Academia.eduAcademia.edu
Download Free PDF
paper cover icon
Download Free PDF
paper cover thumbnail

The Jo gdan tshogs sde bzhi: An Investigation into the History of the Four Monastic Communities in Śākyaśrībhadra’s Vinaya Tradition

The Jo gdan tshogs sde bzhi: An Investigation into the History of the Four Monastic Communities in Śākyaśrībhadra’s Vinaya Tradition

Profile image of Joerg HeimbelJoerg Heimbel

Heimbel, Jörg. 2013. “The Jo gdan tshogs sde bzhi: An Investigation into the History of the Four Monastic Communities in Śākyaśrībhadra’s Vinaya Tradition.” In Franz-Karl Ehrhard and Petra Maurer (eds.), Nepalica-Tibetica: Festgabe for Christoph Cüppers. 2 vols. Beiträge zur Zentralasienforschung 28.1–2. Andiast: International Institute for Tibetan and Buddhist Studies GmbH, vol. 1, 187–242.

Related Papers

The Highland Vinaya Lineage: A Study of a 12th-century Monastic Historical Source, the ‘Transmission Document’ by Zhing-mo-che-ba.

Dan Yerushalmi

Reassembly and annotated translation of an early Vinaya historical source. This previously appeared in Christoph Cüppers, Robert Mayer & Michael Walter, eds., Tibet after Empire. Culture, Society and Religion between 850-1000, Lumbini International Research Institute (Lumbini 2013), pp. 239-266.

View PDF
Dissertation: The Monastery Rules: Buddhist Monastic Organization in Pre-modern Tibet

2014 •

Berthe Jansen

Dissertation Abstract: This study entitled The Monastery Rules: Buddhist Monastic Organization in Pre-modern Tibet discusses the position of the monasteries in Tibetan societies before the 1950s and how that position was formed and informed by Buddhist and monastic notions. This research takes as a point of departure the huge impact of monastic Buddhism on society, economy and law, as well as on a wide range of aspects of Tibetan culture and (popular) religion. Whereas Christian monasticism is only of secondary importance to its faith, Buddhist monasticism is generally seen as primary to Buddhism. Its importance is brought to the fore both in Buddhist doctrine and practice. That Buddhist monastic institutions then not only held their position as a religious ‘driving force’ but also became organizations that dealt with more than religion alone, does therefore not come as a surprise, for, in countries where Buddhism was adopted as the dominant religion, monasteries came to be major players in politics, economics, culture, and society as a whole. This work examines the impact of Buddhist monastic institutions on Tibetan societies by looking at their monastic policies with regard to organization, economy, justice, and public relations. The primary sources in which these policies can be found are the monastic guidelines (bca’ yig). The earliest extant texts in this genre stem from the 12th century, whereas the lion’s share of the works available were written in the 17th and 18th centuries. As this type of literature has not been studied in any detail, this study contains an exploration of this genre, its parallels in other Buddhist cultures, its connection to the Vinaya (regularly translated as ‘Buddhist monastic law’), and its socio-historical value. The in-depth study of these texts is supplemented with important information from over twenty interviews, using oral history methods, with elderly Tibetan monks and monks currently involved in monastic organization, collected during fieldwork in India in 2012. By combining methods of history, anthropology, and philology, this study demonstrates that the monastic institution was, in many aspects, guided by Buddhist monastic law and that it was averse to instability and upheaval of the existing social system. The main reason for the strong adherence to the status quo was the obligation monks were seen to hold: to ensure the continued existence of the Buddha’s Teachings. To this end, monks needed to behave well, also in order to be respected by the lay-community. This meant that monks, and thereby monasteries, continuously had to adapt their position to their environments and to change how they treated themselves and others. These changes are attested in the monastic guidelines, which contain rules that are largely aimed to change the monastery in order to preserve it. By this, I show that – contrary to ideas held by many scholars – the monastic institutions’ influence on society was maintained not merely due to existing power-relations, but also because of certain deep-rooted Buddhist beliefs.

View PDF
The Highland Vinaya Lineage: A Study of a Twelfth-Century Monastic Historical Source, the 'Transmission Document' by Zhing-mo-che-ba

Dan Yerushalmi

One of the earliest among Tibetan historical texts could be recovered by combining two long and overlapping quotations from it found in two more recent histories. The Tibetan text in Romanized transcription and an annotated English translation are included.

View PDF
The Monastery Rules: Buddhist Monastic Organization in Pre-Modern Tibet

2018 •

Berthe Jansen

In The Monastery Rules Berthe Jansen discusses the position of the monasteries in pre-modern Tibetan Buddhist societies and how that position was informed by the far-reaching relationship of monastic Buddhism with Tibetan society, economy, law, and culture. Jansen focuses her study on monastic guidelines or bca’ yig. The first study of its kind to examine the genre of bca’ yig in detail, the book contains an exploration of parallels of these texts in other Buddhist cultures, their connection to the Vinaya, and their value as sociohistorical source material. The monastic guidelines are witness to certain socioeconomic changes, but they also indicate that the monastery created rules intended to change the monastery in order to preserve it. Jansen argues that the monastic institutions’ influence on society was maintained not merely due to prevailing power-relations, but also because of certain deep-rooted Buddhist beliefs.

View PDF

The Eastern Buddhist 48/2

(Review) "The Monastery Rules: Buddhist Monastic Organization in Pre-Modern Tibet. By Berthe Jansen" in The Eastern Buddhist 48/2, pp. 139-142

2020 •

Alexander K . Smith

View PDF
Lineage, Inheritance, and Belonging: Expressions of Monastic Affiliation From Laṅkā

Anne M. Blackburn

View PDF

Journal of Asian Studies

Review of Berthe Jansen's The Monastery Rules: Buddhist Monastic Organization in Pre-Modern Tibet

2020 •

dominic sur

The Monastery Rules is Berthe Jansen’s study of monasticism in premodern Tibet, by which she means to refer to “‘ethnographic Tibet,’ an area encompassing much more space than the Tibet on any map, however contested its borders might be” (p. 187). Replete with first-person reports, this monograph is equal parts sociology and literary survey. It analyzes “social difference” and its religious legitimation in Tibet before 1959 (p. 2), for example, whether and why Buddhist monasteries acted in un-Buddhist ways. The study focuses on documents labeled chayik (bca’ yig), translated as “monastic guidelines” (p. 4). But it also makes good use of Buddhist legal and doctrinal literature, secondary scholarship, and a pool of informants (pp. 183–86). This is a welcome study of an institution that exerted more influence in the daily lives of premodern Tibetans than the state itself (p. 11), though, Jansen writes, monasticism “was from the outset both patronized and controlled by the state” (p. 32).

View PDF

In Henk Blezer (ed), Emerging Bon: The Formation of Bon Traditions in Tibet at the Turn of the First Millennium AD, Proceedings of the Eleventh Seminar of the International Association for Tibetan Studies, Königswinter 2006.

Bon monastic discipline and the life and lineage of the great master dGongs pa rab gsal (9th-10th century AD).

2011 •

Kalsang Norbu Gurung

View PDF
The Late History of Buddhist Monasticism and the Unfolding of a Multi-Religious Landscape in Central India: patterns from the Sanchi Survey Project

2021 •

julia shaw

Julia Shaw, 2021. The Late History of Buddhist Monasticism and the Unfolding of a Multi-Religious Landscape in Central India: patterns from the Sanchi Survey Project, Paper given at Conference on Monasteries in Asia: The Vihara Project. Kyoto University. 13-14 November 2021. https://networks.h-net.org/node/73374/announcements/8800082/different-perspectives-monasteries-india See summary in Vihara Project Newsletter, vol 7, March 2022 (p. 10) https://mie-u.repo.nii.ac.jp/?action=pages_view_main&active_action=repository_view_main_item_detail&item_id=15064&item_no=1&page_id=13&block_id=21 ABSTRACT In this paper I outline the history and chronology of Buddhist monasteries and monasticism in Central India, based on archaeological landscape data from the Sanchi Survey Project. I will begin by discussing the distribution and morphology of monastic provisions that range from simply modified ‘natural’ rock-shelters to towering platformed monasteries, and the significance that the early appearance of courtyard-style planning has for scholarly understanding of the development of institutionalised monasticism. I will go on to present key arguments regarding associated models of governmentality (including links with water and land administration) based on the relative configuration of habitational settlements, and land and water resources in the surrounding area. The third part of the paper will focus on the later history of Buddhist monasticism and consider how the Sanchi Survey Project data relate to extant models of Buddhist decline in central and eastern India. A key argument here is that the Buddhist monastery needs to be viewed within the context of changing agrarian and economic conditions on the one hand, and changing dynamics within the broader multi-religious landscape including the proliferation of Hindu temple construction from the Gupta period onwards, on the other. I conclude by offering several suggestions for how changing perspectives on the dissolution of medieval Christian monasteries in Europe might benefit discourse on the late history of Indian Buddhism, including critiques of the traditional model of an increasingly degenerate institution whose demise was inevitable, as opposed to one whose crucial economic function and embeddedness in the local socio-economic fabric of life lent itself open to appropriation from competing forces.

View PDF

Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies

THE ŚĀKYAS AS GAUTAMAS: MONASTIC SELF-REPRESENTATION IN THE MŪLASARVĀSTIVĀDAVINAYA 1

2022 •

Yael Shiri

This article explores the relationship between the Śākya and Gautama designations associated with the historical Buddha in relation to the re-imagination of his lineage in the textual environment of the (Mūla-)Sarvāstivādins and their wider religio-historical context. In particular, it explores the amalgamation of these two names within an otherwise unknown aetiological story embedded in the Saṅghabhedavastu of the Mūlasarvāstivādavinaya, in a unique narrative sequence designed to re-tell the origin of the Śākya clan. Through a close reading of the text, I provide evidence of the story's many Buddhist and non-Buddhist sources and propose a relatively late date for the story's appearance. In this light, I further suggest a reading of this story as an apologetic narrative with a polemic agenda vis-à-vis the imagined critique of allodox practitioners adhering to Brahmanical religious, social and aesthetic-literary values, and as a self-representation instrument for this monastic community.

