WIENER STUDIEN ZUR TIBETOLOGIE UNO BUDDHISMUSKUNDE

HEFT 17,1

DAVID P. JACKSON

ENTRANCE GATE FOR THE WISE

(SECTION III)
SA-SKYA PA~QITA ON INDIAN AND TIBETAN
TRAOITIONS OF PRAMA~A AND PHILOSOPHICAL DEBATE

ARBIITS~~Rt;'IS FOR TIBETISCHE UNO BUDDHISTISCHE STUDIEN UNIVERSITAT WIEN

WIEN 1987

) Copyright by

DAVID P. JACKSON
1987

Preis (Vol.I und II):

OS 620,-

zu beziehen von:
Arbeitskreis fur Tibetische und Buddhistische Studien
Maria Theresien-Strasse 3/4/26
A - 1090 Wi en

Austria

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Vol.

I
page
ix

tist of Figures
lliist of Tables
;A'b'knowledgments

xi
1
9

;1)ntroduction
. Notes
$a-Ii!kya Par;t4ita's Life, Works, and Tradition
Chapter 1: The Life of Sa-skya PaQQita: Sources and Chronology
Biographical Sources
. . . .
I. Autobiographical Sources
II. Biographies by His Students
A. Contemporaneuous Accounts
B. Posthumous Accounts
C. Lost Biographies by His Students
III. Full-length Biographies by Authors of Later Generations
IV. Genealogical Histories
V. Religious Histories
VI. Political and General Histories
VII. Commentaries on Sa-paQ's Works
VIII. Biographies of a Great Lama's Previous Embodiments
IX. Miscellaneous
....
X. Recent Compositions
Chronology of the Main Events in Sa-paQ' sLife
Early Studies
. . . .
Auspicious Dreams
Youthful Travels and Studies
Studies with Sakyasribhadra and the Other Three Pundits
Later Studies with Tibetan Teachers
The Death of Grags-pa-rgyal-mtshan
Noteworthy Events from His Later Career in Tibet
Sa-paQ' s Departure from Tibet and His Death
Notes
.......... .

15
15
15
16
16
17
18
18
19
20
20
21
21
21
22
24
24
25
25
26
27
27
28
28
32

Ghapter 2: Previous Research on the KhJ and Other Works of Sa-paQ

(1) Mkhas pa rnams 'jUg pa'i sgo
(2) Legs par bshad pa ~in po che'i gter
(3) Tshad ma rigs pa'i gter
(4) Thub pa'i dgongs pa rab tu gsal ba
(5) Sdom pa gsum gyi rab tu dbye ba
(6) Rol mo'i bstan bcos
....
(7) Gzhung lugs legs par bshad pa
.
(8) Bshes pa' iphring yig gi bsdus don
(9) Bu slob rnams la spring ba

39
39

42
44

46

47

48
48

49

49

(10) Gangs can gyi sgom chen rnams la gdams pa

........
(11) Zhen pa bzhi bral gyi gdams pa
............
(12) Rdo rje theg pa'i rtsa ba dang yan lag gi dam tshig bshad pa .
(13) Skyes bu dam pa rnams la spring ba'i yi ge, etc.
Notes
.....
..................
Chapter 3: The Writings of Sa-paI,l: Major Works,
Chronology and Transmission
. . . .
The Chronology of His Works
. . . .
Early Works
.....
....
Later Works
......
The Relative Chronology
. . . . . . .
Traditional Classifications of Sa-paI,l's Greatest Works
The Collection and Transmission of Sa-paI,l's Works
...
The Compilation of His Collected Works
. . .
Early Manuscripts
........
The Inclusion of Sa-paI,l's Oeuvre into the SKKB
The Earliest Printed Edition
The 1439 Sa-skya Xylograph Edition
The Gong-dkar-ba Edition
... .
The Derge Edition
........ .
Notes

49
49
50
50
54
57
60
60
63
64
69
70
70
71
72
73
73
74
76
78

83
Chapter 4: Lost, Apocryphal and Doubtful Works
....
Lost Works
. . . . ..
........
. . . . . . . .
83
84
Dbubtful and Spurious Works
........
. . . . .
93
Unidentified and Extra Titles in the Lists
....
. ...
100
Works Criticized or Doubted by Previous Sa-skya-pa Scholars
102
Notes
Chapter 5: Sa-paI,l's Career as a scholar of PramaI,la:
Studies and Translations
....... .
Studies with Rkyang-'dur-ba Mtshur Gzhon-nu-seng-ge
Studies with Sakyasribhadra and His Disciples
Studies under Sugatasri
. . . . . . . . .
Studies with Sakyasribhadra
........ .
Studies with Sa~hasri
....
Studies with Danaslla
....
Studies with Brtsegs Dbang-phyug-seng-ge
.....
Sa-paI,l' s Translations of Works on PramaI,la
Notes
..............

Chapter 6: Sa-paI,l's Career as a Scholar of PramaI,la:

His Writings and the Lineages He Established
Rngog lo-tsa-ba, the Father of Tibetan PramaI,la Literature
Rngog's Successors and the Bsdus-pa Literature
....
Sa-paI,l and His Tshad rna rigs pa' i gter
. . . .
The Mkhas ' jug on PramaI,la
........ .
Sa-paI,l's Influence on the Subsequent Study of PramaI,la in Tibet
Sa-skya-pa Teaching Lineages of PramaI,la
. . .
Rigs gter Lineages
Notes
...............
10

vi

105
105
107
108
109
110
111
111
112
114

127
127
128
131
132
133
13
14
1

Chapter 7: Sa-paD, Rngog and Phywa-pa on the

Interpretation of Dharmakirti
Rngog lo-tsa-ba Blo-ldan-shes-rab
... .
Phywa-pa Chos-kyi-seng-ge
..... .
Sa-skya PaDqita Kun-dga' -rgyal-mtshan
Notes
.............. .

165
165
169
171
178

Chapter 8: The Structure and Contents of the Mkha~~

The Contents of the KhJ
....
Composition
Exposition
Debating
The Steps of a Debate
A Subject Outline of KhJ, Section III
Notes

191
192
193
195
196
197
200
204

Chapter 9: Commentaries on the Mkhas ' jug

The Earliest Commentators
.....
Gser mdog PaD-chen Shakya-mchog-ldan
(A) The Incomplete Commentary
.....
(B) [Mkhas ' jug dris lan] The Answers to
Glo-bo mkhan-chen' s Questions
Glo-bo mkhan-chen Bsod-nams-lhun-grub
Mkhan-chen Ngag-dbang-chos-grags
. . . . .
Conclusion
. . . . . . . . .
Notes
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

207
207
207
207

Chapter 10: The Critical Edition: Sources and Method

A. The Texts
. . . . . . . . . . . .
B: The Bhutanese Manuscript
......... .
........... .
D: The Derge Edition
. . . .
G: The Glo-bo Golden Manuscript
C: The KhJ Commentary of Glo-bo mkhan-chen (KhJNSh)
T. G. Dhongthog Rinpoche, New Delhi, 1967
Beijing, 1981
Rajpur (Dehra Dun), 1983
................
B. Method of Editing
... .
Orthography and Punctuation
Versification
..... .
The Typeset Text and the Annotation
Notes
. . . . . . . . . .
The Mkhas
Text

210
212
215
210
218

229
229
229
232
236
238
238
228
239
239

240

241

242
24:3

249
251

, jug, Section III

vii

Vol. II

The Mkhas ) jUg, Section III

Variant Readings
Translation
....... .
I. The Preparation
II. The Actual Practice [of Debating]
III. The Conclusion
Notes

330
364
368

Abbreviations

463

Bibliography . . . .
A. Works of Modern Scholarship
B. Works in Tibetan Language

465
465
487

Appendixes
. . . . . . . . . . .
Appendix A: The Writin~s of Sa-paD Listed in
Ngor-chen)s Thob yig rgya mtsho
.....
Appendix B: The Collected Works of Sa-paD as Listed in
the Thob yig of the Fifth Dalai Lama
Appendix C: Index to One Volume of an Old Manuscript
of Sa-paD' s Works
............... .
Appendix D: Fragments of a Golden Manuscript of Sa-pa~ s Works
from Lo Mustang (Glo-bo Smon-thang)
Appendix E: The Works of Sa-paD Listed by Rin-spungs pa
in His Biography of Sa-paD . . . . . . .
Appendix F: The Works of Sa-paD Listed by A-mes-zhabs
in His Sa skya gdung rabs chen mo
Appendix G: The Works of Sa-paD Listed or Quoted in His Biographies
by Lho-pa Kun-mkhyen and Zhang Rgyal-ba-dpal
Appendix H: Works on ~he Lam-'bras Attributed to Sa-paD which
are Lis ted in the Gsa!L~ of the Fi fth Dalai Lama
Appendix 1 : Outline of Glo-bo mkhan-chen' s
Commentary on the KhJ
............. .
Appendix J: Index of the Collected Works of Glo-bo mkhan-chen,
Gelung Manuscript
.......
...... .
Appendix K: Index of the Collected Works of Glo-bo mkhan-chen,
M6nthang Manuscript
.............. .
Appendix L: A List of Sa-paD's Works Found in the
KhJNSh Commentary of Glo-bo mkhan-chen
Appendix ~l : A List of Sa-pa~s Works Found in Gong-dkar
'Phrin-Ias-rnam-rgyal's Record of Teachings Received
Appendix N: The Works of Sa-paD Listed in the Record of
Teachings Received of Dkon-mohog-Ihun-grub
Appendix o The Contents of One Volume from a Sa-skya
Manuscript of Sa-pa~ s Collected Works

505

viii

301

323
323

507
510
514
516
518

521
524
526
528
546
555
566
568

572
575

LIST OF FIGURES

page
1. The Relations of Twenty-two of Sa-pa~'s Works According to

Internal Citations and References (with Conjectural

Chronology)
2.

66

The Steps of a Debate

ix

198

LIST OF TABLES

page
1. The Main Accessible Accounts of Sa-skya Pa~1ita's Life

Listed in Chronological Order

2. A Chronological Chart of the Main Events in

Sa-pa~'s

Life

3. Eleven Lists of Sa-pa~'s Works.

23
30

86

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

would
who

like

to express my thanks first of all to

my

revered

gave me the benefit of their unrivalled understanding

of

Tibetan
Sa-skya

works, the result of their many years of scholarship both in the semiTibet and, since 1959, in India or abroad. In particular, lowe a great
of gratitude to the Venerable Khenpo Appey (Mkhan-po A-pad Yon-tan-bzang-po),
of the Sakya College, Rajpur, for his painstaking explanations of Sapa\l's Mkhas
kindness.

.A and
I

Thub pa'i dgongs gsal,

and for his generous hospitality

and

must also record here my special thanks and gratitude to the Vener-

able Dezhung Rinpoche (Sde-gzhung sprul-sku Kun-dga'-bstan-pa'i-rgyal-mtshan)

and

the Venerable Chogay Trichen Rinpoche (Bco-brgyad khri-chen Thub-bstan-legs-bshadrgya-mtsho)

The
University
Professor

present

study

is

a revision of the disseration I

of Washington in April of 1985.

D.

my

at

the

teacher

Seyfort Ruegg for encouraging my interest in this field and for his

unflagging support and assistance.

mittee members,

defended

I am deeply indebted to

I am also truly thankful to the reading

com-

Professors T. Ellingson, Chr. Lindtner, K. Potter and R. Salomon,

for their valuable comments and criticisms.

Most of the research and much of the writing up of the present study

was

done in Japan and India, and I am particularly grateful to Professor K. Mimaki and
Mr. E. G. Smith for their friendships which made my work in those countries immeasurably more pleasant and fruitful.
I would also like to record my thanks
the Venerable Migmar Tsering for his very useful comments on the translation
KhJ III,
problems.
for
of

to
of

and to Mr. Tashi Tsering for his help on several literary and historical
In addition, I am indebted to the American Institute of Indian Studies

the research fellowship which made possible my studies in India from the fall
1981 to the spring of 1983 and to Professor S.

Sengupta of the Department

of

Buddhist Studies at Delhi University, my research supervisor during that period.

While I was revising this study for publication,
leagues

helped

several friends and

me clarify a number of points through their comments and

col-

sugges-

tions, or they supplied additional references or identifications of sources.

Here

men-

would like to acknowledge in a small way my considerable debt to them

tioning their names:

by

Dr. L. van der Kuijp, Prof. N. Aramaki, Mr. S. Onoda, Mr. S.

Matsumoto, Dr. H. Eimer, Dr. T. Much, and Mr. John Tate.

xi

Learn
find

everything;

you will

nothing superfluous;

narrow education displeases.

1
--Hugh of St. Victor
Disputation
this

is the

wall

building of study,

nothing

is fully

in
for

understood

or

faithfully preached if it

is

not

first

chewed by the

tooth of disputation.
---Peter the Chanter

INTRODUCTION
The intellectual hJstory of traditional Tibet is largely the story of
Tibetans translated,

penetrated,

assimilated, and finally refined and worked

elaborate scholastic systems the great religious,

writings of Buddhist India.
just a

part of the massive expansion of

the best efforts of

12th centuries,
Tanjur--are
scholars.

philosophical,

These were tremendous tasks,

during the first and early second millenia

consumed

C.

they

Indian Buddhist thought in

Asia

E.3

The job of translation alone

many of Tibet's greatest scholars

from the 8th

of these

early

Tibetan
Buddhist

and learning to Tibet was Sa-skya Pa~4ita Kun-dga'-rgyal-mtshan (Sa-pa~)

a savant who is counted among the very greatest Tibetan scholars

of

As a young man he learned Sanskrit and executed a number of transla-

but by his time the work of translating the basic religious scriptures and

philosophical
consolidate

treatises
the

were

to

doctrinal and philosophical advances of his predecessors and

was nearly finished.

Therefore his main tasks

to

enrich further the sch~larly and literary resources of Tibetan Buddhism.

his

to

and the two immense Tibetan canonical collections--the Kanjur and

eloquent witnesses to the zeal and success

(1182-1251),
all
time.
tions,

and other

though

One of the most influential figures in the transmission of Indian

religion

how

doctrinal treatises Sa-paQ contributed in an important way to the

penetration
doctrine.
introducing

and

systematic

interpretation of

Indian

Buddhist

Through
continuing

philosophy

and

But he also made great contributions indirectly through his efforts at

into Tibet the tools and methods of advanced dialectical and literary

scholarship.
tradition

He reestablished in Tibet the full PramaQa

of Dharmakirti,

possibilities

He also expanded

of Tibetan literature by adapting and introducing suitable

of the Sanskrit literary arts.

the

(logico-epistemological)

including the Pramauavarttika.

standards

of

the

aspects

In these ways not only did he singlehandedly raise

Tibetan scholarship in general,

but he also bestowed

on

his

countrymen the tools by which future generations could carry forward that work.
The subject of the present study is Sa-skya PaQgita's treatise the Mkhas
~

pa'i

(KhJ) ,

which was one of his main means for introducing

methods

of

Tibetan

scholarship on a sound methodological footing.

could

traditional Indian Buddhist scholarship into Tibet and

be translated "The Entrance Gate for the Wise," was one of

major works (the other four being his Tshad

bshad,

Legs

and Thub pa'i dgongs gsal).

activities of the traditional scholar:

of

these

thus

This work,

the

putting

whose

title

Sa-pat;,l's

five

rigs pa'i gter, Sdom gsum rab dbye,

matter was the three

main

composition, exposition, and debate.

Its subject

Each

three activities reflected one of the main thrusts of his

own

career.

His teaching of the methods of composition was the outgrowth of his own pioneering
studies

of Sanskrit gralnmar and the Sanskrit literary arts such as

trics,

and

fruit

of

teaching

lexicography.

His

poetics,

me-

explanation of the principles of debate was

his intense study of the Pramat;,la tradition

of

Dharmakirti.

the

And

his

of the principles of correct exposition and interpretation was linked to

his deep involvement in

propagating the Buddhist doctrine through

discriminating

the Buddhist traditions of authentic Indian origins from among the numerous Tibetan traditions current in his day.
Sa-paQ's
real

gap

in

immediate motive for explaining these topics was either to fill a

current

knowledge (as in the case of grammar and

poetics)

or

to

rectify already established traditions (as in the case of some aspects of

exposi-

tion

he

and

debate).4

In his own introduction to the KhJ he states

trying to benefit those Tibetans who,

that

was

though claiming to be learned, were in fact

ignorant of many aspects of Indian and Buddhist scho1arship.5

There was also a deeper,
scholarship,

religious motive for the work.

methods

of

wisdom,

the highest goal of Buddhist practice.

characterized
the

city

his

By teaching

the

Sa-pftQ hoped to lead others ultimately to enlightened

6
Near the end of the treatise he

work as a "gate by which persons of bright intelligence

of the Great Liberation.,,7

And in one of the

concluding

III 73), he states that he opened the "entrances for the wise"

verses

who uphold

enter
(KhJ
tradi-

tions of scholarship "so that the doctrine of the Sage (muni) will increase in all
directions and may long remain in the wor1d."S
He therefore hoped ultimately to
propagate
which

was

the

Buddhist doctrine

and to encourage the attainment

not a merely intellectual understanding,

but which was

of
a

wisdom

liberating

when he called his treatise an "entrance" or "entry gate"

"scholars" or "the wise" (mkhas.M rnams) ,
conducive
(KhJ

to the realization of the highest religious

I 4-5) he furthermore specifies just what,he

pari

(~

he meant it to be a
goal.
means

guide
In

by

his
"wise

(mkhas .M) and what the objects of such a person's knowledge should be:
What

is a wise person?

He is held to be one who understands,just

ll

as

they are, the real facts about knowable things.

autocommentary,

What

is

Sa-pa9 indicates that ideal wisdom is nothing

"wise person"?

objects of knowledge. 12
word

He is one who knows

mkhas.M ("wise"),

however,

without

error

short

all

also has a narrower meaning,

or "learnedness" in a particular field.

of

viz.

Sa-pal]. himself specifies this

lines (I 4cd):
One who
that. 13

knows

the subject of a particular study

is

also

wise

in

And in the autocommentary:

Moreover,

person who knows a particular thing that he studied also

gains the designation "one who is learned in just that.,,14

Sa-pa~next explains the proper subjects for the wise man's study (I 5):

The

objects [of learning] are said to

be

grammar,

dialectics,

healing, and the "outer" and "inner" sciences.

Grammar
epistemology,

the

is

[the study of] words,

dialectics

is

"outer" science consists of manual arts and

niques, the "inner" science is the doctrine of the religious

'
, me d"lClne. 15
tu res, an d t h e SClence
0 f h ea I'lng lS
Thus

the

scholar,

wise

or

truly learned man had to

be

comprehensive,

a master of all theoretical and practical subjects.

logicotechscrip-

encyclopedic

This ideal lay

at

the

heart of the treatise,

and

immediate motive for composing the

Sa-pa~'s

work

was to help his fellow men attain it.

could not of course teach the contents of each and every branch

Sa-pa~

of

Instead, in the KhJ he taught the methods and

principles which were presupposed by true scholarship in any field.
Above all,
learning within a single treatise.

the wise man had to be able to communicate accurately his knowledge to others, and
the three . main means for that were composition, exposition, and discussion or
debate.

These

three

then were the "entrances" through which all who

proficiency in scholarship had to pass.

into three parts,
the wise.
Sa-pa~

methods

of

and in each part

16

desired

This treatise was accordingly divided

Sa-pa~

taught one of the three "entrances" for

was uniquely qualified among the Tibetans of his time to teach the
Indian scholarship and the ways of Buddhist wisdom.
He had himself

mastered all the subjects that his Tibetan teachers could teach, and he had also
studied very assiduously at the feet of four great Indian Buddhist scholars.
He
had become,

in fact,

the first Tibetan who was acknowledged to be a

papdita,

title reserved in Indian Buddhist scholasticism for a scholar who had mastered all

five major fields of knowledge. 17

The KhJ in particular was one of the pioneering

treatises that established his reputation as a paudita.18

was

Sa-pa~

widely

honored

also one of the first Tibetan religious teachers to have

by

later generations with the eulogistic

Dharma" (chos ill ill:

dharmasvamin) .19

appellation

been

"Lord

of

This title shows that in addition to his

specifically. scholarly attainments, he was recognized to be one of the very greatest

upholders of the Buddhist teachings in his day.

teacher

His eminence as a spiritual

was founded upon a careful discernment of and adherence to genuine Indian

Buddhist tradition.
He was a resolute traditionalist, acknowledging as genuine
only those works that he was satisfied could be ascertained as being the word of
the Buddha or the explanations of the Buddha's great
culated this basic principle in the KhJ and elsewhere:
One

must

followers.

study and teach that doctrine which the Buddha

Sa-pa~

proclaimed,

which has come down through a succession of learned masters, which was
realized
pounded by
to

by the adepts (siddha)

l~arned

Tibetan]

men (papdita),

by translators,

through meditation,

which

was

and which is widely recognized

by

Indian and Tibetan learned adherents of the scriptural traditions.

[the doctrine
of

ex-

which was translated [from Sanskrit

all
If

that one teaches] is not like that, the learned masters

India will deride it,

and they will feel repelled,

Buddha taught no such doctrine.

saying,

It harms the [Buddhist] Doctrine

"The
to

arti-

teach a doctrine of one's own fabrication.,,20

also

enunciated

in

the KhJ the principle that doctrinal

error

may

be

appropriately refuted because the Doctrine may be harmed if error is allowed to

proliferate, just as the desired crops in a field will suffer if weeds are allowed
21
to spread unchecked.
He carried this principle into practice in some of his
treatises, and this earned him no small notoriety as a polemicist. 22
Of

the

debate--in
debate,

three

main sections

of

the

KhJ--composition,

exposition,

the following study I have concentrated on the third section,

and have presented

section below.

the edited text and an

annotat~d

and

that on

translation of

this

His treatment of debating is important because debating remains a

typical

and essential part of Tibetan scholasticism,

origins

of that tradition and its early development in Tibet have only now

to be investigated.

though the Indian

Buddhist
begun

For Sa-paI}-, "debate" meant a formal philosophical discussion

between two scholars who maintained differing tenets and attempted to express them
in sound logical form and to defend them from the criticisms of the opponent.
later

Indian Buddhism,

debate belonged basically to the branch of PramaI}-a

dealt with "inference for the sake of others" (gzhan don rjes
mana).

He

In
which

:. pararthanu-

accordingly discussed many points of debating proper included within

that topic, such as how to start and conclude, what constitutes victory or defeat,
and

the identities of the participants.

restricted,
of

But Sa-paI}-'s treatment was not

narrowly

for he also dealt with such diverse peripheral questions. as the place

scripture and tenets in debate,

whether a debator must maintain tenets

or

thesis, how to resolve apparent contradictions of scripture, and what constitutes

reasoning that is objectively validated.
of
but

.In India, formal debates held before an assembly of witnesses were a sort
intellectual duel.
A loss in debate meant not only a great loss of prestige,
it also commonly entailed the repudiation of one's original doctrine and

forced

adoption of the opponent's creed.

debators

(e.g.

Given such high

stakes,

some

some Naiyayikas) held that it.was permissible to use any

fair or foul--to gain victory and to defend one's school.

the

Indian
means--

The Buddhist tradition

following Dharmakirti (and upheld by Sa-paI}-) insisted to the contrary that winning
or losing was entirely dependent on the soundness of the two opponents' statements
of proof and refutation.

Thus for this tradition,

tricks and

other

dishonest

means had no place at all in a genuine d~bate. A real debate was a confrontation
between t wo scholars who held different tenets and attempted to defend them sincerely and honestly.
lectics

In the Tibetan seminaries of Sa-paI}-'s time, however, debating and diawere mainly an academic exercise.
In the schools descending from the

traditions

of Rngog lo-tsa-ba Blo-ldan-shes-rab and

dialectics

was

master.

one

of

Phywa-pa

Chos-kyi-seng-ge,

the core subjects that every student had

to

A number of peculiarly Tibetan ideas and practices became

study

and

incorporated

into the pedagogic debates of the seminaries, anq Sa-pa~, , who had received some
early training in these lineages, later devoted much effort to attempts at correcting them.

Much of the debate section of the KhJ must be understood as

being

directed against these earlier Tibetan traditions.

For Tibetan scholars from the 12th century

on,

discipline PramaQa were extremely important subjects.

seminaries
it

dialectics and its mother

This was because in Tibetan

PramaQa had become the ideal and fundamental intellectual

discipline:

was the standard against which all other scholarly endeavors were measured and

evaluated.

PramaQa

determined
did

for

writers,

and

it

something like Aristotelian logic

For their

actual

dialectic

practice,

Tibetan scholars were most influenced not by the PramaQa of Dharmakirti,

by

the

habits

the thought of Tibetan scholastic

medieval European scholastics.

however,
but

shaped

how they dealt with other subjects,

indigenous introductory handbooks from which they

of logical argumentation in their youth.

had

learned

the

These Tibetan introductory hand-

books, the Bsdus grwa texts, by and large represented the earlier tradition of
Tibetan dialectics founded by Phywa-pa, and they were the targets of Sa-paQ's
criticisms

not

only in the KhJ but also in his great treatise

on

PramaQa,

Tshad .!!!!!. rigs pa' i gter (RT).

The present study describes for the first time some of Sa-paQ's
tions to the development of dialectics and PramaQa in Tibet.
clarify

the

historical

sketch

and the other works of

describe
paQ's

writings
founded.
lars
and

Sa-paQ~

upon

which

biographical

Chapters 3 and 4 survey the writings of Sa-paQ and

as a scholar of

on this subject,

Prama~a,

Chapters 5 and 6 describe

detailing his studies,

and also tracing some of the

Prama~a

Sa-

translations

and

lineages that

he

Chapter 7 investigates the question of how Sa-paQ and the earlier scho-

Rngog lo-tsa-ha Blo-ldan-shes-rab and Phywa-pa

interpreted the thought of Dharmakirti.

structure of the KhJ.

treatise.

the

Chapter 2 reviews the previous modern research on the KhJ

a number of lost or apocryphal writings.

career

of

Chapter 1 gives a chrono-

of Sa-paQ's,life and lists the sources

studies must be based.

some

The study has three main sections, the

of which consists of ten introductory chapters.

logical

contribu-

It also attempts to

context of his contributions and to trace

related doctrinal or philosophical issues.

first

the

Chapter

Chos-kyi-seng-ge

classified

Chapter 8 describes the content and

Chapter 9 surveys the known commentarial writings on

10 completes this first main section,

this

describing the textual

sources for the critical edition.

The second main section of this study consists
of the edited text and annotated translation of KhJ part III. The third and final

section includes the bibliography and several appendixes.

Sa-paQ's
The

KhJ
work

probably
Even

or

"Entrance for the Wise" is not an easy gateway

apparently never became a part of ordinary

to

monastic

pass
curri-

precisely because its contents were judged too specialized . and

in

Sa-pa~'s

up t he stu dy

time there were seemingly only a very few students

"
d
"
0 f 1tS
su bJect
matter. 23 I ndee,
one 0 f Sa-pa9 ' s

teaching of wisdom
realized.
and

to others--was something

It has been said that true

that

scholarship

surely this can also be said of the wisdom of

did succeed in influencing those who mattered most:

of subsequent generations.
of detail,

was

very

cannot
the

sage.

be
25

the greatest Tibe-

Though they occasionally criticized the

later Tibetan savants also recognized the KhJ as a great

in their literary and intellectual history,

and as

never-superseded

methods of scholarship.

As such, it continues to be studied today by

scholars of Tibetan nationality, both in Tibet and abroad. 26
The

KhJ was thus a fundamental work in the development and transmission of

Tibetan literary and scholarly traditions.

that guided the thought of Tibet's
also an

As a description of

the

extremely useful introduction and guide for foreign students of

literature: 7 ,

Buddhist

prin-

greatest scholars and writers,

it

is

Tibetan

This was the initial reason I decided some years ago

to

begin studying it, and for my own education I could not have made a better choice.
When I began,

however,

I did not suspect that in addition to the

basit

diffi-

cUlties of its subject matter, it also contained quite a few textual and doctrinal
conundrums, several of which have for centuries baffled even some of the greatest
savants of the tradition.
The present study records my findings and solutions to
date,

but

I do not pretend to have solved every problem in it,

not even in part

III which I studied most intensively.

Tibetan
mainly

decades,

living tradition.

Buddhist studies have made considerable progress in the last

because

Given Sa-paQ's crucial importance,

his works too have been

speed
depend

of the greater accessibility of both the texts and

it is not surprising

attracting increasingly more attention and interest.

of further progr~ss in doctrinal and philosophical studies,

on the availability of a sound textual and historical basis.

roughgoing

two
the
that
The

however,

will

More

tho-

and penetrating analyses of Sa-paQ's ideas can only be safely

founded

upon careful critical editions of all his seminal classics and upon a more
detailed knowledge of th"d
t s.
Bu t un t"l
e 1 eas 0 f h"1S pred
ecessors d
an
opponen
1
those needs are met, I hope that the present study will be found useful as an

"entrance

gate" of sorts--a small portal into the vast intellectual dominions

of

one of Tibet's greatest geniuses.

Kyoto
January, 1985
New Delhi
December, 1986

D. P. J.

1Hugh

of St.

Victor,

Didascalicon

de Studio Legendi.

Quoted from B.

(1978), p. 86.
2peter the Chanter,

Verbum Abbreviatum.

Quoted from B. Smalley (1978), p.

3See also L. Renou (1964), p. 128.

4Many of Sa-paQ's contributions in the KhJ had no precedents in Tibet.
instance Shakya-mchog-ldan,
5KhJ

(D) ,

p.

81 .3.4-6

Mkhas~,

( tha

l64a. 4-6) :

mkhas ~ khas

ba ~

' che

ill khrod ~ na legs .E!.!:. ma [l64b] sbyangs pa' i skye

cher 'khrul.E!.!:. mthong nasi de la phan pa' i don du mkhas ~ ~ pa ' i
~

'di ~ dol I.
Cf.
bcos ~ pa' i

.~

See

pp. 119.4-120.7.

bo
~

Shiikya-mchog-ldan, Mkhas~, p. 69.4: ~ brag tu bod 'dir

dod ~ ba' i tshe nal rtsom' chad rtsod ~ gsum char I

'phags .Y.!!l du ~ ~ dang shas cher mthun ~ nyid ~ dgos pa' i ~ ~ tu

pa' i ~ zhes ~ ba' i bstan bcos ~ mdzad.Q.QL; and Shakya-mchog-

~ ~ ~

Idan,

~~

byon pa' i

.8.Q!!8.

mi ~ ~
~

dris lan,

p. 119.6: gangs can illijongs 'dir bstan bcos 'di rna

rol tu rtsom ~ dangl 'chad ~ dangl rtsod pa' i tshul gsum legs .E!.!:.
bstan bcos 'dis ni mkhas pa' i ~ ba gsum la.i!:. 1tar ~ pa' i

gzhung .i!:. Ita ba bzhin du 'chad ~ ni bstan bcos 'di' i dgos ~

6This

religious motive could be said to be the underlying motive or

tive of the motive" (dgos pa'i dgos ~) of the KhJ.

This was one of four topics

by which Tibetan and Indian Buddhist scho1iasts commonly introduced and

the purpose

of

the text which they were about to expound.

autocommentary, [D] p. 83.1.5; tha 167a.5

= 5a.5)

"mo-

In the

explained
KhJ

(I 12,

Sa-paQ lists these four:

(1) the subject matter (brjod ~

(2) motive (dgos ~)

(3) motive of the motive (dgos pa'i dgos ~
(4) connection [between the above three] ('breI ~

See also his Byis ~ p. 118.2.6 (tha 238a.6 = 14a.6).

Cf. the four similar
introductory topics mentioned by Conrad of Hissau (d. ca. 1150), as described by
A. Piltz (1981), p. 85. Cf. also the four anubandhas or "requisites" discussed at
the beginning of the exposition of Indian sastras as described by G. S. Huparikar

10

(1949), p. 121f:
(1) the competency of the student to understand a work
(2) the subject matter
(3) connection between the subject matter and the work to be studied
(4) the motive of inducement to enter into the study
7

KhJ (D), p. 111.3.3 (tha 224a.3

thar E!. chen

~.8!.Q!!8.

khyer du

62a.3): b10 gros gsa1 ba'i skye bo

pa'i .2RQ..

SKhJ III 73
9 Sa-paQ

considered religious or moral learning to have value only

insofar

as one put it into practice. As he said in one of his famous aphorisms (LSh 44S):
If

learned

sayings

people

while very easily

understanding

do not practice their meanings,

all

aphoristic

what use is it even if

they

know the "sciences" (lit.: treatises, sastra)?

Cf. J. Bosson (1969), p. 294.
10Sometimes the word ~E!. (Skt. avatara) in a title can be understood as
"introduction."

See A.

K.

Warder (1971),

p.

Cf.

200.

nyumon, which is used in book titles for "Primer of

The
Sa-paQ

image of an "entrance gate" or "portal"

wise" (mkhas E!.

ry

." or "Elementary
was already

Sa-pa:g. himself
~ ~

also referred to

the "three entrances

"
before

= 14b.1).

11S.3.1 (tha 23Sb.1

of

1a
the

pa'i .2RQ. gsum) in one of his earlier works, a commenta-

on Bsod-nams-rtse-mo' s Byis E!. bde bIag tu ~ E!..

mkhas

employed

by his uncle Bsod-nams-rtse-mo in the latter's major treatise the Chos

pa'i.2RQ..

the similar Japanese

E!.~~ pa'i~.

See also ibid.,

p.

See Sa-pav.,: Byis E!.,

122.3.5 (tha 246b.5

p.

= 22b.5):

Cf. Sa-pal).'s Tshig & gter, p. 131.4.5 (tha 265b.5

13b.5) where he speaks of the fields of knowledge as "mkhas E!.

~ ~

pa'i

Bill ~."

11KhJ (D), p. S2.1.2 (tha 165a.2

mkhas

~shes

.ii bzhin rtogs

12Ibid :

3a.2):

bya' i de kho na/ /

lli!!. i l l lli!!. 'dod/ /

mkhas E!. zhes .QE ba ~ .ill ce na/

shes.QE thams cad phyin

ci

rna .!2R lli!!. shes E!. .ill W .

Cf. Sa-paJ;t 's Snye .!!!2. sgom chen i l l dris lan, p.
41S.3.5 (ill!. 24Sb.5):
de'ang paQdita .QE ba.PhI.!. nang & shes bya'i gnas 1a ~
E!. 1a zero

11

13KhJ (D), p. 82.1.2 (tha 165a.2

= 3a.2):

brag sbyangs pa' i don shes ~ I

de E!!!8. de la mkhas

.ill!,

i.J:E! I .

gzhan ~ ~ brag ~ bslabs

14 Ibid :

.ill!. zhes .QY!. ba' i ming thob

.ill!,

E2J.

shes

.ill!,

de la' ang de nyid

la

15 Ibid ., line 3:

.Y!!l brda sprod rtog ~ dangl I

ba .P!.!.vi nang L!.B. ces gsungsl I

sprod .ill!. sgra dangl

.P!.!.vi rol
sman ~ dol I.

rtog

tshad rna dangl

ba

L!.B. .ill!,

L!.B..ill!,

bzo dangl

nang

according to Shakya-mchog-ldan's commentary, those three are the

which

engage the objects to be learned and which

in them.

Shakya-mchog-ldan, Mkhas.ill!" p. 102.5:

.lli!L bzhag .ill!, la mkhas mg:

I.!! ba' i .Y!!l bden

.ill!,

create

gnyis shes tshul dangl

byed pa' i .Y!!l can rtsom 'chad rtsod gsum la mkhas dgos mg: bstan
170n

.ill!,

the title papdita and its threefold classification into

..P.Q. or mkhas .ill!, mkhas .ill!, or mkhas pa'i rab,

see Shakya-mchog-ldan,
usage,

paudita

mastery

or

bstan bcos 'di'i Ius

(1)

(2) mkhas pa'i bar rna,

Mkhas.ill!" pp. 101.5f.

is one who knows the five major fields

mkhas

ste/.
papdita
and

(3)

According to
of

knowledge,

one may become a "lesser paQqita" (paudita chung W by mastering just the
five lesser fields of knowledge. The five lesser fields are:
(1) sgra (Sanskrit grammar)

(2) snyan ~ (poetics)

(3) ~ sbyor (metrics)
(4) zlos ~ (drama)

(5) ming & mngon brjod (lexicon or synonymy)

To become a "great pa:~J.(;tita" (papdita chen .QQ.), one has to master all ten fields of
knowledge.

But cf. R. K. Mookerji (1969), p. 569, where the title papdita is said

to have been sometimes reserved for the head of a Buddhist "university" in

India,

and sometimes applied to all "graduates."

qokhale eds. (1957), p. xxxvi:

V.

Cf.

also D.

D.

Kosambi and

V.

'~hese viharas [Vikramasila, UddaQqapuri, and Jagaddala] gave the title

~Qdita (of the institute in question) by royal command
To judge from
survivals in Tibet, the official title papdita must have involved long study
leading to a formal examination in the Buddhist scriptures by the leading scholars

12

of the particular vihara; the successful candidate would, presumably, be granted a

royal stipend along with the title, or Taranatha's references have no meaning."
was the first Tibetan who studied the five lesser fields

Sa-pa~

ledge intensively.

See for example Shakya-mchog-1dan,

know-

p. 69.3: kha ba

Mkhas~,

de las sngon du .!ill!. byon pa' i .!iK gnas 1nga mkhyen

Shakya-mchog-1dan, Chos .ill.. 'khor, p. 466.1
' dir

9!!!.

of

zhes/

See

also

It is not clear when Sa-pal} first acquired the title "PaI].~ita." He is said
one source to have been so called first by Sakyasri and the latter's retinue

in

after

Sa-pal}

meeting

demonstrated his knowledge of Sanskrit at the time of

(in 1204).

See the account of Go-rams-pa as quoted by L.

their

first

van der Kuijp

(1983), p. 100 and note 290.

seems

Sa-pal}
young scholar.

in fact to have claimed the title for himself when

In the colophon to his Ro1 mo'i bstan bcos written perhaps in 1203

or 1204 (but in any case before 1209),

most

still

he styles himself "a paI].qita who has

of the commonly recognised fields of knowledge the object of his

made

cognition,

who although youthful in years possesses an old [i.e. mature] intellect."

See his

Ro1 mo'i,

pha1 .!!!2..

che

p. 80.2.5 (tha 161a.5 =74.5): shes bya'i gnas

.Y2.!!.8. ~ ~ ~

1a b10s .yy!. du byas pa' i pa\ldita 10 gzhon ..Y.!!!!.8. b10 gros rgan .P2. shakya' i

bsnyen kun ~ .!:&.Y& mtshan ~

An earlier teacher with the title pa\ldita is mentioned in the biography
'Bri-gung 'Jig-rten-mgon-po (1143-1217).
He was one Mgo-pa PaI].gita,
rished in the 1160s. See Khetsun Sangpo, vol. 9, p. 206.
18The KhJ demonstrated his knowledge of Sanskrit poetics,
begin to study in earnest until about 1205.
graphy

were

shown

by his Sdeb sbyor

who

of

flou-

which he did not

His knowledge of metrics and lexicotshogs

.!2R.&i chun

Tshig .&i

.E.Q. and

gter, respectively.
19Sa-pal}

commonly

Grags-pa-rgya1-mtshan.
especially
pal}.

used

the title chos

when referring

For the later Sa-skya-pa tradition,

in the form chos

~~--became

to

his

uncle

however, the title--

identified almost exclusively with Sa-

Cf. Shakya-mchog-1dan, Chos .ill.. 'khor, p. 467.3: chos .ill..

zhes

ba'i

mtshan ..Y.!!!!.8. sngon bod du .!ill!. ~ ~ ~ ~ thob ~

20KhJ II 3, autocommentary, (D) p. 94.4.6 (tha 190b.6 = 28b.6): mnyan bya'i
chos

kyang sangs

kyis gsungsl

mkhas

las brgyudl

grub thob kyis

[191a]

bsgomsl paJ)ditas bshadl 10 tsa bas bsgyurl ~~ dang bod.ill.. sde snod 'dzin
~ mkhas ~ thams cad la legs .E.!!:. ~ pa'i chos la nyan bshad byed dgos/ de Ita
.!ill!.

.vi!!. na

~~

ill mkhas

~ ~ kyis brnyas .E.!!:. ~ tel

sangs ~ kyis

13

~ ~ gsungs .ill!. ~

'!J. ~ !2.1 /
also the ThGS,

p.

rang bzo' i chos bshad .ill!. bstan .ill!. 1a

3.3.2 (tha 7a.2).

,a;:..ts.na(l-IJla'S biography of Bu-ston, p. 13b.5.

(~

74a.2:

5a.2),

Cf.

gnod

ces

the similar statement in

Sa-pa\l in his Skyes bu dam.ill!., p.

credits Grags-pa-rgya1-mtshan with teaching him

the

ty of conforming with what the Buddha taught.

autocommentary.
not by any means the first Tibetan to criticize
religious polemics.

his

countrymen

The great translator Rin-chen-bzang-po (958-1055) was

several early Tibetans who wrote refutations of erroneous religious

as

Sa-pa~

prac-

mentions near the end of his Sdom gsum rab dbye.

See also the
of erroneous Tantric practices listed by Bu-ston near the end of

canonical catalogue section of his Chos

3061, 3064).

One important aspect of

Sa-pa~'s

(S.

Nishioka [1983],

p.

118,

critical doctrinal studies was

apocryphal Sutras and Tantras from those accepted as genuine

Indo-Tibetan tradition.

catalogue section (S.

Chos~,

by

On this see for instance Lho-pa, p. 47b.3; BuNishioka [1980],

p.

78);

and G10-bo

KhJNSh, p. 106b.
Gene

Smith (1969b),

p.

was the Rnying-ma-pa:

Dpa1-'dzin,

63,

asserts that another target of

in

form

and phraseology from the

the Rnying-ma-pa,

Lhas-

and Bu-ston) were 'reformers' who attacked

on the grounds that Sanskrit originals could not be found,

differed

Sa-pa\l's

"Sa-pa\l [and Chag-10] (like 'Gos Khug-pa

'new'

and the extent to which

tantras."
he

and

the
the

Sa-pa\l's

participated

in

practices, requires further investigation.

23KhJ III 73d:
bda.s. ~ 'bad kyang gzhan ~ 'dzin .ill!. .!!Y..!:!!!.8.I /
24E M Forster (1962), p. 28: " Genuine scholarship is one of the highest
successes which our race can achieve.
No one is more triumphant than the man who
chooses

a worthy subject and masters all its facts and the leading facts

subjects neighboring.

they are to himself he would long ago have civilized the human race.
he has failed.

of

the

If his conclusions could be as valuable to us as

As you know,

True scholarship is incommunicable, true scholars rare."

14

Sa-pa~'s

25 Cf
autocommentary

also not transmittable.

26The
compulsory

statement in KhJ I 34 (D p.

that ultimate truth is

third

it

is

See also below, KhJ III translation, note 95.

section

curriculum

84.3.4 [61a.4]) and KhJ III 37

not "knowable," which implies that

of

of the KhJ has recently been included within the

the Sa-skya-pa students at the Central Institute of

Higher Tibetan Studies, Sarnath, following the recommendations of a committee of

leading Sa-skya-pa scholars in India.
27 The

rationale

expressed by G.

for

the study of such works as the KhJ

Makdisi (1981),

p.

xiii:

has

been

aptly

"The form and content of intellectual

works are intelligible in the extent to which the methods of

and composition are understood in their essential details."

instruction,

study

Chapter 1
THE LIFE OF SA-SKYA PA~~ITA:
SOURCES AND CHRONOLOGY

Because

Sa-pa~

religious,

was universally acknowledged as one of the key figures

political and scholarly history of Tibet,

of his accomplishments are found in many places within

accounts

can

in

accounts of his life or

Tibetan

be located in the standard political

and

literareligious

as well as in commentaries on his writings and in various other works.

exist a number of independent

full-Iengt~

or by later followers of the

biographies that were written

tradition.

Indeed,

probably

no

the 13th century is the subject of so much biographical writing.

one reads these accounts,

the first thing that strikes one is the

rela-

The eulogistic element predominates

places,

and so far nobody has gone through these sources wIth the aim of

discerning the historical kernel by removing the eulogistic and

legendary chaff. 1
be

some-

Here is not the place to attempt that in any detail.

worthwhile as part of an introduction to his works to list

It
at

the main sources on his life and to extract from the most important of them
of his career.

Biographical Sources
What

follows is an enumeration of the main biographical

their nature as witnesses,
or biographical,
sources

are

i.e.

sources,

grouped

according to whether they are auto-

or whether primary or secondary.

In addition, the

divided into different groups according to

the

type

of

literature to which they belong.

I. Autobiographical Sources

The sources that must be given the most weight in any study of his life are
those

that date from his lifetime,

and of course a very great importance must be

assigned to those works which issued from his own pen.

Sa-pa~ did not compose an
autobiography as such.
But he did sometimes record details of his early studies

16

and

development,

vein.

or

set down his thoughts and feelings in

an

autobiographical

For instance, he gives in the following works details about his studies:
(1) .fu@. brgyad ma'i 'grel.ill!. (pp. 148.3.4-154.4.6)

(2) Chag 10 tsa ba'i zhus Ian (pp. 411.3.3-412.1.3)

(3) Mkhas

(KhJ) (pp. 81.4.2-82.1.1)

(4) Sdom gsuro rab dbye (DS) (pp. 320.3.1-6)

Other

sources

give more intimate views of his personality,

for instance on

his

indebtedness to Rje-btsun Grags-pa-rgyal-mtshan for his intellectual flowering, on

his

assessment

of himself and his own accomplishments,

and on his

disillusionment because of the hostile reception his works received.

feelings

of

To list just

a few:
(5) Phyogs bcu'i sangs ~ dang ~ chub
'phrin.viB. (p. 327.3.4, et passim)
(6)

btsun rin ..P2. che

.ill!.

.E.&lli. mtshan ill

II. Biographies
The
disciples

~~~

la

zhu

bstod .ill!. (p. 321.3.5)

His Students

next group of primary sources consists of those accounts that his

set down in writing.

written while

Sa-pa~

ba'i

These fall into two groups:

own

(A) those that were

was alive, and (B) those that were composed after his death.

A. Contemporaneous Accounts
Two of

Sa-pa~'s

students wrote biographies of him when he was still

but after his debate with Harinanda (c. 1240).

(1)

Lho-pa kun-mkhyen Rin-chen-dpal,

kun mkhyen rin chen dpal

pp. 38b.1-57a.1.

living

They and their works are:

Dpal ldan sa skya paQ.dita' i..!:lli!E!. thar

mdzad.ill!.,

Lam 'bras slob bshad, vol. 1 (ka),

17

Zhang

Rgyal-ba-dpal,

Dpal ldan sa skya paudita chen po' i.!:ill!!!! .ill!!.

SKKB, vol. 5, pp. 433.2.1-438.4.6.

work

in particular was composed in the last few years

from Tibet in 1244 since he mentions

that at the time of composition
2

Sa-pa~'s

Sa-pa~

~~~~

Sa-pa~'s

studies,

which

Both consist for the

and the former is the most detailed and

seem to have

'Phags-pa Blo-gros-rgyal-mtshan,
vol. 6, pp. 31.3.3-32.1.2

(~

been

written

Chos ill pa'i rnam

by

his

younger

tharbsdus~,

SKKB,

62b.3-63b.2).

Yar-klungs-pa [Byang-chub-;rgyal-mtshan?],

(3)

Klungs

Accounts
survive

Sa-pa~'s

was dwelling in Dbu-ru'i

One cannot date the second work as precisely.3

of records of

before

debate with Harinanda, and

sky a paydi ta chen po' i .!:ill!!!!.ill!!. thar

Yar-klungs-pa Grags-pa-rgyal-mtshan,

Bla.!!@. chos ill ill dpal ldan

mdor bsd us

~.

Chos ill ill sa skya

~ .!:.8.Y!!l

mtshan dpal bzang po' i .!:ill!!!!.ill!!. thar ~ 'bring

slob bshad, vol. 1 (ka), pp. 32b.1-38b.1.

pa:odita

J2Q,

Lam

kun
'bras

first, which is by his nephew 'Phags-pa (1235-1280), was written in Liang-chou

is mainly useful as an account of Sa-pa~'s final years.
versified eulogy.
~

According

The second work is

Commonly called the Chos .!:.8.Y!!l.!!@.,

texts. 4
to

it is found in

In it too the account of his final

the colophon it was written by "rigs.ill!!.

days
~

is
ba

a
Sa-

preYar

1~~~~~" at Liang-chou in the lunar month after Sa-pa~'s passing. 5 The third is
a

versified eulogy,

though much longer and with many

title seems to be Chos ill ill sa skya pa:odita kun

more

details.

.!:.8.lli mtshan

More than half its length was devoted to telling

last years and death.

of

Its
dpal
Sa-

Its author appears to have been a disciple of Sa-pa~,

this is not definitely established. 6

18

C. Lost Biographies

His Students

In addition to these,

one reads in later sources that other disciples also

wrote biographies.

For instance,

rab-rgyas (vol.

p. 21.5 [11a.5]) mentions a biography by 'U-yug-pa Rigs-pa'i-

1,

the.! mdo chos

of

Dkon-mchog-bstan-pa-

seng-ge.
The Gsung sgros ,!!g! biography printed in both the Lam 'bras slob
and Ngor-chen's collected works lists in its colophon (Lam 'bras slob bshad,
1 [ka], p.
following:

67a.5) not only the biographies by Lho-pa and Zhang,

vol.

but also by the

Dmar-ston Chos-kyi-rgyal-po
Bi-ji Rin-chen-grags
Dam-pa Kun-dga'-grags [=Sga A-gnyan-dam-pa]
Bar-ston Rdo-rje-rgyal-mtshan
The

same

colophon

is found in a manuscript of this Gsung sgros,!!g! from

Glo-bo

(Mustang) published in Selected Biographies of Sa-skya-pa Lam 'bras Masters (Dehra

Dun:

Sakya Centre,

Sngags-'chang

1985),

p.

173 (kha 33a).

Kun-dga'-rin-chen

sgros ,!!g! biography by Bi-ji,

(Srid

gsum,

A-mes-zhabs in his biography

p.

26b.3) does mention a

though it is now unavailable.

of

Gsung

Biographies by

the

remaining three authors, however, are otherwise completely unknown.

III. Full-length Biographies

.h Authors
Among

the

of Later Generations

secondary sources at least three

full-length

biographies

are

skya paQdita'i

known:
(1) [Ngor-chen Kun-dga'-bzang-po?
thar

sgros,!!g!,

(1389-1456)],

Dpal

Lam 'bras slob bshad, vol. 1 (ka), pp. 57a-67a; SKKB,

vol. 9, pp. 30.3.4-36.3.5.

(2)

Mang-thos Klu-sgrub-rgya-mtsho (1523-1596),

paQdi ta 'i .!!& mtshar rtogs br j od

dang deli 'grel ~.
(3)

Rin-spungs-pa

~.&Ii

'Jam dbyangs bla rna

skya

'khri shing .y& 'dab n yer .&9:R

Ngag-dbang-'jig-rten-dbang-phyug-grags-pa

(1542-1625?),

'Jam dbyangs mi' i srid ~ ~ skya paQdita kun ~ ~ mtshan dpal

bzang

19

.2,0' i

rtogs .Q!. br jod .Q!. bskal .Q!. bzang po' i legs lam,

vol. 1

Lam' bras slob bshad,

pp. 67a-145a.

(~,

is

a work which purports to combine the contents of

listed above,

all but two of which are now unavailable.

the name of its compiler.

six

The

bio-

colophon

It is included in the Derge

edition

NQOr--ctlen's works and is attributed to Ngor-chen by A-mes-zhabs in his biograSngags-'chang Kun-dga'-rin-chen (Srid .Q!. gsum.

p.

20b.4) and by

ims-rin-chen in the latter's gsan 1iK (Dpal ldan,

.!:ill!!! thar

gsung sgros
is

-mtshan

ill rdo ill 'chang

vol.

Zhu-chen

= ka

1, p. 613.4

mdzad .Q!..

similar to that of the Lam 'bras history by

Its

basic

Bla-ma-dam-pa

(1312-1375) and to the Lam 'bras history included

in

the

De nyid 'dus.Q!. compilation of Bo-dong Pa9-chen Phyogs-las-rnam-rgyal (1375) (Encyclopedia Tibetica, vol. 106, pp. 540.3-557.2).

Probably both the Gsung

Bo-dong's compilation derive from

Bsod-nams-rgyal-mtshan's history.

The second work listed above is

not yet available.

It is included in the list of Klu-sgrub-rgyain a modern bibliographical compilation. 7 Probably it consisted of
basic work with a prose commentary.
The third later biography, the
by Rin-spungs-pa,
is a very long work in verse with many small explanatory
(mchan bu).

It was completed by its eminent author in 1579.

IV. Genealogical Histories

Accounts of Sa-pa9's life are also found in the family histories of the Sa'Khon.

Several such histories existed in the past,

but the most famous

of A-mes-zhabs Ngag-dbang-kun-dga'-bsod-nams (1597-1659),

around the versified

is

which was

struc-

rabs by Dkon-mchog-lhun-grub (1497-1557).

A-mes-

work has the ponderous title 'Dzam gling

~ ~

lli thub pa'i

chen .P.2. dpal ldan sa skya pa' i gdung rabs rin .P.2. che .i!. ltar byon pa' i tshul
~.ill!!: thar .Q!..!!82. mtshar rin .P.2. che' i bang mdzod dgos 'dod kun ~.

In
recent reprint of this work in its Derge edition, the biography of Sa-paq is
on pages 93.6-170.6. 8 A-mes-zhabs copied this biography almost verbatim
Glo-bo mkhan-chen' s Mkhas ~..!:ill!!!! bshad.

20

V. Religious Histories
Sa-pa~'s

including

both

lineages.

In

life story is also briefly told in various religious

general works and those that relate the origins of
the completion (rtsom 'phro kha skong) by

(b.

1649) of the Ngor

cal

sketch (pp.

chos~,

314.6-321.7).

Sangs-rgyas-phun-tshogs

for instance, there is an important biographi-

Also in the histories by the Sa-skya-pa

Mang-thos Klu-sgrub-rgya-mtsho (1523-1596)

mkhan-po Chos-rnam-rgyal

histories,
particular

(flo

(~rtsis

pp.

scholars

79b-82a) and Rta-nag-

17th c.) (Bstan.ill!. dang bstan 'dzin.&Ii 10

~,

pp. 75a-76b, 81b-85a) one finds biographical accounts. Sa-pa9 was also a transmitter

of seemingly every Sa-skya-pa lineage that has a separately recorded

(chos

and his life story is accordingly found for instance in

~)

history
the

dif-

ferent Lam 'bras khog phubs, such as those by Bla-ma-dam-pa Bsod-nams-rgyal-mtshan

(1312-1375),
mes-zhabs,9

by Gnyan-ston 'Dul-ba-seng-ge (mentioned in KhJNSh, p. 26b.2), by Aand

by the unidentified author of the Lam 'bras history

in

Bo-dong

Pa9-chen 's De nyid 'dus.ill!. collection. 10 He is also mentioned in the chos ~s

11
12
.
13
of Bde-mchog,
Mgon-po,
and Rdo-rJe-phur-pa.

VI. Political and General Histories

In the political and more general histories too one finds brief accounts of
Sa-pa~'s

(1)

life and deeds.

He is mentioned, for instance, in the following:

Tshal-pa Kun-dga'-rdo-rje (fl.

14th c.),

Deb ther dmar

.QQ.,

p.

Composed in 1346.
(2) Stag-tshang-rdzong-pa Dpal-'byor-bzang-po (fl.

11&

tshang chen

(U.

skrun-khang, 1985 ed., pp. 322f.).

(3)

Pa~-chen

49b ff.

15

early-15th c.),

Composed in 1434.

Bsod-nams-grags-pa (1478-1554),

Deb ther dmar

.QQ.

gsar.!!!.,

pp.

Composed in 1538.

(4) Dpa'-bo Gtsug-lag-phreng-ba (1503/4-1566), Mkhas pa'i ~ ston,

9(3), pp. 760f, 794f (ba 5b, .!!!. 19a-20a).16 Composed in 1565.
(5)

bod

of Washington MS), p. 194a (= Chengdu, Mi-rigs-dpe-

Dalai bla-ma V,

.Y.!:!l ill sa la

Ngag-dbang-blo-bzang-rgya-mtsho (1617-1682),

pa'i

mtho ris

Gangs

ill.!:.Blli.. blon gtso bor brjod pa 'i

vol.

21

rdzogs ldan gzhon nuli ~

113_115. 17 Composed in 1643.

dpyid

kvi ~ moli .&!:!! dbyangs, pp.

VII. Commentaries on Sa-pauls Works

commentators sometimes prefaced their compositions with a biosketch of the author whose work they were about to expound.
Three
examples of this are found in the following texts:

(1) Spos-khang-pa Rin-chen-rgyal-mtshan (fl. early-15th c.), Sdom

rab

tu dbye bali gzhung lugs legs lli!!: bshad

vol.

~,

1,

pp.

gsum

ZIi

9.1-24.3.

Composed in 1427.
(2) Go-rams-pa Bsod-nams-seng-ge (1429-1489),
~

bshad

ba Ii

130.1.1 (ta 14b.2-22a.l).

rab

gsum rab tu dbye

bali

Composed in 1463.

(3) Glo-bo mkhan-chen Bsod-nams-lhun-grub

77b.5 (94.4-154.5).

Sdom

kvi dgongs gsal, vol. 14, pp. 125.4.2-

(1456-1532),

KhJNSh,

pp.

47b.4-

Composed in 1527.

VIII. Biographies of

Great Lamals Previous Embodiments

Sa-paQ was said by some to have been one of the previous embodiments of the
and accordingly there existed the following biography in the
of those incarnations.

The author was

Pa~-chen

I Blo-bzang-

kvi ill ~ skya pandita kun

~ ~ ill rtogs l..lli!.!:. brjod?J ~ dri za Ii .&!:!! dbyangs. 18
and the work was entitled Chos

IX. Miscellaneous
One can find references to Sa-paQ in various works,

such as in accounts of

histories of the various branches of literary scholarship, guides to places of

lists

of teachings received (thob

11K), and supplicatory prayers to

Verses of praise addressed to him can also contain interesting historiinformation. 19

In addition there are the following two works

that

contain

l
22

fairly long accounts of events from his life but which do not fit neatly

anywhere

in the above classifications:

(1) Gser-mgog pal,l-chen Shakya-mchog-1dan (1428-1507), Chos ill 'khor 10

(2) [Zhu-chen Tshu1-khrims-rin-chen] (1700-1769?),

.h!m.

..!!.&L

ba 'i ~ ~ j i 1tar grub pa'i .Ii ~ ~ bor gnas pa'i mdzangs ~

byed, Collected Works, vol. 16, pp. 465-469.
Dpa1..!! skya' i.ill.

!!!!! 1nga' i ~ rab rin ~ che' i .lli!!:. .&Ii ~ 'phar 'byed

.&Q!!8.

chag 'phru1.&Ii 1de!!!!&.,

SKKB,

vol.

7,

pp.

pa 'i ~

315.1.2-316.2.6 (ba 419b.2-

421b.6).
The

first gives good information on the great convocation of 1216 at which Sa-pal,l

presided,
by

probably based in large part on the biography of

Sa-pal,l.

The second contains a biographical sketch that seems to be based

the Ngor chos

on

~.

x.
Recently

Recent Compositions

there have also appeared a number of treatments of Sa-pal,l's

by living Tibetan scholars.

(1)

Grags-pa-rgya1-mtshan

life

Here I will list only the following four:

Mkhan-po Sangs-rgyas-bstan-' dzin,

mdzod [Legs.lli!!:. bshad

rin

.QQ.

.&!!. ~ ba' i gter

Legs bshad 'dod

che' i gter .&Ii don 'gre1 b10 gsa1 bung ba' i

bsti gnas], pp. pp. 3-25.

(2) Shes-rab-rgya1-mtshan,
sa

tu mdor bsdus
(3)

Gdong-thog

10

A-mi-pa, Rgya1 bstan

skya pa' i bstan 'dzin dang bcas

~ !!&Q.

m'::shar

rab

~~

dang

byon tshu1 .&Ii

skya pa'i bstan

rin

Byang
.QQ.

brag .ill. btsun

~ ~

mtsho' i chu thig, pp. 37-42.

spru1-sku Bstan-pa'i-rgya1-mtshan,

tshab dpa1 1dan sa

20

thar

che j i 1tar

shin

thub

pa'i

ba'i

zhing du snyan pa'i sgra dbyangs, pp. 93.1-99.4 (47a.1-

50a.4).
(4) Dge-bshes Thugs-rje-dbang-phyug,
brag dpa1 Idan ~ skya pa' i bstan
bu'i bang mdzod, pp. 136-153. 21

'Phags bod du
~

rin

.QQ.

che' i 10

bstan

~ !!&Q.

dang

mtshar .!!.QE.

23

recent studies do not have the historiographical importance of the earlier

and I have not relied upon them.
In the following b~ographical.sketch,
the information derives from either the autobio-.
passages or the earliest biographies.

Before beginning

that

sketch,

should conclude this survey by putting the main biographical sources in

perspective,
chronological

listing twenty-two of them consecutively in their

order.

The Roman numerals in parentheses refer to

apthe

above where each was described.

*
Table 1

The Main Accessible Accounts of Sa-skya PaQdita's Life

Listed in Chronological Order
1~".nn_T,a

kun-mkhyen Rin-chen-dpal.

Composed early 1240s. (II.A.1)

Composed early 1240s. (II.A.2)

Composed 1251.

(II.B.2)

(ILB.1)
Composed late-13th c.?
',~t~~'~~'-va

Bsod-nams-rgyal-mtshan. Composed 1344.

Kun-dga'-rdo-rje. Composed 1346. (VI.1)

8pos-khang-pa Rin-chen-rgyal-mtshan.

Composed 1427.

Stag-tshang-rdzong-pa Dpal-'byor-bzang-po.
BO-dong Pa~-chen [?].

(VIL1)

Composed 1434.

Composed before 1452.

(II.B.3)

(V)

(VI.2)

(V)

Ngor-chen Kun-dga'-bzang-po [?]. Composed before 1457? (111.1)

Go-rams-pa Bsod-nams-seng-ge.

Composed 1463.

Glo-bo mkhan-chen Bsod-nams-lhun~grub.

(VII.2)

Composed 1527.

Pa~-chen Bsod-nams-grags-pa. Composed 1538.

(VI.3)

Dpa'-bo Gtsug-lag-phreng-ba. Composed 1565.

(VI.4)

Mang-thos Klu-sgrub-rgya-mtsho.

(VII.3)

Composed 1578. (V)

Rin-spungs-pa Ngag-dbang-'jigs-med-grags-pa. Composed 1579. (111.3)

Rta-nag mkhan-po Chos-rnam-rgyal. Composed first half 17th c.? (V)
A-mes-zhabs Ngag-dbang-kun-dga '-bsod-nams.
Composed 1629, based on no. 13,~
above (VII.3). See also the other works of A-mes-zhabs in (V).
Dalai bla-ma V Ngag-dbang-blo-bzang-rgya-mtsho. Composed 1643.
Sangs-rgyas-phun-tshogs. Composed late 17th c.? (V)

[Zhu-ch~n Tshul-khrims-rin-chen].

Composed 1736.

(IX.2)

(VI.5)

24

Chronology of the Main Events in Sa-pap.'s Life

Sa-paQ was
chen-'od-po,

and

born in the spring of 1182.

22

He was the first son

of

Dpal-

was at birth the likely heir to the spiritual legacy of the Sa-

skya-pas.

The

monastery

throughout

Tibet.

of Sa-skya was then a

religious

establishment

Founded in 1073 by 'Khon Dkon-mchog-rgyal-po,

known

it had in

the

following century won great eminence as the seat of Dkon-mchog-rgyal-po's son, Sachen Kun-dga'-snying-po (1092-1158),
and

adepts of his age.

who was one of the greatest Tantric scholars

Sa-chen was succeeded mainly by his two

sons

Slob-dpon

Bsod-nams-rtse-mo (1142-1182) and Rje-btsun Grags-pa-rgyal-mtshan (1147-1216).

Both had adopted the celibate life and were famed religious teachers.
Sa-chen's
first son had died as a young man while studying in India. 23 His fourth and only
remaining son was

Sa-pa~'s

father,

a lay meditator and doctor,

whose duty it was

to perpetuate the family line and look after their secular interests.
The

year of

Sa-pa~'s

uncle Bsod-nams-rtse-mo;

birth had already seen the premature passing

of

his

thus there must have been special rejoicing at the birth

of this first son of the next generation.

Early Studies
The
an

infant was given the name Dpal-ldan-don-grub ("Glorious

indication

of

the high hopes placed in him.

He was a

Siddhartha"),

remarkably--or

even

miraculously--precocious youngster, if we can believe the accounts of his disciple-biographers. 24 As an infant he is said to have written Indian characters in
the

dirt while playing on the ground and then to have carefully avoided

over

them.

In any case,

there is no reason to doubt that he was

crawling

exceptionally

intelligent and that this became apparent from his very early childhood.
Sa-pa~ (as I will anachronistically call him) began his formal education by
the

age of five or six.

One of his main early teachers was his uncle Grags-pargyal-mtshan and the other was his father. 25 The most important subjects of these
childhood studies were the numerous Tantric rituals followed in his family, and
the Tantras on which they were based. He had to memorize each text and give proof
of his understanding at a public recitation and explication.

His memory was good;

already at the age of seven or eight he correctly recited Saroruhavajra's sadhana

of Hevajra and other sadhanas. 26
At age ten or eleven he recited and expounded
the Hevajramulatantra.

After that he recited the

Panjara and Samputa, and by the

age of fourteen (1196) he is said to have received and understood all the
ritual

practices that had come down from his ancestors.

central

From his father he also

25

learned medicine and prognostication,

he continued

while at the feet of

Grags-pa-rgyal-mtshan

to receive more and more of the great corpus of

tantric

teachings

that Sa-chen had gathered and transmitted to his sons.

In the meantime he

learned various practical subjects such as calligraphy,

drawing,

also

painting,

and

astrological calculations.

Auspicious

In the year

1199 when

Sa-pa~

bis future greatness as a scholar.

was seventeen he had two dreams that presaged

One dream was that a saffron-clad monk named

Vasubandhu was expounding the Abhidharmakosa before the great A-phyi stupa at
skya, and
In the

Sa-pa~

second

"Dignaga's
Prama9a,

dream

he dreamt that he was at

Cave" at *Cakranagara [7] ('Khor-lo-can),

in eastern

Sa-

himself was seated there, listening reverently to the exposition.

India.

including

very

pleasant

place

a district in

There he was given the key to many volumes of

called

*Vijayak~etra

scripture

the PramaQasamuccaya and the seven treatises of

on

Dharmakirti.

Sa-pa9's later biographers attached a great significance to these dreams, as Abhidharma and

Prama~a

were indeed two subjects in which he excelled

propagated widely as a mature scholar. 27

and

which

he

Youthful Travels and Studies

When Sa-pa~ was in his late teens it was decided that he should be sent to
other parts of Tibet to pursue further studies under renowned scholars. He was to
study the Madhyamaka,

Abhidharma and the Five Dharmas of Maitreya,

be was

to

Tantric

and general Mahayana teachers in all Tibet,

prived of
Instead,

learn Prama~a.

but above all

Though Grags-pa-rgyal-mtshan was one of

the

as a youth he had

the chance to study at one of the great seminaries of Dbus or

he

finest

been

de-

Gtsang.

had learned the scholastic treatises from his older brother or

from

other scholars who came to Sa-skya.

Now Grags-pa-rgyal-mtshan must have felt
satisfaction seeing that his promising nephew was about to follow in the footsteps
of Sa-chen and Bsod-nams-rtse-mo,

who in their youths had both left Sa-skya

to

stUdy at great seminaries in Central Tibet.

'Phrang

Sa-pa9 left Sa-skya in 1200 at the age of eighteen and journeyed to

in the upper Nyang valley.28 There he joined the monk-scholar Zhu-ston

Rdo-rje-skyabs, who was also a disciple of Grags-pa-rgyal-mtshan.

Under Zhu-ston
at , 'Phrang (and later at Sa-skya), Sa-pa~ studied the Five Dharmas of Maitreya

26

with

their commentaries,

four of Nagarjuna's "Yukti-corpus" (rigs tshogs)

tises, the Satyadvayavibhanga of Jnanagarbha, and the Madhyamaka1awkara of

.
29
ra k ~J.ta.
30
Sa-pa~ left Zhu-ston to
Then, sometime in the next year (1201),
with the illustrious scholastic master Mtshur Gzhon-nu-seng-ge,
at the temple of Rkyang-'dur which was nearby in Upper Nyang.

study

who was teaching

This teacher was

the student of the famed Gtsang-nag-pa and of the latter's foremost disciple.
taught
first

Sa-pa~

two new subjects:

his text was Dharmakirti's

and the Prasabgika Madhyamaka.

Prama~a

PramaQavini~caya

the Prasannapada of Candrakirti. 31

taught

(PVin),

He

For the

and for the latter

he

These studies were interrupted in 1203

by the serious illness and death of Sa-pa~'s father; because of this, Sa-pa~ had
to return to Sa-skya.
Later, however, he was able to return to Rkyang-'dur and
give a formal exposition of the PVin,
the

years

his first formal scholastic

teaching.

In

1203-1204 during his home visits Sa-paQ also pursued his interests

grammatical and musical studies,

and he even seems to have learned some

in

Sanskrit

from Grags-pa-rgya1-mtshan.

Studies with ~akyasribhadra and

the Other Three Pundits
In

the

following year (1204) when passing through Gtsang Chu-mig

on

the

road between Rkyang-'dur and Sa-skya, Sa-pa~ met an Indian master who would have a
32
great influence over his development as a scholastic phi10sopher.
This was the
Kashmiri

pa~4ita ~akya~ribhadra,

invitation

of

who had recently arrived in Tibet

Khro-phu 10-tsa-ba.

He was then teaching the

PVin,

through
and

the

Sa-pa~

joined these lectures. These studies together, however, did not last long because
Sakyasri left for Dbus by the summer of 1205.
Nevertheless, Sa-pa~ was able to
continue
other

his

studies under en Indian

pa~4ita

scholars in SakyastI's entourage,

because he arranged for one of

Sugatasri,

to act as his tutor

and

the
to

accompany him back to Sa-skya.

Sa-pa~

seems to have spent most of the next three years (1205-1207) at his

home temple of Sa-skya,

works

they

kavya,

studies,

Sa-pa~

Sa-pa~

The

studied included treatises on Sanskrit grammar, poetics (a1rupkara33

lexicography, and drama.
As for philosophical and doctrinal

sastra),
time

assiduously studying Sanskrit texts with Sugatasrl.

and his tutor mainly covered PramaQa and Tantra.

was translating from Sanskrit to Tibetan;

chen-dpa1 names some seven works that

guidance of this paQ4ita.34

Sa-pa~

Within a short

the biographer Lho-pa

worked at

translating

under

Rinthe

27

Sa-pa~ rejoined Sakyasrl by 1208,

and it was then at Nyang-smad Rgyan-gong .

that he took full monastic ordination from the great Kashmiri upadhyaya,
by

two

of his Tibetan teachers and in the midst of a great assembly of

From then until about 1213,

skrit grammar,

Sa-pa9 spent much time with ~akya~ri,

assisted
35

monks.

studying

San-

the Abhisamayalamkara, the Mahayanasawgraha, Abhidharma,

36
various minor works of Vasubandhu, Prajnaparamita, Vinaya, and Vajrayana.
In
37
1210 Sakyasri spent the rainy-season retreat at Sa_skya.
Perhaps at this time
Prama~a,

Sa-p a 9 worked with him on retranslating the

During

Prama~avarttika.

these years the pa~gitas S~ghasri and Vibhuti accompanied ~akyasrI

at least part of the time,

they requested from

and Sa-pa9 was able to receive certain teachings that

38
In addition, Sa-pa~ sometimes studied individu-

Sakyasri.

ally under

S~ghasri.

They worked mainly on PramaQa,

yalawksra,

Madhyamaka,

and

but also on the Abhisama-

39 He also studied with the paQgita Danasila

40
some minor works of PramaQa and part of the commentary on the Amarakosa.

Tantra.

Studies with Tibetan Teachers

Even after his extensive studies under the four paQqitas Sa-paQ seems to
have continued to cultivate more learning through studies at the feet of two more
outstanding

teachers of Tibet.

These were Brtsegs-ston Dbang-phyug-seng-ge

Spyi-bo-lhas-pa Byang-chub-' od.

With the fir.st he studied Madhyamaka,

and the

With the latter,

Dharmas of Maitreya. 41

mtshan who had assisted at Sa-pa~'s ordination,

Grags-pa-rgyal-

he studied Prajnaparamita,

and various major and minor instructions from the lineages then

dharma,
in Tibet,
of

a disciple of

such as the Phyag

the Bka-gdams-pa.

Sa-skya itself.

42

.!:&y!!.

and

PramaQa,
Abhi-

existing

chen.PQ., the Rdzogs ~ chen.PQ., and the precepts

Spyi-bo-lhas-pa gave some of these teachings to Sa-pa9 in

During this period Sa-paQ too probably gav~ some

either as a teaching-assistant of his masters or on his own. 43

instructions,

~ Death of Grags-pa-rgyal-mtshan
In 1216 Grags-pa-rgyal-mtshan passed away.
one era
preceding

and the beginning of another.

generation remaining,

master of Sa-skya.
in Sa-skya. 45

Now,

44 This event marked the end of

with no other male member

Sa-pa~ came into his own as the great

of

the

religious

In this same year he presided at a large memorial convocation

28

Noteworthy Events from His Later Career in Tibet

Sa-paQ's activities during the next twenty-eight years are nowhere recorded
in detail.
But these were his most productive years as a scholar, and his most
active years as a teacher.
In about 1219, when Sa-paQ was thirty-seven years of
age, he is said to have composed his masterpiece on PramsQa, the Rigs gter. 46
This was but one of quite a number of major works that issued from his pen in this
and the following decades.
for

In the year 1225 he is recorded to have been in Samye,

it

was there and then that he met the 'Bri-gung-pa hierarch Dbon Shes-rab47
'byung-gnas.
He was also teaching actively elsewhere during these decades, and

it was probably during this period that he lived and taught for
'
48
Shangs Sreg-s hl.ng.

some

time

at

In about 1232 he is said to have composed his great doctrinal polemic, the
49
Sdom gsum rab dbye.
Three years later in 1235 there occurred the happy event of
the

birth of Sa-paQ's first fraternal nephew and ultimate

successor,

'Phags-pa.

But then only four years later in 1239, Zangs-tsha, who was 'Phags-pa's father and
Sa-paQ's

only brother,

died.

The latter left behind five wives and some

young children, including three sons.

eight

Sa-paQ would seem to have taken responsibi-

lity for 'Phags-pa from about this time.

In
grong

about 1240

near

Sa-paQ

accomplished

debate.

and the five-year-old 'Phags-pa travelled to Skyid50

This was apparently the occasion when

his famous defeat of the Brahmanical

paQ~ita

Harinanda

in

Then,

sometime in the next two or three years, Sa-paQ was back in Dbus,
for some time at Skyid-shod Dga'-ldan. 51 In 1243 he presided at a great

staying
religious
, ,

Sa-pa~

the modern border of Nepal.

convocation
. 52

in which 'Phags-pa gave his first public exposition

of

reI l.gl.OUS text.

Sa-pan's Departure from Tibet and His Death

Sa-paQ's
end

in 1244,

career as a great religious teacher in Dbus and Gtsang came to an

for this is when he received a summons to the court of the

prince

Kodan for the purpose of negotiating the submission of Tibet to

gols.

In the same year,

Mongol

the Mon-

perhaps just before leaving Central Tibet, he ordained

53
'Phags-pa in th~ temple of the Jo-bo (Jo-khang) in Lha_sa.
He then travelled
slowly and with great dignity through Eastern Tibet, giving many religious instructions along the way. He finally reached Liang-chou, the capital of Kodan, in
the fire-horse year (late 1246?),54 and he had his first audience with Kodan in
the

first lunar month of the following fire-sheep year (1247).55

His mission

to

29

the Mongols was a great success.

d
t

5
9

Tibet was spared an invasion,

56

pas received a grant of supremacy.

Sa-pSQ did not live to see Tibet again.

and the Sa-skya-

He passed away at Liang-chou

late 1251 on the fourteenth day of the eleventh lunar month,

57
cious portents.

amidst many

in

auspi-

30

Table 2

! Chronological Chart of the Main Events

in Sa-pao's Life

Year

Age

Birth in Sa-skya

1182
1189-1195

Event

7-13

Early studies and examinations in the main sadhanas and the

Hevajra Tantras

1196

14

Completion

of the basic ritual and scriptural

studies

of

his family lineage

1199

17

Auspicious dreams presaging greatness in PramaQa and

Abhi-

dharma studies
1200

18

Goes to 'Phrang in Nyang-stod, studies with Zhu-ston

1201

19

Goes to Rkyang-'dur in Nyang-stod,

Prasangika with Mtshur-ston

1203

21

Illness
skya.

and death of father.

studies

Returns

Prama~a

and

to

Sa-

tempor~rily

Then gives first formal exposition in Rkyang-'dur.

1204

22

Meets ~akya~ribhadra in Gtsang Chu-mig

1205-1207

23-25

Studies at Sa-skya with Sugata~ri

1208

26

Rejoins Sakyasri.

Takes full monastic ordination at Nyang-

smad Rgyan-gong
1210

28

Sakya~ri stays at Sa-skya for

1213

31

~akya~ri

leaves

Kashmir)

Gtsang

for

the

rainy-season retreat

Mnga'-ris

(and

eventually

31

Age

Event

34

The

death of

Rje-btsun

Grags-pa-rgyal-mtshan.

A great

memorial convocation at Sa-skya.

37

Composes the Rigs gter at Sa-sky a

43

Meets the 'Bri-gung-pa master Sher-'byung at Samye

~.1232

50

Composes the Sdom gsum rab dbye

&235

53

Birth of 'Phags-pa

1239

57

Death of brother, Zangs-tsha

c.1240

58

Journey to Skyid-grong

?J.241-1242

59-60

Stays some time in Dbu-ru Skyid-shod Dga'-ldan

1243

61

Presides at a great religious convocation

1244

62

Mongol

summons.

and

Ordains

debate

with Harinanda

'Phags-pa at

the

Jo-khang

in

Lhasa.

1245-1246

63-64

Travels through Khams and A-mdo

1246?

64

Arrival

1247

65

Meets

in Liang-chou late in the

the Mongol prince

K6d~n,

horse year
first lunar month of

sheep year

1251

69

Death in Liang-chou, 14th day of the 11th lunar month

the

32

1The first modern account of Sa-pa9's life was given by S.

C.

Das in

his

"The Lives of the Pal}-chen Rinpoches or Tasi Lamas," which appeared as part of his
Contributions
(1882),
Das's

Tibet,

pp. 15f.

Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society

Bengal,

vol.

See also the reprint by Manju~ri Publications, New Delhi, 1970.

account was based on the biography that appears in the First PaI}-chen

po-che's 'Khrung rabs,

416f.

This

on which see below.

Cf.

G.

Tucci (1949),

succession of lives was also the subject of a series

illustrations.

51
Rin-

pp. 412-414,
of

blockprint

For the depiction of Sa-paI}, see ibid., p.431, fig. 95.

The next account to appear was that of G. Huth (1892-96), pp. 76f and 123f.
This
chos

was the text and translation of the biographical sketch contained in the Hor
of 'Jigs-med-rdo-rje.
Some fifty years later G. Tucci (1949) pub-

lished a part of the Fifth Dalai Lama's history, including (pp. 625f) the passage
on Sa-pal}.
The next significant biographical sketch was that of J. Bosson
(1969), pp. 2-7, who used the above-mentioned studies as well as the
historical sources then available.
A recent study of note is that of D.
cially the last years of Sa-paQ's life.
paQ

found in A-mes-zhabs's 'Dzam

Schuh (1977),

general

who investigated espe-

On p. 16 he analyzed the biography of Sa-

gling [=Sa skya'i

rabs

,!!!.QJ,

chen

which

ultimately derives from Glo-bo mkhan-chen's KhJNSh.

A list of some biographies of Sa-paQ has appeared in A-khu-chin, MHTL, nos.
10912-10915. Dkon-mchog-bstan-pa-rab-rgyas in his! mdo

chos'~,

vol. 1, p. 21

(lla) ltsts five biographies of Sa-paQ.

2Lho- pa ,
dben gnas [57a]

p.
~

56b.6:

chos

ldan .ill!. bzhugs pa'i tshe/

For mention of the debate,

~/.

.ill.!:.&.Y&.E.Q. nyid dbu ru'i klungs skyi shod .ill

see p. 53b.3.

rin chen dpal

bsdebs

See also below, chapter 5, note

22.
3

Zhang Rgyal-ba-dpal,

p.

437.4.5:

deng sang

.&i bar du gzhung lugs du ma

!:&!.!!!!.!lli! chad M!:. 'chad M. ~.

Note that Tucci (1949),

For the mention of the debate, see p. 438.1.6.

p. 680, note 35, wrongly attributes this biography to Sa-

pal} himself.
version
skya

chos~.

I have had access to is from a recent Indian

In i t this work appears on pp. 19b.1-24a.4.

block print

Sa

33

608.4

5This is supported by Zhu-chen, Gsan ill (=Dpal ldan bla ~), vol. 1, p.
<!!. 304b.4): .!! skya ~ ta'i !:.lli!!!!. thar bstod .m!. chos ~ ~ chung ba

.Y!!!. lung .m!. byang chub

phun-tshogs,

mtshan .8.I.!.. mdzad .m!..

Yar-klungs-pa Grags-pa-rgyal-mtshan,
klungs-pa

But according to Sangs-rgyas-

'phro, p. 320, the brief biography (rnam thar bsdus

was by

as is explained in the following note.

Yar-

Byang-chub-rgyal-mtshan is found among a list of seven junior disciples

who had the final name "rgyal-mtshan."

He apparently participated in the

ordination ceremony of 'Phags-pa in 1255.

According to

full-

Sangs-rgyas-phun-tshogs,

ibid., Yar-klungs-pa Grags-pa-rgyal-mtshan was sometimes added to the above list

of seven to make the group of "eight junior disciples with the final name 'rgyalmtshan.'"
6The colophon ascribes this work to Yar-klungs-pa Grags-pa-rgyal-mtshan,
though the colophon itself was probably added later by someone else (it uses the
honorific verb mdzad with reference to the author). In the colophon, this work is
specified as being the "medium" (bar .m!.) version.
However, Sangs-rgyas-phuntshogs, p. 320.3 (59b.3), attributes a "brief" (bsdus .m!.) version to Yar-klungs-pa
Grags-pa-rgyal-mtshan,

!lli!!:. tshigs bcad ma

was by Yar-klungs-pa

(~

Byang-chub-rgyal-mtshan:

de

!:&ill mtshan nil chos rje'i !:.lli!!!!. thar tshigs bcad ma

Ih!!. W !:.lli!!!!. thar bsdus .m!. rtsoms .m!. .E.Q. ~ lung .m!.
.P!..!:8I!!l mtshan .E!!!&. bsnan ~ .!:&Y1!.!. mtshan mtha' .@. brgyad ~ ~ I .
lung .m!. ~ chub

~~

!&Y!!. .P!.
.&!1!.&.

while stating that the extensive versified biography

~.m!.)

ili2!!!!! [sic]

.ill!..E.Q.

This account is derived from Klu-sgrub-rgya-mtsho, Bstan rtsis, p. 83a.5.

7This

is the Sa skya pa'i dkar chag compiled by the Venerable Khenpo Appey

and others, soon to be published by Ngawang Topgyal,

Jackson (1983a), pp. 4f.

New Delhi.

See

also

D.

Delhi (or Dolanji?), 1975.

A-mes-zhabs, Yongs rdzogs, pp. 193f.

10

12!!!. 'bras bla ~ tshad ma'i

1969), vol. 106, pp. 540.3-557.2.
11

12

lo~,

Encyclopedia Tibetica (New Delhi:

A-mes-zhabs, Dpal ldan.!!, pp. 520.4-523.2 (103b.2-105a.2).

A-mes-zhabs, Dpal rdo

~,

vol. 1, pp. 347.2-360.4.

34

13 'Jam-dbyangs Dpal-ldan-rgya-mtsho,
. chos

Gtsang mkhan-chen,

Rdo i l l phur pa'i

Deb ther dmar ~ (Beijing:

Mi rigs dpe skrun

bsdus ..P!!., pp.188.5f.

14Tshal-pa Kun-dga'-rdo-rje,
khang, 1981), p. 49.
15

Bsod-nams-grags-pa,

rabs,

pp.

49b ff.

For text and translation,

see G. Tucci (1971), pp. 182ff.

16Dpa '_bo Gtsug-lag-phreng-ba,

Mkhas pa'i ~ ston,

Sata-pi!aka

Series,

vol. 9 (3), pp. 760f, 794f (ba 5b, rna, 19a-20a).

17Dalai bla-ma V,

Ngag-dbang-blo-bzang-rgya-mtsho,

Gangs can (Dharamsala:

Shes rig par khang, 1981), pp. 113-115.

18This work is fairly common.

Prints (apparently from the Bkra-shis-lhun-

po edition) exist for instance at the Bihar Research Society, Patna (catalogue no.
710) and at the India Office Library, London (see the catalogue of P. Denwood, no.
120).
19For

instance of a biographical sketch found in prayers or verses

an

of

praise, see Shakya-mchog-ldan, Sa skya ~ chen la bstod"p!!', vol. 17, pp. 21-23.
See also Go-rams-pa, Phar phyin dang tshad rna, Collected Works, Sa skya pa'i bka'
'bum, vol. 11, pp. 22.3.3-23.2.1 (ka 43b.3-45a.1).
20See

also

the English translation,

! Waterdrop from the Glorious Sea

(Rikon: 1976), pp. 36-40.

21See

also the English translation by J.

Schoening,

"The Sa-skya

Throne

Holder Lineage," M. A. Thesis, UniV'ersity of Washington, 1983, pp. 95-117.

22A ccor d"l.ng
rgyal-mtshan?],

p.

to

the short verse biography

19b.3,

by

Yar-klungs-pa

his birth took place on "dpyid zla ra ba

[Byang-chub-

ill .!!.Y.i

shu

drug."
23This

eldest son of Sa-chen is not mentioned by Zhang.

(p. 433.3.6), Sa-chen had only three sons.

24 See Zhang Rgyal-ba-dpal, p. 434.1.2.

According to him

35

25The
435.2.2.

studies

with

his father seem to be

recorded

only

by

Zhang,

p.

Lho-pa does not mention them.

26

According to Zhang,

p.

klungs-pa Grags-pa-rgyal-mtshan,

437 .4.3:
p.

10 bdun Ion

32b.6:

given by Zhang, Yar-klungs-pa, and the Gsung sgros

10

M.

But in Yar:-

The chronologies

~~.

differ a bit.

27For example, Yar-klungs-pa Grags-pa-rgyal-mtshan, p. 33a.3.

28Ibid ., p. 33a.5.
29 Lbo-pa,
late

p.

On this teacher see also D. Jackson (1985a), p. 23.

51b.4.

in the biography,

Lbo-pa lists

whereas he

Sa-pa~'s

~entions

studies with this master quite

Mtshur-ston as the first teacher

im-

mediately after Grags-pa-rgyal-mtshan (see p. 48b.6).

30 Yar-klungs-pa Grags-pa-rgyal-mtshan, p. 33a.6.
31Lho-pa, p. 48b.6.
32According to Yar-klungs-pa Grags-pa-rgyal-mtshan, p. 33a.6, they met when
Sa-pa~

had left Mtshur-ston following

however, states that

chapter 5, notes 12 and 17.
sgros~,

33

Sa-pa~'s

Sa-pa~

exposition of the PVin.

was then coming from Sa-skya.

The Gsung
See below,

Lho-pa, pp. 49a.3f.

34 Ibid

On the Prama~a
below, chapter 5, note 28.

works they studied together in

particular

see

The Gsung sgros ma here inexplicably gives the wrong date--1206--for

ordination. See Lam 'bras slob bshad, vol. 1 (~, p. 59a.6.

his

35

36
37

Lho-pa, pp. 49b.3-51a.3.

Sa-pa~,

lli btsun rin .E2. che'i rnam thar, Lam 'bras slob bshad, vol. 1

(~), p. 28a.5; SKKB, vol. 5, p. 148.1.4.

38

Lho-pa,
pp. 50a.6 and 50b.6.
Bu-ston
Vibhuticandra stayed a long time in Tibet.
See

records
Bu-ston's

that
Chos

Dana~ila
~,

and

E.

36

Obermiller trans. (1931), p. 222.

39

Lho-pa, p. 51a.4.

40 Ibid .,p. 52b.5.

He is known to have worked with this pa~gita in or
before 1208, because in a translation colophon to a work they translated together,
he

designates himself as a lay-adherent (~bsnyen).

See the Slob dpon tsandra
lam, Gzhung bshad klog skya ma sogs, vol. 2, pp. 357-362.

~mi'i ~

41

Lho-pa, p. 51b.3.

42Ibid .,

p.

52a.3. Regarding the question of Sa-pa~'s later refutation of

some of these teachings,

section (5).
43Ibid .,
also G.

p.

see above,

51b.4:

Roerich tr.

Introduction, note 22, and below, chapter 2,

mkhas.ill!!:. sbyangs te gzhan la ..!2!!..ill!!:. mdzad.!!.

(1976),

p.

195, where

Sa-pa~

See

is said to have given tantric

instructions to one Jo-'bar in 1214-15.

44

Sa-pa~,

btsun, Lam 'bras slob bshad, vol. 1 (ka), p. 28a.1; SKKB, p.

148.1.1.
45Ibid ., Lam 'bras slob bshad, vol. 1 (~, pp. 25a-25b.
46

Sangs-rgyas-phun-tshogs,
SKKB, vol. 7, p. 315.3.3.
47G

Roerich tr.

Shes-rab-'byung-gnas's

(1976),

Rtsom 'phro,

p.

606.

p.

316.4;

[Zhu-chen],

Dpal~,

This meeting is described in Dbon-po

biography as having taken place in the fall of

1225

(~

See the Dgongs .89-.&. .lli. cha, vol. 1, pp. 113f, which is the work ~ snga
'bri .8!!!!&. gling pari .!:.!!!!!!!. thar snyan pari 'brug sgra by 'Bri-gung-pa Ratna.

.!Q)

48Zhang Sreg-shing (together with Samye and Nyang-smad Rgyan-gong) is

to

have been one of the "middling residences" of

were Sa-skya and Liang-chou.

Dpal rdo

ill, vol. 1, p. 357.4.

49

See G.

Sa-pa~.

said

His "great residences"

Tucci (1949), p. 680, note 40; A-mes-zhabs,

Sangs-rgyas-phun-tshogs, Rtsom 'phro, p. 316.5.

37

50Ibid ., p. 316.6.
But [Zhu-chen], Dpa1~, p. 316.3.3, states that
'Phags-pa accompanied Sa-pa~ to Skyid-grong in his fourth year (i.e. in 1238).
51 Lho _pa , pp. 56b.6-57a.1.
52Ye-shes-rgya1-mtshan, Lam 'bras slob bshad, vol. 1 (~, p. 150a.6.
53 [Zhu-chen],

Dpa1~,

p. 316.3.4.

54Yar-k1ungs-pa Grags-pa-rgya1-mtshan,

p.

53a.2.

On Liang-chou,

see J.

Szerb (1980a), p. 273, n. 53, and D. Schuh (1977), p. 75, n. 111.

55

Yar-k1ungs-pa

Grags-pa-rgya1-mtshan,

p.

53a.2.

For the chronology of

these years see also D. Schuh (1977), pp. 29 and 57.

56

See also J. Szerb (1980a), pp. 264f, note 9.

57See 'Phags-pa, Chos ill.m!. bde bar, pp. 266.4.4-267.2.6.

The date of his

death was calculated by D. Schuh to have been the 28th of November, 1251, as cited
by J. Szerb (1980), p. 300, note 69.

Chapter 2
PREVIOUS RESEARCH ON THE MKHAS 'JUG
AND OTHER WORKS OF SA-PMj

To
modern

date,

some forty of Sa-paQ's works have been discussed or mentioned in

publications,

ready translated,
only one-the
complete

and nearly twenty have been translated.

however,

Most of those al-

are shorter, minor writings; of his five major works,

Legs 1!!!!. bshad Jll!. rin .Q. che' i gter--has yet been published
Nevertheless,

edition and translation.

been at least discussed by modern scholars,

in

all five major treatises

have

and one can expect editions or trans-

lations of several more in the coming decade.

In the following synopsis of previous research,
and the
areas

four other major works.

of

Tibetan learning,

I will begin with the

In view of Sa-paQ's great importance

religion and history,

every last reference to his works.

in

I cannot hope to have

KhJ
many

traced

Yet what follows should be enough to show

in

some detail how far studies on his writings have progressed until now.

(1)
The

Mkhas Jll!. !:ill!!!!.

The mK' as M
strictly
bshad];

!:ill!!!!.

~ &.MQ.

G.

Tucci.

pp. 101f, this pioneer of Tibetan literary

(in Sanskrit:

Vidagdhavatara) is less

dogmatic [than the Thub pa'i dgongs gsal and Gzhung lugs legs
it

is a small treatise on rhetoric and exegesis,

and at

time it contains a series of precepts on good composition and

the right understanding of texts.

second

pa'i .MQ. (TB no. 6)

first modern scholar to mention the KhJ seems to have been

In his Tibetan Painted Scrolls (1949),

studies described the KhJ as follows:

same

part,

often

goes into

Although the author,

[po

102] subtle details

the
on

mostly in the
and

argues

technical points, the book is altogether a propedeutic, on the lines of

Similar Indian handbooks.
This aCCount requires correction on two points.

"small

treatise" by any standard,

First of ali the KhJ is not a

and within Sa-paQ's collected works it is the

40

third longest.
of

Secondly, Tucci overlooked the existence of the third main section

the work:

that on philosophical discussion and debate.

I am not sure which

Indian propaedeutic handbooks Tucci had in mind as being similar to the KhJ.
The next mention of the KhJ was by E.
duction

to

the Bshad mdzod

(1969),

p.

6,

discussed

ill bzhin
the

Gene Smith, who in his useful intro-

.!!Q!. bu in its ~ata-pitaka

Series

KhJ within the general context of

edition

Tibetan

com-

pendiums:
One

of the earliest scholastic compendia is the Mkhas

Kun-dga'-rgyal-mtshan (1182-1251).

pa~qi-ta

serve
and

as

of

Sa-skya

This work was intended to

a manual for instructing the beginning monk in the

methods

of Mahayana scholarship.

concepts

It is an introduction

to

the

three functions of the scholar: teaching, philosophical refutation, and

literary

composition.

The Mkhas

full-time religious practitioner,

was designed primarily for

the monk.

The Mkhas

of

the
'Jam-

mgon 'Ju Mi-pham-pham-rgya-mtsho (1846-1912) now shares popularity with

that of Sa-skya paqqi-ta.
These are the only two examples
of the
genre that are well-known.
The
from

compendia

of the mkhas

type differ in one major

another group which we can call the

text [the Bshad mdzod

largely
men.
the

layman

mdzod and to

which

ili bzhin nor bu] belongs: whereas mkhas

meant for monks,

The purpose of

b~ad

b~ad

b~ad

aspect
our

are

mdzod are often compiled for pious lay-

mdzod is to serve as a key or outline to help

understand the often abstruse concepts and

categories

of

scholastic

"compen-

Tibetan Buddhism.
While

both

the Mkhas

of

Sa-pa~

and Mi-pham are indeed

diums" of sorts, neither will serve as an introductory manual for beginning monks.
Both in fact are usually read by scholars who have completed considerable preliminary studies.

But beyond this,

and the resemblance of their titles,

works are not really, very similar at all.

of

the

The Mkhas

these

of Mi-pham is an outline

basic concepts of Mahayana Buddhist philosophy,1 whereas that

explains the three functions of the scholar:

The subject matter of Mi-pham's Mkhas
scholastic

teaching,

two

of

Sa-pa~

debating and composition.

was commonly dealt with in the standard

while the content of the Mkhas ~ of Sa-paq was not

covered in any ordinary course of studies. 2 Because of their great differences in
content

as

curriculums,

well as in style and presentation,

it seems there is nothing

to

be

~."

gained

by calling these (and all other?) scholastic compendiums "mkhas

would

prefer to forego the term as the name of a genre and would simply

classify

41

Sa-pa~'s

of

KhJ as a manual of scholarly methodology and Mi-pham's work as an outline

philosophical concepts.

Mahay~na

It

is

position

also to Smith's credit ([1970b],

of

and the Mkhas

Sa-pa~

p.

1) to have noted the

in the development of

kavya

seminal

studies

in

Tibet:
"The

systematic study of Sanskrit poetics begins in Tibet with Sa-skya

Pa~4ita

The Mkhas .m!. ~ pa' i '~ can be regarded as

the

first systematic introduction to the poetical figures."

The

KhJ of

R. Canzio (1980),

was mentioned in passing by J. E. Bosson (1969), p. 4;

p. 72, note 4; and K. Mimaki (1982a), p. 368, note 18. It was

Sa-pa~

also touched on by She

Bira and O. Sukhbaatar (1979), p. 128, who described it,as

"the one of his

Sa-paJ}.'s] philological compositions in which

above all,

[i.e~

the

author,

made an apt and creative comparative study of the Tibetan and Sanskrit

languages similar to modern methods of comparative linguistics [I]."

The

next substantial mention was by

Steven D.

article on Mi-pham-rgya-mtsho and the latter's

peats much of what Smith said.

But he also mentioned (p.

first time that a commentary on Sa-pa9's KhJ existed,

commentary by Shakya-mchog-ldan.
for

later

attested

Tibetan
by

He also observed

(1981).

pp.

67f,

77,

In

his

Goodman re-

note 2) for

the

referring to the incomplete

that the importance of the KhJ

studies on kavya and literary composition

in

the numerous citations of it in the commentary on the

Khams-sprul IV.
Mi-pham.
More

Goodman

Mkhas~,

particular

is

Kavyadar~a

by

In addition, Goodman (ibid.) noted a reference to Sa-pa~'s KhJ by

recently,

L.

van

der Kuijp described the KhJ in his book on

early

Tibetan epistemological traditions (1983), p. 103:

The [KhJ] systematically deals with the methodological guidelines
that govern the three traditional qualities of scholarship of [sic]
composition (rtsom-~,
explication ('chad-~, and debate (rtsodIt has given rise to [an] entire genre of Tibetan works

~).

Thus

far two commentaries to this text have been published,

rather likely,

that,

and it is

given the general importance of this work, addi-

tional ones will surface in due time.

He thus specified the three main sections of the KhJ in their actual
referred to more of its commentarial literature,
mlchan-chen's commentary.
He also mentioned (p.

order,

noting the existence of

306,

and

Glo-bo

note 305) a work that

is

,.

42

similar

in

its subject matter to the KhJ:

though more limited in scope,

"A text belonging to the same

would be the 'Chad-rtsod- [sic] gsum-gyi

legs-bshad nyin-byed snang-ba,

contained in vol.

genre,

rnam-gzh~

Kha of the Collected Gsung-'bum

of Bstan-dar lha-ram of A-lay-sha [sic], New Delhi, 1971, pp. 115-154.,,3

The first study of a specific passage from the KhJ was made by Professor D.
Seyfort

Ruegg

Madhyamaka,

(1983),

he

p.

231f.

In his article on the place of thesis in

discussed the section where

Sa-pa~

described different

the

types

of

disputants who claim to maintain no thesis (III 36-37), including the Madhyamika.

(2) Legs

bshad ..E!!. rin 1!.Q. che' i

gter (LSh) (TB no. 2)

The Legs

bshad ..E!!. rin 1!.Q. che' i gter or Legs bshad is probably

best-known work both inside and outside Tibet.

appeal
what

of its subject matter:

is

good and bad in life.

hermitages
were

Mongolians

it is a collection of wise and pithy sayings about

Its appeal thus reaches far beyond the

and seminaries of Tibet.

known

by

Called the Sa skya legs bshad,

heart not only by countless ordinary Tibetans but

too,

Sa-pa~' s

It owes its fame to the universal

Buddhist

its

also

because it was.translated into the latter language by

verses
by

many

the

14th

century and widely disseminated there.

The Legs bshad was one of the earliest native Tibetan works to attract the
attention of Western Tibetologists.
Indeed, the great pioneer of Tibetan studies
Alexander Csoma de Karos studied two-hundred and thirty-four of its verses in
year

1833 in an article entitled "A Brief Notice of the

Subha~ita

Ratna Nidhi

the
of

Saskya Pa~Qita, with Extracts and Translations." The posthumous publication of

this study in 1855/56 was next followed by a French translation in 1858 of a
selection

of 134 verses by Ph.

E.

Foucaux in his Le tresor des belles

choix de sentences composees en tibetain

and 1865,

Ie lama Saskya Pandita.

paroles;

Then in 1863

A. Scheifner translated thirty-three verses into German in his notes to

the first edition of Otto Bohtlingk,

Indische SprUche.

Then in 1892-96 G.

Huth

presented a German translation of nineteen verses in his Geschichte des Buddhismus

in der Mongolei.
Following those incomplete translations, the first complete text and translation to be published in the West was the German translation of W.
This appeared,

L.

Campbell.

with transcribed Tibetan text, in 1925 under the title Die SprUche
1948

saw the publication of the first of several

reproductions

or

transliterations by L. Ligeti of the work in its pre-classical Mongolian transla4

tion.
In 1952 a partial Czech translation by P. Poucha and P. Eisner is said to

43

have been published in Prague,

and in 1958 the Chinese scholar Wang y~o published'

6
~. A. Stein (1972

a Chinese translation of some two-hundred and twelve verses.

originally

published in French in 1962),

pp.

268-270,

discussed the style

and

origins of these sayings, also comparing similar later Tibetan works.

G. Bethlenfalvy (1965) was the first to study passages from a commentary on

the Legs bshad. 7

E.

Gene Smith (1969a), vol. 1, pp. 122f, also gave some details

on the commentary which was begun by Lho-pa kun-mkhyen but corrected and completed
Sa-pal}'s

under

Annotated

supervision by another of his

transcriptions

translations,

however,

Bosson's .! Treasury
Paodita

in

were not published until 1969.

of Aphoristic Jewels,

Tibetan and Mongolian.

latter

Dmar-ston
with

(Bosson's

English

E.

These appeared in J.

The Subhasitaratnanidhi of

Ligeti in 1948),

Sa

Skya

pre-classical

two recent Tibetan xylo-

and the Tibetan text found with the earlier Mongolian

text

Chos-rgyal.

complete

The texts Bosson used were

Mongolian translation (published by L.

graphs,

disciples,

of Tibetan and Mongolian texts

text A) is of great interest since

translation.

it

probably

The

entered

Mongolia by the mid-14th century.

But in his "edition" of the Tibetan text and
his translation, Bosson did not always indicate which of the several variant
readings he followed.

He also did not have access to any commentary.

In 1973 the Soviet scholar V. S. Dylykova published an article on Sa-pav's

8
sayings.
After that there appeared the article of J. Kolma~ (1978), which is a
good introduction to the Legs bshad and the aphorisms of Sa-paq,
veniently

summarizes the modern publications on it.

and which

within the "Greater Indian" tradition of subhasitas can also be better

now thanks to the books and articles of the late L.
(1974),

p.

40

and note 217;

con-

The place of the Legs bshad

understood

Sternbach: (1973), pp. 224ff;

(1980);

and (1981).9

The sources of some of

verses were treated more recently by M.

Hahn (1984),

who in his earlier textbook

of classical Tibetan (1974),

pp.

216-224 and 239-243,

the

had presented the text of

the first three chapters, together with a brief introduction and textual notes.
Since the mid-1960s a number of other textual and commentarial sources have
become known.

In D. Jackson (1983), p. 7, for instance, I described the discovery

of an incomplete 15th-century xylographic edition from Sa-skya.

There has

also

appeared a recent (1982) Lha-sa typeset edition of the basic text with Dmar-ston's
commentary10 (which I hear has already been reprinted in India).
Given the great
importance of the work for the two Central Asian countries Tibet and Mongolia, it
would seem worthwhile to bring out a critical edition of the Tibetan text, making
USe of the Derge xylographic edition,
edition, the commentaries,
graphs are available.

the extant fragments of the early

Sa-skya

and whatever other significant manuscripts and xylo-

44

(3) Tshad
The
yet

gter

Rigs

(RTRG) (TB no.

rigs pa'i gter (RT) (TB no. 19)

(RT)--with its long autocommentary Rigs

to be thoroughly investigated,

attention.

gter

rang

20)--was Sa-paq's great masterpiece on Buddhist PramsQa.

The

first

'grel
It

though recently it has begun to receive

mention of the Rigs gter that I have located was

by

has
more
Th.

Stcherbatsky in his Buddhist Logic (1930-32), vol. 2 [which appeared first, 1930],
p. 323, note 4, where he described the work as follows:
Rigs-gter

= Nyaya-nidhi,

a concise treatise in mnemonic verses of Sa-

Kun-dgaQ-rgyal-mtshan, held in high esteem by the Tibetans

as their oldest original exposition of Buddhist Epistemology.
Copies

.skya-paq~ita

of the Lhasa block prints are very rare,

I!

no one is available at Lenin-

grad, but a commentary by Rgyal-tshab is found in the Mus. As. Petro

According

to

tradition

his work was originally

written

in

sanscrit.
Here

it

should

be noted that no Lhasa edition of the Rigs gter

though editions from Derge and Sa-skya did exist.

is that Sa-paq wrote the work originally in Tibetan,
Sa-skya.

dbyangs-bzhad-pa's

in c.

1219 while staying at

Blo rigs,

in volume 1 (1932),

pp.

the section on mental

55f,

there is a translation of 'Jamperception,

statements in the Rigs gter are alluded to four times (pp.

Then

now known,

It is said that the work was subsequently translated into Sanskrit.

In the same volume of Stcherbatsky's work,

"

is

Also, the prevailing tradition

323,

where
325,

Sa-paQ's
327, 330).

Stcherbatsky gave another description of the

Rigs gter:
The classical Tibetan work of this period has been produced by the 5th
grand lama of the Sa-skya territory, the celebrated Sa-skya-paQqita
Kunga-gyal-mtshan [sic] (1182-1251).
It is a short mneumonic verse
with

the author's own commentary.

Its title is

Tshadma-rigspai-gter

(prama~a-nyaya-nidhi).

The next scholar to mention the Rigs gter, G. Tucci, also stressed its importance.
In his sketch of Sa-paq's works within his Tibetan Painted Scrolls (1949), p. 102,
he gave this account:
But the Sa skya
of

Pa~qita's

masterpiece is the book which gained him

the foremost places in the history of Lamaistic thought,

one

the Ts'ad

45

!!!!!. rigs

logic,

based

Dharmakirti,
tise,

gter,

an ample and most accurate

on

the Pramapavarttika and on the

and

written

on their commentaries.

exposition

of

Indian
by

PramaQavini~caya

This is a fundamental trea-

in mneumonica1 verse and accompanied by

commentary.

The Sa skya Pa~9ita had some forerunners in this field, but his work
doomed them to oblivion: they are P'vya pa C'os kyi sen ge (1109-1169)
and gTsan pa brTson

~grus

sen ge, who also lived in the Xllth century.

One also finds passing references to the Rigs gter in G.

[originally published in 1953];
Inaba (1961),

p.

A.

Ferrari et.

4; and J. E. Bosson (1969), p. 4.

the only one to have actually seen the Rigs gter;

Roerich (1976), pp. 808f

al. (1958), p. 150, note 497; S.

Of these, Tucci was probably
before the publication of

the

Sa skya bka' 'bum in 1968 from Tokyo, the Rigs gter was quite rare outside Tibet.
Some more details of the place of the Rigs gter within Tibetan PramaQa were
given by E.

Gene Smith (1970a),

and the work was also mentioned by S.

(1978), p. 7, and (1980), notes 2 and 51.

Rigs gter and its commentaries,
has

Matsumoto

The first detailed investigation of the

however, were undertaken by L. van der Kuijp.

studied (1978) Phywa-pa's doctrines in connection with Rigs gter

He

chapter

2.

In another article (1979a), pp. 6f, he touched on the question of Sa-paQ's classification of Tshad ma among the five main fields of knowledge,

,.'..:@

gter.

He has also discussed (1979) the apoha theory expounded in chapter 4

of the Rigs gter,

(1983)

and he devoted the third chapter of his published

dissertation

to an investigation of the place of the Rigs gter within Tibetan

Moreover,

van der Kuijp (1979) presented an edition,

index to Rigs gter chapter 4.

same

as reflected in the

for Rigs gter chapter 8.

work (pp. 104f,

Rigs gter.

topical outline,

PramaQa.
and verse

In his dissertation (1983), pp. 85-95, he gave the

A short but very useful contribution in the

Some other recent references to the Rigs gter include those of Lati
che and E.
review
and did

Napper (1980), pp. 98 and 125.

(1985),
not

ascertain whether the quotes represented Sa-pa~'s

on

L.

Zwilling (1981),

Rinpo-

As L. van der Kuijp pointed out in his

they did not trace the cited quotes back to the Rigs gter

merely purvapaksas. l l
Dharmakirti

same

107) is a chapter concordance of eight major commentaries on the

p.

307,

the two truths found in the Rigs gter,

itself

opinion

or

has studied quotations

of

with the

own
aim

of

under-

standing Sa-pa~'s interpretation of Dharmakirti's philosophy (though unfortunately

he took a quote of PVin II 56 to be a second translation of PV III 3).

S.

Onada

(1981), p. 3, pointed out a topical similarity between the Rigs gter and the order
of classes in the later Dge-1ugs-pa bsdus grwa curriculum.
T. Ti1lemans (1984)
br'le fl y mentions Sa-pa~'s account in Rigs gter chapter 11 on answering prasanga

46

rejoinders in debate.

And Z.

Horvath (1984) has presented a useful topical out-

line of the complete Rigs gter based on the subject headings of the Rigs gter rang
'grel.
listed

Regarding commentaries on the Rigs gter, L. van der Kuijp (1979), p. 410,
seven published commentaries and six unpublished ones, the latter group

deriving from the Tho 1iK of Shes-rab-rgya-mtsho. In (1983), p. 306, note 308, he
repeated the second list, correcting one mistake and one omission.
D. Jackson
(1983a), pp. 8-12, is a preliminary survey of the commentarial writings of twentyfour indigenous scholars. 12

The Thub pa'i dgongs gsal, an expansive treatise on the practice and theory
of

the

Bodhisattva's path,

has yet to receive the attention

it

deserves.

G.

Tucci (1949), p. 101, in one of the few notices of it remarked:

Sa skya

Pa~4ita

composed,

with great acumen,

the Mahayana; one of the most remarkable is the

rab tu gsal [sic].
handbooks and summaries,
old, traditional
complete manner,

synthetic expositions of
~

[sic]

dgongs

This and other works are nothing more than

in which the Buddha's word and its century-

commentary are reproduced in the easiest and most

without the least contamination of doctrines not

carefully sifted.

w.

D. Shakabpa (1967),
According to him:
[Sa-pa~

book

p. 63, also briefly described the Thub Da'i dgongs gsa!.

after leaving Tibet] sent to his fellow clerics in Tibet a

he had written.

Buddha's Intention. 1I

It was titled Thub-Dai Gong-sal,

meaning

"The

Knowing he did not have long to live, he left his

book as a legacy to his country.

L.

van der Kuijp (1983),

p. 102, identified the Tibetan genre to

which the Thub

Da'i dgongs gsal may be assigned: "the 'Stages-on-the-Path' literature (lam-rim)."

He

added that in it "a number of philosophical and doctrinal [issues?]

cussed

and

are

dis-

rejected whenever he found them to be incompatible with what he

per-

ceived the Indian texts tried to convey."

47

In D.

Jackson (1983a),

pp.

4f,

there is a brief description of the Thub

]a'i dgongs gsal and a preliminary sketch of the commentaries and secondary
rature ~n it.
edition
tions

lite-

D. Jackson (1983), pp. 6f, contains a description of a xylographic

of the work from Sa-skya dated 1439.

But until now only two small

of the work have been discussed or published in translation.

Matsumoto (1978),

sec-

Firstly,

S.

p. 8, touched on the classification of the sub-divisions of the

Madhyamaka in the Thub pa'i dgongs gsal and what the work tells us about Sa-pal} as
a Madhyamika.
treatment

Secondly,

Roger

Jackson (1982) devoted an article

of "the council of Tibet" in the Thub pa'i dgongs gsal.

to

Sa-pal}'s

I should

here that in 1983 with the help of the Venerable Khenpo Appey I completed a
translation

of

the complete work,

which I hope to annotate and publish

add
draft

in

the

future.

The

Sdom

gsum rab dbye is another of Sa-paI}'s major works that

has

been

relatively neglected.
It is, however, of the greatest importance for understanding some of the central doctrinal developments in Tibetan Buddhism.
Professor D.
sheds

Seyfort Ruegg was the first to use the Sdom gsum rab dbye for the light it
on

particular doctrinal problem.

tathagatagarbha (1969),
view

Sa-pa~'s

sional

p.

In his study of the

theory

of

the

58, note 5 (see also pp. 9, 142n., and 394), he noted

that the existence of the tathagatagarbha was taught

meaning (drang don:

neyartha).

with

In the subsequent introduction

translation of Bu-ston's treatise on tathagatagarbha (1973),

pp.

provito

his

31 and 32, note

5, Seyfort Ruegg returned to this topic, pointing out the great influence that SapaI}'s

teaching had on Bu-ston and the latter's disciple Sgra-tshad-pa.

translated

here

the

relevant passage from the Sdom gsum rab dbye

and

He

also

supplied

references to related passages in Bu-ston's and Sgra-tshad-pa's treatises, as well

as to Sa-pal}'s Indian sources.
Another
~

dbye

early Western scholar to notice the

was E.

khyab (1970),

p.

Gene Smith.

importance of the

Sdom

gsum

In his introduction to Kong-sprul' s Shes ~ kun

4, he mentioned that works on the subject of the three. vows had

"produced some of the most significant indigenous works in Tibetan-Buddhist liteciting as his first example the Sdom gsum rab dbye, which he said was

rature,"

"written largely to refute the dgongs

mgon-po."l3
Some years later S.

.&.!.B. heresy of 'Bri-gung Skyob-pa 'Jig-rten-

Karmay (1975),

pp. 152f, mentioned the passage in the

~ BSum rab dbye which seems to identify certain Mahamudra teachings with the

48

"Chinese system of Rdzogs-chen."

Karmay understood the latter to refer in fact to

the Rdzogs-chen of the Rnying-ma-pa and Bon-po.

the same understanding of this passage.
note

300,

R. M. Davidson

p. 92, had

(1981~,

But L. van der Kuijp (1983), pp. 101 and

called this interpretation into question.

Van der Kuijp (ibid.) also

characterized the Sdom 8sum rab dbye in general as follows:

The

[Sdom 8sum rab dbye] was composed with the specific aim

teracting

coun-

certain forces within Tibetan Buddhism which he perceived to

be not only counterproductive,

of Buddhist practice.
tical

of

but indeed detrimental to the

efficacy

These tendencies concerned theoretical and prac-

problems with the vinaya as per the pratimoksa

as well as with the Bodhisattva vow,

(~

thar-pa),

and the specific commitments

of

practitioners of the tantras.

In addition,

M.

Tatz (1982),

pp.

5ff,

discussed

Sa-pa~'s

explanations of the

Bodhisattva's vow in the Sdom 8sum rab dbye.

On the Sdom gsum rab dbye commentaries and other related works,
(1983a),

pp.

12-23,

Tibetan authors.

is

a preliminary survey of such writings

by

D. Jackson
twenty-eight

I have also learned that Jared Rhoton has made the Sdom gsum rab

dbye the subject of his recent PhD dissertation (1985) at Columbia University.

wrote this short but interesting treatise on music, song and prosody

Sa-pa~

sometime

before his full monastic ordination in 1208.

discussed some verses of this work,

"Sakya

Pa~4ita's

Liturgy"
I

verse

[.

work

(1978a).

with

'Treatise on Music' and Its Relevance

In

pp.

Canzio (1978)

to

Present-Day

a more recent article (1980) he discussed in

its commentaries.

([1979],

Ricardo O.

and he also completed a doctoral dissrrtation

Tibetan

detail

one

Ter Ellingson has discussed a key section of

the

118f) and has also translated brief passages from it

(1979a)

(1979b)
(7) Gzhung lugs legs .ill!!:.. bshad
This
posed

by

(TB no. 3)

exposition of philosophical tenets (grub mtha') was not in fact

com-

though it was included among his collected works in

Derge

Sa-pa~,

the

edition and accordingly has been treated as genuine by G. Tucci (1949), p. 101; J.
E. Bosson (1969), p. 4; S. Matsumoto (1978), p. 8; R. Ikeda (1980); and L.

49

Zwilling (1981),

p.

310.

van der Kuijp (1983),

outright forgery,

pp.

Since then its authenticity has been doubted--as by L.

101,

103, and 304, note 295--or it has been judged an

as by D. Jackson (1984), pp. 77, 90, note 3; D. Jackson (1985);

and L. van der Kuijp (1985a); cf. K. Mimaki (1982), p. 33, note 65.

by L.

This work, a topical outline of the Suhrllekha of Nagarjuna, was translated

Kawamura (1975), pp. 108-113, though with some mistakes in. the colophon.

This work was also mentioned by Chr.

Lindtner (1982), p. 219, note 184.

it is a late accretion to Sa-pa9's collected works and should not be

authentic.

However,
considered

See below, chapter 6, note 4.

This letter, ostensibly written by Sa-pa9 near the end of his life after he
had reached the camp of Koden,

if genuine is an important document

of early Tibetan-Mongolian relations.

It was translated by G.

for the study

Tucci (1949), pp.

10-12. See also D. Schuh (1977), pp. xvii, 18, 51f and 76, note 125; and J. Szerb
(1980a), p. 264, note 6. Cf. W. D. Shakabpa (1967), pp. 63f.

A translation of this short collection of admonitory verses was published

by Dan Martin (1980) under the title "Sa-skya Pa9~ita's Advice for Tibetan Contemplatives."
Before
(1979), p. 23.

this,

(11) Zhen

verses

11-15 had been translated

bzhi bra1 .&Ii gdams

by

Nawang

Tsering

(TB no. 86)

This is a synopsis of the Zhen ~ bzhi bral,

teaching that goes back to Sa-chen Kun-dga'-snying-po.

Sa-skya-pa b10 sbyong

The Tibetan text with an

English translation by Thutop Tu1ku and Ngawang Sonam Tenzin (1968),

was published by the Sakya Centre, Rajpur.

pp.

20-25,

50

(12) Rdo ill theg pa' i ~ ba dang .I!!!!. ~

.s!. dam tshig bshad ~ (TB no. 64)
Ii,

An

unreliable

translation

of this brief explanation of

the

"root"

and

"branch" downfalls of the Vajrayana was published in J. D. Willis (1972), pp. 100106.

(13) Skyes bu dam

~ ~

la spring ba'i .Ii ~

(TB no. 30)

Sa-pal} wrote
justifying

his

this

interesting work as an "open

previous

letter"

efforts (in works such as the Sdom gsum

rectify what he took to be doctrinal errors on the part of his

work was noticed by A.
1936).

Vostrikov (1970),

p.

It is also accurately described by S.

25,

explaining
rab

and

dbye)

countrymen.

to
This

note 55 (originally written in

Karmay (1975), pp. 152f, who noted

that it contains an important list of writings attributed to Hwa-shang Mahayana.

A translation with transcribed text also exists for this work, rendered by
Madan Mohan Singh (1971).
which

was

It is completely unsatisfactory.

entitled Sulekha of Sakya Paodita,

In the same

book,

one also finds transcriptions

and

translations of ten other epistles and minor works by Sa-paJ}, though unfortunately
of the same quality as the first:
(14) Lung rigs

~.!!!!s.

dang mthun pa'i 'chad dgos tshul (TB no. 31)

(15) Rtog ldan rgyan po'i dris Ian (TB no. 32)
(16) Rnel .Ph!! bali zhus Ian (TB no. 33)
(17) Zhang 10 tsa ba la gdams
(18) Bstan

(19) Tshigs
(20)
(21)
(22)

la

.!!ruL

bcad

ba'i lha

(TB no. 34)

~.8.2!!8. ~

la spring ba (TB no. 35)

gnyis (TB no. 36)

Mi.!!Y1!&..s!. ~ khams ~ gnang ba'i .Ii ~

!iIi ma

(TB no. 37)

la spring ba (TB no. 38)

Sho dgon

~ ~

(23) Sho dgon .8.Y.!.

mgon rin chen la spring ba (TB no. 39)

'dun

la spring ba (TB no. 40)

No. (15) in the above list is actually not by Sa-paJ}, but it is a work ascribed to
his disciple Bi-ji which reached Ngor from Khams in the mid-15th century
nos.

97

and 99).

(cf.

The last two works in the list (22 and 23) are probably

cryphal, as will be explained below.

TB
apo-

51

(24) Lha sa'i bde bar gshegs .E!!.

~

(25)

la bstod .E!!. (TB no. 73)

i

&!!. brgyad ma'i 'grel.E!!. (TB\no. 18)

Only one verse of the first work listed above has been translated,
is important because the verse is the basis for the second work,
ma'i 'grel.E!!. (TB no.
amounting
ments.

18).

the

but

it

&!!. brgyad

The latter is a comment on the above-mentioned verse,

to an autobiographical account of his own studies and scholarly attainThe basic verse has been translated by L.

van der Kuijp (1983),

p. 103.

The commentary has been cited in the same work, p. 306, note 307.

(26) Bla !lli!. ill btsun. chen po' i

!:ill!!!!. thar (TB no. 17)
For

this,

as

for the remaining works to be listed,

no

translation

yet

exists.
It was simply studied and cited in the course of research, in this case
by Ariane Macdonald (1963), pp. 120f, notes 56 and 57. In this admirable study,
that

scholar

investigated the chronology of Buddhism proposed by Sa-pa9

biography of Rje-btsun Grags-pa-rgyal-mtshan.

103f.

These

verses

in

his

Vostrikov (1970), pp.

were written by Sa-paQ to accompany a symbolic

made on the wall of the courtyard at Samye.

an illustration on p.

See also A.

painting

he

They are mentioned in the caption to

53 of Chogay Trichen,' Thubten Legshay Gyatsho (1979).

Some

mistakes in that caption are corrected in D. Jackson (1984a), p. 42.

(28) Sgra la
This

~.E!!.

(TB no. 7)

short work on Sanskrit grammar was analyzed by S.

Inaba as early

1961 in a Japanese article with the English title "Tibetan Philology

[Sa] skya PaI}~ita--One of His Many-sided Researches," pp.
this article were the following:

5-7.

Pursued

as
by

Also studied in

52

(29) Smra sgo'i

bcad (TB no. 8)

(30) Byis M bde blag tu

pa 'i

bshad (TB no. 9)

(31) Yi ge'i sbyor ba (TB no. 10)

(32) Rnam.ill!!: gcad

~ ji

ltar sbyor tshul (TB no. 11)

(33) Sngags ill. klog thabs 'bras bu

(34) Sgra
R.

A.

Miller (1964),

not make such an attribution.

In D.

~!.Q&.

(TB no. 12)

p. 74, sought to correct an attribution of the Smra

Sa-pa9 by Inaba in an earlier study ([1954],

59.)

ba 'i

bar bsdus M (TB no. 13)

Jackson (1983),

p.

(See also the reprint in R.

p.

8,

to

31), though Inaba apparently did

A.

Miller [1976], p.

a 15th-century xylographic edition of nos.

(30) and (34) is discussed.

(35)

Sdeb sbyor

tshogs

~!.Q&.

& chun

.2.Q.

This work on prosody and its sole fragmentary

described in D. Jackson (1983a), pp. 7f.

(TB no. 15)

commentary

were

briefly

(36) Tshig & gter (TB no. 14)

This

lexicographical work

(based on the Amarakosa) and

its

only

known

commentary were briefly described in D. Jackson (1983a), p. 7.

This

important letter written in reply to the questions of Chag

lo-tsa-ba

Chos-rje-dpal has been briefly cited by L. van der Kuijp (1983), p. 305, note 304.

(38) Bka' gdams do kor ba'i zhus Ian (TB no. 79)
This work, a series of answers to the questions of a Bka'-gdams-pa master,
was cited by L. van der Kuijp (1983), p. 306, note 309.

53

(39) Mu stegs

ill ~ E drug btul ba I i

tshigs bcad (TB no. 80)

These

verses were written by

Harinanda in debate at Kyirong.

Sa-pa~

after his defeating the Indian

pa~qita

They were cited by G. Tucci (1949), p. 680, note

36.

(40)
A

15th-century

Dri ba'i tshul

zhig (TB no. 5)

xylographic edition of this short and incomplete

work

is

discussed in D. Jackson (1983), pp. 9f.

This

is

a grammatical treatise ascribed to

poetical work with the same title.

quotation
1915).

from

this

R.

work by Gser-tog

Sa-pa~,

and is not

the

lost

A. Miller (1965), p. 330, translated a

Blo-bzang-tshul-khrims-rgya-mtsho

(1845-

(See also R. A. Miller [1976], p. 74.)

(42) [The Game of Rebirth]

This board game of spiritual progress or downfall is believed to have
by Sa-pa~ for the amusement and edification of his ill mother.

been

The book
.
14
of M. Tatz and J. Kent (1977) is an introduction and explanation of the game.
devised

54

1See S. Goodman (1981), pp. 68f; L. Kawamura (1981), (1982), and (1983).
2Some Khams-pa
Expertise" (mkhas

scholars used to say that to enter Mi-pharn's "Entrance

one did not have to be exceptionally learned,

to

whereas one

could not enter the "Entrance for the Wise" (oikhas ~ of Sa-pal} unless one was
really learned.
wise" and

of

(This saying of course involves a pun on mkhas "expert, learned,

"entrance, enter.")

3If any work deserves to be classed together with Sa-paQ.'s KhJ as a manual
scholarship, it would be this: A-lag-sha Ngag-dbang-bstan-dar, 'Chad ~

rtsom gsum.

See als6 the manual by Shakya-rin-chen, 'Chad nyan la mkho bali legs

bshad phyin ci ~ .!28. pa' i gtarn chos tshul .!8E!. mtsho' i ..J!:!& ~, Collected
Works (Thimbu: 1976), vol. 8, pp. 303-450. The latter, however, mainly treats the
same topics as KhJ II.
4Since these important publications belong to Mongolian studies, I have not
listed them here. For the full citations of Ligeti's publications, the article of
J. E. Bosson (1961), etc., see J. Kolma~ (1978), p. 189, note 2, and L. Sternbach
(1981), pp. 125ff.
5As cited by L.

Sternbach (1981), p. 125.

But is this a mistake for their

translation of the Shes rab sdong bu mentioned by J.

Kolma~

(1978),

p. 192, note

1O?

6As cited by J. Kolma~ (1978), p. 191, note 8.

7He studied the commentarial explanations by Dmar-ston of the three
~

tales alluded to in verses 87, 149, and 150.

Panca-

This commentary was also used

by M. Hahn (1974) in his notes on the text (pp. 240-243).

R. A. Stein (1972)
[French original 1962] had already cited a Sa sky a Legs bshad commentary by "Rinchen-dpal," though presumably this was Dmar-ston's work.
See p. 268, note 3, and
bibliography, no. 164.
8As cited by

J. Kolma~ (1978), p. 203, note 24.

55

9L Sternbach (1969), pp. 24ff, however, mistook the Legs bshad for a
Sanskrit work in Tibetan translation, supposing that Sa-paQ was an Indian pa~9ita.
lOLegs .l!!!:. bshad M. rin ~ che' i gter dang 'gre1 M. [The Legs bshad
commentary by Lho-pa revised by Dmar-ston],

with

Lhasa, Bod 1jongs mi dmangs dpe skrun

khang.
IlL. van der Kuijp (1985), pp. 37-39.
12Noted as a bibliographical item but not seen is the Ph.D. dissertation of
Bruce C. Stewart (Columbia University, 1983), "A Translation of and Introduction
to the

'Direct Perception' Chapter of Go-rams-pa's Sde bdun mdo dang

dgongs ..2!!. phyin ci !I!!. 1&&..lli!!:.. 'gre1 M. tshad !I!!. rigs pa' i gter i l l don

bcas
gsa1

pa'i
bar

hyed .M."
13'Bri_gung Skyob-pa

'Jig-rten-mgon-po had another teaching

gsuro gnad~, though I do not know whether it survives.

116.6
14See also the review by G.
pp.

55-57.

Cf.

S.

C.

E.

Clarke,

called

Sdom

See 'Bri-gung Ratna, p.

The Tibet Journal, vol. 8 (1983),

Das (1902), p. 260, note, in which the game called "the

circle of life" is apparently the game devised by Sa-paIJ..

Chapter 3
THE WRITINGS OF SA-PAij:
MAJOR WORKS, CHRONOLOGY AND TRANSMISSION

Sa-paQ composed a hundred or so works, but most of them were quite short.
Among them, only twenty-six amount to more than five folios in the Derge Sa sky a
bka' 'bum (SKKB) edition, and only seventeen come to ten or more folios.
His
seventeen longest works are the following:
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)

Rigs gter (RT) and Rigs gter rang 'grel (TB nos. 19 and 20), 220ff.
Thu b pa' i .!!&2!!8. gsal (ThGS) (TB no. 1), 99 ff.
Mkhas ~ (KhJ) (TB no. 6), 62 ff.
Sdom gsum rab dbye (DS) (TB no. 24), 48 ff.
Dri .!!!!! med.ill!. zhes ~ ba'i.!:8..I!! cher 'grel.ill!. (TB no. 65), 28 ff.
Legs bshad (LSh) (TB no. 2), 23 ff.

(7) Sdeb sbyor

tshogs

.8i chun .l!.Q. (TB no. 15), 21 ff.

ill. cho.8!!. (TB no. 21), 19 ff.

~ .!Q&

(8) Dbu.!!!!! lugs kIi~ bskyed

Phyogs bcu'i sangs~dang~chub~~~la zhu ba'i

'phrin.v.!&. (TB no. 29), 15 ff.
(10) .!'!&!!. brgyad ma'i 'grel.ill!. (TB no. 18), 14 ff.
(ll) Byis .ill!. bde blag .E!. ~ pa'i !lli!!!!. bshad (TB no. 9), 13ff.
(12) Tshig .8i gter (TB no. 14), 13 ff.
(13) Tshogs 'khor cho .8!!. (TB no. 51), 13 ff.
(14) Bla ~ ~ btsun chen po'i ~ thar (TB no. 17), 12 ff.
(15) Chag 10 tsa ba'i zhus Ian (TB no. 93), 12 ff.
(16) Sgra la.J!!s..lli!. (TB no. 7),10 ff.
(17) Byang chub ill. ~ kIi mchog .E!. ~ bskyed pa' i cho ga' i lung sbyor
(TB no. 22), 10 ff.
(9)

The first thing one notices from this list is that only two works
concerned primarily with Tantra.
One of these (no. 5) is a commentary on

are
the

~ ,g,sum la ~ ~ rin .E2. che' i phreng ba dri ~ med .ill!. of Grags-pa-rgyalmtshan.

Sa-paQ wrote most of it at the age of seventeen and completed it at age
twenty. The second Tantric work (no. 13) is a liturgy for the ganacakra rite. In
th'
~s case Sa-paQ seems merely to have revised and clarified an earlier work by
Grags-pa-rgya1-mtsban. (Another work of GraR-pa-rgyal-mtshan that Sa-pa~ revised
is the Brta.s. ~ gnyis pa' i bsdus don [T~ no. 112]. I t is some 15 folios long, and

58

so

if

it is included among Sa-paQ's own works it would be no.

list.)

Thus Sa-paQ's longest independent (i.e.

9 or

10

in

the

non-commentarial) works belonged

to the exoteric branches of Buddhist and literary scholarship.

Sa-paQ's

general introduction to the theory and practice of

2 in the above list,

no.

explanation
the

first

and

the

It is a

of the stages of practice on the Bodhisattva's path,

second-longest work.

pa~'s

the Thub pa'i dgongs gsal (ThGS).

Mahayana

was

detailed

and it

is

Sa-

Complementing it on the ritual side are nos. 7 and 17,

being an explanation of the ritual for imparting the Bodhisattva

second a collection of scriptural quotations to be used

in

vow,

conjunction

with that ceremony.

Another major work, this one aimed at the widest possible audience, was his
Legs

bshad

.p!!!..

wise

sayings

works

on

.ill!,

rin .P.Q. che' i gter (no.

6)

This was his famous collection

expressed in elegant and memorable verses.

this list,

however,

Several of

the

of

other

were intended for a learned readership and had

clearly polemical or apologetic slant.

These include no. 4, his famed Sdom ~
gsum .&Ii rab tu dbye ba, as well as the less-weI I-known no. 9, Phyogs bcu'i sangs
~

dang ~ chub ~ ~ ~ la zhu ba' i 'phrin lli" and even the greater

part of no. 15, Chag 10 tsa bali zhus Ian.

discussion

and their related scriptures and practices.

earlier polemical activities,
sattvas.

The first of this trio is his critical

of various doctrinal problems connected with the three classes of vows

The

third

contains

The second is a justification of his

ostensibly addressed to all the Buddhas and

further clarifications of some of the

Bodhi-

same

con-

troversial points, here presented in answer to questions from his respected junior
colleague (and disciple?),

Chag lo-tsa-ba Chos-rje-dpal.

Even no.

10,

the

brgyad mali 'grel.ill!" though it is an- autobiographical sketch of his own scholarly
attainments,

was

also

written in part to justify and explain

himself

to

both

critics and followers.

Although

Sa-paQ

was thus a Buddhist master who attempted to

explain

and

clarify the true doctrine, he was also a scholar's scholar.

His goal as a young
man was to master the main branches of traditional Indian Buddhist scholarship,
and

a number of his major writings are the fruits of this.

interests

was

in logico-epistemology

(Prama~a).

One of

his

Thus we find that his

keenest
longest

work (no. 1 above) was the Tshad .!!!.!. rigs pa'i gter with its auto commentary (Rigs
gter rang~, in which he summarized the logical and epistemological traditions
though

of Dignaga and Dharmakfrti as he had learned them from his Indian

sometimes

Tibetan
the Mkhas

masters,

being influenced by the advances of the indigenous schools

1
The other major work that touches on PramaQa is no.
dialecticians.
~

(amounting

to

(KhJ)--the main focus of the present study.

of
3,

Its third main section

some 20 folios) discusses the rules of formal debate

and

related

59

philosophical principles.
The other specialized fields of Indian learning that he cultivated were the
Sanskrit language arts.
KhJ (no.

3),

general
etics,

He devoted part or all of five major works to these.

for instance, has three main sections, the first of which discusses

principles, of grammar and prosody and concludes with an account

including a description of

~s

and alawkaras.

of

po-

For his treatment of the

latter, he translated parts of Dal}4in's Kavyadarsa. The Sdeb sbyor

6,

The

..!!.!!.

tshogs, no.

was a more detailed exposition of Sanskrit prosody, based mainly on the metri-

cal work

of

On the topic of synonymy or

Ratnakara~anti.

lexicography,

Sa-pa~

wrote no. 12, the Tshig &i gter, which was an adaptation and partial translation
of the Amarakosa.
He also composed an introduction to grammar, no. 16 Sgra la
in which he adapted Sanskrit grammar to Tibetan.

~~,

And his early interest

in grammar is also evinced by no. 11, a commentary on the Byis R!!. bde blag tu
~

of

his uncle Bsod-nams-rtse-mo.

Thus he devoted more space in

writings
to logical-epistemological,
all other topics combined.
The

longest

grammatical and literary subjects than

sole remaining work from the above list is no.

Rje-btsun Grags-pa-rgyal-mtshan.

his

14,

his biography

to
of

It concludes with Sa-paQ's chronological calcu-

lations, which were the subject of much discussion by later Tibetan historians.
Turning

to his shorter writings,

Tantric subjects.

one now finds relatively more

works

on

The next nine works in descending order are the following:

(18) Lam zab mo bla ma'i rnal 'byor (TB no. 41), 9ff.
(19) Grub chen bcu (TB no. 47), 8 ff.
(20) Asta'i bzhi bshad (TB no. 50), 8 ff.
(21) Bsngo ba .YQ!!. bshad dang bcas R!!. (TB no.
(22) .R.Qlmo'i bstan bcos (TB no. 4),7 ff.
(23) Gza'

100), 8 ff.

.n!!!!..&r.!.. mchod chog (TB no. 60), 7 ff.

(24) Skyes bu dam R!!. rnams la spring ba'i .Yi ~ (TB no. 30), 7 ff.

(25) Lam 'bras bu dang bcas pa'i khrid 192:. dkar chag (TB no. 54), 6 ff.
(26) 'Jam dpal .&r.!.. bstod pa'i rnam bshad (TB no. 74), 6 ff.
No.

21 is a treatise on the dedicatory transfer (pariQamana) of merit, no. 22 is

a treatise

on music,

and no.

24 is an open letter to other Tibetan

explaining his' polemical activities (something like no.

26,

is

commentary on praises of Manju~ri composed by

The remaining five (i.e.

practice.

nos.

18,

19,

20,

9 above).

scholars,

The last, no.

Grags-pa-rgyal-mtshan.

23, and 25) have to do with Tantric

60

To sum up by classifying
his

most

major works according to literary

significant works are original treatises on doctrinal

cialized topics.
Rigs gter,

Sa-pa~'s

These usually consisted of basic mnemonic

KhJ,

or

types,

other

verses (e.g.

spein the

Sdom gsum rab dbye, Legs bshad, and Rol mo'i), sometimes supple-

mented with a prose autocommentary (Rigs gter rang 'grel, KhJ,

brgyad).

A few

of his treatises consisted partially (KhJ I) or almost entirely (Sdeb sbyor, Tshi&
gter) of close adaptations or translations of sections from basic Indian works.
In addition to such treatises,
just-mentioned autocommentaries,
(nos.
work

5,
he

11,

and 26),

composed

Sa-pa~

he

composed commentaries.

and on separate Tantric works (no. 20).

was liturgies.

Besides his

also wrote comments on works by his

These he wrote for use

in

uncles

Another type of
general

Mahayana

ceremonies (nos. 8, 17, and 21) or specialized Mantrayana meditations (nos. 13, 18
and 23).

In addition, two collections of minor Tantric instructions (nos. 19 and

25) are ascribed to him.

Sa-pa~

also composed epistles,

three of which (nos.

9,

15,

and 24) were

long enough to be counted among his twenty-six longest works.

He also wrote many

shorter letters.

of which the

A last type of work he wrote was biography,

only

example is his biography of Rje-btsun Grags-pa-rgyal-mtshan.

The Chronology of His Works

The

works can be assigned to a

definite

year or period because either the colophon refers to the author's age at

composition

of a few of

composi-

Sa-pa~'s

tion or the work is directly connected with an otherwise dateable event.

Several of
If

them.

those

Sa-pa~'s

early works specify how old

references are correct,

Sa-pa~

was when he composed

he composed the following when he

was

between the ages of seventeen and twenty-two:

1199

Dri ~ med ~ zhes. ~ ba' i ~ cher 'grel ~ (TB no.

65).

He is said (p.

393.1.3) to have completed most of this work in his eighteenth year (i.e.
seventeen, 1199):
gzhung 'di dpal ldan ~ skya'i dben gnas
~ge

sull

bco brgyad Ion tshe kun ~ ~ mtshan ~ I

legs .p!!!:. sbyar tshe cung zad ~ rdzogs ~ I

at

61

1200

~.I!!!

kun

la bsngags
~

1202 Gza'.I!!!!!.
~

(TB no. 69), p. 396.1.2: blo gros gtsang ba'i 'khon.iQ.

rgyal mtshan

m. mchod

&E!!

bcu dgur Ion pa' i tshel

~ 10

chog (TB no.

60),

p.

375.2.5:

shakya'i

bsnyen kun

mtshan .&E& 10 .!!Vi shu ~ gnyis pa' i tshe sbyar ba' 01 I

1202 He completed in his twenty-first year the Dri

med

(TB no. 65) which he

had begun in 1199.

1203 Sgra la ..J!:!8. ~ (TB no. 7), p. 116.1.2:
shakya 'i ~ bsnyen kun dga' !:&E!!. mtshan

.!!.Vi shu rtsa gnyis Ion tshe sbyar ba Yi!Y I

PJi!Y I

1203 Yon tan sgrogs pa'i tshul la bstod ~ (TB no. 81), p. 404.4".5: shakya'i ~
bsnyen kun ~ .!:&E!!. mtshan dpal BJlJ!1 10 ill shu rtsa gnyis Ion pa' i tshe
sbyar ba rdzogs soil
1204 Byis
rin

],Q.

bde blag tu

..J!:!8.

pa'i !.!!!!!!!. bshad (TB no.

che !!!'!. skya paodita chen

.l!.Q!.

9),

p.

122.4.5: chos .!:.k

dgung 10 .!!Ii shu rtsa gsum bzhes pa' i dus

~mdzad ~I

1204 Rang ~ rang la gros 'debs ~ (no.

tipal bzang

.l!.Q!.

107), p. 428.2.3: kun ~.!:&E!!. mtshan

shing .E.hQ. E.v!. ba' i 10 .8!:2. bzhin da ba' i tshe brgyad la brisl I

From among these works,

the last three deserve special

comment.~

The Rang

rang la gros 'debs~, supposedly written in the wood-mouse year (1204), is a

The colophon is anachronistic
spurious later addition to Sa-paq's bka' 'bum.
because Sa-paq had not then received the ordination name of Kun-dga'-rgyal-mtshandpal-bzang-po from Sakya~rI. Moreover he was not in the habit of dating his works
in the colophons, and in any case such a work is not listed in any of
18th-century gsan .v!&.s. 2

the

pre-

The second work which Sa-paq is said to have written in this year, the Byis
~~ blag,

can be accepted as genuine, but the specification of the year of its

composition was not made by Sa-pa~. It was added at an undetermined later time by
someone

century.

else.

It

is already found in the Gong-dkar-ba edition of the

mid-15th

The quotation of the Sanskrit grammatical work Kslapa in it means

that

it was in any case probably not written before he began his studies with Sugata~rI

62

in c. 1204.
Finally,
suspicious

the

in

work

dga'-rgyal-mtshan-dpal.
cate

Yon

tan sgrogs pa'i tshul [=tshal?] la

bstod

that the form of the author's name found in the colophon

is

is

Kun-

It is possible that he was using the dpal (ri) to indi-

that he was a "glorious" personage,

and it is therefore conceivably not

anachronistic use of the dpal from the dpal bzang ~ name ending that he
in 1208. Still, the work deserves a careful investigation.

an

received

A few more works can be dated to or before 1208, the year of his full
monastic ordination.
If he refers to himself as ~ bsnyen (upasaka; lay adhe-

rent) in the colophon,

signs

this gives a terminus ad quem for dating the work.

himself just "Kun-dga'-rgyal-mtshan" (instead of "Sa-skya Pav.qita" or "Kun-

dga'-rgyal-mtshan-dpal-bzang-po"),
predates his full ordination,
he

If he

signs

323.2.6).
On

himself
the

there

is

also a good chance that

though this is less definite:

"Shakya'i dge-slong

basis of the colophons,

Kun-dga'-rgyal-mtshan"
then,

this

work

in at least one case

(TB

the following four

no.

28,

p.

works

can

be

counted as "early", i.e. as dating to before the year 1209:

Rol

mo 'i bstan bcos (TB no. 4), p. 80.2.5: shes bya' i gnas
.!!!Q.

che

la

bIos

lli. du byas pa' i paodita

10 gzhon

~ ..!! .&!:!!&. ~

.y!!!!&.

blo

gros

rgan

phal
~

shakya 'i ~ bsnyen kun ~ ~ mtshan .&r!. ill. pa' i ~ gnas dpal ~
skya'i dgon'p!!!' sbyar ba'oll
Asta'i bzhi bshad (TB no.

'Jam

Dpal

p.

358.4.3:

dpal.&Vi bstod pa'i .!:.ill!!!!. bshad (TB no.

brda sprod pa' i .8!.!!8. ..!M la !!!!! rmongs

~

bzhi pa' i bstod

~ ~

The

50),

(TB no.

84) ,

mtshan .&r!. sa skya' i dgon

74), p. 400.2.6: shakya 'i

~

p.
.p!!!.

des mngon

.p!!!.

405.4.1 :

sbyar ba' 01 I

sbyar ba' 01 I

shakya 'i

bsnyen

bsnyen kun

following four should be considered as possibly of early authorship:

Sngags ill klog thabs 'bras bu

ba kun

~ ~

~ ba'i~!Q&.

(TB no.

mtshan .&r!. sbyar ba rdzogs

and doubtful addition to his collected works.)

sol I

12), p. 125.1.2: 10 tsa

(N .B.: This is a very late

63

.!!.1. btsun!!!!. EQ. che

~ !. !!W!l mtshan ill bstod !. (TB no.

26), p. 322.1. 6 :
sprod I!Y kun ~ rgyal mtshan .8I!!. sbyar ba ~ zhig rdzogs !12.1 / (This
seems to have been written before Grags-pa-rgyal-mtshanls death in 1216.)

Sgrub !. lung sbyin (TB no. 44), p. 347.1.3:

gzhan

.8Y!.!!. bskul

~ kun ~

.!1ill!!. Iiltshan EJ.1!J /

sbyar ba I di la dam ~ bzod .ill!!. ~ /

Brtag !. gnyis pa Ii bsdus don (TB no. 112), p. 446.2.3:
la la .!!!!8. tu kun ~ ~ mtshan EJ.1!J /
rigs.ill!!. ni cung zad spel ba yjJ /

ci

(This was only a revision of a work by Grags-pa-rgyal-mtshan.)

It is interesting to note that some seven out of his twenty-six longest works were
composed before he reached the age of twenty-seven:

nos.

5,

11, 16, 20, 22, 23,

and 26 above (=TB nos. 65, 9, 7, 50, 4, 60, and 74, respectively).

The following later works can be dated by internal evidence or through the
connection of the work with a known event:
1216 Bla .!!!!!..!:.ok btsun chen po I i !.lli!:!!!. thar (TB no.

17)

This was

composed

just

after Rje-btsun Grags-pa-rgyal-mtshan's death in that year.

c, 1240 Mu stegs kYi. ston !. drug btul ba Ii tshigs bcad (TB no.

80).

This

was

composed immediately after his defeating Harinanda at debate in Kyirong.

The

debate seems to have taken place in about 1240. 3

This work purports to have

written soon after
in early 1247.

Sa-pa~

met

K~dMn.

Thus, if it is genuine, it was written

One work can be assigned to the period c.

1235-1244 because it was addressed

Chag lo-tsa-ba Chos-rje-dpal (1197-1264),

who did not return from India until

1235.

This

been

is the Chag 10 tsa bali zhus Ian (TB no.

94).

Such works

as

to
c.
the

following must date to or after the year 1244 since they contain references to the
Mongol invitation:

64

Bka' gdams do kor bali zhus 1an (TB no. 79)

Bka' gdams
Here

one

might

mkha' 'bwn.8!!. zhus 1an (TB no. 96)

add

that the works attributed to Bi-ji Rin-chen-grags (TB nos.

32, 97, 99) and any that state that they were revised by 'Phags-pa (TB nos. 96 and
98), if genuine, probably date to after 1244.
Finally, one must note that Sangs-rgyas-phun-tshogs in his Rtsom 'phro
skong

to

the Ngor chos

composition
dbye,

of the Rigs gter,

and c.

what

little

career,

(p.
c.

316.4-5) posited the dates c.

1232 for the composition of

1240 for the debate with Harinanda.

is

and

appear

The date c.

of

his

However,

mature

the

debate with Harinanda,

(1736),

though

Zhu-chen errs in the same passage by giving

Sdom gswn rab dbye most probably was begun before the death of
(d.

first

and their ulti-

1219 for the Rigs gter also appears in Zhu-

date 1232 (thus omitting the date for the Sdom gswn rab dbye).4
Zangs-tsha

scholarly

these datings

chen Tshu1-khrims-rin-chen's index to the Derge Sa skya bka' 'bwn

for

the

Sdom gswn

t~-le

only in Sangs-rgyas-phun-tshogs's 1ate-17th-century work,

mate origin is unknown.

for

These dates do not contradict

otherwise known about the chronology

they may be provisionally accepted.

1219

1239)

since the latter is said to have tried

dissuade him from finishing it. 5

In any case,
Sa-pa\l's

the
the

brother

unsuccessfully

to

The Relative Chronology of Sa-pauls Works

One
writings

can
if

also

one

establish a relative chronology for a

accepts the supposition that any treatise cited or

composed before the work that cites or quotes it.

tion,
other.
later

This is a

of

Sa-pa9's

quoted

reasonab~e

was

supposi-

but it leaves aside the very real possibility that he worked on" two or more

works at the same time.

But

number

The KhJ and Sdeb sbyor,

for instance, each refer to the

Here the best interpretation is that they were written in the same period.

simply
times

to say so ignores the problem of whether Sa-paQ revised his works at

6
long after their original compositions.
He did edit some of his

predecessors'

writings,

early works.

However,

and

probably he was tempted to do the same to "his

own

there is no way to know for certain whether he did or did

not do so in a given instance.

An unusual case is the Thub pa'i dgongs gsa1,
which in all extant versions includes a final addendum that purports to have been
added

by Sa-paQ after he left Central Tibet for the last time in 1244.7

same

addendum states that all his disciples had previously received its

transmission

since he had taught it everywhere in Dbus,

Gtsang and

But

the

readingKhams.

65

Thus an earlier version of substantially the same work had to have been

composed

prior to 1244; if it had been a different work the lung would have been invalid.
In any case,

the following relations and chronologies have been worked out

from the premise that the cited work usually precedes the one citing it.
the dates are highly conjectural.

Most of

1220-'
1230? _

................

.....

I.

j \~"

Y\Z

----

,,

,I

~/

\...............

~,

'-Phyogs
Skyes DU
bcu'i
c. 1233c. 12331243
1243

--\---:-- --_..
............

- - ....

\:

",

\:

~I

"""

___ ..

Nga trgyad
c. 12301240?

--,-,-,

,..-

/,,1235?
#/1',,'

.I /

c. 1220~ 1230?

Chos spyod

'

Tshig gter
c. 12101220?

... '

T u pari
dgongs gsal
c. 1225-

~~

'jug~ ~

, c. 1220-:
1230?
I

Mkhas

'.....................

--.-

",

Chag 10 ].
c. 12351243
Glo bo
Bka' gdams
c. 1233- c. 12441243
1245?

,.

............

C.112~3~:____

Sdom gsum
rab dbye

c.

Sdeb sbyor

1225?

"~

~~g~2~;~ad

~1219?

*Grub mtha'
c. 1214-

y\
.\

Sems

A cites B by name
A~ B
A +---- B
A quotes or alludes to B
lost work
*

Lha sari
...... -c. 12251235?

Sems

bskyed cho ~skyed lung

ga c. 1220sbyor c.
1230?
1220-1230?

Rol mo'i
*Shes rab
c. 1203-~Byis p~c. 1200- ~Sgra la
1204?
.1204?
1203?
'jug pa
1203

Rigs gter ~

The Relation of Twenty-two of Sa-pao' s

Works According to Internal Citations
and References (with ~ Conjectural
Chronology)

Figure 1.

0\
0\

67

The quotations or citations by name indicated in the foregoing chart appeared

in

the following passages:

Work Containing Citation

Byis i!. bde blag, p. 117.4.1: Shes rab 'phro ba

p. 121.1.6: Rol mo'i bstan bcas
Sgra la

p. 115.4.6: Shes rab 'phro ba (it is described

earlier" [sngar sbyar bal)

~ i!.,

as

"composed

Sdeb sbyor, pp.132.2.5 and 140.3.5: KhJ

p. 133.2.5: Legs bshad

.Th!:!Q. pa' i dgongs gsal, p. 5.3.5: Sems bskyed .!Ii. cho .8!!.
p. 8.3.6: Chos ~ bcu i!.
p. 13.1.3: Legs bshad
p. 24.4.3: Rigs gter
p. 24.4.3: Grub mtha'i dbye ba
KhJ, p. 89.3.2: Sdeb sbyor
p. 96.1.1: "sgra'i bstan bcos"
p. 98.2.6: Legs bshad (verse 7)
p. 98.4.5: Tshig .&!. gter
p. 107.2.2: Grub mtha' rnam 'byed
p. 109.4.5: Rigs gter

&!

brgyad mali 'grel i!., p. 148.4.4: KhJ ("sgra'i bstan bcos bod la ~ bar mkho
ba ~ zhig")
p. 149.1.2: Rigs gter
p. 149.2.5: Grub mtha' i .!:ill!!!! 'byed
p. 149.3.4: Sdeb sbyor
p. 149.4.4: Mkhas pa' i kha .!:&y!!!!.
p. 150.1.2: Rol mo'i bstan bcos
p. 150.3.3: Tshig .&!. gter
p. 150.4.4: Sku ~.!Ii. bstan bcos (not shown in chart)

68

p. 150.4.4: Sa brtag ~ (not shown in chart)

p. 151.1.3: Yan ~ brgyad pa'i don bsdus (not shown in chart)
Sems bskyed ill cho..8!!., p. 273.1.3: Sems bskyed lung sbyor
Chag loti zhu ba, p. 408.2.4: Sdom gsum rab dbye

From the above lists and chronology (however approximate),

one can discern

three stages in Sa-paQ's literary career in Tibet:

(I) Earliest Writings (c.
were

1199-1204).

the exegesis of Tantric treatises,

sources

were

his

At this time his main interests

and language or grammar.

uncles' writings and the teachings

and

His main

explanations he

received from Grags-pa-rgyal-mtshan.

(II) The .!li8. gnas Period (c. 1205-1225?). At this time his predominant
interests were the branches of scholarship (!iK gnas) such as PramaQa, Sanskrit grammar, and the various Sanskrit language arts, including metrics,
lexicography or synonymy, and poetical figures.
His principal teachers for
these subjects were Indian pa9qitas (especially from 1204-1213) and his main
sources were the Indian works he read in Sanskrit.
(III)

Writings

Mahayana Doctrine and Practice

(c.

122~1244).

this time he was a famous master who attracted large assemblies of

wherever

he went.

By

disciples

To these public assemblies he taught the general Maha-

yana doctrines and practices,

and he composed his own manuals for these.

He

also became keenlyinvolved in doctrinal issues.

However,

one need not contrast these stages too sharply because there are threads

of continuity running through them.

for instance,
poetry.
main
stance

His early interest in language and

grammar,

later developed into his intensive studies of Sanskrit language and

In his writings on PramaQa and the literary arts he makes plain that his

aim is to rectify the errors and ignorance of his contemporaries,

of

the

staunch crusader against ignorant error later

manifests

and

this

in his

69

polemical writings.
later writings,
There was,

Only his early work as a Tantric exegete had no sequel in his

though

however,

as a teacher he continued to

a conscious reason for this.

expound

these

At some point

doctrines.

Sa-pa~

that it would be best not to write his own Tantric treatises but that

decided

he

encourage

the circulation of the early Sa-skya founders' works on these

8
by editing and promulgating them.

should
subjects

Traditional Classifications
of Sa-pap's Greatest Works
As might be expected,

Sa-pa~'s

most. influential works for later generations

came from the last two periods of his career.

The three works with the

greatest

impact were among his longest works, and according to the Venerable Dezhung Rinpoche these three were considered indispensable for the Sa-skya-pa order in general,
being called the "Three Treatises of the Sa-skya-pa Tradition"
bcos rnam gsum): 9

(~lugs

.!s.I.!. bstan

(1) Sdom gsum rab dbye

(2) Rigs gter

(3) Thub pa'i dgongs gsa1

In addition there was another traditional classification of
works.

his

four

According to the dge-bshes Bkra-shis-rnam-rgya1 from Sa-skya,

greatest
these were

known as the "Four [Doctrinal] Statements of Sa-pa~" ~lli!1t.&.Y.!. bka' bzhi):l0

(1) The Tshad ~ rigs gter,

a discrimination of what is and is not logically

acceptable (rigs dang rigs min rnam 'byed tshad rna rigs gter)
(2)

The

Sdom gsum rab dbye,

a discrimination of what is and is not

[true]

Dharma (chos dang chos min !:ill!!!!. 'byed sdom gsum rab dbye)
(3) The Legs .lli!!:.. bshad .M rin ..P.Q. che'i gter,

[an excellent,

elegant expres-

sion] of what does and does not accord with good worldly custom

(~

rten

tshu1 lugs mthun dang mi mthun legs .lli!!:.. bshad E rin ..P.Q. che'i gter)
(4) The Elucidation of the Muni's Intent (thub pa'i dgongs E

rab tu gsa1 ~

This second list is thus the same as the first except that the Legs bshad has been
added

to bring the total to four.

The Legs bshad also appears (along

~Bter) in yet another grouping if his major works.

"Th ree Treasures" (gter gsum):
(1) ~.!!. rigs pa Ii gter

(2) Legs .lli!!:.. bshad E

rin ..P.Q. che'i gter

with

the

These were his so-called

70

(3) Tshig .s! gter

All

three belong to the middle period of his writings.

"Three Treasures," however,

later

This classification into

appears to be attested only in the writings

Dge-lugs-pa scholar Klong-rdol bla-ma.

11

of

It seems to be unknown to

the

modern

Sa-skya-pas, and I have not come across it in the writings of the tradition.
The
tional

KhJ was thus not counted among Sa-paQ's greatest works in the

lists.

From many points of view,

however,

it

one of

his

tradigreatest

treatises. It was his third longest work. He wrote it at the end of his !&Bnas
period and at the beginning of his doctrinal period; he was at the peak of his
powers.
(Shakya-mchog-ldan does in fact list it together with the Sdom gsuro ~
dbye and Phyogs bcu as one of his exemplary polemical works, though this element
in no way predominates in it.)12
that the Sdom gsuro rab dbye,

Yet it never gained the readership and attention

Rigs gter,

and Legs bshad did, probably because the

13
subject matter was too specialized and difficult.
It was not an essential work
for ordinary scholastic students, and it could be understood and appreciated only
by advanced scholars.

The'Collection and Transmission

of Sa-pao.'s Works
The history of how Sa-paQ's works were collected and then transmitted
to

the

pieced

present is nowhere told directly in the sources.

together

references

have

from scattered hints and stray references.

to

do

Instead,

it

Most of

with Sa-paQ's works as one of five main

down

must

be

the

later

sections

of a

greater collection, the Sa skya bka' 'bum. Before the mid-14th century, however,
this fivefold collection did not exist, and Sa-paQ's oeuvre existed either independently or together with that of 'Phags-pa.
His most famous works such as the
Rigs gter, Sdom gsuro rab dbye and Legs bshad also circulated from the earliest
period as separate books, and there existed individual xylographic editions of
some of them from the 14th century onward. But very few facts are known about the
one must begin by tracing what little can be
transmission of individual works;
found out about the history of his writings in collected form.

The Compilation of His Collected Works

The first compilation of Sa-paQ's works probably dated to c. 1244-1251.
some

time near the end of his life,

Sa-pa~

must have gathered together

all

At
his

71

available works

and

formally read them to 'Phags-pa.

If he had not

'Phags-pa would not have been able to pass on the lung of

tradition
to

unanimously says he did.

the works

Sa-pa~

Sa-pa~'s

done

so,

as

the

works

This first compilation may have been limited

brought with him to Liang-chou in 1244-1246,

and

this

may

account for the fact that some important works were omitted from all known later
compilations of his works. Sa-pa~'s works were the first of the Sa-skya founders'
oeuvres to have been formally compiled. The works of the first three founders had
to wait until the mid-14th century when they were systematically gathered by B1a14
ma-dam-pa Bsod-nams-rgya1-mtshan and his assistants.
By contrast, the works of
Sa-paQ's

successor

'Phags-pa seem to have been carefully

assembled

during

his

lifetime as a matter of course.

Early Manuscripts
The works of Sa-paQ originally circulated only in manuscript.
of

books

therefore
have

been

from blocks was not yet introduced into Tibet during his

The printing
lifetime

and

each and every copy of his works that his contemporaries read had to
produced by a scribe through laborious hand-copying. 15 Copies of his

books were hard to come by in some places, and those that did exist sometimes left
much to be desired for accuracy.
stance,

writing

to

Sa-pa~

We find Chag lo-tsa-ba Chos-rje-dpal,

telling him about the

difficulties

he

for

in-

experienced

finding a copy of the Sdom gsom rab dbye and relating how when he finally could
borrow a copy for a short while, the one he located was marred with scribal errors

(..ti:&. ~ skyon chags). He concluded his letter with a request that Sa-pa~ send
him a correct copy (~~~ zhig).16 Probably the average quality of a manuscript was somewhat better for those treatises that were less widely read and were
not at the center of any burning doctrinal controversy.

His technical

treatises

and minor writings would have circulated less frequently apart from his collected
works,

and

any separate copies made were probably more painstakingly done

since

they would have been intended for an individual scholar's use.

The earliest manuscript collection of
later

Sa-pa~'s

sources was commissioned by Sga A-gnyan-dam-pa,

who was a disciple of Sa-pa~ and 'Phags-pa.

works that is mentioned

in

a monk-official from Khams

Zhu-chen Tshul-khrims-rin-chen

de-

scribed this manuscript in 1736 as follows:

From Rga [sic] [there was] a set of the collected works of the chos ~
[Sa-pa~]

devotional

and his nephew ['Phags-pa] which had been commissioned as a

object by A-gnyan-dam-pa.
These were six large volumes

II,

...., I
~

72

written

in

gold

terials. 17

and silver letters and crafted

from

exquisite

ma-

According to the Venerable Dezhung Rinpoche, A-gnyan-dam-pa met both Sa-pa~ and
'Phags-pa when they were passing through Khams in 1244-45. A-gnyan-dam-pa is said
to

have

been appointed the political administrator for all eastern Tibet

'Phags_pa,18
manuscript

and

of

he was the latter's disciple in some mgon

the

two

'Phags-pa's death in 1280,

before

]2

masters' works was perhaps executed about

or soon thereafter,

under

lineages.
the

This

time

of

but could not have been made much

that time because 'Phags-pa's complete works would not have been

compiled

by then.
One

can surmise that this earliest known manuscript of Sa-paQ's works

was

not

radically different in contents from the works as they are now accessible in

the

1736 Derge edition.

cessible major works,

Certainly it did not contain any new or otherwise inac-

for Zhu-chen and his associates could have been relied upon

to include these in the new printed edition.

Another

very

early set of

Sa-pa~'s

works that still existed in the

late-

15th or early-16th century was a manuscript written with golden letters on Chinese
paper and kept at Sa-skya in the Gzhi-thog bla-brang.
According to Glo-bo mkhanchen's description, it was executed in about the period of 'Phags-pa.
Glo-bo
mkhan-chen refers to it as one of the earliest textual authorities when discussing
the

status

of

two

minor works ascribed to Sa_pa~.19

existence of "many old collections of

[Sa-pa~'s]

works,"

He
20

also speaks of the

and one hopes that some

of these old sets still survive in the Sa-skya Lha-khang-chen-mo.

The Inclusion of Sa-pan's Oeuvre into the Sa skya bka' 'bum

As mentioned above,
exist

when

Sa-pa~'s

works were first compiled there did

a Sa skya bka' 'bum consisting of his three predecessors' writings

these had not yet been systematically compiled.

pa~

more.

because

Thus the collected works of Sa-

circulated independently of the early three founders' works for a century

after

But

writings,
were

not

it

the mid-14th-century compilation of the first three

was only a matter of time before the works of

added to them to form a single,

Sa-pa~

inclusive Sa skya bka"bum.

14th century the lung for all five masters' works had been gathered

and

'Phags-pa

By the latetogether

single teachers, and those teachers began to give all five lungs together.
early-15th century,
founders'

works

was

the

Sa sky a bka' 'bum as composed of only the

sometimes still considered to be a

separate

or

founders'

first
and

by

In the
three

distinct

73

collection.

This

is

indicated

for instance by an index preserved among the

21
But there also existed an

writings of Ngor-chen Kun-dga'-bzang-po (1382-1456).

By the early-15th century, sets of all five founders' works

urge to consolidate.
were commissioned together, and by the late-15th or early-16th century one finds
Glo-bo mkhan-chen stating unequivocally that the term Sa skya bka' 'bum
22
the collected works of all five Sa-skya founders.

signifies

The Earliest Printed Edition

Though a complete printed edition of
time,

or mid-14th century.
of

Sa-pa~'s

works had to wait

for

some

at least two of his major treatises seem to have been printed in the earlyThese were the so-called "Mongolian xylographs" (hor

the Rigs gter and Sdom gsum rab dbye.

~.!!!!!,)

During the late-13th and first half of

the 14th century a number of Tibetan works were carved onto printing blocks under
Mongol patronage in China--no doubt by Chinese carvers. 23 Such "Mongolian" editions of the Rigs gter and Sdom gsum rab dbye were later referred to as authoritative
The

by

the 15th-century Sa-skya-pa scholars Go-rams-pa

former referred to the hor

and

Shakya-mchog-ldan.

rna edition of the Rigs gter rang 'grel in

his

two Rigs gter commentaries,24 and the latter is said to have approved of a commentary

on

the Sdom gsum rab dbye by Las-chen Gzhon-nu-seng-ge which

consisted

of

explanatory words added to the "Mongolian edition" (rab dbye'i gzhung hor spar .!!!!!
nyid la 'bru gnan ,ill!). 25
A few
present

copies

century.

of the

hor~.!!!!!

probably survived in Tibet

down

to

bshes Tshul-khrims-rgyal-mtshan of 'Phan-yul Nalendra monastery that an ,~old

of

the

was told separately by dge-bshes Shes-rab-'od-zer and

dgeprint

the Rigs gter rang 'grel existed up to 1959 in the Rgyal-mo-rong kham-tshan of

Nalendra.
have
and

angular.

reason
graph

It was printed on doubled sheets of Chinese paper and was believed

come from China.

This

was. probably the "Mongolian edition."

There

is

also

to believe that at least one copy of this edition still exists.

of

the

to

The pages were long and the Tibetan characters were large

Rigs gter answering this description with

pagination

good

A xyloin

Chinese

characters is now preserved in the library of the Sa-skya Lha-khang-chen-mo.

~~ Sa-skya Xylograph Edition

The

printing of books in Tibet itself began in a big way only in the first

decades of the 15th century.

The early decades of the 1400s saw, for example, the

74

carving
many

of

the blocks of. the "Old Dga'-ldan Edition" (~ldan.E!!!:. rnying)

26
By the fourth decade of that century, works

of Tsong-kha-pa's works.

were also being printed.

Sa-pa~

Two of his works published during

this

of
of

period

were the Thub pa'i dgongs gsal and Legs bshad, and blocks of the first were carved
at Sa-skya in 1439.
with

seven

portion
pa

In this edition, the Thub pa'i dgongs gsal is 83 folios long

lines of text per side.

On the right and left edges of the

printed

of folio 1 verso there are columns of "Mongolian-style" (actually 'Phags-

style)

Tibetan characters

(hor~.

The folios also

marginal notation of ta and an uncarved blank space,

possess

left-hand

which indicate that the book

formed a fascicle of part 9 of a larger collection.

The

xylographic

colophon at the end of this book states that

were carved in the don grub

work

(=~~

year,

'Khon family.27
skya.

The

Blo-gros-rgyal-

a member of the Gzhi-thog branch of the Sa-skya

The blocks were carved at Lhun-grub-dge-'phel, a retreat near Sa-

patron of the carving was the son of the above,

(1418-1462),

blocks

which must have been 1439 because the

was printed after the death of Ta-dben gu-shri Gzhi-thog-pa

mtshan-dpal-bzang-po (1366-1420),

the

and the project was dedicated to his father,

Kun-dga'-dbang-phyug
who had died when Kun-

dga'-dbang-phyug was only two years old.

The
bshad,

second

work

by

Sa-pa~

printed from old Sa-skya blocks

is

though unfortunately a complete copy is not known to survive.

plete copy is preserved at the Bihar Research Society,

sisted

Patna.

of nineteen folios of seven lines of text per side,

now missing.

The

the
An

Legs
incom-

It originally con-

of which ff.

1-6 are

pagination is indicated in the margin both in script

and

in

print of the Legs bshad can be seen to belong to the same edition

as

Tibetan numerals, and there is no xylographic colophon.

This

the Thub pa'i dgongs gsal because i t too has the marginal notation ta and i t is of
similar size and appearance.
of

This notation marks them both as belonging to part 9

a larger collection--perhaps an early arrangement of the Sa sky a bka' 'bum in

which

Sa-pa~'s

known,

however,

works comprised at least volumes 9 and 10.

It is

not

presently

whether other works of Sa-paQ or of the other founders were also

published at this time.

The Gong-dkar-ba Edition (c. 1455)

A second

15th-century printed edition of some (or all) of

Sa-pa~'s

works

was prepared at the orders of Gong-dkar-rdo-rje-gdan-pa Kun-dga'-rnam-rgyal (14321496).28

This was apparently envisaged as a part of a complete Sa skya bka' 'bum

edition,

though so far no more than twelve works by three founding masters--Slob-

75

dpon Bsod-nams-rtse-mo, Rje-btsun Grags-pa-rgyal-mtshan, and

ly

known

known

to have been printed then.

Sa-pa~--are

At present only five works of

to survive as xylographs from this edition or as manuscripts

definiteare

Sa-pa~

derived

from

it:
(1) Rol mo'i bstan bcos
(2) Ji ltar dri tshul (=Dri bali tshul

zhig, TB no. 5)

(3) Mkhas ~ [~] ~ pa' i ..82.

(4) Sgra

bar bsdus pa' i tshigs

bcad

(5) Byis ~ bde blag tu ~ pa' i .f.lli!!!!. M!. bshad ~ byis ~ la phan ~
first two survive in an original xylographic print that is now kept in

The

Sakya College library,

this edition,

Rajpur.

Together this pair amounts to only six folios in

with seven lines of text per page.

for

this fascicle,

The

print

the

No marginal notation was carved

though a small area of wood was left"uncarved for later

use.

came to India from the village of Rong-stod near the Indian border

in

Guge district.
Complete prints of one of the last three are not known to survive, but the
textual tradition is preserved in a manuscript deriving from this
is

shown

work.

by

edition.

a xylographic colophon which was retained at the end of

the

This
final

The surviving manuscript was found at Pha-jo-lding monastery in Bhutan (the

same place
preserved),

where the unique set of Shakya-mchog-ldan's collected writings was

and it was reproduced in 1979 and published from Thimphu.
In this

manuscript,

all three works also retain the marginal notation

as the fifth fascicle of the fourth main section

bka' 'bum.

(Sa-pa~'s

~~,

marking it

oeuvre) of the Sa skya

The first pair of works was probably carved onto blocks before 1458 because
the name of its patron, Gong-dkar-ba~ given in the colophon was his lay name Grwa1nga-rgyal-po.
in

or

The last three works would at first sight seem to have been carved

after 1458 because their xylographic colophon contains his

Kun-dga'-rnam-rgyal-dpal-bzang-po, which he received in 1458.

ordained

name

But recently in Sa-

skya I chanced upon a fragment of the original xylograph of this fascicle (~~
which
works,

included the last page of the KhJ (f.

ending

46a) and the whole of the

with the printing colophon to this fascicle.

name is given not as Kun-dga'-rnam-rgyal but as Grwa-lnga.

dga'-rnam-rgyal
scribe. 29

in

There the

next

two

patron's

Probably the name Kun-

the manuscript had been substituted for Grwa-lnga by a

later

76

The Derge Edition

After

the printing of the Gong-dkar-ba edition,

no major edition

pa9'S works is known to have been produced for almost three centuries.
of this period the Gong-dkar-ba prints had become scarce.

of

Sa-

By the end

Complete sets--if such

sets indeed ever existed--no longer circulated in early-18th-century Khams, though

prints

of separate works could still be located.

One may conclude that the

old

blocks were then no longer in common use.

Perhaps by then the Gong-dkar-ba blocks had been destroyed by warfare, fire
or some other calamity.
no longer usable.

Or perhaps they had become so badly worn that they

were

One may even speculate that the blocks survived in good condi30
In any case it is beyond

tion, only to be put under seal for sectarian reasons.

doubt that by the 1730s the need for a new printed edition was greatly felt,
especially in eastern Tibet where the earlier editions probably had not circulated
as widely in the first place. The Derge edition was produced to fill this need.
The Derge edition of the Sa skya bka' 'bum--and hence of Sa-pa9's works-was

carved

at Derge in the mid-1730s under the patronage of the great ruler

patron Bstan-pa-tshe-ring

and at the urgent request of the Ngor

mkhan-po

and
Bkra-

shis-lhun-grub. It was executed between two other monumental publication projects

of this ruler: the already completed Derge Kanjur and the soon-to-be-commissioned
Derge Tanjur.
Though the Sa skya bka' 'bum was much smaller than either of those
tions, it was still an ambitious undertaking.
of

some

total
into

collec-

It entailed the editing and carving

nine-thousand long-page format (ldeb ring) printing blocks to produce a

of fifteen large volumes.

three main groups:

volved in block carving.

The workers involved in the work

general administrators,

were

divided

editorial staff,

and those in-

Head of the editorial staff was Zhu-chen

Tshul-khrims-

rin-chen, the future editor of the Derge Tanjur.

In
sisted

of

this edition,

Sa-pa9's works came to three physical volumes which con-

a total of 906 folios and required just over 1,800 blocks

to

print.

For establishing the text of Sa-paq's works, the editors had seven complete manuscripts to compare. 31 In addition, for some works they may have consulted an
incomplete manuscript of the Sa sky a bka' 'bum and stray prints from the
32
edition.
In general the editors seem to have set the most store

dkar-ba
"very

Gong-

by a

correct" manuscript of the complete Sa skya bka' 'bum from Skyor-mda' Bsam-

gling dgon-pa in Chab-mdo.

Among the seven accessible manuscripts there was also

the old gold- and silver-lettered manuscript believed to have been commissioned in
the late-13th century by Sga A-gnyan-dam-pa.

77

The Derge editors were rather liberal in accepting as genuine a number

questionable and obscure works ascribed to Sa-pa~.
including
works,

but

of

They cannot be blamed much for

works that already appeared in 16th- and 17th-century lists of Sa-pa9's

they also approved a number of works that seem to be

else and that are surely apocryphal.

listed

nowhere

One possible reason for this acceptance was

simply that those works had already made their way into one or more of the seven
available manuscript sets.
However, the consequence of including these into the
Derge edition was great. These xy10graphs became the standard edition of Sa-pa~'s
works. For later scholars, both Tibetan and foreign, each and every work included
therein gained an aura of legitimacy that mayor may not have been truly deserved.

78

ISee below, chapter 6, note 1.

2See
note 59.

also below,

chapter 4,

Doubtful and Spurious Works,

30n this date see also below,

chapter 5,

note 22.

Cf.

and chapter 5,

L. van der KUijp

(1984), p. 46.
4

[Zhu-chen], Dpal sa, p. 315.2.2.

5This is related for instance by Go-rams-pa,

pp. 130.1.4 (ta 23a
6The
however,
mkhas

references

seem

~ gsum

p.

to the KhJ in the Sdeb sbyor (pp.

132.2.5 and

140.3.5),

pa'i sgor bshad zin.

50.1.6 (tha 99a.6):

kho

tshogs chos

dbus gtsang khams gsum

~ ill. ~
nga 'i slob rna thams cad kyis lung thob
.Ii ~ ~ la ltos la shodl I ~ bzhin nyams su longl I

8.fu@ brgyad rna'i,

mngon ~ dang/

p.

shes rab

151.3.3 (tha 305b.3):

1vi. ~

bstan

bcos ci rigs ~ ~ .IQQ. lal

bstan

bcos ci rigs

&

byed 'dod

rab la bogs dbyung

Ius

p.

5b.6,

.!:&y!!.

the

du

.Y!!!.

~ ~ la ~ 'dul ba,-dang/

rol tu phyin ~ la sogs ~ kho bos

byas

pa' i

rdo ~ theg ~ la' ang ~ dang ~ brag .8i

.IQQ. rnod 1vi./

kyang bla rna .B2!!.&. rna de

rna mthong bas bstan bcos phra mo tsam rna

su rdzogs pa'i bstan bcos sngon chad kho bos rna bsdebs

9personal Communication.
that

bos

Cf. L. van del' Kuijp (1984), pp. 46f.

ngas thams cad la bshad

~

bshad,

!!!!!.

to indicate that the KhJ by then was already completed:

~ ~ ~

7ThGS ,

Sdorn

22a).

soil

Ngag-dbang-bsod-nams-rgyal-mtshan, Sdom

m!.

gsum,

states something that was for Sa-skya-pa scholars self-evident, namely,

two greatest works of Sa-pal} were his Sdom gsum rab dbye and

rigs pa' i gter: bdag nyid chen po' i ~ rab

10personal Communication.

