Archaeologies of the Written: Indian, Tibetan, and
Buddhist Studies in Honour of Cristina Scherrer-Schaub
Series Minor
LXXXIX
Direttore
Francesco Sferra
Comitato di redazione
Giorgio Banti, Riccardo Contini, Junichi Oue,
Roberto Tottoli, Giovanni Vitiello
Comitato scientifico
Anne Bayard-Sakai (INALCO), Stanisław Bazyliński (Facoltà teologica
S. Bonaventura, Roma), Henrietta Harrison (University of Oxford),
Harunaga Isaacson (Universität Hamburg), Barbara Pizziconi (SOAS,
University of London), Lucas van Rompay (Duke University),
Raffaele Torella (Sapienza, Università di Roma),
Judith T. Zeitlin (The University of Chicago)
Dipartimento Asia, Africa e Mediterraneo
Università degli Studi di Napoli “L’Orientale”
UniorPress
Napoli
2020
UNIVERSITÁ DEGLI STUDI DI NAPOLI “L’ORIENTALE”
ÉCOLE FRANÇAISE D’EXTRÊME-ORIENT
UNIVERSITÉ DE LAUSANNE
Series Minor
LXXXIX
Archaeologies of the Written: Indian,
Tibetan, and Buddhist Studies in Honour of
Cristina Scherrer-Schaub
Edited by
Vincent Tournier, Vincent Eltschinger,
and Marta Sernesi
Napoli 2020
Volume pubblicato con contributi del Fonds De Boer
dell’Università di Lausanne, dell’École française d’ExtrêmeOrient e del Dipartimento Asia, Africa e Mediterraneo
ISBN 978-88-6719-174-1
Tutti i diritti riservati
Stampato in Italia
Finito di stampare nel mese di novembre 2020
Ricci Arti Grafiche S.n.c. – Via Bolgheri 22, 00148 Roma
Tutti gli articoli pubblicati in questo volume sono stati sottoposti al vaglio di due revisori anonimi
Table of Contents
Prefatory Words.........................................................................
9
Publications of Cristina Scherrer-Schaub.................................
13
Orna Almogi
Akaniṣṭha as a Multivalent Buddhist Word-cum-Name:
With Special Reference to rNying ma Tantric Sources......................
23
Yael Bentor
The Body in Enlightenment: Purification According to
dGe lugs’ Works on the Guhyasamāja Tantra...............................
77
Johannes Bronkhorst
Sacrifice in Brahmanism, Buddhism, and Elsewhere:
Theory and Practice..................................................................
95
Elena De Rossi Filibeck
Il dkar chag del monastero di Lamayuru (Ladakh)........................
103
Vincent Eltschinger
Aśvaghoṣa and His Canonical Sources: 4. On the Authority
and the Authenticity of the Buddhist Scriptures..............................
127
Anna Filigenzi
The Myth of Yima in the Religious Imagery of Pre-Islamic
Afghanistan: An Enquiry into the Epistemic
Space of the Unwritten...............................................................
171
Archaeologies of the Written
Dominic Goodall
Tying Down Fame with Noose-Like Letters: K. 1318, A Hitherto
Unpublished Tenth-Century Sanskrit Inscription from Kok Romeas.....
205
Arlo Griffiths
The Old Malay Mañjuśrīgr¢ha Inscription
from Candi Sewu (Java, Indonesia).............................................
225
Paul Harrison
Remarks on Recently Identified Sanskrit Fragments
of the Pratyutpannabuddhasaṃmukhāvasthitasamādhi-sūtra........
269
Guntram Hazod
The “Anti-Buddhist Law” and Its Author in Eighth-Century Tibet:
A Re-consideration of the Story of Zhang Ma zhang Grom pa skyes....
287
Pascale Hugon
Vaibhāṣika-Madhyamaka: A Fleeting Episode in the History
of Tibetan Philosophy................................................................
323
Deborah Klimburg-Salter
The Materiality of the Bamiyan Colossi, across Three Millennia.......
373
Leonard van der Kuijp
A Note on the “Old” and the “New” Tibetan Translations
of the Prasannapadā................................................................
417
Mauro Maggi
Suvarñabhāsottamasūtra 5.9 and Its Khotanese Translation..........
447
Georges-Jean Pinault
The Dharma of the Tocharians...................................................
461
Isabelle Ratié
A Note on Śaṅkaranandana’s “Intuition”
according to Abhinavagupta......................................................
493
Akira Saito
Bhāviveka on prajñā................................................................
517
6
Table of Contents
Marta Sernesi
A Mongol Xylograph (hor par ma) of the
Mahāyānasūtrālaṃkārabhāṣya.................................................
527
David Seyfort Ruegg
Remarks on Updating, Renewal, Innovation, and Creativity
in the History of some Indian and Tibetan Knowledge Systems
and Ways of Thought................................................................
551
Francesco Sferra
Pudgalo ’vācyaḥ. Apropos of a Recently Rediscovered Sanskrit
Manuscript of the Saṃmitīyas. Critical Edition of the First Chapter
of the Abhidharmasamuccayakārikā by Saṅghatrāta.......
647
Peter Skilling
Conjured Buddhas from the Arthavargīya to Nāgārjuna.................
709
Ernst Steinkellner
Dharmakīrti and Īśvarasena......................................................
751
Samuel Thévoz
Paris, vu du Toit du Monde : Adjroup Gumbo, gter ston
du « pays de France »................................................................
767
Raffaele Torella
Abhinavagupta as an Aristocrat.................................................
843
Vincent Tournier
Buddhist Lineages along the Southern Routes: On Two nikāyas
Active at Kanaganahalli under the Sātavāhanas..........................
857
Kurt Tropper
The Historical Inscription in the ’Du khang
of mTho lding Monastery...........................................................
911
Dorji Wangchuk
The Three Royal Decrees (bka’ bcad gsum) in the History
of Tibetan Buddhism................................................................
943
7
Archaeologies of the Written
Cristina Scherrer-Schaub at the XIIIth Congress of the International
Association of Buddhist Studies, Chulalongkorn University,
Bangkok, December 2002.
8
The Historical Inscription in the ’Du khang
of mTho lding Monastery *
KURT TROPPER
(Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Vienna)
1. Introduction
In September and October 2010, I had the pleasure and privilege
to conduct joint fieldwork with the distinguished and cherished
scholar to whom this volume is dedicated.1 While tracing and
documenting epigraphic sources in various parts of mNga’ ris, we
spent several days in mTho lding, the religious and political cen-
* The research for this paper was generously financed by the Austrian
Science Fund (project nos. S 9811-G21 and P 25479-G19).
1 The field trip was made possible by a cooperation between the Austrian
Academy of Sciences and the Tibetan Academy of Social Sciences (TASS) in
Lhasa. Its planning and realization were greatly helped by various members of
TASS, especially the late and deeply missed Tshe ring rgyal po, Pad ma rgya
mtsho, mTsho mo and bsTan ’dzin, with the latter acting as co-researcher during the entire trip. My thanks are also due to Carmen Auer and Holger
Neuwirth, who allowed me to reproduce their (slightly modified) ground plan
of the ’Du khang and the adjacent gTsang khang (fig. 1). Grong shar Tshe ring
and Mathias Fermer kindly discussed the inscription’s first quatrain with me,
and Christian Jahoda generously sent me the photos reproduced as figs. 2 and
3. Finally, I am very much obliged to Cynthia Peck-Kubaczek, who corrected my
English, and to Marta Sernesi for her most helpful questions and comments.
Kurt Tropper
tre of the ancient kingdom of Gu ge. The town not only served as
a base for our explorations of the areas flanking the Glang chen
kha ’bab (Sutlej), all the way down to the Indian border, but naturally it was also a major object of investigation in itself. The famous
monastery of mTho lding was a particularly high-yielding place,
and we were able to document a considerable number of inscriptions in its various temples. In fond remembrance of our joint
journey, it thus gives me great pleasure to offer this article on a
historical inscription in the monastery’s ’Du khang to my esteemed
kalyāñamitrā.
The inscription is found on the northern west wall, near the
stairs that lead to the adjacent gTsang khang (fig. 1). It measures
c. 8 × 180 cm (height/width) and comprises seven lines. The text
is written in golden dbu can letters on a black background (figs. 2
and 3). Except for the incipient oṃ sva sti and the concluding shu
bhaṃ, it is entirely of a metrical structure and contains 119 lines of
verse. As the inscription is damaged in some places, the number
of syllables per verse-line cannot always be established with certainty, but all the verse-lines that are sufficiently preserved are
made up of nine syllables. 2 The text can be neatly subdivided into
quatrains—save one section consisting of seven verse-lines
(81–87), which is probably the result of a mistake by the scribe
and/or author.
In the summer of 1997, Tshe rdor transcribed the inscriptional
text in situ and published it (in Tibetan script) two years later
(Tshe rdor 1999). His article also contains some explanatory
notes and a short introduction, providing, among other things,
information on the fate of the ’Du khang during the Cultural
Revolution and brief references to various murals in both the ’Du
khang and the gTsang khang. Tshe rdor’s rendering of the epigraph is more or less reliable, but because my own reading differs
in numerous places, I believe it is justified to present a new edition
of the entire document.
Tshe rdor’s transcription of verse-lines 31–119 was reproduced
in Vitali 2012a: 131–137, with an added English translation and a
discussion of their contents. Again, I feel that a new translation is
2
In verse-line 111, de’i must be read as two syllables (i.e., as de yi).