View PDF
Franz-Karl Ehrhard & Petra Maurer (Hrsg.) NEPALICA-TIBETICA FESTGABE FOR CHRISTOPH CÜPPERS BAND 1 2013 IITBS International Institute for Tibetan and Buddhist Studies GmbH Franz-Karl Ehrhard & Petra Maurer (Hrsg.) NEPALICA-TIBETICA FESTGABE FOR CHRISTOPH CÜPPERS BAND 1 BEITRÄGE ZUR ZENTRALASIENFORSCHUNG begründet von R. O. Meisezahl † und Dieter Schuh herausgegeben von Peter Schwieger Band 28, 1 NEPALICA-TIBETICA FESTGABE FOR CHRISTOPH CÜPPERS BAND 1 Herausgegeben von Franz-Karl Ehrhard & Petra Maurer 2013 IITBS International Institute for Tibetan and Buddhist Studies GmbH Abbildung Umschlag Band 1: Rolf A. Kluenter © ALI-Ranjana, 1998 Blackened, handmade Nepalese paper Pigment, binder 120x120 cm Verso dated and signed by the artist ISBN 978-3-03809-119-6 Alle Rechte vorbehalten. Ohne ausdrückliche Genehmigung des Verlages ist es nicht gestattet, das Buch oder Teile daraus fotomechanisch oder auf andere Weise zu vervielfältigen. © (IITBS) International Institute for Tibetan and Buddhist Studies GmbH, Andiast Courtesy of Cristina Scherrer-Schaub PREFACE A person’s 65th birthday is often considered as the occasion to reflect on his or her life and achievements and to express one’s thanks. This opportunity has arisen this year in the case of our friend and travelling companion Christoph Cüppers, who has dedicated his life to Tibetan and Nepalese Studies and assisted and supported many academic projects and careers in these fields. Christoph was born into a family of lawyers from the Rhineland. His academic background is unusual as he began by studying art from 1970 to 1975 at the “Staatliche Kunstakademie Düsseldorf”. He trained under artists such as Joseph Beuys and Gotthard Graubner. It was during that time that he first travelled to Asia and, on reaching Southern India, encountered Tibetan culture and its exile communities. On his return to Germany the decision was made: he changed to Oriental Studies and started to learn Tibetan, Sanskrit, Pali and Chinese at the University of Hamburg. At an Institute where the study of Tibet and its Buddhist traditions had attracted a small band of fellow students, his teachers were, to name a few, dGe-bshes dGe-’dun blo-gros, Lambert Schmithausen and Albrecht Wezler. Fascinated by Asia he returned frequently to Southern India and Himachal Pradesh. A scholarship of the “Studienstiftung des Deutschen Volkes” enabled him to continue his practice on the spot: at Sera Monastery in Bylakuppe he studied Tibetan language and philosophy. With the death in 1979 of his teacher dGe-bshes dGe-’dun blo-gros, who had been a formative influence on his students, it was planned to fill the recently established chair in Tibetan Studies at the University of Hamburg with a native scholar. It was Christoph who facilitated the stay of dGe-bshes Tshul-khrims phun-tshogs at the Institute, helped in practical matters and acted as translator. Soon afterwards, in 1983, Christoph finished his dissertation, a textual study of the ninth chapter of the Samādhirājasūtra. Immediately after taking his degree he was offered by Albrecht Wezler the position of Deputy Director of the Nepal-German Manuscript Project (NGMPP) and Nepal Research Centre (NRC) in Kathmandu. On his first arrival he fell in love with the country, and his feelings towards Nepal have remained constant for the last thirty years. During his time at the NGMPP and NRC, of which he later became Director, he worked in close cooperation with the National Archives and the Department of Archaeology, collecting Tibetan manuscripts and block prints in the Kathmandu valley, and conducting expeditions to photograph manuscripts in regions of the Nepalese Himalayas such as Helambu, Southern Mustang, Jumla and Solu Khumbu. Besides his duties as Director, he supported many individual scholars in their research and assisted larger projects sponsored by the German Research Council such as the Nepal Research Programme under Bernhard Kölver. These activities continued even after his term had finished and after the establishment under Willibald Haffner and Dieter Schuh of a new programme of the German Research Council called Tibet Himalaya. In 1989 Christoph returned together with his wife Savitri and their son Bikas to his hometown of Düsseldorf in order to work on a project at the University of Bonn. His interests had changed to politics and history: the new project was concerned with state formation in 17th-century Tibet and was based on a critical edition and annotated translation of the “Guidelines for Government officials” written by the regent Sangs-rgyas rgya-mtsho. During this time he also worked on the edition and translation of a manuscript containing a Tibetan-Newari Lexicon and on a compilation of Tibetan proverbs and sayings. He also undertook a longer field trip in 1992 to Dharmsala, where he studied and collected Tibetan documents, and in 1994 he assisted the Austrian-Italian research team in Tabo in the region of Spiti. viii Preface In 1995, with the establishment by the Reiyukai of the Lumbini International Research Institute (LIRI) at Buddha’s birthplace, Christoph and Savitri returned to Nepal. Their home in Sano Thimi has served since then—like the LIRI—as a centre for scholarly exchange and personal encounters between foreign researchers and native scholars. As Director, Christoph has initiated several series of publications with a growing number of titles; they are for the most part results of research projects in the fields of Buddhist, Tibetan and Nepalese Studies, supported by the LIRI and conducted on the spot. Successful seminars have also been held in Lumbini, the first of these in the year 2000 on the subject of the “Relationship between Religion and State (chos srid zung ’brel) in Traditional Tibet.” Although the administrative duties are heavy, Christoph continues to travel and to cooperate with researchers, working, for example, with the International Tibetan Archives Preservation Trust (ITAPT) and the Tibetan Autonomous Regional Archives (TARA) in Lhasa, and finds the time to continue his research work. It is therefore a great pleasure to present to Christoph this Festgabe with contributions from friends and colleagues covering the fields of his interest and documenting his influence and inspiration. We would like to thank Dieter Schuh und Nikolai Solmsdorf, who were of great help in producing this volume and bringing the individual articles into a coherent format. Special thanks go to all the authors for delivering their articles in time and making this collection a true offering. Munich, September 2013 Franz-Karl Ehrhard & Petra Maurer TABULA GRATULATORIA JOHN ARDUSSI JÖRG HEIMBEL ALEXANDER VON ROSPATT EBERHARD BERG AMY HELLER ROLAND BIELMEIER NATHAN HILL CRISTINA SCHERRERSCHAUB HORST BRINKHAUS TONI HUBER LAMBERT SCHMITHAUSEN KATIA BUFFETRILLE ROLF A. KLUENTER DIETER SCHUH GUDRUN BÜHNEMANN ANDREAS KRETSCHMAR MARTA SERNESI VOLKER CAUMANNS DAVID P. JACKSON PETER SCHWIEGER MICHELA CLEMENTE MATHEW KAPSTEIN DAVID SEYFORT RUEGG OLAF CZAJA LEONARD VAN DER KUIJP WEIRONG SHEN HUBERT DECLEER CHRISTIAN LUCZANITZ PETER SKILLING HILDEGARD DIEMBERGER KAMAL PRAKASH MALLA PER K. SØRENSEN BRANDON DOTSON DAN MARTIN ERNST STEINKELLNER FRANZ-KARL EHRHARD KLAUS-DIETER MATHES KIMIAKI TANAKA HELMUT EIMER PETRA MAURER TASHI Y. TASHIGANGPA FELIX ERB ADELHEID METTE MANFRED TREU FRANZ XAVER ERHARD AXEL MICHAELS HELGA UEBACH MARTIN GAENSZLE MICHAEL PAHLKE ROBERTO VITALI REINHARD GREVE ULRICH PAGEL MICHAEL WALTER NIELS GUTSCHOW FRANCOISE POMMARET ALBRECHT WEZLER MICHAEL HAHN KARIN PREISENDANZ MICHAEL WITZEL PAUL HARRISON BURKHARD QUESSEL ALEXANDER WUNDER JENS-UWE HARTMANN CHARLES RAMBLE KODO YOTSUYA CONTENTS Volume One Publication List of Christoph Cüppers EBERHARD BERG On the Current Revitalization of the rNying ma Tradition among the Sherpas of Nepal xiii 1 ROLAND BIELMEIER Das Land Marutse in den Biographien des Padmasambhava 27 KATIA BUFFETRILLE The rTsib ri Pilgrimage: Merit as Collective Duty? 37 VOLKER CAUMANNS Paṇ chen Shākya mchog ldan’s Monastic Seat Thub bstan gSer mdog can (Part I): The History of its Foundation 65 OLAF CZAJA Tibetan Medicinal Plants and Their Healing Potentials 89 HILDEGARD DIEMBERGER & MICHELA CLEMENTE Royal Kinship, Patronage and the Introduction of Printing in Gung thang: From Chos kyi sgron ma to lHa btsun Rin chen rnam rgyal 119 FRANZ-KARL EHRHARD The Royal Print of the Maṇi bka' 'bum: Its Catalogue and Colophon 143 KARL-HEINZ EVERDING Introduction to a Research Project on Documents Issued During the Period of the Great Mongolian Empire to Tibetan Recipients 173 JÖRG HEIMBEL The Jo gdan tshogs sde bzhi: An Investigation into the History of the Four Monastic Communities in Śākyaśrībhadra’s Vinaya Tradition 187 AMY HELLER A Sculpture of Avalokiteśvara Donated by the Ruler of Ya tse (Ya rtse mnga’ bdag) 243 NATHAN W. HILL The Emergence of the Pluralis majestatis and the Relative Chronology of Old Tibetan Texts 249 TONI HUBER The Iconography of gShen Priests in the Ethnographic Context of the Extended Eastern Himalayas, and Reflections on the Development of Bon Religion 263 DAVID P. JACKSON Several Episodes in the Recent History of Lumbini 295 xii Contents MATTHEW T. KAPSTEIN A Fragment from a Previously Unknown Edition of the Pramāṇavārttika Commentary of Rgyal-tshab-rje Dar-ma-rin-chen (1364-1432) 315 LEONARD W.J. VAN DER KUIJP Gu ge Paṇ chen Grags pa rgyal mtshan dpal bzang po (1415-86) on the Nyi ma'i rabs (*Sūryavaṃśa) and the Tibetan Royal Families 325 PUBLICATION LIST OF CHRISTOPH CÜPPERS Monographs 1. The IXth Chapter of the Samādhirājasūtra: A Text-critical Study of Mahāyāna Sūtras (= Altund Neu-Indische Studien, 41). Stuttgart: Franz Steiner, 1990. 2. (together with K. Tamot und P. Pierce) A Tibetan-Newari Lexicon Cum Phrase Book (= Nepalica, 10). Bonn: VGH Wissenschaftsverlag, 1996. 3. (together with P.K. Sørensen) Collection of Tibetan Proverbs and Sayings: Gems of Tibetan Wisdom and Wit (= Tibetan and Indo-Tibetan Studies, 7). Stuttgart: Franz Steiner, 1998. 4. Die Verordnungen für das Abrechnungswesen tibetischer Amtsstellen der dGa’ ldan pho brang-Regierung. Faksimile-Edition und Transliteration der Hs. Cod. Tibet 24 der Bayerischen Staatsbibliothek (= Monumenta Tibetica Historica).Andrast: International Instiute for Tibetan and Buddhist Studies GmbH (in press a). 5. Staatsdienst in Tibet: Die Richtlinien für die Beamten der dGa’ ldan pho brang-Regierung nach dem Text Blang dor gsal bar ston pa’i drang thig dvangs shel gyi me long nyer gcig pa des Regenten Sangs rgyas rgya mtsho (= Monumenta Tibetica Historica). Andiast: International Institute for Tibetan and Buddhist Studies GmbH (in press b). 6. Materialien zur Erforschung des traditionellen tibetischen Rechts. Faksimile und Transliteration der HS. Bell 50.31.113 b: The Tibetan Codes of Law (= Monumenta Tibetica Historica). Andiast: International Institute for Tibetan and Buddhist Studies GmbH (in press c). Articles 1. “On the Manufacture of Ink.” Ancient Nepal. Journal of the Department of Archaeology, 113, 1989, pp. 1-7. 2. “Some Remarks on a Tibetan-Newari Lexicon cum Phrase-Book.” In S. Ihara & Z. Yamaguchi (eds.), Tibetan Studies: Proceedings of the 5th Seminar of the International Association for Tibetan Studies. Narita 1989, Vol. 1 (= Monograph Series of Narita Institute for Buddhist Studies, Occasional Papers, 1). Narita: Narita Shinshoji, 1992, pp. 413-419. 3. “Zhabs-dkar bla-ma tshogs-drug rang-grol’s visits to Nepal and his Contribution to the Decoration of the Bodhnāth Stūpa.” In G. Toffin (ed.), Nepal. Past and Present: Proceedings of the Franco-German Conference, Arc-et-Senans, June 1990. Paris: CNRS / Dehli: Sterling, 1993, pp. 151-158. 4. “Short Remarks on the Caves of Tabo in Spiti.” Ancient Nepal. Journal of the Department of Archaeology, 138, 1995, pp. 131-134. 5. “A Ban on Animal Slaughter at Buddhist Shrines in Nepal.” In S. Karmay and P. Sagant (eds.), Les Habitants du toit du Monde. Études recueillies en hommage à Alexander W. Macdonald (= Recherches sur la Haute-Asie, 12). Nanterre: Société d’Ethnologie, 1997, pp. 677-687. xiv Publication List of Christoph Cüppers 6. “Some Aspects of Tibetan Administration under the dGa’-ldan pho-brang Government.” H. Krasser, M.T. Much, E. Steinkellner and H. Tauscher (eds.), Tibetan Studies I: Proceedings of the 7th Seminar of the International Asociatin for Tibetan Studies, Graz 1995, Vol. 1 (= Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Phil.-Hist. Klasse Denkschriften 256 / Beiträge zur Kultur- und Geistesgeschichte Asiens, 21). Wien: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1997, pp. 189-193. 7. “The ’Phags-pa Script.” In A. Kretschmar (ed.), The Fifth Seal: Calligraphic Icons / Kalligraphikons. Paintings by Rolf A. Kluenther. Kathmandu 1998, pp. 49-50. 8. “Eine Merkliste mit den Aufgaben der Distriktbeauftragten (rdzong dpon) aus dem 17. Jahrhundert.” In H. Eimer, M. Hahn, M. Schetelich & P. Wyzlic (eds.), Studia Tibetica et Mongolica: Festschrift für Manfred Taube (= Indica et Tibetica, 34). Swisttal-Odendorf: Indica et Tibetica, 1999, pp. 51-70. 9. “A Letter Written by the Fifth Dalai Lama to the King of Bhaktapur.” Journal of the Nepal Research Centre, 12, 2001, pp. 39-42. 10. “Some Remarks on the Tibetan Language used in Former Government Decrees.” In Srong btsan spyi’i tshogs ’dus thengs dang po / bod kyi brda sprod skad yig gi skor. Dehradun: Songtsen Library, 2003, pp. 222-229. 11. “Ein Glossar zur Terminologie der tibetischen Urkundensprache.” Zentralasiatische Studien, 33, 2004, pp. 25-98. 12. “Newar Craftsmen Employed by the Early dGa’-ldan pho-brang Rulers.” In C. Jest, T.R. Kansakar and M. Turin (eds.), Kesar Lall: a Homage on the Occasion of his Buraa Kanko. Kathmandu: Marina Paper, 2004, pp. 30-33. 13. “Brag-dkar-ba Chos-kyi dbang-phyug’s reminder notes for the duties of a dkon-gnyer.” In S. Hino and T. Wada (eds.), Three Mountains and Seven Rivers: Prof. Musashi Tachikawa’s felicitation volume. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 2004, pp. 601-606. 14. “The classification of people: romanized text edition and English translation of the sKyes bu rnam ’byed bshad pa gzhon nu’i mgul rgyan attributed to Sa-skya Paṇḍita Kun-dga’ rgyal-mtshan.” Journal of the International College for Advanced Buddhist Studies, 7, 2004, pp. 107-160. 15. (together with Dieter Schuh, Roland Bielmeier und Burghart Schmidt) “Forschungsbericht über die Exploration der Höhlen des Muktinath-Tales (1986-1987).” Zentralasiatische Studien, 35, 2006, pp. 107-172. 16. “bsTan ’dzin Chos rgyal’s Bhutan Legal Code of 1729 in Comparison with sDe srid Sangs rgyas rgya mtsho’s Guidelines for Government Officials.” In J.A. Ardussi and F. Pommaret (eds.), Bhutan: Tradition and Changes (= Brill’s Tibetan Studies Library, 10/5). Leiden/Boston: Brill, 2007, 45-52. 17. “Registers and Account Books of the dGa’-ldan pho-brang Government.” In R. Prats (ed.), The Pandita and the Siddha: Tibetan Studies in Honour of E. Gene Smith. Dharamsala: Amnye Machen Institute, 2007, pp. 12-15. 18. “Die Reise- und Zeltlagerordnung des Fünften Dalai Lama.” In B. Kellner, H. Krasser, H. Lasic, W.T. Much and H. Tauscher (eds.), Pramāṇkīrtiḥ: Papers Dedicated to Ernst Steinkellner on the Occasion of his 70th Birthday, Part 1 (= Wiener Studien zur Tibetologie Publication List of Christoph Cüppers xv und Buddhismuskunde, 70.1). Wien: Arbeitskreis für Tibetische und Buddhistische Studien der Universität Wien, 2007, pp. 37-51. 19. (together with Franz-Karl Ehrhard) “Die Kupferplatten der Könige Ādityamalla und Puṇyamalla von Ya-tshe.” In P. Maurer und P. Schwieger (eds.), Tibetstudien: Festschrift für Dieter Schuh zum 65. Geburtstag. Bonn: Bier’sche Verlagsanstalt, 2007, pp. 37-42. 20. “Some Remarks on the Entries and Quotations Taken from the rtsis gzhi phyogs bsgrigs (Rtsii) in S.C. Das’ Tibetan-English Dictionary.” In B. Huber, M. Volkart and P. Widmer (eds.), Chomolangma, Demawend and Kasbek: Festschrift für Roland Bielmeier zu seinem 65. Geburtstag, Vol. 1: Chomolangma(= Beiträge zur Zentralasienforschung, 12.1). Halle: International Institute for Tibetan and Buddhist Studies GmbH, 2008, pp. 15-28. 21. “Some Remarks on Bka’ ’gyur Production in 17th-Century Tibet.” In A. Chayet, C. Scherrer-Schaub, F. Robin & J.-L. Achard (eds.), Edition, éditions: l’écrit au Tibet, évolution et devenir (= Collectanea Himalayica, 3). München: Indus Verlag, 2010, pp. 115128. 22. “Ein Erlaß des Königs Gushri Khan aus dem Jahr 1643.” Zentralasiatische Studien, 40, 2011, pp. 165-177. 23. “Gtsang khrims yig chen mo — A Tibetan legal code kept in the National Archives of Nepal.” Abhilekh, 30, V.S. 2069 (2013), pp. 87-106. Edited Volumes 1. (together with Franz-Karl Ehrhard and Philip Pierce) Views of the Bodhnath Stupa (= Bauddha Books, 1). Kathmandu: Vajra Publications, 1991. 2. (together with Franz-Karl Ehrhard and Ulrike Roesler) Ulrike & Hans-Ulrich Roesler: Kadampa Sites of Phenpo: A Guide to some early Buddhist Monasteries in Central Tibet (= Bauddha Books, 2). Kathmandu: Vajra Publications, 2004. 3. The Relationship Between Religion and State (chos srid zung ’brel) in Traditional Tibe: Proceedings of a Seminar Held in Lumbini, Nepal, March 2000 (= LIRI Seminar Proceedings Series, 1). Lumbini: Lumbini International Research Institute, 2004. 4. (together with Max Deeg and Hubert Durt) The Birth of the Buddha: Proceedings of the Seminar Held in Lumbini, Nepal, October 2004 (= LIRI Seminar Proceeding Series, 3). Lumbini: Lumbini International Research Institute, 2010. 5. (together with Leonard van der Kuijp, Ulrich Pagel. With a Chinese Introduction by Dobis Tsering Gyal) Handbook of Tibetan Iconometry. A Guide to the Arts of the 17th Century (= Tibetan Studies Library, 16:4). Leiden / Boston, 2012. Reviews 1. Tachikawa, Musashi & Yasuhiko Nagano: A Catalogue of te United Staes Library of Congress Collection of Tibetan Literature on Microfiche. Part II (= Bibliographica Buddhica, Series Maior, 3 b). Tokyo: The International Institute for Buddhist Studies, 1988. Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft, 142, 1992, pp. 208-210. xvi Publication List of Christoph Cüppers 2. Ehrhard, Franz-Karl: “Flügelschläge des Garuḍa.” Literar- und ideengeschichtliche Bemerkungen zu einer Liedersammlung des rDzogs-chen (= Tibetan- and Indo-Tibetan Studies, 3). Stuttgart: Franz Steiner, 1990. Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft, 145, 1995, pp. 450-452. 3. Eimer, Helmut: Der Tantra-Katalog des Bu-ston im Vergleich mit der Abteilung Tantra des tibetischen Kanjur (= Indica et Tibetica, 17). Bonn: Indica et Tibetica, 1989. Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft, 145, 1995, pp. 201-202. 4. Harrison, Paul: The Samādhi of Direct Encounter with the Buddhas of the Present (= Studia Philologica Buddhica, Monograph Series, 9). Tokyo: The International Institute for Buddhist Studies, 1990. Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft, 145, 1995, pp. 199-201. Lexicographical Contributions 1. “Religionen des Himalaya.” In Bertelsmann Handbuch Religionen der Welt: Grundlagen, Entwicklung und Bedeutung in der Gegenwart. Gütersloh / München: Bertelsmann Lexikon Verlag GmbH, 1992, pp. 419-421. 2. http://www.tibet-encyclopaedia.de/kompensationsrecht.html 3. http://www.tibet-encyclopedia.de/gesetzbuecher.html 4. http://www.tibet-encyclopedia.de/regierungsverordnung.html CONTENTS Volume Two CHRISTIAN LUCZANITS The Buddha Beyond: Figuration in Gandharan Cult Imagery 1 DAN MARTIN Pavements Like the Sea and the Name of the Jokhang: King Solomon and the Queen of Sheba in Lhasa? 23 KLAUS-DIETER MATHES Clouds of Offerings to Lady g.Yang ri—A Protector Practice by the First Yol mo sprul sku Shākya bzang po (15th/16th Cent.) 37 PETRA MAURER Pferderennen und ihre Bedeutung in Tibet 57 CHARLES RAMBLE Both Fish and Fowl? Preliminary Reflections on Some Representations of a Tibetan Mirror-World 75 ALEXANDER VON ROSPATT Altering the Immutable: Textual Evidence in Support of an Architectural History of the Svayambhū Caitya of Kathmandu 91 CRISTINA SCHERRER-SCHAUB A Frontier Tale: Fragmented Historical Notes on Spiti Monasteries Documents Kept in the Museum of Lahore. Part I. 117 DIETER SCHUH Tibetischen Inschriften ins Maul geschaut: Beobachtungen zu Stein- und Felsinschriften sowie den Schriften des 7. bis 9. Jahrhunderts in Tibet 143 PETER SCHWIEGER A Forbidden Nepalese-Tibetan Love Affair 185 MARTA SERNESI Rare Prints of bKa’ brgyud Texts: A Preliminary Report 191 WEIRONG SHEN Revitalizing Sino-Tibetan Buddhist Studies: Some Old and New Thoughts 211 PETER SKILLING The Samādhirāja-Sūtra and its Mahāsāṃghika Connections 227 PER K. SØRENSEN & FRANZ XAVER ERHARD Tibetan Proverbial Literature: Semantics and Metaphoricity in Context 237 MANFRED G. TREU Lakṣmīprasāda Devakoṭās Essay "Auf der Sitzmatte" 253 vi Contents HELGA UEBACH The lHo-brag Cliff Inscription: An Attempt to Read it with the Help of Katia Buffetrille’s Photographs of 1988 261 ROBERTO VITALI From Sum ru to the Great Central Asian “Sea of Sand”: Hints on the Role of the mThong khyab in the State Organisation of Dynastic Tibet 269 MICHAEL WALTER ‘All that Glitters Is Gold’: The Place of the Yellow Metal in the Brahmanic, Scythian, and Early Buddhist Traditions 283 ZUHIŌ YAMAGUCHI The Connection Between Tu-fan (吐蕃) in the First Half of the Seventh Century and Nepal 299 KODO YOTSUYA dGe lugs pa Interpretation of Bhāvaviveka’s Critique of Buddhapālita’s Argumentation of Non-Origination from Self 323 THE JO GDAN TSHOGS SDE BZHI: AN INVESTIGATION INTO THE HISTORY OF THE FOUR MONASTIC COMMUNITIES IN ŚĀKYAŚRĪBHADRA’S VINAYA TRADITION Jörg Heimbel* 1. Introduction The Tibetan Buddhist tradition follows the Mūlasarvāstivādin Vinaya, and a total of three different monastic ordination lineages (sdom rgyun) of the prātimokṣa precepts (so sor thar pa’i sdom pa) were brought to Tibet. The first lineage was established by the eighth-century Indian Buddhist philosopher Śāntarakṣita during the reign of Khri srong lde btsan (r. 754–797). It was later revived from eastern Tibet with the full monastic ordination of Bla chen dGongs pa rab gsal (832–915 or 892–975) and his disciples from central Tibet. This transmission line thus became known as the lineage of the Eastern Tibetan or Lower Region Vinaya (smad ’dul).1 The second lineage, which was known as the Western Tibetan or Upper Region Vinaya (stod ’dul), was introduced by the East Indian scholar Dharmapāla, who had visited Gu ge in mNga’ ris following the invitation of lHa Bla ma Ye shes ’od (947–1019).2 The third lineage reached Tibet at the beginning of the thirteenth century with the visit of the Kashmiri scholar Śākyaśrībhadra (1127/40s–1225; hereafter Śākyaśrī), better known to Tibetans as Kha che Paṇ chen.3 The lineage that he introduced became known as the Middle Region Vinaya (bar ’dul) as well as kha che lugs or paṇ chen sdom rgyun. Among the four major schools of Tibetan Buddhism, the rNying ma and dGe lugs order preserve the sMad ’dul lineage as passed down from Bla chen dGongs pa rab gsal. The Bar ’dul lineage transmitted from Śākyaśrī became the chief ordination lineage in the Karma bKa’ brgyud and Sa skya order, but was also received by a few prominent dGe lugs pa masters. At a certain point in time, the sTod ’dul lineage of Dharmapāla appears to have become extinct.4 * As a simple token of gratitude for the broad support Christoph Cüppers so kindly provided for finalising my dissertation at the Lumbini International Research Institute (LIRI), I offer with great pleasure this small contribution to his Festschrift. In researching this paper, I am highly indebted to David Jackson who very kindly provided me with his unpublished draft “The gDan-gcig pa or Jo-gdan: An Early Ascetic Tradition of Tibetan Buddhism” and for carefully rechecking my English. I also owe many thanks to Kati Fitzgerald for polishing my “German English.” Parts of the results of this paper have been presented at the 5th Beijing International Seminar on Tibetan Studies (BISTS), August 1–5, 2012, Beijing, China. 1 On these developments, see for example UEBACH 1987: 36–44 and 119–155 and STODDARD 2004. 2 On this invitation, the sTod ’dul, and Dharmapāla’s further activities, see lHa bla ma ye shes ’od kyi rnam thar (fol. 18a3–18b2) from the pen of Gu ge Paṇḍi ta Grags pa rgyal mtshan (1415–1486). Gu ge Paṇḍi ta gives Ye shes ’od’s lifetime with 947 to 1019; see lHa bla ma ye shes ’od kyi rnam thar (fols. 3b1–2, 3b5, and 24a2–3). For other datings, see lHa bla ma ye shes ’od kyi rnam thar (fol. 3b2–3). 3 On Śākyaśrī and Tibetan sources for investigating his life, see JACKSON 1990a, VAN DER KUIJP 1994, and TUCCI 1999: 334–339. See also mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar (fols. 9b5–12a6), mKhas pa’i dga’ ston (p. 502.15–19), and bsTan rtsis gsal ba’i nyin byed (pp. 153.21–160.10). On the dates of Śākyaśrī’s birth and death, see JACKSON 1990a: 18, n. 1. For further discussions, see mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar (fols. 8a3– 11b6), mKhas pa’i dga’ ston (pp. 488.21–503.1), rGya bod yig tshang chen mo (pp. 223.15–224.11, 507.1– 508.17, and 516.6–11), and bsTan rtsis gsal ba’i nyin byed (pp. 157.18–160.4). 4 On these monastic ordination lineages, see, among others, mKhas pa’i dga’ ston (pp. 465–506), ’Khrul spong rnam rgyal gser mdog (pp. 29.6–36.6), Ngor chos ’byung (p. 321.3–7), Deb ther sngon po (pp. 57–59 and 1237.1–12), Deb ther dmar po (pp. 55–59), sDom gsum rnam nges kyi ’grel pa (fols. 28b6–29.b4), sDom gsum rnam nges kyi ’bru ’grel (pp. 76.6–78.3), ’Dul ba’i chos ’byung (pp. 159.3–173.4), gNas gsar ba’i chen po’i rnam thar (pp. 80.3–82.5), Pod chen drug gi ’bel gtam (pp. 116.3–118.3), Bu ston chos ’byung (pp. 28.3–30.7, 46.5–8, 55.5–85.10, and 103.7–105.2), Yar lung chos ’byung (pp. 169–178), Ris med chos ’byung (pp. 867.3–5 and 869.3–5), and Shes bya kun khyab (pp. 220.17–223.10). The sTod ’dul lineage was still transmitted by the fourteenth century when such scholars as Red mda’ ba gZhon nu blo gros (1348–1412) and rGyal tshab Dar ma rin chen (1364–1432) took their full monk’s vows in this tradition; see ROLOFF 2009: 210 and 380–381, n. 482, respectively. 188 Jörg Heimbel At the time that Bihar’s great Buddhist universities became ruined through Muslim conquests, Śākyaśrī left India behind and journeyed to Tibet with an entourage of lesser paṇḍitas, following the invitation of Khro phu Lo tsā ba Byams pa’i dpal (1172–1236).5 His eleven-year sojourn in Tibet from 1204 until 1214 had a great impact on the development of Buddhism. Four of his main contributions, as summarised by David Jackson, were: (1) founding of a Vinaya ordination lineage and fully functioning monastic community; (2) establishing of a revised translation and teaching line of Dharmakīrti’s Pramāṇavārttika (Tshad ma rnam ’grel) in collaboration with his disciple Sa skya Paṇḍita Kun dga’ rgyal mtshan (1182–1251); (3) calculating a Buddhist chronology (bstan rtsis) “which differed considerably from that of the other Tibetan traditions before then, being much closer to the estimates of modern scholars on the probable dates of the Buddha Śākyamuni;” and (4) cooperating with Khro phu Lo tsā ba in the building of the great Maitreya statue at Khro phu monastery in Shab smad of western gTsang.6 Furthermore, Śākyaśrī established numerous lines of textual transmission and both wrote and co-translated Buddhist works. The main Tibetan source of this paper credits Śākyaśrī with introducing four major teaching transmissions (bka’ babs bzhi): (1) the transmission of a philosophical tradition (mtshan nyid kyi bka’ babs) comprising Dharmakīrti’s Pramāṇavārttika to Sa skya Paṇḍi ta; (2) the transmission of a corpus of oral instructions (man ngag gi bka’ babs) such as the so-called “four uncommon instructions” (thun mong ma yin pa’i gdams pa bzhi) to Khro phu Lo tsā ba; (3) the transmission of a tantric system (sngags kyi bka’ babs) to dPyal Lo tsā ba Chos kyi bzang po; and (4) the transmission of a Vinaya tradition (’dul ba’i bka’ babs) to his group of “single mat practitioners” (stan gcig pa).7 In this paper, I will discuss the history of the last transmission mentioned, Śākyaśrī’s Vinaya tradition. When Śākyaśrī returned in late 1214 to his native Kashmir via Pu hrangs, he left behind a group of disciples whom he had trained in Vinaya practice, “thus establishing an important new monastic community.”8 Successive divisions in this original community led to the formation of four different assemblies that became known as the Jo gdan tshogs sde bzhi. Via these communities, Śākyaśrī’s monastic ordination lineage was passed down and received by a variety of prominent Tibetan Buddhist masters and spread in different bKa’ brgyud traditions and within the Sa skya order. Along with this lineage, the Sa skya school preserved a second distinct ordination lineage that also originates from Śākyaśrī, namely the one that was transmitted from Śākyaśrī directly to his disciple Sa skya Paṇḍi ta (though I will only discuss it briefly below). In this paper, I will mainly focus on the formation and historical development of the Vinaya communities in Śākyaśrī’s tradition and the diffusion of their respective ordination lineages. Moreover, I will present some initial findings on the ascetic practice (brtul zhugs) of the “single mat” (stan/gdan gcig) associated with those communities and some other characteristic features. 2. Notes on Tibetan Sources Employed Concise accounts of the founding of the four monastic communities in Śākyaśrī’s tradition along with records of their early abbatial succession are given by several standard Tibetan religious histories, including Tshal pa Kun dga’ rdo rje’s (1309–1364) Deb ther dmar po, Yar lung Jo bo Shākya rin chen sde’s (fl. 14th century) Yar lung chos ’byung, ’Gos Lo tsā ba gZhon nu dpal’s (1392–1481) Deb ther sngon po, sTag tshang rDzong pa dPal ’byor bzang po’s (fl. 15th century) rGya bod yig tshang chen mo, and gTsug lag ’phreng ba’s (1504–1564/66) mKhas pa’i dga’ ston. 5 Within the limited scope of this paper, I could not consider the writings of Khro phu Lo tsā ba such as his Khro lo chen pos mdzad pa’i dpag bsam ’khri zhing; see TBRC (W1CZ1880). For a description of works relevant to Khro phu Lo tsā ba’s life, see VAN DER KUIJP 1994: 601–602 and 613–614. 6 See JACKSON 1990a: 1. On Śākyaśrī’s calculation, see RUEGG 1992: 266–268. 7 See mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar (fol. 12a2–4) and VAN DER KUIJP 1994: 613. See also rGyal gling tshogs pa’i byung ba brjod pa (p. 70.8–11), where a similar passage is cited from an unspecified work of Jo nang rJe btsun Tāranātha (1575–1634): jo nang tā ra na [= nā] thas| kha che paṇ chen shākya shri [= shrī] bha dra la| bod du slob ma mchog tu gyur pa’i bka’ zab mo babs pa ni| sa paṇ la tshad ma’i bka’ babs| byang rdor rnam gynis la ’dul ba’i bka’ babs| khro lo byams pa dpal la man ngag gi bka’ babs| dpyal lo chos bzang la rgyud kyi bka’ babs so zhes dang|. 8 JACKSON 2010a: [211]. The Jo gdan tshogs sde bzhi 189 Those monastic communities are also mentioned in several works on Vinaya such as the Fifth Dalai Lama (Tā la’i bla ma) Ngag dbang blo bzang rgya mtsho’s (1617–1682) bsTan pa’i rtsa ba rab ’byung dang khyim pa la phan gdags pa’i las kyi cho ga mtha’ gcod dang bcas pa ’khrul spong rnam rgyal gser mdog and Yongs ’dzin Ye shes rgyal mtshan’s (1713–1793) ’Dul ba’i chos byung. Moreover, two of the available sources focus exclusively on the transmission history of Śākyaśrī’s Vinaya tradition via those four monastic communities that developed out of Śākyaśrī’s original group of disciples. The first is available as a twenty-five folio dbu med manuscript entitled mKhan rgyud [= brgyud] rnam gsum byon tshul gyi rnam thar (hereafter mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar).9 Although its title implies that the work treats the origin of all three monastic ordination lineages, it discusses only the Indian part of Śākyaśrī’s lineage, his life story and sojourn in Tibet, and the historical development of his Tibetan Vinaya communities, furnishing biographical sketches for latter abbots through whom his lineage was passed down. The author of the text is Shākya dGe slong Grags pa rdo rje (b. 1444). This author does not give his own name in the colophon, but only reveals his identity in a short autobiographical sketch found within the text.10 After Śākyaśrī’s life story and before the biographical sketches of the abbots of the four communities, Grags pa rdo rje included in his work a passage that discusses the lives of a total of seven masters who each acted in turn as presiding abbot (mkhan po, upādhyāya) in the succeeding master’s full monastic ordination, closing this section with his own autobiographical sketch. This presentation thus constitutes the account of the author’s own lineage of prātimokṣa precepts in Śākyaśrī’s tradition.11 Since the first four Tibetan masters in Grags pa rdo rje’s work functioned as abbots of the Chos lung tshogs pa, and the information provided by him on the Chos lung tshogs pa abbots is much more extensive than on the abbots of the other three groups, the author’s own lineage clearly originated within the Chos lung community.12 From a reference to the installation of the latest abbot of the Bye rdzing tshogs pa mentioned in the text, lHun grub rgyal mtshan, it is evident that Grags pa rdo rje authored his work in 1487.13 9 On the mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar, see also VAN DER KUIJP 1994: 603 and VAN DER KUIJP 2006: 14. This work is housed in the China Nationalities Library of the Cultural Palace of Nationalities in Beijing (catalogue no. 002775(6)) and its scan available from TBRC (W1CZ1079). 10 For Grags pa rdo rje’s autbiographical sketch, see mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar (fol. 16a4–16b3). At age ten, in 1454, Grags pa rdo rje received monastic ordination as a novice monk (śrāmaṇera, dge tshul) from Sems dpa’ chen po Blo gros rgyal mtshan dpal bzang po as presiding abbot (upādhyāya, mkhan po) and mKhan chen Sangs rgyas ’bum as ceremony master (karmācārya, las kyi slob dpon). When he reached age nineteen, in 1463, he took the vows of a fully ordained monk (bhikṣu, dge slong) together with bShes gnyen Lung rigs smra ba Chos kyi rgyal po from Shes rab rdo rje dpal bzang po (1394–1467) as presiding abbot, Rig pa’i dbang phyug Ye shes rdo rje as ceremony master, and bKa’ bcu pa Blo gros mtshungs med as secret reveiling preceptor (raho’nuśāsaka, gsang ston) in the middle of a monastic gathering of seven fully ordained monks in the temple (gtsug lag khang) of Ri bo dge ’phel in Shangs of gTsang. Ri bo dge ’phel monastery was founded by Grags pa rdo rje’s master Shes rab rdo rje. For the latter’s biographical sketch, see mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar (fols. 15b3–16a4). Leonard van der Kuijp suggests to identify a disciple of ’Gos Lo tsā ba gZhon nu dpal (1392–1481), who signed himself as Paṇḍita Kīrtivajra (Paṇḍita Grags pa rdo rje), as the Grags pa rdo rje of our text in question; see VAN DER KUIJP 2006: 14. The former was the author of “a brief study on chronological aspects of the Bka’ gdams pa school,” entitled Jo bo yab sras las ’phros pa’i skyes bu dam ’ga’ zhig; see Ibid.: 14 and 43. 11 For Grags pa rdo rje’s biographical sketch, see mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar (fol. 16a4–16b3). Grags pa rdo rje records biographical sketches of the following seven masters: lHo brag Byang chub dpal bzang (1183–1264), mKhan chen bDe ba dpal bzang po (1231–1297), bKa’ bzhi pa Grags pa gzhon nu dpal (1257–1315), Sems dpa’ chen po bSod nams grags pa (1273–1353), mKhan chen bKa’ bzhi pa Byang chub dpal bzang po, Lung rigs kyi dbang phyug mKhan chen Grags pa rdo rje dpal bzang po, and mKhan po Rin po che Shes rab rdo rje dpal bzang po (1394–1467); see mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar (fols. 12a6–16a4). After his autobiographical sketch, Grags pa rdo rje concludes with a short supplication to the lineage masters of his prātimokṣa vows; see mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar (fol. 16b1–3). 12 See mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar (fol. 16b4). 13 The Bye rdzing tshogs pa is the last community discussed, and in the fire-sheep year (me lug = 1487) lHun grub dpal ldan was its last abbot recorded. Since his installation, three years had passed until and 190 Jörg Heimbel The second main source on the four communities is entitled mKhan rgyud [= brgyud] rnam dag nor bu’i phreng ba’i byon tshul legs pa (hereafter dGe ’dun sgang pa’i mkhan brgyud) and is available as a three-folio dbu med manuscript of unknown authorship. When we compare it with the previous work, we can see that it presents the lineage of prātimokṣa precepts for the abbots in the transmission line of the dGe ’dun sgang community. Along with basic biographical details, both sources contain important information about the ordination history of the monastic communities’ abbots, i.e. they mention the persons involved in and the location of the abbots’ own full monastic ordination and refer to prominent masters on whom these abbots, in turn, bestowed full monk’s vows. This information, if examined carefully, tells us more about the sphere of action and the influence of individual masters from those monastic communities. The major difficulty with this corpus of texts lies in the varying or even contradictory information it provides regarding the historicity of certain events, datings, and the abbatial succession. Nevertheless, based on these variations, we can recognise two major lines of textual transmission. These variations were noted and discussed in both Grags pa rdo rje’s mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar and gTsug lag phreng ba’s mKhas pa’i dga’ ston, although the texts provide different results.14 Unfortunately, all these texts furnish us only with information until the end of the fifteenth century. Regarding later developments, we have to look into other sources whose nature will become clearer as we proceed. The recent publication of Tibetan monastic catalogues Bod khul gyi chos sde grags can khag gi dpe rnying dkar chag edited by sKa ba Shes rab bzang po includes an extensive catalogue of books housed at Nā lendra monastery in ’Phan po. Among the many interesting works listed, we find a text in forty-six folios entitled Paṇ chen shākya shrī nas brgyud pa’i mkhan brgyud kyi rnam thar.15 I hope that this work will become available in the near future to enable us to further illuminate the history of the monastic communities in Śākyaśrī’s tradition. 3. The Early History of Śākyaśrī’s Monastic Community In the early years of the original monastic community’s existence after Śākyaśrī’s return to Kashmir, three of his disciples were highly important as leaders of the group: gTsang so ba bSod nams mdzes, Byang chub dpal, and rDo rje dpal. According to the rGya bod yig tshang chen mo, it was first gTsang so ba who headed the community for nine years as the gdan gcig pa’i mkhan po, i.e. as the abbot of Śākyaśrī’s community of single mat practitioners. After his passing, rDo rje dpal functioned as the community’s abbot and Byang chub dpal as its chief preceptor (slob dpon) for twenty-two years. During that time, the monastic community is said to have stayed together as a single group.16 If we follow the chronology of that source, which provides us with rather unusual dates for Śākyaśrī’s life (1122–1220) and sojourn in Tibet (1206–1218),17 the community would have stayed together as one group until the end of the 1240s. By contrast, the including 1487. According to Tibetan chronological calculation, lHun grub dpal ldan was thus installed in 1485. See mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar (fol. 25a3) and VAN DER KUIJP 1994: 603, n. 18. For the list of sources Grags pa rdo rje based his work on, see mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar (fol. 25a6–8). For a discussion of some of these texts, see VAN DER KUIJP 1994: 604, n. 19. 14 See mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar (fol. 22b1–3) and mKhas pa’i dga’ ston (pp. 504.22–505.11), respectively. 15 See dPe rnying dkar chag (p. 138, no. 2962). 16 See rGya bod yig tshang chen mo (pp. 509.16–18 and 510.4–7). A later versified presentation also mentions gTsang so ba’s nine-year tenure, but makes no mention that after his passing the community was led by Byang chub dpal and rDo rje dpal; see rGya bod yig tshang chen mo (p. 506.11–12). See also Deb ther dmar po (p. 60.2–3) and ’Dul ba’i chos ’byung (p. 202.1–6). 17 The rGya bod yig tshang chen mo (pp. 223.15–224.11 and 507.1–508.17) dates Śākyaśrī’s birth to 1122 (chu pho stag), his twelfth year sojourn in Tibet from his eighty-fifth year in 1206 (me pho stag) until his ninety-seventh year (= 1218), and his death to his ninety-ninth year in 1219 (sa mo yos). According to this calculation, Śākyaśrī should have passed away in 1220 (lcags pho drug) and not in 1219. This dating is mentioned in the rGya bod yig tshang chen mo (p. 516.6–11) as well, namely in a versified presentation that concludes the account on Śākyaśrī’s ordination lineage. The Jo gdan tshogs sde bzhi 191 dGe ’dun sgang pa’i mkhan brgyud asserts that when Śākyaśrī headed back to his native Kashmir in 1214, he installed gTsang so ba as tutor (gnas kyi bla ma) of both Byang chub dpal and rDo rje dpal and together they led the fate of Śākyaśrī’s community until 1224, when each of the latter two established his own group.18 Other accounts, such as those found in the mKhas pa’i dga’ ston and Yar lung chos ’byung, also mention that the monastic community divided after the passing of gTsang so ba.19 In line with that, the bsTan rtsis gsal ba’i nyin byed dates the break-up of the community to the year 1224.20 For those early years, we lack any information regarding the whereabouts of the original community, but, considering that after the break-up the individual groups wandered about as encampments, I would suggest that Śākyaśrī’s original community also constituted a mobile encampment. Before I discuss that division, I will first summarise what can be learned about bSod nams mdzes, Byang chub dpal, and rDo rje dpal and their relation with Śākyaśrī. In a fifteenth century compilation of Śākyaśrī’s life by “Maṃ ga laṃ tiṣṭha ma kha ārya” (bKra shis rab gnas/brtan ’phags?),21 we find the following account of the first encounter between gTsang so ba and Śākyaśrī. Hearing of the fame of his future master, gTsang so ba came to meet Śākyaśrī at Slas mo che of sNar in 1205. He told Śākyaśrī that since his bhikṣu ordination he could not remember the slightest transgression of his prātimokṣa precepts and asked him to perform a dedication of the merit he had thus gained. Deeply impressed, Śākyaśrī exclaimed that even in India bhikṣus of such a pure discipline did not exist and performed the requested dedication. As Śākyaśrī asked gTsang so ba to stay with him and act as his ritual officiant (mchod gnas), gTsang so ba is recorded to have followed him as attendant (phyag phyi) for the time of Śākyaśrī’s sojourn in Tibet.22 The sources specify different names and titles of bSod nams mdzes that can occur in a variety of combinations:23 (1) he is introduced as dGe slong bSod nams mdzes from gTsang so in La stod Byang; (2) he is recorded as Śākyaśrī’s bla mchod (ritual officiant); (3) he is referred to as Tshul khrims mdzes instead of bSod nams mdzes; (4) he is addressed as gTsang po ba instead of gTsang so ba; and (5) he bears the title Jo gdan in various homophone misspellings (Jo brtan/gdan) or Jo bo stan gcig pa.24 18 See dGe ’dun sgang pa’i mkhan brgyud (fol. 1b5–7). See also Ngor chos ’byung (p. 321.5–6) and bsTan rtsis gsal ba’i nyin byed (p. 159.11–13). See further Dus ’khor chos ’byung 1 (fol. 222.3–4), which reports that Śākyaśrī entrusted his community to all three of them. 19 See mKhas pa’i dga’ ston (p. 503.15–16) and Yar lung chos ’byung (p. 171.2–3). 20 See bsTan rtsis gsal ba’i nyin byed (p. 159.13–14). 