1vi.

gtso bo sdom

.Ei&l s]

Tshad !!@.

gnyis.

79

11Klong-rdol bla-ma, Collected Works (Mussoorie, 1963), [~], p. 363.

See

also E. G. Smith (1970a), p. 6.

12Shakya-mchog-ldan,

Chos ~ 'khor, p. 467.1. In the KhJ (III 41, autoSa-paI} does state the principle that doctrinal errors should be
appropriately refuted because if they are allowed to spread unhindered they will
harm the doctrine, just as rank weeds will crowd out and choke the crops in a
commentary),

field.

"For

even if passionate and angry fools do not understand,

it

will

be

understood by learned men who dwell in rectitude."

13 In

particular,

any topics that required a knowledge of Sanskrit grammar

or vocabulary (such as in KhJ ; and II) were understood by progressively fewer and
fewer scholars as Sanskrit studies declined with the passing centuries.
14See D.
that

pp. 4f.

Jackson (1983),

Dpal-ldan-seng-ge

sometime after that.

H. E. Richardson (1983), p. 263, states

If true,

died in 1342.

the compilation

project

began

For an earlier sketch of the arrangement and origins of the

SKKB, see E. Gene Smith (1969b), p. 81.

15D Jackson (1983), p. 5. All teaching and study of Sa-paI}'s works deon written texts.
Even when texts were memorized or taught from memory,

pended

they were originally learned by reading texts.

For a reference to a 15th-century
scholar who had memorized the whole Sa skya bka' 'bum, see Shakya-rin-chen, Collected Works, vol. 4, p. 269.3.
16Chag loti zhu ba, (TB no. 93), p. 408.2.4 (na 228a.4).
17
bzhengs

[Zhu-chen],

DDal sa,

p.

341. 2.4: .I.82. nas

gnyan dam pa' i thugs dam du

Da'i chos .ill. khu dbon .&Vi bka' 'bum gser dngul las grub cing/

bzo

.!:.&.y!!

khyad du ~ pa' i chos chen ~ bam drug/.

18
The Venerable Dezhung Rinpoche, personal communication.

See also his Bod

bongs mdo khams ~ 1dan skyur gsum .&Vi ~ tshul .!!Y!!1!&. bsdus gtam .&Vi ~ bon,
Pp. 25, 34, 40f. On pp. 40f he gives the following account, bas"ed on the writings
of

Zhu-chen Tshul-khrims-rin-chen:

sngar dus ~ skya ~ bod chol kha

gsum

la

dbaI!&. bsgyur ba' i skabs/ ~ ~ gnyan dam ill!. kun ~ ~ de nyid chos.ill. khu
~ .anyis ka' i zha1 slob dang/ bla chen ~ pa' i bla chen du 'khod/ .!.&Y!!..!ill&.

.!:.&Y.!!!.
~

~ ~..&!!Y1!!!. dam ill!. ~

mdo

~_ sa dang/ tham ka phul/ mchod.YQ!!. bka' gros

khams stod phal che ba'i dDon du bskos W ~ gnyan dDon tshang ~

80

~ ~

gser khral/

ldan mas 'bru khral/

sogs 'jal dgos dang/

rnams

skyongs/

du .8.I!!!:. ~
sa

gling

ha kyang

'dzi

~ ~

10 shas nas rang gnas khri 'du' i

skya 1!!!. la brtsi 'bul dgongs [p.

gnang mdzad/

drel khral byas

bal

lugs gnyis ill. mdzad 1!!!. .!:.&.Y!!. ches bas mdo stod ill. dgon

41]

ces zhu chen bka' 'bum

dkar chag nang du gsal/.

(~)

che basi
~

skor tsam dbang cha

zhus/

l!.

gnyan dam 1!!!. thugs ngal

skya

gzhan

kyang de

nang ltar chos sde dgon .&Vi lha khang ..8!.

The reference here is to Zhu-chen, Chos sde'i, pp. 212.1

and 214.2.
Sga
to

A-gnyan dam-pa is said to have been alive when Bzang-po-dpal

Sa-skya

from

'Dzam-gling,
257.

China (1296).

See the life of Bzang-po-dpal

in

returned

A-mes-zhabs,

as excerpted in Khetsun Sangpo, Biographical Dictionary, vol. 10, p.

Zhu-chen, Dpal ldan, vol. 2, pp. 206.4, 218.6 and 219.5 identifies A-gnyan-

dam-pa (another spelling:

Rgwa

Anan

dam pa) as Dam-pa Kun-dga'-grags,

three lineages in which he appears.

patronage of "A-gnyen bakshi," see H.
Kanjur (1983),

notes 30 and 81.

and lists

On other manuscripts attributed

Eimer's article on the editions

For other references see also Y.

to
of

the
the

Fukuda and Y.

Ishihama (1986), p. 35.

19G1o_bo
manuscri pt) ,
~

mkhan-chen,

Rab 'byams blo gros rab gsal ~ dris pa'i Ian

vol. cha, p. 200a. 3-4 :

sa skya' i bla brang bzhi thog na

.&Vi bka' 'bum'!:'&'y!!' shog la bris pa' i gser mal

tsam .&Vi dus su

21

Ngor-chen,
p. 366.4.4.

ba .&!.8..Y.2.!!. W.

'bum zhes
gling,
sioned

chen ..P.2. nas bla rna

su

(TB

pa' i

l!.

chos ill. .!:.8.Y&..P.2. ~ ~

btsuri sa skya pa' i bka' 'bum.&Vi dkar chag, SKKB, vol. 10,

22Glo-bo mkhan-chen,
sa skya

..Y2&.

Skyes rtsa bla mas (New Delhi ed.),

~

pa' i bar .&Vi

pa' i mtshan .&Vi rnam grangs.

p. 304.2: bla ~

rab rnams la sa sky a

bka'

See also A-mes-zhabs, 'Dzam

p. 417, where it is recorded that Theg-chen chos-rje (1349-1425) commisa set of the collected works of the five founders (.&Q!!&. rna lnga'i bka'

'bum).
23 D. Jackson (1983), pp. 5f.
24

Go-rams-pa,

rigs, vol. 3, p. 651.6

Sde bdun mdo,

(~326a.6).

vol.

2,

p. 665.5 (kha 141a.5), and Tshad

81

25Referred to by Ngag-dbang-chos-grags, Bod ~ mkhas (Thimbu ed.), p. 258.

See also L.
.ster

van der Kuijp (1983),

p.

19,

and Shakya-mchog-ldan,

dgongs, vol. 1, pp. 373.7-374.1: hor

.QM.m!. dor bar

26 1

..Q!!!..

Tshad

rigs

du rkos .12!!..!&. ni shin tu

~.

have

seen

few old Dga'-ldan prints in

Nepal

and

have

gathered

These are described in an article forthcoming in the T. V.

references to others.
Wylie memorial volume.
27

.
For this colophon,

see D. Jackson (1983), p. 17.

Correct "14th-century"

to "15th-century."
28For more details on this edition, see D. Jackson (1983), pp. 7-16.
29

See below, chapter 10.

30The

blocks for this edition may have survived until recent times at Pede

Dzong near Yamdrok Tsho.

31These

See D. Jackson (1983), p. 16.

manuscripts--and the Derge edition which grew from them--are

des-

cribed in more detail below in chapter 10.

32The

Gong-dkar-ba prints strangely enough are not mentioned in

index ([Zhu-chen],
chapter 10.

Dpal

~),

but only in Zhu-chen's autobiography.

the

SKKB

See below,

Chapter 4
LOST, APOCRYPHAL AND DOUBTFUL WORKS

Sa-pa~'s

fect form.
what

collected works have come down to us in an incomplete and

imper-

Several major treatises by his hand were lost from an early time, and

genuine works do survive have been joined over the centuries by a

consider-

able number of spurious accretions.

At

least five works that

achievements

Sa-pa~

himself considered representative

of

in specific areas of scholarship have quite simply disappeared

his oeuvre.
'grel.Q.2.:1

These are the following,

which he mentions in his

brgyad

his
from
mali

(1) Grub mtha'i rnam 'byed (p. 149.2.5)

(2) Mkhas pa'i kha rgyan (p. 149.4.4)2
(3) Sku~.!91:.. bstan bcos (p. 150.4.4)
(4) Sa brtag .Q.2. (p. 150.4.4)
(5) Yan~ brgyad pa'i don bsdus (p. 15l.l.3)3
The ~ mtha'i ~ 'byed,
phical

tenets,

is

a lost treatise on Buddhist and non-Buddhist philosoworks. 4

The

referred to in no less than four of his extant

Mkhas Ea'i kha ~ is clearly described by Sa-pa~ as beings a poetical work, and
thus
the

it

is probably not the grammatical work by this name found near the end

Derge edition of his oeuvre (TB no.

109).5

The remaining three in the

were on iconometry, geomancy and medicine, respectively.

of
list

Another vanished work is

his

treatise on grammar entitled Shes rab 'phro ba.

He refers to it in his Byis
7
~ bla...&.6 and Sgra la ~.Q.2., both of which were early compositions. He is

also said by his disciple Lho-pa kun-mkhyen to have written a drama tical treatise
entitled .&!.Q ~ la ~.l@.. 8

84

Doubtful and Spurious Works

Given Sa-paQ's unquestioned and enduring stature as the first great paQgita
of Tibet, it is natural that certain later writers would be tempted to try to gain
for

their

own writings some of the glory associated with his name

their compositions to him.

of

them were accepted as genuine and inserted into his collected

such

works

appeared

may

by

ascribing

Such forgeries were usually fairly short, and a number

have cropped up very early,

from the 16th century onward.

works.

but fortunately most seem

A few
to

These can be found among the late

have
addi-

tions to the lists of his writings.

The

seven main accessible lists of the contents of

Sa-pa~'s

oeuvre are

in

the following:
(1) Ngor-chen Kun-dga'-bzang-po's gsan

li&

(2) Gong-dkar 'Phrin-las-rnam-rgyal's gsan

(3) Dkon-mchog-lhun-grub's gsan

li&
li&

li&

(4) The Fifth Dalai Lama's gsan

(5) Zhu-chen Tshul-khrims-rin-chen's index to the Derge Sa skya bka' 'bum

(6) Zhu-chen's gsan li&

(7) A manuscript index to one volume of

some

fifty

first is a list of Sa-paQ's works as they were recited to Ngor-chen by

Shar-

Sa-pa~'s

works listing

minor writings
The
chen

Ye-shes-rgyal-mtshan

probably at Sa-skya,

before the latter died in

1406.

The second is a rare source which I saw briefly and from which I was able to
this
title

passage.

The

copy I saw was a 244-folio dbu med manuscript,

Thob .lli. bum .m!. bzang

recorded in fascicle da.

rnam-rgyal,
third

source

The lineages of Sa skya bka'

'bum

the

lungs

are

This was the record of teachings received by 'Phrin-las-

a later teacher in the Gong-dkar tradition.

the whole work in detail,

out

.P.Q..

Though I could not study

it dates to the late-17th century at the earliest. The

was another manuscript which I saw briefly and from which I

this passage.

copy

bearing

The copy I saw was a 159-folio manuscript in dbu med

copied
script.

Its full title was: Chos ~ ill dpal ldan bla ~ dam.m!. ~ las dam pari ~
thos pa 'i tshul gsal bar bshad pa' i .y.!. ~ thub bstan .!:.8.Y.M pa 'i nyin byed.
Actually

Zhu-chen Tshul-khrims-rin-chen purports to indicate the contents of this

gsan

of Dkon-mchog-lhun-grub as well as that of

li&

sources nos.
those

5 and 6 in the above list,

i.e.

Sangs-rgyas-phun-tshogs,

in

Zhu-chen's index and gsan 11&.

In

works Zhu-chen marked the titles of each work with the numerals 9 or 24

if

they appeared in the gsan 11&s of these two,

who were respectively the 9th

[i.e.

85

10th]

and 24th [i.e.

25th] mkhan

]2

of Ngor.

When comparing these

with the actual gsan liK of Dkon-mchog-lhun-grub,

chen's notes are not always reliable,

however,

indications

one can see that Zhu-

and therefore they have not been used here.

Zhu-chen's gsan 11&, is almost identical with his Derge Sa skya bka' 'bum
In
The last source, no. 7, I located in a monastic library in Nepal.

No.6,
index.
addition,
works

there

are two short lists that I have compiled on the basis of

twenty

that survive in an old manuscript from Glo-bo and nineteen works in an

manuscript

volume from Sa-skya.

chen, . Gong-dkar 'Phrin-las-rnam-rgyal,

Lama,

old

(For the full lists from the gsan liKs of NgorDkon-mchog-lhun-grub and the Fifth

Dalai

from the old manuscript index, and from the Glo-bo and Sa-skya manuscripts,

see below, Appendixes A, B, C, D, M, N, and 0.)

These

lists give a good idea of the contents of actually existing

tions in different periods.

all but nos.
Ngor-pa
lineage.

2 and 7.

list,

though

collec-

The Ngor-pa tradition predominates, being attested by

Even the Fifth Dalai Lama incorporated into his gsan liK a
he

had

also received the lung

within

the

Gong-dkar-ba

When using these lists one must bear in mind the possibility that

very short works may have been omitted by accident.

some

Such minor omissions are not

uncommon in both gsan liKs and indexes to collected works.

Finally,

there

also exist three lists of Sa-pa9's works given in the bio-

graphies of Sa-pa9 by Glo-bo mkhan-chen, Rin-spungs-pa and A-mes-zhabs, which were

composed in 1527,

1579 and 1629,

actually

during a lung transmission or as actually existing in

manuscript
the

recited

collection.

respectively.

These were not lists of works as

latter two were attempts at listing every work he ever wrote,

whether they were still extant or not.

pa~ which
apocryphal

including

regardless

the

of
Sa-

were lost from an early period, as well as quite a few doubtful and
works.
Rin-spungs-pa in particular seems to have been very free,
anything

he heard of or came across that bore

but the second two (both

tion of a negative sort.

it

given

Thus we find listed in them works by

Sa-pa9's

name.

three lists thus do not have the same value as positive witnesses as the
ones,

Rather, the first was a general summary of his works, and

o~

These
previous

which are quite long) do give valuable informa-

If a given work was not listed by either of them,

probably had no significant circulation in two important centers of Gtsang

late-16th

and early-17th centuries.

below, Appendixes E, F and L.)

(For these three lists

in

full,

then
in
see

86

Table 3.

Eleven Lists of Sa-pan's Works

Abbreviations:
TB

= Toyo Bunko reprint of

Sa-pa~'s works as they appear in the Derge Sa skya bka'

'bum (Tokyo: 1968). The numbers are from the index to vol. 5, pp. v-xviii.
This list accords with Zhu-chen's Sa skya bka' 'bum index (1736), except at
the end.

NgCh = Ngor-chen's gsan lis. (Thob lis.) (c. 1400)

GK = Gong-dkar 'Phrin-las-rnam-rgyal' s gsan.I!s. (Thob.I!s.) (c. 1700?)
KLh == Dkon-mchog-lhun-gru b 's gsan lis. (Chos !~1!) (16th c.)
DL5 == The Fifth Dalai Lama's gsan lis. (Zab.E!!) (mid-17th c.)
Sa = One volume from a Sa-skya MS of the Sa skya bka' 'bum
dkar = The index (dkar chag) to one volume of an old manuscript of
G = The Glo-bo manuscript
KhJNSh = Glo-bo mkhan-chen' s Mkhas ~ ~ bshad (1527)
RP == Rin-spungs-pa ('Jam pa'i) (1579)
AMZh = A-mes-zhabs ('Dzam gling) (1629)

TB

NgCh

GK

KLh

DL5

Sa

dkar

Sa-pa~'s

KhJNSh

RP

works

AMZh

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

20
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

36
95
86
104
105
85
101
102
103
98

17
1

22
1

19
1

14?
1

2
3
4

3
4
5

2
3
4

1
10
2

25
2

5
6
7
8

6
7
8

5
6
7

6
10

9a

10

10

9b
10

11

11

11

12

12

13

13

23
20
21

79
99
66
14

9
8

25
36
35?
14
39
34
2
3
4
5

7
13
12
27

6
12
11
10

11

12
13

14
15
16

9
10
11

12

100
96
97
12

87

(Table 3, continued)
NgCh

TB

GK

KLh

DL5

Sa

dkar

KhJNSh

RP

AMZh

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

17
18

13
14

3
87

19
20
21

15
16
18

93
94
28

22
23
24
25
26
27
28

19

29

21

35
24
2

21

23

22
20

12

22?

4?
5
37
39

53
52
23
24

56
55
24
25

25

26
26?

26
18
37
39
38?

17
47
46

29
30
31
32
33
34

?
26

35
36

27
28

37
38

29
30

39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51

22
23
24

31

13

14
18
19

15
16

14
16

15

17

16

21

18

27

91

28
29-30

30

43

31
32

6
7

33

31
32

55
57

36
37

8
70
77.

20

18
32?

15
16

12

7
8

63

27

64

28

17

26

30
20
21
80
82

59(2)
60
61
41
42

92

47

34

6
7

17

40

54

40

18
19
20

32
33
34
35

19

27

50

29ab

40
42?

15

26

88
81
72

41?
43

15?

1
2

35
36

39?
39?
37
40

3
4
5
7?

37
38

3
41
45

9
10

47
43
44?
45

18

16
17

23
24

62

40a
40b

65a
65b
6
67
68

41
46

25
45

63
69

55

70

88

(Table 3, continued)
TB

NgCh

GK

KLh

DL5

Sa

dkar

KhJNSh

RP

AMZh

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72

73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86

"38
39
40
41

42

80
54
20
81

45?
44
48
49
50
51
52
53
54

55
56
57
58
59

46
47
19

41
42

48
49

82
73

43

50

71

44
45
46
47
49
50
51
54
55
57
58
59
60

44

72

43

39
40

68
69
76
1
10
11
14
15
26

52
43
51
54
53
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
84

52

61
62
63

49
88
89
16

64
65
66
67

81
64
6'5

17
30
38

68
69
70

67
68
73

77?
50
32

74?
64
52
53

65
43

54

8
13
51
15 54/76?
52

11/12?
14
16
15

18

25

31?

19
20
21
24?

29
28

23

97(36?)

46a
46b
27
28

66
29
34
32

71

56

8
12
13
11

89
94
95
35
37
62
74

18?
20
23
21

50a?
SOb
37
38

32
31

89

(Table 3, continued)
TB

NgCh

GK

KLh

DL5

Sa

dkar

KhJNSh

RP

AMZh

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114

60
63

61
62
64a
64b
65
66

32
31
22
23
64
657

71

69

74

72

72

75
76
70

75
67
68
60
617

77

78
79
80

30
317
44a
44b
45
48

5
7

73
75
75
76

46
45

36
35

71
77

68

50

787
79

82

47

70

106

81

85

51

19

27
28

85
91
937
90

30

102

57
58

51a
SIb
46

49
33
73

36
78

58

83
99

69

74
33

48
80

42
83

78
117

17

44
39

337

97

90

thirty

From a comparison of these lists one can provisionally conclude that some
works found in the Derge edition were later additions to Sa-paQ's oeuvre.

This does not mean that they all need be counted

esoteric,

as suspect.

first compi1ed. 10

They may have been preserved separately as individual works or

as parts of other collections such as in be'u 'bums,

or

~s,

search

among the Lam 'bras' literature.

large compilations of

It will have to remain for future

to try to trace the provenance of each.

note these Tantric works as late additions.

the

So'me, being highly

were probably considered inappropriate for inclusion in his bka' bum as

For the present it is enough

For the non-Tantric works,

reto

however,

failure to be listed in the earlier sources is prima-facie evidence of doubt-

ful authenticity.
The following were later additions:
(TB no. 3) Gzhung lugs legs

bshad.ill!.

This is listed in the gsan ..ti.8. of Gong-

dkar 'Phrin-1as-rnam-rgya1, and it is also mentioned by Rin-spungs-pa and A11

mes-zhabs. But it is spurious, as I have discussed e1sewhere.
(TB no. 11) Rnam

gcad

~.ii

1tar sbyor tshu1

(TB no. 12) Sngags.w. k10g thabs 'bras bu ~ bali ~!.28.. The first and only
listing of these is in the two lists of Zhu-chen.
They must be considered
doubtful.
This seems to have
three works ascribed to

Sa-pa~'s

been one of the

disciple Bi-ji that were acquired from Khams

in the time of Rgya1-tshab Kun-dga'-dbang-phyug (1424-1478).12

(TB no. 33) Rne1.!!!! bali zhus 1an.
(TB no. 39) Sho dgon .ill!

mgon rin chen 1a spring ba

(TB no. 40) Sho dgon ill ~ 'dun 1a spring ba

These three, and especially the last two, are probably spurious.

13

They make

their first and only definite appearance in Zhu-chen's lists (1736).

(TB no. 47) Grub chen bcu
(TB no. 48) Phra .!!!Q brgyad
This pair was a late addition from the Lam 'bras. The first was included in
the Pod dmar chung compiled by Rgya1-tshab Kun-dga'-dbang-phyug, and it also
is listed by A-mes-zhabs.

Neither appear in the earlier gsan ..ti.8.s.

91

As will be

ex-

plained below, this seems to be a dubious work that Ngor-chen Kun-dga'-bzangpo rejected.

It was probably extracted from a Lam 'bras volume.

(TB no. 57) i l l chol .&Ii rjes

(TB no. 58) Ba ri ba' i gdams

thun mong !!!.!! .Ii!!

(TB no. 59) Man .!!&!!8. bsdus ~

This group of three minor Tantric works seems to be found only in the

Derge

index and Zhu-chen's gsan 11&, and not in the other lists.
(TB no. 61) Rigs drug mtshan don dang
Gong-dkar 'Phrin-las-rnam-rgyal
rences to this work.
(TB no. 62) Rigs
tion

shes bsre ba.

and Rin-spungs-pa are the only other

refe-

It may be considered suspect.

ill rab dbye'i bshad sbyar. This purports to be Sa-paI}-'s comple-

of a work left slightly unfinished by Grags-pa-rgyal-mtshan.

It

war-

rants a careful investigation, even though it appears in several lists.

(TB no. 63) Sgra sgrub dum bu ..!!&!!.~.

This too should be examined carefully, even

though it is listed by Gong-dkar 'Phrin-las-rnam-rgyal,

Dkon-mchog-lhun-grub

and (by a different title) in the old manuscript index.

(TB no. 76) Gangs .!!!!. .&Ii sgom chen la gdams M
(TB no. 77) Bu slob
Of this pair,
the

.!:lli!!!!.

la spring ba

the first appears in the gsan 11&s of Dkon-mchog-lhun-grub and

Fifth Dalai Lama.

The second is listed by both Gong-dkar

rnam-rgyal and Dkon-mchog-lhun-grub.

'Phrin-las-

They do not, however, appear elsewhere.

Both deserve to be reexamined with this in mind.

(TB no.

83) Dod 1!!Q. ri pa' i ~ ~ khang du bsngags ~.

This does not appear anywhere outside of Zhu-chen's lists and is therefore to
be doubted.
(TB no. 89) Sdud M sogs sher mdo 'don thabs
(TB no. 90) Phung .P.Q. gsum pa'i mdo 'don thabs
These

are apparently late additions.

They are,

however,

perhaps

since the Fifth Dalai Lama records a separate lung lineage for them.

genuine

92

(TB no. 99) Rnal 'byor .!!. phru ma'i dris Ian
These two works ascribed to Bi-ji (like no.
14
the second half of the 15th century.

32 above) appeared from Khams in

(TB no. 101) Bde mchog lhan skyes ill byin rlabs

(TB no. 102) Rlung .8i.!:.ill 'breI brtag M.

The first of these is mentioned by A-mes-zhabs, but it does not appear in the
earlier gsan 11&s.

The second is otherwise unknown, though the similar title

Lus ill.!:.ill 'breI appears as no. 6 in the old manuscript index.

(TB no. 103) Mnal lam &.Vi tshigs bcad
This

single

verse is also found in the Gsung sgros

biography

of

Sa-pa~

attributed to Ngor-chen (Lam 'bras, vol. ka, p. 61b.2).

(TB no. 105) Khro bo

brtsegs ill sgrub thabs

This is listed by.Gong-dkar 'Phrin-Ias-rnam-rgyal and Rin-spungs-pa.

15

(TB no. 106) Lus ill ~ .!!. sbyin .!!.1lli!!!K ba'i gzungs
(TB no. 107) Rang .ill. rang la gros 'debs M..
(TB no.

108).lli:!8. bcos.

The first two are listed only by Zhu-chen.

The second should be considered

apocryphal because its colophon is anachronistic, as discussed above. 16 The
third title appears in the lists of the Gong-dkar-ba and Rin-spungs-pa.

(TB no. 109) Bstan bcos mkhas pa' i kha .!1ill!!l

Though
in

this work is listed by Gong-dkar 'Phrin-Ias-rnam-rgyal and is

the Sa-skya and Glo-bo manuscripts,

examined

because it is a grammatical,

its authenticity is to be
not a poetical,

work.

extant

carefully

As mentioned

above, one of Sa-pa9's lost works was a poetical treatise with this title.
(TB no. 110) Legs bshad 'phrul &.Vi dra ba
This

is found only in the Derge edition,

"doubtful" (the tshom 9!!!.).17

and Zhu-chen himself marked it

It is most certainly not genuine,

as will

as
be

explained below in more detail.

(TB no. 114) Bshes pa' i spring
This

was

&. bsdus don

a final addition to the Derge edition.

after the completion of the index.

It was appended

sometime

It is otherwise unknown, and must therefore be counted as probably apocryphal. 18

93

Finally

one should note that TB nos.

23 and 111 too were additions

since

The first, the ~ mchog 10 hi pa' i 'bru 'bum by the

they were not by Sa-pa9.
12th-century master Gnyan Phug-chung-ba, was added to an early manuscript set of
Sa-p a 9's works (or of the Sa skya bka' 'bum) to fill out a small volume, and the
Derge editors retained it for the same purpose.
The second is the work Dpa1 1dan
~

skya pandita chen po' i

Zhang

Rgya1-ba-dpa1.

.Pru:. thar,m!,

a biography of Sa-paJ;l by his

student

It is not uncommon to find a biography of a Tibetan master

added to his collected writings,

and in this case we can be grateful to the Derge

editors for preserving in this wayan otherwise rare work.

Unidentified and Extra Titles in the Lists

One

cannot

definitely link all the titles in the above lists

included in the Derge edition.

as

apocryphal writings,

included in that edition.

with works

Some can be identified as known lost works,

some

and some as extant works which for some reason were

not

A number of other titles simply cannot be traced.

For

the sake of future ease of reference I will list the various extra works here.
Ngor-chen's Gsan .v.!&.
From Ngor-chen's Thob .v.!&. there were only two which could not be positively
identified:

(25) Rtogs 1dan .&f&. .&!!!. dris pa' i 1an

(67) Yang dris 1an mdor bsdus

~.&f&.

Gong-dkar 'Phrin-1as-rnam-rgya1's Gsan.v.!&.

Quite

a few works listed in the Gong-dkar gsan .v.!&. could not be positively

identified within the Derge edition of Sa-pa~'s bka' 'bum.

These are:

(9) Khyad .Pru:. ~ bstod M !BE cher 'gre1 pa' i kha skong (5 ff.)
(13) Sangs ~ 1a bstod M tshig .8!. phreng ba (2 ff.)
(19) 'Jam dbyangs ~ g M!. ~ 1ha 1nga'i mngon.Pru:. rtogs M (3 ff.)
(21) Mtshan brjod 'don thabs (3 ff.)
(25) and (26) are possibly one and the same work.
(27) Chos ~ tshu1 (3 ff.)
(34) It is interesting to note that a basic text (rtsa ~ of the Sdom gsum
rab dbye consisting of two folios is recorded to have existed separately
from the full version.
(41) Grwa M ~ 1a spring .v.!&. (2 ff.)

94

(42) Rtse mdo'i

'dun [la spring ba]

ill dris Ian (3 ff.)
Rtogs ldan ill dris Ian, here linked to "Snye-mo sgom-chen" in a
~

(48) Thos bsam sgom gsum

(51)

bu.
It identifies by means of the marker ka twelve works as belonging purely
to the Lam 'bras:

nos.

6,

7, 53, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, and 67.

He states that there is therefore no lung transmission for them.

Of these,

the following seven are not found in the Derge Sa skya bka' 'bum:
(56) Rdo rje'i Ius

ill 'khrul 'khor

(58) Brda don gsal ba (2 ff.)

(59) Tho .I!8. rin chen sgron
(60) Khrid

(4 ff.)

ill lung sbyor (4 ff.)

(61) Lho pa'i zin bris (2 ff.)

(62) Yang zin bris .8!&. (5 ff.)

(67) 'Khor bzhi'i rgya'i .Ii ~ (1 f.)

Other unaccounted-for works are:
(63) Phyag

chen po'i dbye ba (2 ff.)

(66) Dpal sa skya pa'i gces .p!!. ~ ~.8!&. tu bsdus

and the following work were quite substantial.
(75) Tshul bzhi'i bsdus don snying.P.Q. (18 ff.)

.p!!.

(31 ff.)

This

(78) 'Dod.!:&I& ill rjes gnang (3 ff.)

(84) Thod .p!!. brtag thabs (2 ff.). This title was added in a mchan bu.
(90) Chos

bcu

.p!!.

(92) Rgyas 'bring bsdus gsum ill nyams len.

quite short.
Dkon-mchog-Ihun-grub's Gsan

five works from Dkon-mchog-Ihun-grub's gsan .I!8. had

As listed in the Derge index, these were: 19

(1) Brtag gnyis ill sa bcad

(2) Thub pa'i bstod .ill!. lhug
(3) Gur ston zhus Ian
( 4) Bka' gdams
(5) Yan

.p!!. ill!!!!.

preceding were

ii&

According to Zhu-chen,
not been located by 1736.

This and the

bsring ba

.p!!.

mkha' 'bum ill dris Ian mdor bsdus

bdun ldan ill rtsa ba

Sometime after 1736, however, the first and fifth were located and appended to the
end of the bka' 'bum (TB nos. 112 and 113).
three remain unidentified.

Thus as it now stands only the middle

95

Actually,

from

the

gsan liK as I copied it,

identified, namely (56) Thub pa'i bstod

~ lhug~.

ly affixed the number 9 to the following works,

only one work could not

be

Moreover, Zhu-chen erroneous-

which were not listed in the gsan

1!& as accessible to me: TB nos. 23, 33, 42, 43, 49, 78, 89, 90, 93, 99, 104, 108,
and 109.
~

Fifth Dalai Lama's Gsan liK

The following five works listed in the Fifth Dalai Lama's gsan liK could
t he Derge e d
not be 1 ocate d 1n
1t10n: 20
(2)

Yan ill brgyad pa'i snying .E..Q..

bu),

which

also specifies that

This title is

given in a note

no lung existed for this work.

ii
'I

(mchan
It is

medical work now presumed lost.

(14) Khyad .ill!!. ~ bstod ~ !&Y!!. cher bshad ~.
This title too is given
with a mchan bu, and no lung is said to exist. [See below, ch. 9, note 22.]
(34) Brda don gsal ba rtsa 'grel
(35) Phyag !&y!!. chen .E..Q. rab tu dbye ba
This pair, together with a third work, are said to be listed in the indexes
(dkar chag) to collected works, but not in the gsan liKs.
(38) Sa bdun ~ Bill. chad 'khor bzhi
The

!&y!!.

zhes pa'i dgongs ~ ston ~.

compiler of this list seems to have been comparing earlier gsan liKs with

actual manuscript or its index.

ba and 9b Sgra ~ bar bsdus ~ as one.

Rtogs

ldan

zhig

&i

At no. 26a he adds the note that the work

dris Ian is listed in the gsan liK but is not found

index, and" he makes the same observation about his nos. 33-35.
Tshogs

ffi 'khor lo'i cho

l@.

an

He attempts to identify his nos. 9a Yi ge'i sbyor

rtsod ~.!!!!!.,

in

the

Concerning no. 45,

he notes that some manuscripts state

that Sa-pa~ composed it in Ling-chu-rtse, while others do not. At no. 58a there is
a note stating that according to the gsan liKs there is a work Bstod
but that in fact it cannot be found.
listed

in the gsan liKs,

Four works,

lhug

[~],

nos. 73-76, are said not to be

but he nevertheless succeeded in tracing lung

lineages

for them from elsewhere. These are:

(73) Zhen ~ bzhi bral .&Ii. !!!!.

ill@8.

(74) 'Phags ~ 'jam dpal .&Ii. mtshan .Yill!&. ~ ~ brjod ~ 'don thabs

(75) 'Phags ~ sdud ~ sogs shes rab ill .Elli!. rol tu phyin ~ gdon
~

(76) Phung.E..Q. gsum m! gdon pa'i

!!!!. ill@8.

pa'i

!!!!.

I'

96

Finally, on no. 81 Bka' gdams do skor ba'i dris lan, he says that the gsan .I!&,s do
not

refer

to it clearly except as "a brief reply to a question" (dri

Ian

bsdus

~.

The Old Manuscript Index

From

the

index

of the old manuscript (dkar),

these five

titles

remain

the ending of TB no. 113).

No. 11

unidentified:
(6) Lus ill rten 'breI
(11) Lha !!!2. bco lnga' i bstod .Q.!!
(22) 'Jam pa' i rdo illia bstod .Q.!!
(33) Gus
( 49)
No.

d2&..P.Q.

gsol ba 'debs pa'i ngor sbyar ba

pa' i zhus Ian (Cf. A-mes-zhabs no. 48)

33 is of course only a "ghost" title (cf.

is perhaps to be connected with no. 12 of the same source and TB no. 65.
The Glo-bo Manuscript
Among

the twenty works surviving in the Glo-bo manuscript

(G),

the

fol-

lowing two short works were not included in the Derge edition:
(14) Chos
(16) Yum

bcu .Q.!!
'bring sdus gsum ill don

The List from Rin-spungs-pa's Biography of Sa-pap

From

the list provided by Rin-spungs-pa,

so far some thirty-one have

not

been identified within the Derge edition:

(1) Bzo !!&. bstan bcos [lost]

(2) Rtsis ill .s!..!!&. ill.si bstan bcos

(3) Yan ill brgyad pa'i bsdus don [lost?]
(5)

Sgra shes rab

~.Q.!!

[=the lost Shes rab 'phro ba?

Or is it a mistake

for the extant treatise Sgra la~.m! (TB no. 7)?]

(11) Snyan

mkhas pa' i kha

(22) Bde mchog lha lnga sgrub pa'i thabs

(26) Bde bar gshegs .Q.!! la bstod tshig
(31) 'Jam pa'i dbyangs gtso 'khor lnga la mchod .m!!:. brjod pa'i bstod .Q.!!
(33) 'Jam dpal lha lnga'i bskyed rim mngon rtogs
(36) Rgyal

.P.Q. 10 .P!!ll. ~

la bstod .Q.!! (cf. no. 98; TB no. 75)

97

(38) Phyag .!:.81.!! ehen .E.Q!.. dbye ba

(42a) Rdo

ill.

Ius

.ill

'khrul 'khor dang (42b) Brda don gsal

(48) Gsung .!!8M zin E!!:.. bris

(49) Khrid

.ill

ill.

mdor bstan

lung sbyor

(53) Tshul gzhi'i bsdus pa'i don

(56) Thod .lli!. brtag pa'i thabs
(57)

B.&Y.!& sde

..ll!. II !!!!ill. .!!82.&. gees .lli!. bsdus .lli!.

(59) Rdo .ill.!:ill!!!!. 'joms bir lugs

(69)

Gzhan

i l l mngon E!!:.. rtogs.lli!.

las khyad E!!:.. du ~ E!!:.. bstod pa' i .!:.81.!! eher

rol

pa ' i

kha

are

now

skong
(70) Sher phyin rgyas 'bring bsdus gsum nyams ..!! len thabs
(71) Chos ~ beu .lli!.
(73) Dam pa'i ehos la
(83) 'Bri khung

tshul .82. bder sbyar

.J!&. rten i l l mgon

Q.

la spring

ill.
ill.

(84) ~ snga ~ ~ bar bstod .lli!. spring

i l l dris Ian
(96) Bsam..Y!!.. i l l ~ ~ khang la bsngags

beas ~

(87) Gur ston

(98) Chos gsungs pa'i tshul

(100) Skyes bu' i .!:ill!!!!. 'byed gzhon nu' i mgul !:&Y2.!l
(101) Legs bshad

ill ma' i snying

.Q.Q.

The List from A-mes-zhabs's Biography of Sa-pap.

The

following

seventeen

titles were listed by A-mes-zhabs

either lost or not identifiable among the works in the Derge edition:
(1) Shes rab 'phro ba [lost]
(13) Rab dga'i ~ ~ [lost]
(15) Sku ~ i l l bstan beos [lost]
(16) Sa brtag pa'i rab 'byed [lost]
(17) Yan ~ brgyad pa' i bsdus don [lost?]
(18) Sangs ~.ill bstod ~ (cf. TB no. 71)
(19) Thub pa'i bstod ~
(22) Bsam ..Y!!.. lhun

grub pa' i gnas ehen la

bstod'p'!!

(24) Grub mtha'i ~ 'byed [lost]

(29) Chos nyams ..!! blang ba' i rim ~
(30) Chos ~ beu ~
(44) Shing kun ill!. bzhugs pa' i ~ 'dun ~ la spring
(48) ~ ~ ba' i ~ bshes la spring
(55) Gza' 1.!!!!!..&Vi sgrub thabs

.E&.

ill.

but

98

(75) Sam

!. la mchan

(76) Rdo ill.!:lli!!!!. 'jom .&Ii .!:8I.!& la mchan

(77) Sdom gsum rab dbye la mchan
Zhu-chen Tshul-khrims-rin-chen's Gsan 11&
The gsan 11& of Zhu-chen Tshul-khrims-rin-chen
[kha

211a-216b])

therefore

is

(vol.

very similar to his index to the Sa

it has not been listed separately.

2,

pp.

sky a

421.2-432.6

bka'

'bum,

and

The few special comments or

minor

differences that do exist occur mainly near the end of the list:
(TB 54) Lam 'bras khrid ill dkar chag.

Zhu-chen noted (p.

428.1 = 213b.6)

that since this work is not found in the volumes of his collected works and
is

not listed in the gsan 11&s,

one must investigate whether there

is

lung for it or not.

Thub
(p.

pa 'i bstod .p!!. tshig lhug .p!!..

428.2"= 214b.2).

gsan 11&s,

This work is listed between TB 70 and 71

But Zhu-chen noted that though it is listed in

he did not receive its lung because the work was not

the

actually

located.
(TB 77) Bu slob roams la spring ba.
215a.l)

that

in

the

Regarding this work he notes (p. 429.1 =

Gsan 11& dbang" .&i.!:..&E!!. .QQ. (of

tshogs) there is a [second?] work listed as Bod

Sangs-rgyas-phun-

la bsngags .p!!., which he

supposed was a defective spelling for this work since there is nothing else
it could be besides this.
He

[What about TB no.

69,

Bod

la bsngags .p!!.?]

also noted that the title actually appearing on the work is Bod

..P.Yi la gdams .p!!..

'bangs

Zhu-chen made the same comment in his Sa skya bka' 'bum

index, p. 329.4.2 (= ba 449b.2).

(TB 81) Yon tan sgrogs pa'i tshul [or:

tshal?] la bstod'p!!'.

(p. 429.4 = 215a.4) that this is the Pa .8.QE. zhes

Zhu-chen

noted

ba'i sgra las bstod .p!!.

(of the gsan ms).

This work is listed between TB nos. 97 and 98.
commented (p.
located.
lung

Zhu-chen

431.1 = 216a.l) that it was listed in the gsan 11&s but

In an annotation

(mchan~,

not

he also says that he did not get the

for that and for the Bka' gdams'p!!'

mkha' 'bum.&Ii dris Ian.

the latter was listed separately above as TB 961]

[But

99

(TB 101) Bde mchog lhan skyes !s.v!. byin rlabs ~ l!!. shes rab ~ !s.v!. don du
mdzad l!!. and (TB 102) Rlung .8i rten 'breI. Zhu-chen noted (p. 431.6
216a.6)

that no lung existed for this pair because they are not listed

in

the gsan E:&,s.

(TB 110) Legs bshad 'phrul.&Vi dra ba.
216b.3) listed the work Legs
note

he

work.
for

Before this work, Zhu-chen (p. 432.3

bshad l!!. gzhon nu'i mgul rgyan.

stated that the latter was held by Rin-spungs-pa to

be

In

Sa-pa~'s

Regarding the Legs bshad 'phrul.&Vi dra ba, he said there is a basis
doubting its authenticity.

Because neither appear in the gsan E:&,s,

both are said to lack lung lineages.

bcad ~ bsring ba.

was not found.

(TB

111)

He did not receive a lung for it because the

Rnam thar by Zhang Rgyal-ba-dpal and (TB 114)

Sa-pa~'s

spring bsdus don.

the

text

Bshes

Both are missing from Zhu-chen's gsan E:&,.

Lam 'bras Works

In

gsan

1!&,

the

list of

Sa-pa~'s

writings from

Gong-dkar

'Phrin-Ias-rnam-rgyal's

some twelve works were indicated as belonging to the Lam 'bras, of which

seven are

not found in the Derge edition of his bka'

should note that there are twelve works ascribed to

'bum.

In

addition,

one

in the Lam 'bras gzhung

21
~.P.2!!. dmar .!!!!!. compiled by Rgyal-tshab Kun-dga'-dbang-phyug (1424-1478).
Of
these, eight-are found in his collected works (Derge edition), but the following
Sa-pa~

four have not yet been identified there:

(Pod dmar 29) Brda don gsal ba
(Pod dmar 34) Phyag !..8..Y!! chen po'i dbye ba
(Pod dmar 35) 'Khor bzhi brgya'i bshad l!!.
(Pod

dmar

51) Rnam 'joms!s.v!. gzhung la g

skya panditas mchan bu

mdzad l!!.

The Rsan 1!& of the Fifth Dalai lists as many as twenty Lam 'bras works attributed
to Sa-pa~.
(For the full list, see below, Appendix H.) Thus several of the
"extra" works in the lists of Gong-dkar 'Phrin-Ias-rnam-rgyal, Rin-spungs-pa and
A-mes-zhabs
(GK 58)

are
(RP

extant,
42b)

though outside Sa-pa~'s readily

(Pod dmar 29)7

available

(DL 34) Brda don gsal

bka'

'bum:

100

= (Pod

dmar 34)

= (DL

(GK 63)

(RP 38)

(GK 67)

(Pod dmar 35) 'Khor bzhi rgya'i bshad m!.

(GK 92)

(RP 70)

(G l6)? Yum

35) Phyag !:&I!! chen po'i dbye ba

'bring sdus gsum .&.Ii don

(RP 71)
(G 14) = (AMZh 30) Chos ~ bcu M.
(AMZh 76) = (Pod dmar 51) Rnam 'joms kvi ~ la mchan

(QK 90)

These results, however, are only tentative because of the brief and cursory nature
of this survey.
genuine oeuvre

A definitive and detailed picture of the full extent of Sa-pa~'s

will emerge only after each title and work has been carefully

compared and investigated.

Works Criticized QL Doubted

~

Although
some

some doubtful works seem to have been accepted without

the tradition.

criticized

Ngor-chen

the "Dkar chag tu byed M.," which would seem to be TB no.

pa~:

of

the

for

instance,

However,

54,

Sa-

Lam 'bras bu

Rdo-rje-rgyal-mtshan (fl. mid-15th

Rdzong-pa lineage defended this work and included it among

'bras texts he used.

bo

(1389-1456),

Kun-dga'-bzang~po

for doctrinal reasons a minor work on the Lam 'bras attributed to

dang bcas pa'i khrid kvi dkar chag.

c.)

question,

others were pounced upon and rejected by the more critically minded scholars

within
Ii

Previous Sa-skya-pa Scholars

the

Lam

The authenticity of this work was later investigated by Glo-

mkhan-chen (who found it among the oldest available manuscripts),22

23

and

this

controversy was also mentioned by the Fifth Dalai Lama.

Another work that some later authorities rejected was the Gzhuhg lugs legs
\
bshad M. (TB no. 3). Ngag-dbang-chos-grags found it unacceptable for several
.
hen
. ht. 24 Zh u-c hen Ts hu1- kh'
reasons, an d one must agree t hat h e was rlg
rlms-rln-c

inexplicably

included it in the Derge edition,

but in his index he cast doubt on

the work entitled Legs bshad 'phrul.&.Ii dra ba (TB no.

llO). 25

In his gsan .vi&.

he also mentioned the Legs bshad gzhon nu'i mgul rgyan--a work which Rin-spungs-pa
26
seems to have accepted (RP 100)--as being doubtful.
Zhu-chen was no doubt
correct

in singling out the Legs bshad 'phrul.&.Ii dra ba as dubious,

more or less the same as the Bod kvi chos

chen

!&I& chen

for

it

m2. srong btsan sgam po' i

is

.hl2!!.

drung.&..Ph!!. rabs kvi .8!!!!8. E!&. ~ la phan phyir lugs gnyis la gdams pa'i

bslab .ill. bstan bcos .!!Vi rna 'i ~ ~ which survives as a manuscript in the Taya
27
In addition, Zhu-chen called into doubt the Sgrub m!. lung 'bogs M. (TB

Bunko.

no. 43) because it has no author's colophon [1].28

101

Finally, I should mention three likely forgeries that have surfaced recent-

The first is a work entitled Chos !.k. ~ sky a paQditas mdzad pa' i chos

ly.

~~

1477).

ten of which are now missing.

an

preserved in the Bihar Research Society, Patna (provisional catalogue no.

It is an incomplete manuscript that originally consisted of forty folios,

exposition

It includes a biography of the Buddha akyamuni and

of the correct method for learning the Buddhist teachings. 29

The

second is a religious didactic work entitled Snyin [sic] .!!1@g, rang gzhung padma
dkar po'i phreng ba.
Though not on poetics as its title would seem to indicate,
it was published together with a number of works on the literary arts preserved in
Ladakh. 30
seven
rnam

The

admonitory
gzhag

third suspect text is entitled Rtse bdun ~ and

verses.

by A-mes-zhabs and Chos-rnam-rgyal.

books proceeds,

even more works ascribed to

how few will be genuine I

it

consists

of

It has been published at the end of a Chos 'khor B!i

31

Sa-pa~

As the cataloging
are sure to be

of

found.

Tibetan
Alas,

102

1ef the works listed in Lho-pa, pp. 55b.5-56a.5, which are now missing:
(1) Shes rab 'phro ba ("phal che ba la mkho ba")
(2) Grub mtha'i !m!!!! 'byed
(3) Snyan !!&!!&..&!. bstan bcos Mkhas pa' i kha rgyan
(4) Zlos .8!!!: ill bstan bcos Rab ~ la ~ E
(5) Sku

.&E!.&.

ill bstan bcos

(6) Sa brtag pa'i rab tu byed E

For the full list of works cited or quoted by Lho-pa, see below, Appendix G.
2According

to Kun-dga'-grol-mchog,

~ ta, p. 76, Shakya-mchog-ldan

(1428-1507) expounded some eleven works of Sa-paQ in Sa-skya at the age of twentyeight.

These included the Snyan !!&!!&. mkhas pa' i kha

!..&y.!!!!.

(no. 9):

(1) Sdom gswn rab dbye

(2) Tshad !!!!! rigs gter
(3) Thub pa'i dgongs gsal
(4) Mkhas E~ pa'i ~
(5) Sgra nyer mkho bsdus E
(6) Gso ba .ti:&. pa'i bstan bcos
(7) Sdeb sbyor

~.!Q&..&!.

chun .P.Q.

(8) Mngon brjod tshig gter

(9) Snyan !!&!!&. mkhas pa'i kha rgyan
(10) Zlos .8!!!: rab dga' i

(11) Legs bshad rin .P.Q. che'i gter

3As mentioned in the previous note,
on

medicine

(~

Shakya-mchog-ldan expounded a treatise

ba!i&. pa' i bstan bcos) by Sa-pal}.

medical topic available in the Derge edition is TB no.

The only
108,

treatise

on a

bcos.

In Dalai

still

extant--a

bla-ma V, Zab E, vol. 2, p. 126.2 (kha 63b.2) there is listed a Yan 1!!8. brgyad
pa'i snying .P.Q. attributed to Sa-pal} for which, however, there was no lung. There
is

some

similar

indication that this (possibly apocryphal) work may be

title

attributed

to Sa-pal} is listed in the bibliography

dictionary of Tibetan medicine.

See Dbang-'dus,

pa'i snying .P.Q. bsdus E warQa'i phreng ba.

Bod

~~,

of
p.

recent

714: Brgyad

However, I was informed by one of the

scholars at the Lha-sa Sman-rtsis-khang that this work was not actually available,
but was probably only listed as a bibliographical item.

103

4RTRG ,

p.

172.2.1; KhJ, p. 107.2.2; ThGS, p. 24.4.2; and

~ brgyad ma'i,

p. 149.2.5.
p.

dang/
~

'di.!!!!&.

'chad pa'i bstan bcos kyang/

kho bos byas pa'i mkhas

pa'i

kha

zhes ~ ba'i bstan bcos der Uta bar bya'o//

6p 117.4.1.

7p 115.4.6.
8

See also no.

Lho-pa, pp. 56a.3.
Shakya-mchog-1dan as listed above, note 2.
9Da1ai b1a-ma V,

Zab~,

vol.

2,

10 from among the works expounded

p. 117.3 (kha 59a.3).

by

See also ibid.,

vol. 2, p. 130.2 (kha 65b.2) where he specifies a different title in the tradition
of Gong-dkar-ba (.&2!!8. dkar ba lugs
10According to [Zhu-chen],

1!D.

Dpa1~,

p. 319.2.2, many Tantric works of the

first three founders were excluded from their bka' 'bums,

of similar exclusions from the oeuvres of
IISee D.
(1985a).
forgery,

Jackson (1985);

Here

above,

Sa-pa~

and 'Phags-pa.

chapter 2, no. (7); and L. van der Kuijp

I should add that Ngag-dbang-chos-grags,

earlier had considered it to be genuine.

63.3 (32a.3).

but there is no mention

who identified it as

See his Tshad ma rigs pa'i, p.

He wrote this work in 1611 (lcags mo phag).

12KhJNSh, pp. 30a.4-34a.4, 39a.4-43a.6.

See also chapter 9, note 29.

13They were probably written by someone from Sho-dgon-pa with the aim
glorifying that monastery.

of

14See above, note 12.

15This

seems to be a genuine work that circulated independently

from

his

~ 'bum for nearly five centuries before being included in the Derge edition.
For references to Sa-pa~'s connection with this practice, see G. Tucci (1932-41),
vol. IV, part 2, p. 11, and Dalai b1a-ma V, Zab ~, vol. 1, p. 180.5.

104

16
17
18
19

See above, p. 61, and below, chapter 5, note 59.

[Zhu-chen], Dpa1

p. 330.3.2

~,

451a.2).

See below, chapter 6, note 4.

[Zhu -chen], Dpa1

p. 330.3.3 (ba 451a.3).

~,

20Da1ai b1a-ma V, Zab~, vol. 2 pp. 126.2-130.6 (kha 63b-65b).

21Lam 'bras gzhung bshad ~ dmar ,!!!!!. (Do1anji, 1974).
22

G10-bo mkhan-chen,

Rab 'byams b10 gros,

vol.

cha, pp., 199b-200a.

See

also above, chapter 3, notes 19 and 20.

23Da1ai b1a-rna V, Zab ~, vol. 1, p. 457.
24
25
26

See above, note 11.

[Zhu-chen], Dpa1

p. 330.3.2

~,

451a.2)

Zhu-chen, Dpa1 1dan b1a ,!!!!!., vol. 2, p. 432.4.

271 owe this information to Mr. Tashi Tsering.

28
g

.l@!.

[Zhu-chen],

Dpa1~,

p. 329.1. 3

448a.3): 'di 1a mdzad byang med

.Ii!!. min brtag.

290ne might have been tempted to link it with Gong-dkar-ba no.

27 and Rin-

spungs-pa no. 98, Chos gsungs pa'i tshu1, but Gong-dkar 'Phrin-1as-rnam-rgya1's
gsan li& specifies that the latter consisted of only 3 folios.

20b).
Dam

30The Literary Arts in Ladakh (Darjee1ing: 1972), vol. 1, pp. 1-39 (laThis versified sermon with prose autocommentary has the alternative title:
pa'i

chos

1a bsku1 bali gtam padma dkar po'i phreng ba,

colophon (p. 39.1 [20a.1]).

as

found

in

the

A better reading of the first word of its title would

be snying !!ill!&. instead of snyan

~.

31See A-mes-zhabs, Chos 'khor, pp. 36.7-37.6 (18b.7-19a.6).

Chapter 5
SA-SKYA PA~QITA'S CAREER AS A SCHOLAR OF PRAMAijA:
STUDIES AND TRANSLATIONS

For
less

modern Tibetan scholasticism,

was not always so.

as

the fundamental Indian PramaQa text most

or
this

commonly

in Tibetan seminaries was the Pramanavini~caya (PVin) of Dharmakirti, a

1
and simpler work than the PV.
The most frequently used Tibetan

shorter

manuals were the Summaries (Bsdus

however,

Sa-pa~,

of Phywa-pa Chos-kyi-seng-ge and his school.

saw that these works gave an incomplete (and in the case of the

Tibetan manuals, a distorted) picture of Dharmakirti's thought.

it

But

Before the advent of Sa-paQ (and in some Tibetan schools, even

late as the 14th century),

studied
much

the study of Indian Prams9a is more

synonymous with the study of Dharmakirti's PramaQavarttika (PV).

one

of his main goals to master

Therefore he made

the vast and subtle PV and to restore it

to

its rightful place of pre-eminence in Prama9a studies.

Studies with Rkyang-'dur-ba Mtshur Gzhon-nu-seng-ge

Sa-pa~'s

mastery of Indian Buddhist logic and epistemology was the

result

of

long and arduous studies that began in about 1201, when he was some nineteen
2
years of age.
To study Prama~a, he had to leave Sa-skya because this was one

subject
1158

that his uncle Grags-pa-rgya1-mtshan was not qualified

when

to

teach.

his other uncle Bsod-nams-rtse-mo had gone off to study at

the

(In
great

seminary of Gsang-phu Ne'u-thog in Central Tibet, Grags-pa-rgya1-mtshan--then just

a boy of some eleven years--h&d been obliged to stay behind in Sa-skya,

and thus

his training as a dialectician had been minimal.)3

According to some sources,
eighteen

Sa-paQ first left Sa-sky a in 1200 at the age of

to study under the great scholar Zhu-ston Rdo-rje-skyabs at

'Phrang

in

the upper Nyang val1ey.4

But Prama~a was not one of the main subjects he studied
S
then.
Instead, to get his first real instruction in this subject, Sa-paQ left
Zhu-ston

and joined the classes of Mtshur Gzhon-nu-seng-ge.

The latter

resided

and taught at the temple of Rkyang-'dur, which was also in the upper Nyang valley.
At thl.' s t'l.me Sa-pa~ was nl.ne
' t een years 0 f age an d no t a monk.
He was a young
nobleman (J.~) with only the vows of a lay adherent (upasalca: ~ bsnyen).

106

According
dpal,
and

to

Sa-pa~'s

student and biographer Lho-pa

kun-mkhyen

Rin-chen-

the

texts on PramaQa he studied at this time were the PVin of Dharmakirti

the Tarkamudgara of Jayananda. 6
But another student and biographer, Zhang

Rgyal-ba-dpal,
called

Gzhal

panied by a

asserts

that

his

study of the PVin was accompanied

shes rab sgron mali phreng ba,

quintessential elucidation

Shakya-mchog-ldan

(stong

by

and Jayananda's text was

thun). 7

text
accom-

The much later

scholar

(1428-1507) asserts that Mtshur-ston also taught Sa-paQ one

of

Tibetan Summaries (bsdus ~.8

the

Mtshur-ston

(like

the

previous teacher,

Phywa-pa Chos-kyi-seng-ge at Gsang-phu Ne'u-thog.

Zhu-ston) had been

In the end,

trained

by

however, Mtshur's

most influential teacher would seem to have been Phywa-pa's student Gtsang-nag-pa
I ' s c h"le f d"lSC1P
"1 e. 10
I t was natura1 t hat SaBrtson- ' grus-seng-ge an d t h
e atter
paQ

was

sent to study under masters belonging to the general tradition of

and Phywa-pa.
Gsang-phu

Ne'u-thog under Phywa-pa himself,

and the seminary of Gsang-phu

thog

was still one of the foremost centers of dialectical and scriptural

ll
in Tibet.
Sa-pa~'s

1201-1203).12
teacher
debut

studies
An

for
as

Rngog

Sa-paQ's uncle Bsod-nams-rtse-mo had studied about eleven years at

with Rkyang-'dur-ba continued for about two years

undoubtedly

a chance

Ne'ustudies

brilliant student,

Sa-paQ

formally to expound the PVin and thus

soon
make

a scholastic teacher by giving his first scriptural

gsar) before a learned audience.

(ca.

requested
his

exposition

(bshad

But Mtshur is said to have postponed this first

exposition and urged him to study more.

by the news of his father's illness.

In 1203 Sa-paQ's studies were interrupted

Sa-paQ hurried home to Sa-skya,

but by the

time he reached there his father, Dpal-chen-'od-po, had already passed away.
Sa-paIJ

became

rites.

At

further

delayed because he had to participate

you,

telling Mtshur,

favoritism.

"If the young Sa-skya nobleman is enough

But if you need us too,

give us

doctrinal

At that Mtshur decided to carryon teaching.

Sa-paQ finally rejoined the group during the summer break between
(dbyar chos bar), and it was then that he gave his first exposition.
he

had

because

but his other students--who were probably jealous of the

we are going to disperse.

instruction!"

Thus

"funeral"

Mtshur-ston was

and brilliant young nobleman--resented this as an undue show of

They threatened revolt,

for

the

This was important to Sa-paQ

hoped that year finally to give his first formal exposition.

amenable to the request,

rich

in

that time he is said to have sent Mtshur-ston a letter requesting him

to suspend the lectures for a short while.

he

his

official

brought

many items for hosting the necessary ceremonies and

ferings that would accompany his teachings.

lectures

From Sa-skya
formal

of-

His preparatory studies had not been

very extensive: under Mtshur he had covered the second half of the PVin four times

107

and

the first half only twice. 13

excellent.

His comprehension and

memory,

however,

were

To begin with he offered [to Mtshur-ston?] [copies of the Prajnapara-

mita] scriptures in their extensive,

middling and brief forms.

Mtshur then asked

14
Sa-

him to give his exposition by repeating the basic work from the beginning.
pa~

did not comply exactly.

starting

from

the beginning of the text and the other as an

general sense of the work.

memory in
amazed. 15

the

Sa-pa~

revered him,
tually,

course
also

exposition

of

of one month.

All the monastic

students

studied many other philosophical treatises

and

Sa-pa~

the

Proceeding in this way, he taught the whole PVin from

present

with

were

Mtshur

offering him much gold near the end of his studies under him.

however,

Phywa-pa

Instead, he began to teach two sessions per day, one

came

to reject many of the

Gtsang-nag-pa's schools.

Prama~a

According to some

and
Even-

interpretations

sources,

Sa-pa9

of
had

already

begun to doubt certain of the Tibetan interpretations and interpolations

16
even at the time of his studies with Mtshur.
If that is true, these doubts were

not

confirmed

until a little later when he gained direct access to

the

Prama9a

traditions of India.

Studies with Sakya~rIbhadra

and His Disciples
The

teachers

who influenced Sa-pa9's understanding of PramaQa

most

were

four pa9qitas who arrived in Tibet from India in 1204.

Of these, the chief was
~akyasribhadra (1127?-1225), a venerable abbot born in Kashmir who had achieved an
i1lustrio~s career as teacher and monastic leader in the great Buddhist seminaries
of Bihar and Bengal. ~akyasri travelled to Tibet accompanied by a retinue of nine
junior panditas (~ chung).
This was one of the largest delegations of Indian
Buddhist scholars known to have visited Tibet, and their visit had no doubt been

encouraged in part by the recent vandalic destruction of their home seminaries.

Sa-pa~ first met Sakyasri at Gtsang Chu-mig in the first half of 1204.

that time Sa-pa~ was a twenty-two-year-old

Rkyang-'dur

and he was returning to

17
from Sa-skya to continue his studies with Mtshur Gzhon-nu-seng-ge.

According to one later account,

Sakyasri had at that time already begun to

the PVin with the commentary of Dharmottara to a group of students.

the

assembly

Kashmiri
have

At

lay adherent,

and

provoked

Sa-pa~ joined

tried to follow along with his Tibetan texts while

pa 9g ita expounded from Sanskrit manuscripts.

This is said to

the laughter and ridicule of some of the great teacher's

When Sakyasri asked what was causing their laughter,

teach

the

great

have

to

retinue.

they said they were laughing

p
lOB

at the newcomer who had spread out the pages of his Tibetan books.
asked

Sa-pa~

whether doing so was beneficial or not.

it helps me."lB

does not benefit others,

he

translated

Then,

Sa-pa~

Sakya~d then

replied,

"Though it

with his smattering of Sanskrit,

19
Since it

the sense of the Tibetan version back into Sanskrit.

became evident that Sa-pa~ knew what Tibetan corresponded to the Sanskrit, Sakya20
then scolded his subordinates for their laughter.
With this meeting there

~rI

began

what

Prama~a

were to be some of the deepest and most extensive studies

Indian

by any Tibetan of any period.

The authoritative source that describes in detail

of

of

under the Indian

Prama~a

elderly

pa~gitas

Sa-pa~'s

is the biography of

disciple Lho-pa kun-mkhyen Rin-chen-dpal (fl.

Sa-pa~

c.

further

studies

written

by

1165-c. 1240).21

work was composed after Sa-pa~'s debate with the Tirthika Harinanda (c.

his
This

1240) but

before

his departure from Tibet in 1244.22 At the time of writing, Lho-pa was
23
apparently at a very advanced age.
Lho-pa may be considered a well-informed
witness

for he too was a disciple of Sa-pa~'s teachers such as Sakya~rI and Spyi-

bo-lhas-pa,

and he had been present during many of the teachings that he

records

And as he states in the biography, Lho-pa also consulted

for ascertaining some of his account. 24

Sa-pa~

received.

Sa-pa~

Studies under Sugatasri

Of course, Sa-pa~ at first could not receive the full benefit of ~akyasrI's
teachings

since the latter did not speak Tibetan and

Sanskrit or any Indian vernacular.

to

improve

his Sanskrit.

panditas as his tutor,

pa-rgyal-mtshan.
family

of

This

Atiwara
26

Prajfiaparamita.
arts;

Lho-pa

Since

the

foundation

in

For this

mastered
then, was

arranged to retain one of the

junior

no doubt with the consent and support of his uncle

Grags-

Sa-pa~

tutor

Sugatasri was also strong in Sanskrit and the related

him as a "great grammarian" (brda sprod

purpose of his tutoring

Sa-pa~

was to give the

the main branches of Sanskrit studies,

works on grammar,

had not yet

was SugatasrI, a Buddhist pa~gita from a Brahmin

in western India. 25 He was very learned in Madhyamaka and

described

main

Sa-pa~

The first priority of his studies,

literary

~ chen .P2J. 27
latter

he taught him

sound

many

basic

poetics, prosody, kavya, lexicography (synonymy), and so forth,

In addition, . he taught Sa-pa~

teaching them directly from Sanskrit manuscripts.
three works on Indian logic.
The first of these was Dharmakirti's autocommentary
on

the first chapter of the PV.

Sa-pa~

is said to have studied and then

trans-

lated the 3,500 sloka units of text of this commentary.

The second work was the
Tarkabhasa of Mok~akaragupta.
This too he learned and translated.
Finally, he

109

S-utras. 28 His study of the latter work is

Nseems to have studie d t he ~
cularly noteworthy because no other Tibetan scholar is recorded to have

partihad

first-hand acquaintance with this fundamental text of the Nyaya school.

seems

Sa-pa~

some

three years,

studies

to have studied with Sugata~ri at Sa-skya over the course of

29
presumably from c. 1205 to early 1208.
This stage in his

came to an end in about 1208 for this is when Sakyasri returned to Gtsang
. 30

from Db us an d met Sa-pa~ aga1n.

The

prolonged studies with

tige and wealth of the Sa-skya-pas.

an Indian

pa~~ita

Sugata~ri

were made possible only by the

pres-

It was a very expensive undertaking to invite

(or for that matter, any great teacher) to one's home monastery,

to provide for his needs for several years,

various generous gifts.

and to pay tuition in the end through

It is recorded that before Sugata~ri left Sa-skya, Sa-paQ

made costly gifts to him of gold, silver, silks and brocades, and gratified him in
31

many ways such as through the attendance of servants.

Studies with Sakya~rlbhadra

Sa-paQ
temple
year

was reunited with ~akya~ri by the time the latter was visiting

the

of Rgyan-gong in Nyang-smad (the lower Nyang valley near Zhwa-lu) in the

1208. 32 This was also the occasion when Sa-paQ received full monastic ordi-

nation

from

Sakya~ri.

In the following years ~akyasri moved about

to

i,1
III
I

various

parts of Gtsang. He spent the following summer rainy-season retreats at Rin-chensgang (in Shangs?)33 (1209), Sa-skya (1210), Lu-gu-sdong in Zhang (1211), and
Khro-phu (1212).34
he
and

Sa-pap probably spent much of these years with

is recorded to have "stayed in his [i.e.

followed

him.,,35
Lho-pa as follows: 36

Sakyasri,

for

Sakya~ri's] presence for a long time

The PramaQa texts that $akyasritaught him are

listed

by

(1) PV chapter III, following Manorathanandin

(2)

PV,

using the commentary of Devendrabuddhi with

and quotations from Buddhist

the

Pramanasamuccaya

Sutras.

(3) Two chapters (i.e. II and IV?) of the PV Alamkara commentary by Prajnakaragupta consisUng of 18,000 sloka units of text.
(4)

Two chapters of the PVin commentary by Dharmottara consisting of

sloka units of text.

(5) The Nyayabindu of Dharmaktrti
(6) The Purvapaka[samksipti] of the Nyayabindu, by Kamala~ila.

12,000

',i,I:,:,I'
,i

II
Iii

1,'.1:,,1,'1

,I:
,'j,,;i

!il!'

110

(7) The Sawtanantarasiddhi of Dharmakirti, with the commentary of ~a~aranan-'

dana
(8) Many small treatises by Jffanasri, such as:
(a)

the

"greater and lesser Ksanabhangadhyaya" (skad

is.

che

chung)

[could the "lesser" one be the Ksal)abhangasiddhi of Ratnakirti?]

(b) the ApohaprakaraQa? (gzhan sel ~ .p!!.)
(c) the "Trikapancikacinta" (lnga gsum brtag ~37
(9) The Pramal)asiddhi of Dharmottara
(10) The Alambanapariksa, mula and commentary, by Dignaga
From

among

the above,

number 8 is particularly noteworthy because most

works of Jnanasrtmitra were not afterwards translated into Tibetan. 38

of

the

Studies with Sawgha~rI

While studying under Sakya~rt, Sa-pa~ also received instruction from one of

Sakya~rt's foremost disciples,

famed

the Newar pa~qita S~ghasrI.39

This scholar

was

for his great learning in the Candra tradition of Sanskrit grammar and the
40
However, he was also a master of PramaQa, and he taught the fol-

Abhidharmakosa.

lowing works to Sa-paQ:

(1) PV chapter I,

with the explanations of Manorathanandin combined with the

Pramaoasamuccaya
(2) A commentary on chapter I of the PV,
nandana?].

(3).The Vadanyaya of Dharmakirti,

and

S~aranandana.

translated. 42

These

with the commentaries by both $antarak~ita

is

Sa-pa~

(4) The Hetubindu with the commentary of

In

said to

of

S~gha~ri

have

both

another of 'Sa-paQ's

also taught

Sa-pa~

During
of Sa~gha~ri.
Sakyasri.

Sa-pa~'s

and

1@&Kh

disciples,

the "small commenta-

Dharmottara" (tshad rna chos mchog chung ba)--which would be

commentary on the Nyayabindu--and also the

studied

Arca~a

addition to the works listed above by Lho-pa,

Zhang Rgyal-ba-dpal, states that

ry

in 2,000 units of text [by S~ara

41

Sa-paQ translated and corrected this.

the latter's
43

brda [?] of JfianasrI.

advanced researches too he may have received the assistance

For example, when Sa-pa~ retranslated

the PV he mainly worked with

But as his colophon to the new translation mentions,

others who helped, and Sa~ghasri very likely was one of these:

there were

also

111

At

a later time [this text] was translated,

edited and established by

the scholar who is without any rival on the face of the

great almsman (bsod snyoms ~ chen .QQ) ~akyasdbhadra and

earth,
others

the
(la

sogs ~, and the ~akya bhik~u Kun-dga'-rgyal-mtshan-dpal-bzang-po.44

with Dana~Ila

Danasila was a great dialectician (rtog

dala

(the_ "Bharanta" of Lho-pa) in eastern India.

tas in ~akyasri's party,

ba chen .QQ) from Varendra Jagad45

Among the nine lesser pandi-

he was the most famed as a master of Prama~a.

In parti-

cular,

he was said to have been an expert in the commentaries of Dharmottara and

46
Prajfiakaragupta.
Sa-pa~, however, did not study much under him. Lho-pa lists
the following treatises that the two worked on: 47
(1) Sambandhapariksa
(2) Vadanyaya with commentary [of Santarak~ita?]
(3) A few passages from the PV
(4) Some of Jnanasri's treatises
(5) Jitari's Balavatara[tarka] and Sahalambananiyama[siddhi]
In addition, Zhang Rgyal-ba-dpal mentions that Danasila taught
nantarasiddhi with commentary of Sa~aranandana.48
tions

Sa-pa~

the Sawta-

These studies with Dana~ila may have been the last of Sa-pa~'s investigaof Prama~a under an Indian pa~gita for Lho-pa enumerated them at the very

end of his list of teachings Sa-pa~ received.

(They are listed even after the
teachings received from such Tibetan masters as Brtsegs Dbang-phyug-seng-ge, Zhuston Rdo-rje-skyabs, and Spyi-bo-lhas-pa Byang-chub-'od.)

Studies
Sa-pa~'s

w~th

final studies of

Brtsegs Dbang-phyug-seng-ge
Prama~a

with Brtsegs-ston Dbang-phyug-seng-ge.

tradition

of

under a Tibetan master

were

the writings of Phywa-pa Chos-kyi-seng-ge (phywa ~ chos

~ ~ rab .&Vi sgros 'dzin~),

Dbang-phyug_seng_ge. 49

apparently

Lho-pa describes him as an upholder of the

kli seng

and actually refers to him by the name Phywa

These studies with Brtsegs may have taken place after Sa-

pa~'s last contact with Sakyari and Sa~ghasri (i.e. after c. 1213), since they
are introduced with the works "even after that" (de nas ~.50
However, this

112

chronology

is

by no means certain because Lho-pa lists all of

Sa-paQ's

studies

with

Zhu-ston (which some sources say began when Sa-paQ was eighteen, i.e. in
51
1200) after his studies with Brtsegs.
Sa-paQ probably had a long relationship

with

Zhu-ston

since

the latter participated in the ceremony

of

Sa-paQ's

full

ordination in 1208 and at some point visited Sa-skya and gave a few teachings to
52
Sa-paQ there.
But there is no indication that Sa-pa9 had such a long-term
relation with Brtsegs.
No precise details are in fact known about which works Sa-paQ was taught by
Brtsegs.
and

Lho-pa

merely states that Sa-paQ learned from him

the Dharmas of Maitreya" (dbu tshad dang byams chos).53

scholar

"Madhyamaka-PramsQa
The later Sa-skya-pa

Shakya-mchog-ldan (1428-1507) believed that Brtsegs was the most influensiddhanta. 54

tial teacher in the formation of Sa-pa9's opinions on Madhyamaka and

He

also thought that Sa-pa9 studied the Summaries (of Phywa-pa or his successors)

with him, and that the place of their studies was in the upper Nyang valley.55
During

the time of his studies under Brtsegs,

sort of teaching assistant.

Sa-paQ may have acted as

When mentioning these studies, Lho-pa states that Sa-

paQ

studied these things to the point of mastery and then taught them to others
56
Nowhere else does Lho-pa use
(mkhas ~ sbyangs te gzhan la .lli!!..ill!!: byed ~.
such a phrase.

Sa-pap's Translations of Works .2!!. Pramaqa

One

of Sa-paQ's lasting contributions to Prama9a studies in Tibet was

retranslation of the PV.

and

monk Rma Dge-bffi-blo-gros (fl.

pa9gita

Subhutisri~snti.

his

The original translation was the work of the translator

mid-11th c.) who worked on it with the Indian

This team also translated the commentary of

Devendra-

buddhi,

and the same translator was also responsible for the rendering of Sakya57
mati's commentary.
After Dge-ba'i-blo-gros, the next translator to work on the
PV was

Rngog Blo-ldan-shes-rab (1059-1109),

version

when

Bhavyarsja

who apparently revised the

translating the Pramspavarttikalawkara with

(Skal-ldan-rgyal-po).58

Kashmiri

Sa-pa9's own rendering was the last,

did

it mainly under the guidance of Sskyasrtbhadra.

was

accomplished

during

the

earlier
pa9qita
and

Perhaps much of their

the latter's stay at Sa-skya in 1210. 59

As

he
work

mentioned

above, however, Sa-paQ also collaborated with other pa9gitas, chief of whom was
. new trans 1 ation was accepte d byater
1
.
,":, 60 Th1S
pro ba bl y Sa~g hasr1.
generat10ns
as
their standard
. 61
TanJur.

text of the PV,

and it is found in all printed editions

of

the

113

It may one day be feasible to assess in detail the contributions of Sa-skya

and

Pa9~ita

versions

his

two translated.
in

teachers in this work by comparing

chapter I,

rendering

with

the

One would expect that Sa-paQ's most significant changes were made
for this was the chapter he worked on most intensively

and S~ghasrI.

Sugata~rI

Indeed,

chapter

with

Dharmaklrti's

with

both

Sa-paQ is said to have translated under their

guidance two commentaries on the first chapter.

first

their

of Rma and Rngog that are preserved in the commentaries which the latter

With Sugata~rI he translated the

a commentary of 3,500 units of text (presumably this was

62
Later with S~gha~ri he studied chapter I with

autocommentary).

the explanations of Manorathanandin combined with the PS, and also he both studied
and translated
nandana?).63

chapter I with a commentary in 2,000 units of text

(by

~a~ara

During his studies with those two paQgitas he translated two or three other
PramaQa works. With Sugata~ri he is recorded to have translated the Tarkabha8 of

Mok~8karagupta.64

That

is

the first recorded translation of

translation that eventually made its way into the Tanjur,

this

work.

however, was done about

a century later.
It was the work of Dpang lo-tsa-ba Blo-gros-brtan-pa
1342), who records in his colophon that he did it without the assistance
d'
65
'
I ndl.an
pa9.l.ta.
The
lated

The
(1276of an

last PramaQa works that Sa-paQ is said to have both studied and trans-

were the Vadanyaya and its two commentaries,

said to be by "the Brahmin," Le.

by S~aranandana.

lated while studying with Sa~ghasrI.

one by Santarak~ita

and

one

These he reportedly trans-

The Vadanyaya had already been translated in

the mid-11th century by Rma Dge-ba'i-blo-gros with Jfiana~rlbhadra, and it had been
revised soon thereafter by Dar-ma-grags and
the

rak~ita,

translated
rab,

sometime in the late-11th century by Kumarasribhadra,

and 'Bro Seng-dkar Shakya-'od.

67

the later editions of the Tanjur.

nandana

Dip~ara.66 The commentary by ~anta

full title of which is Vadanyayavrttih vipancitartha,

either

extant or known,

was

already

'Phags-pa-shes-

Theirs is the version that was preserved in

Though there is no VN commentary by

Sa~ara

a fragment of the commentary by Vinitadeva was

68
The name of the translator
translated into Tibetan and preserved in the Tanjur.
of this fragment, however, is not given.

...
114

1The

predominance

of

the PVin continued within Rngog's

branches through the 14th century.

school

and

its

But by the late-14th or early-15th century it

seems to have everywhere lost its place of preeminence to the PV.

2Th-ls
.... age (0~.e.
rgyal-mtshan,
437.4.4,

p.

his "twentieth year" ) is given by Yar-klungs-pa Grags-pa-

33a.6,

and by [Ngor-chen?], Dpal

skya, p. 58a.5.

Zhang, p.

states that his studies of the PVin (three times) and his teaching of it

from memory took place in his nineteenth year, i.e. at age eighteen.
3A-mes-zhabs,

'Dzam gling,

pp. 68.6 and 76.1 (34b.6 and 38a.1).

See also

Khetsun Sangpo, vol. 10, p. 122.

4 Yar-klungs-pa Grags-pa-rgyal-mtshan, p. 33a.5, seems to be the earliest
source for these details.
See also [Ngor-chen?], Dpal sa skya, Lam 'bras, p.
58a.5, and Rin-spungs-pa, p. 92b.3.
5

Yar-klungs-pa Grags-pa-rgyal-mtshan, p. 33a.5, states that he studied "the

Pramanasamuccaya,

etc."

sky a ,

stated

p.

58a.5,

(tshad ma'ang
6

tsam).

p.

436.3.2: rtog ~ tshad ma' i gzhung/ rnam ~ nges .E!! gzhal lli

rab sgron mali phreng ba dang bcas

I

~.

that Sa-pal} studied at that time "a little PramaJ}a too"

Lho-pa, p. 48b.5.

7Zhang,
shes

Rin-spungs-pa repeated this, while [Ngor-chen?], Dpal

teachers,

cannot

identify

the accompanying

Rma-bya Byang-chub-brtson-'grus,

rtog

~tho

works.

ba stong thun dang

However,

one

of

bcas

Mtshur's

composed both a tika on the Tarkamud-

gara (MHTL 11326) and an. Dbu .!!!!!. stong thun (MHTL 11324).

On the authorship of the

Tarkamudgara, cf. Paul Williams (1985), p. 270, note 8.

8Shakya-mchog-ldan,
seng

gsan/
tsam

dang/

Rngog 10, p. 453.4: nyang stod du brtsegs dbang .l!!!v!!&.

rkyang dur ba gzhon .!!!!. seng

See also Shakya-mchog-ldan,

la/

dbu tshad

dang/

bsdus'p!!'

Tshad ma' i mdo, p. 39.1: rang 10 bcu

M!!!l .p!!.

nas ~ nges bsdus ~ dang bcas ~ la gsan sbyong dpyis phyin ~ mdzad/.

Shakya-mchog-ldan's dating of these studies is probably wrong.

115

9Shakya-mchog-ldan, Rngog 10, p. 451.2.

10Lho-pa, p. 48b. 5: ~ ba' i bshes ~ gtsang ~.E!!. brtson 'grus seng ~

lli ba

dang bcas pa' i sgros 'dzin ~ rigs .ill!!:. ~ ba chen .E2. rkyang
'dur ..Q!!. gzhon .!!.!:!. seng~.
The "chief disciple" (lit.: "son," sras) was perhaps

Rma-bya-ba Byang-chub-brtson-'grus.
11Shakya-mchog-ldan,

Rngog 10,

p.

453.2,

relates that Sa-paQ as a young

noble layman actually visited Gsang-phu and expounded the PVin there.
is

said not to have studied there because the main teacher at that

zhig, was difficult to study under: mnyal zhig .&i dus sui
gzhon .!!.!:!. ~ .8l.!!!:.

However, he
time,

Mnyal-

skya pandita .iQ.

phur byon ~ .!:ill!!!!. nges gsungs shingl

bshad

gsar

mdzadl bla ~ ~ .m!. zhig ~ kyang bsten dka' ba zhig ~.&.!:!!!B./ mnyal zhig
la ~ gsan/. This account must be considered suspect since it is not supported by

any known early source.

Sa-pav.

thog dangl

'khor,

p.

nyang stod smadl

465.5:

ne'u

bsam ~ la sogs .ill!!:. bshad .E!!. dang rnani ~.!:1U!!. chen .E2. mdzad/.

12The
'bras,

See also the mention of such expositions by the youthful

in Shakya-mchog-ldan's Chos

pp.

account that follows is based on [Ngor-chen?],

58a-58b.

Dpal ~ skya,

Lam

This account closely follows [Bo-dong pav.-chen?], Lam 'bras

ma'i, p. 542.3ff, and may ultimately be based on the Lam 'bras history of Bla-

ma-dam-pa Bsod-nams-rgyal-mtshan.
Here !lli!!!!.
traditionally

"presentation" seems to mean the ceremonial offerings that

accompanied

similar contexts,

the first teaching.

see Shakya-mchog-ldan, Chos

For occurrences of the

term

in

kri 'khor, p. 465.6, and Dpal-ldan-

tshul-khrims, vol. ka, p. 199a.2.

According to Yar-klungs-pa Grags-pa-rgyal-mtshan,

p. 33a.6, Sa-pav. learned

the PVin from Mtshur-ston at age 19 (1201) and hosted a great teaching-convocation
(~

'khor) at the monastery of Gtsang Rkyang-thur.

After that,

when

he

was

going [back] from there, he met ~akyasrlbhadra at Gtsang Chu-mig:

de ~ ~ 10 i l l shu bzhes pa' i dusl I

mtshur ston chen .E2. gzhon !!.!!. seng ~ lal I

~ bcos tshad !!!!!. !lli!!!!. nges gsan ~ nil I

gtsang .&i rkyang thur ~ 'dun sde chen lall

'khor chen .E2. mdzad ~ byon pa' i laml I

.Y.!:!l ~ byon .E!!. yY I [33b]

..Y.2.!!. ~ mkhan brgyud ~ chen shaky a shd.1 I
gtsang .&i chu .!!!is. ~ byar mjal ~ kyangl I
Still another account is given by Sa-paQ's disciple
.!:8E !@!. kha che' i

Zhang

Rgyal-ba-dpal,

p.

116

437.4.4.

According to the latter,

Sa-pa~

expounded the PVin at the age of eigh-

teen (1200) having studied it three times.

13But according to Zhang, p. 437.4.4, he had "heard it" thrice.
14Alternatively:

Mtshur

"asked him to expound the teaching,

repeating it

from the beginning."

15See also above, note 11, for an account of his supposed exposition of the
PVin at Gsang-phu.
16

[Ngor-chen?],

Dpal E!.!! skya,

p.

.!:&Y.!!.ru!!:. ill bshad lugs rang 'di

58b:

'dra zhig .y!!!. snyam E de dus .ill!....!!!!! 1m!!!8. gsung/.

[Bo-dong],

p. 542.5: .!:&Y.!!.ru!!:. bali shad [sic] lugs 'di min snyam E

170r ,

Lam 'bras bla ~,

de dus .ill!...1m!!!8. M!:!!!8/.

according to Yar-klungs-pa Grags-pa-rgyal-mtshan,

was then going from Rkyang-thur to Sa-skya.

See above,

p.

33a.6, Sa-pa9

note 12, and also Sangs-

rgyas-phun-tshogs, Rtsom 'phro, p. 293.5 (147a.5).

Regarding Sakyasrl's visit to Tibet, see below, chapter 7, note 24.
18These colorful details are supplied only by Dpal E!.!! skya,
simpler version is found in [Bo-dong],

p.

Lam 'bras bla mali, p. 544.

58b.6.

Yar-klungs-pa

Grags-pa-rgyal-mtshan, p. 33b, mentions only his meeting SakyasrI and studying the
commentary of Dharmottara.

19Sa_pa~ is not known to have studied much Sanskrit by this time. However,
Zhang Rgyal-ba-dpal, p. 436.3.1, states that Sa-pa9 learned from his uncle Gragspa-rgyal-mtshan enough of an Indian vernacular to be able to converse, and became
just

barely able to understand religious teachings in Sanskrit,

able to translate to a certain extent:

dang/

and even

became

'phral skad'!:&y'!!.ru!!:. skad dang lab btub'p!!'

skri ta ~ chos .8 ba tsam ~ ~ ci rigs E

mkhyen .ill!!:. bslabs

so/I.
In
[read:

this connection one should also see Sa-pa9's Yon tan sgrogs pa'i

tshal?] la bstod E

skya pa'i bka' 'bum,

{also known as Ba .8..Q.!:..

ba' i sgra las bstod

tshul

~,

Sa

vol. 5, p. 404.4.4, where Rje-btsun Grags-pa-rgyal-mtshan is

credited with teaching certain points of Sanskrit terminology:

~ mtshan ~ .8i man .!!8!!8.. gy /
rjes su 'brangs te kho bos rab rtogs J!!Y/

~E

According to the colophon,

this was written when Sa-pa9 was 21 years of age {i.e.

117

It is noteworthy that three lines of this work are almost

in 1203).
with three lines in the KhJ, part II. Here (D p. 404.4.4) we have:

.8!&.

identical

las d u .!!!!!. du ~ .Bi&. ~ zhingl I

du .!!!!!. du ~ .&!.&. las.&!&. .&i chal I

rkyen dang phrad ill!. gzhan ~ gzhan ~ ball

Compare KhJ II 11 (D p. 97.4.2):

.8!&. la

du !!ll!. du ~.&!&. ~ zhingl I

du ~ du !!ll!. .&!&. la .&!&. .&i sJJ I

rkyen dang phrad na gzhan dang gzhan ~ ball
Lho-pa,

p.

mtshon

48b.1,

records that Grags-pa-rgyal-mtshan taught

cha of Smrtijfianaktrti,

but he does

the Smra

not record the study of Sanskrit

or

Sa-pa~

Indian vernaculars.
20

Sa-pa~

this time.

Cf.

is

said by Go-rams-pa to have received the title of

van der Kuijp (1983),

p.

100, note 290.

paudita

at

(If so, perhaps it was

given partly ironically.) Yet in Sa-paQ's earlier Rol mo'i, p. 80.2.6 (161a.6),
he already styled himself a "pa~1ita." See also above, Introduction, note 17.
21 Lho-pa,
~mdzad

Dpal

ldan sa skya paudita'i !.ill!!!!. thar kun mkhyen rin chen

dpal

.lli!..

22

Lho-pa, p. 56b.6, states that Sa-pa~ was dwelling at Dga'-ldan, a remote

retreat in Dbu-ru'i Klungs Skyi-shod, when this biography was written. The debate
with Harinanda is mentioned on pp.
debate

is

53a.3-54a.4.

not specified in the early sources.

Unfortunately, the date of this

According

tshogs's Rtsom 'phro kha skong to Dkon-mchog-lhun-grub,

the debate occurred when Sa-paQ was 58 years old,

Sangs-rgyas-phun-

Dam pa'i chos (p. 316.1),

i.e. in 1240.

debate was Skyi-grong near the border of modern Nepal.

315.4.3,

to

The place of the

[Zhu-chen],

Dpal~,

p.

evidently mistakes the time of this debate with the time of the composi-

tion of the DS.

1232.

He says that the debate took place when

Sa-pa~

was 50,

i.e.

in

is also said to have been in Skyid-grong in 1238, when 'Phags-pa

was 3 years old.
See ibid., p. 316.3.3. The biography of 'Phags-pa (1235-1280)
Sa-pa~

by Ye-shes-rgyal-mtshan (Bla ~ dam~, p. 149b.2, mentions that 'Phags-pa accompanied Sa-pa~ to Skyid-grong when the former was very young, but does not specify
the year of the journey.
23

.
Lh o-pa 1S said to have been a disciple of Phywa-pa (d. 1169).
See
Shakya-mchog-ldan, Rngog 10, p. 451.1, where Lho-pa is identified as Lho-pa sgog-

118

gzan,

one

of Phywa-pa's three disciples who were grouped together as the

intelligent

persons" (shes rab !!l mi gsum).

as Lho-pa Dha-ra-seng.

Sangs-rgyas-phun-tshogs,

Rtsom 'phro, p. 319.2, seems to

identify him anachronistically as "Bhutanese": lho E

drug [=' brug?] E

writing the biography he was "extremely old" (sku shin tu bsgres ,E!!).
24

p. 55a. 2: mtshungs E med pa' i chos

Lho-pa,

"three

He is also said to 'have been known

m.

When

lli !:&I!!!. l!2. 'di bshes gnyen

dam E.i!. snyed .!&. bsten E de ~ phal che ba' i zhabs drung du bka' 'bangs

.ill.

tha ~ .&I!:!E. E kho bo ~ mchis ~ sdom brtson dam E mkhas E ~ lli ~

rgyan du .8I!!!:. E bsod snyoms E chen l!2. ~ dang bcas E de ~ dangl byang.h!!Q.

de

dpa' kun

brtse ba' i

bkur la ~ ~ brten E

lung tsam bdag

lli zhabs la sogs

lli r jes

de thams cad

kyang khums E

E
~

.ru!!!&. zhig bsnyen cing

'brangs shingl

dangl .ru!!!&..8!. tshe mtshan

.:&!L. zhig .8i

kho bos mngon du

de ~ ~ gsan pa' i ~ grangs thams cad ~ shing .vi ~ bkod cing

, dris .l!!!!.. byas E
~ de tsam la ~ gces .l!!!!.. 'dzin E dangl
'dun cing !!!2.

.&I!:!E. E

dang I .Y!!!!8. bdag .9!8. ~ mngon du 1w!!. pa' i gzhung

lli ~ du .8I.!!!.. E nyid la ~ shing nges.l!!!!.. byas

la spro ba khyad .l!!!!.. !!l .Y.Q.!!. E

la
E

sogs E ~ zhig chos

na mdo~ 'di bri bar ~ 'gjj.

25Ibid .,

p.

49a.2.

Roerich [1976], p. 317 and

'Gos

26Bsod-nams-dpal-bzang-po,
phar phyin la mkhas.
dbu phar la mkhas E
27
also

Lho-pa,

p.

Cf.

lo-tsa-ba identifies him as Kashmiri

(see G.

J. Naudou [1980], p. 251).

p. 31a.3: papdita sugatashr! ~ ba dbu ~ dang

Sangs-rgyas-phun-tshogs, Rtsom 'phro, p. 292.4 (146b):

su .8!!. ta shrI.
49a.2.

Cf. also G. Tucci (1949), vol. 3, p. 335.

As cited by J. Naudou (1980), p. 251, Sugatasri was

the author of the work Mahatma-kirtidhvajastotra (praises of Grags-pa-rgyal-

mtshan), Bstod tshogs section of the Narthang Tanjur.

28 Ibid ,

p.

'grel Ie' u dang po' i 'grel E stong phrag ~ dang bzhi E!. gsan ~ bsgyur cing
zhusl
slo b dpon thar pa' i ~ gnas kyis byas pa' i rtog ge' i skad ~ lli ba' i
bstan bcos gsan cing bsgyur I

chen l!2.

zan

gzhan.I?1!Yi rol .BY!.!i&. byed

lli tshad ma drang srong

lli 2!!.

s byar ba' i rtog ge' i bstan bcos !i&. [sic] E!. zhes

gsan E!. m noll.

For the identification of this PV commentary as Dharmak!rti's autocommentary,

see S.

editions,

Nishioka (1981),

p. 67, no. 1010.

In Bu-ston's index and the Tanjur

the translator of the autocommentary on PV I is not specified.

On the

119

units by which it and other prose texts were measured by Tibetans,

~loka

see M.

Lalou (1953), pp. 314f.

The Tarkabhaea was probably selected as the best available primer of Indian
Buddhist Pramaqa.

Its author Mokllakaragupta intended i t for "students" or "child-

ren."

See the first verse in Kajiyama (1966), p. 23, and S. C. Vidyabhusana

The third text is referred to by Lho-pa as "The treatise on
(1920), p. 347.
dialectics called 'Nyaya' composed by the great ~~i Ka\lada." I understand this to
refer to the Nyaya Siitras (read: rigs~. instead of !.!&. ~ However, some doubt
is cast on this attribution by the mention of Kaqada as author.

The latter's work

would be the Vaisellika Sutras.

29But see [Ngor-chen?],
spent

two

drangs

Dpal~, p. 59a.5, where it is specified that they

years together in Sa-skya:

10 gnyis !!!!

chos ~ ~ su

l@

ta shri ~ skyar

gdan

The chronology presented by this biography is not

always reliable, as mentioned in the following note.

30[Ngor-chen], Dpal ~, p. 59a.6, however, states that he rejoined Sakyasrt
and took full ordination at age twenty-four (1206!):

la nyang smad rgyan .8.Q!!&. .& &!.!!!:!&..!!!8. [59b] khang du

~ ~

10

!!.Vi shu rtsa lnga

10 ston ~

bzhugs

1i!!. ~ dbu skra der bzhar ba ma .8.lQ&. sdom ~ nyung chung du blang gsung/ bla
~ kha che bas mkhan .2. mdzad/ lli!!&. chub ~ ~ ~ bo lhas ~ las kYi slob
~

dpon

bshes zhu khrul

ston mdzad

~ ~

'dun

.!:.&.y!!.

mtsho Ita bu'i dbus su

bsnyen lli!E. rdzogs lli!E. mdzad ~.

31
1!a 'i

Lho-pa,

p.

49b. 2: de ~ mkhas ~ chen .2. de la gser dang dngul la sogs

~ chen dang dar la sogs ~ ,!g!, bza' i rigs mang.2. dang/

.!:.!!!. ..2. che dang/

.&.zhan ~ 'bring ba la sogs ~ ~ grangs du ~ mnyes lli!E. mdzad nas/.

320n this place see A. Ferrari (1958), p. 60.
33Lam 'bras slob bshad (Derge ed.),

vol.

(~, p. 178b.4, mentions a

"Shangs kyi Rin-chen-sgang."

34
vol.

3,

Sangs-rgyas-phun-tshogs, Rtsom 'phro, p. 295 (148a), and G. Tucci (1949),

p.

336.

According to Gzhon-nu-dpal, Sakya~ri also returned briefly to

Dbus in 1212 to gather donations for building the giant Khro-phu Maitreya.
Roerich (1976),

p. 1070.

See G.

Other chronological data on Sakyasri's stay in Tibet is

given in Bu-ston's Chos~.

See A. Vostrikov (1970), p. Ill, n. 341.

120

35
'brangs

Lho-pa,

!:!!.I

p.

49b.5:

de nyid ill. thad du

36Ibid ., pp. 49b.6-50a.3.

..y.!!!!.

ring du bzhugs shing rjes

The Alambanapariksa is mentioned on p. 50b.1.

37The third work by Jfiana~rI referred to here. is probably the

bhavasiddhi,

which

Karyakarana-

deals with the trikapancakacinta (lnga gsum brtags

was informed by Prof.

K.

Mimaki.

On this work see Y.

as I

~),

Kajiyama (1963).

On the

"greater and lesser K1;!aoabhangadhyaya," see the following note.

38Twelve works of Jfianasrimitra were recovered from Tibet in the original
RatnakirtinibandavalI, Tibetan Sanskrit Works
Sanskrit.
See A. Thakur ed.,
Series,

vol.

3 (1957), and K. Mimaki (1976), p. 4.

longest of these works.

Jfiana~rimitra

The Ksaoabhangadhyaya is the

is not known to have written a shorter work

on the topic, but his disciple Ratnaklrti did write a much shorter work KaQabhangasiddhi, which was actually two works, one the Anvayatmika and the other the
Vyatirekatmika.

These were published in A.

Thakur ed. (1957), pp. 62-76, 77-88.

An earlier edition of the last two works was edited by H.

Shastri in Six Buddhist

Nyaya Tracts in Sanskrit, Bibliotheca Indica, New Series no. 185 (1910).

On these

works see K. Mimaki (1976), pp. 4 et passim.

39Lho_pa, p. 51a.3: ~ gnas skabs de nyid du

This refers to the

period when he was studying for a long time with SakyasrI.

40

Bsod-nams-dpal-bzang-po, p. 31b.3: pandita saJ1!ghashrI ~ ba sgra candra

Cf. G. Tucci (1949), vol. 3, p. 335: "SanghasrI
dang mngon ~ mdzod la mkhas.
[who was learned] in the Candravyakaraoa both ancient and recent."
Cf. also

Sangs-rgyas-phun-tshogs,
~

Rtsom 'phro,

p. 292.5 (146b.5): tsandra la mkhas

~ ~

shri/.

41 In the editions of the Tanjur the translator of S~aranandana's

tary is not named.
42In the editions of the Tanjur,

commen-

the commentary by Santarak~ita was trans-

lated by Kumarasribhadra, 'Phags-pa-shes-rab, and 'Bro Seng-dkar Shakya-'od.

Narthang

and

Peking

substantially the same.

Tanjurs contain two copies of this work,

Both

they

are

See A. Vostrikov (1935), p. 10, note 40, and p. 31.

See

also D 4239 and P 5725 and 5738.

though

121

No commentary by "the Brahmin" (Srupkaranandana) is known.

ever,

an incomplete Vadanyayavyakhya by Vinitadeva.

is not specified.

See D 4240 and P 5737.

There is,

how-

The translator of the latter

See also A.

Vostrikov (1935), p. 10,

note 40.
43Zhang Rgyal-ba-dpal, p. 437.2.1.
44Dharmakirti,

Pramanavarttika.

Tib.:

Tshad .!!!!!.!:!!2.!!!' grel,

(Tokyo: 1981), Tshad rna, vol. 1, p. 76.1.7 (~ 151a.7):

~ phyis sa'i steng .!!!! 'gran zla thams cad dang bral ba'i
bsod

sogs

..P.!.

shakya 'i ~ slong kun .QruL.!:&ill mtshan dpal bzang

zhus te gtan la phab pa'o//

45
shi

snyoms

..P.!.

chen J!.Q. shakya shri bhadra la

Lho-pa, p. 52b. 5: shar

la zhes lli ba las/.

bha ranta' i pap.dita rtog

As cited by Y.

identified

in the Cordier catalogue (Rgyud,

jagaddala

(or Jagaddhala Vihara of Bengal).

Kajiyama (1966),
xxvi,

mkhas

bsgyur

p.

50) as being

ed.

..P.!.

dang/

cing

ba chen J!.Q. dana

Danasila is

11,

from

Varendra-

This may have been one and the same

place as the Jagaddala of O~iva~a to which Sakya~rI fled in 1202,

by no means certain.

Derge

though this

is

See D. D. Kosambi and V. V. Gokhale eds. (1957), p. xxxvii,

note 7, and Y. Kajiyama (1966), p. 11, note xxv.

46

Bsod-nams-dpal-bzang-po, p. 31b: pap.dita danashl1a ~ ba tshad .!!!!! ~

dang chos mchog la mkhas. Cf. G. Tucci (1949), vol. 3, p. 335: "Dana~Ila [who was
learned] in logic." Cf. also Sangs-rgyas-phun-tshogs, Rtsom 'phro, p. 292.5
Cf. E. Obermiller tr. (1931), p.
(146b.5) : tshad.!!!!! la mkhas ..P.!. da .!!!! shi la/.
222f.
47

Lho-pa, p. 52b.6.

gupta also exists.

48
49

A Sahalambananirp.aya[siddhi] attributed to Prajfiakara-

See L. van der Kuijp (1979), p. 421, note 11.

Zhang Rgyal-ba-dpal, p. 437.2.3.

Lho-pa, p. 51b.3.

50 Ibid
51
52a.2.

Lho-pa

lists

Sa-pa~'s

studies with Zhu-ston next,

i.e.

on

pp.

51b.4-

....
122

52

[Ngor-chen?],

~mdzad~.

mentions

Dpal~,

p. 59b.1: slob dpon

For more of this passage see above,

Zhu-ston's

bshes zhu,hrul

note 30.

gsans.

Lbo-pa, p. 52b.1,

teachings as Sa-skya as including the Madhyantavibhangaand

the Dharmadh~rmatavibhanga:

'byed!ill!!!!. M gnyis la sogs M ~ zhig ni ~ ~

bshes gnyen de dpal ~ skya nyid du gdan drangs ~ gsan

M.Y!!!. E!l! I.

53
Lbo-pa, p. 51b.3.
54Shakya-mchog-ldan,

Dbu ma'i,

p. 232.

See also Thu'u-bkwan, Grub mtha',

55Shakya-mchog-ldan,

Rngog 10, p. 453.4: nyang-stod du brtsegs dbang

p. 201.

seng
The

~ dangl

rkyang dur ba gzhon .!!!!. seng ~

lal

..Phv!!.s.

dbu tshad dang bsdus M gsan/.

studies with Brtsegs are thus mentioned in the same sentence as

his

studies

1 1 (,.,...
'\
151 a.:
2
vo.
~,p.

~.8!!!:.

with Rkyang-'dur-ba.

56

Lho-pa, p. 51b.4.

57Derge T
'
(T0 k yo:
anJur

1981) , s
T h a d ma,

.&Ii mkhan.I!Q.!!!' bhiiti shri shanti dang I bod ill 10 tsa ba ~ slong ~ ba' i blo
gros kyis bsgyur I. Rma Dge-ba' i-blo-gros flour.ished in the mid-11th century. Two
of

his patrons were Lha-btsun Zhi-ba-'od and Khri-bkra-shis-mnga'-bdag

58Cf

~ of Rngog lo-tsa-ba's translation of the Pramanalaw(ill, p. 151a.2:

the bsgyur

kara: Derge Tanjur (Tokyo: 1981), Tshad ma, vol. 1

dpal ldan dam pa'i las la mngon dges ~I
smad med che ba' i bdag .9!!!. ~ .I!Q. mchogl I

ball

~ ba' i thugs mnga' des M ~ skyong

mi

.vi

bdag .I!Q. d bang sde' i bkas bskul ~ I

brtson ldan lhag .ill!!:. ~ ldan 'chad.I!Q. dangl I

nyan .I!Q. rgol dang phyir rgol don nv,es ddlH:1 I

.sL ston

chen myong ba I i phyir I I

breI gtarn

dzam sling mkhas pa I i !:8li!!!..&1!:!!:. rgyan

Ita ngan kun sel gnyis !!!. med M

gzhan mang don dka I sgrub E!!. dka I

bras bu che phyir

12K

Y!I I

don dam !ill!!!!. ~ lhur len bstan bcos

I

Rtse-lde-

See below, note 66.

btsan.

bad E!!. rigs M

.!@.

di bsgyur I I

dil I

YffIlE.! I

YiE./ I

pa I i !:.8.Y.!!!!. ~ r j es su gzhol .8.YQ. f.!:d /

,/

123

.ll!!. ba chu bo bzlog R!!:. dka' mod k:Jjj I

~ ~ ill. ~ legs R!!:. brda sprad EY I
~.Yi ili la ci ~ 'bab mi ~I
sgra don .8!!ti:. .&!!. nyams ~ bder Ion tel I

.!!!!!!!. sprul ~ ni !!!!! bslad legs bsgyur ~ I

sngon .&Ii ~ byed dam ~ de ~ gjJ I

dri ~ bro ba da Ita kho bo tsaml I
dpal ldan kha che' i ill. ~ ba' il I

&.!!2!:. bu skal
.!:SI& .P.Q. zhes ~ la
~

ldan

EJJ I

thos nasi I
blo ldan bzang .P.Q. 'di bsgyur !!l! I

.&!:Q!!&.

khyer

chen.P.Q. ~ med ~ shar ~ ~ ill 'khor 10

' dzin

zhes ~ ~ I grub pa' i gnas ~ ~ pa' i 'dabsl !ill!!!!. R!!:. .8I!!!. ba 'i
zhing zhes ~ bar I kha che' i paQdi ta chen .P.Q. skal ldan .8I!!!..P.Q. dang
bod

.ill 10 tsa ba chen .P.Q. ~ slong blo ldan shes rab kyis bsgyur roll.

59The

retranslation

of the PV must date to between

returned to Gtsang from Dbus and ordained Sa-pa~,

left

Gtsang

1210,

for Mnga'-ris.

bzang-po,

p.

bas

te .P.Q. sU thams cad khro phur gdan drangs!E./

.E!!. nyid kyis dpal dus ill. 'khor 10 dangl

dang!

when

Sakyasri

Perhaps much of the work was done in the summer

when Sakya~ri spent the rainy-season retreat in

50b.3,

1208,

and 1212 or 1213, when Sakyasri

Sa-skya.

Bsod-nams-dpal-

mentions the translation work of Sa-paQ as follows:

tshad ma dang!

sky a papdita de nyid

.ill

mngon

de' i tshe

'dul ba dangl

sgra

la sogs pa' i chos mang du

10 tsa mdzad ~

of

dangl

10 tsa

skyar

chos
snyan

chos i l l

skya'i ~.!.!!8. khang du [51a]

ma !lli!!! 'grel la sogs pa' i ~ B!!!8. mdzad do!.

In the short time available to me at Patna, I was not able to determine the date that the passage refers

to.
On p. 49b.5, however, there is a reference to the consecration of the Khrophu Byams-chen in the water-male-monkey year (1212), and the same date is mentioned on p. 54b.1.
no.
See also Khro-phu lo-tsa-ba (Bihar Research Society
981), p. 18a.4, where Sa-pa~'s retranslation of the PV at Sa-skya'i-gtsug-lagkhang with Sakya~ri is also briefly mentioned.
In the Derge edition of the collected works of

Sa-pa~,

pp. 427.1.2-428.2.3,

there is a short work entitled Rang ~ rang la gros 'debs.E!!..

be a record of thoughts that occurred to him on the occasion of

This purports

to

Sakyasribhadra's

stay at Sa-skya during that rainy-season retreat (p. 428.2.1):

'di lli!!J. chen ~ skya' i nang tshan dull
dbyar bzhugs byas tshe sems la shar ba'i gtamll

The colophon (p.

428.2.3), however, states: kun ~!.&Y& mtshan dpal bzang ~

124

shing .E.Q. .Qyi ba' i 10 .&!. bzhin zla ba' i tshes brgyad ~ bris/.
"This was written
by Kun-dga'-rgyal-mtshan-dpal-bzang-po on the eighth day of the Gro-bzhin (i.e.
the

seventh) lunar month of the wood-male-mouse year [1204]."

chronistic.

his later full ordination,

though
it.

This date is

ana-

Sa-pal} had not received the "dpal-bzang-po" ending to his name until
and he was by no means a translator (10 tsa

then,

the text requires this--he regularly addresses himself as "translator"

It

is also unusual for Sa-pal} to date his compositions.

in

Thus the colophon

and the work itself are of doubtful authenticity.

It is definite that ~akya~ri spent a rainy-season retreat in Sa-skya in the
year 1210,

the iron-male-horse year.

btsun Grags-pa-rgyal-mtshan,
p.

(~,

28a.5.

Cf.
edition
theca

of
him

C.

Lam 'bras slob bshad (Derge ed.), vol. 1

SKKB, vol. 5, p. 148.1.4.

entitled Bla

This date is also supported

as cited by G. Tucci (1949), vol. 2, p. 336.

Das in his introduction to his and H.

K~emendra's

Indica.

sented

~,

also S.

Sa-pal} states this in his biography of Rje-

btsun,

See also the other edition of the work,

btsun chen po'i !:!!.!!!!!. thar,

by the Ngor chos

M. Vidyabhushana's

Bodhisattvavadana-Kalpalata or Avadana-kalpalata,

1888-1912.

Biblio-

Das stated that ~akya~rI met Sa-patl in 1202 and

a Sanskrit manuscript of that work,

as cited by

P.

L.

pre-

Vaidya

ed.

(1959), pp. vii and x.

60For

the colophon,

which mentions "others" (~,

see above,

Cf. E. Obermiller tr. (1931), pp. 222f, where Bu-ston mentions

note 44.
studies of

Sa-pa~'s

the PV only with Sakyasri and Dana~ila.

61See for instance the Derge Tanjur (Tokyo:

1981),

Tshad ma,

vol.

1, p.

94b-151a, and the Peking Tanjur, vol. 130, pp. 78-102.

62For this identification of the commentary, see S. Nishioka (1981), p. 67,
no.
409,

1010.

The same identification was also made by L.

van der Kuijp (1979), p.

presumably on the basis of Go-rams-pa's Rigs gter dka' gnas.

The

autocom-

mentary comes to some 131 folios in the Peking edition.

63This identification was also made by L.
See

the above note.

van der Kuijp (1979),

p.

The length of this work in the Peking edition (5717[a])

409.
is

only 131 folios.

64The

Tarkabhasa is still extant in Sanskrit and has been published twice.

For references to these editions and for an annotated translation, see Y. Kajiyama
(1966).

125

65peking Tanjur,

~ ~

~ ~

66peking Tanjur,
162.2.5):
khri

~,

la blo' i snang ba cher

slang dpal ldan blo gros brtan

kyis bsgyur cing zhus te gtan la phab

p.

399a.1 (vol.

138, p.

~ .ill!

pandita la

sgra bsgyur 10

tSB

bltos .lli!!:. rang nyid

~/.

vol. ~, p. 400a.5 (vol. 130, p.

kI!. zhal snga nas dangl dpal lha btsan ..P.Q.

Gtan tshigs rig pa,

dpal Iha btsun zhi ba

shis mnga' bdag rtse Ide btsan .&.y! zhal snga .!!ill! kyis bkasl .!1lli!. ..8!!!:.

bkra

.sri mkhan

vol.

tshul' di ni .ru!!!&. E!8. dam .ill! ~ kI!. bka' drin la brten .!!ill! nang dang

132.2 1 ) :

phyi 'i gzhung lugs du

ba

Gtan tshigs rig pa,

chen ..P.Q. jnyana shri bhadra' i zhal snga .!!ill! dang I ~ slang ~ "ba ' i
blo gros kyis bsgyur cing zhus te gtan la phab pa'oll II slad kyis kyang pandita

chen

..P.Q.

la phab

..P.Q.

dh!

.p.!!!!&.

~I

kara dangl

II.

10 tsa ba ~ slang dar ~ ~ kyis zhus shing gtan

67Kumarasrl and 'Phags-pa-shes-rab flourished in the late-11th and possibly

early-12th century.
They revised Rngog's translation of the PV Ala~ara. See J.
Naudou (1980), p. 231.
'Phags-pa-shes-rab himself also worked with some of the
same pa9gitas as had Mar-pa and Rngog.
68 See

Dna.

4240,

P no.

Vostrikov (1935), p. 10, note 40.

5737.

See ibid., p. 215.

On the extent of this commentary see A.

Chapter 6
SA-SKYA PA~PITA'S CAREER AS A SCHOLAR OF PRAMA~A:
HIS WRITINGS AND THE LINEAGES HE ESTABLISHED

Sa-pa~'s

rigs

longest

and most detailed treatment of PramsQa was his

pa'i gter (Rigs gter) with its autocommentary.

Tshad

This was also for the

most

part his final statement on the subject.

The only other place where he discussed
subjects related to PramsQa at length was the final section of the KhJ, though his
main topics there were the procedures and presuppositions of philosophical debate.
In the Rigs gter,

by contrast, he attempted to synthesize and summarize the whole

of Dignaga and Dharmakirti's theory of epistemology and logic.

Rngog Lo-tsa-ba r the Father of

Tibetan PramsQa Literature
The Rigs gter was in many ways original among Tibetan treatises on
but

it

Tibetan

was

also shaped by and indeed to some extent belonged to

tradition of PramaQa scholarship.1

Prama~a,

century-old

One of Sa-paQ's great forerunners

in

Tibet was Rngog lo-tsa-ba Blo-ldan-shes-rab (1059-1109); in fact, the tradition of

composing Tibetan treatises on PramaQa originated with the latter. 2 According to
the list of Rngog's writings preserved in Bu-ston's history of religion, he wrote
topical summaries (bsdus don) on the following PramaQa works: 3
(1) PramaQaviniscaya, with its commentary by Dharmottara
(2) Nyayabindu, with its tika by Dharmottara
(3) Pramanavarttika, with its Alaffikara commentary by Prajnakaragupta
(4) Pramanaparik8 (of Dharmottara)
(5) Anyapohaprakarapa (of Dharmottara)
(6) Ksaoabhangasiddhi (of Dharmottara)
(7) Apohasiddhi (of Sa~aranandana)
(8) Pratibandhasiddhi (of Sa~aranandana)

Rngog's

expositions

of

the summarized meaning (bsdus don) of these

works

perhaps topical outlines of the sort that are now more commonly known as
It

is

worth noting that these summaries were written precisely on those

treatises which Rngog lo-tsa-ba himself had translated.

were

~ bcad. 4
PramaQa

Perhaps he composed them

II

'[

III

~
I

128

while engaged in the work of translating the basic texts.

Rngog's other Prama~a commentaries listed by Bu-ston were not summaries
outlines but were subcommentaries
and

(~

or

bshad : vyakhya) in which the explanations

discussions of earlier commentaries were further elucidated.

In addition

to

some incomplete commentaries, he wrote complete subcommentaries on the following:

(1) Pramsnaviniscaya, with the tiks by Dharmottara
(2) Nyayabindu, with the tika by Dharmottara
These two subcommentaries were an important help for his disciples who became
next

generation of teachers in the school he founded.

the

It is probably no coinci-

dence that active lineages of teaching and study became established especially for
5
the PVin and the Nyayabindu (NB) with the commentaries of Dharmottara.
Thus
Indian
(~

the

Rngog composed two types of

basic

Prama~a

works or their commentaries.

treatise as means for

In writing his

two

expounding

subcommentaries

bshad) he followed a well-established Indian commentarial type, being one of

first Tibetan scholars known to have done so.

But for his topical

outlines

(bsdus don) he utilized a typically Tibetan type which had no clear predecessor in
Indian Buddhist literature. 6
By
jects,

composing

such commentaries on

Prama~a

as well as on many

other

sub-

is said to have initiated among Tibetans the practice of composing

7
treatises on a grand scale.
Unfortunately only very few of Rngog's writings are
now extant, and even in the 15th century only a handful were available. 8
Among
his

Rngog

Prama~a

writings listed above,

Qavini~cayatika

century.
probably
Rngog's
century.

seemingly only the subcommentary on the Prama-

was still available to Shakya-mchog-ldan at the end of

the

15th

(Shakya-mchog-ldan also mentions a "great subcommentary," but this was

identical with Rngog's ~ bshad on Dharmottara's tika.)9
From among
other
10

works,

apparently not many were still available even in the

15th

Rngog's Successors and the Bsdus-pa Literature

Rngog
which

is not known to have written any independent treatise on PramaQa

he expounded the general subject according to a heuristic plan of

devising.
Perhaps the
Rgya-dmar-ba

his

in
own

This innovation apparently did not take place for a generation or two.
first such general thematic exposition of Prama~a was the work of
Byang-chub-grags (fl. c. 1130), a junior student of Rngog who also

studied under Khyung Rin-chen-grags and Gangs-pa She'u.

According to

A-khu-chin

129

Shes-rab-rgya-mtsho's list of rare books, Rgya-dmar-ba wrote several "Summaries of

PramsJta"
works,

(tshad

ma' i bsdus ~. 11

Rgya-dmar-ba's chief disciple,

general
In

Though nothing definite is known about

they may have served as the prototype for the famous Summary (bsdus
Phywa-pa.

If so,

Rgya-dmar-ba's Summaries

of

were

introductions to the most important concepts and practices of dialectics.

case their author would have been the originator of the bsdus

that

which was further developed by Phywa-pa and Gtsang-nag-pa,

be

these
~)

genre

and which continued to

employed centuries later.

Shakya-mchog-ldan,

however,

does

not mention any original Summary by Rgya-

dmar-ba, and instead gives the latter's student Phywa-pa Chos-seng full credit for
this

innovation. 12

Though Phywa-pa is said to have composed a commentary on

PVin and quite a few other commentarial works,

his

"Summary, "

13

an

the

his most influential treatise

was

ill ill.

!!!!:!!!.

independent work known as the Tshad ma bsdus

sel.
Apparently it consisted of a basic work (probably in mnemonic verse) with
. f synops~s
. or out 1~ne. 14
an autocommentary.
There maya 1 so have b een a very b r~e
Though unfortunately this work is not known to be extant,
restatement

of

expository method of its author's invention.

ductory

it seems to have been a

certain key points of PramaJta according to a

text he and his students used,

subject

order

and

It was apparently the general intro-

and it determined much of the terminology

and style of classroom debate for many generations of Tibetan dialecticians.

In
said

addition to his Pramana Summary (tshad ma bsdus

Phywa-pa is

~),

also

to have written a greater and lesser Madhyamaka Summary (dbu ma bsdus ~).15

This was probably an introduction to the dialectics of the Madhyamaka,

Phywa-pa's

own

unique approach.

number of basic topics,

logical entailments.
Phywa-pa

work

addressed

presenting them in a series of connected inferences

is thus traditionally held to have been the innovator of a

Tibetan school of dialectics.

largely

One can speculate that the

presenting

forgotten,

indirectly

a
or

truly

Though his and his teacher's works are now lost and
these scholars exercised a great

Tibetan PramaJta studies down to the present.

influence

over

The basic topics to be taught in the

introductory classes of dialectics, for instance, was probably first determined by

Phywa-pa or his teacher.
Klong-rdol bla-ma asserts that several topics of the
novice class in logic go back to Phywa-pa. 16 Even the name for such classes,
bsdus grwa or bsdus rwa,

would seem originally to have referred precisely to

the

school or class (lit. "enclosure" or "courtyard" grwa) in which the PramaI"la Summary (~.!!. bsdus ~) was taught,

and the modern bsdus grwa textbooks themselves

are probably the distant lineal descendants of the early Prams9a Summaries.
One
systematic

important

specific contribution of Phywa-pa to Tibetan Prams9a was

employment

of

formal arguments involving

the

triad

of

his

definition

130

(~

nyid),

term and

term to be defined (mtshon

definition (mtshan gzhi).

~,

and the thing exemplifying

the

these concepts and their

17
seem not to have been worked out in detail.
Still another legacy

employment

Before Phywa-pa,

that Phywa-pa is said to have left for later Tibetan scholasticism is the practice
of

expounding

consequences

scriptural passage or doctrinal point by means of

(indicated

chain

by the word thaI) and reasons (indicated by

the

of

word

~.18 Phywa-pa presumably employed this style of exposition in his Summaries.

This expository method was adopted wholesale much later in the obligatory manuals
(lis. cha) of the great Dge-lugs-pa scholastic colleges (grwa tshang).19
within the Rngog
Phywa-pa's Prama~a Summary continued to be studied
though some of his students disagreed on certain points and composed

school,

Summaries of their own.

Dan-'bag-pa Smra-ba'i-seng-ge, for instance,
20 Though doctrinally he departed from some of Phywaa Tshad ~ bsdus.m!..
pa's interpretations, he presumably followed the same general structure and expository method as his teacher. 2l Meanwhile other students of Phywa-pa continued to

Pram8~a

wrote

!employ the Summary as a commentarial or propaedeutic genre for Madhyamaka,

no

doubt with many radical differences from Phywa-pa's

doctrine.

Brtson-'grus-seng-ge and Rma-bya Byang-chub-brtson-'grus,

though

Gtsang-nag-pa

for instance, were stu-

II

dents not only of Phywa-pa but also of Pa-tshab lo-tsa-ba, ~e original propagator
22
of Candrak!rti's Prasangika in Tibet.
Each of them is said to have written

I'

Madhyamaka

I"

Summaries (dbu ma'i bsdus,mD.

Gtsang-nag-pa wrote both an

expanded

and abridged Summary,23 while Rma-bya is only known to have written one Madhyamaka
Summary (the latter also wrote an Dbu

stong thun,

which was perhaps similar in

general content but different in presentation).24

The
beyond.

tradition

of writing

Summaries continued

into the 13th century

and

Rgyal-sras Chu-mig-pa,

the foremost disciple of the Gsang-phu Ne'u-thog

25
master Mnyal-zhig (fl. 1200) is recorded to have composed a (Tshad ~ bsdus .m!..
Even two of Sa-pa~'s students wrote Summaries.
Sa-pap's greatest disciple in the
field of Pramapa, 'U-yug-pa Rigs-pa'i-seng-ge (d. 1253), is said to have written
26
Another of his disciples
such a work; it was entitled Bsdus .m!. rigs sgrub.
Rong-pa Rgwa-lo Rnam-rgyal-rdo-rje (1203-1282) also composed one,

which is listed

by A-khu-chin Shes-rab-rgya-mtsho as the Tshad ~ bsdus.m!. chen mo (MHTL 11816).27

He

also composed a Madhyamaka Summary (MHTL 11374).

these

works

---------- -- ----

reflected the views of

Sa-pa~

One cannot be sure

or whether they

were

their authors' previous studies in the school of Phywa-pa-and his

any

case,

lowers.

the

11845)

followers.

Summary as a form of propadeutic writing continued to

According to A-khu-chin,

tJam-dpa'i-dbyangs

Prama~a

whether

holdovers
have

from
In
fol-

Summaries were later composed by 'Chims

(MHTL 11818) and Bo-dong PaQ-chen Phyogs-las-rnam-rgyal

(MHTL

Indeed, it seems likely that some of those Summaries were intermediaries

131

in

the

development of the earliest dialectical manuals into the ,textbooks

28

still

used in the bsdus grwa classes of modern Tibetan Buddhist seminaries.

When

Sa-pa~

Gtsang-nag-pa,
tion.

began

his studies of

Prama~a

in the lineage

of

Phywa-pa

and

he was thus taking part in a flourishing and well-developed tradi-

Later, when he perceived various errors and discrepancies in that tradition

through his

studies under Indian

tions from Indian tradition.

he decided to refute the main devia-

pa~qitas,

His primary vehicle for doing this was his Tshad

rigs pa'i gter (Rigs gter) with its autocommentary, which together form by far the
' h'1S oeuvre. 29
1ongest work 1n

Though
ings

Sa-pa~'s

principal aim in the Rigs gter was to correct

of his Tibetan predecessors,30 the form which he employed for

the
this

teachpurpose

was probably determined in part by the writings of those very opponents. The Rigs
3l
gter too was a Summary of sorts.
It may not have followed the same expository
method as the writings of Phywa-pa and his followers,
duction

to

important
gter

Prama~a

by way of a brief treatment of its key

concepts.

very

it sought to comprehend

work of Dignaga together with all seven of the major treatises

k1rti.

One

difference between the Rigs gter and its predecessors was that the Rigs

included more within the scope of its summary:

basic

but it was a general intro-

The most significant new source that

up until this time Tibetan

Prama~a

Sa-pa~

of

the

Dharma-

took into account was the PV;

had taken as its main Indian sources merely the

PVin and Nyayabindu with Dharmottara's commentaries.

Sa-pa~

divided the Rigs gter into eleven chapters,

a major topic in

Prama~a.

Several of these--such as

each of which addressed

and

brag,

and

'breI, ~ nyid and mtshon~, and gzhal sel--had already been the subjects of
discussion of Phywa-pa and the others in their Summaries. 32 The final four chapters of the Rigs gter discuss the same topics as the four chapters of the PV, viz.

2 ramana,

pratyaksa,

svarthanumana,

and pararthanumana.

work (following the pagination of the Rigs gter rang 'gre1,

The overall plan of the

Derge

edition,

Taya

Bunko reprint) is as follows:

I.

~ ~ ~ 1dog nas gtan la dbab

..p!!.

(The ascertainment of knowable

things

according to general conceptual categories)

A.

~ bya'i ~ (The object which is to be known) (chapter 1: pp. 167.4.3172.2.2)

'I

:',1

iii!
,I

'i

132

B.

shes

byed

b10 (Cognition,

which is the knower)

(chapter

2:

pp.

172.2.2-176.1.6)
C.

b10

des'y!!!' rtogs pa'i tshu1 (The manner in which that cognition

under-

stands the object)

1.

dang

brag rtogs pa' i tshu1 (How the general and particular

are understood) (chapter 3: pp. 176.1.6-179.1.3)

2.

sgrub.ill!. dang gzhan se1 bas rtogs tshu1 (How one understands through
proof and the exclusion of others) (chapter 4: pp. 179.1.3-187.1.3)

3.

brjod

dang brjod byed rtogs pa'i tshu1 (How the thing expressed

and the expression are understood) (chapter 5: pp. 187.1.3-190.2.4)

4.

II.
!

(How logical

connection and

a.

'breI ba ~.ill!. (The investigation of logical

(chapter 6: pp. 190.2.6-201.1.5)

b.

~ ba' i don nges .p!!!:. ~ ba (Ascertainment of the meaning of

inconsistency) (chapter 7: pp. 201.1.5-204.1.1)

shes byed tshad ma' i rang bzhin nges

.p!!!:. ~

connection)

ba (Ascertainment of the

nature

of the means of knowledge, the knower)

'breI ba dang ~ ba rtogs pa'i tshu1

inconsistency are understood)

A. mtshan

of

nyid~.Eill!!!!.

Prama~a])

gzhag (The system of definition [esp., the definition

(chapter 8: pp. 204.1.1-219.3.6)

B. mtshan gzhi so so'i don gtan 1a dbab.ill!. (Settling the sense of the individual exemplifications [of the definition])
1. dngon
2. rjes
a.

rang

(Direct perception) (chapter 9: pp. 219.3.6-230.3.6)

(Inference)
don

rjes su

~.ill!.

1a brtags .ill!. (The

consideration

of

inference for oneself) (chapter 10: pp. 230.3.6-251.4.1)

b.

To

gzhan don r jes su ~ .ill!. 1a brtags .ill!. (The consideration

inference for others) (Chapter 11: pp. 251.4.1-264.1.4)

expound these subjects

Sa-pa~

ject from the different works

'
1
33
accor d1ng
to h'1S own pan.

gathered together the passages on the same

of Dignaga and Dharmakirti,

and

presented

of

subthem

The

second and only other extant work in which Sa-paQ discusses PramaQa in
34
any detail was the KhJ, his primer of scholarly methods.
This work was one of
Sa-paQ's

longest

treatises,

though

less than one-third of it

was

devoted

to

133

subjects
section

related

to

(le'u),

Prarna~a.

The relevant part was the third main

which deals with the practical application of Pramapa in

and philosophical discussion.

The contents of this section will be investigated below in
Still,

one

later

chapter

should

than the Rigs gter.

Thus when

Sa-pa~

composed the KhJ,

already treated some of the same topics in his Rigs gter.

In

debate

more

note here to begin with that the KhJ apparently was

detail.
composed

he seems to
Pramapa,

or

have

debating

belongs in general to the category of "inference for others" (gzhan don rjes

~:

pararthanumana)--i.e. formal argumentation--and Sa-pap had made this the subject

of his last chapter in the Rigs gter. In the KhJ, Sa-pap usually took the opportunity
But

to

discuss new topics not already expounded in detail in the

Rigs

gter.

one subject he naturally could not avoid taking up again was the question

what constituted occasions of defeat and victory in debate.

of

For this he quotes in

the KhJ several basic verses from the Rigs gter and then refers the reader to the
Rigs gter for more details. 35 Another question he returns to in the KhJ is what
answers

should

be given in reply to arguments phrased in the form

consequences (prasanga).36

of

necessary

Here the KhJ contains a slightly longer account of the

four acceptable answers, and Sa-pap adds brief examples of what sort of statements
by

the opponent would warrant each answer.

There are several other passages

in

both works where he discusses the same topics.

In the KhJ,

however,

Sa-pap mainly addresses general problems relating to

debate or philosophical discussion, and not specific problems of logic or inferential reasoning.
He discusses some of the key underlying problems that all Indian
and Tibetan dialecticians had to face, such as: What is the place of scripture in
debate?
To what extent must one hold tenets or advance a thesis in debate? And
how can two debators from different philosophical schools find a common ground for
discussion?
His answers to such questions shed important light on his doctrinal
and philosophical thought.
Thus, though this section of the KhJ is significant
for revealing Sa-pap's opinions on some aspects of Pramapa, it also deserves to be
classed

together with the Sdom gsum rab dbye and Thub pa'i dgongs gsal as one
his most important statements on Buddhist philosophy and.doctrine. 37

of

Sa-pan's Influence the Subsequent Study

of Prama,Qa in Tibet
central importance in later Tibetan scholasticism is obvious from
38
the simple fact that he originated all existing Tibetan lineages of PV studies.
Sa-pa~'s

It

10

is

said

that

as a teacher he laid special emphasis on

expounding

the

PV;

.....
134

according to some accounts,

the

he made a special vow to teach at least one lesson on

PV every day for as long as he lived. 39 Moreover,

there is no doubt that in

his long and influential career as a teacher he gave instructions on the PV to numerous students on very many occasions.
Shakya-mchog-ldan describes in some detail the results of Sa-pa9's

energe-

tic propagation of the study of the PV:

To

briefly

express

the manner in which many religious

teachers

who

upheld the Doctrine appeared and how numerous religious seminaries that
maintained

the exposition lineage were established as a result of

great teachings given by the Sa-skya-pas

following]

the

In particular [the

upholders of the teaching lineages of the religious

scrip-

ture and of the PV appeared:

'U-yug-pa composed his Rnam bshad rigs mdzod and Bsdus .l!!! rigs
40
These were famed as the first [Tibetan] commentaries of the

sgrub.
PV

tradition.

who

It is widely renowned that [Sa-pa9's] direct disciples

had expert knowledge of the PV were (1) Te-ra-ba

Byams-mgon,

(2)

Ldong-ston Shes-rab-dpal, (3) Dkar Shakya-grags, (4) Shar-pa Shes-rab'byung-gnas, (5) Nags-phug-pa Shes-rab-'od-zer, and (6) Lho-pa kunmkhyen.

Afterward there appeared Rgya [=Skya i.e.

b07], Nor [i.e. Nor-bzang-dpal] and Bya [7].

chen,

Nya-dbon Kun-dga'-dpal,

and the two lords of learning G.yag

[-

ston Sangs-rgyas-dpal] and [Red-mda'-ba] Gzhon [-nu-blo-gros],

who are

as widely famed as the sun and moon.

them. 41

some of

ShBkya-mchog-ldan
Gtsang

'Jam-dbyangs-skya-

And also: Nya Dar-ma-rin-

in

This is

ju~indicate

also mentions several of the main seminaries of Dbus and

which the PV was taught according to the Sa-skya-pa tradition

which the Summary (bsdus.l!!!,

here the basic or introductory class on

,
' d 'ln accor dance Wlt
' h t he ~
R'
was malntalne
gter: 42

and

in

dialectics)

(1) Bo-dong E,

founded by Dpang lo-tsa-ba (1276-1342) as a seminary for the

43
study of the PV and AS.
44
(2) Ngam-ring-gi-chos-grwa, founded [in 13547] by the Dpon-chen Byang-pa.
45
(3) Bzang-ldan, founded by Kun-spangs Chos-grags-dpal-bzang.
(4) Shel-dkar chos-sde, founded [in 1385] by Si-tu Chos-rin-dpal
[and Pa9-chen Grags-pa-rgyal-mtshan (1353-14207)].46
(5) Rtse-thang-gi-chos-grwa,
(1302-1374)

founded by

Ta'i-si-tu

(d.

1403)

Byang-chub-rgyal-mtshan

I'

135

(6) Rtse-chen, founded by Nya-dbon (Kun-dga'-dpal) [in 1366-1371].47

(7) Rab-sgang Ka-bzhi-dgon, founded by Mkhan
(8) Nyang-stod

Lcang-rwa'i-chos-grwa,

Byang-chub-dpal~48

founded [in 1413] by Si-tu Rab-brtan-

'phags (1389-1442).49
(9) Rong-byams-chen-gyi-chos-grwa,
50
and his brother.

founded [in 1367?] by Drung

Nor-bzang-pa

When Shakya-mchog-ldan was writing this account in 1495, some seven notable
seminaries

were still at least nominal adherents of the

Prama~a

traditions of the

old school of Rngog and Phywa-pa,

Bd
an d ~~

though the actual teaching lineages of the PVin

51
.
were t hen on t he verge 0 f dy1ng out:

(1)
Gsang
1073]52

[-phu

Ne'u-thog]

[founded

by

Rngog

Legs-pa'i-shes-rab

in

(2) [Snye-thang] Bde [-ba-can]53

(3) [Tshal] Gung [-thang Chos-'khor-gling]54
55
(4) Khro-phu
56
(5) Snar-thang
(6) Zha_lu 57

Ii 1

. 58
(7) Gnas-rny1ng
Any

exposition

of the PV in these seminaries must have originated from

Sa-pa~'s

lineage.
As for the later lineages of study of the PV and Rigs
ldan

gter,

Shakya-mchog-

mentions that there was a special lineage at Sa-skya that was passed by Bla-

ma-dam-pa Bsod-nams-rgyal-mtshan (1312-1375) to Theg-chen-chos-kyi-rgyal-po Kundga'-bkra-shis (1349-1425).59

But the main branch of the tradition that was
perpetuated

in

many seminaries great and small resulted from the

G.yag-ston Sangs-rgyas-dpal (1348-1414).

transmitter

activities

of

This great scholiast was not only a key

but he is also said to have been a noteworthy reviver of Prama~a studies within the Sa-skya-pa tradition. 60 His two main
followers

of Prajnaparamita exegesis,

in

(1382-1456)
known

as

influence

terms

of their later influence

were

Ngor-chen

and Rong-ston Shes-bya-kun-rig (1367-1449).

a great teacher of Prama~a,
to

spread

Kun-dga'-bzang-po

The first is

but he taught the Rigs gter and

the exegetical tradition of G.yag-ston.

He

not

best

used

his

founded

monastery in 1429 and established there a schoolhouse (grwa khang) for the
ing

of

the

Rigs gter and G.yag-ston's commentary on

the

PV.

Ngor-chen

directly founded three branch monasteries where this lineage was maintained:

Ngor
teach61

also

136

(1) Glo-bo Thub-bstan-rnam-rgyal

62

(2) Pu-rang Chos-sde-dga'-byed-tshal

(3) Chu-'dus-chos-sde Chos-'khor-nor-bu-gling
And under his instructions two more branch monasteries were established:
(4) Gu-ge Brgya-gling-thang
(5) Rting-khebs-kyi-chos-'khor Dga'-ldan-rtse-mo
Rong-ston Shes-bya-kun-rig, the second great follower of G.yag-ston, had an
even greater influence on the tradition, for he was a master of general scholastic
studies,

unlike Ngor-chen who specialized in Tantra.

seat of 'Phan-po Nalendra in 1435.

63

Rong-ston founded his great

The following establishments were subsequently

founded as its branches:

(1)

Rgyal-byed-tshal-gyi-chos-grwa in Shar-rgyal-mo-rong,

founded by

Gzhu-

ston Bsod-nams-rin-chen under the patronage of Bstan-Ia rgyal-bu.

(2) Dge-'phel-gyi-chos-grwa in Rab-sgang,

founded by Lha-'bri

Shes-rab-rdo-

rje
(3)

Ra-mdo-chos-'khor-gling-gi-chos-grwa at Spom-'bor,

founded by Dbus-ston

Rin-chen-blo-gros.
(4) Cho-shul Byang-chub-gling,

founded by Mkhan-chen Padma-bzang-po.

(5) Gtsang Sga-gdong, founded by Chos-Iung-ka-bcu-pa.

(The previous two were founded as residences for Rong-ston.)
(6) 'Bras-yul seminary,

"founded in the fire-female-hare year" (1447),

"the

twen.ty-fifth [sic] year after Nalendra's founding" [Le. 14597].64

(7) Pan-khyung-tshang, founded in 1452 by Don-yod-dpal.
(8) Rta-nag Gser-gling,
rab-'byams-pa.,,65

"founded in the fire-dog year [sic] (1466) by

(These last three were founded through

the ruler Nor-bu-bzang-po and son,

times

of

the patronage of

and they had been expanded between

their initial foundation and "the present" [Le.

Go-bo
the

the time that

Shakya-mchog-Idan wrote his account in 1495].)

In addition to Shakya-mchog-Idan's account,

one could mention that the

following

seminaries were established as branches of 'Bras-yul Skyed-tshal or Rta-nag Thubbstan by students of Byams-chen rab-'byams-pa or Go-rams-pa or both:
(1)

'Jad Thub-bstan-yangs-pa-can,

dpal-bzang in 1490.

founded by Mus

rab-'byams-pa

Thugs-rje-

137

I;

(2) Gnyan-yod Bya-rgod-gshongs, founded by

Pa~-chen

'Bum-phrag-gsum-pa Byams-

pa-chos-don-'grub [?] in 1489.

II

(3) Chos-'khor-1hun-po, founded by Gzhung-brgya-pa Dngos-grub-dpa1-'bar

(4) Bzhad-ri Skyed-tsha1-'og-ma, founded by Mnga'-ris-pa Lha-dbang-b10-gros.

These

are

listed by the Rta-nag mkhan-po Chos-rnam-rgya1 in his history of

dhism (Bstan

dang bstan 'dzin).

having been convert.ed to

(5)

Ra-ba-smad,

Bud-

He also lists the following as belonging to or

the~scho1astic

66
tradition of Go-rams-pa:

converted to Go-rams-pa's tradition by Stag-phrug Kun-dga'-

dpa1-'byor.
(6) Rdo-phud-chos-'khor-gnas, and
(7) Dags-po-grwa-tshang,

converted to his system by Shes-grong

B10-

pa~-chen

gros-chos-kyi-rgya1-po.
(8)

Rnam-rgya1-gser-khang grwa-tshang [of Gsang-phu],

also known

as

Ga-zi

that

were

grwa-tshang, founded by Ga-zi bka'-bcu-pa Shakya-b10-gros

There were

also

founded

Khams and A-mdo in the 15th century,

in

many

more branch monasteries of Ngor and

Na1endra

such as the

Na1endra

branches

Nang-chen Pe-ru-chung-dgon Brtse-chen-chos-rdzong-g1ing, Nang-chen Gtsang-mda'dgon, Sde-gzhung dgon-pa, Tre'u Gdong-thog-dgon, Mi-nyag Ri-khug-dgon, and A-mdo
Di-phu-chos-rje-dgon-pa.
fluential,

and

many

In

later times the Ngor-1ugs became more and more

Na1endra branches were subsequently

converted

to

in-

Ngor-pa

establishments.
Though
generations,
records

that

the PV was the main

Prama~a

it was not the only one.

work that

Sa-pa~

transmitted

to

later

The biography of Rong-ston, for instance,

G.yag-ston Sangs-rgyas-dpa1 taught Rong-ston the following

works according to the exegetical traditions that had come down through

PramaQa

Sa-pa~:

67

(1) Dignaga's PS with commentary and subcommentary

(2) PV with subcommentary (i.e. with a commentary on the Varttika itself)
(3) Hetubindu
(4) Vadanyaya

lowing

The Rigs gter, however, apparently did not gain a wide and unanimous folwithin the main seminaries of dialectics in the late-13th to mid-14th

centuries.

It did not supplant the Summaries (in their no doubt continually

68
revised forms) as the basic introduction to dialectical theory and practice.
As
some later (15th-century?) scholars from other traditions alleged, the teachings

I,

138

of

the

Summaries

investigation,

were very detailed and were proven to be

whereas

in

correct

by

comparison the Rigs gter was "extremely

because of that one could not follow and maintain it literally.

careful

rough,"

and

For this reason,

according to those opposing scholars, there did not appear authoritative lineages
of students for the Rigs gter. 69 Shakya-mchog-ldan replied to the above charges
by listing some of the great scholars who maintained the study and teaching of the
Rigs gter according to the correct tradition (the list will be presented later

in

this chapter).70 However, both that criticism and Shakya-mchog-ldan's reply indicate

that

there

were

not in fact many scholars in those days

who

had

really

mastered the Rigs gter and who followed it carefully.

Thus

when

subcommentary

G.yag-ston

on

the

seems

to

in the late-14th or early-15th

century

Rigs gter (the first of its kind) and began

wrote

to

his

teach

it

the

work. 71

Through his efforts the Rigs gter came to be appreciated again as a great

master-

widely,

he

piece calling for

that

broke

efforts
onwards,
to

be

Renown"

of

have been trying to revive the study of

careful~

loose

moreover,
(~

Perhaps the avalanche of commentaries

in the 15th century should be

this man.

included

serious study.

the

attributed

In Sa-skya-pa scholasticism from

ultimately

the

to

late-14th

the

century

the Rigs gter came to be one of the only two non-Indian works

among the eighteen core texts known as the

chen bco

paI}-'s Sdom gsum rab dbye.

~--the

72

"Eighteen

other Tibetan work in the group

of

Great

being

Sa-

Sa-skya-pa Teaching Lineages of PramaQa

Sa-pa9 established a thriving school of PV studies.

The early commentators

on the PV in this school as listed by Glo-bo mkhan-chen in his Rigs gter nyer mkho
include the following three authors of comments on the meaning (don 'grel):73
(1) 'U-yug-pa Rigs-pa'i-seng-ge, author of the Rigs

grub

(2) Rong-ston [i.e. Ldong-ston?] chen-po, author of the Rigs pa'i snang ba
(3) Kun-mkhyen Lho-pa, author of the Sde bdun gsal ba
He also lists the following six early scholars who wrote word-by-word commentaries
(tshig~,

two of whom (nos. 1 and 4) are otherwise unknown to me:

(1) Rwa-grags Stag-rdor

(2) Phyogs-glang gsar-ma [fl. c. 1320 at Sa-skya]
(3) Dpal-ldan-seng-ge

139

(4) Jo-btsun Grags-rgya1

(5) Mkhas-mchog Nor-bzang-dpa1
(6) Gnas-drug-pa [a disciple of B1a-ma-dam-pa Bsod-nams-rgya1-mtshan]
The main lineages through which the PV was transmitted from
generations can be traced with some precision.

Sa-pa~

to later

Go-rams-pa Bsod-nams-seng-ge in a

supplicatory prayer to the lineage (Tshad mali brgyud 'debs,

pp.

27b-29a) evokes

the following transmission:

The four
Indian panditas
I
..
Sa-pa~

(1182-1251)
(d. 1253)

'U-y~g-pa

Mdo-~de-dpa1

(fl. c. 1250-1280)
I
'Jam-dbyangs-skya-bo (fl. c. 1280-1310)

[Dpang 10] B10-gros-brtan-pa (1276-1342)

I
[B1a-ma-dam-pa] Bsod-nams-rgya1-mtshan (1312-1375)

[Mkhan-chen] Brtson-'grus-dpa1 (fl. late-14th c.)

[Goykg-ston] Sangs-rgyas-dpa1 (1348-1414)
I

[Rong-ston] Shes-bya-kun-rig (1367-1449)

I

"Grags-pa'i-mtshan" [Mkhyen-rab-dbang-phyug-grags-bzang]
I

[Byams-chen rab-'byams-pa] Sangs-rgyas-'phe1

A similar lineage is recorded in the lineage-prayer of Shakya-mchog-1dan (Tshad
.!.!!.9.!!!. 'gre1 nges

ill brgyud pa'i gsol 'debs, pp. 79.). It is noteworthy for the

presence of the great scholar Nor-bzang-zhabs in the place of three generations of

scholars:

'Jam-dbyangs-skya-bo,

Dpang-10

B10-gros-brtan-pa,

Bsod-nams-rgya1-mtshan:
Sakyasd

Pa 9-,hen Sa-skya-pa

'U-yug-pa
I
.
Mdo-sde-dpa1
I

Nor-bzang-zhabs
I

Brtson-'grus-dpa1
I

Mi-pham-chos-kyi-rje [G.yag-ston]

Rong~po'i-zhabs
I

[Rong-ston]

Don-yod-dpa1
I

[Shakya-] mchog-1dan-1egs-pa'i-b10

and

B1a-ma-dam-pa

"

140

Another
the gsan

PV

1i&

lineage received and transmitted by Shakya-mchog-ldan is recorded

of Zhu-chen Tshul-khrims-rin-chen (Dpal ldan,

vol.

in

1, p. 105.1 [ka

53a.l]):
The Four
Indian Panditas
I
..
Sa-skya Pandita

'u-yug-pa
I
R'19s-pa
:
'01-seng-ge

I
'Jam-skya
Nam-mkha'-dpal

DpangI lo-tsa-ba
Blo-gros-brtan-pa

I
DpalTldan-bla-ma-dam-pa Bsod-nams-rgyal-mtshan
Mkhas-pa Brtson-'grus-dpal

G.yaJ Mi-pham Chos-kyi-bla-ma

I
RongTston
Mkhas-pa Yon-tan-dpal

I
_
PaQ-Jhen Shakya-mchog-ldan

Sa-sfya'i-las-chen Ye-shes-lhun-grub
Rje-btsun Kun-dga'-grol-mchog

The same source (p.

104.2 [52b.2]) records the following lineage of Shakya-mchog-

ldan for the lung of the Pramaoasamuccaya only.

It is notable for the appearance

of Nor-bzang-dpal and his teacher Sde-bdun-pa Dpal-ldan-seng-ge.

Kha-che Pan-chen Sakya~ri

Sa-syya Pav4ita
'U-yug-pa Rig[s]-pa'i-seng-ge

Zhang Mdo-sde-dpal
I

Sde-bdun-pa Dpal-ldan-seng-ge

Mkhas-pa Nor-bzang-dpal

Mkhan-chen Brtson-'grus-dpal

G.ya~

Mi-pham Chos-kyi-bla-ma

ROngtston Shes-bya-kun-rig
Mkhas-pa Don-yod-dpal
paQ-then Shakya-mchog-ldan
Sa-skya'i-las-chen Ye-shes-lhun-grub
I

Rje-btsun Kun-dga'-grol-mchog

The

following

rather

mkhas D, p. 20b.6):

standard list is given by Ngag-dbang-chos-grags

(Bod

141

Kha-che Pan-chen [SakyasrI]

Sa-paJ}.

'u-yug-pa
I
R'19s-pa " 1-seng-ge

Zhang Mdo-sde-dpal
'JamTdbyangS-Skya-bO
Dpang lo-tsa-ba
I
Bla-ma-dam-pa [Bsod-nams-rgyal-mtshan]
I
Nya-dbon Kun-dga'-dpal

G.yag-ston
Ngag-dbang-chos-grags
generation,

states here that some of these teachers were from the

while others represent successive generations.

same

He is referring

for

instance to 'U-yug-pa and Zhang, both of whom are recorded to have been disciples
74
Zhang was apparently much younger than 'U-yug-pa.

of Sa-pa9.

The

Brtson-'grus-dpal mentioned in several lineages was a great scholar of

Sa-skya who was a contemporary of Nya-dbon Kun-dga'-dpal,

and indeed

Ngag-dbang-

chos-grags here lists the latter instead. Sometimes Nya-dbon and Brtson-'grus-dpal
are

listed

as

a pair in historical accounts,

Mkhyen-brtse'i-dbang-po (Gangs.!!!!. bod,

dang/

mkhan chen brtson 'grus dpal te mkhas

Brtson-'grus-dpal

as for instance

101 [da 51a]:

.p.!!.'!!'!!!'

G.yag-ston.

by

'Jam-dbyangs

.!!.!!!. dbon kun ~ dpal

brtson .!:.ill!!!!. gnyis)

was the senior of the two because,

Rigs gter lineage,

and

p.

Perhaps

as will be seen below in

According to the following source,

however,

in the PV lineage

both Kun-dga'-dpal and Brtson-'grus-dpal were direct teachers of G.yag-ston.

The Fifth Dalai Lama gives the main PV lineage as follows: 75

SBkyari~ )~Diinal1a

.Srupghasri

Sa-paJ}.

'U-y~g-pa
I

Rig[s]-pa'i-seng-ge

Zhang Mdo-sde-dpal
'Jam1skya Nam-mkha'-dpal

Dpan~ lo-tsa-ba Blo-gros-brtan-pa

I
Bla-ma-dam-pa Bsod-nams-rgyal-mtshan

~dbon KUn-dga'-dPal~ Mkhjs-pa Brtson-'grus-dpal

Red-mda'-ba

G.yag-pa

Tsong-~ha-pa

R~g-ston

the teacher Dkon-mchog-grags appears between Brtson-'grus-dpal

142

R&yal-tshab'!ar-ma-rin-chen

Mkhyen-rab-dbang-phyug Grags-pa-bzang-po
(=Dmar-khams-pa Grags-bzang)

A . more
76
this:

complete lineage as reconstructed from Ngag-dbang-chos-grags

looks

like

Kha-che Pan-chen

sa-pln~

Lbo-pa

kUn-mkh~'

:p-yug-pa

Zhang Mdo-sa~-dpal
I
'JamTdbyangS-Skya-bO
Dpang lo-tsa-ba
I

..........

Bla-ma-dam-pa~ ~

Khn-dga'-dpal~Lo-chen

Nya-dbon

Red-mda'-ba

G.yag-ston

Byang-chub-rtse-mo

Lo-chen Grags-pa
I

~:;l~=::::~~_&ru/Rong-\ston~en
Don-yod-dpal

Byams-chen

rab-'byamS-pa~

Phyogs-las-rnam-rgyal

Mkhyen-rab-dbang-phyug
grags-bzang

Sangs-rgyas-'phel

G;:::;::!~::=~~ ~ ~
'Jam-dbyangs-kundga' -cho\zang

pa9-~en

'Bum-phrag-

gsum-pa

Gzhung-brgya-pa

Go-rams-pa
Bsod-nams-

Lcags-thang
rab-'byams-pa

/ng-ge~
Kong-ston

Mus rab-'byams-pa

The complete PV lineage of Tsong-kha-pa is unfortunately not available from

that master's own gsan

11&.

The lineage of course originates with the Sa-skya-pa,

143

but

in

the

reprint

editions I have consulted (including the

old

Lha-sa

Zhol

xylographs) the lineage suddenly breaks off after the following:,7

Sakya~rIbhadra

Sa-paJ}.

" ,
R19s-seng
I
?

The gsan li& of Mkhas-grub-rje is available,

elsewhere: 78

but it gives a lineage not

attested

Kha-che Pan-chen

Chos-rje Sa-paJ}.

'u-rug-pa
I
R"19s-pa '"l-seng-ge
Lte-ra-ba Chos-grags
1

Bya,g-chub-dpal
Mkhjn-PO Dbang-phyug-dpal
NyaTdbon Kun-dga'-dpal
Rje-btsun Red-mda'-ba
Rintpo-che Dpal-'byor-shes-rab
[Tsong-kha-pa] Blo-bzang-grags-pa

Mkhas-grub
Other
which

did

sources record lineages that branched off from the main lineages but
not continue much beyond the 14th or

15th

centuries.

Bu-ston,

instance, received the exposition (bshad ~) of the PV in this lineage: 79

for

Pan-chen Sakyasri

'I

Chos-rje Sa-skya-pa
I
'U-yug-pa Bsod-seng
I
Khang-sten 'Od-zer-rgyal-mtshan (=Khang-ston?)
I
Slob-dpon Tshad-ma-pa [Tshad-ma'i-skyes-bu]

[Bu-ston]
:
I

i
I

The lung (reading transmission) of the PV, however, was received by Bu-ston in the
lineage of the old school of Rngog and Phywa-pa: 80
Rngog lo-tsa-ba

Khy~ng
I

Rin-chen-grags

I
I

, I

:1

1,1

144

Rgya-dmar Byang-chub-grags

Phywa-pa
Gts!ng-nag-pa
Dar1ma-bkra-shis

Gnyal-pa
I
Bo-dong-pa
"
I
Ldong-pa Grags-pa-dpal

I Grub-seng
Lho-pa

Tsh!d-ma'i-skyes-bu

I
[Bu-ston]

Another branch of the PV lineage from

Kh~Tche

Sa-pa~

is recorded by 'Gos lo-tsa-

Pa~-chen Sakyasri

Sa-pal).

'u-yug-pa
I
I

Zhang-btsun Mdo-sde-dpal

I
'Jam-dbyangs-skya-bo

Dpal-ldan-pa

I
I

'Jam-dbyangs Ston-gzhon
Nor-bzangs-dpal

I "
Grags-n.n-pa
J

'Jam-sngon-pa
.

~ChOS-Seng-b~

Rngo-thog-pa

Rgyal-lha-khang-pa Bsam-

ChOS-kYi-~_PO

grub-ye-shes
I

Slob-dpon Bsam-grub-bzang-po
Mkhan-chen Rin-po-che/
Rgyal-mtshan-bzang-po

'Gos

lo-tsa-ba reports that this lineage (which is noteworthy for the absence

both

Nya-dbon Kun-dga'-dpal and Mkhan-chen Brtson-'grus-dpal) was not to

with

and that Mkhan-chen Rgyal-mtshan-bzang-po found it through

others,
" 82
searc h1.ng.

be

of
had

zealous

145

The lineages recorded in Kong-sprul's compendium the Shes

seem to be somewhat confused regarding the earliest period.

kun

khyab

They apparently give

more details for the early generations, but later they converge with the standard
83
Another difference is that Kong-sprul adds this lineage
lineages listed above.
84
for the Dge-lugs-pa:
Sa-pal}
I
Zhang Mdo-sde-dpal
I
Mkhas-pa-nor-bzang

Nya-dbon Kun-dga'-dpal

Red,mda'-ba
Tsong-kha-pa
In addition, Kong-sprul does not single out Zhang Mdo-sde-dpal as a central transmitter
main

of the main Sa-skya-pa lineage,

disciples of Nyi-thog-pa.

but instead mentions him as one

of

four

He also seems to portray 'Jam-dbyangs-skya-bo as

the direct disciple of 'U-yug-pa as well as of Nyi-thog-pa's disciples.

Rigs gter Lineages

The
also

passed,
gsan

above Sa-skya-pa lineages for the study of the PV should be

indicating

11&

taken

the main lineages through which the exp9sition of the Rigs

at least down to G.yag-ston and Rong-ston.

of the Fifth Dalai Lama,

lung of the Rigs gter: 85

This is corroborated by

Rig[s]-pa'i-seng-ge

'u-tug-pa [sic] Mdo-sde-dpal

Bla1ma 'Jam-dbyangs-rgyal-mtshan [i.e. 'Jam-dbyangs-skya-bo?]

Dpahg lo-tsa-ba Blo-gros-brtan-pa

I
~sod-namS-rgyal-mtshan~
Mkhas-pa Brtson-'grus-dpal

Dkon-cog-Irags

G,yag-pa

~sa-bZang

L
I

Dpal-ldan-tshul-khrlms

'Phags-pa

~har-chen

Gzhon-nu-blo=gr~s ~
Sangs-rgyas-dpa~ I ~
Ngor-chen

the

where the following lineages are listed for the

Sa-pal}

'U-~ug-pa

as
gter

146

Independent of the lung lineages,

the only list of the

main teachers of the Rigs

86

gter that I have come across is given by Shakya-mchog-ldan:

[Sa-pat;t]
'U-yug-pa
Te'u-ra-pa
Mdong-ston
Nor-bzang
Nya Brtson
Dkon-grags
G.yag
Rong
The first three names after Sa-pat;t--i.e.

'U-yug-pa,

Te'u-ra-pa and

Mdong-ston--

according to some sources belong to students of Sa-pat;t who were renowned for their
87
However, as seen in the lineage recorded by Mkhas-grub-rje,

mastery of Pramat;ta.
one

of

name,

'U-yug-pa's students was a Lte-ra-ba Chos-grags.

belongs

to a subsequent generation.

mchog-ldan and also one of Kong-sprul's lists,

dpal,

though

seng-ge.
whereas
also

the

fifth
Shakya-

he was a student of Zhang Mdo-sde-

in other lists he is given as a disciple of Sde-bdun-pa

Dpal-ldan~

According to Shakya-mchog-ldan,

he was a teacher of Brtson-'grus-dpal,

88
Kong-sprul lists him as a teacher of Nya-dbon.
Ngag-dbang-chos-grags

mentions him as an important scholar in the tradition,

Nor-bzang

Nor-bzang,

According to one lineage of

but

calling him

not specifying his exact position in the lineage. 89

stands for Nya-dbon [Kun-dga'-dpal].90

Nya

Sa-skya
probably

Brtson is short for Brtson-'grus-dpal, who

as mentioned above was an important contemporary of Nya-dbon Kun-dga'-dpal.

seventh name,
91
G.yag-ston.

Dkon-grags,
The

final

The

belongs to a disciple of Nya-dbon who was a teacher of

two names--G.yag and Rong--are

the

famed

G.yag-ston

Sangs-rgyas-dpal and Rong-ston Shes-bya-kun-rig.

All the above were scholars who,

according to Shakya-mchog-ldan, did their

best

to transmit the teachings of the Rigs gter complete and intact.

were

also some commentators on the Rigs gter who,

Yet

there

while claiming to uphold

tradition, nevertheless made the Rigs gter the target for some of their
92
These cannot be counted as true transmitters of the lineage.
tions.

this

refutaIndeed,

Shakya-mchog-ldan complained bitterly that in his time (the late-15th century) the
terminology used by Tibetan dialecticians had entirely gone over to other systems,
and that there were few scholars who could separate clearly and in detail Sa-pat;t's
own views in the Rigs gter from those of the opponents,
tatives of the bsdus ~ traditions. 93

who were mainly represen-

147

Tshad ma rigs roam bshad,

lShakya-mchog-ldan,

paJ?'s treatment of mtshan nvid, mtshon

~

bod

bsdus ,m! dang mthun

p.

588.3 (regarding

Sa-

lli, and mtshan gzhi): de ltar bshad ,m! 'di

mdzad ,m! .y..!!!. la/.

2Shakya-mchog-ldan, Tshad ma'i mdo, p. 29.2.

3Bu-ston, Bde bar gshegs, pp. 1049-50, as cited by L. van der Kuijp (1983),
p.

272,

note 96.

See also S. Nishioka (1983), p. 118.

Shakya-mchog-ldan quotes

this list in ~ 10, p. 447, as also noted by van der Kuijp.

In addition,
Shakya-mchog-ldan refers to this source (though not by name) in his Tshad ma'i
mdo, p. 29.

See also below, chapter 7, note 15.

4Two or three commentaries by Rngog B10-ldan-shes-rab survive, all of which

seem to be "don bsdus ,m!s," though none is accessible to me at present.

See note

8 below.
For examples of this genre by others,
in the collected works of
(A)

Smra sgo'i

see for instance the bsdus don found

Sa-pa~:

bcad (TB no.

8)

ferred to as the Smra sgo'i gnad

In the colophon of the work,

kY!.

gnas bsdus don.

i t is

re-

See p. 117.1.4.

(B) Dri rna med pa'i bsdus don (TB no. 65B) , pp. 393.1.6-4.6.
(C) Zung

gsa1 ba'i

bcad (TB no. 66)

(D) Bshes pa' i spring ill.&i bsdus don (TB no. 114)
(The

last is a late and probably spurious accretion to Sa-pa~'s

Kawamura [1975],

pp.

96-113,

where it is treated as genuine,

works.

Cf.

L.

and Chr. Lindtner

[1982], p. 219, note 184.) On the bsdus don, see also KhJ II 4 (p. 95.1.6, tha
191a.6), where Sa-pa~ discusses two aspects of the bsdus don as applied to
teaching: (1) a brief summary of the general contents of a work, and (2) a topical
outline.
SA more detailed idea of the
pa

Prama~a texts studied in the Rngog and Phywa-

tradition down to the early-14th century can be got from Bu-ston, Bla ma dam
~,
p. 38. There it is recorded that Bu-ston himself studied the following works
in this tradition:
(1) PV (lung only)
(2) PVin
(3) Nvavabindu

r*""
I

148

(4) Hetubindu
(5) SambandhaparlkS8 with commentary
(6) Sawtanantarasiddhi
(7)

Vadanyaya

(this and the above six forming the "Tshad rna

sde

bdun"

of

DharmakIrti)
(8) Dignaga's Pramapasamuccaya
(9) Dharmottara's PVin commentary
(10) Dharmottara's Nyayabindu commentary
(11) Kamalasila's Purvapaksasawksipti on the Nyayabindu
6Such
the

work

relations

of

treatises.
the

outlines were probably first composed for the purpose of simplifying

of Tibetan teachers and students by clarifying

the

many

levels

One of the Indian

utility

the

of topics and sub-topics

pa~gitas

often

in

the

complicated
great

Indian

who visited Tibet is said to have

of such outlines and commended their use.

(Ven.

Dezhung

noticed
Rinpoche,

personal communication.)
7

Shakya-mchog-ldan,

bstan 'chos

~ .ill!!:.

rtog ge' i srol 'byed

8Ibid .,

p.

mdzad pa' i dbu tshugs.

ill rtsom

p. 29.

available then,

Tshad rna i mdo,

~

29.2:

bdag nyid chen

.QQ. ~

.!!2..

See also ibid., p. 12.7: bod.Y.!!l du

l!Y.!!!!&. ba' i thog rna.

His commentary on the Ratnagotravibhaga (RGV) was probably

for it is extant even now.

where its title is given as Theg chen

See D.

Seyfort Ruegg (1969), p. 24,

bla'i don bsdus

and it is described

as a 66-folio Lhasa [Zho1] xylograph.

L. van der Kuijp (1985c),
reported the existence of his commentary on the Abhisamaya1apkara,
as a ninety-nine folio Bkra-shis-'khyil xylograph.

pp. 49f, has

which survives

In addition, Mr. van der Kuijp

has kindly informed me that he has located a very brief bsdus don of the Mahayanasutra1aJ]lkara attributed to Rngog: Mdo sde rgyan .&Ii bsdus don, Don-grub-rgyalmtshan, ed., Legs .ill!!:. bshad ~ bka' gdams rin .QQ. che' i .&m:!!!&..&i gces b tus nor bu' i
bang mdzod (Delhi: 1985), pp. 153f.
9Shakya-mchog-1dan,

Tshad mali mdo,

quotes from the first lines of the

p. 12.6.

"ill chen."

Cf.

Here Shakya-mchog-ldan also

L.

van der Kuijp (1983),

p.

34.
lOFor

example,

his

Spring .Y.i8. bdud rtsi'i thig ~ was

Shakya-mchog-1dan wrote a commentary on it.

pa'i

bshad

available

See his Spring.Y.i8. bdud rtsi'i

bsam.Y2!!&.@. 'du'i 1jon phreng,

Collected Works,

since
thig

vol. 24, pp.

149

320.6-348.6.

See also above, note 8.

lIThe

only source recording the existence of this work is A-khu-chin Shes-

rab-rgya-mtsho' s
it

rgyun dkon .E!!.

zhig & tho ill (MHTL no.

11810).

There

is listed as tshad ma' i bsdus .E!!. kha shas.

References to Rgya-dmar-ba's interpretations on Madhyamaka and the tathaga-

tagarbha are noted by L. van der Kuijp (1983), p. 293, note 212.
12Shakya-mchog-ldan,
sro1 thog mar

Rngog 10,

p. 451.3: tshad bsdus dang I

13Ibid :

gzhung

lugs bzhi bcu tsam

..&Y.i rnam bshad mdzad.

commentaries are listed by A-khu-chin Shes-rab-rgya-mtsho.

nos.

11317~1320,

mun sel.

Some

of

his

See for instance MHTL

as listed by L. van der Kuijp (1983), p. 299, note 259.

14Shakya-mchog-ldan,
gsum mdzad E!!:.
mchog-1dan

dbu bsdus ill

~.

p. 32.7: bsdus.E!!. ~ 'bring bsdus

Tshad ma' i mdo,

pa' i nang nas 'bring.EQ. tshad ma ill. ill.!!!!ill. sel.

thus specifies that the medium-length version was the Tshad

The extensive

(~.E!!.)

tary listed as MHTL no.

(bsdus) summary.
15See above,

11804.

note 12.

Shakya~ill.ill

version would seem to have been the autocommenI have not seen any other mention of the

brief

Actually two Madhyamaka summaries, one greater and

one smaller, are attributed to him and listed as MHTL no. 11321: dbu ma'i bsdus.E!!.
che chung gnyis.
seng

tion

See also Kong-sprul, Theg

pa'i~,

p. 560.4: phywa.E!!. chos ill

dbu ma sogs la bsdus.E!!. che chung gnyis re mdzad/.

of the word bsdus

1@.

Cf.

as summaries of the whole import of the

the interpretaBuddha's

Word

and the treatises that explain that Word, quoted by Kong-sprul (ibid., p. 560.5):

.!.8..V..2l ba' i bka' dang de 'grel bstan bcos kviI I

dgongs don rna Ius legs E!!:. bsdus
bsdus

1@.

zhes su mkhas

These lines were also quoted by L.

223.

wi

mtshan du btagsll
van der Kuijp (1983),

p. 62, and p. 294, note

16Klong-rdol bla-rna, Collected Works (New Delhi), vol. 1, p. 663.2: bod

.Ph!! la sogs pa' i chos .&.!:!!. chen

ill

slob dpon cha

1@.

.!lli!Q sde pa' i .!:i8.[ s] pa' i ~ sa [read 'gros] dang s byar nasi
srol gtod 1@. nil

kha .QQ8. dkar dmar rdzas chos ldog chos gnyisll

chos seng sogs

bsdus.&.!:!!. zhes pa' i

150

~ dang mi ~ .ill dang ~ brag ~ /

I

breI dang

r jes

.!!. ~

breI tha dad tha min

ldog .!:&I.!:!. dang

~/

bras bu

~/

snga bcan bar bcan .Jill.!!. bcan mtshan mtshon ~ /

.Im!. rtogs med rtogs dngos rtogs

zhes

bsdus

tshan

~/

bco brgyad du byed .M dang/

brtsis pa I i stag tshang .!J!. ba stod pa I i bla

.M dam

chos.!:ill!!!!..!:&ill ~

chen mchog lha

bcu bzhi

phan .y.!!!. gser

btsan..P.Q..!!&M dbang 'phrin las lhun grub la

bzhag gnang ba da Ita btsan ..P.Q. bsdus

~ ~.M

khang

l!!:ill

sogs la bsdus tshan nyer .&ill..9!.

byed.M &I ..
I am not sure how the number of eighteen is arrived at regarding the topics
On this passage, cf. L. van der Kuijp (1983), p.

enumerated in the above verses.

294, note 220.
On
I

the

phrin-las ,

another

bsdus grwa tradition of Phywa-pa,

see also

Dung-dkar

Blo-bzang-

p. 379, note 350, and Rta-mgrin-rgyal, Bod du tshad ma'i, p. 69.

recent history of Tibetan Prama~a,

see Tshul-khrims-bskal-bzang,

For
Tshad

rna 'i. 10 .!:&Iill!..

17Shakya-mchog-ldan,
gzhag

~.M

de .M!! lli!!&/ .

Rngog 10,

p.

451.4: khyad ~ mtshon sbyor .8.Yi.!:ill!!!!.

Here mtshon sbyor should perhaps be understood

mtshan mtshon gzhi gsum .8.Yi sbyor ba.

logy in his Tshad ma rigs dgongs,

as

Shakya-mchog-ldan uses the former terminovol.

10, p. 270.5.

L. van der Kuijp (1983),

pp. 65-68, discusses Phywa-pa's role in this area and also cites the just-mentioned
passage.
18The
by Th.
222.
skya-pa

attribution of this method of exposition to Phywa-pa was first

Stcherbatsky (1930-32),

vol. 1, p. 58.

made

See also E. Obermiller (1934), p.

L. van der Kuijp (1983), p. 62, asserts that this method was adopted by Sascholiasts only in the 14th century.

This style of exposition was

known as thaI 'phreng ("a string of consequences").

also

Go-rams-pa, Sde bdun, p. 665

(kha 141a), criticizes some aspects of his contemporaries' use of thaI and phyir.
19Bsdus .!J!. textbooks too are a type of obligatory manual (liK cha).
20MHTL no. 11811.
21 Dan-'bag-pa

criticized Phywa-pa extensively on certain points (e.g.

garding dus rdul phran thug med),

impression on 'Gos lo-tsa-ba.

re-

but this does not seem to have made a favorable

See the latter's Deb ther,

p.

298.12 (G. Roerich

151

tr. [1976], p. 334).

Cf. RTRG, p. 171.4.2; L. van der Kuijp (1983), p. 70.

Shakya-mchog-1dan evidently had access to Dan-'bag-pa's work, and he refers

to it quite a few times.
220n Rma-bya-ba,
Williams (1985).

See L. van der Kuijp (1983), p. 96.

see D.

Seyfort Ruegg (1983),

p.

230,

note 68,

and P.

For some additional references to the Rma-bya-ba(s), see below,

KhJ III translation, note 158.

23 See MHTL no. 11330.
24MHTL nos. 11324, 11325.
25Shakya-mchog-1dan, Rngog 10, p. 453.2.
26Shakya-mchog-1dan,
mdzod

dang I

~ 'khor, p. 469.3: ~.I.!:!8..ill!.!ill!!!!. bshad rigs

Chos

~ rnam bshad.&Ii thog

gragsl.
Shakya-mchog-1dan
seems to indicate that this Summary too
belonged to the tradition of the PV (~ 'gre1 ~, which would place it within
the Prama~a tradition of Sa-pa~.

bsdus.ill!. rigs sgrub mdzadl .!:ill!!!!. , gre1 lugs

~~

270n Rnam-rgya1-rdo-rje,

see also G.

Roerich (1976), pp. 790-792, and J.

Naudou (1980), p. 256.

28That

Summaries

(bsdus.ill!,) continued ,to be studied in the

century seminaries is indicated by Shakya-mchog-1dan,

Chos

kI!

great

'khor,

p.

14th469.6,

where he speaks of the "tradition of the Summary" (bsdus pa'i srol) as having been
followed in many seminaries in accordance with the Rigs gter.
reference

to a bsdus grwa or bsdus

mastered a

Prama~a

class.

Summary as a student.

Elsewhere Shakya-mchog-ldan

the

terminology employed in them as bsdus skad.

.21. med col chung khyed

!!&.