914
The Historical Inscription in the ’Du khang of mTho lding Monastery
warranted—not only because Vitali’s translation of these verselines is exclusively based on Tshe rdor’s text, but also because his
understanding of several passages, passages for which Tshe rdor’s
and my own readings concur, seems questionable to me.
It will be a matter of further research, preferably by a trained art
historian, to establish the inscription’s relationship to the temple’s
artwork, especially the murals above and below it (figs. 2 and 3).
2. Summary of Contents and Questions of Dating
As the inscription is damaged in several places and sometimes
refers to people by way of allusions rather than by giving their
names, parts of the text remain unclear. In addition, there are the
usual ambiguities that one faces in metrical compositions. The following is an attempt to provide a brief summary emphasizing
those points that are unequivocally clear.
The opening quatrain is dedicated to Tsong kha pa (verse-lines
1–4) and is followed by references to the Buddha (Śākyamuni),
Nāgārjuna and Asaṅga (5–20). Next, the inscription cursorily
refers to the period of Tibetan history from Srong btsan sgam po
to sKyid lde Nyi ma mgon (21–32) and gives a somewhat more
detailed description of the exploits of Ye shes ’od, Rin chen bzang
po, rTse lde and Zhi ba ’od (33–56). After a brief allusion to the
subsequent dark period in “this region,” 3 when “the saṅgha was
disrupted” and the temples were “handled like puffed rice in the
fire” (57–60), Tsong kha pa’s West Tibetan disciple Ngag dbang
grags pa, the first dGe lugs pa abbot of mTho lding monastery, is
introduced (61–68). The inscription’s historical part proper ends
with a reference to Ngag dbang grags pa’s successor, who was “provided with the name of Nam mkha’” (69–72), and the wish that
Shākya ’od 4 as well as his offspring Buddhapālita(?) and Blo
bzang rab brtan 5 may be “victorious in all directions” (73–76).
3
ular.
ljongs ’di—referring to Western Tibet in general and mTho lding in partic-
4 This is the religious name that King (Nam mkha’i dbang po) Phun tshogs
lde received when he became a monk (see n. 102). He was instrumental in establishing Ngag dbang grags pa as abbot of mTho lding.
5 On Buddhapālita(?) (spelled bud dha pa li ta in the inscription) and Blo
bzang rab brtan, see nn. 108 and 109.
915
Kurt Tropper
The following section provides the names of the sponsors, artists
and artisans who were involved in the furnishing and decorating
of the temple according to the design that Shākya ’od considered
appropriate (77–107). Finally, the inscription refers to various elements of the temple’s artwork (108–119).
Regarding the date of the inscription, the year of Blo bzang rab
brtan’s birth (1458, according to Vitali 1996: 512f.) is an obvious
terminus post quem. Moreover, the fact that neither his son ’Phags
pa lha nor any of the latter’s offspring is mentioned in the text suggests that it was composed some time before 1500 (’Phags pa lha’s
exact date of birth is unknown, but by 1499 he was already politically active 6). It is difficult to say, however, if the inscription in its
present form is original or a replication of an earlier (epigraphic)
witness. 7
3. General Notes on the Edition and the Translation
The edition is based on video-documentation I made in early
October 2010 and presents the text as it appeared at that time. 8 All
conjectures 9 and emendations 10 have been relegated to the footnotes. There, the reading of the inscription is first repeated and
then the respective conjecture or emendation is given after a
colon; 11 slightly doubtful cases are followed by a question mark in
brackets 12 and in more speculative instances the brackets are
omitted. The divergent readings of Tshe rdor are only selectively
quoted.
See Vitali 1996: 512f.
Cf. Tropper and Scherrer-Schaub 2015.
8 Several dozen exposures were extracted from the video-sequences. They
can be viewed at www.univie.ac.at/Tibetan-inscriptions; links: Ngari → Tholing →
Red Temple → Inscription 01.
9 I.e., proposed readings where text had become illegible by 2010.
10 I.e., proposed changes for text still legible in 2010; mainly corrections of
obvious scribal mistakes and adjustments of “irregular” spellings to “classical
norms” (here, for the sake of convenience, spellings that are not attested in Das
1985 [1902], Jäschke 1992 [1881], or Zhang et al. 1993 [1985] are considered
“irregular”). No emendations are provided for “irregular” sandhi-forms like “ba :
pa,” etc.
11 E.g., “=g : phrag” and “sred : srid.”
12 E.g., “nga=gis : ngang gis(?).”
6
7
916
The Historical Inscription in the ’Du khang of mTho lding Monastery
In the translation, conjectures are given in square brackets
within the running text. As in the edition, the text of slightly
doubtful cases is followed by a question mark in (round) brackets.13 In more speculative cases (i.e., conjectures that are followed
by a question mark without brackets in the edition) the translation
of the suggested text is provided in a footnote (with question
mark)14 and the running text contains an ellipsis (...).
In both the edition and the translation, the spelling of Tibetan
toponyms and personal names has not been standardized, but
where I considered it appropriate, I have provided the more common alternative(s) in the footnotes.
4. Editorial Signs
{1}, {2}, {3}, etc.
*
|
d
=
-
ṃ
xxx pa xxx / xxx pa xxx
÷
beginning of a line
dbu
shad
uncertain reading (underlined)15
illegible “letter”16
illegible letter(s) that formed part
of a partly legible “letter,” with one
hyphen representing up to three
letters (e.g., -o, -rub, and -od; respectively for partly damaged lo, sgrub,
and spyod)
bindu
insertion below/above the line
deletion in the inscription, with text
no longer legible, each ÷ representing one deleted “letter”
E.g., “[gradually(?)].”
E.g., “Read: ‘venerable’?”
15 Following Tauscher 1999: 50, a letter is marked in this way even in those
cases where it is “‘partly damaged,’ but the reading is obvious and quite certain
from the context.”
16 Cf. Steinkellner and Luczanits 1999: 15 (n. 12), where “letter ” is defined as
“any combination of letters in the Tibetan alphabet that occupy in vertical
arrangement of the letter sequence the space of a single grapheme,” while letter
“refers to the single signs for consonants or vowel modification only.” Thus a “letter ” can be composed of between one and four letters. E.g., bsod na=s (partly damaged bsod nams) or =r (partly damaged spyir).
13
14
917
Kurt Tropper
<1>
empty space, with the respective
number denoting how many “letters” would fit into this space; the
more or less regular instances
found at the end of lines or before,
between or after a (double) shad are
not indicated.
In the annotations to the translation, the following signs are used
for quotations from the inscription:
{}
<>
emendations
conjectures
5. Edition
{1}
** || oṃ sva sti ||
1
2
3
4
dpaldan17 blo yi me long dag pa la | |
thub pa’i lugs bzang gzugs mdzes gsal bar ’char | =18
=====phr-ng ba19 zla ba’i zer phr- b-20 | |
rje btsun rtsong kha pa21 de rgyal gyur cig | |
5
6
7
8
rgya chen tshogs gnyis rgya mtsho’i dbus na mtho22 | |
bsdu bzhi’i bang rim mdzes pas dam du mkhyud | |
mkhyen brtse nyi zla’i ’od ris gsal ba can | |
thub dbang lhun po’i dbang por phyag bgyid do | |
I.e., bsdus yig for dpal ldan.
| = : | |.
19 phr-ng ba : phreng ba. The remaining traces make it difficult to come up with
a convincing conjecture for the beginning of the verse-line; rin chen (’ )phreng ba,
for example, can hardly be justified by what is still extant.
20 phr- b- : phro ba (i.e., irregular for ’phro ba).
21 Irregular for btsong kha pa or tsong kha pa. For the spelling of the inscription,
cf. Zhang zhung mkhan rgyud 1r2.
22 mtho : mthong Tshe rdor; this seems to be an emendation rather than a different reading, as the inscription clearly has mtho.
17
18
918
The Historical Inscription in the ’Du khang of mTho lding Monastery
9
10
11
12
rt-n =-ung23 zab mo’i rta ljang gis drangs===24
mtha’ gnyis spangs pa shar ri’i rtse nas ’ong=25 | |
tog ge ngan pa’i mun pa las rgyal ba | |
klu sgrub nyin mo’i mgon des bdag skyong shig | |
13
14
15
16
mi pham thugs chud ÷dbu ba’i ========
==26 rig grub mtha’i rlabs phreng rab tu g.yo | |
rigs lam stong gi nor bu’i dpal mnga’ ba | |
thogs med chu gter che des gzigs gyur cig | |
17
18
19
20
rgyal dang shing rta che gnyis rjes ’breng {2} bcas | |
dag pa’i zhing gzhan gshegs pas thub bstan ’di | |
snum bral mar me’i gnas skabs bsten pa’i tshe | |
skye bo ’di dag log pa’i lam ngan zhugs | |
21
22
23
24
dus der mtha’ dag ’gro la spyan ras kyi===27
rtag tu gzigs pa phyag na chu skyes can | |
mgon des gangs ri phrod28 ’dir dkar po’i lam | |
rgyas par bya phyir rgyal po’i rnam ’phrul gzung29 | |
25
26
27
28
rje btsun ngag gi dbang phyug mthu stobs gter = |30
=g31 dog spang=-ang32 ’jig rten dbang phyug g-s33 | |
thub bstan rgyas pa’i khur chen ’degs pa la | |
’gran bzhin kha ba ri pa’i dpal du gyur | |
rt-n =-ung : rten ’byung.
drangs=== : drangs pa | |.
25 ’ong= : ’ongs.
26 == : kun ?
27 kyi=== : kyis | |.
