa, see D. Martin 2006, in R. Linrothe ed. 2006, fig. 10.9. 135 On Shug.~eb Ani Loehen's dates and biographies, see Tashi Tsering 2007, "On the Dares of sTang stong rgyal po," in Ramon N. Prats ed. 2007, The Pa1u!ita tmd the Siddha: Tibetan Studies in Honor ofE. Gene Smith, (Dharamshala: Amnye Machen Institute), p. 276f. 1 .. Krang Dbyi-sun et al. eds. 1985, Bod tg)'O tshig mtbod chen mo. Dan Manin 2001, p. 159 and elsewhere, translated thugs dam as "high a~piration," while H. Stoddard 1996, p. 27, rendered it "mind vow.» Neither fits well here. "' Both phrases are arrested in Tibetan hagiographies, and we find the phrase jo bo 'i thugs dam gyi rten in the Guide to Reting (Rwa sgre11g dkar chag). 159 160 161 Dan Martin 2001, p. 153, helpfully indicated that the phrase was an insenion. Mai\juvajra, although with four male deities of the Guhya~arnAja mandala, also appears at the top ofS. Kossak and J. Casey Singer 1998, no. 26 (my Fig. 5. 10). J. Casey Singer 1994, p. I 13, note 79. See also S. Kossak 2010, p. 27 and note 46; translated by C. Luczanits. "' Go Lotsawa, G. Roerich trans. 1949- 53, p. 314, also cited inS. Kossak 2010, p. 37, nme 47. "'' See Go Lotsawa, G. Roerich trans. I949- 53, p. 3 15. 169 D. Klimburg-Salter I998, p. 3, footnote 4, noted the erroneoLL~ identification (by J. Casey Singer 1994, plate 17a) of a figure in monastic dress as the layman, Dromton. 170 S. Kossak 1998, p. 62. 171 See also C. Stearns 2007, p. 48 1, note 164. 172 The term phyag nos mo occurs, for instance, in connection with a statue ofTsongkhapa in the Lhasa "Cathedral" as me-ntioned by Kathok Situ in his pilgrimage guide. According to him, there stood within that temple (the Ra sa 'phrul snang gTsug lag khang), inside the Tsongkhapa Chapel (Tsong kha Lha khang) "a statue ofTsongkhapa that has been consecrated by Lord Tsongkhapa himself' (rje tsong kha poi sku rje rang gi phyag nas ma). Elsewhere in Kathok Situ's work, the term occurs many times, including these three instances: I. Seen at Riwoche (Ri bo che) in Khams, fol. I9a.2: clws sku o rgyan mgon po ·i .m um sku plzyag 11as mo ("a 'medicine' statue [sman sku] ofChos sku 0 rgyan mgon po, consecrated by the master himseU). 2. Seen at Reting, fol. 37b.6: ·brom gyi phyag nas mar bshad kyang phyis b:hengs snyom pa ·i jo 'bmm sman sku ("'Medicine' statues [sman sku] of Ati5a and Dromton, which I consider to have been erected later even though they were explained as being sacred objects consecrated by Dromton himselr'). Note that Kathok Situ, who was writing in 1918, did not uncritically accept this traditional a~seruon. 3. Seen at Taklung, fol. 46b.3: phag gru i 'dra :hal rang gis phyag nas ma ("a portrait [ 'dra : hal] of Phagmorrupa consecrated by the master himself'). In a founh instance just phyag nas occurs: Kathok Situ saw at Taklung, fol. 47a. I: byang nas phyag nas 'dir bobs rob gnos rd:u phrul ma ("an image that was consecrated miraculously by consecration grain (phyag nos] [of the master] that fell here [out of the sl'Y] from the nonh"). Some descriptions of sacred objects combine the term with other technical terms, for example: "a realistic likeness M I RROR OF THE BUDDHA 207 blessed by the master himself' ('dra sku plryttg nas ma). The term phyag nas ma was wrongly translated as "grain consecrated by" by L.A. Waddell 1885 in his article "Description of lhasa Caihedral, translated from the Tibetan," Journal of the Rayal Asiatic Society, Calculla, vol. 64-1, p. 272, note II , mistranslating it as ''grain consecrated by the eleven-faced (Avalokita, who lived in India during the time of) Kashyapa Buddha." 173 See dPa' bo gTsug lag phrcng ba, p. 709. I am not sure what the verb rduglbrdugs means here, but perhaps bothered or threatened. 1 " "' H. Stoddard 2003, p. 26; and J. Casey Singer (J. Casey Singer 1995, p. 82 and note 12), this v.>as also referred to by S. C. Das 1893, p. I I (based on ButOn's flistmy of Buddhism) and Pawo Tsuklak Trengwa (Lokesh Chandra ed. 1961 ), p. 290. 1 " Pawo Tsuklak Trengwa, p. 668. 187 Go Lotsawa., G. Roerich trans. 1949- 53, p. 257. 188 GO Lotsawa, Blue Annals (Tib. 1984 ), vol. I, p. 3 15: de nas dpon g.yog rnams kyis 'on lha khang ge mr =Ia ba gcig Ill b=lmgsl der gtsug lag klwng gi ngos Ia sku 'dro =hig bris pa ding m The iconographic errors of M. Rhie were already pointed out by H. Stoddard 1996, p. 48, note 21, who stressed that Dromton wore layman's robes and had thick curly hair. 115 D. Jackson 2010, p. 126 and fig. 6.32, guru 6b. 17 • Fifth Dalai Lama, Recard of Teachings Recei1•ed, vol. I, p.lll b: spyan ras g=igs gtso 'khor gsum pa ·; /ha 'khrid dmar khrid skyer sgang lugs su gmgs pa thob pa ·; brgyud pa. 111 178 1 "' 180 181 182 1 "' 1, . See Pawo Tsuklag Trengwa., the new edition of his history of Buddhism, vol. I , p. 697. J . Casey Singer 1994, p. 108, note 60, usefully referred to this episode, citing Pawo Tsuklag Trengwa, Lokesh Chandra ed., p. 314. A simplified version of ihat stOI)' is given by S. Kossak 20 I 0, p. 52, who also identified its subject in a surviving yet highly damaged painting with contents similar to a wall painting at Drathang (his Fig. 35). 2.08 NOTES Go lotsawa, G. Roerich trans. 1949- 53, p. 260, who briefly mentions Nagtsho's large painting. I previou~ly described the large painting in D. Jackson 1996, p. 370 and note 843, there copying a later version of the story transmitted in a standard later history of the Kadam Stages of the Path (Lam rim) teachers. I quoted from Khetsun Sangpo ed. 1971-79, vol. 5, p. 9, w ho quoted Tshe mchog gling Yongs 'd2in Ye shes rg.yal mtshan, Lam rim bla ma brgyud pa ·; mam thar, f. 181 b. I: de nas yar byon te ras khru bcu drug pa gcig Itt ri mo mklwn mkhas pa k#r$(1a byo ba rgya gar ba gcig yad pa ·brir bcug nasi stadIa jo bo 'i yi dam gyi /Ita rnams brisl de 'i ·og na phar Ia jo ba i bla mo bcu gnyis pa bris/ de nas jo bo tje nyid kyi sku tslwd khrus g=hal te brisl g.)''GS g.yon [{ll)!iS na nye gntts re /debs skur bris/ g.yas g.yon gyi mtha ·ras Ia jo bo 'i mtl=ad pa mams dangl'og na tshur klw mgog 'bram gswnla sogs pa bad stan mams chos gnM 'i tshul du brisl de 'i mdun dulo tsli ba nyid gsol bo 'deb.t pa 'i tslml du brisl de i rgyab Ia jo ba ·; bstod pa brgyad bcu pa bri.;/... I also described ihis painting in D. Jackson 1984, p. 43, n. 6. 1911 Pawo Tsuklak Trengwa, voL I, p. 698. 191 Ibid., voL I , p. 706. 192 La~ chen See, as an example, C. Baut2e-Picron 1998, fig. I. Kathok Situ (200 I ed.), p. 78, mentions seeing at Taklung a statue that he calls precisely Thub pa grong khyer ma. while rGya ston in his biography of Gongkar Kunga Namgyal, p. 136, mentions such an image made of li dkar metal that was the personal meditation object of AtiSa (jo ho tje ·;thugs dam tlmb pa grong khyer ma). Such standing images, including "sandalwood buddhas," are better known from China and East Asia. See A. Terentyev 2010, p. 5, for a nineteenth-century Mongolian xylograph of a crowned standing buddha surrounded by the sixteen arhats. Atisa's twelve main gurus are listed by Pawo Tsuklak Trengwa., p. 663t: 197 On that eulogy in eighty verses by Nagtsho, see H. Eimer 1989. "''On that locale see also R. Vitali 1997, p. 1027, note 14, and 1029, note 17, a~ noted by D. Martin 2001, p. 145, note 15. 1. , H. Decleer 1996 recorded such a reference in the bKa ·gdoms glegs bom (Satapil8ka, vol. 311 (New Delhi, 1982]), p. 290 ( 121 b) and translated the passage. 200 The Tibetan: dge bshes [{lmg thang pas jo bo ·; sk11 gcig dang/11 pa si ka 'i sk11 gcig =hal sprod kyi ras hris shin Ill che bo =hig md=ad/11 pa si kas 1/w bwm pa dang/[{lmg tltang pa gn)'is Idem du byas pa i jo bo 'i sku 'dra chen pa =hig chen po =hig md=ad pa Ia/ bal bo 'i rgyal pos skye/ ba dang/ mnga ·,is skor gsrm1 gyis bsu bo Ia sogs pa ya mtshan can sna tshogs k)-ang btis Ia bkod dol. 1111 H. Decleer 1996, pp. 45 and 48. 2112 H. Decleer also translated the passage describing those two paintings. See ibid., p. 48. par byedl de nas bsom )''GS s11 phehs nas. I owe to Michael McCormick the observation that the Kadam master holding the staff could be Potowa. See also the depiction of him holding a walking staff in HAR II 0, a nineteenthcentury Karma Kagyo painting from Kham. For "The Sage of the VajrAsana" see M. Willson and M. Manin eds. 2000, no. 14. Kathok Situ, 254.2, u~ed the term bytmg chub chen pa when describing a buddha statue within Oensa Thel: byang chub chen pa 'i sku byatns pa dang spy-an ras g=igs. 1 .. sang g; bar du yang mi rnams gus pas mchod SeealsoD. Jackson2010, pp. 108f. ; p.218, note 157; and p. 220, note 169. The normal word for minor deities appearing in such a context is de1•aputra (Tib. lha yi hu). Some Western an historians refer to them as "l'idyadhara,." such as wben the deities are floating in the sky and sprinkling flower petals, but that is not the correct word here. J. Casey Singer 1994, p. 96, note 51, refers to Stella Kramrisch 1946, The Hindu Temple (Calcutta), pp. 161 - 76, for an account of the mountain cave as a residence of ihe gods. Kundga'rgyal mtshan 1972, vo l. I , p. 197- 99. A still shoner version was located by Manin. ibid., in the history ofPawo Tsuklak Trengwa, 1986 ed., vol. I, p. 706. w Lhun grub chos 'phel, p. 124, as cited by H. Stoddard 2003, p. 61, note 58. "" H. Stoddard 2003, p. 32. The word yon is shon for yon po, and it means not straight. 205 H. Stoddard 2003, p. 37f., citing note 58: lhun grub chos 'phel 1994, p. 124. '"' Lhun grub chos 'phel 1994, Rwa sgnmg dkar chag.t, p. 130f: jo bo rje 'i thugs dam gyi rten sgrol ma jigs pa brgyad sl.yoh ma 'di nil mal 'byor pa chen pas rgya gor du b=hengs su btang stel shar phyogs sems dpa i mkhas pa i [=pas] chos grol md=ad danglnli /antra Ia b=lwgs pa 'i sgrol ma rang byon danglma ga dlwna bytmg chub chen po 'i drung du mchod rten brgyod pa b=hengs te tslwr byon nas jo bo tje .mye thang d11 b=lwgs skabs rab gnas brgya rtsa brgyad mtl=ad cing gsol bo btab pasljo bo tje Ia dam pa 'i cho.t gS!mgs pas gsung byon ma yin nollja bos dge bshes ston pa Ia gnang nas 'di Ia gsa/ bo thob dang khyod kyi 'dO(/ don t!tams cad ·gmb na.r ·ong gs11ngs pa sags byin rlabs can du g~-ags/. 200 Or perhaps read: brgyad po. eight stupas, instead of the eighth. 193 D. Manin 2001, p. 144. ""Go Lotsawa, G. Roerich trans. 1949-53, p. 932. 1 " The Tibetan: ja bo nyid kyi sku mthe bong tsam sing /ding Ia bris te ga ·ur bcug nas dpung pa Ia bwgsl nmyes mnyes 1-g)tl cher mcl=adl. It '"' K. Selig Brown 2002, p. 75 and note 44. R. Vitali 1999, Records of Tho Ling, pp. 150 and 176, mentions that the Arhat Temple at Tholing in Guge came to posses.~ a painting of the triad Atisa, rNgog and 'Brom. is not normally allowed by Tibetan grammar to suddenly switch subjects at the end from Nagt~ho lot~awa to Atisa, without some kind of marker. 195 Quoted by D. Martin 200 I, 142. It is now included in the Bka gdams glegs bom, Plw chos section, vol. 2 (kha), foL 91, Lhasa ed. This pa<t~age, according to Martin, closely resembles the oldest version of ihe story as found in the most detailed of AtiSa 's biographies, the rNam tltar rgyas pa. See H. Eimer ed. 1979, voL 2, p. 365. 2111 Pawo Tsuklak Trengwa, p. 708f. "' H. Karmay 1975, p. 34, note 134. As Christian luczanits informed me, the Avalokitesvara image made by Rinchen Zangpo and which was the same size as his father is still extant. It was published in Ulrich von Schroeder 200 I, voL I, p. 71, fig. JJ-5, as the Khatse Jowo, at Khatse near Guge in western Tibet. Its size and the broken ring finger identitY it. 15. rJe brsun pa [rJe btsun Rin po che Grags pa rgyal mtshan] 23. Chos rje [Sask-ya PaQc)i ta] ( 11 82- 1251) and his nephew 16. Chos rje pa [Sa skya Par.1<Ji ta] 24. ['Phags pa] (1235-1280) See., tor example, the parasols in Figs. 1.18c and 1.1 8d,andS. Huntington2001,fig. 18.16. 17. 'Phags pa [Bio gros rgyal mtshan] 25. Zhang dKon mchog dpal (b. 1240) 18. 'Jam skya [Nam mkha'dpal] 26. Brag phug pa ( 12TI- 1340) This painting, now in a private collection, was published by J. Casey Singer 1994, no. 32, and J. Casey Singer 1997, no. 36,; and 0. Jackson 2009, fig. 4.6. 19. dPal ldan seng ge 27. Blo gros brtan pa ( 1316-1358) 20. Chos rje Bla ma [Bia ma Dam pa bSod nams rgyal mt~han] 28. Bla ma dPal ldan tshul khrims (1333-1399) 2 1. dPal )dan tshul khrims 29. Chos rje Ye shes rgyal mtshan (d. 1406) "' The term for a thickly or completely painted painting was rd=ogs tshon in Tibetan, as opposed to har tshon, paintings made with thin washes. m "~ '" 0. Jack.~on 2009, p. 76. "• Christian Luczanits, personal communication. "' 0. Jackson 2009, p. 40. 218 Contacts between the Karmapas and Riwoche were recorded in the Taklung history by sTag lung Ngag dbang mam rgyal, p. 626: Third Karmapa, Rangjung Oorje (Rang 'byung rdo rje), was aware of the consecration of the main temple at Riwoche in about 1328, when he was in Soksam (Sog zam). The same source (ibid.) relates that the Fourth Kannapa, Rolpe Oorje (Rol pa' i rdo rje 1340-1383), pertbrmed a consecration for a stupa erected (panly) in a Chinese style for the late Choku Orgyen Gonpo, d. 1366. ,.. See 0 . Jackson 20 I0, chapter 8. "° For a contemporaneous depiction of the three Sakya founders, see 0. Jackson 2010, fig. 4.3a. Ibid., fig. 4. 1, depicts Sachen and Sonam Tsemo as gurus in a Yuan woven copy of a Pala style original. "' See G. Beguin 1977, p. 129. In the exhibition, this painting of Sachen was no. 122, and in the catalog description, Anne Chayet read some of the inscriptions. "' The names given are: "-' See the exhibition catalog, G. Beguin et al. 1977, no. 121. "' Ibid., p. 129. Beguin also referred to the catalogue of !he Christie's sale in London on July 18, 1974, no. 222, pl. 68. '" See Glo bo mkhan chen bSod nams lhun grub, Lam 'bras bu dang bcas pa 'I bla ma brgyzJd pa dang bcas pa mams kyi bris yig, Toyo Bunko, Tokyo, Tibetan manuscript no. 44, vol. ka, ff. 139a- 140a. '"' I have also discussed !his set and Lowo Khenchen's description in 0 . Jackson 1986; 0 . Jack.~on 1996, p. 78; and 0. Jackson 2010, p. 182tf. and figs. 8.4 and 8.5. >n The Tibetan name is bde mchog nag po pa ·; dbang gi brgyud pa. '" Ngorchen, 17wb yig rgya mtslw, p. 5 1.1.6 ( 102b.6): m Fifih Dalai Lama, Record of Teachings, vol. I, p. I09b: mnga ·ris rab 'byams pa /shu/ khrims ·otJ =er gyis md=ad pa 'i dkyil chog jJhrin/as limn grub kyi s/eng nas bya rgyud rigs gsum spyi 'i ras bris kyi dkyil 'khor du dbang legs par nos pa 'I b1-gy7id pa nillxub·a dha ml bad=ra pii 11il ma ha aindra bh1i til ma dya mal mri1y1li no ga rd=u nal no ga bo dhil kha che ye shes rdo Jjtfla clumg grags 'byor shes rab/ rje btsun [p. IIOa]// briSe ba chen pal rje bmm grllgs pa rgylll mtshan. "" H. Stoddard 2003, p. 4 1. "' G. Tucci 1949, p. 307. m Ibid. H. Stoddard believed one RMA depiction ofTsongkhapa (HAR 4 10) to be perhaps the closest "ponrait" of the master Tsongkhapa existing today. m This work of Akhu Ching was cite-d by Tucci 1949, p. 307. See A khu Ching Shes rab rgya ml~ho, rJe bdag nyid chen po sog.f kyi sku bm yan 'go'=hig gi lo rgyus c1mg =ad brjod pa mnyan par 'os pa 'i gtam gyi plm!ng ba. I. rOo rje 'chang (Vaj radhara) 2. Phyag na rdo rje (VajrapaQi) See also D. Martin 1997, where he described his work no. 382 as "A history of the artistic representations of various Buddhas and deities." Martin thought rje bdag nyid chen pain the title referred to the Buddha, but it actual ly refers to Tsongkhapa. 3. Saraha (Saraha) 4. Klu sgrub (Nagarjuna) 5. Sha ba ri [pa] (Savariplida) I. rOo rje 'chang (Vajradhara) 6. Lo [h]i pa (Luhipada) 2. bOag med ma (Nairlltmya) 3. Birwa pa (Virilpa) 4. Oombi Heruka 5. A Ia Ia badzra 6. Nags khrod pa 7. 'Gar pari pa (GarbharipMa) 8. bSod snyoms pa (also known as Ozaya shrf, i.e., Jay8Sri) 7. Dha ri ka pa (Parikapada) 8. rOo rje dril bu pa (VajraghaQtapMa) 9. Rus sbal zhabs (Kunnaplida) 10. SrT dza landha ri pa [sic] (Jalandharapada) II. Nag po spyod pa (Kr$Qacarin) 12. Gu hya pa (GuhyapMa?) 13. rNarn rgyal zhabs (Vijayapada) 14. Tai lo pa 9. Mi !hub zla ba [or: dPyad dka' zla ba] (Ourjayacandra) 15. Na ro pa (NarotapMa or Na<japlida) 10. dPa' bordo rje (Viravajra) 16. and 17. The Pham mlhingpa brothers II. ' Brog mi [Lo tsli ba Shl!kya ye shes] 18. Klog skya ba [Shes rab bnsegs] 12. 'Khon dKon mchog rgyal po 19. Mal Lo tstsha ba Blo gros grags 12b. Bla ma mNga' ris pa [gSal ba' i snying po] 12c. mKhon sGyi chu ba 13. Sa chen pa [Sa chen Kun dga' snying po] 14. Slob dpon Rin po che [bSod nams rtse mo] '-" For a later manual on how to paint the Stages of the Path lineages, we should also check the work of Ongul chu Bla ma Chos bzang (=Ongul chu Dharma bha dra, 1772- 185 1), "How to paint the images of the guru lineage of!he Stages of the Path" (Lam rim bla ma brgyud pa i snang bmyan 'bri tslml), in 6 folios, no. 16 in volume 5 (ca) of his collected works. It was listed in the bibliography gSung 'bum dlwr chag (SBKC, Bod ljongs mi dmangs dpe skrun khang, 1990), p. 598, as listed by Dan Martin in an unpublished list of works on art in Tibetan. 