Rolf Stein's Tibetica Antiqua

Rolf Stein’s Tibetica Antiqua Brill’s Tibetan Studies Library Edited by Henk Blezer Alex McKay Charles Ramble VOLUM...

Author: Henk Blezerm Alex McKaym Charles Ramble

111 downloads 1787 Views 2MB Size Report

This content was uploaded by our users and we assume good faith they have the permission to share this book. If you own the copyright to this book and it is wrongfully on our website, we offer a simple DMCA procedure to remove your content from our site. Start by pressing the button below!

Report copyright / DMCA form

DOWNLOAD PDF

Rolf Stein’s Tibetica Antiqua

Brill’s Tibetan Studies Library Edited by

Henk Blezer Alex McKay Charles Ramble

VOLUME 24

Rolf Stein’s Tibetica Antiqua With Additional Materials

By

Rolf A. Stein Translated and edited by

Arthur P. McKeown

LEIDEN • BOSTON 2010

This book is printed on acid-free paper. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Stein, R. A. (Rolf Alfred), 1911–1999. Rolf Stein’s Tibetica antiqua : with additional materials / by Rolf Stein ; translated [and updated] by Arthur P. McKeown. p. cm. — (Brill’s Tibetan studies library ; v. 24) Translation of articles which originally appeared in French in the journal Bulletin de l’Ecole francaise d’Extreme-Orient from 1983 to 1992, together with Stein’s contributions to the Annuaire de college de France from 1967 to 1970. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-90-04-18338-4 (hbk. : alk. paper) 1. Tibet (China)—Civilization. 2. Tibet (China)—Civilization—Sources. 3. Indigenous peoples—China—Tibet— Religion. 4. Buddhism—China—Tibet—History. 5. Buddhism—China—Tibet— History—Sources. 6. Taoism—China—Tibet—History. 7. Tibet (China)—Religion. 8. Buddhist literature—China—Tibet—History and criticism. 9. Tibetan language— Texts. 10. Dunhuang Caves (China)—Antiquities. I. McKeown, Arthur P. II. Title. III. Title: Tibetica antiqua. IV. Series. DS786.S765 2010 294.30951’3—dc22 2009053997

ISSN 1568-6183 ISBN 978 90 04 18338 4 Copyright 2010 by Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands. Koninklijke Brill NV incorporates the imprints BRILL, Hotei Publishing, IDC Publishers, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers and VSP. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, translated, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior written permission from the publisher. Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use is granted by Koninklijke Brill NV provided that the appropriate fees are paid directly to The Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Suite 910, Danvers, MA 01923, USA. Fees are subject to change. printed in the netherlands

Dedicated as a gurudakṣiṇā to Leonard W.J. van der Kuijp, in lieu of a cow

CONTENTS Preface ................................................................................................. xi Acknowledgements ............................................................................ xix List of Abbreviations ......................................................................... xxi Introduction by Cristina Scherrer-Schaub .................................... xxiii Tibetica Antiqua I The Two Vocabularies of Indo-Tibetan and Sino-Tibetan Translations in the Dunhuang Manuscripts .................................................................................... Vocabulary ................................................................................. Analysis of vocabulary ............................................................. Recapitulation ............................................................................ Notes on the sources ................................................................

1 19 22 83 85

Tibetica Antiqua II The Use of Metaphors for Honorific Distinctions in the Epoch of the Tibetan Kings ...................... Additional note to Tibetica Antiqua I .......................................

97 111

Tibetica Antiqua III Apropos of the Word Gtsug lag and the Indigenous Religion ...................................................................... The dating ....................................................................................... Characteristics of the Ancient Religion ..................................... The sense of Gtsug and Gtsug lag ............................................... Review of the Sources ................................................................... Appendix: The etymology of gtsug lag ....................................... Recapitulation ................................................................................

117 118 121 126 170 182 187

Tibetica Antiqua IV The Tradition Relative to the Debut of Buddhism in Tibet ........................................................................ The religious kings and the royal laws ...................................... The sūtra fallen from the sky ...................................................... Recapitulation ................................................................................

191 215 220 229

Tibetica Antiqua V The Indigenous Religion and the Bon po in Dunhuang Manuscripts ...........................................................

231

viii

contents

Theories ........................................................................................... The ancient religion .................................................................. Bon pos and Bon ....................................................................... Theories on the antecedents of late Bon .......................... The Dunhuang manuscripts and the later tradition ........... Dunhuang Documents ................................................................. Bon po in the texts translated from Chinese and bon po communities. ......................................................................... Translations from Chinese .................................................. Bon po communities ............................................................ Bon po and gshen, their differences and their functions .... Gshen rab mi bo ........................................................................ Other people .............................................................................. Names and their epithets ......................................................... Themes ........................................................................................ Funerary ritual ........................................................................... Divinities .................................................................................... The word Bon alone ................................................................. Linguistic and stylistic traits ...................................................

231 231 237 237 243 246 246 246 250 251 255 258 261 264 265 267 268 269

Tibetica Antiqua VI Confucian Maxims in Two Dunhuang Manuscripts ....................................................................................

273

Annuaire 1967 .................................................................................... Aspects of the Sworn Faith in China .......................................... The Bonpo Cosmogonies in Tibet and among the Mosso ........

285 285 290

Annuaire 1968 .................................................................................... Daoist texts relative to the transmission of revealed books ..... The bonpo accounts on the beginnings of culture .....................

299 299 304

Annuaire 1969 .................................................................................... Bonpo accounts on the first men ................................................. Some aspects of the Daoist parishes ............................................

307 307 313

Annuaire 1970 .................................................................................... Popular cults in organized Daoism ............................................. Elements constitutive of the bonpo literature ............................

321 321 328

contents Bibliography of Rolf A. Stein ........................................................... Select Bibliography ............................................................................ Indices General Index ................................................................................. Index of Dunhuang Documents ................................................. Index of Tibetan Terms ............................................................... Index of Sanskrit Terms ............................................................... Index of Chinese Terms ...............................................................

ix 337 343 355 371 375 380 382

PREFACE Many of Stein’s categories are as persistent a problem now as they were for him, though perhaps more widely discussed. This is particularly true for his concern with what he variously terms “popular religion” and “nameless religion.” This encompasses what many now name “domestic religion,” or what J.Z. Smith called the religion of “here.”1 Smith could rightly state that “popular religion” represents a “dubious place-holding category” (325), and Stein recognized it as such. Smith defines domestic religion as “focused on an extended family, [it] is supremely local. It is concerned with the endurance of the family as a social and biological entity, as a community, as well as with the relations of that community to its wider social and natural environs” (326). In Stein’s writing on the bon po religion, funerary rituals made up the greater part of their significance. When he writes about the criticisms of “excessive worship” charged against Daoists, he notes that the polemics are not so much between Confucians and Daoists as between individual adherents within Confucian and Daoist schools to “official and semi-official behavior, codified institutions and ‘popular’ customs (which are not limited to the people, but are partaken by all the layers of society)” (p. 322). In this, Stein recognizes the defects of “popular” in the sense of “folk” religion. However, any other category large enough to be generalized has similar deficiencies, including “domestic” or “family” religion. Stein’s ultimate concern, though, was not with the popular or domestic religions of antiquity. He recognized that he had no access to them. He had textual evidence from the past and ethnographic evidence from the present. The texts constituted a testament to the interpretation or remembrance of the nameless religion among members of the official religions. He was concerned with the continuities and relationships among these categories. In the Tibetan context, this lies with the relationships among (and within) bon, Bon, and Buddhism.

1

J.Z. Smith, “Here, There, and Anywhere,” in Relating Religion, 323–339. Smith cites a number of works on domestic religion, and draws inspiration from the work of Granet on China. Granet was, of course, Stein’s mentor and predecessor at the École française des Hautes études.

xii

preface

Each of these groups were—in time, place, or membership—both semi-official and official, domestic and civic, religions of “here, there, and anywhere.” Translating and updating Tibetica antiqua The Tibetica antiqua series was an obvious and long-overdue object of translation. I am aware that the third and fifth articles have been translated by Peter Richardus, and published already in the collection edited by Alex McKay, History of Tibet.2 Aside from any question of the quality of translation of those articles (which may have only been provisional), they suffer in other respects. Rendering these articles into English requires not only the translation of Stein’s French, but also his Tibetan and Chinese. Stein used a French system for transliterating Tibetan, which has here been changed to the widely accepted Wylie system. Further, he used the ÉFEO transcription of Chinese terms, which has here been rendered into Pinyin. Stein attempted to provide Chinese characters wherever possible in these articles, which were generally restricted to a separate, sometimes handwritten appendix, presumably due to the formatting restrictions of the day. I have here attempted to provide the Chinese characters next to the pinyin wherever possible without being too repetitive. Further, these six articles were intended by Stein as a set, and they often refer to each other, especially to Tibetica antiqua I, which can be viewed as laying the groundwork for the others. Therefore, it was imperative to translate all the articles in a single volume which could be indexed. Finally, I have in certain cases provided some updating. For instance, where an article or criticism by Stein elicited a response from another scholar, I have tried to include a reference to that article in a separate footnote, or as an addition to a previous footnote. Stein’s own footnoting system is somewhat idiosyncratic, and to leave it unchanged I have had to take recourse to what may seem like a slightly burdensome additional system. All footnotes that are not Stein’s are lettered rather than numbered. All notes added by the editor are marked as

2

“On the word gcug-lag and the indigenous religion,” in The History of Tibet, ed. Alex McKay (New York: RoutledgeCurzon, 2003), 530–583; “The indigenous religion and the bon-po in the Dunhuang manuscripts,” in The History of Tibet, ed. Alex McKay (New York: RoutledgeCurzon, 2003), 584–614.

preface

xiii

such (-ed.). Cristina Scherrer-Schaub has also been kind enough to provide some very useful comments and criticisms of these articles. Her emendations are marked by her initials (-C.S-S.). These references are by no means exhaustive, but will hopefully be useful. Modifications I have made a small number of changes to the original articles, including correcting as many typographical errors as I could find. For ease of reading, I have shortened further a number of Stein’s abbreviations, P. tib. becomes PT [not to be confused with a common abbreviation for dPa’o gTsug (PT), which I write Dpa’o Gtsug] and I.O. becomes ITJ. Given the sheer number of times Stein references the call numbers of Dunhuang manuscripts the longer P. tib. and IOL Tib J references would be too unwieldy. In addition, I have altered Stein’s Chinese reconstructions from Kalgren’s 1950 scheme to Baxter’s 1992 schema.3 It was suggested to me that I change Stein’s references to the Tibetan kings to Tibetan “emperors.” While I agree that in general the Tibetan btsan po should be translated as “emperor,” and rgyal po as “king,” I have not changed Stein’s references to the Tibetan “king.” There are a few reasons for this. One superficial reason is that Beckwith’s research on this topic was as yet unknown to Stein when he wrote Tibetica antiqua I, and replacing “king” with “emperor” would be anachronistic, as well as perhaps representing a dangerous precedent for how much “updating” would be appropriate. A more significant reason for not changing “king” to “emperor” is in deference to Stein’s theoretical schema. For Stein, the term “king” is not simply a hierarchical ranking, above kinglet and below emperor. It is an abstract, structural entity that partakes of a number of relationships, with ministers (as well as the relationship king : minister : heaven : earth, etc.), mountains and sky, deities (as lha and lha sras) and other worldly beings, his own sacred being (sku bla), his good government (gtsug lag), ancestor-kings, the idea of the king’s body, the king as bodhisattva, etc. When Stein uses the term “kinglet” or “minor king” it is almost always with reference to the twelve kinglets who

3

I owe this suggestion to Nathan Hill.

xiv

preface

elected the first, mythic king of Tibet, thus making the use of the term “kinglet” a structural necessity. When Stein uses the term “emperor” (almost always restricted to the Tang emperors), this term is never used in relation with Tibetan “kingship.” When referring to Chinese royalty, Stein generally also uses the term “king,” especially when making a structural or theoretical point. As a result of this, to parse Stein’s use of “king” into “emperor” and “king” would constitute a disservice, and an undermining of his conceptual framework. Annuaire The inclusion of Stein’s contributions to the Annuaire de collège de France from 1967–70 was suggested by one of the readers from Brill’s Tibetan Studies Library. Rather that just translate the sections relating to Tibet, I decided to translate them in full. The Annuaire provides a concise demonstration of Stein’s method and theoretical framework as they relate to his project of comparative religion. Stein never makes strong comparative statements linking Chinese Daoism and Confucianism with Tibetan Buddhism and Bon, but he does make occasional references from one to the other, and the reader can see that he is constantly informed by a wide field of sources—religious, geographical, philological, and ethnographic. A Biographical Sketch4 Born June 13th, 1911 in Switzerland, Rolf Stein was the second of three children. The family moved to Berlin, where his older brother studied Latin and Greek at the Gymnasium, but left to study Mathematics, English and French at the Oberschule. Not wanting to make the same mistake, his parents enrolled Stein immediately at the Oberschule, but he wanted to study Latin and Greek. So he had to learn Latin on his own. He was not too fond of mathematics, Physics and Chemistry, but

4 This relies most heavily on the “necrologies” of Kuo Liying and Anne-Marie Blondeau, as well as Michel Strickman’s earlier notes. Kuo Liying. “In memoriam: Rolf Alfred Stein (1911–1999),” Cahiers d’Extrême-Asie, 11 (1999): xi–xx; Anne-Marie Blondeau. “Rolf Alfred Stein,” Ecole Pratique des Hautes Études, Annuaire, tome 108 (1999): 29–31; Michel Strickman. “Introduction,” in Tantric and Daoist Strudies in Honor of R.A. Stein, vii–xvi.

preface

xv

the French and English were to prove useful. His older brother died at 18. This strongly affected Stein, who left school for a year. In Berlin, Stein was fascinated with astrology, and frequented a bookstore specializing in esotericism and occultism. A friend of the proprietor, a Russian emigrant and Egypto-phile let Stein read his hieroglyphics, and the young Stein worked to translate them. In searching for other scripts which might help him in the deciphering, he found Chinese. As the business of his father was far from prosperous, Stein began learning Chinese in order to become an interpreter. He later published an article on the Egyptian inscriptions, but was not forthcoming on where to find it. He first trained in Otto Francke’s sinological seminar in Berlin with fellow students Stefan Balazs and Wolfram Eberhard (1909–1989). When Eberhard graduated but couldn’t live as a Jew in Berlin after the rise of the Nazis,5 Stein decided to leave for France as he knew the language and literature, thanks to the collection of his maternal uncle (and his education at the Oberschule). He emigrated to Paris in 1933, and did not return to Germany for 44 years. In 1977, he accepted an honorary degree from the University of Bonn in person. In Paris, his knowledge of Chinese impressed teachers and fellow students. He received his degree in Chinese in 1934, and in Japanese in 1936. He studied Chinese and Japanese at the École Nationale des Langues Orientales Vivantes and followed the seminar of Granet (1884–1940) on ancient China and Mestre on Indochina at the 5th section of the École des Hautes Études. He worked on Tibetan under the tutelage of Jacques Bacot (1877–1965) and Marcelle Lalou (1890–1967), and attended the lectures of Paul Pelliot (1878–1945), Henri Maspero (1883–1945) and Sylvain Lévi at the Collège de France. In the milieu of Marcel Mauss (sociology)(1872–1950), Marc Bloch and Lucien Febre (social history), and Georges Dumézil (linguistics). Stein (in East Asia) seems to have followed the daunting example of Dumézil.6 Granet was his greatest influence, admired for his great intelligence and extreme lucidity. It was he who encouraged Stein to combine

5 Eberhard was to become a pioneer in the sociological and ethnographic study of China. 6 Stein recognized the additional hardships of attempting to implement Dumézil’s Indo-European comparative method in Asia, which lacked linguistic, ethnic, or sociological homogeneity. However, throughout his career, he demonstrated the possibility of such a method.

xvi

preface

Chinese studies with the study of Tibet and Mongolia. He and Bacot were like fathers to him, introducing him to people and getting him jobs in libraries and collections. One of these contacts, Michel Calmann (1891–1976), was probably responsible for speeding through naturalization papers and saving Stein from deportation to the German camps. Having applied for French nationality so as not to be a citizen of the Third Reich, he acquired French nationality only days before the outbreak of war in 1939. In June, 1940, the Académie des Inscription et Belles-Lettres proposed Stein as a member of the École Française d’Extrême-Orient. The nomination was quashed by the anti-Jew laws promulgated by the Vichy government. He was then sent to Vietnam as a Chinese and Japanese translator. When he arrived in Indochina, however, headquarters was not aware of his translating post and mobilized him to active service with the mountain artillery. He subsequently served translating Japanese papers at the Hanoi ÉFEO, without pay (Vichy had removed his name from the rolls and deprived him of his salary). Despite amoebic dysentery and time spent as a Japanese prisoner of war, the years in Indochina did provide him with the opportunity to witness the last vestiges of refined mandarin culture, as well as peasant and montagnard religion, first hand. These experiences were to perfuse his subsequent work. Following interventions by Paul Mus and Paul Demiéville, Stein was installed as a member of the École Française in 1946 (retroactive to 1941), and sent to China. He resided in Chengdu, Kunming, and Beijing until 1949, making trips to Inner Mongolia, Amdo and Yunnan. Mindful of the counsel of Granet and Mestre, he continued his work on Tibetan and Mongol studies, as well as the aboriginal cultures of the Sino-Tibetan borderland. In 1949, at the request of Paul Demiéville, he returned to Paris to take up an appointment as Professor of Chinese at the École Nationale des Langues Orientales Vivantes. In 1951, appointed professor at the fifth section of the École des Hautes Études. His chair, Religions de la Chine et de la Haute Asie, was formerly held by Granet. In 1957, its title was changed to Religions comparées de l’Extrême-Orient et de la Haute Asie, reflecting the special nature of his interests. Stein began to focus on the Gesar epic in the 1950s (though his research on Gesar goes back to the ’40s), regarding it as a privileged point of access into Tibetan culture. This culminated in his monumen-

preface

xvii

tal Recherches sur l’épopée et le barde au Tibet in 1959, in which he demonstrated his unequalled understanding of Tibetan literature. In the 1960s, he turned to the study of Buddhism and Daoism, and moved away from the aboriginal religions per se. In 1960, he brought Dagpo Rinpoche from Kalimpong so students would be familiar with spoken as well as written Tibetan. He returned to Sikkim, India and Nepal to acquire books and information, never neglecting the importance of contemporary sources, oral or written. In 1966, Stein was appointed Professor at the Collège de France. While there, he began an intellectual exchange with fellow-professor Claude Lévi-Strausse. While his early career emphasized indigenous or nameless religion, usually overshadowed by Buddhism, Daoism, and Confucianism, his work gradually turned to these religions. Once, he stated that if he had to start all over again, he would take Buddhism as the principal subject as Buddhist worship and belief effectively constitute the common fund of communal Asian culture. He was able to bring together his concerns with Buddhism and social practice in his 1972 publication ‘Brug pa kun legs, le yogin. Concomitantly, he became ever more interested in the source of this communal culture, looking to Dunhuang manuscripts to illuminate the early workings of Buddhism and Daoism in Tibet and East Asia. In a work which synthesized the differing viewpoints which occupied his research on Tibet, he published La civilisation tibétaine in 1962, substantially revising and augmenting it in 1981. Throughout the 1970s, his lectures at the Collège de France dealt with tantrism, particularly Sino-Japanese and Tibetan. Regarding Tibet, he was concerned especially with non-canonical Rnying ma tantras, many of which he viewed as perhaps not having been translated from Sanskrit, but composed in Tibetan, and so demonstrating the originality of Tibetan culture. Because of his background and expertise, Stein could trace the often Byzantine diffusion of tantric influence in East and Central Asia both synchronically and diachronically. Much of Stein’s genius lay in demonstrating the importance of synthesizing diverse genres of literature, as well as recognizing synthesis in that literature itself. He underscored the desideratum of utilizing Chinese sources for the comprehension of the history and civilization of Tibet. As well, he highlighted the necessity of combining rigorous philological and ethnographic methods in the study of Tibetan literature. One should consider that he published classic works on the Gesar epic and historical geography in the same year. At the same time as

xviii

preface

he was lecturing on the non-canonical Rnying ma tantras and publishing on the mystic and social critic ‘Brug pa kun legs, he was writing this monument to careful philological and historical analysis, Tibetica antiqua. In her testament at his passing, Anne-Marie Blondeau stated that Rolf Stein was the uncontested master of generations of Tibetologists and Sinologists. It is hoped that even now, on the ten-year anniversary of his death, this publication will offer some glimpse of why. Arthur P. McKeown Cambridge, MA 9 October, 2009

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I should like to first of all thank Professor Leonard Willem Johannes van der Kuijp, who initially urged me to translate these articles during my first year as a graduate student. While too many years have passed since then, it is perhaps fitting that I now have the opportunity at the end of my graduate career to dedicate this book to one who has provided me with so much help and inspiration. I would also like to thank especially Cristina Scherrer-Schaub for kindly agreeing to write the introduction, giving the manuscript a detailed reading, and providing extremely valuable comments. I am also very grateful to Nathan Hill, who read preliminary drafts and made very useful suggestions for updating these articles, adding a great deal of worth to this edition. Thanks are also due to Christina Svendson, who made valuable translation suggestions. Obviously, any lack of precision or mistake is my responsibility alone. Many thanks also to Dr. Christoph Cüeppers of the Lumbini International Research Institute for providing a wonderful library and great company while I was revising these translations. Finally, I would like to thank Albert Hoffstädt, Patricia Radder, and everyone at E.J. Brill for their guidance and patience. I would also like to thank the following for permission to publish in translation articles originally appearing elsewhere: “Tibetica Antiqua I: Les deux vocabulaires des traductions indo-tibétaine et sino-tibétaine dans les manuscripts des Touen-Houang.” Bulletin de l’École française d’Extrême-Orient 72 (1983): 149–236. “Tibetica Antiqua 2: L’usage de métaphores pour des distinctions honorifiques à l’époch des rois tibétaines.” Bulletin de l’École française d’Extrême-Orient 73 (1984): 257–272. “Tibetica Antiqua III: A propos du mot gtsug-lag et de religion indigène.” Bulletin de l’École française d’Extrême-Orient 74 (1985): 83–133. “Tibetica Antiqua IV: La tradition relative au début de bouddhisme au Tibet.” Bulletin de l’École française d’Extrême-Orient 75 (1986): 169–196. “Tibetica Antiqua V: La religion indigène et les bon-po dans les manuscrits des Touen-Houang.” Bulletin de l’École française d’ExtrêmeOrient 77 (1988): 27–56.

xx

acknowledgements

“Tibetica Antiqua VI: Maximes confucianistes dans deux manuscrits de Touen-houang.” Bulletin de l’École française d’Extrême-Orient 79 (1992): 9–17. Les Presses du palais royal for: “Etude du monde chinoise: institutions et concepts.” Annuaire du collège de france (1967): 411–421. “Etude du monde chinoise: institutions et concepts.” Annuaire du collège de france (1968): 453–459. “Etude du monde chinoise: institutions et concepts.” Annuaire du collège de france (1969): 461–471. “Etude du monde chinoise: institutions et concepts.” Annuaire du collège de france (1970): 437–449.

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS Mhvy Pkg JAs DDT

Mahāvyutpatti Peking Journal Asiatique Documents de Touen-houang relatifs à l’histoire du Tibet TLTD Tibetan Literary Texts and Documents Concerning Chinese Turkestan Choix Choix de documents tibétains conserves à la Bibliothèque Nationale AFL Ancient Folk-Literature from North-Eastern Tibet JRAS Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society TP T’oung Pao (Leiden) Tribus Les tribus anciennes des marches sino-tibétaines A.M. Macdonald, Ariane. “Une lecture des Pelliot tibétaine 1286, 1287, 1038; 1047 et 1290, Essai sur le formation et l’emploi des mythes politiques dans la religion royale de Sron ̦-bcan sgam-po,” in Etudes tibétaines dédiées à la memoire de Marcelle Lalou, Paris, 1971, pp. 190–391. Ōtani A comparative analytical catalogue of the Kanjur division of the tibetan Tripitaka, Ōtani University, Kyoto, 1930–2. Tōyō Bunkō A Catalogue of the Tibetan manuscripts collected by Sir Aurel Stein TA Tibetica Antiqua BEFEO Bulletin de l’École française d’Extrême-Orient (Hanoi, Paris) BSOAS Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies (London) HJAS Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies (Cambridge, MA) T. bstan ‘gyur K. bka’ ‘gyur PT Pelliot tibétaine P. chin. Pelliot chinoise ITJ IOL Tib J (India Office Library Tibetan J)

INTRODUCTION The wealth of material presented here, despite its being ‘just’ part of Stein’s impressive work, is literally amazing.1 The felicitous initiative of Arthur McKeown of translating into English Tibetica Antiqua (together with the related résumés of Stein’s teaching) makes accessible to the scholars and educated persons a fundamental corpus of writings for the history of Tibet. If we try to pierce the impetus given by Stein to his oeuvre, we note that he constantly proceeds by way of successive approaches to the subject-matter, while never departing from that “vision élargie” inherited from his teachers.2 The tendency towards specialization that has characterized the field of Asian studies from the second half of the past century up to the present has provided (and still continues to provide) a large and varied amount of inestimable instruments (edited documents, catalogues of primary sources, indices, unpublished works, data-bases etc.). On the other hand, the fact of “distributing” the knowledge of the field of Asian studies among current themes has impressively contributed to the number of essays built upon common etic models shared with social sciences at large. Stein’s intellectual project navigates between the Scylla and Charybdis of these two methodologies if taken to the extreme, that is, between the kaleidoscopic image resulting from refracting the problem into discrete elements and the uniform image built upon overly relying on (if not conforming to) fashionable theories. In the words of Michel Strickmann (1981: vii) the themes set forth by R.A. Stein “. . . call for a synoptic approach to the subject,

1

For two excellent portraits of Rolf A. Stein, including the list of his publications, see the late Michel Strickmann Tantric and Taoist Studies in Honour of R. A. Stein Bruxelles, Institut belge des hautes etudes chinoises, 1981, vol. I, pp. i–xxi, and KUO Liying “In Memoriam: Rolf Alfred Stein (1911–1999)”, in: Nouvelles études de Dunhuang. Centenaire de l’École française d’Extrême-Orient, Cahiers d’Extrême-Asie 11, 1999-2000, pp. xi–xxx. 2 Marcel Granet of course, but also Sylvain Lévi, both being “les chantres par excellence” of an enlarged vision of Asian studies. Cf. Michel Strickmann, op. cit., p. VIII, and KUO Liying, art. cit., p. xviii: “Suivant la grande tradition de ses maîtres, Chavannes, Pelliot, Maspéro et Demiéville, R.A. Stein voulut toujours comprendre la culture asiatique dans son ensemble et la traiter globalement. Il voulait à tout prix éviter tout cloisonnement entre des cultures qui partagent un fond commun.”

xxiv

introduction

overleaping the traditional bounds imposed on Asian cultures both by their own, internal tradition and by the majority of western interpreters. Stein’s youthful vision of the basic, if complex, interrelationship between ‘high culture’ and the ‘nameless religion’ of the people became the lattice structure for all his subsequent works. His writings represent adventurous French scholarship at its finest, mingling erudition with intuition in a manner all too seldom found in the Asian studies of other lands.” In the essays presented here, Stein focuses on Tibet. In his own words, he is not primarily and essentially concerned with history, although this last intervenes and surfaces relatively often. His analysis, reconsidered from a distance (twenty years or so separate his teaching on the subject and the publication of Tibetica Antiqua) the themes of his research, excellently combining “erudition and intuition”, brings about a polymorphous reading of socio-political facts, that is religious and social practices and institutions. Despite the inevitable restatements that the attentive and informed reader will be confronted with, the essays presented here continue to be a precious source of information for the history of Tibet, and a remarkable example of an original methodological approach. Rolf Stein, a Tibetologist and Sinologist, stresses the problematic related to both fields of investigation. The Indianists and the specialists in Indo-Tibetan studies find food for thought. This material is a field to explore; indeed the groundbreaking themes that Rolf Stein developed in the wake of his teachers remains, in part, unknown. The background of the dynamic and material that we may see in Tibetica Antiqua is partially inspired by two fundamental works published by Stein the same year (1959), Recherches sur l’épopée et le barde au Tibet and Les tribus anciennes des marches sino-tibétaines. The Gesar Epic represents an inextinguishable field where myths, narrative motives, toponyms, ethnonyms, institutional patterns, not to speak of crossborrowings meet. To this wealth of material, Stein adds the study of the Dunhuang documents, and his extensive recourse to indigenous literature, Chinese, Tibetan, and Mongol, aims at tentatively trying to distinguish the possible dynamic instantiated between indigenous practices and beliefs versus “les religions constituées”, namely Buddhism. Stein was aware of the difficult task of disentangling the influence, impact and contribution of Buddhism on “local” religions. From this point of view the relatively recent prodigious rise of Buddhist studies

introduction

xxv

in the field of the manifold aspect of its transmission outside India, and the parallel success of the studies on Tibetan indigenous religion and social practices, have given a better understanding of some aspect of the phenomenon. Nonetheless the problematic is still puzzling the field of Asian studies.3 Stein’s monumental first essay (TA I) concentrates upon the IndoTibetan and Sino-Tibetan vocabularies that result from the translation of Buddhist literature into Tibetan based upon a Chinese or an Indian text. His analysis takes its stand upon a selection of Dunhuang manuscripts (Mss), focusing in particular upon the Mss of the so-called Chinese-Chan (p. 5), that first attracted the attention of Marcelle Lalou, whose pioneering work was eventually retaken by the Japanese scholars (p. 5). The problematic is extremely complex and Stein proceeds his inquiry in advancing a working hypothesis carefully considered according to the pro and contra arguments. In brief, he is cautious and critical in recognizing the limits of theoretical presuppositions. But his incisive and relevant remarks are made so much en passant that it is as if they escaped notice. With much accuracy Stein notes extremely pertinent facts, despite his “strangeness” to Indian and Buddhist textual history precluding him from a further step. Examples may be chosen at random, such as the following (p. 10): “Another case which leaves one perplexed; ‘Chan Writing’ (ITJ 709.11) studied by Kimura. This text utilizes the Ind.[ian] voc.[abulary], but preserves at the same time the Chin.[ese] voc. [abulary] from the translation of the Laṅkāvatāra-sūtra when it cites it”. As a matter of fact this may well result from a common practice of editing texts and translating technique, mentioned for instance in the Dag yig mkhas pa’i ‘byung gnas of lCaṅ skya Rol pa’i rdo rje4

3 On this problematic, see David S. Ruegg The symbiosis of Buddhism with Brahmanism/Hinduism in SouthAsia and of Buddhism with ‘local cults’ in Tibet and the Himalayan region, (Wien: Verlag der Oesterreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 2008). The same author has published various essays that may be considered a necessary complement to Stein’s Tibetica Antiqua, among them Buddha-nature, Mind and the Problem of Gradualism in a Comparative Perspective. On the Transmission and Reception of Buddhism in India and Tibet. (London: SOAS, 1989), and Ordre spirituel e ordre temporel dans la pensée bouddhique de l’Inde et du Tibet, (Paris: Collège de France, 1995). 4 See David S. Ruegg “On translating the Buddhist Canon: a dictionary of IndoTibetan terminology in Tibetan and Mongolina: Dag yig mkhas pa’i ‘byuṅ gnas of Rol pa’i rdo rje”, in Perala Ratnam, ed., Studies in Indo-Asian Art and Culture, vol. 3 (Acharya Raghu Vira Commemoration Volume), 243–261.

xxvi

introduction

and confirmed by the study of textual transmission.5 Other facts may intervene in order to explain the seeming discrepancy attested by the two vocabularies. Stein indeed notes (p. 25) that “the Chinese vocabulary of the original texts was not [always] uniform”. In fact, the translation made from a Chinese version could also and indirectly stand upon Indian versions earlier than that actually used by the team of Indian paṇḍitas and Tibetan lo tsā bas in the process of translating the Indian text into Tibetan. This fact is crucial in many respects. Indeed, if we know the exemplars or copies of Buddhist texts in Tibetan translations, attested among the Dunhuang Mss, as well as the canonical Tibetan translations, we know nearly nothing about the precise identity of their Indian antecedents. And still, we proceed by comparing relatively uncomparable matter. This, at times imperceptible, shift in meaning may be occasionally responsible for at least part of the hiatus that we may observe between the Indian- and the Sino-vocabularies. But there is more. What is indeed remarkable is the fact that if the terminology may be seen as different, apparently, there is in the target language no phrase marker that could give a hint of the source language. Other factors may be involved, such as bi- or multilingualism, noted by Stein, and abundantly attested in Dunhuang and Central Asian documents. Or also, the interpreting process intervening in the course of translating (cf. infra p. 22–3), that the manual destined to the team of Tibetan and Indian translators, the sGra sbyor bam po gnyis pa, explains in detail. Relying on the longstanding tradition of the Indian principles of Buddhist exegesis and grammar, this sample of erudite lexicography offers a varied pattern of interpreting the Indian term to be translated into Tibetan. And the Buddhist Chinese tradition equally records the precise procedure of the translating process.6 The inquiry becomes particularly dense when Stein compares and analyzes the two vocabularies with respect to cosmology, mythology, social structure, territorial and institutional practices, or local/

5 Cf. the case of the Yuktiṣaṣṭikāvṛtti, Cristina Scherrer-Schaub “Towards a methodology for the study of old Tibetan manuscripts: Dunhuang and Tabo”, in C.A. Scherrer-Schaub & E. Steinkellner, eds., Tabo Studies II. Manuscripts, Texts, Inscriptions, and the Arts. (Roma: IsIAO, 1999), 23. 6 On these pattern, see C. Scherrer-Schaub “Enacting words. A diplomatic analysis of the Imperial decrees (bkas bcad) and their application in the sGra sbyor bam po gnyis pa tradition” JIABS 25, 1–2 (2002): 328–330. On Chinese practices, see recently Jinhua CHEN “Some Aspects of the Buddhist Translation Procedure in Early Medieval China” Journal Asiatique 293/2, (2005): 603–662.

introduction

xxvii

indigenous beliefs. Worth noting and extremely didactic particularly nowadays is the fact that Stein never indulges in reductionism. He punctuates his work by illuminating short phrases, words of a wise man, underlining the complexity of the encounters and reciprocal influences among several societies, if not cultures (p. 66): “There were loans. Yet certain analogies may be explained either by coincidence, or by a common archaic ground”. Some topics touched on in TA I, at times very briefly, will receive an elaborate treatment in TA III–VI, when in TA II, Stein centers his analysis upon IO 506 and explores the symbolic code concealed behind the “use of metaphors for honorific distinctions”. While noting that the Old Tibetan Chronicles and the Annals, as well as secular Dunhuang documents and Tibetan inscriptions (Stein cites the lHasa rdo ring recording the treaty between Tibet and China in 821/2) attest the use of honorific ensigns (yi ge) in the civil and military administration of Imperial Tibet, Stein reads this material in the light of indigenous Chinese and Tibetan historiography, following the common trend of his fellows historians, in this case Géza Uray and Giuseppe Tucci. Thus, the current use of all sources available (archive documents, epigraphy, indigenous literary narrative, historiography, etc.) makes possible the combined study of “facts” and “beliefs”. Centering upon the first 14 lines of IO 506 , Stein translates and comments upon this literary piece, presumably also tainted with irony, and addressed to the taste (and strive . . .) for “honorifences” which characterizes at that epoch (as today . . .) officials and functionaries, and where the ensigns are in this case attributed to the “brave” religious following the Buddhist teaching and prescriptions. The descriptions of the precious material for ensigns and the images represented on seals are tropes that may be linked with other Dunhuang fragments, some of them attesting to the institution of grades among military and civil officers.7 Stein compares the methaphoric and administrative use of enseigns as found in the Dunhuang documents and their record in later narrative and stresses upon the common pattern shared by their use in administrative matter and their metaphorical use in poetry.

7 Cf. C. Scherrer-Schaub “Revendications et recours hiérarchique. Contributions à l’histoire de Śa cu sous administration tibétaine”, in Jean-Pierre Drège Etudes de Dunhuang et Turfan, (Genève: Droz, 2007), 257–326.

xxviii

introduction

In TA III, Stein proposes a re-reading of some fundamental elements concurring to the royal theory as this may be gathered from some Dunhuang documents clustering round the Chronicles, and studied by Ariane (Macdonald) Spanien in her groundbreaking essay “Une lecture des P. T. 1286, 1287, 1038, 1047 et 1290. Essai sur la formation et l’emploi des mythes politiques dans la religion royale de Sroṅbcan sgam-po”.8 While Stein is right in underlining the importance and complexity of dating the Dunhuang manuscripts, a desideratum that still continues to be seriously considered, his review is, at least in part, tainted with ad hominem critique. Much of this attitude is due to his personal style that may at time sound abruptus, and expressed with acrimonia. Stein as we already saw is extremely cautious and in analyzing ‘facts’ that are not limited to archive records but include also myths, legends, and stylistic forms he fixes his careful attention upon the elements of the theory in question. For him the study of documents, narrative, historical sources, myths and narrative may reach a fair level of “vraisemblance”, not of truth. And the variety of sources although they may and shall be studied together, cannot be treated in the same way, and the conclusion that we may gather from them must be carefully balanced (p. 120) “We may suppose it, but not affirm it. We must also take account of the vocabulary in a given era. One and the same word, perfectly Tibetan and early, may cover different notions, sometimes even foreign ones.” With Stein’s virulent critique of Ariane (Macdonald) Spanien’s position concerning the pre-Buddhist religion (as opposed to the royal religion) termed by him “populaire” (pp. 124–126) the reader is confronted with the extreme complexity of the problematic. It is here that one may wonder how far the “vision dumézilienne”9 could have been appropriate. Even apart from other consideration, this would imply the fact of discarding India, being an integral part of the IndoIranian area, thereby facing a paradox. Indeed, quite a number of the themes central to the problematic may be noted in India as well. It is here that the “vision dumézilienne” should be abandoned in favor of the “vision élargie” evoked earlier and appealing to the analogy of the models considered with regard to the diversity of their applications.

8 Études tibétaines dédiées à la mémoire de Marcelle Lalou (Paris: Maisonneuve, 1971), 166-391. 9 Cf. Michel Strickmann (1981: vii–viii), and Kuo Liying (1999–2000: xvi).

introduction

xxix

Stein, without his knowing, comes fairly near to this (cf. na. p. 128, n. 23): here everything is Indian and/or Indic. He admits not knowing the Indian text attesting mi chos and lha chos. Yet, he provides very interesting material that naturally leads to the answer, the treatment of which however far exceed the present scope. As material contributing to clarify the complexity of the interrelation between indigenous tradition and foreign influences, the remaining essays concentrate upon the introduction of Buddhism to Tibet, the indigenous religion and the ‘organized’ Bon po, and finally the presence of Chinese Classics in the Tibetan manuscripts from Dunhuang. The last decades saw a renewal of the studies on Tibetan Dunhuang religious and secular documents, and new material is now accessible. Parallel to this, the so called Bon po studies are in full bloom, and the Buddhist multi-lingual communities of Dunhuang and Central Asia pierce the screen of anonymity. Leading scholars in these fields, such as Annemarie Blondeau, Anne Chayet, Samten G. Karmay, Kuo Liying, Per Kvaerne and Yoshiro Imaeda that the reader will find on his path through the essays presented here, have continued, enlarged and opened the work of their master Rolf A. Stein whose oeuvre, destined to last, represents an inextinguishable source of inspiration for Asian scholars, and more. Cristina Scherrer-Schaub Paris-Lausanne 9 August 2009

TIBETICA ANTIQUA* I

THE TWO VOCABULARIES OF INDO-TIBETAN AND SINO-TIBETAN TRANSLATIONS IN THE DUNHUANG MANUSCRIPTS** R.A. Stein I. Everyone realizes the great activity of translation of Buddhist texts achieved by the Indian monks and Tibetan translators before and after circa 800 A.D. We also know that this activity was regulated by an “edict” of King Khri lde srong btsan (798 or 804–815) dating from 814. He aimed to make uniform the Tibetan vocabulary serving to translate the Indian terminology and to impose it as a single model. In this “edict,” this vocabulary is called, perhaps, “new” (skad gsar bcad; cf. n. 1, 12). It was codified in a glossary in which the technical terms and proper names were classified thematically in a more or less “logical” order (except for a series of verbs and common names added pell-mell at the end).a This is the Sanskrit-Tibetan “dictionary” Mahāvyutpatti (henceforth, Mhvy), of which all translators, contemporary (such as Ye shes sde, Dpal brtsegs and Chos grub, alias Facheng) and later (all ? or the majority, verification remains to be done) made use, and to which they all conformed, in the same way as all modern Buddhologists. This “dictionary” was complemented by a sort of commentary in which are explicated a certain number of terms (not all) by

* Under this collective title, the author hopes to publish a series of articles or notes on the problems posed by the ancient documents (Dunhuang manuscripts, inscriptions, etc.) relative to ancient Tibet (until c. 1000 AD) and its neighbors. ** Chinese characters will be found at the end. The isolated words are classified in alphabetical order of [English] transcription. Phrases are enumerated, and their numbers are placed between square brackets in the text [N.B.: in this edition, the Chinese characters are inserted directly into the text—ed.]. For authors cited in brief, see the bibliography, and for the works cited, see the bibliographical notices at the end. a Stein failed to recognize the fact that the Mhvy is arranged according to Indian classical tradition, cf. C.A. Scherrer-Schaub “Sa-cu: Qu’y a t-il au programme de la classe de philologie bouddhique?” In Tibetan Studies. Proceedings of the 5th Seminar of the International Association of Tibetan Studies, ed. Ihara, Shoren and Yamaguchi, Zuiho, vol. I, 209–220. (Narita: Naritasan Shinshoji, 1992), 216—C.S.-S.

2

r.a. stein

quasi-scholarly etymologiesb which demonstrate how the translators analyzed the Sanskrit words and names, and how or why they were chosen as the “new” Tibetan translation. This is the Sgra sbyor (bam po gnyis pa, in two scrolls; Madhyavyutpatti, Peking Tanjur, Japanese ed., vol. 144, № 5833).1 During the same epoch, the king(s), fervent protector(s) of Buddhism, ordered a general recension of all texts translated up to that time, the collective activity of which resulted in three catalogues named after the palaces in which they had been compiled (or where the collections were found?), Ldan dkar, Phan thang, and Chims Phu. Only the first is preserved in the Tanjur.c It dates to 812 (according b As a matter of fact the composition and derivation of words that appear in the Sgra sbyor bam po gnyis pa, again, follow the Indian tradition, see P. Verhagen, A History of Sanskrit Grammatical Literature in Tibet. volume 1: Transmission of the Canonical Literature. (Leiden: Brill, 1994); “Studies in Tibetan indigenous grammar (3): Sanskrit nīpata, Tibetan tshig-phrad.” In Tibetan Studies. Proceedings of the 7th Conference of the International Association for Tibetan Studies, Graz 1995, ed. Helmut Krasser, Michael Torsten Much, Ernst Steinkellner, and Helmut Tauscher. (Wien: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1997), 1011–1022; C.A. Scherrer-Schaub “Sa-cu: Qu’y a t-il au programme de la classe de philologie bouddhique?”, 211–216; C.A. Scherrer-Schaub, “Enacting Words. A Diplomatic Analysis of the Imperial Decrees (bkas bcad) and their Application in the sGra sbyor bam po gñis pa Tradition,” Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies 25, no. 1–2 (2002): 328–330.—C.S.-S. 1 Simonsson (1957), with the review by G. Uray (Acta Orientalia Hungaricae 8, no. 3) and de Jong (“compte rendu de N. Simonsson, Indo-Tibetische Studien,” 216–19). Yamaguchi reprised the discussion concerning the two works. According to him, one should not speak of an edict, nor of a “new translation” (skad gsar), but of a “ultimate decision” (definitive establishment: sar bcad = tshar bcad) of vocabulary (cf. n. 12). I will continue here, however, to call the decision an edict since the king approved it, and the translations “new” since tradition designates them thus. Simonsson minutely compared passages of certain sūtras in their versions from the Kanjur and in certain old manuscripts (from Khotan and Dunhuang). Principally, he asserts differences in grammar, prosody and orthography, but he also notes some differences in vocabulary (p. 70, paryāya regularly translated as gzung in the old mss, while the “new” translation translation (Mhvy) is rnam grangs; pp. 105–106, the deities ābhāsvara = kun snang dang ba in the old mss, but ‘od gsal (lha) in Mhvy). I have verified that the vocabulary is almost always identical in the two cases (e.g. sūtra = mdo (sde)). But I have also found some examples of differences. P. 28, tīrthika: “old” mur ‘dug vs mu stegs; pp. 59, 65 bhūta and abhūta (Mhvy 2621: “true”), “old” bden, myi bden vs yang dag (min); p. 82, “good, well”: “old” dge’o vs legs so; p. 89, “otherwise”: sngun shad vs sngon shad; p. 202–203, śāstra: gtsug lag vs bstan bcos. c At the time of Stein’s original publication, the Phang thang catalogue was missing. This is no longer the case. Recently, the Phang thang catalogue has surfaced and is now published, see Dkar chag ‘phang thang ma, Sgra sbyor bam po gnyis pa. (Beijing: Mi rigs dpe skrun khang, 2003). It is indexed in Adelheid Herrmann-Pfandt, Die lHan kar ma: ein früher Katalog der ins Tibetische übersetzten buddhistischen Texte, kritische Neuausgabe mit Einleitung und Materialien (Wien: Verlag der österreichischen

the two vocabularies in the dunhuang manuscripts

3

to Tucci) or, more probably, to 824 (according to Yamaguchi Zuihō).2 But Bu ston (1290–1364) already had the two others at his disposal, and he cited them.3 Whether it was a question of a new lexicon (skad gsar) imposed by an edict or a “new (‘final’) resolution” relative to the lexicon (gsar bcad; sar chad), that decision implied that there was at that time one (or multiple) divergent lexica. Kimura Ryūtoku4 thought, with reason, that it could not be created ex nihilo, suddenly, on the resolution of the king. It must have existed prior to the edict (814). Kimura and other Japanese scholars before him (Ueyama, etc.) speak of “new translations” (xin yi 新訳) and “old translations” ( jiu yi 舊訳). They always rely on the difference with the translations made from the Chinese, which we will speak of at length (cf. n. 5). We might think that the translations made from the Sanskrit before 814 also support the differences of vocabulary with those which had been codified by the edict (cf. Simonsson). In effect, numerous colophons from translations of Sanskrit texts, owing to the Indian masters and their Tibetan collaborators, affirm that these translations had been arranged (bcos) in conformity with the “new” vocabulary fixed by the edict.5

Akademie der Wissenschaften, 2008); Eishin Kawagoe, dKar chag ‘Phang thang ma, (Sendai: Töhoku indo chibetto kenkyü kai, 2005). See also An Early Tibetan survey of Buddhist Literature: The Bstan pa rgyas pa rgyan gyi nyi ‘od of Bcom ldan ral gri, ed. Kurtis R. Schaeffer and Leonard W.J. van der Kuijp, (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2004); G. Halkias, “Tibetan Buddhism Registered: A Catalogue from the Imperial Court of ‘Phang Thang,” The Eastern Buddhist 36 (2004): 46–105.—ed. 2 Lalou, “Les texts bouddhiques au temps de Khri-sroṅ lde bcan,” 3; Yamaguchi, “Toban ōkoku bukkyō-shi nendai-kō,” 19. 3 The “new” translations had not eliminated the “old.” The latter did not remain hidden in a Dunhuang cave. Some of them were incorporated into the Kanjur and Tanjur. Examples of these texts have been found to exist in Tibet (this is also true for the old texts cited by Dpa’o Gtsug lag phreng ba) and were still available in the 13th and 14th centuries. This is the case with apocryphal sūtras translated from Chinese, with their “old” vocabulary, such as “Net of Brahma” (Fanwang jing 梵網經), “King of Law” (Fawang jing 法王經), Bayang jing 八陽經, “Vajra Samādhi” (Jingang sanmei jing 金剛三昧經; see the bibliographical notes). Sa skya pandita (1182–1251) and Bu ston were aware of Chan treatises preserved at Dunhuang and knew that they had been redacted in preparation for the Bsam yas debate (Karmay, “A Discussion on the Doctrinal Position of rDzogs-chen,” 153). Cf. n. 5. 4 Kimura, “Tonkō shutsudo no Chibetto-bun Zen-bun no Seikaku”, 453, 460. 5 de Jong (here, n. 1) makes the remark that these colophons are sometimes contradictory and subject to caution. He has indicated three colophons from texts translated from Chinese according to the catalogue of the Sde dge edition (Schmidt, Der Index des Kandjur). 1) Saddharmarāja-sūtra (№ 243 = Peking, № 909 = Fawang jing 法王經; mention: “does not seem to have been arranged in new language”); 2) Āyuḥpattiyathākāra-pariprcchā-sūtra (№ 308 = Peking № 947; mention: “translated at the epoch of the first diffusion of Buddhism, had not been arranged according to the resolution

4

r.a. stein

This revision not being thus viewed solely from former translations of Chinese (Buddhist) texts, but also from translations made from Indian manuscripts from Central Asia or India, translations of which the Tibetan vocabulary and style were not yet fixed ne varietur. The majority of works included in the Ldan dkar Catalog are translations from an Indian language, but a certain number are called “translations from Chinese.”6 The Tibetan scholars have selected for discussion only the Indian side. The theory of the author of the Li shi gur khang Dictionary (written in 1536) has been translated by Taube (1978, 173). Here is the periodization that he proposes: 1) in the era of Thu mi Sa ‘bo ta (Thon mi Sambhota) and of king Khri srong lde btsan, preliminary translation according to “the first royal resolution” (dang po bkas bcad kyis) namely the Buddhāvataṃ saka, the four āgama (lung sde bzhi, the

on the (new) language, bstan pa snga dar ba’i tshe ‘gyur ba las skad gsar chad kyis kyang ma bcos pa’o); 3) Rgyal bu Don grub kyi mdo (№ 349, Tōhoku № 351, Peking № 1020 = Taishō № 152, 171; notice: “it is the old language of the translations from Chinese,” sngon Rgya las ‘gyur ba’i brda rnying par ‘dug). Undoubtedly, these notes are not contemporaneous with the translations, but have been added much later (by Rig ral or Bu ston?; cf. n. 23). They indicate the opinion of the editor (“it seems that,” snang). For him, at least in the third case, “Chinese vocabulary” and “old language” are equivalent. But the revision into “new language” applies equally, and even more often, to the translation of Indian texts. Here are some examples of translations revised according to the edict of 814 by Ye shes sde: Peking Kanjur № 148–151, 156–158, 135–137. № 137 had been arranged according to these norms much later by Atiśa. № 138 had been revised by Dpal brtsegs, without mention of “new language.” Such mention is often missing, without apparent motive or pattern (e.g. № 906, Ye shes sde, without the note, but № 904, the very same [example], with it. For the Suvarṇaprabhāsa-sūtra, the note appears in the translation of Ye shes sde (№ 175), but is missing in the translation (from Chinese) by Chos grub (№ 174) which employs the “Indian voc.” As de Jong has stated (above, n. 1), a systematic study of the colophons in the various editions is essential. Simonsson (211–212) has equally established that the statement “translated by Ye shes sde” cannot be taken literally. 6 Cf. Tucci (Minor Buddhist Texts II, 47, 49), who has uncovered the passage from the Chos ‘byung Mkhas pa’i dga’ ston of Dpa’o Gtsug lag phreng ba (ch. ja, 105a) where it is said that at the beginning in “Chos ‘byung Mkhas pa’i dga’ ston” Tibet, there were more translations of Chinese texts that of Sanskrit texts. Tucci remarks that few of these translations from Chinese have been discovered in the Ldan dkar catalogue. He also puts forward two translation periods: in the first, the translation of technical terms would have been inadequate, which would have necessitated a revision. The remark of Dpa’o Gtsug lag phreng ba also bears on the translations of texts from Li (Khotan ?, or perhaps the Dunhuang region, on account of a confusion of Lho Bal, the Dunhuang region, with Nepal, which also bears the name Li). It is without doubt based on the Sba bzhad text (73) which speaks of a first period of translations beginning with Chinese, Sanskrit, Nepali (Bal po, confused with Lho Bal?) and the language of Uḍḍiyāṇa. For Lho Bal, see below, 79.

the two vocabularies in the dunhuang manuscripts

5

vinaya) various texts (from the section of) sūtras and various sūtras from the Prajñāpāramitā (section); these works have not been edited in conformity with the “new resolution” (gsar bcad kyis gtan la ma phab). It follows a list of “old” words (e.g.: te por for “very, many”; this word is employed in the Sba bzhed; rdzogs sho in place of rdzogs so, etc.) and of orthographic particularities; 2) “second resolution” (bkas bcad gnyis pa) relative to a “new, fixed language” (skad gsar bcad) utilized up to ( yan chad) Ral pa can by Dpal brtsegs, Ye shes sde, etc.; 3) “third resolution” concerning the rules established by lha bla ma Ye shes ‘od, Rin chen bzang po, etc. At this point, we will be concerned above all with the Chinese translations and the difference of their vocabulary compared to that which was codified in 814. For more than convenience, I will designate them henceforth, with gross simplification, as Chinese vocabulary (henceforth, Chin. voc.) and Indian vocabulary (Ind. voc.). As will be seen, the first utilizes solely the authentic Tibetan vocabulary. This is why I will sometimes cite, as a comparative title, from properly Tibetan writings. II.1. Aside from Simonsson’s remarks, it is the study of Tibetan manuscripts from Dunhuang relative to Chinese Chan 禪 which have revealed the existence of a Buddhist vocabulary totally different from that of the Mhvy. Marcelle Lalou7 was the first to publish and translate this genre of text. But, ignorant of Chinese, she was not able to avoid errors, and these translations must be amended. Many Japanese scholars have published remarkable works.8 One significant text is “Note on the transmission, from master to disciple, of (the doctrine which claims authority from the) Laṅkāvatara-sūtra (Chan 禪).” It consists of a Chinese version and a Tibetan translation, both of which are mss from Dunhuang.9 The two have been studied by Ueyama Daishun.10 7 Lalou, “Documents tibétain sur l’expansion du Dhyāna chinois” and “Sūtra du bodhisattva ‘Roi de la Loi’” (cf. Kimura, “Tonkō Chibetto-go Zen bunken mokuroku shoko,” 118–119 and below, n. 14). 8 For a listing, see Kimura, “Tonkō Chibetto-go Zen bunken mokuroku shoko,” and Ueyama, “Études des Manuscrits Tibétains de Dunhuang,” 292–295. 9 Leng qie shi zi ji 楞伽師資記 (see note) and Ling ka’i khan po dang slob ma’i mdo. As Ueyama (below, n. 10) showed, the Tibetan translation presumes a Chinese original a little different from the preserved ms. 10 Ueyama, 1968 and 1973. According to the author, the (unknown) Chinese text which corresponds to the Tibetan translation was prior to that which we have. The latter has been augmented. Ueyama, “Chibetto-yaku Tongo-shinshū-yōketsu no kenkyū,”

6

r.a. stein

One of the documents was surely translated in light of the Indo-Chinese debate at Bsam yas. The Chinese text was written circa 720 AD. Ueyama relates the history of the Chan master Jin Heshang (金和尚) of Yizhou (益州) who had received the Tibetan emissary Sang shi (c. 750) according to the Sba bzhed.11 Ueyama thought that the translation was made at Dunhuang after the Tibetan occupation (c. 781) by a translator who did not know Chinese well. This is because its Tibetan vocabulary is different from the Mhvy. From this, he concludes that the translation is anterior to 814 and dates from the “first period.” Kimura Ryūtoko (1981, 100) thinks the same. This conclusion was reinforced by another work of Ueyama (1976) bearing on the text PT 0116.8, which is the translation of a Chinese Dunhuang ms. (P. Chin. 2799 and four others). It employs the Chin. voc., for which reason Ueyama considers (61) that it is prior to 814 (Mhvy). He also suggests that the translator of the text was extremely learned. And he accepts, as the title of a provisional hypothesis (62–3), that the Chin. voc. of the text studied represents the “old translations” as opposed to the “new translations” of the Mhvy. He also remarks that, for the most standard terms of Buddhism (buddha, bodhisattva, nirvāṇa), the translation is identical in the two lexicons (but cf. below n. 30). He imagines that these words suggest themselves “spontaneously” or “naturally” according to the sense at an era older than the introduction of Buddhism to Tibet. This hypothesis does not appear satisfactory to me. Another text of this genre is the apocryphal sūtra “King of Law” (Fawang jing 法王經, see note). It is extant in Dunhuang mss, in Chinese and Tibetan. Presently, the version preserved in the Sde dge Kanjur (Tōhoku, vol. 66, № 243, fol. 15b) carries the following colphon: “old (text?) of the translation made formerly starting with the Chinese; does not seem to have been arranged (bcos) according to (the edict regarding) the new language.”12 We will speak again of this sūtra (cf. n. 7, 14). The problem is complex.

has also thoroughly studied another Chan text, Chinese redaction and Tibetan translation (PT 0116.8 = P.Chin. 2799 and S. 5644). 11 Identified by Yamaguchi, “Chibetto no bukkyō to Shiragi no Kin ōsho.” 12 Kimura, “Tonkō Chibetto-go Zen bunken mokuroku shoko,” 119–120 = PT 2105.2. According to Schmidt (Der Index des Kandjur, 40), the colophon states: “it is an old (text) formerly translated from Chinese; it does not seem to have been corrected according to the new vocabulary”; sngon Rgya las ‘gyur ba’i rnying pa skad gsar gyis mi bcos snang. I have not been able to examine the Sde dge Kanjur. The phrase is strange. The word “text” is lacking. (Kimura translates furui mono). Perhaps rnying

the two vocabularies in the dunhuang manuscripts

7

Kimura (1981, 122–128) analyzed many Tibetan Chan mss (ITJ 704.1–4, and 710.1) which introduced, at the same time, the doctrine of Chan (master Mahāyāna) and (for the purpose of critique) that of the Indians utilizing, for the latter, the Ind. voc. (e.g. mdo for sūtra and de bzhin gshegs pa for tathāgata). And he concludes (125) that these texts must be prior to the controversy of 792–794, and that the two doctrines of Tibet, properly called, had been studied. In his earlier work (Kimura 1980, 443, 453, 460) he had already reached the following conclusions: 1) a Chan text (bsam gtan gyi yi ge), commanded or inspired13

pa is mistakenly used for snying po (“summary”)? The ms. PT 2105.2 ends with the note Ha se’i gcan ‘dva’i to sen lyog Meng Pab ha’i gyis // Chos rgyal gyi mdo ‘di/mjug chad pa Rgya’ ‘i gpe (=dpe) las bsgyur pa’o //, “translated by Pab ha’i . . . from a Chinese text.” Kimura adopted the reconstruction in Chinese from Okimoto (cf. n. 14): He xi guan nei du seng lu (sha) men Fa hai [河西管內都僧綠（沙）門法海] and thinks like him that the title of the translator, an ecclesiastic of high rank, indicates the date of the second part of the 9th century. Okimoto’s reconstruction does not seem to me entirely acceptable: meng (孟) cannot substitute for (sha) men. On the contrary, Meng (Chin. Meng) appears many times in the Dunhuang mss. as the name of a scribe (e.g. PT 0982). Okimoto (“Zen-shū-shi ni okeru gikyō, Hō-ō-kyō ni tsuite,” 32) renders the colophon thus: “translated from a Chinese text as the definitive edition” and is shocked that this high functionary uses “old vocabulary.” I think that mjug chad pa usually signifies “of which the end is missing.” In the Chinese mss of this sūtra, the beginning is missing in all (but is preserved in Tibetan) and the end is missing in a ms. preserved in Peking (Okimoto, 30). In a version of the Kanjur, the texts terminates in rdzogs so, “the end.” This note is missing in the ms. PT 2105.2, and for this reason: the end is without doubt lacking in the Chinese original. 13 lha btsan po Khri srong lde brtsan gi (sic!) mgur gyi phyag rgya ‘og tu ‘byung ba, “appeared under the ‘sign (or seal, mudrā?) of the throat’ (of the speech) of the king . . .” Kimura translates: “by order” of the king. But the Tibetan expression is aberrant. “Order” is generally stated as bka’s bcad pa. The expression “sign” (phyag rgya) is found in a Dunhuang ms. (ITJ 506, recto). There is at first (1. 1–10) question of various honorific insignia, distinctions or decorations. Besides the “letters” of gold, jade, etc. (the yi ge or yig tshang, “certificates” mark the hierarchy of officials, as is well known), also enumerated there are the decorations or images such as “tiger necklace” for the brave (or soldiers dpa’o) and “eye (of a feather) of a peacock” for certain monks. There follows (1. 10–13) a series of six “signs” or “symbols” (phyag rgya = rtags), the first being a bird (bya ‘phar ma ku kang), “sign of the (royal) order” (bka’i phyag rgya). This series is consistent with another seven (6+1): Sumeru for the Body (sku), sun and moon for the face (zhal), ocean for the Heart, (Thought, thugs, of the king, undoubtedly), victory banner for the Sex (?, rtags), svastika for the order (royal, bka’) and jewel for the Merits (yon tan). The seventh is “the sign of the throat of the prince (or king),” lha sras mgur gyi phyag rgya. It figures also (as a title?) at the beginning of this series. I hope to return to this text, which merits much extended research. [See TA II—ed.] We may recollect the seals provided from images imposed on certain official letters (in Tibetan and Chinese) or decorations given as compensation. We see that the Chan Writing (ITJ 709.11) could not be written “under order” of the king, but with his endorsement. This case may be compared to Chinese ms. S. 3966, the colophon of a Buddhist text: “this sample of the sūtra of the Ten Good Things, provided

8

r.a. stein

by the king Khri srong lde btsan who provoked the controversy (ITJ 709.11 = Kimura 1981, 127) is written in Ind. voc. But when he cites the Laṅkāvatāra-sūtra, translated from the Chinese, he preserves the Chin. voc. of that translation. From this, Kimura concludes that the text is not a translation, but a Tibetan composition, and that the Ind. voc. already existed before the edict of 814 side by side with the Chin. voc. The question is complicated from the fact that the title “Chan Text” is also given in the Ldan dkar Catalogue (Lalou, № 613) with the note: “translated from Chinese, oeuvre of the ācārya Bodhidharmatara.” Kimura (1981, 127) thinks that, given the Ind. voc. from ms. ITJ 709.11, “there is very little chance that that it is a question of the same text.” Evidently, the title is very general and able to designate different texts, but we can see that there are many translations from Chinese using Ind. voc.; 2) inversely, certain Dunhuang mss relevant to Chan are subsequent to the end of the Tibetan occupation (848 A.D.): they have been redacted by the Tibetans (e.g. PT 0699.1, Kimura 1981, 108); 3) to these considerations of chronology are added the criterion of a possible geographic or regional difference, texts written in Tibet and texts redacted in the Dunhuang region. Kimura demonstrates (443) that this criterion is not of absolute value, since Chos grub (Facheng) who worked in the region until 859 employs the Ind. voc. Certain of these translations are anterior to 824 (because they figure in the Ldan dkar Catalogue) or at least anterior to 841 (death of Khri gtsug lde btsan (r. 815–841), dating to which the edict had without doubt lost the force of law).14

with a seal which is a proof of the btsan po of Great Tibet (Fan) . . .” (大番國有讚普印信並比十善經本; Fujieda, “Toban shihai-ki no Tonkō,” 270). 14 In her work on the apocryphal sūtra “King of Law” (Fawang jing 法王經), Okimoto (“Zen-shū-shi ni okeru gikyō, Hō-ō-kyō ni tsuite”), has already expressed analogous views: 1) the distinction between “new translations” (from 814) and “old” would not come down to a simple difference of chronology; 2) she often refers to the divergence between translations of Indian and Chinese texts; 3) the “new” translations have not eliminated the “old” 4) certain differences—but not all—may by explained by the locus of translation (Tibet or the Dunhuang region). 5) The Chinese translations seem maladroit; we may suppose that the translators did not know Chinese well. For Chos grub and the translation of the Laṅkāvatāra-sūtra, cf. Takasaki, “Some Problems of the Tibetan Translations from Chinese Material,” and for his translation of Mdzangs blun, cf. J. Terjék, “Fragments of the Tibetan sūtra of ‘The Wise and the Fool’ from Tun-Huang,” Acta Orientalia Hungaricae, 22.3 (1969): 289–334; 24.1 (1970): 55–83.

the two vocabularies in the dunhuang manuscripts

9

The materials relative to Tibetan translation of Chinese texts are in truth very complex. For the moment, we should guard against premature conclusions and simplistic reasoning. The example of the sūtra “King of Law” (Fawang jing 法王經) is significant in this regard. According to Okimoto and Kimura (and earlier Ueyama 1968, 199–200), the translation preserved in the Kanjur (Peking, № 909) and that of the majority of Dunhuang mss are identical, except the ms. translated by M. Lalou (PT 2105.5). The first have kept the Chin. voc. (whence the colophon from the Kanjur, cf. n. 12), whereas the latter employs the Ind. voc. The latter is signed by a high ecclesiastical official from Dunhuang, and undoubtedly dates from the second half of the 9th century, a time when that area was under Chinese administration and the Tibetan royalty were under stress. The regional criterion does not seem to apply here. We have seen that Chos grub (Facheng), who still worked there under the Chinese regime, used the Ind. voc. Did the edict of 814 still have the force of law? It is hardly probable, but the Mhvy might henceforth serve as a model. Among the Dunhuang mss, there figure many prayers for subsequent kings, not only for Glang dar ma (U’i dun brtan, r. 841–42), but similarly for his successor ‘Od srung (842/3–890; PT 0999 and PT 0130 for Khri btsug lde btsan, PT 0134 for ‘Bu’i dun brtan [= U’i dun brtan—ed.], PT 0131 and PT 0230 for ‘Od srung). The ties with Tibet had thus not ruptured. But there is more. The vocabulary of the translations of the Fawang jing 法王經 is not uniform. Those of the Kanjur and multiple Dunhuang mss (e.g. ITJ 223) often employ Chin. voc. in the text (e.g. chos kyi yi ge for sūtra, etc.), but in the title they employ the Ind. voc. (mdo for sūtra). Such is also the case in the Ldan dkar Catalogue (Lalou, № 155) which, moreover, does not locate this sūtra among the Chinese translations. The same title (Chos kyi rgyal po’i mdo) is also cited in a work from the Tanjur (Peking, № 2001, p. 8–4) for which the translation dates circa 800, and in the ms. PT 0116.5 (Lalou Catalogue). Contrariwise, in the ms. PT 0624, the title is cited with yi ge (= chos kyi yi ge, Chin. voc.). There are other analogous cases. For one and the same text (Saddharmapuṇḍarīka), the old version from the Khotan ms. (cf. n. 1) frequently has the same Ind. voc. as that of the Kanjur (due to Ye shes sde, circa 800 A.D.), but also occasionally utilizes the Chin. (or “old”) voc.: mur ‘dug and gdzung. It is the same in the Lexicon of

10

r.a. stein

Dpal dbyangs (see note).15 We find there, side by side, the Chin. voc. (e.g. mur ‘dug = waidao 外道 and yang dag par gshegs pa = rulai 如来) and the Ind. voc. (as in Mhvy, e.g. fol. 8, the twelve literary genres = Mhvy § 1266). The mixture is very narrow. The eight exemplary ways (fol. 8–9; ‘phags pa’i lam brgyad as Mhvy § 996: the terms are identical in their second part, lta ba, etc., but the epithet which precedes is always g.yung drung (gi), Chin. voc., in the Lexicon PT 1257, whereas it is yang dag pa in the Mhvy; see below). Another case which leaves us perplexed: “Chan Writings” (ITJ 709.11) studied by Kimura (see above). This text utilizes the Ind. voc., but preserves at the same time the Chin. voc. from the translation of the Laṅkāvatāra-sūtra when it cites it. However, in that same citation it gives the title in Ind. voc. (‘phags pa).16 The two vocabularies coexist, sometimes even in the translation of the same Chinese text, with a preponderance of one and some elements of the other. Such is the case with the Kanjur version of the Bayang jing 八陽經 (see below); mdo in the title, but yi ge and dharma17 in the text, next to mdo. It represents a mixture of the two vocabularies. As previously mentioned, Chos grub (Facheng) always employs the Ind. voc., but sometimes he

15 Sometimes, the Tibetan term seems to be a literal translation from the Chinese (e.g. I, fol. 2, 1. 12 gcig las brtses (= brtsegs) pa’i gzhung = [增一阿經] (Taishō 125) Ekottaragama whereas in the Ldan dkar Catalogue we have gcig las ‘phros pa’i lung; II, fol. 10, 1. 12: bsod rnams kyi sku (sambhogakāya) = baoshen 報身, “body of fruition,” and fol. 7, 1. 20: spyi bo nas blugs, “anointed on the sinciput” = guanding 灌頂, whereas in I, fol. 1, there is the usual term dbang bskur (= bkur) pa’i mdo, Da Guanding jing). 16 Other examples, p. 832 (Imaeda, “Documents tibétains de Touen-houang concernant le concile du Tibet,” 130 and Kimura, “Tonkō Chibetto-go Zen bunken mokuroku shoko,” 114). It is a Chan text (questions and responses) which corresponds to “old questions” from the dossier of Wang Xi 王錫 (Demiéville, Le concile de Lhasa). Imaeda thought that it ought to date from the end of the 8th century. The majority of its vocabulary is “Indian,” but Chin. voc. is used when it cites a Chinese sūtra (Siyi jing 思益經, T. 586): myi bden pa’i ‘du shes for “discursive thought” (wangxiang 妄想) vs Mhvy rnam par rtog pa, and chos kyi sgo (literal translation of famen 法門) in place of chos kyi rnam grangs (dharmaparyāya). The same sūtra is cited in the Chan text ITJ 709.5 where we find Chin. voc. yang dag par gshegs pa, yon po (in place of log pa), skye shi (saṁsāra, but also Ind. voc. ‘khor ba). Likewise in ITJ 709.6, Chan text, de bzhin gshegs pa (“Indian”), but chos kyi sgo. Contrariwise, Chan texts ITJ 709.1–4 and ITJ 709.8 are entirely in Ind. voc.: ‘phags pa, ‘khor ba, mu stegs can. 17 On this word, see below, 47. It is Sanskrit, but its meaning—not dharma, but sūtra—is peculiar to the Chin. voc. [Ususally. However in this case, the spelling is darma (and not dharma)—C.S.-S.]

the two vocabularies in the dunhuang manuscripts

11

has recourse to the Chin. voc.18 Sometimes he seems to be helping himself to a Chinese version and to a Sanskrit text at the same time (cf. n. 23). It is impossible to decide if it is a question of chronological or regional differences. Political reasons or various contingencies may play a role. For the Chan text which should have served as preparation for the controversy at Bsam yas (perhaps also for the apocrypha), a simple reflection arises. Each of the two protagonists should have understood the vocabulary of the other (an idea already expressed by Ueyama 1976, 64). If not, how could they debate? For the Chinese, this is evidenced by the citations from Chan texts. For the Indians, we have seen a few examples attesting to the two vocabularies at the time (n. 1). But we are mistaken if the old ms. represents the translation of a Chinese original or a Sanskrit text. The “translation” or Tibetan paraphrase of the Rāmāyaṇa (see note) also combines words from the Ind. voc. (mtho ris, bsod nams, etc.) with expressions characteristic at the time of Chin. voc. and to idiomatic Tibetan (chos lugs, etc.). For that which is from Chan and from the controversy, Ueyama (1976, n. 10) proposed a slightly different solution. In order to debate together before the King, the two parties would have furnished written reports and would have benefited from Tibetan translations. But, as previously stated, the problem is more complex. The Japanese authors have mainly considered the works of Chan and the sūtra “King of Law” which was surveyed. The question is complicated if we take account of other translations from Chinese, apocryphal sūtras and Confucian texts, as well as writings redacted directly into Tibetan. II.2. The example of Bayang jing 八陽經 (see note) is particularly instructive. As it has not yet been utilized for the problem which occupies us and which I have studied in detail, it is time to present the material which it furnishes. This is an apocryphal dhāraṇī sūtra which combines old elements relative to the series of Seven or Eight buddha saviors with the purely Chinese speculations and practices which are characterized as “heretical.” The old Buddhist theme was reinterpreted

18 Ueyama (“Chibetto-yaku Ryōga-shishi-ki ni tsuite,” 200) indicates that he at one time translated fanyu 凡愚 “ordinary and stupid men” by blun po as in the Leng qie shi zi ji 楞伽師資記, Chin. voc., in place of byis pa = bāla in the Ind. voc. One other exception is found in his Chinese version of the Prophesy of Khotan (see note). See further, Vocabulary I, № 17, xiangfa 像法 = gzugs brnyan.

12

r.a. stein

from a vijñānavādin and tantric point of view.19 Attested in China toward the end of the 7th century and by the Buddhist catalogues of 730 and 764, it exists in three numbered Dunhuang mss (complete and fragmentary) in Chinese, in Tibetan and in Uighur.20 When and where it was translated into Tibetan is unknown. Fairly numerous copies of the Chinese text date from the 9th century (and one from 855 A.D.). A long Tibetan transcription from a Chinese text demonstrates the interest that the Tibetans took in it (to understand the Chinese? or in order to “correctly” recite it as a charm?). These mss must have been propounded in the region of Shazhou, in proximity to the Uighurs. The Uighur translation comports with the clarifications or paraphrases. It must have benefited from explications furnished by the Chinese. Curiously, Bu ston states: “the dhāraṇī (sūtra) called Eight Appearances (Snang brgyad = Bayang 八陽), translated (from the language) of Li, is accepted as ‘correct speech’ (an authentic sūtra) in the ‘Pang thang (Catalogue), but it remains to examine (further this question).”21 We no longer have this catalogue,d and the Ldan dkar Catalog does not mention this sūtra. If Bu ston is justified, the Tibetan translation must have existed prior to 824 A.D. It is also possible that Bu ston refers here only to the (unique) mantra from this sūtra, since he mentions it after a series of dhāraṇī (gzungs) and of buddha names. A Dunhuang ms. (PT 0043) gives, in effect, this mantra indicating that it is that of the Snang brgyad (sūtra).22

19

R.A. Stein in Annuaire du Collége de France, 1980–1981. See the bibliographical note. 21 Bu ston, chos byung, xyl., fol. 166a (gsung ‘bum, ed. Lok. Chandra, vol. Ya, 24, p. 981; information that I owe to Samten G. Karmay). Li ought not indicate Khotan, China. In the Chin. voc. from the translation of the Leng qie shi zi ji, “Tang dynasty” (Tangchao 唐朝) is translated by Rgya rje Li, “sovereign of China Li” and Songchao 宋朝 by Rgya rje Song. On that usage of Li, cf. Stein, “Saint et divin, un titre tibétain et chinois des rois tibétains,” 240. Cf. also Rgya rje ni Bsam glang (= Xuanzong) in the Old Tibetan Chronicle (Bacot DTT, 113), Li Bsam glang in ITJ 742 and Rgya rje Li in the treaty of 821–2, East, 1.21. d This is no longer the case. See note, supra, 2.—ed. 22 Beginning: ōṃ , a ka ni, ña ka ni…’di ni Snang brgyad kyi sngan yin ‘o. There follows the mantra “tsa ni tsa which is the buddha Śākyamuni.” Then the note: “in Chinese one speaks thus (?, Rgyad skad la ‘di skan (= skad ?) zar (= zer ?) ‘o; it is Myi lig hur.” The last name is the transcription of the Chinese name of Maitreya Mile fo 彌勒佛 (*mjie lok bjut). The transcription hur for fo was preserved in the Sba bzhed (5), where it is a question of Chinese Buddhism (Rgya’i Hur zhes bya ba’i gtsug lag). 20

the two vocabularies in the dunhuang manuscripts

13

A certain confusion (willingly?) maintained on the subject of the language of origin, as Bu ston has it, is perhaps in rapport with the appearance of translations in “new language” (Ind. voc.) in relation to those made in the Chin. voc. The Bayang jing exists in fact in two sorts of translations utilizing one or the other of two vocabularies. Still, many mss and the Kanjur version indicate the title to be a Tibetan transcription from Chinese, proceeding from the note: “in the language of India” and in employing the Ind. voc. It is possible that the authors of these translations may have wished to camouflage the Chinese origin of the sūtra. Other cases could be explained in the same way.23 On account of a great number of translations utilizing the two vocabularies, the study of Bayang jing is particularly useful. Here is a provisional list, which does not pretend to be exhaustive:

23

PT 0743, Rgya gar gyi skad du Par yong shin ji’u kyed (= kyeng)/Bod skad du ‘Phags pa Snang brgyad . . . (PT 0744 nearly identical). PT 0745, Rgyad skad du // Par yong shing (sic!) dzu (sic!) kyang. The text from the Kanjur begins like PT 0743 and stops the translation after Bod skad du, but it gives it in the colophon and recovers the title at the beginning of the text with another translation which is a sort of paraphrase relying on an interpretation: sangs rgyas kyi chos gsal zing yangs pa. The word Bayang 八陽 (“eight clarities”) was interpreted twice: 1) an allusion to the eight buddhas and 2) “clear knowledges” (gsal bar rig pa), a sort of commentary on snang pa. For the confusion between “India” and “China,” there are other examples. 1) Suvarṇaprabhāsa. The title from the Kanjur is a transcription from Chinese, but in one version (IIIa from Nobel, vol. II) it is preceded with “in the language of India,” whereas in another (IIIb) the editor has corrected to “language of China”; 2) Peking Kanjur, № 1022, notes: “in the language of India,” but the Chinese title is given in transcription: Ta’i phan pen hvo pa’o ngin ging = Taishō 156, Da fang bian bao en jing (after Pelliot, “Notes à propos d’un Catalogue du Kanjur,” 138 and 141-2, the phonetics of that transcription suggest that the translation dates from the Tang); 3) Shan wo yin guo jing; Taishō vol. 85, № 2881 (Dunhuang ms.?). It exists in Sogdian translation (Gautier and Pelliot, Le Sūtra des Causes et Effect du Bien et du Mal; Sogdian, Chinese and Tibetan) and another in Tibetan (Kanjur № 1023), with the note: “translated from the Indian,” though there is the question of a translation from Chinese (= mss ITJ 220, 298), to compare with № 1024 (different translation without indication of origin). Then, Bu ston (chos ‘byung, xyl., fol 138a) states that this sūtra had been “translated by Chos grub from Indian and Chinese books ” (Rgya gar dang Rgya’i dpe las bsgyur ba), a phrase which figures in the colophon of the Sde dge edition (Schmidt, Der Index des Kandjur, 53). Other sūtra exist in two translations employing one or the other of two vocabularies: 1) Fawang jing 法王經; Chin. voc. in the Kanjur, Ind. voc. in certain mss; 2) Fanwang jing 梵網經, the two vocabularies mixed; 3) The sūtra “Great Liberation,” Da dong gang guang jing exists in two versions, that of the Kanjur (№ 930, 931) is in Ind. voc., that of ms. PT 0092 in Chin. voc.; 4) inverse situation for the apocryphal “Vajra Samādhi” sūtra, Jingang sanmei jing 金剛三眛經, Kanjur version (№ 803) in Chin. voc., that of ms. PT 0623 as well (see notes and Obata, “Chibetto no Zenshū to Zō-yaku gikyo ni tsuite”).

14

r.a. stein

Ind. voc.

Mixed

Chin. voc

PT 0106, 0730, 0743, 0744, 0745, 0454, 2110; ITJ 0458, 0463

Kanjur, PT 0126

PT 0742, 0746, 0747, 0748, 0749 (compare with the Uighur)

An important finding results from this example. While the Chin. voc. is evidently characteristic of translations from Chinese, the Ind. voc. may equally serve these translations; it is not reserved for translations from Sanskrit. We also recall that, sometimes, one and the same translation employs the two terminologies.24 The simplest supposition would be that the Chin. voc. is “old” and the Ind. voc. “new” (as Bu ston seems to have thought, cf. n. 5). One must prove the need to place the “anterior” translations with Chin. voc. into accord with the edict of 814. But each objective criterion does not allow this to be affirmed. The regional criterion must also enter into account. A project like the Tibetan transcription from the original Chinese is partially explained only in the Dunhuang region. An older example (second part of the 8th century) illustrates the contacts in that region. This is the ms. PT 0992 (Lalou, 1939; Kimura 1981, 118–9) which describes the activity of the Chan masters, Chinese and Tibetan, in the region of Kokonor (Khri ga = Tsong ka and the Gansu corridor). The monk Ye shes dbyangs from Spug, ordained between 742 and 797, worked for fifty years at Khri ga in the company of Indian, Chinese and Tibetan masters. Contacts and exchanges were therefore established in this region, and the

24 For “hell” (di yu 地獄), we have myal ba in Ind. voc. (PT 0106, 0730), but sdig yul in Chin. voc. (PT 0748). PT 0742 combines the two: sdig yul mchams myed pa’i sems can dmyal ba (T., p. 1425a: a bi wu jian di yu 阿鼻無間地獄). This passage is missing in the Kanjur. In the Bayang jing (§ 7, T., p. 1422c), “heretical demons and heretics” (xiemo waidao 邪魔外道), the translation of PT 0746, 1. 2 combines log par lta ba “Indian” and mur dug, yon po “Chinese.” Other examples have been seen (155). The translation of Fanwang jing also combines mur ‘dug and log par lta ba (waidao xiejian 外道邪見, Kanjur, p. 171–2 = T., p. 1006a). Frequently employed there is the first (Chin. voc., pp. 172–1, 172–2, 174–2, 174–4), but also the second (Ind. voc., 174–2 = 1009a). In that translation, ‘phags pa and ‘phrul gyi are used at the same time for “holy” (see Vocabulary 2, № 1). The word sūtra is nearly always translated according to the Chin. voc. (yi ge, chos kyi yi ge), but one time by mdo sde (Ind. voc., 170–4 = 1005b). [This may be the case for various reasons, for instance the collaboration of scholars with various linguistic competence, or various translation‘s techniques, as well as the use of synonyms already in the Indian original, and so on. The question must be reprised. Actually, the (at time problematic) idea of a process of standardisation used in the course of translating should be requestioned.—C.S.-S.]

the two vocabularies in the dunhuang manuscripts

15

two vocabularies could have been elaborated and/or utilized side by side. The problem persists. It remains to study in detail the two vocabularies and their divergences. Certain interesting indications result. III.1. The ideal would be to find purely formal criteria for distinguishing the two “schools”25 or traditions of translation. I had thought to have found one of them, but the materials are contradictory. III.1.A. The terminal formula of the texts: “It is finished” (rdzogs so). In certain Dunhuang mss this classic form is employed, but in many others one writes rdzogs sho (sometimes: svo, so’). As seen above (5), rdzogs sho was considered typical of the first period. In the later literature, bon po and rnying ma pa, bzhugs sho instead of the classic bzhugs so is nearly always written at the end of titles. This orthography has undoubtedly been retained for the purpose of giving an archaic allure to texts. We could thus think that, in the Dunhuang mss also, -sho would be older. Sometimes this seems true, but frequently this is not the case. For the Bayang jing, we find rdzogs sho in the Kanjur and ms. PT 0106 (I, l. 86), both in Ind. voc. Inversely, in Chin. voc., we have rdzogs so (and zhus sho in the colophon). The archaism is thus attested from both sides. Different colophons from Kanjur texts (cf. n. 5) do not support any possibility of distinction. In the translations of Ye shes sde and others, dating from c. 800 A.D., we find rdzogs sho (Peking, vol. 6, № 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147) and the same with the note “arranged according to the edict on the new language” (№ 148, 150, 151; 135, 136, 138; 910–913, etc.), but also rdzogs so (№ 914, trans. Atiśa; № 915, trans. Ye shes sde). In the Dunhuang mss, Chan texts, apocryphal and other purely Chinese texts, rdzogs sho is frequent. Examples include: Leng qie shi zi ji (ITJ 710 fol. 14b, three times); PT 0021.1, 0021.2, PT 0044 (19b); P. 972, fol. 3v (Chinese); ITJ 748r, Cu yag gyi yi ge (the Chinese Zhou Yi 周易); PT 0837, by Dpal dbyangs (the edition from the Kanjur, № 5082, p. 166–1, has rdzogs so). In the sūtra “King of Law,” the Kanjur texts has rdzogs sho, but that of the Dunhuang ms. does not have it, without doubt because the end

25 Fujieda signaled the existance, at Dunhuang, of an “organized group” (sde) of translators (lo tsā ba) to which a Chinese nun belonged (“Tonkō hatsugen Chibetto-go bunshō shishaku,” 5, № 19 and p. 10 = Thomas TLTD, II, № 13).

16

r.a. stein

is missing in the Chinese original (cf. n. 12). We also find rdzogs sho in the sūtras translated from Chinese, such as the Suvarṇaprabhāsa (Peking, № 174, but Snar thang and Lhasa have: rdzogs so), translated, however, by Chos grub who always employs the Ind. voc. (similarly in the translation of Jinamitra, etc. (№ 175) made, however, according to the edict of 814). It is possible that the editors could have manipulated the original, sometimes preserving sho, sometimes modernizing(?) it to so. If the difference is explained neither by chronology nor by the Indian or Chinese original, it could be a question of a regional trait or dialect. I have not been able to research this further, but it merits pursuing. Another problem is connected with this. In the Chinese texts, we sometimes find zhong 終, “it is finished,” at the end of a text. This is the case with the apocryphal Bayang jing. In the majority of these dhāraṇī sūtras from the “tantra” section of Taishō, this formula is missing, but we find it at the end of certain Dunhuang mss of apocryphal sūtras (Taishō, № 2870, 2881). There also, it may be necessary to see if it is a question of a pertinent trait or not. J.W. de Jong often wished to point out to me that the formula “it is finished” is the translation of the Sanskrit expression samāpta (e.g., end of Bhāvanakrāma, ed. Tucci 1958, 229 & 282), whereas the formula bzhugs so at the end of a title is a Tibetan invention. While this inquiry is unsatisfactory, I believe that it should be pursued with the view of searching out formal traits of difference. The search is only beginning. In most of the vocabulary, we ought to examine the elements of grammar and style. For the moment, I am only able to signal two properties particular to the Chin. voc. Unfortunately, it is not always possible to compare the two vocabularies simply because we are not disposed of two versions of the same text, or because if we have them (such as the Bayang jing), the mss are only fragments of a sort that this or that passage from one version do not exist in the other. Here are the two particularities relevant in the Bayang jing. III.1.B. Yong at the beginning of a paragraph. I have not encountered it in the versions in Ind. voc. We might think that it is a simple variant, graphic or phonetic, of the word yang, “moreover, otherwise.” An etymological relation is possible, the alternating a/o being frequent. Yet in the translations from Chinese, yong always corresponds to Chinese fu 夫, “now then,” or to fan 凡, “in a general manner.” Yong

the two vocabularies in the dunhuang manuscripts

17

and yong ye are attested in the late dictionaries as “old words” (brda rnying) with the value: “in all cases, in a general manner, in truth” (as the Chinese fan; cf. A. Macdonald, 1971, n. 331: yong yang in ms. PT 1047; we will find ye ni further on). The decisive examples come from Bayang jing: § 426 (p. 1422c) 夫天地之間為人最勝, “now, between sky and earth, man is the most exalted.” In PT 0748 (Chin. voc.), the first word is illegible, . . . ni gnams sa’i bar ni myi’i lus ni btsun zhing . . ., literally translated. In the Kanjur (mixed voc.), we have: yong sems can gyi nang na mi las btsun pa med de, free translation: “now, among living beings, there are none more exalted than man.” In PT 0106 (Ind. voc.) yong is omitted (gnam sa’i bar na). In § 16 (p. 1423c) 夫天地廣大清, “now sky and earth are large, great, pure,” the Kanjur has retained yong gnam sa gnyis ni shis, “now sky and earth, these two, are brilliant.” In § 20 (p. 1424a), 夫天陽地陰, “now the sky is yang 陽, the earth is yin 陰,” we find yong in PT 0746 (l. 57; Chin. voc.), yong gnam ni stangs, sa ni dbyal, “now the sky is masculine, the earth is feminine.” The same translation in the Kanjur (p. 275–1), but yong has been omitted (an effort at modernization?). In PT 0729 (fol. 17b, a single page), yong is also missing, but the translation employs a vocabulary of idiomatic Tibetan.27 Other translations from Chinese attest to this usage. For the sūtra “King of Law,” we find in the Kanjur (p. 137–4) yong ni and yong (p. 138–3), whereas there is not an equivalent in Chinese. The passage is not found in the Dunhuang ms. One hesitates. Did the scribe of the Chinese ms. neglect the word fu? If he did not represent it, it would demonstrate that the translator (without doubt Tibetan) had interpreted well and had underscored the beginning of the paragraph in introducing yong according to the Tibetan usage. Far from being maladroit, he was reading his text intelligently. We find many yong chos lam =, “now the Dao,” in the ms. (ka, 28a = p. 1285). Another example is found in the Leng qie shi zi ji ka, 22a: yong chas (= chos-) so chog, “now the dharma.” In Chinese, we have only “the dharma . . .” without the initial fu. Naturally, the translators have not invented this word. We see that the Chin. voc. has largely dipped into properly Tibetan language. We also find this word in the Tibetan writings, as in the maxims of ms.

26 27

The paragraph breaks are mine; they are arbitrary. See below, Vocabulary 3, № 1.

18

r.a. stein

PT 0992.1 (fol. 1v, 1.1 : yong, ‘jig rten pa’i ngan tshul ni . . ., and 1.6: yong la) and in the Zhanguo ce 戰國策 at the beginning of the paragraph (PT 01291, § 1, 1.3, “now to take an example,” yong dper bgyi na = jin fu 今夫; § 2, 1.14, yong ni = qie fu 且夫). The Dialogue of the Two Brothers (see note) furnishes a great number of variants. It is always at the beginning of a response of the senior that is placed this word “now thus” or “in a general manner” (like Chin. fan 凡). Sometimes there is yong ni, following yongs ni; sometimes there is yong yang and sometimes ye ni, either at the beginning of an enunciation, or after phu na re (“elder brother says”), followed now and then by the citation of a maxim from the ancients, gtam rnying pa dag las. Twice, the doublet PT 2111 B has yong ni (1.10 = PT 1283, 1.97) or ye ni (1.34.5 = 1.124) there where PT 1283 has nothing. The author is naturally free to write to his own taste and to vary his style and expression. III.1.C. Orthography of the verb “to read in a high voice, to recite,” in classical Tibetan klog pa, past klags. In the Bayang jing, this verb (which translates Chin. du 讀) is sometimes written thus, but most frequently with a labial as a prefix. We know that, in the Dunhuang mss, orthography is very unstable. What is curious is the regularity of this variant in this particular case. I have not systematically surveyed all cases. It is impossible to draw out a rule according to the two vocabularies. We find plags, phlags, blags as much in the Chin. voc. mss (PT 0748) as in the Kanjur (mixed: twice blags) and in the Ind. voc. mss (p. 106). Same observation in the Fanwang jing 梵網經 (“mixed” vocabulary). Sometimes one says kha ton (du) blags (Kanjur, p. 173–4 = Taishō, p. 1008b; 174–5 = 1009b, 175–1 = p. 1009c), sometimes kha ton (du) klags la (174–1), klog go (174–3) or lhogs shig (175–1). The result is deceiving. But this does not mean to say that it would not necessitate pursuing these sorts of observations. Would orthography with an initial labial be older? We find such an example in the ms. PT 1060 (1. 18, 39) which is characterized by religious themes and an “archaic” vocabulary. For each type of horse one ought “to say” (smos) and “to recite” (blag) its family. The same form is employed in the Rāmāyaṇa (Balbir, 1. 211, yi ge blags na; 1. 229, phrin yig blags pa, but 1. 258, bklags(?) na; de Jong, § XXIII A, 1. 278, plags na). III.2. The vocabulary. It is time to present here a list of words in order to compare the two vocabularies. It is very limited and provisional, and is restricted to

the two vocabularies in the dunhuang manuscripts

19

texts translated from Chinese.28 The words of the Ind. voc. will be indicated sometimes according to translations (when there are such), sometimes (between brackets) according to the “new vocabulary” of Mhvy, conforming to the edict of 814.29 1. Technical vocabulary of Buddhist philosophy Sources 1) I, II, IIIb, IV, Va–b 2) IV

Sanskrit

Chinese

(tathāgata)

rulai 如来

Chin. voc.

yang dag par gshegs pa (saṃ vṛti) shiti 世諦 ‘jig rten pa’i bden pa 3) IIIb, IV (paramārtha) diyi ti 第一諦 yang dag pa’i don (or bden pa) 4) Va–b (asaṃ skṛta) wuwei, kongwu bya ba myed pa 5) IV, VI --| (vikalpa) wangxiang myi bden pa’i 妄想 ‘du shes 6) IIa, IIIa–b |-} wangxin 忘心 mi bden pa’i sems 7) I --| (vikalpa) wangnian 妄念 myi bden pa’i sems 8) I pāramitā poluomi pha logs su phyin pa pha rol du phyin pa 9) I, IX (skandha) wuyun 五蘊 lnga phung 10) I, IIa, IIIa, (mithyāxiejian 邪見 yon po (lta ba), Va–b, IV dṛsṭ ị ) yo . . . 11) I, IIa, IIIb, dharma, sad- dao 道, lam, chos, chos (de) dao (德)道 lam,

Ind. voc. de bzhin gshegs pa (kun rdzob) (don dam pa) ‘dus ma byas (rnam par rtog pa) bsams sgyu ma

idem

phung po lnga log par lta ba, log la ltas ba chos, dam pa’i chos

28 For the technical vocabulary of philosophy, I restricted myself to a limited choice. 29 Sources are indicated as follows (see bibliographical notes): I. Leng qie shi zi ji 楞伽師資記 (Ueyama, “Chibetto-yaku Ryōga-shishi-ki ni tsuite”); II, various Chan texts cited by Ueyama in reference; IIa, Chan text of Ueyama, “Chibetto-yaku Tongoshinshū-yōketsu no kenkyū”; IIIa, Fawang jing 法王經 in Ind. voc. (Okimoto, “Zenshū-shi ni okeru gikyō, Hō-ō-kyō ni tsuite); IIIb, the same in Chin. voc. or mixed (ibid.); IV, Chan texts cited by Kimura (“Tonkō shutsudo no Chibetto-bun Zen-bun no Seikaku” and “Tonkō Chibetto-go Zen bunken mokuroku shoko”); Va, Bayang jing 八陽經 in Chin. voc.; Vb, the same in Ind. voc.; Vc, with mixed vocabulary; VI, Imaeda, “Documents tibétains de Touen-houang concernant le concile du Tibet,” 130; VII, Fanwang jing 梵網經; VIII, examples from Simonsson; IX, bilingual vocabulary from ms. PT 1257; X, Confucian texts; Xa, Zhanguo ce; Xb, Shujing 書經 or Shangshu 尚書 that Imaeda intends to publish; XI, Rāmāyaṇa. [Imaeda never published a study of the Shangshu, but Huang Bufan and W.S. Coblin did. Cf. Coblin 1991b.—ed.]

20

r.a. stein Va–b

12) IV, Va–b

dharma

miaodao 妙道

(nirvāṇa)

dam pa’i chos kyi lam, yang dag pa, gtsug gi chos mye ngan, g.yung drung mye ngan (mya ngan) las ‘das pa ‘khor ba ‘khor ba

13) I, IIa, IV, Va–b 14) I

(saṃ sāra)

shengsi 生死

skye shi

(tripiṭaka)

sanzang 三藏

sde snod gsum

15) I, IIa, IIIa–b, IV, Va–b, XI

(sūtra)

jing 經

16) IIa, IV, VI

(dharma paryāya, -mukha) (pratirūpa, -ka)

famen 法門

mdzod gsum, chos gsum chos, yi ge, chos kyi yi ge, gzhung; dharma, darma chos kyi sgo (-mo) gzugs brnyan (gyi chos)

(dam pa’i chos) ltar bcos pa

17) (see 185)

xiangfa 像法

mdo, mdo sde

chos kyi rnam grangs

2. Religious vocabulary, Buddhist et alia

(tīrthika)

sheng 聖, shen 神 waidao 外道

(pṛthagjana)

fan (-fu) 凡 (夫)

I I

(bāla)

6)

III, V

7) 8)

IIIa, Va IIIa, Va

(pañca maṇḍala) (kuśala) (akuśala)

yu 愚 shan nan -zi 善男子 wuti 五体 (?)

1) 2)

I, III, Va–b XI I, II, IIIa,

3)

IV, Va–b I, IIa

4) 5)

9) 10) 11)

IIIa, Va–b IIa, Va–b IIIa–b

(ārya)

(puṇya) (guṇa)

‘phrul (gyi)

‘phags pa

mur dug ('dug) (pa) mu‚ jug (pa) tha mal pa, myi phal tha mar pa blun po pho dge ba

mu stegs can

shishan 十善 shiwu 十惡

smad lnga, sgo lnga dge ba bcu ngan pa bcu

fu 福, de 德 fu 福 liyi 利益

legs pa’i dpal dpal yon phan sod pa

(yan lag lnga) idem mi dge ba bcu bsod nams yon tan phan yon

(so so‘i skye bo) (byis pa) rigs kyi bu

the two vocabularies in the dunhuang manuscripts 12)

Va–b

(śrī)

13) 14) 15) 16)

I, Va–b IIIa, Va III, V Va–b

(puṇya)

17)

(naraka) (svarga, diva) (durgati)

jili 吉利

legs pa’i dpal, lha dpal de, gongde 功德 legs pa’i don gongyang 供養 yon (gsol, ‘bul) diyu 地嶽 sdig yul tianshang 天上 dge ba’i gnas, lha yul, lha lam (wodao 恶道) guishen 鬼神 heng yao 橫夭 zhongyao 中夭

sdig lam, ngan pa’i lam lha ma srin, ‘dre

18)

I, V, VII

18a)

Va–b

19)

Va, XI

(havyam, kavyam)

guishen 鬼神

lha btsun (mtshun)

20) 21)

Va–b Va–b

(preta)

wogui 恶鬼 xieshi 邪師

yi dags (-gdon) chos yon po (mo -bon), yon po’i mkhan po, bon po

(buwen 卜問)

ye ‘brog (‘drog), yen-‘brog

21

dpal bsod nams dmyal ba mtho ris (bde ‘gro, bzang ‘gro) (ngan ‘gro, ngan song) ‘dre gdon, (chin. wogui 恶鬼) (lha la gtor ba, mtshun la gtor ba) (yi dags) log pa’i mkhan po (mo btab)

3. Vocabulary of Chinese and Tibetan ideas

1) 2) 3) 4) 5)

Sources

Chinese

Tibetan

Va Va “altruism” Va, VII “filial piety” Va, XI “integrity” Va “superior family, honored men”

yinyang 陰陽 ci 慈 xiao 孝 (shun 順) zhong 忠 men xing, ren gui 門興人貴

stangs/dbyal; sribs/gdags byams sri zhu (che) drang; chu gang (che) srid kyi sgo ni mtho (thob), myi ni btsan; srid ni dard, sgo ni brtsan

4. Vocabulary of non-Buddhist texts

1) 2)

Sources

Chinese

Tibetan

cf. Voc. 2, № 1 IX, Xb, XI, “majesty, prestige, charisma”

shengshen 聖神 weide 威德, wei (shenzhi) li 威(神)力

‘phrul gyi lha (btsan po) byin, rlabs; gzi byin, gzi brjid

22 3)

r.a. stein Xb “(tablet of ) ancestors, sacred mountains, earth and sky gods

4)

Xb, etc. “uncivilized”

5)

VII, Xa, b, XI “art of governance” V, Xa “administrative office” Xa “prefect”

6) 7)

zu 祖; shanchuan 山川; tiandi shenming 天地神明 rongyi 戎夷, manmo 蛮貊 (wang) fa 法

zhal-bu; sku bla; mgon mtshun, lha mtshun lho bal

(deest)

(rgyal po’i) lugs, chos lugs rje blas

shou 守

rtse rje

III.3. Analysis of vocabulary. These vocabularies invite some observations in order to complete the preceding reflections. The problem is posed for the Tibetan translations of all the Chinese texts. We have seen that the Japanese scholars have thought that the vocabulary of these translations is frequently maladroit, and they have suspected the translators of not always knowing Chinese well. It seems to me that this is improbable. In Dunhuang, there were bilingual Tibetans and Chinese. We also know that, during the Tibetan occupation of that region, the Tibetan kings dispatched Tibetans to China in order to learn Chinese and that they were employing Chinese monks (settled in Tibet) for diplomatic missions to China. Yet it is true that a problem must have presented itself to translators: that of Buddhist terminology. It was necessary to create it from fragments. Indians and their Tibetan apprentices had to start from Sanskrit texts, at first undoubtedly in a manner more or less anarchic and variable (otherwise the edict of 814 lacked purpose), in order to finally lead to fixed terminology. The Chinese and their Tibetan collaborators must have done the same, starting from Chinese texts. We are unaware of how this was done, and especially if there was agreement between them or if an authority was able to impose a unification of terminology. In all cases, it is reported that, in the Chan texts as well as in the apocryphal sūtras, their Buddhist vocabulary is generally stable and uniform on the whole (save for exceptions; more detailed research still remains to be done). And in this stable vocabulary which seems fixed once and for all, the chosen translation is visibly the fruit of a thoughtful, mature decision, from a sort of philosophical choice

the two vocabularies in the dunhuang manuscripts

23

or from an etymological interpretation (as the Indians had done in the Sgra sbyor). We know that the “Indians” interpreted tathāgata as “thus gone” (de bzhin gshegs pa). The Chinese realized the same interpretation, ruqu 如去 (tathā, “thus” + gata “to go”), but they most often preferred the older translation rulai 如来, “thus come” (tathā + āgata). The translators undoubtedly knew that this term represented the Sanskrit tathāgata. However, in the translation into Tibetan, they made a choice without a doubt consciously volitional and deliberate: yang dag par gshegs pa signifies “perfectly (purely) come (gone).” They also retained the same verb as the “Indians” (with an ambiguity in its double sense: to go and to come). But for the adverb or the complement (“thus, thusness”), they preferred a translation which deviated from the original sense (“pure”). Now, in one of the Chinese interpretations of tathatā, tathā (ru 如) was explained as “thusness” (ru shi 如是), Supreme Reality.29a They have followed through on the consequences of retaining the same translation for tathatā. In place of the “new word” (Mhvy 1709) de bzhin nyid (thusness), we find yang dag pa nyid = zhenru 真如 in the Vocabulary of Dpal dbyangs (see note) and yang dag pa’i g.yung drung = zhenru 真如 in the Chan text P. 116.8 (Ueyama 1976), an expression which is even glossed in the Old Tibetan Chronical (Bacot, 115, 1. 15–16). Contrariwise, in Mhvy (№ 1708), yang dag pa’i mtha’ (bhūta-koṭi) is one of the epithets of paramārtha. In Chin. voc., this last term is rendered in the Fawang jing 法王經 by yang dag (pa’i) bden pa (ms., 1. 70; Kanjur, pp. 193–4, 142–2 = Taishō, p. 1390a, 1386c, zhenshi 真實 or shiti 實体, supreme Reality); or also yang dag pa’i bden pa’i gzhung (K., p. 142–2 = T., p. 1389c, shiti 實体) and Leng qie shi zi ji (Ueyama 1968): yang dag pa’i gzhun = zhenli 真理 (fol. 31b = T., p. 1285b), whereas in the Fawang jing 法王經, paramārtha (diyi yiti 第一義諦) is translated sometimes as yang dag pa’i bden gzhung (K., p. 171–5 = T., p. 1006c), sometimes

29a Explications according to the commentary of Vimalakīrti (ch. 9) and the great commentary of the Mahāvairocanasūtra (ch. 1) according to the dictionary of Oda, Bukkyo dai-jiten, pp. 1112c and 1349c. I owe the knowledge of the form “thus gone” to Mme Kuo Li-ying and the appeal to Oda to M. Mimaki. The Tibetans had, themselves, realized the two interpretations “gone” and “come.” For that etymology, cf. Simonsson, Indo-tibetische Studien, 268–9.

