BIBLIOTHECA ORIENTALIS HUNGARICA

VOL. XXIX/1

TIBETAN AND BUDDHIST STUDIES

COMMEMORATING THE 200TH ANNIVERSARY

OF THE BIRTH OF ALEXANDER

CSOMA DE KOROS Edited by

" LOUIS LIGETI

AKAD&MIAI KIAD6, BUDAPEST 1984

TIBETAN AND BUDDHIST STUDIES

COMMEMORATING THE 200TH ANNIVERSARY

OF THE BIRTH OF ALEXANDER

CSOMA DE K3ROS Edited by

LOUIS LIGETI

Volume 1

AKAD&MIAI KIAD6, BUDAPEST 1984

F W H 5 C & M - M J /Aaml81 ^ - 2 2 2 ' DO Ajam-mno 223

"a -mfy je j 203 "a-fy'a-Ao 185, 232

Aar-re; nag-Aar-re 80 Ara 87, 223

UNDECIPHERED (OR PROBLEMATIC) ITEMS

(30) . . . xy, xy dung)) (48) yHryitaoHe hairw (50) . . . mj]!t(j]H)p- . . . to mumble)) (52) . . . Mary (enemy))> (55) . . . a)xaM6n tallo (73) rypb ((smoke)) (90) MO Ksnako) (91) caps ashes))

(103) HHHe(p3) plaited hair)) (HI ) t)KH3yH to bark)) (121) . . ,-yjiyH-rycyH (many, much))) (128) . . ,-garycyH (to grunt))) (145) xHihuyHto ((he))

(146) cyxa hearthx (152) WKHMypbmry ((ring-finger)) (157) upTM xaHO eKH behind)) (158) ruHTornc show!)) (160) . . . KOMe . . . help!)) (175)

significance the statement Wt'-yAaJ Mag-gM Znfan-cwg M a J - p a had on the interpretation of tantra in the WVy/ng-wa system.

'Jigs-med-giing-pa was active in the area of sDe-dge, which became the . . . inteiiectuai and artistic heart of Khams.. .))* and which was the centre for the. Ris-med movement that was initiated by him and that represented a reaction against reiigious rivatry and persecution that marred Tibet's history.

The fervent patronage of the rNying-ma-pa (foiiowers of the oid), especiaity of 'Jigs-med-gfing-pa and his disciple, rDo-ba-grub-chen, by Tshe-dbang-iha-mo aroused the jeaiousy and envy of the Ngor-pa iamas, because previous to the honours bestowed upon the rNying-ma-pas, they had enjoyed a preferentiai reiationship with the sDe-dge Royat Famiiy. Tshe-dbang-tha-mo was widowed in 1790 when her husband, Sa-dbang-bzang-po, the then king of sDe-dge, died suddeniy while on a pilgrimage to Central Tibet. During her brief eight-year regency, her patronage made it possible not only for the carving of the blocks for the 26 volume rNytng-wa-rgytv J- 7? MM, the 9 volume g-Rvng- 'Auw o f ' Jigs-med-gling-pa, and a number of Klong-chen-pa's (1308-1364) works / but aiso for open civil warfare in 1798 in which the rNying-ma-pa faction was defeated and a number of rNying-ma-pa partisans executed."

This rivalry with and the persecution of the rNying-ma-pas was, in all probabilities, re-kindled from the embers of a debate that was first ignited during the period referred to by Tucci as the first diffusion of Buddhism in Tibet)) and that was left unchecked during the second diffusion)).? That famous debate at bSam-yas in 755 which established, once and for all, the Indian tradition as orthodoxy and which, as a consequence, sanctioned the new)) tantras ('rgyuJ-gyar-waJ, newly introduced or revised according to the tested)) Indian tradition, as orthodox, left a bulk of Tibetan works, both indigenous and translated, without foundation. Thus, those works that reflected the Indian tradition have been accepted throughout the ages as orthodox and, traditionally, those scholars who, on that basis, interpreted the tantric texts in accordance with that tested)) Indian tradition, often overlooked the unique Tibetan influence and characteristics of the so-called (unauthentic)) or dubious)) tantras that belong to the rNying-ma-pa tradition. Hence, Tucci, for example, writes:

*E.GeneSmith,op.c[ '

the tantras, D. L. Sneilgrove's comments in the ((Preface)) to his work on the #eva/'ra 7an/ra is not oniy worthy of note but must be heeded. He states:

To attempt an interpretation of Buddhist tantra is to move into unmapped territory; certain landmarks are ciear, a few tracks here and there, and that is a i i . . . the Buddhism of India from the eighth to the thirteenth century remains reiativeiy unknown. On the other hand, expressions of opinion have not been so siow in forthcoming. These have either been based on the Hrst impressions given by the few texts that have become available, or upon Sir John Woodroffe's series of non-Buddhist /an/ray. This has ied to the ail too rapid assumption that the Buddhist /an/ray are in ail things identifiable with ya/c/a /an/raj, a conclusion which, if indeed justified, should have followed from an examination of tne texts and traditions on both sides. The wide divergence that separates them becomes apparent when we consider the later development of tantric Buddhism, particularly inTibet.))'"

H.V. Guenther also notes that: The word Tantra is used differently, and hence does mean different things to Hindus and Buddhists. This is also borne out by the underlying metaphysics so that Buddhist and Hinduist Tantrism are quite distinct from each other, and any similarities are purely accidental, not at all essential. Hinduist Tantrism, due to its association with the Samkya system, reflects a psychology of subjectivistic dominance, but tempers it by infusing the human with the divine and vice versa; Buddhist Tantrism aims at developing man's cognitive capacities so that he may Ac, here and now, and may enact the harmony of sensuousness and spirituality. . . Because . . .the word jaA/i ((creative energy, frequency used in Hinduist Tantra, but never in Buddhist Tantra, could be understood as ((power)), the word Tantrism has almost exclusively become synonymous with Hinduist ((Tantra,^ and more is known about it than about Buddhist ((Tantra)) which stresses individual growth and tries to realize the uniqueness of being human.))''

These comments suggest that what is of utmost importance in the investigation of the tantras is to examine tantric literature in its proper context. Thus, from the very beginning, the investigation must be guarded against the problem of falling into the rut of tradition that can only prejudice one's perspective and prevent one from seeing what a text has to offer. It would follow from this that, unless the investigator is aware that one and the same word in either Sanskrit or Tibetan can be used in a

D. L. Snettgrove, 7*Ae Tfeva/ra 7an

Malaya^ and others, and not aH tantras have remained in India. Even if they, had, insofar as you couid not possibly see them aii in just a quick glance, you shouid not reproach the eariier great teachers of the path (y/zgaw-gy: /aw-j/or: cAen-jyo maws J, because one cannot conciude, on the basis of having coilected all of the name-tags of sutras and tantras kept in one small temple (gfjag-/ag-/cAaw

s cAawg^, that there are no other tantras. Here in Tibet, there are many sutras and tantras which exist or do not exist in India. Earlier teachers such as Padmasambhava^ and others brought many tantric works from such Dakin l" countries as O-rgyan and others and translated them [into Tibetan], and even with respect to the sutras, before there was the destruction by the sun's blaze,*" many of them such as PAa/-pa-cAe f t^a!pa/ya-v4va/arA.MA:a), Afya-ngan-/a.s- 'das /AfaAaparw/rva^asM/ra^, and the were translated from Chinese texts by the lo-tsa-bas Vairocana and 'Ba'-sangs-shis vta the interpretation of the Chinese pandita Ha-shang Mahayana.))^",

Thus, from 'Jigs-med-gling-pa's words, it would seem plausible to infer that even some of the so-called authentic tantric texts found in Tibet may not have had their origin in India. This would account for the reason why many Tibetan tantric texts are not known in the Indian tradition and why there are tantric texts in Tibet that cannot be found in India. If the view presented by 'Jigs-med-gling-pa be acceptable, then it would seem meaningless to determine the authenticity of a

Just where, in terms of modern-day geography, these names refer is not ciear to me. The text simpiy reads j/oA-dpon padma. See Note )3.