235 SeeM. Rhie and R. Thurman 1999, p. 349, in connection with figure 2.14 (HAR 595) and HAR410. 136 20. Sa chen [Kun dga' snying po] (109211 58), father and two sons M. Rhie and R. Thunnan 1999, p. 349, a~scn that there was a group ofTsongkhapa's eight close disciples, who "accompanied him on a long retreat from 1392to 1398." m 2 1. [Slob dpon Rin po che bSod nams nse mo ( 1142- 1182)] I first described the painting in D. Jackson 2010, fig. 7.34. '-"'See 0. Jackson 2010, p. 165ff. 22. [rJe btsun Rin po che Grag.~ pa rgyal mtshan ( 11 47- 12 16)] "" As Christian Luczanits suggested in a personal communication, this painting could easily MIRROR OF T HE BUDDHA 209 have been brought to western Tibet at some later stage, after being painted in central TibeL Ifit really is a work of western Tibetan an, he held that it must be one of the latest paintings that were made before !he Guge style was revived. II does conform to !he earliest representation ofTsongkhapa !hat Luzcanits knows in western Tibet, that of !he Red Temple in Tho ling. slob dpon a bha yo 'i lug.f kyi rdo 1je phreng ba ·; dbang dAyil 'khor h=hi bcu rtsa Ingar byt1S nos rd=ogs par gnang stel de 'i brgyud pa nil nfo •je 'chang I bad=ra yogi nil t1 bha yii ka rolnii yo kii bu diil do sha ba lo shri bi khyii ta de bah shri blw dral la li w bad=ral dha rma guhtal ratna ka ral padma bad=ral ramo kirtil songs rgyas dhyangsl chos kyi 1je pa11 chen rin pa che ·ol I chos kyi rgyal po chen pas dbang gson pa 'i rjes Ia dkyil 'khor de nyid du sde smxl ;d=in pa chen po gsrmg rob Ia dbang gyur pa dumas A)·ang dbang tshang bar =husl de ·1 tshe chos Ayi 1gya/ po grogs pa ·byung gnas pa 'klwr sde snod 'tl=in pa [p. 938] /nga tsam dang bcas pa ltr 'grel chen man ngag .mye ma 'i hmg stsal ba 'I h•gyud pa nil a bho yal nli ya kal ratna buddhil chos sbasl lhan sAyes gragsl dharma shn1 shiikya rgyal mtshanl ngag dbang gragsl1i11 chen gmgsl pa11 chen rin po che 'ol. "" See D. Jackson 20 I0, fig. 8.2. '-' 1 Compare !he head nimbuses of the earlier Kadam: D. Jackson 2010, fig. 7.36 and fig. 5.5; and S. Kossak and J. Casey Singer 1998, no. II . '-'' The Six Ornaments and Two Excellent Masters oflndian Buddhism were a standard iconographic grouping consisting of eight of!he greatest scholastic authorities of Indian Buddhism. According to one tradition, the "Six Ornaments» were NAgarjuna, Aryadeva, Asanga, Vasubandhu, DharmakTrti, and DignAga, while the "Two Excellent Ones» were Guoaprabha and SAkyaprabha, great expens ofVinaya. See also D. Jackson 2009, p. 121. 5. Da sha pha Ia shrr 7. bKra shis blo !dan 8. Phyogs grol 9. Chos kyi mtsho 10. Ye shes rgya mtsho I I. Chos k-yi rgyan 12. Srid pa'i dpung gcig Grags pa'i rdo rje 13. Chos grags 14. Sangs rgya~ dbyang.~ 162 peared" in !he 1980s and 1990s from Nepal in response to the insatiable demand of antiquity dealers and collectors. See J. Schick 1998, The Gods ore Leao•ing the Country. But such a large painting with that distinctive a subject matter should be possible to identitY in the future, if it turns up in a prominent private collection or is sold at auction. 9. Dharmrna gupta 10. Ratna ka ra G. Tucci 1949, p. 640. 13. Buddha gho ~a 251 Fifth Dalai Lama, Record of Teachings Receio•ed, vol. 1, p. 199a-b. The lineage included: dMar ston rGyal mtshan 'od zer 14. Ma M slhli bi ra siddhi shwa ra shrr ba na ratna p~ da 15. Bhana ra ka pul)ya dzwa dza p1l da (bhaJtiiraka is a Sanskrit title, "great lord, venerable one" Punyadvaja p!ida, bSod nams rgyal mtshan zhabs) Gong rna Grags pa 'byung gnas (a.k.a Sre paLo ts!l ba, Sa skyong Tharns cad mkhyen pa, and Chos Lnga rin po che) 16. Gongkarwa (Gongkar Dorjedenpa) 255 E. Lo Bue 1990, p. 54. 256 LoBue 1990, p. 54, note 222, refers in pa~sing to !he stupa and to Tucci's record of his visit to it: G. Tucci 1952, p. 126. ,.., D. Jackson 1996, p. 140. "" D. Dinwiddie ed. 2003, no. 99, p. 34 1. 259 160 Ramon N. Prats 2000, no. 176, p. 208, identifies the subject as Kunga Drolchok (Kun dga' grol mchog 1495- 1566). Go Lotsawa, G. Roerich trans. 1949- 53. This was first noticed in D. Dinwiddie ed. 2003, no. 99. "" II was one of many sacred objects !hat "disap- 8. Lalita badzra 250 NOTES 6. Legs sk-yes 7. Shri bha tt~ 12. Ratna kini 2.10 5. Sangs rgyas ye shes 6. Bi khya ta de ba '"E. LoBue 1990, pp. ~10. thong du yon lag drug gi khrid rd=ogs rjes su mi g.yo blo no med pa 'i dbrmg bka ·dang g=lmng drug Ia hrten pa 'I phag mo 'i byin brlabs moms Ayang gnang I de 'i lo phyi ma Ia chos kyi rgya/ po grogs pa 'byung gnas pa Ia 4. mKhas pa'i rje 4. N~ ya ka p1l da II. Padma badzra m Go Lotsawa, G. Roerich trans. 1949-53, p. 800f.; BA (Tib. 1984), vol. 2, p. 937f.: rises 3. Pad ma'i rje 16. Gongkarwa (Gongkar Dorjedenpa) 3. A bhya ka ra gupta S. Kossak and J. Casey Singer 1998, fig. 55, pp. 190-92. Go Lotsawa G. Roerich trans. 1949-53, p. 800f. On Go Lotsawa's names, see L van der Kuijp2007. 2. dBang po'i gtsug rgyan 2. Bad21a yogi or >.os H. Stoddard 2003, p. 34. 252 (Sal:yarnuni) 15. dPal Nag.~ kyi rin chen (Vanaratna) ,. For other religious lineages transmitted in Tibet by Vanaratna (Nags kyi rin chen), see the Fifth Dalai Lama, Record of Teachings Receio•ed, vol. I, p. 197b; vol. 2, p. 5a-5b; vol2, p. 147b; vol. 4, p. 162a: vol. 4, p. 322b-323a; and vol. 4, p. 349a Chag lo Rin cen chos rgyal I. bCom !dan 'das ShAkya thub pa I. Vajradhara (badzra dha ra) us Cf. H. Stoddard 2003, p. 34. dPalldan Kun bzang rol pa (a.k.a. Kun bzang rtse pa bSod nams rgyal mL~han) 190]: 1gyud pa 'i phreng br1 tlwh pa 'i brgyud pa: ,.._. Cf. P. Pal 2003, p. 151. 7 Gongkar Dorjedenpa, Record of Teachings Receil'ed, p. 189: 'phags pa jam dpal gyi don dam pa 'i mtshan yang dog par brjod pa ·; rgyud phon yon dang bctrs pa 'i brg);ud pa [p. "' See also K. Mathes 2008, p. 141, and notes 77 I- 773, in which Mathes quotes from Go Lotsawa's longe.r biography ofVanaratna and Zhwa dmar Chos grags ye shes's biography of Go Lotsawa. Another lineage ofYanaratna is !he Record ofTeachings Received ofGongkar Dorjedenpa, p. 48 1f.: pa11 chen rin po che las "' Cf. !he painting of Shangton Chokyi Lama. with Narlhang Lineage. Its last two lamas are painted smaller. See D. Jackson 2010, fig. 2.22; published as J. Casey Singer 1997, plate 46; and 1994, plate 24. " 261 ,.. Christie's Amsterdam, Oct. II , 1994, lot 146; and Christie's New York, March 2011, lm337; see also HAR 66792. On !he life and works of Lowo Khenchen, see Jowita Kramer 2008. We do find there several references to lhangkas in the index: those that Lowo Khenchen described or those !hat he wrote prayers for. Could one be for one of the two main temples in MOnlhang, capital ofLo Mustang? J. Kramer 2008, no. 297, lists the main deities beginning with the gser klumg (top-floor temple). '"' The highest attainment is buddhahood, while the ordinary attainments include all sorts of worldly boons. 266 D. Weldon and J. Casey Singer 2003, note 72. ,., G.-W. Essen and T. T. Thingo 1989, vol. 2, no. 223, p. 103. See also another statue of Lowo Khenchen in Basel Ethnographic Museum, described in G.-W. Essen and T. T. Thingo 1989, vol. 2, no. 227, height 3 718 in. ( 10 em), smaller with a label. 268 SeeJ. Kramer 2008, pp. 58-78. CHAPTER4 .,. See D. Jackson 20 I0, chapters 2 and 3. "" J. Casey Singer inS. Kossak and J. Casey Singer 1998, p. 17: "More than 80 paon11ngs have survived from Taklung monnstery; many are portraits." '"C. Luczanits 200 1, p. 136: "The comparatively large number of paintings belonging 10 or related to the Taklung School would definitely allow for the construcuon of a first, well-founded and comprehensove basos for the sty listie development and relauonshop of early Tibetan paintings. HO\'e' er, despote promising beginnings, this work has not )e! been achieved" 84.5) a "librnr)" or huge stack of hoi) books, about 10,000, that had Slit\ "ed a major fire (chos brtsegs m~ tlwb). lie mentioned (p. 88.3) an image commissioned by ChOku Orgyen Gonpo of RI\\OChe. Also in Taklung there survived unul 1920 (p. 89.2) a large number of old tftangkas, including a "fireproof' tfta,gka or Jowo AtiSa and Dromton. Here he saw (p. 90.2) a copy of the Lijiang ('Jang) printed Ktmjur. On p. 9 1.5 he lists all possible major styles of suuues, including such rare ones as chos rgyal (early Tibetan king period) and kam1a (Knrma Kagyo). His account also menuons other onteresting paintings and statues, such as (p. 92) an extremely lifelike portran ofThaglungthangpa that said ("!am not like [)ou]. )OU are [lole me]!"). m See P. Schwieger 1996. "" C. Luczanits 200 I, p. 136. m E:. de Rossi Filibeck 1994, p. 237. ""' For a more recent descnpuon of Riwoche and its temple, see Gyurme Dorje 1996, p. 462. I regret that I could not take into account the detailed study orRiwoche in Andreas Gruschke 2004, 77te Cullltral Mt>n11me111s of Tibet$ Outer Pro••inces: Khttm. l'of11me I, 17.e Xi=ang Part of Klu1111 (Bangkok: White Lotus Press). '" sTag lung Ngag dbang rnaon rgyal, p. 609. When Phagmotrupa showed Sachcn the notes, the lama remarked, "You have placed a '•ajra on the mouth of Jo sra~!" "Let me conceal it within a silk cloth,'' replied Phagmotrupa, and because the book was kept in the lobrary, it was called the "Library One" (dpe md=od ma). Nobody was supposed to teach 11 for as long as the teacher Jo sras (Sachen 's son. SOnam Tsemo) lived, it was said. On Phagmotrupa's work as the long-unrecogfliz.ed earloest major "Tinen commentary on those tnstrueuons, see C. Steams 200 I, p. 29. '" Ibid. I have found no trace of contact during the following generation, the 11me Sa pill) composed his critical doctrinal work sDom gsum rab dbye, which was the penod of the second Taklung abbot, Kuyalwa (sKu yal ha, 1191- 1236). ""' See also S. Kossak 2010, p. 169IT. "" Tnshi Lama ma) have been forced to go to Sakya and SlaY at the coun, accordong to S. Kossak 2010, p. 173. "" sTag lung Ngag dbang mam rg) al, p. 306 and G. N. Roerich trans. 1949-53, p. 628. "" sTag lung Ngag dbang mam rgyal , p. 604: 'bra/ ba bsnmg ba 'i rten mams brtsal. ""' Ibid., p. 607: 'bra/ ba bsnmg lx1 'J rten rm11us srog gi dbang po ma ·gag gi lxtr t/11 Sit fa 'ang gtad po mi ·ong. Cf. G. N. Rocrich trans. 1949-53, p. 651 : "Sanggye YarJOn ... told me that I should not separate from these objects till my death! lfl do 11, I shall doe!" "" For a sketch of the subsequc:nt hostor) o( Ri" oche see P. Sch" iegcr 1996. p. 122IT. "" sTag lung Ngag dbang mam tg) al. p. 609. "" Ibid., p. 62 I. "" Ibid., p. 311. "" Ibid., p. 640. ""' While visiting the mother monastery or Taklungthang in northern l) in late 1918, Ka~ thog Situ 1972, p. 83.6, referred to a great tire in the time of the seventeenth abbot, Namgyal Tnshi (Roam rgyal bkra shis). He described (p. hoi~ objects poled as high as a mountain (s/Qg /wlf: mar thong rten gnm1 ri /tar brtsegs), was already in notoceable decay in 1918. When he later visited Taklung itself, Kathok Situ lamented the decline of both monasteries. 191 ,.., On Taklungthangpa, see G. N. Roerich 1949/53, pp. 61~21. m On Kuyal RnlChen Gon, see G. N. Roerich 1949153, p. 621-27. 19< For the nan1es and dates of the main masters from the Gazo family in the Taklung line down to the seventeenth century, see E. de Rossi Filibeck 1994, p. 239. nos. 3 through 22 . 295 For the names and dates of lhe main masters from the Gazo family in the Riwoche line down to the early eeighteenth century, see E. de Rosso Folobeck 1994, p. 239. nos. 23 through 33. For lhe complete religious traJlS.. mission, one has 10 insen sKu zhang Rin po che bSod narns dpal (a.lca. sKu zhang Lha Kun dga' dpal) as Ia neai guru between nos. 23 and 24. Sec sTang lung Ngag dbang mam rg)al, p. 619. He was Sanggye Onpo's maternal uncle, the son of the ruler rTsad po Sho rna rn sa Jo boA mchog. ""' E. de Rossi Folibeck 1994, p. 237. ""' Kal) thok Situ, \\ho \ISited YoshO Palgyi Riwoche (dBy1 shod dPal 8)'1 Rt bo che, i.e., Kham Riwoche) early 1n has pilgrimage in late 1918, described 1n detail (p. 27-41) what he saw. He reached Rl\\oche on the fifth dav of the ninth lunar month. A few weeks lat~r (ibid., pp. 81-94 ), he traveled on to 0 Province and visited Taklungthang, probably toward the end of the tenth lunar month. At YishO Palgyi Riwoche, Kathok Situ mentions (ibid.. p. 27 .6) pigments donated by Phakpa for murals of a Hevajra (Kye rdor) temple. He also saw (p. 30) many rei igious works of an commissioned by Sanggye Onpo. On p. 35.4 he mentions very good murals painted in what he called a Ben Sl) le [these might ha\e been in the Sharro Sl) le]. He sa" (p. 37.5) a wo\'en silk thangka depocung Sanggye Yarjon (songs 18J·as yar byon gyt dar thong). He described (p. 38) paintings of a thousand Buddhas and many tantric deoties and mandalas that he considered to be in a style of Nepal. Similarly he saw the sixteen Elders painted in Beri style (hal bris g11as brwn). lie also could see (p. 38.6) bone ornaments oflhc Indian adept Ji\i!na5rT. He descnbed (p. 38.3) sites left as empty shells by Chinese [soldiers] and (p. 39.1- 2) destroyed by the centrni-Tibetan army (bod tlmag, i.e., by soldoers of the Lhasa government). He noted (p. 39.3) that one reliquary stupa (gtlung ntn) had been broken into by thieves. Unfortunately (p. 39.5), a monastic community of the Ny1ngma tradition had been largely destro)ed by a central-Tibetan army, whereas (p. 40.2) a monasuc community of the Taklung KagyO tradiuon had been left undamaged by the Tobetan soldiers. He also saw (p. 40.4-5) many excellent thangkas, though numerous sacred scriptures had been de.stroyed at Riwoche during the recent warfare. Thus (p. 40.5) Riwoche Mona.'llery, the lower plain ofTaklung, fom1erly one of the richest Buddhist sates, wnh ots three types of Per K. Sorensen and Guntram Haznd 2007 include a section on the abbatial succession ofTaklung Monastery in their book Rulers of the Celestial Plain: Ecclesiastic and Secular lftgemony in Metl•e•·al Tibet: a Study ofTshal Grmg-tlumg, section IY.8.2. See also E. de Rossi Filobeck 1994, p. 239. nos. 3 through 22. ,., J. Casey Singer 1997, p. 61. "" Heather Stoddard began investigating these paintings many yc:ars ago, writing ex penises for individual paintings. J. Casey Singer 1994, 1996 and 1997 has devoted the most attention to them. Other publocations include: G. Beguin 1990 and 1995, M. Rhie and R. Thurman 1996, and P. Pal 1997. "" This first con' ention of descent was e.xplained in D. Jackson 2010, p. 27. ,.. Thos was the fifth convention of descent in ibid., p. 33. 300 This was the eighth convention of descent explained on ibid. , p. 38. 301 This was the ninth convention of descent explained on ibid., p. 40. 302 For more on the chronological aspects of this method, see Jackson 2003. JGl K. Sehg Brown 2004, p. 31, n01e 39, q1101es from Phag mo gru pa's manual on making a guru's footpnnts. JO> See G. N. Roench trans. 1949153, p. 619. JOS The Tibetan: sku 't bkod pa du rna tlus gcig Ia mthong ba Ia sags po mang tlu b)'ung. 3"' Go Lotsawa, G. Roerich trans. 1949-1953, p. 561. m Go Lotsawa, G. Roerich trans. 1949-53, p. 619; (Tib. 1984), vol. 2, p. 728. "" See sTag lung Ngng dbang rnam rgyal, sTag MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA 211 lungchos 'byung, p. 216f; H. Stoddard 2003, p. 3 I. ,.. Go Lotsawa (Tib. 1984), vol. 2, p. 728: ·da · /Jwr kho bo bde bor gshegs pa dang 'bra/ ma myong I thugs rt>Jmd gcig pa yin g.wng I g=ims spyil du slob dpan dpan pa dang nye gnas rnams Ia bde bar gshegs pa dang kho bo 'bra/ ma myong byas pas ma go bor 'dug bde bar gshegs pa kho bo rang yin gnmgl. 31o Go 311 Go Lotsawa, BA (Tib. 1984), vol. I, p. 728f. Lot~awa, G. Roerich trans. 1949-53, p. 5 I7. " ' lbl'd ., p. 62 . ""J. Casey Singer 1997, p. 67. 327 346 ,. I am grateful to have been able to use the upublished notes ofAmy Heller counesy of the owner and Fabio Rossi. The inscriptions refer to two great lords, whose titles were Mi dbang chen pa ("Great Ruler") and Lha bu ("Divine son" or "divinity," i.e., prince?). The second is also called A mkhar, which some have a~surned to have been a family name. The most relevant pan of the inscription is: gang sku mtshan gang dpe dbyad rab 'bor boll bohengs pa de 'i bsod tU/ms mthu yis nilphun 'tshogs mngon mtho 'I dpal gyi 'byor bo yil mi dbang chen pa bsO<l nams rdo 1je dang II dad gwng rigs g=ugs yon tanrgyanldan pa 'ill lha bu a mkhar yah yum sras bcas kyill skutshe brtan =fling dpal 'byor 1gyas pa dang(!I] chab srid 'd=in pa 'i khyonltar ngas pa /all dbang b.tkyur chos /danrgyal.trid brtan par shig/1 dus 'di nos h=ung byung ba thob pad! Yab yum sras bcas can also mean "together with "' Go Lorsawa, G. Roerich trans. 