24

r.a. stein

as gzhung gi mchog bden pa (K., p. 174–1 = T., p. 1008c). In the translations from Chinese, yang dag pa corresponds to zheng 正 or to zhen 真 (“correct” “veritable”). It serves to form other technical terms, as has just been seen. In the Bayang jing 八陽經, yang dag pa = zhen 真, “true,” is opposed to wei 偽, “false,” or yang dag pa (variant drang po) = zheng 正, “correct,” is opposed to xie “false, heretical” (in Ind. voc., PT 0106, we have dam pa). Inversely, in Mhvy, № 997–1004, yang dag pa = zheng = samyak-. But surprisingly, as we have seen (10), this yang dag pa = zheng from the Eightfold path in Mhvy is replaced by g.yung drung in the Vocabulary of Dpal dbyangs. The word yang dag pa was undoubtedly a neologism in the two vocabularies, but employed with a different sense. We might say that the supporters of the one and of the other vocabularies wished to distinguish everything in their knowledge (or in borrowing one from the other?). It seems then that the choice of yang dag par gshegs pa for tathāgata (rulai 如来) does not arise from a “maladroit” translation or an ignorance of Chinese, but from a deliberate choice (cf. the Vocabulary I, № 3 and 10). As Ueyama (1976) has said, for other Buddhist terms the two vocabularies are identical (sangs rgyas for buddha; byang chub sems dpa’ for bodhisattva).30 But in other cases, proper names of divinities, places, etc., and less frequent expressions, the translators of Chinese Buddhist texts contented themselves with a literal translation. Such is the case for properly Chinese expressions (above all from Chan) so that gtsang gdang for qingjing 清淨, “pure” (Fawang jing 法王經, Leng qie shi zi ji 楞伽師資記 and PT 0116.8) and yul gtsang ma for jingtu 淨土, “Pure land” (paradise; ibid.). In certain cases the translators have perhaps not recognized the original Sanskrit from a Chinese expression (e.g. pho dge ba, literal translation of shan nanzi 善男子 “man of virtue,” against Mhvy rigs kyi bu, “son of good family”; we should think of dge ba bcu = shi shan 十善 “the ten virtues”). For proper names, we

30 For Ueyama (“Chibetto-yaku Tongo-shinshū-yōketsu no kenkyū”) these terms common to the two vocabularies would have impressed themselves “spontaneously” at the time of the first introduction of Buddhism to Tibet on account of the “evident” sense of these words. I confess to not understanding how this could have been done. A look at the list that I have drawn up shows that, for nirvāṇa, the “Chinese” translation is sometimes different. As regards buddha and bodhisattva, the Chinese preferred the transcription from Sanskrit to the translation ( fo and pu sa). Is this why the translators of the Chinese texts chose the words of the Ind. voc. sangs rgyas and byang chub sems dpa’? The question of chos (Chin. fa 法) for dharma (a dharma or the Dharma) is more complex.

the two vocabularies in the dunhuang manuscripts

25

find the literal translations follow in the Leng qie shi zi ji 楞伽師資記: Jin guangming 金光明 (Suvarṇaprabhāsa) was translated by Gser ‘od snang ba (Ind. voc.: Gser ‘od dam pa); Puxian 普賢 (Samantabhadra) by ‘Jangs khyab, “wisdom which covers (all),” in place of Kun tu bzang po.31 Sometimes one translates literally (e.g. snga ma’i che’i rgyu, “cause of past time” = guoqu xiuyin 過去宿因, “past karman”), but sometimes one interprets the whole thing, as yuzhou 宇宙, “the world,” translated by gnam sa’i bar gyi yod do chog, “all that is between heaven and earth” (Leng qie shi zi ji 楞伽師資記). If the translation of certain terms remains remarkably stable, it is variable for others. No authority seems to have fixed the vocabulary. The hesitations and the variations without a doubt often depend on the nature of the texts translated and on differences between translators. At least in certain cases, this may also be explained by the fact that the Chinese vocabulary of the original texts was not uniform. Sometimes it was purely Chinese and could comport with accepted variants (e.g. dao and fu), sometimes it belonged to properly Buddhist vocabulary (like gongde 功德). At other times, too, the original text could be sufficiently vague to permit different interpretations (e.g. “poor incarnation,” here interpreted as “hell,” there as “poor gati”). The translators’ perplexity must also have been great when it was a question of translating purely Chinese (non-Buddhist) texts, or purely Chinese concepts incorporated into Buddhist texts. Then, for these translations, the vocabulary established above permits an important finding. Certainly, as for the Buddhist texts (Chan and others more purely “Chinese”), one is often resigned to a literal translation or a transcription of the Chinese word (e.g. Vocabulary 2, № 6, 9, 10, 11). Often as well, the translation represents a sort of explication of content, a sort of commentary (e.g. Vocabulary 2, № 1, 6, 7, 7, 11). Yet what is remarkable and weighty of consequence for the study of Tibetan conceptions current to that epoch, is that in many cases the translator has chosen, rightly or wrongly (it remains to be seen in each case), an indigenous expression peculiar to the fund (more or less archaic) 31 Sometimes, in a composite expression, an author translates literally the part which does not have an equivalent in Tibetan, while correctly interpreting the known part. We have seen the example of Chinese dynasties (n. 21). For another, see Leng qie shi zi ji: 西城南天竺 “India of the South (which makes a part) of Countries of the West” = nub phyogs kyi Rgya gar gi (sic!) yul gyi lha (= lho) phyogs gyi yul. On this genre of literal translations, cf. Imaeda, “Documents tibétains de Touen-houang concernant le concile du Tibet,” 130.

26

r.a. stein

of Tibetan conceptions. To translate is always to traduce a little, and sometimes the Tibetan equivalent chosen is undoubtedly only a stopgap (e.g. sku bla, 4, № 3), adopted for lack of anything better or as an approximation. There remains that which distinguishes the Chin. voc. (save for the literal translations); that is its constant recourse to idiomatic and traditional vocabulary. At the beginning of this investigation, we might think that the employment of the Chin. voc. automatically suggests a translation from the Chinese while admitting that the words employed were existing naturally before in the contemporary and traditional Tibetan language.32 This is true in many cases, and we may henceforth suspect, at first, that a text employing this vocabulary is perhaps a translation from a Chinese text. But this criterion cannot be applied uniformly, exclusively, or automatically. It may only be a question of presumptions. We may be tempted to consider that this Chin. voc., if largely drawing from traditional Tibetan terms, represents an older stage. This is probable, but such a conclusion does not automatically permit even an approximate dating (e.g. a formula like “archaic”). The purely idiomatic (and undoubtedly ancient) Tibetan expressions are also employed in the translations from Ind. voc.33 and have been preserved, as we know, in very late texts. Although this is the case, it is certain that we must take into account translations of Chinese texts with Chin. voc. in order to determine the sense or the meanings of certain “archaic” Tibetan words. Far from having been “maladroit,” the Chinese and Tibetan translators were well aware of the traditional concepts, Chinese as well as Tibetan, and they proceeded with intelligence. III.4. We have already been able to account for that which preceded the employment of Chin. voc.; it is not uniform. In many cases, the chosen term poses problems. The table above does not permit an account of

32 Stein, “Saint et divin.” I neglected to note that the rapprochement between the word ‘phrul gyi = sheng, “holy,” of Leng qie shi zi ji 楞伽師資記 with the title of the Tibetan Buddhist kings (‘phrul gyi lha btsan po = shengshen 聖神) had already been made by Ueyama (“Chibetto-yaku Ryōga-shishi-ki ni tsuite”). For the retroactive employment of this title, cf. idem, n. 99. 33 Here is an example from Bayang jing (§ 28, T., p. 1425a) qianqian wanwan shi, “for thousands, tens of thousands of generations” is translated literally in PT 0742 (1. 10, Chin. voc.), lo stong khri’i bar du, but with recourse to idiomatic or archaic vocabulary in PT 0106 (1. 1.71): nam nam zha zha’i bar du, “for a long time and for all time” (and yet that translation is in Ind. voc.).

the two vocabularies in the dunhuang manuscripts

27

the complexity. We proceed, to the end, to examine in detail a certain number of these words or terms (the № refers to the table). Vocabulary 1. № 11. Chos. The variety of translations maintains after all that it is sometimes a question of Dharma (always in the singular, never here dharma (pl.), nor also of apparent concepts, bodhi, nirvāṇa, status of buddha), sometimes of diverse meanings as the Chinese word Dao. That translated by lam (sometimes Chos lam, an abbreviation of dam pa’i chos kyi lam) must displease “Indians.” The latter employ it also in the case of “the Eightfold path” (mārga, ‘phags pa’i lam) which begins with the “correct view” (yang dag pa’i lta ba, Mhvy. № 996) that the Chin. voc. sometimes preserves. However, there exists a celebrated precedent. When, around 645 A.D., someone wished to translate the Daode jing 道德經 into Sanskrit, in order to diminish the value of the Daoist text, Xuanzang or the Indian translators proposed the translation mārga, which incited the protest of Daoists for whom the Dao was much more (and, as we know, the translation was abandoned).34 And notice that the literal translation of Dao as lam, “path,” appears anew (8th–9th centuries). The translator of the Leng qie shi zi ji (Chan text) hesitated. Shengdao 聖道, “holy-path” is there translated as ‘phrul gyi chos (16b = Taishō 1284a), ‘phrul gyi lam (35b = 1285c) and ‘phrul gyi chos lam (43a = 1286b). We know that here ‘phrul gyi is equivalent to Ind. voc. ‘phags pa “holy” (sheng 聖), but it is not a question of ‘phags pa’i lam (noble path) of the Mhvy. As is the case with yang dag pa, the word lam is common to the two vocabularies, but their usage differs. In the same Chan text, the word lam serves also to translate dao in the sense of “practice” (e.g. lam spyad = xiu dao 修道). The differences in the Tibetan translations of a single passage are not always explained by a different choice, but from the fact that the Chinese original includes variants. For example, Bayang jing 八陽經 § 9d (T. 1423a): “in order to attain the state of buddha” 以成佛道 has the variant: “in order to establish bodhi” 而證菩提. From there, the two translations; Chin. voc.: sangs rgyas kyi chos lam (PT 0746, whereas elsewhere, this ms. uses byang chub kyi lam, 1. 18, and ‘phrul gyi chos lam, 1.30; PT 0749, 1. 50 idem); Ind. voc.: byang chub thob pa (PT 0106, II, 1. 132, missing in the Kanjur). The same Bayang jing also offers different translations for the same Chinese term. Here is a list: § 4 (T. 1422c) “all obtain the Holy Way” 皆成聖道 = ‘phrul gyi chos

34

Pelliot, “Autour d’une traduction sanscrite de Tao-tö king.”

28

r.a. stein

(PT 0748, 1. 27), whereas PT 0106 (II, 1.57, Ind. voc.) has ‘phags par ‘gyur.35 Contrariwise, the same phrase (§ 29, T. 1425) is translated by ‘phrul gyi lam du song ste in PT 0742 (but ‘phags pa’i lam thob pa in PT 0106, I, 1. 40; missing in the Kanjur). We find it again in § 16 (T. 1423b) where PT 0749 (l. 48) and PT 0748 (l. 88) have ‘phrul gyi lam grub bo (deest in PT 0106 and Kanjur) and in § 20 where PT 0746 (l. 51) has ‘phrul lam grub bo and PT 0749 (l. 99): ‘phrul grub pa thob bo. In § 6 (T. 1422c) “to become buddha,” chengfo 成佛, becomes ‘phrul gyi gral thob bo in PT 0746 (l. 19), whereas, in Ind. voc., PT 0106 (II, l. 68) writes dpal yon thob pa (which corresponds to gongde 功德, “merit”) and Kanjur (p. 274–3): dgra bcom pa’i ‘bras bu thob pa (“to obtain the fruit of an arhat”). The most curious translation is found in § 31 (T. 1425a) where de Dao 得道, “to obtain the Dao,” is translated by “to obtain the supreme (sublime, exalted) dharma,” gtsug gi chos thob pa, whereas PT 0106 (I, l. 71) has lam thob. This use of gtsug is remarkable. We know that, like ‘phrul gyi and chos/chos lug, this word plays a large role in diverse indigenous Tibetan texts and has given rise to a particular interpretion.36 It would take too long to discuss this collection of words here, and soon I hope publish an article on this subject.e It suffices here to cite a phrase from the Old Tibetan Chronicle (Bacot DTT, 81) which is constructed exactly like that of the Bayang jing 八陽經: “among all the rivers, the Yar chu is the bluest, and (among all the holy mountains) the Yar lha sham po is the (the most) exalted god ” (gtsug gi lha). The interpretation is delicate indeed, because there is a homophony between two gtsug: 1) sinciput, elevated, exalted and 2) abbreviation of gtsug lag “custom, art, science,” etc. Vocabulary 1. № 2 g.yung drung. It is a question of § 29 (the last) of Bayang jing 八陽經 (T. vol. 85, 1425b): “one has thus the joy of nirvāṇa” 即涅槃樂 (idem in Uighur), translated by gdod g.yung drung du phyin tho, “one (thus) reaches eternity (which lasts) forever” in PT 0742, l. 12 (in Ind. voc., PT 0106, 1, l. 82: mya ngan las ‘das pa’i bde pa, “joy of nirvāṇa,” with an interesting gloss which does not exist in the original Chinese: “this is the same nature as Emptiness, the

35 “Become an ārya,” as in Uighur (Bang and Gabain, Türkischen Turfan-Texte, 58, n. 38): qut bulmis or qut, “saintly,” regularly translates ārya. 36 Ariane Macdonald, “Une lecture des P. tib. 1286, 1287, 1038, 1047 et 1290.” e See Tibetica Antiqua III in this volume—ed.

the two vocabularies in the dunhuang manuscripts

29

vajra samādhi,” ‘di ni stong pa’i rang bzhin rdo rje’i ding nge ‘dzin yin no//).37 The same word already appeared in § 18a (T. vol. 85, 1424a): “all produce the thought of anuttara-samyak-sambodhi” (in Chinese transcription) 皆發阿耨多羅三藐三菩提, translated by bla na myed pa’i g.yung drung rdzogs pa’i byang chub (PT 0746, l. 55; PT 0749, l. 109–110). The beginning and end of that expression are classic (Ind. voc.), but g.yung drung replaces yang dag pa (samyak). The two terms appear in diverse Dunhuang mss. Whereas ITJ 297 (beginning) has yang dag par gshegs pa, dgra bcom pa, g.yung drung rdzogs pa’i sangs rgyas (Chin. voc.), ITJ 297 records: de bzhin gshegs pa / dgra bcom ba yang dag par rdzogs pa’i sangs rgyas (Ind. voc.), with a different employment of yang dag pa which we have surveyed above. We saw above (15–16) the combination yang dag pa’i g.yung drung for tathatā. The situation is confusing. In the Sino-Tibetan Vocabulary (PT 1257), Dpal dbyangs (Indian?) always translates zheng 正, “correct,” by g.yung drung and not by yang dag pa.38 In is likewise in the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa where the Buddha says: g.yung drung rdzogs pa’i sangs rgyas (PT 0610, 0611, Chin. voc.).39 It is necessary to stress that it is here not a question of the g.yung drung characteristic of the posterior literature of the Bon po, but of the word which served to translate the Skt. śāśvata according to the dictionaries of S. Ch. Das and of Tshe ring dbang rgyal (18th century), but sanātana, “eternal,” in Mhvy (№ 4653, 7286) where śāśvata = rtag pa, “eternal” (№ 4653, 7286). This is an example of different usages of an “indigenous” Tibetan word in both translation vocabularies. The meaning “eternal”f is without doubt the nearest to the “indigenous” sense. We frequently find it in the purely Tibetan writings, but the latter date from an epoch when the Buddhist vocabulary was already in general use (the same dilemma

That samādhi is the name of a Chinese Chan sūtra, Jingang sanmei jing 金剛三眛經 (see note). 38 In contrast, in the bilingual vocabulary P. 1261 (Li Fang-kuei, 1961), zheng 正 is translated by yang dag pa. 39 de Jong (“Encore une fois le fonds Pelliot tibétain no. 610,” 7) has noted well that the vocabulary of these two mss differs from that of the Mhvy. Undoubtedly, it is a question of a translation from Chinese, but de Jong has found that the original is neither the Chinese translation of Kumārajīva, nor that of Xuanzang. f One may wonder if “permanent” would not be better than “eternal,” that is, not submitted to change. The word is indeed used at this epoch as an equivalent of Skt. nitya.—C.S.-S. 37

30

r.a. stein

as for chos, gtsug lag, etc.). In the inscription from the tomb of Khri lde srong brtsan (804–815), l. 5, it is mentioned that the legendary ancestor ‘O lde spu rgyal reigned “conforming to the great, eternal art (g.yung drung gi gtsug lag chen po).40 Similarly, in the Prayers of De ga (PT 0016, fol. 40b), it is stated of the king that “his life and his power become eternal” (sku tshe dang mnga’ thang g.yung drung du grub pa) and (fol. 34a): “his life becomes eternal, he has no disease” (sku tshe g.yung drung bzhes te / sku la snyung myi mnga’), yet others speak only of “long life” (sku tshe ring). The two equivalent expressions are combined in the ms. ITJ 751 (2nd part of the Prayers, fol. 35a): “his reign and his judicious treaties are stable and eternal, his life is long” (chab srib mjal dum g.yung drung du brtan sku tshe ring zing . . .) and, (fol. 35b): “if the reign is eternally stable and great, it is a result of his grace” (chab srid g.yung drung brtan zing che ba’i bka’ drin), yet fol 37a explains “the divine promise that it will be stable and without alteration forever,” nam tu yang myi ‘gyur zing brtan bar smond to.41 The inventors of Ind. voc. and the later translators who adopted it prefer rtag pa, “eternal,” for the philosophical doctrine, but Mhvy preserved g.yung drung in the general vocabulary. Is this latter word, retained in the Chin. voc. with a Buddhist significance, more archaic? In all cases, when we find it in the purely Tibetan writing of the epoch, the Buddhist sense is already present. In the Old Tibetan Chronicle (Bacot DTT, 114), it is employed retroactively for the king Khri srong lde btsan in exalting precisely his adoption of Buddhism. In doing so, “he was liberated from saṃ sāra (cf. № 12 below) and obtained nirvāṇa” (skye shi las bsgral to g.yung drung du bton to). And it is stated in the same passage (115): “by the grace of (buddha?), pure and eternal, there is nothing he cannot give us” (and we ought to be grateful to him, as above in the Prayers of De ga), yang dag par g.yung drung gi bka’ drin ma byin ba myed do. Vocabulary 1. № 10 yon po, yo, “heretical” vs log par lta ba. Yon po = xie 邪, “heretical, false” as opposed to drang po = zheng 正, “correct,” is attested in the Chan text IIa (Ueyama 1976). But the better

40 Tucci (Tombs of the Tibetan Kings, 37 and 41) thought that g.yung drung applied to the Bon-po. But Richardson (“The Inscription at the Tomb of Khri Srong Lde Brtsan,” 32) rectified that error and translated it better as “eternal wisdom.” 41 The same divine promise for the king in the ms. PT 0134, l. 48: “that his life endures eternally” (sku tshe g.yung drung du bzugs par smon no).

the two vocabularies in the dunhuang manuscripts

31

and more numerous examples that I know come from Bayang jing 八陽經. We can divide them into two groups. The word retained by the Chin. voc. is archaic. It is apparent in the words g.yo (-ba), “artifice,” and g.yon (archaically also g.yos as opposed to g.yas, “left” and “right”): “left, defective, hypocritical, false, contrary.” It seems to always translate the Chinese xie 邪, “heretical,” “false,” “defective." 1. The “correct” (drang po, Chin. zheng 正) view, opinion, religion is often opposed to the false. Here as elsewhere, the translators have sometimes employed the two vocabularies, one translation normally employing one of the two and sometimes (exceptionally) employing the expressions of the other. Thus, in §1 (T., p. 1422b) xiejian 邪見 vs zhengjian 正見 (heretical view and correct view) is translated by drang po vs yon po in ITJ 458, but also by log par lta ba vs yang dag par lta ba (samyak-dṛsṭ ị in Mhvy 197). Inversely PT 0106 (Ind. voc.) has here drang po / yon po, but also log par lta ba (idem in the Kanjur). PT 0745 has drang po / yon po, but PT 0748 has log par lta ba in relation to chos yon po and drang po. In the other §, PT 0748 has yon po / drang po (§ 15, T. p. 1423b, § 18, T. p. 1423c). Similarly PT 2206 for the § 21 (T. p. 1424a) and PT 0746 for the § 23 (T. p. 1424a). In one case (§ 7, T. p. 1422c) xiedao jian 邪倒見 (heretical, false view) is translated log par lta ba in PT 0106 (normally; PT 0746 has yon po and log par lta ba, PT 0748 log pas lta zing), but in § 27 (T. p. 1425a), zhengfa 正法 (saddharma) vs xiejian 邪見 (false view), PT 0106 has dam pa’i chos (the contrary is unreadable) and PT 0742 has yang dag pa and drang pa confronting chos yon po. Regarding § 4 (T. p. 1422c) for “the man is true, correct” (zhen 真, zheng 正), PT 0106 writes yang dag par drang po. Finally, in § 28 (T. p. 1425a) PT 0106 opposes yang dag and log pa, yet PT 0742 has yo drang. Translation (?) or a purely Tibetan redaction, the Dialogue of Two Brothers (PT 1283, I) employs often, and sometimes in opposition, the words yon po and drang po (e.g. l. 61, 64–5, 71, 74, 80) similarly yon po’i chos (l. 113–114, 178), drang po’i chos (l. 105, 209). 2. The second group is more interesting. The word xie 邪 (“false, heretical, evil,” translated as yon po) is the epithet of teachers, xieshi 邪師. In the Bayang jing 八陽經, this does not pertain to the “heretical teachers” of great religions,41a but to the “sorcerers” 41a

The “heretical teacher” Mani is qualified as Par sig g.yon chen, “great liar of

32

r.a. stein (geomancers, diviners, and others), specialists in the rituals of marriage, of birth and death, of house construction. It is nevertheless often compared to the “heretics” (mur ‘dug = mu stegs can) that we encounter in the Vocabulary 2, № 2. This comparison had heavy consequences for the usage of the word bon po. In the ancient rituals of the Dunhuang mss, this word designated the specialists of various rites (notably funerals). Later, in the tradition, it indicated the representatives of a philosophy and of a religion treated as “heretical” by the Buddhists.

In the Bayang jing 八陽經 (§ 16, T., p. 1423c) we read of the abuses of the “stupid” people, (the people) opposed to the king who is a bodhisattva on earth, where he guarantees the cosmic order by the establishment of a calendar. These people, who “believe only the letter” 依字信用, employ the heretical teachers (xieshi 邪師) in order to overcome ( yanzhen 厭鎮, demons) by magic, in order to speak true and false (by divination), in order to wrongly implore (man qiu) the heretical (false) divinities (xieshen 邪神) and to render worship to the evil demons (wogui 恶鬼, preta).g They also go to oppose the “Correct View” (zheng Dao 正道) and search for “false paths” (xiejing 邪經). The translation from the Kanjur diverges a little and is abridged (pp. 274–5): the king presents a “good religion for the country” (yul chos bzang po), but the people call the pretas and make them offerings (yi dags kun pos (= bos) shing mchod pas), and the author adds: “for the religion of the demons, they make them offerings of (killed) animals and eat the meat” (‘dre gdon gyis (= gyi) chos la ni srog gis mchod nas / dmar gsum dbral du za ba la). This passage is missing in ms. PT 0106 (Ind. voc.). See how it is rendered in the mss into Chin. voc. (PT 0746, l. 44 and PT 0749, l. 86): the king presents “the religion of the country” (yul chos), but the “stupid people” (blun po; cf. Vocabulary 2, № 4) gave themselves back to the false teachers (yon po’i mkhan po gnyer nas) and overcame the pretas (yi dags gnan te; PT 0749: mnan),” Persia” (Stein, “Une mention du manichéisme dans le choix du bouddhisme comme religion d’état par le roi tibétain Khri-sroṅ lde-bcan,” 133 n. 12). It is possible that the word g.yon (related to yon po), corresponds to xie, “heretic,” of the Chinese imperial decree concerning Manichaeism. g Actually, one should distinguish between “demons” (Skt naraka) and “ghosts/ unhappy wandering dead people” (Skt preta). If wogui translates preta, then it should be “ghost”—C.S.-S.

the two vocabularies in the dunhuang manuscripts

33

and: “they venerate the pretas” (yi dags la ni phyags ‘tshal). Yet a significant novelty is introduced in ms. PT 0748 (l. 105–106): “the bon po do . . . (lacuna) . . . the pretas” (bon po yi dags byed (?)////). In ms. PT 2206 (p. 2), we find this: “the bon pos invoke (?) the pretas” (bon po yi dags dgon te), and: “to render the demons impotent, they venerate them and they take to the pretas for refuge” (lha ma srin dang / ‘dre dbang don myed pa la ni phyag ‘tshal / yi dags gdon ni bskyabs shin bsdus te). We shall find later (Vocab. 2, № 2) the use of ‘dre gdon or of gdon pa (verb) and ‘dre in a passage (§ 7) dedicated to the heretics (mur ‘dug, mu stegs) and to the “false demons” (yon po’i bdud) and we shall see (n. 78) that certain Chinese texts add to an analogous list the term daoshi 道士, “Daoists,” a word that the Tibetans later translated as bon po. To return to the Bayang jing 八陽經, there is a further critique of the abuse of the marriage divination. In § 21 T., p. 1424a, it states: “the stupid people, without wisdom, believe in their heretical teachers (xieshi 邪師) who query by divination in the hope that (the marriage) will be favorable” (愚人無智信其邪師卜問望古). In the Ind. voc., the Kanjur has another redaction and does not speak of diviners; the passage is missing in ms. PT 0106. Yet in the mss PT 0746 (l. 59) and PT 0749 (l. 122), there is log pa’i mkhan po for the heretical teachers who consult the oracles (mo btab cing phan du re nas; PT 0749: shis su re nas). Here as well, in ms. PT 2206, the author speaks of “imbeciles who give themselves over to (the tenets of) false (evil) religions and pay honors to the poor bon po diviners (mo bon) in the hope that (the marriage) will be favorable (happy),” ye ni blun po glen bas chos yon po ‘o cog la ni bltas / phongs pa’i mo bon no cog la ni yon tshol zhing legs phan du re nas. The theme is reprised in the final gātha (T., p. 2425a): “if one desires to acquire merit for (worldly) actions, either one recites (this) sūtra, or one does not question the (heretical) teachers” (欲作有為功讀經莫問師). This passage is missing in the Kanjur and is attenuated in ms. PT 0106 (I, l. 69–70): ‘du byed las dag gang byed pa// gzhan la ma ‘dri, mdo sde lhogs, “to those who (wish) to accomplish mundane actions, either do not question others, or recite (this) sūtra!” Yet in the Chin. voc., we find this. PT 0742: “read this book, don’t trust heresy, don’t question the bon po diviners (mo bon)” (chos kyi yi ge ‘di phlags la / log pa la mi bltas / mo bon la myi ‘dri na), and PT 0749 (l. 216–217): yi ge lhogs la (yon po ?) mkhan (po) la ma ‘chol (= ‘tshol ?). The expression mo bon has been preserved in a song of

34

r.a. stein

Milarepa (chap. 24), which imitates a bon po ritual of healing (the word ye ‘brog is also used there for the demons, a word we find in the Bayang jing 八陽經; cf. Vocab. 2, № 18a). It is equally attested in ms. PT 0991, 1 (Maxims, fol. 2, v., l. 3): “where there are many mo bon, there is an assembly place for demons” (mo bon mang por byed pa ni ‘dre’i ‘dun sa). This use of the word bon po to designate Chinese specialists in “popular” religion (“sorcerers”) is confirmed by a Sino-Tibetan vocabulary (Dunhuang ms.) in which the Chinese words are transcribed into Tibetan. There we find bon po = shi kong (Chin. shigong 師公, “sorcerer”).41b Here it is necessary to mention a discovery heavy in significance. In three Dunhuang mss, we find an association or identification between bon pos and “heretics” (mu stegs). The first was discovered by Samten G. Karmay. This is a small tract of Buddhist maxims and exhortations (PT 0972), analogous to those of the “holy bhikṣu” (PT 0992.5). Its vocabulary (of the “Chinese” type) is close to that of the Bayang jing 八陽經. We read there that “the stupid beings who have faith in the heretics (and the ?) bon pos practice the signs (only, a purely external religion) in order to (find happiness in mundane) enterprises,” mu stegs bon la yid ches te / las kyi don du mtshan ma spyod. Then it councils: “do not entrust your life (destiny) to the bon po diviners (bon po dag la srid ma ltos), do not make offerings to the demons (‘dre srin dag la yar ma mchod), do not seek protection with the demons (bdud dang bgags (= bgegs) la skyabs ma tshol); in order to protect oneself from misery, the ‘religion of god’ (Buddhism) is better (sdug bsngal skyabs su lha chos bzang); the better protectors are the Buddha and the clergy (‘phags pa’i dge ‘dun).” There also, the amṛta of the correct (religion, yang dag bdud rtsi) is opposed to the poison of heretical views (log par lta ba’i dug). The vocabulary is mixed (“Indian” and “Chinese”).

41b Thomas and Giles (“A Tibeto-Chinese Word and Phrase-Book,” 761, № 131). The reconstruction is correct. The word shigong 師公 is attested in a Dunhuang ms. of the Sūtra of Causes and Effects (T., vol. 85, № 2881, p. 1381c), and this in an analogous context to that of the Bayang jing: “those who, in this life, kill animals in order to render worship unto the heretical divinities” go to hell (今身殺生祠邪神者), and: “those who, in this life, practice sorcery (shigong), sometimes in order to inter the dead, (sometimes) in order to consult the oracle, benevolent or harmful, (with a view to the construction) of a house” go to hell (今身作師公或葬埋死人占宅吉凶).

the two vocabularies in the dunhuang manuscripts

35

The bon pos of this text are not the representatives of a heresy of great religion, but of the specialists in ritual and divination. The two other texts were found by myself. The first will be cited below (PT 0443; Vocabulary 2, № 2). The second, quite long, is a commentary of the tantra Rgyud gsum pa (mss from Dunhuang and Kanjur № 470, 471). In the ms. ITJ 711, the author explains the proper names (Heruka, etc.) and the technical terms from the legend of origin and interpretations. I focus here only on the passage which concerns our problem (fol. 3b–4a). From the union of Sun (goddess) and Moon (demon) three eggs are produced from which emerge three beings. The first flies away through the hole in the roof and goes to heaven. His name is “eldest son of Moon” in Tibetan (zla ba’i bu chen po) and Tsan bu du (or dra?) in Sanskrit (= Candraputra?). The Buddhist clergy (dge ‘dun) called him “son of the gods Chad pa (= Daṇḍa?),” lha’i bu chad pa, but the bon po called him “god of heaven” (gnam lha). The second wants to leave by the window, but the mother draws him by the feet and he disappears (below the earth, it seems). In Sanskrit, he is a de’i, in Tibetan a the’u rang. The third is crushed and his limbs are damaged. His name is ‘gong po. This extraordinary commentary will not be discussed here. However, we will take up the appearance of common words from the purely Tibetan religion (the’u rang, ‘gong po) which we find in other tantras (considered “doubtful”) and in later writing. Sometimes these words have a Sanskrit equivalent. Yet what is essential for the problem which occupies us is the opposition between the bon pos and the Buddhist clergy. The name which this last gave to the divinity is Tibetan and characteristic of the later Bon tradition.41c As the bon pos appear here as a (homogeneous? organized?) group

41c Despite the Tibetan aspect of the god of heaven (gnam lha), this word may also hide an analogous divinity of Turkish domain. In the same commentary (fol. 8a), the author explicates a list of minor divinities or demons (yakṣa, nāga, etc.). Apropos of the gods of the harvest (lo tog lha) and of the road (lam lha), mentioned in the tantra, he explains that these last are “the petty divinities which protect the (ten) directions” (phyogs skyong ba’i lha phra mo) and he summarizes: “these are the ten brothers, such as the yol dang re and the cog dang re, etc.” (yol dang re cog dang re spun la sogs pa spun bcu gnyis ‘khor dang bcas). Yet in a description of the Turkish lands in Tibetan (archaic text, PT 1060, Choix, II, l. 90) in which are indicated the specific Turkish words for the kings, horses, etc. It is also stated that “the god (or gods) of the Turks (are) the yol tang re” (Dru gu’i lha). Satō (Chibetto rekishi chiri kenkyū, 409) already recognized there the Turkish word yol täṅri, “god of the road” (relying on Thomsen, “Dr. M.A. Stein’s Manuscripts in Turkish ‘runic’ script from Miran and Tun-huang”; Clauson, An Etymological Dictionary of Pre-Thirteenth-Century Turkish; and Hamilton,

36

r.a. stein

compared to the Buddhist clergy, this undoubtedly implies the epithet “heretic” (mu stegs), which is given to them in the other texts cited. Vocabulary 1, № 13: skye shi.h This is an abbreviation of skye shi’i ‘khor ba, “cycle of birth and death,” in Chinese: “coil of birth and death,” shengsi lun 生死輪. In the Ind. voc., we always read ‘khor ba alone (saṃ sāra, Mhvy № 2165, 797); in the Chin. voc., we always find skye shi alone, exactly like shengsi 生死 in the majority of Chinese texts.42 Naturally, there are cases where one simply speaks of “birth and death.”43 I exclude these here and select only the case where these expressions clearly designate saṃ sāra (as opposed to nirvāṇa). Note the examples. PT 0116.8 (Ueyama 1976, 58, № 25; Kimura 1981, 103), Words of the Chan master Mahāyāna, a passage which corresponds to the dossier of Chan in Chinese, published by Demiéville: “saṃ sāra and nirvāṇa, these two sorts (of aspects) are equal” (生死涅槃二種平等); PT 0116.8 (Ueyama 1976, fol. 99–100): skye shi nyid mya ngang las ‘das pa yin no (生死即涅槃). In the Leng qie shi zi ji, saṃ sāra is always rendered by shengsi 生死 in Chinese, and this word is always translated by skye shi, in opposition to Chin.

“Le colophon de l’Irq Bitig”). This god appears indeed twice in a divination manual (Thomsen, § 2, “I am the god of the road,” and § 73: I am the god of the dark road”). Hamilton has compared this manual to the analogous Tibetan texts. Based on the colophon, he thought that it was of Manichaean inspiration, and he dates it to 930 A.D. What is remarkable (and ignores the Turcologists), is that the “god of the road” also finds itself among the personages who deliver an oracle in the Tibetan divination manuals from Dunhuang (ITJ 740.1, № 10; PT 1043, № 16; and Manichaean JesusMessiah, cf. Stein, “Une mention du manichéisme,” 337). Mr. Hamilton has explained to me that yol often signifies “road” (later also “luck, good fortune”) and that čog signifies “glory, brilliance” (but is unknown as a name of a divinity). We see that, in this commentary, the apparently very Tibetan lam lha encompasses also a Turkish god of the road. The “god of heaven” of this same commentary may also include a Tibetan notion and a Turkish notion. h This paragraph should be reconsidered. In fact, the expression skye shi‘i ‘khor ba is a synonym of saṃ sāra in Indian texts, very common and commonly used.—C.S.-S. 42 Examples: T., vol. 85, № 2823 (from Tan Guang 曇曠, viiith century), p. 1208b: “that which is not attached to saṃ sāra (shengsi 生死) is not separated from bodhi,” and p. 1211c: “do not interest yourself in what is called saṃ sāra (shengsi 生死), do not seek out existence; T., № 2836, p. 1282a: thirteen examples of the opposition saṃ sāra/ nirvāṇa. For an example of a more idiomatic adaptation, gson gshin ‘khor ba, cf. n. 52. 43 Such as ITJ 709.5, fol. 19a: chos la skye shi myed pa, “there is neither birth nor death in the Dharma.”

the two vocabularies in the dunhuang manuscripts

37

niepan 篞槃 (nirvāṇa; thirteen times). As expected (cf. above, 10), the nomenclature of the two vocabularies is employed in the collection of Chan texts from ms. ITJ 709: ‘khor ba (fol. 10b, 19b and 39b, opposed to nirvāṇa) and skye shi (fol. 20a, 20b, 22b). Many texts have at the same time skye shi and ‘khor ba. Imaeda thought that it may be a question of a redundancy.44 I believe rather that skye shi’i ‘khor ba, as well as shengsi lun (生死輪), have been abridged to skye shi and shengsi (生死). Likewise, ‘khor ba was assimilated to ‘khor lo, “coil,” a literal translation of the Chinese lun 輪.45 Imaeda has also signaled that this term skye shi is employed in the Old Tibetan Chronicle. It has been seen that there is opposition to g.yun drung like saṃ sāra to nirvāṇa (above, 30). In the Prayers of De ga, which also employ the term g.yun drung, we find skye shi and ‘khor ba side by side.46 Vocabulary 1, № 15, chos kyi yi ge, gzhung and dar ma. As an equivalent to sūtra, the first term is very frequently, if not always employed in the Chin. voc., opposite mdo in the Ind. voc. When an unidentified text is characterized by this usage, there is a presumption, if not always certitude, that it concerns a translation or an adaptation of a Chinese text (or inspired by such a model). The inverse is true for the use of mdo. Yet we must distinguish between two meanings of this word. 15a. In the Chin. voc., mdo does not signify sūtra (jing 經, as translated in Kimura, 1981), but “short sentence,” “maxims,” “sayings.” This meaning is well attested in the Chan writings, as in the purely Tibetan redactions of Chan47 and as in the collections of “indigenous” maxims.

44 Imaeda, “Documents tibétains de Touen-houang concernant le concile du Tibet.” This text is qualified as chos kyi yi ge, a term from the Chin. voc. 45 Mss cited by Imaeda: PT 0220, skye shi ‘khor ba’i chos kyi le’u, but ITJ 345: skye shi ‘khor lo’i le’u. These are variants of the title skye shi’i lo rgyus (many times). In ITJ 751, the title is explained as “book of birth and death, history of birth and death” (skye shing shi ba’i chos/skye shi lo rgyus). 46 P. 16, fol. 24b, the accumulated faults are “the seeds of saṃ sāra” (skye shi’i sa bon), but fol. 25a: we are attached by the cord of saṃ sāra (‘khor ba’i gshal thag). 47 Kimura, “Tonkō Chibetto-go Zen bunken mokuroku shoko.” These “sayings” of the Chan masters have been called yulu 語錄 from the ixth century Linji, T., № 1985 ff).

38

r.a. stein

15a.1. Let us commence with the latter. A large collection of wise maxims called “Great ma shags of the Sum pa, sentences (mdo) bequeathed as an example to future generations” (see note).48 There, the author speaks of relations between parents and children, and of the virtues of respect and honesty (see Vocabulary 3, № 3, 4). The exhortations of a “holy monk” are also qualified as “sentences (mdo) taught to posterity” (PT 1284.2: ‘phrul gyi byig shus myi phyi ma la bstan pa’i mdo; cf. note Maxims).49 Another text of the same genre, PT 0126 (preaching against abuses) contains at the end of light discussion: “on the habits of the bad people” (l. 66, ngan pa’i tshul bshad pa),50 “on filial piety” (l. 77, sri zhu’i mdo bshad pa), “on Good and Evil” (l. 90, legs nyes kyi mdo bshad).51 All these texts are variants of ms. PT 0992.5. The Chin. voc. is employed in all.52 15a.2. Chan texts. A complete series of “sayings” of the masters finds itself in the ms. PT 0116 (Kimura 1981, 97–104). Sometimes we read: “taught by master” (so-and-so, name indicated), sometimes: “sayings taught by so-and-so” (bshad pa’i mdo, 0116.6) or, abbreviated, “taught by so-and-so” (bshad pa, but one time ‘grel pa, “commentary”). Often the author prefers: “Chan sentences of master so-and-so” (bsam gtan gyi mdo, 0116.7, seventeen cases; similarly in PT 0813, Kimura, 110). In some cases, we know the Chinese equivalent: yu 語, “saying” (116.7.n), perhaps jue (決/訣), “brief formula” (0116.7.p; but 0116.8, we read chos kyi sgo mo = dharmamukha, an expression which corresponds to famen yaojiu 法門要決, “brief formula essence of the sūtra”).

48 See the note on Sum pa ma shags. The genre is well represented among the Dunhuang mss. In Tibetan, PT 1058 verso; PT 0235 (on father and mother, sons and daughters, brothers, daughters-in-law, etc.); PT 0987 and 0988 (Sayings of Kong tse = Confucious); PT 0989 (father and sons); PT 1283 (Dialogue of two brother, see note); PT 2111 (dialogue between two brothers on morals). In Chinese: T., vol. 85, № 2825, “important precepts of true words”; S. 6537–3 Buddhist morals; Peking, Wei 緯 68 (Xu Guolin, Dunhuang shishi xiejing tiji and Dunhuang zalu II, 166–167). 49 Sentences studied by A. Macdonald, “Une lecture des P. tib. 1286, 1287, 1038, 1047 et 1290,” 370–373. 50 In the Leng qie shi zi ji, bshad pa corresponds to Chin. lun 輪 (= śāstra, fol. 48a) or to zhu 注 (= commentary, fol. 44b, 46a). We will find this word in the vocabulary of the Chan teachers. 51 To be distinguished from the sūtra of the same name (see note). 52 PT 0992.1 (on Good and Evil); PT 0992.3; PT 0992.5. See Vocabulary 2, № 10, 13, 14, 17a. For the contents too (marriages determined by divination, useless worship of the dead, etc.), this text is analogous to many passages from the Bayang jing.

the two vocabularies in the dunhuang manuscripts

39

The divergent uses find themselves in the Leng qie shi zi ji 楞伽師資記. One time, the author speaks of “dhyāna sentences” fol. 23b, bsam gtan gyi mdo53 = yaojue 要決. Yet bshad pa corresponds once (48a) to lun 輪 (śāstra) and twice (44a, 44b) to zhu 注, “commentary” (as above: bshad pa / ‘grel pa). The Chinese word lun is sometimes transcribed in Tibetan: bsam gtan gyi lon (PT 0117.1) or simply lon (PT 0121.1). 15b.1. Let us now examine chos kyi yi ge = mdo in the sense of sūtra. We already noted (7) that the Chan texts also employ the Ind. voc. (mdo, mdo sde) when they cite the texts of Indian origin or when they refer to “Indian” ideas (Mādhyamika, etc.). A certain incoherence appears also in certain translations, notably in the Leng qie shi zi ji 楞伽師資記. The Laṅkāvatāra-sūtra (six times) and other sūtras (eight times) are designated by chos kyi yi ge = jing 經, but five other sūtras are called mdo = jing 經 (Ueyama 1968, incomplete list), including the Laṅkāvatāra (25a). Inversely, the word mdo once serves to render the Chinese ji 記, “account” (in the title), whereas the word zhuan 傳, “biographies,” is rendered once by mdo (26a) and once by bshad pa’i yi ge (42b). I have been unable to discover the reason for these variations. However, for the sūtras translated from Chinese, we always finds chos kyi yi ge in Chin. voc. and mdo in Ind. voc. (barring exception, cf. n. 24, Bayang jing, and Fanwang jing). In effect, as previously stated (n. 23), these sūtras have often been translated in the two vocabularies. Witness a provisional list (see notes).

53 Note the orthographic difference: bsam brtan in PT 0116 and PT 0117.1 (treatment of the Chan of the tathāgata,” rulai chan 如来禪), but gsam gtan in the Leng qie shi zi ji 楞伽師資記 (fol. 23b), in ITJ 704.1 (de bshin gshegs pa’i bsam gtan, Ind. voc., Kimura, “Tonkō Chibetto-go Zen bunken mokuroku shoko,” 122) and in ITJ 709.11 (fol. 43a, bsam gtan gyi yi ge, where yi ge is lifted from the Chin. voc., but the text is in Ind. voc.; cf. n. 13).

40

r.a. stein

Sūtra

Chos kyi yi ge

Mdo

Fawang jing 法王經

Kanjur, ITJ 222, PT 0624 (yi ge)

PT 2105 (mdo sde); citation in PT 0116 and in the Ldan dkar Catalog, n6 155

Fanwang jing 梵網經 Kanjur (-- and yi ge, gzhung)

Ibid.: mdo sde

Bayang jing 八陽經

PT 0749: sngags kyi yi ge; PT 0742: yang dag pa’i chos kyi yi ge

PT 0744: rig sngags kyi mdo; Kanjur; PT 0106, 0458, 0743, 0745, 2110; ITJ 459 ff.

To “recite,” saepe: chos, yi ge, chos kyi yi ge

mdo, mdo sde, chos kyi mdo

Fozang jing 佛藏經

Kanjur № 791, trans. From Kanjur n6 886 Chinese; sangs rgyas kyi mdzod

Datong fangguang 大通方廣經

PT 0092

Kanjur n6 930, 931

As in the other case, the usage of these two vocabularies is so constant and so regular that we may, if not be certain, at least presume that an unidentified text marked by chos kyi yi ge (and variants) is perhaps translated from Chinese or at least inspired by a Chinese source. A case from this genre is the Skye shi’i lo rgyus. This text is called chos kyi yi ge’i le’u, but also carries a subtitle which transcribes a (pseudo-) Sanskrit word: sang gra dar ma.54 It is perhaps only a pious invention. It has been seen (n. 23) that, like the Chinese title of the Bayang jing 八陽經, transcribed into Tibetan, it is said to be “in the language of India.” In the principle part of the Skye shi’i lo rgyus, an adaptation of the Gaṇḍavyūha, the heroic Sudhana (classically Nor bzang; Mhvy № 5500) carries the name Rin chen lags (Imaeda wrongly removes the word lags). If we correct lags to legs, this namei corresponds well to the Chinese name of Sudhana, Shancai, “fine richness.” The text bor-

54 Cf. n. 44 and 68. We will see that dar ma signifies sūtra in the old Tibetan vocabulary. As for sang gra, it ought to render Skt. saṁgraha (Tib. bsdus pa), “collection, summary” (e.g. ITJ 26.2). Imaeda has shown that this text combines many sources. i Rin chen legs is just a literal translation of Skt. Sudhana, like Nor bzang is. —C.S.-S.

the two vocabularies in the dunhuang manuscripts

41

rows from other elements of the Chin. voc., mur ‘dug for heretics (PT 0218), ‘phrul gyi = lha’i, “divine” (ITJ 345, ‘phrul gyi rdzas = PT 0218, lha rdzas), the five gati: rgyud lnga = Vocabulary PT 1257, fol. 9, l. 12: lam rgyud lnga. The most curious case in this text is that of rūpadhātu (classically gzugs khams = sejie 色界). This word is here rendered by gzugs yod (khna v.). The same expression is also found in the Vocabulary PT 1257 (fol. 5, l. 2): gzugs yod pa’i khams = sejie 色界. The Chinese equivalent finds itself literally in a prayer from Dunhuang (T., vol. 85, p. 1302a): seyou 色有 (likewise in T., № 762, vol. 17, p. 651b, but this text was only translated around 1000 A.D.). It is true that the Skye shi’i lo rgyus also employs the Ind. voc. (‘phags pa, mtho ris, etc.). This mélange is no doubt reflected in the double title. 15b2. Here is posed the problem of the formation of this expression. We have seen that we often read simply chos or yi ge. The base word, typical for the contemporary Tibetan in that era, is surely yi ge; chos kyi yi ge is derived from it.55 Inversely, in this precise meaning of “book,” chos seems to be an abbreviation of a compound term. It will be seen that its Sanskrit equivalent (dharma, Tibetanized as dar ma) has the same meaning. There are many examples for yi ge in the sense of “book.”56 Often, another word specific of some genre of book is concerned. Then we find in the “Confucianist” literature of China, “the book of the wise” (myi ‘dzangs pa’i yi ge, PT 0988, l. 52) with the final note: “this book (dpe) is a book of the sages of olden times” (dpe ‘di ni gna’ myi ‘dzangs pa’i dpe lagso). These are the Chinese “classics,” the Yijing 易經 (= Zhou Yi 周易) in PT 0987 (l. 11): ‘jangs pa’i yi ge Ci’u yag, “book of the wise”) and in ITJ 748. Cu yag gyi yi ge; or the Liji 禮記 (PT 0987,

55

For lack of an “etymological dictionary” such that the Sgra sbyor, we can grasp only by hypothesis how the translators of the Chin. voc. formed the new expressions. For chos kyi yi ge, we would do well to note that the translations into Uighur have the same expression: nom bitig (Bang and Gabain, Türkischen Turfan-Texte, index, say “= sūtra?”). In a fragment (Bang and Gabain, Türkischen Turfan-Texte, text IV B 68) they translate the title at the end (115) by Gesetzes-Buch, “book of the Law” (nom = chos = dharma; bitig = “book”; contemporary expression, cf. S. Tekin, Maitrisimit nom bitig). In the Bayang jing in Uighur, we find the combination of the two vocabularies: sudur nom bitig (sudur = sūtra). Same combination in Tibetan (§ 25, T., p. 1424c = Kanjur, p. 275–3): chos kyi mdo, combining chos kyi yi ge and mdo. 56 Later, one often says yig tshang. The two words also have the meaning “insignia, decoration.” Were they accompanied by a written certificate? Cf. n. 13.

42

r.a. stein

l. 41: yi ge Le Ke). The account of the voyage of the Five Uighurs57 is entitled: rabs kyi yi ge (“book of the account of . . .”). The Rāmāyaṇa calls itself rgyal po Ra ma na stangs dbyal bka’ mchid kyi ye ge. A Chan writing carries the title bsam gtan gyi yi ge (cf. n. 13), and the title shenzhou jing 神咒經 was rendered by sngags kyi yi ge58 (above, 40). In the Fanwang jing are cited the texts (sūtra?) of the vinaya as tshul khrims kyi yi ge (or glegs bam) and tshul khrims kyi bzhung (Kanjur 922, p. 172) or rather chos kyi yi ge, tshul khrims kyi legs bam (ibid., p. 170–4, 174–3). One speaks there also of “sūtra of the Mahāyāna” (theg pa chen po’i yi ge, in Ind. voc. -mdo). In the Bayang jing 八陽經 (T., p. 1424a), it is a question of books of astrology or of a forcast of destiny (luming shu 祿(=錄)命書; var. xiangming shu 相命書, “a book where destiny is written”). This purely Chinese expression is rendered by dbang thang gi yi ge, “book of destiny or fortune,” in the translations in Chin. voc. (PT 0746, l. 63 and PT 0749, l. 129). We will note the use of an idiomatically Tibetan term in this translation (use which is maintained in the traditional religion; rlung rta with dbang thang, srog, etc.). It is attested in another Dunhuang ms. (PT 0389), an amulet of Tārā: wishes for the donor, for his life and his luck (tshe srog dang dbang thang, see Lalou 1936, 138), but also in Mhvy, № 5220: dbang thang tshe ba = mahābhoga. 15b.3. gzhung. Like mdo, this word is employed in two different senses. We shall only treat the first here: “book, correct or sacred text.”59 Yet we ought to at least note the second. In the Bayang jing 八陽經 and in the Leng qie shi zi ji 楞伽師資記, it is useful to translate Chinese li (“principle, ratio”) or zhenli (真理) “true principle” (yang dag pa’i

57 PT 1283, cf. Bacot, “Reconnaissance en haute Asie septentrionale par cinq envoyés ouigours au VIIIe siècle.” 58 We find there also (§ 16, T., p. 1423c): “one makes the calendars” (liri 曆日 = *lek-nyit, Uighur: likžir) = skar ma’i yi ge (PT 0746, l. 44 and l. 45: ‘di rnams kyi yi ge’i phyi mo ni, Chin. wen 文). 59 Bayang jing 八陽經, § 24a (T., p. 1424b): 大乘空無之理 = Kanjur, p. 275–2: theg pa chen po’i mdo / bya ba byed pa’i (= med pa’i) gzhung; PT 0746, l. 73: theg pa chen po bya ba myed pa’i gzhung. Cf. ibid., T., p. 1423b 得其深理, “obtain the true principle” = PT 0746, l. 23: gzhung dam pa; p. 1424a 天之常道自然之理, “it is the eternal View of Heaven, the spontaneous principle,” PT 0746, l. 59: gnam gyi rtag pa chos / rang bzhin gyi ni gzhung. The word corresponds also to Chin. yi, “sense” (T., p. 1424a, etc.) and designates a moral and intellectual quality (e.g. Bayang jing, T., p. 1423c: 聰明智慧, “they will be intelligent and full of wisdom” = Kanjur, p. 274–5, yid gzhung mtshan dang ldan, and PT 0748, l. 108: yid gzhung // // ‘dzangs).

the two vocabularies in the dunhuang manuscripts

43

gzhung; I, p. 205). In the Dialogue of the two brothers (see note), it signifies “character”: “certain people have a rough character (gzhung la ni rtsing), but soft words” (?, tshig la ni zhib), or “soft limbs” (yan lag pa la ni zhib), but a rough character (mdo la ni rtsing ba). In its meaning as “book,” gzhung replaces (and is equivalent to) yi ge. In place of Chos kyi yi ge, the author states chos kyi gzhung (dharmagrantha?), and the two words may replace chos kyi rnam grangs (dharmaparyāya, Ind. voc. or chos kyi sgo mo in Chin. voc.).60 A sūtra translated by Ye shes sde (beginning of the ixth century) is qualified as chos kyi rnam grangs in the version of the Kanjur (№ 771 = T. № 484, jing 經 = sūtra), but as chos kyi gzhung in the ms. ITJ 49. It is likewise in ITJ 610 (Vimalakīrti) and in the Karmavibhaṅga (K., № 1006), as in the mss ITJ 269, 172, 192 (chos kyi gzhung and chos kyi gzhung mdo sde). Remarkably, this clearly Buddhist expression is also employed in the Old Tibetan Chronicle (Bacot DTT, 118), and that—retroactively, without a doubt—in order to characterize the reign of Srong btsan sgam po: “all the good (Buddhist) ‘religious books’ of Tibet have made their appearance under the reign of king Khri srong brtsan” (Bod kyi chos kyi bzhung bzang po kun / btsan po Khri Srong btsan gyi ring las byung ngo). The final redaction took place in the era of the Buddhist kings where appeared the opinion (true or false) that Buddhism had already been introduced by Srong btsan sgam po.61 As for yi ge, the genre of text (gzhung) is often specified by an epithet. For example: ms. ITJ 180.6, chos dkon mchog lo rgyus kyi gzhung, “book of history of the dharma and of the triratna.” 15b.4. While not wanting to enter into a discussion which does not have a place here, it is nevertheless necessary to highlight a problem. This is the ambiguity of the words chos and gzhung. Although they 60 The sūtras are named “exposition of the law” (Lamotte, L’enseignement de Vimalakīrti, 368, dharmaparyāya, and p. 31–2, 65, also dharmamukha), the two words are equivalent (e.g. ITJ 102.2, Prajñāpāramitā: mdo, but at the end: chos kyi rnam grangs; Kanjur № 149, 169, etc., translated by Ye shes sde, around 800 A.D.). In many cases the author indicates at the end of a sūtra several titles qualified as dharmaparyāya. The Chinese adopted the form dharmamukha which they translated as famen (法門), whence the Tibetan translation chos kyi sgo (mo). 61 R.A. Stein, “Une mention du manichéisme.” Here is not the place to discuss this problem. It is known that Tibetologists have generally wished to distinguish “the good religion” (chos bzang) of which one speaks in the chronicle apropos of Khri srong lde btsan (ch. viii beginning). We shall return to this problem later (n. 63).

44

r.a. stein

are often employed as abbreviations of chos kyi yi ge or gzhung, “holy book,”62 they also designate the contents of such a book: custom, religion, dectrine, method. In this meaning, they are sometimes replaced by lugs and/or tshul, “fashion, manner,” of action or of thought. These elements are also composed into expressions: chos lugs, chos tshul, gzhung lugs. This meaning of “custom,” etc. will not be discussed here, but it is necessary now to underscore that these expressions, with this meaning, are common to the Buddhist texts and to the purely Tibetan writing relative to the indigenous tradition. As seen above for chos kyi gzhung (43), this may be satisfactorily explained by the fact that these indigenous accounts were redacted in the era of the Buddhist kings and that one had then a tendency to project the Buddhist vocabulary and ideas retroactively onto the more ancient epoch.63 Here, we will note only that it is often difficult to distinguish if the term concerns a work or its contents. In the Shujing 書經,64 (rgyal po’i) chos lugs is used to translate Chin. (wang) fa 法, “method (of government) of the kings.” The same expression finds itself in the Suvarṇaprabhāsa translated by Chos grub (title of chap. 20, Nobel 1958, II, 244: rgyal po’i chos lugs yang dag pa’i bstan bcos = wangfa zhenglun 王法正論), but in another translation (K. № 175), the same title is abridged to rgyal po’i bstan bcos. In one case, we have the con-

62 It is likewise for gtsug lag, “savoir faire, art, etc.,” abridged as gtsug; cf. above, 169 and n. 52. 63 R.A. Stein, “Une mention du manichéisme.” I hope to revisit this problem. In the meantime, here are some examples. We have already seen the use of chos lugs at the time as “method of government” and as the book which explains it (Suvarṇaprabhāsa). In other Buddhist texts as well, chos lugs designates the contents, a particular aspect of the religion. In ms. PT 0037 (fol. 1b), Buddhism is called chos lugs bzang po and, abridged, chos bzang po (fol. 15a). The same expression chos lugs bzang po is employed in the inscription from the tomb of Khri lde srong btsan (Richardson, “The Inscription at the Tomb of Khri Srong Lde Brtsan,” 31, l. 2–3) sometimes being replaced completely by lha’i lugs (l. 7, lugs alone) and by gnam gyi chos (l. 8, chos alone). The contracted form chos bzang (parallel to srid che or gtsug che, abbreviation of chab srid and gtsug lag) is found in the Old Tibetan Chronicle (Bacot DTT, 113–114). Chos bzang should correspond to saddharma and to Chin. shanfa 善法. Lalou translates chos bzang po by saddharma (“Les chemins du mort dans les croyances de Haute Asie,” 45; PT 0047, 15a), and shanfa is attested in a Dunhuang ms. (I.O., C. 97). Yet in Ind. voc. (Mhvy, № 1325, 1335), saddharma is translated by dam pa’i chos (Chin. zhengfa 正法 or miaofa 妙法). Also found there are these words in the Prophesy of Khotan perhaps ascribable to Chos grub (see note) who employs this vocabulary (Kanjur, p. 300–1/2 = T., p. 996b; Thomas TLTD, I, 79, etc., translated as “good religion”). 64 PT 0986 (also commonly known as Shangshu 尚書.There, we also frequently find chos, chos lugs and chos lam (the Dao), gnam gyi chos (or chos lugs alone for Chin. “Heaven” only). Cf. note and Vocabulary 4, № 3–4.

the two vocabularies in the dunhuang manuscripts

45

tents and the book which is mentioned, for the other, only the book. The word gtsug lag which designates an art, a science, a competence (Buddhist or not) is also the equivalent of bstan bcos = śāstra65 and designates thus a book. Similarly, gzhung lugs designates some content (movement, opinion, doctrine) as well as the book which explains it. In Mhvy, many philosophical schools are qualified as gzhung or gzhung lugs (sometimes = samaya, № 1438). The reason for the choice of these words is curiously explained in the Sgra sbyor (K., № 5383, pp. 73–1): “the Indian words translated have been recorded in the table of the teachers,” and: “the translators should never stray from this established text” (gzhung lugs).j It is explained there that gzhung and lugs have the same sense, giving as examples chos kyi gzhung (= sūtra) or theg pa che chung gi gzhung and sgra’i lugs, books of grammar (p. 73–4/5). Sometimes one speaks of sacred (or doctrinal?) books of the heretics (mu stegs pa’i gzhung, pp. 79–3), sometimes the books (or sciences?) of the Mādhyamika (pp. 82–5, Dbu ma’i gtsug lag, but also mdo sde dang Dbu ma’i gzhung, or pp. 84–2/3: bram ze’i gzhung). In a Buddhist adaptation of a bon po ritual, the three words gzhung, lugs and chos have the same value (“custom,” or a book which discusses it). From the bon po or “black men” side, we read (missing a phrase): myi nag po’i gzhung and shid nag po’i lugs; in the Buddhist or “white men” equivalent, we have: lha chos dkar po’i gzhung, myi dkar po’i lugs and shid dkar po’i ches (= chos) (PT 0239; Stein 1970, 162–3). We find many examples in the Buddhist texts. Buddhism is named 65 Mhvy, № 1432: gtsug lag = ārṣa “sciences of the ṛsị .” In the Ldan dkar catalogue, the works “composed” by the king are qualified as gtsug lag (Lalou, 336). These are the tracts (śāstra). According to the Chos grags dictionary, the word also designates sūtras. In this, the author follows the Tibetan-Mongol dictionary of Ye shes rdo rje (Corpus Script. Mongolorum, 428b; gsung rab, dam chos, sde snod). In the vocabulary of Dpal dbyangs (cf. note, PT 1257, l. 18), gtsug lag = lun 輪 (śāstra). In the Suvarṇaprabhāsa we find, in a parallel manner, rgyal po’i bstan bcos (ms. ITJ 443 and Kanjur № 175) and rgyal po gtsug lag = wangfa 王法 (ITJ 444; ch. 12 = ch. 24; Skt. ms. rājaśāstra). In ms. PT 0507 (Simonsson, Indo-tibetische Studien, 202–3), Skt. śāstra is rendered by gtsug lag (but Kanjur, trans. Chos grub, has bstan bcos). Furthermore, the Sgra sbyor designates the Hindu books by the words mu stegs pa’i pa’i gzhung or bramze’i gzhung, a text which critiques the doctrines of the hinayāna (ITJ 667) speaking about ‘jig rten gi rigs byed gzung lag (sic!) dang / gtam dang / sgrung las stsogs pa, “vedantin (?) tracts of the people of the world (Hindus), their accounts and tales.” In a tantra (Kanjur, № 463, pp. 160–3, on Heruka), it is said that the teacher “explained the rite of consecration” (dbang gig tam rgyud bshad) and proclaimed the “great books of tantra” (rgyud kyi gtsug lag chen po). j This is rather odd. Actually the Sgra sbyor refers here to the Mhvy, see C. ScherrerSchaub “Enacting Words,” 283.—C.S.-S.

46

r.a. stein

“pure religion” (gtsan ma’i chos, ITJ 239) or “white religion” (chos dkar po, ITJ 280, or dkar po’i chos in a tract of Nāgārjuna translated around 800 A.D., Tanjur № 5822). In the Rāmāyaṇa, it is a question of “transgressing the religion (or custom)” of the ṛsị (PT 0981, l. 41, drang srong gi chos lugs), but also simply of lugs (de Jong, § XL, A, l. 334) or of lha’i lugs (ibid., l. 430), an expression that we also find in a purely Tibetan inscription (cf. n. 63). The same genre of “transgression of the custom” is attested in the Shujing 書經 (PT 0986, l. 6, chos lugs las ‘gal = 弗敬上天, “do not venerate heaven above”), further l. 10–11, “to venerate heaven” (feng tian 奉天) is rendered by gnam gyi chos lugs gus par (cf. n. 63, gnam gyi chos in the inscription). Then, for the same phrase (“to conform to heaven,” shuntian 順天), one is content with the abbreviation chos lugs (l. 13). This expression, in its turn, is replaced by chos lam (l. 15, deest in Chinese), as in the Bayang jing 八陽經 where it corresponds to dao 道 (Vocabulary 1, № 11). From its side, gnam gyi (chos?) corresponds to dao 道 (l. 32–33) as well as to tian 天 (“heaven,” l. 65). These words are sometimes replaced by lugs. We find “royal custom” (rgyal po’i lugs, l. 46–7 and l. 122–123; Chinese deest) together with chos lam and rgyal lugs (l. 124 = dao; the same expression as in the Buddhist texts). Other epithets can determine these words. We have legs nyes chos lugs (“principle of Good and Bad,” l. 32–33 = dao), sri-zhu dang chu gang gi lugs (rnam lnga), “the five lessons of filial piety, honesty (etc.); l. 33 and 153–4, 五常之教, dgra chos (l. 90 = wu 武, “war”; l. 143 = rong 戎, “military”) and lha mtshun mchod pa’i lugs, “tradition of the cult of the ancestors” (l. 153–4, Chinese deest). We see that chos is sometimes replaced by other words, sometimes combined with them. To gzhung and lugs, we must add tshul, “manner, fashion.” In the Skye shi’i lo rgyus, we often find chos tshul or chos kyi tshul (“teaching”). We will note also that one expression may be sometimes short (shortened?), sometimes elongated. We have seen chos bzang po, “good religion.” In the ms. PT 0037 (fol. 1b, 2a, 3a), the author writes chos lugs bzang po. Already cited were lha chos and chos dkar po for Buddhism (chos). In the ms. 127 (divination), we sometimes have lha chos (l. 14, 47), sometimes only chos (l. 22, 28–9). In the Old Tibetan Chronicle (Bacot DTT, 81), the same religion is called chos bzang as well as chos and tshul. In ms. ITJ 234 (the Ten Virtues), “these chos of Virtue” establish (bcu ste = bcug ste) “the view of the white religion” (dkar po’i chos kyi lam). While one often says mi (myi)

the two vocabularies in the dunhuang manuscripts

47

chos, a translator of c. 800 A.D. writes more explicitly mi yi chos lugs (Tanjur, № 2820, pp. 2–4, tract of Nāgārjuna). The Fanwang jing 梵網經 is particularly rich in variation. To the examples already given for yi ge (41), we must here add others for lugs and gzhung. Chos kyi yi ge’i lugs is opposed to tshul khrims kyi gzhung (K., pp. 172–1 = T., p. 1006c: “sense of sūtra and of vinaya,” jingyi liuyi 經義律義). In opposing Buddhism and heresy (K., pp. 172–1 = T., p. 1006c), we have on the one side sangs rgyas kyi chos and tshul khrims kyi yi ge ( fo jing lü 佛經律) and on the other: mur dug gi chos and ma rabs kyi gzhung (邪見二乘外道俗典). Once, chos kyi yi ge is replaced by dar ma (K., pp. 173–2 = T., p. 1008a, see below) “the sūtra of the holy religion of the buddhas of the three times,” dus gsum gyi sangs rgyas kyi dam pa’i chos kyi yi ge (三世諸佛經) or “sūtra of the great vehicle,” theg pa chen po’i yi ge (大乘經; 173–4 = 1008b; 174–1 = 1008c). Or further: “vinaya of the Buddha” (sangs rgyas kyi tshul khrims kyi yi ge, fo jie) (174–3 = 1009a) and: sangs rgyas kyi chos dang tshul khrims (佛法戒律; 174–4 = 1009b). We may compare the use of these words in the Prophesy of Khotan. Sometimes the author only says chos (K., pp. 362–1; Chin. fa 法), sometimes lha chos (361–2 = T., p. 997b, fo fa), as opposed to heretics (mu stegs kyi chos, Chin. waidao fa 外道法); or further dam pa’i chos (Chin. miaofa 妙法 or zhengfa 正法) (300–1 = 996b) or chos alone in Tibetan (300–2), but “correct Law of the Buddha” in Chinese ( fo zhi zhengfa 佛之正法, 996b). One remark presents itself. It might be left unsaid, but it is good to highlight it in view of the discussions of the non-Buddhist and “ancient” Tibetan texts (cf. n. 61). An author is free to vary expressions as he pleases. He may designate one and the same idea, sometimes contenting himself with a brief and vague word or making use of a longer, more specific expression. 15b.5. dar ma. As in the preceding case, this word simultaneously designates the contents and the book which explains it. Yet here the usage is different. Dar ma is a Tibetanized form of the Sanskrit dharma (orthography sometimes retained). However, the translators who had recourse to the Chin. voc. only retained the derived sense: a book of dharma, i.e. sūtra or other Buddhist text. Many translations from Chinese texts arise. In an oft repeated formula: “To read this sūtra three times” (du cijing 讀此經), the Bayang jing always employs mdo or (chos kyi) yi ge, but one time, the version of the Kanjur (p. 274–5 =

48

r.a. stein

T., p. 1423c) has dharma lan gsum blags te (whereas PT 0728, l. 112, has chos ‘di . . .). It could be said that, once chos kyi yi ge is abbreviated to chos, the author has retranslated this word as dharma. Thus alerted, we encounter this usage often enough in the Dunhuang mss, and the purely Tibetan (untranslated) texts therein. In the copy of an Amitāba-sūtra, executed for the “preceding king” (sngun lha sras) Khri gtsug lde btsan (815–836), we twice read: “at Shazhou, one wrote the Amitāyus dar ma in Chinese and Tibetan” (Rgya Bod kyi dar ma Tshe dpag tu myed pa bris te, PT 0999, dating to c. 850 because the author cites Hong Bian and the king ‘Od srung). It is an oft copied book. In PT 0735 (Lalou’s Catalogue), we find another copy executed for the same king by an inhabitant of Shazhou: “this dharma is called sūtra (mdo) of impermanence” (dar ma ‘di ni myi rtag pa’i mdo shes bgyi’o). In ms. PT 2122 (beginning), we read: “in order to augment the merit of the prince . . . (following the date) . . . one recits the dar ma and one fabricates tsha tsha” (dar ma klags pa dang / tsha tsha gdab pat mdzad). Also, in the aspirations for the king ‘U’i dum brtan (c. 836?), the author gives a list of sins66 against which one should guard: “to destroy or raze the stūpa of the Triratna, the statues, the temples, the sūtras, etc.” (dkon mchog gsum gyi mchod rten dang / sku gzugs dang / gtsug lag khan dang / dar ma la stsogs te bshig shing dral ba). The two words chos and dar ma find themselves side-by-side in the ms. ITJ 699.2: “If one asks which (works) are truly chos (the Dharma?), these are the twelve (sorts of) sūtra (beginning: chos yin bar dzi mngon zhe na / dar ma mdo sde bcu gnyis kyi mdo, etc.).67 In the Prophesy of Khotan (PT 0960, l. 113), the colophon (which is missing in the Kanjur) speaks of the sūtras (dar ma mdo sde) of Sūryagarbha and of Candragarbha. The same is employed many times in the texts of Thomas TLTD (index, 143), e.g. vol. II, pp. 73–75, copies of sūtras by the Chinese and Tibetan copyists in Guazhou and in Shazhou (dar ma ‘dri ba’i yi ge pa), and p. 81, copy of a sūtra for the benefit of the king (lha sras kyi sku yon dar ma Shes rab ‘Bum pa / bri ba’i yi ge rnams). Similarly in PT 0033 (Lalou Catalog): “sūtra in a scroll” (chos kyi dar

66 These are just the sins that the later tradition attribute to Glang dar ma at the time of his persecution of Buddhism. 67 These are the 十二部大經卷 of the Bayang jing 八陽經 (T., p. 1423b, translated by sangs rgyas kyi chos kyi yi ge sde myi (sic!) bcu gnyis in PT 0748, l. 89, by sangs rgyas kyi snod dang sde bcu gnyis in PT 0749, l. 53, but by dam pa’i chos kyi rnam grangs (dharma-pravacana) in Mhvy № 1266. These are twelve literary genres.

the two vocabularies in the dunhuang manuscripts

49

ma bam po gcig), an expression constructed as in the final notes of the Bayang jing 八陽經 (PT 0742) and of the Fawang jing (法王經; Kanjur): yi ge bam po gcig.68 The most interesting case is a fragment important because it attests around 800 A.D. to the opinion that Buddhism was already adopted by Srong btsan sgam po. It is ms. ITJ 370.5, entitled “dar ma fallen from the sky, in a scroll” (gnam babs kyi dar ma, bam po gcig go). Richardson translated: “The Dharma that came down from Heaven.”69 However, our inquiry proves that it concerns a sūtra or other Buddhist book. As is known, according to the later tradition, the debut of Buddhism in Tibet was marked by a book and objects fallen from the sky onto the palace of the king Lha Tho tho ri. In the Dunhuang fragment, we see without a doubt one version of this tradition.70 15b6. It must be noted that the vocabulary being reviewed was maintained sporadically according to the later authors well informed about ancient documents. In speaking of the “book fallen from the sky,” Nyang ral Chos kyi ‘od zer (1124–1192) states in his chos ‘byung (ms. A, pp. 244–5)71 that in a dream, the king Tho tho ri saw falling from the sky a book (dar ma), and he venerated it. In his Chos rgyal mes dbon rnam thar (p. 179), the author states that Khri srong lde btsan gave the order to translate the sūtras (dar ma) of India, Nepal, etc. (Rgya gar gyi dar ma dang / Bal yul gyi dar ma . . .) and (p. 239) that in the same era, the dar ma of China and of India, the Buddhist books (chos dpe) of the Mahāyāna were found for the most part in Nālandā, but that these books (dpe cha) had been burned, and were thus complete (scribal error? It must read: incomplete).72 The same account is

68 It is possible that this usage of dar ma for sūtra explains the pseudo-Sanskrit title of the Skye shi’i lo rgyus (cf. n. 44, 54): sang gra dar ma (“account of sūtra”?), taking into account the note from ms. PT 0220 (l. 1): le’u pa grangs myed pha snga nas, “the first of innumerable chapters.” 69 Richardson, “The Dharma that Came Down from Heaven: a Tun-huang Fragment.” 70 We know that there is at least one other Dunhuang ms. in which there are enumerated already several versions of the origins of the Tibetans which were known by the later writers. This is ms. PT 1038 (A. Macdonald, “Une lecture,” 215 ff.). [Cf. Tibetica Antiqua IV, 220ff, for more on the “Darma fallen from Heaven”—ed.]. 71 Ed. Rin chen gter mdzod chen po’i rgyab chos (16 vols, Paro 1979–80), vol. 6 and 6 (chos ‘byung, ms. A and B), vol. 7 (rnam thar). 72 Rgya dang Rgya gar gyi dar ma theg pa chen po’i chos dpe phal cher dpal Shri Lentra na yod pas, de mes tshig / de’i dpe cha da lta (missing: ma?) tshang bar yod pas.

50

r.a. stein

reprised by Dpa’o Gtsug lag phreng ba (Chos ‘byung Mkhas pa’i dga’ ston, chap. ja, 125a). The king heard the Chinese teaching of tunmen 頓門 (ston min). Yet noone was able to teach this “religion” (chos), nor even the books (darma’i dpe). It was wished to translate these “Buddhist books” (chos dpe) from India, but at Nālandā “the Indian dharmas had been burnt and were not complete.” As in the Bayang jing, the author here has reconstructed the pseudo-intellectual form from Sanskrit, enjoying the double sense of the word. As we know, Dpa’o Gtsug lag phreng ba preserved the text of two royal edicts (ja, 109; it remains unknown if he rendered them exactly or if he “arranged” them). In the first, it is a question of the “text (approved or ordered) by the king on the manner in which the religion of the Buddha appeared in Tibet formerly and later” (sangs rgyas kyi chos Bod yul du snga phyir ji ltar ‘byung ba’i bka’ mchid kyi yi ge). In the second, the same phrase is repeated with significant variants: “text of the history (lo drung gi yi ge; cf. above lo rgyus kyi gzhung) of the appearance of the religion” (chos ‘byung ba’i); repeated as: “text of the history of the practice (adoption?) of the religion of the Buddha” (sangs rgyas kyi chos mdzad pa’i lo drung gyi yi ge). We will note that the author indifferently employs the abridged form chos and the explicit form sangs rgyas kyi chos, as in the Old Tibetan Chronicle. Later (ja, 111a), he employs both the Chin. voc. (chos kyi yi ge) as well as the Ind. voc. (mdo sde). № 17. “Fabricated law.” This expression (xiangfa 像法) designates the penultimate stage in the decline of Buddhism (the ultimate being mofa 末法). The Sanskrit equivalent is pratirūpaka (Mhvy № 6688, 6689), in Tibetan ltar bcos pa, “arranged in resemblance” (but in Mhvy, the epithet applies only only to mārga and śrāmaṇa, not to dharma). In the “new translations” (Ind. voc.) we effectively find (chos) ltar bcos pa (e.g. Kanjur, № 135, translated around 800 A.D., pp. 126–4: dam pa’i chos ltar bcos pa, and № 136, pp. 135–5, same phrase = T. № 451, trans. 700–712, p. 415b 於後末世像法起時, “in the era of the end, at the time when the Fabricated Law will appear.” Xiangfa is employed four times in the Prophesy of Khotan, attributed to Chos grub (T., № 2090, p. 996a, 997a). It appears first in the title: “Account of the complete disappearance of the Fabricated Law of the tathāgata” (如來像法滅盡記; without allusion to Khotan!). This title is missing in the Kanjur, but figures in

the two vocabularies in the dunhuang manuscripts

51

the ms. ITJ 592: how the image of the Holy Religion will be destroyed” (dam pa’i chos kyi gzugs brnyan). Yet in the text, we also read: “after the nirvāṇa of the Buddha, in the lands of Khotan, of Shuluo (疎勒, Kashgar) and of Nhanxi (Bukhara), how long will last the Fabricated Law, the stūpas, etc., and who will destroy them?” (如來像法窣波等). An ambiguous expression which invites another interpretation. It was rendered literally into Tibetan (also by Chos grub? K., № 5699, pp. 299–5, ms. ITJ 597, 1a = Thomas TLTD, I, 78; also in the Candragarbha-sūtra, K., № 1025, p. 346–3, cited by the Prophesy): “after how long from the nirvāṇa of Buddha will the image(s) of the Good Religion and the stupas which have been erected perish, by whom destroyed?” (mya ngan las ‘das pa’i ‘og tu dam pa’i chos kyi gzugs brnyan dang / mchod rten bzhugs pa rnams dus dzi cam zhig nub / sus ni shig). The response is: “the images of the religion and the stupas (var. relics) will last two thousand years” (chos (ITJ dam pa’i chos) kyi gzugs brnyan dang ring bsrel (ITJ mchod rten) lo stong du gnas). In Chinese this phrase is 彼法影像及以塔廟二千年在世: “the image of this religion, its stūpas and its temples will endure two thousand years.” Same ambiguity! In the third passage (T. 997a), it states that in China, in Tibet, in Khotan, etc., “the Fabricated Law will disappear” (像法滅後). In the Kanjur (pp. 300–5), the author states only: “the practice of the holy religion will disappear” (dam pa’i chos spyod pa yang nub par gyur to), but in the ms. it has: “the image(s) of the Good Religion” (Thomas, 84, fol. 4a: dam pa’i chos spyod pa’i gzugs brnyan yang der nub par ‘gyur ro). At the end it states: “the Fabricated Law of the Buddha will be destroyed” (佛之像法從茲滅盡). Yet in Tibetan, we see in the ms. (5a): the images of the religion (Thomas, 86), as well in the Kanjur (pp. 301–3) we have simply: “the divine religion will be destroyed” (lha chos der nub bo). The editor of the Kanjur eliminated the ambiguous term. He did not replace it with the word ltar chos from the Mhvy. The ambiguity undoubtedly prevailed already in China. According to one observation that I owe to Mme Kuo Liying, the expression “Fabricated Law” (xiangfa 像法) was already in China, meaning something like: “Law (of the Buddha, of which there does not remain any more) images or statues.” In his Dictionary (1178a and 1517–1519), Mochizuki does not give more examples of this, but a text cited suggests that the decline goes from the spirit to the letter (there is no longer refuge, nor dhyāna, but one constructs stūpas, etc.). It is undoubtedly for this reason that one

52

r.a. stein

speaks, in the Prophesy, at the same time of the disappearance of this Fabricated Law (or images?) and of stūpas, temples, etc., and it is for that reason that Chos grub introduces once the expression yingxiang 影像, which designates the portraits of great persons, notably statues (like those of Hong Bian in the Dunhuang cave, № 16–17; cf. Wen Wu, 1978, № 12, p. 25a, yingtang, and Lidai minghua ji, III, § 5, trans. Acker 1954, 282). We do not have to discuss the question of the meaning, as it is the vocabulary which interests us. The equivalent gzugs brnyan may very well come from Chos grub himself. He employs it to render xiangfa 像法 in his translation of the Suvarṇaprabhāsa (ch. 24), based on the Chinese version of Yijing (Nobel, I, 313). Let us add that the association of ideas with the destruction of the stūpas of which the Prophesy speaks should be strong. In the Fanwang jing (K., p. 168–1 = T., pp. 1003a), the expression: “during the Fabricated Law, after the death of the Buddha” (佛滅度後於像法中) is translated as: mchod rten las chos byed pa’i tshe, “when one will practice the Religion beginning with the stūpas.” Vocabulary 2. № 1. “holy, divine” (cf. voc. 1, № 11 and n. 32 and n. 35). To the references cited, we may add some remarks. For the etymological relationship between ‘phrul and sprul,73 Yamaguchi Zuihō (1977) remarked that we must distinguish between ‘phrul gyi, “holy, divine” and ‘phrul pa, “transformation.” In his article, he only cites a single ancient case (a myi lha transformed into a ‘dre).74 This form is attested in the Laṅkāvatāra-sūtra where it corresponds to Skt. Nirmāṇa (kāya), nirmāṇika (Buddha) and nirmita.75 For the meaning “holy, divine,” we

73

R.A. Stein, “Un ensemble sémantique tibétain,” 417–18. Myi lha ‘dre mor ‘phruld pha’i ngo in Yamaguchi, “Katsubutsu ni tsuite,” 275–6 and n. 1. 75 Suzuki, Index to the Laṅkāvatāra sūtra: ‘phrul ba, ‘phrul bas sprul pa and ‘phrul bas sprul pa’i sangs rgyas = huafo. Cf. Edgerton, Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit Grammar and Dictionary, 1970, 302a: “magical creation, magic transformation, magically formed magic creation,” and p. 97. Another example finds itself in the Fanwang jing 梵網經 (Kanjur, pp. 172–1 = T., p. 1006c): ston cing ‘phrul ba’i bdag po = jiaohua zhu 教化主, “sovereign who transforms (civilizes) while teaching.” There is neither separation nor entrenched distinction between the two forms ‘phrul ba (= sprul pa) and ‘phrul gyi. As I have stated elsewhere (Stein, “Saint et divin,” 273–4), the translators of Ind. voc. have retained rnam ‘phrul and rdzu ‘phrul for 74

the two vocabularies in the dunhuang manuscripts

53

may add examples from the Bayang jing 八陽經. At the beginning of the title, PT 0749 has ‘phrul gyi, but PT 0744 has ‘phags pa. We also find sangs rgyas kyi ‘phrul gyi sngags for tuoluoni shenzhou 陀羅尼神咒 (§ 23a, T., p. 1424b = PT 0746, l. 68; PT 0749, l. 145), whereas in the Kanjur we have sngags kyi snying po (p. 275–2; deest in P. 106). In the Leng qie shi zi ji 楞伽師資記, we also find ‘phrul gyi chos for “holy View” (sheng Dao 聖道, Ka, 16b, = T., p. 1284a). In the Fanwang jing, generally in Chin. voc., we also find ‘phags pa as well as ‘phrul gyi. The first is three times the epithet of xian 賢, “sages” and sheng 聖, “saints,” but once we find ‘phrul gyi dge ‘dun, “holy clergy” for xian sheng seng 賢聖僧, “wise and holy clergy,” k. 172–2 = T. 1007a; a term analogous to ‘phrul gyi byig shu. The word ‘phags pa = xiansheng is attested in the inscription of 821 and in the Sino-Tibetan Vocabulary PT 1261, whereas many purely Tibetan texts simultaneously employ the two words. We will further note that the archaic use of ‘phrul gyi survived in the later texts. Nyang ral speaks of btsan po ‘phrul mnga’ (ba) apropos of Srong btsan sgam po (rnam thar, p. 278–280), and the Sba bzhed has the same expression (p. 79, l. 5). Ne’u paṇḍita (xiiith–xivth century) speaks of the “wise” or “crafty” (‘phrul) subjects.76 Dpa’o Gtsug lag phreng ba does likewise (ja, 124a): the minister Khri sum rje prepared a ruse (‘phrul bshams te) and (ja, 91a): the king understood the ruse of the ministers (blon po’i ‘phrul du mkhyen nas). № 2. “Heretics” (tīrthika, Mhvy, № 3320). The opposition mur ‘dug vs mu stegs was remarked upon long ago in the Chan texts. The Bayang jing confirms it (e.g. § 7, T., p. 1422c, “to be defeated by heretical demons and heretics” (邪魔外道) = PT 0746, l. 3: log par lta ba’i mur dug dang / yon po’i bdud, but PT 0106, II, l. 71: bdud sdig can dang / mu stegs can). We may add examples from the Fanwang jing. In the supernatural capacities, but lha “divine” for the sense organs which are equipped with them. However, in place of lha mig “divine eye,” ms. PT 0239 (Buddhist) employs the word ‘phrul gyi myig (not “wise” or “holy,” but “supernatural”). This use is also attested in the Prophesy of Khotan (of Chos grub(?) which employs Ind. voc.): “contemplation with the divine eye” in Chinese (T., p. 997a 以天眼觀), but “regard of the supernatural eye” in Tibetan (‘phrul gyi mig gis bltas nas, K., p. 301–1, Thomas, 84). This example shows how the translators, while drawing from the same vocabulary of idiomatic Tibetan, have adopted different meanings according to which they employ one or the other of the two vocabularies. 76 Ed. Rare Tibetan Historical and Literary Texts from the Library of Tsepon Shakabpa, 71.

54

r.a. stein

two cases, the two vocabularies are combined. In the second, we have: it is a sin to accept the sūtra (chos kyi yi ge) and the monastic regulations of heretics (log par lta’o cog) which arise from a heresy (mur ‘dug gi chos) and from the two vehicles, from the śrāvaka” (T., p. 1005c 受持二乘聲聞外道惡見一切禁戒邪見經律; analogous phrase, K., pp. 171–2 = T., p. 1006a 橫教他二乘聲聞經律外道邪見論);77 and: “it is a religion of demons and heretics” (K., pp. 174–4, mur ‘dug dang / bdud kyi chos = T., p. 1009b 外道天鬼).78 We also find mur ‘dug in a text of divination by the twelve nidāna which employs the Chin. voc. (PT 0055, l. 124, 136; cf. Vocabulary 2, № 19). Another form, mu ‘jug pa, is attested by S. Ch. Das’s dictionary (= tīrtha) and by ms. PT 0443 which explains the “heresies” of the evil “tantrics” (sorcery, etc.). There, one asks Mahābala to protect the faithful against those who do wrong, to know the abusive “tantrics” (sngags log pa), the heretics, the “witch-goddesses” (‘phra men ma), all those obscurely “attached to Bon and Yol” (for this last word, cf. n. 41c). № 9–14. Yon and compounds. It is necessary first to dismiss homophones (yon po, g.yon) which belong to a different semantic complex. The meanings of these other words may be classed into groups according to an etymology which takes account of religious concepts. A. Beginning with yon itself. Specified as the complement of the verb “to offer” (gsol, ‘bul). It is translated by Chin. gongyang 供養. Examples: Fawang jing 法王經 (T., p. 1389b = K., pp. 142–3, “offerings made to the Buddha,” sang rgyas la yon gsol); Bayang jing, the

77 The same critique is expressed in Ind. voc. in ms. PT 0842 (Lalou Catalog): “summarizing the doctrines of the three vehicles, great and small, of Buddhists, of heretics, etc.” (sangs rgyas pa’i theg pa che chung gsum dang / mu stegs la sogs pa’i lta ba mdor bsdus te). 78 The Chinese expression is reprised textually in an apocryphal sūtra (T. 2879, Zhengming jing, p. 1364b); when one recites the mantra, “the demons (and?) the heretics” submit (waidao tianmo 外道天魔). The analogous expressions are found in the “sūtra of the Eight Buddhas” (T. 430, p. 75b 象魔及外道; this is the model of the Bayang jing) and in the sūtra, probably apocryphal, of the Ullambana (T. 685, p. 779b): “will be rendered incapable of harming “the gods of the sky, the gods of the earth, the heretical demons, the heretics, the Daoists, the gods Four Celestial Kings” (天神地神邪魔外道道士四天王神)). Same expressions in the Bayang jing § 16, T., p. 1423c xieshi 邪師 and xieshen 邪神, § 21, p. 1424 xieshi); cf. Vocabulary I, № 10.

the two vocabularies in the dunhuang manuscripts

55

gods offer flowers and incense (PT 0748, l. 73: yon gsol zhing = T., p. 1423). The expression is well attested in these purely Tibetan writings, notably the wishes for the great personages (smon lam or bsngo ba = pariṇāma). Thus, in the Prayers of De ga g.yul tshal, the author speaks of the merit (bsod nams) acquired by the ministers who have reconstructed a temple (PT 0016, fol. 27b): they are great “donors” (yon bdag) because they “offered donations” (28b, yon du phul nas and yon phul ba’i yon bdag). These donations or offerings consist of parasols (30a, yon bla re dang / gdugs phul bas) and flowers (30b, yon me to gsol bas) or music (31b, yon rol mo gsol bas). I pass on other examples (38b, 39a, 40a, and even as a verb, yon ba, 40b). It is likewise in the other prayers for the king (of c. 815 to 846), entirely in Ind. voc. (e.g. PT 0230, l. 12, yon rnams mang po phul ba’i bsod nams); or further in ms. PT 0116.2 (mythological account of the Dmu and of the Phya): offerings (yon ‘bul) to the gods (l. 11: lha la; l. 21: sku bla ni) and in mss ITJ 733–735 (History of the Ages, Thomas AFL, III and IV), offerings to the gods (l. 29–39, yon ‘bul, lha la mchod; and l. 35, lha yon tsam ‘bul). B. By extension, the same word (preceded by sku—honorific if the recipient is a great personage) has two meanings, B.1., “merit” thus acquired and B.2., “religious benefit” (happiness, luck, etc.) that the sender or the recipient draw from it. In Ind. voc., this meaning is rendered by yon tan (Mhvy 1704, 4602: guṇa; e.g. Prayers of De ga, Thomas TLTD, II, 112, l. 12: yon tan sku tshe ‘di nyid kyis bzhes par gyur cig, “that by these (works) of merit and the longevity (of the king) might be assured,” but one also states simply yon in the same Prayer (fol. 41b): by the merit (yon kyis) of constructing temples, etc., by the ministers, the king will have a long life. Here one speaks of the merit of the donors, elsewhere that of the recipient: “the merit (sku yon) of king-ministers (rje blon), holy and divine, such a benefit.” (41a); in a fragment (Thomas, II, 109, l. 1) we read: lha sras kyi sku yon bla skyes nar ma, “the merit of the king which augments and perpetuates itself”; and in various prayers for the kings, we have PT 2122, lha sras kyi sku yon bla skyes su, and the analogous forms in PT 0130, PT 0999 (beginning) and PT 0134 (title). Yon alone for “merit” is also attested in the Zhanguo ce 戰國策 (§ 3, l. 15): “that ‘Gvi not lose his reign, it is the merit of Thang tsu,” ‘Gvi srid ma stord pa ni Than tsu’i yon lagso = 魄氏復全唐且之說也.

56

r.a. stein

The two meanings are thus easily confounded. Sometimes we find (sku) yon, sometimes yon tan and bsod nams. The confusion is above all apparent in Chin. voc. It should not be imputed to the ignorance of the translators, but resulted undoubtedly from the imprecise redaction of the original Chinese. Not only have the Chinese often confounded the two terms of the Ind. voc. (guṇa, “quality” and puṇya, “merit”), both translated by de 德 and gongde 功德. They also assimilated the Buddhist term gongde, “merit,” to the purely Chinese word fu 福, “happiness.” This word designates first the part of the sacrificial meat consumed by the sacrificer who takes from it a religious benefit, then this benefit itself. In the Bayang jing, a third equivalent word, jili 吉利, “splendor and procure the benefits (advantages),” is often added. Before these hesitations, the translators have retained the following expressions in Tibetan: Ind. voc. bsod nams (PT 0106, PT 0454 v) = Chin. voc. legs pa’i dpal (Kanjur) = Chinese fu 福 (T., p. 1422c), gongde 功德 (p. 1422c), de (p. 1422c), fude (福德) in the Fawang jing 法王經, fol. 18a. Ind. voc. dpal yon (PT 0106 and Kanjur) = Chinese fu 福 (T., p. 1422c). Chin. voc. legs pa’i dpal (Kanjur, PT 0748) = Chinese jili 吉利 (p. 1424a); lha dpal ’go and shin tu dge zhing phan (PT 0748, l. 108, 111) = Chinese jili (p. 1423c); legs pa’i phan (PT 2206, PT 0746, l. 59) = (wang 望) ji 吉, “(to hope for) glory” (p. 1424a); legs pa’i yon stobs (PT 0748, l. 110) = fu 福 (p. 1423c); legs pa’i don = gongde 功德 (Ueyama, I, 206).

I have not examined all the mss. However, this first comparison permits us to note the hesitations of the translators and to better define the etymology of the expression legs pa’i dpal. The first element, legs pa, corresponds to the value of de, “merit,” but first: “virtue, the Good.” The second, dpal, without doubt corresponds to “great splendor,” jili 吉利, often associated with “great merit” and the advantages that are derived from it. The variant lha dpal (‘go) is interesting. This expression was common in the properly Tibetan usage (honorific nomenclature).79 The two words are sometimes separated and equivalent. In the ms. PT 0055 (divination, partly in Chin. voc.), the author indicates the results of a good dream: “this will be ‘heaven’ and ‘god (divine)’ and ‘splendor,’ and one will be honored” (l. 192, gnam dang lha dang dpal

79

Examples in Stein, “Saint et divin,” 247–8.

the two vocabularies in the dunhuang manuscripts

57

byas te / srid mtho zhing legsu ‘ong). If legs pa’i dpal designates simultaneously both the merit and the benefit that is gained from it, dpal alone also has the meaning of “splendid situation,” “divine state.” In the Maxims (PT 0992.5, end, and PT 0126), the author tells us that “those who do the Good (legs) take rebirth in a “splendid” (divine) state (dpal du skyes), and those who do Evil sully the gods (lha) and become demons (byur; PT 0126, l. 90, PT 1284). The same expression is found again in the ms. PT 0972 (which assimilates mu stegs and bon po): “to do the Good brings great ‘splendor,’ to do the Evil causes one to become a demon” (fol. 2v, legs par spyad na dpal du che // nyes par spyad na byur du ‘ong). In analogous fashion, this opposition is also formulated in the Dialogue of the two brothers (PT 1283, l. 459–60): if one speaks of the Good (legs), the mouth is a door of splendor (= the gods, dpal gyi sgo mo) and language a supernatural key (phrul gyi lde myig, where phrul = lha); if one speaks of Evil (nyes), it is a door of harm (= demons, byur gyi sgo mo) and a demon’s hachet (bdud kyi sta re). In this context, dpal is thus equivalent to lha, and this splendid or divine state is the result of Virtue (legs).79a This example may clarify the expression legs pa’i dpal. The stereotypical phrases of which it makes a part (if one practices this sūtra, one will obtain great merit, etc.) are parallel to others in which the good actions are recompensed by a good rebirth and the contrary by a bad one (cf. below № 16–17). In these contexts, we may understand the association and like equivalence of dpal and of lha, “gods,” opposed to “demons” (byur). In the Tibetan usage of the viiith and ixth centuries, lha has (at least) three meanings: 1) gods (of Tuṣita heaven, etc.), 2) the soul of the dead which may become a “god” (Chinese shen 神) and 3) buddhas and bodhisattvas (whence the frequent term lha chos for Buddhism).80 As the expression dpal du skyes, “glorious rebirth,” designates the recompense of Good, like the parallel formulas for the implied compensation of “rebirth in heaven” or to obtain the state of a buddha, as finally dpal

79a The word “splendid, glorious” (dpal = śrī?) appears in many names from the series of the Seven Buddhas of Bhaiṣajyaguru and in those of the Eight Buddhas. In the list of sūtra of the Vocabulary of Dpal byangs (l. 24), bkra shis brgyad pa’i gzungs corresponds to Ba jixiang shenshou jing 八吉祥神咒經. In these translations into “new language,” bkra shis replaces dpal. 80 For 1) cf. the dge ba’i lha = shanshen 善神 (“gods of the Good”), Hindu gods became protectors of Buddhism; for 2) cf. the case of the Chinese ritual for the dead executed by Wencheng in the Sba bzhed (p. 3, l. 15), a ritual called tshe, i.e. Chin. zhai 齋.

58

r.a. stein

is equivalent to lha, the formula dpal du skyes is the equivalent of lha, the formula dpal du skyes is equivalent to that which we will see in a moment: lha (yul) du skyes, “born in the land of the gods” or, eventually, lha ru skyes, born as a god or buddha.81 № 15–17a. Paradise and hell. The authors speak sometimes of ways of reincarnation in general (gati), good or bad, sometimes only of those which are the most typical (heaven and hell). A grouping in two pairs of words already imposed itself from a formal perspective: in the two cases sdig is opposed to lha. In the Bayang jing 八陽經 (p. 1423a), the author opposes hell (diyu 地嶽) and heaven (tianshang 天上). In Ind. voc. (PT 0106, II, l. 128 and PT 0730) we have dmyal ba (Kanjur: mnar med vs mtho ris. Yet in Chin. voc. (PT 0748, l. 64–5), we find sdig yul vs dge ba’i gnas. Elsewhere (T., p. 1425a), avīci hell is translated by dmyal ba on the one hand (PT 0106) and by sdig yul + dmyal ba on the other (PT 0742; for this genre of mixing, cf. n. 24). Elsewhere still (p. 1423b), we only have sdig yul in PT 0748 (l. 87, Chin. voc.), but ngan pa’i lam in PT 0746 (l. 29). There is a properly Buddhist vocabulary. We do not encounter it in the mythological accounts and the archaic funerary rituals (except lha

81 In a love poem written written on a repaired piece of paper from a Dunhuang ms., we read: “the night we cannot separate; we took the Buddha as witness; (likewise), if, one day, we become gods (or spirits, buddhas), it is still this life which we (find) better” (or perhaps: as if, at night, we become . . .”), nub dang bral mi nuso (repeated) / sangs rgyas ‘di ni dpang dug sol pa’o / nam lhar grub na ni che ‘di la mchog go (Xizang wenyi 西藏文藝, 1980, II, 62, erroneous translation). The same expression in the Bayang jing, ms. PT 0744 (Ind. voc.): mtho ris kyi lhar skye zhing , contracted to mtho ris su skye bar ‘gyur to (T., p. 1423a 而生天上) = ms. PT 0106 (II, l. 130, mtho ris kyi lhar skye zhing, abridged to mtho ris su skye’o in Kanjur, pp. 274–4), and in the Skye shi’i lo rgyus (fol. Kma, recto): shi ba de la phan bar ‘ong // yar te lha ru skye bar rung, “(if one goes well) that will be used for the dead; when rising he could be born a god (in heaven, by the gods).” Similar words also in the Rāmāyaṇa (Balbir, L’histoire de Rāma en tibétain, l. 206) apropos the death (gum ba) of a monkey: “dead, you are reborn as a god, and your heart will be satisfied(?),” lha ltar skye bas, bla ‘grang, but in another version (de Jong, “The Tun-huang manuscripts of the Tibetan Rāmāyaṇa story,” § XXVII, l. 207): shi bar lhar ‘grub pas bla grang; and elsewhere (de Jong, § XXI, l. 143): “being born a god, although you were killed, your heart(?),” lhar skye bas / gum yang bla. These expressions have survived. For the death of ‘Bum lde (mgon, xiiith century), king of Gung thang, the chronicle of this lineage employs the expression: gnam gyi lhar gshegs so; “it is part (became) god of heaven” (Deb ther dvangs shel, ms. 14a).

the two vocabularies in the dunhuang manuscripts

59

yul, but this “land of the gods” is only one of numerous lands of all sorts of divinities, sring yul, etc.). In these texts, sometimes the land of the dead is associated with the Land of Bliss (dga’ yul / gshin yul; cf. Stein 1971, 497), sometimes lands of bliss are opposed to lands of suffering (dga’ dang skyid pa’i yul vs nyon mongs sgug pa’i yul, ibid., 499). Contrariwise, in the Buddhist adaption of the bon po funerary ritual (PT 0239, Stein 1970), the author utilizes the Ind. voc. (dmyal ba, mtho ris, and also yon tan, bsod nams, ‘phags pa, save one case: smad lnga for the limbs of the body; cf. Vocabulary 2, № 6). However, we find the Chin. voc. of the Bayang jing in the Maxims of the wise or holy bhikṣu: “to never be liberated from the three evil gati” (PT 0992.5, fol. 10v, l. 5, sdig lam gsum las thar myi myong), to which is opposed: “to obtain the view (gati) of the gods” (lha lam thob, fol. 14r, l. 2–3). Elsewhere (10v, l. 6), the sdig yul is spoken of, and (11v, l. 6–7) sdig yul is opposed to lha yul. It is likewise in two other mss of the same genre, PT 0126.1 and PT 1274, l. 20: “nobles or villains, all have the same hell; at the gate of ‘heaven,’ great and small are equal” (mthon dman kun kyang sdig yul gcig // lha yul sgo mor che chung mchungs). Mme A. Macdonald (1971, 370–373) thought that the evoking rites are those of the indigenous religion. This is not certain. Such critiques aimed at funerary rites are frequent in the orthodox and apocryphal sūtras (e.g. Bayang jing, 1423b–c). In the text in question there is also an allusion to the Tibetan conception of the Age of Calamities (skyin dang), but there the author employs Chin. voc. Without being able to confirm it, a Chinese inspiration is possible. One detail seems to indicate it (PT 0126.1, l. 53). In order to prepare the feasts, one kills cows and sheep, and one traverses the mountains holding prepared falcons (?), khra sgrig thogs shing ri lung rgyug (= PT 1284, l. 54 and PT 0992.5, fol. 12v, l. 1). To my knowledge, the Tibetans did not practice falconry. In contrast, it was common among the Turks (Uighurs) and in China (Tang).82

82 One man, carrying a falcon on his fist, found himself among the mural paintings of the tomb of prince Yide (around 700 A.D.), at Qianxian (乾县乾陵懿德太子; Xi’an museum). The hunt with dogs and falcons is attested in a Chinese Dunhuang ms., and there precisely in the context of a Buddhist critique of the “butchering of living beings to receive his companions” (P. 2449, Demiéville, Le concile de Lhasa, 243, dated after 832 A.D.). We also find there (245) a diatribe against “sacrifices to the divinities in order to request their favor and happiness (☐祠鬼神乞其恩福), a phrase that Demiéville believed referred “evidently to indigenous paganism.” It is nothing of the sort. Such condemnations were common in China and aim at the “abusive cults” (yinsi

60

r.a. stein

№ 18–20. Minor divinities. It is sometimes difficult to distinguish between the two vocabularies. The words lha and klu are common in both (deva, nāga), as srin (Mhvy, srin po = rākṣasa). The word ‘dre does not figure into the Mhvy, but is employed in the Ind. voc. of the funerary ritual (Stein 1970) and other indigenous texts. The word gdon, which we also find, is itself attested in the Mhvy (graha). The word yi dags (Mhvy, preta) is absent from most of the Tibetan writings of an archaic sort,83 but in the Baying jing 八陽經, it appears in both vocabularies. We have seen it before (32). For T., p. 1423c, cult of the pretas (求邪神拜餓鬼), we have lha ma srin dang yi dags . . . and ‘dre dgon (Kanjur, 274–5) or lha ma srin dang ‘dre . . . and yi dags dgon (PT 2006, p. 2; Ind. voc.). Similar words in the Chin. voc. (PT 0749, l. 87–88): lha ma srin dang yi dags . . . gdon; PT 0748, l. 105, analogous). The missing passage in PT 0106 (Ind. voc.), and in Uighur only retains preta (p. 39). The words ‘dre dgon serve to translate various words designating malfaisant beings. For Bayang jing p. 1422b, the Chinese texts exists in two variants: “numerous are those who do not call upon the Buddha” (不念佛者多; textually in PT 0106); 2) “numerous are those who pray to the divinities” (求神者多), rendered by “offerings to the demons” (‘dre dgon la chod pa ni mang, PT 0745) and by “[they] venerate demons and sorcerers” in Uighur. Elsewhere, ‘dre dgon corresponds to chimei wangliang 魑魅魍魎 (imps) and wogui 恶鬼, “malicious demons” (T., p. 1422c = PT 0106.2, l. 70–71 and 78; PT 0746, l. 2 separates ‘dre and dgon).