28 phrod : khrod (khrod Tshe rdor); phrod may simply be an irregular spelling of
khrod, but since the syllable can also be read as phrong and since there are some
indistinct marks in front of it, perhaps the scribe first wrote phreng (resulting in
the common phrase gangs ri[’i ] phreng), and then, as a kind of half-hearted and
makeshift correction, tried to change it to khrod.
29 gzung : bzung.
30 = | : | |.
31 =g : phrag.
32 spang=-ang : spangs kyang.
33 g-s : gis.
23
24
919
Kurt Tropper
29
30
31
32
nag phyogs ’byung po’i gdon gyis thugs brlams pa | |
dar mas bstan pa=========== | |
skyid lde nyi ma mgon sras dang bcas pas | |
gangs can stod ’dir sngon med skal bzang byas | |
33
34
35
36
dpal ldan bkra shis mgon sras mthu bo mchog | |
’khor ba’i phun tshogs {3} rtsa34 rtse’i zil pa ltar | |
dgongs te sras dang btsun mor bcas pa yi35 | |
ngur smrig rgyal mtshan blangs te dul bar gnas | |
37
38
39
40
ye shes spyan ldan ’od kyi mtha’ can des = |36
’phags yul mkhas pa’i mdun sar mi ’jigs=’i37 | |
mgrin pa mtho ldan rin chen bzang po swags38 | |
mkhas pa brgya phrag nga=gis39 gang bar mdzad | |
41
42
43
44
de ltar yang dag lugs bzang sprol40 gtod pas | |
sbyor sgrol la sogs log pa’i lam ngan dag | |
sa’og41 gting rum dag la skyabs42 byas pas | |
rdzogs ldan bzhin du =43 chen bskal bzang byas | |
45
46
brtse ldan yab mes gong ma’i rnam ’phrul la | |
sred44 pa’i mig yangs gyen du mngon phyogs pa | =45
rtsa : rtswa.
While yi can be justified from a grammatical point of view, emending it to
yis would yield a much smoother text.
36 = | : | |.
37 ’jigs=’i : ’jigs pa’i (’jigs pa’i Tshe rdor).
38 I.e., for sogs (sogs Tshe rdor). See Hahn 1996: 8, n. 1. The spelling swags for
sogs is also found in one of the as yet unpublished inscriptional panels on the life
of the Buddha in the gTsang khang of the Red Temple.
39 nga=gis : ngang gis(?) (ngang gis Tshe rdor); the remaining traces also allow
for the conjectures dag gis and ngag gis.
40 sprol : srol (srol Tshe rdor).
41 Sic (i.e., without tsheg between sa and ’og).
42 Tshe rdor has btab (which certainly would make good sense), but the
inscription clearly reads skyabs.
43 = : ngo or pho (irregular for ’pho)? Tshe rdor has (bzhin du) dus (chen), which
would make good sense. However, it can hardly be justified by the remaining
traces.
44 sred : srid (srid Tshe rdor).
45 | = : | |.
34
35
920
The Historical Inscription in the ’Du khang of mTho lding Monastery
47
48
============sras dang bcas | |
rgyal ba’i bstan la rgyal ba bzhin du gyur | |
49
50
51
52
mkhyen pa’i nyi ’od ’bar ba yis | |
ma lus shes bya’i pad mo kha phye bas | |
mdo sngags gzhung brgya’i {4} ze ’bru gsal ba can | |
lha rje bla ma zhi ba ’od de rgyal | |
53
54
55
56
gang de’i bka’ lung spyi gtsug la ’god pa | |
sa bdag rtse ldes mthun rkyen yo byad dag | |
tshogs par byas pas dpal ldan ’dzam gling brgyan46 | |
skal ldan mig gi=ga’47 ston lta bur bsgrubs | |
57
58
59
60
ljongs ’di skye bo’i legs byas dman pa dang | |
nag po’i phyogs kyi stobs chen rgyas pa las | |
dge ’dun sde gshig gtsug lag khang chen dag | |
mtha’ dag me la ’bras yos bzhin du byas | |
61
62
63
64
de nas ring zhig lon tshe btsong kha pa,i | |
sras kyi mchog <1>gyur ngag dbang grags pa’i dpal | |
zhang zhung skye bo’i bsod nams pho nya yis | |
legs par spyan drangs ========== | |
65
66
67
68
mgon des rin chen bzang po’i rgyal tshab mchog | |
legs par gzung48 nas rgya mtsho’i gos can ’dis | |
li khri’i bla gos blangs pa ltar byas ste | |
dga’ ldan gnas {5} kyi mi pham mdun sar gshegs | |
69
70
71
72
de yi rgyal tshab chos kyi spyan ldan pa | |
nam mkha’i mtshan ldan slob mar bcas pa yis | |
snying stobs mchog dang lhag b=m49 mi dman pas | |
slar yang lha rje bla ma’i rnam ’phrul bstan | |
lhag par
brgyan : rgyan.
gi=ga’ : gi dga’.
48 gzung : bzung.
49 b=m : bsam.
46
47
921
Kurt Tropper
73
74
75
76
dpal ldan shākya,i 50 ri<1>gs51 kyi thig le mchog | |
rje btsun shakyā52 ’od dang de yi sras | |
mi yi dbang po bud dha pa53 li ta | |
blo bzang rab brtan phyog=las54 rgyal gyur cig | |
77
78
79
80
rtse55 ldan chos ’dzom pu ñe nam mkha’ sgron | |
dpal ldan ’dren dang =or56 bu rgyal mo sogs | |
’di dag rnams kyis sgyu ma’i zas nor la | |
snying po len phyir mthun rkyen dpag med mdzad | |
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
57’jig
88
89
90
91
’di yi shing gzo62 lhun grub mgon po dang | |
dpal ldan chos bzang lha btsun grags rdor sogs | |
mkhas pa du ma’i sor mo’i rtse mo las | |
sngon med gsar pa’i rnam ’phrul ’di ltar ro | |
rten mes po’i y-==========(==)
(==)=58 bar mi nus mig gi bdud rtsi ’di | |
pir thogs dbang po sangs rgyas bzang po dang | |
gzo59 rig mthar son dkon mchog rdo rje sogs | |
zhang zhung ljongs ’di’i mkhas {6} pa mtha’ dag gis | |
legs par bris pas ’phags-ul60 nub phyogs kyi | |
gzo61 rig kun la chags bral gyur te ’dug | |
50 Unlike in the following verse-line, here the ’ below kya seems to have been
added as the rten for the i inserted above the line.
51 Clearly, the space between ri and gs was left empty by the scribe deliberately, because the stacked letters of the syllable bsgrubs in line 4 extend all the way
down to the upper parts of line 5 at this point.
52 shakyā : shākya.
53 pa : pā(?).
54 phyog=las : phyogs las.
55 rtse : brtse or tshe(?).
56 =or : nor.
57 Note that the following passage consists of seven verse-lines, as pointed out
in the introduction.
58 (==)= : zhi(?) (zhi Tshe rdor).
59 gzo : bzo.
60 ’phags-ul : ’phags yul.
61 gzo : bzo.
62 gzo : bzo.
922
The Historical Inscription in the ’Du khang of mTho lding Monastery
92
93
94
95
lha yi bkod pa sngon med=di63 ’dra ba | |
rje btsun shakyā64 ’od kyi rnam dpyod kyis | |
legs par dpyad las ’byung gi gzhan dag la | |
’di tshungs65 mo sham bu yi ’gying phag66 yin | |
96
97
98
99
lha yi sku mdog phyag mtshan bzhugs stabs sogs | |
rang rang gzhung nas ji ltar bshad pa bzhin | |
ma nor gsal bar ’khod pa’i zhal ta== |67
==============nam b== yin | |
100
101
102
103
’di yi phyir du lus ngag yid gsum gyis | |
legs par ’bad pa ’od zer rgyal mtshan dang | |
smon lam grags sogs gnyer byed thams {7} cad la’ang | |
’==pa’i68 dbyangs kyi gzigs pa ’jug gyur-ig69 | |
104
105
106
107
’di dag kun =70 kun nas ’bad pa kun | |
kun mkhyen go ’phangs kun gyis thob gyur cig | |
bstan dang bstan ’dzin yun ring gnas pa dang | |
dge ’dun dge legs rgyas pa’i bkra shis shog |
108
109
110
111
gtsang khang dbus su ston pa sangs rgyas la | |
sangs rgyas so lnga gnas bcus legs par bskor | |
g.yas su rdor dbyings gtso bo rnam snang la | |
de’i rtsa lha skal bzang rnams kyis bskor | |
112
113
== rig71 gtso la rigs lnga yum bzhi dang | |
’og tu sbyong72 rgyud dkyil ’khor gtso bo lnga | |
med=di : med ’di.
shakyā : shākya.
65 tshungs : mtshungs.
66 phag : bag.
67 = | : | |.
68 ’==pa’i : ’jam pa’i.
69 gyur-ig : gyur cig.
70 = : tu(?)—Tshe rdor has ’di, but this can hardly by justified by the remaining traces and the available space.
71 == rig : kun rig(?)—Tshe rdor has rgyal rigs, but rgyal can hardly be justified
by the remaining traces, and the second syllable definitely reads rig.
72 The visual appearance of the letters supports the reading sbyong rather than
spyod (spyod Tshe rdor) (cf. n. 76).
63
64
923
Kurt Tropper
114
115
phugs kyi g.yon phyogs dpal mchog rdor sems kyi | |
gtso ’khor lha tshogs tshang ba legs par gzhugs73 | |
116
117
118
119
=tsu=74============r-d75 dang bcas | |
de ’og sbyong76 rgyud dkyil ’khor gtso bo lnga | |
’og gi ’khor yug ston pa,i mdzad pa dag | |
ma lus rdzogs pa bcu gnyis dag gis bskor | |
shu bhaṃ | | | |
6. Translation
Oṃ svasti !