1949-53, p. 569f 313 J. Ca~ey Singer 1997, p. 294, note 10, held as a basic assumption that consecration inscriptions were usually contemporary with a paint· ing. But she was also well aware that certain types of inscriptions are possibly later additions (see ibid., p. 56), such a~ those indicating consecration by Sanggye Onpo. Especially those that employ honorific (=he sa) nouns or verb forms should be examined as possible later inscriptions written to identifY a piece as an object of special sanctity for later generations. A clear example of a later inscription is the golden-lettered addition employing the honorific phrase thugs dam lags published by J. Casey Singer 1997, plate 40, below the mandala on the front(!) of the painting. 329 m J. Casey Singer 1997, note 28. Christian Luczanits pointed this out in a personal communication. •117 See D. Jackson2010, p. 10. 318 Compare also the same two Taklung abbot~ in S. Kossak 20 I0, Fig. 116, noting the 1reatment of the hair in front oftheir ears. 319 320 321 According to Taklung Ngawang Namgyal, p. 221, on Taklungthangpa's second stay at Taklung, this hut became his "precioll~ oogon grass hut ('jag spyil rin po che), together with its bla dbye." Perhaps bla bre "decorative silk canopy" is meant here by the word bla dbye, an otherwise unknown term. On Sanggye Onpo's full ordination name., see sTag lung Ngag dbang mam rgyal, p. 601. On Sanggye Onpo's life, see sTag lung Ngag dbang rnam rgyal, p. 585ffand G. N. Roerich 1949/53, p. 650ff m Thus the original proposed dating by J. Casey Singer to 1273 is implausible considering that several paintings of Sanggye Onpo exist, and surely not all were commissioned during that brief and hectic period. 323 J. Casey Singer 1997, p. 60, says Fig. 4.14 (her no. 42) has an inscription that records its consecration by Onpo, which is identical \\~th the one on this painting, her no. 41 . 3"' S. Kossak 20 I0, p. 80 (his Fig. 55). 325 J. Casey Singer 1997, p. 59. 2.12. NOTES See P. Schwieger 1996, p. 126, who mentions the prominent presence of their castle (m/Jwr) and records the titles mklwr drung and chos tje m/J1ar ba in that family during the fifteenth century. If Miwang Sonam Dorje and Lhabu Akhar were not the two nameless children of Rinchen Dorje shown in P. Schwieger 1996, p. I 31, who would have been born in ca. the 1350s, then they probably carne from been from another of the powerful families in eastem Kham relatively near Riwoche. We also need to check the Taklungpa/Gazi genealogy. JJO J. Casey Singer 1997, plate 44. 331 J. Casey Singer 1997, p. 60, says that Fig. 4.13a 3 "" See also the recent detailed conclusions of S. Kos.sak 2010, chapter 7, wn.e 'Taklung' Thanka~: Their History and Provenance Reconsidered." 3 "' See D. Jackson 2010, chapters I and 2. CHAPTER JJJ On the Taklung version of the Eight Great Siddha~. see C. Luczanits 2006, p. 85. S. Kossak 20 I0, p. I 81. ..... J. Casey Singer 1997, note 24. 335 sTag lung Ngag dbang marn rgyal, p. 624. J.l6 Cf. J. Casey Singe.r 1997, note 2 I. m Fifth Dalai Lama, Record of Teachings Received, vol. I, p. 77a. JJS Fifth Dalai Lama, Record ofTeachings Received, vol. I, pp. I JOb-111 a. 339 On Nyukrurnpa, see Go Lotsawa, p. 322. 351 R.A. Stein 1972, p. 176. 352 Or as H. Stoddard 2003, p. 29, puts it, through the practice of gumyoga, insight into the nature of primordial mind could be gradually anained. 353 J. Ca~y Singer 1994, p. 166f and fig. 21. 3" J. Casey Singer inS. Kossak and J. Casey Singer 1998, p. 17. 355 Ibid. 356 C. Luczanits 2003, p. 31 and figs. 3 and 4. Luczanits was referring to the earliest Taklung portraits and to his Fig. 6, the Cleveland tbangka with Phagmodrupa in the crown. 357 C. Luczanits 1998, p. 154 and fig. I. Concerning the Alchi portrait, A. Heller 2005 (pl. 2) hypothesized that the master locally identified as "Rinchen Zangpo" actually was founder ofDrigung order, which would fit better historically. "'' C. Luczanits 2003, p. 34. 359 Ibid., p. 35. See D. Jackson 2010, fig. 1.25. "'' As mentioned above in connection with figures I. 9 to 1.1 Ob, the example of Phagmotrupa's poruaiture wa~ briefly taken up by J. Ca~ey Singer 1995. ,., sTag lung Ngag dbang rnarn rgyal, p. 212f. 362 D. Jackson 1996, p. 69. 36l D. Martin200 l, p. 173.1narecentemail, Dan Manin kindly added that he had seen those artistic works mentioned in the biography of Phagmotrupa [by dPal chen Chos kyi ye shes] found in the Phag-gru Bka'-'bum Golden Manuscript (xeroxes available in Hamburg University, Asia and Africa Institute library), vol. I (ka), fol. 14r.6. There one finds mention of likenesses (sku 'bag) ofGampopa and Sakyapa (Sa skya pa, i.e., Sachen), and also of Dampa Gyagar (Dam pa Rgya gar, an early name for Pha dam pa Sang.~ rgya~). ""' On Naljorapa Chenpo, see ibid., p. 262. 3" 5 "'' See H. Stoddard 2003, p. 29; and R A. Stein 1972, p. 174( (her plate 42) has inscriptions that are the same as on Fig. 4.9 (her no. 41). 332 See also A. Heller 1999, plates 103 and 104, which Heller dates on the basis of inscriptions as late as circa 1550! "' See H. Stoddard 2003, p. 56, and E. LoBue 1990, p. 10. their father, mother and son." ' " J. Casey Singer 1997, note 14. Sanggye Onpo's inscription is also quoted in S. Kossak and J. Casey Singer 1998, no. 20, p. 99, note 5. " 6 Ibid., p. 6 I. Dromton was omitted when Naljorpa Chenpo received teachings directly from AtiSa. "' Another instance of dual or multiple-lineage painting of this type that carne to my attention too late to be studied in detail is S. Kos.sak 2010, Fig. 118. "' M. Rhie and R. Thurman 1996, p. 450. "" Go Lotsawa, G. Roerich trans. 1949-53, p. 612. .... On this, a ninth convention of descent, see D. Jackson 20 I0, p. 40. 365 GO Lotsawa, Blue Annals (Tib. 1984), vol. 2, p. 719: de nos snyel der b=lwgs /sana bla ma rmag Ia phag ma gru pa 'i sku 'bag cig hskur b)lmg ba /ttl khyod rang yang mclwd pa Ia e ·ong :er bas mar me 'i Tg}ll g=tmg nas mdwd pa Ia byo11 pasI 'di ·, rtsar ctg ma byatr no snyam pa ·, :Jre bead 'khnmgsl de nos dbus su 'byon ... . .. K. Mathes 2008, p. 140, citing Zhwa dmar Chos grags) e shes's biograph) of Go L.01sawa -'"' The Tibetan, according to the Go LotSawa, BA (Tib. 1984), vol. I, p. 671: 'jag spyil tra b:hugs pa 'I sku 'dra rin po cite 'di nil gshegs rjes kJro nor bu slob moms k)•ts smtm dang rm pa che dang dar :ab Ia sogs bsl'l's pa 'i 'jim pa Ia gd1111g thai mang du btab ste b:hmgsl bym rlabs kyang shin tu chel gsung yatrg /an ma11g du byotrl byi bas sku 'i gdan g)'l :ur tras sa crmg :ad brus pa lol dkon gttyer Ia gsutrg byon nos bp gtwd pa byas pa ·, rJes moms bkag sa de moms Ia "' ma byas te b:hengs pa ·i sku 'dra ·wrg mmrg du yod pa lal byr sa ma :hes grogs! b:o byed pa ·i tshe sku'1 cha .•has tras /hag po mtuus dras pa 'i sa Ia ru ma byas te b:hengs pa ·,sku rnanrs Ia 111 dms st1 ma :Ires grags~ Cf. II. Stoddard 2003, p. 41 , note 63. Go L.otsawa, G. Roerich trans. 19-19-53, p. 569. rTa tshag tshe dbang rg~al, Lho rong chos 'bJ-wrg, p. 326, also describes 1n derail the making of statues afier his death, with some differences. "" The Tibetan, p. 671 : chos khnla b:Jrugs pa ·, sku 'dro 'd1 yatrg mar pa lho Sll)1ng bya bas matrg ·gar sgatrg du b: hetrgsl rags pa grub pa tra ga nos ·ong., clra med pa 'i jo mo mo cig ilyrmg naslnga ·; bla mode 'di kho no 'dral do bcas bcos ma byed :er bas nga mtshar du g:rmg stel chos khri ·i stetrgs su spyan dratrgs tillS b:hugs su gsol ba ym nol. the purported dating of the sculptute to the 13th centul).~ "" According to Dan Manin, "ho discusses the inscription '"his Tibeto-L.og1c Blogspot, "I believe that the lama rinche11 epithet is just an alternative version (more amenable to versified contexts) of lama rmpoche (bla-ma ritr-po-ch~). and the Iauer IS a WS) of referring to one's 0\\11 teacher that was initiated by Pagmodrupa (I didn't make this up - for testimony on this point see Tire Collecud Writi11gs [Gswrg- 'bum] of 'Brt-gwrg ChOH')t :Jig-rten·mgon-po Ri,-chen-dpal, reproduced photograph1call} from the 'Bn-gung Yangre-sgar xylographic edition, Khangsar Tulku (New Delhi 1969), vol. 4, p. 385)." ru Ibid., (Tib. 1984), vol. I, p. 361 f. ""'lbid.,( Tib. l984),vol. l,p. 439. 3., Ibid., (Tib. 1984), vol. I, p. 440. ""Go L.otsawa, G. Roerich trans. 1949-1953, p. 616. See also ibid., (Tib. 1984), vol. I, p. 724: de Ia sp)>r stag l1111g 'dt 'gro ba ·; mgotr pa rin pa ches dgrmg /o drug cu b:hes pa sa mo glatrg g1 to Ia sku Ius A)'l bkod pa bcu guJ1S md=ad pa ·; tslrel skulu.r kyi bkod pa gcig gis stog lung gis thams ead :!tabs kyis bcags shitrg bym gis brlabs tel stag lutrg gi sa thams cad sngags 'dam dang chuthams cad sngags chu md:ad nasj. 3"' Christian Luczanits kindly referred me to this passage. "' sTag lung Ngag dbang mam rgyal, sTag lung chos 'bJ•mg, p. 648; and H. Stoddard 2003, p. 41. ,. rGyal sras can mean either pnnce or conquer· oc's son (1.e., bodhisam a). ,.. Kathok Situ, p. 256.1 . 1•• This was suggested to me by Dr. K. Tanaka. ... , As listed by Alexander Schiller in his unpublished Ph.D. disserration, "Die Vier YogaSrufen" (llamburg Uni,e<Sit) , 2009), p. 429, the titles of' ol. I were: 392 dPol phag ma gru pa ·i mamtha r dpal chen clros yes md:tul po [ka 1]1 See bSod naons rgya mtsho 1991, no. 44. "" Ibid., p. 10. ,.. Kathok Snu, p. 251.4: gSang 'dwr nri bsAyod pa tho so gnytS po. 395 Cf A.lleller 1999. no. 55. Pirog mo gru pa ·; rnam thar chos rjes md:OLI po (ka 2]1 "" 1 am grateful to the 0\mer for kindly providing this data. Pirog mo gru pa nyid Ayis gswtgs po 'i sAyes robs chen mo [ka 3]1 ,., See C. Luczanits 2006, p. 82 and note 26. '"' Cf D. Jackson 2010, chapter 2. Bla rna gtsang b:lrer rin chen rgyalnrtshon Ia gsungs pa ·, sAyes robs dang lung bstan [ka 4 j 1mTshon cho gsang ba ·, md:od sgo dbye ba ·, sAyes robs (ka 511 '"" For the typ1cal nliga king form, see 'Jigs med chos k)ardo rje 2001 , p. 1216. ""' Tatshak Tshewang Gyal (Rta tshag tshe dbang rgyal), U10 IY)IIg clros 'bytmg, p. 326. dPal plrog mo gm pa 'i sku/us kyl bk{){/ pa bcu gnyis [ka 6 ] .ool ""Katho k Situ., p. 254f. (fols. 12Th-128a). "" Compiled b) Dan Martin from The Collected Works (Gsrmg 'bwu) ofPhag 1110 gru pa rDo r;e rgyal pa, "reproduced from rare mss. from India, Nepal. and Bhutan, Gonpo T.~heten" (Gangtok 1976), vol. I [ka]. 111 Kathok S1tu, p. 250.5: ·gro mgon 'jag sAyil sku b:hi sogs gs01rg ba-; lhar grogs. ·''' G. Roerich u·aMiated the term 'jag spyilas "grass hut." See G. Roerich trans. 1949-53, p. 569. m Kathok S1tu, p. 254.6. "' Ibid., p. 255.5. "' D. Weldon and J. Casey Singer 1999, p. 139. I am grateful to C. Luczanits for bringing the statue to m) auenuon. ,. D. Weldon and J. Casey Singer 1999, p. 147, note 3 10. m Dan Martin, Tibeto-Logic Blogspot. says: "'nteresung that the scribe for the inscription does no1 recognize T1betan punctuation con,•enuons go,eming the usc of tslreg immediately before the shad (it uses tslreg in every case, all of them 'incorrect'). The 'a-chu11g beneath the ·m • in na-m6 is torally unknown and superfluous (ignorance of Sanskrit is not the excuse it's made to be). The 'ghu-ru spelling for Sanskrit guru is known to a mid-13th century manuscript we have onen mentioned before, the Zhije Collection (although not limited to it). This is at least consistent with I . dPal phag mo gm pa 'i mom thar rin po che ·, plrl'l'ng ba dpol chen chos k;• )>'shes kps md:ad pa (fol. 29, the last fol., missing), pp. .H;2. 2. (rNam thor mi :ad pa tgya mtsho ·; gter). 12 folios m1ssing_ 3. tiPa/ phog mo gru pa ·i sk)>'s robs chen nro, pp. 63-74. 4. Blama gtstmg g:lrer rin chen rgyal mtslrtm Ia lung bstan pa dang skyes robs, pp. 75-86. fol. 6 missing. 5. mTshon cha gsang po ·i md:od sgo dbye ba '1 sAyes rob.t. fol. 1 missing, pp. 87- 92. 6. dPal phag mo gru pas sku Ins kyi bkod pa bcu gnyis md:ad pa, pp. 93-126. "" SeeR. Sakaki ed., number 3239. That possibility was suggested to me by Dr. K. Tanaka 1n a personal communication. ..., See R. Sruki ed., number 3273. "" The inscnption: sgom po rm chen rdo rye ytsl bla mt1 cho.r I'J• rin chen dpal... AJ;{! (:lr]ab?... .... ryes skab.< dang... nr... gsol ba btab nas :hus pa... gong? mig [gis?] mtlrong tlrOJ reg pagong! . .. rd:ags par shog! c/ros r;e ·, mam thor?"'! [trgo] mtslwr? I'Je.r 'jug tlrams ead .<lob par .tlrog! grags 'od mtslro pa b:atrg ??? I. I am grateful to Karl Debreczeny for photographing this inscriptiOn. ..., SeeK. Selig Brown 2004. p. 68. note 14. A bumon is an inflamation and swelling of the bursa at the base of the big toe, with a thickening of the skin. .,.; K. Sehg Brown 2003, pl. 8. ..,. K. Sehg Br0\\11 2004, pl. 26. ""' A. Heller 2005, p. 5. "" Dpa' bo gTsug lag phreng ba, p. 81 &f. ...., See Go Lotsawa, G. Roerich trans. 1949-53, p. 552ff. "" Go L.otsawa, G. Roerich trans. 1949-53, p. 552. See also Go L.otsawa, Blue Annals (T1b. 1984), vol. 2, p. 652. .., Ibid., p. 552: 4'o those possessed of excellent understanding, he openly proclaimed that he was the Buddha of the Past and Future, as well MIRROR OF THE BUDDH A 2.13 as the Lord of the Sal.:yas ("'Shakyendra," i.e., Sakyam uni) of the Presem Age." 410 Groups of statues that are arranged before a background of stylized mountain cragca 'es are also called brag rima: for examp le. the sixteen arhaiS: gnas brtan brag ri ma. 411 • J&gs med chos kyi rdo rje 200 I, p. 120 I, explains l.he six mythical animals on l.he backrest of a buddha as symbo lizing the six perfections. J. Casey Singer 1995, p. 96, note 37, refers to J. Aubo)er 19-19, u Trone et son symboltsme dans 1'/nde m1citn11t (Paris: Presses Univcrsitaires de France), pp. I0H8, who explamed the significance ofl.he Indian throne wil.h animals, name!) l.he assemblage of natural and supernatural forces and l.heir obeisance to him or her "ho sat upon 11. In India it was reserved for those rare rulers who became umversal emperors (cakramrtm•), buddhas, bodhisanvas, or deities, and was "not merely a seat, but a setting of great symbolic significance:• 4" 4" This parallels closely l.he observations of A. Coomaraswamy l.hatlndian pocll'llllure observed two apparently contradictory approaches: one that was informed by observation of l.he subject and the ol.her that followed prescriptions for •deal types. See J. Casey Singer 1995, p. 82, who cites Ananda Coomaraswamy 1943, '"The Tmditional Conception of Ideal Ponraiture," in Why Exhibit llor.b ofArt? (London: Luzac and Co.), pp. 111-118. On ponraits in South Asia in general ond in the ninth and tenl.h centur ies in panicular, see P. Kaimal 1999 and 2000. C. Bautze-P~eron 1995, p. 60 and note II. '~4 Dung dkar Blo bzang 'phrin las 2002, p. 11 6, defining k/11 dga 'bo. 4 " A. Heller 2005. 41• See S. Kossak and J. Casey Singer 1998. no. 15. 4" Drawn by Wangdrak ofShek ar ( 192>-1988). 411 Legdrup Gyatsho (ca 1927/28- 1984),the monk-painter from Nalendra Monastery in Phenpo, was l.he son of l.he Nalendra painter Thongmon Topa SOnam Chodzin (mThong smon stod pa bSod nams chos 'dzin, ca. 1910-1957?) and Yeshe Lhadron (Yc shes lha sgron). He led l.he painting of the murals in the first Tibetan Buddhist monaster) at Lumbini, Nepal, from 1972 to 1974. 4 .,. See Carola Roloff2009, p. 9, who doseusses l.he modeling of Red mda' ba's biography on l.he twelve deeds of l.he Buddha, saying that it was commonly done by other Tibetan biographen. CHAPTER6 "' 1 am gratcfulto David Jackson for mitiating l.has anicle, which origanally was simply planned as a new version of my earlier study, '"The An-Historical AspectS of Dating Tabetan An," deri' tng from a lecture delivered at a symposium, Dating Tibetan An, organized by l.he Kunsthaus Lempertt, Cologne, November 17 to 18, 2001. While two ofl.he three e.xamples in l.he ocaginal anicle are republished here, l.he focus of the Study has been altered toward l.he early saddha, hierarch, and Iineage depictions documented in l.hesc examples and what l.hcy tell about their early usage. .,. I am !honking here not only ofl.he Himalayan Art Resources (hup://www.himalayanan.org/), henceforth referred to as l-IAR, but also of The Tibetan Buddhast Resource Center (http:// \nw..tbrc.ocg/), heocefocl.h TBRC. ..,, InS. M. Kos.sak, and J. C. Singer, St•cred 11sions (New York : The Metropolitan Museum of At!, 1998), where many ofl.he earliest l.hangkas are published foe l.he first time, l.he mo aul.hors could not compromase on one chrono logical hypothesis for dating l.he objects. Thus, l.he object~ are dated and arranged according to the two chronologiesof l.he authors, of" hach neal.her one as ec'<Piatned any., here, resulting on a ral.her confused picture of the early mediaeval development of Tibetan an. "' For a general assessment ofl.he usage of these methods in l.he study of Tibetan an, see C. Luczan ots, "Mel.hodological Comments Regarding Recent Research on Tibetan An,'' ll'ie~~er airsch rijlfor die KlU1de Sadas1ens 45 (2001). 