淫祀)—local, Chinese cults with sacrafice to minor or popular divinities. We also have examples of this in the edifying Buddhist literature, of indigenous origin, where they aim at the cult of the devas or the non-Buddhist sacrifices (Chavannes, Cinq cents contes et apologues extraits du Tripiṭaka chinois, C. 114, 117, 118: the prayers and sacrifices to the devas are useless and condemned). One list of funerary rites of the abhorrent heretics finds itself in the Skye shi’i lo rgyus (Imaeda, Histoire du cycle de la naissance et de la mort, 71–2). In the Bayang jing 八陽經 (§ 21, T., p. 1424a), the author critiques “the imbeciles who believe in the heretic teachers (here, the Chinese “sorcerers”) who interrogate the oracle in the hope of finding splendor, who do not practice the Good and accomplished all sorts of evil actions.” The Uighur version adds to this phrase, for precision: “they kill living beings and make their food from it; parents, brothers and friends gather and execute the rites” (with the meat of the killed animals). [For more on the yinsi (abusive or excessive cults, cf. Annuaire du Collège de France 1970, translated in this volume—ed.] 83 We find it in the Old Tibetan Chronicle (see note) where they gloss some Buddhist terms.

the two vocabularies in the dunhuang manuscripts

61

More significant is the form lha srin, lha ma srin translated guishen 鬼神 (Leng qie shi zi ji 楞伽師資記, 16a–b = T., p. 1284a; Fanwang jing 梵網經, Kanjur, 170–2 = T., p. 1005a et saepe). The translators have perfectly understood the meaning of the Chinese term. In order to translate it, they forged an expression which rendered well the entire sense in conformity with the Tibetan usage. In fact, in each of the two languages the binomes are fixed.84 The author writes “demons/ divinities” in Chinese, but “divinities/demons” in Tibetan. The Chinese expression does not signify “gods and demons,” but minor, local, indigenous divinities who only become malicious if one does not render worship unto them. The translators have understood it well. In intercalating ma between lha and srin, they rendered the ambiguous character of these divinities, semi-gods, semi-demons or a mix of the two.85 Another word is proper to the Chin. voc. This is ye ‘brog. In the Bayang jing, it does not correspond to a defined word, but marks the indefinite cause of a premature death, of an unforeseen accident. The author states (1422c): if this sūtra is recited, one obtains long life and “there is no premature death” (無橫夭). In the Kanjur, this is translated: ye ‘drog gis mi tshugs par ‘gyur (p. 274–3) and in PT 0106, we have: dus ma yin bar glo bur myi ‘chi’o (literal translation). Thanks to this reading, “children are born easily . . . and do not die prematurely” (T., 1422c; 兒即昜生 . . . 而不中夭). The translations have (Kanjur, pp. 274–5): “the demons do not fly by their vitality, the ye ‘brog do not kill them” (mi ‘am ci la sogs pas mdangs mi ‘phrog cing / ye ‘brog ‘chi bas mi byed) or (PT 0748, l. 108): “the newly born will not be carried off by the yen ‘brog” (bu stsa’ang btsas la yen ‘brog gis mi khyer). Elsewhere (1422b), the author states that the heretics will attract many miseries to themselves (獲如是者). As above, ms. PT 0106 (II, l. 36) translates literally (sdug bsngal). However, in the Kanjur (274–2) the author interprets: “many beings will have short lives, will be killed by the ye ‘brog and will have many miseries” (sdug bsngal). Yet this category of demon is attested in the purely Tibetan texts (ms. PT 0055, divination, l. 19: “one will die by the yen ‘drog,” yen ‘drog gis ‘chi ste, etc.; Thomas AFL, text III, l. 36; text IV, l. 142). The An example above, 17, Chin. yinyang 陰陽 and tiandi 天地, always in that order, reflect the Tib. stang/dbyal and sribs/gdags, always in that order. 85 Likewise, it is stated lcam ma gdung, “half-beam, half-cross,” for a marriage between partners from two different generations. 84

62

r.a. stein

word does not figure in Mhvy.86 However, it is maintained in the later tradition. It finds itself in a song of Milarepa imitating a bon po healing ritual (Hoffmann 1950, 280: “360 kinds of disaster caused by the demons”) and in the Rgyud bzhi (II, ch. 31) to which the Vaiḍūrya sngon po dedicates a long explanation (Dharamsala ed., 248v, 250r). Once, guishen 鬼神 certainly designates the ancestors. The reading of the sūtra at the time of the funeral causes men and divinities to be happy (諸人愛樂鬼神愛樂). This passage is missing in PT 0106 (Ind. voc.) and in PT 0748 (l. 113). Yet in the mss PT 0749 (l. 101) and PT 0746 (l. 51–2), in Chin. voc. guishen is translated by lha mtshun, “god-ancestors” (Kanjur, 274–5: lha btsun).87 The Uighur version gives a paraphrase: “spirits, demons and underworld forces” (ol üzüt—souls, spirits—yäklär—demons). It is aberrant. In a celebrated remark attributed to Confucious, the cult of the ancestors is designated by 享鬼神 (先進) (Lunyu 論語, § xianjin). This guishen 鬼神 often designates the ancestors. The translators of the Bayang jing would have known that. The word mgon mtshun, “ancestor” is also employed in the translation of the Shujing 書經 (see Vocabulary 4, № 3) where it is associated with sku bla (l. 33) and with the tablets of the ancestors of seven generations (七也之祖). The Chinese equivalent is vague, but at the end one speaks of the “ancient customs of funerary rites and offerings to the ancestors” (shi bdur dang lha mtshun mchod pa’i lugs), an intelligent interpretation of the Chinese formula sangji 喪祭, “funerary sacrifices.” The word mtshun, “ancestor,” is attested in Mhvy (№ 6847, havyam = lha la gtor ba, “offerings to the gods,” and № 6848, kavyam = mtshun la gtor ba, “offerings to the ancestors”). According to Monier-Williams, these two words are employed in the Mahābhārata and in the Laws of Manu. The word mtshun is defined in the dictionary of Dpal khang pa (xvith century) who cites the anterior sources: “god of the male ancestors” (pha mes pho lha). In the modern dictionary by Chos grags and Dagyab, the definition becomes: “non-Buddhist (lay) god, (one of five) protector gods (= the pho lha) transmitted since the time

86 Curiously, we do not find more in the Tibetan lists of minor divinities from the mss PT 1285, 1042 (bon po ritual), 1060 (horses), 1047 (divination). 87 It is said that this is a modernization by incomprehension. Yet the alterate mtshun/btsun is already attested in one and the same text (Dunhuang ms.: mgon tshung / mgon btsun in Thomas AFL, text IA, § 59–60 (the Ancestor Phya) and ITJ 739 (ibid., Add., 4b, l. 4).

the two vocabularies in the dunhuang manuscripts

63

of the ancestors; also Yāma.” We would need a more narrow study to define certain divergences. The “offerings to the ancestors” (mtshun gtor) figure among the ill omens in the Rgyud bzhi (Dharamsala ed., 94). Rather, it concerns a cult of the dead. The monk-king Ye shes ‘od (xith century) complains that the “offerings to the tomb” ceased (dur sa’i mchod pa; Sog bzlog pa, Writings, I, 441). In the A mdo chos ‘byung (216b), the word mtshun lha is utilized in order to designate the onggon (“ancestors”) of the Mongols. In the ancient tradition, one speaks of mgon mtshun phya (cf. n. 87), divine ancestors of the kings descended from the sky. Vocabulary 3, № 1. Yin Yang 陰陽 In the Bayang jing 八陽經 (§ 20, 1424a), the author states: “But Heaven is yang, Earth is yin; the moon is yin, the sun is yang.” In certain mss, the sexes are inverted. The translators have loyally followed. In the ms. PT 0746 (l. 57), we have: yong gnam ni stangs, sa ni dbyal; zla ba ni pho nyi ma ni mo (sky = husband, earth = woman). Yet in the ms. PT 0729 (a single folio), we find: gnam ni sribs / sa ni gdags / zla ba ni sribs / nyi ma ni gdags (sky = shady side of the mountain, ubac; the earth = sunny side, adret; and in PT 0748, l. 124–5: yong ni gnam gi bag ni mdags, sa’i bag ni srib [?]). The translations are very instructive. The translators, Chinese or Tibetan or both, understood the etymology of Yin 陰 and Yang 陽, adret and ubac, and they knew that this binome served as a classification (sky/earth, masculine/feminine). In order to render it, they had to make an intelligent choice with the Tibetan vocabulary of the era, with recourse to the binomes to do everything. One of them, srib/bdags, reproduces at the same time the etymology of yin-yang (adret/ubac) and the phonetic aspect of the alternation i/a. The other translators preferred the classification masculine/feminine in choosing another archaic term: stangs/dbyal.88 The last is common in the Dunhuang mss (e.g. Bacot DTT, 20; Rāmāyaṇa, Balbir, PT 0981, l. 2 and 143) and it has survived in the later archaic texts (bon po, such as Klu ‘bum, Gzi brjid and Mdzod phug; and lamaist, as in the “dubious” tantra Gsang ba snying po, chap. 9). As for srib/gdags, we ought 88

Examples in Taube, “Zu einigen Texten der Tibetischen brda-gsar-rniṅ Literature,” 490–92. The same classification appears in the Dialogue of Kong tse (Soymié, “L’entrevue de Confucius et de Hiang T’o,” l. 56 = p. 1248, l. 55; missing in Chinese): sky = father, earth = mother, sun = husband (khyo), moon = wife (chung ma).

64

r.a. stein

to remember that, in the later mythology, the names of the reigns of the first seven ancestral kings commence with the binomes: sky and earth, so (space?) and dog (earth?), gdags and srib. Yet already in the ancient mss (PT 1285), the masculine gshen priests, associated with white and with adret, are opposed to the others, women, associate with black and with ubac (Stein 1971, 505). The Tibetans thus had representations analogous to those of the Chinese. The translators utilized them advisedly. № 2–4. Confucianist morals. A list of these virtues is found in the Bayang jing 八陽經 (§ 9, 1422c– 1423a). Rather than resorting to Chinese techniques (geomancy, etc.), it is sufficient to recite this sūtra so that in case of the construction of a house, the gods of the soil are appeased, the demons rejected. Thanks to the merit acquired, “the house will be eternally at peace, the buildings, solid. Wealth, honor and fortune will be obtained without effort. Distant voyages, leaving with an army, administrative career and (commercial) prosperity will turn to one’s advantage. The family will be elevated and its members will be distinguished (see № 5). There will be a hundred sons and a thousand grandsons. The father will have kindness, the sons, filial piety; the sons will be loyal, the daughters, chaste; the elder brother respectful, the younger brother obedient; husband and wife in accord and in harmony” (父慈子孝男忠女貞兄恭弟順夫妻和睦). The words selected for the translation of virtuous principles are found in both vocabularies: 1) Chin. voc., PT 0748, l. 19, PT 0749, l. 6, PT 0746, l. 12: pha (ma) ni byams / bu (tsa) ni sri zhu che / bu po (pho) ni drang (0749, 0746: snying che) / bu mo ni gtsang / phu nu (0749, 0746: bu pho) ni ri mo che / nu bo (0746 bu) ni log pa myi byed / khyo shug ni ‘dum (0746, 0749: khyo shug gnyis ni mthun (‘dum) shing khrel ltas che); 2) Ind. voc., PT 0106, II, l. 112, PT 0454, fol. 7, PT 0744, fol. 13a: pha ni byams / bu ni sri zhu che ba / pho ni chu gang che / mo ni rigs myi sun pa / phu nu dang khyo shug mdza’ shing ‘dum pa (0454: ‘dum zhing mdza’ ba). In the Kanjur (pp. 274–3), the entire passage was abridged into a single phrase: “the children have great filial piety” (bu tsha pha ma la sri zhu che ba).

the two vocabularies in the dunhuang manuscripts

65

In the first phrase, the translators of PT 0748 and of the Kanjur have added the mother to the Chinese text. Undoubtedly, they knew 1st that, in the analogous Tibetan texts, it was often said “respect for father and mother” (e.g. PT 0992, fol. 3v, l. 1: pha ma la sri zhu che ba ni, etc.); 2nd that in Chinese, the epithet “kindness” (ci 慈) characterizes in general the mother, the father being “severe” (yan 嚴).89 The word sri zhu, which translates here “filial piety” (xiao 孝), is common in the purely Tibetan writings of the era. In the Maxims (PT 0992.5, fol. 13r–v), a paragraph is dedicated to that virtue (sri zhu’i mdo bshad pa), but especially describes the sufferings of the mother’s pregnancy to conclude that one should respect her for it. The word chu gang of the third phrase (sometimes chab gang) is equally common in that literature (e.g. Stein 1971, n. 24). The sense is often “force (of character), courage” (an epithet of a warrior, dpa’ bo). Yet the meaning attested here (zhong 忠, loyal, honest) is found also.90 The word is sometimes associated with khrel (ltas), “decency, modesty.” The two words in question are not found in Mhvy, but survive in the later texts (see the dictionaries). It is otherwise more curious that, in the Bayang jing 八陽經, the word chu gang only appears in the versions in Ind. voc. The translators employ this vocabulary thus not unaware of the ancient words. This seems evident, but it is good to note it. The inverse is also true. In the fifth phrase, only the versions in Chin. voc. have retained 89 Cf. Soymié, “L’entrevue de Confucius et de Hiang T’o,” 336, in Chinese: “I have a ‘severe’ father (yan fu 嚴父) that I should serve; I have a ‘benevolent’ mother (ci mu 慈母) that I should nourish; I have an older brother whom I should obey (shun 順) and a younger brother whom I should educate.” In the Tibetan version, the author did not retain the typical epithet for the father, but for the mother he says snying rje can, “compassionate.” We must note that the author employs the word ci 慈, “benevolent” as well for the father, and likewise for the sovereign. In the treaty of 821–2 (West, l. 23, 48), the word shri zhu (and bkur sti) corresponds to ciqin 慈親 or cijin 慈近 (“near and benevolent”) and applies to good kin relations (gnyen). 90 Old Tibetan Chronicle (Bacot, 102, l. 30; 104, l. 16); cf. Stein, “Saint et divin,” 263–4 where I committed an error in translating ri mo by “insignia.” As the Bayang jing 八陽經 demonstrates, ri mo signifies “to venerate, to estimate.” In the dictionaries, chu gang is explained by snying stobs, “courage” (Mhvy, 4550, 4327). Yet Jäschke indicates (after the Mdzangs blun): “virtue, honesty.” That meaning is attested in the ancient mss (PT 0239, fol. 23 = Stein, “Un document ancien relatif aux rites funéraires des bon-po tibétains,” 161: chu gang dang khrel ltas, a sign of affection for the family; in the Shujing 書經 (P. 986, l. 33, 153–4), the author states in Chinese that the malicious king Zhou 紂 of the Yin did not observe the “five virtues (which regulate the familial and social rapport),” wulun 五論, wuchang 五常 (benevolence, rectitude, etc.). In Tibetan, we read: “he did not practice the five kinds of principles (srid pa), the custom of filial respect and honesty” (sri zhu dang chu gang gi lugs / srid pa rnam lnga).

66

r.a. stein

for brothers the expression ri mo (che) that, itself, is attested in Mhvy (№ 1753, 1756, 1784 and 2434: “to venerate the elders,” rgan po la ri mor byed pa). In contrast, for husband/wife, we have in both versions the word khyo shug which finds itself in Mhvy (№ 3905). I have already noted the mixing of both vocabularies. Both must have existed simultaneously (before and/or after 814). We may be astonished at the composition (or at the current state) of the Mhvy. The technical vocabulary is not a problem. The authors forged terms that they thought best adapted to the sense of the Sanskrit words. Yet the numerous words of the general vocabulary, drawn from existent translations of Sanskrit texts, belonged naturally to the ground of the Tibetan language. In this ground, there is also ri mo as well as sri zhu and chu gang. Why was the first retained and the others not?91 Whatever the sense, as has already been stated, the Tibetan translation does not correspond necessarily or exactly to the Chinese word translated: sri zhu may have a value a little different from xiao 孝, “filial piety.” Yet for the content, we may make some observations: 1st the devotion to the parents and the respect of the elderly is not exclusively Chinese; we find them also in India and in Buddhism (e.g. Śyāmājātaka, T., pp. 174–5, and Xiaozi jing 孝子經, T. 687); 2) the “Confucian” notions of xiao 孝 and shun 順 (obedience) had long since been assimilated by Buddhism in China and among the Uighurs;92 3) the Tibetans were aware of the Chinese classics (Yijing 易經, Liji 禮記, Sayings of Confucious = Lunyu 論語, Shujing 書經), the Uighurs also. There were loans. Yet certain analogies may be explained either by a coincidence, or by a common archaic ground.

91 We have seen (n. 90) that ri mo and chu gang are utilized in the Old Tibetan Chronicle. 92 Cf. K. Chen, “Filial Piety in Chinese Buddhism”; Jao Tsung-i, ““La conception de la piété filiale et les airs bouddhiques de Touen-houang”.” For the Uighurs, cf. Bang and Gabain, Türkischen Turfan-Texte, text B (ten explanations of the Law). There are cited various sūtras and śāstras, but also Zhongni (Confucious = Lunyu 論語) and the Chunqiu 春秋 (Zuozhuan 左傳). This text starts with the note: this is from the paper of Shazhou,” but it was found in Yar Qoto. The citations from Confucious and from Daoist philosophers find themselves in the Chan writings (Zhenyan kaojue 眞言要决, T. № 2825, ch. 3, and Lidai fabao ji 歷代法寶紀, T. № 2075) that the Tibetans knew (Dunhuang mss).

the two vocabularies in the dunhuang manuscripts

67

№ 5. We read in the Bayang jing 八陽經 (§ 9, T., p. 1423a): “the gate (family) will develop, the men (members of the family) will be honored (men xing, ren gui 門興人貴). In mss PT 0746 (l. 11) and PT 0749 (l. 4), the translation is literal: “the gate develops, the men are powerful” (sgo ni dar, myi ni btsan). Yet in PT 0748 (l. 19), the author employs a more idiomatic turn of phrase: “reign elevated, men powerful” (srid mtho / myi btsan). The versions in Ind. voc. simplified the phrase to: “they will be powerful and will develop” (btsan zhing dar pa, PT 0106, II, l. 112; PT 0744, fol. 13; PT 0454, fol. 7). An analogous phrase appears in § 18 (T., p. 1423c): “the gate will be glorious, the men honored; their years lengthened, their longevity augmented” (門榮人貴延年益尊). In Chin. voc. PT 0748 (l. 112) preserves an idiomatic and developed language: “for the living and the dead, the reign will develop, the gate will be powerful, the years grow long, the life will be augmented” (gson gshin gnyis sis rid ni dard / sgo ni brtsan lo ni nar / tshe ni bsnan). PT 0749 (l. 102) and PT 0746 (l. 52) have: “the gate will be rich, the men will develop” (khyim sgo ni phyug, myi ni dar te). The phrase is missing in the versions in Ind. voc. The theme is reprised in § 22 (p. 1424a): “the gate will be raised, the men honored; sons and grandsons will develop and will succeed one another, intelligent and respectful in filial piety” (門高人貴子孫興盛聰明利智孝敬相承). This time, we find the idiomatic style in the Kanjur (pp. 275–3): “srid kyi sgo ni mtho / mi ni btsan / bu tsha ni phan zhing ‘dzangs la sri zhu che. This is a repetition (abridged and deformed) of ms. PT 0746 (l. 63, Chin. voc.): srid kyi sgo no thob (= mtho)/ myi ni btsan / bu ni ‘phel zhing dar te / yid gzhung shing ‘dzangs rgya che ba rtsal che ste / sri zhu dang bkur sti ni gcig gis gcig bkur zhing (PT 0748 deest; PT 0749, l. 132–3 idem). The author has here combined both translations of Chinese men 門, “gate” (family): srid kyi sgo, “gate of the reign” (of the family affairs). Another translation of this word was adopted in the Fanwang jing 梵網經 (K., pp. 171–4 = T., 1006c). There, one speaks of great (or small) clans and noble (or base) gates (大姓高門小姓卑門); in Tibetan: “great (small) clan, elevated (small) title” rus che (chung) zhing thabs na (= ni?) mtho pa (thabs chung).

68

r.a. stein

Vocabulary 4, № 1. See Stein 1981a, and above, n. 32. № 2. Charisma. To remarks already made (Stein 1981a, 266 and n. 65, 72, 76), we may add some observations. The problem is complicated because of a feature of the language about which we have already spoken (44). Initially, two monosyllabic and independent words are coupled into a binome (e.g. chos + lugs > chos lugs). This binome sometimes preserves the same sense (example cited). Yet sometimes, above all for the technical terms of Buddhism, it acquires a new sense (byin + rlabs > byin rlabs = adhiṣtḥ āna). Yet secondarily, the binome is in its turn abridged into only one of its components. In this case, we are in the presence of an ambiguity. We may not always know if the monosyllabic word keeps its primary (let us say: “archaic”) sense or if it only represents an abbreviation of the new binome and thus its new meaning. This ambiguity reigns in the texts which combine (perhaps knowingly) the ancient sense and the new meaning, i.e. in our context, the two vocabularies. This is the case in the Prayers of De ga g.yu tshal (PT 0116, ITJ 751). Dating perhaps to c. 823, they are Buddhist and employ the Ind. voc. (e.g. fol. 35a, by merit, bsod nams, and benediction, byin gyi rlabs, sins are purified; fol. 37b, temples blessed by the saints, ‘phags pa rnams; 38b, by the blessing (or force?), byin gyis of merit, bsod nams). Yet often there is written byin (or mthu) and rlabs separately, with a value which seems archaic. However, this is perhaps only an illusion or a confusion desired on the part of the authors. In fact, these same monosyllabic words are equally often the abbreviation of the Buddhist binome from the Ind. voc. Sometimes the king has byin and the ministers have rlabs. Likewise in an analogous ms., Thomas TLTD, II, 112, for the king Khri gtsug lde brtsan: lha sras . . . byin rlabs yang bas. Further, in another prayer for the same king (PT 0130, l. 12: mthu and bying gyi rlabs of the Triratna), as well as in the analogous prayer to the king ‘Bu’i dun brtan (PT 0134), one sometimes states mthu stobs (l. 42) and byin rlabs (l. 43), sometimes mthu dang byin (l. 47–8). Similarly too in the Annals of Khotan (Thomas TLTD, I, 114). It is said of a monastery that it was “potent and of great blessing” (gnyan zhing byin che rab ste) where Thomas interpreted byin as byin rlabs. He was partly right. In another passage (98), someone searched for a suitable place for a stūpa and it was qualified as byin can gnyan po

the two vocabularies in the dunhuang manuscripts

69

byin gyis rlabs pa, “blessed sites, potent in blessing.” The author combined perhaps intentionally the brief expression (archaic, “sacred,” byin and gnyan po) and the Buddhist binome. As already stated, the author is naturally free to express himself as he wishes. Sometimes he is brief; sometimes he is precise. In the Rāmāyaṇa, the nāgas protect by their bright force (Balbir, l. 149; de Jong, § 21, l. 147–8, klu gnyan byin gyi mthus bsrungs pa). Elsewhere, the author employs composite words: force and brilliance of the demon (B., l. 8; 25) mthu stobs or mthu rtsal and gzi byin. It must be noted that the word byin is not found in isolation in Mhvy (byin figures there solely for sbyin, “to give”), rlabs is also attested there (№ 2688, udāra = rlabs che ba, “very extreme” or “very vast”). The translators would have known both since they forged the expression byin (gyis) rlabs. Yet in this genre of binome, the speakers remain ever conscious of the fact that its sense results from the combination of the two words which compose it. In fact, on that occasion, in case of negation for example, they separate them anew.93 We have already stated that many words of the Chin. voc. belong to the idiomatic ground of the language of the era. The present case recalls to us that the authors of the Ind. voc. have naturally also had to draw from the same ground. As they utilized byin and rlabs in order to form the equivalent of adhiṣtḥ āna, they had to retain the other words or form the other expressions for the notion of “glory, prestige, majesty, radience, charisma, supernatural power” (naturally, I do not imagine a chronological succession!). We have seen gzi byin in the Rāmāyaṇa. In the Mhvy, gzi brjid was chosen, perhaps because byin was already utilized for byin rlabs. 93 Ancient texts: 1) Rāmāyaṇ a, dbang bskur pa (p. 981, l. 62, abhiṣeka), but l. 63: lha rnams kyi dbang / lha mo des bsgyur nas, and l. 83: dang pod bang sus bkur (“who gives the power”); 2) Fanwang jing 梵網經 breaks down bstan bcos = śāstra in employing it as a verb (K. 173-5 = T., p. 1008c: bstan bcos te = jiaohua ren 教化人 “while teaching and while civilizing,” and p. 174-3 = p. 1009b: sems can ma bston ma bcos na = bu jiaohua 不教化; “if one does neither teach, nor civilize beings,” and ibid., rtag par bstan cing bcos pa = 常行教化; 3) for cho ‘phrul (prātiharya) and rdzu ‘phrul (ṛddhi), we find in PT 1289, l. 24: ji zhig cho re ‘phrul; ji zhig ‘brang re rdzus, and in PT 1040, l. 24 (after various transformations, rdzus): rgyal no ne rdzus, che ne ‘phrul (l. 132 id.); 4) for phrag dag “envy, jealousy” (īrṣyā), we find a play of etymologizing words, “narrow space,” in PT 1283.1, l. 296: the younger brother asks ci la yang phrag yangs na bzang na / phrag dogs pa la bzang ba ci yod, “in any event, if to be broad should be good, what good is there to be narrow?”; 5) Thomas AFL, l. 103, man and horse make a contract (tha tshigs ni, and tha bgyis, tshigs bgyis te). This fashion of separating the two words of a binome remains in use in the later texts.

70

r.a. stein

In the Ind. voc. of the bilingual PT 1261 (Li Fang-kuei 1961), we find neither byin, nor rlabs. For Chinese weide 威德, “majesty, radience, charisma,” the translator there employs rdzu ‘phrul (Mhvy, “supernatural power”) or mthu, “force” or gzi brjid, “radience,” but rhu ‘phrul is there also translated by tshen, “divine.” In the bilingual Vocabulary of Dpal dbyangs (fol. 6, l. 16), weide 威德 is rendered by gzi brjid. It is likewise in the Bayang jing 八陽經 (§ 23, 1424a): 承佛威神, “they receive the divine power of the Buddha,” translated by sangs rgyas kyi ‘phrul gyi gzi brjid (PT 0746, l. 65, PT 0749, l. 36, mss in Chin. voc., save for gzi brjid). In Mhvy, gzi brjid serves to translate “radience, supernatural power,” № 6410, ujaska = wei 威, weide 威德 or ojaska (№ 227) or ojas (№ 6409; or further tejas, № 732) = wei 威, guangwei 光威, weili 威力, but prabhāva (also Chin. weili 威力) is rendered by mthu stobs (№ 5184). Once (№ 227), the radience of the sun and moon was characterized by the word “supernatural force” (ṛddhi = rdzu ‘phrul), “(magical) force” (mthu) and “radience” (gzi brjid). The words wei 威, weide 威德, weiguang 威光, weishen (li) 威神(力) are common in the sūtras. We find them equally in the wishes, in Chinese, addressed to the Tibetan king (Dunhuang mss).94 These words are not proper to the Buddhist terminology where they took the meaning “supernatural, divine power.” We find them in the Shujing 書經 and other ancient texts. In the Tibetan adptation of the Shujing (which contains some words of the Ind. voc., cf. 86), an archaic vocabulary was used for these words. Of king Wenwang, it was stated: “the great lands feared his force (li 力), the small were moved by his Virtue (de 德),” and the commentary replaces “force” (li 力) by “charisma” (wei 威), but keeps also “Virtue” (de 德) (大邦畏其力[威], 小邦懷其得). The Tibetan translation reads (l. 119–120): “to augment his reign, (the king) oppressed (dominated) the great lands by his force (mthu) and his “radience” (byin); as for the small lands, pondering his qualities of Good (legs pa’i yon tan), they sought to be tamed” (chab srid bskyed pa’i phyir / rgyal khams che po ni mthu dang byin gyis mnan // khams chu ngu ni legs pa’i yon tan soms (?) zhing ‘dud du stsal pa). As above, this vocabulary may give a false impression

94 E.g. T., vol. 85, № 2853, p. 1302a: (after transfer of the merit to the divinities), “wish that the radience of his majesty be eternally brilliant (weiguang 威光), that his divine force be without limit! . . . moreover, we offer this great ‘happiness’ (= merit) to the btsan po, holy and divine” (惟願威光恒赫神力無涯 . . . 又持勝福上資聖神贊普; idem, 1302b). These wishes correspond to those that are had in Tibetan.

the two vocabularies in the dunhuang manuscripts

71

of high antiquity. The same words are employed in the same fashion in the Buddhist texts. Witness a last example. At the end of a mutilated text of the dhārāṇī of Usṇīsavijayā, we read: “by the force (mthu) and the radience (byin) of all this merit (bsod nams, Ind. voc.) and of the fact that one will have written this dhāraṇī . . .” (PT 0398, Lalou Catalog: gzungs ‘di bris pa dang / bsod nams ‘di dag kun gyi mthu dang / byin kyis). № 3–4. Gods of the soil and ancestors. The sense and the role of the sku bla have been studied by Mme Ariane Macdonald (1971, 272–281 & 295–309). These are the divinities, often of the sacred mountains, considered as the ancestors of the kings who protect them, tutelary divinities who also sit on the body. We shall limit ourselves here to some observations on the vocabulary. As in other cases, the two elements of the binome have an independent existence and are able to combine themselves with other words. The word sku is honorific and designates the body or the person of the king (or of the divinity). The combination sku sri seems to be the opposite of sku bla. In a text of wishes for the king ‘Od srung (around 845–50; PT 0230), the author wishes to assure the well-being of the king by the merit (bsod nams) of the confession of sins, the erection of stūpa of saints, of opening of the eyes (spyan phye ba; ritual attested for the sku bla)95 and of the autumn festival (equally in rapport with 95 The rite of opening the eyes is attested by a fragment on wood from Central Asia (Thomas TLTD, II, 381). There are enumerated various donations made by various ministers to serve as “the opening of the eyes of the sku bla” (sku bla spyan dbye ba’i rkyen). Undoubtedly, this concerns the consecration of a statue. The rite is common in China (kai yan 開眼, kai guang 開光, kai ming 開明), both in religious Confucianism (ancestral tablets) as well as in Buddhism (statues): a point is marked with the brush. An inscription from Dunhuang cave № 365, relative to the statue of Hong Bian, director general of the clergy, inscription dated 832–34, mentions this rite: “one opened the eyes of the statue . . . of Hong Bian, and one consecrated it (lit. “heated the face”), Hong pen . . . sku gzugs spyan phyed de / zhal bsros so (this passage is missing in the parallel inscription in Chinese; cf. Wen Wu, 1980, № 7, 48). In the ms. P. Chin. 2054, of Buddhist authorship (copy dating from 924), the early hour is characterized by the song of the cock. The rich still sleep, the poor already bustling about: “the ones near the god of the soil of the city (chenghuang 城隍), the others in the villages and the marsh (cun sou 村藪), each constructs and arranges; 口 of the seat and opening of the eyes, all that is fraud and pride” (口床開眼是欺謾). The analogous texts speak of the chenghuang of Shazhou and of Guazhou.—The rite is not attested in Mhvy. In constrast, it is well known in the Chinese Buddhist texts. In a rite of the vidyarāja Uccuṣma (= Mahābala), T. № 1227, presented in 732 A.D., p. 148c, one states that

72

r.a. stein

the sku bla), as well as by the tantric rites (wrathful homa, etc.), the ill-omens (ltas ngang) and the sku sri. We see that the last is harmful. We know in addition the rite of “submission of the sri” (sri mnan or gnon). In the place of sku bla, the later authors often wrote sku lha (e.g. Dpa’o Gtsug lag phreng ba, chap. ja, pp. 110–111, repeating an edict of Khri srong lde btsan, and p. 132a, repeating the oath of the Treaty of 821), but also continued to employ the ancient orthography. In the Dunhuang mss, sku bla may (sometimes) designate the soul of a corpse that one affixed in its effigy (Stein 1971, 510). It is also the equivalent of lha, “god” (e.g. PT 0126.2, l. 11: lha la ni yon ‘bul, but l. 21, parallel phrase: sku bla ni yon ‘bul). The other part, bla signifies “superior, chief” (e.g. PT 1038 = rje) and often designates the king or his administration (who enact edicts, bka’, e.g. Old Tibetan Chronicle (Bacot, 113, l. 9: “for the king” blar, “for the people,” ‘bangs). This is why Thomas always translated sku bla by “grandee, magnate.” This is surely an error, but the case merits reflection. The sku bla is also in one way or another the sacred person of the king. Another formal element prompts reflection. From one side, in various religious texts, the feminine counterpart of the sku bla, often named in parallel, is a sman (“woman” > “fairy”). In a divination text (Thomas AFL, 119, l. 28 and p. 121, § 5), we find one and the same phrase successively with sku bla and with mtsho sman (“fairy of lakes”) or the very short sku bla and sman (ITJ 739, fol. 16b, missing in Thomas; there is a question of offerings for the soil, the place, gnas,

an “artisan will sculpt the statue of the god in the center of the surface…(offerings); he will decorate it in colors; in the center of the front of the statue, he will make a red or yellow dot (with the brush, dian 点) . . .” The same procedure is well described in a special ritual of statue consecration (T., № 1418, p. 934c; translated a bit before 1000 A.D.). After having invited the “saint” (Buddha or another) to affix himself in the statue (‘an xiang 安像); after the bath and offerings accompanied with mantra, “one proceeds to the opening of the eyes of the statue (so that they become) luminous (= visible), (rite) analogous to the point (stroke of the brush given) to the eyes, and one recites the mantra (called) Opening of the light of the eyes: oṁ cakṣu cakṣu samanta (?) . . . svahā, and: oṁ netra . . .” (being ignorant of Sanskrit, I am not able to restore all the words). The donor is associated with these rites which are followed by a homa. The donors who have offered food eat the remainders and derive from it the elimination of their sins and the increase of their merits. [As a matter of fact, the rite of consecrating an image is well attested in India. The rite is designated as “opening the eyes” (Skt: akṣyunmeṣaṇa) or “installing the breath” (prāṇapratiṣtḥ ā)—C.S.-S.]

the two vocabularies in the dunhuang manuscripts

73

the sku lha, the sman, the gods of the land, yul gyi lha). Elsewhere also, the pleasure or the displeasure of the sku bla goes hand in hand with those of mu sman or gnam sman (“fairies of the sky”; Ar. Macdonald 1971, 295–6). We are then shocked to see that near the sku bla and of their cult, one speaks of rtse bla and of rtse sman, parallel to the yul lha, yul bdag, sman or yul sman, gods of the land; Thomas, II, 152, 386, 387, 394, 395, 398, 399). These are visibly the divinities (the summits of mountains, rtse?), always localized in the region of the Small Nob, the Lop nor. Yet on the formal level, this binome rtse bla is without doubt approaching the title rtse rje (see below). For the sense of sku bla, we should now add the terminology of the paraphrase of the Shujing 書經. An article of Y. Imaeda, in press, treats this subject. Meanwhile, however, some citations are indispensable in the present work. See the themes in Chinese and Tibetan. a) The king of the Yin is not respectful towards Heaven on High (shangtian 上天). In Tibetan (l. 6), he “transgressed the customs” (chos lugs las ‘gal). b) “The August Heaven is angered; he elected (to power) my ancestor Wen (wang) (commentary: in order to punish him) . . . Shou (受) does not render worship unto the Supreme God (Shangdi 上帝) and to the divinities (of the sky and earth, shenzhi 神祇), he neglected his ancestors and did not make sacrifices to the temple of the ancestors (commentary: “he abolished the sacrifices to the divinities of the sky and earth and to the temple of the ancestors).” This passage is missing here in Tibetan, but will be reprised later. In Chinese, the author continues: “Heaven protects the people and establishes the sovereign ( jun 君), establishes the teacher. Provided that he is able to help the Supreme God (Shangdi 上帝) to pacify the world!” This passage is translated (l. 10–11): “However, Heaven (yong gnam ni) . . . (cuts) . . . for the people (?) elected as sovereign of men; provided that he observes with respect the custom (religion, law) of heaven” (myi’i bdag du bskos pa ni / gnam gyi chos lugs gus par bsrung ba yin na). We have seen above analogous expressions in the purely Tibetan writings. c) The author speaks of Kher (Jie 桀, evil king of Xia). Already, he was not able to conform to heaven (commentary: shuntian 順天). Shou (受) is worse still. He states that “it is useless to practice respect, that the sacrifices are not useful, that violence does not bring about

74

r.a. stein

ill.” In Tibetan (l. 12–13): “Kher transgressed the custom” (chos lugs las ‘gal bar spyod pa ni); still more the king Ci’u.”96 He steals the wealth of the virtuous and kills the faithful (snying nye), such that the uncle-nephews (khu dbon; in Chinese only “the good,” yuanliang 元良). He states: “what evil is there to not (make the offerings, ma // = gsol?) to heaven (gnam), to the sku bla and to the tablets (zhal bu)97 and . . . (illegible) . . . to transgress the custom?” (chos lam la ‘gal ba). We have already encountered chos lam and chos lugs for the Dao. d) “Yet see that Shou (受) . . . mistakes the Five Virtues (cf. n. 90), is violent and without respect (commentary: does not venerate the heavenly and terrestrial divinities tiandi shenming 天地神明); he has cut himself off from Heaven.” In Tibetan (l. 33), the king “does not respect the customs of the ancients, neither the sku bla nor the ancestors (mgon mtshun, see above), etc. The life of Ji’u has been cut by Heaven” (gna’ myi snga rabs gyi gtsug lag dang / sku bla dang mgon mtshun la stsogs pa la ni gus par myi sems pas / Ji’u gi srog gnam gyis bcad pa yin te). e) “He abandoned the sacrifices” (commentary: he abandoned and troubled the sacrifices, jisi 祭祀, that he had established and no longer made offerings to the divinities, guishen 鬼神). In Tibetan (l. 79): “although he knows (that it is appropriate to) make the offerings to Heaven and Earth, to the sku bla and to the tablets, etc., he does not make offerings to them” (gnam sa dang sku bla dang zhal bu la stsogs pa mchod cin // gsol ba’i rigs pa yang myi mchod myi gsol). f ) After the campaign of king Wu, “sacrificed to the temple of the ancestors, miao 廟, of the Zhou 紂 (himself; commentary: “sacrificed and announced (the victory) to the god of the soil and to the ancestors of seven generations before the king Wen (七世之祖); the feudal princes run while carrying the offerings for this worship”). In Tibetan (l. 104): “when he made offerings to the tablets (of the

96 Ci’u transcribes rather Zhou 紂. Here, it is an error for Ji’u. The translators always transcribe Yin, whereas the actual text generally has Shang (same dynasty). For the last malicious king of the dynasty, they do not transcribe Shou from the actual text, but his other name Zhou 紂. They were well informed and had perhaps utilized a redaction a little different from the actual Shujing 書經. 97 All the dictionaries define zhal bu as a small container (bowl, cup). This sense is not appropriate here. We will see (l. 104) that it concerns the ancestors. I would compare zhal byang, “title written on a tablet.”

the two vocabularies in the dunhuang manuscripts

75

ancestors) up to seven generations (gdung rabs bdun tshun cad gyi zhal bu gsol ba’i tshe), the kinglets (rgyal phran) ran with their offerings (rang lha ‘bras) and ingredients of the worship (l. 106) and, assembling in the place of offering to the tablets, they sacrificed” (zhal bu gsol ba’i sar ‘dus te / gsol lo). g) “By lighting stakes and sacrificing (in the sacred places), he made a grand announcement of victory” (commentary: “he illuminated the stakes for the worship of Heaven, jiao tian 教天, and he made the sacrifice wang to the mountains and to the rivers, (like the sacrifice) to the ancestors,” xianzu 先祖). In Tibetan (l. 107–108): “close to the accumulations of wood (stakes), one deposited the three kinds of animals (of sacrifice), without releasing them, (for) the offering to Heaven” (shing spongs pa’i khar / srog chags snag sum bzhags ste / myi btang nas gnam mchod de); there follows the announcement of victory: “I have achieved a great deed conforming to the order of Heaven” (gnam gyis lung stsal bzhin don chen po grub ste; in Chinese a single word: “announcement,” gao 告); then, in taking up the Chinese commentary, “he made complete the offerings to the sku bla (of the Yin or Shang) submitted to his power, to the sacred mountains, to the great rivers, etc.” (chab ‘og du ‘dus pa’i sku bla’o ‘tshad dang / ri gnyan po dang / chu chen po la stsogs pa / ril mchod de). We will note that the translators were well informed. They knew that the great sacrifice to Heaven entailed the three great animals (cow, sheep, pig, the sansheng). The Tibetans had seen the Chinese accomplish one such sacrifice at the time of the great sworn treaties of 756, 783 and 821–2 (Demiéville 1952, 230, note). One such sacrifice is mentioned in the text of the Treaty of 821–2 (West, l. 65, srog chags bsad de). h) He announced (gao 告) the faults of the Shang to the August Heaven (huangtian 皇天) and to the Earth (Houtu 后土; commentary: this is the god of the soil, she 社), to the mountains and to the rivers where he passed” (commentary: announced to heaven and to the Earth, to the mountains and to the rivers). It states that he made war, since Shou (受), the king of the Shang, did not have the Dao. In Tibetan (l. 124), we read: “(the king Wu) having invited (?) and rendered worship unto Heaven and Earth, to the lha and to the klu, to the sku bla and to the tablets, etc., he made war. The king Ji’u transgressed the View (chos lam); he cut the power (he cut himself from the power) of Heaven and Earth, of the sku bla and

76

r.a. stein the tablets, and did not make the offerings which were appropriate (gnam sa dang / sku bla dang / zhal bu la stsogs pa // mna’ thang bcad de . mchod pa’i rigs pa las / ril myi gsol bar). This is a repetition of §§ c and e.

We remain perplexed. The Tibetans knew and utilized the clichés of the Chinese literature. Yet, if we did not know that it concerned the Shujing 書經, if we only had the isolated phrases, without the Chinese proper nouns, we might be able to see in these phrases a purely Tibetan text relative to the ancient beliefs. This is all the more so since, in the Shujing as in the inscriptions and the royal Chronicle, one also constantly speaks of the wise king (sgam po, sgal dkyel) and of his good government (chos lugs, chos lam, gtsug lag) exerted for a great reign (chab srid). If the Shujing speaks of a “Heavenly custom” (gnam gyi chos lugs) that the bad king transgresses in neglecting the worship of Heaven and Earth, but to which the good king conforms, in the inscription of Phyong rgyas (for Khri srong lde btsan; Richardson 1964, 6), the author exalts the fact that the king acted in conformity with “the religion (custom) of Heaven and Earth” (gnam sa’i chos). In the purely Tibetan inscription of Rkong po (798–804?), the author speaks of the klu bla gnyan po (“sacred”) to which one renders worship (gsol ba; Ar. Macdonald 1971, 298). It undoubtedly concerns the sacred mountain of Rkong po (dkar po) who linked himself with a goddess of the River. In the Prayers of De ga g.yul tsha (Thomas TLTD, II, 93), the terms of exaltation of the royalty are applied to the first legendary ancestor: his sku bla was sacred (or powerful, gnyan). He is in rapport with a mountain. In a prayer to the gods of the soil of Shazhou (PT 1569; Ar. Macdonald, 304, Sha cu’i sku bla thams cad la ‘us phyag ‘tshal do) the author repeats that the prayer (smon lam) is addressed to these sku bla and that one greeted all the “powerful gods” (lha gnyan). We have seen in the Shujing 書經 (§ g) that the sku bla, the sacred mountains (ri gnyan po) and the great rivers corresponding, in Chinese, to the Five Great Sacred Mountains and to the Four Great Rivers which received, in China, the royal worship called wang. In the following passage (§ h), we find lha and klu in the place of the mountains and rivers. In the Prayer of De ga (fol. 36a), the author states that, as the king erected a (Buddhist) temple, the sku bla, the lha and the klu of heaven and earth (gnam sa’i lha klu), all were delighted. Following the Chinese custom, the oath of the Treaty of 821–2 was sealed by a sacrifice of the three animals (the “translators” of the Shujing added

the two vocabularies in the dunhuang manuscripts

77

this detail!) and by the evocation (classic in China) of divinities serving as witnesses. On the current stele in Lhasa (West, l. 61–64), “the Triratna and the saints, sun and moon, planets and stars” are taken as witnesses. However Dpa’o Gtsug lag phreng ba, quite well informed (ch. ja, 132a), repeats this text in writing: “the Triratna, the lha and the klu, the planets and the stars, and all the sku bla.”98 Yet, for the drafting of this inscription, the Tibetans utilized a cliché of the Shujing (see note). As for the other words, the translators found the word sku bla in the Tibetan common for their era and they chose it with intelligence. The religious idea that covers this word in Tibetan should approach the sense of the Chinese expressions. As we think of it apropos of other words (Stein 1981a, 275), it may concern “coincidences, a common fund or loans.” The cult of the ancestors and of the gods of the soil (mountains, etc.) are spread through many lands, comprising China and Tibet. Without wanting to define here this Tibetan notion, some remarks still stand out vis-à-vis the form and the date. The rite of “the opening of the eyes” in order to consecrate a statue is quite Chinese. The Tibetan texts speak of it with regard to the sku bla, the Chinese texts with regard to the chenghuang 城隍, god of the soil of the city (see above). In this case, as in that of the texts which evoke the cult of the sku bla in Shazhou and in Lop nor, we cannot know if it concerns a Tibetan or Chinese divinity. Admittedly, the word sku bla is employed in the purely Tibetan texts (the legend of the dmu and the phya, PT 0126.2; a funerary ritual; the divination texts; the inscription of Rkong po). Yet curiously, to my knowledge we find it neither in the Annals, nor in the Old Tibetan Chronicle (we read there only once lde bla; Ar. Macdonald, 302). All the more shocking is that the cult of the sku bla is mentioned six times in a single small fragment of the Annals, where it is especially a question of the ‘A zha (feasts in summer and in winter) during the years 635 to 643 (according to some: 706–714), in relation to the marriage of a Chinese princess with the Tibetan king.99 Mme Ariane Macdonald thought (304) 98 This is only a summary. Dpa’o Gtsug lag phreng ba adds (132b): “if one could copy the text of the stele of Lhasa, one would insert it here” (Lha sa’i rdo ring gi yi ge bcu bar nus na bar ‘dir chug zhig). He quoted thus from memory or from another source. 99 The text mentions Mun sheng kong co = Wencheng. Yamaguchi wanted to show that it concerns her, although Petech and Uray believed it an error for Jincheng. It is always tactful to suppose an error of the authors or scribes (cf. Stein, “Saint et divin,”

78

r.a. stein

that “the cult of the sku bla was thus largely spread in the upper strata of the Tibetan or Tibetanized society,” and she believed probably that one such cult was practiced in the court of the Tibetan kings. This is possible. Yet then why is it never mentioned in the Annals and in the Old Tibetan Chronicle? Why only in a fragment dedicated to the ‘A zha? We may think to hazard a reservation about the documents. Yet perhaps this fact is significant. The ‘A zha are the Tuyuhun of the Chinese chronicles. They have admittedly been included and in part assimilated by the Tibetans, but around 640 the Tuyuhun are on the contrary characterized by the adoption of the Chinese civilization and they were established in Lop nor. Yamaguchi Zuihō may even think that it was by their intervention that Srong btsan sgam po was inspired by the Chinese models for the setting-up of his administration.100 Yet, according to the Tangshu (198, 4a–b), they rendered worship unto the gods of the mountains (祭山神). The young khaghan received in marriage a Chinese princess (in 640), a tribal chief revolts in 641 in order to attack the princess, to remove the young khaghan and to take refuge among the Tibetans. In order to execute his project, he pleads to go “to render worship (to sacrifice) to the god of the mountain” (祭山神). These facts correspond to the cult of the sku bla to which the fragment of the Annals seems to attest especially among the ‘A zha. I will be careful not to propose a hypothesis, but we see at least that the question is complex. The nonTibetan populations of the Northeast of Tibet have long since been in contact with China having been absorbed and assimilated by the Tibetans. One of them, the Sum pa, gave its name to a grand account of wise maxims (Sum pa ma shags).101

253–3, n. 8, 9). The ms. is torn. The entire right portion is missing. The text may be manipulated. In absence of context, we find there the royal title ‘phrul gyi lha btsan po. Yet for the ancient epoch, this title was only attributed (retroactively, in my opinion) to the first legendary ancestor and to Srong btsan sgam po (for the reasons of prestige, in the texts dating from the Buddhist kings which carried the title). If I am right, that could be a reason to maintain the reading Mun sheng kong co and to attribute the entire account to his era as is the view of Yamaguchi. 100 Lecture given at the Collège de France in March, 1981. 101 The divination text (PT 1047) where the sku bla is often mentioned utilizes a divinatory schema in a foreign language. Ar. Macdonald (“Une lecture,” 286) thought that this could be Zhang zhung because the campaign against this country is used there in an oracle. It is possible, but not certain. For the Northeast of Tibet, we ought to remember the long text in the Nam language (Thomas, Nam, an Ancient Language of the Sino-Tibetan Borderland and the review by Wen Yu in T’oung Pao which indi-

the two vocabularies in the dunhuang manuscripts

79

№ 5. Barbarians. Elsewhere, I have signaled the example from the Shujing 書經 and from the Prophesy of Khotan (Stein 1981a, n. 51; cf. here, the note from the Shujing). We may add the employment of this word in the purely Tibetan texts. Various authors poorly understood it in translating Lho Bal by “South Nepal.” Dge ‘dun Chos ‘phel (1978, 34–35) saw it as Li yul (Khotan or Central Asia) and thought that the Nepalese were settled there (the same confusion finds itself already in the Rgya Bod yig tshang, Seattle copy, 58a). This interpretation is based on the ms. PT 1085. In his note to this ms. (Choix II), Imaeda identified the seal which he carried and which attested that the text emanated from the governmental Palace of Lhan kar (central Tibet). This document alludes to a petition from the Chinese of Shazhou, who themselves are described as “we other barbarians” (bdag cag lho bal). As he also mentiones the establishment of the Ldan dkar Catalogue of the Kanjur (824?) and that he gave to the Tibetan king the title (rje blon) ‘phrul gyi, “holy,” it should date from c. 815–830. The humiliating expression that the Chinese employ (“we other barbarians”) is in accord with the phrase from the 821–2 Treaty of Lhasa (“China is not like the other barbarians,” see the note from the Shujing). We find the same expression in another missive from the Chinese of Shazhou (Rgya Sha cu pa; Lalou 1955, 2 (172) = PT 1089, l. 21–22): “the governor (to dog = dudu 都督) of Sha cu and we others ask to be (classed hierarchically) above the (rank of) stong pon stong cung. The governor of the “barbarians” (lho bal gyi to dog) and those named stong zla were never superior . . .” And the author cites the example of the functionaries of Khotan (Li) in speaking of insignia of rank accorded to the chiefs of ten thousand, to the chiefs of a thousand and to the stong cung which subjugated (?; dul pa) the stong (communities? military groups?) “barbarians” (lho bal; l. 24–25), etc.”102 The author also mentions the great barbarian communities (lho bal sde chen, l. 27). It may be that the word does not designate only the Chinese, but also (or above all) the foreign populations

cates the existence of a qiang tribe of Nan 南 (*Nam) or Nanshui 南水 before 713 A.D.). 102 This text was retranslated and commented upon by Yamaguchi (“Sasu kanjin ni yoru Toban futa-gundan no seiritsu”), who preserved the translation of Lalou: “South Nepal.” He dates it to 820 or 832. This date corresponds well to the epoch wherein appeared the use of lho bal for “barbarians.”

80

r.a. stein

(Qiang, Tuyuhun, Long 龍) who inhabited the region. The Chinese texts of the era often mention the “tribes” (buluo 部落), mixed with the Chinese and with the Tibetans, who were governed by a special functionary. Another document should be noted, but the historical problems which it poses cannot be discussed here. This is a wish for the king (or prince) ‘Od srung, the last king of Tibet (around 850?; PT 0131). There, the author asks for the protection of the Buddhist divinities for the whole of Tibet which remains in the (his?) domain (?; dum na) of the lha bal, ‘Od srung, son of the emperess ‘Phan (?) (l. 27–28; Bod yongs gyi . . . l(?) po chen po / lha bal dum na bzhugs pa / jo mo btsan mo ‘Phan gyi pho brang ‘Od srung). Lha bal should undoubtedly be corrected to lho bal. The king or the prince must sojourn in the region of the “barbarians” of the “Gansu corridor.”103 The etymology of the word lho bal remains obscure. This is in every case a compound term, forged intentially.104 The word is retained in the later chronicles. Being no longer understood, it was confused with Nepal (Bal po). We have already seen above an example in the Rgya Bod yig tshang. Another finds itself in the chronicle of Ne’u Paṇḍita (p. 70). Speaking of the power of Khri gtsug lde btsan (815–841), the author states: “the warrior tribes (dpa’ sde) Ldon (and) Stong protect the frontiers. At the four confines (mtha’ bzhi), the lho bal (barbarians,

103 The word dum makes up part of the expression mjal dum, “peace treaty” of which it is a question in the Prayers of De ga g.yu tshal (PT 0016, 33b, 35a). It is generally thought to concern the treaty of 821–2, but we may have doubts. There, the author celebrates the victory of Tibet over the Chinese (Rgya), the Turks (Drug) and the ‘Jang (a population that one might qualify as “barbarian,” the Qiang?; the Nanzhao seems excluded). The gathering place is in every case situated to the Northwest of China, occupied by the Tibetans. In other places, the word dum is derived from sdum, which signified at the time “concluded agreement” and “house, residence” (ancient vocabulary). Jäschke gives a Ladhaki expression yul or grong dum dum, dispersed farms or villages carrying one and the same name. It may concern a sort of “secondary residence” (country field, farm) where one may retire, as this was the Chinese custom (the biezhuang 別莊 or bieshu 別墅). In the Old Tibetan Chronicle, the Khri bom castle of the king is twice designated as mkhar (p. 101, 106), but once as sdum pa (p. 112, l. 3). 104 Lho does not unequivocally signify “south,” unless we do not think of an association with the Chin. man from the translation of the Shujing 書經 (“barbarians of the South”; cf. the Lho Mon of the later literature). The Tangut (Qiang, Xixia) had two names with which to designate themselves: 1) Mi or Mi Nyag, the more frequent, and 2) Lhε. The second expression has been compared to the name of the Lho (Rngegs) tribe from the Old Tibetan Chronicle by Kychanov (Gimn svyaščennīm predkam Tangutov, 226). Cf. Nishida Tatsuo, Seika no monji, 26.

the two vocabularies in the dunhuang manuscripts

81

foreigners) were all subjugated. The Li (Khotan, Central Asia) and the stupid (blun po = barbarians) Gar log (Turks, Qarluq) offered tribute.” The submission of the barbarians in the four directions is a cliché wellknown in the Chinese literature. In the Sba bzhed (p. 4), the father of Khri srong lde btsan (then very young, around 745 A.D.) received the Chinese emissary ‘Ba’ de’u. The king who sought religion (Buddhism) sent him to Lho Bal. In citing the Sba bzhed, Dpa’o Gtsug lag phreng ba (ch. ja, 73b) replaced Lho Bal with Rgya gar, India. He thought of Nepal. Yet, given the context, this is unlikely. An emissary was then sent to China. When it concerns India, the author usually states Rgya gar in the Sba bzhed (p. 1, l. 9). In the second edict of the king, reproduced by Dpa’o Gtsug lag phreng ba (ja, 110a), it is a question of the efforts made from the Chinese side: “under pretext (snyad) that it is not appropriate to practice the god and the religion of the Lho Bal (Buddhism) in Tibet,” Buddhism was prohibited.105 We remember the phrase from the Treaty of 821–2: China is not like the other barbarians. The text cited seems to situate itself in this tradition. № 6–7. Civil Servants. № 6, rje blas. We might think that this is the instrumental of rje bla, an expression comparable to sku bla (e.g. PT 1038, l. 13, the first ancestor-king came from the sky as rje, “lord” and bla, “superior,” for those who who did not have any). However, this is not the case (e.g. Thomas TLTD, II, 185: rje blas gyis brtsald te). The word is frequently in the Central Asian mss and is attested in an inscription of 764.106 It designates a function. In the translations, it is employed in a vague sense. In the Bayang jing 八陽經 (1423a), speaking of the advantages of sūtra reading, the author states: “if one goes far with an army, if one is a civil servant, shiguan 仕官, or if one does commerce.” In the

105 Tucci’s translation (Tombs of the Tibetan Kings, 47) is erroneous (“Nepal of the south”). Here, Dpa’o Gtsug lag phreng ba did not correct it to Rgya gar. 106 See the texts of Thomas (III, 5–6) and of Richardson (“Ancient Historical Edicts at Lhasa,” 9, 12). The Tibetans consulted understood rje blas as rje las (30, “royal work”). Yamaguchi (“Sasu kanjin ni yoru Toban futa-gundan no seiritsu,” 38, n. 25) retains this reading and translates it as “government service.” We will see that this is quite possible. Fujieda (“Tonkō hatsugen Chibetto-go bunsho shishaku,” 10 = Thomas TLTD, II, 404) poorly understood rje blas. He read rje bla and translated it as taishou, “prefect.” [On rje blas, see now also Coblin 1991a; Schuessler 1998—ed.]

82

r.a. stein

version in Ind. voc. (PT 0106, II, l. 109; PT 0454, fol. 7 = Choix II, pl. 182.2), one translates: “if one goes to war, if one has a public function (rje blas), if one goes to commerce.” Yet in the versions in Chin. voc., one translates (PT 0746, l. 11): “whether a work is done (las shig byed byed kyang rung) at the frontiers or on a remote road, whether one does commerce (tshong zhig byed byed kyang rung),” this will be advantageous (PT 0749, l. 4–5, shorten this phrase and remove the word “work”; PT 0748, l. 74a: lam ring por las byed tsong byed kyang). The translators, generally well informed, give reason to interpret rje blas as las, “work, employment” (cf. n. 106). We have seen that they employ advisedly, in general, the idiomatic Tibetan vocabulary. Yet here, they are the translators of the Ind. voc. who have done it in adopting rje blas. The same choice was made in the translations of the Confucian texts. In the Shujing 書經, the king of Zhou (紂) states in Chinese: “if one has much merit, one will be generously compensated; if one does not follow the right way, one will be punished”; and in Tibetan: (PT 0986, l. 59–60): if one does not work according to my orders, and if one does not execute the rje blas, one will be killed” (bdagi lung ltar ma byas te / rje blas nyams su myi len pa ni / srog la dbab ‘o). Translation extremely free. The same sense is attested in the Zhanguoce 戰國策 (Imaeda 1980, 60; PT 1291.5, l. 5–6). In Chinese, we read: “’An ling is a small country. It is not able, at any price, to employ its subject (使其民), and in Tibetan: “Shu ke’u . . . is a man from a small country; (illegible) the rje blas” (Imaeda: “the order of the lord? Rje blas . . .”). № 7, rtse rje. Frequently in the Zhanguoce 戰國策, this is the title of a high functionary. Shu ke’u is named rtse rje from the land of Kvan (V, l. 2), which corresponds to the Chinese zhou, “prefect, governor.” Elsewhere (l. 16), the author states: “the rtse rje abandoned the castlefort and revolted” (rtse rje mkhar bor te glob a dring ba; in Chinese, we are not given the title). The word is attested in Mhvy № 3705, where it renders koṭtạ pāla, “commander of a fortified town, prefect.” It is very frequent in the Dunhuang mss. In the Chinese mss, the author simply transcribes it as jie’er 節兒.107

107 Demiéville (Le concile de Lhasa, index) thought, wrongly, that this word could be an abbreviation of jiedushi. In the Chinese transcriptions, ‘er 兒 (*nye) regularly reproduces rje (e.g. Khri Sum rje = Qixin’er), whereas the °t final of jie 節 (*tset) reproduces the r° initial of rje.

the two vocabularies in the dunhuang manuscripts *

*

83

*

Recapitulation I. The difference between the two vocabularies is patent not only in the Buddhist terminology, but also for the ordinary words. a. For Buddhism, the Chin. voc. does not solely appear in the Chan writings, but also in other texts, orthodox and apocryphal sūtras. b. The sole chronological reference mark is the date 814 (Mhvy)k for the diffusion of the Ind. voc. (the “new language”). But as the new manuscripts are neither dated nor located, it is not certain that the Ind. voc. can always be called later (“new”) and the Chin. voc. always prior (“ancient”). The first must be established before 814, the second may continue to be employed after that date. i. For both, it is evident that the translators were not able to create words, but only the technical expressions or the neologisms (artificial binomes in rapport with the ground of the language). Both drew from the existent stock of the Tibetan language of the era. However, this ground is only attested very partially in the Mhvy. It was more abundantly preserved in the Chin. voc. ii. In the Chin. voc. also, artificial neologisms were created, above all for Chan. In both cases, these neologisms are often literal translations. iii. Yet these creations often also imply a conscious choice which depends on an etymology (real, correct or supposed, arbitrary). This etymological reasoning may be studied for a part of the Ind. voc. thanks to the Sgra sbyor. It is only able to be deduced, by research, for the Chin. voc. c. The supporters of one of the two vocabularies must have known that of the other, and vice versa. Certain texts mix the two. i. For certain basic Buddhist words, both vocabularies employ the same word. Certain Tibetan expressions were utilized by both vocabularies, each retaining a different meaning.

k

Cf. C. Scherrer-Schaub “Enacting Words,” 313–316.—C.S.-S.

84

r.a. stein d. The translators, Tibetan and Chinese, of Chinese texts operated with intelligence. They knew Chinese well, and well understood the purely Tibetan, idiomatic, vocabulary that could be characterized as “ancient” or “traditional” (archaisms), above all in that which concerned non-Buddhist religion. It seems that they preserved and utilized it more and better than the translators of the Indian texts. i. Although we do not know any authority which would be able to impose the Chin. voc., the latter is remarkably homogeneous (sharing literal translations). We might suppose one “school” or one tradition. ii. Because of its utilization of Tibetan idiomatic words, the Chin. voc. carries a certain ambiguity. On one side, one composed expression (binome) is often abridged into a monosyllabic word. On the other side, one such word often was developed and specified as a disyllabic expression. From this fact, the vocabulary of the translations from the Chinese is often the same as the traditional, indigenous (archaic) vocabulary. If the title or the subject of a given text is not specified, we cannot state with certainty if it concerns an indigenous writing or one from the Chinese tradition. iii. The Chin. voc. characterizes the translations of the Buddhist, as well as Confucian, texts, but we find it also in indigenous adaptations or redactions inspired by Chinese sources. e. Just like the non-Buddhist texts (Rāmāyaṇa), Confucian dialogs were if not translated or adapted, at least copied and utilized by Buddhists or at least in view of a diffusion in a Buddhist milieu. i. The indigenous Tibetan vocabulary, idiomatic and “ancient” (or archaic) is specially employed (with an ambiguity without doubt desired, at least in part) in the texts which date from the epoch of the great Buddhist kings (redactions dating from c. 790–840). For lack of indicated dates, the degree of seniority of this indigenous vocabulary is relative and cannot be determined. ii. The analogy or the identity of the terms of the Chin. voc. and of the indigenous or “ancient” Tibetan (as well as the notions which they render) may be explained in different fashions which are not necessarily exclusive: coincidence, analogous (in China and Tibet) notions (and expressions), loans, common archaic ground (cf. Stein 1981).

the two vocabularies in the dunhuang manuscripts

85

II. The first outline, completely incomplete and restricted, names some desiderata. a. For the Ind. voc., an index of expressions treated in the Sgra sbyor and a study of Sanskrit etymologies which determined how the translators adopted such and such translation. b. For the Chin. voc. and the ancient Tibetan vocabulary from which it borrowed, a systematic statement of the words from the Dunhuang mss is highlighted. We may await the many projects coming from the calculating of a certain number of texts currently on hand in Japan. c. Another systematic statement ought to be made of “ancient words” preserved in the works of the later literary works relative to the “ancient and new words” (brda gsar rnying). *** Notes on the sources (Foshuo) Shanwo yinguo jing (佛說) 善惡因果經 Taishō vol. 85, № 2881, apocryphal. Mss from Dunhuang and Turfan, from viith to xth century. Literal Sogdian translation from the Chinese. Another Chinese version, Taishō № 81, translated around 1000 A.D. Peking Kanjur, vol. 40, № 1023. Legs nyes kyi rgyu dang ‘bras bu bstan pa’i mdo, translated from the Chinese by Chos grub (absent from the Ldan Dkar Catalog; cf. Kanjur, № 1024, dge ba dang mi dge ba’i las kyi rnam par smin pa bstan pa’i mdo (without indication of translator). Tib. Dunhuang mss, ITJ 220, 298. Cf. Shanwo bao’en jing and n. 23. Shujing 書經 [also commonly Shangshu 尚書] PT 0986. Imaeda Yoshiro has the intention of publishing this ms. However, I am obliged to help myself to it here for certain words and methods of translation. Already identified in the Lalou Catalog as the part concerning the Zhou 紂, this text corresponds rather well to the current edition of the Shangshu Kongzhuan 尚書孔傳 (end of ch. II, ch. III, V), but differing a little (cf. here n. 96). The translation combines the text of the Shujing and its commentary. It often paraphrases and incorporates elements drawn from elsewhere (an example, Stein 1981a, 271; another here, 204). The author adds precise details on the subject and Tibetan turns.

86

r.a. stein

Mixed vocabulary, “Chinese” (chos lugs, chos lam), “Indian” (yon and yon tan for “merit”; sdug bsngal las thar pa) and purely Tibetan (srog ‘phongs or spongs “to kill,” gnam mtha’ ‘og, mthu and byin). An important fact is to be noted. This “translation” furnished phrases and expressions to the redactors of the Tibetan version of the Treaty of 821–2. It ought thus to be anterior to this date. In the announcement of his victory against the Yin that King Wu made to his ancestors, he recalls their virtues and the crimes of Shou 受, king of Shang, against Heaven and against the people. Aided by the wise, King Wu realized the will of Heaven in exterminating this king. “(Then the kingdoms of) China and the barbarians, all came to be subjugated and respectfully accepted the Decree of Heaven.” (華夏蠻貊, 無不率俾, 恭天成命). The Tibetan version is very free: “like me (my kingdom) was different from other kingdoms, (because) it was great and provided with wisdom (and the art of governance, gtsug lag), the lho bal, etc. (barbarians), all the kingdoms submitted themselves to my power and listened with respect to the Decree (of Heaven?)”; l. 132–4 nga rgyal khams gzhan dang myi ‘dra bar tshe zhing / gtsug lag dang ldan bas / lho bal la stsogs te // rgyal khams thams cad chag (= chab) ‘og du ‘dus nas / bka’ gus per nyan te/. In the inscription of 821–2 is found a foreign phrase (Stein 1981, n. 51) which repeats turns of phrase from the Shujing in applying them astutely to China (East, l. 18–20): In the East, there is China which “is not like the other barbarians . . . has good customs and a great wisdom (gtsug lag) and is (by this fact) the equal of Tibet” (lho bal gzhan dang myi ‘dra (bar ?) . . . chos bzang // gtsug lag che bas // Bod dang yang // ‘thabs kyi zla . . .). This is not the only example. In the harangue which precedes it, where King Wu exalts the virtues of his ancestors, the Tibetan text of the Shujing writes (while freely deviating from the Chinese text) that from the first ancestor (He’u tshig = Houji) “comes the beginning of the lands and of the raised soil” (yul sa mtho ba’i mgo yang de nas byung). In the treaty of 821–2 (East, l. 5–6), one speaks of the first ancestor from whom “comes the land and the soil . . . elevated lands and (pur?) soil” (yul byung, sa dod . . . yul mtho sa (gtsang ?)). The Shujing continues: (the other ancestor) King Wen has great wisdom (sgal dkyel tshe bas) and, in order to augment his kingdom (chab srid), subjugates the great countries by his force (mthu, byin) and lures countries by his merits. What is the most curious is that these phrases from the Shujing 書經, reprised in the Treaty, are also found nearly identical in the Old Tibetan Chronicle (redaction from the beginning

the two vocabularies in the dunhuang manuscripts

87

of the ixth century), but applied to the mythical first ancestor (Bacot DTT, 81: ri mtho sa gtsang / yul bzang…rgyal po gzang dang myi mtshungs pa’i chos; in this passage, it is also glossed as a Buddhist expression: Ri rab lhun po). In the Treaty (East, l. 35), the king-ancestor has “by his great wisdom (sgam dkyel che po) perfectly known the religious and civil affairs (chos srid). For the action of the armies, one states dgra chos in the Shujing 書經 (l. 64, 90, 143); in the Treaty also (West, l. 49). In the first, the word “sermon,” shi 誓 (harangue) is rendered by gtsigs (l. 29, 64); in the Treaty also (West, l. 6, 67, 70, 72–3, 76, shi 誓 or meng 盟). Moreover, in the Treaty there appears (for the first time?) the dating of the years by the Tibetan adaptation of the Chinese system of the sexagenary cycle (combination of the 5 elements and 12 animals). Yet this system is equally employed (for the days) in the Shujing in order to render the Chinese sexagenary cycle (e.g. l. 70 shing po byi for jiazi 甲子; l. 95, 100, 106–107, 140). This system was utilized later (dedications from 832 and 834 in the Dunhuang cave № 365; cf. Wen Wu, 1978, № 12, 33, n. 7; PT 1188, № XV, xth century). A divination text, undated, is visibly translated from the Chinese (PT 0127 vth, III, l. 1–9: gser pho byi, etc. (where gser, “gold,” is a literal translation of Chin. jin 金 “gold,” but “metal” (iron) in the list of five elements). Old Tibetan Chronicle (PT 1286 and PT 1287) Edited in Bacot DTT. Although this text reproduces old data, transmitted orally (of epic character, chants, ancestral legends) and/or by (archived) writing, the final redaction ought to date from the beginning of the ixth century. Khri srong lde brtsan is there glorified for his Buddhist activities (114) and PT 1286 terminates with the birth of Khri gtsug lde brtsan and of ‘U’i dum brtan (82). We may think that these names were added later. It remains that some (rare) Buddhist expressions are found inserted in the ancient accounts (chu srin, 122; Ri rab lhun po, 81; yi dags, 104), which seems to indicate that they were altered. For the Buddhist expressions which are normal for the era of Khri srong lde brtsan, cf. here 30 (yang dag parn g.yung drung) and n. 61 (sangs rgyas kyi chos). For the expressions that we find in the Shujing 書經, see the note from the text. The verses of the chronicle ms. have been poorly collated, whence a disorder in the continuity of the chapters. See the detailed note in Choix II, 21–31.

88

r.a. stein

Dialogue of two brothers PT 1283.1 (Choix II, 1a 2nd part is the Voyage of the five Uighurs, Bacot 1956). Very long ms., partly torn. The younger brother poses questions, the elder responds. Unidentified (beginning: “another time, in the country Golden Hat and Turquoise (Hat?), two brothers . . .”). These are the maxims of wisdom or of kinds of sayings. The “ancient sayings” (gtam rnying pa dag) are cited many times, e.g. l. 323: “return evil with good, that is fine; but return good with evil, that must not be.” Regulations of conduct between members of a family, to know to be satisfied with that which one has, respect for father and mother and for the superiors (bla ma, as opposed to the inferiors, ‘og ma), etc. “Chinese” vocabulary (yon po and drang po, etc.) and ancient or idiomatic Tibetan (rje blas, rje blon, rje gol, zho sha). Same genre of sayings, in a Buddhist tally, in PT 0992.9 (dialogue of a king and of a minister, see Maxims) and in a dialogue between father and son (PT 0989). Cf. also PT 2111.B. Fawang jing 法王經 (sūtra “King of the Law”) Chinese Dunhuang ms. published in Taishō vol. 85, № 2283. According to Okimoto 1978, 41–2, this sūtra is attested in the catalogs 602, 664, 800 and 900–974 in short and long versions. The author is unknown. By its contents it is attached to Northern Chan. Cf. Lalou 1961 and Obata 1975. The Tibetan translation incorporated in the Peking Kanjur (vol. 36, № 909, Dam pa’i chos kyi rgyal po theg pa chen po’i mdo) is anonymous, but the (or another?) Chos kyi rgyal po’i mdo is cited in the Khyad par ‘phags pa’i bstod pa (Tanjur, vol. 46, № 2001) which was translated around 800 A.D. There are several Tib. mss: ITJ 222, 223, 264, 265, 266, 267 and PT 0624, 2105.2 (Kimura 1981, 119–120). The sūtra is cited in the Chan texts (PT 0116 and PT 0813; cf. here, n. 12. Mixed vocabulary, semi-“Chinese,” semi-“Indian.” Fanwang jing 梵網經 (“Net of Brahmā” sūtra) Taishō vol. 24, № 1484 = Kanjur vol. 36, № 922 (mention: “translated from the Chinese”: at the beginning, confused with the sūtra which preceded it (№ 912): Chos kyi rgya mtsho, but then correctly called Chos kyi rgya mo; anonymous translation).

the two vocabularies in the dunhuang manuscripts

89

The Chinese sūtra, translation attributed to Kumārajīva, is undoubtedly an apocrypha which must be distinguished from Bramajāla-sūtra (Taishō, vol. 1, № 21; Kanjur № 1021). Cf. J. Ware, Notes on the Fanwang ching. Mixed vocabulary (see Obata 1975). (Fo shuo) Fumu ‘enzhong jing (佛說) 父母恩重經 Taishō, vol. 85, № 2887, apocryphal, Dunhuang mss (colophon from S.4467, dated 875 A.D.). Confounded with (or identical to?) Dafangbian fo bao’en jing 大方便佛報恩經, called ‘Phags pa pha ma drin lan bsab pa in the later editions (?), but absent from the Kanjur. In the Ldan Dkar Catalog, we find a Pha ma’i drin lan bstan pa (№ 263) among the texts translated from Chinese. Jingang sanmei jing 金剛三昧經 “Vajra Samādhi,” Taishō, vol. 9, № 273, attributed to the vth century, but without doubt apocryphal. Peking Kanjur, № 803, translated from the Chinese: Rdo rje ting nge ‘dzin gyi chos kyi yi ge; Complete Dunhuang ms.: PT 0623 and citation from the text in PT 0116; cf. Obata, 1975. Lengqie shizi ji 楞伽師資記 Many Dunhuang mss, one of them published in Taishō, vol. 85, № 2837, Tibetan translation, ITJ 710; see here, notes 9, 10, 31. Chinese vocabulary. Maxims Multiple texts of the same genre, but of different provenance, are grouped in the ms. PT 0992 (cf. Lalou Catalog). The very fact of this collection demonstrates how a reader of the era could assimilate and amalgamate multiple elements and different vocabularies. 0992.1. “Teaching on the Distinction Between Good and Evil,” Buddhist, Ind. voc. 0992.2. “Teaching on the Advantages,” maxims, sayings; rather lay. 0992.3. “Teaching on the Characteristics of Evil,” examples. 0992.4. Interview with Confucious and the wise child (Soymié 1954). Adaptation of a Chinese text (doublet PT 1284). Mixed

90

0992.5.

0992.6. 0992.7.

0992.8. 0992.9.

r.a. stein vocabulary (“well, well,” sometimes dge’o, “Chinese,” sometimes legs so, “Indian”). PT 1284 has a final note which indicates without doubt a Buddhist scribe: Zhig Hva yen kyis bris so, “written by . . .” Soymié (335) thought that Zhig is a transcription of the family name Shi 石 (“stone,” *dzyek). I believe that this is rather Shi 釋 (“śākya,” *syek), “family name” of numerous monks. For an analogous case, cf. Rāmāyaṇa. “Sayings of the Wise Nun, Maxims (mdo) Stated for Posterity.” There are other versions (wise monk, PT 0994.1 and 1284.2). Discussed by Mme A. Macdonald (1971, 370–373). Titles separated in the text, as in PT 0992.1 and PT 0992.3: “Exposé on the mores of the evil” (l. 66), “Exposé, saying (mdo) on respect (sri zhu, l. 77), “Exposé, saying (mdo) on Good and Ill” (l. 90). Rather “Chinese” vocabulary. Mention of the civil servant (Chinese or Turkish element). Morals of the laity in a Buddhist framework. Untitled, evocation of Mañjuśrī. Untitled. “Combination of Buddhism (lha chos) and lay morals (myi chos). Mlle Lalou transcribed, wrongly, ‘brel ma-ste (“without relations”). It must read: ‘brel-ma ste. The idea that lay morality might prepare the view of the Buddhist Law was understood around 800 A.D. by the translation of Nāgārjuna and a Dunhuang ms. (Stein 1981, n. 71). Sum pa ma shags (see note). Dialogue between King Go ‘phang and minister ‘U phrad. Embarrassing questions (as in 0992.4) and responses by maxims. Buddhist framework and Ind. vocab. (de bzhin gshegs pa, mtho ris, ngan song).

Bayang jing 八陽經 Complete title Foshuo Tiandi Bayang shenzhou jing 佛說天地八陽神呪經. One of the Chinese mss (I.O. 127) was reproduced in Taishō, vol. 85, № 2897. A mélange of five others, from the Peking collection, was published in the edition and the translation of the Uighur mss (Säkiz yükmäk yaruq) by W. Bang and A. von Gabain. The Tibetan versions were identified by Yoshiro Imaeda in a note from Choix II, 20–21. The Uighur version has been studied by Haneda Tōru from the 1929 (Tōyōgakuhō, V, 3; reprised in his oeuvres, vol. II, Kyōto, 1958) and by

the two vocabularies in the dunhuang manuscripts

91

L. Ligeti (Studia Turcica, Budapest, 1971). We will not speak here about new redactions later than this sūtra, different from the ancient texts (cf. de Jong 1959, 76–77). For these last, many Chinese Dunhuang mss are dated: 855 A.D. (S. 1472), 926 A.D. (P. 2098 Ro), 934 A.D. (S. 5373), 942 A.D. (S. 6667), 968 A.D. (6424 Vo), 988 A.D. (P. 3759). These are the copies made in order to acquire merit. One of the Peking mss (yu 宇 10) carries the dedication of a “great celestial King” (大天王) and dates which should situate it in the xth century. The Uighur mss are not dated, but appeared “quite ancient” (prior to the xith century) to Bang and Gabain. The Tibetan mss are not dated. One of them (PT 0749), in “Chinese vocabulary,” carries the mention dge slong Dpal gyi rdo rjes bris // zhus sho, “written by the monk Dpal gyi rdo rje; corrected.” Another (in “Indian vocabulary”) is signed by “the monk (dge slong) She rab ‘od (PT 0106). In the last paragraph, it carries a supplementary phrase which is not found in the Chinese text: ‘di ni stong pa’i rang bzhin / rdo rje’i ting nge ‘dzin yin no, “this is the nature even of the Void, the vajra samādhi.” The second expression is the title of an apocryphal sūtra, translated from Chinese (Chan), the Rdo rje ting nge ‘dzin gyi chos kyi yi ge = Jingang sanmei jing 金剛三昧經 (Taishō, № 273—Peking Kanjur, № 803 and Dunhuang ms. PT 0263, Chin. voc.), whereas the ms. PT 0106 is written in Ind. voc. One Tibetan version (in Ind. voc.) has been preserved in the Kanjur (Peking, vol. 11, № 693; without date nor name, it was translated and edited by Huth and Weber, 1891). An exceptional and remarkable thing, one of the Dunhuang mss (PT 1258) is a transcription of the Chinese text in Tibetan writing (identified by Imaeda, loc. cit.), something which demonstrates its popularity in the Sino-Tibetan milieu of Dunhuang. Moreover, this sūtra (Par yang kyi = Bayang jing 八陽經, in one scroll) figures in a list of copied sūtras found in the colophon of a Tibetan transcription of the Sukhāvatī-sūtra (Thomas and Clausen 1927, 293–4). This colophon is dated to a year of the tiger. There, it is stated that these copies were effected by or for a certain “Ha se to ‘ab ‘ga den chun shi ‘gi, (alias?) Khang rje Man, in the land (of?) Gir kis.” On the verso, we find 31 columns in Chinese and two lines in Tibetan: ‘di yang de ‘i tshe / Thu pod Yang ‘brug gis bris pa’o (with the wish to be reborn in heaven). The authors have translated “written by Thu-pod (yaṅ), a Hbrug.” It may be that Thu pod, that is to say a reading of Tufan

92

r.a. stein

(Tibetan, Turkish: Tūpüt). The title on the recto ought to designate a (Uighur?) civil servant of Hexi 河西. Prayers of De ga g.yu tshal Dunhuang mss PT 0016 and ITJ 751 (Thomas TLTD II, 92–109, and two fragments, uncataloged, 109, 112). Thomas linked it to the SinoTibetan peace treaty of 730. Yet contemporary scholars tied it to that of 821–2, seeing there the wishes expressed on the occasion of the erection of a stele and of a monastery in order to celebrate the peace at the time of the treaty between Chinese, Tibetans and Uighurs and date it to 823 (Yamaguchi 1980, 34). The place is De ga g.yu tshal, situated in Dbyar mo thang described as the “plain of the treaty” (mjal dum thang). There are mentioned the high functionaries of Tibet, of Mdo gams, of Kam bcu (Ganzhou), of Go cu, and the military of Mkhar tsan, of Kya cu (Guazhou), of Phyug tsams, of ‘Brom khong. According to the study by Yamaguchi, the Mkhar tshan of the era were situated in the region of Lingzhou, alias Lingwu 靈武, i.e. far to the East, in the Ordos. It is there that the frontier between China and Tibet (Alašan) was fixed, according to the Treaty of 821–2. There, there was a sub-prefecture of Mingsha 鳴沙, a name which we find in Dunhuang (Shazhou). Another placename is proper to the two regions. This is Yulin 榆林 (*yu lim) “forest of elms”: 1) a name of the celebrated caves of Wanfo xia 萬佛峽 (c. 30 km to the East of Dunhuang), and 2) twice in the Ordos, a) = Suiyuan, river north of the Yellow River; b) = Xiazhou (later occupied by the Xixia). A 3rd Yulin, a military post, existed between ‘Anxi 安息 (Turfan) and Yanqi (Karašar) in the viiith century. A temple of Yu lim (= Yulin) is mentioned together with Kva cu and Phyug mtshams in the ms. PT 0997 and, with wishes for the Tibetan king (lha sras kyi sku yon), in PT 2122. In these conditions, we might ask ourselves if the name G.yu tshal “forest of turquoise” is not half translation (“forest”), half transcription (g.yu = yu?) of Yulin. The difficulty comes from the fact that the Treaty of 821–2 only mentions the peace between Tibetans and Chinese (and not the Uighurs), whereas the Prayers speak of an accord between two or three countries, China, Drug (Turks, Uighurs)(and the ‘Jang). One such treaty (between China, Hor and ‘Jang) is described by Dpa’o Gtsug lag phreng ba (ja, 123b–124a, summarized after citing from the Sba bzhed).

the two vocabularies in the dunhuang manuscripts

93

It would have been concluded (mjal dum) after the war between the three countries for the region of ‘Ga’ (?) on the initiative of Khri Sum rje Stag snar, in the era of Khri srong lde btsan. This minister organized a gathering in Dbyar mo thang. In the Rgya Bod yig tshang (Seattle ms., 120b–121a), the three countries are: China, Gru gu and Ljang. According to Ne’u paṇḍita (114), ‘Bro Khri gsum rtag snang erected a temple at Gling Khri rtse (Liangzhou or Lingzhou?) in order to efface the sins (of killing) committed during the war against China. The Ljang can hardly be other than the Qiang Dangxiang (since the Nanzhao seem excluded). The Prayers place on scene King Khri gtsug lde btsan (r. 815–841), Zhang Khri sum rje and Zhang Lha bzang. These personages are well known in that era (also in the Chinese mss, cf. Demiéville 1952, 244–246, and 280 for Lha bzang klu dpal). They are associated with the text of the prayers (in order to efface the sins gained in the war). All this remains obscure (for me in any case). For the problem which occupies us, Richardson (1977) revived the style and the language “of a colonial regime of the frontier.” The vocabulary comprehends the archaic Tibetan formulas and the Buddhist terms in Ind. voc. (byin, rlabs and byin rlabs; rnam par ‘phruld pa, dkyil ‘lhor, mtho ris, ‘phags pa, etc.). Prophesy of Khotan There are two versions, one Chinese and one Tibetan. The first, a Dunhuang ms. (Taishō, vol. 51, № 2090 = P. chin. 2139), is called “Note on the complete disappearance of the Fabricated Law of the tathāgata Śākyamuni, translated by the great teacher of the land, Facheng” (alias Chos grub, c. 770–858), 釋迦牟尼如來像法滅盡之記, ?唐法成譯. As the name of the country, normally Da Fan 大蕃 (great Tibet) was removed, the text was undoubtedly published after the fall of Shazhou in 848 (in the text, Tibet is always called “land of the red faces,” gdong dmar = zhimian; only once, T., vol. 51, p. 996c, the author states zhimian Da Fan guo 赤面大蕃國). This is an adaptation of various sūtras, notably of the Candragarbha-sūtra (already known in 824, Ldan Dkar Catalog), which announced the disappearance of the Religion, in the history of Khotan. The Tibetan version exists among the Dunhuang mss (ITJ 597, 598, 601.2 and PT 0960 = Choix I) and in the Tanjur (Peking 5699) where it is followed by “The History (Annals) of Khotan.” The entirety was translated by Thomas TLTT, I (1935) and

94

r.a. stein

by Emmerick (1967). Neither the author nor the translator are indicated. The role of Chos grub remains obscure. He was bilingual. The Chinese version claims to be a translation. There was thus a Tibetan model. Yet the Tibetan version seems to have been redacted at least in part based on the Chinese version. We find there the Chinese names transcribed into Tibetan (such as Shu lig = Shuluo 疎勒, An se = ‘Anxi 安息, ‘Ge’u to shan = Niutou shan 牛頭山 and, above all, So byi = Subi). There, the author speaks of the te’u shi (= daoshi 道士, Daoists) and of the “king of the wind” (rlung gi rgyal po), an expression unknown in Tibetan and visibly translated from the Chinese “the godking Count of the (Wind)” (T., p. 996b feng (missing) bo shenwang 風伯神王). Chos grub thus was able to collaborate in the redaction of the Tibetan version. The latter is in Ind. voc. (e.g. mdo sde, mu stegs), vocabulary that Chos grub employed constantly. It is shocking that for “Fabricated Law” (xiangfa 像法), the Tibetan version does not employ the term from the Mhvy, but retains a translation inspired by the Chinese. Rāmāyaṇ a Multiple Dunhuang mss. The initial work of Thomas and Lalou was reprised in a more complete manner by Balbir (1963) = PT 0981 and de Jong (1972, 1977), PT 0982, 0983, ITJ 737 (see the detailed note in Choix I, 24–26). There are also fragments in Khotanese and in Uighur (and Chinese versions). De Jong (1972, 198) remarks on the absence of Buddhist influences, but the colophons (Tibetan, Uighur) demonstate that the scribes were Buddhist. A homage to the Buddha was inserted into the middle of the Tibetan ms. ITJ 737–c, the Khotanese and Chinese versions are in the form of jātaka; the redaction was motivated by a Buddhist milieu. The vocabulary also is in part “Indian” (Buddhist, e.g. mtho ris, bsod nams and de bzhin gshegs pa). De Jong (1972, 191) raised the point that the name of Sīta (Rol rnyed ma), belonging to the title of a work, was incorporated in Mhvy (№ 7629). The remainder of the vocabulary is idiomatically Tibetan. Sum pa ma shags Ms. PT 0992, Sum pa ma shags ched po zhes bya ba / phyi rabs kyi dper bzhag pa’i mdo (same title as ma sheg (shegs) pa, in PT 1382 and PT 1399), ITJ 730 (ed. Thomas AFL, 107–8). In PT 0992, this text is

the two vocabularies in the dunhuang manuscripts

95

inserted among other moral writings (see note, Maxims). The title ma shags remains inexplicable. The Sum pa, although quickly incorporated into the Tibetan society, was an aboriginal tribe situated in the Tibetan frontier, where they were in contact with the Chinese (cf. 78–9). The vocabulary is at times “Chinese” or “ancient,” Tibetan (‘dzangs kyi ‘phrul, “wise,” yon po, rje blas, sri zhu) and “Indian” (bsod nams, yon tan, spyod lam). Suvarṇ aprabhāsa-sūtra Chinese translation by Yijing (dated 703 A.D.) and Tibetan translation of the latter by Chos grub (ed. and trans. Nobel 1958 = Kanjur, № 174). Tibetan Dunhuang mss studied by Nobel (I, xxi ff.), Simonsson (1957, 178–209) and de Jong (cf. n. 1). Another translation (of Ye shes sde, c. 800 A.D.) is preserved (Kanjur, № 175). Among the Chinese mss, one is dated 854, another c. 900. Nobel (xxvi–vii) demonstrates the translation differences in the Tibetan mss. He also cites Bu ston (Obermiller, II, 186) according to whom this sūtra had already been translated into Tibetan under Mes ag tshom (r. 704–754). He also notes one Khotanese translation (partly from Sanskrit), whereas the Uighur and Sogdian translations are based on the Chinese text of Yijing (xxxiii–iv), both undoubtedly from the xth century. Ind. voc. (normal for Chos grub), same in the Dunhuang ms. (PT 0507) studied by Simonsson (for some notable variants, cf. n. 62). Da fangbian fo bao’en jing 大方便佛報恩經 Taishō, № 156 (iiird century?). Peking Kanjur, vol. 40, № 1022, Thabs mkhas pa chen po sangs rgyas drin lan bsab pa’i mdo, translated from the Chinese (Ldan Dkar Catalog № 253, *sangs rgyas kyi drin la lan gyis blan pa’i chos kyi yi ge, section of the Chinese translation); cf. n. 23 and Fufu’enzhong jing. Da foding jing 大佛頂經 Taishō vol. 19, № 945 (Śūraṃ gama-sūtra, apocrypha, dated 705 A.D.); Peking Kanjur № 902, 903, translated from the Chinese; Ldan Dkar Catalog № 260, Gtsug tor chen po las bdud kyi le’u bstan pa (section of the Chinese translation); cited in the mss PT 0116, 0118; cf. Obata 1975.

96

r.a. stein

Datong fang guang jing 大通方廣經 Taishō, vol. 85, № 2871 (Dunhuang ms., S. 1847), Peking Kanjur № 930, 931 (Thar pa chen po), translated from the Chinese (Ldan Dkar Catalog, № 258, section from the sūtras translated from Chinese), also called Dpang skong chen po as opposed to Dpang skong chung ngu (= Phyag brgya pa, Kanjur, № 933). There are some Dunhuang mss (ITJ 207, 250, PT 0092, for the “great” Dpang skong; and ITJ 208–211 for the “small”); cf. Obata 1975. Zhanguo ce 戰國策 Dunhuang ms. PT 1291, ed. Imaeda 1980. Like the Shujing 書經, this is rather an adaptation or a paraphrase. Imaeda does not discuss the vocabulary. It is indigenous or ancient (see yong, rtse rje). In one case (Imaeda 1980, 56, § 1), a proper noun is at once transcribed and translated (or interpreted): Huizi 惠子 becomes gtsug (lag) can Hye tshe, Hye tshe the wise (or expert). Bilingual vocabulary Ms. PT 1261. According to Li Fang-kuei (1961), this is a glossary taken from the translation of the Yogacārabhūmi by Xuanzang (T. 1579, ch. 13–20, 31–34 = Peking Tanjur 4536, 5537). According to Li, the text certainly dates to the middle of the ixth century. Despite the Chinese model, the vocabulary is “Indian” (‘phags pa, mdo, etc.). This fact speaks in favor of the dating by Li (posterior to 814). Vocabulary of Dpal dbyangs Ms. PT 1257. See the note in Choix II (leaves badly folded together). Bilingual Sino-Tibetan in two parts: 1) list of sūtras, with colophon: “written and revised by Dpal dbyangs” (bris te zhus). Yamaguchi (1975) thought that it might concern the celebrated Sang shi, which enjoyed a great role around 750 A.D. in the quest for Chinese books. However, there were other Dpal dbyangs. That of the colophon was perhaps not the author of the list, but a simply copyist. Vocabulary at once “Indian” and “Chinese” (see 23). * * * For the Shujing 書經 (85–87) see an additional note in the next volume.

TIBETICA ANTIQUA II

THE USE OF METAPHORS FOR HONORIFIC DISTINCTIONS IN THE EPOCH OF THE TIBETAN KINGS R.A. Stein We have long since known that in the royal epoch, the hierarchy of high functionaries was marked by the granting of “ensigns” ( yi ge or yig tshang; Ch. gaoshen 告身) of precious materials. The higher the rank to which one was elevated, the loftier the material. This institution was understood both by the Chinese historians of the Tang period and by the Chinese and Tibetan Dunhuang manuscripts.1 Demiéville identified these ensigns with the bifurcated objects ( fu 符) which served to authenticate the functionaries in their mission. They were often in the form of fish (gold and crimson; silver and “bluegreen”). They were carried in a small bag or sachet. There were also those in the form of a tiger (under the Tang).2 1 P. Demiéville, Le concile de Lhasa, 284–6. The Chinese information dates back to the end of the 8th century (Tongdian). The Chinese manuscript translated by Demiéville concerns the same era (P. chin. 2765 = PT 1070). The Tibetan documentation is furnished by the mss PT 1071 and 1089 (edited and translated by M. Lalou, “Revendications des fonctionnaires de Grand Tibet”). The problem has been discussed by Yamaguchi Zuihō, 「沙州漢人による吐蕃二軍団の成立」 , and 「吐蕃王國成立と法令・制度」. In these manuscripts, the ensigns are called yi ge. It is likewise in the inscription of Lhasa (764 A.D.) and in that of Zhwa’i lha khang (812). In the Old Tibetan Chronicle, there is a question of a turquoise yi ge given in recompense to a wise and expert minister (115, l. 8). In the Annals, for the year 699 (18, § 50), we read of yig gtsang and gifts given (in recompense) for loyalty (in 759, p. 57, yig gtsang), but in 763 (60) we read of yi ge made from ke ke ru and from turquoise given to great ministers (blon che). In later texts, we generally see yig tshang (e.g. The Chronicle of Ne’u paṇḍita, 71; Sba bzhed, 10 and 53; Dpa’o Gtsug lag phreng ba, chapter ja, 78b; Rlangs po ti bse ru, 17a and Rgya Bod yig tshang, Seattle ms., 122b–123a). 2 R. Des Rotours, “Les insignes en deux parties ( fu) sous la dynastie des T’ang.” Curiously, in this exhaustive work the word gaoshen 告身 is never used. According to Morohashi’s dictionary, the gaoshen was an order of mission. It is rightly identified with the fu by the Tangshu (Des Retours, Le traité des examens, 44: “lettres en deux parties” ( fu) appelées “titre de nomination,” (gaoshen). A seal was added to this title, gaoshen yin (Tongdian, Des Retours, op. cit., 219). In the Dunhuang grottoes (and in the manuscripts), we read only of officials (e.g. guanglu daifu) equipped with “a bag of gold and crimson fish” or simply “gold and crimson” ( jinci 金紫) and “silver-green” ( yin qing 銀青); see Shazhou wenlu, 11b,

98

r.a. stein

This identification is uncertain. Following the Chinese Tang documents, the Tibetan “ensigns” were affixed to the chest or the shoulder (somewhat like the medals of modern soldiers). They were called “decoration, (sartorial) ornament (zhangshi 章飾 or zhangfu 章服).” Demiéville thought that the Tibetan costume undoubtedly derived from Chinese inspiration (285). He cites the Tangshu, according to which a Tibetan ambassador (extremely well informed about Chinese affairs) received as a gift, in 730, a robe, a girdle, and a sachet holding fish ensigns. He refused the latter saying that “this sartorial ensign” (zhangfu) did not exist in Tibet. We are ignorant of the form of Tibetan “ensigns” mentioned above. However, there are others that had a determined form or that were associated with an image metaphorically exalting a particular virtue. In the Old Tibetan Chronicles (115, l. 9–10), following the mention of various yi ge given in recompense (see n. 1), we read that “as a sign (symbol) of bravery, one gives a globule(?)3 of a tiger.” (dpa’i ba’i mtshan mar/stagi thog bu stsal lo). What a banal image! In China, since antiquity (Zhouli), brave soldiers have been called “tigers” (hupen 虎賁). In Tibet, this image is attested by the Chinese Annals; “Near the tombs of the nobles, one finds a construction plastered in red on which a white tiger is painted. This would be an emblem (jing 旌, a sort of flag of military command) of bravery for those who have distinguished themselves in battle. For their lifetime, they assumed a skin (of tiger).”4 The Chinese Annals further attest, by another example, that the ancient Tibetans (like other peoples) had the custom of designating functions indirectly, by metaphorical, allegorical or symbolic language. In order to raise troops, the functionary carried a golden arrow as a sign of authority. The swift messenger carried the name “flying

24a–b, etc., and the Sino-Tibetan treaty of Lhasa (821–2), South face, l. 20–1 and 26–7; the names of the ensigns have not been translated, but only transcribed into Tibetan: kim ci’, l. 20, and ‘gin tsheng, l. 26. 3 Translation doubtful. What comes to mind is thog gu or tog, an honorific ornament on the hat or the helmets in the Manchu era, in China and in Tibet. But this is only a comparison. In the Mahāvyupatti, tog serves to translate ketu, the top of a victory banner; cf. n. 8. 4 Xin Tangshu, 216 B (Pelliot, Histoire ancienne du Tibet, 130). Contrariwise (216 A; op. cit., 81), the tail of a fox was attached to beaten or cowardly soldiers, for their shame. The image of a tiger remains common in the later literature (notably in the epics). S. Ch. Das (dictionary, 1068b) gives the name of the military penal code: “law of the warrior-tigers” (dpa’ bo stag gi zhal lce). See below.

distinctions in the epoch of the tibetan kings

99

bird (variant: horse)” ( fei niao [ma] shi, 飛鳥 [馬] 使). The degree of urgency was signified by the carrying, on the chest, of one or more silver falcons. This was an ensign (Pelliot 1961, 64 and 8). In the “ancient vocabulary” (brda rnying), the messenger is called bya ma rta, “halfhorse, half-bird.”5 The Tibetan taste for indirect language and metaphor is well known through records of their palavers, the exchanges of challenges and proverbs or wise sayings, texts that are equally represented in the Dunhuang manuscripts as in the later literature. This is in itself significant. One Dunhuang document permits us to see in detail how this genre of metaphor was utilized for ensigns or for honorific decorations. This is ms. ITJ (Stein) 506, recto (only one leaf ). The opening is missing. The part which interests us occupies the first four lines. The first paragraph ends at line nine. The second begins at line ten, after a space. The end is well marked. The remainder takes up another topic (l. 15–30, auspicious days for the bath6). An attempt at translation: “(1)(Those who) have been designated as “heroes” (braves, dpa’ bo), I7 present them with a collar (?, globule?)8 of tiger. (2) As my ordained monks have exhaustively experienced the difficulties of the Vehicles of the Tripitạ ka and as, despite these difficulties, they have arrived at the true meaning, they have been designated as “sages” (‘dzangs); I present them with an “ensign of gold” of great size. (4) As my ordained monks have themselves (5–6) demonstrated, according to the Vehicles of the Tripiṭaka, how the beings of the Three Worlds and(?) the beings of the Five (. . ., blank) (ought to comport themselves) in conformity with the vinaya, I present them with (the ornament or ensign) “eye of (feather of ) peacock” (rma bya’i mdongs). (6–7) Since it is thus, as they observe the two hundred fifty-four (rules of ) observances, they are honored with an “ensign of turquoise” of great size. (8) As they are dressed in a pure (?, white, transparent?) vestment, (ornamented) with drawing(s) of golden goose (geese), they are more magnificent than the triple

5 The winged horse or horse-birds (bya rta) are frequently mentioned in the epics (and elsewhere, e.g. in India). Bya ma rta is attested in the Li shi’i gur khang. 6 See the text transcribed at the end. 7 This is certainly the king who is speaking, since he is giving an order, bcad (without doubt for bka’s bcad). 8 I correct ‘gong from gong and understand gong ba, “collar.” We could also think of gong bu “globule,” since the author also speaks of “globule” (?) of a tiger as an ensign of bravery; cf. n. 4. We will see the word gong appear in the military ensign (see below, 107).

100

r.a. stein

collar (?, sum ‘gong; cf. n. 8) of the “brave” (?). (9) They are thus honored by (my royal) order and glorified by the meaning (of these images) /// (10) / / The seal (or sign)9 of the (royal ) order: a bird ‘phar ma ku kang; the seal of the muster: a stag with eight points; (11) the seal (which is) a sign of market (or town; military group?): a lion which roars; the seal (which is) a sign of pastoralists (nomads): a lha gang; (12) the seal (which is) a sign of religion (Buddhism): a bird shang shang te’u (crane?); the seal (which is) a sign of a messenger: a man galloping on a horse. (13) Thus there are six. // The seal of the neck (throat, word) of the prince10 // (that phrase is perhaps too much). “The Body (of the king or of the prince): Sumeru; (his) face (or his speech): the sun and moon; (his) mind (or his heart): the ocean; (his) command: the svastika; (his) merit: the jewel. With the seal of the neck (throat, speech) this makes seven.” The redaction or the copy of this fragment has visibly been disrupted. After a series of six seals, the series ended, we twice find the “seal of the neck of the king,” considered seventh at the end. We read initially “this makes six,” but then: “this makes seven with the neck.” But instead of indicating what was the sign or symbol of the neck, there is enumerated, after this mention, another series of six images which have a visible rapport with the king or prince. The fifth image, the svastika for the command, seems redundant with the first seal of the first series (a bird for the order). This series is clearly of tantric inspiration. It is the fivefold classification: Body, Speech, Mind, Works (phrin las) and Merit ( yon tan). However, the second element, zhal, seems to have been understood not as a mouth (speech), but as a face since the image is the sun and moon (the two eyes). Moreover, the fifth element has been replaced by the command (bka’), this being redundant with the first element of the first series. Finally, a sixth has been added: the sex (?).

9 Phyag rgya has served to translate mudrā in the Mahāvyupatti (thus around 815 A.D.). In India also, mudrā designated at the time the seal, the mould, the matrix and the imprint or the trace, thus the sign. 10 To my understanding, this expression is the only one to be concretely attested to in a document of this era. It concerns a “Chan Writing” (bsam gtan gyi yi ge), ITJ (709.11) noted by Kimura (cf. Tibetica Antiqua I, n. 13). There it is said that this writing “appeared under the sign (or seal ) of the throat (of the speech) of the divine king Khri srong lde brtsan” (Kimura has translated: “by order of the king”; lha btsan po Khri srong lde brtsan gi (sic!) mgur gyi phyag rgya ‘og tu ‘byung ba).

distinctions in the epoch of the tibetan kings

101

In any event, this fragment is interesting on more than one level. 1. The “diplomas” or ensigns, which are otherwise reserved for high functionaries and the form of which we are ignorant, are attributed here to eminent monks. 2. They seem to be arranged into the same categories as the honorific signs of clothing which exalt, for example, virtue in battle, signs called rtags in the Old Tibetan Chronicle. 3. In the context of the fragment, these “letters” (diplomas) or signs seem also to relate to the same category as the “seals” or allegorical or metaphorical signs. We will see that the real seals have been called phyag rgya or bka’ rtags and that these words are associated with yi ge for designating one and the same object. The use of seals is well-attested in the epoch of Buddhist kings (ca. 790–840) to which we may without doubt attribute this fragment. In the inscription of the Sino-Tibetan treaty of 821–2 (West, l. 74), it is said that “the two great kings (of Tibet and of China) have applied their seals (phyag rgyas btab), while the ministers associated with the treaty have “written their signature (?)” (l. 75, lag yig du bris te).11 The form of the seal of the Tibetan king is unknown. Yet many official messages from the royal court bore some images in addition to the text. Yoshiro Imaeda drew up the list of these instances and translated the inscriptions.12 In four legible cases, the seal is called phyag rgya, in three others we read bka’ rtags. The missives are sent from the (royal, in one case Lhan kar) palace, from a minister (bde blon), from a military division (khrom, with a fortified town, undoubtedly) and from pastoralists (‘brog). Regarding the palace and the minister, the image is a “bird with spread wings” (three cases), regarding another minister: “two people seated,” with regard to a large military unit (khrom chen po): a winged lion. We find also “elephant or horse” and “horse(?).” These realia accord with the fragment:

11 We could also translate: “have written (or drawn) their ensign by hand” (taking yig for yig tshang, yi ge). It could be a question of their title, but we may also think of an image. It is true that the seal of certain ministers contained the image of a bird. In the Chinese Dunhuang manuscripts (of which six date from the 10th century), we find signatures in the form of birds, sometimes (five mss) “with wings spread” (D. Eliasberg, “Les signatures en forme d’oiseau dans les manuscripts chinois de Touen-houang”). 12 Choix de documents tibétains conservés à la Bibliothèque Nationale, II, 16–7.