21 See Kha che paṇ chen gyi rnam thar 2a (fol. 35b2). Cf. Kha che paṇ chen gyi rnam thar 2b (p. 82.6), where his name has been given as Manga laṃ ṭaṣṭhi ma kha o rgyan. For a description of the former work, see VAN DER KUIJP 1994: 607–608. The colophon dates the biography to the fifteenth day of the first month of a female iron-ox year (lcags mo glang), which Ibid.: 607 dates on text-internal evidence to “at least 1421 or 1481.” According to the Dung dkar tshigs mdzod, s.v. kha che paṇ chen, the author was a disciple of “Sa skya’i ’Jam dbyangs rin chen.” 22 See Kha che paṇ chen gyi rnam thar 2a (fols. 20a5–21b1) and Kha che paṇ chen gyi rnam thar 2b (pp. 45.6–46.4). For similar accounts, see mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar (fol. 8b4–6), mKhas pa’i dga’ ston (p. 503.6–12), ’Khrul spong rnam rgyal gser mdog (p. 35.2–3), Dus ’khor chos ’byung 1 (fol. 200a4–200b1), bsTan rtsis gsal ba’i nyin byed (pp. 155.18–156.1), and gSang ’dus chos ’byung (p. 164.5–6). Cf. VAN DER KUIJP 1994: 605, n. 22, who understands the accounts found in the bsTan rtsis gsal ba’i nyin byed (pp. 155.18–156.1) and gSang ’dus chos ’byung (p. 164.5–6) as referring to bSod nams mdzes’s own monastic ordination. 23 On that, see also VAN DER KUIJP 1994: 605, n. 22. 24 (1) Kha che paṇ chen gyi rnam thar 2a (fol. 20a5), Kha che paṇ chen gyi rnam thar 2b (p. 46.1), and mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar (fol. 8b4). (2) mKhas pa’i dga’ ston (p. 503.6–7), Deb ther dmar po (p. 59.17– 18), and Yar lung chos ’byung (p. 170.18). (3) rGya bod yig tshang chen mo (pp. 224.5, 508.12–13, and 509.15–16) and ’Dul ba’i chos ’byung (p. 202.1). An annotation in the dGe ’dun sgang pa’i mkhan brgyud (fol. 1b6) specifies his personal name as bSod nams seng ge. (4) For gTsang so ba, see mKhas pa’i dga’ ston (p. 503.7 and 15), ’Khrul spong rnam rgyal gser mdog (p. 35.2), dGe ’dun sgang pa’i mkhan brgyud (fol. 1b6), and Deb ther dmar po (p. 59.18). For gTsang po ba, see rGya bod yig tshang chen mo (pp. 508.12 and 509.15), bsTan rtsis gsal ba’i nyin byed (p. 155.18), Yar lung chos ’byung (p. 170.18), and 192 Jörg Heimbel Religious histories such as the mKhas pa’i dga’ ston, Deb ther dmar po, and Yar lung cho ’byung furnish some information on the relation between Śākyaśrī and his two disciples Byang chub dpal and rDo rje dpal. According to them, when Śākyaśrī travelled to Central Tibet (dBus), the two were among a group of eleven monks who received full monastic ordination from him at a monastery in Chu shul (or Chu shur), which is recorded by a variety of homophone spellings: (1) Krog ma dgon pa, (2) sProg ma dgon pa, (3) Phrog ma dgon pa, and (4) Srog ma dgon pa.25 According to his biographies, Śākyaśrī observed the summer retreat (dbyar gnas) at Slas mo che of sNar in 1205, travelled afterwards to Chu mig ring mo, and continued to lHa sa via gZhu sNye mo, mTshur phu, and sTod lung.26 He could have thus passed through Chu shul on his way from sTod lung to lHa sa. After their monastic ordination, Byang chub dpal and rDo rje dpal approached Śākyaśrī asking his permission to accompany him as attendants, but the former denied their request, sending them instead to Na bza’ ’phred gsol (or Nam za ’phred gsol), the abbot of Zul phu, to study Vinaya, which they accordingly did.27 To this account, the Fifth Dalai Lama adds that after Śākyaśrī had made gTsang so ba his ritual officiant and attendant (zham ring), he sent him to assist Byang chub dpal and rDo rje dpal with their Vinaya studies under Na bza’ ’phred gsol.28 The sources further specify that Byang chub dpal and rDo rje dpal were either made attendants or ritual officiants of gTsang so ba. When Śākyaśrī embarked on his journey back to Kashmir, they once again asked to be allowed to follow him as attendants, but, once again, Śākyaśrī refused, saying that they would not be able to stand the heat of India. Instead, he instructed them to rely on gTsang so ba as their spiritual mentor and teach the Vinaya. Moreover, he told them that they should not live apart from a community of four bhikṣus, which would make up a proper saṃgha according to the Vinaya.29 In comparison to the previous account, a major difference can be observed in the presentations found in such works as the mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar, Dus ’khor chos ’byung 1, bsTan rtsis gsal ba’i nyin byed, and gSang ’dus chos ’byung. All of these texts record another date and location for both Byang chub dpal and rDo rje dpal’s full monastic ordination. According to them, Byang chub dpal was ordained in 1204 at Khro phu and rDo rje dpal two years later in 1206 at rGyan gong in Myang smad, not far from Zhwa lu.30 The existence of those conflicting accounts was noted by dPa’ bo gTsug lag phreng ba, who followed the presentations found in the Deb ther dmar po and Yar lung chos ’byung, refuting the gSang ’dus chos ’byung (p. 164.5). (5) For Jo brtan, see Deb ther dmar po (p. 59.18); for Jo dan, see Yar lung chos ’byung (p. 170.18); and for Jo bo stan gcig pa, see mKhas pa’i dga’ ston (p. 503.6–7). 25 For these spellings, see (1) Yar lung chos ’byung (p. 170.12); (2) Deb ther dmar po (p. 59.14) and rGya bod yig tshang chen mo (pp. 509.14); (3) mKhas pa’i dga’ ston (p. 503.3); and (4) ’Khrul spong rnam rgyal gser mdog (p. 35.1), Du kū la’i gos bzang (vol. 3, p. 105.12), and Shes bya kun khyab (p. 222.13). Cf. rGya bod yig tshang chen mo (p. 509.13–16) and ’Dul ba’i chos ’byung (pp. 201.6–202.1), which both state that is was gTsang so ba who received full monastic ordination at sProg ma dgon pa. 26 See Kha che paṇ chen gyi rnam thar 1 (pp. 66.3–67.2), Kha chen paṇ chen gyi rnam thar 2a (fol. 20a2– 20b5), and Kha chen paṇ chen gyi rnam thar 2b (pp. 45.4–47.3). See also JACKSON 1990a: 13–14. 27 On Zul phu, see SØRENSEN & HAZOD 2007: 695–696, n. 5, who state that Zul phu “too was a Vinaya settlement and Vinaya teachings and hermeneutics long remained it stable curricula.” They identify Na bza’ ’phred gsol as Zul phu’s third abbot Chos kyi byang chub (ca. 1194/1206–1271/83), who probably “ruled as abbot from ca. 1225.” They further state that “the early 13th cent. abbots of Jo-gdan tshogs-pa, rDo-rje-dpal, Byang-chub-dpal (and bDe-ba-dpal (1231–97)) were also ordained in his presence.” 28 See ’Khrul spong rnam rgyal gser mdog (p. 35.1–5). 29 See mKhas pa’i dga’ ston (pp. 487.19–20 and 503.1–15), Deb ther dmar po (pp. 59.14–60.2), Du kū la’i gos bzang (vol. 3, p. 105.12–15), Yar lung chos ’byung (pp. 170.11–171.2), and Shes bya kun khyab (p. 222.13–15). The Yar lung chos ’byung (p. 170.16–18) further specifies in an annotation that Byang chub dpal’s and rDo rje dpal’s Vinaya studies under Na bza’ ’phred gsol were the reason for the close connection between Zul phu and Śākyaśrī’s monastic community. 30 See mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar (fols. 11a7–11b1, 12a6–12b1, 21b6–22a1, and 22a4–5), Dus ’khor chos ’byung 1 (fols. 219b.5–220a1 and 220b2–3), ’Dul ba’i chos ’byung (pp. 195.1–6 and 197.6–198.3), bsTan rtsis gsal ba’i nyin byed (pp. 155.13–16 and 156.1–3), and gSang ’dus chos ’byung (pp. 164.3–4 and 164.6– 165.1). The Jo gdan tshogs sde bzhi 193 account included in the Dus ’khor chos ’byung 1.31 Grags pa rdo rje, the author of the mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar, was also aware of the former two presentations, but, in contrast, considered the account of Byang chub dpal and rDo rje dpal’s bhikṣu ordination at sProg ma monastery, as well as their Vinaya studies at Zul phu, as purely ill-judged or indiscriminate guesses (bab chol kho na yin), referring to documents that prove otherwise. He mentions the existence of records by the time keepers (dus go ba) involved in the ordination ceremonies of Byang chub dpal and rDo rje dpal that predate the composition of both the Deb ther dmar po and Yar lung chos ’byung. He adds that these documents were affixed with the seal of a certain bDag nyid chen po and were still in existence.32 The bDag nyid chen po in question can surely be identified as Sa skya’s throne holder bDag nyid chen po bZang po dpal (1262–1324). Luckily, a passage relating the occasion upon which bZang po dpal affixed his seal to those documents referred to by Grags pa rdo rje is preserved in the Zhwa lu gdan rabs. In that history this account serves as an explanation for the preservation of Śākyaśrī’s monastic ordination lineage at Zhwa lu since the time of bKa’ bzhi pa Grags pa gzhon nu (1257–1315), who acted as both the third abbot of the Chos lung tshogs pa (tenure: 1294–1315) and an abbot of Zhwa lu.33 According to the Zhwa lu gdan rabs, Śākyaśrī ordained Sa skya Paṇḍi ta and rDo rje dpal in the temple (gtsug lag khang) of rGyan gong Byang chub dge gnas. Later, when bZang po dpal and his son Ti shri Kun dga’ blo gros (1299–1327) received full monastic ordination, more than fifty masters, including sDe snod ’dzin pa dPal ldan rgyal mtshan, were invited to Sa skya to investigate the legitimacy of the monastic ordination lineage (sdom brgyud) of the prātimokṣa and bodhisattva precepts. As Śākyaśrī’s transmission lineage was undisputed and bKa’ bzhi pa Grags pa gzhon nu considered a genuine and authentic holder of this lineage, the convention issued a letter stating that this master’s monastic ordination lineage (sdom rgyun) should be taken as legitimate. The letter was affixed with the seal of bZang po dpal and many other masters and thus became an official decree.34 Unfortunately, as reasonable as this account appears, it suffers from the anachronism that bZang po dpal and his son received full monastic ordination at different times: the former at age fifty-two in 1313 and the latter between 1322 and 1324 when he had returned to Sa skya from the Mongol court of China.35 Nevertheless, Grags pa gzhon nu seemingly presided over bZang po dpal’s full monastic ordination in 1313, but not over Kun dga’ bla gros’ since he is recorded to have passed away in 1315. In his mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar, Grags pa rdo rje provides biographical sketches of Byang chub dpal and rDo rje dpal that constitute the most extensive accounts now known. According to Grags pa rdo rje, lHo brag pa Byang chub dpal was born in 1183 at Khe’u gad in eastern lHo brag.36 At age twenty-two, in 1204, he met Śākyaśrī at Phag ri, where the Indian master was received by a large gathering after his arrival in Tibet.37 In the same year, Byang chub dpal took 31 See mKhas pa’i dga’ ston (pp. 504.22–505.8). See mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar (fol. 22b1–3). 33 For Grags pa gzhon nu’s biographical sketch, see bKa’ gdams chos ’byung (vol. 2, pp. 266.3–270.1), mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar (fol. 13a1–13b3), Lam rim bla brgyud kyi rnam thar (vol. 2, pp. 538–543), and Zhwa lu gdan rabs (pp. 360.6–366.6). 34 See Zhwa lu gdan rabs (pp. 361.3–362.2). The mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar (fol. 13b1) records Grags pa gzhon nu as ordination abbot of bZang po dpal and his son Kun dga’ blo gros as well. 35 See Sa skya gdung rabs (pp. 295.5 and 304.2–305.2), respectively. According to an inscription on a thangka related to the dGe ’dun sgang community discussed below, Ti shri Kun dga’ blo gros received full monastic ordination from gZhon nu byang chub, the third Tshogs dGe ’dun sgang abbot; see PAKHOUTOVA 2012. 36 In the Tibetan sources, Byang chub dpal is mentioned by the following names: lHo brag pa Byang chub dpal (rGya bod yig tshang chen mo, p. 510.6; Dus ’khor chos ’byung 1, fol. 200a1; ’Dul ba’i chos ’byung, p. 195.3; bsTan rtsis gsal ba’i nyin byed, p. 155.15; and gSang ’dus chos ’byung, p. 164.4), Gru shul ’Khor gang Byang chub dpal (mKhas pa’i dga’ ston, p. 503.4), Gro shul (pa/ba) Kher gad Byang chub dpal (’Khrul spong rnam rgyal gser mdog, p. 35.2; Du kū la’i gos bzang, vol. 3, p. 105.13–14; and Shes bya kun khyab, p. 222.14), and Gru shul pa Kher gang Byang chub dpal (rGya bod chos ’byung, pp. 45.18–46.1). 37 See Kha che paṇ chen gyi rnam thar 1 (p. 64.7–15), Kha chen paṇ chen gyi rnam thar 2a (fol. 19a4), and Kha chen paṇ chen gyi rnam thar 2b (p. 43.3). See also JACKSON 1990a: 13. 32 194 Jörg Heimbel full monastic ordination at Khro phu from Śākyaśrī as presiding abbot (mkhan po, upādhyāya), Byang ston Rin chen grags (alias Shangs pa Jo gdan) as ceremony master (las kyi slob dpon, karmācārya), and rGyang ro ba gZhon nu rin chen as secret revealing preceptor (gsang ste ston pa, raho’nuśāsaka).38 Thereafter, he pursued studies under those three masters as well as under gTsang so ba, Khro phu Lo tsā ba, dKar Shākya grags, and rTogs ldan Ngam shod pa, a student of Sangs rgyas dbon ston (1138–1210), from whom he also received a special statue of Śākyaśrī. Byang chub dpal composed commentaries on texts such as the rGyal sras lam ’jug and Vinayakārikā (’Dul ba tshig le’ur byas pa or Me tog phreng rgyud). He established his own monastic community of single mat practitioners, which he led for forty-two years, and passed away at age eighty-two at rGyun gnas of bZad on the fifteenth day of the first half of the last summer month of 1264.39 His much shorter biographical sketch included in the dGe ’dun sgang pa’i mkhan brgyud adds that Byang chub dpal was born at Gro shul of lHo brag into a family line of lay tantric ritualists (sngags pa) and headed the dGe ’dun sgang community for thirty-two years. In contrast to Grags pa rdo rje’s account, this source mentions that Byang chub dpal passed away at age seventy-seven.40 Grags pa rdo rje introduces rDo rje dpal as the spiritual son or close disciple (thugs sras) of Śākyaśrī and refers to him as mTsho mda’ rDo rje dpal. From other sources, it becomes evident that mTsho mda’ was part of sNye mo.41 He received full monastic ordination in the temple of rGyan gong in Myang smad from Śākyaśrī as presiding abbot, gTsang so ba as ceremony master, and bSod nams rgyal mtshan as secret revealing preceptor. According to Grags pa rdo rje, this event was clearly recorded by mKhan chen Chos kyi rgyal mtshan, who functioned as the time keeper of the ceremony. rDo rje dpal acted for twenty-three years as the abbot of the Tsha mig or Tshogs chen community and passed away at age seventy-three. Grags pa rdo rje emphasises that rDo rje dpal received full monastic ordination in 1206 at rGyan gong, the same year Sa skya Paṇḍita took bhikṣu vows from Śākyaśrī. He recounts, however, that Sa skya Paṇḍita only got his hair cut at rGyan gong and that the main part of the ordination ceremony took place at dPyal Lo tsā ba Chos kyi bzang po’s monastery of Nyung chung gser sdings in Myang smad.42 While Grags pa rdo rje discussed prior to that the dates of Śākyaśrī’s life and sojourn in Tibet, he already referred to these two ordinations, but an annotation by a later hand remarks that it needs to be further examined whether rDo rje dpal was really ordained at that time.43 In this context, we need to take note of accounts found in Sa skya Paṇḍi ta’s early biographies, which record the latter’s full monastic ordination in 1208 at rGyang gong.44 The dPal sa skya paṇḍi ta’i rnam thar gsung sgros ma, a later biography of Sa skya Paṇḍita ascribed to Ngor chen Kun dga’ bzang po (1382–1456), records, however, the same information presented by Grags pa rdo rje.45 38 See also dGe ’dun sgang pa’i mkhan brgyud (fol. 1b7). See mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar (fol. 12a6–12b3). See also mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar (fol. 11a7– 11b1). Byang chub dpal’s forty-two-year tenure probably refers to the total of years he successively headed both the dGe ’dun sgang pa and Chos lung communities. According to HAZOD & SØRENSEN 2007: [659], the region of g/bZad is located in Chu shul. UEBACH 1987: 139 records the foundation of the rGyun gyi gnas by the brothers “Vang Nyi ma” and “Vang Zla ba.” I tend to identify the rGyun gnas where Byang chub dpal passed away as this site in bZad, instead of understanding it as his permanent residence (rgyun gnas). Byang chub dpal’s passing at rGyun gnas is also confirmed by the dGe ’dun sgang pa’i mkhan brgyud (fol. 3a2). 40 See dGe ’dun sgang pa’i mkhan brgyud (fols. 1b7–2a1 and 3a2), respectively. 41 rDo rje dpal occurs in the Tibetan sources under the following names: sNye mo rDo rje dpal (’Dul ba’i chos ’byung, p. 195.5), sNye mo mTsho mtha’ ba mKhan po rDo rje dpal (rGya bod yig tshang chen mo, p. 510.5), gTsang pa rDo rje dpal (mKhas pa’i dga’ ston, p. 503.4; ’Khrul spong rnam rgyal gser mdog, p. 35.2; Du kū la’i gos bzang, vol. 3, p. 105.14; and Shes bya kun khyab, p. 22.14–15), and gTsang smad pa rDo rje dpal (rGya bod chos ’byung, p. 45.18). 42 See mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar (fols. 21b4–22.5). 43 See mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar (fol. 11b1). 44 See JACKSON 1987: 27 and 109 and VAN DER KUIJP 1994: 612. 45 See JACKSON 1987: 35, n. 35 and 119, n. 30. 39 The Jo gdan tshogs sde bzhi 195 This discussion of the early history of Śākyaśrī’s Vinaya community and of the life stories of its most prominent and instrumental teachers—gTsang so ba bSod nams mdzes, lHo brag pa Byang chub dpal, and mTsho mda’ rDo rje dpal—shows that, despite the significant role this community and its original preceptors played in preserving Śākyaśrī’s Vinaya tradition and transmitting his ordination lineage, many aspects of the community and its preceptors’ history were forgotten early on. This led to the conflicting accounts encountered in the diverse later sources employed. Notably, only a few Tibetan authors were aware of these inconsistencies, and precisely their accounts need to be considered for future studies. 4. The Emergence of the Four Monastic Communities Śākyaśrī’s original Vinaya community divided when rDo rje dpal and Byang chub dpal desired, as Tibetan sources put it, to draw apart, both establishing their own separate community. Each of these two newly emerging groups divided once again, ultimately resulting in a total of four communities in Śākyaśrī’s Vinaya tradition. The two groups associated with rDo rje dpal were the Tsha mig tshogs pa and Bye rdzing tshogs pa, while the two linked with Byang chub dpal were the dGe ’dun sgang pa or Tshogs dGe ’dun sgang and Chos lung tshogs pa.46 This quartet became known by a variety of similar names such as (1) Tshogs sde bzhi, (2) Tshogs pa sde bzhi, (3) Jo gdan sde bzhi, (4) Jo gdan tshogs sde bzhi, or (5) Jo stan/gdan tshogs pa sde bzhi.47 Individual groups were also simply referred to as Jo gdan tshogs pa and when, for instance, two communities appeared in an account together, they could be addressed as Jo gdan tshogs pa sde gnyis.48 Standard religious histories refer to rDo rje dpal’s original community as Tsha mig and its branch as Bye rdzing, both deriving their names from places where they settled at an early point in their history: the former at Tsha mig in sNye mo and the latter at Bye rdzing in sNye mo gZhu.49 The division of rDo rje dpal’s monastic community occurred during the term of the second abbot, Sangs rgyas dpal, when dKon mchog rgyal mtshan separated from rDo rje dpal’s original community.50 From the mKhan rgyud kyi rnam thar, we learn that dKon mchog rgyal 46 For this presentation, see mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar (fols. 12a6–25b2), mKhas pa’i dga’ ston (pp. 503.15–504.21), dGe ’dun sgang pa’i mkhan brgyud (fols. 1a7–3a6), rGya bod chos ’byung (pp. 45.18– 46.16), rGya bod yig tshang chen mo (pp. 510.4–514.10 and 516.12–518.2), Deb ther sngon po (pp. 1248.2–1249.5), Deb ther dmar po (p. 60.2–22), ’Dul ba’i chos ’byung (pp. 198.3–5 and 201.3–204.2), and Yar lung chos ’byung (pp. 171.2–172.13). For a simplified presentation, see bKa’ gdams gsar rnying gi chos ’byung (pp. 68.6–69.3), ’Khrul spong rnam rgyal gser mdog (p. 35.4–6), Ngor chos ’byung (p. 321.5–7), bsTan rtsis gsal ba’i nyin byed (p. 159.11–17), Shes bya kun khyab (p. 222.14–18), and gSang ’dus chos ’byung (p. 166.3–4). For early mentions of these four communities in non-Tibetan literature based on an entry in the ’Khrul spong rnam rgyal gser mdog, see TUCCI 1999: 134. 47 See (1) mKhas pa’i dga’ ston (p. 505.16), ’Khrul spong rnam rgyal gser mdog (p. 35.6), ’Dul ba’i chos ’byung (pp. 198.4–5 and 201.5–6), Yar lung chos ’byung (p. 172.13), Rab brtan kun bzang ’phags kyi rnam thar (p. 303.7), and Shes bya kun khyab (p. 222.17); (2) bKa’ gdams gsar rnying gi chos ’byung (p. 69.2) and rGya bod yig tshang chen mo (p. 224.7); (3) Yar lung chos ’byung (p. 171.10–11); (4) Ngor chos ’byung (p. 321.6–7), bsTan rtsis gsal ba’i nyin byed (p. 159.16–17), and gSang ’dus chos ’byung (p. 166.4); and (5) dKon mchog bzang po’i rnam thar 2 (fol. 4a3), Bla ma dam pa’i rnam thar (fol. 64a6), and TUCCI 1971: 80.1. 48 On the former term, see dPal ldan tshul khrims kyi rnam thar (p. 406.6), dBus gtsang gnas yig (p. 160.12), Yar lung chos ’byung (p. 77.15), Zhwa lu gdan rabs (pp. 71.2 and 72.2–3), and Sa skya gdung rabs (p. 323.6). On the latter, see bSod nams rnam rgyal gyi rnam thar (fol. 71a7). 49 See mKhas pa’i dga’ ston (p. 503.19–22). We encounter alternative or probably mistaken spellings for Tsha mig such as Tshag mig (’Khrul spong rnam rgyal gser mdog, p. 35.5), Tshal mig (’Dul ba’i chos ’byung, pp. 201.6 and 202.6 and Shes bya kun khyab, p. 222.15–16), and mTshal mig (mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar, fol. 22b6 and rGya bod yig tshang chen mo, pp. 511.16, 512.11–12, and 517.3). For Bye rdzing appear mistaken spellings such as Ji rdzing (bKa’ gdams gsar rnying gi chos ’byung, p. 297.1) or Byi rdzing (bKa’ gdams gsar rnying gi chos ’byung, p. 78.3 and mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar, fols. 23b4 and 24b1). 50 See mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar (fols. 22b3 and 24b1–2), rGya bod yig tshang chen mo (pp. 510.7–12 and 512.11–14), and ’Dul ba’i chos ’byung (p. 203.1–2). Grags pa rdo rje records that Sangs rgyas dpal led 196 Jörg Heimbel mtshan received full monastic ordination from rDo rje dpal and taught at Bye rdzing in sNye mo. The congregating of many monks at this site eventually led to the foundation of dKon mchog rgyal mtshan’s own group. Initially, members of both communities travelled back and forth as they liked, the larger called Tshogs chen pa.51 According to the mKhas pa’i dga’ ston and rGya bod yig tshang chen mo, the Tsha mig pa later on became known as the Tshogs chen pa, and we need to be aware of this identification when reading Tibetan texts.52 Grags pa rdo rje relates that the fourth abbot of the Tsha mig tshogs pa, Chos kyi rgyal mtshan, received the site of Tsha mig as the base where his community would reside (gnas gzhi).53 More research is needed to determine whether this site is identical with the Tsha mig temple founded in sNye mo by a member of the group of sMad ’dul revivers during the early phyi dar period.54 As the Tsha mig tshogs pa previously had no particular temple, the relics (nang rten) of their former abbots were brought to Zul phu. However, from the time of their establishment at Tsha mig, those relics were kept at Tsha mig.55 In the second half of the fourteenth century, a rift between the Tsha mig community’s abbot and chief preceptor led to a temporary division of the group, until the Gong dkar rDzong dpon intervened and successfully mediated between the two parties. The Tsha mig tshogs pa resided in dBus and was headed by brTson ’grus seng ge when Slob dpon bKra shis mgon po left with a group of disciples to gTsang. About fifteen years later, when the gTsang faction was led by bKra shis tshul khrims and the dBus faction by bSod nams dbang phyug, the Gong dkar rDzong dpon Sangs rgyas dpal rin invited both parties to the Bye zhing lha khang in the gZhung valley and was able to settle the dispute.56 The two Tsha mig factions thus reunited and collectively observed the summer retreat. While settling the dispute, it was established that the community’s sitting arrangement should from now on be not exclusively based on seniority of precepts, but arranged following the alternating sequence of one dBus pa and gTsang pa monk. Since then, this regulation was read aloud at the first day of each year’s summer retreat and was still practiced when Grags pa rdo rje wrote his mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar in 1487.57 After the two factions had reunited, bSod nams dbang phyug was installed as the Tsha mig tshogs pa’s abbot and bKra the Tsha mig tshogs pa for a total of thirty-seven years and it was during the thirty-third year of his tenure when the Bye rdzing tshogs pa branched off; see mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar (fols. 22b3 and 24b1–2), respectively. According to the abbatial succession of the Bye rdzing tshogs pa included in the rGya bod yig tshang chen mo (pp. 510.7–12) and ’Dul ba’i chos ’byung (p. 203.1–2), however, Sangs rgyas dpal headed the Tsha mig community also for a total of thirty-seven years, but it was already when four years of his tenure had passed that dKon mchog rgyal mtshan separated and established the Bye rdzing community. Confusingly, the rGya bod yig tshang chen mo (p. 511.16–17) records in the abbatial succession of the Tsha mig tshogs pa that Sangs rgyas dpal, here called g.Yag sde pa Sangs rgyas dpal, led the community only for a total of five years. Cf. also mKhas pa’i dga ston (p. 503.21–22), where dKon mchog rgyal mtshan is recorded as dKon mchog bzang po. 51 See mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar (fol. 24b1–2). 52 See mKhas pa’i dga’ ston (p. 503.19–20) and rGya bod yig tshang chen mo (pp. 511.16 and 512.11). See also mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar (fol. 24a6). 53 See mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar (fol. 22b6). 54 The rGya bod yig tshang (p. 236.18–19) credits Klu mes Tshul khrims shes rab with the foundation of Tsha mig, whereby the mKhas pa’i dga’ ston (p. 474.18–21) and Deb ther sngon po (p. 103.5–7) ascribe it to rNgog/rDog Byang chub ye shes. The reading of the rGya bod yig tshang chen mo (p. 460.15) and Bu ston chos ’byung (p. 64.3–4) is more open for interpretation, but both seemingly ascribe it to the latter as well. According to HAZOD & SØRENSEN 2007: 660, Tsha mig “formed the basis of a number of establishments and dependencies in the area of sNye-mo and neighbouring ’O-yug.” See also UEBACH 1987: [40], Tabelle 4 and 137. 55 See mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar (fol. 22b6–7). Cf. mKhas pa’i dga’ ston (p. 503.20) and Yar lung chos ’byung (p. 170.17–18), where it is recorded that the nang rten up to Seng ge rgyal mtshan, the eighth Tsha mig tshogs pa abbot, were brought to Zul phu. 56 The same Gong dkar rDzong dpon, but now called Sangs rgyas dPon dPal rin pa, offered land to the later Tsha mig abbot ’Khrig pa Sangs rgyas blo gros, who then founded the monastery of Yol Rin chen gling; see mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar (fol. 24a12). See also Deb ther sngon po (pp. 632.6–9 and 632.17–633.1). 57 See mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar (fol. 23a2–23b2). The Jo gdan tshogs sde bzhi 197 shis tshul khrims left for rTse thang, where he served as preceptor of ’Jam dbyangs Shākya rgyal ba, whom we could probably identify as ’Jam dbyangs Gu shrī Shākya rgyal mtshan (1340– 1373), the nephew of Ta’i si tu Byang chub rgyal mtshan (1302–1364), abbot of rTse thang (tenure: 1352–1364/65), and later ruler of the Phag mo gru pa dynasty (r. 1364/65–1373).58 When bSod nams dbang phyug died thirteen years later, bKra shis tshul khrims was installed as the new abbot of the Tsha mig tshogs pa. He headed the community in 1379 when the great Sa skya pa master Shar chen Ye shes rgyal mtshan (1359–1406) received full monastic ordination from bKra shis tshul khrims while travelling in dBus.59 Standard religious histories make no mention of this temporary division and it is also not reflected in the abbatial succession of the Tsha mig tshogs pa that these texts provide for the second half of the fourteenth century. Grags pa rdo rje’s account is therefore extremely valuable and has to be taken into account when identifying abbots from this community for that period. The two monastic communities that became associated with Byang chub dpal emerged in relation to his invitation to the Mongol court to bestow full monastic ordination on ’Gro mgon Chos rgyal ’Phags pa (1235–1280). When this invitation reached Byang chub dpal, he installed his trusted attendant gTsang pa dBang phyug grags as his community’s new head and embarked on a journey to the imperial court. When he reached ’Dam, however, he came to know that ’Phags pa had already taken the bhikṣu vows and headed back. After his return, he resided apart from his old community, thereby establishing a new group. From A myes zhabs’ (1597–1659) Sa skya chronicle, we learn that ’Phags pa received full monastic ordination in 1255 at The le on the Chinese Mongolian border (rgya dang hor yul gyi mtshams the le).60 Consequently, we can date the division of Byang chub dpal’s community to about the mid-1250s. His original community became known as the dGe ’dun sgang pa or Tshogs dGe ’dun sgang and, according to Tibetan religious histories, obtained its name from having resided at a place called dGe ’dun sgang in sNye mo gZhu.61 Grags pa rdo rje, who otherwise has nothing to say about Byang chub dpal’s journey to the Mongol court,62 relates that gZhon nu byang chub (fl. 13th to 14th century), the third Tshogs dGe ’dun sgang abbot, was endowed with land on a site called brTan po sgang, which previously constituted a settlement of musicians. At this site, gZhon nu byang chub 58 For a biographical sketch of ’Jam dbyangs Gu shrī Shākya rgyal mtshan, see Bod kyi lo rgyus (vol. 2, pp. 211.11–216.20). Shākya rgyal mtshan took his full monks vows at age nineteen from the Sa skya pa master Bla ma Dam pa bSod nam rgyal mtshan (1312–1375), who himself had received ordination in the lineage passed down through the abbots of the Chos lung tshogs pa; see Bod kyi lo rgyus (vol. 2, pp. 212.8–9) and below n. 183, respectively. 59 See Shar chen gyi rnam thar (pp. 224.19–225.12) and Shar pa gdung rabs (p. 646.4–5). See also mKhan brygud kyi rnam thar (fol. 23b3). According to the biography of bKa’ ’gyur ba mGon po bSod nams mchog ldan (1603–1659), Shar chen took monastic ordination at Yar klungs rNam rgyal; see bKa’ ’gyur ba’i rnam thar (p. 654.2–3). 60 See Sa skya gdung rabs (pp. 197.3–202.4). Chos rgyal ’Phags pa received ordination from sNye thang pa Grags pa seng ge as presiding abbot, Jo gdan Byang pa bSod nams rgyal mtshan as ceremony master, and Yar lung pa Byang chub rgyal mtshan as secret reveiling preceptor. A myes zhab’s presentation suffers from the following anachronism, however. According to Sa skya Paṇḍi ta’s instructions, ’Phags pa was supposed to take full monastic ordination from ’U yug pa Rig pa’i seng ge. But when he came to know of ’U yug pa’s recent death in 1253 (glang lo), he took full monastic ordination from Grags pa seng ge in 1255. The invitation ’Phags pa sent to Grags pa seng ge with regard to his ordination dates, however, from the summer of 1252. Nevertheless, the date of ’Phags pa’s full monastic ordination in 1255 is confirmed by other works such as the Yar lung chos ’byung (p. 149.5–8). 61 See mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar (fol. 20b3–5), mKhas pa’i dga’ ston (p. 504.3–9 and 17–21), rGya bod yig tshang chen mo (pp. 512.14 and 513.9–15), Deb ther dmar po (p. 60.4–8), and Yar lung chos ’byung (pp. 171.17–172.3 and 11–12). 62 However, in his mKhan brygud kyi rnam thar (fol. 20b3–4), Grags pa rdo rje provides us with a remark that apparently refers to this transition period. He states that when Byang chub dpal was seventy-two years old, i.e. in 1254, his attendant gTsang pa dBang phyug grags resided at sNye mo gShag ram. The author continues by mentioning that dBang phyug grags engaged for thirteen years in the spiritual practice of rNam ’joms and led the dGe ’dun sgang pa for fifteen years. Could that reference to 1254 point to Byang phyug grags’ installation as second Tshogs dGe ’dun sgang abbot? 198 Jörg Heimbel founded a monastery and named it dGe ’dun sgang.63 Fortunately, a painting from dGe ’dun sgang has survived, which was commissioned in relation to the passing of gZhon nu byang chub. This unique painting consists of a double-sided thangka, showing on one side the construction of a stūpa at dGe ’dun sgang and, on the other, rituals and ceremonies performed during the stūpa’s consecration. The painting also contains a long inscription that furnishes details about the life of gZhon nu byang chub and explains the events depicted in the painting.64 From this inscription, we learn that the stūpa was built as a reliquary shrine for gZhon nu byang chub by Yon tan rgyal mtshan, the sixth Tshogs dGe ’dun sgang abbot.65 It is probably this abbot who is depicted as the painting’s patron in the bottom left corner of the thangka. We can expect that the thangka was commissioned not long after the stūpa’s consecration and can therefore date the painting to the fourteenth century. In his mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar, Grags pa rdo rje records that gZhon nu byang chub passed away at the site of his monastic foundation of dGe ’dun sgang and his “outer relics” (phyi rten)—i.e.   sacred   objects   commissioned   after   his   death   in   his   memory—were erected in the monastery’s vicinity to the west of lCags ri.66 It is possible that the stūpa depicted in the painting constitutes the main outer relic mentioned by Grags pa rdo rje. The community that Byang chub dpal established after his return from the Mongol court became known as the Chos lung tshogs pa, whose name also originates from a monastic foundation. From the mKhas pa’i dga’ ston, we learn that a monastery was established at Chos lung in the sNubs valley of Rong and since then the community was known as the Chos lung pa; prior to that, the group had been called sBar sTag pa Jo stan.67 On the successive break-ups and divisions of Śākyaśrī’s original Vinaya community, accounts included in other works vary to some extent. The Fifth Dalai Lama in his Vinaya history, for instance, concurs that rDo rje dpal established the sNye mo Tsha mig tshogs pa, his disciple gZhu ba dKon mchog rgyal mtshan the Bye rdzing tshogs pa, Byang chub dpal the Tshogs dGe ’dun sgang, but says it was Byang chub dpal’s disciple dBu mdzad bSod nams stobs who established the Chos lung tshogs pa.68 The rGya bod yig tshang chen mo, in comparison, records bSod nams stobs not as the founder, but as the second Chos lung tshogs pa abbot and specifies his 63 See mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar (fol. 20b5–6): (...) brtan po rgang [= sgang] zer ba’i glu mkhan gyi grong cig yod pa phyag du phul| chos sde btab nas dge ’dun sgang du btags|. 64 As I had no access to the original Tibetan inscription, my remarks derive from the discussion of this painting by PAKHOUTOVA 2012. According to her, the inscription states that gZhon nu byang chub was born in a female water-hare year (chu mo yos = 1243) and passed away in a female fire-bird year (me mo bya = 1357). However, gZhon nu byang chub is said to have been eighty years old when he died (= 1322). Noticing this anachronism, PAKHOUTOVA 2012 states that “he was probably born in the year of the earth hare, 1279, which fits with the rest of the dates mentioned in the inscription.” Considering that gZhon nu byang chub presided over the full monastic ordination of the Third Karma pa Rang byung rdo rje (1284– 1339) in 1301, such a suggestion seems doubtful; see Karma kaṃ tshang gi rnam thar (vol. 1, pp. 198.5– 199.1). 65 Yon tan rgyal mtshan took his full monk’s vows at dGe ’dun sgang; see dGe ’dun sgang pa’i mkhan brgyud (fol. 2a5). 66 See mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar (fol. 20b6). On gZhon nu byang chub’s passing at dGe ’dun sgang, see also dGe ’dun sgang pa’i mkhan brgyud (fol. 3a3). His dbon po and abbatial successor, ’Dul tshad pa Byang chub bzang po, died at dGe ’dun sgang as well; see dGe ’dun sgang pa’i mkhan brgyud (fol. 3a3). 67 See mKhas pa’i dga’ ston (p. 504.20–21). Cf. mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar (fol. 20a6), which specifies the community’s previous name as sTag pa Jo gdan. The dGe ’dun sgang pa’i mkhan brgyud (fol. 2a2) locates Chos lung in gZhu of sNye mo, whereby the gTam rgyud 1 (p. 14.5–6) and gTam rgyud 2 (p. 11.19) specifiy its location as the Rong district of gTsang. The latter is confirmed by the Tsong kha pa’i rnam thar 3 (pp. 49.2), which locates Chos lung in sNubs of Rong. See also EHRHARD 2010: 232, who mentions that dBus smyon Kun dga’ bzang po (1458–1532) visited several times “sNubs Chos-lung, located in the region of Rong-chen to the south of the gTsang-po.” On the location of Chos lung, see also FERRARI 1958, p. 124, n. 231. Note that in the bKa’ gdams gsar rnying gi chos ’byung (pp. 68.6–69.3) the two communities are obviously confused because it is stated that the first community established by Byang chub dpal was known as Chos lung pa, out of which the dGe ’dun sgang pa emerged. 68 See ’Khrul spong rnam rgyal gser mdog (p. 35.5–6) and TUCCI 1999: 134. See also Dam pa’i chos ’byung tshul (p. 85), Deb ther sngon po (p. 1248.16), and Shes bya kun khyab (p. 222.15–18). The Jo gdan tshogs sde bzhi 199 successor as bDe ba dpal.69 We do not find bSod nams stobs recorded among the abbatial successions furnished in other histories, such as the mKhas pa’i dga’ ston, Deb ther dmar po, or Yar lung chos ’byung, but he is mentioned in the mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar within the biographical sketch of bDe ba dpal (1231–1297), the second Chos lung tshogs pa abbot (tenure: 1268–1294).70 This sketch asserts that bSod nams stobs functioned as ceremony master in bDe ba dpal’s full monastic ordination in 1250 at g.Yag sde rtsa labs and when the Chos lung tshogs pa’s founder Byang chub dpal passed away in 1264, it was he who transitionally led the monastic community (dge’ dun gyi dbu mdzad mdzad) until 1268. During that period, bDe ba dpal resided at dGa’ ba gdong, where he pursued Prajñāpāramitā studies under g.Yar Nyi ma brtson ’grus Seng ge gzil gnon. When he returned in 1268, he was installed as abbot of the Chos lung tshogs pa. Although this presentation can serve as an explanation for the account found in the rGya bod yig tshang chen mo, it still does not explain the Fifth Dalai Lama’s statement that dBu mdzad bSod nams stobs established the Chos lung tshogs pa. Considering the discrepancies regarding the early history of Śākyaśrī’s monastic community and its further break-up, it is difficult to establish reliable datings for these successive events. Nevertheless, as we saw in the previous section, the first division of the original community was dated overwhelmingly to 1224, with only the rGya bod yig tshang chen mo providing a later date (about the end of the 1240s). In relation to the reference of Chos rgyal ’Phags pa’s full monastic ordination in 1255, we are able to establish a date for the further division of Byang chub dpal’s community to about that year.71 Following the internal chronology of the mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar, we can provisionally date the break-up of rDo rje dpal’s community to about the end of the 1270s.72 A foundation date for three of those communities is also recorded in the chronological calculations of the Buddhist doctrine (bstan rtsis) written by sDe srid Sangs rgyas rgya mtsho (1653–1705), Sum pa mKhan po Ye shes dpal ’byor (1704–1788), and Tshe tan zhabs drung ’Jigs med rig pa’i blo gros (1910–1985). All three date Byang chub dpal’s foundation of dGe ’dun sgang and rDo rje dpal’s of sNye mo Tsha mig to 1225 and record the foundation of the Chos lung tshogs pa in 1255.73 These dates should probably be taken only as references for the establishment of these communities, but not as dates for the settlement at Tsha mig or the monastic foundations of dGe ’dun sgang and Chos lung.74 Reliable dates for these events are even 69 See rGya bod yig tshang chen mo (p. 512.14–17). See mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar (fol. 12b3–7). See also in bDe ba dpal’s biographical sketch included in the bKa’ gdams chos ’byung (vol. 2, pp. 265.5–266.1) and Lam rim bla brgyud kyi rnam thar (vol. 2, pp. 535–536). 71 In this context, it is interesting to note that the dGe ’dun sgang pa’i mkhan brgyud (fol. 2a1) specifies Byang chub dpal’s tenure as abbot of the Tshogs dGe ’dun sgang with thirty-two years, which according to Tibetan chronological calculation matches the period from 1224 to 1255. 72 This dating is reached by assuming the initial break-up of the original community in 1224, adding rDo rje dpal’s tenure of the Tsha mig tshogs pa for twenty-three years, and further adding the thirty-three year time period from the tenure of the Tsha mig tshogs pa’s second abbot, Sangs rgyas dpal, when dKon mchog rgyal mtshan established his own community at Bye rdzing. 73 On the foundation of the former two, see Bai ḍūrya dkar po (vol. 1, p. 49.2): (...) shing bya la| byang rdor gnyis kyis tshogs sde btsugs|; Dam pa’i chos ’byung tshul (p. 73); and brsTan rtsis kun las btus pa (p. 397.4– 5): (...) shing bya| (...) kha che paṇ chen gyi slob bu byang rdor gnyis kyis dge ’dun sgang dang snye mo tsha mig btab. On the latter, see Bai ḍūrya dkar po (vol. 1, p. 49.3): (...) shing yos la| chos lung tshogs pa’i chos sde btab|; Dam pa’i chos ’byung tshul (p. 85); and brsTan rtsis kun las btus pa (p. 402.1–2): (...) shing yos| (...) chos lung tshogs pa btab|. See also TUCCI 1999: 702, n. 756. 74 With regard to the Chos lung tshogs pa, we have to note that the Bai ḍūrya dkar po (vol. 1, p. 49.3) actually refers to the founding of the monastery of the Chos lung tshogs pa (chos lung tshogs pa’i chos sde btab). But considering the records in the Dam pa’i chos ’byung tshul (p. 85) and bsTan rtsis kun las btus pa (p. 402.1–2), the mKhas pa’i dga’ ston’s (p. 504.20–21) remark that the Chos lung tshogs pa was prior to the foundation of Chos lung known as sBar sTag pa Jo stan, and that the earliest mention of Chos lung as a monastery by the mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar (fols. 13b7–14a1) can only be dated as late as 1342, I suggest that sDe srid Sangs rgyas rgya mtsho’s record might have been mistaken and should probably be understood as only referring to the community’s foundation. Cf. also the more recent publications sNye mo 70 200 Jörg Heimbel more complicated to establish. Although the mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar provides the names of the abbots during whose tenure these events occurred, absolute datings are made impossible by the contradictory information regarding the length of each abbot’s tenure given by the sources. If we assume in line with the previous remarks that the Tsha mig tshogs pa was established in about 1224, the community would, according to the internal chronology of the mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar, have settled at Tsha mig between 1295 and 1308. Likewise, gZhon nu byang chub would have founded the monastery of dGe ’dun sgang during his more than fifty-year tenure, which lasted from 1268 to 1322. From the earliest reference to Chos lung in the mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar, we can establish a terminus ante quem for the monastery’s foundation of prior to 1342.75 We also have to bear in mind that the names of the Tsha mig tshogs pa, dGe ’dun sgang pa, and Chos lung tshogs pa constitute later designations originating from the sites where these groups settled after they had been endowed with offerings of land or temples. The Tibetan sources do not provide names with regard to Śākyaśrī’s original as well as Byang chub dpal’s and rDo rje dpal’s monastic communities prior to their division. 4.1. Subdivisions of the Four Monastic Communities My reading of the Tibetan sources suggests that we should not understand the term Jo gdan tshogs sde bzhi as referring to four fixed communities that remained together as single groups at just one monastery. Instead, we need to think of them, initially, as wandering encampments with no fixed abode or means of support that over time branched off into further sub-communities whose members settled at different locations beyond the borders of the wider region of sNye mo. Such a development is indicated, for example, by the writings of ’Jam dbyangs mKhyen brtse’i dbang po (1820–1892). In his abbatial histories of Tibetan monasteries, he specifies the four monastic communities as dGe ’dun sgang pa, Chos lung pa, Tsha mig pa, and Bye rdzing pa.76 In his pilgrimage account of central Tibet, however, we find a different enumeration of the communities. In addition to the Chos lung tshogs pa, he lists three communities–cum–monasteries in lHo kha: the rTse tshogs pa at sNe’u gdong, the Tshong ’dus tshogs pa at Grwa phyi, and the rGyal gling tshogs pa at Grwa nang.77 Furthermore, he mentions that sPos khang monastery in Myang stod of gTsang is also considered part of the four communities.78 In the following pages, I would like to examine the relationship between these two sets of groups. As much of their early history is shrouded by obscurity, my presentation has to be understood as a first tentative attempt at illuminating a few aspects of the history and relationship of those communities and not as a final comprehensive overview. 