125-45. "' 0 "'1 S. Kossak 2010, p. 73, citing J. Casey Singer 1995, p. 85, and J. Casey Singex inS. Kossak and J. ~y Singer 199&, p. 17. S. Kossak 20 I 0, p. 73. .w PraiYeka buddhas are depicted wil.h smaller pcoruberances. 2.14 NOTES '" 1 ha' e OOled l.his already more than a decade ago. C. Luczantts, ''On an unusual painung style in Ladakh," on The Inner A.rian International Style 12th-14th Cenlllries. Papers presented at a panel ofthe 7th seminar ofthe lnremnrional Associationfor Tibetan Studtes. Gra: /995, ed. D. E. Klimburg-Salter, and E. Alhnger, Proceedangs ofl.he 7th Seminar of the International Association for Tibetan Studies, Graz 1995 (Wien: OsterrcachiscbeAkad· emae der Wissenschaften, 1998. '" For overviews and large pictures, cf. R. Goepper, "Clues for a Dating," Asiatl.rche Slll<lien: aitsch rifl der Schwei=erischen Gestllschafl fW' Asienkunde I Ewdes_ M1a11que.s: RenJI! dt Ia Sociire Swsse d'Etudes A.!iatiques 44, no. 2 ( 1990): 159-75 , and R. Goepper, and J. Poncar, A/chi (London: Sennd ia, 1996), 2 12 and 216( "" Thas 1dentificauon is based on l.he iconographic appcamnce of the figure, having the right hand in front of the breast and the left on l.he hap as if holding vajra and bell in l.he respecU\e positions. It is to be noted, ho\\e,e r,l.hat m early western-Himalayan an l.he iconographies of Vajradhara, Vajrao;a nva, and even Vajrapl!oi have not been as clearly distinguished as one \\OUld expect "' Possibly white was used to contrast l.hem woth Tilopa and N!iropa, who arc dark brown (Goepper. and Poocar, A/chi, 216), butl.he unusual color may also 1ndieate l.hatl.hcy are foreagners to l.he region. m Besides Alchi, ~1c Iiule pub! ished monuments of Mangyu and Sumda have to be iocluded in l.he comparisons (see C. LUC2811its, Buddlust Scalpt we in C/ay(Chicago . Serindia, 2004), 124-95). m The two monks are identified in D. P. Jackson, "Lama Yeshe Jam) ang," Tht Ttber Jouma l XXVII, no. I & 2 (2002): , 164. On Gan1popa and the famihal inheritance of his monastery seeR. M. Davidson, Tibetan Renaissa11ce (Ne\\ York: Columbia University Press, 2005): 282- 90. .,. The pnncipal chronological work on Tibetan art has to be credited to G. Tucci, Tibetan Painted Scrolls, 3 vols. (Roma: La Librcraa dello Stato, 1949), still used as a base in many respects. 4lll o• Dung dkar Blo bzang phrin las 2002, p. 2031, liSlS l.he pceseoce of \I heels on l.he palms and soles as the second of thony-two characteristic deriving from a buddha's previous acts of generosity. ..,. S. Kossak 199912000, p. 5 and S. Kossak 2010, p. 73. pubhcations favor the traditional date agaanst all evidence. " 0 Bes ides more detailed studies on s ingle monuments, a cenain area or l.he an of a certain Buddhast school D. P. Jackson, A History of Tibetan Painring: The Great Tibetan Paimtrs and Their Traditions (Wien: Verlag der Osterreichischen Akadcmie der Wissenschaften, 1996) •s most notewonhy for itS enormous weall.h in historical information on an_ Jackson now is refining l.his earlier work in a senes of exhibation catalogues ofwhach this is the . l.hird one, the earlier two being Jackson, Davad P. Patron and Pamter: Situ Pa11chen and the Ren•·al ofthe Encumpmenl Style. New York. Ruban Museum of An, 2009, and Jackson, David P. The Nepalese Legacy In Ttbeum Paintmg. New York: Rubin Museum of Art, 2010. D.P. Jackson, "A PaantingofSa-Skya-Pa Masters," Berliner lndologische Stud/en 2 ( 1986 ): 181-91 , had already pointed out this problem more l.han two decades ago. ., As l.he hook ofN. Tsering, and A. Arya, Alc/11. the /,Mng Heritage ofLadakh (Leh-Ladakh: Central Institute of Buddhist Studies & Likar Monastery, 2009) shows, even' ery recent '" TBRC P1845. J.>O TBRC P1841. uo The complete mseription runs as follows (m· eluding l.he unconventional spellings): "II bdag dge slong Tshul khrinu 'o d ces bgya bo 11 :xdus gsum gi smtgs JID'OS thams cud A)i sku gmm thugs k)·r bdag ny 1111 [name of each deotyfteacher with the followang veneration formula] ... Ia phyag 'tslwl =hing skyabsu 'chi ·o I "I the monk called (ces bya bo) Tshul khrims 'od with my own (bdag nyid) body speech and mind of all the budd has of l.he three worlds pay homage and take refuge to (sA)Yibs su mchi ba) ... (l.he respeeti\e deityfleacher]". .., See D. L. Snellgrove, and T. Skorupski, Clllturai/Jeritage ofLadakh I (Warminster: Aris & Plnllips, 1977) , 77- 78, and the detailed Sludy of R. Goepper, "Great StOpa," Artibus Asrae Llll, no. 112 (1993): 111-43. m Onganally, only Snellgro•e, and Skorupsk~, Cult11ral Hmtag e of LiK/akh I, 78, descnbed the stiipa shortly and also noted !hat the teachers represented in the inner .<llipa have a context here. Although I have mentioned the lineage in several publications, only C. Luczanits, "Aichi and !he Drigungpa School," in Mei shou wan11ian- Long Life Without End. Festschrift i11 Honor ofRoger Goepper, ed. J.-h. Lee-Kalisch et al. (Frankfurt a.M.: Peter Lang, 2006 is a more detailed study of the relevant Drigungpa panel. Denwood (London: Laurence King Publ., 1997, fig. 43, who identifies the main image a~ Onpo Lama (Sangs rgya.~ dBon Grags pa dpal 1251- 1296), and the others in private collections (A. M. Rossi, and F. Rossi, Selection 1994 (london: Rossi publications, 1994), no. I 0; Singer, "Taklung Painting., fig. 41, again identified a.~ Onpo Lama). This composition is also found in a thangka in rather poor condition in the Koelz collection at the Museum of Anthropology at Ann Arbour, Michigan (C. Copeland, Tankas fivmthe Koel= Collection, vol. 18, Michigan Papers on South and Southeast Asia (Ann Arbor: The Universiry of Michigan, 1980), 98), which is to be counted among the Drigungpa paintings referred to above (n. 25). "' Snellgrove, and Skorupski, Culwrallleritage ofLadakh I, 77- 79, followed among others by Goepper, "Great Stapa", identified the siddha as Naropa and the teacher opposite him as Rinchen Zangpo (Rin chen bzang po). "' R. N. linrothe, Holy Mad11ess (Chicago and New York: Serindia Pub) ications in a.<>Sociation with Rubin Museum of An, 2006), Cat. no. 79, while D. Martin, " Padampa Sangye," in Holy Madness. Portraits ofTamric Siddhas, ed. R N. Linrothe (New York: Rubin Museum of Art, 2006), studying early depictions of this siddha in the same volume, does not refer to the Alchi depictions. This siddha, usually depicted crouching and holding a twig and a ftute, is also found in a prominent position at the bottom of the dhofi ofBodhisattva ManjusrT in the Alchi Sumtsek (Goepper, and Poncar, A/chi, 102, 109), and is also depicted in the niche of the Assembly Hall ofSumda Chung, a monument decorated by artists of the same painting school(s) as Alchi. A similar dark-skinned siddha is depicted in Example 2 (see below). " 6 ' 47 See also Snellgrove, and Skorupski, Cultural lferiwge ofLadakh I, pl. 13, and Goepper, "Great Stllpa", fig. 14. For the usual depiction of teachers during the 13th century, compare, for example, Kossak, and Singer, Sacred J.lisions, nos. 5, II, I 7, 18, 19,26,30,and 51. "' Compare also the teachers in the Great Stilpa in Goepper, "Great Stapa", figs. 15 and 16. " 9 " 0 In the meantime, I have studied this composition in detail, Luczanit.~, "Aichi and the Drigungpa School" and have also shown that it is characteristic for early Drigung School painting (C. Luczanits, ''A First Glance at Early Drigungpa Painting," in Studies in Sino-Tibetan Buddhist Art. Proceedings ofthe Seco11d International Confuence on 71bewn Arclweology & Art. Beijing. September 3-6, 2004, ed. X. Jisheng et al., The Monograph Series in Sino-Tibetan Buddhist Studies (Beijing: China Tibetology Publishing House, 2006). Snellgrove, and Skorupski, Cultural Heritage ofLadakh I, 78, note with regard to this representation: "Such a painting would certainly seem to pay Rin-chen bzang-po full honours as an acknowledged Buddha-manifestation." " ' For example, of the teacher representations in Sacred Vi.rions referred to in note 23 only no. 17 has flanking Bodhisattvas. In terms of composition, too, this privately owned painting executed in a unique style is the closest comparison to the Ale hi depiction. Other examples with flanking Bodhisattva.~ are three paintings of the Taglung School from the late 13th and early 14th centuries: one in the Musee Guimet (MA 6083 ; G. Beguin, Les Peiutures du Bouddloisme 71bbaiu (Paris: Reunion des Musees Nationaux, 1995), 482- 84; J. C. Singer, "Taklung Painting," in Tibetan An. Towards a definition ofstyle, ed. J. C. Singer, and P. '" Compare for example D. E. Klimburg-Salter, Tabo (Milan- New York: Skira - Thames and Hudson, 1997), 220- 25 and figs. 45, 139, 151, and 23 I. "' The term "new schools" refers to the schools originating from the II th to the 13th century (Sakya and the diverse Kagyo branches), whic.h distinguished themselves from the Old School (Nyingma School) and the more scholastically oriented Kadampa by their promotion of highest yoga tantra teachings. An interesting question is, when such teaching traditions were first noted in the literature. One of the earliest mentions may be a short text by Zhang g.Yu brag pa brTson 'grus grags pa ( 1123- 1193), "rGyud pa sna l~hogs [Diverse Lineages]," in Writings (bKa 'tloor bu), ed. K. s. Don brgyud nyi rna (Palampur: Sungrab Nyamso Gyunpel Parkhang, 1972. In a personal communication (July 18, 2001 ) Dan Martin, who pointed out this text to me in another context (the painting in Example 2), called this text a proto-gsan yig, that is a predecessor of the texts dedicated to the teaching traditions (on this genre and its use for an history see Example 3 below). Zhang g. Yu brag pa himself is depicted on a famous early tapestry in the Potala collection (R. Dorji et al., Bod-kyi-tlumg-ga I Xi=ang Tangjia (Beijing: Wenwu chuban~ha, 1985), no. 6). '"Although this is certainly an oversimplification, one can even suppose that the success of this concept ultimately led to a counter-development in the old schools, in pan.icular to the treasure (gter ma) tradition of the Nyingmapa (rNying mapa). m PrevioLL~Iy published in Kossak, and Singer, Sacred J.lisions, no. 13; J. C. Singer, and P. Denwood, eds. Tibetan Art: Towards a Definition ofStyle (London: Laurence King, 1997); J. C. Singer, "Painting in Central Tibet., ca. 950-1400," Artibus Asiae 54, no. 112 ( 1994): 87- 136. .,. For a table of the different Kagyo schools see, for example, Tsering Gyalpo et al., Civili=ationattloe Foot ofMount Sham-po, Beitr!lge zur Kultur und Geistesgeschichte Asiens Nr. 36 (Wien: Osterreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, 2000), p. 230. " ' G. N. Roerich, The Blue Annals (New Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1988), p. 552. By contra.~, from the story of his life as told inK. K. Gyaltsen, The Great Kagyu Masters (Ithaca: Snow lion Publication, 1990), p. 205-63, it appears that his pupil Jigten Gonpo introduced this notion (cf. in particular p. 206). The latter also wrote a hagiography of his teacher. Gene Smith suggested looking in the collected writ- ings (gsung ·bum) ofPhagmodrupa for further clarification of his position in this regard. "' See, for example, G. Beguin, Art esotirique de 1"/Jimti/aya (Paris: Reunion des musees nationaux, 1990), no. 2 (MA 5176); Kos.~ak, and Singer, Sacred J.lision.r, no. 18; Singer, "Painting in Central Tibet, ca. 950-1400", 25; Singer, "Taklung Painting., figs. 36, 37, 42, and 44. S. M. Kossak, "Early Central Tibetan Hierarch Portraits: new perspectives on identification and dating," Oriental Art XLV, no. 4 ( 1999): 2-8, p. 5, notes that the auspicious wheel on the sole of the feet ofTaglung Thangpa Chenpo show that the lama is an enlightened being. ,,. See Luczanits, "A First Glance at Early Drigungpa Painring." "'' See A. Mignucci, "Three Thirteenth Century Thangkas: A Rediscovered Tradition from Yazang Monastery?," Orie111ations 32, no. 10 (200 I): 24-32. ' 61 The above mentioned depiction of Zhang Rinpoche (note 29). ' 62 Somewhat on the periphery of that context is the depiction of a gNyos hierarch, a secular teacher, on a well-known thangka formerly in the Jucker collection, which is also to be anributed to around 1200(see E. Allinger, "A Gnyos Lineage Thangka," in Buddhist Art and Tibetan Patronage Ninth to Fourteenth Centuries, ed. D. E. Klimburg-Salter, and E. All inger, PlATS 2000: Proceedings of the Ninth Seminar of the International Association for Tibetan Studies, leiden 2000 (Leiden: Brill, 2002); E. All inger, "Nyo Ma~ter," in Tibetan Paiming. The Jucker Collection, ed. H. E. Kreijger (london: Serindia Publications, 200 I). A painting from the time of !he third Karmapa with footprints ha~ similar features, but is no longer nearly a.~ explicir as it represents Buddhas a level (row) above the Katmapa lineage (see Singer, "Painting in Central Tibet, ca. 950-1400", fig. 32). ' 61 Beguin, Art esoll!rique de I Himtilaya, no. 2 (MA 5176); D. P. Jackson, "The Last "P8J)<Jita" of Nor: A Biographical Sketch of Nag-dbari-bsod-nams-rgyal-mtshan, the Wanderer from gTsaoi-rori," in Studio 71belica et Mongo/lea {Festschrift Manfi"ed Taube), ed. H. Eimer et al., Indica et Tibetica (SwisttalOidendorf: 1999, 76, fig. I (cf also 78, pl. I). See also K. H. Selig Brown, ed. Eternal Prese11ce. Handprints and footprints in Buddhist art (Katonah, NY: Katonah Museum of An, 2004). '"' D. Martin, "Painters, Patrons and Paintings of Patrons," in Embodying Wisdom. Art. Text and lmerpretation in the flistory of Esoteric Buddhism, ed. R. Linrothe, and H. H. S0ren~en, SBS Monographs (Copenhagen: The Seminar for Buddhist Studies, 200 I, p. 155f., mentions an interesting example demon~trating this shift in paintings recorded of sPyil phu mona~rery. While the second abbot, lha lung gi dbang phyug Byang chub rin chen ( 1158-1232), was depicted along with his nephew to either side of an eleven-headed Avalokitesvara, the third abbot, Lha 'Gro ba'i mgon po was shown in the centre of the painting surrounded by the 16 Arhats. .., I disregard here a thangka with a depiction of a teacher in the Metropolitan Museum of An anributed to as early as the late II th century, Kossak, and Singer, Sacred J.lisions., no. 6, for MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA ZI5 t\\O reasons; firstly the in$cription on which the daung as OOsed and which reponedly is difficult to mterpret (ad. 64, n. 1), has not been published and thus cannOt be •erified, and secondl) !has teacher deptction need not be read as depacung the teacher as a Buddha, as he is onl) shown "uh t\\0 Bodhisall\as(Maitre)a and MaiiJuSrl} ho' enng tn the sl') abo' e him and he holds a rosat) in hts hands. .... Thas de' elopment can also be seen as precondauonmg the establishment of the first reincamauon hneage after the Second Kannapa Kannapaksha (Karma pak shi 1204-83) in the course of the 13th century (see the fascinating account tn M. T. KapStein, 111e Tibetan Animtfauon of Buddlusm (New York: Oxford Universuy Press, 2000), panicularly p. 97- 100). "'' The comparisons cued here are far from being complete. A more careful and detailed analysas of the teacher depictions and their interrelationship from an iconographical and iconologtcal viewpoint would certainly enable one to dilferentiatc difl"crcnt shades of(self?) representation and in this way also help 10 date comparable thangkas where the central figure can not be readily identified. ... I first had the chance to study this fascinating painting when it was still in the Jucker collection, the collector and his wife providing me with plenty of opponunity tO examine the piece as "ell as "onderful hospitality. Funher, the present analysis of this painting would not ha•e been possible without the generous input of Dan Manm "ho not only pro\ ided me \\ith sources I "ould ne'er ha\e found myself but also shared my enthusiasm about this painting. .,. B. E. KreaJgcr, Tibetan Pamting (london: Senndaa Pubhcauons. 200 I), no. 18. l·lis discussaon as darected towards a general reader and thus does not mention the interesting questiOns the pamung poses. In addition, his entry does not adenllf) tng the middle siddhas, and-despue the fact that he thought to recognu..e t\\O Kannapa teachers (cf. below}-he calls the pamung a Taglung painting. .,. Jackson, Patron and Palmer, 39-42 and fig. 3.1. "' On the early representations of the eight mahOsiddha see C. Luczanits, "'1l!c Eight Great Siddhas," in lfoly Madness. Portrait.t ofTamnc Siddha.r, ed. R.N. Linrothe (New York: Rubin Museum of An, 2006. "' I owe thas crucial reference to Dan Manin, who even provtdcd a copy of the text. The paragraph below is taken of his tran$cripa of the text published in Palampur: dpal dlfYC'S po rdo IJt /fum cig skyes po ·; dlKmg du byas 11a I bcom /dan "das /444/ dpltfll£ RU AM bsdud pet po Pt!YAG NA ROO RJ£ Ia bshad I de byang chub ums dpa · BLO GRC5 Rt.v cnc.v Ia b.rhad I de byang chub sems dpa · bram =e S< R.