" In his 77Aefan-,Eng//jA Dica'onary, Caicutta (The Bengat Secretariat Book Depot) 1902. Reprinted by Rinsen Book Company in a compact edition, 1977, p. 258, Sarat Chandra Das gives an account of the Bon, cosmography in which there is mentioned a subcontinent named mKa'-'gro-mi-rkun-giing. H. A. Jasckhe, in his 77AeMn-fngA'jA D/ca'onary, London (Routiedge & Kegan Paut Ltd.) 1958, p. 80, states under g/ing; . . . i n a more genera) sense: region, country, so Nepai is frq. denominated nn-pc-c ei g/iri the country of jeweis and treasures, Urgyan m/c 'a-gro; g/in the country of Dakini, as is aiso Lahoui, in ioca) chronicies...)<

" The phrase rry

where only the term mantra (gjaMg-jngagj^* applies, here in Tibet, we speak of the eartier and iater ones, and we caii the tantras transmitted during the period beginning with the first Kings and Ministers, such as Vairocana, up to the Pandita Smrti,^ the old, and those tantras transmitted from Lo-tsa-ba Rin-chen bzang-po on, the new. Insofar as the ease or difficulty in their being understood or the extent f JAyMgyJ of their influence, simiiar to a large or smali wave, are concerned, because the eariier Lo-tsa-bas were abie to transmit authoritatively frang-JAangj, owing to the fact that they were manifestations on the Buddha-level, they appeared as great waves. The Lo-tsa-bas of the later period, though being scholars, were of the status of ordinary people; therefore, they had difficulties understanding [the meaning of a text] although clever with words and they were just so because they were unable to convey the meaning [of a text] from merely the word order of a Sanskrit text.))^ Here, along with the historical background for the division of the tantras into

the

3. Spiritual path of ethically positive actions that confer autonomy fdAang-Asgyur /AaAs-Ayz /Aeg-pa,).

The spzrz/tza/pa/A wAi'cA (AcybMwdaa'ow or cause is threefold in view of the spiritual capacity of an individual. Therefore, there is the spiritual path of a listener (sravaka), who must be trained in matters pertaining to ethical principles explained in the H'na.ya-p:'?aA:a. There is the spiritual path of a self-styled Buddha fpra/ye/ca-AaddAaJ, who must be trained in matters pertaining to mental integration or meditative concentration explained in the ^azra-p/Za/ca. Finally, there is the spiritual path of a bodhisattva who must be trained in matters pertaining to appreciative-discrimination explained in the /4AAz'dAarwa-p!ZaA:a. The tantric text, &Xod-pa cAe/i-po FzW-AzAzTz wcAog-g; rgyud, states:

The explanation regarding the three on an inferior level: When one understands ethical principles, he is a listener. When one possesses perfect knowledge, he is a self-styled Buddha. When one possesses critical discursive faculties, he is a bodhisattva.

The s/7i*r;'?Ma/ pa/A /Aa? wa/ces /Aeprac/;7;'ofier aware o/"/Ae dZ^ca//;'es /nvo/ved refers to the three divisions of A:r(ya, apa, and yoga that constitute the outer tantra. The tantric text quoted above states:

The explanation regarding the three on the middle level: Those who are lowest [practice] A:r/ya. Those who are next, carya. Those with understanding, yoga.

The importance of these three tantras lie in their capacity to aid one's progress in the growth process. According to H. V. Guenther, A:r/ya which refers to action and . . . t h a t initiates the subsequent stages for man's quest for meaning, . . . opens up new perspectives from which man is able to see himself as a living being rather than a theoretical p o s t u l a t e . ^ "

When man sees himself as a living being, his mode of life becomes sincere to his very existence, and this is carya.^* ' But action and behaviour do not belong to the private domain of man himself, for they express themselves in a temporal world. Therefore, action and behavior must originate in a contemplative mind.^ This is yoga.