1
The good system and the beautiful body of the Muni arising
lucidly in the clear mirror of the mind of the glorious one77
... [garland] ... [radiating] moon beam(s); that venerable
master rTsong kha pa—may he (always) be victorious!
5
Exalted78 in the midst of the vast ocean of the two accumulations (of merit and wisdom); tightly embraced by the
beautiful layers of the four (means of) attraction(s);79 the
one provided with the lucid pattern of the light of the sun
and moon of wisdom and love—homage is paid to the lord
of the sages, the sublime lord.80
gzhugs : bzhugs.
=tsu= : btsun (btsun Tshe rdor)?
75 =r-d : brgyad (brgyad Tshe rdor)?
76 Tshe rdor has spyod, but the inscription quite clearly reads sbyong. Emend
to spyod (cf. n. 72)?
77 Partly due to the damage at the beginning of the third verse-line, the meaning and syntactic correlation up to phr<o> b<a> is not entirely clear. In the translation presented above, dpal ldan blo is taken in the sense of dpal ldan gyi blo, with
dpal ldan relating to Tsong kha pa.
78 Or (following Tshe rdor): “Seen” ?
79 Skt. catuḥsaṃgraha(vastu); i.e., (with variations,) giving (dāna / sbyin pa),
speaking kindly (priyavacana / snyan par smra ba), being useful (to others)
(arthacaryā / don spyod pa), and having the same aims (as others) (samānārthatā /
don mthun pa).
80 thub dbang is a stock epithet of the Buddha Śākyamuni, but since both Tsong
kha pa and Nāgārjuna are often referred to as “second Buddha” this quatrain
73
74
924
The Historical Inscription in the ’Du khang of mTho lding Monastery
9
Brought by the (yellowish-)green horse81 of the profound
[dependent arising], the one who gave up the two extreme( view)s82 [came] from the peak of the eastern mountain;83 victorious over the darkness of bad reasoning—may
Nāgārjuna, that protector of the day (i.e., that sun), help!
13
Invincible, of deep understanding, ...84 ... ...85 (he) made the
series of waves of the tenet system(s) utterly shake; (the one)
possessing the precious glory of a thousand paths of reasoning—may Asaṅga, that great ocean, grant a (favourable)
look!
17
The Jina and the two great charioteers (Nāgārjuna and
Asaṅga), together with (their) disciples, moved on to another pure field, and therefore—at a time when this teach-
could perhaps also be read together with the previous or following one. Yet, for
reasons of symmetry it seems more natural to understand the first four quatrains
as referring respectively to Tsong kha pa (with the author of the inscription indicating his sectarian affiliation by putting the founder of the dGe lugs school first),
Śākyamuni, Nāgārjuna, and Asaṅga. This is corroborated by the fifth and sixth
quatrain, stating that Avalokiteśvara incarnated as a Tibetan king (i.e., Srong btsan
sgam po), after the Jina (rgyal [ba]) and the two great charioteers (Nāgārjuna and
Asaṅga) had “moved on to another pure field” (i.e., died). Because of the biographical data of Srong btsan sgam po (died 649 CE) and Tsong kha pa
(1357–1419), here Jina obviously can only be referring to Śākyamuni.
81 This probably alludes to the horses that are thought to be pulling the chariot of the sun, thus likening Nāgārjuna to the latter (see n. 83).
82 Skt. antadvaya/dvayānta; i.e., the extreme (view) of eternalism (śaśvatānta /
rtag mtha’ ) and the extreme (view) of nihilism (ucchedānta / chad mtha’ ).
83 The eastern mountain is a common topos in Tibetan poetical literature
(for examples, see Sørensen 1990: 44) and it is often used in a metaphorical
sense. Here, too, it most likely must be taken in a figurative sense and does not
relate to an actual mountain (e.g., Śrīparvata at Nāgārjunakoñḍa) connected to
the life of Nāgārjuna. This is especially borne out by the allusion to the sun in
verse-lines 9 and 12.
84 Because of the damage to the next passage, the meaning of dbu ba’i remains
unclear. Considering expressions like dbu ba’i gong bu or dbu ba rdos pa (both rendering Skt. phenapiñḍa, “heap of foam,” “nonsense”), the end of verse-line 13 may
have portrayed Asaṅga (mentioned in verse-line 16) as a “no-nonsense” person.
Alternatively, dbu ba(’i ) could be a (metrical) shortening of dbu ma pa(’i )/ba’i
and the damaged passage thus may have identified his relation to the Madhyamaka school. Finally, it may have contained a panegyric expression, with dbu
ba meaning “top of the head” (see Rangjung Yeshe Dictionary 2003, s.v.).
85 Read: “learned,”?
925
Kurt Tropper
ing of the Muni, a butter lamp without oil, was kept (only)
temporarily—these people entered a bad, wrong path.
21
At that time, continuously looking at all beings [with] (his)
deep vision, the lotus holder (Avalokiteśvara), that protector,
in order to develop the white path in the midst of these snowy
mountains, incarnated as a king (Srong btsan sgam po).86
25
The venerable master and lord of speech, a mine of power
and strength,87 [(and) (the one who) gave up envy/jealousy, too,] the powerful lord of the world,88 in striving to shoulder the great responsibility of spreading the teaching of the
Muni, became the glory of the Tibetans.
29
Possessed by an evil demon, Dar ma ... the teaching(s) ...89
sKyid lde Nyi ma mgon, together with his sons, created
unprecedented good fortune here, in snowy sTod.90
86 Cf. n. 80, above. For some early Tibetan sources portraying Srong btsan
sgam po as an incarnation of Avalokiteśvara, see Tropper 2016: 53, n. 484.
87 According to Tshe rdor 1999: 83, this verse-line refers to Srong btsan sgam
po’s minister Thon mi Sam bho ta, famous for his creation of the Tibetan script.
While Tshe rdor does not provide any evidence for this identification, it fits the
general context and is also supported by the inscription’s expression ngag gi
dbang phyug.
88 According to Tshe rdor 1999: 83, this verse-line (which he reads, p. 81, as
“□□□□’jig rten dbang phyug gis ||”) refers to Srong btsan sgam po’s minister mGar
sTong btsan. Again, Tshe rdor does not provide any evidence for this identification, but the preceding <phra>g dog spang<s> would certainly be a suitable phrase
for describing a loyal minister. In fact, in PT 1287 (Old Tibetan Chronicles) the
ministers of Khri Srong lde btsan are praised with a similar phrase (’phrag myī dog
‘[they] were not envious’) (for the Tibetan text and an English translation of the
entire passage, see Dotson 2006: 26f.). On the other hand, ’jig rten dbang phyug
(Skt.lokeśvara) is a frequent epithet of Avalokiteśvara, and in light of the previous
quatrain it thus could, perhaps, also relate to Srong btsan sgam po here. This interpretation would be corroborated by dPal ’brug pa rin po che mthu chen ngag gi dbang
po’i bka’ khrims, which has ’jig rten dbang phyug srong btsan sgam po (Aris 1986: 126).
Hence the inscription’s =g dog spang=-ang ’jig rten dbang phyug g-s may either refer to
mGar sTong btsan(/rtsan), to Srong btsan sgam po, or to both of them.
89 The completely damaged end of the verse-line obviously must have portrayed Glang dar ma’s persecution of the Buddhist teaching(s). For his being
possessed by a demon, see, e.g., sBa bzhed 80, 1–2, Deb ther dmar po gsar ma 31v3,
32v6–33r1, and Me tog phreng ba 14v3–4.
90 I.e., “Upper/Western Tibet.” For a brief summary of sKyid lde Nyi ma
mgon’s activities, see Petech 1997a: 231f.
926
The Historical Inscription in the ’Du khang of mTho lding Monastery
33
The powerful and supreme son of the glorious bKra shis
mgon considered the wonders of cyclic existence like dew
on a grass tip;91 having taken the saffron coloured victory
banner of one who has children and consort,92 he abided by
the vinaya.93
37
The one who was provided with the deep vision of pristine
awareness (ye shes) and who(se name) ended in splendour
(’od)94 (Ye shes ’od) [gradually(?)] brought the (number
of) scholars to the hundreds, (scholars) such as the one with
the high neck,95 (that is,) Rin chen bzang po, [who was] not
afraid in the presence of scholars of the noble land (i.e.,
India).
41
In that way, the tradition of the authentic good system was
introduced (in Tibet), and thus the bad perverted paths of
91
For this simile of ephemerality, cf. Tropper 2015: 154 and 164f., n. 231.
92 I.e., he became a monk, but (still) had children and consort. As mentioned
in the corresponding footnote of the edition, the emendation yis would yield a
much smoother text: “after the one with children and consort had taken the saffron coloured victory banner, ... .”
93 As Petech (1997a: 233) points out, the tradition is uncertain about which
of the two sons of bKra shis mgon (and grandsons of sKyid lde Nyi ma mgon),
i.e., ’Khor re or Srong nge, “became king of Purang, married and begot two sons,
... abdicated in favour of his brother and was ordained a monk.” The inscription’s
’khor ba’i phun tshogs may be an allusion, indicating that according to the author
of the inscription it was ’Khor re. In any case, it is clear that after his ordination
he was known by his religious name Ye shes ’od (cf. the following quatrain).