< IIA Ia bshad I des ROO RJ£ DRtL BlJ B.< Ia bshad I des l-«.\" uc; AIED I'A "t ROO RJ£ I des DGA ·B.< "t ROO RJ£ I des ROO RJ£ GLH\ '-' Ia bshad I des A PtiYA .u JU Ia bshad I des '10" gar lho phyogs Ayu gro11g klt)vtr so 110 tha11g pu ri ro sku "khnmgs po ·,mal "byor gyi dbang plryug brtul :hugs k)"ls spyod pa ba SHRJ B.<t RO JS.< -'-' B.<OZIIA B.< Ia bshad I des SI'IUXG B.<X OtAXCi Ia rgyol g)"l ftmg pur bshad pa "o II Zhang g.Yu brag pa brTson ·grus grags pa (IIH-1193), -rGyud pa sna L~hogs [Di'erse Laneagcs] .", p. 443.7-444.4. :1.16 NOTES m Although the differentiation or Vajrapruu, Vajradhasa and Vajrasanva is not always as clear as one would like it to be, at as unhlely that this is also the case in this context, smce for the bKa • brgyud pa school VaJradhasa as of prime imponanee. classic of MaMmudrll: 71te Path ofUltimau Profimdity: 71te Gn'at Sea//nstroctions of Zhang.·· 253-55. ..., Sec S. M. Kossak, Pamted Images ofEnlightenmem (Mumbai: M~. 2010), 92 and fig. 59, Vairocana' ajra being the figure in the upper left comer, just underneath the top row or siddhas. This position ma} indicate that he is ne' cnheless understood as a siddha. "' I am grateful to Dan Manin for maling me aware of a misreading in the name or !has siddha. m D. Martin, "lay Religious Mo•ements,- Katlash 18, 00. 3&4 ( 1996): 23-55, p. 36. '" See Manin, "Lay Religious Mo,ements," 31-32. "" TBRC P43. A. Scbiefner, Taratliillro $ Geschichte des Buddhismus mlttdttn [16()8 AD]. Obersec t aus dem 1ibetudten (St. Petersburg. Kaiserliche Akademje der Wissenschaften, 1869), p. 261. ,,. Davidson, Tibetan Renaissance, 246-47; R M. Davidson, ··gSar ma Apocrypha," in The Many Canons of Tibetan Buddhism, ed. H. Eimer, and D. Germano, Proceedings of the Ninth Seminar of the lntemational rusociation for Tibetan Studies, Leiden 2000 (Leiden: Brill, 2002), 21 1,2 15. "' Martin, "Lay Religious Movements"', p. 37. "' TBRC P3835. '" TBRC P3731, born in the same year a~ Mt·laras-pa, i.e., 1040 or 1052. Sec also H. Eimer, rNam thar rgyas pa, 2 vols., vol. 67, Asiatische Forschungen (Wiesbaden: Ouo l larrassowitz, 1979), p. 456. '"' Martin, "Padarnpa Sangye," 121-22 . '" See Martin, "Padampa Sangye," 121-22, m particular n. 30. "' On his life see G. BOhnemann, and M. Tachtkawa, Ni$pannayogiil·ali. 1lt' O Sansknt manuscripts from Nepal, Bibliotheca Codtcum ruiaticorum 5 (Tol-yo: The Centre for East ruian Cultural Studies, 1991 ), xaii-xia, G. Bllhnernann, ~Some Remarks on the Date or Abhayalcaragupta and the Chronology of I Its Work,~ ZLitschrifi der Deutsche~~ MorgenliindischenGesel/sclrofll42. no. I (1992). 120-27. "' Other names used in the colophons of has works and translations are plain!) 'kiroeana and Vairocan~ita (K. R. Schaeffer, "The religious career ofVairocanavajra,~ Joumol of Indiatr Philosophy 28. no. 4 (2000), 372). I owe the reference to Schaeffer's arucle to Dan Martin. Another name used for hun as dngul chu 'Bhe' ro or Be ro ba (D. Martm, "'A twelftb-cenrury Tibetan classic of MahAmudra: The Path ofUlwnate Profimduy: The Grt!at Sem brstroclions ofZhtmg," Joumal ofthe lllfemational A.tsociation ofBuddhist Studies 15, no. 2 (1992):, 254-55; D. P. Jackson, Enlightemnent by a Single Memrs, Beitrnge zur Kulrur- und Geistesgeschichtc Asicns, vol. 12 (Wien: Verlag der Osterreichischcn Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1994), 58-59). '" Or KamalllSila as referred to in Davidson, ~gsar ma Apocrypha," 213-15. ••> On the life of Dam pa Sangs rgyas cf Roerich, The Blue Amw l.<, 72- 73, 222- 28, 867- 71 , as well as numerous following references to his ·pacification' (=hi byed) teachings; D. L. Snellgrove, Indo-Tibetan Buddhism (London: Scrindia, 1987) , 467~9. and J. Edou, Mac/rig LL1bdron (Ithaca. New York: Snow Lions Publications, 1996) ,3 1- 38. Phadam paSangs rgyas (called rje Dam pain the quotation) is funher known to have produced a compendium ofTantric texts in collaboration \\ith Zha malo Lf6 ba Chos kyi rgyal po (1069-1144) a protagonist of a rather unsuccessful early fat11 "bras tradition (Davidson, ~gSar ma Apoctypha," 213-15.). A Nag po chung ba or Nag po 2habs chung is said to be a contemporar) ofNaropa (BA 1, 372. cf. Eimer, r.Vam 1har 110-as pa, I, 353). "' Thts color usage may deri,·e from the ambiguity of the "ord kr$1Ja, whjch can mean black, dark or (dark) blue alike. '" For the manuscript illUStrations and a detailed discussion of their iMnography and compari· sons see Martin, "Padarnpa Sangye. ~ ,.. Rob Linrothe appears to take that Stand when he interprets ahe AI chi Sumtsek siddha as such (Linrothe, lloly Madness, text and comparative illustration for Cat. no. 79). ,,. Apparently the references in Chag lo Chos rje dpal's ( 1197-1264) sNgags log sun "byin kyi skor arc not unambiguous in this regard (see Davidson, "gSar ma Apocrypha," 215, n. 36). "' Sec Manin, "Painters, Patrons and Paintings of Patrons," 173. '" For a translation and djscussion of this biography see Schaeffer, "The religious career of Vairocanavajra". u; Schaeffer, '"The religious career or Vairocanavajra," 365, 382. The texts referred to are D 374, dPol khrog "thtmg nmgon par "byung ba - Srihmtkiibhyudayo (Schaeffer, "The religaous career ofVairocanavwa:· n. 37) and possibly D 1415, but more probably a group of texts (Schaeffer, "The religaous career of Vairocana\'ajra," n. 38). "" Schaeffer, "The religious career or Varrocanavajra,~ 370-71. "' Jackson, EnlighunmeJJI by a Smgle Means, 53--M. Araother description of Zhang's hfe IS found in Marun, "A t\\elfliKenturyTabetan '" See Roerich, The Blue A11nals, 554. ,., On his life cf Roerich, The Blue Annals, 552~3. "here he is also called an inearnatjon ofktng lndrabhUti. "" He first met Phag mo gru pa at his grass-but monastery gDan sa mthil in 1165 (Roerich, 11te Blue Annals, 561 ). ,., Kretjger, Tibetan Paintmg, 66, compares this pair \\tth a painting of two teachers in the center published in Kossak and Singer, Sacred llstons, no. 26. On that painting anributed by Stnger to ca. 1300 the images are not inscribed but adentified due to their physical features. "" IIts position, his proponional relationship to the matn figures flanking him, and his iconogra- which ha~ been adapted to the Tibetan rendering. The latter contains an edition of the la~t verses of the siitra correcting the Gilgit manuscript edition (92- 93). Naturally, this version is closest to the Tibetan text. phy have striking similarities with the Vajrasanva beginning the AIchi Sumtsek Iineage (see Table I on p. 175). .,, Roerich, The Blue Annals, 474-75; Jackson, Patron and Painter, p. 40-1 I. "" On the life of this eminent teacher who later be.came recognized as the first Karmapa cf. Roerich, The Blue ArmaL<, 4 74- 80, Karma Thinley, The History of the Sixteen Karmapas of Tibet (Boulder: Praj~a Press, 1980), p. 41-45, and Jackson, Patron and Painter, p. 40-1 I. Another possible identification of this bla ma is the Third Karmapa, who has the same ordination name. Howeve.r, the circumstantial evidence collected so far appears to rule out this identification. m Luczanits, "'The Eight Great Siddha~." ;,. As mentioned earlier, Phag mo gru pais considered a reincarnation oflndrabhilti (Roerich, The Blue Annals, 552- 53). ul m On the early depictions of Saraha and the appar- siddhas from their inscriptions on the backside. It is quite possible that the captions for Padmavajra and Li!yipa acrually were exchanged, since their respective iconographies would fit much better in this case. However, the iconography of the early representations of the eight siddhas is so incons istent, that the postulation of such an error cannot be substantiated sufficiently. .,. Cf. also J. M. Stewart, The Life ofGampapa, 1st ed. (Ithaca, N.Y. : Snow Lion Publications, 1995) • 92- 93 .,. Roerich, The Blue AnnaL<, 488, 538. ° Cf. Stewllft, The Life ojGampapa, 93. 51 m Kreijger, Tibetan Painting, 66, identifies the left teacher as Dus g.~um mkhyen pa and the right one as the Third Karmapa Rang chung rdo rje (I 284- I339) without giving a conclusive reason except that the latter "is the first Karmapa to be depicted with the black hat." m TBRC P3 I43. On his life cf. Roerich, The Blue Annals, 374-79, which does not contain a date for this prolific translator. m TBRC P4278. On his life cf. Roerich, The Blue Annals, 436-40. m TBRC P222 1. ;1• It is likely that the inscription on the back again records an ordination name. One eminent candidate for being depicted here would be 'Jig nen mgon po (I 143- 1217; abbot ofDrigung monastery from its foundation in I I 79 to 1217) for whom I could not yet identify an ordination name e.g. in Gyaltsen, The Great Kagyu Masters; Roerich, The Blue Annals and TBRC PI 6. However, Rin chen dpaJ, being his personal name, could well be understood as such in terms of iL~ usage. m http://www.asiaclassics.org/ m The translation is based on translations of the Sanskrit versions of the text in C. S. Prebish, Buddhi.tt Monastic Discipline: The Sanskrit Prdtimo4a Sritras of the MahlisliJpghikas and Mrilasarvdstirlidins (University Park and London: The Pennsylvania State University Press, 1975), I 10-13 and K. T. Schmidt, DerSclrlujJteil des Prlitimok$a.tlitra der Sanlistil"lidins. Text in Sanskrit und Toclrarisdr A vergliclrerr mit Paralle/versionen anderer Schulen, Sanskrittexte aus den Turfanfunden XIU (GOttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1989), 77- 79, m ;u The translation for this verse mainly follows Martin, "Painters, Patrons and Paintings of Patrons.» 525 adhiciua! ;,. For skyob pa. m Kreijger, Tibetan Palming, 66, interprets the name as 'probably a cognomen ofPadmasambhava'. mTBRC PORKI517. ;., For the Alchi Sumtsek depiction see, for example, R.N. Linrothe, "Group Ponrait,» in Embodying Wisdom. Art. Text and /nterprt!tation in the Histo1y of Esoteric Buddhism, ed. R. Linrothe, and H. H. S0rensen, SBS Monographs (Copenhagen: The Seminar for Buddhist Studies, 2001 or Goepper, and Poncar, Alchi: 102- 109, the black siddhaon page 109. ilO Certainly the eighty-four great adepts depicted at Ale hi Shangrong have a dark-skinned adept in the la~t row. Sadly his caption is too mutilated to be sure about his identity, but reading "Phadampa» is possible. ;, D.P. Jackson, "A Painting ofSa-Skya-Pa Ma~ ters», and D. P. Jackson, "The identification of individual teachers in painting.~ ofSa-skya-pa lineages," in lndo-Tibelau Studies. Papers iu honoru· and appreciatiou of Prof Da1'id L. Snellgrove's contribution to lnda-Tibetan Studies, ed. T. Skorupski, Buddhica Britannica, Series Continua II (Tring, UK: The Institute of Buddhist Studies, I990. m Published by Tucci, Tibetan Palmed Scrolls, no. I86, pl. 220, p. 603, and again in M. M. Rhie, and R. A. F. Thurman, Wisdom and Compassion (New York: Harry N. Abrams, 199 I), no. 69, p. 216-19 (the measurements are cited from this publication), where it is anributed on stylistic grounds 10 the late 14th or early 15th century. On the pmctitioner (who can also be the donor) in the bottom section of a thangka painting see Martin, "Painters, Patrons and Paintings of Patrons." n• I only consulted literature of the Sa skya pa school. 337 m With the exception ofGhaQtapa, Kreijger, Tibetan Painting, 66, correctly identifies the .,., Roe rich, The Blue Annals, 4 74-75. m The degree of coincidence with the earlieSI historical account as summarized in Jackson, Patron and Painter, p. 40, that also mentions the deep blue color of the hat, is funher suppon for identifYing this figure \\Oth the First Karmapa. The more extensive later historical account~ do ascribe the black hat to the Third Karmapa. "' Kossak, and Singer, Sacred Visions, no. 43, p. 156f, where it is described by J. C. Singer and attributed to ca. 1400 following the date suggeSied for Thangka I (see note I07). ent cross-identification \\Oth Savaripa see LuczaniL~, wine Eight Great Siddhas," p. 79. "'Roerich, The BlueAnnals,414. .,. TBRC P3975. 'Jig rten mgon po ( 1143-12 17; abbot ofDrigung mona~tery from its foundation in I I79 to 1217) is considered a reincarnation of Nllgiirjuna (Roerich, The Blue Annals, 552). painting was published with the two bottom rows cut off(ibid. fig. 207). The acquisition number of this painting is MNAO no. 960. See mandalas nos. 62- 74 of the Ngor collection in bSod narns rgya mtsho, Tibetan Mandalas, 2 vols. (Tokyo: Kodhan.~a International, 1983), or the drawings in Raghu Vira, and L. Chandra, Tibetan Ma,ujalas, Satapi[aka Series No. 383 (New Delhi: International Academy of Indian Culture, 1995), p. 62- 75. ns Full title: rGyud sde rin po che kunlas btus pa. n• rGyud sde kun btus pa'i thob yig, "rGyud sde rin po che kun las btus pa' i thob yig de bzhin gshegs pa thams cad kyi gsang ba ma Ius pa gcig tu ' dus pa rdo rje rin po che'i za ma tog,» in rGyud sde rin pa che kun las btus pa b=fwgs so, ed. 'Jam dbyangs Blo gter dbang po (Delhi: N. Lungtok & N. Gyaltsen, 1971, p. 107.1- 139.4. The lineages have been compared with those in theN. c. Kun dga' bzang po, "Thob yig rgya mtsho,", Sa skya pa'i bka' 'bum (Tokyo: The Toyo Bunko, I968), p. 50.2.31f., ofNgor chen Kun dga' bzang po ( 1382- 1456). '"'See, for example., rGyud-sde-kun-btus, "rGyud sde kun btus," in 'Jam dbyangs Blo-gterdbang-po (Delhi: N. Lungtok & N. Gyaltsen, 1971), vol. 12, text LXV, 2. 541 The sa lugs lineages of the inner and outer tra· ditions are identical. Tucci, Tibetan Painted Scrolls, p. 603, identified the painting as representing Lilyipa's tradition, but there is no Layipa tradition lineage with Dril bu pa as its first siddha, and in the Ulyipa tradition mandala the secondary deities are four-armed. "' TBRC P3814. m This lineage is actually identical with that of the sa lugs Lilyipa tradition, and the two can thus only be differentiated by the iconography of the mandala deities. ;.u Elderly, light-skinned siddha aiming an arrow. m The siddhas within the square bracket cannot be considered as identified, a~ their iconography does not conform to their representation in the other two thangkas. ;,. Here a dark-skinned s iddha seated on a tiger skin and drinking from a skull-cup. m Depicted seated on a tiger and drinking from a kapala as J)ombmeruka usually is. '"Dancing, light-skinned siddha carrying a dog on his shoulder and holding bow and arrow. 59 ' Here light-skinned. ;Sl) The siddha in royal robes seated on a throne. m Wearing the robes of a king. m Said to be from Sa skya, gTsang G. Tucci, Ti·anshimalaya, Ancient Civilizations (London: Barrie & Jenkins, I973), 234, where the m He is not listed in rhe consulted lineage, but follows GhaQtapMa (Dril bu pa) in the regular sa MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA 217 lugs lineage, ~bile in others he is immediately succeeded by Sri Jiilandhara ('Barba 'dzin). m He is light-skinned and drinks from a horn. ;;.. = Bhadrapa. m The remaining images in the following four rows are bla-ma, LL~ually \\1th •·a jra and bell in their hands or on lotuses ai their sides. The identity of some of the figures following the last siddha (Nliropa) is still unclear as no perfect march for the depicte-d lineage has yet been found in the literature. ;;• Long-haired, wearing secular dress. m I thank David Jackson for trying to identify these figures for me. ;;s The identity of the following six figures cannot be verified, but it is q uite cenain that here it is not the lineage transrnined via Ngor chen Kun bzang that is depicted. ;;• Cf. also the discussion of the siddha depictions on MalljusrT's dhofi in the Alchi Sumtsek by linrothe, "Group Ponrait. » difficult, if not impossible, to find a secondary deity in this huge collection without going through hundreds of them. Similarly, there are no stylistic comparisons to be found there. This is partially compensated by the accompanying book publication M. M. Rhie, and R. A. F. Thurman, Worlds ofTransjormation (New York: Tibet House New York in association with The Shelly & Donald Rubin Foundation and Harry N. Abrams, 1999). ;,s As Kreijger evidently corrected the spelling.