102

r.a. stein

ITJ 506

Seals found

Royal command: bird Military unit or city (khrom): lion Pastoralists: (‘brog): lha gang

Palace command: bird khrom: winged lion ‘brog: horse (?); unidentifiable

The use of images and metaphors for seals and ensigns is also highlighted by two other manuscripts discovered and analyzed by Ariane Macdonald (Spanien), PT 1290, recto, and PT 1067, verso.13 These are copies which combine fragments of different texts. One of those is “Catalogue of Principalities” (PT 1286 and doublets). One poem, attributed to the famous minister-monk (Dpal gyi) Yon tan, is intended to glorify the king Khri gtsug lde brtsan. As Mme Macdonald has shown, this fact dates the fragment to c. 815–22. It is introduced by images, “signs of happiness” (skyid pa’i rtags), which explain without doubt the name of the reign (skyid rtag), adopted by this king (op. cit., 319).14 The poem evokes an auspicious landscape. Its vocabulary is in part Buddhist (vajra hill, “eternal” river, g.yung drung = śāśvata) and includes two foreign words (the one for monk is Chinese): the flower hva and the small bird ǰrǰan.15 This poem is followed by another which evokes the house. Between the two there is found a small passage: one searches to find something good or auspicious for “the day (sun) of today,” the author evokes the elements (of architecture?) qualified successively by: 1) gold, 2) turquoise, 3) bcod, 4) blue-green ram le, 5) white conch (a hierarchy of precious materials analogous to that of the “ensigns”). The last phrase 13 Macdonald, “Une lecture des Pelliot Tibétain,” 317–26. The photos of these mss are found in Choix II, pl. 600–3 and pl. 372. Other texts fortified with seals (PT 1217; PT 1083; PT 1085; PT 1113) have been studied by Yamaguchi Zuihō. He distinguished between phyag rgya, “royal seal,” and bka’ brtags, (transmission of a) royal order”; cf. here n. 1, (Zhuihō, 「沙州漢人による吐蕃二軍団の成立」 , 8). 14 For the whole, see the analyses of Mme Macdonald. In certain cases, my analysis and translations differ. 15 Hva surely represents the Chinese hua “flower.” A flower of this name is known in Tibetan: ha lo (eight sisters flowers ha lo in Vaidūrya dkar po, 141a; ha, ha lo or ha de in Klu ‘bum, 164a, 167a–b, 168, 250d, 289b, 352b, 363a, 366a). According to Samten G. Karmay, this flower grows in Amdo and is used for rituals for the klu. This word is already attested in the Dunhuang mss (Thomas AFL, 119: men tog ni hva lo mchon, and 126; this would be the rose hollyhock, aconite or mauve). In the ritual Phur pa gnam lcags spu gri, lo rgyus chapter, 13b, a goddess steals a flower; in punishment, she is condemned to earth where she becomes a breeder of birds who contributes to the construction of the Bya rung kha shor stūpa. At her death, she is reborn as the goddess Pra mo hva.

distinctions in the epoch of the tibetan kings

103

mentions the construction of a house (of gold) with a door of gold. It forms a link between the two poems which are devoted to the metaphors derived from the house. The first sentence presents the house with the note: “by degrees (gradually, one after the other), these make six” (rim ste drug). Then, in the middle, the courtyard, “this makes seven,” with the golden door “this makes eight,” with the borders(?) “this makes nine” and with the seal (which serves as authentication, as “truth,” bden) “this makes ten.”16 The author here makes a visible allusion to the golden door mentioned at the end of the intermediary passage (it takes a seal to open it). In effect, the poem continues with the phrase “we others,” “weak (of inferior status) made of brass” (ra gan dag bdag zhan ste) and with the indication that one single (seal?) alone would never be sufficient to open that door.17 At this juncture, the text is interrupted in ms. PT 1290, recto. Without a single mark of interruption, there follows a whole other text, which will be examined later. Mss PT 1290, verso and PT 1067 continue with the enumeration of many totals marked by the number nine, e.g. the variegated: tiger and leopard; the great: sovereign and ministers; the sharp: arrow and lance. A final, very obscure, verse ends this fragment. While PT 1067 has a line which I do not understand, PT 1290, verso (l. 11) speaks of “we others, people (subjects) of Tibet” (cf. below: “we other weak . . .”) qualified by the bravery parallel to that of a tiger, in order to speak then of Hor (the rest of the ms. is ruined). Finally, after a verse which announces a decision by Heaven, Earth, three men and three cadavers, the fragment ends with a wish for

16 Mme Macdonald (223) counts six precious materials in the intermediate passage, while adding as first the “precious stones” (which I did not find in the text). She has put these six elements (perhaps placing one over the other) in relation to a series (rim) of six houses which she imagines are made of precious stones. This is not quite right. In the intercalated passage there are only five materials. The house is counted as the sixth (but one may also understand it as a series of six constructions, whether vertically, in stages, or horizontally, as successive buildings). Mme Macdonald has not included the sixth element of this enumeration. This is the seal which has the value of evidence of truth (phyag rgya dag bden dang bcu). 17 Mme Macdonald has understood that the “weak” (humble) men are “(similar to) brass” and ought not to open a single door. However, as is shown as in the following verses, the author or copyist seems to have been referencing “ensigns” of grade (in gold, etc., brass, copper).

104

r.a. stein

happiness18 and makes an allusion to the apposition of a seal on a letter (sug rgya). We see that the author or the copyist of this amalgam of texts has in his head, obscurely, an association of ideas wherein the ensigns and the seals serve as an authentication of certain messages. This is also seen from a missive with seals which treat the fragment from ms. PT 1290, recto, after the interruption of the poem (l. 6–7) with the mention of the door which does not open with only one (seal?). The passage (l. 10): Bka’ rtags yi ge phyag rgya zhig rlagna ‘rings sam myi rings pa las sdod du gzug pa dang [above this, there are these five words: lha dpal gyi za snga nas] bskal ba’i thag po na lastsogste / slungs la mci’o ‘tsal gyi bka’ rtags dang / phyag rgya yi ge zhig shul na rlag na’ slad logs (l. 11) gyi slur (= slung?) nga cang pha la bka’ rtags rlag gam ma rlag19 brtagste / slung cang slad logs pos ‘di nas mchis pa na bka’ rtags mcismad chis mchid gyis phye na ‘khon shi la mchi ba’i lo drung brtagste myi rigs zig na’i sod du rchugste bkra (= bka’) rtags gzhod mgls nod par bka’ rtags gsol ba’ ong shig driste rings pa (l. 12) zhig de // pho nya lcags bya thogs thogs pa zig na’ gar bka’ scalde mchi bar / slungs gcig nas gcig du rtags gyi stem (? ste ma?) ‘phyis slebs par skyol de thong shig // pho nya phyag rgya thang las shor tam (missing ma?) shord bla yug dang ‘geggupas gsol ba’i thang la’i // po nya zig yanman nas mchis kyan rung [above this, there are these words: g gsol zin mchisna bka’ stsal pa and bla yug] // (end of fragment).

Mme Macdonald has analyzed this difficult passage (325). She has recognized that it concerns instructions addressed to monk messengers about seals or other documents of identification or authentication. It also concerns, according to her, the transmission from relay to relay (slungs, or commissariats) and the verification of authenticity. She has well noted that the emissary carries as an ensign an “iron bird” and she thought that the command is “apparently” given by Bla yug ‘Geg pu pa (she writes further Bla yug bka’ stsal pa). She also combines the principal text with three lines (in a different hand) written between the lines. These intercalated notes concern a person of high stature (lha dpal), the author of a message. In the first poem of ms. PT 1290, recto, on the site, we read also, above l. 8, the words rje lha dpal, “divine, glorious sovereign,” without continuation. 18

It is possible that this verse reprises the intercalated passage where one looks for something auspicious for “this day.” 19 The syllable rla- is oddly written: a large la carrying the ra is inscribed over the last vertical mark.

distinctions in the epoch of the tibetan kings

105

I am no more capable than Mme Macdonald of furnishing a complete translation. In each case, the seals and the ensigns or other distinctions have visibly the same function. We envisage the case where these seals, etc., would be broken or destroyed (rlag na, twice, and once rlag gam ma rlag) or even lost (shor) by the messenger. An examination (btags)20 is then made by an “exterior” (?, slad logs = slad rol ) slungs. One examined the writ (lo grung) concerning quarrels (‘khon) in the case where the document (?) would be opened (phye na). In case of fault (myi rigs pa), (the culpable one) should be executed (?, sod du rchugs). It is also a question of then knowing if the message was urgent or not (rings sam myi rings, twice). The messenger (pho nya) carries an iron bird. We have seen above the Chinese and Tibetan expressions which attest to this image. At the beginning (l. 10), the author speaks of a fish, etc. (nya lastsogste) entrusted (bskal ba) to a messenger (?; the passage is obscure; thag po nya is perhaps to be read as pho nya, messenger?). Whatever the real contents of this passage, it is as well to note the associations of ideas which have led the scribe to pass without break from a metaphoric poem to a message. To my sense, this link does not occur randomly. It is necessary to study elsewhere the purely literary problems. However, to understand the document, we must in all cases remember that these poetic expressions and metaphors are used for the same image or form as the seals and the ensigns. These last are made of a hierarchy of precious materials. The more precious of these materials (gold, turquoise, etc.) are obscurely evoked before mention of the house. Yet in the metaphor of this house of gold, it leads to the gate of gold that no (seal) can open except for the seal in question. However, one speaks on this subject of “our other weaklings (made of ) brass.” We may be reminded of the ensigns of brass and of copper attributed to more base grades of the hierarchy of functionaries in the Chinese and Tibetan lists. This ensign or seal would have been found insufficient to open the “golden door.” The expression “our other” refers to the end of the fragment (PT 1290, v., l. 11): “Our other people (subjects) of Tibet” (thus “weak,” not noble). Finally, the same fragment exalts the bravery (equal to that of a tiger) in speaking of “sons 20

One difficulty in translation comes from the confusion of the words btags and rtags. For the seals of the royal commands, we read bka’ rtags, but for the others we read that these seals are signs (rtags). A third homophone intervenes as well: brtags, “to examine.” For these expressions, cf. Mme Macdonald, 324.

106

r.a. stein

of Tibet” (Bod kyi bu) as opposed to the Hor (broken fragment). We thus find yet again a metaphor (the tiger) utilized by the ensign which honors the brave. These ancient documents (before c. 1000 A.D.) are confirmed by the later historical tradition. As for the other institutions of the royal epoch, the later literature has an understanding of these ancient documents.21 One such tradition has been preserved in the Blon po bka’ thang (c. 1350 A.D.), ch. IV (fol. 227, a–b = 8a–10a) and in the Chronicles (Chos ‘byung Mkhas pa’i dga’ ston) of Dpa’o Gtsug lag phreng ba (ch. ja, 19a). The first has been translated by F.W. Thomas. The second has been studied by G. Tucci and G. Uray.22 However, the information from Dpa’o Gtsug lag phreng ba confirms that given in ms. ITJ 506, at the same time rendering it more comprehensible from the fact that it indicates the entire system of the classification of ensigns. The passage from the Blon po bka’ thang (repeated by Dpa’o Gtsug lag phreng ba, ja, 19b–20b) does not directly concern our subject. It is dedicated to the military organization by groups of one thousand (stong sde) distributed between the “Four Horns” (Dbu ru, G.yo ru, G.yas ru and Ru lag), each divided into high and low (stod, smad). Yet as each Horn is characterized by a series of distinctive signs, their images and metaphors interest us for their comparative aspect. They are of the same type as those of the boasts, challenges and exaltations that we often see in the Old Tibetan Chronicle and (much later) in the epic of Gesar. Each Horn is defined by: 1) a general (we are given his name), 2) a horse (ru rta), 3) a flag (ru dar) and 4) a battle order compared to a poetic image (dmag gi bzhed). The Blon po bka’ thang also includes: 5) a cover (?, ru sgab pa) and 6) the ensign ( yig tshangs pa). The horses are characterized by their finery of different colors and marks. The flags also are of different colors and bear different designs.

21 G. Tucci, “The validity of Tibetan historical tradition”; R.A. Stein, Les tribus anciennes des marches tibétaines, 8–12; G. Uray, “Traces of a narrative of the old Tibetan chronicle in the Mkhas pa’i dga’ ston” and “The narrative of legislation and organization in the Mkhas pa’i dga’ ston.” 22 G. Tucci, Preliminary report of two scientific expeditions in Nepal, 84–6, 88–90; G. Uray, op. cit. (1967–9).

distinctions in the epoch of the tibetan kings Horn

Blon po bka’ thang

107

Dpa’o Gtsug lag phreng ba

Ru lag (high) Ru lag (low)

white lion raised to the sky white lion jumping to the sky white flag “which covers glorious black flag the plain” G.yas ru (high) black “like a lake” black with a white center, with the design of the khyung bird G.yas ru (low) lion with a mottled neck yellow (?) with mottled neck ( gong bkra) (skyer kha gong bkra) Dbu ru (high) red with white flame red with mottled flames Dbu ru (low) lion with black neck glorious red flag (gong nag) G.yo ru (high) lion with mouth ? red lion (kha sprod) G.yo ru (low) like the five beautiful colors white with black center (sna lnga mdzes pa ‘dra)

The ensigns are as follows: Ru lag high: copper, low: turquoise; G.yas ru high: copper, low also; Dbu ru high: copper, low missing; G.yo ru high: copper, low also. Finally the order of battle: Horn

Blon po bka’ thang

Dpa’o Gtsug lag phreng ba

Ru lag (high)

parallel to that of a divination, made of crystal, spread out parallel to hail which falls on a plain parallel to the spreading of trunks of coral

we read that one marches like hail, one climbs (?, ‘grim) on a glacier

Ru lag (low) G.yas ru (high) G.yas ru (low) Dbu ru (high) Dbu ru (low) G.yo ru (high) G.yo ru (low)

parallel to a burning plain parallel to young (?), wild yaks falling in herds parallel to the darkness which extends over a lake parallel to a them bu (?) of lead which spouts parallel to the pigeons which fall upon the food

we read that one climbs (?,‘grim) like the fire set on a plain we read that it is parallel to the snow which falls on a lake we read that one climbs (‘grim) like a rain of honey on a lake

As seen in ms. ITJ 506, recto, the ensigns of precious materials were attributed to monks. Here, they appear as distinctions between military groups (but Dpa’o Gtsug lag phreng ba removed them). All are of copper, ranked lower on the hierarchy of functionaries, except for

108

r.a. stein

Ru lag (low): turquoise. Contrary to other signs where the images and metaphors dominate, no indication is given about the form or image of the yig tshang. Yet one way or another, they fall in the same category as the other images. That which follows in the exposé of Dpa’o Gtsug lag phreng ba is still more significant for our problem of seals and honorific distinctions. After the Four Wings and their “groups of a thousand” (stong sde, soldiers), we then read about civilian groups (g.yung gi mi sde) of people (without details; Tucci 1956, 86), then about three “groups of braves” (dpa’ ba’i sde; Tucci 1956, 87). They are classified into high, middle and low, and are associated with five clans and their chiefs. These metaphors lead to the decorations (Tucci and Uray do not mention them). In each of the first few groups, an anecdote makes an allusion to an event (text illegible) which concerns the vanquished people: Hor for the high, Ljang for the middle and China for the low. For the third, the author evokes history and geography. However, these anecdotes terminate with a “sign of bravery” (dpa’ mtshan) characterized by a metaphor. For the high it is a shield (?) of a (skin?) of tiger(s) (stag gi lcig po phub; or better: one covers . . .?); for the middle, one traces a drawing on the sword (ral gri la ri mo bris); for the low, one cuts (?) the scabbard of the sword (ral gri’i shubs bcag). Despite the obscurity of these images, their indications are interesting. We recall that, in the Old Tibetan Chronicle, the author speaks of a “sign of bravery” (the tiger) which accords with the king. After this indication placed in the margin, Dpa’o Gtsug lag phreng ba then gives another more systematic classification which associates multiple kinds of distinctions in the selfsame group. It concerns six laws (khrims yig) governing five categories of signs of power or function (Tucci 1956, 88; Uray 1972, 20–2). These are: 1) six “grand precepts” (bka’ ‘gros chen po), regulations of conduct towards different classes of society; 2) six “ensigns” ( yig tshang); 3) six “seals (attesting to or authenticating) an order” (bka’i phyag rgya); 4) six (distinctive) “objects”; 5) six “signs of the brave” (dpa’ mtshan). The first category does not concern us here. The second is the known list of the ensigns made of precious materials marking a hierarchy. However, instead of limiting itself to the high officials (ministers), they are also attributed to other groups (as in ITJ 506 and in the Blon po bka’ thang), to wit: two sorts of religious (those of the monastery, relevant to sūtra, mdo; and those of tantra, sngags), a bon po who maintains the life of the king, many middle officials (all equipped with the silver

distinctions in the epoch of the tibetan kings

109

ensigns), the “six tribes of ancestral people” (bronze ensigns), the military chiefs (stong dpon, ru dpon, copper ensigns as in the Blon po bka’ thang) and the “brave in battle” ( g.yul du dpa’ ba, iron ensigns, lcags yig). One phrase (omitted by Tucci) added: “Further, it is said that to the ordinary people is given an ensign (bearing) the image of a pine and rippling water ( yang thang shing skya chu ris kyi yi ge ‘bangs phal pa rnams la gnang skad).a The third category, relative to the seals, confirms the list from ms. ITJ 506,23 but with important variants: 1) The seals of the (royal) command, bka’ btags24 kyi phyag rgya, a little box (sgrom bu). 2) The seal which is a sign of a military unit (or market, town, khrom rtags), a banner (“sign of a Wing,” ru mtshon). 3) The seal which is a sign of a (cultivated) country, yul rtags, a royal palace (sku mkhar). 4) The seal which is a sign of Religion (chos rtags), a temple (lha khang). 5) The seal which is a sign of (military) bravery (dpa’ rtags), a skin of a tiger (stag slag). 6) The seal which is a sign of wisdom25 (intelligence, mdzangs rtags), an ensign ( yig tshangs). This list seems to be the fruit of a mixture or betrays a disorder. The yig tshang figures elsewhere; the “brave” and the “wise” find themselves in the fourth category. This miscellany is without a doubt owing to the narrow association between seals, ensigns and metaphoric signs. Two of the seals from the list of Dpa’o Gtsug lag phreng ba are attested in realia and in ms. ITJ 506: the royal command and the town or the military group (khrom), but the images are different. The fourth category of distinctions, objects or vestments, from Dpa’o Gtsug lag phreng ba comes the following (Tucci 1956, 90):

a Helga Uebach interprets this passage as “The most inferior ( yang tha) ensign, [a piece of ] pale wood with a design of water-waves is said to have been given to the common subjects.” H. Uebach, “From Red Tally to Yellow Paper: The Official Introduction of Paper in Tibetan Administration in 744/745,” in Tibetan Studies in Honor of Samten Karmay, Revue d’Etudes tibétaines 14 (2008), 62 n. 17.—ed. 23 The translation of Tucci is in places erroneous. 24 For the alteration of btags/rtags, cf. n. 20. 25 The “wise” are generally the ministers whose counsel is appreciated. Tucci has reason to translate this mdzangs as “nobles” (89–90).

110

r.a. stein

1) Objects (“supports”) for the “brave” (warriors): (skin of ?) leopard ( gung) and of tiger (stag). 2) Objects for the intelligent (sly): a fox hat (wa zhu). 3) Objects for the superior classes:26 divine religion (Buddhism, lha chos). 4) Objects for the vile (g.yung po): “cord” (?, thags) and bon.27 5) Objects for the “wise” (mdzangs pa): ensign ( yig tshangs). 6) Objects for the poor (ngan pa): thieves (rkun ma). These metaphors thus characterize social categories. The list has without doubt been manipulated. We have seen (n. 4) that, according to the Chinese Annals, the brave were compared to tigers, the cowards to foxes. Here the fox is the “symbol” of the trick. The “ensigns” are here better justified than in the third series of seals. Finally, for the poor, there is no image or metaphor. To conclude, the fifth and final category of Dpa’o Gtsug lag phreng ba. It is entirely dedicated to “signs” (mtshan) of the brave. There are six: 1–2. (skin of ?) tiger, high and low; 3–4. cord (?, zhar), large and small; 5. neckerchief (?, gong ras);28 6. vestment of tiger (skin) (stag slag). We may note one further time the documentary value of the late writers, but we also see a certain disorder, some confusion and amalgams which are found in their explanations. However, certain amalgams are already present in the Dunhuang manuscripts. Already in the Tibetan thinking of the ancient era, the characteristic differences between the ensigns, the honorific distinctions and the seals are associated among themselves and set on the same scheme as the metaphors or the images employed in songs and poems. This method of expression and its role in literary creation should be studied in another work.

26

Ya rabs, often the nobles, but here the monks. Tucci translates this literally by “weaving,” but this hardly makes any sense. We may think of the “dmu cord” of the bon po which is “braided” or “attached.” In the Dunhuang mss (e.g. PT 1047, divination), we read dmu dag ‘dogs (for a woman, auspicious sign) and dmu dag togs pa (for an king). In the later tradition, “attached” or “braided” the “dmu cord” is a bon po rite of marriage guaranteeing happiness (cf. Gzher myig, ed. A.H. Francke, fol. 13a, l. 5: dmu thag ‘dogs pa’i bon po and zhal srod pa’i bon po; also fol. 14, l. 6 and fol. 109a-b, tr. Francke, “gZer Myig. A Book of the Tibetan Bonpos,” 170). 28 Tucci has put rgod ras, undoubtedly an error in his manuscript. For the neck, cf. n. 8. 27

distinctions in the epoch of the tibetan kings

111

Ms ITJ 506 (1) ‘jug nus pa // dpa’ ‘o la bcad (?) de (?) // stag gi ‘gong stsal to // (three words crossed out) (2) nga ’i rab du byung ba’i dge slang (= slong) gis mdzod sum gi theg pa rdzogs par dka’ zhing / ‘jug (?) par (3) dka’ ba la / yang yang dag pa’i don go bas / ‘dzangs kyi la(s?) bcad de / gser yi ge tshed po (4) stsal to // nga ’i rab du byung ba’i (d)ge slong gis // mdzod sum gi the pa’i nang nas // (5) khams gsum gi ‘gro ba (two words: dang (?) . . .) lnga ‘i sems can ci ltar ‘gro ba ‘dul ba bzin du ston (6) shes pas // rma bya ‘i mdongs stsal to // de lta bas tshul khrims nyis brgya lnga bcu (7) bsrungs pas ni // g.yu ‘i yi ge tshed po bas btsun // na bzha’ seng ba gser gi ngang (8) ris can mnabs pas ni // s ?ag (= stag?) gi sum ‘gong bas brjid do // de bas na bkas (9) kyang bstod / don gyis kyang bsngags so //(10) / / bka’ ‘i phyag rgya ‘phar ma ku kang // ‘gugs pa’i phyag rgya sha ba rwa brgyad pa / (11) khrom rtags kyi phyag rgya seng ‘ge ‘gying ba // ‘brog rtags kyi phyag rgya lha gang // (12) chos rtags kyi phyag rgya bya shang shang le’u // ‘phrin byang rtags kyi phyag rgya myi rta rgyug pa / (13) de ltar drug go // lha sras mgur gi phyag rgya // sku ni Ri rab / zal ni gnyi zla // thugs (14) ni rgya mtsho // rtags ni rgyal mtshan // bka’ ni g.yung drung // yon tan rin po che, mgur gyi phyag rgya dang bdun no // // Additional note to Tibetica Antiqua I In signaling that certain phrases from the Tibetan translation of the Shujing 書經 find themselves in the inscription of the Treaty of Lhasa of 821–2 and in the Old Tibetan Chronicle (TA I, 86), I have been obliged to take account of another, more ancient, inscription which utilizes these phrases. This is the inscription of the king Khri srong lde btsan, situated at Phyong rgyas. The actual text preserved is very fragmentary, but the entirety has been copied by Tshe dbang nor bu (1698–9 to 1755). This text has been published, translated and annotated by H.E. Richardson, “A new inscription of Khri Srong Lde brtsan,” (1964, 1–2), who dates it to the last years of the 8th or the first years of the 9th century (9–10). The inscription consists of two parts: an exposé of the glory of the king who ought to be exalted on a stele (l. 1–15) and the repetition of this praise of the king qualified as a bodhisattva (l. 16–34). In the first part, the author takes up especially the two great virtues of the king: 1st civil virtue (excellence of religion and customs) and

112

r.a. stein

2nd military virtue (power). The two conform to that of their ancestors. The expressions used (chos, gtsug lag, byin, gnam sa’i chos dang ni ‘thun) are found in the Tibetan translation of the Shujing (TA I, 73–76). In the second part, these two virtues (wisdom, byin gyi sgam dkyel, and military power, the “strong helmet”) are evoked in order to explicate the fact that the king can make submit to his power the “royalty of the four Directions,” from Persia “on high” (in the West, Ta zhig) to “the low” (in the East, the Long shan mountain, Chinese frontier). The pertinent passage (l. 17–21): As (the king), by his great wisdom of Virtue and by his Strong Helmet, is not like the other kings of the four directions, he has subjugated (them) to his power, from . . . until . . .b

This phrase is analogous, and in part identical, both to a phrase from the translation of the Shujing and to one phrase from the Treaty of Lhasa for which I have made a comparison. Thus: Shujing 書經

Inscription of Phyong rgyas

Treaty of Lhasa

l. 132: nga rgyal khams gzan dang myi ‘dra bar che zhing /

l. 17: (btsan po . . . za snga nas) mtha’ bzi’i rgyal po gzhan dang myi ‘dra ste /

(China) lho bal gzan dang myi ‘dra (bar?)

l. 133: gtsug lag dang ldan bas

byin gyi sgam dkyel chos bzang gtsug lag che chen po dang / dbu bas rmog brtsan pos / (l. 2–4: chos gtsug lag ni lugs kyis bzhang // dbu rmog brtsan po nib yin du che’o //)

b The passage as it appears in Richardson’s article is as follows: “The Divine Manifestation, the Btsan-po Khri Srong Lde Brtsan being beyond comparison with the other kings of the four frontiers, by his gloriously profound intellect and his mighty helmet in the upper direction from the borders of Ta Zhig downwards and in the lower direction from the line of passes of the Long Shan, all was drawn together beneath his sway . . .” (1964, 7). Richardson later revised this translation (in light of Stein’s criticism elsewhere) as follows: “The supernaturally wise divinity, the Btsan-po Khri Srong-lde-brtsan, being beyond comparison with other kings of the four frontiers, by his profound intellect and his mighty helmet from the borders of Ta-zhig in the upper direction and from the line of passes of the Long Shan in the lower direction all was drawn together beneath his sway . . .” Richardson, A Corpus of Early Tibetan Inscriptions, 40–41.—ed.

distinctions in the epoch of the tibetan kings lho bal la stsogs te // rgyal khams thams cad chag (= chab)

yar ni . . . man tshad / mar ni . . . yang cad / chab ‘og ‘du ste

113

(Bod dang yang ‘thabs kyi zla).

The relationship between the three texts is evident. The only difference is that, in the Treaty, the virtues are attributed to China as the equal of Tibet. There, there is no doubt a light allusion to the Chinese habit of treating other lands of the four directions as “barbaric.” In the Chinese text of the Shujing 書經, the king of Zhou subjugated the Chinese (feudatory) lands and the barbarians because he is not like them: he has more Virtue. The word which designates the “barbarians” (lho bal) in the Shujing and in the Treaty is replaced by the words “king of the four borders” in the Phyong rgyas inscription. The terminology for the civilized virtues is identical. In all three cases, the king or the civilized lands (Tibet or China) is situated in the center. In fact, this signals a supplemental analogy. In speaking not of “barbarians” but of “kings of the four borders” subjugated by the wisdom of the Virtue (the prestige) of the king, the text of the Phyong rgyas inscription is equally very near to another passage from the Shujing (a little before, l. 117–9). The Tibetan king glorifies himself in following the customs of his ancestors. The king Wu wang, before announcing his merits proper, exalts those of his ancestor Wen wang. The king Wen wang has himself also “conformed to the wish of Heaven (Chinese tian ming 天命, ‘Heavenly decree’),” rendered happy (has pacified) the subjects of the four directions (gnam mtha’ bzhi). This translation corresponds to the following Chinese text: “has pacified the Directions and China ( fang Xia),” or further in the commentary: “the four directions and China in the middle” (si fang zhong Xia). In the following phrase, it is explained that the king Wen wang, as he has a great wisdom (sgal [= sgam] dkyel che bas), has overcome the great lands by his force (mthu) and his Virtue (his prestige, byin), and he has seduced the small countries by his good deeds (legs pa’i yon tan). In Chinese we read: “the great lands fear his force (li 力), the small lands are struck by his Virtue (de 德),” and in the commentary: “the great fear his prestige (wei), the small are struck by his Virtue (de).” A comparison of the two texts:

114

r.a. stein

Shujing 書經 Chap. IV, l. 61–5: Bdag gi yab / B’un vang legs pa’i yon tan dang ldan te . . . mtha’ bzi ‘bangs kyang legs pa’i yon tan la mos nas // phal cher ‘bangs su ‘ang ‘dus so bdag gi yab B’un bang gis / gnam la nyes ma byas te / gnam gyi chos dang mthun bar spyad pas (deest in Chinese).

Chap. V, l. 118–9: ‘Bun wang . . . gnam gyi dgongs pa dang ‘thun bar . . . gnam mtha’ bzi ‘bangs kyang bde bar byas so l. 119: ‘Bun vang sgal (= sgam dkyel che bas / chab srid bskyed pa’i phyir rgyal khams chen po ni mthu dang byin gyis mnan // . . . khams chu ngu ni legs pa’i yon tan mos zin ‘dud du stsal pa /

Inscription of Phyong rgyas

l. 6: lha btsan po . . ./ yab myes kyi lugs bzhin / lha’i gtsug lag ni ma nyams / gnam sa’i chos dang ni ‘thun par mdzad / sku yon tan yongs kyis . . . l. 12–13: (the king) dbu rmog brtsan po’i byin gyis / chab srid skyes pa . . .

l. 17–8: lha btsan po . . . mtha’ bzi’i rgyal po gzan dang myi ‘dra ste / byin gyi sgam dkyel chen po dang / (and above, l. 12–3). dbu rmog brtsan pos (from Persia to China) chab ‘og ‘du ste (and l. 3–4: dbu rmog brtsan po ni / byin du che’o).

I have suggested that the redactors of the Tibetan version of the Treaty (without its Chinese counterpart) gained inspiration from the phraseology and from the vocabulary of the translation of the Shujing. The latter should thus be considered anterior. This is certainly valid. However, the inscription of Phyong rgyas complicates the question. It also has the same phraseology and the same vocabulary. Was it also inspired by the translation of the Shujing, or is the reverse true? The “translation” is not always literal. It includes these phrases, and its vocabulary is quite Tibetan. This vocabulary naturally had to exist independently of the translation of the Shujing, and had to be employed for this translation. For the possible date of this translation, we ought to remember that which relates to the Chinese Annals from the Tang. Yoshiro Imaeda has looked at them.29 In 730, at the time of the negotiations in view of

29

Y. Imaeda, “L’identification de l’original chinois du Pelliot tibétain 1291—tra-

distinctions in the epoch of the tibetan kings

115

the peace treaty, the Tibetan ambassador—who knew Chinese well— demanded for the king of Tibet and for his queen, the Chinese princess Jincheng 金成, the Chinese classics, and notably the Shujing 書經 and the Zuo zhuan 左傳 (historic precedents of the state of the lands). Despite the strong objections from one of the literati, the demand was acceded to. The translation may have occurred starting from this date.

duction tibétaine de Zhanguoce,” 64). The Zhanguo ce is analogous to the Zuozhuan (historic precedents). There also the translation is not always literal and comprises added explanations.

TIBETICA ANTIQUA III

APROPOS OF THE WORD GTSUG LAG AND THE INDIGENOUS RELIGION R.A. Stein It is already twelve years since Mme Ariane Macdonald published a foundational article which, in the same stroke, totally upset both the ideas of Tibetologists regarding the pre-Buddhist religion of Tibet and the idea of the Tibetan tradition itself that those scholars had adopted up to that point.1 As its title indicates, that article is primarily concerned with critical readings of certain Dunhuang manuscripts. Yet these readings led to a new theory concerning the indigenous religion in the first half of the 7th century. This is a monumental work of vast erudition, not only in the domain of manuscripts and inscriptions of the era, but also in the later texts of the tradition (starting from the 11th century). Its considerable size, the absence of an index, and the examination of a great number of different problems, all render the work complicated and unwieldy. Also, it did not cause the reaction that it merited.2 The reviews did not give space to a critical discussion of the new ideas. Yet many scholars joined her, explicitly or tacitly.3

1 “Une lecture des Pelliot tibétain 1286, 1287, 1038; 1047 et 1290, Essai sur le formation et l’emploi des mythes politiques dans la religion royale de Sroṅ -bcan sgam-po,” 190–391. The author (henceforth A.M.) always cites the texts by their number. The manuscripts PT 1286, 1287 are the Old Tibetan Chronicle (and PT 1288, the Annals), ed. Bacot. PT 1038 explains different “Theories of Origin” of the first king, PT 1047 is a long, divinatory text and PT 1290 is an assemblage of many texts beginning with a “Song of Glory.” I will use these fictive titles for more clarity. Photographs of all these manuscripts have been published by A.M. and Imaeda in Choix, vol. II. See the list of abbreviations in the bibliography. 2 A similar fate struck another work of great scale by E. Haarh, The Yar-lung Dynasty. 3 A.M. Blondeau (Religions), who closely followed the development of the theory of A.M., gave a summary of this. G. Uray seems to have accepted it (that pre-Buddhist religion in essence differed from the Bon religion) completely in citing “some slightly different” opinions (“The Old Tibetan Sources of the History of Central Asia up to 751 A.D.: a Survey,” 298). He also followed A.M. on the subject of Chinese influences (“L’annalistique et la pratique bureaucratique au Tibet ancien,” 169). Richardson as well (“A Sino-Tibetan Treaty Inscription of A.D. 821/823 at Lhasa,” 147). An assenting

118

r.a. stein

For my part, a first reading left me unconvinced. With the passing of years, I hesitated and changed opinions regarding certain elements, but the principal theory always appeared unacceptable to me. The fact remains that this article brings many new developments and forces reflection. With her great intelligence and lucidity, A.M. herself saw extremely well the difficulties in her demonstration and the objections that we might make. It is impossible to take up here all the problems and to discuss all the translations and interpretations of texts which appear erroneous to me. 1. The dating Mme A.M. is known as an excellent historian, prudent and critical, who always seeks to date documents with as much precision as possible. Since her work bears on the era of Srong btsan sgam po, the date of the documents utilized is important. A.M. was well aware of the fact that the majority of the documents are of relatively late date. The known inscriptions date to c. 764–822. For the important manuscript of the Prayers of De ga (PT 0016, etc.), A.M. accepts the date 823 (202, 224). Another document treating antiquity (PT 1290) dates to c. 815 and comes from a minister, a Buddhist monk (326–7). The ms PT 1038 (“Theories of Origin”) is also attributed to the 9th century (218). It is undoubtedly later still (cf. Review of sources, infra p. 176). The final redaction of the Old Tibetan Chronicle (PT 1286, 1287) must be posterior to 842 (191, 220, 228, 261). This text is composed of pieces and of fragments, of independent elements written by different authors (334).4 A.M. also utilized the edicts of Khri srong lde btsan, such as they were preserved by the well documented historian Dpa’o Gtsug lag phreng ba (1504–1564/6)5 and a fictionalized chronicle, the Sba bzhed (12th–14th century?).

review by P. Kvaerne appeared in Journal Asiatique (1971): 392–3. The most detailed and critical review is owed to Z. Yamaguchi (Tōyō gaku-hō, 78–87). Other remarks are found in his magisterial work, Toban ōkoku seiritsu-shi kenkyū. 4 This conclusion has just been confirmed by a surprising discovery. One whole part of a discourse of the minister Spung sad zu tse (Bacot, p. 106, l. 33–p. 107, l. 8), inserted without break or graphic mark, is a translation adapted from an ancient Chinese text, the Shiji 史記 (Takeuchi, “A Passage from the Shih Chi in the Old Tibetan Chronicle,” 1984 [1985]). 5 This author often faithfully reproduces ancient texts in his chronicle, Chos ‘byung Mkhas pa’i dga’ ston. Nevertheless, in certain cases, certain expressions have been modernized (Stein, “Saint et divin,” n. 13 and Tibetica Antiqua I, n. 98).

apropos of the word gtsug lag

119

Obviously, the notions attested by a document may be more ancient than its date, but we cannot measure their degree of antiquity. In the neighborhood of the year 800, and even much later, we have oral traditions and written archives concerning a more ancient era. A.M. even thought that the archaic song of the Buddhist minister might form part of a “ritual of the accession of the kings” (326). I don’t know. The Chinese description of the ritual of the Peace Treaty of 821–822 well demonstrates that indigenous, non-Buddhist elements were used jointly then with Buddhist elements. However, we ought never forget to take account of the language employed, of the contemporary ideas, of stylistic processes and of literary allusions common to that era. As regards the non-Buddhist religious texts (utilized by A.M. in order to reconstitute the religion of the first half of the 7th century), they are undated. The sole criterion possible is of a formal, linguistic order. Certain texts are distinguished by a very particular grammar, vocabulary and style. Also, the translation is itself very difficult, if not impossible. We could characterize them as archaic (without dating them), but it may also be a question of regional differences, or differences proper to a particular milieu (e.g. the accounts published by Thomas AFL, IA and B, II and part of IV6, and the funerary rituals).7 Other texts, less obscure, are nevertheless written in a very particular style, in verse, also very different from classical Tibetan (e.g. PT 12908 and the Old Tibetan Chronicle). Yet this style does not appear only in the clearly indigenous, and certainly quite ancient, texts. It was also employed in purely Buddhist texts (e.g. PT 0977) and it was preserved in the later tradition. A.M. was naturally well aware of these problems. She also sought for a contemporary document of the royal religion that she could attribute to Srong Btsan sgam po. She believed she found it in a long divination text (PT 1047), or at least in its first part (oracles relative to the “great sku bla, to the great ministers and to the great kings” (rgyal pho, 272).

6 Text III is the “Account of the Ages” that A.M. extensively analyzed (see below). Lines 1–40 of text IV form part of it. See the Review of sources at the end of the present work. 7 Cf. Lalou, “Rituel bon-po des funérailles royales”; and Stein, “Du récit au rituel dans les manuscripts tibétains de Touen-Houang.” A.M. also speaks about them by mixing them with other, more “classical,” texts. 8 This text is composed of many different parts. It contains the list of principalities from the Old Tibetan Chronicle (A.M., 320–21) and a passage relative to the insignia carrying some Buddhist expressions; cf. Tibetica Antiqua II, where I propose a translation different from that of A.M.

120

r.a. stein

She dates this text to c. 640 and thought that in that era the “ancient religion of Tibet” (a Tibetan expression that we find elsewhere) was “the only religion practiced in Tibet” (289–291, 309, 356). This dating is not based on any objective criterion. It derives from the following facts: 1) at the beginning of the text, an oracle eulogizes the role of the minister Spung sad zu tse, implicated in the conquest of Zhang zhung by Srong btsan sgam po, 2) the minister was originally from that region, and 3) the foreign language of the divinatory coordinates could be Zhang zhung (but this remains to be proven; 286). A.M. concludes that this text is contemporary with the events described. I must acknowledge that I don’t believe it. Like the other minister of this era, of the Mgar clan, Spung sad zu tse has been celebrated since the time of the Old Tibetan Chronicle and formed the subject of fictionalized accounts through to the later tradition. The divination manual demonstrates the first instances of this, but it may very well post-date the events. As far as I can see, G. Uray admits not the date of the text, but the historicity of the events described (1972, 40). Yamaguchi underscores the fact that the oracle simply utilizes a case made famous by the account (1983, 407) and is not contemporaneous with the events (review, 81a).9 The date of the text remains uncertain, and the conclusions that A.M. draws from it are thus doubtful. The sku bla (and the mu sman) are certainly named often in the text, and their relations with the kings are well attested at the end of the 8th century. These beliefs could well have existed one hundred and fifty years earlier. We may suppose it, but not affirm it. We must also take account of the vocabulary in a given era. One and the same word, perfectly Tibetan and early, may cover different notions, sometimes even foreign ones.10

9 There are difficulties in the oracle concerning Spung sad zu tse. Witness one example. A.M., Uray, and Yamaguchi translated chab srid (mdzad) as “make war” or “lead an army.” Yet this sense is not attested. I think that it concerns marriage (cf. Stein, “Un ensemble sémantique tibétain,” 413, n. 5). Uray raised the problem of dates which result from his translation. In any case, as Yamaguchi stated it, the honorific verb mdzad designates the king as subject, and not Spung sad zu tse. 10 This is the case for lam lha, “god of the road,” and perhaps for gnam lha, “god of heaven,” and sometimes even for sku bla (cf. Tibetica Antiqua I, 76–8 and n. 41c). A.M. has not stated the characteristics of the vocabulary of the “Divination” text (PT 1047), first part. There, the kings are always designated by the word rgyal po (and the queens by rgyal mo). There is only a single exception (the king is btshan po zha sngar, l. 40, 43) and it is precisely in the evocation of the history of Spung sad zu tse. That supposes perhaps another source (the Old Tibetan Chronicle?). We will further note that none of the key words from A.M.’s article are found in this text, neither gtsug nor

apropos of the word gtsug lag

121

One word more about the documentation relative to the religion and mythology. With the exception of the accounts in an archaic style and of certain fragments of the Old Tibetan Chronicle, the manuscripts and the inscriptions furnish only bits, isolated phrases. We may extract themes and motifs, but it is dangerous to reconstruct an entire system and still more to want to date it. Yet these fragments find themselves in the later tradition of the year one thousand, and there they are inserted into comprehensible and explicit contexts. Like other authors, A.M. helped herself to these later renderings and was right to do so. Although a historical critique ought to take account of the inherent transformations in the life of an institution as a whole and of an entire concept, despite the deformations due to a poor oral or written transmission, we note that the tradition was very stable and there was no true break (cf. the Review of sources, infra p. 176, “Theory of Origins”). A.M. rightly brought up at the time the continuity and discontinuity, the conformity of the tradition with the Dunhuang texts or, on the contrary, their divergences and variations. I have counted A.M.’s citations. We find nine cases of continuity-conformity (199, 202, 205, 223, 261, 300, 312, 329 and n. 300), two cases of discontinuity-divergence (204, 218) and three cases of changes in continuity (225, 230, 260–61). Between these (more or less) late texts and the (more or less) ancient texts is situated a very important manuscript (PT 1038; cf. Review of sources, infra p. 176). 2. Characteristics of the Ancient Religion A.M. sought to define the ancient religion (and mythology): its name, its contents and its function. For her, this religion was that of the King in the era of Srong btsan sgam po. It would have been called Gtsug or Gtsug lag (270, 354, 357, 360, 365), it would have had as a fundamental concept the Gtsug, “Order of the Universe” (353–4). It would have been used as a theory of the power of the king. It would have carried political and administrative aspects (cf. 346), but also a “total vision of the world, of space and time” (378, 382). This was not “an amalgam of magico-religious notions, anarchic and dispersed,” but a religion characterized by “a structured system” (367). Finally, this “coherent gtsug lag, nor the powerful or “firm helmet,” nor the supernatural power of the king (byin and ‘phrul gyi), etc.

122

r.a. stein

system undoubtedly elaborated prior to the introduction and diffusion of Buddhism in Tibet” would have been probably codified “as the royal religion” by Srong btsan sgam po (376–7). But surprise! At the end of her work, A.M. lucidly asks if the “monarchical constitution” (of laws, of administration) was not “inspired by foreign influences.” She is reminded of China, treated as an equal of Tibet in the Peace Treaty of 821–22 (340, 378), and notably of Confucianism (382–3). Otherwise, if it is not a question of influences, there would have been at least communal notions and analogies (384–5). As for the religious content (outside of the analogy of Gtsug, “World Order,” with the Chinese Dao, 384), A.M. reconstructs it beginning with various texts. The kings are “sons of the gods” (lha or phya), their ancestors descended from heaven. In the beginning, during a happy era, men and gods were not separate. While being men, the kings could ascend to heaven. The gods lha or phyva are also associated with the sacred mountains who are, in addition, the divine protectors of the kings, sku bla. These are the phyva (which A.M. locates at the beginning of creation; to my sense it concerns, rather, the organization of the world) who would have commissioned the mountains of heaven on the earth and who would have “established the Gtsug” (see below, 146–7). And since the first ancestor of the kings, Gnga’ khri or Spu de gung rgyal, was also a god from heaven descended to earth, he also founded the Gtsug and reigned according to it. A.M. drew from this an impression of the great antiquity of these notions although it concerns legends or myths, and not historical events (see below). The most coherent unit is the “Account of the Ages” where it is a question of successive stages of decadence and of a good era, which would have preceded and succeeded this decline. This text itself gives the impression that “this was therefore an ensemble of coherent and organized beliefs” (of the good gtsug lag of former times; 367). She bases this on the funerary rituals (in archaic style) which speak of a “cure” or new life after death. Yet the “Account of the Ages” concerns two sorts of very different documents (see the Review of sources, infra p. 171ff “Account of the Ages”). And the bon po religion which, according to the unanimous tradition, must have preceded Buddhism in order to, then, coexist with it until the end of the dynasty? A.M. was very conscious of this problem, but hesitated and thought to revisit it later. She calls upon it with regard to the manuscript PT 1038 (“Theory of Origins”) because there we find the Bon po name Thod rgyal: organized Bon does not appear anterior to the 11th century, and ancient Bon enters within a different religious

apropos of the word gtsug lag

123

framework (215–218).11 Would this be “another religious current as one would conceive it by the presence of bon and of gshen (officiants) in the rites concerning the dead?” A.M. does not decide there (357) as, for her, the ideas on life after death form part of the Gtsug (because of the “Account of the Ages”). In examining the manuscript PT 0239 in which a Buddhist critiques the Bon po funerary rites12, she observes (n. 616): “one notes the absence of the term Gtsug . . . But it practically never appears in the attacks of the Buddhists, certainly because the principles of the Tibetan monarchy were established according to the Gtsug.” She should have said that it appears no more in the funerary rituals and in the accounts which they justify, other than in the manuscripts PT 1047 (divination) and PT 0126.2 (History of the Dmu and the Phyva; cf. here n. 10). But she admits (376) that Bon and the bon po were components of the “Gtsug lag religion.” Finally, after having studied the Sba bzhed, where one speaks of the opposition of Bon to Buddhist (380), she concludes (388) that the total absence of memory of the Gtsug lag, up to the name itself, in the tradition, and according to the well educated, “a singular fact,” could not be owing to chance. This must be the fruit of a systematic effort tending to “completely suppress memory of the official religion of the monarchy.” We remain incredulous before such an affirmation and we are tempted to think that it is rather A.M. who is mistaken. *

*

*

11 It does not appear as an organized religion in the “Divination” text PT 1047 (A.M., 292). 12 Cf. Stein, “Un document ancien relatif aux rites funéraires des bon-po tibétains.” It is stated that the Bon (or the Bon po) love(s) the yas (construction of thread, like the mdos). These yas (and stags) are mentioned in the “Divination” (PT 1047, 2nd part, l. 284). They are well known in the later tradition (Klu ‘bum, Blon po bka’ thang, etc.). The bon, the gshen and the gsas (“mediums”) are attested in the divination texts (PT 1047; ITJ 740. I, No 27 and Thomas AFL, 122–23). They appear also in the archaic accounts relating to the funerals and “cures.” They are inserted into the “Catalog of Principalities” (except in the Catalog of the Old Tibetan Chronicle, PT 1286). See the example in Lalou (“Fiefs, poisons et guérisseurs” and “Catalogue des principautés du Tibet ancien”), sometimes the bon (po), sometimes the gshen (cf. infra, Review of sources, “Theories of Origins,” § 1 and 3). The word gsas was well preserved in the later tradition (Tshe tan zhabs drung Dictionary: gsas mo, Chinese nü wu, “sorcerer,” and gsas khang: “bon po temple”). Various gsas are named in the Klu ‘bum (22a, 235b) and in the Mdzod phug (commentary, pp. 8–9, 59, 61–2, where they are parallel to the gods, lha). In an archaic text (Thomas AFL, IV, l. 223), three bon po (a lha bon, a g.yang bon and a phya bon) utilize, for the funerals, three sorts of “cord” (elsewhere called dmu thag or phya thag; cf. n. 46), namely dmu dag, lha dag and gsas dag. For the yas, cf. n. 89.

124

r.a. stein

There was, naturally, a religion indigenous to Tibet prior to Buddhism and it maintained itself next to it (with modifications? we don’t know), Indian Buddhism, but also Chinese Buddhism under diverse forms. As with other religions (save the great ones), it did not, perhaps, have a name.13 A.M. rejects, with a certain disdain, the idea that it may concern a group (for it is amorphous) of beliefs and practices, a little like the missionaries and the governments of republican China treated the “popular” Chinese religion as “superstition.” The religions and institutions of more or less illiterate populations have an (unconscious) structure that we may engage by analysis. Yet A.M. desires that the royal religion (she does not speak of the rest) is a “true” religion that must be “structured” (consciously) and that must carry that which characterizes such a (great) religion: a supreme principal (the “World Order”), a vision of time and space and precise conceptions of death and survival. And, like the great religions, it ought to have a name. Yet the corpus extracted by A.M. is not, like the great religions, an ensemble of sacred texts vetted by priests. It is only the fruit of the chance preservation of a certain number of documents and of a voluntary choice by A.M., in which archaic texts and others are combined without distinction. For the name chosen, A.M. does not fear despising the entire tradition and above all the beliefs of Tibetan scholars who read, like us, the inscriptions and who knew at least part of the texts preserved in Dunhuang since they cite them. No one would have retained this name, although it figures as an oft repeated phrase in the inscriptions. Yet there were Bon and bon po. There also, A.M. rejects the tradition and the writings of greatly erudite bon pos and Buddhists. That in the earlier tradition of circa one thousand, there was not the philosophical and religious Bon such as it appeared in the 11th century, no one will

13

In the manuscript PT 0239 (Stein, “Un document ancien relatif aux rites funéraires des bon-po tibétains,” 162) where the bon po funerals are opposed to those of Buddhism, the latter is characterized by the words “white men” and “white, divine religion” (lha chos), whereas the others are characterized by the words “black men” and bon po, and not by a religious name. The rnying ma pa scholar Sog bzlog pa (1552–1624) distinguished in the “ancient” tantras, next to Buddhist and bon po elements, the names of divinities which, according to him, are neither one nor the other (chos min, bon yang ‘dra la min; cf. Stein, “La mythologie hindouïste au Tibet”). Certain of these divinities thus defined appear already in the Dunhuang manuscripts. For China, I formerly adopted the expression “popular religion” or nameless religion, in specifying that it was common to the people and to the leading classes (the king, the court, etc., cf. Stein, “Les religions de la Chine,” 4–5).

apropos of the word gtsug lag

125

contest and no one has stated it.14 In any event, the Bon of the 11th century did not emerge ex nihilo. It had a past. The Dunhuang manuscripts that A.M. was not able to review demonstrate in every case that the bon po were understood as a group opposed to the Buddhist clergy, a group who understood versions of the Hindu mythology with Tibetan equivalences. They demonstrate also that these bon po were sometimes seen as the equivalent of Chinese “sorcerers” or mediums, representatives of the Chinese “popular” religion (divination, rites of marriage and funerals).15 As such, the Chinese Annals of the era show them (hierarchically in a lower place) associated with the ritual of the oath sworn at the time of the Peace Treaty of 821–2.16 Yet, as in the manuscripts utilized by A.M.—she saw it well—the bon po (and bon mo) and the gshen appear in a good place in the archaic accounts. We find even there already the name Gshen rab mi bo, attached to Zhang zhung and Gu ge, not certainly as the initiator of Bon as in the later tradition, but as an important bon po.17 In the manuscript PT 1040 (of which A.M. was surely aware, but about which she did not speak) it is

14

Still, I disregard here the problem of Rdzogs chen, Buddhist and bon po, and its eventual rapport with Chinese Chan. 15 Stein, Tibetica Antiqua I, 31–6 and Stein, “La mythologie hindouïste au Tibet.” We must add the “History of King Go ‘phang” (PT 0990; Choix I, pl. 297, l. 15–16). Apropos of pretentious words (boastfulness), one quoted as comparison the male and female bon po who received instruction from the gods (lha bka’ nod cing, kha nas byung, rgyal du smra ba). These were without doubt the mediums (in a milieu to be determined). The ancient expression survived in the explanation of the Bon by ‘Bri gung ‘Jig rten mgon po (1143–1207). Among others, the bon po made lha bka’ and lha mchod (offerings to the ancestral gods, rgan gyi lha mchod pa; Dgongs gcig yig cha, I, 292). As a comparison, we might cite a Chinese manuscript (P. chin. 2943), dated 971 AD. In Guazhou, on the occasion of the 1st of the 5th moon, a celebration which joined monks and laity, a “divine old woman” (shen po 神婆), being held on the walls of the city, is seized by a god (shen zhao 神着) and utters “speech divine” (or “from the gods,” shen yu 神語). She reveals that the cause of the misfortune which struck the city is (the soul of the late) Lord of the place. 16 These same “sorcerers” officiate at the time of the great oaths by taking as witnesses the divinities of heaven and earth, of the mountains and rivers, of the sun, moon and stars. It is also stated, apropos of a cult of the ram (?) divinity, that the Tibetans believed in “wizards and witches” (Pelliot, Histoire ancienne du Tibet, 2–3 and 81–2). The origin and date of this information is unknown. The two Tangshu 唐書 were written late (10th and 11th centuries). The Tongdian 通典 (completed around 800), k. 190, does not mention the “sorcerers.” 17 A.M. noted this (Choix II, 19) apropos of the manuscript PT 1136. Other references (PT 1068.2; 1134; 1194; 1289 and Thomas AFL, 16) were given by S.G. Karmay, “A general Introduction to the History and Doctrines of Bon,” n. 16. Another personage of the later Bon is perhaps already known in an ancient manuscript (cf. Review of sources, “Theories of Origins”).

126

r.a. stein

likewise a question of Bon tout court, as if it concerned a sacred text.18 The tradition which gives to the non-Buddhist religion the name bon po thus has its reasons. Should it be drawn aside? I would like to, but what to say then of the name chosen by A.M.? 3. The sense of Gtsug and Gtsug lag It is in this way that A.M. writes these expressions, always in capital letters. However, they are never proper names; they are words which must be translated. The refusal to do this is a source of error. The two words are strictly equivalent, the first being merely an abbreviation of the second. It is employed when the style, the prosody, requires it—in verse—conforming to a rule well established in the ancient texts. In prose, we state chos lugs (or °tshul, °lam) bzang po and gtsug lag che ba. In verse, it is contracted to chos bzang, gtsug che (with variants, A.M., 338–9, 343, 348, 350, list of variants, 353, 357, 360). The word gtsug lag covers a rather broad range of meaning, such that it is impossible to always keep the same translation (cf. TA I, 44–7). A chronological reference is given by the Mahāvyutpatti (c. 814), where it serves to translate Skt. ārṣa, “sacred sciences or texts (relevant to the ṛsị )” (No 1432) or further, sciences or texts of the brahmans (No 5046), and by metonymy: vihāra, place where one cultivates or preserves the sacred texts, as undoubtedly in the monastic university of Nālandā. Thence is derived the sense: “treatises” (śāstra) of techniques, sciences, morality, art of governance, etc. (like the nītiśāstra, etc.).19 This meaning is the most widespread. In the modern dictionaries, the word is defined as

18 It begins with the note: “This Bon is the account (the history) of the (?) by the secret Bon” (Bon ‘di gsang ba’i Bon gis (sic!) sul yang bslag pa lo rgyus). The title follows: “Account (of origin, rabs) of the (rites?) rgyal and byin” (rgyal byin gyi rabs). Another bon rabs serves as the model for a text in a foreign language, “preserved in the archives” (PT 1248, recto): . . . ’u va’ bu ca’i (ci?) bon rabs / phyag sbal na mchis pa la dpe blangs pa’). The text follows. 19 For the etymology, see the appendix. For the ancient examples of the meaning “treatises,” note the eight philosophical works attributed to Khri srong lde btsan in the Ldan dkar Catalog (ed. Lalou, “Les texts bouddhiques du temps de Khri-sroṅ lde bcan,” 336). In one of these works, it is a question of the gtsug lag of Mar Mani (Stein, “Une mention du manichéisme dans le choix du bouddhisme comme religion d’État par le roi Khri-sroì lde-bstan,” 333; other examples in Tibetica Antiqua I, 44–7, n. 65). The techniques of black magic from Uḍḍiyāṇa (byad and stems), which belong to “Bon and Yol,” are qualified as “evil sciences” (gtsug lag ngan pa) in a tantric text (ms. PT 0443).

apropos of the word gtsug lag

127

gsung rab, gzhung lugs and dam chos (the sacred books, sūtra, tripiṭaka) and we distinguish 1) the two sorts of grammatical treatises, and 2) the religious and lay customs (Ye shes rdo rje20, Dagyab, Chos grags, S. Ch. Das). The most celebrated science is divination, especially that of China, from “Confucious” (already in the Dunhuang manuscripts; A.M., 282–284).21 Another meaning, unattested in the “Indian vocabulary” of the Mahāvyutpatti, but common in our manuscripts, is that of “wisdom.” It is thus translated by Thomas (TLTD, vocabulary: “wisdom”), and also by H. Richardson (1977, 221): “wise teachings.” This translation effectively renders an essential aspect of the meaning. In the translation of the Zhanguo ce 戰國策 (PT 1291; Imaeda 1980, 56), the proper noun Huizi (hui signifies “wisdom”) is at once transcribed and translated: gtsug lag (can) Hye tshe. In the history of the king Go ‘phang (PT 0990, p. 122), the wise minister tells the king about that which acts as the ornament (the excellence) of a country. These are a wise king (rgyal po ‘dzangs pa) and a minister of great wisdom (or: art of governance; gtsug lag che ba). A common meaning, which is the development of this (or its opposite), is that of morality, good conduct, wise living, right/correct habits or conduct, etc. . . . In the translation of the Shujing 書經 (PT 0986, l. 33, 152; TA I, 85), the phrase (that is also found in the “Account of the Ages”): “wisdom (or tradition, morality, custom) of the former generations” renders the Chinese expression “the five immutable lessons,” to know the custom or conduct (lugs) of filial piety (xiao 孝, Tib. sri zhu) and of loyalty (or courage, chu gang, Chin. zhong 忠); these virtues are evoked together with the worship of the ancestors and the sacred mountains (mgon tshun and sku bla). It is natural to find this meaning also in the moral Maxims (PT 0992.3, fol. 6 r°, l. 8–9). Critiquing evil conduct, the author states that the people “run without discernment to evil customs (or mode of living, chos lugs ngan pa) and state that they do not worry about good customs (or moral conduct, chos lugs bzang po).” In the same account, this “good custom or conduct” (gtsug lag bzang po) is associated with the distinction

20

Tibetan-Mongolian Dictionary, 428b. Yet the interpretation of the colophon from ms. ITJ 742 is erroneous. It is Kong tse himself who is qualified as wise child or with supernatural faculties (cf. Stein, “Saint et divin,” 270) as in the ms. PT 0127 (A.M., 282–284) the “wise man.” The end of the ms. ITJ 748 ought to be read cu yag, i.e. Zhouyi 周易, the Yijing 易經 (Stein, “Saint et divin,” 269; Tibetica Antiqua I, 41–2). 21

128

r.a. stein

between Good and Evil (legs nyes).22 In an analogous critique of mores (PT 0126, § 1), the author fustigates people “do not practice Buddhism (lha chos) and run like fools” (toward Evil, as in PT 0992). For a marriage, one must see if the two spouses are in accord in (or with) morality or good conduct (gtsug lag dang sprod myi sprod; PT 0992.2, fol. 4 v°, l. 5). This sense of the word is close to that which we call, in the later tradition (but also already in the era of the kings), the “religion (custom) of men” (mi chos; contraction of mi yi chos lugs) as opposed to the “religion of god(s)” (lha chos), Buddhism.23 Both expressions, gtsug lag and mi chos, are very close and more or less synonymous. In the Prayers of De ga (PT 0016, l. 33), the author exalts the bounty of the Buddhist king who “spreads the good custom (conduct,

22 It should be remembered that, in that era, the apocryphal Chinese sūtras on Good and Evil were very widespread in Tibetan and Sogdian (Legs nyes kyi rgyu dang ‘bras bu bstan pa, Peking Kanjur No 1023 = Taishō vol. 85, No 2881; cf. Gauthiot and Pelliot, Le sūtra des causes et des effets du bien et du mal and Tibetica Antiqua I, n. 23). This sūtra is cited in the account of maxims (PT 0992.4, fol. 14 r°). 23 Cf. Stein, La civilization tibétain (1981), n. 204. The Ten Virtues (dge ba) and the sixteen rules of moral conduct (mi chos), attributed to Srong btsan sgam po in the later tradition, are already explained in the letter of Dpal dbyangs (Śrīghoṣa) to the Tibetan king around 800 AD (Tanjur, No 5842, vol. 144, pp. 123–2; Tucci, Minor Buddhist Texts II, 142). It is likewise in the letter from Buddhaguhya to Khri srong lde btsan (Tanjur, No 3324–25, vol. 70, pp. 284–2). These are the wise maxims associated with Buddhism, called lha chos. We find this association in the account of moral maxims, Prajñāśataka, attributed to Nāgārjuna, translated around 800 (Tanjur, No 5820, vol. 144, pp. 1–4). There, it is stated that if one observes the mi yi chos lugs (this is the mi chos), one easily attains the land of the gods. This phrase is attested in a remarkable manuscript that I will take up later (140), but which ought to be studied separately (Tibetica Antiqua IV; cf. Stein, “Saint et divin,” n. 67 and 71). The translation of the Prajñāśataka is attested by many Dunhuang manuscripts (PT 0066, 0787.9; ITJ 617.2, 618). The phrase in question appears often in PT 0066. Nāgārjuna further exalts the mi chos in his Nītiśastra (Tanjur, No 5822, vol. 144, pp. 9–2). In a work by Aśvaghoṣa (translated at the end of the 10th century; Tanjur, No 5307, vol. 102, pp. 18–3), it is stated: when one venerates mother and father, when one has piety (sri zhu) for the old, when one (thus) practices well the myi yi chos lugs, that is the conduct of a good man ( ya rabs). In the account of maxims cited above (PT 0992.7, fol. 14r°), the author also insists on the union of Buddhism and lay morality (lha chos mi chos ‘brel ma ste) which, through effort, makes complete success possible. In two other manuscripts (PT 1283 and PT 2111, “Dialogue of the Two Brothers”), the younger brother asks what the myi chos is. The elder responds: “The myi chos: it is to be right and filled with filial piety (sri zhu) . . ., full of compassion . . ., prudent and chaste (modest).” Mi chos corresponds to manuṣya-dharma (Mhvy., No 8425) and lha chos to deva-dharma, but I am unaware of precise examples from Indian texts. For lha chos designating Buddhism, cf. Stein, “Saint et divin,” n. 39 and 71 and Tibetica Antiqua I, 46–7, 57. The Buddha is usually called “god” (in Uighur: tengri; also for Mani). In the inscription from Rgyal lha khang (East face), it states that the men who take refuge in the Triratna take as God the Buddha (lhar sangs rgyas gzung).

apropos of the word gtsug lag

129

morality, etc.) of (or: and ?) Buddhism” (lha chos gtsug lag bzang po).24 In the parallel fragment PT 0100, the same king is lauded for his gtsug lag chos. Despite one allusion to the first ancestor Spu rgyal (becoming the name of Tibet), it must concern Buddhism since the result is that “the people had the thought of bodhi and faith.” The moral aspect of this “good custom” (gtsug lag bzang po) is highlighted in the Prajñāśataka (cf. n. 23): “when the king thinks of Good and Evil (and their distinction) of the people, it is said that there is a king in that land . . . (When he does not think of it), such a king is not respected (venerated) by those who know the tradition (the custom, etc., or the sacred texts).” Additionally, a little later: “Those who do not respect the old, those will not become (wise) connoisseurs of the tradition (custom, morality, etc.).”25 * * * I have intentionally cited examples that A.M. did not use. The fact that she never translates gtsug lag results in the problem being obscured. The principal data is the repetition of a stereotypical phrase, a literary cliché, in the praises to the glory of the kings of c. 780 to 840 which extend, retroactively, to their first, mythical ancestor. This phrase is composed of two, strictly parallel, parts according to a rule well attested from the ancient style. The two parts may be equivalent. We may go as far as splitting into two a single noun or a single expression, maybe with the same verb, maybe with two analogous verbs. The two parts may also be opposed or treated on a hierarchical, but complementary, basis (king and minister, heaven and earth, man and animal, crown and helmet).26 We should take account of the fact that we are

24 For A.M., this phrase designates the ancient religion (337). It is true that the sentence begins with the evocation of the king, sovereign of men but also a god. Yet following this, the author exalts his compassion (thugs rje), thanks to which he spread the “divine religion” (Buddhism) and “good custom,” expressions which may also designate Buddhism (cf. n. 28). 25 Kanjur, vol. 144, pp. 104 and PT 0066 with some variants: gang na rgyal po rmangs (K.: ‘bangs) rnams kyi (K.: kyis) / legs nyes sems par byed pa yi / yul de (K.: der) rgyal po yod ces bya . . . legs nyes sems par myi byed pa / rgyal po de dag gtsug lag mkhas (K.: mkhan) myi ‘gyur. To my knowledge, the original Sanskrit is not preserved. My translation is only a temporary expedient. Cf. appendix. 26 Proper nouns: PT 1289, l. 31, the son of the cow, Skyi lde ru bran, is caught (l. 32): “Skyi lde was seized there, Ru bran was seized there.” In the Old Tibetan Chronicle (Bacot DTT, 102), Rgyal Stag snya gzigs is called btsan po Spu rgyal and Spu rgyal Stag bu (104). Of Khyung po Spung sad zu tse (101), the author states (106): “Khyung po Spung sad . . . offered, Zu tse was faithful.” In the Annals (year 673), one speaks of the

130

r.a. stein

dealing with a literary work, and that the writer is liberal in his composition while varying phrases. In the cliché which occupies us, he generally writes chos bzang, gtsug (lag) che, but the order may be inverted. The two terms seem to be sometimes equivalent, sometimes slightly different but related. A.M. also sometimes hesitated, especially since she sought a religion and the (quite rare) descriptions of the gtsug lag often suggest a political wisdom or a morality of living. As chos bzang and gtsug (lag) che are not defined and appear parallel, A.M. thought (357) that—faced with expressions which designate Buddhism in the Old Tibetan Chronicle (the chos of the Buddha or the supra-mundane chos)—expressions like Gtsug gi chos or Gtsug lag gi chos would be needed in order to prove that Gtsug or Gtsug lag was the name of the pre-Buddhist Tibetan religion. However, she did not find them. We may now cite an example of gtsug gi chos in a translation of the apocryphal Chinese sūtra, Bayang jing 八陽經, but there it does not have the sense that A.M. expected. The phrase: “(To obtain) the Dao 道 (bodhi, the state of buddha) for one hundred thousand and ten thousand years” is translated as gtsug gi chos thob pa.27 But A.M. believed

minister Mkhar (Mgar) Btsan snya ldom bu, but in 676, it is stated: “The minister Btsan snya led (an army) to the land of the Dru gu, Ldum bu made Khri bshos a military unit.” Simple substantives. For a single person: pha dang yab, ma dang yum. For a couple: khab dang dbyal, bshos dang nams (Taube, Die Tibetica der Berliner Turfan-Sammlung, 135), byin and rlabs (Stein, “Saint et divin,” 263, 267). With verbs or adverbs: 1) identical: rta bzhugs ni gnam la bzhug, rmang bzhugs ni gdung la bzhugs (AFL, IA, l. 41); se mo bgrod nongs, gru bzhi bgrod nongs (PT 1134, l. 34, 36, 63; se mo gru bzhi is unique). 2) Different verbs: skyin dang bab kyi ‘og, rman dang g.yos kyi ‘og (AFL, IA, l. 39); pu drug gi ni ldag, nu drug gi ni ‘og (Taube); ring bzang smyug re ldem, zhal bzang zla re ‘od; or: zhal bzang zla re ‘od, tshems bzang ‘grog re dkar (etc., Lalou, “Fiefs, poisons et guérisseurs,” 169–171); lan chen kha’is blangs, dug chen mchus ‘tungs (PT 1134, l. 114); kha yangs kyis ni rtsi za, mgrin yangs kyi ni chu ‘thung (AFL, IA, l. 84): pha’i shid myi thengs, yab kyi rmang (rmad?) myi tshugs (idem, IB, l. 9); lug ‘tsho, g.yang skyong (l. 33) or lug ted, g.yang ded (l. 36); spo ma sna ma drag, nye du rgyab ma rgod (PT 1289, l. 33–4; spo ma nye du is a singular thing). 27 Tibetica Antiqua I, 27–8. The equivalence with the phrase “to obtain bodhi” (lam thob, ‘phrul gyi lam, ‘phrul gyi chos lam) is certain there. We might justifiably think that gtsug corresponds to Dao 道, but this would be an illusion. It is here an adjective that designates the excellence (of the Dao, i.e. bodhi), since the word is parallel to ‘phrul gyi. We may add another purely Buddhist example. In the ms. PT 0001.5 (Choix I, pl. 3, l. 57), it is stated that while remembering a certain mantra at the moment of death, “although one dies, one is reborn as a god (lhar skye’o) of the (heaven of the) Thirty-three, and one recalls to memory the supreme (exalted) name (gtsug gi mtshan) of the Buddha. That the adjective gtsug gi “exalted,” elevated, is derived from “sinciput” (spyi gtsug, etc.) is proven by certain Buddhist turns of phrase. In order to state that rays of light emanate from the sinciput of a buddha, one employs the expression

apropos of the word gtsug lag

131

she found that which she sought in a very particular religious text (the “Account of the Ages,” see Review of sources, infra p. 171ff ). The “Good epoch” is characterized by the expression gna’i gtsug lagi chos bzang po, the “good religion of the Gtsug lag of former times” (357, 360). In abstaining from translating gtsug lag, A.M. seeks a tautology or a pleonasm: “the good religion of the tradition (of morality, political wisdom, etc.) of former times.” Yet the word gi does not here designate a genitive or a dependance. The two terms are equivalent or close, as in other cases, and the order of the two expressions is indifferent. In a variant which is found in the same text (364), it is stated (as elsewhere for Buddhism): “the religion (or custom), the good tradition (morality, wisdom, etc.) of earlier generations” (myi rabs snga ma’i chos gtsug lag bzang po) for the good era, and for the bad: “to each country its religion (custom) and its tradition (morality, etc.)” ( yul re chos re gtsug lag re re). We saw above the example from the Prayers of De ga where “the religion of the gods, the good custom (tradition, morality, etc.)” should designate Buddhism and not the pre-Buddhist religion.”28 As previously noted, even if it were a question of the tradition regarding the most remote antiquity, when the word gtsug lag is defined in detail with concrete examples, it does not designate a “religion,” but the political or administrative institutions or good conduct. A.M. recognizes this (346). In a song of a political nature (Old Tibetan Chronicle, 113; A.M., 344–5), when one evokes the coming of the first

gtsug tor gyi gtsug nas (Kanjur, No 151, vol. VI, pp. 158–4; translation around 800). At the end of the apocryphal sūtra Vimalaprabhā-paripṛcchā (same era; Ldan dkar Catalog, No 107; Thomas TLTD, I, 258), the author gives as equivalent titles Chos kyi spyi po, “Sinciput of the Dharma” and “Quintessence of the Dharma and of all buddhas.” The use of the adjective gtsug gi, “exalted,” was maintained. According to Nyang ral (12th century), the King of China, Kong tse ‘phrul chung, is celebrated as “supreme (exalted) king of the buddhas” (sangs rgyas kyi gtsug gi rgyal po; Chos rgyal mes dbon rnam thar, 166). 28 A.M. (200, 339–40) states as well that this designates “the system of governance utilized by Khri gtsug lde brtsan” (a fervent Buddhist!). Yet she thinks that this system rests on the ancient religion. It is true that the cliché in two parallel expressions is also employed for the first mythical ancestor and that a certain ambiguity reigns often in the use of this formula. We will return to this. Here, we will note a small difference. For the king, the author states gtsug lag bzang po, whereas in the evocation of the ancient state, he always states gtsug lag che ba (“great” and not “good”). In a work attributed to Khri srong lde btsan (cf. n. 19; Tanjur No 5839, pp. 98–1), one greets Samantabhadra (“All Good”) because he “proclaims the good gtsug lag (bzang po) which covers all with Virtue” and because (of the fact that) “he realizes well the benefit of the entire world.” We also finds gtsug lag bzang po in the “Account of the Ages” (see Review of sources, infra p. 171ff).

132

r.a. stein

divine ancestor, the latter is presented as the chief of all the lands and princes, thanks to the “good religion” and the “great gtsug (lag, A.M.: “because its good law was the Great Gtsug,” translation impossible). The phrase is less than explicit, but seems to designate a political wisdom. In the legend of this ancestor, (ibid., 81; A.M., 346), the author describes the excellence of the land and its inhabitants. The latter were at the same time wise (‘dzangs) and valorous (dpa’). They raised (?) a “good religion” (or custom, chos bzang), and the horses were fast. This “religion (custom) was different from that of the other kings.” After an obscure phrase, the author states that the honored men donned the ceremonial (rje sa) clothing, and this was the origin of the great men and the honored men.29 As obscure as this passage is, it seems to me to refer to the honorific distinctions which recompense the wise and the brave (cf. TA II). This theme characterizes the kings Srong btsan sgam po (Old Tibetan Chronicle, 118) and Khri srong lde brtsan (114; A.M., 343–4, 349). Srong btsan sgam po takes his name or surname (sgam po, “wise”) from the fact that he was, on high, a wise lord (sgam) and that his minister, below, was equally wise (‘dzangs). This is why eulogies for the wise (‘dzangs) and respect for the brave (dpa’ bo) often appear among the other institutions of political wisdom. As “his religion (custom) was good and his reign elevated (chos bzang srid mtho ste), all the world was happy.” It was he who introduced writing to Tibet and, from this fact (byung nas) all the good rules (or writings) of the religion (custom, institutions) of Tibet (Bod kyi chos kyi gzhung bzang po) appeared during his reign. These were “the great code (and? namely?) the gtsug lag (tradition, morality, good custom, etc.) of Tibet” (Bod kyi gtsug lag bka’ grims ched po; cf. n. 29), namely the hierarchy of ministers, the (respective) powers of the great and the small, the recompense for good and the punishment for offenses, etc. Nothing religious in all that. It is the same for Khri srong lde brtsan. As the “religion (custom) was good and the reign great” (chos bzang

29 In this passage and the ones following, A.M. chose a mistaken translation for chos, to know the “good Law” and “his Law,” words that she compares with the expression chos khrims from the Treaty of 821–2, translated as “civil law” (343–4, 346; likewise 377 for the reign of Srong btsan sgam po). Yet chos never signifies “law.” [Stein’s affirmation is doubtful—C.S.-S.] This translation applies only to the saddharma (the Good Law, the Dharma) of the Buddhologists (cf. A.M., n. 543, for chos bzang po, “the good Law,” i.e. Buddhism, in an inscription). For A.M., the phrases from this passage are poorly written and in disorder (340, 200), because it is the first ancestor who brought the “good religion.” She tends to draw from this mention a sort of chronological reference mark for the ancient religion (also 357; cf. here 134–5).

apropos of the word gtsug lag

133

srid che ste), “the king stands (is held?) in the land between heaven and earth, and his great gtsug lag (wisdom, art of governance, etc.), which made of him the sovereign of men and animals, was naturally to be used as a model for men.” Then, of what does this gtsug lag consist? It was to mete out reward to the good (legs) and punishment to the bad (nyes), to respect the wise and the brave, etc. There again, nothing religious. Yet at the end, the king is lauded because, “having found the religion of the Buddha (sangs rgyas kyi chos), he constructed monasteries (gtsug lag khang) everywhere.” Having then “established the Religion” (chos btsugs nas) and having thought of all with kindness, “he was delivered from saṃ sāra and reached nirvāṇa” (skye shi las bsgral to, g.yung drung bton to).30 A.M. has well recognized this administrative aspect (350), and likewise the “constitutional and administrative regulations” (377). For her, these aspects are the most visible because they concern official documents. Let us thus view the definitions that we find in the “Account of the Ages,” a religious text that A.M. links, wrongly, to the very ancient religion (analysis, 357–366; cf. the Review of sources, infra). The author there speaks of a “good period” where one was happy. It was here that “men and gods were not (yet) separated.” It is followed by more and more evil epochs of “Calamities,” during which men became more and more evil. They no longer act according to the “good religion and the good conduct (morality, etc.)” of former times. In the majority of passages, these formulas are not explicated. Yet we find some more precise indications (A.M., 360–1). In the evil era, there is an evil “religion” (chos). Of what does it consist? Demons incite men to do evil; the malicious become rich, the innocent become poor. Then, it will be worse. In place of a single king, there will be many of them, and in place of a single “good religion and good conduct (morality, etc.),” each land will have its own (cf. below). Men will scorn this “good religion” (etc.) of former times, and they will act according to a “new religion” (chos sar pa; A.M. thinks of Buddhism). This is rather vague, but chos and gtsug lag are parallel and almost identical. We find these details in a variant of this text. (A.M. 362–3). These are the wise adages or maxims completely analogous to the other texts of this genre (PT 0991; Sum pa ma shags; Dialogue between the Two Brothers; History of the King Go ‘phang). The swindlers will be powerful (Thomas AFL,

30

On these Buddhist expressions from translations made partly from Chinese, cf. Tibetica Antiqua I, 28–30. The word g.yung drung corresponds to nirvāṇa and bodhi.

134

r.a. stein

IV, l. 1–2), the rich will lauded as “wise” even if they are evil, and the poor—though wise—will be vilified as “villains” (evil, ngan pa). Examples are given. An evil son will be lauded by his parents as a sage (because he became rich), whereas another son who is just, does not do evil, and is a man of (good) conduct (morality, etc.; gtsug lag gi myi), will be denigrated as bad. One will listen to the lies of the rich, and will mock the speech of the poor. One will neglect ones parents if they are poor, whereas the rich will be loved like parents, even though they are not. One will no longer have shame or modesty, “an adulterer or a thief will be more admired than a hero, valorous in combat.” The women will be perverted and will sow discord between father and son, older and younger brothers, who will kill each other. We see that these evil mores are the opposite of that which not only the accounts of maxims, but also the Old Tibetan Chronicle apropos of the two kings, considered to be the rules of conduct proper to “good religion and good government (etc.).” Here, it is not a question of religion. The “good religion (or custom)” consists of conducting oneself according to morality and wisdom (and naturally these principles are also common in China and India). Both parts31 of these manuscripts are indeed religious texts, one archaic, the other “classical.” This last often evokes the ancient times, but this does not prove that the cliché which occupies us designates the ancient religion of c. 650 A.D. It concerns an evocation of the good old days where all was good, linked elsewhere to the kings, historical and legendary, from ancient times whom a folklorist would classify in the category of “civilizing heroes.” As seen before, A.M. clearly saw the character of morality and political wisdom. If she nevertheless thought of a religion, it is because the cliché in question (chos bzang, etc) is also applied to the first divine ancestor, because the king carries the title “son of god” (lha sras) and because he is presented as provided with supernatural powers. The majority of the terms composing the cliché are often associated with expressions like “custom of the gods (or divine)” lha’i lugs (A.M. poorly translates: “system of the gods,” 349), “wisdom (etc.) of the gods (lha’i gtsug lag) and “religion (mode of being) of heaven and earth” (or of heaven only, gnam (sa’i) chos; A.M., 350: “Law of Heaven”).

31 Everything that we come to read about the “good religion” of former times is only found in the part in the “classical” style and never mentioned in the part in the archaic style. See the Review of sources, infra p. 171ff, “Account of the Ages.”

apropos of the word gtsug lag

135

We shall speak of these metaphors later. As for the titles, they were common under the Buddhist kings (and conceived on the model of Chinese titles; cf. Stein 1981a),32 and not in the era of Srong btsan sgam po. Other hyperbolic titles (lha dpal, etc.) were similarly applied to ministers or other eminent personages. A.M. also accepts the fact that, in one version of the “Account of the Ages,” the ancient, legendary epoch is linked to ‘Brong zi (legs?), who is the thirteenth legendary king in the later tradition. And she thinks that it is a “first, very precise, chronological marker” (359). The existence of non-Buddhist myths and legends around 800 A.D. is certain. Yet this is not sufficient to give to the archaic religion (that cannot be dated) the name gtsug or gtsug lag or chos bzang. These words were common in the era of the Buddhist kings. In the 821–2 Treaty of Lhasa, China is treated as Tibet’s equal because it had the same “grand gtsug lag” and the same “good religion.” A.M. fully recognizes (379) that it there concerns “social and political organization,” and not religion. Moreover, this phrase was borrowed from the translation of the Shujing (cf. Stein 1981a, n. 51 and TA I, 86). * * * Since both parallel terms of the cliché are more or less equivalent, why not give to the ancient religion the name chos? Haarh did it, as we shall see. Is it because we might confound this word (chos) with the chos (Dharma) which designates Buddhism? It does not seem so. A.M.’s choice is above all owing to multiple texts which speak of the gods in the phrases where we find the word gtsug alone. However, instead of recalling each time that this word is the same as gtsug, an abbreviation of gtsug lag, A.M. gives it another, more abstract, value. She rejects another meaning of this word alone (“sinciput,” elevation). Therein resides, to my sense, the principal source of error. In the texts in question, the author states, apropos of the kings, that “gtsug does not vary” 32 We might further cite the ms. PT 2111, written in the Dunhuang region and dating from the beginning of the 10th century (cf. Uray, “L’emploi du tibétain dans les chancelleries des états du Kan-sou et de Khotan postérieurs à la domination tibétaine,” 88). The author states that “conforming to the ancient usage (rnying lugs bzhin), there was loyalty between the king of China (Rgya rje rgyal po) and the senders of the letter. And: “Thanks to the divine manner (or: “of the gods” lha’i lugs) of the great king (of Khotan?), the minor kings submitted to his protection “are treated in equal fashion (?; l. l. 3: rgyal po chen po’i lha’i lugs kyis // skyab ‘og na rgyal phran . . .). The same eulogizing comparisons are popular in the epistolary style. The recipient is often called “equal to the gods” (lha dang ‘dra ba; lha dpal ‘phrul dang mtshungs pa; dgung dang ‘dra ba , cf. Stein, “Saint et divin,” 247–8; sometimes the word “equal to” is suppressed).

136

r.a. stein

and other formulae that will be seen below (n. 34). Seeking a great and “true” religion, containing an abstract principal, and aided in this by her refusal to translate the word, A.M. neglects, in these cases, the fact that gtsug is only an abbreviation of gtsug lag. Not content with the idea that the gods and the divine ancestors instituted a “good religion” and a “(political ) wisdom,” gtsug lag, she defined the gtsug from these passages as “The World Order,” and she compared it later to the Chinese Dao (351, 353–4, 365; confusing gtsug and gtsug lag, 352, 357, 376–7). Yet nowhere, in any text of the era, appears a definition specifying gtsug as “Order of the Universe.” It is curious to note that, departing from the same stereotypical phrase (chos bzang, gtsug che), E. Haarh allowed himself the same kind of induction in defining chos as “universal order . . . at once in nature . . . and in society . . . guaranteed by the Tibetan king” (447, n. 6; cited by Kvaerne 1972, 34). A.M. shared this thinking (354). She thinks that gtsug is “The World Order” because gtsug lag is parallel to chos bzang, the “Good Law” introduced by the first ancestor (but this tradition is misleading, cf. n. 29). Just as mistaken is this way of creating an abstract notion departing from a concrete meaning (chos, abbreviation of chos lugs), the word chos would be more appropriate than gtsug. There is not only an analogy with the Chinese Dao, but also with the Indian dharma, not the Buddhist Dharma, but the dhamma of the Aśokan inscriptions which designates the good government of the king guaranteeing the good mores and the religious practices of all communities, Hindu and Buddhist.33

33

The dhamma of these inscription is morality; it is distinguished from the Buddhist saddharma (E. Lamotte, Histoire du bouddhisme indien, 248–255 and W. Schumacher, Die Edikte des Kaisers Aśoka, 20, 25, 27–29, 43). There, we find the works of benefit for all, the just application of rewards and punishments (as in the Old Tibetan Chronicle), respect for father and mother, criticism of animal sacrifices and rites (of marriage, in case of malady, etc.), the wish that men attain the celestial world, the insistence on good conduct (dharmamaṅ gala). These are the “ancient regulations” (Lamotte, 249–250). We even find the theme of the separation of men and gods when the world was evil and, contrariwise, of their mixing (“as in olden times”) in the era of the king, thanks to his “moral merits” (P. Meile, “Misā devehi chez Aśoka,” 196–198, 201, 210–11, and J. Filliozat, “Les deva d’Aśoka, dieux ou divines majestés,” 225–247). I cite these edicts only as a comparison, to clarify a type of thinking, without considering loans. The pilgrims Faxian 法顯 and Xuanzang 玄奘 saw these inscriptions and spoke about them (Lamotte, 267). Yet the Chinese and the Tibetans undoubtedly only knew the legend (Aśokāvadāna, Divyāvadāna; Lamotte, 66, 266). Yet there are echoes. Meile cited Brahmanical and Buddhist examples. In the Lotus de la Bonne Loi, it is a question of a “golden age where gods and men lived together” (Burnouf, ch. VIII, p. 123; ed. Kern, 202; Taishō, vol. IX, No 262, k. 4, p. 27c: the devas will see men there and men

apropos of the word gtsug lag

137

Returning, however, to the word gtsug alone, such as it appears in a certain number of texts in connection with the gods of heaven and the divine ancestors. We may divide these texts into two groups: 1) the phrases of the type “gtsug does not waver” serving to glorify the good reign of the king (variants: reign does not waver, helmet is firm, etc.); the phrases where the word gtsug is associated with divinities (lha and phyva). A.M. never translates this word and always interprets it in the sense “World Order.” We may begin with the inscription from the tomb of Khri lde srong btsan (Richardson 1969; A.M., 349–50). The first ancestor, a son of the gods who became sovereign of men, “had a good religious system: the Gtsug never wavered” (but it is necessary to translate it, rather, as: “as for the good religion, the gtsug (lag) never wavered” or “never deteriorated”). In the first part of the cliché, the expression is not abridged (chos lugs bzang po); in the second part, the expression is abridged for reasons of prosody (gtsug alone). The strictly parallel verse which follows evokes “the grand power (mnga’ thang), its efficacy (byin) never diminished.” A less well balanced verse follows: “as for the helmet, its power (brtsan pa) is always like the grand, eternal gtsug lag.” Elsewhere, the author always states “powerful helmet” (dbu rmog brtsan). In the verse, the word “powerful” ought to follow the word “helmet,” and in the second part, we ought to have something like “was never reduced.”34 In place of this, we find a comparison with the grand gtsug lag (perhaps suggested by the gtsug from the first verse).

will see devas there”; in Chinese: “men and devas will mix (or: will have exchanges) and the one will see himself in the other”). 34 We may emphasize the process of composition by the comparison of variants. For greater clarity, let us first take three inscriptions. 1) Khri lde srong btsan. a. chos lugs bzang po b. mnga’ thang chen po c. chab srid d. dbu rmog

ni gzhar ni nam khyang ni ni yun du

2) ‘Phyong rgyas. a. chos gtsug lag ni b, d. dbu rmog brtsan po ni

gtsug myi ‘gyur byin myi nyamste (phyir zhing che) bran pa’i (g.yung drung gi tsug lag chen po bzhin du; lha’i lugs dang mthun par; gnam gyi chos dang mtshungs) lugs kyis bzang byin du che’o ( yab myes kyi lugs bzhin; gnam sa’i chos dang ni ‘thun par mdzad) gdung ma ‘gyur bar . . .

138

r.a. stein

This last expression receives the adjective “eternal,” which should qualify the helmet. Yet, naturally, an author is free to vary his phrasing. The inscription continues in stating that the King Khri lde srong brtsan reigned according to the same principles (“divine manner,” “custom [or principle] from heaven”). In the analogous inscription 3) Treaty of Lhasa. a. gtsug lag chen pos b. chos khrims bzang pos c. chab srid d. dbu rmog a. b.

ni yund kyi ni ni ni nam zhar

4) Prayers of De ga. a. chos gtsug ni b-d. dbu rmog brtsan ba’i ni chab srid dbu rmog brtsan, mnga’ thang ěh ba’i a. nam zhar yang c. chab srid mjal dum

slar zhing brtsan pas . . . gtsug myi ‘gyur byin myi nyams pa’i ( g,yung drung gi rgyal po chen po yin) lugs kyis bzang . . . byin che bas

nyam tu yang

myi ‘gyur gtsigs kyi rdo ring sku tshe g.yung drung du bzhes te gyung drung tu brtan, sku tshe ring rje’i gtung ma ‘gyurd te ( g.yung drung tu brtan . . .) ma mnyam (= nyams) te myi ‘gyur zhing brtan bar . . .

ni nam zhar

myi ‘gyur

c. chab srid a. lha’i lugs c. chabs srid kyi phang mtho ba . . . a. Bod rje blon gtsug lag

srid btsugs myi’i lugs bsrang . . . (phyir zhing che)

The prosody was upset. We pass from verse to prose. The elements are sometimes associated, sometimes dissociated. Richardson (1969, n. 17) admits the possibility of gtsug “summit, sinciput” (adverbially) and compares it, justly, with mtha’r myi gyur (Old Tibetan Chronicle): “at the end” or “at the borders.” We find the height in 4) (phang mtho), and this expression in confirmed by another Prayer (PT 0999, l. 7): “reign elevated (to the summit? rtse), great efficacy” chab srid rtse (a g is subscribed) mar mtho zhing byin rlabs yang bas. As for that which never changes “at the borders” or “at the end,” we will see an example of it apropos of animals (146, mtha’ myi g.yo). The same idea is expressed by a variant. For the animals, one seeks (something) eternal (g.yung drung). Then, “the confines of the enclosure will not diminish in any way” (Thomas AFL, VI, § 12: ra mtha’ ni cang myi ‘gri). This is an oracle in verse, but in prose (§ 13, l. 65) the author states: if one renders worship unto a good god, “cattle and fields will never diminish” (mtha’ myi ‘gyur). Another oracle, in verse, concludes (§ 28): “glorious birth, will never diminish” (pdal skyes ni mtha’ myi gri). As a supplement, I add less official variants. 5a. First inscription of Rkong po. lha sras kyi chab srid / / di ltar mtho, dbu rmog brtsan pa / / lha sras gnam dang ‘dra ba. (The brother) chu srid / / g.yung drung dang ‘dra ba. 5b. Second inscription of Rkong po. bu tsha pheld rgyud / / nam zhar / / srid g.yung drung dang mtshungs par. (Xizang yanjiu, Lhasa, 1982, No 2).

apropos of the word gtsug lag

139

from Phyong rgyas (of Khri srong lde brtsan; Richardon 1964), the author states that the king reigned in the manner (lugs bzhin) of the ancestors, that the gtsug lag (sic! and not the gtsug) divine (lha’i gtsug lag) never diminished (ma nyams, like the “power” in the other inscription: myi nyams) and that this mode of ruling conformed to the manner or principle (chos) of heaven and earth. A.M. did well to emphasize (350) that the historical kings justified their reigns by the divine nature of their first ancestor descended from heaven. Yet she sees in their gtsug lag not only civil, but also religious, aspects. That is because of the synonymous formulae “manner of the gods” (which she translates: “system of the gods”), etc. To my sense, these formulae do not imply that the gtsug lag (and not the Gtsug) was also a religion. The author only exalts good government in attributing it to the first (mythic) ancestor and in qualifying it in this by making hyperbolic epithets. In the same fashion, the title of the kings (‘phrul gyi lha btsan po) was retroactively attributed to this mythic ancestor. As for eulogizing comparisons, these are literary metaphors (perhaps of Chinese inspiration).35 We shall speak of them later. However, we return again to the expressions already cited above (95, “manner of the gods”). They find themselves in a new and very important document (Richardson 1977; ITJ 370.5). It exalts the kings Khri srong lde btsan and Srong btsan sgam po for having adopted

6. Old Tibetan Chronicle (DTT 113, l. 25, 35). lha sras ni myi’i mgon . . . yul mtho ni sa gtsang bas . . . chos bzang ni gtsug che ba . . . chos bzang ni (rjed gshin zhing). 7. PT 1552.2, verso (3) isolated line. lha srad / / gtsug che, lha ris myi mgon / sad bang, cho gtshang, rigs btshung, byar (?) gnyan. 8. “Darma fallen from the sky.” myi mgon lha sras / / rgyal mchog ste (. . . Buddhism . . .) gtsug lag ‘di ltar (like an ocean, Sumeru)/ / ‘di mdzad gzhung btsugs, ring lon te. (myi lus thob kyang)/ / lha’i lugs. chos bzang gtsug lag rnying / / nub mod (the inverse of gtsug myi ‘gyur). 35 Richardson (1964, n. 3) wonders if lha’i lugs and gnam sa’i chos are antithetical (Buddhism and Bon) or, more probably, both epithets of Bon as Tucci thought (cf. also Snellgrove and Richardson 1968, 59 & 96). Richardson (1978, n. 5) accepted A.M.’s idea that the “esoteric” expressions resembled Chinese conceptions of the art of governance, but also had distinctly Tibetan characteristics. He elsewhere brought up, justly, the style and the language “of a frontier, colonial regime” and he wondered if there wasn’t, in this text, a Chinese influence (1977, 233). In effect, certain phrases from the inscriptions have been borrowed from the translation of the Shujing 書經 (Tibetica Antiqua I, 86–7 and additional note in Tibetica Antiqua II). Cf. Review of sources, infra p. 171, Prayers of De ga.

140

r.a. stein

Buddhism (which is confirmed by the inscription of Skar chung; Stein 1980). Thanks to Buddhism, here clearly designated by the word gtsug lag (l. 7), the country was happy and powerful; the people were honest and had a “grand manner (correct way of life, chab gang, lugs che, l. 9).” There follows a phrase taken from the Prajñāśataka on the myi chos (good custom) which is preparatory to the lha chos (Buddhism; cf. n. 23). Here, this phrase illustrates the good conduct of the people. The author then states that (the king and) the people, although having the bodies of men, have the “manners of the gods” (lha’i lugs, l. 12) and that such a way of life was different from that of the other royalty and men (as in the Treaty of Lhasa, apropos of gtsug lag). This had never been seen and would never more be seen (l. 13), and this is rare even among the gods (lha la dkon ba yin). Finally, the author makes allusion to the fact that “the father being dead and the son (the king) still young,” the “good religion” (chos bzang) and the “ancient (rnying) gtsug lag” had disappeared. After which, the author wonders how the true religion of the Ten Virtuesa (cf. n. 76) and of the vinaya, the royal law and the wise instructions of the ancestors will be (or could be?) exercised “in the Tibetan manner” (Bod kyi chos lugs ltar, ga la byed, l. 16). The two last lines are dedicated to the questions of Buddhist doctrine. A complete interpretation of this document poses problems and cannot take place here. In any case, the ideal of a good reign and of wise customs of former times is attributed to Srong btsan sgam po in the same manner as Buddhism. The employment of the same words ( gtsug lag, lha chos) and eulogizing epithets (lugs che, lha’i lugs) suggests a subtle assimilation.36 We may now examine the Treaty of Lhasa (821–2, East face), which is an official document parallel to the two inscriptions cited above. Yet the composition of the phrases is different (variations of the author;

a

On the veracity of this translation, cf. Tibetica Antiqua IV, n. 14. – ed. The goal of this text (to demonstrate the origin in Buddhism in Tibet) is clearly indicated by the title: “dar ma (i.e. book) fallen from the sky, in a roll.” In the later tradition, this first Buddhist book is dated to the era of Lha Tho tho ri, here to Srong btsan sgam po (and his ancestors?). Richardson (1977) did not discuss the value of the terms. He thought that the text emanated from the successor of Khri srong lde brtsan. But then the sentence on the decline of Buddhism is made problematic. It seems to me that this phrase (at the death of the father, the son being young) alludes to the situation evoked (with this phrase) in the Sba bzhed (see below, 165). The young king must be Khri srong lde brtsan. 36

apropos of the word gtsug lag

141

A.M., 341, 349). The author first names the King Khri gtsug lde brtsan with his title ‘phrul gyi lha btsan po. In the 5th line, this title is given to the mythic first ancestor. Since the time he inaugurated the country, his line (and not his good governance, gtsug lag) did not waver (was not altered, gdung ma ‘gyur). In the country, exalted as pure (another frequent cliché), he came from the land of the gods as sovereign of men, he established his permanent government ( yund kyi srid btsugs) thanks to his grand “art of governance” (etc. gtsug lag; Richardson: “by great wisdom and method”); and thanks to his great religious law (chos khrims, certainly the same thing), he made right the customs of men (myi yi lugs).37 It is (l. 12) thanks to his “powerful helmet” that his “art of governance” (etc., gtsug here for gtsug lag?) never wavers (“his wise order was immutable”). He was a great king of the Eternal (g.yung drung; Richardson: “Of the Eternal Svastika”), the efficacy (byin) of which never diminished. The word “eternal” is here an epithet of the king and not of the gtsug lag, as in the inscription of Khri lde srong brtsan (where byin goes with power and where the helmet does not have the epithet “powerful”). I have here preserved Richardson’s and A.M.’s interpretation (gtsug is for gtsug lag), because the phrase relative to the helmet corresponds visibly to the phrase from the other inscription where “powerful” is connected to gtsug lag. Yet as of now, I note that the expression “gtsug does not waver” could be applied to the elevation (to the sinciput, gtsug) and not to the gtsug lag. The formula “gtsug does not waver” reappears in a hymn to the king, read by a minister, the Buddhist monk (Dpal gyi) Yon tan (PT 1290; A.M., 319–20, 339). The author first describes the excellence of the land (“pure,” of great altitude), a place worthy of being a residence of the gods (lha gnas). This is in order to indicate that the king of the men is (also) a god there. His reign (art of governance, etc.?; gtsug for gtsug lag?) is not altered (myi ‘gyurd). This method of presenting first the excellence of the land (even before the arrival of the divine ancestor) is found in the Old Tibetan Chronicle (Bacot DTT, 81; A.M., 345–47). A.M. considered this

37 The expression myi’i lugs is analogous to myi’i chos lugs (morality, etc.; cf. n. 23). For the equivalences of chos, lugs gzhung, tshul, cf. Tibetica Antiqua I, 44–7 and n. 63). We may add gtsug (= gtsug lag) illustrated by an example from ms. PT 1194 (Stein, “Du récit au rituel dans les manuscripts tibétains de Touen-Houang,” 512, n. 87 and 543, n. 21): (l. 19) chos gsar ma lagso . . ., rnying gi lugs; but l. 67: chos gsar ma yin . . ., rnying gi mtshug.

142

r.a. stein

passage poorly edited (see above, 93; A.M., 200, 340), because the ancestor who descended from heaven found a land already perfect with its wise men and fast horses. The author states only, in modest terms, that this first king made a good “custom” (chos), a “manner” (tshul ); Snellgrove-Richardson, 24: “his mode”), a “custom” (chos, loc. cit.: “religion”) different (i.e. better) than those of other royalty (as in the Treaty of Lhasa and in ITJ 370.5 above). At the end is found a phrase about which I will speak later (the sacred mountain is gtsug gi lha). The formula “gtsug does not waver” does not appear there. It is likewise in a hymn of glory on the occasion of the conquests of Khri lde gtsug brtsan (705–755) and of his relations with the Nanzhao (a hymn more ancient than the inscriptions examined if we allow that the text was not altered by the editor; Bacot DTT, 113; A.M., 342–45). The author first recalls the descent of a god from heaven onto the earth in order to become a king of men; he then exalts the excellence of the land (“pure, elevated”) and his “good religion and great political wisdom (etc.)” (Snellgrove-Richardson, 23: “religion too surpassing all” is erroneous). Thanks to them, he subjects all the minor kings (it is first written: chos bzang ni gtsug che bas; then: gtsug che la chos bzang ni). Finally, the king of Nanzhao (who received the title “younger brother” of the Tibetan king) is associated with this genre of glorious reign (and a little subordinate: “sovereign and subject,” rje dang skol ). Since the reign of men is exercised by a god, the reign is grand; (until ) the end (to the borders?) it will not waver” (srid che ni mtha’r myi ‘gyur). From a formal viewpoint, this phrase is constructed like the formula “gtsug does not waver.” We find analogous formulae in the divination text PT 1047. An oracle (l. 9) consists of the aspect of a “king whose reign does not waver (does not deteriorate) during three generations (srid myi ‘gyurd pha) or (l. 13) that “the reign does not waver (does not deteriorate, chab srid myi ‘gyurd pha) or further (l. 17) that “the reign was elevated, it never wavered (deteriorated, chab srid ‘to zhing nam du’ang srid myi ‘gyurd pha). In an analogous fashion, in the Old Tibetan Chronicle (Bacot DTT, 112), after having subdued the rebellion of the ministers, it is stated: “the reign (of the king) was even more elevated than before” (chab srid sngon bas kyang mtho). The theme of the reign, the power, the good government, etc. which “never wavers” is also many times utilized in the Prayers of De ga (A.M., 335–340). The terminology is clearly Buddhist, but we find

apropos of the word gtsug lag

143

mixed there, in a subtle and sometimes ambiguous fashion, the indigenous expressions which characterize the excellence of the first mythic ancestor, so much so that it is sometimes difficult to distinguish. I have already cited a phrase which, in context, designates (to my sense) Buddhism, but that A.M. arranges among the non-Buddhist expressions (cf. n. 24 and 28). The list of variants which I established (n. 34) clearly demonstrates how an epithet or a metaphor may be displaced from one subject to another at the whim of the author’s inspiration. Despite the ambiguity which results, we see—among different possibilities— that the theme of perenniality and invariability is applied both to the reign and to the (military) power of the king, metaphorically characterized by the “powerful helmet,” eternally firm and qualified (like the reign) by its height. We will revisit this soon. It remains to examine the second category of phrases relative to gtsug alone. We have already seen (142) a primary example apropos of the descent of Gnya’ khri btsan po from heaven onto the sacred mountain. Previously, the author evoked the excellence of the land where the mythic king assured a good “custom” (chos, tshul). From the beginning, the poetic phrases describe the reaction of the land to the event: even Mount Sumeru bows down (before the king); the trees, the water, the rocks salute him. At the end, the author repeats this excellence with the phrase: “the fir is the tallest of all the trees, the river Yar is the bluest of all the rivers, and (the sacred mountain of Yar) Yar lha Sham po is gtsug gi lha. A.M. (200, 347) rejects Bacot’s translation: “is the god of the supreme peaks” (likewise Snellgrove-Richardson, 25: “is god supreme”) because, she states, “gtsug should not be translated.” She notices, however, quite admirably that “this phrase also ends with a superlative.” And she translates: “(Among all the sacred mountains,) Yar lha sham po is (the greatest) god of the gtsug.” Completely refusing to translate, A.M. well understands that this Gtsug is not translated as “World Order” (353). If we refuse the usual meaning of gtsug alone (peak of the head), we can only take this gtsug as an abbreviation of gtsug lag. We would then have a very banal and improbable phrase: “this is a god of good government (custom, etc.)” I think that Bacot’s reasoning was sound, and that gtsug here designates the summit, either like an epithet of the mountain, or with a derived meaning, such as “elevated,” “exalted.” We have seen one such use of gtsug gi as an adjective (gtsug gi chos; cf. n. 27). All the more since the land comes

144

r.a. stein

to be glorified by a phrase repeated in the royal inscriptions (up until the king of Ladakh in the 11th century)38 in order to designate Tibet: “high mountains, pure earth” (ri mtho, sa gtsang). We also find exaltation of the sacred mountains and/or the gods who represented them (lha or phyva) in the second example cited by A.M., the song of victory of the king Dus srong. We have already seen that his reign had then become “yet more elevated than before” (142). This song is in verse (Bacot DTT, 118–19; A.M., 351–53). At the beginning, formerly, below heaven and above the earth, “gtsug established and well established (gtsug gtsugs ni btsugs legs te).39 As this is elevated (mthos te),40 the sky does not collapse and the earth does not shrink (flat or ravined).41 The sun in the sky heats the earth. The feather, well attached (to the arrow), makes it possible to shoot it. There follow allusions to the ministers who could not equal the king. The earthworm wants to behave like the bird, but cannot fly into the sky even if it had wings, because the sky is high (phang mthos te). Among other comparisons, the author states that the snows of (Yar lha) Sham po never melt and that the waters of the river Yar are never drained. Similarly, the lineage (of the kings) of Tibet “is never cut” (gdung myi chad). Compared to others, Mount Yar lha Sham po is the grandest and the river Yar is the longest. Then cited as witnesses are various sacred mountains, the sun and moon and the sky with the formula “they know it” (mkhyen) or “they see it from on high” ( ya bis gzigs, ya bi mkhyen). It is the man who mounts the horse, and not the reverse: witness the phyva provided with gtsug (pyva’i ni gtsug mkhan mkhyen; A.M.; 352: “the Phyva who understand the Gtsug know it well”). It is the sickle that cuts the grass and not the reverse: witness sun and moon who see (all) and the sky which hears (all). (Likewise) gtsug and phyva never change (deteriorate) (phyva’i ni gtsug myi ‘gyur), (no more than) the

38 Alchi inscription: kling gi kling mchog la’i ‘dzam bu gling / / ri mtho sa gtsang, Spu gyal Bod kyi yul (Snellgrove-Skorupski, The Cultural Heritage of Ladakh, 30, 123; also 138). 39 The word gtsug is undoubtedly superfluous, or it is necessary to read btsugs, which gives “gtsug established, well established.” 40 High in opposition to the earth. Later, we have: gdung sngo ni phung mthos te, “as heaven is elevated” (twice). This height undoubtedly refers to the preceding gtsug, an epithet of the sky or of the mountains which touch and support it. 41 Uncertain orthography: sding (myi nyams). We will see a variant below (146): heaven cannot change, the earth cannot fly away (lding).

apropos of the word gtsug lag

145

feather of the arrow is not (ever) torn off (mda’i ni sgro myi ‘bog), the true and the false (are well established) forever. The phrases with gtsug are assuredly obscure, but A.M.’s translation seems erroneous to me, because she does not take account of the context. Yet she lucidly admits (353) that we might think of the assimilation of mountains into the pillars of heaven, the cosmic axis, and the king.42 If she rejects this idea, it is because she is thinking of Gtsug or Gtsug lag. However, only gtsug lag would be valid, but then I don’t see why it would be alluded to in this literary evocation where the complementarity, but also the hierarchy, of the king and the minister are compared to those who reign between heaven and earth (comparisons to which we will return later, 157–8). What guided A.M. were still other phrases associating phyva with the word gtsug. We shall speak of these in a moment. Yet, let us further revisit the song examined above. It is entirely centered around the evocation of sky and earth, and above all of high heaven, with sun and moon, and of the sacred mountains. These are the divinities who see and hear all and are taken as witnesses in the Treaty of Lhasa of 821–2 (divinities of heaven and earth, sun, moon and stars, according to the description from the Chinese Annals; the Triratna, the saints, sun and moon, the stars, according to the Sino-Tibetan inscription). On the subject of the preeminence of the sacred mountains, the song utilizes the same formulae as in the legend of Gnya’ khri. There, this ancestor is a god (lha and phyva) who descended from heaven onto the “mountain of the gods,” Lha ri gyang do (as in the inscription of Rkong po, l. 4, and as in the later tradition where it is conceived of as a staircase or a scale; see below). The sacred mountains bow down before him, Sumeru (axis mundi), but also Yar lha Sham po, who is qualified with a superlative (certainly: the most elevated, gtsug gi lha). Also in the song, the other sacred mountains watch from on high (as witnesses), like heaven: they are also qualified as phyva “provided with gtsug” and, like heaven, elevated (phang mtho), they never change gtsug (summit? height?). The mountain Yar lha Sham po in particular witnesses that the castle of the king is more elevated than that of the minister (gang mtho ni gang dma’ ba).