94 The expression ’od kyi mtha’ can, as a thinly veiled allusion to Ye shes ’od,
also occurs in lHa bla ma ye shes ’od kyi rnams (sic) thar rgyas pa by one Grags pa
rgyal mtshan. The passage is quoted, translated and briefly discussed (including
other attestations for the phrase) in van der Kuijp 2015: 368–371. For the similar
’od kyi mthas brgyan pa can “who[se name] is adorned with the ending ’od,” see van
der Kuijp 2015: 367.
95 While Rin chen bzang po is often reported to have had the face of a bird
(see, e.g., Rin chen bzang po’i rnam thar snyan dngags puñḍa rī ka’i phreng ba 2r2: bya
yi gdong can, and ’Jig rten mig gyur lo chen rin chen bzang po’i rnam thar gsol ’debs 6r3:
mkha’ lding gdong can), I am not aware of any sources describing his neck (or
throat) as long. Thus I am rather inclined to understand the inscription’s mgrin
pa mtho ldan in the sense of “outstanding.” Cf. the similar phrase (tshogs kyi dbus
su) mgrin pa {m }thor steg “[Phag mo gru pa] raised his neck (in the middle of the
flock),” found in verse-line 75 of the dGung ’phur inscription (edition and translation in Tropper 2016: 28 and 59f.).
927
Kurt Tropper
(sexual) union and liberation (by killing) were guarded in
the depths below the ground.96 As a result, a fortunate aeon
of great ...97 like the kr¢tayuga was created.
45
For/among the emanations of the loving ancestors and
forefathers, the vast eye of the world,98 moving upwards, ...
together with (his) (spiritual?) son(s), became like (a) Jina(s)
for the teachings of the Jina.
49
Having opened the lotus of everything there is to know with
the blazing sunlight of supreme wisdom, the one endowed
with the bright stamens of hundreds of sūtra and tantra texts,
that divine master and guru Zhi ba ’od, was victorious.
53
The one who placed the precepts of that one (i.e., Zhi ba
’od) on the crown of (his own) head, (that is,) the worldruler rTse lde, brought together the resources and implements, and thus the glorious ’Dzam gling rgyan (Ornament
of Jambudvīpa)99 was established as [a feast for] the eye of
the fortunate ones, as it were.
96 Cf. mNga’ ris rgyal rabs 64 (referring to the activities of Atiśa, who had been
invited to Western Tibet by Ye shes ’od’s nephew Byang chub ’od): lo chen rin chen
bzang po dang mjal | ... phal cher dad de | chos rnam dag la zhugs | ... sngags log pa dang
| log chos spyod pa rnams sun phyung nas bkag te ; “(He, i.e., Atiśa) met the great
translator Rin chen bzang po. ... Most people had faith and engaged in the completely pure dharma. ... The employment of perverted mantra s and a perverted
dharma was refuted and stopped.” For a discussion of the general background
and a short text from Tabo directed against the “bad perverted paths” mentioned
in the inscription, see Scherrer-Schaub 2001.
97 Read: “men” or “transformation”?
98 As a variant of ’jig rten (gyi) mig, srid pa’i mig is not only used as an epithet
of the sun but also as a metaphorical expression for translators (see Kramer 2007:
51, where the common “Tibetan” term for translator, i.e., lo tsā ba [with many variant spellings] is identified as a derivation of Skt. lokacakṣu ‘eye of the world’).
Hence the entire quatrain could relate to Rin chen bzang po and his spiritual
sons. However, since ’jig rten (gyi) mig and srid pa’i mig are not exclusively used for
translators, but also for other important figures, the quatrain could also refer to
a number of historical characters, including Ye she ’od, Byang chub ’od or Atiśa.
See, in particular, Grub mtha’i rnam bshad kun bzang zhing gi nyi ma 550, where Atiśa
is called ’jig rten kyi mig gcig pu mnyam med (rendered as “the unparalleled sole eye
of the world” in Hopkins 2003: 459). The beginning of the third verse-line may
have contained more clues, but regrettably the text is completely damaged here.
99 Also known as gSer khang. On this temple in mTho lding, see Vitali 1996:
311ff. (and passim) and 1999: 29–33. Note that the present-day ’Du khang (or lHa
928
The Historical Inscription in the ’Du khang of mTho lding Monastery
57
As for this region: after the virtuous actions of the people
had weakened, the great power of the dark side spread, so
that the saṅgha was disrupted and the great temples, all (of
them), were handled like puffed rice in the fire.100
61
Then, after some time had passed, the one who had turned
into the supreme (spiritual) son of bTsong kha pa, (that is,)
the grace of Ngag dbang grags pa101—the meritorious
ambassador of the Zhang zhung people ... invited (...) in an
excellent manner ... .102
khang dmar po) is also called ’Dzam gling (b)rgyan, but according to Vitali 1999:
38 this latter temple dates “to the time of Ngag.dbang grags.pa” (i.e., 15th century). See also Vitali 1999: 129.
100 Cf. the chapter “The period of obscurantism in Gu.ge and particularly at
Tho.ling” in Vitali 1999: 32ff. As discussed there, with the death of rTse lde and
his uncle Zhi ba ’od at the turn from the 11th to the 12th centuries, Gu ge and
mTho lding fell into a state of oblivion for the next one and a half centuries. For
a more detailed account, see also Vitali 1996: 335–355.
101 Here, ngag dbang grags pa’i dpal is taken as an explicative genitive (i.e., “the
grace that is/was Ngag dbang grags pa,” or, more freely, “the gracious Ngag
dbang grags pa”). Vitali 1996: 527, n. 899, quotes a passage from Thub bstan dpal
ldan 1990: 289–290, which contains exactly the same phrase: “Gu.ge.ru
’jam.mgon bla.ma Tsong.kha.pa chen.po’i zhal slob.ma rje Ngag.dbang
grags.pa’i dpal dang mjal”, “in Gu ge, [he, i.e., lHa dbang blo gros] met the grace
of Lord Ngag dbang grags pa, (i.e.,) the direct disciple of the gentle protector
and guru, the great Tsong kha pa” (my translation).
102 Due to the damage at the end of the last verse-line, the syntax of the quatrain is somewhat unclear: zhang zhung skye bo’i bsod nams pho nya could either be
an apposition to ngag dbang grags pa’i dpal, or it could relate to another person.
The latter alternative seems much more likely, however, considering the evidence, for example, of Zhang zhung mkhan rgyud 1r1–2 and Chos ’byung mkhas pa’i
yid ’phrog 196f., which tell us about King (Nam mkha’i dbang po) Phun tshogs
lde’s invitation of Ngag dbang grags pa: ngag dbang graḍ [i.e., grags; K.T.] pa ni ...
chos rgyal phuoḍ [i.e., phun tshogs; K.T.] ldes spyandrangs [read spyan drangs; K.T.]
te, and: chos rgyal phun tshogs ldes ... ngag dbang grags pa spyan ’drongs te. Thus in the
inscription, ngag dbang grags pa’i dpal probably should be taken as the object of
(legs par ) spyan drangs, and zhang zhung skye bo’i bsod nams pho nya as an epithet of
King (Nam mkha’i dbang po) Phun tshogs lde (1409–80, according to Vitali
1996: 133, 147, 508ff. and passim). According to Vitali 2012a: 146, “Phun tshogs
lde’s alleged responsibility of the invitation extended to Nag dbang grags pa goes
against the evidence provided by mKhar nag lo tsa ba—accepted by sde srid
Sangs rgyas rgya mtsho—that this king’s father, rNam rgyal lde, was responsible
for the presence of the Gu ge pa disciple of Tsong kha pa at the court.” Note,
however, that according to both mKhar nag lo tsa ba (dGa’ ldan chos ’byung
84v3–4) and Sangs rgyas rgya mtsho (Vaiḍūrya ser po 272.16–17), Ngag dbang
929
Kurt Tropper
65
That protector took hold of Rin chen bzang po’s supreme
representation in an excellent manner,103 and then he made
it happen that this ocean-clothes wearer (i.e., the earth)
donned the orange upper robe, as it were; (later) he went to
the presence of the invincible one of the “Joyous
(realm).”104
grags pa was invited by bKra shis ’od lde, Khri rNam(s) rgyal ’od and a certain
Shākya ’od, and that elsewhere Vitali considers it untenable “that it is
rNam.rgyal.lde who is called rNam.rgyal.’od in this passage of Bai.ser [i.e.,
Vaiḍūrya ser po 272.16–17; K.T.]” (Vitali 1996: 506, n. 854). Finally, it should be
pointed out that according to mNga’ ris rgyal rabs 84f., Shākya ’od is the religious
name that (Nam mkha’i dbang po) Phun tshogs lde received when, at age fortyone, he became a monk in front of the three silver statues at Kha char (’Khor
chags): de nas zhe gcig pa la kha char du dngul sku mched gsum gyi drung du | thar pa’i
rgyal mtshan bzhes | lha rje btsun shākya ’od du mtshan gsol.
103 In principle, this clause can be interpreted in two different ways: 1) “That
protector ([Nam mkha’i dbang po] Phun tshogs lde[?]) took hold of Rin chen
bzang po’s supreme representation (Ngag dbang grags pa) in an excellent manner” or 2) “That protector (Ngag dbang grags pa) took hold of Rin chen bzang
po’s supreme representation in an excellent manner” (i.e., Ngag dbang grags pa
was an excellent representative/successor of Rin chen bzang po). Again, the second alternative seems much more likely to me, especially in combination with
verse-line 68 and the following quatrain. But in either case, the passage—in one
way or another—clearly refers to Ngag dbang grags pa’s nomination as abbot of
mTho lding and thus as the (remote) successor of Rin chen bzang po. On this
nomination, see Zhang zhung mkhan rgyud 1r2–3 and Chos ’byung mkhas pa’i yid
’phrog 197: (ngag dbang grags pa) mtho gling du skye mchog lotstsa ba rien bzango’i [i.e.,
rin chen bzang po’i ; K.T.] khri la bzhugsuol [i.e., bzhugs su gsol ; K.T.], and: ngag dbang
grags pa de nyid lhag par lo tstsa ba’i khri la bzhugs su gsol.