Bu-ston

See D. Seyfort Ruegg (1966), p. 71, note

4.

~~~, p. 167.3:

This is probably a

It is also recorded that

refers to such classes as the bsdus~,

See his Rang lugs

and to

~~

gzhi

J!JJ I

bsdus ra'i bsdus skad de 'dra nail

lung ra' i lung chos ci
rigs ra' i rigs

de ltar

shesl I

wi

Shakya-mchog-ldan, Mkhas.ill!., p. 99.4, also mentions later Tibetan followers of the

bsdus .l@ tradition who were critical of the Rigs gter:

tshad ma'i ~ ni tshad

bsdus ~ las ~ ba ~ ches zhib dng ~ .ill!. !ill!!!!. ~ ~ lal

rigs pa' i

152

gter

ni

ches shin tu rtsing

tshad ldan

kyang ma

sgra j i bzhin .lli!!. skyong mi

~ .!!&Q. ~

slob .!:.&y!&

!!.!:!. ~

mosl.

L. van der Kuijp (1983), p. 294, note 220, believes that the attribution of
the bsdus grwa textbooks to Phywa-pa as suggested by A. Vostrikov (1935-37), pp.
60f, and supported by G. Tucci (1949), p. 137, cannot be substantiated. On the
contrary, it is very likely that the bsdus grwa began as a class in which the
bsdus ~ textbooks were studied, and that these textbooks had a continuous
lopment down to the present. See also above, note 16.
29

Klong-rdol bla-ma,

Collected Works (Mussoorie,

1963),

deve-

part~,

p. 263,

classified the Rigs gter as one of Sa-pal}Is "three treasures" (gter gsum),

though

as mentioned above this classification was not known in the Sa-skya-pa

It

was

tradition.

usually classed by Sa-skya-pas with the Sdom gswn rab dbye and Thub

pa'i

dgongs gsal (and sometimes the Legs bshad) as one of three essential treatises

of

their order.
30

Sa-pal}

described

this treatise as a destroyer of bad

eliminator of the bad tradition of previous Tibetan

teachers.

dialectics,
RT,

p.

the

167.1.2:

rtog ~ ngan I joms bstan bcos chen 2. 'di byas sol I.

See also ibid., p. 167.1.3:
rgan po I i lugs ngan dor ~ ngas Iiii bshadl I.
And in the RTRG, p. 167.4.2: ..I!!!!8..

pa I i shes ~ la rigs .lli!!. smra bar khas I che ba rnams kyang .!.2..&. .lli!!. rtog ~ du
ma mthong bas de sun dbyung ba dang E!!!&.~ pa'i don gtan la dbab pa'i phyir 'di

brtsam moll.
31Shakya-mchog-ldan,

Tshad mali mdo, p. 39.4: mdo sems

bzhag nas ?sdus pa'i srol thog mar

32See

above,

note

16,

treated by Phywa-pa are listed.

where

the

where

some of the categories said to

See also Shakya-mchog-ldan,

following subjects are enumerated: gzhan sel dangl

mtshan mtshon.&Vi.!ill!!!!

Mkhas
~

sogs Igrel mdzad gzhan la !!!!! ..@.8.]!!f}

.!:ill!!!! ~ kyis rtsal thon du mdzad ~ Yl!Y .

For more details on Phywa-pa's theories,

71-84.

ill gzhung thad

..!:.

ba ni tshad ma rigs pa'i gter

see L.

have
p.

~,

'brel

been
96,

dangl

rang kho na Ii

van der Kuijp (1983), pp.

This is the text and translation of Shakya-mchog-ldan, Tshad mali mdo, pp.

33-38.
There

is

also said to have been a thirteen-chapter division of

gter maintained by Sa-paQIs student Ldong-ston.

mdo ....!:ill!!!! bshad, p. 14.5 (7b.5).

See Glo-bo mkhan-chen,

the
Sde

Rigs

.M!ill.

153

33 Sa-pa~

also quotes or refers to the views of Prajnakaragupta

and

other

commentators a few times.

See e.g. RTRG, pp. 199.4.6, 221.3.5, and 221.4.4.
latter two passages have been discussed by L. van der Kuijp (1983), pp. 6f.
34 Sa-pa~
This

Prama~a.

cussed

seems

to

have composed or at least envisaged a

third

work

is indicated by a passage in his RTRG where he says that he

two of the jatis (ltag chod) elsewhere in detail (p.

259.3.3):

The

rab

on
disbyed

dang mtshungs ~ dang dus las 'das ~ mtshungs pa Ii dbye ba mang ..P.Q. zhig..Y9..!!. mod
!:JjJ .vi ~ mangs kyis dogs .EM rna bris!!!QQ/ kho bos gzhan du bshad .E!!!:. bIta bar
~/.
Almost nothing else is known about the work referred to. Glo-bo mkhanchen refers to it in his Sde bdun mdo rnam bshad, p. 392.6 (196b.6), where he
mentions that this work was said to exist in early annotations (mchan rnying) but
that it was not available in his time and should therefore be searched for.
There are several other mysterious citations of unknown works in his writings.
35KhJ III 4-10. See RT, pp. 165.4.5-166.1.1; 166.2.3-5.
36KhJ III 68.

the

See RTRG , p. 264 1

1

37As mentioned above, Shakya-mchog-ldan, Chos lYi 'khor, p. 467.1, grouped

KhJ together with the Sdom gsum rab dbye and Phyogs bcu'i as one of Sa-pa~Is

three major polemical works.

Chos lYi 'khor,

38Shakya-mchog-ldan,

p.

ding sang ~ 'grel .&.vi

470.2:

~ .!:&Y!:!!!. sa skya ~ las rna .!:&y!& [sic] ~ ~ .Y.!!!!8. med

w.

39Shakya-mchog-ldan, Tshad mali mdo, p. 39.3: ~ 'grel la ~ bcos dang

nyin

la tha nalang chos thun re re.&.!!!!.8. bali dam bca ' mdzad/.

mkhan-chen,

KhJNSh,

p.

35.4 (18a. 4 ) :

chags m!E. mdzad pa Ii dam bca I mdzad

40The
rigs dgongs,

Rigs
vol.

~rel &Yi 'grel~,

sgrub
9,
f.

is

chos mthun [read:

See also Glo-bo

thun] ~ nyin bzhin rna

also

p. 277.7.
398b.S (vol.

mentioned

by

Shakya-mchog-ldan,

Tshad

IU-yug-pa in his PV commentary, Tshad ~ ~

2,

(though here the spelling is rigs grub):

.&.tan la phab zin .EM

p.

396.2),

himself mentions the

work

~ ~ thams cad ni rigs ~ grub .E!!!:.

41Shakya-mchog-ldan, Chos lYi 'khor, p. 469.3: khyad .E!!!:. sde snod dang ~
~rel &Yi bshad .!:&I!:!!!. Idzin ~ lal ~'y!!&'.EM rnam bshad rigs mdzod dangl
bsdus

'"I

154

sgrub mdzad! .!.ill!!! , grel lugs ill !:ill!!!!. bshad ill thog ~ lli..m!!:. ~
ba byams mgon dang! ldong'ston shes rab dpal dang! dkar shakya ~ dang/

R.!!. rigs
~!:!!.

shar R.!!. shes rab ~ gnas! nags.ill!!:!&. R.!!. shes rab ~ ~ dang! lho R.!!. 19m.
mkhyen la sogs dngos ill slob ~!:lli!!!!. 'grel mkhas .m!!:. mkhyen R.!!. ~ lli. zhes .8!:.28!.

phyis ni

dpal!

!:&y!!.

.!!2!. ~ gsuro dang! .!!E!. dar ~ rin chen! .!!E!. dbon .Q. kun .!!sa'

mkhas pa'i dbang .Q.

R.!!. ~ ni mtshon R.!!. tsam

!!l2.J.

gzhon gnyis

42Ibid , p. 469.6: .!:!!!!!!.

gter !tar 'dzin pa'i bshad grwa.

.!!.Vi zla ltar grags R.!!. byon

~!:!d

'grel.&.Vi!..ill!!!!. bshad

~ lugs dang bsdus

R.!!. rigs

43See A. Ferrari (1958), pp. 67, 156.

44 A

Ferrari (1958),

p.

153, note 536: "It was founded in 1225 by the Sa

skya pa teacher sTag rtse la rgyab pa SBkya sen ge and was restored in
Ta'i dben Blo gros rgyal mtshan (b. 1332); Re'u.!!!i&., pp. 59, 60."
45He

was

perhaps a disciple of

1354

'Jam-dbyangs-don-yod-rgyal-mtshan

by

(1310-

See Ngor-chen, Thob liK, p. 77.3.3.

1344).

46See

Bo-dong paJ}.-chen Phyogs-las-rnam-rgyal,

Gsang 'dus lung

rigs,

pp.

468-470.
47A
rtse,

Ferrari (1958), p. 142, n. 417: "founded by the first prince of rGyal

'Phags pa dpal bzang po (born 1318) [Tucci,

Indo Tibetica] IV,

1, p. 14."

But in Tucci (1949), p. 664, the date of its founding is given as 1366-71.

'Dzam-

thang bla-ma, pp. 38b.7-39b.2, supplies the dates 1285-1379 for Nya-dbon Kun-dga'dpal.
The death date seems reasonable, but both will need further verification
for the birth date makes him twel1ty-seven years older than his teacher Bla-ma-dampa Bsod-nams-rgyal-mtshan.
48Shakya-mchog-ldan,

Chos

ill.

'khor,

p.

452.6, identifies the founder as

'Jam-dbyangs Shakya-gzhon-nu's disciple Ka-bzhi-rkang-cig (fl. mid-13th c.).

was not Byang-chub-dpal-bzang-po the disciple of Kha-che
Spos-khang in 1213.
On the latter see A. Ferrari (1958),

This

who founded
142, note 422. A

Pa~-chen

p.

Byang-chub-dpal who flourished from the late-13th to early-14th centuries appears

in Mkhas-grub-rje's PV lineage. See below, note 78 and chart.

155

49Tucci (1949),
Rgyal-rtse in c.

p. 665.

The same ruler founded the Dpal-'khor-chos-sde of

1418, and the Sku-'bum there in 1427.

See A. Ferrari (1958), p.

141, note 413.

50According

to A.

Ferrari (1958),

p.

162,

note 631,

Sems-dpa'-chen-po

Gzhon-nu-rgyal-mchog (1311-1390) was its spiritual founder in 1367.

51Shakya-mchog-ldan, Chos ~ 'khor, p. 470.3.
299.1

(G.

Roerich tr.

[1976],

p.

335).

See also 'Gos lo-tsa-ba, p.

For a list of works studied in

this

tradition in the early-14th century, see above, note 5.

520n Gsang-phu Ne'u-thog, see A. Ferrari (1958), p. 165, note 672. In
addition, accounts of the monastery's abbatial succession are found for instance
in Tshal-pa Kun-dga'-rdo-rje, Deb ther dmar ~, chapter 20 (Beijing, 1981, pp. 6873); Shakya-mchog-ldan, Rngog 10; 'Gos lo-tsa-ba, Deb ther sngon ~; and Sde-srid
Sangs-rgyas-rgya-mtsho,
independent manuscript
library.

Vaidurya ~~.
Mr. S. Onoda also informs me that an
Gsang phu'i gdan rabs survives in the Otani University

53Shakya-mchog-ldan,

Rngog 10,

p.

452.2, states that this was founded by

Mnyal-zhig's disciple Rgya-ston Phying-ru-ba.

have been 1205.
54The

The year of its founding is said to

See A. Ferrari (1958), p. 165, note 668.

seminary

here was founded by 'Jam-dbyangs Shakya-gzhon-nu and

Tshal-pa nobleman Dga'-bde.

See Shakya-mchog-ldan,

Rngog 10,

p.

the

452.4, and A.

Ferrari (1958), p. 106.

founded

55The seminary for the study of Prajnaparamita and PramaQa at Khro-phu was
by Mnyal-pa Dad-pa-bzang-po's disciple Bzang-ring Dar-ma-tshul-khrims.

See Shakya-mchog-ldan, ~ 10, p. 452.1.

56According to Shakya-mchog-ldan, ibid., p. 453.6, the teaching lineage of
Prama~a at Snar~thang was founded by Phywa-pa's student Bru-sha Bsod-nams-seng-ge.
57

According to Shakya-mchog-ldan, ibid., the PramaQa lineage at Zhwa-lu

came there from Khro-phu, and thus it goes back to Mnyal-zhig. This is confirmed
by Bu-ston's lineage, on which see his Bla ma, p. 38.6.
58Th1S
, temple seems to have been 1ocate d in t he upper Nyang valley.

156

59

.
Shakya-mchog-ldan,

Chos ill 'khor, p. 470.3: ~ 'grel .&Ii ~ bshad

.&.!!!!!!8. brgyud zhal ngos mdzad .ill!. ni ill bla .!!!!! dam ~ rnam bshad ~.ill!. dang/
theg chen chos ill.!:.&lli.P.Q.. bsdus .ill!. zhig mdzad/ ~' grel.&Ii gzhung skyur

l!!!Y
~

sngon

da lta'i bar du

.lli!..

ill mdzad

skya'i tshogs las mang ba

~.!!!!!

myong

pa'i dus der tshig rkang .ill!. phyed ~ tsam las .!!!!! thob .ill!. byung

la/
zhes

.8!M.&.Q/
Other

teachers from the 'Khon family,

the Gzhi-thog bla-brang,

such as some of the main masters of

taught the Rigs gter at Sa-skya during the late-14th and

early-15th century.
60Shakya-mchog-ldan,
,
Dka , ~,
p. 443.5:
de .Ii legs bshad .!!Q!. bu gjJ /
~

'dir skal ba dman .ill!. la/ /

can .!!Q!. mtsho' i gting zhig

.Y!!!!. rings

de

.lli!..

ill cing nub

sangs

lli!!:.

!:JY /

2.YJJ!..! /

bstan pa' i dpal/ /

ded dpon mkhas .ill!. ~ med ~ /

~

bshad dang ni [p. 444] phrin las

.!:.&lli mtshan rtse

.!!!Q!..

bkod de' 0/ /

61ShSkya-mchog-ldan, Chos

lliI /

ill 'khor, p. 470.7.

62This is Rnam-rgyal Thub-bstan-dar-rgyas-gling.

On the conflicting tradi-

tions of its establishment, see D. Jackson (1984), p. 42, note 6.

63Shakya-mchog-ldan, Chos
64Ibid .,

ill 'khor, p. 471.2.

p. 471.4: ill!. lendra btab nas 10 .ill shu rtsa lnga .ill!. me mo

:t2..

la

'bras ill du bshad pa'i grwa btsugs. According to A. Ferrari (1958), p. 163, note
635, Skyed-mo-tshal in 'Bras-yul was founded by Byams-chen rab-'byams-pa Sangsrgyas.....;'phel in 1447.

The Rin-spungs-pa ruler Nor-bu-bzang-po was said by

Shakya-

mchog-ldan to be the patron of the founding of the seminary (bshad grwa) there.
65Ibid ., p. 471.5: me mo khyi lola .& bo rab 'byams ~ rta m!8. gser gling
du

bshad grwa btsugs.

The date 1478 is found in the Re'u .!!!i8. of Sum-pa mkhan-po

for the founding of Rta-nag Thub-bstan-rnam-rgyal by Go-bo rab-'byams-pa.

Ferrari (1958),

p.

158.

See A.

L. van der Kuijp (1983), pp. 120f, gives the year 1472

for the founding of Rta-nag Thub-bstan-rnam-rgyal.

157

:i
~

"

66Rta-nag mkhan-po Chos-rnam-rgyal (1 17th c.), Bstan lli!. dang bstan 'dzin,
ff. 90b-91b:

!!!2,Q. sngags

.P!!ti:.

las [91a] dang po'i srol 'byed ill. gtso bo.&...!..Y!&. rong I!Jlll./

gnyis

~ .ill!. lendra' am bod skad du rgyun

btab/

bshad!'&y!!!!''!:&y!!' cher mdzad

de ' i

ill

dbang .PQ. zhes ~ lli!:!&.

slob ~.!!.Q!:. 'dzin

ill

1M

byams

chen

ill!!!!.

rab' byams lli!. sangs

.!:&I!!...

de'i gdan sa lli!. 'jam dbyangs chos

.I9.!!.

chen .!!!Q.

sod chen ~ bskyangs/

btab/
rong ston don

khang

rdul ~ byung ~

nang ill!. ~ [=smar] khams lli!. ~ lli!. bzang .P.Q.. grwa tshang

de' i gdan g

btab/

.ill!.

ill[ s]

dpal

.!:.k.

ill

'phel ~ 'bras

kun ~ chos bzang

~ mo lung

skyed

ili

tshal

I'

bskyang/

.&i chos sde btab/ de' i gdan sa

chen shakya mchog ldan ~ mdzad ill!. dgon lli!. thub bstan gser mdog .!!!!. du bsgyur/
rong

ston dang byams chen rab 'byams lli!. gnyis char

ill

slob ma

.&Q. ~

bstan

ill ~ thog !!!!!!. skyed tshal ill ~ 'chad mdzad/ phyis thub bstan!.ill!!!!.

pa'i

!&Y&

.ill!!..

ba' i dgon lli!. btab/

de'i

slob ~ ~ rab 'byams lli!. thugs

.!:.k.

dpal bzang

ili

thub bstan ~ lli!.

Em. ~ [sic] dgon lli!. btab/

'bum ~ lli!. byams lli!. chos don 'grub ill.[s] E@ rgod gshong btab/
gzhung ~ lli!. don [sic] grub dpal 'bar .&Ii. chos 'khor lhun .PQ. btab/
mnga' ris lli!. lha dbang blo gros kyis gzha' ri bskyid [sic] 'tshal btab/
stag

[91 b]

.Ph!J!.&. kun

~ d pal 'byor .&Ii.!!!. ba smad .&Q. ~ chen po' i

gros su bsgyur/
shes

.&r2.!!&. ~

chen blo gros chos

.ill !:&Y&.P.Q.. rdo

phud chos

'khor

bka '
gnas

dang/ dags .PQ. grwa tshang de'i bka' srol du bsgyur/

zi bka' bcu lli!. shakya blo gros kyis !.ill!!!!. .!..&.Y& gser khang

.l@

.stsugs te

.l@

&. grwa tshang

zi grwa tshang du ~ Sd

Cf. L. van der Kuijp (1983), p. 121.

major

67Shakya-mchog-ldan,

lli

68As

note 42,

quoted above,

seminaries

btsun thams, p. 309.4.

Snakya-mchog-ldan mentions that many of

maintained the study or class of the "Summaries" in

the

accordance

with the Rigs gter.

69Shakya-mchog-ldan,

Mkhas lli!., p. 99.3: gzhan

rnams las ~ ba ~ ches zhib cing ~

!!i

shin tu rtsings

k yang

.!!@.

.!lli!.!!&. .!!82.

.ill!.

.i!. bzhin
!!!QQ/

sgra

zhes ~

.ill!. ~

pa'i bshes gnyen chos

.ill!!.. ~ la/

skyong mi ~ ~ slob

.E8Y!&

rigs pa' i
tshad ldan

gter
~

158

70 Ibid ., p. 100.2.
71ShBkya-mchog-ldan,

Dka' 'grel, p. 443, implies as much through his meta-

phor

of G.yag-ston as a skillful and fearless boat captain who recovers the long-

lost

jewel (of the Sa-skya and Rngog

Prama~a

traditions) from its concealment

in

the bed of a jewel-lake.

See above, note 60. The key line is .I!!!!. rings J@Q, cing
nub ~~, which indicates that the tradition was in decline for a long time-if this is not mere poetical fancy. Dr. L. van der Kuijp has also suggested to me
that G.yag-ston's activities may have been meant to counter the criticisms of the
Rigs gter by Bo-dong Pa~-chen Phyogs-las-rnam-rgyal (1375-1451).
72Zhu-chen Tshul-khrims-rin-chen in his gsan liK lists these eighteen,

and

states that this enumeration became established in the time of G.yag-ston and Redmda'-ba at such places as Sa-skya and Ngam-ring. The eighteen are:
[Three treatises on PramaQa]
1. Tshad ma'i mdo

(Prama~asamuccaya)

2. Tshad ma rnam 'grel

3. Tshad ma rnam nges

(Prama~avarttika)
(Prama~avini~caya)

[Two Vinaya texts]

4. 'Dul ba mdo
5. 'Dul ba mdo rtsa
[Two Abhidharma treatises]
6. Mngon pa kun las bus pa (Abhidharmasamuccaya)
7. Mngon pa mdzod (Abhidharmakosa)
[The five "Dharmas of Maitreya"]
8. Mngon rtogs rgyan (Abhisamayal~ara)
9. Mdo sde rgyan (Mahayanasutral~ara)
10. Dbu mtha' rnam 'byed (Madhyantavibhaga)
11. Chos nyid rnam 'byed (Dharmadharmavibhaga)
12. Rgyud bla ma (Ratnagotravibhanga)
[Prajfiaparamita]
13. Phar phyin
[Three Madhyamaka treatises]
14. Dbu ma rtsa ba shes rab (Mulamadhyamakakarikas)
15. Dbu ma la 'jug pa (Madhyamakavatara)
16. Dbu ma bzhi brgya pa (Catu9sataka)
[Two treatises of

Sa-pa~]

17. Rigs gter

18. Sdom gsum rab dbye

159

See Zhu-chen, Dpal ldan, vol. 1 , pp. 103.5-104.1 ~ 52a-b): ill btsun .!!. skya
'dzin kun mkhyen ~ ~ sangs ~ dpal dangl red mda' ba gzhon .!!!!.

.2!L!. ~

dpal .!!!&..8!. skabs

~ .!!.

ill !!!!!!!!. gzhag mdzad

sky a dang ngam ring sogs

~.E2. ti ~

chen

bco

brgyad

tshad mdo .!:ill!!!!. 'grel.!:ill!!!!. nges tshad ma' i skor II

'dul ba mdo dang mdo ~ 'dul bali skorll

kun las btus dang mdzod gnyis mngon pari skorll

byams chos lnga dang phar ph yin dbu ma Y!/I
rtsa ~ bzhi gsum ches zab dbu rna'i skorl/

sde bdun mdo bcas dgongs 'grel

illW gter

dangll

sde snod !.8I!& sde kun 'grel sdom gsum ili/I

.P!! t i grags ~ bco brgyad zhes ~ gragsll

73

Glo-bo mkhan-chen, Sde bdun ~ bar mkho, p. 63.3 (3a.3):

gzhung de nyid la'ang dpal ldan

.!!.

skya' pauditas [sic]11

wi

rigs tshul gsal bar !!l!..Y2.!!. ldan ~ .I!!&.

rigs pa' i seng ~ rigs .p!!. grub .p!!. dangll
rong ~ chen .Q.. rigs pa' i snang ba dang!1
kun mkhyen lho
don

.p!!.

sde bdun gsal ba

'grel byed rmad

~.!:.!!!!!!!.

~I

gsum E..v!m&/!

sngon .8.Y.!. mkhas .p!!..E!ti!. ~ stag rdor dangl!

~ ~ gsar .!!!!!. dpal ldan seng ~ dangl!
jQ btsun ~ .!:&Y!!l mkhas mchog .!!.Q!:. bzang dpalll
mtshungs med blo gros gsal ldan gnas drug pa'i/!
bshad dang bcas tshig .&i 'grel ~ drug!1
tshig don nyams ~ med pa' i .!:.!!!!!!!. 'grel YlIY I
first three (one can assume that Ldong-ston is meant instead

The
since

her~

what is needed is a student of

Nor-bzang-dpal
mkhan-chen
YUg-pa,

are

Sa-pa~)

of

Rong-ston,

as well as Dpal-ldan-seng-ge and

known from the standard sources and

lineage

lists.

Glo-bo

in his Rigs gter commentary Sde bdun mdo ~ bshad quotes from

Ldong-ston and Lho-pa.

In a recent bibliographical list,

'U-

Phyogs-glang-

gsar-rna is asserted, 'perhaps erroneously, to have written a Rigs gter commentary.

See D. Jackson (1983a), pp. 8f.
references to other studies of Zhang Mdo-sde-dpal with Sa-pa~ see
Thob.I!B., pp. 49.4.2, 61.1.3, and 84.4.4. 'Jam-dbyangs-skya-bo is
Zhang's disciple also in these minor Tantric lineages.
Ngor-chen,

160

75Dalai bla-ma V Ngag-dbang-blo-bzang-rgya-mtsho, Zab~, vol. 1, pp. 37.538.4 (ka 19a.5-19b.4).

It is strange that the Fifth Dalai Lama here ascribed to
this same lineage also the origin of his bsdus grwa tradition, though he does
acknowledge

that

the

latter tradition spread from the time of such

Phywa-pa and Gtsang-nag-pa.

76

masters

as

See ibid., p. 36.5 (ka 18b.5).

Ngag-dbang-chos-grags, Bod !Ii mkhas (D), pp. 20b.6ff.

77peking Tibetan Tripi~ika,

vol.

Delhi: 1979), vol. ka, p. 286.4 (gsan

11&,

153,

p.

158.5.3;

Collected Works (New

p. 28b.4); (New Delhi, Gurudeva, 1978),

p. 283.2.
78Mkhas-grub-rje, Mkhas grub thams, pp. 40f (4b.6-5a.l).
79Bu-ston, -.J!.
BI
80Ibid .,
~~,

p.

~..l!!!!.~,

38.6.

4
p. 39

Cf. the 'Jam-skya lineage, p. 56.3.

Cf. the PVin lineage given in Shakya-mchog-Idan, Tshad

pp. 79-80:
Rngog lo-tsa-ba
I

Khyung-phrug Rin-chen-grags
I
Phywa-pa

Gtsang-nag-pa
I
Gnyal-zhig Jo-nam

Mkhas-pa 'Od-zer-mgon
,Jamldbyangs Shak-gzhon

G.yag-sde Pa9-chen
Rin-Jhen-tshul-khrims

I
Sangs-rgyas-chos-skyong

[Sha~ya-]

mchog-Idan-Iegs-pa'i-blo

81'Gos lo-tsa-ba, p. 308 (cha 9b), and G. Roerich tr. (1976), p. 346.
82Ibid .: 'di ~ 'grel gzhan rnams la mi snang basi
~

mtshan bzang

EQ.

'bad

chen

EQ.

btsal bas rnyed

mkhan chen rin

J2..Q.

che

.vi!!. .8..!!!!&. ste/.

83

Kong-sprul, Theg pa'i~, pp. 561f (~203b). Here Kong-sprul seems to

say that Shar-pa Shes-rab-'byung-gnas, (Shar-pa) Rdo-rje-'od-zer, Nub-pa 'U-yug-pa
Rig[s]-pa'i-seng-ge, Gung-pa Skyo-ston-dri-med, and ('U-yug-pa's nephew) Nyi-thogpa Sangs-rgyas-kun-smon were all noteworthy immediate disciples of Sa-pa9 in

161

PramsQa,

and that the latter had four chief disciples:

mtshan,

Gnyan Dar-ma-seng-ge,

grags-pa.

But

disciples who
brgyud 'dzin).

all
were

Zhang Mdo-sde-dpa1,

Khang-ston 'Od-zer-rgya1-

and Zur-khang-pa Dkar Shskya-

nine of these are traditionally listed together as

"the upholders of the lineages of

On the lineage see also L.

exposition"

van der Kuijp (1983),

Sa-paQ's

(bshad

pa'i

p. 118, and on

the classification of his disciples see ibid., pp. 107ff.

84Kong-spru1,

Theg

p. 562

pa'i~,

See also L. van der Kuijp

(~204a).

(1983), p. 314, note 359.

85Da1ai b1a-rna V Ngag-dbang-b1a-bzang-rgya-mtsho, Zab~, vol. 2, p. 131.4

66a.4).
A somewhat different record is preserved in Gong-dkar 'Phrin-1as-

rnam-rgya1's gsan ill:

Thob ill bum

rang 'gre1 chos .!:.k .&..!.B!&. ~

ill!.

bzang

f.

QQ.,

221b (=da 17b.1): rigs gter

brgyud ~ bshad .ill!. dang bcas pa' i brgyud ~

'Jam-dbyangs Sa PaQ4ita Chen-po

,u-yug-p~s-pa'i-seng-ge ~lags-pa

'U-yug-pa Mdo-sde-dpa1
Gu-ru

'J~m-dpa1-rgya1-mtshan
I _

Pang IO-rSa-ba Blo-gros-brtan-pa

Zhang Dkon-mchog-dpa1

Brjg-PhUg-pa

B1a-ma-dam-pa Bsod-nams-rgya1-mtshan

Brtson-'grus-dpa1

Sa-bzang

'Ph~-pa
\

Dpa1-1dan-tshu1-khrims

D~n-mChOg-grags s~-pa
I
__ .,

Ye-shesyya1-mtshan

""
Buddhashrf

i
I

Mkhal-chen sangs-rgyaS-d~
B1a- a Kun-dga'-bzang-po

B1a-ja Shes-rab-dpa1-1dan
Rje-btsun Thams-cad-mkhyen-pa-chen-po (=Gong-dkar-rdo-rje-gdan-pa)
Another

somewhat differing lineage preserved within the Ngor-pa school

listed by Zhu-chen, Dpa1 1dan, vol. 1, p. 106.2

is

53b.2):

sa-paQ~

'PhagS-pa~
I

'U-yug-pa

162

I
,
Na-1za' Brag-phug-pa

I
,
'Jamlskya Nam-mkha'-dpal-ldan

Zhang Dkon-mchog-dpal

Zhang Mdo-sde-dpal

'J~-dbyangs Don-yod-rgyal-mtshan Dpal,ldan Blo-gros-brtan-pa

Slob-dpon 'Dul-'dzin-pa
Bla-ma-dam-pa Bsod-nams-rgyal-mtshan
Cho!-rje Byang-chub-seng-ge
Dpal1ldan-tshul-khrims

~Shar-chen Ye-shes-rgyal-mtshan
/
I

Ngor-chjn Kun-dga'-bzang-po

86Shakya-mchog-ldan, Mkhas ~, p. 100.2.

87

See above,

note 41.

Mdong-ston (also spelled Ldong-ston) Shes-rab-dpa1-

bzang-po was one of a group of thirteen senior disciples who had taken
from Sa-paQ.

ordination

(This group also included Zhang Mdo-sde-dpal, though the latter also

appears in a group of nine disciples who upheld the lineages of explication.

L.

van der Kuijp [1983], pp. 107f.)

'Jigs-byed lineage,

See

Mdong-ston was also active in transmitting a

receiving it from Sa-paQ and bestowing it on 'Phags-pa.

See

Ngor-chen, Thob .I!&" p. 48.3.2.

Te'u-ra-pa (also spelled Te-ra-pa) Byams-pa-mgon-po was one of four of Sapa~'s
~

closest disciples who were both learned and reverend (mkhas btsun &Ii thugs
bzhi).
88But in the lineage presented by 'Gos lo-tsa-ba (see below),

intervene between 'Jam-dbyangs-skya-bo and him.

Shakya-mchog-ldan, Chos
89

'khor, p. 469.5.

Ngag-dbang-chos-grags,

Bod

two teachers

Nor-bzang was also alluded to in

See above, note 41.

mkhas

(Thimphu

edition),

p.

258.4

(130b.4)
90But ShBkya-mchog-ldan,

Chos ~ khor,

p.

469.5, lists also Dar-ma-rin-

chen (Nya-dbon's uncle) as a great scholar of PramaQa.

91Dalai bla-ma V Ngag-dbang-blo-bzang-rgya-mtsho,
(kha

66a.6).

Zab~, vol. 2, p. 131

Could he be the Bzang-ldan-pa Dkon-mchog-grags-bzang who

tioned in Ngag-dbang-chos-grags,

Bod.ill mkhas (Thimphu), p. 258.4?

passage from the Fifth Dalai Lama's gsan .I!&, cited above, n. 85.

is men-

See also the

163

92ShBkya-mchog-ldan, Mkhas ~ p. 100.1.

This would seem to refer to the
Rigs gter commentary by Rgyal-tshab Dar-ma-rin-chen, which is n@t included in his
accessible collected works.
The work does seem to survive in Leningrad as it was
used by Th. Stcherbatsky. See above, chapter 2, section (3).
93Ibid .,
because

this

Nevertheless,
trace

p. 96.4.
was

The second complaint must be taken with a grain of salt

a very active period of Sa-skya-pa exegesis

and

scholarship.

Shakya-mchog-ldan was indeed one of the few who took great pains to

back the purvapaksas of the Rigs gter in detail.

Chapter 7

SA-PA~,

RNGOG AND PHYWA-PA

ON THE INTERPRETATION OF DHARMAKIRTI

A basic canon of interpretation is that the exegete should explain his text
in its own terms and should not impose upon it a philosophy that is foreign to the
intent of its author.

This principle was accepted--in one form or another--by the

Buddhist exegetes of India and Tibet.

disagreed
the

Yet there do exist cases where commentators

about which philosophy their author followed,

different

a notable example

interpretations of the works of Dharmakirti,

Indian Buddhist logicians.

Th.

being

the greatest of

the

Stcherbatsky in his classic study Buddhist Logic

described how in India there developed three main schools of interpreting

Dharma-

kirti's Pramal}a ("logico-epistemology").

There was a "philological" school that
included Sakyamati, and a "philosophical" school whose founder was Dharmottara. 1
Different

from

both

of these was the so-called "religious"

school

founded

by

Prajnakaragupta. 2 The first two schools were said by Tibetan doxographers to have
interpreted
viewpoint,

Dharmakirti's

Pramal}a

works as representing ultimately

the third was said to explain the ultimate intent of

kirti as being the Madhyamaka. 3
Not

whereas

well

Dharma-

Tibet too
there existed some three different traditions of interpreting Dharmakirti. 4
Each
was

as

Yogacara

identified

(1059-1109),
1251).

known is the fact that in 12th- and 13th-century

with an illustrious founder:

Phywa-pa

Rngog

Chos-kyi-seng-ge (1109-1169),

lo-tsa-ba

Blo-ldan-shes-rab

and Sa-skya

Pal}~ita

A key point of difference between them was how to classify the

(1182-

I
I

u1timate//

intent of ~Dh~~~~_~ir_ti--in the la-st analysis was he a Yogacarin or a Madhyamika? (

Since the positions of these three authors (and especially of Sa-pa~) on this
question have yet to be studied in detail,

I will present below some translations

of the materials that clarify the opinions of each. 5

Rngog lo-tsa-ba Blo-ldan-shes-rab

Tibetan

Rngog lo-tsa-ba more than anyone else was responsible for the founding
scholasticism.
In addition to his prolific translation activities,

of
he

established the main teaching lineages of the Dharmas of Maitreya (byams chos) and

12

166

the

three eastern Indian treatises of the Svatantrika Madhyamaka (rang

gsum).

And as previously mentioned,

studies.

Regarding

the

latter,

he founded an influential school of

shar

Prama~a

it is said that he translated the PV with

the

Pramaoalamkara of Prajfiakaragupta and the PVin with Dharmottara's commentary,

and

that by expounding these (especially the PVin with commentary),

teaching line which lasted well over five hundred years in Tibet.
Rngog

interpreted

Dharmakirti

as a Madhyamika.

he established
6
sources

D~~ain

cRp~~~'s opinions are the writings of Shakya-mchog-ldan,

I scholar
thog.

According to Shakya-mchog-ldan's History of PramaQa:

[Rngog]

explained

the

PV as Madhyamaka according to

[Prajfiakaragupta's] [PV] Alamkara.

the

intent

of

And as for the PVin, [he explained

ultimate as higher than the Mind-Only [i.e Yogacara]

because

it

rests in [i.e. is consonant with?] just what was said in the passage of
the

fourth

retained

consideration of the fruit [of cognition],7

as

they

were the separate passages of the

[but]

having

Sautrantika

and

Mind-Only.
There are, nevertheless, two widely recognized traditions originating
in

India

lowers:

for the exposition of the Dharmas of Maitreya and

its

(1) exposition according to learning and reflection,

exposition according to meditative cultivation.

tradition

of

(2)

the Great Translator [Rngog] was mainly just the former.

(bdag med:

imp~licative

and

fol-

From among these, the

Therefore he expounded the identification of all three

ties

insubstantiali-

nairatmya) too as just non-presuppositional and non-

negation

(med

~),

since

the

emptiness

established

through learning and reflection is merely non-presuppositional and nonimplicative negation. 8 And regarding [that exposition], he held that
also
of

the identification of the ultimate truth here too in the

context

Maitreya's Dharmas and in the context of the author of the PV was,

on the level of transactional usage, entirely beyond the scope of mind.

[Question:] If the Great Translator commented on the PV as

Madhyama-

ka, which did he explain it as--the two known as Prasangika and Svatantrika,

or that which is known as the Madhyamaka [which maintains that]

the cognitive image [is] false (roam brdzun dbu

[Answer:]
author of the PV,
not

~)?

Since he based himself just on the reasoning of

the

he did not comment on it according to the traditions

of Prasangika or Svatantrika.
did

for

a 15th-century Sa-~
originally--hed--studred --at--R~gog '-;-~ld -~~n~stic seat, Gsang-phu Ne' u-

who-

the]

Nor was it that latter tradition, for he

expound the identification of emptiness as being

Gnosis

167

shes)

according to the expository system of the traditions of

medita-

tive cultivation of the Dharmas of Maitreya.

[Doubt:]

If it is none of those traditions,

there do not exist

any

other commentarial systems of the Madhyamaka.

[Answer:]
that

does

This way of commenting

is another great doctrinal

system
For

not rely, upon those previous founders of systems.

he

said the following in his Spring .lli. bdud rtsi thig .lli!.:
"After clearly understanding that entrance gate into the principle
of
the

all factors of existence being empty of own natures--which

highest of correct reasonings taught by

beautiful
reached

works

Nagarjuna--from

of the author of the [Pramaoa]varttika

perfection

in reasoning,

one should abandon

who
all

is
the
has

other

traditions like straw.,,9

I [Shakya-mchog-ldan] have seen only a few of the investigations he
made of the Alswkara commentary on the PV, whereas he refuted many
points in the exposition nf Dharmottara that he took to be unacceptable, having retained as they were those [passages] he thought were
acceptable. 10
Thus

according to Shakya-mchog-ldan (and the quote from Rngog's own work),

the Great Translator linked the thought of Dharmak!rti to Nagarjuna,

out

identifying

it as belonging to any later Madhyamaka school.

though withThis

was

opinion of Shakya-mchog-ldan late in his life when at age 73 (1501) he wrote

History of Pramaoa.

Nineteen years previous to that,

in

(~

his subcommentary

the
that

however, Shakya-mchog-Idan

bshad) on the Rigs gter linked Rngog to the

Yogacara-

Madhyamaka of Santarak~ita:
Having executed translations,
scale,

editions, and subcommentaries on a large

he explained [the ultimate import of

the Madhyamaka
rak~ita.ll

which

accords

with the

Dharmakirti's Prama~a] as

basic

treatises

of

Santa-

Probably still earlier in his life (c. 1475-1480?), Shakya-mchog-Idan

portrayed the interpretation of Rngog in more general terms in his history of
Rngog lo-tsa-ba and the latter's successors:

168

[Rngog

understood]

the ultimate intent (mthar thug

&

dgongs .lli!)

of

Dharmakirti to be in agreement with Nagarjuna. And as for his identification of the definitive meaning (nges don),
ness

of

both

he explained it as empti-

[apprehended object and apprehending

subject]

in

aspect of non-presuppositional and non-implicative negation (med

Regarding

[the commentaries of]

Dharmottara and

its

~).

Prajfiakaragupta,

he

refuted those parts that were contradictory and explained the agreeing

.
N-agarJuna
-.
'?]
parts accor dlng
to h'lS [ 1.e.
s. system. 12
Elsewhere Shakya-mchog-ldan summarized Rngog's basic approach in this way:
He

revealed the nectar of emptiness;

having interpreted the system of

the reasoning of the author of the Pramanavarttika as that great tradi13

tion, the theory of the excellent system of Nagarjuna.
in

~inally,

scribed

the

his incomplete commentary on the KhJ,

tradition of "Rngog together with

his

Shakya-mchog-ldan

followers"

(Le.

Phywa-pa?) as follows:
The

Prama~a treatises of Dignaga and his chief successor [Dharmaktrti]

were,

in

those

who followed in his lineage.

spread

general,

it,

they

spread very much by Rngog lo-tsa-ba together

But as-for the way in which

let stand the accepted consensus of the

garding the mechanism of perception]

world

the

purport of the author [i.e.

of Dharmakirti].

[Prajfiakaragupta],

others as definitive (or:

they
[re-

and except for him did not

as decisive, mtha'

~~,

were

And from among

commentators [on the PV], they [accepted] merely the master of the
Alamkara

with

because the manners of exposition

of Sautrantika and Mind-Only which occur in the basic text itself

not

consider

[~V]

the

besides [using]

merely an abridgment of their best points.

As

for their own manner of exposition,

surface

level,

regarding the system of

as

being just [a reasoning] which

things

as empty of own-nature (rang stong).

truth

which is the thing to be experienced,

the Madhyamaka],

and

~stablishes

all

knowable

Regarding

the

ultimate

they applied that to just

the non-dual gnosis and expounded it as being part of the

nature [i.e.

the

they let stand just the innate consensus of the world.

They applied that reasoning taught in the PV of "devoid of oneness

manyness"

Without-own-

in agreement with Santarak~ita.

for the system of the "exclusion of other" (anyapoha),

de-

including

And as

logical connec-

169

tion and incompatibility,

them

definition and defined, etc., they explained

as best they could through just their own powers of

not relying on other commentators.

And [Rngog?] expounded

discernment,
[Prama~a]

at

length, having pledged to compose the treatise with these words:

I

shall exactly ascertain the difficult points of the real

of

facts

which are not well and exactly clarified even in

14
minds of other composers of treatises.
Prama~a

perhaps

the

many

of

school of Rngog was for nearly half a century the sole interpreter

of

Shakya-mchog-ldan

could not give a more detailed account since

1S

Rngog's works were apparently no longer available in his time.

Phywa-pa Chos-kyi-seng-ge
The

Dharmakirti in Tibet.

Then, in the mid-12th century, a great Tibetan dialectician

appeared within Rngog's own school who reinterpreted Buddhist Prama9a according to
his own acute but idiosyncratic understandings.

16,cc,' '
Ph ywa-pa Chos-k y~-seng-ge.
Phywa-pa
independent
krh~

is

said

to

This

sel.

The latter work,

dialectician

have written a commentary on the PVin

treatises such as his famous "Summary" (bsdus .m!.),

as

well

the Tshad rna

was
as

ill

in its brief, medium and expansive versions, soon

eclipsed the tradition of Rngog's own explanations,

it

great

was the most influential work on

Prama~a

and for some two

in Tibet.

generations

This was possible because

Rngog had not written extensively or in great detail on Prama~a;

sors had much room in which to improvise. 17

Rngog's

succes-

According to Shakya-mchog-ldan's History of PramaQa, Phywa-pa's interpretations of Dharmaklrti were strange indeed:
Having

explained the ultimate intent of Dharmaklrti as abiding in

principle of the absence of own-nature (niQsvabhava,

the

i.e. as Madhyama-

ka), [Phywa-pa] expounded the identification of the definitive meaning,

emptiness,

as

just non-presuppositional and non-implicative negation.

And he explained the [reasoning of] absence of oneness and manyness

as

that

he

which

established

establishes that [emptiness].

or confuted,

Regarding the

matters

there are very many excellent cases where he

let stand as they were the statements in the main commentators and also
[commented]
discernment.

according

to

however it occurred to his

own

skills

He paid no heed whatsoever to the Sautrantika and

of

Mind-

-170

Only

scriptural

traditions occurring in Dharmakirti which

establish external objects;

refutations.

rather,

h~

took them as the target for his

Vaibha~ikas.

in doing so he did not accord with the Prasangika Madhyamaka,

he wrote
school. 18

or

Having done so, he made the system of transactional usage

of his own school to accord with worldly consensus and the

But

refute

extremely

extensive refutations of

the

opinions

for

of

that

A similar account is found in Shakya-mchog-ldan's commentary on the Tshad

pa'i gter (Rigs gter) of Sa-pal}-.

rigs

Here Phywa-pa is described as the famous origi-

nator in Tibet of the custom of writing general, thematic commentaries as aids for
the teaching of Dignaga and Dharmaklrti's writings.
His best-known work is again
. said to have been the Tshad ma
He

.ri!!. ill .!!!!!!!. sel. In

it:

[Phywa-pa] explained as being purely unacceptable all the

expositions
Sakara

of

the systems of the surface level of

[Mind-Only] and Nirakara Mind-Only,

own reasoning.
that

the

refuting them through

He set forth his own system as follows:

He

of
his

accepted

an object is cognized by a cognition in which the object appears,

in a way that is bare and without a cognitive image, like the

ka

ways

Sautrantika,

[accepts],

and said of that tradition that it was in

worldly consensus'.
the

ultimate

those

Vaibha~i

accord

with

And as for the way in which he set forth emptiness,

reality,

this he explained according to the

who maintain no own-nature [i.e.

the

MBdhyamikas],

system

of

[teaching]

that all factors of existence are empty of own-nature, and not accepting even the slightest thing that could be termed a "veridically
established factor."
non-presuppositional
that

[emptiness]

And he expounded the nature of emptiness as

and non-implicative negation, and affirmed

too was something which was

~ bzod) by means of reasoning. 19

critically

just
that

discernable

Later in the same work:

That reasoning of Phywa-pa which said "[We] refute the Sakara school by
means

of

Vaibha~ika

reasoning and the reasoning of worldly

consensus,

and refute the Nirakara Mind-Only by means of Madhyamaka reasoning, and

then

explain the seven Pramal}-a treatises [of Dharmaklrti] as being

in

accord with worldly consensus" ignores all the excellent expositions in

the

basic treatises and merely puts together with great zeal what

had

171

not been expounded.

Still

20

again near the end of that work Shakya-mchog-ldan described the approach of

Phywa-pa in similar terms:

The lord of Dharma,

the lion of reasoning [Phya-pa

Chos-kyi-seng-ge],

in the treatises called The Elimination of Mental Darkness

(~~~

sel) refuted the two traditions of Sautrantika and Mind-Only, and

explained the seven treatises [of Dharmaktrti] as the 'Jig-rten-gragssde-spyod-pa'i Dbu_ma. 21

Sa-skya Pandita Kun-dga'-rgyal-mtshan

Thus a few decades after Rngog's death,
epistemology had grown up.

a second and distinctively Tibetan

school

of

rival,

and it would have exercised an even longer and deeper influence on Tibetan

This school for a time had

no

effective

scholasticism had it not been vigorously opposed some two generations later by Saskya PaQQita.

Sa-paQ was an all-around scholar, but if he was more erudite in any

one branch of scholastics,

subjects of all.

it was probably in PramaQa,

one of the most

arduous

As already described above in some detail, Sa-paQ received his first detailed instructions on PramaQa from the age of nineteen to twenty-one from Rkyang'dur-ba Mtshur

belonged to the tradition of Phywa-pa's

22
At that time Sa-pap studied the
PVin (and according to Shakya-mchog-ldan, the PramsQa Summary of Phywa-pa). 23 He
student

is

Gzhon-nu-seng-ge,

Gtsang-nag-pa

said

to

becoming

who

Brtson-'grus-seng-ge.

have made quick

~rogress,

and he was no doubt well on

teacher in this tradition when suddenly there opened up a

study in a completely different tradition.

Sa-paQ

his

way

to

chance

to

What happened was that in 1204

had studied PramsQa for about three years,

the renowned Kashmiri

after
pap~ita

SBkyasrfbhadra

(11277-1225) arrived in Tibet accompanied by an entourage of nine

24
other accomplished scholars from East India, Nepal and Kashmir.
These scholars

belonged to the last generation of savants who had studied and taught in the great
Buddhist

monastic seminaries of Magadha,

the heartland of Buddhism.

Only a few

years earlier, Turkic brigands had sacked the great seminaries as Nalanda
and
Vikramasila, thus destroying the foremost centers of Indian Buddhist learning and
dispersing

their scholars.

For Sa-pap,

created a uniquely favorable opportunity.

however,

these disastrous developments

172

The
and

young and gifted

Prama~a

assiduously
become

Sa-pa~

threw

himself

studies with the visiting teachers.

studied

whole-heartedly into

Sanskrit

By the end of the decade he had

in Sanskrit all the fundamental

Prama~a

scriptures

and

had

full-fledged translator who worked with Sakyasribhadra himself in re25

translating Dharmakirti's greatest work, the PV.
When Sakyasri departed from
Tibet in 1213-1214 at the end of his ten-year visit, Sa-pa~ had become one of the
26
greatest Tibetan experts on Prama~a of all time.
Some five years later (c.
1219)

he

is said to have composed his monumental Tshad ma rigs pa'i

gter

gter) with autocommentary (rang 'grel). 27

As
studies

Shakya-mchog-ldan observes,

the tradition

Sa-pa~

received through

with the Indian masters was "not adulterated by Tibetan

(Rigs
his

explanations.,,28

Through these studies:

saw that the explanations in the PramaQa Summaries [of Phywa-

[Sa-pa~]

pa and others] that had previously appeared were not in accord with the
basic scriptures.

Thereafter he composed his Tshad

rigs gter

with

commentary, which was the first beginnings of a tradition of teaching a

topical

summary

traditions
were. 29
Sa-pa~'s

of

(bsdus pa'i srol) of

Prama~a

in which the

Sautrantika and Mind-Only were retained

scriptural

just

as

they

immediate motive for composing his Rigs gter was to correct the misinter-

pretations of Phywa-pa and his followers:

If one expounds as above [i.e. as Phywa-pa had done], one will have
affirmed the main doctrine that is opposed to the fundamental works of
Dignaga

and Dharmak!rti.

explain

as

long

The reasons are as follows:

Those works
their own system that very position of the Sautrantika as

as external objects are affirmed,

worldly
external

and they refute

conceptions and opinions maintained by the

objects are negated,

the

accepted
When

Vaibha~ikas.

those texts at first remain within

the

tradition of the Sakara Mind-Only, establishing all appearing phenomena

as

the mind through the reasons of "illumination and awareness"

zhing

.!i&.~)

hended"
that
be

and "necessary concomitance of the simultaneously

(lhan.!8. dmigs nges).30

(gsal
appre-

In the end they take as their

basis

which is the system of those who consider the cognitive image

false

[i.e.

the Alikakara],

and establish [mind] as without

duality of apprehending subject and apprehended object.

to
the

173

[Phywa-pa] taught that all factors are empty of own-nature (rang

stong).

He

factor,

ultimately

did

not affirm any

veridically

of non-presuppositional and non-implicative negation.

teachings

do

fundamental
were

established

and he expounded the identification of emptiness as an

not appear in the great doctrinal system
scriptures

as explained by Asanga and his

not taught also in the fundamental works of Dignaga

kfrti.

Therefore

aspect

But since these

of

Maitreya's

brother,
and

they

Dharma-

the refutation of those points is the direct motive

for this treatise [the Tshad !!!!!. rigs gter].31

One of the key differences between Phywa-pa and Sa-paQ on PramaQa had to do
with the number of objects of apprehension that each accepted.

In contrast to the

threefold

knowledge

scheme of Phywa-pa,

perception
32
effect.
point,
the
mate

is

only

one:

Sa-pa~

the

held that the object of

svalaksaoa,

and he quotes PV III

53d

through
to

this

In the course of replying to the objections of others concerning

this

Sa-paQ in his Rigs gter rang 'grel discusses three main topics,

viz.

(1)

general arrangement of Indian philosophical schools with regard to the

objects

of

knowledge (which for many schools is an

underlying

ulti-

causal

ontological entity), (2) a refutation of the non-Buddhist oplnl0ns regarding

above, and (3) the establishment of the Buddhist tradition. 33
Regarding

or
the
the

first, he lists seven major philosophical schools of India, from among which four
are non-Buddhist 34 and three Buddhist:
(1)

Those (followers of the Carvaka) who hold that "natures" (svabhava)

the

causes

and that all reality arises from the predetermined

are

nature

of

things (i.e. not from a separate cause).

(2)

Followers of Isvara.

(3)

Followers

of

the

They hold that reality was created by Isvara.

Sa~hya.

They hold that

reality

is

created

by

pradhana.
(4)

Followers of

Ka~ada,

i.e., the

Vaise~ikas.

They hold that the world is

made up of "atoms" (Le. minute indivisible particles).

(5)

The Sravakas.

They too hold that the world is made of "atoms."

(6)

The followers of the Mind-Only (i.e.

of Yogacara).

They maintain that

the world is mind.

(7)

The followers of the Madhyamaka.

level
they

all

They maintain that on

is free from discursive elaboration,

the

ultimate

and on the surface

follow either those schools that maintain existent entities

maintain a position which accords with worldly consensus. 35

or

level
that

174

After rejecting the positions of the first three non-Buddhist schools,

Sa-

pan arrives at part three, the establishment of the tradition of the Sugata.
has

two main parts:

(1) the identification of the Buddha's intent,

that was specifically established by the Acarya [Dharmakirti].

the

reality

how

When he investi-

tattva) of transactional usage (tha

(de kho na nyid:

vyavahara) , he affirmed

and (2)

The Sage (i.e. the

Buddha) affirmed "atoms" when he investigated exterior objects.

gated

This

snyad:

And when he engaged the reality of the ulti36

mate truth, he engaged in that which is free from discursive elaborations.
mind alone.

Now, the real question is where the author of the PV fits into this scheme.
Sa-pa9
the

states that the Acarya's [i.e.

Buddha's

intent

involved two

Dharmakirti's] procedure for

things:

objective cognition

establishing

fig)

and

"mental cognition" (.!!!!!!!!. ill: vi jnapti).

As for the first, he states: "When one
affirms external objects, one must maintain the tradition of the Sautrantika.,,37
But before explaining the second, Sa-pa9 tells how to negate the "constructions"
(i.e. the tenets) of others. For instance, one can analyze the Vaibha~ika notion
of a substance that possesses parts through the reasoning of "absence of oneness
and manyness." 38 Similarly one analyzes and rejects more subtle entities, such as
the

"atoms"

simultaneous

of the Vaise~ikas and the Sravakas,

conjunction of six ['atoms,]".39

through the reasoning

According to Sa-pa9,

of

"the

however,'

it

does not accord with the Pramana tradition to base oneself on worldly consensus as
in the Prasangika tradition ofCandrakirti. 40
As for the actual establishing of "mental cognition" (rnam
Sa-pa9

states:

(kun tu tha snyad"p!!':

saItlvyavahara),

establish

vijnapti)

one should follow the authors of the

the Prama9asamuccaya] and the [Prama~a] Varttika.,,4l

[i.e
to

ill:

"When investigating means of knowledge within transactional usage

mental cognition by means of two

awareness" (gsal zhing

ill~

proofs:

Specifically,
(1)

Sutra
this is

"illumination

and

and (2) "the necessary concomitance of simultaneous

apprehension" (lhan i l l dmigs nges).

Sa-pa~ here also defends cognition or mind
against opponents such as Madhyamikas who criticize it as being [subject to nega7
42
tion] like an atom.
He furthermore denies that the presence or absence of the
cognitive image (.!!!!!!!!.~: akara) is of any relevance to the discussion at hand
since

all that is meant to be established here is that it is just the mind that
43
Sa-pa9 does, however, discuss the difference between the

appears as the object.

Sakara

and Nirakara schools later,

(mngon

~:

pratyaka).

There

in chapter nine,

which deals with perception

in one passage he again sums

up

his

position

regarding the philosophical classification of Dharmaktrti:

Thus

from

among the four philosophical schools,

the Acarya

[Dharma-

klrti] followed the Sautrantikas when he affirmed external objects, and

175

he

maintained

the Nirakara when the object of knowledge

nalized" (nang la

was

~ ~) .44

"inter-

In spite of such clear statements in the Rigs gter rang 'grel itself and
R.
gter, 45 t here are st1. 11 t hose wh0 say
also from the main commentators on t he ~
that Sa-pa~ interpreted Dharmakirti as being other than a Yogacarin.
For example
Kong-sprul in his

kun khyab asserts (without citing his source) that Sapa~ commented on Dignaga and Dharmakirti as being in accord with Yogacarasvatantrika-madhyamaka, as established by Santarak~ita.46 This we did not find in

the

Rigs gter.

made

Shes

However,

even in the Sa-skya-pa tradition

similar assertions,

nams-lhun-grub,
master

for instance,

states:

connection Glo-bo mkhan-chen cited PV I 220a and also the famous verse

since

have
great

Sa-pa~], the ultimate intent expounded by Dharmakirti in the PV is

,,47
the Madhyamaka that agrees with the system of -Arya N-agarjuna.
In

This

of

scholars

"In the opinion maintained by this

Rngog lo-tsa-ba's Spring .v!&. bdud rtsi thig

pa'i

some

Glo-bo mkhan-chen Bsod-

[i.e.

precisely
this

though more carefully worded.

~.48

characterization by Glo-bo mkhan-chen deserves careful

he made it when commenting on

(KhJ III 48,

philosophical

scribed above.
vijnapti, here

Sa-pa~'s

autocommentary).

consideration

own words in the Mkhas

In that passage,

analyses and negations,

from

much like

Sa-pa~

~~~

performs a series

those in the Rigs gter

de-

Yet whereas in the Rigs gter the analysis stopped when he reached
in the KhJ he does not stop at that.

Instead, he goes on to say:

Therefore, having established cognition (rnam!i&: vijnapti), the basis

for transactional usage,

[now] for the sake of establishing the

49

ulti-

mate truth, which is beyond transactional usage

Next

Sa-paQ

Yukti~a~tika

quotes the Lankavatara Sutra,

(v.29) of Nagarjuna.

the PV (II 252cd,

conditions.

Since

being

the

The point he makes through these verses and his

subsequent comment is that non-dual cognition is dependent,

from

253ab),50 and

momentary,

born from conditions is the absence

of

and

born

genuine,

independent birth, in ultimate reality the "birthless"--ultimate reality free from

discursive

elaborations--is established.

raja parip5ccha Sutra

Therefore
one

(B.8.v2.

Then after quoting the Anavataptanaga-

mtshos zhus~, Sa-pa~ concludes:

the intent of the author of the Pramaoavarttika is

understands well "cognition" (vijnapti),

5l
undistorted reality of the Madhyamaka.

that

one will understand

if
the

-176

Thus, though in his main work on Prama':la, the Rigs gter rang 'grel, Sa-pa':l
not allow himself to interpret Dharmakirti as a Madhyamika, here in the KhJ

does

he does. What could account for this? It seems that Sa-pa~ in the Rigs gter rang
'grel never directly concerns himself with explaining the "ultimate intent" (~

thug & dgongs W of Dharmakfrti. Rather, what he attempts to explain is Dharmakirti's teachings on the "means of knowledge of transactional usage" (tha snyad

.ill tshad ~52 or the "reality of transactional usage" (tha snyad.ill de ~

~,

53 which

is to say the ultimate within the sphere of

practical application.
or

~).54

saint (..12ill!. rol gzigs pa'i tshad

Sa-pa':l

specifies

that

&ri

don dam).

the KhJ,

in

Even
intent

however,

that

is

.ill:!...

from
i.e.

the goal of the series of ontological analyses

Rigs gter this level of truth is explained as

of the Buddha. 57

free

pa'i don dam),

and

developments. 56

was the ultimate truth that is free from discursive

the

and

Instead, what is in question is

the ultimate truth that is causally effi'cacious (don byed

55
the ultimate truth of the Prama~a teachings proper.
In

action

Elsewhere in the Rigs gter rang 'grel,

his topic is not the ultimate truth

discursive elaborations (spros bral

dissolutions

purposive

This is not, however, the means of knowledge of the Buddha

being

the

ultimate

And now here in the KhJ Sa-pa':l asserts that what Dharma-

kirti had in mind in teaching vijfiapti was that by understanding it, one will come
to understand the ultimate truth of the Madhyamaka. Evidently Sa-pa':l means to say
that

with its Mind-Only tenets, was in the last analysis a propaedeutic,

and that this was understood by Dharmakirti. 58
Prama~a,

Such a
actually made

characterization of the Prama~a of Dharmakirti is not, however,

explicit in the Rigs gter rang 'grel.
When commenting on the

tradition

Prama~a

directly,

Sa-pa~

to be the framework of that system.

Yogacarin.
In

seems to prefer to stay within

he refuted the tradition of

On1 y

Sa-p~':l:

[Phywa-pa's] Summaries by

explaining the ultimate theory of the PV as Nirakarin and

the

took

There he classifies Dharmakirti as a Nirakara

In this sense, Shakya-mchog-ldan was right in saying of

particular,

what he

[explaining]

provisional theory in exact accord with the Sautrantika and

.
59

Mind-

scr~ptures.

Whatever the final answer to this problem may be, it will not be reached by
uncritically citing the doctrinal classifications laid down by later scholars from
other

traditions.

It would also be wrong to try to base one's answer on just

passage or two of his translations or revisions.

To do justice to the problem,
one would really have to study all available passages in his works that deal with
this subject.

Since the Rigs gter with its autocommentary is the

main source for

177

understanding

Sa-pa~'s

thought on

Prama~a,

one's primary task should naturally be

to ascertain what he said there.

Perhaps
'grel

in the future someone will be able to interpret the Rigs gter rang

differently

pected,

from how I have outlined above.

and it may even come as a welcome advance.

This is probably to

be

But as Go-rams-pa said in

related context:
Those who

explain the intended sense of the Rigs gter as

this

show where

must
60

mentary.

that is in the Rigs

gter

or

its

other

than

[auto]com-

exa

178

IF.
the

Th. Stcherbatsky (1930-32), vol. 1, pp. 39-42.

"philosophical"

school

can also be termed the

He states, p. 40, that

"Cashmerian"

or

"critical"

school.
2Ibid .,

vol. 2, pp. 42-45.

Pramana-varttika,

according

Stcherbatsky, p. 43, explains: "The aim of the

to this school,

was not at all to comment upon Dig-

naga's Pramaua-samuccaya, which work was a purely logical treatise, but to comment
upon

the

whole of the Mahayana Scripture which establishes

3L

the

existence,

the

"

omniscience and other properties of the Buddha

van der Kuijp (1983),

p. 272, note 98, cites two Tibetan authors-Mkhas-grub-rje and Shakya-mchog-ldan--as agreeing on this point.
4Cf

the

three

Tibetan schools of Prama~a interpretation,

which are said to have interpreted it as Madhyamaka [I],

Blo-gros-mtha I -yas in his Theg
pa I i don la dgongs

vol.

~ ~,

[1] !!&28.. 10 chen

..Q!l!.,

~.!!&2.

p. 204a:

rten

sde

pa I i dbu

of

Kong-sprul

br jod .lli gtan la phab

bo nyid med M!:.

[2] sa lugs ~ ~ kyis rnal 'byor ~ pa'i dbu mal

~

all three

mentioned by
~

ba I i dbu

[3] gzhan ~ phal

.!!!Q.

bkral te bod ill I grel tshul gsum mol I.

che
I

wonder what source Kong-sprul was basing himself on here.

Some

preliminary studies on the

Prama~a

traditions in Tibet

during

these

centuries are L. van der Kuijp (1978), (1979), and (1983).

5For

brief

descriptions

of the opinions of Rngog and

Phywa-pa

on

this

point, see L. van der Kuijp (1983), pp. 50 and 63, respectively.
6Shakya-mchog-ldan,

Tshad ma'i mdo,

p.

29.2.

It was his PVin lineage in

particular that survived and exercised a long-lasting influence.

Before Rngog-lo, there survived from the early propagation period (snga
dar) mainly just Abhidharma and Vinaya lineages, though from the mid-11th century
there apparently began among the early Bka'-gdams-pa the study of six major scriptures, the so-called Bka ' gdams gzhung drug:
(1) Skyes rabs (Jataka)
(2) Ched du brjod pa'i tshoms (Udanavarga)
(3) Byang sa (Bodhisattvabhiimi)

179

(4) Sdo sde .!:&!ru!. (MahayanasiitralBlJlkara)

(5) illQ.!!. ~ (Bodhisattvacaryavatara)
(6) Bslab btus (Siksasamuccaya)
7This "fourth section" refers to PV III 353-367,
in the PVin.

According to L.

and the parallel

passage

van der Kuijp (1983), p. 287, note 182, this four-

. fold division as a means for PV interpretation was first attested in the Rigs gter
rang 'grel, but its locus classicus seems to have been the Madhyamakalamkara.
Shakya-mchog-ldan, Tshad ~ rigs, p. 492.4, explains that Rngog (along with
Prajnakaragupta, Santarak~ita, and Kamalastla) took Dharmaktrti to follow a "Great
Madhyamaka" (dbu ma chen .E.Q.) because in the PV there are taught three
nairatmya. Cf. L. van der Kuijp (1983), pp. 36, 274.
8Cf
~

Rigs gter rang 'grel,

p.

types

of

stong nyid med ~ tu bsgrub ~

237.1.5:

, apparently a reference to Rngog lo-tsa-ba.

9Shakya-mchog-ldan,

Shakya-mchog-ldan,
287a.3.

Spring

Tshad ma'i mdo,

11&,

p.

p.

322.7,

30.3.

This quote also occurs in

and in Glo-bo mkhan-chen,

Presumably the readings in Shakya-mchog-ldan's Spring

ritative since the latter was a commentary on Rngog's work,

probably

had

11&

KhJNSh, p.

are more autho-

and Shakya-mchog-ldan

a copy of the text before him when writing it (and was not

from memory).
Here is the text with variants (S= Spring

11&,

T= Tshad ma'i mdo,

quoting
and

K=

KhJNSh) :
chos

~ ~

rigs

rang bzhin stong pa I i tshul la

rigs tshogsklu sgrub zhal nas gsungs

pa'i

mthar thug

gsal bar rtogs

..E.!!!!!!.

pa Ii
~

Igrel mdzad pa'i gzhung

lugs ngan gzhan kun

bzhin

~I

del I

mdzes

dorll

lasll

1 rnams ST: kun K; stong pa'i KS: med pa'i T

2 tshogs S: mchog KT; zhal ST: zhabs K; nas S: las T: kyis K; gsungs pa KS: 'byung
ba T; de SK: gang T
3 mthar thug ST: dbang phyug K; mdzes S: bzang KT
4 gsal bar ST: legs par K
If

we

"collection
"collection
made

up

follow the text of S above,

of Nagarjuna's five or six main theoretical scholastic

Seyfort Ruegg (1981),

of

the translation of line 2 should

read

of reasonings" instead of "the highest of correct reasonings."

The
of reasonings" (rigs tshogs) is the so-called Yukti-corpus which is

in line 4.

p.
Cf.

8.

Probably

Go-rams-pa,

works.

See

D.

"straw, grass" is to be read instead

ba thams,

p. 177.5: bzhi mdo'i rtswa

180

bzhin dor bar bya' 0/ ;

dor nas ni//.

Sa-pal},

10Shakya-mchog-ldan,
(1983),

pp.

50,

52.

Chag 10, p. 336.1.6: sgra..vi rnam gzhag

Tshad ma'i mdo,

p.

29.3-30.4.

~ ~

Cf. L. van der KUijp

For the Tibetan text see also ibid.,

pp. 49-51.

Van der

Kuijp,

p. 35, speculates that Shakya-mchog-ldan's discussion of Rngog's interpre-

tation

is motivated by a desire to discredit the Dga'-ldan-pa,

but he offers

no

justification for this.

For another brief summary of Rngog's

Prama~a

system, see Glo-bo mkhan-chen,

Sde bdun mdo ~ snga, pp. 52.2-54.2 (26b.2-27b.2).

lIS ha-kya-mchog-ldan, Rigs gter .!:ill!!!!. bshad , p. 745:

'grel mdzad blo la .!!!!! shar rigs pa'i gsang//
gsal mdzad blo ldan phrin las bzang .P.Q. ~ /
dang zhus chen rnam bshad

mdzad nasi /

zhi mtsho'i gzhung dang mthun pa'i dbu

Cf.

Shakya-mchog-ldan,

Dbu rna rnam,

vol.

.15,

bkral//
p. 457.3, where Prajnakaragupta,

Santarak~ita and Rngog are listed together as similarly interpreting Dharmaklrti's

purport.
Rngog 1, p. 449.6-450.1.
Cf. 1. van der
For the Tibetan text see also ibid., p. 286, note 174.

12Shakya-mchog-ldan,
(1983), p. 46.

13Shakya-mchog-ldan, Sa skya~, pp. 92.5-93.1.

p.

29.

rate

in

chariot

this

verse.

The

other

de

mdzad modi

min

dar tshul ni gzhung nyid du

las kyang .!:&E!!. ill mkhan

mtha'.&.!&. tu mi rtsi ba dang/

..Ji8.

~ ~ ~..E.Y.i

'bebs

..Ji8.

.P.Q.

byed nyid du sbyor ba dang/

sogs

dang

dang/

the

rang.8!.' chad tshul kun

.!!&Q

gzhan

shin tu dar

..B ~
.!!B.

..B ~

dang/

dang/

rdzob .ill .!:m!!!!

dang/ .!:ill!!!!. , grel du

rang stong ~ gtan la
~

bo nyid med pa'i nang tshan

~

tshul

gzhan la legs btus tsam

nyams su myong bya'i don dam bden

shes nyid la sbyar nas

mthun.m!!:.' chad

tsam

rten .&.Y.i ~ ~ sor

tsam rna

rten lhan skyes la ~ ~ nyid thad sor

~ gsungs ~ de shes ~ mtha'

med.ill

guided

ba'i mdo sems.ill 'chad

.&.!& du bral ill rigs

[96]

There is an elabo"Having

Mkhas~, pp. 95f: ~ glangs ill ~.ill tshad

mdzad ~ po' i dgongs.E2..!!!!!.ill ~ na

'grel mdzad

is:

"

to that great track

14Shakya-mchog-ldan,

translation

ma'i bstan bcos nil .!:!!&.2.8. 10 brgyud .m!!:. bcas

bar

Cf. van der Kuijp (1983),

For the Tibetan text see also ibid., p. 268, note 71.

pun

Kuijp

, breI

dang/

ni

gnyis

zhi

mtshan

181

mtshon ..&Ii .!:!!!!!!!.

sogs

grel mdzad gzhan la ma .!1!.8.

i l l tel Ji skad
gzhung rtsom rnams .kv.i blo la ~ I
Ji bzhin legs .lli!.!:. mi gsal ball

kyis rtsal thon du mdzad

1@.

rang kho na I i

rnam

tshad mali de nyid dka ' ba rnams/I

~/

Ji bzhin du ni .!:.!ill!!!. nges

~

rtsom .lli!.!:. dam bcas ~ ~.lli!.!:. I chad

1@.

i l l lal

15Shakya-mchog-ldan, Tshad mali mdo, p, 29.2, observes that even though few
of

the treatises by [early] Tibetan masters are extant,

the

p~actice

of

writing

extensive original treatises began with Rngog, and numerous works of Rngog such as
his

PVin

panjika

have

been listed in [Bu-ston's]

history

of

religion

Cchos

The latter history would seem to be Shakya-mchog-ldan's main source of

information about the full corpus of Rngog's writings, and not the writings them-

~).

selves:
bod i l l mkhan

spyir

.P2.

bdag nyid chen .QQ. I di nas bstan

nges pa I i dka I I grel sogs chos
phran du ma ~ mdzad.,
Elsewhere CRngog 10,

p.

based on the list in Bu-ston's

bstan
I

chos

chos mdzad

1@.

cha shas tsam las med .ill!. .E!!!&.

lli!E. mdzad pa I i dbu tshugs nas .!:.!ill!!!. .lli!.!:.

.& dkar chag tu tshud pa I i rtog ge I i

chos

446.7) Shakya-mchog-ldan enumerates Rngog's works

Chos~.

Cf.

S.

Nishioka (1983), p. 118.

In

yet another place he appears to quote an opening verse from a commentary by Rngog.
See above, note 14.
Rngog's

commentarial summaries of the Ratnagotravibhaga and Abhisamayalaw-

kara are still extant.

160n Phywa-pa

See above, chapter 6, note 8.

(also spelled Phya-pa and Cha-pa),

see L.

van

der

Kuijp

(1978), passim, and (1983), pp. 59-84.

17Shakya-mchog-ldan, Dka ' 'grel, p. 443.4:
de .vi.!:.!ill!!!. bshad tshig nyung basi I
r jes ~ ~ kyis gzhan du lang brtagsl I
18Shakya-mchog-ldan,
(1983),

p.

63.

Tshad mali mdo,

p.

33.1-33.5.

Cf. L. van der Kuijp

For another brief summary of Phya-pa's Prama~a system,

see now

G10-bo mkhan-chen, Sde bdun mdo ~ snga, p. 54.2-5 (27b.2-5).

The

school

of Candrakirti is characterized as according

rten ..&Ii

with

"commonly

accepted worldly usage" or "worldly consensus"

(~

siddha),

Grags-sde-spyod-pa'i-dbu-ma.

13

and

was hence sometimes called the

1@.:

lokapraHere

182

Shakya-mchog-ldan
the

world,

specifies that Phywa-pa followed the commonly accepted usage of

but did not in fact adhere to the Prasangika school

See also Shakya-mchog-ldan,

Rngog 10,

p.

Candrak1rti's teachings are mentioned.

of

Candrakirti.

451.4, where Phywa-pa's refutations of

Cf. below, note 20.

Tibetan doxographers

did not always identify the Grags-sde-spyod-pa'i-dbu-ma with the Prasangika.

See

K. Mimaki (1982), p. 28, and (1983), p. 162.

19Shakya-mchog-ldan, Tshad
tsam !ill!!!!. bcas ~ dangl
tshul

mtha ' ~ rang .s!. rigs

ME. bshad ~

rigs, pp. 452.6-453.2: mdo sde

~ dangl

!ill!!!!. rdzun ~ gswn .&Ii kun rdzob .ill.Elli!!!!. gzhag

.ill!. .!!!!. ~

rang.s!. lugs ~ tshull

ba' i

.8.Q,

~ mi 'thad ~ nvid du ~

~ brag tu ~ ba ltar don

snang

[453] don rtogs tshul !ill!!!!. med r jen char .&Ii tshul khas blangs

shes

de ni

.J!s. ~ ill ~ ~

dang mthun ~

zhes ~ zhingl

don dam stong ~

nv id .ill..B tshul .I!!!!8..!!8.Q. bo nvid med ME. ~ ba'i tshul ltar bshad ~
thams cad rang
zad

.8! .!!8.Q.

khas mi len ~ dangl

kvang

bden ME. grub pa' i chos zhes

.!2.v.!!

stong nvid .ill.!!8.Q. bo med ~ kho.!!!!

ba cung

la

' chad

de.I!!!!8. rigs ~ ~ bzod du khas len ME. bved ~

dngl

Sa-paQ
not

bos stong ~ dangl

.8!
lugs

and Rngog held that the ultimate was beyond the scope of mind,

"something

(rigs

and

that can undergo being critically _~is_cerne~/~~') reasoning"

~ ~ bzod).

See for instance 'GOSlo-tsa-ba-i'~'

[1976], p. 349) and/D. Seyfort Ruegg (1983), p. 232, note

309.6 (G.

75.-~See-ai;0

Roerich

below, KhJ

III translation, ~bte 95'.

~ rigs .!:ill!!!!.
M!.!!8. .I!!!!8. ..P!!.E pa' i rigs ~ !EJ I
~ brag smra dang .J!s. rten BJi/ I
~ ~.!:ill!!!!. bcas ~ bved dngl I
~ tsam .!:ill!!!!. med dbu ma yjJ I
20Shakya-mchog-ldan, Tshad

bshad, p. 473.5:

rigs ~ bkag nas sde bdun gZhungl1

.J!s.

rten

ill

ni ~ ~ dang I I

mthun ME. 'chad ~ M!.!!8. ~

de

lli

kun la

BY I

gzhung ~ legs bshad nasll

ill

rton med bvas ~ I

ma bshad .ill!!!. .8.Y!.. sbvor bar ~ I

See

also

ibid.,

p.

647.2,

on the pramanaphala according to Phywa-pa

school.
21 Ibid ., p. 745:
chos .ill dbang ~ rigs pa'i seng ~ yYlj I

and

his

183

illlli .!!!!:!!!

se1 zhes bya' i bstan bcos Jl./ /

mdo ~ lugs gnyis bkag nas sde bdun gzhung//

~~~

The

first

22
is

sde ~ pa'i dbu mar bkra1//

line is an expansion of Phywa-pa's

Lho-pa,

Dpal

ldan~,

p. 48b.5-6.

personal

name,

Chos-kyi-seng-ge.

Before this, at age 18 (1200) Sa-pa9

said by a few later sources to have received a little instruction

of

Prama~a

from Zhu-ston Rdo-rje-skyabs.

23Shakya-mchog-ldan,

Tshad ma'i mdo,

passage by Shakya-mchog-ldan is wrong (cf.

working

from

memory

p. 39.
above,

The chronology given in this

chapter 1).

Apparently he was

for he qualifies all his dates with the word

tsam

"about,

circa."
240n the visit of Sakyasribhadra to Tibet see G.
335-339.

Tucci (1949), vol. 2, pp.

The most detailed extant biography of Sakyasri is Bsod-nams-dpal-bzang-

po, Sa'i steng na 'gran zla dang bral ba kha che papdita shakya shri bhadra'i ..!:ill!!!!.
thar.
A xylographic edition in 66 folios exists at the Bihar Research Society,
Patna (provisional catalogue no. 591). It seems to be the Gra-phyi Tshongs-'dusgrwa-tshang xylograph mentioned in Gangs ~&Ii, p. 212.1.
Tucci may have
brought a copy of it to Rome.
For another account of Sakyasrt's visit to Tibet, see 'Gos lo-tsa-ba Gzhonnu-dpal (G. Roerich transl. [1976], pp. 1063-1071). See also A. Ferrari (1958),
p. 90, note 53, and A. Vostrikov (1970), p. 111, note 341. On Sakyasrt's dates
see also Shakya-mchog-ldan,

Kha che,

pp. 556.2-557.6.

The dates of Sakya~ri are

also discussed by D. Seyfort Ruegg (1966), p. 42, note 1.

I,

250n the date of the PV retranslation, see chapter 5, note 59.

26Sa_paQ may actually have seen Sakyasri for the last time in late 1212

or

early 1213, for the latter reached Pu-rang in Mnga'-ris by the summer of 1213, and
spent the rainy-season retreat there.
27

Sangs-rgyas-phun-tshogs,

Rtsom

'phro kha skong to Dkon-mchog-lhun-grub,

Here Sa-paQ is said to have composed the Rigs gter in

pa'i chos, p. 316.4.
about his thirty-eighth year, i.e. c. 1219.
L. van der Kuijp (1983), p. 101,

states that Sa-pa~ "started work on [it] in 1219," taking brtsams to mean
"started" instead of "composed." He refers, p. 303, note 293, also to Bkra-shis-

184

lhun-grub [actually it should be Zhu-chen Tshul-khrirns-rin-chen], Dpal

ldan~,

f.

llb.2-3.
28Shakya-mchog-ldan,

Tshad ma I i mdo,

p.

39.2: bod

ill

bshad pa I i lhad

.!!@.

zhugs ..I?!!E..
29Ibid ., p. 39.3.

Cf. van der Kuijp (1979), p. 409.

For the text see also

ibid., p. 421, note 15.

300n these terms see below, KhJ III translation, note 135.

~ bshad, p. 453.2-7: de ll2E.

.& ~ zla I i gtso bo ~
blangs ..P!t nyid du ~ tel gzhung lugs de dang de ..Q.M tu nil j i srid.P.hri !.2.!.
ill don khas len ..P!t de srid!lJY ~ rten .sE:. ~ ..P!t dangl ~ brag tu ~
ba I i I dod ..P!t bkag nasi mdo sde pa I i ~ .S!!!!S. .Y.!!!. ..P!t de nyid rang lugs .1!!!. bshad
pa 'i phyir dangl .P!!.vi rol don ..B pa 'i tshel thog.!!@!: ~ tsam !ill!!!!. bcas kv!.
lugs la gnas ~ gsal zhing !.!s. pa I i rtags dangl lhan.9:&. dmigs nges ill rtags
kyis snang ba ~ .1!!!. bsgrubs pa I i phyir dang I mthar ni ~ rdzun pa I i lugs .82!!S.
.Y.!!!. ..P!t de nyid gzhir bzhag nasi ~ I dzin gnyis med te bsgrubs pa I i phyir dangl
shes ~ thams cad rang stong dangl mthar bden. grub i l l chos shig khas rni len ..P!t
dangl stong nyid ill ngos I dzin med ~.& cha la I chad ..P!t nil ~ btsun byams
31Shakya-mchog-ldan,

bshad

Tshad rna rigs...

na .P!:!I2&. glang ~ pa I i zhabs

pa'i gzhung thogs med sku mched

.!:&Y.Y. mtshan Eil.1

kv!.

ill

gzhung

bkral ba'i shing rta'i srol las mi ~ ba'i

~.81!!!!.8. ~ pa I i gzhung lugs

..Q.M tu 'ang .!!!!!. gsungs pa I i

phyir roll
des na de ..Q.M ~
This
ibid.,

p.

byin ..P!t ni bstan bcos

di 'i dngos

587 .4:

~ ba I i lugs .1!!!. bkral

nasi

snga masl
de der

sde bdun
I

chad ..P!t

.8.Ii mthar thug

.Y.!!!. E:Jjj

lugs la de I i dgongs ..P!t.E!!!!!!!. brdzun du gnas ~

745:
~ med ~ bo ~ skya I i ~ btsun

2Ji!H I

mdo ~ .8!.!! chen bzung nas sde bdun E:Jjj I

.!:&E mthor zhugs tshe byams pa'i chos lnga yj}1

nges don gsal mdzad rigs pa'i gter gzhung mdzadll
32

ill

dgos ..P!t

.Y.!!!. W .

is a continuation of the passage quoted above in note 19.

RTRG, p. 168.3.6-168.4.1 (da 28b.6-29a.l).

See

also

.!!8Q bo nyid med ~

rang lugs

.!!!!!..Y.!!!. tel

rang

See further ibid., p.

185

p. 169.3.1 (da 30b.1): grub mtha'i roam gzhag spyir ~ nal; p.

33 Ibid .,
169.3.4:

de

la gzhan

.8Yi

brtags ~ ~.!!!!I;

and p.

169.3.5 (30b.5):

bde

bar

gshegs pa' i lugs bsgrub ~.

34Compare his list of non~Buddhist schools at the end of the Rigs gter rang
'grel, p. 264.1.6 (da 119b.6):
thub ~ ~ skya rkang

!!!.i8. ~

l!J!/ I

dang ~ pa' i

~.!!!!. dang tshu rol mdzes pa' i gzhung 'dzin ~ I

mkha '
Elsewhere

(and many others) followed a conventional fivefold

Sa-pa~

the non-Buddhist Indian schools.

division

of

See KhJ III 43 and D. Jackson (1985), pp. 4f.

35RTRG , p. 169.3.1-3 (da 30b.1): grub mtha'i .!:.!!!!!!!. gzhag spyir ~.!!!!I
.!!8.Q. bo nyid dang dbang ~ dangl I

gtso bo rdul dang rnam

rten 'breI

.r.!!!.

i l l dang I I

zhes grub pa'i mtha'il

tha dad rang gzhan sde ~ 'dodl I

byed.!!82. bo nyid .!:.8I!!!: ~ ba nil

.!!!.!!. stegs

dangl

dbang ~ ~ dbang ~

dangl

dangl
~

rung

l l i byas

thams cad !!&.Q. bo nyid las.hI!!!!&.

ba

dangl

grangs.!!!!. gtso bos byas

Em. dang nyan thos rdul phran ~ byas ~ dangl

~ tsam ~

dbu !!!!!. ~ don dam ~ spros ~ dang bral zhing kun rdzob tu dngos
ba de ~

iliI

r jes ..!!. ~ kyang rungl

~ rten ~ sde dang

bstun

.EQ!.

de ~ ~ 1 tar ~ kun tu tha snyad ~ la don dang shes ~ gnyis ..!!.

kha ~ .!:!.Qi
For

.8i

sems

wi.

an expansion and explanation of this passage,

see Glo-bo

mkhan-chen,

Sde bdun mdo .!:.!!!!!!!. bshad, pp. 31.4ff (16a.4ff).

Regarding

the

proach to the relative,

twofold division of the Madhyamaka according to

surface level of truth,

ferent principle of classification.

403.3.2.

Sa-pa~

their

elsewhere adopted a

apdif-

See his Bka' gdams do kor bali zhus lan, p.

On this see also D. Jackson (1985a), p. 27.

36RTRG ,

!.2.!. .!!ll..Q.!! ~

p.

169.3.5 ~ 30b.5): dgongs ~ ngos bzung ba nil

na rdul phran zhal ~ bzhes lal

~ ~ ~ tsam zhal ~ bzhes shingl

tha snyad

kv!.

thub.lli!..PhI!.

de kho ~ nyid ~

don dam pa' i de kho ~ nyid la ~ ~ ~

!pros ~ dang bral ba la ~ ~ mdzad dol I.

37Ibid .,

p. 170.1.4 (da 31b.4):

.Da'i lugs gzung bar bya'oll.

38Ibid ., p. 170.3.1 (da

32b.1)

.P!:!vi

rol

ill don khas len ~ nal mdo sde

186

39Ibid ., p. 170.3.2 ~ 32b.2).

40Ibid ., p. 170.3.5

32b.5):

kun rdzob ~ rten ~ ~ Wi

brten .ill!. tshad ma' i ~ gzhag ~ I

41 Ibid .,

p. 170.4.2 (da 33a.2): kun tu tha snyad pa'i tshad

mdo mdzad ~ dang ~ 'grel mdzad pa' i r jes ~ 'brang ~ I.

42Ibid ., p. 171.3.1 (da 34b.l).
Sa-paI}

!!!!!.!!.P..I2.!! ~ ~

But cf. the ThGS, p. 31.3.4 (62a.4), where

is maintaining the Madhyamaka position:

gnyis med

kI!.

shes

mthar dngos

.l!Q. la thug pa' i phyir don dam .p!!:.. mi rung .!!&Q..

43RTRG , p. 172.1.4
44Ibid .,

p.

230.1.5

..P!!Ii

rol

~.ill!.

roam med zhal

45

nyid

ill

~ 35b.4).

151b.5): de ltar grub mtha' bzhi las slob dpon ni

don khas len ~ .ill!. mdo sde

~

See Go-rams-pa,

bzhes

sol I.

.p.!!.

1 tar mdzad

shes.lli nang la

See also Go-rams-pa, Sde bdun mdo, p. 555.5.

Tshad ma rigs,

p.

67.2 (34a):

tha snyad

kI!.

de kho.ill!.

la ~ pa' i tshe ~ ~ zhal ~ bzhes la ~ la ~ bden rdzun

!J2../I

.Y..Q!!

dang

don dam pa' i de kho .ill!. nyid la ~ pa' i tshe chos thams cad

bral ba la ~ .p!!:.. mdzad

del

'di ni dbu rna' 0 .&!!!!8.

.!!&.

gnyis

spros

rigs gter rang 'grel

.&Ii ~ khongs 'di la brten nasi rigs gter .8!i lugs la ~ 'grel .8!i ~ thug
.8! dgongs .p.!!. dbu mar skyel ba .y.!!!. no zhes ~ ba ni rang nyid blo gros rtsing bar
mtshon pa 'i !.&I.!!!. mtshan 'dzugs ~ stel .8.Q!!&. du ..P!!Ii nang .8! grub mtha' du ~
bshad pa' i nang nas skabs 'dir sangs ~ pa' i grub mtha' la bzhi .Y..Q!!.p!!:..
bzhi

.l!Q. de' i nang ~ kyang ~ 'grel 'dir mdo ~ gnyis

d ba b

.p.!!. ~

See also Ngag-dbang-chos-grags, Bod

above,
L.

Kong-sprul Blo-gros-mtha'-yas,

note 4.)

since on p.

107.

don

mkhas (Derge ed.), p. 27a.5.

part 1,

p.

563.2.

(Cf.

Zwilling (1981), p. 313, note 20, and

The latter seems to disagree with Kong-sprul

note 328, he states that "the final position of Sa-skya PaI}qita

Cittamatra."

assertion
Though

310,

p.

kI!.

Theg pa'i~,

This was cited by both L.

van der Kuijp (1983),

is

bstanl

grub mtha' gtan la

bcad ~ ma dang s byor L8Y!!..y.!!!."p'!!' 'di 'dra' i 'khrul'p'!!' skye ba' i

med pa'i phyir ro/.

46

kI!.

But L. Zwilling, p. 309, apparently accepts Kong-sprul's

and tries to understand Sa-paI} translation of PV III 3 in light of

Zwilling's article raises some interesting points,

it.

its main arguments are

187

vitiated

by the fact that the verse quoted in the RTRG,

p.

197.4.4 (da

which he takes to be a second translation by Sa-pan of PV III 3,

II 56.

(The same first pada also occurs as PV I 166a.)

87a.4),

is actually PVin

The full PVin verse II 56

as quoted in the RTRG is:

.!!Q!l byed

~ ~ ~

.I.!!!. ~

de 'dir don dam .IQ!! ~ Yl:!Y /

de la rim dang rim !!!!!. Yl:!Y /

i l l min ~ ~ /
be worth noting in this connection

~ phyir skad

It may

also

exponent

of

the Sa-skya-pa tradition,

that

Go-rams-pa,

the

later

authoritative

interpreted PV III 3 as

definitive Sautrantika statement on the two truths.

the

See Go-rams-pa, Sde bdun mdo,

p. 391.3.
L.

Zwilling

(1981),

pp.

3l0f,

speaks of the Rigs gter as

composed prior to Sa-paQ's retranslation of the PV.

(chapter

note

59),

having

been

as described above

the translation work was done sometime between 1208

and

On the other hand, the Rigs gter was composed at Sa-skya sometime after his

1213.
full

5,

However,

ordination

years

(1208),

of age (c.

Gzhung lugs legs

according to tradition when he was

1219).
.p.!!!..

bshad

about

thirty-seven

It is also best not to draw any conclusions

from

about Sa-paQ's thought, for it is a forgery.

the

See D.

Jackson (1985); cf. L. van der Kuijp (1983), pp. 103 and 304, note 295, and (1985)
passim.
47KhJNSh,

p.

'grel du bshad pa' i dgongs ~ mthar thug

lugs dang mthun pa' i dbu .!!!!! kho .!!!!!:. bzhed cing/.

But

in

his

Rigs gter

bshad (Sde bdun

Ell

~ ~

klu sgrub ill.

mdo ~ bshad),

p.

36.2

(18b.2), Glo-bo mkhan-chen explicitly denies this interpretation of PramsQa in the

Rigs gter.

See also ibid.,

DharmakIrti

as

See

p.

47.1 (24a.1),

where Indian interpretations

a Madhyamika are discussed but not accepted as

Sa-paQ's

of

system.

also Glo-bo mkhan-chen's succinct summary in his Sde bdun mdo ~ bar mkho,

p. 61.4-62.3 (2a.4-2b.3):
lha dbang rjes ~ 'brang ba'i slob dpon ~ /
.!!!!!. stegs rtsod tshe

.h.vi rol khas len cing/ /

rang lugs mthar thug .!:m!!!! med tshad ~ smrai/

~

i l l r jes 'brang rigs .m!.!:. smra ba kun/ /

tha snyad

tshe j i 1tar byed kyang rung/ /

mthar thug kun rdzob dri

don dam d bu ma' i lam chen der

dben

yJj /

..J!!& W /

lugs srol de Itar .I.!!!. B!!!&. sa skys pa' i/ /

,,1
!

188

bzhed gzhung

di ni dpal ldan ~ ~ yjJ I

dgongs don gnas skabs gnvis la legs sbvar

dbu ,!!g! bde blag rtogs ~ yjJ I

~I

~.!:!8.

thabs

gsal bar bzhed

'chad

~I

48For the verse of Rngog, see above, note 9.

49KhJ III 48,
snyad]

pa I i

gzhi

autocommentary (0 p.

~.!:!8.

bsgrub nasi

107.4.3): des.!!.!! kun tu tha dad [read:

tha snvad las 'das

bsgrub pa I i

phv ir

Cf. KhJ I 34 (p. 84.3.4 [170a.4]) and OS, p. 315.1.2:

tha snvad

pa' i rigs

lal I

dgongs ~ chos ~ ~ su gsungsl I

dam pa'i don la dgongs ~ nill
chos kun spros

bra 1 zhes gsungsll

50The same verse from the PV is quoted in the RTRG, p. 172.1.3 ~ 35b.3).
51

KhJ III 48, autocommentary (0 p. 108.1.1): des .!!.!! ~.!:!8. legs ~ rtogs
.!!.!! dbu ma I i de kho .!!.!! nvid phvin ci ma .!28. ~ khong du chud 1!.!!!:. ~ roll
zhes
.!:!!!!!!!. I grel mdzad pa 'i dgongs ~ de .vi!!. noll.
52RTRG ,

pp. 170.4.2 (da 33a.2), 172.1.2 (35b.2); Go-rams-pa, Sde bdun mdo,

p. 551.3, discusses tha snvad (vvavahara) in this context.

53RTRG , p. 169.3.5 ~ 30b.5).
54Ibid ., p. 171.2.4 ~ 34a.4).
55Ibid .,
31.3.1

pp. 172.1.2 ~ 35b.2) and 211.4.6 ~ 115a.6).

(tha 32a.1),

Cf. his ThGS, p.

where he specifies that there he is concerned with the ulti-

mate truth of the Madhyamaka and not with the causal efficiency of
56See above,

notes 49 and 51, which mention the goal as being the ultimate

reality of the Madhyamaka (dbu ma'i de kho na nvid) that is beyond

usage (tha snvad las I das ~.
57 RTRG ,

p.

Prama~a.

transactional

189

58This was also Glo-bo mkhan-chen's understanding in his Sde bdun mdo ~
p.

~~,

62.1-2 (2b.I-2),

Dharmakirti's

intended

where he states that Sa-pav's method was to apply

sense

to the two contexts of Sautrantika

and

Yogacara,

while maintaining that vijnapti was a means for easily understanding Madhyamaka.
lugs srol de ltar i l l .Y!!!!8. sa skya pa' il I
bzhed gzhung 'di ni dpal ldan

.&!:!!&. ~

yjJ I

dgongs don gnas skabs gnyis la legs sbyar

m!!!!

.E!.8. dbu

.!!!!.

~I

bde blag rtogs ~ yjJ I

~ ~ gsal bar bzhed ~ 'chad dol I

Sa-pav
the

without a doubt interpreted the Pramava scriptures as belonging

Buddhist teachings,

things

he

took

i.e.

as revealing the path to liberation.

pains to show in his Rigs gter rang 'grel was

followed

both

followed

the teachings of the Buddha himself (RTRG,

Thus
is

the Sautrantika and Yogacara,

and that in

an

utterly profane science,

46, averred.

mika,

doing

Dharmakirti

169.3.5f [=da

that

is

30b.5]).

all

the more reason to think that he believed

the liberating view of the Madhyamaka.

PramaQa

PramaQa would thus be a means for drawing

one of the five main fields of knowledge

he

to

have

student
agreement

that

Pramava

(.E!.8. gnas chen 2Q), and within that

.E!.8. ~).

mkhas (D), p. 21b.4.

laying of great emphasis on the religious content of Buddhist

is said to go back in the Tibetan tradition at least to Tsong-kha-pa.

p. 21b.3.

as

vol. 1,

classified it as separate from doctrinal studies (nang don

See Ngag-dbang-chos-grags, Bod

The

the

But Sa-paQ (in

the usual Indian Buddhist classification) indeed did maintain

context

just

Even if Sa-pa~ thought that Dharmaktrti was ultimately a Madhya-

ultimately

to

all,

Stcherbatsky (1930-32),

content.

was

Dharmakfrti

containing nothing Buddhistic at

soteriological
with

the

that

I cannot see the justification for saying that Sa-paQ "maintained that logic

medicine and mathematics are," which is what Th.

p.

pp.

so

One of

to

On the religious status of

Prama~a

Prama~a

See ibid.,

cf. also D. Seyfort Ruegg (1966), p.

37, note 1.
59Shakya-mchog-ldan,
p.

97.

~ btsun~, pp. 93f. Cf. L. van der Kuijp (1983),

Yet Shakya-mchog-ldan,

philosophical
Madhyamaka.

tenet
This,

Tshad ma'i mdo,

p. 6.5, identifies the ultimate

of this tradition (lugs 'di'i grub mtha' mthar thug) as

however,

interpreted by Asanga.

is

the "Madhyamaka" of the Dharmas of Maitreya

Ngag-dbang-chos-grags, Bod

the
as

!Ii mkhas (D), p. 27b.3, takes

strong exception to this interpretation.

60

.!!!!. 'chad

Go-rams-pa, Sde bdun mdo, p. 556.4: rigs gter ill dgongs

~ ~ kyis

'di las gzhan

nil rigs gter rtsa 'grel ~ na ~ ston dgos sol I.

Chapter 8
THE

The

main

scholarship,

STRUC~uRE

AND CONTENTS OF THE MKHAS 'JUG

subject of the Mkhas

and

in

particular,

is the methodology of Indian

the methods and principles of the

activities of the traditional scholar:

composition,

concluding the treatise,

however,

three

teaching, and debating.

pa9 devotes one main section of the treatise to each of these.

and

Buddhist

When

main
Sa-

introducing

he followed established Indian custom and

added brief preliminary and concluding sections.

Thus the general outline of the

work is as follows:
I. Preliminaries (3 ff.)
II. Main Contents (57 ff.)
A. Composition (25 ff.)
1. Preliminary

sections of a treatise (2 ff.)

2. Grammar (6 ff.)
3. Poetics (17 ff.)
B. Exposition (14 ff.)
C. Debating (18 ff.)
III. Concluding matter (1 f.)
The

preliminaries include verses of homage or worshipful invocation (mchod

brjod) and of the author's resolution to expound

his subject ('chad

dam

bca'

ba).

In the subsequent introductory verses he also identifies his motive, his own
l
identity and capabilities, and his subject matter.
The concluding matter of the
treatise consists of some final verses of explanation, exhortation and dedication,
and also a final colophon.
Sa-pa9
India:
the

composed the work following a format that was well

versified

basic text with a prose autocommentary.

established

The basic contents of

work were presented first of all in concise verses which were

memorization.
expanded

Then,

immediately

following each verse or group

and explained the meaning through a prose comment.

in

suitable
of

verses,

for
he

Usually the comment

was just a restatement of the same point in a form that had been made grammatically
and

and semantically more complete through the addition of

grammatical

explanatory words or phrases that were missing in the basic mnemonic

Sometimes,
elaborate

too,

the

excursus.

particles
2
verse.

basic verse served merely as the point of departure for

an

Two additional commentarial devices that Sa-pav employs are

I'

192

the

"intermediate verse" (bar skabs

(bsdus pa'i tshigs bcad).3

kri tshigs bcad) and the "summarizing verse"

The former usually occur as a verse or group of verses

that expand on the subject just preceding,

but which do not complete the

discus-

sion.

The latter are verses which concisely summarize and conclude the foregoing
discussion.
It is not known whether Sa-pa~ composed both basic verses and commentary at
the same time, or whether he composed first the one and then the other.
Nor do

there survive any copies of the versified basic text apart from and independent of
the prose autocommentary (as one finds in the case of the Rigs gter).
not

clear

whether

Sa-pa~

would have included the intermediate

It is also

and

summarlzlng

verses with the basic verses or as an addition to the prose commentary.4

When

arguing a point in other works such as the Rigs

gter,

often

Sa-pa~

follows a three-step presentation, and in the KhJ he employs it once, in part III:
(1) The refutation of the tradition of others (gzhan ill lugs

~ E!.)

(2) The statement of one's own opinion (rang

E!.)

.&i

'dod

E!.

brjod

(3)

The rejection of controversy (or objections) regarding the latter (de la

rtsod E!. ~ ba) 5

Such

a manner of presentation belongs to the expository method called

and reply" (brgal Ian).

33)

as

the

resolving

Sa-pa~

"objection

recommends this very method in the KhJ itself (II

proper method for analyzing apparent mixtures of

apparent doctrinal contradictions.

doctrine

and

He holds that through this

one can use scripture and reasoning to settle very thorny questions, but
without it one will not be able to discern what is correct from incorrect. 6

The Content of the Mkhas

devotes

contains
Sa-pa~

somewhat more space to the first,

that

Of the three main topics of the Khj--composition,

Sa-pa~

for

method

exposition, and debate--

mainly

because

this

a long translated passage from an Indian work on poetics.

In

section
general,

seems to have treated each of the three topics as of equal weight and thus

accorded a major section to each.

The particular order in which he presented the three topics appears to have
been dictated by the subjects themselves.

He did not follow the stereotyped order

by which this triad is now most commonly referred

composition"

('chad rtsod rtsom gsum),

to:

"exposition,

nor in the order by which

refers to them elsewhere: "exposition, composition, and debate.,,7

debate,

Sa-pa~

and

himself

Exposition here

193

in

the

KhJ could not come first because it presupposed a knowledge

Thus composition had best precede exposition.

appropriate

to

begin

Moreover,

of

grammar.

Sa-pa~ t~ought

the main contents of his own treatise

by

it

most

explaining

one

aspect of compositional practice, the preliminary parts of treatises in general.

The

section

point of view.
most

For

on composition also deserved a primary position from

Sa-pa~'s

new and unprecedented material.

chen-dpal,

for

instance,

Sa-pa~'s

disciple Lho-pa

kun-mkhyen

Rin-

considered the KhJ to be the greatest (and most diffi-

cult) of Sa-pa~'s three "grammatical treatises" (sgra'i bstan bcos).8

the

another

contemporaries it was this section that contained the

In

putting

most emphasis on the work's grammatical content he seems to be following

who

pa~,

grammar
bcos

in his own

which

bod la

Sa-

described the KhJ as a "treatise on

[teaches] merely as much as is required for Tibet"

(sgra'i

bstan

~ bar mkho ba tsam zhig).9 But since there is so much else taught

in the KhJ,

it is not surprising that other Tibetan scholars sometimes classified

the work otherwise.

poetics,

Mill!. brgyad mali 'grel

Kong-sprul, for example, referred to the KhJ as a treatise on

one of Sa-paI}'s "three treatises [on Sanskli=it literary arts] in which he

.&.

summarized the sense of an Indian basic work" (..!:BE gzhung

don bsdus pari bstan
10
~~ gsum).
Shakya-mchog-ldan emphasized still a different aspect of

bcos
the

work,

classifying

it as one of Sa-paI}'s "treatises which

refute those

who

possess

erroneous narrow pathways" (.!!.QE. pari 'phrang.IQQ. ~ rnams ~ 'byin pari

II
bstan bcos), i.e. as a polemical treatise.
Yet probably the most fitting description

of

all

is

given by the writer of a biography of Sa-pa9

history of the teachers of the Lam 'bras

line~ge.

found

in

He called this work "the

KhJ,

is [a treatise] required for the basic texts in general" (gzhung lugs ...P.Y.i

which

la mkho ba mkhas ~).12

Composition
Sa-pa9's treatment of composition,
(1)

the

tises,
first
The

of

these explains very briefly how one should begin a treatise

are
ac-

of language and semantics by explaining the basic-units of language on

the

tinguishes

7-12).

that

phonological (.ti:.~),

(I

Sa-pa9 begins his

for the sophisticated composition of treatises.

analysis (I 13-14).

had three main parts:

second two deal with some aspects of language and literary studies

required
count

the first topic,

explanation of the preliminary sections found at the beginning of trea13

The
(2) language (including grammar) and semantics, and (3) poetics.

for

"morphological" (ming), and "grammatical" (tshig) levels of

Then he explains some basic concepts of semantics.

instance

the original arbitrary designations (brda)

of

He disnatural

194

language from later,

The

deliberately established terminology (tha snyad)

(I 17-18).

latter can be divided into either ironical designations or designations

accord

in

sense

with the original arbitrary designations (I

23-26).

that

He

also

describes echoic and onomatopoeic words (I 27-29).

Sa-pa9
(common

next

nouns)

(I 30) classifies words (especially nouns)

and name-words (proper nouns),

into

attributing this

class-words

distinction

to

Dignaga (based on the latter's PS I 3c, commentary). He also enters into epistemological and logical considerations,
and thought,

briefly treating the relation of object, word

and both assertive and negative statements (I 31-37).

He ends this

section with some explanations of more properly grammatical topics: cases and case
endings (I 38-39),

gender (I 40),

the sandhi of case endings (I 43), exceptional

uses of grammatical particles (I 45-46), verb formation (I 50), and the definition
of a sentence (I 51).
The
certain
nine

third

and

last part of the main section

aspects of Indian poetics.

aesthetic emotions (rasa),

81).

on

composition

He begins by defining and

the

and explaining their proper combinations (I

53-

He also gives some examples of good and faulty imagery,

from Bhoja's Sarasvattkaothabharaoa (I 82-86).

of materials from

Da~qin's

Kavyadarsa,

drawn for instance

Next he explains a basic typology

of literature and principles of prosody (I 87-90).

tation

introduces

illustrating

He then embarks on his presen-

including the

classification

of

verse types (I 92-95) and the distinction of the Vaidarbha and Gauqa
poetic
dictions (I 99-108).
Finally he begins his treatment of the poetical figures of
meaning (don
composition.
being

: artha1awkara), which form the longest part of the section

He translated most of the beginning of Kavyadarsa chapter

on

2,

this

the first ever rendering of a part of this work into Tibetan (I 110).

His

translation includes descriptions of the following nine figures, together with the
examples of the many subtypes of the first eight:
(1) factual expression (svabhavokti)
(2) simile (upama)
(3) metaphor (rupaka)
(4) zeugma (dtpaka)
(5) recurrence (av{tti)
(6) objection (aksepa)
(7) adducing another matter (arthantaranyasa)
(8) distinction (vyatireka)
(9) possibility (vibhavana)

195

Exposition
Sa-pa~'s

presentation of the second main section of the KhJ,

that on

the

principles and techniques of scriptural exposition, can be divided into two parts:
I4
(1) a general introduction and (2) a detailed explanation of actual practice.
The

first consists of a description of the three most important factors

involved

in any act of exposition: the teacher, the student, and the doctrine or text which
The second main part, the explanation of the actual practice

is taught (II 1-3).

of

exposition,

sets

forth

five

main

topics

taught

by

Vasubandhu

in

his

first of these Sa-pa9 had already touched on in his discussion of

the

Vyakyayukti:
(1) statement of purpose

(2) summarization
(3) explanation of the sense of the words
(4) explanation of the connections between words and topics
(5) explanation by way of objections and

The

rep1ie~

preliminary parts of treatises (I 12).

This topic in any case seems to have been

I5
commonly understood by the Tibetans of his time.
Therefore he quickly

already
passed

on

to (2) summaries,

of which he discerned two main types:

summaries of the general topic,

(a)

concise

and (b) more detailed topical outlines (II

4-5).

He explained the desired traits and possible defects of each.

Next, when explaining (3) how to expound the sense of the words, he 1ikewise distinguished two methods: (a) the explaining of compound words, and (b) the
method of commenting word-by-word.
The first mainly applies to Sanskrit, so he
did

not

develop it in much detail (II 6-7).

applied

in

pertinent
passage

too

cannot

be

full

to Tibetan, but Sa-pa~ extracts and adapts some of the most

features, such as basic grammatical parsing, and grammatical analysis

through questions and answers (II 8-9).

a

The second method

and

He

gives some examples of how to expound

also discusses the classes of terms

that

require

explanation.

Words in ordinary usage can be explained in three ways: (i) directly, (ii) through
etymology,
word

and (iii) through rearranging or altering the component elements of

(II 10).

several

He gives examples of each.

grammatical

topics,

In this connection he also takes

such as the interpretation of "intensive"

pronouns ("whatever," "whoever," etc.) and their correlatives (II 12),

in

the

vocative

religious
method

(II

case (II 13).

teaching,
14-20).

He goes on to describe the virtues

and the possible faults of teacher,

student,

He concludes his discussion of word-by-word

relative
and

of
and

a
up

words
correct

teaching

exposition

by

196

treating

some

of the problems that beset Tibetan

teachers

(II

22-26).

I
I

These

include the exposition of translations that are difficult to understand because of

archaic vocabulary, differences of dialect, varying understandings of the etymology

of

etc.

the original Sanskrit by different translators,

mistakes of

translation,

He also explains other potentially difficult features often found in Tibetan

translations,

such

as

the addition of clarifying

words

(II

27),

translation

through a repetitive phrase (II 28-29), and common maxims (II 30).
The

fourth

main topic was the method of explanation by

previous and subsequent words and topics.

linking

linking

together

He explains how to do this whether the

topics or concepts are explicitly mentioned in the basic text or not

31-32).

Then

thorny

doctrinal

presentation

he

treated the fifth main topic,

the method of commenting

question by means of objections and

that

replies,

i.e.

mirrors the exchange of views of participants in a

(II
on

through

discussion

(II 33).
After concluding the account of Vasubandhu's five methods,
introduces

the

method

of explaining scriptures through

the

he very briefly

six

hermeneutical

categories called the "six limits" (mtha' drug), viz. (1) special intent or (2) no
special

intent,

literal

expression or (6) non-literal expression (II 34).

(3)

interpretable meaning or (4) definitive

meaning,

and

(5)

(Sa-pa9 also mentions

these six "limits" in his commentary on KhJ III 23.)

Debating
The
methods

third main section,

which is translated in full below,

of debate and some of the presuppositions upon which such

sophical

discussions

are

founded.

explains
formal

At first sight this would appear

the

philo-

to

be

practical guide to debating, for the exposition is arranged according to the three
main steps of an actual debate:
conclusion.

(1) preparation,

(2) the debate itself,

and (3)

In fact, Sa-pa9 does not explain directly or systematically the basic

procedures of debate.

Rather, he mainly treats various philosophical and textual

issues that are related to debating, going into just some of the more difficult or
controversial points of debating practice.
forth

connectedly some of the actual steps of debating,

dwells
approach

on

what must be considered technicalities.

or

and even there he

Thus

Sa-pa~'s

often

The explanation for such

is that debating was in Sa-pa9's time already established as a

part of Tibetan scholasticism.

fic

Only near the end does he begin to set

treating of particular

an

standard

theoretical

technical points should be understood as attempts to correct or augment speciaspects

of

current debating practice.

The basic steps

of

debating

were

- i

197

apparently

so well known that he considered them not to require a detailed

sepa-

rate exposition.
The

Steps of

Debate.

Most modern readers are unlikely to have any fami-

liarity with the basic debating practices of Indo-Tibetan scholasticism, and

therefore a brief sketch of a somewhat later Sa-skya-pa system of debate will help
make the context of many of the discussions clearer.

The following is drawn from

Shakya-mchog-1dan's

Tshad

his detailed

and

of the Rigs gter which in these passages takes

interpretation

some of

Sa-pa~'s

The

rigs gter dgongs rgyan,

into

prativadin).

The first asserts a

The second disagrees with the

proponent's

argument and believes that either the thesis or its probans is faulty.
job

is

therefore

(~]2:

The
his thesis.
to

16

two main participants in any debate are (1) the proponent (sngar rgo1:

and proves it with a probans.

addition to

account

explanations in the KhJ, but does not accord with it exactly.

purvavadin) and (2) the respondent (phyir rgo1:

thesis

amplification

to refute one or the other by demonstrating

the above two participants,

its

His

main

faults.

there must also be a witness or

In

arbiter

saksin), whose duty it is to judge the debate impartially.

debate begins with the respondent questioning the proponent to
The proponent replies by stating his thesis.

be fundamentally erroneous,

elicit

If the thesis is taken

then the respondent may straightaway

refute

it.

But if it is accepted as correct, then the respondent inquires about the reason
which proves that thesis.
The proponent replies by stating the probans.
The
respondent then asks whether the probans possesses all three logical relations of
a sound inference (tshul gsum: trairupya).
In reply the proponent "removes the
thorns" (tsher ~ 'byin: kaqtakoddhara), i.e. he negates the three possible faulty
relations between the probans and the subject and predicate of the thesis. I7 This
concludes

the first phase of the debate.

The three questions of the

respondent

are subsumed under the single function "inquiring about the [proponent's} opinion"
('dod ~ 'dri ba), and the corresponding answers of the proponent are his "setting
forth the initial position" (~ snga ~ ~ ~).
Now,

if

the respondent agrees that the thesis and probans are

must admit his concurrence.

is

faulty,

he

If,

sound,

enters into the second main phase of the debate,

consists of the statement of refutation (sun 'byin brjod

~).

which

for

The

him

As mentioned above,

the respondent may also immediately enter into his refutation if he believes
the thesis itself is unsound.

he

on the other hand, he believes that the probans

that

In that case he need not wait to hear the probans.

respondent phrases his refutations in the form of logical consequences

(tha1

~: prasanga) which reveal the faults or inconsistencies entailed by the propo-

nent's reasoning.

14

198

After the respondent has concluded his criticism,

second main task,

which is the giving of a rejoinder (Ian

the proponent begins his

'debs~.

This he may

do only if he believes that the refutation given by the respondent was fallacious,
for

his rejoinder is simply the identification of the fallacy of the

refutation.

If the undesired logical consequences stated by the respondent are sound, then the
proponent
formal

instead

of

giving a rejoinder must ask the respondent

proof of the refutation in its positive form (i.e.

consequence,

to

but as an independent, formally stated inference).

These steps of debating can be shown schematically as follows:

Proponent

The Steps of !! Debate

0 Respondent

Query about thesis (~ bca' 'dri ba)

Advancing a fallacious
thesis (dam bca' ltar

Advancing a sound thesis

(dam bca ' ~ E1!&. ~ J2!!)

snang ~ J2!!)
Refutation of fallacious

o Query

about the probans of

thesis (dam bca' ltar

the sound thesis (dam bca'

snang la

brjod

'byin

E1!&. .&i sgrub byed

'dri ba)

~)

Presentation of a fal-

Presentation of a sound

lacious probans (sgrub

probans (sgrub byed

byed 1 tar snang

E1!&. ~ J2!!)

o Query

J2!!

about the three in-

) Query about the three

ferential relations of

inferential relations be-

that probans (sgrub byed

longing to that probans

de'i tshul gsum .ill

(sgrub byed de'i tshul gsum

sgrub byed 'dri ba

.ill sgrub byed

the

logical

This the respon-

dent must then do.

Figure 2.

state

not as a mere

'dri ba

199

Correct "thorn removal"

Incorrect "thorn removal"

(tsher

'byin

i.e.

negation of possible faults

Refutation of fallacious probans (in the
form of logical consequence) (sgrub byed
ltar snang la sun
'byin br j od .I!i!)
Query about the probans
which is complete with
regard to the three relations ('khor gsum)

of a sound refutation 18
(~ 'byin ~

.M .&i

'khor gsum tshang ba'i

sgrub byed 'dri

Statement of such a probans

Concurrence that the

Statement of

probans is sound

futation

(sgrub byed ~ .M .&i

snang brjod

rjes su

ba'i

fall~cious

(~

re-

'byin ltar

Rejoinder to the fallacious

refutation (identifying the
fallacy)

(~

'byin ltar

snang la Ian 'debs .I!i!)

*
for

One thing that must be kept in mind when reading Sa-pa~'s account is that
him real debate is a formal confrontation between two scholars who maintain
attempt to defend different tenets. 19 He was not talking about the classroom

and
debates of students by which they tested each other's knowledge. 20

Such

debates, however, could be useful to prepare one for real debating. 21

practice

200

When explaining debating.

tion of Dharmaktrti.
quotes

that treatise some ten times.

times besides.
the

moreover.

Naiyayikas

Sa-pa~

aimed at presenting the tradi-

especially as it is set forth in the latter's Vadanyaya.

and refers to it and to Dharmakirti several

The opinions that he rejected belonged for the most part either to
of

India or the earlier dialecticians of

Tibet.

Most

Tibetan purvapaksas derive in particular from the teachings of the great

Chos-kyi-seng-ge and "his successors in the early Bsdus

!
quick

Subject Outline of KhJ Section III.

overview

sometimes

not

He

subject

the

tradition.

The following outline will give

of the contents of section III.

identical)

of

Phywa-pa

For the

corresponding

headings given by Glo-bo

mkhan-chen

(though
in

his

refutation of the legitimacy of

de-

KhJNSh, see below. Appendix I.

I. Preparation: The determination of the three participants

(III 1)

A. Refutation of the opinions of others

1. Erroneous opinions of early Tibetans
a. Sixteen occasions of defeat (III 2)
b. A witness is not necessary (III 3)
2. The Naiyayika system of

Ak~apada

a. Twenty-two defeats (III 4-7)

b. Twenty-four futile rejoinders (III 8-10)
B. Establishing

Sa-pa~'s

own system

1. The defeats number four, coming from the basic two (III 11)
2. Proper motivation and goal of debate (III 12)
3. Correct conduct in debate (III 13)
C.

Elimination of further discussion:

ceitful means (III 14)

II. The actual debate itself
A. The debating of neophytes
B. The debating of scholars
1.

Debate

in which both opponents maintain

tenets:

the practice of great

scholars (III 15)

2.

The special case of a respondent who refutes the opponent's thesis with-

out maintaining his own (III 16)

3. Detailed discussion of debate between opponents who each maintain tenets
a.

Basic subject of debate:

one only maintains the immediately relevant

tenets. not every tenet of one's school (III 17-18)

b. Engaging in debate on that topic

201

i.

Basic similarity of debating through reasoning and scriptures (III

19)
ii. Differences

(A) Debating though scripture

(1) The scope of scriptures in debate: objects of the third kind
(III 20)
(2) Contradictions of scripture
(a) Contradictions between Buddhist and non-Buddhist
(b)

Internal contradictions of non-Buddhist scriptures

(c)

Apparent contradictions
(i)

between Buddhist schools

Between Sravaka and

(ii)

Mahayana (III 21)

Principles of interpretation which resolve

apparent

contradictions (III 22)

(iii) Those who do not understand these principles imagine
contradictions (III 23)
(iv)

Summary verses:

examples of application

of

inter-

'I

pretive principles (III 24-26)

(3) Questions and answers when debating on scriptures

(a)

Such

questions are

permissable (III 27)

The Buddha's four

(b) Answers:

ways of answering (III 28)

(c) Such answers are acceptable in debate,

for the ignorant to understand (III 29)
(d)

though difficult

Two kinds of answers when debating on

scriptures:

pure

scripture and reasoning based on scripture (III 30)

(i) Restricted definition of "scripture" (III 31-32)
(ii) Examples of apparent contradictions of scripture
(iii)
(iv)

Apparent contradictions
Resolving

apparent

of theory

contradictions

(v) Summary (III 33)

(B)

Debating

through

reasoning:

One

should

determine

whether

opponents are following tenets or not (III 34)

(1)

Persons who claim not to

(a)

Most

can

be

follow tenets

seen actually

to

follow

tenets,

under

examination (III 35)

(b)

Those

who

do

not

out

(c)

Those

who

do

not

out of

of ignorance (III 36)

fear

of

sequence
(d) Learned persons' nonaffirmation (III 37)
A. Through deceit

the

logical

con-

202

B. Truthful non-affirmation
(2)

(e) Summary (III 38-39)

Maintaining a mixture

of

tenets (III 40)

(3) Systems of tenets maintained by the learned:

non-Buddhist Indian sectarians

Buddhist

and

(a) Some other tenets held by Tibetans (III 41-42)

(b) Schools of the non-Buddhist Indian sectarians
(i) Classification into five (III 43)
(ii) Further criteria of classification (III 44)
(iii) Need to avoid classifications made by Tibetans

(III

45)
(c) Buddhist tenets (III 46)
(d) Principles of Buddhist and non-Buddhist debate
(i) Determining the basic

subject (III 47-48)

(ii) Objective grounding

A.

When

investigating external

objects,

Sautrantika

reasoning has objective grounding (III 49)

B.

Impossibility of there being followers of the Mind-

Only who assert external objects (III 50)

C.

When external objects are negated,

Mind-Only

rea-

soning has objective grounding (III 51)

D. When ultimate reality is being determined, Madhyamaka has objective grounding (III 51 cont.)
E.

Objection

that there is no objective grounding

if

one affirms tenets (III 52)

(4) Classification of dialectics
(a) Twofold classification (III 53)
(i) non-Buddhist Indian sectarians
(ii) Buddhist

A.

Differences

between

earlier

and

later

Buddhist

dialecticians, and features of their debating

1. Early (III 54)
2. Later (III 55)
3.

Specific procedures of debating:

"removing

the

thorns" (III 56-59)

B. Explanation of debate for beginners (III 60)
1. Questioning and answering (III 61)
2.

Only one logical mark to be stated (III 62)

3.

Counter-questioning

the respondent when he says

203

I'

the subject is not established (III 63)

4.

The Madhyamika's reasoning through sunyata makes

the replies of others unestablished (III 64)

5.

Answers

to

rejoinders

phrased

as

necessary

consequences
a. The practice of others (III 65-67)
b. Sa-pa9's system (III 68)
C.

The

benefits

of

debating (III 69)

III. The conclusion

A. The witness should summarize and express the arguments (III 70)
B. If the assembly is ignorant or dishonest: record the arguments and show them
to an upright judge elsewhere (III 71)
C. Concluding prayer (III 72)

L
I

204
I .1

IThese preliminaries are explained immediately afterward,

of the section on composition.

in the first part

See KhJ CD) p. 82.1.6 Ctha 165a.6

= 3a.6).

2For a traditional classification of commentarial types, see Dung-dkar Blobzang-'phrin-las, p. 378, note 346, where the following three are distinguished:
(1) tshig 'grel
(2) don 'grel
(3) mchan 'grel
See also

Vostrikov (1935/37), pp. 72ff, where three main types are described:

~.

(1) ~ bshad

(a) tshig 'grel

(b) don 'grel
(2) mchan
(3) mtha'
30n

these

translation,

types

note 60.

of

verses see K.

and

below,

though it is not certain that

See (D) p. 93.3.6f (tha 188a.6

4Such

(1980)

KhJ

III

Elsewhere in the KhJ (section I, poetics) one finds a few

explanatory annotations (mchan bu),

there.

Mimaki

put them

Sa-pa~

= 26a.6).

verses were included in the independent edition of the basic

verses

of the Rigs gter.

5E

Obermiller (1932),

methods described by G.S.

p.

3;

(1934),

p. 222.

Huparikar (1949), p. 166.

putata form in Medieval European scholastic philosophy,

Cf. the different Indian

Cf. also the quaestio disdescribed by R. Allers in

D. D. Runes ed. (1981), p. 261, and A. Piltz (1981), pp. 87, 148.
6KhJ (D), p. 101.2.2-5 (tha 203b.2
an
nowadays

explains that
(tha 122a.6
33a.6).

see Dung-dkar Blo-bzang-'phrin-las,

this order proceeds from easiest to most difficult.

see for instance the colophon of his Legs bshad

= 23a.6),

and

in

of the three activities of the scholar

their typical order,

used by Sa-pa~,
=

explanation

41b.2).

p.

what
382.

is
He

For the order

(D),

p.

61.2.6

the colophon of his Sdeb sbyor, p. 141.3.6 (tha 285a.6

205

8Lho-pa, ka, p. 55b.5.

9Nru!. brgyad ma'i, p. 148.4.4 (tha 300a.4).
lOKong-sprul,
Tshig

Theg pa'i,

.& gter and Sdeb sbyor

~~,

p.

596.

tshogs

The other two such treatises were his

1.Q.&..& chun.I!Q.. Cf. Shakya-mchog-ldan,

p. 95.2.

l1Shakya-mchog-ldan, Chos ill~, p. 466.7.

12Lam 'bras bla ma tshad ma'i lo~, Encyclopedia Tibetica, vol. 106, p.
553.3.

This

goes

back to the Lam 'bras khog phub by

Bla-ma-dam-pa

Bsod-nams-

rgyal-mtshan.
13For

the detailed subject headings of section I as given in Glo-bo mkhan-

chen's KhJNSh, see below, Appendix I.

14For the subject headings of section II as given in the KhJNSh, see below,
Appendix I.
15KhJ
bzhag B&.

(D),

p.

16Shakya-mchog-ldan,
339-342.

de thams cad la ~ ~ re zhig

95.1.6 (tha 191a =29a):

See also above, Introduction, note 6.

Tshad ~ rigs...

dgongs'!:&y!!!!', vol. 9, pp. 302-305,

It is a curious fact that in this system described by Shakya-mchog-ldan,

the formal argument is stated by means of a thesis and reason,

steps prescribed by Dharmakirti and enumerated in the KhJ,

Dharmakirti held the statement of a thesis to be superfluous.

that

and not by the two

III 55 autocommentary.
On the controversy

grew out of Shakya-mchog-ldan's interpretations of the argument

forms,

see

below, KhJ III translation, note 190.

17

See below, KhJ III translation, note 194.

18The 'khor gsum according to modern bsdus

.@

tradition are:

(1) rtags grub

(2) khyab ~ grub

(3) dam bca' la bsal ba
A correct prasanga refutation must show the opponent that he is in
with the 'khor gsum.

See 'Jam-dpal-'phrin-las,

p.

contradiction

16b.4: 'khor gsum dngos

206

blo'i lli du gsal bar ston pa'i ched du thal

~ .r!!!!&.

.!!!!&. YlEJ.

'phangs la/

de'i

.l!@!.

tshe

Cf. the classification of rejoinders to thal ~ replies,

KhJ III 65-66, 68, and KhJ III translation, note 220.
19KhJ III 15.
200n classroom debating in Tibetan monasteries, see A. Vostrikov (1935/37),
pp.

60f;

F.

Sierksma (1964),

Perdue (1976),
Tibetan

pp.

29-31;

scholastic

debating

pp.

130-42;

R. A. Stein (1972), pp. 160-163; D.

and Dung-dkar Blo-bzang-'phrin-las, p. 379, note 350.

has only recently begun to be

studied

though its historical development has hardly been touched on.

in

detail,

A logical analysis

of the bsdus grwa debating problems has been made by Margaret E.

Goldberg (1985).

There also exist two doctoral dissertations that I learned of too late to consult,
both apparently concerned mainly with bsdus grwa:
Theory

of

Daniel E. Perdue, "Practice and

Philosophical Debate in Tibetan Buddhist

Education,"

(University

of

Virginia, 1983), and Margaret E. Goldberg, "Argument and Understanding, A Study of

Tibetan Religious Debate" (University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 1984).
an

account

of one modern Geshe's dialectical studies,

see Rato

For

Kyongla

Nawang

see for instance Y.

Bagchi

Losang, !:!y. Life and Lives (1977), pp. 58-74, 105f, and 109-114.
On

Indian non-Buddhist practices of debating,

(1953) and E.

A.

Solomon (1976-78).

Cf.

S.

S.

Barlingay (1965),

Important Sanskrit works on this topic include Udayana's Bodhasiddhi,

Khag4anakhaQ4akhadya,

and ~a~ara Misra's Vadavinoda.

vol. 2, p. 238, note.

21KhJ III 15, autocommentary.

See U.

pp.

193f.

Sri Har~a's

Mishra (1957-66),

Chapter 9
COMMENTARIES ON THE MKHAS 'JUG

The Mkhas

like at least eight other works by

~~,

Sa-pa~,

became in later

a subject for the commentarial writings of Sa-skya-pa scholars. 1

times

only one systematic,

was the Mkhas

However,

full-length exposition of the KhJ was ever completed.

.1@. ~ ~

pa' i sgo' i

~.m!!:.

This

bshad lli!. ill gnas gsal byed (Mkhas

bshad= KhJNSh) by Glo-bo mkhan-chen Bsod-nams-lhun-grub (1456-1532).

Nevertheless, several minor commentarial works were written before and after Glo-

bo mkhan-chen's work,
finished.

and at least one other major commentary was begun but

not

The Earliest Commentators

In

the colophon at the end of his commentary,

Glo-bo mkhan-chen

two earlier scholars who had written in connection with the KhJ.
disciple Lho-pa kun-mkhyen Rin-chen-dpal (fl.
Glo-bo

mkhan-chen

Buddhist .tenets
was

in

c.

1165-c.

1240).

One was

Sa-pa~'s

He is said by

to have slightly elucidated the section on Buddhist

in section III of the KhJ (III 43-46).2

mentions

and

non-

This passage by

Lho-pa

fact intended as a clarification of the teachings on tenets (grub

mtha')

found

in Rje-btsun Grags-pa-rgyal-mtshan's Rnam bshad ~ ldan commentary on the

Hevajra Mulatantra. 3 Lho-pa's work seems to have been a short treatise entitled
Rnam bshad ~ ldan gsal byed. 4
A second

early

commentarial work belonged to a

slightly

later

period.

Though it does not survive,

of

it is described by Glo-bo mkhan-chen as being "a few

'Phags-pa Rin-po-che's oral sayings set down as notes." 5 Perhaps this refers

to a manuscript of the KhJ to which Sa-pa~'s nephew 'Phags-pa Blo-gros-rgyalmtshan (1235-1280) had added annotations or glosses that consisted of Sa-pa~'s own
oral explanations. 6

Gser-mdog Pan-chen Shakya-mchog-ldan

(A)
completed

L
i

The Incomplete Commentary.

his commentary,

Some decades before Glo-bo

his former teacher Shakya-mchog-ldan

mkhan-chen

(1428-1507)

had

i.
I

208

already

begun a full-length exposition of the KhJ.

unknown,

he

was

not

able to finish it.

Yet for reasons that are

Only the beginning--a

very

now

detailed

introduction and comment on the first few verses--survives in his published collected works (vol. 24, pp. 67-102).7 On the first folio there is found the title
Mkhas .ru! la ~ pa'i sgo 'i ~ bshad dri Ian dang bcas .ru!.
Probably this title
was given by the person who compiled Shakya-mchog-ldan's complete works or this
I,

I,
i

manuscript set of them,

answers

for the title refers also to a second work:

to questions put to him about the KhJ.

a series

These answers to questions

of

(~

Ian) form in fact the third work grouped under this title; just before it there is
yet another incomplete commentary on a different work,

.& chun

Sdeb

Sa-pa~'s

sbyor~!Q&

..P.Q..

In the extant fragment of his KhJ commentary, Shakya-mchog-ldan used all of

eighteen

folios

to explain only as far as KhJ I 6

with

autocommentary.

verses with autocommentary constitute less than three percent of the KhJ.

These
Thus he

began it on a large scale and it would have been a monumental work had he finished
it.

The

which

following

subject headings give a good idea of the

thoroughness

Shakya-mchog-ldan treated his subject (the pagination here is that

work, not of the volume):

I. [tIka'i klad kyi don]
A. mchod brjod (rtsa 'grel) (lb.1)
B. rtsom par dam bca' ba (rtsa 'grel) (2a.1?)
II. [t1ka'i gzhung gi don]
A. sngon du 'gro ba thog mali don (2a.6)
1. rang gzhung gi mtshan don la rmongs pa sel byed
2. rang gzhung mdzad po dam par rtogs byed (2b.7)
a. rtsa ba gzhung ji Ita ba bzhin du sor gzhag pa (2b.7)
b. 'grel pa gzhung ji Ita ba bzhin du sor gzhag pa
c.

rtogs par dka' ba 'grel bshad kyis kha bskang ba (3a.1)

i. [mchod brjod kyi] dgos pa (3a.4)
ii. bsdus pa'i don (3a.5)
[iii. tshig don?]

iv. mtshams sbyar (3b.3)

v. brgal Ian (3b.4)
3. brtsam bya ma Ius pa mthar son byed do (4a.1)
a. rtsom par dam bca' dngos
i. gzhung ji Ita ba bzhin thad sor bzhag pa
(A) dgos pa'i don (4a.2)
(B) bsdus pa'i don (4a.3)

of

with
the

209

(C) mtshams sbyar (4a.4)

(D) brgal Ian (4a.5)
ii. ~ika byed pas kha bskang ba (4b.l)
(A) sgra
(1) rang bzhin
(2) rkyen
(3) rnam 'gyur (4b.7)
(B) rnam par phye ba (5a.5)
(C) byed tshig (5b.6)
(D) dpe (5b.5)
(E) tshig gi rgyan (6a.4)
(F) dbye bsdu (6a.5)
(G) grangs nges (6b.l)
(H) go rims nges pa (6b.3)
b. rtsom pa po nyid kyi mtshan dang yon tan brjod pa (6b.6)
i. rtsa bas mdor bstan pa
ii. de nyid 'grel pas rgyas par bshad pa
iii. 'grel bshad kyis kha bskang ba (6b.7)
(A) mtshan
(B) dgos don
(C) shes par bya bali yul bstan pa (8a.5)
iv. [?] bsdus pari don (9a.6)
(A)
(B)

rtsa 'grel gzhung ji Ita ba bzhin du bri ba

gal che bali don tshan kha cig 'grel bshad kyis kha bskang
(1) rkang pa dang po gnyis: shes bya ji Ita ba la nges par mkhas
dgos pari don la sbyar ba (9a.7)
(a)

phyi

rol pa dang thun mong

gis dbang du

by~d

pa

(i) thun mong du grags pa mu stegs kyi (9b.2)

(ii)

phyi

nang gang du yang mi 'du ba kla klo'i chos

grags pa (10a.2)
(b) thun mong rna yin pa sang rgyas kyi bstan pari

dbang

su
du

byas pa (12b.l)
(i) bye mdo gnyis kyi bdag rned
(ii) theg chen las/ dbu rna'i Ita ba ngos 'dzin (13b.4)
A. phar phyin lugs
1. rang stong
2. gzhan stong
B. sngags kyi lugs (13b.6)
(2)

rkang pa phyi rna dag gis rnam dpyod kyi rtsal grub

pas

ni

210

shes

bya

ji snyed pa'i tshogs la'ang brtson 'grus rtsom

dgos

par bstan pa (14b.4)

(a) rig gnas chung ba (lsa.l?)
(b) tshad ma (lsa.s)
(c) sgra (lsb.s)
(d) gso ba (16a.s)
(e) bzo (16b.4)
(f) nang rig pa (16b.7)
c.

[?] bstan bcos 'di'i Ius rnam par gzhag pa (18b.s)

i. mkhas par bya ba'i yul bden gnyis shes tshul
mkhas par byed pa'i yul can rtsom 'chad rtsod gsum la mkhas

ii.

dgos

par bstan pa
(A) ming gi sgo nas mdor bstan
(B) don gyi sgo nas rgyas par bshad pa
(1) rtsom pa la mkhas par bya dgos pa
(2) 'chad pa la mkhas par bya dgos pa
(3) rtsod pa la mkhas par bya dgos pa

(B) [Mkhas
The

second

questions

work

dris Ian]

posed

by his disciple Glo-bo

twenty-one in all.
the

unfinished commentary.

collected

mkhan-chen.

These

questions

The answers to them fill pages 113-149 of vol.

mchog-ldan's Collected Works,

as

The Answers to Glo-bo mkhan-chen's Questions.

by Shakya-mchog-ldan on the KhJ is the answers he gave

to

the

numbered

24 of Shakya-

and thus they form a work of nearly the same length

As mentioned above,

these answers occur in

works a bit after the incomplete KhJ commentary,

because

another

the
un-

finished exegetical work--this one on Sa-pal}'s Sdeb sbyor sna tshogs me ..t2&. .&i
chun ]2--intervenes between them. 8
The
are

questions by Glo-bo mkhan-chen,and Shakya-mchog-ldan's answers to them

impossible

to date precisely.

Shakya-mchog-ldan's

They were seemingly written

long visit to Lo in 1472-1474,

sometime

but probably not

after

many

years

after

the death of Rgyal-tshab Kun-dga'-dbang-phyug in 1478, because sometime in

the subsequent years their relations soured. 9 When writing his questions, Glo-bo

mkhan-chen

was thus probably in his late teens or early twenties.

Some

of

the

questions may have been suggested to him by his learned tutors.

The subjects of the twenty-one questions are as follows:
(1) Does the sgra spyi'i snang ba of the KhJ (I 13,
a "sound" (sgra)?

(pp. 114.3-115.6)10

autocommentary) count as

211

(2)

The

ming,

Rnam.m!!:. bshad pa'i

and

Yh~

bsdu ba and the relationship of the

levels of language described in KhJ I 13-15.

tshig,

(pp. 115.6-

118.4)
(3)

The

different accounts of the twelve vowels in the

(pp. 118.4-119.4)

(4) The originality of statements by Sa-pa9 in the KhJ.

(5)

Different

teaching methods for expounding

Lankavatara

11

Sutras

Sutra.

(pp. 119.4-120.7)
and

Tantras.

(pp.

120.7-124.4)
(6)

The

teaching

methods

definitely needed for any

whether Sutra, Tantra or Sastra (KhJ II 5, 8).

and

all

(7) Why do all writers not use a brief introductory outline (Ius

(KhJ I II)?

scriptures,

(pp. 124.4-126.1)
~

(pp. 126.1-127.4)

(8) Why do these "doors of firm retention" belong only to Saints of the great

stages (bhumi) (KhJ II 29, autocommentary)? (pp. 127.4-128.2)

(pp.
(9) The position of the Pratyekabuddha in siddhanta (KhJ III 21).
128.2-129.4)
(10) The scriptural basis for the fivefold classification of non-Buddhist
dialecticians (KhJ III 43).12 (pp. 129.4-130.4)
(11) What passage in the Tarkajvala states that Tirthika theories can be
classified into one hundred types (KhJ III 43, autocommentary)?
(pp.
130.5-131.3)
(12) The twofold division of tenets according to permanence and annihilation
in KhJ III 43, autocommentary, and its apparent contradiction of the
Madhyamakaloka. (pp. 131.3-132.6)
(13) The classification of the MIma~saka as annihilationist by some Tibetan
scholars (cf. KhJ III 43). (pp. 132.6-133.3)
(14) The apparent differentiation between the Sa~hya and the Kapila in the
Jnanasarasamuccaya (cf. KhJ III 43). (pp. 133.3-134.7)
(15) Origins of the pragmatic, materialistic doctrines of statecraft associated with K~atriya rulers (KhJ III 43, autocommentary).
(pp. 134.7135.5)

(16)

Different classifications of the Mima~saka and the Vedantin in the

KhJ

(III 43) and in the Tarkajvala. (pp. 135.6-137.3)

(17) Btsun-pa Dge-srungs (~ubhagupta) and his Phyi rol don sgrub: Sautrantika
or Yogacarin?

(18)

(pp. 137.3-138.7)

Interpretation of the statement in the Jfianasarasamuccaya about

tioned objects not existing.

(19)

The classification of Dignaga as a Sakarin in

(pp. 140.4-141.7)

condi-

(pp. 139.1-140.4)
the

Jnanasarasamuccaya.

....
212

(20)

Are there taught in authoritative scriptures any classifications of the

Madhyamaka

besides

commentary)? 13

(21)

Are

such

Svatantrika and Prasangika

(cf.

KhJ

III

46,

auto-

(pp. 143.1-147.1)
designations as

"Mdo-sde-spyod-pa'i-dbu-ma-pa"

(Cf. KhJ III 40, autocommentary)

acceptable?

(pp. 147.1-148.1)

Glo-bo mkhan-chen Bsod-nams-lhun-grub

The
mentioned
(Mkhas

only

known

extant and complete commentary on the KhJ is

Mkhas ~ rnams ~ pa' i sgo' i rnam

rnam bshad) by Glo-bo mkhan-chen.

of Rnam-rgyal-dpal-bzang-po,
gyal

l@!.

the king of Gu-ge,

beginni~g

monastery

of

in the thams cad 'dul year (=fire-pig,

Bsam-grub-gling,

breathed his last.

the

above-

gsal

He wrote this work at the

byed

request

work on it at the Nam-

monastery (Thub-bstan-dar-rgyas-gling-gi-chos-sde) in Lo.14

after a long delay,

the

bshad ~.ill. gnas

He completed it

1527) at the

place in Lo where some five years

smaller
later

he

In the colophon he explains that the long delay in completing

the work was because of harms caused by "barbarians of the degenerate age" (snyigs
dus

kla

threatened
commentary,

klo).

to

This

was

a reference to the

Turkic Moslem
15
While

attack Lo several times in the early 1500s.

Glo-bo mkhan-chen was assisted by a secretary

monk Kun-dga'-rgyal-mtshan-dpal-bzang-po.

(Li~~),

When he finally completed

raiders

who

writing

his

the learned
it,

Glo-bo

mkhan-chen had reached the then very venerable age of seventy-one.

An

old manuscript of this commentary,

silver characters on polished black paper,

with alternating lines of gold

and

is preserved in the Tayo Bunko, Tokyo;

it

is manuscript no. 43 in the Tibetan collection.

The same text has been pub16
I am told that a different manuscript of the work also exists
lished in India.

in

the set of Glo-bo mkhan-chen's writings that is preserved in the Lo village of

Gelung. 17

The Taya Bunko manuscript of this commentary once formed the last volume in
a

set of the author's collected works that had been arranged into eight

volumes.
volume

physical

A few other pieces of this set also survive in the Tayo Bunko, including
one (ka),

which is manuscript no.

44 of the

Tibetan

collection.

This

volume is of special importance because on the verso side of the first folio there
is an inscription in which the patrons who commissioned the manuscript are named:
.!.~

lha rigs mkhyen brtse'i mgon//

sa dbang bsam grub dpal rab 'bar//

lha~.!.

mchog skye dgu'i dpal//

chos skyong .!:..8.Y!!.l mor bcas rnams .!:..8.Y!!.l/ /

213

The

Lo ruler Bsam-grub-dpal-'bar belonged to the tenth generation of the

counting from the great early king A-ma-dpal,

and he flourished c.

son

Tshe-dbang

A-mchog

Skye-dgu'i-dpal

succeeded him,

(also known as

flourishing in c.

1700.

or

lineage
18
1675.
His

Gtsug-rgyan-nor-bu)

Therefore the manuscript can confidently

be dated to the second half of the 17th century.

Glo-bo mkhan-chen felt a special devotion toward
autobiography

Sa-pa~.

He records in his

that one of the turning points in his life was the inspiration

and

faith that arose in him when as a young monk he read the minor writings of Sa19
In the course of his scholarly career, Glo-bo mkhan-chen became the most
pal}-.
prolific contributor of commentarial and other secondary writings connected with
Sa-pa9's
Sdom

works.

In addition to the KhJ commentary, he wrote on the Rigs

20
and Thub ~ dgongs gsa1.
Though as a scholar he

reached the attainments of his senior contemporaries Go-rams-pa and

ldan,

the teacher of the Sa-sky a bdag-chen Sa-lo 'Jam-pa'i-rdo-rje

kun-dga'-bsod-nams)
the tenth abbot,

(1485-1533) and of several great masters of

Dkon-mchog-lhun-grub (1497-1557).

never

Shakya-mchog-

he was much respected within the Sa-skya and Ngor-pa traditions;

fact

rab

gter,

sgum rab dbye,

he was in

('Jam-dbyangsNgor,

including

His writings on the Sdom sgum

dbye in particular are valuable for an understanding of the late-15th-century

schism within Sa-skya-pa scholasticism caused by the controversial questions

21
doctrines of Shakya-mchog-ldan.

and

Glo-bo mkhan-chen's interpretations of the KhJ reflected the understandings

he

had worked out over many decades.

man,

and

he

tried

He had begun his study of it when a

to resolve some of its difficult points by

outstanding teacher Shakya-mchog-ldan.

to the study of

Sa-pa~'s

questioning

the

When he finally wrote his commentary many

years later and near the end of his life,

contribution

young

he must have viewed this work as a last

writings and as a final token of his

loyal

devotion to that great saint and genius.

Glo-bo

mkhan-chen's general procedure as a commentator was sound.

explains in his colophon,

Indian
and
tary,

As

he sought to understand Sa-pal}-'s words in light of

he
the

Buddhist treatises on the relevant topics (in their Tibetan translations)

22
Sa-pa~ had taught elsewhere.
While preparing the commen-

in light of what

he went through all of

Sa-pa~'s

accessible works,

looking for explanations

of the same or similar points.

He also set great store by the writings of Sa23
a
p 9's direct student Lho-pa kun-mkhyen Rin-chen-dpal.
One finds several of Lho24
pals works quoted or cited in the commentary.
Glo-bo
Sanskrit

mkhan-chen's

main

language and grammar.

Sanskrit was far from perfect,

regard

to

He admits in his colophon that his knowledge

weakness as a commentator was

with

of

and that therefore he has relied upon the writings

of other scholars for this and related topics.

He mentions for instance that

he

214

sent

questions

translator

about various difficult points concerning grammar to the

Zhwa-lu lo-tsa-ba Chos-skyong-bzang-po (b.

1441),

received the answers he incorporated them into the commentary.

his

sources

paq-chen,

on alamkarasastra such great early authorities as

eminent
when

he

He also lists as
Mkhan-po

Kha-che

Dpang-lo chen-po Blo-gros-brtan-pa, Snar-thang lo-tsa-ba Sa~ghasri, and

26
lo-tsa-ba Ngag-gi-dbang-phyug.
However, neither here nor elsewhere

Sa-bzang
does

25

and that

he mention Shakya-mchog-ldan as one of his informants.

date--some

twenty

Even at

this

years after Shakya-mchog-ldan's death--the question of

mkhan-chen's early studies under Shakya-mchog-ldan and their subsequent

late
Glo-bo

doctrinal

opposition was apparently still a sensitive issue.

nations

As an exegete, Glo-bo mkhan-chen is often disappointing because his explaare either too brief or non-existent.
On many occasions instead of a

gloss or a paraphrase he simply gives a quotation of the passage in extenso,

no

comment

thought
But we

besides

an introductory subject heading.

It seems

that

with

where

he

Sa-paq's text was understandable he preferred to let it speak for itself.

should be grateful for these quotes for another reason: they sometimes

contain different readings which help clarify textual problems.

Some of the most valuable and interesting parts of the commentary are
bo

mkhan-chen's

discussions

of a general topic

that

(~don)

Glo-

introduce

his

comments on the actual words of a particular section of the treatise (gzhung don).
He

gives

a useful preliminary discussion of poetics (pp.

83b.3-101a.1)

and

an

interesting sketch of the origins of the dialectical treatises that were the basis
for

Indian

indicate

traditions

to

what

of debate (pp.

237b-254a).

These

extent Tibetan scholars of the 15th and

general
16th

discussions

centuries

were

familiar with the Indian sources of their scholarly traditions.

Another

important section of the commentary is the introductory

biography

of Sa-skya Paqgita.
It is one of the longest extant biographies of Sa-pa?, being
some forty folios long in the Taya Bunko manuscript and thus constituting about
one-eighth of the work.
Printed in the Derge long-page (ldeb ring) format, the
biography comes to some thirty folios, and thus it was the longest biography of
27
Sa-paq that is known to have existed in that time.
(The later versified biography

composed

by Rin-spungs-pa Ngag-dbang-'jigs-med-grags-pa in 1579 comes

to

some 78 folios in its Derge edition, making it the only extant biography that is
greater in sheer length. 28 ) This biography by Glo-bo mkhan-chen became as long as
it

did

because it was filled out with extensive quotations from

writings

and
from Khams. 29
This

historian

Sa-pa?'s

with some related materials that were then only recently

biography won the approval of the discerning Sa-skya-pa

'Jam-mgon A-mes-zhabs Ngag-dbang-kun-dga'-bsod-nams

minor

recovered

scholar

(1597-1659).

and
The

215

latter in fact admired it so much that he incorporated nearly the whole of it into
his classic history of the Sa-skya 'Khon family, the Sa skya

.&.!!!!!!8.

rabs chen !!Q..30

In the colophon to that work, A-mes-zhabs lists many of his sources, but strangely
enough he

does not mention the source of this biography, even though it forms
31
one-tenth of his work.
Nevertheless, Glo-bo mkhan-chen's name does

nearly

appear at least once in this lengthy quotation.

On p. 100.2 (50b.2), A-mes-zhabs

indicates that Glo-bo mkhan-chen was the source of a short explanatory note (mchan

mv.

The note reads: ' di 'i khri .ill zangs tsha' i mdzad ~ khyad .ill!!. ~ ~

E:!!. zhes chos ill.&12. bo mkhan chen

7b.7) there is this similar note,

bshad do.

In the commentary itself

'di 'i khri .ill zangs tshas mdzad

chen's students:

(p.

apparently the addition of one of Glo-bo mkhan~

khyad

..Q!!!. ~

.&!!!!&.

.!!SQ..

A-mes-zhabs copied the biography almost word-for-word (compare KhJNSh, pp.

4a.3-43b.3).
One significant departure from Glo-bo mkhan-chen's text that I have
noticed

is

an

60a.4-61a.6
purportedly
81b.1]),

addition by A-mes-zhabs to the list of Sa-paQ's writings

(compare KhJNSh,
sent

and

the

p.

22a.3).

Others are the letter of

by the Mongol prince Kodan to Sa-paQ (pp.

letter

ostensibly sent by Sa-paQ to the

on

156.4-162.1
Tibetans

pp.

invitation
[78b.4-

after 'his

meeting with Kodan (p. 134.1-6 [67b.1-6]).

Mkhan-chen Ngag-dbang-chos-grags
The

most

recent commentarial work on the KhJ came from the pen of

chen Ngag-dbang-chos-grags (1572-1641).

able,

and

mkhan-

This commentary itself is not now avail-

it is known only from lists of its author's writings.

One

of

these

lists is found in a bibliography of Sa-skya-pa works entitled Dkar chag chos mdzod
~

Appey
rare

ba'i Ide .!!!!&. that was compiled in the early 1960s by the Venerable Khenpo
and slightly supplemented later by another scholar. 32 For the contents of
collected works,

dbyangs

Khenpo Appey based himself mainly on a notebook

Mkhyen-brtse'i-dbang-po

(1820-1892)

written in the latter's

of

'Jam-

own

hand.

Khenpo Appey was able to borrow this notebook from the Mkhyen-brtse mchod-dpon
1960 when compiling the bibliography in Sikkim,
unknown.
In
given as

that bibliography,

of

bshad

in
are
is
.!!QL

This title indicates that the work was a general exposition of

the purport of the work.

the title of Ngag-dbang-chos-grags's commentary

Mkhas ~ ~ sgo' i dgongs ~ spyi' i .!!ru!&..&i. bstan ~ legs

bu'i 2hreng mdzes.

biography

but its present whereabouts

An almost identical title for this work is given in the

Ngag-dbang-chos-grags,

the

second

source

where

the

work

is

216

mentioned. 33

The only difference between the wordings of the titles is that

biography gives

~~

in the place of

the

bstan~.

It is regrettable that this commentary is not available, for it promises by

its title to discuss the main points that

Sa-pa~

had in mind when writing the KhJ.

One would expect that Ngag-dbang-chos-grags explained in it some of the thornier

passages in the work.
Ngag-dbang-chos-grags's comments would in any case deserve
careful consideration
skya-pas.
There
lected

because he was one of the last great

pa~gitas

of

is reason to think that this commentary is still extant.

the

Sa-

The

col-

writings of Ngag-dbang-chos-grags are reported by a recent Tibetan visitor

to Sa-skya to survive there still,

in the Lha-khang chen-mo.

With a little luck,

this work may turn up among them.

Conclusion
Thus the KhJ was commented upon by some of the greatest scholars of the Saskya-pa tradition.

But strangely enough, no living Sa-skya-pa scholar known to me

remembered reading any of these commentaries in Tibet.

A possible reason for this

was that the KhJ was not one of the works regularly studied and taught in the

Sa-

skya-pa seminaries in recent times (nor was it a core work in the Sa-skya-pa
curriculums during the previous periods of highly flourishing scholarship).34 The
greatest
time

scholars

of all traditions no doubt continued to read it from

down to the present,

but one would guess that the formal public

Sa-pa~'s

exposition

(bshad ~ of the work within the Sa-skya-pa had died out by the late-17th
early-18th century as a part of the general decline of Sa-skya-pa scholarship
an

era dominated politically and economically by the Dga'-ldan pho-brang and

or
in
the

great Dge-lugs-pa convents.

from

Another reason some of these commentaries were unknown to recent scholars

Tibet was that the writings of most of these commentators were, in general,

very scarce in Tibet.

circulate

widely,

xylographic
remained
there

was

pressed
writings
they

printing;

more

The writings of Glo-bo mkhan-chen,

for instance,

even

those of his works that had been printed

35
In the case of Shakya-mchog-ldan's

would

Of

Derge

course

have to do directly with the KhJ are minor or fragmentary

not in any case have been likely to circulate widely apart

One might have expected at least the commentary by

by

writings,

they had been forcibly

by the Dge-lugs-pa authorities since the 17th century.36

collected works.

at

or less unknown.

an additional reason for their scarcity:

that

did not

except for the few works that had been published from Ngor

suphis

works-from

the

Ngag-dbang-

217

chos-grags to have been known to modern Sa-skya-pa scholars.

He ,was a highly
reputed savant, and many of his works were not only printed but also in common use
as textbooks (11& cha) in the college of scriptural and dialectical studies (bshad
grwa)

at Sa-skya.

But the KhJ itself was not part of any curriculum of studies,

and this commentary on it was certainly not a required textbook.

not

Indeed,

yet definitely known whether it was actually ever printed together

it

with

is
the

numerous other published works of Ngag-dbang-chos-grags.

rl

218
,I
!

NOTES

1See

D.

work.

This

Since then I have come across a commentarial writing on a ninth

is Ngor dpon-slob Ngag-dbang-legs-grub's Phyag mtshan ri mo'i

tshig las 'phros pa'i dris lan,

mtshan

There I listed commentaries on eight works in-

Jackson (1983a).

cluding the KhJ.

ri mo'i bstod tshig (TB no.

reply

to

rdzogs

questions)

bstan

which was a clarification of Sa-pal}'s small Phyas.

75).

This "commentary" (actually it

was published at the end

of

was

Ngag-dbang-legs-grub's

pa 'i nyams len sdom .E!!. gsum gtan la 'bebs.E!!. 'jam d byangs bla
See pp. 192f of the Khams xylograph of both works that has

dgongs~.

Yongs
rna' i
been

republished from New Delhi in 1979 by T. G. Dhongthog Rinpoche.

2KhJNSh,

p.
gsal byed duj

mtha'i
byas

le'u gsum pa'i

.P!:!.v!. nang .&i grub mtha'i gsal byed cung

This apparently refers to the passage on pp. 263a.6-265b.5.

~.

again quoted on the Madhyamaka view on pp. 281a.6-283a.2.

Lho-pa is

The quote from the Rnam

bshad .!!!!&. ldan begins on p. 265a.1.

3Grags-pa-rgyal-mtshan,
~

'joms

KhJNSh,

.p!!!:.

pp.

See D.

byed pa' i

265a.1-265b.5.

Snellgrove (1959),

~ gnyis pa' i ~.P!!!:. bshad .I!1! rna .!!!!&. .I!1!

'grel .!!!!&. ldan, SKKB, vol. 3, pp. 133.2.4-3.4. Cf.
Brtag

The
vol.

verse commented upon is Hevajra Tantra I,x,12.

2,

4Dkon-mchog-lhun-grub's Gsan
lung
as:

pp.

11&

36f and the commentary,

(Chos kri~, p. 144a.1) records that the

transmission for this work existed in the 16th century.

lho

p. 132.

mdzad pa'i .!!!!&. ldan grub mtha'i gsal byed.

There it is listed

Also listed is

Lho-pa's

(and Dmar-ston's) Legs bshad sgrung 'grel.

Glo-bo mkhan-chen in his KhJNSh, p. 263a.6, introduces the passage with the

words: ~ .!!!!&..&i don la chos kri r je' i 1@!:!!!&. sgros ~ ba' i bshes ~ lho .I!1!
kun mkhyen ~ bkod .I!1! ni.
Compare the later reference to Lho-pa's unavailable
Gsung sgros rna commentary on the Bodhisattvacaryavatara (KhJNSh,

p.

281a.6):

.!!!!&. .&i don bdag nyid chen po' i dgongs .I!1! .i!. Ita ba bzhin tuj lho.I!1! kun mkhyen
rin chen dpal

~ ~ ~

5KhJNSh,

p.

1i ka

301 b .2: bla rna chos

sgros mar bkod [281 b] .I!1! ni.

kri .!:&Y!!l .E.2. ~ .I!1!

.&i sgros mchan bur btab .I!1! phran tshegs tsam.

rin .E.2. che' i

219

6If this is the meaning,

instead

]Q.

as I take it to be, a better reading would be rin

of rin .l!2. che' i.

'Phags-pa would then have

been

merely

the

recorder of the "oral sayings" (~.&!. sgros), and Sa-pa~ would be the probable
source of them, as in the case of the above-mentioned Gsung sgros ~ commentary of
Lho-pa.
poetics,

'Phags-pa himself was not known to have been a great master of grammar,
Sanskrit, or Prama~a, and thus it is unlikely that he originated these

explanations.
784),

where

See also the Blue Annals of 'Gos lo-tsa-ba (G.

Roerich [1976], p.

'Phags-pa is said to have admitted not having learned

Sa-pa~'s

Tshig .&!. gter and Sdeb sbyor ~ tshogs me .!Q&..&!. chun.2..

'Phags-pa,
did know some poetics and was certainly capable of elegant composition.
71 am indebted to Mr.
dga'-grol-mchog,

Zhen

Shakya-mchog-ldan's

~,

minor

E.
p.

works

however,

Gene Smith for first showing me this work.

24a.3,

works.

also

Other works by

listed in Kun-dga'-grol-mchog, Rnam thar

~,

Kun-

referred to this work in a list

Shakya-mchog-ldan

are

of

found

pp. 4a-4b.

80n this commentary see D. Jackson (1983a), pp. 7f.

9Glo-bo mkhan-chen records in his autobiography

27a)
the

~,

p.

that the signal of Shakya-mchog-ldan's worsened attitude toward him came

in

latter's

(~

reply to Glo-bo mkhan-chen's request that he write a detailed

graphy of Rgyal-tshab Kun-dga'-dbang-phyug (1424-1478).

mkhan-chen himself wrote the only known biography of
is

a short work entitled Bla ma'i

read a 16-folio manuscript in Lumbini.

where

btsun bsod

Kun-dga'-dbang-phyug.

thar rin chen phreng ba,

This

of which I

It also exists in the Taya Bunko,

it is found in the fragments of Glo-bo mkhan-chen's

146b.1-178a.1.

bio-

As it turned out, Glo-bo

works,

vol.

once
Tokyo,

ka,

pp.

He wrote this work in a dog year (1490?).

Relations between the two were still good as late as 1479, for that is when
Shakya-mchog-ldan

wrote

a history of Rngog lo-tsa-ba Blo-ldan-shes-rab

school at Glo-bo mkhan-chen's request.

~

bstan

See Shakya-mchog-ldan,

.fu!&2.8.

.i!:. 1 tar bskyangs pa' i tshul mdo tsam du EB!. ba

and

his

10 tstsha ba

.!!&Q. mtshar

gtam

Eli rol mo, Collected Works, vol. 16, p. 456.

10

Shakya-mchog-ldan in his answer to this question refers to a criticism of

the

KhJ by Dpang lo-tsa-ba,

the sgra

I1Shakya-mchog-ldan's
anything

but states that Dpang 10 erred there in

considering

snang ba as permanent.

answer was that the KhJ was not intended to teach

that was new or not contained in the great treatises of Buddhist India.

220

But because in

Sa-pa~'s

so

been well explained in Tibet,

far

not

time the methods of composition, exposition and debate had

Sa-pa~

was

motivated

precisely

to

expound these topics.

12r

have

studied this question (and Shakya-mchog-ldan's answer)

in

more

detail in D. Jackson (1985), p. 9, note 7.

13This

question gave Shakya-mchog-Idan an opportunity to explain his posi-

tion regarding the gzhan stong tradition of Madhyamaka.

Glo-bo mkhan-chen

could

never agree with Shakya-mchog-ldan's teachings on this point.

14KhJNSh,
cousin

since

301b 4

p.

The

Gu-ge king may have been Glo-bo

the latter's mother was a Gu-ge princess.

mkhan-chen's

The king may also

have

been the Rnam-rgyal-dpal-bzang-po of Gu-ge mentioned near the beginning of a

long

list of Shakya-mchog-ldan's students.

See Kun-dga'-grol-mchog, Paodita, p. 228.

5
The threatened invasions--which apparently never
p. 301 a
for Lo proper--disrupted life in many parts of Western Tibet in the

15KhJNSh,
materialized
early 1500s.
and

See for instance Kun-dga'-grol-mchog,

106a.

See

also

Dpal ldan, pp. 90b.2, 93a.5,

the biography of Legs-ldan-bdud-'joms-rdo-rje

in

Khetsun

Sangpo, Biographical Dictionary, vol. 3, pp. 383 and 385. The disturbances referred to in the latter seem to date to 1520-21. See further the biography of the
'Ba'-ra-ba
chen mo,

teacher Nam-mkha'-rdo-rje (1486-1553) in the Bka' brgyud

vol.

2,

1527:

.!!&!!!!.8.

chen

~~

p.

phr~ng

591, where it is mentioned that there were such dangers c.

10 bzhi bcu zhe gnyis

ba.

gser

.kv! dus E./ stod

nas hor ill ~ .E

Other references are found in Dkon-mchog-yon-tan-rgyal-mtshan,

Ri-khrod-pa, Dgos 'dod

kun~,

pp. 229.5, 677.2, 998.5 and 1001.3.

The general Mirza Haidar under the Chagatay sultan Sa'id of Yarkand invaded
Ladakh

and

western Tibet in 1531 and 1548,

Denison Ross, trans.,

456.

according to N.

Elias

ed.

and

E.

! History of the Moghuls of Central Asia, pp. 12-15, 270 and

H. Hoffmann (1975), p. 31, mentions invasions in 1517 and 1533.

16New Delhi, Ngawang Topgye, 1979.
17Another manuscript may survive in the Sa-skya Lha-khang-chen-mo.

Glo-bo
(also

mkhan-chen's
called

mkhan-chen's
Sngags-'chang

main

disciples

'Jam-pa'i-rdo-rje).
collected

works

was

Sa-lo

One of

'Jam-dbyangs-kun-dga'-bsod-nams

The practice of reciting the lung

continued at Sa-sky a until at least

Ngag-dbang-kun-dga'-rin-chen (1517-1584).

the

of

Glo-bo
time

See A-mes-zhabs,

of

221

gling,

p.

At

546.3.

one

time one or more manuscripts of Glo-bo

mkhan-chen's

writings also existed at Ngor.

Some of Glo-bo mkhan-chen's main commentarial writings were also printed at
Derge,

perhaps as late as four decades ago.

See below,

note 20.

In addition,

manuscripts of many of Glo-bo mkhan-chen's works were taken to Beijing and are now
kept in the Mi-rigs-dpe-mdzod-khang there.
Bod~~,

See vol.

1 of the library catalogue,

under Klo-bo mkhan-chen.

180n the dating of this ruler and his son, see D. Jackson (1984), pp. 129f.

lli

19G1o-bo mkhan-chen,

btsun bsod nams, p. 21a.

This event happened when

he was about 16.

200n the Rigs gter, Glo-bo mkhan-chen composed the commentary Tshad rna rigs
pa 'i gter ill' grel pa' i !:lli!!!!. ~ bshad .p!! rigs .p!! rna Ius .p!! la ~ pa' i ~.
According to the colophon, he wrote it in 1482, i.e. when only twenty-six years of
age

(he

could be expected to have received considerable help from

This work has already been published twice:

on

the basis of a cursive MS from Glo-bo,

Ewam Choden Ngorpa Centre,

different title.

and a second time from Dehra Dun

least

bshad
works.

intended to help
.p!!

.p!!

Finally, Glo-bo mkhan-chen also composed a work

TShad.!!. rigs gter

ill

rigs lam gsal byed.

connection with the Thub pa'i dgongs gsal,

three

(Pal

1985) on the basis of the Derge xylograph, which has a

which identifies the piirvapaksas in the Rigs gter:

In

tutors).

T. Kazi, 1970)

Another important work on the Rigs gter was his Rigs gter la

bar mkho ba mtha' gnyis gsal ba.

snga .!:ill!!!!.

his

once from Gangtok (S.

Glo-bo mkhan-chen wrote

One of these is a collection of Siitra quotations which

teachers expounding the text.

gsal ba' i bstan bcos

mdo rnam

bshad

It is entitled
.p!!

rin ..P2. che' i gter.

letter manuscript of this work survives in the Toyo Bunko, Tokyo.

pa'i

at
are

dgongs

A silver-

In addition, he

wrote at least two other teaching aids ('chad thabs) on the Thub pa'i dgongs gsal.
One is potentially of great importance because it gives an account of the obscure
proverbs or fables (gtam brgyud) that Sa-pa~ alludes to as illustrations of certain points.
by the title
commentary
printed
"teaching

In one index of Glo-bo mkhan-chen's works, this commentary is listed

~ ~

was

at Derge,
aid"

lam bzang .&i skabs

composed

by

gtam brgyud nyer mkho.

disciple Zhang

Mdo-sde-dpal,

apparently with Glo-bo mkhan-chen's works.

for the Thub pa'i dgongs gsal,

indexes regarding its title;

Jackson (1983a),

Sa-pa~'s

pp. 4f.

there is some

A similar
and

it

was

As for the third

confusion

there may in fact exist a fourth such work.

in

the

See D.

But the extant xylograph from Derge is said to bear the

222

title Thub pa'i dgongs gsal.&Ii 'chad thabs 'jam dbyangs dgongs rgyan.
Glo-bo

mkhan-chen

wrote at least five works in connection with

the

gswn rab dbye:

(1)

Sdom'p'!!' gswn ill rab tu dbye ba'i dka' ba'i gnas rnam"p!!!' bshad'p'!!' .@.

!!!Q..!ill!.!!!. 'thag

(2) Sdom gsum brgal Ian tshig don !!!!!!!. sel

(3) Sdom

.p.!!.

gsum ill ra b tu d bye ba' i dris Ian lung .8!.. tshad ma

(4) Skal ldan snying .8!.. !!!!!!!. sel lha dbang rdo ill.
(5) Sdom

.p.!!.

gswn ill skabs

kvi bde gshegs snying po'i gsal byed

Probably all five have some connection with the controversy raised
mchog-ldan's questioning of the Sdom gsum rab dbye.
The first and
these
This

was an explication of certain difficult points in the Sdom gswn

and the second work were printed from wooden blocks at Ngor.

136-folio manuscript

rab

dbye.

I have seen a

copy made from the Ngor par-rna edition of the

through the kindness of Mr. E. Gene Smith.

also

by Shakyalongest of

first

work,

An original xylograph of the work (and

of number 4) was photographed in 1984 by the German-Nepal Manuscript Preser-

vation Project.

See L.

van der Kuijp (1985b), pp. 92f.

Nwnber 4 is also access-

ible as a silver-letter manuscript now in the Tayo Bunko.

For more details,

see

D. Jackson (1983a), pp. 18f.

Of

the above-mentioned commentaries and polemical works,

were also printed at Derge,

seemingly in the late 1940s.

fortunately most

These are listed in the

recent index to the Derge printery by Bkra-shis-rdo-rje (Chendu:

dpe skrun khang,

1983),

pp.

Si khron mi rigs

328-330, as follows: mkhan chen bsod nams lhun grub

legs pa'i ~ gnas kYi~ 'bum ~

[1] Sde bdun mdo dang bcas pa'i dgongs 'grel tshad ma rigs

gter .8..Yi

pa'i

'grel ba' i .!ill!.!!!. bshad ill lam gsal ba' i l l i rna ldeb 207
[2] Thub

.p.!!.

dgongs gsal ill 'chad thabs 'jam dbyangs dgongs

[3] Thub pa'i dgongs

.p.!!.

gsal ba'i bstan bcos

kYi mdo roam

.!:&y!!!!

..p!!!.

ldeb 15

bshad

.p.!!.

rin .E.Q.

che'i gter ldeb 78

[4]

pa 'i dgongs gsal .!:8lli sras

Thub

ba'i

pa' i lam ill sgrung

'grel

zla

zer ldeb 144

[5] Dkar chag ldeb 1

[ 6 ] ...pyi

brgal Ian

min gsal byed .8.!!.8. rna' i [sic] dgongs'!:&y!!!! Ide b

11

[7 ]

Slo b dpon bsod nams rtse mos mdzad pa' i !..81!!&. sde

pa'i gsal byed lli ma'i

[8]

Mogon

ldeb 49

..p!!!.

rtogs

.p.!!.

.v.!. roam

..p!!!.

bzhag

zer ldeb 44

rin chen 1 jon shing .8!.. gsal byed rin chen

sgron

223

Sdom gsum.&Ii rab tu 'byed pa'i dris Ian lung .&i tshad

[9]

dgongs
[10]

'khrul

ldeb 57

Mkhas .ill!. rnams

pa 'i

~.vi.!.ill!!!!..lli!f.

bshad .ill!. i l l gnas

gsal

byed

'phrul .&Ii ~ long Ide b 304

[11]

Sde bdun mdo dang bcas pa'i dgongs 'grel tshad

rigs gter la

bar

mkho ba mtha' gnyis gsal byed ldeb 4

Tshad ma rigs gter .&Ii ~ snga .!.ill!!!!..lli!f. bshad .ill!. i l l lam gsal
ldeb 29 rnams mkhan chen gsungs sol.

[12]

Prints of numbers 6 and 7,

as pOinted out to me by Mr.

able on microfiche from IASWR, Stonybrook.

(1449)
works
not

and

11.074 (1450).

Tashi Tsering, are avail-

See also J. Kolmas (1971), nos. 11.073

Somehow in Kolma's index the title pages

of

were included among those of the writings of Mi-pham-rgya-mtsho.

Centre,

listed

in

Beijing.

an

index

See Bod
For

below,

Manduwalla,

of

holdings

of

the

also

Mi-rigs-dpe-mdzod-khang,

9!!!., vol. 1, pp. 88f.

Cf.

complete

works,

see

the list of many of Glo-bo mkhan-chen's works--

at least two manuscript sets of his works which probably came

Sa-skya or Ngor--found in vol.

rigs-dpe-mdzod-khang

if

Chodan

Eleven of these Derge prints are

detailed indexes of G10-bo mkhan-chen's

Appendixes J and K.

fragments

Dun.

of the Tibetan

two

Dehra

these

Most

all of these Derge xylographs have now been reprinted by the Pal Ewam

Ngorpa

byed

1,

pp.

68-88, of Bod

index of some one hundred and eighty collected works)

the heading "Klo-bo mkhan-chen," and E.

from

9!!!. (the Beijing Mi-

under

Gene Smith (1970a), which is based on the

Sa skya pa'i dkar chag compiled by Khenpo Appey.

21

Ngag-dbang-chos-grags,

Bod.ill mkhas (Thimphu ed.),

p.

259, also cites

Glo-bo mkhan-chen in this connection.

22KhJNSh,

p.

301b.5.

In addition, Glo-bo mkhan-chen used materials that

had translated, having apparently had access to a collection of his translations.

He mentions in an introduction that he wrote to a Sa sky a bka' 'bum
Sa-pa~

index

the interesting fact that there were traditionally a four-part and

part collection of
had

translated,

Sa-pa~'s

whereas

collection, did not.

~

la

'bum la/

complete works.
the former,

six-

The latter included the works that he

which was taken as the more

authoritative

See his Skyes rtsa, p. 304.5: chos .ill i l l ~ skya pandita'i

dum bzhi dang/

dum drug tu

.&!J!.&.

.ill!. gnyis ~ ba las/

ni ~ mdzad .ill!. ~ kyang bcug ~ snang basi

snga ~ d bang

..P!!v.i ma

rtsan

la/.

For instance, one of the works he consulted in preparing his Sde bdun mdo . ~
sn~,

was the supplementary explanations that Sa-paQ added to the Vi~esastavatika

of Prajnavarman.

1
I

See the colophon appearing in the Peking Tanjur,

vol.

46,

p.

f'

224

26.3.3-8:
rab

khyad

du

~.ill!!.

bstod pa'i

.!:&.y!!

cher bshad

slob dpon

shes

chas mdzad .ill!. ~ bar skabs ~ tshigs ~ bcad .ill!. bcu gnyis.ill 'grel ~
.!:&.y!! ~ .!!!!. rnyed nasi dus phyis shakya' i ~ slong kun ~ ~ ~ .5!pal
bzang .EQ. zhes ~ bal dpal .. skya' i dgon .ill!!. sbyar ba rdzogs sol I. I am indebted
to Mr. L. van der Kuijp for the latter reference, which reached me as this book
was going to press.
Thus this completion of that commentary is a work mentioned
..8.Q.

li&

in some gsan
listed

as

folios.

(9)

lists,
Khyad

including Gong-dkar 'Phrin-las-rnam-rgyal's where it

~ ~.ill!.

bstod .ill!. .!:&.Y!! cher 'grel pa' i

kha

was

skong,

See also Dalai bla-ma V, no. 14, and Rin-spungs-pa, no. 69.
23 See above, note 4.
24KhJNSh,

included

his

251a.1),

his

pp.

5a.5,

biography of

(p.

242a.5, 251a.1, 263a.6, 281a.6.

5a.5),

These works

a biography of Prajnakaramati

(p.

lli!8. ldan grub mtha'i gsal byed (p. 301b.2), and his Gsung sgros.!!!!.

commentary on the BCA (p.

serve

59b.3,
Sa-pa~

Sa-pa~'s

281a.6).

own explanations,

The latter in particular is thought to

pre-

being based on Lho-pa's notes set down during or

after Sa-pa~'s lectures. The recent Khams xylograph of the latter is not now
accessible.
Glo-bo mkhan-chen in his Rigs gter commentary, Sde bdun mdo .!lli!!!!
bshad, pp.
commentary,

38.3 (19b.3) and 404.4 (202b.6), also quotes from Lho-pa's Prama9a
the Sde bdun gsal ba'i !:&I!!!!..
See also his citation of this work in

Sde bdun mdo ~ bar mkho, p. 63.3 (3a.3), as quoted above, chapter 6, note 73.
25KhJNSh,

pp. 301b.6-302a.4. In the commentary itself, Zhwa-lu lo-tsa-ba

is referred to on pp. 83b.2, 220b.5, and 221b.2. Cf. Glo-bo mkhan-chen's letter
to Zhwa-lu lo-tsa-ba entitled Zha lu 10 tsa ba la dris Ian mdzad .ill!., Collected
Works, vol. 3, pp. 53.1-55.3.
26These are cited for instance in the following places:
Mkhan-po

Kha-che

pa~-chen

(='Jam-dbyangs Kha-che Bsod-nams-dpal,

teacher of

Rong-ston), p. 178b.6.
Dpang

lo-tsa-ba

Blo-gros-brtan-pa,

pp.

145a.5,

162b.1,

172b.1,

178b.6,

184b.5, and 187b.2.

Snar-thang lo-tsa--ba Sa'Pghasd,

pp.

127b.2, 128a.6, 152a.4, 159b.3, 161b.5,

162b.1, 172b.4, 176a.1, 176b.5, 180a.5, 184a.6, and 187b.1.

Sa-bzang lo-tsa-ba Ngag-gi-dbang-phyug, p. 153b.3.
271
Sa skya

have taken this count from the biography as it is incorporated in

&.!!!!!!s.

the

rabs chen!!!Q. (Le. 'Dzam gling ) of A-mes-zhabs, pp. 94.4-154.5

225

The approximate
(47b-77b).
editions are:

lengt~s

of the main extant biographies in their Derge

Rin-spungs-pa, 78 ff.
Glo-bo mkhan-chen, 30 ff.
Rin-chen-dpal, 19 ff.
Zhang Rgyal-ba-dpal, 11 ff.
The Gsung sgros rna (i.e. Dpal sa ), 10 f.
28Lam 'bras slob bshad (Derge ed.), vol. ka, pp. 67b-145a.
29KhJNSh,
, di

sngan

chad

dbang .l!!!I.!!.&. &

p. 33b.5.
dar ba rna

tu

A brief note here states: dris Ian .&Ii rim m! gsum .P

~ ~[ng] /

mdo khams

ba las bris m!.Y.!!!.!!Q..

.ill!..

rdo Lk 'chang

questions are:
Mdo khams ill ston m! blo gros rab gsal .&Ii dris

(1)

kun

..!!&L

The first three replies

1!!!!.

(pp.

to

30a.3-32a.4;

see TB no. 97)

(2) Rnal 'byor m! phru

~ lli!.

zhes

.m!..

dris pa'i Ian (pp.

32a.5-33b.4; see TB

no. 99)
(3)

A very brief and probably apocryphal untitled reply to a question

Sa-pa~'s

about

criticism of the ring bsrel relics (pp. 33b.4-34a.4). This passage

also appears in the Gsung sgros rna. biography ascribed

'bras slob bshad (Derge ed.), vol. 1, pp. 62b.5-63a.2.

to

Ngor-chen,

Lam

A little later in the KhJNSh, a fourth work ascribed to Bi-ji appears:

(4) Rtogs ldan ~ po'i dris Ian (pp. 39a.3-42a.6; see TB no. 32).
Though all four purport to be the work of Lha-rje Bi-ji, one of Sa-pa~'s disciples, the first two and the fourth came to be included in Sa-pa~'s bka' 'bum by
the

time of the tenth Ngor abbot Dkon-mchog-lhun-grub (1497-1557);

printed

in

the Derge edition of the Sa skya bka'

'bum.

As

and they were

Glo-bo

mkhan-chen

indicates, these three works became known in Central and Western Tibet only in the
time of the fourth Ngor abbot Rgyal-tshab Kun-dga'-dbang-phyug (1424-1478).
That
later

Kun-dga'-dbang-phyug

had searched out such materials

in

Khams

brought them to Glo-bo is also indicated by Glo-bo mkhan-chenin his

to a Sa skya bka' 'bum whose arrangement was mainly based on Ngor-chen's gsan
See

his Skyes rtsa,

304.5 :

de

gsan

Y!K !&E mtsho

zhig

dam m! kun ~ dbang .P.hv!!&. ~ mdo khams nas ~ rtsad chod

byon m!

zhig kyang chud

.Y2!!..m!..

shin tu

~ m!

Y!K.

las .i!.. ltar l2Y!!.!!8. ba

bzhag pa' i stengs su bka' 'bum 'thor bu ba' i nang tshan

~ m!
~

p.

and
index

bdag
.ill!..

zhig bzhugs la/.

&

'dir

226

30KhJNSh,
154.5 (47b-77b).
31

pp.

4a.3-43b.3, is found in A-mes-zhabs, 'Dzam gling, pp. 94.5-

A-mes-zhabs, 'Dzam gling, p. 666 (333b).

321 am grateful to Mr.

E. G. Smith for first showing me this index and for

indicating that a KhJ commentary by Ngag-dbang-chos-grags was listed in

supplements

seem

to have been added mainly from Ngag-dbang-chos-grags,

it.
Bod

The

!I!

mkhas.
33

Dgon-gsar-ba Bsod-nams-rgyal-mtshan, Dpal ldan

bshad (Dehra Dun ed.), vol. 4 (~, p. 356.3 (178b.3).

bla~,

Lam 'bras

slob

34

.
I know of only three references to the formal public exposition of the
KhJ by great Sa-skya-pa scholastic teachers.
Two of the teachers were Rong-ston
Shes-bya-kun-rig (1367-1449) and Shakya~mchog-ldan (1428-1507).
See respectively
the biography of Rong-ston by Shakya-mchog-ldan: ~ btsun thams cad, p. 320.1,
and the biography of Shakya-mchog-ldan by Jo-nang Kun-dga'-grol-mchog, in the
former's collected works:

Paodi~,

p.

76.6.

In addition, the much earlier Sa-

skya-pa scholar Mi-nyag paQ-chen Rig[s]-pa'i-seng-ge (1287-1375) formally studied

According to his biography Mkhan chen bka' bzhi

the KhJ in Gtsang in about 1322

..P!!. .!!&. pa' i seng ge' i !.lli!!!!...P.!!!:. thar

Sakya Centre),

..p!!..I.Q!!.

tan rin

..P.Q.

che' i !:&I!!. mtsho (Dehra Dun:

p. 24 (12b), he studied the following works of

Sa-pa~

mainly under

Slob-dpon Gzhon-nu-mgon-po:
(1) Legs

..p.!!!:.

bshad

..p!!.

rin

..P.Q.

che' i gter

(2) Mkhas"p!!' ~ pa'i ~

(3) Sdom gsum rab dbye
(4) Sdeb sbyor ~!.Q8. chun
(5) Thub pa'i dgongs gsal

..P.Q.

(6) and (7) Sems bskyed chen .!!!Q. dang de'i Lung sbyor
(8) Sgra ~ bar bsdus pa'i tshig bcad
(9) Phyogs bcu'i sangs ~ la bstod pa'i phreng ba [sic]
(10) Snyi .!!!Q. rtogs ldan &Ii dris Ian
Before that he had studied an eleventh work, the Rigs gter with slob-dpon Byamsmgon-pa, also known as Phyogs-glang-gsar-ma.

See ibid., p. 21.1 (11a.1).

chen

35At least two works connected with the Sdom gsum rab dbye by Glo-bo mkhanwere reprinted at Ngor--the Sdom"p!!' gsum &Ii rab tu dbye ba'i dka' ba'i gnas

!.lli!!!!.

..p.!!!:.

bshad

..p!!.

zhib mo !.ill!!!!. 'thag and Sdom gsum brgal Ian tshig don.!!!!ill. sel--

227

See
and quite a few of his other commentarial writings were printed at Derge.
Gangs.!!!. .ill., p. 217.4, and above, note 20.
It seems likely that these works of Glo-bo mkhan-chen were carved rather
late at Derge, and that this accounts for their not having circulated widely. T.
G. Dhongthog Rinpoche was the only scholar I have met who came into contact with
any of these works in their Derge edition.

He remembered that his teacher mkhan-

po Me-nyag Dam-chos had used Glo-bo mkhan-chen's Rigs gter commentary for detailed
explanations

when

teaching the Rigs gter in 1951 at the Rdzong-gsar . bshad-grwa,

near Derge.
36It
stong

is said that along with the writings of Shakya-mchog-ldan (whose

theory

linked him with the similarly proscribed

Jo-nang

works of the other great

15th~century

gzhan

Taranatha),

the

Sa-skya-pa savants Stag-tshang lo-tsa-ba and

Go-bo rab-'byams-pa were also suppressed, their printing being prohibited.

three were guilty of the same offence: criticism of Tsong-kha-pa.
It was

All
not

until the fairly recent publication of Go-rams-pa's works from Derge by Sga bla-ma
'Jam-dbyangs-rgyal-mtshan

(1870-1940) at the suggestion of Mkhan-chen

Gzhan-dga'

Gzhan-phan-chos-kyi-snang-ba (1871-1927) that the Sa-skya-pas regained easy access

to one of these scholars' complete works in printed form.
That printing is
mentioned for instance by E.
detail

by

Sde-gzhung

G.

Smith (1969b),

pp.

32f, and it is described in

sprul-sku Kun-dga'-bstan-pa'i-nyi-ma in his

'Jam-dbangs-rgyal-mtshan:

lli btsun bla

!!!!!!!!. thar mdor bsdus skal bzang .!:ill!

1983), pp. 25.2-37.2 (13a.2-19a.2).

~ dam.E2. 'jam dbyangs

(New Delhi:

T.

G.

biography

of

.!:&E!.!. mtshan .ill.

Dhongthog Rinpoche,

Chapter 10
THE CRITICAL EDITION: SOURCES AND METHOD

The

fo1iowing edition of the third main section (le'u) of the KhJ is based

on a comparison of four exemplars:

I,

I'

B: a Bhutanese manuscript.
D: the Derge xy10graphic edition
G: a manuscript from G10-bo Smon-thang (Mustang)
C: The commentary on the KhJ by G10-bo mkhan-chen (KhJNSh),

in a

manuscript

from G10-bo
The

first

three embody the complete work,

contains many extensive quotations.

the

basic verses--can also be found in Tibetan literature.

almost

never

systematically.

~:

while the last is a commentary which

Many other quotes of the KhJ--especial1y

decisive
1

in

improving the readings,

have

Yet since these

not

collated

of
are
them

The Bhutanese Manuscript

Text

B is a Bhutanese manuscript preserved in Pha-jo-Iding

monastery

in

Bhutan.
A reproduction of the manuscript was published from Thimphu in 1979 by
Tulku Kunsang Gyatso.
The title page of the new publication begins Bses pa'i
'phring .ill & rl ka and 'Phags ~ klu sgrub .kY.i rtogs brjod mdor bsdus because in
fact this same volume also contains the reproductions of some other manuscript

works

from

Nagarjuna,2

that
and

monastery.

legs-rgya-mtsho'i-sde.
skya

These include a commentary on the

a brief biography of Nagarjuna by

At

one

Suhrllekha

of

Ngag-gi-dbang-phyug-dge-

the end of the volume there appear three works of Sa-

Pal}.~ita:

(1) Mkhas ~..H pa'i .gQ (52 ff; pp. 131-234)

(2) Sgra

bar bsdus pa'i tshigs

bcad

~ (1

f; pp. 234-235)

230

(3)

Byis.ru! bde blag tu

pa'i .!:ill:!!!!.

bshad .ru! byis .ru! la phan .ru! (11

ff; pp. 235-255)

However,

at the beginning of the first work (p. 131),

on the title page and in

the

table of contents of the recent reproduction there appears the title Byis

bde

blag tu ~ pa' i .!:ill:!!!!. ~ bshad .ru! mkhas .ru! ~ pa' i.gQ,

a combination of

the titles of the first and third works.

I have not had the chance to examine the Pha-jo-lding manuscript itself;

have only had access to the reproduction, which does not yield sufficient information to date the manuscript precisely.3

In any case, the manuscript itself cannot

be earlier than the mid-15th century, for the texts of

a

xylographic edition of that period.

255)

what

appears

Sa-pa~'s

works derived from

The manuscript preserves at its

at first sight to be the colophon from that

end

earlier

(p.

printed

edition:
/ / .2!1!. swasti/

.!:.&.Y!!.!. ~ kun las lhag pa' i snying stobs S:MI /

.!! la thub bstan spel mdzad chos .ill. ill! /
ill btsun kun .!!&L .!:ill:!!!!. .!:.&.Y!!.!. <:ipal bzang ~ /
bka' bzhin byis .ru! bde blag
'thun rkyen grong rnying

The

byed chos .ill.

.&Ii ill byed mthar

pa' i gzhung

du sgrub .ru! yjJ /

~ ~

bali .&!:.Q!!&. nas bsgrubs//

ldan dpal 'dzin bzang/ /

~ bzod .ru! 'phel/ I

fourth line thus identifies the original xylograph as having been one of

many

Sa-skya-pa

tronage

of

works that were printed in the mid-15th century

the noble monk Gong-dkar-rdo-rje-gdan-pa

under

the

Kun-dga'-rnam-rgyal

the
pa-

(1432-

1496).
The ultimate origin of the Bhutanese manuscript in the Gong-dkar-ba edition
is

further indicated by the marginal notation of

later manuscripts.

(ca) of the fourth main section

tion

was

writings

the

Sa

ca that was retained by

the

These characters mark the works as forming the fifth fascicle

of a major collection.

(~)

skya bka' 'bum,

That major

with its five main sections made

of the five great founders of Sa-skya in their

up

chronological

collecof

the

sequence.

The other extant fragments of this edition, a few writings of Slob-dpon Bsod-namsrtse-mo and Rje-btsun Grags-pa-rgyal-mtshan,
the

second

manuscript

(kha) and third (~) main

is

one

of

sections,

respectively.4

The

probably a few copies removed from the Gong-dkar-ba

contains many scribal errors.

and

are similarly marked as belonging to

Bhutanese

edition.

It

Moreover, it incorporates two folios out of order,

them contains a dittography some sixteen

syllables

in

length

(or

231

twenty-nine written characters long, counting three shad).5

If

the

establish

that

Bhutanese manuscript contained the

original

the blocks were carved in or after 1458,

dkar-ba received the ordained name Kun-dga'-rnam-rgyal.

of the original xylograph is different.
Tibet a fragment of this same fascicle

it

would

for that is when

colophon,

Gong-

But in fact the

wording

I was fortunate enough to come across in

(~~

of the original Gong-dkar edition.

What survived was the last page of the KhJ as well as the next two complete works:
(1) Mkhas.l!!!. ~ ~ pa'i~.

Fascicle ~ ca, f. 46a.1-5.

begins with the words mkhas .l!!!. I dod pa I i skye bo nyung bas ~ I .

(2)

Sgra ~ bar bsdus pa I i tshigs ~ bead

Fasc..!!8!!..!!.,

..p!!..

The text
f.

46a .5-

46b.6.
(3)

Byis

bde blag tu ~ pa'i .!:ill!!!!. ~ bshad

..p!!.

..p!!.

byis"p!!' la

phan

..p!!..

Fasc. .!!8!!..!!., ff. 46 b .6-55a. 7

The
this

numbering of the last folio is given as

fascicle

was complete in fifty-five folios.

lnga byon,

The

printing

indicating that
colophon

for the fascicle begins at 55a.8, and it reads:

~)

II

.Q.g!

swastil

~ ~

kun las lhag pa'i snying stobs ~I

1m!!!s/I

sa la thub bstan spel mdzad chos

de ni dpal ldan grwa Ingar brjod

..p!!. ~ I

mkhas ~ ~ pa'i ~ khang gts[u]g .8I!:!!:. Wi

mtshungs med gzh[u]ng 'di ~ du sgrub .l!!!. yjJ I
I

thun rkyen .8!2!!8. rnying

ba I i .8!2!!8..!!!!. bsgrubsl I

lli. byed chos .ill ~ ldan dpal 'dzin bzangl I

~ ..sr!!!.s. byed mthar son bzod ..p!!. ~ I

In this version, then, the name of the patron is given as Grwa-lnga, and he
is referred to as a "religious ruler"
colophon.

(chos~.

This is no doubt the original

The version found in the Bhutanese manuscript substituted the following

three lines for lines 2-5 of the original:

~

la thub bstan spel mdzad chos

ill btsun kun

.ill ill!I

dpal bzang ~ I
bde blag ~ pa'i gzhung 'di

~ .!:ill!!!!. ~

bka I bzhin byis

..p!!.

du sgrub

..p!!.

yjJ I

232

This

change

was

probably introduced by a later scribe or patron who

wished

clarify who the original sponsor of the Gong-dkar-ba edition had been.
tampering

with

the text is evident,

for example in the long

to

Some other

unmetrica1

fourth

line which would not have been allowed to stand in a printed edition

.Q.: The Derge Edition

For
standard

the

living Tibetan tradition,

the Derge xy10graphic edition

edition of the Sa skya bka' 'bum as a whole and,

particular treatises contained in it,

such as the KhJ.

by extension,

is

of

the

The exemplar of D is the

print brought out of Tibet by the former Ngor Thar-rtse mkhan-po, Bsod-nams-rgyamtsho, which was subsequently reproduced under his supervision in 1968 when he was
at the Toyo Bunko in Tokyo.
The

original

blocks of the Derge Sa skya bka' 'bum (most of

which

still

survive in the Sde-dge Par-khang-chen-mo) were carved in Derge in the mid-1730s. 6

This large project was undertaken initially as the result of a request made to the
Derge king Bstan-pa-tshe-ring by the 30th mkhan-po of Ngor, Bkra-shis-1hun-grub. 7
That Derge king was a great patron of Buddhism, and he had especially close ties
8
with the Ngor-pas.
By that time he had already sponsored the printing of the
more

than one hundred volumes of the Kanjur,

and later in his life he would have

the rest of the Tibetan Buddhist canon--the even more massive Tanjur--carved
printing
the

blocks.

When asked on this occasion by Bkra-shis-1hun-grub to

printing of the Sa skya bka' 'bum,

onto

sponsor

he is said to have immediately given

his

joyful assent.
According to the record preserved in the index this edition, the king
deputed one of his main ministers, Gnyer-pa A-srung, to be the chief overseer of
The secretary (drung 11&) Tshe-ring-'phe1 and the bursar (~
the project. 9
mdzod)
in

Gu-ru-bkra-shis were appointed to be foremen of the workers and to

handling the responsibilities of the work.

out

and storing the completed b1ocks--a formidable task when dealing

co11ections--was the
The
of

The worker in charge of

with

Sa sky a bka' 'bum was indeed a large collection,

consisting as it did
Each

volume

about three hundred folios and thus about six hundred printing blocks.
of

pages
stage,
correct

editing
in

and proofreading such an enormous

all) posed great difficulties.

but

the

original

most
(rna

large

dpon Gzung-skyabs.

fifteen volumes in the Derge long-page (ldeb ring) format.

lem

assist
bringing

corpus

Errors could be

difficult and dangerous stage was the

~).

(approximately
incorporated
establishing

For this the method of the Derge

editors

had

The prob9,000
at

any
of

was

a
to

233

1-

compare the readings of all available manuscripts and xylographs, and to chose the
best

reading

where differences were detected.

The editors of the Sa skya

bka'

'bum had the following manuscripts at their disposal:

(1) from Skyor-mda' Bsam-gling-dgon-pa (in Chab-mdo district):
rect" set of the complete Sa sky a bka' 'bum.
(2) from Sga Khri-'du-dgon: the collected works of

a "very
and

Sa-pa~

cor-

Chos-rgyal

'Phags-pa arranged into six volumes and written in gold and silver letters.
These manuscripts

may have dated from the late-13th century since they are

said to have been the sacred possessions of Sga A-gnyan-dam-pa (fl.

second

half of the 13th c.).10

(3) from Sga Thar-lam-dgon: a complete set commissioned by Rab-'byams-pa Kundga'-ye-shes,

disciple of Rong-ston Shes-bya-kun-rig and Ngor-chen Kun-

dga'-bzang-po.
from Sde-dge dgon-chen: two complete sets, one commissioned by
"
Bstan-pa-tsh
"
11
e-rlng.
rulers and the other by the present k lng

former

(4)
(5)

from

Lcags-ra Bsam-grub-rtse and Bsam-grub-gling [two monasteries

near

Derge], one complete set from each.

(6)

several

volumes from an incomplete set originally commissioned

by

the

earlier Ngor mkhan-po Sangs-rgy.as-phun-tshogs.

Thus

there were a total of six complete and two incomplete sets. 12

In

addition,

they had access to an undetermined number of works in the 15th-century Gong-dkarThough the mention of the latter is strangely absent from the Derge
ba edition.
Sa skya bka' 'bum index, it is found in the autobiography of the chief editor and
13
proofreader, Zhu-chen Tshul-khrims-rin-chen.
was only one member of the editorial staff which established

Zhu-chen
text

of the Derge Sa skya bka' 'bum.

editors and proofreaders,

Beneath him there also worked three

'dzin-rgyal-mtshan who are described as experts in ancient and modern

comparing

the various manuscripts,

terminology

Zhu-chen noticed an

fact regarding certain works of the first three Sa-skya founders.

where

the

wording

other

includinr Rmugs-sangs-pa Sbyin-pa-rgya-mtsho and Bstan-

and orthography. 14
When

the

of the different witnesses varied

"edition" or version could often be discerned.

greatly,

interesting

He found
three

One "edition" type was

types

that
of

extremely

conCise, and it probably represented the form of the composition when it was first
completed

and

"edition"

type

themselves.

immediately
The

seemed

disseminated by the

authors'

disciples.

certain to be a later expanded revision

by

A second
the

authors

third type of "edition" was where Sa-skya Pa~~ita had evidently

I
I

234

edited

the works of his predecessors,

sometimes slightly expanding passages

15
sometimes slightly condensing very extensive topical summaries.
In the Derge Sa skya bka' 'bum index Zhu-chen also explains a little
how

he

and his assistants solved textual problems and chose among the

readings they found.

When dealing with commentarial works,

was the basic text that the commentary aimed to expound.

and
about

different

their first recourse

Where discernable, they

followed the reading that best accorded with the basic text.

Those passages that

could not be clarified in this way were examined by the editors (and, according to
the index,

by mkhan-po Bkra-shis-lhun-grub) to see if they could decide the

rect reading on the basis of their own knowledge.

correct

meaning,

they

cor-

Where they felt certain of the

emended the text or chose the best reading.

Where

they

could not be sure, they left the doubtful reading, marking it with a sign or small
16
annotation so that it could be examined later.
In theory their editorial policy should have been very
writings

conservative.

of the founders were thought of as sacred and immutable vajra-words

The

(!&

rje'i tshig); to tamper with their substance was a great sacrilege.

But with
regard to the "accidentals" of the text such as spelling and punctuation, they had
In this perhaps they simply followed the editorial style alfreedom to emend.
ready established by Si-tu PaQ-chen during the editing of the Derge Kanjur. 17 The
assistant
as

editors included experts in old and new terminology and

orthography,18

well

buted
most

as in the established practices of the system of Tibetan grammar attrito Thu-mi Sambhota. 19 Thus they followed the practices preferred by the

learned

scribes and scholars of early-18th-century Khams.

No

doubt

they

found much to "correct," for their materials consisted of works composed in a much
earlier era,

the 12th and 13th centuries, and the physical books themselves dated

from as early as the 13th to as late as the 18th century.

The editors modernized and standardized the spellings of certain ,nouns
adjectives.

They

also

their "tense" or aspect).

particles
grammatical

(such as zhes,
usage

(und~r

emended the spellings of some verbs (sometimes

They regularized the sandhi of the various grammatical

~,

etc.),

thus bringing them in line

the influence of Si-tu's grammar?).

with

(such as &Ii for

a

~)

current

They also seem to

have done more sometimes--substituting phonetically similar grammatical

demand it.

and

changing

particles

one for the other, where the sense of the passage seemed to

This, however, was emendation of a different order.

sure understanding of the sense of the passage,

the substance of the text.

Unfortunately,

It would require

since such changes could alter

the editors probably had neither

the

time nor the background in studies to be able to determine accurately the sense of
each sentence.
six

Indeed,

they lacked the time to compare slowly and carefully the

or more witnesses word by word (they were able to hand over the corrected and

I-

235

I
I

proofread copy for all fifteen volumes in about a year and a half).

Instead, they

probably followed a less thoroughgoing procedure that was common in other printing
projects

of

manuscript

Khams in the present century:

or xylograph as the base text

First they would select

the

"best"

for many works the

base

text was probably the "very correct" manuscript from Skyor-mda' monastery.20

This

would be read aloud by one person while some or all of the other manuscripts

were

(~~--here

read silently by the others, every difference or problem being noted.

ly

similar readings could thus be easily overlooked.

word-by-word

Careful

Phonetical-

letter-by-letter,

examination of all witnesses was probably limited to passages

21

where

serious differences or problems were found.

Some details of the economics of this printing project are also recorded in
the index.
carving,
carvers

For the preparation of the master manuscript and for the actual block
sixteen scribes of,special merit and about one hundred and fifty skilled

were

assembled.

For their work they received payment in whatever

form

they desired--horses, cattle, tea, cloth, etc.--but the wage scales were reckoned
in measures of barley:22
The editors received 11 'dong per day.
carvers of the depictions of deities that appeared on the

The

first

folios

(dbu lha) received 1 khal, 2 zho for each figure.

Scribes of the highest level received 15 'dong for each page, those of medium
level

received

14 1/2 'dong,

and those of the lowest level

received

12

'dong.

',I

Carvers

of

the highest level received 2 khal,

2 zho for each

better carvers of the middle level received 2 khal,

those

5 'dong; those

1 zho,

ordinary carvers of the middle level received 2 khal,

page;

1 zho;

and those of

the lower level received 2 khal.

The drawers of lines and the preparers of paper received 4 'dong per day.
23
Wood cutters were paid 1 zho for every 7 zhar of wood they cut.
The
day

It began on the

fifteenth

of the fourth lunar month--one of the great Buddhist holy days--of the

tiger

year

fourteenth
was

work was done at Sde-dge Lhun-grub-steng.

(1734).

The scribes finished writing out the master copies

day of the eighth lunar month of the next year (1735).24

finally completed and the blocks arranged in their storage racks

The

woodon

the

carving

during

the

fire-dragon year (1736) that followed.

Much

of

from its index,

.ti.!!.
I

.P.Q.

che' i

the above information about the Derge Sa skya bka'

a work entitled Dpal

skya 'i

btsun

.&Q!!8. ~

'bum

lnga'i

derives

.8..!!!!8.

rab

.&Yi. ~ 'phar 'byed pa' i dkar chag 'phrul .&Yi. Ide .!!!.!&. that was

236

written at the time of the block carving and that forms the last work in the final
volume.
By all appearances the work was written by the mkhan-po Bkra-shis-lhungrub:
where

his name is mentioned as author in the colophon, and elsewhere in the work
the word "I" (bdag) appears, it refers to him. 25 But the actual compiler

and author of the index was the chief editor,

Zhu-chen Tshul-khrims-rin-chen, who

is referred to in the work as "my attendant" (rang .&i ~ ba 'khor). 26

Here we have an instance of false ascription, a fairly common occurence in

Somet1mes
'h
"
f 19ure
'
w en a great re 1 1910US
wou ld arrange

1 ater T1' betan I'1terature. 27

for

the composition of a work,

real

that great person's name and not the name of

author eventually appeared in the colophon.

mkhan-po

In the present case,

was the main instigator of the whole printing project,

specifically

requested by the royal patron to compose the index.

time came to write it,

prevented

the

the Ngor

and he had
But

been

when

the

he fell ill with an ailment called 'bam (thrombosis?) that

him from working on it.

modest Tshul-khrims-rin-chen,

Moreover,

conveniently near at hand was

the

who anyhow was probably his superior as a writer of

elegant 'prose and ornate verse.

(Ghost writing of this sort is sometimes

still

practiced by Tibetans even today,

though its propriety now does not go completely

unquestioned.)
Falsely
internal

ascribed works such as this are usually impossible to detect

evidence

alone.

Here

it could be identified mainly

because

from

another

account

of the preparation of this edition survives in the autobiography of the

author. 28 Zhu-chen Tshul-khrims-rin-chen recounts that originally the plan

true
was

for

him

to lay the groundwork of the index (i.e.

to do the basic

work

of

compilation and a draft of any additional sections that were needed?), and for the
mkhan-po

to correct and embellish this as necessary.

illness,

however,

After

he

changes

had
or

Because of the

the entire job in the end fell upon Zhu-chen's own

composed the index,

additions,

and

sent

the mkhan-po approved it

it to the

ruler

without

Bstan-pa-tshe-ring

inspection.
Since the latter also liked it very much,
,1mme d'1ate1 y. 29

mkhan-po's
shoulders.
any

major

for

his

it was carved onto blocks

Q: The Glo-bo Golden Manuscript

This is a beautiful manuscript from Glo-bo Smon-thang,

written in gold dbu

can

characters on polished black paper.

I located it in Nepal in June of

and

I was able to borrow it long enough to have it microfilmed.

folios long, with each folio measuring 8.7 x 35.9 cms.

of

vol.

16

(ma)

of

a manuscript of the Sa skya

1983,

The text is

95

The text forms fol. 46-140

bka'

'bum.

Sa-pal}'s

works

237

comprised at least four volumes in this manuscript collection,

30
:

for the

following

fragments in Nepal are among those that survive

(1) Rol mo'i bstan bcos.
(2) Mkhas.m!.
(3) Sgra la

pa'i

.m!..

VoL.!!!!!, ff. 36-45.

.&Q..

VoL'.!!!!!, ff. 46-140.

VoL.!!!!!, ff. 141-154.

(4) Thub .m!. dgongs gsal.

Vol. tsha, ff. 42-209.

(5) Glo bo 10 tsa ba shes rab rin chen la spring

(6)

Zhang 10 tsa ba la spring

m.

Vol.

(7) Bka' gdams do bskor bali zhus Ian.

m.

dza,

Vol. dza, ff. 266-269.

ff. 269-271.

Vol. dza, ff. 271-275.

(8) Thos bsam sgom gsum i l l bris [sic] Ian. Vol. dza, ff. 275-278.

(9) Snye mo sgom chen i l l bris [sic] Ian.

(10) Blo gsal zhing don du
Vol. dza, ff. 283-284.
(11)

Rta

Vol. dza, ff. 278-283.

ba'i skyes bu

ri khud ill. rnga bo che la

bstod .m!..

ill. bris [sic] Ian.

Vol. dza, ff. 284f.

(12) Mu stegs i l l ston .m!. drug tshar bcad dus sbyor ba'i snyan.!!&!!&..
dza, ff. 285f.
(13) Ba.&Q.!:. zhes bya' i sgra la grangs pa' i stod [sic]
286f.
(14) Chos

bcu.m!..

(15) Smra ba gnyis.m!..

(16) Yum
Of these,

.m!..

Vol.

Vol.

dza,

ff.

Vol. dza, ff. 288f.

Vol. dza, f. 289.

'bring sdus gsum .&Ii don.

Vol.

dza, ff. 289f.

numbers 14 and 16 are of special interest since neither is found in the

31

Derge edition.
The
rajas,
been

ultimate

origin of this manuscript was the library of the Lo

commissioned

excellent

by

one of the past Lo rulers.

craftsmanship

the 15th century.

The

for

(r.

materials

and

of

such as the reigns of the great

the
kings

Manuscript sets of the Sa skya bka' 'bum are recorded

have been commissioned by the kings A-mgon-bzang-po (r.

Rdo-rje-brtan-pa

precious

of the manuscript mark it as the product of one

high points in the cultural history of Lo,

of

Mustang

and a golden manuscript (gser chos) of this quality would most likely have

ca.

1489-1496).32

a firm dating of this manuscript,

to

ca. 1435-1460) and A-seng

At present there is not enough evidence

but a more accurate determination may

day become possible if the fjrst or index volume of this set can be located.

one

238

,: The KhJ Commentary of Glo-bo mkhan-chen (KhJNSh)

As mentioned in the previous chapter, Glo-bo mkhan-chen's commentary on the
KhJ

contains extensive quotations from the basic text,

and thus it

is

valuable

also for textual reasons.

The available copy of the work is a manuscript from Lo
now preserved in the Toyo Bunko, Tokyo (Tibetan collection, vol. 43). It is 303
folios long and is written in gold and silver dbu chen characters on black paper.
It formed the eighth and final volume of a manuscript set of Glo-bo mkhan-chen's
collected works that was commissioned by the late-17th-century Lo ruler Bsam-grubdpal-'bar

(see

above,

chapter 9).

A modern edition of this work also

having been published from New Delhi in 1979.

exists,

Though printed in black letters on

white paper, the text is identical to the above-mentioned manuscript in all but a
" deta1
" ls. 33
f ew very m1nor
Glo-bo
the

He

wrote

work in Lo in the early 1500s and probably had access to more than one

manu-

script there.
searched

in

mkhan-chen does not specify the source of his KhJ text.

When trying to wrest some sense from corrupt passages, he must have
other manuscripts for better readings.

Occasionally he
34

must

have

emended the text if he felt certain of what Sa-paQ intended.

.L..9..:..

Dhongthog Rinpoche, New Delhi. 1967

each

of

In addition to the above four exemplars,

there are three modern

which is derived from the Derge edition.

The first to appear

editions,
was

the

edition calligraphed and published by T. G. Dhongthog Rinpoche from New Delhi in

1967.
It includes a four-page introduction by the publisher, as well as a verse
on the title page enjoining all who want to practice scholarly activities to study
this book.
This is a fairly faithful copy of a Derge print of the KhJ, 'with only
a

few corrections and minor errors.

The original print which was the basis

for

this edition was from the library of H. H. the Sakya Trizin.

Beijing. 1981
This

next edition of the KhJ was published from Beijing in 1981 by the Mi-

rigs-par-bkrun-khang.

It includes a very brief introduction (p. i) that

fies the author and main contents of the book.

for printing are named on the last page (p.
and Mgon-po-rgyal-mtshan.

identi-

The two men who prepared the text

158): Rgyal-sras Ngag-dbang-blo-bzang

On that same page it is also written that the book was

239

published

in

accordance with a Lhasa xylograph (deb Idi lha sali shing

bsgrigs nas bskrun .m!..ti:!:!.).

on

If this statement is accurate, the edition was based

a previously unknown xylographic edition.

however,

A careful examination of the

reveals that it is almost identical with D.

seem to be just printing errors and minor,

fact

ltar

text,

What differences there are

obvious corrections.

If there was in

a Lhasa edition,

it must have been copied from the Derge edition

35
would possess no independent value.

and

thus

Almost as soon as a copy of the Beijing edition found its way to India,
many

of the new Tibetan publications are receiving from the Tibetans living

side of Tibet and China.

copyright

it

There could be no better indication of the enthusiastic reception

was reprinted.

out-

Moreover, since these publications are not bound by any

36
they can be freely reproduced.
In this case the pub-

restrictions,

lisher of the Indian reprint was Migmar Tsetan of the Sakya Centre, Rajpur.

],. Method of Editing

My
many

basic

errors

receptus

goal in preparing this edition was simply to find and remove

as possible.

(edition

D)

To do this,

my first step was to

with teacher and commentary,

study

in order to

the

as

textus

understand

the

general contents of the work and to note any particularly problematical

readings.

When

exemplars

~ame

to the actual editing work,

I began by collating the four

and noting every difference except those of punctuation.

reading

by

considering

Then I selected the best

the probable intent of the author

and

the

nature

and

possible causes of the differences.

I
sis.

was not able to follow a strict method of recension and stemmatic analy-

This was because several of the exemplars are probably conflated, i.e. they

have double or multiple ancestors.

of

For example,

it is recorded that the editors

D had direct access to seven different manuscripts and possibly

xylograph
graph,

when preparing their edition.

one

earlier

Since text B also derives from a

it too may easily have been contaminated during its preparation.

xylo-

Even the

KhJ quotations in the autograph KhJNSh (the ancestor of C) were probably conflated
in

places

by its author when the latter checked other manuscripts to

correct possibly corrupt passages.

verify

or

240

Still,
understanding
important

differences

punctuation.
different

collating

the

many errors.

locating

and

The work of collating uncovered many slight and

four exemplars was indispensable for

un-

in the "accidentals" of the text such as

D for example followed a later,

from that of the others.

Collation

orthography

and

standardized orthography that

was

also uncovered many more substan-

tial

errors,

quite a few of which could be recognized as typical scribal

such

as dittography and homoeoteleuton (eye-skip to a similar word

the most difficult passages--Le.

or where

where more than one

errors

below).

variant seemed

But

acceptable

none was probable-- could only be resolved by considering the

author's

intent in light of the immediate context of the passage, the author's other works,
and the tradition in which he stood.
For elucidating many of the difficulties in the text, I am much indebted to
the Venerable Khenpo Appey, principal of the Sakya College, Rajpur.
In 1982 he
explained to me part III of the KhJ line by line, and in the course of this he
often pointed out problems of grammar and likely corruptions.
At that time our
text was D (in Dhongthog Rinpoche's edition), and so we often compared D (TB), B,
and where possible, C.
(At that time G had not yet been located.) In a few
passages the Khenpo suggested emendations, but in this he was very conservative:
emending the text was considered the last and most desperate measure.
I

did the collating and final editing in 1983-84,

and reached Japan.

after I had left

edition on a comparison of three and sometimes four exemplars.

was valuable.

India

By then I had located text G in Nepal and could thus base the
The discovery of G

I was gratified several times to find that G supported the emenda-

tions that Khenpo Appey had proposed.

Orthography and Punctuation

Two styles of orthography can be discerned among the four
is

an older orthography and is witnessed to by B,

C,

and G.

exemplars.

One

The other is

the

newer standardized orthography of D. In my edition I have attempted to follow the

earlier orthography since it is more likely to reflect the original usage of the
author.
For the punctuation,
exceptions

however,

in most cases I have followed D.

were where the placement of a shad or its absence made the

tion wrong or made the passage hard to understand.

most fluid aspect of Tibetan texts.

The main
versifica-

Punctuation in general is the

Since it is also relatively much less impor-

tant than spelling, I decided not to note all variants of punctuation or to try to
reconstruct an earlier punctuation.

241

Versification
Sa-pa9 wrote most of the KhJ in two parts: (1) a versified basic text (rtsa
mula),

~:

and (2) a prose autocommentary.

Unfortunately the divisions between

the verse and prose portions are not always clear in the available exemplars.
problem

of

separating
because

difficult

the two and of numbering the verses

Sa-pa~

is

did not always employ verses of four

made

even

lines

each.

The
more
He

states
tions,

in his KhJ and Rol mo'i bstan bcos that in religious or mundane composia loka (tshigs bcad) or verse can consist of from two to six lines,
37
whereas in kavya (snyan ~ each verse must have four lines.
Accordingly the
KhJ itself, which is not a work of kavya but a technical treatise, contains verses
that number from two to six lines.
autocommentary
verses
ness

between verses of,

appear consecutively,
of sense of the lines.

four-line

verses,

Often this is obvious because there is

say,

two or three lines.

But where

prose
several

they can only be divided according to the completeIn many cases they could be divided into the

while occasionally other divisions were required,

usual

and I

have

numbered the verses accordingly.

In a text written or printed in dbu

script,

all verses--whether by the

same author or quotations from other works--should be indicated by the presence of

two shads after each line.
confused

In the KhJ, however, scribal or editorial errors have

the borders of verse and prose at various places in the four

exemplars.

In some passages, verse has been assimilated into the prose commentary, while in a
few other passages two shad have been added at appropriate intervals in the prose,
thus creating what seem to be more lines of verse in the basic text.

I have tried

to sort these out by comparing the different exemplars and considering the sense.
As

a rule,

Sa-pa9 does not break or divide individual lines of

gloss or explain.
The

third

line

verse

to

But there are two exceptions in the KhJ: verses I 13 and I 14.
of I 13

Between these two pieces,

begins

QM zhes bshad and ends dbyangs gsal byed. 38

he inserts the definition of a

Q~.

Moreover,

the

fourth line of I 13 is one of the few versified lines that stand alone (see also I
45c and II 2a, b, c).39 The division of I 14 also occurs in the third line. It
begins ming .y!!!. and later concludes de Lh khyad
One

problem

faced

~~.

in numbering the verses was how to

deal

with

the

several summary verses (bsdu ba'i tshigs bcad) and intermediate stanzas (bar skabs
tshigs bcad). Though it could be argued that they belong more properly to the
40
autocommentary, here I have numbered them among the verses of the basic text.

Still another problem was how to number the first six and final six verses of

the

work,

the

i.e.

the

introductory verses before the real beginning of part I and

concluding verses after part III proper has ended.

Rather than establish two more

242

parts (0 and IV), I have included them within parts I and III.

The Typeset Text and the Annotation

The
R,
the

edited text presented below is an enlarged and corrected photocopy

the 1983 Rajpur reprint of the 1981 Beijing edition.

In
are

used

scholars and students of Tibetan nationality.

the Beijing edition,

all verses--whether from the basic text or from quotes-indented and given line by line. 41 To the basic verses I have added my own

verse numbers in parentheses

text

I have chosen to present

text in Tibetan characters because in this form it is more likely to be

by its widest potential readership:

of

and in the left margin,

at the end of the final line of each verse.

In the

I have indicated for the sake of easy reference the

places where each page of the three complete texts (B,

D,

and G) begins.

But to

avoid cluttering up the margins, I have indicated the locations of the quotes from
C only

in the notes.

In the right margin I have added numbers to every

fifth

line to facilitate counting.

In the notes I have listed the variant readings consecutively and according
to

the line and page in which they occur.

I have listed the

preferred

reading

(i.e., the one actually shown in the edited text) first, the most similar readings
next, and the more different ones last. The sources of the variants are indicated
by the initials of the texts (B, C, D, or G). Variants of one and the same word
or

phrase are separated by colons,

while variants of different words or

phrases

are separated by semicolons.

Finally,
dundant
and

was

in

phrase (e.g.

C and G it sometimes happens that a misspelled word

marked as such by the placement of three dots over each

incorrect
underlining
incorrect."

character or syllable.
the

or

re-

a dittography) was noticed by a later scribe or proofreader

incorrect

unnecessary

I have indicated this in the notes

character (e.g.

lrtsod G) or by stating

or

either

by

"marked

as

243

lSee for example Shakya-mchog-ldan, Dam pa'i chos mngon, pp. 332-335, which
quotes KhJ II 1-5,

8-10,

14-23,

and III 54-58,

61-69.

The locations of other

quotations of KhJ III are given in the notes to the translation.

2The

printed

Byams-gling

pa~-chen

byams M &ling du/

edition from Gra Byams-pa-gling of a work on this

(1400-1475) is listed in Gangs

3Pha-jo-lding
and

was

works.

chen byams gling

.8....!:!.!!.8

~~,

topic

by

p. 212.2 (22b.2):

bshes spring 'grel

62.

was the seat of the Rje mkhan-po Shakya-rin-chen (1710-1759)

the source of the surviving manuscript of Shakya-mchog-ldan's

collected

Could the ancestors of these manuscripts too have been gathered from Tibet

at the same time?

4For more on the Gong-dkar-ba edition, see above, chapter 3, and D. Jackson
(1983), pp. 7-16.
(1) p. 141.4, beginning with ~M and

5The folios out of order in Bare:

ending on p. 142.4, mtshan M, and (2) p. 142.4, beginning with

ending on p.

te/

143.6,

shes
6
0n

(1961),

the

pp.

nges

mi.

ma ..y.!.!!. pa' i phyir ro/

J.

la skyon and

Kolma (1971);

China: Bkra-shis-rdo-rje, Ko-btso, Sde

!Yi~

see

Lokesh

Chandra

and the recent indexes published

~~

khang.

from

It is technically incorrect

to speak of the Derge edition because over the years some blocks must have
damaged,

ma

rten tha snyad.

Derge printery and the works printed in it,

507-516;

The dittography occurs on p. 142.3:

broken or worn out, and thus required replacing.

become

It would be more exact

to speak of "printings" of Derge blocks.

70n the king Bstan-pa-tshe-ring, see J. Kolma (1968), pp. 36-40.
80n the religious patronage of the Derge kings,
pp. 23, 25.
9

[Zhu-chen], Dpal sa, p. 341.1.4 (ba 272a).

see E.

Gene Smith (1970),

244

I
I
I

lOS ga

regional

A-gnyan-dam-pa

is

to have been a monk who

said

ruler in Khams under 'Phags-pa.

was

He appears in some mgon

Sometimes his name is given as "A-nan," Le.

appointed
]2

a
lineages.

as "Ananda" (Le. Kun-dga' [grags]).

See also above, chapter 3, note 18.

Dpal~,

11In the index ([Zhu-chen],

as "extremely excellent" (shin tu legs

only one set from Derge is mentioned.

p. 341.2.4, these two are described

w.

is elsewhere said by Zhu-chen (ibid.,

But in Zhu-chen, Chos smra, p. 474,

The set commissioned by Bstan-pa-tshe-ring

p. 473) not to have been known for having a

very-correct text.
12In

Chos~, p. 474,

Zhu-chen,

to

have

The manuscript set commissioned by Bstan-pa-tshe-ring

was mentioned in the previous note was apparently not actually used.

that

13Ibid ,
family

the complete sets are said

only five.

numbered

p.

background

Cf.

475.
and

[Zhu-chen],

p. 341.2.5.

Dpal~,

his study of iconometry

and

painting,

see

On Zhu-chen's
D.

Jackson

(1984a), pp. 144f.

14Zhu-chen, Chos smra, p. 474, lists his three assistants as follows:
(1) Gsal-ldan Mgon-po-bkra-shis
(2) Spo-lung drung-yig Blo-gros-pa
(3) Rmugs-sangs Sbyin-pa-rgya-mtsho
15Ibid .,
on

As Zhu-chen noted, Sa-pa~ at one point intended to write

p. 475.

Tantra in depth.

Later,

however,

he decided that it would be better if the

Tantric writings of the three early founders circulated widely.

See Sa-pa~,
brgyad ma'i, p. 151.3.4 (tha 305b).
Therefore instead of composing his
treatises on this subject,
works.

Sa-pa~

For another mention of

undertook to revise some of their main

Sa-pa~'s

editorial work,

own

Tantric

see Zhu-chen, Dpal ldan,

vol. 2, p. 401, as quoted below, note 20.

16
mchan
not

[Zhu-chen], Dpal sa, p. 341.3.2:

bu.Y..2.!!. m!E.

nas

nges

.!. ~ Q!:.

rung bzhag ste/.

noticed any such marks or notes.

bzhag la rtags dang

So far in my readings I

This procedure was not specified again

Zhu-chen in his autobiography (Chos smra),

p.

476.

have
by

Moreover, in the latter ac-

count there is no mention of Bkra-shis-lhun-grub having actually participated.

245

17

The

style was presumably continued by Zhu-chen when he edited

same

the

Derge Tanjur.
18

[Zhu-chen], Dpa1 g, p. 341.2.6: gsar rnying brda' i khyad 1a mkhas M.

Chos~, p. 474: dpa1 1dan thu mi 10 tsa ba'i gzhung

19Zhu-chen,

& lugs

srol 1a !:ill!!!!. M ~ pa' i 'dren byed.

20Zhu-chen elsewhere records that Gong-dkar-ba xy10graphs were used as
base

text

at least once.

This was for Grags-pa-rgya1-mtshan's

sde

the

spyi'i

.!:!!!!!!!. ~ dang rgyud

kIi mngon .2!:. rtogs pa'i stong thun sa bcad, SKKB, vol. 3,

pp.

See Zhu-chen's Dpa1 ldan, vol. 2, p. 401: stong thun g

70.2.1-81.2.6.

mgor/

b1a!lli!. dang dpal 1dan birwa M 1a

thams

cad

'tsha1 dang/

sangs

bcad

ill chos

kIi gsung & don kye' i rdo ill. zhes .Y.Q.!!. ~ , di 'i h.I.!..!!!Q. .&.Q!!&. dkar
ba 'i .2!:. rna las bshus ~ thun mong ba' i lam rim ska bs kIi g bcad bsdus tsam las

med kyang
po'i zhus

'di nyid ~ ~ .ill. M dang/ slad ~ g .m!Q..lli. gzhung

mdzad pa' i ska bs cung zad bsdus M ll!! .!!!!!! snyam/ gzhan du

&Vi ~ rnying

las

.!lli!!!!.

l;on i l l gzhung

~ ji

ltar

ba'i g

gnyis
sngon

bcad shin

tu ~ M.!ill mang .Q. ~.

This same passage occurs in the Derge Sa skya bka' 'bum index ([Zhu-chen],
Dpa1 g), p. 323.1.3.
21The result of this procedure was conf1ation of the texts.
of

one

text would predominate,

The

readings

but here and there the readings from some

other

witnesses were introduced.

22Salaries
Tibet.

23

officials were always expressed in measures

of

barley

in

[Zhu-chen], Dpa1 g, p. 341. 3 .3

24Ibid .,
~

of

See T. W. D. Shakabpa (1967), p. 10; N. Rhodes (1980), p. 261.

p.

342.1.6:

ba chen .Q. dang g

skya

shing.YQ, khrums stod zla ba'i tshes bcu bzhi/ i l l

~

!!!.Q. mnyam.2!:. ~ pa' i zla dus

eighth lunar month.

Sa-pa~

chen gnyis ka'i thugs chos [342.2.1] dbyings zab

ill mchod pa' i nyin.

Khrums stod zla ba is the

actually passed away in the eleventh lunar month (smal

..P.Q. or .!!!8.Q. zla).

25Ibid ,

p. 341.3.2: bdag ~ kyang ~ pa' i ~ byas.

phon (p. 343.1.4-5):

L
I

17

From the colo-

slong bkra shis 1hun grub kyis/ bgyis M.

246

26 Ibid ., p. 431.2.6.
27See E. Gene Smith (1969b), p. 102, and (1970), p. 19 and notes 38 and 40,
who

mentions several works falsely ascribed to the Fifth Dalai Lama and

Sde~srid

Sangs-rgyas-rgya-mtsho.
28The
connoisseur

Venerable Dezhung Rinpoche has pointed out to me that in this case a

of Tibetan literature might also detect Tshul-khrims-rin-chen's

dis-

tinctive style at least in the versified passages of the work.

29

Zhu-chen, Chos

30Through

~,

pp. 477-478.

the help of Mr.

Leonard van der Kuijp,

it was also possible to

have these manuscripts microfilmed by the Nepal-German Manuscript Project, running

nos.

D 1784-D 1800.

Bunko

Three fragments of this same manuscript survive in the

Tibetan collection (manuscript 42).

gter rang 'grel manuscript in the library of H.

the same set.

Taya

I have also determined that the

H.

Rigs

Sakya Trizin also belongs

to

On this manuscript see also below, Appendix D.

31Both works,

however,

are found in the list of Sa-pa~'s writings in Rin-

spungs-pa, 'Jam pa'i (see Appendix E, nos. 70 and 71). The Chos
is found in the list of A-mes-zhabs,

bcu

alone

'Dzam gling (see Appendix F, no. 30), and it

is referred to in the ThGS, p. 8.3.6.

32The Tsarang Molla, p. lOa, states that A-mgon-bzang-po commissioned a set
of the Sa skya bka' 'bum in gold letters.

See D. Jackson (1984), pp. 147 and 164.

The more detailed genealogical history Blo bo chos~,

p. 22a, also mentions a

Sa skya bka' 'bum commissioned by the same king, though not specifying that it was
in golden letters.
of

20

The same work, p. 35b, mentions a Sa skya bka' 'bum manuscript

volumes on white paper in black letter,

and on p.

36a it mentions a

set

consisting of 31 volumes that was written out in gold letters on black paper under
the patronage of A-seng Rdo-rje-brtan-pa.
been offered to Glo-bo mkhan-chen,
set

is

mother,

The set on white paper is said to have

the younger brother of this ruler.

said to have been commissioned in commemoration of the passing

who had been a princess of Gu-ge.

The latter
of

their

Still another manuscript Sa skya bka'

'bum is recorded to have been commissioned in Lo at the death of Rgyal-tshab

dga'-dbang-phyug
176b.2.

(1424-1478).

See

Glo-bo mkhan-chen,

Bla ma'i

thar,

Kunp.

247

33Both have identical handwriting and pagination.

Also note that ff. 192-

193 are out of order in both. There also exists a Derge edition of this commentary, which was recently reproduced in India. It reached me too late to be used.
34See for example his reading rkyang

.p!!

ba at the end of the autocommentary

to III 43 (edited text, p. 133.2), KhJNSh, p. 261b.4.

mkhan-chen

explains

this

terminology as being the

In ibid., p. 266b.3, G10-bo

opinion

of

Gtsang-nag-pa's

disciples.
35
~

(a

Compare

the 'Phan-po Na1endra edition of the Gzhung lugs 1egs.m!!. bshad

forgery attributed to

Works and Archives,

copy of a Derge print.

in the margin.
colophon:

Sa-pa~)

that is preserved in the Library of

Dharamsa1a (kha, 7, 9, 2954).

Tibetan

It seems to have been a direct

It has, for example, the same pagination and the same tha

But the location of the blocks is stated in the final xy10graphic

spar ..!mm&..!!!Q!l tshig bcas .p!! 'di ni ~ sbyong .!!&!!&. dbang b10 gros kyis !!./
spar 'di shri na1endra'i mthong.!!!Q!l grwa tshang 1a bzhugs/.
36Ch1na
'
' copyr1g
'h taws,
1
at present has no domest1c

and therefore it cannot

join any international copyright convention.

37

KhJ I 89

rkang

.p!!

= p.

gnyis

89.2.5 (tha 17b.5) and Ro1 mo'i, p. 79.1.3 (4b.3):

drug .&

~I

.!!&!!&. don 'bre1 na tshigs bcad

Cf.

the

Abhidharmasamuccaya,

!lJ:pj1

commentary by Gzhan-dga',

Chos

mngon,

p.

279.1

(140a.1), wbere tshigs bcad pa'i sde is defined as from two to six rtsa bas.
38KhJ I 13c

= D,

p. 83.2.1 (tha 167b.1).

39

= D,

p. 83.2.3 (tha 167b.3):

KhJ I 13d

de .Ii dbye bsdu 'dir .!!@. bshad/ I.

KhJ I 45c = D, p. 85.4.1 (tha 172b.1):
~

KhJ II 2a

zhig brjod'p!! bde ba'ang phyirll.

= D,

p. 94.3.3 (tha 90a.3):

gtsang mkhas gzhan 1a phan.m!!. 'dodll.

KhJ II 2b = D, p. 94.3.4 (tha 90a.4):
b10 gsa1 shes 'dod b1a mar ~/.
KhJ II 2c = D, p. 94.3.5 (tha 90a.5):
lung rigs rjes su gdams pa'oll.
';

l
I

~------------

248

40

On these types of verses,

see below,

KhJ III translation,

notes 60 and

84.
41But

some

verses

were overlooked and some

considered as versified text.

prose

These I have tried to correct.

passages

erroneously

THE MKHAS 'JUG

SECTION III

1] OIl
Of~

JI

)t

lJ-n
1]

-'J

)t

CD

II

lJ..J1I

l!

L:!

.J1
nJ n

...s

)t

..J1
..JIfJ

..

~
0tIl!!

BJ

...

II

1lJ

....

.I!I

J1}

!!

~ ~
. 1i.

zi ~
~

U1

I!~.Do l J
J!
de(.!I

ril~ ~

",-

J!
.a

1'I)t

.
UII

c;

..Jj

l!

.Ii

81(

fl} -Sf(

CJIl.

0'\
Vl
0"'

Jj

.Ii
..Ji.J1J
n

.ill

lJ

lJ

ll'

lJ

B -'Ii
1i. .a
~

n j..!!l

.a

..J1(
)t
4D2(

)t
lJ

I-'

Ji

J1

..11(
)t

.l)

JSI

~
.!J

.a
.Ii

'lAi

.....e
)t

.a
J1
.l)
1I
II )t 1JI II ~
cgusa

B
)t J1
!!
.a .,. )t
!!
II .a

.n. ~ zi
:;JI
...s
Otf(
111 J!

0tIl !! U1 -.::#)
J1

B JI :;JI
.!J

~
J!
.A !! l!
!!
.a .,. .J1 :;JI
!! '-'I
:;JI .l)
.!J
.QII
- n
~ .J1}
--. .a n 1i
em
...s
)t

.l)
.!J B
.a ~ li : ...n
lJ
_

J:!
0tIl ;I
Ji, JI n CO2 )t J1
.A .,.

.
n

li 0tI l! l ! ..J1 J:! *l!

TK :;JI

.J1
li n :; l JI I )em
t
~
TK

lJ

J:I ...it ,}II.!J

~ ,.a )t .A ~
/IhI *
l! ...J1!
--.
.A
.!J
ri
..M
~
...,., ;ilJ H
~
.a

)t

..Jj-Jl!

.oJ

11

:;l

J1J ~

.A .J1

~
n
OII(.!J
,

411'

!!

nJ
Jl

"~

""

...s

.!J

li~ mi l!
~ ~ li ~J1.Ji
U1 ...n
111 :;l Ii 1]
~ l! em .D l)( I!

)t

. ~ U!I
~ .a. .,.
~

jl)

~1]

.I!I

jl)

)I

'"""B

n.a J!
ua ..J1(.
)t
n ~ ~

A ...A! ..g,

--'

nJ~lJ-...J1I

J:I

!!

.!!~

J1J
J1

4JJI.l)-H

.m.D~ ~J!n 1i

'Ii

1]~

~} ~

.a
lit J1J JI :i-BI
)t
,Ji '! u;, ~

J1~Ui ~

t:J:1

f\.)

o
w

t:I:I

~
~

zo

C1

en

t:I:I

c::

C-i

=
>
en

t:I:I

t:I:I

t:I:I

U1

c;,
I

2.5?

~q""~~'~ElJ~'~~,,'q';'~'IfF~'q~'It"'Q~'ElJ~~,~'~~~'q~
~C:'~C:'~'Q~~'q'~~~'~~'Q'IfF~'q~'Ql!ElJ~'Q~'~q~'ElJ71f"

G66a

~'~~ElJ'CJ~ 'S~I

'~pt~~'~pt~'a).1\q~"'Q,,,c:l ~'~. ElJ!~'

q~'ElJ~ ~,~, ';"e'51~'~' ~, ~~'~~~~~'!'~~~'''~ElJ' q, ~C:'

"~Z)"Q'Ql,,q,

~~ "";'

~'~'f,,'q'!lC:'Q'~~If'~~1

ElJC:~'~~ 'Q~'~I1)~'"~~.q',,c:' I

"ClJII)'Q~1

"c:'ll'~'

"tC:'Il~'Q~'~II)~'

1"c:'ll'~1
~pt'q'~~~'''~'''Q~'ll'~1 ,
a)~q~,,CIJ~ ~'~'QS'EIJ'S)~" (III 2)

D43b

a)~~Q~"'~'CIJ~~'i!i"~If~'~Ilfq'~~'~~Q~'Q~'iq..,,~,

! ~' fj ~'q~' ~ Q~' ~' a) ~ . q~,,' ElJ ~ ~. ~ , 11)'

a) ~'q~". Q) ~ 5f 1

"C:'I ~~'~pt'~~'Q~'~q~'~'a)~'Q~"'~~~1
~q~.~. ElJ~If'~'II)'''C:' I
a).1\q~"'II)~5f1

!rQl,,'q~

"q~ll~~IfQ~~~"Q~~q~~'

!~'Ii~'5' ~.~.~;

1I)'6lri'~~'S)~'~1

10

".q........

~. a)~q~"QS

11~'~'~II)~'q'~~'~'Q~"'~1

f'"

15

q~'~CIJ~'CI~1

~q'Q~'~r~IIJ'~'Ql"'~C:'11

!~'St'ql,,q'IIJ'~'ll',,~ I
a)~.q~".q'~'I1)~..,'5t~ ',I I