42 The expression gnam gyi ka ba, “pillars of heaven” for mountains is frequent in the later literature (and quite popular in China).

146

r.a. stein

The same images of the immutability of sky and earth and mountains find themselves in other songs, utilized for divination, which A.M. does not seem to have taken into consideration. We read: “The blue sky is firm in its center, sun and moon, path of warmth” (Thomas AFL, 143; ITJ 739, 1a). And elsewhere: “The blue sky, on its height (mtho gong na), the venerable sun with its warm light” (AFL, 128, § 30; analogous verse in the parallel text PT 1052). Another strophe explains why sky and earth are immutable (AFL, 127, § 26). “Surrounded by iron at the borders, . . . , the borders of the sky cannot change (degenerate, ‘gyur myi srid). As the nine nodes are firm in the center, the stars cannot fall. As the Golden Nail is driven in,43 . . ., the borders of the earth cannot fly off ” (lding myi srid). In another version (PT 1052, AFL, 143, 1a), the terms are changed. As the blue sky is firm in its center (paper badly stuck here), . . .; as the glacier is powerful (gnyan) at its base, the lynx and the? (gza’) . . .; as the mountain of the gods (divine, lha ri) have a great protective power (skyabs che ba), the stags and the donkeys are not agitated on the borders (or never? mtha’ myi g.yo; cf. n. 34). There are other literary variations evoking the excellence of the site. There exists a Buddhist version (PT 1290; dated c. 815): vajra rock which never collapses, eternal (g.yung drung) river which never runs dries (cf. TA II). The perenniality of earth and sky or of (sacred) mountain and river, exalted in the Old Tibetan Chronicle in order to characterize the excellence of the king’s castle, this image is also found in an archaic text (an account justifying funerals; Thomas AFL, IV, l. 274): “The castle (on) the rock, its peak does not collapse; . . ., the blue river, rngo does not run dry” (brag mkhar rtse myi rnyil, . . ., tshab sngon mo rngo myi skams). On the subject of the first song of the Old Tibetan Chronicle (above), A.M. correctly thought of the mountains while rejecting the idea that gtsug might refer to elevation. She cites, however, certain phrases from other fragments which are analogous and even in part identical to the obscure phrase from the song. Yet they certainly refer to the mountains (A.M., 351). “Formerly, at the beginning, the ‘pure’ ( gtsang ma) land of Tibet (elsewhere always ‘high mountains and pure earth’) was set in order by the phyva: “sky and earth were (thus) protectors” (phyva’i

43 The Golden Nail is the Pole Star according to the Turko-Mongol speaking populations.

apropos of the word gtsug lag

147

s bskos, gnam sa mgon skabs, for skyabs?).44 And elsewhere (PT 1640): “Formerly, at the beginning, the phyva (well ) established (the mountains?) on gtsug (high?) phyva ni gtsug btshugs pa (in the same way that) the feather is attached to the arrow” (same phrase as in the song, where phyva’ ni gtsug myi ‘gyur is perhaps to be corrected to phyva’is ni . . .: the phyva made it so that the peaks (of the mountains) never changed), A.M. naturally translated this as: “the Phyva established the Gtsug,” and nevertheless, she cites another very clear phrase which refers to the mountains (“Account of the Ages”; A.M., 363). In the evil epoch, when everything becomes bad, the sky will be cut (? grum, for ‘grum?), the earth will tremble; “(then) the high mountains established (put in place, ordered) by the sky, the high rocks will no longer weigh on the earth” (gnam gyis bskos pa’i / ri mthon po dang / brag mthon po ni / sa la myi lci’o). Yet the gods of the sky are the phyva. The phrase is thus parallel to that wherein the phyva set Tibet in order (with its high mountains) and to that other phrase where the phyva establish (the mountains) on high (?).45 Leaving her idea that the Phyva established the Gtsug (“World Order”), A.M. herself states extremely cogently (352–3) that if the sky and the earth are stable, it is because the phyva “are the high mountains delegated by the sky to weigh on the earth,” in the same way that the feather assures the equilibrium of the arrow. Precisely both phrases (on the phyva and on the arrow) are parallel and construed in the same fashion: gtsug corresponds to “arrow” and thus becomes a concrete substantive. * * * Since the word gtsug is used apropos of phyva, it is necessary to say some words about these divinities. Sometimes phyva (phya) is the equivalent of lha46 (god of heaven) or of lde. Often, these phya represent the agnatic line (father’s side). They

44 A.M. (351) removed the second part of the phrase and reads phyva’i sa, which is an error. 45 For an example of gtsug, an epithet of a mountain, cf. Thomas AFL, IV, l. 78. We find a “lake of life” (bla mtsho) and a high mountain (? gtshug ri). In the Gzer mig (ed. Francke, ch. VI, p. 8, 17, 19, 23, 25), we find a mountain Gtsug ri ‘bar ba (variant of Gtsug rum °) on which resides the g.yung drung gtsug gshen Rgyal ba. We shall see that gtsug is the name of a clan or species of being, like dmu (they have a dmu gshen, abbreviation of dmu rigs gshen; cf. Karmay, The Treasury of Good Sayings, 3–4). 46 The expression phyva’i yang phyva is construed as lha’i yang lha (devātideva, an epithet of the Buddha). I will not speak here about the use of Dmu and Phya as clan names, an usage attested above all in the later literature (Karmay 1975c, n. 8; Yamaguchi

148

r.a. stein

are allied by marriage to another category of heavenly gods (dmu, rmu, etc), the cognatic line. A.M. thought (270, 377) that these divinities were also mountains of the sky, dispatched onto the earth, the high mountains of Tibet being their doubles (355). This strange interpretation comes from the interpretation of an isolated expression (gnam ri phyva) which merely linked the three elements sky, mountain, and phyva (we will speak of this later, 157). One of these phyva or lha descended from heaven in order to become the first king of Tibet. This was Gnya’ khri btsan po, son of the phyva Ya bla bdag drug (Rkong po inscription; Richardson 1972). He belonged to a group of six or seven gods which were sometimes qualified as “gods on high” (from heaven, yab bla, ya bla; once opposed to the gods of the earth, sa bla) and as “protector-ancestors” (mgon tshun (tsun, read btsun) phyva).47 They are the ones who assign to each thing and each being its place in the world (bskos), e.g. respective habitats for the horse and yak (Thomas AFL, 1 A, l. 60, 62; A.M., 358–60). Rather than creators, these are directors, world developers. Examples of this have been seen. Once, when it concerned high mountains, the author stated that they were established (their place and their function were assigned to them) by heaven, which amounts to the same thing. A.M. insists that, by their ancestry, the kings are not gods (lha) of any category, but phyva. This is correct only in part. The distinction is not rigorous in the texts; not only phyva but also mu refer especially to heaven.48 We should here

accepts only this aspect, even in the ancient texts). Linguistically, the words mu and phya designate the sky in the Tibeto-Burman languages. The cord which connects the heads of men to the sky is called dmu thag (or dag), but sometimes we read phya thag (or dag). For a bon po example, cf. Stein, Tribus, 61, and for Bhutan, cf. M. Aris, Bhutan, the Early History of a Himalayan Kingdom, V, xiii-xiv: gser gyi phya thag). In an archaic text, the author enumerates, side by side, dmu dag, lha dag and gsas dag (cf. n. 12). With the sense of phya, other than as a category of divinity, there are two (these are perhaps homophonous, but distinct, words?): 1) “oracle, destiny, lot of fate,” often attested in the ancient and later texts (phya g.yang) as in the Tibeto-Burman language of Xixia (piah, oracle bone”; homophone of piah, another written character, “sheep,” like g.yang in Tibetan; cf. Nishida, Sei-ka bun Kegon-kyō, 275). 2) “Artisan, architect” (see below). 47 On the cult of the ancestors (mtshun), see Tibetica Antiqua I, 22, 62–3, 74. The ancient mgon mtshun Phya became Sgam po Phya in the later tradition. He carries a symbol of the world. We find him later (Phya rje Sgam po). He was identified with Maheśvara the Creator (byed pa po; Stein, Civil. Tib., n. 245). 48 A.M. (336) cites two sentence fragments, but the reading is uncertain and its translation impossible. They are found in a couplet from the Prayers of De ga (PT 0100, recto, II; Choix, pl. 90). The king Khri gtsug lde brtsan has supernatural knowledge (‘phrul) and his actions are parallel to those of the gods. He has the efficacy of

apropos of the word gtsug lag

149

note how the later translation carried out the transformations according to a sort of internal “logic” from ancient concepts. The words which had characterized the phyva in the Dunhuang manuscripts (adjectival verbs or adverbs) became common nouns designating the director gods themselves (skos, gtsug, mkhyen). An abstraction made from the sense (or from a homophonous word?) “oracle, divination” whence derives the expression phyva mkhan “soothsayer,” this last expression (phyva mkhan) is attested in 814 (Mahāvyutpatti, No 3667) as an equivalent of sthapati (Tib. “agent of the queen”). According to Monier-Williams, the Sanskrit word signifies 1) “lord of the place,” i.e. king, chief, governor; 2) guard or attendant of the gynæceum (women’s apartments) and 3) master artisan, potter, carpenter (whence the definitions of the modern dictionaries: sa las mkhan or ar las mkhan, project superintendent or mason, and rdza mkhan, potter). It is the meaning “architect” which seems to have prevailed in the later texts (e.g. in the Sba bzhed for the construction of Bsam yas, cf. S.G. Karmay 1975c, 577, n.). This word alternates with skos mkhan phya (ibid., Gzer myig). The latter are the directors of the world (saepe in Klu ‘bum where they are near the “gods of existence,” srid pa). The great “fashioner” of the world, Sgam po Phya, is a skos (Gzer myig, Kha, 18b, that is p. 797). Another skos is Ye mkhyen.49 He assigns to each thing and each being its habitat and category (Klu ‘bum, 353b-354a). Or futher, the bskos mkhan is the srid pa mkhyen pa (op. cit., p. 117b). Finally, the relationship between the gods lha, phya and the helmet, thanks to which he subjects the kings of the world. There follows a nearly effaced line (22–23) that A.M. read: chos rgyal (?) dgung gi (?) phyva mched (?) kyis (she understands that the king is, like his mythic ancestor, son and brother of the phyva gods; lha sras and phyva mched). After having evoked the Spu rgyal ancestor and lauded the gtsug lag chos, the author states that, thanks to the (Buddhist!) king, the people had faith and the thought of bodhi. Then, A.M. reads (l. 34): brtsan po lha (?) sras dbang gi phyva (?), but the last barely legible syllable does not seem to be phyva. A.M. translates: “the king, son of the gods, who draws his power from the phyva,” which seems to me impossible. 49 A.M. (207) poorly read the text of the Bshad mdzod (the manuscript was defective). In the edition of Lokesh Chandra, we read Tsha (= Phya) Ya mkhyen chen po (proper name). This is the Phya Ye mkhyen rgyal po from the Klu ‘bum (227a). Elsewhere, a certain Phya Kha rje dang po is a lha’i skos mkhan (Mdzod phug, commentary, 124). He lives to the Southwest of Sumeru, there where the phyva and the skos live, knowing Phyva Kha rje dang po and Skos Yid la drang dkar (126). In the Gzer mig (ed. Francke, I-II, 169; text, 108a). Phya Kha rje dang po is the paternal uncle of Rgyal bon Thod dkar and reigns over the phya. Next to them, there were the dmu, who descended from Dmu rgyal and the ye gshen. For Rgyal bon Thod dkar, cf. the Review of sources, infra p. 176ff, “Theory of Origins.”

150

r.a. stein

lde (and the kings of divine origin) is also marked by the apparently diminutive forms (in °u) which we find in all texts, ancient and late.50 This brief outline ought to suffice here, and it is time to revisit the epithet gtsug which is problematic. We would expect that it too would have been preserved in the later tradition in one form or another. This is in fact the case, taking into account certain modifications. I have already highlighted the presence of this word, combined with words of the same genre, in the names of kings (Khri lde gtsug brtsan, first called Rgyal Gtsug ru, Khri gtsug lde brtsan) and in the names of tombs ( gung ri, mu ri, lha ri gtsug nam, phrul ri gtsug snang).51 We might add other proper nouns of diverse personages, real or legendary. In a military listing (Mirān; Thomas TLTD, II, 439), we find the ministers Gtsug bzang and Phya bzher, and a “tiger” (brave soldier) Gtsug bzang. In the Old Tibetan Chronicle (Bacot DTT, 100), a list of wise and brave ministers includes Khri Dog rje gtsug blon of Gnubs. For the later texts, there was the legend of origins from the great clan Rlangs (Po ti bse ru, 2nd part, 56a) where we find Ar rje gtsug gsum (or Spra rje gtsug gsum in the “testament of Si tu,” ed. New Delhi, 1974, p. 213). For the mythology, we have Spyi gtsug rgyal ba (Po ti bse ru, 4a). In these names, the element gtsug does not seem possible to be the abbreviation of gtsug lag. The parallelism with phya (attested by Mirān) and the ancient association of the word gtsug with the phya gods could represent the basis of a later development, at first glance aberrant and inexplicable. In effect, if—in the ancient texts—one only

50 Lha becomes lhe’u; lde > lde’u; phya > bye’u. For lha sras = lde sras, cf. A.M., 337. Lhe’u Yang ka rje is the son of Mgon tsum Phyva (PT 1134, l. 67). In the later texts, we find the oracle Lha’u (or lha bu) Gyang dkar (epic, Rta rgyug), but the author also writes Phya’u Gyang dkar (Prayers of Mi pham, Na, 37b, etc.; Gnam chos, vol. E, bsang, 15b, etc.). Becoming Lde’u Yang dkar, this name designates a maleficent being (Rgya Bod yig tshang, 335b-336a). In the Dunhuang texts, we find the god Lhe’u rje Zin tags and a Le’u rje Zing po (PT 1043, § 27), but also a Lha rje Ltang dkar (PT 1052). As for phya, we will note that in the superior Rtsang, the lord is Phyva, but the god or chief is Bye’u (PT 1060, l. 74; PT 1285, l. 171). Cf. the Review of sources, infra 170–1, 176ff, “History of the Dmu” and “Theory of Origins.” 51 Cf. Stein, Tib. Civil., n. 259, 229. It is necessary to add the ancient kings ‘Brong gnyan lde ru and Lde Pru bo gnam gzhung rtsan (Old Tibetan Chronicle, 100). Later, among the kings of Ladakh and of Gu ge, there are many Lde, notably Lde gtsug mgon. In addition, the association of lde and gtsug seems to indicate the glory and pride of power. In an “ancient” tantra, in speaking of a terrible (krodha) divinity, the author states that he acts with his “pride” (nga rgyal gyi lde’u gtsugs; Rnying ma rgyud ‘bum, vol. Ra (25), p. 599 = 30 1a).

apropos of the word gtsug lag

151

speaks of two categories of heavenly divinities, related by marriage (dmu and phya), in the later tradition there is added a third category, the gtsug (14th century and later; Karmay 1975c, n. 81, citing the Srid pa las kyi gting zlog gi rtsa rgyud, 39a, that is pp. 76–77; add ibid., p. 146, being p. 301). The descendants of the dmu are the people of Stag gzigs or of ‘Ol mo lun ring; those of the phya, the people of Tibet; and those of the gtsug, the people of Bru sha. Yet previously, the author spoke of the continent of men of which the saint-king (‘phrul gyi rgyal po) is the srid pa Ye smon, very beautiful and wise. He is venerated by all because he is a “man” from the race of the gods (mi lha rigs). From his union with (the goddess) Chu rlung rdzu ‘phrul ma (the Chu lcam from other texts), three sons are born: Phya rje sgam po, Dmu rje btsun po, and Skos rje ‘og sko. From Phya rje sgam po (77) descend the men of the world, but also four brothers, knowing the phya gods, first Yab bla bdal drug, next ‘Od de gong rgyal, next Lhri lde sram po and finally the youngest brother Phya bla ‘bram shing. The first three have for descendants various solar deities, the fourth has none. The descendants of Dmu rje btsun pa are the dmu gods “from the nine steps” (‘then dgu; variant: them dgu in the Btsan ‘byung, 35b). The descendants of Gtsug rje (sic!) ‘og skos are the gtsud (scribal error for gtsug), whence come the doctrine of Bon.52 The variant, at the interval of one page, of Skos rje in lieu of Gtsug rje, is significant. The category of gtsug is identified with that of skos. The combination of the words gtsug and skos are found again in the name of a bon po, Skos bon gtsug sras (Gzer myig, ed. Francke, III, p. 330, 337–8; IV, 334). Certain skos rje (and not gtsug rje) are divinities identified with the klu (Klu ‘bum, 412a). Elsewhere, the gtsug are associated with the dmu and the phya: the last of the nine ‘then of the dmu was Gtsug then rgyal ba, grandfather of the phya sovereign Yab bla bdal drug (bon po chronicle Srid pa rgyud kyi kha byang, 14th century, 37b; cf. Stein 1959, 58). This is undoubtedly the same as Spyi gtsug rgyal ba (Po ti bse ru; see below). In a list of divinities, there are enumerated the srid pa, the skos and the phya (plus lha and klu; Gzer myig, ch. VI, p. 8). The gtsug are missing here, but we see of which type their kin were.

52 Same genealogy in the Dbu nag mi’u dra chags; passage translated by Hoffmann, Die Religionen Tibets, 99 and Märchen Aus Tibet, 6.

152

r.a. stein

To return to the triad, in the Dbu nag° (13b–14a), the dmu gave birth to the bon po, the phya to the ordinary men, and the gtsug to the insects and the klu or to cattle in general (byol song phyugu). This last construction is perhaps derived from another classification. We have seen that the chief of the dmu is qualified as btsun pa, “noble.” In the Rgyal rabs Bon (ed. Das, 6), the author speaks of four castes (rgyal, rje, bram ze and gdol pa; these castes derive from the race of the dmu (rigs) of the triad, according to the Bshad mdzod, 111b). Yet there, the race of the gtsug (rigs) is qualified as “rich” (phyug po), and it is located in the continent of Gtsug rje rgyal po. This classification makes us think of the Indo-European Tripartition of G. Dumézil; the priests, the nobles and the rich (cattle breeders?; in Tibetan, phyug po resembles phyugs, “cattle”).53 The bon po speculations are also found amongst the lamaist authors. According to the Bshad mdzod (111b), the men who descend from the gods (mi rgyud lha las grol ba) have for an ancestor the srid pa Ye smon rgyal po. From him and his woman Chu lcam issue the three (races) phya, dmu and gtsug; and from the dmu derive the four castes. In the Rlangs Po ti bse ru (4a), Sangs po ‘bum khri, another name of Ye smon rgyal po (Dbu nag°, 14a), and his woman Chu lcam have for a son Spyi gtsug rgyal ba.54 According to Kong sprul (1813–1899), the descendants of this srid pa Ye smon rgyal po know Phyva rje sgam po, Dmu rje btsan pa (and not btsun pa) and Gtsug rje ‘og skos.55 The beings who derived from him are not ordinary men, but “the lineage of wise (or supernatural) men of (the first) existence” (srid pa’i ‘phrul gyi mi rgyud). At the beginning of this text, dedicated to marriage and especially to the arrow which one attaches to his fiancée (mda’ dar), the author explains the origin of the convention of 1) the three (kinds of divinity) phya, dmu and gtsug, 2) the ordinance (bskos bzhag) of Sgam po Phya 53 An analogous tripartiton appears in the list of twelve men (kinglets, bon po, ministers or shepherds) who receive the first god-king; two “mighty” (btsan pa, kinglets), two “venerables” (btsun pa) and two “holy” (gnyan pa). There are six clans (Stein, Tribus, 11–12). In a classification of the clans as four (ibid., 18, n. 17), the Ra or Dpra are characterized by magic, the Ldong by numbers, the ‘Bru by war virtues and the Rga by wealth (cattle, phyug rgyud). This list comes from the Rlangs Po ti bse ru (Stein, “Une source ancienne pour l’histoire de l’épopée tibétaine, le Rlaṅ s Po-ti bse-ru,” 96). 54 Likewise in Bshad mdzod, 151. In the Dbu nag° (14b), he is Phya bu Spyi gtsug rgyal ba. 55 D. Schuh, “Die Darlegungen des tibetischen Enzyklopädisten Koṅ -sprul Blo-gros mtha’-yas über Osttibetische Hochzeitsgebräuche,” text B, 334–5 (passage untranslated).

apropos of the word gtsug lag

153

and 3) the opening of the path of relations (marriage, gnyen lam), thanks to the well decorated “divine arrow” (lha mda’) of good omen. This arrow (mda’ dar) is then designated as a sign (rtags) of the phyva and as a support (rten) of good luck (g.yang). It then stresses the origin of the eagle feather (thang dkar rgod po’i sgro) which serves as a plume. We are tempted to imagine a remote reflection of the ancient metaphor of the well-feathered arrow, which illustrates the perenniality of the gtsug of the phyva (above, 147).56 * * * These late developments may perhaps clarify such rare use of the word gtsug in the obscure phrases of the ancient texts. Why did the later authors add the gtsug to the other categories of divinity, phya and dmu, always associated in these ancient texts? The marked penchant for tripartition, well attested, was certainly the first motivation. Yet whence came the choice of the word gtsug, which is not understood with the sense of divinity? Why not have chosen another of the multiple species of divinity? Since other significant words from the ancient texts have been selected and transformed into divinities (mkhyen > Ye mkhyen; bskos, srid), it seem to me possible that the word gtsug also, an epithet of the phya (phyva’is bskos, phyva’is gtsug btsug), might have determined this choice. All the more so as, in the later tradition, the gtsug alternates with the (b)skos, or are their equivalents. The idea is not absurd, or at least it allows us to take a further step, which retrieves for us another metaphor from the ancient texts, the “powerful helmet”—itself also unalterable as the grand reign and the military power of the king (cf. n. 34). As for the usage of the later tradition, we have seen that it is justified in many cases, either by its loyalty, or even by its transformations. The rite of marriage described by Kong sprul (who links it to the triad of phya, dmu and gtsug) is executed in another fashion in the bon po texts which inspire it. There, the dmu attach the “cord of the dmu” and the phya collect the good fortune of the phya (Gzer myig, ed. Francke, I, 14b). It is true that the second element is a function of

56 It is true that the relationship between the arrow equipped with a flag and “good fortune” rests on the sense of phya g.yang, derived from phya, “lot, fate, divination,” and not on phya as divinities. Let us note that a “divine arrow” (lha mda’) is found among the objects that the Phya should offer to the sku bla of the Dmu (both are allied by marriage); cf. the Review of sources, infra p. 170–1, “History of the Dmu.”

154

r.a. stein

the meaning “good fortune,” “lot, destiny” from the word phya (cf. n. 56). Yet the line with the “cord of the dmu” is implicit. In effect, if one states, in general, “cord of the dmu,” one also sometimes states “cord of the phya” (phya thag), and we know that the two words refer to all the gods in the sky (n. 46). There is more, however. In the Zhang zhung language of the bon po (partially artificial, but preserving words from the Tibeto-Burman family),57 the “cord of the dmu” is known as mu tsug (p. 9, in the sentence: “the gods, men and bon po seize the dmu cord”), but the word mu tsug also signifies “good fortune” (p. 9, 16, in the phrase: “good fortune, long life of the phya, wealth”) and “unalterable” (p. 12, gyur med). We might say a memento of the ancient phrase phyva’i ni gtsug myi ‘gyur. As we know, this “dmu cord” enjoys a preponderant role (along with the dmu ladder) in the mythology of the descent of the first ancestor and in the legend of Gri gum. In the latter, the cord assures the “life” of the king, thanks to the god lde bla Gung rgyal (A.M., 221, 337). Previously, the author stated that Gri gum was capable of going to heaven “in person,” in appearance human, but in reality a god. Regarding the first ancestor, he makes a lengthy descent along the steps of a ladder, either of the stages of heaven or of a sacred mountain (the two are touching or are equivalent). According to the version from the Bshad mdzod (A.M., 209), he receives for that objects from his phya father (bow and arrow, armor and helmet) and from his dmu maternal uncle (armor, helmet58, sword, a ladder with nine steps and a cord, all dmu; but the cord is called rmu phreng zang yag). However, apropos of Gri gum, in the Old Tibetan Chronicle (Bacot DTT, 97; same words) the cord (or the line) and the ladder are not qualified as “of the dmu” (from heaven), but “of the head” (dbu).59 We

57 Cf. Stein, Civil. Tib., 194, 197 and Stein, “La langue žaṅ -žuṅ du Bon organisé,” 246, n. 1 and 247, n. 2. I cite the Zhang zhung Tibetan Dictionary (ibid., 231, n. 2). 58 In the Dunhuang texts, there is often mention of the dmu yad in proximity to the dmu dag cord (long life; PT 1047, divination, l. 120, 122, 165, 167). But for a man of the people, one says ya lad, “armor” (ibid., l. 267). The yad of dmu yad is perhaps a contraction of ya lad. One significant modification took place in the later tradition. Phya tshe (long life of the phya”) is linked with Dmu thag (“cord of the dmu,” longevity). They have eighteen children. These are the eighteen dmu yad gods (Mdzod phug, commentary, 62; these are the gods of various domestic animals, of different parts of the body, the srog lha, etc.). 59 In the Bshad mdzod, the author states rmu skas rim dgu and rmu phrang zang yag (and later: rmu thags thang yag). In the Old Tibetan Chronicle, the author writes dbu’ skas sten (= then?) dgu and dbe ‘breng zang yag. For Yamaguchi, in this case and

apropos of the word gtsug lag

155

know that, in the later tradition, this cord leaves from the sinciput and links it to heaven. As Gri gum was engaged in combat, we may suppose that he wore a helmet and that the ladder and the cord from his head formed part of the helmet. This is perhaps whence comes the expression “mighty helmet,” which characterizes the power of the king. We are ignorant of what form the helmet of the ancient kings had. In the later images (for Ge sar, the dgra lha, etc.), the helmet is surmounted by a feather or a small flag, called dar phru (rmog phru) (cf. Stein, Recherches, index). The ancient helmet was perhaps also equipped with a pointed or upright ornament on the top.60 The word phru (kha) further signifies an ornament for a roof and stūpa. In the ancient texts, it also designates peak of heaven, there where “the opening of the roof ” of heaven is opened on occasion ( gnam mthong bye; PT 1647, l. 35–38; A.M., 279; PT 0992). The exaltation of the height of the head (dbu ‘phang, go ‘phang) is parallel to that of the “mighty helmet” in designating a grand reign, and this great power is, in its turn, celebrated by the height (cf. n. 34).61 This height is compared to that of the sky and mountains. The first king of great military power drew his name from it. According to the Old Tibetan Chronicle (Bacot DTT, 106), he was given the name Gnam ri Slon mtshan because “his reign was more elevated than the sky (gnam) and his helmet more powerful than the mountains (ri; still the height! chab srid gnam bas mtho, dbu rmog ri bas brtsan). In the same fashion, the three words “sky, mountain, phyva” characterize the sovereign in a literary metaphor of which we will speak later. In the Prayers of De ga also, the reign of the king is sometimes “of elevated

in many others, even mythological, dmu and phyva are the names of clans (which is correct elsewhere). 60 By way of comparison, we may cite the helmet of one of the lokapāla. At the summit, we see either a point terminating in a ball (Dunhuang cave, No 380, 7th century, or an ovoid plume (a feather?; Bannières et peintures de Touen-houang, pl. 194 and p. 373). For the feather, we may compare the “bonnet of bird (feathers) of the “sorcerer-evokers,” wuzhu 巫祝; Tib. bon po) who mix with the soldiers, guarding the gates of the enclosures (marked by lances) of the military camps of the king since the sworn Treaty of 821–2. They beat drums and shook arrows. They have thus a warlike character (Xin Tangshu 新唐書; Pelliot, Histoire ancienne du Tibet, 130, more precise in Cefu yuangui 冊府元龜, k. 981). Later, the bon po wear hats ornamented with “horns(?) of birds” (bya ru) and with eagles (rgod phod: Srid pa rgyud kyi kha byang, fol. 62b, 63a, 193a: rgod kyis bya phod btsug pa). It is also necessary to think of Padmasambhava’s hat and Gesar’s helmet. 61 Likewise in the divinatory text PT 0055, l. 192: “(like the) sky, gods and brilliance of glory, the reign was elevated” (gnam dang lha dpal byas te / srid mtho zhing).

156

r.a. stein

height” (37a, l. 1; chab srid kyi phang mtho ba), sometimes “mighty helmet and grand reign” (40b, l. 2 dbu rmog brtsan la chab srid che). The same images are utilized in other Dunhuang manuscripts, from the Buddhist texts evoking the Indian mythology. One makes the active wish (bsngo) that the deva vanquish the asura and that their “reign be (like) the mighty helmet” (lha yi rgyal srid dbu rmog brtsan bar bsngo;62 in ITJ 467, the same phrase is followed by the wish that “their radiance, gzi byin, and their wealth augment and that they have the elevation of power” (mthu rtsal go ‘phang). This metaphor is well explained in the Tibeto-Mongol Dictionary of Ye shes rdo rje (cf. n. 20), 387a: “mighty helmet” (dbu rmog btsan pa) signifies “elevation of the head” (dbu ‘phang mtho ba) and (by extension) “great benefit (or merit)” (bsod nams che ba). In the later tradition (cf. Stein 1981b, 194–98), the dmu cord and “the opening of the hole of heaven” are not only the prerogative of the kings, but also valued by other people. Likewise, in a Dunhuang manuscript (divination, ITJ 740.1), we find the following favorable oracle: “for (a man of the) people, the opening of heaven opens a little . . ., the elevation of the head becomes higher and higher” (§ 22, dmangs gyi gnam mthong chungu bye . . ., gom phang (equals go ‘phang) phyi phyir mtho). Another favorable oracle this text (§ 18) is characterized thus: “as it is a god who became king,63 his face is high; as it is the sovereign who makes his subjects royal(?), his head is high” (rgyal po lhas mdzad na zhal mtho / rgyal (this word is superfluous) rgyal ‘bangs rjes mdzad na go mtho).64 I will keep myself from reconstructing an ancient version or from rationalizing and systematizing the variants or modifications. Yet I believe that there is a coherent group of ideas and representations, themes and motifs, which may clarify and, so to speak, justify the enig-

62

PT 0209, tantra Rgyud gsum pa (Peking Kanjur, vol. XI, No 470, pp. 65–3). On this text, see Stein, “La mythologie hindouïste au Tibet.” 63 An allusion to the cliché frequenting the king’s praises. 64 The same metaphors are often employed in the later texts. Of Güshi Khan, it is stated: “the height (dbu ‘phang) of the reign of his palace Tuṣita, designated as Heaven, touches the sky” (Grub mtha’ shel gyi me long, 199b). Elsewhere, it is stated: “that the enemies, the blacks, have their heads down below the earth; that the height of the heads of the allies, the whites, may be elevated to heaven!” ( gnyen dkar po’i ngo ‘phang dgung la bstod; Prayers of Mi pham, vol. Na, 34a). Or further, in the epic (ch. Hor. 1b): “the height of the head of the king of the world is elevated, the son of the gods, ‘Bum pa, is (of a height) equal to heaven” (‘dzam gling rgyal po’i dbu ‘phang mtho, ‘Bum pa’i lha sras dgung dang mnyam).

apropos of the word gtsug lag

157

matic use of the word gtsug in the sentences of the ancient texts where it does not seem to be an abbreviation of gtsug lag. * * * We must now analyze a certain number of phrases which A.M. held out to characterize the archaic religious representations as pledges of royal power. I set them aside, and group them here, firstly because it is visibly a matter of eulogistic literary expressions (a little like the typical phrases from a manual of epistolary style), but also because we find their equivalents in the Chinese literature. Indeed, that justifies, more than she could have foreseen, A.M.’s impression that the “ancient religion” owed something to China. It is true that these phrases have a religious content, but—like the titles of the king and the elites of this world (“glorious gods,” etc.) and like the hyperbolic epithets that we have encountered—these phrases are so common that they have taken on a literary aspect. The authors combine their elements to the liking of their knowledge and inspiration.65 Commencing with the phyva, of which we have spoken above (147), assimilated with the sky and mountains. A.M. attaches a great importance to them, but her translation seems inadequate to me. She renders gnam ri phyva as “celestial mountains divinities Phyva” (270, n. 309), and “according to the system of the Phyva, mountains of heaven . . . According to the rules of use on earth” (351; emphasis mine; cf. 349: “system of the gods” and “Law of heaven”; also 377). Bacot

65 The employment of deva (devarāja) for “king” is common in India and among her neighbors [Central Asia (Kushana inscriptions: rājātirāja, devadeva) and Khmer]. On the topic of the mixing of gods and humans in the Aśokan edicts, it was thought that these “gods” were the kings (cf. n. 33). In the Suvarṇaprabhāsa-sūtra (Chinese, ch. 20, Nobel, I, p. 283; Sanskrit, ch. 12; Tib., ch. 20, pp. 244–5, 308), the author explains in detail why the kings are called deva and devaputra. We find here the ancient themes of the Tibetan kings. The king should be just, punish the malefactors and reward the good, otherwise the gods will abandon him; he and his country will undergo misfortune. The gods give him half of their strength, but he should renounce evil and do good. If he does evil, the gods will no longer protect him in the present and, later, during the Evil Age, there will be disasters (of which a list is drawn up; Nobel, I, p. 286). We must remember, apropos of the hyperbolic eulogies, that the Buddhist Tibetan kings carried the title bodhisattva, as in Karoṣtḥ i documents, as well as in Turkish (cf. Stein, “Saint et divin,” 232). They were also called “divinities personified” (ibid.), exactly like Gri gum is called “aspect of a man, but (in reality) a god,” who can go to heaven “in person” (mngon bar). Still in the 11th century, the king of Ladakh bore a name of the ancient type, Lha lde, but was also called bodhisattva and great deva (lha chen po byang chub sems dpa’, lha che po Lha lde; Snellgrove and Skorupski, The Cultural Heritage of Ladakh, I, 71).

158

r.a. stein

suggested, reasonably, that the sentence must be understood according to that which explains the name of the King Gnam ri (above, 155). The entire passage of the Old Tibetan Chronicle (Bacot DTT, 118) is dedicated to the close links which join the lord and his subject, the king and the minister, links of complementarity, but also of hierarchy. “If, above, the sovereign is wise (sgam), this is (in) the manner of heaven, of the mountains, of the phyva; if, below, the minister is wise (‘dzangs), this is (in) the fashion of the earth, of the ravines.” This is a literary comparison, indicated by the words “in the fashion of ” (lugs, tshul). Elsewhere, we find the comparison of the rapport between the king and the minister with the union of heaven and earth (see below). We are here in the presence of two strictly parallel and symmetric phrases: king/minister, heaven/earth, mountains/ravines; only the last element phyva does not have an equivalence, perhaps because, faced with the divinities of heaven, those of the earth do not enjoy any role in our texts.66 The association of king and minister is so close that the subject of the sentences is often rje blon, “king-minister” (Treaty of Lhasa, Prayers of De ga) as if it concerned a single person. Furthermore, the eulogistic epithets, in principle reserved for the king (‘phrul, byin, etc.) are distributed into two parallel sentences, one having for a subject the king, the other the minister (and then one sometimes employs, in parallel, equivalent but different terms, e.g. byin for the king and rlabs for the minister; cf. n. 26 and Stein 1981a, 263, 267). The parallelism between the pairs king-minister and heaven-earth, as comparisons or metaphors, are two, very frequent, literary processes (in China also). We find them notably in the Prayers of De ga in which we recognize “colonial” language and where we find reminiscences of Chinese expressions (cf. n. 35). In the list of variants that I compiled

66 We once saw ya bla opposed to sa bla (above, 147–8). A.M.’s translation of lugs as “system” and tshul as “rules” is incorrect. These are only comparisons. Her translation of sa’i ngam len as “in use on earth” is also impossible (she was no doubt thinking of nyams len,” to practice”). It is true that the word len is problematic. Yet the strict parallelism of the two phrases requires a word opposed to “mountain” (as earth to sky). This is correctly ngam, usually ngam grog, “ravine” (valley), a common expression even becoming an epithet of Tibet (cf. Stein, “La mythologie hindouïste au Tibet”). In the Mahāvyutpatti (No 526), we find ngam (‘)grog (‘brog?) for śvabhram, “ravine.” The association of ri and ngam appears in a place name. According to the Bshad mdzod (ed. L. Chandra, I, 152), before the descent to earth, Gnya’ khri lives in the land Rmu yul (in heaven), which is called Ram Ri ngam; and the king of this land, Rmu rje, remains at the edge (‘gram) of Ngam ri rab (151; ram is perhaps a contraction of ri ngam).

apropos of the word gtsug lag

159

(n. 34), the comparisons are expressly indicated as such. In the two Rkong po inscriptions, the reign of the king is like (similar to) the g.yung drung. In the instription of Khri lde srong brtsan, his reign is “similar to the manner of the gods” (lha’i lugs) and “similar to the religion (custom, mode of being) of heaven” (gnam gyi chos). The fact that it concerns a metaphoric language has been neglected by scholars to the point that we might wonder if the two terms of comparison do not designate the indigenous religion of Tibet (the Bon). In the texts cited, the authors by no means give the name of a religion. As I have already stated (134), the authors only compare the wisdom and power of the king to the way of being of the gods and of heaven.67 In the inscription of Khri srong lde brtsan, the expression is formed by an important variant. The king makes “conformity to the manner (custom) of his ancestors” ( yab myes kyi lugs bzhin) and “in accord with the way of being (the Way, the principles) of Heaven and Earth” (gnam sa’i chos dang ni’thun ṕar mdzad). It thus does nothing to indicate the name of a religion (gnam gyi chos or lha’i lugs), but of a manner of behavior in accord with the gods and with earth and sky, taking their way of acting as a model (to be just, impartial, etc., well known clichés in China). These images are specified in the Prayers of De ga. The sky is high and large (mtho zhing yangs pa): it covers everything. The earth is thick and grand: it bears all. (Between the two) the king is right and just: he nourishes all (beings, 35b). This maxim (well known in China) is then taken as a metaphor. The king, who has a supernatural body (‘phrul gyi lus, like his ancestors) “covers and bears like sky and earth (gnam sa dang mtshungs); he is right and just: he “changes (transforms; bsgyur, like Chinese hua, “to change, civilize”) all beings; he is large ( yangs shing rgya che ba, as before the sky);68 His way of reigning is good by its manner (chos gtsug ligs kyis bzang; variant of chos lugs bzang po, etc.). 67 Cf. Tibetica Antiqua I, 44–7, 73–6 and n. 63, 64; above, 134. We may add the expression lha lam that S. Ch. Das (dictionary) translates as “custom, usage,” in a phrase of the epistolary style. The words lugs, tshul, lam might certainly designate a religious system, but it is not the case in our texts. They also simply signify “mode of being, mode of behaving.” In the examples given, we may add a passage from the Zhva’i lha khang inscription (812 A.D.; West face, l. 21–22): “(the monk) holding to the behavior of a subject (rjes ‘bangs kyi lugs) and the customs of a monk (dge slong gi tshul; Richardson, “Tibetan inscriptions at Zva-hi Lha Khang”); cf. here n. 32. 68 The same expression is utilized in a Chinese ms. from Dunhuang for the Tibetan king: “his holy body is large and vast, his longevity lengthens and endures” 聖躬遐遠, 聖壽延長 (Peking, No 7119, fragment 6, yue, shang). In another Chinese ms., one

160

r.a. stein

Later (33b), the author states that, the king being a god, he spread by his compassion the “religion of the gods” and the “good method of governance” (allusion to Buddhism?, cf. n. 24, 28) “so as to cover all under heaven.” He is holier (‘phags pa, and not ‘phrul gyi) than the other kings, and his thought is vast as space, while his speech covers all, his kindness and compassion like Sumeru and like the sun and moon (34b). Then the topic of compassion is reprised. The king is the lord of the great sky with its four orientations, he conforms to the “supernatural manner (of the gods)” (‘phrul gyi lugs, as elsewhere lha’i lugs, 36a) and his compassion for all men “conforms to the way of being of sky and earth” (gnam sa’i lugs, exactly in accordance with gnam sa’i chos above). However, this way of being of sky and earth consists in “covering and bearing” (as above; bkab cing bkur te, 36b). By his strength (and that of his ministers), he subjected the foreign kings, and by his kindness he developed the (Buddhist) faith: it is like “the union of sky and earth” (gnam sa yid sbyor ba dang ‘dra bar); all lands venerate him (36b). This union of sky and earth is the image of the union of sovereign and subject; the two are parallel, as in the key phrase from the Old Tibetan Chronicle (above, 110): (wise) king—sky—mountain—phyva vis-à-vis (wise) minister—earth—ravine—(deest). The last term of this comparison (phyva equals lha) is reprised in the Prayers (41a) with an eloquent and significant parallelism. “The lord remains above: he is divine (lha); the minister (charged) with the reign—missing: “below”—is supernatural (‘phrul). Lord-minister (rje blon) divine-supernatural (what do they do in case of danger?), if the sky is rent, the (lord) erases (the tear) by the efficacy (byin) of his divine being; and if the earth is rent, the minister stitches (the tear) by the efficacy (rlabs lacks the supernatural or divine quality, as does the earth in the Old Tibetan Chronicle). “(The two, lord-minister, are as) sky and earth united (gnam sa ni yid sbyar).69 The same pronounces for the king of Tibet the wish that his life may be “long and eternal as (that of ) sky and earth” (Taishō, vol. 85, No 2852, p. 1302b). 69 King and minister are so closely linked that the epithets of one hold value for the other. The expressions proper to the king alone are distributed, in corresponding phrases, to the one and to the other; lha and ‘phrul, byin and rlabs, sgam and ‘dzangs (Stein, “Saint et devin,” 263–5, 267–8). The pair wisdom-bravery characterizes the minister and other inhabitants of Tibet, but is also proper to the king. The elements of this pair are sometimes distributed between one and the other of the protagonists. The minister is at once wise and brave “like a jewel” (Prayers of De ga, 26a); the king has the mighty helmet, the minister is brave and wise (38a). King-minister (rje blon, the king alone) has the mighty helmet and great wisdom (38b, 39b), but also the

apropos of the word gtsug lag

161

formula is applied in the Old Tibetan Chronicle (Bacot DTT, 114) to the relations (amicable, but set in a hierarchy, rje and skol, lord and subject) between the king of Tibet and that of Nanzhao (whose title was “younger brother”). Above, the sky is content (dgyes); below, the earth is happy (dga’). The two kings are more and more close and “firm” (like the mountain-divinity Sham po, above, 144). The two are as “sky and earth united” (gnam sa ni yid sbyor ba). The phrase survived in the hyperbolic style of eulogies of the kings of Ladakh. In a dedication to the king, we read: “Between heaven and earth which are united (like a closed box, ga’u kha sbyor gnam sa gnyis kyi bar), high mountains, pure earth, the land of Tibet (Spu rgyal Bod).” It is the land of Mount Kailāsa and Zhang zhung, wherein reigns the brother of the “son of the gods” (lha sras, the king) Nyi ma’i dbang phyug Khri lde. It is the “land of the gods” (lha yul ) Khva rtse. In another dedication, the author also evokes the “high mountains, the pure earth, Spu rgyal Bod,” especially Zhang zhung (“land of the gods,” lha’i ljongs) where reigns the “sovereign of sky and earth” ( gnam sa’i bdag po) Khri Grags pa Lde, who has the “mighty helmet” and a reign glorious (as) the ocean.70 The king conforms to the way of being of sky and earth; like them, he covers and supports and, by that, he protects and nourishes all beings. He takes part in the cosmic pair. Moreover, the union of sky and earth is used as a metaphor for the good agreement between the king and his ministers, or between them and foreign kings. The union is secure, all is well. In case of bad signs (rending of sky and earth), the king-minister pair erases them.71 The union of sky and earth (when all is well) is a very widespread Chinese cliché. It is conceived like a king (rje alone) has the mighty helmet, the minister the “jewel” of bravery-strength (38b, 39a). 70 G. Tucci, Indo-Tibetica, III, texts pp. 177–78; translation pp. 8–10. In place of ‘od gsal lnga (9, n. 1), it should read ‘od gsal lha. Another example of ancient style is found in a Tabo inscription (end 13th, beginning 14th century; op. cit.; 195–6, 74). One speaks of rje rnam lha Byang chub ‘od, born into a family of gods, bodhisattva, god became lord of men, protector of the black headed ones. In an Alchi inscription (16th century), we read: between sky and earth united (like the two parts of a) box, the palace (of the king) . . . is elevated and powerful” (Kha’u khab sbyar (kha sbyar) nam sa gnyis kyi bar . . . sku mkhar mtho la btsan; Snellgrove-Skorupski, I, 84). 71 There is a beautiful opening in the sky which is large; it is “the opening of the roof ” (gnam thongs). Here, the author speaks of a harmful situation (which is found in the divination). The narrow tear in the sky (like the edge of a sword) and the fissure in the earth, which must be erased (bsub) or “stiched,” these notions and images were preserved in the later literature (cf. Stein, Le monde en petit, ch. III, 2, Tibet).

162

r.a. stein

sexual union. The Tibetans knew this, surely. It is spoken of in the Bayang jing 八陽經 (cf. TA I, 11–15, 90), close to the union of sun and moon, specifying that it is there the “eternal Law (way of being) of heaven.” The author also stigmatizes those who “go to oppose the (propitious) moments of heaven and the good fortune of the earth” (Chinese text, but in Tibetan we have: “who oppose the Law of heaven and the Law of the earth”).72 That, in this union, the king participates in the pair and serves as a go-between, is also a common notion in China. In Tibet, I only know one example (in the Old Tibetan Chronicle; Bacot DTT, 114). The author states: “As his custom is good and as his reign is grand, the king seizes the land between heaven and earth.” This image is less specific than in China. The expression “manner of the gods” and “Principle (way of being) of heaven (and of the earth)” does not thus designate the ancient religion, but the models to which the king conforms by his wisdom and art of governance. However, these pompous expressions and this official phraseology are clearly of Chinese inspiration (like the official title of the king: “holy and divine”). I have indicated that many phrases from certain official inscriptions reproduce textually, in adaptation, phrases from the Tibetan translation of the Shujing 書經 (TA I, 76, 85–7; additional note in TA II). We might think that these expressions were indeed Tibetan and that the translators have astutely utilized them in order to render analogous Chinese phrases. Yet the testimony of the Chinese Annals on the Chinese classics furnished to the Tibetans upon their request,73 the discovery of Takeuchi (an entire pas-

72 For the union, Taishō, vol. 85, 1424a 天地氣合. The sky is masculine ( yang 陽), the earth feminine ( yin 陰). For the Tibetan translation, PT 0749, l. 118 has: gnam sa gnyis kyang dad pa ‘byord na. PT 0748, l. 58 removed this phrase, and in the Kanjur (pp. 275–1) we have: gnam sa gnyis ni ‘byor na. For the conduct conforming or not to the eternal Dao of heaven, the Chinese phrase (loc. cit. 是天之常道 is translated by gnam gyi rtag pa’i chos (PT 0749, l. 121); and the phrase (1423c 返天時, 逆地理, 背日月之光明 is translated as: gnam gyi chos la ni gal, sa’i chos las ni log, etc. (PT 0746, l. 47). 73 Cf. the additional note in Tibetica Antiqua II, and A.M., 382–3. Not only did the Tibetans receive the Chinese classics (and the Wenxuan 文選) in 730, but Srong btsan sgam po had already sent the Tibetans from good families to China in order to study the Shijing 詩經 and the Shujing 書經. He then requested (and surely obtained) lettered Chinese “to place in good style his supplications and memorials” (translation Pelliot). It is correctly in this genre of official texts that one employs in China the hyperbolic phraseology of which we are speaking. Takeuchi (“A Passage from the Shih Chi in the Old Tibetan Chronicle”) thought that the passage of the Shiji 史記 incorporated into the Old Tibetan Chronicle doubtlessly comes, not directly from the

apropos of the word gtsug lag

163

sage from the Shiji 史記 inserted into the Old Tibetan Chronicle), and finally the phrases of the Prayers of De ga and elsewhere, which have been discussed, all these seem to demonstrate well that the Tibetans borrowed much from the Chinese. A Sinologist will recognize these clichés immediately, having read them repeated ad nauseum, in the Chinese literature from antiquity to the end of the empire. Without wishing to search extensively, and without pretending to be exhaustive, here are some examples. 1. The king (or the saint) united with heaven and earth As of the first century of our era, the Chinese character wang, “king” (three horizontal lines joined by one vertical line in the center, 王) is explained (by a false etymology) as Heaven, Earth and Man joined (by the king; Shuowen Dictionary 說文解字 citing Dong Zhongshu 董仲舒, c. 179–104 before J. Chr. 三者天地人也, 而參通之者王也. That author states (Chunqiu fanlu 春秋繁露, k. 7, § Yao Shun 堯舜): “The king is certainly the son of heaven. Heaven gave the empire (lit. “under heaven”) to Yao and Shun (wise kings of antiquity: whence his title Son of Heaven 王者亦天之子也, 天以天下子堯舜). And elsewhere: “Heaven is the great-grandfather (the ancestor) of man” (k. 11, § 41 天亦人之曾祖父也). Already in the Yijing 易經, hexagram qian 乾 (sky), it is proclaimed: “However, the Great Man (the king, the saint) unites his virtue (efficacy, de 德, a word which is translated by byin in our texts) to heaven and earth” 夫大人者與天地合其德. Huainan zi 淮南子 (c. 139 before J. Chr.): “The sentiment of the sovereign of men communicates on high with heaven” (k. 3, 2a 人主之情, 上通於天). Or further: “the saint . . . (does not voluntarily intervene) . . .; (he) conforms to the View (dao) of heaven . . .; he follows the Principle (li 理) of heaven . . .; he follows the rules of heaven” (k. 14, 4b 聖人 . . . 遵天之道 . . . 循天之理 . . . 從天之則). In antiquity (the Golden Age), all men behaved thus: “The men of antiquity united their qi 氣 (vital breath) with heaven and earth . . . in that era, there were (not yet) the advantages of felicitations (rewards for good), nor the menace of punishments (for evil )” (k. 8, 3a 古之人, 同氣天地 . . . 當此之時, 無慶賀之利, 刑罰之威). Elsewhere, “The saint (the king) nourishes

Shiji, but from a quotation from it made by the Wenxuan or one of its commentaries (the most celebrated commentary of Li Shan 李善 dates to 719).

164

r.a. stein

the people”; “when a saint (king) is on high (reigns well ), the people are transformed (civilized)”; “When a saint is on high, he transforms (civilizes) and nourishes (the people) like a god” (k. 10, 2b, 3b, 4b 聖人養民 . . .; 聖人在上, 民遷而化; 聖人在上, 化育如神). 2. Heaven covers, Earth carries (the king does likewise). In the Zhongyong 中庸 (classic of the “Milieu”; before J. Chr.), the great kindness and compassion (ren ci 仁慈) is compared to the fact that the sky covers and the earth carries (similarly in the Xunzi 荀子, ch. 9, 仁慈, 天之所覆, 地之所在載). As the Zhuangzi 莊子 (V, 3) states: “The sky covers all, the earth carries all.” And the Huainan zi specifies (k. 1, Ia 天道者覆天載地): “Yet the Dao, it covers (like) the sky and it carries (like) the earth” or again: “The sky covers, the earth nourishes” (as elsewhere the king; k. 7, 5a 天地覆育); or further: “the saint covers (like) the sky and carries (like) the earth; he shines (as) sun and moon. Ying-yang are in harmony . . .; it is that he is capable of imitating heaven” (k. 20, 8b 聖人天覆地載, 日月照, 陰陽調 . . . 故能法天〔聖人象天〕; idem 20, 1a). 3. The union of heaven and earth. Already in the Yijing 易經, a line of the eleventh hexagram (tai, “excellence”) is characterized by the phrase: “Heaven and earth communicate” 天地交泰. Often cited, this cliché signifies “a prosperous age.” In the Laozi 老子, we read: “Heaven and earth are united and, by this, make the soft dew descend” (ch. 32 天地相合, 以降甘露; and naturally: “heaven and earth endure (eternally)” (ch. 7 天長地久). We could multiply the examples. * * * These few Chinese citations demonstrate that we cannot naïvely read the royal inscriptions and the Prayers of De ga to see in them the elements of the indigenous religion. Certain phrases often refer to that religion (the descent of the first ancestor), but many others reproduce the phraseology common in China. It is not by chance that the greatest number of these examples are found in the Prayers. They were redacted in the Chinese territories. A.M.’s intuition is thus correct. The literary influence of China was important. This is no doubt due in great part to the literati habitually redacting diplomatic documents, letters, etc., which abounded in eulogies and hyperbolic comparisons. It is necessary to add the proper

apropos of the word gtsug lag

165

language to the purely Chinese Buddhist texts. Might we date this influence already to the era or Srong btsan sgam po, as A.M. thought? This is possible, especially if we consider not only the direct relations with China, but also if we take account—as Yamaguchi suggests (TA I, 77–8)—of the relations of Srong btsan sgam po with the Tuyuhun (the ‘A zha) who, themselves, had long since well absorbed elements of the Chinese civilization, who were the first partners (in marriage, etc.) and the adversaries of the king and who were subjugated by him. Though it is of this era, we should in any case remember that this influence of Chinese phraseology became important following the arrival of the princess Jincheng 金成 and especially from Khri srong lde btsan onwards, an epoch of the redaction of all the known inscriptions and of all the other texts utilized (approximately from 750, and especially from 780, to 840–50). It remains for us to say a few words about an account from the Sba bzhed, a late work but one which surely utilizes (in the first part) ancient elements. A.M. utilized it to add to the information from the Chinese Annals (379–385). It speaks of the gtsug lag of China which (A.M. ably demonstrated) cannot be, in this context, the divinatory science attributed to Confucius in the later tradition and already in the ancient manuscripts (cf. above, 127). A.M.’s analysis is now in part exceeded by the discoveries of Yamaguchi. A detailed discussion of this account would overburden this article. I will raise only that which treats our problem. According to this text, Khri lde gtsug brtan already wanted to introduce Buddhism from India, but this project aroused the hostility of his mother’s clan. When the princess Jincheng 金成 arrived to marry the son of this king, she instituted the funerary rite of Chinese Buddhism for her “aunt,” the princess Wencheng 文成, offerings of merit (dge ba), observing the fast (Tib. tshe, Chinese zhai 齋) during the period of seven times seven days after death (p. 3 = Chos ‘byung Mkhas pa’i dga’ ston, ja, 71–72; pp. 8–9 = Chos ‘byung Mkhas pa’i dga’ ston, 76a). While outwardly executing a bon po rite, they practiced in secret the (Buddhist) rite of contrition (gyod kha).74 When her son Khri srong lde btsan was only four years old, the emperor of China sent to his 74 The rites of zhai 齋 (fasting) and of confession and contrition (chanhui 懺悔), often executed for the health of dead parents and ancestors until the seventh generation, these rites are attested by many Chinese Dunhuang manuscripts. Many are directed toward the Tibetan king.

166

r.a. stein

old father an ambassador called ‘Ba’ de’u, accompanied by a “Chinese child dancer” (alias Sang shi). The old king desired to practice Buddhism. He sent emissaries to Lho Bal (Chos ‘byung Mkhas pa’i dga’ ston: in India, Rgya gar). Here, it cannot be a question of Nepal and India, since in the ancient manuscripts, Lho Bal designates the “barbarians,” and especially the tribes of the Dunhuang region (TA I, 79–81 and n. 6). On the occasion of this mission, one episode illustrates the principle that it is a sin (from the Buddhist point of view) to kill an animal. Interrogated by the young king, the Chinese boy states that it is a sin according to the “doctrine (or the sacred books, gtsug lag) of China, called Hur” (A.M., 380). However, this word is a transcription of the Chinese fo 佛, “Buddha.”75 It clearly concerns Buddhism as the boy adds that the Hur understand the “religion of the Ten Virtues” (dge ba bcu’i chos, p. 5; Chos ‘byung Mkhas pa’i dga’ ston, 73b).76 Then the king-father sent a mission to China to seek that “Chinese doctrine” (Rgya’i gtsug lag).77 This time, the mission does not move towards Lho Bal, but goes directly to the capital of Sichuan (Eg chu, Chin. Yizhou 益州, present-day Chengdu 成都) where it is received by a high dignitary. The emperor of China desires that Buddhism (p. 6, lha chos bzang po) should be widespread in Tibet. To this end, he gives to the emissaries Buddhist texts (sangs rgyas kyi bstan pa’i dpe; a thousand bam po of sangs rgyas kyi gsung rab). The author then mentions a prophesy taken from the āgama, according to which, in the last period of five hundred years (decline of Buddhism), the “holy religion” would appear in the Land of the Red Faces (Tibet in the Prophesy of Khotan and elsewhere) thanks to a kalyāṇamitra. The master Kim Ha shang (Korean Chan master, founder of the Sichuan school, alias Wu xiang, around 750; Yamaguchi, 1973), endowed with prescience, then predicts that at the return of the mission, the king-father will be dead and the son (Khri srong lde btsan) will still be young. The “black” (bon

75 The transcription hur for fo is attested in a Dunhuang ms. (Tibetica Antiqua I, n. 22). We find more often ‘Bur and Phur. Yamaguchi adopted the (faulty) variant hu ra and saw in it a transcription of foutu, “Buddha” (“Chibetto no bukkyō to Shiragi no Kin ōsho,” 20, n. 94). 76 These Ten Virtues (shi shan 十善 are frequently evoked in the Chinese Dunhuang manuscripts (cf. Stein, “Saint et devin,” n. 52). The also characterize the “true,” ancient Buddhism, which has declined and which is regretted in the “Dar ma fallen from the sky” (above, 140). 77 Cf. the gtsug lag bzang po (Buddhism) in the Prayers of De ga (cf. n. 28) and the gtsug lag (Buddhism) of the text “Dar ma fallen from the sky.”

apropos of the word gtsug lag

167

po) ministers will have promulgated a law which forbids the practice of Buddhism. When the king becomes an adult, he will speak of the “religion of the veda of the heretics” (mu stegs rig byed kyi chos).78 In order to convert him to Buddhism (p. 10, lha chos), the emissary Sang Shi will have to explain to him three books that the monk gave him with the prophesy. These are: 1) the sūtra of the Ten Virtues (dge ba bcu’i mdo), 2) the Vajracchedikā, and 3) the sūtra Sa li ljang po (Śālistamba). We will note that the first and third texts represent a simple and moral Buddhism. Indeed, when Sang shi returns to Tibet, the king Khri srong lde btsan is not yet an adult, and the anti-Buddhist laws are still in force. In addition, he cached in Mchims phu (Bsam yas) the Chinese (Buddhist) books that he received (Rgya’i chos). When the king attains his majority (13 or 15 years?; in 756?), he sees the writings (or books, yi ge) of his father (p. 9; Chos ‘byung Mkhas pa’i dga’ ston, 78a: of his father and grandfather). However, he finds the Le’u tshe kyang in which is unveiled the conduct to take (the art of governance, tshis) in order to render the people happy. And he thinks that it is there that his ancestors found a (their) supernatural power (rdzu ‘phrul). Yamaguchi demonstrated that it concerns a transcription of the title Laozi jing 老子經 (the book of Laozi; Yamaguchi 1973, 19). He thought the Daode jing 道德經, but it could also concern the Laozi huahu jing 老子化胡經 which had caused controversy in

78 A.M. (381) omits the word rig and translates: “a religious text composed by the Mu stegs.” She was thinking of Confucianism. The following demonstrates that we must see Daoism. Yamaguchi (op. cit., n. 30) well notes that rig byed is the equivalent of veda. The assimilation of Daoism (or certain of its doctrines) with the Hindu heresy was made by Father Wieger (Histoire des Croyances, 69, 144: “monism imported from India”) and by Liebenthal, “Lord Atman in the Lao-tzu.” Responding to the Yi Xia lun of Gu Huan, in a controversy between Daoists and Buddhists, dated 467 A.D., a Buddhist retorts that Buddhism considers that which has a body like an illusion and forgets himself to aid others, whereas Daoism considers the Ego (wuwo 吾我) as the True Reality, whence his penchant for the techniques of life (H. Schmidt-Glintzer, Das Hung-ming chi und die Aufnahme des Buddhismus in China, 110; Taishō, No 2102, p. 42a). It is true that Thu’u bkvan identified rig byed with Confucianism (in 1801–2; Grub mtha’ shel gyi me long, ch. 10; ed. Sde dge, 169b–171b). This is only an opinion from a modern author. He also arbitrarily identifies Daoism with Bon. For him, rig byed designates the sciences of which the patron is Confucius (especially divination, rtsis, the Yijing, etc.). He does not qualify the rig byed as heretics (mu stegs). I did not find this identification in the two books of the sde srid (of 1688, see n. 89). In his Chronicle, the 5th Dalai Lama summarizes the Sba bzhed, but does not breathe a word of the mu stegs rig byed and Le’u tse kyang. Earlier still (1545–65), Dpa’o Gtsug lag phreng ba first cites without omission the Sba bzhed (ja, 74b), but then removes the word rig byed (78a) and does not propose any identification.

168

r.a. stein

that epoch (Stein 1980, 330 & 336–7). According to the logic of the account (the prediction and its realization), this discovery and this flattering appreciation of the Le’u tshe kyang corresponds to the “religion of the veda of the heretics.” Yet the ministers demand: “How is this Me’u (read Le’u) tshe kyang of the ancestors from China?” (Rgya’i yab mes kyi), and it was the Chinese scribe or writer ( yi ge pa) Mes mgo (“scorched head,” the sobriquet of a monk) who is asked to read this text. According to Dpa’o Gtsug lag phreng ba, the king explained to his ministers that this Chinese book (or this doctrine, gtsug lag) of the Le’u ke tse arrived, as we know, at the time of his father. Here, the editing appears to be the fruit of a confusion. We know that the Tang emperors, from the Li clan, had adopted for a first ancestor Laozi 老子, equally from the Li clan. The book thus belonged quite well to a Chinese doctrine, dating back to the ancestor of these emperors. It is quite possible that the Daode jing 道德經 arrived in Tibet (at least by hearsay). Or also, the Tibetans may have known the controversies and accusations of heresy against the Laozi huahu jing 老子化胡經.79 Yet in the account of the Sba bzhed, the author speaks of it as if it concerned the ancestral religion of the Tibetan kings, which seems imposible. The account continues thus. After a reading of the Chinese text, read by a Chinese scribe, the king states that this doctrine (or this art of governance) gtsug lag, is truly good. My ancestors, he states, have

79 In this apocryphal sūtra, Laozi incarnates in the West as Buddha and Mani. It is for this reason that it is condemned as heretical. It is also this feature which may contribute to the confusion from the account of the Sba bzhed. First, the author speaks of the gtsug lag of China called Hur, i.e. Fo 佛, Buddha. Then, a Chinese Buddhist monk (hence anti-Daoist) predicts that one will find in Tibet a heretical work, and it is the Laozi jing which was found. For Dpa’o Gtsug lag phreng ba, the Laozi jing 老子經 is justifiably a gtsug lag from China, and for the Sba bzhed it is the book of the Chinese ancestors. Yet is it possible that the Laozi jing might find itself among the books of the ancestors of the Tibetan kings? We should recall that Srong btsan sgam po was meant to have known about Indian events, since he adopted their writing system. He may have learned that an Indian prince had demanded a Sanskrit translation of the Daode jing (cf. Stein, Civil. Tib., 36 and n. 52; Tibetica Antiqua I, 27). Later, Khri srong lde btsan heard talk of the Daode jing via its quotation in the Memorial of Wang Xi (Demiéville, Le concile de Lhasa, 218-9). Other views are possible. The citations of the Daode jing (as well as the Zhuangzi 莊子 and the Confician classics), interpreted according to the Chan doctrine, are found in the Sayings of Wuzhu (the Bu cu of the Tibetans), a contemporary of Wuxiang, alias Kim Ha shang. These citations are found in the Lidai fabao ji 歷代法寶紀, Dunhuang ms, written around 775, that the Tibetans may have known (cf. Demiéville, “L’introduction au Tibet du bouddhisme sinisé d’après les manuscripts de Touen-houang,” 1-7 and Yanagida, Early Ch’an in China and Tibet, 18, 23, 34-36, 38-41).

apropos of the word gtsug lag

169

(also?) practiced a good religion (or custom, chos lugs bzang po). Let us see (Chos ‘byung Mkhas pa’i dga’ ston: blta; the brda of the Sba bzhed has no meaning) which good practices of the world exist? (‘Jig rten gyi spyod pa bzang po). It is then than Sang shi recalls the prediction of the master Kim ha shang, who had advised presenting Buddhism to the king (lha chos) when the latter will speak of the “religion of the heretics” (mu stegs kyi chos). He also tells the king that there exists in China a good Buddhism (Rgya’i lha chos bzang po) and that he must not allow the Le’i ce to enter into the palace (?, or admit error?). Then the king demands a proof or verified document (gtan tshigs) proving that the Buddhism of China is good. The response is that he does have some proof. These are the sūtras (Dpa’o says dharma) received in China, which he cached. Then he produces the three works cited above. Of the first (the Ten Virtues), he states that it is valuable for good conduct (spyod pa dag pa; which corresponds to the quest for a “good practice of the world” by the king); the second is valuable as a good philosophy (lta ba dag pa) and the third for the two combined (lta spyod zung ‘brel). The king is then full of faith. He thinks that the fact of having found a “good religion” (chos lugs bzang po) is the sign of the amity of heaven and earth, and he desires to offer thanks (rtang rag) to all the gods. This summary should suffice here. A.M. (381–2) took from it that the “good religious system” of the ancestors of Khri srong lde btsan was “in part founded from Chinese treatises, gtsug lag, of administrative character, certainly, but also religious.”80 She also thought of the Confucian classics. The latter surely had a great influence, as has been stated. Yet here, in the Sba bzhed, it does not concern Confucianism, but Daoism (understood as heresy) and Chinese Buddhism. Willingly or not, the redaction of the account is sufficiently imprecise and confused so that we might first think of the ancient, indigenous religion of the Tibetan ancestors, in suggesting that one understood the Daoist tradition of the Chinese emperors and the Buddhism which was already introduced by Srong btsan sgam po, according to the official version current around the year 800. Daoism hardly left any traces in Tibet. Contrariwise, more than Confucianism, the eminent role of China around 730–750 resides in the transmission of Chinese

80 A view accepted by G. Uray, “L’annalistique et la pratique bureaucratique au Tibet ancien,” 149.

170

r.a. stein

Buddhism (partly via the intermediary of Chan), in parallel and in concurrence with Indian Buddhism. And this not only with regard to Chan, properly so-called, but also especially the apocryphal sūtras, the simple texts of morality and the practices usable by the laity (funerary rites, zhai 齋). The later Tibetan historians have retained well this preponderant role of China (TA I, 5, 49–50 and n. 23). Review of the Sources I. Shujing 書經 (PT 0986). See TA I and additional note in II. Add Y. Imaeda 1979. He notes that Richardson has already remarked that the vocabulary of the Shujing is found in the inscriptions. II. Divination (PT 1047); See n. 10. III. “History of the Dmu and Phyva” (PT 0126.2; A.M., 210, 305–6; cf. Stein 1959, Tribus, 62–4). The Phyva (subjects) go to the Dmu (lords). The two are related (through marriage?). Legendary or mythic account which somewhat resembles—in an inverse sense—the legend from the later tradition where the first Phya ancestor descends from heaven in visiting his maternal Dmu relations (Bshad mdzod; A.M., 208–210). Here, the Dmu are in heaven, a land of Joy, inaccessible to the Phya. The latter are assimilated to the men of other versions, since they do not have a chief and demand one. They are the subjects (‘bangs, skol ), the “black heads,” and they say of themselves: “We bad (inferior) others.” The two protagonists are treated as clans. In another part, the author opposes two communities as stong sde in the upper valley (phu) and rgya sde in the lower valley; subjects of a single chief, men of a single country. In order to visit the Dmu, the Phya depart Western Tibet, Rtsang smad (Yamaguchi 1983, 171–73). In the ms PT 1060 (the kinglets), Phya, sovereign of Rtsang, is the lord of Rtsang stod (cf. here, n. 50 and the Review of sources, infra p. 176ff, “Theory of Origins”). In order to appreciate the composition of this text, some features are to be raised. 1. There are many questions about the sku bla of the Dmu, to whom it is necessary to present offerings ( yon ‘bul ) and notably zhal bu (l. 55), which permit the figure (lha zhal) of these sku bla to be seen. We find this vocabulary in the translation of the Shujing 書經 (TA I, 73–4).

apropos of the word gtsug lag

171

2. Among the offerings, there figures a “divine arrow” (cf. n. 56). In order to fabricate it, bamboo from ‘Jang (Nanzhao, Yunnan) and Chinese silk is necessary. 3. At the end (l. 64), the author states that it is necessary to consult the Che’u yag and the Log men (dag). The first is the Zhou Yi 周易, the Yijing 易經, undoubtedly in the broad sense of a divination book (as in the case of n. 21). I am not able to identify the second, but this word is no doubt also Chinese and probably designates another type of divination. 4. In the entire text, we find neither gtsug, nor gtsug lag, nor the other words discussed. IV. Prayers of De ga. See earlier TA I. We should compare certain Chinese manuscripts from Dunhuang. 1. P. chin. 3829 (one folio, 28 lines). Beginning and end missing; many words are illegible and the entirety is difficult to understand. Style of hyperbolic eulogies. The author mentions many blon, of which one received an honorific insignia of brass. There, the author speaks of a sword treaty of peace between three countries ☐盟誓得 (?) 使三國和好. 2. P. chin. 2974 R° and P. chin. 3395 (cited by Demiéville 1952, 280). The author exalts (l. 1) the Dao of the (honorific void) holy and divine btsan po which extends to all the kings, and whose Virtue (Efficacy, de 德, Tib. byin) extends to the four seas (extremities of the earth). The author makes aspirations for him (l. 5). The merit extends to the ministers Zhang Lha bzang Klu dpal (l. 8–9 and 24) and Zhang Khri sum rje (l. 30–31). These are the two great ministers of the Prayers of De ga (26a). The phrasing of these Chinese texts is often very close to that of the Prayers. An example (l. 28): “Our holy and divine btsan po, (his) Dao extends to the eight directions; (his) grace (kindness) covers the four seas; (his) light . . . (equals?) the sun and moon; (his) Virtue (Efficacy) unites heaven and earth.” And for Zang Khri sum rje, the author exalts his “long, divine life” (shen shou 神壽) and his elevated merit which surpasses the excellence of the stars (l. 30). This is like (l. 33) “the sovereign is holy and divine, the subject is loyal and glorious” 君聖神, 臣忠榮, 邦國 . . . 為安. The lands are at peace. V. “Account of the Ages” (ITJ 733, 734, 735; A.M., 357–367). The first two were edited and translated by Thomas (AFL, texts III and IV;

172

r.a. stein

photos, pl. IV and V), the third by A.M. Due to the fictitious titles, Thomas connects these texts, wrongly, to different accounts (texts I and II, and IV, 2nd part). He states: “I, the end of the good age; III, The decline of the good age; and IV, Ages of decline. However, he quite justly remarks (50) apropos of III (ITJ 733), that “linguistically, this text is closer to normal Tibetan than I and II.” He also made the same remark for the first part of IV (l. 1–40; p. 95). This part is dedicated to the “Account of the Ages.” The paragraphs are well marked (indent on the line). By contrast, the second part, an account in the “archaic” style, recounting a different legend, follows without any break or graphic mark in the middle of line 40, but is distinguished by an intersyllabic double point, and a point between two shad. It is true that there are some analogous themes in both sorts of texts. Yet in the “Account of the Ages,” the author always states dus ngan pa, chos ngan pa and tshe ngan pa for the bad age, whereas, in I, the author states that the byin is augmented and that the rgyang sdig (the evil) has been removed. The two kinds of accounts also have in common the expression skyin dang ‘bab. Yet in the archaic texts, this phrase is doubled by the parallel phrase rman dang g.yos, according to the usual process in this style (cf. n. 26). It is likewise in the archaic account PT 1285. Contrariwise, in the “classical” text (III, l. 6, 45, 56), there is only kyin dang alone (cf. Stein 1971, 546; deest in IV). It is true that this distinction is not always made. Two divinities, Skyin tang (1a 13th) and Rman dang (1a 21st) appear in a divination manual (PT 1043). Yet in an archaic funerary ritual (Stein 1971, 492 & 497), we only find skyin dang. It is the same in the archaic account PT 1134 (l. 67). Nevertheless, the fact remains that, in the “classical” texts, we only find skyin dang alone (example PT 0126, l. 39–40; A.M., 372, Maxims of the wise bhikṣu). This word alone survived in the later dictionaries. As for the third version of the “Account of the Ages” (ITJ 735), the paragraphs are also well marked. Yet the first has very particular contents. It is announced by cham and phyva (divinities or divination?) and contains a separate legend in which we find the name of a legendary king known in the later tradition (above, 135). The following paragraphs are in conformity with the two other manuscripts. As stated earlier, our text is in classical Tibetan, and linguistically very different from the archaic texts (in style, grammar, vocabulary). For the vocabulary, Thomas only cites some words (95). We may extend the list as follows: nyon mongs (AFL, III, l. 5, 12, 20; IV, l. 37); mya ngan bsangs pa (III, l. 27); lha la phyag ‘tshol (III, l. 30, 35, also

apropos of the word gtsug lag

173

for the deceased parents); myi tha mal pa (III, l. 43); myi g.yon chan (IV, l. 12); khyo bo and chung ma (IV, 38); khrel myed and ngo tsha (IV, 22, 23); bud myed and skyes pha (IV, 31–32); rgyal po and blon po (IV, 36); tshigs ‘di yi ger bris la (III, 18). Plural marked by ‘o cog (‘greng myi ‘i cog, IV, 17, 32, etc.; myi ‘o cog alone, IV, 12; srin no chog, III, 41; lha’o chog, III, 42; ci bya’o cog, IV, 26 and ITJ 735, A.M., n. 571). None of these words, nor this plural, is found in the archaic texts.81 We will also note that gtsug lag receives the epithet bzang po (and not che ba) as in the Prayers of De ga (III, 7, 10, 20; cf. n. 28). For the date, we can take into account two elements. 1) A unique sentence (IV, l. 21) evokes a happy and good era before the age of calamities. It is one where “gods and men were not yet separated.” However, this phrase is found, apropos of the ancestors of the kings, in the first Rkong po inscription (dating to c. 800 AD; for the meaning, cf. n. 33). 2) Manuscript III ends with a historical prophesy on the subject of China and the Turks (A.M., 362). It is comprised of legendary themes which seem to be taken from Chinese sources relative to the Qi dan, sources analogous to those which were utilized by the “Account of the Five Uighurs” (cf. Ligeti 1971, 171–2, 178, n. 37, 182–4; Moriyasu 1980). The problem is complicated and cannot be explained here. Prior to this prophesy, we find another non-Tibetan element. In the age of calamities, the great(est?) king between (bar) heaven and earth, Bar Shan she will be destroyed. The name is surely foreign. As for the contents, it is necessary to bring up some elements which could not belong to the archaic, indigenous religion. When everything goes from bad to worse (l. 13–23), one is advised to write and diffuse (the predictions; an injunction that we often find in the Buddhist sūtras, apocryphal or not). The author then distinguished three categories of men. The first is that of sages who retain the teaching and conform to the good conduct of old. They will die a natural death (dus la babs te ‘chi na; an ideal well known in China). They will not suffer in the land of the dead and will be happy (another dominant theme in

81

The sole exception that I know of is the phrase nyon mongs sdug pa’i yul for the land of the dead (also called dga’ dang skyid pa’i yul) in the ritual of the archaic style from the ms PT 1134 (Stein, “Du récit au rituel dans les manuscripts tibétains de Touen-Houang,” 499). Contaminations could have occurred.

174

r.a. stein

the sūtras). The following sentence is certainly foreign.82 After the age of calamities will come a good era of the gods (or divine). The men will generally live one hundred years (a Chinese and Buddhist cliché on the maximal length of a human life). This will be the life of (those who?) “live firstly” (sngar ‘tsho’o; perhaps the first category of sages?). The author again speaks of this category further on (l. 36; A.M., § 7; these are the wishes): “That, in my living, I do not die a premature and violent death! . . . That I have wise sons! That, in death, I do not go to the land of the dead, but to the land of Happiness! That after the period of calamities, I should be “living before” (sngar ‘tsho’o) with a life of a hundred years!” The second category of men, “living (also?) a hundred years, but afterwards” (phyiste ‘tsho’o) is that of men who will have heard the predictions, but will not retain them. Finally, the third category, “living in the middle” (bar du ‘tsho’o) is that of men who do not listen, even if they heard, and do not see, even if they looked; a category of “not good, faulty” (or better: “men between good and evil,” myi-legs nyes [or: myi legs-nyes] kyi bar du ‘tsho’o). The obscurity of the three unusual expressions is perhaps due to the fact that it concerns translation. A.M. is hung up on using the word “to live” (‘tsho) to explain this text by the archaic accounts where the rite assures the dead of being “healed” or “revived” ( gso ba) and where the land of the dead is called Joy and happiness (cf. Stein 1971, 1). Plus, she compares the hundred years (for her, “centuries”) with the quantity 700,000 of the archaic accounts, a quantity that she takes for the duration of life after death (366). But that is an error. The author states that the horse that will guide the dead will eat among the 700,000, the 700,000 stars (Thomas AFL, IA, l. 14). Thence, living, his life will endure a hundred years; dead, he will go as lord of the 700,000 (stars, l. 101; Stein, op. cit., 489). It is likewise in AFL, IV and in PT 1134, which A.M. also cites (op. cit., 497–506). Of course, there are analogies between the archaic accounts and the “Account of the Ages” (they concern the life of after death), and it is possible that the redactors or the copyists wanted to subtly associate them in writing them without break on the same paper, but the two concepts are quite different.

82 The text is obscure (uncertain readings and foreign construction). Yet A.M.’s translation is certainly impossible. That of Thomas is a bit better.

apropos of the word gtsug lag

175

Let us return to our text. In order to escape from disasters and seek salvation, the text counsels (l. 24–29) “to arrange the hair well (skra; Thomas read ‘dra, A.M., 361: sku; erroneous readings) every three days, to wash the body every five days.” It repeats (l. 29–31) that it is necessary to venerate the gods without being mistaken in the moment (i.e. according to an established calendar) and that, if that is impossible, it is necessary to greet them by washing the body the third day of the month. It is necessary to make offerings and prayer, not only for oneself, but also for all men between heaven and earth. This is valuable for the dead ancestors (it concerns funerary rites). These elements seem to recall the apocryphal sūtras (Chinese and others), of which a part of the Tibetan translations are known. I think especially of the calendars for bathing (of the body and hair), of which there are Chinese and Tibetan, Daoist and Buddhist Dunhuang manuscripts (in Chinese: Daozang No 1227, dated 943 AD, a zhai 齋, and Laozi huahu jing 老子化胡經, k. 8; in Tibetan: ms. ITJ 474, recto and 506; PT 0127, verso, 4; Stein, Annuaire du Collège de France (1978–79): 546–49 and (1979–80): 622–24, and Soymié 1979). Our text continues, paradoxically advising to feast because the end in near. The author states, however: “Rather than seek the provisions of nourishment, (brgyags) for a hundred years for a living being, it is appropriate to search for provisions for 10,000, 100,000 years in the land of the dead (gshin yul). This formula is comparable with that of the “wise bhikṣu” (PT 0126) who states, contrarily, that the beautiful vestments and nourishment placed on the tombs for the dead serves no purpose. A.M. compared the two texts (370–374). She thought that the critiques were aimed at the Tibetan religion. Yet nothing is less sure. In the “Account of the Ages,” the allusion to the provision necessary to be made for the dead perhaps aims at the Chinese zhai 齋 rites for the dead. Also, the Buddhist critiques (repeated in PT 1284 and PT 0992) might be applied to not importing any non-Buddhist custom (the text bears a Chinese element, falcon hunting; TA I, 59). In any case, the notion of food provisions for the dead is absent in the “archaic” texts of funerary rites. A.M. saw clearly that this text presents analogies with the sūtras on the decline and the end of Buddhism, but she only did it apropos of the final prophesy (362, n. 584) or she thought of the theory of yugas (357). She did not draw any conclusion. It is certainly necessary to think of the apocryphal Chinese (Daoist and Buddhist) sūtras on the terminal epoch (bearing critiques of mistakes and the promise of life

176

r.a. stein

for the elect). They are often adapted to a particular historical situation (example near Tibet, the Prophesy of Khotan, in Chinese and Tibetan; middle of the 9th century). On this question, we may now read the fine article by Zürcher, “Prince Moonlight, messianism and eschatology in early medieval Chinese Buddhism.” For our text, we will further note the expression “bad epoch, time of famines” (mu ge’i dus ngan pa’i tshe) that we find in the Suvarṇaprabhāsasūtra (ch. XI, Nobel, 165; translated from Chinese). However, this “bad epoch” seems to be conceived as contemporaneous with the translators. In the colophon of the Uighur translation of this sūtra (also partly from Chinese), the author states that he is “a scholar of Beshbaliq, who lives in the bad epoch” (Müller 1909, 14). VI. “Theories of Origins” (PT 1038, 18 lines: translated and discussed by A.M., 215–19 and Yamaguchi 1983, 174). A.M. dates it to the first half of the 9th century, but it could equally well be dated to the 10th century. To my mind, this text marks a step toward the later tradition, affirmed as beginning in the 11th century (cf. Annuaire du Collège de France (1969–70): 332). Here is an analysis. (§ 1. l. 1–6; A.M., § 1 and 2). Among the different lands and castles came the king (btsan po) of the Spu rgyal Bon, the king lte’u Thod rgyal. According to some, he was one of twelve kinglets; according to others, he was not. M. Lalou read lte’u, but A.M. thinks that the vowel is i. Yamaguchi also reads lti’u and thinks that these are the thi’u brang, different from lde, lde’u (1983, 195, n. 74). In reality, these details are deceptive, as they do not take account of the habits of certain scribes. For the double initial, lh° and lt° are often confounded, graphically (the h resembles the t) and phonetically (the word lho is transcribed by the Chinese tu, and lha by ta). The name of the clan Lho (Rngegs) is clearly written Lto in the Old Tibetan Chronicle (l. 471). In the following line clearly appears the name of the divinity Lhe’u rje Zin dags (Bacot DTT, 119). However, the same name is written Le’u rje Zing po (PT 1043, l. 87; A.M. read Lti’u rje, but the t is hardly visible; as for the i in the place of e, in the next word (rje), the e is written in the same way as in Le’u or Lhe’u; the true i is very different).83 The same name is again clearly found written in the ms ITJ 740.1 (divination, not reproduced in Thomas AFL), § 1: Lte’u rje Zin dag; § 25: Lhe’u

83

It is likewise in the ms PT 1045 (divination by raven), Choix II.

apropos of the word gtsug lag

177

rje Zin dag. This lhe’u/lte’u should be a diminutive of lha or lde (cf. n. 50). The last example from A.M. is false (PT 0126.1, l. 90). There, we clearly read: de lti’u (lte’u?) bu ‘i sdig yul du, “in such a land of sin.”84 In our text, the name of the king is thus preceded by the habitual epithet lde’u or lhe’u, here written lte’u. As for the variant Bon in place of Bod, it survived in the later texts.85 The author perhaps knowingly adopted this form in order to distinguish this king from those of the official lineage, since he often writes Spu Bod and Spu rgyal in the last line for the true kings. Because of the possible allusion to Bon, A.M. compared the name of the king, Thod rgyal, with the name Rgyal bon Thod dkar, borne by the father of Gshen rab in the Gzer mig (of the Dmu clan, the grandfather being Dmu rgyal; ed. Francke, 1, p. 314, 332). The clan of the mother is Phya (an inverse situation from that of “The history of the Dmu” and the later texts where the paternal clan is Phya, and Dmu the maternal clan). It is necessary to add the Mdzod phug (commentary, pp. 73–4) where we find Dmu rgyal Bon Thod dkar.86 Despite the difference of name (Thod rgyal in our text), this rapprochement seems correct to me. It is the context which suggests it, since according to one version, this king of Tibet was one of a dozen kinglets. However, this version should be that of the “List of principalities” (PT 1286; Bacot DTT, 80–81). At the end of the list, the author declares that despite the power (btsan pa) of these kings (rgyal po, kinglets) and despite the wisdom of their ministers, they were mutually destroyed, and none of them obtained the helmet of ‘O lde Spu rgyal (does not become the king of Tibet). There follows the descent of the first ancestor of the dynasty, Ngag khri (A.M., 198). This official version corresponds to the second one of our text: the king of Tibet is not one of the twelve kinglets. Yet if Thod rgyal is the same as Thod dkar, the king who is one of the twelve kinglets, according to the first version, could 84 Aberrant graph for de lta bu. For the confusion between lde bu and lte bu (= lta bu, “like, similar to”), cf. Yamaguchi in Tōkyō daigaku bunka-bu Bunka kōryū kenkyū shisetsu kenkyū kiyō 1 (1975): 35. 85 Rgyal rabs Bon (ed. Das, 9, citing different works and 26); Rgya Bod yig tshang, fol. 77a. The linguistic problem of the alternation Bod/Bon cannot be discussed here. 86 These personages are situated in the land of the West. We also find a phyva gshen bon po Thod dkar from Zhang zhung (Tucci, Tibetan Painted Scrolls, 740). Already in an archaic account (Thomas AFL, text IV, l. 47), one speaks of a hundred gshen with white turbans (thod dkar). According to the colophon of the Rgyal rabs Bon, this text was composed in the hermitage of Khyung po Rgyal ba Thod dkar, also situated in the West.

178

r.a. stein

be Thod dkar, second of the kinglets, lord of Rtsang, inhabiting Myang ro’i Pyed kar. He also figures in other lists of principalities (Lalou 1958 and 1965; Yamaguchi 1983, 209, 222, 248–50, and the charts, 913–14). Thod dkar is the king of upper Rtsang (western stod) and is also called Phyva. The land of the west conquered by the father of Srong btsan sgam po was called Rtsang Bod.87 The Phyva who went to seek a chief among the Dmu left lower Rtsang (smad; eastern). The redactor of the ms PT 1038 seems to have thought of this king Thos dkar of Rtsang, one of the kinglets, who became one of the kings of Tibet, according to some. Is this in order to veil the claim that he changed Bod into Bon and Thod dkar into Thod rgyal? If this hypothesis is correct, it would perhaps be the start of the later tradition in which the Bon would have come from a Western land. The later tradition carries yet another element already in germinal form here and in other Dunhuang texts. The first ancestor descended from heaven is received and elected king by twelve personages. According to the sources, these are twelve kinglets, sages (ministers), local gods or bon po (Stein Tribus, 11). In the Old Tibetan Chronicle and the royal inscriptions, the authors do not specify who accepted as sovereign the god from the sky. Our text seems to indicate that they were precisely the twelve kinglets from the twelve principalities. One of the most ancient texts from the later tradition (Ma ṇi bka’ ‘bum, I, 161a–b) gives a remarkable variant of this theme. The men (it is not stated who) asked for a sovereign (from heaven) “because (until then) there were no distinctions between lords and subjects (rje ‘bangs kyi rnam dbye med pa las).88 This corresponds well to our text and to the Old Tibetan Chronicle (none of the kinglets come to impose themselves on the others, but according to some, one of them, the lord of Rtsang (?, Thos dkar, alias Thos rgyal) would have done it). The sentence from the Ma ṇi bka ‘bum is also compared to the ancient texts, according to which in the beginning there was no separation between gods and men (cf. p. 86 and n. 65; the word “god” may designate the king). The regent (Sde srid) Sangs rgyas rgya mtsho adds interesting information.89 The bon po rites are attached sometimes to the first ancestor

87

In the catalogs of principalities, we find Rtsang ro and Rtsang pho (Lalou). We recall that, in the history of the Dmu and the Pyva, the first are the “lords” (rje), the second the subjects (‘bangs). 89 Vaiḍпrya g.ya’ sel (c. 1688), 426–27, fol. 147a–b. Discussion of the sciences of divination and ritual (gtsug lag, cf. appendix), especially of the gto and yas which form 88

apropos of the word gtsug lag

179

of the dynasty, sometimes to the kinglets. According to certain “ancient accounts” (sngon rabs), the gto would have been redacted in Tibet by Kong tse ‘phrul rgyal at the time of the king (rje) Yab bla brdal drug. The regent then cites the legend of the simian ancestor and the “Speeches of the Saint” (Avalokiteśvara)90: “The lineage of men should descend from the gods (like) a lineage of rivers touches glaciers. To the men who have not a god, I designate a god; to the cattle who do not have a herdsman, I designate a herdsman; to the demons who do not have a yas, I give a yas. I designate Yab lha brdal drug as god of men; I designate Yar klungs Sogs pa as the center of the country.” The Sde srid thinks (427) that it is necessary to distinguish between Yab lha brdal drug, the god and the sovereign (rje). Here, it concerns the second, known as Gnya’ khri. Contrariwise, the yas would be those of Kong tse (after their account of origin, yas rabs). But in other rabs on the origin of the gto yas, it is stated that Kong tse made them in Tibet at the time of Gtsang rje Thod dkar. The last one, like Kyi rje btsan po, Mchims rje Ne dgu, etc. made up part of the kinglets (rgyal phran gsil ma) and lived in the same era. Another ancient account (sngon rabs) on the yas is that of Mchims rje Ne dgu. It is owed to the gter byon of Nyang (undoubtedly Nyang ral nyi ma ‘od zer, 1126– 1304). We see that, for the yas, the author hesitated between the first ancestor of the dynasty and his country Yar lung, on the one hand, and one of the kinglets, notably Thos dkar, on the other. § 2. (l. 5–8). A title is indicated: “origin of the lineage of the kings (btsan po, of Tibet).” The order of sentences seems to be disturbed. We consider three hypotheses. A] (not numbered, l. 6): above the sky, a god (lha) ku spyi ser.91 I think spyi ser is to be corrected to skyi ser, an epithet of the wind,92 and ku could be khu ‘phang, wet snow. In the Old Tibetan Chronicle (Bacot DTT, 81), the first ancestral god descends onto the earth (like) the rain. In the later tradition, he descends from

a part thereof (§ 93, commentary on a sentence of the Vaiḍūrya dkar po, ed. Dege, 1, 141a). For the yas, cf. n. 14. 90 The Ma ṇi bka’ ‘bum or the Bka’ chems? I did not verify. In the reading of this difficult passage, I have often profited from the counsel of S.G. Karmay. 91 I understand the last words bzhis bgyi ba as a bad rendition of zhes bgyi ba, as l. 11: Dza zhes bgyi ba, and l. 13: shes bgyi. 92 In the epic, etc., but also already in the Old Tibetan Chronicle (Bacot DTT, 116, l. 35–6), and in a work where Khri srong lde btsan poses the questions (Tucci, Minor Buddhist Texts, II, 135).

180

r.a. stein

the sky via stages, which are marked by atmospheric phenomena (clouds and rain are mentioned; Stein, Tribus, 57). If we accept this reading, we may connect this isolated phrase with the third hypothesis given (l. 12), according to which the descent from the sky starts thirteen stages from the sky. The first hypothesis is only explained on line 7. The author states that, in the geneology of the first king, he was the Chief of all the ma sangs. He reigned over all the (gods of ) creation (srid pa) and he was the “phyva above the phyva” (cf. n. 46). A.M. saw clearly that these beings could belong to different categories. Indeed, in the late texts, different texts give the successive stages of the occupation of Tibet by the different beings. At each stage, the country bears a different name.93 According to the Rgyal rabs Bon, they were the gnod sbyin, the srin po, the ma sangs (name of the country: Bod ka g.ya’ drug), the twelve kinglets (Bod Kha brgyad; king Thod dkar who venerated the Bon) and finally the king of Bod, Gnya’ khri btsan po (who also venerated the Bon). This late tradition undoubtedly sheds light on the mangled redaction of our text. As the phrase of 1.6 seemed linked to the third hypothesis of 1.12, the ma sangs from 1.7 reconnects to the arrival of the first ancestor, since Tibet is then called Bod Ka g.yag drug (l. 17), the name of the country occupied by the ma sangs in the later tradition. As for the chief of the phyva, he also became linked to the third hypothesis (l. 13), since the god of the Seven Khri, who was mentioned already, was rightly the phyva Ya bla drug in the Old Tibetan Chronicle. B] (second hypothesis, marked as such; A.M. § 5). (The first ancestor of the kings) belonged to one of the classes of beings assimilated into castes (rigs). This is an allusion to the Indian classification of the Buddhist texts which is maintained in the later tradition (Stein, Tribus, 6). Although these two castes are distinguished here: the vile who are the “eaters of meat” (demons) and the kings who are the “red faces,” these two species are in fact identical. A third caste (not specified as such) is that of the gnod sbyin ( yakṣa) which hardly differs from the others. A.M. noted well (217) that the “red faces” are the Tibetans in the later tradition and that this term seems to come from a Vimalaprabhāvyākaraṇa. It is necessary to add that this term

93 Rgyal rabs Bon, pp. 8–9 (taken from a gter ma of Shel brag); Bshad mdzod (13a); Rgyal po bka’ thang (18a = 56a); Dpa’o Gtsug lag phreng ba (ch. ja, 3a, citing the Lo rgyus chen mo).

apropos of the word gtsug lag

181

is commonly utilized in the Prophesy of Khotan (Chinese version from c. 848–850; cf. TA I, 93). In the later texts (already in the Sba bzhed), these “red faces” are the first Tibetans descended from the simian ancestor. In our text (l. 10–11), the yakṣa Dza is the sovereign of the enclosure of snow mountains. His name must make allusion to the yakṣa Jambhala (a form of Kuvera), situated in the North of the world. This foreign version may be clarified by the recently revealed texts. In the tantras, we come to know of a certain king Tsa or Dza (alias Indrabhūti), located in Uḍḍiyāṇa or Zahor. However, he was identified with the king Khri srong lde btsan in the ms. PT 0840 (dating at the earliest to c. 840–850, since it mentions the kings Dar ma and Od srung; Karmay 1981). Another king Tsa (or Pa?)94 is equally identified as a Tibetan king (undoubtedly the same) in a fragment of the Mañjuśrīmūlakalpa (ITJ 380) dating to the same era (Imaeda 1981). However, in this text, the king is situated in the North, in the center of snow mountains (as the yakṣa king Tsa of our text), and he subjugated every country. In the ms. PT 0840 also, the king Tsa, bodhisattva, is situated in Tibet, in the center of the snow mountains and the divine country (with the usual formula: “high country, pure earth”). S.G. Karmay compared this passage with the song of the minister-monk Yon tan (PT 1290; A.M., 320): arrival of the first king, a god, Spu rgyal, “in the center of the snow mountains, high mountains and pure earth . . . in the (country) Bod kha g.yag drug . . . in the center of the country, a divine residence We see that our text begins with speculations at once bon po and rnying ma pa (tantric). § 3 (l. 12–17; third hypothesis, C] marked as such; A.M., 218–8). It is the official theory of the dynasty in the era of the Buddhist kings. Yet the author only names the group of Seven Khri on the thirteenth stage of heaven, and not the descended god Ya bla bdag drug. He comes as the chief of men (and animals) who did not yet have one. On this subject, a series of six personages are inserted who characterize one of the principalities and correspond, according to Yamaguchi (1983; 205, 253, n. 17), to the name of Tibet Bod kha g.ya’ drug (divided into six

94 S.G. Karmay (“King Tsa-Dza and Vajrayāna,” 195, n. 10) noted that the manuscript clearly reads Tsa, but that it is an error for Ba (Pa). Yet the transformation is significant.

182

r.a. stein

parts). Strange list! It is formed on the model of the lists of principalities (ministers and others) but does not correspond to any of them. Aside from two ministers (Lho and Rngegs; elsewhere countries or clans) and two attendants (Sha and Spug), it gives two bon po gods (Mtshe and Gtso). The first four names are found again in the Old Tibetan Chronicle (Bacot DTT, 116). Yet the novelty of our text is the addition of two bon pos. It is there a further beginning of the later tradition in which the first divine ancestor is received by ministers or bon pos (in the framework of principalities). § 4 (l. 17–18; A.M. § 7). Conclusion: (no version) is certain. (In every case) the clan (of the established dynasty) is called Spu rgyal and Spu Bod. We know that, according to the Tongdian, Spu rgyal is the name of the king’s clan because the first ancestor was a god from heaven called ‘O lde Spu rgyal. The presence of king Dza, and especially the very fact of citing, next to the official version on the origins of the kings, a version according to which the king was one of a dozen kinglets, all this suggests that the redaction of our text ought to be posterior to the end of the dynasty (c. 850). Otherwise, the author would no doubt not have dared cite a non-official and politically dangerous version. The inspiration of the text is already bon po and rnying ma pa or tantric. There was no break between the Dunhuang documents and the “late” tradition! The ms PT 1038 situates itself between the two. Appendix: The etymology of gtsug lag The analysis of this expression may reveal the associations of the ideas of the Tibetans from the epoch considered. We may distinguish two questions: 1) the sense of the expression; 2) its composition. 1. We saw the sense such as it appears in context, and noted that in 814, in the Mahāvyutpatti, gtsug lag serves to translate Skt. ārṣa. I am ignorant of Sanskrit and am thus only able to say a bit about this word. According to the Monier-Williams Dictionary, it is derived from ṛsị and signifies “in relation to, belonging to or deriving from ṛsị ” (the poets of ancient hymns); also: “sacred, vererable, respectable descent.” It is undoubtedly necessary to add: the traditions, the wisdom, the words or writings of the ancient sages who constituted authority.

apropos of the word gtsug lag

183

We saw an example in the Prajñāśataka (n. 23), but the Sanskrit text was not preserved. A Sanskrit example is found in the Mahāyāna Sūtrālaṃ kāra (translated into Tibetan around 800; Nagao Index, Pt. II, Tokyo, 1961, p. 106): gtsug lag bstan pa’i chos = ārṣa . . . deśanādharma. The Chinese equivalent is neng quan 能詮 (Pt. I, Ch. XVIII, verse 31), “capable of explaining.” In his translation (Paris, 1911), S. Lévi states (233): “Idéal de prédication consacré” (sic!, without e [i.e. not consacrée, thus “Ideal of preaching devoted (consacré)” instead of “Ideal of devoted (consacrée) preaching”—ed.]), and he notes (n. 2): ārṣa, Tib. Gtsug lag, “sacrosanct,” in Chin. “a competent interpretation,” with the gloss: “The twelve categories of holy texts proclaimed by the tathāgata.” These are the twelve gsung rab (Mahāvyutpatti, No 1266–1278; cf. here pp. 126–7). Another example, drawn from the Jātakas, is cited in the Vaiḍūrya g.ya’ sel (144a; reed., p. 420 § 91; cf. here n. 102): “Not contrary to the custom, to the gtsug lag, to logic?” (lugs dang gtsug lag rigs pas mi ‘gal lam); with the commentary of Dharmakīrti: “gtsug lag, it is that which was stated by the Buddha.” Prof. Steinkellner kindly indicated to me that this phrase is found in the Jātakamāla (ed. Kern, p. 1, 11; Peking Tanjur, No 5650, 2a) and the commentary in Tanjur, No 5651, 155a. In Sanskrit, we have śrutyārṣayukti, which the commentary explains as thos pa dang gtsug lag dang rigs pa, “contrary to logic, to the śāstras(?) and to the oral tradition (or what is understood).” Yet why did the Tibetan and Indian translators choose gtsug lag to translate ārṣa, since the Tibetan expression does not seem to make any allusion to a derivation from the word ṛsị ? Unfortunately, the word gtsug lag is not found in the Sgra sbyor where the author explains the analysis of the Sanskrit words, and the choice of the Tibetan word. Perhaps they did not forge a neologism (as they did with byin rlabs for adiṣtḥ āna from the parallel words byin and rlabs). The expression gtsug lag perhaps already existed in the Tibetan usage (cf. TA I, 23–6, 69–70). 2. From a linguistic and formal point of view, gtsug lag is visibly composed of two independent words gtsug and lag. They are attested in isolation in the Mahāvyutpatti: gtsug is the sinciput, the summit of the head. It enters words composed of an analogous sense, gtsug tor, gtsug phud and spyi gtsug (No 513), also written spyi’i tshugs (No 3068, 6800), derived from spyi bo (cf. also spyi phud, No 3042, and here, n. 27). For its part, lag (hands, arms, limbs) was also conjoined to other words: lag cha, “arms, objects”; rtsa lag (“roots and branches”)

184

r.a. stein

for “relatives, members of the family” and yan lag = aṅ ga, “limb.” For more distant members (members’ members), one says nying lag (Skt. pratyaṅ ga, Mhvy. No 299, 3929, 4037, 5199). Figuratively, this expression is employed for emanation in the second degree, sometimes with the typical alternation a/i.95 2a. That, in the expression gtsug lag, gtsug clearly designates the sinciput or the head and lag the limbs, results from the idea that one had parts of the body. The head is one of the parts or “limbs.”96 In his Gsang ‘dus stong thun (commentary of the Guhya-samāja-tantra; ed. New Delhi, 1973, p. 85), ‘Gos Khug pa lhas btsas (11th century) cites a work in which the Buddha is spoken of with “his head, best of the members” ( yan lag gi mchog mgo la sogs pa). In the Dgongs pa lung bstan pa tantra (Kanjur, No 83; translated around the millennium; pp. 248–2, fol. 280a), it states: ōṃ “it remains on the tip of the nose, pure, on the apex of the sinciput (?) and on the hands” (sna yi rtse mor yang dag ldan / gtsug mtha’ dang ni lag pa gnas). For the prostration which consists of prostrating one’s whole body on the ground, one designates this body as the “five limbs” ( yan lag lnga in Ind. voc., Skt. pañcamaṇḍala, in Chin. voc.: sgo lnga or smad lnga; cf. TA I, 20). These are the two arms, the two legs and the head.97 It is also stated: “complete in six limbs (or branches)” ( yan lag drug dang ldan pa, Mhvy., No 424, Skt. ṣaḍāṅ ga), an epithet of the Buddha (five limbs, plus the entirety). We even have “provided well with seven” ( yan lag bdun legs par gnas pa, Mhvy., No 6734, Skt. śaptāṅ ga) for a complete body. Prof. Steinkellner had the kindness to announce to me that the head is also designated by the expression uttamāṅ ga (Mhvy., No 341, translated by dbu, head), “supreme, most elevated member,” and varāṅ ga, “best member.”