104 I take this to be a euphemistic expression for Ngag dbang grags pa’s passing away, with an added play on words: mi pham (“the invincible one”) is a frequent epithet of both Maitreya and Tsong kha pa, while dga’ ldan (Skt. tuṣita) can
refer to the future Buddha Maitreya’s realm as well as to the monastery that was
founded by Tsong kha pa (1357–1419) in 1409. Vitali (2012a: 132) translates rgya
mtsho’i gos can ’dis | | li khri’i bla gos blangs pa ltar byas ste | | dga’ ldan gnas kyi mi
pham mdun sar gshegs as “those who used to wear brocade robes likewise opted for
the saffron robe of the bla [ma- s], and entered into the presence of the mi pham
(the ‘invincible [master]’, i.e. Tsong kha pa) of the holy dGa’ ldan (i.e. became
dGe lugs pa).” While the first part of this translation can hardly be justified,
Vitali’s interpretation of verse-line 68 constitutes a viable alternative to the one
given above (in this case, however, the expression blangs pa ltar byas in verse-line
67 would have to be taken as a periphrastic rather than a causative formation; in
other words, the verse-line would have to be understood in the sense of “and then
this ocean-clothes wearer [i.e., the earth] donned the orange upper robe, as it
were, and ...”). In this connection it should be mentioned that according to Vitali,
the following passage (verse-lines 69–70) “adds that Ngag dbang grags pa abdica-
930
The Historical Inscription in the ’Du khang of mTho lding Monastery
69
His representative (i.e., successor), provided with religious
insight, provided with the name of Nam mkha’105 (and)
accompanied by disciples, with great courage and good
altruistic [intent] once again exemplified the miraculous
manifestations of the divine master(s) and guru(s).106
73
The supreme essence of the glorious Shākya lineage, the
venerable master Shākya ’od107 and his offspring, (that is,)
the lord of mankind, Buddhapālita(?),108 (and) Blo bzang
rab brtan109—may they be victorious [in all directions]!
ted [my emphasis; K.T.] the throne of Tho ling in favour of a disciple of his,
named Nam mkha’” (Vitali 2012a: 134). Vitali’s interpretation of verse-lines
68–70 is doubtlessly based on his assumption that the Ngag dbang grags pa who
was a disciple of Tsong kha pa (1357–1419) and already a senior scholar in 1424
is the same person who wrote mNga’ ris rgyal rabs as late as 1497—an assumption
that has already been contested by Petech (1997b: 107f.; 1999: 101) and recently
again by van der Kuijp (2015: 342ff.).
105 Vitali 2012a: 143 provides a comparative chart on the evidence found in
various literary sources on the mTho lding abbots after Ngag dbang grags pa.
According to Chos ’byung mkhas pa’i yid ’phrog 200 and bKa’ gdams gsar rnying gi chos
’byung yid kyi mdzes rgyan 98v1, his direct successor was Nam mkha’ dpal / (dbon)
Nam mkha’ ba. Zhang zhung mkhan rgyud, dGa’ ldan chos ’byung and Vaiḍūrya ser po
have additional names in between: Ngag dbang grags pa → Zhang zhung pa
Chos dbang grags pa → Nam mkha’ dpal ba (Zhang zhung mkhan rgyud 1v2–8);
Ngag dbang grags pa → Tshul khrims bshes gnyen → (kun spangs pa) Nam mkha’
(dGa’ ldan chos ’byung 85r4–5); Ngag dbang gr{a}gs pa → Tshul khrims bshes
gnyen → Legs grub pa → (kun spangs pa) Nam mkha’ (Vaiḍūrya ser po 273).
106 Vitali 2012a: 132 takes lha rje bla ma as referring to Ye shes ’od and Byang
chub ’od and translates the passage as “... manifested the miracles of the lha rje
bla ma-s (i.e. Ye shes ’od and Byang chub ’od).” See, however, also verse-line 52
above, where Zhi ba ’od (who followed Byang chub ’od on the religious throne)
is called lha rje bla ma. Moreover, the phrase lha rje bla ma’i rnam ’phrul bstan could
of course also be understood in the sense of “presented (himself as) an incarnation of the divine master(s) and guru(s).” In either case, the passage may be an
indication that Nam mkha’ was a member of the royal family.
107 I.e., (Nam mkha’i dbang po) Phun tshogs lde. Cf. n. 102.
108 In mNga’ ris rgyal rabs 85, Shākya ’od’s / (Nam mkha’i dbang po) Phun
tshogs lde’s son is referred to as khri rnam ri sang [read sangs] rgyas lde dpal bzang
po. While the inscription’s pa/pā li ta remains somewhat unclear, bud dha obviously corresponds to sang {s } rgyas.
109 According to Vaiḍūrya ser po 273f., Blo bzang rab brtan (pa) was the son of
“chos rgyal Buddha” but lived many generations (rgyal rabs du ma) after (Nam
mkha’i dbang phyug/po) Phun tshogs lde/sde: gu ge bdag po khri nam mkha’i
dbang phyug phun tshogs sde’i dus su ... de nas rgyal rabs du ma zhig song rjes | chos rgyal
buddha’i sras | blo bzang rab brtan pas rje ngag dbang grags pa’i zhabs pad spyi bos bsten.
931
Kurt Tropper
77
110(b)rTse/Tshe(?)
ldan chos ’dzom,111 Pu ñe112 nam mkha’
dPal ldan ’dren114 and [Nor] bu rgyal mo,115 etc.—
they provided immeasurable assistance by taking full advantage of the illusory food and wealth.
sgron,113
81
... of the ancestor(s) of the world ... this nectar for the
[restless(?)] eye—the leader in brandishing the brush, Sangs
rgyas bzang po, and the expert in the arts and crafts, dKon
mchog rdo rje, etc., all the masters of this Zhang zhung
region painted (it) in an excellent way, and therefore the
situation is/was such that one is/was not attached to all the
arts and crafts of the western noble [land] any more.116
mNga’ ris rgyal rabs 85, however, suggests that Blo bzang rab brtan was the grandson of (Nam mkha’i dbang phyug/po) Phun tshogs lde/sde (cf. n. 108). For a
discussion of these conflicting views, see Vitali 2012a: 197. The inscription clearly supports the evidence of mNga’ ris rgyal rabs.
110 Verse-lines 77–78 obviously contain the names of several donors, but due
to the peculiarities of Tibetan names, it is not completely clear how many people
the passage is referring to. In my translation I provide the reading that seems
most natural to me, adding some comments and/or alternative interpretations
in the footnotes. At any rate, it seems that most or even all of these donors were
women.
111 Or: “(b)rTse/Tshe ldan (and) Chos ’dzom”? Or: “the compassionate/venerable Chos ’dzom”?
112 Vitali 2012a: 132, n. 48, relates this to the term phu ne found in Kho char dkar
chag 50–51, which he takes as referring “to the son whom an unidentified king of
Glo bo and his wife wished to have in order to perpetuate their line.” However,
apart from the fact that in the respective passage, phu ne refers to the king himself rather than to the son he longed for, it seems doubtful that the inscription’s
pu ñe has anything to do with this episode related in Kho char dkar chag. In Ti se lo
rgyus (ed. Don grub 1992: 66, ed. de Rossi Filibeck 1988: 41), pu ñe rmal is clearly a phonetic transcription of puñyamalla, which, in turn, is the Sanskritized rendering of bsod nams lde (cf. Petech 2003: 37ff.). I am thus also inclined to take the
inscription’s pu ñe as a Sanskritization of bsod nams.
113 Or: “Pu ñe (and) Nam mkha’ sgron”?
114 Cf. Everding’s (2015: 82, 92) edition and translation of the printing
colophon of a xylograph of Theg pa’i mchog rin po che’i mdzod (prepared in Mang
yul Gung thang in 1533), which gives the name of the wife of a certain Nam mkha’
mgon po as dPal ldan ’dren ne (cf. also the edition in Ehrhard 2000: 107). While
she can hardly be the person mentioned in the inscription, the obvious similarity may be taken as an indication that the latter is also a woman.
115 Or: “Nor bu (and) rGyal mo”?
116 Referring to north-western India (situated more or less to the west of
mTho lding), where many of the artisans that were active in western Tibet traditionally came from. See, e.g., Klimburg-Salter 1997: 202 and Luczanits 2004: 7.
932
The Historical Inscription in the ’Du khang of mTho lding Monastery
88
The carpenters here (were) lHun grub mgon po, dPal ldan
chos bzang and lHa btsun grags rdor, etc.; the unprecedented new magical manifestations (coming) from the fingertips
of the many masters are like this.
92
[Such an] unprecedented arrangement of deities came into
being after it had been thoroughly judged by the judgement
of the venerable master Shākya ’od; but for others, suchlike
(arrangement of deities) is (like) the dignified appearance
of a son of a barren woman.117
96
The deities’ body colour, hand emblems, postures, etc., are
according to how they are explained in the respective texts.
... authentic and clearly written instructions ... is/are ... .