~~~~Il'~Q}~'9.1\~'~~"'1
~~4'CIJ~C:~Q';'.1\'~'

1~f2fQ'~'~'~a)~q~"~'EIJ~~'qS'

Q}~(i'li~~C:'a).1\' q~".5t,., '~PIq~ ~q"Q~,gq~ '13111)' ~'Ql')'

110

20

253

G66b

Clr~~ '~EI!'IW~~'CI'Q~"'CI'EI!~ ~r

9~ '~~'c~~!~ 'il'Ql ".q.

"C:'!~'~~~'CI'Q~,,'q'~'EI!~~'~~~Q~q~ll El!C:'5C:'5' .

~5'~'~'''EI!'i 'il'~5'~ 'a)~'q~"""'5f'Gl~' ~ r

r"Qc:'ll'~'

~~ 'q ~,,'il"'~'EI!~~'ll' "EI!' a) 2\ 'Q ~,,'q~'1)~ ~'~~' ~'~~"'"

B204

EI!~C:~'~'EI!~C:~~'!)'~EI!2\'~C:'~'5f'EI!~c:~'q~,~~,~ r r

. ~'~'''Qc:'ll'5l'"CIj~'st2\' r
5fF~'Q~'''Qc:'ll~'5f'~' ~"
~~'QR'5fF~'~c:~'iI'~~'Q~' ,

l"'q~'~tlJ~'Q2\',,CIj~'q2\'I)~C:~" (III

~'~'l"'q~'~Q~'~'''Qc:'fi'il',,CIj~'ij,
~~'5f'Q"1'" Q~'~' ;5f'~'

D4 4a

10

!~ '~c: '')1)' Q2\' Ql C)'qR'~'

~EI!~,qR'~~'~r~fjEl!'q~'~~2\'~1

Q2\.~.q~'~~'~,

~ ~'~~'EI!~C:'

il,~~,,'~'l,,'q~'~EI!~'Q'tal~,

~q9~otC:'''EI!,q~, Ql '" q~5f I

~~r

3)

')CJc:'ll~',,~~,~,CIj'

1~'~'~'''5f'Q'~tlJ~'q~~~ l.\r~'~~c:'q~'

1"'QCS:'~~'~~C:~'CI'~~'~ I

I~J~'q'~c:'il~'~'G~~'''EI!EI!'

15

~,

"5f'Q~~ '~'EI!i"'')5f'Q~~ '~l~ I'

')5f' q~~ '~~~'')C:'')5f' Q~~' ~talll
G67a

~7~~~~~'~~r"C:'~~'~~~'')t::'11
~~'il')'Q'')c:'~~'il'~~"

20

(III 4)

~~'~~'S~'~'5f'QQ'')t::'r I

'"

5f'a)t::'5~'''t::'~C:'Ql'''''C:'11
111

....

,
254

I
I

l ~~"IJ"1~,r:rr
I

Ijq~tI",,r:~~IIJ~r:,r:rr

(III 5)

~i)',qr~'~,cUfi~q~IIJ~i)'2\'

l~~I~,.'~I2\,r:, ,

~q'~q~"~~',r:'~IIJ~'';'~'~r:''r

!qq",r:IlIlJ~~q"i'Q~ rr

a;OI\q~')J'~3'IIJJ~'~,rr

(III 6)

~~,q~~"~IIJ~q~~11
~1IJ~~IIJa;2\CI~,~,q~Cl1"

a;~q~,5l''IIJJ~ll~!,rr

(III 7)

a;~q~,)~IIJ,~J"" :'IIJ~~'li'~~r

CI~')'~'EIJ'~'~'~"~I

10

~CJ}~ '~CJ}.a;~.

""

~iJf~2~,q1"Q~q~q q~tJf~ ~CJ}'

lIql'QPI~IIJ~Q~~5q:l\~~~q~~IIJ~q~1IJ5~51~"
Q2\'9~rr

~,',r:'~'!!,'IIJ'j"~IIJ~',r:'rt

16

~CIJ' '')C:'~'m~'~'!~',c:' r I

~~~'S'I~'~!~'~'~'!",r:'r r
~~~,",,.,'')~~~q,r:r r

(III 8)

ij'!~'~~'~'~~'~~~'~~~r I

J~~~qi~5lr~Qj~'q'~~~1 r

G67b

~i.lr~r~!lQql'),c:~q(')',)C:1 r
~~~'''''')C:'i'~'~~',\Z;fI
112

(III 9)

20

255

B205

CI~q~r~'IIJ~Q~'')C: r r
5~~'~~~C:~CJ~ ';'IIJ'I')'~ r r
,.~. r'Q~'9Cf)~'mC:'~~r r

D44b

CI"l~'9~'~IIJ~'~~'Cl7C:'~~~'~~')rr

(III 10)

';'IIJ'I')"'~' r'CI~'li'~~"1IJ l'~:I\'~El)~'~~'~~IlI~~'

i!~'~'~Q'IIJ~~'5 '~5 '(aI'~~ '~'~5'~' a),'~'~ "'5' ')i1jc:~' ry r

l,'~~~'(aI~'l'';':I\'~EIJ~'~~'ElJ7~'~El)~' 7J:I\.~c::.q'')El)'~'~C:''
5~5Q~'9:1\~~~EIJ~c::~q';':I\~r
~'mc::'li~'~~'CJ:I\'q"lCIJ'~~'
~.~~,.~,

r7J~'i,'~~'')El)'~~'

~iJI~~(aIiJI~'CJ~q7C:'~iJI~

r~~~'CJ':I\C::'~'~CJj~'~1

10

a):I\qo'CIJ~~IlI~~q~q~ II

~')'Gl~'~'(aI~'CIJ~~'~"~~II

(III 11)

f,'CJ~'~~~'~~r
~QCJ~~~(alCIJ~ql'~C:11
....
!~~q{,qCIJ~~ll')~ ,

15

a):I\qo'CJ~CIJ~~Gl~~11

~~cr~'~'~ClJ~'S:l\'~'~~')r I
G68a

," ~~'~~C::~'CJ'~:I\'~ r

I ~(aI'Q';jq'Q~'~~ '(alClJ' ~q{')CJ')C:1

~~(aI~~:Gl~CJql,CJ~~ ~I .... S:I\~IlI!~i{qe:,q'C:1

!~iJIGl~qql')CJ~~~~ I

I ~~'7J'Er ~:z:.' Clo,'~'ClJi ~.~~,

~ r EIJ~~ '~'a):I\ qo')~ClJ~ ~'iJI'~i'Q:I\ '')~c::~' ~ II

113

1
i
i

20

256

~.,,~.,'ql.,'9:1\'Q~"S' ~ rr
~CIJ~' ~c:"QC:'~~'~~'~~ ,',C:' r r
f4'~~'f45f'tI'Q!,'~:I\'~~1f

(III 12)

.,C:' ~CIJ',5f' "":I\C:' :l\C:'~'Qf!~ 'tI'CIJ~C:'Q:I\ '9' Q~' ~ ~'5'

A~~'''''QMCIJ'~C:'5f'~~(lI'Q~'~~'~'Q:I\'s'Q~'9:1\1~~'9:1\'''''
~114'Q~,'~ I (!i"~'~C:'~~''J~'~ ~.q~c:~'~' :l\C:' !~'Q',C:'f4'

~114' f4~'''''Q9,'q~'9:1\'f,' Q~'~'Qf!r"" !C:'~' ~~' ~c: 'f!!' Q"

'C:'/'i~.", ~~r"':1\ '~~:I\ 'Q~',5f' tI""'~' Q~,'~ I

'"

"'~'~~I

...

,~.,.

ClJC:'~CIJ'~~'~~,~q~ '~~'~~II

10

f"~'5f'''''~'~r~ II
D45a

~';,'~~';';:~'''':I\'S,' ,

~~'S'Q'~' ~CIJ~~""!~'''':I\ 'CIJ~C:~' ~"

~~'~'~f~'Q~'~Q'~~~'!~' ,

B206

'~'~:I\'Ql,'q~'tt;::I\'q~,'~,,

15

ClJC:' :tCIJ'!~ ',C:'Q,"'Q~,' Q"

G68b

c:~'~~~'~'9:1\~~f~'Q~'a""

(III 13)

9~'9,,~,q~'f"""~':I\C:'~'~Q'~~~'Q~Q'Q"C:"

EIJ~~ '~'~Q'~~~ '~:I\'Q'~~~'~~ ,,~C:'~'~'~:I\ 'q'~~'~' ~~~"

"",c:', C:CJI''''',c:', Q,"'~'Q~,' Q',C:',

"~~'~'Ii,'''''
,C:', ~a)C:'~' Q~'~'~ ~'~5c:'q'Q9,'Q"C:'1
:l\c:'~.~q.
~~~ '~~~'UlC:'~~''''~'f~'~r'''',C:'1
11-1

EIJ~~!'~q'~q~
'~'
...

20

m
II

~~.i:!

Ji

.JII

n
6tAJi
.J'! n

.....

~
=

)t

-l:I
J:J.

....l1

JI
~

Wc.a
l! n

.,5JI
~

"J!

III

.2!?

,m

JI

LJ

)t

c.:

()e.
.!!

..0

'l.!I

....l1

LJ)t

....l1. . . .

'!.~

J!

1]

l:!

.....

:iJ!

~Jt(~

I! -r.! ~

g,~

J()

..M

Ii

JI(

J!

~)t

'!

Ji

ii

l!

}lit(

lJ

-J!
~

.JIf

.....

.....

.i!

III

)t

.Ii

i:!

-!II(

~ '!
~,U!

z....l:l-..J1

Ii.J1

01(

6t

....l1

.oJlJt

Jl~...!iII

Z!:l! ,4St....ll

~ ~
.'

....l1lS(

.!!

9I!'-::

....l1

.....l:I

n....l1

~~

J:J.
W

1]

1!l -r.!
;J} .ri
..0
~~J1l:!~.J1..!il

,(!I

.l)

Ii

....l1J

~ .J'!

,~;J}.
J! Otp{~

~
()e
-!I....l1

'lSI)t
JI

l! ~

LJ

ll..oJl
'J~

II
.'
81. ~
.!!?....l1

..0

..J'12

11

;l

~.i!
. JI
,,~
..o~

,~

J(),~

- - t~'

__ ~

-JII

n~

~ ~ -

'! ~U!2

....l1

9t(

J!

;>(.l)

c.c

~
.

a
.a

.i!

J!

.a _
)t ill
~....l:I.J1....l1 ~

Jill CJ.I'

JI

~ "}111(~ -JII
~ut....l1~....l1

)t

J!

11!

J!
..

l!

Hi:!.....

n )t , , " : . i !
.....:::II..........
-!K --t
..0
II
~
(.ii
. ~ ~ ~~
n
Jt '! c.m ~

Ji!,JI

JV.;<I

.ri~,~,a.ri

.E.

li
.

l2!2!

.!!?

c.c ~J

'!
..0
l!

~.J1

lit

.E< -.l1I
lJ1~~ JI

~ ~ ~

;i

~....l1/-S....l:I

....l11 ;i
.E<)t -S

-l:I

~}t{..5J7 ()\f{ LJ J2!! ..0

.0
i:! ~.....l1 -.J1I
.0 ~
~ 11l2!!-.J12! 1!?1l ~JI

n
i:! .IV ..0 JI l2!!..J12
'J ~
~
CIR1
~ ....l:I
)t....
JI.....,.,.....l1)t
~
~
LJ
,4.!i
)t
~ -l:I 11\' ~....l1
~)t

II
~JI. J!

""
....l:I

O\'l....l:l

i:!)t
~ i:!

l
i ' '-.J12!d5t
tj
....l:I
'J~J1( ..... i:!....l:I
,~
'c.9Ji ~
.ci li .E< f--J
n4.0. ~."
~

.,5JJ

'~

'!

....l1

....l1

~
~U1

.!!?

.S!!

Ji

9ft

0'

0\
'Cl

~ ..0 -32!
i:!{jy'c.!JJ.,..o~

i:!

~~

ClV
..J1

-s -.!i!' ~

.!!.....:::II

.0

~.JIII

LJ
-.J12!

.S!!

....l1.!1
J1(

i:!
LJ

'l.!I~

II

on JSi

~~
~ ~

-S

OJ

-..J1

J:J.

t::J
Vl

-....J

~--

co

11"1
N

r-1

S'i(

...

...

I("

fffl

if

rr

I("

Ie

irEL<!
if

~
if

...-

B"fIO

it

....., i!Ir

"
I("
wn

rr

ElC

rr
~

'to

1("'

)tr

rr

if

If
Ii'

I("

'-0

r-1
H
H
H

!2

w~

li1

rr

rr

)IIi"""

i7

~
~

...-

it

fir'

...

....,..ifQ)

....-

!iT' ~
N-

B"

~,

<!

Ii"'"

Dr

<!

<!

If

if

0'

i7.!L~
i:1
....-

<!

~, ~

to-.

...-an

C!

ar

cr

an

I("

IF

li""cr~

liif

S"

iv it if
LI ir ~
iii'
if
Er
u- iY
<!

~
if

Er~
)I&""" Q(

cr

Frn~~~

L1

iF

U
LI<!
<!
C!'
ElC (.in a7 IV U U
if
~ ~ 5" ~ !L
.. n rr rr ErIi""I("
i(

fi77 fi77.
asi!It'
!

!
i7
<! QIl

)tr

lEi)

.
it

fi7' 0'

i:r

i(

C!
a7

C;-I("
Mr"

ir~

LI;;
LI

..,
leI"'WtoU
~.
El

cr ...-1i""c-.i7
~
!

m ~ u1111 uL I,a. l1litoH~~ir~~~

(~.

".,~.

IV

LI

~.

!
i7
ir(~

rr.
IF"
U.,.,.

H.
<!~!
<!
LI
H
LI a7
i7
a7 'Wto
tUlif"'-
i(.
~

'18
if
rr 4FP
rr
iran

Ii"" &71.

&7' if
! ( J f I .
rr

!
rr . Xl

if

Ii""

ir F

IIr

Ii""

if

1("'

EJ

cr
)if

)1\0

k it ~
i7 .:in ...i r k An
<!

iF)6{

_~~

EL

i7

.0

0\
'-0

[J'

iv .ar <r u
.

Er )IL
cr.

if.

III"

~
cr

if

Q;,

...-

)iN

0"

lr' if

ir

i7 ~
ir~

i7
rr 'Wto.
i.- it k
tr

ilt'-

iii)

to- ...-

Ii"" if
I(" 1Ei)4r.

""
~..,.
<!
LI
if
!' ta ~....~
If U
~
tE)
!i7u-~.
i7

<!
lei"

if
i7.lIt'LI)lrtr

if

c:)

)16

EJ

~
IF

t"-

a:l

C\J

uS"

iF

10

lei"

if

Icr

Iff

LI.

i:1

lit..

tLr 1iI""'-

11
uif g
LI

LI

B"

...-

fir

E-

if

C!

ar

if

~ I( i.rr
w- ~ lID)6{
!i7'
~ ~ Q.-w f!t'
U

to- C!
Ii"'" ~
to.
~
C'!El
LI

(if
)lJ

fir'

f I tLrU

cri!\C'-C'!IF

if"

if

!'

(~

co

259

1IJ~r::'~ "'E:l~,q~~q,U~~ '']~I'

f,q~~CJ~~Iitr::~'~~11
f,q~~q~ ~'~CJ'~~~

,,1 I

~qq~~~q~~~~eJ~~1I

(III 17)

,Q~~9~~~~~q~ 11

D46a

~~~~CIJ'CIJ~r::'~~'~~~'5l'~~"1
~Q~~~q~~~7J~~tJ2\1I

G70a

(III 18)

..,r::""!i~.q~.~q.~~~ 'F~~ litr::~'~ ~f,, ~r::'~' ~.,~ ...

~,~~~~q~~q~~~~~q~~9~~!)~~~~ilr:: ....
~"'f')Ii"~''',~r::~CIJ~c:~~r::q ~~~.~.q."').q',,r::""

10

...

~~~i'l~~q'')Q~~CIJ~''

~q~~S~"~~"r~~~

q~'iCJ~' ~'~~'~~'9' ~~'!'~~'~~r::~' Q~r::'~')'2\r::'~'""'''

qoZ\ '~~Z\' ~ .~~. S q.,) r::"

,)9~f')q~~II~r,.~r::'i!')'

Z\r::'~'~~'~~' Q~'')II' qoZ\ '~~Z\ ~~~Sq')r::1

'4

8208

~.q~~.

5'~' ~CIJ""9"'~C:'~'~C:'S' !:J~'q'~'~r::~'o~' Q""II'Il'~"'CI~'

15

~q'9 ". qi{ ,,' q~ ~. ~r::'~'IIJ~r::'~~' J' ~~'"r~'iJi~''j~'~C:'''''''

qoZ\~~Z\q~~"r::~~~qPlr::""qo~,,r::~IIJr.qq~,~
-.a

~~'S'CJ~'Ii~'!)~'~'CIJ~,)'~'
~

!!Iq'''~~'F~'~~'S''~'~r::''
...
...

~c:,,~~,q~~q~'~~~'~'J')''),,qoZ\~~Z\!) ')~~'q ..

....

~'')')'~',~c:~' q~'~~ ~~~o'""E:loZ\r~IlPl, q~'92\'"

~I

,~".~~~.~""
a;')~~~~q'~~o~e
II
-.a
117

20

;,

....

-B

..32(

91/

;>
~

l1jJ

91
-B
l:!J

JI

-B

n ~
)t.~

)t

~.'
JI

.a

-B

Jrtt)..32(

.2!

c:9I.

D 4i?

l!

-;>

J!

m
~

J1

'i!

1!J

-P! c:4Si

J!)t
4.3!(
n

........

Ii

J'l

)t.........B,

.D...n

l!

l:!~

)t

.q C:Jn 'In
,2?....B....B
-p!.E ~

JI)t
~
":'I

,,a ,4li

;>

C:(I.B

,~

.a

JfIV -B

1!J
-B

1a

a .
n~
...n ~

l:!

-B
,,a

.51J

'J.!J
.D
.i!

~
0
0'

.If'

'!

J1

.a

!!.!SI(

....nJ

Ji

.'

~
=

'J'l

!!

JI

,2?J'l

}II'

~~

JI)

,!JI

J'l

)t

UI

-B
~

,li
}l(
11(
'! ~ '!
,BJlJlc:9I.. 1]

-B ,~,c..!i ~ 'J'! 'l!2! .J1

~.i!.i!13.J'l

'1

~'!
ai<~Lll~
'!~
~
-B m-,!...nJ14I!
l:!
'!}t(JSJ
-B ~ .a JYL) ~
81 C:i! - B ; >
.1a
J1
n .0 -B '!)t?
~.
~
D c:~ ...l! 9t( -B '! c:,a
..Jf)
.A>(.ci' '! Ji?...l! -..:st') ...:fJ) ~
}DtJ
.ci
l:! ~ ~ J'l 1!
'! 6l!! J ! )t Ot m -B l:! ~ ~ ~.1a
-Ii ~ ~ ;i ,~ ~ '! 1:!
'i!
~ 4..:l ~) -'! i! ,a ;>? ,B J ! 1:!
,.a
GL"{~IlJ'l;i-B;>.Ji
nUJI n
~)t?;i.ri
Ji?.i!
~
~;>
J'l .Ji .ri ~
91
~ -B GL"{
~,-,! at. ~
'c.B
;>? -B
}l( c:9I.
Otpt
Ul
,.;
n...!iil? 1:!JI~ ~JI
~J1J'l
)t....:, ~JI n J l
n
~.
. ' -B

n
. c:.1!.
1:!
"'I'l..
~

~
,BJlJ'l.D.~
1:!
C:Jn.!!
n;>?
JI
~'~.l:!
n
. .a
n..!il?l:!-BJi
-B....B

,.;
~!!
J!l
~
J!
,i!,
'J!.
#UI
~-B....B?0tA-B
~
JI~

nc:d.5I
.J'l~
~J1-.::t:1?
.JI....n
.-BJ'l.~
Ot#
nJ'l
~ ~
'J!
:-DI(.
n
c.3' ~
,B;> H H .
4.lJ).J'l l:!
.-BJ'l
Lll
J'l~
EM'~
.D ,a H
'.B

~ ~ ....!I ~
....nv
r\)
n d..3 ,13 .B e!l .a
J!
J'l 0

n i! ' . J I

.E c:4li

....B

Lll

4.lJ) ,,,,,,

~?J)I

'!.

J!

0'

t:J

Pl

--J

261

EIJ~ "'CIJ~"Q:I\~~P4q" r

q,~.q, ""~"I:I'~"""~~'~~ "

~~'Erf~C::~'I:I'';':I\'~r

r~~~~"~:I\.,~,~~~qI:I~I9,)

~:I\!JI~q~~q~~5l'IJ:I\~qi',r ~'4':I\~q~CIJ"'Ii')r

~3l'~:1\ ',)EIJ'~A'AI~'~~'~~' ~ I
II!J~'f')'I:I'"
B209

"'C::~'!j~'~'')C::'~II!'~')~~'

eq!9')c::~~t~!:J~~~CIJ..,~q~~~:I\

~~')'~C::'CI)"~'~C::'.C::~'II!~".!~~q!')'I:I~'~~'~~'I:I'')C::''
3l'CI)CIJ~'I:I'')C::'~' ~C::' ~,'I:I'')C::'"'' ~EIJ'~')'I:I~'~~',~' q:l\ ....

~~qCIJ;~"1 ~!~ .... ~I

~CIJ' ~~~II5:1\q')c::~EIJI:I~~!j~

~~:I\~~q~:I\~~qElJJ~"1~eJc::~!~.')1

~~.~c::.~q~.

10

~~c::'51~~~q~'l')~'~EIJ9~'~~'

tIJ~~~"c::'~4~~~1 ,
a~'q'~~',c::'~~'fl~'~, I

"1'~'~' ~~'~~II!'~~~'~II

~~'S~'~C::'e' ~~'3l'~~ rr
G71b

D47a

..

15

~~.~~~' ~'~'FC::'~C::'~'elC::'~C::'~"I~'~ I
.

~EIJI:I~'~q~~~

a;tIJ~,~,~~~'q'~3l~'~'I~'~~'~1

~~~'q'~3l~'51'~~"

~:z:.~S~ii')~,~~~~')'q~'~?1

~'IJ4I~'!i~'a;CIJ~'tIJ~,

q'~'~"1~'~'~'~:I\.q'q~~.~,

'~')'~'eJC::'~'!j,~'~'~~'

~~i'

20

~~')'a;'''''4~'i'~'~~C::'4' ~~'lC::'"
~~'S' q..~. ~~~.q.')c::.,

~~~' ')~'')~~'~~il
119

18

)t

4l!V

L.'l

'!

c.!II-..:::Il'

11

--!I
Ll --!I

91} .SrJ
911
Jt
i! J t
~
i!
.--!I

Jri,

J:SJ)

lSJ(

JSI}

.J1

11

.J1J

J()

11

c.3

--!I

J1

f-J

rv

H
H
H

.JII

~
JiiJI

;i
1i -B

11

'-1iil

--!I

;J'J

c.9I

lSJ('3)

'3)

llJ

4llI

--!I
i!

11

.
-= ;J'J
D

)1

-.!I

l!

81J

J1

CC!(

...JI2

D ,L!3
D
4!11
.J1
.2!

Of(

to
rv

f-J

l:!

.JII

,.lSI..i!

..J1}

a}

-4

.a

-.::s:rJ

-4
&i!
-B
~
i!

11

Oil

;J'J

~-B

11

rv

..

Ji

.J1(

.2!

11

1:!

.J1

~?

.ri

~
~

Pl

~
;:i

.ai.

JI

11

'i!

11

J1

-B
~

.3

i!

.ci

ui

.5JJ

.JII

J1(

11

.J1(

.2!J
..J1

i!
D

n -4

..S1(

.2!

-4
~
D

.:bJ ~

li
)1
J1-1i

.JII

'3)

-4

.!!' 9lJ

J!

811

-4

J!

-'*

-...J

Jt

!J

;l

)t

1St

;i

Jf

11

l:!

.iI'

Jt

.2!

.JII

.J1

11

..J1

-B

.3

tl]

.:JJ

.a

1St

;l

)t

1St

;l

.J1}

J()

.2!

uj,

,91.
l!

<=

J()

l:!

f.9t

1!
11

J1J

.If)
~

'! ~
....!i -

.If)

,.

""':

.!il1

Li
li

11

ttl]

~Jt

~ ~

l:!
~

.a

""

l!

.2
$

112!
i!

~ .n!
1? ~
~ Li

1 ! J ( )-.it
-

-B

;:i -B

..n11

c.9I

-HJ t:.J1

L!il
11

;l

e,j, -B

D t:.J1

..J1

.Jl(

11

&~

....!i

.su

.J11

l:!

.a

.J1

't

JI

;l
~

..J1

Jt

Lit

;J'J

)1

JI(

l:!

J!\ ~
)1
11
~

D..n2{-,!'
)t
IJ
;l
;:i ~ --!I

)1.!irJ

l:!

-B

.3

.B

tl]

i!

~
JI

;J'J

(321

~
-4
.J1 ..J1) -4
....!JI
;J'J

.
t:4JJI-

J!I

l:!

J!

..S1(

lJI

.J1

.J1

11

ell

.J1

0IIe,j,~
~

..J1

....!i

.JI

.Ii' .!irJ

l\.9t

1i ....nl

~I

Jf'

Jl(

.
.~

..JIll

.
11

.
l!
l:!
~
~ ,uj

~ -4

~-..111(

11~

.tl]

Jt

. t~.

l!

~ .~ ,~

)1

'i3(

U!'..J1

-'!}

..M1

0.

..J1
c.3J

.J1

;l
.J'l(

0\
N

263

D47b

(~'~' 9~'~'I)E::''''''E::'!'''''''''~' t.4~' i:z:. '51'~S~ q.1\' ~E::'~ I

...

1'4' ~~"r 9~'q'Pf~r:::'~If~' t"'')E::'')Erlf'~'~s'~r:::',

~~E::'

!"~'~~E::'~I)'~.q~~, '~"'.,~.,'~'~s'q.1\'~E::'q.., ~')'~r:::'"

~~r:::'~r:::'~IIJ~'q~'~I),q~~'5"~I)'~'~'~1
1IJE::'!lIIJ'IIJ~IIJ'q~'~If'q'')E::'' ,

~!iI)'t~'1~'~'~"AI'q'~'1"

(III 22)

.,r:::' .IIJ'I)"~' q'') E:: '1f1.,'~'Ii~' CI' ')r:::',

~~'~'~~.,'q'I)r:::',

.1\E:: 'l) ~'') E:: '.,~~'

!lQ'q'')~'~' ffi 'Q'AI'')''~' Q'')~''

SE::'

~~'I)E::'~~'~~'!)'~' ~~' ~Q~'lfr~' CI~'q~' q'il'~~~'5'

Iiq,,,fi~'~q"~'l:J~ I
G72b

10

~"I)'I~'AI~."'If.1\'~' ,
~"~'~I)'iJi')'~~'Qf/~'q:z:.91 ,

~~'~~ .. ' ~1IJ~'~~'i!)~~'~')'~' I

9~'~' ~1f'q.1\ '"q~'q';')"

~~'s'q'I)~'1

15

ql)~'i1j'~~'~E::'Q5"~'~:z:.
... '~, r

q""'~')'~~'~E::Q?~~q.1\~::z:.11

...

"'E::~!~'~If~'~""Q').,'')r::::~, ,

q').,'~C)'~"I~ '~,,'~~'~r::::'Q~~I'
~~'''I~r::::~'q'';':I\'~1 ,

20

~~'~S~'~"'''I~'''Il'~~'l:J' ,
R.1I)~q::z:.q~If~"~'!')Ji,,,~, r
l~l

+
i

264

~.,~q~~~~~IIJ~q"')"
,r::::' iI,'')qr::::'!i' ~q'~!C:'I)C:"
"1"'')5f~'!' ~". q' PC' 'llJfc=:~'

.,~r::::Il'f'q'')r::::' r

(III 23)

,.. .. .,..I) c:. , Jill'f,q.,)c:, r

, .... .,. q~' ~ ... q'~' ~~. q'

..

--tr:::: ....r~q.,. qI1"'l~"ilfc:It4'

Il'f'q",,'

Q~~f.'I'Sr ')')',,~r::::Il'f'q'~' 8r~,)IIJ~C:~IIJ ...q2\' ~~Il'f'Ii')'~,

!q'q~'')~r::::~.q.~,,~ ,,,iil.,.,.q2\~~'~"P4 q.~').~, r
it,,'q~lIJf.'Iq"2\ '.c:.q r,

"r::::,.,t.I4,~"",,~,,'92\ ',~r::::.., I r
1"4' ')r::::'I4'~""''''S'

",Il'f"

D48a

f.'I~')r::::'JrJir::::~'~"~f.'I'')ifjr::::~r''

G73a

~q~~,,~,,~.q~~,r::::li~"~11

(III 24)

10

q,)"~~~'~~'~I4""~r::::'92\'Gl~ r r
Q~')q"'Sr::::'tQ.qQ'~"~' I

!r~'q,)"'~~r'~')'~'~~" I

(III 25)

~'~~~~IIJ~q~' f')'Q'~' I

15

~f~Q~I4~'~~Ilf~~~',,,qrr

(III 26)

Q:E\'~Q~'~',,~'q~')'~r I
e1r::::'I2t'f')'Q~'''~~'~Q~'~1 r
eJr::::~~~I2t~~'q~5f11

~~'~r::::'~ri'~"'~2\'~11
~~'~'~~'q'~"~.q'~'),,
B211

~r::::' ~'I~'~'
122

f,)'

Q'

20
(III 27)

~~ ~. ~')' "~~'~' ~r e~' ~~~'

265

"~'~~'~q',,.c::'~~e '~l~'P4"'Qr~""5 '~~ 'q(.Uf,

~')'~'

q~~'~ ~ '~~ 'QI\ '~r;'Q'''~'!j~'Q~'~'''Q'~~' ~!~~'5 '~~'"

Q~~ I

34~' ~')~~'~CIJ~~"Q'~IIf~z;.~ ~~. 9Q~' ~~ ~.'

')~~'~;Y;~'ElJ~~'~~'CIJ~~'')Q~'~CIJ'~'~CIJ~'Q~~'

~'I:l'J::!"1R'

~"1~~'~CIJ~~~~~~'q"~"C:~C::'!!"1~~~"'Q~~'

~')'

q'''9'34'~~'CIJ~~'Q~')'3~~'''C::'~~'~~'5Q'Q'~'~~~'Q'~~''
G7 3b

Q!~~';'~~~~'~' ~ ~~.q'''C:'~CIJ'~CIJ'')c:'ij'I~~~'~' ~ ~.~~.

~,

~~'qz;.'~~'Q~I:l~')~')'~IIJ~ ~.~,~~.~,

'~~'~~'UI~'

34~~~~~~"Q~~Q~z;.IIJ~~~11

34~'~~~'~~'~'~'')~'~~~ ,

10

~~'Q~~ ,~~ '')C:'S 'Q'')~'II

1:l!!t;:'''~'I:l''~'~'iJir'~'~CIJ~''

(III 28)

Ql ~'~~'~"~'~~'~~'~')Q'CJ~'~~'Q~'~~C:~'51 ~~'
q'Q~~' ~".~~ 'if'~2,

r~~'~"1:l1
D48b

~,

~~'~~'~'~~'CJz;.~~ '~~'~Qj' ~~~'

1'Q'Q~~'~')'!'~'g'~~'~~'~'Q"~'~~~'~~'

1:l,,~'~t~if')'~~!~~'~~Qz;.ff~~~~'ElJ"QI

9~qI:l!!~'~~~~'~~~~C:'~'~~'~~~~'

~'Q!!~"

~'~'~~'~'C:~'~~'~~'CIJ')Q'

15

~z;.'

~~'~~ ~'~~'

1:l')~'~~'~~'iI'?~'

~~'~~'~' 1:l"~'~'~Q' Q~'~'~'~CIJ'Q'')~'~';CIJ'Q'~'~'''1'~'

~!!]QQ~~~~~'qz;.~~'''l''1:l1
...

20

~~"'~~I

~~' ElJ~Qr')c:'~' ~31'g ,')~., r

123

266

~~'''~'9'''~''''''Q~'tV4~~r r
q"lIJ"~~'llr~'~'~'9'~~ r r
G74a

~~'~~~~'Q'';'~' ~~'~~~'~'~'~~'!"'" ~'q'71~~tlI'tlI~,!,

~~'ZIJ~ZIJ'~'~:I\'~~'i'~~'~~'tlI~"~~~'~'

"~~'~~'

ql ~'~~ '~"~'Ilf'~~'~'~' ~~ '~~~'~~"~Ilf'tJ' a;erj'~'q",

~~'~~~'~"'~'Ql",~,

'Q"J~ '~Ilf'Q'

~'Q!"'~~'Q~'!;"

~'Ql"'''~'~'Ql", Ql"'~'~~~'~"'~'Q~"'Q"~~'~'
8212

Ql",~ ,~, Q!i,,'Q'(5UQl "'~'Q~ "'Q'~' ~"'~ ~'?

Q' ~~q'Q'Ul ~'t.I~'9~'~'l!f~'S'''~~~'~'

~
Q:I\

'~~'"

tJ I

lil'

'.",,'Q'q"1"

'''1~''7'~'
~~'il'fI'
~
~ ~
~

fl~I~'Ql ~'~~'~"~'Ilf' ~,,'9"'t.I'''''~~''~Ilf'

"i''J '7' ~,~~ ZIJ'~~ 'Ilf'~~~ '~'"

10

"~'~~' 5i' Q'(.Il'~'~'t.I'Q ~'

q~'~~'t.I'(.Il'~~'~',~~'q~'q~'~'~1

I~~'i~'~' Q'tlI~,

~~~'~~'iJf~~'''~'~~'~iJf'~~11
~~'r~tlI'q'il'ZIJ~~'q~~~ II
ZlJc::'9:1\'~';':I\'~q't.lR'ffi~, I

15

~"'~~'~~(.Il'il'ZIJ~~'Q' I
~~,,'92\'~'~F~r~~~'~~ II
~~ '~~~ '~CJj~' ~"'~~~'Q~'~ I

G74b

~~'ZIJ~~~~t.I'';'2\' ~,

I ~~'r~~' 5'iJf'Q~~ 't.I'; 'rIJ~ElJ'Q2\'~~'

ZIJ~qt.I(.Il~'~'~"~~~ "

D49a

e1~.~~~q~, ~,~~. A S'~ I r

~"'Q~'~~ Ilf'~~IlfqiI" II
124

20

267

~~~'C"~'DlC::'lb~IIJ~'Ii, rr

~~'~~'S~'li~'~cP"'"l~rr

(III 29)

~t::~~q~~~~~9~f,C!~q~~qqc!~f~~')~1

~~""C!'~'DI~'~~'~:I\"~~EIJ'Ji,r

~~~~~~li..,q~ ~qrr

ill' '"l~'q~. ~~~'Cf~' ~~..,.q~'~~'~'1q. fj rI

Dlt::~~t::.~. ~~'~~'~~~I r
~t::.~~.~~.~.q~~.C!.~,

~~~C!~'1~..,~qIEIJs, r

(III 30)

~~~~t::~i~f,q~~q~!J'
q~~t::~~'1~~~~~,qC!'1~1

~q~.~.')t::'~a)~'

~t::.~.~.~&~.q~.~~~.

10

C!' '~'1~ .~~.~~.~,q. C!?5; rr

~~DI~~t::~f,C!U!, r

~q"',t::~S~C!~~c:U!~ r r
~q..,~~~~q~~~,CJ~ r r

~~~~~'~Dlc::!~It~~ r,

15

(III 31)

"~.1\,~"~,~,,,ij~i~,~, I
~1t~~~fj~'1i)'1 ~~.., r,

l"4~~~~~~Plc:'!~'il~q~ ~II
G75a

(III 32)

er~~q~~~l'.4~~~':f'1q~ij~C!~~~ C!.')c:.~.q~ ...

9~~,c::qq~~qqq:I\c:~~~t::5l~:I\r~~c:~C!~"

~C:'~~'~I

"q.1\~~5~qF"'~~C!~1

3.. q~~q~

:l\C::.1\C::~eJC:'5r"'fc::~q~~t::~rQ~~'1t::~~~~~c::"
125

11

20

268

"C::'REIJ~'Q'BI~'~,

st~~'~,'iJi,'IJ~'f~' ~C:~.~ ~'EIJ~~' Q~~'

Q'~' ~EIJ~'Q' ~. Q'ElJG1~ '!)'GC:'')C:'~EIJ~'IJIC:'~C:',C:'R ~~'Q:t;,

B213

~'R~:t;,'~'

EIJ~~'Q,rQ'~~~EIJ~'Q'f~' ~C:~.~~' st~~'~,'

~"'IJ'~' ~~~'Q'~"'~ "C:'R~~'IJIC:'GC:'~'!~ '~'Gl ~. Q' ,C:',

D49b

~' Q ~ ~'''''~'Ii ~'~~'~~:t;, ',S~'~~ 'Q~WC: 'Q:t;, 'R~:t;, '~'~EIJ'Q"

'"
....
'"
i~,fi '~~.~' ~C:~'Q'WC::'Q:t;, 'Q"1,'Q',c:',

....

,~'Ii~' t.I~'~~'

~~~'''~'Q~' "1' ~c. 'Q'if,'~' ~~' i~t.I~,WC:: 'Q:t;, '~~C:~' Q"''''

....
....
"C:'I
'~'Ii ~'~~' .:t~'Q~"Q'''C:'~'II' Cl~'Q~~~~~~'5'C::'Q:t;,'
'" '"
....

~~C::~'Q'~' ~'" ~ 'RQ)~' ~EIJ'~~'

G75b

~C::'EIJ~ ~',C:' ~'fI' Q~'

Q~~'~~~'~~'~~C::'2~~'Q~QQ:t;,EIJ~c::~~t.I'~'~~~'t.I'~"Q'

'"
'"
R~~'Q'';':t;,'~C::'Q'~':t;,C::'~'~~C::'~'"'~'~~~'iQ~'~'~'''5'''
~

~"'Q'~',C:'Q~ClJ' ~."

10

ti,'Q:t;, '~~C:~'~'GC::'R~~'Q:t;,' R~:t;, '~'

Q)~~' iq~'~' ~'" 5'~~C::~'t.I'~' ~ ,'Q~'''s' Q'~~' t.I~' ~'R~~"

i7' ~"'~' ",,'~':t~ '~' ",'~?C:'Q'Q~~'~'

'~'Q~~'5' ~. Q'

IJIC::"~ 'li~'~~'" ~"C:'i,'~~'~~'Q~~'Q~'~~C:'R~~'~ ~".'

'"
'"
,~' Q:t;, 'Q"1"'~ 1
~~~o ~.t.I~'!jC:'Q'~~~'~"'~'~~'Q'~~'

15

Q:t;, 'Q~,'Q~'GC:'~~~' J4t~.~~ '~EIJ~'Q:t;, '~C:'Q'~' :t;,c:' :t;,c:'~"'"

~Cl'~stR 'F~'~~ 'Q~'~C:'~~'~~,'~'~~~'Q'Gl~'~" 1

:t;,c::

:t;,C:'~'~~C::'''C:'~'~EIJ~'~'~~~ ',C:'~EIJ~' Q'!~ '~,'~' :t;,c::'~""

~Q'~st:t;, 'F~'~'~~ t.I~'9:t;,~C:'~~~~lq'QQ~ ~,~,

I~RC::'

:t;,C:'''C:'~~~'Q~'EIJ~C::'~~~'~~~'Q~'~Q~'~~' Sc::~,, ,~ .....

l26

20

269

,,~c:~'~'~~ '5'~~~~' ~ ~'2\C:'~'~~'3Ut~ ,e~'~~ '~3f'SC:"'"

G76a

Zi~'''~C:~'Q:I\'~~~'~~'r~;:I\'~i ~'~2\'~"I~'Q~'Q~~'~'
~~.~.~c:."c:.t:\"1~'~'~~'~'~"~ r r
:l\c:t:\~,,~c:')c:t:\"I~~:I\'~r r
~

~'~'"EfjC:~'Q'~' ~.~"1,)"
D50a

"I~'5'')EfjC:~'Q'~'~~'~' ,.
a)2\'~~')'Q'61'''I~~,~t:\~2\''

~!'Q~'~~~'Q~')'~'
B214

(III 33)

'utC:'~'

~~~'Q~'~'~~'f"~Q'~"
~~'~q~'~~'~'~~C:'~'~~C:'"
~3f'Q:I\'~' ~'''I~~'Q2\'f')''
~~~'Q~i.~~'f~~r:::~~~l')Q~'

10

(III 34)

~CIJ~'Q'~~C:'2\C:'

2\C:'~'Q fJ~' Q'~' f4~' Q:I\' S' QRg2\ .~~. 92\ .~~.~c: ~r ~~. ~ ... "

') C:'~' ~~~'Q~'~Q'3fq~' Q~r:::'~~' C4~ 'f~ 'f')'Q'~':I\C:'2\C:'~"

~fJ~'Q'''I~r:::'Q~'~2\'w~'~'

~fJ~'Q'IIJ~C:'Q2\'~' ~~')'~C:'

15

f4~'~~"CJI~'~')'Q~'~r5' ~~Zi~F4~~~2\qq ~~'5'~')'

Q'~'!~'e'')~'Q',)''I'~'f')'Q'~'W~'~'''I~'~',)''I'~~'@~'ll'~'
3fa)2\'!')'Q2\'~')'l{,

'~~'~'~Q'CJlq~ 'F~'~~ .~. ~~'~~'Q:I\'

S~~~~~"I~~"1~~q~q~CIJ~c:q~c:~~!')l{11
20

~~'3fq~'~~'~'~'~~C:. '~II

G7(

~'6l'~')'''I~'~~'S~'Q~I'~~i:l\~q~if~9~~~!C:11

(III 35)
12?

I
I

~l

,
270

I
!

~~'fl' ~~~'Q:I\'~I~'Q'I)""jWi' ?!i~'~q'5fs,~ 'r~'~'~~'"

~

!'~~~'Q~':' ';I:I\'~~'Q' ~""~~~'?'~' ~I

~'/lf' ~EfJ'~:I\'fl)'

Q~'CIJ~,ql~'~1

itl)'Q~~1

Q~~I

fl)'Q~'CIJ~'~'iJi"'Q~~1

~')'Q~~I

Q~~'Q~~'

Q~~'Q~~'

?~'

~F:I\'Q~~'

!j' c:::~ '/lf~' ~ ,,~' Q'/lf' ~CIJ~'Q'ClJC:::' ~C:::' 5C:::'Q' ~ CIJ'/lf'~ ~,,'i)' ~s,')'

~'9C:::'~ I
f"'Q~'~' iQ~' iJ)'~~ ~'nrR"')'~'~~')' ~CIJ'/lf' f')'
""
Q'~ I ClJC:::'~~')'Q'r~'~rQ'~' 3')'~Q'~":I\'~~:I\'~ I iJi,,'it,)'
'"
""
R~')'~ 'ill') 'l:.lRiJI~')' Q:I\ '~' Q~'~Q'iJl~:I\'~~:I\'/lf'
ijCIJ'~')'

D50b

~s,')'~'i! CIJ' CJi')'~'QI' Q:I\'~~:I\'~C:::"

'J

""

~. q~~'~' q~~ 'q~~'')c:::'

""

~F:I\ 'Q'')C:::'~' c:::~ '~~'~')~'Q~/lf' ~~~'Q'ill')' it')' ",C:::'5 'f~"'"

10

~~ 'UlC:::'~R'~'~'~~ '~'~' ~C:::'~'~Q'~~~' ~CIJ'~'FC:::~'~'~"'"

~c:::,~. ~')' Q~' ~',)"~'QE:')'Q~'!~ '~')'~G"~ I I

.....

~Q'~~~'9~~'~'~'7/C:::'~11
.....

~'~' e~~'~a~9~'Q~11

C4~'i~',!iI~'fl~'~IrJ~'Q:I\'~~"'''
-.a

G77a
B215"

""

(III 36)

15

~. ';I~'Q?'~~~C:::' fl)Q~qq~~ ~q'~s,~' r~' il'!1l~'r

~'~~'~~'r~'il'~~'q~5f'!~'~C:::'~~'~~~'~~'r~'~' iil~~Q'"
~'"

1')C:::'fi'';I:I\'~'!1l~'~C:::'''I)~~1

q'~C:::'')C:::'~r~''''f')'

'~~'Q'~'r~'il'~rQ'~')'F~'~~'~~'~'iil~1

!1l~'rr~'il'

~~ 'Q~'')af' Q~~' 9')'~'r~'il'iilrtf' I)'r~' AlC:::~' Q~'92\'~C:'

it')'5 qry~~'QilC:5 ~c:.q.q~~.~ I

~~'~ 'f~'~~ 'Q:I\ '~~:I\'~I

r r~il!1l~q r~'Il'

"1rJ",qq"1",q~qQ~rq~

20

271

~::I\'

~~,q .. ~~q'~~~~'~~'li::l\~~!I\'q'q~~'i"
'"
",~~'~'~q'~Q~'~CfJ~'~CfJ'~'

'"

l~'~'~'~~CfJ'~'!!')'~"

(III

37)

~E8J~q~~eC::~tJ,)CfJ') .. qO~r'~'~~~q,~CfJ~~"
~,

CfJiJi'~~'F~'~~~q')&::"

S&::li~r'~~~~'q~,

f')&::'

li ~~&::~,~~~S~ q'~'Gl~' q'CfJ~~ '~'~ ~ '~"'~'~~' !I\&::'~" or

'"

~~'~')q~'~'~~')'F~'1)'~iqz:.,

G77b

CfJ~~'!'~~'F~~~~'q~~f

~'Qq~,~~.~,~~'),q~.

~'~~'~~~'qt1'''CfJ'CfJ~~'Qo~~'

tiz:. Q'';', ~r ~~ ')'q'F~'~'~~' qz:. .~.~ ~ ,)'q'"IA' Qo~' Q'~'~Q'

')li~'lfCfJ~'~')'~~'&::~'CfJiJi~'~'Q'~~'ClJ~C::IfI' ~f CfJ~~' ~'9'Q~'
D51a

10

Q,)CfJ'?CfJ' 'q' ')c::~?~q;z:.Qe:')'5~I:)~~~ F~'31' ~~'q.~,

~Q'')li~'~~'F~'31,~~,q~'~'Q'~~',;,'i5i~'~~~&::'S'Q~~'~' ,
,..

'"

CfJ~~'q'S&::li~F~'~~~'q~'~~~,)9'CJ4~'';''Q'UlC::' ')~,~,

,,~~'li~'ClJ"~'~~~,~~'q',,&::' ~~'Q'~'~' ~~'~AI'~'~r q~"

~~'Ql')'~~'~,,~'q~~z:.'~,

15

~~Q~~~li1)'CfJ~&::Q~~~' ,

~CfJ~&::Q'~')'!'iz:.~~~11
~~'s'q')&::',

~~'i~'~&::'Q'~~1

~tCfJ'~~'~&::~'o~'6~'~~'')&::'' ,
ilj~'~')'Qo~'~'CfJ~'~'~CfJ ,

20

iJi"'~,,'~,,~q;z:.'II'~~~' ,

~9z:.'~C::~!!~'~CJ4~~~1 ,
q~~q'~a~')iJi')~')~~, ,

129

...w

'11

.q

.2!

JI

,.2

11

.JJ
!.!

!.!

J!

nJ

ri
I:!

c,S,

""'11""":n

'.

J1(

J!'

J'I

n.JW

~ ~

.JI

..!iI

lJ

~,~

00

J3

91.

--

ftI

n ~
jj .m
~J1(~
J1
us.

)t(

15~~

'-'!
ui
~

)I

J'I

J1

.....
=

...

lJ ~
~~ J!JW ~
n J1( lJ
C.D( 4l!2l
~
~
)I
-'I
JW
.J12!)
.ri
SJ)
JI
~
II

Jnc"....f!
0\ ~ '''!

'll

J1

~
.2!
~

.a J 4 '
~ Jl(

JI

x,JIi

JI

J1

lit

15

n e-.J1)

nJi~Ji
~
.2! CUll

.Ji

lJ ..JW
432( J12J
lJ
JI
II
~

..!iI

J'I

~.J1
-,!I ,~

JI

J'I

.q

.2!

Of,

:i1J

~~

JW 01

II
~

.2!

J1(

~ ~

1IY
.2!

J1(

)I

15

..!iI
!.!

.'
~

n J1
J1 n
.B n-=....f!

JI

DAJlili

.2!
.2!

.
J'Q.-:hJ

J.UI J'I

'll

.2!

Jl

l:!

0'

t::1

\Jl
f-J

~aJ)I

J1

0"

co

--.;j

.t-

H
H

UJ

..il

]fltJ

J11

Jt)

JI

J1

.iV

JI

e2!I.

1:2

~)

.m

.2!

as

~
~

Ot

1]

..!iI
~

P?

lJ

II

c;:;

..!iI
..!iI
J'I

Jl(

.2!

lJ

~ ~, ~ -'!
J1(
~
~,~
U1
l!
1]
J'I

JI

JI

~~
SJ7 1]

ci~

~ !!
JI JI

UJ

0cJ

-"!

.B

\.D

LA)

H
H
H

J1

lJ

Il

..!iI

JI

~}

;:;

JI

Ui

.2!7

co

LA)

H
H
H

)I

'CoB

)t

lJ

,ili

JI

...111

J1

JI

)I

,CoB

,~

.Ai -.::tl'
~
J1(

~
~ 1]
,....:31

J!
~

:i1J
JI

JV

J!)t(

l:!

...11

91(

J!(

JJI

;l

J'I
!.!

9
en,
li ci Ii

.!.!

JI

;B,'

lJ

.2!

J3

J1

aJ
g
....11

~U1

~n~
JI

9IJ

)I

l:!

J1

ri

J1
~
-Jl~...I1

J1(aJ

.Ai~~.JJ

}II(

J1

!I

JI

JJ

J'I

li
~ 1! ~ ~
..!iI:i1J""'1I
'~ .saJ
!.!
-..,J'IJI
~~
JI

IJ!
~ li

n
.!!?

.!!?

~ iBI ~

Jra

...,

,~

!.!

0tJ

. Ii
~

n !.!

.
Jt)""'1I

.~

li(

~ ~
15 J3
~
.q .q
'-.31
~ ~ -a
~
JI

.2!7 ..!iI

l!

JI

.81

UJ

ll!2l J1)

:i1J~~

.J'I
'Il

J3

Ji c.an
JI

Jt)

J'll

RJ

J.!'
JI

O'Ipj

f-.Jco

tJ:1Q

I'\.l--.;j

-...J

C"")

r--

[l)

)(!

if
a
u
ETc!
ir
Qr

~
li:7

ri

kr

)L{

II'

lr.

t{

V;
u

Q('

ft
~
~
U

1!7' ~ ~
rcr
t{.
En'!i":'

~t{

Hatlic,-U.

H
H

)tJ

)eF"

Lr

Il

II'

Ll

(IU'

..

)Ir

Lr fLr

it

ic,-

C!

f'-,

icr

...

icr

li:7

Ie
~

"'"
~

m? .,

i7

.8"
u

ETc!'
.

kr

li:7

i1

17

uf.fl 1M
Lr

IiY
C!

E.2

\!!-

iI

ft

<!

t{
fi)'

rr

)W'"

i;-

17 'C!
16 rr

ilr t{

c.71>
r;
.

if ()!j- Lr Qi')
rr
kr U icr
10
m, er ~

II'

10

kr

;; -it
t:E')

(C;"'"

ETc!' ~

IIIr

it

rr

t:liicr7

Il.
(,if

if

t{

kr h
hal).

107
cr.

17

(,(!

krk cr
~

~
!
u
t{
(,t::/:'..krcr
a
4r )[1
kr
L1
~8
;; fie
Vi
~ IIf) a
kr ir . ;; ~i7 u C ! (lEI
go- ~
er
I
n

-it
&It{
~
u
~.
~
~
a ~ er lir-~~'~~
iJ).
.....,
t{
kr
~.
m fcc-. U~
er
Ef
8" ~

(,(!

D
&;; ~
kr
C!

li:7

!"T
&It{
)(!
.
.
..

Ll

ir

10

irU(KC'

k
er it . it .,
r .cr cr l. r
k
~
h kr
~ Ll~ fir'
~
kr Dr

C!

L. ~
<!

krlllr~~
IS
iIn 117)

&7? C!

<rar.,.
a i1 u

II'

<r~
1ST

Ucr

t{
a)IL)Ut

Em

~ 117
it
~c:S.

all.

fir

II'

kr

i7
C!

~,

II'

Vicr

(,if

.U

)C!F')Ir

rr

it

II'

.,.

1IIr.

if

er

~.;,-

t{

kr

-,...

1ST

II'

'!D iJ '?

cr

~'k :, ;;
;; it

lr'

17 ~

IIIr

L.....

L1

Vi

~g

c:FP &7' iir

Lr f.fI ~

.it
er

Qr~

L.~

If

If\
~

(\J

cd

tF)

!Dis ~
II'

it
'Ie1

m)IST

(C;"'"

~".

t{

ir, a

(JIt'-

~)Ir

17

~L.U.~.eotI
~ er !1' Vi ;; En'cr it lID
.
~ flr,.~ :U" 17 &- l r ."
a ~
~

~
U

it

po

cd

0\

CJ

t--

&It{

)[1

11

If

if

t:E')

1m

(JQ

if
(,fI

.if

Hl

.u

Lr

t{

t&l

!
Ir.
.
)[]
;; W&
t{
it Cr
ocr, tEl . )LrflU'i:l
a
0/
ixr
ir,
;.,ar
Cr
ir
~
i.,Il U
~
kr 17 it
Ll

DC!'1 Ll
1ST
:
:'"
rcr U g,
~ LrIl7

m7 E...IU""LrU
cr II' rr - 1ir~
8.
.,
ir~cr
~!' i1 ~~,~L. L
r.
i:r a . kr ~ Lr it
fTfW

l7a.
kr rr ~ [7)'.
Lra
Em er
r r ) ( ! Ll icr 'Ccrr

C!
Ll
kr IU"" &7?1lr

iIV"~
.
.
tF
....
allW:
~,
~
~
icr;ro.
fT t{
it
kr
kr .
~ "" u.. .
.
.
tW- ~ 17 ~, ;; (,(! ~ ~.,
ir
Lr
i:1 ."
if ! (,(! er u~
~ ft
~
Ll
iJ'
if (,(! a ir- u & I t { . t:E') cr U k r f T
kr
a L1 fT
;.,- ~ .u, Cr Lr
.
liE')

,r!!j'

U
[7)'

Lr

ri

t--

!Xl

(\J

C ")

-....

CA

..

-l!

;l

)t

..JIt
~

-1:i

WI

.J1t

..JIt

~ -1:i

.t!

II

~
U.'lJ1(
~ JI ....51

II

~
,~

-1:i
6lI
II

'JI
'or:

}lO

".M

CSI
l!

Ji
L1

II

)t

IT

II

lli
~JI

JI

..J1 L112!

J1(

..JJ

~ c.9I

C3

JI

1:1

hi.

J!\ J2!2

-'

4.3? t61..N
.2!
~ .t! JI

II

~..,M,..J1
JJjJ-1:i
-1:ic.zV
l!l
21 ~
~
.J1 ....B

...2:i

ri

..JJ

'l.1!

,;l
..s J!'
~

-...:J

\0

'JI

....B

~,

11I
}lO
..J1-1:i

'JI
e,a,

1:1
JI

..32

II

~
.UIJ)t

..J1

....!J?

....;;:n

tE!

l::!

.ri

.a

Ul
II

(lJ

JilJ

JI

61

"'-:I

..JIt

i!

..

o
II
ll..J1'

l::!

Jnl;l

)t(

~
~..;,

i!
~
)t
i!
.
~
li!2
.2!

.2!1_
..J1 ~
. .

Q
;:I,

.t!

..J1

.2!J

'"'

J.:!

~.2!..JIt

J.:!

~ ~..nir.-PI A'iJ
~ )t( ri ~ sf.

.ci

)t

.
l::!

}lO

-?

..JIt

ot

.ci

JI

.2!

.a

c;:;

..J1(

(lJ

JI

l!.
l!
..!iilJ
.8 ~

4321

)t

l::!

11

r2

.J12!J

....SI

n --"'

-.l1I(

i!

.q

.ri
)t
.

.JV

l!

L1

;l

~ -1.{~

91.

Ii
.ri

l!

..J1.

.~.-:'c.a

~
II

~ JI

)t

.t!

CllI ,,a c..!l?

~
LB'
l! ..JJ
.2!?
~ri
II

ri~

n
om
Of ..JIt
JI!.

uV e2

i!

..JJ

lliLB

-1:i.J1

~
LB

.-3

!!

-1:i

II
~
.-1:i JI
JI
.

d.!Jt

.J1

CllI....B

-'!

11I

~.-B

n4lJJ~

. .
Ul J:

JlJ

CllI

4=:"

H
H

l!

.{~

U)

-1:i
l! ,~

'"'
~

11i!

-1:i

..J1(

c.zVc.zV ..JJ
.J1.J1
l:!
sf
~
4 lIi Ii ~ J.i .t! 'LS ri -"!
.al ~,~
Co:!'
~
~ L!i c.W ..JJ
J2!2
..JIt
...B( n
.q
n;;
~
'.J12!
~

..J1
JI

11
~
..N
)t(
~ .J1
91
II
oi
l::!
n ~~<Il:!{n~ L1 i!
Li
~
~ 01
-"! Jil, .J1, ~ w LS
01 -.l1I(
LS ~ .al -'! ~ g. Li !! ..JIt
..J1
~
~
.-B
.2!
l!}lOn
~

LS

ri ~
-1:i

-'! ..,M,

....B

.t!~
~
!!

<t.Bt

..JIt

...nJ J1(

~
~

IT

co

f\.)

f\.)

IJj

I-'

t::l

\Jl

4=:"
f\.)

L1
..!il
..JJ

.2!

)t

'l!Il

..JJ

')I"

.....

a,

JI

n
J!(

!!

JI

..JJ

i!
~

. JiJ

41

J!

~
aD
.Dt 01
.....
:J11 ....
!iuS li
~
II .n

-'!'

-JlIJt

~ ~

811
a
Li P'J

~
.t!
~

J!

'"1!

.......
.po

-~

275

e'qr

,151)'

~'ZS"I)t~'Iqq,~~.,~q~~"!!Jt:~~r

~.,~. ~"'~lllJ'~~!I!' 9' il'~ ~ I)' q~'~t:.z:r~' q~'~~' ~Z\.q.~ .. '

G80a

~t:''tI~q~'.~,,,~~q:l\=r')~~,..~q~~~At"!!J'~

q~'!'~~r

r!PI'~IIJ~IIJ~C:5lrq~~,~q~c:~~~q~~'

~.~t:.~.

f~~'I)"~' ~ASI~~s~~~Z\q~~q~ q~'a5I)'

q~ 1Iq~~~~~, r~' ;':I\"'~"~' ~. ~'li' ~~c:.~,. a;~'IIJJ~'

~'~5~'~rr

!'''''~'''li'~''l'~~'~~~r r

9''''~''',J~'~'''9,-~~:I\r r

q"'''f,).q:l\ '~'q~~'~')'~ !,r r

"Q~'s'sqr'C!J~'il'~srr

10

(III 1-14)

~':I\~,~~~!!~,~~~~,~,qr
e,~,q~~~~~,s'~'~:I\s,~r

!!JC:~' ~~'qr

~~~t:~,s,q

,t:!!Jt:~~~cr,J~~~,S'~S~q:I\t:Sc:~~q~
r;t:~
.,.

"~sr~~'~t:q~~~Q;~?~~~:I\~r
~,qc:,~,,~~s~q:l\'~~,~r
G80b

rllJ~,~=r~q

15

1~'';':I\'r~Q'~q~''~CSf'li'

~r;t:~q')t:r ,qt:'~''t:1 "Q'~~"~'~~'9"~i ~r

~t:.,t:'~'~'I)'"
,qc.:~'",t:1

!!J'~'?I

q~~.~

5s,q~~ilt: ~Q' ~ I

r;t:~'q'Q',c:'

"q~~,q~~sQ~~,~q~~t:5

~t:~~~q5l'CSfq"~iJfq~~~~t:5!!J,~q

I~""~iJf'''I'~''s,'~'aS,'~Z\'9,' ~~,9,q

J')5~~9:1\~~i{'~~1

q~r7~~~c:~,S,t!~~,
133

20

276

~"'~"'~'''~2\'S'''~1

~C:~' ~~'!)C:'''~EIJ~' ~~'Q' ~'~EIJ'~,'

Aas"'Q~' Sc: !jt:'~ . .,~ 'l52\ 9,tJ~' 92\ .~. ')c:.~~. ~c:.~~ .....

D53a

q5E1J~'~1

~C:~!~'tJ~~~CJI~'~a;')If2\9'~C:lfl)'~ Q'

A~~' ~EIJ'~~'~~'~c:'15q'~'9' S~'~ '~' q.,)c:' ~If~' ~ If'Q'')C:'

B219

"eIfQ~~Ifa)~~~~~~~C:'5'Q?EIJ~Qq~~~i
~EIJ~Qstlf~~')q!)~rR~~CJ~'~~~51
q')"'~EIJ'Q2\'A ~ ').~,
Q~'~'

G81a

I~J'

~EIJ'~q ~CJI~'

as!) 'ij' q.~ 'ct"~'~!)' Q' as,'Q2\' R ~ ".

r Iiq')Zl~.,,~if')~~~ ~EIJ~'S')~~qElJC:'~

ii')' . 'ili')' Q'~' stlf~' ~').~ 'q').,''j' ~~jf 'Q'~~~~ 2\';' ~~ ...... '
9
~
1
~

EIJ~C:~'CI~C:'~'~'')~C:~'Q~'

I~Q'CJI~~'S' SEIJ'''~~'~~'~'

10

RS~"C:~~"C:R~~9~~CJI'''~''~'RSq2\~C: ~'II

!5'~~"~tJ~~~'~ II
~~'Gl' ~1f'''~'''A@''~'Q'~C:'11

~. 9:1;, .~. ""'~~'i)~'~~"

qf1~q~~q~~Q2\'4J~c:~srr

ZS,'~'''~'~~~'A''A' ~.,.~~"

ll.c: 'Ii ')1

15

(III 45)

, ,. g2\'Q~ '~q'~"A '~C:'

~.,., ..,~c: 'eJ"~' i~ 'Zl~, ~~'''~'''II'''~''~'Q2\'

C4~~~~~~c:~~q~~~~~EIJ~It')')5q~EIJ~1

~q.

~~A ~S~Q~II~~Ifa)~~q~~~~~.,~'~ .,~.,. ~ ..

" ..

~~"'Q'~'~~'Q~'A~~~'Q'~~'~'
i~'')C:''

9S~~'Iq,)C:1

')Q2\'~ "~'~ ~'')c:'ij.,'

"~'~'Q'')C:'I

~~~'~If'Q'

') C:'I ')9' II ' Q ' C4~ '~~ '~~'A ~~ '~C:lt,)'5i) A~'" Q~' ~c:~.
134

20

277

~~q~~"18"1~ ~').~, ~"I'SI)'~''''1~' q'~"I~' ')C:' ~')'9i'

'"
q' ') C:'~"~' t~' q' 'i IIJ' ~ c: . ~,.~, ~'S I)' q~ . ~CI'" '1 ~ '~IIJ~ , ~.,'.
G8lb

~!rq'')C:'1

-.

')91)'q'CI',)C:'1

!C:'''I:J~ 'q'')C:'1

('\~l\'CI'~"~'~"'~,)' q'~~'~~rq'')C:'1

D53b

II
i

')9'~'q~'

.,~~'~. '~.,~.q~.

i~')q.,~')c:,~c:q'~')'~,~.,~,q'~c:'~!r~c:'~r~~~q~

~ "I'~'~' q'')')'5'~r.,qq~~~11
~c:~'~~'q'~r~q,,.q~'CI~11

~'~"I'i1'')C:'''~' ~'q"
~~'~"I'~' ~'~')'~')'IJII

~~ ',)IIJ'~ '~'')9'CI'~''

10

~CI'~q~',)9'CI'~'~"~'~')11
~~'ql\'~CI'~q~'~~'~91)'~~"

(III 46)

CI~' Cll\ '''I~.,~'q~'''I~c:~''r~~ ,)C:'ij"l' i~ '''I~ ~I ,~'

~~q'~'9' ~"I'~' ~'CI'')C:'I
~,,~'t~'')e'I4'''I~~1
B220

8f~' ~'q'''Il~1

ij"l'q'i~'fi'~'

~,.~t~'~'~I4'CI~~'~I4,~'),.,~~r

')9'~'~'l\c:'~')'q~'~~:1\ '.,~~~~ I

15

I~' ,)"I"C:"I~~,~')S 'CI'

~"~~'~CI'.,q~' ~5f'~91)'5'q~'q:l\'Srs:,1
~'').,'~q'~q~'F~'t1l~',,1

.,',.:1\ 'f'),.,~'~~'q:l\'sll

!j' ~"~'91)'')C:''~ .~~. ~8f~ II

20

9' ~~'~ ~ '~~')'~'')IiJ'')C:'' I

f')'~'~'~~'~~'F~',!ijC:'"

(III 47)
135

19

II'
I'

278

I
,

-~rf'~~.:~!~Q~"

I
I

flrQ~~~~~~q~~~~Q""1~"

a82a

(III 48)

~~q~J..,~~~~~q'~Q~!t:q~9~~q .. q~"

q~~.q~~.q~"Q~.~q~.~,

'~'~"",~'e' ~1IJ~'9' ~flI'!'

~~q~~Q~JII~~~Q~'IIJ't:f,~,

,qt:'~~'~IIJ'Sfll'flI'

~1IJ"'Q~q~qQ~~q"'~~flI~""'liJ,q"1I1J~ .~q.., .....

~~!f'Q~'t:~Q~~,~q~"~~lJ~~IIJ..,q~t:~,~~!
"-

"!~e~"::"Q~~IIJ~Qq~,~"'f'Q~~q..,q~ ~IIJ'~'
~~q'Q~.,itjt:..,.~,

,q~

... ~~.~,,~.~~.~t: ... ~.~.~ .. ~.~~.

9~Ilf!~~~Ilf!~q~~~,

~1f'~~Ilf'~""

10

~~~J,~~q?t:t .. ~~~"

mt: i~IIJ'IIJ~~~"'J""E(,~~..",

D54a

~lllJ~~!IIJ~~~q~~IIJ~~"

9' ~1lf',9')'flI'~511J'Q'IfE(""
~~CIJ~t:~~,

r~~"~~~Qq~t:q~9~I~~~~~C!~J

15

1IJ1lf'~'9'~Ilf'~~'Ilf'~~IIJ'Q'~JJ
a82b

j'i' !5~'''~' ~~.~q~'~'~5I'Q~ 'CI~~"

~~CIJ~t:~Q~'~IIJitjr '9~~!~~~CI~~'Q~~f,q~'DI~
~'~5I~'I,,~ ~.~~. 3"CI'CI~,'Q~'9~,

ClJt:'~"~~'li'~If"~"C!rr
~",'5'~'~"~~'il"
CIJ~'~'9~'~'~'''~'~rr
136

20

279

IIJ~CIJ')~5~~~~q~~~"rr
~~'IIJ~CIJ'')~'5' ~~'~~'9' ~~.!. ')~~'ll' q"lIlJ'Q~'~' ~~~CIJ~

~~qz5v"~rCIJ~~~CIJ~~U~q~~CIJ~Q~q~q~~~9
~~!~~f.,~q',r

~~'~'Q~'!~'~'~S' qOI~~~~q~r

~~,,~~~')q~~~~~~l!4rr

~'11~~,~~,~,q~,rr
~~~t:~~S~~~~ rr

~~Sq~~CIJ~qCIJ~~~q~~~r
B221

r~q~'~~~'CIJ~CIJ'')~'5'

~~~~~~~"',)~~CIJ~q~~~!)r ')e'''~'~IIJ~~~r~~')'Q'
~IIJ~~~~q~~~"1fi~~q~:s')~r

~1IJ'~'~CIJ~'Q~'~'~'9~r
~~~'~'~',r

...

G83a

'~"'l!t::.q.~~.')ql::'

10

5~'~~'~CIJ~'Q~'~'~')' ~~9q~

~~CIJ~~~q~Q~~r

~!~q~!f~,)1IJ

F"~'IIJ~"'ll'~~' ,)CIJ~~~~o'''I'i~~9q')~ r

Pf~"I:z:.

IIJ~CIJ~~q'~~r
qCIJ'i!iCIJ~'~~'~',)~CIJ~'Q~'~"~rr

15

~~5~~q~ql~~~r'

~ ~.~'). "'51~' ~"~'J')'~ II

9'~~'~~'''l~'1fiCIJ'z:r51~rr
~~CIJ~C:~Q~~~~CIJ~Q~q~q~~'~CIJ')51CIJ~ e~~~~

D54b

Q~'CIJ~C:'i!i'9'~~'!'~~~CIJ~"51~'Q'~ClJI!4'~r

I~''II~'~'~~'

!~'fCIJ~Q~CIJ~~q~~~q'~'~~')'~""',r

~CIJ~'Q~'~'~~~'J')'~~'FCIJ~'~r
137

19"

20

fi
I
I

280

1IJ8t: 'q.~,,' tI~'~J\ 'f\t, 'il" 1.1

~"".,~t:~. tI'''J\'~'

,~~,~ .!t:.q'~'J\t:. ~1IJ!t~I\~q,

"St:~t~"l::~li ,q"'~""'~~IIJ..,tI~~.,~, tI~'IIJJ~'~,,'

~.~~.q'J".~~q.~,

~'~~"~""5t:'s'IIJ~~'~" "
~~'5t:qIIJ~~~"~'fI
1IJ~t:',t:'~t~q~,q~9J\ II

~. ~'~' ;':I\:.:.t:'J"IIJ~AlII
~~'''~t:..,.q.,,:.:.'~ I

,~~.~.~ .,..,.q.,t:.~.~ 1IJ~'q~',qt:

~"'~@Al"~@AlAl"'~jIi:.:. 'q',t:'5' t:~ 'Al",~,~'q~.,~ '~~"

','~~'q:.:.',i1jt:~'~1
G83b

q~q~.,,,,,

10

1~~~~~'~''1';,'q~'.,~~~~.,

'1"Al~!~,~,q~~"Sfqq~qq~'9:.:.~t:'

"1:':""~IIJ""Q'Al~1
~~~'~SfAl~~q..,~~ ..,.~t:."
~t:'q.~,.~.:.:.q.i' g:l\

~~'''~t:~'~t:''

I'

15

~"'~~Al'Al~1

~5~'~IIJq!AlAl,i1jt:~,..",
~1IJ'q!Alq~SfQ:':' .,~t:~. q.~",

i:"~'~'~'~~'Al~'!~ II

~'~t:.q'Q)'~"';" ,~.~~ I'

~~,.,~t:~'AlI

~1IJ..,qIIJ'~q'Al~1

~~'~ '~q~"~~Al~t:11
138

20

281

"c:~~9~~~"r:r~.,~qll

..

"
!r~~9r:r'~',, .. r::rr
~,,tI~_ ~~~~~.~

B222

~~'.,~c:~.q~" "'~~,~~~tI'''''GI~,qc:~,',,,,
!~'~~'9'r:r'~~'~1 ~~'Af~9'q"'!J'~,~~q~1 ~~"".
tlZ\'9'~')'a~'a~'~q'~1

~'~I~'~~'tI'AI~1

.,c:.q.,' ~~'~~'9~'tI~,,,,!~ rI

~'~'9~q~'~c::'qq~'iJi~''''&l~ rI

D55a

~~'~'~"'~~'''C:~''~tI'',rl
"C:'~~'~C::',,'~~'~' q.,'iJi,&l~
G84a

~~'.,~c::~tI'~Z\~1

rr

10

r~~~~"~"'~"~'QZ\~"~'~',~r

"~'~'j'i,~,,'9~ '!'~'i5l"'Q'j'iC::'''~~~'QZ\ '~~Z\'~

I
....

r~~'

~1f~~AIIfE(,tI~',ifjc::~tI~~~, ~ rr

9'~~'~~"~'''~'~' Q~ rr

~qIfQ~,~~li' ,q~' ~"~'~~ rI

15

~'9:1\'''~~'Q'Q~~'~,'~ rr

"~C:'eJ"~'Q5I~'~~'~'~Z\'''i,rr

(III 49)

9~~!J~~'~'~~"'~~~"~S~,~,~~tI~5q~ ..

~9~t.I~'~~'~"'Q"C::'1

S' a.,,~ 'II'Q~'~~'~c::'~qc:'li'

"~'''~~'Q~'~~'~'''QZ\'~~,'Q'~'''~~'S,'~'a),' ~iJi, Q~'

~

~'~Q~'~c::'r "~'AI~r

~.,'~'q'~"C::'''~I)~'~''~''~'~~'

1l"~~~QZ\1~tI9,~~.,~c::~tI~~~~~,~ Q"" ~~ .....

139

20

..nI

Jf

l!

.B

.J1
P
l:!J..liI

'.B

Ji,.J!'

~. ~

.l)

.J1(

~
Vl
Vl

~
J!

1]

Of{

lJ(

.J1

=l!2l

~
~

OJ

JI(

(3'

~
II

.N

J1(

l:!l

11

II

J1

P,

'! at. 1i 9
.....
91(~~~
1! ~ J! ll.B
..liI llJ
Co uV .. ,;
~
n

.s;:, ,}f7 U!{ L!il

Jf ..liI ..liI ..liI

1a

U!1

.....

B,

"'"
=

-..s;

U!? Ji

~~

~.J1(:

.!!

..J!'
.!!.

~ )t
":. J f .

<6V

1-'1

.....

}t(

JV...5V
Jf
.a

11

)t:

~:L!il

.;

~
......:::I

III JiJI
h
....

Jf

J1(

J!
H

II

Jf

..JI!

<=

i,""'

..s

H..!

~ll...!l(H
11 Vl

(31

~ Jit Li

J1(..

.a

J1

~..J1J Lit ~

Of{

II

ri)t(~

.'-'1

.J1

ai ~ ~ ~ .fflaj
J1a~.2'j.B 11
.J1<.a ~ ~ .B e,S, .a

p
l:!l

III g

41

JI
..J1(
)t(Jf
~ .Jf').B

9f(JII

J!

Ii

~Jf.a

J!

J!J

Ao."\

.J11

.....

9f.

:J1

U2
..J1
e:
11
~
911

II
.a

)t

II
:

~ ~ -'!4~

......

-'! 01 -Ii ....

n-'!..liI 11(J!
~a.a
~~
.",_
.a

_
!J

..m.

.J1J::;:'

.B 41 ~ ~ J! J!..nI 1I.N
J1(
~
~ )t( ~ J1( ~
.a.;"
.a.J1(
...
~.3

4V
. Jf ..J1J ~
.c:'~ J12J J1 ~.B
..liI -=:I Jf ..J1 J1
-'!~
.1I~~1I.
~c.S1~. J1( 1 1
~~2li
..s..J1:!."'~.a...JII ~1
Of.J1e.B n . a . a :
J!
.B-J1.
~
J1(

Ba
15...ni 1lI .aI ~Jf ~ li li g . a
~ ..
0-' ~
~ 1a
~ )t..s ~ ~ JI ~-li II li ~Jf 0.J12J..s
11

.B Lit.a
J! Li ~ .-~ .ffl11""
~ ~..tiJJ J!
~.a
~-II
;i
.
. ~/.)t ll...JII Of..B
.a..lil-.JV
~
~
llJ-.l12l.N
~...:hl
~ ~ J!

~ 1i .a ;i ~ ~
.B

li
Il
1] ~
ri
~ l!'Jf J! ~c..!!'
~ 15.;" 1](.ffl
li J! .a Q,
.a
~ ~ }III( n .N -..JV ~ .... .J1(.
) t . -'! l!
"'" 1I Ji c.zJ1 ...JII
p'4I

""
.Jf..lil~
.J!' . . . . . .
...JII.a.J1.
n.L!il n..J1
...
..J1..n1 .......... ~.;,a
JU

J!.J'I(
~

l:I
Ji .f!
.....
)t~
-.l12l1] ..:..liI
1!
~
Ji
.a
~
..J1
.J1a? .a.....
~
~ II. . . !'.!M
.;,a
~
.a..

-41
.....

~~~~x;i.J1~~

1]

'llJ
.J1

)t(

.B

41

~ ~

a!?

J!

Of. .JW

f\)
f\)

283

"~r~~'~?~'&"1~,,,t:~'~Q~'~~"

G85a

(III 51)

~~'~'~' ~~'~'~r~i5f~'Q~'5~'~' ~~~~~ ~'Q~' ~~EI1'"

')C:'5'S~'')C:''

~~~'')C:''

~~'~~'''~~~'t:~'')C:''

~~"'Q~' ~7~'

~~'~'Q~~'~ ~'~~'~~EI1'~C:'Q''''')')'~'~''1~' Q~'

~7~'~~~'~~~'~"'')~~'~'~[:P~~'~rlJ~'Ul~'~, I~'~')'~'j~'~'
~qQ~c.(~'')e'~:I;,C: ~~'CJR'~'i '~~~~'~'')C:''

~'Q~ ,~.

~'tlJ'~'~EI1~'Q'')C:'' ~~'~~:I;, 'Q~'Q;jQ'9' ')C:'~eC:~'CJ'c; 1::',

'"

~'~a)"~~C::~'Q'~' ~~~'Q'')~~'~~'~Q~'~~~'w~'~''

r'~~'~Q'~~~ 'f~'~~'~"
10

')~~'~'~Cl~'~~~~c;'~~'~:z;."

~'Ul~' ')~~'~~'~Cl~' ~')' ~ II

~~~'CJ~"~EfJ~q~ '~:z;. '~~c;"

(III 52)

lS')r~~~Cl'~~~'~Q~~'.~~:I;,Z:::~~~QR' ffiClJ~'~Z:::"

~'~'~ ~.~~ 'nl'~' Q:a:.' ~')'~I

~t::'~'Q~~'QR'~q' ~{1~ '(lI'

')l:~'ll' ~Cl~' ~~~'~')' ~'~~'~:a:.'Q'~'~"')'~'

G85b
D56a

I ~c::.~' ~~'

15

Ql iJ{'~~ .~,,~'') t::'~C4~~'Q~'EfJc:':s~'')c::'~r~'Q~' !'lS' ~~~'

~~:a:.'Q'Q7q':CJ:a:.~~~~'1

eJt::'~'Q~~'Q~'~Q'~"~'~'~'c;~'

~'i ~'~' ~st::'Q~'9:a:. '~'

,~~,~ '~Q'~"~ '~':a:.c:':a:.c:'~'~q~'

~'~~~'Q~'')~~'~R'~t:I~'~')'~'~q~'~'~'~~'Q~' ')~~'~Q'
~'~ ~."
~

')2):a:.'~ '~~'~'~C::'Q''''''~')'CJ~'Ql'::::' :SEl1'~' ~'')t::'il'

~1

~!iCll~'CJ:a:.'~Z:::'~~IJ4~'Q'')t::'!~Q'~'~~~'Q'~~~'~~'a),''
B224

~,~').')~~'fj' ~Cl~'~~IW~~'~1

GI'')~~'nl~~~~'CJ'~'W~'
141

I
I

20

t
284

~!"C1'~~"~"'~'lIi~~'C1'J)~~'fi"Q~'~~~''''6l''!J,
~r::~r::~.r::Q~E::~'C1~JJ)J)~~fi'Q..,~.,~5l'~r'

~Q~'511~~ljra~~''S~~I1~"'Il'~'C1~'~Q'C1''\~~'

fi"Q~'~~~'~"!'

I1S''''C1'I~'q''~'~J)':II\r::' Q~"~'"

q~'I1t:~.lj. J'\ .. ~QC1~~~,~iJi'\ C1r.tlRil,\ C1'ra~'Il'~'"

C1~S~iJil1~"'Il~~CI~~QC1,,!!!~fi'Q~~.IIJ"'~~~"

G86a

~lR'~"" ~. ~~ 'e' illR~'il,' C1'~'~"

Clr.tlRil,, '1:11\ .". ,1l1lJ~"'"

~iJJ''lR~~~SQ,r::, ~,'C1'~~r
1l,;,,iJir::~~Q~'C1t1f ~'~'aJ)'CI' ~ rr

~~.,~r::~CI'I/:II\~"~Q~'5~s~e"r:-,\-"~CI~~IIJ~
~E::' ~r::'Q', E::~t1lRq~ q' J)"'CI~' ~., ~''\t:~. fi"

J,.q. ,,'CI~ '~~:I:\ '~r

IJIE::'~' ~ ~'lR~E::'Q""

~'~'~'~~"'CI,~~'lj,~q~'~"~'Ga~'~'

10

t:I~. ~ .,~ .....

,QE::.lj' ~ .~~.

r'4'~~'~'IIJ~'CI~'

"'E::~'!~'~',QE::'ll'~ '~~'qjJf~'~,"~f ~~.,. ~r

lR~' ~. ~,.

15

AI~r

,qC:'Zi'~'~~~'IfJ~"~:II\',r ,

~~.~~ 'r.t~~"C:'q~~'~"~"
ili~?~Q~'!1.,q~~J~r.tSC:' ,
r.t 9:1:\'

D56b

CI','"

'-a

Q' ~Q'

CI:I:\ .r.t~2\ If
~

~~"~C:~~CJ~,,~~lj~Q~~~~5)~Q~'

~~',C:'~C:'

S!1fJ'~'')9' q~.,~ l,If'lj' 'Q~'~~l,If'~"q' ~,'Ga ~. Q~'~:I:\ 1fJE:: ..

')i!! ~'ll' 'l:g~~~OJ~6)r lR'U!~','9 ,.~ II}
142

~/\l';' j~ '~q'

,c:.

20

285

~ ~ 'E)~'Q~' ~If'~~~'~'~ S'CI~'

G86b

~~'CllE)'~~'~"~'~'

?{ ~'E)If' Qti~' Q'E)::' ~~'CI~'

~~'liCl'4~'Cll')'~'~~'~~' Q~'~~~'

"~~'Zj '~CI~'~~~'~~'E)~~'~CI'S"'~' ~Ol'i'

~'~'~ 'J~'

~ CI'~')'iJi"'Q'')::'~'" Q'E) r::'~ElJ'Q'E)r::'~' ~ ElJ'Q'E)E::"

a~~' Zj.

1:)r::'~ElJ'Q'''::'ElJ~r::'Q'E)r::'~~~'Q'~'~ElJ~'Q'~~')'il' R~')'F~"

B225

~~'Q'~'

~. ~3']~'S,,'')r::'~E::~'~~'Q~'~CI'~~R'!:.~Q~~('.I

~~ElJ'~1

~'E)3']''JE::'~' ~~~'SE)"QC)3']'?ElJ'Q'~~~~' i5:lE::~'~')'

Q'~3']'F~'~~'~'fE::'z:.E::'lfJ'~~~'Q'~~~'~('.I'il')~,

~'Q~~'

5' S' s~'l'f1' CI',)QE::'Zj' ')E:: '~(lj'5~'~~iJI' Q~'A ~~'Q' ,)E::',

iJI~'~'Q('.I'~~'Q~(lj('.l'~(lj'~~~'~'~iJI~~'~'CIlE::'

~~~.

10

~ iJI'Q~'~E::'Q'~~~'ilE)'~'~~'Q'Q~'i!i~~'~~'~' ~~.~' ~E::'Q'

"r::',
~,

E)9~Q'z:.E::' Q~ ~ 'il')' Q'~'

~~ '~9(lj'~' ~E::' CI'Q~')' Q'

z:.E::z:.E::'~eJ~~'F~'~~Q(ljz:.c::z:.C::'~iQ~~'~~~'Q'~

~')'iQ~'~'~'~~'~~'iQ~'~'QQ'QR'~~~'Z:I'~'~')' iQ~'~R'
')~~.Zj'~Q~' ~~~~~'~'~~'S'Qz:.'')~E::~'?'
G87a

QR~~~Q~iJlqz:.'A.~~'Q~'~.z:.~,

1:4~'e~'~!;(lj'

15

,')q.z:.'~ '~~'5~n:r

')')'~'~'~iJlIlf'~ElJ~'Q~'S'Q'~'.z:.c::.z:.C::~eJElJ~~~'~~Q'~'

C4~ 'e~'Rffi(lj'~'il'A.~Q'Q'Q~~'~r

'Q~ ~'~~. ~~~'~~''JE::'

Q~iJI'Q~'S' S~'~~' ~. ~"'~'')')'5'ElJ~E::~'Q~r:::'~'~' '1Qjr::~'"

D57a

~I ,~~'? ~Q'iJI~~~~' "')'(lj'~E::'x.~'~'~Q~'~'~~~'Q'~'~~'~' 20

~')~' Xl" I

~F~'q'''~'~~'~ElJ~' 'l~'''~')'~'''~ElJ' Q~'A.~~'

~'~E::'~'R~~'q'~' ')~ ~'q'~Q~'~~(i'Ulr ~~'~,

~. 5~ '~'
143

,
I

II

286

~~('4lj~q~~,~~'~~~'q'~t:jqlt:j'qiI~t:j~1

5~c:~qCJ~'~'q~"l~~'!~~~~q~9;r;1

~"'~I

~~.~~.

~Irq~~/'.i~

~t'9~'~~'~~r
~~q~!f~ll'iI~~C:Q~IJf~' I

il'~~c:q~t:j'~ a5~'~~~1 r

~~'S'q't:jC:'1

~~'''~~'~~I

l~~~~,~~t:j~t:jQ"

~'~'~'~~'~3f"'S/ll'~~ I r
~~~'Q'~~~'~~'~C::'~~C::~'QI r
~.~.t:jl!~.'q~. /'.iC::~'Q'~~"

G87b

~~'~~C:~'Q~ I

"l!~'ll'''~Q~'~~~'~'~Qj~' Q~' "SJI:)'~'~C:

10

~C:::'il',,~q'Q~'~~~'~~'5J~'~3f'~~'~'~~~'Q~' S~ II
~~~'Q'~'PlC::'~~'Q'~~~ II

~~i'~'~'~~~'~~~'~'~~~lr
a)"3f~~tlJ"C::3fC:'ll"C:11

15

~"~~~~3fa)i~"t:jC::'I"

B226

"Sq~~S~~~C::'Ji,,~ I r
....
~~~Q~~~~Q~"~~~q-l-1,,rr

(III 53)

~11(~CJ~~&f~~~~Plc::~c:~~c::~~~q"c::~~~~~'
~ttt~S,,~~~~~ I

~C::~'~~'Q'2' ;r;q~' q.~. 3f~i'~~'~~'

~QEIJ~C::a)~~t:jC::EIJ~3fq~l~r

~9~~roc::q~~~~q

"C::~EIJ~q~~C:a)"~~~~~iq~r
144

~~~'Q~'~'Qfi"'~C::'

20

"'"

U'I

...

In?

.0

1)

l!
~

91(

~
)f

l!

~
'L!I

~ J1

.J1

...J1

T12!

.2!

n
.J1

.J11

~
~

.2!

;:J7

1)

Ll
'..112

.J1

}I1t(

Ll

l:li

.J1

l1a

.!!
~

'91.

;:J7

"i)(
.JI

.J1

c;;

.J1

-B
;>

;>

)1

.J1

B n

t:ei.ri

~, .D ~ H
)III(
l!I H
91. .J1 J1 H
.J1
jj l! .!!l Ul

-1i
,,a

.J1 J1(
Ull JII

Ll
~ 012
;>7 ;:J7

J1

J1c )fn
li .J1B

43 -B

.JI

.J1
11

11

L!I

;:l'

)f

112

.a

J11

11

)f

43

.J1

.!!t

.J1

li,

~
~

~
....B

...lI

~
~
~

~
11

;i

.JI

'"

)f

e\
~, .J1
.a 2!

2!

Jff

~~

~I
~

-1i

4..C'
m3...l1
;>

c:;

~..Ji~~~

.!!

;>

~
~

.2!

11

....:1

.J1
11

112

.J1
11

Ll

.J1
11

.a

L!lan
....B . ....B

J1

..a
ot

.SJ
.!!

l!

~
L:!

m3

;>

-B

..J1

..J'!'

;>

43

....!I
.!!l ,~

.J1

.2! J1(
l.C2i. .J1

Jf)
)f

..AJ

91.

...J1

11

4..a

Ji
-'! ,li
11
n

JII

--=1

]ntl

.J1
4.ll'

...PI

J1

,~

Jl{
.JI

.!!

J1
.J1)

)1

J1
L:!

l:li

l!i.

J1

E!\

J1
11

J1

.5l)

JI\ ..J1i!
J1 ~

.!!

'J1

112

-B

li

13

11

;:J7

'lS2
Ll

JT

~.J'!

. 012

...PI

,.a
.2!
;i ,Ji

.2

6.i!
-B

p.J

00
00

91.

;:J7

~.

00

-B

1!

.J1

...lI
~
91.

,.21

)t(

.2zJ(

)f

'! ,C,!j

4.W -B

...R(

-'! ,.Ii
~
.a
;:J7

;>
.2!I J1?

.J1

....:

.D

,~

1!'
Ll

Jt)

JII

t:ei.

.JI

11
E!

,~

91.

~
2

..a

,~

11

-B

Jl

.J1

}ltV

.J11

.!!l

.J1
f..31

Jt

.!!

LSJ ...J1

;i

-11>1

-B

....n J!,o
...J11 ;i

.5l1

.ci

)1

;>

U1
.D.

~ JtI
9f !!

s;,

CW
. J1
~
~
9W

Li-M)~
.5lI
11

)f

!!

l! -'!

..J1i!

11

...1)
,~

Ll

..32

/fIt/....B(
,~

J1.

L:!

-B

U!

011

t::1

0"

Ul
--....J

CD
........

T
288

~'~'9 C1J~':DC:'~ ~"I' '!)C1J~' ~ C1J~ II

'!)C: ~'~ c: '~9' Q~R' 9' 9C1J'~ c: 'II

Qll:)'CJ~' ~Ill'(~r ~ C:'~~' ~ClJ~"

"

@'~~'~Ill'Ill~'~')'CJl\'~f4OJ~"

(III 55)

9' ~Q~' ~'iJlF~' CJ' 9OJ~'~' gjC:' ZJ 'Ill' ~C1J~'q' if) ')' iJI~'"
G88b

'!Jr:::~'ll)~~'~' ~ ~'1ll1
~C:'I

c;JC::'~' ClJ~' CJ'e; r::: '~ClJnr~ 'd! ')~iJI'iJI'~~'

3)'~QjIll'~'~~'')qQ"]'~'5e;'q'C;C:'1

"9,q~'lJlC:'~')'

ql\ '~r se;'Ill' ~Cl]~' CJR "~nJ'q' ~~~' Q~C1J'C1J~C1J' ~'sC:: 'C)' ~ ')'q'
B227

e;c:',.

c;rCl]'c!"'Q"]~~'5'~'R5'W' 31~'Ill~1

~ ~ ~

~~'iS'~C7j'"c::'31'Q~rl:)C:'11

10

R OJIll'~')'~OJ';Jj \ ~3J~'nJ' ~"

8 ')'q'~q' CJl\' ~nJ'lt]~31'q4~ "

R ~ 'Ill'~')'ql\' iJI~ ~'q'3!l"
D58a

I g') ,I:.! ~ , c: C1J' R ~ ') , ~ Ill' lJl r::: ' lJl ~ 'Ill t7J. ~ , ~ ~ .

-.
r. I
iii ~' C7j ~ c: {'oj' q ~' "'I

C'

,\q~'~ '~'Ill,~I)je;'~'

5' q'l)je;' q~' l\' alC:'iJlC: 'q~ ~ I

~C:'5' q.l)jC) , q~'~'I)je;' ~~'R ~ ,)'q'.J.rR 5:f~'~1

~'alr::: 'I

1:: I

~'Ill'

15

~'~CJ'qit ,)'q'

e;iJI' qoR' e;c:' ~~' S~ "C:' ~15 ~'~e;'t7J ~~'~C7j'CJR' ~~'

I ~ ~. ~ , ~ '). q~ r::: err ~ c: '~ ~' ~ ~ ,

~

s'

q' ~ q' q' "

r::: ' I

t1 OJ ~'

c!~'qi! ')'q'Ul~ '1ll~'9~~'~i'5'~ l\ 'CJ~' ~',\q~'q~. ~ C1J,~.f',)'

CJ~'~'R~lt]~'~1

I~' ~Q~' !~'~~~~CJ~9~b~q~~ 'CJ~'

~C:' ~~' ~cJI~'Ill'Ulr:"

!
146

')'CJ~' ~nl'nj' ~ cJI'~~~' cJI1fc:'"

20

289

1~~~~~qQ~r::~,q~')~~, ,

G89a

~5~~~~~.1;,~~~~~'Q.1;,~e:"r ,
(III 56)

~~~'5a)~q~')'ClJ"i~'~'q~')"
~')'Q~'~~~'Q~~~'~.1;,'~~C::~Q'~~1

fl)'Q~'

~q~'~c::'~rQ~'~Q'~~'c::~'~~'il'Qr;,,~~,~.z;.,.~~'~~

~~~'5'

ij~~'~~ 'a{'~Q'Q'~'W~';' i~'~~'IlI'~lir::'ClA'

~.1;,'~'

1~~~'Q'~'W~';'~~~'~~~'~'~Q'Q~'9~'J;;,

~~'Q'~'W~'5' ~'~~~ '!ClJ~'~'FClJ~'Q~'9.1;,'~'

r~'

'~I!f'~'~'

9~' ~~'~' a;.1;, .~.~~~. ~.~ S~ 'tJA' ~~'Q'~' a).1;,' q~"'Q~'~~~'

~

riI~'~C::'1

a;.1;,'~'~r::'Q~'~~'~'9.1;,'~~!'~r~s~'Q~r:::~

10

~~ClJ'Q.1;,'ClJ~C::~~"

9'~~'~~~'Q.1;,'~'Q'~CfJ~11
gQ's')Ql,~'9.1;,'~~'~~11

""

!~ 'ql'\'~ ~'~' a;.1;, 'a{'~S~11

Q"~~~'~"C::'~~~'Q.1;"g,,1

(III 57)

15

q'~'~'~'~~'~f~'Q'~CfJ"C::'~'CfJ'~~'~iJt'~'~~'!I~'Zi'
D58b
G89b

B228

!t' (f),'~~'Q'~CfJ'~~',Qc::'fi' S~'5'g,'q'~1

~a{EtI!f~~9,,

~'!t' ijCfJ'Q.1;, '~~ ,'Q'~ I ~c::~~~~' Q~'~'ij~~~'I)31q~I!f'

~a{~~'~'ijCfJ'~~~~'~.1;,~~~~1 ~C::~'~~'Q~'~r::!ili,,q~
ijClJ'~' ~~'Q'Q~~.!t' ~r::'lJl"~'~~'~Q'tJ~'C::CfJ'Qi'1r

~.~.

~iJt'~~'i!:ClJ~'~A,a;.1;,'~'~'~C::'~'~~'Q"1c::'~r::'~~'Zi~q~~,
"

""

""

!!n.!'Zi' ,)qc:: 'Zi' ~ ~'q~' ~r::~' ~~' Q'~'ij ~~'~~' a;.1;, '~'~r::'~~'"
141

20

20

290

i~R~1

Q''7~itiq~~~~!~ .~".q.~.~ ~ '~'''~C:'''"i5j~'

~~.~~.q'7q,

~:I\9~~~i;~~~~~,\iIj~q~~~~~~

41~q~tiq~q~,\CJ~~5~EIj

1~~~16,\~~qq~i~

~~~~st:c:.Q~C:~ ~?CIJ~~~ ~ .~.~.~ ~~.q.~. ~~~.q~.~~.

~~~.~,\.q'5fI::'~ '~~'~~'aj

'~"'CJR'~'~'CJ~'~5f'~qCIJ'

~~~CJ~l5,,~~ ~.~. q'~~~'~C:'1 ~~{'.I.~.a;:c:. '~'il'~S~ .~~.

9:1\'~N'!'g~ 'Ql,\'cr~'''~~'CJ~' ~".~.~q". ~~. ~. ~ ~I::"

...

~."
f~'''~'1 ~.~. ~~~. CJ'61, ,

Q~,\Qil~9:c:."st~CJ,\"1""

l"CJ~~~~CJ:~.'~CIJ~~j:j ~ 'l:J'~'~:c:. '~'~'~I::'~' ~nIQr.t~

G90a

10

(III 58)

....

CJ~'CIJ~~'~'~~C::~'Q~' a;~iJI~C::~l:J~'\~I

..

1~~(r5'~'

1~~~EIJ~q~,,~c::~q,\C:"~~Q:I\"~~~ II

-.

~~'''S~'l'\'Q'~' Q5~ ',\1::'"

~~~'QR'EIJ~~ .".
... ~lIf'CJ~ .~~"

(III 59)

15

~~~~~~~~~~x:.l:JrS"~~Q5~5~~q:c:." ...
.,~c::~.~c:.,

~CJ"~~~~Q~~QFQ~S~CJ~S;EIJ~CJ~

I'

...

1I1~~'5' ~~'~x:. S~

...

~~:I\~~~:c:.9 ~~~. fi1'l:J~"

~5fq:l\~~~q~c::=t,\Q~"'I

D59a

(III 60)

~q~~~~f,\q~~~9 ,\Q}'~~'Qj' ~'Q~' S Cl~~9:1\'"

~~.q."c:.~~ .,,~q~'Q~' ~~. ~C::' =t,\'Cl4,\'~ I

U8

20

291

,
8~~~,~ .. ~c:: ..... c::'li_Ii"

~t,~q~~qqq~,

(III 61)

~r~CIJ"'!iiCIJ'~P4'q"'!""'!"~~Sq~ ti~I!11"

q!."c::.J .... q!.~.'i.,I!II'

c::.,t,,,'.,~q?~ .,~,

~. !~.

~~i!""~'~"~''''~I!CIJ~'Q~'!'''''!~'l~'~'QI'''~' ~.~....
G90b

B229

~'~3f~'9"~'!'''~'~''~9~'~'

~',,e~!"~!QI,, ..

~~'l~~-qr"Q~~9q~q~,,~~CIJ~~~~~~~~
~~it~~, 'f"Q~~CIJ~Q~~q ... ~qqQ~!""'!~~~~
qq~~ .. qqQAg.,~, !l ... ~q.i

~~9c::q"'I"Ii,,,
-.

.... ~~.Q.,,,.~~ . ~.

Q.~.~q.q."c::.,

~~.~~~.!.~~.I2f.,

q~"'5'''~C::~'~'

'~~~9:1\~~~~~~ 'Q'~ ''''Ic::.~.,~ ..

10

.,Iq, ... '~'~If!'~~'S'Q''lJ' 9' qQ~' ~.qq'Q~' f,,.,~tq~

S~I

:l\c::~c::Gl~~~g~9~S~QGl~'~~~Sq~~If!"'

~. Q~ '~'9' ~,

!' ~.~.~~. Q~' 9' ~'f "'Q'C::.,. I"~

~~'~'~~~'Q~'!~'f:1
.... ....

,~i,,~~,,~~.,~~~q~!.,~

Q'lqc:: .lj'

15

2~~c::Zii~ ~~~l'lJqQ~~~~Q~~~~~~~Q~"

~~'Q.q~~.~ ~~ql"Q')C::~~ ~~~'Q'~~CIJ'~C::'~~~'Q~''

~~~'~'~''lJ'~'rJQ~'Q'''1'l'Q'~~'9'Q'a):I\' ~~I:)'~'I}~~'~"'"
....
Q7C:QRltQ~W~; ,~.~,
G91a

~'~'9' 9' QQ~'~~'(I)~'Q~'l'

~C:'~Q'~Q~ ~t~ .~. ~~. Q~''''f'Q~' f1~'~'wr ; '~~'I ')~.. ~

'-a

~.,~.~~.~~c:.~.,
Q

....

~C1'~' .,is'~i) 9~' ~C:' Zi"

149

292

R~~'~c:'f')'~ '~c:'ll'~~"
~'~'~~~'~~ 'a):I\' q~')'~~~ "
~~~~~9~'a)Z\q~')'R~~ II
~

D59b

(III 62)

f' il'~~'Q'~Q'Q,~,~'),q~')C:'S~,q,') C:' f~'~c:'~'~~~'

~Q' S')'~'~ ,~' 51C: 'f;' ~')' ~c: 'CfJC:' 5C:' ~ Q)'QE: ')'~' ~~~. ~c: 'fl'

i)'QE:')'~'

~'51'~CfJ~'IW~~'~ '~Q'S')'51'~~' q'QE:,)'Q"" a):I\'

~'51'ijCfJ~'5I~'~ '9' ~'~CfJ'q'ql ')' q~' a)~' q~')'

q~')'51r~1

U!r 7'')5I'q~~ 'qE:')'Q'q~~'~ II

i~'~~'5I'~q'q'~'~CfJ~11
~

~7~'~CfJ~'~~' q~'~~Q'Q:I\'Q)~~"
'"

(III 63)

10

~'fjC:'~'')~a{'Q')~!~'o~' .

~~'s'q'~'~CfJ~'Q'i~'o~'~'~')'q~~1

~'~~'951'q~5I'

~ ~ '). ~~~'')I::' ~~'q' i~' ~~ '~~'s' Q'~' ~ ~~'q'~')'~C:'a) ')".

~~'5I~q'Q'i~'o~'5'~!:CfJ'Q~~1

Bl')'~'~~r~~'~~1

B230

~ ~'~')'~'~CfJ~'q'i~' o~' a) ')~~~,~q,~c:,~q, SI)'ql ')'~ 'f,)' 15

G91b

Q~'~~'~~CfJ~'~~'~CfJ~,q~~~Q~~'i~o~'5I~q'~~'~:I\'~"
~~,;,Z\q(')'~1

5I~q'Q~~.~~o~~~~5I'~'~'CfJ7~'

1 ~~'~I)'

~CfJ'o 5I'~~'5I'2Jq'QZ\ '~~:I\ ~'Fl!i~'~c:~q'~~'

'"
'"
'"
q(l'Q~~~9~~'~~q,
~~~'~')'~'~'~'ij~~,~,jti')'~CfJ
CfJ~'?'~~'ij~~'q~')'~'~' QC:'~'~'')C:'~' ~~. 951'Q'~'~~~q..

i~'~~'55Iq~~'~'~Z\'~~'~~c:'i~'o~ilR~q'~1

~~'Q~'~C:'!~' o~ '~q'Q'~'~')'~i'
150

i'

Q~~'~'

,~'q~~ '5 'l~'q'

20

c.n

--

1](

JI

!1Y

9t(

U!l

~J

.2!

,~

1!

J)I

..E

t31

)t

;>
,(S

~
m
1!

.2!

..J1
~

sf
~
.a

J)I

""

0'\
\Jl

II

..J1J

;>

J)I

..J1

'15

.2!

li riII
~
l! ri

..J1

.J1(

;>

n
Jt

13

z:

J!
)t{

)t

II

)t

~
~

-"'I

~
..2!

JI

~J..J1J ~

"'"

)t

a
.

II

n~&l!2

1!

z:

.a ,.a

i!

,~

.2!

.zI2{

:iYJ
.2!
-B<

..2!

J)I

91.

..2!

)t{

~
)t

J!
'J1 ~
1! c.zj
;>(
n
J)I

;>
&(S

.lSI

.2!

JII

lJ(

..J1

Jij1)

.at" ~
~-.!I

1!

-"'I

1!?

..J1
II

-"'I

1i

..J1

01

i!

.lSI

.EJ

4.:1?

~,
..J1

JI

~
-"'I

41l

II
l2!2 ~
..J1
(!]I

J12l
J)I

1!
J)I

n
..!ii, ri

JlJ ~

;;c:

-3(

.2!

II

II

ri

II

'll

.B n

-B

II
.
L'\
~~ '!
1!
II l2!!

.D

Ii

;:>?

n.

Of,
..2!

;:;

.~,

.!!

'LB

II

&l!2

II
~

'll

JI

~Ji
II
n

J)I

J'!

n .....!I

......:3

.zj

-li

'4.&

H
0'\

lJJ
.2!

..c-

i!

H
H

~JI

..5lJ

_~

.9,....3

i!

nJII

(3J

J1

~,

~~5)-B

i!J)I

ft,.....!I

;>?

Ii

Cll'-E
~
~

!:!

ft,
4.3 .....!I .J1
II

~'J'!

.If'

JllJI

.!!

L'\

;>

~jlJi ~ ~-'!.2!
JI
~ :z:U!~ D
ur1 n
..5lJ JI -B Ji

,4.&
-B

II

JI

n
Ji

~ -3(-E..J1
..2! ..J1
~
II
~

n.

JI

n U!! ~
;) ' l l
.
JII
L11 ClV .2!

..J1,~
..J1 'JI

4.3

..J1

.
4.3'

-"'I
..eg(

JI

t:1

0'\

0
il'

~.2V.DJi.2! .B
c.zj,JM -BJ'!Jft ~~~

1!

II

II '15

J)I

..!il

-B

)t

II

01
..J1

..

.2!

.lSI

z:

..J1

-3(

II

~U!!

:iYJ

U!2

..J1J

.l!

il'

..J1
.2! U!! &4.&
L'\
.- II ~
-"'I ~

D 4.1lJ U!!
f3
. .J1
II
IJJ

I\)

\.D

;>(

4.ll

)t

~J
~

"'"

)t

4D2!

)t

.a

.....!I

OI?
.If'

-"'I

-S

N
\0

294

~. ~,,~ ",~. '"~ ~Q'

~q.q'~'~Q' Cl I

ClI

~"'Ilf' q~5I'If'~~'Cl'I]~~""~'

F~' ~C:~'Q''lC::'~!J~'~ '''~'l.q~.",~.~~q~'

l'irr
~.~, ~ '~'IiI~'~~~ ,'~ r r

1i1~~' i,,~~q"'~I]e~ 'R~~' I

B231

~'RS' ~q5~Ilf~5fq+1""
G92b

[1(",

(III 66)

..,~~. ~..,~.!~ .~~ '1iI'f~'~"~'5f~qZ5~~'~9~ ._.".

~~5~~'~'iJ4~q'q~~5JiI)' ~~'~C:!I]~~'a~~'iJ4'

~qQ~'g",~I~'~'!~~~'~,

"QCliW~qtr~"q'Q~!~

Pti!i 'Q~I ",~~lCIJ~iJ4~Q'q"c:"qqiJf~qQ..,J~~r~~~

:(.~.~,

~~~R~~Q"C:'iJf~~qCIJ~~"JRc:~qQ~!r

w~'~C::'1

R~Ilfq~~!~g~~~CIJ'j~~R~I]~'

~~~!rg"l~IlfRC:~~~Q~~I]Ilfq"C:iJf~~q
D60b

10

"'~~'Q'

'11"

q~qllfR~~ 'CIJ~~'~' ~~'9~'~'R~:I\ I ~~.~.",~q~q~ .~".~.

CIJ~EfJ'1'R~~'~'

,,~~q~~~~~~S"~~~"5~~~:("

15

~~~~~q5~~~f"Q~iq~!riJf,~q'Q'''C:' ~I]~'q'''C:''

iJf~~q~~!~~~iJfEfJ~C:~'~'

"Q'QiJf~q'Q ''''~'''r

iJ4,q~~.?,

I]'jr~"l~'~'i'~~'CIJ~iJf'~RC::'"
R~' ~~'cW~q'Q~~'~~ '"C::', ,

""
R~~'Q'~~'!'~'~'ll~'~' r

~~'Q'Q{"'Q~ 'iJfe:"'Q'~" I
~~'''I~c:~'q'~~.:( II
152

20

t:::J

.2!

:J'I
t.I

OJ

0'\

H
H
H

J!

<=

TV

.2!

~
~

;>

.q.

J!,wj

J!

lii ~
n ~
Ji ;>

-JIf

.}t
.~
.Jl(
IJ
.J1
.EIi{-3'

!l!:J
'LB
IJ
~

J!

1:'

'4.B

;>

f\)

~~....s
J!
~ ~
.lSI L112!
JjlJ

f\)

to
w

~.B

BJ!

~
!.!

J1
....st

.2!

0tJ
;>

Un

.J1

}lilt

lJ

4f~

9C'
!.!

Ji...:blli.J1.2!J

;:i

lJ

;>
Jl1

""
....!I

c.3

;>

;>

1!'

'?~;i

.2!1
J!I

'"'!

9f

J1

Cll1 .B

1JI
~ lJ

;>

:i

lJ

;:i

!.!

.
l!

.lSI

)t

15

')t
"

~
~

c.a

~'"
...lJ

.lSI
~

n
~
. )t

Jt

.....!I...,.
....!I J1

)t

~ n ~iY,}II
.....!I
~. J!' ~. ~ ~ ~ ~ )t ...lJ 1! ~

11(-.1Ii!
~...ni~
~U
~ m ~ 1li
""~

....s...:bJ. n ...ni.J'!
lJ
~ J!'lJ~

~
li
...lJ
9
0tJ

.~~J!
.n
Jt
!.!
'! lU1.ci ~~~;i;> ~ .ci nJ!
JI
}IIIt...ni
9 ,}II ~
~ }lit( ,ui
!.! .J1
.q
-"! -4
.JI! ~ '!

Ul

..2i

-.:s:J'
~

lJI'~-'J1.
c..
.-3

....s,.~

~,(.9

n~

.E

~.J!

~ -','

)t.

,c.g

;>

....s_

..

.lSI.

.J1

li 'J1
lJ
n.
B
.J1

c.3

ell

JjlJ

.q

lJ

.lSI

...!i .2!1
~. ~
.
..J1.J1
-..:s:J'~
Bell
v..Qf"IJ!JJf.
~J1
.a l!I:I .J1 ~
-"! .a s"
~ '-'! .!iilJ iY -:1 U1! ..JIf ..3
)t.J!
J!,;i)!.!.J1
'.J1

.q

.'J1

'WoI

ell

--...:1JI
~.
~
;>

0tJ

~
-lI
~ ,(.9 ~ .a 9f ~

;>(
n
.}t.J1J.ci~

.2!J ~

,;0,

,,.;;>.
~

lJ-.1Ii! JJ1I(aO~
B

~ JH

;>

.J11

0'

Q
\.0
W

~J1 J1.!ilJ
)t J1c
li ~ ...ni l!
...:bJ ....~ ;> .J1" ~...ni ..!jjjJ
_,
~ ",.; ....s
-M ,(.9 J1 n lJ ~ ~ ,Ji
~
'J1
)t
~
;>'}111( n

;> J1
.lSI
.J'!I ~ ;>
gl!i m.J'! '!~ .q .2! n J11 .q
B. ....s
.J1 ,~ Jl1
-JIf
J!,.J1 .J1.lS1

.
B
.2!
'!
;i)

J? -.1Ii! J1
~
.,Ji~.B
nJ!
'-M!J
...,. Ji
.

PJ

0'\
f-J

0'\
--.J

H
H

)t

,e.g

"";>

i!l

Jt

'"

~
~

..
a

.J1

-l!

Sf

15

CJlI

J1

)t

.J1

,.,. U1I

PJ

Q
\.0
W

!.!

'*

~
.D

Jjl

.ci

;>
~
~

.B

.J1

Jnt(

..H

~,(.9

JI

Jt

c.3

B
J1

N
I.C

Ln

..........


I
I

296

fEi 'li' ~ ~.

g.5l~' ~..,. err ~~. S6) ~. CJ~ 9 ~ . i~' q l,' ~. ~ 5~.

tEIJ~'c'w~Q'CJ~~'
~

,,~.,

,,qili,,
CJilil"CJ~~~~~it.l\~~EIJ~Q
,..
~

"l~~'~r til~ CJ~'9~'~err'CJ~'~~'i~' it~ '~'5f'~~'z:r')~' r

S~'Q~'5l'?EIJ'CJ~' ,,~~~,it~~,~ ~')'CJ',~' r

S~'CJ'~EIJ'CJ~'

~~ ')'CJ'~'s~'CJ~'9~'?EIJ'CJ~ ~~'~~'ql')'~ ~~')~'tilr CJ~"

ql~'CJ~'5l' ~~'~"
~',;,~'i~'I)~' ~~~'CJ'~' r
f')CJq~~CJ~S)~Q~' ~'r
')5fCJ~~..,~~q!err~CJ~9~, ,

5fr~'CJ~'S'li~'~err~'CJ~'g~"

qf1~'CJ'')~'CJ~ '~EIJ~'CJ~ 's'Q~'9~,

(III 69)

10

~~',C::'~'!r

iiE)' CJ~' ~. ~ ~'~Q'CJ"~'~~'~ ~~ 'CJ'Q f1~ 'CJ'~S)~'Q~'~'Gl~'"

Q~'

G94a

"5fCJ~~~~~~';"9~i~~ElJ5~~~q~9~"
"l~5f'CJ'5f~"l'!~~'CJ~'EIJ~~' q~'Q~,~~.c::~.q~~.?

...

q" . ~ '). CJ' ~ r

15

~.~.x:. ~EIJ~CJ.x:."l5~f4q~~ "

')CJ~fi~~~r5!lJ~~CJ~9.x:.11
f')'CJ~'C::~'~5f~'Q~~'?' q~~~"

~~'~'~F~'CJ~'~~C::'~~~'W~"

(III 70)

~,;,.x:.f')CJ~,)~~"l~~Q&lJ~

~~ .~.~. ~ ~,)EIJ~~q~~~ ~'~Z::I' CJ~~q~,,~ ~c::.~ ~.~~~ ..

CJl:; 'S~'~~'C::EIJ' ~;. ~".~ ij:z::.'Q' ~~~'~"l~'CJ~'~' ~'z:p:: 'S'Q~'

~:z::.1
154

Q~~'?' qir'i'CJ~ 'S~"

'"

20

297

IIJ~'~'! IIJ~'Q' Jai

... 'fl'~~"

a;L1Jl'f'~C::'~'~ ~'~'t:l~~ '~r r

D61b

lIJi ~'~:I\'l ~qll:)~~'~ l'f'~ r r

5fF~Q~IIJ~l5IIJG\i~q~~rr

(III 71)

C1J~'?'''Qr:::flfl:)q~'~~~~~F~Q~' @~' Z1t:l~r

B233

4 ~'~C::'ffillJ~' ~r:::'~'~' i~' il:)'i:l\ ~~~~~'CI~~ I r:::~rsc::'Z1~'

~. q~i '5'~:I\ 'q'~~Q~' Q~~ I

C::~'~'~:I\' ~C::' ~,,;q~ ~.~. ~.