~ of the names as far as he has read them I do not refer to minor deviations regarding his readings. If both are present, it is also unclear if his readings reflect the captions on the front side, the mantras on the back, or both. ""The rdo is nearly vanished while the supposed tje is not recognizable, but the name on the back confirms this reading. "'' Kreijger, Tibetan Paiminf{. n. 42, reads "Yamlag-spyod-pa'i rdoe», both deviations being evident reading mistakes. "' The lower line barely legible. ""'The other tradition he received from this teacher is the one represented in Thangka I . ... Kreijger, Kathmandu Valley Palming, 66, did not realize that the name continues in the next line. "' Thus the attribution of the paintings to ca. I 400 in Kossak and Singer, Sacred Visions, no. 43, and in Rhie and Thurman, Wisdom and Compassion, 216-19, no. 96, appears a linle too early. ;.,. Again, Kreijger, Kathmandu Valley Painting, n. 4 I , did not realize thai the name continues in the following line and only reads dam po. 562 Due to the small number of scholars in the field, it is not surprising that even when the material for a detailed study is already available such analysis ha~ not yet been carried out. For example, Jane Casey Singer has not been able to study the early central Tibetan paintings in sufficient detail to establish a basis for early Tibetan painting, and Roger Goepper has not provided a detailed stylistic analysis of the early monuments at Alchi. "' I am aware that in some cases the pub Iisher or the design of a publication may not allow the author to provide this information to the specialists in an appendix. However, present-day media offer other low-cost forms of making this information available to those interested. "' At Vienna University I have substantially contributed to build an archive concentrating on early Western Himalayan art which, thanks to the generosity of Jaroslav Poncar and Roger Goepper, also contains the AI chi documentation. Sadly the documentation now held in the Western Himalayan Archives Vie.nna (WHAV) is not a~ accessible as I have intended but visitors to Vienna can use it. Similarly focused, publicly accessible photographic archives on other regions or subjecL~, e.g., early thangkas, or Central Tibetan temples, would greatly facilitate the establishment of a proper anhistorical basis for early Tibetan art. Another method of publishing the pictorial material in such a way that all the information is available has been successfully demonstrated by the website of the Rubin Museum's collection (http://www.himalayanan.org/). On this website thangkas from private collections are made available in an exceptionally comprehensive way by allowing one to zoom in on details such that even the captions are legible. In the same way the reverse of each thangka c.a n be viewed. The site even offers other private collectors the possibility of having their paintings included. However, currently it i.~ 2.18 NOTES m Again, Kreijger, Kathmandu Volley Painting, n. 41, did not realize that the name continues in the following line. "' Erroneously identified as Vajrapada in Kre.ijger, Kathmandu Valley Palming, 66. m Kre.ijger, Kathmandu Valley Pointing, n. 44, gives rta as an alternative, a possibility I noted too. A comparison of this compound to the dlw in the mantras, how-ever, proves that dha is the more likely reading. m Apparently short for Of/lvajra-mahiikiila gLtliO· hrido '"'''' phaJ (M. Willson, and M. Brauen, eds. Deities aj1ibeta11 Buddhism (Boston: Wisdom Publication, 2000), p. 345). BIBLIOGRAPHY Alling~r. Eva. 2001. "Nyo Master." In Hugo. E. Kreijger ed., In Trbetan Pamtmg: Th~ Juckr Collectian, pp. n-73. London: Serindia Publications. - -- . 2002. "A Gnyos Lineage Thangka." In Deborah E. Klimburg-Salter, and Eva Allinger, eds., In Buddhist Art o11d Tibew11 Patronage Ninth to Fourteenth Cemurles, pp. 59-{)8. Leiden: Brill. Bnutze-Picron, Claudine. 1995. "Bet"een Men and Gods: Small Motifs in the Buddhist An of Eastern India. an lnterpretauon." In K. R. van Kooij and H. 'an der V~re ~s.. F1mction and Meanmg m Buddhw Art, pp. 59·79. Groningen: Egben forsten. - -- . 1995196. "SMcyamuni in Eastern India and Tibet from the II"' to the 13" oentunes." Silk Road Art and Archeology, \'01. 4, pp. 355-408. - -- . 1998. "The Elaboration of a Style: Eastern Indian Motifs and Forms in Early Tibetan (?)And Burmese Painting." In Deborah E. Klimburg-Salter, and Eva Allinger eds., The Inner Asian lntemattOtWI Style 12tlr-f.ltlr Cenwries. Papers present~ at a panel of the 7th seminar of the lntemauonal Association for Tibetan Studies, Graz 1995, pp. 15· 66. Wien: Osterreichisehe Al.ndem 1~ der Wissenscbaften. Beguin, Gilles, ed. 1977. Dieux et dimotJS d "Himiilaya: Art du Bouddlusme lammque. Paris: Reunion des Musees Nallonnux. - -- . 1990. Art isoterique de /"llilluikl)-'0: La do11ation Lionel Foumiet: Paris: Reun ion des musees nationaux. - -- . 1995. Les peinlures du Bouddlusme 1ibitain. Paris: Reunion des musees nauonaux. Beguin, Gilles, and lionel Foumoer. 198611987. "'Un sancruaire meconnu de Ia R~g•on d'Alchi." Oritmtal Art, New Scrtes, \Ol. 32, no. 4, pp. 373-388. Brauen, Marrin. 2003. "Forgery, Genuone or Painted Over: On the lmpossoboloty of Dating a Thangka Exactly." In I. Kreide· Darnani, ed., Dating TlbeJan;lrt: E.vsays on the Possibililies amllmposstbillties of Chronology from the Lempert: S}mpo.tium. Cologne. Contributions to Tobetan Stud ies 3, pp. 73-89. Wiesbaden: Dr. ludwig Rcichcn Verlag. Bruce-Gardner, Roben. 1998. ~Reali2a1ions: Reflections on Technoque on Early Cenual Tibetan Painting." InS. Kos.~k and J. Casey Singer eds., Sacred llsions: Early Paintings from Central Tibet, pp. 193-205. New York: The Metropolitan Museum of Art. bSod nams rgya mtsho. 1983. "Tibetan Mandalas." In Musashi Tachikawa, and Malcolm P. l. Green, eds., The Ngor Collectinn.t. 2 vols., Tokyo: Kodhansa International. bSod nams rgya mtsho and Musashi Taehikawa. 1989. The Ngar Mtmdalas af7ibeJ: Pla1es. Bibliotheea Codicum Aslllucorum 2. Tol.-yo: Tbe Centre for East Astan Cuirural Studies. BOhnemann, Gudrun. 1992. -some Remarks on the Date of AbhayAimmgupta and the Chronology of Hts Work." allsclrrift der Deutsclten Margenltmdtsclten Gesel/scltafi. vol. 142, no. I, pp. 120-27. Buhnemann, Gudrun, and Musashi Tachikawa. 199 I. Nitpannayogiii"OIT: 1l•o Sanskrit mamrscripufrom Nepal. Bobliotheca Codicum Asiaticorum 5. Tokyo. The Centre for East Asian Cultural Srud•es. Copeland, Carol) n. 1980. T01rkas from the Koel: Cal/ec11on. Mochigan Papers on South and Southeast Asia. ~ol. 18. AM Arbor: The University ofMtchtgan. Dagyab, Loden She rap. 1977. Tibetan Religious Art. Part 1: Te."tts. Woesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz. Dalai bla ma V, Ngag dbang blo bz.ang rgya mtsho. 1971. Zab pa dang rgya cite ba "i dam pa 'i chos kyi tltab ytg gang gr•"i elm rgyun. 4 vols. Delhi: N. Sonam Kazi. Davidson, Ronald M. 2002. MgSnr rna Apocrypha: The Creation of Onhodo~), Gm) TextS, and the Ne\1 Re~ela11on." In Helmut Eimer, and David Germano, eds. 2002, T11e Jfany Canmu of7ibetan Buddlrtsm, pp. 203-24. leiden: Brill. - - -. 2005. Trbetan Renmssance. Tall/ric Buddhism in the Rebtrtlt of Tibetan Cullllre. New York: Columboa University Press. Decleer, Huben. 1996. "Some Recent Albums and Studies on Indian, Indo-Tibetan and Tibetan Buddhist An." The Trbetan Journal, vol. 3-1' pp. 73- 119. Dinwiddoe, Donald, ed. 2003. Portraits of 1he Mast~rs: Brorre Sculptllll!s aflhe 7ibeJan Buddhut Lmeages. Chicago and London: Serindia Pubhcntions and Oliver Hoare. Doboom Tulku, and Glenn H. Mullin. 1995. Mitleid 1111d Wiedergeburt in der tibetisclten Kww: Tltangko.v au.v dem Tibet House Museum ill New Delhi. St. Gallen, Stiftung: St. Galler Museen. Dorje, Gyurme. 1996. Trbet lfandbook wilh Blwum. Ba1h. footprint Handbooks. Dorji, Rez•n, Ou Ch:logui, and Yishi Wangchu. 1985. Btxl-kyHhaJtg-gal Xi:ang Tangjia. Beojong: Wenwu chubansha. dPa' bo gTsug lag phreng ba. 1985. Dam pa "i chas k)1 "kltor lo b$g)11r ba moms Ayi bj.11ng ba gsa/ bar byed pa mkltas pa "i dga ·stott [History of Buddhism and the Karma Kagyo School], 2 vols. Beijing: Mi rigs dpe skrun khang. Dung dkar Blo bz.ang 'phrin las. 2002. Dung dkar tsltig md:tXI chen mo. Beij ing: Krung go'i bod rig pa dpc skrun khang. Edou, Jerome. 1996. Machig Labdron and the fawi(/(IJtatiS ofCitiJd. Ithaca, New York: Sno" Loons Publications. Eimer, Helmut,~- 1979. r.\'am that tg}m pa: Matenaltett :u emer Biograplrie des AttJa (Dipamkarosrijtiana). Asiatishe Forschungen, no. 67. Wiebaden: Otto Harrassowotz. - -. 1989. "Nag tsho Tshul khrims rgyal ba'i bsTod pa brgyad cu pa in Its Extant Version." Bulletin of Tilmology (Gangtok, Sikkim), new series no. I, pp. 21 -38. Ernst, Richard. 2001. "Ans and Sciences. A Personal Perspective ifTibetan Painting.r Chtntta, \OI. 55, no. II, pp. 900-914. - -. 200.1. "Sc•ence and Ans." EPR Newsletter, •ol. 14, no. 1·2, pp. 15-18. Essen, Gerd-Wolfgang. and Tsering Tashi Thingo. 1989. Dte G6uerdes Himalaya: Buddlusttsclre Kww Tibets. Die Sammlung Gerd-Wolfgang Es.ren. 2 vols. Munich: Prestel· Verlag. Fifth Dalai Lama. Record of Teaching Receired. See Dalat bla rna V, Ngag dbang blo bz.ang rgya mtsho. MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA 219 Filibeck, Elena de Rossi. 1994. "A Manuscript on the Stag lung pa Genealogy." In Per Kvaeme ed., Tibetan Studies, vol. I, pp. 237-240. bSod nams lhun grub, Glo bo mkhan chen. 14561532. "Lam 'bras bu dang beas pa'i bla ma brgyud pa dang bc.as pa rnams kyi bris yig" Tibetanmtmuscript. no. 44, vol. I (ka), ff. 139a-140a. Tokyo: Toyo Bunko. Go Lotsawa, Blue Annals. See G. N. Roerich trans. 1949-1953. Go L{)t~awa, Blue Annals (Tib. 1984). I cite the Chengdu (Si khron mi rigs dpe shun khang, 1984) edition in 2 vols. The cla~sic xylograph edition that it was based on and which was translated by G. N. Roerich is: 'Gos Lo tsa ba gZhon nu dpaL Deb tiler sngon po. The Blue Annals. Sata-pitaka Series, vol. 212. New Delhi: International Academy oflndian Culture, 1974. Goepper, Roger. 1990. "Clues for a Dating of the Three-Storeyed Temple (Sumt~ek) in Alchi, Ladakh." Asiatische Studien: Zeitschrift der Schwei=erischen Gesel/schaft fiir Asienkunde I Etudes Asiatiques: Revue de Ia Societe Suisse d'Etudes Asiatiques, vol. 44, no. 2, pp. 159-75. - - -. 1993. "The 'Great StOpa' at Alchi." Artibu.t Asiae, vol. 53, nos. I & 2, pp. 11143. - - -. 2003. "More Evidence Jbr Dating the Sumtsek in Alchi and It~ Relations with Kashmir." In I. Kreide-Damani, ed., Dating Tibeltm Art: Essays on the Possibilities and impossibilities of Chronology ji-om the Lempert=Symposium. Cologne, pp. 15-24. Wiesbaden: Dr. Ludwig Reichert Verlag. Goepper, Roger, and Jaroslav Poncar. 1996. A/chi: Ladakh s lfidden Buddhist Sanctua1y: The Swntsek. London: Serindia. Gongkar Dorjedenpa 2005. Record ofTetlChings Receired. In Gong dkar rOo rje gdan pa Kun dga' rnam rgyal, rD=ong pa kw1 dga · mam rgyal gyi gsan yig. Kathmandu: rGyal yongs sa chen dpe skrun khang. Gyalt~en, Khenpo Konchog. 1990. The Great Kagyu Masters: The Golden Lineage Treaswy. Victoria Huckenpahler, ed. Ithaca: Snow Lion Publication. HAR: Himalayan All Resources, accessed February-May, 2009, hnp:l/www. himalayanart.org/. Heller, Amy. 1997. "A Set ofThirteemh Century Tsakali." Oriemations, vol. 28 (I 0), pp. 48-52. - - -. 1999. Tibewn Art: Tracing the Development ofSpirifllalldea/s and Art in Tibet600-2000. Woodbridge, Suffolk: Antique Collector's Club. - - -. 2003. "The Tibetan Inscriptions: Dedications, History, and Prayers." In Pratapaditya Paled., Himalayas: An Aesthetic Adrenture, pp. 286-97. Chicago 220 BIBLIOGRAPHY and Berkeley: An Institute of Chicago and University ofCalifomia Press. - - -. 2005. "A Thang ka Portrait of'Bri gung rin chen dpal, 'Jig rten gsum mgon ( 11 43-1217)." Journal ofthe lmemational Association of Tibetan Studies I (October), pp. l-1 0. Accessed February II, 20 I0. http:// www. thlib.org?tid=T 1222. Huntington, John C. 1968. ''The Styles and Stylistic Sources ofTibetan Painting." Ph.D. dissertation, University of California Los Angeles. Huntington, John C., and Dina Bangdel. 2003. The Circle of Bliss: Buddhist Meditational Art. Columbus: Columbus Museum of Art and Chicago: Serindia Publications. Huntington, Susan L. 2001. The Art ofAncielll India. Boston: Weatherhill. Huntington, Susan L., and John C. Huntington. 1990. Leaves ji-om the Bodhi Tree: The Art ofPii/alndia (8th- 12th centuries) tmd its lmernationa/ Legacy. Seattle and London: Dayton An Institute in association with the University ofWashington Press. lshihama, Yumiko. 2005. "Study on the Qianlong as Cakravartin, a Manifestation of Bodhisattva MadjusrT Tangkha." Waseda Daigaku Mongol Kenky,L\yo, vol. 2, pp.l 939. Jackson, David. 1984. Tibetan Thangka Painting: Methods and Materials. London: Serindia Publications. Revised in collaboration with J. Jackson, London: Serindia Publications, 1988. - - -. 1986. "A Painting of Sa-skya-pa Masters from an Old Ngor-pa Series of Lam 'bras Thangka~." Berliner lndologische Studien. vol. 2, pp. 18 1-19 1. - - -. 1990a. , The Identification of Individual Masters in Paintings of Sa-skya-pa Lineages." InT. Skorupski, ed., IndoTibetan Studies, Buddhica Britannica, Series Continua, vol. 2, pp. 129-144. Tring, UK: Institute of Buddhist Studies. - - -. 1990b. 1\Fo Biographies of SakyaJtibhadra: The Eulogy by Khro-phu Lo-tsli-ba and its "CommelllflJY .. by bSod nams-<lpol-h=tmg-po. Text.t and Variants from Two Rtlre Exemplars Pll!sened in the Bilwr Research Society. Patna. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag. - - -. 1993. "Apropos a Recent Tibetan Art Catalogue," review of Wisdom and Compossion, by M. M. Rhie and R. A. F. Thurman. Wiener Zeitschrift fiir die Kunde Siklasiens, vol. 37, pp. 109-130. Asiens, No. 15. Vienna: Verlag der Osterreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. - - -. 1998. ''Traditions artistiques des premiers Sa-skya-pa: sources ecrits et peintures encore existantes," Annuaire EPNE. Section sciences religieuses, vol. I06 ( 1997-1998), pp. 101 -107. - - -. 1999a. "Some Karma Kargyupa Paintings in the Rubin Collections." In Marylin M. Rhie and Robcn A. F. Thurman, Worlds of Transformation: Tibetan Art of Wisdom and Compo.tsion, pp. 75-127. New York: Tibet House New York. - - -. 1999b. ''The Last 'Par)<Jita' ofl'olor. A Biographical Sketch of Nag-dbali-bsodnams-rgyal-mtshan, the Wanderer from gTsan-roli." ln Helmut Eimer, Michael Hahn, Maria Schetelich, and Peter Wyz.l ic eds., Studia Tibelictl el Mongolicfl (Festschrift Monfred Taube), pp. 137- 52. Swisnai-Oidendorf: Indica et Tibetic.a Verlag. - - -. 1999c. ''Tibetische Thangkas deuten, Teil 1: Die Hierarchie der Anordnung." Tibet und Buddhismus [Hambwg], no. 50-3, pp. 22-27. "Tibetische Thangkas deuten, Teil2: Obertragungslinien und Anordnung." Tibet und Buddhismus, no. 50-4, pp. 16-2 1. - - -. 2002. "Lama Yeshe Jamyang ofNyurla, Ladakh: The Last Painter of the 'Bri gung Tradition." n,e Tibet Jounwl, vol. 27, no. I & 2, pp. 153-176. - - -. 2003. ''The Dating ofTibetan Paintings is Perfectly Possibl~Though Not Always Perfectly Exact." In I. Kreide-Damani, ed. 2003, Dating Tibetan Art: E.~wys on the Possibilities and Impossibilities af Chronology from the Lempert:: Symposium, Cologne, pp. 9 1-11 2. Wiesbaden: Dr. Ludwig Reichen Verlag. - - -. 2008. "Portrayals ofZhabdrung Ngawang Narngyal (Zhabs drung Ngag dbang rnam rgyal) in Bhutanese Painting: Iconography and Common Groupings of the Great Unifier of Bhutan." InT. Tse Bartholomew and John Johnson, eds., The Dragons Gift: The Sacred Arts ofBimttm. pp. 78-87. Chicago: Serindia Publications. - - -. 2009. Patron tlnd Painter: Situ Panchen and the Reriral ofthe Encampmelll Style. New York: Rubin Museum of Art. - - -. 20 I 0. The Nepolese Legacy in Tibetan Painting . New York: Rubin Museum of An. 'Jigs med chos kyi rdo rje. 200 I. Bod brgyud nang bstanlha tshogs chen mo. Mtsho sngon mi rigs dpe skrun khang. China: Mi rigs dpe skrun khang. - - -. 1994. Enlightenment by a Single Means: Tibetan controrersies on the 'selfs•iflicient white remedy· (dkar po chig thub). Beitrage zur Kultur- und Geistesgeschichte Asiens, vol. 12. Vienna: Verlag der Osterreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. Kal) thog Si iu Chos ~-yi rgya mtsho. 1972. Gangs ljongs dbus gtsang gnas bskor lam yig nor bu =Ia she/ gyi se modo [Record ofa Pilgrimage to Cemral Tibet]. Pal am pur, H.P.: Sungrab Nyamso Gyunphel Parkhang, Tibetan Craft Community. - - -. 1996. A History of Tibetan Painting: The Great Painters and Their Traditions. Beitrage zur Kultur- und Geistesgeschichte Kaimal, Padma. 1999. "The Problem ofPortraiture in South India, 870-970 CE," Artibus Asiae. vol. 59, no. I & 2, pp. 59-133. - - -.. 2000. ''The Problem of Ponraitur e in South India, Circa 970-1000 A.D." Artibru Asroe, vol. 60, no. I, pp. 139-1 79. Kalista, Kmhlcen. 2009. Ma.<tetpteces of Himttlayon Art from a European Prirme Collecllon. New York: Carlton Rochell Asian An, Rossi & Rossi ltd. Kapstein, Matthew T. 2000. The Tibetan As.timrlallon ofBuddlri.rm. Com·ersion. Come.rrmion. tmd Memory. New York: Oxford University Press. Karma Thinlt). 1980. The flmory ofthe Sixteen Karmapas of Tibet. Boulder. PrajM Press. Kannay, Heather. 1975. Early Sino· Tibetan Art. Warmonster, England: Aris and Phillips. Khersun Sangpo, ed. 1973-79. Btogrophical Kramer, Jo" ot.a. 2008. A Noble M01rk from .Hustattg: Life and Works ofG/o-bo nrKhanchm (1456-/531). Wien. Un.-ersit at Wicn, Arbensl..reos fllr tibeusche und buddhisu schc Studien. Luczanirs, Christian. 