4.1.1. rGyal gling tshogs pa Regarding the history of the rGyal gling tshogs pa, we possess slightly more information than for the other three monastic establishments.79 While travelling in central Tibet in the 1720s, Si tu Paṇ chen Chos kyi ’byung gnas (1700–1774) visited the three monasteries of the Jo gdan tshogs sde rdzong (pp. 42.20–43.1) and lHa sa’i dgon tho (pp. 319.–320.1), which both date the foundation of dGe ’dun sgang monastery to 1225. 75 See mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar (fols. 13b7–14a1). We also have references for the years 1348 and 1352 when Bla ma Dam pa bSod nams rgyal mtshan visited his ordination abbot and teacher Sems dpa’ chen po bSod nams grags pa (1273–1353), the fourth Chos lung tshogs pa abbot (tenure: 1315–1342), at Chos lung; see Bla ma dam pa’i rnam thar (fols. 23b5–7 and 27b7–28a1), respectively. On Bla ma Dam pa’s full monastic ordination, see below n. 186. 76 See gSang sngags gsar rnying gi gdan rabs (p. 205.3–4). 77 See dBus gtsang gi gnas rten rags rim gyi mtshan byang (p. 201.15–17) and FERRARI 1958: 49. 78 See dBus gtsang gi gnas rten rags rim gyi mtshan byang (p. 209.4–5) and FERRARI 1958: 59. 79 For mentions of the rGyal gling tshogs pa in non-Tibetan literature, see for instance FERRARI 1958: 49, 55, and 133, n. 327, CHAN 1994: 470–471, 495, 502–505, and 521, DOWMAN 1996: 147, 160, and 176, and GYURME DORJE 2004: 174. Different spellings for that monastery are encountered in the sources: Gyang gling tshogs pa (dBus gtsang gnas yig, p. 159.3), rGya gling tshogs pa (Rang tshul drangs por brjod pa, p. 89.5), and brGyad gling tshogs pa (FERRARI 1958: 55). TUCCI 1956: 148 refers to the monastery as Gu ru tshogs pa. The Jo gdan tshogs sde bzhi 201 bzhi that are located in lHo kha. He records in his travelogue that the rGyal gling tshogs pa constituted a branch of the dGe ’dun sgang pa, the latter having moved to lHo kha and settled at an estate of the Yar rgyab family.80 This was confirmed by Kaḥ thog Si tu Chos kyi rgya mtsho (1880–1923/25) in his dBus gtsang gnas yig, who records that the monastery of the rGyal gling tshogs pa was a Jo gdan tshogs pa, namely the grwa tshang of Śākyaśrī’s disciple Byang chub dpal, which constituted an encampment (sgar pa). He further specifies that it was the dGe ’dun sgang community that later settled at rGyal chen gling in Grwa, which was previously said to have been a ruler’s palace turned into a monastery.81 Further information on the rGyal gling tshogs pa is given by the article dPal ldan tshogs chen rgyal gling tshogs pa’i byung ba brjod pa don ldan tshangs pa’i sgra dbyangs by the late ’Jigs med dpal ldan bzang po.82 Given the rich information it provides, the author seems to have been closely linked to the rGyal gling tshogs pa, probably even as a local monk. According to him, the community was founded by Byang chub dpal in 1224 at the site of rGyal gling (rGyal ba yar rgyab pa’i gling), which was an estate of the Yar rgyab family. Elderly and lacking a male progeny, an unnamed member of the Yar rgyab noble house offered the site to Byang chub dpal and endowed his community with agricultural estates.83 Citing an old, one-folio handwritten manuscript,84 that author further explains that the rGyal gling tshogs pa emerged from the dGe ’dun sgang community of sNye mo, which constituted the rGyal gling tshogs pa’s mother institution (ma dgon). Previously, the dGe ’dun sgang pa had been a wandering encampment without any fixed abode and, according to oral traditions, resided during the summer at Arge sbug in Grwa, where they observed the summer retreat, and during the winter at Kha rag Thar pa gling.85 At their original site at dGe ’dun sgang, the community was only equipped with a meditation place (sgrub gnas) until a Chos khang was built at the same site in 1225. With the foundation of rGyal gling in 1224, the situation changed insofar as the new seat in lHo kha became the mother institution and dGe ’dun sgang in sNye mo its branch (bu dgon).86 ’Jigs med dpal ldan bzang po further specifies that the construction of the rGyal gling tshogs pa monastery actually began three years earlier and was only completed in 1224.87 As the basis for his datings, he refers to Tshe tan zhabs drung’s bsTan rtsis kun las btus pa, which indeed records the 80 See Rang tshul drangs por brjod pa (p. 89.5): rgya [sic] gling tshogs pa zhes dge ’dun sgang pa’i byes pheb yar rgyab kyi gzhis khar chags pa la (...). 81 See dBus gtsang gnas yig (p. 160.11–14): dgon pa ’di kha che paṇ chen pa’i slob ma byang chub dpal ba’i grwa tshang sgar pa| jo gdan tshogs pa ste phyi dus su gtsang gi kha rag gi tshogs dge ’dun sgang pa grwa rgyal chen gling du chags pa yin pas rgyal po’i pho brang dgon par song ba yin zer|. 82 This article served as the basis for the entry “dGe ’dun sgang” in the lHa sa’i dgon tho (pp. 319–321). On the rGyal gling tshogs pa, see also the entry “dGa’ tshal sbug” in lHo kha sa khul gyi gnas yig (pp. 26–28). 83 See rGyal gling tshogs pa’i byung ba brjod pa (pp. 66.26–67.10). 84 See rGyal gling tshogs pa’i byung ba brjod pa (p. 72.8–12): dpal ldan tshogs chen rgyal gling tshogs pa ’di ni| ma dgon snye mo dge ’dun sgang las gyes pa yin te| yig rnying bris ma shog lhe zhig tu dpal ldan tshogs chen rgyal gling tshogs pa ’di’i ma dgon snye mo dge ’dun sgang ni sngar rabs su gnas nges med la sgar skor du phebs zhes pa dang| mkhan chen byang chub dpal bas dpal ldan tshogs chen ’di nyid phyag btab rjes ma dgon du gyur ces gsal ba ni khungs btsan te|. ’Jigs med skal ldan bzang po also mentions a thangka painting that shows the dGe ’dun sgang community as a wandering encampment; see rGyal gling tshogs pa’i byung ba brjod pa (p. 72.21–22). 85 Interestingly, the dGa’ ldan chos ’byung (p. 224, no. 18) records the Ar dge dgon in Grwa nang that is seemingly related to Arge sbug: bka’ gdams kyi dge bshes bya ’dul ba ’dzin pa’i slob ma byang chub brtson ’grus kyis btab| bar skabs su gtsug lag khang la chu’i ’jigs pa cher byung ba grwa nang shākya chos rab pas gsos shing yar gtsang gi dus jo stan pa’i mkhan thog brgyad tsam gyis bskyangs ’dug kyang ser khyim du song| (...). On Kha rag, see SØRENSEN & HAZOD 2007: 674–675, n. 9. The dBus gtsang gnas yig (p. 160.11– 14) mentions that the dGe ’dun sgang pa constituted the group from Kha rag of gTsang. 86 Along with dGe ’dun sgang, ’Jigs med dpal bzang po records ’Brog rong po dgon, Mo dgon, and dGon pa gsar as other branch monasteries of the rGyal gling tshogs pa; see rGyal gling tshogs pa’i byung ba brjod pa (p. 73.10–13). For a list of the estates of the rGyal gling tshogs pa, see rGyal gling tshogs pa’i byung ba brjod pa (pp. 85.26–86.1). 87 For the whole presentation, see rGyal gling tshogs pa’i byung ba brjod pa (pp. 72.8–73.13). See also sNye mo rdzong (pp. 42.20–43.1). 202 Jörg Heimbel establishment of the rGyal gling tshogs pa by Byang chub dpal in the year 1224 and, as previously mentioned, dates the founding of dGe ’dun sgang to 1225.88 ’Jigs med dpal ldan bzang po also cites texts preserved at the rGyal gling tshogs pa that attest to the connection between this monastery and the dGe ’dun sgang pa. He reproduces, on the one hand, a lineage record of the ordination abbots through whom Byang chub dpal’s lineage of prātimokṣa precepts was passed down and, on the other, the abbatial succession of the rGyal gling tshogs pa.89 Regarding the lineage of the first fifteen ordination abbots of the dGe ’dun sgang pa, we are also furnished with the respective records from the mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar and dGe ’dun sgang pa’i mkhan brgyud. Comparing the entries for these lineages, it becomes evident that Byang chub dpal’s mkhan brgyud corresponds to the mkhan rabs of the rGyal gling tshogs pa as well as to the other two mkhan brgyuds of the dGe ’dun sgang pa. This seems to imply that the rGyal gling tshogs pa was already established by Byang chub dpal and headed by the same successive masters that both led and acted as the ordination abbots of the whole dGe’ dun sgang community. However, with regard to my previous remarks on the chronology of the division of Śākyaśrī’s Vinaya community and the emergence of the Jo gdan tshogs sde bzhi, I hesitate to follow some of ’Jigs med dpal ldan bzang po’s conclusions. Although I am unable to explain the dating of the foundation of the rGyal gling tshogs pa in 1224 in Tshe tan zhabs drung’s bsTan rtsis kun las btus pa, the record of the foundation of dGe ’dun sgang in 1225 can, in my view, not be understood as referring to the monastic foundation, but only to the establishment of Byang chub dpal’s monastic community. This is especially evident when we take into consideration the previously mentioned account that it was only during the time of the third dGe ’dun sgang abbot, gZhon nu byang chub, that the monastery of dGe ’dun sgang, from which the community received its name, was built.90 Moreover, the biography of Khrims khang Lo tsā ba bSod nams rgya mtsho (1424–1482) reports an episode of the dGe ’dun sgang pa’s settlement that contradicts ’Jigs med dpal ldan bzang po’s explanation. This account is related to illustrate bSod nams rgya mtsho’s eclectic religious activities in general and seemingly refers to the dGe ’dun sgang pa’s establishment at rGyal gling in particular. According to his biography, bSod nams rgya mtsho stayed in 1476 in retreat at lHun grub chos rdzong in Dol, the monastery on the estate of the Yar rgyab family. At that time, the dGe ’dun sgang pa had travelled to La stod, where internal friction’s among members of the monastic community occurred. This situation prompted the majority of the group’s monks to part ways, leaving behind the community’s abbot together with some monks without an idea where to move next. Thereupon, under the instructions of bSod nams rgya mtsho, the Yar rgyab Nang so newly established the remaining members of the dGe ’dun sgang pa at what appears to have been rGyal gling.91 Based on this account, the establishment of the dGe ’dun sgang pa in lHo kha needs to be dated to about 1476 and, consequently, the abbatial succession of the rGyal gling tshogs pa provided by ’Jigs med dpal ldan bzang po has to be considered a later adoption of the dGe ’dun sgang pa’s succession. 88 See bsTan rtsis kun las btus pa (p. 397.3–5): (...) shing sbrel| (...) kha che paṇ chen gyi dngos slob mkhan chen byang chub dpal bas tshogs sde bzhi’i ya gyal rgyal gling tshogs pa btab| (...) shing bya| (...) kha che paṇ chen gyi slob bu byang rdor gnyis kyis dge ’dun sgang dang snye mo tsha mig btab|. 89 See rGyal gling tshogs pa’i byung ba brjod pa (pp. 70.20–71.7 and 73.27–74.13), respectively. The former quotation stems from the supplication mKhan rgyud [= brgyud] kyi gsol ’debs of unknown authorship and was recited during the regular assemblies of the rGyal gling tshogs pa. The latter originates from the Chos dbyings bde chen ma (bla ma spyan ’dren pa) section of the rGyal po chen po rnam thos sras mchod pa’i cho ga rin po che’i gter. 90 See above n. 63. 91 See bSod nams rgya mtsho’i rnam thar (pp. 422.23–423.6). I owe many thanks to Mathias Fermer for drawing my attention to this passage. The settlement at rGyal gling in about 1476 could serve as an explanation for the fact that neither the mKhan brygud kyi rnam thar nor the dGe ’dun sgang pa’i mkhan brgyud have anything to say about the foundation of the rGyal gling tshogs pa, far from even mentioning the name of that monastery. The Jo gdan tshogs sde bzhi 203 With the establishment of the dGe’ dun sgang pa at rGyal gling, the groups’s new home temple developed into the main seat of the monastic community.92 Nevertheless, the entire community continued to be known as dGe ’dun sgang pa or Tshogs dGe ’dun sgang, even though they had become established at rGyal gling. The name of their seat at rGyal gling, the rGyal gling tshogs pa, was seemingly never used as the proper name for the whole dGe ’dun sgang community, but only referred to the monastery at rGyal gling. It even appears that the rGyal gling tshogs pa itself was known and referred to as dGe ’dun sgang pa. This can be seen in the biographies of certain Karma pa and Zhwa dmar incarnations who maintained close ties with the dGe ’dun sgang community, for which I have come across three examples. The Fourth Zhwa dmar Chos grags ye shes (1453–1524) bestowed teachings on the Yar rgyab dGe ’dun sgang pa while travelling in lHo kha; following the invitation of the Yar rgyab dPon chen, the Fifth Zhwa dmar dKon mchog yan lag (1525–1583) journeyed to rGyal chen gling and held a great prayer festival on the Tibetan new year of 1570, on that occasion also bestowing teachings and monastic ordinations on members of the Tshogs dGe ’dun sgang; and still later, when the Fifth Zhwa dmar was again invited by members of the Yar rgyab ruling house to Byams gling and Dol, he made a tea offering and spoke auspicious words (legs ja shis brjod) to Rin chen shes rab, the then abbot of the Tshogs dGe ’dun sgang.93 Having become established at rGyal gling, it is uncertain if the dGe ’dun sgang pa continued to wander about as an encampment; an early characteristic of Śākyaśrī’s Vinaya communities, which the dGe ’dun gsang pa maintained even after their foundation of dGe ’dun sgang monastery in sNye mo. This practice is mentioned, for instance, in the biography of the fourteenth century Sa skya pa Lam ’bras master dPal ldan tshul khrims (1333–1399). In 1340, as a child of seven years, he was told by his maternal half-brother that it would be good to obtain monastic ordination at Sa skya because the Jo gdan tshogs pa was in residence there. dPal ldan tshul khrims therefore travelled to Sa skya, where the dGe ’dun sgang community was residing at the lHa khang chen mo, and was ordained by Don grub dpal, the fifth Tshogs dGe ’dun sgang abbot.94 Another example, which will be discussed in more detail below, is the occasion of the dGe ’dun sgang community’s journey to Kong po to preside over the Fifth Karma pa bDe bzhin gshegs pa’s (1384–1415) śrāmaṇera (dge tshul) and bhikṣu (dge slong) ordinations. ’Jigs med dpal ldan bzang po’s article on the origin of the rGyal gling tshogs pa reveals further aspects of the history of this monastic institution. For example, over the centuries different ritual traditions were performed at the rGyal gling tshogs pa depending on the particular abbot’s affiliation and preferences. ’Jigs med dpal ldan bzang po reports that, initially, the monastery maintained purely Śākyaśrī’s Vinaya tradition, but later on ritual systems of the bKa’ brgyud and Sa skya order were performed. From the nineteenth century onwards, rNying ma rituals of the Klong chen snying thig tradition were introduced as well.95 Thus the rGyal gling tshogs pa 92 It remains to be examined what happened to dGe ’dun sgang monastery in sNye mo. The source material only provides references to that monastery until the 15th century; see mKhan brygud kyi rnam thar (fol. 20b6) and dGe ’dun sgang pa’i mkhan brgyud (fol. 3a2–4). See also Rab ’byor seng ge’i rnam thar (p. 490.16–17). The only exception is the modern publication called sNye mo rdzong (pp. 42.20–43.1), which records a dGe ’dun sgang bla brang located in sNye mo xiang of sNye mo county, stating that it adhers to the rNying ma tradition and is home to two monks. See also lHa sa’i dgon tho (pp. 319.–320.1). 93 See Karma kaṃ tshang gi rnam thar (vol. 1, p. 607.6, vol. 2, pp. 111.7–112.1, and vol. 2, pp. 128.7– 129.1), respectively. See further Karma kaṃ tshang gi rnam thar (pp. 79.6–7, 173.6–7, and 199.2–5). 94 See dPal ldan tshul khrims kyi rnam thar (pp. 406.4–407.1). This episode is also found in the biographical sketch of dPal ldan tshul khrims included in a modern biographical dictionary, entitled Gangs can mkhas dbang rim byon gyi rnam thar mdor bsdus. The editors seemingly misunderstood the original reading that the dGe ’dun sgang community was “present” or “residing” (bzhugs) at Sa skya. Thus they emended bzhugs to zhugs (“to enter” or “to join”); see rNam thar mdor bsdus (p. 92.6–10). 95 See rGyal gling tshogs pa’i byung ba brjod pa (p. 90.18–22). See also dBus gtsang gnas yig (p. 160.16). Kaḥ thog Si tu reports that at the time of his visit the rGyal gling tshogs pa was home to about eighty monks; see dBus gtsang gnas yig (p. 160.10–11). For the ritual calendar and liturgical texts of the rGyal gling tshogs pa, see rGyal gling tshogs pa’i byung ba brjod pa (pp. 83.12–85.17). In contrast, Paṇ chen bSod nams grags pa (1478–1554) records in his bKa’ gdams gsar rnying gi chos ’byung (pp. 296.6–297.1) 204 Jörg Heimbel adhered not exclusively to one Buddhist order, as it was the case with other communities of the Jo gdan tshogs sde bzhi. A visit to the site of the rGyal gling tshogs pa in June 2011 revealed that its main temple, as well as some of its old murals, has survived the Cultural Revolution, but remains empty.96 Except for a few minor repairs executed by the local population, the monastery still awaits restoration, but was recognised by the Bod rang skyong ljongs rig dngos srung skyob sde tshan as a protected site in 2009. 4.1.2 Tshong ’dus tshogs pa The Tshong ’dus tshogs pa in Grwa phyi is related with the Bye rdzing tshogs pa whose members at one point in time resettled from Bye rdzing in sNye mo gZhu to Grwa phyi in lHo kha.97 This observation is based on remarks found in the autobiographies of the Fifth Dalai Lama and Si tu Paṇ chen Chos kyi ’byung gnas, who both refer to the Tshong ’dus tshogs pa as Gra phyi Bye rdzing tshogs pa.98 Kaḥ thog Si tu Chos kyi rgya mtsho in his dBus gtsang gnas yig makes it still even clearer by specifying two alternative names for this community: Grwa phyi Tshong ’dus tshogs pa or Bye rdzing tshogs pa.99 As Grags pa rdo rje in his mKhan rgyud kyi rnam thar makes no mention of a previous monastic establishment at Bye rdzing or elsewhere, it appears that until the Bye rdzing tshogs pa became permanently established at Tshong ’dus, they remained essentially a mobile encampment.100 that the Tshogs pa Grwa nang, which most surely is a reference to the rGyal gling tshogs pa, housed only dGe ldan pa monks since the time when Legs rin acted as abbot of the mTshan sgrog pa. Legs rin was a disciple of Tsong kha pa and is included in the latter’s disciple quartet called Jo stan bzhi or Jo bo gdan gcig pa bzhi; see bKa’ gdams gsar rnying gi chos ’byung (p. 97.3), Tsong kha pa’i rnam thar 1 (p. 367.19– 21), Tsong kha pa’i rnam thar 2 (p. 395.7–8), and KASCHEWSKY 1971: vol. 1, 212. The members of this quartet are enumerated as Jo stan/gdan Zla ba blo gros, Jo stan/gdan bSod nams lhun grub, Jo stan/gdan Legs rin pa, and Kong po Jo stan/gdan. On their activities, see bKa’ gdams gsar rnying gi chos ’byung (pp. 296.3–297.2). Legs rin apparently led a monastic community known as mTshan sgrog pa or mTshan sgrog tshogs pa. The latter name is given in the Rab brtan kun bzang ’phags kyi rnam thar (p. 303.7–10), where the mTshan sgrog tshogs pa is mentioned along with the Tshogs sde bzhi as a recipient of food offerings made on behalf of the recently deceased rGyal rtse ruler bKra shis rab brtan dpal bzang po (1427–1462). 96 According to CHAN 1994: 504 and DOWMAN 1996: 160, the monastery was used as Party offices. DOWMAN 1996: 160 further specifies that later on the monastery was used as a granary. 97 For mentions of the Tshong ’dus tshogs pa in non-Tibetan literature, see for instance DAS 1902: 234, FERRARI 1958: 49, 54, 104, and 132, n. 315, TUCCI 1956: 145–146, CHAN 1994: 28, 365, 470–471, 495– 497, 505, 521, and 548, DOWMAN 1996: 147, 160–161, and 176, and GYURME DORJE 2004: 175–176. 98 See Du kū la’i gos bzang (vol. 3, p. 52.6) and Rang tshul drangs por brjod pa (p. 89.1), respectively. The Fifth Dalai Lama is recorded to have been cured from an eye disease by the protector deity of the Tshong ’dus tshogs pa, Bya khri spyan gcig, and ordered subsequently that the people of Grwa phyi had to pay the taxes of the Tshong ’dus tshogs pa; see lHo khar gnas pa’i tshogs pa sde bzhi (p. 56, second col., l. 7–12) and lHo kha sa khul gyi gnas yig (pp. 33.23–34.4). The collected writings of the Fifth Dalai Lama contain versified supplications to that protector deity of Tshong ’dus, who is refered to as Bya khri(d) mig gcig pa; see gSung ’bum (vol. 22, pp. 394–395, pp. 423–424, pp. 431–432, pp. 475–476, p. 484, p. 551, pp. 562– 563, and pp. 602–603. According to DE NEBESKY-WOJKOWITZ 1996: 109, 112, 122–123, 418, and 424, the protector Bya khri mig gcig po is the minister (blon po) of Mon bu pu tra, who in turn belongs to the rGyal po sku lnga group. 99 See dBus gtsang gnas yig (p. 217.16). This connection is also evident from the prinintg colophon of Khro phu Lo tsā ba’s eulogy of Śākyaśrī, where the patron of the block carving identifies himself as grwa phyi bye tshogs sde pa dpal ldan; see JACKSON 1990a: 37.5. Chos ’phel in his lHo kha sa khul gyi gnas yig (p. 33.18–19) refers to the Tshong ’dus tshogs pa as Tshong ’dus grwa tshang and provides its more extensive name as mkhas mang bye ba ’dus pa’i rdzing bu “rje [= bye?] rdzing tshogs pa”. The dKar chag (p. 212.1) also refers to the Tshong ’dus tshogs pa as Gra phyi Tshong ’dus grwa tshang. SØRENSEN & HAZOD 2007: 172 (continuation of p. 171, n. 423) record the further names of the Tshong ’dus tshogs pa as Bye ma rdzing tshogs pa, Bya tshogs, and Bye tshogs. On the Tshong ’dus tshogs pa, see also lHo khar gnas pa’i tshogs pa sde bzhi (pp. 56–57). 100 For about 1432, the bSod nams rnam rgyal gyi rnam thar (fol. 19b7) attests the presence of the Bye rdzing tshogs pa in the lower reaches of the gZhung valley to the west of Grwa, where the community The Jo gdan tshogs sde bzhi 205 We know of a temple that was established in Grwa phyi by Klu mes Tshul khrims shes rab during the period of the early bstan pa phyi dar, the Tshong ’dus gnas.101 More research will be needed to determine whether the Bye rdzing rdzogs pa permanently settled at that temple. Given the striking resemblance of the architecture of the Tshong ’dus tshogs pa’s main temple with that of the rGyal gling tshogs pa (Image 1 and Image 3), the possibility has to be considered that the temple previously constituted an estate of a noble patron, who, as in case with the rGyal gling tshogs pa, donated the site to the Bye rdzing tshogs pa. The architecture of these two temples is considered by David Jackson to be in line with an record in the Yar lung chos ’byung, according to whom the Yar klungs ruler mNga’ bdag Grags pa rin chen (1255-1328; r. 1268– 1307) patronised Śākyaśrī’s monastic communities and endowed them with estates for their permanent support.102 As this text records, however, only Grags pa rin chen’s patronage for a further unspecified “Jo gdan tshogs pa,” it remains unclear which community he supported.103 Nevertheless, this remark verifies the presence of at least one Jo gdan community in Yar klungs or lHo kha by the time of Grags pa rin chen’s rule.104 The earliest mention of the Tshong ’dus tshogs pa dates to the year 1346. This date appears in the following account and allows us to establish a terminus ante quem for the settlement of the Bye rdzing tshogs pa at Tshong ’dus prior to 1346. After the death of Sa skya’s throne holder Ta dben Blo gros rgyal mtshan (1332–1364), the rGyal rtse noble ’Phags pa dPal bzang po (1318– 1370), a noble sponsor of the Jo gdan tshogs sde bzhi, was sent by Ta dben Kun dga’ rin chen (1339–1399), the new throne holder of Sa skya, to sNe gdong to deliver a “share of offerings” (’bul skal) intended for a religious service on behalf of Ta dben Blo gros rgyal mtshan. As ’Phags pa dPal bzang po’s journey coincided with either an illness or even the passing of Ta’i si tu Byang chub rgyal mtshan (1302–1364), Tibet’s new ruler from the Phag mo gru pa dynasty, he seems to have resided temporarily. In general, the mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar includes hardly any reference to the activities of the Bye rdzing pa abbots. What we can learn is, however, that Rin tshul, the twelfth Bye rdzing tshogs pa abbot, had invited Dol po pa Shes rab rgyal mtshan (1292–1361) to sTod lungs, where he obtained teachings on the Sixfold Yoga of Kālacakra (sbyor drug) because it was from that time on that this teaching of the completion stage of Kālacakra became the meditational practice of the Bye rdzing community; see mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar (fol. 24b5). Rin tshul’s student, Shes rab yon tan ’phel, is recorded to have founded Zhu lung mTsho kha and by doing so he became known as Grub chen mTsho kha ba; see mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar (fol. 24b6). On the relation of Sher ’phags pa, the sixteenth Bye rdzing tshogs pa abbot, with rTse chen, see Myang chos ’byung (p. 90.6–7). 101 See mKhas pa’i dga’ ston (p. 474.2–5) and Deb ther sngon po (p. 103.12). See also SØRENSEN & HAZOD 2005: 320 and SØRENSEN & HAZOD 2007: 172 (continuation of p. 171, n. 423) and [659]. The bKa’ gdams chos ’byung (vol. 1, p. 144.3–4) records that Atiśa was invited to Grwa phyi Tshong ’dus by a small community (gnas chung), where he consecrated a temple. See also Deb ther sngon po (p. 314.12–13). The lHo khar gnas pa’i tshogs pa sde bzhi (p. 56, first col., l. 21–24) mentions that the Tshong ’dus tshogs pa obtained its name from the eponymous village, where in former times a great market was held annually from the seventh day of the eighth month on. On that, see also lHo kha sa khul gyi gnas yig (p. 33.22–24). 102 See JACKSON 1990a: 21, n. 11. Another early patron of the Jo gdan tshogs sde bzhi was the lHa stod Byang ruler rDo rje mgon po (b. 1298); see dPyid kyi rgyal mo’i glu dbyangs (p. 113.14–16). 103 See Yar lung chos ’byung (p. 77.15–17): jo gtan [= gdan] tshogs pa’i chos gzhi [= gzhis] <nam zhag> [= rnam gzhag] gtan du ’degs pa'i sron [= srol] ’dzugs pa la sogs pa bstan pa’i zhabs tog dang|. 104 The mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar (fol. 16b5) mentions a site called Tshong ’dus as the place where bSod nams bzang po (1292–1356), the later fifth Chos lung tshogs pa abbot (tenure: 1342–1351), received in 1307, at age sixteen, monastic ordination from bKa bzhi pa Grags pa gzhon nu (1257–1315), the third Chos lung tshogs pa abbot (tenure: 1294–1315). If the place in question was the Tshong ’dus tshogs pa in Grwa phyi, we could establish a terminus ante quem for the Bye rdzing tshogs pa’s settlement at Tshong ’dus prior to 1307. Considering, however, that the bodily remains of Grags pa gzhon nu were brought to and cremated at Tshong ’dus m/’Gur mo in Myang of gTsang, such an identification seems doubtful; see bKa’ gdams chos ’byung (vol. 2, pp. 269.4–270.1,) mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar (fol. 13b3), and Zhwa lu gdan rabs (p. 365.3–6). 206 Jörg Heimbel fell victim to some conspiracy, resulting in his abduction to the Tshong ’dus tshogs pa, where he was put under house arrest for five months.105 As with the rGyal gling tshogs pa’s main temple, the temple of the Tshong ’dus tshogs pa was spared the destruction of the Cultural Revolution.106 During that time, the main temple’s murals were whitewashed and thus preserved. Recently, the layer of white paint was partly removed, revealing beautiful murals beneath that probably date to the nineteenth century and attest to the monastery’s affiliation with the Sa skya order.107 The sections of the assembly hall visible so far show, along with Śākyaśrī’s depiction (Image 5), classical Sa skya motifs such as Hevajra (Image 4), Sa chen Kun dga’ snying po (1092–1158), and Sa skya Paṇḍi ta. On one wall of the assembly halls’ gallery accessible only from the second storey, we find depictions of masters from what appears to constitute a Lam ’bras lineage arranged on both sides of a central image of Vajradhara (Image 6).108 To this day, the monastery remains mainly empty and still awaits restoration, but was recognised by the Bod rang skyong ljongs rig dngos srung skyob sde tshan as a protected site in 2007. 4.1.3. rTse tshogs pa Initially, the rTse tshogs pa at sNe’u gdong (Image 8) near rTse thang is said to have been a Sa skya monastery, but was later converted to the dGe lugs order by mKhas grub rJe dGe legs dpal bzang (1385–1438). The Fifth Dalai Lama wrote the rTse tshogs pa’s monastic code and the Seventh Dalai Lama bsKal bzang rgya mtsho (1708–1757) renamed the monastery rTse tshogs dGa’ ldan byang grol bde chen gling.109 Additional aspects of the history of the rTse tshogs pa can be learned from research conducted by Per Sørensen and Guntram Hazod on the monastery of Khra ’brug, of which the rTse tshogs pa became the chief support monastery.110 According to these scholars, the rTse tshogs pa was 105 See rGya bod yig tshang chen mo (pp. 382.4–383.3), Rab brtan kun bzang ’phags kyi rnam thar (pp. 10.20–11.20), VAN DER KUIJP 2001: 62–64, LO BUE 1992: 561, LO BUE & RICCA 1990: 343, RICCA & LO BUE 1993: 14, and TUCCI 1999: 663–664. 106 According to CHAN 1994: 496 and GYURME DORJE 2004: 175, the monastery was used as a granary, whereas DOWMAN 1996: 161 mentions that it served as Party offices. 107 In his lHo kha sa khul gyi gnas yig (p. 34.5–6), Chos ’phel specifies that the Tshong ’dus tshogs pa was home to about more than ninty monks who adhered to the Ngor sub-school of the Sa skya order. In contrast, Paṇ chen bSod nams grags pa (1478–1554) records in his bKa’ gdams gsar rnying gi chos ’bung (p. 297.1–2) that many dGe ldan pa abbots appeared in the Ji rdzing pa, i.e. Bye rdzing tshogs pa, and that during his time an equal amount of dGe ldan pa and Sa skya pa monks were found among this community. 108 According to CHAN 1994: 496, a major restoration of the Tshong ’dus tshogs pa was undertaken in the nineteenth century and all paintings date from that period, though their contents followed the originals. Part of the inscription below the mural of Sa chen reads as follows: bsil ldan gyi ljongs ’dir nag phyogs bdud rigs rgya mtsho’i pha mthar sprad ste dkar phyogs rgyal rnga srid rtse’i bar du brdung nas sa’i me btsa’ rnams bsos phan bde’i rtsa lag gtsug lag khang rnams bzhengs dam pa’i chos kyi srol btod pa sde snod gsum gyi bstan pa gsal ba mkhas btsun bzang gsum| chos rgyal mi dbon rnam gsum la sogs pa’i mkhas grub ji snyed kyi snang bsnyan tshad ldan ri mo mkhan sman mkhyen mkhas pa’i ring lugs nyi zla ltar grags pa rnam pa gsum lags so| dad gus <brtsol grub> [= brtson grus?] kyi byed po bidra ming can zung gi bstan pa’i rim gro kho nar ’grub pas gser sogs ’phangs med ser sna’i dri mas ma gos pa dga’ ’gu yid rang zhing tshe rab [= rabs] nas smon lam rnam dag gi mthu smin pa e yin snyams|. 109 See rTse tshogs dgon gyi rtsa che’i nang rten (p. 53, first col., l. 10–18), lHo khar gnas pa’i tshogs pa sde bzhi (p. 55, first col., l. 17–21), and SØRENSEN & HAZOD 2005: 109, n. 282. 110 See SØRENSEN & HAZOD 2005: 7, 29–31, 85, n. 203, 109, n. 282, 112, n. 285, 263, and 310. For further mentions of the rTse tshogs pa in non-Tibetan literature, see DAS 1902: 234, FERRARI 1958: 49, and 124, n. 228, TUCCI 1956: 136, CHANG 1994: 521–522, DOWMAN 1996: 176–177, and GYURME DORJE 2004: 193. For descriptions in Tibetan literature, see, in chronological order, Rang tshul drangs por brjod pa (p. 87.3), dBus gtsang gnas yig (pp. 237–241), gNas bskor bskyod pa’i nyin deb (p. 100.8–18), lHo kha sa khul gyi gnas yig (pp. 44–45), rTse tshogs dgon gyi rtsa che’i nang rten, and lHo khar gnas pa’i tshogs pa sde bzhi (pp. 54–55). See also the article rTse tshogs pa dgon pa’i lo rgyus ngo sprod mdor bsdus by Vang Zhi-ha, published in lHo kha rtsom rig rgyu rtsal, 1994, no. 1, pp. 84–85. This article was unavailable to me and the reference is given according to SØRENSEN & HAZOD 2005: 375. The Jo gdan tshogs sde bzhi 207 founded in the early 13th century as a residence of one of Śākyaśrī’s monastic communities.111 They further ascribe the foundation to Śākyaśrī himself and date this event to 1210 in relation to his sojourn in Yar klungs.112 By contrast, an old guide book of the rTse tshogs pa entitled lHo kha rtse tshogs dgon gyi gnas yig dad pa’i sgo ’byed mentions that the rTse tshogs pa constituted a settlement of the Tsha mig tshogs pa, a monastic community which is said to have received the patronage of Ta’i si tu Byang chub rgyal mtshan (1302–1364). While travelling in dBus, the Tsha mig tshogs pa resided for a couple of months at sNe’u gdong and, eventually, was invited to settle permanently there. For the Tsha mig tshogs pa, a new assembly hall was built in 1356 and it was invested with monastic estates. This temple became known as the rTse tshogs pa.113 The year 1356 is also mentioned by Sørensen and Hazod, who refer in this context only to an expansion of the rTse tshogs pa then.114 An account included in the mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar confirms that the Tsha mig tshogs pa was in residence in dBus by the middle of the fourteenth century, though it neither specifies where or whether the group had already been permanently settled by then. As previously mentioned, while residing in dBus, a rift between the Tsha mig tshogs pa’s abbot, brTson ’grus seng ge, and chief preceptor, bKra shis mgon po, led to a temporary division of the group, with the preceptor leaving with one faction to gTsang. When the group was reunited about fifteen years later due to the mediation of the Gong dkar rDzong dpon, the gTsang faction’s abbot, bKra shis tshul khrims, left to rTse thang, where he served as tutor of ’Jam dbyangs Gu shrī Shākya rgyal mtshan until he was installed about twelve years later as abbot of the Tsha mig tshogs pa. For the year 1380, we possess a reference for the Tsha mig tshogs pa’s presence in Yar klungs, when Tshul khrims rin chen, the successor of bKra shis tshul khrims and twelfth Tsha mig tshogs pa abbot, presided over Tsong kha pa Blo bzang grags pa’s (1357–1419) full monastic ordination in Śākyaśrī’s Vinaya lineage at Yar lung Nam rgyal. Tshul khrims rin chen was assisted by Bye rdzing mKhan chen Shes rab mgon po as ceremony master, Bye rdzing dBu mdzad bSod nams rdo rje as secret revealing preceptor, and twenty monks from both the Tsha mig and Bye rdzing communities.115 One year earlier, in 1379, Shar chen Ye shes rgyal mtshan had taken the bhikṣu vows from bKra shis tshul khrims; the location of this ceremony is recorded 111 See SØRENSEN & HAZOD 2005: 29–30. See SØRENSEN & HAZOD 2005: 85, n. 203 and 310, respectively. Tshong dpon Kha stag ’Dzam yag in his travelogue for the years from 1944 to 1956 also specifies that the rTse tshogs pa was founded by Śākyaśrī; see gNas bskor bskyod pa’i nyin deb (p. 100.8–9). In his Du kū la’i gos bzang (vol. 2, p. 289.10– 11), the Fifth Dalai Lama addresses an unnamed abbot from the rTse tshogs pa as paṇ chen shākya shrī’i gdan sa ba rtse tshogs mkhan chen. 113 As I had no direct access to this manuscript, my remarks are based on lHo khar gnas pa’i tshogs pa sde bzhi (p. 54, second col., l. 23 – p. 55, first col., l. 14): <<lho kha rtse tshogs dgon gyi gnas yig dad pa’i sgo ’byed>> ces pa’i dpe rnying bris ma zhig mjal ba’i skal bzang thob byung bas de’i nang ’di ltar ’khod ’dug ste| rdo byang rnam gnyis kyis tshogs sde bzhi rim par btsugs pa’i nang tshan chos sde chen po ’di nyid (sne gdong rtse tshogs pa) mkhan chen rdo rje dpal gyis thog mar snye mor tsha mig tshogs pa zhes byung yang| drang srong chen po ’di nyid kyi rnam thar las| phyogs bral rgyal khams kun tu bsod snyoms dang| bstan gcig pa’i brtul bzhugs las nam yang mi ’da’ bar mdzad pas jo bo bstan [= stan] gcig ces yongs su grags kyang gnas nges med kho na mdzad stabs| bod spyi’i rgyal po ta’i si tu byang chub rgyal mtshan sogs dang chos yon tu gyur te dbus su phebs pa’i dus sne gdong du zla shas bzhugs| mthar rgyun du bzhugs par gsol te me sprel lor ’du khang gsar du bzhengs (...)| chos gzhis sogs sbyor ’jags mdzad pa nas rtse tshogs pa zhes mtshan gsol|. The title of the manuscript in question is given by SØRENSEN & HAZOD 2005: 367 as lHo khul rtse tshogs dgon gyi gnas yig dad pa’i sgyo ’byed. It comprises ten folios and is marked as incomplete. 114 See SØRENSEN & HAZOD 2005: 31, 109, p. 282, and 310. 115 See bKa’ gdams gsar rnying gi chos ’byung (p. 78.1–3), mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar (fol. 23b3–5), dBus gtsang gnas yig (p. 241.6–12), Tsong kha pa’i rnam thar 1 (p. 81.9–19), and Tsong kha pa’i rnam thar 2 (pp. 105.17–106.1). See also KASCHEWSKY 1971: vol. 1, [92] and SØRENSEN & HAZOD 2005: 31, 85, n. 203, and 310. For Tsong kha pa’s ordination lineage, see also Tsong kha pa’i gsan yig (p. 283.2–4). Paṇ chen bSod nams grags pa (1478–1554) records in his bKa’ gdams gsar rnying gi chos ’bung (p. 297.1–2) that many dGe ldan pa mkhan pos appeared in the Tshogs chen pa, i.e. the Tsha mig tshogs pa, and that during his time an equal number of dGe ldan pa and Sa skya pa monks was found among this community. 112 208 Jörg Heimbel by a later source as Yar klungs rNam rgyal as well.116 This site is specified by Cha har dGe bshes Blo bzang tshul khrims (1740–1810) in his biography of Tsong kha pa as being a Jo gdan monastery (jo gdan dgon pa).117 Kaḥ thog Si tu calls it rNam rgyal gser khang and locates it “on the other site” (phar ka’i ngos su) of the rTse tshogs pa.118 Little more than thirty years later in 1410, Dwags po bKra shis rnam rgyal (1398–1458) obtained both his pravrajyā (rab tu byung) and śrāmaṇera (dge tshul) ordination at the sNe’u gdong rtse palace from bKra shis seng ge, the fifteenth Tsha mig tshogs pa abbot.119 In general, the Jo gdan tshogs sde bzhi were often active in Yar klungs in the fourteenth century. This is exemplified by the full monastic ordination of Grags pa rgyal mtshan dpal bzang po (1313–1373), the later seventh Chos lung tshogs pa abbot (tenure: 1358–1373?), at Khra ’brug in 1335. At that time, he took his full monk’s vows from bSod nams grags pa (1273–1353) as presiding abbot and bSod nams bzang po (1292–1356) as ceremony master, the former the then acting fourth Chos lung tshogs pa abbot (tenure: 1315–1342) and the latter his abbatial successor (tenure: 1342–1351).120 As Grags pa rgyal mtshan obtained his ordination in the second summer month (dpyid zla ’bring po), we can assume that the Chos lung tshogs pa observed their summer retreat at Khra ’brug. The presence of all four communties in Yar klungs is recorded a couple of years later. This we come to know from their involvement in religious services after the cremation of Bla ma Dam pa bSod nams rgyal mtshan (1312–1375), who passed away at bSam yas in 1375. When parts of Bla ma Dam pa’s cremated remains were brought to sNe gdong rtse, four hundred sixty-eight monks wearing rnam sbyar upper ropes from the Jo gdan tshogs sde bzhi, who were observing their summer retreat in Yar klungs, took part in the ceremony to receive the sacred relics.121 Likewise, the four communities were residing in Yar klungs in the mid-1420s when ’Jam dbyangs dKon mchog bzang po (1398–1475),   who would later serve in various monastic functions such as abbot of dPal ’khor sde chen and Jo nang,  did an examinationround (grwa bskor) by giving an exposition of the four difficult scriptures (dka’ chen bzhi) at the “site of the Tshogs sde bzhi” (tshogs sde bzhi’i sa) at sNe gdong. His impressive performance made an outstanding impression on the members of the communities, prompting the abbots of each group to ask dKon mchog bzang po whether he could accompany his community as attendant (phyag phyir) until he would be qualified enough to take over as abbot; an offer he, however, denied. Before he left, dKon mchog bzang po received various gifts from the abbots and assistant teachers (zur chos pa) of the four communities.122 This episode is also found in another biography of dKon mchog bzang po, though with some slight differences. According to that work, he came to sNe gdong and did his examination-round (grwa bskor) at the “site of the Jo gdan tshogs pa sde bzhi” (jo gdan tshogs pa sde bzhi’i sar). Delighted by his performance, the 116 See above n. 59. See Tsong kha pa’i rnam thar 1 (p. 81.9). 118 See dBus gtsang gnas yig (p. 241.6–7). See also DOWMAN 1996: 177, who records that the rNam rgyal lha khang “was attached to the Tse Tsokpa, and stood to the south of it near Trandruk. We were unable to locate it and assume its destruction.” 119 See bKra shis rnam rgyal gyi rnam thar (p. 265.4–6). Later on, bKra shis rnam rgyal received full monastic ordination from mKhan po rJe btsun Su ma ti kīrti as presiding abbot, ’Dul ba ’dzin pa gNas brtan mKhas pa chen po Kīrti dhwa dza as ceremony master, mKhas pa Nam mkha’ dpal (1373–1447) as secret revealing preceptor, and sNar thang pa Shes rab seng ge (1383–1445) as time keeper; see bKra shis rnam rgyal gyi rnam thar (pp. 265.6–266.1). The first two persons can surely be identified as Tsong kha pa Blo bzang grags pa (1357–1419) and his disciple Grags pa rgyal mtshan (1374–1434). 120 See mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar (fol. 17a6–7). We also have to recall, as mentioned above, that the Yar klungs ruler mNga’ bdag Grags pa rin chen (1255-1328; r. 1268–1307) supported an unspecified Jo gdan tshogs pa. 121 See Bla ma dam pa’i rnam thar (fol. 64a5–7). For the role of Grags pa bshes gnyen (1329–1401), the eighth Chos lung tshogs pa abbot (tenure: 1374–1389), in the religious services, see Bla ma dam pa’i rnam thar (fols. 64a1–2 and 65.5–6). 122 See dKon mchog bzang po’i rnam thar 1 (fol. 12a7–12b5). See also Dus ’khor chos ’byung 2 (p. 237.1), where it is mentioned that, among others, dKon mchog bzang po did his examination-round at sNe gdong Tshogs sde bzhi. 117 The Jo gdan tshogs sde bzhi 209 abbots and preceptors of the four communities presented dKon mchog bzang po with various gifts, and he is said to have stayed at the “communities’ site” (tshogs pa’i sa) for a short while. During that time, voices were raised that he should become abbot of the Chos lung tshogs pa, which he rejected, however.123 Those different espisodes clearly attest that the four communities resided in Yar klungs on a regular base and, at times, even together. Unfortunately, as in the last two accounts, their exact abode is not specified. Thus further research should be done to illuminate the communities’ relation with Yar klungs. At present, it is impossible to determine whether the site where the four communities resided could be identified as sNe gdong, the rTse tshogs pa, Yar lung Nam rgyal, or was just a reference to the site where the communities pitched their encampment. Another Phag mo gru pa ruler who patronised the Tsha mig tshogs pa was dBang Grags pa rgyal mtshan (1374–1432; r. 1385–1432). Paṇ chen bSod nams grags pa (1478–1554) in his Deb ther dmar po gsar ma credits Grags pa rgyal mtshan with the patronage that this Phag mo gru pa ruler paid to all four communities, but especially singles out his support for the Tshogs chen pa, i.e. the Tsha mig tshogs pa, which in this context most probably refers to the group at the rTse tshogs pa.124 Although the Tsha mig tshogs pa became established at sNe’u gdong, the community maintained their link with Tsha mig in sNye mo as illustrated by the association of many of their fifteenth century abbots with this area.125 4.1.4. sPos khang tshogs pa A few more details can be learned about the history of sPos khang monastery, which is located in an upper side valley east of the Myang river between gZhis ka rtse and rGyal rtse. To my knowledge, the only, now unfortunately inaccessible, text that discusses the history of sPos khang was obtained by Giuseppe Tucci (sPos tshogs chos sde ’di nyid paṇ chen shākya shri [= shrī] ring lugs su phyag btab mdo sngags bzang [= bzung] ’brel gyi lo rgyus rmad du ’byung ba). According to Tucci, this text consists of “a bare record of events concerning the temple, beginning with its foundation; it also contains brief and useful descriptions of the most important articles of cult, kept or venerated in each single chapel.”126 While describing sPos khang, Tucci records that “according to the tradition it was founded by Byaṅ c’ub dpal bzaṅ po, a disciple of Śākyaśrī. The foundation took place one year before Śākyaśrī returned to India, namely in the bird-year 1213.”127 The recent sPos khang tshogs pa’i lo rgyus mdor bsdus, a short history displayed at sPos khang, associates the monastic site with Khri Ral pa can’s foundation of a temple to subjugate demonic forces and further identifies it with a place where the Three Ancestral Religious Kings erected three stūpas.128 Moreover, it relates the site to a monastery called Ḍa lung, which 123 See dKon mchog bzang po’i rnam thar 2 (fol. 4a3–5). According to its colophon, the dKon mchog bzang po’i rnam thar 2 is based on the dKon mchog bzang po’i rnam thar 1; see dKon mchog bzang po’i rnam thar 2 (fol. 22a2–3). On dKon mchog bzang po, see also Rab brtan kun bzang ’phags kyi rnam thar (pp. 234.13–240.5) and STEARNS 2008a. 124 See TUCCI 1971: 79b5–80.1 and 216. 