~:I\ ~~Q~Cl~I:)Clc::flI:)IIJ~C::i~~~5~Cla.ClJi ~'~r ~i'~"

~"'~'IIJ~~'Q'~~'~F~'Cl~'ll:)'Cl'Q2C1J~'Cl:l\'~'~~~'Q~1
G94b

C)Qr:::fl "C::'Q~~'Cl~'~i ~~~:z;. ,c::~.~. ~:I\'Q1"'~ 1

CIJ~' Q~'

10

CIJ~ ~Cl~~F~q~!CIJ~Cl~~~ .~.~:z;.. ~C::'Q~' ~F~' Cl~~~"

7~'~'~'Q'Q~~'~'IJ~'Cl:l\'t:l~:I\'~ I

I~~'~~'~~'~'~F~'Q'

~~~.~. ~~'Q:I\'Q:I\'Q'~~' ; II

Q~~4~~q~~Q~r:::~~~q~CIJ~Q~11
15

~~.~~.~ '1C1J~'~~~' ~1:)'C4tJ1'S~'?"

l,,QiI,, q~.~ '~C4r:::'~'QJ~~' ~~ II

~r:::~~l'fQ~~Q~~~~~~q:z;.4~ I
~

...

(III 72)

tJlF~q'~~~'~G~Cl~~~~' ~q~Q~ClJ5~~t:l~~q'

~'~~'~~~'Q~"

"

20

~cP:Ja.'Q~~l:.rg~~~~~~Q"r:::'I'

~~ ~~~F~~t:l~:I\ '~~'~r:::'~~~' Sa. ~:I\ II

tJlF~'q~~~~~~~~F~'Q~GClJq~~ I r
~~'C1J~~~~~:I\~F~~tJI~~G~

q:l\'

~"

(III 73)

155

'U
298

"~'~~'5(14'~'~~~' ~~Q~')~,,~tc:, r
~9~~F~QmQQ~~~q~')'r

Q,\~'~~' ~Q')'~C: .~~~.~ !f'f.\~~'Q' ,..

S)C:' rI

~""~'~c.,~'4lI'l4~'Q~'a;'~Q~',)"J~Jf

G95a

(III 74)

'\5C:Q')~4lI~~~~q",~,, Ji".~ II
~~~'~~'5~'~'R~'Q~'~"'~4lI'~~11
~F~'Q'R~')'Q~'9'Q'~C:'Q~' ~Jf

S')!Q'~C:'9~'~~'Q~'R~~ ''''ti!fll

D62a

(III 75)

Q;'~'Q~'~~"R~~'Q;'~'~'~Q'~~'4C:" I
Q;'~QcJU~f.\,)'Q~C:~C:f.\f(~f.\~')Q' r

10

~~~'')a'j' ~C:' ~~ .,tljf.\' ~~.~a;~"Q~ I J

QSlc:fi!fQ;'~~'1~~~f.\~8~~1f

(III 76)

~C:'!fC:'~~' ~C:'~~'Q;'~'Q'f.\~ II
f.\QQ'~' SI")'QR'~C:'Q~~'~~'~' f.\~1 J

~'!f~~~~~~~r.rf.\~~~!f~~~~"

q~'Q'R ~ "'Q'''~'~~'f.\Q')."a;~'~''
B234

15

(III 77)

Q"tIJ~ !f'Q~~'Q~a~'~~'R~'Q'')' Q~ II
~F~'Q'R~tIJ'Q~'~'~'~Q'9'Q~11
f.\~~~~~QjiZj~~~~~~'?r r

~Al'Q'~~'QO~'''~~'Q'IiQ'Q~'~~ r

(III 78)

~'~~~~AlQ~'~15'~~~~~'Qj~fi~~C:~~5""

f.\~tIJQ~~r
156

')~Q~~~~~'Q!j')Q~S'Q~'f.\~ ~'~~~r

20

299

G95h

f~~"C::'~5,,q'''c::f''l:t~~~'~~~'I2t~Ct~~~l:t.r,'~'''l:t'
~r~'q' ~~~.~~,.l:t~' ~'~~'~r CI~ '~~~ 'Clf ~'~~' ~'~~f5C::"

g~~.~.~",

,..q'~'!~C::~'9C::'t~'~~c::'li'~' i~'~,,~

~~'''Q~'a;,,'q~'~!i'''l:t~'IfJ~~'

RE.~'l:t~',)5C::~'~~~~'~

~"'~:1\~~~"'~!J~'l:t'!c::'ss,,'q~~q:l\9~'l:t~'

~~'5~'

'~~RF.r, 'f4r~,.Jl' i .~' ~F~' ~C::'Q'lfq' Q~'Rii')' ~'')C:'I

Q',c::"

ll4'

f')'Q~'e~'~'tiQ~'Q' ')~'Q"~'~~~' "ar'~C:'J~'

'~R~~'~a)~'')Q~'qSSc:,q~',.r,'q'R~'~ '1tlJ'li~~'~ II

II
151

VARIANT READINGS

(N.B.:

The pagination follows that of the Beijing edition,

i.e. the page numbers appearing at the bottom of the text.)

p. 109
2 bar BD: ba G
3 'bel CD: 'breI BG (C 254a.6)
5 dpang BD: dbang G
6 rtsod B: brtsad DG
7 'thun BG: mthun D

8 'bel D: 'breI BG; rtsod BD: lrtsod G; rgol ba

10 brgal BD: rgal G

p:

bsgom pa B: missing G

11 ngag BD: ngag don G; sprad DG: sprod B

14 sky on yon G:

skyon BD;

'byed par khas len pa'i B: 'byed pa'ikhas len pa'i D:

'byed pa'i G
15 eol BD: beol G; rtsod BD: lrtsod G

p. 110

1 kyis D: kyi G: missing B; 'gyur bas BD: gyur pas G

2 pas DG: par B; 'bel D: 'breI BG: 'bel bali C (C 254a.6)
3 par DG: par shes par B; bead BG: gead D
8 dpang BD: dbang G
9 bead B: gead DG
10 bead BG: gead D
11 bead G: gead BD; bead G: gead BD
12 bead B: gead D; brjod D: spong B
12-13 homoeteleuton in Q,

missing: phyir rgol 'dri bali skabs su tshar bead gsum/

skyon brjod pa'i skabs su gsum ste drug dang/

13 dpang BD: dbang G; 'byed BD: dbye G
14 bead BG: gead; pa BG: pa gsum D; tshar bead B: tshar gead D: missing G
19 bead BG: gead D; pa yi D: pa'i BG
20 ni DG: du B
21 bead BG: gead D
21-22 beu gnyis G: su gnyis BD
22 de'ang DG: de B; bead BG: gead D; sgrub DG: bsgrub B

302

p. 111

1 pal yan G: pa yan BD; la DG: missing B

3 bead BG: gead D; dpang D: dbang G: dang B
4 bead BG: gead D; bead BG: gead D
5 gsungs DG: gsungs pa B
12 skyon yang dag par BG: skyon yang dag pa D
14 dam pa BD: dam pa'i G
15 gi BD: pa'i G
16 na BD: nas G
17 la gnod DG: gnod dam B
18 'gal BD: gal G
19 gzhan dang BG: unclear D

p. 112
5 rtags BD: rtag G
7 bead BG: gead D

9 bead BG: gead D

10 bead BG: gead D; sdud D: bsdud BG

11 bead BG: gead D

12 bead BG: gead D
13 la sogs DG: log B
14 legs par BD: missing G
16 rtag G: rtags BD
17 'thun mi 'thun BG: mthun mi mthun D
18 khyad med BG: khyad par D; dang DG: ltar B
19 tshom BD: tsom G
20 brtag B: brtags DG; las G: la BD

p. 113
5 pas BD: pa'i G
7 rtsod BD: brtsod G; pas BD: pa'i G
11 bead BG: gead D; bali BG: bas D
12 de BD: re G
16 bead BG: gead D

303

20 brjod pa DG: missing B; bead BG: gead D

21 bead BG: gead D
22 'thun BG: mthun G

p. 114

brtsad BD: rtsod G

3 pham DG: pam B; bskyed DG: skyed B
4 gzung D: bzung BG
6 brtsad BD: brtsod G; bslangs te D: bslang ste BG
7 pas BD: pa G; ni DG: missing B; skyong DG: bskyong B
8 khon DG: 'khon B
14 des na BD: des na grub mtha' G; mtha'i BD: mtha' G
15 bead BG: gead D
18 bsgrub pa D: sgrub pa G: missing B
20 ngam D: ngan BG
21 mtshang 'dru D: 'tshang 'bru BG

p. 115

dittography

in B following 'khrul yang:

gyi grub mtha' rna 'khrul yang

3 mtho D: mthon BG; sogs pas BD: sogs pa G
4 gnon DG: mnon B
5 bead BG: "gead D
6 'thun B: mthun DG
12 'dra G: 'dra'i D: la B; bkag BD: bkab G
15 nyid BD: de nyid G
17 bsdigs pas BG: bsdigs kyang D
19 pa BCG (C 254b.l): par D
22 bzung BCD (C 255a.6): gzung G

p. 116

2 dag DG: missing B

3 bzung BD: gzung G

zhen pas khas mi len pa dang/

gzhan

304

4 nyid dang CDG: na nga B

5 bton BDG: gton C (C 254b.5); skye bo DG: missing B
6 mkhas pa'i BD: mkhas pas G; skye bo DG: missing B
10 'dri DG: 'di B; kyang BCD (C 255a.l): missing G
11 phyir CDG (C 255b.l): phyi B
12 pa CDG: pa'i B
13 la CDG: zhig B
14 rang BG: rang gi D
17 dngos BD: ngas G; beas BD: bea' G

p. 117

11 brtsad BD: rtsod G

12 rang gi DG: la B
13 ma D: mar G: ma pa B
15 nang BD: na nga G
18 bya ba'i DG: bya'i B; yang BD: kyang G
19 dgos BG: dogs D

p. 118

1 ngam D: dam B: ba G
2 zhes DG: ees B
5 sum BD: gsum G
6 pas D: bas B: las G
7 gi BD: gis G; gnyis BG: ni gnyis tel D
8 sgrub pa BD: sgrub pa dang G; bsgrub bya BD: sgrub bya G
11 kyis G: kyi BCD (C 256a.3)
12 lkog gyur BCD: lkog .' gyur G
14 zhe DG: ee B
19 kyis BD: kyi G
22 pa na BD: na G

p. 119

4 dri ba BD: 'dri bar G

305

6 sogs pa BDG: sogs pa thams cad C (C 256a.5)

7 bskyed CDG: bskyad B
9 'thun BG: mthun C (C 256a.6): mthun pa D
10 'thun BG: mthun CD
11 'thun B: mthun CDG (C 256b.l); rtsod BD: lrtsod G
12 gangga'i D: gangga'i C:

ga~

ga'i G: gang ga'i B

14 1a'i BCG (C 256b.2): yi D

16
18
19
22

khong BDG: kho C; nang DG: na C: dang B

med BCG: mod D
sbor BC: spor DG; nol BCD: missing G
dpyis BCD: spyis G

p. 120
2 byung CD (C 256b.4): 'byung BG
5 1tar BCD: 1tar ro G
6 'gags BDG: 'gag C
7 rna1 DG: brna1 BC
8 de bzhin du CDG: zhes gsungs pa ltar B; 'dod bzhin BCD: 'dod de bzhin G
9 rgyal BCD: rgya pa G; gsad BDG: bsad C; rang gi BCD: rang rang G
12 zhes BDG: ees C
13 'gror 'phen CDG (C 257a.1): 'gro 'phel B
14 bya ba CDG: pa B
18 rnam gzhag DG: rnam bzhag B
19 zhe BD: ee G
22 beo DG: bewo B; spyod BD: dpyod G; la'ang DG: las B

p. 121
2 dbu rna DG: dbu rna pa B
3 bzhi'i BG: bzhi po D; bas G: ba B: 1a D
4 brtan du BG: brtan D
5 gzhug BD: bzhug G
9 don BG: den D; bkri DG: dri B
16 zhes BG: zhas D; btags BD: rtags G; gyur BD: 'gyur G
17 ees D: zhes BG; gyur BD: 'gyur G
19 'ga' DG: 'gal B

306

21 gzhag DG: bzhag B

p. 122

2 rab 'bring BD: 'bring G

3 rim pa BD: rigs G; ba BD: bar G
8 rim gyis D: rims kyis BG; gzhug BD: bzhug G
9-13 missing B
9 gsad D: bsad G
13 sogs D: bsogs G
14 gsod BD: bsod G
16 kyis BD: kyi G
19 'dri BD: 'bri G

p. 123

2 las G: la BD
3 las BG: nas D; gsungs pa DG: gsung ba B; skyabs BD: skabs G
4 bka' D: bkar B: dka' G
6 nyams BD: nams G; zhing BD: shing G
7 log rtog BD: log rtogs G; tshom BD: tsom G
8 'os BD: mi 'os G; ma BD: missing G
10 gcig DG: cig B; rnam phye BD: phye dang G; dri BG: di D; gzhag D: bzhag BG
14 'chi mi 'chi BD: 'chi'am mi 'chi G; gcig DG: cig B
17 zhes DG: shes B
19 de la rtag pa dang mi rtag pa BD: mi rtag pa'am rtag pa G; gnyis BD: gnyi G
20 emended to gzhag par: bzhag par BG: missing D
21 dang ni BD: pa dang G
22 gzhag D: bzhag BG

p. 124

3 ltar D: ltar ro B: Ita bu'o G; dri ba BD: dri ma G

4 gzhag DG: bzhag B
5 emended to tu : du BDG; pa BG: ba D; go'u BG: gau D

307

6 mi bzod dol DG: ni bzod do B; pa'i BD: bya ba'i G; dittography in G: dol
stsa1 pa mi bzod
7 nyams BD: mi nyams G
8 emended to mi bzod pa mi bzod na
9 tu D: du BG

mi bzod pa bzod na BDG

10-11 gsol pa BG: gsol ba D

11 go'u BG: gau D; zhes BD: ces G
19 bzhag BG: gzhag D
21 'dra BG: 'da D

p. 125
2 bar dka' D: ba dka' B: dka' ba G
3 pas DG: pa B; 1a DG: mod B

4 1tar BG: Ita bu D

6 rnam gnyis BCG (C 257a.5): rnam pa gnyis D
7 yi BDG: yin C
9 chos BD: chos 1a G
10 de nyid BD: nyid G
11 pa BG: pas D

14 pa'i BD: pa yi G
22 blangs BD: len G

p. 126

1 smra'i DG: smra B

4 smra BD: smra ba G; gzhan BD: sde pa gzhan G
6 blangs pa DG: blangs bar B
7 pas BD: las G

8 las 00: pas B

9 la DG: dang B; smyugrBD: bsnyung G
10 kYis BD: kyi G; bsgrub BD: 'grub G
11 'gal BG: 'ga' D
12 de dang BG: de dag D; na BD: nas G
15 dang DG: missing B; cig DG: gcig B
19 gis BD: gi G
20 de DG: do B

bka'

308

21 mthar D: mtha' G: mtha' las B; de'ang DG: de yang B

p. 127
dgongs BD: dgos G; bsgrubs DG: bsgrub B
2 bsgrub BD: sgrub G; pas DG: par B; bsgrub D: sgrub BG
4 gyur BCD (C 257a.5): 'gyur G
5 de yi CDG: de'i B
7 tshar bead CG: tshar gead D: char bead B; pa yi CD: pa'i BG
10 mtha'i BCD (C 258a.5): mtha' G
13
15
17
18

phan par bya ba'i phyir B: phan par ba ba'i phyir D: phan par bya ba'i G
gzung D: bzung BG; gzung BD: bzung G
dam pa DG: missing B
skyed D: bskyed BG

20 'brang BG: 'brangs D

p. 128
'ehos pa DG: 'ehes pa B
5 la BD: las G
6 go BD: missing G; eig D: zhig BG
8 pa'am BG: pa'ang D
12 srid BG: srad D
16 rtsod BD: brjod G
17 mi shes nas khas D: mi shes na
18 zhig BG: eig D; len D: Ian BG;
19 mi len/ len na DG: mi len na/
20 bud BD: 'bud G; de D: da B: te
22 bkag pa DG: missing B

mkhas G: rna shes nas B

lang BD: glang G
B
G; mi DG: missing B

p. 129
1 phyir BD: phyir ro G
4 sbyangs pa BG: sbyang ba D; bea' DG: beal B
6 don BD: don byed pa G; dittography in G: pa yin te zhes rang gi don byed
7 kyis BG: kyi D

309

8 ba dag D: bdag B: missing G

9 mi 'dod pa BD: mi 'dod par G; bca' DG: 'cha' B
11 bdag rtag pa BG: bdag rtag D
13 drang DG: dang B
15 te BD: ro G
19 dang BD: pa G
22 kyi BD: kyis G

p. 130
4 sgyus DG: sgyas B; mi BG: rna D; rna DG: mas B; dbu rna pa BG: dbu rna ba D
5 brkus pa D: rkus pa G: brkus pas B
6 blangs BDG: len C (C 258b.l)
7 na BCG: nas D
9 mthar BD: 'thar G: mtha' C
10 na BCD: la G
12 ces BCD: zhes G
14 bsres BCD (C 258b.3): sres G
15 dgag BCD: dgab G
17 thun CDG: 'thun B; bsdebs BD: sdebs CG
18 bsdebs BD: sdebs CG
19 kyis BDG: kyi C
20 bsdebs BD: sdebs CG; phyi BDG: gyi phyi C; blangs BDG: len C; zhes CDG: shes B
21 bsdebs BD: sdebs CG
22 dbu rna pa dang CD: dbu rna dang BG; dbu rna BD: dbu rna pa CG; bsdebs BD: sdebs CG

p. 131
1 na DG: pa B; blang bar BD: blad par C (C 258b.6-259a.l): blangs par G
5 glo DG: blo BC; brta~s BD: btags CG (C 259b.4)
6 mtha' BDG: mtha' ni C
7 bde ba BG: bden pa CD
10 bzung ba CD: bzung la B: gzung G
11 yun BCD: missing G; sbyangs pa BD: sbyang ba C (C 260a.l): sbyar ba G; so so'i
BD: so so CG; bo'i BCD: bos G
14 dbyung CDG: dbyang B; de BDG: 'di C
15 kYis CDG: kyi B; sgrub BDG: bsgrub C

'f""'t"

310

17 stong BDG: ~stong C

18 sbyar ba BCD: skyar la G; kyis BDG: kyi C
19 BD: gis G: missing C; gzung BD: bzung CG
20 yur rna CDG: yur ba B

p. 132
2 mtha' CD (C 260a.6): mthang B: missing G
3 sla'i BCD (C 260b.l): sla yi G
4 pas BCD: pa G
10 bsdus CDG (C 261a.4): bsdu B; de bdsu CDG: de yang bsdu B
11 grub pa'i DG: grub pa BC
12 dpyod G: spyod BCD; better tshangs pa ba (see below, p. 133.18)
13 skye pa BD: skya ba G: skya pa dang C
14 cu CD: bcu BG; ni BDG: rnams ni C
15 kyis D: kyi CG: gyi B; grangs can pa CG: grangs can BD; gnyis ka BCD: gnyis G
16 gzegs BDG: bzig C; bye CDG: byed B; can BDG: can pa C (C 261b.l)
17 ni BDG: rnams ni C
20 sogs pa ni BCD: sogs pa G
21 zhes BDG: ces C
22 emended to pan (see below, p. 133.2): phan G: 'phen CD: 'phan B; Ita ba pa CDG:
Ita ba ba B; smra ba pa CDG: smra ba ba B

p. 133
1 rgyur smra ba pa D:
missing B

sgyur smra ba pa G:

rgyur smra ba BC;

2 mi BDG: med par C; rgyang pan pa'o B: rgyang phan pa'o G:

rkyang pa ba C; zhes BDG: ces C
3 pan B: phan G: 'phen CD; zad BDG: rna zad C
5 ni BCG: gis D; skur BDG: bskur C
6 smra ba BCG: smra D; zhes BDG: ces C

9 'dor CDG: 'dod B

10 'thun BG: mthun CD

12 lnga CD (C 262a.2): lnga la G: missing B

14 grangs can pa CD: grangs can BG; rna byas pa BDG: tshang rna C
15 bton to BDG: gton no C; gzegs BDG: gzeg C

ni CDG (C

261b.3~:

rgyang 'phen pa D:

311

16 do BDG: missing C; na BDG: missing C

17 dbang phyug dang CDG:

dbang phyug dar B; lhar byed la CD: ltar byed la G: ltar

byed pa B
18 yi BCD: yid G; du BCD: missing G; tshangs pa ba BD: tshangs pa CG

19 dbang phyug pa dang/

khyab 'jug pa BDG: khyab 'jug pa dang/

dbang phyug ba C

19-20 du grags te BDG: thob ste C (C 262a.4)

20 sangs rgyas pa D:

sangs rgyas pa'i BG:

sangs rgyas C; yi BCD: yid G; sgom BD:

bsgom CG
21 ka BCG: ga D
22 rig byed pa CDG: rig byed B

p. 134

1 nyid BCD: missing G; gtsor BDG: gtso bor C;

la BCD (C 262a.6): pa G; grangs can

BDG: grangs can pa C; gzegs BDG: gzeg C

2 gtso bor BCD: gtsor G; gis BDG: gi C
4 'ba' G: 'ga' BCD; gis BDG: gi C (C 262b.l)
5 gyis BDG: gyi C; no CDG: ne B
6 stegs pa D; stegs BCG; 'thun BG: mthun CD; rtag BDG: rtag par C
7 la BDG: pa dang C; chad BDG: chad par C
9 snyed BCG: snyed pa D; ni BCD: missing G; tu BCD: missing G
10 pa'o BCD (C 262b.4): so G
11 gzhag DG: bzhag BC
12 pa BCG: ba D
13 gzhag DG: bzhag BC
14 ba'i BCD: ba yi G
15 gzung BDG: bzung C
17 gzhag DG: bzhag BC
18 phan tshun BDG: missing C; sun CD:
rtog ge CDG: rtog ge pa B

missing BG; dittography in C: phyung ba;

19 'thun BG: mthun CD (C 259a.l, 263a.l.

line 6 are quoted in two places in C)
20 bzhag BCDG (C 259a):
259a)

gzhag C (C 263a.1);

21 sems tsam pa CDG: sems tsam B

Note that p.

134 line 19 to

'khyams BCDG (C 263a):

p.

135

'khyam C (C

312

p. 135
1 bsdud BCG: sdud D; rig BCD: rigs G; mtha' BDG: 'thab C (C 259a.3, 263a.4)
3 'thun BCG (C 259a.4): mthun CD (C 259a.3); dpyod pa ba G: spyod pa ba BCD (C
263a.4): spyod pa C (C 259a.3); emended to pan: phan B: 'phen CDG
4 'gyur ba BCG: 'gyur 1a D; 1a C (C 259a.4): las BCDG (C263a.4); pa'i BCG: par D
5 'thun BG: mthun CD; bas CDG: bar B
10 gi BG: gis DG
13 dang BG: missing D
16 dbu ma D: dbu ma pa BG; 'gyur DG: 'gyur ba B; gses BD: ses G
20 thos rnams BCD (C 273a.6): thos dang G
22 b1ang CDG (C 273b.l): b1angs B

p. 136
1 min BD: yon G; 'thun B: mthun DG
3 rang rang BC: dang rang DG; gzung D: bzung BCG (C 283a.6)
4 bshad BDG: rtsod C (C 283b.l)
6 bsgrub BCD: sgrub G; bems BDG: bem C; na BG: nas D: missing C
8 mthus DG: mthu B: mthas C; skyes pa CG: skyes BD
9 dgongs so CDG: dgos so B
13 ni BDG: na C
14
15
16
17
18

dpyod DG: spyod BC; pa BDG: par C (C 283b.4)

bskyang BD: brkyang CG
1a BDG: du C
skabs BD: skas CG
zhes CDG: ces B; grag go BCD (C 283b.5): grags so G

19 ga BDG: ka C (C 285a.6)
20 gis BCG: gi D; rnam CD: rnams BG

p. 137
2 gyi BC: gyis G: missing D; bkag CD: bkak B: dgag G; tshe BCD: phyir G
3 ma CG (C 285b.l): missing BD; gis BDG: gi C; cig car CD: gcig char BG; ba'i CDG:
ba yi B; bsgrubs BCD: grub G; nas BCD: na G
4 don BCD: don gyi G; skyes 1a CDG: skyes pa B; 'dra ba BCG: 'dra D
5 des BCD: de G

313

6 zhe CD: ee BG
7 ngag BG: nges CD; 'dra CDG: 'gra B
8 zhes CDG: ees B; 'dir BCG: 'di D
9 nyid CDG: de nyid B; mali BD: rna pa'i CG
10 rna longs CDG: la mongs B
11 ni BCD: kyang G; khegs pas BCD: khegs G
12 ro BCD: missing G
13 po CDG: pa B; dag BCG: 'di dag D; kar BCD: dkar G
19 bsgrub D: bsgrubs CG: grub B; na BCD (C 286a.l): nas G
20 gzung eha D: bzung eha B: bzung bya CG
21 gzung bar BD: bzung bar CG; gzung eha BD: bzung bya CG: dittography in C: sol
de ltar phyi rol gyi don khegs
22 nyid BDG: gnyis C

p. 138

1 gzung BDG: bzung C (C 286a.2)

3 gzung BDG: bzung C;
4 kyi BG: missing DC
5 yis BCD: yi G

zhugs CDG:

shugs B;

khegs BCG:

khags D

6 ba CDG: bya B

7 gzung BD: bzung CG

9 zhes BCD: ees G
10 'di BCD: de G
11 nyid CDG: eing B; dgongs CDG: dgos B; des na kun ti tha BDG: de Itar kun rdzob
tu tha C; snyad CG: dad BD
12 dam pa DG: dam B; bsgrub D: sgrub BG
13 kar BCD: dkar G
14 bZl as DG: 'das BC (C 286b.l)

15 la BCD: par G

18 bsg om BCD: sgom

19 nged CDG: deng B

21 zhes CDG: ees B; la CDG: pa la B; eu BCD: beu G

p. 139

1 btags CD: brtags G: brtag B

314

2 yis BCG: yi D

,I

jl

5 homoeteleuton in B, missing: yin la/ rkyen las skye ba

6 rgya mtsho BCD: klu'i rgyal po rgya mtsho G
8 skye ba'i CDG: de yi B
9 1a BCD: las G; las BCD: las ~ G
14 dpyod CDG (C 287b.2): spyod B
16 kyi BCD: kyis G
19 'breI pas BG: 'breI bas D; smra ba'i BD: smra bas G
20 dus BD: du G
21 mig DG: ming B; brten D: rten BG

p. 140
2 sgrub BD: bsgrub G
3 mched BD: mched dang G
4 kyis D: kyi BG
5 gzhag DG: bzhag B
8 sgrogs D: sgrog CG (C 272b.3): skrogs B
10 btags CDG: brtags B
12 rnams DG: dang B; gyi BD: missing G
14 len BDG: blangs C; par BG: pa D: ma C
15 'gal DG: 'galla B; rol BD: ro1 gyi G
16 rtag pa DG: rtag dngos B
18 ma CDG: mi B
19 phyi BC~ (C 273a.l): gyi phyi G
21 zhugs BCD (C 288a.2): shugs G

p. 141
2 des BD: nges G; gyi don DG: missing B
3 rig G: rigs BD
4 nas DG: pa B; snang ba DG: bzhed pa B
5 chos nyid gtan 1a 'bebs pa na G: missing BD
7 bsgrub bya DG: sgrub pa B; pa dang BD: pa'i rna grub pa dang G
9 cig BCD (C 288a.4): gcig G
10 po CDG: po'i B; zhugs BCD: shugs G
12 'thad BDG: byed C

315

14 smra bar BD: smra ba G: missing C

15 po CDG: po'i B; de BG: do D
20 emended to tha mi dad : tha dad BOO
21 par snang BD: pa snang G; sreg BD: bsreg G
22 po DG: po'i B; yi BD: yid G

p. 142
1 'thun B: mthun 00; gzhan la BD: gzhan G
3 par BD: pa G
6 byas BD: byas pa G
7 par D: pa BG; Ita 00: Itar B
8 zhes DG: ces B; sdud DG: bsdud B
9 batan pa D: ston pa BG
10 zhes DG: ces B; dang BG: missing D
13 po DG: po'i B
14 ste DG: te B
18 'byung BD: la G
21 bas BD: ba G; po DG: po'i B; yin BD: missing G
22 zhugs yin BD: missing G

p. 143

1 gzhag DG: bzhag B

3 kyis DG: kyi BC (C 288b.5)
4 med pa dang CDG: missing B
7 bdag BCD: pa dang G
8 pa zhig eDG: ba zhig B; rigs CDG (e 289a.l): rig B
9 pas BCD: pa G
11 pas DG: pa BC; kyis C: kyi BDG; tu BG: du CD
14 rigs DG: rig B; missing in C: skabs su bab pa'i rigs pa de nyid
16 'khyam CD: 'khyams BG
19 du CD: missing BG
20 rang rang BCG: dang D
22 mi BCD (e 298b.l): gis G

316

Ii

p. 144
1 kyi BCD: kyis G

,I
I

3 de CDG: do Bj Ii tsa BG: Ii tsam C (C 289b.2): Iitstsha D

8 bral BCG: 'breI D
11 po BCG: pori D
12 Ii tsa BCG: litstsha D
15 gcig DG: cig B
19 gzhag DG: bzhag B
21 po BD: pos G
22 mi gnod BG: ma gnod D

p. 145
3 bslu DG: slu B
5 med BG: mad D
7-8 gcig dang/ G: cig dang/ B: gcig dang/ gnyis dang/ D
8 lnga dang DG: missing B
17 'khrul pa CDG: 'khrul ba Bj
18 gses BD: ses CG

mod CDG (C 290a.4):

mod kyi B

21 bsdud BCG: sdud Dj sgrub BG: sgub D: bsgrub Cj ngag CDG (C 290a.5): missing B

p. 146
1 glang CDG (C 290a.6): glangs B
7 sdud BD: bsdud CG
8 gcig BD: cig CGj sdud DG: bsdud CB
12 tshul BD: skyon CG
14 pas so CDG: palo B
15 mang BD: bang C: dpang G
16 de BCD: te G
17 sdud D: bsdud BCG
20 du CDG: missing
22 la BCD (C 291a.l): la yang G

317

p. 147
1 sgrub BDG: bsgrub C
3 bead BCG (C 291a.2): gead D
5 sgrub BDG: bsgrub C
7 'thun BG: mthun CD
8 'thun B: mthun CDG
9 gyis BG: gyi CD; bead BCG: gead D
12 par BCD: pa G Shak 14, 333.3
13 sgrub BCD: bsgrub G; phyir BCD: phyi G
15 'thun BG: mthun CD
16 emended to bi kra ma shi 1a'i :
ka ma shi 1a'i B:

bi ka ma shi 1a'i G:

bhri ka ma shri 1a'i D;

bh~

bi ka ma shi 1a'i C: bri

ga 1a'i BG:

bha~ ga'i D
17 shes pa BDG: 1a mkhas C; rtsod DG: brtsad BC; bram CDG:
rig CDG: rigs B
18 beas BCD (C 291b.l): beat G

br~

bha~

gha 1a'i C:

B; zes BCD: ze G;

19 bram CDG: bra~ B

20 sgrub DG: bsgrub BC
21 bram CDG:
bz1as G

br~

B;

bshung zhing D:

bshub eing CG:

bshum zhing B;

b1tas BCD:

p. 148
1 pa~~i CDG (C 291b.3): paQ di B
2 zhes CD: ees BG
4 bzung BCD: gzung G;

mi BCD:

5 gzhag DG:

missing C; byed BCD: mi byed G; mang BCG: mong D; gzhag DG:

bzhag B:

missing G;

'byin CDG:

bzhag CB
6 ba CD: pa B: missing G; par BCG: missing D
11 kyi CDG: kyis B
12
15
16
19

brtsad BC: rtsad G: rtsod D

gyis BCD (C 292a.l): bya G
1a sogs pa CDG: sogs B
bu DG: bus C: du B

20 gzhag DG: bzhag BC

21 rtsod DG: brtsad B
22 'dri DG: 'dra B

sbyin B

318

p. 149
2 cig D: gcig BG; car BD: char G
3 byed BCD: missing G; 'dra BeG: Ida D; rgyud CDG (C 292a.4): rgyun B
4 gcig DG: cig BC; phyir BCD: phyi G
5 gyis CD: gyi BG; sngar CDG: sngar ba B; de nas BeG: des na D
6 'byin CDG: 'byin pa B
7 bcad BCG: gcad D
8 re re nas BCG (C 292b.5): re re D
9 phyung CDG: 'byung B
10 dang BeD: missing G; tshar BeG: char D
11 bcad BeG: gcad D; phyir BeD: phyi G; gyis CD: gyi BG
11-12 sgra rtag gam mi rtag BCG: sgra rtag mi rtag gam mi rtag D
12 gzhi CDG: gzhi gcig B
13 bya'i BCG: bya'i zhes D
15 re CDG: ro B; dri CDG (C 293a.l): tri B
16 sbrel CG: sbrengs BD; de BCD: missing G;
18 tshar BeG: char D; bcad BeG: gcad D

pas BCD: pa'i G

19 btang BCG: gtang D; kyis DG: kyi Be; bcad BCG: gcad D
22 bsgrub BCD: sgrub G; gcig CD (C 293a.6): gcig ~ G: cig B

p. 150
2 bcad BCG: gcad D
3 sgrub BDG: bsgrub C; bcad BCG (C 293b.l): gcad D
4 byas pa" dang CD: byas pa B: missing G; rtsol BCD:
5 zhig CD: cig B: gcig G; mang po BD: missing CG
6 ma yin BDG: min C; brjod pa D: brjod pas BCG
7 bcad BCG: gcad D; na BDG: missing C; bcad BeG: gcad D
11 rwa'am CDG (C 293b.5): ra'am B
13 zhes CDG: ces B
14 dittography in C: kyi
15 brjod na CDG (C 294a.l): ni B
16 kyis CDG: kyi B; na BDG: ba na C
20 des BCD: missing G; bkod CDG: dkod B
21 phyir BCD: phyi G
22 bali yang BCD: bali G

rtsod G

319

p. 151
1 1a BCD (C 294a.4): 1a'ang G
2 dag CG: ngag D: missing B
3 brtsad CD: brtsed B: rtsod G; na BDG: nas C; Ian CDG: las B
4 bsgrub BCD: sgrub G: yi CDG: yis B[?]
10
11
13
15
16

bkod CDG: dkod B; grub BDG: yin C; sgrub byed kyang BCD: bsgrub byed kyang G
sgrub BDG: bsgrub C
na CDG: nas B
gdab BDG: btab C
bsgrub BCD: sgrub G

18 pa la'ang BD: pa'ang CG (C 294b.4)

20 grub BCD (C 295a.3): grub pa G

p. 152
gnyis la BG: gnyi ga D
2 'thun BG: mthun D; Ian DG: missing B
4 Ita BG: ltar D
5 gcig DG: cig B
7 tshigs BD: tshigs kyi G; bo BD: po G
8 'on kyang BD: kyang G
'9 pa ni BG: pa'i D
10 pas BG: la D; pa gnyis BD: pa dang gnyis G
12 'thun BG: mthun D
13 'thun B: mthun DG; pa BG: pa'i D
14 thaI 'gyur DG: thaI gyur B; sdud D: bsdud BG
15 la BD: las G [~ 1a]
16
17
18
19

de'i phyir DG: de phyir Bj las BG: la Dj 'gal ba dang DG: missing B
gsum DG: missing Bj grub pa G: grub pas BD
ma G: missing BD
kyi BD: kyis G

20 'di yis D: de yis G: de'i B

23 zhes DG: ces B

320

p. 153
2 sto DG: lto B
3 sdud BD: bsdud G
5 phyir BG: phyir na D
6 zhes DG: ces B; ces BD: zhes G
7 thaI ba BG: thaI 'gyur D
9 sdud BD: bsdud G; par byed BD: missing G
11 zhes DG: ces B; ba'am DG: ba'i B; ka BD: missing G
12 yin DG: .min B; Ia yang D: Ia'ang BG
13 sdud BD: bsdud G
14 ces BD: zhes G
15 sgras BD: smras G
16 sdud BD: bsdud G

i'

17 nus pa BCD (C 295a.4): nus pa nges pa G

18 gyi BCG: missing D
19 she BD: zhe G
20 'dir BCG: 'di D; grub BCD: sgrub G
23 phyir BDG: te C

p. 154
1 gis DG: gi B; gzung bya B: gzung ba D: bzung bya G; ces BD: zhes G
2 tshigs DG: tshig gis B; pas BG: pa D; ces B: zhes G: missing D
3 gzhaI bya yin pa'i phyir rtag par thaI ces zer na ma nges pa dang D: missing BG
4 byas pas mi BD: byas pa mi G; ces BD: zhes G
5 Ia DG: ma B; ces BD: zhes G
7 'thun BG: mthun CD (C 296a.4)
9 kyis BDG: kyi C
10 bos CDG: pos B
12 sgrub DG: bsgrub BC
14 mjug BCD: 'jug G; gzung D: bzung CG: gzugs B
16 Itar BCD (C 296b.l): Ita G
17 gzhug BCD: bzhug G
18 bsgrags CD: bsgrag BG
20 brgaI BCD: rgaI G
21 gnas CDG: gnas ma B; dittography in G
22 ba BCG: pa D; bar bya BCD: missing G

kyis gnas grub

321

p. 155
5 la BDG: missing C (C 296b.4)
6 ehed BDG: missing C
7 skur pa BDG: bskur ba C; gi BDG: missing C; beos te CDG: missing B
8 skur BDG: bskur C
9 rtsod pa BCG: rtsod par D; bsngags par BCG: bsngags pa D
10 yi BCD: yig G
11
12
15
18

pa BCD: missing G; spring BD: springs C: sring G; bas D: pas BCG

bzhin CDG: bzhin du B
dwags D: dags BCG
'bel DG: 'breI B

20 su DG: beur BC (C 297b.l)

22 lugs CDG: yul B

p. 156

2 pa BD: par CG (C 297b.5)

3 gyis BCD: gyi G
5 bshad BCG: spyad D
6 missing in C : snyigs mali dus kyi 'gro bali spyod yul min II
7 pa BD: par CG; nyung bas BCD: nyungs pas G
8 rgyas par CG: rgyas pa BD
9 mjug BCD (C 298a.3): 'jug G
10 zhing DG: shing B
11 dpal CDG: gyis B
12
13
14
15

bzang pos CDG: sangs rgyas B

deng CDG (C 298b.2): ding B
re BDG: rer C; 'bri BD: bri CG
kyis BCD: kyi G

17 gis BCG: gi D; pa'i CD (C 299b.6): te B: eing G

20 dgyes D: dges BCG (C 300a.l)
22 sgo BCD: lam G; kyis bgrod CD: kyi bgrod G: 'jug B

p. 157
3 rgyud BDG: brgyud C (C 300a.6)

322

5 pas BCD (C 300b.l): pa G

8

'di BCD: 'dir G; shig BCG: zhig D; so BD: s.ho CG; missing in BD but added in
G: II 'dis bstan pa dang sems can la phan pa rgya chen po 'grub par shogl

sh

THE ENTRANCE GATE FOR THE WISE

Section III: Philosophical Debate

thus set forth the way for entering into exposition,

Having
plain

the

method

[now] to

of debating so that [one] will know how to accept

and

ex-

reject

philosophical tenets:

(III 1) The dialectical discussion

tion,

an actual practice,

[of debate] has [three parts]: a prepara-

and a conclusion.

One should enter into debating

after determining [Who] the two opponents and the

preparation to cleanse the path of debate. 2
are

There

which

(religious

principle)

[identity
matter

the

of

[are],

three [stepsl for entering into a debate through a

discussion
preparation,

witness

consists of the acceptance of truth that

and the rejection of error.

cleansing

of

the

accords
to

the

dialectical
with

[These three are:]

path of debate in order

as

Dharma
(I)

the

determine

the

the] opponents,3

through

(II) the actual practice, the settling of the

4
assertions and replies for the sake of protecting the Doctrine,

and (III) the conclusion,

a summarized communication [of what transpired] so that

the assembly can easily retain it.

I. The Preparation
Regarding

the first of these [i.e.

one ought to debate

5
[only] after determining who these three people are: (a) the proponent who under6
takes to maintain his own philosophical tenets, (b) the respondent who undertakes
7
to refute him, and (c) the witness who undertakes truthfully to judge the faults
and merits of those two.

the preparation],

Whereas to debate heedlessly without determining

those

[participants] would, [po 110] like the quarrelling of vulgar people, be an occasion for the dispraise of scholars. Consequently, one should enter into the [sort
of] dialectical discussion that is capable of maintaining one's own doctrine [and]

324

is praised by learned men.

the

8
What kinds of things constitute occasions for defeat or for
[of victory]9 for the proponent and respondent?
[Answer:]

[Question:]
acknowledgment

This [answer] has three parts: (1) refuting the traditions of others, (2) stating
our own opinion, and (3) the elimination of objections.
The first, [the refutation

of other traditions,] is twofold:

(a) refuting the traditions of

Tibetans, and (b) refuting the [Nyaya] tradition of

(III 2)

Ak~apada.

[earlier]

For the first:

They say there are sixteen occasions of defeat for the two opponents

and the witness.

Regarding

the

occasions of defeat:
the

time

defects;

of

occasions of defeat,

Tibetans say that there

are

sixteen

six for the proponent, being three [occasions of] defeat at

answering and three [occasions of] defeat at the time

of

removing

six for the respondent, being three [occasions of] defeat at the time of

questioning

and

three at the time of stating the defect;

three

[occasions

of].

defeat for the witness at the time of his coming to a judgment;

and one [occasion

10
Dharmaof defeat] to which all are susceptible, which is not paying attention.

kirti did not maintain this, for as he said in his Vadanyaya:

Not stating something that forms part of a sound proof and not stating
the logical defect [of the opponent's reasoning] are the occasions of
defeat for the two [opponents].

I do not maintain any other [occasions

11

of defeat] because they are logically unacceptable.

Furthermore,

those

for the two opponents,

twelve things that are [supposed] occasions of

defeat

if they are [genuine occasions of] defeat, can be included

somewhere among the four [classes of defeat] that those [basic] two can be divided
into:
[po

for the proponent the two defects of not stating the parts of a sound proof
111] and stating something besides the parts [of a sound proof],

respondent,

not

and for the

to state the logical defect [in the proponent's argument] and to

state something that is not a logical defect.

Anything not included within those

[four] is not a true [occasion of] defeat.

A witness is not susceptible to defeat,

because as [Dharmakirti] said

[in

Are the occasions of defeat for the two,"

and

the

verse just quoted],

because

he

did

"

not mention that [defeat for a witness]

12

section of [his] basic treatises.

even

in

some

[small]

325

(III 3)

Some say that a witness is not necessary.

Because one cannot know

how learned or stupid the opponents [themselves] will be if a learned witness

does not judge it,

[Dharmakirti] in the Vadanyaya taught that [a witness] is

necessary.
Some may think that a witness is no.t necessary at the time of
this was not taught in the treatises on dialectics.

debate,

[This opinion] is not

for
cor-

rect, for as [DharmakIrti] said in the Vadanyaya:

[Noble debaters] will follow reasoning by way of a correct statement of
proof or a correct statement of the logical defect, so that the witness
will

understand

it

directly.

. h reason1ng.
.
13
accor d W1t

In that way noble persons

Second, the refutation of the [Nyaya] tradition of

debate

in

Ak~apada:

(III 4,5,6,7) There are twenty-two [occasions of] defeat [in debate]
by the sage Ak~apada:14
[1]

annihilation of [one's own] thesis [such as through citing an

taught

incompat-

ible example] (pratijnahani),

[2] [shifting to] another thesis (pratijnantara),
[3]

the

thesis

being

in contradiction [with

the

reason]

(pratijnaviro-

dha),
[4] abandoning [one's] thesis (pratijnasannyasa),
[5] [shifting to] another reason (hetvantara),
[6] [shifting to] another [irrelevant] topic (arthantara),
[7] meaninglessness [i.e.

uttering a string of meaningless syllables]

(nir-

arthaka),
[8]

unintelligibility

[of the thesis to the respondent

and

witness,

even

though stated three times] (avijnatartha) (III 4),

[9] incoherence [i.e., uttering unconnected words] (aparthaka),
[10] inappropriate sequence [in the steps of proof] (apraptakala),
[11] incompleteness [in the steps of proof] (nyuna),
[12] superfluity [in the steps of proof,
ple] (adhika),

such as citing more than one exam-

[13] [needless] repetition (punarukta), [po 112]

[14] not repeating [when one should repeat the assertions of
(ananubhaaI,la) ,

the

opponent]

326

[15] ignorance [of the thesis on the part of the respondent,

even though the

witness understands it] (ajnana),

[16] lacking the confident composure [to reply correctly] (apratibha),
[17]

[falsely

evading

the debate by claiming] to be distracted

[by

other

affairs] (viksepa), (III 5)

[18]

[indirectly] admitting the charge [by simply leveling the

same

charge

against the opponent] (matanujna),

[19]
[20]

overlooking the censurable

(paryanuyojyopeksaoa),
censuring the non-censurable (niranuyojyanuyoga),

[21]

not keeping to [one's own] tenets (apasiddhanta), and

fallacious logical reason (hetvabhasa) [such as in a futile

[22]

(jati)].

rejoinder

(III 6)

Regarding

these,

the

glorious

[Dharma]kirti explained some as

not

being

[occasions of] defeat.

If they are defeats, he included them within the two
[basic classes of defeats].15 (III 7)
Of

these

"twenty-two occasions for defeat," some of them are

not

[true]

occasions for defeat, while those that are should be included within the previously explained [occasions for defeat of] not stating the parts of a sound proof
the

other

[one].

One

should learn well how this is so from [my]

Treasure

and
of

Reasoning (Rigs pa'i gter).16

(III 8,9,10)

There

were

twenty-four futile rejoinders

(jati)

[taught by
[Dignaga

Ak~apada and refuted by Dignaga].17 In the Pramaoasamuccaya,

refuted] ; 18

[la]

futile

rejoinder

by balancing (or parity) with

the

co-presence

reason and assertion to be proved] (praptisamajati),

[lb] futile rejoinder by balancing with no co-presence [of reason and

[of

thesis

to be proved] (aprapti--),
[2]

futile rejoinder by balancing with the [impossibility of] the reason [in

the three times]

(hetu= ahetu--),

[3] futile rejoinder by balancing with permanence [i.e.

arguing that

things

are permanently impermanent] (nitya--),

[4] futile rejoinder by balancing with the unspoken [i.e.
to

the

arguing that prior

act of stating the reason proving the impermanence of sound

the reason is that sound is produced through effort),

(here

this reason (produc-

tion through effort) did not exist and therefore the thesis (that sound
impermanent) could not follow then] (*anukta--?),

is

327

th

!
[
D

[5]

futile

though

rejoinder by balancing with the unproduced

sound

[i.e.

may be impermanent after its production,

arguing

that

it is not so

when

unproduced] (anutpatti--),
[6] futile rejoinder by balancing with [difference of] effect (karya--),
[7]

futile rejoinder by balancing with agreement [of a quality of the

exam-

ples] (sadharmya--),
[8]

futile

rejoinder by balancing with disagreement [of a

quality

of

the

examples] (vaidharmya--),
[9]

futile rejoinder by balancing with alternative [qualities of the subject

and example] (vikalpa--),

[10] futile rejoinder by balancing with non-difference [between the parts

of

the "syllogism" on account of qualities they hold in common] (avisea--),

l
.

[11]

futile rejoinder by balancing with perceiving [that the thesis is

sible

without the stated reason,

thesis] (upalabdhi--)
[12]
[13]

the

(III 8),

futile rejoinder by balancing with doubt [about the particular

of the reason]

pos-

or that there are other reasons for

meaning

(sam~aya--),

futile rejoinder by balancing with [a contrariety] implied by the

cir-

cumstances (arthapatti--), and

[14]

futile rejoinder by balancing with an entailment of a necessary

quence

conse-

[that the reason must be established for the example itself]

(pra-

sanga--),
And in the Nyayaparlksa [Dignaga refuted the following]:19
[15]
to

futile rejoinder by balancing with enlarging [the subject by attempting

apply an additional characteristic to the subject because that

charac-

teristic is possessed by the example] (utkara--),

[16]

futile

tempting

rejoinder
to

subtract

by balancing with decreasing [the

a characteristic

because

that

argument

by

characteristic

atis

lacking from the example] (apakarsa--),

[17]

futile rejoinder by balancing with the questionability [of the example,

i.e.

whether

it

should

not also become the subject of a

proof

of

its

possessing the predicate, just like the subject itself] (varoya--),

[18]

futile rejoinder by balancing with the unquestionability [of

ject,

i.e.

the

sub-

that its predicate need not be proven if the example's posses-

sion of the predicated quality is unquestioned] (avaroya--),

[19]

futile

rejoinder

by balancing with [a different

[leading to the opposite conclusion without

original thesis] (upapatti--),

line

disputing

of]
the

reasoning
proponent's

328

[20]

futile rejoinder by balancing with a counter-example (pratidretanta--),

(III 9) [po 113]

[21] futile rejoinder by balancing with the thing to be proved [i.e.

arguing

that the soundness of the example needs a full proof just like the

proban-

dum,

for otherwise one cannot be sure that it too possesses the predicated

quality] (sadhya--),
[22] futile rejoinder by balancing with impermanence [as a supposed universal
characteristic shared by all things because all things possess some sort of
similarity with an impermanent pot] (anitya--),
[23]

futile

into

rejoinder by balancing with the point at issue [by

calling

doubt through an opposing proposition in which some agreeing

teristic

of

the

subject is made the basis for

different

it

charac-

reason

and

example] (prakaraoa--), and

[24]

futile rejoinder by balancing with a mistimed [reason,

i.e.

reason

adduced for a time in which it does not hold good] (kalatlta--),

Because these were refuted by Dignaga, Dharmakirti disregarded them. (III 10)
[Dharmak1rti]
be

appropriately

held that these twenty-four futile rejoinders are all

included within the three

certain and unestablished [reasons],

they

are indeed sound.

included

within

priate.,,20

[categories of]

contradictory,

to
un-

and that if they do not go into those three,

For as he said in his Vadanyaya:"

Since they

the fallacies of reason (hetvabhasa) in whatever way

Because Dignaga refuted these futile rejoinders at length,

is

are

appro-

the author

of the Pramaoavarttika passed over them [without further comment].21

Second, one's own system:
(III 11)

The [occasions for] defeat [in debate] are just the four which come

from the [basic] two.

No others are needed.

As [Dharmakirti] said in the Vadanyaya:

Not stating something that forms part of a sound proof and not
the

stating

logical defect [of the opponent's reasoning] are the occasions

of

defeat for the two [opponents].

I do not maintain any other [occasions

22
of defeat] because they are logically unacceptable.
[Thus Dharmaklrti's] opinion is that the proponent has two [possible] occasions of
defeat:

not

stating

something that forms part of a

something that is not part [of a sound proof].

sound

proof,

and

stating

The respondent [also] has two: not

330

does not make up a proof.

[debater],
gious

26

These methods are not capable of defeating the other

and [such] debating that does not accord with Dharma [i.e.

principle]

is something that learned persons should avoid since

with reliit

is

cause for birth in evil realms of existence.

Third, the elimination of objections:

(III 14)

If one says that it is permissible for even a noble person to speak

deceitfully

for the sake of defending his doctrine, [I answer that] through

27
Such [deceits] have been rebutted [by

deceit one cannot uphold a doctrine.

.Dharmakirti] in the Vadanyaya.
Some

non-Buddhist Indian sectarians in order to defend their doctrine also

proceed deceitfully,
nent

calling out "I have won" even though at that time the

is [merely] sitting silently.

Concerning [such practices],

oppo-

if one has

defend one's doctrine through deceit, the doctrine itself will become impure.
if

the

matter at issue can become established merely by [the opponent]

silent,

there would ensue an extreme consequence [i.e.

a fault of

becoming

overextension

(atiprasanga)28

of the term "defeat"] because even silence caused through

tening

weapon or with fire would then amount to such

with

defeat].29

a
[As

DharmakIrti]

said in the Vadanyaya:

[an

to
And

threa-

occasion

"A noble person

will

for
not

engage in [debate] nor compose treatises for the sake of tormenting others.,,30

II.

(III 15)

The Actual Practice [of Debating]

For the two opponents to debate maintaining their own philosophical

tenets [po 116] is the traditional practice of the learned men of the past.
[Great
sectarians

masters]

used

such as Dharmaklrti when debating with

the

non-Buddhist

to debate adhering to the philosophical tenets of the

and [with the opponent maintaining the tenets of a teacher] such as

Buddhists
But

Ka~ada.

for someone who has no capability of maintaining a doctrine to extract any sort of
definition
debate
scholars

or fragment of texts and to say "Set forth a formal argument!" is

by which a childish person tests his knowledge.

who

adhere to tenets.

the

It is not the debate

Such [elementary debate] is explained as

of

being

331

he
th

debate

that

is proper to the occasion for explicating [texts],

but

as

debate that is proper to the occasion of debating,

for' [by it

suitable

it

is

It may possibly also be an occasion for entering

cannot accept or reject tenets.

into

[real debate] if one inquires in that way in order to find an occasion

.
. t 1ng
'
accept1ng
an d reJec
tene t s. 31

(III 16)

There

appears

not
one]

in some scriptures on reasoning a

respondent

for

who

refutes the proponent's tenets without affirming tenets [of his own].
:

Some Madhyamikas without admitting tenets of their own refute whatever

the

proponent maintains, whether it is maintained as existent, non-existent, or some32

thing else.
For as the Acarya Arya [Nagarjuna] said [in his VigrahavyavartanI

29]:
L

If

possessed

any thesis,

I would therefore

possess

that

fault.

Because I possess no thesis, I am certainly without fault.~3

(III 17,18)

Even if one affirms tenets, [po 117] during the time of debating

it is not necessary to affirm every tenet taught in the basic scriptures.

is

the

traditional

practice of scholars to prove just the

particular occasion of debate (III 17).

tence

of external objects,

tenets

the texts [which teach] Vijfiapti do not

should apply [this principle] to all systems of tenets.

existence

of]

on an occasion of

Indian sectarians one should debate having

external objects in accordance with the

affirmed

Sautrantika

[view],

[one's position] is not disproven [if the opponent] says in debate:

Contradiction
externally]
tutes

no

(tenets,

with

the

appearing phenomena are mind."

the

"You are

explanation which is found in your own texts

Likewise [the alleged

real disproof if] when one is affirming

opponent] asserts,

Mind-Only

disprove

Likewise one

(III 18)

Even though one debates having affirmed Buddhist tenets,

non-Buddhist

the

For example, when proving the exis-

[the position maintaining external objects] in this connection.

refuting

of

It

that

fault

(i.e.

[the
and
in
[all

consti-

Vijfianavada)

"The external objects taught in the Sutras must

also be what you assert," or when debating as a Madhyamika [if the opponent] says,
~.

1nce

assert."

Vijnapti is also [taught in] your Sutras,

it should be something that you

And likewise even among non-Buddhist Indian sectarians,

when a

Sa~hya

adherent says to a Vaise~ika, "When you state your reason proving the impermanence

332

should

become

a thesis [for you],

and consequently since you

contradict

that,

there

is a contradiction with your thesis," the alleged fault does not amount to
34
any [real] disproof.
For even though one has affirmed a system of tenets, one's
thesis

is just that immediate matter which one is maintaining,

affirm

every

point
motives in mind. 35

[taught in the scriptures of one's

and one does

school]

with

not

different

As [Dharmakirti] said in the Pramanavarttika [II 46ab]:

Why

follow

tenets that contain matters not established through

knowledge? 36 [po 118]

(III 19)

The

two

[types

of]

debating--through

reasoning--are alike if one knows them well.

the

scriptures

and

through

Nevertheless, with reference to

two objects of cognition ["manifest" phenomena and "hidden"

reasoning

sound

phenomena],

on the basis of direct perception and inference can falsify [those

two]
[Concerning] debate through scriptures and debate through
as

all such things as refutation and proof,

consequence,

reason

and

reasoning:

independent "syllogism" and

proposition to be proved,

and defects of

just

logical

language

or

defects of sense can [amount to] faults and strengths when one is debating through
reasoning,

so also when debating through scriptures, that very procedure operates

similarly if one has a good understanding of it.

knowledge

engage

phenomena,

and

Nevertheless,

the two means of

as their objects [respectively] manifest phenomena

the things which act to prove or falsify [them] are

and

hidden

also

direct

37
perception and inference, whereas here the scriptures do not come into play.
[Question:]

What is the scope of the scriptures [in debate]?

[Reply:]

(III 20) When investigating the third object of cognition [i.e.

"completely

hidden" phenomena,

one's position] is disproven if one contradicts one's own

,
38
scrlptures.

for

proclaims

As

example [the contradiction

occuring]

when

that ahlutions purify evils and that harming [sentient

is a religious virtue,

while teaching that desire,

'"
f ree dom f rom desire is a re 119lOUS
vlrtue. 39

someone

creatures]

etc., are evils and that

333

When
D
3,

investigating such completely hidden phenomena as [the existence

previous and subsequent lives,

features

of]

the causality of moral actions, and the particular

40
and miserable realms of existence,41 one must

of the fortunate realms

)e

base

IV 51cd]:

oneself on the scriptures.

[po 119]

for as it is said [in Pramaoavarttika

When one passes on to the third topic [Le.

"completely hidden" pheno..

, f'1ed 1n
. accept1ng
.
[t h
'
.
42
mena ] , one 1S
Just1
e w1tness
0 f] treat1ses.

Id

[Question:]

How can particular characteristics be established as true or false

43
with regard to a basic [subject]--a "completely hidden" phenomenon _-which itself
is not established?
t

answer is this:

maintain

sality

[Answer:]

Indeed such a question is reasonable.

the truth of [the existence of] previous and subsequent lives,

of moral actions,

etc.

hatred and confusion are evil,

Existence

(sawsara),

one

anger

that evils [cause] the round of

debate concerning their disagreeing scriptures (which explain]

[If]

desire,

that actions [accomplished] without desire,

Cyclic

and that if one is freed of evils that is liberation.

[for achieving liberation].

dvara),

the cau-

And they agree that deeds produced from

and nescience are virtuous (or salutory),

they

The correct

When a Buddhist and a *Vaidika (Mima~saka) debate, both opponents

the

But

methods

The "Veda" states:

performs ablutions at the river shores of Gangadvara

(Hari-

Bilvaka, Nilaparvata and Kanakhala, it is not pos44

sible that one will be born again.
The

Kusavarta,

recitation of this constitutes [for the Mima~saka] an internal

of his own scriptures. 45

contradiction

The root of evil deeds are mental events such as desire,

and it is not consistent to wash the body which has no direct connection with
while pot washing the mind,

it,

which is its root.

This is just like setting fire to

the forest for the purpose of killing the creatures of the ocean. 46
Our scriptures [describe] the partial suppression [of the emotional defile-

ments with] such words as:

Those

in

whom

lust predominates [should think of the bodies

opposite sex as] unclean meat and fat, and

47

of

the

concerning] the complete termination [of the emotional defilements],

[po 120]

it is

334

o desire,
thought.
[0
me.

aggregates (skandhas)],

48

Accordingly,
the

I have understood your root:

[you] arose

conceptual

therefore [that desire] will not arise

in

[the doctrine of our scriptures is that] by cutting off egoity (i.e.

psychological postulation of a self),

which is the seed of Cyclic Existence,

the emotional defilements which they produce will cease.

one

from

Since I do not conceptualize [a self] in connection with you,

is freed from suffering,

Through their cessation

just as through the exhaustion of fuel a fire

dies

out, and by virtue of that, smoke does not arise.

Likewise,
texts.

While

existence

[for
he

the

maintains

is virtue,

*Vaidika]

there are contradictions between

that the cause of [birth in]

fortunate

[there are texts of his that say] such things as

should kill K~atriya.,,49

his

own

realms

of

"K~atriya

As for the Buddhist, there are no contradictions between

his scriptures. [His texts contain consistent statements] such as "Through morality one goes to the higher realms of existence,"SO and "Non-meritorious [deeds]
propel one to miserable realms of existence."Sl
If one objects that even in the case of the Buddhist himself there are seen
contradictions between his Sutras:

(III 21)
[main

Someone may object that because in the Sugata's scriptures the two

schoo1s]--Sravaka

the most part disagree,

and Mahayana--have doctrinal formulations that

for

those [Buddhist scriptures] are contradictory. 52

In

that case
[Objection:]
and Mahayana,
cular,

In the Buddhist basic texts the two [main divisions], Sravaka

generally conflict regarding their philosophical tenets.

In parti-

[within] the Sravaka there are the eighteen [schools] that developed

from

the

four basic communities, which appear to conflict to a great extent in their

S3
theory and practice.
Also in the Mahayana [po 121] there are the two--Paramita
and Mantra--which appear for the most part to be unalike. Also within the Paramita
there are the dissimilar Mind-Only (Yogacara) and Madhyamaka,

and also within the

Mantra the four classes of Tantra appear to have different doctrinal formulations.
And since your own scriptures [thus] conflict, there can be no relying on them.
[Reply:]

335

(III 22)

If one understands [the different inclinations of] individuals, the

stages of introduction,

and the methods of explanation,

there is no contra-

diction.
[Reply:]
according

to

It

is not contradictory to lead through

whether

inferior or the highest [goal],

or
and

skillful

expedients--

the individual [to be taught] has inclinations

for the benefit of others,

toward

an

whether [he] applies himself for his own benefit

whether he delights in deep and vast [truths] ,

by way of interpretable and definitive truth.

For as Arya [Nagarjuna]

said

[in Yuktisastika 30]:

To

one

who

exists."

seeks for reality,

one should

first

teach

"Everything

One who understands objects [on the relative level]

and

is

without attachment [should] afterward [be taught] "isolation" (vivikta.1.- ) 54

ta- = l:iunyata

And [as Nagarjuna said in Mulamadhyamakakarika XVIII 6]:

[The Buddhas] indicated both "A self exists" and they indicated "A self
does not exist." The Buddhas also taught, "Self and absence of self do
not exist at all.,,55

(III 23)
[the

Those who do not understand such a formulation debate thinking that

doctrines] are contradictory.

But [po

122] if one understands

well,

think that there are scriptural contradictions in the

[Bud-

there are no contradictions.

[Some]
dha's]

fools

teaching of different levels of vehicle which have in mind individuals

of

Superior, middling, [or inferior] faculties, [different] constituent elements and

inclinations [i~ the minds of those to be trained], and [the existence of] superior and inferior stages.
different

And [they imagine contradictions] in his uttering of

ways of exposition that take into account the differing dispositions of

individuals.

But

i f one has a good knowledge of the "six limits" of the

intention, there is no contradiction.

(III 24,25,26)
so that

56

The apparently contradictory doctrinal vehicles were

indiv~duals

would gradually be introduced [into religion].57

Sage's

taught
[State-

336

ments] such as "Father and mother are to be killed,,58 [were uttered] with the
intended

meaning that [the fetters of] deeds (karma) and the

emotional

de-

filements [should be destroyed]. (III 24)

Such

[doctrines] as "the womb of the Tathagata [exists]" were given for

sake of guiding those who possess egoity (self-postulation,

statements

ahamkara).

as "Awakening is won by killing" refer to the slaying of

the
Such

egoity.

(III 25)
Learned

men

should

give this answer to those who debate

[apparent] contradictions. 59 (III 26)

because

of

such

These were intermediate verses. 60

(III 27)

On occasions of debate on the scriptures there is nothing

incon-

sistent about posing questions concerning matters in the scriptures, or about

posing

questions concerning completely hidden objects [of

cognition],

even

those not [taught in the scriptures].

When

debating on the scriptural teachings,

it is proper to inquire and it

is not an occasion for laughter if one asks questions concerning the import of the
Three Baskets of Scripture (Tripitaka) [such as] about [the disciplines of] mo.
[123]
d lscrlmlnative
.
..
k
Id
..
ra l lty,
p.
now
e ge an d me d ltatlve
trance, 61 or as k s questions

about the import of the four classes of Tantras,

[processes
hidden

phenomena not taught in the Sutras or Tantras concerning places of

other than the Three Jewels,

from
a

[such as] concerning

the

of] "ripening" and "liberating, ,,62 or asks questions about [completely]

refuge

different
63
the [four] "seals" which are the marks of the doctrine for theory,
such as

theory of a self or person,

such as Isvara,

or concerning [theories]

or concerning modes of conduct different from

64
65
and mortifications.

the

Middle Way, such as physical pleasures

And as for answering those [questions]:

(III 28)

In Sutras (the Buddha] uttered answers [to questions] in four ways:

by

absolute affirmation (ekapsena),66 by drawing distinctions (vibhajya),67

h-)
'
. .
( parlprcc
.
bY c 1 oser questlonlng
a, 68 an dy b
settlng
aSl'd e t he matter [ as

meaningless
those

or

unfruitful] (sthapanlya),69 [po 124] to such

regarding the inevitability of] death,

[questions

[the inevitability of]

as

birth,

the excellence [of human birth], or the qualities of the self, respectively.

337

Blessed One taught four methods for answering questions.

The

[1] To

the

question "Will all beings that are born die or not?" he answered: "They definitely
will

die,"

thus answering by absolute affirmation.

[2] When

asked, "Will

all

beings who die be born again or not?" he answered: "Those who possess egoity (egopostulation)

will be born.

If they have no egoity they will not be born."

he answered by drawing distinctions.

human?" he [answered by] questioning: "[Good] in relation to what?

the

evil realms of existence it is good.

[4] When asked,

Thus

[3] When asked, "Is it good to be born as a

In relation to

With regard to the gods,

it is

"Is the self permanent or impermanent?" he answered:

bad."

"Since

the

self is not established, both permanence and impermanence are not established with
regard to it," thus setting aside [the question as meaningless].

As (Vasubandhu] ,

stated in the [Abhidharma-] koSa [V 22]:

ELucidating
and

by absolute affirmation,

setting

aside,

about death,

by distinguishing,

questioning,

(the Buddha answered] such [questions]

rebirth,

as

those

excellence, (whether the skandhas are identical

with] the self (or] other (than it], and so

forth~

[The Buddha] stated in the Sutras that such is the (correct] system for
7l

answering

all questions of such types.

Furthermore,

[When]

the wandering religious mendicant Dirghanakha said to

the Blessed One, "0 Gautama, I cannot accept anything," [the Buddha] replied, "Can
you accept or not the statement 'I cannot accept'?"
non-acceptance is destroyed.

If one can accept

it,

one's

If one cannot accept that, not to be able to accept

non-acceptance is just to be able to accept,72 for a negated negation is an

73
assertion.
This is what (the Buddha] intended (by his question]. The wandering
ascetic fell silent. 74
Also

(when]

the

questions beginning,

K~apa~akas

(Jaina ascetics?) asked the

Buddha

fourteen

"0 Gautama, does this world have a (posterior] limit?"

75
As [Nagarjuna] said in the RatnavalI [I 73c-74d]:

the

BUddha remained silent.

When

asked

silent.
those

if the world has a (posterior] limit,

the

Jina

remained

For the very reason that he did not teach the deep doctrine to
beings who were not fit receptacles,
76

learned persons understand

the Omniscient One to be all-knowing.

Therefore

(questions]

that

(the Buddha] did not elucidate are

to

be

included

Within "answering by setting aside (the questions as unhelpful or fruitless].,,77

i'
1

}o

.:

1 ";

'

j 'ii

338

(III 29)

On occasions of [debating on] scriptures,

bility in dialectical answers of this sort. [po 125]

patibility

[in

there is no

incompati-

There is also no incom-

the use of such answers] for [debating

through]

reasoning.

Nevertheless, they are difficult for the ignorant to understand.

On occasions of scriptural [debates],
because

this is the right occasion for them,

also for [debating through] reasoning.

such [ways of] debating are suitable

and such [methods] can be

employed

Nevertheless, since [these things] are not

easily understood by the ignorant, [in the latter context] one should give answers
which are recognized in [the science of] reasoning.

(III 30)
Otherwise [one should give] two kinds of answers [when debating]
on scriptures: one should refute that [argument] by means of [quotations
from] scripture or by means of reasoning based on scripture.
Otherwise,

on an occasion of debate on scriptural teachings,

there exists

answering by means of just that scripture which is right for that occasion, and by
means of other reasoning that applies to that scripture.

(III 31,32)
lar

And as for scripture,

[scriptural]

that which is connected with the particu-

context about which one is debating is

"scripture."

Any

other scriptures that do not belong to that [scriptural] context and that are
not maintained by the proponent are not [capable of causing] the defect [of
textual contradiction]. (III 31) Just as for example even though there is
contradiction
Vijnapti and
these].

When
scripture
vehicle

between the ~ravaka and Mahayana, and between such things

NiQsvabhava, this is no defect [for one who espouses one

as
of

(III 32)

debating

back and forth basing oneself on scriptures,

[what

is [is determined by] whatever one has affirmed as one's own

(e.g.

Sravakayana or Mahayana),

immediately relevant text.

For example,

one's]

level

of

as one's particular theory,

and as the

when one affirms the Vinaya

("Monastic

Discipline") [as the general scriptural basis for debate], one's scripture is that
which

is maintained as the [Vinaya] scriptures of each of the four basic monastic

communities,

and -consequently

if a contradiction occurs within that,

scriptural [po 126] contradiction.

But when one has affirmed [for

it

i~stance,

is

a
the

339

particular Vinaya of] the Sarvastivada, even if there occurs a contradiction with
the scriptures of the other monastic communities such as the Sthaviravada, that
78
will not constitute a scriptural contradiction.
And when one has affirmed such
[Vinaya systems] as the Sthaviravada, there is no defect of scripture even though
79
contradictions occur with such schools as the Sarvastivada.
And

likewise,

though

in

the Sravaka [Vinaya] it amounts to

an

offense

(apatti) to accept gold and silver, according to the Mahayana it is taught to

80
an offense not to accept it.
And though for the Sravaka [eating] meat that
pure

in

three ways (trikotiparisuddha) is not an offense, the Mahayana

8
[meat eating] to be an offense. ! And while the Sravakayana teaches that

observances

~uch

be
is

teaches
austere

as silence and fasting are offenses, in some Tantras it is taught

t ..at the Mantra [practices] are to be realized by the observance of temporary vows
of fasting and silence.
amount

These and other examples of apparent contradictions will

to [real] scriptural contradictions if in that very context,

text of one's own [school],

opposite

way.

in that very

those practices are taught as to be practiced in

But as for teachings given for different occasions,

the

they are not

contradictory.
[This is] because they are [mere] divisions of conduct, just like
the giving of different medicines for different diseases.
Likewise for theory too, the texts [of the different schools may] appear to
be

in contradiction:

in the Sravaka[yana] the subject and object which are

com-

posed of "atoms" and moments are explained as being ultimate reality, [whereas]
the follower of the Mind-Only teaches that the experience of non-dual cognition is
ultimate reality, and the Madhyamika holds that all factors of existence (dharmas)
are without own-nature.
If the texts affirmed by one's own philosophical school
disprove [tnese],
tion
fect,

there is indeed a contradiction.

between one's own texts,

But if there is no contradic-

[merely] to contradict another [school] is no

de-

for one has not affirmed that [other school] as one's own system of tenets.

It is just as in the steps of farming [in different places and seasons].82

Furthermore, other texts [of one's own school] that contradict one's [position] will become acceptable if one knows how to establish one's own tenets as'
being of ascertained meaning or as of direct intent, after establishing through
the force of reasoning that [the contradictory text] is of interpretable ,meaning
[Po 127] or [was taught] with special intent. 83 But if one does not know how td
establish in that way [that the text one follows is of definitive meaning, etc.]
by means of reasoning, one cannot escape a contradiction of scripture.

(III 33)
maintains,

If [a text of one's tradition] contradicts the scriptures

one should explain it by distinguishing its intention.
If

one
one
ii,

Ii

II

'l
Ii

1,

I
i

340

does not understand the intention, there occurs an occasion of defeat.

. .
That was a summar1z1ng
stanza. ~

When

(III 34)

Otherwise--

debating by way of reasoning,

one should

debate

clearly,

having distinguished whether one is or is not following philosophical tenets.

When debating following reasoning,
benefitting one's own doctrine.
respondent
each

the tenets of Buddhist or non-Buddhist (IITirthika ll ).85

heedlessly with no wish to uphold a doctrine and with the aim

each other's knowledge,

like the argument of fools,

determined

of

to

testing

Therefore it shOuld

whether [the opponents] are or are not affirming tenets.

they are maintaining them,

with

But

is not the debating of noble

persons, but it is merely crafty people amazing the ignorant.

be

for

[is to be done] for the purpose of upholding their own doctrine,

maintaining

debate

that reasoning too [is to be used]

The debating back and forth by the proponent and

And

if

then both should debate maintaining the basic texts of

a system of tenets.

(III 35)

If

tenets,

by

[a

debater says that] he does not

follow

any

philosophical

determining his subject of debate he will usually [be

86
[po 128]

seen

to]

take some philosophical position.

Some

ignorant persons making out to be learned may say,

tenets, but I maintain whatever I can through reasoning."

"I do not

affirm

In that connection, one

first has to come to an agreement regarding the basic subject of debate.

For

if

nothing whatsoever such as existence or non-existence, permanence or annihilation,

truth

or

found

to

debating.

falsity,

or Cyclic

Exi~tence

be acceptable or unacceptable,
But

when

(samsara) or Extinction (nirv8Qa) can

there will not occur any

occasion

one [finds] something acceptable or unacceptable

about,

that very thing which one affirms as acceptable becomes one's

either

existence or non-existence is acceptable,

maintains

either existence or non-existence.

are acceptable,
hilation.
whether

no

matter

or falsity,

tenet.

And if permanence or

tenets of that sort.

If

annihilation

what one affirms as existent

Cyclic Existence or Extinction,

or
or

anni-

non-existent-whatever--it

impossible not to fall within the purview of some Buddhist or non-Buddhist

of

for

debate

then there results a tenet that

there results the speculative view asserting eternalism or

Likewise
truth

to

be

Consequently just the fault expressed concerning

is

system
those

341

[philosophical systems] applies [to that debater too].

(III 36)

If [a debater] does not take sides with any philosophical position,

by determining what his initial position (purvapaksa) [is],

[his stand] will

usually be [seen to be] the reasoning of an ignorant person.

If

person at the time of debating will not affirm tenets no matter

one investigates
[tenets]

out

[his views],

[he may be] either someone who

that some logical defect may arise.

case,

tion.

If

not

how

affirm

of ignorance or someone who does not affirm [them] out of the

need for him to accept [tenets]?

second

does

If it is as in the first case,

Who would debate with an ox?

affirms it,

what is

the

If it is as in the

[one should ask him] if he affirms or does not affirm

he

fear

non-affirma-

he abandons his thesis of not affirming,

for he

has

affirmed non-affirmation, just as the designation [of something] as "nameless" has

become a name.

If he does not affirm non-affirmation, an affirmation occurs, for

a negated negation is an assertion [po 129], just as if something is not non-blue,

it is blue. 87

(III

37)

If [a person is] expert [in reasoning],

it is impossible that

he

not follow some tenets.

There

are two ways for persons whose minds have been trained in

not to affirm theses (pratijfia):

affirm.

reasoning

deceitfully not to affirm and truthfully not

to

[An example of] the first is the Sa~hya [philosopher] who argues, "Com-

posite [things
another,"

such

as

the eyes and other sense organs] exist for

the~

use

thus deviously affirming a "use of another" that they do not [in

of

fact]

maintain, while not [expressly] maintaining the really intended [thesis], which is
that the
atman].88
thesis
tain,

sense organs function for the sake of self [i.e. for the sake of an
Or [another example of such deception] is the Carvakas, who assert a

that they do not maintain,

while not affirming what they [in fact] . main-

such as in the argument formulation of "possessing a second" (sadvitIyapra-

.Y.2.!@).89

[These views] the Acarya Asanga declared to be "devious theories.,,90

[Another group is] the Vatsl.putdyas who make no affirmation,

self

[i.e.

[theory]

the

the

pudgala] is unstateable as permanent and

Arya

[Asanga] called "a non-affirming theory,,92

within "mistaken theories.,,93

saying

impermanent. ,,91
and

included

"The
This
it

342

second [way of not affirming],

The

not to affirm [any thesis] truthfully,

94
for the real nature

is the correct theory of the Madhyamaka if one understands,

of

things

pressing,

which

is free from discursive elaborations is beyond knowing

because it is not an object of language or mind. 95

or

For as it is

exsaid

[in the Vimalaklrtinirdesa]:

The son of the Conqueror remains without speaking.
explains at great length. 96

Not speaking itself

And as [Nagarjuna] said in the Ratnavall [I 61b-62d]:

Ask

the

people in the world--the

together

Sa~hya,

the Aulukya

thing going beyond existence and non-existence.

know

(Vaise~ika?),

with the Nirgrantha (Jaina ascetics)--if they maintain

that

the

teaching

Therefore one

of "the profound immortal

doctrine

which is beyond existence and non-existence" [po

special wealth of the Dharma. 97

Buddhas

someshould
of

the"

130] is

the

Therefore the non-Buddhist sectarian who while possessing affirmations deceitfully

denies

them is like a thief who does not admit [his crime].

The Madhyamika

who

does not affirm is like one who has not stolen and who does not admit [any crime].

Thus there is a great difference. 98

(III 38,39)

If there is no maintaining of any affirmation whatsoever,

examination

two [ways of not affirming] will emerge.

under

If they are not main-

tained because [ultimate reality] is free from discursive elaborations,

will be the Madhyamaka tenet if it is understood.
himself

to

affirm [his theses] even though he has

that

If [someone] cannot bring

some,

his

[theory]

is

explained as a deceitful speculative view.

That was a summarizing verse.

(III 40)

Some maintain philosophical tenets that are an

dissimilar

tenets.

should

individually refuted.

them.

be

If

[any of the combined tenets]

are

intermingling
defective,

If they have no defect one should

of
they

follow

343

Some people combine and affirm various different tenets.

maintain

For example, some

the simultaneous apprehension of a sense-object by [sensory]

combining

the

Vaibha~ika

and Sautrantika.

Vijnapti system,
matra

saying [they are] followers of the Mind-Only [i.e.

Yogacara] who have affirmed external objects. 99 And some

or

Sautrantika
(.!!!.!!Q. sde
form

and

a]

Madhyamaka,

cognition,

And some combine the Sautrantika

the

combine

resulting in a "Madhyamika who follows the

and

*Cittathe

Sutras"

pa'i dbu !!!2. ~, and some combine the Mind-Only and Madhyamaka [to
100
Those who maintain such [combinations] as the

Yogacara-Madhyamaka.

131] to refute such defects [i.e. incompatible

and if there is no defect [of
101
incompatibility] one should accept [those tenets] with a mind of rectitude.

above

should use reasoning [po

tenets]

as

exist

(III 41)
two:

in those [combined systems],

The

Buddhist

philosophical tenets that are adhered to by learned men

and

non-Buddhist sectarian.

[Anything] besides

those

are
are

[fictitious] tenets that have been haphazardly considered by fools.

in

the

The Buddhist tenets pacify the sufferings of Cyclic Existence and place one
102 They affirm direct perception [as the means
bliss of the Saints.

cognizing]
scriptures
hidden

manifest phenomena, inference for [cognizing] hidden phenomena, and

which are not falsified by reasoning for [the cognition of] completely

phenomena.

They

are something adhered to by learned men who

have

con-

sidered it thoroughly; they are a resting place [resorted to] by the world of men
together with the gods.
As

for

the non-Buddhist Indian sectarian [tenets],

they were

previously

cultivated since a long time ago [and] have been thoroughly considered through the
fully

developed discriminative understanding of the ordinary individual

iana).

They are based on the path of the person in the world.

', " "1

(prthag-

To a small extent

they are capable of discerning the suitable and unsuitable for ordinary people who
103 And they are something that is worthy of
are concerned only with this life.
refutation by learned persons.
refute.

Thus

BUddhist

But

these
new

two

are suitable as objects for learned persons to

philosophical tenets which are other than [Buddhist

prove
and

or

';I

non-

'ri

sectarian] and which were fabricated by ignorant persons are

empty of reasoning [and] in contradiction with the scriptures.
[They are] falsehoods

Indian

concocted by "non-virtuous friends" [i.e.

I!

Ii

'l

sham spiritual teachers] for the

!I'

sake of [acquiring] the necessities of life, [and they are] tenets upheld as their
own by fools out of desire and hatred.
source,

!,'

But since they originate from no authentic

they are indeed unworthy of refutation or proof.

Nevertheless, if errors

'!

II

Iil
I'1

:,

I:I
lll

111

:I:!

344

spread excessively like weeds [growing] in a field, they will hurt the doctrine of
the Buddha.

Consequently, one should appropriately refute them by means of scrip-

ture and reasoning. 104

For even if passionate and angry fools do not

understand,

it will be understood by learned men who dwell in rectitude. [po 132]

(III 42)

Here

in the Land of Snows there also exist many tenets of

that are different from [Buddhist and non-Buddhist Indian sectarian

fools

tenets].

Because fools can easily understand [those], learned men have usually ignored
them.
That was an intermediate verse.

(III 43)

Within the Indian non-Buddhist sectarians there are five [schools]

of speculative dialecticians:
Aulukya

(Vaise~ika),

(4)

(1) the *Vaidika

K~apa?aka

(Mlma~sa),

(2)

Sa~hya,

(3)

(Jaina), and (5) Carvaka.

Although there are inconceivably many speculative views of the non-Buddhist

sectarians (Tlrthikas),

in the [Madhyamakahrdaya

ka] they were summarized into one hundred. 105

!I!!i] Tarkajvala [of Bhavavive-

If one summarizes those,

they [can

be

reduced to] the universally recognized five classes of speculative dialecti106

cians.
And [as for] those, [the following terms] are synonyms [and refer to
the Mlma~sa-Vedanta]:
"Followers of the Veda (*Vaidika: ..!l&. byed ..2!!.) which was established from the
beginning"
"Followers of the old"

(Purva-[MIma~sa]?)

"Followers of the secretly spoken" (Tib.:

"Followers of Jaimini" (Jaimintya)

bar smra ba ..2!!.) 107

Mlma~saka

Smarta
Brahma (Brahma-mlma~saka?

A branch of the Uttara-mlma~sa or Vedanta)108

[The following terms] are synonyms:

Sa~hya

Kapila ("Followers of Kapila")

"Followers

of the self-originated" (Tib.:

rang skye ba)

"Follm. . ers of the thirty [categories]" (Tib.:

sum cu ..2!!.)

345

'ip
nd

The

term

"followers

of Prabhakara" (Tib.:

gsal byed ,ill!) is

according

Sa~~ya.109

context an accepted designation for either the *Vaidika or the

[The following terms] are synonyms [and refer to the

to

the

&

don

Nyaya-Vaise~ika]:

Auliikya ("followers of the doctrine of Uluka")

KaJ].ada ("followers of the doctrine of KaI}ada")

ol

s]

VaiSe~ika

Naiyayika

re

"Those who follow the six categories [of the

drug

VaiSe~ika]"

.m0

(Tib.: tshig

[The following terms] are synonyms [and refer to the Jaina school]:
K~apal}aka

("fasters")

"Followers of the

"Those who follow the nine categories" (Tib.: tshig & don

~~abha

Jina" (Tib.:

.E.&E!. ba dam

Aji vika [?] (Tib.: srog & sde tshan

.I!.!! ba)

.m0

ill. .I!.!!)

Nirgrantha ("those freed from hindrances"; Tib.: 'dzem med .I!.!!)

Nagna ("naked mendicant"; Tib.: gcer bu

.m0

Digambara ("sky-clad"; Tib.: ~ ill ~ can)

"Space-clad" (Tib.: ~ mkha 'i ~ can, another possible rendering of Dig-

'

ambara?)
Those

four

[main] schools are called "propounders of

eternalism"

because

they

maintain that moral causation is true.

[The following terms] are synonyms [and refer to the Materialist school]:
Carvaka
Lokayata
Uccheda-dH~ika

("adherents of the theory of annihilation")

Nastika ("deniers, nihilists")

Barhaspatya

("followers

of

Brhaspati"

[the

originator

of

the

Lokayata

aphorisms]) [po 133]

"Asserters that nattire is the [only] cause" (Tib.: .!!8.Q. bo nyid .!:8.Y.!!f. ~ ba)
Some Tibetans say the Lokayata adherent (Tib.: ~~.I!.!!) is so called because
he does not maintain the existence of previous or subsequent lives.
[Those
Tibetans] are simply ignorant of the Sanskrit etymological meaning of lokayata

(~~~, and since [this explanation of theirs] is not recognized by

learned, it is of no consequence. IIO

the

I,

----------~.

II
I!i"

346

and

The teaching of [the ways of] the warrior class (K~atriya) as a doctrine
other such teachings also arose based on this [materialistic philosophy]. III

Because these [materialists] deny moral causation,

they are called "proponents of

annihilation."

In that way those five schools of dialecticians are also

together into two classes: eternalists and annihilationists. 112

(III 44)

The first three adhere to the Vedas.

The latter two reject

Vedas.

They all agree on the existence of a self.

theory they are dissimilar.
Thus

the first three of the five schools of

Sa~hya

the

In other particulars of

dialecticians--the

*Vaidika,

and Aulukya--take the Vedas to be a sound means of knowledge.

Sa~hya

the *Vaidika and

grouped

say that the Vedas were not made,

Even

so,

but came into being of

themselves, after which Brahma became aware of them and uttered them from his four
mouths.

The

Ka~adas (Vai~e~ikas) hold that they were composed by Isvara.

cordingly those three philosophical systems take as their deities Brahma,

and Vi~~u.113

Nevertheless,

AcI~vara,

they receive [only] the name of [the god] they

chosen as their tutelary deity: they have become known by such names as

have

*Brahma~a,

*Aisvara (Saiva),

and Vai~~ava, just as Buddhists who meditate on different tute114

lary deities become known by that [deity's] name.
[Question:]

If

all those three take the Vedas to

be

sound means

knowledge, why are they not all placed in the [single class] "Vaidika"?
There is [some] truth in that.
the

*Vaidikas

while the

and

be an authority,

All

arise

the

particular
doctrinal

Vaibha~ika,

maintain

expounded

while the [other Bud-

Mind-Only, and Madhyamaka--were named according to

sectarians agree on positing a

that the self is permanent,

self

(atman),

[The

statement]

however many non-Buddhist sectarian theories there are,

the positing of a self was also stated with this in
features

for

and the annihilationists

existent self is annihilated [at death].

that
from

themselves,

emphasize the sages (is) who

only the Sautrantikas received that name,

non-Buddhist

eternalists
that

Ka~ada (Vaise~ika)

Just so, even though in general [all] Buddhists consider the Sutras to

dhist schools]--the
other reasons. lIS

Asanga

they got their respective names because

(Mimiamsa-Vedanta) give the primary place to the Vedas

Sa~hya

the Vedas.

However,

of

[Answer:]

of the [non-Buddhist systems of]

tenets,

mind.
[such

by

and its fruit, are seen to be different.

Acarya

[they]
116
as]

formulations about moral cause and effect and about the spiritual

the
hold
all
Other
their
path

347

(III 45)

There are many instances of Tibetan dialecticians having

the arrangement of this.

confused

Therefore one should not hold as true the treatises

they have promulgated.

There

indeed exist many [arrangements of] tenets that have been formulated

by some Tibetan religious scholars.

But those [scholars], not having studied the

doctrinal systems of the major scriptures,

cians

of

tween

the subdivisions of the school],

dialecticians
of a

have blundered by arranging

dialecti-

a single school separately on the basis of the mutual refutations

[those of different schools] based on the reason of mere

tenet.

For example,

[be-

and by arranging into a single school

the Sravaka and Mahayana,

and also the

of

agreement
Vaibha~ika,

Sautrantika,

Mind-Only and Madhyamaka, even though they refute each other, are to

be included

within

[po 135]

the single grouping

"Buddhist,"

without

being

separated.

And the same is the case with the schools of dialecticians, which are to

be kept separate because even though there may be agreement between a few
of mentalistic schools,
schools,

or

even though there may be similar terminology [such as] the

Lokayata,

and

entities,"

"inference recognized by others" (gzhan la grags pa'i rjes

Madhyamaka-Prasangika's

"emptiness" (stong ~ nyid:

mentioning

"refutation

Vijfiapti[vada] ,
l18

and NiQsvabhavavada (Madhyamaka).

divisions

of

Mlma~sa,

existent

~),

sunyata), [in fact] their meanings are different.

(III 46) The Buddhists have four systems of tenets:

several

tenets

[i.e. between] some Vedantins and the Jaina and Mind-Only

of tenets exist.

For a

or
117

Sautrantika,

Vaibha~ika,

As to their subdivisions,

detailed

[description]

one

should refer to [my] Analysis of Tenets (Grub mtha' !lli!!!!. ~ .119

Among the scriptures of the Sugata there are two [main divisions]:
and Mahayana.

The Sravaka has two [branches]:

Mahayana has two [branches]:

has

two

[sub-schools]:

Mind-Only (Yogacara) and Madhyamaka.

Sakara

Sravaka

Vaibha~ika and Sautrantika.

("possessing a cognitive

image")

The

The Mind-Only
and

Nirakara

("without a cognitive image").

The Madhyamaka has two [sub-schools]: Svatantrika
and Prasangika. 120
For [details about] their subdivisions one should refer to
[my] Analysis of Tenets (Grub mtha' !:ill!!!!. 'byed).

(III 47,48)

If the two [debaters] affirm tenets, first they should determine

the basic subject of debate. 121

If one debates with non-Buddhist

sectarians

348

and Sravakas who maintain external objects,

affirm

external objects.

If not,

one should [for the moment also]

it will be hard to find an occasion

for

debate because the basic subject of debate is not in accord. [po 136]
What

[Dharmakirti]

explaining

the

doctrine,

meant

was that on an occasion when two

truth or falsity of tenets for the sake of

debaters

upholding

their

are
own

one is debating with ~ravakas of non-Buddhist sectarians who affirm

external objects as real, one should adopt the Sautrantika system. 122 Because if
one

if

denies

[or negates] physical objects when establishing sensory cognition

non-conceptual, . etc.,
occasion

for

the debate on the immediate topic will be put off.

as

But an

debate will be easily established if one posits such things as

the

[similar cognitive image] that is produced [immediately afterward] by the force of

the object. 123

The

Blessed

One

too affirmed external objects

in

the

Sutras,

for

as

[Dharmakirti] said in the Pramaoa-varttika [III 219]:

Therefore,

looking

[at

objects]

in the way that an

elephant

[seemingly] overlooking the ultimate reality of objects,

engaged

in investigation of external objects,

[the

with [his] mind

does,
Buddha]
solely

[directed toward how] ordinary people in the world [view objects].124

It

is traditionally said that Dharmakirti,

in order to make the intended meaning

of that fully [plain], declared:

But when engaging in external objects,
the Sautrantika. 125

I base [myself] on the level of

Having cut off the limbs of the debate which is based on external objects, for the
sake of cutting its root [Dharmakirti, PY'III 360 and PYin I 51, said]:126
Entities

do

not

exist in reality because of

that

very

[reasoning]

through which one investigates entities.

This is because those [enti127

ties] do not have a single or plural nature.
[Objection:]
sence

of

When external entities are thus negated by [the reason of] the
128
oneness and manyness,
the logical reason of that [argument] is

established.
ly]

have

not

[Reply:] The similar [cognitive image] that is produced [secondari-

(skyes la 'dra ba) of the Sautrantikas is also not established when

objects

ab-

been

negated

through a proof by means of

the

reasoning

external
of

the

349

simultaneous

conjunction

of six [atoms].129

For as [Dharmaklrti] said

in

the

passage beginning [PY III 353b-d]:

Someone may ask,

"How could there be the apprehension of objects by that ap-

pearance-possessing [cognition] for which there does not exist any real
entity [as its] object?" That is true.
I too do not know [how that could
be] so.130
On this

occasion the [reasoning of] being devoid of oneness and

manyness

is

reasoning of just the Mind-Only,

while those who maintain that it is a Madhyamaka

131
tradition simply miss the point of this passage in the text.
[Objection:]

created

by Isvara.

appearance]

arises

Granted that this appearance [of an external world] was

IJ

not

[But] if one negates atoms, it will be the case that [this

132
without a cause.
[Reply:]
There
is
no
[such]

inconsistency, because as it is said in the DasabhUmika Sutra:

o sons

133

of the Conqueror, these three world-realms are merely mind.

And as it is said in the Lankavatara Sutra:

The mind which is agitated by latent propensities
appearance as objects.
There are no objects.
It is just the mind.
"
134
obJects
1S erroneous.
If one

establishes

refutes

[the

evolves

The seeing of

the sense of those statements by

means

[Doubt:]

of

negating

Because

one has thus negated

external

the apprehended [i.e.

[po 138]

Because there is no apprehended [object],

apprehender. 136

refuting

one

a : separate

concomitance
the

of

[mental]

[Reply:]

the "objective"] part [of perception],

[subject] that apprehends it is also negated.

Therefore

reasoning,

objects,

[of things] as apprehended [objects] is not acceptable.

the

external

contention] that the objective part [of perception] is

external object by means of such [reasoning] as the necessary

, 1taneous apprehension. 135
Slmu
appearing

into

the

By
very

For as [Yasubandhu] said:

for that there

exists

no

pure

experience is established by self-referential awareness.

By
apprehended [object] and apprehending [subject] through reasoning that
I'

i ,'
;,

,I

;:11;,
"II

1i,1

'II,

,;1,:
,"

350

" ive ground"~ng, 137 non- dua1 awareness ~s

"b
l "~s he d
has 0 bJect
esta
kirti] said [in PVin I 38]:
The

mind has no other thing to experience.

For it,

For as

[Dharma-

there exists

no

other experiencer.

Because apprehended [object] and apprehending [sub138

ject] do not exist, [the mind] thus illuminates itself.

Therefore [Dharmakirti's] intended meaning was that this very [non-dual awareness]
is

the

from

basis of Cyclic Existence (sawsara) and Extinction (nirv8Qa) which arise

being

mistaken or not,

through the power of understanding

or

not

under-

standing.
Therefore,

having established "mental cognition" (vijnapti), the basis for

transactional usage, [now] for the sake of establishing the ultimate truth that is
beyond

transactional

usage [we consider the following]:139

In

the

Lankavatara

Sutra it is said:
And

having gone beyond "mind-only," one should apply [oneself] to that

140

which is without appearance.

And in the Pramapavarttika [II 252cd, 253ab] [Dharmakirti] said:

[The

Buddha] taught the meditation on suffering with the suffering

of

conditionality in mind.
[According to] our [school], that [suffering]
was born from the conditions [of the klesas]. That [production through
141
conditions] too is a support for the theory of no-self.
And in the Yuktisastika [v. 12, Nagarjuna] said:
That

unwise

entity

[po

conditions.

142

man who imagines the birth of even

139]

does

not

perceive

the

Therefore non-dual awareness itself is dependent,

tions.

And

since

birth

from

an

sense

extremely
of

birth

subtle
out

of

momentary, and born from condi-

conditions itself is the

absence

of

[genuine,

independent] birth, [only] that which is birthless and free from discursive developments is established in ultimate truth. For as it is said in the Anavataptanagarajapariprccha Sutra:

351

Anything born from conditions is not born.

:-

nature

that

emptiness.

is born.

For it there does not exist

That which is dependent

He who understands emptiness is prudent.

on
143

conditions

is

i f one well understands "mental cognition" (vijnapti), one will under-

Therefore,

stand the undistorted reality of the Madhyamaka.

oka. 145
of the aut hor 0 f t he Pramanavartt~

144

That was the intended meaning

'
(III 49)
objective
f

When one discerns external objects, the Sautrantika tenets have

grounding. 146
Therefore all the basic treatises of all [great]

scholars possess such [tenets as their basis].

When

one

engages

external objects,

in [investigations wherein one

provisionally

accepts]

what the non-Buddhist sectarians maintain--cognition of a sense

object through a connection of inherence (samavaya) [i.e. of a quality in the

object which comes in contact with the sense organ]147 __and what the Vaibha~ikas
maintain--cognition
faculty--are
disproves
opinion

not

them.

of

the

object

acceptable,
[But]

through

simultaneous

object

for there exists a sound means of

and

sense

knowledge

there does exist proof and there is no disproof

of

that
the

maintained by the Sautrantikas that there is birth of cognition from four

conditions,

such

as the object,

sense faculty,

import of the statement in a Sutra:

ocular cognition

is born.,,149

and attention,148 which is

the

"Based on the eye, taking form as its object,

[po

140]

Consequently this is a sound means

knowledge that possesses objective grounding.

Therefore this is the reason

of
that

all [great] scholars such as the Acerya Asahga and his brother [Vasubandhu],
Dignaga, and Dharmakirti composed their doctrinal formulations of scripture and
reasoning based on the Sautrantika.

(III 50)
of

the

In this regard,

[certain] Tibetans proclaim that [some]

Mind-Only asserted external objects.

entity, 150

this

is

impossible.

followers

[But] just like a

[Those who assert external

permanent

objects]

are

Simply to be included within the Sautrantika.

[Certain]

Tibetans

maintain that those texts which affirm

objects and mind--the treatises of the higher [i.e.

the
[This]

both

Jlbhidharmasamuccaya--are Mind-Only [texts] that assert external

is

unacceptable,

for

if the [theory] is

external

Mahayana] Abhidharma such as

mind-only

(Tib.:

objects. 151

~ ~:

352

cittamatra)

it is incompatible with the affirmation of external objects,

one affirms external objects that is incompatible with the Mind-Only.

example, just like affirming a permanent entity.
it

is not possible that it be an object,

not possible that it be permanent.

virtue

if

For if [something] is permanent,

[and] if [something] is an entity it is

Therefore [here] it is simply the case that by

of their not knowing well the Sautrantika tenets,

speak of "followers of the Mind-Only who have affirmed

(III 51)

and

It is, for

When external objects are being negated,

jnapti) is objectively grounded.

[such

persons]

rashly

external objects."

"mental cognition" (..y!=.

When reality is being determined, [po 141]

the reasons of the Madhyamaka are objectively grounded.

Therefore,
sons]

[the rea152
the Mind-Only [such as] "the absence of oneness and manyness,"
"the
"
,,153 an d" t h e reason 0 f ["I
concomitance 0 f simu1taneous appre h enSl0n,
1 -

of

necessary
lumination

at the time when external objects are being negated,

and] awareness,,,154 as well as reasons based on scripture such as

the

different appearances of a single object [to beings of different karmas], all have
objective grounding.
But

when ultimate reality is being determined,

the reasoning of the

Sva-

tantrika-Madhyamaka such as the "vajra-particle" <..!:..!! ill ~ ~ and the "negation of the 'tetralemma' (catuskoti) of birth" (.!!!!:!. bzhi skye ..B)155 and the
reasonings
proven"

of

the Prasangika such as the "[unestablished] like the thing

(sadhyasama)156

and

the "[analogous reasoning through] a

158

like

to

be

reason"

(*hetusama)157 have objective grounding.

(III 52)

Some

grounding.

say that if one affirms tenets,

That is not so.

there exists

no

objective

If there were no objective grounding, how would

the negating and establishing of [anything by] reasoning be feasible?

Some
ignorant

Tibetans say that when one bases oneself on tenets one merely

and capricious fabrications through the desire and hatred

that

utters
[arises

from]

maintaining one's own opinion, and that tenets based on scripture have no
objective grounding. 159 This is not acceptable.
[To say so] is to detract from

the Lord Buddha,

scripture

saintly individuals and learned persons, because tenets based on

follow them.

Therefore,

if tenets have no objective grounding coming

into play in their respective contexts, there will be no capability of negating or

establishing [anything] with respect to that context. 160
For example, for

353

individuals

of similar experience of appearances [according to their]

such things as water and fire appear,

tion

karma,

if

just that sound cognition by direct percep-

of [their characteristics of] quenching or burning has objective

But for others whose karmas do not agree,

grounding.

such as for hungry ghosts (pretas), [po

161
[For them] what is

142] such things as water do not have objective grounding.

objectively grounded is just whatever they experience themselves.

Accordingly,
[entities]

are

if

one affirms [the existence of] entities,

impermanent

the proof

that

through [the reason] that they are fabricated [or]

162
But how could the proof that [an entity] is

existent has objective grounding.

impermanent

because it is fabricated [or] existent have objective grounding for a

Madhyamika?

[The Madhyamika] does not affirm either existence or non-existence as

the characteristic of [a subject] whose "entityness" is not

all

factors of existence (dharmas) are without own-natures.

established, because
163
For as it is said

in the Mother (i.e. the Prajfiaparamita):

o Sariputra,

where there does not exist mind,

is there anything to be

objectively apprehended as something like existent or non-existent?164

And as it is said in the Prajfiaparamita Ratnagu9asawcayagatha [V lc]:
[If a Bodhisattva] expounds impermanence,

feit. 165
'
L1 k
eWlse
will

[he] deals with the counter-

. 166 an d
t he reasons t hat are base d on causa 1 lty

have

different objective grounding according

to

' 16
non-appreh
enslon
different

too

experienced

appearances [of external reality] and [different] tenets.

Moreover,
organs

though

for

ordinary beings of mundane vision

the

engaging their own separate objects has objective grounding,

fi ve

who has transcendental vision the five sense organs engage all objects.
time] the very thing described in the Mahayanasutralawkara [IX 41] is
grounded:
When

they]

engage

all objects,

and there arise

hundred good qualities for all [the senses].

wealth [of the two kayas].168
Therefore
ferences

[At that
objectively

the five sense organs are transformed [through the attainment

Buddhahood,

between

since

the objective

the

sense

for a Buddha

of

twelve-

One attains the excellent

grounding is different according

[various beings'] karma and [between] individuals,

you

to

difshould

354

discern [in every context] what is and is not objectively groundedl

[Doubt:]
different,
because

The system of the surface-level and [po 143] ultimate truth

and

it

therefore

while the ultimate is beyond knowledge and

is free from discursive developments,

objectively

grounded

negation and

[can] operate. [only] with regard to the

are

expression

proof

that

are

surface-level [of
169
[Answer:]

truth] since [the latter] is the object of knowledge and expression.

That being so,
play

the stages of non-Buddhist sectarian and Buddhist tenets come into

concerning the acceptability or non-acceptability of just the surface level,

[including] such [topics] as the existent and non-existent, the permanent and noninsensible material things and mind, and apprehended object and appre-

permanent,

hending subject.
And regarding those [different stages of tenets], if the nonBuadhist sectarian affirms a self that partakes of objects, for him there is
nothing

suitable

meaning

[of

besides that reasoning of his.

Dharmakirti?]

schools]--the

Vaibha~ika's

And accordingly

was that the positions maintained

by

the

intended

[the

Buddhist

"apprehension through simultaneously [occuring]

organ and object," the Sautrantika's "production of cognition that

objects through four conditions,,,170 the Mind-Only adherent's "pure
[that

is]

non-dual

habitual
[arising]

and

which appears as external [objects]

the

Madhyamika's

"appearance

of

because

of

interdependent

for that which lacks an own-nature,"--[are objectively grounded each in

their own contexts].

one's

cognition,

propensities,"

sense

apprehends
experience

own

In the affirming of one's own system, that very reasoning of

situation--that very reasoning which is immediately

appropriate with

reference to that context--is [held to be] objectively grounded,

for to reason in

a way that is mixed up [with other contexts or systems] is to wander in error.

For example, in activities such as farming in different places and seasons,
[each

activity] will be successfully realized through its own system of practice,

171
whereas if one mixes them up one will not succeed.
The Buddha's teaching of
different classes of scripture according to the particular mental dispositions [of
different creatures] was also done with that in mind.
[Objection:]
Even though one should stay within the
context of one's own [school],
scholars
grounded.

is

mistaken,

while

reasoning

of

the

still, whatever becomes destroyed when examined by

whatever

[remains]

undestroyed

is

objectively

[Reply:] In that case, [po 144] reasoning that is objectively grounded

would be impossible to express.

For whatever is established as the object of mind

172
Nothing is [then] suitable but

becomes,

upon examination,

liable to faults.

silence.

For as it is said in the Sutra of the Licchavi [i.e. the Vimalakirtinir-

desa] :
The

Son of the Conqueror remains in silence.

173

greatly.

Silence itself explains

355

And in the

Pramanavarttika [III 209]:

"However one examines [objects], just so [do they] disintegrate."

[reasoning]
stated
174
'
groun d l.ng.

by

learned

persons

issues

from

That

objective

Therefore since nothing whatsoever is established if examined by reasoning that is

objectively

grounded,

ultimately one should adopt the behavior of

[Vimalakirti]

the Licchavi.

(III 53)

And with regard to reasoning there are two types.

the other group,

means
many

of knowledge,

and [they maintain] separate definitions for those

differences in [their] divisions and classifications.

are well known as being erroneous, here I shall

Also
group--the

with

regard to the system of reasoning,

Buddhists--and

From among those two,

that

scripture

ledge,

and

that

not explain them.

there

are

the other group--the non-Buddhist

inference,

and

But since these

two:

Indian

our

own

sectarians.

the early Buddhists maintained that there were three

direct perception,

of knowledge:

The tradition of

the non-Buddhist sectarians [is that there are] one or many

means

and scripture; whereas Dignaga held

that is incompatible with reasoning is not a true means of

if scripture is not falsified by reasoning and [po 145] is

knownot

mutually contradictory, it is a means of knowledge, though it should be included

within inference. 175 For as [Dharmakirti] said in the Pramanavarttika [I 216]:
Even

though

from

the general [classes of manifest and hidden phenomena

the object of trustworthy words [of scripture] is

hidden

cognizable

by the] infallible [means of knowledge], because there is no opportunity [to cognize a "completely hidden" phenomena otherwise],
tion

the

cogni-

[that understands through scriptures] is held to be the means

knowledge, inference. 176

of

The non-Buddhist sectarians maintain that there are one, three, four, five,
177
six or more sound means of knowledge.
But since these [opinions] are univer11
sa y known to be erroneous, here I have not elaborated on them 178

356

(III 54)
tion

Our own faction holds the Buddha to be an authority.

of logico-epistemology] has two [schools],

early

[school],

viveka,179
[from the

which

That [tradi-

an early and a

included such [scholars] as

later.

Vasubandhu

and

The

Bhava-

though in fact being without error, was nevertheless different

later school] with respect to some differences of division and

classification, and in its manner of expressing [a formally stated inference].

Those early scholars in actual fact were without error.
exist

of knowledge,

their internal divisions and classifications,

pression [of the formal argument].

of knowledge were held to exist:
And

ex-

They maintained a system in which three means

inference, and scripture. 180
~

grub

~)

classified

three

futile

[classes].181
Also [the early logicians] employed
182
statement of proof.
[po 146]

rejoinders

five-membered

The later [Buddhist logicians] such as Dignaga and Dharmakirti 183

(III 55)
were

means

and the form of

direct perception,

Vasubandhu in his Vadavidhi (Rtsod

into

Nevertheless there

differences [with the later logicians] regarding the number of sound

superior to the early school with respect to such things as the

[of sound means of knowledge],

number

differences of divisions and classifications,

and the "expansiveness in brevity" regarding the form in which [their

formal

argument] was expressed.

The

later

scholars

such as Dignaga determined that the

knowledge were two in number;

it

conflicts

means

of

and if it does not conflict [with reasoning] it

184
[should be] included within inference.
And as for the differences of divisions

and

with

sound

scripture [for them] is not a means of knowledge if

classifications,

reasoning,
such

logical

relations (sambandha) as

(karya-karaQa) were included within [the two]:

(tadutpatti).185

cause

identity (tadatmya) and

and

effect

causation

They did not classify futile rejoinders into three classes,

for

as the sutra [i.e. the Prama9asamuccaya] says:

In the Va david hi [of Vasubandhu] three types [of futile rejoinders] are
explained

with reference to the futile rejoinders [taught by the

Buddhist dialecticians]: inverted, untrue, and contrary.

186
this, one cannot differentiate [them in this way].
Also,

the

method by which [the early logicians] set forth [their]

five members.

To give an example:

non-

Regarding

argument

had

357

(1) There exists a fire on the pass

(2) for there exists smoke,
(3) as in a kitchen.

[Thesis]

. [Reason]

[Example]

(4) Smoke exists also on the pass.

[Application]

(5) Therefore fire exists [on the pass].

This

[Conclusion] 187

is unacceptable, because the expression of pervasion (vyapti) of the reason

188
[i.e. "wherever there is smoke there is fire"] is not com-

by the predicate
plete,

and the thesis (pratijna), application (upanaya) and conclusion (nigamana)

are redundant. 189

Therefore [their] statements of argument were

"expansive

in

brevity,,,190

which means that because they formulated [their argumentation] in

two-membered

form--the expression of the pervasion of the reason by the predicate

and the statement of the presence of the reason in the subject

dharmata)191_-the dialectic of the later [logicians] was supreme.

(paksa-

And regarding the later persons who based themselves on the basic texts of
Dharmakirti:

(III 56)

I have seen two debating procedures.

moved

thorns" from the reason after having set forth his

the

proof.

[po 147]

Dharmaklrti "re-

statement
192
He held that [to do] otherwise was a defeat situation.

As [Dharmakirti] said in his

Vadany~ya,193

after one has set forth a fault-

less statement of proof for whatever the present context of debate is,
"remove the thorns,,194 [Le.
as follows:
This logical
subject.

mark

It is not contrary
instances.
It is not uncertain
instances.

is

one should

show the absence of a fallacious reason by

not unestablished (asiddha) for it is

(viruddha),

for

(anaikantika),

it

of

is

established

for it is

absent

from

seen
in

stating]
in

the

homogeneous
heterogeneous

A proponent who does not remove the three thorns through such a procedure is in a
defeat situation. 195
After the fallacies of the reason have been negated, the
respondent's statement of rebuttal should begin, he taught. 196

(III 57)
reason

Some later scholars of reasoning in their statements of the logical

[during debate] "removed the thorns" [i.e.

negated the fallacies

of

358

the

reason]

[only]

after

the respondent had

stated

the

logical

fault.

Tibetans debate in general in agreem~nt with that [method].197

It

is related that a debate once took place between a scholar of

Vikrama-

8i1a and an Eastern Indian (Bahga1a) Brahmin, in which a king who knew grammar and
logic acted as a witnessing arbiter.
Brahmin

At that time the opinion maintained by

was that the sound of the Veda was permanent,

Buddhist advanced the thesis that it was impermanent.

what reason is it not permanent?"
of proof:
that
not

''Whatever exists is non-permanent,

"Remove

the

answered,
without
need
I'

fault?"

of that logical markl"

is

the

tice

Sound too exists."

[po 148]

The

[Buddhist]

paI.lqita
which

is

for

the

since he did not know the reason

sat there [silently],

To
have

the latter said to the Buddhist,

need to remove the thorns of my logical mark

At that the Brahmin,

to remove the thorns,

reply.
I

as a pot.

"The 'thorns' of that logical mark

Since the king was witness,

thorns

"What

The Brahmin inquired, "For

[In reply] the Buddhist set forth the statement

the Brahmin remarked in criticism,

been removed."

the

and in that connection the

having lost the confidence

to

Since then most proponents have adhered to that procedure, and many praca

system [of debate] that includes such things as not removing

the

thorns

have seen that the debating [practice] of Tibetan dialecticians,

who do

regarding the logical mark.

I

not know the system of the Vadanyaya, is also always to engage in the respondent's
statement of faults without [the proponent] having removed the thorns with
I,

regard

to the logical mark.

(III 58)

Since this procedure is not what was maintained by Dharmakirti, it

198

is difficult for it to be acceptab1e.

Since [Dharmakirti ] taught in the Vadanyaya that it is an occasion of

for the proponent if he does not remove the thorns with respect to the
199
statement of the logical mark [in his formal argument],
one should debate
defeat

having removed the thorns.

If [one does] otherwise,

it will be contrary to

the

intent of Dharmakirti.

(III 59)
Seven"

One

should

understand this sort of debating from the

[treatises by Dharmakirti] and from the Treasure of

pa'i gter).

"Group

Reasoning

of

(Rigs

359

[This

method of debating] is taught at great length in the Pramanavarttika

and the others of the

"Group of Seven" [PramaI}a] treatises [by Dharmakirti],

and

one should [also] understand this from the Treasure of Reasoning (Rigs pa'i gter)
~a

of my own composition, which summarizes the import of

"Group of Seven.,,200

Here I shall explain a little of the system [of debate]

(III 60)
easily understandable for beginners.

"
i

On

h
.

th~

this

answering,

occasion I shall explain a little of the way of

in

order

to

make

it easily understood by

which

is

questioning

beginners

at

and

debating.

[po 149]

(III 61)
topic.

If one questions, one should ask something that is pertinent to the

[One should] not [ask] simultaneously a large number [of questions].

r
The
single

sectarians

or two hundred of them,

hundred
of]

non-Buddhist

say that after the proponent

recites

in

continuous statement a [long] series of different purvapaksas such as

purvapaksas

a
one

the respondent [should] repeat that [long series

without mixing up their order.

Then

[the

refute [that] ordered series by means of [his] uttarapaksas.

respondent]

should

But if [the respon-

dent] is unable to state such [a long series] of purvapaksas, there will occur the
defeat situation called "not repeating.,,201 The intended meaning [of Dharmaklrti]
in the Vadanyaya is that although it is permissible to refute each purvapaksa that
is immediately relevant to the topic,
defeat
proof

to repeat irrelevant purvapakeas would be a

by the very fact that [to do so] is not a "branch" [i.e.

or refutation. 202

ask about

a statement]

Therefore even \I'hen the respondent questions,

a relevant topic of debate such as "Is sound permanent

or

non-perma-

But he should not ask many [questions] such as "Is it self-produced?"

nent?"
it made

by

a person?" [and so forth],

for to debate about

of

he should

latter

"Is

question

without determining the previous would make one's statement faulty.

[Objection:]
has

those exactly,
and
that

Some non-Buddhist sectarians say that after [the

strung together many purvapaksas,

the respondent,

[they

retain

will become mixed up and make mistakes when [attempting to] repeat

refute them in the order [that they were recited by the proponent].
way

proponent]

not being able to

hold that] the enumerating of many purvapakeas is

And
means

in
for

Causing the occurence of the defeat situation called "lacking the confident composure of mind [to reply].,,203

360

[Dharmakirti]

[Reply: ]
[others]

by

means

of trickery,

in the Vadanyaya said that even

if

this does not enable one to

uphold

one

defeats

tenets. 204

Therefore it is not [to be considered] the debate of a noble person.

(III 62)
debate

Even though many logical marks apply to one probandum [po 150],
one should not [state] many.

logical mark,

If the previous one is not

that is a defeat situation.

[a

in

sound]

If it is [a sound] logical mark,

[then to state] the latter brings about a defeat situation.

For

demonstrating that sound is impermanent there exist many logical marks

that are probans,

such as [that sound is] an existing entity,

cated,

and

those]

and should not state many others.

reason],

that it is the outcome of effort.

205

if

the

that it is

fabri-

But one should state only one [of

For [when one states more

than

one

earlier [reason] is not a [sound] logical mark there will be

defeat occasion through stating something that is not a probans.

Whereas if the
former [reason] is a [sound] logical mark, there is a defeat situation [because]
the statement of the latter [reason] is a redundancy, just as a statement of the
thesis [is redundant and unnecessary in Dignaga and Dharmaklrti's system].206

(III 63)

[In some cases where the

responde~t

says] such things as that the

subject is not established, if [the proponent] questions the reason, it [may]

be revealed as established.
[A respondent] may say,

"The subject is not established,,,207 when one

[as

the proponent posits] as one's subject an impossible subject such as the horn of a
~r~~~,208 ; or posits a su b ject tat,
h
hare or t he se 1 f (~
t houg h possi bl e, is not
from desire

established

by a sound means of knowledge, such as a demon's pot or the freedom

209
; or when a subject such as a mental direct perception or an [inde-

pendent],

non-contingent [entity] [is asserted] which, though established through

a means of knowledge, threatens to spoil the basic topic of debate if one states a
probans. 210 In that case, one should speak [in reply] as follows: "Is its being
unestablished merely words,
merely
[just
"There

on

or is there a reason for it?

account of [your] words,

my words if] I too say,

exists

If it is unestablished

then why is it not established by

'It is established'?"

If [the

a logical mark" [then one should reply],

means

respondent]

"Set forth that

mark."

If he sets forth a logical mark,

subject

such [unestablished] things as the horn of a hare or a demon's

and if he does not set forth

of

says,
logical

as
pot,

[his]
the

361

subject

will

be unestablished for the respondent too.

But if

[t~e

respondent]

does set forth [such unestablished things as his subject], that itself will be the
established subject of the proponent too.

Likewise [po 151] one should fittingly

apply and understand [this principle] in relation to other debates.

The master [Nagarjuna] maintained that when Madhyamikas debate

(III 64)

emptiness, all the replies of others are unestablished

211
things to be proven.

means

of

like

by
the

When a Madhyamika [in a debate] against those who maintain the existence of
entities negates such things as Isvara [the creator], insensate material objects,
or Vijnapti by means of such reasoning as the absence of production, at that time
[in]

all [those proofs]--the proof by the *Aisvara (Saiva) of [the existence

the creator

Isvara

by the putting forward of such things as

shapes

of]

[found

in

nature],212 and [in the putting forward of] "atoms" by the Sravaka and the positing of a probans for [the existence of] Vijnapti by the Mind-Only adherent 213 __
the probans is also unestablished just as the probandum is

unestablished.

though "they set forth something else for the sake of proving that
theirs],

it

is

similar

to that.

Even

[probandum

For as the master [Nagarjuna] said

[in

of
the

Mulamadhyamaka karikas IV 8]:

If one argues through emptiness, whoever claims to give a reply has not
replied at all, for [his probans] is like the thing to be proven. 214
Likewise

one

should apply and understand [this principle] with

regard

[Prasangika reasonings] as the "balancing through a like reason"

mtshungs pa' i !!!&.Q.. snyoms). 215

(III 65)

to

,I
: I

,I

such

(~ mtshan

Tibetans have three answers to [rejoinders given by the

respondent

in the form of] necessary consequences: they answer that the reason or the
pervasion is unestablished, or else that they are agreed in maintaining [the
consequence].
Tibetans have three answers to necessary consequences [in which the respondent attempts to refute the proponent's formal statement of proof]: If the reason
is absent from the subject, [po 152] [they answer], "The reason is unestablished."
To

both

contrary

and

uncertain

[reasons

they

answer],

"The

pervasion

is

.J :~I.
i

,Ii

III

'I

II

I,

I,:,

362

unestablished."
If [the consequence] is in accord with what
answer "Agreed.,,216

they

affirm,

they

(III 66)
In that case all logical defects of necessary consequences should
be [reduced to] "It is unestablished" alone.
[But] this was not taught in
the "Group of Seven [treatises of Dharmakirti].,,217
Why
Although

not

say "It is unestablished" to all

faulty

reasons?

[Objection: ]

in fact they are all subsumed within "not established," still

establishment

of

the

and

subject,

Consequently

the

non-

the reason is a fault regarding the absence of the reason

from

the non-establishment of pervasion is a defect

there

pervasion.

should be the two:

[Reply:] In such a case,

unestablished reason

of

and

pervasion.

unestablished

though the contrary and uncertain [reasons]

are both defects of pervasion, the contrary is where [the reason] has no occurence
whatsoever

in

homogeneous instances,

and the uncertain is

occurs also in heterogeneous instances.

where

[the

reason]

So why should there not be two [kinds of]

necessary consequences, called "contrary" and "uncertain"?

Therefore,
replies

if

one

subsumes

will be one and the same,

the answers under "unestablished,"

view, there will be three [replies that indicate logical faults].

tain."

taught three logical defects:

the
in

For that reason

[Dharmakirti] in the "Group of Seven [Treatises]" on the occasion of

debating

all

whereas if one divides them with a purpose

[explaining]

"unestablished," "contrary," and

"uncer-

But he did not make "the pervasion is unestablished" into one class.

For

as it was said [in PV I 15]:

And with regard to the three modes of the reason,
sity

he stated the neces-

that these [three must act] as the counteragents to [reasons that

are] unestablished,

of opposite content [Le.

neous [Le. "uncertain,,].218

"contrary"],

and erro-

[p.153]

(III 67)

[In

answer] to the statement of

contrary

consequence,

proponent

says] "What does it matter i f [the opposite of the original predi-

cate] is the case even if [the reason] exists?" the force of the
. 1e (
) goes awry. 219
part1c
~
[In
is

[if

the

conjunctive

answer] to statements of incompatible consequences such as "Because it

fabricated

it

follows that it is

permanent" or

"Because

smoke

exists it

363

follows

that

there is no fire," [in your tradition you] must say,

incompatibility

if [something] is non-permanent even if it

is not established."

pervasion

fire even if smoke also exists?

cases,

Or:

is

"What is

The

"What is the incompatibility if there exists

The pervasion is not established."

because the word kyang (here:

the

fabricated?

But in those

"even if") is a particle which causes

con-

junction, [the sense becomes]: "Even if 'fabricated' applies to both permanent and
non-permanent,

here it is non-permanent."

Or:

"Even if 'smoke' applies to both

the existence and non-existence of fire, here what is the incompatibility if it is

smoke which has a fire?" [The particle kyang] will be a particle of conjunction
[giving
fire."

the

sense]: "There is the consequence of smoke even in

Just as in the following example:

is

[sound]

an object of knowledge,

absence

it follows that it is permanent,"

tradition

you] must state [in reply]:

permanent

even if it is also an object of knowledge?"

the

of

When [the respondent] states, "Because

[in

your

"What is the incompatibility i f it is nonBut in that case the

word

acts as a particle that joins both "permanent" and "non-permanent" to "object

of knowledge."
Therefore

all

such modes of expression are manifestations of not

identi-

fying the force of the words because of not understanding grammar.

[Question:]

(III 68)

How do you reply to necessary consequences?

For

this there are the three [replies to

"unestablished," "contrary," and "uncertain."

[Answer:]

faulty

consequences]:

If it is none [of these three,

the reply is]: "What I maintain is established" [Le. "Agreed"].

If it is
none of those [four], it cannot be confuted because it is a sound logical
conseq uence 220 [p. 154]
We [maintain as follows]:
If [a respondent] says [to a proponent who
maintains that sound is impermanent because it is fabricated]: "[It follows that]
sound [is permanent,
sion

or anything else] because it is an object of sense-apprehen-

for the eye," [the proponent's reply is]:

the subject]."

Or if [the respondent] says:

because there is smoke,"

"The reason is unestablished

[in

"It follows that fire does not exist

[the reply is]: "[The reason] is contrary."

And i f [the

respondent] says, "It follows that [sound] is permanent because it is an object of

knowledge," [the reply is]:

"[The reason] is uncertain."

And i f [the respondent]

says, "It follows that [sound] is not permanent because it has been
[the proponent's reply is]: "I maintain that."
And
[the

fabricated,"

if to [a proponent] who maintains that fabricated things are permanent

respondent]

states,

"It follows that [sound] is permanent

because

it

is

364

fabricated," he cannot confute this because it is valid [as a consequence of

. . ] 221
posl.tl.on

Debating

(III 69)

Doctrine to flourish.

that

thus conforms with the Dharma is a cause

for

his

the

Since it is praised by the Noble Ones, learned persons

should excellently compose [such discourses].222

Proof

and

refutation

[that

are achieved] without

faults

of

sense

or

language for the sake of correct understanding of the Doctrine are a cause for the
Doctrine to flourish.

Therefore noble individuals should produce such

religious

discourses.

III.

The Conclusion:

The Summary and Communication [of What Transpired]

for the Sake of Making it Easily Understandable to the Assembly

(III 70)

Having thus properly settled [the debate],

[finally] for the sake

of making [the contents of the debate] retained, the witness should summarize
and

proclaim

the statements made in the debate.

This is

the

traditional

practice of [great] scholars.

After

the matters to be proved or negated have been established by way

assertions and replies in the actual debate,

and after the acceptance and

tion of tenets have thereby been made understood,

rejec-

[the witnessing arbiter] should

bring together any statements that have become a bit dispersed,

223
[po 155]
that the assembly can easily understand.

(III 71)

of

If the assembled [witnesses] are ignorant,

and state them so

or if through attach-

ment or anger they do not take heed, one should in that place write down the
words [of the arguments] and [afterward] show them to another learned, up. h t [.JU dge ] 224
rl.g
If the witness is an ignorant person who is unlearned in the procedures
debate,

or

of

if even though he understands he does not pay attention on account of

desire or anger,

or if he falsely detracts [something] from one's honestly stated

365

words,

or falsely imputes something by slightly changing the wording--where

witnesses are found,

the debating of [true] scholars will not be praised, just as

in.a place where there is a poisonous snake, a lamp will not be bright.
in that place with the witness present,
h
n

[of

opponents],

both

assembly
exactly

This

Therefore

one should set down in writing the

and by sending [this record] to the gathering

of upright scholars,
understood.

such

of

words
another

the learned virtues [of the two debaters] will

procedure is the liberated conduct [followed by]

be
the

great scholars of the past.

)

(III 72)
gata,

By sounding forth the lion's roar of the Doctrine of

may I defeat all the wild animals of erroneous views,

the
incontrovertible attainment,
the Buddha,225

the

Tatha-

and dwelling in

may I continually uphold the doctrine

of

366

[Concluding Verses and Colophon]

(III 73)

So that the Sage's Doctrine may widely flourish and so that it may

remain for a long time in this world,

I have opened the three entrance doors

for the wise who uphold the traditions of scholarship.

within,226 [po 156]
(III 74)
merit.

The

sentient

creatures of this degenerate

May the wise

age

possess

enter

little

For that reason they lack the capacity to [be able to] study [to the

point of] mastery.

Even though I exert myself, there are few who take it up.

(III 75)

indeed I have still more excellent sayings

Therefore it is difficult [for me to find] a chance for benefiting others. 227

these

Though

are not within the "range of the beings of this corrupt

persons who desire learnedness are few,

length, for there is little it will do.
(III 76)

[I],

[to

impart],

age.

Because

I have not expatiated here at

228

the Sakya bhik~u Kun-dga'-rgyal-mtshan-dpal-bzang-po who have

great

reverence toward the Doctrine here at the termination of the

trine 229 and who wish to defend and uphold the entire Doctrine, have
230
posed this for the benefit of the Doctrine.
(III 77)
like

Doccom-

Nowadays this doctrine of the Sakya Lion diminishes day by day,

231
Those who have bright

a pond whose tributary streams have dried up.

minds

[and]

who desire liberation must exert themselves

understanding of this procedure. 232

(III 78)

here

great

for

By the opening of [this] Entrance Gate for the Wise,

composed

so that the Doctrine may flourish,

an

excellent

which I have

may all beings enter

the

gateway of the great liberation, and may the Conqueror together with his sons
be pleasedl 233
This treatise, the Entrance Gate for the Wise, which establishes the procedures of
composition,

teaching and debate, is a gateway by which intelligent persons enter

into the great city of liberation;

persons.
of

[po 157]

Glacier-peaked

it is a passageway to be crossed over by noble

It was composed in a country of the northern region, the Land

Mountains,

place

situated one hundred

yojanas

from

the

367

BodhimaQ4a of the Vajrasana (Bodhgaya), by the Sakya bhik~u Kun-dga'-rgyal-mtshandpal-bzang-po,

whose mental darkness was removed to a small extent by light

'i
,

rays

from the mind of Manjugho~a and who thereby attained mental illumination over most
of the MaQ4 a1a of knowable things and thus has the merit of possessing a ready
'h
"d
confi dence concern1ng
teac'1ng, compos1t1on
an de bate. 234
[Here] for the present
[this treatise]
is completed.

i'l

II

',1,1

368

l'bel

ba'i

gtam (saQIkathya) "dialectical discussion or discourse."

Venerable Khenpo Appey explained it as "question-and-answer discussion,

and-forth
~

back-

conversation" (dri ba dang dris Ian .!!2.!!!. phan tshun skad cha bshad ..P.2.).

Gzhan-dga',
bsam

or

The

Chos mngon..P.2.,
gtan la dbab .lli!.

p.
~

375.5 (188a.5) similarly explained:

dri ba dang Ian 'debs pa' i tshul

j i ltar ~

phan

tshun

'BEL BA'I GTAM GYIS RNAM PAR NGES PA DANG. But Khenpo Appey also pointed out that
Bu-ston
in his commentary on the Abhidharmasamuccaya (AS), Chos mngon .lli!., pp.
729.7-730.1,

explained

(skyon med .lli!. .I!!!!&.

is

S~lIpkathya

the AS.

'bel gtam as a "faultless,

pa' i gtam nil

correct account (or

speech)"

'bel gtam ste/).

one of six samgrahaviniscaya (bsdus .lli!. rnam

..p..!!!:.

nges.lli!.)

in

See also W. Rahula (1971), p. 180 and note 16.

2

Glo-bo mkhan-chen,

instead

refers

commented

on

the

KhJNSh,

does not comment on KhJ verses III 1-14,

reader to the RT (which means the

but

RTRG).

He had already
these passages in his RT commentary Sde bdun mdo rnam bshad, pp.

282.4ff (= 191b.4ff).
For

discussion of the topics of KhJ III 1,

see RTRG,

chapter

11,

p.

251.4.3-4:
rgol dang phyir rgol
bsgrub dang
sgrub

byed br jod

..p..!!!:.

rgoll de gnyis pham

~ .E2.

gsuml I

'byin brda sprod

~II

khas len .lli!. rgol bal

sun' byin br jod

khas len.lli!. phyir

~ brjod ..p..!!!:. khas len .lli!. dpang ~ I.

3rgol ba (vadin),

the general word for both adversaries in a debate.

in some contexts it must be translated as "proponent," i.e.

sngar

..p..!!!:.

as the equivalent

But
of

rgol ba (purvavadin).

brgal Ian.

brgal Ian

lung dang rigs

5

See also KhJ III 71.

Cf. KhJ II 33 (D p. 101.2.2):

nas gzhung .&.i doni I

~

gtan 1a dbabll

rgol ba (vadin), Ilproponent."

See above, note 3.

6phyir rgol (prativadin).

7The

"witness" or "witnessing arbiter" (~.E2. : sak1jjin) is thus both an

impartial observer and a judge or umpire.

For the Sanskrit equivalent see VN (S),

369

D. Shastri (1972), pp. 69.1, 107.2, and 107.6.

Cf. the AS: ~ ba'i zhal che ba,

vididhikaraua ; W. Rahula (1971), p. 181. Th. Stcherbatsky (1930-32), vol. 1, p.

340, note 5, listed the following terms for "impartial judge": madhyastha, prasnika,

and sabhya.

According to Shakya-mchog-ldan, Tshad rna rigs dgongs, vol. 9,

p. 323.5, the Vinaya system too had a functionary with the title
8tshar bead pa'i gnas (nigrahasthana).
9rjes ~ ~ ba (anugraha).
favor,

further. "

~2.

See RTRG, p. 252.2.2.

A basic meaning of this term is "to assist,

Cf. Critical Pali Dictionary, vol. I, p. 183, anug-

See ibid.

gaha, "admission, concession."

lOSa-paI} discusses the opinions of these "Tibetans" in

RTRG,

p.

252.2.6:

pa'i lugs nil

rgol ba la ni [252.3.1] gsum gnyis drugll

~.@.

phyir rgol la B!!!&. gsum gnyis drugl I

~

2 la gsum kun la

.&i&I I

~'!:!!!'.ill!.~ bcu drug 'dodll

rgol

ba dris pa' i Ian mi br jod ill!. skyon can br jod .ill!. !lli!. dris .ill!. br jod .ill!. ste gsum

dang/ I

skyon

..P2!!&.

ba' i tshel

.!!!i! bab pa'i Ian brjod .ill!. ste drug

phyir

skyon mi ~ bal

wi

rgol 'dri ba' i tshe mi 'dri bal

ba dang gsuml I

skyon brjod

.lli!...2:.

tshel

mi

Ian Itar snang bal

~.ill!.

skabs ~

'dri bal !!!!.' breI ba

skyon mi brjod ~

wi

' dri

sky on Itar snang brjod

J/ ~ ~ ma bab pa'i skyon brjod .ill!. ste drug

.!!P2!l8. 2 la shan mi 'byed ~ phyin ci l2s. tu 'byed]2./ skabs!!!!. .ill .lli!!:.
'byed ~.ili gsum mol I

.!.!ill!!. mong

du ~ mi gtod .ill!. dang drug .&.2. zhes ~ roll

~ mi 'thad del

The commentators do not seem to identify these Tibetans more precisely.

See for instance Shakya-mchog-ldan, Tshad rna rigs rnam bshad, p. 707.7; and Gorams-pa,

Sde bdun mdo,

p. 648.5 (132b.5).

But these Tibetans would seem to have

been the initiators and followers of the main school of dialectics

time, i.e. Phywa-pa and his successors.

tise.

IlThis

verse in the Vadanyaya (VN) appears at the beginning of

in

Sa-paI}'s

the

trea-

It is one of only three verses in this mainly prose work.

See E. Steinkellner (1977), p. 225; cf. A. Vostrikov (1935), p. 6. The verse as preserved in
the Tanjur translation is nearly identical.

See VN (D),

p.

326b.5,

and (P) p.

370

I
364b.2:
sgru b pa' i .ll!!.

M!&.

mi br j od cingl I

skyon mi br jod lli!. gnyis .Q2. .!!2g/ I

tshar gcad lli!..vi gnas .Y!!!. WI I

gzhan ni mi rigs phyir mi
line c: gcad D: bcad P

'dodll

This verse is also quoted in RTRG, p. 252.2.5.

The Sanskrit (following M. T. Much [1983], cf. D. Shastri [1972], pp. 4f):
asadhanahgavacanam
adosodbhavanam dvayob I
nigrahasthanam. anyat tu
na yuktam iti nesyate II
On the two defeat situations, cf. A. K. Warder (1971), p. 206.
12For an identical discussion, see RTRG, p. 252.4.4: ~.Q2. la tshar gcod
pa'i gnas

The two main duties of the witness, as discerned by Shakya-

mchog-ldan,
discerning
323.5:

are:

(1)

accurately repeating the words of the opponents,

who has won and lost.

.Q2.

.i!. 1 tar

See his Tshad

ba' i rim lli!. lal

rigs dgongs,

and

vol.

(2)

9,

p.

dam pa' i 'dul ba las ~ .P!!!:.

ill bstan lli!. la zhugs lli!. nang phan tshun.&.Vi dbang

du byas shing de nyid 'dir khas blangs .lli.!!&. ~ ba med .!!!Q/ I 'dir ni.hri nang
gsungs lli!. de nyid sangs

thun mong & dbang du byas ~ bshad nal

rgol phyir rgol

~ ~

dang.Q2..!:ill!!!!..lli!!:. dbye ba 'i ~ ~ nil

pa' i .!!.&!!8. thams cad

lli!. shan 'byed pa' i ~ ~ nil

nor bar br jod .lli!!:. bya' 01 I

.!:&Y!!l pham shan 'byed

lli!. byed

dol.

13Sa_pa~ quotes an identical version of this passage in RTRG,

Cf. the Tanjur translation, VN (D), p. 337a.5 and VN (P), p. 377b.7:

p.

gnyis

251.4.4.

~~

pa'i

sgrub .lli!!:. byed lli!. br jod pa' ami ~ ~ pa' i skyon br jod pa' i ~ nasi rigs ~
r jes su ~.lli!!:. ~ tel dbang po' i mngon sum nyid du .8.Q. bar ~ ba' i phyir

roll

de ltar na dam lli!. rigs pa'i rjes su 'brang ba'i rtsod

The Sanskrit text in VN (S),

M.

T.

Much (1983),

~/.

p.

24,

1.

6f; cf. D.

Shastri (1972), pp. 68.22-69.1: nyayam anusareyub satsadhanabhidhanena bhutadosodbhavanena va.

saksipratyaksaw tasyaivanuprabodhaya, tad

nyayanusaraQaW

sata~

vadah,
14The explanations in brackets follow Sa-paQ's exposition in his RTRG.

For

the location of each discussion, see below, note 16.

These

twenty-two

occasions

of defeat in debate are taught in

Sutras (NS) ascribed to Aksapada or Gautama,

V,2,1-23.

the

Nyaya

G. Oberhammer (1963), pp.

371

102f,
~

has suggested that the fifth and first books had their origin in an early
doctrine which was later rearranged and turned into a vada manual, to which

book II and later books III and IV were added.

See also G. Tucci (1929), pp.
468ff, and also G. Oberhammer (1964) as cited by K. Potter (1977), pp. 221 and
694.
There

exist

many

editions and translations of the NS into

European

and

Indian languages (listed in K. Potter [1970], nos. 214A-276B). See especially the
edition and English translation of Ganganatha Jha, Poona Orientalist, vol. 1-10
(1936-45),

which also includes Vatsyayana's Bhaya.

The edition and translation

were reprinted as Poona Oriental Series 58 (1939) and 59 (1939),

translation
(1917),

12

respectively.

by Jha originally appeared in the Indian Thought Series 7

(1919), and 13 (1919),

and it was reprinted in the Rinsen

(1915),

A
9

Sanskrit

Series II (1983), nos. 1-4.

On these NS occasions of defeat see S.
G.
tr.

Tucci (1929),

pp.

C.

Vidyabhusana (1921), pp. 84-90;

468f; Th. Stcherbatsky (1930-32), vol. 1, pp. 340f; G. Jha

(1939), pp. 540-554; E. A. Solomon (1976), pp. 209-261; and K. Potter (1977),

pp. 272-274.
For

the

early Buddhist system of nigrahasthanas

according

to

Asanga's

Yogacarabhumi, see G. Tucci (1929), pp. 458-460, and A. Wayman (1958), pp. 35-37.
For the similar vadanigrahas in the AS, see W. Rahula (1971), p. 183.
15Dharmakfrti
the edition
places:

of D.

discussed these defeat situations in his VN.

Shastri (1972),

the defeats are discussed in

(1) pratiiffahani (73.1-75.8)

(2) pratijnantaram (75.9-77.11)
(3) pratijfiavirodha (77.12-92.11)
(4) pratijfiasamnasa (92.12-93.5)
(5) hetvantaram (93.6-94.10)
(6) arthantaram (94.11-95.4)
(7) nirarthakam (95.5-96.8)
(8) apratijnatartham (96.9-97.4)
(9) aparthakam (97.5-98.2)
(10) apraptakalam (98.3-104.6)
(11) nyunam (104.7-14)
(12) adhikam (105.1-5)
(13) punaruktam (105.6-106.8)
(14) (punaruktam continued?] (106.9-109.1)
(15) (punaruktam continued] (109.2-5)

According
the

to

following

"

372

(16) ananubhasanam (109.6-114.6)

(17) ajnanam (114.7-117.7)
(18) apratibha (117.8-12)
(19) viksepa (118.1-121.2)
(20) matanujna (121.3-122.5)
(21) paryanuyojyopeksaoam (122.6-124.7)
(22) niranuyojyanuyoga (124.8-125.8)
(23) apasiddhanta (125.9-129.6)
(24) hetvabhasa (129.7-135.1)
16The

identical verses--which are thus probably the origin of

III 4-7--are found in the RTRG, pp. 252.4.5-253.1.1.

Sa-pa~'s

KhJ

verses

auto commentary runs

from pp. 253.1.1-257.1.1:

(1) dam bca' la gnod (253.1. 2-5)
(2) dam bca' gzhan (253.1.5-2.4)
(3) dam bca ' ~ (253.2.4-254.1.2)
(4) dam bca' sel (254.1.2-5)
(5) gtan tshigs gzhan (254.1. 5-2 .3)
(6) don gzhan (254.2.3-6)
(7) don med ~ (254.2.6-3.5)
(8) don mi shes ~ (254.3.5-4.2)
(9) don bral ba (254.4.2-4)
(10) dus la
(11)

bab (254.4.5-255.1.6)

tshang (255.1.6-2.2)

(12) Ihag brjod (255.2.2-4)

(13)

(14) rjes

brjod (255.2.4-3.5)
~

(15) don mi

mi

~es

(255.3.5-256.1.2)

(256.1.2-5)

(16) mi spobs (256.1.5-2.6)

(17) rnam
(18) 'dod

(256.2.1-3.1)
khas len (256.3.1-4)

~
~

(19) brgal brtags 'dor ba (256.3.4-4.1)

(20) rjes

sbyor med la sbyor ba (256.4.1-3)

(21) grub mt-ha' ~ms (256.4.3-257.1.1)

(22) gtan tshigs ltar snang (257.1.1)
Shakya-mchog-ldan, Mkhas ~ dris lan, pp. 119f, mentioned Sa-pa~'s treatment of the defeats as one of the main "original" contributions in the KhJ.
But
the RT was apparently composed first (c. 1219?), and the KhJ only sometime afterward (c. 1220-1230?). Thus this "original" contribution had probably already been

373

made in the RT.

17These futile rejoinders (ltag chod:
Nyaya Sutras,

V,I.

discussed by S.

jati) were taught by Gautama in the

See G. Jha tr. (1939b), pp. 502-535.

C.

380, note 4; and E. A. Solomon (1976), pp. 144-199.

K. H. Potter (1977), pp. 268-

272,

gives each of the twenty-four futile rejoinders,

they

purport

to

They are also listed or

Vidyabhusana (1921), pp. 288f; S. Dasgupta (1952), vol. 2, p.

preceded by the

answer and followed by an explanation of how

to

arguments

"solve"

such

sophistical argumentation, in connection with Vatsyayana's Nyayabhasya.

These twenty-four are (see G. Jha [1939b] and S. C. Vidyabhusana [1921]):

There
would

(1) sadharmya-sama-jati

[RT 7]

(2) vaidharmya-(3) utkarsa--

[RT 8]
[RT 15]

(4) apakara--

[RT 16]

(5) varoya--

[RT 17]

(6) avarlJ.ya-(7) vikalpa--

[RT 18]
[RT 9]

(8) sadhya--

[RT 21]

(9) prapti--

[RT lA]

(10) aprapti--

[RT IB]

(11) prasanga--

[RT 14]

(12) pratidrtanta--

[RT 20]

(13) anutpatti--

[RT 5]

(14) sal)lsaya--

[RT 12]

(15) prakaraoa--

[RT 23]

(16) ahetu-- [RT *hetu-]

[RT 2?]

(17) arthapatti--

[RT 13]

(18) aVisesa--

[RT 10]

(19) upapatti--

[RT 19]

(20) upalabdhi--

[RT 11]

(21) anupalabdhi-(22) anitya-(23) nitya--

[RT 22]

(24) karya--

[RT 6]

[RT 3]

is no anupalabdhi (NS no. 21) in the RT account (the Tibetan equivalent

be mi dmigs ~).
Also in the NS list there is nothing that corresponds in

name to RT no. 2,
no, 16, ahetu--.

gtan tshigs (*hetu--),

though it should be identified with NS

374

in his RTRG explains the futile rejoinders in the following

Sa-pa~

based on the PS and Nyayapariksa.

explains on p. 257.1.4.
(1A) phrad

.p!!.

Sa-pa~

mtshungs pa' i ltag chod

counts the first two as

order,

one,

as

no.

he

[NS 9]

(257.2.1-2)
[NS 10]

(1B) ~ phrad .p!!. (257.2.1-2)

(2) gtan tshigs (257.2.2-5)
(3) rtag'p!!' (257.2.5-3.1)

[NS 16?]
[NS 23]

(4) ~ smras .p!!. (257.3.1-3)

(5) ma skyes'p!!' (257.3.3-5)

[NS 13]

(6) 'bras bu (257.3.5-4.3)

(7) chos mthun .p!!. (257.4.3-5)

[NS 24]
[NS 1]

(8) chos mi mthun (257.4.5-258.1.1)

[NS 2]

(9) rnam rtog (258.1.2-4)

[NS 7]

(10) khyad .EEL med

[NS 18]

.p!!.

(258.1.4-2.3)

(11) dmigs'p!!' (258.2.3-3.2)

[NS 20]

(12) the tshom (258.3.2-5)

[NS 14]

(13) don

[NS 17]

~.8Q.

ba (258.3.5-4.2)

[NS 11]

(14) thaI ~ (258.4.3-5)

(15) 'phel ba (259.1.3-4)

[NS 3]
[NS 4]
[NS 5]

(16) 'grib'p!!' (259.1.4)

(17) brjod

.p!!.

(259.1.4-5)

(18) ~ brjod .p!!. (259.1.5)

(19) rigs'p!!' (259.1.5-6)

[NS 6]
[NS 19]

(20) ~ so' i ~ (259.1. 6)

(21) bsgrub .hI.!! (259.2.1-2)

[NS 12]
[NS 8]

(22) mi rtag .p!!. (259.2.2-3)

(23) rab byed (259.2.3-6)

[NS 22]
[NS 15]

(24) dus las 'das .p!!. (259.2.6-3.4)

In the NS list of jatis there is nothing that corresponds to

(~

smras .p!!.: *anukta--?) and no. 24 (dus las 'das'p!!' : kalatita) of the RTRG. The
latter, kalatlta, however, is discussed as a fallacious reason (hetvabhasa: gtan
tshigs ltar snang) in NS I,2,9.
tr.

(1939b),

pp.

85-97;

S.

It is a reason that is "mistimed."

C.

Vidyabhusana (1921),

See G.

Jha

pp. 63-65; and K. Potter

(1977), p. 247.
Sa-pa~

have

used

259.2.6).

explained

the latter as a jati because the Naiyayikas are said

it as a futile rejoinder to their

Mima~saka

opponents

(see

RTRG,

to
p.

He says that this was employed by later Naiyayikas such as Vatsyayana.

For the Buddhist debator,

however, this was not a "mistimed" reason.

Rather, the

375

reason is simply unestablished (asiddha

ter 6,

grub

w.

18See Dignaga's Pramaoasamuccaya (Tshad ~ kun las btus,M, D 4206), chapltag chod brtag pa'i le'u, PS (P), pp. 12a.1-12b.6. The jatis mentioned

there are as follows:

(1) phrad / .!!!!. phrad
(2) gtan tshigs .!!!!. tshang mtshungs
( 3) rtag .E!!.
(4) .!!!2. brjod mtshungs
(5) .!!!2. skyes mtshungs
(6) 'bras mtshungs
(7) chos mthun mtshungs

(8) chos mi mthun

mtshungs

(9) .!:ill!!!!. rtog mtshungs

(10) khyad med .E!!.
(11) dmigs .p!! mtshungs

(12) the tshom

(13) don rtogs

(14) thaI ba mtshungs

based his exposition of the first fourteen (or fifteen) jatis on the

Sa-pa~

PS itself,

and he quotes the PS some fifteen times (and quotes Dignaga's autocom-

mentary once,

p.

On the nityasamajati (RT 3,

258.4.5).

NS 23) see also B.

pp.

Many
Viidavidhi.

these jatis had been previously discussed by

of

See E.

K.

On sadharmya-- and vaidharmya-- see also A. K. Warder

Matilal (1971),
(l971), p. 142.

159f.

Frauwallner (1957), pp. 121ff.

Vasubandhu

in

his

See also KhJ III 55, autocom-

mentary, and below, note 186.

19The
either

Nyayapariks

is

one of the works of Dignaga that

in Sanskrit or in translation.

(chapter

VI,

Vadanyayatika.

end;

see

PS [P],

p.

do

not

survive

It is cited by Dignaga himself in his

12b.7) and by Santarak~ita in the

See M. Hattori (1968), p. 9 and note 52.

PS

latter's

H. Nakamura (1980), pp.

298-300, apparently overlooked the Nyayaparlkss.

Sa-pa~

is the only known Tibetan author whose writings seem to indicate

more direct or detailed knowledge of the work.

the iatis in the RTRG (p.
Dignaga

in his PS,

~ kY.i ~
.l@ Rsungs so/I.

He introduces his introduction of

257.1.5) by saying that these were briefly discussed by

but that these were extensively taught in

the

Nyayapartksa:

kun las btus ..!! bsdus te gsungs la/ rigs.E!!. brtag ~ ~

Then he introduces his exposition of his jatis nos. 15-24 by

.E2...

376

saying (p.

259.1.3): "To explain a little of what was taught in the Nyayapariksa"

(rigs .P.2. brtag

Sa-pa9
with

gsungs .P.2. de cung zad bshad

is not,

Nyayapariksa
Sutras

however,

directly.

recorded in his biographies to have studied

He probably learned of it during his study of the

The account of the jatis nos.

Sugata~ri.

tremely brief,

m0.

15-22 in the RTRG is

and nowhere does Sa-pa9 quote the Nyayapariksa itself.

Shakya-mchog-ldan, Mkhas

the
Nyaya
ex-

Still, as

dris lan, pp. 119f, notes, this account of the jatis

was one of Sa-pa9's "original" contributions (though like the nigrahasthanas,

the

same treatment had in fact already appeared in the RTRG).

Sa-pa9 studied his jatis nos. 23 (rab byed: prakarana) and 24 (dus
: kalatita) in more detail in an unknown separate work, as he indicated

'das
RTRG,

p.

dbye
I;,

ba

259.3.3:

rab byed dang mtshungs .P.2. dang dus las 'das .P.2. mtshungs

mang Q. zhig .Y2. mod

bos gzhan du bshad.l@!. blta

bshad, p. 718.3-7, sheds
mdo ~ bshad,

p.

1s:iiI .vi.&!:. mangs

kyis dogs

~ ~

bris

in

'p'a~i

kho

modi

Shakya-mchog-ldan, Tshad ma rigs .Elli!!!!

no light on this.
But Glo-bo mkhan-chen, Sde M!!!!.

bar~.

392.6 (196b.6) notes the mention of such a work in ancient

annotations (mchan rnying),

though also stating that it was not available in

his

time.
In

connection

with his "jati" no.

24 (kalatl.ta),

resting

reference to Vatsyayana,

Dignaga

had refuted the earlier Naiyayikas (RTRG,

rigs .P.2. can rgan po' i lugs

tsha'i bu la sogs .P.2. na

Sa-pa9 makes an

stating that he was a later

~

p.

Naiyayika

259.2.6):

inte-

whereas

dus las 'das

kY! ili!!&. ~ bkag .P.2. la phyis kY! ba

dus las brgal teo

Sa-pa9 seems to say that Vatsyayana

replied to the refutations of Dignaga by saying that they were "mistimed" (kalati-

!.V.
20I think the source of this quote is VN (D) 355a.5: ~ ~ gtan tshigs
ltar snang ba ~ nyid kY! nang du 'dus pa'i phyir roll.
Cf. VN (P), p. 399b.6,
which is identical except that it omits the probably unnecessary final roo
See
also VN (S),
~

D.

Shastri (1972),

vacyam II.
Perhaps the

addition

p.

of the

129.5: idam

hetvabhasesv antarbhav8t

ltar rigs

(yathanyayam) in

the

KhJ

quote resulted from conflation with a similar and closely following passage in the
VN,

which was also quoted in RTRG,

rab tu dbye ba de lta bu .!lyid dam

~
~

p.

257.1.6: ci de

te

ba y!.!!. na' ang 'dir shin tu thaI bar

~ .P.2.

~ ~

gzhan B!!!8.

skad du mtshon pa'i

Y!.!!. zhes de

ba' i phyir rna smos tel

gtan tshigs [257.2] ltar snang ba tshar gcad pa' i gnas y!.!!. noll

de tsam 'dir 'dod .P.2.

ba y!.!!. noll.

~ 1 tar

rigs

zhes

377

See also PV (D),

p.

355a.7,

and PV (P),

mtshon ~ byed pa'i rab du dbye ba de [P:

E.!!. shes te

.&.zhan

p. 400a.l: ci de

da] lta bu nyid daml

skad du

~J!.

te.!:lli!!!!. E

E.QE [D 355b] ba ill.!!!!. ~ 'di shin tu thaI bar

ba'i phyir de ma spros [P: smos]1 ci ltar rigs ~ gtan tshigs ltar snang

l!! ~ gcad [P: bcad]

~ ba E.!!. noll.

~~

ba' i gnas ill

!!.Q..

zhes .QE ba de tsam 'dir 'dod ~

In VN (S), D. Shastri (1972), p. 135.1, the key sentence is: hetvabhasas,!!.

yathanyayam nigrahasthanam iti.
21Cf RTRG, p. 257.1.5: chos hl~~ ni ~hlili!!8..~ bkag zin
.E1!. dang I

ltag chod de ~ spros .!!!!. nyung lal

snyoms

mdzad de rtsod rigs lasl

Dharmaklrti
jatis.

in

ci

de

bsdus.!!!!. mangs ~ dgongs ~ btang

[as quoted above, note 20].

the final two sentences of the NB (III 140-141)

briefly

defines

See Th. Stcherbatsky (1930-32), vol. 2, pp. 252f, and NB (D), p. 238a.5.
Sa-pa~,

RTRG, p. 259.1.1, also mentions Vasubandhu's classification of the

jatis into the classes of ph yin ci .!2&. (vipadta),

(viruddha)

in his Rtsod E grub E (Vadavidhi),

this classification.

See G.

Tucci (1929),

mi bden (abhiita)," and ~ ba

explaining that Dignaga rejected

pp. 484f.

See also PS VI 21 [?] (PS

[P], p. 12b.6), as quoted by Sa-pa~ below, KhJ III 55, autocommentary.

220n this quote see above, note 11.
23Compare the almost identical passage in the RTRG,
bsgrub

pa 'i ~ ~ mi brjod E

J!.Jurir rgol skyon mi br iod E

dang/

dang/ .Y!!!!. ~ ~ ill E

skyon min br jod E

p.

252.2.5:

brjod E

rgol bas

gnyis

gnyis ~ I.

dang I

See also ibid., pp. 251.4.6-252.1.1.

24

KhJ

III

12 was quoted by Glo-bo mkhan-chen,

Sde

bdun

mdo,

(194a .1).

p.

387.1

Eristic or sophistry (~ was admitted by Gautama as a second type of

disputation similar to proper debate or discussion (vada), though it makes use of
Such

devices

as

quibbles (chala) and futile

rejoinders.

Naiyayikas

such

as

Vatsyayana (NBh, 1,2,83-85) held that quibbling and similar methods "have as their
proper

use the guarding of one's own views by attacking those of the opposition."

See K.

Potter (1977), pp. 225 and 246.

was

cavil

(vitaQda),

establishing anything.

A third type of disputation they admitted

which aims at destroying the opponent's

position

without

The Buddhist tradition rejected both eristic and cavil, as

Sa-pa~ goes on to explain in more detail in the following verses.

"

378

On a second use of the term vitapda,

see D.

Seyfort Ruegg (1982),

p. 521

and note 65.

so

far

25The translation of the last part of the quote is conjectural. I have not
been able to locate these lines among the writings of Vasubandhu.
As

Khenpo Appey observed,

several interpretations are possible.

Glo-bo

mkhan-chen,

Sde bdun mdo .!:ill!.!!!. bshad, p. 387.1 (194a.1) quotes the same lines, with two small
differences at the ends of lines one and two:
.8!!!!&. zhig

.!:.8E!.!. I dod I ba I zhig &1/

rtsod ~ dam .ill! ~..ti:!!. tel /

See also the same text from the reproduction of an Dbu-med MS from
~

Glo-bo:

Tshad

rigs, p. 393.4.
26See also Sa-paQls ~ brgyad mali, p. 149.2.1, where Dharmakirti's disap-

proval

of

various underhanded ploys and methods for wriggling out of

defeat

is

mentioned: mkhas.ill! ~ kvi ~ .& nor bu Ii bzhed .ill! rgol ba dang/ Eh.vi !g01
ba la brten pa Ii tshar gcad pa Ii gnas legs ~.8.2. bas chos dang mthun ~ Qhyir
rgol ba tshar gcod
.Q.

dang/

kvi rtsod pa'i skabs 'chol bar .!w! bali don du/ .ill!.!:. dang/ S!.
!!!!8.. zur dang/ zur ston .ill! dang/ ~ ba mi gtod M.

sdigs mdzub dang/

dang/ ~ kyis ~ .ill! dang/ ~ mos ~ ba dang/ spre I u ltar !!!8.Q. dang kha
bzhin bsgyur ba dang/ smyon.ill! 1 tar ..8.Y!!!!. ma chad ~ smra ba dang/ go Ii dogs M.
ltar

myur

dang/

ba/

myur bar bshugs .ill! dang/

br jod .ill!

rdzogs

~.!:&Y!!l

bstod

del

dang/

phdn dang/ ..P!!.2.. nya Ii

I thor ba dang/

su sdud .ill! dang/ .!!.p!!!!&. I byin te sgrogs su

la .!:&Y!!l ba Ii sgra thob

~.!w!

nas

I bros M.

.!!.p!!!!&...PQ. la

..J.!!&. .ill!

sbyor ba

ngor

dang/ .Ii ~

tshogs

blun..PQ. ~ zhig la .!!!8!!. bar ~ kyang/

rang nyid .!!8.Q. tsha ba Ii gnas ..ti:!!. no/ /

kyis khrel zhing/

smras

rol sma ci phibs su .8.tQ!!8. ba dang/

ba Ii phyir ngan

~ ~ ro-l ill!!!8.Q. smod .ill! nil

~

i!.

ba Ii sgra sgrogs .ill! dang/

rang

kvi ~
mkhas ~

de Ii phyir de

Ita

underhanded methods are mentioned by Dharmaktrti in his VN (D),

pp.

bu Ii rtsod .ill! ni mkhas .ill! roams mi bzhed dol /

Other

I:

337a.7-337b.1.

See also VN (S),

D.

Shastri (1972),

p. 68.15.

This passage is

quoted in the following note.

In

the

ThGS,

is

not

which accords with religious principle" (chos dang mthun

p.

46.4.2

(92a.2),

Sa-paQ explains what is

and

"opposing

[debate]

brgal

explaining that the Buddha cannot be opposed in a principled debate.

~,

270ne finds a similar point made in RTRG, p. 252.1.5:

rdzun dang ..&.!..Y2. ~ tshar bcad kyang/ /
de la ~ pham mi bzhed dol /

379

brdzun dang .&.!l.Q.. dang tshig dor &I.!. balus kyang grub mtha' bsrung mi

pham

!!!!.. ~

!8Y!!. ~ del.

Sa-pal} then cites lines to the same effect from the VN: de kho na nyid bsrung ba'i
du dam .ill!. ~ kyang ~ bar 'dod ~.&!.Y.Q. ~ la sogs .ill!. ~ ~ tshar

gcad ~ ~ ba .!ill .!!2. zhe nal

[252.2]

ruiJ

mtshon bsnun .ill!. dangl

ma.!ill tel

khu tshur dangl

thaI

me la sogs ~ kyang zhes br jod .ill!!: ~ nal

lcag

'di

de

kho !!!!. nyid bsrung ba' i thabs dam .ill!. ~.!ill tel.
The
377b.8:

!8Y&

translation

in the Tanjur editions is

te de kho .ill!. nyid bsrung [P:

bar 'dod .ill!..!:.8Y!!. [read:

~~

ba .!ill

.!!Q.

zhe nal

similar--(D)

p.

337a.6,

bsrungs] ba'i don du dam.ill!.

(P)
kyang

sgyu] la [P 378a] sogs .ill!. ~ ~ tshar gcad [bcad]

~.!ill

te khu tshur dang/

thaI lcag dang/

mtshon chas

banun [P: banan] .ill!. dang/ ~ la sogs .ill!.

~ kyang zhes brjod ~ ~ ~
de kho !!!!. nyid [P adds: du] bsrung ba' i thabs dam [D 337b] .ill!. ~.!ill tel.

'di

See also VN (S), M. T. Much (1983), p. 24, 1. 10; cf. D. Shastri (1972), p.
69.3:
~

tattvarakaoartha~

sadbhir upahartavyam ~ chaladi vijigisubhir iti

nakhacapetasastrapraharadlpanadibhir apiti vaktavyam.

cet,

tasman .ill!. jyayan !!Y!!!I!.

tattvaraksanopayab I.
These
rak~ita

remarks of Dharmaktrti are clearly aimed at NS IV,2,50,

and

in his VN commentary indeed quotes that sutra in this connection.

Shastri ed.
even employ

(1972), p. 69.
dubious

SantaSee D.

In this sutra Gautama maintains that in fact "one can

procedures like sophistry and cavil to

make

oneself

more

zealous for truth and to protect it" (K. Potter [1977], p. 237).
28ha

cang thaI [bar

ba]:

atiprasanga.

See

Bhimacarya

Jhalakikar

(1978), Nyayakosa, p. 7, where atiprasanga is equated first of all with ativyaptib

"over-inclusiveness" or "overextension of definition" [Tib.:
of

the three major fallacies of definition.

khyab ches .ill!.],

On the latter see G.

S.

one

Huparikar

(1948), pp. 125 and 170; J. F. Staal (1961), pp. 124f; and K. Potter (1963), p.
87.
In an inference, a logical reason that is over-inclusive (i.e. that includes
a dissimilar example) is "uncertain" (anaikantika
~ nges W. Moklilskaragupta,
TBh 25, includes atiprasanga within anaikantika. See Y. Kajiyama (1966), p. 119.
The term atiprasanga, however, is more general than ativyapti in that it designates any description--inferential, defining or otherwise--that implies too much.
See K. Potter (1963), p. 87.
29

Cf. VN (D), pp. 337a.7-337b.l, as quoted above, note 27.

30VN (D),

p.

350b.6, and VN (P), 394a.8: gzhan

bar

bar

ba'i

~ ~ .I@. ~ pa 'ami bstan bcos byed ~ mi ~ ro/ /

-""'II

380

VN (S), D. Shastri (1972), p. 114.2:

ca paropatapaya san tab

pravartante~

sastrani va praniyante.
Cf.

VN (D),

.p!!. ~ ~

dam

p. 337a.1: skye bo ngan pa' i

bstan bcos la mi
ni rnyed

.p!!. ~

byed.ill!!..~

.p!!.

la sogs

12K .ill!!.. rtog

pa'i phyir f2.! I.

.p!!. ~

.p!!.

la brten

See also ibid.,

p.

lli!. ~

337a.4:

bar bsags pa' i phyir rigs pa' i bstan bcos

roll.

31Glo-bo mkhan-chen, KhJNSh, p. 255a, discusses the difference between

"debate which is proper to the context of teaching" and "debate which is proper to
the context of debating."

The first is meant to clarify doubts and questions, and

it does not require two opponents who maintain opposing tenets.

Another

possible

reading is 'dris na "if one becomes

accustomed

or

ac-

quainted."
32See

the discussion of the Madhyamika's non-affirmation of tenets

KhJ III 37-39.

.p!!.

.v!!! na des khas blangs

.p!!.

med

K.

(1981),

p.

22,

note

47,

For the Sanskrit text

and English translation

This verse is also discussed by D.

Bhattacharya (1978).

33Vigrahavyavartant 29.
see

below,

See also Bsod-nams-rtse-mo, Byang chub, p. 493.3.5: des na dbu

Seyfort

Ruegg

and it is discussed in connection with its commentary

ascribed to Nagarjuna, by D. S~yfort Ruegg (1983), p. 207 and note 5. The Sanskrit and Tibetan texts for this verse (here following Chr. Lindtner [1982], p.
80) are as follows:
yadi ka cana pratijfia syat
tata ~ me bhaved dosah I
nasti ca mama pratijna
tasman naivasti

dosab II

Y2Y I
Y2Y I
dam bca' med ~ nail
skyon med kho na JJE/I

1@.!. te ngas dam bca ' ~

des

~ .!!ill!.

.!!ill!. la
.!!ill!. la

34
~

.v!!!

la skyon de

See RTRG,
~

p.

sgra mi rtag .ill!!.. bsgrub

~

246.2.5: kha

i8.

bstan bcos las mthong ba thams cad bsgrub

de la gnod na' ang gtan tshigs dang dam bca' i sky on .v!!! tel

.p!!. la bstan bcos nasi

10 zhes zer ba gcod doll.

nam mkha' i

.Y.Q!!.

dper .!!!

tan tu bshad .m!. danK

381

The

adherents apparently tried to quote the

Sa~hya

against them.

scriptures

Vaise~ikas'

Prasastapada in his Padarthadharmasawgraha had explained that sound

was a quality of space (aka~a). This position was reached by inference: the locus
of sound had to be in akasa because it could not be in the other substances.
Yet
the

Vaise~ikas

(1977),

pp.

argued

that sound was nevertheless

286 and 300.

The argument by the

momentary.

See

K.

Potter

in favor of the imper-

Vaise~ikas

manence of sound was perhaps what Dharmakirti was referring to in NB III 52.

See

Th. Stcherbatsky (1930-32), vol. 2, p. 163, note 2.

35Dharmakirti in his NB III 46 makes the same point (cf.

Th.

Stcherbatsky

[1930-32], vol. 2, p. 156):

Supposing that someone has stated a proof based on some treatises [of a
philosophical

school].

Even though the author of that

asserted many predicates [or qualities:

treatise

has

dharma] regarding that subject

(dharmin), just that predicate which that proponent at that time wishes
to

establish

is the thesis which is to be established

(sadhya),

not

something else.
NB (D), p. 234b.1:
bstan
tshe

.ill!.!. te bstan bcos

bcos de byed
rgol

chos

zhig la brten te sgrub

~ ~

de la chos mang zhig khas len du zin

m!.12EiJ

kyang

de'i

Eil./

ba des chos .&!!!!&. sgrub lli!!:. 'dod ~ de nyid bsgrub lli!!:. ~ ba.Ii!!.

.i&. sh a s

.ill!.!!@. .Y1:!!. .!!2..

But compare NS 1,2,1 in which it is stated that accepted tenets should

not

be contradicted.
36The
109a.6.

translation of PV II 46ab is identical in D and P.

See PV

In the commentary on these lines by Go-rams-pa (~pa'i,

the subject heading is sangs ~ ~

der KUijp (1983),

p.

150,

no.

.Y.!.. lung .&i grub

78,

~ ~~.

(D),

p.

p. 76.1.5),

See ?lso L. van

where it is also mentioned that these lines

refer to the Carvaka.

37See RTRG,

.&!!!!:. rnngon
The

p. 249.1.4: gzhal

~ dang/ lkog.BY!:!!. la r jes

two basic means aT knowledge,

gnyis la tshad

!!@.

gnyis//

dang/
direct perception and inference,

mngon

their objects "manifest" phenomena and "hidden" phenomena,

respectively.

have as
Direct

perception is for example vision, which perceives its "manifest" object, such as
the blue of a cloth.
In inference, on the basis of something immediately given
one recognizes the presence of an object which is not now present or visible.
example, one understands that there is a fire someplace when one sees smoke.

For

382

38 RTRG, p. 249.1.4:
bskal pa'i don la rang tshig
mi gnod

rab nged

~I

lung I I .

shin tu lkog 1m:!!:. la lung .si tshig phan tshun nang mi

lung .Ii!!. la de Ita bu'i lung de ~ ~
tshad

gswn M!:. mi bzhed cing/.

48-51,

and Go-rams-pa's commentary

ill la lung tshig tshad

stobs

min

~.

zhugs kyis grub pa' i lung

mi ldan pa' i lung ~ nil

ba' i

.!! ~

rab nged

.hi

bsdus ~

M!:.

Sa-pal} in the RTRG then quotes PV I 216, which

he also quotes below in his commentary on KhJ III 53.

PV IV 2,

ili!!8...P..Q. rjes

In this connection see also.

pa'i, p. 161.3.4:

On this see also RTRG,

ni r jes

p.

dngos stobs

249.2.2: dngos

tshad ma nyid .Ii!!. lal

rang tshig dang khyad M!:. med

de dan&.

1@.

39Cf Shakya-mchog-ldan, Tshad ma rigs dgongs, vol. 9, p. 231.4.

40mtho ris:

svarga.

For the Buddhist,

svarga includes the three higher

realms of existence--not only the heavens of the gods and the asuras, but also the
realm of humans.
Hence, my translation "fortunate realms of existence." It is
often opposed to the following, ngan song.
See also ThGS, p. 46.3.1-3 (92a.1-3)
for Sa-pal}'s explanation of these terms and their synonyms.
41

ngan song

apaya (or sometimes durgati).

42PV IV Sled; cf. PVin 12cd.

PV (D),

p.

The Tanjur editions D and P--see for instance

141a.7--differ only with the reading len M!:. instead of

also the commentary by Go-rams-pa,

~ bsgrub pa'i dus.

len~.

See

Rgyas pa'i, p. 167.2.4: lung la ltos nas gzhal

PV IV 51 is (following Y. Miyasaka [1971/2], p. 170):

tadvirodhena cintayas
tat siddharthesv ayogatab I
trtiyasthanasa~rantau

nyayah

~astraparigrahab

43shin tu lkog 1m:!!:.

II

atyantaparoksa.

For the Sanskrit equivalent see PV I

314c and IV 210c.

44This
some
Prof.
near

quotation of course cannot be Vedic,

Pural}ic source,
R.

perhaps a guidebook to pilgrimage places near

Salomon suggested to me.

Haridvar:

Nilaparvata

is

but instead is probably

from

Haridvar as

Most of the places mentioned seem to be at or

Gangadvara is Haridvar itself,

Kusavarta is a ghat at

"the Haridwar hills called Chal}gi-pahad situated on the

Haridvar,
northern

383

side of

the

Ganges called here Niladhara between Haridwar

and

Kankhala,"

and

See N. L. Dey (1927), pp. 62, 111 and

Khanakhala is the place just mentioned.
141. V. Mani (1975), Puranic Encyclopaedia, p. 146, identified Bilvakattrtha too
as a holy place in Haridvara.

Cf. the Kurma Purapa II, 20 and 28-29.

45Sa_paQ makes the same point in the RTRG,

p. 249.2.5-3.2: lung gzhan

.m.

ba 'ang der ~ la/ ~.ill!. i l l byed las khrus kyis sdig .lli!. ~.E!!:. bshad .lli!. dang
ba' ang lung dang ~ bar ~ !: zhe na/

46The

Buddhist writers upon whom Sa-pa~ based his account perhaps did

know that in the

Pura~ic

"wash the mind."

tsha,

See for instance R. Salomon (1985), p. 207.

47 See P 428,

'Phags.lli!. ~ bzang &. zhus .lli!. zhes

p.

See also

183b.5.

Sa-pa~,

verse from the Subahupariprccha Tantra.

quotes

not

sources there are many lengthy discussions of the need to

lli. ba' i"!:'&y!!!!', Rgyud,

ThGS, p. 11.4.4 (22b.4) who quotes the full

Cf.

ThGS,

p.

19.4.1

a verse from the Abhidharmakosa to the same effect.

Cf.

(38b.1),

which

also Dharmapada

349 and Udanavarga 3.1.

48

Udanavarga 2.1:
kama janami te miilalJl
sal!lkalpat kama jayase /
.ill!. tvalJl saqtkalpayisyami

tato ~.!!!!. bhaviyati / /

See also Mahavastu iii, p. 190; Mulamadhyamakakarika (de la Vallee Poussin's ed.),
pp. 350 and 451; and Mahabharata 12.171.25.
for these references.

I am indebted to Professor N. Aramaki

Cf. ThGS, pp. 11.4.5 (22b.5) and 35.4.6 (70b.6).

49Not identified.
gsal, pp. 39b.6-40a.3.

This passage is quoted at greater length by Dbus-pa Blo-

50Catuhsataka XII 11c: tshul khrims kyis ni mtho ris JQ:si /.

Quoted in M.
Ichigo (1985), p. 328. Cf. the similar quote in the commentary on KhJ II 34 (D,
p. 101.4.1-2): sbyin ~ longs ~ khrims kyis bde/ /,
literal statement.

an example of a direct,

51 Not identified.

--00IIIIIIII

384

52
long

Compare Bsod-nams-rtse-mo,

discussion

ferent schools,
~

Byang chub,

especially the Mahayana and

dris lan,

pp.

499.4.5ff, where there is a

on the problem of contradictions between the scriptures of

pp.

128.3-129.4,

Sravaka.

Shakya-mchog-ldan,

difMkhas

discusses in connection with this verse whether

the Pratyekabuddha path should not be classified as a third Buddhist tenet.

53Cf. DS, p. 301.4.3-302.1.5 and Skyes bu dam~, p. 331.3.2.
54 yuk"
tl.sastJ-"k-a 30
Lindtner (1982), pp. 110f:

The

edited

Tibetan

and

Sanskrit,

following

Chr.

de nyid tshol la thog .!!@!:. nill

thams cad

..vm!. ces br jod

don

rtogs shing chags med

~ ~I
~I

phyis ni .!:.!!.2!! ~ dben pa' 01 I

Note that in b the KhJ reads bstan instead of brjod.

The KhJ too

agrees

with

Lindtner's correction to phyis (Skt. pascat) in line d, in the place of the

incorrect verbal 'phyis of Nand P.
The Sanskrit was recovered from the Subhasitasawgraha and the Nyayaviniscayavivaraga:
~ asdti vaktavyam

adau tattvagavesinab I
pascad avagatarthasya
nibsangasya viviktata II
Cf.

Lindtner's translation of 30cd:

"Later when he has understood the meaning he

gains isolation (viviktata) without being attached."

55MMJ( XVIII 6:
bdag .&.Q. zhes kyang btags .8.Y.!!!:. dngl I
bdag med ces kyang bstan
sangs

~ ~

bdag med

med

~ ~I

kyis bdas. dang nil I

~

kyang bstanll

The Sanskrit text as given by Chr.

[atmety

Lindtner (1982b),

p. 198, is:

prajnapitam

an]iitmety ~ desitam I
buddhair natma na c.anatma
Cf.
p. 7.

kasdd i l l ~ desi tam I I

L. de la Vallee Poussin (1903-13), p. 355.

See also D. Seyfort Ruegg (1977),

385

56The "six limits" (mtha' drug:

pretation

are

atkoti[ka]) or six principles of

the three pairs of hermeneutical categories that

Sa~pa9

inter-

discussed

above in KhJ II 34 (D 101.2.5):

mtha' drug i@!!8. ~ shes m!. del I

gzhung bshad m!. la shin tu mkhasll

.8zhung lugs chen

rna ill @
:ill.~1

As

bshad m!. la mtha' drug shes dgos!!!.l

.
Sa-pa9

goes

abhipraya,

~m!.:

:ill.

1!.Q.

drang ba' i don dang nges pa' i doni

on to explain,
sa~dhya)

nasaJlldhya?).

dgongs m!. dang dgongs m!.

sgra i i bzhin m!. dang i i bzhin .!lli!.

the first two are (1)

special

and (2) without special intention

intention

(dgongs~.!lli!.

The first includes the four "intentions" (dgongs m!.

abhipraya) and the four "ulterior motives" (Idem dgongs : abhisaJlldhi) as taught in
MSA XII 16-18.
ed.

(1982),

provisional

On these see also D.

Mahayanasawgraha,

meaning (drang don

(nges pa'i don: nitartha).

SaJj!dhinirmocana Siitra.

Seyfort Ruegg (1969),

pp. 94ff.

p. 165, and G. Nagao

The next pair are (3) interpretable or

neyartha) and (4)

direct,

definitive

The final pair are (5) literal (sgra i i bzhin m!. : yatqa-

ruta) and (6) non-literal (sgra i i bzhin .!lli!.

.Y!.!!.~:

naruta?).

are said by Sa-pa9 to have been discussed by "Candrakirti."

All six categories

Apparently this is a

reference to the Pradipoddhyotana commentary on the Guhyasamaja,

Candrakirti (II) or Candrakirti-pada.
p.

(1981),

l2.,

105.

meaning

For the explanation of these two Sa-pa~ refers to the

by a Vajrayanist

On the latter author see D.

Seyfort Ruegg

On the above categories see also Sa-pa~, DS, p. 315.1.1ff; Chag

p. 401.1. 2; and Skyes bu dam,lli!, p. 333.2.4.

These six "limits" or "ends" as applied to the interpretation of the

Anut-

taratantras were mentioned by D. Seyfort Ruegg (1962), p. 330, and they have been
studied in more detail by M. Broido (1983) and E. Steinkellner (1978). Note that
Sa-pa~

Tantras.

applies these six to all the basic treatises, and not just to the highest
Bu-ston Rin-chen-grub wrote a book on the "six limits," his Mtha' drug

~ Rsal,

which was
Papdita, p. 132.7.
57 Cf

be
two
Buddhists?

studied by

Shakya-mchog-ldan.

See

Kun-dga'-grol-mchog,

. Mok~akaragupta, TBh 30 (Kajiyama [1966], p. 139): "How can

kinds of omniscient beings
and also different schools

there
among

[The author:] This is not to be confuted because the Blessed One taught
these [different doctrines] in order to introduce sentient beings [of different capacities] into truths."

all

386

58

.
Asanga

II

the final section of the AS explains this line

in

special interpretation since it was spoken with a special motive.

(1971),

p.

184.

Dhammapada:

as

requiring

See W.

Rahula

Rahula, ibid., note 3, refers to the very similar verse in the

XXI 5.

For the Sanskrit see Pralhad Pradhan (1950),

p.

109.1, and

For a discussion of this verse see F. Bernhard

Nathmal Tatia (1976), p. 155.6.
(1968-69), pp. 57ff. For the commentaries in Tibetan see Rgyal-ba'i-sras (Jinaputra) ,

Mngon' E

chos kun nas btus pa' i rnam ME. bshad E, P vol. shi, p. 395b.4;

Bu-ston, Chos mngon E, p. 744.1; and Gzhan-dga', Chos mngon E, p. 384 (192 b)
Sa-paQ

quotes

this line also in KhJ I 21 and II 34.

See

KhJ

(D),

pp.

83.4.2 (tha 168b.2) and 101.4.2 (tha 204b.2).

59Glo-bo mkhan-chen,

KhJNSh,

pp. 257b.1-258a.3, takes verses III 24-26 as

the point of departure for his first real comment on part III.
all

the Buddha's declarations that such things as the

and

nisprapanca exist were actually stated provisionally.

quotes

the Lokanuvartana Sutra ('Jig rten mthun

He explains

tathagatagarbha,

.J!!&.'&'

that

sunyata,

In this connection he
mdo),

(D),

vol.

(200)

tsha, p. 306a.3-4. (For various citations of this verse and its Sanskrit text, see
K.

Mimaki [1982],

neither

p. 135, note 386.)

In the vision of the Saint (arya) there is

existence nor non-existence,

Sa-paQ's Chag 10 (D),

p. 412.3.5.

and on this point Glo-bo mkhan-chen

quotes

In the "multifarious vision" (of the Saint who

is not in concentrative meditation),

such things are said to exist,

and here the

commentator, Glo-bo mkhan-chen, cites lines from the RGV.

The

commentator also mentions the opinion of some opponent:

"Since

those

things were taught as having provisional truth, one must maintain that they do not
exist

on

cording

t~

the direct,
that

the level of transactional usage (vyavahara)."

Glo-bo mkhan-chen,

But

such

people,

ac-

fail to discriminate correctly the provisional from

definitive truth, because according to their opinion they must affirm

all the surface level of truth does not exist on the level of

transactional

usage.
For
directs

the

principles of scriptural debate

his reader to the AS of Asanga,

the 'Bel ba'i gtam rnam ME. nges E,

more

in

general,

Glo-bo

in which debating is briefly treated.

detailed knowledge of how scriptures are to be established and

recommends Sa-paQ's explanations in his DS,

lines on p. 301.1.1 (9a.1):
~

kyang mdo sde

zhig dang/ /

theg E chen .PQ..!:&!!!!! bla mar / /

~ ngan nang na rin chen ltar//
sems can rnams la sangs

mkhan-chen

no doubt referring to its final section,

mI /

probably referring to the

For a

refuted,

he

noteworthy

387

snying

.Q2.

.Y..Q.Q. ~ gsungs .ill!. EJj I

dgongs .ill!. .Ii!!. ~ shes ~ lli/ I

de.v.!. dgongs gzhi stong nyid Yl:E/1
dgos .ill!. sky on lnga ~ phyir gsungsl I
dngos la gnod byed tshad

!!!!!.

nill

de 'dra' i sangs ~ khams .Y..Q.Q. nail

mu stegs bdag dang mtshungs .ill!. dang II
bden pa' i dngos

.P.Q.!:.. ~

phyir dangl I

nges pa'i don i l l mdo sde dangll

~ .ill!.

This

passage

kun tu ~ phyir roll

is quoted by Sgra-tshad-pa Rin-chen-rnam-rgyal in

his

Bde

bzhin

gshegs, pp. 47a-b, and translated by D. Seyfort Ruegg (1973), p. 32.

On

the tathagatagarbha doctrine and its interpretation by the 14th-century

see D.

scholar Bu-ston,

Seyfort Ruegg (1969),

(1971) and (1973).

pa9'S opinion in particular see Seyfort Ruegg (1969),

pp. 31ff.
60For

skabs

kYi

discussion of the nature and use of

tshigs su bcad.m!

p.

Regarding Sa-

58, note 5, and (1973),

"intermediate

verses"

(bar

antarasloka) in Indian and Tibetan treatises, see K.

Mimaki (1980).
It
were

seems that intermediate verses--together with "concluding

considered

verses"--

by Sa-paQ's editors to belong to the basic verses of his

works.

See for instance his RT, p. 166.2.5, where an intermediate verse is included among
the basic verses.

For similar examples of the inclusion of "concluding

verses,"

see RT, pp. 156.2.6 and 157.1.1.

Glo-bo mkhan-chen in his RT commentary (Sde bdun mdo ~ bshad,
[12a.2]),
~

from

Indian PramaI].a sources:

bar skabs .ill tshigs su bcad pa'i don nil

tshan gzhan ~ bar du rna chod pa' i tshul ~

~ ~

ba' 0

ni

.8..Q!!8.

don

.&.!. rtsa ba' i tshigs bcad .ill

zhes bram ze shangka ~ ~ nanta ~

dzn~ ~ shrls rnam nges

ba

p. 23.2

quotes two interesting explanations of the bar skabs .ill tshigs su bcad

EE.S!l

~ ~ slob

.ill ri ka lasl bar skabs .ill tshigs su bcad

.ill!. zhes

sngar rna bshad .ill!. cung zad ~.P!!:. bshad ~ zhes gsungs.@ nyid

dpon
~

' dir

~ .Pi!. .Y.!!!. no I I .
Khenpo Appey remembered his teacher, the great Brag-g.yab Blo-gros, explaining that an intermediate verse sums up the meaning of the earlier and later
parts of the given text (tshigs bcad gzhung 'di'i E!&2..!!!.i!!&. gnyis
don bsdus
~).

---I

388

61The three disciplines are:

(1) lhag ~ tshul khrims ~ bsla b ~ : adhiSilasika
(2) lhag
Each

shes rab

bslab

adhiprajfia~ika

(3) lhag ~ ting ~ 'dzin ill bslab ~: adhisamadhisiksa

of the three "baskets" of the Tripitaka is supposed to treat chiefly one

of

these disciplines: 8ila being treated in the Vinaya, prajfia in the Abhidharma, and
samadhi in the Sutras.

See for instance

Sa-pa~, ~

brgyad, p. 151.1.4.

62"Ripening" (smin .P!'!E. byed ~ and "liberating" (grol bar byed ~).
631 ta

bka' rtags ~ ~ .!:..8.Y!!..

ba

These are the

basic

philosophical

tenets of Buddhism:
(1) all compounded things are impermanent ('dus byas thams cad mi rtag ~)

(2) all defiled things are suffering

(3)

all

bdag med ~)
(4) Nirval}a is peace
Cf.

Dbus-pa Blo-gsal,

82b.1: chos

la 'das

(~ngan

p.

sdom bzhi.

4a.5-6: Ita ba chos

bcas thams cad sdug bsngal ba)

~

zhi ba)
~ ~ ~

bzhi, and ibid., p.

See also K. Mimaki (1980), p. 172, note 48.

64bsod nyams ~ (sukhallika).

(~~

(~

factors of existence (dharma) are without a "self" (chos thams

This is one of the two extremes of

mtha' gnyis) that the Buddha taught were to be avoided.

conduct

See also Dbus-

pa Blo-gsal, p. 4a.6.
This was the second of the two extreme

modes

of

conduct as mentioned in the previous note.

66.!!!8Q..8.!..& tu Ian gtab ~
types

of

ekalJl8enavyakaralJ.a.

This and the other

answers are taught in the AK V 22 and its commentaries.

Sandhinirmocana Sutra 8.21.2 and 10.7.4.2 (as cited by Lokesh Chandra

443),

three

See also

the

[1976],

p.

and E. Lamotte (1935), pp. 103 and 154; and D. Seyfort Ruegg (1977), p. 58,
The Pali for ekalJlsa is ekamsa, on which see F. Edgerton (1970), p. 153.

note 4.

Cf.

the fourfold system of answering found in the AS: W. Rahula (1971), p.

180.
67

.P!'!E.

ste Ian gdab

68dris te Ian gdab

vibhajya--

pariprcchii--

389

-sthapaniya--

69~ ..Q!!!.. ~
1 ~
d m!
70 AK V 22.

The Sanskrit (following P. Pradhan [1975], p. 262):

ekamsato vyakaraQam
vibhajya pariprcchya ca I
sthapyam ca maraQotpatti[r?]
visistatma 'nyatadivat II
See also L. de la Vallee Poussin (1971), vol. IV, pp. 44ff.
71This

perhaps refers mainly to the Sandhinirmocana Sutra as cited

above,

note 66.
72See the Majjhima Nikaya (vol.
Horner tr. (1975), vol. 2, p. 176.

1,

pp. 497ff), Dighanaka Sutta, and I. B.

According to Horner, ibid., note 6, Dirghanaka

:1

could not accept "all" (sabbam), by which he meant "all uprisings and relinkings."
But

the

Buddha

takes "all" literally,

and shows by his

question

the

problem implicit in such a statement.

Dirghanakha was the maternal
Sariputra, on which see G. P. Malalasekera (1960), p. 1081.
On this Sutra see also E. Lamotte (1949),
indebted to Dr. H. Eimer for this reference.
~

logical

nephew

vol. 1, pp. 47-8, note 1.

of
I am

In the Kanjur there is another short Sutra with the title Kun tu ~ ba
rings kyis zhus m! (P 1009, D 342?), Sanskrit: D1rghanakhaparivrajakapari-

~rccha-nama-sutra.

But it does not contain this discussion.

73This sentence is probably a gloss inserted into the Sutra

Professor

D.

Seyfort Ruegg suggested to me.

quotation,

as

The point made by the glossator is

that the Buddha was applying the law of double negation in this passage. See also
Sa-p a9's use of such reasoning in KhJ III 36.
In general, the Buddha's style of
argument

in

the Sutras typically employs double negatives and

alternative judgments.
In many cases,

hypothetical

and

See F. Watanabe (1972), p. 978 (53).

however,

the Buddha himself did not feel bound to answer a

question with either an affirmative or negative;

as mentioned above,

many

ques-

tions were to be set aside without giving either answer.

On the principle of excluded middle in Buddhism,

see A.

Kunst (1957), and

for the Madhyamaka see D. Seyfort Ruegg (1969), pp. 383ff, and (1977), pp. 5, 49f,
52 and 54.

Cf.

the sources listed in ibid.,

p.

71,

note 185.

Contradiction in Indian logic in general, see J. F. Staal (1962).

On the law of

,I

390

74

cang

writings,

mi

bar .&!!!!:. to

(*tiisoIlJlbhuta?).

In

Buddhist

canonical

silence (Pali: tunhibhava) was often a sign of agreement or affirmation

which the Buddha himself also used.

Ruegg (1981), p. 35.

See G. Nagao (1955), pp. 137f, and D. Seyfort

On the silence of the Buddha see G. Nagao (1955).

Cf. T. W.

Organ (1954-55).
75In

the

Pali scriptures these questions are regularly enumerated not

fourteen but as ten.

on

as

In the Majjhima Nikaya, Sutta 63, for example, the questions

these topics by M8lunkyaputta were set aside as not

edifying

(H.

C.

Warren

[1973], .PP. 117-122):

(1) that the world [loka] is eternal
(2) that the world is not eternal
(3) that the world is finite
(4) that the world is infinite
(5) that the soul [jiva] and body are identical
(6) that the soul is one thing and the body another
(7) that the saint [i.e. the Tathagata] exists after death
(8) that the saint does not exist after death
(9) that the saint both exists and does not exist after death
(10) that the saint neither exists nor does not exist after death
Cf.

Vaccha's questions,

Majjhima Nikaya, Sutta 72 (H. C. Warren [1973], pp. 123-

128).
In the lists as they appear in the Chinese translations, there are sixteen or
fourteen questions enumerated.
of the four main topics,

For sixteen, four alternatives are given for each

i.e. the eternality of the world (loka), the finitude of

the world, the relation of jiva and body, and the existence of the Tathagata after
death.
first,

For the enumeration of fourteen,

second and fourth topics,

and jlva,
Aramaki has

the four alternatives are given for the

while regarding the third, the relation of body

it is only asked whether they are the same or different.

suggest~d

sarv8stivadin

Professor N.

to me that the enumeration of fourteen may represent a Mula-

scriptural tradition which was preserved both in Tibet and in

some

Chinese Siitras.
He also kindly referred me to the list of fourteen as found in
the Chinese Samyukta Agama, Taisho no. 99, Siitra 962/963, Taisho vol. 2, pp. 245f,
and

to the study of these lists by Tetsuno Watsuji,

Genshibukkyo no Jissentetsu-

gaku [Practical Philosophy of Primitive Buddhism] (Tokyo:

other

1927),

pp.

135f.

studies on the points not explicated (avyakrtavastu) and the four

tive positions (catuskoti), see D. Seyfort Ruegg (1977), pp. 58f, note 4.

For

alterna-

391

76RA I 73c-74d.

See the edition by M. Hahn (1982), pp. 30f.

The Sanskrit:

antav8n i ti lokas .!!

~ tiis{li!ll jino 'bhavat I I 73 I I
sarvajna iti sarvajno
~ tenaiva gamyate

yenaitad dharmagambhlryaw
nov8cabhajane jane II 74 II
The Tibetan from the Tanjur:

ili.!! mtha' dang ldan ill!!!!. zhesl I

~ ill!. ~ ba mi .8.!!!!&. phyir/ I (73)

de 1tar zab mo'i chos ~ nill

snod min ~ la mi

.8.!!!!&.

ball

de nyid phyir ill!. mkhas ~ kyisl I

kun mkhyen thams cad mkhyen ~ shesl I (74)

RA II 6, on which see D. Seyfort Ruegg (1981),

Cf.

p. 25: "Now, since anything

that is altogether 'not so' (neti) cannot be stated (in some determinate manner in
terms

of a logico-ontological position) by the omniscient Sage,

the teacher
limit,

does

has

refrained

from stating that the world (loka) has a (posterior)

have one,

both has and does not have one, and neither has nor does not have one."

not

Cf. also RA II 14-15, MMK XXII 12 and XXV 21-23.

770n the Buddha's rejection of certain questions as unfruitful (e.g. on the
nature

of

the "self," on the posterior limit of the world,

Frauwallner (1973),

vol.

1, pp. 172-177.

etc.),

see also

E.

As Frauwallner observed (in connection

with the Buddha's discussions with Malufikyaputra and Vatsagotra mentioned above in
note

75),

"The

teaching of the Buddha is throughout governed by an

attempt

to

avoid unnecessary theoretical discussions."

78

A similar point is made by

lli!:.

Sa-pa~

in the DS, pp. 316.4.6-317.1.1:

che chung la' angl I

Q.han ~ i l l ni lung ~ EJlj I
~

theg E

~ ~ gzhung lugs ~ [317] mi nusl I

.!!Van

gzhung lugs khas len cingll

.r!. 1 ung dang ~ .81!:!!:. nail

~ .r!. lung ~ ~ ~ nusl I
~

See also Go-rams-pa, Rgyal ba, p. 253 (.!! 127a.3).

79

See also Sa-pa~'s Skyes bu dam~,

Scriptural bases the following works:

'Ii
p.

331.3.2-5.

There he cites as his

392

(1) Sde .ill!. tha dad klog pa'i 'khor 10

(2) 'Dul ba
(3)

~ ~

ldan

.Bi shes rab Ie 'u (BCA IX)

(4) Rnam bshad rigs .ill!. (Vasubandhu's Vyakyayukti)

(5) Rtog

'bar ba (Bhavya's Tarkajvala)

80DS , p. 298.3.4:
dper .lli!.. nyan thos

slong nill

bkagl I
~ chub serns dpa' i ~ slong lal I
gzhan don ~.lli!.. ltung ba medii
gser dngul len .ill!. thub

81 0

..
.
an d t he eatlng
n vegetarlanlsrn

0f

. t he hlstory
meat ln

0f

Buddhism,

see

D. Seyfort Ruegg (1980).

That

which

constitutes "meat that is pure in three ways"

differently by the Tibetan schools.

is

interpreted

The usual Dge-lugs-pa (and Theravadin) inter-

pretation is that it is meat about which one has not seen, heard or even suspected
that the animal was killed especially for oneself.
following Sakyaprabha was more rigorous.

The Sa-skya-pa

interpretation

The eater should not have seen, heard or

suspected that the meat was from an animal killed for its.meat (sha .vi ched du).
The meat from animals which had died from other causes (shi sha) was allowed, and
as

an exception the meat of slaughtered animals was allowed for sick monks.

See

Go-rams-pa, Sdom.ill!. gsum ~ bshad, p. 119.4 (ta 59a.4).

82 Cf. KhJ III 52 autocommentary: dper .lli!..lli dus tha dad ill. so nam la sogs

pa 'i lli ba la rang .Bi lugs kyis 'grub

noll.

lliI

See also DS, p. 302.2.4:

dper na padma 'i ~ ~ lal I
rtag tu 'dam dang ljan ljin dgosll
shu

sogs kyis bskor na skyel,'

me!.Q.& gzhan la de mi dgosll

chu las skye la skarn sa dgrall
skarn sar skye la rlon.ill!. dgrall
~ ~

dro ba' i rdzas .!!!i sminl I

dro sar bsil ba 'thad

des na lli ba

minll

ci'ang rungll

rang rang lugs bzhin byas na 'grubll

de las bzlog pa'i lugs byas nail
mi 'grub grub

bzang .E.2. dka' I I

phan tshun 'chol na mi 'grub .ill!. bzhin

393

83To

prove that a tenet or scriptural passage is of special intent (dgongs

Q!~)' one has to demonstrate (1) the motive for teaching it with sp~cial intent

teo gsungs pa'i dgos

W,

(2) the subject that was

ultimately

intended

gzhi), and (3) the criterion which shows that the statement conflicts with

the real state of things (dngos la gnod bved tshad.!!).

~ ~

rigs dgongs,

these three, see

Sa-pa~,

vol.

9,

p.

DS, 301.1.2

and Bsod-nams-rtse-mo,

(~77b);

237.5.
(~

See

Shakya-mchog-ldan,

For instances of the application of

9a); ThGS, p. 27.4.4 (tha 54b) and 39.2.1

Bvang chub,

p.

494.2.5.

The above-mentioned

passage of the DS has been translated by D. Seyfort Ruegg (1973),

reference to Bu-ston, Bde bzhin gshegs, and Sgra-tshad-pa.
84bsdus pa'i tshigs ~ bcad .ill!.
K. Mimaki (1980).
85Cf

samgrahasloka.

KhJ III 12,

du

with

kY.i tshigs bcad.

& bstan

.ill!.

Or one may be motivated by the desire

to

autocommentary:

defend and preserve true facts:

32,

On summarizing verses see

See also above, note 60, on bar skabs

.&!!!!!.&. bar..Q.v!!. ba' i don du

p.

1@!!&. E!.8.

dam .E!!. rang rang

VN (D), p. 337a.6: de kho ~ nvid bsrung ba'i don

If one is unable to defend tenets, there is no victory or defeat in

debate.

See RTRG,

p.

252.1.5: grub mtha' bsrung mi

~ ~

pham

med, and

above, note 24.

86

In non-technical language
~ ~ lhung.
partial to one side, to be biased.

lhung means

to

be

87Sa_pa~ here employs a dilemma based on the principle of double negation.

Cf.

the

use of the same principle attributed to the Buddha above in KhJ III

This type of negation is thus "relative," Le.,

(~~~.ill!. : parvudasapratiedha).

74.

Glo-bo mkhan-chen,

and the expression "Who would

Sde bdun mdo .!:lli!!!!. bshad,

debate

p. 22.4 (llb.4):

.k grub mtha'i rjes su mi 'brang.!!&Q. zhe nal da ni ba .sb!!!.s. dang

rtsod .P.2!:. bved del

28.

implicative

See D. Seyfort Ruegg (1983), p. 231, note

On the necessity of following tenets,

with an ox?" cf.

~

presuppositional and

zhig

mi ~ ba'i tshul 'dzin tol

88 1 have not translated the (erroneous?) negative of the 'dus

~~~~.