95 Ms. ITJ 711 (commentary of the Rgyud gsum pa tantra), fol. 12b. The divinites are second-degree emanations of Vairocana (nying lag spruld pa’o; and fol. 14a: nyang lag nying lag phyi’i spruld pa ni rigs lnga). 96 Lag and klag are sometimes confounded. Following the Dictionary of Tshe tan zhabs drung, the expression chun lag designates a sort of phoenix, because it has a crest (tuft, ornament, of gold (gser gyi gtsug phug). One also writes chun lag. 97 For a Khmer example, cf. L. Bizot, Le figuier à cinq branches, 87. The head is the principal of the five limbs (aṅ ga, whence aṅ ga, human body). For the salutation, the feet (the lowest part) of the person honored are equal to the head (the highest part) of the disciple (A. Wayman, “The Human Body as Microcosm,” 175).

apropos of the word gtsug lag

185

3a. Yet might the head of this image of a body complete in 5, 6 or 7 parts, enjoy a role in the composition of the gtsug lag with its specific meanings? I do not know. Prof. Steinkellner further indicated to me that an important vedic text is sometimes designated by the expressions śrutiśiras, śrutimūrdham, “sinciput (and not the head in general ) of the oral tradition.” 3b. Another ancient Tibetan expression (which seems to have disappeared from the dictionaries) attests that a writing or a group of writings may be designated by the two extremities of the body, a little like we speak of a corpus of texts for a coherent group and as we say “from foot to head” or “from head to foot” (totally). This is the expression dbu zhabs (honorific: “head-feet”). In the commentary to the tantra ‘Phrul gyi me long dgu skor, attributed to Vimala (mitra), Tanjur No 5917, it states that the yogin (? rnal ‘byor) Rig pa me tog summarized the tantra “completely” (?, dbu zhabs su) into four subjects (the homage, the engagement, the text, and the pariṇāma). In the commentary to the tantra (Vajrasattva) Māyājāla (Tanjur No 4756, without the name of the author, pp. 188–94),98 he indicates before the title: “In commentating on the Sgyu ‘phrul tantra, (Rmad =) Rma rin chen mchog linked it to the Mahāyoga, and he (divided it) into five in total (?, dbu zhabs) on the subject of the group of three (divisions) beginning with the lakṣaṇa, (to know) the best, the middling (missing: and the inferior).”99 Five subjects follow. I do not fully comprehend this sentence. Yet we see that it leads to a classification into a total of five. The expression is preserved in a late text, knowledge of which I owe to S.G. Karmay. The 3rd Karmapa, Rang byung rdo rje (1284–1339) writes: These Nine Vehicles of Ancient Secret Mantra were translated entirely and completely (dbu zhabs su) in at once accounting for the Royal Law and the Religious Law.”100 The meaning of totality results from the context.

98 Cordier, Catalogue du Fonds tibétain, 3rd part, 140, which gives the phrase in Tibetan and in Sanskrit (no doubt reconstituted). It is not found in the Japanese edition. It is stated in the text that is concerns a commentary of the Gsang ba’i snying po (Guhyagarbha) tantra. 99 Mahā yogar gtogs, mtshan dpe las rab’bring (word missing) gsum char gyi don du dbu zhabs su lnga ste, mtshan dang phyag dang dam bca’ ba dang bzhud dang ‘ju(g) go. 100 Rgya mtsho mtha’ yas kyi skor, (ed. Gangtok and Delhi, 1978), vol. I, No 3, Ga, p. 330: sangs sngags rnying ma’i bka’ theg pa pa dgu po ‘di / rgyal khrims dang chos khrims gnyis gcig tu sdebs nas dbu zhabs su tshangs par rdzogs par bsgyur zhing.

186

r.a. stein

3c. There may be no direct relation between the etymology of gtsug lag (head and limbs) and its adoption in order to translate ārṣa. Yet if we accept this, we could think of an indirect relationship. In India, it has been seen, the five or six members of a body (with the head) are called aṅ ga. On the other side, for the ṛsị , one counts six “limbs of the Veda” (vedāṅ ga) as addenda to the three or five Veda. These are the (linguistic, astronomical, ritual) sciences. However, gtsug lag also serves to translate vihāra, “brahmanical sciences” (Mhvy., No 5046).101 In a Buddhist context, we might think of a passage from the Suvarṇaprabhāsasūtra (translated from the Chinese into Tibetan by Chos grub around 820–850; ch. XII, trans. Nobel, I, p. 206; Taishō, p. 430a): “Just as the god Mahābrahman always explained the mundane śāstras for beings, the lord Śakra also proclaimed the multiple śāstra; likewise the ṛsị who has the five abhijñā.” Yet all this is only a hypothesis, and the mystery remains. 4. It is necessary, nevertheless, to note that a late, but scholarly, author attests that the Tibetans indeed speculated on the etymology and then analyzed gtsug lag, “sciences (of divinaltion and ritual )” into gtsug “head” and lag, “limbs.” It concerns the explanation of the divinatory sciences (rtsis gtsug lag) of the regent Sangs rgyas rgya mtsho.102 Here, I only take up that which concerns us. I. Exposé of the Tortoise, whence emanated creation. II. Mañjuśrī resides in Wutai Shan in China. He pronounced the gtsug lag. On this subject, there are many explanations. He would have been born from the sinciput (gtsug) of his mother, or otherwise left her womb. III. Long exposé of the different forms of the Tortoise. 1. Mañjuśrī’s father was a nāga king, his mother the goddess Vijayā (Rnam rgyal; 139a).103 101 One of the seven great ṛsị , Aṅ giras, author of the hymns of the Ṛg-Veda, was also author of a law code and astronomical treatise. 102 Vaiḍūrya dkar po, I, ch. 20 and Gya’ sel, § 91 (144a ff., p. 420). On the question of these calculations, attributed to Kong tse, cf. Ar. Macdonald, “Préambule à la lecture du rGya Bod yig-chaṅ,” 75, n. 89 and p. 124. 103 On the title page there are two images, at left Mañjuśrī, at right the goddess Rnam par gnon.

apropos of the word gtsug lag

187

2. Phrase obscure. It seems that the Tortoise of divination left Brahmā (Tshangs pa), from his sinciput, and that it was placed into the hands of the goddess.104 IV. After having spoken of the tantras of divination and of the lineage of Kong tse (144b), the author indicates (144b) the following: IV.1. These tantras are called gtsug lag because “gtsug is invariable” (mi ‘gyur),105 specifically the Five Elements; and because lag, they are the year and months. IV.2. Or also, states the author, these tantras were drawn from the sinciput ( gtsug) of Mañjuśrī and were placed in the hands (lag) of the goddess Rnam rgyal ma who asked for them (idem in the Gya’ sel, 144a; p. 420; there, we also find more realistic etymologies).106 Did the regent invent the legend? He undoubtedly had a source. It is necessary to find it (in a tantra, apocryphal or not?). It is also necessary to verify what links there may be between Mañjuśrī and Vijayā. Regardless of the various speculations, we can note that, for one Tibetan interlocutor, there is no doubt. The expression gtsug lag is a composite of gtsug (head or sinciput) and lag (limbs).107 Recapitulation 1. For the ancient religion, no document is known objectively dating to the pre-Buddhist period. Certain texts are written in an archaic language (unless not taken from a different milieu), but nothing permits the measurement of their relative antiquity. The other documents were 104 Yet later (144a), Mañjuśrī explains the gtsug lag to his entourage. To Brahmā (Tshangs pa), he states the five parts (rgyud, lung, ‘grel pa, man ngag and ṭika; calculation of years, etc.). To Rnam rgyal ma, he states the other tantra (marriage, etc.). 105 A phrase encountered in the ancient texts; cf. n. 34. 106 The roles are inverted in the Grub mtha’ shel gyi me long (A.M., loc. cit.). The author denounces many aberrant theories of the bon po tradition: 1) the calculations were recited on Wutai Shan by Mañjuśrī in the form of a dhāraṇi ( gzungs); 2) they came from the sinciput of the goddess Rnam rgyal ma; 3) they were recited by Padmasambhava (ch. 10; ed. Sde dge, p. 173b). 107 In speaking of gto, the regent employs the expression “chapter of the gto, supplementary member (appendix, le lag) of gtsug” (Gya’ sel, p. 426: gtsug (omission of a syllable) gi le lag gto i skor). The omission is undoubtedly explained by the suppression of the word lag. It clearly concerns gtsug lag, “sciences of divination and ritual.”

188

r.a. stein

redacted in the era of the Buddhist kings, which more or less coincided with that of the Tibetan occupation of the Dunhuang region. The elements of mythology and religion that we find there, distinguished by a poetic style, are surely anterior to the final redaction, but cannot be dated. 2. The indigenous religion undoubtedly lacked a name. Yet in the archaic texts, the Bon and the bon po already enjoy an important role. This Bon was certainly not yet the elaborated form that we find from the 11th century onward, but there is no break between the Dunhuang manuscripts and the later tradition. We might take up A.M.’s idea that this bon po collection does not perhaps cover the entire domain of indigenous religious concepts, but this domain would not bear the name Gtsug or Gtsug lag. 2a. Although some expressions are common to them, the accounts and the funerary rites in archaic language are clearly distinct from another text relative to life after death (“Account of the Ages”). 2b. There are other examples of assimilation and juxtaposition, overtly acknowledged or subtly suggested, between the ancient, indigenous texts and others, more “modern” (notably Buddhist) or even foreign. 3. In the era of the Buddhist kings, there was a utopian vision of perfection regarding the ancient time of the first kings. This way of seeing expressed itself in a certain number of formulae which subtly combined indigenous elements, expressions borrowed from China, and Buddhist expressions. 3a. The kings drew their glory and their legitimacy from the fact that they took as a model two prestigious kings from ancient times, the one historic (Srong btsan sgam po), the other legendary or mythic (the first ancestor, a god descended from heaven). 3b. Their title (“holy and divine”) and other religious traits which glorified them were attributed to these two models (no doubt retroactively). 3c. The celestial and divine character of the first legendary kings and the literary formulae, at least in part borrowed from China, according

apropos of the word gtsug lag

189

to which model ancient kings reigned in conformity with the celestial origin and with the View of heaven and earth, these elements explain the expressions “(to reign) in the fashion of the gods” or “in accord with heaven.” These are metaphors and not names of the ancient religion. 4. In more of these expressions, the perfect reign of the model kings is characterized by the formula: “good custom and grand art of governance” (chos lugs bzang po, gtsug lag che ba; often abridged, for stylistic reasons, to chos bzang gtsug che). 4a. The first element is hardly defined by the texts. Sometimes it alludes to the excellence of the men of the legendary epoch (wise and brave, of good conduct). Applied to Srong btsan sgam po, combined with the second element, it perhaps subtly suggests an amalgam of the good custom of the ancestors and of Buddhism that this king must have introduced, according to the official opinion of 800 AD. 4b. The second element, gtsug lag, is well defined by numerous texts. It comprises a rather broad range of meanings, such that it is impossible to adopt a single and same translation in all cases. It designates a wisdom, an art, a science, a savoir-faire (and the writings which speak about it). For the king, notably for Srong btsan sgam po, it clearly concerns the art of governance and a political wisdom. There also, the authors could subtly play on an assimilation of the ancient wisdom of the first mythic kings with Buddhism (sometimes called gtsug lag bzang po, and not chen po). Since 814 (Mahāvyutpatti), gtsug lag designates the sacred texts of Buddhism. In the same era, it was also employed by the Indian paṇḍits. It then designates the morality and the good conduct of the laity (synonymous with mi chos) being used as preparation for Buddhism (lha chos). 5. Never in a single case case does the word gtsug designate a supreme religious principle, such as the “World Order.” 5a. In certain formulae (“gtsug never degenerates”), applied to the legendary ancestors, gtsug alone may be the abbreviation of gtsug lag (wisdom, art of governance). We might also see there the meaning of excellence or eminence.

190

r.a. stein

5b. This last meaning (derived from the principal sense of gtsug: “sinciput, summit”) seems to me to have been retained in a certain number of obscure phrases concerning the divine ancestors (phyva) associated with the sacred mountains. 5c. In this case, the word gtsug seems to rise from a coherent semantic group serving to exalt, to glorify, the force and the perenniality notably of royal power. It comprises images of height or of an elevated summit attached to the head and to the helmet of kings, which connected them to heaven. 6. The Chinese influence is confirmed. It is exerted quite early by the mediation of the literati (Confucianism; classics, literary expressions) and of Chinese Buddhist monks (mostly from Chan, apocryphal sūtras and morality).

TIBETICA ANTIQUA IV

THE TRADITION RELATIVE TO THE DEBUT OF BUDDHISM IN TIBET R.A. Stein In the entire tradition postdating the Dunhuang manuscripts, the introduction of Buddhism to Tibet is attributed to the king Srong btsan sgam po. Scholars often see here only a pious legend, more so in so far as the Chinese texts of the Tang make no mention of it (cf. Demiéville 1952, 188–92). However, many documents dating to c. 800 A.D. attest that in this era it was officially proclaimed, wrongly or rightly, that Srong btsan sgam po had adopted Buddhism. (A. Macdonald 1971, 308; Stein 1980, 329, n. 1; Richardson 1985, 27; Beckwith 1983, n. 7). A later Dunhuang manuscript (10th or beginning of the 11th century) situates itself at the dawn of the later tradition. Inserted in the middle of this Buddhist Sanskrit vocabulary—we find in Tibetan, only in Tibetan, a list of kings. From Srong btsan sgam po (without title) to btsan po Khri gtsug lde brtsan (alias) Ral pa can “all have practiced the doctrine (chos) of the Mahāyāna.”1 For the beginning of the 9th century, we have three royal edicts that Tibetologists consider authentic (with perhaps some small modifications)2 although they are preserved only in the Chronicle (Chos ‘byung Mkhas pa’i Dga’ ston) of Dpa’o Gtsug lag phreng ba (1504–1564/6). From the same era, we find an inscription and a manuscript from Dunhuang. All these sources have been published and studied. The inscription of Skar chung (Richardson 1949, 1973 and 1985, 72–81) is an edict of Khri lde srong btsan (reigned 798 or 800–815) on the glory of Buddhism. At the beginning, it reads (l. 4–7): “In the era of (my) ancestor Khri srong brtsan (alias Srong btsan sgam po), a holy

1 Hackin (Formulaire sanscrit-tibétain du Xe siècle) dates the manuscript to the 10th century because of the list of the kings, but there is not always a distinction made between sons and brothers and a great confusion reigns in the genealogies of the later chronicles. 2 Richardson, A corpus of early Tibetan inscriptions, 27, 72. For an example of transformation, cf. Stein, “Saint et divin,” 234, n. 13.

192

r.a. stein

and divine king, (he) practiced the religion of the Buddha and he constructed the temples of Ra sa (Lhasa) and others. He (then) founded the supports of the Three Jewels (Triratna).3 The author enumerates then the Buddhist works of the following kings while counting without interruption ( gdung rabs rgyud kyis) five generations. These are: 1) Khri Srong btsan, 2) Khri ‘Dus srong (676–704), 3) Khri lde gtsug brtsan (704–754), all three qualified as “ancestors, grandfathers” (myes), 4) Khri srong lde brtsan (754–796), “father” ( yab), 5) the author of the edict, “divine king” (lha btsan po) Khri lde srong brtsan (798–815).4 The three edicts noted by Dpa’o Gtsug lag phreng ba (Chos ‘byung Mkhas pa’i Dga’ ston, ch. ja, 108b–111b and 128b–130a; Tucci 1950, 95ff, tr., 52ff; Richardson 1980) are written with similar import. The two first edicts are from Khri srong lde btsan, the third from Khri lde srong btsan. This last edict is expressly attached to the Skar chung inscription. The two others refer to the Bsam yas and Phyong rgyas inscriptions (Richardson 1964 and 1985, 31 & 39). In the last, the king exalts the “good religion” of his father and of his ancestors ( yab myes, l. 1–4), and specifies that: “A detailed account telling how the great king(s) of the Religion (have) acted . . . is found elsewhere” (l. 11–15). The king is here qualified as a bodhisattva. He has founda Buddhism by virtue of which he has governed his people (l. 27–34). The first edict specifies further that it was written in golden letters on blue paper, placed in a golden box, and deposited in the Bsam yas temple. The father and the ancestors ( yab mes snga ma kun) have all acted in accordance with Buddhism. The chronological account (“before and after,” snga phyir) of the diffusion of Buddhism in Tibet has been written in thirteen exemplars deposited in the temples (Tucci 1950, 97–8; Richardson 1980, 65–6). This fact is further underscored in the second edict. There, the author expressly talks about a chronicle of Buddhism (in Tibet, chos ‘byung ba’i lo drung gyi yi ge) deposited in Bsam yas. This chronicle commences with the “fourth ancestor” (bzhang po bzhi mes) Khri Srong btsan who, in constructing the temple of Ra sa has “done” (practiced) for the first time the religion of the Buddha (sang 3 Usually, the “supports” (rten) of the Triratna are of three kinds (body, speech, mind). The first two designate statues and books. Richardson discusses only “Shrines” (Corpus, 75). This expression is also found in the Bsam yas inscription (Richardson, Corpus, 29). 4 The author has thus passed over in silence the princes of doubtful succession. a This translates Tib. brnyes that would be better translated as “received,” “assumed,” or “adopted.”—C.S.-S.

debut of buddhism in tibet

193

rgyas kyi chos thog ma mdzad). Five generations have passed since this lofty deed until the construction of the temple of Kwa cu by the father of the king (author of the edict, Khri lde gtsug btsan). The account is different from that of the Skar chung inscription. The third edict reproduced by Dpa’o Gtsug lag phreng ba, the edict attached to the foundation of the Skar chung temple (Tucci 1950, 101), counts seven generations from the ancestor (mes) Srong btsan (construction of the temple of Lha sa [sic!]) up until father ( yab) Khri srong lde btsan who constructed many temples and to the king (author of the edict) Khri srong lde btsan. This last has (like his father) had the edict written in gold letters and had it deposited in the temple of Bsam yas. In this edict, the author repeats that in the time of Khri srong lde btsan one “recounted according to written accounts how one found (brnyes) the Religion and that (one found there) in detail (how) the books of the Religion (chos kyi yi ge, sūtra) themselves arrived (appeared).” We find seven generations in the passage from the Prophesy of Khotan5 in which the author describes the events from Tibet. The Tibetan kings there are also qualified as bodhisattvas, but their names are not indicated. As is appropriate to a prophesy, the events have been confused (Peking Tanjur, p. 300. 1, 2; Taishō, vol. 85, p. 996a–b; Thomas 1935, 79–80). “The king of the Red Faces will have great power and will occupy many of the other lands. There will also be among the Red Faces a bodhisattva king, and the Holy Religion (dam pa’i chos; miao fa 妙法) will appear in Tibet (Bod khams; Chin. ‘in his land’). From other countries, the king will send for ‘masters of Religion’ (chos kyi mkhan po; fashi 法師), sūtra (sung rab mdo sde; jinglun 經論), etc. . . . The king and the ministers will practice the Holy Religion (dam pa’i chos; zheng

5 The Chinese version dates to c. 850 (Stein, Tibetica Antiqua I, 93–4). To avoid confusion, I reserve the title “Prophesy” (lung bstan) for the first text of the Tanjur (Thomas, Tibetan literary texts and documents concerning Chinese Turkestan, ch. 3A), which is followed by “Annals” (lo rgyus; Thomas ch. 3B and Emmerick, Tibetan texts concerning Khotan, which does not give “Prophesy”). The confusion comes from the fact that lo rgyus is not counted as part of the catalogues. My note (Tibetica Antiqua I, 93–4) is precisely worded. There exist many examples of “Prophesy.” These are 1) Peking Tanjur No 5699; 2) Ms. ITJ 597 (but the colophon gives the title Li yul gi (sic!) dgra bcom bas lung bstan pa); 3) Ms. ITJ 598 (according to the catalogue, it is identified as precedent); 4) Ms. ITJ 601.2 (title: dgra bcom ba’i lung bstan); ms. P. chin. 2139 (Taishō, vol. 51, No 2090). In contrast, ms. PT 0960 corresponds in the ensemble to “Annals” (transcribed by Emmerick 1967, 78–91; translated by Thomas 1935, 305–23).

194

r.a. stein

fa 正法). In this era (the king of ) Khotan will submit to the king (of the Red Faces). . . .” “The king of the Red Faces will have already practiced the Holy Religion for seven generations . . .” There follows an interlude according to the Prophesy of Candragarbha indicating the decline of religion and morality. After this (de’i rjes la; Chinese: in a different era), a bodhisattva will be king of the Red Faces at the end of seven generations (Chin: the king of the seventh generation). The spouse of this king, equally a bodhisattva, will be the daughter of the Sovereign of China (Rgya rje; Chin. Han 漢; this is the princess Jincheng 金成; the same in the Prophesy of Saṃ ghavardhana, Thomas 1935, 60–1). Thomas (1935, 79, n. 6) thought that the first bodhisattva king must have been Srong btsan sgam po and that the seventh must have been Khri lde gtsug brtan, the spouse of Jincheng. However, we have seen that a count of seven generations cannot apply to this situation. In reality, the title bodhisattva has been given to Khri srong lde btsan, but the ancestor in the seventh generation may not be thought of as Srong btsan sgam po.6

6 At the very beginning of the Sba bzhed (ed. Stein), the author invokes the three kings, “ancestor-grandsons” (me dbon gsum) who overcame the Red Faced meat-eaters (this phrase is missing in the Beijing edition, [ed. Gonpo Gyaltsen, (Beijing: Mi rigs dpe skrun khang, 1980); and in the Dba’ bzhed, trans. and ed. Pasang Wangdu and Hildegard Diemberger (Wien: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 2000)—ed.]). In the tradition, attested in the Bod kyi rgyal rabs of Grags pa rgyal mtshan (around 1200; Sa skya bka’ ‘bum, vol. IV, pp. 295–6), these are three bodhisattva kings: Avalokiteśvara—Srong btsan sgam po, Mañjuśrī—Khri srong lde btsan, Vajrapāṇi—Khri gtsug lde btsan (Ral pa can). Yet in the Sba bzhed, the two latter ought to be Khri lde gtsug btsan and Khri srong lde btsan. From the beginning, Khri lde gtsug btsan wrote the testament (bka’ chems kyi yi ge) of his ancestor (or grandfather, mes) Srong btsan. It contains the prophesy that the Holy Religion of god (Buddha, dam pa’i lha chos) would appear (in Tibet) in the era of his sons and grandsons (nga’i dbon sras) who would carry the names Khri and Lde. The king thinks that Lde is himself (the same in Chos ‘byung Mkhas pa’i Dga’ ston, ch. Ja, 70b–71a). Later (6, Chos ‘byung Mkhas pa’i Dga’ ston, 74a) the young Khri srong lde btsan received from China the revelation that a Buddhist prophesy announced that, in the last period of fifty years (decline of Buddhism), the Holy Religion would appear in the land of the Red Faces. Finally, a third element of the Sba bzhed is to be remembered here (9, Chos ‘byung Mkhas pa’i Dga’ ston, 78a). “Since Khri srong lde btsan reached adulthood, he consulted the “writings of his father” ( yab kyi yi ge, but Dpa’o Gtsug lag phreng ba writes: “of his father and grandfather or ancestor,” yab mes kyi yi ge; further on it says: “books of the father” and “Good Religion” of the grandfather or ancestor). It is true that this could be found in the Laozi jing 老子經, but this does not exclude an allusion to a sort of archive or a “chronicle” treating the efforts made in view of the adoption of a strange religion (cf. Stein, Tibetica Antiqua III, 167–8). However, this religion was Buddhism, not uniquely that of India, but also that of China (from where the king

debut of buddhism in tibet

195

All this shows that the Buddhist kings had the concern to justify their faith by making it come down from an ancestor. Two documents recently studied confirm this. The first is a fragment of the Mañjuśrīmūlakalpa (manuscript ITJ 380.1) which has been edited and commented on by Imaeda (1981). A colophon indicates that it dates to the beginning of the 9th century. The king Tsa (or Pa), in the Land of Snow, in the North, subjugated all the lands. He had the consciousness of bodhi and practiced Buddhism (this passage not found in the version from the Kanjur!). Imaeda thought, justifiably, that this prophesy (referring to the king of India in the tantra) had been applied to a Tibetan king, probably Khri srong lde btsan. The second new document was discovered and discussed by Samten G. Karmay (1981). This is the manuscript PT 0840, a fragment of a tantric text. In Tibet, the Land of Snow, there is a king called Tsa, from a divine family or species and from a line of bodhisattvas. This is the “son of god” (lha sras) Khri srong lde btsan. He has invited from India the Holy Religion and masters. He has also made happy the people of Tibet. “Since the ‘son of god’ (lha sras) Dar ma, since the ‘grandson’ (dbon sras) ‘Od srus (read: srung), in general the Holy Religion has been spread . . .” but then abuses occur and this causes a decline. This part of the text is undoubtedly sullied due to a scribal error. However, the exaltation of Khri srong lde btsan as a bodhisattva does conform to other ancient sources. It is here attested in an unofficial tantric context (cf. further, 162). The text must have been written around 846–8 or 850.7

had received sūtras). When the second edict recounted the prohibition of Buddhism practice by the ancestors, it explains that the pretext was that it was not appropriate to practice (or to bring) in Tibet the “god” and the religion of Lho Bal. This, indeed, refers to Buddhism. However, it is not that of Nepal or of India, as had been thought, but mostly that of the “barbarians,” probably the Chinese of the Dunhuang region. 7 S.G. Karmay translates (208): “From the time of the Divine Son Dar ma, down to the time of ‘Od-srung and his descendents (lha sras Dar ma man cad dang/’Od srus dbon sras man cad du). He considers (210, n. 15) the second man cad to be a mistake for yan cad. Yet it cannot concern the descendants of ‘Od srung. Perhaps the two man cad are corrected to yan cad. It would then be translated: “Until the era of the son and grandson, (specifically) the kings (or princes) Dar ma and ‘Od srung.” For these two kings, we still find Buddhist prayers (with tantric rituals and homa) among the Dunhuang manuscripts (PT 0131, 0134, 0230). This is after those that begin the decline. Dar ma was the son (sras) of Khri gtsug lde btsan (assassinated) and ‘Od srung his grandson (dbon). Despite the order of the words, the expression dbon sras rightly signifies sons and grandsons or descendants (cf. Richardson, A Corpus of Early

196

r.a. stein

Returning now to the “detailed written record” ( yi ge and gtam gyi yi ge zhib mo gcig) concerning Buddhism according to the Phyong rgyas inscription. Richardson (1964, 8, n. 6) initially thought that these decrees deposited elsewhere may be the edicts preserved by Dpa’o Gtsug lag phreng ba. Yet in the continuation (1980, 63) he should be credited with highlighting that the 2nd edict (bka’ gtsigs) itself cites a sort of chos ‘byung, a chronological record (bka’ mchid). To the chronological explanation of the 1st edict, is included the “chronicle” of the 2nd edict. According to the two edicts, the “chronicle,” written by a religious, Śīlavarman of Brang ti, was written in part as a “companion” or model (zla la bzhag go), an expression we also find in the Skar chung inscription (l. 55). In the 2nd edict, the debut of Buddhism under Srong btsan sgam po is known as: chos thog ma mdzad. The 3rd edict refers also to a “detailed account” (gtam gyi yi ge) concerning the origin of Buddhism in Tibet. There, however, the formula is: chos ji ltar brnyes, “How the Religion was found.” This phrase also appears in the Phyong rgyas inscription (l. 11–4: gtam gyi yi ge; l. 29: chos bzang po brnyes nas) and in that of Lcang bu (815–36, Richardson 1985, 94: yab myes kyi ring la / dam pa’i chos brnyes nas). The 3rd edict further includes in an obscure manner the origins of one or more sūtra(s), (chos kyi yi ge).8 We might think that we have here in germinal form the later tradition on the debut of Buddhism (dbu brnyes). This will be discussed further on. The Sba bzhed seems to suggest that one such account, one such “chronicle,” may have existed in the era of the youth of Khri srong lde btsan (cf. n. 6). In the absence of other documents, we may consult the celebrated Old Tibetan Chronicle (Bacot DTT, 1940). It is certainly made up of bits and pieces, often epic or legendary, and it concerns above all the

Tibetan Inscriptions, 79; H. Uebach, “Zur Identifizierung des Nel-pa’i č’os-‘byuṅ ”; and here, n. 39). 8 Chos ‘byung Mkhas pa’i Dga’ ston, ch. Ja, 128: chos ji ltar brnyes pa’i gtam gyi yi ge las smos cing / chos kyi yi ge nyid zhib tu ‘byung ba yin no. The phrase is poorly written or poorly preserved. Tucci (The Tombs of the Tibetan Kings, 51) translates: “. . . and the scripture of the Law itself came to existence in a subtle way.” Yet given the model of the inscriptions, the word zhib tu must signify “in detail.” We here distinguish the accounts on the origin (gtam gyi yi ge) and chos kyi yi ge, which is the equivalent of sūtra (or other Buddhist text, cf. Stein, Tibetica Antiqua I, 39–41). The same expression is employed in the 1st edict (fol. 108b) where it designates the Tripiṭaka and in the 2nd edict (fol. 111a) where a complete explanation of the basic doctrines of Buddhism follows from the remark: “an explanation found in detail in the sūtra(s) (or other Buddhist text)” (gtan tshigs zhib tu ni chos kyi yi ge’i nang na mchis so).

debut of buddhism in tibet

197

political history, but there taken to celebrate the diffusion of Buddhism by the pious king Khri srong lde btsan. Now, as Richardson has stated (1985, 37), the phrases which describe this event are very similar to those from the inscriptions. Old Tibetan Chronicle (DTT, 114)

Inscriptions

1) sangs rgyas kyi chos bla na myed pa brnyes te mdzad nas 2) dbus mtha’ kun tu gtsug lag khang brtsigs te / chos btsugs nas

Phyong rgyas, l. 28: ‘jig rten las ‘das pa’i chos bzang po brnyes nas Skar chung, l. 14: dbung (= dbus) mthar gtsug las khang brtsigs te . . ., l. 24: sangs rgyas kyi chos mdzad pa . . .

However, the two phrases from the Old Tibetan Chronicle are applicable to Khri srong lde btsan, whereas the analogous phrases are attributed to Khri srong btsan in the Skar chung inscription, l. 5: sangs rgyas kyi chos mdzad de, and l. 6: gtsug lag khang las stsogs pa brtsigs shing. We know that, in the Old Tibetan Chronicle, Srong btsan sgam po is exalted above all for his wisdom, his art of governance, his high deeds as a civilizer (gtsug lag), but writers also attribute to him chos bzang and, above all, they state that, from his time, there appeared “all the good (sacred) texts of the Religion” (DTT, 118, chos kyi gzhung bzang po kun). I have already spoken about the ambiguous terminology (TA III, 131–2, n. 24, 28, 29, 36). All of this evoked without doubt the “good customs” (morality, etc.). We are also able to view discreet allusions to Buddhism since these are clearly made in the inscriptions that the authors of the Chronicle have had to utilize. In that of Phyong rgyas (l. 2–3), the ancestors of Khri srong lde btsan (thus also of Srong btsan sgam po) are called chos gtsug lag ni lugs kyis bzang, an expression which could designate the indigenous religion, but which does not exclude Buddhism. The same expression appears in a Dunhuang manuscript. This document confirms, around 790–815, the tendency to justify and to exalt the Buddhism of the reigning kings by making it stem from the glorious ancestor Srong btsan sgam po, and perhaps even beyond. This is the fragment “Dar ma falls from the sky” (ms. ITJ 370.5), edited, translated and annotated by Richardson (1977). I have already had occasion to speak of it (1980, 329; 1981. I, n. 67; TA I, 48–9; TA III, 140) and must excuse myself for the inevitable repetitions. However, this text is very important and merits a new analysis. As the article by Richardson appeared in a nearly inaccessible

198

r.a. stein

publication, I believe it necessary to give here the text and to revisit his analysis. (Title, 1.1) Gnam babs kyi dar ma bam po gcig go// (A) Myi mgon lha sras rgyal mchog ste// ‘phrul gyi rgyal po (l. 2) Srong brtsan dang// btsan po Khri srong lde btsan gnyis// ‘dzam gling myi yul Bod khams su// ‘gro ba (l. 3) kun la phan mdzad pa’i// u dam ‘ba ra’i me tog ltar// shin du bzang dkon sman gi mchog// (B, l. 4) dus (Richardson supplements gsum) bde gshegs yum gyur pa// Shes rab pha rol phyin pa’i chos// de bzhin nyid la mnyam ba ste// (l. 5) yod dang myed pa’i phyogs ‘jig pa’i// bla myed theg chen rab sgrags pa// ‘Ge’u tam Shag kya’i b bstan pa (l. 6) bslabs// dang du blangs nas thugs dam bzhes// ‘gro ba kun la rgyas par spel// brtan ba’i gzungs su rdo rings la (l. 7) rje ‘bangs rnams kyi gtsigs su bris// (C) gtsug lag ‘di ltar rgya mtsho la// rje ‘bangs spyod pa Lhun po’i (l. 8) ris// ‘di mdzad gzung btsugs ring lon te// mnga ris mtha’ skyes Bod khams bde// lo legs myi nad (l. 9) phyugs nad dkon// (D) ‘bangs kyang chab gang lugs che ste// lha chos myi chos ‘dzem bas na// bkur zhing (l. 10) gzung su cher bzung nas// slobs pon pha ma phu nu gnyen// rgan zhing gong ma mtho ba la// ‘jam des sri zhu (l. 11) chul myi nor// kun la nga (read: ‘ang) byams pa’i sems yod pas// gzhan la rku ‘phrog myi byed de// brdzun dang (l. 12) ‘phyon ma ngo cha ‘dzem// ba/ drang brtan dpa’ rtul chu gang che// myi lus thob kyam lha’i lugs// rgyal (l. 13) khams gzhan dang myi gzhan la// sngon yang myi srid phyis mi ‘byung// de bzhin lha la dkon ba yin// (E) rgyal po (l. 14) yab nongs sras chungs pas// chos bzang gtsug lag rnying nub mod// bden ba’i lam mchog dge ba’i chos// (l. 15) ‘dul ba’i dge bcu srung ba dang// myi mgon rgyal po rgyal khrims dang// pha myes ‘dzangs pa’i stan ngag gzhung// (l. 16) Bod kyi lugs ltar ga la byed// (F) ‘jig rten thog ma’i dangs ma la// Shag kyi mya ngan ‘das ‘og du// Byams pa (l. 17) Mu tri ma byon par// [intercalated: lung ma bstan par glo bur du//] sangs rgyas rang bzhugs man zhig byung// /g (crossed out)/ zhu dang chos dang rdo rje theg// sangs rgyas rabs (l. 18) bdun gsung rabs dang gsuṁ ka myi mthun gzhung re re// dper na chos rnams sa ‘on ‘dra// (end of the fragment; broken, not torn).

b ‘Ge’u (as transliterated by both Richardson and Stein) is the Tibetan rendering of the Sanskrit syllable gau, thus rendering the name Gautama Śākya. This gau is also often rendered by the omission of the a-chung suffix (here ‘u), and simply appending both the e and the u onto the root g.—ed.

debut of buddhism in tibet

199

I have arbitrarily divided the text into paragraphs in order to facilitate discussion. The title. Richardson translated: “A volume on the Dharma that came down from heaven.” Yet the word dar ma designates a sūtra or another text from the Tripiṭaka (cf. TA I, 47–9). The “title” is not one. The author indicates only a miracle. The sūtra fallen from the sky was short, a single scroll or chapter.9 The lines which follow cannot be part of this sūtra. This is a sort of explanation or introduction. As will be seen, the text bears marks of certain sūtras and śāstras. It is not unsophisticated and resembles one of the works attributed to Khri srong lde btsan aided by his spiritual guide Śāntarakṣita.10 The first paragraph (A, l. 1–3) exalts the good works of the king Srong brtsan (sgam po) and Khri srong lde brtsan. Their titles are the same as in the inscriptions, save that the first is here rgyal po and not btsan po. He is “miraculously wise” (‘phrul), best of the kings and “protector” of all men while being son of a god (or divine). (B, l. 5–7). They have learned the teaching of the Buddha Gautama. They are attached to it and they have spread it to all the beings (of Tibet). So that one holds to it firmly they have (had) written on a stele and sworn edict (which binds) the sovereign and his subjects. The author thus refers expressly to the royal inscriptions. As in these inscriptions, in the edicts and in the Prayers of De ga (PT 0016), it is this propagation of Buddhism which in Tibet earned for him his power and a beneficial reign. 9 Richardson (219) is himself surprised that the fragment has only 26 śloka, whereas a bam po ought to have 300. The rule is less than strict; cf. Ldan dkar Catalogue No 8, 10, 12, 15. An analogous title, unfortunately without the text, is found in the verso of the ms PT 0033: chos kyi dar ma bam po gcig. The expression gnam babs, “fallen from the sky”; (cf. n. 18) evokes in this era the idea of a miracle, of an unforseen apparition. In the “Letter to a Friend” (Suhṛlleka, Tanjur, No 5682, vol. 129, p. 236.3), Nāgārjuna states that the Five Aggregates are born neither spontaneously nor from time, etc. (‘dod rgyal is Skt. yādṛcchika, Mahāvy. No 2209, and Chinese ziran 自然, Taishō, No 1674, vol. 32, p. 752b). The commentary, translated at the beginning of the 9th centry (Tanjur, No 5690, vol. 129, p. 261.5), glosses the word ‘dod rgyal with gnam babs. 10 Ldan dkar catalogue, No 723, in seven bam po (cf. Stein, “Une mention du manichéisme dan le choix du buddhisme comme religion d’état”). According to Dpa’o Gtsug lag phreng ba, ch. Ja, 124b, there exists an abridged version of this treatise in a single bam po. The citations are not indicated as such. I have found one of them. Mr. H. Richardson has had the kindness of providing me with a commentary of 16–18 lines with which the dge bshes Pema Tsering had furnished him at another time. In a letter of 19/11/1985, Mr. H. Eimer obligingly explained this commentary to me and communicated to me the discovery of a citation by the dge bshes. I express here my gratitude to these three scholars.

200

r.a. stein

(C, l. 7–9) “In the ocean of this doctrine (gtsug lag), the practice of the sovereign and of his subjects is (as great as) Sumeru. As this basic doctrine (gzhung) was established and has endured a long time, the power or reign is extended to the borders, the harvests were good, the ills rare.” (D, l. 9–12) By virtue of this Buddhism, the people had benefited from a good moral conduct; respect and love of close relations, neither theft nor lies, decency, courage, uprightness. Here is inserted a truncated and camouflaged citation. These virtues are due to the fact that the people have venerated and firmly held (to the principle expressed by the phrase): one reaches the Religion of god (lha chos, Buddhism) by climbing (the ladder of ) the religion of men (myi chos). I have already stated elsewhere (1981a, n. 71 and TA III, n. 23) that this phrase, poorly written, comes from a strophe of the Prajñāśataka (She rab brgya pa), an anthology of maxims of Nājārjuna.11 I cite here the ms. PT 0066 (towards the end): myi’i chos lugs legs spyad na // lha yul bgrod pa thag myi ring // lha dang myi yi them skyas las // bzegs (Kanjur: ‘dzegs) na (Kanjur: nas) thar pa (K.: pa’ang) gam na ‘dug// “If one practices well the custom (‘religion’) of men, one is not long in arriving at the land of the gods. If one climbs along the ladder of the gods and of men, salvation is close.”12 Thus all was well. The morals and the good mores of the people are, as Nāgārjuna put it, an excellent preparation for salvation of the Buddhism that the kings, on their side, had the merit to propagate for them. These kings may well have had a human body, but the “manner” of gods (l. 12), an expression that we find in the inscriptions and in the manuscripts from Dunhuang.13 “Such a manner of being has never

11 Peking Tanjur, No 5820, vol. 144, p. 2, col. 4 (cf. Tibetica Antiqua III, n. 23). The Sanskrit original does not seem to be extant. 12 The poorly written ‘dzem of our manuscript has troubled Richardson. His translation of this is impossible (“far from shunning the rites of gods and men,” 221). The word ‘dzem here imposes itself on the scribe by analogy with the following phrase: they have shame (ngo tsha) and reserve, modesty (‘dzem). For mi chos, cf. Tibetica Antiqua III, n. 23). The metaphor of the ladder which leads one to salvation is found in ms. ITJ 675; “Morality (śīla) is the ladder (which leads to) discernment because it is the cause of certain Good” (de la tshul khrims ni mngon bar mthong ba’i them skas / nges par legs pa’i rgyu yin ba’i phyir). 13 Cf. Tibetica Antiqua III, 134–5; n. 32, 34; Treaty of 821–2, West, l. 52: lha’i lugs; Old Tibetan Chronicle (Bacot DTT, 118); pywa’i lugs; the king, god of heaven, descends as sovereign of men (saepe).

debut of buddhism in tibet

201

existed (previously) and will never exist in other lands and among other men; it is even rare among the gods” (l. 13). The paragraph which follows (E. l. 14–6) marks a rupture from this pleasant state. “With the king (father) being dead and (his) son still (too) young, the good religion (chos bzang) and the ancient morality (? doctrine, religion, gtsug lag) have disappeared.” As Richardson has aptly remarked, this concerns the youth of Khri srong lde btsan during which the anti-Buddhist ministers created legal edicts which forbade the practice of Buddhism. The 2nd and the 3rd edicts speak of this also and the Sba bzhed evokes this situation at length (5–10; cf. TA III, 165–70). In the context of our manuscript, the expressions chos bzang and gtsug lag ought to designate Buddhism. In effect, in paragraph C, the doctrine of Gautama which the kings have propagated is designated by the word gtsug lag. And now, in paragraph E, it continues: “Since the Good Religion (chos bzang) and the ancient religion (or doctrine, morality, art of governance) have been disappearing, how would one (be able) ‘to do’ (to practice), in the Tibetan manner, the Supreme View of Truth,14 the religion or Virtue, the Vinaya, thanks to which one observes the (regulations or prohibitions of the) Ten Virtues, (but also) the royal Law of the kings, ‘protectors’ of men, and the teachings of the wise ancestors?”15 Since these are the anti-Buddhist laws which have caused the disappearance of chos bzang and gtsug lag, the word “ancient” must refer to the situation anterior to these laws and the “good religion” and gtsug lag ought to designate the Buddhism which has been forbidden. The “Tibetan manner” consists, perhaps, in the combination of the Vinaya, etc. with the royal laws and the wisdom of the properly Tibetan ancestors. This combination for the propagation of Buddhism, of which is retained above all the Morality, with the drafting of a Royal (just) Law and with the wisdom of the ancestors is found in the inscriptions and

14 The Four Truths or the Two Truths? In Tibetica Antiqua III, 140, I have certainly been wrong to translate: “The true religion of the Ten Virtues.” 15 Cf. the brief explanation of Buddhism in the 2nd edict (of Khri srong lde btsan). After having spoken of the Ten Virtues, the Ten Non-virtues (faults) and of that which is neither the one nor the other, the author explains what constitutes the Two Accumulations (tshogs) of merit and knowledge. These are: “in addition to the Ten Virtues, the Four Truths and the Twelve nidāna . . .” (Tucci, The Tombs of the Tibetan Kings, 49). This explanation contains the same elements as the letter from Dpal dbyangs (Śrīghoṣa) to the same king (cf. n. 38).

202

r.a. stein

in the edicts. They will be addressed later. The “wisdom of the ancestors” could designate mi chos (cf. n. 38). The ambiguity of the two expressions chos (bzang) and gtsug lag has already been underscored many times. In our text, Richardson translated it (221) with: “The good religion and old learning were, indeed, eclipsed.” Yet he does not make clear what we should understand by this.16 In the Old Tibetan Chronicle, the author claims for Srong btsan sgam po above all political wisdom, good and just laws, and morality. However, in the Phyong rgyas inscription (l. 203), Khri srong lde btsan holds to Buddhism by imitating therein the manners (lugs) of his ancestors ( yab mes, l. 6). The latter are called chos gtsug lag ni lugs kyis bzang (l. 2–3). This imitation, justifying his Buddhism, must allude to Srong btsan sgam po (inscriptions of Bsam yas and of Skar chung, l. 4–5). One Dunhuang manuscript (PT 0037) is dedicated to the “subjugation of the three poisons” (the three kleśa). Hate is vanquished by this “good religion” (chos lugs bzang po; Imaeda 1979). This expression cannot but designate Buddhism. As I have already stated, there is a tendency to ascribe to the first, legendary ancestor the elements proper to the Buddhist kings, or even to say that the Buddhist kings utilized the indigenous myths and conceptions as a model of their political vision. Thus, in the inscription from the tomb of Khri lde srong btsan (800–15) the “good religion” (chos lugs bzang po) is ascribed to ‘O lde Spu rgyal (l. 2; Wylie, 1963). Later still, in the Treaty of 821–2, this legendary ancestor retroactively receives the title ‘phrul gyi rgyal po (cf. Stein 1981a, 255), whereas his descendents (and himself?) are characterized by the theme of the perfection of the land but also by the “good religious laws” (chos khrims

16 In the view of Mme Macdonald (“Une lecture des P. tib. 1286, 1287, 1038, 1047 et 1290”), these terms designate the indigenous, non-Buddhist religion. When, in the 2nd edict, the king, having become an adult, decided to propagate Buddhism anew, fears were expressed by certain people. Some said that Buddhism was not “the ancient religion of Tibet” (Bod kyi chos rnying pa ma lags) the rites (of Buddhism?, cho ga) were not in accord with the cult of the sku lha, nothing was good. Tucci and Richardson have read ma legs in lieu of ma lags, an error which Mme Macdonald has corrected (“Une lecture,” 308). In any case, “ancient religion” designates here the indigenous religion. The latter has of course continued to exist and to enjoy a similar role under the Buddhist kings. In the 1st edict, the sku lha (the king’s tutelary deities) are cited as witnesses of the royal oath in relation to the minor Buddhist divinities. They are also attested in the Rkong po inscription (Macdonald, “Une lecture,” 355).

debut of buddhism in tibet

203

bzang po; East, l. 9). We will later find these laws as the work of Buddhist kings.17 The ambiguity of the vocabulary (chos, gtsug lag, Buddhism or indigenous conceptions) brings together the employment of a certain number of common themes in two domains. In our manuscript, the good mores and the moral qualities of the people are presented as being the effect of the propagation of Buddhism. However, in the Old Tibetan Chronicle (DTT, 81), this theme characterizes the Tibetans in the era wherein the first, mythic ancestor descends from the sky (cf. TA III, 131–2). The land was pure and good, and it seemed that it was that ancestral deity who, by his arrival and his manner, rendered the people wise and brave (and the horses quick) and “made” a good religion (chos bzang). This religion (chos) had no parallel among the other kings. As we know (A. Macdonald 1971, 343), this account was utilized, in the middle of the 8th century, in the song of an emissary of the king of Nanzhao 南詔 (Bacot DTT, 113) addressed to the king Khri lde gtsug brtsan (704–755), the father of Khri srong lde btsan, whose death was put to profit for an anti-Buddhist action. In this song, the king is “son

17 The word chos khrims has been poorly translated by Mme Macdonald (“civil law”; cf. Tibetica Antiqua III, n. 29). In a certain context (see below) it has two meanings: laws protecting the clergy and laws conforming to the principles of Buddhism. In the “Indian vocabulary” (cf. Tibetica Antiqua I), officially adopted (Mahāvyupatti, No 7095), chos khrims is the translation of dharma-śāstra. In Hinduism, these are the treaties relative to the law, to custom and to morality (punishments, merits, etc. cf. Renou and Filliozat 1947, 431–9). In the “Chinese vocabulary,” chos khrims sometimes replaces tshul khrims (Ind. voc.; śīla, the prohibitions of the Vinaya). That is, on the one hand, tshul khrims has been sometimes abridged to khrims (the five and the eight prohibitions, ms. ITJ 43; and in the sūtra “Son of Brahmā,” “sūtra and vinaya” translated by dar ma dang khrims, Taishō, p. 1008a; Kanjur, p. 173, col. 2). On the other hand, the author has contracted the phrase “sūtra and vinaya” (chos dang tshul khrims) to chos khrims. This is the case in the apocryphal sūtra “Son of Brahma” translated from Chinese (Taishō, No 1484, vol. 24, p. 1008b; Peking Kanjur, No 922, vol. 36, p. 171, col. 1 and p. 173, col. 4). In place of “dharma and vinaya,” we sometimes read “law of the dharma.” The phrase “(the Buddha) has briefly inaugurated the religious prohibitions of the Seven Buddhas (of the past)” (Taishō, p. 1009c, qi fo fa jie 七佛法戒 rendered as: sangs rgyas rabs bdun gyi chos kyi khrims mdo tsam zhig phye ba (Kanjur, p. 174, col. 5–175, col. 3)). As we know, this sūtra treats the Prohibitions, the Good and the Bad, the moral conduct of the laity (filial piety, etc.), and the acts of contrition from the Vinaya. For the “royal laws” (rgyal po’i rgyal khrims), in our manuscript associated with the Vinaya and the Ten Virtues, we could compare a passage from the “Dialogue of the two brothers” (ms. PT 1283.1, l. 47 and 94; PT 2111 B, l. 5–6) where it is a question of chos khrims or of rgyal po’i chos khrims. The author considers the case of transgression of that law or of its observance. The ambiguity of the words renders the translation uncertain.

204

r.a. stein

of god” (lha sras) and “protector of men” (myi’i mgon). It is different than other lands. He has come ( gshegs) to Tibet, a land high and pure, and he has subjugated the kinglets by his “good religion” (chos bzang) and his great gtsug (lag). All the elements of this song concord at once with the “mythological,” indigenous account and with the expressions from our manuscript. Yet here, it is the Buddhist kings who have established the good mores of the people. Despite their human bodies, they have the “manner” of gods, as this is expressed in no other place.18 But their “good religion” and the gtsug lag have been interrupted. The utilization or assimilation of the vocabulary and themes of the indigenous tradition by the Buddhist kings (and their faithful subjects) is well known from inscriptions, the Prayers of De ga (PT 0016), and a couplet from these prayers, the ms. PT 0100, II, that Mme. A. Macdonald should be credited with discovering (cf. TA III, 129 and n. 24, 28, 48). In the latter, the Buddhist king Khri gtsug lde btsan is exalted by the more or less “mythological” terminology (manner of the gods, powerful helmet, Spu rgyal, “protector of men,” l. 29; but this expression is also Buddhist, cf. n. 18). Yet at the same time, the author glorifies the king for his practice of the Virtues (dge ba, l. 28), which has carried his subjects to the consciousness of bodhi (l. 32). So that they are able to go (after death) to the “Land of Eternal Joy” (g.yung drung skyid yul), he has made them observe the Prohibitions (of Buddhism, 18 There are analogies between the indigenous themes and certain Buddhist conceptions that the authors of our manuscript must have been familiar with. Nyang ral (cf. n. 23 and 29) cites the Karuṇā-puṇḍarīka sūtra, chap. 4; Kanjur, No 780, vol. 29, pp. 228–4 to 229–2; Taishō, No 157, vol. III, pp. 200c–201a). After the Buddha Kāsyapa, the 4th mānava, Vimalavaiśāyana (Dri ma med pa) will appear when the times decline. All is ill, there is no more Virtue (dge ba), life-span is diminished to ten years. This is the “middle kalpa of arms.” He will descend from the gods and will be the “Protector” of beings (Nyang ral: lha las babs nas sems can gyi mgon mdzad; sūtra: lha rnams kyi nang nas babs shing sems can rnams yongs su skyob par gyur cig). He will make appear the practice of Good (dge ba la spyod pa; Chin. shan fa 善法). The beings will have the Ten Virtues (dge ba bcu; shi shan 十善). He receives the prediction that he will be the Buddha Maitreya. This sūtra was translated around 800 (Ldan dkar Catalogue, No 101). For the expression “descended from the gods,” we can compare the royal inscriptions. Like their mythic ancestor ‘O lde Spu rgyal, the kings have come ( gshegs) from the gods of heaven (gnam gyi lha las) as lords of men (myi’i rjer) or as “protectors of men” (myi’i mgon; fragment II from Zhwa’i lha khang; Prayers of De ga, see above, 198). Sometimes we read gnam lhab (Zhwa’i lha khang, West, l. 1; Old Tibetan Chronicle, 81). I have suggested (“Saint et devin,” 233) that lhab may be a contraction of lha ‘bab. This is also the opinion of Wang Yao (Dunhuangben Tufan lishi wen shu, 201). As for the Buddha coming from the land of the gods, the word avatāra (“descent”) is translated by babs pa (Mhvy., No 4103) or by gshegs pa (or ‘jug pa; ibid. No 6347).

debut of buddhism in tibet

205

śīla; tshul khris (read khrims) bsrung). The praise had been redacted in a monastery (l. 40) of Shazhou by the Buddhist monks who have also (redacted?, lacuna) the sure “laws” (khrims, śīla), roots of the Ten Virtues (l. 44: gthan khrims zab mo dge ba bcu’i rtsa ba). The same “mythological” vocabulary of glorification of the king is employed in a “Summary of sūtra, of Vinaya, and of śāstra,” ascribed to Chos grub (Facheng, ca. 833–858; ms. ITJ 687). There is a question of the roots of the Virtues and of the renumeration of the Good and of the Bad. We find there also the prayer that the king, “god become lord of men” (powerful helmet, etc.) assured for all time by the Holy Religion, the salvation to the beings who wander in saṃ sāra (Ueyama 1982, text p. 5; translation p. 8–9, erroneous in parts). Following the logic of the eulogy to the Buddhist kings, I have omitted two passages concerning the doctrine. They demonstrate that the author was well informed and erudite. Without so indicating, he used citations from a sūtra (as for the Prajñāśataka from §D). The first passage is placed at the beginning (l. 4–5). Buddhism, the excellent medicine, that Srong btsan sgam po and Khri srong lde btsan have adopted, is the doctrine (chos) of the Prajñāpāramitā which is the Mother ( yum) of the Buddhas of the three (times). The dge bshes Pema Tsering (cf. n. 10) revealed that the phrase which follows is in part constructed with a citation from the Laṅ kāvatāra-sūtra (I mark the the citation with brackets): “(The doctrine of the Prajñāpāramitā, is) the Thusness (tathatā) equality (samatā) [where or when the partial views of being and of nothing are destroyed; it is that which proclaims (sūtra: teaches) the unsurpassed Mahāyāna].”19

19 Kanjur, No 775 (without the name of the translator), vol. 29, p. 74, col. 3: yod dang med pa’i phyogs ‘Jig pa // nga yi theg pa ‘Jig rten du // bla med theg chen rab byed nas; Suzuki, The Lankavatara Sutra, 233–4, No 165 and No 166. MM Pema Tsering and Eimer indicated to me also that there are other phrases of the same type in this sūtra (84, col. 1–2; Suzuki, 285ff.) and that the entire context is to be retained. In this chapter, the author underscores that the sole valulable doctrine is the Mahāyāna (e.g. No 881, p. 84–3) and raises the errors of the Hindu masters (mu stegs), of the theoreticians (rtog ge pa) and of the false views (dualism, e.g. No 699, 723; being and non-being, No 546). We remember that, in his critical work (Bka’ yang dag pa’i tshad ma; Stein, “Une mention du manichéisme dan le choix du buddhisme comme religion d’état”), Khri srong lde btsan proceeded in the same manner. In the chapter cited from the Laṅ kāvatāra-sūtra the author also describes the correct view of the yogin who ought to preach the doctrine (No 792–3). He revives god, lhar skyes, sovereign (dbang) or cakravartin who has the characteristics of a god (No 783, p. 84, col. 1). The same is said of the Tibetan king in our manuscript.

206

r.a. stein

The second passage occupies the end (F, l. 16–8). It is obscure in parts, undoubtedly because the scribe or the author abridged the explanation. It has been explicated in the form of a commentary by the dge bshes Pema Tsering that I give in notes and between brackets. “The (most) pure (or excellent) of the first [men] of the world was (the Buddha) Śākya (muni). Between his nirvāṇa and the coming of (Buddha) Maitreya, the unforeseen Buddhas (out of sequence, suddenly appeared, glo bur)20 who have not been announced (predicted and thus justified, vyākaraṇa [in the sūtra and tantra of the Buddha]). They appear numerous (although) the Buddha remains (always) in himself [Pema Tsering: The Buddha himself is abiding (in a state of calm, but) many (of the authors of śāstra) appear].”21 It is then a question of the discord or the difference (mi mthun) between three sorts of doctrines or sacred texts (?) and the author speaks, the phrase being incomplete, of “each of the doctrines (or texts)” (gzhung re re). Three (or four?) sorts of texts connected by the copula dang are effectively enumerated. The first word is written ( g deleted) zhu (Richardson has proposed the reading gzhung)22 the second is chos (Dharma), the third Rdo rje theg (Vajrayāna) follows, without the copula, the “sacred texts (gsung rab) of the Seven Bud-

20 The word glo bur designates one of three categories of kings (Blon pa bka’ thang, ch. II, 225b–226a; Dpag bsam ljon bzang, ed. Das, I, 65): 1) The “appointed” (bskos pa) kings, namely those of the four large countries in the four directions; 2) the king who has a lineage (gdung brgyud) like the Śākya who descends from Mahāsammata; 3) the glo bur, the ten kings anterior to the Fifty kings of Tibet (A. Macdonald, “Une lecture des P. tib. 1286, 1287, 1038, 1047 et 1290,” 313). However, such a classification is unknown to me for the buddhas. 21 Pema Tsering includes: sangs rgyas rang (nyid zhi bar) bzhugs (kyang) and adds: “the authors of śāstra” appear in great number. He takes the word gzhung from the text as equivalent to śāstra and thinks that these are the tracts of great philosophers like Nāgārjuna, etc. I believe that the explication of rang bzhugs is justified, but it would better apply to the numerous buddhas. We often read that the buddhas appear in order to save beings without leaving dharmadhātu, “without movement” (mi g.yo; Chin. bu dong fa jie). See for example Upāliparipṛcchā-sūtra (Kanjur No 760 (24), vol. 24, pp. 48–5 = Taishō, No 1348, 1349, p. 515b). Likewise in the Mahāyāna Uttaratantra cited by Nyang ral (chos ‘byung, ms A, p. 26 = ed. Meisezahl, p. 18a: chos kyi sku las ma g.yos par / sprul sku’i rang bzhin sna chogs kyis. 22 The word gzhung (grantha) designates any important text, even that of tantra and of the heretics (Mhvy., No 4224, 4585, 1438, 4404). The Vinaya (‘Dul ba) contains seven works of which the last two are called gzhung bla ma and gzhung dam pa. This Vinaya was translated around 800 (Ldan dkar Catalogue, No 486; cf. Eimer, Rab tu ‘byuṅ ba’i gži, Die tibetische Übersetzung des Pravajyāvastu im Vinaya der Mūlasarvāstivādins, 10–6).

debut of buddhism in tibet

207

dhas (of the past).”23 I do not see how we can count three. Perhaps the first dang is out of place. Pema Tsering understands thus:c there are numerous śāstra (the first zhu = gzhung = bstan bcos); each author has redacted his own treatise (gzhung re re); these are false doctrines which do not accord with the Tripiṭaka. However, I do not see how the Vajrayāna is able to enter into the Tripiṭaka, and the author does not state sde gsum, but gsum ka, “the three” (which preceed). Maybe the author wanted to state that there was discord or simply difference between Dharma, Vajrayāna and the texts of the Seven Buddhas, and that each of these categories have their own exemplar. The question lies open. The last phrase seems to be simple: “for example, dharma are like grains (seeds).” In place of writing sa ‘on (= sa bon, seed, common orthography in the manuscripts), Pema Tsering interprets sa as “world” and ‘on as ‘on pa, “deaf.” He also comments on the use of these words: “For example, the false doctrines are like the deaf of the world whose understanding is skewed because they do not distinguish between word (skad) and meaning (brda, the signified intent).”24 Despite the respect due to the great erudition of the dge bshes, I acknowledge that this explication seems to me incredible. We 23 The expression rabs surely designates the Seven Buddhas of the past. Each of them enunciated a gātha of Buddhist morality. They are celebrated and often cited (Mochikuzi 1916). We find them in the Vinaya, notably in the Pratimokṣa-sūtra (Taishō, No 1454, vol. 24, p. 507c; Kanjur, No 1031, vol. 42, p. 149, col. 2–3). The translation was made at the beginning of the 9th century, by order of the king. The Sanskrit text does not correspond to the Tibetan text (Ōtani, III, 407, note). The Tibetan text exists among the Dunhuang manuscripts (ITJ, No 5–19). The commentary (Kanjur, No 5605, translated at the beginning of the 9th century; Ldan dkar Catalogue, No 500) calls itself gzhung ‘grel (but gsung rab is not mentioned; a reference that I owe to Samten G. Karmay). A table of variants of this gātha in the diverse Chinese Vinaya has been drawn by Tsuchihashi (“Tonkō-hon ni mirareru shuju no bosatsu kaigi,” 143–5). He published a Chinese manuscript from Dunhuang (S. 1020 where the gātha figure after an extract from the Fanwang jing 梵網經). c This passage is very weak and full of doubful statements.—C.S.-S. 24 My thanks go out to M. Eimer who had the generosity to explain to me the thoughts of Pema Tsering. Sa would be the world, because one says sa yi skyong ba for the king who reigns over the world. ‘On would be for ‘on pa, “the deaf,” as the proverb states: the blind and the deaf falsely understand the many ways. Then gzhung re re ought to designate the false views. Pema Tsering has also thought to discuss the literal meaning and the true meaning. Effectively, in the edict of Khri srong lde btsan concerning vocabulary, the author critiques those who do not stick to the intention of the tantras (ldem po ngag), but take them at the letter (sgra Ji bzhin du) and have from this fact a false conduct (Simonsson, Indo-tibetische Studien, 260). We will note that Khri srong lde btsan wrote a work on the words and the signs of the Buddha (de bzhin gshegs pa’i skad brda; Ldan dkar catalogue cited by Dpa’o Gtsug lag phreng ba, ch. Ja, 124b; poorly printed in Lalou, No 724).

208

r.a. stein

could more innocently be reminded of the metaphor of grain, which we find often. The dharma (or the doctrines) can be compared to a seed which gives birth to new developments.25 It remains to examine what relationship there may be between this explanation, the title “sūtra fallen from the sky,” the critique of the buddhas appearing “brusquely” without prediction and the differences between three kinds of texts. In deciding to propagate Buddhism, the kings had to make a choice. Khri srong lde btsan, aided by his kalyāṇamitra, made it in an erudite and critical fashion. The author of our manuscript is equally scholarly and insists on the differences or even the discordances between different systems. When he speaks of the benefits of the actions of Srong btsan sgam po, he insists on morality and good conduct. When he regrets the interruption of the propagation of Buddhism and, from that fact, that which cannot exist “in the Tibetan fashion,” these are the fundamental enunciations (the Four or the Two Truths), the Vinaya, the observance of the Prohibitions and the Ten Virtues, all of which combine with the royal laws and the precepts of the wise ancestors.26 We may be surprised that the Vinaya does not figure among the three sorts of texts of which the author underscores the difference. It was translated around 800 A.D. and contains works qualified as gzhung (cf. n. 22). Yet the Vinaya and the Ten Virtues appear in a clear and simple fashion in the stanzas of the Seven Buddhas of the

25

We find examples in the chapter cited from the Laṅ kāvatāra-sūtra. One example, No 839: the odor of the onion, womb of a pregnant woman, the salty taste of salt, etc. . . ., is it that none grow like a seed? The sūtra “Drum of Gold” (translated around 800; Kanjur No 888, Taishō No 270) [which corresponds to Chapter III of the Suvarṇabhāsottamasūtra—C.S.-S.] is composed of stanzas which exalt the efficacy of the sound of the Drum of Gold for removing errors. It exists in many Dunhuang manuscripts. In one of them (PT 0066), the author states: “By this sound of the drum of the holy Suvarṇaprabhāsa the seeds of the dharmas not being planted, the dharmas are not produced” (chos kyi sa bon btab myed de // chos so chog la skye ba myed). In another manuscript (PT 0972), an anthology of Buddhist moral maxims, we find three times the metaphor of the seed (sa bon): 1) To practice virtue (dge ba), this is like planting a seed in a field; one will reap the fruit (l. 21–3). 2) “For example (dper na), from the seed is born the fruit” (l. 63–4). 3) The Ten Virtues (dge bcu) are difficult, but these are the seeds which allow one to be reborn as a god or man (l. 112–3; Karmay, “King Tsa-Dza and Vajrayāna”). 26 In the wishes for the Tibetan king, in Chinese (S. 2146, Taishō, vol. 85, p. 1301b) the author writes: “when a dharmarāja ( fawang 法王) appears . . ., he propagates above all the Vinaya-piṭaka (jie zang 戒藏).” In the Prayers of De ga (24b) in favor of the Tibetan king, the author regrets having transgressed the Dharma and the Vinaya (chos dang ‘Dul ba las ‘gal ba).

debut of buddhism in tibet

209

past which are cited often among the other texts in the different versions of the Vinaya. The last stanza (of Kāśyapa) states: “Not committing sins (sdig pa; Chin. wu 惡), one should have, to the highest degree, all the Virtues (dge ba; Chin. shan fa 善法); then one will overcome (will purify) completely his thoughts; this is the teaching of the Buddha.” It concludes: “Gods among the gods (lha yi lha; Chin. tian zhong tian 天中天), unsurpassed in taming (men), best of the “protectors” of the world, the seven Buddhas, the reputable heroes, have taught this (method) of prohibitions (so sor thar; Chin. jie fa 戒法) . . .”27 The link between these Ten Virtues and the Seven Buddhas of the past is attested by a Chinese inscription from Dunhuang in honor of a certain Kong Zhou. The cyclic date given at the end may correspond to 687, 747 or 807. The scholarly editor opted for 747. The author hopes that he “always will hear the teachings of the Seven Buddhas of the past . . . and that he will be born in the Entrance of the Ten Virtues.”28 We will see the considerable role of the texts, the rituals and the practices of the laity relative to the Ten Virtues and to the Ten Faults (good and bad). However, beforehand it still remains to consider two other possibilities of relations in our manuscript. The writings about the Seven Buddhas of the past are mentioned apropos of the Vajrayāna, in a context which perhaps implies a critique or underscores the differences at least. At the same time, this classic group of Seven Buddhas is here visibly the model to which are opposed an excess, i.e. the unexpected appearance of other groups of buddhas who have not been authenticated by a prediction.29 Do the two reproofs go together? In the

27 Pratimokṣa-sūtra (Kanjur, No 1031, vol. 42, p. 149–2; Taishō, No 1454, vol. 24, pp. 507c–508a) and Fanwang jing 梵網經 (Kanjur, No 922, pp. 175–2; Taishō, No 1484, vol. 24, p. 1009c). 28 Shazhou wenlu 沙州文錄, p. 2a, 3b 常聞七佛之教 . . . 當生十善之門. 29 In his chos ‘byung, Nyang ral gives a long explanation of the Seven Buddhas of the past and of others who have received a prediction (lung bstan pa, vyākaraṇa). The accounts vary according to the sūtra. Many, such as the Bhadrakalpa-sūtra, give only four Buddhas of the past (ms A, 32; Meisezahl, 22a; cf. Mochizuki, 1987b). Nyang ral cites the Buddha Avataṃ saka-sūtra, which distinguished ten types of prediction. The third is that of the Seven Buddhas who are given the prediction from one to another (ms A, 44; Meisezahl 29a, citing the Gser lung ‘thun pa’i mdo that I am unable to identify). Yet, this type is not found in the list of the Śūraṃ gamasamādhi-sūtra (Lamotte, Le Concentration de la Marche héroïque, 202–15). Each of the Seven Buddhas was formerly a brahman youth (student, bram ze khye’u). Nyang ral recounts their history (ms A, 31–40; M., 21a–26b). There are variants. The Brahman youth (mānava, Chin. rutong 儒童) received from the Buddha Dīpaṃ kara the prediction that he would

210

r.a. stein

Vajrayāna, (and in the apochryphal sūtras) we see the appearance of a number of new Buddhas, unknown in the classical pantheon, bearing names formed from various combinations of recurring elements. There are the seven Buddhas of Bhaiṣajyaguru and of other groups of seven, eight, ten, twelve, thirty-five, and fifty-two (or three) buddhas (cf. Hōbōgirin, 197; Mochizuki, 4438–4440). Yet the sūtra dedicated to these groups belong to the Mahāyāna. The Karuṇā-puṇḍarīka-sūtra (cited by Nyang ral, cf. n. 29) gives a very large number of personages, unknown elsewhere, who have received the prediction of becoming buddhas, all of which are incorporated into that long list of famous bodhisattvas (Avalokiteśvara, Mañjuśrī, etc.; Taishō, No 157, vol. III, pp. 184–8; Kanjur No 780, vol. 29, pp. 211–5) like the Seven Buddhas of the past and Maitreya (Taishō, pp. 191c–201b). Not being a Buddhologist, I am incapable of seeing in what way, on this subject, the Vajrayāna differs from these sūtras. We might think that the Vajrayāna distinguishes itself by the importance of mantra and of dhāraṇī. Yet the sūtras of the Mahāyāna are equally replete with them. The Vajrayāna is known for wanting to realize a rapid path of access to salvation and to the subjugation of Evil. Yet this is also the case in a Mahāyāna-sūtra such as the Karuṇāpuṇḍarīka and in the sūtras dedicated to the diverse groups of buddhas. There is always the question of the confession of sins and of their elimination, easily and quickly, by the invocation of the names of the buddhas and by the recitation of mantra and of dhāraṇī.30 Even the Seven Buddhas of the past who are above all famous for their stanzas of morality and of Vinaya, also utter mantra which protect from all ills and purify sins (Kanjur, No 477, a sūtra, and No 936 = Taishō, No 1333). They have even been incorporated in the Vajrayāna. In a Dun-

become the Buddha Śākyamuni (Mochizuki, 2434b; Lamotte, Le Traité de la Grand Vertu de Sagesse, 248, n. 2 and 1921, n. 1; the name of the youth is Megha, Sumedha or Sumati; Bareau, 1966 following the Vinaya, Taishō No 1428). Dīpaṃ kara, in turn, had received his prediction from the Buddha Ratnaśikhin (Mochizuki, 4438b). 30 Cf. Ldan dkar Catalogue No 202 (for the seven buddhas, also PT 0498, their dhāraṇī, and PT 0078), No 210 (the eight buddha), No 218 (the twelve). The seven buddhas of Baiṣajyaguru (No 147, 148) erase sins and are bound to the practice of the Ten Virtues (in Tibetan around 800 A.D., Kanjur No 135, 136 and a treaty of Dpal brtsegs, Tanjur, No 5844, vol. 144, pp. 129–5). The Seven Buddhas of the past are equipped with mantra and charms in what Demiéville called “tantric sūtras” (Hōbōgirin, 196b).

debut of buddhism in tibet

211

huang manuscript (S. 2272. V), when they were still bodhisattva, they received the “Prohibitions of secret Dharma of the Vajra.”31 Thus, we do not really see why the Vajrayāna figures among the sacred texts from which discord or difference is brought up. Our manuscript exalts Khri srong lde btsan. However, as we saw earlier (195), this king is presented as an incarnation of king Tsa who is bound to the Vajrayāna (ms. PT 0840). On this occasion, the author does not criticize the Vajrayāna per se, but only the abuses to which it sometimes succeeded later on. He even states that: “When they were in accord (‘thun pa) with the sacred texts (gzhung) and with the authorized teaching (of the Buddha, bka’ lung gzhung dang ‘thun pa’i che), the masters of the exoteric and esoteric (teachings) like the (tantric masters) karmavajra, these three, were not mixed. Between these masters and the venerable ones (the monks), each understanding his own conduct, there were no troubles, and the people of Tibet were happy” (Karmay 1981, 207–8; my translation differs a little from his). The prophesy of the Mañjuśrīmūlakalpa, adapted into Tibetan (cf. 195) equally makes allusion to Khri srong lde btsan and his association with a master of mantra and tantra (Imaeda 1981, 312, § IV). The author thus admits the difference of conduct of the Vajrayāna with the condition which is not appropriate from the other practices. The same prudent attitude towards tantra reigns in the edict of Khri lde srong btsan (cf. n. 24). These texts are nearly contemporaneous with our manuscript. We may add to it the letter of Buddhaguhya (cf. n. 39), despite its doubtful character. After addressing itself to the king, it gives counsel to the ministers, to the “great meditators” (sgom chen), and to the monks in general (ban de spyi la). Speaking exhaustively about the Ten Virtues, etc., it tells the ministers that “each of the (Three) Vehicles has its gate of entry (‘jug sgo re re, a little like the gzhung re re of our manuscript) and each can bear fruit (‘bras bu, which presupposes a seed!). Yet it advises also to practice the Vajrayāna (gsangs sngags Rdo rje theg pa, p. 284.5). The same counsel is given to the “monks in general” (p. 285.4). They ought to venerate the tantric masters (rdo rje slob dpon) 31

Tsuchihahi, “Tonkō-hon ni mirareru shuju no bosatsu kaigi,” 108–9. This text would have been translated by Amoghavajra. In the manuscript, it is called: “World (read Prohibitions; two words jie homophones) of the secret Dharma, in a scroll, translated from the Tibetan (?, Sanskrit?)” 蕃譯密法界 (the author writes initially jie 界, but then jie 戒). The title resembles Taishō No 878 and 1789, Amoghavajra’s translations.

212

r.a. stein

as their tutelary divinity ( yi dam lha) and to hold to their “profound teachings” (secrets, man ngag zab mo) as to their eyes. The “secret Vehicle (of mantra)” (gsang theg) is the best. Finally, as in the manuscript PT 0840, the author warns against abuse: to teach the teachings of the secret mantra ( gsang sngags zab mo, of the Vajrayāna), with drum and bell, to the laity in the villages, etc. (p. 286.1). I have not been able to discover which are the Buddhas “abruptly” appearing without having received the prediction, who are contrasted with the Seven Buddhas who have received it. In our manuscript, they are situated between Śākyamuni and Maitreya. Like the Seven Buddhas of the past, they are qualified as “gods among the gods” and as “protectors.” The kings also are gods and protectors (cf. n. 18), notably Khri srong lde btsan who is a bodhisattva. Maitreya must have interested the author of our manuscript.32 In the sūtras which are dedicated to him, he descends from Tuṣita heaven, where live the gods (deva or devaputra), into our world. This world is then perfect. Among other marvels, we find good harvests, no malady or infirmity, the perfect reign of a cakravartin who has the thirty-two marks of a buddha. The two personages were initially distinct (Ajita becomes the cakravartini and Maitreya the future buddha), but the two have also been conflated. Maitreya speaks gāthas and preaches the roots of Good and the Prohibitions. In the Karuṇā-puṇḍarīka, he figures among the other buddhas, those also associated with cakravartins, the Dharma kings, who establish a just reign comprising the Ten Virtues, etc.33 In an apocryphal sūtra (Dunhuang manuscript, Taishō, vol. 85, No 2879), we find an aberrant series of seven buddhas (from King Kong 孔王 to Maitreya “who has received the prediction” 受記彌勒; Forte 1976, 275). Sometimes the prediction alludes to someone who will be initially a cakravartin, or a queen, and then will become a buddha (Mahāmegha-

32

A Chinese Dunhuang manuscript associates the contemplation (dhyāna) of Maitreya with a royal order which subordinates this practice to the obligation to make a prayer for “the current holy and divine btsan po Khri lde gtsug btsan” (without doubt a scribal error for Khri gtsug lde btsan; cf. Stein, “Saint et divin,” 251). For this contemplation (guan) and its relation with Maitreya on earth and the predictions, see Demiéville, “La Yogācārabhūmi de Sangharakṣa,” 372, 380ff. 33 The studies on Maitreya are numerous, see e.g. Peri, “Compte-rendu de Matsumoto Bunzaburo, Miroku jōdō ron,” 444–9; Demiéville, “Compte-rendu de E. Leumann, Maitreya-Samiti,” 162–4, and “La Yogācārabhūmi de Sangharakṣa”; Lamotte, Histoire du Bouddhisme indien, 775, 779, 782. Many sūtras of Maitreya were translated into Tibetan at the beginning of the 9th century (Ldan dkar Calalogue, No 47, 65, 66, 265, 469; Kanjur, No 1011, 760.23 and 760.42).

debut of buddhism in tibet

213

sūtra; Taishō No 387 = Kanjur, No 901, translated around 800 A.D.). We know that the prophesy from this perfectly authentic sūtra has been applied to the empress Wu Zetian 武則天.34 The case is analogous to that of the prophesy from the Mañjuśrīmūlakalpa applied to Khri srong lde btsan. The sūtras, the treaties, the anthologies of moral maxims (at once Buddhist and lay) have for an object the Ten Virtues and the Ten Faults like the causes and effects of this conduct. In China, these texts appear very early (4th–6th centuries), not only in Buddhism,35 but also in Daoism36 which copied them. In Tibet, this subject is attested in the royal edicts, in our manuscript, in the 9th century at the latest, in texts which are often translations from the Chinese. A “religious writing” (chos kyi yi ge) cited in the 2nd edict explains karman and its fruit, the Good (legs pa) which gives Virtue (dge ba), the Bad (nges

34 Cf. Forte, Political Propaganda and Ideology in China at the End of the Seventh Century, 253–70; Zürcher, “Prince Moonlight, Messianism and Eschatology in Early Medieval Chinese Buddhism”; here, n. 19. 35 Taishō No 125: the Ten Virtues (shishan 十善) and the Five Prohibitions for the laity which will be practiced at the time of the coming of Maitreya (Przyluski, La légende de l’empereur Açoka, 206–7 and 178); T. No 1485, vol. 24, p. 1017a (the shishan and the jie 戒), p. 1019c (the shiwu 十惡); T., No 411: “The ten wheels (teachings) of Kṣitigarbha, great summary of the Mahāyāna.” This sūtra was translated into Tibetan around 800, undoubtedly from the Chinese, by the hwa shang Zab mo, and corrected by the Chan master Rnam par mi rtog pa (Kanjur No 905, chap. 6 on the dge ba bcu). In the ms. PT 0977 (fol. 11a), the benefits of the practice of the Ten Virtues and the ills that result from sins (sdig pa) are evoked in a poem written in an archaic style. There was a “sūtra of the Ten Virtues” (dge ba bcu, PT No 968 and ITJ 606; dge ba bcu’i mdo, PT 0970, 0971, 0972, 0973, 0974; ITJ 606; Ldan dkar Catalogue, No 266, “Acceptation of the Ten Virtues,” dge ba bcu dang du blang ba’i mdo; in Chinese: Shou shi shan jie jing 受十善戒經 S. 5175.2 and S. 2565.2 = Taishō No 1486). In 822 a text of the sūtra of the Ten Virtues was invested with the seal of authentication of the btsan po of Great Tibet 大蕃國有贊音印信 ordering the diffusion in all the prefectures in order that it be recited 傳流諸州流行讀誦. It is part of a short catechism (P. chin. 2298, S. 3966, S. 553; Ueyama, “Tonkō shutsudō Daijō-kyō San-yō-gi kō”). There exists a fragment of it from Dunhuang in Tibetan (Ueyama, “Tonkō shutsudō Daijō-kyō San-yō-gi kō,” n. 5 and “Kodai Chibetto ni okeru zen-aku gō-hō shisō rufu no ichi men,” n. 17). 36 The second part of the Dao De jing 道德經, copied at Dunhuang in 709, carries in an appendix a sūtra of the Ten Prohibitions (shijie jing 十戒經) with a dedication to a Daoist master (P. 2347, 2350; two other copies date from 751 and 757; S. 6454, P. 3770). It is a Daoist text with Buddhist vocabulary (Daozang, No 459). With the Ten Prohibitions are included fourteen moral Exhortations (shisi te shen 十四特身 a little like the sixteen mi chos moreover the ten dge ba; Yoshioka, “Bukkyō no eikyō ni yoru Dōkyō-kai no keisei”). In the Laozi huahu jing 老子化胡經, the king of the Jibin does not have need to become a monk. It suffices that he accept the Five Prohibitions and the Ten Virtues; Yoshioka, Dōkyō to Bukkyō, 107).

214

r.a. stein

pa) which gives Sin (sdig pa), and that which is neither the one nor the other which gives the indeterminate (lung du mi ston pa, avyākṛta; Mhvy No 4652). In the “Ten Teachings of Kṣitigarbha,” chap. 6, the author treats the “Witness of the karman of the Ten Virtues” (dge ba bcu’i las kyi lam). These words are explicated in the Sgra sbyor (Tanjur, No 5833, vol. 144, p. 83, col. 5). The sūtra of Causes and of Effects has been translated from the Chinese by Chos grub (cf. Stein, TA I, 85). The application to the laity is well attested by the anthology of Maxims often enunciated by a “wise bhikṣu” (TA I, 89–90). Other sūtras treat the linking of Causes and of Effects, the Ten Virtues and Faults (Sins), are represented in the same era. This is exemplified by the Śalistamba (Sa li ljon pa; Ldan dkar Catalogue, No 180).37 We find the same themes in kinds of catechisms (cf. 200 and n. 35). The fusion of morals, Buddhist and lay (Chinese and Indian), appears in the letter of Śrīghoṣa to the king Khri srong lde btsan.38 The ancient documents do not allow us to go further. We can only divine and imagine. Just as Srong btsan sgam po is glorified as the patron of Buddhism, the mention of the miraculous arrival of a sūtra seems destined to illustrate or to underscore that glory in attributing this miracle to this king or to another ancestor. One such theme is well known in the later tradition. We know that, according to it, a sūtra fell from the sky onto the palace of the king Lha Tho tho ri, thus marking the debut of Buddhism. It has also preserved the second impor-

37 The ms. PT 0972 bears an analogous title (zhal nas gsungs pa ljon shing; Karmay “King Tsa-Dza and Vajrayāna”). For the Śālisthamba and the twelve nidāna in the Dunhuang manuscripts, see Ueyama “Tonkō ni okeru in-nen ron no shōsō,” 57, 77–8; and p. 80 for its relation with the Sba bzhed. 38 Cf. Stein, Tibetica Antiqua III, n. 23; Tucci, Minor Buddhist texts, II, 142–3; Tanjur No 5842, vol. 144, p. 123, col. 2–3, 4–5: The Ten Virtues (dge ba bcu) which we find in the sūtras, the list of the Ten Prohibitions, the results of the Ten Faults (mi dge ba bcu), the sixteen mi chos (respect for the Triratna and for the clergy, uprightness, respect for father and mother, etc.). By that one obtains birth as god or man. With this is included (124, col. 1–2) the counsel that the king ought to make laws (khrims and bka’ khrims) for protecting Buddhism, and that he punish severely those who contravene the laws. The king should also name the wise (‘dzangs pa) to civil posts, let the brave (dpa’ bo) carry out the war, engage the honest old men in the council, etc. (124–5 to 125–1). The counsels resemble the measures of a good gtsug lag attributed to Srong btsan sgam po in the Old Tibetan Chronicle. By contrast, in the (undoubtedly apocryphal ) letter of Buddhaguhya, the association of the Ten Virtues and the law, of lha chos and mi chos, is attributed to Khri srong lde btsan (cf. n. 39).

debut of buddhism in tibet

215

tant theme of our manuscript, the juxtaposition of the royal laws and Buddhist morality. Naturally, modifications have taken place. Yet we may consider them as versions of which the first forms appear already in the ancient texts. There is no rupture (for one example, cf. Stein, TA III, 121). The later authors were able to understand the inscriptions and the royal edicts (before Dpa’o Gtsug lag phreng ba) and even other texts. We found them in Dunhuang, but specimens must have existed in the archives of Central Tibet. The reconstruction, as a historian, of actual events surrounding the introduction of Buddhism is not at issue here. We are concerned solely with discovering the ideas which have arisen concerning this introduction, that which one believed or wanted to have others believe at the end of the 8th century and at the beginning of the 9th century, and then in the later tradition. *

*

*

1. The religious kings and the royal laws This theme has been well studied by Uray (1972) and by Yamaguchi (1979). Both have taken account of later works except for certain sources which were not then accessible, and which I will include. Uray wanted to release the ancient core of what appeared to him as the more or less arbitrary interpretations and additions motivated by the Buddhist faith of later authors. Yamaguchi, citing the Chinese sources from the Tang and certain traditions, emphasized the existence of laws carrying severe punishments in the era of Khri srong lde btsan and later, which implies that the Buddhist influence (the Ten Virtues) on the laws is a later pious fiction (cf. n. 41). Yamaguchi has also shown that the “Sixteen pure (laws) of mi chos” do not date to Srong btsan sgam po, but come from the letter of Śrīghoṣa (which enumerates eleven of them) and concern the rules of lay morality. He underscores that these rules are not particularly Buddhist at all. This is true. However, these rules (Confucian in China) have been incorporated into the Buddhist texts where they are associated or mixed with Buddhist “prohibitions” for monks and laity (cf. Stein, TA I, 64–6, 89–90; TA II, n. 22, 23). Here in chronological order are the versions of the combination of royal laws and Buddhist rules.

216

r.a. stein

1) 8th century, Dunhuang Annals. In 645 the author wrote the laws (bka’ grims kyi yi ge). The event was transferred from the king Mang slon Mang rtsan to Srong btsan sgam po (Uray 1972, 32). 2) Around 800–40, Old Tibetan Chronicle (Bacot DTT, 118). Srong btsan sgam po makes the “great law of (or: and?) the art of governance of Tibet” (Bod kyi gtsug lag bka’ grims ched po), the rewards and punishments, the weights and measures, etc. Under his reign appeared “all the good writing of the religion of Tibet” (Bod kyi chos kyi gzhung bzang po). An ambiguous phrase. 3) Around 800–20, the manuscript “Dharma fallen from the sky.” One is unable to make “in the Tibetan fashion” the dharma and the Virtue (dge ba’i chos), the Ten Virtues of the Vinaya . . ., the royal laws of the king (rgyal po’i rgyal khrims) and the teachings of the wise. 4) 821–2, Inscription of the Treaty of Lhasa (i.e. Treaty of 821–822; East, l. 9). Khri lde srong btsan and his ancestors constructed “a good religious law” (chos khrims bzang po; conforming to Buddhism?). 5) Between 850 and 1000 (?), the letter of Buddhaguhya.39 Khri srong lde btsan is praised as a descendant of Srong btsan sgam po, an incarnation of Avalokiteśvara, in a line of bodhisattvas. This line goes back to king Khri rje Thog btsan (the last of the twenty-seven legendary kings, Thog rje Thog btsan, predecessor of Lha Tho tho ri). Khri srong lde btsan (and his entire line?) overcame (the Tibetans, dul bar mdzad) in establishing the Ten Virtues and the Laws by edicts (?, or: the laws of the Ten Virtues?; dge bcu thang khrims btsugs nas; cf. Padma thang yig, chap. 67 where the king makes three sorts of laws: chos khrims, rgyal khrims and thang khrims). He invited scholars from India (Vairocana, Dpal brtsegs, etc.) and he (then) extended his power to the summit (thanks to?) mi chos (and) lha chos (mi chos lha chos mnga thang rtse ru chib).

39 Letter from Buddhaguhya to Khri srong lde btsan (Tanjur No 5693, vol. 129, p. 284, col. 5; cf. Stein, “Saint et devin,” n. 64). It is without doubt later as it makes allusion to two sons, evil rakṣas, who were the descendents ( yas [read mes ?] kyi yang dbon) of Khri srong lde btsan (cf. Rockhill, The life of the Buddha, 221, n. 2). Yet certain expressions resemble a Dunhuang manuscript (PT 0840) which exalts Khri srong lde btsan and compares him to king Tsa (cf. n. 7). Whatever its date, this document is important. Bu ston gives this letter with some variants (Works, ed. Lok. Chandra, vol. 11, Da, pp. 135–8). He writes: dge ba bcu khrims btsugs nas; and: mnga’ thang rtse ru phyin.

debut of buddhism in tibet

217

After a silence of three centuries, the later tradition resumes the themes and expressions while establishing a logical link between the Buddhist model and the laws. 6) 1167 A.D., Chos la ‘jug pa’i sgo (Sa skya bka’ ‘bum, vol. II, p. 343, col. 2). Srong btsan sgam po “wrote the laws based on the Ten Virtues” (dge ba bcu las brtsams te khroms bcas). 7) 12th century (?), Sba bzhed40 (51, abridged text = Chos ‘byung Mkhas ba’i dga’ ston, ja, 104b). After the consecration of Bsam yas and the ordination of the first monks: “Until then, Khri srong lde btsan had issued the edicts and written the religious laws” (bka’ sgog chen po btang ste, chos khrims bcas). From then on, the eyes of men were no longer plucked out, nor were the noses of women cut off, nor the guilty killed. The subjects obeyed the king and venerated the monks. The king called this the “Great Law of (Buddhist) Religion” (chos kyi bka’ khrims chen po; Sba bzhed: chos kyi khrims bcas).41 8) 12th century, Nyang ral’s Chos ‘byung. Under Srong btsan sgam po were translated many sūtras and “teachings of Buddhism and lay morality” (lha chos dang mi chos kyi gdams pa; variant, 73: lha

40 Ed. Stein. For the date of the first part, I take account of the fact that the Sba bzhed is cited in the Chos rgyal mes dbon rnam thar of Nyang ral (166ff, the account of Buddhist books coming from China) and by Ne’u Paṇḍita (95, the laws of the bon po ministers, and 99, the first seven monks). Cf. Vostrikov, Tibetan historical literature, 24–5. 41 According to the second part of the later Sba bzhed (75), the king Khri gtsug lde btsan wanted to put the reign into accord with Buddhism (chab srid chos dang btsun). He also gave power to the clergy (dbang dge ‘dun la phul bas). The opposition could not hinder him. The king (76) then made a “Law of Religion” (chos khrims) which envisaged cruel chastisements (torn out eyes, chopped fingers, etc.) for those who were hostile to the clergy and criticized the pro-Buddhist politics of the king. I owe to S.G. Karmay the suggestion that chos khrims signifies here a law relative to the clergy. This sense is attested in the Padma thang yig (ch. 67, Ka, 113b) which distinguished between religious law (chos khrims), compared to a silken knot: sure, but soft, and the royal law (rgyal khrims), compared to a yoke of gold which is heavy. The first often concerns the religious, but also the laity who have good conduct. The second, which is also applied to the two categories, envisages severe chastisements. It is likewise in the Blon po bka’ thang (ch. VI, Kha, 229a–230a, rgyal khrims; chap. V, Kha, 228b–229a, chos khrims). Yet in certain cases, severe punishments do not exclude the payment of the blood price for a murder (as in the Ma ṇi bka’ ‘bum). The authors of these works reprise thus (thanks to an intermediary model?) one phrase of our manuscript (the rgyal khrims next to the Vinaya, etc.). For the Sba’ bzhed and the texts which follow, the chos khrims is a law which seeks to reconcile the penal law with the imperatives of Buddhism. We recall (cf. n. 17) that chos khrims is sometimes the equivalent of tshul khrims.

218

r.a. stein

mi rnams gnyis kyi khrims dang gtsug lag). In order to prevent the opposition of the ministers (263), the king made a chos khrims which removes the Ten Faults (mi dge ba bcu). He (then) made a Law of the Ten Virtues (dge ba bcu’i khrims). It was such a law that the Nepalese required before granting a princess to the king (311): “A pure Law of the Ten Virtues of the Religion, in accord with the Religion” (chos dge ba bcu’i khrims gtsang ma, chos dang mthun pa). This is the beginning of the Holy Religion (in Tibet; chos kyi dbu snyes, sgrol gtod pa). For the last formula, see above, 152 and following. 8a) “Biography of Padmasambhava,” called Zangs gling ma, by Nyang ral (ed. Rin chen gter mdzod, 43b, 44a, 46b). Khri srong lde btsan notes that the ministers are impious and jealous of Buddhism. They likewise expelled those whom he sent to search in India, justifying this using the Royal Law (rgyal khrims). The king issued an edict or command (bka’ khrims) stipulating that he is a Protector King of the Religion. From then on, he made a Law of the Religion (chos khrims) according to which the monks, the translators, and the meditators ought to be venerated. This Law of the Religion is compared to a silken knot. It implies that one ought to bow to the monks. Later, Vimalamitra refused to bow the king (49a; this subject was made the object of much discussion in China in the 4th century). 9) C. 1200, Bod kyi rgyal rabs (Sa skya bka’ ‘bum, vol. IV, p. 296, col. 3). Debut of Buddhism (dam pa’i chos kyi srol btod) under Srong btsan sgam po. 10) C. 1200, Ma ṇi bka’ ‘bum (ed. Sde dge), vol. I, p. 163b.42 In order to establish Buddhism in Tibet, Srong btsan sgam po “made a law based on the sūtra of the Ten Virtues” (dge ba bcu’i mdo la brten nas khrims bcas te) because formerly the ten kinglets had made the laws (khrims bcas) of Faults (mi dge ba, to kill, etc.; second version, 230a: they had a royal law, a law of faults, rgyal khrims sdig khrims; following the list of the ten faults). It indeed required a chos khrims (var., 230a: dge ba bcu’i khrims), a religious law, in accord with Buddhist principles. Capital punishment was replaced

42 The same account is repeated, with variants, in the part called “The Twenty-one Acts of the King,” ch. VI, p. 230a and ch. XVI, pp. 242a–243a.

debut of buddhism in tibet

219

by payment of the blood-price (stong; 2nd version: mi stong), etc.43 Moreover, the king made another royal law (bka’ khrims) which was based on the “sixteen pure (rules) of the custom” (mi chos gtsang ma).44 11) C. 1200, Bka’ chems ka khol ma (369, 371). In order to avoid the Ten Faults, Srong btsan sgam po made the Law of the Ten Virtues (dge ba bcu’i khrims bcas pa). Later, (chap. 14, p. 464), the king explained that he had made the laws strong because, without them, the Tibetans could not have been converted. They were not capable of “climbing the ladder of salvation” (thar pa’i skabs (read skas) la ‘dzeg tu ma tub pa), an allusion to the maxim of Nāgārjuna (cf. n. 12). He subjected them with the force of his kingship. This is undoubtedly an allusion to the Royal law. 12) 1283 A.D., Ne’u paṇḍita. In the ancient texts it says that after the twenty-seven kings, there was not a Royal Law (rgyal khrims, 66). Srong btsan sgam po made a law conforming to the Ten Virtues (dge ba bcu dang btun pa’i khrims bcas) and he inaugurated Buddhism (68: dam pa’i chos srol dod pa; cf. No 7 and 8). He made this law taking as a model the Ten Virtues of Buddhism (gloss: for murder, payment of the blood-price, etc.; dge ba bcu la dpe blangs pa’i khrims bcas). Many sūtras and the Cintāmaṇī dhāraṇī were translated (87). 13) 1321, Bu ston (fol. 119a). Srong btsan sgam po: dge ba bcu’i khrims bcas (Uray 1972, 53). Yet elsewhere Bu ston poses as a general rule that the “religious laws” appear to be based on the “royal laws” (spyir rgyal khrims la brten nas chos khrims byung ste). Then appeared the Debut of the Religion (chos kyi dbu brnyes) under

43 This custom is attested in modern Tibet (cf. Stein, La civilisation tibétaine, 113, 116). There is an example of it in the Sba bzhed (65). When the prince Mu tig assassinated the minister ‘U ring (Dbu ring), the judgment is that he ought to pay the blood-price (stong) and that he would be banished (Chos ‘byung Mkhas ba’i dga’ ston, ja, 126b). 44 In the second version, three stages are distinguished. The king has initially (dang po) made the dge ba bcu’i khrims, and then (bar ma) the rgyal khrims. This “royal law” carried cruel punishments. It was made to threaten adversaries and protect the “religious law” (bsdigs shing chos khrims bsrung ba) or (242b) because the king thought that the “religious law” was not solid (enough) (chos khrims ma brtan). One final law (khrims tha ma) was ascribed to Khra ‘brug at the time of the construction of the temple. It stipulates that (even the king) ought to bow to and to venerate the monks. Here, chos khrims has two meanings: 1) a law conforming to the rules of the Ten Virtues, and 2) a law granting a high status to the clergy.

220

r.a. stein

Lha Tho tho ri. Five generations afterwards, Srong btsan sgam po applied it (srol gtod) and after five others there was Khri srong lde btsan (Rnal ‘byor rgyud kyi rgya mtsho la ‘jug pa’i gru gzings, Works, ed. Lok. Chandra, vol. 11, Da, 135). 14) 1373, Rgyal rabs, chap. 10 (Uray 1972, 54–5). The king makes the “royal law,” based on the Ten Virtues (dge ba bcu la brten pa’i rgyal khrims ‘cha’ ba, and: dge ba bcu la bstun pa’i rgyal khrims bcas). This list is sufficient. We see the importance of the manuscript “Dar ma fallen from the sky.” It contains all the elements of later texts and is the first known version of it. It makes it possible to hesitate between Khri srong lde btsan and Srong btsan sgam po since it associates them in the glory of having introduced Buddhism. It exalts the virtues of the people. The latter are analogous to the rules of mi chos which, in its turn, is the basis of lha chos (Buddhism). It regrets that one cannot realize the combination of the Ten Virtues and of the Vinaya, on the one hand, and the “royal law” on the other. It is impossible to know if this sort of combination really existed, if the application of the Buddhist rules was able to influence the law. A zealous king, dominated by the influence of the monks, makes an effort in many ways to favor Buddhism and thus the clergy, one such king ought naturally to envisage laws (chos khrims) protecting the clergy and at the same time to introduce the dispositions conforming to Buddhism. However, this problem does not concern us here. 2. The sūtra fallen from the sky Since the themes which we have just seen are found at the time of our manuscript and in the later tradition, we might suppose that its first line, which ought to have a connection with what follows, is equally a version of the legend well known from tradition. The debut of Buddhism (always called dbu brnyes, as in the royal edict, cf. 152) is marked by one or more sūtras fallen from the sky under the king Lha Tho tho ri. There follows a list of versions with the same numbering as in the preceding list. 3) Around 800–20, ms. ITJ 307.5. Sūtra fallen from the sky, in a scroll or chapter.

debut of buddhism in tibet

221

6) 1167, Chos la ‘jug pa’i sgo (343). The buddhas and the bodhisattvas made fall from the sky: a) a small stūpa of gold, b) (the sūtra) Pang kong phyag rgya pa.45 The king dreams that in the seventh generation, Srong btsan sgam po will make a law based on the Ten Virtues. 8) 12th century, Chos ‘byung of Nyang ral (ms. A, 243; Meisezahl, 173b) and chos rgyal mes dbon rnam thar (52). Debut of Buddhism (dbu snyegs). A box falls from the sky. It contains a golden book equipped with a seal ( gser gyi glegs bam mu tri’i phyag rgya dang bcas pa). The king does not know if this is chos or bon. Inspired by a dream, he founds a cult according or conforming to this dar ma (= sūtra; dar ma de dang mthun pas mchod pa byas). The author observes that the date (of Lha Tho tho ri) is confirmed by the sūtra Lha mo Dri ma med pa’i ‘od according to which the debut of the Holy Religion among the Red Faces (Tibet) is placed 2500 or 2800 years after the nirvāṇa of the Buddha. It adds that there are other versions. According to (a) Tibetan work(s), Bod kyi yi ge, the event passed in the era of (king) Khri se btsan po. Following four kings up to Gnam ri, then Srong btsan sgam po who made the laws. 9) C. 1200, Ma ṇi bka’ ‘bum, I, 161b. Debut of the religion (dbu brnyes, 162a). Avalokiteśvara emanated a box (ga’u) which contained: a) a small golden stūpa, b) a small seal (bka’ rtags kyi phyag rgya), c) a golden book with writing in liquid vaiḍūrya, in Tibetan, the sūtra Za ma tog bkod pa, d) (the sūtra) Spang skong, e) the sūtra of the twelve nidāna (rten ‘brel bcu gnyis kyi mdo) and its dhāraṇī (gzhungs, 226b), f ) the sūtra of the Ten Virtues (dge ba bcu’i mdo). The author proclaims that meaning would be understood in five generations, under Srong btsan sgam po (same text in the second part, 226b–227a). 11) C. 1200, Bka’ chems ka khol ma (396). Debut of the religion (dbu bsnyengs) in order to plant the seed (sa bon) of the White Religion (dkar po’i ched, read chos). Allusion to a History (lo rgyus) of Dharma Aśoka, apropos of the Indian king called Li Dza.46 The

45

The names of the sūtras will be discussed below. Rgya gar gyi rgyal po Li Dza zhes bya ba la sten te / Dharma Ashoka’i lo rgyus dang (read nang?) rgyas par snang ngo. This is the text from the Darjeeling edition, 1972. That from Leh (1973, 669–674) gives a long account instead. The subjects of the king (‘bangs mes) tell him that (formerly) the king of Ma ga ta, named Dza, has seen 46

222

r.a. stein

arrival of four texts: a) Zab ma tog bkod pa, b) the sūtra of the Ten Virtues [Las (variant: chos) dge ba bcu’i mdo], c) Spang kong, d) a seal (mu tra’i phyag rgya; cf. No 11). The link with Srong btsan sgam po appears on p. 408. This king is wise (thugs sgam). Also, he makes the laws. 12) 1283, Ne’u paṇḍita (84). Debut (dbu brnyes pa) under Lha Tho tho ri. When he took power, Li The se and the translator Blo sems mtsho, of Tho gar, invited the erudite pandit Legs byin. They preached the Religion of the king, in vain, because there was no more writing. Then they wrote in golden letters (gloss: on a scroll of yellow paper) the mantra (snying pa) of six syllables from the sūtra Za ma tog bkod pa. They struck it with a seal and told the king to venerate it. As they thought that their presence in Tibet was useless, they betook themselves to China.47 The author considers the legend of the descent from the sky as an error of the bon po (who worshipped the sky). There follows the history of Srong btsan sgam po and of his laws. It was he who inaugurated the Holy Religion (srol dod). He invited scholars from Nepal and from China. He sent Thon mi and others to India in order to create a script. Among those figures, a certain Li byin whom Ne’u

“the writing of his ancestors” ( yab mes kyi yi ge, where it was said that): formerly (his) ancestor (sngon gyi yab mes) Dharma Aśoka made the wish of making the supports of body, mind, speech (stūpa, etc.), but had not been able to make the “supports of the dharma” (chos kyi rten, sūtras). King Dza wants to achieve this deed. He makes prayers. Then Vajrasattva comes from the sky and a rain of books falls (673), but they then disappear. At this moment, in Tibet, Lha Tho tho ri is struck by the rays of the sun. A box is left there containing a book with golden leaves and in writing of melted vaiḍūrya. The account of king Dza appears also in the Chos ‘byung of Nyang ral (ms. A, 152; ed. Meisezahl, 92b-101b), but is not connected there to Lha Tho tho ri. Vajrapāṇi reveals the Vajrayāna to diverse beings, notably to Li tsa byi Dri ma med pa (Vimala?). Without transition, king Dza received a rain of golden books with writing of vaiḍūrya ink (cf. n. 57). As he does not know how to read them, he addresses himself to Kukkurarāja. Wishing to lead all beings to the Vajrayāna, he has the sūtras and the tantras (mdo rgyud) written on white paper. Thus it is that one day, king Dza saw “the writing of his ancestors” ( yab mes kyi yi ge). He thus learns the work of Aśoka that he wants to complete. 47 For the translators, cf. Uebach, “Zur Identifizierung des Nel-pa’i č’os-‘byuṅ ,” 226. The theory of Ne’u pandita was accepted in the Deb ther sngon po (Blue Annals, I, 38). Relying on the Sba bzhed (12) where it is said that Śāntarakṣita (Zhi ba ‘tsho) awaited the king Khri srong lde btsan during nine lives and where he is qualified as a bodhisattva, the author deduced that Li The se translated bodhisattva by blo sems and that ‘tsho concords with Zhi ba ‘tsho. Cf. the second list, No 17, Dpa’o Gtsug lag phreng ba.

debut of buddhism in tibet

223

paṇḍita identifies with the Legs byin of the era of Lha Tho tho ri (he obtained the power of longevity).48 13) 1321, Bu ston (fol. 137b–138a; Obermiller 1931, 183). A box fallen from the sky contains: a) Za ma tog bkod pa, b) Pang kong, c) a golden caitya. This is the debut (dbu brnyes). A dream predicts to the king that the meaning will be understand in the fifth generation, under Khri lde Srong btsan. 14) 1373, Rgyal rabs (24a). Debut (dbu brnyes pa). According to a prophesy of the Buddha, Buddhism will develop in Tibet. In the guise of an augur (rten ‘brel), there falls from the sky: a) the sixsyllable mantra, b) the Spang skong, c) a small golden stūpa, d) a bolus of tsha tsha of cintāmaṇi (tshindhama ṇi sa tstsha bskol phor; cf. No 8), e) a seal. One will understand in five generations, under Srong btsan sgam po. 15) 1476–8, Deb ther sngon po (20a, Blue Annals, 38). There fall: a) the dhāraṇī cintāmaṇi, the Spang skong, etc. 16) 2nd half of the 15th century, Bshad mdzad yid bzhin nor bu (163). Objects fallen: a) a crystal stūpa, b) the Spang skong, c) the Za ma tog bkod pa, d) the sūtra Padma dkar po, etc. There follow five generations up to Srong btsan sgam po and five others up to Khri srong lde btsan (164–5). These kings are the “Three Protectors” (with Avalokiteśvara and Mañjuśrī). Account repeated (315–6). There fall a) a precious box (za ma tog), b) a crystal stūpa equipped with the eight seals of the royal orders (bka’ rtags phyag rgya brgyad), c) the Za ma tog bkod pa, d) the Spang skong, e) the sūtra of the Ten Virtues, f ) the Karmavibhaṅ ga (Las rnam par byed pa’i mdo). Important addition! At that same moment, a rain of books fell on the roof of king Dza of Za hor. This will be revisited. Three generations afterwards, under Srong btsan sgam po were translated dhāraṇīs (the first being Dam chos tsan dha ma ṇi) and many sūtras. 17) 1545–65, Dpa’o Gtsug lag phreng ba (Chos ‘byung Mkhas pa’i Dga’ ston, chap. ja, 9b). Lha Tho tho ri is the incarnation of Samantabhadra (gloss: it is also said Vajrapāṇi or Kṣitigarbha). Of the fallen objects, I retain only the bowl (skos phor) of cintāmaṇi (gloss: this

48 In place of Legs byin, the Lo paṇ bka’ thang (208b) writes Li byin. The author has perhaps confused India (Rgya gar) and China (Rgya nag) where Legs byin (and the others?) goes after having failed in Tibet.