125 See mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar (fol. 24a2–5). 126 TUCCI 1999: 170. 127 TUCCI 1999: 202. On sPos khang, see also FERRARI 1958: 59 and 142–143, n. 422. Cf. Sā k tyāyana 1938: 139, according to whom sPos khang was “established sometime towards the end of the 13th century when the Indian teacher Vajrapāṇi or Gyagar Chhagna as he is known to the Tibetan, visited Tibet.” Unfortunately, Kaḥ thog Si tu could not visit sPos khang due to some unsolved issues with his patrons; see dBus gtsang gnas yig (p. 372.1–3): nyang spos khang pa’i tshogs sar [= par?] nang rten mang tsam mjal du yod na’ang sbyin bdag ’ga’ zhig gi rkyen las ma sleb bo|. 128 See sPos khang tshogs pa’i lo rgyus mdor bsdus (p. 2.5–9): (...) bstan pa snga dar gyi dgon gnas khyad par can zhig yin| de’i skabs su gtsug lag khang ka ba gsum bcu so drug dang brtsan [= gtsang] khang ka ba drug yod pas [= pa’i] nang brten [= rten] (...) sogs mnga’ bdag khri ral gyi bzhengs pa’i bdud klo’i kha gnon sbad dgon du grags pa dang| chos rgyal me [= mes] dbon rnams [= rnam] gsum gyi bzhengs pa’i chos 210 Jörg Heimbel constituted one of the five ’Ja’ lung monasteries.129 As I cannot illuminate the early history of the site of sPos khang, I will only address here its relation with the monastic communities in Śākyaśrī’s tradition. We possess a description of sPos khang from the pen of dGe ’dun chos ’phel (1903–1951), who visited this monastery during his travels with Rāhula Sāṅkṛtyāyana (1893–1963) in the 1930s in search of Sanskrit manuscripts.130 dGe ’dun chos ’phel refers to the small monastery as sPos khang tshogs pa and relates that sPos khang is said to constitute the Chos lung tshogs pa that was first established in the Rong district of gTsang, but later shifted to its present location in Myang.131 Close to sPos khang, dGe ’dun chos ’phel also mentions an old temple that was said to have been built as one of the geomantic or border-pacifying temples (mtha’ ’dul) during the bstan pa snga dar period; he holds that account, however, to be untrue. He continues to describe some of the religious objects preserved at sPos khang that belonged to Śākyaśrī such as the latter’s monk’s robe and begging bowl.132 Links between sPos khang and Śākyaśrī’s Vinaya tradition are also confirmed by other older Tibetan sources. The Myang chos ’byung, for instance, records that distinguished Jo gdan bla mas emerged successively from sPos khang, and the Fifth Dalai Lama reports that Śākyaśrī’s ordination lineage was preserved at sPos khang tshogs.133 The connection between sPos khang and the Chos lung tshogs pa can be established as far back as the beginning of the fifteenth century. In 1427, for example, ’Jam dbyangs dKon mchog bzang po (1398–1475) received at “the site of the Chos lung tshogs pa at sPos khang” (spos khang du chos lung tshogs pa’i sar) full monastic ordination from ’Jam dbyangs Rin chen rgyal mtshan (1348–1430) as presiding abbot, mKhan chen Byang chub Sems dpa’ Zla ba blo gros (1371–1442), the then thirteenth Chos lung tshogs pa abbot (tenure: 1425–1434), as ceremony master, and mKhan chen rGyal ba phyag na (b. 1388) as secret revealing preceptor.134 Along with brten [= rten] gsum sogs yod pa’i dgon gnas yin|. For another recent description of sPos khang, see gZhis rtse sa khul gyi gnas yig (pp. 170–171). 129 See sPos khang tshogs pa’i lo rgyus mdor bsdus (p. 2.1–2): (...) myang chos byung [= ’byung] du’ang spos khang du ’ja’ lung dgon pa lnga bzhes [= zhes] dang de’i nang nas ḍa lung bzhed [= zhes] pa ’di yin|. I am unable to locate this reference in the Myang chos ’byung. TUCCI 1989: vol. 1, 56 records at sPos khang a temple called ’Ja’ lung founded under Khri Ral pa can. 130 See gTam rgyud 1 (pp. 14.2–16.16) and gTam rgyud 2 (pp. 11.16–13.18). For the Indian paṇḍita’s account, see Sā k tyāyana 1938: 139–140. For a list of Sanskrit manuscripts housed at sPos khang, see gTam rgyud 1 (pp. 15.20–16.16) and gTam rgyud 2 (pp. 13.5–18). It is probably the result of George N. Roerich’s cooperation with dGe ’dun chos ’phel that the former identified the Chos lung tshogs pa with sPos khang monastery; see ROERICH 1996: 1073. For this identification, see also JACKSON 1990a: 19–20, n. 9. Along with a translation of the gTam rgyud, Kazuo Kano of Koyasan University is researching about the Sanskrit manuscripts once housed at sPos khang. 131 According to Chos ’phel, this shift in residence (spo ba) is taken, among others, as an explanation for the monastery’s name (spos khang); see gZhis rtse sa khul gyi gnas yig (p. 170.5–9). Chos ’phel records an alternative spelling of sPos khang as sPo sgang; see gZhis rtse sa khul gyi gnas yig (p. 170.7–8). We find this spelling, for example, in the mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar (fol. 25a7) and Rab brtan kun bzang ’phags kyi rnam thar (pp. 308.11, 327.5, and 357.3). 132 According to Sā k tyāyana 1938: 139, sPos khang housed “the Chīvaras (monk’s garb), alms-bowl, a pair of shoes, all belonging to Śākyaśrībhadra, (...).” During my visit to sPos khang in September 2007, I was shown a begging bowl (lhung bzed) and a walking staff (’khar gsil; Image 9) that are said to have both once belonged to Śākyaśrī. 133 See Myang chos ’byung (p. 115.21–22) and Du kū la’i gos bzang (vol. 3, p. 106.5–7), respectively. 134 See Dus ’khor chos ’byung 2 (p. 237.2–3). See also dKon mchog bzang po’i rnam thar 1 (fols. 13b5– 14a5) and dKon mchog bzang po’i rnam thar 2 (fols. 4b7–5a2). From the former work, it is also evident that the Chos lung tshogs pa was residing at sPos khang, whereas the latter gives the location of dKon mchog bzang po’s full ordination only as the “site of the Chos lungs tshogs pa” (chos lung tshogs pa’i sa). On his ordination, see also mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar (fol. 18b3) and Rab brtan kun bzang ’phags kyi rnam thar (p. 235.11–18). A similar, though not unproblematic, remark which establishes a link between sPos khang and the Chos lung tshogs pa is also found in the Zhwa lu gdan rabs (pp. 71.2–3 and 72.2–3). According to that source, the Vinaya expert mKhan chen Lo tsā ba Drung Dharmaśrībhadra alias Chos dpal The Jo gdan tshogs sde bzhi 211 Zla ba blo gros, the other two masters functioning in this ordination also belonged to the monastic ordination lineage of the Chos lung tshogs pa: the Sa skya pa scholar Rin chen rgyal mtshan had previously served as its eleventh abbot (tenure: 1401–1411) and rGyal ba phyag na would follow Zla ba blo gros as its fourteenth abbot (tenure: 1435–1450).135 From the early fifteenth century on, references to sPos khang are also found in the abbatial succession of the Chos lung tshogs pa.136 In the mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar, the monastery’s name, sPos khang, occurs for the first time in the biographical sketch of Nam mkha’ rgyal mtshan (1346–1409), the ninth Chos lung tshogs pa abbot (tenure: 1389–1401), who retired to sPos khang after handing over the abbacy to the above mentioned Rin chen rgyal mtshan in 1401.137 When the latter stepped down as abbot in 1411, he also took up residence at sPos khang, where he finalised in 1423 his famous commentary on Sa skya Paṇḍi ta’s sDom gsum rab dbye.138 Rin chen rgyal mtshan maintained a close relationship with the rGyal rtse rulers of his time. For Nang chen Kun dga’ ’phags pa (1357–1412) he planned, for instance, bSam ’phel rin po che’i gling, the gtsug lag khang in the palace of rGyal rtse. Later on, in about 1396, this temple was consecrated by another master associated with the Chos lung tshogs pa, Grags pa bshes gnyen (1329–1401), who had served as its eighth abbot (tenure: 1374–1389).139 Kun dga’ ’phags pa’s eldest son, Rab brtan kun bzang ’phags (1389–1442), patronised Rin chen rgyal mtshan’s religious activities and was responsible for ornamenting sPos khang, as Tucci reports.140 We also find references to religious functions held at dPal ’khor chos sde, such as consecration ceremonies, led by Rin chen rgyal mtshan and his abbatial successors from the Chos lung tshogs pa; at times, these ceremonies were also attended by the whole monastic community of Chos lung.141 As a good example illustrating the relationship between the Chos lung tshogs pa and the rGyal rtse nobles serves the appointment of dKon mchog bzang po as abbot of dPal ’khor sde chen (= dPal ’khor chos sde) in rGyal rtse in 1432. When he returned to gTsang from his sojourn in dBus, which was mentioned above, he performed an examination-round (grwa bskor) at gNas rnying and dPal ’khor sde chen. While at rGyal rtse, he was requested by Rab brtan kun bzang ’phags to take up residence at dPal ’khor sde chen and give teachings. As, by then, dKon mchog bzang po had, prior to becoming a disciple of Bu ston Rin chen grub (1290–1364), been a Jo gdan tshogs pa monk, who later in his life was installed as the abbot of Chos lung sPos khang. Paradoxically, however, the mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar does not enumerate Chos dpal bzang po among the abbots of the Chos lung tshogs pa. The only reference we have for this period is to mKhan chen Dharmaśrībhadra, to whom the abbacy of the Tsha mig faction that had travelled to gTsang was offered, but who did not accept; see mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar (fol. 23a3–4). 135 For their biographical sketches, see mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar (fols. 18a1–18b3 and 19a6–19b2), respectively. The Myang chos ’byung (p. 91.3) addresses Rin chen rgyal mtshan as sPos khang pa ’Jam dbyangs Rin chen rgyal mtshan. When Khrims khang Lo tsā ba bSod nams rgya mtsho (1424–1482) visited sPos khang in about 1467, rGyal ba phyag na was still alive; see EHRHARD 2002: 73. 136 See mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar (fols. 18a1, 18b2, and 19b2). 137 See mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar (fol. 18a1). For Nam mkha’ rgyal mtshan’s biographical sketch, see mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar (fols. 17b5a–18a1). 138 See mKhan brygud kyi rnam thar (fol. 18b1–2) and sDom gsum rab dbye legs par bshad pa (vol. 3, pp. 501.5–504.2), respectively. 139 See Myang chos ’byung (pp. 48.10–49.9) and Rab brtan kun bzang ’phags kyi rnam thar (pp. 19.19– 21.6). See also LO BUE 1992: 562, LO BUE & RICCA 1990: 62, and RICCA & LO BUE 1993: 17. 140 See TUCCI 1999: 202. 141  Rin chen rgyal mtshan consecrated major sections of the ground storey of the enlarged gtsug lag khang of dPal ’khor chos sde; see Myang chos ’byung (pp. 53.2–21 and 55.8–18), Rab brtan kun bzang ’phags kyi rnam thar (pp. 65.14–75.16), LO BUE 1992: 565, LO BUE & RICCA 1990: 67–69, and RICCA & LO BUE 1993: 20–23. Prior to that, Rin chen rgyal mtshan had consecrated the large appliqué thangka known as Gos sku chen mo mthong ba ldon ldan on which thirty-seven tailors had worked for twenty-seven days; see Myang chos ’byung (pp. 50.21–51.6) and LO BUE 1992: 564. Zla ba blo gros (1371–1442), the thirteenth Chos lung tshogs pa abbot (tenure: 1425–1434), performed consecrations at dPal ’khor chos sde as well; see Rab brtan kun bzang ’phags kyi rnam thar (p. 233.1–5). For further references exemplifying the relation between the noble house of rGyal rtse and the Chos lung tshogs pa, see Rab brtan kun bzang ’phags kyi rnam thar (pp. 227.4–5, 258.21–259.1, 299.20–300.2, and 305.12–14).   212 Jörg Heimbel bzang po had not yet taken his full monk’s vows, he suggested that, prior to begin teaching, he would first have to pay a visit to the Chos lung tshogs pa to take these vows from Rin chen rgyal mtshan. Afterwards, he would come back and begin teaching, as requested. Accepting this proposal, Rab brtan kun bzang ’phags invested him with a petitionary letter and gifts for Rin chen rgyal mtshan and also took care of dKon mchog bzang po’s personal needs. Subsequently, dKon mchog bzang po headed to sPos khang where, as mentioned above, he received full monastic ordination in 1427 from Rin chen rgyal mtshan as presiding abbot, under whom he also studied Sa skya Paṇḍi ta’s famed sDom gsum rab dbye. After three months, he returned to dPal ’khor sde chen and acted for the next four years at Khang gsar (college?) as religious instructor (’chad nyan) and gzhung las (supervising official?). During those years, he also functioned as gzhung las of the Shar sKu ’bum at Sa skya and gave teachings at Chos ’khor sgang in g/bSing gshongs, at bSam gling, and in the Srad region. Prior to his passing in 1430, Rin chen rgyal mtshan advised Rab brtan kun bzang ’phags that dKon mchog bzang po should be installed as abbot of dPal ’khor sde chen and thus, at the beginning of 1432, Chos rje dPal ldan legs pa installed dKon mchog bzang po as abbot. On that occasion, the Chos lung tshogs pa, headed by mKhan chen Zla ba blo gros, came down to dPal ’khor sde chen and participated in that function.142 The connection between the Chos lung tshogs pa and the noble house of rGyal rtse can be dated back to the time of Kun dga’ ’phags pa’s father, Nang chen ’Phags pa dPal bzang po (1318– 1370), who patronised all four Vinaya communities in Śākyaśrī’s tradition and the Chos lung tshogs pa in particular; the latter, for instance, he provided with sites for their summer retreat at Shol bla rtsam and lCang ra.143 That strong tie also found its expression in the arrangement of the mKhan brgyud lha khang in the sKu ’bum at dPal ’khor chos sde. Here, the statue of Śākyaśrī is flanked by Byang chub dpal and Rin chen rgyal mtshan, representing the monastic ordination lineage of the Chos lung tshogs pa.144 142 See dKon mchog bzang po’i rnam thar 1 (fols. 13a4–15a7). See also dKon mchog bzang po’i rnam thar 2 (fols. 4a7–5b1). For dKon mchog bzang po’s installation, see also Rab brtan kun bzang ’phags kyi rnam thar (p. 236.6–10). Note that the dKon mchog bzang po’i rnam thar 1 (fol. 15a3–4) dates his installation to 1432, but mistakenly specifies his age with thirty-four instead of thirty-five years. For a praise of dKon mchog bzang po offered by the Chos lung tshogs pa on the occasion of his installation, see dKon mchog bzang po’i rnam thar 2 (fol. 5b1–2). Along with dKon mchog bzang po and masters from dPal ’khor chos sde, the Chos lung tshogs pa was also involved in the consecration of additions to the sKu ’bum in 1474. At that time, the community was seemingly headed by Kun dga’ blo gros; see Rab brtan kun bzang ’phags kyi rnam thar (pp. 148.18–149.8) and RICCA & LO BUE 1993: 31. 143 See Rab brtan kun bzang ’phags kyi rnam thar (pp. 7.12–15, 7.20–8.5, 8.12–16, and 11.12–13). See also LO BUE 1992: [559], LO BUE & RICCA 1990: 59 and 343, RICCA & LO BUE 1993: 12, and TUCCI 1999: 663. After ’Phags pa dPal bzang po had built Shol bla rtsam in 1343, it was from the time of bSod nams bzang po (1292–1356), the fifth Chos lung tshogs pa abbot (tenure: 1342–1351), that the community observed their summer retreat at Shol bla rtsam. The Rab brtan kun bzang ’phags kyi rnam thar (pp. 7.12– 15) refers to the priest-patron relationship established at that time as yon mchod ’grogs snga ’grol zab pa ’di yin. Although this phrase is not entirely clear to me, it seemingly refers to that event as the beginning of the close tie between the noble house of rGyal rtse and the Chos lung tshogs pa. When ’Phags pa dPal bzang po married in 1350 dPon mo Pad ma, the dauther of Zhwa lu sKu zhang Hor rtsa Kun dga’ don grub, he obtained the estate and monastery of lCang ra as dowry, to where gZhon nu mgon pa (1292–1368), the sixth Chos lung tshogs pa abbot (tenure: 1351–1358), led his group for the observance of the summer retreat. For a later reference of rGyal rtse patronising all four monastic communities, see Rab brtan kun bzang ’phags kyi rnam thar (p. 303.7–10). 144 See Rab brtan kun bzang ’phags kyi rnam thar (pp. 130.21–131.7). For the inscriptions of the mKhan brgyud lha khang, see TUCCI 1989: vol. 2, pp. 84–86 and 227–229. On the mKhan brgyud lha khang, see further LO BUE & RICCA 1990: [340]–344 and RICCA & LO BUE 1993: 299. An image of rDo rje dpal is also found in the mKhan brgyud lha khang, but “only” in form of a mural that portrays him surrounded by masters from the ordination lineage of the prātimokṣa precepts (that was transmitted by him?) and from the exposition lineage of the Vinayasūtra (’dul ba mdo rtsa’i bshad brgyud). Moreover, dGra bcom pa Yon tan blo gros, the ninth Tshogs dGe’dun sgang abbot, is shown surrounded by ordination abbots from the dGe ’dun sgang pa lineage. For other mentions of images of Śākyaśrī and the ordination abbots from his Vinaya The Jo gdan tshogs sde bzhi 213 These observations suggest that the ordination lineage of the Chos lung tshogs pa might once have been preserved at dPal ’khor chos sde. This is hinted at by the full monastic ordination of bShes gnyen bzang po (1398–1462), the later fifteenth Chos lung tshogs pa abbot (tenure: 1450– 1462), as he took his full monks vows in 1417 at the gSer khang of rGyal rtse from the previously mentioned Rin chen rgyal mtshan as presiding abbot and rGyal dbang grags pa, the then twelfth Chos lung tshogs pa abbot (tenure: 1416–1425), as ceremony master.145 The modern abbatial history of Jo nang (Jo nang ba’i gdan rabs mdor bsdus) records the sPos khang Jo gdan tshogs pa as a monastic establishment adhering to the Jo nang tradition, jointly founded by Jo gdan bSod nams bzang po, a disciple of Dol po pa Shes rab rgyal mtshan (1292– 1361), and the former’s student sPos khang pa ’Jam dbyangs alias Jo nang Dus ’khor Rin chen rgyal mtshan.146 The former master can be identified as Jo gdan gNyag/sNyag phu ba alias mTshal chen/min pa bSod nams bzang po (1341–1433), the eighth Tshogs dGe ’dun sgang abbot, to whom I will return below, and the latter as the just previously mentioned Chos lung tshogs pa abbot Rin chen rgyal mtshan. That history further records that sPos khang served as the residence of rTse sprul Kun dga’ phun tshogs dpal (1304–1377), who was another disciple of Dol po pa, and for later Jo nang pa masters such as rJe btsun Kun dga’ grol mchog (1507–1566) and mKhan chen Lung rigs rgya mtsho (fl. 16th century). Moreover, the editors of the book express the view that sPos khang may have been renovated and extended by rJe btsun Tāranātha (1575–1634).147 In sum, we can be sure that by approximately the year 1400 members of the Chos lung tshogs pa became permanently established at sPos khang. More research will be needed to determine when exactly this took place and to clarify the early history of sPos khang after its alleged foundation in 1213. With a group of monks from the Chos lung tshogs pa settling at sPos khang, their monastery at Chos lung was not abandoned, as later references to this establishment exist.148 Although the Chos lung tshogs pa had become established at sPos khang, the monastic community continued to wander about. For instance, when Byams pa gling pa bSod nams rnam rgyal (1400–1475) visited bSam bde in Yar stod in about 1471, the Chos lung tshogs pa was in residence there.149 Similarly, when Mang thos Klu sgrub rgya mtsho (1523–1596) paid a visit to mKhar kha rdzong in Myang stod (built by ’Phags pa dPal bzang po in 1365), he encountered the Jo gdan tshogs pa sPos khang pa (or sPos khang Jo gdan tshogs pa), which had taken temporary residence at this fort and Mang thos got the chance to take a look at some of its sacred relics such as one of the seven clay statues of Śākyaśrī made during the latter’s sojourn in Tibet.150 5. The Four Monastic Communities’ Impact on Tibetan Buddhism Among the four teaching transmissions that Śākyaśrī is acknowledged to have introduced to Tibet, it was his Vinaya tradition that became embodied by the Jo gdan tshogs sde bzhi. His monastic ordination lineage in particular was passed down through the abbots of these four communities and thereby found its way into different schools of Tibetan Buddhism. The impact of these communties is summarised in Kong sprul Blo gros mtha’ yas’s (1813–1899) Shes bya kun khyab and ’Jam dbyangs mKhyen brtse’i dbang po’s (1820–1892) gSang sngags gsar rnying communities at dPal ’khor chos sde; see Rab brtan kun bzang ’phags kyi rnam thar (pp. 67.5–7 and 90.12– 14). 145 See mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar (fol. 19b3–5). 146 See Jo nang ba’i gdan rabs mdor bsdus (p. 34.11–14). I like to thank Michael Sheehy for drawing my attention to this entry. In his recent gZhis rtses sa khul gyi gnas yig (p. 170.9–10), Chos ’phel also credits Rin chen rgyal mtshan with the foundation of sPos khang. 147 See Jo nang ba’i gdan rabs mdor bsdus (p. 34.10–11 and 15–19). At one point, probably during the time of the Fifth Dalai Lama, sPos khang became a dGe lugs pa institution; see dBus gtsang gi gnas rten rags rim gyi mtshan byang (p. 209.4–5) and FERRARI 1958: 59. After its restoration, the monastery is these days known as sPos khang Jo gdan Nges don bshad sgrub dar rgyas gling; see sPos khang tshogs pa’i lo rgyus mdor bsdus (p. 2.19) and gZhis rtse sa khul gyi gnas yig (p. 170.2–3). 148 See, for example, mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar (fol. 19a3–19b5). The monastery continued to exist until the 20th century; see FERRARI 1958: 124, n. 231. 149 See bSod nams rnam rgyal gyi rnam thar (fols. 54b6–55a3). 150 See Mang thos kyi rang rnam (p. 526.2–5). On the seven clay statues of Śākyaśrī, see below n. 173. 214 Jörg Heimbel gi gdan rabs.151 From these two presentations, we learn that successive Karma pas received Śākyaśrī’s ordination lineage as transmitted by Byang chub dpal via abbots of the dGe ’dun sgang community and that Ngor chen Kun dga’ bzang po (1382–1456) took full monastic ordination in Śākyaśrī’s lineage as passed down through rDo rje dpal via the abbots of the Tsha mig community. In this way, Śākyaśrī’s lineage spread among the Karma bKa’ brgyud and Sa skya order, especially in the latter’s Ngor branch. The lineages that passed down through the communities of Chos lung and Bye rdzing, however, had died out by the time Kong sprul was writing his encyclopaedia. Generally speaking, as he puts it, the monastic ordination lineages of the individual communities had, at a later point in time, been broken off at their respective seats, but continued to flourish via other religious traditions.152 In addition, ’Jam dbyangs mKhyen brtse’i dbang po mentions that Śākyaśrī’s lineage had also spread in the ’Brug pa bKa’ brgyud order by way of the Chos lung community.153 He concludes that in former times the four communities distinguished themselves for both the exposition and practical application of the Vinaya, but that at his time they were just complying with the common rules, lacking any distinctive characteristics.154 Another reason for their loss of influence could be that as their ordination lineages spread widely through the centuries, they became available at numerous other monastic institutions, making it unnecessary to approach one of the community’s abbots to receive ordination in Śākyaśrī’s lineage. Moreover, with the formation of distinct Tibetan Buddhist schools and the accompanying rise of sectarian conflict, monks seemingly took ordination from within their own tradition and not from without. In the following pages, I will present a number of references exemplifying how Śākyaśrī’s monastic ordination lineage spread via the Jo gdan tshogs sde bzhi. These are not exhaustive and are surely restricted by the limited number of sources employed for this paper. Moreover, since I have not encountered any reference mentioning that an abbot of the Bye rdzing tshogs pa presided over a full monastic ordination external to the Jo gdan tshogs sde bzhi, I am unable to make any statement about the spread of this lineage. To further trace and illuminate the diffusion history of Śākyaśrī’s lineage in Tibet, we need to investigate in detail such works as the mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar and record which masters where ordained by abbots of the four communities. This we have to counter-check with their respective biographies, be they independent full-length works or sketches included in religious histories (chos ’byung), abbatial histories (gdan rabs), genealogies (gdung rabs), or other sources. Another promising method will be to carefully examine the “record of teachings received” (thob yig, thos yig, gsan yig) of eminent Tibetan masters and look into the lineage records for their bhikṣu vows. Individual biographies of abbots from the four monastic communities can also be illuminating. So far, I have only come across two biographies. First, the one of Jo gdan gNyag/sNyag phu ba alias mTshal chen/min pa bSod nams bzang po (1341–1433), the eighth Tshogs dGe ’dun sgang abbot, written by bKa’ bzhi ’dzin pa Yon tan bzang po. Second, the one of Rab ’byor seng ge (1398–1480), the nineteenth abbot of Tshogs dGe ’dun sgang (tenure: 1463–1471?), from the pen of the Fourth Zhwa dmar Chos grags ye shes (1453–1524).155 151 The rGya bod yig tshang chen mo (p. 224.7) designates the four communities as bod kyi spyi mchod, which probably alludes to the central position that the communities occupied as Tibet’s common object of worship and offering by different Tibetan Buddhist traditions and patrons. 152 See Shes bya kun khyab (p. 222.19–24) and gSang sngags gsar rnying gi gdan rabs (p. 205.5–6). 153 See gSang sngags gsar rnying gi gdan rabs (p. 205.5). 154 See gSang sngags gsar rnying gi gdan rabs (p. 205.4–5). 155 For the biography of bSod nams bzang po, see below n. 156. Rab ’byor seng ge took his full monk’s vows in 1420 from mKhan chen Seng ge dpal, the eleventh Tshogs dGe ’dun sgang abbot, as presiding abbot at bKra shis chos ’phel Chos lung dgon gsar; see Rab ’byor seng ge’i rnam thar (p. 487.2–7). In 1463, he was installed in the presence of Gong ma Kun dga’ legs pa (1433–1483) as abbot of the Tshogs dGe ’dun sgang, which he headed for nine years (until 1471?); see Rab ’byor seng ge’i rnam thar (pp. 489.23–490.1 and 491.4–6), respectively. He is regarded as the manifestation of the Arhat Angaja; see Rab ’byor seng ge’i rnam thar (p. 491.1–3). The Jo gdan tshogs sde bzhi 215 5.1. dGe ’dun sgang pa The mKhas pa’i dga’ ston reports a prophecy by Śākyaśrī that at some future time when abbots of the dGe ’dun sgang community would emerge as manifestations of the Sixteen Arhats, they would preside over the monastic ordination of successive Karma pas. As the first abbot in question, the mKhas pa’i dga’ ston specifies sNyag dbon bSod nams bzang po. He can be identified as Jo gdan gNyag/sNyag phu ba alias mTshal chen/min pa bSod nams bzang po (1341– 1433), the eighth Tshogs dGe ’dun sgang abbot (tenure: 1384-1399), who was recognised as a manifestation of the Arhat Bakula.156 bSod nams bzang po was an eminent figure, who served Dol po pa Shes rab rgyal mtshan (1292–1361) from the age of seventeen as close attendant and, after his master’s passing, pursued further studies under Dol po pa’s major disciples. Along with that, he also studied under great Sa skya pa masters such as Bla ma Dam pa bSod nams rgyal mtshan (1312–1375) and Theg chen Chos rje Kun dga’ bkra shis (1349–1425) as well as with the Fourth Karma pa Rol pa’i rdo rje (1340–1383).157 bSod nams bzang po was honoured by an invitation from the Phag mo gru pa ruler dBang Grags pa rgyal mtshan (1374–1432; r. 1385–1432) and installed as abbot of the dGe’ dun sgang pa.158 In 1403, he was offered the monastery of mTshal min by the Fifth Karma pa Chos dpal bzang po alias bDe bzhin gshegs pa (1384–1415), where he instituted a teaching system based on the exegetical tradition of the bKa’ brgyud order.159 In his position as ordination abbot of the dGe ’dun sgang pa, bSod nams bzang po had already formed a connection with the Fifth Karma pa when he, along with other masters of the Tshogs dGe ’dun sgang, presided over the Karma pa’s śrāmaṇera as well as bhikṣu ordination and bestowed teachings on him, too. The former ordination took place during the community’s visit to rTse lha 156 See mKhas pa’i dga’ ston (p. 504.10–13). On bSod nams bzang po, see Karma kaṃ tshang gi rnam thar (vol. 1, p. 453.3), Kun mkhyen chen po yab sras bco lnga’i rnam thar (pp. 625.7–628.4), bKa’ gdams chos ’byung (vol. 2, pp. 388.2–390.4), mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar (fol. 21a1–4), dGe ’dun sgang pa’i mkhan brgyud (fols. 2a7–2b1 and 3a4), rGyal gling tshogs pa’i byung ba brjod pa (pp. 75.10–76.23), Jo nang chos ’byung (vol. 1, p. 104.3–7), Deb ther sngon po (pp. 1184.17–1186.5), and bsTan rtsis gsal ba’i nyin byed (pp. 189.21–193.2). Just recently, Dan Martin kindly drew my attention to bSod nams bzang po’s biography, the dPal ldan bla ma rin po che bsod nams bzang po la rnam thar gyi sgo nas stod [= bstod] pa dngos grub gyi [= kyi] char gnas. This work (manuscript, fourty folios) was written by his disciple bKa’ bzhi ’dzin pa Yon tan bzang po; see bSod nams bzang po’i rnam thar (fol. 40b2–5). However, there was no time to analyse the biography within the scope of this article. On the life of bSod nams bzang po, see also JACKSON 2009: 61, STEARNS 2007: 526, n. 577, and STEARNS 2008b. According to the rGyal gling tshogs pa’i byung ba brjod pa (p. 76.1–2), bSod nams bzang po wrote both a dkar chag and a chos ’byung of the Jo gdan tshogs sde bzhi. The mKhas pa’i dga’ ston (p. 504.14–17) further records that it was a disciple of bSod nams bzang po, ’Phags chen bSod nams dar, who led a monastic community that observed fasting as an ascetic discipline and became known as ’Phags sde. As four of bSod nam dar’s disciples established their own fasting communities, a total of four groups emerged, the so-called ’Phags sde bzhi. These four groups were considered branches of the dGe ’dun sgang pa. As implied by the name of those groups (’Phags sde), the fasting rituals were seemingly connected with the practice of Avalokiteśvara. This leads us back to bSod nams bzang po himself, who figured in the transmission of Avalokiteśvara teachings that he bestowed on bSod nams dar. On this transmission and the ’Phags sde, see bKa’ gdams chos ’byung (vol. 2, pp. 388.6 and 389.5–390.4), Deb ther sngon po (p. 1186.2–13), and EHRHARD 2002: 39, n. 6. 157 The mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar (fol. 21a2) records bSod nams bzang po mistakenly as a student of the Third Karma pa Rang byung rdo rje (1284–1339). 158 See bsTan rtsis gsal ba’i nyin byed (p. 192.5–8). However, this record suffers from the anachronism that the year of bSod nams bzang po’s installation (shing pho byi = 1384) is specified as his forty-first year of age (= 1381) and his resignation (sa mo yos = 1399) with his fifty-sixth (= 1396). Nevertheless, the dates of his tenure are also confirmed by his biography. According to the bSod nams bzang po’i rnam thar (fol. 15a1–3), he was installed as abbot in the sixth month of 1384 (shing pho byi) and led the dGe ’dun sgang pa until the tenth month of 1399 (sa mo yos). But also this statement is partly anachronistic as bSod nams bzang po’s age at his installation is given with forty years (= 1380). See also TUCCI 1971: 80.4–5 and 216, where Grags pa rgyal mtshan is recorded as a student of bSod nams bzang po. 159 See Kun mkhyen chen po yab sras bco lnga’i rnam thar (p. 626.6–7) and Jo nang chos ’byung (vol. 1, p. 104.5). Cf. mKhas pa’i dga’ ston (p. 504.13–14), which states that bSod nams bzang po was offered Tshal min in Dol, where he established a large monastery. Cf. also SØRENSEN & HAZOD 2007: 174–175 (continuation of n. 423 from p. 171). 216 Jörg Heimbel sgang in Kong po in 1390 and the latter in 1402 when the dGe ’dun sgang community was invited to rNam thos kyi ri bo, also located in Kong po.160 Thereafter, he also presided over the śrāmaṇera ordination of the Sixth Karma pa mThong ba don ldan (1416–1453) at ’Ol kha bKra shis in 1424 and accepted the request to perform the bhikṣu ordination at a later time. His bestowal of full monk’s vows, however, never materialised due to intrigue caused by a close attendant of an imperial messenger (gser yig pa zhig gi nye gnas).161 Along with the Karma pas’ ordinations, bSod nams bzang po also bestowed full monastic ordination on the Third Zhwa dmar Chos dpal ye shes (1406–1452) and taught Karma bKa’ brgyud pa masters such as Ngom pa Bya bral Nam mkha’ rgyal mtshan (1370–1433) and Sog dbon Rin chen bzang po.162 Nevertheless, bSod nams bzang po was not the first abbot of the dGe ’dun sgang community to bestow ordination on a Karma pa. By 1301, gZhon nu byang chub, the third Tshog dGe ’dun sgang abbot, had bestowed full monastic ordination and teachings on the Third Karma pa Rang byung rdo rje (1284–1339) and on the First Zhwa dmar rTogs ldan Grags pa seng ge (1283– 1349) as well.163 Likewise, the Fourth Karma pa Rol pa’i rdo rje (1340–1383) received from ’Jam dbyangs Don grub dpal, the fifth Tshogs dGe ’dun sgang abbot, both the pravrajyā and śrāmaṇera vows along with Vinaya teachings in 1353 and full monastic ordination in 1357.164 Regarding the period of time after bSod nams bzang po’s tenure, we know of one later abbot from the dGe ’dun sgang community who presided over the full monastic ordination of a Karma pa. The person in question is Chos grub seng ge, considered a manifestation of the Arhat Rāhula, who in 1527 presided at rNam thos kyi ri bo over the ordination of the Eighth Karma pa Mi bskyod rdo rje (1507–1554).165 These short episodes from the lives of successive Karma pa and Zhwa dmar incarnations attest to the close link between the dGe’ ’dun sgang pa and Karma bKa’ brgyud tradition; the latter had its most senior masters take full monk’s vows from abbots of the former. This close relationship was further maintained as illustrated by the biographies of such eminent figures as the Fifth Zhwa dmar dKon mchog yan lag (1525–1583) and Ninth Karma pa dBang phyug rdo rje (1556–1603). From the former’s biographical sketch, we come to learn, for instance, that the Tshogs dGe ’dun sgang abbot Shākya rgya mtsho functioned as secret revealing preceptor in the Zhwa dmar’s full monastic ordination; an unnamed abbot from Tshogs dGe ’dun sgang was, along with the Zhwa dmar, involved in the full monastic ordination of the Fourth 160 See Karma kaṃ tshang gi rnam thar (vol. 1, pp. 449.3–5 and 453.1–5), respectively. See also mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar (fol. 21a3), Deb ther sngon po (p. 601.5–8 and 14–16), and bsTan rtsis gsal ba’i nyin byed (p. 193.1). 161 See Karma kaṃ tshang gi rnam thar (vol. 1, pp. 519.7–520.3). See also mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar (fol. 21a3) and bsTan rtsis gsal ba’i nyin byed (p. 193.1). 162 For the Third Zhwa dmar’s ordination, see Karma kaṃ tshang gi rnam thar (vol. 1, p. 489.1–5), mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar (fol. 21a3), and Deb ther sngon po (p. 647.12–15). On the teachings bestowed on the latter two masters, see Karma kaṃ tshang gi rnam thar (vol. 1, pp. 503.6 and 513.5), respectively. 163 On Rang byung rdo rje’s ordination, see Karma kaṃ tshang gi rnam thar (vol. 1, pp. 198.5–199.1). In this text passage, gZhon nu byang chub is referred to as ’phags pa’i gnas brten, but it is not further specified as which manifestation he is considered. See also mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar (fol. 20b5–6) and Deb ther sngon po (p. 582.1–5). For Grags pa seng ge’s ordination, see Karma kaṃ tshang gi rnam thar (vol. 1, pp. 245.7–246.1 and 252.2) and Deb ther sngon po (p. 625.12–13). Along with Rang byung rdo rje, gZhon nu byang chub also functioned in the full monastic ordination of mKhas grub Darma rgyal mtshan; the former as presiding abbot and the latter as ceremony master; see Deb ther sngon po (p. 634.11–13). 164 See Karma kaṃ tshang gi rnam thar (vol. 1, pp. 340.3–341.3 and 350.2–5), respectively. In the first ceremony, Don grub dpal was assited by other members of his monastic community such as gDan gcig pa Jo btsun bSod nams ’bum as ceremony master and gDan gcig pa gZhon nu dpal as time keeper. In the second, he was assisted by bSod nams ’bum as ceremony master and gZhon nu dpal as secret revealing preceptor. See also Deb ther sngon po (pp. 591.17–592.1 and 592.10–13), respectively. 165 See Karma kaṃ tshang gi rnam thar (vol. 2, pp. 29.7–30.6) and JACKSON 2009: 61. Following the request of members from the Tshogs dGe ’dun sgang, Mi bskyod rdo rje composed a short praise on Chos grub seng ge, entitled mKhan chen chos grub seng ge la bstod pa. Chos grub seng ge functioned also as the ceremony master in the full monastic ordination of the Second dPa’ bo gTsug lag phreng ba alias Mi pham Chos kyi rgya mtsho (1504–1564/66); see Karma kaṃ tshang gi rnam thar (vol. 2, p. 57.5–6). The Jo gdan tshogs sde bzhi 217 mTshur phu rGyal tshab Grags pa don grub (1547–1613); and that the Zhwa dmar held, as mentioned above, the prayer festival of the Tibetan new year of 1570 at rGyal chen gling, bestowing both teachings and ordinations on members of Tshogs dGe ’dun sgang.166 That link was also maintained by other masters; for example the Fourth Zhwa dmar Chos grags ye shes (1453–1524) was a disciple of Rab ’byor seng ge (1398–1480), the nineteenth abbot of Tshogs dGe ’dun sgang (tenure: 1463–1471?), who functioned as ceremony master in the Zhwa dmar’s full monastic ordination in 1476 and whom the latter honoured by writing his biography.167 Moreover, the Zhwa dmar himself bestowed teachings on the dGe ’dun sgang community.168 Similarly, to receive full monastic ordination, the First dPa’ bo Chos dbang lhun grub (1440–1503) sent some of his monks to the dGe ’dun sgang community.169 The tradition to recognise abbots of the dGe ’dun sgang pa as manifestations of the Sixteen Arhats also found its expression in paintings, as illustrated by a surviving thangka in the Karma sgar bris style. This thangka depicts as its main figure the Arhat Vanavasin, identifiable from an inscription. He is surrounded by the lineage of early dGe ’dun sgang pa abbots, whose original names are furnished by inscriptions as well. The main figure was identified by David Jackson to be Byang chub dpal, the community’s original founder. 170 At the rGyal gling tshogs pa, this system of identification was later on transformed into a system of reincarnate lamas whose sprul skus became known as the gNas brtan dPa’ bos. The First gNas brtan dPa’ bo (1824–1908) was installed in the 1870s and succeeded by the Second gNas brtan dPa’ bo rJe btsun dKon mchog chos dpal rgya mtsho alias rJe Dharma’i mtshan can. Both gNas brtan dPa’ bos had studied with the rNying ma pa master ’Jigs med dpal gyi seng ge, from whom they received the title dpa’ bo.171 The First gNas brtan dPa’ bo established, in the second half of the nineteenth century, the retreat site and scholastic seminary known as dGa’ tshal sbug to the north-east of the rGyal gling tshogs pa, which was subsequently enlarged by his successor, dKon mchog chos dpal rgya mtsho.172 Nowadays, dGa’ tshal sbug houses the famous clay statue of Śākyaśrī, which is said to be the only surviving piece of a total of seven statues made during the time of Śākyaśrī’s sojourn in Tibet.173 However, as mentioned above, not only Karma bKa’ brgyud pa monks received monastic ordination from abbots of the dGe ’dun sgang pa. This community also had connections with Sa skya, where, for instance, the Lam ’bras master dPal ldan tshul khrims obtained monastic ordination when the dGe ’dun sgang pa stayed there in residence in 1340. Moreover, the dGe ’dun sgang pa was apparently related with dPal ’khor chos sde at rGyal rtse, as illustrated by the 166 See Karma kaṃ tshang gi rnam thar (vol. 2, pp. 74.5–7, 105.5, and 111.7–112.1), respectively. See further Karma kaṃ tshang gi rnam thar (vol. 2, pp. 79.7, 123.6–124.1, and 128.7–129.1). On the relation between the Ninth Karma pa and the Tshogs dGe ’dun sgang, see Karma kaṃ tshang gi rnam thar (vol. 2, pp. 173.6–7, 176.3–5, 181.1–2, 199.2–5, 219.1–2, and 230.4). 167 See Karma kaṃ tshang gi rnam thar (vol. 1, p. 600.3–5) and Rab ’byor seng ge’i rnam thar (p. 491.8–9). 168 See Karma kaṃ tshang gi rnam thar (vol. 1, p. 607.6). In general, Zhwa dmar Chos grags ye shes maintained relations with all four communities; see Karma kaṃ tshang gi rnam thar (vol. 1, pp. 612.3 and 613.7). 169 See Karma kaṃ tshang gi rnam thar (vol. 1, p. 665.1). 170 See JACKSON 1999: 120–122 and JACKSON 2009: 109, 112–113. For this painting, see also HAR 273. 171 See rGyal gling tshogs pa’i byung ba brjod pa (pp. 76.23–77.22). 172 See rGyal gling tshogs pa’i byung ba brjod pa (pp. 86.20–88.12) and lHo kha sa khul gyi gnas yig (p. 27.9–18). On dGa’ tshal sbug, see also CHAN 1994: 505, DOWMAN 1996: 160, and GYURME DORJE 2004: 174. 173 See rGyal gling tshogs pa’i byung ba brjod pa (pp. 80.25–81.20) and lHo kha sa khul gyi gnas yig (pp. 27.16–28.5). See also rTse tshogs dgon gyi rtsa che’i nang rten (pp. 54–55), where it is specified that along with Śākyaśrī’s clay statue at the rGyal gling tshogs pa, another clay statue is housed at the Po ta la in lHa sa. For a picture of Śākyaśrī’s statue kept at dGa’ tshal sbug, see rGyal gling tshogs pa’i byung ba brjod pa (picture section). 218 Jörg Heimbel commissioning of statues and wall paintings of the dGe ’dun sgang pa’s lineage masters until dGra bcom Yon tan blo gros, the ninth Tshogs dGe ’dun sgang abbot.174 5.2. Tsha mig tshogs pa Śākyaśrī’s lineage of monastic ordination spread among the Sa skya order, which preserved two lineages, both originating with Śākyaśrī.175 The first was passed down by the abbots of the Jo gdan tshogs sde bzhi. As we shall see in the next section, eminent Sa skya pa masters of the fourteenth century also took full monastic ordination in the lineage of the Chos lung tshogs pa. From the fifteenth century on, however, the lineage of the Tsha mig tshogs pa dominated, spreading widely in the Ngor sub-school that was established by the tantric expert and strict Vinaya advocate Ngor chen Kun dga’ bzang po (1382–1456).176 Ngor chen received full monastic ordination in the lineage of the Tsha mig tshogs pa from his main teacher Shar chen Ye shes rgyal mtshan (1359–1406) in 1400/01 at Sa skya. Shar chen, in turn, had taken, as mentioned above, his bhikṣu vows in 1379 from bKra shis tshul khrims, the eleventh Tsha mig tshogs pa abbot.177 With Ngor chen’s role as one of the most important Sa skya pa masters in the first half of the fifteenth century and thanks to the influence of his Ngor tradition, his lineage of monastic ordination became at times the dominant one in Sa skya’s monastic circles.178 The other lineage preserved by the Sa skya order did not pass down through the abbots of the Jo gdan tshogs sde bzhi, but was transmitted directly from Śākyaśrī to his disciple Sa skya Paṇḍi ta.179 Both Sa skya Paṇḍi ta’s and Ngor chen’s lineage—the sa paṇ sdom rgyun (or sa skya lha khang chen po’i sdom rgyun) and ngor chen sdom rgyun—were at certain times threatened by extinction. But when one lineage had become too dominant, the other was saved and revived by the conscious effort of far-sighted masters, who gave up their existing ordination and retook full monks’ vows in the other rarer lineage.180 Kong sprul adds that the lineage of Sa skya Paṇḍi ta later flourished due to the efforts of the Fifth Dalai Lama.181 In his autobiography, that lama relates that at age sixty, in 1677, he retook full monastic ordination, seemingly harbouring doubts about the legitimacy of his own ordination lineage, i.e. the one passed down through Bla chen dGongs pa rab gsal. In the Po ta la, he thus retook his bhikṣu vows in Sa skya Paṇḍi ta’s linage from Zhwa lu mKhan chen Rin chen bsod nams mchog grub (1602–1681) who served simultaneously as both presiding abbot and ceremony master.182 Immediately after that, the Fifth 174 See Rab brtan kun bzang ’phags kyi rnam thar (pp. 67.5–7 and 130.21–131.7) and TUCCI 1989: vol. 2, 85.4–5 and 228. On a possible connection with the dGe lugs school, see above n. 95. 