This argument by the Sa~hya (see karika 17) has been widely discussed in the PramaI].a Ii tera ture , and its mention in the Buddhist texts goes back at least to the
NMukh and PS of Dignaga.
In PS III 2 it is referred to in connection with a
theSis

maintained

mentally ('dod~) in the midst of Dignaga's definition

~ (bsgrub ..Q.v!!.).

Dignaga

here

establishes the

intended

thesis

of
of

the

j'

.I
I

'1
j
I"

il
fr

394

proponent

as

the real thesis,

even if the opponent tries the stratagem

of

not

explicitly stating it.

Sa-paQ in the RTRG (p. 246.1.4) quotes PS III 2ab as follows:
.!!&.Q. bo kho na bstan ~

bdag nyid 'dod dang

.!!@.

ball

gsal ball

translation (following Kitagawa [1965], pp. 471f):

Vasudhararak~ita's

rang &.!!&.Q. bo dang nyid ldan [=bstan?] I I

rang dang 'dod

~.!!@.

bsal ba' 01 I

Kanakavarman's translation of the whole verse as preserved in PS (P), p. 6b.4:

rang & .!!& bo kho ~ bstanl I

& chos !!!. lal I

mngon ~ don dang r i es .lli!&. dang I I
.YiQ.. ches ~ ~.!!@. bsal ba' 01 I
bdag 'dod rang

Of

the five unacceptable types of theses,

the first four were already taught

the Nyayamukha, as Go-rams-pa observes in Sde bdun, p. 119b.2.

also T. Tillemans (1984a), p. 376, note 42.

Dharmaklrti's discussions of this can be found for instance in PV IV

and NB 48-49, 89-90.

See NB (D), p. 234b.2, and

2, pp. 158-160, and 203f.

jee (1935), p. 348.
pp.

agree

with

Th. Stcherbatsky (1930-32), vol.

Cf. S. C. Vidyabhusana (1921), pp. 315f, and S. Mooker-

this reasoning of the

245.4.1 and 246.1.5.

Sa~hya

is also mentioned twice in the

In the first place it is mentioned by

whi~h

PS III 2).
ldan,
.!!@.

an

determina-

rejects five erroneous aspects of a thesis to be proved (as listed

See also Go-rams-pa,

to
in-

The second mention

in connection with the definition of sadhya by means of a negative

tion

Sa-pa~

Dharmaklrti against Dignaga that this need not be considered

stance of a separate class of contradictory (viruddha) reason.

is

28-29

See also A. Kunst (1957), p. 147.

As in the NB,
RTRG:

in

On this verse see

in

Sde bdun, p. 623 (kha 120a.2); and Shakya-mchog-

Tshad ma rigs .!:ill!!!!. bshad, p. 682.3: lnga ..I2..Q. 'di bsdu na

. , and Tshad

rigs . dgongs, vol. 9, p. 419.3.

As Professor K.

17

as

Potter pointed out to me, the

Sa~hya

basic text of karika

it now exists actually maintains as an explicit thesis:

"There

exists a

purusa" (purusasti).
89This
reasoning

of

sophistical argumentation is identical in principle with the

the

Sa~hya

dhist PramsQa scholarship.

subject of his thesis,
a

second"

(gnyis

Bud-

The Carvaka implicitly affirms a self or person as the

and his implicit thesis must be considered his real thesis

even though it is not explicitly stated.

sing

above

adherent as it was traditionally characterised by

This "syllogistic application of posses-

bcas ~ sbyor ba

sadvitIvaprayoga)

is

refuted

by

395

Dharmakirti PV IV 34-35. See also Go-rams-pa, ~ pa'i, p. 165.3.6.

Dharmakirti seems also to reject a sadvitiyaprayoga reasoning
Mima~sakas

in the VN (S),

p.

VN (D),

66.16;

of

some

p. 336a.2; and VN (P), p. 375a.6.

Santarak~ita,

VNV (S), p. 66, refers in this connection to the

and

See D. Shastri (1972), p. 66.

discusses this reasoning in RTRG, p. 246.2.2, in connection with the

Sutra 1,1,2

Mima~sa

itsBha~ya.
Sa-pa~

word 'dod

of PS III 2,

mentation:

de

just after the discussion of the similar

bzhin du gnyis bcas

chos .9!!! mngon .2.!:. gsal ba' i

rung

bas

gnyis

zhes

ba

la

doll. . .

dang bcas

mngon

Sa~hya

argu-

ill sbyor ba la' ang r jes ~ med del bum ~

can Ius ill. skyes bu dang bum ~ .&!!!!.8. ..Y2!!.8.

~ ~
~..Y.!.!!.

tel utpala rna ..y.!.!!. pa' i phyir rtsig

gsal ba'i skyes bu

rtsig

la

rjes

bzhin

med

See also Dbus-pa Blo-gsal, pp. 11b.1, 13b.5-14a.2, and Go-rams-pa,

Sde bdun, p. 623 (kha 120a).

As mentioned by H.
Japanese

Nakamura (1980),

p.

376,

S. Watanabe translated into

and examined "Sadvitlyaprayoga (Prama~avarttika IV 28-41,

tion by Carvakas)" in Mikkyogaku, nos. 13 and 14

90ngan ~ Ita ba : kusrtidrsti.
speculative views (Ita ba
(chos.E!@!!!. ~ nges

Tatia (1976), p. 113.

Ita

ba

DANGI
DANGI.

ngan~:

This is listed among twenty-eight evil

section of the AS.

See W.

Rahula (1971), p. 140, and N.

See also Gzhan-dga', Chos mngon~, p. 297.5 (149a. 5) :

~

gzhan rna l l i ~ la ..y.!.!!. Q!E.

mi len pa'i Ita ba dang ngan

dri ba na KHAS MI LEN PA' I

These two make up the class of chad ~ bcad

(l49b.6):
.
~

(1977), pp. 194-209.

asaddrti) near the end of the Dharmaviniscaya

de..@.& las brtsams te gzhan

~

an argumenta-

shes

lli!....2.

Ita ba.

LTA

BA

PHYIN CI LOG TU LTA

BA

See ibid.,

p.

298.6

Ita ba ni CHAD PAS BCAD PA'I LTA

BA

rigs ~ !!@. l l i ~ de la rgol na ~ mi srid pa' i phyir.

Sa-pa~ in his ThGS, p. 32.3.2 (64a.2) referred to the AS in connection with these
two Views.
~

9l

0ne

of

the earliest and most important accounts of the avaktatva

tained by the Vatsiputriyas is AKBh,

Vallee Poussin (1971),

vol.

chapter 9.

main-

See the translation of L. de La

5, pp. 227ff, and Th. Stcherbatsky (1919).

See also

D. Seyfort Ruegg (1977), pp. 34ff.

The pudga1a posited by the Vatsiputriyas is said by them to be

unstateab1e

Or indeterminate, being neither different nor not different from the skandhas

396

92khas mi len pa'i Ita ba

anabhvupagamadrstL

See W. Rahula (1971), p.

140, and N. Tatia (1976), p. 113.16-18.

93

12K

Ita

asaddrti?

In the AS these are classed as asaddrsti,

there is translated as Ita ba ngan

the mithvadrti

(12K~

~.

which

Earlier, in the Laksaoasamuccava section,

Ita ba) is defined.

See W.

Rahula (1971),

p.

10, and

Gzhan-dga', Chos mngon~, p. 29. 1 (15a. 1)

94
Cf. KhJ III 16 and Bsod-nams-rtse-mo, Bvang chub, p. 493.3.5.
95Sa_paQ, KhJ I 34a (D) p. 84.3.4 (61a.4):
dam pa'i don la
don

sgrub medii

.Y2i ~ dangl med ~ dangl

ill. ill ma .y!!!. tel shes ~ ma .y!.!!.

dam ~ spros ~ dang bral ba' i.Eh.Y.!!l

~ .P..I! dangl

sgrub ~ la sogs ~ tha snvad

pa'i phvir roll

In his ThGS, (D) p. 31.1.6-2.1, Sa-paq further develops his position on the
ultimate truth when giving his definition of the two truths:
Some

people

truths are:

say,

"The defining marks (Le.

definitions) of the

two

that which is possible to be made an object of mind is the

surface truth,

[and] that which is not included within objects of mind

is the ultimate truth."

Those people base themselves on the

statement

in the BCA [IX 2]:

[The

truth-level of] ultimate reality is not the province

of

mind.

Mind is held to be the surface [level of truth].

These

are instances of what is being defined (mtshan gzhi) and are not

the defining marks.

Therefore our own tradition is as follows:

That

which is established as an object of an uncritical mind is "the surface

level."
is

That which is not established as the object of a critical mind

"the ultimately real."

The absence of any [disproving]

impairment

regarding the object of each one's mind is "truth."

See also ThGS,
ThGS,

pp.

32.2.5 (63b.5) and 44.1.6 (87a.6).

And according

to

(D) p. 31.3.1: "This ultimate truth, moreover, is not the causal efficiency

recognized

by

discursive

developments'

dialecticians.

Here

we maintain it to be just

(niprapafica) which is recognized in

the
the

'free

from

Madhyamaka."

Cf. RTRG, pp. 172.1.2 and 211.4.6.

There

is also an interesting discussion of the two truths by Sa-paQ in his

Bka' gdams do kor, p. 403.3.4:

don dam shes

ma .y!!!. tel I

397

p.

.8zhan sel shes .m!!:. ~ ba' ang srid!!

Cf. ThGS p. 32.2.5 (63b.5) on the role of anyapoha here.
On the restriction of proof and disproof to the surface level, see below, KhJ

:h

III 52,

1,

based on Sa-pal}'s explanations, in Ston lli!. rab gsal, SKKB, vol. 5, p. 416.4.6.

autocommentary, and note 169.

Sa-pa~

1d

mchog-ldan,

disagreed with the opinion of Phywa-pa as it is described by Shakya-

~.!ill!

stong .ill!. dang!

dangl

stong

~~

See also the comments of Bi-ji purportedly

nyid

chos thams cad rang &.!!82. bos

.lli. ba cung zad kyang khas mi len lli!.

rigs .!:!!2!!!. bshad, p. 453.1:

bden.m!!:. grub pa' i chos zhes

ill.!!82. bo med

cingl de B!.!!& rigs ~

See also 'Gos lo-tsa-ba' s remarks made with

~ kho .!!!!.. la 'chad

du khas len .m!!:. byed do! I.

regard to the tathagatagarbha as taught in the RGV (p. 309.6-7; G. Roerich (1976],
p. 349):

I
!!.
e

Rngog 10 tsa ba chen

J2Q

dang slob dpon gtsang ~ lli!. nil don dam

pa 'i bden .ill!. ni sgra dang rtogs pa' i dngos ~ lli .!ill! ..ti:.!!. lli!. 1 ta zhogl

.Y!!1. tsam

rna

lli. zhes

slob dpon phywa m! ni dngos

zhen

:QQ. ~

pa ' i

bden ~

stong pa ' i med.m!!:. ~ .P2. ni don dam pa' i bden m! lli. zhing! de sgra rtog &
zhen pa' i lli du nl!!.S. bzhed. See also D. Seyfort Ruegg (1973), p. 60, and (1983),

p. 232, note 75.

Go-rams-pa,
detail,

after

ba, p. 147.1

(~

74a), discusses

nag-pa and Rma-bya-ba, respectively.

146.1) and their criticisms by

phrase "found through reasoning" (rigs

rnam,

Rngog

vol.

Rngog
Gtsang-

In this account we are told that Gtsang-nag-

pa's and Rngog's positions are not to be identified,

ultimate.

opinion in some

presenting the definitions of ultimate reality according to

(p . 144.4) and Khyung Rin-chen-grags (p.

the

Sa-pa~'s

m!.

and that Gtsang-nag-pa added

rnyed .P2.) to his definition of the

and Khyung are closer in opinion.

Shakya-mchog-ldan,

Dbu

.!!@.

15, p. 56.5-6, described Rngog's interpretation of Santideva's state-

ment (BeA IX 2) on this point, and in a subsequent passage Shakya-mchog-ldan gives

a summary of no fewer than eleven early Tibetan scholars' opinions
72.4-74.5).
On

the inexpressibility of ultimate reality according to the early

Madhyamaka,
with
dent

MMK

<ibid.,

see D.

Seyfort Ruegg (1981),

p.

Indian

18, where it is said in connection

XVIII 9 that "the characteristic of reality (tattva) is to be not

on another (Le.

pp.

-not to be communicated)," and on p.

depen-

42 in connection with

the same verse, this is said to be one of the essential rationales for Nagarjuna's
philosophical

procedure--"the principle that ultimate reality (tattva) cannot

expressed

conceived

or

in the frame of vikalpa and prapanca."

"For

the

reason Nagarjuna's procedure cannot be described as anti-philosophical even if

maintains no propositional thesis (pratiifia) intended to establish a
metaphYSical system."

be

same

he

speculative

I
I

398

On

the other hand,

paramartha

Candraklrti in his Prasannapada commentary on the

defined

"the

on the basis of the MMK (xviii 7 and 9)

respect

to which there is no functioning of words and cognitions,

as

that

MMK
with

for it is

not

communicated by another, and it is still, directly knowable (pratyatmavedya) by

the Aryas, and beyond all discursive development (prapanca)." See D. Seyfort
Ruegg (1981),

p.

75, and also (1977), pp. 11, 18f, and note 42.

account of Go-rams-pa, Rgyal ba, p. 158.6

(~

Cf. the similar

79b.6).

On the problem of the knowability of ultimate reality,

see also D. Seyfort

Ruegg (1971), passim, and (1973), p. 60.

96Vimalakirtinirdesa Sutra,

VIII 33 (E. Lamotte [1962], p. 317).

are also quoted below in the autocommentary to KhJ III 52,

citly

attributed

to

the "Li tstsha byi'i mdo."

These lines

where they are

This is a designation

explifor

the

VimalakIrtinirdesa because VimalakIrti himself is "the Licchavi."

On silence in the Vimalakfrtinirdesa,
bstan .I!!!.),

see

E.

tions of the Sutra also exist--by R.

Lal Mani Joshi (1981),
Boin (1976).
The
pp.

A.

Three more recent trans1a-

Thurman (1976), Bhiksu Prasadika and

and the English rendering of Lamotte's translation by Sara

Vimalakirtinirdesa is quoted by Jfianagarbha in his Sattvadvayavibhanga

6a-6b,

In the extant Tibetan translation of that treatise (D 3881),

it is said that "as stated in the Vimalaklrtinirdesa, only silence is

to the dharma-mukha which is without duality (advaya) and is

discursive development (nisprapanca)"

See
tstsha

F.

Dri.!!!1!. med ..P.2!:.

These are discussed by de Jong (1984), p. 89.

to the same effect.

adequate

(D 176:

pp. 109f, 317f.

Lamotte (1962),

also Go-rams-pa,

Rgyal ba,

p.

97 .4:

bi .la don dam .I!!!. dris pa' i tshe ci .Yill!& mi

.&Q. ba Ita

free

from

(D. Seyfort Ruegg [1981], p.-70).

bu'oll.

~.I!!!.'
~

bar cir

jam dpal
~

mi grub

1i
~

Meaningful or "semioticized" silence is a part of the Madhyamaka methodology and is related to the silence of the Arya (arya tUSQ.i[m] bhava) and the silence
See D. Seyfort Ruegg (1981) , pp. 34f, the sources cited in ibid.,

of the Buddha.

notes 89 and 92, and also (1977), pp. 12 and 19.

97RA

I 61b-62d.

The full verses in Sanskrit and Tibetan as cited

Hahn (1982), pp. 26f, are:

sasBwkhyaulukyanirgranthapudgalaskandhavadinam I
prccha lokal}l yadi vadaty
astinastivyatikramam II 61 II

by M.

399

dharmayautakam i l l asman
nastyastitvavyatikramam I
vidhi gambhiram ill uktam

buddhan8w sasanamrtam II 62 II

.8!!!!&. ~ phung .P.Q!. ~ ba

~ ~ grangs !!!. ~
~

.8!!!.

med bcas la

.Y2!!. med 'das

~ ~

wi

..P!!!:.!!s.

dangl I

te zhigll
na drisl I [61]

de phyir sangs ~ ~ ill nil I

bstan ~ 'chi med .Y..Q. med lasl I
'das ~ zab mo ~ bshad ~I
chos

ill khud

.vi!!. shes BY1!Y I [62]

Cf. the rendering of these verses in D. Seyfort Ruegg (1983), p. 232.

there,

note

Sanskrit.

77,

As observed

the Tibetan version (from the Tanjur) differs slightly from the

The version in the KhJ itself differs in some details from the

Tanjur

version:
61d par KhJ: pa T
62c zhes KhJ: 'di T
62d lags mkhyen mdzod KhJ: yin shes gyis T
98See also ThGS,
which

concludes:

kho

p.

32.3.2 (64a.2),

where the same simile is found,

bo B!8. don dam .ill!!:. spros ~ dang bral ba' i phyir dam

~ mi len ~ la ngan .&.:.YQ. !!!. zhes skur ba ci ste 'debsl

bstod

l@

D.

bca'

drang.EQ!. ~ ba zhes

rigs sol I.
Seyfort Ruegg (1983),

p. 232, note 78, observes that this non-affirma-

tion of the Madhyamaka described here by

and

non-implicative

Cf.

the reasoning mentioned above,

Y.

and

Kajiyama (1973),

Sa-pa~

absolute negation" (med

note 87.

is a "case of non-presuppositional

l@ ~ ~

prasajyapratililedha).

On these types of negation see also

pp. 167-174; J. F. Staal (1962); and the sources cited in D.

Seyfort Ruegg (1977), p. 59, note 10.

990n the "Vijflanavadins who affirm external objects," see below, KhJ III 50
and note 151.
lOOOn
~~,

Shows,

the terms mdo sde

pa' i dbu ma

and rnal 'byor

pa' i dbu

see K. Mimaki (1983), pp. 163f and (1982), pp. 41-44. As Mimaki (1982)
these terms of a double filiation appear in Tibetan writings from at least

the early 9th century,

and according to D.

Seyfort Ruegg (1981),

p.

59,

their

400

usage

may be dated slightly earlier,

to the end of the 8th century.

As Mimaki
the earliest known occurence of such terms in an Indian work is

(1982) mentions,

in the Pancakrama Irks by the early-11th-century Kashmiri nun Lak~mi.

ibid.,

note

99,

mtha' chen mo,

As cited in

the latter work'is quoted by 'Jam-dbyangs-bzhad-pa in his

chapter ca (Svatantrika chapter),

Grub

pp. 77a.5-77b.2 (New Delhi ed.:

pp. 823-824; II 106a-b).

10lGlo_bo mkhan-chen, KhJNSh, p. 259a.l, understands Sa-pa~ as disapproving
of these mixed terminologies,
show

such

and quotes from KhJ III 45 in support of this.

combinations to be absurd,

To

he points out that one would also have

to

come up with various other combined names for other instances where two schools
share tenets.
Glo-bo mkhan-chen was disagreeing with the answer he was given on
this point by Shakya-mchog-ldan in the latter's Mkhas
tInges ..l!!!!:. 'thad do."

dris

lan,

p.

Here, as Khenpo Appey suggested, Glo-bo mkhan-chen may have missed

intended meaning.
with

Sa-pa~'s

merely seems to be saying that if. one maintains a school

Sa-pa~

such "mixed" tenets,

means of reasoning.

147.2:

one should make sure to remove any

Whatever elements they may include,

contradictions

by

the tenets of one's own

school should be internally compatible and consistent.

Glo-bo mkhan-chen,

p.

259b.l, concludes by saying, "Nevertheless, some of

those terms which have been previously current such as those taught in the work of
the
were

great

translator Dpal-brtsegs were left as they were [read:

merely

mentioned by name in such works as

bzhag]

[Grags-pa-rgyal-mtshan's]

rtogs lion shing."

Glo-bo mkhan-chen was thus probably referring to the Lta

rim

of Dpal-brtsegs (which also appears again in

bshad

Narthang
bcu

Tanjurs under the different title Lta ba'i rim

bdun).

Madhyamaka.

This

the

and
Mngon

Peking

Seyfort Ruegg (1981),

and

.Ii .!!@!!..!!&!!&. snang ba

work indeed employs combined names for the sub-schools of

See D.

ba'i

the

p. 59, and K. Mimaki (1982), pp. 41f.

Glo-bo mkhan-chen probably also had in mind the Lta ba'i khyad..l!!!!:. of another
early translator, Ye-shes-sde, since this too employs such terms (see also KhJNSh,
p. 278a.2: sngon.8.Y!. 10 tsa ba dpal brtsegs la sogs ~ bshad pa'i mam grangs).
Shakya-mchog-ldan, Mkhas ~ dris lan, p. 147.4, had referred Glo-bo mkhan-chen
to this text as the Lta ba'i

rjed~.

On the work of Ye-shes-sde see Y. Imaeda

(1975), D. Seyfort Ruegg (1981b), and K. Mimaki (1982), pp. 40-42, 44.
The

reference

E.8.v!!!!. ill mngon

to the Mngon rtogs lion shing is to

..l!!!!:. rtogs

rin .2. che ' i I jon shing,

passage

has been studied by K.

correct

by

Go-rams-pa,

Mimaki (1982),

Zab mo,

twofold division of rnal 'byor

p.

pp.

26b.l (52.1),

~ ~

and mdo sde

p.

Grags-pa-rgyal-mtshan,
15.3.2 (BOa. 2)

31f.

It is also

cited

This
as

though the latter rejects a

~ ~

as

incomplete.

See

401

ibid., p. 26a.3 (51.3).

102'phags
(=aryasatya),

pa'i

bde

KhJ (C) and (D) both read ~ pa'i

ba.

which is also possible.

But cf.

Dbus-pa Blo-gsal,

bden .ill!

p. 4a.2: srid

oa 'i sdug bsngal zhi ba dang/ ~ ngan las 'das pa' i bde ba la ~.ill! sangs
See also Glo-bo mkhan-chen, Sde bdun mdo ~

.!:8.YM pa'i grub pa'i mtha'o//.

snga,

p.

4.6 (2a.6), who when commenting on this verse reads bde ba.

KhJ III 41

with autocommentary is quoted in ibid., p. 4.4f (2a.4f).

103 tshu
(1966),

p.

rol mthong ba:

VN (S),

396;

D.

arvagdarsin,

arvagdaraana.

Shastri (1972),

Literally, this is one who sees this side or the

the term as follows:
.ill! la Ita mkhan) ,

p.

See also

13.3;

T.

near side.

Khenpo Appey defined

(1) "one who considers only the present life" (tshe

or (2) "one who is not a Saint (arya)"

Hirano

and VN (D), p. 327a.6.

~.ill!

ma.vi!!.

kho

w.

Th. Stcherbatsky (1930-32), vol. 2, p. 334, note 4, translated tshur mthong as "an
ordinary man."
term

Cf.

L.

'short-sighted'

beyond

ordinary

Sopa and J.
or

Hopkins (1976), p. 117: "etymologically, the

'one who looks nearby' refers to one who does

worldly appearances."

Cf.

also Lati

Rinpoche

and

not
E.

see

Napper

(1980), p. 57: "one who looks nearby [i.e. an ordinary being]."

104Glo_bo mkhan-chen, KhJNSh, p. 260b.4, understands this as a reference to
the ~ pa'i dgongs gsal where Sa-pa~ refuted.various

erroneous

passage referred to is in the section explaining the perfection of

understanding (pp. 23.4.5-34.1.5 [46b.5-76a.5]).
of the chapter is as follows:

tenets.

The

discriminative

The structure of the beginning

I. The definition of discriminative understanding

II. The (detailed) ascertainment of the nature of discriminative understanding
A. Identification of the opposite
1. Identification of imperfect understanding
2. Reflection on its harmful consequences
B. The individual disaernment of the nature of the antidotes
1. The antidote to the causes of imperfect understanding
2. The antidote to the resulting imperfect understanding
i. The refutation of non-Buddhist schools
ii. The refutation of erroneous opinions of Buddhists
(A)

Refutation of those who

(B)

Refutation

maintain ~ravaka tenets

of followers of the Mahayana who

erroneously

400

usage

may be dated slightly earlier,

to the end of the 8th century.

As Mimaki
the earliest known occurence of such terms in an Indian work is

(1982) mentions,

in the Pancakrama Tika by the early-11th-century Kashmiri nun Lak~mI.

ibid.,
mtha'

note

99,

chen~,

As cited in

the latter work'is quoted by 'Jam-dbyangs-bzhad-pa in his

chapter ca (Svatantrika chapter),

Grub

pp. 77a.5-77b.2 (New Delhi ed.:

pp. 823-824; II 106a-b).

101Glo_bo mkhan-chen, KhJNSh, p. 259a.1, understands Sa-paQ as disapproving
of these mixed terminologies,

and quotes from KhJ III 45 in support of this.

show

such

come

up with various other combined names for other instances where

share

combinations to be absurd,

tenets.

To

he points out that one would also have

two

to

schools

Glo-bo mkhan-chen was disagreeing with the answer he was given on

this point by Shakya-mchog-ldan in the latter's Mkhas

tInges .m!E. 'thad do."

dris

lan,

p.

147.2:

Here, as Khenpo Appey suggested, Glo-bo mkhan-chen may have missed Sa-paQ's
intended meaning.
with

Sa-paQ merely seems to be saying that if. one maintains a school

such "mixed" tenets,

means of reasoning.

one should make sure to remove any

Whatever elements they may include,

contradictions

by

the tenets of one's own

school should be internally compatible and consistent.

Glo-bo mkhan-chen,

p.

259b.1, concludes by saying, "Nevertheless, some of

those terms which have been previously current such as those taught in the work of
the

great

translator Dpal-brtsegs were left as they were [read:

merely

were

mentioned by name in such works as

bzhag]

[Grags-pa-rgyal-mtshan's]

rtogs ljon shing."

Glo-bo mkhan-chen was thus probably referring to the Lta

rim

of Dpal-brtsegs (which also appears again in

bshad

Narthang
bcu

bdun).

Madhyamaka.
Glo-bo

Tanjurs under the different title Lta ba' i rim

This

the

ba'i

Peking

Seyfort Ruegg (1981),

probably

and

.Ii ~ ~ snang ba

work indeed employs combined names for the sub-schools of

See D.

mkhan-chen

and
Mngon

the

p. 59, and K. Mimaki (1982), pp. 41f.

also had in mind the Lta ba'i khyad

of

another

early translator, Ye-shes-sde, since this too employs such terms (see also KhJNSh,
p. 278a.2: sngon ill 10 tsa ba dpal brtsegs la sogs ~ bshad pa'i ~ grangs).
Shakya-mchog-ldan, Mkhas ~ dris lan, p. 147.4, had referred Glo-bo mkhan-chen
to this text as the Lta ba'i

rjed~.

On the work of Ye-shes-sde see Y. Imaeda

(1975), D. Seyfort Ruegg (1981b), and K. Mimaki (1982), pp. 40-42, 44.
The

reference

to the Mngon rtogs ljon shing is to

Grags-pa-rgyal-mtshan,

passage

mngon ~ rtogs ~ rin .P.Q. che' i 1 jon shing, p. 15.3.2 (130a. 2)

This
has been studied by K. Mimaki (1982), pp. 31f.
It is also cited as

correct

by

~ ~

Go-rams-pa,

Zab mo,

twofold division of rnal 'byor

p.

26b.1 (52.1),

~ ~

and mdo sde

though the latter rejects

~ ~

as

incomplete.

a
See

401

p. 26a.3 (51.3).

~.,

102~ pa'i bde ba.

(=aryasatya),

pa 'i sdug bsngal zhi ba dang/

~

pa'i grub pa'i mtha'o//.

snga,

p.

KhJ (C) and (D) both read ~ pa'i

which is also possible.

.!!!y.!!

But cf.

Dbus-pa Blo-gsal,

ngan las 'das pa' i bde ba la

bden

.p!!

p. 4a.2: srid
sangs

~.p!!

See also Glo-bo mkhan-chen, Sde bdun mdo ~

4.6 (2a.6), who when commenting on this verse reads bde ba.

KhJ III 41

with autocommentary is quoted in ibid., p. 4.4f (2a.4f).

103 tshu
(1966),

p.

rol mthong ba:

396;

VN (S),

D.

arvagdarsin,

arvagdarsana.

Shastri (1972),

Literally, this is one who sees this side or the

the term as follows:
na

la 1ta mkhan),

p.

See also

13.3;

Hirano

T.

and VN (D), p. 327a.6.

near side.

Khenpo Appey defined

(1) "one who considers only the present life" (tshe 'di
or (2) "one who is not a Saint (arya)"

~.p!! ~.Y..!.!!.

kho
.p!!).

Th. Stcherbatsky (1930-32), vol. 2, p. 334, note 4, translated tshur mthong as "an
ordinary man."
term

Cf.

L.

'short-sighted'

beyond

ordinary

Sopa and J.
or

Hopkins (1976), p. 117: "etymologically, the

'one who looks nearby' refers to one who does

worldly appearances."

Cf.

also Lati

Rinpoche

and

not
E.

see

Napper

(1980), p. 57: "one who looks nearby [Le. an ordinary being]."

104Glo_bo mkhan-chen, KhJNSh, p. 260b.4, understands this as a reference to
the Thub

pa'i dgdngs gsal where Sa-pa~ refuted.various

erroneous

passage referred to is in the section explaining the perfection of

understanding (pp. 23.4.5-34.1.5 [46b.5-76a.5]).
of the chapter is as follows:

tenets.

The

discriminative

The structure of the beginning

I. The definition of discriminative understanding

II. The (detailed) ascertainment of the nature of discriminative understanding
A. Identification of the opposite
1. Identification of imperfect understanding
2. Reflection on its harmful consequences
B. The individual discernment of the nature of the antidotes
1. The antidote to the causes of imperfect understanding
2. The antidote to the resulting imperfect understanding
i. The refutation of non-Buddhist schools
ii. The refutation of erroneous opinions of Buddhists
(A)

Refutation of those who

(B)

Refutation

maintain ~ravaka tenets

of followers of the Mahayana who

erroneously

402

I
I

maintain

teachings

of provisional meaning as of

definitive

meaning
(C) Refutation of those who uphold as Buddhist a doctrine that
is neither Sravaka nor Mahayana
(1) Refutation of a previously appeared Chinese tradition
(2)

Refutation

of a later tradition

that

follows

the

former
(3) Refutation of a tradition that maintains a meditation
of

the Nirakara ("cognitive-image-less")

Mind-Only

as

being the Mahamudra

(4)

Refutation of a fallacious semblance of the

tion

of Discriminative

Understanding

Perfec-

(prajnaparamita)

that is held to be Mahamudra

For a first translation of section (1), see Roger Jackson (1982), pp. 91-93.
writer,

p.

90,

described

the

Thub pari dgongs gsal as

Tibetan history of Buddhism

1251."
the

"possibly

That
oldest

written in Mongolia sometime between 1244 and

The Thub pari dgongs gsal is in fact a religious treatise on the stages of

Bodhisattva's

path (i.e.

it is a special kind of lam rim,

though it does contain this one "historical" passage).

taught by

Sa-pa~

addendum

at the end of the work,

before his departure from Tibet;

Sa-pa~

not

history,

It was composed and widely

however,

according to a
Liang-chou.

Note

the Sa-skya-pa tradition usually cites its abbreviated title as Thub

dgongs gsal, and not as Thub pari dgongs

R.

Jackson (1982),

final

sent a copy of it in its final form back

to his disciples in Tibet after leaving for the Mongol camp in

that

the

~('i)

rab gsal.

pp. 93f, suggests that

Sa-pa~

in section (1) "put into

the mouth of Kamalasfla" words that reflect "more closely what a Buddhist logician
[i.e.

Sa-pa~

said."
course

But
a

himself]

would like the acarya to have said than what he

it is difficult to substantiate this.

highly accomplished Buddhist logician,

Kamalasfla
and regarding

himself
his

actually
was

of

dialectical

procedure, it was typical for him to negate the views of his opponents by dividing
them into sets of alternatives and then refuting the alternatives one by one.
for instance his MAl (Dbu rna snang ba),

See

(P) pp.198a.6-198b.4, and the translation

of that passage by S. Moriyama (1984), p. 15, note 24.

Moreover,

to

altered

their

content

sources

Sa-pa~

know

how closely

Sa-pa~

followed his sources or whether

to suit his own purposes,

one would have

based his account on and examine their contents.

to

he

know what

The second

task

is not possible at present, but in the Thub pari dgongs gsal Sa-pal) does cite four
written sources (pp. 25.3.6 and 25.4.1):
the chronicles known as Rgyal ~,
[or Dba'?] bzhed and 'Ba' bzhed, and "other bka' chems writings" (bka' cherns

403

m Ii ~ gzhan).
explains

the

See also Sa-palJ,

Skyes bu dam.lli!"

sources of this account:

m!.

bshad/.

Just above,

bzhed/

la' i

(ibid., p. 332.3), Sa-pa.1} mentioned the

That Sa-pal} in his Skyes

referred to the three Tibetan histories was noted already by A.

kov (1970), p. 25, note 55.

R. Jackson, p. 93,
"the

where he again

bdag &. kyang .ka ~ la shi

Q!lli. .!!. sgom rim gsum and Dbu ~ snang ba of Kamala~ila.

bu dam

332.4,

m.&i 10 .!:&.Y!!. rnams/

'di

bzhed/ 'bangs bzhed ~ mthun m!!. snang/

rjes.!!. 'brangs

p.

Vostri-

translates the references to the three chronicles as

bzhed dba' bzhed chronicles," and comments, p. 98, note 7, "This almost

certainly refers to the

rabs sba bzhed, an early chronicle that is concerned

chiefly with the reign of Khri srong Ide btsan." Of the three chronicles, the
only one that is extant is the Sba bzhed ('Ba' bzhed in Sa-pal}'s list?), of which
the Zhabs btags

version was edited by R.

version of the Sba bzhed,

A.

Stein (1961).

There is also one

recently published from Beijing (1980,

second printing

1982) based on a manuscript in the Mi-rigs-rig-gnas-pho-brang library, in which

an account of the debate almost identical to that in the Thub pari dgongs gsal is
related.

See Sba Gsal-snang,

duced with the words

.y!!!!&.

lugs

Sba bzhed,

pp. 72-75, where the passage is intro-

.&.9:..8. la.

One should also note that fragments of some of the works attributed to
master Mahayana

in Sa-pal}'s account have indeed been found among the

documents, though not all were by Mahayana himself.

on

the
Huang

See S. Karmay (1975), p. 153,

the identification of the Bsam gtan nyal ba'i 'khor 10 (Pelliot tibetain 811),

~ gtan

ill Ion (Pelliot tibetain 117), and Mdo sde brgyad cu'i khung (Pelliot

tibetain 818;
6,

Tun

and G.

explains

compare Pelliot tibetain 996).

W.
the

Houston (1980),
contents

p.

5.

Cf. R. Jackson (1982), p. 98, note

Sa-palJ,

II

Skyes bu dam.lli!" pp. 332.1.1-2,

of the five works attributed to

Mahayana,

as

was

also

I,

recorded by S. Karmay (1975), ibid.

105
On this work see D. Seyfort Ruegg (1981),
classification was the subject of later discussion.

This hundredfold
pp. 62f.
Glo-bo mkhan-chen as a young

scholar had asked Shakya-mchog-ldan, "Which words in the Tarkajvala teach the 'In
the Tarkajvala they were summarized into one hundred' that [Sa-pal}] mentioned?"
Shakya-mchog-ldan's answer, Mkhas ~ dris lan, pp. 130.5-131.3, was that one
could neither point out the specific place that taught it nor deny that it was
taught as such in the work.
And Shakya-mchog-ldan held that it was not substantially wrong to classify them as one hundred, for many basic scriptures clearly

state

hundred,

the

numerical

and this,

seems to convey.

determinateness of the tenets as

he believed,

four

less

was what the general content of the

than

one

Tarkajvala

He then listed the groups of TIrthika dialecticians as follows:

I'

404

.&!.. Ita ba
44 .Eh.Yi rna' i mthar rtog .&!.. Ita ba
18 sngon ill mthar rtog

14 lung du !!!!!. bstan pari Ita ba

20

Ita

[~

tshogs la Ita ba],

"which

issue

forth from the five views which are their 'root.'"

96
Shakya-mchog-ldan furthermore suggested that the number of views attributed to the
Tarkajvala by Grags-pa-rgyal-mtshan, viz. 363, may be a scribal error in which 363
was

written instead of 163.

number

(But as I was informed by Dr.

363 indeed appears in TJ V,

108.)

Chr.

Lindtner,

See also Glo-bo mkhan-chen,

Sde

the
~

mdo ~ snga, p. 8.1-10.3 (4b.1-5b.3), where the list of some one hundred and
twenty theories from this source is given.
When Glo-bo mkhan-chen wrote his KhJNSh,
ldan's system of enumeration.
tion

and

Instead,

he did not mention

Shakya-mchog-

on p. 264b, he discussed the classifica-

numbering of the non-Buddhist schools quoting from the Dbu rna rin

sgron rna (*Madhyamakaratnapradipa).

(The latter is ascribed to Bhavaviveka,

is perhaps the work of a Bhavaviveka II;

note 214.)

see D.

Seyfort Ruegg [1981],

but

p. 66 and

The following are taught there, according to Glo-bo mkhan-chen:

363 Ita bali 'phreng ba

62 Ita ba
20 ~ tshogs ill ri bo
12 byed pari skyes bu
12 bdag tu smra ba
5 Ita ba
3 Ita ba
2 Ita ba
Next

Glo-bo

mkhan-chen quotes from the Rnam bshad

mtshan for its commentary on Hevajra Tantra I,x,12,

cating the five main schools.

ldan

of

Grags-pa-rgyal-

which is interpreted as indi-

Grags-pa-rgyal-mtshan then summarizes the enumera-

tive classifications of these "erroneous views": they may be reduced to 360, or to

62.
~

Moreover, those can be reduced to twenty

gzhi

tshogs la Ita ba.

tshugs .ill!. are here reduced to five doctrines.

Those

may

And the rtog

be

further

reduced to two: eternalist or annihilationist.

And those may finally be reduced
to a single category: "self postulating" (bdag tu 'dzin .ill!.).
Somewhat
(~

later Glo-bo mkhan-chen presents the opinion of some

authorities

zhig gsung) on how the TIrthika theories are summarized into one hundred in

the Tarkajvala:

405

16 sngon ill mthar rtog ~ [read: gi] mtha' dang ldan

E!i ldan la ltag chad gnyis

..!!. ~

bas

8 E.ru!&. .&1 ~ ba .f!!!!.

1 .!:&y!!. med ~ ba
32

.12hIi

mthar rtog .&1 'dus shes ldan E

16 'dus shes mi ldan E

16 'dus shes .Y.Q.. min med min
10 mthong ba' i chos 1a
1 chad

ngan 'das E

100
Glo-bo mkhan-chen then goes on to list a different way of classifying and enumerating these theories as found in a commentary on the Phung .QQ. Inga'i rab tu byed E
(Paficaskandhaprakaraua) of Vasubandhu:
50 .J!&. E la lta ba
10 mthar 'dzin ill lta ba

24 Ita ba mchog 'dzin [gyi Ita ba]

10 tshul khrims dang
6

12K ~

..h!:!!!!.

zhugs mchog 'dzin i l l lta ba

Ita ba

100
This comment no doubt expands the basic fivefold classification of theories

found

in the basic work (P 5560), si, 15a.3 (vol. 113, p. 238.2.3).

Glo-bo mkhan-chen also opined that of the above two ways of arriving at one
hundred, the latter was through a division of the five main schools [?], ,while the
former

embraced all five schools in general (cf.

dris.!.2,

p.

131.1).

two ~ ltar .&Vi mthar rtog.,

jvala.
Glo-bo

Shakya-mchog-ldan,

Mkhas

He also states that the Dbu !!!!!. rin chen sgron ~ explains

mkhan-chen

whereas these are said not to be found in the Tarkaalso

investigated

this

problem

in

his

Sde

bdun

~ . ~ snga, p. 10 (5b), but did not reach a final conclusion.

For

other

classifications of lta ba,

see

Bu-ston,

Chos

mngon E,

p.

---

170.1ff, esp. p. 173.5 (wa 48a.5), where he discusses the sixty-two Ita ba mentioned in the Mdo sde tshangs pa'i dra ba (Brahmajala Sutra), and Glo-bo mkhan-

chen, &
listed

bdun

mdo ~ snga,

p.

7.5f (4a.5f),

where several others

..._----------

are

406

106Sa_pa~ followed this fivefold grouping in several of his own works.

was

also

accepted by his predecessors Phywa-pa

students

Lho-pa

and

Grags-pa-rgyal-mtshan,

kun-mkhyen Rin-chen-dpal and Zhang Rgyal-ba-dpal, and

scholars such as Bla-ma-dam-pa Bsod-nams-rgyal-mtshan and Dbus-pa

D.

Jackson (1985),

apparently

pp.

criticized

9,

note 7, and 11, note 16.

this fivefold system.

by

It
his
later

Blo-gsal.

See

Bcom-ldan Rigs-p~i-ral-gri

See Glo-bo

mkhan-chen,

Sde

bdun

mdo ~ snga, p. 11.4 (6a.4).

107According to Shakya-mchog-ldan,

Mkhas

~ dris lan,

p. 136.7, Dbus-pa

Blo-gsal criticized the KhJ for its inclusion of the Gsang-bar-smra-ba in the same
group as the Rig-byed-pa.

This is a reference to Dbus-pa Blo-gsal, p. 44b.2, who

bases himself on the Tattvasapgraha:

kha .!&.!is. byed ,E dang ~. ba ,E ~ grangs su Ichad ,E ~ ni chcs mi

!llid

~ ba,E
~

&J

ba I i mtshan nyid dang ldan

ni cung zad .YQ. min ~ I

de phyir 'di

rung,

~I

thams cad nill

snangl I
zhes ~ tsam du ~ la snga ma ni de ~ pa Ii phyir tel i!. skad ~
~ I dir gzhan ~ mi shes pa Iil I
~ shes .&Y!!E. .P.!L ~ ~

dri ~.&2.. ~ blo ~ rnamsl I

tsam tshul Idi mi rigs ylj I

thos

gnod pa I i phyir zhes smral I

zhes tshad mali de kho na nyid bsdus ,E las

The
legs

.P.!L

See D.
snga,

dris lan,

bshad ,E,
a

p.

135.6.

Shakya-mchog-ldan

One should also note that the Gzhung lugs

a treatise on siddhanta falsely ascribed

to

radically separate classification of the Vedanta from

Jackson (1985),
p.

bali phyirll

Gsang-bar-smra-ba-pa are identified as Vedantins by

in his Mkhas
advocated

14.5 (7b.5),

p.

4.

also

Sa-pa~,

the

Mlma~sa.

Cf. also Glo-bo mkhan-chen, Sde bdun mdo ~

where Rma-bya Byang-chub-brtson-'grus and some others are

said to have identified the Spyod-pa-ba with the Ngo-bo-nyid-rgyur-smra-ba.

108Alternative1y,
below,

this may mean "devotees of Brahman," as Sa-pa~ discusses

commentary to III 44.

But Dbus-pa Blo-gsal,

p. 7a.4, also reads tshangs

,E.

109This is a reference to the Prabhakara, the branch of the Mima~sa founded

by

Prabhakara

(c.

650-720).

In some ways i t "might be held to provide

media between Buddhism and Nyaya" (K.

Potter [1977], p. 14).

This school is also

407

mentioned by

Mok~akaragupta

associates

S8-p8~

the

in his TBh.

Prabhakara

See below,

with

explanation is that the name refers to the

Dbus-pa Blo-gsal,
his

"Vai~~ava"

synonyms.

class,

p.

the

note 177.

Sa~hya

It is unclear why

though

Sa~hya,

one

7a.3, classifies the Gsal-byed-pa (Prabhakara) among

and states that Gsal-byed-pa, 'Od-byed-pa and Nyi-ma-pa are

But the 'Od-byed-pa should be "followers of Uddyotakara."

gsal later (p.

suggested

theory of causation.

77b.l) mentions this school as "'Od-byed-pa-dag."

Dbus-pa Blo-

See

K.

Mimaki

(1980a), p. 151.
110Glo_bo mkhan-chen,

KhJNSh,

p. 266b.3, states that the Sanskrit equiva-

lent of ('Jig-rten) Rgyang-'phen [pal or Rgyang-song is *Lokayatin (the text

actually reads: 10 ka ~1Q!1), and that the opinion of some followers of Gtsangnag-pa that the term is rkyang .ill!. ba ("one who [maintains] merely or solely") is
thus incorrect.
Glo-bo mkhan-chen apparently emended his text to read rkyang .ill!.
ba (see also ibid., p. 261b.4) based on this understanding of the purvapaksa.
also his Sde bdun mdo ~ snga, p. 14.4 (7b.4) where he reads:
.Qhv.i mi 'dod
la.

See

rten snga

rkyang .ill!. ba' 0 zhes ~ ba ni .!:.8Y.ill!&. 'phen pa' i sgra don 1!!!! shes
Here rkyang ~ .ill!. would seem more likely because i t is closer

M!:. zad

phonetically to the standard form.

Compare Dbus-pa Blo-gsal 's treatment of the same problem (p.

.&!. sgra' i don ni

~ .ill!.

~
~

..J!i
~

rten pa' i E!!!&.

.9.!!&. pa 'i Ita ba las .&!& d u song bas .ill!. ~

ste/ ~ 1Q ti ni song ba dang bral ba dang ~ ba'i don to zhes slob dpon

.!!!!Q. bzang ~ bshad .12!!. 'di .I!!!. no/ des.ill!. tshe snga ..P!:!!i ~ du

.!:.&Iill!.8. 'phen Jill.. dang/

tshe snga

..P!:!!i mi 'dod

kho.ill!. la phan ~ 'dod ~.8..!ill!.8. [read:

.!!!. .!:8I!!!!&. ~ pa 'i sgra' i don mi shes

Dbus-pa

the
other

6b.3): de.M

.l@E.

dang/

tshe

rkyang?] phan .ill!. la sogs ~ 'chad

zad

i1E./ /

Blo-gsal (or his later scribes or editors) thus seem to have

spelling Rgyang-pan-pa,

which seems to have been the preferred spelling

good scholars of the period as well.

Chos mngon~,

~ .!:B.Y!!!!&. ~ Jill..

'phen

used
for

It is found for instance in Bu-ston,

p. 177.1 (~50a.l), and also in KhJ (B).

In the Derge edition of

the KhJ, however, the accepted spelling was Rgyang-'phen-pa.

The

Sanskrit term lokayata has been interpreted as "concerning the

world"

by E. Frauwallner (1973), vol. 2, p. 221, and as "found among people in general"

by S. N. Dasgupta (1951), vol. 1, p. 78.
1l1.!:.&Y1!l rigs

gzhung du

ba.

This seems to be a

reference

doctrines of statecraft taught by such persons as Ca~akya and Kautilya.

Shakya-mchog_ldan,

Mkhas ~ dris lan,

p.

134.7,

to

the

However,

explains that this is a re-

ference to the "doctrine of the evil K~atriya" (LSlli. rigs ngan pa'i gzhung lugs),

408

phrase

proper

used in India for the defeating or suppressing of those

who

abide

doctrines while oneself abides in an improper religious system.

He

in
also

cites PV IV 63d (=PVinIII 20d):

ba ~ rigs lugs .Yi!!. E2.I I
the Sanskrit equivalent of ~ rigs lugs

..E
(Here

mchog-ldan

explains

is

rajakulasthiti.)

Shakya_
an evil

that Dharmaklrti used this phrase to refer to such

system.
On

this latter "K/ilatriya tradition" see also KhJ II 30 (D p.

40b. 2]): ~ po 'i.&.@. sa I i .!:ill!!!!. ~ dangl

ba

la sogs

nil

rang mi rigs

la

100.4.2

[~

rigs ill. lugs .Yi!!. !!Q zhes ~

dng gzhan mi rigs

byed

gcod pa'i dpe'oll.

See also the explanations of this system merely as unethical materialism in
Glo-bo mkhan-chen, Sde bdun mdo ~ snga, pp. 14.6-15.2 (7b.6-8a.2).
112

Glo-bo mkhan-chen, KhJNSh, pp. 263a.5-266b.6, took verses III 43-45 as a

point of departure for various comments and expansions, most of which have already
been mentioned in the previous notes.
He

begins

with

To summarize his commentary:

a quote from Lho-pa kun-mkhyen

Rin-chen-dpal

(from his

now - unavailable commentary on the BCA) in which Lho-pa would seem to be recording
Sa-pa~'s

general teachings on the origin and nature of the five main

non-Buddhist

philosophical schools of India:

(1)

Sa~hya

(263b.4)

(2) *Vaidika (Mima~sa and Vedanta) (264a.3)

(3)

Vaise~ika

(264b.1)

(4) Jaina (264b.2)

(5) Carvaka (264b.3)
Cf.

Dbus-pa

Blo-gsal,

p.

5b.1,

who denies that the

Sa~hya

came

first,

rejecting an interpretation of a line in Candraklrti's Madhyamakavatara.

thus

For more

discussion of this fivefold classification of the Tirthika schools, see D. Jackson

(1985), pp. 4ff.
Glo-bo

mkhan-chen next discusses the numbering of the non-Buddhist schools

as found in the Dbu rna rin chen sgron rna (described above,

note 105).

Next

(p.

265a.1) he quotes from the commentary on Hevajra Mulatantra I,x,12 given in Gragspa-rgyal-mtshan's

Rnam bshad

ldan.

There the Tantra is interpreted as indi-

cating the same five schools as in Lho-pa's list.

Grags-pa-rgyal-mtshan's account

concludes with a summary that reduces all the schools to 360, 63, 20, 5, 2, and 1.
Glo-bo mkhan-chen interprets this commentary as being in accord with the KhJ.
Next (p. 265b.S) Glo-bo mkhan-chen asserts that just this classification of
the

non-Buddhist

schools into five main schools is found in

other

great

basic

409

scriptures too.

As an instance he quotes the closing lines of the Rigs gter:

..!.h!!Q. .M. ~ skya rkang ~ .M. dang ~ pa' i bull
mkha ' ~..!!. dang tshu rol mdzes pa' i gzhung 'dzin J./ I
Here the Nyaya and Vaise~ika are listed separately, while the Mlma~saka

are

omitted.
Shakya-mchog-ldan, Mkhas ~ dris lan, p. 129.5, had already pointed
out this difference between the Rigs gter and KhJ to Glo-bo mkhan-chen.
However,
in his subsequent Tshad
!.
!.

.!!@.

rigs ~ bshad,

pp.

741.7-742.1, Shakya-mchog-ldan

described these as the "five schools of [non-Buddhist] dialecticians" (rtog

Inga) ,

though

thus

The later scholar

sde

Ngag-dbang-

Bod ill mkhas, pp. 54f, in a gloss explained rkang .!!!!&. .M. as !!&. byed

chos-grags,
~,

still identifying each correctly.

only obfuscating the point.

Here Ngag-dbang-chos-grags may have

been

following Glo-bo mkhan-chen, Sde bdun mdo ~ snga, p. 17.3 (9a.3) where this
passage

is explained.

Glo-bo mkhan-chen (p. 266a.l) then' goes on to mention the two ways in which
the Tirthika views may be summarized into one hundred in the Tarkajvala (as listed
above

in

note 105).

Then (p.

266b.2) he discusses the term Lokayata

Tibetan equivalent (see above, note 110).

and

its

The final point he makes (p. 266b.3) is

to refer the reader to the following works for further clarifying analyses:
(1) The Tarkajvala of Bhavaviveka.
(2) The commentary on Bhavaviveka's Prajnapradipa by Avalokitavrata (on which
see D. Seyfort Ruegg [1981], p. 67).
(3) The Dbu ma rin chen 'phreng ba (D 3901,
"Candrahari-pa";
~

the

Madhyamakaratnamala

could this be a mistake for the Dbu

ascribed to a Bhavaviveka?

Cf. number 5 below.

.!!@.

of

rin .Q.Q. cheri sgron

But Glo-bo mkhan-chen,

Sde bdun mdo ~ snga, p. 12.5 [6b.5] cites i t in the same way.)
(4) The Lta bali rab dbye of Atisa (not extant?).
(5)

The "Madhyamaka treatise" of the acarya Candrahari (probably his

Ratna-

mala, D 3901, but cf. number 3 above).

(6)

The

treatise

by Kamalas1Ia famed as the "great authority"

(?)

(tshad

chen) (=probably his Panjika on the Tattvasawgraha).

(7) The Nyayabindu purvapakasawksipta of Kamalasila.
For more sources on siddhanta, the modern reader should consult the lists

in

K.

Mimaki (1976), pp. 67f, and (1982), p. 2.

113

See Glo-bo mkhan-chen, Sde bdun mdo ~ snga, p. 15.4 (8a.4), who
quotes this passage. Cf. Dbus-pa Blo-gsal, p. 7b.3, who also refers to this Hindu
trinity.

,I
, Ii

;J

410

114Cf
(Ai~vara

and

Dbus-pa Blo-gsal,

= Saiva)

the

Rna-ma-phug-pa.

Tshangs-pa-ba,
pa,

6b.6-7b.3.

On p.

The Khyab-'jug-pa

7a.3 the Dbang-phyug-pa

Bye-brag-pa, Gsal-byed-pa,

(Vai~~ava)

are said to

At least, this is what "the masters explain" (slob dpon

Thus here the "followers of Brahman" are classed as

the classification by Shakya-mchog-ldan, Dbu

115Cf.

include

the

Dpyod-pa-ba, Rig-byed-pa, Brda-sprod-pa, Tsa-ra-ka-pa, Rgyal-dpog_

and Gsang-ba-pa.

'chad.QQ).

pp.

are said to include the Rigs-pa-can,

Cf.

Vai~~avas.

rnam, vol. 15, pp. 429.5f.

pp. 6b.6-7a.1: dper na sangs ~ [7a] pa 'i ~

Dbus-pa Blo-gsal,

lli!. gzhan ~ ~ bcom ldan 'das ~ mdo 'dzin mod ~ mdo sde lli!. zhes sde lli!. ~

nyid

no/I. Dbus-pa Blo-gsal makes this remark to explain not

.12h.v.!!&. lli!. and khyab ~ lli!..

la btags lli!. bzhin

.!:!&. byed

lli!., but dbang

Bodhibhadra

in his JSSN states that the name Sautrantika has been given to

those who accept literally the text of such Sutras as the SaQrnukha and Bhadracarya
and who follow them.

See K. Mimaki (1976), pp. 196f, and D. Seyfort Ruegg (1981),

p. 59, note 175.

illli

116Is this a loose paraphrase of Asanga's description in the AS of satkaya(~

tshogs la Ita

mngon,

p.

27.3 (14a .3).

cad

rten byed pa'i las can

Cf.

Here

Brtags lli!., pp. 133.2.4-133.3.4, also quoted in

Grags-pa-rgyal-mtshan's comments conclude with the same quote

paraphrase from Asanga,

from the KhJ:

tshogs la Ita ba is said to be "Ita ba thams

noll."

Grags-pa-rgyal-mtshan,

KhJNSh, pp. 265a-b.

or

See W. Rahula (1981), p. 10; and Gzhan-dga', Chos

~?

though its wording at the end is

bdag tu Ita bar 'du'o/.

Perhaps

Sa-pa~

slightly

different

got this quote second-hand

from his uncle's work.

11 7~
h
"
. m!&.
d
..J! I
~
.m!.2:. r les
sangika

Madhyamaka,

*parapras1..ddh-anumana.
-

this is to argue not only by means of

logical

(prasangas),

but

accepts

"three modes" (tshul gsum) of the logical reason.

note 157.

the

W'1. t h'1.n t he Praconsequences

also through the formally stated inferences of an opponent who

See also

below,

Cf. the discussion of anumana that is anyataraprasiddha by Candrakirti

in the Prasannapada (on MMK I 1),

cited by K. Mimaki (1982), p. 176, note 478.

have not yet found an instance of the use of this term in another school.
The term stong lli!. nyid (sunyata) was indeed interpreted differently in
other schools. To cite an extreme example, Uddyotakara in his Nyayavarttika III 1
denied that sunya had no denotation;

rather, he held that it meant "fit for dogs"

and denoted any substance that was fit for dogs.

Elsewhere

sunyata

was

See K. Potter (1977), pp. 327f.

understood in the more usual sense of mere

emptiness

or

411

voidness.

See for example Sa~ara, UpadesasahasrI 11,18,125 and K. Potter (1981),

p. 248.
KhJ III 45 is quoted by Glo-bc;> mkhan-chen,

Sde bdun mdo ~ snga,

p.

16.2-3 (8b.2-3).
118Khenpo Appey here glossed ci rigs wi th ~ zhig.
1190n the Grub mtha' ~ 'byed,

which is no longer extant, see D. Jackson

(1985), pp. 4 and 8, note 2.

120Glo_bo mkhan-chen, KhJNSh, pp. 266b.6-283a.2, discusses and expands upon
III 46 at length.
He gives background information on the classification of the
Buddhist schools, and also presents what amounts to a brief summary of the tenets
of the four main schools with special emphasis on the Yogacara and Madhyamaka.
begins by quoting Hevajra Tantra II,viii,9-10 (see D.
p.

116).

He

vol. 1,

Then he quotes a verse from the JSS of a later Aryadeva (see K. Mimaki
p.

[1976],

Snellgrove [1959],

canonical

186).

In

authority.

this

way he shows that the fourfold

classification

He also points out that the latter is also quoted

in

has
the

Vima1aprabha commentary on the Ka1acakra Tantra.

He next (p.

267a.3) addresses a very interesting issue.

scholars had adopted a critical,

They

By his time some

historical approach to the Buddhist scriptures.

had come to the conclusion that the four schools were established and

subsequent

named

to the Nirva~a of the Buddha by different teachers according to

own opinions, whereas

classifications.

during the Buddha's own lifetime there had been

their

no

such

G10-bo mkhan-chen (p. 267a.5) could not accept such a view because he
believed that in that case it would have been unfeasible for the Buddha to have
given

these various teachings in accordance with the different mentalities of his

disciples.

Moreover, this would contradict the statement by the Arya (Nagarjuna)

that the Buddha made doctrinal pronouncements which possessed a

(Sunyatasaptati 44; see also Chr. Lindtner [1982], pp. 54f.):

special

intent

~~l@~med ces ~I
~ de ~ med de'ang ~I

sangs

~ ~

.&.sun~

Those

l@ rtogs

sla rna

Y.l!Y I

Tibetan scholars who followed

following (p.
appear

kyis dgongs nas nil I

267b.2):

a historical approach moreover proposed

After the Nirva~a of the Buddha, the first scriptures to

were those of the Vaibha?ika school.

Sautrantika,

the

and next the Madhyamaka.

Then there arose the tenets of the

Then Arya Asanga established the tenets of

,;
412

the Yogacara.
For that reason one finds the tenets of the Vaibha~ika and Sautrantika appearing as purvapaksas in the basic writings of Nagarjuna, whereas the
latter
them.

does

not

take the tenets of the Yogacara as his purvapaksas

and

refute

According to Glo-bo mkhan-chen (p. 267b.6) this too is untenable.

points out that the Yogacarins are mentioned in the Bodhicittavivara9a (BV)
Nagarjuna,

quoting

first

Lindtner [1982], pp. 194f).

in

verse 30 and then 31 (for these verses see

Chr.

He quotes in addition Yuktisastika 12, as also quoted

the auto-commentary on KhJ III 48.

person"

also

He
of

Glo-bo mkhan-chen interprets the

of the latter verse to be one who maintains the existence of a

"unwise

momentary

non-dual Gnosis, which is the very tradition of the Mind-Only.

Regarding the authorship of the BV,
Cf.

Chr.

including

Lindtner (1982),

p.

see D.

Seyfort Ruegg (1981),

p. 104.

11, who counts the BV among the twelve texts--not

the MMK--attributed to Nagarjuna that must be considered genuine.

See

also ibid., p. 122, note 149, and p. 180, and Chr. Lindtner (1982a), pp. 186ff.
On

the four major Buddhist schools,

Glo-bo mkhan-ch~n's exposition is as

follows:
[Nyan thos theg pal
I. Bye brag tu smra ba (268b.2)
II. Mdo sde pa (269a.2)
[Theg pa chen po-- Introduction (270a.5)]
III. Rnal 'byor spyod pa sems tsam pa (270b.3)
A. kuri gzhi'i rnam shes de'i mtshan nyid
1. gzhan dbang (270b.5)
2. kun btags pa (271a.1)
3. yongs su grub pa (271a.1)
B. sems tsam pa grub mtha' tha dad
1. sems tsam rnam med pa (271a.3)

2. sems tsam rnam pa dang bcas pa (271b.1)

C. phyi rol gyi don mi 'dod -pa (272a.3)
1. Mngon rtogs ljon shing

2.

Ye shes snyin po kun las 'dus pa'i 'grel

3.

bod snga rabs kyi mngon pa smra ba (re:

pa (272a.4)
KhJ III 10)

a. [phyogs snga brjod pal

b. de gzhung 'dir 'gog pa (272b.2)
c. Mngon rtogs ljon shing las kyang (273a.1)
d. Mu stegs dang nyan thos dang rtsod pa'i tshe phyi don khas
pa (273a.4)

len

413

D. gzhan dbang
1. ming gi don (273b.l)
2. dbye ba (273b.2)
a. rna dag pa
b. dag pa
E. kun btags (273b.6)
1. ming don (273b.6)
2. dbye ba (274a.l)
F. yongs su grub pa (274b.3)
1. ming gi don (274b.4)
2. dbye ba (274b.4)
a. gnyis su dbye ba (274b.4)
b. bzhir dbye ba (275a.l)
G. mtshan nyid gsum bden pa gnyis su bsdu na (275b.4)
IV. Dbu rna pa (277a.3)
A. [Rje btsun dang Sa pal} gyis gzhan du g.sungs pa] (277a.3)
1.

Mngon

rtogs

ljon

shing (277a.4;

rejected by

Glo-bo

mkhan-chen,

278a.2)
2.

Rgyal sras lam bzang (277a.4; rejected by Glo-bo mkhan-chen, 278a.2,

as "grub mtha'i rim pa rna yin")

B. ji ltar 'dod pa (278b.6)
1. [dbye ba]

a. snga rabs pa rnams kyi gzhung phyi mo'i dbu rna

b. de rjes su 'brang ba'i dbu rna (279a.l)
i. thaI 'gyur ba
ii. rang rgyud pa
2. de'i nang tshan gyi dbye ba la/

thaI 'gyur ba'i dbye ba (279a.2)

rags pa phyi'i dbu rna (279a.3; cf. 280b.2:

pa'i dbu rna rnams rags pa phyi'i dbu rna yin)

~.

thaI rang la sogs

b. phra ba nang gi dbu rna (cf. 280b.2: rim pa lnga la sogs pa'i man
ngag du 'byung ba'i sgom rim gyi dbu rna rnams)
3. don dam pa'i 'dod tshul la mi mthun pa med (280b.5)
4. don dam pa la nges pa bskyed pa'i rigs pa (281a.3)
a. thaI rang gnyis kyi khyad par (281a.4)
i. Bka' gdams do kor ba'i dris Ian las (281a.4)
ii.

Lho pa'i gsung sgros mar (281a.6)

Cf. Glo-bo mkhan-chen's earlier analysis of tenets in his Sde bdun mdo,
(17a.3), which includes quotes from representative texts of each school.

p.

33.3

414

The

above

together.

account

in

the KhJNSh seems somewhat

rough

or

hastily

put

Nevertheless, it has passages of considerable interest, such as on the

division

of

the

Dbu-ma into phra ba and rags

(279a.3-280b.3)

attributed

Atisa, and the long quote from the otherwise unavailable Gsung sgros
on the BCA by Lho-pa kun-mkhyen (281a.6-283a.2).
made by Ngag-dbang-bsod-nams-rgyal-mtshan,
mistakenly

ascribes the Dbu

Sdom

The same attribution to Atisa is

~

gsum, 267.5 (134a.5).

could not locate the rags

559.4 (279a.4).

He here

rin .E2. che'i sgron ma (Madhyamakaratnapradipa)

Atisa, as Glo-bo mkhan-chen (and Lho-pa?) also did,

was not the beginning of the quotation from Atisa.
but one can compare his Dbu ma'i

to

commentary

to

if the mention of the title

1 phra ba distinction in Atisa's writings,

man~.

(P), vol. 102, p. 55.2.7 with KhJNSh p.

As Mr. S. Matsumoto informed me, the passage attributed to Atisa

above quotes the Madhyamakaratnapradlpa (P),

tsha,

353a.3-4.

This passage

has

been discussed by S. Yamaguchi in his Works, vol. 1, p. 313.

121See NB III 59 and its commentary by Dharmottara (Th. Stcherbatsky [193032],

vol.

2,

p.

172).

Stcherbatsky,

ibid., note 1, stated that "this is the

celebrated rule of Dignaga which lays down the fundamental principle that a philosophical
nor
as

debate must have some common ground to start with.

Neither the speaker

his opponent has the right of quoting facts or reasons that are not
real

by the other party."

In his

Nirvi2a

(1927),

pp.

118f,

admitted

Stcherbatsky

translates Candraklrti on the difficulties this rule caused for Madhyamikas. Cf.
K. Potter (1963), p. 67, where agreeing on an example of established subject is
described as a basic procedure for making progress in Indian debating in general.
of the points that Sa-pa~ stressed in his teaching of

1220ne
that
of

Prami~a was

Oharmaklrti when investigating material objects operated from the standpoint

Sautrantika

tenets,

whereas when he negated external objects

he

adopted a

Yogacara standpoint (on this approach of Dharmakirti, see also S. Moriyama [1984],
p.

16

and note 27).

In stressing this,

Phywa-pa and his followers.

rigs rnam bshad,
170.1. 4:
etc.

p.

Sa-pa~

was rejecting the procedure

See above, chapter 7, and Shakya-mchog-ldan, Tshad

453.

Sa-pa~

of
~

explained this in more detail in his RTRG, p.

.PhI!. rol ill don khas len .m!. nal mdo sde pa I i lugs

bar

bya I 011,

See also Shakya-mchog-ldan, Tshad ma rigs rnam bshad, p. 468; and Go-rams-

pa, Sde bdun mdo, pp. 399.1 and 555.5.

Glo-bo
and

now (pp.

autocommentary.

mkhan-chen,

KhJNSh (pp.

273a.6-273b.l) already quoted KhJ III 47,

283a.6-287a.6) devotes considerable space to explaining it and

its

According to his topic headings, this verse is the first part of

a main fourth section:

de

rtsod pa'i tshul (p.

283a.2?).

According to

the

415

~pic

headings he worked out (see also below,

Appendix I),

this first part con-

~18ts of the identification of Dharmaklrti's intended meaning (chos ill .8!:!!.S. pa' i
IMongs .ru!. ngos bzung .ill!).
Glo-bo mkhan-chen discerns four steps in Sa-pa~'s
sutocommentary on this verse, which are four steps in a critical philosophical

analysis of entities:
(1) ..E!!I.!. rol .ill. don dgos pa' i d bang

khas len pa' i tshul (283a. 6 )

(2) rigs ~ ~ ~ de nvid ~ pa'i tshul (285a.5)

(3) kun tu tha snvad pa'i gzhi

i l l bsgrub .ru!. (285b.4)

(4) tha snvad las 'das E don dam la ~ pa' i tshul (286a. 6)
The comment on the first of these seems to consist of a quote from a PV commentary by Rong-ston Shes-bya-kun-rig (see 284b.3), though the beginning of the quote
is not clearly marked.
of

pramapaphala

Kuijp (1983),

The topic is the first section (skabs) of the

(tshad 'bras) in PV III 301-367.

p.

287, note 182.

Hattori (1968), pp. 28 and 182f.

discussion

On this see also L.

van

der

Here Rong-ston quotes PS I 8cd, on which see M.

Rong-ston--if he is the real author--considered

the lines
tshad ~ nvid du 'dogs.ru!. stell

~ ba med ~ ~ .tiE. E2i I

belong to the karikas, and they are found in PS (P),

to

p.

2b.2;

Mimaki (1979),

note 14.

On the tshad 'bras discussion in the PV,

rams-pa,

pa'i,

136.2.4-137.2.4.

pp.

see also

K.

see also Go-

After this quote, Glo-bo mkhan-chen

(pp.

284b.4-285a.5) also applies the Sautrantika tenets to the third skabs of the

'bras investigation, quoting PV III 341d and also RTRG, p. 230.1.2.

In a similar passage in the RTRG (p. 169.3.5),

(dgongs ~ not of Dharmaklrti but of the Buddha.

Sa-pa~

how Dharmaklrti is supposed to have identified that intent.):

lugs bsgrub .Q2. la gnvis lasl

.ill! ~ !m!!!! zhal ~ bzhes shingl

spros M. dang bral ba la

slob
so/I.

144.

.EhY.i

thub ~

tha snvad ill de kho ~ ~

don dam pa' i de kho .!!3! nvid la

lli!!:. mdzad doll.

also

bde bar gshegs pa'i

dang..Q. dgongs .Q2. dngos bzung ba nil

!.Q!. .2.!!..pyQQ..Q2. ~ rdul phran zhal ~ bzhes lal

~

describes the purport

(But this is presumably

M. .!!3!

(p. 169.4.1) gnyis M. de

dpon ~ ..ii ltar gtan la phab pa'i tshul la don ill dang ~ i l l gnvis
(The slob dpon of the last sentence is Dharmaklrti.)

123The

Venerable

See also below, note

Khenpo Appey here considered the possible emendation

to

&2!!. m. ~ skyes la 'dra ba since D: don.ill. mthus skyes did not seem to make
good

sense.

In

any

case,

referred to in this passage.

ka

epistemology.

The

the skyes la 'dra ba is definitely

what

is

being

This is the second moment of cognition in Sautranti-

mind cognizes only this cognitive image

that

arises

in

'

416

resemblance to the original object.

the

object

cognized

itself,

(in

According to the Sautrantikas,

this is

and there is an interval of one moment before the

contrast to the

perception of the object).

Vaibha~ikas

See RTRG,

who maintain the direct

p. 170.1.5: de

tshogs

and
~

not

image

is

immediate

las

~.!&.

gnv is .ill!!:. ~ shes .hi .l!!:!!!. rol ill .lli ~ ~ I dra bar skves ~ de nyid skves
la I dra ba I i shes ~ .Y.!!!. nol.
See also Shiikya-mchog-ldan, Tshad rna rigs rnam
bshad, p. 646.6.
Glo-bo mkhan-chen,

KhJNSh, p. 284b.2 (a quote from Rong-ston?) defines the

.&E!.!!B. rnam of the Sautrantikas as don dang I dra bar skyes ~ ill .lli ~ ~ I.
On the subsequent refutation of the skyes la 'dra ba by Dharmakirti, see PV III

323 and Go-rams-pa, Rgyas pa'i, p. 139.4.5. For more on Sautrantika epistemology,
see Jadunatha Sinha (1938), pp. 35-42.
124PV III 219.
I

This verse is identical in the Tanjur version except that P

and N read ~ in line d, according to E. Steinkellner (1977), p. 152.

verse is also quoted in RTRG, p. 169.3.5, and explained in RTRG, p. 221.1.4.
125These

lines

are not found in Dharmaktrti's main works,

attributed to him by oral tradition.

but

They are also quoted in RTRG,

and Go-rams-pa, Sde bdun mdo, p. 399.3.

p.

are

This

only

170.2.6,

In the Rigs gter rang 'grel, skas appears

instead of skabs.
126ThiS

is the second of four philosophical stages that

his autocommentary:

rigs ~ ~ nas

.l!!:!!!. rol .lli don

Sa-pa~ treats in

..B~.

See KhJNSh, p.

285b.4, and below, note 144.

127PVin I 51 and PV III 360.
(1979),

p.

note 420.

See T.

Vetter (1966),

pp.

K. Mimaki

The canonical Tibetan for the PV as given by Miyasaka (1971/72), p. 89,

is:
dngos .P.Q. rnam ~
de nvid du na de dngos medii

i@.!!&. ~

wi

.&! phv ir na de

~ lal I
.&.!.8. dang du mali rang pzhin medii
i@.!!&.

92f;

204, note 38, and (1980b), p. 158; and Y. Kajiyama (1966), p. 149 and

(No variants were noted.) The Sanskrit from K. Mimaki (1980b) is:
bhiivii vena niriipvante
tadriipam nasti tattvatab I
vasmad ekam anekalJl ca
rupam tesalJ!.!!!! vidvate II

417

128The reasoning of "absence of oneness and manyness" is one of the four or

five great reasons used by later Madhyamikas to establish the Madhyam~ka theory of
4brmanairatmya.
works.

See

below,

note 155.

But it was also used in many Mahayana

It is found for instance in:

Nagarjuna, RA, I 71
Vasubandhu, Vimsatika, 11ff.
Dignaga, Alambanapariksa 5
Dharmakirti, PV III 360 (cf. VN [P], p. 371a.6)
reasoning was elaborated especially by Srtgupta,

This

and by Santarak~ita,

his Tattvavataravrtti,
It
Madhyamakalamkara.

was

who made it the subject of

who discussed it in detail

also employed by Jnanagarbha,

in

Kamalasl1a and

his
Hari-

Atisa was one of the later Madhyamikas who listed it as one of the four
bhadra.
(or five) great reasons used to establish their doctrine.
See K. Mimaki (1982),
p.

212,

note 547,

and Chr. Lindtner (1981), p. 207.

On this reasoning see also

Th. Stcherbatsky (1930-32), vol. 1, p. 514, and D. Seyfort Ruegg (1981), p. 68 and
note 221.
Sa-pal},

RTRG,

p.

170.3.1-5,

used

the "absence of oneness and manyness"

reasoning to negate two distinct sorts of "constructions":

which

(1) coarse

constitute a "whole" which possesses sections or parts (rags

ill rdzas) as accepted by the

supposedly

impartite

VaiSe~ikas,

the Vaise~ikas).

"atoms"

too are not truly simple and impartite,

If

an

"atom" (paramaQu) was conjoined with six [other

taneously,
the

it would have six parts

same place (samanadesa),

[i.e. sides].

impartite

like a heap of rice.

for they involve six

(the six sides of spatial extension) just as a house does.

Vasubandhu's Vimsatika 12:

are

Sautrantikas

The first is not simple or

because it involves several parts and directions (or sides),

The

E!.!!.1!!&. ~

and (2) subtle "atoms" (J!1!!!) which

(phra.!!!2.. cha med = rdul phran) as accepted by

and some Tirthikas (e.g.

substances

Here

parts
quotes

Sa-pa~

atoms]

simul-

If those six occupy

a physical object would also be just the

size of an "atom."
In

addition,

Sa-paI} states. that "atoms" are negated by critically

investigating

whether one or a series of two of them have or lack spatial extension (ring

.!Q! ~) .

thung

In this connection he then quotes PV III 360 (=PVin I 51). See also Th.

Stcherbatsky (1930-32),

vol.

1, pp. 191 and 519, note 2; L. de La Vallee Poussin

(1971), vol. 1, pp. 89f; and Y. Kajiyama (1976), p. 141, note 5.

Later
Dharmakirti

in the RTRG (pp.

171.2.6 and 171.4.5),

Sa-pa~

as an interpreter of

restricts the application of these critical negations to

and subtle substantial entities just described.

the

coarse

He says these reasonings are here

not to be applied to momentary impartite consciousness in the way that Madhyamikas

418

do.

See also below, note 131.

129This refers to the drug lli .&!&. char sbyar ba .ill! (satkena yugapadyogst)

of Vimsatika 12a.
used
this

As mentioned in the previous note,

Sa-pa9,

RTRG, p. 170.3.2,

this reasoning to negate the notion of "atoms" (rdul phran = ~) and quoted
verse of the Vimsatika.
See also Mok~akaragupta 32 (Kajiyama [1966], pp.

145f), where the same verse is quoted.

130PV

III 353b-d.

The Tanjur version of this verse

(following

Miyasaka

[1971/72], p. 89):
j i ltar ~M.~ zhig ltarll

don dngos med

snang

~ ~I

j i ltar don 'dzin zhe na bdenll

de 'dra ngas kyang mi shes

Cf.

soil

PVin"I 44b-d, which is very similar.

On this verse from the PV see T. Vetter

(1966), pp. 90f; and K. Mimaki (1979), p. 206, note 46, and (1980b), p. 160.

The

Sanskrit text in K. Mimaki (1979) is:

yatha kathancit tasyartha
rupam muktvavabhasinab I
arthagrahab katharp sat yam
m!. jane 'ham aplddam I I

131Rngog
oneness
as

and

his

successors (including Phywa-pa) used

empty of own-natures,

i.e.

they used it to establish

Shakya-mchog-ldan, Mkhas M., p. 95.7:

, grel

the

"absence of

and manyness" reasoning of Dharmakirti to establish all knowable entities

.I!!&.Q&.

10

[b]~ ~

du".&!&. du bral .&Ii rigs M. gsungs M. de shes

gtan la 'bebs byed nyid du sbyor ba!!!!8.l.

mchog-ldan,

Tshad ma'i mdo,

bkral ba nil

p. 33.1: des

mthar thug .8.i dgongs

~ .!!.8.Q..

byed .8.i&. dang du bra 1 la 'chad M. dang/.

23.2 and 30.5; and Springs
As

mentioned above,

11&,

the

Madhyamaka.

bcas M.

mtha'

See

rang stong

On Phywa-pa in particular, see Shakya~

'grel mdzad pa'i dgongs .E.E!. Ji Itar

bo nyid med M..

de gtan la 'bebs

See also Shakya-mchog-ldan, ibid., pp.

p. 324.5.

note 128,

soning of Dharmakirti also in RTRG,

pp.

Sa-paI}. explains the .&S!:&. dang du bral rea171.3.1 and 171.4.5.

There he indicated

that Dharmaklrti had in mind the negation of "objects" (lli = visaya) of the
duality of apprehended object and apprehending subject (~ 'dzin = grahya
grahaka)

but

did not use this reasoning to criticize the notion of

momentary

impartite consciousness as the Madhyamikas do. See also Shakya-mchog-ldan, ~~

vol. 15, p. 376.4f.
But in the ThGS where he adopts the Madhyamaka

~,

419

standpoint,

he criticizes non-dual cognition as not being the ultimate because in

the last analysis it amounts to an entity.

See ThGS p. 31.3.4 (62a.4).

132This purvapaka begins the third of the four philosophical stages

with

by Sa-paQ in his autocommentary:

dealt

kun!!:!. tha snyad pa I i gzhi .!.!!.2!!!..!is. bsgrub

See below, note 144.

~.

133This

seems to be quoted from the Vimsatikavrtti (3.2-3)

and not from the Dasabhumika directly.

of

Vasubandhu

See K. Mimaki (1982), p. 95 and note 291.

The corresponding passage in the extant version of the Sutra does not contain the
words

ill

ill ~ ba'i

~ ~

(bho jinaputra).

Cf.

Dbus-pa Blo-gsal,

p. 82b.3:

~ ba I i ~ ~ khams gsum .p!!. ~ ~ ni ~ tsam .!!!2"

and Da~abhiimika
Sutra (Tib P) [25] (761 [31]), vol. li, p. 103a.8: khams gsum.lli!. ~ ~ tsam

stele
134This is not one verse but is two pairs of padas from two nearby
~

chags kyis, etc., is Larikavatara Siitra X 155ab, and don

153cd.

See K.

Mimaki (1982),

p. 96, notes 293 and 294.

same translation as Dbu-pa Blo-gsal,

the Tanjur (P) [29]

pp.

(775)~,

p.

82b.4-5.

verses.

.Im!. ~.Y.!!!., etc., is X

Sa-paQ quotes from the

Cf. the Tibetan translation in

180a.8-180b.1, as quoted by K. Mimaki (1982),

p. 96, textual notes to lines 1-8.

~

chags kyis ni dkrugs pa'i sems//

don du snang ba shin tu

~/

and:

hti. rol don mthong ..!& .p!!. ste/ I

don ni ~ ni 'ba I zhig EQ/ I
The non-canonical
153cd:

translation

follows the available Sanskrit

text

closer

for

Dignaga

and

bahyarthadarsanam mithya
nasty ar thaw [sic] ci t tam
See ~., p. 96, note 293.
135There

are

two reasons or proofs used in the tradition of

Dharmakirti to establish vijfiapti.

~

nil

tu I I

See RTRG,

p. 170.4.2: rnam ~i&.lli!. bsgrub

kun tu tha snyad ~ tshad ma ~ E!. .!ill.. mdo mdzad .E!!. dang.!.!!.2!!!.

~ ~ rjes !!. 'brang!lB2.l

de la gnyis tel

gsal dang lhan .!R dmigs ngeH 'grub//

Thus the tKO proofs are:

' grel

420

(1) "illumination (gsal ba = prakasa) and awareness (!.!.&.ill!.)"

(2)

"the necessary concomitance (nges ill!. = niyama) of things

simultaneously

apprehended (lhan ill dmigs ill!. = sahopalambha)"

ibid., explains the first as follows: The defining mark of cognition (shes

Sa-pa~,

is said to be illumination and awareness (gsal zhing !.!.&. ~.

impossible for there to be an object of knowledge (shes

illumination and awareness,
just

as

And since i t is

that does not possess

all objects of knowledge are established as the mind,

cow is established [to be such] by its dewlap [which is

defining marks].

[Cf.

one

of

its

S. Matsumoto (1980), p. 273, note 2; and L. van der KUijp

(1983), p. 311, note 335.]

then

Sa-pa~

concomitant

thing different.
94.18-19)

explains the second proof:

(nges ill!. = khyab

Whatever things

are

necessarily

through simultaneous apprehension are not

He gives as his example (from PVin I,

=T.

Vetter

some-

[1966],

p.

that a perceived patch of blue and the cognition that apprehends it are

necessarily concomitant through simultaneous apprehension,

the implication

being

that cognition and its object are one.

Shakya-mchog-ldan,
soning:
ever]

Through
appears

cognition.

Tshad.!!!!! rigs .!:m!!!!. bshad,

p. 474, explains this rea-

the necessary concomitance of simultaneous apprehension,

is established as not being a substantial

entity

[what-

different

from

Whatever is necessarily concomitant through simultaneous apprehension

is impossible to be different from cognition, as for example the appearance of two

moons

and

the cognition of those [moons are not different].

The

appearance as

blue, etc., and the cognition that apprehends it too are necessarily concomitant
as simultaneously apprehended.
Go-rams-pa,
as

follows:

Sde bdun mdo, p. 560.6, expresses the thesis of this reasoning

The sensory cognition (dbang shes) in which there appears something

as an object and that which at that same time appears as the object in it are
and

the same.

He also explains the meaning of the proof according to the

brdzun-pa (p. 561.6): lhan ill ill!. ni

..Y.!!l dus ill car du snang ba

..y..!!!. la/

one
Rnam-

dmigs

See also the discussion of this

reasoning in PV III 388 with its commentary by Go-rams-pa,

pa'i, p. 146.2.3,

and in Dbus-pa Blo-gsal, beginning on p. 90b.2.

As
170.4.2),
should
ma~a)

points

Sa-pa~

asserted

at

follow the author of the

Varttika (i.e.
out

the beginning of

when one critically discerns the

that

(Prama~a)

Dharmaklrti).

the

Prama~a

above

account

(RTRG,

of transactional usage,

Sutra (i.e.

Shakya-mchog-ldan,

the above two reasonings are indeed

tradition of Dignaga and are not found in other systems,

Dignaga) and of the

Tshad mali mdo,
peculiar

to

the

p.
one

(Prap.

21,

PramaQ8

whereas the reasoning of

"absence of oneness and manyness" is employed in many other scriptural traditions.

422

139Here

begins

the

fourth of the four stages of

dealt with in Sa-paQ's autocommentary,

las 'das

don dam la

quoted at
(24a.4).

according to KhJNSh,

pa'i tshul.

See below,

length by Glo-bo mkhan-chen,

140Lankavatara Sutra X 257ab.

philosophical

Sde bdun

analysis

p. 286a.5: tha snyad

note 144.
mdo ~

This passage
bshad,

pp.

is

47.4f

The full verse in the Tanjur (P), vol. [29]

(775) ~, p. 184a.4, is considerably different, as is the Sanskrit:

~

tsam las ni 'das ~

snang ba med las 'da' bar

!EJ I

~I

rnal 'byor snang ba med gnas 1@./ I

theg

chen

.Q.

mi mthong E!l,/ I

In Sanskrit:
cittamatram atikramya
nirabhasam atikramet I
nirabhasasthito Y2&i
mahayanaw sa [alt.: na] pasyati II
See Y. Kajiyama (1976), pp. 136-140; D. Seyfort Ruegg (1981), p. 90, note 293; and
K.

Mimaki (1982),

pp.

237-239 and note 592.

The translation of lines ab in the

latter is:
Apres avoir depasse Ie "rien que pensee", il doit depasser la [connaissance]

sans apparence [des deux,

c.-a-d.

d'objet et agent de

cogni-

tion]
The

translator there followed Kamala~ila's interpretations in the first

krama,

211.10-12:

eva~

cittamatram atikramya tad

dvayanirabhasam

Bhavana-

jnanam

tad atikramet/.
The

version found in Dbus-pa Blo-gsal,

quote:
~

K.

Mimaki

(1982),

is closer to the

KhJ

~I

note 592,

discusses the likelihood that the lines quoted

Blo-gsal

Sutra.

Indeed, for these two lines the text is identical to that found quoted in
MAl.

taken from a secondary source and not directly

See (P),

p.

171a;

A quite different version is found in KhJNSh, p. 279b.1:

~

nail

snang ba med ~ gnas ~ ~ I

snang med gnas pa'i rnal 'byor 1@./1

the

(D), p. 157a; and S. Moriyama (1984), pp.

29f, note 56.

sems tsam las ni 'das

from

by

Dbus-pa

Kamala~ila's

were

110b.4,

sull

tsam las ni 'das nas

snang ba med la bzla bar

p.

423

de .lli. theg .ill! chen .Q..Q. mthongl I

This translation is imbedded in a quote from an unidentified work by Atisa, and it
was based on the Sanskrit reading sa instead of ~.
Still another version is found in Shakya-mchog-ldan,

Dbu

~~,

vol. 14,

p. 433.4:
tsam las ni 'das

kyangll

snang ba med la shin tu 'da'il

snang med gnas pa' i rnal 'byor

~I

de ili theg .ill! chen .Q..Q. mthongl I

Here Shakya-mchog-ldan interprets Santarak~ita as maintaining that the sems
refers to the Rnam-bden-pa,
chen

the snang med to the Rnam-brdzun-pa,

tsam

and the theg .ill!

mthong to the Dbu-ma-pa.

141PV II 252cd, 253ab.

See (D) ~, p. 117a.5.

...Jill.

byed sdug bsngal la dgongs nasll

nged

ill. de

The Tibetan:

sdug bsngal bsgom.ME. gsungs .ill! YEY I [252cd]

.Y2.!!&. rkyen las skyesl I

de ni bdag med Ita brten YEYI [253 ab]

The Sanskrit, following Miyasaka (1971/72), p. 36:
samskaraduhkhatam matva
kathita dubkhabhavana II [252cd]
pratyayopattiQ.
sa nairatmyadrgasrayaQ. II [253ab]

~.!! ~

142Yuktisastika 12.

The wording of the version in the Tanjur is different,

though the meaning is the same.

dngos

.Q.Q.

1@!8. ~

See Chr. Lindtner (1982), pp. 106f:

shin tu phra ba la'angll

skye bar ~ brtags ~ I

mi mkhas de ~ nil I
rkyen las ~ ba'i don rna mthongll
No variants were noted from Nand P.
~ l@!:.

143Anavataptanagarajapariprccha

Sutra (Tib.:

KIu'i

~.Q.Q. ~

dros

~'pa'i mdo), CD).P.h.2., p. 230b.2-3; and (P) [33] (823),.Q!!, p. 238a.6:

rkyen las skyes .ill!

~.Yi:.!!

de rna skyesl I

de la skye ba .!!&Q. bo nyid kyis medii

rkyen la ~ las ~ .Yl!!. stong .ME. gsungsl I

stong nyid ~ shes de ni ~ .Y.QQ. ~ I

Line 1 of P reads te instead of de. See K. Mimaki (1982), p. 225, note 572

........,j

424

The version found in Dbus-pa Blo-gsal,

KhJ

except

p.

108b.5-6, is the same as in the

that the former reads stong ill!!. bshad in line three

(KhJ:

stong ..Q!!.

nyid).
The edited Sanskrit in K. Mimaki (1982), p. 226, note 572, is:

l l i pratyayair jayati sa .hY. a jato

na tasya utpada svabhavo 'sti /

l l i pratyayad1.nu sa sunya ukto

lli ~unyatrup janati so 'pramattab / /
144Thus

the Madhyamaka is the fourth and final main stage that the

philo-

sophical analyses and dissolutions lead to in the autocommentary to KhJ III 47-48.
The four stages, as listed in KhJNSh, p. 283a, were:
(1)

How external objects are accepted because of a special motive

(~

LQl

ill don dgos pa'i dbang .ill. khas len pa'i tshul) (p. 283a.6)
(2)

How those very [external objects] are negated after critical examination

through reasoning (rigs ~ ~ nas de nyid

(3) The establishment of vijfiapti,

.B.

pa'i tshul) (p. 285a.5)

the basis of transactional usage (kun

tha snyad pa'i gzhi rnam !..!..8. bsgrub

tu

(p. 285b.4)

(4) How to enter into the ultimate truth, which has transcended transactional
usage (tha snyad las 'das ill!. don dam la

pa' i tshul) (p. 286a. 6)

Glo-bo mkhan-chen considered the subject of KhJ III 47-48 to be the identification
of

Dharmakf.rti 's intended meaning or purport (chos

bzung

ba),

and

thus

.hl ~

pa' i dgongs'p!!' ngos

he understood Sa-pa~ to be identifying

Dharmakirti

Madhyamika.

This

commentary.

But in a parallel passage of the Rigs gter rang 'grel (p.

Acarya (i.e.

Ji Itar gtan la phab pa' i tshul).

Go-rams-pa,

169.3.5),

Dharmakirti) systematically established that intent (slob' dpon

See above, note 122.

Sde bdun mdo, pp. 398.6-399.1, interprets the above passage of

the Rigs gter rang 'grel as above,

beginning his explanation of "the

identifica-

of the intent" with the words bde bar gshegs ~ ("the Sugata [maintained]")

where

the Rigs gter rang 'grel has thub

plained

the second part,

("the Muni

~ ~

[maintained]").

the systematic establishment of the intent,

"Thus from among the four Buddhist philosophical tenets,

Acarya establish.
gter

subject was "to identify the intent" (of the Buddha) and to described how

Sa-pa~'s

the

tion

as

seems all the more justified by the last sentence of the auto-

.." (de Itar sangs

gtan la dbab .P!!..ill zhe na).

ex-

if you ask which did the

pa' i grub mtha' bzhi

slob dpon

And in the following passages of the Rigs

rang 'grel Sa-pa~ states that Dharmakirti adopted Sautrantika

tenets.

He

beginning,

and

Yogacara

Here Sa-pa~ did not mention Dharmakirti as following the Madhyamaka.

the DS, p. 315.1.2, regarding the Buddha's purport (dgongs .p!!.):

Cf.

425

de la ~ rten mthun ~

lal/

dgongs ~ ~ rol don du gsungsl I

!h!!.

snyad illQQ. pa' i rigs .l@.

lal I

dgongs ~ chos ~ ~ su gsungsl I

dam pa'i don la dgongs nas nil I

chos kun spros.l@. bral zhes gsungsll

Dharmakirti

himself in PV III 195-213 and 301-367 also engaged in step-by-

step critical analyses of this sort.

and p.

277,

note 123;

and T.

See L. van der Kuijp (1983), p. 272, note 99

Vetter (1964),

pp. 67-71.

In his Rigs gter rang

'grel Sa-pa9 interpreted these ontological dissolutions as ending with the Nirakara

(Sems tsam

med) and did not go on to the establishment of the

paramartha

of the Madhyamaka.
In the KhJ,
rim

to

however,

Sa-pa~

used a gradual series of negations (bkag pa'i

lead through the Sautrantika and Yogacara to

Madhyamaka (see above,

chapter 7).

the

final

view,

was well established among the Indian Madhyamikas of the Yogacara-Madhyamaka.

rams-pa,
forming
minds

ba,

pp.

27f (ca,

pp.

14a.5-14b.6) spoke of such procedures

two of three methods by which the Madhyamaka could be established in

of those who had been trained in philosophical tenets.

The three

Where

tenets

student reaches [on his own?] th~

of

reasons

higher

philosophical

the four Buddhist schools by hearing explanations of

through which the relatively higher schools

criticize

the
what

the schools beneath them maintain as their ultimate real.

(2) Where the teacher,
end
tence

who is a Madhyamika, applies the student in the

to the Madhyamaka after criticizing those who maintain the exisof entities according to the non-Buddhist and

schools,

by

lower

Buddhist

stating the reasons which the relatively higher schools

use to disprove the relatively lower schools.

(3)

Where a Madhyamika teacher appJies the student in the end

Madhyamaka
according

tenets

by

stating the criticisms of the

to the Madhyamaka tradition itself (i.e.

to

lower
using

the

schools
the

rea-

soning that is peculiar to the Madhyamaka).

According to Go-rams-pa, the sequence of argumentation in the second method is:
(a) Refutation of the Vaibha~ika tenets through Sautrantika reasoning
(b)

Refutation of the Sautrantika opinion of a really existent

"atom"

through the reasoning of "simultaneous combination of six"

(c)

The refutation of the opinion of the Yogacarin that mind is really

existent,

by

means

of

the reasoning of

"devoid

of

oneness

Goas
the

methods

were:
(1)

the

In so doing he was following a procedure that

and

426

manyness"
Go-rams-pa later (pp. 298f) quotes the lines from BCA IX 4:
rnal 'byor

~.!ill!&

.8.Q!!.&. ~ .8.Q!!.&.

And

he

"like

discusses the step-by-step refutation of lower tenets by higher as

the reasoning taught in the JSS"

pa'i rigs
two

blo khyad kyis//

.!!!!!. ~ kyis gnod//

Ita

(~

the

BV

bshad

Still later in the same work (p. 337), Go-rams-pa mentions

~.

Madhyamaka works that adopted such a procedure of sequential

tenets:

being

shes snying .QQ. kun las btus las

attributed to Nagarjuna and the JSS attributed to

refutation
an

of

Aryadeva.

Here the negations begin with the "self" imputed by non-Buddhists and end with the
non-dual consciousness (advayajnana) of the Yogacara.
~~,

Cf. Shakya-mchog-ldan, Dbu

vol. 14, pp. 433.2, 437.1ff and 587.6; and vol. 15, pp. 381.6f and 468.

Perhaps

the

earliest Indian Buddhist source for such a series of

tions is the Lankavatara Sutra X 256-258, and indeed

his autocommentary.
kas" commonly

See also above,

note 140.

Sa-pa~

refuta-

did quote from this in

Later Indian "Yogacara-Madhyami-

took this Sutra as their basis for first refuting external

objects

through Cittamatra reasoning and finally refuting the notions of a really existent
mind as held by the Yogacarins.
Those who are known to have followed such a
method include:
(1) Jnanagarbha (fl.

mid-8th c.) in his Satyadvayavibhanga.

See M.

Ichigo

(1985)
(2) Santarak~ita (fl.
p.

132,

Dbu
(3)

late-8th c.) in his MA 92-93.

and D. Seyfort Ruegg (1981), p. 90.

See Y. Kajiyama (1976),

(See also Shakya-mchog-ldan,

rnam, vol. 14, pp. 433f.)

Kamala~ila

(fl.

late-8th to early-9th c.?) in his Bhavanakrama (Skt.

p.

210.9-14), on which see K. Mimaki (1982), p. 238, note 592; and Y. Kajiyama
(1976),

pp. 133-140.

And also in Kamalasila's Madhyamakaloka, as cited by

D. Seyfort Ruegg (1981), pp. 95f, and S. Moriyama (1984), pp. 29f.
(4) Vidyakaraprabha (fl.

c.

800?) in his Madhyamakanayasarasamasa.

See D.

Seyfort Ruegg (1981), p. 99.

(5) Jitari (c.

1000?) in his Sugatamatavibhanga karikas and Bhasya, which is

directly linked to the JSS.

See D.

Seyfort Ruegg (1981), p. 100 and note

312.
(6)

Mok~akaragupta

(late-11th or 12th c.) in his Tarkabhaa,

manual

Buddhist logic and philosophy. See Y. Kajiyama (1966), pp. 139-148.

Ratnakara~anti
(c. 1000) of the "Vijnapti-Madhyamaka" in his commentary on

of
the

Madhyamakalapkara also interprets the stages of understanding taught in the ~

vatara Sutra as four stages of Yogacara.
See D. Seyfort Ruegg (1981), pp. 122f.
Cf.

the similar approach of Haribhadra of the Madhyalnaka-Prajnaparamita synthesis

427

as described by S.
vol.

~,

14,

Moriyama (1984),
p. 434.6.

pp.

33ff,

and by Shakya-mchog-ldan, Dbu

Ati~a Dip~ara~rijfiana is also said to have followed

See the quote in KhJNSh, p. 279a.3, from an unidentified work

such a method.
attributed to him, and also the discussion above, note 120, end.
Sa-pa~

as mind

and Sa-skya-pa tradition accept the establishment of all appearances

(snang ba

realization

su sgrub

.m0

of the Madhyamaka view.

as a useful propaedeutic to
Some

Dge-lugs-pa

stage because for them it smacked of the Yogacara.

280b.4,

replied

the

critics

meditative

rejected

to such critics by quoting Candrakirti(pada?) and Atisa

them, and then saying:

this

Glo-bo mkhan-chen, KhJNSh, p.

against

.82!!& ~ snang ba ~ ...!! khas blangs ~ ~ tsam las ~

'das zhes .!!ill!. ba ~ ~ JJi/ rang nyid kYi sgrub byed kYi gtso bor byed
pa'i dpal ldan zla ba ~ pa'i lugs/ j.Q. bo ~ ti shas gsal bar bkod .ill!. ~ ~

ma gzigs lli!!:. gsal 10//.

See also Shakya-mchog-ldan, Dbu ~~, vol. 14, pp.
557.5f, and vol. 15, pp. 65.6f, and Ngag-dbang-bsod-nams-rgyal-mtshan, Sdom .ill!.
gsum, p. 266.6-267.6 (133b-134a).

Cf. Dipa~ara~rijfiana Atisa, Dbu ma'i ~~,

(P), vol. 102, p. 55.2.7: thams cad rang .&i

Some

~ ~

"

ma 'i

later Dge-lugs-pa scholars identified the above procedure as a

point

of similarity between various early Tibetan masters (including Mar-pa and Bu-ston)
and the Yogacara-Madhyamikas such as Santarak~ita and Kamalasila.
Ruegg (1966),

p.

bsam ljon bzang,

~

12,
p.

and note 1.

Cf. Sum-pa mkhan-po Ye-shes-dpal-'byor,

kYi gzhung la brten

ba'i ~ 'byor ~ pa'i dbu ma'i srol 'dzin

Ita bar

145Sa_paQ
doctrines

of

.!!Q!:.

175: de las gzhan pa'i bod snga rabs pa'i mkhas .ill!. phal cher

slob dpon de ~ ~

1!!. ~

See D. Seyfort

~ ~ ~ .ill!.

dang cung zad 'dra

phyis...!! ~ tsam pa'i Ita ba

ba 'ang ~ Ef!.9..! /.

when directly expounding in his Rigs gter rang 'grel the

Dharmakirti

did not state that the latter

considered

Prama~a

vijfiapti

steppingstone to the Madhyamaka or even that Dharmakirti explicated the Madhyamaka

at all.

See above,

chapter 7.

that in the opinion of Sa-pa~,

his

But Glo-bo mkhan-chen,

KhJNSh, p. 287a.l, held

"The ultimate intent explicated by Dharmakirti in

Pramauavarttika was just the Madhyamaka that accords with the

traditions

of

Arya Nagarjuna." In this Glo-bo mkhan-chen goes against the prevailing Sa-skya-pa
tradition as represented by both Go-rams-pa and Shakya-mchog-ldan, and even
against his own earlier commentary on the Rigs &!er.

But he no doubt felt justi-

fied in his interpretation by the words of the KhJ itself.

As

discussed

above in chapter 7,

the interpretation of Dharmakirti as

Madhyamika was the old tradition of Rngog and his successors,

and Glo-bo

chen states that Sa-paQ here was in agreement with that great translator.
tradition

derives froID the teachings of Indian scholars such as

mkhanRngog's

Prajnakaragupta,

428

the author of the Pramaoa1amkara.

sion was Jitari [fl.
show
D.

mdo ~ bshad,

pp.

p. 100.)

146
explained
possesses

and in this connection had discussed also Prajnakara_

though

251.3.5:

the

rjes

The first sense (don dang 'bre1

~).

indicates

that

things.

But

of this sort must have a correspondence to real

intentional objects of inference

&.lli

dngos .E2. lli),

are

real

things

248.2.1.

an inference as verbally expressed

(sva1aksaoa,

the object of pratvaksa).

See RTRG,

pp.

247.2.6

Cf. KhJ I 31, autocommentary (D p. 84.2.6) and KhJ I 35 (D

real correspondence between word or thought and its

system,

is indirect.

referent,

p.
or

was a strict requirement.

Potter (1977), p. 204.

also J.

F.

to

It is a function of "exclusion of other" (anyapoha),

35b (D p. 84.3.6 [tha 170a.6]): ~ 'dzin ~ ni gzhan se1 ..Yi!!..

In the Naiyayika tradition, the actual existence of the
inference

and

p. 84.4.1).
according

which is the conceptual apprehension of a "universal" (samanvartha).

See S.

Mookerjee (1935),

(On the subject or locus

[~]

Staal [1973] and K. Potter [1963], p. 66.)

non-Buddhist logician alike,

:

(RTRG,

entails a mistaking of the meaning of the words to be the really existent

particular

this

Appey
which

proof while lacking disproof" (don dang 'bre1 ba'am sgrub byed .YQQ. cin.s.
reasoning

thought

G10-bo mkhan-chen himself had staunchly

The Venerable Khenpo

dngos .E2. stobs zhugs = vastuba1apravrtta.
this term as "reasoning which is connected with real fact or

gnod byed med pa'i rigs

logical

See

Earlier in his Rigs gter commentary (Sde bdun

47-70 [24a-35b]),

denied this interpretation,

gupta's interpretations.

The

persua-

that Dharmakirti was a Madhyamika who was in agreement with Nagarjuna.

Seyfort Ruegg [1981],

even

(Another later Indian scholar of this

c. 1000?], who attempted in his Sugatamatavibhanga Bhasya to

Cf.

subject
p.

408,

KhJ I
of

of Indian inferences, see

And for both Buddhist and

the inferential relation, i.e. "pervasion" (khvab

vvapti) too had to be founded upon true facts.

an

and K.

See E. Steinke11ner (1974), p.

120, note 9.
In

the Buddhist logic of Dharmakirti,

three types of sound reasons (rtags

(1) dngos .E2. stobs zhugs

(2)

ill ches pa'i rtags

~~)

.ill rtags

"objectively grounded" was

one

of

in inference:

~ ~

~ ~

(3) ~ pa'i rtags.Y.!!.!!.8. ~

The

latter two can be classified as a single type for they depend on human accep-

tance and not on objective fact for their validation or grounding.

247.4.4:

rjes

gnvis soli
~

gnvis su

1a rtags .ill khvab

dang.E2. 1a'ang rang

~

bas so/.

See RTRG,

khas b1angs dang dngos .E2. stobs

khas blangs dang/

thams cad kvis khas

(Sa-paD- based this account on PV IV 93.)

p.

zhugs
blan&.!!

See also Go-

429

rams-pa, ~.M.!!!!. mdo, p. 603.4.

Glo-bo mkhan-chen, Sde bdun mdo ~ bshad,
178a.l),

gives

differentiating

clear

the

pp.

354.6-355.1

and succinct definition of dngos.Q.Q. stobs

two types of sound reasons:

zhing ~ bzung ba ltar don la

.J!!&. .E!!

(l77b.6-

zhugs

don la gnas .E!! 1 tar bIos

ni dngos stobsl

wben
bzung

don la mi gnas kvang

dod

M rkyang ~ sbvar ba ni ~.E!!.Y!!!. tel.

A correct reason that is objectively grounded is necessary for an inference
that is concerned with "slightly hidden objects" (cung zad lkog .8.y!!!:.).

And

ultimately

Tshad

is

based

rigs dgongs,
"completely
the

vol.

hidden

on
9,

direct

perception

p. 98.4).

(see

Shakya-mchog-ldan,

this
~

The other type of inference is concerned with

objects" (shin tu lkog .&.y!!!:.) and it has as its sound

two remaining ones in the above list.

Thus inference can be

reasons

classified

as

twofold:
(1) dngos .Q.Q. stobs zhugs

rjes

(2) ill. ches pa'i rjes ~

See Shakya-mchog-ldan, Tshad ma rigs dgongs, vol. 10, pp. 33.7';"34.1; Tshad ~
rigs ~ bshad, pp. 694.7-695.2, and 696.5; and Go-rams-pa, Sde bdun mdo, p.
631.
In
between

a
the

relation."

sound reason that is given by objective

reason

and

predicate can be said to be

See Shakya-mchog-ldan,

dngos.Q.Q. stobs zhugs

~ ~

dangl

.Bi rtags

p.

connection
grounded

chos gnvis

gzhan

brel"p!!' la

~.I.!!!. ~ rtags chos kvis [?]

breI

.E.!!. noll.

term "objectively grounded" is also applied by Sa-paI]. on

occasion

breI

..p!!.

zhes ~ ba

di ~ nges ~ grub

the connection between words and their referents (RTRG,

(RTRG,

the

"objectively

..p!!.

la sgro btags pa I i
The

..p!!.

an

Tshad ma rigs dgongs, vol. 9, p. 520:

rtags

dngos .P stobs zhugs ~ I breI

~

grounding,

to

p. 251.1. 2), to scripture

249.2.2), as well as to means of knowledge (pramaoa) themselves (RTRG,

pp. 246.4.6-247.1.1).
mngon

rjes

Direct perception too is gained by objective grounding:

dngos stobs

.wiI

.vi!!. khas blangs ~.E!! gnvisl I

sgro btags .E.!!. phvir khongs su [po 247.1] bsdusll

mngon ~ dang r jes ~ gnvis dngos .Q.Q. stobs zhugs kvis bsal ba.E.!!. lal

khas

~ dan.s. ~..p!!. gnyis ni

Cf. Tsong-kha-pa, Lam rim chen.!!!2., p. 435b,

as translated by D. Seyfort Ruegg (1983), p. 229: "an objectively gained prama.l}.a."

A dngos.Q2. ~ zhugs ~ tshad ma may also be opposed to a tha snvad 191. tshad
See Go-rams-pa, ~ ba, p. 242.4.

~.

Sometimes Sa-paI]. uses the term "objectively grounded reasoning" in opposition to "fallacious reasoning" (rigs ..p!!. ltar snang).
See his Skyes bu dam"p!!', p.
333.2.6:

dngos .Q.Q. stobs zhugs

~ rigs

m!. dang mi

~ nal rigs"p!!' ltar snang

;
430

dang

mi skyon/.

~ ~

See also his Lung rigs, p. 334.1.4:

rigs ~ dngos .l!2. stobs zhugs gzungl I

rigs

Itar snang snying .l!2. ~ I

The term vastubalapravrtta has been variously translated.

(1930-32),

vol.

241

and 260:

and

E.

p. 157: "the weight of real facts."

p.

229,

A. Wayman (1978), notes

"authority aroused by strength of a present fact."

Napper (1980):

(1982),
p.

2,

Th. Stcherbatsky

"the power of the fact" (dngos

178: "mus par la force des choses reelles."

elucidated the term as follows:

Lati

stobs).

And

Rinbochay
K.

Mimaki

D. Seyfort Ruegg (1983),

"Inferential knowledge may be gained by

objective validation (vastubala) and by consensual validation through convention

or authority."
The latter also mentioned the occurence of vastubala in PV I 65
and 130,
note

III 45 and 185,

and in Kamalasila's TS Panjika 1395.

One should

that the relation of vastubala to scripture is discussed in PV IV 2,

and 98-101b.
On

also
48-51b

See Go-rams-pa, Rgyas pa'i, pp. 161.3.4, 167.1.3, and 173.1.6.

the different theories of grounding or validity of judgments in

philosophy--whether

"external," "internal," or both--see K.

Potter

Indian

(1977),

pp.

158ff.
KhJ III 49 is quoted by Glo-bo mkhan-chen,

Sde bdun mdo .E!!!!!!! bshad,

p.

35.6 (18a.6).
147 This is a tenet of the later Nyaya-Vaise~ika.
in his Nyayavarttika 1,1,4,

for instance,

tween sense object and sense organ.

tact"

(sazpyoga

(samavaya:
see

K.

'phrod

Potter

e.g.,

jar which

is

in

described six types of connection

See G.

Jha (1983), pp. 118ff.

mu.

p.

307:

is [read:

in] that

on which

which

is

in

when we see the color of a jar, the color inheres in the

contact with the visual

(According to Sridhara,

"inherence"

One of the latter is sarpyuktasamavaya,

"Inherence

be-

One is "con-

phrad wand four of the other five are types of

~ ~

(1977),

contact,

Uddyotakara (fl. c. 650)

however,

organ."

See

also

the Vaise~ika do not uphold the

ibid.,

p.

162.

commonsensical

notion of contact, as Professor K. Potter informed me.)

Sa-pa~,

~~

RTRG, p. 229.3.5, discusses this model of sensory cognition: !!K[s]

dbang .l!2. dang don phrad ~ tshad ~ de las don rtogs ~ I bras bur

dod ~

.ii skad dul dbang.l!2. dang don phrad ~ las skyes pa I i I phrod ~ ~ ba 3!!!. tshad
rna I i I bras bu .til!. .!!2.. zhes ~ ba lang mi I thad del dbang.l!2. don .ill. bdag nyid ~
dang phrad

kun rtogs"p'!!!:' thaI bali phyir roll.

And in RTRG,

p.

192.4.2, he

criticizes inherence as an unacceptable type of relation or connection ('breI ~),

quoting

for instance PV III 149,

where the notion of samavaya is

refuted.

See

also Go-rams-pa, Rgyas pa'i, pp. 119.1.3-3.3.

Jinendrabuddhi in his PS commentary refers to the theory of five varieties

431

See Hattori (1968),

of indriyarthasamnikara.

p. 121, note 3.1 and p. 137, note

4.13.
148 See RTRG, p. 170.1.3:

.Y!!l

dang dbang J2.Q. ill la byed/ /

de las skyes pa'i !!!!!!!!. shes Yi!Y/

Cf. RTRG, p. 220.3.6ff.

149Sa_pa~ quotes this in RTRG, p. 170.1.3. This quote is also given in Th.
Stcherbatsky (1930-32),
vijfianam

utpadyate.

vol.

1,

p. 520, note 7: rupam pratitya caksu~ ca cakur

This passage is used by a Sarvastivadin who objects to, the

repudiation of the external world.

along mentalistic lines.
150
dngos

va stu

J2.Q.

Dignaga,

Alambanapariksa 7cd,

explains this

See S. Yamaguchi (1929), pp. 10f.

Sautrantika as a momentary,

This is to be understood here

efficacious entity.

according

to

the

Something that is permanent and

unchangeable cannot be efficacious; hence it is not a really existent entity.

See

Madhyamakalawkara 8, and PV I 211 (on the link between the MA and PV at this point
see D.

Seyfort Ruegg [1981],

see also M.
188).

Ichigo [1972], p. 993 (38), and L. van der Kuijp [1983], p. 289, note

See also Y. Kajiyama (1976), p. 118, and now M. Ichigo (1985).

151Glo_bo

tenets

mkhan-chen,

identified

only scholastic

Tibet

prior

schools.

KhJNSh,

p.

272b.1,

in his exposition of Yogacara

this piirvapaksa as the opinion of "early Tibetan

Abhidharma" (bod snga rabs

the

p. 93, note 298; on other links between these works

ill mngon .E smra ba !!!!8.).

early

of

Abhidharma and Vinaya were

subjects systematically studied and taught

in

to the founding of Atisa's and Rngog Blo-ldan-shes-rab's

The

teachers

11th-century
respective

scholars of Abhidharma alluded to perhaps belonged

to

the

lineage of AS (and Kosa?) studies which persisted in Tibet since the late-8th
century, the time of the great translators Ka-ba Dpal-brtsegs, Lcog-ro Klu'irgyal-mtshan, and Zhang Ye-shes-sde.
Shakya-mchog-ldan, Dam pa'i chos mngon, p.
389,
to

records this lineage and his place in it.

the

pa~~ita

lineage

Or those early scholars belonged

of AK studies established in 10th-century Tibet

Smrtisrijnana.

On these Abhidharma lineages see also

by

the

Indian

Kong-sprul,

Theg

~~, pp. 440.7ff (.Q!l!. 143a. 7).

The

topic of this verse was already discussed by Grags-pa-rgyal-mtshan

his ~ ~ mngon .ill!!:. rtogs .E rin

J2.Q.

che'i lion shing,

in

and Glo-bo mkhan-chen,

KhJNSh, p. 273a.1 , briefly quotes from there: ~ tsam .Y!!!. ~ .P1!vi rol .8.ti:. don
~ blan~ ~.E ~ ba'i phyir roo See also the commentary proper in KhJNSh,

432

p. 287b.5.
The
discussed
rje'i
I

are

also

greater length by Glo-bo mkhan-chen in his Sa skyar bdag chen

chos

dris Ian mdzad

replies
I

opinions
at

to

of Grags-pa-rgyal-mtshan and Sa-pal] on this point

~

(Toyo Bunko MS,

questions put by Sa-skya

cha,

lo-tsa-ba

pp.

191b.3-197a.5),

a number

of

'Jam-dbyangs-kun-dga'-bsod-nams,

written at Thub-bstan-dar-rgyas-gling on the 8th day of the sixth lunar month of a

monkey

year

(1512 or 1524).

mkhan-chen's reply begins on p.

quotes

KhJ

III

The sixth question is on this

194b.4.

To begin his answer,

50 with its autocommentary.

scholars apparently interpreted

Several early

observes

tenets
AKBh

that

of Vasubandhu.
in

Indeed,

Glo-bo

Glo-bo mkhan-chen
and

later

Tibetan
the

Glo-bo mkhan-chen (p.

there exist scriptures in which more than one

are taught in different sections,

translation

and

Grags-pa-rgyal-mtshan's remarks to mean that

AS must therefore be an exclusively Sautrantika scripture.

195b.2)

topic,

system

of

and

the

such as the PV of Dharmakirti

there are no basic treatises available in

which the Sautrantika tenets are set forth independently

Tibetan
and

in

their own right (rang rkang tshugs~, he says. Those critics thought that Rjebtsun Grags-pa-rgyal-mtshan did not understand the final purport of the scriptures, but in Glo-bo mkhan-chen's opinion they were indulging in controversy on a
flimsy basis--their supposition that slight textual corruptions in Grags-pa-rgyalmtshan's works indicated a real error on Grags-pa-rgyal-mtshan's part.
152See above,

note 128.

KhJ III 51 is quoted by Glo-bo mkhan-chen,

Sde

bdun mdo .Elli!!!! bshad, p. 36.1 (l8b.1).

153See above, note 135.
154The

correct reading is probably

ti:&. pari gtan tshigs.

gtan tshigs is equivalent to gsal zhing .!is. pari rtags.

[1966],
dmigs
ba

p.
~

dang

tshigs

PVin I,

ti:&. pari
(T. Vetter

100.1-3, also quoted in S. Matsumoto [1980], p. 26, note 3): lhan

dang .!is.
de.!is.

was

Cf.

Here

!&

.PhI.!. rol .&.Y.!. don .Y..Q.Q. kyang sngon .QQ. la sogs ~ snang
tha dad med lli!!. grub boll.
The reading rigs pa 'i gtan

~ ~ ~

~ ~

perhaps alectio facilior

caused by the proximity of the word

lung.

See also above, note 135.

155These two belong to the four (or five) "great reasons" (gtan tshigs chen
.QQ.) used to establish an understanding that all factors of existence (dharma)

insubstantial.

They are treated in the Bodhimargadlpaka commentary

are

attributed to

Atisa. As described by D. Seyfort Ruegg (1981), p. 112, these are:

(i) the 'reason' analyzing the (supposed) production of a product;

433

the so-called *Vajrakal).a-' reason , (rdo

(ii)

lysing

catuskoti
~s,

~ ~

ma'i gtan chigs)

origination from any of the causes postulated in

by either non-Buddhists

Brahman,

Vi~l).u,

(e.g.

Isvara,

t~e

purua,

frame

ana"'"

of

the

svabhava,

the

Mahadeva) or Buddhist (e.g. the Abhidharmika's six

hetus and four pratyayas;

(iii)

the 'reason' analysing things as devoid of both a single and

mUltiple

nature; and
(iv)

the

'reason' constituted by origination in dependence

(pratityasamut-

pada) establishing sunyata.

See also Dbus-pa Blo-gsal,

pp. 106b.5-108b.6; K. Mimaki (1982), p. 212, note 547;

and T.

pp. 361 and 371, note 16.

pp.

Tillemans (1984a),

307ff (ca pp.

Go-rams-pa,

ba thams,

154a ff), discusses these four and an additional one under the

rubric chos ill bdag

pa'i rigs pa'i gtso bo bshad

.p.!!:

(1) .!!&.2.. bo la ~.P.!!.B!&. dang du bral (p. 308.1)

(2) .!:8..Y.!! la

~.p.!!

rdo ill ~

(p.

313.5,

but discussed in

detail

earlier in the work)

(3) 'bras bu la ~.P.!!.Y!!. med skye ~ (p. 313.5)
(4) gnyis ka la
(5)

~.p.!!,!!!!:!,

thams cad la

~.p.!!

bzhi skye

(p. 316.5)

rten 'breI ill gtan tshigs (p. 318.2)

For Shakya-mchog-ldan's treatment of these under the rubric bden grub ill spros

.p.!!

ill rigs .p.!! bshad .p.!!, see his Dbu ~!,!g!!!!, vol. 15, pp. 370.2-398.2:
.B!&. dang du bra 1 ill gtan tshigs -(pp. 370.2-385.7)

~ byed

(1)

(2) rdo

~ ~

ma'i gtan tshigs (pp. 385.7-392.6)

.Y!!. med skye ~ &.!.. gtan tshigs (pp. 392.6-393.5)

(4) rten 'breI ill gtan tshigs (pp. 393.5-396.7)
(3)

(5) El!!. bzhi skye ~ (pp. 396.7-397.2)

Cf. the Gzhung lugs legs bshad, pp. 73.4.4. On Gtsang-nag-pa's acceptance of
these reasonings when discerning the ultimate, see Go-rams-pa, Rgyal ba, p. 202.3.
On the ~ dang du bra 1 in particular, especially as used by later Tibetan (Dgelugs-pa) Madhyamikas, see T. Tillemans (1982), (1983), and (1984a).
156
note 211.

bsgrub

dang mtshungs

.p.!!

sadhyasama.

See below,

KhJ III 64, and

157

"panty
.

The full name of this reasoning is !&I.!!. mtshan mtshungs pa'i.!!!&Q. snyoms
(or logical balancing) of the same reasoning." This is one of four

reasonings

used

(anumana),

one

by Prasangikas which together constitute

for

them

"inference"

of the four means of knowledge (pramaQa) that establish the ulti-

mate truth (don dam sgrub byed .kvi tshad ma bzhi).

The four prama(!as are:

434

(1) mngon ~

pratyaksa

(2) rjes.!!lli!&.

anum13na

(3) lung : 13gama

(4)

nyer 'jal ba

See Go-rams-pa,
there

defined

ba,

as

upamana
pp.

266ff

(~p.

133b).

knowledge that has arisen from

The pramapa of inference is

non-mistaken

understanding

regarding [the relation between] the logical mark and the thing to be proven,

and

which has a "hidden object" as its subject (rjes su .!!lli!&. pa'i tshad ~ ni lkog l!!.

ill .!!.!!. rtags bsgrub

.&Y.!!!:. ba' i

As

mentioned

above,

the

.lli!!:.. ~ ba la mi 'khrul E las skyes pa' i shes ~).

four reasonings of the Prasangika's inference are as

follows:
(1)

ba brjod pa'i thaI

(2) gzhan la

pa'i rjes .!!lli!&.

(3).E&I!! mtshan mtshungs pa'i.!!!&2. snyoms

(4)

sgrub byed bsgrub

Go-rams-pa,

ba,

p.

dang mtshungs pa' i

grub E

267.2 (ca 134a.2) interprets the PP as

teaching

the

following with regard to the first two:

(1)

[This

is] an adducing of a logical consequence which

that contradicts [the opponent's position]

used

(~

ba brjod pa'i thaI

if a mere elicitation of a logical consequence (thaI

indicates

states

something
It is

~).

prasanga) which

.&y.!!!:.:

a contradiction is able to remove the erroneous idea of

the

opponent.

For instance, as when proving that "birth" cannot be meaningfully predicated to an

entity

"self,"

nonsensical

to

earlier (ibid.,
such

the reason being its existence as a [permanent] "self."

predicate

birth

to something that

is

permanent.]

[It

is

Go-rams-pa

p. 28 [ca 14b]) explained that this reasoning can be used against

opponents as the

Sa~hya

adherent who maintains the birth of a self and

the

Jaina who maintains both "self" and "other."

(2) Inference which is accepted by others (gzhan la

pa'i rjes

~).

This is where one starts with the statement of a contradictory logical consequence
as

described above,

and adds to it further elements of a formal

argument,

even

going so far as to state the full five branches of the traditional Indian argument
form.
(3)
This

Balancing

of the same reason (.E&I!! mtshan mtshungs pa'i.!!!.8.Q. snyoms).

is a reasoning used against someone who maintains that even though a

(.E&I!! mtshan:
are dissimilar.

hetu) is the same,

the conclusions it leads to (.E&I!! mtshan

~)

Here the M13dhyamika argues by a logical "balancing" (Le. analo-

gous reasoning) that the conclusions led to are the same.

two ways of answering an objection:
~,

reason

In general,

there are

(a) directly, with the actual reply (Ian

and (b) indirectly, through "balancing" or a parity of reasoning (.!!!.8.Q. snyoms

435

or

bsgre).

For instances of these two see Sa-pa9,

10a.6-10b.1), and Shakya-mchog-ldan, Dbu

~~,

ThGS,

pp.

5.3.6-4.1 (D

vol. 15, pp. 595.2, 603.1.

Go-rams-pa states that the earlier master Gtsang-nag-pa classified the

mtshan

mtshungs

clear to me):
(a) rtog
This

pao'i
ge'i

is

snyoms into the following three types

snyoms ("the balancing argumentation

(which
of

in

there

means

existing a reason accepted in pragmatic

normal

sequence"

?)

of

usage

snyad kYi ~ mtshan .I.Qi .ill!!:. mtshungs ~ ~ ~

(b) thod rgal.8.Yl~ snyoms ("balancing argumentation which does not
the

not

dialectics"?).

said to be a negation of the opponent's position by

similarity

are

This is said to be a negation by means

(tha
follow

of

the

similari ty in there not existing a sound reason (.IS.!!&. !!B. pa' i .!:8Y!!.!!. [read:
.B.Y!!. mtshan] med .ill!!:. mtshungs ~ ~ ~

(c) ..l?.!!. ldog .&9:&..ill!..ti!!. ~

general concept"?).

.ill!. ("negation by its being the same

[On this type see also Shakya-mchog-Idan, Dbu

~~,

vol. 15, p. 406.1.]

Go-rams-pa above (ibid.,
pa'i

p.

28

[~

14b]) mentioned that the

mtshan mtshungs

snyoms is used for instance against fellow Buddhists who

maintain

the

birth of an entity that is different (from what gives rise to it) and against nonBuddhists

such

as Jainas who maintain both "self" and "other," and Lokayata

ad-

herents who maintain the birth of something in the absence of a cause.

Another

discussion

of this reasoning is found in Tsong-kha-pa's

Lam

rim

p. 250, where according to the Mchan bzhi sbrags~, pp. 474f, the system
of Khu lo-tsa-ba is the purvapaksa.
For still other discussions, see K. Mimaki

~.!!!2.,

(1982), p. 176, note 478.

(4)
mtshungs

The fourth Prasangika reasoning is called sgrub byed bsgrub

pa'i

rna grub

.p!!

"the probans being unestablished like

the

dang

probandum."

See KhJ III 64 and below, note 211.

For

classification of these four Prasangika reasonings ascribed to

tshab's disciple Zhang Thang-sag-pa,

Pp. 404.lf.

Pa-

see Shakya-mchog-Idan, Dbu ~~, vol. 15,

157

.
[sgrub byed] bsgrub ~ dang mtshungs .p!!L.2:.. ~ grub .lli!.]
On this reasoning see KhJ III 64 and below, note 211.

sadhyasama.

158Here Sa-paQ holds that the Prasangika reasonings are

vastubalapravrtta.

to 'Jam-dbyangs-bzhad-pa in his Grub mtha' chen~,

Pa-tshab lo-tsa-ba

According

held that the key difference between Svatantrikas and Prasangikas was
Svatantrikas accepted a sound means of knowledge given by objective

that the
grounding

436

(dngos

stobs zhugs ill. tshad ~ whereas the Prasangikas did not.

]Q.

The passage

from the Grub mtha' chen mo, ca, p. 74b.5-7 (as quoted in K. Mimaki [1982], p. 45,
note

110):

ma thaI rang & khyad .8!!!!&. .ti:!!. zhe nal .ill!. tshab dngos.Q2. stobs

dbu

zhugs ill. tshad ma khas len .ill!. dbu .!!!!!. rang .!:&!.!!!!. dang de mi len .ill!. thaI
zhes

.Q.2.

skad del.

Cf.

Sa-paQ on the differences between the Svatantrika and Prasangika,

gdams do kor, p. 403.3.3:

~

snyad du ni mi bslu barll

'dod .ill!. de ni tshad ma' i lugsl I

dbu ~ .ill!. la !:!!!!!!!. gnyis

Wi

rang .8Y!& de dang cha mthun

WI

thaI ~ .ill!..!!!!.&. tha snyad du' angl I

bden .ill!!. mi 'dod mdor bsdus ~ I
Tsong-kha-pa, Lam rim chen~, p. 436b, describes as his fourth purvapaksa
an

early Tibetan Madhyamika (apparently one of the Rma-bya-bas) who held that the

correct procedure was to negate objectively gained pramaQas and establish ultimate
reality by means of pramaQa recognized in everyday consensus, which he accepts in
pragmatic usage.
See also D. Seyfort Ruegg (1983), pp. 229f, and note 68. The
scholar "Rma-bya-ba chen-po" is also referred to by Go-rams-pa as having held that
the

Madhyamika

does

not maintain any such dngos

]Q.

stobs zhugs .ill tshad

~.

(This was perhaps Rma-bya Byang-chub-brtson-'grus being referred to here.

Rma-bya

Byang-chub-ye-shes is specified by Go-rams-pa in

77a.4],

but compare Go-rams-pa,

Lta ba'i shan 'byed,

p.

ba,

431.5

Byang-chub-brtson-'grus is the only Rma-bya-ba mentioned.)

ba 'i,

p.

snyam

nal

grub

203. 6

(~p.

102a. 6):

p.

[~

[~

See Go-rams-pa,

na rang [p. 204] .!:&!.!!!!..ill!!. ci' i phyir mi

rang.!:&!.!!!!. .ill don ni tshu1 gsum dngos

]Q.

stobs zhugs.ill tshad

pa 'i rtags las bsgrub E.v.!!. bsgrub .ill!. .ti:!!. la 'dir ni dngos

]Q.

stobs zhugs

mas

m.

des bsgrub E.v.!!. bsgrub .ill!. ni don dam dang tha snyad .ru!!!.8. .8!.

tshad

ma gtan med

skabs

su' ang khas mi len cing rtags .ill tshu1 thams cad kyang

153.4

216a.5] where Rma-bya

rten na

pa 'i tshad ma tsam ~ grub .ill!. .Y!!!. ~ rang .!:&!.!!!!. .ill!!. mi ~ roll.
Later (p. 209.5) Go-rams-pa sums up a similar discussion by saying that SapaQ maintained the opposite opinion:

dngos

]Q.

ma ~ khas mi len .ill!!. rma E.v.!!. chen ~ bshad kyangl

kyis

de

!tar 'dod

snyad du .YQ.Q.. pa' ami

dbu.!!!!!.

stobs zhugs

tshad

dbu

sa.P!!Q. ~ dngos smra ~

chos de 1a rtags de bskyed pa' i nus.ill!. tha

chos de dang rtags de tha snyad. du .&i&. .ti:!!..ill!. tsam ~ chog

.ill!. la dgongs nas dngos ]Q. stobs zhugs .ill rigs .ill!. bzhed .ill!!. bshad .ill!. ni shin !.
legs soil.
I am not sure which work of Sa-pa~ it is that Go-rams-pa refers to
here, if not the KhJ.

437

Go-rams-pa mentions Rma-bya-ba again,

!h!! snyad pa'i tshad

rang

On

ibid.,

p.

242.4: rma byas chos

kYi tshad

ma grub

du mi ~ bar bshad ~ " See also below, note 169.

Rma-bya-ba Byang-chub-brtson-'grus and his later critics, see now

P.

Williams (1985).

grub kyang dngos ..P.Q. stobs zhugs

482.4,

That Rma-bya Byang-chub-brtson-'grus was the direct disciple of

Pa-tshab would seem to be indicated by Shakya-mchog-ldan, Dbu

~

vol. 15, p.

ma~,

where he quotes from the work Pa tshab 10 tsa ba' i gsung dbu ma .I?!!. chen ..P.Q.
chub brtson 'grus

according

kYi br jed

du bkod .I?!!. zhes

to Mkhas-grub-rje's gsan 11&,

subsequent

generation.

See D.

ba' i bstan bcos.

But

Byang-chub-brtson-'grus belonged to

Jackson (1985a),

p.

31,

note 33,

the

and also D.

Seyfort Ruegg (1983), p. 230, note 68.

159Glo_bo mkhan-chen,
the system of Phywa-pa:
pa'i lugs."

KhJNSh, p. 288a.4, identifies the purvapaksa here as

"gangs can .&Yi rigs .I?!!.

ba chen ..P.Q. slob

dpon

Cf. Dharmottara's commentary on NB III 46 (Th. Stcherbatsky [1930-32], vol.

2, p. 157):

Should

not

a logical argument [liilga

regard

all

established

weight

of real facts?

= "logical

doctrines and be guided

mark,

reason"]

exclusively

dis-

by

the

Therefore a philosopher should never take

his

stand on a body of established doctrines, since they must be left out

of account?
(56.20) Quite right!
But, as a matter of fact, even in
those

cases

when (a philosopher) selfreliantly takes his stand

body of established doctrines,

system (and) quotes arguments (in accordance with that system),

theless

on

i.e. if he is an adherent of a definite

only that proposition will represent his thesis which he

neverhim-

self chooses to advocate (at a given occasion)."

On the relation of scripture (lung : agama) to reasoning that has objective
grounding (dngos stobs), see RTRG, p. 246.2.6:

.!l..&.. ~ lung 1a mi hos lal

l!!!!.&. ~

pa' i phyir rol.

~ 1un8. ~ nil
Some
(i.e.

de 1a'ang dngos ..P.Q. stobs zhugs

gnas gsum ~ ~ ba na rigs .I?!!. dang mi ~

And RTRG,

p.

249.2.2:

kYi
ba 'i

dngos..P.Q. stobs zhugs kyis grub

rang tshig dang khyad ~ med ~

(Tibetans?) seem to have held that logical marks accepted by

oneself

from the scripture of one's tradition, .y!.! ches pa'i rtags) and accepted by

everyone (i.e.
tive grounding.

from worldly consensus,

pa'i rtags) are also given by objec-

See Sa-pag, RTRG, p. 248.1.2, where he rejected this.

q
438

1600n

whether

the

sphere in which negation and

proof

are

possible

is

limited, see below, note 169.

161

See also Go-rams-pa,

Lta ba'i, pp. 454.5ff.

Glo-bo mkhan-chen, KhJNSh,

p. 288b.3, summarizes this passage as follows: snang ba tha dad .m!. dangl
tha

dad

Cf.

the Mahayanasamgraha (G.

la bltos

dngos .Q stobs zhugs

.!!.

mi

ba med

~ ~

pa I i don

toll.

Nagao ed., p. 70), II. 14A, where similar reasoning

is used to refute the existence of objects.

162

The words byas .YQQ. should be understood as byas pa I am .YQQ..m!. ("made" .2!.

"existent").

See for instance the RTRG, p . 194.2.6: byas .YQQ. dang mi rtag .m!..&!.&.

ill. I grub

na/, and p.

194.3.3:

.YQQ. pa I am byas .m!.

bkod kyang

run8.

~.

163
kho
.Q

bo
la

See Go-rams-pa,

Rgyal ba,

dngos med .!!&Q. bo med

~.&i

Kajiyama [1966],

dngos med la mi
p.

.p!!.!:.

p.
I

187.7

~.&;

(~94a.6).

Cf. RTRG, p. 196.3.3:

rtag mi rtag .&i

dod lal

~ ~

and also Mokl?akaragupta,

TBh

dngos

25.1

(Y.

121): "No logical mark as essential nature is available just

because the existence of the entity (dharmin) is itself not established."

1641 have not yet located this quotation in the Prainaparamita Sutras.

The

same quote occurs in the ThGS, p. 32.1.2 (63a.2).

dmigs su.YQQ..m!. is perhaps upa-

lamba.

See E. Conze (1973), p. 35.

Cf. dmigs su med.m!., anupalamba, AA I 30.

165pralnaparam~ta
.-- . - Ratnaguoasamcayagat
- h-a V 1

and 165; . and E.

Obermiller (1960),

p. 28.

SAY
ee. uyama (1976) , pp. 28

The edited Sanskrit of this verse is

(following Yuyama [1976], p. 28):

saci rupa salJljna

vedana cetana ca

cittaw anitya paridlpayi bodhisattvo I

prativaroikaya carate apraianamano
na hi dharma paQgita vinasa karoti jatu II
The Tanjur recension of this verse (Yuyama's recension B) is:

.!w!!!.&. chub sems

~

~ ~

te rab tu mi shes bzhinl I

dang ~ shes tshor ba ~ dang

.P!!E. shesl I

mi rtag ~ su ston .m!. bcos la ~.m!. stell

mkhas ~ .!!!!!!!. ~ chos ~ ~ .p!!.!:. mi byed dol I
Recension A (the Tunhuang recension) reads, following Yuyama (1976), p. 165, brjod
.m!. instead of ston .m!. in line c, and chud gzon instead of

~ .p!!.!:.

in line d.

439

166'bras bu'i rtags

(svabhavahetu)

rta~

karyahetu.

This,

the following, and rang bzhin ill

make up the three types of reasons or logical

marks.

The

above discussion mainly concerns the rang bzhin ill rtags.

167mi

dmigs pa'i rtags

Mimaki (1976),

pp.

= anupa1abdhihetu.

On this type of reason see

K.

27 and 228ff, notes 93 and 94; and E. Steinke11ner (1974), p.

117, note 1.
168Mahayanasutral8ffikara IX 41.

The Sanskrit of this verse as given in

S.

Levi (1907), p. 41:

pancendriyaparavrttau
vibhutvaw 1abhyate

sarvarthavfttau sarveam
gupadvadasatodaye II
The canonical version,
157a.5 (p.

79.1.5),

translations of S.
The

latter

also

P [108] (5521),

11b.3 [po

pp.

163ff.

1,200.

and D (4020),
Cf.

the

Levi (1911), p. 80, and R. A. F. Thurman et a1. (1979), p. 89.

includes the brief explanations of the commentary

Vasubandhu, for which see also D ~ 157a.5.

Thogs-med-bzang-po,

6.5.3];

is identical except that Dreads 'thob in line d.

Theg.Q!!. chen,

p.

ascribed

to

See also the commentaries Rgya1-sras

165, and Mi-pham-rgya-mtsho, Theg .Q!!. chen,

The Tibetan translation and commentaries are clear that the number is

Cf. S. Levi (1911), p. 80, note 41.1, who perhaps misread or misunderstood

~ phrag bcu gnyis as ~ rtsa bcu gnyis or ~ dang bcu gnyis.

169Sa_pa9 thus holds that reasoning or pramsQa that is objectively grounded

can only function on the surface level,
negation and proof are possible.

the level of transactional

usage,

where

In this he accords with a doctrine expounded by

Santarak~ita in his MA 77.

See also Y. Kajiyama (1976), p. 130

above, KhJ III 37, autocommentary, and note 95.

and below.

Cf.

This "doubt" seems related to the real views of Rma-bya chen-po as described by Go-rams-pa, ~ ba, p. 203.3: des na dbu .!!@. ~ kun rdzob tu ~
~rub

1v!.

dam bca' gnyis ka'ang 'dod 1al

~ ~ sgrub ~ dam bca' med/.

rtags shing ~ pa'i shes ngor don dam

He also holds (ibid.,

~ sgrub byed pa'i tshad ma'ang.YQQ. del,

dngos

.EQ

~ zhugs kv.!. tshad rna.

10

du

but that for the Dbu-rna-pa there is no

(1) dmigs pa'i rkyen : a1ambanapratyaya

!k.!!@.

tha snyad

See ibid., p. 204.1, and above, note 158.

170The four conditions are:

(2)

line 4):

thag pa'i rkyen : sarnanantara--

440

(3) rgyu'i rkyen : hetu-(4) bdag po'i rkyen : adhipati-On these see for instance E.

Lamotte (1949-80),

vol.

5,

pp.

2163-2173, and S.

Mookerjee (1935), pp. 316-318.

171See above, KhJ III 31-32, autocommentary, and above, note 82.
172See above, note 95.
173See above, note 96.
174PV III 209.

The Sanskrit, following Miyasaka (1971-72), is as follows:

idaW vastubalayataw
~

vadanti vipascitab /

yatha tatharthas cintyante

viSiryante tatha tatha //
See

also Go-rams-pa,

whereas only D reads

pa'i,

p.

126.1.1.

KhJ B,

C and G read

bral,

The corresponding Sanskrit

'breI as in the Tanjur.

is

visiryante "they are shattered, dissolved."

175See also RTRG, p. 249.1.5: shin tu lkog ..8Y!!!:. la lung

.&i

tshig phan ~

mi ~ ba' i ~ rab nged ill lung .Ii!!. la de Ita bu' i lung de ~

nang

r jes su ~.m!I. bsdus ~ tshad ~ gsum .m!I. mi bzhed cing/

nyid.Ii!!. te rnam 'grel las/. (He then quotes PV I 216.)

The source of this in Dignaga's writings is PS V 1.

(1930-32),
AS,

gnod

vol.

1,

Stcherbatsky

p. 459, and M. Hattori (1968), p. 68, note 1.12.

Asanga already had specified that trustworthy scripture

aptagama)

See Th.

was teachings that do not contradict the first two

(lii

kIi

byed

ches

But in the
lung:

p~'i

pramauas.

See W.

Rahula (1971), p. 182, and Gzhan-dga', p. 379.1 (190a.1).

176PV
KhJ.

216.

The Tanjur versions D and P are almost the same as in

In line a, D and P read slu instead of bslu, and in line d they read

du gsungs instead of pa'i tshad mar bzhed.

reading ldog instead of lkog (line b) and

instead of rjes in N (line d).

pp.

249.1.6-2.1.

samanyad anumanata /

The

For the inter-

pa'i, p. 57.2.

The Sanskrit of this verse, following Miyasaka (1971/72), p. 146, is:

aptavadavisawvada

the
nyid

Miyasaka (1971/72), p. 147, notes the

KhJ version is identical to that found in RTRG,

pretation of this verse see Go-rams-pa,

441

agatyabhihita

paroke

..J!.i asya

177KhJ

Band G omit:

go care I I
"two [pramap.as]," though D has it.

Cf

Mok~akara-

gupta, TBh 4 (Kajiyama [1966], p. 30):

By

the word 'twofold' are refuted the

sify valid knowledge into] one,

'is to say,
ception;

different opinions which [c1as-

three, four, five and six kinds.

the Carvaka recognizes only one valid cognition,

the

Sa~hya

perception,

inference

and

verbal

That

i.e. pertestimony

(sabda); the Naiyayika perception, inference, identification (upamana),

verbal testimony;

and

testimony,

the Prabhakara

perception,

inference,

verbal

identification and presumption or postulation (arthapatti);

the [Bhatta-]

Mima~saka

perception,

inference, verbal testimony, iden-

tification, presumption and non-existence (abhava).

Kajiyama, ibid., note 27, also refers to the same account with slight variations
in the Tarkasopana of Vidyakarasanti. See G. Tucci (1956), p. 277.4-10.
For

a similar list see M.

ultimately based on H.
the

Vaise~ika

ence,

while

Vaise~ikas

N.

Hattori (1968),

Randle (1930), p. 305.

p.

78,

are said to recognize two means of knowledge:

the

Paura~ikas

recognize eight.

note 1.12,

which

is

Here in addition to the above,

perception and infer-

In maintaining two

pramap.as,

actually were not in fact very different from the Naiyayikas,

the

for they

classified the comparison and verbal authority of the latter within their pramapa
of inference.
See K. Potter (1977), p. 174. For another summary of the pramanas
maintained by the different schools,
pp. 55-68.
178Glo_bo mkhan-chen,
not

see S. C. Chatterjee and D. M. Datta (1939),

KhJNSh, p. 289b.6, states that one reason

Sa-pa~ did

expatiate here in the KhJ was because he had already investigated this

topic

in detail in the Rigs gter rang ~grel, and that the error of this opinion was well
known to all: tshad rna rigs

M..2

gter lasl

zhib tu ~.P!. dangl

~ ~ 'khrul

cad 1a ~ ~ 'dir ma spros so zhes gsungs sol.

I have not identified which passage or passages in the Rigs gter rang 'gre1 are referred to.

l@!. ~

179

E.

Frauwallner

(1961),

p.

131,

assigned the date c.

400-480 to the

logician Vasubandhu, as opposed to the earlier Vasubandhu (Asanga's brother), who

flourished c. 320-380.
However, it is simpler to assume instead that there were
two phases in the career of one and the same Vasubandhu, who flourished in the
late-4th century.
Bhavaviveka (Bhavya) can be placed c. 500-570. See D. Seyfort
Ruegg (1982), p. 513

442

It is interesting that Bhavaviveka, who was probably a younger contemporary

of

Dignaga and who "evidently wished to utilize methods developed by the Buddhist

logico-epistemological school headed by

Dignaga" (D. Seyfort Ruegg [1981],

p. 61), was nevertheless classified doctrinally as belonging to the earlier school

of PramaI,la.

See also Shakya-mchog-ldan, Tshad ma'i mdo, p. 8.7:

snga E!!! ni thogs

med mched dang legs ldan sogs ill la/ .P.hYi E!!! ni ~ ill. ili.!!.8. po' i
'brang la 'chad.@ bzhin nolo

r jes

According to Ngag-dbang-chos-grags, Bod ill. mkhas (Derge ed.), p. 16a, some

scholars held that the Indian scholars of PramaI,la could be grouped into three
periods: early, middle, and late.
the

But Ngag-dbang-chos-grags himself follows just

exposition of Sa-paI,l in the KhJ and in this connection quotes KhJ III

Glo-bo

mkhan-chen,

threefold
cians

KhJNSh,

division.

For him,

before Dignaga,

bandhu.

In

the

p.

239a.4-254a.3,

54-55.

was one of those who followed

in the first period there came the Buddhist logi-

including the arhat *Dharmatrata (Chos-skyabs)

middle period he placed Dignaga and Dharmakirti.

and

Vasu-

In the

last

period he put all the subsequent scholars of PramaI,la.

180See above, note 175.
181See RTRG,
chod

p. 259.1.1: slob dpon dbyig gnyen .&Vi rtsod .@ sgrub

ph yin ci 12K dang mi ldan .@ dang/

phan tshun 'chol ba'i phyir slob dpon mi bzhed

Tucci (1929), pp. 484ff, and above, note 21.

~
~

.l@L

ltag

ba zhes gsum tu bsdus .@ ni

'dir mi bshad del.

See also G.

On the identification of the Rtsod .@ grub .@ with the Vadavidhi, see M.

Hattori (1968), p. 114, notes 2.1 and 2.3-5. On this treatise see also E. Frauwallner (1957) and H. R. R. Iyengar (1953).
182See RTRG, p. 259.4.5, and below, KhJ III 55, autocommentary.
183E

Frauwallner (1961),

pp. 134 and 137, assigned the approximate dates

of c. 480-540 to Dignaga and c. 600-660 to Dharmakirti.

184See above, note 175.
185The logical relations ('brel.@:
are

the

bases

svabhavahetu)
third

reason,

sambandha) of identity and

causation

for the two logical reasons of "nature" (rang bzhin.&Vi rtags

and "result" ('bras bu'i rtags
"non-apprehension"

variety of "nature."

See E.

(mi dmigs .@

Steinkellner (1974),

karyahetu),

respectively.

:
The

anupalabdhi) is

ultimately a

p. 117, note 1.

The Rigs gter

443

ranK 'grel, chapter 6 (pp. 190.2.6-201.1.5), is devoted to an investigation of the

logical relations of the terms of an inference.
On these relations, see also E. Steinkellner (1971), pp. 202f (cited by E.
Steinkellner [1974],

p.

118, note 2), Y. Kajiyama (1966), p. 72, and Th. Stcher-

batsky (1930-32), vol. 1, pp. 248 and 309.

186PS
to me).

VI 21 [1] (the numbering of the verses in this chapter is not

See PS (P),

p.

12b.6-7.

P line c reads: rtsod.E!!. sgrub

clear

skyon

gswn bshad//.
On the futile rejoinders (ltag chad: jati) see also KhJ III 8-10,
and above, note 21. On this verse see also the commentary of Mi-pham-rgya-mtsho,
Tshad ma kun, p. 614; and E. Frauwallner (1957), pp. 121 and 138, fragment 11.
187ef
classical

Mok~akaragupta,

statements

TBh 11.2 (Y.

Kajiyama [1966], p. 73).

of the five members of the Indian argument

form

One of the
or

"syl-

logism" is NS 1,1,3.
188Tib .:

.ll.!. khyab.

This

is very similar to the major premise

in

an

Aristotelian syllogism.
189See also RTRG, pp. 259.4.6-260.1.1: grangs.!!!!. la sags pa'i snga rabs .E!!.
~

1a la ~ .Y.Q.Q. de du ba .Y.Q.Q. pa' i phyir tshang mang bzhinl

la la' ang du ba .Y.Q.Q.

lnga ldan du br jod .E!!. mi 'thad del .ll.!. khyab br jod .E!!. ~ tshang
bsgrub ~ nyer sbyor .!!!.i!:!.&. sdud gsum lhag pa'i phyir [260] rol I.
Sa-pa~
then quotes two unidentified lines from Dharmaktrti, and then PVin III 5ab (which

~ .!!!.~.Y.Q. ~

1al

is similar to PV IV 17ab).
made by Dignaga,

This criticism of the superfluous members was

for instance in the Nyayamukha.

first

See Y. Kajiyama (1966), p. 73,

note 185, and Th. Stcherbatsky (1930-32), vol. 1, p. 281.

On

the Indian and Buddhistic "syllogistic" forms,

see

Th.

Stcherbatsky,

ibid.; S. Sanghvi (1961), pp. 85ff; K. Potter (1963), pp. 56-74; K. Mimaki (1976),
p.

48;

and the sources cited by the latter on pp. 251f, note 185.

For the five-

membered form in the AS, see W. Rahula (1971), p. 182, sadhana nos. [1]-[5].
190"Expansive in brevity" (nyung

~.

See also RTRG, p. 260.2.2, where

it is explained that for the inexpert (mi mkhas .E!!.) one should use the nyung ~

form with its two branches:

b1un

I!.Q.

la ni nyung ~ sbyarl I

~ ~ ~ gnyis pa'i ~ tu sbyar tel des ~ dang ~ chos brjod .E!!.

~ mthun ~ nyid kY.!. ~ dper na ~ byas .E!!. de mi rtag ste bum .E!!. bzhin

~ ~ byas sol I.

For an expert or learned man

(mkhas .E!!.) ,

however,

the

444

"reason" itself is sufficient (p. 260.2.5):

mkhas .E.!! la ni gtan tshigs nyidll
gtan

tshigs

grub stel

brjod

khyab .E.!! dran

~ ~.

shes .E.!! de la gtan tshigs tsam .8..V.i[

dper!!.2. byas .E.!! la mi rtag ~ khyab ~ ~ ba "i rgol ba mkhas"p!!' ~

la ~ ill!. sgra .E!.!!&. byas ~ zhes br jod ~ 'grub

formal

debate

fuller form of expression.

The

l?2i I.

But Sa-paI]. adds that in a

that is conducted in the midst of an assembly one should

phrase nyung

use

the

became the subject of scholastic discussion in

the

In this connection he quotes PV I 27.

later Sa-skya-pa school.

Ngag-dbang-chos-grags,

Bod

~mkhas

(Derge

16b.3,

explains

'grel,

and he indicates his uncertainty about Shakya-mchog-ldan's

of

the

'grel:

term
sgrub

ed.),

p.

the term as meaning the same in the KhJ as in the Rigs gter ranK
interpretation

because the latter is not clearly supported by the Rigs

gter

brjod tshul la Bill.l!!&. lnga ldan las tshig .!!Y.!!.!!8. la don

pa 'i Bill. l!!&. gnyis ldan .&Ii sgrub ~ ~ ~ mdzadl

'dir gsungs

rang
~

pa 'i

nyung

blun .P. la ni .!!Y.!!.!!8. ~ sbyar I I

gsungs pa'i nyung ~.&.Q. don.&!gj ~ chen .&Ii !.!&[s] gter tikkar

nyung

~ dangl .ti.gJs] gter dul

zhes

zhes .E.!! ~ ba' i sgrub ~ Bill. l!!&. gnyis ldan dangl

~.E.!!

sgrub byed ~ !.!&[ s] .E.!! ~ la s byor bar mdzad kyangl

kha mi ~ ~ i!. ltar 'thad dam/.
And

on

p.

23b.4,

de' i

gswn

'grel ~ de 'dra' i gsal

Ngag-dbang-chos-grags points out again

interpretation of Shakya-mchog-ldan:

tshul

the

different

r!&[s] gter dul

blun .P. la ni .!!Y.!!.!!8. ~ sbyarl I

zhes

pa 'i

nyung .!!8!!. ni

~ ~ ~ 'di

JiEI

i@!!8.

byas na zhes sogs Bill. l!!&. gnyis ldan.&Ii sgrub

~ ~ .E.!! ni byas rtags Ita bu la mtshon ~

tshul gsum sgrub byed ~ rigs .E.!! ~

Shakya-mchog-ldan,
explain
proof:

.Y!!!.

Tshad!!!!! rigs ~ bshad,

nyung as a brief expression and

tshul

.E.!!

.Y!!!. ~

de

byas nasi

723.1,

can be seen to

as a longer expression of a

gsum mi shes pa'i rgol ba blun .P. la nil

nges

p.

de' i

formal

thog mar rtsod gzhi .8!!!!8.

rtsa ba' i rtags bkod daml

ma

bkod

kyang

rungl

tshul gsum ston byed ~ ~ ~ .E.!! dangl dran lam du 'phen byed ~ .!!8M
nyung .!!8!!. gnyis ka sbyar dgos tel. And a little later (p. 723.4): tshul gsum ~
pa'i

mkhas .E.!! la nil ~.!!Y.!!.!!8. ~ gnyis ka sbyar mi

dgos

tel.

Cf.

also

Shakya-mchog-ldan, Tshad!l!!! rigs dgongs, vol. 9, p. 385.1.

191The
positively

basis

for the theory of a two-membered argument

by Dignaga in his PS III 1.

in his Nyayamukha.

form

was

stated

He also rejects the longer argument form

See Y. Kajiyama (1966), pp. 72f, note 185.

.!

445

192The last three lines of this verse together with KhJ III 57 are
in Shakya-mchog-ldan, Tshad ~ rigs dgongs, vol. 9, p. 323.4.
1931

have not located an explicit mention of "removing the thorns"

.!!! 'byin) in the VN.

~ ~

faults
~
~

However,

as Glo-bo mkhan-chen rightly points out, Sde bdun

in the passage beginning:

'chos E!!!. la dang .22E.

nyid rab tu

~ ~

~.Y!!!.

te.

Dr.

T. Much

located this passage (which occurs very near the start of the work) in

(P), p. 365a.7 and VN (D), p. 327a.2.

194tsher ~
Appey,

"thorn"

According

'byin:

(tsher

kaotakoddhara.

According to the

Venerable

to Shakya-mchog-ldan,

!!@.

rigs dgongs,

khas

Khenpo

may here be understood as "[potential] fault" (skyon).

the procedure of "extracting thorns" was one
(~

purvapaksa) by the proponent (sngar rgol ba : purvavadin) in a debate.

Tshad

VN

See also M. T. Much (1983), p. 1, line 15.

the three essential steps of the advancing of the "initial position"

bsgrub

dper.!!!! sgra ni ~ pa' am byas

lal de Ita bu M!!8. .Y!!!. ~ de thams cad ni mi rtag

kindly

(tsher

bshad, p. 385.2 (193a.2), the VN enjoins the negation of these possible

phyis kyang khyab ~ rab tu bsgrub ~ nyid!EJ

quoted

vol. 9, p. 302.2: rtsod pa'i skabs .m!.

of
snga

See his

snga

~..B

len pa' i M!!8. E!.8. de sngar rgol .BY.!. mtshan nyidl ~ snga ~

..B

tshul la.Y..!!!!8. gsum stel dam bca' ..B ~ dang I sgrub byed ~ ~ dang I
~!!@. 'byin pa '01 I.
(For a summary of the duties of the respondent, see ibid.,
p. 304.3.)
pa 'i

Below (p.
removal"
.!:&I!! ~

and

303.6),

Shakya-mchog-ldan mentions two incorrect ways of "thorn

states the one correct way:

bzhin du 'byin ~ dangl

du 'byin ~~.
the proponent.

tsher

tsher

'byin

kyang mi 'byin ~ dangl i i Itar ~ ~

however, is found below, pp.

(1) the proponent's own denying of faults in his

probans,

(2) his stating of the fault of the refutation made by the respondent:

~ 'byin ~ zhes ~ ba sngar rgol kho na' i khyad chos .y!!!. lal

tel

lal

Thorn removal is there said to be proper only to the proponent, and

it has two procedures:

and

The former two are mistakes that constitute defeats for

Shakya-mchog-ldan's most detailed discussion,

322.7-323.5.

'byin

sngar rgol rang ~ sgrub byed

.ill

de la tshul

tsher
gnyis

skyon sel ba dangl phyir [323] rgol ~

.:.vhangs ,pa'i ~ 'byin la skyon brjod ~I

dang .Q. la tshul gsum ste rang .&!. ~ ba'i sgrub byed de skyon med du ~
~ phyir dul ~ ba dang ~ nges ~ dang ~ grub pa' i skyon gsum sel ba '01 I
.&!!:iis ~ nil

da.!!&l

.!!@.

gzhan ~ 'phangs pa' i thaI ~ la ~ ba dangl ~ nges .E!!

grub ~ dang I

bsal ba med pa'i Ian btab ~ de rang rjes .m!. mthun

~ ~ rang .!:.&.Y.!!!!. hi ~ ~ ston ~

mkhas ~ .Jgg, pa' i sgor I

pa'i

dang.E2E.

I, I

:1

I
I,

I~

"I',

446

sgrub ~ .E!!!8..!!M bkod ~ de' i r jes .!! tshul gsum sgrub ~ la tsher ~ 'byin
zhes.ill. zhingl tsher ~ mi 'byin ~ rgol ba tshar bcad pa' i gnas i l l .!!Q. zhes

gsungsl

moll.

de'i dgongs ~ ni snga ~ de nyid las gzhan du mi bsam

mention of the KhJ,

From his

it is clear that Shakya-mchog-ldan had that work in mind when

describing this procedure.

Finally,
"thorn

Shakya-mchog-ldan (ibid.,

removal"

fallacious

p. 340.4) describes in more detail the

to be practiced by the proponent when the

rebuttal.

Not

respondent

only may he remove the thorns of his own

reason, but he may "insert thorns"

(tsher~..J!!g)

the opponent.
The Madhyamika,

does

however,

states a
thesis

not follow this procedure.

He need

"remove thorns" because he advances no independent formally stated proof or

logism." See Shakya-mchog-ldan, Dbu ~~, vol. 14, p. 445.1Sa-paI}'s

made

(mkhas

dris lan,

in the KhJ.

Jha (Allahabad:

"thorns" to be
~

120.5) to be one of

Y.

Bagchi (1953),

of thorns (kaotakoddhara) in Naiyayika debate,

Vadavinoda of Sa~ara Misra (fl.

G.

p.

1915),

removed,

the

"original"

Such "extraction of thorns" is also known

other Indian traditions of debating.

extraction

not
"syl-

description of "thorn removal" in KhJ III 56-57 was considered by

Shakya-mchog-ldan
contributions

and

into the fallacious rebuttal of

c. 1450).

P.

570,

from

describes the

basing himself on

the

See also the edition of the latter by

p. 11, lines 18-19.

For the Naiyayika there are five

for he maintains five fallacies of the reason (hetvabha-

that require negation:

(1) vyabhicarin "wandering" (=anaikantika "uncertain")
(2) viruddha "contradictory"
(3) asiddha "unestablished"
(4) satpratipaka "having an equally justified counter-inference"
(5) badhita "sub1ated"

These five are maintained for instance by Jayanta

Nyayamafijarl.
See K. Potter (1977), p. 394.

(late-9th century) in his

Bagchi (1953), p. 570, also

Bhat~a

Y.

relates that there exists a completely different tradition of "thorn extraction."

It is a procedure of eliciting the formal argument of the opponent through interrogation,
on

the

and it is said to be explained in Mathuranatha Tarkavaglsa's commentary

Avayava section of the TattvacintamaQi.

On this term

cf.

also

S.

C.

Vidyabhusana (1920), p. 333, note 4.

195This passage is paraphrased by Shakya-mchog-ldan, Tshad ma ~ dgongs,
vol.

9, p. 305.3, as quoted above, note 194.

See also ibid., p. 305.3: de'i

.E!!!8. sngar rgo1 .&.Y.!.. tsher ma 'byin ma shes ~ ~ pham med ~

na la tshar bcad pa' i gnas .til!.

1al

phyir rgo1 ~

tsher ma 'byin shes shing sgrub byed ~ ~

447

br jod .I!!!. de' i tshe phyir rgol kho .ill!. tshar bcad pa' i gnas ~ ~ Wi.
196Cf

Y.

Bagchi (1953)

p.

571,

who explains that in the system of the

Vadavinoda: "having extracted the thorns in this way, the disputant will stop; and
then his

opponent

will

point out the faults in the hetu

put

forward

by

the

former."
1975hakya-mchog-ldan,
this

verse.

Tshad ~ rigs dgongs,

In the quotation,

line breads brjod

vol.
~

9, p. 323.4-5, quotes

instead of brjod la.

See

also the quotation of the autocommentary by Glo-bo mkhan-chen, Sde bdun mdo ~
bshad, p. 385.5 (193a.5).
1985hakya-mchog-ldan,

Tshad ~ rigs dgongs,

vol.

9, p. 323.5, combines

these two lines into one when quoting them (presumably from memory):
tshul 'di ~ pa' i bzhed .I!!!. mini I
199 5ee above, note 193.
200 For the "Group of Seven" treatises by Dharmakirti, see above, chapter 6,
note 5, nos. (1)-(7).

The citation of the Rigs gter probably refers mainly to the

last chapter of the Rigs gter rang 'grel,

(gzhan don rjes
201This
sixteenth
Sa-pa~'s

which deals with "inference for others"

~).

is ananubhasaya (rjes su mi ~ or rjes ~.!!!!1!. ba med

.E!D,

the

occasion of defeat mentioned in the Nyaya Sutras and the fourteenth

in

list in KhJ III 5.

202This

supposed occasion of defeat is discussed at length in the VN

D. Shastri (1972), pp. 109.6-114.6; and VN (D), pp. 349a.5-350b.7.

pp. 255.3.5-256.1.2.

(S),

See also RTRG,

In this connection Glo-bo mkhan-chen, KhJNSh, p. 292b.1, refers to a story

of Devendrabuddhi repeating and then refuting five hundred purvapak~as.
He coneludes that this must be an incorrect account.
He also thinks that the practice
of some of his contemporaries of putting forward many theses concerning one

basic

treatise--as a way of displaying their wide knowledge-- was not in accord with Sapa~'s

teachings.

He sums up (p.

293a.4) by saying that the debating in his day

was simply that of childish persons testing their knowledge and that therefore
is difficult to apply the terms "fault" and "virtue" to it.
15, autocommentary.

Cf.

above,

it

KhJ III

,
448

This is the eighteenth defeat

situation
III 5.

of the Nyaya Sutras and it is listed as number sixteen by

Sa-pa~

in KhJ

It is discussed in VN (S), D. Shastri (1972), p. 117.8-12; and VN (D), p.

351h.5-7.

See also RTRG p. 256.1.6-2.1.

204This does not seem to be a direct quote from the VN.

made in RTRG,

p.

252.1.5, and there

The same point is

quotes VN (D), p. 337a.6.

Sa-pa~

See above,

note 27.
205Cf RTRG, p. 253.3.4, where in his discussion of the defeat situation of
"thesis in contradiction [with the reason]" (dam bca'
states:

sgrub

roll.

phyir

~.&is.

la rtags mang

Glo-bo mkhan-chen,

..P.Q.

mi

KhJNSh,

p.

293b.3,

definiens (mtshan nyid) and definiendum (mtshon

~:

pratijnavirodha)

stel .P!!.Yi ma

~):

he

rnams don med pa' i

explains this in terms

'di mtshon nasi

mtshon

of
~

.&is. la mtshan nyid mang ..P.Q. mi ~ ~ snga ma mtshon mi nus na mtshan nyid du
mi ~ zhingl nus m!. .P!!.Yi ~ bzhag ..P..2. lhag ~ tshar bcad du ~ ba' i phyir

roll.

206 See above, KhJ III 55, and note 189.

*dharmyasiddha [=asrayasiddha],
ject

or

three

locus."

relations (tshul gsum:

presence

in the subject.

systematic

"unestablished sub-

For Buddhists this is one type of failure of the first

trairupya),

namely,

The reason too is thus

the failure of the

"unestablished"

of

the

reason's

(asiddha).

and detailed analysis of this fallacy does not seem to have been made

by the great masters of Indian Buddhist Prama~a. Among the Naiyayika, Uddyotakara
in his Nyayavarttika (re: NS 1,2,8) discerned three types of asiddha fallacy:
(1)

where

the

logical reason (hetu) is as much in need

of

proof

as

the

probandum (sadhyasama)
(2) where the locus of the hetu is not established (asrayasiddha)
(3) where the hetu can be explained in a way other than that which would make
it a proof (anyathasiddha)
See K.

Potter (1977),

p.

319.

Cf. G. Jha tr. (1983), vol. 1, p. 515.

On other

classifications, see S. Sanghvi (1961), p. 100f.

Of these three,
discussion
nents,
positive

among

especially
and

the unestablished locus or subject became a topic for much

the later Indian Buddhist logicians and their

Naiyayika

oppo-

in connection with the proof of universal momentariness in its

negative contraposed forms.

number of modern discussions.

This problem has

See for instance S.

also

stimulated

Mookerjee (1935), pp. 29f; D.

51

449

pp.

Seyfort Ruegg (1970),

and (1971),

pp.

301f;

A. C. S. McDermott (1970); B. K. Matilal (1970)

J. L. Shaw (1974); K. Mimaki (1976), p. 60; and K. Potter

130f;

(1977), p. 204.
The problem of the unestablished locus has been briefly touched on by
paQ above,

in connection with the scope of scripture in debate:

"completely hidden" (shin tu lkog .&r!!!.) object such as the existence of future

or

past

KhJ III 20,

Sa-

lives is in some sense unestablished since it is not established by the

pramaQas.

He also discusses it in much more detail in his RTRG,

connection

with fallacies of reason (rtags ltar snang

p.

two

242.2.3, in

hetvabhasa).

There

he

discerns three main varieties of this fallacy:

(1)

Unestablished in fact (or with regard to real objects) (don la

ma

grub

2.2.)

(2) Unestablished with reference to cognition (blo ngor .!!!!! grub 2.2.)
(3)

Unestablished

with respect to the opponent (rgol ba la ltos te.!!!!! grub

2.2.)

The

subdivisions of these and their examples as subsequently expounded by

Sa-paQ

in his Rigs gter rang 'grel are as follows:

(1) don la ~ grub 2.2.
(a)

chos

lli..!!&2. bo ma grub

can

2.2. (the essential nature of the subject

is

unestablished)
(i)

mi

srid

example,

ill!.

"The

ma grub 2.2.

(unestablished,

self is omnipresent" (cf.

absolute truth is impermanent."

being

impossible).

For

NB III 67) or "The sound

of

(RTRG, p. 242.2.5)

(ii) srid kyang rtsod gzhir rna grub 2.2. (subjects that,

though possible,

are not established as the basic subject of debate) (RTRG, p.

242.2.6).
For example: "Sound is an audible object" or "Sou'nd is not
an

audible object."

thesis.]

Go-rams-pa,

(2) (b) below,

cal

[Here any reason will do;

Sde bdun mdo,

the

comments that if the subject and predicate are identi-

as in the above case,

lished.

the fault is in

p. 609.6, in connection with (I)

the basic subject of debate is not

estab-

Sound is by definition an audible object, and thus the thesis

really asserts nothing.

But regarding the second example, this seems

to be nothing but an egregious self-contradiction.

(b) rtags .lli. .!!&Q. bo ma grub 2.2. (the essential nature of
unestablished)
(i)

mi

srid

example:
quality

..

ill!.

"This
of

rna grub 2.2.

person

self[hood]"

(unestablished,

possesses a self,

being

the

reason

impossible).

because he

For

possesses

or "because he was poked by the

horn

is

the
of

I,

450

hare."
(ii) srid kyang shes 'dod dang Eli!. 'breI.!!!!. Eli!. grub lli!. (though possible,

the reason has no logical connection with what is desired to be known,

i.e. with the subject of inquiry)
A..!!&.Q. bo

ma.Ii!!..!!!!. rna grub lli!. (unestablished,

same] nature).

not

being

[ the

For example, "Sound [is impermanent], because it

is an object apprehended by the eye."

(Cf. NB III 60)

B. ldog lli!. tha dad med nas Eli!. grub lli!. (unestablished, in that there
does not exist a difference of differentiated concept)
1. gzhi

rtags

and reason).

tha dad med lli!. (no difference between

For example,

subject

"Sound [is impermanent] because

it is sound."
2. chos rtags tha dad med lli!. (no difference between
and reason).

For example,

predicate

"[Sound] is impermanent, because

it is impermanent."
(c) de

&

re la ma grub lli!. (unestablished in just a part of those)

(i) rtags chos.!!!!..ill. ~ .&!.&. la Eli!. grub lli!.

not established in part of the subject)

ill.

A. rigs

concept
"Trees

of

(the logical mark is

chos .!!!!. du bzhag lli!. (setting forth the

a class as the

possess a mind,

subject)

(242.3.5).

For

for they sleep." (This is

from three points of view.)

general
example,

unestablished

Or "Sound is impermanent, because it

arises from effort." (It overlooks water and wind sounds.)

B. tshogs

ill. ~ rtags

byas lli!. (making the general concept of

a group or assemblage to be the logical mark).

three

For example, "The

relations of the terms of an inference (tshul gsum)

is

sound reason, for this is able to show a reason to be sound."

(ii)

rtags

ill.

.&!.&. chos can [la?]

Eli!. grub lli!.

(part

of

the

logical mark is not established [in] the subject)

A. rigs
1.

ill. ~ gzhi rtags su byas pa' i tshe mtshungs

grub

2. grub

lli!.

rna grub mtshungs lli!.

mtshungs lli!. (242.4.3)

B. tshogs pa'i gzhi (?) gzhi rtags su byas pa'i tshe mtshungs
(2)

blo

ngor

rna

grub lli!. (unestablished with respect

to

the

cognizing

mind)

(242.4.6)
(a) chos can la the tshom za ba (doubt regarding the subject)
(i) nges rung med nas the tshom za ba (doubt, in that there does

not

exist an ascertainable object). For example: putting forward a demon's

pot as the subject.

451

even though there

nges rung.IQ& kyang the tshom ~ ba (doubt
exists an ascertainable object). For example, to put forward a jewel

(ii)

as the subject when one has not ascertained whether it is a

[glowing]

jewel or a lamp [that one sees].

(b)

rtags 18 the tshom

(i) nges rung med
an

ba (doubt with regard to the reason)

ascertainable

the tshom

object).

ba (doubt since there does not

For example:

[The pot

is

exist

impermanent]

because it is made by the freedom from desire.

(ii) nges rung .IQ& kyang the tshom za ba (doubt even though there exists
an ascertainable object).
smoke

or

reason.

water

For example, when one doubts whether it is

vapor [on the pass],

to put forward

(c) de gnyis ~ 'breI ~ 1a the tshom ~ ~ rna grub

one doubts the connection of those two).
(i)

smoke

as

the

(Cf. NB III 64)

nges rung med

determinable).

the tshom

(unestablished since

ba (doubting something which is

not

For example: "Previous merit exists, because it is the

cause of present happiness [Go-rams-pa reads: bde].n

(ii)

nges rung .IQ& kyang the tshom

[otherwise] determinable) (243.1.3).

of

three

caves there is a peacock,

ba (doubting something

which

is

For example, "In the middle one

for the peacock's cry

is

heard

[though the hearer is not sure from which].n (Cf. NB III 65-66)
(3) rgol ba la

ltos pa'i .!!E! grub

(243.1.3)

sants)
(a)

rgol

self).
are

(unestablished with reference to the

ba rang nyid la rna grub

For example,

unconscious,

impermanent."
destruction.

(unestablished for the

discus-

proponent

him-

when a SElIpkhya adherent says, "Thought and happiness

for

they possess an origination" or "because they

Here the
Instead,

Sa~hya

he

are

does not in fact maintain originating

is said to maintain mngon

gsal

ba

and

'I

II
: I

(abhi-

vyakti?) and .!!E. bar zhi ba (upasanta?).

(b)

phyir

rgol ba la rna grub ~ (unestablished for

the

respondent).

For

example, when the Jaina says, "A tree possesses a mind, for it dies if you
peel off the skin." (Cf. NB III 61)
EXamples
tenets
BUddhist

of (3) are classified as unestablished with regard to the

of

the

opponents,

dialectician

but in fact they are from the point of

unestablished

by virtue of the nature of the

reason, i.e. they belong to (1) (a) or (1) (b) in the above scheme.
243.2.3

._ - - - - - - - -

philosophical
view

of

the

subject or
See RTRG, p.

452

Go-rams-pa,
ples

in

Sde bdun mdo, p. 609.1 (kha 113a.l), expands some of the exam-

the above.

See also his Tshad ma

rigs,

pp.

543.3-547.3' (272a-274a).

Shakya-mchog-ldan, Tshad ma rigs .!:ill!!!! bshad, p. 677.4, observes that' the

opinions of the great early dialecticians of Tibet were not unanimously decided on
the subdivisions of the unestablished reason because the basic Indian sources were
not clear on this score.

Rngog lo-tsa-ba, for instance, followed a basic fourfold

classification, while Phywa-pa in his Bsdus ~ taught a sevenfold classification.