100
Therefore, [may] the favour of [Mañju]ghoṣa be bestowed
on the ones who exerted themselves with body, speech and
mind, (that is,) (on) ’Od zer rgyal mtshan and sMon lam
grags (pa), etc., all those who took care!
104
All these (people), who exerted themselves completely all
[the time(?)]—may it come about that all attain the rank of
an omniscient one! May the teachings and the adherents of
the teachings stay for a long time, and may there be the
auspiciousness of the increase of the saṅgha’s prosperity!
108
In the centre of the gTsang khang, the enlightened teacher
is surrounded in an excellent way by the thirty-five
(Confession) Buddhas (and) the sixteen Sthaviras.118 On
the right, the principal (deity) of the Vajradhātu, Vairocana,
is surrounded by his worthy primary deities.119
117 The “son of a barren woman” is a stock example for something impossible.
Thus, the meaning intended here is probably that no one else could create such
a dignified arrangement of deities.
118 I take gnas bcu to be an abbreviation of gnas brtan bcu drug (as in gnas bcu
lha khang ; see, e.g., Vitali 1999: 88, 222 and passim). For examples of early
Tibetan representations of the Buddha Śākyamuni together with the thirty-five
Confession Buddhas and/or the sixteen Sthaviras, cf. Watt 2012a; see also Watt
2012b.
119 This probably refers to a Vajradhātu-mañḍala with Vairocana in its centre.
See n. 120.
933
Kurt Tropper
112
As to the (mañḍala with the) principal (deity) [Sarvavid(?)
(Vairocana)], (there are) the five (tathāgata) families (and)
the four consorts,120 and, below, the five principal (deities of
the[?]) mañḍala(s) of the Śodhanatantra(?).121 On the left
side of the innermost (part of the temple) properly reside
the principal (deity) and (his) entourage, the entire assembly of deities of the glorious supreme Vajrasattva.
116
... ...122 ... together with ...123 ...; below that, the five main
mañḍalas of the Śodhanatantra(?).124 All around, below,
revolve (the paintings [and inscriptions] conveying) the
entire and complete twelve deeds of the Buddha.125
śubham !126
120 This seems to take up the concluding two verse-lines of the preceding
quatrain, explicating the structure of the Vajradhātu-mañḍala: Vairocana is surrounded by Akṣobhya, Ratnasambhava, Amitābha, Amoghasiddhi (together
constituting the five tathāgatha families), and the four consorts. For examples of
such representations, see, e.g., Luczanits 2004: 134 and 284–288; see also
Wayman 1973: 186f. and Bentor 1996: 80ff.
121 If the inscription’s sbyong rgyud dkyil ’khor gtso bo lnga is taken in the sense
of “the five principal mañḍala s of the Śodhanatantra,” it remains somewhat
unclear to which mañḍala s it refers (for the various mañḍala s described in the
Sarvadurgatipariśodhanatantra, see Skorupski 1983: 35–65, 74f., 180–216 and 230).
The passage also remains ambiguous if dkyil ’khor gtso bo is taken in its usual meaning “the principal deity of a mañḍala;” the Sarvadurgatipariśodhanatantra does not
explicitly refer to “five principal deities” in any of its mañḍala descriptions.
Similarly, I cannot come up with a satisfactory explanation for the alternative
reading spyod rgyud dkyil ’khor gtso bo lnga “the five principal (deities of the[?])
mañḍala(s) of the Caryātantra.” A comprehensive documentation of the gTsang
khang’s and ’Du khang’s art work would be of help in this matter. Regrettably,
the available publications contain only selected photos of the murals.
122 Read: “venerable” ?
123 Read: “eight” ?
124 Cf. n. 121.
125 This cycle of combined paintings and inscriptions is presently being prepared for publication. Cf. n. 38.
126 I.e.,“Good fortune!”
934
The Historical Inscription in the ’Du khang of mTho lding Monastery
References
Primary Sources
sBa bzhed
Ed. in Stein 1961: 1–92.
Chos ’byung mkhas pa’i yid ’phrog
Zhang zhung pa dPal ’byor bzang po, Chos ’byung mkhas pa’i yid
’phrog. Manuscript reproduction in Vitali 2012b, following p. 86.
Deb ther dmar po gsar ma
bSod nams grags pa, Deb ther dmar po gsar ma. Manuscript reproduction in Tucci 1971: 1–126.
dGa’ ldan chos ’byung
mKhar nag lo tsa ba dPal ’byor bzang po, dGa’ ldan chos ’byung.
Manuscript reproduction (fol. 83r–89v) in Vitali 2012a: 63–69.
Grub mtha’i rnam bshad kun bzang zhing gi nyi ma
’Jam dbyangs bzhad pa’i rdo rje, Grub mtha’i rnam bshad kun bzang
zhing gi nyi ma, ed. by ’Brug rgyal mkhar. Lanzhou: Gan su’u mi rigs
dpe skrun khang, 1994.
’Jig rten mig gyur lo chen rin chen bzang po’i rnam thar gsol ’debs
Lo chen sprul sku Blo bzang dpal ldan rin chen rgya mtsho, ’Jig rten
mig gyur lo chen rin chen bzang po’i rnam thar gsol ’debs. Manuscript
reproduction in rDo rje tshe brtan 1977: 1–18 (fol. 1r–9v).
bKa’ gdams gsar rnying gi chos ’byung yid kyi mdzes rgyan
Pañ chen bSod nams grags pa, bKa’ gdams gsar rnying gi chos ’byung yid
kyi mdzes rgyan. Xylograph reproduction in Gonpo Tseten 1977:
1–205 (fol. 1r–103r).
Kho char dkar chag
Ngag dbang bsod nams rgyal mtshan, lHar bcas ’gro ba’i mchod sdong
jo bo dngul sku mched gsum sngon byung gi gtam rabs brjod pa rin chen
baiḍūr[y]a sngon po’i pi waṃ. Ed. in Jackson and Bod ljongs mnga’ ris
rig gzhung gces skyong khang 1988: 35–61.
Me tog phreng ba
Nel pa pañḍita Grags pa smon lam blo gros, sNgon gyi gtam me tog
phreng ba. Ed. in Uebach 1987: 47–160.
mNga’ ris rgyal rabs
Gu ge mkhan chen Ngag dbang grags pa, mNga’ ris rgyal rabs. Ed. in
Vitali 1996: 1–85.
935
Kurt Tropper
dPal ’brug pa rin po che mthu chen ngag gi dbang po’i bka’ khrims
bsTan ’dzin chos rgyal, dPal ’brug pa rin po che mthu chen ngag gi dbang
po’i bka’ khrims phyogs thams cad las rnam par rgyal ba’i gtam. Ed. in Aris
1986: 121–168.
Rin chen bzang po’i rnam thar snyan dngags puñḍa rī ka’i phreng ba
Zhang zhung pa Chos dbang grags pa, Gangs can gyi skad gnyis smra
ba thams cad kyi gtsug gi rgyan lo chen thams cad mkhyen pa rin chen bzang
po’i rnam thar snyan dngags puñḍa rī ka’i phreng ba. Manuscript reproduction in rDo rje tshe brtan 1977: 19–49 (fol. 1r–16r).
Ti se lo rgyus
bsTan ’dzin chos kyi blo gros (aka dKon mchog bstan ’dzin), Gangs
ri chen po ti se dang mtsho ma dros pa bcas kyi sngon byung gi lo rgyus mdor
bsdus su brjod pa’i rab byed shel dkar me long. Ed. in De Rossi Filibeck
1988: 11–65; ed. also in Don grub 1992, with the title Gangs ri’i gnas
bshad shel dkar me long.
Vaiḍūrya ser po
sDe srid Sangs rgyas rgya mtsho, dGa’ ldan chos ’byung vaiḍūrya ser po,
ed. by rDo rje rgyal po. Xining: Krung go’i bod kyi shes rig dpe skrun
khang, 1989.
Zhang zhung mkhan rgyud
Blo bzang bstan ’dzin (rnam rgyal), Zhang zhung mkhan rgyud.
Manuscript reproduction in Vitali 2012a, between p. 90 and p. 91.
Secondary Sources
Aris, Michael
1986
Sources for the History of Bhutan. Vienna: Arbeitskreis für Tibetische
und Buddhistische Studien, Universität Wien.
Bentor, Yael
1996
Consecration of Images and Stūpas in Indo-Tibetan Tantric Buddhism.
Leiden: Brill.
Das, Sarat Chandra
1985 [1902] A Tibetan-English Dictionary. With Sanskrit Synonyms. Kyoto: Rinsen.
De Rossi Filibeck, Elena
1988
Two Tibetan Guide Books to Ti se and La phyi. Bonn: VGH Wissenschaftsverlag.
rDo rje tshe brtan (ed.)
1977
Collected Biographical Material about Lo-chen Rin-chen bzaṅ-po and his
Subsequent Reembodiments. A Reproduction of a Collection of Manuscripts
936
The Historical Inscription in the ’Du khang of mTho lding Monastery
from the Library of Dkyil Monastery in Spiti. S.l.: rDo rje tshe brtan.
Don grub (ed.)
1992
dKon mchog bstan ’dzin, Gangs ri’i gnas bshad shel dkar me long. S.l.:
Bod ljongs mi dmangs dpe skrun khang.
Dotson, Brandon
2006
“Administration and Law in the Tibetan Empire: The Section on
Law and State and its Old Tibetan Antecedents.” PhD diss.,
University of Oxford.
Ehrhard, Franz-Karl
2000
Early Buddhist Block Prints from Mang-yul Gung-thang. Lumbini:
Lumbini International Research Institute.