175 See JACKSON 2010a: [211]. 176 On Ngor chen, see HEIMBEL 2011 and the author’s forthcoming dissertation Ngor chen Kun dga’ bzang po (1382 – 1456) – An Investigation into the Life and Times of the Founder of the Ngor Sub-School of the Sa skya Order. 177 See Ngor chen gyi rnam thar 1 (p. 436.3–4), Ngor chen gyi rnam thar 2 (p. 488.1–2), and Thob yig rgya mtsho (p. 182.3–5). Note that Ngor chen’s biographies date his ordination to 1401, whereas it is recorded for the year 1400 in his record of teachings received. For the lineage of Ngor chen’s bhikṣu vows, see Thob yig rgya mtsho (pp. 182.5–183.1). 178 Ngor chen is credited with having bestowed full monastic ordination on more than ten thousand monks; see Ngor chen gyi rnam thar 2 (p. 511.3–5). 179 See JACKSON 2010a: [211]. See also Shes bya kun khyab (p. 222.18–19) and gSang sngags gsar rnying gi gdan rabs (p. 108.5–6). 180 See JACKSON 2010a: [211]–215 and [291]–304. 181 See Shes bya kun khyab (p. 222.21–22). See also gNas gsar ba chen po’i rnam thar (p. 86.1–2). 182 See Du kū la’i gos bzang (vol. 3, pp. 103.3.–108.4). See also gNas gsar ba chen po’i rnam thar (pp. 85.3–86.2). For the Fifth Dalai Lama’s original lineage of full monastic ordination, see Thob yig ganggā’i chu rgyun (vol. 1, pp. 20.1–23.3). Already Rin chen bsod nams mchog grub himself had retaken full ordination in Sa skya Paṇḍi ta’s lineage from lHa khang mKhan chen Byams pa bSod nams bkra shis after he had prior to that received the bhikṣu vows at Ngor from sGrub khang pa dPal ldan don grub (1563– 1636/46), the sixteenth Ngor abbot (tenure: 1618–1621), as presiding abbot; see Zhwa lu gdan rabs (pp. 339.6–340.3 and 342.3–5) and Rin chen bsod nams mchog grub kyi rnam thar (pp. 16.5–17.5 and 28.1– 29.4). Note that the former text dates Rin chen bsod nams mchog grub’s full monastic ordination to his The Jo gdan tshogs sde bzhi 219 Dalai Lama, as presiding abbot, and Rin chen bsod nams mchog grub, as ceremony master, bestowed full monastic ordination in Sa skya Paṇḍi ta’s lineage on about two hundred monks each day for a couple of days.183 As pointed out above, prior to the Fifth Dalai Lama retaking full ordination in the Tsha mig tshogs pa’s lineage, Tsong kha pa had taken the bhikṣu vows in this lineage at Yar lung rNam rgyal in 1380. To further trace this lineage among Tsong kha pa’s disciples and determine its diffusion within the dGe lugs order, we will need to find out to whom Tsong kha pa bestowed full monastic ordination, thereby transmitting the Tsha mig pa lineage. 5.3. Chos lung tshogs pa The abbots of the Chos lung tshogs pa bestowed full monastic ordination in Śākyaśrī’s lineage on a variety of eminent masters from different Tibetan Buddhist schools. It was, for instance, Bu ston Rin chen grub (1290–1364) who took his bhikṣu vows in 1312 at Tshong ’dus m/’Gur mo in gTsang from bKa’ bzhi pa Grags pa gzhon nu (1257–1315), the third Chos lung tshogs pa (tenure: 1294–1315) and Zhwa lu abbot.184 According to the Zhwa lu gdan rabs, from the time of this ordination abbot on Śākyaśrī’s lineage was maintained by all Zhwa lu abbots.185 Grags pa gzhon nu was also instrumental in establishing the Chos lung tshogs pa’s lineage at Sa skya. As mentioned above, when a council was held at Sa skya to investigate the legitimacy of the different monastic ordination lineages, Śākyaśrī’s lineage was considered the most genuine and Grags pa gzhon nu, the holder of that lineage, bestowed full monastic ordination on bDag nyid chen po bZang po dpal (1262–1324) in 1313. This link with Sa skya was further upheld when bZang po dpal’s sons ’Jam dbyangs Don yod rgyal mtshan (1310–1344) and Bla ma Dam pa bSod nams rgyal mtshan (1312–1375) took full monastic ordination together from Grags pa gzhon nu’s successor, Sems dpa’ chen po bSod nams grags pa (1273–1353), the fourth Chos lung tshogs pa abbot (1315–1342), at Bo dong Bya rgod gshong in 1331.186 Another eminent Tibetan master who took his full monk’s vows from bSod nams grags pa was Dol po pa Shes rab rgyal mtshan (1292–1361).187 Dol po pa is also known to have resided and twenty second year (= 1623), but the latter to 1635. The Fifth Dalai Lama makes no mention of Rin chen bsod nams mchog grub’s retaking of ordination in Sa skya Paṇḍi ta’s lineage. 183 See Du kū la’i gos bzang (vol. 3, p. 108.3.–13). 184 See mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar (fol. 13b1–2), Zhwa lu gdan rabs (pp. 18.2–5 and 364.2–3), and RUEGG 1966: 77–79. According to the Zhwa lu gdan rabs (pp. 18.2–5 and 364.2–3) and RUEGG 1966: 78, bSod nams grags pa (1273–1353), the later fourth Chos lung tshogs pa abbot (tenure: 1315–1342), functioned in Bu ston’s ordination as ceremony master and bSod nams bzang po (1292–1356), the later fifth Chos lung tshogs pa abbot (tenure: 1342–1351), as secret revealing preceptor. Cf. mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar (fols. 14a4–6), where bSod nams grags pa is recorded as secret revealing preceptor. 185 See Zhwa lu gdan rabs (pp. 360.6–361.1). It needs to be further examined if this lineage constituted the lineage of the Chos lung tshogs pa. 186 See mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar (fols. 13b1–2 and 14a1–4), respectively. On bZang po dpal’s ordination, see above note 35. On Don yod rgyal mtshan and Bla ma Dam pa’s ordination, see Bla ma dam pa’i rnam thar (fol. 9a4–9b5) and Sa skya gdung rabs (pp. 319.3, 320.4, and 323.5–324.4). The mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar (fols. 13b1–2 and 14a1–4) lists two more Sa skya pa masters, Ti shrī Kun dga’ rgyal mtshan (1310–1358) and Ti shrī bSod nams blo gros (1332–1362), who allegedly took their bhikṣu vows from bSod nams grags pa. According to the Sa skya gdung rabs (p. 451.1), however, bSod nams blo gros obtained his bhikṣu vows from Bla ma Dam pa. bSod nams grags pa had previously functioned as ceremony master in Bu ston’s ordination; see above n. 184. For biographical sketches of bSod nams grags pa, see bKa’ gdams chos ’byung (vol. 2, pp. 270.2–279.4), mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar (fols. 13b3–14a7), and Lam rim bla brgyud kyi rnam thar (vol. 2, pp. 538–543). Less than ninty years later, Rin chen dpal bzang po (1348–1430), the former tenth Chos lung tshogs pa abbot (tenure: 1401–1411), bestowed full ordination on Don yod dpal (1398–1484) in 1420; see mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar (fol. 18b3) and CAUMANNS 2012: 201 and 412. 187 Dol po pa is recorded to have taken ordination from bSod nams grags pa either in 1314 or at age twenty one (= 1313) at Zhwa lu; see STEARNS 2010: 14, and Dol po pa’i rnam thar (p. 430.3) and STEARNS 2010: 318, n. 40, respectively. The Dol po pa’i rnam thar (p. 430.3) further specifies that Dol po pa took upasaṃpadā ordination from the Jo gdan tshogs pa headed by bSod nams grags pa. Note that the mKhan 220 Jörg Heimbel taught at Chos lung monastery.188 A later master with a Jo nang connection who received full monastic ordination from the Chos lung tshogs pa at sPos khang was ’Jam dbyangs dKon mchog bzang po (1398–1475).189 It remains to be determined how the Chos lung tshogs pa’s lineage may have spread in the Jo nang tradition among the disciple lineage of those two masters. Paṇ chen bSod nams grags pa (1478–1554) mentions that the number of dGe lugs pa monks in the Chos lung tshogs pa became very high during the tenure of Zla ba blo gros (1371–1442), the fourteenth Chos lung tshogs pa abbot (tenure: 1425–1434); this was, however, only a temporary phenomenon, he reports.190 Zla ba blo gros was a disciple of Tsong kha pa, (1357–1419) who was included in the quartet of Tsong kha pa’s disciples known as the Jo stan bzhi or Jo bo gdan gcig pa bzhi.191 Tsong kha pa himself visited Chos lung monastery at sNubs in Rong a couple of times. It was, for instance, at Chos lung that he studied with Grags pa bshes gnyen (1329–1401), the eighth Chos lung tshogs pa abbot (tenure: 1374–1389), and where he met and studied with Bla ma dBu ma pa brTson ’grus seng ge.192 The lineage of the Chos lung tshogs pa also spread in the dGe lugs order via the bKra shis lhun po tradition. This becomes evident from the lineage record of Yongs ’dzin Ye shes rgyal mtshan (1713–1793). While presenting Śākyaśrī’s life and Vinaya tradition in his ’Dul ba’i chos ’byung, he records his own lineage of bhikṣu vows, which was originally transmitted via the abbots of the Chos lung tshogs pa and passed down by masters from the Zhwa lu tradition into the dGe lugs order. From this lineage record, we come to know that prominent masters from bKra shis lhun po, such as the First Paṇ chen Bla ma Blo bzang chos kyi rgyal mtshan (1570– 1662) and the Second Paṇ chen Bla ma Blo bzang ye shes (1663–1737), obtained full monastic ordination in that lineage.193 Also masters from the Karma bKa’ brgyud tradition took ordination from abbots of the Chos lung tshogs pa, though their chief ordination abbots originated from the dGe ’dun sgang community. For example, g.Yung ston rDo rje dpal (1284–1365) took his full monk’s vows from bKa’ bzhi pa Grags pa gzhon nu (1257–1315), the third Chos lung tshogs pa abbot (tenure: 1294– brgyud kyi rnam thar gives the tenure of bSod nams grags pa as fourth Chos lung tshogs pa abbot only from 1315 to 1342. According to STEARNS 2010: 318, n. 40, Dol po pa “wrote a short versified work on the Madyamaka view at the order of this Khenchen Sönam Drakpa.” 188 See STEARNS 2010: 32 and 132. 189 On dKon mchog bzang po, see above n. 123. 190 See bKa’ gdams gsar rnying gi chos ’byung (p. 296.5–6). For the biographical sketch of Zla ba blo gros, see mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar (fol. 19a3–6). 191 On this quartet, see above n. 95. 192 See bKa’ gdams gsar rnying gi chos ’byung (pp. 79.5–80.1) and Tsong kha pa’i rnam thar 3 (pp. 49.2– 50.3, 53.3, and 61.1). See also ROLOFF 2009: 294 and 396, n. 573. 193 See ’Dul ba’i chos ’byung (pp. 199.3–200.1): paṇ chen de nas bsnyen rdzogs kyi sdom pa rim par brgyud pa ni| paṇ chen shākya shrī| byang chub dpal| bde ba dpal| mkhan chen grags pa gzhon nu| bu ston rin po che| grags pa rgyal mtshan (Second Zhwa lu mKhan chen, 1365–1448, P2915)| sher ’byung blo gros (Shar rtse mKhan chen, P1790)| ye shes grags pa (P2916)| blo gros legs bzang (Ninth Khri thog of bKra shis lhun po, Shar rtse mKhan chen, P2917)| paṇ chen dam chos yar ’phel (P2269)| thams cad mkhyen pa blo bzang chos kyi rgyal mtshan (First Paṇ chen Bla ma, 1570–1662, P719)| rdo rje ’dzin pa dkon mchog rgyal mtshan (Fourth Khri bKras lhun rGyud pa grwa tshang, 1612–1687, P1002)| rje btsun thams cad mkhyen pa blo bzang ye shes (Second Paṇ chen Bla ma, 1663–1737, P106)| don gyi slad du mtshan nas smos te mkhan po rin po che grub dbang blo bzang rnam rgyal dpal bzang po’i (1670–1741, P107) zhal snga nas| de’i zhabs drung du bdag gis bsnyen rdzogs kyi sdom pa thob bo|. The lineage recorded by Yongs ’dzin Ye shes rgyal mtshan is in parts abridged as Grags pa ’byung gnas, for instance, took full monastic ordination from Bu ston’s chief disciple Thugs sras Lo tsā ba alias sGra tshad pa Rin chen rnam rgyal (1318–1388); see Zhwa lu gdan rabs (pp. 101.6–102.1). Rin chen rnam rgyal, in turn, seemingly bestowed orindation on Shes rab ’byung gnas blo gros as we find the latter recorded among his disciples; see Zhwa lu gdan rabs (p. 105.3). The connection between the Chos lung tshogs pa and bKra shis lhun po is also mentioned by the Fifth Dalai Lama; see Thob yig gang gā’i chu rgyun (vol. 1, pp. 22.5–23.1) and Du kū la’i gos bzang (vol. 3, p. 106.5– 7): (...) paṇ chen blo bzang chos kyi rgyal mtshan yi mkhan po paṇ chen dam chos yar ’phel gyis thog mar shangs ston blo gros legs bzang la bsnyen par rdzogs pa spos khang tshogs paṇ chen kyi rgyud pa yin cing (...). The Jo gdan tshogs sde bzhi 221 1315), in 1314, when the Chos lung tshogs pa was observing its summer retreat at sTag mkhar. At that time, rDo rje dpal seemingly obtained the pravrajyā, śrāmaṇera, and bhikṣu vows simultaneously (chig rdzogs).194 Moreover, the First dPa’ bo Chos dbang lhun grub (1440–1503) sent some of his monks to the Chos lung tshogs pa to take their bhikṣu vows.195 Another Karma bKa’ brgyud master who maintained relations with the Chos lung tshogs pa was the Fourth Zhwa dmar Chos grags ye shes (1453–1524). He paid a visit to Chos lung in 1485, establishing a religious or Dharma connection (chos ’brel) by bestowing teachings on the view, meditation, conduct, and fruit (lta sgom spyod ’bras) in accord with the bKa’ brgyud pa’s position.196 Later on, in about 1496, the same lama once again bestowed various teachings on the Chos lung tshogs pa and consecrated some of its religious objects.197 The influence of the Chos lung tshogs pa at sPos khang on dPal ’khor chos sde via its patrons from the noble house of rGyal rtse, and ’Jam dbyangs mKhyen brtse’i dbang po’s statement that, by way of the Chos lung community, Śākyaśrī’s lineage spread in the ’Brug pa bKa’ brgyud school both remain to be examined. 6. The Ascetic Disciplines Observed by the Four Monastic Communities In this paper, I have regularly referred to the four monastic communities in Śākyaśrī’s tradition as the Jo gdan tshogs sde bzhi and I mentioned that individual groups were also called Jo gdan tshogs pas. However, the term jo gdan, together with its variant jo stan (both sometimes misspelled as jo dan, jo bstan, or jo brtan), has so far not been explained. In the following pages, I would like to summarise my initial findings on this tradition of Vinaya ascetic practice and their other typical features. The term jo stan/gdan is apparently an abbreviation for jo bo stan/gdan gcig pa,198 and since the meaning of the latter element of this term, the so-called “practitioners of the single mat” (stan/gdan gcig pa), is slightly better known than the former, we will turn to that first. The stan/gdan gcig tradition constitutes an ascetic conduct (brtul zhugs) aimed at a very strict selfdiscipline, whose followers were called stan/gdan gcig pa. The practice was associated with Śākyaśrī and his disciples as well as with the monastic communities that formed from his tradition. This is illustrated by the following compilation of remarks drawn from the sources employed for this paper. The Bu ston chos ’byung, for instance, characterises Śākyaśrī’s two chief monastic followers, Byang chub dpal and rDo rje dpal, as upholding the ascetic discipline of the gdan gcig pa after they had taken their full monk’s vows from Śākyaśrī.199 Similarly, the Deb ther sngon po states that having received full monastic ordination from Śākyaśrī, Byang chub dpal and rDo rje dpal adopted and maintained the ascetic discipline of stan gcig.200 The latter two are further recorded to have established their own communities of stan/gdan gcig practitioners, i.e. the communities that eventually became known as the Jo gdan tshogs sde bzhi.201 Moreover, 194 See Karma kaṃ tshang gi rnam thar (vol. 1, p. 276.3–4). See also Deb ther sngon po (pp. 190.18–191.1). See Karma kaṃ tshang gi rnam thar (vol. 1, p. 665.1). 196 See Karma kaṃ tshang gi rnam thar (vol. 1, p. 607.2–3). 197 See Karma kaṃ tshang gi rnam thar (vol. 1, p. 613.7). See also Karma kaṃ tshang gi rnam thar (vol. 2, p. 284.1), where it is mentioned that the the Sixth Zhwa dmar Gar dbang Chos kyi dbang phyug (1584– 630) paid a visit to the Chos lung tshogs pa. For the Eleventh Karma pa dBang phyug rdo rje’s (1556– 1603) relation with the Chos lung tshogs pa, see Karma kaṃ tshang gi rnam thar (vol. 2, p. 238.1–2). 198 See, for example, mKhas pa’i dga’ ston (p. 503.6–7), ’Dul ba’i chos ’byung (p. 198.4), and Tsong kha pa’i rnam thar 1 (p. 367.19–21). See also JACKSON 1990a: 21, n. 21, JACKSON 1990b: 86, n. 56, and VAN DER KUIJP 1994: 606, n. 26. 199 See Bu ston chos ’byung (p. 104.12–14). 200 See Deb ther sngon po (p. 1247.9–11). See also rGya bod chos ’byung (pp. 45.18–46.1) and ’Dul ba’i chos ’byung (p. 198.2). The translation of stan/gdan gcig with “single mat” stems from George N. Roerich’s 1949 translation of the Deb ther sngon po; see ROERICH 1996: 1071. 201 See bKa’ gdams gsar rnying gi chos ’byung (pp. 68.6–69.2), mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar (fol. 12b2–3), and dGe ’dun sgang pa’i mkhan brgyud (fol. 1b6–7). See also Dus ’khor chos ’byung 1 (fol. 222a.3–4) and ’Dul ba’i chos ’byung (p. 198.3–4). 195 222 Jörg Heimbel Śākyaśrī himself is credited by the rGya bod yig tshang chen mo to have established the gdan gcig pa tradition in Tibet.202 Having established the four monastic communities in Śākyaśrī’s tradition as practitioners of the single mat, we have to find out what this stan/gdan gcig discipline actually was. As defined in the dictionary Bod rgya tshig mdzod chen mo, the term stan gcig refers to the monastic discipline of not eating food more than once per day, i.e. taking a whole day’s food at a single sitting.203 This practice has been linked by Yongs ’dzin Ye shes rgyal mtshan (1713–1793) with the qualities of a purified ascetic (sbyangs pa’i yon tan).204 A total of twelve of these qualities are enumerated in the sGra sbyor bam po gnyis pa (Mahāvyutpatti) in the section on the sbyangs pa’i yon tan bcu gnyis kyi ming la (dvādaśadhūtaguṇāḥ), among which stan gcig pa (aikāsanikaḥ) is listed as number five.205 A description of this ascetic practice is found in the biography of mKhan chen bKa’ bzhi pa Rig pa’i seng ge (1287–1375) from Mi nyag Rab sgang. He adopted the gdan gcig discipline from bSod nams grags pa (1273–1353), the fourth Chos lung tshogs pa abbot (tenure: 1315–1342), when taking full monastic ordination in 1322 in the temple of Rin chen sgang. Since that time, neither meat nor alcohol touched his lips and he did not break the gdan gcig practice in the slightest way. That he could remain very pure in his discipline, Rig pa’i seng ge attributed to the blessing of the flawless lineage of his monastic ordination abbots. Moreover, he only subsisted on alms for which he begged.206 Another short mention of the gdan gcig practice is included in the biography of Glo bo mKhan chen bSod nams lhun grub (1456–1532). His biographer Kun dga’ grol mchog (1507–1566) relates an account of Bhikṣu Paṇḍita Lokatāra, an old aged Vinaya ascetic and scholar from East India, who visited Glo bo. When the time for the gdan gcig midday meal had come (gdan gcig gi gdugs tshod la bab pa na), Lokatāra took his iron begging bowl and begged for alms at the foot of whatever family’s door it might have been, covering his face with the bowl’s bamboo lid when receiving alms that were offered by a woman.207 Some of the practices mentioned in these two accounts, such as subsisting on alms (bsod snyoms pa, 202 See rGya bod yig tshang chen mo (pp. 508.14 and 514.8–9). See also VAN DER KUIJP 1994: 609. See Bod rgya tshig mdzod chen mo, s.v. stan gcig: nyin rer lto chas za thengs re las mi za ba'i brtul zhugs|. See also VAN DER KUIJP 1994: 606, n. 26. An even stricter form of this practice was the ascetic discipline known as stan/gdan gcig rdor/sdor dkar or rdor/sdor dkar stan/gdan gcig, which restricted the single food intake to a meatless diet. A practitioner only observing the practice of rdor/sdor dkar is definded by the Bod rgya tshig mdzod chen mo, s.v. sdor dkar ba, as follows: smyung gnas sogs dmar zas spangs nas dkar gsum gyi zas la rten mkhan|. 204 See ’Dul ba’i chos ’byung (p. 202.1–2): (...) gtsang so ba tshul khrims mdzes kyis paṇ chen rgya gar la gshegs rting lo dgu’i bar kha che paṇ chen gyi rnam thar bskyangs| sbyangs pa’i yon tan stan gcig gi brtul zhugs ’dzin pa’i dge slong mang du tshogs pa’i mkhan po mdzad de dge ’dun gyi sde bskyangs|. 205 See sGra sbyor bam po gnyis pa (p. 86, no. 1132). For the whole section, see sGra sbyor bam po gnyis pa (pp. 85–86, no. 1127–1139). For an early description of these twelve qualities from 1932, see DAYAL 1970: 134–140. Ibid: 136 already understood the term as referring to the practice of eating once meal at one sitting. See also, Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit, s.v. ekāsanika (= Pali id.; BHS aikā°), where the meaning is given as “observing the rule of using the same seat (for eating his meal).” For a description of that practice, its benefits, and exceptions, see the translation of the rNam par grol ba’i lam las sbyangs pa’i yon tan bstan pa by BAPAT 1964: xxiv, 8–9, 26–33, and 66–69. For a description of thirteen practices in Buddhaghosa’s Visuddhimagga, see the translation by Bhikku Ñāṇamoli 1999: 58–81. On the “one-sessioner’s practice” or “eating in one session,” see Ibid: 58–59, v. and 67–68, v. See also BAPAT 1937: 19 and REV. N. R. M. EHARA, SOMA THERA, & KHEMINDA THERA 1961: 27–28, 31, and 36. 206 See Rig pa’i seng ge’i rnam thar (pp. 58.14–59.4 and 88.9–16). However, Rig pa’i seng ge deferred his practice temporarily; see Rig pa’i seng ge’i rnam thar (p. 59.2–4). His biography does not specify bSod nams grags pa, the presiding abbot, as Chos lung tshogs pa abbot, referring to him only as Khro phu ba bSod nams grags pa. Nevertheless, his identification as Chos lung tshogs pa abbot is possible due to an entry in the mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar (fol. 14a3), where he is recorded as presiding over bKa’ bzhi pa Rig pa’i seng ge’s ordination. The other masters involved in Rig pa’i seng ge’s ordination, Khro phu ba bSod nams bzang po as ceremony master and Slob dpon gZhon nu mgon po as secret reveiling preceptor, might be the sixth and seventh Chos lung tshogs pa abbots. 207 See Glo bo’i mkhan chen rnam thar (p. 243.1–6). 203 The Jo gdan tshogs sde bzhi 223 paiṇḍapātikaḥ) and not eating after one has risen from the single mat session at or prior to midday (zas phyis mi len pa, khalupaścādbhaktikaḥ), are also included among the qualities of a purified ascetic.208 It will require more research to establish whether these practices were also part of the ascetic discipline maintained by Tibetan gdan gcig practitioners. The origin and meaning of the first element jo bo in the term jo bo stan/gdan gcig pa may tentatively be taken as a honorific title used for monks who maintained the gdan gcig discipline. Consequently, the term jo bo stan/gdan gcig pa might refer to a noble monk who maintained the practice of the single mat and a Jo gdan tshogs pa would thus be a community of revered monks that maintained this practice.209 The abbreviated form jo stan/gdan (or jo stan/gdan pa) is used in the same sense both as an epithet or sort of title for masters in that tradition as well as in reference to the ascetic discipline itself (jo stan/gdan gyi brtul zhugs). Nevertheless, we should know that even though the stan/gdan gcig pa tradition was associated with Śākyaśrī and the monastic communities in his tradition, the two terms stan/gdan gcig and jo stan/gdan were already in use several decades prior to Śākyaśrī’s arrival in Tibet.210 More research will be needed to clarify the origin and development of this ascetic tradition in Indian and Tibetan Buddhism. As the term jo stan is used, for instance, in connection with Nag po dar tshul, a disciple of the bKa’ gdams pa master sNe’u zur pa Ye shes ’bar (1042–1118),211 we should examine whether this tradition might be linked with Jo bo rJe Atiśa’s bKa’ gdams pa tradition and the name element jo/jo bo could have been associated with his person.212 Along with maintaining the ascetic discipline of the single mat, the monks of the Jo gdan tshogs sde bzhi also distinguished themselves as upholders of a very strict Vinaya system by other practices. From a description of Si tu Paṇ chen Chos kyi ’byung gnas, we learn that the members of the Jo gdan tshogs sde bzhi wore some special kind of monk’s robes, probably closer to the Indian monk’s dress prescribed by the Vinaya.213 As mentioned above, Si tu Paṇ chen visited the communities’ monastic establishments in lHo kha in the early 1720s. Having finished his accounts on the related monasteries in that area, he reports that though these communities 208 See sGra sbyor bam po gnyis pa (p. 86, no. 1131 and 1132), respectively. The term zas phyis mi len pa appears to refer to not eating after midday. Bla ma Dam pa bSod nams rgyal mtshan (1312–1375), for instance, is recorded to have not eaten any food after noon (phyi dro’i kha zas) since the time of his full monastic ordination; see Bla ma dam pa’i rnam thar (p. 324.1–4). See also Bod rgya tshig mdzod chen mo, s.v. zas phyis mi len pa: sbyangs pa’i yon tan bcu gnyis kyi nang tshan te| phyi dro’i kha zas mi za ba’o|. Cf. Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit, s.v. khalupaścādbhaktika: not (...) eating after (the time when one should cease). 209 So far, the term jo stan/gdan has been explained as follows: (1) S. C. Das understood the term as an abbreviation for “jo nang gi gdan sa the seat or head-quarters of the Jo-nang-pa sect of Buddhism in Tibet;” see Tibetan-English Dictionary, s.v. jo gdan; (2) TUCCI 1971: 216, n. 1, in the context of explaining the Phag mo gru pa ruler dBang Grags pa rgyal mtshan’s (1374–1432; r. 1385–1432) support for the Jo gdan tshogs sde bzhi, described the term as “Jo monks; stan: cushion upon which they sit; to the four congregations is given food once a day;” and (3) KASCHEWSKY 1971: 290: 27 provides us with the Mongolian translation and explanation of the term jo bo gdan gcig pa in the context of introducing Tsong kha pa’s four Jo bo gdan gcig pa disciples: “sutulqu-yin erdem-ün törü yosun-i barigči yayča tebisker-tü sayiqan ögülegči. Dies ist dann im Einzelnen kommentiert: sutulqu-yin erdem: sich um Weltliches nicht kümmern; Kasteiungen auf sich nehmen. yayča tebisker-tü: nur eine Mahlzeit am Tage zu sich nehmen. sayiqan ögülekü: alle Wesen nur noch in freundlicher Weise anreden. For further explanations, see also JACKSON 1990a: 21–22, n. 11 and JACKSON 1990b: 86, n. 56. 210 See JACKSON 1990a: 21–22, n. 11 and VAN DER KUIJP 1994: 603, n. 17. 211 See VAN DER KUIJP 1994: 603, n. 17. 212 See JACKSON 1990a: 21–22, n. 11. Chos ’phel explains in his entry for Jo gdan dgon, a monastery located in lHun grub county whose foundation is ascribed to ’Brom ston rGyal ba’i ’byung gnas (1004/05– 1064), that the monastery’s name derived from the skin of an animal called Kri na, which once served as Atiśa’s seat and was then housed at the monastery; see lHa sa sa khul gyi gnas yig (pp. 202–203). Similarly, Chos ’phel records in lHun grub rdzong the sNe mo dgon or sNe mo Jo gdan dgon, whose foundation is ascribed to a disciple of Atiśa called Jo gdan bZod pa rgya mtsho; see lHa sa sa khul gyi gnas yig (pp. 183–184). 213 For a description of Śākyaśrī’s dress once preserved at sPos khang, see gTam rgyud 1 (pp. 14.9–15.1) and gTam rgyud 2 (p. 12.1–10). 224 Jörg Heimbel were once at the very centre of the stan gcig pa tradition, they had lost the appreciation their flawless manners had previously aroused. The reason for this loss in common faith was that the monks had discarded the special robes of the jo stan pa tradition. As they did not like their robes and desired more decent cloth of better quality, they put aside their traditional robes under the pretext of fearing that the invading Dzungar Mongols (1717–1720) would single them out for harassment due to their appearance.214 That monks of the Jo gdan tshogs sde bzhi initially wore robes different from monks of other traditions can also be established from depictions in paintings. Two thangkas and one mural that portray masters of the four communities depict each of the main figures without the typical Tibetan style vest worn by most Tibetan monks, but instead with some sort of upper garment that, though covering the entire left upper body, leaves the breast area of the right side uncovered.215 Two other related paintings depict the monks not with this type of dress, but with Indian-style robes without any vest at all.216 Another characteristic feature of the four monastic communities that has been mentioned a couple of times was that they wandered about as an encampment without any fixed abode and seemingly retained this practice also after they had settled in monasteries and been invested with agricultural estates. Members of these communities are recorded to have subsisted on alms as well; similar to their master Śākyaśrī, the Great Almsman (bsod snyoms pa chen po).217 214 See Rang tshul drangs por brjod pa (pp. 89.7–90.1): lar tshogs sde bzhi’i gras ’di rnams jo stan pa’i thil [= mthil?] rang yin mod kyi dus phyis dzhong ghar gyi sog dmag sleb pa nas bzung cha lugs mi mtshungs par sog po rnams kyis snyad ’tshol ba’i dogs pas yin zer khag der bzhag pa’i don du cha lugs der mi mos pa dang ’byor chas ’dod pa ’grigs nas jo stan pa’i lugs kyi ches [= chas?] rnams bor tshar nas sngar gyi gtsang sing nge ba dang ba ’dren pa de bsdus grub nas mi ’dug go|. Some parts of this passage are not entirely clear to me and my presentation is a first tentative attempt in understanding it. 215 The first painting is the above-mentioned depiction of Byang chub dpal as a manifestation of the Arhat Vanavasin. He is surrounded by early abbots of the dGe ’dun sgang community, who are depicted wearing the same sort of upper garment; see JACKSON 1999: 120–122 and JACKSON 2009: 109 and 112–113. For the painting, see also HAR 273. Regarding the clothing, JACKSON 1999: 120 remarks: “Note that (...) the Tibetan monks here are shown observing the prohibitions of sleeves, going so far as to avoid even the typical ceremonial vests worn by most Tibetan monks and lamas.” The second painting portrays bKra shis tshul khrims, the eleventh Tsha mig tshogs pa abbot, surrounded by the Indian and Tibetan lineage of full monastic ordination of this community; see JACKSON 2010b: 137–139. The low quality scan to which I have access at the moment does not allow making any statement with regard to what kind of upper garment the Tibetan lineage masters are wearing. For a mural from the rGyal gling tshogs pa portraying two Jo gdan masters wearing such an upper garment, see Image 7. These two figures appear to be Byang chub dpal and rDo rje dpal because they are depicted directly below an image of Śākyaśrī. 216 The first painting portrays Śākyaśrī depicted together with one of his Tibetan disciples; see JACKSON 2010b: 135–137 and JACKSON 2011: 2–4 and 53–54. In regard to the Tibetan monk, JACKSON 2010b: 137 remarks that “he is probably one of his [Śākyaśrī’s] main monastically ordained Tibetan disciples, i.e. one of the early Tibetan abbots of the important Vinaya observance that he established, (...). He, too, does not wear a lama vest, but that would be in keeping with his strict adherence to the monastic rules as one of the key early abbots of his tradition.” JACKSON 2011: 53–54 further states that “he is without a Tibetan lama’s vest, indicating that he belongs to yet another monk subtype among Tibetans: those who followed Śākyaśrībhadra in strictly observing the dress rules of the original Indian vinaya.” The second painting is the above-mentioned double-sided thangka, showing on one side the construction of a stūpa at dGe ’dun sgang and on the other rituals and ceremonies performed during its consecration. With the exception of the donor figure, all other monks are depicted wearing Indian-style monk robes. On that painting, see PAKHOUTOVA 2012. On the distinctions of depicting Indian and Tibetan human figures, see JACKSON 2011: 35–65. 217 For example, rDo rje dpal and Rig pa’i seng ge are said to have lived on alms; see lHo khar gnas pa’i tshogs pa sde bzhi (p. 55, first col., l. 1–7) and Rig pa’i seng ge’i rnam thar (p. 88.13–14), respectively. The Jo gdan tshogs sde bzhi 225 APPENDIX A — Lists of Abbots of the Four Monastic Communities The following lists present the succession of the abbots of the four communities as extracted from the mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar and rGya bod yig tshang chen mo. The first entries in a larger font size follow the former text, while the second in smaller font follow the latter.218 The first source constitutes the most detailed account of the abbatial succession that has so far become available. The second one is not nearly as extensive, but illustrates well the differences in chronology and tenure found among the sources.219 1. Abbots of the Tshogs dGe ’dun sgang / dGe ’dun sgang pa 1. lHo brag pa Byang chub dpal bzang po (1183–1264) 2. Chus sgo sbugs pa mKhan chen gTsang pa dBang phyug grags (tenure: 15 years) 1. mKhan po dBang phyug grags pa (tenure: 8 years) 3. gZhon nu byang chub pa (tenure: 55 years; dbon po of no. 2) 2. Chu sgo ba mKhan po gZhon nu byang chub (tenure: 13 years; dbon po of no. 1) 4. ’Dul tshad pa Byang chub bzang po (tenure: 6 years; dbon po of no. 3) 3. sTag se ba ’Dul tshad pa Byang chub bzang po (tenure: 14 years) 5. Yar ’brog pa ’Jam dbyangs Don grub dpal (tenure: 14 years) 4. Yar ’brog pa ’Dul tshad pa Don grub dpal (tenure: 25 years) 6. sNye mo Bong ra ba mKhan chen Yon tan rgyal mtshan (tenure: 19 years) 5. Bong ra ba Yon tan rgya mtsho (tenure: 14 years) 7. Yar ’brog pa mKhan chen dPal grub pa (tenure: 8 years) 6. dPal grub pa 8. gNyag dbon bSod nams bzang po (1341–1433; tenure: 16 years [1384-1399])220 9. sNye mo gNya’ yur ba dGra bcom Yon tan blo gros pa (tenure: 12 years) 7. Yon tan blo gros pa 10. Yar ’brog pa mKhan chen brTson rgyal ba (tenure: 5 years) 8. brTson ’grus rgyal mtshan pa 11. La stod Byang pa mKhan chen Seng ge dpal ba (tenure: 8 years) 9. Seng ge dpal ba 12. sNye mo Bong ra ba mKhan chen Chos ’grub pa (tenure: 20 years) 10. mKhan po Chos grub pa (in office during the compilation of the rGya bod yig tshang chen mo in 1434)221 218 The names of the abbots are reproduced as given in both texts, but obvious misspellings have been emended without explicit notice. The mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar employs its own chronology by marking each abbot with a number written above his name. However, this numbering has not been followed here due to the following two reasons. First, Grags pa rdo rje begins the abbatial succession of the Chos lung tshogs pa with bSod nams bzang po, whom he counts as number one, though he states that the first four abbots are similar to the ones in his own lineage of full monastic ordination that he had previously outlined. Second, for the period of the temporary division of the Tsha mig community, he first enumerates the abbots of the gTsang faction, before continuing with the ones of the dBus faction, though two different chronologies should have been employed. 219 See mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar (fols. 12a6–25a6) and rGya bod yig tshang chen mo (pp. 510.9–514.5). The mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar includes at the end of each abbatial succesion a versified supplication enumerating the abbots by abbreviated names. On the last folio after its colophon, the mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar is followed by a similar supplication by another hand, which records the abbatial succession for the Chos lung tshogs pa, dGe ’dun sgag pa, and Tsha mig tshogs pa; see mKhan brygud kyi rnam thar (fol. 25b3–8). Similarly, also the rGya bod yig tshang chen mo (pp. 516.12–518.2) includes such a versified supplication as part of the Bla man mkhan brgyud dang| su tsho mkhan brgyud| paṇ chen mkhan brgyud nam mkha’ btugs|. For other less detailed lists, see mKhas pa’i dga’ ston (pp. 503.15–504.21), rGya bod chos ’byung (pp. 45.18–46.16), Deb ther sngon po (pp. 1248.2–1249.5), Deb ther dmar po (p. 60.4–22), ’Dul ba’i chos ’byung (pp. 203.1–204.2), and Yar lung chos ’byung (pp. 171.3–172.12). See also the recent presentation by RDO RJE SGROL MA 2008. 220 On the dates of bSod nams bzang po’s tenure, see above n. 158. Jörg Heimbel 226 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. Nyang stod Bye phu ba mKhan chen Blo gros rgyal mtshan pa (tenure: 18 months) gZhur pa mKhan chen Yon tan lhun grub pa (tenure: 2 years) dKa’ bzhi pa Nam mkha’ dpal ba (tenure: 5 years) g.Yag sde ba dPal yon pa (tenure: 4 years) gZhu ba Nam mkha’ dpal ba (second tenure: 2 years; identical with no. 15) Yar ’brog pa Nam mkha’ lhung bzang pa (tenure: 4 years) sNye mo Phu sum pa Rab ’byor seng ge [tenure: 1463–1471?]222 2. Abbots of the Chos lung tshogs pa 1. lHo brag pa Byang chub dpal bzang po (1183–1264) dBu mdzad bSod nams stobs bzang po (dbu mdzad: 1264–1268) 1. mKhan chen Byang chub dpal ba (tenure: 8 years) 2. sNye mo dMag lam pa mKhan chen bSod nams stobs (tenure: 6 years) 2. mKhan chen bDe ba dpal bzang po (1231–1297; tenure: 1268–1294) 3. g.Yag sde pa mKhan po bDe ba dpal (tenure: 7 years) 3. bKa’ bzhi pa Grags pa gzhon nu dpal bzang po (1257–1315; tenure: 1294–1315) 4. lHan mdzes pa mKhan po Grags pa gzhon nu (tenure: 8 years) 4. Sems dpa’ chen po bSod nams grags pa (1273–1353; tenure: 1315–1342)223 5. sNye mo Phu gsum pa mKhan po bSod nams grags (tenure: 4 years) 5. mKhan chen bSod nams bzang po (1292–1356; tenure: 1342–1351) 6. Tshong ’dus pa mKhan po bSod nams bzang po (tenure: 3 years) 6. mKhan chen gZhon nu mgon po pa (1292–1368; tenure: 1351–1358) 7. sNye mo Ru mangs pa mKhan po gZhon nu mgon po (tenure: 6 years) 7. mKhan chen Grags pa rgyal mtshan dpal bzang po (1313–1373; tenure: 1358–1373?) 8. Nyang smar ba mKhan po Grags pa rgyal mtshan (tenure: 14 years) 9. Grags pa tshul khrims pa 8. mKhan chen Grags pa bshes gnyen dpal bzang po (1329–1401; tenure: 1374–1389) 10. Grags pa bshes gnyen pa 221 Though only recording ten abbots, the rGya bod yig tshang chen mo (p. 514.4–5) states that, including Chos grub pa, a total of twelve abbots had appeared. 222 See Rab ’byor seng ge’i rnam thar (pp. 489.23–490.1 and 491.4–6). According to the rGyal po chen po rnam thos sras mchod pa’i cho ga rin po che’i gter, the abbatial succession of the rGyal gling tshogs pa was as follows (rGyal gling tshogs pa’i byung ba brjod pa, pp. 73.25–74.14): (1) mKhan chen Byang chub dpal bzang, (2) Grub thob gTsang pa, (3 and 4) gZhon nu’i mtshan can khu dbon, (5) ’Jam dbyangs Chos rje, (6) mKhas btsun Yon tan rgyal mtshan, (7) mKhas grub chen po, (8) mTshungs med Chos rje, (9) dGra bcom Chos rje, (10) Byang sems brTson rgyan, (11) Kun mkhyen Seng ge dpal bzang, (12) Chos grub bstan pa’i rgyal mtshan, (13) sNgags ’chang Blo rgyal, (14) mKhas grub Nam mkha’i mtshan can, (15) ’Dul ’dzin pa chen po, (16) dGra bcom dPal yon, (17) rJe btsun mThu stobs dbang phyug, (18) mKhas grub Rab ’byor seng ge, (19) mKhan chen Byang chub brtson ’grus, (20) Paṇ chen Chos kyi dbang phyug, (21) ’Khrug zhig Ratna’i mtshan can, (22) mKhan chen Chos grags rgyal mtshan, (23) mKhan chen Yon tan rgya mtsho, (24) Kun mkhyen Chos grub seng ge, (25) Byang sems Nor bu brtson ’byor, (26) mKhan chen Rin chen bkra shis, (27) mKhan chen Ngag dbang kun ’byor, (28) sNgags ’chang Shākya rgya mtsho, (29) mKhan chen Shākya chos rab, (30) mKhan chen Rin chen kun ldan, (31) mKhan chen Ngag dbang chos grags, (32) mTshungs med Rin chen shes rab, (33) ’Jam dbyans bKra shis chos ’phel, (34) mKhas grub Shākya ri dbang, (35) mKhan chen Ngag dbang legs bshad, and (36) mKhan chen Kun dga’ blo gros. 223 The mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar (fol. 14a7) records the passing of bSod nams grags pa for the eighteenth day of the middle of three summer months, i.e. the fifth month, of 1353 (chu mo sbrul) at age eighty-two (= 1354). However, according to Tibetan chronological calculations, he should have died at age eighty-one (= 1353). His passing in 1353 is confirmed by the chronology of the Bla ma dam pa’i rnam thar (fols. 27b6 and 28b3–4). Cf. his biographical sketch in the Lam rim bla brgyud kyi rnam thar (vol. 2, pp. 538–543), where his passing is recorded at age seventy-three in 1345. He is also said to have become abbot of the Chos lung tshogs pa at age fifty-four in 1326, leading the group for twenty-eight years (until 1353) when he installed bSod nams bzang po as his successor at about age seventy (= 1342). To make sense out of this passage, one would need to shorten bSod nams grags pa’s tenure to eighteen years (until 1343). Cf. also bSod nams grags pa’s biographical sketch in the bKa’ gdams chos ’byung (vol. 2, pp. 270.2–279.4). This sketch served as the model for the former one, but includes even more confusing dates. The Jo gdan tshogs sde bzhi 227 9. mKhan chen Nam mkha’ rgyal mtshan dpal bzang po (1346–1410;224 tenure: 1389–1401) 11. Nam mkha’ rgyal mtshan pa 10. mKhan chen Rin chen rgyal mtshan dpal bzang po (1348–1430; tenure: 1401–1411) 12. ’Jam dbyangs Rin chen rgyal mtshan pa 11. mKhan chen bShes gnyen rgyal mchog dpal bzang po (1360–1414; tenure: 1411–1414) 13. bKa’ bzhi pa bShes gnyen rgyal mchog pa 12. mKhan chen rGyal dbang grags pa (1361–1444/45;225 tenure: 1416–1425) 14. rGyal dbang pa 13. mKhan chen Zla ba blo gros pa (1371–1442; tenure: 1425–1434?) 15. Zla ba blo gros pa 14. mKhan chen rGyal ba phyag na dpal bzang po (b. 1388; tenure: 1435–1450) 16. rGyal ba phyag sna ba (in office during the compilation of the rGya bod yig tshang chen mo in 1434) 15. mKhan chen bShes gnyen bzang po (1398–1462; tenure: 1450–1462) 16. mKhan chen mGon po bkra shis pa (1411–1462; tenure: 1462) 17. mKhan chen Nyi ma rgyal mtshan dpal bzang po (b. 1406; tenure: 1463–after ca. 1487) 3. Abbots of the Tsha mig tshogs pa / Tshogs chen pa 1. mTsho mda’ rDo rje dpal (tenure: 23 years; d. at age 73) 2. sNye mo ba Sangs rgyas dpal (tenure: 37 years; d. at age 73) 1. g.Yag sde pa mKhan po Sangs rgyas dpal ba (tenure: 5 years)226 3. rGyal gsar sgang pa mKhan chen ’Od zer dpal ba (tenure: 14 years; d. at age 79) 2. Tsha mig pa mKhan po ’Od zer dpal (tenure: 14 years) 4. g.Yag sde ba Chos kyi rgyal mtshan (tenure: 14 years; d. at age 68) 3. g.Yag sde phu pa mKhan po bSod nams rgyal mtshan (tenure: 14 years) 5. g.Yag sde ba Sangs rin pa (tenure: 2 years) 4. g.Yag sde pa mKhan po Sangs rin (tenure: 2 years) 6. sNye mo Bong ra ba mKhan chen bSod nams dpal (tenure: 13 years; d. at age 66) 5. sNye mo mDo khra ba mKhan po bSod nams dpal (tenure: 13 years) 7. rTsibs pa mKhan chen Sher mgon pa (d. at age 59) 6. rGyal gsar sgang pa mKhan po Sher mgon (tenure: 6 years) 8. sNye mo Se khud Bye ma thang pa Seng ge rgyal mtshan (tenure: 13 years; d. at age 70) 7. sNye mo Bye ma thang pa mKhan po Seng ge rgyal mtshan (tenure: 13 years) 9. Ru pa mKhan chen brTson ’grus seng ge (tenure: 13 years); temporary break-up of the community; Slob dpon bKra shis mgon po leaves to gTsang; gTsang faction successively headed by Sa dkar ba mKhan chen Byang chub ’od zer, Dharmaśrībhadra (although he did not accept his appointment, he became known as mKhan chen Dharmaśrībhadra), Bar thang sGang rings pa mKhas btsun gZhon nu ’bum, Yar ’brog sBrang mda’ ba mKhan chen bKra shis tshul khrims (tenure: 16 years?) 10. Yar stod sPong rings pa mKhan chen bSod nams dbang phyug (tenure: 12 years; d. at age 63); during his tenure reunification of the community due to Gong dkar rDzong dpon Sangs rgyas dpal rin pa’s mediation 224 According to the mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar (fo. 18a1), Nam mkha’ rgyal mtshan passed away at age sixty-four on the sixteenth day of the twelfth month of the female earth-ox year (re bzhi pa sa mo glang gi hor zla bcu gnyis pa’i tshes bcu drug). Since I am unable to determine which calendar system was employed by the author, Nam mkha’ rgyal mtshan could have passed away either in December 1409 or January 1410; see SCHUH 1973: 98. 225 rGyal dbang grags pa passed away at age eighty-four on the tenth day of the waning moon, i.e. on the twenty-fifth day, of the eleventh month of the male wood-rat year (gya 4 pa shing pho byi ba hor zla bcu gcig pa’i mar ngo’i tshes bcu); see mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar (fol. 19a3). As I am unable to determine the calendar system followed by the author, rGyal dbang grags pa could have passed away either in December 1444 or January 1445; see SCHUH 1973: 107. 226 Cf. rGya bod yig tshang chen mo (p. 510.9–12 ), where in the account of the division of the Tsha mig tshogs pa he is called sNye mo ba mKhan po Sangs rgyas dpal and his tenure is specified with thirty-seven years. See also above n. 50. Jörg Heimbel 228 8. Yar lungs sNe chung pa mKhan po bSod nams dbang phyug (tenure: 2 years) 11. Yar ’brog sBrang mda’ ba mKhan chen bKra shis tshul khrims (tenure: 8 years; together with his previous term of the gTsang faction total tenure: 24 years) 9. Yar ’brog pa mKhan po bKras tshul (tenure: 1 year) 12. Gra skyid pa Sa ba? Zhig po Tshul rin pa (tenure: 5 years) 10. Zhig po Tshul rin pa 13. ’Khrig pa mKhan chen Sangs rgyas blo gros pa (tenure: 9 years) 11. Sangs rgyas blo gros pa 14. mTshal [= Tsha] mig Khang skya ba Byang chub rgyal dbang pa (tenure: 7 years) 12. rGyal dbang pa 15. Tsha mig pa bKra shis seng ge (tenure: 22 years; d. at age 88) 13. bKra shis seng ge ba 16. Tsha mig Khang skya ba Yon tan rin chen pa (tenure: 7 years) 14. Yon tan rin chen pa 17. sNye mo Bong ra ba Byang chub bzang po (tenure: 13 years; d. at age 90) 15. mKhan po Byang chub bzang po ba (in office during the compilation of the rGya bod yig tshang chen mo in 1434) 18. 