224

r.a. stein is a bowl of the dhāraṇī cintāmaṇi of Avalokiteśvara with eleven heads) and the seal on which is engraved the (mantra) of six syllables. There follows the citation of the Bka’ chems (Ka khol ma) on the subject of king Dza, descendant of Aśoka (like No 11). The author includes two other traditions. According to some (10b), the first year there fell two books with golden paper (? ljang) and ink of liquid vaiḍūrya, and then the mūdras. According to some sgang ba’i chos lugs,49 Zhi ba ‘tsho was born for the welfare of Tibet. He wondered if (the predestined king) was not Khri srong lde btsan. Also, he sent two sūtras to the king of Tibet (Bod rje). This king was wise (?, thugs sbram pas, read: sgam?). In order to convert the bon po ministers “who love the sky,” he said that the books were fallen from heaven.

The two lists demonstrate that the theme of the book fallen from the sky is bound to that of the royal laws. The latter are associated with the rules of the Ten Virtues of Buddhism. The first event is expressly characterized as a predicted action (rten ‘brel, No 14), a premonitory sign, of the second event. This fiction corresponds to the desire of the Buddhist kings, attested as of the inscriptions, to trace back their faith and their institutions to their ancestors. We have seen how this process is put into work with a detailed account of the generations by groups of five kings (sometimes seven).50 In retracing the geneology, beginning with Khri srong lde btsan, we arrive also at Srong btsan sgam po, then Lha Tho tho ri. We will note that the last is duly retained in the list of the kings from the Chinese Annals. After the first ancestor ‘O lde

49

These are the texts according to which the first ancestor came from India (Bshad mdzod, 160). Dpa’o Gtsug lag phreng ba (ja, 5b) cited as a gsang ba chos lugs an account drawn from the Mañjuśrīmūlakalpa: the kings of India, the Licchavi, the Śākya, etc. 50 For the ancient texts, see 193–4. In the later tradition, between Lha Tho tho ri and Srong btsan sgam po, there were 5 generations (except No 6 which counts 7); from the latter to Khri srong lde btsan also 5 (list No 16). This sort of periodicisation is in relation to the theory of the “Three Protectors” of Tibet, three kings who are incarnations of bodhisattvas. The letter of Buddhaguhya (No 5) begins with an evocation of Mañjuśrī, followed by an eulogy of Khri srong lde btsan. The latter a descendant of Srong btsan sgam po, incarnation of Avalokiteśvara (cf. Stein, “Saint et divin,” n. 64). In the Sba bzhed the attributions are uncertain (cf. n. 6). In the account of the books fallen from the sky, Lha Tho tho ri is the incarnation of Samantabhadra (variants in No 17).

debut of buddhism in tibet

225

Spu rgyal (name deriving from the clan or from the line of kings), the author gives a second (that I cannot identify), then Lha Tho tho ri and, after five generations, Srong btsan sgam po.51 These speculations on the supposed history of the diffusion of Buddhism have permitted or have implied the displacement of a motif from one king to another. The “religious laws” are attributed sometimes to Srong btsan sgam po, sometimes to Khri srong lde btsan. Lha Tho tho ri is connected to king Dza and the latter to Aśoka. According to the Sba bzhed, the young king Khri srong lde btsan intends initially to speak of the (Chinese) religion of the Buddha (Hur, Chin. Fo 佛). This is the religion of the Ten Virtues (dge ba bcu’i chos). The king then received from China three books, the sūtra of the Ten Virtues, the Vajracchedikā and the Śālistamba-sūtra. Two of them are characteristic of both the manuscript “Dar ma fallen from the sky” and the double tradition of the Law and of the books fallen from the sky (cf. n. 35).52 It remains to analyse the later versions of the book fallen from the sky. We may disregard the sacred objects, signs of Buddhism. The sūtra Za ma tog bkod pa (Karaṇḍavyūha) asserts the fact that Srong btsan sgam po was considered to be an incarnation of Avalokiteśvara. The sūtra is dedicated to him and gives his six-syllable mantra and the dhāraṇi cintāmaṇi appropriate to one of his forms. Yet this sūtra is not in accord with the parallel list of the laws. The sūtra of the Ten Virtues is well represented therein (No 10, with the sūtra of the twelve nidānas, and No 11).53 This sūtra would be appropriate also to our manuscript because of its brevity. However, regarding the sūtra fallen from the sky, the most frequently attested in the list (and the oldest, No 6, where it is alone) is the Spang skong phyag rgya pa, a sūtra called “small” because it is brief. It also concerns the Virtues and the Faults.

Xin Tangshu 新唐書, 216 A (Pelliot, Histoire ancienne du Tibet, 82). The reconstruction of the first name as ‘O lde Spu rgyal is sure. The third name, transcribed Tuotudu (*d’â-t’uo-d’uo), ought to correspond to Lha Tho tho ri, as the initial Tibetan lh° is regularly rendered by a t° in Chinese (lha is transcribed tâ in the Treaty of Lhasa, North, l. 21 and 38). 52 Cf. already Tibetica Antiqua III, 166–7. When the king became an adult, he consulted the “writings” of his father (and grandfather), he found the Laozi jing 老子經. This appears strange. Yet the Ten Virtues figure in many places in the Daoist books of that era (cf. n. 36). 53 Śāntarakṣita explains to Khri srong lde btsan the Ten Virtues, the eighteen dhātu and the twelve nidāna (Sba bzhed, 17). 51

226

r.a. stein

This sūtra is preserved in the Kanjur (Peking, No 933) and figures in many instances among the Dunhuang manuscripts,54 but it is not mentioned in the Ldan dkar Catalogue. The Peking edition does not have a colophon, but that of Sde dge (No 267) states that it fell from the sky under Lha Tho tho ri.55 It does not exist in Chinese. In contrast, another sūtra of the same name, qualified as “large” (ms. S. 207 and 250, Pang kong chen po) exists in Tibetan and in Chinese among the Dunhuang manuscripts and in the Ldan dkar Catalogue (No 149 and No 258: mahāyāna-sūtra translated from the Chinese). The Tibetan version was incorporated into the Kanjur (Peking, No 930) and the Chinese version into the Taishō (vol. 85, No 2871). As its name indicates, it is dedicated to the purification of Faults by means of a confession and of an act of contrition (regret).56 Very long and confused, it does not concern us here, but some elements illustrate certain themes from our manuscript. The superiority of the Mahāyāna is largely underscored there (Taishō, pp. 1340a–1341b). In his previous lives, buddha Śākyamuni observed the prohibitions and venerated numerous buddhas. Despite this, they did not give him the prediction that he would become a buddha. Indeed, they belonged to the Hīnayāna. From this 54 ITJ 208.1 (Pam kong chu ngu , incomplete), followed by 208.2, “prayer of contrition” (‘gyod tshangs kyi smon lam), 247, 248 (with a confession of faults), 452.2, 209, 210 (title at the end: Pam kong brgya pa), 210.2, 211 (at the end: Dpang skong phyag rgya pa); PT 0017.1 (contrition, for a dead person), 0017.2, 0022 (with invitation of lha and klu), PT 0024 (anthology of texts, explication of saṃ sāra, explication of the Truths, in a scroll, contrition; translation and revision by Jinamitra and Ye shes sde, beginning of the 9th century), PT 0098.4 (with Prajñāpāramitā-naya-sūtra in 150 ślokas), and many others. 55 Schmidt, Der Index des Kandjur, 43–4. The Japanese editors of the Tōhoku Catalogue indicate Thon mi saṃ bhota as translator. This corresponds to the theory of Ne’u Paṇḍita, from the Blue Annals and the Dpag bsam ljon bzang: book later translated by Thu mi (or Li The se; cf. Ōtani, No 933). 56 Kanjur, No 930, Thar pa chen po phyogs su rgyas pa ‘gyod changs kyis sdig sbyangs pa ste sangs rgyas yongs su grub pa bkod pa; Ldan dkar, No 149 and No 258; ms. PT 0092, Thard pa chen po phyogs su rgyas pa’i chos kyi yi ge. Two fragments, ITJ 207 and 250, have been identified by the team of the Tōyōbunko (vol. III). In the Kanjur, this sūtra is followed by another, No 931 (chapters on confessions, prostrations, rites, buddhanāma, etc., taken from a ‘gyod changs kyi mdo sde, vol. 37, p. 64, col. 4). The Chinese version bears a colophon dated 590 and another from 536. We find there a long list of buddhas, the classic ones, the others unknown from elsewhere, the evocation of their names, the rituals of purification, lots of dhāraṇī and the effacement of the most grave sins by the recitation alone. The same subjects form chapter 4 of the Suvarṇaprabhāsa-sūtra, very widespread in Chinese, in Tibetan (translated from the Chinese) and in Uighur. From it originate numerous Dunhuang manuscripts (contrition and prayers) like another, more brief sūtra, the “Sūtra of the Great Drum” (Rnga bo che’i mdo, Kanjur, No 888; ms. PT 0066; Taishō, No 270, 271).

debut of buddhism in tibet

227

fact, the Buddha never heard the large Sūtra (Fangguang jing 方廣經; Thar pa chen po). It was only from Dipaṃ kara that he heard this Mahāyāna sūtra, was able to recite it, and received the prediction (1346c, 1347a–b, 1347c). The “small” Spang skong is, in fact, very brief. It begins with an evocation of the buddhas of all times and of the ten directions, of the bodhisattvas and of the sūtras (Kanjur, p. 84, col. 1–5). Following the aspirations and the offerings, the confession of faults (the ten Non-Virtues, mi dge ba) which eliminates them and procures merit, the wish of producing the thought of bodhi and of finally becoming a buddha. Could one of these sūtras fallen from the sky be the “Dar ma fallen from the sky” of our manuscript? The Karaṇḍavyūha (Kanjur, No 784, translated at the beginning of the 9th century) is mentioned in the Ldan dkar Catalogue (No 114). As it is long, this must not refer to our manuscript. The brief (“small”) Spang skong does not figure in the Catalogue. Only the Sūtra of the Ten Virtues is—at the same time—1) brief, 2) known from the Catalogue and 3) represented by the Dunhuang manuscripts (cf. n. 35). In the later tradition, it is the only one logically connected to the list of the Laws, a link which appears also in our manuscript. There, one faithfully suffers these royal laws and the Ten Virtues. It is this Sūtra which is best suited to the title “Dar ma fallen from the sky.” However, this is only one possibility here. In our manuscript, the author perhaps makes allusion to another sūtra completely. As in the beginning the “Mother” Prajñāpāramitā is exalted, we may think of a brief version of this sūtra or, for example, of an “Explanation of the Truths in one volume” as it exists in a series of texts from a Dunhuang manuscript (cf. n. 54). It is impossible to reconstitute the history without another contemporaneous document. All that we can state, but this is already an established fact, is that there was an ancient prototype of the later tradition. Alternately, later versions could be considered as a development, not absurd and arbitrary, but logical and justified, of ancient documents—identical or analogous to our manuscript—that the later authors must have been familiar with. One other possibility could be envisaged. The theme of sacred books falling from the sky is not solely attached to the sūtra of which we have just spoken. It also characterizes the first appearance of tantra. This

228

r.a. stein

theme is well known (Karmay 1981). The author of the Bshad mdzod (No 16 from the list) expressly associates the arrival of the sūtra under Lha Tho tho ri and the rain of Mahāyoga books which fell on the palace of king Dza. The Bka’ chems (No 11) connects the two events just as it connects the kings Dza and Lha Tho tho ri (cf. n. 46). Samten G. Karmay has given many versions of this legend dating from the 12th to 14th century.57 One version is found already in a commentary of the Prajñāpāramitā-naya-sūtra which, according to Bu ston, dates from the 8th century (Tanjur, No 3471, vol. 77, pp. 44–2; Karmay 1981, 199). Yet the motif of the rain of books does not figure there. Could this version of a rain of books falling from the sky onto the roof of a king worthy to receive them, but not able to understand them, have a rapport with our manuscript? The probability is small as this rain of books included the “eighteen sūtras (from the tantras).” Only the form of the miracle would be retained. The Vajrayāna figures a lot in our text among the different teachings. Another motif from the late legend of the tantras fallen from the sky could be considered as being found on germinal form in the ancient texts. In the later tradition, the book is generally golden and the writing in liquid vaiḍūrya, and just as for the classic sūtras so for the tantras (called sūtras). Sometimes, it is the inverse: leaves of vaiḍūrya and letters of gold (Bshad mdzod) or blue paper (mthing gi shog gu) and golden letters (Klong chen chos ‘byung). Often the book is placed in a box of precious stones (for the tantras, cf. n. 46). This motif is more widespread for revealed texts, secret and precious (notably in Daoism). However, it is worth the trouble to remark that it also characterizes the royal edicts in Tibet. The first edict was written on blue paper (shog bu 57 In the 12th century, Bsod nams rtse mo stated in his Rgyud sde spyi rnam (Sa skya bka’ ‘bum, vol. II, p. 28–2) that twenty years after the nirvāṇa of the Buddha, there was, in the East, in the land of Za hor, alias O rgyan, the king Dza, alias Indrabhuti. On his house fell a golden book with writing in liquid vaiḍūrya. Karmay gives the same account according to the Vai ro ‘dra ‘bag, cited in the Klong chen chos ‘byung (of 1362 if this work is really his). In this work (Karmay 1981, 222), the books fall on the Asura Cave situated in Za hor. Karmay also cites the Padma thang yig (ed. Sde dge, 24b) and the Rgyal po bka’ thang (ed. Lhasa, 24b). We may include the Ma ṇi bka’ ‘bum (Lo rgyus chen po, chap. 17, vol. 1, 40b). The Bon po bka’ thang (chap. 29, 276n), speaking of gter ma, mentions in relation to the tantra Sgyu ‘phrul, the kings Li tsa byi Dri ma med (Vimala) and Dza. Dpa’o Gtsug (chap. Tha, 238) gives the lineage of the people who have received from Vajrapāṇi the Mahāyoga tantras. The fifth is Li tsa byi Dri ma med pa. It is after him that king Dza receives the rain of books, placed in a golden box, written on blue paper with ink of gold (thing shog gser yig). It is similar in the chos ‘byung of Nyang ral (cf. n. 46).

debut of buddhism in tibet

229

thing ga) in golden letters, and it was placed in a golden box. The third also, but the box was made from phra men (lapis lazuli, Richardson 1985, 105, n. 1).d In the inscription of Rkong po also, the edict-sermon of the king was placed in a box of phra men (op. cit., 69). It is the same for the inscription of Lcang bu (of Khri srong lde btsan; Richardson, 105). The “chronicle” relative to the debut of Buddhism, cited in the second edict, was written in letters of phra men and placed in a golden box. We know that the custom of writing sūtras and other sacred texts on dark blue paper with ink of gold or of silver is maintained up to our time.58 Recapitulation On the subject of the debut of Buddhism in Tibet, the later tradition, starting from the 11th or 12th century, goes back in part to around the year 800 A.D. We cannot contrast it to the ancient texts as an arbitrary invention due to the zeal of fervent Buddhists. Certainly there is fiction, but it is already considered fact by the Buddhist kings and by the pro-Buddhist faction. We find it at work in certain inscriptions and in the edicts. The first even cites the name of the author of a “chronicle,” Śīlavarman of Bran ti, surely a Tibetan Buddhist. The manuscript “Dar ma fallen from the sky” is certainly too fragmentary to permit its characterization with precision. However, we can state that it is distinguished by the following traits. On the one hand, it resembles the works of Khri srong lde btsan and his kalyāṇamitra Śāntarakṣita. The author discusses the different aspects of Buddhism and of its texts in using scholarly citations from śāstras and sūtras. On the other hand, the author insists on the theme of the good governance of a Buddhist king who effects the happiness of the people and guarantees the good mores of the laity. The first of these kings is Srong btsan sgam po.

d It is now fairly clear that phra men does not mean lapis lazuli. According to Cristina Scherrer-Schaub, it concerns gilded metal. According to Dan Martin, it may refer to gilded silver or a variegated hard stone, such as agate or onyx. Dung dkar Blo bzang ‘phrin las defines it as follows: “gser dang dngul spel nas bzos pa’i dngos rigs” (Dung dkar tshig mdzod chen mo, 1359)—ed. 58 According to the Ma ṇi bka’ ‘bum (I, 70b), the “testament” (bka’ chems) of Srong btan sgam po was written in letters of gold and silver on blue silk (chu dar sngon po) and hidden at Khra ‘brug as “royal treasure” (bla gter).

230

r.a. stein

The language employed (gtsug lag) and some references, such as the teachings of the ancient sages, are ambiguous. They could be applied equally well to Buddhism (and to its sage-king Srong btsan sgam po) as to the indigenous traditions to which the author knowingly refers by going back to the first legendary ancestor ‘O lde Spu rgyal. In this way the author may satisfy, at least in part, the conservative faction hostile to Buddhism whose anti-Buddhist laws, however, the author laments. Finally, by its title, our manuscript introduces a legendary element, a miracle, probably concerning the debut of the rise of a certain type of Buddhism. The later tradition, which has amply developed this theme, certainly cannot be used to reconstitute the legend to which the manuscript makes allusion. It permits us, however, to imagine that the author perhaps wished to attribute the appearance of an essential Buddhist text to a legendary ancestor, a bit like in the inscriptions.

TIBETICA ANTIQUA V

THE INDIGENOUS RELIGION AND THE BON PO IN DUNHUANG MANUSCRIPTSa R.A. Stein I. Theories 1. The ancient religion As we know, the entire lamaist tradition since the middle of the 12th century presents the bon pos as the priests of the indigenous religion, partly from foreign origins, which reigned prior to the introduction of Buddhism. All Tibetologists have followed this tradition in stating that Bon was the pre-Buddhist religion in Tibet. Although this tradition is only attested in a later era—and no ancient (7th–9th centuries) text proves it—it was natural and inevitable that it should be adopted for want of anything better. The properly bon po tradition, from an equally late date, has only been studied lately and partially. Certain scholars have adopted it. They will be spoken of below. However, a problem poses itself from the moment we take note of the Dunhuang manuscripts, notably in the work of F.W. Thomas and of Marcel Lalou. Among these manuscripts figure many clearly non-Buddhist texts. Taking account of the later lamaist tradition, these a

For information on the considerable amount of work done in Bon studies since Stein’s article, see Dan Martin’s annotated bibliography of Bon studies, contained in his Unearthing Bon Treasures: Life and Contested Legacy of a Tibetan Scripture Revealer, with a General Bibliography of Bon, (Leiden: Brill, 2001), 287–442. Note that scholarly books and articles in Russian, Japanese, and Chinese are not contained in this extremely useful work. An updated version of Dan Martin’s Bon bibliographies has been made available by the author online at https://sites.google.com/site/ tibetological/bon-bibliography. Since the publication of Martin’s bibliography, S.G. Karmay and Yasuhiko Nagano have continued to publish outstanding works in this field as part of their ongoing series in Bon studies. See A Catologue of the New Collection of Bonpo Katen Texts, ed. S.G. Karmay and Yasuhiko Nagano, (Osaka: National Museum of Ethnology, 2001); The Call of the Blue Cuckoo: an Anthology of Nine Bonpo Texts on Myths and Rituals, ed. S.G. Karmay and Yasuhiko Nagano, (Osaka: National Museum of Ethnology, 2002); A Survey of Bonpo Monasteries and Temples in Tibet and the Himalaya, ed. S.G. Karmay and Yasuhiko Nagano, (Osaka: National Museum of Ethnology, 2003); A Lexicon of Zhangzhung and Bonpo Terms, ed. S.G. Karmay and Yasuhiko Nagano, (Osaka: National Museum of Ethnology, 2008)—ed.

232

r.a. stein

authors have qualified these texts as bon po and as “pre-Buddhist.” It would be better to avoid this last expression and speak only of “nonBuddhist” texts. In fact, we are ignorant of the exact date of different Dunhuang manuscripts. They are certainly ancient, dating in the majority from the 9th and 10th centuries, but in that era Buddhism had already taken root in Tibet. In order to be able to speak of “preBuddhist” texts, we must admit that at least the non-Buddhist manuscripts date from the previous centuries (7th–8th). Yet nothing proves this. All that we can state is that the contents of a manuscript may be anterior to it. However, this will never be anything other than a hypothesis. In a rather great number of non-Buddhist texts, but not in all, above all in the funerary rituals and in the divinatory texts, an essential and constant role is enjoyed by the priests named bon po1 (or bon of different sorts) and gshen, words well known in the later tradition. Also, certain authors (Lalou 1953)2 and Stein (1970 and 1971, 479) have themselves qualified these texts as “bon po.” In his magisterial work, Snellgrove (1987, 403, n. 47) expressly criticized me for this use of the word. He underscores that we must distinguish between the bon pos of the Dunhuang manuscripts, simple priestly functionaries, and the Bon po faithful of the sect or school of that name (a “Buddhist heresy” as Snellgrove states, 451, 503) such as we understand them later.3 The problem of knowing if there is a relation between the two sorts of bon po will be revisited. Suffice it to say here that the distinction has not evidently escaped anyone. In writing the critiqued phrase (1971, 479), I have simply thought about the presence of bon po priests in that text and about analogies of structure and of content between the accounts of the Dunhuang manuscripts that I had analyzed and the Klu ‘bum of the late Bon pos. As to the text PT 0239 (Stein 1970), the term bon po that I used for the funerary ritual is expressly justified by the text itself. There, a Buddhist attacks the customs of Bon or the bon pos considered as bad and opposed to those of Buddhism (lha chos, 162–3). Samten 1 In order to avoid confusion, I am writing from now on the words bon and bon po in italics when it concerns the Dunhuang manuscripts and in Roman (Bon and bon po) for the religious system and its adherents of the later era. 2 Lalou, Rituel bon-po des funérailles royales, 2, this is a “rituel funéraire des Bon-po.” Lalou, “Fiefs, poisons et guérisseurs”: “fragments de la littérature bon-po.” 3 He did this before, twenty years earlier in The Nine Ways of Bon, 21. Cf. here, n. 8.

bon po in dunhuang manuscripts

233

G. Karmay (1983, 93) has also cited this text in order to prove that (late) Bon is already attested in the era of these manuscripts, but his perspective does not seem adequate to me.b The text writes bon yas ‘dod where bon is perhaps not Bon, but an abbreviation of bon po (“the bon pos love the yas”) since earlier the author spoke in parallel of the black men and of the black funerals as opposed to “white” Buddhism. Karmay’s interpretation will be discussed later (250). Snellgrove states that the ancient religion is nowhere designated by the word bon(-po) (389). This is true only in part. That is true for the Old Tibetan Chronicle, the second royal edict, and the inscriptions. However, there is the manuscript PT 0239 that I have just cited and still others that Snellgrove does not mention.4 In any case, Snellgrove naturally is aware of the numerous bon po and gshen who enjoy a large role in the accounts and the funerary rituals, but for him these are simply functionaries (n. 47). We will look at these cases below. One bon mo is attested in a historical text, the Annals (PT 1288; Bacot DTT, 19) on the date 705, where she figures among the rebels who have been killed. A bon po and a bon mo are mentioned in the manuscript PT 0990 (History of King Go ‘phang; cf. Stein 1985, n. 18). Snellgrove does not talk about these bon pos and does not clearly state if they make up part of the pre-Buddhist religion or not. He speaks however of priests of the indigenous religion (according to him excessively identified with Bon). They occupy themselves with funerary rites, with divination and with the cult of local divinities (389). Yet in the Dunhuang texts, these priests are often called bon po. Snellgrove states elsewhere also (390) that Bon designates initially a particular category of priests of the indigenous religion, but that Bon (as a system) appears with another sense between the end of the 9th and the middle of the 11th century (390, 399).

b The editor would like to draw the reader’s attention to the English translation of the Karmay article refered to here by Stein. S.G. Karmay, “Early Evidence for the Existence of Bon as a Religion in the Royal Period.” As an addendum (168), Karmay addresses the criticism posed here by Stein, and points out some problems with Stein’s own argument.—ed. 4 This is the case with texts in which the bon pos are presented as “heretics” (mu stegs pa) by the Buddhists who criticize them or as opposed to the Buddhist clergy. S.G. Karmay (“Un témoignage sur le Bon face au bouddhisme à l’époque des rois tibétains”) has given an example of this, and other cases have been signaled by myself (Tibetica Antiqua I and “La mythologie hindouïste au Tibet”). These can be found here below.

234

r.a. stein

If the term Bon or bon po is not appropriate for designating the indigenous religion of ancient Tibet, how should it be named, or at least how is it designated in the Dunhuang manuscripts? We know that Mme A. Macdonald (1971) set aside the word Gtsug or gtsug lag, but I have tried to show that this is an error (TA III). Previously, Haarh reserved the word Chos (capitalized! Cf. Stein, TA III, 135–6). Snellgrove in fact did as much. That is, in the royal inscriptions and in the Old Tibetan Chronicle, the perfect state in the era of the ancestors is qualified by the binome chos (lugs) bzang (po) and gtsug (lag) chen (po, op. cit., n. 34). Yet, whereas Haarh has excessively made from Chos a cosmic principle, Snellgrove is more prudent. He contents himself to state, with reason, that the authors of certain texts employed the word chos (which Snellgrove always writes in small letters and in italics) in order to designate the indigenous religion. The latter is thus not named Bon, but chos (389, 399, 401, 410–2). For him, this word initially designated that religion and was later employed in order to translate the word dharma (356, 389, 399, 441). For the first proposition, he refers to the royal inscriptions (514); yet the use of chos for dharma is contemporaneous with, and not posterior to, these texts. The word chos refers to the ancient religion of the ancestors, but the inscriptions in which it figures date from the same era as that of the use of chos for dharma. In any event, the word chos (often an abbreviation of chos lugs) simply signifies “religion,” and can apply to any. We cannot employ it as the name of the pre-Buddhist religion. Snellgrove saw this well (356). This would return to a tautology: the religion calls itself or is designated by the word “religion.” The word may be applied to all sorts of beliefs and customs. It appears sometimes alone or with the adjective “good” (chos bzang) as in the hymns to the glory of the kings, sometimes it is specified by an epithet as in “religion of the Buddha.” Often the authors remain willingly vague. In the Old Tibetan Chronicle (Bacot DTT, 114), the reign of Khri srong lde btsan is initially described by the formula chos bzang srid che, analogous to that of the inscriptions (chos bzang gtsug che). We might believe that it concerns the indigenous religion. Then the author states that outwardly the king overcame the enemies and inwardly he practiced religion (chos), which together indicate a good and just administration. Yet at the end the author states that the king found the “religion of the Buddha” (sangs rgyas gyi chos). The same expression is employed for the same king in the Bsam yas inscription (l. 4) and for

bon po in dunhuang manuscripts

235

the king Srong btsan sgam po in the Skar chung inscription (l. 5; Stein, TA III, 133). In the era of the redaction of the Old Tibetan Chronicle (800–40), the introduction of Buddhism was usually attributed to Srong btsan sgam po. In the Old Tibetan Chronicle (Bacot DTT, 118), the author says of the king simply chos bzang; we might believe that it is a question of the indigenous religion. This is, however, not very probable. The same king is there exalted for the promulgation of a just Code and of the redaction of “good texts of the Tibetan religion” (Bod kyi chos gzhung bzang po). With the reader to divine with which religion it is concerned. Similarly, in the text called “Dharma fallen from Heaven” (ITJ 370.5), the author eulogizes the kings who have propagated Buddhism, but to this purpose speaks of chos bzang gtsug lag rnying and of Bod kyi chos lugs. Although that manner of speaking may cause us to think of the indigenous religion, it must concern Buddhism (cf. Stein, TA IV, 200–2). In contrast, in the second royal edict, “the ancient religion of Tibet” might well suggest the indigenous, non-Buddhist religion.5 Naturally, the word “religion” (chos or chos lugs) may be employed, according to the authors of the texts, in all sorts of circumstances. In a collection of moral maxims (PT 0992, text III, Legs nyes kyi mtshan ma bstan pa), a Buddhist critiques the poor mores of the people (chos lugs ngan pa) as opposed to Buddhism (“good manners,” gtsug lag bzang po). Elsewhere, Buddhism is designated by the expressions chos lugs bzang po (PT 0037, 1b–3a) or chos bzang po (PT 0037, 15a). In the “Account of Ages” (ITJ 733–735), the author states that each land has its religion or its habit (yul re chos re) and criticizes the “new religion” (chos sar pa; Thomas 1957, text III; Stein 1985, 93–4). We are unaware of which religion it concerns. When an author wants precision, he employs an epithet. He states lha chos (“religion of the gods” or “of god,” the Buddha) for Buddhism (e.g. in the Prayers of De ga,” PT 0016, l. 33; Stein, TA III, 128–9) and myi yi chos lugs (“the custom of men”) for the morality of the laity (letter of Buddhaguhya; ibid., n. 23). In the royal inscriptions, the “good religion” of the ancestors is qualified by elegiac expressions like lha’i lugs, “manners of the gods” or it is exalted as similar to the “religion (or the Principle) of Heaven” (gnam gyi chos; 5

Chos rnying pa, but Snellgrove thinks that this “ancient religion” cannot be identified either with the royal cult (because it is described as harmful, 412). It is however known to be connected with the sku lha and thus often refers to the indigenous religion of the kings (cf. Stein, Tibetica Antiqua IV, n. 16).

236

r.a. stein

inscription of Khri lde srong btsan) or similar to the “religion (or the Principle) of Heaven and Earth” (gnam sa’i chos; inscription of Khri srong lde btsan; cf. Stein, TA III, 159). Here, it is not a question of the name of the archaic religion, as we might think it, but of expressions which have perhaps even been copied from the Chinese expressions (ibid., 163–4).6 It should thus always be remembered that, according to the authors, chos may be employed in all sorts of contexts and circumstances, and not only for the ancient religion. Of what consists, according to Snellgrove, this ancient, non-Buddhist religion named chos? It is the cult of the divine royalty, maintained despite the propagation of Buddhism (384). This cult disappears with the dynasty in 842 (384, 514). However, there are also all the non-Buddhist religious customs, notably the belief in the sacred mountains (356). There are also the sacrifices to the tombs and on the occasion of the oaths,7 the augurs (divination, 389) and all sorts of popular rites, popular religion as we find it across the entire world (514). There is nothing very new there. As I have stated elsewhere (TA III, 124), the ancient religion does not, certainly, have a particular name. Without doubt, we should give up calling it bon po like the later lamaist tradition does, but we do not gain much in naming it chos. There is this fine word, but it does not necessarily designate, always and everywhere, in the ancient documents, the pre-Buddhist religion. If it is well understood that we must not confound the ancient bon pos of the Dunhuang manuscripts with the Bon organized later, was there no link—was it etymological—between the homophones bon and Bon?8 Was there not rather a conti-

6 For chos and its derivatives serving to translate the Chinese Dao 道 in the sense of the Supreme Principle designating notably bodhi, see Stein, Tibetica Antiqua I, 27–8. 7 This is undoubtedly a reference to the Chinese documents relative to the oaths; cf. Stein, “Les serments des traités sino-tibétains (viiie–ixe siècles).” 8 Snellgrove (The Nine Ways of Bon, 20, n. 2) went as far as proposing two different etymologies for the bon pos, ancient priests, and the Bon pos, faithful of the later Bon. On the one hand, he proposes that the word bon derives from ‘bod pa, “to name,” and translates bon po by “to invoke” in beginning again the work of W. Simon and of G. Uray. On the other hand, Bon, the Tibetan religion, derives from Bod, “indigenous” (while recalling the article of M. Lalou). Also, Snellgrove and Richardson (A Cultural History of Tibet, 52, 59) state that the ancient priests were probably the bon “invokers” and the gshen “sacrificers” (in thinking about gshed, etymology uncertain; for the functions of the gshen, see below). For the use of the verb bon in the Dunhuang manuscripts where it signifies “to give,” cf. my review of The Nine Ways of Bon in Asia Major, 125, n. 4. Already Thomas (TLTD, II, 395 and TLTD, III, 102 and AFL,

bon po in dunhuang manuscripts

237

nuity between these two terms? To my sense, it is a question of one and the same word and there ought thus to be an unspecified relation between the two meanings. It is necessary to attempt to respond to these questions. 2. Bon pos and Bon 1. Theories on the antecedents of late Bon Everyone knows the tradition which makes of Bon the pre-Buddhist religion. It is necessary only to say a word about the “periodicization” of its history in three periods. It is understood and has been oft repeated since S. Ch. Das translated the chapter on Bon from the Grub mtha’ shel gyi me long of Thu’u bkwan blo bzang chos kyi nyi ma (1737–1802), because it is there that we find it (cf. Hoffmann 1950, 416; trans., 329–31). We may have doubts (as is the case with P. Kvaerne 1972, 29) as to the merit of this affirmation, given the late date of the author. Yet in reality, we know now that the chapter from Thu’u bkwan is in part a verbatim citation from of the ‘Bri gung dgongs gcig of ‘Bri gung pa ‘Jig rten mgon po (1143–1207). This history of Bon in three stages thus goes back to an important scholar of the 12th century. I point them out here according to the text of ‘Bri bung pa, which differs in part from the explanation of Thu’u bkwan.9 The first stage is the brdol bon. It situates itself in the era of king Khri srong lde btsan, in the sixth generation after Gnya’ khri btsan po. A boy of Central Tibet (Dbus), from a Bshen (read: Gshen) clan, had been “initiated” by demons and thus understood the lha ‘dre, the good and ill that they are able to do and the rites that it is necessary to execute to turn them aside. The murder of Gri gum occurs, and for that it is necessary to find the funerary rite (gri bshid). The bon pos state then that one may resume the rites of three kinds: below, overcome the demons; above, make offerings to the “gods of the old” (rgan gyi lha, the ancestors?); in the middle, purify (‘don) the foyer of the

56) translated gshen by “executioners.” However, he had doubts, and points out that the documents do not provide evidence (TLTD, III, 104). M. Lalou (Rituel bon-po des funérailles royales, 12 [350]) also translates sku gshen by “sacrificers.” She relies on the fact that in the list of diverse bon po from the Jo mo gling gsum, the gshen slit the throats of animals (I refer myself to the same text; Stein, “Un document ancien relatif aux rites funéraires des bon-po tibétains,” n. 3). Yet this is an exceptional case; cf. below n. 38). 9 Dgongs gcig yig cha, ed. New Delhi, 1969, I; p. 292.

238

r.a. stein

house. Yet they do not understand the rite of subjugating the sword (gri ‘dul; in case of murder). This rdol bon is known as the chab nag (“black water”) and as the Bon of Causes (Rgyu’i Bon).10 The second stage is that of the ‘khyar bon (“mislaid”). This is a bad philosophy of heretics. ‘Bri gung pa here cites a cosmological text. From Non-being comes Being. Then a white dew is produced. At the end, the world is born from an egg. The author also affirms that the world has been made by Phya (and?) Dbang phyug (Īśvara). This is a philosophy of the Śaivite heretics. The funerary rites (bshid), the techniques of making bleedings (gtar du len pa)11 and of cutting iron with a bird’s plume, the statements of the gods (lha bka’; cf. Stein, TA III, n. 15), the cords (rngu tig; read ju tig), the red scapula (?, sogs dmar), to kill horses and sheep, all which arises from a philosophy of permanence. These are the four poor philosophies (“straying,” ‘khyar ba). As Gshen rab mi bo did not know the gri bshid (necessary for the death of Gri gum), three bon pos from Kha che (Kashmir), from Bru sha and from Zhang zhung were called. One of them went to the sky on a drum, took bleedings, cut iron with a feather, etc. (thus showing his power). Another made the ju tig cords, the statements of the gods (lha bka’), the red scapula (?, sogs dmar). He thus practiced divination. The third bon po evokes the dead (gshin po ‘dur ba) and knew different funerary rituals (bshid). Before the arrival of the three bon pos, Bon was not formulated as a philosophy (lha ba grub mtha’). With them, the cult of the gods (lha mchod pa), subjugation of demons (sri gnon pa), etc., were erected into a unique philosophical view of Bon. All this is the “straying” Bon (‘khyar bon). This paragraph seems poorly written or poorly transmitted. Thu’u bkwan has omitted the citation of the text which justified the qualification of the “straying” Bon as Hindu heresy. The appearance of an organized, philosophical school dates from the arrival of bon pos from foreign lands in the west. Yet the techniques of these bon pos do not have anything belonging to such a philosophical school. The third period is that of Bon of adaptations (bsgyur bon). It is divided into three stages, first, middle and last. The first is marked by 10

These are the inferior vehicles (magic, ritual) of the Nine Vehicles (Snellgrove, The Nine Ways of Bon, 12, 17, and Karmay, “A General Introduction to the History and Doctrines of Bon,” 178–9). 11 Here, Thu’u bkwan writes: gter kha len pa, “taking the treasures.”

bon po in dunhuang manuscripts

239

a paṇḍit dressed in blue12 who was subjected to a punishment by the king Indrabodhi.13 To harm the Buddhists, he comes close to their enemies and becomes chaplain of the king. He transformed many of the books of Buddhism (chos) into Bon and hid them. The king, informed, discovered this “treasure.” The text of this “treasure” contains the processes which are still useful “up to the present.” The intermediate period is situated in the era of king Khri srong lde btsan. A discussion between Buddhists and bon pos had been organized.14 The Buddhists were victorious. There was then a competition of magic (mthu). The bon pos made a funerary ritual (shi ba’i bshid) and recalled the soul (bla bkug pa) of a minister, a rite which was efficacious. However, Padmasambhava intervened (in a fashion which I do not understand well). He is proclaimed the victor. The king ordered Rgyal ba’i byang chub to learn Buddhism (chos) alongside the ācārya Rin chen mchog. Yet he refuses. Punished, he becomes angry and associates himself with the bon pos. Together they transform the Buddhist terminology into bon po vocabulary. There follows a list of these adaptations (chos becomes bon; chos sku becomes bon sku, etc.). Having learned that, the king orders the cutting of the throats of those who have done thus. The bon pos have little and hide the texts as “treasures.” These are what are later called the bon po “treasures” (gter ma). The last period is that of the renewal of Buddhism in Amdo after the persecution of Glang dar ma. A certain Gshen sgur (read: rgur) Glu (read: Klu) dga’15 frequented the Chu mig ring mo monastery in Gtsang, and transforms into a bon po place the place called Sgro lag of Dar yul. There, he transformed the great sūtras of Buddhism into bon po sūtras. The Klu ‘bum is thus elaborated on the basis of the “Five Sections of dhāraṇī.” He hid them as “treasures.” Then he discovered them himself. From that era “up to the present” (12th century), the

12 A paṇḍit dressed in blue is associated with a “red ācarya,” a tantrika or yogin with heterodox practices (notably sexual). Both are criticized in the era of Atiśa (Karmay, “The Ordinance of Bla-ma Ye-shes-‘od,” 152, n. 29). 13 This account is missing in the explanation of Thu’u bkwan. 14 Sba bzhed, ed. Stein, 27–8 and elsewhere. See below. 15 This is without doubt the gshen chen Kun dga’ (996–1035) who made his discoveries in 1017 (Karmay, “The Ordinance of Bla-ma Ye-shes-‘od,” 184). For the date according to the bon po chronological Table, the Bstan rtsis, see Kvaerne, “The Bstan rcis of Ñi ma bstan ‘jin.”

240

r.a. stein

Khyung po16 Bon zhig and other bon pos have continued unabated this genre of “transformations.” All these three periods of bsgyur bon are called chab dkar (“white water”) and belong to the “Bon of the Fruit” (‘bras bu’i bon).17 As Kvaerne indicated (1972, 29), this periodicization was the basis of the historical exposé of Hoffmann (1956). However, there is evidently no reason not to also adopt the point of view of the bon po tradition as Snellgrove, Kvaerne and S.G. Karmay have done. All of them have had particularly amicable relationships with the bon po refugees in India (Karmay being himself bon po). The bon po literature is still in great measure unexplored. It may well be that we will find therein a text of the periodicization of its history. We find a start in the “Treasury of Good Sayings” (Karmay 1972, 30ff.). A brief outline is given in the Bstan ‘byung. We may consult other works.18 I am not in a position to study here these bon po texts directly and limit myself to again taking up the principle theses of the three authors cited above. The founder of Bon, the master (ston pa) Gshen rab (sometimes: °rabs) mi bo, came from Ta zig (Iran) or from Zhang zhung. Snellgrove (1987, 390) thought that this tradition must be taken seriously. Bon came from Zhang zhung and their texts were translated from Zhang zhung into Tibetan (388). Snellgrove does not specify the date. For him, Bon as a great, organized religion represents a heretical form

16 In the modern era, the tribes and lands of Khyung po (in Khams) were bon po. Mi la ras pa (1040–1123) was from this clan. His ancestor was Khyung po Jo sras. According to the Bstan ‘byung (bon po text; 111bff.), the Khyung po clan of Mi la ras pa descended from that of Zhang zhung. We know that Mi la ras pa was very familiar with bon po ritual of which he gave a description (cf. Stein, La civilisation tibétaine, 206). The father and mother of Khyung po rnal ‘byor (founder of the Shangs pa bka’ brgyud) were bon po (Rgya Bod yig tshang, Seattle manuscript, 326b). He himself studies Bon at thirteen years of age (11th century). 17 These are the superior vehicles (cf. n. 10). 18 The Bstan ‘byung or Bstan pa’i ‘byung khungs of Kun grol pa dates from 1766 (manuscript from the British Museum). There is a Bon chos dar nub kyi lo rgyus (library of the University of Oslo). Snellgrove (The Nine Ways of Bon, 16, n. 1) indicated that the Zhang zhung snyang rgyud contains a chapter Bstan pa dar nub kyi lo rgyus. The Bstan ‘byung evokes in some pages the major events: 1) disappearance of the Bon under Gri gum and the hiding of gter ma (43a, 46a); 2) second disappearance of the Bon under Khri srong lde btsan (43b); 3) invitation of O rgyan rin po che; bon and chos jointly; bon po part hidden as “treasures,” another part assimilated (44b); 3) sixty years without Bon (45a); 4) disappearance of Bon to Zhang zhung, then conquered by Khri srong lde btsan (45a); the hiding of gter ma (45b); persecution of Buddhism under Glang dar ma (45b); no Buddhism for seventy-two (or two times seventy?) years (46a).

bon po in dunhuang manuscripts

241

of Buddhism (1967, 15). Without ever stating it clearly and expressly, he seems to allow that this Bon (as it is presented later in the 11th century) was already present in Tibet in the 8th century and even before (7th–11th centuries; 1987, 400 and 514). It there concerns the superior Vehicles (Rdzogs chen, etc.) of the Nine Vehicles of Bon. Yet at the same time the inferior Vehicles, rites and accounts, were also present among the bon and gshen priests (401).19 In spite of the warning, oft repeated, that the ancient religion was never called bon po and ought not to be confounded with the later Bon, Snellgrove allows for the tradition according to which Gshen rab gave to the Tibetan bon pos these inferior Vehicles of prayer to the gods and of subjugating demons (1967, 14). The late Bon preserved the rites which “surely formed part” of the pre-Buddhist, indigenous religion (n. 39). Snellgrove cites in this regard the “Treasury of Good Sayings” (Karmay 1972, 30–1) which gives a list of twelve kinds of rituals and situates them in the era of the seven Khri kings. The author of this text thinks that the other superior Vehicles were also revealed in this era. According to Karmay (1975b, 182), history begins with the indigenous religion (divine royalty, sacred mountains) wherein figure the priests named bon po and their rituals. This in the 6th and 7th centuries. Then, in the 7th century has been placed the adaptation of foreign elements. Finally, we arrive at Bon in a position of power in the 8th century. It is then opposed to Buddhism. Kvaerne (1972, 27 & 33) speaks of foreign bon pos coming from the Indo-Iranian frontiers, who were able to to bring Hindu and Buddhist elements (via Zhang zhung). Snellgrove also distinguished between the Buddhism (and perhaps Manichaeism) that the bon po had been able to absorb in Zhang zhung and in Central Asia and that which the Tibetans had introduced from India (400). Kvaerne (op. cit., 34) speaks of foreign bon pos at whose sides there were indigenous specialists also named bon po in the later texts. The relationship between the two is not clear (38). However, in the 8th century, there were bon po siddhas in Tibet. Some were Tibetans; others came from Zhang zhung. Living side by side with Indian and Tibetans tantrists, they elaborated a system named Rdzogs chen (38). “For reasons still obscure,” these

19 Pp. 405–7, he compares the Nine Vehicles of the Bon pos with those of the rnying ma pas. The first four Vehicles of the Bon pos represent the “popular religion” which is common to the two.

242

r.a. stein

(bon po) siddhas identified themselves with the indigenous priests of which one part was named bon po, “invokers” (39). There is a relation of continuity between the later Bon (11th century) and the ancient bon po priests, the Bon having preserved many of the ancient beliefs and practices (Kvaerne 1985, 5). Snellgrove thinks the same (1967, 4). I also think that this is just and later will give precise examples of this continuity. As with the lamaist tradition, that of Bon po admits of the hostile relations which opposed Buddhists and Bon pos in the 8th century. The great, public controversy which the Sba bzhed recounts (cf. above, n. 14) took place in 785 (Karmay 1975, 183; cf. Snellgrove 1967, 19 where he cites the Rgyal rabs Bon, ed. S.Ch. Das, 50). There follows from it a persecution of the Bon pos. Apropos of this, Kvaerne (1974, 29) speaks of the opposition between the Buddhists invited by the king and certain aristocratic clans as well as an organized body of the traditional, but not necessarily indigenous, religion. Undoubtedly, he is thinking of the organized, philosophical Bon represented by the Tibetan siddhas and originating from Zhang zhung. This is only a supposition and the question remains open. In the account of the Sba bzhed, it is a question of a magical competition rather than a philosophical disputation. When the texts speak to us about the hostility of the clans, we are unaware if these communities were those of “sorcerer” bon po priests of which the Dunhuang manuscripts speak, or if these were groups of siddhas or other philosophers (e.g. the representatives of Rdzogs chen) whose existence in the 8th century has been admitted. As Karmay puts it (1975, 183), an obscure period for the history of Bon extended from 785 (the controversy) to 1017 (the discovery of “treasures” by Klu dga’). He indicates, however, the date 913 for the first discovery (187), but he adds that the codification of the bon po texts and the constitution of the Canon dates from Klu dga’ (cf. above, n. 15). According to Kvaerne (1974, 30), the formation of the bon po Canon had to be done between the end of the empire (c. 842) and the 11th century, the date by which the bon pos are in fact a lamaist school. Snellgrove (1967, 16) situated the organization of Bon into Nine Vehicles at the latest to the 10th century. As an organized religion, Bon goes up to the 9th century. According to him, since 838 the future bon pos and the rnying ma pa elaborated their teachings without the control of a Church and without temples and monasteries (1987, 404). They concerned themselves above all with the superior vehicles, but did not go so far as to neglect the popular religious practices.

bon po in dunhuang manuscripts

243

These are probable assumptions. Yet the authors cited never, on this subject, speak of the Dunhuang manuscripts which date, for the most part, from the 9th and 10th century and which contain some indications of the bon pos. We will speak soon about this. For this obscure period, we have as a benchmark in the 10th century the celebrated Bla chen Dge rab gsal, or Dgongs pa rab gsal, who restarted the Buddhist vinaya lineage interrupted by the persecution. Yet, he was born in Tsong kha in a bon po family (according to the lamaist chronicles).20 However, what is intended by “bon po family”? The Bon faithful or bon po priests? We will note that the Dunhuang manuscripts were available on site until 1035 (or thereabouts), the date of the closing of the deposit. We must suppose that other specimens of these texts could be consulted elsewhere in Tibet. Therein is an element of the problem of the continuity of the tradition, a problem which will occupy us later. In the 11th century, at the latest, the Bon organized as a school is constituted and its principle works are “discovered” or composed. In the same era, we also see Buddhists and bon pos side-by-side, sometimes in opposition, sometimes in amicable relations. Snellgrove announces these relations in citing the Blue Annals (Roerich, The Blue Annals, 112–3). At the joining of the 10th and 11th century we see a tantrist and a bon po priest invited to the same celebration. We have already seen (above, n. 16) Mi la ras pa imitate a bon po ritual. Otherwise, in the legend, he is in magical competition with Na ro bon chung. Rwa lo tsa ba (c. 1050–1110) is attacked by the magic of the bon po Gshen te thul and subjugates him (his biography, fol. 97a), and in Zhang zhung he converts many bon pos (98a).21 3. The Dunhuang manuscripts and the later tradition The authors cited above readily admit that the later texts, whether they are lamaist or bon po, have preserved elements of the ancient

20 His date is uncertain because of the chronological confusion of that era which relate to a sexagenary cycle. Richardson (“A Tibetan Inscription from rGyal lha-khaṅ; and a note on Tibetan Chronology from A.D. 841 to A.D. 1042,” 62) thought his dates 832–915, but we could also allow 892–975 (Tucci, Tibetan Painted Scrolls, 83). According to the Bon texts, he was a bon po monk, born in 952 (Karmay, The Treasury of Good Sayings, 107, n. 1). Karmay returns to Rgyal rabs Bon (Das ed., 57) where Bla chen states that there is no difference between Bon and Chos (Buddhism), but that his vinaya lineage is close to Bon. 21 Xylograph of the biography, 1905 ed. (230 and 233 of the New Delhi edition, 1965).

244

r.a. stein

indigenous religion (era of the empire). For the lamaist texts, we have some good examples. The best is Dpa’o Gtsug lag phreng ba, who cites verbatim the list of the principalities and their outstanding characters from the Old Tibetan Chronicle and from other manuscripts (Stein 1959, n. 25).22 The proper names are so particular and the list so unique that we must suppose a written transmission. Dpa’o Gtsug lag phreng ba had to have seen a manuscript analogous or identical to that enclosed in Dunhuang. We know that he also preserved three royal edicts which all Tibetologists accept as authentic. It is also in his works that Uray (1967) has located an account from the Old Tibetan Chronicle. However, there it is a question of a simple memory of the history of a personage and not of the textual preservation of words, expressions or passages.23 We may include here two cases where a legendary theme from the later literature is already attested, in germinal form so to speak, in the Dunhuang manuscripts. One is the reception of the first ancestral king by the representatives of the people (PT 1038; cf. Stein, TA III, 176ff.). As we shall see below, a bon po chronicle from the 14th century gives the same names for the same people as the manuscript PT 1038. The other case is the legend of the first Buddhist book fallen from the sky onto the palace of the king Lha Tho tho ri (ITJ 370.5; cf. Stein, TA IV, 214). Finally, a more precise case was announced by Mme Blondeau (1971, n. 43): the legend of Padmasambhava coming from Nepal to Nālandā in order to search out the texts of Phur pa finds itself already in manuscript PT 0044. Here we will consider only the Bon texts. Tucci (1970, 255) cites side by side the diverse kinds of gshen and bon from the late texts and those from the Dunhuang manuscripts (according to Lalou 1953). Snellgrove (1967, 21) admits that the bon po texts preserved much pre-Buddhist material, while noting that a lamaist text (Rgyal po bka’ thang) arises from the same context as the “bon po” ritual from the 22 The comparative list that I have established is sufficient for the demonstration, but several readings are to be corrected. On one side, we have the Mkhas pa’i Dga’ ston of Dpa’o Gtsug lag phreng ba (1545–1565), chap. ja, 4b–5a; on the other, the Old Tibetan Chronicle (Bacot DTT, 80) and Lalou’s manuscript, “Catalogue des principautés du Tibet ancien.” 23 For such memories, we may include the history of Spung sad zu tse (Old Tibetan Chronicle, Bacot DTT, 106–7, 111–2), which is concerned in the bon po chronicle Srid pa rgyud kyi kha byang (manuscript from the Bibliothèque Nationale, fol. 43a–45a). It is also worth remarking that the oral tradition has preserved in modern Dwags po the name and the history of the minister Seng po mi chen of the Old Tibetan Chronicle (Deb ther dkar po, fol. 24b).

bon po in dunhuang manuscripts

245

royal funerals according to Lalou (21, n. 1). I have myself tried to show that the archaic accounts with a funerary theme have the same structure and the same contents as the analogous rites from the Klu ‘bum and from the Na khi (Naxi, Mosso) accounts (Stein 1971). Apropos of a funerary ritual where a yak, horse, sheep, khyung, dragon and lion are evoked, Kvaerne notes (1985, 19) that the first three are already found in the ritual from the Dunhuang manuscript PT 0239 (Stein 1970). Yet this is nothing much. I will endeavor here to draw up a list of many other examples which are much more significant than they are precise, and have a particular character. Karmay (1975b, 178) is alone in having raised from the Dunhuang manuscripts the name of Gshen rab mi bo. I will speak of this below. Karmay (1986, 81 & 83) also compares the mo, the rtsis, the gto and the dpyad, rituals of the late bon pos, with those of the Dunhuang manuscripts (Lalou 1958; PT 1285). He concludes that the late bon po tradition was never cut off from the ancient tradition (cf. n. 41). For him (1983, 95), there are numerous relationships between the (late) organized Bon and the ancient tradition. He cites as an example (n. 15) Ariane Macdonald (1971, 210), who compared two accounts comprising the inverse theme. On the one hand, according to the Bsgrags pa Bon cited in the lamaist Bshad mdzod, Gnya’ khri descended to the earth as a king by way of his relatives, the Dmu. In addition, in the manuscript PT 0126.2, the Phywa, the people of the earth, demanded a king from the Dmu. However, this case is not very convincing. It is solely a question of a thematic analogy. By contrast, another case cited by Karmay (1975b, 180–1) poses a real problem. We know that, in the Old Tibetan Chronicle, certain swaths of the manuscript have been poorly assembled. This fact, the conquest of Zhang zhung (Bacot DTT, chap. VIII), immediately follows the reign of Khri srong lde btsan with the words: “in the epoch of the king” (Bacot DTT, 115). In reality, this conquest ought to be placed after the reign of Srong btsan sgam po (Bacot DTT, chapter VI). However, in a work from the later bon po tradition, the fall of Zhang zhung is also attributed to Khri srong lde btsan. We ought to ask ourselves whether the late bon po authors were able to view a manuscript of the Old Tibetan Chronicle in which the passages were compiled as in the manuscript that we have. All this implies that, far from separating the bon pos of the Dunhuang manuscripts from the late organized Bon in attributing different etymologies to them as Snellgrove does (cf. above n. 8), there

246

r.a. stein

should be a link between the two. It should be a question of one and the same word despite its different meaning according to the era and the context. The only problem which poses itself each time is knowing if the bon pos of the Dunhuang manuscripts designates a group of “sorcerer”—priests or if it is already a question, as Karmay thinks, of communities of Bon faithful (apropos of manuscript PT 0239, Karmay 1983, 93; and PT 0972, Karmay 1983, 93–4). The two cases will be revisited later. II. Dunhuang Documents 1. Bon po in the texts translated from Chinese and bon po communities I have already had occasion to publish these documents and excuse myself from repeating them here. Yet they are too important in the context of the present work to not be briefly recalled. A. Translations from Chinese Were we unaware that it is a question of translations of apocryphal Chinese sūtras, we would risk naïvely reading certain texts which speak abundantly of bon po and bon mo, and we might believe that they testify to the situation in Tibet. I have given examples drawn from the apocryphal sūtra Gnam sa snang brgyad, translated from the Chinese Tiandi Bayang jing 天地八陽經 (TA I, 90–2 and 31–3) and I have briefly summarized a passage from the apocryphal sūtra of Cause and Effect (1988, n. 42). For the Tiandi Bayang jing 天地八陽經, we have different Tibetan translations. Thus, in paragraph 16 (T. 2897, vol. 85, p. 1423c), the Chinese word “false teacher” (or “heretical teacher,” xieshi 邪師) is translated literally as yon po’i mkhan po (“false teacher”) in the manuscripts PT 0746, l. 45 and PT 0749, l. 86. However, in the manuscripts PT 0748, l. 106 and PT 2206, p. 2, the same word is translated as bon po. It is known that there are ignorant people who ask for “false teachers” to overcome (the demons), that they seek “false” divinities (xieshen 邪神) and that they return worship to evil demons (bai’e gui 拜惡鬼). For certain translators, bon pos were thus to have at least an analogous function. The same difference in translation appears in paragraph 21 (T., p. 1424a) in the phrase: “the stupid people believe in their ‘false teachers’ (xieshi 邪師); they question the divination in the hope of a display (response).” In the manuscript PT 0746, l. 57,

bon po in dunhuang manuscripts

247

“contrary teachers” (log pa’i mkhan po) translates those who practice divination (mo blab cing). Yet in the manuscript PT 2206, the word is translated: “one goes back from there to false religions” (chos yon po ‘o cog la bltas) and: “one gives honors to poor bon po soothsayers” (phongs pa’i mo bon no cog la ni yon tshol zhing). Here, the bon pos are specialists in divination. It is the same, in Tibetan, in the final verse (T., p. 1425a) without it being specified in Chinese. In Chinese it reads: “if one wants to acquire merit, whether one reads (recites) this sūtra, or one does not question the teachers (the false teachers).” This phrase is translated literally in the manuscript PT 0749, l. 216: “read the sūtra, do not search out the teacher” (mkhan ma ‘tshol). Yet in the manuscript PT 0742, p. 1, l. 10, we have: “read this sūtra, don’t trust in error (log pa la mi bltas), don’t question the bon po soothsayers!” (mo bon la myi ‘dri na). The “false teachers” (or “heretical teachers”) are thus the bon pos who are the soothsayers. The same expression is found in a collection of maxims in which Buddhists critique non-Buddhist beliefs (PT 0992.1, fol. 2 vo, l. 3). It states: “There where there are many bon po soothsayers (mo bon), this is a place for the gathering of demons” (bon mo mang por byed pa ni ‘dre’i ‘dun sa). The same expression appears yet again in a small sūtra (undoubtedly apocryphal). The audience is exhorted to Buddhism and is warned against non-Buddhist practices (Karmay 1983). It states: “do not entrust your destiny (or life) to the bon po soothsayers (mo bon), do not make offerings to the demons!” (mo bon dag la srid ma ltos). The author there also qualifies the bon pos (or Bon) as heretics (l. 69: mu stegs bon la yid tshes le).24 Karmay (94) did not recognize that the word mo of mo bon designates divination,

24 The word mu stegs (Sanskrit tīrthika) often designates the Hindus, but in the texts called upon here, it retains the general meaning “heretic.” In the apocryphal sūtras translated from Chinese waidao 外道 (; Tibetan mur ‘dug), they are qualified as log par lta ba, “erroneous-” or “false view” (cf. Stein, Tibetica Antiqua I, 53–4). It was seen above that the Chinese xieshi 邪師, “false teacher” is sometimes translated by mo bon, sometimes by log pa’i mkhan po. My translation of these words is only makeshift. In Chinese, xie 邪 is the opposite of correct. It also signifies “erroneous” and “heretical,” not conforming to the norm. In Tibetan, log pa signifies contrary, the reverse, rebellion, false, heretical or erroneous doctrine. As for the expression “teacher” (Chinese shi 師), it is necessary to remember that the expression “teacher” (shigong 師公) designates the “sorcerer”-mediums and that this expression is translated as bon po in a Sino-Tibetan lexicon from Dunhuang (Stein, Tibetica Antiqua I, 34, n. 41b). These Chinese “sorcerers” consulted oracles on the occasion of funerals and marriages in order to determine the place and date of the rite. Whence the Tibetan translation mo bon where mo designated divination.

248

r.a. stein

but he did well to state that the mo bon are “those who practice the bon po ritual, thus the priests.” Another apocryphal sūtra, the “Sūtra of Causes and Effects of Good and Evil” (Gauthiot and Pelliot), a Chinese manuscript comes beyond doubt from Dunhuang, and was translated into Tibetan and into Sogdian.25 We find there a long list of repayments for meritorious acts and for faults. Among the faults are enumerated the religious activities of “sorcerers” or female mediums (shimu 師母). This Chinese word is always translated as bon mo, the feminine form of bon po. The entire passage is important because it gives a rather precise description of the activity of these specialists of popular religion. The 15th case from the Chinese list, the 16th in Tibetan, is the killing of animals to make offerings to the “false divinities” (xieshen 邪神 as in the Ba yang jing 八陽經; Tibetan: log pa’i lha). The 16th (Tib. 17th) case concerns a “sorcerer” (medium; Chin. shimu 師母; Tib. bon mo)26 who pronounces the speech of demons and (in so doing) misleads others and draws out their wealth27 (the honors which she received). The following phrase is: to act as ‘witch’ (shimu 師母; bon mo), eyes closed sleeping on the soil; to tell the people that they are reborn in heaven and to accept then (the speech) of demons who are not correct.”28 We then read: “to act as a ‘witch,’ to kill others (in Chinese: ‘to incite others to kill animals’) and to make them make offerings to demonic gods (lha ‘dre), to the gods of the ground of the Five Ways, to demons (srin mo), etc.; anything of this kind, etc., by all that

25 Cf. Stein, Tibetica Antiqua I, 85. Chinese text in Taishō, vol. 85, no 2881 (Nakamura collection). Tibetan translation from Chos grub in the Peking Kanjur, vol. 40, no 1023, pp. 340–343. A slightly different redaction in Kanjur, no 1024, p. 344. A Tibetan translation exists among the Dunhuang manuscripts (ITJ 220), but I have been unable to consult it. 26 Pelliot 1961, 40, n. 115. The translation as “witch” is only makeshift. Certain others prefer “shaman.” There is not a pejorative connotation. 27 Bon mo byas nas ‘dre gdon gyi tshig ‘don cing gzhang dag bslus te nor blangs pa. The redaction from the Kanjur, no 1024 is a little different: “acting as a witch she speaks falsely that she called the demons and (then) she obtained riches” (bon po byed cing ‘dre bos so // zhes brdzun zer zhing nor len pa). 28 bon mo byas nas mig brtsums le/sa la nyal nas gzhang dag la mtho ris su skye bar ‘gyur ro zhes drang po ma yin pa’i ‘dre dgon dag gi len pa. In Chinese we have rather: eyes closed, sleeping on the ground, pretends to others that she(?) climbs to the sky and takes the soul of the late father.” In the Kanjur, no 1024, we read: “making a bon, the eyes close to mislead (the people), saying (to them): you should venerate your bla ma” (bon byed cing mig brtsums nas khyod kyi bla ma mchod ‘os so zhes zer zhing slu ba ni).

bon po in dunhuang manuscripts

249

to mislead ignorant people.”29 In Chinese, the last phrase from this list takes as its subject a “sorcerer” (shigong 師公), but in Tibetan has been preserved: “to act as a bon mo (in place of bon po), this is to enter the cadavers of dead men; to examine (the character) good and bad omens of houses and to see if one obtains or does not obtain the beneficence of the Five Families;30 to delight the klu;31 to make the offerings of thanks to oneself; to oppress (to overcome) the demons;32 to mislead (thus) the stupid people, to acquire much wealth;33 by means of falsehoods to state the well- and ill-omened.”34 We do not have here a description of the practices of Tibetan bon pos. It is a question of a translation from Chinese. The description is applied to Chinese “sorcerers.” To translate is always to betray a little. For the Bayang jing 八陽經 it has been seen that there are two sorts of translation, one literal—which renders word-for-word the original “false teacher”—the other looser—which translates with bon po. The translators of the Chinese sūtra are unknown. However, that of the sūtra of Causes and Effects is well known. This is Chos grub (alias Facheng 法成), who worked in Shazhou 沙州 (Dunhuang) and in Ganzhou 甘州 in the middle of the 9th century. He was bilingual, at ease in Chinese and in Tibetan. If he chose the word bon mo to translate the Chinese shimu 師母 and one time shigong 師公, he was in accord with a bilingual lexicon in Dunhuang (cf. n. 24) and had

29 bon mo byas nas gzhan dag gi srog gcad de lha ‘dre dang lam lnga’i sa’i bdag po dang srin mo la sogs pa la mchod pa byed du bcug pa gang yin pa ‘di lta bu la sogs pa de dag thams cad ni skyes bu blun po rnams ‘drid pa yin pa. Kanjur no 1024a: “To make a bon, to induce (the people) to kill (animals) and induce them to render worship to the divinity-demons” (bon byed cing srog gcod du bcug te/lha srin rjed du bcug pa). The Tibetan translators were not able to render into Tibetan the different divinities of the Chinese text. 30 Pelliot 1961, n. 122, found in the Peiwen yunfu 佩文韻府 dictionary that in Chinese it is a question of the Five Families of soothsayers according to a work on divination concerning the house. 31 In Chinese, an long 安龍, “pacify the dragon,” that is to say the god of the soil of the house. The Tibetan phrase is found in the manuscript ITJ 298. 32 Srin gnan nas, but in ITJ 298, we have: srin rnams mnan nas. 33 Bon mo byas nas mi shi ba’i ro rnams sbed pa dang/khang khyim rnams kyi bzang ngan dung/rigs lnga pa rnams kyi khe thob pa dang mi thob pa lta ba dang klu rnams bde bar ‘god pa dang/dar gyi srin bu dag la gtan rag gton ba dang/srin gnan nas skyes bu blon (read: blun) po dag bslus te nor mang po blangs pa dang. The text from the Kanjur, no 1024 writes here: bon cing gshin rdog du ‘dur ba dang/khang khyim bzang ngan lta ba dang/rigs lnga’i khams bde mi bde lta ba dang/glen pa bslus te nor mang du len pa. 34 brdzun tshig gis bzang ngan ston pa.

250

r.a. stein

to have good reasons. The practices of the Tibetan bon pos of the 9th century were to resemble at least partly the Chinese “sorcerers” (mediums). Divination visibly occupied an important place there. For the prophesies in a sort of trance state in order to discover the fate of the dead it is less certain. Yet the practice of a medium or “shamanic” type is perhaps attested by the expression lha bka’i (cf. Stein, TA III, n. 15). In modern Tibet, it is well known in lamaism. B. Bon po Communities I permit myself to repeat here, as a matter of interest, that which I have stated elsewhere (Stein, TA I, 34–5 and “La mythologie hindouïste au Tibet,” 1422–6). The first text was published, translated and commented upon by S.G. Karmay (1983). I have already spoken of it above (232–3). Karmay considers this text as proof of the existence of Bon as a “system of beliefs spread and already taken root at the time of the kings” (1983, 94). For him, the organized Bon of the 11th century would be thus already attested in the royal era. I believe this conclusion should not be accepted. Initially, we consider the date. Nothing proves that this little sūtra dates from the royal era. It is equally possible that it presupposed a Chinese translation, its vocabulary being the same as that of the other translations cited above. In any event, the sūtra may date from the middle of the 9th century or even later. Next, we consider the contents, Bon. There also, the vocabulary (mo bon) suggests rather that it is not a question of Bon organized into a religious and philosophical system, but of bon pos, religious specialists (notably of divination) of the other more archaic Dunhuang manuscripts. Karmay (1983, 93) has also cited the manuscript PT 0239 (Stein, 1970). There, a Buddhist gives a sort of Buddhist interpretation of the bon po funerary ritual. He exhorts the people to renounce this bon po ritual and to follow the Buddhist view. The text thus attests to the existence of a bon po community beside that of the Buddhist clergy. There also, Karmay thinks of organized Bon. I believe rather that it is a question of bon po, “sorcerer” priests. Another Dunhuang manuscript attests to a bon po community living and acting beside the Buddhist clergy. This is the commentary from the tantra called Rgyud gsum pa. This text is preserved in the Kanjur (Peking, nos 470, 471) and among the Dunhuang manuscripts, but the commentary only exists as a Dunhuang manuscript. For the gods Sun (a goddess) and Moon (a god), the commentary gives a little mytho-

bon po in dunhuang manuscripts

251

logical account. Three beings come forth from an egg. The first calls himself Tsan bu dwa (or: dra?) in the language of India and “Great elder Son of Moon” in the language of Tibet (zla ba’i bu chen po). The Buddhist clergy (dge ‘dun) calls him “son of god” (lha’i bu; devaputra) Chad pa. The bon pos call him “Heavenly God” ( gnam lha). For the other two beings, the author also gives a name in the language of India and in the language of Tibet, but he omits the clergy and the bon pos. The account and the proper names are obscure. However it remains that one and the same “Indian” divinity is accepted by the Buddhist clergy and by the bon pos. The two communities are thus juxtaposed, and the name of the divinity according to the bon pos, “Heavenly God,” seems to be properly Tibetan.35 In the later lamaist tradition, it is stated that the bon po “love the heavens.”36 As for knowing which bon po it concerns, we must note the fact that beside the Buddhist clergy, they here received and accepted an Indian mythological account. They situate themselves thus on the path of the elaboration of organized Bon which was qualified as “heretical” because it contained Indian elements, or in any case not Tibetan. 2. Bon po and gshen, their differences and their functions As seen above (n. 8), Snellgrove and Richardson based themselves on an uncertain and hypothetical etymology in order to translate bon po as “invoker” and gshen as “sacrificer.” Yet even if the etymology was just—which is by no means proven—an etymology does not permit a definition of the precise functions in given contexts, a long stretch from the formation of the word.37 The only admissible method is to

35

Strictly speaking, it could also be Turkish; cf. Stein, Tibetica Antiqua I, n. 41c. Cf. Ne’u paṇḍita, chos ‘byung, 84 (Uebach, “Zur Identifizierung des Nel-pa’i č’os‘byuṅ,” 87): “to state that (the book) fell from the sky, this is an error of the bon pos.” Yet the Deb ther sngon po (Roerich, The Blue Annals, 38) cites Nel pa paṇḍita thus: “because the bon pos adore the heavens, it was known as that (the book) fell from the sky.” 37 I critique this translation in my review in JAs. (1952, 100), and in Oriens (1957, 372). For another use of bon (“singers”), cf. my review of Snellgrove in Asia Major (1968, 125). It is true that there exists a case in which gshen designates a sacrificer. It is found in a list of various bon pos and their functions from Jo mo gling gsum (cited by Tucci, Tibetan Painted Scrolls, 715–6). There, the gshen bon cut the throats of animals. It is, perhaps, a case of poor spelling in place of gshed. One such misprint is found in the Gzer myig (ed. Francke, fol. 7a): lha, gshed and srid pa, whereas in the translation there is lha, gshen and srid pa. In the edition of Tenzin Namdak (16), there is also gshen. 36

252

r.a. stein

examine the texts at our disposal. Hoffmann refused that etymology (1944, 341). He translated gshen as “shaman” (1944, 355–6 and 1956, 13 & 77). This is based on an alleged relation with a word from the language of the Ket (Кеты) from Siberia. Haarh (375, etc.) and Tucci (1955, 199, etc.) equally speak of “shamans.” In the texts of organized Bon (starting from the 11th century), there does not seem to be a difference between bon po and gshen. The founder of Bon himself is Gshen rab (or rabs) mi bo, a gshen par excellence. In the classifications of Bon that provide as well the “Nine Vehicles” of Bon (Snellgrove 1967, 9–10) that the lamaists chronicle, the different domains of Bon are classified as various gshen.38 These are the phya gshen, the snang gshen, the ‘phrul gshen and the srid gshen (Blon po bka’ thang, chap. 22, and Grub mtha’ shel gyi me long). The srid gshen, which consists of funerary rites (shi thabs and ‘dur sgo) is replaced by the dur gshen in the Chos ‘byung Mkhas pa’i Dga’ ston of Dpa’o Gtsug lag phreng ba (chap. ja, 8b) and in the Rgyal rabs gsal ba’i me long. In contrast, in the bon po work Byams pa are enumerated, among others, the lha bon, the phya bon, the srid gshen, the lta bon (cited in Karmay 1972, 31). Dpa’o Gtsug lag phreng ba (Chos ‘byung Mkhas pa’i Dga’ ston, chap. ja, 10a) speaks, under the king Lha Tho tho ri, of sku gshen who are called Rmu bon Skyo ngo mchar. In the Chronicle of the 5th Dalai Lama and in the Dpag bsam ljon bzang the author speaks of the sgrung, the lde’u and the gnam bon gshen po che (Hoffmann 1944, 345). In the Gzer myig (I, 152a), a question is posed to the bon po gshen, and it is Gshen rab who responds (348). In the same text (I, 70a), the five lha gshen are bon pos. Bon po and gshen seem thus to be situated on the same plane. Hoffmann (1944, 344, citing the Padma thang yig) has shown that the author speaks of gshen bon invited from Zhang zhung, but elsewhere (Gzer myig) the author says bon and gshen. The two words are distinct, but practically identical. Yet in certain Dunhuang manuscripts, there is an opposition between the gshen and the bon po. This is the case in the list of lands in which the same account is repeated for each land (PT 1285, l. 39–41; Lalou, 1958). Somebody is sick. Then one hundred male gshen and one hundred female gshen arrive. Although they proceed to the divination (mo

38 See Tucci, Tibetan Painted Scrolls, 715–8 and Hoffmann, Quellen zur Geschichte der tibetischen Bon-Religion, 349, 419, 299. For the Nine Vehicles, see Snellgrove, The Nine Ways of Bon, 9–10.

bon po in dunhuang manuscripts

253

btab, phya klags), they do not find the cause of the disease (and in consequence they are unable to cure the patient). Then the bon po of the land (e.g. Smra bon) suddenly arrives. He washes the stains from the mouth and hands, practices divination (mo btab, phya klags) and finds the cause. He explains what occurred (l. 43). At the end, the patient is cured and he is the same/better than before (gna’ bas da bzang).39 The same account is repeated for the next land, Dmu, but the functions are different. The Dmu bon (bon po from the land of Dmu) washes the stains and makes the diagnosis (gto and dpyad).40 In the next country, Lde (Yar lung), the one who washes the stains is not a bon po, but a gshen (Lde gshan), but the functions are not indicated (l. 86). In the subsequent paragraph, many countries are grouped together (Rngegs, Dags, Mchims, Zhong and Rkong), yet there, the author does not speak of the group of a hundred gshen who do not succeed and there is no opposition between gshen and bon po. Each of these countries has its gshen (as in Lde). However, in the last land, Rkong, the one who fights is a bon po, but he is qualified as a gshen (Rkong gshen). In the next paragraph (the country of ‘Ol), the bon po who succeeds is also a gshen. In the following lands (Rgya, Bal and Ltam), we see again the hundred gshen powerless to oppose the bon po who makes the divination and the diagnosis (mo and phya; gto and dpyad). This list of eight lands is followed by another, where the groups of a hundred gshen do not appear. Yet there, each country has its gshen which fights the god of the land. In this second list, the land of ‘Ol has an ‘Ol gshen which fights the ‘Ol lha whereas in a third list, the same land has an ‘Ol bon. The same accounts from diverse lands are found in a manuscript published by Thomas (1957, text IV, beginning, l. 46). There also the hundred masculine and feminine gshen perform mo and phya (divination), but also other rites such as the nyan, the meaning of which is unknown. But they are not alone in doing so. Diverse bon po (lha bon, g.yang bon and phya bon) for whom the names are given carry

39 Cf. Thomas AFL, text IV, l. 226–7 and l. 241: gna’ bas da bzang, gzhe bas da rgyan. 40 S.G. Karmay (“L’apparition du Petit Homme Tête-Noire” 81–2) has already cited these functions and has indicated that he found them in later Bon; cf. above, 245. The word gto designates ritual, in general. I have not translated it because, in context, this word always precedes dpyad and participates in the parallel phrase mo and phya, gto and dpyad. If it was a question of ritual, the word ought to be placed after dpyad, and the parallel phrase suggests the preliminary acts.

254

r.a. stein

out different rites: to seize good fortune or recall to life (g.yang du glan sku bla and nyan), various chords (dmu dag, lha dag and gsas dag) like nyan and glud (“ransom”; l. 163–4, 222). In a series of lands, each has its gshen who is invited. He executes the glud ritual against the demons and the nyan rite for the god of the land (l. 211, 299, etc.). One exception is to be noted. In the land of Rgya (l. 348) the author names not a gshen, but a bon po, the Rgya bon Leg dang rman pa. In the document PT 1068 (2nd part, l. 28; Stein 1971, 522), someone invites the “father” (pha) Gshen rab mi bo and the dur gshen Rma da to ask them about what he must do (for these two people see below). The response is that the bon (read: bon po?) ought to execute the gthod (read: gto?) rite and that the gshen ought to execute the dpyad rite. The same rites gto and dpyad are executed by three bon gshin gsas drag or a bon gshin gshen drag (PT 1134, l. 48 and 88; Stein 1971, 491ff.). One of them is the dur (g)shen Rma da na (l. 28). However, as the gto and the dpyad do not suffice, they proceed to true funerary rites (shid and rmang; mdad and shid). If the gsas drag are the gshen here, in the manuscript PT 1047 (2nd part, l. 285, 313, 316), they are the bon pos. They are capable of overcoming the demons. In the same way, in the manuscript ITJ 740.1 (which Thomas did not reproduce, 140–1), the “bon po” oracle comprises a gsas drag frightened by the demons. Elsewhere, a bon po makes a gto and a dpyad, but is not successful (PT 1134, l. 88). The functions of the bon po and the gshen are thus always the same, diagnoses (gto and dpyad, but the sense of the word gto is certainly broader) and funerary rites, but also expulsion of demons and recalling of life and of good fortune. Never are they presented as “invokers” (bon po) and “sacrificers” (gshen). On the contrary, one time it is a gshen who chants (bkrol lo) an account (lo rabs or lugs rabs; PT 1194, l. 53–5). As Karmay has already stated (supra 245), the preliminary functions, necessary but insufficient to combat the disease or resuscitate a corpse, are typical for the later, organized Bon. We may include other traits there. Thus, although we do not know of what the ritual of the cords consisted—which was met above (253–4)—in the later Bon, one of the functions of the bon pos was, at the time of a marriage, to attach the cords of the dmus (dmu thag btag or ‘dogs; Gzer myig ed. Francke, 13a and 111a). Karmay (1986, 89) cites the Gzi brjid where it is a question of a colored thread attached to the sinciput (same motif in the Bshad mdzod). He compares this motif with a passage from the manuscript PT 1047, an oracle, where one well-omened woman

bon po in dunhuang manuscripts

255

attaches the cord of the dmus (dmu dag). In the Dunhuang manuscript, the priests also execute the rite of “catching life or good fortune” (supra 254). In the Gzer myig also, for the same marriage, the bon pos “take the good fortune” (phya yang blan nas, 13b, or phya g.yang blan, 111a). The phya and the g.yang also figure in the list of specialties of various bon pos (cf. Tucci 1949, 715–6). The characteristics of the bon pos and the gshens from the Dunhuang manuscripts have thus been preserved in the texts of later Bon. There was no discontinuity. This is true as well for the entire structure of the ritual account in which they figure. An example of this was seen in the manuscript cited above (253–4). The same theme is attested many times in the Klu ‘bum (cf. Stein 1971, 482–4; 1981b, 213). Here is an example of that type of account of which there are many variants throughout the work: The sun god has been offended. Angered, he avenges himself by sending a disease to a man. The latter searches for the cause and the remedy. He invites initially a soothsayer (mo ma), then a “tantrika” (sngags pa), then a specialist in gto and dpyad and finally a doctor (sman pa). None of them succeeds. He invites a bon po and notably Gshen rabs. The latter indicates means of cures (rites of confession, reading of sacred texts) and he utters mantras. Finally, there is reconciliation between the klu and the man. All is better than before.41 3. Gshen rab mi bo There is thus continuity between the Dunhuang manuscripts and the later Bon texts. In one fashion or another—from oral tradition or knowledge of the manuscripts—the later bon pos understood and utilized the themes and the technical terms which find themselves already in the ancient manuscripts. The most striking example is that of Gshen rab mi bo, the founding teacher (ston pa) of Bon in the late Bon. S.G. Karmay (1975, 178) has indicated that this name is found five (in fact, six) times in the Dunhuang manuscripts as a priest who intervenes

41 I have unfortunately lost the reference to the page of the text and no longer have access to the Klu ‘bum in order to find it. The motif of the result which is better than the initial situation very often returns in the Klu ‘bum (e.g. 106a, 116a, 143b, 153a, 173b) as in the Dunhuang manuscripts (cf. n. 39 and Stein, “Du récit au rituel dans les manuscripts tibétains de Touen-Houang,” 503, 505–6 and n. 73). The same theme can be found in the text published by Laufer, Ein Sühngedicht der Bonpo, aus einer Handschrift der Oxford der Bodleiana.

256

r.a. stein

in the funerary ritual. He thinks that this perhaps proves that such a person really existed, was of Tibetan origin, and lived prior to the 7th century. This supposition does not seem very probable to me. The texts are not historical, but ritual. The diverse gshen and bon po priests to whom these names are given are not real people, but make up part of the legendary or mythological account of the ritual. In any case, the fact remains that the same name is employed in the Dunhuang manuscripts and in organized Bon, although the people are different. As Mme A. Macdonald has remarked (Choix II, 19), the Gshen rabs myi bo of the manuscripts is always qualified as “father” (pha). He is different from the teacher (ston pa) Gshen rabs of the later Bon. Yet the name is the same. This cannot be due to chance; this cannot be a coincidence. We must suppose that, when the Bon authors (in the 11th century, undoubtedly) had to choose a name for the legendary founder (prior to Śākyamuni) of their religion, they chose a name which had appeared many times in the Dunhuang manuscripts. The probability that this is a question of an oral transmission is slight. The teachers of organized Bon had to know the analogous manuscripts. We will see that Gshen rab myi bo is not the only name from the Dunhuang manuscripts which has survived in later Bon. The question of knowing why Gshen rabs was chosen from the manuscripts and was made into the most eminent personage in Bon must remain outstanding. Unknown factors had to contribute to it. The Dunhuang texts are described below. a) Manuscript PT 1136 (not noted by Karmay). The text includes two accounts. In the first (Stein 1971, 521), there is no question of recourse to a bon po or to a gshen. In the second account, a girl dies from an accident. Her appearance becomes dark and something makes her neck ache. The father and brother ask for aid from the “father” (pha) Gshen rabs (sic!) kyi myi bo so that he might revive her (l. 51). He tells them that the bya gshen ‘dzon mo must do it. A bya gshen must go to seek him, but does not do it. Another person does it. He engages in many operations (among which, three nights of bon gshen bom du bgyis, l. 56). The corpse recovers a resplendent visage and her neck recovers. The father prepares the tomb and the brother does something else. In this manner, the girl is made better. We will note that Gshen rabs intervenes only as a counselor. He is above the executor. This is also the case in the Klu ‘bum where Gshen rab explains thoroughly the cause of evil and states what should be

bon po in dunhuang manuscripts

257

done, but is not directly concerned. However, in other manuscripts, Gshen rabs also occupies himself with funerary rites. b) Manuscript PT 1194. On line 5, there is a question of the “father” (pha) Gshen rabs (but the final °s seems crossed out)42 myi bo and the dur gshen Rma da, as well as the sgal shen Tho’u yug, who say something. On line 16, the author writes pha Gshen rab (sic!) myi bo. There also, he is associated with the dur gshen Rma da. They say something. This association is underscored by the fact that Rma da is also qualified as “father” (pha, l. 54). The functions of these two “fathers” are not indicated. Elsewhere, in a list of priests, we find, among others, nine pha and nine bon, but no gshen (Thomas 1957, text IV, l. 58, 101, 165). The family is called (chos las smos, l. 21), one speaks about offerings and states that one makes an account (gtam bgyi mod), an account of former times (gna’i gtham bgyis, l. 24). The author repeats the allusion to an account (l. 29). Later (l. 53), an account (lo rabs) is chanted (bkrol lo) by the gshen (is it Gshen rabs?) whereas the “father” dur gshen Rma da does not occupy himself with the funerary rite (ma bdur kyang gchig myed do). c) Manuscript PT 1068.2 (cf. Stein 1971, 522). Similar type of account. For the funerals, someone asks for counsel from the “father” (pha) Gshen rab (sic!) myi bo, from the dur gshen Rma da and from the gshen lha Lung sgra. d) Manuscript PT 1134 (cf. Stein 1971, 491ff ). Contains many accounts. In the second, it is a question of a death while hunting and of ritual horses (do ma snying dags). Then the “father” ( pa) gur gshen Rma da na does not do anything, then shows the way of death (l. 33, gshin lam mar ba yang bstand). A third ( gsum) “father” ( pa) Ngag gshen ngag chig does not go to the land of the dead (gshin yul mar ba ma bgrod). As there are three people, Gshen rab myi bo is perhaps insinuated. The third account concerns yet another death. The dur gshen (without the epithet “father”) is initially mentioned in relation to the other shen and bon who make gto and dpyad (l. 48–50). Later

42 In Stein, “Du récit au rituel dans les manuscripts tibétains de Touen-Houang,” 540, n. 11, I preferred the orthography rabs, but the scribe seems to hold to rab as in the manuscript PT 1068.2. In the Klu ‘bum, the author nearly always writes Gshen rabs (e.g. 95a, 95b, 97a, 155a, 158b, 186b (but 190b: Gshen rab). P. 155a and 158a, Gshen rabs is plural (Gshen rabs rnams). In the Mdzod phug, by contrast, the author writes Gshen rab (p. 15) and explains the word rab. It is the same in the Gzi brjid (Snellgrove, The Nine Ways of Bon, 86, l. 21; cf. the index: Gshen rab, “the best of Shen (viz. a good priest).”

258

r.a. stein

(l. 61), the author mentions the “father” (pa) dur shen Rma da and (dang) Gshen rabs (sic!) myi bo and (dang) Skab(?) shen Thi’u, whereas on l. 64, the two “fathers” dur shen Rma da and Gshen rab (sic!) myi bo come in or to the tomb (se mo, gru bzhi). e) PT 1289 (cf. Stein 1971, 520). This text is important because it is the only one to give an iconography. The “father” (pha) comes thence, Gshen rabs (sic!) myi bo comes thence. He takes in his left hand a small bell (gshang dril chen) and in the right hand a plume (gshog). The dead is conjured (?, bdur), the dead man is . . . (?) by the gshen. In the texts of the later Bon, the verb which designates the principal act of the funerary rite is ‘dur (for examples, see Snellgrove’s index, 1967). In the Klu ‘bum (217a), the author speaks of a ‘dur gshen. We may compare this with the dur gshen Rma da of the Dunhuang manuscripts and with the verb bdur (shi ni bdur) that we have just seen. The phrase (l. 72) is as follows: shi ni bdur, rlag ni tshol. It is formed from two parallel expressions which we find elsewhere (PT 1136, l. 7–8 where it is a question of a contract of mutual aid, gcig shi ni gshig gis bdur bar gyis; gchig rlag ni gching gis btshal bar bgyis na, “if one dies, the other performs the rite, bdur; if one is destroyed, the other looks for him(?)”). However, this same phrase is utilized just as it is in the Klu ‘bum (nag po, 230b): shi ba yang ‘dur; lag pa yang btsal te. The same phrase reappears still elsewhere in the Klu ‘bum (308a). Somebody is dead. The son thinks that the father ought to go to paradise. Towards that purpose, he invites a ‘dur gshen from whom he requests: 1) to prevent his father from falling into bad incarnations (ngan song) and 2) that he remove his blemishes (sgrib pa). The ‘dur gshen then says: shi ba bsdur (variant: ‘dur) ba yang bkum mo/brtag pa btsal ba yang bkum mo. On the preservation of archaic phrases in the later Bon, cf. Stein, Annuaire du Collège de France, 69th year, 307. f ) S. 731 (Thomas 1957, text I A, l. 124; Stein 1971, 490). On the occasion of someone’s death, the “father” (pha) Gshen rabs (sic!) myi bo dad and the dur gshen Rma dad arrange the tomb and attends to the dead. 4. Other people The selection of Gshen rabs myi bo as the principal person remains mysterious. His companion, the dur gshen Rma da (na) seems not to have left a trace in the later Bon. Yet the latter retained other people from the Dunhuang manuscripts. Such is the case for Legs tang Rmang

bon po in dunhuang manuscripts

259

po of China (Rgya nag) of whom a work, the ‘Phan yul sgrub mtshod, figures in the bon po Bstan ‘gyur, section Mdo ‘bum, II.43 He is found in Karmay 1972 (index). There also, he is from China and preaches in China (16, 24, Rgya bon Legs tang Rmang po). He is one of the six scholars after the death of Gshen rab mi bo (24, 75, etc.). Naturally, he is also concerned in the Grub mtha’ shel gyi me long (Hoffmann 1950, 415). We find him in the Srid pa rgyud kyi kha byang (manuscript from the Bibliothèque Nationale, no 493). In a list of various lands and their respective bon pos, that of China (Rgya nag bon po) is Leg tan Rmang po (fol. 11a). We also find Rgya bon (44a). However, this person figures already in the Dunhuang manuscripts. There also he is one of the bon pos of various lands (the “principalities” of M. Lalou) who are enumerated in a list. This is the Rgya bon Leg tang Rman ba (PT 1285; Lalou 1965, 171, 200; l. 138, and Thomas 1957, text IV, l. 349, p. 76). In this list, Rgya is a Tibetan land like the others. The later bon pos who have borrowed the name have not understood it and have interpreted Rgya as “China” (Rgya nag), but they have on that occasion preserved the expression Rgya bon from the Dunhuang manuscripts. The name is so particular and so isolated that we can hardly think of an oral tradition. It is probable that the bon pos found it in a manuscript. It is likewise in another list of various bon po, incarnations of gshen, who are the second continuation of Gshen rab (Gzer myig, ed. Francke, 27a; ed. Tenzin Namdak, 59). These are the ye gshen gnyag po (chap. 13), but they are all called bon (po). The list is too long to be reproduced here in its entirety. However, I take up the names which we find already in the Dunhuang manuscripts. The first is Dbal bon Rom po. He is found in PT 1285, l. 152–3: Bal bon Rum and Bal bon Rom po. The fifth from the list is ‘O bon ‘Brang or ‘Brang zu. He is already mentioned in Thomas’ text IV (1957, l. 60, 87, 164 and 222), where we find a triad: lha bon ‘Phrang zu, g.yang bon Theg leg and Pya bon Kyur ra or Kyu ra. The eighth name from the list of the Gzer myig is Dmu bon Ye than or Ye’u than (The’u tan). He also appears in PT 1285, l. 70: Dmu bon Ye’u than btsan ba. Finally, the twelfth bon po of the Gzer myig is Phya bon The legs (ed. Tenzin Namdak, 47: The’u leg; 60: phya bon rnga brdung Th’u legs). This is the Theg leg of Thomas (loc. cit.), which has just been encountered. Here the concordance is

43

Chandra and Namdak, 15.

260

r.a. stein

all the more astonishing as two of the three names form part of a triad in the Dunhuang manuscript: lha bon, g.yang bon and pya bon. In the list from the Gzer myig, the thirteenth is also a lha bon, but his name is Thod dkar. In the Byams ma, a sūtra of organized Bon, the author cites the lha bons and the g.yang bons in the era of the king Gnya khri btsan po (cited in Nam mkha’i nor bu 1981, 57). The author of the list from the Gzer myig made his choice in inserting the names which he must have found in the manuscripts analogous or identical with those of Dunhuang. The names are so particular and so rare that an uninterrupted oral tradition is little probable. Another group of proper names is attested at the same time in the later Bon and in the Dunhuang manuscripts. These are the names of women formed in a particular fashion: the first and the last syllables are identical. In the manuscripts PT 1040 (an account, rabs), a girl called Tha nga pung ma tang has many marriage suitors. In PT 1134 (l. 11), there is in the sky a father Mgon tshung Phya and a mother Ta nga ngur (or: dur) mo tang (l. 67: Tang nga bdud mo tang; Stein 1971, 492). Elsewhere (PT 1285, Lalou 1958, index), in a series of lands, we find Tha nga Bal mo thang, a girl from Bal yul, Tha nga Rgya mo thang, a girl from Rgya yul, and Tha nga brla ma. Moreover, there is a brother and sister pair (Lalou, I, l. 60), the brother being Thang ba dmu thang and the sister Thang dmu mo thang. However, in a text from the later Bon cited by Tucci (1949, 714),44 it is a question of eight messengers of Gshen rab whose names all begin with Thang nga and end with mo thang, etc. Only the central element changes, but always designates a category of divinity. In the Klu ‘bum as well (283a–284b), two sisters are promised in marriage to the god (lha) Yod pa. However, they refuse and flee to the lands of the demon (bdud), where they become the friends of a girl bdud who calls herself Thang nga bdud mo thang. Subsequently, the two girls flee to the lands of the dmu and become the friends of (the girl) Thang nga dmu mo thang. From both sides, we are faced with the same method for forming names, always for women. It cannot be a question of chance. The later bon pos have seen an ancient model. Mme Macdonald (1979, 312 & 319) and Karmay (1987, 110–2) have noted the proper names from the Dunhuang manuscripts which have been preserved in the Srid pa rgyud kyi kha byang, a chronicle of organized Bon (14th century). It concerns a list

44

Tucci cites the Dpal sgag rngam pa sku gsung thugs kyi sgrub gzung, 50.

bon po in dunhuang manuscripts

261

of people in the entourage of the king. Many names are found indentically in the manuscript PT 1038. In the Old Tibetan Chronicle, there are two pha ba (later gshen po pha ba) Tshe and Gco, following the ministers (blon po) Lho ris (and) Brngegs po and the stewards (phyag tshang) Shes and Spug. In PT 1038, we have the bon pos Mtshe and Gco, the blon pos Lho and Rngegs and the phyag tshangs Sha and Spug. This case of borrowing is much more significant in that, for still other reasons, the manuscript PT 1038 presents itself as a case of transition toward the later bon po tradition (cf. Stein, TA III, 182). In the Klu ‘bum (252a, 102b, 143a), the goddess Gnam phyi gung rgyal acts like a good advisor. Elsewhere (277a), she consults a miraculous mirror (‘phrul gyi me long) in order to discover the cause of a malady. The same name and the same function of good advisor of the heroine is found in the manuscripts of Thomas (1957, text I B, l. 71). In the Dunhuang manuscripts, Mgon tsun Phywa is an important personage. We find him in the manuscript PT 1134 (l. 10; Stein, TA III, n. 50) and in a text from Thomas (1957, text I A, l. 59–60; also in ITJ 739, fol. 4b, l. 3 that Thomas has not given in his Addenda). In the manuscript PT 1043, he appears in the form Gnam rce (read: rje) Mgon tsun. The Bon texts preserved this name. In the Gzer myig (ed. Francke, 6b; trans. 312) many people are found in the land of ‘Gon btsun Phya or in its city (3b, 17a). The same name is given as a city in the Gzi brjid (Ka, p. 454, 497 and Kha, p. 394). 5. Names and their epithets The tomb in general and various lands in particular are qualified by an epithet based on the number four or eight. A funerary ritual from the Klu ‘bum—which we will see later—includes the tomb called se mo gru bzhi (with four corners). In the Dunhuang manuscripts, the tomb receives the epithets se gru bzhi and rgyal thag brgyad (square and eight cords). For an example, see Lalou 1952, l. 10 and PT 1136 (Stein 1971, 501). Yet in addition, the Klu ‘bum speaks of a land sometimes called Gshan (read: Gshen) yul thang mo gru bzhi (where thang is corrected to thag, 230b) sometimes (238) yul Gshen yul thang brgyad.45 The same epithet is also given to the land Smra yul thang brgyad

45 We find the Skos yul thang brgyad ma in the contrition text published by Laufer (Ein Sühngedicht der Bonpo, aus einer Handschrift der Oxford der Bodleiana, 33, l. 76), the Sa bdag gnyan gyi byad grol.