1998. "'n an unusual painung style in Ladal..h. ~ In Deborah E. Klomburg-Salter, and E'a Allinger eds., The Inner Asion !nternallonttf Stylt> 11th-14th Ct>mw·ies. Papers presented at a panel of the Krang Dbyi-sun , et al., eds. 1985. Bod rgya tslug md=od chen mo. 3 vols. Beojing: Mi rigs dpe skrun lhang. 7oh seminar of the International Associati on for Tibetan Studies, Graz 1995, pp. 151-69. Wien. Osterreichische Akademi e der Wissenschaften. Kreijger, Hugo. 1999. Kathmandu Valley Pai11tmg: The Jucker Collection . London: Serindia Publicauo ns. - - - . 200 I. "Methodological Comment~ Regardin g Recent Research on Tibetan An.'' - - -. 200 I . Tibetan Paimmg: The Juckl'r Collectto11. london: Scnnd1a Publications. Wiener Zeit.tchrifi for die Kunde Siidasrens, vol. 45, pp. 123-45. - . 2003. "An-Historical Aspecrs of Dating Tibetan An.~ In I. Kreide-Damano ed., Dating Tibewn An: Essays on - - Kuijp, leonard van der. 2007. '1loe Names of 'Gos Lo ts!l ba Gzhon nu dpal ( 13921481 )."In R. Prars ed. 2007, The Pondita the Possibilities and Impossibilities of Chronology from the Lempert:: Sympo.rmm. Cologne, pp. 25-57. Wu:sbaden: Dr. lud•\lg and tire Stddlw: Tibetan Studits in Honour ofE. Gene Snuth. pp. 279-285. Reichen Verlag. Dicti01rary of Tibet and Tibetan Buddhum. 12 vols. Dharamsala, H.P.: library of Tibetan Works and Archives. Klimburg-Saltcr, Deborah. 1982. Tlte Silk &111e and the Dramond Path: Esotenc Buddhist Art 011 tire Trons-Himalayan Trade Routes. los Angeles. The UCLA An Council. - - - . 1997a. "A Thangka Painting Tradition from the Spiti Valley." Ortelltotions, vol. 28, no. 10, pp. 258-265. - . 1997b. Tabo - a Lamp for the KingdonL - - Early Indo-Tibetan Buddltrst Art intire Western I fimalaya. Milan • New York: Sk ira - Thames and Hudson. - .. 1998. -Is There an Inner Asian lmemauo nal Style 12*to 14th Centuries? Definition of the Problem and Present State of Research ." In D. Klimburg-Salter and E. Allinger eds., The Inner Asimt International Style 12tlt-14th Centuries, pp. l- 13. Wien: Verlag dcr Osterreic hischcn Akademi e der Wissenschaften. - - - - - . 2()().1. "Lama, Yidam, Protectors." Orientations, vol. 35, no. 3, pp. 48-53. Klimburg-Salter, Deborah, and Eva Allinger, eds. 1998. The hvrer Asia11 lmemotio110/ Style 11th-14th Centuries. \Voen: Verlag der Osterreochiscben Akadcmoe der Wissenschaften Kossa.k, Steven M. 1990. "lineage Paintings and Nascent Monastic ism in Medoeval TibeL" Archi•·rs ofAstan An. vol. 43, pp. 49-57. - - . 199912000. "Early Central Tibetan Hierarch Portrait~: New Perspectives on Identification and Dating." Onental Art, vol. 45 (4), pp. 2-8. Revised and republished as "lineage Paonting and Ponranur e in Tibet,~ Painted mwges ofEnligllltnment: Early Tibetan Thankas. 1050-/.150, (Mumbai: Marg Publocations), chapter 2, pp. 64-89. - - - .2010. Painted lmagesofEnlightenmem: Early Tibetan Thankos, 1050-1450. Mumbu. Marg Publications. Kossak, Steven M., and Jane Casey Singer. 1998. Sacred Visions. Early Paintwgs ji'Om Cemral nbet. New York: Metropolitan Museum of An. Kun dga' bzang po, Ngor chen. 1968. Chos Ayr r;e dpalldcm bla mo dam pa mam.t los dam pa 'i chos ji Itar nod pa ·; tsfm/ gsa/ bar bshad pa thab yig {11wb ytg rgyo mtslw]. Sa Sl..)'a pa'o bk:a' ·burn, 'ol. 9, pp. 44.4. 1108.2.6 (ka 90a-217a ). Tok)o: TO)'o Bunl..o. lauf, Detlef-lngo. 1976. Verbargene Botschafi - - - . 2004. Buddhist Sculpture 111 Cloy: Early We stem 1/ima/ayan Art, late I Oth to early 13th centuries. Chicago: Serindia. - -. 2006a. "A First Glance at Earl} Drigungp a Painting. " In Xie Jisheng, Shen Weirong, and Liao Yang eds., Studies in Sino-17bettm Buddhist Art· Proceedi11g.v ofthe Second lnternalloua/ Conftrence on Tibetan Archaeology & Art. Beijing. September 3-6. 1004, pp. 459-488. Beijong. tibetischer Thangkas: Bildmeditation und Deutung lamoistischer Kultbrfder [Secret Revelauo n ofTibeta n Thangkas : Picture Medotauon and lnterpreta uon of Lamaist Cult Paontings]. Freiburg om Breisgau: Aurum Verlag. Las chen K un dga • rgyal mtShan. 1972. bKa · Chona Tibetology Publoshong House. - . 2006b. "Aichi and the Drigungp a School ofTibeta n Buddhism : the Teacher Depiction in the Small Chonen at Alchi." ln Jeonghce lce-Kalis ch, Antjc Papist-M atsuo, and Willobald Veit eds., Met shou wan nian • - - gdams k)i mam par thor pa Bka ·gdanu chas 'b)1mg gsa/ ba ·, sgro.r ntl'. B. 2 vols. New Delho. Jamyang Norbu. Lang Life Without End: Festschrift in Honor ofRoger Goepper, pp. 181-96. Frankfurt Leidy, Denise Patry, and Roben Thurman . 1997. Mtmdofa. the Architecw re of Enlightenmem. am Main: Peter Lang. New York: Asia Society Galleries. Linrothe, Roben N. 2001. -Group Poruait: Mahasoddhas in the Alcho Sumrsek. " In Roben N. Linrothe, and llenrik H. Sorensen eds., Embodyin g Wi.tdom: Art. Text and lnterpt'l!totion in the lftSIOI')' ofEsoteric Buddlusnr , pp.l85-20 8. Copenhag en: The Seminar for Buddhist Studocs. - - -. 2004. Paradise and Plumttge: Chinese Connections in 1ibeto11 Arhat Palming. New York: Rubin Museum of An. - - -, ed. 2006. llo~·· Madness: Portraits of Tomnc Suldhas. Na\ Vorl: Rubon MtL..eum of An. Linrothe, Robert, et al. 2004. "Turning a Blind Eye." Orlemotions. vol. 35, no. 5, pp. 73-74. - lmematioual Association ofBuddlrist Studres. vol.l5, no. 2, pp. 243-319. - - - . 1996. "Lay Religious Mo•emen rs in II th- and 12th-Cent ury Tobet: A Survey of Sources.' ' Kai/ash. vol. 18, no. 3 & 4, pp. 23-55. - - Lettere. Lowo Khenchcn. See Glo bo mkhan chen bSod nams Ihun grub. . 2006c. "The Eight Grea1 Siddhas in Earl) Tibetan Painting from c. 1200 to c. 1350.~ In Roben N. l inrothe ed., floly Mod11ess: Portraits ofTantric Siddlws, pp. 76-9 1. New York : Rubin Museum of An. Manin. Dan. 1992. ~A T\\elfth- «nturyTi betan Classrc of MahamudrA, The Path of Ultimate Profundity: The Great Seal Instructions of Zhang." Journal ofthe Lo Bue, Erbeno, and F. Ricca. 1990. Gyantse Rl'l'isued. Fire02e: Casa Edotrice le Losty, J. 1989. "Bengal, Bihar, Nepal? Problems ofPro•en ance in 12th<ent ut} illuminated Buddhost Manuscripts, Pan One." Oriental Art, N.S., vol. 35, no. 2, pp. 86-96. - - . 200 I. ~Painters, Patrons and Paintings of Patrons in Early Tibetan An.~ In Rob lonrothe, and Henn~ H. S0rensen eds., Embodyin g Wisdom. Art. Text o11d lmerpreta/IOn iuthe 11istory of Esoteric Buddlusm, pp. 139-184. Copenhag en: The Seminar for Buddhist Studoes. - - - . 2006. "Padamp a Sanggye: A History of Represen tation of a South Indian S iddha in Tibet." In Roben N. linrothe ed.,/1ofy MIRROR OF THE BUDD HA 22.1 Madnen. Portraits ofTantnc SuJd!Jas, pp. 10Prl23. Ne" York: Rubin Musewn of An. Mathes, Klaus-Dieter. 2008. A Dil'l!cl Path to tile Buddha Within: Go Lotsawa:. Mailiinwdrii lmerpretation a/the Ramagotral'lblu1ga. Boston: Wisdom Publications. Mignucci, AI do. 200 I. "Three Thirteenth Century Tlwngkas: A Rediscovered Tradation from Yazang Mona'ltery?" Orientations. vol. 32, no. 10, pp. 24-32. Ngorchen. 1968. Record ofTeaclmrg Recm·ed. See Ngor chen Kun dga' b2iillg po. 17rob )Tg rgyamtsho. Saskya p3'i bka' 'bwn, 101. 9, pp. 44.4.1- 108.2.6 (l:a 90a-217a). Tokyo. T<>yo Bunko. Pal, Pratapadil)'a 1982. A Buddlust Paradrse: The Murals ofA/chi Western 1/unalayas. Hong Kong: Ravi Kumar for Visual Dharma Pub Iications. - --. 1983. Art a/Tibet: A Caw/ague ofthe Los Angeles County Museum ofArt Collection. Los Angeles: University of California Press. Enlarged second edition, Los Angeles: Los Angeles County Musewn of An, 1990. - -- .. 1984. Ttbetan Paitwngs: A Sllldyof Ttbetan Paintings. £/e•·emh 10 ,\ uwteentlr Cmturies. Basel: Ra\ i KumariSotheby Publications. Coll~ction. I 1>1. Ill: Sculpture and Painting. Newark: 11le Newart.. Musewn. t(;ya ston Byang chub dbang rgyal. 200 I. Chos A}i rje thams cad mkhyen pa rtlo rye gtlan pa chen pa kun dgo ·mom rgyal tlpal b=ang pa 'imam par thor pa ngo mtshar rin pa che 'i gter md=od. Lhasa: Shang kang then rna dpe skrun khang. t(;yud sde kun btus pa'i thob ytg. 1971. rGyud sde rin pa eire kwr los billS pa 'i tilob yig de b=hin gshegs pa thams cad k)·t gsong ba ma Ius pa gcig 111 'dus pa rdo r;e rin pa cile 'i =o ma tog. In 'Jam db)angs Blo gter dbang po ed., rGyud sde nn pa che kun las billS pa lt=hugs so, pp. 1-237. Delha. N. Lungtok & N. Gyaltsen. Rhie, Marylin M., and Roben A. F. Thurman. 1991. Wisdom and Compassion: The Sacred Art af1ibet. New York: llenry N. Abrams. - - -. 1996. Wei.•ileit wrd Liebe: I 000 .Jahre Kunst des tibeti.1che11 BuddhismtJS. Bonn: Kunst- und Ausstcll ungshalle dcr Bundesrepublik Deutschland. - - -. 1999. lll>rlds of Transformation. Tibetan Art ofWisdom Ulld Compassio11. New York: Tibet House New York m association with 11le Shelly and Donald Rubin Foundation and Hatr) N. Abrams. Sc.hiefner, Anton. 1869. Taranlitha s Geschichte des BuddlusmtJS m lndren [1608 AD]. Obtrset:l atJS dem Ttbetischen. St. Petersburg. Kaaserl ichc Al:ademie der Wissenschafien. Schmidt, Klaus T. 1989. Der Schluflteil des Prlillmo/cyasrltm der Strl"''liSiil'iidinr: Text in San.vkrittmd Tocltoriscil A •·erglichen mit Paralle/a·ersionen anderer Sch11len. Sonskriuexte aus den Turfanfw•den XIII. Goningen: Vandenhocck & Ruprecht Schroeder, Ulnch von. 200 I. Buddhist Sadpturrs in Ttbet. 2 'ols. Hong Kong: Visual Dharma Publ icatrons. - - -. 2006. Empo11 ertd Masters: Ttbetan Wall Pamtmgs afMahiisrddilas at Gyantse. Chicago. Senndaa Publications. Schroeder, Ulrich von, and Heidi von Schroeder. 2009. nheum Art of the Aloin Bordier Foundation. Hong Kong: Visual Dharma Publications. Schwieger, Peter. 1996. ''The Lineage of the Nobel House ofGa-Za in East Tibet." Kailash, vol. 18, no. 3-4, pp. 115- 132. Selig Bro\\n, Kathryn. 2002. "Early Tibetan fOOtprint Thang kas, 12th-14th Cenrury." In E. Lo Bue cd., 77.e Ttbet Journal. vol. 27, nos. 1-2, pp. 71-112. - -- . 1991. Art afthe lhmalayas: Trl!asul'l!s from Nepal tmd Ttbet. New York: lludson Hills Press. Richardson, Hugh. 1998. 1/rgil Peaks. Pure Eartlr: - - - . 1997. Tibet: Tradition tmd Cila11ge. Albuquerque. New Mexico: The Albuquerque Museum . Roerich, George N., trans. 1949-53. 77re Blue Annals [Deb-t her sngon-po]. 2 vols. Calcuna: Royal Asiatic Society of Bengal. Reprint, New Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1988, I vol. Singer, Jane Casey. 1994. "Paintings in Central Tibet, ca. 950- 1400." Anibus Asiae. vol. 54, no. I& 2, pp. 87-136. Roloff, Carola. 2009. Red mtla · ba. Buddhist - - -. 1995. ·'Early l'onrait Painting in Tibet." In K. R. van KOOiJ ed., Function and Meaning in Buddhrst Art, pp. 81-99. Groningen: E. Forsten. Pal, Pratapaditya, and Hsien-ch'i Tseng. 1969. Lamaist Art: The Aesthetics afllonllall)l. Boston: Museum of Fine Ans. Pal, Pratapaditya et at. 2003. 1/rmalayas. An AestlreticAd.-eiiiiiTI'. Chicago. 11le An Institute of Chicago. Pa\\o Tsuklag Trengwa See dPa' bo gTsug lag phreng ba Prats, Ramon N., et at. 2000. Monastertos y lamas de/1ibe1. Barcelona, Sp3in: La Caixa. Prats, Ramon N., ed. 2007. The Pt•l•<lita am/ the Siddha: Tibewn Studies in llor10r of E. Gene Smith Dharamshala: Amnye Machen Institute. Collected Writings 011 Ttbeton 1/mory and C11f111re. London: Serindia Publications. Yogi-Scholar ofthe Fourteelllil C~ntury: The Forgouen Rem·er ofMadilyamaka Philosophy m Ttbet. Wtesbadcn. Dr. Ludwig Reichert Verlag. Rosenfield, J., et at. 1966. Tile Am oflndw and Nepal: The Nasir and A free 1/eertrmaneck Collection. Boston: Museum of fine Ans. Rossi. Anna Maria, and Fabio Rossi. 1994. Selection 1994. London: Rossi publications. Rta !Shag Tshe dbang rgyal. 1994. U.o rong chos 'byw1g. Gangs can ng mdzod no. 26. Lhasa: Bod ljongs bod y•g dpe rnying dpe skrun khang. Pr~bish, Charles S. 1975. Buddlrm Monastrc Drscipline: Th~ Sansknt Priillmolqo Siitras oft!J~ .\fah/Js/Jrpgilikas and Miilasarwistil·iidins. UniHISll) Park and London: The Pennsyh ania State Unl\erstty Press. Raghu Vita, and Lokesh Chandra. 1995. Tibetan Ma!rf/alas: Vajrtimli and Ttmtra Samuccaya. Satapi[oka Series No. )83. New Delhi: International Academy of Indian Culture. Reynolds, Val rae. Amy Heller, and Janet Gyatso. 1986. The Newark Museum 'nbetan l.l.:!. BIBLIOGRAPHY Sakaki, Ryozaburo, ed. 1916 and 1925. J.lahth')'utpaltl. KyOto. Shmgonshu KyOto Daigalru. Reprint, Tok)O; Suzulu Research Foundation, 1962, 2 10ls. Schaeffer. Kurtis R. 2000. ''The religious career of Vairocanavajra- A twelfth-century indian Buddhist master from Oak~iQa Kosala." Journal a/Indian Philosoph)\ vol. 28, no. 4, pp. 361-384. Schick, Jorgen. 1998. The Gods are Leol'lng the Counlly: Art 111ejifrom Nepal. Bangkok: Orchid Press. - - -. 20Q.I. Etenwl Presence: Handprints and Footprmts m Buddhw Art. Katonah, NY: Katonah Museum of An. - -.. 1996. ~Early Thangl:as. EleventhThoneenth Centuries.~ In P. Pal ed., On tile Path 10 ~l>rd: Buddhut Art ofthe Ttbetan Realm. pp. 180-95. Mwnbai: Marg Publ icnt ions. - - -. 1997. ''Taklung Painting." In Jane Casey Singer, and Philip Denwood eds., Ttbeum An· Towards a De.fimtion ofStyle, pp. 5267, figs. 36-49. London: Laurence King. Singer, Jane Casey, et al. 1993. Tibetan Painted Mandalas. [No pagination or nwnbering. unbound lea,es.] London: Rossi and Rossi. Singer, Jane Casey, and Philip Denwood, eds. 1997. Ttbetan Art: Towards a Dejinillon of Style. London. Laurence King. Smith, E. Gene. 1970. Introduction to Kongtnrl's £ncyclopedw oflndo-Ttbetan C11lfllre. Sata-pi!J)ka Senes, vol. 80. New Delhi: International Academy of Indian Culture. - - -. 2001. Among Tibetan Texts: History tmd Literature of/Ire 1/ima/aytm Plateau, ed. Kunos R. Schaeffer. Boston: Wisdom PubIicat ions. Snellgrove, David L., ed. 1978. The Image of the Buddha. London: Serindia Publications. - - -. I 987.1ndo-Tibetan Buddhism: Indian TBRC: Tibetan Buddhist Resource Center, accessed February-March 2009, http://tbrc. orglsearchl. Buddhists and their Tibetan successors. London: Serindia. Snellgrove, David L., and Tadell~Z Skorupski. I 977. The Cultural Heritage afLadakh: Central Ladakh. vol. I. Warminster: Aris & Phillips. Snellgrove, David, and Tadeusz Skorupski. I 980. The Cultural Heritage of Ladakh: Zangskar and 1he Ctn•e Temples ofLadakh, vol. 2. Warminster: Aris and Phill ips. Sobisch, Jan. 2008. Life, Transmissions. and Worl<s ofA-mes-=lwbs Ngag-dbong-kun.tfga ·• bsod-nams. the Grr!Ot 17th Century Sa-skyapa Bibliophile. Wiesbaden: Dr. Ludwig Reichert Verlag. Sofukawa, Hiroshi et al. 2009. Seichi chibello: potarakyii to tenkti no shihi!. Tiber, Treasures from the Roofof the World. Tokyo: Daiko Advertising Inc. All~trian Academy of Sciences Press. - - -. 1997. Art ofThangka: A Caw Iogue of the Holm Found(IJion for Museum. Vol. I . Seoul: Hahn Foundation for Mll<ieum. Weldon, David, and Jane Casey Singer. 1999. The - - -. 1999. Art ofTJwngko fivm Holm Kwang-ha Collection, Vol. 2. Seoul: Hahn Foundation for Museum. - - -. 200 I. Arl ofThongka fivmthe Hahn Kwang-ho Collection, Vol. 3. Seoul: The Hahn Cultural Foundation. - - -. 2003. At1 ofTiwngka from the Hahn Kwang-lra Collection, Vol. 4. Seoul: The Hahn Cultural Foundation. Tanaka, Kimiaki, and Yoshitomo Tarnashige, eds. 2004. Tamashige Tibet Collection: Gems of Thangka Art. Tokyo: Watanabe Book Co. Ta~hi Tsering. 2007. ';On the Dates of sTang stong rgyal po." In Ramon N. Prats ed. 2007, The Pa~ufita and the Siddha: Tibetan Swdies fn Honor ofE. Gene Smith, pp. 268-278. sTag lung Ngag dbang mam rgyal. I 992. Brgyud Gangs can rig mdzod, vol. 22. Lhasa: Bod ljongs bod yig dpe mying dpe skrun khang. Steams, Cyrus. 200 I. Luminous Lives: The Stoty ofthe Early Masters of the Lam 'brtzs Tradition in Tibet. Boston: Wisdom Publications. - - - . 2007. King of the Empry Plain: The Tibeltm!ron-Bridge Builder Tangrong Gyalpo. Ithaca: Snow Lion Publications. Stein, R. A. 1972. Tiberan Ci••ili=arion. London: Faber and Faber ltd. Revised English translation of La civilisorion ribhaine, Paris: Dunod, 1962. Stewan., Jampa Mackenzie. 1995. The Life of Gampopo: The Incomparable Dharma Lord of Tibet. 1st ed. Ithaca, N.Y.: Snow Lion Publications. Stoddard, Heather. 1996. "Early Tibetan Paintings: Sources and Styles (Eleventh-Fourteenth Centuries)." Archiws ofAsian A11, vol. 49 (XLIX), pp. 26-50. - - - . 1998. "The 'Indian Style' rGya lugs on an Early Tibetan Book Cover." In D. Klimburg-Salter and E. Allinger eds., The Inner Asian International Style 12th-14th Centuries, pp. 121-132. Wien: Verlag der Osterreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. - - -. 2003. "Fourteen Cenruries ofTibetan Portraiture." In D. Din";ddie ed., PortJ·aits ofthe Masters: Bron=e ScufplwT!s of the Tibetan Buddhist Lineages, pp. 16-6 I. Chicago and London: Serindia Publications and Oliver Hoare. Dharamshala: Amnye Machen Institute. Waddell, L.A. 1885. ~Description of Lha<;a Cathedral, translated from the Tibetan." Dharamshala: Amnye Machen Institute. pa yid b=hin nor bu'i rtogs po btjod pa ngo mtslwr rgya mrsho [sTag lung chos , byzmg]. A Literary and Visual ReconstntCJion ofthe "Mother" Monastety in Gu.ge. Tanaka, Kimiaki. 