19. 20. 21. ’Khrig pa Blo gros rgyal ba (tenure: 18 months) sNye mo Phu sum pa Don grub dpal ’byor ba (tenure: 7 years) Tsha mig pa Byang grags pa (tenure: 12 years) Dwags po Ku ra pa bKra shis byang ba 4. Abbots of the Bye rdzing tshogs pa 1. gZhu sBrags po ba mKhan chen dKon mchog rgyal mtshan (tenure: 10 years) 1. gZhu sGra po ba mKhan po dKon mchog rgyal mtshan (tenure: 10 years) 2. Yar lungs pa Thugs rje dpal (tenure: 22 years) 2. Yar lungs Shel sa mKhan po Thugs rje dpal (tenure: 23 years) 3. bTsan thang pa Dar ma dpal (tenure: 5 years) 3. bTsan thang pa mKhan po Dar ma dpal bzang (tenure: 5 years) 4. Gan pa ba mKhan chen Kun dga’ dpal (tenure: 5 years) 4. Gan pa ba mKhan po Kun dga’ dpal (tenure: 5 years) 5. Thang po che pa mKhan chen gZhon nu bzang po (tenure: 2 years) 5. Yar lung Thang po che pa mKhan po gZhon nu bzang po (tenure: 2 years) 6. Mal gro ba mKhan chen Tshul khrims dpal ba (tenure: 5 years) 6. Mal gro ba mKhan po Tshul khrims dpal (tenure: 15 years) 7. Gan pa ba Kun dga’ dpal (second tenure: 5 years) 8. Shel sgang pa Sangs rgyas gzhon nu (tenure: 22 years) 7. Shel sgangs pa mKhan po Sangs rgyas gzhon nu (tenure: 22) 9. Bla ra ba Dar ma bzang po (tenure: 8 years) 8. Gye re Glang ra ba mKhan po Dar ma bzang po (tenure: 8 years) 10. sBu sde brGya ra ba Tshul khrims mgon pa (tenure: 12 years) 9. sBu sde ba mKhan po Tshul mgon (tenure: 12 years) 11. Shangs Sreg shing pa bSod nams ’od zer (tenure: 5 years) 10. Sreg shing pa mKhan po bSod nams ’od zer (tenure: 15 years) 12. sBu sde Khang gsar ba Rin tshul ba (tenure: 1 year) 11. sBu sde gNas sar pa mKhan po Rin chen tshul khrims (tenure: 1 year) 13. Srin mo mgo dgu’i sGro mangs pa mKhan chen bSod nams shes rab pa (tenure: 13 years) 12. rDzong sGre mang pa mKhan po bSod nams shes rab (tenure: 9 years) 14. Thon pa Sher mgon pa (tenure: 6 years) 13. mThon pa mKhan po Shes rab mgon po (tenure: 25 years) 15. gZhu Gru sna ba Grags bsod pa (tenure: 5 years) 14. gZhu Kun dga’ ra ba mKhan po Grags pa bsod pa (tenure: 7 years) 16. sNye mo lung pa nang gi sNang dge ba Sher ’phags pa (tenure: 5 years) 15. gZhu dGe ba mKhan po Shes rab ’phags pa (tenure: 7 years) 17. sTod lungs Ngang tshang pa Sher tshul ba (tenure: 5 years) 16. gNam Ngang tshangs pa mKhan po Shes rab tshul khrims (tenure: 5 years) The Jo gdan tshogs sde bzhi 229 18. gZhu ’Char khro pa Rin she ba (tenure: 6 years) 17. ’Chad drod pa mKhan po Rin chen shes rab (tenure: 7 years) 19. sNye mo Bong ra ba Chos dpal ba (tenure: 4 years) 18. dMag lam pa mKhan po Chos dpal ba (tenure: 5 years) 20. Thon phu ba Sher ’od pa (tenure: 8 years) 19. mThon pa mKhan po Shes rab ’od pa (tenure: 5 years) 21. gZhu Ne kha pa Kun she ba (tenure: 11 years) 20. gZhu Ne kha ba mKhan po Kun dga shes rab pa (for about 8 years in office during the compilation of the rGya bod yig tshang chen mo in 1434) 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. sTod lungs lCang khog pa Grags rgyal ba (tenure: 5 years) gNam Bla tsho ba Tshul dpal ba (tenure: 6 months) gNam pa Rin grub pa (tenure: 5 years) gZhu sNgags mkhar ba dBang she ba (tenure: 4 years) Zla ba rin chen pa (tenure: 12 years) Byang chub ’od zer ba (tenure: 9 years) bZang she ba (tenure: 9 years) lHun grub rgyal mtshan pa (tenure: until this fire-sheep year (me lug; = 1487) three years have passed since his installation) APPENDIX B Abbots of the the Tshogs dGe ’dun sgang / dGe ’dun sgang pa according to the mKhan rgyud [= brgyud] rnam dag nor bu’i phreng ba’i byon tshul legs pa (= dGe ’dun sgang pa’i mkhan brgyud) 1. mKhan chen Byang chub dpal bzang po (tenure: 32 years, 1224–1255; d. at age 77) 2. mKhan chen gTsang pa dBang phyug grags (tenure: 24 years; d. at age 73) 3. mKhan chen gZhon byang pa (tenure: 54 years; d. at age 79; dbon po of gTsang pa dBang phyug grags) 4. mKhan chen ’Dul tshad pa Byang chub dpal bzang po (tenure: 6 years; d. at age 51; dbon po of gZhon byang) 5. mKhan chen Don grub dpal ba (tenure: 14 years; d. at age 60) 6. mKhan chen Yon rgyal ba (tenure: 19 years; d. at age 69) 7. mKhan chen dPal grub pa (tenure: 11 years; d. at age 81) 8. mKhan chen bKa’ bzhi pa bSod nams bzang po (tenure: 16 years; d. at age 93) 9. mKhan chen Yon blo ba (tenure: 12 years; d. at age 79) 10. mKhan chen brTson rgyal ba (tenure: 5 years; d. at age 71) 11. mKhan chen Seng ge dpal ba (tenure: 8 years; d. at age 59) 12. mKhan chen Chos grub rgyal mtshan pa (tenure: 20 years; d. at age 75) 13. mKhan che Blo rgyal ba (tenure: 1 1/2 years; d. at age 48) 14. mKhan chen Nam mkha’ dpal bzang pa (tenure: 5 years) 15. mKhan chen Yon tan lhun grub pa 230 Jörg Heimbel BIBLIOGRAPHY Tibetan Sources Karma kaṃ tshang gi rnam thar = Si tu Paṇ chen Chos kyi ’byung gnas (1699/1700–1774) and ’Be lo Tshe dbang kun khyab. History of the Karma bKa’-brgyud-pa Sect: Being the text of “sGrub brgyud karma kaṃ tshang brgyud pa rin po che’i rnam par thar pa rab ’byams nor bu zla ba chu sel [sic] phreṅ ba”. 2 vols. New Delhi: D. Gyaltsan and Kesang Legshay, 1972. Kun mkhyen chen po yab sras bco lnga’i rnam thar = Rigs ldan rGyal ba Jo bzang dpal bzang po. Chos kyi rje kun mkhyen chen po yab sras bco lnga’i rnam thar nye bar bsdus pa ngo mtshar rab gsal. In: Kun mkhyen dol po pa shes rab rgyal mtshan gyi gsung ’bum. ’Dzam thang, 199?, vol. 1 (ka), pp. 559–629. TBRC (W21208). dKar chag = Gangs can gyi ljongs su bka’ dang bstan bcos sogs kyi glegs bam spar gzhi ji ltar yod pa rnams nas dkar chag spar thor phyogs tsam du bkod pa phan bde’i pad tshal ’byed pa’i nyin byed. In: Three Karchacks. Edited and reproduced by Ngawang Gelek Demo with an English Introduction by E. Gene Smith. New Delhi: Ngawang Gelek Demo, 1970, pp. 169–[243]. dKon mchog bzang po’i rnam thar 1 = Blo gros rgya mtsho. ’Jam pa’i dbyangs dkon mchog bzang po’i rnam thar dad pa’i ljon shing rgyas byed. dBu med manuscript (85 fols.). TBRC (W1CZ1870). Completed on the twenty-second day of the fifth month of 1478. dKon mchog bzang po’i rnam thar 2 = Jo nang Chos rje bSod nams rgyal mtshan. ’Jam pa’i dbyangs dkon mchog bzang po’i rnam thar dad pa’i ljon shing rgyas pa. In: dPal brtsegs bod yig dpe rnying zhib ’jug khang (ed.), Bod kyi lo rgyus rnam thar phyogs bsgrigs thengs gnyis pa. Xiling: mTsho sngon mi rigs dpe skrun khang, 2011, vol. 54 (yi), pp. 411–451. bKa’ ’gyur ba’i rnam thar = Fifth Dalai Lama Ngag dbang blo bzang rgya mtsho (1617–1682). Dus gsum rgyal ba’i mkhyen brtse nus pa’i rang gzugs dkyil ’khor rgya mtsho’i gtso bo khyab bdag rdo rje sems dpa’i ngo bo mgon po bsod nams mchog ldan bstan pa’i rgyal mtshan dpal bzang po’i rnam par thar pa ngo mtshar dad pa’i rlabs phreng. In: Lam ’bras slob bśad: The Sa-skya-pa teachings of the path and the fruit, according to the Tshar-pa transmission. Dehra Dun: Sakya Centre, 1983–1985, vol. 4 (nga), pp. 499–701. bKa’ gdams chos ’byung = Las chen Kun dga’ rgyal mtshan (1432–1506). bKa’ gdams kyi rnam par thar pa bka’ gdams chos ’byung gsal ba’i sgron me: A detailed account of the spread of the Kadampa sect in Tibet. 2 vols. New Delhi: B. Jamyang Norbu, 1972. bKa’ gdams gsar rnying gi chos ’byung = Paṇ chen bSod nams grags pa (1478–1554). bKa’ gdams gsar rnying gi chos ’byung yid kyi mdzes rgyan. In: The Collected Works (gsung ’bum) of Pan-chen bSodnams-grags-pa. Mundgod: Drepung Loseling Library Service, 1982–1990, vol. 11 (da), pp. 9–331. bKra shis rnam rgyal gyi rnam thar = Karma ’phrin las pa (1456–1539). Kun mkhyen bkra shis rnam rgyal gyi rnam par thar pa ngo mtshar gyi rgya mtsho. In: Sa skya pa’i bla ma kha shas kyi rnam thar bzhugs so|| (kha): Biography of Some Sa-skya-pa Masters. Volume-Kha. Kathmandu: Sa skya rgyal yongs gsung rab slob gnyer khang, 2008, pp. 255–363. Kha che paṇ chen gyi rnam thar 1 = bSod nams dpal bzang po. Sa’i steng na ’gran zla dang bral ba kha che paṇḍi ta shākya shrī bhadra’i rnam thar. In: David P. Jackson (ed.), Two biographies of Śākyaśriībhadra: The eulogy by Khro-phu lo-tsā ba and its “Commentary” by bSod-nams-dpal-bzangpo. Texts and variations from two rare exemplars preserved in the Bihar Research Society, Patna. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag, 1990. Kha che paṇ chen gyi rnam thar 2a = Maṃ ga laṃ tiṣṭha ma kha ārya (bKra shis rab gnas/brtan ’phags?). Kha che paṇ chen gyi rnam thar rin po che’i phreng ba. dBu med manuscript, 35 fols. TBRC (W25588). Kha che paṇ chen gyi rnam thar 2b = Manga laṃ ṭaṣṭhi ma kha o rgyan. Kha che paṇ chen gyi rnam thar rin po che’i phreng ba. In: Sa skya pa min pa’i bla ma kha shas kyi rnam thar bzhugs so|| (ga): Biography of Some Other Masters. Volume-Ga. Kathmandu: Sa skya rgyal yongs gsung rab slob gnyer khang, 2008, pp. 1–83. mKhan brgyud kyi rnam thar = Shākya dGe slong Grags pa rdo rje (b. 1444). mKhan rgyud [= brgyud] rnam gsum byon tshul gyi rnam thar. dBu med manuscript, 25 fols. TBRC (W1CZ1079). mKhan chen chos grub seng ge la bstod pa = Eighth Karma pa Mi bskyod rdo rje (1507–1554). mKhan chen chos grub seng ge la bstod pa. In: Karma bde legs (ed.), dPal rgyal ba karma pa sku ’phreng brgyad pa mi bskyod rdo rje’i gsung ’bum. S.n., 2004, vol. 3 (ga), pp. 183–185.1. TBRC (W8039). mKhas pa’i dga’ ston = dPa’ bo gTsug lag phreng ba (1504–1564/66). Dam pa’i chos kyi ’khor lo bsgyur ba rnams kyi byung ba gsal bar byed pa mkhas pa’i dga’ ston. 2 vols. Beijing: Mi rigs dpe skrun khang, 1986. The Jo gdan tshogs sde bzhi 231 ’Khrul spong rnam rgyal gser mdog = Fifth Dalai Lama Ngag dbang blo bzang rgya mtsho (1617 1682). bsTan pa’i rtsa ba rab byung dang khyim pa la phan gdags pa’i las kyi cho ga mtha’ gcod dang bcas pa ’khrul spong rnam rgyal gser mdog. In: The Collected Works (gSung ’bum) of the Vth Dalai Lama, Ngag-dbang blo-bzang rgya-mtsho. Gangtok: Director, Sikkim Research Institute of Tibetology, 1991– 1995, vol. 14 (pha), pp. 3–530. Glo bo’i mkhan chen rnam thar = Jo nang rJe btsun Kun dga’ grol mchog (1507–1566). dPal ldan bla ma ’jam pa’i dbyangs kyi rnam par thar pa legs bshad khyad par gsum ldan. In: dPal brtsegs bod yig dpe rnying zhib ’jug khang (ed.), Bod kyi lo rgyus rnam thar phyogs bsgrigs thengs gnyis pa. Xiling: mTsho sngon mi rigs dpe skrun khang, 2011, vol. 56 (li), pp. 213–351. dGa’ ldan chos ’byung = sDe srid Sangs gyras rgya mtsho (1653–1705). dGa’ ldan chos ’byung baiḍūrya ser po. Krung go bod kyi shes rig dpe skrun khang, 1998. Third edition. dGe ’dun sgang pa’i mkhan brgyud = mKhan rgyud [= brgyud] rnam dag nor bu’i phreng ba’i byon tshul legs pa. In: dPal brtsegs bod yig dpe rnying zhib ’jug khang (ed.), Bod kyi lo rgyus rnam thar phyogs bsgrigs thengs gnyis pa. Xiling: mTsho sngon mi rigs dpe skrun khang, 2011, vol. 41 (di), pp. 337–341. rGya bod chos ’byung = Khetsün, Shin’i chrio Miyake, Maho Iuchi, and Shoko Mekata (eds.). History of Indo Tibetan Buddhism by dGe ye Tshul khrims seng ge: a Critical and Facsimile Edition of the Tibetan Text with Summary and Index. Tokyo: Otani University Shin Buddhist Comprehensive Research Institute, 2007. rGya bod yig tshang = sTag tshang rDzong pa dPal ’byor bzang po (fl. 15th century). rGyal rabs mang po’i legs bshad rnam grangs yid ’dzin nor bu’i phreng ba. dPal brtsegs bod yig dpe rnying zhib ’jug khang (ed.). Beijing: Krung go’i bod rig pa dpe skrun khang, 2007. rGya bod yig tshang chen mo = sTag tshang rDzong pa dPal ’byor bzang po (fl. 15th century). rGya bod yig tshang mkhas pa dga’ chen mo ’dzam gling gsal ba’i me long. Chengdu: Si khron mi rigs dpe skrun khang, 1985. rGyal gling tshogs pa’i byung ba brjod pa = ’Jigs med dpal ldan bzang po (fl. 20th century). dPal ldan tshogs chen rgyal gling tshogs pa’i byung ba brjod pa don ldan tshangs pa’i sgra dbyangs. Bod ljongs nang bstan, 1992, no. 2, pp. 65–91. sGra sbyor bam po gnyis pa = Sakaki Ryōzaburō (ed.). Honyaku myōgi taishū (Mahāvyutpatti). 2 vols. Tokyo: Kokusho Kankōkai, 1987. Reprint of 1916. Ngor chen gyi rnam thar 1 = Mus chen Sems dpa’ chen po dKon mchog rgyal mtshan (1388–1469). sNyigs dus kyi rdo rje ’chang chen po chos kyi rje kun dga’ bzang po’i rnam par thar pa mdor bsdus pa. In: Lam ’bras slob bśad: The Sa-skya-pa Teachings of the Path and the Fruit, according to the Tshar-pa transmission. Dehra Dun: Sakya Centre, 1983–1985, vol. 1 (ka), pp. 432–473. Ngor chen gyi rnam thar 2 = mNga’ ris pa Sangs rgyas phun tshogs (1649–1705). rDo rje ’chang kun dga’ bzang po’i rnam par thar pa legs bshad chu bo ’dus pa’i rgya mtsho. In: Lam ’bras slob bśad: The Saskya-pa Teachings of the Path and the Fruit, according to the Tshar-pa transmission. Dehra Dun: Sakya Centre, 1983–1985, vol. 1 (ka), pp. 475–585. Ngor chos ’byung = Ngor chen dKon mchog lhun grub (1497–1557) and mNga’ ris pa Sangs rgyas phun tshogs (1649–1705). A History of Buddhism: being the text of Dam pa’i chos kyi ’byuṅ tshul legs par bśad pa bstan pa[’i] rgya mtshor ’jug pa’i gru chen źes bya ba rtsom ’phro kha skoṅ bcas. New Delhi: Ngawang Topgay, 1973. Jo nang chos ’byung = Contributions to the Study of Jo-nang-pa History, Iconography and Doctrine: Selected Writings of ’Dzam-thang Mkhan-po Blo-gros-grags-pa. Introduced by Dr. Matthew Kapstein. 2 vols. Dharamsala: Library of Tibetan Works and Archives, 1993. Jo nang ba’i gdan rabs mdor bsdus = Jo nang mdza’ mthun lo rgyus phyogs sgrig tshogs pa (ed.). Jo nang ba’i gdan rabs mdor bsdus drang srong rgan po’i zhal lung. Beijing: Mi rigs dpe skrun khang, 2005. rNam thar mdor bsdus = Mi nyag mGon po. Gangs can mkhas dbang rim byon gyi rnam thar mdor bsdus bdud rtsi’i thigs phreng, vol. 1 (deb dang po). Beijing: Krung go’i bod kyi shes rig dpe skrun khang, 1996. sNye mo rdzong = Grong khyer lha sa srid gros lo rgyus rig gnas dpyad yig rgyu cha rtom ’bri u yon lhan khang (ed.). Grong khyer lha sa’i lo rgyus rig gnas, Deb dgu pa, sNye mo rdzong. Lhasa: Grong khyer lha sa srid gros lo rgyus rig gnas dpyad yig rgyu cha rtom ’bri u yon lhan khang, 2000. gTam rgyud 1 = dGe ’dun chos ’phel (1903–1951). rGyal khams rig pas bskor ba’i gtam rgyud gser gyi thang ma (stod cha). In: Hor khang bSod nams dpal ’bar et al. (eds.), dGe ’dun chos ’phel gyi gsung rtsom. Lhasa: Bod ljongs bod yig dpe rnying dpe skrun khang, 1990, vol. 1 (deb dang po), pp. [1]–426. gTam rgyud 2 = dGe ’dun chos ’phel (1903–1951). rGyal khams rig pas bskor ba’i gtam rgyud gser gyi thang ma. In: Ngang tshang ’bum skyabs et al. (eds.), mKhas dbang dge ’dun chos ’phel gyi gsung ’bum. Chengdu: Si khron dpe skrun tshogs pa and Si khron mi rigs dpe skrun khang, 2009, vol. 1 (stod cha), pp. [1]–480. 232 Jörg Heimbel bsTan rtsis kun las btus pa = Tshe tan zhabs drung ’Jigs med rig pa’i blo gros (1910–1985). mNyam med shākya’i rgyal po ’das ’khrungs kyi lo tshigs gtsor gyur ba’i bstan rtsis lo sum stong tsam gyi re’u mig gi rnam gzhag mthong tshad kun las gtus pa. In: Rab ’byams rgyal ba’i zhal skyin bka’ drin mtshungs med mkhan chen rdo rje ’chang rje btsun ’jigs med rigs pa’i blo gros dpal bzang po’i gsung ’bum. mThu ba dgon, 2007, vol. 9 (ta), pp. 253–535. TBRC (W1PD94). bsTan rtsis gsal ba’i nyin byed = Mang thos Klu sgrub rgya mtsho (1523–1596). bsTan rtsis gsal ba’i nyin byed lhag bsam rab dkar (published together with Tha snyad rig gnas lnga’i byung tshul blo gsal mgrin rgyan by ’Dar stod dGra ’dul dbang po). Bod rang skyong ljongs spyi tshogs tshan rig khang gi bod yig dpe rnying dpe skrun khang (ed.). Lhasa: Bod ljongs mi dmangs dpe skrun khang, 1987. Thob yig ganggā’i chu rgyun = Fifth Dalai Lama Ngag dbang blo bzang rgya mtsho (1617–1682). Zab pa dang rgya che ba’i dam pa’i chos kyi thob yig ganggā’i chu rgyun. In: The Collected Works (gSung ’bum) of the Vth Dalai Lama, Ngag-dbang blo-bzang rgya-mtsho. Gangtok: Director, Sikkim Research Institute of Tibetology, 1991–1995, vol. 1–4 (ka–nga). Dam pa’i chos ’byung tshul = Tibetan Chronological Tables of ’Jam-dbyaṅs bźad-pa and Sum-pa mkhanpo. Translated into English with critical comments by Alaka Chattopadhyaya in collaboration with Sanjit Kumar Sadhukhan. Sarnath, Varanasi: Central Institute of Higher Tibetan Studies, 1993. Du kū la’i gos bzang = Fifth Dalai Lama Ngag dbang blo bzang rgya mtsho (1617–1682). Za hor gyi ban de ngag dbang blo bzang rgya msho’i ’di snang ’khrul ba’i rol rtsed rtogs brjod kyi tshul du bkod pa du kū la’i gos bzang. 3 vols. Lhasa: Bod ljongs mi dmangs dpe skrun khang, 1991. Dung dkar tshig mdzod = Dung dkar Blo bzang ’phrin las (1927–1997). mKhas dbang dung dkar blo bzang ’phrin las mchog gis mdzad pa’i bod rig pa’i tshig mdzod chen mo shes bya rab gsal. Beijing: Krung go’i bod rig pa dpe skrun khang, 2002. Dus ’khor chos ’byung 1 = Chag lo Rin chen chos rgyal (b. 1447). dPal dus kyi ’khor lo’i brgyud pa rin po che’i rtogs brjod dpag bsam snye ma. In: dPal brtsegs bod yig dpe rnying zhib ’jug khang (ed.), Bod kyi lo rgyus rnam thar phyogs bsgrigs thengs dang po. Xiling: mTsho sngon mi rigs dpe skrun khang, 2010, vol. 19 (dza), pp. 1–458. Dus ’khor chos ’byung 2 = A myes zhabs Ngag dbang kun dga’ bsod nams (1597–1659). dPal ’dus kyi ’khor lo’i zab pa dang rgya che ba’i dam pa’i chos byung ba’i tshul legs par bshad pa ngo mtshar dad pa’i shing rta. In: dPal sa skya pa chen po sngags ’chang bla ma thams cad mkhyen pa ngag dbang kun dga’ bsod nams kyi gsung ’bum. Kathamndu: Sa skya rgyal yongs gsung rab slob gnyer khang, 2000, vol. 19 (dza), pp. 1–531. Deb ther sngon po = ’Gos Lo tsā ba gZhon nu dpal (1392–1481). Deb ther sngon po. 2 vols. Chengdu: Si khron mi rigs dpe skrun khang, 1984. Deb ther dmar po = Tshal pa Kun dga’ rdo rje (1309–1364). Deb ther dmar po rnams kyi dang po hu lan deb ther. Dung dkar blo bzang ’phrin las kyis mchan ’grel bkod. Beijing: Mi rigs dpe skrun khang, 1981. Dol po pa’i rnam thar = Kun spangs Chos grags dpal bzang po (1283–1363?). Chos rje kun mkhyen chen po’i rnam thar gsal sgron gyi rnam grangs dge legs chen po’i nor bu’i ’phreng ba. In: Kun mkhyen dol po pa shes rab rgyal mtshan gyi gsung ’bum. ’Dzam thang, 199?, vol. 1 (ka), pp. 235–557. TBRC (W21208). ’Dul ba’i chos ’byung = Tshe mchog gling Yongs ’dzin Ye shes rgyal mtshan (1713–1793). rGyal ba’i bstan pa’i nang mdzod dam pa’i chos ’dul ba’i byung tshul brjod pa rgyal bstan rin po che’i gsal byed nyin mo byed pa’i snang ba. In: gsung ’bum / ye shes rgyal mtshan: the collected works (gsung ’bum) of tshe-mchog-glin [sic] yons [sic]-’dzin ye-ses [sic]-rgyal mtshan. Originally published 1974. Originally reproduced from a set of the tshe mchog gling blocks by Tibet House Library, New Delhi, and scanned for the Tibetan Buddhist Resource Center, New York, vol. 6 (pod drug pa), pp. 1–307. TBRC (W1022). rDo rje sgrol ma. Kha che paṇ chen shākya shrī’i ’khrungs ’das kyi lo tshigs la mdo tsam dpyad pa. In: dPal brtsegs bod yig dpe rnying zhib ’jug khang (ed.), Sa mtho’i bu mo, vol. 1 (spyi’i deb grangs dang po). Beijing: Krun go’i bod rig pa dpe skrun khang, 2008, pp. 75–79. sDom gsum rnam nges kyi ’grel pa = sMin gling Lo chen Dharma shrī (1654–1717/18). sDom pa gsum rnam par nges pa’i ’grel pa legs bshad ngo mtshar dpag bsam gyi snye ma. In: Lo chen dharma shrī’i gsung ’bum. Dehra Dun: D. G. Khochen Tulku, 1999, vol. 6 (cha), fols. 1a–342a. sDom gsum rnam nges kyi ’bru ’grel = bDud ’joms ’Jigs bral ye shes rdo rje (1904–1987). sDom gsum rnam par nges pa’i bstan bcos kyi ’bru ’grel blo gros gsar bu’i yid kyi gdung sel legs bshad bdu rtsi’i za ma tog. In: The Collected Works & Revelations of His Holiness bDud-’joms Rin-po-che ’Jigs-bral-yeses[sic]-rdo-rje. New Delhi: Yashodhara Publications (Siddharta’s Intent), 1999, vol. 4 (nga), pp. 1– 407. Second reprint. The Jo gdan tshogs sde bzhi 233 sDom gsum rab dbye legs par bshad pa = sPos khang pa Rin chen rgyal mtshan (1348–1430). sDom pa gsum gyi rab tu dbye ba’i gzhung lugs legs par bshad pa. 3 vols. Thimpu: Kunsang Topgyal and Mani Dorji, 1979. gNas bskor bskyod pa’i nyin deb = Tshong dpon Kha stag ’ Dzam yag. Phyi lo 1944 nas 1956 bar bod dang bal po rgya gar bcas la gnas bskor bskyod pa’i nyin deb: A Pilgrim’s Diary: Tibet, Nepal & India 1944– 1956. New Delhi: Acharya Jamyang Wangyal, 1997. gNas gsar ba’i chen po’i rnam thar = Sa skya bDag chen Gong ma Kun dga’ blo gros (1729–1783). Khyab bdag rdo rje ’chang ngur smrig gi blo gsal ’chang pa dpal gnas gsar ba chen po ’jam mgon bla ma thams cad mkhyen pa legs pa’i mtshan gyi zhal snga nas kyi rnam par thar pa ngo mtshar rab ’byams. In: Lam ’bras slob bśad: The Sa-skya-pa teachings of the path and the fruit, according to the Tshar-pa transmission. Dehra Dun: Sakya Centre, 1983–1985, vol. 6 (cha), pp. 1–299. Pod chen drug gi ’bel gtam = mKhan po Ngag dbang chos grags (1572–1641). Bod kyi mkhas pa snga phyi dag gi grub mtha’i shan ’byed mtha’ dpyod dang bcas pa’i ’bel pa’i gtam skyes dpyod ldan mkhas pa’i lus rgyan rin chen mdzes pa’i phra tshom bkod pa. Thimpu: Kunsang Topgyel and Mani Dorji, 1979. dPal ldan tshul khrims kyi rnam thar = Mus chen dKon mchog rgyal mtshan (1388–1469). Bla ma dam pa dpal ldan tshul khrims pa’i rnam thar. In: Lam ’bras slob bśad: The Sa-skya-pa teachings of the path and the fruit, according to the Tshar-pa transmission. Dehra Dun: Sakya Centre, 1983–1985, vol. 1 (ka), pp. 406.2–413.5. dPe rnying dkar chag = sKa ba Shes rab bzang po (ed.). Bod khul gyi chos sde grags can khag gi dpe rnying dkar chag. Beijing: Mi rigs dpe skrung khang, 2010. dPyid kyi rgyal mo’i glu dbyangs = Fifth Dalai Lama Ngag dbang blo bzang rgya mtsho (1617–1682). Gangs can yul gyi sa la spyod pa’i mtho ris kyi rgyal blon gtso bor brjod pa’i deb ther rdzogs ldan gzhon nu’i dga’ ston dpyid kyi rgyal mo’i glu dbyangs. Beijing: Mi rigs dpe skrun khang, 1980. Second edition. sPos khang tshogs pa’i lo rgyus mdor bsdus = gZhis sa gnas pa snam rdzong byang stod shang spos khang tshon spos khang dgon dmangs bdag tshogs chung. sPos khang tshogs pa’i lo rgyus mdor bsdus. gZhis sa gnas pa snam rdzong byang stod shang spos khang tshon spos khang dgon dmangs bdag tshogs chung, 2002. (Two page history of sPos khang displayed at sPos khang monastery). Bu ston chos ’byung = János Szerb (ed.). Bu ston’s History of Buddhism in Tibet. Wien: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1990. Bod kyi lo rgyus = Chab spel Tshe brtan phun tshogs and Nor brang O rgyan (eds.). Bod kyi lo rgyus rags rim g.yu’i phreng ba. 3 vols. Lhasa: Bod ljongs dpe rnying dpe skrun khang, 1989–1991. Bod rgya tshig mdzod chen mo = Krang dbyi sun et al. Bod rgya tshig mdzod chen mo. 3 vols. Beijing: Mi rigs dpe skrun khang, 1985. Bai ḍūrya dkar po = sDe srid Sangs rgyas rgya mtsho (1653–1705). The Vaiḍūrya dkar po of sDe-srid Saṅs-rgyas-rgya-mtsho: The Fundamental Treatise on Tibetan Astrology and Calendrical Calculations. 2 vols. New Delhi: T. Tsepal Taikhang, 1972. dBus gtsang gi gnas rten rags rim gyi mtshan byang = ’Jam dbyangs mKhyen brtse’i dbang po (1820– 1892). dBus gtsang gi gnas rten rags rim gyi mtshan byang mdor bsdus dad pa’i sa bon. In: Sa skya’i dpe rnying bsdu sgrig khang (ed.), Sa skya’i chos ’byung gces bsdus. Beijing: Krung go’i bod rig pa dpe skrun khang, 2009, vol. 6 (deb drug pa), pp. 193–220. dBus gtsang gnas yig = Kaḥ thog Si tu Chos kyi rgya mtsho (1880–1923/25). Si tu pa chos kyi rgya mtsho’i gangs ljongs dbus gtsang gnas bskor lam yig nor bu zla shel gyi se mo do. Chengdu: Si kron mi rigs dpe skrun khang, 2001. Bla ma dam pa’i rnam thar = Lo chen Byang chub rtse mo (1303/15–1379/80). Chos rje dpal ldan bla ma dam pa’i rnam thar thog mtha’ bar gsum du dge ba. dBu med manuscript, 67 fols. TBRC (W1CZ1868). Mang thos kyi rang rnam = Mang thos Klu sgrub rgya mtsho (1523–1596). Rang gi rnam par thar pa yul sna tshogs kyi bdud rtsi myong ba’i gtam du byas pa zol zog rdzun gyis ma bslad pa sgeg mo’i me long. In: Lam ’bras slob bśad: The Sa-skya-pa teachings of the path and the fruit, according to the Tshar-pa transmission. Dehra Dun: Sakya Centre, 1983–1985, vol. 3 (ga), pp. 395–625. Myang chos ’byung = (ascribed to) Jo nang rJe btsun Tāranātha (1575–1634). Myang yul stod smad bar gsum gyi ngo mtshar gtam gyi legs bshad mkhas pa’i ’jug ngogs. Lhasa: Bod ljongs mi dmangs dpe skrun khang, 2002. Second edition. Tsong kha pa’i rnam thar 1 = Cha har dGe bshes Blo bzang tshul khrims (1740–1810). rJe thams cad mkhyen pa tsong kha pa chen po’i rnam thar go sla bar brjod pa bde legs kun gyi ’byung gnas. Beijing: Krung go’i bod rig pa dpe skrun khang, 2006. Tsong kha pa’i rnam thar 2 = rGyal dbang Chos rje Blo bzang ’phrin las rnam rgyal (fl. 19th century). ’Jam mgon chos kyi rgyal po tsong kha pa chen po’i rnam thar thub bstan mdzes pa’i rgyan gcig ngo mtshar nor bu’i phreng ba dang mdzad rnam zhal thang. Ser gtsug nang bstan dpe rnying ’tshol bsdu phyogs sgrig khang (ed.). Lhasa: Bod ljongs mi dmangs dpe skrun khang, 2009. 234 Jörg Heimbel Tsong kha pa’i rnam thar 3 = mKhas grub rJe dGe legs dpal bzang (1385–1438). rJe btsun bla ma tsong kha pa chen po’i ngo mtshar rmad du byung ba’i rnam par thar pa dad pa’i ’jug ngogs. In: The Collected Works (gSuṅ ’bum) of the Imconparable Lord Tsoṅ-kha-pa Blo-bzaṅ-grags-pa. New Delhi: Mongolian Lama Gurudeva, 1978–1979, vol. 1 (ka), pp. 5–146. Tsong kha pa’i gsan yig = Tsong kha pa Blo bzang grags pa (1357–1419). rJe rin po che blo bzang grags pa’i dpal gyi gsan yig. In: The Collected Works (gSuṅ ’bum) of the Imconparable Lord Tsoṅ-kha-pa Blobzaṅ-grags-pa. New Delhi: Mongolian Lama Gurudeva, 1978–1979, vol. 1 (ka), pp. 235–288. rTse tshogs dgon gyi rtsa che’i nang rten = Bu bzang. sNe gdong rtse tshogs dgon gyi rtsa che’i nang rten ’ga’ zhig gi skor brjod pa. Bod ljongs nang bstan, 2008, no. 1, pp. 53–58. Zhwa lu gdan rabs = Zhwa lu Ri sbug sPrul sku Blo gsal bstan skyong (b. 1804). On the History of the Monastery of Zhwa-lu: being the texts of the Zhwa lu gdan rabs and the Autobiography by Zhwa-lu–Risbug Sprul-sku Blo-gsal-bstan-skyong. Leh: Tashi Yangphel Tashigang, 1971. gZhis rtse sa khul gyi gnas yig = Chos ’phel (b. 1945). Gangs can bod kyi lam yig gsar ma: gZhis rtse sa khul gyi gnas yig. Beijing: Mi rigs dpe skrun khang, 2008. Yar lung chos ’byung = Yar lung Jo bo Shākya Rin chen sde (fl. 14th century). Yar lung jo bo’i chos ’byung. Lhasa: Bod ljongs mi dmangs dpe skrun khang, 1988. Rang tshul drangs por brjod pa = Si tu Paṇ chen Chos kyi ’byung gnas (1699/1700–1774). The Autobiography and Diaries of Si-tu Paṇ-chen. Edited by Lokesh Chandra with a foreword by E. Gene Smith. New Delhi: International Academy of Indian Culture, 1968. Rab brtan kun bzang ’phags kyi rnam thar = ’Jigs med grags pa. rGyal rtse chos rgyal gyi rnam par thar pa dad pa’i lo thog dngos grub kyi char ’bebs. Lhasa: Bod ljongs mi dmangs dpe skrun khang, 1987. Rab ’byor seng ge’i rnam thar = Fourth Zhwa dmar Chos rgyags ye shes (1453–1524). dPal ldan bla ma dam pa chos kyi rje rab ’byor seng ge’i zhal snga nas kyi rnam par thar pa che long tsam smos pa. In: Yangs can dgon ris med dpe ryning myur skyobs khang (ed.), Thams cad mkhyen pa 7 zhwa dmar bzhi pa spyan snga chos kyi grags pa’i gsung ’bum. Beijing: Krung go’i bod rig pa dpe skrun khang, 2009, vol. 4 (ja and nya), pp. 486–491. Rig pa’i seng ge’i rnam thar = Seng ge bzang po. mKhan chen bka’ bzhi pa chen po rig pa’i seng ge’i rnam par thar pa yon tan rin po che’i rgya mtsho. In: Mi nyag mkhas dbang lnga’i rnam thar. Chengdu: Si khron mi rigs dpe skrun khang, 1986, pp. [37]–115. Rin chen bsod nams mchog grub kyi rnam thar = Fifth Dalai Lama Ngag dbang blo bzang rgya mtsho (1617–1682). Dus gsum gyi bde bar gshegs pa ma lus pa’i ngo bo khyab bdag rin chen bsod nams mchog grub bstan pa’i rgyal mtshan dpal bzang po’i rnam par thar pa dpyod ldan yid dbang ’gugs pa’i lcags kyu. In: Lam ’bras slob bśad: The Sa-skya-pa teachings of the path and the fruit, according to the Tshar-pa transmission. Dehra Dun: Sakya Centre, 1983–1985, vol. 5 (ca), pp. 1–109. Ris med chos ’byung = ’Jam mgon Kong sprul Blo gros mtha’ yas (1813–1899). Ris med chos kyi’byung gnas mdo tsam smos pa blo gsal mgrin pa’i mdzes rgyan. In: rGya chen bka’ mdzod: The expanded edition of the writings of ’jam mgon kong sprul blo gros mtha’ yas (1813–1899). New Delhi: Shechen Publications, 2002, vol. 5 (ca), pp. 859–889. Lam rim bla brgyud kyi rnam thar = Tshe mchog gling Yongs ’dzin Ye shes rgyal mtshan (1713–1793). Lam rim bla ma brgyud pa’i rnam thar. 2 vols. ’Bar khams: rNga khul bod yig rtsom sgyur cus, 198?. TBRC (W2DB4613). Shar chen gyi rnam thar = Ngor chen Kun dga’ bzang po (1382–1465). Chos kyi rgyal po dpal ldan bla ma dam pa thams cad mkhyen pa’i rnam par thar pa dad pa rgyas byed. In: dPal brtsegs bod yig dpe rnying zhib ’jug khang (ed.), E waṃ bka’ ’bum. Beijing: Krung go’i bod rig pa dpe skrun khang, 2010, vol. 8, pp. 220–261. Shar pa gdung rabs = rTa nag mKhan chen Ngag dbang brtan pa’i rdo rje (b. 1584). dPal chos kyi rje ’jig rten gsum gyi yongs su ’dren pa shar chen chos kyi rgyal po’i yon tan rgya mtsho gsal bar byed pa’i rnam par thar pa ye shes chen po’i glu dbyangs. In: mKhan chen A pad Rin po che (ed.), gSung ngag lam ’bras tshogs bshad chen mo: The Great Collection of the Lamdre Tsogshe Teachings. Kathmandu: Sachen International (rGyal yongs sa chen), 2008, vol. 28 (sa), pp. 631–719. Shes bya kun khyab = Kong sprul Yon tan rgya mtsho (1813–1899). Theg pa’i sgo kun las btus pa gsung rab rin po che’i mdzod bslab pa gsum legs par ston pa’i bstan bcos shes bya kun khyab. Beijing: Mi rigs dpe skrun khang, 2002. Sa skya gdung rabs = A myes zhabs Ngag dbang kun dga’ bsod nams (1597–1659). ’Dzam gliṅ byaṅ phyogs kyi thub pa’i rgyal tshab chen po dpal ldan sa skya pa’i gduṅ rabs rin po che ji ltar byon pa’i tshul gyi rnam par thar pa ṅo mtshar rin po che’i baṅ mdzod dgos ’dod kun ’byuṅ: A history of the ’Khon lineage of prince-abbots of Sa-skya. New Delhi: Tashi Dorji, 1975. gSang sngags gsar rnying gdan rabs = ’Jam dbyangs mKhyen brtse’i dbang po (1820–1892). Gangs can bod kyi yul du byon pa’i gsang sngags gsar rnying gi gdan rabs mdor bsdus ngo mtshar padmo’i dga’ The Jo gdan tshogs sde bzhi 235 tshal. In: mKhyen-brtse on the History of the Dharma. Leh: S. W. Tashigangpa and B. P. O. Nemo, 1972, pp. 1–207. gSang ’dus chos ’byung = A myes zhabs Ngag dbang kun dga’ bsod nams (1597–1659). dPal gsaṅ ba ’dus pa’i dam pa’i chos byuṅ ba’i tshul legs par bśad pa gsaṅ ’dzus chos kun gsal ba’i ñin byed [and] dPal gsaṅ ba ’dus pa’i dkyil ’khor ’khor lo sgrub pa’i thabs rnam par bśad pa ṅes don phrin las rgy mtsho’i ’byuṅ gnas: A history and detailed exegesis of the Guhyasamāja tantric cycle in India and Tibet and its practice. Dehradun: Sakya Centre, 1985. gSung ’bum = Fifth Dalai Lama Ngag dbang blo bzang rgya mtsho (1617–1682). rGyal dbang lnga pa ngag dbang blo bzang rgya mtsho’i gsung ’bum. 28 vols. Beijing: Krung go’i bod rig pa dpe skrun khang, 2009. bSod nams rgya mtsho’i rnam thar = Fourth Zhwa dmar Chos rgyags ye shes (1453–1524). rJe thams cad mkhyen pa lo tsā pa [sic] chen po’i rnam par thar pa ngo mtshar rgya mtso. In: Yangs can dgon ris med dpe ryning myur skyobs khang (ed.), Thams cad mkhyen pa 7 zhwa dmar bzhi pa spyan snga chos kyi grags pa’i gsung ’bum. Beijing: Krung go’i bod rig pa dpe skrun khang, 2009, vol. 4 (ja and nya), pp. 272–458. bSod nams rnam rgyal gyi rnam thar = Byang chub rnam rgyal dge legs. dPal byams pa gling pa chen po’i rnam par thar pa ngo mtshar gyi phreng ba. dBu med manuscript, 95 fols. TBRC (W26621). bSod nams bzang po’i rnam thar = dKa’ bzhi ’dzin pa Yon tan bzang po. dPal ldan bla ma rin po che bsod nams bzang po la rnam thar gyi sgo nas stod [= bstod] pa dngos grub kyi [= gyi] char gnas. In: dPal brtsegs bod yig dpe rnying zhib ’jug khang (ed.), Bod kyi lo rgyus rnam thar phyogs bsgrigs thengs gnyis pa. Xiling: mTsho sngon mi rigs dpe skrun khang, 2011, vol. 54 (yi), pp. 215–296. lHa bla ma ye shes ’od kyi rnam thar = Gu ge Paṇḍi ta Grags pa rgyal mtshan (1415–1486). lHa bla ma ye shes ’od kyi rnam thar rgyas pa. In: dPal brtsegs bod yig dpe rnying zhib ’jug khang (ed.), Bod kyi lo rgyus rnam thar phyogs bsgrigs thengs gnyis pa. Xiling: mTsho sngon mi rigs dpe skrun khang, 2011, vol. 43 (pi), pp. 273–355. lHa sa sa khul gyi gnas yig = Chos ’phel (b. 1945). Gangs can bod kyi gnas bshad lam yig gsar ma: lHa sa sa khul gyi gnas yig. Beijing: Mi rigs dpe skrun khang, 2004. lHa sa’i dgon tho = bShes gnyen Tshul khrims (b. 1951; ed.). lHa sa’i dgon tho rin chen spungs rgyan. Lhasa: Bod ljongs mi dmangs dpe skrun khang, 2001. lHo kha sa khul gyi gnas yig = Chos ’phel (b. 1945 ). Gangs can ljongs kyi gnas bshad lam yig gsar ma: lHo kha sa khul gyi gnas yig. Beijing: Mi rigs dpe skrun khang, 2002. lHo khar gnas pa’i tshogs pa sde bzhi = Bu bzang. lHo khar gnas pa’i tshogs pa sde bzhi’i skor rags tsam brjod pa. Bod ljongs nan bstan, 2012, no. 1 (dus deb dang po), pp. 53–57. Non-Tibetan Sources Bapat, P.V. Vimuttimagga and Visuddhimagga: A Comparative Study. Poona: P. V. Bapat, 1937. — Vimuktimārga dhutaguṇa-nirdeśa: A Tibetan Text Critically Edited and Translated into English. Bombay: Asia Publishing House, 1964. Bhikku Ñāṇamoli. The Path of Purification (Visuddhimagga) by Bhadantācariya Buddhaghosa. Translated from the Pali by Bhikku Ñāṇamoli. Seattle: BPS Pariyatti Editions, 1999. Reprint of 1975. Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit = Edgerton, Franklin. Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit Grammar and Dictionary. Volume 2: Dictionary. Kyoto: Rinsen Book Co., 1985. Reprint of 1953. Caumanns, Volker. Der Mahāpaṇḍita des Klosters gSer-mdog-can: Leben und Werk des Sa-skya-Meisters Shākya-mchog-ldan (1428–1507). Inaugural-Dissertation zur Erlangung des Doktorgrades der Philosophie an der Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, 2012. Chan, Victor. Tibet Handbook: A Pilgrimage Guide. Chico: Moon Publications, 1994. Das, Saras Chandra. Journey to Lhasa and Central Tibet. Edited by the Hon. W. W. Rockhill. London: John Murray, 1902. Dayal, Har. The Bodhisattva Doctrine in Buddhist Sanskrit Literature. Delhi, Patna, and Varanasi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1970. First published 1932. Dowman, Keith. The Power-Places of Central Tibet: The Pilgrim’s Guide. New Delhi: Timeless Books, 1996. First published 1988. Rev. N. R. M. Ehara, Soma Thera, and Kheminda Thera. The Path of Freedom by the Arahant Upatissa. Translated into Chinese (Gedatsu Dō Ron) by Tipiṭaka Sanghapāla of Funan. Translated from the Chinese by Rev. N. R. M. Ehara, Soma Thera and Kheminda Thera. Ceylon: Dr. D. Roland D. Weerasuria, 1961. Ehrhard, Franz-Karl. Life and Travels of Lo-chen bSod-nams rgya-mtsho. Lumbini: Lumbini International Research Institute, 2002. 236 Jörg Heimbel — “The Holy Madman of dBus and His Relationship with Tibetan Rulers of the 15th and 16th Centuries.” In: Peter Schalk (ed.), Geschichten und Geschichte: Historiographie und Hagiographie in der asiatischen Religionsgeschichte. Uppsala: Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis, 2010: [219]–246. Fermer, Mathias. The Life and Works of Gong dkar rDo rje gdan pa Kun dga’ rnam rgyal (1432–1496). Thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Magister Artium at the Department of Indian and Tibetan Studies (Asien-Afrika-Institut), University of Hamburg, 2010 (slightly revised version). Ferrari, Alfonso. mK’yen brtse’s Guide to the Holy Places of Central Tibet. Completed and edited by Luciano Petech with the collaboration of Hugh Richardson. Roma: Istituto Italiano Per Il Medio Ed Estremo Oriente, 1958. Gyurme Dorje. Footprint Tibet. Bath: Footprint, 2004. Third edition. HAR = Himalyan Art Resources. http://www.himalayanart.org/ (accessed January 29, 2013). Heimbel, Jörg. “Biographical Sources for Researching the Life of Ngor chen Kun dga’ bzang po (1382– 1456).” Revue d’Etudes Tibétaines, vol. 22, November 2011, pp. [47]–91. http://himalaya.socanth.cam.ac.uk/ collections/journals/ret/pdf/ret_22_03.pdf (accessed January 29, 2013). Also published in: Marc-Henri Deroche et al. (eds.), Revisiting Tibetan Religion and Philosophy, Proceedings of the Second International Seminar of Young Tibetologists, Paris, 2009. Part II. Dharamshala: Amnye Machen Institute, 2012, pp. [47]–91. Jackson, David P. The Entrance Gate for the Wise (Section III): Sa-skya Paṇḍita on Indian and Tibetan Traditions of Pramāṇa and Philosophical Debate. 2 vols. Wien: Arbeitskreis für Tibetische und Buddhistische Studien, Universität Wien, 1987. — Two biographies of Śākyaśriībhadra: The eulogy by Khro-phu lo-tsā ba and its “Commentary” by bSodnams-dpal-bzang-po. Texts and variations from two rare exemplars preserved in the Bihar Research Society, Patna. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag, 1990a. — “Sa-skya Paṇḍita the ‘Polemicist’: Ancient Debates and Modern Interpretations.” Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies, vol. 13, 1990b, no. 2: 17–116. — “Some Karma Kagyupa Paintings in the Rubin Collection.” In: Rhie, Marylin M. and Robert A. F. Thurman, Worlds of Transformation: Tibetan Art of Wisdom and Compassion. New York: Tibet House in association with The Shelley and Donald Rubin Foundation, 1999: 75–122. — Patron and Painter: Situ Panchen and the Revival of the Encampment Style. With an Essay by Karl Debreczeny. New York: Rubin Museum of Art, 2009. — “Preserving Endangered Ordination Traditions in the Sakya School.” In: Thea Mohr and Jampa Tsedroen (eds.), Dignity & Discipline: Reviving Full Ordination for Buddhist Nuns. Boston: Wisdom Publications, 2010a: [211]–215 and [291]–304. — The Nepalese Legacy in Tibetain Painting. New York: Rubin Museum of Art, 2010b. — Mirror of the Buddha: Early Portraits from Tibet. With Contributions by Christian Luczanits. New York: Rubin Museum of Art, 2011. Kaschewsky, Rudolf. Das Leben des Lamaistischen Heiligen Tsongkhapa Blo-bzaṅ-grags-pa (1357–1419) dargestellt und erläutert anhand seiner Vita »Quellort allen Glückes«. 1. Teil: Übersetzung und Kommentar. 2. Teil: Faksimiles. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag, 1971. van der Kuijp, Leonard W. J. “On the Lives of Śākyaśriībhadra (?–?1225).” Journal of the American Oriental Society, vol. 114, 1994, no. 4: 599–616. — “On the Fifteenth Century Lho rong chos ’byung by Rta tshag Tshe dbang rgyal and Its Importance for Tibetan Political and Religious History.” Lungta, 2001, no. 14: 57–76. — “On the Composition and Printings of the Deb gter sngon po by ’Gos lo tsā ba gzhon nu dpal (1392– 1481).” Journal of the International Association of Tibetan Studies, 2006, no. 2: [1]–46. http://www.thlib.org/ ?tid=T2714 (accessed January 29, 2013). Lo Bue, Erberto. “The Princes of Gyantse and their Role as Builders and Patrons of Arts.” In: Shōren Ihara and Zuihō Yamaguchi (eds.), Tibetan Studies: Proceedings of the 5th Seminar of the International Association for Tibetan Studies, Narita 1989. Volume 2: Language, History and Culture. Narita: Naritasan Shinshoji, 1992: [559]–573. Lo Bue, Erberto and Franco Ricca. Gyantse Revisited. Firenze /Csemeo - Torino: Casa Editrice Le Lettere, 1990. de Nebesky-Wojkowitz, Réne. Oracles and Demons of Tibet: The Cult and Iconography of the Tibetan Protective Deities. New Delhi: Book Faith India, 1996. Second reprint. First edition 1956. Pakhoutova, Elena. “A Wondrous Great Accomplishment: a Painting of an Event.” In: Amy Heller (ed.), The Arts of Tibetan Painting: Recent Research on Manuscripts, Murals and Thangkas of Tibet, the Himalayas and Mongolia (11th-19th century). http://www.asianart.com/articles/pakhoutova/index.html (accessed January 29, 2013). The Jo gdan tshogs sde bzhi 237 Ricca, Franco and Erberto Lo Bue. The Great Stupa of Gyantse: A Complete Tibetan Pantheon of the Fifteenth Century. London: Serindia Publications, 1993. Roerich, Georg N. The Blue Annals. Parts I & II (Bound in one). New Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Publishers Private Limited, 1996. First edition: Calcutta, 1949. Roloff, Carola. Red mda’ ba: Buddhist Yogi-Scholar of the Fourteenth Century. The Forgotten Reviver of Madhyamaka Philosophy in Tibet. Wiesbaden: Dr. Ludwig Reichert Verlag, 2009. Ruegg, D. Seyfort. The Life of Bu ston Rin po che. Roma: Istituto Italiano Per Il Medio Ed Estremo Oriente, 1966. — “Notes on some Indian and Tibetan Reckonings of the Buddha’s Nirvāṇa and the Duration of his Teaching.” In: Heinz Bechert (ed.), The Dating of the Historical Buddha / Die Datierung des historischen Buddha, Part 2. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1992: [263]–290. Sāṅkrityāyana, Rāhula. “Search for Sanskrit MSS. in Tibet.” Journal of the Bihar and Orissa Research Society, vol. XXIV, 1938, part IV, pp. [137]–163. Schuh, Dieter. Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der Tibetischen Kalenderrechnung. Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner Verlag GmbH, 1973. Sørensen, Per K. and Guntram Hazod in cooperation with Tsering Gyalbo. Thundering Falcon: An Inquiry into the History and Cult of Khra-’brug, Tibet’s First Buddhist Temple. Wien: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 2005. — Rulers on the Celestial Plain: Ecclesiastic and Secular Hegemony in Medieval Tibet. A Study of Tshal Gung-thang. 2 vols. Wien: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 2007. Stearns, Cyrus. King of the Empty Plain: The Tibetan Iron-Bridge Builder Tangtong Gyalpo. Ithaca and Boulder: Snow Lion Publications, 2007. — “Jamyang Konchog Zangpo,” Treasury of Lives, 2008a. http://dev.treasuryoflives.org/biographies/view/ Jamyang-Konchok-Zangpo/4168 (accessed January 29, 2013). — “Sonam Zangpo,” Treasury of Lives, 2008b. http://www.treasuryoflives.org/biographies/view/Sonam-Zangpo/4164 (accessed January 29, 2013). — The Buddha from Dölpo: A Study of the Life and Thought of the Tibetan Master Dölpopa Sherab Gyaltsen. Revised and enlarged edition. Ithaca: Snow Lion Publications, 2010. Stoddard, Heather. “‘Rekindling The Flame’, A Note on Royal Patronage in Tenth Century Tibet.” In: Christoph Cüppers (ed.), The Relationship Between Religion and State (chos srid zung ’brel) In Traditional Tibet. Proceedings of a Seminar Held in Lumbini, Nepal, March 2000. Lumbini: Lumbini International Research Institute, 2004: 49–104. TBRC = Tibetan Buddhist Resource Center. http://www.tbrc.org (accessed January 29, 2013). Tibetan-English Dictionary = Das, Sarat Chandra, Rai Bahadur, C. I. E. A Tibetan-English Dictionary. Revised and Edited under the orders of the Government of Bengal by Graham Sandberg, B. A., and A. William Heyde. Calcutta: Bengal Secretariat Book Depot, 1902. Tucci, Giuseppe. To Lhasa and Beyond: Diary of the Expedition to Tibet in the Year MCMXLVIII. With an Appendix on Tibetan Medicine and Hygiene by R. Moise. Translated by Mario Carelli. Roma: Istituto Poligrafico Dello Stato and Libreria Dello Stato, 1956. — Deb T’er dmar po gsar ma: Tibetan Chronicles by bSod nams grags pa. Vol. 1: Tibetan Text, Emendations to the Text, English Translation and an Appendix containing two Minor Chronicles. Roma: Istituto Italiano Per Il Medio Ed Estremo Oriente, 1971. — Gyantse and Its Monasteries. English Version of Indo-Tibetica IV.1, edited by Lokesh Chandra, from a first draft translation by Uma Marina Vesci. 3 vols. New Delhi: Aditya Prakashan, 1989. First published in Italian, Roma: Reale Accademia d’Italia, 1941. — Tibetan Painted Scrolls. 3 vols. Bangkok: SDI Publications, 1999. First edition 1949. Uebach, Helga. Nel-pa Paṇḍitas Chronik Me-tog phreṅ-ba. Handschrift in der Library of Tibetan Works and Archives. Tibetischer Text in Faksimile, Transkription und Übersetzung. München: Kommission für Zentralasiatische Studien, Bayerische Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1987. 238 Jörg Heimbel PLATES Image 1: The rGyal gling tshogs pa in Grwa nang, ’Du khang Image 2: The rGyal gling tshogs pa in Grwa nang, ’Du khang The Jo gdan tshogs sde bzhi Image 3: The Tshong ’dus tshogs pa in Grwa phyi, ’Du khang Image 4: Mural of Hevajra in the ’Du khang of the Tshong ’dus tshogs pa 239 240 Jörg Heimbel Image 5: Mural of Śākyaśrī in the ’Du khang of the Tshong ’dus tshogs pa Image 6: Lam ’bras Lineage in the skylight of the ’Du khang of the Tshong ’dus tshogs pa The Jo gdan tshogs sde bzhi 241   Image 7: A Tibetan master wearing the special upper dress of the Jo gdan tshogs sde bzhi. Mural in the ’Du khang of the rGyal gling tshogs pa Image 8: The rTse tshogs pa at sNe’u gdong Image 9: The ’khar gsil housed at sPos khang that is said to have once belonged to Śākyaśrī 242 Jörg Heimbel  