The spZrZZaaZpa/A q/*e/AZcaZZy posZ/Zve acZZcHS /Aa/ ccn/er aa/onowy refers to the three divisions of waAa, ana, and a//' that constitute the inner tantra. The same text quoted above summarizes this aspect as follows:

3"H.V. Guenther, op. c

spiritual path regarding which there is nothing superior). He begins his discussion by exptaining the common source for the occurrence of tantra. Having made the case that the source for tantra is twofoid, he goes on to discuss why one of the sources expresses itseif by the words Thus have I said)), and why the other source expresses itseif by the words Thus have I heard. He begins his discussion by quoting the TM-'gyHr^* which states:

In conformity with other spirituai pursuits, In order to gain the confidence of his audience,

The compiier presents [the teaching] . From the common [stories of the] MJanay. Because the teaching has arisen from

A basic ruie to educate, In order to educate [man],

He makes [the teaching] abide.)) This passage cieariy indicates two sources for the origination of the tantras and, as 'Jigs-med-gling-pa has aiready shown, the two forms, Thus have I said)) and ((Thus have I heard)), are equaiiy expressions of the Buddha word.

In this context, however, the teacher refers to one who is freed from the restrictions of acceptance and rejection, because he is constant in the intensity of his luminous existence and because the foundation of his iife Akanistha is a seif-iiiuminating awareness that radiates from the very core of the meaningfuiness of his existence. Therefore, when he communicates, he communicates in the form, Thus have I said)).

In contrast, a mediator who derives his experiences in !ife by paying attention to the words in the text rather than to meaning, communicate in the form, ((Thus have I heard)).

However, those who are confused ciaim that because other sutras and tantras explicitly state, ((Thus have I heard)), and do not state, Thus have I said)), the texts that begin with the latter statement could not be tantras. However, this merely indicates that their eyes of the intellect are closed.

'Jigs-med-gling-pa goes on to argue that if those texts that begin, Thus have I said)), cannot be accepted as authentic tantras because they make the claim to

3* Dr;'j-/an p. [68: I MeggzAan mamy dang jgo Asian pAyir II (Ann mang dag gig/enggzA/yM II ydadpo rangg/ 'AAormamy/a H yidcAfy AyapAyir Ayianpayie jjgda/gzAi/ayni 'duiAyedda )l Ayang AayAyianpa gnaypar Ayed [ These [ines with variant speiiing or speiiing mistakes which are simpiy to be ignored can be found in rNying-ma rgyad-'Aam Voi. [0 fpcd iAo) p. 396. Passages having simiiar impiications can be found in r/Vying-ma rgyad-'Aam, Voi. [ fpcd Aa) p. [7. gdai-gzAi above might be better read 'dai-gzAi aithough gdai can be found in the dictionary. See Chandra Das, ^ 77Aeian-EngiiyA Dictionary, p. 66).

374

explain rather than to listen, then those who would so claim would have to face the problem of having texts such as the Afan/'iivf-jaJ/iaiia and the /IMfWMMd/iara-(cniraps turn into non-tantric texts, because the Afaii/MVMaJ/iana states:

Because it is the identity-experience of the secret [doctrine], It must be explained properly by me to you.))

and the /[MitMandMara-fanira states:

((Therefore, the secret [doctrine] is to be explained.))

Thus, from the discussion above, it becomes evident that the novel phrase, ((Thus have I said)), results from a difference in perspective and in foundation on which the person stands. This difference in perspective and foundation has been the basis from which the distinction between the new)) and the ((old)) traditions has arisen.

This distinction, however, need not become the basis for alarm. Instead, it can become the basis from which new avenues and new perspectives in life can be found. In discussing the rNying-ma-pa tantras, therefore, what is important to remember is that the rNying-ma-pas ( ( . . . intended first and foremost to be pragmatic, a putting into practice of the insights realized by all the Buddhas and Bodhisattvas of the p a s t . . . The achievement of realization through the practice of teaching is the ultimate test of that teaching.))^

3s These texts appear in the AATa'-'gyur section of the Tripitaka and therefore are Buddha-vacana. The particuiar passages quoted are taken from 'Jigs-med-gting-pa's Driy-ian p. t68.

" E . G e n e S m i t h , op. cii.. p. 7.

375 23*

A HITHERTO UNNOTICED YUAN-PERIOD COLLECTION ATTRIBUTED TO 'PHAGSPA*