1996. "The Usefulness of Buddhist Iconography in Analysing Style in Tibetan Art." The Tiber Joumal. vol. 21-2, pp. 6-9. Sorensen, PerK., and Guntram Hazod. 2007. Rulers ofrhe Celesrial Plain: Ecclesiastic and Secular Hegemony in Medieval Tiber: a Study ofTshal Gzmg-thang. Vienna: Vitali, Roberto. 1999. Record; ofTizo.ling: Joamal of the Royal Asiatic Societ)\ Calcuua, vol. 64-1, pp. 259-283. Scafplura/ Heritage ofTibet: Buddhist Art in the Nyingjei Lam Collection. London: Laurence King. - - -. 2003. Faces of Tibet: The Wesley and Carolyn Halpert Collection. New York: Carlton Rochell Ltd. Willson, Martin, and Martin Brauen, eds. 2000. Deities of Tibetan Buddhism: The Zurich Paintings of the Icons Wortlnl'hi/e to See [Bris sku mthon ba don !dan]. Boston: Wisdom Pub I ication. Zhang g.Yu brag pa brTson 'grus grags pa (I 1231193). 1972. "rGyud pa sna tshogs [Diverse Lineages]." In Kharns sprul Don brgyud nyi rna ed., Writings [bKa' thor bu], pp. 433445. Palampur: Sungrab Nyamso Gyunpel Patkhang. Zwalf, W., ed. 1985. Buddhism: Art and Fairh. London: British Museum Publications. Terentyev, A. 20 I0. The Sanda/woad Buddha of the King Udayana. St. Petersburg: Narthang. Thubten Legshay Gyatso, and Chogay Trichen Rinpoche. 1979. Gateway to the Temple: A Manual of Tibetan Monastic Customs. Art. Building and Celebrations. Bib Iiotheca Himalayica, Series m, vol. 12. Kathmandu: Ratna Pustak Bhandar. Tsering Gyalpo, Guntram Hazod, and Per K. S0rensen. 2000. Civili=ation tztthe Foor of Mount Sham-po: The Royal House of /Ha Bug-pa-ean and the History ofg. Yo·. b=ong. HisJOricol Texts fivmthe Monastety ofg. Ya '-b=ong in Yar-stod (Cemral Tibet). Beitrage zur Kultur und Geistesgeschichte Asiens Nr. 36. Wien: Osterreichische Akadem ie der Wissenschaften. Tsering, Nawang, and Aditya Arya. 2009. A /chi, the Living Heritage of Ltzdakh. Leh-Ladakh: Central Institute of Buddhist Studies & Likir Monastery. Tucci, Giuseppe. 1949. Tibetan Painted Scrolls. 3 vols. Roma: La Libreria Delio State. Reprint, Kyoto: Rinsen Book Co., 1980, 2 vols. - - -. 1956. To Lhasa and Beyond. Diwy of the Expedflionro Tiber in the Year MCMXLVIfl [1948]. Roma : lnstiruto Poligrafico dello Stato. - - -. 1973. Transhimalaya [Ancient CivilizatioM]. London: Barrie & Jenkins. - - -. 1980. The Religions ofTibet. Berkeley: University of California Press. M I RROR OF THE BUDDHA 223 INDEX A c Abhayakaragupta, 18, 94-95. 180, 183. 195, 199, 2 10 A cal a, 83, 184. 201 Akbar (a mkhar), 44, 64, J 19,206 Akhu Ching Sherab Gyatsho (A khu Ching Shes rab rgya mtsho). 88 Ak$obhya, 8 1 Alchi, 9, 13, 16-17,21.24, 133-134, 165, 171 -1 77, 179, 183, 186, 192., 199. 206. 208-212 Allinger, Eva, 68, 199,200,208-209 Amitabha, 13.74-75 Amitayus, 24-25,29 Amsuvarman. 140 Anandavajra. 140. 180. 194 Anavatapta, 155. 166 Anuttarayoga. 91. 116, 117. 125 Apalala. 158 Apowa, 55 Arhats, Sixteen, 54-55. 122, 200, 209 Asanga, 140. 204 AtiSa Drparplcarasrrjilana, 9, 13,23-24,26,29-30, 37-38,40,44-46. 50, 52, 54-55, 67-70, 72, 7479. 82. 90-91.94. 125-126. 146. 178. 184-1 85. 197-1 98,200-202. 205-206 Avadhntipa, 84 Avalokitesvara, 36, 44, 65, 72. 74-75. 79, 83. 85. 108. 119, 166. 176,201-202.209 Sa4ak$ara, 4, 75-76 Cakrasamvara, 26, 77, 83, 85, 108, 119 Cha Chekhawa. 68, 70 Cha TsondrU 0, 67, 68 Chag lo Rin oen chos rgyal, 204 Charnpalingpa Sllnam Gyaltshen. 97 Chapa Cbokyi Sengge. 79 Chayulwa. 70. 126 Chekhawa, 67,70 Chim Narnkha Drak, 77 Chinese artistic elements, 97 Cbogyal Phalcpa (Chos rgyal 'Phags pa). 18. 44, 85. 106-107, 199,205 Choje Drakphukpa (Chos rje Brog phug pa), 85 Choku Orgyen Gonpo. 106. 119. 122. 129-130. 203. 205 8 Ba lingta A tsarya, 30 Bari Lotsawa (Ba ri Lo t.ta ba Rin chen grogs pa). 85. 94 Bautze-Picron, Claudine. 14-15. 198.200. 202, 208 bDe gshegs rGya bo ba, 199 Beguin, Gilles, 8-9, 42. 83-84, I00, I 09. Ill , 124, 198, 203,205,209 Bengal, I, 9, 15. 31 -32. 67, 70, 75, 78, 198, 201 Beri (Bal ris) style. 1-2, 4. 7 . 9. 11 -12, 18, 67. 8283 . 85. 87-88. 90-91.93. 138, 198. 201.205 early. I I. 141 Bhairava. 30. 200 bhaO Oiiraka Punyadvajapada, 204 BlueAnnal.v, 29, 78, 94, 98, 108, 126, 136, 140, 202, 207, 209. 2 10, 2 11. See also Go LoiSawa Bodh Gaya, 15. 75, 78 Brag phug pa, 203 Buddha Sakyamuni, 14-15, 26-27, 35. 4 1, 44, 50. 53-54. 58~. 75. 81,98. 108, 125-126.133. 140. 146. 159, 166-168.1 80. 184,198.201. 203-204, 208 Buddhaghosa, 94 Buddhashrr, 84-85 Bu ston Rin chen grub, 9. 30 224 I NDEX Dusum Khyenpa. See Karmapa. First Dwags po Lha rje. 107, 126. See also Garnpopa. E Eastern-Indian style. See Sharri style Eastern Vinaya, 9, 57, 199,201 eight auspicious symbols, 26 eight great adepts. 54. 57, 116, 129, 155, 16 1, 179, 180,184, 196. 201 eighty-four great adepts. 46, 57. 180. 186.21 1 F five great founders. 44 fourdeities.67, 108. 119, 16 1 four great kings, 36 Fournier, Lionel, 9. 109, Il l, 198 0 Dalai Lama. Fifth, 16, 29-30, 36. 55, 72, 94, 199206 Darma Lotro (Dtw ma blo gros). 70 oarikapada, 203 Dasabalasrr, 94 Densa Thel. 108, 11 0, 136. 163. 202 Deumar Geshe. I. 16. 198 Dharmasna, 122 Dharmatala, 55 Dharmagupta, 94, 204 Dbarmakrrti of Sumatra, 54 Dignaga, 140,204 Dinmuka. 98 Dngul chu Bla rna Chos bzang, 203 Dngul chu Dhanna bha dra. 203 Dombi Heruka. 203 Don ri ba Grags pa dpal bzang, 200 dpe md=od ma, 138, 205 Drakpa Gyaltshen (Crags pa rgyal mtshan). 38, 4 1,44. 83-85.87-88,90,105-106,186,189 Drakpa Jungnay, 94, 110-11 1 Drakpa Pal , 30, 11 5 Drakpa Sengge (Crags pa seng ge). Prince. 140 Drakphukpa (Cbojc), 85 Drathang, 57. 201, 202 Drenka Lhabso Lutsen Trak, 78 Drigung Kyoppa Jigten Gunpo, 38, 11 0, 134, 138, 155, 158-163. 167 Drokmi Lotsawa ( 'Brog miLo tsii ba), 58, 84 Dromton Gyalway Jungnay ( 'Brom st011 rGyal ba i 'byung g.ws), 37-38,44-46,67-68,70-78, 82, 91. 125, 126. 146. 200-202, 205-206 Drophukpa Shilkya Sengge. 29 Drowa Ukjin. 140 Dungkar Losang Thrinlay (Du11g dkar Blo b=a11g 'phrin/os), 166 Dunhuang, 8-9, 24 Durjayacandra, 203 G Gampopa (sCam po pa), 30, 33, 72, 105, 107. 125-1 26, 129, 136, 146, 148, 175, 184.206, 208,2 11 Garbharipada. 203 garuda. 4. 163, 164 Gayadhara. 36. 58, 84, 140. 20 I Gazi, 11 9, 205-206 gcod, 64, 183 Geluk. 65, 67,87-88. 90-9 1, 106,200 Gelung Village. 100 Geway Lotro Chokyi Pal Zangpo. 140 Glan Shakya byang chub, 29 Glan Shakya bzang po. 29. 199 Ghao!apada (Dril bu pa). 189-1 90, 211 G6 Lotsawa, 76, 78, 94, 108. 136, 140, 162. 199. 201 -202. 204, 206-208 Goepper, Roger. 17, 172, 175,208-209.211-2 12 Gomadevr, 199 Gompa Rinchen Dorje, 158 Gongkar Dorjedenpa, 29-30, 97-98. 204 Guhyasamaja. 29-30, 4 1. 50,70. 138. 140. 143, 155, 158. 161.201 Mailjuvajra Guhyasamaja, 29, 70, 138. 143144, 155 Gyaltshab Darma Rinchen, 65. 90 Gyantse, 46, 94. 97 GyatOn Jalcriwa, 126 Gyer Gompa Shonnu Trakpa. 70 Fl Heller.Amy.3.39,43.62.130-13 1.134. 148. 159. 198, 200. 206-208 Hevajra. 82, 180,205 Huntington. Susan and J ohn, 7-8, 10-15, 28-29, 68, 93,198- 199. 201.203 I Imperial Preceptors. 40 lndrabhoti. 36. 108. 140. 143. 184. 196.210. 21 I J Jackson, David, 3-4, 10. 12. 22. 42. 49. 52. 56. 63. 76. 79.80-81 ,84-90. I 12. 159. 167. 175. 179. 183.186. 198-208. 2 12 Jnkriwa (Lcags ri ba). 126 Jalandharap:tda. 203 Ja) .Sri. 203 Jenngawa. I 26 J•gme 010kyi Dorje. 26 Jigten Gonpo. Drigungpa Rmchen Pal. 23. 38. I 10. 134.138. 155. 158-163.167.172.209 J•gten Wangchulc. 13 I Jilphuwa. 67, 70 Jl\larnma. 16 Jiinnatapa, 57. 116, 129 Jilnnavajra, 85 Jokhang Temple. 9. I I Jucker collection. 52. 179. 199. 209-210 K Kadampa. 9- 10. 13. 15. 23-24.37-39.44.46-47 , 50. 52. 67. 70. 72.74-79.82. 88-91. I 17. 125126.129. 140. 198.20Q-202. 204 earl).37.70. 72.75. 77 four deities. 72. 126 "Kadampa St)le''. 9-10. 13-15. 67 Kag)U. 13. 33. 38. 41. 46. 67. 81. 105. 110. 130, 133-134. 136. 138. 146. 155-167. 169. 172. 175. 179.184. 201 . 206.209.211 Dakpo,30,97. 105- 106. 125.134.146 Drigung,41,46.67, 133-134. 136. 146.155. 158, 169 Taklung, 41. 82. 105-106. 108. 130. 134. 136 Kn•.1ha. See J<J:s 0 apada Karma Pakshi, 80-8 I Karmapa Firs!. 79. 136. 179. 183- 184. 186. 192. 196. 21 I Founh. 203 Third. 81-82. 179.203.21 I Karmay. Healher. 9. 50. 200. 202 Kashmir. 7. 53. 79. 198 Kathok Siru (Kao thok Situ). 55. I06. 138. I 43, 201 -202. 205. 207 Khache Panchen. 23 Kham, 11,44. 64. 82.105-106.112.114. 116-117. I 19, I 22, 130. 134. 136.202. 205-206 Khara-Khoto. 8 Khedrup Gyalwa (mKhas grub rGyol ba). 122 Khu lung Yon tan rgya rntsho. I 99 Khut!m (Khu ston). 77 Khyung po dByig gi rdo rje. I 99 Khyung Rio chen grags. 85 Khmburg-Salter. Deborah.&. 9.13. 156. 198-199. 201.208. 209 KonglTlll Lotro Thaye (Kotrg spntl Blo gros mtho · yas). I. 15 Kossa~.Steven.12- 13.15.24-27.31.38.40.47, 49-50. 55. 68-72, 86.95. I 10. I 14. I 18-119. 122. 124. 129. 135. 141-142. 144. 154. 159. 167,198-202,204-206.208-212 Ko!filipa, 140 Kreijger, H.. 52. 56. 99. 179. 199-200.209-2 12 Kr$0acllrin (Nag pa spyod fXI). See Kr.~nn1>lldn Kr$napada (Nag po po). 30. 84-85. 190-191 Kuku Raja. 199 Kurmapada. 203 Kushana. 26 Kuyal Rinchen Gon. 107-108.205 Kuyalwa. 106. 108. I 12-113. 115. I 17. 125, 127. 205 Kycrgangpa. 74-75 Kyura,44 L Laliravajra. 94. 204 Ladakh. 9. 12. 24. 133-134. 171-1 72.208-209 Langri Thangpa (Giang n thong po). 78, I 26 Lhachok Sengge. 19 LhUndrub Cbophel (Uum gntb elm 'phel), 78 Lima Lhalchang. 27. 46 Ling Repa. 33. 46. 49 Linrolhe. R. N.. 55. 156. 20 I. 209-212 LoBue. E.. 10. 9-l. 97.204. 206 Lochen Sonam Gyatsho. 97. 98 Lotro Gyaltsben Palzangpo (8/o gro.< rgyalmtslwn dpol b:tmg po). 122 Lotro Tenpa (8/o gros brta11 pa), 85 Lowo Khenchen Si:lnam Lhundrup (Gia ba mkhan chen bS<x/ noms limn grub). 82-85,98, 100. I 02, 203-204 Luczanits. Christian. 21. 24. 72. 122. 133-1 34. 146. 155-156. 159. 171. 199-211 Luhipada. 203 Lurnbini. 58. 208 Lurne Dromchung. 55 :II Magadba. I. 32. 50. 78. 79. 198 Mahakala, 33. 83. 183- 185. 197 Mahamudrli, 125. 21 0 mahiisiddhas. 46. 54. 57. 116. 122. 129, 140, 155. 161. 176. 179-1 80. 184-1 86. 189. 196.201. 211 Mahayoga. 29 Mahipala. 14,75 ~ueya. 70.75.82.84-85.91.1 98.201,210 Majig Labdron. 62 Mandarava. 60-61 ManggarGang (Mang 'gar sgang). 136 ~jt~Sn.36.55.70. 75.82. 84-85.91.100.166. 176.198.201.209-210 Maiijuirinwlakalpo Tontro. 199 Marpa. 23. 30. 32.43-44. 62. 106. I 19. I 25, 130. 136. 146. 173. 189. 198 Marpa Lhanying (Mar fX' /.Ira sttying), 136 Martin. Dan. 180. 183. 199.201,203.206-207. 209-210 Mayadevr. Queen. 58-60 Medicine Buddha. 63. 65. 72 Menri (sMan ris) style. I. 93 Milarepa (Mi Ia ras pa). 23. 30. 33. 44, 46. 48. 107. 130. 146. 173. 175 Minyak Panc:lila Drakpa Dorje. 98 Miwang SOnant Dorje. 119.206 MUcben. 19. 22 Mulctipaksa (Phyogs grol). 98 MUStang. 98. I 00. I02. 204 :-I Nagarjuna.54. 76.91. 140. 168. 184,190, 196. 203-204, 211 Nagtsho Lotsawa. 26. 29.76-78. 202 Nai raunya. 84. 203 Nalanda. 8. 15. 64. 78. 208 Naljorpa Chenpo. 78. 126.206 Nllropa. 106. 125. 173. 190-191.208-209,212 Nii)akapada. 9-l Newar features. 16. 35. 87, 91, 138. 198.200 Ngok Lekpay Sherab (r,\'gog Legs po ·;shes rob). 77 Ngorchen Kunga Zan gpo (A'gor chen Kun dga · b:tmgpo). 17-22.82-85.91, 192. 199,203 Nyi:l Drakpa Pal (gNyos Grogs pa dpal). 29-30. 199 Nyi:l Lotsawa (gNyo.v /..() tsli ba Yon tan grogs). 23. 30. 200 Nyukrumpa. 126. 129,206 0 0 rg)an mgon po. 106. 129.201 O<jc:li)ilna. 36. 107. 140 p Padmasambhava. 36. 58, 60-62, 65, 116. 122. 185. 201,2 11 Padmavajra. 9-1, 140. 184, 197, 2 11 Pal. Pratapaditya. 2. 8-1 0. 12-1 3. 15. 20, 22, 28. 39.43.59.68.76.84.8 9,92. 11 7.127, 148. 155. 198-199.201 , 2~205 Pala style. Sec also Sharn St)le. I. 8. 10. 13- 14. 79.203 Palden Lhamo (dPalldan lha mo). 122 Palden Seng~ (dPalldan mrg ge). 203 Pal den Tshullrim (dPalldon tshul khrims). 83. 85. 203 Pawo Tsul..lag Treng" a. 78. 138, 202 Peripheral elements. 4. 16 I -164. 208-209 Phadarnpa Sang~e (Pha dam pa Songs tgyos). 46. 64, 116. 122. 136, 146, 176. 183-184. 186. 195.201 , 207.2 10-2 11 Phagmotrupa. 16-1 7, 33.72,88. 94. 97, 105-1 08. 110. I 14-115. 11 7. 126, 129. 134-136. 138144. 146-148, 161-164, 169,201.205-206 Phclgye Ling. 138 Pondrung Drolma. I00 Potala Palace. 26-27. 32. 44. 46 PrahastJ. 199 Q Qianlong Emperor. 36 R Rahulaguptavajra. 74 Ratnakara. 94. I07 Ratnakrrti. 9-l Rendawn (Red mda · ba). 168 Reting Mon:ll.tcry. 67. 72. 78. 20 I Rhie. Marylin. II. 37. 57-58.60,68.73. 86. 90. 100.112.118.128-129 .151.200-203.205206.211 -212 Richardson. Hugh. 107 Rinchen Sherab Pal Zangpo (Rin chen shes rob dpol b:ang pa). 122 Rincben Zan gpo (Rm chen b=ang pa). 21. 79. 134. 146.185.202.206.209 Riwoche. 13- I4. 44. 55. 82. I05-108. 113. I I 5117. 119. 122. 129-131. 134. 138. 141.201. 203. 205-206 s Sachen Kung a Nyingpo (Sit chen Ktm dga ·snying po).42.44. 79.82-87, 94.105-106. 136. 186. 190.203.205.207 MIRROR OF THE BUDDHA 225 Sahajavajra, I 40 Sakya Lotsawa. 98-99 Sakya Monastery, 82 Sakya paintings, 82, 19 1 Sakya Par)Qita, 2, 38, 40, 44, 85. 87-88. 168. 189191 , 199 Sakya~n1>hadra. 24, 50. 53 Samantabhadra. I 99 Samayavajra, I 40 Sanggye Onpo (Sangs rgyas dbon po), 14. 44, 105107, I I 1- 117. I 19, 122, 124, 129-130, 141, 143, 146, 205-206 Sanggye Rinchen (Sangs rgyas rin chen), 19 SanggyeYarj1ln. 106-107, 111 -11 3, 116-117, 122, 126, 128-129. 205 Sangphu Monastery, 79 Saraha. 140. 180, 184, 196. 203,211 Sarvajagannalha, 140 Savaripada, 203 Sazang Phakpa (Sa b=ang 'Phags po), J 7-19, J 99 von Schroeder. Ulrich, 27, 202 Sekhar Guthok tower, 2 L 23 Selig Brown, K., 79,109, 157-158. 202.205. 207, 209 Sena dynasty, I. 7, 67 Se!On Kunrik (Se stan Krm rig). 84 Shanrbhala, 36, 64-65, 87 Shangt1ln Ch1lbar (Zhang ston Chos 'bar). 23, 50, 84-85,204 Sharchen Yeshe Gyaltshen, 82-83,85 Sharri (sharrls)sryle, 1,2,4, 7-1 5,21,57, 67, 70, 72, 75. 79,81-84, 87, 9 L 93. 105. 119. 122. 130,134, 143. 163- 165.198. 205 early. 4. 10-11, 13,55 end of. 122 name, 15 neo-Sharri, 9 I nimbuses. 93, 143 pre-Sharri depictions, 24 previous research, 7 Simhanada, 83 Singer. JaneCasey, 11 -13. 16-17.2.5-26.3 1,38, 4 1. 43 . 47. 49-50. 55. 68-69, 7 I, 8 1. 86. 94-95. 100, 102, 107, 109-110, 112-114, 11 6- 117, 11 9-120, 123-1 25, I 29-130, 133, 136, 138, 143, 144, 153, 159, 167. 198-212 Sonam Tsemo (bSad nams rtse mo). 44, 79. 83, 84, 106, 186, 190, 203, 205 Sorensen. Per. 30. I98-200, 205 S rTbhadra. 94 S toddard. Heather. 13. 15, 23 , 40. 94, 144. 205 Surchung Sherab Drakpa. 29 T Taglung Thangpa Chenpo (sTag lung Thang po chen po). 179, 183, 209 Taklungmonastery, 13,23,41, 67,82, 105-1 08. 11 2-117, 119, 12 1-122.125-127. 129-13 1. 134, 136. 138, 140. 146. 164. 179, 183-184, I86. 192. 20 I -203. 205-206. 209-2 I0 Taklung-Riwoche paintings, 82. 105, 107. I 12. I 19, 129 Taklungthangpa, 105- 110, 11 2- 123, 12.5-126, 13 1, 134. 136, 143-144, 146, 149-154. 161 -168. 179, 183, 200, 20.5-206, 209 Tara, Green, 12, 4445, 68. I76, 20 I Tara. White. 126 Taranatha, I, I5. 2 I0 tathagatas. five, I99 Thangpa Chenpo (Thang pa chen po). I 29 Thangtong Gyalpo, 17, 36 Tholing. 202. 204 226 I NDEX Thongmon Topa S6nam Chodzin. 208 T hurman, Roben, I I, 37, 58, 60, 68, 73, 86, 90, 100, 112, I 18, 128-129. 151,200,203. 205206, 2 11-212 Tibetan paintings as realistic depictions, I6, 176, 20 I chronology. 12. I71 divine iconographic types. 133-134. 168 early, 27. 105 human iconographic types, 35-37, 40, 167 inscription types, 2 1 lineage representations. 20, 3 I -32. 39, 42, 63. 72. 80,83, 93 . 107-108, 114- 116. 11 8-1 20, l n- 1 3~ 1 46, 1®-l li i ~IQ, I 75- I M, 179-180, 186 styles. 13 taxonomies. I5 Tilopa, 30. 32, 106. 146. 173. 190-191.208 Trashipal (bKra shis dpal). 179 Tsongkhapa ( Tsong kha pa), 16- 17. 65,87-93,201, 203-204 Tucci, Giuseppe, 2, 7- 11, 16, 28,89, 133, 186. 192, I98. 200-20 I, 203-204, 208, 21 1 Tusira heavens. 76-n IJ universal emperors. 26. 36. 208 Upananda, 158, 166 Upasika, 77, 200 v Vairocana. I I, 81 , 176, 178-180. 195,210 Vairoc.~navajra. 180, 183, 186.210 Vajradhara, 19, 30, 32. 8 1. 84-85, 94. 98-99, 113, 119. 12 1, 125. 129, 146. 180. 190, 194. 203204. 208. 210 Vajragarbha. 84 VajraghaQtapada, 203 Vajrap:l!)i , 75, 83, 180,203. 208, 210 Vajrasana, 94. 180, I95. 202 Vajrasauva, 9. I0, 28-30, 32, 173, I90, I95, 208, 2 10-2 1 I Vajrih·ali. 18, 94. 95. 199. See also Abhayakaragupta VajravarahT. 61 -62. 108, I 10-112. I 19. 186, 189190 Vaj rayogiiJL 62, 94, 204 Vanaratna. 46, 94-98, 204 Vijayapada. 203 Vikhyatadeva. 94 Vimlilagupra, 30 Vi mal amirra. I99 VTravajra (dPa' bo rdo rje). 140. 203 VirOpa. 84, 85, 140, 203 w Wangdrak of Shekar. 208 Western Tibe~ 10. 59, 89 Wok Lhakhang Keru. 76 y Yamantaka. 30 Yarlung, 44, 64-65 Yazang Choje (g. Ya · b=ang Chos tje), 4 Yazang Monastery, 4, 209 Yeshe Lhadron. 208 Yeshe Senge. 140 Yeshe Tshogyal, 6 1-62 Yisho Palgyi Riwochc, 205 Yondak Dorje Rinchen, 115 z Zurchung, 29

RELATED PAPERS

RELATED TOPICS

Log In

Mirror of the Buddha: Early Portraits from Tibet.pdf

Mirror of the Buddha: Early Portraits from Tibet.pdf

Related Papers

RELATED PAPERS

RELATED TOPICS