RELATED PAPERS

Quality of Life Research an International Journal of Quality of Life Aspects of Treatment Care and Rehabilitation

Social network and health-related quality of life in older adults: a population-based study in Spain

2005 •

Rafael Herruzo

View PDF
Markov model to forecast the change in prevalence of soil-transmitted helminths during a control programme: a case study in Vietnam

Aya Yajima

View PDF

… Educativa de la …

Libro de Resúmenes de las Jornadassobre el EEES de la Facultad de Biología

2009 •

Pilar Icaran Lopez

View PDF
Study on the numerical model with nonlinear and transient moving boundary

2013 •

彥誠 陳

View PDF
“Manos a la obra”: trabajo con textos paralelos en el aula e/le: contextualización de las unidades fraseológicas

2016 •

Cristina Hermoso

View PDF

The Lancet. Infectious diseases

Safety and immunogenicity of Pfs25H-EPA/Alhydrogel, a transmission-blocking vaccine against Plasmodium falciparum: a randomised, double-blind, comparator-controlled, dose-escalation study in healthy Malian adults

2018 •

Kourane Sissoko

View PDF

Bilingualism: Language and Cognition

Cross-linguistic influence in simultaneous Cantonese–English bilingual children's comprehension of relative clauses

2014 •

Angel G Baas Chan

View PDF

Education Research International

A Comparative Study on Academic Achievement of Mathematics and English with Other Subjects of Secondary Level in BTR of Assam, India, Using Mahalanobis Distance

2022 •

subir sen, Dr. Gurudas Mandal

View PDF

Journal of Comparative Physiology B

Defects in resting metabolic rates and mitochondrial respiration in Kwashiorkor and dietary obese rats

1991 •

john kamau

View PDF

Archivos Espanoles De Urologia

Neoplasias Mucinosas Primarias De Pelvis Renal, a Proposito De Dos Casos

2011 •

juana martina ramirez

View PDF

Cureus

What Lies Behind the Cannonball Pulmonary Metastases: Hodgkin's Lymphoma?

Samia Malki

View PDF

Hypertension

Role of Superoxide in Modulating the Renal Effects of Angiotensin II

2003 •

Bernardo López

View PDF

Jurnal manajemen dan bisnis Indonesia

Pengaruh Financial Literacy, Financial Behavior dan Financial Experience Terhadap Keputusan Investasi Generasi Milenial di Batam

2022 •

Arienda Gitty Ramadani

View PDF

Remote Sensing

Hazard Implications of the 2016 Mw 5.0 Cushing, OK Earthquake from a Joint Analysis of Damage and InSAR Data

2018 •

Magali Barba

View PDF

Revista Colombiana de Educación

José Agustín, cartógrafo histórico. Un nativo leído por una inmigrante–

2011 •

Aydee Luisa Robayo

View PDF

Journal of Food Processing and Preservation

Flavor and Aroma Attributes of Riesling Wines Produced by Freeze Concentration and Microwave Vacuum Dehydration

2006 •

John Fellman

View PDF
Island wake impact on evaporation duct height and sea clutter in the lee of Kauai

2002 •

Steve Burk

View PDF

IEEE Transactions on Communications

A Statistical Model of Uplink Inter-Cell Interference with Slow and Fast Power Control Mechanisms

2013 •

hina tabassum

View PDF

Cornea

Evidence for a GPR18 Role in Chemotaxis, Proliferation, and the Course of Wound Closure in the Cornea

2019 •

Sherry Hu

View PDF

Nutrition

Neurometabolic effects of sweetened solution intake during adolescence related to depressive-like phenotype in rats

2020 •

Fernanda Urruth Fontella

View PDF
Exposure Assessment of Monosodium Glutamate in Prepared Foods with Frying, Sautéing, Grilling or Baking Process

2019 •

Hanifah Nuryani Lioe

View PDF

Geology

Amino acid chronostratigraphy of late Quaternary coral reefs: Huon Peninsula, New Guinea, and the Great Barrier Reef, Australia

1988 •

Paul Aharon

View PDF

Antibiotics

Diffusible Compounds Produced by Hanseniaspora osmophila and Gluconobacter cerinus Help to Control the Causal Agents of Gray Rot and Summer Bunch Rot of Table Grapes

2021 •

Ximena Besoain

View PDF

cerab

Cerebrozen Hearing Support Supplement Working, Benefits & Reviews

2024 •

cerebrozen male

View PDF
Translators’ Decisions in Translation Works within the Context of the Introduction of Western Drama to the Ottoman Empire

2023 •

Faruk Yücel

View PDF