Everding, Karl-Heinz
2015
Tibetische Handschriften und Blockdrucke. Teil 18. Prachthandschriften,
alte Blockdrucke und eine Dhārañī-Sammlung, Bestand der Staatsbibliothek
zu Berlin – Preußischer Kulturbesitz. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag.
Gonpo Tseten (ed.)
1977
Two Histories of the Bka’-gdams-pa Tradition from the Library of Burmiok
Athing. Pañ-chen Bsod-nams-grags-pa: Bka’ gdams gsar rniṅ [sic] gi chos
’byuṅ yid kyi mdzes rgyan (1529). Bsod-nams-lha’i-dbaṅ-po: Bka’ gdams rin
po che’i chos ’byuṅ rnam thar ñin mor byed pa’i ’od stoṅ (1484). Gangtok:
Gonpo Tseten, Palace Monastery.
Hahn, Michael
1996
Lehrbuch der klassischen tibetischen Schriftsprache. Siebte, korrigierte
Auflage. Swisttal-Odendorf: Indica et Tibetica Verlag.
Hopkins, Jeffrey
2003
Maps of the Profound. Jam-yang-shay-ba’s Great Exposition of Buddhist and
Non-Buddhist Views on the Nature of Reality. Ithaca and Boulder: Snow
Lion Publications.
Jackson, David P. and Bod ljongs mnga’ ris rig gzhung gces skyong khang
1988
lHar bcas ’gro ba’i mchod sdong jo bo sku mched gsum sngon byung gi gtam
rabs brjod pa rin chen baiḍūrya sngon po’i pi waṃ. Dharamsala: Bod
ljongs mnga’ ris rig gzhung gces skyong khang.
Jäschke, Heinrich A.
1992 [1881] A Tibetan-English Dictionary. With Special Reference to the Prevailing
Dialects. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.
937
Kurt Tropper
Klimburg-Salter, Deborah E., with contributions by Christian Luczanits et al.
1997
Tabo — A Lamp for the Kingdom. Early Indo-Tibetan Art in the Western
Himalaya. Milan: Skira.
Kramer, Ralf
2007
The Great Tibetan Translator. Life and Works of rNgog Blo ldan shes rab
(1059–1109). Munich: Indus Verlag.
van der Kuijp, Leonard W.J.
2015
“A Fifteenth Century Biography of Lha bla ma Ye shes ’od
(947–1019/24): Its Prolegomenon and Prophecies.” In Tibet in
Dialogue with its Neighbours: History, Culture and Art of Central and
Western Tibet, 8th to 15th century, ed. by Erika Forte et al., 341–375.
Vienna: China Tibetology Research Center; Arbeitskreis für
Tibetische und Buddhistische Studien, Universität Wien.
Luczanits, Christian
2004
Buddhist Sculpture in Clay. Early Western Himalayan Art, late 10th to early
13th centuries. Chicago: Serindia Publications.
Petech, Luciano
1997a
“Western Tibet: Historical Introduction.” In Klimburg-Salter 1997,
229–255.
1997b
“A Regional Chronicle of Gu ge pu hrang” [Review of Vitali 1996].
The Tibet Journal 22/3: 106–111.
1999
“A Chronological Problem in the mNga’ ris rgyal rabs.” The Tibet
Journal 24/2: 99–101.
2003 [1980] “Ya-ts’e, Gu-ge, Pu-raṅ. A New Study.” In The History of Tibet. Volume
II. The Medieval Period: c. 850–1895. The Development of Buddhist
Paramountcy, ed. by Alex McKay, 33–52. London and New York:
RoutledgeCurzon. (Originally published in The Central Asiatic
Journal 24/1–2: 85–111).
Rangjung Yeshe Dictionary
2003
The Rangjung Yeshe Dictionary of Buddhist Culture. Version 3 (CD-edition). Kathmandu: Rangjung Yeshe Publications.
Scherrer-Schaub, Cristina A.
2001
“Contre le libertinage. Un opuscule de Tabo adressé aux tantristes
hérétiques?” In Le parole e i marmi. Studi in onore di Raniero Gnoli nel
suo 70° compleanno, ed. by Raffaele Torella, 693–733. Rome: Istituto
Italiano per l’Africa e l’Oriente.
Skorupski, Tadeusz
1983
The Sarvadurgatipariśodhana Tantra. Elimination of All Evil Destinies.
Sanskrit and Tibetan Texts with Introduction, English Translation and
Notes. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.
938
The Historical Inscription in the ’Du khang of mTho lding Monastery
Sørensen, Per K.
1990
Divinity Secularized. An Inquiry into the Nature and Form of the Songs
Ascribed to the Sixth Dalai Lama. Vienna: Arbeitskreis für Tibetische
und Buddhistische Studien, Universität Wien.
Stein, Rolf A.
1961
Une chronique ancienne de bSam-yas: sBa-bžed. Édition du texte tibétain et
résumé français. Paris: Institut des hautes études chinoises.
Steinkellner, Ernst and Christian Luczanits
1999
“The Renovation Inscription in the Tabo gTsug lag khaṅ. New
Edition and Translation.” In Inscriptions from the Tabo Main Temple.
Texts and Translations, ed. by Luciano Petech and Christian
Luczanits, 9–28. Rome: Istituto Italiano per l’Africa e l’Oriente.
Tauscher, Helmut
1999
“The «Admonitory Inscription» in the Tabo ’Du khang.” In
Inscriptions from the Tabo Main Temple. Texts and Translations, ed. by
Luciano Petech and Christian Luczanits, 29–94. Rome: Istituto
Italiano per l’Africa e l’Oriente.
Thub bstan dpal ldan
1990
dPe thub dgon dga’ ldan dar rgyas gling gi chags rabs kun gsal me long.
Leh: dPe thub Monastery.
Tropper, Kurt
2015
“The Inscription in the Lo tsa ba lha khaṅ of Kanji, Ladakh.” Wiener
Zeitschrift für die Kunde Südasiens / Vienna Journal of South Asian Studies
55 (2013–2014): 145–180.
2016
The Inscription in the ’Du khang of Dgung ’phur Monastery, Spu rang
(Mnga’ ris). Vienna: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der
Wissenschaften.
Tropper, Kurt and Cristina Scherrer-Schaub
2015
“Of Epigraphic Palimpsests and Similar Phenomena. Some Notes on
Tibetan Wall Inscriptions.” In Cultural Flows across the Western
Himalaya, ed. by Patrick Mc Allister, Cristina Scherrer-Schaub and
Helmut Krasser, 393–413. Vienna: Verlag der Österreichischen
Akademie der Wissenschaften.
Tshe rdor
1999
“mNga’ ris mtho lding dgon pa’i ’du khang gi ldebs bris yi ger dpyad
pa.” Krung go’i bod kyi shes rig 1999/3: 77–86.
Tucci, Giuseppe
1971
Deb t’er dmar po gsar ma. Tibetan Chronicles by bSod nams grags pa. Vol. I.
Tibetan Text, Emendations to the Text, English Translation and an
Appendix Containing Two Minor Chronicles. Rome: Istituto Italiano per
il Medio ed Estremo Oriente.
939
Kurt Tropper
Uebach, Helga
1987
Nel-pa Pañḍitas Chronik Me-tog phreṅ-ba. Handschrift der Library of
Tibetan Works and Archives. Tibetischer Text in Faksimile, Transkription
und Übersetzung. Munich: Kommission für Zentralasiatische Studien,
Bayerische Akademie der Wissenschaften.
Vitali, Roberto
1996
The Kingdoms of Gu.ge Pu.hrang. According to mNga’.ris rgyal.rabs by
Gu.ge mkhan.chen Ngag.dbang grags.pa. Dharamsala: Tho ling gtsug
lag khang lo gcig stong ’khor ba’i rjes dran mdzad sgo’i go sgrig
tshogs chung.
1999
Records of Tho.ling. A Literary and Visual Reconstruction of the “Mother”
Monastery in Gu.ge. Dharamsala: High Asia.
2012a
The dGe lugs pa in Gu ge and the Western Himalaya (early 15th-late 17th
century). Dharamsala: Amnye Machen Institute.
2012b
Chos ’byung mkhas pa’i yid ’phrog by Zhang zhung pa dPal ’byor bzang po,
with an Introduction by Roberto Vitali Entitled “Zhang zhung pa
dPal ’byor bzang po’s Chos ’byung mkhas pa’i yid ’phrog: An
Outline (Contents and Synopses)”. Dharamsala: Amnye Machen
Institute.
Watt, Jeff
2012a
2012b
“Shakyamuni Buddha: Life Story, Confession & Arhats.”
http://www.himalayanart.org/search/set.cfm?setID=2956
“Shakyamuni Buddha - Shakyamuni.”
http://www.himalayanart. org/items/90140
Wayman, Alex
1973
The Buddhist Tantras. Light on Indo-Tibetan Esotericism. London:
Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Zhang, Yisun et al.
1993 [1985] Bod rgya tshig mdzod chen mo / Zang-Han da cidian. 2 vols. Beijing: Mi
rigs dpe skrun khang / Minzu chubanshe.
940
The Historical Inscription in the ’Du khang of mTho lding Monastery
941
Fig. 1. Floor plan of the ’Du khang (right) and the adjacent gTsang khang (left) (© Carmen Auer and Holger Neuwirth,
2008); arrow showing the location of the inscription added by author.
Kurt Tropper
942
Fig. 2. The inscription on the northern west wall of the ’Du khang (© Christiane Kalantari, 2007)
Fig. 3. Detail of the inscription (© Christiane Kalantari, 2007)
The Historical Inscription in the ’Du khang of mTho lding Monastery
943