Shakya-mchog-ldan (ibid., p. 676.2, 676.7) describes both systems in detail. Cf.
Shakya-mchog-ldan, Tshad ma rigs dgongs, vol. 9, p. 86.5, where Rngog's position
is described after that of Dharmottara (based on his NB commentary and the ~
uaparlka).
For Dharmakirti's discussion in NB III 59-67 and Dharmottara's
comments, see Th. Stcherbatsky (1930-32), vol. 2, pp. 172-179. See also Stcherbatsky's own discussion of hetvabhasa in ibid.,
Glo-bo mkhan-chen,

Sde bdun mdo .!:ill!!!! bshad,

vol. 2, p. 179, note 3.

p.

364.2-6 (192b.2-6),

See also
where the

Acarya Jetari is said to have maintained a tenfold classification.

208 In

the Rigs gter rang 'grel both the horn of a hare and a self (bdag

atman) as subjects would be classified as (1) don la

~ grub~,

(a) chos

.sri

(i) chos ~ ill.!!&2. bo mi srid ~ ma grub ~.

See above,
Here the locus is not established as a really existing thing, and it is

.!!&2. bo ma grub~,

note 207.
considered

an impossibility.

According to the Buddhist dialectician, then, (and

in harmony with the Buddha's answering through setting aside certain questions
unedifying),

the

Mok~akaragupta,

that

self

cannot be a subject of meaningful discussion.

as

See also

TBh 25.1 (Y. Kajiyama [1966], pp. 119 and 121).

According to Tsong-kha-pa, some Tibetan dialecticians such as Phywa-pa held

"an independent 'syllogism' is not proper for an [unreal] subject designated

by 'others' [i. e. by non-Buddhists]" (gzhan

mi rung).

btags pa' i chos can la rang .!:.&.y..!&

See Tsong-kha-pa' s Dbu ma .E&E!!!. ill zin bris, p. 77b.5, as cited by T.

Tillemans (1984a), pp. 365 and 383.

209A demon's pot (sha za'i bum ~:
('dod chags dang bral ba

vitaraga?) as subjects would be classified in the Rigs

gter rang 'grel as (2) blo ngor ma

nges

rung

med

pisacaghata?) and freedom from desire

grub~,

the tshom za ba.

(a) chos .!!..!!. lathe tshom B!. ba,

They are not established

as

subjects

(i)
in

relation to a cognizing mind, and they are a matter for doubt, being impossible to
ascertain.

See above, note 207.

m. mngon

210Menta 1 d'lrect perceptlon

.
(~
d k

non-contingent

or non-dependent (ltos med:

manasapratyaka) and

the

nirapeka) as subjects would seem to

453

be classified in the Rigs gter rang

established

grel as (1) (a) (ii):

as a subject of meaningful debate.

though

See above,

possible,

note 207.

not

They may

also belong to the class of subjects that are unestablished with reference to

the

opponent, i.e. (3) rgol ba la !tos pa I i ~ grub.ill!., subjects that are problematic
when debated on by followers of different philosophical schools.
The

manasapratyaksa

perceives. the jivatman.

S.

Mookerjee (1935),

Buddhist

according to the Naiyayikas,

the faculty

311,

and Y.

Stcherbatsky (1930-32),

(1935), pp. 309-315.

Something

Kajiyama (1966),

See also TBh 6.1

vol.

p.

120, note 324.

(Y~

2,

pp.

311-339,

and S.

dis-

Mookerjee

Kajiyama [1966], pp. 45-47).

Kajiyama [1966],

nir-

Dharmakirti uses non-contingence as a

reason in refuting a permanent agent such as a creator God in PV II 268.

pp. 130-132).

See also

Buddhists also argue that destruction

is a necessary characteristic of every impermanent entity;

destruction is thus not contingent on causes.
pa~,

The

are

non-contingent or independent of other causes (ltos med

is permanent and non-efficacious.

TBh 28 (Y.

which

Buddhists maintain a quite different manasapratyaksa. See

p.

view on mental direct perception and its Naiyayika criticisms

cussed by Th.

apeksa)

is,

See K.

this being subject

Potter (1977), p. 62.

RTRG, p. 195.1.3, discusses and rejects an objection

to
Sa-

that non-contingence is

not established:

..J!.& .ill!. .!:&Y..!!

ltos med

gzhan la 1 tos phyir / /

di ni ~ grub 10//

See also RTRG, p. 195.4.5.

p.

198.2.1 :

1 tos

med

The motive for teaching ltos med is explained in RTRG,

ni mu stegs byed

zhig dngos

.P.Q. ~ ~.!:&Y..!!

dang

phrad .!!!!. .J!&. la/ ~ phrad .!!!!. mi ~.m!. I dod .ill!. la ~ .m!. khas len .!!!!. .!:&y..!! la
mi ltos ~ rang .&!. ~ E!.!:. I grub ~ .til!. cing/.
See also Shakya-mchog-ldan,
Tshad ~ rigs dgongs,
ka--that

an

vol.

9, p. 106.2.

nisatva.
See also
(1976), pp. 125ff.
211[sgrub

the

byed] sgrub

his

note 157.

dang mtshungs pa'i ma grub .m!..

K.

in

pramaoa of inference for the

p.

(~) reason.

196.

of

Prasangika.
need

This sort of fallacy has had a long history of discus-

the Nyaya school.

Potter (1977),

Mimaki

This is one

reason is not established (rtags ~ grub) because it is just as much in

In NS 1,2,8 the sadhyasama is listed as one of

fallacies of the reason (hetvabhasa).

in

sahetukavi-

This reasoning is basically to reply to the proponent that

of proof as the probandum.

sion

called

Buddhist critique of this by Ratnak1rti

the four reasonings that constitute the

See above,

The opposing position of the Naiyayi-

entity requires a cause for its destruction--is

See B. K. Matilal

five

(1974), pp. 212, and K.

Uddyotakara in the NBh classified it as an unestablished

In the Buddhist Prams9a tradition too this sort of reason would

$1
454

be

classified as "unestablished" (.!!!f!. grub

~:

asiddha).

It is usually a

where the reason is not present in some or all instances of the subject.
207,

where

in the Rigs gter rang 'grel this would be classified as (1)

rtags chos .f!!!!. i l l ~ .8.!&. la .!!!f!. grub ~.

reason, Sa-paQ gives the argument by a Jaina:
sleep."

Sa-paQ (RTRG,

p.

For an example of this

"Trees possess

case

See note

mind,

(c)

(i)

type

of

for

they

242.3.5) explains that such a reason is unestablished

from three points of view: (1) If the Jaina means "to retract [the leaves]" as "to
sleep,"

then that reason is not established in one part of [the class

[because

not

all trees exhibit this].

of]

(2) If he means "to doze" by "to

trees
sleep,"

then the reason is by its nature unestablished [i.e. it is untrue of the subject].
(3) The reason "they sleep" is not established for the [Buddhist] respondent
respect
"A

to the tenets he upholds.

shadow

is

a substance,

because it has movement."

In

these

instances

sadhyasama involves a fault of circularity of reasoning or "begging the

(petitio

principii),

though

with

The basic example of the NBh (on NS 1,2,8) is

the

question"

here this is not the specific fault of identity

reason with predicate of the thesis.

of

Sa-paQ (see above, note 207) classified the

latter fault in particular as (1) (b) (ii) B.2: chos rtags tha dad med~. In the
previous examples it is just that the premises are unreal and require the conclusion (i.e. the thesis) for their proof.
The
the

sadhyasama

of the Madhyamika seems usually to be the same as that

reason

The main difference is that here it is sunyata which shows the

to be unreal and in need of proof, just as it dissolves any other concep-

tually conceived entity.

If the proponent (someone who maintains the existence of

entities) adduces any thing as his reason,

probandum.
as

of

Naiyayika.

it has the same unreality as the basic

K. Bhattacharya (1974), pp. 228f, translated the Madhyamaka sadhyasama

"equal .to the object or thesis to be established" or "sembable

demontrer,"

by the Naiyayikas.
Go-rams-pa,
of this reasoning:

Rgyal ba,

p. 269.1

(~

that
the

term

135a.1) discerns two main applications

(1) as a reply to the proponent's statement of proof,

the first embraces more than the fallacy

proponent

and (2)

These two types go back to Nagarjuna's

two different mentions of sadhyasama in MMK IV 8 and 9,

states

l'objet

But see also B. K. Matilal (1974), p. 222.

as a rejoinder to an opponent's rebuttal.

"When

and he attempts to differentiate it sharply from the use of the

respectively.
of

Go-rams-pa

unestablished

puts forward some 'true properties' (bden

pa'i

reason:

chos)

[as

probans] , the presence of the reason in the subject (~ chos) is not established.
If he puts forward some 'appearing properties' (snang bali chos) [as
probans] , the pervasion (khyab ~) [Le. the presence of the reason in like
instances] is not established.
And for both cases he is not able to show an
example which is established by a means of knowledge."

455

Cf. Shakya-mchog-ldan, Dbu

~~,

vol. 15, p. 403.4: gzhan.&ll gtan tshig

EL.2.. dang mtshungs pa'i rna grub ~. And ibid.,

line 6: gnyis tel gzhan.&ll sgrub byed ~ tshul bsgrub EL.2.. dang mtshungs E
dang/ rang la skyon 'dogs tshul la bsgrub EL.2.. dang mtshungs~. And p. 405.6:
sgrub byed bsgrub ~ dang mtshungs ~ nil thaI ba de ltar 'phangs E la gzhan
gy!. tsher ~ 'byin mi nus .P bstan E .vi!!. nol.
According to Shakya-mchog-ldan,
.!ill

'byin.ill!. sgrub byed bsgrub

this

was

one of three prasanga reasonings (the others were

mtshan mtshungs E) which negate the erroneous conceptual

others, and which are employed before the gzhan la

Sadhyasama

ba brjod E

and

constructions

of

pa'i rjes

~.

is also the name of a Naiyayika futile rejoinder.

See

above,

note 17, numbers 8 and 21 in the first and second lists, respectively.
212The

proof

of the existence of Isvara through "the putting

such things as 'shape' (dbyibs:

dhakar9a.

The

latter

is

forward

of

sannivesa)" refers to the argumentation of Avid-

widely quoted in Indian philosophical

having propounded two arguments for the existence of Isvara.

literature

The reasonings

as
are

as follows (K. Potter [1977], p. 339):

(1)

An object,

all,

perceptible by the two sense organs,

or not perceptible at

is produced by a conscious cause, because it possesses an arrangement

among its parts, like a pot, etc., or atoms, etc., respectively.

(2)

Material causes (upadana) of an organism are dependent upon an

intelli-

gent Being, because they possess color, etc., like threads, etc.
On these two see also Umesha Mishra (1957-66), vol. 2, p. 57.
Sa-pa9

perhaps

learned

of the first of

Isvaraparik~a chapter, commenting on TS 47.

and A.

Akamatsu (1984),

pp.

753,

these

from

Kamalaslla's

TSP,

On the Panjika account, see K. Mimaki

note (i),

and 763f, where Dbus-pa Blo-gsal's

discussion of this argument (p. 27b.3) is identified as a quote from the TSP (=TSP
[D] 166b.5;

and [P] 202b.1):

dbang.Q.Q. gnyis kyis ~ bar

EL.2.. ba dang ~ bar

.Ql!!, ba ~ ..Y..!!!. E blo mi mthun pa' i gzhi nyid du .&Y..!:!!:. E ni blo dang ldan pa 'i
.!:&.Y!! sngon du ~ ba .fill!. .Y!!!. tel rang rtsom .P byed pa' i cha shas kIi dbyibs

m khyad ~ dang

ldan pa' i phyir bum E

.!!.!. ~ phra rab Ita bu' 0 zhes smra' 01 I.

la sogs E

bzhin noll

On other Naiyayika proofs of the existence of Ivara,

(1961) and K.

Potter (1977),

pp.

101-110.

chos mi

see G.

mthun.lli!.

Bhattacharya

For the Buddhist critiques,

see the

sources and studies cited in Y. Kajiyama (1966), p. 95, note 255; G. Chemparathy
(1968-69); and D. Seyfort Ruegg (1981), p. 30, note 73a.

2130n~he

two proofs establishing vijnapti, see above, note 135.

1\

--'

f
I

456

214MMK IV 8.

The canonical Tibetan text in the Tanjur is:

stong .ill!. nyid kyis brtsad byas tshell

i@!!8.

zhig Ian 'de bs

byed

~I

Yi thams cad Ian btab .!!!i!!/I

de

bsgrub m!L ~ dang mtshungs m!L ~II

The Sanskrit text as given in Chr. Lindtner (1982b), p. 181:
vigrahe

pariharam

krte sunyataya vadet I

sarvarn tasyaparihrtaw
samaw sadhyena jayate
On this verse see also K.

II

Bhattacharya (1974),

p. 225; B. K. Matilal (1974), pp.

221f; and D. Seyfort Ruegg (1981), p. 12.

2150n

the &I!! mtshan mtshungs pa'i !!!&2. snyoms and the

reasonings,
ciple

see above,

note 157.

other

Here Sa-pa9 seems to indicate

Prasangika

that the prin-

behind the Madhyamaka sadhyasama also applies to the other Prasangika

rea-

sonings.
Glo-bo mkhan-chen,
to

Vasubandhu's

KhJNSh,

p. 294b.4, in his comment on KhJ III 64 refers

Vyakhyayukti (Rnam bshad rigs .ill!.) as explaining another

way

of

answering, though it apparently has no direct connection with this verse.

216This opinion is attributed to Phywa-pa by Shakya-mchog-ldan,
mdo,

p. 38.6.

van der Kuijp (1983),

p.

84.

Phywa-pa held that there were three and only three

replies to fallacious refutations in the form of prasangas,

in KhJ III 65.
just 'dod.
p.

prasanga
general

The third reply,

'dod thog,

namely,

those listed

is synonymous with 'dod .ill!. grub

or

(No separate explanation seems necessary for thog in the sense of "in

addi tion to."

bzang,

Tshad ma'i

On this passage see also Tom J. F. Tillemans (1984), p. 63; cf. L.

Cf.

197,
forms

way:

T.
in

with

Tillemans [1984], p. 63.)

Sum-pa mkhan-po,

bsam 1 jon

a disparaging comment also links the earliest use of certain

Phywa-pa,

cha .ill!. chos seng

'khor gsum bskor ba'i sgra

l@!!&.

though he seems to be speaking only

~

[sic] dus

dar ba'i thaI brdab

in

very

thaI

skad

che la 'gran.ill!. ci/.

Phywa-pa's student Gtsang-nag-pa also followed this classification,

though

he is said to have devised his own colorful terminology for the prasangas to which
each answer corresponded.

According to Shakya-mchog-ldan,

Tshad ma

rigs ~

bshad, p. 739.7, these were:

(1)

The consequence which causes no contradiction with the proponent's posi-

tion

and which can be answered as "Agreed" was called "the

coming poison" (rma

'joms).

peacock

over-

457

(2)

An

"unestablished"

replies

"the

(ma grub .ill!.) consequence for

which

weapons [?]" (mtshon cha'i khri

"a

catapult

The sound consequence which stymies the proponent was called a

that

reply.)

the fourth is not fallacious and thus does not have

nag-pa and some of his contemporaries.

See also Gtsang-nag-pa's

of the .!:&I.!!. mtshan mtshungs pa' i .!!!&Q. snvoms in Go-rams-pa,

and

the

for

"meteor-

~).

corresponding

Such classifying and systematizing seem to have been typical of

134a.4),

cut

~).

ite-" or "lightning-bolt-consequence" (gnam lcags thog .&i thaI

(Note

proponent

reason is unestablished" was called "the herq with arms

off" (~ bo ~ rdum).
(3) A consequence of unestablished pervasion was called
(4)

the

Gtsang-

classifications
ba, p. 267. 4

(~

names for the four types of Prasahgika reasonings ascribed

to

Zhang Thang-sag-pa in Shakya-mchog-ldan, Dbu

~~,

vol. 15, p. 404.1-3.

The threefold system of Phywa-pa and his followers is presented as a purvaby Sa-paQ also in his RTRG, p. 263.4.1:

thaI ~ Ian ni ~ gsum zhesl I

kha ba

.ill!. de skad smnl I

bod ~ thaI ~ ill. Ian la gtan tshigs ~ grubl

~

gsum las mi srid

doll

zhes zer

rol.

khvab.ill!. ma grubl

'dod thog

This threefold system was continued within the bsdus grwa traditions of the
Dge-lugs-pa.

See T. Tillemans (1984), p. 66, note 13, and Geshe Lobsang Tharchin

(1979), pp. 218f.

217This argument is also found in the RTRG,
phrased:

p. 263.2.1, though differently

mi 'thad del

.&!&. tu ~ I
1 tar snang gnvis ~ ~ I

~ dang rna nges

'dod

.!@.

de ~ gtan tshigs ltar snang kunll

grub .&!&. tu ~ bar ~I I

Mkhas-grub-rje criticized this in his Tshad
.!!@.

p.

!!@.

sde bdun ill ~ ill k1! E!!:!!!. sel,

178b, and Shakya-mchog-ldan, Rigs gter ~ bshad, p. 738.6, replies to him,

as Mr.

S.

Onoda pointed out to me.

He also informed me that 'Jam-dbyangs-bzhad-

pa, Bsdus~, p. 480, gives a fivefold system and seems to harmonize the Rigs gter
and bsdus ~ traditions, including even a fifth answer: the tshom ~ ba.
218 pV I 15;
is found in PV (D),
Tanjur
line b.

cf. PVin II 68 (E. Steinkellner [1973], pp. 100f).

p.

95a.6,

PV (P), p. 190b.

This verse

The only difference between the

and KhJ versions is that the latter has 'di instead of de at the start

of

The Sanskrit text (Miyasaka [1971/72], p. 116) is: .

f
458

hetos triev ill riipesu

niscayas tena varnitah I

asiddhaviparftarthavyabhicarivipakeatab II
criticism

219This

practice of his day.

lead

is

evidently directed against

Tibetan

dialectical

His point seems to be that the use of the particle kyang may

to ambiguity in that it indicates the possible existence of the predicate in

similar instances.

See also RTRG, p. 263.4.5 (da 219a.5), where the same topic is

treated briefly:
Moreover

if one

replies,

"The pervasion is unestablished," a mistake will arise.

on an occasion of contradiction

For

example,

to [the proponent] who maintains that sound is produced,

[there is the

(~ba),

respondent's] consequence which indicates a contradiction:

is made, it entails being permanent."
"So what if,

"Because it

If [the proponent] says to this,

even though made, it is impermanent? The pervasion is not

established,"

he

must accept implicitly that permanence is

for something made.

possible

Just as when "[because it is] a knowable thing" is

put forward as the reason [for the consequence, "it is permanent"].

Shakya-mchog-ldan,
tion

that

answer

if

"The

sequences

Tshad.!!@. rigs ~ bshad, p. 739.3, comments in this connec-

one replies to a contrary pervasion (khyab ~~ ba)

pervasion is not established," one will mistake

(~

ba'i thaI

pa'i thaI ~):

ba 'i
Cf.

thaI

Rigs

gter

khyab ~ rna grub pa'i Ian btab nal

dngos kyis rna nges pa' i thaI

Sde bdun mdo,

rang 'grel.

the
con-

as being actually uncertain consequences (rna nges

khyab ~ ~ ba lal

~ ~

Go-rams-pa,

~)

with

contradictory

p.

du 'khrul

ba 'i

~.

671.2 (kha 144a.2), who merely summarizes the

See also the discussion of Glo-bo mkhan-chen,

Sde

bdun

mdo rnam bshad, p. 406.6 (203b.6) and Tshad rna rigs, p. 414, who quotes there at
length from the autocommentary to KhJ III 67.
dated in any detail
The
a

Sa-pa~'s

None of these commentators

general meaning of the basic verse and autocommentary seems to require

negative sense for the phrases brjod dgos in both occurrences

lines 8-9,

15).

be

He

made.

as is brjod ci dgos;

moreover,

explain

is

brjod

(text,

p.

153,

The point of this passage is that this sort of reply should not
indicates that kyang is not admissable as a

because he considers it to have conjunctive force.

state.

eluci-

comments about the impropriety of the particle kyang.

dgos

that

neither is attested.
Sa-pa~

concessive

particle,

But brjod mi dgos is awkward,

Therefore the best way

is indicating here what

the

opponent

to
must

a
h
r

459

220The same position is found in the RTRG, p. 264.1.1:

des m!. mkhas ~ thaI ~ lanl I
~.ill!!. thar pa' i ~ bzhis

~ ba' i Ian la nil

gdabl I

~ ngesl

~ grubl

'dod.p!. grub .p!. ~ ~ bzhi ' 01/

Ian .&ti& bzlog .p!!!:. mi .ill!. m!.

sde .Ii rjes 'brang dam pa'i lugsll
~ ~.Y!!.!!B.

bdag
I

M Ian

bzlog

~ .ill!.

m!. khro ba dang

la bstod dng gzhan la smod .p!. ni thabs sdugs .p!.

brang ba dam pa I i ~.ill!!. thar

In this connection T.

[i.e.

.p!!,

.y!!:!.

E9.I I .

Tillemans (1984),

p.

khon du

dzin .p!. dangl

r jes .!!!!

66, note 13, observes the "He

Sa-paQ] argues for four kinds of reply, dividing unestablished implications

(khyab .p!. ~ grub) into two sorts, contradictoriness

nges

.I.!.!!. ~ bden pa I i

and uncertainty

(~~

(~

thus transferring to the theory of consequences some of the terms more

~,

usually associated with the classification of fallacious reasons (gtan tshigs ltar
snang

hetvabhasa)."
Sa-paQ

considered the principles behind the classification

of

fallacious

reasons and fallacious consequences to be the same,

namely:

conflicting with the

"three modes" (tshul gsum) of inferential relation.

In his system there were thus

four types of fallacious consequences:

(1)

(2)

nges pa'i thaI

ba'i thaI

(3)

.!!.

grub pa' i thaI

(4) bsal ba Y!}. med ill thaI ~

See Shakya-mchog-ldan, Tshad ~ rigs ~ bshad,

p.

739.5.

unanswerable consequence is called 'khor gsum tshang ba'i thaI

The irrefutable,
~,

according to

Shakya-mchog-ldan.
In his Mkhas.p!!"

p.

119f, Shakya-mchog-ldan identifies Sa-paQ's treatment

of how to reply to fallacious consequences as another of

tributions in the KhJ.
221Here

that

argumentation is just this:

any

"original"

con-

the proponent must also have maintained that sound is impermanent.

Otherwise he would not be stymied.

of

his

The ultimate goal of the "Prasangika"

to leave the proponent

stymied in the

of the responses involves him in a contradiction.

method

knowledge

One should keep

in

mind, however, that all respondents phrased their replies through this type
argumentation, not only Prasangika-Madhyamikas.

of

Glo-bo mkhan-chen,
himself

in

KhJNSh, p. 295b.1, comments that if the proponent finds

the position of being stymied,

responses that Sa-paQ lists in KhJ III 13;

he should not resort to

the

ignoble

RTRG, p. 252.1.5; and ~ brgyad ma'i,

"'1

460

p. 149.2.1.

On these see above, notes 26 and 27.

222 Note
KhJ

III

phyir//

69.

the difference between the basic verse and the

Nothing

in the autocommentary corresponds to

mkhas pa'i skye bos" in the basic verse.

autocommentary
the

of

"bsngags .I@.'i

But in Khenpo Appey's opinion,

this does not impair the passage.

Cf. RTRG, p. 264.1.3:
de !tar bsgrub dang

'byin gyjJ/

..!!!!

rigs pa' i gzhung lugs

1@!!&. ~

shes/ /

mkhas ill!. de ni rdzogs ill!. yjJ /

sangs' ~ ~.kY.i bstan ill!. 'dzin/ /
2230n

the

rigs dgongs,
witness

duties

vol.

9,

of
p.

the

witness,

323.5.

see

~.!!@.

Shakya-mchog-ldan,

One of the basic duties of the

is to repeat accurately what each of the debators said.

arbitrating

See also above,

note 12.
224This verse is quoted by Glo-bo mkhan-chen, Sde bdun mdo .!:lli'!!!!. bshad, p.
284.1 (192b.1).

Sa-pa~

in the RTRG, p. 251.4.6, adds that some great scholars say

that in a great debate the arbitrating witness will not be able to deny or falsify
what

each opponent said if he correctly repeats both of their statements and then

sets down in writing the main points of philosophical tenets that they contain.
225 In this connection Glo-bo mkhan-chen,
attributed to Acarya Sura:

KhJNSh, p. 287a.4, quotes a verse

'chi bdag bstan ill!. sa chen gyjJ /

khams gsum ~ na ~ byed ~ /
mi bzlog thogs ill!. !!!!!. mchis ~ /
khyod

.kY.i bstan

zil

ffinan/ /

226According to the KhJNSh, p. 297a.5, this verse explains Sa-pa~'s

for

composing

little,

the treatise.

On p.

297b.3,

Glo-bo mkhan-chen expands

saying that the first pair of hemistiches reveals the motive,

motive
this a

while

the

second pair is his injunction (to the reader) to enter into these three "doors."
i

227According to the KhJNSh, p. 297b.3, this verse reveals one reason he has
not expatiated at great length: it is difficult to get a chance to benefit others.
C

461

228According to the KhJNSh,

not

ibid., this verse explains that the author did

elaborate in great detail because most people become satisfied with

just a little,

learning

and there are very few who maintain the complete Buddhist doctrine

through exposition, composition, and debate.

229bstan

pa'i

mjug

'dire

This verse reflects Sa-pa9's opinion

had

already elapsed since the Nirva9a of the Buddha,

trine was thus nearing its final phases.

and that the Buddha's

~

Docthe

btsun, Lam 'bras slob

bshad,

vol. 1

mtshan

and went back to the calculations of Bsod-nams-rtse-mo in his Chos la

~,

the
years

He mentions this calculation near

end of his biography of Rje-btsun Grags-pa-rgyal-mtshan:

p. 28a.2.

on

He had calculated in 1216 that 3,350

chronology of the Buddhist doctrine.

This reckoning had the approval of Grags-pa-rgyal-

~~.
Sa-pa~ mentions that his teacher Sakyasribhadra upheld a different

chrono-

logy (which is much closer to the datings of modern historians).

The latter
calculated in 1210 that 1,753 years had passed since the Nirv89a, thus putting its
date in BCE 544 instead of BCE 2133.
ba,

Deb ther (G.

pp.

106ff);

On these chronologies, see also 'Gos lo-tsa-

Roerich [1976], pp. 1063ff); Bu-ston (E. Obermiller tr. (1931],

Ariene Macdonald (1963),

pp.

64ff and 120f,

notes 56 and

57;

A.

Vostrikov (1970), pp. 101ff; and D. Seyfort Ruegg (1966), p. 33, note 1.
230This verse, according to the KhJNSh, pp. 297a.6 and 298a.4, explains the
special characteristics of the time of composition and the author.

Sa-pa~ in
:lEl2J I
'bab chu skam pa'i mtsho bzhin.!:.!ll!!!!~ brill
~ ~ phal cher de xi srog chags bzhin
231This same image is also used by

deng sang thub

l@ ~

& bstan

his Chag lo'i, p. 414.1.1:

l@

~ ~ ngan ~ chu skyar bzhin du !I5J1l! I

The image of the receding pond filled with trapped fish was used by the Buddha
himself. See Suttanipata 936 (as translated by N. Aramaki [1983], p. 64): "When I
Contemplated that [all] living beings [in this Sa~saric world] are thrashing about

desperately
[rapidly]

hither
"

and

thither,

like

fish

left

in

waters

diminishing

Another similar passage from Sa-pa9's works (not yet located)

is quoted by Glo-bo mkhan-chen, Sde bdun mdo ~ bshad, p. 409.3 (205a.3):

de ltar bde bar gshegs pa'i bstan l@:lEl2JI
~ ~ chu bzhin myur du bri ba
Cf. ThGS, p. 50.1.1:

denE sang shakya thub pa'i bstan

dangl I

l@

'dill

---J

462

bud shing zad pa'i

bzhin nyam chung

~I

Cf. also his 'Jig rten dbang.PhY.!!&., p. 397.1. 4:

bde bar gshegs pa' i bstan M ~ I
!!!.!!!:. ~ ~ zad Ji bzhin dull

ring QE. mi thog nub ..P!!E. ~J I.

And in Glo bo 10 tsa bali, p. 415.1.6:
deng sang bde bar gshegs pa' i bstan M

&I I

.!2!!. ka'i [415.2] shing bzhin 'bras bu phal cher lhagsll

232According to the KhJNSh,
to exert themselves.

p. 297a.6, this verse explains how others need

For this he also quotes from the DS:

rin chen chos kyang dkon la nill

rtag tu 'tshe ba mang zhes gsungsll
'di la bsam
He

mkhas

kyisl I

rtag tu bstan pa' i .P!!Ii dor ~ I

also quotes more extensively from the passage in Chag

previous

note.

loti

quoted

in

The line rin chen chos kyang dkon la rtag tu 'tshe ba mang

the
ori-

ginates from the Prajnaparamita RatnaguQaSafficayagatha.

233This verse, according to the KhJNSh, p. 297a.6, is the dedicatory transfer (bsngo ba) of the merit from composing this work.

1ar c1

11nes
234Cf t he S1m1
oS1ng
(1969), pp. 9f; and Sdeb sbyor

f Sa-pa~ 'LSh
2 3-6; J E Bosson
s
,p. 61

tshogs, p. 141.3.4.

ABBREVIATIONS

AA

Abhisamayala~ara

AK

Abhidharmakosa

AKBh

Abhidharmakosabhasya

AMZh

A-mes-zhabs

AS
B

Abhidharmasamuccaya
Bhutanese manuscript of the KhJ

BCA

Bodhisattvacaryavatara

BV
C

BodhicittavivaraQa
The KhJ passages quoted in the commentary by Glo-bo mkhan-chen (KhJNSh)

Derge edition

DL

Dalai Lama
gsum i l l rab tu dbye ba

DS

Sa-paQ, Sdom

GK

Gong-dkar 'Phrin-las-rnam-rgyal

JSS

Jnanasarasamuccaya

JSSN

Jnanasarasamuccayanibandhana

KhJ

Sa-paQ, Mkhas ~~~ pa'i ~

KhJNSh

Glo-bo mkhan-chen,

Mkhas

rnams

pa' i sgo 'i..!:.!!!!!!! E!.!:. bshad

rigs

gnas gsal byed

KLh

Dkon-mchog-lhun-grub

LSh

Sa-pal}, Legs E!.!:. bshad

MA
MAl

Madhyamakala~ara

Madhyamakaloka

MHTL

Materials

rgya-mtsho

MMK

Mulamadhyamaka karikas
Mahayanasutrala~ara

Narthang edition
Nyayabindu
Nyayabha~ya

Ngor-chen

NMukh Nyayamukha
NS
Nyaya sutras
P

PP
PS

rin .P.Q. che' i gter

for ~ History of Tibetan Literature.

MSA
N
NB
NBh
NgCh

Peking edition
Prasannapada
Prama~asamuccaya

PV

Prama~avarttika

PVin

PramaQaviniscaya

See A-khu-chin

Shes-rab-

464

!.

RA

RatnavaH

RGV
RP

Ratnagotravibhaga
Rin-spungs-pa

RT
RTRG

Sa-paI].. Tshad rna rigs pa'i gter

Sa-paI].. Tshad ~ rigs pa' i gter ill rang 'grel

Sanskrit

Shak

Shakya-rnchog-ldan

SKKB

Sa skya bka' 'bum

TB

T6y6 Bunko edition

TBh

Tarkabha~a

ThGS

Sa-paI].. Thub pa'i dgongs

TJ

Tarkajvala

TS

Tattvasa~graha

TSP

Tattvasa~graha

VN

Vadanyaya

VNV

Vadanyayavrtti

YS

Yukti~a~tika

pafijika

rab tu gsal ba

BIBLIOGRAPHY

A. Works of Modern Scholarship

Aramaki,

Noritoshi (1983).

Today.
Bagchi,

"History and Buddhism in Creative Ages," Zen Buddhism

Vol. 1, pp. 56-70.

Y. (1953).

of India.
Barlingay,

"The Art of Philosophical Disputation," The Cultural Heritage

Calcutta.

Vol. 3, pp. 562-580.

S. (1965). ! Modern Introduction to Indian Logic.

S.

Delhi, National

Publishing House.
Bernhard,

Franz

(1968-69).

"Zur Interpretation der

Prattyasamutpada-formel,"

Wiener Zeitschrift fUr die Kunde SUd- und Ostasiens.

Bethlenfalvy,

G.

the Tibetan

(1965).

Vols. 12-13, pp. 53-63.

"Three Pai'i.catantra Tales in an Unedited Commentary to

Subha~itaratnaniddhi,"

18, pp.

Vol.

Acta Orientalia Hungarica.

317-338.
Bhattacharya,

Gopikamohan (1961).

Bhattacharya,

K. (1974).

No. 14, Studies no. 5.

"A Note on the Interpretation of the Term Sadhyasama in

Madhyamaka Texts," Journal of Indian Philosophy.

-------- (1978).

The

Calcutta

Studies in Nyaya-Vaisesika Theism.

Sanskrit College Research Series.

Vol. 2, pp. 225-230.

Motilal

Banar-

"On the Tibetan and Mongolian

Trans-

Dialectical Method of Nagarjuna.

Delhi:

sidass.
Bira, Sh.,

[and] Sukhbaatar,

O.

(1979).

lations of Sanskrit Grammatical Works," Indologica Taurinensia.

127-137.
Bos son ,

James E.

'Phags-pa

(1961).

Version

Vol. 6, pp. 85-102.

Vol. 7, pp.

"A Rediscovered Xylograph Fragment from the Mongolian

of the

Subha~itaratnanidhi,"

Central

Asiatic

Journal.

466

! Treasury of Aphoristic Jewels The Subhasitaratnanidhi of

-------- (1969).

Skya Pandita

in Tibetan and Mongolian.

Indiana

University

Publications,

Ura1ic and A1taic Series, Vol. 92.

Broido, M. (1983).
in E.

"Bshad thabs: Some Tibetan Methods of Explaining the Tantras,"

Steinke11ner and H.

Tauscher, eds., Contributions on Tibetan and

dhist Philosophy. Wien: Arbeitkreis fUr Tibetische und Buddhistische Studien.

Vol. 2, pp. 15-45.
Campbell,

W.

L.

(Berlin).
Canzio,

R.

(1925).

"Die

SprUche

von Sakya," Ostasiatische

Zeitschrift

Neue Fo1ge 2, pp. 31-65, 159-185.

(1978).

"The Place of Music and Chant in Tibetan Religious Culture,"

Tibetan Studies.

Zurich.

See also Tibetan Review.

Vol. 13-6 (June 1978),

pp. 14-17.
-------- (1978a).

"Sakya

present-day

Pandita's

Tibetan liturgy."

'Treatise
PhD thesis,

on Music' and

its

School of Oriental

relevance
and

to

African

Studies, University of London.

"On the Way of Playing Drums and Cymbals Among the Sakyas,"
-------- (1980).
Tibetan Studies in Honour of Hugh Richardson. New Delhi, Vikas. pp. 67-72.
Chandra, Lokesh.
Chatterjee,

A.

See Lokesh Chandra.

K.

(1975).

The Yogacara Idealism.

Varanasi,

Moti1a1

Banarsi-

dass.
Chatterjee, S. C. and Datta, D. M. (1939).
Calcutta, University of Calcutta.
Chemparathy,

G.

(1968-69).

An Introduction to Indian Philosophy.

"Two Early Buddhist Refutations of the Existence of

Isvara as the Creator of the Universe," Wiener Zeitschrift fUr die Kunde SUdund Ostasiens.
Conze,

E. (1973).

Summary.

Vo1s. 12-13, pp. 85-100.

The Perfection of Wisdom in Eight Thousand Lines and Its

Bolinas.

467

________ (1973a).

Materials

for

Dictionary of the Prajfiaparamita

Literature.

Tokyo, Suzuki Research Foundation.

Csoma de Koros,
of

Alexander (1855-56). "A Brief Notice of the

Saskya

Subha~ita

Ratna Nidhi

with Extracts and Translations," Journal of the

Pa~9ita,

Society of Bengal.

Vol.

24,

pp.

141-165,

Asiatic

and vol. 25, pp. 257-294.

Re-

printed in JASB (1911), pp. 93-172.

Das,

S.

C.

(1881-82).

Contributions
Vol.

50,

on

pp.

"The
Tibet.

Lives

of the Pan-chen Rinpoches or Tasi

Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society

187-251, and vol. 51, pp. 1-85, 87-128.

Lamas,"

of

Bengal.

Reprinted New Delhi,

ManjusrI Publishing House, 1970.

-------- ed. (1888-1912).
-------- (1902).

Kalpalata.

Bibliotheca Indica. Calcutta.

Journey to Lhasa and Central Tibet.

Edited by W.

Reprinted Bibliotheca Himalayica, series 1, vol. 1.

Dasgupta, S. N. (1951).
Press.

N.

Rockhill.

New Delhi, 1970.

History of Indian Philosophies. Oxford, Oxford University

5 vols.

Davidson, R. M. (1981).
Dey,

W.

L.

(1927).

"The Nor-pa Tradition," Wind Horse.

Vol. 1, pp. 79-98.

The Geographical Dictionary of Ancient and Medieval

India.

Reprinted: New Delhi, Oriental Books Reprint Corporation, 1971.

Edgerton,

F.

(1977).

Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit Grammar and Dictionary.

2 vols.

Delhi, Motilal Banarsidass.

Eimer,

H.

(1983).

"Some

Results of Recent Kanjur Research," Archiv

tralasiatische Geschichtsforschung.

flir

Zen-

Sankt Augustin, VGH Wissenschaftsverlag.

Heft 1, pp. 3-21.

Elias,

N.

ed.

and E.

Denison Ross, trans. (1970).

! History of the Moghuls of

Central Asia. Reprinted: New York, Praeger Publishers.

Ellingson,

Ter (1979).

gories," Asian Music.

" 'Don rta dbyangs gsum: Tibetan Chant and Melodic CateVol. 10-2, pp. 112-156.

.........

-, 'l
468

-------- (1979a).

"'On Music' --Sa skya

PaI)~ita,"

Asian Music.

Vol. 10-2, pp. 3-

4.
-------- (1979b). "'Why Study Music?' --Sa skya PaI)~ita," Asian Music.
pp. 157-158.

Vol. 10-2,

Ferrari,

of Central

A.

Tlbet.

[et. a1] (1958).

Mk'yen brtse's Guide to the Holy

Serie Orientale Roma.

Vol. 16.

[Completed and edited by L. Petech,

with the collaboration of H. Richardson]

Forster,

E.

M. (1976).

Aspects of the Novel.

Harmondsworth, Middlesex; Penguin

Books.
Le Tresor des belles paroles; choix de sentences 2!!!=.
Foucaux, Ph. E. (1858).
po sees en tibetain l@!:. 1e lama Saskya Pandita. Paris, Benjamin Duprat.
Frauwa11ner,

E.

(1957).

"Vasubandhu's

Kunde SUd- und Ostasians.

-------- (1961).

"Landmarks

Fukuda Y.
Vol.

(1986).

2 vo1s.

Delhi.

! Study of the Grub mtha' of Tibetan Buddhism

4.--0n the chapter on the history of Mongolian Buddhism of Thu

Grub mtha'.
Goldberg,

Vol. 5, pp. 125-148.

History of Indian Philosophy.

and Ishihama Y.

Wiener Zeitschrift fUr die

in the History of Indian Logie," Wiener Zeitschrift

fUr die Kunde Siid- und Ostasians.

-------- (1973).

Vadavidhi,"

Vol. 1, pp. 104-134.

M.

[In Japanese.]

(1985).

Studia Tibetica No. 11.

bkwan's

Tokyo: The Toyo Bunko.

"Entity and Antimony in Tibetan bsdus grwa Logic," part I

and II, Journal of Indian Philosophy.

Vol. 13, pp. 153-199, 273-304.

Goodman, Steven D. (1981).

"Mi-pham rgya-mtsho: An Account of His Life, the
Printing of His Works, and the Structure of His Treatise Entitled mKhas pa'i
tshu1 1a
Hahn,

M. (1974).
Hahn.

pa'i

~2.,"

Wind Horse.

Vol. I, pp. 58-78.

Lehrbuch der k1assischen tibetischen Schriftsprache.

Bonn, M.

469

________ (1982).

Nagarjuna's

Tibetan, Chinese).

________ (1984).

RatnavalI.

Vol.

Indica et Tibetica.

1.

Band 1.

The basic texts

"Zu den Quellen einiger Strophen aus Sa skya

ratnanidhi," Tibetan and Buddhist Studies.

(Sanskrit,

Bonn.
Pa~9itas

Subhasita-

Bibliotheca Orientalis Hungarica.

Vol. 29/1, pp. 251-266.

Dignaga.
Hattori, M. (1968).
Dignaga's Prama~asamuccaya
versions.
Hirano,

On Perception,
from

the

Pratyak~apariccheda

and

the

of

Tibetan

Vol. 47.

Harvard Oriental Series.

T. (1966).

being the

Sanskrit fragments

An Index to the Bodhicaryavatara Panjika, Chapter IX.

Tokyo,

Suzuki Research Foundation.

Hoffmann, H. (1975).

Tibet: !Handbook.

Indiana University Oriental Series. Vol.

5.
Horner,

B. trans1. (1975).

I.

The Collection of the Middle Length Sayings, Vo1.

II The Middle Fifty Discourses.

Pali Text Society Translation Series.

No.

30.
Horvath,

Z.

(1984).

Epistemological

"Structure and Content of the Chad-rna rigs-pa'i

Treatise

of Saskya

Bibliotheca Orientalis Hungarica.

Houston,

G.

w.

(1980).

Tibetica Historia.

Ichigo M.

2 vols.

gter,

an

Studies.

Vol. 29/1, pp. 267-302.

Sources for ~ History of the bSam ~ Debate.

The Problem of Sanskrit Teaching.

Monumenta

Kolhapur, The Bharat

Geschichte des buddhismus in der Mongolei.

ed.and trans.

commentary

Tibetan and Buddhist

Abteilung I, Band 2.

Huparikar, G. s. (1948).
Book Stall.
Ruth, G. (1892-96).
TrUbner.

Pa~qita,"

Vrtti

(1985).

Madhyamakalapkara of SantarakSita: With his ~

and with the Subcommentary or Pafijika

Kyoto, Buneido.

Strassburg, K. J.

of

KamalasIla.

470

Ikeda R. (1980). "Tibetto ni okeru <GoD setsu--Sa pal} cho gZuh lugs legs par bSad
pa 0 toshite--" ["'Five Categories' Theory in Tibet According to the Gzull:&.
lugs

legs .ill!!:. bshad

Kenkvu Kiva.
Imaeda Y.

of Sa skya pal}qita"],

(1975).

S. (1954).

R.

R.

David

P.

(1953).

"The Vadavidhi and the Vadavidhana of Vasubandhu,"

No. 17, pp. 9-20.

(1983).

"Notes on Two Early Printed Editions of

Works," The Tibet Journal.

-------- (1983a).

ichi-

Vol. 8, pp. 1-14.

Advar Library Bulletin.

Jackson,

Kyoto, Hoz6kan.

"Saskya pa1}geita no gy6seki ni okeru bumpogaku kenkyu no

men," Otani Shigaku.

H.

Vol. 263, pp. 125-146.

Tibettogo koten bunpogaku.

-------- (1961).

Iyengar,

Daigaku

"Documents tibetains de Touen-houang concernant Ie conci1e du

Tibet," Journal Asiatigue.

Inaba

Komazawa Joshi Tanki

Vol. 14, pp. 1-7.

Sa-skya-pa

Vol. 8-2, pp. 3-24.

"Commentaries

on the Writings of Sa-skya

graphical Sketch," The Tibet Journal.

A Biblio-

Pal}~ita:

Vol. 8-3, pp. 3-23.

-------- (1984).
The Mo1las of Mustang: Historical,
Traditions of the Nepa1ese- Tibetan Borderland.

Religious and
Dharamsala,

Oratorical
Library

of

Tibetan Works and Archives.

-------- (1984a).

Tibetan

Thangka

Painting Methods and Materials.

collaboration with Janice A. Jackson.

-------- (1985).

"Two Grub mtha' Treatises of Sa-skya Pal}gita--One Lost and

Forged," The Tibet Journal.

-------- (1985a).
Journal.
Jackson,

Studies.

"Madhyamaka

One

Vol. 10-1, pp. 3-13.

Studies

Among the Early Sa-skya-pas,"

The Tibet

Vol. 10-2, pp. 20-34.

Roger

History

Written in

London, Serindia Publications.

(1982).

as

"Sa

skya

pal}gita's Account of the bSam yas

Polemic," Journal of the International Association

Vol. 5-1, pp. 89-99.

of

Debate
Buddhist

471

Jha,

Ganganatha tr. (1916).

"Pra~astapada's Padarthadharmasamgraha translated
with $rldhara's Nyayakandali, Pundit. Vols. 25 (1903)-37 (1915). Reprinted
Banaras, 1916.

-------- (1939).

Nyayasutras, with Vatsyayana's Bhssya, Poona Orientalist.

1 (1936)- 10 (1945).

Vols.

Translation reprinted as Poona Oriental Series, Vol. 59

(1939).
-------- (1983).

Nyayaslltras,

with Vatsayana's Bhaya.

The reprint of Jha's NS

translation as it originally appeared in the Indian Thought Series,

(1915), 9 (1917), 12 and 13 (1919), republished in the Rinsen
Series, II, nos. 1-4.
Jhalakikar,

Bhimacarya

edition,

See also Jha (1939).

(1978).

Indian Philosophy.

vols. 7
Sanskrit

Nyayakosa or Dictionary of Technical

Terms

Revised and re-edited by Vasudev Shastri Abhyankar.

Bombay Sanskrit and Prakrit Series,

Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute,

1928.

no.

49 (1893).

Reprint:

of
2nd

3rd edition,

Poona,

Bhandarkar

Oriental Research Institute.

de

Jong,

J.

W.

(1984)

"Recent Buddhist Studies in Europe and America, 1973-

1983," The Eastern Buddhist.

Kajiyama Y. (1963).

New Series, vol. 17-1, pp. 79-107.

"Trikapancakacinta, Development of the Buddhist Theory on the

Determination of Causality," Miscellanea Indologica Kiotiensia [Kyoto University].

No. 4-5, pp. 1-15.

-------- (1966).

An Introduction 1 Buddhist Philosophy--An Annotated Translation

of the Tarkabhasa of Mokskaragupta.

Kyoto University. No. 10.
-------- (1973).

"Three

Memoirs of the Faculty

of

Letters,

Kinds of Affirmation and Two Kinds of Negation in

dhist Philosophy," Wiener Zeitschrift fur die Kunde Slidasiens.

Bud-

Vol. 17, pp.

159-175.
-------- (1976).
Buddhist

"Later

Meditation:

Madhyamikas on Epistemology and Meditation,"

Theory and Practice.

Honolulu,

Mahayana

University Press

of

Hawaii.

::,
,

'

472

Karmay,

Samten G. (1975).

"A Discussion of the Doctrinal Position of rDzogs-cheno

from the 10th to the 13th Centuries,"

156.
Kawamura,

Leslie

Friend.

S.

(1975).

Golden

Journal Asiatigue.

Vol. 263, pp. 147-

Zephyr: Instructions from .2. Spiritual

[Translation of Nagarjuna's Suhrllekha, with a bsdus don ascribed to

Sa-sky a Pa99ita]
-------- (1981).

Emeryville.

"An Analysis of Mi-pham's mKhas-' jug," Wind Horse.

Vol. 1, pp.

112-126.
-------- (1982).

"An Analysis of Yana-kausalya in Mi-pham's mKhas

of the Institute of Buddhist Cultural Studies,

Bulletin

~,"

Ryukoku University.

No. 20,

pp. (1)-(19).
-------- (1983).

"The

Akl?ayamatinirde~asutra

and Mi pham's Mkhas

tions on Tibetan and Buddhist Religion and Philosophy.

Kitagawa H. (1965).
Logic]. Tokyo.
Kolma,

Contribu-

~,"

Wien.

Indo Koten Ronrigaku no Kenkyu [Research on Indian Classical

! Genealogy of the Kings of Derge. Prague, Oriental Institute

J. (1968).

in Academia.
-------- (1971).

Prague

Forschungen.
-------- (1978).
the

Collection

Band 36, part 1.

of Tibetan Prints from

Derge.

Asiatische

Weisbaden.

"The Aphorisms (legs-bshad) of Sa-skya pa99ita," Proceedings of

Csoma de Ktlr5s Memorial Symposium.

Bibliotheca

Orientalis

Hungarica.

Vol. 23, pp. 189-203.

Kosambi,

D.

D.

and Gokhale,

Oriental Series.
van

der

Kuijp,

V.

V.

eds. (1957).

Subhaitaratnakosa.

Leonard W.

J.

(1978).

"Phya-pa Chos-kyi seng-ge' s Impact

Tibetan Epistemological Theory," Journal of Indian Philosophy.

355-369.

[An

Harvard

No. 42.

article

with

(Zurich, 1978), pp. 163-177.]

the

same title appeared

in

Vol.

Tibetan

on

5, pp.
Studies

473

"Tibetan Contributions to the 'Apoha' Theory

(1979)

the Fourth Chap-

ter of the Tshad-ma rigs-pa'i gter," Journal of the American Oriental

Socie-

Vol. 99, pp. 408-422.

~.

________ (1979a).

"Introductory

Notes

to the Prama9avarttika Based on

Tibetan

Vol. 4-2, pp. 6-28.

Sources," The Tibet Journal.

-------- (1983). Contributions to the Development of Tibetan Buddhist EpistemoloKL from the Eleventh to the Thirteenth Century.
Alt- und Neu-Indische Studien.

No. 26.

-------- (1984).

Weisbaden: Franz

Stein~r

"Marginalia to Sa-skya Pa9qita's Oeuvre," Journal of the Inter-

national Association of Buddhist Studies.

-------- (1985).

Vol. 7-1, pp. 37-55.

"Miscellanea Apropos of the Philosophy of Mind in Tibet: Mind in

Tibetan Buddhism," The Tibet Journal.

-------- (1985a).
buted

Verlag GmbH.

Vol. 10-1, pp. 32-43.

"On the Authorship of the Gzhung-lugs legs-par bshad-pa attri-

to Sa-skya PaI"lgita,"

Journal of the Nepal Research

Centre.

Vol.

pp. 75-86.
-------- (1985b).

"Some

Recently

Recovered

Sa-skya-pa

Report," Journal of the Nepal Research Centre.

-------- (1985c).

Texts,

"Apropos of a Recent Contribution to the History of Central Way

Philosophy in Tibet: Tsong Khapa's Speech of Gold," BIS.

KUnst,

A. (1957).

La1ou,

M.

(1953).

E. (1935).

-------- (1949-80).

Vol. 21, pp. 141-147.

"Les textes bouddhiques au temps

du roi Khri-sron-lde-bcan,"

Vol. 241, pp. 313-353.

Samdhinirmocana Sutra.

Louvain-Paris.

Le Traite de la Grande Vertu de Sagesse de Nagariuna

~raifiaparamita~astra).

and 5 [1980]).

Vol. 1, pp. 47ft.

"The Concept of the Principle of Excluded Middle in Buddhism,"

Orientalistyczny.

Journal Asiatigue.
Lamotte,

A Preliminary

Vol. 7, pp. 87ff.

Five volumes

(1 and 2 [1949],

3 [1970],

(Maha-

4 [1976],

Louvain.

.........

474

-------- (1962).
[English

L'enseignement de Vimalakirti

translation

by Sara Boin:

(Vimalakirtinirdesa).

The Teaching

of

Louvain.

Vimalakirti,

London,

1976.]
Lati
i

Rinbochay and E.

Napper (1980).

Mind in Tibetan Buddhism.

London, Rider

and Co.
La Vallee Poussin, L. de (1903-1913).
Nagarjuna.

avec

Buddhica.

No.4.

-------- (1971).
bouddhiques.
Levi, S.

Prasannapada commentaire de

No. 16.

Bruxelles.

Asanga.

Chr.

(1981).

-------- (1982).
na.

"Atisa's

~.

Melanges chinois et

expose

Tome I (1907):

de la doctrine
texte.

du

Tome II

Paris.

Introduction to the Two Truths,"

Journal

of

Vol. 9, pp. 161-214.

Nagarjuniana

Indiske Studier 4.

-------- (1982a).

6 vols.

Mahayana-Sutralawkara.

Vehicule selon Ie systeme Yogacara.

Indian Philosophy.

Bibliotheca

Reprint edition.

(1911): traduction, introduction, index.

Lindtner,

Candrakirti.

St. Petersburg.

L'Abhidharmakosa de Vasubandhu.

(1907-11).

Grand

la

Mulamadhyamakakarikas (Madhyamikasutras) ~

Studies in the Writings and Philosophy of NagarjuCopenhagen, Akademisk Forlag.

"Adversaria

Buddhica," Wiener Zeitschrift fur die Kunde

Siid-

Vol. 26, pp. 167-194.

-------- (1982b).

Nagarjunas Filosofiske Vaerker,

Indiske Studier.

K91 benhavn.

Vo1. 2.
Lobsang Tharchin, Geshe (1979). The Logic and Debate Tradition of India. Tibet and
Mongolia --History. Reader. Resources--.
Lokesh Chandra (1961).
Journal Asiatique.
-------- (1976).

Howell, N. J., Rashi Gempil Ling.

"Les imprimeries tibetains de Drepung,

Derge et Pepung,"

Vol. 249, pp. 503-517

Tibetan-Sanskrit Dictionary.

from the first edition, New Delhi, 1961.

Kyoto, Rinsen Book Co.

Reprinted

475

Macdonald, Ariane (1963). "Preambule

n.

Asiatique.

'n,

a la

lecture d'un rGya-Bod yig-chan," Journal

Vol. 251, pp. 53-159.

Makdisi, G. (1981). The Rise of Colleges: Institutions of Learning in Islam and

the West. Edinburgh, Edinburgh University Press.

er

Malalasekera,

G.

P. (1960).

Dictionary of Pali Proper Names.

London, Luzac and

Co.

:a

~t

Mani, Vettam (1975).

Puranic Encyclopaedia.

Martin,

"Sa-skya PaQqita's Advice for Tibetan Contemplatives," Tibet

Dan (1980).

Society Bulletin.
MatHaI,

l!l

B.

K.

No. 15, pp. 33-44.

(1970).

"Reference and Existence in Nyaya and Buddhist Logic,"

Journal of Indian Philosophy.

:1

Delhi, Motilal Banarsidass.

Vol. I, pp. 83-110.

Epistemology, Logic, and Grammar in Indian Philosophical Analy-------- (1971).

sis. The Hague, Paris, Mouton.

-------- (1974).

"A Note on the Nyaya Fallacy Sadhyasama and Petitio Principii,"

Journal of Indian Philosophy.

Vol. 2, p. 211-224.

Matsumoto S. (1978). "Sa skya PaQqita no Kyogaku ni kansuru Ichikosatsu,"[A Remark

upon the Doctrine of Sa skya paI].qita"], Nihon Tibetto Gakkai Kaiha, .2!. Report
of the Japanese Association for Tibetan Studies.
-------- (1980).

"Sahopalambha-niyama, "

Vol. 12, pp. 1-34.

Miller,
~.

R.

Philosophy.

A.

327-340.

"Empty Subject Terms in Late Buddhist LogiC," Journal

Vol. I, pp. 22-29.

"A Twelfth Century Tibetan Grammatical Fragment," T'oung

Vol. 51, pp. 72-84.

-------- (1965).

(1964).

Sotoshu Kenkyuin Kenkyusei Kenkyii Kiya.

[In English].

McDermott, A. C. S. (1970).
Qf~

Vol. 24, pp. 7-9.

"Some Minor Tibetan Grammatical Fragments," ZDMG.

Vol. 115, pp.

476

-------- (1976). Studies in the Grammatical Tradition in Tibet.

in the Theory and History of Linguistic Science.
Mimaki K.

(1976).

Amsterdam Studies
Series III, vol. 6.

La refutation Bouddhigue de la permanence des choses (sthira_

siddhidu1?aI)a) et la preuve de la momentandte des choses

Publications de l'institut de civilisation Indienne.

(k~aI)abhangasiddhi).

Serie in-8,

fasc. 41.

Paris.
-------- (1979).

"Le chapitre du Blo gsal grub mtha' sur les

sentation et edition," Zinbun.

-------- (1980).

Sautrantika,

"Sur Ie role de l'antarasloka ou du saipgrahasloka,"

et Bouddhisme,
pp. 233-244.

Pre-

Vol. 15, pp. 175-210.

Melanges offerts!~ ttienne

Lamotte.

Indianisme

Louvain-la-Neuve.

-------- (1980a).
"Le chapitre du Blo gsal grub mtha' sur les
essai de traduction," Zinbun. Vol. 16, pp. 143-172.

Sautrantika,

-------- (1982).

et XI (Yogacara)

edite,

Blo gsal grub mtha'.

Chapitres IX

(Vaibha~ika)

et Chapitre XII (Madhyamika) edite et traduit.

Un

Kyoto, Zinbun Kagaku

Kenkyusyo, Universite de Kyoto.

-------- (1982a).

"Le

Studies

Honour

in

Canberra.

commentaire de Mi pham sur Ie Jiianasarasamuccaya,"

of Professor.:h.

de Jong on his

Sixtieth

Indian

Birthday.

pp. 353-376.

"The Blo gsal grub mtha', and the Madhyamika Classification in

-------- (1983).
Tibetan Grub mtha' Literature," Proceedings of the Csoma de Karas Symposium
held at Velm-Vienna,

Austria,

[English summary of the

Mimaki K.

and

Akamatsu A.

Tibetain du 14 e siecle,"

offert au Prof.
and

French

13-19 September,

intro~uction

(1984).

1981.

Vol. 2, pp. 161-167.

in Mimaki (1982).]

"La philosophie des ~aiva vue par une auteur

MHanges chinois et bouddhigues,

!.:.. h .Stein. Bruxelles. pp. 742-768.

volume

d'hommage

[Edited Tibetan text

translation of the 5th (Dbang-phyug-pa) chapter of the Blo

grub mtha]
Mishra, Umesha (1957-66).

History of Indian Philosophy. Allahabad.

2 vols.

gsal

477

Miyasaka Y. (1971-72).

Mookerjee,

Pramapavarttika-karika (Sanskrit and Tibetan).

Satkari (1935).

tion

Acta Indo-

Vol. 2, pp. 1-206.

logica.

of

Dignaga.

The Buddhist Philosophy of Universal Flux, an ExposiExpounded k[ the

the Philosophy of Critical Realism

Calcutta, University of Calcutta.

Reprinted: Delhi, Motilal Banar-

School

of

sidass, 1980.
Mookerji,

Radha Kumud (1969).

Ancient Indian Education.

Delhi, Motilal Banarsi-

dass.
Moriyama

S.

(1984).

"The Yogacara-madhyamika Refutation of the Position of the

Satyakara and Alikakara-vadins of the Yogacara School.

of the Portions of Haribhadra's
Memoirs

M.

Part 1: A Translation
Prajnaparamitavyakhya,"

of the Postgraduate Research Institute of Bukkyo University

Daigaku Daigakuin Kenkyu Kiya).

Much,

Abhisamayala~araloka

T.

"Dharmaktrtis

(1983).

(Bukkyo

No. 12, pp. 1-38.

Vadanyayal)

(siddhanta~)

Sanskrit-Text,

tibersetzing und Anmerkung," Dissertation, Universitat Wien.

Nagao G. M. (1955).
~

"The Silence of the Buddha and Its Madhyamic Interpretation,"

in Indology and Buddhology.

Nakamura H. (1980).

Indian Buddhism

Kyoto; Hozokan.

! Survey with Bibliographical Notes. Osaka,

Kansai University of Foreign Studies.

Naudou, Jean (1980).

Buddhists of Kashmir.

Nawang Tsering (1979).

Delhi, Agam Kala Prakashan.

"Ascending the Ladder of Highest Realization in the Life

Instruction for Retreat," The Tibet Journal.

Nishioka S.
of

(1980-81-83).

Buddhism, "'

Exchange,

"Index

Annual

Oberhammer,

G.

(1963).

to the Catalogue Section of Bu-ston's 'History

Report of the Institute for the

University of Tokyo.

(1981), pp. 43-94; (III)

Vol. 4-1.

"Ein

(I)

Study

of

Cultural

= No.4 (1980), pp. 61-92; (II) = No.5

No.6 (1983), pp. 47-201.

Beitrag zu den Vada-traditionen Indiens,"

Zeitschrift fUr die Kunde SUd- und Ostasiens.

Vol. 7, pp. 63-103

Wiener

478

-------- (1964). "Paklllilasvamin's Introduction to his

[Philippines]. Vol. 2-3, pp. 302-322.
Obermiller,

E.

transl. (1931).

Part: The Jewel of Scripture.

Heidelberg.

Nyayabha~ya,"

Asian Studies

History of Buddhism (Chos-hbyung) k[ Bu-ston

I.

Materialien zur Kunde des Buddhismus, 18 Heft.

-------- (1932).
"The Doctrine of Prajfiaparamita as exposed in the Abhisamaya_
la~kara of Maitreya," Acta Orientalia.
Vol. II, pp. 1-133, 334-354.
-------- (1934).

"Nirva\1a

torical Quarterly.
-------- (1960).
text,
Conze.

according to the Tibetan Tradition," The

Prajna-Paramita-Ratna-GuQa-Samcaya-Gatha,

edited

by E.

Sanskrit and

Tibetan

Obermiller with a Sanskrit-Tibetan-English Index by

Indo-Iranian Reprints V.

theca Buddhica,

Vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 211-257.

The Hague.

E.

Originally published as Biblio-

no. 29 (1937), Leningrad.

Onoda S. (1981).
The Yons 'dzin rtags rigs -- ! Manual for Tibetan Logic
Studia Asiatica.
No.5.
The Association of Indian and Buddhist Studies,
Nagoya University.
Organ, Troy R. (1954-55). "The Silence of the Buddha," Philosophy East and West.
Vol. 4, pp. 125-140.
Perdue,

Daniel

(1976).

Introductory Debate in Tibetan

Buddhism.

Dharamsala,

Library of Tibetan Works and Archives.

Pil tz,

A.

(1981)

The World of Medieval Learning.

D. Jones, transl.

Oxford,

Basil Blackwell.
Potter, K. H. (1963).

Presuppositions of India's Philosophies.

Englewood Cliffs,

N. J., prentice Hall.

-------- (1970).
Philosophies.

Bibliography of Indian Philosophies.

Vol. 1.

The Encyclopedia of Indian

Delhi, Motilal Banarsidass.

"Realism, Speech-acts, and Truth-gaps in Indian and Western

-------- (1970a).
Philosophy," Journal of Indian Philosophy. Vol. 1, pp. 13-21.

479

________ (1977).

Indian Metaphysics and Epistemology:

Vaisesika .!!l!. to Gangesa.

The tradition of

Encyclopedia of Indian Philosophies.

Nyaya-

Princeton",

Princeton University Press.

-------- (1981).
Advaita Vedanta .!!l!. to Scupkara and His Pupils.
Indian Philosophies. Delhi, Motilal Banarsidass.
Pradhan,

Pralhad (1950).

No. 12.

Abhidharmasamuccaya of Asanga.

Visva-Bharati Studies.

Shantiniketan.

-------- (1975). Abhidharmakosabhasyam of Vasubandhu.

Tibetan
Series. No.2. Patna, K. P. Jayaswal Research Institute.
Prasadika,

Bhiksu, and Joshi, Lal Mani (1981).

Walpola (1971).

orient.
Randle,

H.

Publications

Works

Tibetan Ver-

Sarnath.

Le Compendium de la super-doctrine (philosophie)

d'Asanga.

dharmasamuccaya)

Sanskrit

Vimalaklrtinirdesa.

sion, Sanskrit Restoration, and Hindi Translation.

Rahula,

Encyclopedia of

de l'ecole

fran~aise

(Abhi-

d'extreme-

Vol. 78~
N.

(1930).

Indian Logic in the Early Schools.

study of the Nyaya-

dar sana in its relation to the early logic of other schools.

Oxford, Oxford

University Press.
Rata Kyongla Nawang Losang (1977).
Renou, L. (1964).
Rhodes,

N.

Richardson,

Life and Lives.

(1980).

"The

Development of Currency in Tibet," Tibetan Studies in

E.

(1983).

New Delhi, Vikas.

on

Appendix (pp. 258-263) in P. Pal,

of Tibet, Los Angeles, Los Angeles County Museum of Art.

ROerich, G. transl. (1976).

Runes,

pp. 261-268.

"Text and Translations of Selected Inscriptions

Tibetan Works in the Museum's Collection,"

~

New York, E. P. Hutton.

Indian Literature. New York, Walker.

of Hugh Richardson.
H.

The Blue Annals.

Dagobert D. ed. (1981).

Delhi, Motilal Banarsidass.

Dictionary of Philosophy.

Totowa, N. J.; Little-

field, Adams & Co.

480

Salomon,

R.

(1985)

The

Bridge

to the Three

Holy

Cities.

Delhi, MotUal

Banarsidass.
Sanghvi,

Sukhlalji

(1961).

Advanced

Studies in Indian Logic and

Metaphysics.

Calcutta, Indian Studies Past and Present.

Schoening, J. (1983). "The Sa-skya Throne Holder Lineage,"
sity of Washington.
Schuh, D. (1977).
Geistliche.
Seyfort

Ruegg,

M. A. Thesis, Univer-

Erlasse und Sendschreiben mongolischer Herrscher fUr tibetische

St. Augustin, VGR-Wissenschaftsverlag.
D.

(1962).

"A Propos of a Recent Contribution to

Buddhist Studies," Journal of the American Oriental Society.

Tibetan
Vol.

82,

and
pp.

320-331.
-------- (1966).
ston

The Life of Bu.ston Rin.po.che.

thar.

-------- (1969).

Serie Orientale Roma.

La.

th~orie

du Tathagatagarbha et du Gotra,

teriologie et la gnoseologie du Boudhisme.

d'extreme-orient.
-------- (1970).

With the Tibetan text of the Bu

Vol. 34.
etudes

Publications de l'ecole

la

Fran~aise

Vol. 70.

"On Ratnakirti," Journal of Indian Philosophy.

Vol. 1, pp. 300-

309.
-------- (1971).
"On the Knowability and Expressibility of Absolute Reality
Buddhism," Journal of Indian and Buddhist Studies. Vol. 20, pp. 489-495.
-------- (1973).

Le Traite du Tathagatagarbha de Bu ston Rin chen grub. Publica-

tions de l'ecole Fran9aise d'extreme-orient.

-------- (1977).

Vol. 88.

"The Uses of the Four Positions of the Catuskoti and the Problem

of the Description of Reality in Mahayana Buddhism," Journal of Indian

~.

in

Vol. 5, pp. 1-71.

-------- (1980).

"AhiIpsa

and Vegetarianism in the History of Buddhism," Buddhist

Studies in Honour of Walpola Rahula.

London, Gordon Fraser.

pp. 234-241.

481

The Literature of the Madhyamaka School of Philosophy in India.

-------- (1981).
Vol. 7, fasc. 1. Wiesbaden, Otto HarrassoA History of Indian Literature.
witz.
"Autour du ITa bali khyad ..P2!:. de Ye
-------- (1981a).
houang, Pelliot Tibetain 814)," Journal Asiatigue.
-------- (1982).

sde (version de Touen-

Vol. 269, pp. 207-229.

"Towards a Chronology of the Madhyamaka School," Indian Studies

in Honour of Professor
-------- (1983).

~es

"On

R:..

de Jong

.Q!!

his Sixtieth Birthday.

Canberra.

the Thesis and Assertion in the Madhyamaka/Dbu

ceedings of the Csoma de Karas Symposium held at Velm-Vienna.

September. 1981.
Shakabpa,

T.

W.

ma,"

Pro-

Austria. l3-19

Vol. 2, pp. 205-242.

D. (1967).

Tibet

! Political History. T. V. Wylie, ed. New

Haven, Yale University Press.

Shastri, D. (1972).

Vadanyayaprakarana of Acharya Dharmakirti. with the commenta-

II Vipanchitartha of Acharya Santaraksita.

Shastri,

H.

ed.

Indica.
Shaw, J.

(1910).

(1974).

"Empty

Indian Philosophy.
F.

Singh,

Six Buddhist Nyaya Tracts in

Sanskrit.

No.8.

Bibliotheca

New Series, no. 185.

L.

Sierksma,

Bauddha Bharati Series.

Madan

The Nyaya and the Buddhists," Journal

of

Vol. 2, pp. 332-343.

(1964).
Journal.

Terms:

"Rtsod-pa

The Monachal Disputations in Tibet,"

Indo-

Vol. 8, pp. 130-152.

Mohan (1971).

Sulekha of Sakya Pandita.

Patna,

Bihar

Research

Society.
Sinha, Jadunatha (1938).

Indian Realism.

Smalley,

The Study of the Bible in the Middle Ages.

Beryl (1978).

London, Kegan Paul.

Notre Dame,

University of Notre Dame Press.

Smith,

E.

Gene (1969).

Introduction to: Don~dam-smra-bali-seng-ge, Bshad mdzod

.ti:i bzhin nor bu ("A 15th-Century Tibetan Compendium of Knowledge").

Ii

;a;
482

Sata-pitaka Series.

Vol. 78.

-------- (1969a).
parts.

Tibetan

-------- (1969b).

[Addenda

New Delhi.

Catalogue.

Seattle,

University of

to the Tibetan Catalogue.]

Washington.

Seattle,

University

of

Washington.
Introduction to: Kongtrul's Encyclopedia of Indo-Tibetan
-------- (1970).
ture. Satapitaka Series. Vol. 80. New Delhi.
-------- (1970a) . Preface to: Glo-bo mkhan-chen, Tshad rna rigs pa'i gter
.ill!!:. bshad .ru! rigs .ru! .!!!!! Ius la ~ pa' i..gQ.

-------- (1970b).

Snellgrove,

D.

L. (1959).

University Press.

lli~

Gangtok, S. T. Kazi.

Introduction to: Encyclopedia Tibetica [Bo-dong

nyid 'dus .ru!], vol. 6.

Pa~-chen's

De

New Delhi, Tibet House.

The Hevajra Tantra,

Critical Study.

London, Oxford

2 parts.

Solomon, Esther A. (1976-78). Indian Dialectics Methods of Philosophical Discussion.

Sheth Bholabhai Jeshingbhai Institute of Learning and Research.
Research Series, nos. 70 and 74.
Sopa, Lhundrub and Hopkins,
New

York,

Grove

J.

Press.

Ahmedabad, Gujarat Vidya Sabha.

(1976).

Practice and Theory of Tibetan Buddhism.

[Includes a translation of

dbang-po (1728-1791), Grub pa'i mtha'i

Staal,

J.

F. (1961).

Comparative
Vol.

gzhag rin.QQ. che'i phreng ba.]

"The Theory of Definition in Indian Logic," Journal of the

American Oriental Society.

-------- (1962).

Dkon-mchog-'jigs-med-

"Negation

Vol. 81, pp. 122-126.

and the Law of Contradiction in Indian Thought

Study," Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African

Studies.

25, pp. 52-71.

-------- (1973).

"The

Concept

of

Philosophy.

Vol. 2, pp. 156-166.

-------- (1975).

Exploring Mysticism.

paka in Indian Logic",

Journal

Harmondsworth, Penguin Books

of

483

Stcherbatsky,

Th.

(1919).

The

Soul

Theory of

l'Academie des Sciences de Russie.

pp.

the

823-957.

Buddhists.

Bulletin

de

Reprinted Varanasi, Bhara-

tiya Vidya Prakasana, 1970.

-------- (1927).
The Conception
Sciences of the USSR.
-------- (1930-32).

of Buddhist NirvsQa.

Buddhist Logic.

Bibliotheca

Leningrad,

Buddhica.

Academy

Vol.

26, parts I

(1932) and II (1930). Leningrad, Academy of Sciences of the USSR.

New York, Dover, 1962.
Stein, R. A. (1961).
Steinkellner,

E.

Sba-bzhed: Une Chronigue Ancienne de Bsam-yas.

(1971).

"Wirklichkeit

Zeitschrift fUr die Kunde SUdasiens.

-------- (1973).
~

und

of

Reprinted

Paris.

Begriff bei Dharmakirti,"

Wiener

Band 15, pp. 179-210.

Dharmakirti's PramsQaviniscayah.

Zweites Kapitel: Svsrthsnuma-

Teil I Tibetischer Text und Sanskrittexte.

Wien,

Verlag der

Oster-

reichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften.

-------- (1974).

"On the Interpretation of the SvabhavahetuQ," Wiener Zeitschrift

flir die Kunde Slidasiens.

-------- (1977).

Band 18, pp. 117-129.

Verse-Index of Dharmaklrti's Works

Studien zUr Tibetologie und Buddhismuskunde.

-------- (1978).

(Tibetan Versions).

Wiener

Heft 1.

"Remarks on Tantristic Hermeneutics," in E.

Ligeti,

ed.,

Pro-

ceedings of the Csoma de Koras Memorial Symposium. Budapest. pp. 445-458.

Sternbach,

L. (1969).

The Spreading of Caoakya's Aphorisms .QY. "Greater India."

Calcutta.
-------- (1973).
Sanskrit

-------- (1974).
Literature.

"Subha~ita-sa~grahas,

Literature~"

Indologica

Forgotten Chapter in the Histories

Ta~rinensia.

Subhssita, Gnomic and Didactic Literature.

Wiesbaden, Otto Harrassowitz

of

Vol. 1, pp. 169-255.

A History of Indian

;:
484

-------- (1980).

"Note on the 'Identification' of Some Sayings in Sa skya

ta's Subhasita-ratna-nidhi," Acta Orientalia Hungarica.

Vol.

34,

Pa~gi

pp. 249-

262.
"Indian Wisdom and Its Spread Beyond India,"

-------- (1981).

American Oriental Society.

Szerb,

J.

ties

(1980).
of

of

the

Vol. 101, pp. 97-131.

"Glosses on the Oeuvre of Bla-ma 'Phags-pa: I. On the Activi-

Sa-skya

Pa~gita,"

Tibetan Studies in Honour

Warminster, Aris and Phillips.

-------- (1980a).

Journal

of

Hugh

Richardson.

pp. 290-300.

"Glosses on the Oeuvre of Bla-ma 'Phags-pa:

II. Some Notes on

the Events of the Years 1251-1254," Acta Orientalia Hungarica.

Vol. 34, pp.

263-285.
Tatia,

Nathmal

Series.
Tatz, M.

(1976).

No. 17.

Abhidharmasamuccaya~bhayam.

Tibetan

Sanskrit

Works

Patna, K. P. Jayaswal Research Institute.

and Kent, J. (1977).

The Tibetan Game of Liberation: Rebirth. New York,

Doubleday.
Tatz, M.

trans!.

Its

(1982).

Candragomin's Twenty Verses on the Bodhisattva Vow and

Commentary h Sakya Dragpa Gyaltsen.

Dharamsala,

Library of

Tibetan

Tibetan Sanskrit Works Series.

Vol. 3.

Works and Archives.

Thakur, A. (1957).

RatnakIrtibandhavali.

Thurman, R. A. F. (1976).

The Holy Teaching of Vimalakirti. A Mahayana Scripture.

Pennsylvania State University Press.

-------- (1979).

Maitreyanatha's

Ornament for the Scriptures of

Vehicle, recorded h Aryasanga, explained h Vasubandhu.

by Losang Jamspal,

M.

with assistance of R.

Sweet,

the

Universal

English translation

R. A. F. Thurman, J. Williams, & L. Zwilling,

Clark and L.

Zahler.

Edited by R.

A.

F.

Thurman.

American Institute of Buddhist Studies, Amherst? [Xerographic reproduction]

Thutop

Tulku

and Ngawang Sonam Tenzin (1968).

Zenpa Zidel.

Dehra Dun, Sakya Centre.

The Manjusri Tradition

and

485

Tillemans,
and

Tom J.
Its

F.

(1982).

Tibetan

"The 'Neither One Nor Many' Argument for Sunyata,

Interpretations:

terials," Etudes de Lettres.

(1983).

Background Information

Laussanne.

and

Source Ma-

pp. 103-128.

"The 'Neither One Nor Many' Argument for Sunyata, and Its Tibe-

Contributions on Tibetan and Buddhist Religion and

tan Interpretations,"
Philosophy. Proceedings of the Csoma de Karas Symposium Held at Velm-Vienna,
Austria, 13-19 Septeber 1981. pp. 305-320.
"On a Recent Work on Tibetan Buddhist Epistemology," Asiatische
-------- (1984).
Studien. Vol. 38, pp. 59-66. [Review of L. van der Kuijp (1983).]
-------- (1984a).

"Two

Tibetan texts on the 'Neither One Nor Many' Argument for

Sunyata," Journal of Indian Philosophy.

Tucci,

G.

Vol. 12, pp. 357-388.

"Buddhist Logic Before Dinnaga (Asahga,

(1929).

llastras)," Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society.

-------- (1932-41).

Indo-Tibetica.

Rome, Reale Accademia d'Italia.

Tibetan Painted Scrolls.

-------- (1949).
Rinsen Book Co., 1980, 2 vols.
-------- (1956).

Minor Buddhist Texts

-------- (1971).
Roma.
Vaidya,

Vasubandhu,

I.

Deb t'er dmar .P. gsar

Roma.

3 vols.

Serie Orientale Roma.

~

Tarka-

Vol. 1929, pp. 451-488.

Tibetan Chronicles.

4 vols.

Reprinted

Kyoto,

Vol. 9.
Serie Orientale

Vol. 24.

P.

No. 22.

L. (1959).

Avadana-Kalpalata of Ksemendra.

Buddhist Sanskrit Texts.

2 vols.

Vetter, T. (1963).

Erkenntnisprobleme bei Dharmakirti.

Osterreischische Akademie

der Wissenschaften.
-------- (1966).
leitung,
setzung.

Dharmaklrti's Pramanaviniscayab

Text der tibetischen Ubersetzung,

Wien,

Hermann

Bohlaus

Nachf.,

reichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften.

IiIfI

Kapitel:

Pratyakam.

Ein-

Sanskritfragmente, deutche UberKommissionsverlag

der

Oster-

486

S.

Vidyabhusana,

C.

! History of Indian Logic.

(1920)

Calcutta.

Reprinted

Delhi, Motilal Banarsidass, 1978.

Vostrikov,

A.

(1935).

"The

Nyayavarttika of Uddyotakara and the Vadanyaya

Dharmakirti," Indian Historical Quarterly.

of

Vol. 11, pp. 1-31.

"Some Corrections and Critical Remarks on Dr. Johan Manen's

-------- (1935-37).
Contributions to the Bibliography of Tibet," Bulletin of the School of ~
tal and African Studies.
-------- (1970).

Vol. 8, pp. 51-76.

Tibetan Historical Literature.

Indian Studies Past and Present.

Calcutta.
Warder, A. K. (1971).
Warren,

H.

Outline of Indian Philosophy.

C. (1973). Buddhism in Translations.

Delhi, Motilal Banarsidass.

New York, Atheneum.

Previously

published as Harvard Oriental Series, no. 3.

Watanabe

F.

(1972).

"Logical Arguments in the Dialogues suttas),"

Indian and Buddhist Studies.

Wayman,

A.

(1958).

"The

Journal

Rules of Debate According to Asanga," Journal of

Americal Oriental Society.

of

Vol. 20-2, pp. 988-976 (43)-(55).

the

Vol. 78, pp. 29-40.

-------- (1978). Calming the Mind and Discerning the Real, Buddhist Meditation and
the

Middle View,

from the Lam rim chen

!!!Q.

of Tson kha lli!..

New

York.

Re-

printed Delhi, Moti1al aanarsidass, 1978.

Williams,

P.

(1985).

"Rma bya ba Byang chub brtson 'grus on Madhyamaka Method,"

Journal of Indian Philosophy.

Willis,

Janice

Dean (1972).

Vol. 13, pp. 205-225.

New York,

The Diamond Light of the Eastern Dawn.

Simon and Schuster.

Yamaguchi S.
parik~a),

(1929).
textes

mentaire,
Vinttadeva,
pp. 1-65.

"Dignaga,
tibetain

eclaircissements

Examen de l'objet de la connaissance (Alambanaet chinois et traduction des stances et du

et

notes

en collaboration avec H.

d'apres Ie

commentaire

tibetain

Meyer," Journal Asiatigues.

comde

Vol. 214,

487

Yuyama A.

A).
Zwilling,

(1976)

Prajna-paramita-ratna-guna-samcaya-gatha

(Sanskrit Recension

Cambridge University Press.

Leonard (1981).

"Sa skya PaQgita's Version of PramaQavarttikam 11.3 --

A Case Study on the Influence of Exegesis upon Translation in Tibet," Studies

in Indian Philosophy,
Series.

Vol. 84.

Memorial Volume in Honour of Pandit Sukhlalji.

L. D.

Ahmedabad.

B. Works in Tibetan Language

A-khu-chin Shes-rab-rgya-mtsho. ~.!:8I!!!!. dkon .ill!. ~ zhig & tho .v.!&., Materials
for a History of Tibetan Literature.
Part 3. Sata-Pitaka Series. Vol. 30,
pp. 503-601.
A-lag-sha Ngag-dbang-bstan-dar (b.
legs bshad nyin byed snang ba,

1759).
'Chad rtsod rtsom gsum .&Ii !!!!!!!!. gzhag
Collected Works, Vol. 2 (kha), pp. 115-154

(zha 1a-20b).
A-mes-zhabs Ngag-dbang-kun-dga'-bsod-nams,
blo gsal padmo kha 'byed.
--------

'Jam-mgon.

Chos

'khor.&Ii~

bshad

Dalhousie, H. P., Damchoewe Sangpo, 1982.

Dpal ldan M skva pa' i lli chos hl snying khu 'khor 10 sdom pa' i chos

.hv.!!!!&. bali tshul legs

bshad m!. bde mchog chos kun gsal bali nvin byed. In

A-mes-zhabs, Lam 'bras, pp. 315-595.

-------Dpal rdo ~ .lli!.8. .Q2. chen po' i zab mo' i chos skor ~ lu!!!!.&. ba' i tshul
legs ~ bshad m!. bstan srung chos kun gsal bali nyin byed.
2 vols.
New
Delhi, T. G. Dhongthog Rinpoche, 1979.
'Dzam gling

~~

hl thub pa' i

.!:..&y!!.!.. tshab chen .Q2. dpal ldan M

skVa pa 'i .&.!!!!&. rabs rin .Q2. che j i !tar byon pa' i tshul .&Ii ~ ~ thar m!.
.!!&.Q. mtshar rin .Q2. che'i bang mdzod dgos 'dod kun~. Delhi, Tashi Dorje,
1975.
-------Lam 'bras khog phub [and] Bde mchog chos
Topgay, 1974.

~.

New Delhi,

Ngawang

13

-----------------~

488

Srid.E2. gsum .8.!.!. bla .!!!!. dpal sa skya .E2. chen .2. sngags 'chang ~ .8i

--------.

dbang .2. kun ~ rin chen .8.!.!. rnam lli!!. thar .E2.!!&Q.. mtshar ~ mtsho.
Rajpur, T. G. Dhongthog Rinpoche, 1980.

--------. Yongs rdzogs bstan .E2. rin .2. che' i nyams len .8.!.!. !!@.!! .ill@&. ~ ~
.2. che' i byon tshul khog phub dang bcas .E2. ~ lli!!. bshad .m!. legs bshad 'dus
pa'i !..8.Y1!.mtsho.

In A-mes-zhabs, Lam 'bras, pp. 1-313.

A-mi-pa Shes-rab-rgyal-mtshan.

See Shes-rab-rgyal-mtshan, A-mi-pa.

Bco-brgyad khri-chen Rin-po-che.

See Chogay Trichen Rinpoche.

Bka' brgyud gser phreng chen!!!Q..

Biographies of Eminent Gurus in the Transmission

Lineage of Teachings of the 'Ba'-ra Dkar-brgyud-pa Sect.

Dehra Dun, Ngawang

Gyaltsen and Ngawang Lungtok, 1970.

Bkra-shis-lhun-grub, Ngor mkhan-po.
rab

Dpal

skya' i

btsun

.&Q!!8. .!!!!.

See: [Zhu-chen Tshul-khrims-rin-chen], Dpal

Bkra-shis-rdo-rje,

Ko-btso.

Sde

dge'i lli!E. khang !&. gnas

khang chos mdzod chen mo bkra shis

pa'i lde'u !!!!.&..

ldan
skrun

khang,

version

(395

1983 (no.

mang

.& dkar

[Composed in 1979.]
M 7140.17).

lnga' i

sky a 'i

kun 'dus gzhal

chag rdo rje'i chos

Si-khron,

bdun

Si khron mi rigs dpe

[This is a much revised and

pages instead of 41 pages) of a book with the same

enlarged
title

and

identity number which the same publisher published in 1981.]

Blo

bo

chos.!:&.!& rim byon .!:&.!& rabs mu thi Ii' i

'phreng

mdzes.

MS,

tshugs

thung script, 64 ff.

Bo-dong

PaI}-chen Phyogs-las-rnam-rgyal.

byed

~2

bla ma tshad ma'i

Tibet House, 1973.

[Bo-dong PaI}-chen?].
ca.
Bod

Gsang 'dus lung rigs man

lo~,

Encyclopedia Tibetica.

.ill@&.

ston

New Delhi,

Vol. 64, pp. 383-577.

Lam.. 'bras 'pIa ma tshad mali

lo~,

Encyclopedia Tibeti-

Vol. 106, pp. 411-573.

~ ~

ill grub mtha' ris med ill mkhas dbang

dang brgyad .!! lhag .8!.

'bum ~ so' i dkar chag ~ .&.!..8. tu bsgrigs .E2. shes bya' i gter ~.

Vol.

1 (stod cha), to be completed in 3 vols.

Chendu, Si-khron-mi-rigs-dpe-

489

skrun-khang, 1984
'Bri-gung-pa Ratna.
sgra.

snga 'bri &!!!!&. gling pa 'i ~ thar snyan pa'i

'brug

Bir, D. Tsondu Senghe, 1975.

IL

Bsod-nams-dpal-bzang-po. Sa'i steng na 'gran zla dang bral ba kha che papdita
shakyashri bhadra'i rnam thar.
Xylograph, 66 ff.
Bihar Research Society,
provisional catalogue no. 591.
edition.

See Gangs can

Bsod-nams-grags-pa,

[This is the Gra-phyi tshong-'dus grwa-tshang

ill . . . , p. 212.1.]

Pa~-chen.

Rgyal

po'am deb gsar ma [Deb ther dmar

rabs 'phrul

.PQ.

gsar ma].

ill Ide .!!!!&. i@!!!. deb ther dmar

Text and partial

translation

published in G. Tucci (1971).

Bsod-nams-rgyal-mtshan,

Bla-ma-dam-pa.

mtshar snang ba, Lam 'bras slob

1-121

(~

Slob-dpon.

(~

Bla

~.ill!!:.

--------

thar m!.!!&2.

Vol. 16, pp.

dpa'i

~ m!

Tokyo, Toyo Bunko, 1968.

la

pa'i 'grel

Vol. 2, pp. 457.4.1-

Bde bar gshegs pa' i bstan pa' i gsal byed chos kY.!.. ~

rab rin

24, pp. 633-1057

--------

~.ill!!:.

220a-335a).

Bu-ston Rin-chen-grub.
Bnas

Bvang chub

Sa skya pa'i bka' 'bum.

515.2.6

ma brgyud pa 'i

1a-61a).

Bsod-nams-rtse-mo,
~,

Bla

bshad (Rajpur, 1983), Pod nag.

.PQ.

che' i mdzod,

Collected Works.

New Delhi, 1971.

(~1-212).

dam m!

byed.p.!.,

kyis rjes su bzung ba'i tshul bka' drin rjes

Collected Works.

Thubten Legshay Gyatsho.

Gateway to the Temple:

f Tibetan Monastic Customs, Art, Building and Celebrations.

Series III, Volume 12.

40 ff.

Manual

Bibliotheca

Kathmandu, Ratna Pustak Bhandar, 1979.

~ ~ ~ skva papditas mdzad pa'i chos ~ chen mo.

ginally
1477.

Col-

Vol. 20, pp. 79-748.

Chogay Trichen Rinpoche,

Himalayica.

su

Vol. 26, pp. 1-142.

.hos mngon m! kun las btus kY.!.. ill ~ bshad .!!Vi ma 'i ~~,

lected Works.

Vol.

Bihar Research Society,

Patna.

Incomplete

MS,

ori-

Provisional catalogue no.

490

Chos-rnarn-rgyal,
'du' i

Rta-nag mkhan-po.

Dalai bla-rna V,
pa'i
nu'i

Bstan ~ dang bstan 'dzin.8Y!. 10 ~ ~

!.2&. gsar pa' i do shal.

Ngag-dbang-blo-bzang-rgya-rntsho.

mtho ris

.!!&!L.

dbu-rned MS seen in Tibet.

96 ff.

Gangs .9!!!. ill .8Y!. .!!. la

ill ~ blon gtso bor brjod pa'i

ill ~ mo'i .&!!! dbyangs.

deb ther rdzogs ldan

ston dpyid

Dharamsala,

~hon

Shes-rig-par_

khang, 1981.
Zab
.!&I.!!!l.

Dbang..,..'dus.

.E.8.E!. che ba' i dam pa' i chos

dang

4 vols.

ill

thob

.v.!.&. ill!!!&.

Bod ~.9!!!. pa'i

.&.Q,

ba

.r.!.&.

pa'i dpal ldan

!:.8..Y.!!i

bzhi sogs

dang dka' gnad ~ zhig bkrol ba sngon by on mkhas pa' i gsung rgyun

ed. 7), 127 ff.

ill ~

dbang chos

pa'i dbyar mtsho ~ byed,

Vol. 4, pp. 337-387

Dhongthog Rinpoche,
pa 'i

bstan

T.

G.

thub bstan rin .P2. che

Lam 'bras slob bshad.

Dkon-mchog-lhun-grub.

'chang chen
rgyun

dad

Dehra Dun, Sakya Centre,

169a-194a).

.i!.

.i!.

1 tar

lli.!!&.

ba' i 10 !..81..!:!.!! rab 'byams

Brag-dgon zhabs-drung.

Yul mdo srnad

!tar dar ba'i tshul gsal bar brjod

zhing

ill

du

ljongs su

deb ther

~ata-Pitaka Series, Vol. 226-228.

See also the edition of Yon-tan-rgya-mtsho,

Wa-~ul

ill

New Delhi, T. G. Dhongthog, 1977.

[=A mdo chos 'byung].

1975-1978.

pa'i

Dpal ldan bla rna dam .ill! rdo

pa' i ~ thar byin rlabs .8Y!. char

(~

rin.P2. che

Dkon-mchog-bstan-pa-rab-rgyas,

dbyangs and

(Derge

Byang ~ thub pa'i ~ tshab dpal ldan.!!. sky a

snyan pa'i sgra dbyangs.

mtsho.

thoR

Reproduced in K. Mimaki (1982), pp. 331ff.

Dgon-gsar-ba Bsod-narns-rgyal-mtshan.

1983.

Xylograph

Grub pa'i mtha ' ~.m!!:. bshad pa'i mdzod.

Dbus-pa Blo-gsal.

.ill@&.

ill ~

.&.!..y.!!.

Pe-cing, Mi rigs dpe skrun khang, 1982.

dgongs~.

.P2.

.h.!!.

ga' i

Delhi, 1971

New Delhi,

Delhi, A-lags 'Jam-

Skal bzang Bstan-pa, 1974.

Chos

ill ill

tshul gsal bar bshad pa'i

med MS seen in Tibet.

dpal ldan bla ma ~ las dam pa' i chos ~

.Ii ~ thub bstan

pa'i nyin byed.

dbu-

ill ~

tshul

159 ff.

Dkon-mchog-lhun-grub and Sangs-rgyas-phun-tshogs.

bstan pa' i !.&y!!. mtshor ~ pa' i .8!..!:!. chen.

Dam pa' i chos

[=Ngor chos 'byung.]

New Delhi,

491

Ngawang Topgay, 1973

[The work was left uncompleted by the first author, and

finished by the second.]

Dkon-mchog-yon-tan-rgyal-mtshan,
QQL bu.

Dolanji,

Dgos 'dod kun ~ ill bzhin ill

Ri-khrod-pa.

Patshang Lama Sonam Gyaltsen, Tibetan Bonpo Monastic Com-

munity, 1984.
Dpa' -bo

Gtsug-lag-' phreng-ba.

Dam pa' i chos

kIi

'khor los bsgyur ba

byung ba gsal bar byed ~ mkhas pa'i.!!.&!L stone

Series. Vol. 9 (1)-(4).
Dpal-ldan-tshul-khrims.

Ri

khrod

'bras slob bshad (Derge ed.).

Dpal

skya pandi ta 'i !.!!.l!!!!. thar

Vol.

Ngor-chen

Vol. 1

pp. 57a.I-67a.6.

1~,

chen

.P.Q.

parts.

kIi

Sata-Pitaka

blo gros brtan pa'i!.!!.l!!!!. thar,

Lam

pp. 187b.5-193b.4.

(~,

sgros IiJa, Lam 'bras slob bshad (Derge ed.).

See also the edition in the Derge edition of

Kun-dga'-bzang-po's collected works.

[The name of the author

or

compiler is not specified.]

Dung-dkar Blo-bzang-'phrin-las.
gnad bsdus.

In:

.P.Q. hu Ian deb there

'Dzam-thang

Deb ther dmar po'i nang &.&!!l che'i tshig 'grel

Tshal-pa Kun-dga '-rdo-rje, Deb ther dmar .P.Q.

Pe-cing, Mi rigs dpe skrun khang, 1981.

Ngag-dbang-blo-gros-grags-pa.

bla-ma

Dpal ldan .iQ. nang

!.&:i&. ba' i chos tshul gsal byed zla ba' i sgron

Society, 1983.

Gangs

..Y2!!

ill 1 iongs

bka' dang bstan bcos sogs

~.

kIi ~

kvi dang

Pp. 152-462.

Bir,

pa'i

chos

Bir Tibetan

bam spar gzhi.li ltar

~ ~ ~ dkar chag spar thor ~ tsam du bkod ~ phan bde' i ~

tshal 'byed pa'i nyin byed.
In: Three Karchacks, Gedan Sungrab Minyam Gyun-

phel Series.

Vol. 13.

New Delhi, Ngawang Gelek Demo, 1970.

Pp. 169-243.

Glo-bo mkhan-chen Bsod-nams-lhun-grub.

Bla ma'i .!:ill!!!! thar rin chen phreng ba
[Biography of Rgyal-tshab Kun-dga'-dbang-phyug]. MS, Toyo Bunko [MS no. 44].
Vol. ka, pp. 146b.I-178a.1.
-------Mkhas ~ ~ ~ pa' i sgo' i
New Delhi, N. Topgye, 1979.

.P!!!:. bshad ~ .!i&. gnas gsal

byed.

--01IIII

492

Rab 'byams blo gros rab gsal ~ dris pa'i Ian.

42]

MS, Toyo Bunko [MS no.

Vol. cha, pp. 197a.5-213a.5.

.Rk. btsun bsod nams lhun grub legs pa 'i ~ gnas .!:&Y2!. ~ .!!pal
bzang po'i !.lli!!!!.lli!.!:.. thar E. MS, T6yo Bunko. Vol. ca, 37 ff.

--------.

Sa skyar bdag chen chos rje'i dris Ian mdzad E.

-------aiso

Glo-bo

mkhan-chen,

Sa

MS, T6yo Bunko. See

skya bdag chen chos rje'i dris

"Collected Works" (New Delhi:

Ian

mdzad .P2.

N. Topgay, 1977), vol. 3 [actually only vol. 3

ever appeared], pp. 85-93.

--------.

Sde

--------

bdun mdo.

Sde

bdun

Derge edition.
--------

mdo

dang

snga!.lli!!!!. lli!.!:.. bshad

bcas pa'i dgongs 'grel tshad ma

~

rigs lam gsal byed.

29 ff.

gter

ill

Reprint of

the

rigs

Manduwalla, Dehra Dun, Pal Ewrun Chodan Ngorpa Centre, 1985.

Sde bdun mdo dang bcas pa'i dgongs 'grel tshad !!!!!. rigs gter la

mkho ba mtha' gnyis gsal byed.

4 ff.

Reprint of the Derge edition.

bar

Mandu-

walla, Dehra Dun, Pal Ewam Chodan Ngorpa Centre, 1985.

'grel

pa 'i

edition.

rnam bshad

Manduwalla,

!i&W

lam gsal ba' i l l i !!!!!..

Dehra Dun,

Reprint of

the

Derge

Pal Ewam Chodan Ngorpa Centre, 1985.

See

also Glo-bo mkhan-chen, Tshad ma rigs.

--------

Skyes rtsa bla mas sa skya bka' 'bum bzhengs pa'i mtshon byed, "Collec-

ted Works."
-------bzhag

Slob

New Delhi, Ngawang Topgay, 1977.

dpon

bsod nams rtse mos mdzad pa 'i

pa 'i gsal byed lli rna' i

edition,

IASWR,

Vol. 3, pp. 301-311.

Stonybrook,

zer.

N.

Y.

sde

~.Y.!

Xylograph (Derge ed.).

[See also J.

Kolrna~

!.lli!!!!. .m!.!:.
Microfiche

(1971), no. 11.074

(1450). ]
-------graph

!.lli!!!!. brgal Ian

(Derge ed.).

min gsal byed .&!!&. ma' i

Microfiche edition from

(1971), no. 11.073 (1449).]

IASWR.

dgongs~.

Xylo-

J.

Kolma

[See also

493

__------. Tshad ~ rigs pa' i gter .&Ii 'grel pa' i .!:ill!!!!. lli!!:. bshad ~ rigs ~ ~ Ius
~ la ~ pa'i~. Gangtok, S. T. Kazi, 1970. The reprodu~tion of a Glo-bo
MS.
See also Glo-bo rnkhan-chen, Sde bdun mdo ~ bshad, the same work in
the Derge edition
Go-rams-pa Bsod-narns-seng-ge. Lta ba'i shan 'byed theg mchog gnad .k!!. zla
Collected Works.
Dehra Dun, Sakya College, 1979. [reprint of Derge

~,

ed.]

Vol. 5, pp. 417-510 (ca 209a-255b).

--------.

Phar phyin dang tshad

phreng ba,

Collected Works.

brgyud pa' i bla

la rnchod bstod rin ..PQ che' i

Sa skya pa'i bka' 'bum.

Vol. 11, pp. 20.2.1-

23.3.6 (ka 39a-46a).

fuu& ba thams cad .k!!. thugs .k!!. dgongs

--------

ston

zab !!!2. dbu rna' i de kho .ill!.

nyid spyi' i .&ill!&.

pa'i bka' 'bum.

Vol. 12, pp. 348.1.1-451.3.1 (ca 1a-208a).

nges don rab gsa!.

Collected Works.

Sa

sky a

-------~ pa' i bstan bcos tshad ~ rnam 'grel .&I.!. ~ lli!!:. bshad ~ kun tu
bzang po'i ~~, Collected Works. Sa skya pa'i bka' 'bum.
Vol. 11, pp.
27.2.1-195.4.4 (ka 54a-392a).
--------

Sde

bdun mdo dang bcas pa' i dgongs

phyin ci

l2.&. lli!!:. 'grel

rigs pa' i gter .&Ii don gsal bar byed]22., Collected Works.
Vol. 2,
pp. 385-672 (ka 1a-144b).
Sa skya pa'i bka' 'bum, Vol. 11, pp. 291.4.1365.2.2.

~ ~

--------.

Sdom

gsurn .&Ii rab tu dbye ba 'i

dgongs ~ gsal ba.

1a-161a).
-------~

Tshad
gsal,

167.3.3

Sa skya pa'i bka' 'bum.

bshad .!:&.Y!!l ba 'i

rab

.k!!.

Vol. 14, pp. 119.1.1-199.3.6 (ta

rigs pa' i gter .&Ii dka' ba' i gnas .!:ill!!!!. lli!!:. bshad ]22. sde bdun

Collected Works.

(~

Sa skya pa'i bka' 'bum.

Vol.

12,

pp. 1.1.1-

1a-334a).

-------Tshad rna'i brgyud 'debs, Collected Works.

Sa skya pa'i bka'
Vol. 11, pp. 17.2.6-18.1.3 (ka 27b [32b]-29a [34a]).
[Gong-dkar 'Phrin-las-rnam-rgyal?].
Tibet. 244 ff.

Thob 11& bum ~ bzang..PQ.

'bum.

Dbu-rned MS seen in

494

'Gos

lo-tsa-ba Gzhon-nu-dpal.

Deb ther dngon 2..

International Academy of Indian Culture, 1974.

The Blue Annals.

New Delhi,

Sata-pitaka Series.

Vol. 212

Grags-pa-rgyal-mtshan, Rje-btsun. .R.&Y!& kYi mngon ~ rtogs .I!!!. rin 2. che' i ]jon
shing, Sa skya pa'i bka' 'bum.
Tokyo: Toyo Bunko, 1968. Vol. 3, pp. 1-70
(cha la-139a).
-------Rtags.l!!!. gnyis pa' i .Elli!:!!!. ~ bshad .I!!!. ma ~ .I!!!. ~ 'joms ~ byed
pa'i !:lli!.!!!. 'grel ~ ldan, Sa skya pa'i bka' 'bum. Vol. 3, pp. 96.3.1-162.3.6
(cha 194a-326a).
Gzhan-dga' Gzhan-phan-chos-kyi-snang-ba.
bali mchan 'grel.
Gzhung

lugs legs

bshad .I!!!. zhes

bali bstan bcos.

Vol. 5, pp. 61.3.1-77.1.6 (tha 123a-154b).

'bum.
pa 9'

New Delhi, 'Dan-ma sprul-sku, 1976.

In:

Sa skya pa'i

bka'

[A forgery ascribed to Sa-

'Jam-dbyangs-bzhad-pa'i-rdo-rje.
mdzod.

Collected Works.

Bsdus

ba kun bzang zhing .& .!!Y.i

gsal

bkongs,

sbyor i l l snying 2. kun bsdus ill pa'i

New Delhi, 1973.

.!!!!.

Vol. 15.

lung rigs

mtsho skye dgu' i re ba

Collected Works (Bla-brang Bkra-shis-dkyil ed.).

New Delhi,

kun
1973.

Vol. 17, pp. 33-1091.

'Jam-dbyangs

Dpal-Idan-rgya-mtsho,

Gtsang mkhan-chen.

Rdo ill phur

pa'i

chos

Published with the same author's Rdo i l l phur pa' i

chos

bsdus.l!!!..

.!:&1!& sde mang po' i ili.!!&. gzhi dang sbyar ba.

Dar j eeling,

Taklung

Tsetrul Pema Wangyal, 1979.

'Jam-dbyangs

Mkhyen-brtse'i-dbang-po.

sngags gsar rnying .& gdan rabs mdor bsdud

rtsis Sherig Spendzod.

Vol.

29.

gg.Q.

mtshar padmo'i

tshal.

Leh, S. W. Tashigangpa, 1972.

Sman-

pp. 1-207

(da ia-104a).
'Jam-dpal-'phrin-Ias-yon-tan.
~

stan.

Bsdus

gra'i don kun bsdus .I!!!. legs bshad mkhas 'p'a'i

Gangtok, Govt. of India Printing Press, n. d.

495

Khetsun Sangpo.
Biographical Dictionary of Tibet and Tibetan Buddhism.
Dharamsala, Library of Tibetan Works and Archives, 1973-.
To be complete in 12
vols.
Khro-phu
tsa

lo-tsa-ba Byams-pa-dpal.
~ chen shakya shrf' i .!:ill!!!! thar khro..Ph!!. 10
bas mdzad ~.
Xylograph (Grwa-phyi ed.), 8 ff. [5 lines per page].

Bihar Research Society, provisional catalogue no. 1511 (B.N. 591).

--------.

Shaky a

MS,

shr1 bhadra'i rnam thar.

Society, provisional catalogue no. 981.

Klong-rdol bla-ma.
1973.

Collected Works,

Kong-sprul
che'i

Mang-thos.

Blo-gros-mtha' -yas.
mdzod bslab

Kun-dga'-grol-mchog,
thar

-------'byed

Bihar Research

[See also the following.]

Sata-pitaka Series.

Vol. 100.

New Delhi,

Bstan

rtsis gsal ba'i nyin byed lhag bsam rab

Dbu-med MS, 136 ff.

Sata-pitaka Series.

21ff.

Another edition: Mussoorie, Dalarna, 1963.

Klu-sgrub-rgya-mtsho,
dkar.

dbu med,

.&Q.

kun las btus

Vol. 80.

Jo-nang.

In:

.QQ.

.lli! ~

rab

rin

.QQ.

khyab.

New Delhi, 1970.

Dpal ldan bla

legs bshad khyad .ill!!:. gsum ldan.

Pandita chen
~.

Theg pa' i

gsum legs .p!!!:. ston pa' i bstan bcos shes .lli kun

'jam pa'i dbyangs kyis [sic] .!:ill!!!!

MS, cursive script, 125ft.

shakya mchog ldan .&y! .!:ill!!!!.p!!!:. thar

zhib !!!Q. rnam .ill!!:.

Shakya-mchog-ldan, Collected Works, Thimphu, 1975.

Vol. 16,

pp. 1-234.
--------

Rnam thar zur 'debs mdzes

biographies

rang grol

shing rta 'dren byed.

New Delhi, 1982.
~

rin

.QQ.

che' i lung

.Y.!&..

In:

The Auto-

of Jo-nan Kun-dga'-grol-mchog and His Previous Embodiments,

Delhi, Tibet House, 1982.

Zhen

New

Vol. 2, pp. 535-584 (ca la-25a).

.&Y!

lhug .ill!!:. brjod pa'i gtam skal bzang

dad

pa'i

In: The Autobiographies of Jo-nan Kun-dga'-grol-mchog,

Vol. 2, pp. 285-534

(~

la-125b).

rim chen mo'i mchan bu mchod brjod bstod ~ mtha' gcod mchan rtags gsar
bcos ill 10 ~ bcas. New Delhi, Chos 'phel legs ldan, 1972. 2 vols.

r
I

496

Lho-pa kun-mkhyen Rin-chen-dpal.

rin chen dpal ~ mdzad"p'!!,

ldan ~ skya palJ.dita'i rnam thar kun mkhyen

Lam 'bras slob bshad (Derge ed.). Vol. 1 (~,

D~al

pp. 38b.1-57a.1.
Mang-thos Klu-sgrub-rgya-mtsho.

Mi-pham-rgya-mtsho.
..p.!!

Theg"p'!! chen .EQ. mdo sde' i

theg mchog bdud rtsi' i

1975.

Vol. 2, pp. 1-760

--------

Tshad

ba,

See Klu-sgrub-rgya-mtsho.

.!!.8L

(~

ston,

.&Vi dgongs don

Collected Works.

~ l@.!:. ~

Delhi,

S. T. Kazi,

1a-380b).

ma kun las btus pa'i mchan 'grel.ill. lam rab gsal de nyid

Collected Works.

Mkhas-btsun-bzang-po.

See Khetsun Sangpo.

Mkhas-grub Dge-legs-dpal-bzang-po.
bzang po' i gsan

snang

Vol. 7, pp. 473-619 (hum 1a-74a).

Mkhas grub thams cad

mkhyen"p'!!~

legs

dpal

.v..!.&., Collected Works. n. p., n. d. Vol. 1, pp. 33-119 (ka 1-

86).
--------

Tshad

Library.

ma sde bdun .ill

Vol.~,

Ngag-dbang-bsod-nams-rgyal-mtshan,
len

.ill. .ill mun sel.

Khang-gsar mkhan-po.

gtan la 'bebs"p'!! 'jam dbyangs bla ma 'i dgongs

bzang

Bod.ill mkhas

..p.!!

snga

rin chen mdzes pa'i phra tshom bkod"p'!!.

Mani Dorje, 1979.
Tshad ma rigs pa'i gter .ill dgongs

~.&

dpal ster.

..p.!!

gsum.ill nyarns

rnam 'grel

skal

pa'i dris Ian.

pa'i

..p.!!

ldan mkhas

pa'i

Ius

Thim-phu, Kunsang Topgyal and

don gsal bar byed

legs bshad

New Delhi, Ngawang Tobgya[l], 1983.

Ngag-dbang-legs-grub, Ngor-dpon-slob.
bstan

Sdom

~.ill

.P!!vi ~ .& grub mtha' i shan 'byed

dang bcas pa'i 'bel bali gtam skyes

--------

Tibet House

.!!!!R 'byed .ill ~ thur. New Delhi, Ngawang Tobgyal, 1984.

Ngag-dbang-chos-grags.
mtha'

Xylograph,

pp. 1a-192a.

mtshan ri mo'i bstod tshig las 'phros

Published at the end of:

nyams len sdom

..p.!!

Ngag-dbang-legs-grub, Yongs rdzogs

gsurn gtan la 'bebs"p'!! 'jam

dbyangs

bla

rna'i

497

dgongs

~,

[Ngor-chen? ]
skya....

New Delhi, T. G. Dhongthog, 1979.

Dpal ~ skya pav.dita' i .!:m!!!! thar .&!!!!8. sgros ~.

See
Dpal ~
[This work was published with the Derge edition of Ngor-chen's

works and also in the Lam 'bras slob bshad,

but the colophon does not

esta-

blish his authorship.]

Ek

Ngor-chen Kun-dga' -bzang-po.

sky a pa'i bka' 'bum.

btsun sa skya pa' i bka' 'bum ill dkar chag,

Tokyo, Toyo Bunko, 1968.

Sa

Vol. 10, pp. 366.4.4-369.2.6

(2,. 304a-309a).

Thob .riB. .!:.&Y!!. mtsho,

--------

Sa skya pa' i bka' 'bum.

Vol.

9,

pp.

44.4.1-

108.2.6 (ka 90a-217a).

'Phags-pa
~

Blo-gros-rgyal-mtshan.
ba'i bshes

Bunko, 1968.
--------

~ ~

(~

Thogs-med-bzang-po.

bsdus~,

Sa skya pa' i bka' , bum.

Theg

chen .Q mdo sde'i

Ngag-dbang-'jigs-med-grags-pa.
~

Tokyo, Taya

Vol. 6, pp.

ill 'grel

rin

Delhi, 1979.

mgon .Q sa sky a pandita kun

bskal

&

62b.3-63b.2).

.Q che'i phreng ba.

Rin-spungs-pa

bde bar gshegs dus dbus gtsang

la spring ba, Sa skya pa'i bka' 'bum.

Chos.ill pa' i.!:m!!!! thar

Rgyal-sras

Vol. 7, pp. 266.4.4-267.2.6 (ba 320b.4-321b.6).

31.3.3-32.1.2

Chos .ill

bzang po'i legs lam,

'Jam pa'i dbyangs dngos ~ ba'i

.!:.8Y& mtshan dpal bzang po' i .!:m!!!! ~ thar

Lam 'bras slob bshad (Derge ed.).

Vol. 1

(ka), pp. 67b-145a.

Rta-mgrin-rgyal.

"Bod du tshad ma'i gzhung lugs dar tshul dang 'bsdus grwa'i' go

don che long tsam brjod pa," Bod ljong zhib

61-79.

J!!8..

No. 13 (1983, no. 2), pp.

Rtse bdun~. In: A-mes-zhabs, Chos 'khor, pp. 36.7-37.6 (18b.7-19a.6).

Sangs-rgyas-bstan-'dzin,

Mkhan-po.

Legs

bshad 'dod.8.!!.~ ba'i gter mdzod.

Kalimpong, Sakya Khenpo Sangey Tenzin, 1974.

Sangs-rgyas-phun-tshogs.

Rtsom 'phro kha skong.

See:

Dkon-mchog-lhun-grub

and

4>
498

Sangs-rgyas-phun-tshogs.

Dam pa'i ehos

Sa-skya Pa1J.4ita Kun-dga'-rgyal-mtshan.

Tokyo,

Taya

Bshes pa'i spring

.Y.!8. &

pa'i bka' 'bum.

Bka' gdams do kor bali zhus lan,

Bunko,

1968..

Sa skya

Vol. 5, pp. 403.1.6-404.2.2 (l!!!.

217b.6-220a.2).
--------.

--------

bsdus don, SKKB.

Vol. 5, pp. 446.4.1-447.3.6

[Probably aproeryphal.]

(~306a.I-308a.6).

Byis.m!, bde blag tu ~ pa' i .!:ill!!!!. bshad byis .m!, la phan .m!"

SKKB.

Vol. 5, pp. 117.1.5-122.4.5 (tha 235b-247a).

--------.

ehag

10 tsa bali zhus lan,

SKKB.

Vol.

5,

pp.

409.1.1-414.2.1 (l!!!.

229b.I-240a.l).
--------

Dri !lli!. med .m!, zhes

.ill.

ba'i .E.&E!. eher 'grel.m!"

SKKB.

Vol.

5,

pp.

379.4.1-393.2.6 (na 170a-197a.6).

--------

Glo bo 10 tsa bali zhus lan,

SKKB.

Vol.

5, pp. 414.2.2-415.2.3

(~

240a-242a).
--------

&!&,

--------.

'Jig

rten dbang ~ thugs

SKKB.

!J!:. chen

Vol. 5, pp. 396.4.4-397.2.1

(~

..PQ.

la bstod .m!, tshigs

bead

beu

204b.4-205b.l).

Lam zab!!!Q. bla mali rnal 'byor, SKKB.

Vol. 5, pp. 339.3.1-343.4.1 (na

88a-:96b).
--------

Lung rigs ~

333.4.2-334.2.2

(~

dang mthun ~ 'chad dgos tshul, SKKB.

Vol. 5, pp.

76a.2-77a.2).

Mkhas .m!, rnarns ~ pa'i~,

SKKB.

Vol. 5, pp. 81.1.1-111.3.6 (tha

163a-224a)

.fu@. brgyad mali 'grel.m!"

SKKB.

Vol.

5,

pp.

148.3.4-154.4.6 (tha

299b.4-312a.6).
-------'phrin

Phyogs

11&,

beu' i sangs ~ dang ~ chub serns ~ rnams la zhu

SKKB.

Vol. 5, pp. 323.3.1-330.3.6 (da 55a-69a).

499

________

Rang.&.!. rang la gros 'debs.ill!"

266a.1-268b.3).

--------.
Vol.

B.k
1

SKKB.

[Probably apocryphal]

btsun rin .E..Q. che' i .!ill!!!!. thar,

(~,

Vol. 5, pp. 427.1.1-428.2.3 (M

pp.

18a.4-29a.4.

Lam' bras slob bshad (Derge

ed. )

The identical work is also found under the

ti tIe Bla ,!!!!! ill btsun chen po' i .E.!!m!! thar,

Sa skya pa' i bka' 'bum.

Vol. 5,

pp. 143.1.1-148.3.4 (tha 288b.1-299b.4).

--------.

Rol mo'i bstan bcos, SKKB.

--------.

Sdeb sbyor sna tshogs

Vol. 5, pp. 77.2.1-80.2.6 (tha 155a-161a).

~.!.2.8..&.!.

chun.E..Q.,

SKKB.

Vol.

5, pp. 131.4.6-

141.3.6 (tha 265b.6-295a.6).

--------

Sdom.ill!, gsum.ill rabtu dbye ba, SKKB.

Vol. 5, pp. 297.1.1-320.4.5 (M

1a-48b.5).
--------

Skyes bu dam .ill!, ~ la spring ba' i .vi~, SKKB.

Vol. 5, pp. 330.4.1-

333.4.2 (na 79b.1-76a.2).

--------

Smra sgo'i ~ bcad,

SKKB.

Vol.

5,

pp. 116.2.1-117.1.5 (tha 234a.l-

235b.5).
Snyi mo sgom chen .ill dris lan, SKKB.

Vol. 5, pp. 417.2.3-419.1.2 (M

246a-249b).
--------

Ston .ill!, blo gros rab gsa 1 .ill dris lan,

SKKB.

Vol.

5, pp. 416.3.4-

417.2.3 (na 244b-246a).

--------

Thub pa'i dgongs.ill!,rab tu gsal ba,

SKKB.

Vol.

5, pp. 1.1.1-50.1.6

(tha 1a-99a).
Tshad,!!!!!rigs pa'i gter,

SKKB.

Vol.

5, pp. 155.1.1-167.1.6 (da la-

25a.6).
--------

Tshad,!!!!! rigs pa'i gter.ill rang 'grel,

SKKB.

Vol.

5,

pp. 167.2.1-

264.2.6 (da 26a.1-220a.6).

--------

Tshig.&.!. gter, SKKB.

Vol. 5, pp. 125.3.1-131.4.5 (253a-265b).

500

--------.
Yon tan sgrogs pa'i tshul [= tshal?] la bstod.ill!.,
404.3.3-404.4.6 (na 220b.3-221a.6).
--------

Zung

gsal bali sa bead,

SKKB.

Vol.

SKKB.

Vol. 5, pp.

5, pp. 393.3.1-394.4.2

(~

198a.I-200b.2).
Sba Gsal-snang.
Sde-gzhung

Sba bzhed.

Beijing, Mi-rigs-dpe-skrun-khang, 1982.

sprul-sku Kun-dga'-bstan-pa'i-nyi-ma.

Bod ljongs mdo khams

skyur gsum ill ~ tshul nyung bsdus gtam .81i sa bon.

manuscript in the author's own hand. 54 pp.
Sgra-tshad-pa
ba'i

rnam

rgyan mkhas pa' i

Delhi, 1971.

thar.ill!. snyim

pa'i

New Delhi, 1971.

ill~.

--------

Rin-chen-grub,

Vol. 27 (sha) , pp. 1-84 (la-42a).

Chos.hi 'khor 10 bskor bali rnam gzhag i!:. ltar grub pa'i .Ii
~

byed, Collected Works.

Thimphu, Kunzang

Vol. 16, pp. 457-482.

Dam pa' i chos mngon .ill!. kun las btus pa' i rnam

Bu-ston

In: Bu-ston Rin-chen-grub, Collected Works, New

bor gnas pa' i mdzangs .ill!.

Topgey, 1975.

In:

10

Vol. 28, pp. 161-284 (sa, Yang.Dill!!!" la-62b).

Shakya-mchog-ldan.
~ ~

me!2&..

Xerographic copy of

Chos ill thams cad mkhyen .ill!. bu ston

Rin-chen-rnam-rgyal.

Collected Works.

bshad .ill!. rnal

gzhung .!:&.Y..1!. mtsho'i rlabs .hi phreng ba, Collected Works.

'byor

Vol. 14, pp.

1-340.
-------Dbu rna rnam ~ nges pa'i chos .hi bang mdzod lung dang rigs pa'i .!:.8TI!.
mtsho, Collected Works. Vol. 14, pp. 341-647; Vol. 15, pp. 1-695. This work
is
pa'i

sometimes cited by the title Theg .ill!. chen .P2. dbu rna rnam

also

bang mdzod lung rigs .!:8..Y2. mtsho.

chapter

An early printed edition of the

(Chos .hi bdag med sgrub pa'i rigs pa'i gnas la mkhas

~ ~

nges
8th
bali

le'u) is preserved in the Bihar Research Society. It is provisional catalogue

no. 272.
--------

Dbu

rna' i

Collected Works.

tshul rnam

Vol. 4, pp. 209-248.

bshad pa' i gtam ill bzhin

lhun

.PQ.,

501

________

Kha che .Pill!. chen shakya shrl' i bstod .E!!. lha' i roga d byangs,

--------

Collected

Vol. 16, pp. 556.3-557.6.

Works.
--------.

Vol. 19, pp. 169-445.

Dka' 'grel rigs pa'i snang ba, Collected Works.

[Mkhas ~ dris Ian], Collected Works.

--------.

Vol. 24, pp. 113-149.

Vol. 24, pp.

Mkhas .E!!. la ~ pa'i sgo'i ~ bshad, Collected Works.

67-102.7.
--------

Rang lugs

ill ~

Vol. 19, pp.

gzhi rna' i ~ gzhag, Collected Works.

155.2-167.4.

--------

lli

btsun tharns cad mkhyen

bshes gnyen shakya

thar .!!&2..rntshar dad pa'i rol rntsho, Collected Works.

--------

,Rngog

.hE!.

tsarn du

.!".&I!!.!.

rntshan

ill ~

Vol. 16, pp. 299-377.

10 tstsha ba chen ~ bstan ~ j i 1 tar bskyangs pa' i tshul

ba .!!&2.. rntshar gtarn

ill

rol!!!2.,

Collected Works.

16,

Vol.

rndo
pp.

443-456.
Sa skya
-------Works.
--------

Sa

skya 'i

chen la

ill.

Collected Works.

btsun sku rnched

lli

Ita ba' i

Vol. 17, pp. 21-22.

bzhed

tshul,

Collected

Vol. 23, pp. 71-104.

Spring

.Yi&. bdud rtsi'i thig pa'i rnarn bshad

~ bsarn ~ 'du'i ljon

Vol. 24, pp. 320-348.

phreng, Collected Works.

--------

bstod~,

Theg.E!!. chen .PQ. d bu rna ~ m!.!:. nges pa' i

See Shakya-rnchog-ldan,

Dbu rna ~ m!.!:. nges pa' i

--------

Tshad rna rigs pa' i gter

.&Y.i dgongs .!:&E!!!., Collected Works.

Vol. 9, pp.

1-717; Vol. 10, pp. 1-588.

--------

Tshad

rna

rigs pa' i gter

rntsho, Collected Works.

Tshad

ill.

rnarn m!.!:. bshad ~ sde bdun.!!82..8.

&

rol

Vol. 19, pp. 447-749.

.!lli! ~ 'grel nges ~ brgyud pa'i gsol 'debs,

Collected Works.

Vol. 17, pp. 79-80

......
502

Tshad ma' i mdo dang bstan bcos kY.i shing rta' i srol ~ j i 1 tar ~

--------.

tshul gtarn du 1m! ba nyin .!!!Q!:. byed pa' i snang bas

ba 'i

bar byed

Shiikya-rin-chen,

~,

Collected Works.

!!!!&.

ldan mtha'

Vol. 19, pp. 1-137.

'Chad nyan la mkho ba 2 legs bshad

Rje mkhan-po IX (1710-1759).

phyin ci ma 12K pa' i gtam chos tshul ~ mtsho' i ~.!!&Q&., Collected Works.
Thimbu, 1976.

Vol. 8, pp. 303-450.

Shes-rab-rgyal-mtshan,

A-mi-pa.

Rgyal bstan

dang

brag

btsun sa skya
tu .!!!!!.Qr.

pa ' i bstan' dzin dang bcas ~ byon tshul .&y.!.. !:ill!!!!..ill!!:. thar ~ shin
bsdus .!!.&Q. mtshar ~ mtsho'i chu thig. Rikon/Zurich, 1970.
Shri-bhuti-bhadra.
Snyin

.!!1@8.

See Stag-tshang-rdzong-pa Dpal-'byor-bzang-po.

rang gzhung padma dkar po'i phreng ba [or:

gtarn padrna dkar po'i phreng ba].

Spos-khang-pa

Rin-chen-rgyal-mtshan.

lugs legs .ill!!:. bshad m!..

Stag-tshang-rdzong-pa
University

of

Darn pa'i chos la bskul bali

Literary Arts in Ladakh.

Sdom

Vol. 1, pp. 1-39.

gswn .&y.!.. rab tu dbye

Thimbu, K. Tobgyel and Mani Dorje, 1979.

gzhung

3 vols.

B.&E!. bod.Ii&. tshang chen mo.

Dpal-' byor-bzang-po.

Washington,

bali

East Asia Library.

See also

the

new

MS,

typeset

edition: Chengdu, Mi rigs dpe skrun khang, 1985.

Sum-pa mkhan-po Ye-shes-dpal-'byor.

bsam lion bzang.

Kyoto, Rinsen, 1984.

Reprint of edition by S. C. Das, Calcutta, Presidency Jail Press, 1908.

Grub rntha' thams cad kY.i khungs dang 'dod

Thu'u-bkwan Blo-bzang-chos-kyi-nyi-ma.

tshul ston m!. legs bshad shel '&y'!"me long, Collected Works.

New Delhi, 1969.

Vol. 2, pp. 5-519.

Tsarang Molla.
Tsha.l-pa

In D. P. Jackson (1984), pp. 157-170.

Kun-dga'-rdo-rje.

Pe-cin,

Deb ther dmar .QQ. mams

Mi rigs dpe skrun khang,

1981.

rdo ries mdzad pa'i hu Ian deb there

logy, 1961.

dang

RQ.

hu Ian deb

Another edition: 'Tshal m!. kun

Gangtok,

there
~

Namgyal Institute of Tibeto-

503

"Tshad ma'i 10 rgyus," ("A History of Logical

Tshul-khrims-bskal-bzang.

in Tibet" [in Tibetan]).

Sambhasa,

vol. 7 (1986), pp. 55-96.

Studies

Nagoya, Asso-

ciation of Indian and Buddhist Studies at Nagoya University.

Tsong-kha-pa Blo-bzang-grags-pa.

Byang chub lam rim che ba, Collected Works.

Delhi, Ngawang Gelek Demo, 1977.

--------.

Dbu

rgyan .&Ii zin bris .!:k. rang

22, pp. 412-445

Lam rim chen!!!.Q..

--------.

New

1a-491a).

gnang ba, Collected Works.

Vol.

See: Byang chub lam rim che ba.

rin .E.Q. che blo bzang ~ pa'i dpal.&Ii gsan

(~,

ill,

Collected Works.

pp. 233-293.

'U-yug-pa Rigs-pa' i -seng-ge.

vols.

lli

17 ff.).

-...,------.

Vol. 1

Vols. 19 and 20

Tshad ma ..!:lli!!!!. 'grel .&Ii 'grel .ill!. rigs pa' i mdzod.

Delhi, Patshang Lama Sonam Gyaltsen, 1982.

Yar-klungs-pa [Byang-chub-rgyal-mtshan?].

ill .ill

Bla ~ chos

paodita chen po' i .!:ill!.!!!..m!!:. thar .ill!. mdor bsdus.ill!.'

dpal Idan sa

Sa skya chos spyod,

skya
n. p. ,

n.d., pp. 19b-24a.

Yar-klungs-pa Grags-pa-rgyal-mtshan.
~

dpal

(Derge ed.).

bzang

ill.ill g

skya paodita kun ~!.&.Y.&

Lam 'bras

slob

bshad

Vol. 1 ~), pp. 32b.1-38b.1.

Ye-shes-rgyal-mtshan.
~

Chos

po'i.!:ill!.!!!..m!!:. thar .ill!. 'bring.E.Q.,

Bla .!lli!. dam ~ chos

rin .E.Q. che' i phreng ba,

.ill .!:81.2l .E.Q.

rin .E.Q. che' ,i rnam .m!!:. thar

Lam' bras slob bshad (Derge ed.).

Vol.

1 (ka),

pp. 145b.1-169b.5.
Zhang Rgyal-ba-dpal,
~ thar~,

Gung-thang-gi-btsun-pa.

Sa sky a pa'i bka' 'bum.

Dpal g

skya paodita chen po'i .!:ill!.!!!.

Tokyo, Toyo Bunko, 1968.

Vol. 5, pp.

433.2.1-438.4.6 (na 279a-290a).

Zhu-chen Tshul-khrims-rin-chen.
~

ba

Chos sde' i ~ ~ khang bzhan 'phrul mngon .m!!:.

zhes ~ ba bskrun ~ las 'phros pa' i ~ ba kun dga' i 'dzum ~

'dzas. pa' i zla gzhon, Colected Works.

14

Vol. 7, pp. 197-303 (,2, 99a-152a).

I'

504

-------Da 'i

Chos

bali bande tshul khrims rin chen du bod Da'i skye ba

rkang 'thung ~ sdig 'dres rna' i las

.w. ~ ~ phan

tshun

du

'dzin8.

bde sdug .&i 10 'dab dus lli. !:&Y& mos ~ ~ su bsgyur ill!..
The Autobio_
graphy of Tshul-khrims-rin-chen of Sde-dge [sic] and Other of His Selected

l@

Writings, pp. 278-638.

--------.
~

Dpal

ldan

bla

Delhi, N. Lungtok and N. Gyaltsan, 1971.

~

dam ill!. ~ las dam pa' i chos thos pa' i .vi ~ .QQ!l

gdengs .!!!!. rol Da'i chu gter.

[Zhu-chen Tshul-khrims-rin-chen].

Dpal

Dehra Dun, D. Gyaltsan, 1970.

~

skya 'i

btsun .82!!8.

2 vols.

lnga 'i

rab rin.Q. che' i l@ ill ~ 'phar 'byed Da' i dkar chag 'phrul ill Ide .!!!!&.,
Sa skya pa'i bka' 'bum.
Tokyo, Tayo Bunko, 1969.
Vol. 7, pp. 310.3.1-

343.1.6.

[Falsely ascribed to Bkra-shis-lhun-grub.]

jiiP

#1
i

S3XION3ddV

Appendix A

','I

The Writings of Sa-paQ

Listed in Ngor-ehen' s Thob .r!&.

Ngor-ehen Kun-dga'-bzang-po,

mtsho

Thob.r!&..!:8!!! mtsho, Ngor ehen bka' 'bum, SKKB, vol.

9, p. 62.1.1-62.3.4 (ka 124b.I-125b.4).

ka pa 1a/
(1) Legs bshad
(2) Ro1 mo'i bstan beos
(3) B10 gsa1 zhing don du gnyer ba'i skye bo rnams 1a ji Itar dri

ba'i

tshu1

beu'i sangs rgyas dang byang ehub sems dpa' rnams la zhu ba'i

phrin

rtsom 'phro 1a bzhag pa

(4) Mkhas pa 'jug pa'i sgo
(5) Sgra 1a 'jug pa zhes bya ba'i rnam par bshad pa
(6) Smra sgo'i gnad kyi gnas bsdus pa
(7)

Byis

pa bde b1ag tu 'jug pa'i rnam bshad byis pa

la phan pa

(8) Yi ge'i sbyor ba

(9) Sgra nye bar bsdu ba'i tshigs su bead pa
(10) Tshig gi gter

(11)
(12)
(13)
(14)

Sdeb sbyor sna tshogs kyi me tog gi ehun po

Bde bar gshegs pa'i thugs rje la bsku1 ba
Rje btsun ehen po'i rnam thar thun mong du grags pa
Nga brgyad ma rtsa 'gre1

kha pa 1a/

(15) Rigs gter rtsa [ba]

(16) [Rigs gter] 'gre1 [pa]
(17) Rje btsun ehen po la bstod pa

ga pa 1a/
(18) Dbu ma lugs kyi sems bskyed kyi eha ga
,

I,

(19) de'i Lung sbyor

(20) Thub pa'i dgongs pa gsa1 ba zhes bya ba'i bstan beas

(21) Sdom pa gsum gyi rab tu dbye ba

(22)

Phyogs
yig

II'!

I,
I

(23) Skyes bu dam pa rnams 1a 'phrin du spring ba'i phrin yig

,;:'
J

; 'I,

,I

"

,I
I

508

(24) Lung rigs rnam dag dang mthun par 'ehad dgos tshu1 gyi tshigs su bead pa
(25) Rtogs 1dan geig gis dris pa'i Ian
(26) Zhang 10 tstsha ba 1a gdams pa'i tshigs su bead pa beu gsum pa
(27) Bstan pa 1a dga' bali 1ha rnams 1a springs yig
(28) Yang tshigs su bead pa thor bu pa gong log gnyis
(29) Mi

nyag

gi

rgya1 khams dpa1 bde ba ehen po 1hun gyis grub pa'i

gtsug

lag
[125a] khang ehen por gnyug mar bzhugs pa'i mkhan slob dge 'dun rnams 1a phul
bali yi ge

(30) Nyi ma 1a springs pa

nga pa 1a/
(31) Lam zab mo b1a mali rna1 'byor
(32) Sgrub pa'i lung sbyin
(33) Yang gcig
(34) Rten 'breI 1nga'i yi ge
(35) Lam sbas bshad kyi 'gre1 pa
(36)

A~~a'i

bzhi bshad snying po don gsa1

(37) Tshogs kyi 'khor 10'i eho ga

(38) De 1a dgos pa'i rdo rje gur gyi lung sbyor
(39) Rdo rje rnam 'jom kyi rgyud kyi bshad pa bdud rtsi spe1 ba zhes bya ba
(40) A ra pa tsa na dang
(41) Rje btsun rna sgroI mali sgrub thabs bsdus pa
(42) Gza' yum gyi mehod ehog
(43) Dri rna med pa'i rgyan gyi 'gre1 pa
(44) B1a rna 1a thun mong rna yin pa'i sgo nas gsol ba gdab pa'i tshu1
(45) B1a rna dam pa 1a gsol ba gdab pa'i rab tu byed pa
(46) Bde mehog gi b1a rna brgyud pa 1a gsol ba gdab pa
(47) Mthu stobs dbang phyug 1a gsol ba gdab pa
(48) Bod yu1 1a bsngags pa
(49) Shakya'i rgya1 po 1a gsol ba gdab pa'i tshigs su bead pa beo 1nga pa
(50) Bde bar gshegs pa khams gsum gyi mgon po 1a gsol ba 'debs pa'i tshigs su bead
pa dgu pa
(51) 'Jig rten dbang phyug 1a gsol ba 'debs pa'i tshigs su bead pa beu gcig pa
(52) Lha sa'i bde bar gshegs pa thams ead 1a rab tu bsngags pa
(53) Rje btsun ehen pos mdzad pa'i 'jam dbyangs kyi bstod pa'i rnam bshad

yi

ge

nyung ngu zhes bya ba

(54) Bsam yas su 'phags pa 'jam dpal gyi phyag mtshan ri mor bris pa'i yi ge
(55) Mu

stegs

kyi ston pa 'phrog byed dga' bo 1a sogs [125b] pa drug

tshe sbyar bali tshigs su bead pa

btu1

bali

509

(56) Pa gor zhes bya ba'i sgra las drangs pa'i bstod pa
(57) Rta nag ri khud kyi rnga bo ehe la bstod pa
(58) Gdong bzhi pa la bstod pa
(59) Theg pa ehen po'i lam gyi rnam gzhag mdor bsdus pa
(60) Snang ba mtha' yas kyi bsgom don mdor bsdus
(61) Spyod pa rnam par dag pa'i ehos tshigs su bead pa beu gnyis pa
(62)

Sems

kyi gnas lugs rnal du mtshon par byed pa'i man ngag tshigs su bead

brgyad pa
(63) 'Chi kha'i gdams ngag ngo mtshar ean
(64) Chag lo'i dris Ian
(65) Glo bo 10 tstsha ba la springs yig
(66) Dge ba'i bshes gnyen sgrub pa rtse geig tu mdzad pa'i dris Ian
(67) Yang dris Ian mdor bsdus pa geig
(68) Snye mo sgom ehen la springs yig
(69) Phyag rgya ehen po yan lag bdun ldan gyi rtsa ba
(70) Bsngo ba'i yon bshad

pa

510

Appendix B
The

Collected Works of

Sa-pa~

as Listed in the Thob li& of the 5th Dalai Lama

Dalai bla-ma V,

Zab~,

vol. 2, pp. 126.2-134.1 (kha 63b.2-67b.l):

(1) Legs bshad rin po che'i gter (=TB 2)

(2) [Yan lag brgyad pa'i snying po] [lung ma byung]
(3) Rol mo'i sbyor ba (=TB 4)
(4)

Blo

gsal

zhing don du gnyer ba'i skyes bu dam pa roams la ji ltar dri

ba'i

tshul bstan pa (=TB 5)

(5) Mkhas pa 'jug pa'i sgo (TB 6)
(6) Sgra la 'jug pa (TB 7)
(7) Smra sgo'i gnad bsdus pa (TB 8)
(8) Byis pa bde blag tu 'jug pa'i rnam bshad byis pa la phan pa (TB 9)
(9a) Yi ge'i sbyor ba (TB 10.)
(9b)

Sgra

nye

bar bsdus pa'i tshigs bcad

(TB 13) [This and the

preceding

are

identified as a single work.]

(10) Tshig gi gter (TB 14)
(11) Sdeb sbyor sna tshogs kyi me tog chun po [sic] (TB 15)
(12)

Bcom ldan 'das mgon po 'jam dpal rdo rje la mchod par brjod pa dpal ldan blo
gros ma (TB 25)

(13) Bde bar gshegs pa'i thugs rje la bskul ba (TB 16)
(14) [Khyad par 'phags bstod kyi rgya cher bshad pal [lung ma byung]
(15)

Rje

btsun chen po grags pa'i rnam thar thun mong du grags pa

shakya

grags

kyis gsol ba btab pa la brten nas mdzad [64a] pa (TB 17)

(16) Nga brgyad ma rtsa 'grel (TB 18)
(17) Rje btsun chen po grags pa rgyal mtshan gyi bstod pa srid pa'i 'khri shing rna
(TB 26)
(18-19) Tshad ma rig pa'i gter rtsa 'grel gnyis (TB 19 and 20)
(20)

Theg

pa chen po dbu ma lugs kyi sems bskyed kyi cho ga blo gsal rnams

gsol ba btan nas bsgrigs pa (TB 21)

(21)

De'i lung sbyor serns bskyed cho ga rab gsal (TB 22)

(22) Thub pa'i dgongs pa gsal ba zhes bya ba'i bstan bcos (TB 1)
(23) Sdorn pa gsum gyi rab tu dbye ba (TB 24)

kyis

511

(24)

Phyogs bcu'i sangs rgyas dang byang chub sems dpa' rnams la zhu ba'i

'phrin

yig (TB 29)

(25) Skyes bu dam pa rnams la 'phrin 'du bsrings pa (TB 30)
(26) Lung

rig

rnam dag dang mthun par 'chad dgos tshul gzu bo'i bIos

dpyad

par

zhu'i mtha can (TB 31)

(26a) Rtogs

ldan

zhig gi dris Ian zhes gsan yig na 'dug kyang dkar chag

nas

ma

rnyed
(27)

Zhang 10 tsa ba la gdams pa (TB 34)

(28) Bstan pa la dga' ba'i lha rnams la springs pa (TB 35)

(29a) 'Gor yang smras pal cung zad dben na rgyan po du rna 'gyed ces

sogs

kyi

zhes

yod

tshigs bcad yod ri skan gyi mtha' canl (TB 36)

(29b) 'Gor

yang

smras pa

Brgya tshar nyan pas tshig tsam shes pa can

pa'i tshigs bcad rlom pa mi bya ba'i mtha' can (TB 36)
(30)

Me nyag gi rgyal khams bde chen lhun gyis grub pa'i gtsug lag khang gi gnyug
mar gnas pa'i mkhar slob dge 'dun rnams la gnang ba'i yi ge (TB 37)

(31)

Lam zab bla ma'i rnal 'byor ling chu rtser khabs

(32)

Bla ma'i rnal 'byor gu ri dza 'bum la bsrings pa nad gdon mar grags pa
42)

rna (TB 41)

(TB

['di nas phyag rgya chen po rab dbye'i bar dkar chag tu gsal ba las gsan

yig tshor mi snang]

(33) Skyu

ra'i

dbon po dpon g.yog gi don du gnang ba'i Phyi nang gsang gsum

gyi

mandaI (TB 49)

(34)

Brda don [64b] gsal ba rtsa 'grel rdo rje 'dzin thob shog gi mtha' can

(35) Phyag rgya chen po rab tu dbye ba

(36) Mnal lam du byung ba'i tshig bcad [dang bcas pal
(37)

Rten

(TB 103)

'breI lngas lam yongs su rdzogs par gsungs pa'i dgongs pa

phyogs tsam

bstanpa (TB 45)

(38) Sa bdun pa yan chad 'khor bzhi'i rgya zhes pa'i dgongs pa ston pa
(39) Lam bsdus te sgrub pa'i lung sbyin pa (TB 43-44?)
(40) Lam

sbas bshad zin bris la mi mthun pa 'ga' zhig 'dug par brten mdo smad

du

mdzad pa (TB 46)

(41) A~~a'i rnam par gzhag pa snying po don gsal (TB 50)
(42) Brtag pa gnyis kyi bdag nyid can gyi rgyud kyi rgyal po'i bsdus don (TB 112)
(43)

Rje

btsun

chen po grags pas mdzad pa'i bdag med ma'i bstod pa dri

rna

med

pa'i rgyan zhes bya ba'i rgya cher 'grel pa TB 65)

(44)

Rigs

kyi rab tu dbye ba'i bshad sbyar 'gor sangs rgyas thams cad gcig bsdus

pa zhes yod pa (TB 62)

(45)

Tshogs kyi 'khor lo'i cho ga rtsod spong rna (TB 51) [mdzad byang na ling chu
rtse khab tu mdzad zer ba dang med pa sna tshogs 'dug]

~.

'.

0:
I

512

(46) De 1a dgos pa'i lung sbyor 'gor 'phags pa mkha' 'gro rna rdo rje gur gyi rgyud
las zhes gsung ngo'i mtha' ean (TB 52)
(47) Rdo rje rnam 'joms rgyud kyi bshad pa bdud rtsi spe1 ba (TB 53)
(48) 'Phags pa 'jam dpa1 a ra pa tsa na'i sgrub thabs kyi gsa1 byed (TB 55)
(49) Rje btsun sgroI rna 1jang gu'i sgrub thabs (TB 56) .
(50) Gza' rnams kyi yum gyi mehod pa'i man ngag gi rim pa (TB 60)
(51) Slob

dpon

sgra gean 'dzin gyis mdzad pa'i zung 'jug gsa1 bali sa gead

bdag

nyid ehen po grags pa dpa1 bzang gi ngor mdzad pa (TB 66)

(52) Rdo rje theg pa'i rtsa 1tung beu bzhi'i bshad [65a] pa nyung ngur byas pa (TB
64)
(53) B1a rna dam pa 1a thun mong rna yin pa'i sgo nas gsol ba 'debs pa (TB 68)
(54) B1a

rna 1a gsol ba gdab pa'i rab tu byed pa sku'i spyod par grags pa (TB

[gsan yig mtshor thun mong rna yin pa zhes 'dug pa'i

67)

'di thun mong ba yin nam

snyam]
(55) Bde

mehog b1a rna brgyud pa'i gsol 'debs mdo khams kyi sa eha 'bri

k1ung

gi

yu1 nas bsku1 ba 1a brten nas mdzad pa (TB 28)

(56) Birwa pa'i bstod pa dang ehu rna (TB 27)
(57) Bod kyi yu1 1a bsngags pa 1ha mehog gtsug tor rna (TB 69)
(58) Beom

1dan 'das shakya'i rgya1 po 1a gsol ba 'debs pa tshigs su bead pa

beo

lnga pa (TB 70) [gsan yig tshor bstod pa tshig 1hug geig yod zer ba rna rnyed]
(59) Bde bar gshegs pa khams gsum gyi mgon po 1a bstod pa (TB 71)
(60) 'Phags pa 'jig rten dbang phyug thugs rje ehen po 1a gsol ba gdab pa (TB 72)
(61) Lha

sa'i bde bar gshegs pa thams ead 1a rab tu bsngags pa'i tshigs bead

(TB

btsun grags pas mdzad pa'i 'jam dbyangs kyi bstod pa'i rnam bshad yi

ge

73)
(62) Rje

nyung ngu (TB 74)

(63) Bsam

yas su 'jam dbyangs kyi phyag mtshan ri mor bris pa'i yi ge zhar

byung

deli rgyu mtshan 'phags pas mdzad pa dang beas pa (TB 75) [Sdom brtson dam
pa rna zhes grags ehe zhing gang du bzhugs par byin ehe bar bshad]
(64) Mu

stegs kyi ston pa 'phrog byed dpa' [read:

dga'] bo dpon slob drug

'pham

par byas nas rab tu byung bali dus sbyar bali tshigs bead (TB 80)
(65) Yon tan sgrog pa'i 'tsha1 1a bstod pa ba gor zhes bya bali sgra las drangs pa
(TB 81)
(66) Rta nag ri khud du rnga bo ehe 1a bstod pa (TB 82)
(67) Gdong bzhi pa'i bstod pa dpa1 1dan dbang 1dan rna (TB 84)
(68) Theg pa ehen po'i lam gyi rnam gzhag mdor [65b] bsdus pa
(69) Snang ba mtha' yas kyi sgom don (TB 87)
(70) Spyod pa rnam par dag pa'i tshigs su bead pa beu gnyis pa (TB 91)

513

(71) Rang

gi

sems ngos gzung ba de kho na nyid kyi don dam pa bstan

pa'i

bstan

kha'i gdams ngag ngo mtshar can yi ge nyung ngur bkod pa (TB 88)

[gong

beos tshigs su bcad pa brgyad pa (TB 92)

(72) 'Chi

dkar ba lugs la snang ba mtha' yas kyi sgom don gyi rtsa tshig tu ngos 'dzin]
(73) Zhen

pa

bzhi bral gyi man ngag phyin ci rna log pa (TB 86) ['di dang 'og

rna

gsum po gsan yig tshor mi gsal]

(74) 'Phags

pa

'jam

dpal gyi mtshan yang dag par brjod pa 'don thabs

gsum

rim

gtsang rna dag pa ste zhes pa'i mtha' can

(75) 'Phags

pa sdud pa sogs shes rab gyi pha rol tu phyin pa gdon pa'i

man

ngag

(TB 89)
(76) Phung

po gsum pa gdon pa'i man ngag (TB 90) ['di gnyis po bsdoms

nas

mdzad

ba'i bshes gnyen sgrub pa rtse gcig tu mdzad pa bka' gdams pa nam

mkha'

byang 'dug]
(77) Chag 10 chos rje dpal ba'i dri ba bco lnga pa'i (TB 93)
(78)

Ian sdom dang bcas pa (TB 94)

(79) Glo bo 10 tsa ba shes rab rin chen la springs pa (TB 95)
(80) Dge

'bum gyi dri las (TB 96)

(81) 'gor

so so thar pa 'dul ba bzhin zhes yod pa'i Bka' gdams do skor

ba'i

dri

Ian (TB 79) [gsan yig tshor dri Ian bsdus pa zer ba las gsal kha mi 'dug]
(82) Snye mo sgom chen gyi zhu Ian rin cen 'phreng ba (TB 98)
(83)

'gor

chos

kun nye bar zhi ba can yod pa'i Phyag rgya chen po yan lag

bdun

ldan gyi rtsa ba go bde bar sbyar ba (TB 113)

(84) Gangs

can khrod kyi sgom chen rnams la gdams pa kha bcig ces pa'i tshigs

su

bcad pa (TB 76)

(85) Bsngo ba yon bshad dang bcas pa rang gi slob mas gsol ba btab pa'i ngor tshig
gi sdeb sbyor spangs nas sbyar ba rnams [66a] (TB 100)

L
I

514

Appendix C

I
I

Index to One Volume of an Old Manuscript

of Sa-pa9's Works

Title of index:
(originally,

Dkar chag bzhugs

~.

Margin notations:

was written in red ink at margin).

p. la: them; p. 2a:

Location:

library of Taruk

Trulku, Bodhnath.

swastil
ji snyed lta'i don kun ji bzhin legs gzigs kyangll

o~

ji srid srid pa gnas pa de srid phrin las kyill

cho

'phrul rnam par 'phrul mdzad rdzu 'phrul zhabs

brtan pall

skyabs med 'gro ba'i skyabs gyur skyabs mchog de la 'dudll

dpal

ldan sa skya pa9gi ta'i gsung rabl

[erasure] po ti 'di'i nang na bzhugs

lal
(1) Bla ma'i rnal 'byor
(2) Yang bla ma'i rnal 'byor cig
(3) Bsgrub pa lung sbyin
(4) Lam bsdus te bsgrub pa'i lung sbyin pa
(5) Rten 'breI 1ngas lam yongs rdzogs
(6) Lus kyi rten 'breI
(7) 'Khor bzhi'i rgya
(8) Rigs kyi rab tu dbye ba'i bshad sbyar
(9) Rtsa ba'i sngags kyi bshad pa snying po'i don gsal
(10) Tshogs kyi 'khor 10
(11) Lha mo bco lnga'i bstod pa
(12) Bdag rned rna'i [b]stod 'grel
(13) G1eng gzhi'i sgra bshad
(14) Zung 'jug gsa1 ba'i sa gcod
(15) Thun mong rna yin pa'i gsol 'debs
(16) Sku'i spyod pa rnam dag rna
(17) Rje btsun grags pa rgya1 mtshan 1a bstod pa
(18) Bde mchog brgyud pa'i gsol 'debs
(19) Bde bar gshegs pa sras dang beas pa 1a bstod pa
(20) 'Phags pa spyan ras gzigs 1a gsol ba gdab pa [2a]
(21) Lha sa 1a rab tu bsngags pa

pa

515

(22) 'Jam pa'i rdo rje 1a bstod pa

(23) 'Jam dbyangs kyi phyag mtshan ri mo'i bstod tshig
(24) 'Jam dbyangs 1a bstod pa'i rnam bshad yi ge nyung ngu
(25) Shakya'i rgya1 po dang 'jam dbyangs 1a gsol ba

gdab pa

(26) 'Bir ba pa 1a gsol ba gdab pa

(27) Mu stegs pham mdzad
(28) Yon tan sgrogs pa'i tshu1 1a bstod pa
(29) Gdong bzhi pa'i bstod pa
(30) Spyod pa rnam par dag ma
(31) Rang gi sems ngos gzung ba
(32) Zhen pa bzhi bra1
(33) Gus pas gsol ba 'debs pa'i ngor sbyar ba [sic]
(34) Theg pa chen po'i so'i [=sa'i] lam gyi rnam bzhag mdor bsdus
(35) 'Chi kha ma'i gdam ngag
(36) Snang ba mtha' yas kyi sgom don
(37) Phyogs bcu'i sangs rgyas dang byang chub sems dpa' rnams 1a spring ba
(38) Mkhas pa 1a spring ba
(39) Skyes bu dam pa rnams 1a spring ba
(40) Bstan pa 1a dga' ba'i 1ha rnams 1a spring ba
(41) Me nyag bde chen du spring ba
(42) Tshigs bcad tho[r] bu ba
(43) Nyi ma 1a spring ba
(44) Chag 10 tsha ba'i zhus Ian
(45) B10 bo 10 tsa ba'i zhus Ian
(46) Do kor ba'i zhus Ian
(47) Snyi mo sgom chen gyi zhus Ian
(48) [added in a different hand:] Bka' gdams nam mkha' 'bum gyi [sic]
(49) Jog po pa'i zhus Ian
(50) Zhang 10 tsha [2b] ba 1a gdams pa
(51) Bsngo ba yon bshad
de 1tar na dpe sna 1nga bcu nga gcig bzhugs//

IIIIi

516

Appendix D
Fragments of a Golden Manuscript of

Sa-pa~Is

Works

from La Mustang (Glo-bo Smon-thang)

These texts were filmed on June 7,

1983, by the Nepal-German Manuscript Preserva-

tion Project (Running numbers D-1784-1794, reel numbers D 110/18-D 111/2).

(1) Rol mali bstan bcos (TB 4).
(2) Mkhas

~-'.J.&.

pa'i

(TB 6).

(3) Sgra la

-'.J.&. ~

(4) Thub

dgongs gsal (TB 1).

Vol. ma, fols. 36-45. Size

(TB 7). Vol.

Vol. ma, fols. 46-140.

8.7 x 36 cm.
Size 8.7 x 35.9 cm.

fols. 141-154.

~,

Vol.

tsha,

fols.

42-209.

Size 8.6 x 35.9 cm.

Fols. 87 and 88 are one folio, marked with both numbers in the margin.
98 and 99 are actually two folios each.

Fols.

(5) Glo bo 10 tsa ba shes rab rin chen la spring.I!&. (TB 95). Vol. dza, fols 266269b. In D the title is given as: Glo bo 10 tsa bali zhus Ian.
(6) Zhang 10 tsa ba la spring .I!&. (TB 34).
title is: Zhang 10 tsa ba la gdams

Vol.

dza, fols. 269b-271a.

In D the

~.

(7) Bka ' gdams do bskor bali zhus Ian.

Vol. dza, fols. 271a-275a. This is not
the same as the work bearing this title in D.
It is instead TB 96 (Bka '
gdams 'nam mkha I I bum i l l zhus Ian).

(8) Thos bsam sgom gsum i l l bris [sic] Ian.

Vol.

dza, fols. 275a-278a.

This is

the Bka ' gdams do kor bali zhus Ian of D (TB 79).
(9) Snye mo sgom chen i l l bris [sic] Ian (TB 98). Vol. dza, fols. 278a-283a.
(10) Blo

gsal zhing don du

Vol.

dza,

fols.

ba Ii skyes bu

283a-284b.

In

(TB

5).

D the title appears as Dri bali tshul

ill. bris [sic] Ian

zhig.
(11) Rta

285b.

ri khud'ill. rnga bo che la bstod

The title in D is: Rnga I i bstod

(12) Mu stegs ill. stan

dza, fols. 285b-286b.

(TB 82).

Vol.

sgra las drangs

drug tshar gcad dus sbyar ba Ii snyan

dza, fols. 284b-

~.

In D the title is: Mu stegs ill. stan

(TB 80).

Vol.

drug btul bali

tshigs bead.
(13) Ba .&QE. zhes bya'i sgra la[s] grangs [sic] pa'i
286b-287a.
bstod ~.
(14) Chos ~

bstod~.

Vol.

In D this work (TB 81) is entitled Yon tan sgrogs

beu~.

dza,

fols.

tshul

la

Vol. dza, fols. 288a-289a.

Vol. dza, fol. 289a.

the one title Tshigs su bcad

In D these verses (TB 36) are given

.&.2!!.& ~ gnyis.

517

(16) Yum
Three

other

'bring sdus gsum .&.Yi don.

Vol. dza, fols. 289b-290a.

fragments of the same Glo-bo manuscript survive in the

Tayo Bunko,

Tokyo (MS vol. no. 42):

(17) Bstan bcos mkhas pa'i kha rgyan (incomplete) (TB no.
263a-266a.

109).

Vol.

ma,

fols

(missing one folio?)

(18) Sdom"p!! gsum .&.Yi rab tu dbye ba (TB no.

24).

Vol.

tsha,

(missing one folio at the end?)

(19) Bsngo ba .Y..Q!!. bshad dang bcas"p!! (TB no. 100).

Vol.

dza,

fols. 210b-278b.
fols.

314a-323b.

(missing one or more folios at end.)

The last was probably the final work in this manuscript set of Sa-pag's writings.
(20) Tshad ma rigs pa'i gter [gyi 'grel pa] (TB no. 20).

A 301-page manuscript of

this work, forming vol. tsa of this set, is preserved in the library of H. H.
the

Sakya Trizin.

recently

been

A negative reproduction (black ink on white

brought out by the Sakya Centre (Dehra Dun:

paper)

has

1985) under

the

title: Tshad ma rigs gter rtsa ba dang rang 'grel.

Thus

well over half of this four-volume set (consisting of vols.

ma to

dza)

is

known to survive--scattered in Nepal, India and Japan--including most of his major

works.

Rearranged in their original order, they are:

ff. 36-154 = nos. (1) to (3)
ff. 263-266 = no. (17)

vol.

~,

vol.

= no. (20)
~, ff. 42-278 = nos. (4)
dza, ff. 266-290 = nos. (5)
ff. 314-323 = no. (19)

vol.
vol.

~,

ff. 1-301

and (18)
to (16)

---"""'IIi

,
I

518

Appendix E
The Works of Sa-paQ Listed by Rin-spungs-pa
in His Biography of Sa-paQ

Rin-spungs-pa Ngag-dbang-'jigs-med-grags-pa,

'Jam pa'i dbyangs dngos,

112b:
(1) Bzo rig bstan beos
(2) Rtsis kyi gtsug lag

.si

bstan beos

(3) Yan lag brgyad (pa'i) bsdus don

(4) Mkhas pa 'jug pa'i sgo
(5) Sgra shes rab 1a 'jug pa (=Shes rab 'phro ba?)
(6) Sgra 1a 'jug pa'i

bshad

(7) Sgra nye bar bsdus pa'i tshigs bead

(8) Yi ge'i sbyor ba
(9) Byis pa bde b1ag tu 'jug

pa~~

(10) Smra sgo mtshon eha'i gnad du bsdus pa

(11) Snyan ngag mkhas pa'i kha rgyan
(12) Sdeb sbyor sna tshogs me tog gi ehun po
(13) Tshig gi gter
(14) Ro1 mo'i bstan beos
(15) Rigs pa'i gter
(16) de'i Rang 'gre1
(17) Sdom pa gsum rab tu dbye ba
(18) B1a rna dam pa 1a thun mong min pa'i gsol 'debs (2)
(19) Grags pa rgya1 mtshan (gyi) rnam thar
(20) Mthu stabs dbang phyug bi ru pa 1a gsol ba gdab
(21) 'Khor 10 sdom pa'i rtsa brgyud b1a rna rna gsol ba gdab
(22) Bde mehog 1ha 1nga sgrub pa'i thabs
(23) B1a ma'i rna1 'byor
(24) (B1a ma'i rna 1 'byor) go shri 'bum rna
(25) Phyi nang gsang ba'i mandaI 'bu1 tshu1 bshad pa
(26) Bde bar gshegs pa 1a bstod tshig
(27) Bde bar gshegs pa'i thugs rje nye bar bsku1 ba
(28) Lha sa'i rgya1 bar bsngags pa
(29) 'Jig rten dbang phyug 1a gsol ba btab
(30) 'Jam pa'i dbyangs rkyang pa mehod par brjod pa'i bstod pa (2)

pp.

109b-

519

(31) 'Jam pa'i dbangs gtso 'khor lnga la mehod par brjod pa'i bstod pa
(32) A ra pa tsa na'i mngon rtogs
(33) 'Jam dpal lha lnga'i bskyed rim mngon rtogs
(34) 'Jam dpal mtshan brjod 'don pa'i thabs
(35) Rta nag ri bo'i khud du rnga bo ehe la bstod pa
(36) Rgyal po 10 pan rnams la bstod pa (=Phyag mtshan ri mo?)
(37) Gdong bzhi pa la bstod pa
(38) Phyag rgya chen por dbye ba
(39) Phyag rgya chen po bdun ldan gyi rtsa ba
(40) Sgrub pa lung 'byin
(41) Rten 'breI lam rdzogs pa
(42a) Rdo rje Ius kyi 'khrul 'khor dang (42b) Brda don gsal
(43) Rigs kyi dbye ba de bshad sbyar ye shes bsre pa'i bshad pa
(44) Brtag gnyis kyi bsdus don
(45) A~ra'i gzhi'i bshad pa
(46) Lam sbas bshad
(47) Tho yig rin chen sgron rna dang
(48) Gsung ngag zin par bris yig mdor bstan zung ste gnyis
(49) Khrid kyi lung sbyor
(50) Khrid kyi dkar ehag
(51) Rtsa ba dang yan lag gi dam tshig rnam par bshad pa
(52) Zung 'jug gsal ba'i bsdus don
(53) Tshul bzhi'i bsdus pa'i don
(54) Bdag med bstod 'grel dri rna med pa'i rgyan
(55) Tshogs kyi 'khor 10
(56) Thod pa brtag pa'i thabs
(57) Rgyud sde spyi yi man ngag gees pa bsdus pa
(58) Khro bo sme ba brtsegs pa sgrub pa'i thabs
(59) Rdo rje rnam 'jom bir lugs kyi mngon par rtogs pa
(60) Spyod pa rnam dag
(61) Rang sems ngos gzung ba
(62) Theg pa chen po'i rnam gzhag
(63) Sems bskyed eho ga
(64) de nyid Lung dang sbyar ba
(65) Gza' yum mehod ehog
(66) Gzhung lugs legs par bshad pa
(67) Sher phyin mdo sdud pa 'don pa'i man ngag
(68) Phung po gsum pa 'don pa'i thabs
(69) Gzhan las khyad par du 'phags par bstod pa'i rgya eher rol pa'i kha bskong

15

!'

4!lj
520

(70) Sher phyin rgyas 'bring bsdus gsum nyams su len thabs
(71) Chos spyod beu pa
(72) Smras pa rnam pa gnyis
(73) Dam pa'i ehos la 'jug tshul go bder sbyar
(74) Zhen pa bzhi bral
(75) 'Da' kha'i gdams ngag
(76) Dri rna med pa'i rgyan gyi rgya eher 'grel pa
(77) Rnam bshad bdud rtsi spel ba (Rnam 'jom)
(78) Dug sel ba'i thabs
(79) Thub pa'i dgongs gsal
(80) Phyogs beu'i sangs rgyas la zhu ba'i 'phrin
(81) Bstan pa la dga' ba'i lha rnams la spring yig
(82) Skyes bu dam pa spyi la spring yig
(83) 'Bri khung , jig rten gyi mgon po la spring yig
(84) Spyan snga grags 'byung bar bstod pa spring yig dang beas
(85) Glo bo 10 tsa ba (la spring yig)
(86) Chag lo'i dris Ian
(87) Gur ston gyi dris Ian
(88) Zhang 10 tsa ba'i dris Ian
(89) Do gor ba'i dris Ian
(90) Snye mo sgom ehen gyi dris Ian
(91) Nam mkha' 'bum gyi dris Ian
(92) Rtogs ldan rgyan (po'i) dris Ian
(93) Blo gros rab gsal gyi dris Ian
(94) Mu stegs ston pa drug btul skabs tshigs su bead pa
(95) Ba gor zhes pa'i sgra las drangs pa'i bstod pa
(96) Bsam yas kyi gtsug lag khang la bsngags pa
(97) Phyag mtshan ri mor bris pa'i tshul
(98) Chos gsungs pa'i tshul
(99) Lugs kyi bstan beos legs par bshad pa

(100) Skyes bu'i rnam 'byed gzhon nu'i mgul rgyan

(101) Legs bshad nyi ma'i snying po
(102) Bsngo ba'i yon bshad

521

Appendix F
The Works of Sa-paQ Listed by A-rnes-zhabs in His
Sa skya

.8.!!!!!:!&. rabs ehen rno

A-rnes-zhabs, 'Dzarn gling (Derge ed., pp. 60a-61a):

(1) (Sgra) Shes rab 'phro ba
(2) Sgra 1a 'jug pa
(3) Srnra sgo'i bsdus don
(4) Byis pa bde 'jug gi 'gre1 pa
(5) Yi ge'i sbyor ba
(6) Sgra nye bar bsdus pa
(7) Tshad rna rigs pa'i gter rtsa ba
(8) (Rigs gter rang) 'gre1
(9) Mkhas pa'i kha rgyan
(10) Bde bar gshegs pa'i thugs rje 1a bsku1 ba
(11) Sdeb sbyor me tog gi ehun po
(12) Tshig gi gter
(13) Rab dga'i 'jug pa
(14) Ro1 mo'i bstan beos
(15) Sku gzugs kyi bstan beos
(16) Sa brtag pa'i rab 'byed
(17) Yan lag brgyad pa'i don bsdus
(18) Sangs rgyas kyi bstod pa
(19) Thub pa'i bstod pa
(20) Spyan ras gzigs kyi bstod pa (2)
(21) 'Jam dbyangs kyi phyag mtshan gyi ri mo 1a bstod pa
(22) Bsam yas 1hun gyis grub pa'i gnas ehen 1a bstod pa
(23) 'Jam dbyangs kyi bstod pa'i rnam bshad
(24) Grub mtha'i rnam 'byed
(25) Thub pa dgongs gsa1
(26) Sdorn gsum rab dbye
(27) Sems bskyed ehen mo
(28) (de'i) Lung sbyor
(29) Chos nyams su b1ang ba'i rim pa
(30) Chos spyod beu pa
(31) Zhen ba bzhi bra1

522

(32) Theg pa chen po'i lam gyi rnam gzhag mdor bsdus pa
(33) Bsngo bali yon bshad
(34) Mkhas pa 'jug pa'i sgo
(35) Gzhung lugs legs dpyad
(36) Legs bshad
(37) 'Phrog byed dga' bo pham par byas pa'i tshigs bead
(38) Ba gor zhes bya bali sgra las drangs pa'i tshigs bead
(39) Blo gsal bali skyes bu rnams la ji ltar dri bali tshigs bead
(40) Nga brgyad ma rtsa 'grel

(41) Phyogs beu'i sangs rgyas dang byang chub sems dpa' 1a zhu bali 'phrin yig
(42) Skyes bu dam pa rnams 1a springs yig
(43) Bstan pa la dga' bali 1ha rnams la springs yig
(44) Shing kun na bzhugs pa'i dge 'dun rnams 1a springs yig
(45) Nyi ma 1a springs yig
(46) Glo bo 10 tsa ba la springs yig
(47) Zhang 10 tsa ba la gdams pa
(48) 'Od jo bali dge bshes la springs yig
(49) Snye mo sgom chen 1a springs yig
(50) Do gor bali zhus Ian
(51) Chag 10 tsa bali zhus Ian
(52) 'Jam dpa1 gyi sgrub thabs kyi gsa1 byed
(53) SgroI mali sgrub thabs
(54) Gza' yum gyi mehod pa'i eho ga
(55) Gza' yum gyi sgrub thabs
(56) Zung 'jug gsal bali dkyil 'khor gyi eho ga
(57) Snang ba mtha' yas kyi bsgom don
(58) 'Chi kha mali gdams ngag
(59) B1a mali bstod pa (2)
(60) Rnal 'byor dbang phyug gi bstod pa

(61) Bde mehog brgyud pa'i bstod pa

(62) B1a mali rna1 'byor chen mo
(63) Phyi nang gsang gsum gyi mandaI
(64) Lam 'bras kyi khrid kyi dkar ehag
(65) Sgrub pa lung sbyin
(66) Rten 'breI lngas lam yongs su rdzogs pa
(67) Lam sbas bshad rtsa ba yan lag dang beas pa
(68) Grub chen beu phra InO brgyad dang beas pa
(69)

A~ta'i

gzhi bshad

(70) Tshogs kyi 'khor loti yi ge

523

(71) Bdag med ma'i bstod pa'i 'gre1 pa

(72) Rigs drug gi mtshan don dang ye shes bsre ba'i bshad pa
(73) Bde mchog 1han skyes kyi by in br1abs
(74) Rnam 'joms bir lugs kyi bshad pa
(75) Sampu~a 1a mchan
(76) Rdo rje rnam 'jom gyi rgyud 1a mchan
(77) Sdom gsum rab dbye 1a mchan

.......

we;
524

Appendix G
The Works of Sa-paQ Listed or Quoted
in His Biographies by Lho-pa Kun-mkhyen and Zhang Rgya1-ba-dpa1

1.

Lho-pa

kun-mkhyen

Rin-ehen-dpa1,

Dpa1 1dan (Lam 'bras slob bshad ka

55b.5-

56a.5).
A. Works eited by Lho-pa

I:

(1) sgra'i bstan beos Mkhas pa rnams 'jug pa'i sgo zhes bya ba ehen po dang/
(2) pha1 ehe ba 1a mkho ba Shes rab 'phro ba
(3) de bas kyang rtogs sla ba Sgra 1a 'jug pa
(4) Rigs pa'i gter
(5) Grub mtha'i rnam 'byed
(6) Sdeb sbyor sna tshogs me tog gi ehun po
(7) Snyan ngag gi bstan beos Mkhas pa'i kha rgyan
(S) Bde bar gshegs pa'i thugs rje la bskul ba
(9) zlos gar gyi bstan beos Rab dga' la 'jug pa
(10) Rol mo'i bstan beos
(11) Tshig gi gter
(12) Sku gzugs kyi bstan beos
(13) Sa brtag pa'i rab tu byed pa
(14) Yan lag brgyad pa'i don bsdus
(15) Commentaries on other works (rtsa ba gzhan gyi don gsa1 bar mdzad pa)
(16) Praises (bstod pa'i tshogs)
(17) Biography of Grags-pa-rgyal-mtshan (p. 41a.l)

B. Works Quoted by Lho-pa

(1)

p.

41b.5:

Rje

btsun rin po ehe grags pa rgyal mtshan gyi bstod pa (TB

no.

26), p . .322.1.4.
(2)

p.

53b.5:

Mu stegs kyi ston pa drug btul bali tshigs bead (TB no.

SO),

404.2.3.
(3) p. 54a .5: Rol mo'i bstan beos (TB no. 4), p. 7S.4.1.
(4) p. 55a.6: Sdeb sbyor sna tshogs me tog gi ehun po (TB no. 15), p. 141.1.5.

p.

525

II.

Sa-pa~'s

Works Cited or Quoted in Zhang Rgyal-ba-dpal's Biography of Sa-pa~,

Dpa1 sa.
A. Works Cited by Zhang

(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)

Legs par bshad pa'i gter (pp. 434.2.3, 438.1.1)

[Zlos gar gyi] bstan beos (p. 434.2.4)
Bde bar gshegs pa'i bstod pa (p. 438.1.1)
Thugs rje 1a bskul ba (p. 438.1.1)

B. Works quoted by Zhang:

(1)
(2)

p. 435.1 . 1: Sdeb sbyor sna tshogs me tog gi ehun po, p. 141.1.5.

p. 435.1.1: Nga brgyad ma'i 'grel pa, p. 148.3.3 (=Lha sa'i bde bar gshegs pa
rnams 1a bstod pa, p. 397.3.5)

(3)
(4)

.I.

p. 435.1.1: Phyag mtshan ri mo'i bstod tshig, p. 400.3.3.

p. 435.1.2: RTRG, p. 264.1.4

1
\

526

Appendix H
Works on the Lam 'bras Attributed to Sa-paQ
Which are Listed in the Gsan yig of the Fifth Dalai Lama

Dalai bla-ma V, Zab

(vol. 1, pp. 457.1-458.5 [ka 229a-b]):

bzhi pa sa paQ gyis mdzad pa la/ 'khrid/ bshad pa/ lam zab/ bir bsrung dang bzhi/
[I] dang po la/
(1) lam 'bras bu dang beas pa'i 'khrid kyi dkar ehag/ 'di gsung yin min la rtsod
pa byung na'ang bka' bsgrub bstan pa'i skabs bsgrubs zin zhes pa dkar ehag tu
'dug go/
(2)

lam

sbas [na] [pod dmar na'ang yod] bshad/

'di la 'dra min 'ga' zhig

byung

de'i

yan lag rnal 'byor dbang phyug gi zhal gyi gdams pa thun mong gi

dngos

grub

chen

med/

lte

bsgyur/

rlung gi beud len/

nor sgrub/

skye ba

brtag pa dang/

bar brten/
bdag

ji skad du/

ni gsang

yi ger byed

sngags

la

eung

zab

mo'i don//

zad skrag//

'on kyang gzhan gyis sbyar ba la//

bla ma'i gsung dang 'gal bar mthong//
des na gsung dang mthun par bkod//
ees ehed du gnyer nas mdzad pa yin no//
(3)

(4)

phra

IDO

po beu zhes pa/

tshe sgrub/

brgyad ees pa gza' bsrung/

rdo rje ehu 'thung/

thig Ie

'dzag

'chi blu/ dbang sdud/

gdon

'grol/

bgegs bsrung/

rkyal pa kha beu/

rab rib/
lee dig/ snying rlung rnams sel ba/ drod skye ba/
brtag pa'i gdams pa rtsa 'grel/ [pod dmar na'ang yod]
(5)

rje btsun chen po dgung 10 lnga beu rtsa drug bzhes dus brtse ba
gnang ba'i brda don gsal ba'i rtsa 'grel rdo rje 'dzin thob shog
ean/

(6)

mig

rten

gi

'breI

chen
gi

pas
mtha'

[pod dmar na'ang yod]

de'i yan lag 'khrid kyi lung sbyor rgyas bsdus rnams la blta bar bya'o'i mtha
[229b] ean/

(7) lam bsdus te sgrub pa'i lung sbyin pa'i yi ge rnams [pod dmar na'ang yod]
[II] gnyis pa bshad pa la/
(8)

rtsa
yod]

sngags

kyi rnam par bshad pa snying po'i don gsal/

[pod

dmar

na'ang

527

(9)

phyag rgya chen po'i rab tu dbye bal [pod dmar na mjug tu skye ba skye ba med
pa sogs kyi shlo ka gcig thol du yod pa zhig snang/]

(10) rdo

rje'i

tshig rkang las rten 'breI lngas lam yongs su rdzogs

pa'i dgongs pa phyogs tsam bstan pal

par

gsungs

[pod dmar na'ang yod]

(11) rlung It as rten 'breI brtag pal

(12)

sa

bdun

pa yan chad 'khor bzhi'i rgya zhes pa'i dgongs pa ston

pal

[pod

dmar na'ang yod] 'gor bla ma'i zhal nas zhes pa dang dbu ma la dbang phyug gi
ming

pa ni dbu ma'i yon tan brgyad do'i mtha' can rnamsl

btags

[dkar

chag

ma'i rnal 'byor thun mong rna yin pa'i ling chu rtse khab mal [pod

dmar

nas sa

pa~

zin bris zer/]

[III] gsum pa lam zab nil

(13)

bla

na'ang yod/]
(14) bla ma'i rnal 'byor gu shri jo 'bum la bsrings pa nad 'don mar grags pal
[IV] bzhi pa bir bsrung lal
(15)

bir bsrung thun mong rna yin pa chu la brten pa'i rgyun bsrung dang mi bskyod
pa la brten nas nam dgos su bsrung bal

(16) sngags byang zhu dag mal

(17) rdo rje bsrung ba'i phyag rgyal
(18) tsakra'i bsrung bal
(19) thabs shes kyi bsrung ba ste bsrung ba gsuml
(20) ril bu bcud len sgrub pa rnamsl

41
.528

Appendix I
Outline of Glo-bo mkhan-chen's Commentary on the KhJ
Extracted from the subject headings in
Glo-bo mkhan-chen, KhJNSh

(Pagination is based on the Taya Bunko manuscript.)

[I. 'grel bshad kyi mchod brjod]

[II. 'grel bshad dngos]

A. bstan bcos rtsom pa pori yon tan brjod pa (2b.2)
1. gang du skye ba brnyes pari tshul (2b.4)
2. brnyes nas thos bsam gyis rgyud sbyangs pari tshul (4a.2)
a. rgyu dus su shes bya la bslabs pari tshul (4a.3)
b. 'bras dus su rig pari gnas lnga mkhyen pari rnam par thar pa (5a.6)
i. shes bya ji snyed pa mkhyen pari rnam thar (5b.l)
(A) sgra (6a.6)
(B) gtan tshigs (6b.2)
(C) bzo (7a.2)
(D) gso ba (8a.4)

(E) nang rig pa (8b.3)

ii. shes bya ji Ita ba mkhyen pa'i tshul (14a.3)
3. bstan pa dang sems can gyi don ji ltar mdzad pari tshul (17a.l)
a. gangs can gyi khrod 'dir bstan pari bya ba ji ltar mdzad pari tshul
i. mkhas pari bya ba gsum gyis bstan pa rgyas par mdzad pari tshul
(A) 'chad pari nyi mo'i 'ad zer gyis phan

bde'i pad tshal rgyas par

mdzad pa'i tshul (17a.4)

(B)

rtsom

pa

rin po cheri 'phreng bas mkhas pa'i yid

'phrog

par

mdzad pari tshul (20a.l)

(C)

rtsod pa rdo rje'i shags kyis Ita ngan gyi brag ri

bshig

pa'i

tshul (22a.3)
ii. phrin las sna tshogs pas gzhan gyi don mdzad pa'i tshul (24a.5)
b.

byang phyogs hor gyi yul du bstan pa'i bya ba ji Itar mdzad pa'i tshul
(29a.3)

B. des mdzad pari bstan beos nyid bshad pa (44a.4)

1. klad kyi don
a. mtshan SOlOS nas mchod par brjod pa (44a.5)
i. dngos

529

ii. phyag 'tshal ba (44a.6)

iii. mchod par brjod pa (44b.2)
(A) dngos
(B) deli don bshad pa (44b.4)
(1) dgos don
(2) bsdus don
(3) tshig don
b. bshad par dam bca' ba (46a.1)
i. dgos pa gang gi phyir 'chad pa (46a.1)
ii. 'chad pa gang gi tshul ji ltar 'chad pa (46a.2)
iii. mkhas pa'i sgra don bshad pa (46a.6)
(A) spyi don
(1) mkhas par bya bali yul spyir bstan pa dang (46b.5)
(2) rig pa'i gnas lnga la sogs pa bye brag tu bstan pa (47a.2?)
(a) sgra (47b.2)
(b) rtog ge (47b.4)
(c) bzo (47b.5)
(d) gso ba (48a.4)
(e) nang rig pa (48b.3)
(B) gzhung gi don (52b.1)
2. gzhung don dngos (52b.1)
a. rtsom pa
i. rtsom pa la 'jug pa'i thog mali ngag rnams bshad pa (52b.2)
(A) mchod brjod kyi tshul
(1) mtshams sbyor ba (52b.5)
(2) rtsa ba (52b.5)
(3) 'grel pa (52b.6)
(4) phyogs gcig tu nges pa'i dgos pa bsal ba
(a) 'tshams sbyar (53a.1)
(b) rtsa ba
(c) 'grel pa (53a.2)
(B) bshad par dam bca' ba (54b.5)
(1) rtsa bali gzhung dgod pa
(2) de dag gi don bshad pa (55b.1)
(C) khengs skyung bali tshul (56b.3)
(D) Ius rnam gzhag gi tshul (57a.5)
(E) dgos 'grel gyi tshul (57b.6)
(1) dgos don (58a.3)
(2) bsdus pa'i don (58b.6)

530

[(3) tshig gi don?]

ii. bstan bcos kyi Ius rtsom pa'i tshul (60b.3)
(A) sgra'i rgyu yi ge dang ming dang tshig gi tshogs gsum bshad pa
(1) tshogs gsum spyir bshad pa
(a) yi ge
(i) bshad gzhi'i gzhung
(ii) ji ltar 'chad pa'i tshul (61a.l)
A. mtshan nyid
B. nges tshig (62a.6)
C. rgyu (62b.4)
D. ldang tshad (62b.5)
1. dbyangs gcig gis bcings pa (62b.5)
2. ming gi mtha'i yi ge (62b.6)
E. dbye ba (62b.6)
1. rtsa ba dang yan lag du dbye ba
2. dbyangs dang gsal byed du dbye ba (63a.2)
a. tha snyad rig pa las bshad tshul
b. mdo rgyud las gsungs tshul (63a.5)
c. bod la grags pa ji ltar yin pa (63b.l)
3. gnas kyi sgo nas dbye ba (64a.3)
4. 'dren pas dbye ba (64a.4)
(b) ming gi tshogs (65a.5)
(i) gzhung dgod pa
(ii) don bshad pa (65a.6)
A. mtshan nyid
B. rgyu (65b.3)
C. ldang tshad (65b.3)
1. yi ges ming ldang ba'i tshad
a. yi ge rkyang pas 'grub pa (65b.4)
b. des tshogs pas 'grub pa (65b.5)
2. de la rtsod pa spong ba (65b.6)
D. dbye ba (66a.3)
1. 'dod rgyal gyi ming
2. rjes su grub pa'i ming
(c) tshig gi tshogs (66a.4)
(i) bshad pa'i gzhi dgod pa
(ii) don bshad pa (66a.6)
A. mtshan nyid (66a.6)
B. rgyu (67a.l)

531

c.

ldang tshad (67a.l)

1. ming gnyis 'tshogs pas 'grub pa

2. du ma 'tshogs pas 'grub pa

D. dbye ba (67a.3)
(2) ming tshig bye brag du bshad pa (67a.3)
(a) brda dang tha snyad kyi rnam gzhag
(b) 'dod rgyal dang rjes bsgrub kyi khyad par
(c) grags pa'i brda bye brag du bshad pa (68a.3)
(i) sngon grags pa'i brda bshad pa
A. 'jig rten la grags pa
B. bstan bcos la grags pa (68a.6)
C. de bzhin gshegs pa'i brda (68b.l)
(ii) phyis grags pa der bsdu ba (69a.l)
(d) rjes bsgrub kyi rnam dbye zhib tu bstan pa
(i)

rjes

bsgrub mtshungs pa dang/ bzlog pa

mi

mtshungs

pa

gnyis su dbye ba (69a.6)

(ii) grags 'jug 'gal mi 'gal mu bzhir dbye ba (69b.6)
(iii)

log pa kho nar 'gyur ba'i rjes bsgrub kyi dpe bstan

(70a.6)
(iv) don dngos su gsal bar mi ston pa'i sgra la rjes su
pa'i

sgra

dang/ nye bar sbyor ba'i sgra gnyis su

pa
byed

ji

ltar

dbye

ba'i

dbye ba'i tshul

A. rjes su byed pa'i sgra (70b.3)
B. ?

(e)

rigs kyi sgra dang ming gi sgra gnyis su ji ltar

tshul (71a.l)
(i) gang las bshad pa'i khungs
(ii)

de ltar bshad pa'i sgra'i mtshan nyid (71a.3)

(f) dgag sgrub kyi yul ngos bzung ba (73a.l)

(i) don dam spros bral la dgag sgrub med par bstan pa
(ii)

'jig rten tha snyad pa'i shes bya la dgag sgrub ji

ltar

byed pa'i tshul

A. spyir bstan (72b.2)
B.

so

sor

bshad pa (73b.3?) dgag sgrub kyi sgo

nas

rtogs tshul
1. don gyi sgo nas rtogs tshul
2. sgra'i sgo nas rtogs tshul [med dgag, ma yin dgag]
(g) tshig ji ltar 'chad pa'i tshul (77a.4)
(i) ming sgrub pa

Ii.

yul

l~
532

A.

legs par sbyar bali skad la sbyor bali tshul rndo

smos te bzhag pa

tsarn

B. bod la mkho bali rnam par dbye ba eung zad tsam (78b.3)
C.

legs sbyar gyi skad la dbyangs yig so soli mtha' can la

rtags 'du so sor sbyar nas bsgrub pa'i tshul (79a.5)

D. de bod kyi sgra sbyor la mi dgos pa'i tshul (79b.4)

E. bod nyid la yang brjod 'dod dang/ gnas skabs dang/ tshig
shugs kyis sgra tha dad du 'gyur tshul (80a.3)
(ii) khams bsgrub pa (81b.5)
A. gzhung las bshad pa'i tshig bkod pa
B. der rni gsal bali don eung zad bshad pa (82b.2)
(B) snyan ngag rtsorn pa la 'jug pa'i tshul (83b.3)
(1) spyi'i don
(a) snyan tshig brtsarns pa'i dgos pa
(i) sde bzhi'i tha snyad la 'jug pa'i dgos pa (83b.6)
(ii) grags pa yun ring du gnas pa'i dgos pa (84a.3)
(iii)

yon tan dang skyon 'byed pa'i dgos pa (84a.5)

(iv)

dgos pa dang ldan pa'i phyir snyan ngag brtsarns

pa'i

tshul (84b.3)
(b) snyan tshig dngos (84b.6)
(i) sgra'i don (84b.6)
(ii) sgra de dang ldan pa'i don (85a.2)
A.

snyan

ngag gi rntshan nyid ston par byed pa'i

rgyan

gyi bstan beos [where is B?]

1. snyan ngag gi Ius (85b.2)
a. gzhung gi dbye bas gsum du bshad pa (85b.2)
[i. mdor bstan?]
(A) tshigs su bead pa
(B) rkyang pa
(C) rgyud ehags
(1) rgyud ehags bead pa (85b.5)
(2) rgyud ehags rna bead pa
[ii. rgyas bshad? 87b.2]
(A) tshigs bead bshad pa (87b.3)
(1) rntshan nyid
(2) dbye ba (87b.5)
(a) sdeb sbyor gyi sgo nas gnyis su dbye ba
(87b.5)
(i) vrtti

533

(ii) jati

(b)

sbyor tshul gyi sgo nas bzhir dbye

ba

(89a.l)
(i) grol ba
A. mtshan nyid (89a.3)
B. dpe (89a.4)
C. nges tshig (89a.6)
(ii) rigs

A. mtshan nyid (89b.2)

B. dpe (89b.4)
C. nges tshig (90a.l)
(iii) mdzod (90a.3)
A. mtshan nyid
B. dpe (90a.5)
[C. nges tshig?]
(iv) 'dus pa'am tshogs pa (90b.l)
A. mtshan nyid
B. dpe (90b.3)
C. nges tshig (90b.4)
(3) snyan ngag chen po ngos bzung ba (91a.6)
(a) mtshan nyid kyi spyir bstan
(i) khyab mnyam gyi mtshan nyid (91b.l)
(ii) rang bzhin gyi mtshan nyid (91b.4)
A. dang por rtsom pa'i thabs sogs spyir
bstan (91b.4)
B.

Ius

sogs

rtsom pa'i thabs so

sor

bstan pa (93b.l)
C. de dag bsdus te sarga'i bya ba bstan
pa (95b.4)
(B) lhug pa (96b.5)
(1) mtshan nyid
(2) dbye ba (97a.l)
(C) spel ma (97b.4)
b. skad kyi dbye bas Ius bzhir bshad pa (98a.3)
i. mdo tsam
Ii. rgyas bshad (98a.6)
(A) legs sbyar (98a.6)

(B)

rang bzhin gyi skad (98b.3)

(C) zur chag (99b.3)

~I
534

(D) 'byung po'i skad (?)

iii. de dag gis brtsams pa? (99b.5)
c.

sbyor

tshul gyi sgo nas Ius gnyis su bstan

(100a.5)
i. Ita ba mig gi don gtso bor ston

pa'i

pa

snyan

ngag gi bstan bcos (100b.2)

ii.

rnar

snyan

pa'i ro nyams gtso bor ston

pa

(100b.3)
2. snyan ngag gi rgyan (100b.4)
a. thun mong rna yin pa'i rgyan
b. thun mong gi rgyan (100b)
i. don rgyan
ii. sgra rgyan
iii. gab tshig gi rgyan
(2) gzhung gi don (101a.2)
(a) rgyan gyi sbyor tshul spyir

bstan pa

(i) nyams dgu dang sbyar te mdor bstan pa

A. nyams dgu spyir bstan pa
1. sbyar ba'i gzhi (101b.1)
2. brjod pa'i tshul
B. nyams dgu so sor rgyas par bshad pa (102a.3)
1. rtsa ba
2. 'grel pa? (103b.2?)
a. so so'i mtshan nyid dang rab tu dbye ba (103b.2)
C.

b. de dag gi dpe (105b.5)

phan tshun 'gal ba mi sbyor zhing/ mi 'gal ba sbyor
ba'i tshul (108a.2)
1. gzhung dgod (108a.2)
2. de'i nang tshan gyi don la dpyod pa (112a.4)

D. 'gal ba sbyar na smad pa'i gnas su bstan pa (113a.3)

1. spyi'i don (113a.3)
E.

2. gzhung gi don (114b.4)

tshig sbyor legs pa'i

dpe brjod (115b.5)

1. gzhung (115b.5)
2. dpe nyid ji ltar yin pa (116a.4)
F. tshig skyon can mi sbyor ba'i tshul (117a.1)
1. gzhung dgod
2. nang tshan gyi dpe brjod so sor bshad pa (118a.2)

535

a.

tshig gi geod 'tshams du sbyar bas skyon

zhugs

pa'i grong pa (118a.4)

b. brjod bya'i don skabs su bab rna bab kyi tshig gi
1hag ehad kyi nyes pas skyon du 'gro ba
(b) bstan beos 1a 'jug pa'i lam rnam par dbye ba (119b.l)
(i) tshigs bead dang rkyang pa dang spel ma'i sbyor tshu1
gsum spyir bstan pa (119b.3)
(ii) tshigs bead kyi sbyor tshul bye brag

tu

bshad

pa

(119b.6)
A. tshigs bead gnyis kyi dbye ba bstan pa (120a.l)
1. gzhung
2. dpe brjod (120b.l)
B. sdeb sbyor 1a grags pa'i tshigs bead khyad

par

du

bshad pa (121a.2)
1. rab tu dbye ba spyir bstan pa (121a.2)
a. yi ge bgrang ba dang phyi mo bgrang ba'i sgo nas
gnyis su dbye ba (121a.4)
i. gzhung

ii. don rgyas par (bshad pa) (121b.l)

b.

Ius

dang

rgyan gyi sgo nas gnyis su

dbye

ba

(124b.3)
e. brjod tshu1 gyi sgo nas bzhir dbye ba (124b.6)
i. grol ba
ii. rigs 'breI
iii. mdzod
iv. tshogs pa
2. sbyor tshu1 so sor SIUOS pa (125a.5)
a. rgyan 'ga' zhig rna tshang bas skyon du mi 'gyur
b.

ba spyi 1a grags pa'i tshu1 (125b.l)

gtso bo'i yon tan sngon 1a brjod nas de'i 'gran
zla zi1 gyis gnon pa'i tshul la grags ehe ba
dang/ dgra'i yon tan sngon 1a brjod nas
(125b.5)

(iii) shar phyogs dang 1ho phyogs pa'i sbyor tshu1 bsdus te
bstan pa (126a.3)
A. gzhung dgod (126b.l)
B. don bshad pa
1. 'breI pa (126b.4)
2. rab tu dang ba'am gsa1 ba (127a.3)

L
!

536

3. mnyam pa nyid kyi yon tan (127b.6)

4. snyan pa'i yon tan (128a.6)
5. shin tu gzhon pa (128b.4)
6. don gsal ba (128b.6)
7. rgya che ba (go che ba) (129a.3)
8. brjod pa (129a.2)
9. mdzes pa (130a.5)
10. ting nge 'dzin (130b.5)
(c) rgyan gyi dper brjod lung dang sbyar te legs par bshad
(131b.3)
(i) rang bzhin brjod pa'i dpe (132b.3)
A. rigs tsam brjod pa
B. bya ba tsam ston pa
C. yon tan brjod pa
D. rdzas brjod pa (133a.1)
(ii) dpe'i rgyan (133b.5)
A. mdor bstan nas rgyas

bshad (134b.2)

1. chos kyi dpe (135a.1)

2. dngos po brjod pa'i- (135a.2)
3. bzlog pa'i- (135a.3)
4. phan tshun gyi- (135a.5)
5. nges pa- (135a.6)
6. nges med kyi- (135b.1)
7. bsdus pa'i- (135b.3)
8. phu1 byung gi- (135b.6)
9. rab rtog gi- (136a.2)
10. rmad byung gi- (136a.4)
11. rmongs pa'i- (136a.5)
12. the tshom gyi- (136b.2)
13. gtan 1a 'bebs pa'i- (136b.4)
14. sbyar ba'i- (137a.3)
15. mnyam pa'i- (137b.2)
16. smad pa'i- (138a.1)
17. bsngags pa'i- (138a.3)
18. brjod 'dod (138b.1)
19. 'gal ba'i- (138b.5)
20. dgag pa'i- (139a.2)
21. ngo bstod kyi- (139a.5)
22. de nyid brjod pa'i-

pa

537

23. thun mong ma yin pa'i24. byung min gyi25. srid pa ma yin pa'i26. mang ba'i27. rnam 'gyur ba'i28. 'phreng ba'i29. ngag don gyi30. bzla bo' i- dngos po' i31. mtshungs par sbyor ba'i32. rgyu'i dpeB. skyon med pa dmigs gsal gyi dpe (143a.2)
C.

mtshungs

pa gsal byed kyi rnam grangs drug cu

gsum bsdus te bstan pa (143a.6)

(iii) gzugs can
A. ngo bo
B. don
C. dbye ba
1. bsdus pari gzugs can (144a.5)
2. ma bsdus pa'i- (144b.4)
3. bsdus shing ma bsdus pa'i- (145a.3)
4. mtha' dag gi- (145a.5)
5. cha shas kyi- (145b.6)
6. cha shas can- (146b.l)
7. yan lag gcig gi- (147a.2)
8. ldan pa- (147b.3)
9. ldan min- (148a.2)
10. mi nyam- (148b.l)
11. khyad par can gyi- (149a.5)
12. 'gal ba- (153a.l)
13. rgyu'i- (153b.5)
14. sbyar ba'i- (154a.3)
15. dpe- (154b.3)
16. ldog pa can- (155b.1)
17. 'gog pa'i- (156a.5)
18. mnyam 'jog- (156b.1)
19. gzugs can gyi- (156b.5)
20. mnyon dor gyi- (157a.4)
(iv) gsal byed kyi rgyan (158a.2)
A. mtshan nyid kyis mdor bstan

.--.
I

rtsa

538

B. dpe brjod kyi(s) rgyas par bshad

1. gnas gsum gyi gsal byed
a. thog
i. rigs brjod pa'iii. bya ba- (159a.4)
iii. yon tan- (160a.2)
iv. rdzas- (160b.1)
b. bar
i. rigs brjod pa'i dpe (161a.4)
ii. bya
c. mtha'i
i. rigs
ii. bya

ba- (161b.3)
gsal byed- (162b.2)
brjod pa'i- (162b.3)
ba brjod pa'i- (163a.3)

2. 'phreng ba'i- (163b.1)

3. 'gal don (164a.3)
4. don gcig gi- (164b.3)
5. sbyar don- (165a.3)
C. ma bshad pa slob pa'i tshul (165a.5)
(v) bskor bali rgyan (165b.5)
A. don bskor gyi dpe (166a.3)
B. tshig bskor (166b.2)
C. gnyis ka bskor ba (167a.3)
(vi) 'gog pa'i rgyan (167b.4)
A. dbye ba mdor bstan (167b.5)
1. 'das pa (168a.2)
2. da Ita (168b.5)
3. ma longs
B. de nyid cung zad rgyas par bshad pa (170a.1)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

chos- (170a.1)
chos can- (170a.5)
rgyu 'gog pa- (170b.2)
'bras bu- (171a.1)
rjes gnang gi- (171b.2)
dbang ches- (172a.2)

7. ma gus- (173a.3)
8. shis brjod- (174a.1)
9. tshig rtsub- (174a.5)
10. grogs kyi- (174b.4)
11. rtsol bas- (175a.5)

539

12. gzhan dbang- (176a.3)

13. thabs kyis- (177a.2)
14. khro bas- (177b.2)
15. rnying rje- (178a.3)
16. phyis smon (179a.3)
17. the tshom (179b.5)
18. sbyar ba (180b.4)
19. don gzhan (181b.2)
20. rgyu mtshan (182a.1)
(vii) don gzhan bkod (182b.4)
A. mtshan nyid (182b.5)
B. dbye ba (183a.5)
C. dpe dngos (183b.4)
1. kun khyab (183b)
2. khyad par can (184b.2)
3.
4.
5.
6.

sbyar ba can (185b.3)

'gal ba can (186a.4)
mi 'os pa byed pa (186a.4)
'os pa'i don (187a.1)

7. 'os pa dang mi 'os pa'i don (187b.3)

8. bz10g pa?
(viii) 1dog pa can gyi dpe (188a.4)
[A.

sgras zin mtshungs pa'i 1dog pa can -- Bod-mkhaspal

1. gcig 1a gnas pa'i- (188a.4)

2. gnyis ka'i- (189a.1)
3. sbyar ba can gyi- (189b.3)
4. 'gog pa can [dang] gtan tshigs kyia. dam bca'
b. dpe brjod (191a.1)
i. 'gog pa can (191a.1)
ii. gtan tshigs (191b.2)
[B.] rtogs pa mtshungs pa'i 1dog pa can
1. dam bca' (193a.5) [=192a~5]
2. dbye ba
a. don gyi go ba'i Idog pa can
i. dpe dang dpe can gyi dbye
(193b.1) [=192b.l]
ii.
dpe
bas dpe

can

Ihag

ba

tsam

gyi

pa'i- (193b.6)

;;
540

[=192b.l]
iii.
de
gnyis
[=193b.l]
b.

kyi

don

bsdu

ba

(192b.1)

'byed byed mtshungs pa'i ldog pa can (192b.4)

[=193b.4]
i. dam bca'
ii. dpe bstan
(A) mtshungs chos dang 'byed byed
sgras zin pa (194a.2)
(B) mtshungs
(194b.l)

chos

sgras dngos

su

gnyis

ka

rna

zin

iii. de dag gi gnas lugs bshad pa (195a.5)

C. rigs mthun 'byed pa'i- (195b.5)
(ix) srid pa can (196b.2)
A. mtshan nyid (196b.2)
B. dpe brjod (196b.4)
iii. snyan tshig brtsarn pa' i dge ba bsngo ba (198a. 4)
b. bshad pa la 'jug pa (198b.l)
i. mdor bstan (198b.2)
ii. rgyas par bshad pa (207a.5)
(A) rnarn bshad rigs pa las gsungs pa ltar 'chad thabs lngas bshad pa
(108a.4)
(1) dgos don dgos 'grel gyi ngag (208a.6)
(2) bsdus don (208b.6)
(a) ngag don bsdus te bstan pa (209a.l)
(b) gzhung lugs so soli bsdus don (209a.6)
(3) tshig don bshad pa (211b.4)
(a) tshig gi sbyor ba
(b) tshig gi rnarn par bshad pa'i tshul (211b.6)
(i) legs sbyar gyi lugs dpyis phyin par bshad pa (212a.1)
(ii) bod la nye bar mkho bali bshad tshul cung zad brjod pa
(212a.5)
(iii) de Ita bu'i gzhung 'chad tshul (216a.3)
A.

sgra

la

mkhas

pas

tshig don phye

(216a.4)
1. spyir bstan
2. so sor bshad pa (216a.6)
a. sgra drang por bshad pa (216b.l)
b. sgra drangs nas bshad pa (216b.6)

ste

bshad

pa

541

c. phan tshun bsgyur te bshad pa (2I7b.6)

~. rnam grangs bsgyur ba (2I7b.6)
ii. yi ge bsgyur ba (220a.I)

(A) dgag pa'i sgra phyir bton pa

(B) dgag pa'i sgra phyir rna bton pa
B.

don

la mkhas pas lhag chad dang 'khrul ba

med

par

bshad pa (223a.5)
1. 'chad nyan bya ba'i tshul spyir bstan (223a.6)
a. rtsa ba
b. 'grel pa (223b.I)
i. skyon bcwo brgyad dang bral pa'i 'chad tshul
ii. [skyon gtso che ba] 'dor dgos tshul (223b.I)
iii.

gnyan pa po'i skyon gtso che bar spong dgos

tshul (223b.5)
2. rtogs par dka' ba'i don bye brag bshad pa (224a.5)
(4) mtshams sbyar (232a.2)
(a) rtsa ba
(b) 'grel pa (232a.3)
(i) [sgra] (232a.4)
(ii) don (232b.I)
(5) brgal Ian (233a.I)
(a) rtsa ba
(b) 'grel pa (233a.2)
(B) mtha' drug gi bshad pa (235b.5)
iii. 'jug bsdus te legs par bshad pa'i dge ba bsngo ba (237a.5)
c. rtsod pa la 'jug pa'i le'u bshad pa (237b.4)
i.

rtsod pa'i tshul ston pa'i gzhi byed pa'i gzhung lugs ji Itar byung
ba'i 10 rgyus
(A) mu stegs kyi rtog ge'i gzhung byung tshul (238a.I)
[(1) rig byed kyi 'byung tshul (238a.I)]
[(2) rtog ge'i bstan bcos nyid 'byung tshul (238a.3)]
(a) chad par smra ba (238a.3)
(b) rtag par smra ba
(i) ser skya (238a.6)
(ii) gzegs zan (238b.2)
(iii) rkang mig (238b.4)
(iv) rig byed kyi mtha' dang bhadrahari (238b.5)
(v) gcer bu pa
(B) sangs rgyas pa'i rtog ge'i bstan bcos 'byung ba'i tshul (239a.4)

542

(1) dang po ji ltar byung bali tshul (239a.4)

(a) sangs rgyas 'od srungs kyi bstan pa'i dus su ('dul bali
lung las gsungs) (239a.5)
(b) ston pa thub dbang nyid bzhugs pa'i dus su byung bali rtog
ge'i bstan beos (242a.4)
(i) dgra beom ehos skyobs (242a.4)
(ii) dbyig gnyen (242a.5)
(2) bar du byung ba phyi rabs pa'i lugs (242b.6)
(a) phyogs glang gi rnam thar (242b.6)
(b) ehos kyi grags pa (247a.3)
(3) tha mar ji ltar byung bali tshul
(a) lha'i dbang po'i blo gros (249b.4)
(b) shes rab 'byung gnas blo gros (250b.l)
(e) bde byed dga' bali lugs (253a.2)
[(i) bde byed dga' bali 10 rgyus]
[(II) deli brgyud pa (253b.5)]
ii. gzhung gi don (254a.4)
(A) bshad par dam beat ba (254a.4)
(B) 'jug tshul dngos (254a.5)
(1) sbyor ba rtsod pa'i lam sbyang ba
(a) mdor bstan (254a.6)
(b) rgyas bshad (254b.l)
(2) dngos gzhi (254b.3)
(a) byis pa'i skye bo nyams sad pa'i rtsod pa (254b.4)
(b) mkhas pa'i skye bo grub mtha' 'dzin pa'i rts?d pa (255a.4)
(i)

rgol

ba gnyis kas rang rang gi grub

mtha'

'dzin pa

spyir bstan pa (255a.6)

(ii) phyir rgol gyis grub mtha' mi 'dzin pa dmigs gsa! du
bstan pa (255b.l)
(iii) gnyis kas grub mtha' khas len pa'i tshul

phye

ate

bstan pa (255b.2)
A. rtsod gzhi nges par bya ba (255b.3)
B. nges nas rtaod pa la 'jug pa (255b.5)
1. lung rigs kyi rtsod pa gnyis thun mong ba mtshungs
pa'i tshu! (255b.6)
2. mi 'dra ba bye brag tu bshad pa (256a.l)
a. lung gi rtsod pa (256a.3)
i. phyi rol pa dang sangs rgyas pa gnyis lung mi
'thun pa la rtsod pa'i tshul (256a.5)

543

ii.

sangs

rgyas pa nyid la yang phan tshun 'gal

bar rtsod pa'i tshul (257a.2)

(A)

lung las grags pa'i rtsod pa

dang/

de'i

Ian spyir bstan (257a.2)

(B)

bye

brag tu mdo nyid nas gsungs pa'i

Ian

(257a.3)
(C)

Ian

'debs

tshul

gyi

khyad

par

gzhan

(257a.4)
b. rigs pa'i rtsod pa'i tshul (258a.3)

,i
I

b. rigs pa'i rtsod pa'i tshul (258a.3)

i. grub mtha' rjes su 'brang mi 'brang rnam par dbye ba
pa'i skabs su khas mi len pa gnyis (258a.4)
(A) mu stegs byed khas len yod bzhin du g.yo sgyu'i

rtsod

khas

mi

len pa rkun ma khas mi len pa Ita bu (258a.6)

(B) dbu ma pa khas mi len pa ma rkus pa khas mi len pa Ita bu
ii.

grub mtha' thun chags sdebs nas tha snyad mi mthun par 'dogs

pa la rnam par dpyad pa (258b.3)

iii. khas len pa'i grub mtha' rgyas par bshad pa (259b.3)
(A) grub mtha'i dbye ba (259b.3)
(1) rnam bshad spyir bstan (259b.4)

(2) de dag so sor phye ste bshad (260b.2)

(a) phyi rol pa'i grub mtha'i rnam par gzhag pa (261a.3)
(b) de dag gi don so sor bzhag pa (263a.5)
(c) sangs rgyas pa'i grub mtha' bzhir dbye ba (266b.6)
(i) bye brag tu smra ba (268b.2)
(ii) mdo sde pa (269a.2)
(iii) rnal 'byor spyod pa (270a.5)
(iv) dbu ma pa (277a.3)
(d) de dag rtsod pa'i tshul bstan pa (283a.2)
(i)

chos

kyi

grags pa'i dgongs pa dngos

(283a.3)
A. rtsa tshig gis mdor bstan (283a.4)
B. 'grel pas rgyas par bshad pa (283a.5)

bzung

ba

,
I
I

544

1.

phyi rol gyi don dgos pa'i dbang gi khas

pa'i tshul (283a.6)

2.

rigs

pas

dpyad nas de nyid 'gog pa'i

len
tshul

(285a.5)
3.

kun tu tha snyad pa'i gzhi rnam rig bsgrub pa

(285b.4)

4.

tha snyad las 'das pa don dam pa la 'jug pa'i

tshul (286a.5)

(ii)

dngos po stobs zhugs kyi rigs pa'i

rnam

bzhag

rgyas par bshad pa (287a.6)

A.

phyi
grub

rol

gyi don khas len pa na mdo sde

mtha'

dngos

po stobs zhugs

su

pa'i

bstan

pa

rol gyi don 'gog pa na rnam rig dngos

po

(287b.2)
B.

phyi

stobs zhugs su bstan pa (287b.6)

C.

chos

nyid

gtan la 'bebs pa na dbu

ma'i

gtan

tshigs dngos po stobs zhugs su bstan pa (288a.1)

(iii) de la rtsod pa spong ba (288a.3)
A. phyogs snga brjod pa (288a.3)
B. de dgag pa (288a.6)
C. nyes spong gi Ian gdab pa (288b.4)
(B) [phan tshun rtsod pa'i tshul?] rigs pa'i rtsod
(289b.4)

pa

(sic)

(1) phyi rol pa dang nang pa sangs rgyas pa'i lugs gnyis su
dbye ba spyir bstan pa (289b.5)
(2) rang sde bye brag tu bshad pa (289b.6)
(a)

rtog

ge snga phyi gnyis kyi dbye bsdu'i khyad

par

sogs so sor bshad pa (290a.3)

(b) gsar bu rnams kyis go sla ba'i phyir dri ba dang Ian
'debs pa'i tshul (292a.3)
(i) phyogs snga['i mang nyung]
(ii)

bsgrub

bya la sgrub byed kyi rtags

'god

pa'i

tshul (293a.6)
(iii)

Ian

'debs pa'i skabs su chos can mi

srid

pa

smra

ba

sogs byung na (293b.4)

(iv)

grub mtha'i mchog ngo bo nyid med par

rnams kyis rtsod pa'i skabs su (294a.5)

(v) rigs pas
(295a.2)

rtsod pa'iskabs su Ian

'debs

tshul

545

A. gzhan gyi lugs dgag pa (295a.2)

B. rang gi lugs gzhag pa (295a.5)
(e) rtsod pa rnam par dag pa'i phan yon (296a.4)

(e) rtsod pa rnam par dag pa'i phan yon (296a.4)

(3) mjug tshogs pas bzung bde bali phyi ngag bsdus te brda

sprad

pa (296a.6)
(C) brtsad pa las byung bali dge ba bsngo ba (297a.2)
3. mjug gi don (297a.5)
a. bstan beos brtsams pa'i dgos pa (297a.6)
b. rgyas par rna spros pa'i tshul (297b.3)
i. gzhan la phan pa'i go skabs dka' bar bstan pa (297b.4)
ii. rgyas par bshad pa'i byed pa chung bar bstan pa (297b.6)
e. dus dang rtsom pa po'i khyad ehos bstan pa (298a.2)
d. gzhan gyis kyang 'bad dgos par bstan pa (298b.I)
e. brtsarns pa'i dge ba sangs rgyas dges pa'i sar bsngo ba (299b.6)

[f. rndzad byang (300a.4)]

[III. 'grel bshad kyi mdzad byang (300b.3)]
[A. tshigs bead du gsungs pa (300b.3)]
[B. lhug par gsungs pa (30Ib.I)]

11_"_

-"""III

546

Appendix J
Index of the Collected Works of Glo-bo Mkhan-chen,
Gelung Manuscript

(Based on a manuscript copied from the original by order of the Venerable

Trichen Rinpoche.)
[la] po ti bzhi po 'di'i nang du bzhugs pa'i go rims dang bstun pa'i
bzhugs sol
[lb]

Chogay

dkar

chag

II na rna gu ru bhat yal

rgyal bali yab cig rje btsun 'jam pa'i dbyangsll
sa skya paQ chen zhes byar sku sprul nasll
deng 'dir bsod nams lhun grub mtshan bzung ba'ill
thub bstan nyin mor mdzad pa gang de yill
bka' 'bum pot bzhi mar bzhugs pa'i dkar chag gi tho lal

ka pa lal
1. rje nyid kyi rnam thar zhus Ian rna
2. mkhyen [b]rtse rna
3. lam 'bras bla ma brgyud pa'i rim pa bsgrub mtha' shan 'byed cung cad dang bcas
pa dge legs rol pa'i chu gter
4. rje btsun sa skya pa chen po kun dga' snying po la bstod pa yon tan gyi
par bco lnga'i sgo nas bsngags pa

khyad

5. rje btsun bsod nams rtse mo la thun mong ba'i yon tan 'ga' zhig mtshan spel gyi
sgo nas bstod pa
6. yang rje btsun sa skya paQgita kun dga' rgyal mtshan dpal bzang po la bstod

pa

mtshan gyi phreng ba rnam par spel ba

7. yang rje btsun rtse mo la thun mong ma yin pa'i bstod pa
8. rje btsun rin po che grags pa rgyal mtshan la bstod pa rin po che'i phreng ba
9. chos kyi
Idan

rje sa skya

10. chos kyi rje sa skya

pa~4ita

pa~gita

la mtshan don gyi sgo nas bstod pa dam

bstod pa phan mdzad ma

11. chos [2a] kyi rgyal po 'phags pa la bstod pa

12. rgyal ba kun dga' bzang po la bstod pa rin po che'i sgron ma
13. rje btsun kun dga' dbang phyug la bstod pa dus gsum rna
14. rje btsun kun dga' dbang phyug la gcig las 'phros pa'i bstod pa

pa

bzhi

547

15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.

rje btsun kun dga' dbang phyug 1a bstod pa gsang ba'i sgo 'byed
yang rab mdzes gser ri ma
rje btsun kun dga' dbang phyug 1a bstod pa dpag yas ma
rje btsun kun dga' dbang phyug bstod pa dge tshogs ma
'jam dbyangs shes rab rgya mtsho 1a bstod pa
go rams pa 1a bstod pa dad 1dan ma
chos kyi rje dkon mchog 'phe1 ba 1a bstod pa rgya1 ba'i rigs bdag ma
chos kyi rje dkon mchog 'phe1 gyi rnam thar ngo mtshar 'phreng ba

23. chos

kyi rje

pa~4ita

grags pa rgya1 mtshan mtshan spe1 gyi sgo nas

bstod

pa

dge legs rgya mtsho ma

24. chos kyi rje

pa~

chen 1a bstod pa yon tan rgya chen ma

25. chos kyi rje pa~4ita grags pa rgya1 mtshan 1a bstod pa

26. rdo rje phur pa'i bdud rtsi mchod pa'i b1a ma brgyud rim

27. byang chub sems dpa' yon tan chos rgya1 1a bstod pa
28. rwa ston yon tan dpa1 bzang 1a bstod pa yon tan rgya chen rna
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.

chos rje rwa ston yon tan dpa1 bzang 1a gsol 'debs
chos rje tshu1 khrims rgya1 mtshan 1a bstod pa rab dkar ma
yang chos rje tshu1 khrims rgya1 mtshan 1a bstod pa
yang chos rje tshu1 khrims rgyta1 mtshan bstod pa bkra shis kyi grangs spe1 ma

rna1 'byor gyi dbang phyug dge legs rgya1 [2b] mtshan 1a bstod pa
34. b1a ma rab brtan bzang po 1a bstod pa mkhyen rab rna
35. mus pa chos rje thugs rje dpa1 bzang 1a bstod pa

36. b1a rna kun brtson pa 1a bstod pa

dbyangs kun dga' bsod nams grags pa rgya1 mtshan dpa1 bzang po 1a
pa

37. 'jam

bstod

38. chos rje dbang phyug grub pa 1a bstod pa

39. chos rje 1ha mchog seng ge 1a bstod pa

40.
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
47.

dbu mdzad ngag dbang bzang po 1a bstod pa

bdag chen kun dga' rnam rgya1 sde'i sku bstod
b1a ma kun dga' chos legs 1a bstod pa
b1a rna tshu1 khrims dpa1 1a bstod pa
mkhan chen dkon mchog chos skyabs kyi bstod pa
chos rje mgon po pa'i bstod pa
rab 'byams pa rgya1 mtshan rin chen 1a bstod pa

bla rna tshul rgyal bstod pa

48. 'khor 10 bde mchog gi Iha tshogs la bstod pa nges don bcud kyi snying po
49. sgrub thabs brgya rtsa'i Iha tshogs rnams kyi bstod pa rin po che'i tshom
50. thub pa'i dbang po skyes pa'i rabs kyi phreng ba'i tshigs su bcad pa me tog gi
phur rna

548

51. shes rab kyi pha rol tu phyin rna dkar rno la bstod pa rgyan gyi phreng ba
52. dpon btsun dkon rnchog grags pa 1a bstod pa
53. skyid grong jo bo'i bstod pa
54. srid rntsho rna
55. Ius can rna
56. dga' ba gdong gi rab 'byarns pa 1a bstod pa
57. khro phu'i byarns pa 1a bstod pa
58. 'phags rna sgroI rna yid bzhin 'khor lola bstod pa dngos grub kyi pho nya
59. rje btsun sgroI ma 1a bstod pa bdud rtsi'i chu rgyun

[3a]

60. 'phags ma yid bzhin 'khor lola bstod pa 'dod pa'i 'bras bu rtso1 ba
61. 'phags ma yid bzhin 'khor1 lola bstod pa thugs rje rgyun 1dan rna
62. 'phags ma sgroI ma la bstod pa dus gsum rgya1 ba ma
63. 'phags rna sgroI mali bstod pa dus gsum sangs rgyas ma
64.

'0

mtsho rna

65. sgroI rna'i rntshan brgya rtsa brgyad pa'i don rnthun bstod pa
66. 'dod don rna
67. bstod pa [sgroI mali bstod pal
68. rgyud kyi b1a rna brgyud pa'i gsol 'debs me tog 'phreng ba
69. kye

rdo rje rntshan cha can gtso 'khor rnarns kyi bstod pa rgyud nas phyung

ba

rndzad pa
70. kye rdo rje bcu bdun rna'i sngags 'phreng bu krig las rnchan bur btab pa
71.

gav4i'i

bstod

pa slob dpon rta dbyangs kyis rndzad pa las tshig gi sdebs

su

legs su rndzad pa
72. gzhan gyi snyan ngag gi dpa1 rnarn par 'phrog pa'i tshig don rnarn par bkra ba
73. e

wa~

gyi bkod pa 1a bstod pa theg chen sgra dbyangs

74. chos zorn gyi gtsug lag khang gi logs ris kyi gtso bo rnarns bstod pa rndzad pa
75. dpa1 nag po chen po 1a bstod pa rndzad pa
76. bsarn 'grub gling 'du khang rab ngas dus rndzad pa
77. dpa1 gur gyi mgon po 1a bstod pa rndzad pa
78. dpa1 gur gyi rngon po 1a bstod pa rnarn dag rna
79. dpa1 1dan 1ha rno 1a bstod pa
80. rnarn sras kyi bstod pa
81. lam 'bras bu dang bcas pa'i bla rna brgyud pa dang bcas pa'i 'bri yig
82. b1a

rna rdo rje 'chang kun dga' dbang phyug pa'i thugs [3b] dam thang ka

mgon

po'i bri yig

83. rje btsun sa skya pa'i yin thang dngos 1a zhib tu gzigs tshu1
84. b1a mali rnam thar rin chen 'phreng ba
85. rje btsun mkhas pa'i dbang po bsod nams sengge'i rnam par thar pa nyi mali 'ad
zer

549

86. ehos

kyi

rje

tshul khrims rgyal mtshan gyi rnam par thar pa dgos

'dod

kun

'byung
87. bla ma dmar ehos kyi rgyal po'i rnam par thar pa
88. grub thob yon tan dpal dang la tu ba bsod nams sengge'i rnam par thar pa
89. skyid grong jo bo'i rnam thar dri med snang ba
90. ehos rje shar pa'i gdung brgyud kyi rim pa ji ltar byon pa'i tshul
91. lam 'bras kyi gsung rgyun zin bris
92. yan lag lnga sbyong
93. lam zab bla mali rnal 'byor
94. kye rdor dpa' geig gi mngon rtogs las dang po pa'i don du mdzad pa
95. dpal

kye rdo rje'i mngon par rtogs pa yan lag drug pa'i dka' bali

gnas

mdor

byed

pa'i

bsdus pa
96. rgyud

sde

spyi'i

rnam par bzhag pa'i gsal byed zab don nyin mor

snang ba
97. mngon

beud

kyi

pa gsum gyi rab tu dbye bali dka' bali gnas rnam par 'byed pa zhib

mor

par

rtogs

pa rin po ehe'i ljon shing gi gsal byed zab

don

snying po
98. log min sdug po bkod pa'i rgyan
99. mngon par rtogs pa'i tho yig bdud rtsi'i thig pa
100. dag ldan gling bzhi'i gnod sbyin kha pa ra'i lam dus kyi gsal byed
101. rgyu dus kyi dbang gi sngon du gsungs pa'i gsungs rgyun
102. rgyud sde bdun eu rtsa gnyis kyi dkar ehag gsal bali sgron me
103. rje btsun rdo rje rnal 'byor [4a] mali bkra shis rnams bzhugs sol
kha pa la/
104. sdom

rnam 'thag
105. sgrub thabs padma'i snying po zhes bya ba ku ru ku lli'o
106. dkyil 'khor gyi eho ga rin po ehe padma ra ga'i gter
107. rdo rje phur pa'i sgrub thabs
108. na ro pa nas brgyud pa'i dbang gi sngon 'gro'i sems bskyed kyi phyag len
109. drag po sgroI dbang gi tho
110. rnal 'byor rna kun spyod kyi 'chad thabs
111. dpal mngon par rtogs pa'i sa bead
112. rna ha rna ya'i bsdus Jon
113. rtog pa bdun pa'i bsdus don nyung ngu rabgsal
114. lwa wa pa'i beu gsum mali dbang gi tho
115. bong bu'i zhal gyi dbang gi skabs su gsung bali tho
116. dgra gdong gi tho yig
117. dpal phyag na rdo rje 'khor 10 chen po'i dbang gi tho

4
550

118. gshin rje dgra nag gi dbang tho

119. bstan beos sdom pa gsum gyi gnas gsum gsal bar byed pa nor bu ehu shel
120. 'jigs byed beu bdun mali dbang gi tho
121. 'jam dpa1 gyi sngags mehan bu dang beas pa
122. gur nas gsungs pari khro bo beu'i gtor 'bu1 'khor 10'i bsgrubs

tshu1

dang

beas pa
123. mehod rten bsgrub pari tho
124. kye rdo rje nag po lugs kyi dbang gi tho
125. gnyan sgroI yan lag drug pari mngon par rtogs pa
126. rdo rje mkha' 'gro'i sbyin sreg
127. rta mgrin gyi gtor ma
128. ri ma ti'i mehod gtor
129. gshin rje'i gshed dgra nag po dpa' geig mngon rtogs
130 . phag mo zha1 gnyis mali [4b] bsrung 'khor shin tu zab pa
131. pu ta ming sring gsum gyi rjes gnang gi tho yig rje'i zha1 mnga' nas mdzad pa
132. 'phags pa mi g.yo bali rjes gnang gi tshu1
132. sha ba ri'i rjes gnang byed tshul
134. tshe dbang dang bza' mehog gi tho yig
135. 'dod rgya1 gyi'o
136. 'jam dpa1 ye shes sems dpa'i bsrung ba dang bz10g pari 'khor 10
137. 'phags pa za ma tog bkod pari snying po las btus pa eheg chen lam gyi
po
138. dpal gur gyi mgon pori mngon rtogs
139. gtor 'bu1 brgya rtsa 'bu1 tshul
140. dpon btsun kun dga' dpa1 bzang 1a gnang ba
141. 'phags pa spyan ras gzigs beu geig zhal gyi sgrub thabs
142. khro bo'i rgyal po 'byung po 'dul byed kyi rjes gnang byed tshul
143. phyag rdor 'khor chen gyi sgrub thabs 'bring po
144. don zhags dpa' geig gi rjes gnang byed tshul
145. phyag rdor gyi rjes gnang dang sgom don
146. shin tu spros med kyi khrid kyi tho yig mthong ba don Idan
147. 'jam dpal smra bali sengge'i rjes gnang gi tho dang sgrub thabs
148. rnam sras kyi rjes gnang byed tshul
149. rnam 'joms kyi gtor mehog ma ni badzra
150. tshar gsum khug pari byin br1abs mdzad tshul
151. rnam 'joms kyi khrus ehog
152. sangs rgyas klu dbang gi sgrub thabs
153. beom Idan 'das kun rig gi bsnyen pa bya tshul
154. phyag na rdo rje 'gro bzang gi bsgrub thabs

snying

551

155. phyag rdor gturn chung go mngon rtogs

156. 'phags rna sgroI rna gser mdog [Sa] can gyi sgrub thabs zab mo
157. sgroI rna dug sel ma'i sgrub thabs
158. sgroI rna nyin mtshan zhi khro'i 'don thabs
159. rnal 'byor dbang phyug la rnam 'gyur drug gi sgo nas bstod pa
160. bsam 'grub gling gi gzim khang gi logs ris kyi lha tshogs rnams la bstod
mdzad pa

pa

161. 'phags rna yid bzhin 'khor lo'i bdag mdun bskyed pa'i mngon rtogs
162. dpal phyag na rdo rje u tstsha'i mngon rtogs
163. sdom chen gyi tho
164. gdong drug gi dbang gi tho
165. bsrung ba lnga'i tho
166. bcom ldan 'das gdug dkar mo can gyi dbang gi tho
167. gdugs dkar can gyi gtor chog bdud rtsi snying po
168. gdugs dkar can gyi phyir bzlog
169. rna rno sha gos kyi gtor chog
170. 'od zer can gyi dbang gi tho
171. yul chen po bdun gyi ngos 'dzin 'khrul med gsal ba
172. sdom gsum sgrag bzung gi thad kyi gsung rgyun
173. rma bya chen rno nas gsungs pa'i ri'i sdom
174. dpyal ba'i phag rno skor gsum gyi byin brlabs bya tshul
175. tsa ri dang de wi kong di'i yul gyi 'gag bsgrub
176. shri

e w~ chos ldan nas chos rje lha ~chog seng ge phebs dus kyi 'bul

ba'i

mchod brjod
177. rdo rje 'dzin dbyangs las btus pa [?]
178. yas ~tam rin po che rnam par spel ba dngos 'grub kyi gter
179. 'jam dpal ye shes sems dpa'i bsrung bzlog bsdus pa
180. sdom pa gsurn gyi skabs kyi nyer mkho bde gshegs snying po'i gsal byed
181. thob yig rin po che'i phreng ba mkhas pa'i mgul rgyan
182. sems [5b] bskyed kyi cho ga
183. rnam bshad don dam snying po rnarns bzhugs sol
ga pa la/
184. tshad

rna

rigs pa'i gter gyi 'grel pa'i rnarn par bshad pa rigs pa rna Ius

la

'jug pa'i sgo

185. tshad rna rigs pa'i gter la nye bar mkho ba mtha' gnyis gsal ba
186. blo'i rnam par gzhag pa sde bdun snying po zhes bya ba'i bstan bcos
187. chos rje
zhus Ian

I
I

17

rnam rgyal bas rtsa rgyud kyi dga' ba'i gnas la dri ba

zhus

pa'i

552

188. chos rje rnam rgyal dpal bzang po'i dris Ian zab don nor bu'i gter
189. slob dpon yon 'byung gis gnas gsum gsal byed las 'phros pa'i dris Ian
190. dris Ian don gsum gsal byed
191. mi'i dbang po mgon po rgyal mtshan gyi dris Ian rgyal sras bzhad pa'i me tog
192. dpon btsun kun dga' dpal bzang la gdams pa
193. zha lu 10 tsa ba la dri ba mdzad pa
194. byang pa mchod gnas pa'i dris Ian nges don snying po
195. zhang po rgyal bali dbang po'i dris Ian
196. sa skyar bdag chen chos rje'i dris Ian mdzad pa
197. rab 'byams pa blo gros rab gsal gyis dris pa'i Ian
198. bka' bcu pa dpal 'byor gyi zhus Ian
199. theg mchog gnad kyi snying po bla rna dpal skyabs la gdams pa
200. rin po che'i bstan bcos dgos 'dod 'byung gnas
201. bslab bsdus kyi Ie 'grel bslab pa'i rgyan
202. bsgom rim bar mali sa bead 'phags lam snying po
203. yum gyi 'dres rkang
204. mdo kun las btus pa'i sa bead kun btus sgron me
205. rje btsun sa skya

pa~gita

la phrin du gsol ba padmo'i phreng ba [6a]

206. rje btsun mi 1a ras pa'i mthar thug gi Ita ba ji ltar bzhed pa'i lugs su bkod
pa 'khrul med snang ba.
207. rang la bskul bali tshig zur brgyad pa
208. bdag chen chos rgyal nor bu la thog mar gnang bali gsung 'phrin
209. bla mali rnam thar chos rgyal nor bu 1a gdams pa
210. yang chos rgya1 nor bu la gdams pa
211. mi dbang bkra shis dgon la phul ba
212. a seng rdo rje brtan pa la gdams pa
213-218. yang a seng la gdams pa drug
219. mnga' bdag grags pa rgyal mtshan la phul ba
220. sne shangs 10 tsa ba la springs pa
221. dge slong dpa1 1dan grags pa 18 gnang ba
222. bdag chen chos rje 1a phul ba
223. bla rna dpa1 skyabs 1a gnang ba
224. 1ha bla rna ye shes 'od kyi gdung brgyud thor pa 1a phul ba
225. chos rje shi'u ri pa 1a gnang ba
226. rdzong kha bdag chen la phu1 ba
227. yang rdzong kha bdag chen la phul ba
228-231. yang thar po la phul ba bzhi
232. ra nag pa
233. db on po rma bya ba 1a gnang ba

553

234. dge slong dar bzang ba gnyis la gnang ba

235. bla rna sho rna phug pa la gdarns pa
236. bla rna blo pa la gdarns pa
237. yang drung blo pa la gdarns pa
238-239. yang drung blo pa la gdarns pa gnyis
240. bla rna bzang po la gdarns pa rndzad pa
241. dbang phyug rgyal mtshan la gdams pa
242. rje

btsun

rdo rje 'chang kun dga' dbang phyug gi dgongs

rdzogs

kyi

mdzad

phrin mdzad pa'i mehod brjod mdzad pa

243. yang dgongs pa rdzogs thabs bar mali dus kyi 'jug gi shis brjod
244. rjes kyi dgongs rdzogs kyi mehod brjod
245. ehos rgyal chen po bkra shis dgon gyi sa skya'i dgongs rdzogs kyi mehod brjod
246. ehos rje nor bu [6b] la phul ba
247. khrigs rtse mkhan po rab brtan bzang po la gnang ba
248. gzhi khar gnang bali phyag gdams zhal bshu
249. bdag chen kun dga' bsod nams la phul bali gsung phrin
250. khams yul zil gnon pa'i dge 'dun bzhi la gdams pa thor bu ba 'dra
251. ehos rje lha dbang la skyid tshal du springs pa
252. 'tsho byed rgyal rdor la gdams pa
253. yid 'byung bali tshigs bead
254. yang tshigs bead beu bdun pa
255. stod phyogs su gsung shog tshigs bead rna phul ba
256. mdo mang gser gyi glegs bam gyi mtshon byed
257. snyan tshig mkhas mang yid kyi shing rta
258. rin po ehe bde legs rgya mtsho'i brgyad stong pa'i dkar ehag
259. 10 gsar dus kyi shis brjod rndzad pa
260. bdag mo sangs rgyas sgron gyi gdung ehos brgyad stong pa'i rntshon byed
261. thub chen gyi 'phan la btab pa'i tshig bead
262. bde gshegs gling pa'i gtsug lag khang bzhegs pa'i rntshon byed
263. ngarn rings kyi byams pa'i 'phan gyi tshigs bead
264. bsam

'grub

gling gi lam 'bras pa'i bla rna rnams la phul bali gos

phan

gyi

tshigs su bead pa
265. bdag rno thugs rje sri gnon gyis ngam rings su phul bali' 'phan gyi dkar ehag
266. khro phu byams pa'i 'phan gyi shlo ka
267. bsam 'grub gling gi gser khang gi bkod pa
268. phun tshogs bsam gtan gling gi gtsug lag khang bzhengs pa'i mtshon byed
269. dkar ehag rin po ehe'i sgron rna
270. dpon sri btsan gyis bzhengs pa'i brgyad stong pa'i sum 'big
271. 'phags pa shes rab kyi pha rol tu phyin pa'i mtshon byed

554

272. drung rgyal gyis yab gyi phyir bzhengs pa'i brgyad stong pa
273. bdag

chen

gur gum rgyal mo'i rin chen gser gyi [7a] glegs bam bzhengs

pa'i

dkar ehag gi snyan ngag

274. dpon

po tshe dbang bzang po'i shes rab kyi pha rol tu phyin pa

stong

phrag

nyi shu lnga pa rin po ehe las bzhengs pa'i mtshon byed
275. skyes rtsa bla rna bas sa skya bka' 'bum bzhengs pa'i mtshon byed
276. slob dpon kun bzang ehos dpal gyi rtogs brjod mdzad pa
277. 'tsho byed sangs rgyas skyabs pa'i mdo mang gi dkar ehag
278. bka' 'bum gyi dkar ehag gsal bali sgron me
279. 10 gsar dus kyi bkra shis kyi tshigs bead rnams bzhugsl
nga pa lal
280. thub pa'i dgongs gsal gyi 'chad thabs lam bzang snang ba
281. rgyal sras lam bzang gi skabs kyi gtam brgyud nyer mkho
282. thub

pa'i dgongs pa gsal ba zhes bya bali gzhung gi bshad thabs

rgyal

sras

lam bzang gi mdzes rgyan

283. snying po'i don gsal bar byed pa lung gi phreng ba
284. sdom gsum gyi rab tu dbye bali dris Ian 'dung gi tshad rna
285. tshig don mun sel
286. pha rol tu phyin pa'i sa lam gyi rnam par bzhag pa
287. mkhas

pa

rnams 'jug pa'i sgo'i rnam par bshad pa rigs gnas gsal byed

bzhugs soil
mdo rgyud bstan beos kun gyi snying po'i donll [7b]
sa skya'i 'jam dbyangs rim par bzhed pa'i tshulll
grub mtha' rnam bzhi'i legs bshad gsal mdzad pall
bstan pa'i nyi rna bsod nams lhun grub rgyalll
phyogs beu'i rgyal ba kun gyis phyag mdzad eingll
gdan gsum tshangs pa lha yi ngo no nyidll
rgyal bali rigs bdag bsod nams lhun grub kyill
bstan pa yun ring gnas pa'i bkra shis shogll

dge'oll

rnams

555

Appendix K
Index

to the Collected Works of Glo-bo

mkhan-chen,

Tayo Bunko Manuscript

Dbu-chen

manuscript

of 5 folios,

found in the Toyo

Bunko

Tibetan

collection,

manuscript no. 44, vol. ka, between folios 94 and 95.

/swasti

pradzabhya~

rmad byung thugs bskyed bsod nams dang//

ye shes lhun grub legs pa'i dpal//
'byung gnas grags pa'i rgyal mtshan 'dzin//
dpal yon bzang po rgyal gyur cig//
gang gi gsung rab yid bzhin nor bu'i 'phreng//
gzur gnas mkhas mang mgrin pa'i rgyan gcig bull
legs bzhugs glegs bam rin chen za ma tog//
nor lha'i grangs ldan chos sna'i bzhugs tho dge//
ka pa la/
1. rje nyid kyi bstod pa mkhyen brtse ma gcig/
2. nyid kyi rnam thar zhus Ian mal
3. rnal 'byor dbang phyug la rnam 'gyur drug gi sgo nas bstod pa
4. bsam 'grub gling gzims khang gi logs ris kyi lha tshogs rnams la bstod pa
5. lam

'bras bla ma brgyud pa'i rims pa grub mtha' shan 'byed cung zad dang

bcas

pa dge legs rol pa'i chu gter

6. yang lam 'bras kyi bla ma brgyud pa'i rims pa mthong ba don ldan
7. rje

btsun

sa skya pa chen po kun dga' snying po la yon tan gyi khayd par

bco

lnga'i sgo nas bstod pa

8. rje btsun bsod nams rtse mo la thun mong gi yon tan gyi tshul 'ga' zhig

mtshan

spel gyi sgo nas bstod pa

9. yang rje btsun rtse mo la thun mong min pa'i yon tan gyi sgo nas bstod pa
10. rje

btsun

rin po che grags pa rgyal mtshan la bstod pa mtshan rin

po

che'i

'phreng ba
11. chos kyi
Idan

rje sa skya pa9gita la mtshan don gyi sgo nas bstod pa dam pa

12. yang sa paQ la bstod pa mtshan gyi 'phreng ba rnam par spel ba

.I.

bzhi

~
I .
556

13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.

yang de 1a bstod pa phan rndzad rna

ehos kyi rgya1 po 'phags pa rin po ehe 1a bstod pa
rgya1 ba kun dga' bzang po 1a bstod pa rin po ehe'i sgron rna
rje kun dga' dbang phyug 1a bstod pa dus gsurn rna
yang de 1a geig las 'phros pari bstod pa [2a]
yang de 1a bstod pa gsang bali sgo 'byed rna

19. yang de 1a bstod pa rab rndzes gser ri rna

20. yang de 1a bstod pa dpag yas rna
21. yang de nyid 1a bstod pa dge tshogs rna
22. 'jam dbyangs shes rab rgya rntsho 1a bstod pa dad pari shing rta
23. go bo rab'byarns pa 1a bstod pa dad 1dan rna
24. ehos rje dkon rnehog 'phe1 1a bstod pa rgya1 bali rigs bdag rna
25. deli rnarn thar bstod tshig ngo rntshar 'phreng ba
26. ehos rje

pa~gita

grags pa rgya1 rntshan 1a rntshan spe1 gyi sgo nas bstod pa dge

legs rgya rntsho

27. yang de 1a bstod pa yon tan rgya chen rna
28. de 1a bstod pa dngos grub rna Ius rna
29. rdo rje phur pari bdud rtsi rnehod pari b1a rna brgyud rims
30. byang chub serns dpa' yon tan ehos rgya1 1a bstod pa phan bde kun 'byung rna
31. ehos rje rwa ston yon tan dpal bzang po 1a bstod pa zab rgyas rna
32. yang de 1a gsol 'debs dge legs yon tan rna
33. ehos rje tshu1 khrims rgya1 rntshan 1a bstod pa rab dkar rna
34. yang de 1a bstod pa shin tu rnam dag rna
35. yang de 1a bstod pa bkra shis kyi grangs spe1 rna
36. rna1 'byor dbang phyug bde legs rgya1 rntshan 1a bstod pa phan bde'i pad tsha1
37. b1a rna rab brtan bzang po 1a bstod pa rnkhyen rab rna
38. rnus pa ehos rje thugs rje dpa1 bzang 1a bstod pa byarns pari sprin phung rna
39. bia rna kun brtson pa 1a bstod pa
40. ' jam dbyangs kun dga' bsod narns 1a bstod pa zab yangs rna
41. ehos rje dbang phyug grub pa 1a bstod pa gzhung lugs rna
42. ehos rje 1ha rnehog seng ge 1a bstod pa 1hag pari 1ha mehog rna
43. dpon btsun dkon mehog grags pa 1a bstod pa
44. dbu rndzad dga' ba bzang po 1a bstod pa
45. bdag chen kun dga' rnarn rgya1 1a bstod pa
46. b1a rna kun dga' ehos legs 1a bstod pa
47. b1a ma tshu1 khrims dpa1 1a bstod pa
48. rnkhan chen dkon mehog ehos skyabs 1a bstod pa
49. chos rje mgon po dbang phyug 1a bstod pa
50. rab 'byams pa rgya1 mtshan rin chen 1a bstod pa

557

51. b1a rna tshu1 rgya1 1a bstod pa

52. 'khor 10 bde rnchog gi 1ha tshogs 1a bstod pa nges don bcud kyi snying po
che'i tshorn
54. thub

pa'i

dbang po'i skyes rabs kyi 'phreng ba me tog gi phur rna

tshigs

su

bcad pa
55. shes [2b] phyin dkar rno 1a bstod pa rgyan gyi 'phreng ba
56. skyid grong jo bo'i bstod pa
57. srid rntsho rna
58. Ius can rna
59. dga' ba gdong gi byarns pa 1a bstod pa
60. khro phu'i byams pa 1a bstod pa
61. 'phags rna sgroI rna yid bzhin 'khor lola bstod pa dngos grub kyi pho nya
62. rje btsun sgroI rna 1a bstod pa bdud rtsi'i chu rgyun
63. yang yid bzhin 'khor lola bstod pa 'dod pa'i 'bras stso1
64. yang de 1a bstod pa thugs rje rgyun 1dan rna
65. yang sgroI rna 1a bstod pa dus gsurn rgya1 ba rna
66. yang de 1a bstod pa dus gsurn sangs rgyas rna
67. yang de 1a bstod pa '0 rntsho rna
68. sgroI rna'i rntshan bbrgya rtsa brgyad kyi don rnthun bstod pa
69. yang gsol ba 'debs pa 'dod don rna
70. yang gsol 'debs ngo rntshar rna
71. rgyud kyi b1a rna brgyud pa'i gsol 'debs me tog gi 'phreng ba
72. kye

rdor

rntshon cha can gtso 'khor rnarns kyi bstod pa rgyud nas

phyung

bar

rndzad pa
73. kye rdor bcu bdun rna'i sngags 'phreng bu tik 1a rnchan bu btab pa
74. gaQgi'i

bstod pa slob dpon rta dbyangs kyis rndzad pa las tshig 1debs legs

su

rndzad pa gzhan gyi snyan ngag gi dpa1 rnarn par 'phrog pa'i tshig don rnarn par
bkra ba
75. e wa~ gyi bkod pa 1a bstod pa theg chen sgra dbyangs
76. chos zorn gyi gtsug lag khang gi logs ris kyi gtso bo rnarns 1a bstod pa
77. dpa1 rdo rje nag po chen po 1a bstod pa dpa1 1dan srid gsurn rna
78. yang de 1a bstod pa rab brjid rna
79. yang de 1a bstod pa dbang sngon 1hun brtsegs rna
80. yang de 1a bstod pa rgya1 bali rnam dag rna
81. dpa1 1dan 1ha rno 1a bstod pa
82. rnam sras 1a bstod pa
83. rdo rje 'chang kun dga' bzang po'i thugs dam thang ka lam 'bras b1a ma brgyud
pa dang bcas pa rnams kyi bris yig
84. rje btsun kun dga' dbang phyug gi thugs dam thang ka mgon po'i bris yig

~--

r
I

558

85. rje btsun sa skya pa chen po'i yin thang dngos la zhib tu gzigs tshul
86. rje btsun kun dga' dbang phyug gi rnam thar rin chen 'phreng ba
87. rje btsun mkhas pa'i dbang po bsod nams seng ge'i rnam thar nyi mali 'od zer
88. chos kyi rje tshul khrims rgyal mtshan gyi rnam thar dgos
mtshon byed dkar chag ste chos sna dgu bcu [sic] bzhugsl

'dod

'byung

ba

mkhas dang grub pa'i zhabs sen 'od brgya'i zerll

blo chen khyod kyi cod pan la shar basil
sdebs legs snyan tshig rtogs brjod utpal 'phrengll
kun nas rgod 'di dpyod ldan rna bali rgyanll
Ikha pa lal
89. bla ma dmar chos kyi rgyal po'i rnam thar
90. grub thob yon tan dpal dang la ru pa bsod nams seng ge'i rnam thar
91. skyid grong jo bo'i rnam thar dri med snang ba
92. chos rje shar pa'i gdung brgyud kyi rims pa ji ltar byon tshul
93. lam 'bras kyi gsung [3a] rgyun zin bris
94. yan lag lnga sbyong gi zin bris
95. lam zab bla mali rnal 'byor
96. dpal kye rdo rje'i mngon par rtog pa yan lag drug pa'i dka' gnas mdor bsdus
97. rgyud

sde

spyi'i

rnam par bzhag pa'i gsal byed zab don nyin mor

byed

pa'i

snang ba
98. mngon

par

rtogs

pa rin po che'i ljon shing gi gsal byed zab

don

snying po
99. log min stug po bkod pa'i rgyan
100. rgyud kyi mngon par rdzogs pa'i tho yig bdud rtsi'i thigs pa
101. dag ldan gleng gzhi'i gnod sbyin kha pa ra'i 10 rgyus kyi gsal byed
102. chos sna so dgu'i grangs 'dren tshul
103. rgyu dus kyi dbang gi sngon du gsungs pa'i gsung rgyun
104. rgyud sde bdun cu rtsa gnyis kyi dkar chag gsal bali sgron me
105. rdo rje rnal 'byor mali dkyil 'khor gyi bkra shis ste
chos sna bcu bdun bzhugsl
grangs yas rgyud sde'i them skas las long pa'ill
gsang ba sngags kyi rin chen za ma togll
gang gi rnam dpyod nor bu'i zer 'phreng gisll
skal bzang gdul bya'i blo gros gsal bar mdzadll

bcud

kyi

559

/ga pa la/
106. ku ru kulle'i sgrub thabs padmo'i snying po
107. dkyil 'khor gyi cho ga padma ra ga'i gter
108. rdo rje phur pari sgrub thabs
109. grag po sgroI dbang gi tho
110. rnal 'byor rna kun spyod kyi 'chad thabs
111. dpal mngon par rtogs pari sa bcad
112. rna ha ma ya'i bsdus don
113. 'jigs byed gzhung rtogs bdun gyi bsdus don
114. rnam par rgyal mali rtogs pa che bali bsdus don
115. la ba pari bcu gsum mali dbang gi tho
116. bong bu zhal gyi dbang gi tho
117. dgra gdong gi dbang gi tho
118. phyag rdor 'khor chen gyi dbang gi tho yig
119. gshin rje dgra nag gi dbang gi tho
120. gdong drug gi dbang gi tho yig
121. 'jigs byed bcu bdun mali dbang gi tho yig
122. sdom chen gyi tho yig
123. bsrung ba lnga'i tho
124. gdugs dkar mo can gyi tho
125. gdugs dkar gyi gtor chog bcud kyi snying po
126. gdugs dkar can gyi phyir bzlog
127. rna mo sha gos kyi gtor chog
128. rod zer can gyi dbang gi tho
129. kye rdor nag po lugs kyi dbang gi tho yig
130. 'phags pa mi g.yo bali rjes gnang byed tshul
131. yang mi g.yo bali sgom thabs
132. sha ba ri'i rjes gnang bya tshul
133. tshe dbang dang gza' chog gi tho yig
134. 'jam dpal smra seng gi rjes gnang gi tho sgrub thabs dang bcas pa
135. gang blo mali rjes gnang byed tshul
136. rnam sras kyi rjes gnang byed tshul
137. rnam 'joms rna ni ba dzra gyi gtor chog
138. don zhags [3b] dpa' gcig gi rjes gnang byed tshul
139. chab gtor gyi tho
140. tshar gsum khug pari byin brlabs byed tshul
141. rnam 'joms kyi khrus chog
142. 'byung 'dul gyi rjes gnang byed tshul
143. 'phags pa spyan ras gzigs kyi sgom zlas

560

,
I

I
j

144. yang deli sgom zlas

145. spyan ras gzigs beu geig zhal gyi sgrub thabs
146. ' jam dpal ye shes sems dpa'i bsrung bzlog gi 'khor 10
147. ' jam dpal gyi sngags mehan dang beas pa
148. shin tu spros med kyi 'khrid kyi tho yig mthong ba don ldan
149. gtsug gtor rnam rgyal mali rjes gnang gi tho
150. seng ge sgra'i gdon sgroI gyi phyag len gyi tho
151.
152.
153.
154.
155.
156.
157.
158.
159.
160.

sangs rgyas klu dbang gi sgrub thabs

mehod rten bsgrub pa'i tho
gnyan sgroI yan lag drug pa'i mngon rtogs
sgroI rna nyi rntshan zhi khro'i 'don thabs
sgroI rna gser mdog can gyi tshe bsgrub
sgroI rna dug sel mali sgrub thabs
'phags rna yid bzhin 'khor loti bdag mdun bskyed pa'i mngon rtogs
dpyal bali phag mo bskor gsum gyi byin brlabs bya tshul
phag mo zhal gnyis mali bsrung 'khor shin tu zab pa
phyag rdor u tsarya'i mngon rtogs

161. yang phyag rdor gyi rjes gnang dang sgom don
162. phyag rdor 'gro bzang gi sgrub thabs
163. phyag rdor gtum chung gi mngon rtogs
164. phyag rdor 'khor chen gyi sgrub thabs
165. gshin rje gshed dgra nag dpa' geig gi mngon rtogs
166. gur nas gsungs pa'i khro beu'i gtor 'bul 'khor loti bris tshul dang beas pa
167. rdo rje wcha' 'gro'i sbyin bsreg
168. dpal gur gyi mgon po'i mngon rtogs
169. gtor 'bul brgya rtsa 'bul tshul
170. dpon btsun kun dga' dpal bzang la gnang bali mgon po'i bsnyen thabs
171.
172.
173.
174.
175.
176.

pu

~a ming sring gsum gyi rjes gnang gi tho yig

re ma ti'i mehod gtor

rta mgrin gyi gtor ehog

kye rdor gyi sbyin sreg gi tho
'dod rgyal gyi 8gom bzlas byed tshul
kun rig gi bsnyen pa byed tshul

177. 'phags pa za rna tog bkod pa'i snying po las bsdus pa theg chen lam gyi snying
po
178. sdom pa gsum gyi rab tu dbye bali dris Ian lung gi padma ste
ehos sna bdun eu don gsum bzhugs/

i
I

561

dri med bka' dang bstan bcos 'bum phrag gill

dgongs don 'khrul pa'i dri bral legs bshad bcud//
ngom med gsol ba'i gtam bzang ro brgya'i zas//
bgrang yas gdul bya'i yid kyi shing rta'i dpa1//
/nga pa la/
179. sdom pa

gsum gyi rab tu dbye ba'i dka' ba'i gnas rnam par bshad pa zhib

rnam 'thag
180. gnas gsum gsal byar byed pa nor bu'i chu shel
181. yul chen so bdun gyi ngos 'dzin 'khrul med gsal ba
182. tsa ri dang de wi ko ta'i yu1 gyi dgag sgrub [4a]
183. rma bya chen mo nas gsung ba'i ri'i sdom
184. sdom gsum gyi skabs kyi bde gshegs snying po'i gsal byed
185. sngon pa bsgrag zung gi thad kyi gsung brgyun
186. dbu ma lugs kyi sems skyed kyi cho ga
187. na ro pa nas brgyud pa'i dbang gi sngon 'gro'i sems bskyed kyi phyag len
188. chos dbyings bstod pa'i rnam bshad don dam snying po
189. rdo rje 'dzin dbyangs las bsdus pa
190. 'jam dpal ye shes sems dpa'i bsrung bzlog bsdus pa
191. bde mchog nag po rims bzhi'i khrid kyi brjed tho
192. yang gtor bsgrub kyi phyag len gyi tho
193. yas gtam rin po che rnam par spel ba dngos grub kyi gter
194. gsan yig rin po che'i 'phreng ba mkhas pa'i mgul rgyan
195. chos rje lha mchog seng ge phebs dus kyi 'bu1 ba'i mchod brjos de
chos sna bdun cu bzhugs/
rang bzo'i pho tshad sdom pa gtsor byed pa'i//
mkhas rlom legs bshad sbang zan chang bu'i tshogs//
khyod kyi rnam dpyod sor mos reg pa'i tshe//
sbyor po de dag glen chen nyid du bstan//
/ca pa la/
196. tshad rna rigs pa'i gter gyi 'grel bshad rigs pa rna Ius pa la 'jug pa'i sgo
197. rigs gter 1a nye bar mkho ba mtha' gnyis gsal ba ste
chos sna gnyis bzhugs/
rig[s] pa'i gzhung lugs rnam mang sprin gyi 'phreng//
gcig car 'dus las tshad ma'i chos char 'bebs//
Ihan gcig gnam lcags rig[s] pa'i thog zer gyis//

mo

562

log rtog brag ri'i dpung kun phye mar bshigll

Icha pa lal
198. thub

pa'i

dgongs pa gsal bali bstan bcos kyi mdo rnam par bshad pa

rin

po

che'i gter
199. chos rje rnam rgyal bali rtsa brgyud kyi dka' bali gnas kyi dris Ian
200. yang deli dris Ian zab don nor bu'i gter
201. slob dpon yon 'byung gis gnas gsum gsal byed las 'phros pa'i dris Ian
202. yang dris Ian don gsum gsal byed
203. mi'i dbang po rgyal mtshan gyis dris Ian rgyal sras bzhad pa'i me tog
204. yang deli dris Ian padma'i snying po
205. yang de nyid kyis dris Ian sngon rab gsal bali me long
206. 'tsho byed chos skyong dpal bzang gis dris Ian
207. dpon btsun kun dga' dpal bzangla gdams pa
208. zha lu 10 tstsha ba la dri ba mdzad pa
209. byang pa mchod gnas kyis Ian nges don snying po
210. nang so rgyal bali dbang po'i dris Ian
211. sa skya nas bdag chen chos rje'i dris Ian
212. rab 'byams pa blo gros rab gsal gyis dris Ian
213. bka' bcu dpal 'byor gyis dris Ian
214. bla ma [4b] dpal skyabs la gdams pa theg mchog gnad kyi snying po
215. rin po che'i bstan bcos dgos 'dod 'byung gnas
216. bslab btud kyi Ie 'grel bslab pa'i rgyan
217. sgom'rims bar mali sa bcad 'phags lam snying po
218. yum gyi 'gres rkang
219. mdo kun las btus kyi sa bcad
220. sa skya

pa~~ita

la 'phrin du gsol ba pdmo'i snying po'i 'phreng ba

221. skal ldan snying gi mun sel Iha dbang rdo rje
222. rje btsun mi las mthar thug gi Ita ba ji Itar bzhed tshul bkod pa 'khrul med
snang ba
223. rang la bskul bali tshig zur brgyad pa
224. yang Ita bsgom spyod 'bras kyi mgur
225. bdag chen chos rgyal nor bu la thog mar gnang bali gsung 'phrin
226. bla mali rnam thar chos rgyal nor bu la gdams pa
227. yang chos rgyal nor bu la gdams pa
228. mi dbang bkra shis mgon pa phul ba
229. ngam rings bdag chen la gnang ba
230. khang gsar drung chen la gnang ba
231-237. a seng rdo rje brtan pa la phul bali gsung shog tshan bdun

563

238. mnga' bdag grags pa rgya1 mtshan 1a phu1 ba

239. sne shangs 10 tstsha ba 1a springs pa
240. yang de 1a gnang ba
241. bdag chen chos rje 1a phu1 ba
242. b1a rna dpa1 skyabs 1a gnang ba
243. 1ha b1a rna ye shes 'od kyi gdung brgyud thar po 1a phu1 ba
244. chos rje she'u ri pa 1a gnang ba
245-246. rdzong kha bdag chen 1a phu1 ba tshan pa gnyis
247-250. yang thar po 1a phu1 ba tshan pa bzhi
251. rwa nag pa 1a gdams pa
252. dpon po rma bya ba 1a gdams pa
253. dge slong dar bzang ba gnyis 1a gnang ba
254. b1a rna sho rna phug pa 1a gdams pa
255-258. drung b10 pa gdams pa tshan pa bzhi
259. b1a rna bzang po 1a gdams pa
260. dbang phyug rgya1 mtshan pa gdams pa
261. rje btsun
brjod

kun dga' dbang phyug gi dgongs rdzogs kyi mdzad 'phrin gyi

262. yang dgongs rdzogs bar ma'i dus kyi mjug gi shis brjod
263. rjes kyi dgongs rdzogs kyi shis brjod
264. chos rgya1 bkra shis mgon gyi sa skya'i dgongs rdzogs kyi mchos brjod
265. chos rje nor bu ba 1a phu1 ba
266. khrig rtse mkhan po rab brtan bzang po 1a gnang ba
267. gzhis khar gnang ba'i phyag gdam zha1 bshus
268. bdag chen kun dga' bsod nams 1a phu1 ba'i gsung 'phrin
269. khams yu1 zi1 gnon pa'i dge 'dun bzhi 1a gdams pa
270. chos rje 1ha dbang b10 gros 1a springs pa
271. 'tsho byed phyag rdor 1a gdams pa
272. 'phags yu1 gyi shakya'i rigs kyi rgya1 rabs mdor bsdus te
chos sna drug cu re gsum bzhugs//
gur gum gzhon nu'i mdangs kyis [5a] rab mdzes shing//
nyan tshig ngag gi 'dod 'jo mi zad slad//
ngag dbang 1ha der nges pa rnyed mod kyis [sic]//
glegs bam ra1 gris khyod las khyad par byas//
/ja pa 1a/
273. tshig don mun se1
274. pha ro1 tu phyin pa'i lam gyi rnam par bzhag pa

mchod

564

275. snying po'i don gsal bar byed pa lung gi 'phreng ba

276. blo'i rnam bzhag sde bdun gyi snying po
277. rtags kyi rnam bzhag rigs lam gsal bali sgron me
278. rgyal sras lam bzang gi skabs kyi gtam brgyud nyer 'kho
279. yid dbyung bali tshigs bead
280. tshigs bead beu bdun pa
281. stod phyogs su gsung shog tshigs bead rna phul ba
282. a seng rdo rje brtan pas bzhengs pa'i mdo mang gser gyi glegs bam gyi

mtshon

byed mkhas mang yid kyi shing rta

283. ehos

rgyal

bkra shis mgon gyis bzhengs pa'i rgyud kyi glegs shing

gi

dkar

ehag
284. rin po ehe bde legs rgya mtsho'i brgyad stong pa'i dkar ehag
285. dbu dum brtag gnyis kyi dkar ehag
286. 10 gsar dus kyi shis brjod mdzad pa
287. bdag mo sangs rgyas sgron gyi gdung ehos brgyad stong pa'i mtshon byed
288. thub chen gyi phan la btab pa'i tshigs bead
289. bde legs gling pa'i gtsug lag khang bzhengs pa'i mtshon byed
290. ngam rings kyi byams pa'i phan gyi tshigs bead
291. bsam

'grub gling gi lam 'bras bla rna rnams la phul bali gos phan gyi

tshigs

su bead pa
292. bdag mo thugs rje sri gnon gyis ngam rings su phul bali phan gyi dkar ehag
293. khro phu byams pa'i phan gyi sho 10 ka
294. bsam 'grub gling gser khang gi bkod pa
295. phun tshogs bsam gtan gling gi gtsug [lag] khang bzhengs pa'i mtshon byed
296. rgyal

bali

gtsug lag khang rin po ehe gser gyi ta la ltar 'bar zhing

tshes

gsal ba 'di gtso bor byas pa'i Iha khang so soli lha'i grangs
297. dkar ehag rin po ehe'i sgron rna zhes bya ba
298. 'phags pa shes rab kyi pha rol tu phyin pa'i mtshon byed
299.

bdag chen gur gum rgyal mo'i rin po ehe gser gyi glegs bam bzhengs pa'i dkar
ehag gi snyan ngag

300. dpon po tshe bzang bali shes rab kyi pha rol du phyin pa stong phrag nyi

shu

Inga pa rin po ehe las bzhengs pa'i mtshon byed

30l. skyes rtsa bla mas sa skya bka' 'bum bzhengs pa'i mtshon byed
302. sa

skya bka' 'bum lam 'bras spros med lam zab bla rna brgyud pa sogs

pa'i mtshon byed

303. dpon slob kun bzang ehos [5b] dpal gyi rtogs brjod mdzad pa
304. dpon slob kun bzang chos

dpal gyi rtogs brjod mdzad pa

305. 'tsho byed 8angs rgyas skyabs pa'i mdo mangs kyi dkar ehag
306. brgya rtog gser gsurn nang so dpal srungs kyis bzhengs pa'i dkar ehag

bzhengs

565

307. bka' 'bum gyi dkar chag gsal bali sgron ma

308. 10 gsar dus kyi bkra shis kyi tshigs bcad
309. thub pa dgongs gsal gyi 'chad thabs lam bzang snang ba
310. thub

pa'i dgongs pa gsal ba zhes bya bali gzhung gi bshad thabs

lam bzang gi mdzes rgyan ste

chos sna sum cu so bdun bzhugs

rgyal

sras

soil

long spyod 'khor 10 grol bali bang mdzod

nasll

legs bshad sde bzhi'i dga' ston 'bum bkye yang II

mgrin med rab tu 'phel bali ngo mtshar

gyisll

yid bzhin nor dang chu gter chen po bzhinll

Inya

pa

lal

311. mkhas pa 'jug pa'i sgo'i rnam bshad rig gnas gsal byed bzhugsl

rang gzhan grub mtha' yid bzhin rgya mtsho chell

pha mthar son pa'i ded dpon bla na

medii
nill

sna tshogs rig gnas nor bu'i do shal

mchog dman skye bo kun gyi mgrin par bzhagl/

gterll
mtsholl

sras bcas rgyal bali dgongs don nor bu'i

dri med lung rigs chu klung kun 'du'i

legs pa'i 'byung gnas gsung rab chu gter chell

bshad grub rlabs 'phreng phyogs bcur 'phro gyur

cigll

gcig zhusl

i:ii

566

Appendix L

A List of Sa-paQ's Works

Found in the KhJ Commentary of Glo-bo mkhan-ehen

[See KhJNSh,. pp.

Appendix G.]

40-41 (=20b-21a).

Cf. the similar list of Lho-pa kun-mkhyen in

1. Legs par bshad pa rin po ehe'i gter (TB no. 2)

2. Mkhas pa 'jug pa'i sgo (TB no. 6)
3. [Sgra'i bstan beos] Shes rab 'phro ba [lost]
4. Shes rab [i.e. Sgra] la 'jug pa (TB no. 7)
5. Sgra nyer bsdu (TB no. 13)
6-7. Rigs pa'i gter, 'Grel pa dang beas pa (TB nos. 19-20)
8. Sku gzugs kyi bstan beos [lost]
9. Sa brtag pa [lost]
10. Bstan pa rin po ehe'i rtsis
11. Sman dpyad kyi bstan beos yan lag brgyad pa'i don bsdus
12. Sangs rgyas dang byang ehub sems dpa' la zhu ba'i 'phrin yig (TB no. 29)
13. Grub mtha' rnam 'byed [lost]
14. Pha rol tu phyin pa'i gzhung lugs spyi'i tshogs ehos ehen mo (=ThGS, TB
no. I?)
15. Bdag med ma'i bstod pa'i 'grel pa (TB no. 65)
16. Rten 'breI lna'i yi ge (TB no. 45)
17. Lam sbas bshad (TB no. 46)
18. Bla ma'i rnal 'byor (TB no. 41)
19. Khrid kyi dkar ehag (TB no. 54)
20. Sdeb sbyor me tog gi ehun po (TB no. 15)
21. Bde bar gshegs pa'i thugs rje la bskul ba (TB no. 16)
22. Snyan ngag mkhas pa'i kha rgyan [lost]
23. Tshig gi gter (TB no. 14)
24. Zlos gar rab dga'i 'jug pa [lost]
25. Rol mo'i bstan beos (TB no. 4)
26. Zhang [10 tsa ba'i] zhus l3n (TB no. 34)
27. Chag [10 tsa ba'i] zhus Ian (TB no. 94)
28. Blo [bo 10 tsa ba'i] zhus Ian (TB no. 95)
29. Bka' gdams pa rdo rje seng ge['i zhus Ian] (?)

567

30. Snye mo sgom chen [gyis zhus 1an] (TB no. 98)
31. Thub pa 1a bstod pa (TB no. 70?)
32. 'Jam dbyangs 1a bstod pa (TB no. 25?

18

Cf. TB no. 74)

,
I

568

Appendix M
A List

of

Sa-pa~'s

Works

Found in Gong-dkar 'Phrin-las-rnam-rgyal's

Record of Teachings Recieved

Gong-dkar
4aff.

'Phrin-las-rnam-rgyal [?],

This

is

also

Thob y!:&. bum

a description of one manuscript

complete with the foliation of each substantial work.

indicates the number of folios.
Sa skya

pa~~i

1. Bla

rna

2. Gdung

set

of

fascicle da,
Sa-pa~'s

p.

works,

The number after each title

The annotation (ka) indicates a Lam 'bras work.

tali bka' 'bum dza pa la

dam

gnyis

bzang..EQ.,

pa la thun mong rna yin pa'i sgo nas gsol ba 'debs pa'i

rab

byed

2 (TB no. 68)

rgyud rnam par dag pa'i dge bsnyen grags pa rgyal mtshan la bstod

pa

(TB no. 26)

3. Rje btsun chen po'i rnam thar 11 (TB no. 17)
4. Rnal 'byor gyi dbang phyug birwa pa la gsol ba gdab pa 2 (TB no. 27?)
5. 'Khor 10 bde mchog gi bla rna brgyud pa la gsol ba gdab pa 3 (TB no. 28)
6. Bla mali rnal 'byor gyi cho ga ling chu rtse khab rna 8 (ka) (TB no. 41)
7. Bla mali rnal 'byor gu shri jo 'bum rna 4 (ka) (TB no. 42)
8. Phyi nang gsang gsum gyi

ma~4al

'bul tshul 2 (TB no. 49)

9. Khyad par 'phags pa bstod pa rgya cher 'grel pa'i kha skong 5
10. Bcom ldan 'das shakya'i rgyal po la gsol ba 'debs pa'i tshigs su bcad pa 2 (TB
no. 70)
11. Bde

bar gshegs pa khams gsum gyi mgon po la gsol ba 'debs pa'i tshigs su bcad

pa dgu pa 2 (TB no. 71)

12. Bde bar gshegs pa'i thugs rje la bskul ba 3 (TB no. 16)
13. Sangs rgyas la bstod pa tshig gi phreng ba zhes bya ba 2
14. 'Phags pa 'jig rten dbang phyug thugs rje chen po 1a gsol ba 'debs pa'i tshigs
su bcad pa 2 (TB no. 72)
15. Lha sa'i bde bar gshegs pa thams cad la bstod pa 2 (TB no. 73)
16. Rta na ri khud rnga bo che la bstod pa [no separate foliation] (TB no. 82)
17. Dpal gdong bzhi pa la bstod pa 2 (TB no. 84)
18. 'Phags pa 'jam dpal gyi bstod pa'i r~am bshad rgyud gsum 'khor 10 yi ge nyung
ngu zhes bya ba 6 (TB no. 74)
19. 'Jam dbyang a ra pa tsa na 1ha lnga'i mngon par rtogs pa 3

569

20. A ra pa tsa na lha gcig gi mngon rtogs 2 (TB no. 55)

21. Mtshan brjod 'don thabs 3
22. Sdud pa 1a sogs sher phyin 'don pa'i man ngag [no separate foliation] (TB

no.

89)
23. Phung po gsum pa 'don thabs [no separate foliation] (TB no. 90)
24. Bcom ldan 'das 'jam pa'i rdo rje la mchod par brjod pa'i tshul gyi bstod pa 3
25. Rgyal po 10 pa9 la bstod pa [no separate foliation] [=26?] (TB no. 75?)
26. Bsam yas su 'jam dbyangs phyag mtshan ri mor gyis pa'i tshul [no separate
foliation] (TB no. 75)

27. Chos gsung tshul 3

28. Byang chub sems bskyed 15 (TB no. 21)
29. Sems bskyed lung sbyor 9 (TB no. 22)
30. Theg chen rnam gzhag [no separate foliation] (TB no. 85)
31. 'Chi kha mali gdams ngag 2 (TB no. 88)
32. Snang ba mtha' yas gyi sgom don 2 (TB no. 87)
33. Chos

la

'jug tshul go bde bar sbyar ba 2 (Phyag chen bdun ldan gyi

rtsa

ba

zer) (TB no. 113)

34. Sdom pa gsum gyi rab tu dbye bali rtsa ba 2 (TB no. 24?)
35. Sdom pa gsum gyi rab tu dbye ba 39 (TB no. 24)
36. Thub pa'i dgongs pa gsal ba zhes bya bali bstan bcos 83 (TB no. 1)
37. Phyogs bcu'i sangs rgyas dang byang chub sems dpa' rnams la zhu bali phrin yig
12 (TB no. 29)
38. Zhen pa bzhi bral 1 (TB no. 86)
39. Skye bu dam pa rnams la spring yig 6 (TB no. 30)

40. Bstan pa la dga' bali lha rnams la spring yig 2 (TB no. 35)
41. Grwa pa rnams la spring yig 2
42. Rtse mdo'i dge 'dun dang
43. Nyi rna la spring ba 3 (TB no. 38)
44. Blo gsal don gnyer bali dris Ian 2 (TB no. 5? but see GK no. 105)

45. Glo bo 10 tsa ba la spring yig 3 (TB no. 95)

46. Chos rje dpal gyi dris Ian 10 (TB no. 94)
47. Zhang 10 tsa ba la gdams pa 2 (TB no. 34)
48. Thos bsam sgom gsum gyi dris Ian 3
49. Bka' gdams pa do bskor bali dris Ian 3 (TB no. 79)
50. Snye mo sgom chen gyi zhus Ian 4 (TB no. 98)
51. Rtogs ldan gyi dris Ian 4 (mchan: Snye mo sgom chen)
52. Chos rje sa skya
byon 288

pa~qitas

bod 'bangs spyi la gdams pa 4 (TB no. 77) rnams soli

570

dzha pa la
53. Lam 'bras bu dang beas pa'i khrid kyi dkar ehag 5 (ka) (TB no. 54)
54. Sgrub pa rlung 'byin 4 (TB no. 44)
55. Rten 'breI lnga rdzogs 4 (ka) (TB no. 45)
56. Rdo rje'i Ius kyi 'khrul 'khor (ka)
([ka]-- 'di lam 'bras kho na yin pas lung mi gnang)
57. Lam sbas bshad 5 (ka) (TB no. 46)
58. Brda don gsal ba 2 (ka)
59. Tho yig rin ehen sgron me 4 (ka)
60. Khrid kyi lung sbyor 4 (ka)
61. Lho pa'i zin bris 2 (ka)
62. Yang zin bris geig 5 (ka)
63. Phyag rgya ehen po'i dbye ba 2
64-65.

Spyod pa rnam dag (TB no. 91) Rang sems rang ngos bzung ba gnyis 2 (TB no.

927)
66. Dpal sa skya pa'i gees pa rnams phyogs geig tu bsdus pa 31
67. 'Khor bzhi'i rgya'i yi ge 1 (ka)
68. Rtsa ba dang yan lag gi dam tshig bshad pa 4 (TB no. 64)
69. Dri rna med pa'i rgyan zhes bya ba'i rgya eher 'grel pa 21 (TB no. 65)
70. A~~a gzhi bshad 7 (TB no. 50)
71. Rigs kyi dbye ba'i bshad sbyar 4 (TB no. 62)
72-73. Ni dha na'i sgra bshad (TB no.
no. 61)

63) dang}

Ye shes sre ba'i bshad pa 2 (TB

74. Kye rdor bsdus don 13 (TB no. 112)

75. Tshul bzhi'i bsdus don snying po 18
76. Sgra ean 'dzin gyis mdzad pa'i zung du 'jug pa gsal ba'i dkyil 'khor gyi

eho

ga bsdus don 3 (TB no. 66)

77. Rnal 'byor blana med pa'i tshogs kyi 'khor lo'i lag tu blangs pa'i rim pa
(TB no. 51)
78. Khro bo srne rtsegs kyi bsgrubs las tshogs dang beas pa 2 (TB no. 105)
79. 'Dod rgyal gyi rjes gnang 3
80. Rnam 'joms rnam bshad bdud rtsi spel ba 3 (TB no. 53)
81. Rje btsun rna sgroI ma'i sgrub thabs 2 (TB no. 56)
82. Gza' thams ead kyi [yum gyi] mchod pa'i man ngag gi rim pa 6 (TB no. 60)
83. Dug sel thabs 4 (TB no. 108)
84. (mehan: Thod pa brtag thabs la shog bu 2)
85. Mkhas pa 'jug pa'i sgo 51 (TB no. 6)
86. Gzhung lugs legs par bshad pa 29 (TB no. 3)
87. Nga brgyad rang 'grel dang beas pa 11 (TB no. 18)

12

571

88. 'Phrog byed dga' bo btul tshe 'phags pa wa ti'i gtsug lag khang dang nye bali
tshong 'dus su gsungs pa dang [no separate foliation] (TB no. 80)
89. Ba gor zhes bya bali sgra las drangs pa'i bstod pa 2 (TB no. 81)
90. Chos spyod bcu pa [no separate foliation]
91. Smras pa gnyis pa [no separate foliation] (TB no. 367)
92. Rgyas 'bring bsdus gsum gyi nyams len 2 rnams soli

byon 273

nya pa la
93. Tshad ma rigs pa'i gter 21 (TB no. 19)
94. Rigs gter rang 'grel 168 (TB no. 20)
95. Legs par bshad pa rin po che'i gter 20 (TB no. 2)
96. Tshig gter 11 (TB no. 14)
97. Sdeb sbyor sna tshogs me tog gi chun po 18 (TB no. 15)
98. Yi ge'i sbyor ba 3 (TB no. 10)
99. Sgra'i bstan bcos mkhas pa'i kha rgyan 4 (TB no. 109)
100.
101.
102.
103.
104.
105.
106.

l
I

Sgra nye bar bsdus pa 2 (TB no. 13)

Sgra la 'jug pa'i rnam bshad dang/ [no separate foliation] (TB no. 7)
Smra sgo'i gnad kyi gnas bsdus pa 10 (TB no. 8)
Byis pa bde blag tu 'jug pa'i rnam par bshad pa 11 (TB no. 9)
Rol mo'i bstan bcos [no separate foliation] (TB no. 4)
Ji ltar dri bali tshul 7 (TB no. 5)
Thun mong dang bye brag gi bsngo ba (TB no. 100) 6 rnams soli by on 282

572

Appendix N
The Works of Sa-skya PaQgita
Listed in the Record of Teachings Received of
Dkon-mchog-1hun-grub

Dkon-mchog-1hun-grub, Chos
thos pa 'i
120a.l:

ill ill dpa1 1dan b1a ma dam ~ ~ las dam pa' i ~

.Yi ~ thub bstan ~ pa' i nyin byed, f.

tshu1 gsa1 bar bshad pa' i

Chos kyi rje sa skya paQgita chen po'i gsung rab thob pa 1a
1. Legs par bshad pa rin po che'i gter (TB no. 2)
2. Ro1 mo'i bstan bcos (TB no. 4)
3. Dri ba'i tshu1 'ga' zhig (TB no. 5)
4. Mkhas pa 'jug pa'i sgo (TB no. 6)
5. Sgra 1a 'jug pa (TB no. 7)
6. Sgra'i gnad bsdus pa (TB no. 8)
7. Byis pa bde 'jug gi rnam bshad (TB no. 9)
8. Yi ge'i sbyor ba (TB no. 10)
9. Sgra nyer bsdu (TB no. 13)
10. Tshig gi gter (TB no. 14)
11. Sdeb sbyor me tog gi chun po (TB no. 15)
12. Bde bar bshegs pa'i thugs rje 1a bsku1 ba (TB no. 16)
13. Rje btsun chen po'i rnam thar (TB no. 17)
14. Nga brgyad rtsa 'gre1 (TB no. 18)
15. Dbu ma lugs kyi sems bskyed (TB no. 21)
16. De'i lung sbyor (TB no. 22)
17. Thub pa dgongs gsa1 rnams dang (TB no. 1)
18-19. Rigs gter rtsa 'gre1 (TB no. 19-20)
20. Rje btsun chen po'i bstod pa (TB no. 26)
21. Sdom gsum rab dbye (TB no. 24)
22. 'Jam dbyangs kyi bstod pa (TB no. 25)
23. Phyogs bcu'i sangs rgyas 1a zhu phrin (TB no. 29)
24. Skyes bu dam pa rnams 1a spring ba'i yi ge (TB no. 30)
25. Lung rigs rnam dag dang mthun par 'chad dgos tshu1 (TB no. 31)
26. Rtogs 1dan zhig gi dris Ian (TB no. 32?)
27. Zhang 10 tsa ba 1a gdams pa (TB no. 34)
28. Bstan pa 1a dga' ba'i 1ha 1a springs pa (TB no. 35)

573

29-30. Yang tshigs su bead pa gong 'og 2 (TB no. 36)

31. Mi nyag gi rgya1 khams su gnang ba'i yi ge (TB no. 37)
32. Nyi ma 'bum 1a springs pa (TB no. 38)
33. Lam zab mo b1a ma'i rna1 'byor (TB no. 41)
34. Sgrub pa lung sbyin (TB no. 44)
35. Rten 'breI 1nga (TB no. 45)
36. Lam sbas bshad (TB no. 46)
37.

A~~a'i

bzhi bshad (TB no. 50)

38. Tshogs 'khor gyi eho ga (TB no. 51)

39. De 1a dgos pa'i lung sbyor (TB no. 52)
40. Rnam 'joms kyi [120b] rgyud kyi bshad pa (TB no. 53)
41. A ra pa tsa na'i mngon rtogs (TB no. 55)
42. SgroI ma'i mngon rtogs (TB no. 56)
43. Bza' yum gyi mehod ehog (TB no. 60)
44. Rigs kyi rab dbye'i bshad sbyar (TB no. 62)
45. Sgra sgrub dum bu dgu pa (TB no. 63)
46. Rtsa 1tung beu bzhi pa'i 'gre1 pa (TB no. 64)
47. Bdag med bstod 'gre1 (TB no. 65)
48. Brtag gnyis kyi sa bead sna bsrings pa (TB no. 112?)
49. Zung 'jug gsa1 ba'i sa bead (TB no. 66)
50-51.

B1a

ma 1a thun mong dang thun mong ma yin pa'i sgo nas gsol ba 'debs pa 2

(TB no. 67-68)

52. Bde mehog b1a ma brgyud pa'i gsol 'debs (TB no. 28)
53. Bi ru pa'i bstod pa (TB no. 27)
54. Bod yu1 1a bsngags pa (TB no. 69)
55. Shakya'i rgya1 po 1a gsol ba 'debs pa (TB no. 70)
56. Thub pa'i bstod pa 1hug pa
57. Bde bar gshegs pa khams gsum gyi mgon po 1a bstod pa (TB no. 71)
58. 'Jig rten dbang phyug 1a bstod pa (TB no. 72)
59. Lha sa'i bde bar gshegs pa rnams 1a bsngags pa (TB no. 73)
60. 'Jam dbyangs kyi bstod pa'i rnam bshad (TB no. 74)
61. Phyag mtshan ri mo'i yi ge (TB no. 75)
62. Gangs ri'i khrod kyi sgom ehen rnams 1a springs pa (TB no. 76)
63. Bu slob rnams 1a springs pa (TB no. 77)
64. Do bskor ba'i dris Ian (TB no. 79)
65. Mu stegs btu1 ba'i tshigs bead (TB no. 80)
66. Yon tan sgrogs pa'i tsha1 1a bstod pa (TB no. 81)
67. Rnga bo ehe 1a bsngags pa (TB no. 82)
68. Gdong bzhi pa 1a bstod pa (TB no. 84)

..

14 ;
I

574

69.
70.
71.
72.
73.
74.
75.
76.
77.

Theg ehen lam gyi rnam gzhag (TB no. ~5)

Zhen pa bzhi bral (TB no. 86)
Snang ba mtha' yas kyi bsgom don (TB no. 87)
[Added in dbu-ehen seript:] Spyod pa rnam dag gi tshigs su bead pa (TB no. 91)
Sems kyi gnas lugs rnal du mtshon pa'i man ngag gi tshigs su bead pa (TB no.
92)
'Chi kha ma'i gdams ngag ngo mtshar ean (TB no. 88) [po 121a]
Chag lo'i dris Ian (TB no. 94)
Glo bo 10 tSB ba la springs pa (TB no. 95)
Bka' gdams pa nam mkha' 'bum gyi dris Ian (TB no. 96)

78. Yang dris Ian mdor bsdus pa geig (TB no. 971)
79. Snyi mo sgom ehen gy~ dris Ian (TB no. 98)
80. Yan lag bdun ldan gyi rtsa ba (TB no. 113)
81. Bsngo ba yon bshad dang beas pa (TB no. 100) rnams soIl

575

Appendix 0
The Contents of One Volume from a Sa-skya Manuscript
of Sa-pa~'s Collected Works

The contents of one volume from an dbu med manuscript preserved in Sa-skya,
ink on white paper, vol.

~,

black

429 ff:

1. Legs par bshad pa rin po che'i gter (32 ff.) (TB no. 2)
2. Rol mo'i bstan bcos (9 ff.) (TB no. 4)

3. Blo gsal don myur [sic] gyi skyes bu dam pa rnams la dri ba'i tshul gyi
yig rtsom 'phro (3 ff.) (TB no. 5)
4. Mkhas pa 'jug pa'i sgo (78 ff.) (TB no. 6)
5. Sgra la 'jug pa (11 ff.) (TB no. 7)
6. Smra sgo'i gnad bsdus (4 ff.) (TB no. 8)
7. Byis pa bde blag tu 'jug pa'i rnam par bshad pa (17 ff.) (TB no. 9)
8. Sgra'i bstan bcos mkhas pa'i kha brgyan [sic] (5 ff.) (TB no. 109)

phrin

9. Yi ge'i sbyor ba (5 ff.) (TB no. 10)

10. Sgra nye bar bsdus pa'i tshigs su bcad pa (3 ff.) (TB no. 13)
11. Ming gi mngon brjod ston pa'i bstan bcos tshig gi gter (21 ff.) (TB no. 14)
12. Sdeb

sbyor sna tshogs me tog gi chun po zhes bya ba'i bstan bcos (28 ff.) (TB

no. 15)
13. Bde bar gshegs pa'i thugs rje la bskul ba (4 ff.) (TB no. 16)
14. Rje btsun grags pa rgyal mtshan gyi rnam par thar pa (16 ff.) (TB no. 17)
15. Lam

zab bla ma'i rnal 'byor ling chu rtser khab rna (10 ff.) (final mchan

bu:

dpal ling chu rtser khab kyi gtsug lag khang du sbyar ba'oll) (TB no. 41?)
16. Nga

brgyad rang 'grel dang bcas pa

(17 ff.)

(mchan:

nga brgyad rtsa

kyang zer) (TB no. 18)

17. Byang chub mchog tu sems bskyed pa'i cho ga (22 ff.) (mchan:

dbu rna lugs

'grel
kyi

sems bskyed kyang zer) (TB no. 21)

18. Byang chub kyi mchog tu sems bskyed pa lung dang sbyar ba (14 ff.) (TB no. 22)
19. Thub pa'i dgongs pa gsal ba (130 ff.) (TB no. 1)

577

INDEX

This

is

a selective index of technical terms and proper nouns,

order of the Roman alphabet.

For finding other subjects,

of contents, pp. v-x, and the outline of KhJ III, pp. 200-203.

Abhidharma 25, 30, 351, 388, 431

Abhidharmakosa 25, 27, 110, 178, 383
abhipraya 385
Abhisamayala~ara

27

abhisalJldhi 385
abhuta 377
adhika 325
adhipatipratyaya 440
advaya 398
advayajnEma 426
8gama 434, 437
A-gnyan-dam-pa.

See Sga A-gnyan-dam-pa

A-gnyen bakshi.

See Sga A-gnyan-dam-pa

aharpkara 336
ahetusamajati 326
*Aisvara 346, 361, 410
Ajivika 345
ajnana 326
Akamatsu, A. 455
akara 174
akasa 381
A-khu-chin Shes-rab-rgya-mtsho 32, 46, 128-130, 149
Ak?apada 200, 324-326, 370
A-lag-sha Ngag-dbang-bstan-dar 42, 54
alambanapratyaya 439
alarpkaras 59
alarpkarasastra 26, 214
Alikakara 172, 420, 423
Allers, R. 204
A-ma-dpal 213
Amarakosa 27, 52, 59

i
I

arranged in

the

see the detailed table

,
I
i

578

A-mchog Skye-dgu'i-dpal 213

A-mdo 31, 137
A-mdo Di-phu-chos-rje-dgon-pa 137
A-mes-zhabs Ngag-dbang-kun-dga'-bsod-nams 18-20, 23, 32f, 36, 80, 85f, 90, 92, 9799, 101, 104, 114, 214f, 221, 224, 226, 246
A-mgon-bzang-po 237, 246
396
anaikantika 357, 379
anabhyupagamadr~~i

ananubha~ana

325, 447

anityasamajati 328
antarasloka 387
a\lu 417f
anubandhas 9
anugraha 369
*anuktasamajati 326
anumana 433f
anupalabdhihetu 439, 442
anutpattisamajati 327
anyapoha 168, 397, 428
anyathasiddha 448
apakar~asamajati

327

aparthaka 325
apasiddhanta 326
apatti 339
apaya 382
A-phyi stupa at Sa-skya 25
apoha 45
apraptakala 325
apraptisamajati 326
apratibha 326, 448
aptagama 441
Aramaki, N. 383, 390, 461
Arcata 110
Aristotelian logic 6, 443
arthala~ara 194
arthantara 325

arthapattisamajati 327
arvagdarsin 401
Aryadeva 411, 426

579

asaddr~~i 395
Asahga 173, 189, 341, 346, 371, 386, 410, 440

A-seng Rdo-rje-brtan-pa 237, 246

asiddha 357, 375, 446, 448, 453
a~rayasiddha

A~~a'i

448

bzhi bshad 59, 62

atiprasanga 330, 379

Ati~a

113, 409, 414, 417, 423, 427, 431

ati vyapti 379

Atiwara 108
stman 341, 346, 360, 452
atyantaparok~a 382
Aulukya 342, 344-346

avaktatva 395
avar~yasamajati

327

avatara 10
AviddhakarQa 455
avijnatartha 325

327
avyakftavastu 390

avise~asamajati

badhita 446
Bagehi, Y. 206, 446
'bam 236
Bangala 358
Barhaspatya 345
Ba ri ba'i gdams pa thun mong ma yin pa 91
Barlingay, S. S. 206
bar skabs kyi tshigs bead 192, 214, 387, 393
Bar-ston Rdo-rje-rgyal-mtshan 18
Beom-ldan Rigs-pa'i-ral-gri 406
bdag med 166, 452
bdag po'i rkyen 440
Bde mehog lhan skyes kyi byin rlabs 92, 99
bden pa'i ehos 454
Beijing 221, 223, 238f, 242
'bel ba'i gtam 368
Bengal 107, 121
Bernhard, F. 386

--1000II

580

Bethlenfalvy, G. 43
be'u 'bums 90
Bhattacharya, K. 380, 454-456
Bhavaviveka 344, 356, 392, 404, 409, 441f
Bhavyaraja 112
Bhoja 194
bhumi 211
Bhutan 75, 229
Bhutanese MS 229-231
Bihar 107
Bihar Research Society 34, 74, 101, 123, 183
Bi-ji Rin-chen-grags 18, 50, 64, 90, 92, 225, 397
Bira, She 41
Bka' gdams do kor bali zhus Ian 52, 64, 96, 185, 237, 396
Bka' gdams gzhung drug 178f
Bka' gdams nam mkha' 'bum gyi zhus Ian 64, 66, 68, 94, 98
Bka'-gdams-pa 52, 178
bkag pa'i rim pa 425
Bkra-shis-'khyil 148
Bkra-shis-Ihun-grub, Ngor mkhan-po 76, 183f, 232, 234, 236, 244
Bkra-shis-Ihun-po 34
Bkra-shis-rdo-rje, Ko-btso 222, 243
Bkra-shis-rnam-rgyal, dge-bshes, 69
Bla-ma-dam-pa Bsod-nams-rgyal-mtshan 19f,

23,

71,

115,

135, 139-142, 145, 154,

161, 205, 406

Bla rna rje btsun chen po'i rnam thar 51, 57, 63, 124
blo ngor rna grub pa 449-452
blo sbyong 49
Bodhgaya 367
Bodhibhadra 410
BodhimaI}-qa 367
Bodhisattva vow 48
Bo-dong E 134
Bo-dong-pa (of Gsang-phu lineage) 144
Bo-dong pa~-chen Phyogs-Ias-rnam-rgyal 19f, 115f, 130, 142, 154, 158
Bod yul la bsngags pa 61
Bohtlingk,

o.

42

Bosson, J. 10, 32, 41, 43, 45, 48, 54, 462

Brag-g.yab Blo-gros 387

581

Brag-phug-pa 161
Brahma 346, 433
344, 410
'bras bu'i rtags 439, 442

Brahma(-Mima~saka?)

'Bras-yul Skyed-tshal 136, 156

brda 193
brda sprod pa ehen po 108
'breI 131
'breI pa 9, 430, 442
brgal Ian 192, 368
Brhaspati 345
'Bri-gung-pa Dbon Shes-rab-'byung-gnas 28, 31, 36
'Bri-gung-pa Dpal-'dzin 13
'Bri-gung-pa Ratna 36, 55
'Bri-gung skyob-pa 'Jig-rten-mgon-po 12, 47, 55
brjod bya 9
Broido, M. 385
'Bro Seng-dkar Shakya-'od 113, 120
Brtag pa gnyis pa'i bsdus don 63, 94
Brtsegs-ston Dbang-phyug-seng-ge 111f, 122
Brtson-'grus-dpal 139-141, 144f, 161
Bru-sha Bsod-nams-seng-ge 155
bsal ba ye med kyi thaI 'gyur 459

'il,1'"I:'

Bsam-grub-bzang-po, Slob-dpon 144

Bsam-grub-dpal-' bar , Glo-bo ruler 213, 238
Bsam-grub-gling, in Glo-bo 212
Bsam-grub-gling, near Sde-dge 233
bsdu ba'i tshigs su bead pa 192, 241, 393
bsdus don 127f, 147-149
bsdus grwa 6, 45, 129, 131, 150-152, 160, 206, 457
Bsdus pa 105f, 112, 129, 134f, 137, 146, 151f, 157, 169, 171f, 200, 452
bsdus pa'i srol 151, 172
bsdus pa'i tshigs su bead pa 192, 241, 393
bsdus rwa 129, 151
bsdus skad 151
bsgrub bya 393
bsgrub

bya

dang mtshungs pa 433.

See also sgrub byed bsgrub bya dang

mtshungs

pa'i
bshad grwa 217

---'-'

582

bshad gsar 106

bshad mdzod 40
bshad pa 143, 216
bshad pa'i brgyud 'dzin 161
Bshes pa'i phring yig gi bsdus don 49, 92, 99, 147
bsngo ba 462
Bsngo ba yon bshad dang beas pa 59
Bsod-nams-dpal-bzang-po 118, 120f, 123, 183
Bsod-nams-grags-pa, PaQ-ehen 20, 23, 34
Bsod-nams-rgyal-mtshan. See Bla-ma-dam-pa Bsod-nams-rgyal-mtshan 19
Bsod-nams-rgya-mtsho, Ngor Thar-rtse mkhan-po 232
Bsod-nams-rtse-mo, Slob-dpon 10, 24f, 59, 75, 105f, 230, 380, 384, 393, 396, 461
bsod nyams pa 388
bsod snyoms pa chen po 111
Bstan beos mkhas pa'i kha rgyan 53, 66f, 83, 92
Bstan-,' dzin-rgyal-mtshan 233
Bstan-la rgyal-bu 136
Bstan pa la dga' ba'i lha rnams la spring ba 50
Bstan-pa-tshe-ring, Derge king 76, 232f, 236, 243f
'Bum-phrag-gsum-pa Byams-pa-ehos-don-'grub 137, 142
Bu slob rnams la spring ba 49, 63, 91, 98
Bu-ston 13,

35, 47, 118f, 124, 127f, 143f, 147, 151, 155, 160, 181, 368, 385-387,

393, 405, 407, 427, 461

Byams-ehen rab-'byams-pa Sangs-rgyas-'phel 139, 142, 156
Byams-gling
Byang

pa~-ehen

chub

243

kyi sems kyi mehog tu sems bskyed pa'i eho ga'i lung sbyor 57,

68
Byang-ehub-dpal 143, 154
Byang-ehub-dpal, Mkhan 135, 154
Byang-ehub-rtse-mo, Lo-ehen 142
Byang-ehub-seng-ge, Chos-rje 162
Byang-pa, Dpon-ehen 134
bye brag 131
Byis pa bde blag tu 'jug pa 10
Byis pa bde blag tu 'jug pa'i rnam bshad 9f, 52, 57, 59, 61, 66f, 75, 83, 230f
Bzang-ldan 134
Bzang-ldan-pa Dkon-mehog-grags-bzang 162
Bzang-po-dpal, Bdag-nyid-ehen-po 80
Bzang-ring Dar-ma-tshul-khrims 155

66,

583

Bzhad-ri Skyed-tshal-'og-ma 137

Campbell, W. L. 42
CaI)akya 407
Candrahari 409
Candrakirti 26, 130, 174, 181f, 398, 408, 410, 414
Candrakirti (II) 385, 427
Candrapa 110
cang mi smra bar gyur to 390
Canzio, R. 41, 48
Carvaka 173, 341, 344f, 381, 394f, 408, 441
catu~koti 352, 390, 433
Central Institute of Higher Tibetan Studies, Sarnath 14

Chab-mdo 76
'chad pa 41
'chad par dam bca' ba 191
chad pas bcad pa'i Ita ba 395
'chad rtsod rtsom gsum 192
'chad thabs 221
Chag lo'i zhu ba 79
Chag lo-tsa-ba Chos-rje-dpal 13, 52, 58, 63,66, 68, 71
Chag 10 tsa ba'i zhus Ian 16, 52, 57f, 63, 385, 461f
chala 377
Chatterjee, A. K. 421
Chatterjee, S. C. 441
Chemparathy, G. 455
'Chims 'Jam-pa'i-dbyangs 130
China 73, 80, 239, 247
Chinese block carvers 73
Chogay Trichen Rinpoche 51
chos 'byung 20
chos can rna grub 448
Chos-grags-dpal-bzang, Kun-spangs 134
Cho-shul Byang-chub-gling 136
Chos-'khor-lhun-po 137
chos kyi rje 4, 12
Chos-lung ka-bcu-pa 136
Chos rgyal rna 17
chos rje pa 12

19

584

Chos-rnarn-rgyal, Rta-nag mkhan-po 20, 23, 101, 137, 157

Chos-seng-ba 144
ehos spyod 17
Chos spyod beu pa 67, 237, 246
Chu-'dus-ehos-sde Chos-'khor-nor-bu-gling 136
eittamatra 352, 426
Clarke, G. E. 55
Conrad of Hissau 9
Conze, E. 438
Csorna de KBros, A. 42
eung zad lkog gyur 429
Dags-po grwa-tshang 137
Dalai bla-rna V,

Ngag-dbang-blo-bzang-rgya-rntsho,

20, 23, 32, 34, 84-86, 91, 95f,

99f, 102-104, 141, 144, 160-162, 224, 246

dam bear 'gal 448
dam bear la bsal ba 205
Darn-pa Kun-dga'-grags. See Sga A-gnyan-darn-pa
Danasila 27, 35, Ill, 121, 124, 141
Dan-'bag-pa Srnra-ba'i-seng-ge 130, 150
Da~~in 59, 194
Dar-rna-bkra-shis 144
Dar-rna-grags 113
Das, S. C. 32, 55, 124
Dasgupta, S. 373, 407
Datta, D. M. 441
Davidson, R. M. 48
Dbang-'dus 102
Dbang-phyug-dpal 143
dbang shes 420
dbu rna bsdus pa 129f, 149
dbu rna chen po 179
dbu rna'i de kho na nyid 188
Dbu rna lugs kyi serns bskyed kyi eho ga 57, 66-68, 226
Dbu-ru'i klungs Sky i-shod 17, 31, 117
Dbus 25, 28, 64, 109, 119, 123
Dbus-pa Blo-gsal 383, 389, 395, 401, 406f, 408-410, 419f, 422, 424, 433, 455
Dbus-ston Rin-ehen-blo-gros 136
dbyar ehos bar 106

585

dbyibs 455
de kho na nyid 174
de rna thag pa'i rkyen 439
Denison Ross, E. 220
Derge. See also Sde-dge
Derge editions 43f, 64, 72, 76f, 83, 92f, 96, 100, 102f, 123, 216, 221f, 225, 227,
229, 232-236, 238f, 243
Devendrabuddhi 109, 112, 447
Dey, N. L. 383
Dezhung Rinpoche 69, 72, 79, 148, 227, 246
Dga'-ldan-pa.

See Dge-lugs-pa

dga' Idan par rnying 74, 81

Dga'-ldan pho-brang 216
dge bsnyen 62, 105
Dge-lugs-pa 145, 180, 216, 392, 427, 433, 457
Dge-'phel-gyi-chos-grwa 136
Dgon-gsar-ba Bsod-narns-rgyal-rntshan 226
dgongs gzhi 393
dgongs pa 385, 424
dgongs pa can 393
dgongs pa rna yin pa 385
dgongs te gsungs pa'i dgos pa 393
dgos pa 9
dgos pa'i dgos pa 9
dharma 381
dharmas 339, 353, 432
Dharmakirti 2, Sf, 25,
165-176,

180,

45,

58, 105f, 108f, 110, 113, 118, 121, 127, 131f, 148,

189, 200, 205, 324-326, 328, 330, 332, 348-351, 354-360, 377-

379, 381, 394f, 408, 414-420, 424f, 427f, 432, 442f, 447, 452f
Dharmas of Maitreya 25, 27, 112, 165-167, 173, 189
dharmasvarnin 4
dharrnin 381, 438
Dharmottara 107, 109-111, 116, 127f, 131, 148, 165-168, 414, 421, 437, 452
*dharmyasiddha 448
Dhongthog Rinpoche, T. G. 22, 227, 238
Digambara 345
Dignaga 58, 110, 127, 131f, 137, 148, 168, 170, 172f, 175, 194, 211, 326-328, 351,
355f, 375, 377, 393f, 414, 417, 419f, 431, 440, 442-444
Dignaga's Cave 25

4
I

586

Dlpa~ara 113, 409

Dlrghanakha 337, 389

Dkar Shakya-grags 134, 161
Dkon-mchog-bstan-pa-rab-rgyas 18, 32
Dkon-mchog-grags 141, 145f, 161
Dkon-mchog-lhun-grub 19, 84-86, 91, 94f, 117, 183, 213, 218, 225
Dkon-mchog-yon-tan-rgyal-mtshan, Ri-khrod-pa 220
Dmar-ston Chos-kyi-rgyal-po 18, 43, 54f, 218
dmigs pa'i rkyen 439
dmigs su med pa 438
dmigs su yod pa 438
dngos la gnod byed tshad rna 393
dngos po 431
dngos po stobs zhugs 421, 428-430, 436
dngos stobs 421, 428-430, 437
'dod 456
'dod chags dang bral ba 452
Dod mo ri pa'i gtsug lag khang du bsngags pa 91
'dod pa 393, 395
'dod pa 'dri ba 197
'dod pa grub 456
'dod thog 456
don bsdus pa 147
don byed nus pa'i don dam 176
'dong 235
don 'grel 138
don la rna grub pa 449, 452
don rgyan 194
don rig 174
Don-yod-dpal 136, 139f, 142
Dpa'-bo Gtsug-lag-phreng-ba 20, 23, 34
dpa' bo lag rdum 457
Dpal-brtsegs 400
Dpal-'byor-shes-rab 143
Dpal-chen-'od-po 24, 106
Dpal gdong bzhi pa'i bstod pa 62
Dpal-'khor-chod-sde 155
Dpal-ldan-don-grub 24
Dpal-ldan-pa 144

I
I
I

587

Dpal-ldan-seng-ge 79, 138, 140, 1447, 159

Dpal-ldan-seng-ge, Sde-bdun-pa 140
Dpal-ldan-tshul-khrims 115, 145, 161f
Dpang lo-tsa-ba Blo-gros-brtan-pa 113, 134, 139-142, 145, 161f, 214, 219, 224
dpang po 197, 368
dpe dag pa zhig 71
dpe nyer 'jal ba 434
dpyad bzod 170, 182
drang don 47, 385
Dri bali tshul 'gal zhig 53, 75, 237
Dri rna rned pa zhes bya bali rgya eher 'grel pa 57, 60f, 147
dris Ian 208
dris te Ian gdab pa 388
drung yig 232
Dug beos 92, 102
'Dul-'dzin-pa, Slob-dpon 162
Dung-dkar Blo-bzang-'phrin-las 150, 204, 206
Dylykova, V. S. 43
'Dzarn-thang bla-rna 154
'dzern med pa 345
Eastern Tibet 28
Eimer, H. 80, 389
Eisner, P. 42
ekarp.sena 336
Elias, N. 220
Ellingson, T. 48
Ferrari, A. 45, 119, 154-156, 183
Fifth Dalai Lama.
Forster, E. M. 13

See Dalai bla-rna V

Foueaux, P. E. 42
Frauwallner, E. 375, 391, 407, 441-443
Fukuda, Y. 80
'gal 131
'gal ba 458f
'gal ba brjod pa'i thaI 'gyur 434, 455
'gal bali. thaI 'gyur 458f

.
I

....

9:
588

gaI)acakra 57
Gangadvara 333
Gangs can gyi sgom chen rnams la gdams pa 49, 91
Gangs-pa She'u 128
GauQ,a 194
Gautama 370, 373, 377, 379
Ga-zi bka'-bcu-pa Shakya-blo-gros 137
Ga-zi grwa-tshang 137
gcer bu pa 345
gcig dang du bral 418, 433
Gdong-thog sprul-sku Bstan-pa'i-rgyal-mtshan 22, 227, 238
gdung rabs 19
Gelung 212
Glo-bo 18, 85f, 92, 96f, 210, 212f, 221, 229, 236-238, 246, 378
Glo bo 10 tsa ba'i zhus Ian 66, 68, 237, 462
Glo-bo mkhan-chen Bsod-nams-lhun-grub 13,

19,

21, 23, 32, 41, 72f, 80, 85f, 100,

104,

138,

152f,

159, 175, 179f, 185, 187, 200, 205, 207, 210-216, 218-227,

229,

246,

368,

376-378, 380, 386f, 393, 400f, 403-409, 411f, 414-416, 422,

427-432, 437f, 441f, 445, 447f, 452, 456f, 460f

Glo-bo Smon-thang 236
Glo-bo Thub-bstan-rnam-rgyal 136, 156, 212
gnam lcags thog gi thaI 'gyur 457
Gnas-drug-pa 139
Gnas-rnying 135
Gnyan Dar-ma-seng-ge 161
Gnyan Phug-chung-ba 93
Gnyan-ston 'Dul-ba-seng-ge 20
Gnyan-yod Bya-rgod-gshongs 137
Gnyal-pa.

See Mnyal-pa

Gnyal-zhig Jo-nam 160.

Same as Mnyal-pa?

Gnyer-pa A-srung 232

gnyis bcas kyi sbyor ba 394
Go-bo rab-'byams-pa.

See Go-rams-pa

Gokhale, V. V. 11, 121

Goldberg, M. E. 206
Gong-dkar 'Phrin-las-rnam-rgyal 84-86, 90-94, 99f, 104, 161, 224
Gong-dkar-ba edition, 61, 74-76, 81, 230-233, 243, 245
Gong-dkar-ba tradition 103
Gong-dkar-rdo-rje-gdan-pa Kun-dga'-rnam-rgyal 74f, 161, 230f

589

Goodman, S. D. 41, 54
Go-rams-pa Bsod-nams-seng-ge 12,
142,

150,

21, 23, 34,

55,

73, 78, 80, 117, 124, 136f, 139,

177, 179, 186-189, 213, 227, 369, 381f, 391, 394f, 397, 400, 414-

416, 420, 424-430, 433-440, 449, 451f, 454, 457f

'Gos Khug-pa Lhas-btsas 13
'Gos lo-tsa-ba Gzhon-nu-dpal 118f, 144, 150, 155, 160, 162, 182f, 219, 397, 461
Gra Byams-pa-gling 243
grags chen bco brgyad 138
Grags-pa, Lo-chen 142
grags pa'i rtags 437
Grags-pa-rgyal-mtshan,

Pa~-chen

(of the Bo-dong-pa) 134, 142?

Grags-pa-rgyal-mtshan, Rje-btsun, 12f, 16, 22, 24-27, 31, 35, 51, 57, 59f, 63, 68,
75, 91, 99, 105, 108, 116-118, 124, 207, 218, 230, 245, 400, 404, 406, 408,
410, 43lf, 461
Grags-rin-pa 144
Grags-sde-spyod-pa'i-dbu-ma 181f
grahya grahaka 418
Gra-phyi Tshongs-'dus-grwa-tshang 183
grol bar byed pa 388
Grub chen bcu 59, 90
Grub mtha'i dbye ba 66f
Grub mtha' rnam 'byed 66f, 83, 102, 347, 411
grwa khang 135
Grwa-lnga-rgyal-po 75, 231
grwa tshang 130
gsal ba 420
gsal byed pa 345, 407
Gsal-1dan Mgon-po-bkra-shis 244
gsal zhing rig pa 172, 174, 420, 432
gsang bar smra ba pa 344, 406
Gsang-phu Ne'u-thog 10Sf, 115f, 130, 135, 137, 155, 166
gsan yig 84-86
gser chos 238
Gser-mdog pav.-chen.

See Shakya-mchog-ldan

Gser-tog Blo-bzang-tshul-khrims-rgya-mtsho 53
gsung gi sgros 219
gtam hrgyud 221
gtan tshigs chen po 432
gtan tshigs Itar snang 459

,.j

590

gter gsum 152

Gtsang 25, 64, 109, 123, 226
Gtsang Chu-mig 26, 30, 107
Gtsang-nag-pa Brtson-'grus-seng-ge 26, 45, 106f, 129-131, 144, 160, 171, 247, 397,
407, 433, 435, 456f
Gtsug-rgyan-nor-bu 213
Gu-ge 75, 136, 212, 220, 246
Gu-ge Brgya-gling-thang 136
gu~a 433
Gung-pa Skyo-ston-dri-med 160

Gu-ru-bkra-shis, Phyag-mdzod 232

G.yag-sde pa~-chen 160
G.yag-ston Sangs-rgyas-dpal 134-142, 145f, 158, 161
Gza' yum gyi mchod chog 59, 61
gzhag par Ian gdab pa 389
Gzhan-dga' Gzhan-phan-chos-kyi-snang-ba 227, 247, 368, 386, 395f, 410, 440
gzhan don rjes dpag 5, 133, 447
gzhan gyi lugs dgag pa 192
gzhan la grags pa'i rjes dpag 347, 410, 434, 455
gzhan sel 131
gzhan stong 220, 227
Gzhi-thog bla-brang 72, 74, 156
Gzhi-thog-pa Blo-gros-rgyal-mtshan-dpal-bzang-po 74
Gzhon-nu-dpal. See 'Gos lo-tsa-ba
Gzhon-nu-rgyal-mchog, Sems-dpa'-chen-po 155
Gzhung-brgya-pa Dngos-grub-dpal-'bar 137, 142
gzhung don 214
Gzhung lugs legs par bshad pa 39, 48f, 90, 100, 187, 406, 433
Gzhu-ston Bsod-nams-rin-chen 136
gzung 'dzin 418
Gzung-skyabs, Par-dpon 232
ha cang thaI 379
Hahn, M. 43, 54, 391, 398
Haribhadra 417, 426
Haribhadra Suri 421
Haridvar 333, 382
Harinanda 16f, 28, 53, 64, 108, 117
Hattori, M. 375, 415, 431, 440-442

"
I
I

591

hetu 434, 447

hetupratyaya 440
*hetusama 352, 361
hetusamajati 326
hetvabhasa 326, 328, 374, 446, 449, 452f, 459
hetvantara 325
Hevajra mulatantra 24
Hevajra sadhanas 24,30
Hirano, T. 401
Hoffmann, H. 220
Hopkins, J. 401
Horner, I. B. 389
hor par ma 73
hor yig 74
Horvath, Z. 46
Houston, G. W. 403
Hugh of St. Victor 1, 9
Huparikar, G. S. 9, 204, 379
Huth, G. 32, 42
Hwa-shang Mahayana 50
Ichigo, M. 383, 426, 431
Ikeda, R. 48
Imaeda, Y. 400
Inaba S. 45, 51f
India 63, 75, 107
India Office Library 34
indriyarthasa~nikar~a

431

Ishihama, Y. 80
Isvara 173, 336, 346, 349, 361, 433, 455
Iyengar, H. R. R. 442
Jackson, Roger 47, 402f
'Jad Thub-bstan-yangs-pa-can 136
Jagaddala 11, 111, 121
Jaina 337, 342, 344f, 347, 408, 421, 434f, 452, 454
jalpa 377
'Jam-dbyangs-bzhad-pa 44, 400, 435, 457
'Jam-dbyangs Don-yod-rgyal-mtshan 154, 162

20

592

'Jam-dbyangs Dpal-Idan-rgya-mtsho, Gtsang mkhan-chen 34

'Jam-dbangs-kun-dga'-bsod-nams, Sa-sky a Io-tsa-ba 213, 432
'Jam-dbyangs-kun-dga'-chos-bzang 142
'Jam-dbyangs Mkhyen-brtse'i-dbang-po 141, 215
'Jam-dbyangs-rgyal-mtshan, BIa-ma? 145, 161?
'Jam-dbyangs Shakya-gzhon-nu 154f, 160
'Jam-dbyangs-skya-bo Nam-mkha'-dpal 139-142, 144f, 159f, 162
'Jam-dbyangs Ston-gzhon 144
'Jam dpal gyi bstod pa'i rnam bshad 59, 62
'Jam-dpal-'phrin-las 205
'Jam-dpal-rgyal-mtshan, Gu-ru? 161
'Jam-skya. See 'Jam-dbyangs-skya-bo
'Jam-sngon-pa 144
jati 153, 326, 373-377, 443
Jayananda 106
Jayanta Bha~ta 446
Jha, G. 371, 373f, 430, 446, 448
Jhalakikar, B. 421
'Jig-rten-grags-sde-spyod-pa'i Dbu-ma
'jig rten gyi grags pa 181
'Jigs-med-rdo-rje 32
Ji Itar dri tshul.

See Dri bali tshul 'gal zhig

Jinendrabuddhi 430
Jitari 111, 426, 428, 452
jiva 390
jivatman 453
Jnanagarbha 26, 398, 417, 426
JKanasribhadra 113
Jffana~rimitra

110f, 120

Jo-'bar 36
Jo-btsun Grags-rgyal 139
Jo-khang 28, 31
jo sras 105
'jug pa 10
'jug pa'i sgo 3
Ka-ba Dpal-brtsegs 431
Ka-bzhi-rkang-cig 154
Kag chol gyi rjes gnang 91

593

Kajiyama, Y. 119-121, 124, 379, 385, 399, 416-418, 422, 426, 431, 438f, 441, 443f,
452f, 455
Ka1apa 61
ka1atitasamajati 328, 374, 376
Kamalasila 109, 179, 402f, 409, 417, 422, 426f, 430, 455
KaQada 119, 173, 330, 345f
Kanjur 80, 232
197, 445f
Kapila 211, 344
ka~takoddhara

karma 336, 352

Karmay, S. 47f, 50, 403
karyahetu 439, 442
karya-karaQa 356
Kashmir 30, 107, 171, 178
Kautilya 407
kavya 26, 41, 108, 241
Kavyadarsa 41, 59
Kawamura, L. 49, 54, 147
kaya 353
Kent, J. 53
Kha-che Pa~-chen.
khal 235

See Sakyasribhadra

Khams 31, 50, 64, 71f, 76, 90, 92, 137, 214, 225, 234
Khams-sprul IV 41
Khang-ston 'Od-zer-rgyal-mtshan 143, 161
khas mi len pa'i Ita ba 396
Khenpo Appey (Mkhan-po A-pad) 33, 47, 215, 223, 240, 368, 378, 387, 400, 411, 415,
428, 445, 460
Khetsun Sangpo 12, 80, 114, 220
'Khon 156, 215
'Khon Dkon-mchog-rgyal-po 24
'khor gsum 205
'khor gsum tshang ba'i thaI 'gyur 459
'Khor-Io-can 25
Khri-bkra-shis-mnga'-bdag Rtse-Ide-btsan 122
Khro bo sme brtsegs kyi sgrub thabs 92, 103
Khro-phu 109, 119, 123, 135, 155
Khro-phu lo-tsa-ba 26, 123
Khu lo-tsa-ba 435

594

Khyad par 'phags bstod kyi rgya cher bshad pa 93, 95

khyab ches pa 379
khyab pa 420f, 428, 454
khyab pa 'gal ba 458
khyab pa grub 205
khyab pa ma grub 459
Khyung Rin-chen-grags 128, 143, 160, 397
Kitagawa, H. 394
kle~a ~50

Klong-rdol bla-ma 70, 79, 129, 149, 152

Klu-sgrub-rgya-mtsho, Mang-thos 18-20, 23, 33
Kodan 28,31,49,215
Kolmas, J. 43, 54, 223, 243
Kong-sprul 47, 145f, 149, 160f, 175, 178, 186, 193, 205, 431
Kong-ston 142
Kosambi, D.D. 11, 121

337, 344f
211, 334, 346, 407f
K~emendra 124
Kuijp, L. van der 12, 41f, 45f, 48f, 51f, 55, 78, 81, 103, 117, 121, 124, 147f149, 151-153, 156-158, 161f, 178-181, 183f, 187, 189, 222, 224, 246, 381,
415, 420, 425, 431, 456
K~apa~aka
K~atriya

Kumarasrfbhadra 120, 125

Kun-dga'-dbang-phyug, Gzhi-thog-pa 74
Kun-dga'-dbang-phyug, Rgyal-tshab 90, 99, 210, 219, 225, 246
Kun-dga'-grol-mchog, Jo-nang 140, 219f, 226, 385
Kun-dga'-rin-chen, Sngags-'chang 18f, 220
Kun-dga'-rnam-rgyal-dpal-bzang-po.

See Gong-dkar-rdo-rje-gdan-pa

Kun-dga'-ye-shes, Rab-'byams-pa 233

Kun-spangs Chos-grags-dpal-bzang 134
Kunst, A. 389, 394
kun tu tha snyad pa 174

395
See Skyid-grong

kusrtidH~i

Kyirong.
Ladakh 220

the Kashmiri nun 400

Lalou, M. 119
Lak~mi

Lam 'bras 59, 90f, 94, 99f, 115, 193, 205

595

Lam 'bras bu dang bcas pa'i khrid kyi dkar chag 59, 91, 98, 100
Lam 'bras gzhung bshad dmar mao See Pod dmar chung
Lamotte, E. 388, 398, 440
lam rim 46, 402
Lam zab mo bla ma'i rnal 'byor 16, 59
Ian 'debs pa 198
Ian rnal ma 434
Las-chen Gzhon-nu-seng-ge 73
Lati Rinpoche 45, 401, 430
La Vallee Poussin, L. de 383, 389, 395, 417
Lcags-ra Bsam-grub-rtse 233
Lcags-thang rab-'byams-pa 142
Lcang-rwa'i-chos-grwa 135
Lcog-ro Klu'i-rgyal-mtshan 431
ldeb ring 76, 214, 232
Idem dgongs 385
Ldong-pa Grags-pa-dpal 144
Ldong-ston Shes-rab-dpal 134, 138, 146, 152, 159, 162
Legs bshad. See Sa sky a legs bshad
Legs bshad 'phrul gyi! dra ba 92, 99
Legs-ldan-bdud-'joms-rdo-rje 22
Legs par bshad pa gzhon nu'i mgul rgyan 99
Legs par bshad pa rin po che'i gter.
Leningrad 44

See Sa sky a legs bshad

le'u 133, 229

Levi, S. 439
Lha-'bri Shes-rab-rdo-rje 136
Lha-btsun Zhi-ba-'od 122
Lha-dbang-blo-gros, Mnga'-ris-pa 137
lhan cig dmigs nges 172, 174, 420
Lha-sa 28, 31, 43, 239
Lha sa'i bde bar gshegs pa rnams la bstod pa 51
Lha-sa Sman-rtsis-khang 102
Lho-pa Dha-ra-seng 118
Lho-pa kun-mkhyen Rin-chen-dpal 13, 16-18, 23, 26, 32, 35-37, 43, 83, 102, 106,
108, ll1f, 114, 119-122,134,138,142,159,183,193,205,207,213,218,
224, 406, 408, 414
Lho-pa Grub-seng 144
Lho-pa sgog-gzan 117f

596

Lhun-grub-dge-'phel retreat 74
Liang-chou 17, 28f, 31, 36f, 71, 95, 402
Library of Tibetan Works and Archives 247
Ligeti, L. 42f, 54
Lindtner, C. 49, 147, 381, 384, 404, 411f, 417, 421, 423, 456
Lo. See Glo-bo
Lobsang Tharchin, Geshe 457
Lo-chen Byang-chub-rtse-mo 142
log par Ita ba 396
loka 390f
lokaprasiddha 181
Lokayata 345, 347, 407, 409, 435
Lokesh Chandra 243, 388
Ita ba bka' rtags kyi phyag rgya 388
Ita ba ngan pa 395f
ltag chod 153, 373, 443
Ita log 396
Lte-ra-ba Chos-grags 143, 146.

See also Te-ra-ba, Te'u-ra-pa

ltos med 452f

Lu-gu-sdong 109
Lumbini 291
lung 64f, 72, 84, 95, 102, 434, 437
Lung rigs rnam dag dang mthun pa'i 'chad dgos tshul 50
Lus kyi zag pa sbyin pa gtang ba'i gzungs 92
Ius rnam gzhag 211
Macdonald, A. 51, 461
Madhyamaka 25, 27, 42, 108, 112, 129f, 149, 165-171, 173-176, 185-189, 202f,
212, 218, 331, 334, 338f, 342f, 346f, 349, 351-354, 361, 380, 389, 396f, 400,
411, 417f, 424f, 427f, 433f, 436, 454, 456
26, 179
Madhyarnaka-Prajnaparamita synthesis 426

Madhyarnakala~ara

Madhyarnikas.

See Madhyamaka

rnadhyastha 369
rna dpe 232
Magadha 171
rna grub pa 454
rna grub pa'i thaI 'gyur 459
Mahadeva 433

597

Mahamudra 47.

See Phyag rgya chen po.

Mahayana, Hwa-shang 403

Mahayanasa~graha

27

Makdisi, G. 14
Maialasekera, G. P. 389
Malufikyaputta 390f
452f
ma nges pa 379, 459
manasapratyak~a

ma nges pa'i thaI 'gyur 458f

Mang-thos KIu-sgrub-rgya-mtsho.

See KIu-sgrub-rgya-mtsho

Mani, V. 383
Mafijusri (Manjugho~a) 59, 367
Man ngag bsdus pa 91
Manorathanandin 109f, 113
Mar-pa Io-tsa-ba 125, 427
Martin, D. 49
matanujna 326
Matilal, B. K. 375, 449, 453f, 456
Matsumoto, S. 45, 47f, 414, 420f, 432
ma yin dgag pa 393
McDermott, A. C. S. 449
mchan 204
mchan bu 204, 215
mchan 'grel 204
mchan rnying 153, 376
mchod brjod 191
Mdong-ston.

See Ldong-ston

Mdo-sde-dpal.

See Zhang Mdo-sde-dpal

Mdo-sde-spyod-pa'i-dbu-ma-pa 212, 343, 399f

med dgag 166, 168, 399
med par dgag pa.

Same

above.

Me-nyag Dam-chos, Mkhan-po 227

mgo bsgre 435
mgo gcig tu Ian gtab pa 388
Mgon-po-rgyal-mtshan 238
Mgo-pa

pa~gita

12

mgo snyoms 434

mi dmigs pa'i rtags 439, 442
M~ller,

R. A. 52f

598

Mimaki K. 41, 49, 120, 182, 204, 386-388, 393, 399f, 407, 409-411, 415-419, 421423f, 426, 430, 433, 435f, 439, 443, 449, 455
Mima~sa

211, 333, 344, 347, 374, 395, 406, 408f, 441

mi mkhas pa 443
Mind-Only.

See Yogacara

ming 193, 211

ming gi mngon brjod 11
Mi nyag gi rgyal khams su gnang ba'i yi ge 50
Mi-nyag paQ-chen Rigs-pa'i-seng-ge 226
Mi-nyag Ri-khug-dgon 137
Mi-pham-rgya-mtsho, 'Jam-mgon 'Ju, 40f, 223, 439, 443
Mi-rigs-par-bkrun-khang, Beijing 238
Mi-rigs-dpe-mdzod-khang, Beijing 221, 223, 403
Mirza Haidar 220
Mishra, U. 206, 455
mithyadHl~i 396
Miyasaka, Y. 416, 418, 423, 440, 457
Mkhan-po Kha-che PaQ-chen ('Jam-dbyangs Kha-che Bsod-nams-dpal) 214, 224

Mkhas-grub Dge-legs-dpal-bzang 142f, 146, 154, 160, 178, 437, 457

mkhas pa 3, 443
mkhas pa mkhas pa 11
mkhas pa'i bar ma 11
mkhas pa'i chung ngu 11
Mkhas pa'i kha rgyan.

See Bstan bcos mkhas pa'i kha rgyan

mkhas pa'i rab 11

mkhas pa rnams 3
Mkhyen-brtse mchod-dpon 215
Mkhyen-rab-dbang-phyug-grags-bzang 139, 142
Mnal lam gyi tshigs bcad 92
Mnga'-ris 30, 123, 183
mngon sum 174, 434
Mok~akaragupta 108, 113, 119, 379, 385, 407, 418, 426, 438, 441, 443, 452
Mongolia 43, 49, 63, 402
"Mongolian-style" script 74
"Mongolian xylographs" 73
Mongols 28f, 31
Mookerjee, S. 394, 428, 440, 448, 453
Mookerji, R. K. 11
Moriyama, S. 402, 414, 422, 426f

599

mtha' dpyod 204

mtha' drug 196, 385
mtha' gcig tu 168
mthar thug gi dgongs pa 176
mtho ris 382
mtshan gzhi 130, 147, 396
mtshan nyid 130f, 147, 448
mtshon cha'i khri sgyogs 457
mtshon bya 130f, 147, 448
mtshon sbyor 150
Mtshur-ston Gzhon-nu-seng-ge 26, 30, 35, 105-107, 114-116, 122, 171
mu bzhi skye 'gog 352
Much, M. T. 370, 379, 445
mula 241
Mus rab-'byams-pa Thugs-rje-dpal-bzang 136, 142
Mustang. See Glo-bo
Mu stegs kyi ston pa drug btul ba'i tshigs bcad 53, 63, 237
Mnyal-pa Dad-pa-bzang-po. Same as Mnyal-zhig?
Mnyal-zhig 115, 130, 144, 155
Na-bza' Brag-phug-pa. See Brag-phug-pa
Nagao, G. 385, 390, 438
Nagarjuna 26, 49, 167f, 175,
411f, 417, 426-428, 454
Nagna 345

179, 229, 331, 335, 337, 342, 350, 361, 380, 397,

Nags-phug-pa Shes-rab-'od-zer 134

nairatmya 166, 179, 417
Naiyayikas 5, 200, 345, 374, 376, 428, 441, 446, 448, 453-455
Nakamura, H. 375, 395
Nalanda 171
Nalendra. See 'Phan-po Na-Iendra
nam mkha'i gos can 345
Nam-~<ha'-rdo-rje

220

Nang-chen Gtsang-mda'-dgon 137

Nang-chen Pe-ru-chung-dgon 137
nang don rig pa 189
Napper, E. 45, 401, 430
Nastika 345
Naudou, J. 118, 125, 151

--=I

600

Nawang Tsering 49
Nepal 28, 81, 85, 117, 171, 236f, 240
neyartha 168, 385
Nga brgyad mali 'grel pa 16, 51, 57f, 60, 66f, 78, 83, 103, 205, 244, 378, 388,
459
Ngag-dbang-bsod-nams-rgyal-mtshan, 78, 414, 427
Ngag-dbang-chos-grags, Mkhan-chen 81, 100, 103, 140-142, 146, 160, 162, 186, 189,
215-217, 223, 226, 409, 442, 444
Ngag-dbang-Iegs-grub, Ngor dpon-slob 218
Ngag-gi-dbang-phyug-dge-Iegs-rgya-mtsho'i-sde 229
ngal zhing dub pa 388
Ngam-ring-gi-chos-grwa 134, 158
ngan g.yo'i Ita ba 395
ngan song 382
Ngawang Sonam Tenzin 49
nges don 168, 385
nges pa 420f
ngo bo nyid rgyur smra ba 345, 406
Ngor 50, 76, 135, 137, 213, 216, 221-223, 226, 232
Ngor-chen Kun-dga'-bzang-po 18f, 23,
135f, 154, 159, 161f, 225, 233

73,

80, 84-86, 91-93, 100, 114f, 119, 122,

nigamana 357
niQsvabhava 169, 347
Nirakara Yogacara 170, 174-176, 347, 402, 425
niranuyojyanuyoga 326
nirapek/ila 452f
nirarthaka 325
nirgrahasthana 369, 371
Nirgrantha 342, 345
nirv8Qa 340, 350
Nishioka S. 13, 118, 124, 147, 181
nisprapanca 386, 396, 398
nitartha 385
nityasamajati 326, 375
niyama 420f
Nor-bu-bzang-po, Rin-spungs-pa 135f, 156
Nor-bzang-dpal, Mkhas-pa 134, 139, 159, 162
Nor-bzang-pa, Drung 135
Nub-pa 'U-yug-pa.

See 'U-yug-pa Rigs-pa'i-seng-ge

601

Nya Dar-rna-rin-chen 134, 162

Nya-dbon Kun-dga'-dpal 134f, 141-146, 154, 162
Nyang-srnad Rgyan-gong 27, 30, 36, 109
Nyang-stod 25f, 30, 135, 155
Nyang valley 25f, 105, 112, 155
Nyaya (see also Naiyayikas) 109, 119, 324, 325, 345, 406, 409, 430
Nyaya Sutras 109, 119, 370f, 373, 376, 381, 447f
Nyi rna la spring ba 50
Nyi-thog-pa Sangs-rgyas-kun-smon 145, 160
nyurnon 10
nyuna 325
nyung rgyas 443f
Oberhammer, G. 370f
Obermiller, E. 36, 121, 124, 150, 204, 438, 461
121
'Od-zer-rngon, Mkhas-pa 160

O<J.iva~a

old Dga'-ldan editions 74, 81

Onoda, S. 45, 155, 457
Organ, T. W. 390
Padma-bzang-po, Mkhan-chen 136
428

pak~a

pak~adharmata

357

Pancatantra 54
PaQ-chen Bsod-nams-grags-pa.

See Bsod-nams-grags-pa,

Pa~-chen

PaQ-chen I Blo-bzang-chos-kyi-rgyal-mtshan 21, 32

PaQ-chen Rin-po-che 21, 32
paI} chung 107
paQgita 4, 11, 12
paQgita chen po 11
paI}qita chung ngu 11
Panjara 24
Pan-khyung-tshang 136

ii

II"

paramaI}u 417

i,lll

paramartha 425
Paramita tradition 334

'iii

326
*paraprasiddhanumana 410
paranuyojyopek~a~a

II!"'I'
,

'

I"

:II'i

Iii

:Iil

;i!!

1'1:
I

1.,/11

':!:,I
'III

602

pararthanumana 5, 131, 133

par byang 231
par dpon 232
pariI}amana 59
pariPfccha 336

paryudasaprati~edha

393

Pa-tshab 1o-tsa-ba Nyi-ma-grags 130, 435, 437

Paura'tika 441
Pede Dzong 81
Perdue, D. E. 206
Peter the Chanter 1, 9
petitio principii 454
'Phags-pa B1o-gros-rgya1-mtshan 17,
207, 219, 233, 244

23,

28,

31,

33, 37, 64, 70, 72, 117, 161f,

'Phags-pa-dpa1-bzang-po 154
'phags pa'i bde ba 401
'Phags-pa script 74
'Phags-pa-shes-rab 113, 120, 124
Pha-jo-1ding monastery 75, 229f, 243
'Phan-po Na1endra 73, 136f, 247
'Phan-yu1 Na1endra 73, 136f, 247
pha ro1 gzigs pa'i tshad rna 176
phra ba (dbu rna) 414
phrad pa 430
Phra mo brgyad 90
'Phrang 25, 30, 105
'phrod pa 'du ba 430
Phung po gsum pa'i mdo 'don thabs 91, 95
Phyag mtshan ri mo'i bstod tshig 51
Phyag rgya chen po 27, 402
phyi mo 235
phyir 130
phyir rgo1 197, 368
Phyogs bcu'i sangs rgyas dang byang chub sems dpa' rnams 1a zhu ba'i 'phrin
16, 57f, 70, 153, 226
phyogs chos 454
Phyogs-g1ang-gsar-ma 138, 159, 226
phyogs kyi gos can 345

yig,

603

phyogs snga 445

phyogs snga ma 'jog pa 197
phyogs su lhung 393
Phywa-pa Chos-kyi-seng-ge 6, 45, 105-107, 111f, 129-131,
155, 160, 165, 168-173, 176, 178, 181-183, 200, 369,
452, 456f
Piltz, A. 9, 204
Pod dmar chung 90, 99f, 104
Potter, K. 371, 373f, 377, 379, 381, 394, 410f, 414,
448f, 453, 455
Poucha, P. 42
Prabhakara 345, 406f, 441
Pradhan, P. 386, 389
pradhana 173
Prajnakaragupta 109, 111, 121, 127, 165f, 168, 179f, 224,

135, 144, 147, 150, 152,

397, 406, 414, 418, 437,

428, 430, 441, 443, 446,

427f

Prajnaparamita 27, 108, 135, 155

Prajnavarman 223
prakara~asamajati

328, 376

prakasa 420
prama~a 131, 429, 433f, 436, 439, 441, 449
prama~aphala 166, 179, 182, 415
Prama~asamuccaya 25, 110, 114, 137, 158, 174, 326, 375, 393f, 415, 443f
Prama~avarttika 2,
27, 45, 105, 108-110, 112f, 114, 121, 124, 131, 133-137,
147, 151, 158, 165-168, 172, 174, 187f, 328, 332f, 348-350, 355, 359,
377, 381, 415-416, 418, 421, 423, 427f, 430, 432, 440, 443, 457
PramsQaviniscaya 26, 35, 45, 105-107, 109, 114f, 131, 135, 147, 158, 160,
171, 178, 187, 348, 350, 416-418, 420f, 457
prapanca 397f
prasajyaprati~edha 399
prasanga 45, 133, 197, 205, 410, 434, 455f
prasangasamajati 327
Prasangika Madhyalnaka 26, 30, 130, 166, 170, 174, 182, 212, 347, 352, 361,
433-436, 453, 456f, 459
Prasannapada 26
Prasastapada 381
prasnika 369
pratidr~~antasamajati

pratijna 341, 357, 397

pratijnahani 325

328

145,
362,
166,

410,

604

pratijnantara 325
pratijnasannyasa 325
pratijnavirodha 325, 448
48

pratirnok~a

prativadin 197, 368

pratyak~a

131, 428, 434

Pratyeka 211, 384

preta 353
pfthagjana 343
pudgala 341, 395
punarukta 325
PuraI}as 382f
Pu-rang 183
Pu-rang Chos-sde-dga'-byed-tshal 136
purvapak~a

341, 359, 445

purvavadin 197, 445

quaestio disputata 204
Ra-ba-srnad 137
Rab-brtan-kun-bzang-'phags, Si-tu 135
Rab dga' la 'jug pa 83, 102
Rab-sgang Ka-bzhi-dgon 135
rags pa (dbu rna) 414
Rahula, W. 368f, 371, 386, 388, 395f, 410, 440, 443
Rajpur (Dehra Dun) 239f, 242
Ra-rndo-chos-'khor-gling 136
Randle, H. N. 441
rang bzhin gyi rtags 439, 442
rang gi 'dod pa brjod pa 192
rang gi nye ba 'khor 236
Rang gis rang la gros 'debs pa 61, 92, 123
rang rkang tshugs pa 432
rang skye ba 344
rang stong 168, 173
rasa 59, 194
Ratnakarasanti 59, 426
Ratnaklrti 110, 120, 453

605

Rato Kyong1a Nawang Losang 206

Rdo-phud-chos-'khor-gnas 137
rdo rje gzegs rna 352, 433
rdo rje'i tshig 234
Rdo-rje-rgya1-mtshan, Rdzong-pa 100
Rdo rje theg pa'i rtsa ba dang yan lag gi dam tshig bshad pa 50
Rdzogs pa chen po 27, 48
Rdzong-gsar bshad-grwa 227
Rdzong-pa 100
Red-mda'-ba Gzhon-nu-b1o-gros 134, 141-143, 145, 158
Renou, L. 9
Rga.

See Sga

rgo1 ba 368
rgo1 ba 1a 1tos te rna grub pa 449
Rgya? 134
Rgya-dmar-ba Byang-chub-grags 128f, 144, 149
rgya1 ba dam pa ba 345
Rgya1-byed-tsha1-gyi-chos-grwa 136
Rgya1-1ha-khang-pa Bsam-grub-ye-shes 144
Rgya1-mo-rong 136
Rgya1-mo-rong kham-tshan of Na1endra 73
Rgya1-mtshan-bzang-po, Mkhan-chen 144
rgya1 rigs gzhung du smra ba 407
rgya1 rigs lugs 408
Rgyal-rtse 154f
Rgyal-sras Chu-mig-pa 130
Rgya1-sras Ngag-dbang-blo-bzang 238
Rgya1-sras Thogs-med. See Thogs-med-bzang-po
Rgya1-tshab Dar-ma-rin-chen 44, 142, 163
Rgyal-tshab Kun-dga'-dbang-phyug 90
rgyang pan pa 345, 407
rgyang 'phen pa 407
Rgya-ston Phying-ru-ba 155
rgyu'i rkyen 440
rgyu mtshan 434
rgyu mtshan can 434
rgyu mtshan mtshungs pa'i mgo snyoms 361, 433-435, 455-457
Rhodes, N. 245
Rhoton, J. 48

..

606

Richardson, H. E. 79
rig gnas 68, 70
rig gnas chen po 189
rig pa 420
rig pa'i gtan tshigs 432
Rigs drug mtshan don dang ye shes bsre ba 91
Rigs gter.

See Tshad rna rigs pa'i gter

Rigs kyi rab dbye'i bshad sbyar 91

rigs pa ltar snang 429
rigs pas dpyad bzod 182
rigs pas rnyed pa 397
rigs tshogs 26, 179
Rin-chen-bzang-po 13
Rin-chen-sgang 109, 119
Rin-chen-tshul-khrims 160
ring bsrel 225
Rin-spungs-pa Ngag-dbang-'jig-rten-dbang-phyug-grags-pa 18f,
99f, 104, 114, 214, 224, 246
Rin-spungs-pa Nor-bu-bzang-po.

23, 85f, 90-92, 96f,

See Nor-bu-bzang-po

Rje-btsun Grags-pa-rgyal-mtshan. See Grags-pa-rgyal-mtshan, Rje-btsun

Rje btsun rin po che grags pa rgyal mtshan gyi bstod pa 16, 63
Rje btsun rin po che'i rnam thar 35f
rjes su gzung ba 369
rjes su mi smra 447
Rkyang-'dur 26, 30, 105, 107, 115f
Rkyang-'dur-ba.

See Mtshur Gzhon-nu-seng-ge

Rlung gi rten 'breI brtag pa 92

Rma-bya-ba Byang-chub-brtson-' grus ll4f, 130, 150, 397" 406, 436f, 439
Rma-bya Byang-chub-ye-shes 436
Rma-bya-ba chen-po 436
rma bya dug 'joms 456
Rma Dge-ba'i-blo-gros 112f, 122
Rmugs-sangs-pa Sbyin-pa-rgya-mtsho 233, 244
Rnal 'byor pa phru mali dris Ian 92
rnal 'byor spyod pa'i dbu rna pa 399f
rnam bden 423
rnam brdzun. See Alikakara
rnam bshad 128, 167, 204
rnam gzhag ll5

607

rnam pa 174
Rnam par gcad bya ji ltar sbyor tshul 52, 90
rnam par phye ste Ian gdab pa 388
Rnam-rgyal-dpal-bzang-po of Gu-ge 212, 220
Rnam-rgyal-gser-khang grwa-tshang 137
Rnam-rgyal-rdo-rje, Rong-pa Rga-Io.

See Rong-pa rga-Io

Rnam-rgyal Thub-bstan-dar-rgyas-gling.

See Glo-bo.Thub-bstan-rnam-rgyal

rnam rig 174f

Rnel phu bali zhus Ian 50, 90
Rngog Legs-pa'i-shes-rab 135
Rngog lo-tsa-ba Blo-Idan-shes-rab 6, 106, 112-114, 122, 125, 127f, 130, 135, 143,
147f, 160, 165-169, 175, 178-181, 188, 219, 397, 418, 427, 431, 452
Rngog tradition 158
Rngo-thog-pa Chos-kyi-bzang-po 144
Rnying-ma-pa 13
Roerich, G. 36, 44, 118f, 150f, 155, 160, 162, 182f, 219, 397, 461
Rol mo'i bstan bcos 12, 48, 59f, 62, 66f, 75, 117, 237, 241
Rong-byams-chen-gyi-chos-grwa 135
Rong-pa Rgwa-Io Rnam-rgyal-rdo-rje 130, 151
Rong-stod, Gu-ge district 75
Rong-ston Shes-bya-kun-rig 135-137,139-142, 146, 159, 226, 233, 415f
~~abha

Jina 345

346
rtags ltar snang 449
r~i

rtags ma grub 453

rtags yang dag 428
Rta-mgrin-rgyal 150
Rta-nag Gser-gling 136
Rta-nag mkhan-po Chos-rnam-rgyal. See Chos-rnam-rgyal
Rta-nag Thub-bstan-rnam-rgyal 136, 156
Rting-khebs-kyi-chos-'khor Dga'-ldan-rtse-mo 136
rtog ge sde lnga 409
Rtog ldan rgyan pori dris Ian 50, 90
rtsa ba 241, 247
Rtse-chen 135
Rtse-thang-gi-chos-grwa 134
rtsod pa 41
rtsod pa spong ba 192
rtsom pa 41

21

li,i

ill

608

Runes, D. D. 204
Rwa-grags Stag-rdor 138
sa bead 127
sabhya 369
Sa brtag pa 68, 83, 102
Sa-bzang lo-tsa-ba Ngag-gi-dbang-phyug 214, 224
Sa-bzang 'Phags-pa Gzhon-nu-blo-gros 145, 161
Sa-chen Kun-dga'-snying-po 24, 34, 49
sadharmyasamajati 327
sadhya 381, 393
sadhyasama 352, 433, 448, 453-455
sadhyasamajati 328, 375
sadvitiyaprayoga 341, 394
sahetukavini~atva

453

sahopalambhaniyama 420
Sa'id, Chagatay sultan o Yarkand 220
Saiva 346, 361, 410
Sakara Yogaeara 170, 172, 174, 211, 347
saklilin 197, 368
Sakya Centre 49, 239
Sakya College 75, 240
Sakyamati 112, 165
Sakyamuni 101
Sakyaprabha 392
Sakyasribhadra 12, 26, 30, 61, 107-112, 115, 119, 121, 123, 139-144, 154, 171,
183, 461
Sakya Trizin, H. H. 238, 246
Sa-lo 'Jam-pa'i-rdo-rje 213, 220
Salomon, R. 382
sa lugs kyi bstan beos rnam gsum 69
samanantarapratyaya 439
samanyartha 428
samavaya 351, 430
sambandha 356, 442
sarpdhya 385
Sarpghasri 27, 110-113, 120, 141
sa~grahasloka

Sarpkara 411

393

609

Sa~ara

Misra 206, 446

110f, 113, 120f, 127
173, 211, 331, 341f, 344-346, 381, 393-395, 407f, 434, 441, 451

s~aranandana
Sa~hya

Samputa 24
s~sara 333, 340, 350
327
174

sa~sayasamajati
sa~vyavahara

Samye 28, 36, 51

sa~yoga

430

430
Sanghvi, S. 443, 448
sa~yuktasamavaya

Sangs-rgyas-bstan-'dzin, mkhan-chen, 22
Sangs-rgyas-chos-skyong 160
Sangs-rgyas-phun-tshogs 20, 23, 33, 36, 64, 84f, 98, 116-121, 183,233
sannivesa 455
Sanskrit grammar 27, 79, 108, 116
Santarak~ita 26, 110f, 113, 120, 167f, 175, 179f, 375, 379, 395, 417, 423, 426f,
439
Santideva 397
Saroruhavajra 24
Sarvastivada 339, 431
Sa-skya 24-27, 30f, 35f,

:1

III

II

43f, 47, 55, 72, 74f, 80, 84, 92, 102, 105f, 109, 112,

119, 121, 123f, 156, 158, 213, 223

Sa skya bka' 'bum 70, 72, 75-77, 79, 84f, 93f, 223, 225, 230, 232-236

':.11

::1
1III

Sa-skya editions 73f

Sa-skya 'Khon 19, 156, 215
Sa skya legs bshad 2, 39, 42f, 57f, 60, 66f, 69f, 74, 102, 152, 204, 226, 462
Sa-skya Lha-khang-chen-mo 72f, 220
~astras

9, 10

f}atkoti 385
Satyadvayavibhanga 26
Sautrantika 166, 168-172, 174, 176, 187, 189, 202, 211, 311, 343, 346-348, 351f,
354, 410-412, 415-417, 424, 431f
Sba Gsal-snang 403
Scheifner, A. 42
Schoening, J. 34
Schuh, D. 32, 37, 49
sdeb sbyor 11

........

610

Sdeb sbyor sna tshogs me tog gi chun po 12,

16,

52,

57,

59, 64, 66, 78, 102,

204, 208, 210, 219, 226, 462

Sde-dge.

See also Derge

Sde-dge dgon-chen 233

Sde-dge Lhun-grub-steng 235
Sde-dge Par-khang-chen-mo, 232
Sde-gzhung dgon-pa 137
Sde-gzhung sprul-sku Kun-dga'-bstan-pa'i-nyi-ma 227
Sde-srid Sangs-rgyas-rgya-mtsho 155, 246
Sdom gsum rab dbye 2, 13, 16, 28, 31, 47f, 50, 57, 60, 64, 66, 68-71, 73, 78, 93,
98, 102, 117, 133, 138, 152, 213, 222f, 226, 384-387, 391-393, 462
Sdud pa sogs sher mdo 'don thabs 91, 95
Sems bskyed kyi cho gao See Dbu ma lugs kyi sems bskyed
I

sems tsam 351, 423

Seyort Ruegg, D. 42, 47, 148, 151, 179, 182f, 189, 378, 380, 384f, 387-393, 395,
397-400, 403f, 409f, 412, 417, 422, 426-432, 436f, 441f, 448, 455f, 461
Sga A-gnyan-dam-pa 18, 71, 76, 79f, 233, 244
Sga bla-ma 'Jam-dbyangs-rgyal-mtshan 227
Sga-gdong 136
Sga Khri-'du-dgon 233
Sga Thar-lam-dgon 233
sgra 11, 210
Sgra la 'jug pa 51, 57, 59, 61, 66f, 75, 83, 237
Sgra nye bar bsdus pa 52, 95, 102, 226, 229, 231
Sgra sgrub dum bu dgu pa 91
sgra spyi'i snang ba 210, 219
Sgra-tshad-pa 13, 47, 387, 393
sgrub byed bsgrub bya dang mtshungs pa'i ma grub pa 434f,
bya dang mtshungs pa
Sgrub pa lung sbyin 63
shad 240f

453.

See also bsgrub

Shakabpa, W. D. 46, 49, 245

Shakya-mchog-ldan, Gser-mdog pa~-chen, 9, 11f, 22, 34, 41, 70, 73, 75, 79, 81,
102f, 106, 112, 114f, 117, 122, 128f, 134f, 138-140, 142, 146-158, 160, 162f,
166-172, 176, 178-184, 189, 193, 197, 205, 207-213, 216, 219f, 222, 226f,
243, 369f, 372, 376, 382, 384f, 394, 397, 400, 403-410, 414, 416, 418, 420,
423, 426f, 429, 431, 433, 435, 437, 442, 444-447, 452, 456-460
Shakya-rin-chen 54, 79, 243
Shangs kyi Rin-chen-sgang 119

611

Shangs Sreg-shing 28, 31

Shar-chen Ye-shes-rgyal-mtshan 84, 145, 161
Shar-pa Rdo-rje-'od-zer 160
Shar-pa Shes-rab-'byung-gnas 134, 160
Shar-rgyal-mo-rong 136
Shastri, D. 369, 376-380, 395, 401, 447
Shastri, H. 120
Shaw, J. L. 449
sha za'i bum pa 452
Shel-dkar chos-sde 134
shes bya 420
Shes-grong pa9-chen Blo-gros-chos-kyi-rgyal-po 137
shes pa 420
Shes-rab-dpal-ldan 161
Shes-rab-'od-zer, dge-bshes, 73
Shes rab 'phro ba 66, 83, 102
Shes-rab-rgyal-mtshan, A-mi-pa 22
Shes-rab-rgya-mtsho, A-khu-chin. See A-khu-chin
shin tu lkog gyur 382, 429, 449
Sho dgon gyi dge 'dun rnams la spring ba 50, 90, 103
Sho dgon pa 'gro mgon rin chen la spring ba 50, 90
siddha 4
siddhanta 112, 211, 406, 409
Sierksma, F. 206
Sikkim 215
Singh, M. M. 50
Sinha, J. 421
Si-tu Chos-rin-dpal 134
Si-tu Pa9-chen Chos-kyi-'byung-gnas 234
Skal-ldan-rgyal-po 112
skandha 334, 337, 395
Sku gzugs kyi bstan bcos 67, 83, 102
Skyes bu dam pa rnams la spring ba'i yi ge 13, 50, 59, 384f, 391, 403
skyes la 'dra ba 348, 415f
Skyid-grong 28, 31, 37, 53, 17
Skyid-shod Dga'-ldan 28, 31
akyon 445
Skyor-mda' Bsam-gling dgon-pa in Chab-mdo 76, 233, 235
Slob-dpon Bsod-nams-rtse-mo. See Bsod-nams-rtse-mo

612

sloka 241
sloka units 119
Smalley, B. 9
Smarta 344
smin par byed pa 388
Smith, E. G. 13, 40, 43, 45, 47, 79, 219, 222, 226, 243, 246
Smra sgo'i sa bead 52, 147
Smrtijnanakirti 117
Smrti~rijfiana 431
snang ba'i ehos 454
snang ba sems su sgrub pa 427
Snar-thang 135
Snar-thang lo-tsa-ba Sa~gha~rI 214, 224
Snellgrove, D. 218, 411
Sngags kyi klog thabs 'bras bu 'byung ba'i me tog 52, 62, 90
sngar rgol (ba) 197, 445
snyan ngag 11, 241
Snyan ngag gi bstan beos Mkhas pa'i kha rgyan 102
Snye mo sgom chen gyi dris Ian 10, 94, 226, 237
Snye-thang Bde-ba-ehen 135
snyigs dus kyi kla klo 212
Solomon, E. A. 206, 371, 373
Sopa, L. 401
so sor thar pa 48
Spo-Iung drung-yig Blo-gros-pa
Spom-'bor 136
spobs pa med pa 448
Spos-khang 154
Spos-khang-pa Rin-ehen-rgyal-mtshan 21, 23
spros bral gyi don dam 176
spyi 131
Spyi-bo-Ihas-pa Byang-ehub-'od27, 108
spyi don 214
spyi khyab 443
spyod pa mtha' gnyis 388
Sravaka 173, 201, 334, 338, 347, 361, 384, 401
Sridhar a 430
Srigupta 417
sri Hada 206

613

srog gi sde tshan pa 345

Staal, J. F. 389, 399, 428
Stag-phrug Kun-dga'-dpal-'byor 137
Stag-rtse-Ia-rgyab-pa Shakya-seng-ge 154
Stag-tshang lo-tsa-ba Shes-rab-rin-chen 227
Stag-tshang-rdzong-pa Dpal-'byor-bzang-po 20, 23
Stcherbatsky, Th. 44, 150, 163, 165, 178, 189, 369, 371, 377, 381, 394f, 401, 414,
417, 421, 430f, 437, 440, 443, 452f
Stein, R. A. 43, 54, 206, 403
Steinkeliner, E. 369, 385, 428, 439, 442f, 457
Sternbach, L. 43, 54f
Stewart, B. C. 55
sthapaniya 336
Sthaviravada 339, 392
stong thun 106, 130
stong pa nyid 347, 410
Ston pa blo gros rab gsal gyi dris Ian 91f
Subhagupta 211
Subhuti~rIsanti 112
Sugatasri 26, 30, 61, 108f, 113, 118, 141, 376
Suhrllekha 49
Sukhbaatar, O. 41
sum cu pa 344
Sununaries. See Bsdus pa
Sum-pa mkhan-po Ye-shes-dpal-'byor 156, 427, 456
sun 'byin brjod pa 197
sunyata 203, 335, 347, 386, 410, 433, 454
~iira 460

Sutras, apocryphal 13
svabhava 173, 433, 442
svabhavahetu 439
svalak~ax:a 173
svarga 382
svarthanumana 131
Svatantrika Madhyamaka 166, 212, 347, 435f
Szerb, J. 37, 49

tadatmya 356
tadutpatti 356

614

Ta'i-dben Blo-gros-rgyal-mtshan 154

Ta'i-si-tu Byang-chub-rgyal-mtshan 134
Tanjur 112f, 118, 120
Tantras, apocryphal 13
Taranatha, Jo-nang 12, 227
Tarkabhasa 108, 113, 119
Tarkamudgara 106, 114
Tashi Tsering 104, 223
tathigatagarbha 47, 386f
Tatia, N. 386, 395
tat tva 174, 397
Tatz, M. 48, 53
Te-ra-pa Byams-mgon 134, 162. See also Lte-ra-ba Chos-grags
Te'u-ra-pa 146, 162
thaI 'gyur 197, 206, 434
Thakur, A. 120
thaI phyir 130, 150
tha snyad 174, 188
tha snyad kyi de kho na 176
tha snyad kyi tshad ma 176
tha snyad las 'das pa 188
Theg-chen chos-rje Kun-dga'-bkra-shis 80, 135
Theravada 392
the tshom can 92
thob yig 21
Thogs-med-bzang-po, Rgyal-sras 439
Thub pa'i dgongs gsal 2, 13, 39, 46f, 57, 64, 66, 69, 74, 78, 102, 133, 152~
186, 188, 213, 221-23, 226, 237, 378, 382, 393, 395-397, 399, 401, 418f,
435, 438, 462
Thugs-rje-dbang-phyug, dge-bshes 22
Thu-mi Sambhota 234
Thurman, R. A. F. 398, 439
Thutop Tulku 49
Thu'u-bkwan 122
Tillemans, T. 45, 394, 433, 452, 456-458
Toyo Bunko MS 212, 214, 219, 221, 238, 246
trairupya 197, 448
Tre'u Gdong-thog-dgon 137
triko~ipari~uddha 339

615

336
tshad 'bras 415

Tripi~aka

tshad rna bsdus pa 129f. See also Bsdus pa

Tshad-ma'i-skyes-bu 143f
Tshad ma rigs pa'i gter 2, 6, 28, 31, 44, 57f, 60, 64, 66f, 69f, 73, 78, 102f,
127, 131-133, 135, 137f, 145f, 151-153, 157f, 161-163, 172-177, 179, 183-189,
213, 221-223,- 226, 326, 358f, 368ff
Tshal Gung-thang Chos-'khor-gling 135
Tshal-pa Dga'-bde 155
Tshal-pa Kun-dga'-rdo-rje 20, 23, 34, 155
tshar bead pa'i gnas 369
Tshe-dbang 213
Tshe-ring-'phel, Drung-yig 232
tsher rna 'byin 197, 445f
tsher rna 'jug 446
tshig 193, 211
tshig gi don dgu pa 345
tshig gi don drug pa 345
Tshig gi gter 10, 12, 52, 57, 59f, 66f, 70, 102, 205, 219
tshig 'grel 138, 204
tshigs bead 241
Tshigs su bead pa gong 'og gnyis 50
Tshogs 'khor eho ga 57, 95
tshul gsum 197, 410, 448, 450, 459
Tshul-khrims-bskal-bzang 150
Tshul-khrims-rgyal-mtshan, dge-bshes 73
tshu rol mthong ba 401
Tsong-kha-pa 74, 141, 143, 145, 189, 227, 429, 435f, 452
Tucci, G. 32, 36, 39f, 44-46, 48f, 53, 103, 118-121, 124, 152, 154, 183, 371, 377,
441f
Tun Huang 403
Turks 171, 212
Udda9qapuri 11
Uddyotakara 407, 410, 430, 448, 453
upadana 455
upadhyaya 27
upalabdhisamajati 327

616

upanaya 357
upapattisamajat~

327

upasaka 62, 105

utkar~asamajati
uttarapak~a

327

359

'U-yug-pa Mdo-sde-dpal. See Zhang Mdo-sde-dpal

'U-yug-pa Rigs-pa'i-seng-ge 18, 130, 134, 138-146, 152
Vaccha 390
vada 371, 377
vadanigraha 371
vadin 368
Vaibha~ika 170, 172, 174, 343, 346f, 351, 354, 411f, 416, 426
Vaidarbha 194
vaidharmyasamajati 327, 375
*Vaidika 333f, 344f, 408
Vaidya, P. L. 124

173f, 331, 342, 344-346, 381, 408f, 417, 430, 441

Sutras 119
Vai~~ava 346, 407, 410
Vajrasana 367
Varendra 111, 121
Vaise~ika

Vaise~ika

var~yasamajati

327

vastu 431
vastubala 430
vastubalapravrtta 428, 430, 435
Vasubandhu 25, 27, 195f, 329, 337, 349, 351, 356, 375, 377f, 392, 405, 417, 421,
432, 439, 441, 456
Vatsiputriya 341, 395
Vatsyayana 373f, 376
Veda 333, 344, 346, 358
Vedanta 211, 344, 347, 406, 408
Vetter, T. 416, 418, 420f, 425, 432
vibhajya 336
Vibhuticandra 27, 35
Vidyabhu~ana, S. C. 119, 124, 371, 373f, 394, 446
Vidyakaraprabha 426
Vidyakarasanti 441
vihara 11f

617

Vijnanavada.

See Yogacara

vijnapti 174-176, 189, 331, 338, 343, 350-352, 361, 419, 427, 455
Vijffapti-Madhyamaka 426
vikalpa 398
vikalpasamajati 327
Vikramasfla 11, 171, 358
viklilepa 326
Vimalak1rti, the Licchavi 354f, 398
Vinaya 27, 48, 179, 338f, 369, 388, 431
Vinitadeva 121
viparita 377
viruddha 357, 377, 394, 446
visaya 418
Vi~1}u

346, 433

377f
viviktata 335, 384
Vostrikov, A. 50f, 119-121, 125, 152, 183, 204, 206, 369, 403, 461
vita~9a

vyabhicarin 446
vyakhya 128
vyapti 357, 421, 428
vyavahara 174, 188, 386
Warder, A. K. 10, 370, 375
Warren, H. C. 390
Watanabe, F. 389
Watanabe, S. 395
Watsuji, T. 390
Wayman, A. 371, 430
Williams, P. 114, 151, 437
Willis, J. D. 50
Yamaguchi, S. 414
Yamdrok Tsho 81
yang 362f
Yan lag brgyad pa'i don bsdus 68, 83, 95, 102
Yao 43
Yarkand 220
Yar-klungs-pa [Byang-chub-rgyal-mtshan?] 17, 23, 33f
Yar-klungs-pa Grags-pa-rgyal-mtshan 17, 23, 33, 35, 37, 114-116

618

Ye-shes-1hun-grub, Sa-skya'i-1as-chen 140

Ye-shes-rgya1-mtshan 37, 117
Ye-shes-sde 400, 431
yid ches pa'i lung 440
yid ches pa'i rtags 437
yid kyi mngon sum 452
yig cha 130, 217
yi ge 193, 211
yi ge pa 212
Yi ge'i sbyor ba 52, 95
yig mkhan skyon chags 71
Yogacara 165f, 168-173, 175, 186, 189, 202, 211, 334, 339, 343, 346, 349, 351,
354, 361, 399, 411f, 414, 425-427, 431
Yogacara-Madhyamaka 167, 175, 343, 425-427
Yogacara-Svatantrika-Madhyamaka 175
Yon-tan-dpa1? 140
Yon tan sgrogs pa'i tshu1 la bstod pa 61f, 98, 116
Yukti-corpus (rigs tshogs) 26, 179
yu1 418
Yuyama, A. 438
Zangs-tsha 28, 31, 64
Zha-lu. See Zhwa-lu.
Zhang 109
Zhang Dkon-mchog-dpal 161
Zhang 10 tsa ba 1a gdams pa 50, 237
Zhang Mdo-sde-dpal 139-142, 144f, 159, 161f, 221
Zhang Rgyal-ba-dpal 17-18, 23, 32, 34, 93, 99, 106, 110, 114-116, 120f, 225, 406
Zhang Sreg-shing 28, 36
Zhang Thang-sag-pa 435, 457
Zhang Ye-shes-sde. See Ye-shes-sde
zhar 235
Zhen pa bzhi bral gyi gdams pa 49, 95
zho 235
Zhu-chen Tshul-khrims-rin-chen 19, 22, 33, 36, 64, 71, 76, 78-81, 84-86, 90-92,
98-100, 103, 117, 140, 158f, 161, 184, 233f, 236, 243-246
Zhu-ston Rdo-rje-skyabs 25, 105, 112, 121, 183
Zhwa-Iu 109, 135, 155

619

Zhwa-lu lo-tsa-ba Chos-skyong-bzang-po 214, 224

zlos gar 11
Zung 'jug gsal ba'i sa bead 147
Zur-khang-pa Dkar Shakya-grags.
Zwilling, L. 45, 48f, 186f

See Dkar Shakya-grags

:1