262

r.a. stein

where is found “man” (smra mi; 312b). It is already found in the Dunhuang manuscript PT 1285 (Lalou 1958, index): Smra yul thag brgyad. I have suggested elsewhere that myi and rma or smra are equivalents and designate man (Stein 1971, 488 and n. 26). In fact, in a text from Thomas (1957, text I A), the land of men (myi), Skyi mthing, is parallel to the land Smra Thang rgyang (read: brgyad) wherein lives the man (myi) Rma bu Ldam shad. For the epithet “man” (as mythical being), we have myi rma bu Mching rgyal in the manuscript PT 1134 (Stein 1971, 497; l. 161). Elsewhere the epithet is attested under the form Rma myi de btsun po (PT 1136; Stein 1971, 501). On the other hand, in the Klu ‘bum (248b; ed. supposedly by Tāranātha,46 175a), there is a list of beings who were the first (snga’o) in the world (these were the phya, the klu, the lha, the stars, etc. and at the end smra mi bu, variant: smra mi). An account from the Klu ‘bum (nag po) commences thus (214b; ed. supposedly by Tāranātha, 2a). A king of the Klu, ‘Ang te’u, and his woman have six children. The father seeks a land for them (a theme very often repeated). Provided with a horse and provisions, the son goes to the land Byang kha sna brgyad (variant: snam brgyad) to hunt the stag and the antelope there, sha bshor, dgo ‘grim. He does not find them, but binds himself in friendship with a demon (srin). He does not find them in Byang kha rnam brgyad. This land is well attested in the Dunhuang documents. In PT 1060 (Lalou 1965, 192), Byang ka snam bryad is a Turkish land. In one of the texts from Thomas (1957, I A, l. 53), Byang ka snam rgyad is a place of rest for horses and yaks. The same land figures as the thirteenth principality in the Old Tibetan Chronicle (PT 1286; Bacot DTT, 80). With the alternation of eight and of four that has been already encountered with respect to the tomb, we find Byang ka snam bzhi in the manuscript PT 1068 (2nd part, l. 7). What is remarkable is that there, the phrase which designates the hunt is exactly the same as in the Klu ‘bum: sha bshor, dgo ‘drim. This phrase is an expression taken up again in its entirety elsewhere. In the

46 This edition, a xylograph in three volumes, exists at the University of Kyoto and part Nag po also at the Toyo Bunko of Tokyo (no 463). It was reedited as five volumes at Dolanji, in 1977, under the title Gtsang ma Klu ‘bum chen mo, and another time as three volumes, at Dalhousie, in 1983, under the title Klu ‘bum dkar nag khra gsum rgyas pa. According to an anonymous note (undoubtedly owed to G. Smith), these editions are based on a xylograph produced and preserved at the monastery Rtag brtan Phun tshogs gling (in Tsang) in the era of Tāranātha. I am not able to verify this assertion.

bon po in dunhuang manuscripts

263

manuscript PT 1289, l. 50–1, someone goes to the land Byang ka snam brgyad to hunt the stag (sha shor du gshegs), to hunt antelope (dgo ‘drim du gshegs). Some lines later (l. 54–5), the author writes Byang ‘brog snam stod. We find the same alternation in the manuscript PT 1136, l. 12: Byang ka snam brgyad, but l. 8–9: Byang ‘brog snam stod. One hunts there: sha shor, ‘brong ‘gor. Finally, in PT 1040 (l. 40), the land is Byang ‘bro (read: ‘brog). One goes to hunt there: sha shor, dgo ‘drim du gshegs. It is likewise in PT 1068 (Stein 1971, 519 & 522). The Klu ‘bum has not only preserved the name of the Northern land, but also the typical and very particular phrase from the Dunhuang manuscripts, in a similar context. In another passage (235b), the Klu ‘bum has also preserved not only an unusual name from the Dunhuang manuscripts, but also the characteristic expressions (cf. Stein 1971, 500 and n. 62). A father gives his son a horse of gold with a turquoise mane. “as for what is seeks, it seeks rice-shoots and it drinks molasses” (‘tshal ni ‘bras kyi ljang pa ‘tshal/bu ram gyi myug chu ‘lhung ngo). This phrase is found almost word for word in one of the texts from Thomas (1957, I A, l. 45, the horse): ‘bras kyi lcang pa ni stsald /. . . / bu ram rnyung chu ni blud. We find it also in PT 1136 (Stein 1971, 501) and in PT 1194 (Stein 1971, 514). In the Klu ‘bum, this horse is flown by a demon (bdud ) who encounters it in the land Bdud lung nag po Dgu lung, and a klu mo reveals that this horse is in a bse’i cho rol. The land Dgu is known from the Dunhuang manuscripts. Among the “fiefs” (Lalou 1958), we find the srin yul nag pa Dgu sul wherein lives the demon Dgu bo kha. Likewise in a text from Thomas (1957, text I B, p. 18, l. 49): in the srin yul nag pa Dgu sul, lives the srin rje Nag pa Dgu lcogs. As for the enclosure bse’i cho rol from the Klu ‘bum, where the horse is locked up, it is equally attested by the same expression in PT 1134 and PT 1136 (Stein 1971, 495, n. 47 and p. 501). In the Klu ‘bum (265 = 193a and 406 = 139b), the author speaks of the land of Rgya, alias Gtan bzang (yul Rgya yul ni Gtan bzang). Yet in PT 1285 (Lalou 1965), the capital of the land of Rgya (yul) is Gtan bzangs (in Thomas 1957, text IV, l. 348: Gdan bzangs). In the Klu ‘bum (loc. cit.), the father, the ruler of Rgya (rje) is Rmang pa. We find him in Lalou (1965), where the ruler of Rgya (rje) is Mying mtshan. This is Mye mtshang Rmang po in Thomas (1957, text IV, l. 348). In certain Dunhuang manuscripts, the land of Joy (Dga’ yul) designates the land of the dead (Stein 1971, 497, n. 52; PT 1134, l. 140: Dga’ yul and Dga’ ri, and l. 204: dga’ dang skyid pa’i yul). Yet in the Mdzod

264

r.a. stein

phug (commentary, 74), it is a question of specialists, notably of Mu cho ldem drug, who calculates the heat of Dga’ yul (Dga’ yul gyi drod brtsis). In this text, it seems that this land is situated on the summit of Sumeru where there are doctors (commentary, 125: yul yang Rga (variant: Dga’ ) yul Byang snam la, tshal yang Rga (Dga’ ) ba’i tshal zhes bya’o). 6. Themes As I have already stated on another occasion (1971, 509–10), the funerary ritual from the Dunhuang manuscripts often carries an intercalated sequence in which the origin and the identity of the personages and ritual ingredients are presented. The author then employs the formula: “if one speaks of the father, it is so; if one speaks of the mother, it is so.” Thus we read in PT 1134 (l. 11–2) that in the sky, pa dang yab smos pa/Mgon tshung Phya/ma dang yum smos na/Ta nga ngur mo tang. In PT 1194 (l. 38), we have pa spos na and ma spos na (read: smos) for the father and mother of the eagle (Stein 1971, 514). In text IV from Thomas (1957, l. 118), we have: pha Dung gyi glang po dang/ma g.Yu’i ‘pra mo gnyis smos ste. Yet this expression is frequently employed in the Klu ‘bum. In the edition supposedly from Tāranātha (cf. n. 47; nag po, chap. 37, 248b), we read: pha dang yab smos pa Mon rje ring po lags/ma dang yum smos pa . . . (phrase missing in the Sde dge edition, 307a). In the Sde dge edition, we find it elsewhere, e.g. fol. 221a: pha dang yab smos pa . . . ma dang yum smos pa (other examples: 294a, 299b, 319a). The Sde dge edition is not so good. For example, fol. 216b we read pha dang yab smon pa, whereas in the edition of “Tāranātha” (4a) we often have smos pa. Whereas the Sde dge edition (230b) has simply yab ni; yum ni, the passage corresponding to the other edition (22a) clearly writes: pha dang yab smos pa and ma dang yum smos pa. In the ritual chant imitated by Mi la ras pa, the formula is a little different: pha dang yab mtshan gsol ba (likewise for ma dang yum; Hoffmann 1950, text, 378–9). However, an analogous formula is found in the manuscript PT 1134 (l. 24) where the author writes: pa dang yab kyi mtshan, some man, and ma dang yum gyi mtshan, some woman. Another common theme was already given above (253–4). This is the intervention of a specialist who initially makes a diagnosis (gto and dpyad). In general, this preliminary intervention does not suffice and he must have recourse to Gshen rab. In the end, the patient or the corpse is “better than before” (above, n. 40, 42).

bon po in dunhuang manuscripts

265

An entire account from the Dunhuang manuscripts has been found in the Gzer myig of the later Bon. This is the interview between Kongzi (Confucius 孔子) and three small boys who are wiser than he (Soymié 1954). S.G. Karmay (1975, 1), who has edited and translated the text from the Gzer myig, has observed (564) that the version from the Gzer myig is an adaptation which would be incomprehensible without an understanding of the Dunhuang manuscript (PT 0992). The two accounts are sufficiently closely related so that Karmay could quote step by step the lines from the Dunhuang text. 7. Funerary ritual This ritual is attested in the Dunhuang manuscripts. It is well known through the work of Lalou (1953, text minutely analysed by Haarh 1969, 368–70) and of Stein (1971). It is remarkable that the entire ritual has been preserved, with some variants and alteration, in the Klu ‘bum (217a–219a). This is the history of the king of the klu ‘Ang te’u, the beginning of which I cited above (262). It goes from the beginning until the death of the principal personage. The funerary rite is then explained three times. However, the account is rather confused and the vocabulary is so obscure that a coherent translation is impossible for me. A doctor initially intervenes in vain (216a). The parents dig a hole for the cadaver (?, ring; khung ring du brkos nas sbas). The word ring (cadaver) is attested in the Dunhuang manuscripts.47 A soothsayer ( gtsug lag mkhan) is invited, who makes the diagnosis (gto and dpyad) and decides on something (life, death). Someone is addressed then as a srid pa’i gshen and (?) someone invites the srid pa’i bon po Mu cho ldem drug and the rgyal gshen The’u yug. Animals are killed and offerings prepared. The animals are qualified by epithets. There are lhos yaks, horses and birds, then the other animals without epithets, then the offerings (axe, hatchet), then again the animals this time qualified as dri (horse, yak) or without epithet (sheep, goat). There are also

47 Lalou, Rituel bon-po des funérailles royales, 349, n. 1 and p. 354: ring mkhan; PT 0239) Stein, “Un document ancien relatif aux rites funéraires des bon-po tibétains,” 19 and n. 22: ring gur): PT 1285 (Lalou, “Fiefs, poisons et guérisseurs,” 171, l. 146: ring bzang (the body); Thomas AFL, text IV, l. 290: ring, parallel to sku. [Nathan W. Hill has also indicated to me the work of Michael Walter on the term ring, including “From Old Tibetan ring to Classical Tibetan ring bsrel: Notes on the Terminology for the Eminent Deceased in Early Tibet.” Acta Orientalia Hungaricae 51 (1998): 63–69; “The Significance of the Term ring lugs. Religion, Administration, and the Sacral Presence of the btsan-po.”Acta Orientalia Hungaricae 51.3 (1998): 309–21.—ed.]

266

r.a. stein

gshed goats and sheep (to be slaughtered?). Then, someone gives offerings to the dri bon. There are as many objects as serve to turn aside the evil (bshos), among others: the horns of a stag, the horns of yaks, and the yas thag (offerings of the analogous threads to the mdos; the author often writes ya stag or yas rtags). One year passes(?). An intermediary introduces anew the “mirrors” of the soothsayer ( gtsug lag) who serve to calculate the date. This is the one called srid pa’i gto dpyad. A dur gshen (supra 257) is then invited. The soothsayer ( gtsug lag mkhan) decides the date through consulting the Chinese oracles (Rgya’i gab tse). The dur gshen, the dri bon, the soothsayer and a mag pa(?) makes things (to burn, to strike the ground?) just above the head of the klu. On that occasion someone recalls the origin of the klu according to the model that I have indicated above (264). After this short sequence, the author recommences the description of the funerary ritual executed by the mag pa, the dri bon po, the soothsayer, the ‘dur gshen and the srid pa’i bon po Mu cho ldem drug. This last declares that a certain horse G.yu bun has the function of a do ma, a word which designates the ritual horses or yaks in the Dunhuang manuscripts.48 The dri bon takes the dri horses and yaks. The klu becomes enraged and causes a malady to the soothsayer. To cure it, Gshen rabs is addressed. Thanks to the rites and the maṇḍalas, the klu is forced to leave. He complains that someone made an “enclosure” (or a tomb, se mo gru bzhi) above him. He is forced to fight (the soothsayer), but he still sends a malady to the mag pa and to the srid pa’i bon po Mu cho ldem drug. The Yid kyi khye’u chung (a relation or a form of Gshen rabs) explains to him the cause of the malady. There follows a list of acts of the funerary ritual (218b). Although most of the technical terms are untranslateable, their being grouped into a list is significant when we compare it to the ensemble of terms that the Dunhuang manuscripts fournish. Numbered below are the terms from the Klu ‘bum and their equivalents from Dunhuang:49 1) gshog pa. The meaning is unknown. The word is attested in PT 1042 (Lalou 1953, l. 110: sku gshen gshog thabs stsalto). 2) shid rab. It should be read rabs. This is a funerary rite. In one of the texts from 48 Cf. Stein, “Un document ancien relatif aux rites funéraires des bon-po tibétains,” n. 47 and Stein, “Du récit au rituel dans les manuscripts tibétains de Touen-Houang,” n. 41 and p. 493, 501 (PT 1136). 49 Cf. Stein, “Du récit au rituel dans les manuscripts tibétains de Touen-Houang,” n. 61.

bon po in dunhuang manuscripts

267

Thomas (1957, IV, l. 271), we find shi(d) rab, but in text I A, l. 27, there is shid rabs, parallel to ‘brang rabs. In PT 1285 (Lalou 1958, 181, par. V), there is shi rabs. This last form is attested in the Gzi brjid (Snellgrove 1967, 118 & 120). 3) se sgo. The door of the enclosure or of the tomb (se mo gru bzhi). 4) bzhes pa. The meaning is unknown to me. 5) do ma. The funerary horses and yaks (see above). 6) sgrib lug. This is the orthography of the Sde dge edition, but the edition supposedly of Tāranātha (nag po, 7a) writes skyibs lug, as in the Dunhuang manuscripts. It concerns the sheep of the funerals which show the way to the corpse (PT 0239; Stein 1970, 162 and n. 35; PT 1042, l. 106, Lalou 1953, 357–9; Thomas, text I B, l. 20; PT 1134, l. 122, 188; Stein 1971, 496 & 498). 7) spur khab. This is the house of the cadaver. 8) tsha log. We may compare this with the word tsha lob or tsa lob in PT 1134, l. 287, 289, 290. 9) tho. The meaning is unknown to me. 10) The dri birds, the dri horses, the dri sheep and the dri yaks. 11) lam. The way. This list is then repeated with some variants. Before gshog pa (1) there is ldem ring ldem thung, an expression which I do not understand. There follows shid rab (2), se sgo (3), dkor nor, cattle or wealth (in place of bzhes pa), do ma (5), sgrib lug (6), spur khab (7), tsha log (8), tho (9), the dri animals (10), zas phud, the first fruits of food, and lam ston (11), “to show the way.” The account continues. 8. Divinities In the song of Mi la ras pa in which he imitates a bon po ritual of healing (Hoffmann 1950, 378–86), the following divinities are mentioned: 1) the 360 ge ‘brog (379: the same are named in the Gzi brjid, Snellgrove 1967, 70); 2) the pho lhas, the yul lhas and the dgra lhas (382, 383, 386); 3) the srog lhas; 4) the mo smans (386; Gzi brjid, 52, the dgung smans); 5) the phung sri (382, 383); 6) the ya bduds and the ma bduds (384); 7) the klu bduds (384); 80 the rgyal ‘gongs and the rgyal pos (384); 9) the btsans. The majority of these categories of supernatural beings are frequently named in the classical and modern lamaist texts. However, it is good to raise here the fact that they are also already attested in the Dunhuang manuscripts. Thus, the ye ‘brog (1) appear in a text from Thomas (1957, IV, l. 142 and III, l. 36). The yul lha (2) finds itself in the manuscript PT 1042 (Lalou 1963, l. 98) in ITJ 740.1, paragraph 34 and and in ITJ 739, fol. 16b which Thomas has not published. The dgra lha (2) is attested in PT 1043, paragraph

268

r.a. stein

18 (written tgra bla), in PT 1047, paragraphs 3 and 18, in the text from Thomas (VI, l. 6) and in PT 1051, l. 30, 48. The srog lha (3) is named in ITJ 740.1, par. 46 (not published by Thomas) and in PT 1046, par. 2. The mo smans (4) are undoubtedly the same as the mu smans of the manuscripts (Thomas, text VI, l. 19ff; PT 1047, very frequently, notably l. 329: mu sman mched dgu; PT 1051, par. 2; cf. PT 1043, par. 6: chu sman). For the phung sri (5), we may compare the dphung srin of the manuscript PT 1043 (twice) and, simply, the sri (PT 1047, l. 23: mo sri; PT 1051, par. 2: sri gnon and Thomas 1957, text VI, l. 14). The ya bdud (6) appear in PT 1043, par. 20, under the form ya mtut, but we have ya bdud in PT 1047, l. 23, 267, 282, 295, 318. It should be included here that, in the song of Mi la ras pa, one proceeds each time to an oracle concerning such or such domain. This is called °cha (homophonous orthography to phya). In this manner, there is srog cha, khyim cha, nor cha and dgra cha. These expressions are employed identically in the Dunhuang manuscripts where it is always written °phya (Thomas 1957, text VI, l. 21: khyim phya and srog phya; l. 22: dgra phya and don phya, etc.). 9. The word Bon alone Since we come to find such ancient terms in the song of Mi la ras pa, we may include another significant detail about it. In the course of the ritual Mi la ras pa imitates, it is advised that in the case of harmful oracles, one “does a bon” (Hoffmann, 383: mo ngan bzlog phyir bon gcig byed ), and a yogin “intones a bon” (bon gcig sgyer, 383). The second formula is attested in PT 1134, l. 122, apropos of the funerary horses: “which will sing the bon?” (bon gang gis ni bgyerd). The first formula is equally frequent in PT 1047, a divinatory text. In the first part, l. 81–2, the oracle is bad, the demons are struck with a pur pa, one ought to make a bon (bon bgyis). In the second part, l. 145–6, the oracle is good, but having made a bon (bon byas te), it is not beneficial. The same result is attributed to a bad oracle (l. 210–1: bon byas na’). One meets the oracle “to make a bon” (bon bya, l. 213). Other examples are found on l. 284: one delights the demons in making a bon (bon byas te). All goes well if one makes a bon (l. 295: bon byas te), and the bon is beneficial (l. 390–1: bon phan ba). We find the same formula in another divinatory text, PT 1051, l. 7: if one makes a bon (bon byas), it is beneficial; if not, it is bad. Elsewhere (PT 1134, l. 44), in order to revive a corpse, one does not make a bon (bon ma mchis).

bon po in dunhuang manuscripts

269

Moreover, according to Mi la ras pa, as in the Dunhuang manuscripts, the word bon seems to indicate a rite. It does not concern Bon as a principle of philosophy or as a name of the later doctrine. 10. Linguistic and stylistic traits Some rare words and expressions from the ancient manuscripts are preserved in the texts of the later Bon. In the Klu ‘bum, we find a list of solar divinities (cf. Stein 1981, 213 and n. 302) which have been offended. It contains a category, unknown elsewhere, called gzed. However, this rare word is also attested in a list of divinities (lha, bdud, dmu, etc.) in the manuscript PT 1060, l. 51, 58 (gzed kyi g.yal chags na). In the accounts of the Northern hunt from the Dunhuang manuscripts, two or three kinds of game are named: sha (stag), dgo (antelope) and dngas (po), a word unknown to the dictionaries. Thus, we read in a text from Thomas (1957, text IV, l. 207): sha bros te mchis/ dngas po ‘pral gangs bros te mchis, and l. 208: sha dngas (Thomas incorrectly reads dangs). In the Klu ‘bum, the author recounts an analogous hunt in the North, to Byang ka sna brgyad (cf. supra 262). Someone goes seeking sha and dgo, but does not find them. Then, sha lam sngas lam du byas lags pas/sha lam sngas lam ni. A man comes thence (mi’i cig pha se gda’ bas), but this is in reality a demon (srin gcig pha se gda’). This expression pha se for “thence” is very peculiar. The usual expression is phar (pha rol; and tshur, tshu rol for “hence”). Phas for pha rol is attested in the Great Dictionary, but not phas se. Likewise, tshu kha for tshur, but not tshus se. Yet this very peculiar form already is found in the Dunhuang manuscripts. In the texts from Thomas (1957, text IV, l. 203, etc.) we have phas se byung. In PT 1289, l. 54–5, we read: Byang ‘brog snam stod na sha zhig pha se byung. In the same text, l. 45, the brother comes thence, the lady comes hence (mying phas se gshegs na . . . jo mos tshus se bsus). This is without doubt a dialect or archaic form. Another small detail is to be mentioned here. In the Klu ‘bum (230b), a father gives a drum which is called (rnga pho lang) g.yag snying (“yak heart”). This quite peculiar form is already found in a text from Thomas (1957, text I B, l. 56): a small bell (drill bu) g.yag snying. In connection with oaths, the Klu ‘bum (153a–b) writes tha tshig skam la bcad, mnga’ dang mtho yang bgyis, and (181a) klu dang tha

270

r.a. stein

tshig skam la bgyis. This peculiar form with skam is already attested in Thomas (1957, text I A, l. 103): tha tshigs ni skam la bchas . . . mnga’ bchad mtho bchade. Another expression is found in both parts. In the Klu ‘bum (265b, 283a), a girl catches a bird and wants to send it as a messenger of a harmful sort: thang dang phrin bya ba. In the manuscript PT 1194 (l. 44), a bird delivers a harmful message: myi gson gshin kyi than dang prin du bgyis. The link between birds and bad omens remains alive in the contemporary language. The bird of illomen (than bya) is the equivalent of srin bya and of ‘ug pa, the owl (Great Dictionary). Two styles of very peculiar language are found at once in the Klu ‘bum and in the ancient texts. The first consists in twice repeating the principal substantive, one time at the beginning in an isolated position and a second time linked to another word. The most frequent case is that of place names. Thus, we have in Thomas (1957, text IV) yul Gags yul (l. 334), yul Mchims yul (l. 336), yul Rkong yul (l. 343) and yul Rgya yul (l. 348). From the other side, in the Klu ‘bum, we find yul yang Bskos kyi yul/mkhar yang Bskos kyi mkhar (103b), mkhar sa mkhar (221b), yul Gshen yul thang brgyad, mkhar Gshen mkhar rin po che (238), yul Rgya yul ni . . ., mkhar Rgya mkhar (265a), yul bdud yul (371b), yul Rgya yul (406a). Another peculiar style is linking two words of the same meaning with the copula dang (“and”) when it does not concern a couple. Thus, for “father,” the text states pha dang yab and for “mother”: ma dang yum. Examples of this have been seen above (264) in the Dunhuang manuscripts and in the Klu ‘bum. In the manuscript PT 1134, l. 11, the text speaks of the children created: bshos dang nams kyi sras. Likewise in Taube (1980, text 27, p. 80): pha dang yab smos kyi . . . ma dang yum smos kyi . . . bshos dang nams kyi sras.50 The Klu ‘bum has exactly the same phrase (294a): bshos dang nams kyi sras. The binome bshos nams, “procreate” is cut in two by the copula. It is connected with the expression so nams, “agriculture.” The Klu ‘bum sometimes writes so dang nams (221a) or so dang nam bya 9106a, 278b, 169b). Elsewhere, for the value of possession of a land, the Klu ‘bum writes yul dang sa skal ni (221a), etc. For the horse, the Klu ‘bum understands the binome rta

50 Taube (1980, 81, n. 2) gives many examples of pha dang yab from the Dunhuang manscripts. He also (n. 3) cites ming dang mtshan and gives many examples of bshos dang nams kyi sras.

bon po in dunhuang manuscripts

271

dang rmang gcig where rmang is an archaic word for “horse.” In one of the manuscripts from Thomas (1957, text I A, l. 41), the two equivalent words are placed in parallel phrases: rta bzhugs ni gnam la bzhugs ni dgung la bzhugs, “the horse remains in the sky.” Another expression of this type is less clear. When a man desires to marry a woman, the Klu ‘bum usually states khab dang dbyal (103b, 95b, 101b, 185b, 142a, 214b). In one of the manuscripts from Thomas (text IB, l. 97), a man and a woman are united and have children: khyab dang dbyal du bgyis te. Likewise, in PT 1040, l. 8, a young man marries a girl: kyab dang dbyal du blangste. In the first example, it apparently concerns a couple: khab, the man, and dbyal, the woman. This case would be identical to the expression stangs dang dbyal, husband and wife (Taube 1980, text 3, l. 1, p. 51). Likewise in the Klu ‘bum (203a–b): stangs dang dbyal du bgyi/rje dang khol du bgyi. Yet in other examples, the two words of the binome designate the woman. This is the case in Taube 1980, text 27, l. 11, p. 80. There, it is a question of a woman: khab dang dbyal du bgyi. The word khab has survived. In the Great Dictionary, it is defined as an honorific for “house” and as “wife, daughter-in-law” (de’i bu mo khab tu blangs pa). However, the word dbyal is not attested. It is employed only with the sense of “woman” in the Klu ‘bum: dbyal mi mo bzang mo (96b), dbyal gyi mi bzang cig and dbyal gyi mi mo bzang mo (120a), dbyal mi bzang cig and dbyal mo bzang mo (153b).51

51

I will take advantage of this occasion to correct an error that I committed in Tibetan Civilization (1972 [English translation], 243) where I stated that the bon pos are designated by the word dbyal. The error comes from an ambiguous and strange passage from the Klu ‘bum (96b). A man wants to construct a castle of wood (shing mkhar), but does not even make a khab. Gshen rab himself states that men of the world ought to make or have khab dang dbyal. A beautiful woman appears and they are united. The woman is cold and states that he ought to make a castle of earth (sa mkhar). The man constructs one, but he falls ill. The dbyal mo sems states that this comes from the nails, and the dbyal mo gshen gives him a drug. She goes to China in order to there find the art of gto and of dpyad. Having received it, she consults the gab tse (oracles) and sees the cause of the illness (the construction has been made above a klu). Yet the man is not cured. The woman (dbyal mi mo bzang mo) rediscovers the cause and indicates what he must do, but in vain. Then the dbyal mo gshen (the same woman?) comes to Gshen rabs and asks him to cure the man. The latter is then cured. The woman thus enjoys an analogous role to that of the bon pos or the other soothsayer specialists. Whence my error. An analogous account finds itself on page 101b. There is a marriage (khab dang dbyal du bzhes nas). The man and the woman plow. The klu is angered. The man strikes him. He returns to the house (khab) and recounts to the woman (dbyal) that which occurred. The woman (dbyal) makes a divination

272

r.a. stein *

*

*

There are surely many other examples of borrowing of organized Bon in the Dunhuang manuscripts. They should be researched and systematically brought to light. Yet the literature of Bon is quite vast. I am not able to consult it and am myself limited to some texts, above all the Klu ‘bum which is rich in archaisms. We could also bring up the case of this genre in the lamaist literature which I have neglected here. As S.G. Karmay, Per Kvaerne and myself have stated on occasion, there is no rupture between the ancient manuscripts and the texts of later Bon. The authors of this Bon must have had at their disposal manuscripts analogous or identical to those of Dunhuang. In the majority of cases, we should postulate a written model. The case of an interrupted oral transmission would be rare.

(mo, gto and dpyad), but does not find the name of the demon. She thus comports herself like the specialists of the bon po type. In many of the accounts of this type, intervene doctors, soothsayers (mo and phya, mo ma, 133b, or gto pa, 140a, etc., cf. 13). The word bon po is rarely employed. We have seen (266) the dri bon (in relation to the various dri animals; 216a, 218a–b) and a bdud bon who fights the bdud of an illness (186a) is spoken of. Otherwise, the word only appears in the expression srid pa’i bon po, which is an epithet of Mu cho ldem drug (216a, 368a, 373b) and in srid pa bon who gives a name and a consecration (dbang bskur) to a young woman (207a).

TIBETICA ANTIQUA VI

CONFUCIAN MAXIMS IN TWO DUNHUANG MANUSCRIPTS R.A. Stein We know that in the 8th century, the Tibetans had a good understanding of the classical literature and the traditional institutions of China. As Imaeda (1980–5) and others have remarked, the Chinese Annals deliver to us some indications on this subject. In 641, the princess Wencheng 文成 sent the young nobles to the imperial college in China to study the Shijing 詩經 and the Shujing 書經 (Pelliot 1961, 5 & 84). In 670, talk is heard of a Tibetan, called Zhong cong 仲琮, who had studied at the Great Academy (Pelliot 1961, 87). Between 705 and 710, the Tibetan princes studied in China at the Academy of the Sons of the State. In 730, the Tibetan Ming Xilie 名悉獵, living in Chang’an, understood well the Chinese literature (Pelliot 1961, 19–20). In the same period, the princess Jincheng 金成 requested for the Tibetans the Shijing 詩經, the Liji 禮記, the Zuozhuan 左傳 and the Wenxuan 文選. An academic was opposed to this. Yet the five classics were finally copied and given to the Tibetans (Pelliot 1961, 102; for all this, see Demiéville 1952, 187–8, note). As we know, the Tibetan translations of the Chinese classics figure among the Dunhuang manuscripts. Already, Mlle Lalou located a chapter of the Shujing 書經 or Shangshu 尚書 (PT 0986), and Y. Imaeda identified a fragment close to the Zhanguoce 戰國策 (Imaeda 1980). He also studied in detail the Tibetan version of the Shujing 書經 (1985). I have also dedicated some lines to it (TA I, 85–7). We have both stated that the Tibetan “translation” does not correspond always and everywhere to the Chinese text of the present editions. Sometimes the Tibetans included glosses and anecdotes which they knew from elsewhere, sometimes they have removed the passages. Ma Ming-t’a (1984) discovered that the text identified as Zhanguoce 戰國策 by Wang Yao and by Imaeda, despite some divergences, is in fact a translation of the Shenqiu houji 春秋後記 (a work of the 4th century) for which there exists a Dunhuang manuscript. Likewise, for a passage of the Shiji 史記 inserted into the Old Tibetan Chronicle,

274

r.a. stein

Takeuchi (1985, 141) has shown that it is not a question of a direct and literal translation of the Shiji 史記, but more of a paraphrase following a commentary that the Tibetans would have found in the Wenxuan 文選. This is to say that we may never know with certitude if the differences between the Tibetan versions and the Chinese texts are due to the initiative of the Tibetan translators or if they had at their disposal a Chinese work different from the models that we know. The two Tibetan manuscripts that I wish to present here are two examples of the same text. This text is an account of wise maxims from Chinese Confucianism. As for the other Chinese texts in Tibetan, it is impossible to state if this account was composed by Tibetans or if they translated or paraphrased a Chinese account perhaps made at Dunhuang. It concerns the manuscripts PT 0987 and 0988. Apart from some variants, the text is the same. PT 0987, line 1, corresponds to PT 0988, l. 44, and so on until PT 0987, l. 21 = PT 0988, l. 61. The last phrase of PT 0988, l. 62 is missing in PT 0987. This phrase indicates the intention of the account: “These examples (dpe) are examples (stated by) the wise men of other times” (dpe ‘di gna’ myi ‘dzans pa’i dpe lagso). They are cited on several occasions. These are listed below. PT 0988, 12: “If one makes an example” (dper [?] bya na); l. 17: “The example, it is that” (dpe ni de yin no); l. 24: “(As) an example” (dpe ni); l. 30: “As an example of the upright men” (‘grin myi’o chog gi dper); l. 37: “If one makes an example” (dper bya na); l. 55: “This is akin to that example” (dpe de dang ‘dra’o). However, in l. 61 and 62, the author states: “This statement or writing” (yi ge ‘di).1 The wise men from whom the examples emanate are cited many times. One time (PT 0988, l. 21), the author states: “Act according to the principle or the custom (chos) of wise men of the past (gnga’ myi mdzans pa’i chos bzhin byos shig). Of Yang ‘Tshing, “an old man of yore” (l. 27, gna’ myi snying po), the author cites a dialogue with a rich man. Later, l. 37, the author makes allusion to two “wise men,” The kong and Tsang shu. The first is easy to identify. We read about him (PT 0988, l. 37): “If one takes an example, the wise man called The kong was engaged in fishing on the bank of a river, and he was made minister.” This is the celebrated Taigong 太公, alias Lu shang 呂尚 or Shang fu 尚夫, a hidden sage found on the banks of the river Wei by

1 In Stein, Tibetica Antiqua I, 41–2, I was amiss to translate dpe as “book,” because it is parallel to yi ge in our manuscript.

confucian maxims in two dunhuang manuscripts

275

the king Wen of Zhou and became counselor and father-in-law to king Wu.2 The second person, Tsan shu, equally became “minister” when he was in the process of doing something at the moment when he was discovered (this phrase is partially illegible). The Chinese name ought to be read Tsang (or Cang) Zhou, but I have not been able to identify this character. In this account of examples and anecdotes, the source is not always given. This is the case with one phrase which is not expressly designated as a quote; this is the only one I was able to identify because it was easy to recognize (see the summary, l. 21, below). However, in another case, the source is cited with more or less precision. In the ms. PT 0988, l. 17, we have; “Kong tse, the wise child, stated” (Kong tse ‘phrul gyi bu na re). This person will be spoken of later. In parallel, the author cites: “Kong tse stated” (na re; l. 41 and 48 = PT 0987, l. 7). We also find a citation from the “Liji 禮記 book” (yi ge Le ke na re). Many times the author refers to a “statement” or to an account, to an anecdote (gtam). On line 19, we have simply: “If one speaks of it according to the saying (account, proverb)” (gram du zer na). On line 33, the author states: “If one speaks of it according to the saying which is found in some books” (yi ge ‘ga’i nang nag tam du zer na), and, line 56, we have: “An ancient saying or proverb spoken of long ago” (gna’ gtam rnying ma pa na re). One time the author specifies (l. 52): “If one speaks of it following the saying which is found in the book called Ci’u yag of the wise man” (myi ‘dzangs pa’i yi ge Ci’u yag ces bya ba’i nang nas gtam du zer na). It is concerned with the Zhou yi 周易 or Yijing 易經 (*tsyuw yek; cf. Stein 1981, 269 and TA I, 41). In the later tradition and from as early as the era of the Dunhuang manuscripts, the name Ci’u yag was contracted into Cu yag. This proper noun became a common noun signifying (a book of) divination. This is the case in the manuscript ITJ 748. It is a divination text of Chinese origin (within it are found Chinese proper nouns which I am not able to identify), but not the Yijing 易經. At the end, we read: “The book of the cu yag is finished” (cu yag gyi yi ge rdzogs

2 An account of wise maxims is known among the Dunhuang manuscripts. This is the Taigong jiajiaor 太公家教 (P. 3069, etc.). On that work intended for the instruction of children, see Wang Zhongmin, “Taigong jiajiao 太公家教.” The Dunhuang text was translated by P. Demiéville (L’œvre de Wang le zélateur, 611–835). For the sage fishing with the line, cf. Granet, Danses et legends de la Chine ancienne, 318, n. 5, and 405–6.

276

r.a. stein

sho).3 This use of the name Zhou Yi 周易 for an entire other form of divination is attested by a Chinese Dunhuang manuscript which discusses the method of divination in twelve coins, the Li laojun zhouyi shi’er qian bu fa 李老君周易十二錢卜法 (S. 813, S. 3724, S. 5686), which we will further discuss below. We may ask if, among the authors cited, there is a difference between the concise Kong tse (Confucius) and Kong tse ‘phrul gyi bu (“wise child”). The first citation undoubtedly designates a precise text attributed to Confucius (the Lunyu 論語 or another classic). The second citation has the same form: “Confucius states,” but the name of this author has a more legendary allure. It is remarkable to find the two forms in the same text. I thought formerly that first, Kong tse ‘phrul gyi bu ought to signify “Kong tse, the (miraculously) wise child” (Stein 1981, 257 and 269, n. 87); second, we find the theme, inverted, with Confucius humbly questioning the wise child Xiangtuo 項託; and third, Confucius was identified with the “educated boy” (rutong 儒童, māṇava). Confucius also plays the role of the respectful interlocutor in his interview with Laozi 老子.4 Confucius, wise child, was perhaps assimilated with Laozi, or borrowed features from him. The possibility of one such assimilation is illustrated by the patronage of the “Method of divination by the twelve coins.” It has been seen above that in Chinese, this method is placed under the patronage of Li Laojun 李老君 (Laozi divinized) although there is no connection between Laozi and this method of divination. Yet the same method exists in Tibetan in a Dunhuang manuscript. This is the method by the twelve dong tse, without doubt the Chinese tongzi 銅子, “bronze coin.” At the end of this text, the author clearly states: “The end of the divination of the twelve coins made by Dkong tse ‘phrul” (ms. ITJ 742; Thomas 1957, 151). It is really Confucius as

3

Mme A. Macdonald (“Une lecture des Pelliot tibétain 1286, 1287, 1038, 1047, et 1290,” 284) cited the beginning of the manuscript PT 0127.1, which is a doublet of ITJ 748: “Formerly, the gifted man of magical faculties (‘phrul gyi myis) established this text of divination (or of astrology, gtsug lag) as a model (dpe) for the future generations.” We will see that ‘phrul gyi myi may also by translated by “sage.” 4 A well-known anecdote from the Shiji 史記; cf. Kaltenmark, Lao Tseu et le taoïsme, 12–4; and Zuangzi 莊子, ch. 13. It was also illustrated by the bas-reliefs from the Wuliang ci of Shandong and of Xinjing at Sichuan. For the celebrated image of the Jinshi suo 金石索, see the dictionary of Morohashi, vol. III, 807. Between Kongzi and Laozi, we see a child. Another dialogue between Laozi and Confucius is attested by a Dunhuang manuscript (P. 3155.1), but it only discusses the mythic emperors. It is followed (P. 3155.2) by moral aphorisms and by advice for good conduct.

confucian maxims in two dunhuang manuscripts

277

wise child since at the beginning of the text, it states: “Formerly Kong tse wise child (‘phrul gyi bu) joined together many of the divinatory sciences (gtsug lag) and well-established them. The wise king (‘phrul gyi rgyal po) Li Bsam glang established this divination from the top of his horse5 (and thugs ring nas, which I cannot understand). Mme Macdonald initially thought (1971, 282–3) that the king “with magical faculties” was the “spiritual son” (‘phrul gyi bu) of Confucius and that this “king” was the emperor Xuanzong 玄宗 of the Tang. The first part of this supposition was erroneous. The author rectified this passage in her note on the manuscript PT 1055 (Choix II, 12), her revised account agrees with my point of view. In my opinion, the two names ought not to designate two people. The same phrase is repeated twice. Once, the author of the divination is Kong tse ‘phrul gyi bu; the second time, it is ‘phrul gyi rgyal po Li Bsam glan. Confucius and the emperor have the same epithet. As Mme Macdonald has correctly stated (283), in the later tradition (part of the Sba bzhed), the emperors of China (of the Tang) are, among others, Kong tse ‘phrul gyi bu and Kong tse ‘phrul chung. As Mme Macdonald states, it is true that the emperors of the Tang are the patrons of the divination; with this title, they are associated or identified with Confucius. But in reality, they have a link with Daoism. The family name of the “wise king” of China (Tang dynasty) is Li in the Tibetan text. It is known that the Tang emperors were from the Li family and that they attached this name, for a time, to that of the family name Li of Laozi. However, witness that the same divination by the twelve coins is patronized by Kong tse and by the king Li in the Tibetan version, but by Li Laojun 李老君 in the Chinese version.6 It is time to come to the examples and to the texts cited. I have not been able to identify the citations. Yet, we ought to note that this genre of citations was present in the Chinese classics. Thus, in the Liji 禮記 (chap. Tangong, shang 檀弓上, 7b), we read: “The men of antiquity have a proverb which states . . .” (古之人有言曰). We often

5 Kalinowski (“La literature numéromantique dans le manuscripts de Dunhuang”) cites one method of divination in twenty-nine or nine cards, called Kongzi matou bufa 孔子馬頭卜法 or Licheng Kongzi mazuo buzhan fa 立成孔子馬坐卜占法. One legend explains that, at the time of a voyage, Confucius found this divination on horseback. 6 The two methods are identical. Twelve coins are thrown. Those which fall face down (bub) or up (gan) are counted. However, for the prognostication, the operations of the Tibetan text seem to be less complex than those of the Chinese text (which employs hexagrams). A detailed study of the Tibetan text is necessary.

278

r.a. stein

find (e.g. chap. Liyun) the expressions “Kongzi stated” (孔子曰) and “the superior man states” (君子曰). Unfortunately, a complete translation of the manuscript is impossible. There are many reasons for this. The writing is clear (of an angular type), but the intersyllabic dots (in general placed in the middle of the letter) are often missing. As a result, it is often difficult to separate the syllables. To this are included numerous lacunae and illegible passages. Having at our disposal two identical texts with variants ought to facilitate translation. However, the variants often leave us perplexed. As it is a question of a translation, and since the original Chinese is unknown to us, it is difficult to decide which variant is better. It is equally impossible to divine the exact meaning of certain Tibetan terms (such as chos and rtsal) which ought to have the particular meaning of a specific Chinese word. The brevity of the maxims does not permit us to define them by context. Given their relative frequency, we might think that chos would be the equivalent of Dao 道 and rtsal that of De 德, but this is only a hypothesis. As rtsal is many times associated with the body (notably l. 58), I have translated this word as “force.” Despite the impossibility of a full translation, I believe it useful to give a summary and a tentative translation, admittedly literal and clumsy, of the passages I believe comprehensible. I have resigned myself to this only in the hope that a Sinologist might one day point out a Chinese text corresponding to the Tibetan maxims or identify one or another of the citations. Here follows a summary of the text (the ellipses [. . .] indicate the lacunae in the text and illegible passages). PT 0988. For the first eleven lines, half of the page is missing. On line 10, it is a question of rtsal (“force or ability”?) that a man may have. This word returns rather often (e.g. l. 49). The lines 12 to 18 form a paragraph which begins with an example (dper bya na): In a house of grass (?), there is a wise man. He was before a specialist in herbs (rtswa mkhan). One should not quarrel. A wise man (l. 13), when he hears a pleasant story elsewhere, he states it (?). If a man has done ill, he hides it (?) . . . (l. 16). One does not cut off the head of the man who has not done ill. If I do not . . . myself ill . . . no one will be my enemy. This is the example (l. 17). Kong tse, wise child, said: If I speak many words of . . . great will be the number of benefits . . . of the words stated. A new paragraph occupies the lines 19–21. A tear on the left prevents seeing its length (l. 19). If one speaks according to the (or a) statement

confucian maxims in two dunhuang manuscripts

279

(account, proverb gtam du zer na), after having said a word . . . (?). If one says two words, the reign of the king will be just and happy in “statements” (gtam du) . . . Likewise if one speaks much (?), one knows evil, one does not do it (or: one ought not to do it). If a good principle is made (?, chos), likewise if one makes many, the people will not be hostile (?, mkhon) and this is good. From this point of view (?), even the men say words with the mouth . . . (l. 21). Act according to the principles (chos) of wise men of yore! That which one does not wish in his heart, do not show it (do not do it) to other men. Although it is not indicated as a citation from a work or from Kong tse, this last phrase is visibly a translation or an adaptation from the celebrated phrase of the Lunyu 論語: “That which you do not wish yourself, do not do to others” (XV, 23; Couvreur 1910, 244)(己所不欲勿施於人), or from its variant from the Zhongyong 中庸 (op. cit. par. 13, p. 26): “That which you do not wish that one do to you, do not do it to others either (施諸己而不願亦勿施於人).” A new paragraph seems to begin on line 22 (without a special sign). At the beginning, the author perhaps speaks of Kong tse (the transcription is uncertain). We read then: “For those who are superior wise men (myi ya rabs ‘dzangs pa; these are undoubtedly the Chinese junzi 君子), likewise if I have done well and right, I (?) it to others. Even if others have done ill, I . . . (l. 23). If one speaks of it (according to) the statement (proverb? gtam zer na), I . . . that which is not the principle (chos), I do not look at it with the eyes, I do not speak of it with the mouth, I do not hear it with the ears. By (all) that which is not the principle (chos), I do not shake at the thought.” (I am not disturbed by the thought of anything that is not the principle.) The following lines (l. 24–7) remain incomprehensible to me. In the middle of line 27, a new paragraph is marked by the usual sign of the beginning of a paragraph. An old man of yore, called Yang ‘Ching (Chinese: Yang Cheng?) having given wealth, when (?) Yang ‘Ching wanted . . ., the owner of the valuables says: “Disperse them (?) so that nobody knows.” Yang ‘Ching says: “There are four (kinds of ) knowledge; the sky knows, the earth knows, you know, I know. As there are these four, I do not want any” . . . (l. 29). A man of former times (?), called Shug(?)-tsher . . . wine and wealth, these three at one time . . . these two men were thus largely upright and (?). My body and my life (?, srid) are precious (l. 30) . . . having been faithful to the king and full of filial piety (srid zhu) for parents, they were examples (dper) for men, etc. (l. 31). Likewise among inferior men (myi tha ma), this

280

r.a. stein

is bad (?). Hearing ill talk, doing wrong to men (?); one does not judge faithful among the ministers . . . On line 33, a new paragraph is indicated by the usual sign, but there is a large tear on the left. If one speaks (according to) the saying (proverb, gtam du zer na) in some books, there is no (difference between) rich and poor for men. Those who have a view (?) are rich . . . also, there is a great difference (?). A new paragraph is indicated by the sign, line 36. The poor man, he should not be scorned. The rich man, he ought not to be (?, bsnyags). If sun and moon turn both . . . A new paragraph is indicated by the sign (l. 37). In order to give an example, there is a wise man called The kong (Taigong 太公, see above) who fished on the bank of a river and was (even so) named minister. (Another) called Tsan zhu . . . (l. 38) was engaged in . . . and was (even so) named minister. Of crystal . . . not made and is not appropriate as riches. In a single body . . . from the “force” (rtsal) (l. 39) . . . thus it is great. If one learns as from the age of a small child (?), it is like the sun which rises in the beginning; (l. 40) if one learns as an old man, it is like the sun which sets. Moreover, if one does not learn (at all), it is like walking in the dark night. New paragraph on line 41. The book Le ke (the Liji 禮記) states: “the superior man (yabs),7 even if he is poor, does not change principle (chos). The inferior man (ma rabs), even if he is rich, does not produce taste” (enjoyment?; myang).8 Kong tse states: “Witness an example of training after seeing a thing studied. (This is like horses, cattle, etc.) (l. 42). Similarly those which have not met . . . if they learned while being (?, beaten?; gzhus) by the whip, are not fit for the race (to gallop). The man who has learned to write (?) is similar to that.” Paragraph marked by the usual sign. The wise man, having seen that one has left on the way the matter of the whip called (?) keng shu . . . (l. 43), he went, making a greeting to the tree. If one says, when he went there, he greeted the tree (or: wood), this man stated: having made from this tree (or: wood) a whip, I have beaten (?; gzhus) and now . . . (l. 44) . . . the tree (wood) . . . Thus I greeted (that he greeted) . . . 7

Contrariwise, there comes next “inferior men” (ma rabs). This is why I think that yabs is a contraction of ya rabs (see above, l. 22). For other examples of this genre of contractions, see Stein, “Saint et devin,” 233, and Tibetica Antiqua IV, n. 18. 8 I have not succeeded in finding that phrase in the Liji 禮記.

confucian maxims in two dunhuang manuscripts

281

You, later men,9 if you also act according to principle (chos), the rest and the joy (dal skyid pa) will come quickly (phral du). (Without sign of separation) The ignorant man states (l. 45) . . . (PT 0987, l. 3): “rather than to study (to learn) ten thousand or a thousand po (?), I prefer a full sack of coins (dong tse); if I am poor, I will immediately have it at my disposal (‘phral du yod do; PT 0988, l. 45: ‘phral du spyad du yod do). If one studies books, when one is poor, . . . (spyard ) . . . (l. 46) when one is . . . one does not immediately have it at one’s disposal (spyad par myed do).” The wise man responds: “to learn the ‘force,’10 there is enough there for a lifetime,11 and it is precious. If one does not learn (does not study) . . . (l. 46) . . . the principal (chos) of a base man . . . does not agree. Rather than a bag (?, sgro ba; sgrob?) full of gold dust, he wants more the scroll of a book (yi ge bam pho). (Cut) To give wealth to another, if one takes an example, it is like (mtshungs te) before a tree . . . (l. 48), the tree will later decline. To give wealth to someone and later to bring low his own life (srid), it is like that.” Paragraph marked by the usual sign (l. 48 = PT 0987, l. 7). Kong tse said: “If one says . . . (?) . . . (PT 0987: ‘if one vilifies12 the principle [chos], one does not experience shame’). If one possesses a thousand ounces of gold, this is not great wealth. If in the beginning one learns (studies) with effort in assimilating well the “force” (rtsal); if one possesses the “force” in the body, one is rich forever” (PT 0987: gtan du; PT 0988: gtam du, according to the saying) (l. 50). The ignorant man (PT 0987) regards (is concerned with) wealth; he does not regard the body of men. If one has wealth, (but) no body (PT 0987, l. 9); if a man searches for wealth (btsal), he finds it (rnyed do); if wealth searches for the man (or if one looks for a man by means of wealth), it (or one) does not find him. From that point of view (l. 50), my body and my “force” (lus dang rtsal ), the two, it is not appropriate that they make a contract (??). The ignorant man13 responds: “The man and the wealth,

9 Here, like the couplet from the manuscript PT 0987, l. 2: “of our days also . . . if now you, later men, you act according to principal (chos) of former times . . .” 10 brtsal, but PT 0987, l. 4, has rtsal. 11 PT 0987, l. 4: tshe chig zad zadu rin che’o//. 12 Chos gshes na. It should perhaps be read shes na, “if one understands the principle.” The variant of PT 0988, ‘tshogs shig zhes na, remains incomprehensible. 13 Here and elsewhere the words blun po and lan blan are written with the prefix b° before l°, and not above.

282

r.a. stein

these two, are produced at the same time (PT 0987: lan gchig tu skye ste).14 Even in the absence of wealth, that is not appropriate.” Paragraph marked on line 52. If one speaks according to the saying (proverb; gtam du zer na) taken from the book of the wise man, called Ci’u yag,15 make it that wealth be feared as an enemy of the body. Make the wine (or the beer; chang) be eliminated because it is a poison to the body (l. 53). The dirty and the bad do evil to the “force” (rtsal) of thought,16 leave them. The fierce words17 which penetrate to the interior (of thought . . . (?) . . . the nogs shig). If the men dispute . . . (l. 54). If you see done something which is not principled (chos), show it! If you do not fall on a companion and . . . (?) . . ., get away (?)! If one does not get away (?) when it is convenient to flee, this is equal to the example of the bird (?) . . ., fish hook . . . (?) . . . poor counsel of a man (?). If at the beginning one is not awakened (?; sod) by a counsel, one does not learn (?; slabs) later by regret. Paragraph on line 56 (PT 0987, l. 15). An old saying (proverb; gtam) of yore states: “Initially difficult, then easy, this conforms to the principle of life (srid chos). Initially easy, then difficult, this is not like the principle of life.” Nowadays very few are those who have . . . (?) . . . There are many who, not being appropriate, are destroyed. To act on good principles (chos) and a pleasant saying (gtam), one (has no need?) to cross the threshold of the door. To act on poor principles (chos) and an unpleasant saying, that (?) crosses the track of a thousand li. If a single principle (chos) is poor (faulty), this is akin to a hundred poor (faulty) principles (chos). To say many words, this is to do evil (a wrong) to the body. And to posses little “force” (rtsal), this is beneficial (useful) for the body (l. 59). A wise king does not commend a minister full of calumny. A wise father is not affectionate with a son of little filial piety (sri zhu). A loyal minister does not display a spirit of revolt (of contrariety) to a wise king. A son full of filial piety (srid zhu) does not display a spirit of revolt (of contrariety) to a wise father. That the men may also think thus in their hearts! No matter what they do, there will be nothing which is not good (well). Last paragraph on line 61 (PT 0987, l. 21). If one acts as it is (stated) in the book (yi ge), it is like after having lit a single lamp; in the end, 14 15 16 17

The word nor is missing in PT 0988, but is found in PT 0987. The books of divination; see above. PT 0988 has sems gyi rtsal; PT 0987 writes: sems gyis rtsal. PT 0988: tshig gtum po; PT 0987: gtam po.

confucian maxims in two dunhuang manuscripts

283

it will multiply (PT 0987: ‘pheld) into a hundred lamps. There is not a moment where the light . . . (?) . . . and good becomes exhausted (finished) (l. 62). That all men listen to this book (yi ge), that they pick through it (reflect), write it and read it (PT 0988: lags pa; PT 0987: plags pa)! This will be used to augment the “force” (rtsal). These examples from former times are examples from wise men of yore.

ANNUAIRE DU COLLÈGE DE FRANCE 67TH YEAR (1967) Study of the Chinese World: Institutions and Concepts M. Rolf A. Stein, Professor I. The subject treated in Tuesday’s course, Aspects of the Sworn Faith in China, demands attention following our research on the purchase contracts for land allocated for tombs, and preliminary to a study of the Daoist institutions. These contracts are, in fact, characterized by certain remarkable traits, which can be productively enumerated: 1) Continuity; we know a great number of them, of which many are found in situ by recent excavations, well dated and located, spreading out from the environs of our target era to the present time. 2) Integration in religion, both popular and organized. Starting from the first specimens known (1st–2nd centuries) in which all the relevant terms of the social reality (purchasers, salesmen, witnesses, price, localization of terrain), these “contracts” became talismans, guaranteeing the perennial enjoyment from the grave by the dead, of which the terms (save the names of the purchaser and the dead beneficiary) are all religious. The models were conceived and diffused by the Daoists, but they were utilized for the making of the elements of popular religion. 3) Form, which illustrates under many aspects the bipartition or the dichotomy and responds perfectly to the function. Yet, the same type of contract, with witnesses, guarantors, oaths and pledges, and the same form of bipartition, were utilized by the Daoists for a different situation. This was the necessity of a link between master and disciple in view of the transmission of revealed and secret texts, which were considered treasure-talismans. We have therefore started research on this subject. It proved extremely long and complicated because it implicates an enormous mass of texts iterating themselves with a remarkable perenniality from the beginning of our era up until the modern epoch. Yet it is also quickly becomes evident that we must not treat the problem by entering immediately in medias res and being limited to it alone. From the beginning of our era, the Daoists who formed organized religious groups and systems were never invented, but continued the

286

annuaire 1967

institutions and concepts of ancient China either in maintaining the same structures and their forms, or by operating with purely cosmetic borrowings based on their culture of letters. This is why we can only approach the properly Daoist deeds in the last lessons. The first ten lessons should be dedicated to antecedents. We could believe that the work on the oath by Granet, Maspero, Mullie and Serruys have exhausted the question. We have, however, found that there is much to add and that we must sometimes bring corrections and precision. And still, we restricted ourselves to studying the concepts, without trying to reach the sociological reality. We thus commented on the texts that the Daoist literati knew certainly as well as us and we analyzed their concepts and formulations by often taking as a discussion thread the changes in meaning of the most important words. While referring ourselves on occasion to the work of Davy and Mauss, to which the Chinese documents may add good illustrations, we voluntarily abstain from entering into theoretical discussions on the nature of the oath and the contract. We nonetheless have tried to define the Chinese notions on this subject. The choice of documents and the definitions have often been determined according to subsequent facts of Daoism which it was necessary to explain. The first difficulty is that of defining the difference between the two terms which designate the oath in China, meng and shi. The commentators want that meng be defined by the use of a blood sacrifice. Whence the conclusion of Maspero: meng is an oath between equals, with devotio to the divinities acting as guarantors of the pact; whereas shi would be an oath imposed by a superior upon an inferior, without victim, thus without devotion, etc. Yet we find cases of meng without victim and between unequal persons, just as we find cases of shi between equals and with devotion to the divine witnesses. The analysis of the different cases suggests still another difference; the meng often implies a text at the same time written and read aloud, whereas the shi seems always to be exclusively oral. Yet there are exceptions. In reality, from the end of the Zhou at least, the two words are employed without rigorous distinction. Meng ends up, however, by referring more specifically to the sense of alliance, convention, and likewise reunion or assembly (hui), whereas shi poses a remarkable problem in taking two meanings: a) order given and b) promise offered. Despite these differences, we can reduce all the cases to a single formula. It is always a question of a procedure which serves to link two partners (individuals or groups or both) which are of opposing

annuaire 1967

287

natures and must collaborate or at least coexist. The situation being bi-partite in nature, the form which the procedure takes will tend to be so too. The following cases arise: 1) alliance (meng) between two lands or groups of lands, either in opposition to a third party or to make peace, to surmount antagonism; marriage, private alliance (a brotherhood or fraternity); 2) alliance (shi) of friendship and of love (friends, sworn brothers, lovers, marriage); 3) alliance (meng or shi) between superior and inferior for merit acquired by the second and good deeds accorded by the first; 4) necessity or desire of avoiding a process or means of liquidating it (meng or shi). The link thus created permits the surmounting of a latent or apparent antagonism of situation, statute, or nature (war, vendetta, process, incompatibility of character, sex, social situation). Two other cases, both characterized by the term shi, seem to make an exception and have thus been examined the most closely: “oath” shi of military command (Shujing 書經) and solemn promise (shi). In the first case, shi is explained as equivalent to ming “order, decree, mandate” or sometimes “entrusted mission” and gao “solemn announcement.” It is, indeed, but although it is imposed by a superior upon an inferior, it carries a reciprocal link. The order or the mission comprises an engagement of the one who gives it: disobedience will be punished, but the devotion will be recompensed. The king swears that he will not “eat his words.” We immediately raised the fact that the two equivalent terms, gao and ming, have a remarkable history. On the one hand, they ended by designating the investiture accorded to the foreign sovereigns (in the Ming epoch, e.g.), and on the other, the mandate that Heaven confers upon a predestined man or the revelation of a divinity to one elected (which obliges the recipient as much as the sender and implies a pledge of faith). The examination of the second use of shi, as solemn promise, permits us to see that, if there were not a formal alliance between the two human partners, the one who offers it binds himself in taking a divinity as a witness and in offering a pledge (a precious object, often jade, which replaces the person or the animal victim). The examination of shi as an apparently unilateral decree, imposed from high to low, led us to the cases of shi or meng on the occasion of feudal investiture. Erkes saw there a veritable contract, an opinion violently critiqued by O. Franke for whom the “Zentralherrscher” could not be bound by any obligation. A link does exist, however. The king commits himself to reward merit: the solemn oaths and the ensigns in

288

annuaire 1967

two parts periodically joined together establish it and express it. This link (the literati speak of yue “link, contract”) is also hereditary. We were then brought to study the contracts which the king accorded to his devoted faithful in order to reward their merits. Celebrated since their invention by the founder of the Han dynasty, they have been a great fortune, being maintained (as a literary formula in any case, since the political reality was often very different) up to the Ming. They are remarkable in that they combine and identify in their form the oath with sacrifice and the contract in the form of cut and counter-cut [taille et contre-taille] (a small board, broken into two parts which are reunited as a type of proof ), “red writing, iron cut” (danshu tiejuan) or “ensign cut in two” (pou fu). The merits acquired by the subordinate, duly consigned to the registers preserved in the ancestral temples (like the contracts and treaties, “red writing” from antiquity), guaranteed to him rights, the enjoyment of which the king promises to respect. This bond was extended to their respective descendants. What is essential for the goal that we assigned ourselves is that all the themes and their formulation have been employed by the Daoists, comprising for them a particular meaning of these contracts, to know the function of safe conduct to which we will return later. We have then approached the different forms and functions of the solemn and constraining bond. With this intention, we have taken as a discussion thread the word xin “faith,” which in any event posed for us an important problem from the fact that it ended up indicating, according to the Daoists, real objects and no longer an abstract idea. To commence, we followed the common utopia of the literati starting from the end of the Zhou up until the later Daoist texts: during the golden age, the word sufficed so that faith (good faith) reigned. This is only with the decline of humanity that the oaths and contracts appear. The degradation follows the following stages: 1) the faith alone (from heart to heart); 2) the faith supported initially on the word alone, then on the oral oath or the solemn promise (shi); 3) The word reinforced by an oath with sacrifice (meng), an object set in pledge (zhi) or a “contract” in the form of an object broken into two parts, each contractor keeping one (qi, fu, juan, etc.). The two last objects are soon simply called xin, “faith.” As a point of departure for this series, the “faith” xin is attached to the “word” (yen) and the latter to the intention, to the “heart.” The theory of the oath and the sacrifice joins the Chinese theory of language. As in brahmanical India (where according to Sylvain Lévi, śraddhā “faith” is associated with satya “ritual

annuaire 1967

289

exactitude”), sacrifice to the divinities is only desired if it is accompanied by xin “faith” (not faith as we understand it, but sincerity, good faith). This “faith” is that the words of the hymns are “correct” (zheng). That which concords with the theory of the necessity of concordance between the thought, the words, and the things (zheng ming and xingming) and involves consequences for the oaths and contracts. Before signifying the concrete pledge itself, by metonymy, the “faith” xin is manifested by this pledge (zhi). Initially by the word that one “eats” or swallows in case of perjury (one jokes about a man who’s grown fat by force of perjury; shi yen, as in Tibetan mna’ za ba); later, by a precious object (above all jade). From there, we pass to the equivalence of xin “faith” and zhi “pledge” > “hostage” > “contract.” This pledge is a link (cf. Mauss, Dumézil: nexus and nexum). From there, we may pass to the different functions of the pledge under the form of a bipartite object (“tessere” of Granet, “countersign” of Chavannes, a sort of cut and counter-cut [taille et contretaille]). These objects have a real use of course, but their bipartite form also plays a semantic or symbolic role. It is not only for practical reasons (lack of commodity) that their use diminished notably beginning from the Tang and that they are finally replaced by documents without counterparts starting from the Song (save archaic exceptions for literary or religious reasons). This break coincides with what we may describe as the beginning of modern China. The symbolic form is all the more significant as it does not apply only to the true contracts or other bonds, but also with relations seemingly as simple as the transmission of a message. A coherent network of connections joins the different functions, the objects which symbolize them and the words which designate those objects, the common denominator being xin “faith”: 1) The ensign of delegation of power, of a mission (ming) conferred by the king to the feudatories, tablets ( jie) of jade identical to the ensigns of investiture; these are the “jewels” (rui); 2) The words of passage, passports, authorizations to pass by the relays, mission orders ( juan, juanxin, xinfu, fuxin); these are the pledges (zhi). It is by this route that the word xin ends by taking its modern meaning of “letter”; 3) the pledges ( fu) which are at once the “jewels” (rui, bao) and omens ( fuming, ruiying); these are the evidences (xin) of the mandate (ming) accorded or granted by Heaven to the meritorious man. The relation is qualified as a “contract” ( juanshu) by the Taiping jing 太平經. We see here the start of a transformation which will lead according to the Daoists to

290

annuaire 1967

the “faith” such as it is conceived today. There is something remarkable, which is—as in the case of feudal investiture—the reciprocity of the bond. We were able to demonstrate it with the aid of some significant texts from the “apocrypha” (weishu). The merit of the man calls the mandate from heaven under the form of a “revealed text” (charm) or omen which engages the giver as much as the receiver. Yet the precise cases show that this merit is not only to provoke the mandate of Heaven. The man also accomplishes a rite which provokes the response from Heaven. The form is also important; it is that of a reciprocal gift of jade, buried (just as for the oaths) by the man and returned by the divinity (bi disks which are readily divided into two; the return often carried out by a couple of fish); 4) The Daoist charms ( fu) which reunite the diverse preceding functions: mission order of the divinity accorded to the faithful, delegation of power, safe conduct, revelation, pledge of life. After this long and complicated, but indispensable, introduction, we were finally able to recover these elements, without exception, in the Daoist concepts and institutions. A brief explanation was initially dedicated to the famous “contracts [with] the Three Functionaries” (of Heaven, Earth, and Water, sanguan shoushu) and to the oaths which link the faithful to the divinities. Then we passed to the first more elaborate Daoist texts (Baopuzi 抱朴子 and following). Yet their great number and their complexity are such that we have only been able to evoke the most important themes. We will examine some of these texts in more detail next year. II. The subject of the second course, The Bonpo Cosmogonies in Tibet and among the Mosso, was chosen for many reasons. For the first time, the Bonpo refugees out of Tibet published texts indispensable, but which heretofore remained inaccessible, and able to be interrogated. The bonpo literature is still hardly explored. It concerns many problems of great portent: relations with India, China, and the aborigines from the marches, direct filiation from Dunhuang manuscripts, and others still. We have taken as a basis the Gtsang ma klu ‘bum (large edition from Sde dge in 459 folios). A great number of cosmogonies of this work, but not all, were signaled and summarized by G. Tucci from 1949. We believed it necessary to tender a complete translation and a deeper discussion. We have added other Tibetan versions to it and above all the Mosso (Nakhi/Naxi) versions.

annuaire 1967

291

In order to situate these accounts—which are not new myths, but theological speculations—we had to dedicate many lessons to the literary and historical problems concerning the composition of the Klu ‘bum, the sources and the possible intermediaries. The accounts in question have been compared with the Indian, Chinese and also Iranian elements, and we spoke of the influences or loans. Yet if, independent of the analogies of possible structure, common as well to other domains, we wish to admit one such filiation—and we must, at least for certain details or groups—we also had the obligation to demonstrate by what route it was able to be established. This was not done. Although the Klu ‘bum is a bonpo text, the currently known editions are all the work of the Lamaist church. The only certain date, 1730, is only valid for the separate edition of the first 92 folios. The reasons for the official adoption of this text by the Church (Dga’ ldan and Peking publications, Mongolian translation in 1766 under imperial patronage) are obscure. Currently, it is only made use of for a recitation which has the value of a charm. We note on several occasions that the text was manipulated, probably intentionally, of a manner to render it often incoherent and even sometimes incomprehensible. Glosses have been inserted pell-mell, words removed, accounts truncated and repeated elsewhere (e.g. the same account fol. 138 and 341). This manipulation was two-fold, a first time resulting from the work of the Bonpos who had to assimilate their texts to Lamaism in order to escape persecution and to struggle against the influence of the official church (bsgyur bon, “assimilated Bon”) and a second time resulting from the work of the edition by the Lamaists. The situation is identical to that which determined the elaboration of many Daoist works in China. Another characteristic of the Klu ‘bum finds itself equally close to the Daoists, i.e. the absence of system, of dogmatic or theological uniformity, due certainly to the lack of an organized church or a clerical authority. With particular concern for the cosmogonies, we find side-by-side, but dispersed throughout the work, different accounts, contradictory affirmations and divergences from the pantheon. The lack or organization of the Bonpos does not totally explain with certainty this situation. The sources indirectly utilized are also responsible for it since the same situation seems to reign in the brāhmaṇas and the purāṇas (according to S. Lévi and H. Jacobi) which furnished the model for the greater part of the cosmogonies. The date and the precise circumstances of the redaction of the Klu ‘bum remain unknown. Mentioned in texts from the middle of the

292

annuaire 1967

xivth century, it could date back to the xiiith (Mongolian era) if we accept the tradition which attaches it to Rgwa lotsaba, and also to the xiith since at least one of the bonpo cosmogonies (coming from an egg) is already refuted as “Hindu” by ‘Jig rten mgon po (1143–1217). The bonpo and Lamaist tradition also assigns it to the viiith century (and its lamaist re-manipulation to the xth (?)). Certain linguistic and folkloric elements go back to this era since we find them already in the Dunhuang manuscripts. We will examine them in detail next year. The numerous parallels with the cosmogonies of the Vedas, the Brāhmaṇas, and the Purāṇas pose another problem. It would be tempting to think that the Bonpos were able to understand these models in their land of origin, Zhang zhung, where the Tibetan populations were able to be in contact with the Indian elements (Śaivite type), a bit like in the present Kulu. Yet it is impossible to prove it. What is certain, in contrast, is that they were able to find these models in the Buddhist works of refutation against the Hindu heretics or “Vedantins” which enumerated in detail the cosmogonic theories of the latter. These works were studied by H. Nakamura and V.V. Gokhale. The most important for our problem is the Tarkajvālā of Bhavya (vith century). Another source of models for certain cosmogonies of the Klu ‘bum is a work of Āryadeva (Taishō 1639 and 1640), but it does not seem to have been translated into Tibetan: we only know it in Chinese translation (vith century). A third important source, the Śardulakarṇāvadanā, translated very early into Chinese (iiird–vth centuries), was only translated into Tibetan, as far as we know, in the xvth century. Yet it is not impossible that the Tibetans were aware of these two latter works in China. We noted many indices of them, in the epoch of the Tang and the Yuan. There is also the indirect lineage from China (and from Nanzhou perhaps) or better still from the Kālacakra, that we should consider in connection with “Iranian” elements which certain people thought it possible to detect in at least one of our cosmogonies. Finally, one last historical inquiry presents itself on the subject of the presence of important elements from the Klu ‘bum in the Mosso literature: all the ritual and several cosmogonies. For the first, it concerns without any doubt a more or less textual borrowing, for the latter the amalgam with the indigenous myths is more profound. This additon is certainly not as old as Rock thought. It was the Karmapas who seemed to have favored that introduction of the Bon among the Mosso starting from, undoubtedly, the Mongolian era. The invention of the Mosso literature in this epoch seems to be linked to the successive conquest

annuaire 1967

293

of Xixia (Mi nyag) in 1227 and of the kingdom of Dali (’Jang) in 1254 by the Mongols. The examination of the principle cosmogony of the Mosso brought us to a small discovery which will certainly reveal itself to be fruitful. Both the abstract, binary terms that the Mosso regularly translated as Yin and Yang, i.e. Ndo (Yang) and Ssä (Yin) are found in the Xixia-Chinese vocabularies with inverted values, Xixia * tu = Chinese Yin and Xixia * so = Chinese Yang. The Mosso and Xixia languages are, as we know, closely related (Tibeto-Burman). Yet what is significant is that in adopting the equivalence of both pairs of words, the Mosso performed an inversion. It seems to us that this method of affirming oneself by inverting the terms picked by one’s interlocutors characterizes also the Bonpo in general. Their adoption of cosmogonies that the treatises of refutation qualify as “Vedantic” could serve to affirm their individuality by comparison with the Buddhists. This affirmation of self in opposition to the interlocutor on which one depends is expressed well by ban bon, “Buddhist monks (< bandhe) and bonpo,” which utilizes a pertinent and current opposition of the vowels a/o in Tibetan (e.g. g.yas/g.yon “right”—“left”). It was certainly desired in the choice of the svastika and the ritual circumambulation to the left as opposed to the Buddhists, according to whom the same symbols turn to the right. In what concerns the cosmogonies in themselves, their different forms and their structures, we have selected for discussion a certain number of significant facts. For the definition of the initial terms, we spoke of “creation” and also of “demiurge.” It is a question rather of emanation or apparition and of putting in classificatory order, conceptions as well known in China as in India (for the latter, my Indologist colleagues agreed to help us with their knowledge). The most important word, srid (-pa), is both noun and verb: 1) “existence” (it translates Skt. bhava in Buddhist), “phenomenal world” (= snang srid, lit. “that which is apparent and has become”); 2) synonym of ‘byung ba “to be produced, to appear,” chags pa “to be produced, to be formed,” and sprul pa “to be transformed miraculously, to emanate,” it is also employed (with past bsrid) in the sense of “to become something” (-du bsrid), etymologically derived from srid “extension” (parallel to ring “long, length,” sring ba “to extend,” “to prolong”). The equivalence with sprul pa is important because 1) this word corresponds to the Chinese hua, “transformation, mutation, etc.,” which we will find in the cosmogonies (we already suggested that the Chinese expression zaohua, “creative transformation,” etc., corresponds to the Tibetan

294

annuaire 1967

binome rdzu ‘phrul “magical creation, artifice,” etc.) and 2) it is this word which the Mosso (> pü pa) employ in their cosmogony. The very particular use of this word among the Mosso (“perform magic,” “miraculous transformation,” and “sexual relations”) inserts itself into an ensemble of Tibetan and Chinese representations, sometimes sexual and sometimes culinary, of “creation.” Two other terms seemed to us particularly pertinent for the definition of the cosmogonic conception of the type puruṣa, the cosmic Man, here a klu (nāga) sometimes masculine, sometimes feminine. This is a being who “names,” “designates,” “elects,” “assigns to each its task or place” (skos, whence the meaning of “destiny” as in Chinese fen or ming, in Turkish id- and in Iranian baxt) or who “arranges” or “puts in order” the world or existence (srid pa gtan la phab pa). The idea of sacrifice—on which we emphasize the connection with agrarian rites—does not enjoy any role in the Tibetan versions, and if it appears often in the Mosso versions, it is under an aspect atmospheric (thunder, etc.) and culinary (parts roasted and distributed or assigned to corresponding parts of the world). As Renou strongly stated apropos of the Veda, it is rather a question of a concern to establish a system of correlations. The Tibetan versions concord up to the grammatical and lexical expression with the Hindu models. The models, where the correlation is often noted by a correlation which forgoes the verb (from this > that, or this = that), were spread to Tibet by the translation of the Tarkajvālā which utilized this formula (in Tibetan A ni B ‘o, as in Chinese the common formula of the definition: A zhe B ye). And when a verb is used, its use is significant. In the Śārdūlakarṇāvadāna, the Sanskrit text (according to a note by de Jong) is in nominal style, avoiding even the verb “to be”; the Tibetan translation respects this in employing the formula . . . ni . . . ’o, but adds twice the auxiliary verb “to be” (yin). The Chinese translators, on the contrary, employed two formulae: a) “to become,” “to make B from A” (yiwei, chengwei, wei, or cheng) or b) “to resemble, to be comparable to, to symbolize, to be metaphorically” (fang, yu, bi, pi, wei, ru). The classificatory and metaphoric character was also underscored by other traits. After having considered the Indian models, we also utilized the Chinese cosmogonies. To the legends of Ban Gu 班固 often cited, we added new versions in taking account of the possible influence of Chinese translations, anterior or contemporary, of the Śārdulakarṇa. In China, the systems of correlation Man-Universe go back to at least the iind century before J.C. (Dong Zhongshu 董仲舒).

annuaire 1967

295

The cosmogony of the dualist type poses other problems. The opposition between a good Being of light and a malicious Being of gloom did not appear to us sufficient to suppose an Iranian “influence.” The historical possibilities (directly or via the Iranian colonies, Mazdaist or Manichaean, of China and notably of Dunhuang) were passed in review, but we also paid attention to similar concepts from India. All the beginnings of the accounts (passage from Nonbeing to Being) are identical to the Indian speculations (Ṛg veda, etc., but also Chinese from Zhuangzi). The name of the Being recalls that of Prajāpati, whereas the opposition between Good and Bad, light and darkness, finds itself also in Indian texts. The dualist structure is not necessarily tinted with morality (Good-Bad), and it expresses itself sometimes in opposing two coupled terms, not simultaneously, but successively in the unfolding of events. Two other cosmogonies illustrated this principle (that from the Dbu nag mi’u dra chag and its variants, and that from the beginning of the Klu ‘bum, fol. 2b). The first was then compared with a long Mosso account which was analyzed in detail. Both combine the theme of passage from Nonbeing to Being, of the hatching of an egg, and of the appearance—sometimes simultaneous, sometimes successive—of two opposing principles. The literary and symbolic expression is particularly interesting among the Mosso, according to whom all the categories of beings and things present themselves via associated couples, opposed and complementary. Their cosmogony distinguished itself also by a very expanded syncretism of elements indigenous, Tibetan (and thus in part Indian), and Chinese (Yin and Yang; thabs = upāya, “capable,” masculine and shes rab = prajñā, “wise,” feminine; true and false; activity and non-activity; egg, hen, and white and black jade, etc.). It also has something remarkable in that it juxtaposes a conscious and abstract formulation and an imagined or mythical expression, as if the Mosso priests had already done the analytical work of modern scholars. The bipartition or dualism initially stated in many redundant accounts, extracted and borrowed from interlocutors, can be summarized by a new description: a lark wants to be completely white, but has a black chest, and a crow wants to be totally black, but has a white feather (without black, not white, and vice-versa, adds the text); then the theme is reprised by a white butterfly which could signify Good, but weakened by winter it is constrained to be “stuck” on the sunny side of the mountain, whereas a black ant, weakened by the summer

296

annuaire 1967

rains, is forced to embed itself on the shady side (we know that the terms Yin and Yang designated initially these two sides of a mountain). The other cosmogonies translated and analyzed are especially centered around the theme of the unique egg or the many eggs, with pseudo-scholarly speculations, and the role enjoyed by a primordial aquatic being, the klu (= Indian nāga). For the theme of the primordial egg, we naturally recalled the Indian and Chinese parallels and we found, in relation to the former, through which intermediaries they were able to be used in Tibet. This type of cosmogony is common in the Buddhist texts. Combined with speculations on the elements, its diffusion must have been assured by works like the Shes bya rab gsal of Sa skya paṇḍita (1278), which was translated into Chinese (Taishō 1645). The properly Tibetan cosmogonies distinguish themselves from these speculations by the myths which claim the intervention of a number of eggs, two (white and black) or three (black, white, and multicolored) or eighteen (3 × 6), of different mineral materials. This system is characteristic of the indigenous legends on the origin of diverse categories of divinities (dgra lha, btsan, etc.) and living beings (gods, men, animals, or other typologies). Finally, the last group of accounts drew us to another problem which merits a more ample revisiting. This is the role and the nature of the primordial aquatic being, the klu or klu mo. The fact that this word normally translated the Indian word nāga (or nāgī) and that these beings are at the center of rites of healing and of the expiations of sins, well known from Buddhism and reprised in good part from the Klu ‘bum (and in the Mosso liturgy) gave the impression to certain authors that it concerns purely Buddhist and Indian texts and notions. If this observation is correct for a part of the Klu ‘bum, it is not so for the cosmogonies which we have studied. The Buddhist prototypes ignore the principal theme, the reason for the anger of these beings and the evils which result from it, i.e. the intervention of man in nature by the work of culture. We will tackle it next year. Yet this year, we noted the absence of the usual themes of the nāga folklore (guardians of wealth, etc.) and the insistence upon the ideas which establishes a link between the Tibetan klu and the Chinese long (“dragon”): seasonal alternation and double morphology—aquatic and celestial—without forgetting that nāga and long have on their side many traits in common (notably the character of the sun god). These cosmogonies delivered a last remarkable element. These speculations on the role of humidity and heat as a source of vegetal life succeed

annuaire 1967

297

to an exaltation of the idea of Nourishing Mother and of agriculture. This account carries important fragments of very technical and precise instructions pertaining to agricultural work, completely analogous to the poem on agricultural work attributed to the 5th Dalai Lama (‘Jig rten lugs kyi bstan bcos). This work speaks at length of the milieu in which the Klu ‘bum was elaborated.

ANNUAIRE DU COLLÈGE DE FRANCE 68TH YEAR (1968) Study of the Chinese World: Institutions and Concepts M. Rolf A. Stein, Professor I. Daoist texts relative to the transmission of revealed books It is necessary to demonstrate, with the aid of some precise examples, how the ancient notions, relative to the oaths, contracts, and pledges isolated the preceding year, were utilized by the Daoists. The literature on this subject is as vast as it is confused, full of fastidious repetitions and deprived of system. We limited ourselves to the sources, already quite numerous, of the Six Dynasties (vth–vith centuries), but as the latter are not always so explicit and are notably deprived of concrete illustrations of the objects in question, we have utilized later works (Tang and Song) with which we are furnished. We chose as a principle source the Taizhen yudi siji mingke jing 太真玉帝四極明科經 (Daozang No 184, fasc. 77–78). Many lessons must be dedicated to a systematic exposure of the date of the work, its genre, and the ideas which it uses before passing to the translations and commentary of typical extracts from its five chapters. It is cited in many works from the vith to the xith centuries, but the particular nomenclature of its chapter titles are not found yet in the Baopozi 抱朴子. It thus should be situated between 350 and 500 of our era. It belongs to the genre of “regulations” (ko) or “codes” (liu) and more particularly to those related to the oaths (ming = meng) and to the kinds of hell or courts of which the principal here is Nüqing 女青. In this text, the oaths in question are especially dedicated to the transmission of sacred texts. The hell of Nüqing appears as a doublet of Fengdu 酆都, mentioned simultaneously, and depends on the central administration of the “Mysterious Capital” (Xuandu) or “Jade Capital” (yujing), the five “palaces” of which are distributed to the four directions and the center. Each direction has its god (“emperor” di 帝) and governor, who governs life and death. This horizontal orientation, which is found in

300

annuaire 1968

other analogous systems (the god-emperors of the Five Sacred Peaks, the Five “Bushels” (dou) governing destiny), is paired with another vertical one, in three stages: the “Three Functionaries” (sanguan, Sky, Earth, and Water), the “Three Principles” (sanyuan) and the Three Supreme Heavens (Qingwei = Yuqing, Yuyu = Shangqing and Dachi = Taiqing). These contain various subordinate bureaus, notably the “Nine Bureaus” (Jiufu) with their hundred and twenty “services” (cao). We showed how all these notions go back to the representations and the ancient institutions from the first Daoist movements at the beginning of our era (above all their “regulations” and their “parishes” or administrative seats, the zhi). A certain hesitation between the high and the low characterizes this cosmography. The supreme authority is sometimes situated at the summit, sometimes at the base (subterranean or aquatic) of the world or the sacred mountain which represents it. In the legendary texts, the “nine bureaus” make up part of the sacred mountain Gunlun. Another authority of judgment, the “Sources of the (Yellow) River,” the “Twelve Sources of the River,” “Chambers with nine turns” ( jiuqu) is explained by the legends of the “Tale of the River” (Hebo), psychopomp which leads to the Gunlun via the meandering of the Yellow River. Yet another “chamber with nine turns” is situated in the supreme palace of the “capital” of the immortals where the sacred texts are preserved. The ambivalence is explained undoubtedly by the preponderant place that the North occupies in these “regulations,” since according to whether one chooses one or the other of two systems of classification, it corresponds sometimes to the high or to the center, sometimes to the low. The same ambivalence holds for the functions of that supreme authority. It punishes faults, but also rewards merit. It is the same with the Nüqing “tribunal” which does not only sanction sins, but may also efface them. The “codes” or regulations placed under its aegis (Nüqing guiliu 女青鬼律, Daozang 563, and others) includes the positive parts; they notably give the names and the iconography of gods and demons, and have the function of charms or talismans which give power over them. They are presented in fact as orders ( fuming) or delegations of powers granted by the supreme divinities for the benefit of the faithful who receive them from them. They carry a reference to the sanctions foreseen by the code. The final formula which is there referred to (“which it follows according to the text, the order or code of Nüqing”) is identical to that which ends the charms for the contracts relative to the tombs beginning in the iiird century up to the most diverse talismans of our days (ru liuling).

annuaire 1968

301

The analysis thus demonstrated that the regulations viewed are not restricted to indicating the rules of transmission of the sacred texts. They make themselves part of this category of sacred and revealed texts. We have concentrated on the fact that, by their form and function, these talismans qualify as “treasure,” similar to the oaths-contracts of antiquity that we studied last year. Like them, they carry their peculiar imprecatory formula which here takes the form of the announcement of the punishment in the hells threatening those who contravene the rules of transmission (and sometimes also of the positive counterpart, the announcement of the reward in cases of conformity with the rules). It always concerns a contract of alliance, which does not comprise any less a clause of reciprocity for being concluded between a superior (divinity or master) and an inferior (devotee or disciple). It may be accorded by a superior or solicited by an inferior. It is true that the authors of the treatises that we posses did not consciously formulate this underlying system. The use of oaths, contracts, and objects of “faith” (xin), pledges, is too confused and varied. The divergences of schools or sects certainly existed (we know some manifestations of this). The absence of formulated dogma and a certain tendency to logorrhea render analysis difficult. We may nevertheless reduce this variety to a quite coherent group. In the course of our commentaries, we briefly explained the diverse uses and the varied forms of these oaths, contracts, and pledges. Certain facts have a sociological import. Often condemned are the masters who accept silver for the transmission of sacred texts or talismans or who use for their profit the offerings that the faithful owe to the “parish.” Likewise the contributions of “five bushels of cereal,” which gave their name to the first religious movement of the Daoists, were interpreted symbolically as a pledge of “faith” offered to the gods of the five directions. These aspects, as well as the utilization of oaths, contracts, and pledges of a precious nature (objects of gold, rolls of silk, etc.) in the rites of ransoming faults, protection against demons or other malfeasance, request for diverse benefits, all of which should be studied in detail on another occasion. This year, we restricted ourselves to examining the use of these processes on the occasion of the transmission of “treasures,” sacred talismans or texts. In this case, as in the others, it is always a question of creating or recreating a bond, an alliance, with the divinities or the master. The forms and the functions of these processes are the same as in the rites just mentioned.

302

annuaire 1968

The revealed texts, transmitted by oath and contract, can be extremely long, but as in this case, they are presented as an elaboration, a superfluous lengthening of brief writings or figures (tushu) which are from talismans, charms, pledges of alliance ( fu) or mandates (ming). In this character, they are considered like the “treasures” (bao), objects precious and charged with power. It is not the textual content which is important; a point of revelation of mystical or philosophical doctrine. Their value resides in the fact that they are engagements, delegations of power, pledges of life accorded by the divinities. They establish a link of filiation or alliance. Like the palladia or family jewels, like the noble valuables (bao) of ancient China, they are characterized by the requirement to be catalogued in secret and not to be put into circulation for ordinary transaction, but to be transmitted as a legacy to a descendant. Also, the “regulations” always carry only two conditions inherent to the revelation of these “treasures”: 1) They must only be transmitted to predestined disciples, and this according to a rhythm which varies for each of them (e.g. once every ten thousand years, thrice in seven years, etc.); the more precious and important they are, the more rarely they are transmitted; 2) They must not be “divulged” to others; that is to say, they must not circulate freely like common property, and must remain hidden. Their characteristic is of being written in “primordial” letters (in gold, jade or other precious materials considered pure) and preserved in equally precious bottles or coffers. The transmission (zhuan) of the sacred object creates a link of a sacramental type between masters and disciples (initially divine, then human). Contrary to that which is generally passed in the systems of relation where the lineage of descent is opposed to the relation by alliance, the transmission in a direct lineage goes hand in hand, in our case, with a lineage of bond of alliance recreated each time by a rite of contract, oath and exchange of pledges. The ancient texts are not explicit of the subject of lineage. They often mention three kinds of master (Zhoushi mingtong ji 周氏冥通記 of Tao Hongjing 陶弘景 (452–536), beginning of the 6th century) or a succession of three generations of masters (e.g. Daozang No 129, fasc. 59 and the first three “celestial masters,” the three Zhang), but the Daoists themselves do not know too well what they represent. It is only in the later texts, Tang and Song, that we have found explanations and the precise design of talismans. Yet, according to these documents, the three masters are presented as a lineage of three generations which precede the adept. In a talisman constructed

annuaire 1968

303

according to a rigorous doubling and parallelism, the three generations of masters corresponds to a lineage of great-grandfather, grandfather and father. Despite this model of agnatic lineage, the transmission of the sacred object (“treasure”) operates, in this talisman like others, in a contract of alliance between master and disciple which imposes obligations on both. We wonder if this form does not stem from the fact that it concerns a relation by adoption. The relations between master and disciple ought to be studied in a subsequent course. This year, we still linger on verifying the application of the principle of bipartition noted previously in the case which occupies us. In the ancient texts, we find it in the rite of alliance where master and disciple fast face-to-face (dui zhai) and in the form of certain objects. On the one hand, the “treasure,” a talisman accorded by the divinities, generally presents itself under a bipartite form: red and green, red and black, yellow and white, gold and jade (or the inverse), gold and silver, etc. On the other, the pledges of “faith” come, in great part, in pairs: gold fish and jade dragon or jade fish and gold dragon, gold rings and silver rings. Certainly, in these texts, the multiplicity of forms escapes a rigorous system. We have, however, been able to draw out the frequency of these binomes and the relativity of the two elements which compose them (taken in isolation, none of them has an intrinsic symbolic value; only their opposition is significant). The form of fish, dragons, and rings in precious materials returns to the pledges of alliance and omen that we encountered the preceding year in the more ancient “apocrypha.” The bipartition thus attested in the very ancient sources is particularly well illustrated in the charms of the Tang and Song that we have studied as a comparison. These charms present themselves under the form of contracts intended to be broken into two pieces ( juan), each of the two contractants, the master and disciple, must keep one of them. We found two systems: vertical cut between right and left, and horizontal cut between high and low. In the first case, the text of the oath-contract is written twice, from right to left (as is the norm in China) and from left to right (inversion), the cut passing in the middle of the charm properly stated, which is qualified as a “contract” (hetong juan). The horizontal division manifests itself by the same type of opposition, the top part being written normally, the bottom part inverted like the image in a mirror. They are there privileged cases where the form corresponds perfectly to the function.

304

annuaire 1968 II. The bonpo accounts on the beginnings of culture

The cosmogonies studied the previous year are in many cases followed by accounts concerning the first inhabitants of the world. They have to be examined in their turn. As in the past, we took as a point of departure the large volume of the Klu ‘bum from which the accounts were compared to those of the Mosso and Dunhuang manuscripts. This comparison turned out to be still more fractious than for the cosmogonies. Despite the deformations undergone from the part of the editors and despite the general assimilation to Lamaism, the Klu ‘bum preserved elements of archaic vocabulary and style, the themes, motifs, and schemas from accounts proper to the Dunhuang texts. The latter, from their side, remain very obscure up to here, being clarified by the comparison with the Klu ‘bum, and that also from the purely philological perspective. The explanation of unknown words is a function of an analysis of the global schema of the account. The clearer texts from the Klu ‘bum permit this analysis in furnishing the code necessary for decryption. The three sources compared have a remarkable trait in common. They are presented as a collection of accounts which differ not only from one source to another, but also within one and the same corpus. However, they are all reduced to a unique schema of which they are variations. No authority chose among these variations an account considered as orthodox or valid in relation to the others. On the contrary, the authors of these collections were conscious at the time of the thematic unity of all these accounts and of the necessity for giving them as large a number as possible of variants. These accounts are in fact as many as the cases or precedents which justify and authenticate the rites on the occasion of which they are recited. This principle results clearly from the analysis of the Klu ‘bum and the Dunhuang manuscripts, even if not always consciously expressed. It is, on the contrary, expressly formulated in the Mosso ritual where is underscored the necessity of stating the history (and above all the origin) of each object, ingredient or personage, mentioned in the ritual, or likewise in the interior of the legend, each time that it is named there for the first time. The same principle is applied to Tibet, in popular Lamaism and in the texts of systematized Bon, as among the different aboriginals of Tibeto-Burman languages of the Himalaya (Gurung, Tamang). Although it is insoluble, the question is posed to know if the authors of the rituals themselves multiplied the variants or if they, like ethnog-

annuaire 1968

305

raphers before the letter, collected the accounts from different dates and places, discovering from them a unity of structure. Regardless, the collections thus formed permit us to know, in a particularly clear manner, the passage from account to liturgy or the utilization of the first for the formulation of the second. Certain accounts are, in fact, given in extenso, others are abridged and reduced to the schema that the interested parties released and concluded by appearing in the ritual under a form of recalling mythic precedents of various ritual acts. That which the three bodies of accounts have, in fact, in common, is that these accounts serve as an introduction and justification for a similar ritual: the healing of a malady among the Mosso and in the Klu ‘bum, funerary ritual in the Dunhuang texts. The latter aspect is only a variant of the former, because, from both sides, the theme of healing is placed in parallel with that of resurrection (we note the etymological relative of the two words gso “to heal, nourish” and gson “living”). The schema of the account is always the same: an offense of the first occupants or an intrusion on their domain entails their vengeance. The malady or the death which results from it necessitates the intervention of a specialist who reestablishes the harmony by a rite of conciliation and serves as mediator. In the three literary works considered, a first category of specialist who does not succeed in healing (soothsayers, sorcerers or magicians, doctors) are opposed to others who succeed (priests, bonpo). We also find there formulated the concept that at the end of the account, after accomplishing the rite, one does not simply return to the previous situation, but arrives at a better state. The first lessons were dedicated to the preliminary questions: the relationship between the three corpora considered, the (quite loose) link between the cosmogonies and the accounts of the first men, and the nature of the beings who preceded them. They are not necessarily or exclusively the Klu (nāga), but all sorts of “owners of the land.” We then analyzed and translated some accounts from the Klu ‘bum to show its genre, the philological and stylistic difficulties, and the schema. They are so numerous and varied that we propose to continue their analysis next year, and this year to pass immediately to certain parallel accounts from the Mosso and above all to the Dunhuang manuscript to which we must dedicate many lessons. In making an abstraction from multiple variants of forms, we may reduce all the accounts to a dichotomy. In the Klu ‘bum and among the Mosso, it concerns above all the opposition between nature and culture. In the Dunhuang manuscripts, this theme is less apparent, but

306

annuaire 1968

underlies the opposition between living and dead. Some indications, never developed into a coherent account, make allusion to a first, happy and harmonious age, sometimes characterized by the indivisibility of different categories of inhabitants of the world, sometimes by their relationship or by their establishment on the separate domains which were assigned to them (perhaps also by the absence of the dead). The resulting drama follows from the encroachment of one of the categories of beings on the domain of the others. The most frequent type is the intervention of man via his works or activities, whatever they may be: agriculture (labor, irrigation), construction (houses, tombs, monuments), hunting and fishing, breeding. The bipartition is particularly well formulated among the Mosso, not only by the account, but also by the use of metaphors (type: wild/ domestic animals). In one of the Dunhuang manuscripts, it takes the form of the opposition between the yak and the horse, between the wild horse or the kyang and the domestic horse. The hostility caused by the intrusion of one among the others or by their opposition is finally surmounted by a contract of amity or alliance, accompanied by an oath, which stipulates the reciprocal obligations. Often, the account begins with an equilibrium established by one such sworn contract of friendship, and the drama which erupts is characterized as a rupture of that contract. The opposition is often formulated in a sort of adage according to which the different categories of beings (men and gods of the soil, different legendary beings among them, living and dead) should not enter into competition (such as races, games of dice, etc.). We remembered that this theme characterizes the heroes of the Tibetan epic in its vulgar or ambivalent form. In our accounts, it is the bonpo priest or his divine prototype Gshen rabs who functions as mediator. This simple schema is sometimes complicated by the appearance of a supplementary mediator, the Garuḍa, among the Mosso. Despite its great importance among the Bonpo, this personage does not appear in the accounts of the Klu ‘bum examined up to here. In contrast, we also sometimes find there marginal actors, poorly defined, who suggest a system of tripartition. We propose to pursue the analysis next year. The examination of Dunhuang manuscripts permitted us to specify the sense of many archaic and unknown words, to clarify the stylistic processes, and to discover the function of the accounts. They all serve as precedents for the funerary rites (London No 731, 732, 734, published and translated by Thomas; Paris No 1068, 1134, 1194, 1285, and 1289). The translations of Thomas are perhaps corrected. The results of this research will be published subsequently.

ANNUAIRE DU COLLÈGE DE FRANCE 69TH YEAR (1969) Study of the Chinese World: Institutions and Concepts M. Rolf A. Stein, Professor I. Bonpo accounts on the first men Like last year, it is the Gtsang ma klu ‘bum which serves as the basic document. As the analysis of this voluminous work progresses, we encounter new problems. This text proves very rich in ancient elements. Unfortunately, it comes to us in a very poor redaction. The accounts are often truncated, the sequences upset, the orthography faulty. We initially thought that the Lamaist editors, and perhaps also the bonpos, deliberately disfigured the material. The pursuant analysis confirms this point of view. Yet the discovery of more and more numerous fragments which arise from the archaic literature of the Dunhuang manuscripts oblige us to nuance this judgment. Incoherence is already of fact of these manuscripts. The bonpos found them in the same state as we. They have, however, augmented the confusion and the difficulty of reading by inserting these fragments into the more recent accounts and by truncating them from time to time in the course of their work of assimilation or syncretism. The problem posed is to know how they could have knowledge of these archaic fragments. The vocabulary, the proper nouns, the style of it are so particular that we must suppose that the later bonpos must have had access to manuscripts analogous or identical to those of Dunhuang. Many such manuscripts were effectively preserved in Tibet itself, what we have already been able to prove elsewhere with the aid of fragments preserved by the historian Dpa’o Gtsug lag phreng ba in the middle of the xvith century (Stein, Tribus, 9, n. 25). The analysis of the Klu ‘bum has up to now delivered quite a large number of these fragments of ritual accounts from the Dunhuang manuscripts, sometimes textually identical (e.g. fol. 230b: a bonpo priest “calls the dead, seeks the destroyed,” shi ba yang ‘dur, rlag pa yang btsal te; same account in the Ms PT 1289, l. 72 where the master Gshen rabs does the same thing with bell and drum: shi ni bdur, rlag ni tshol). An oral transmission of

308

annuaire 1969

these rituals, and a continuity of the corresponding practices, is possible, but the written models have certainly contributed to maintaining the archaic forms. In order to illustrate the work of conservation and adaptation, we translated and commented on a quite long account (Klu ‘bum, 214b– 221a). As in many Dunhuang manuscripts (PT 1068, 1285, 1289) the drama is provoked by the departure of the hero to hunt the wild yak in the desolate plains of the North, his alliance of friendship with a being qualified as a “demon” (srin), and the opposition of these two friends with a being belonging to another category of demon (bdud), and that with the issue of an exchange of challenges. To this account is then superimposed one of numerous accounts particular to the Klu ‘bum: vexation of a klu (nāga) by the intervention of man into the place which he occupies, his vengeance by the sending of maladies, and the healing by the intervention of bonpo priests—mediators who aid in surmounting the antagonism between the two parties via the conclusion of a contract of exchange of mutual services (worship rendered by the man, protection accorded by the klu). A remarkable fact, the intervention of man, the cultural activity, is here the same ritual for funerals, pits dug, sacrifice of animals, so many contaminations for the klu. The complete ritual, which carries a long series of technical operations, reproduces an archaic text with a vocabulary that we recount point by point in the Dunhuang manuscripts. The account analyzed is unfortunately in a desperate state of redaction which risks discouraging the reader. The experience has, however, shown that it is worth the pains of undertaking the patient work of analysis. We propose to continue in the last quarter the work which has still not been examined in detail. The philological conditions are hereafter better. We were in fact able to discover in Japan an edition different from the sole one available to us up until now, that of Sde dge. It is unfortunately neither dated nor localized. Presented in three volumes (Klu ‘bum white, variegated, and black), it comprises 748 folios in large format (eight lines to a page). After a quick reading of this enormous mass, the hope of finding a more complete reading was disappointed. The augmentation in volume is simply due to the repetition of entire pieces. The order of the different parts of the work is not the same as in the Sde dge edition, and we had to establish a list of correspondences. The text is in the identical grouping in both editions, but it comprises numerous variants from one to the other. None can

annuaire 1969

309

be preferred, but the two complement each other usefully so as to render possible a critical edition. The passages which remain incomprehensible now become clear, truncated sequences may be completed. The comparison of the two texts suggests that one can hardly derive from the other. They undoubtedly go back to a still unknown common source. We thus assured a better reading of the text by the preliminary indispensable work. We also are hereafter sure of being able to compare the archaic accounts which remain and the new forms that the later bonpos elaborated. We do not know in what conditions they accomplished their task of assimilation. One of the important elements of this problem is the insistence on the role of the klu. The entire work is written for their glory, which only equals that of the bonpo priests. If the power of the latter always carries in the end, it is not absolute. Initially, it is reserved for the most eminent masters (Gshen rabs and two bonpo bodhisattvas). The other bonpo specialists in diverse rites must expiate, via the malady, their intervention which offends the klu. Moreover, the submission of the klu does not succeed immediately. It shows itself initially under various disguises (in the form of animals of a chthonic type: marmot, scorpion, toad, etc.) before being constrained to come in person. In order to obtain this result, it is necessary that the master employ more and more powerful mantras. When finally the klu goes to the convocation, he is not shown to be humble and submissive. He invokes his right and contests with the master the right of constraint in making the point that the man was culpable in his consideration, broke a contract, or encroached on his domain. Finally, the master makes a success of the defense and the healing of the man only in his function as mediator, witness, and guarantor of a new contract of alliance between the two parties. It is evident that the model of the Tibetan klu are the Indian nāga. As M. Tucci stated, it is in Indian Buddhism that the bonpo could find this model, but elements coming from Chinese divination texts were equally utilized. We have, however, already noted certain differences between the Buddhist rituals of healing from the nāgas and the accounts of the Klu ‘bum. This year, we have found it necessary to examine more the nature of the klu to the extent that it can explain why the bonpos, in their task of syncretism, consciously chose the klu as principal actors in their accounts. These beings are in fact absent from the Dunhuang manuscripts that the bonpo, nevertheless, so often

310

annuaire 1969

used. And as the Tibetan klu can be located only in relation to the Indian nāga and the Chinese long (“dragon”), we are engaged in a comparative examination. From both sides, the question is complex, and there can be no question of studying them in their every aspect. The two words and the representations that they recover have a long history. The similitude of the concepts and forms of expression is astonishing. It is partially explained by the diffusion of anecdotes relative to the nāga thanks to the Buddhist literature, but this propagation is not sufficient to explain everything. Pryzluski went so far as to suppose a common Australasian basis, and even desired to trace back the two words nāga and long to a common prototype. This hypothesis appears ill-founded and an extremely debatable method. It remains that it is on both sides about the same type of representation. We thus restrict ourselves to as precise an examination as possible of only those themes pertinent in order to read the accounts from the Klu ‘bum. We also dismiss the academic speculations on the atmospheric phenomena linked to the seasonal movement of the klu. They do not enjoy any role in the structure of the accounts and rituals. The sole theme to extract from the latter is that of the link between the klu and men, at once a bond of kinship and of antagonism. On the basis of numerous accounts which explicate these relationships by the fact that the klu were the first inhabitants and proprietors of the site, and that the arrival of men was equivalent to their eviction, we initially made the criticism of the historicizing interpretations which see in these klu an indigenous and primitive population who would have been driven out, oppressed, or “civilized” by newcomers. We might think that a way of seeing so simplistic and methodologically so indefensible must belong to the past. It is, however, still very widespread. Its critique also has the advantage of making necessary an analysis of the theme. The “ethnographic” interpretation rests above all on two series of presuppositions. The first concerns the legends regarding the nāgas, the first inhabitants. The latter implies that the inhabited country was primitively occupied by a lake or a sea, and they understand this fact since the nāga, the klu, and the long live in the water while coming periodically to sojourn on land. The theme of the primitive lake is attested for Kashmir, Nepal, Khotan, Tibet, Uḍḍiyāna, Nanzhou. A god, a creature, or a saint overcomes the inhabitants from the lake, drains it, and makes of it an inhabited country where “civilization” is established, often a new religion, completely assuring the

annuaire 1969

311

prosperity of the new inhabitants by a contract with the old ones. It is, in sum, a passage from primitive chaos to created site. The opposition between nāga and men is expressed both successively in time and simultaneously in space. The second series of facts consists of legends which present the actual inhabitants, or only certain dynasties, as descendants of nāga, klu, or long, generally by the union of a first human ancestor, having come from elsewhere, with a female of the species nāga, etc., unless the roles are not reversed. To these legends, it is necessary to add cases of populations or social groups which are called “dragons” (nāga, long, ‘brug) or who (like the Yue in South China) are considered to be related to “dragons.” Often, authors explain these cases via an ancient hypothetical totemism. Yet in the absence of objective and independent documents, the ethnic history cannot be reconstituted starting from legends. We have joined together the documents which demonstrate the classificatory nature of the representations envisaged as well as the relative and unstable character of the attribution of a given element of a system to a signification. In the Lamaist tradition, the Tibetans descend from an ancestor of the species “gods” (lha, deva; sky); in the bonpo legends, they derive from the klu (nāga; underground). Yet in another system, it is the Chinese who descend from the klu. In addition, China, characterized as black and low, is classed under the rubric of klu, whereas, by contrast, India, characterized as white and high, is classed with the gods. Other systems oppose the language of men (Chinese) to the language of the gods (Sanskrit) or further the language and writing of the gods (Sanskrit, noble language) to that of the nāga (Prakṛt, vulgar language). This inquiry involved us in a domain which escapes our competence, but we were obliged to explore it. Although linguistics is not definitively in agreement on the IndoEuropean etymology of the word nāga, in the historical epoch which interests us, it seems often to evoke the nudity of this being (initially elephant, then aquatic animal, serpent). Does this representation underscore its relation with man or oppose it to him? The propensity of this being to show itself in human form, its relation with the saint are well marked in the Buddhist texts. It is found that, in the ancient Chinese works, in principle anterior to the introduction of Buddhism, it is man who is characterized by the category of nudity as opposed to the “dragon” characterized by the category of scales. This comparison applies, at the very least on an experimental basis, to the plane of

312

annuaire 1969

typology. It also underscores the relativity of the attributions in the different systems of classification. It concerns the occurrence of a classification by five (the four directions and the center). Sometimes it is man who is in the center (the saint). Qualified by his nudity, he is then opposed to the beasts with hair (unicorn), with feathers (“phoenix”), with carapaces (tortoise), and with scales (“dragon”; Dadai liji 大戴禮記). Sometimes man (scarcely hairy) is opposed to the four species of dragon which are respectively the ancestors of the birds (feathers), quadrupeds (hair), fish (scales), and tortoises (carapaces; Huinan zi 淮南子). After this detour which shows one of the possible types of kinship and opposition between man and dragon, we reprised the analysis of this theme in the Klu ‘bum, where it is the basis of all the accounts in which it is never expressly formulated. It is, in contrast, in the Mosso rituals whose close connections with the Klu ‘bum we now know. In these latter, we find ourselves in the presence of two traditions which are never combined. The first concerns the kinship of men and nāgas (they have a single and same father, but two different mothers). It is a transformation of the Indian legend of the kinship and hostility between the nāgas and Garuḍas (same father, different mothers). The possibility of replacing the Garuḍa bird with man is already inherent in the Indian variants which demonstrate well (as in the case of the Chinese dragon) the relativity of the attributions. Sometimes thirteen, sometimes eight girls (carrying the same name) are at the origin of diverse categories of beings among which figure the nāgas, the birds, and the men. The second tradition of origin of the Mosso opposes, not nāgas to men, but two categories of men, the tso and the dzi. The specialists claim that these two words signify “man” (tso could be compared to Xixia ndzu “man”). Yet the informers hesitate on the subject of their difference: men before the flood (dzi) against men after the flood (tso); men (dzi) against women (tso); strangers, neighbors (above all the Lolo, with a nuance of contempt expressed by the verbs employed to that purpose) against men par excellence (tso, the Mosso). We studied in detail this ensemble which poses the problems well. The two words tso and dzi are written with a head of an elephant and a head of a jackal, and the specialists (Rock, Fu Mao-chi, Li Lin-ts’an) think that it is a question of a simple phonetic borrowing. However, we noted that the Mosso language has completely different words. Could the Mosso have known that nāga also signifies “elephant” and that led them to write post-diluvian “man” with the sign “elephant”

annuaire 1969

313

because of the kinship between nāga and man? (They certainly were aware of the Chinese texts in which nāga is translated just as well by “dragon,” long 龍, as by “elephant,” xiang 象). If we might be permitted to combine the two Mosso traditions (regarding the binome tso + dzi and on the relation nāga-men), we would pass from a bipartite system to a tripartite system. We draw out the experiment because we find the same alternation in the Tibetan legends of the first “men” of creation. In the archaic texts from Dunhuang, we encounter as divinities and first men the dmu and phya. The two words signify “sky” in various Tibeto-Burman languages from the Sino-Tibetan marches, sometimes together, sometimes separately. Yet in the Ms PT 0126, the phya are the people on earth who do not have a chief and go in search of one in heaven among the dmu. In other texts of this epoch, in contrast, the phya are associated with another category of poorly defined beings, the gtsug. When we pass to the later bonpo accounts, we see at the beginning of creation, issue the three eggs (white, black, variegated), the gods (lha; white), the “men of creation” (srid pa; variegated), and men as a whole (wicked; black). Yet from these three categories derives another triad: the phya (identified with men; epithet: black heads), the dmu (identified with the “buddhas” and the “bonpos”), and the gtsug which are all klu (nāga) while being described as insects, worms, quadrupeds, cattle. It seems to us: 1) that this Tibetan ensemble cannot be separated from that of the Mosso, previously studied, 2) that the two are mutually clarifying, and 3) that they represent the sometimes bipartite, sometimes tripartite structure of kinship and hostility at the foundation of the near totality of the Klu ‘bum accounts. *

*

*

II. Some aspects of the Daoist parishes We studied the administrative and religious centers of Daoist movements of the first seven centuries (zhi, li, or hua), their transformation into what Maspéro has called the “phalansteries” ( guan1), then as monasteries ( guan3), as well as the parallel institution of the “calm or pure chambers” ( jingshi and variants). It was initially necessary to make a general explanation of the functioning of the “parishes” (zhi) by isolating the significant elements, certain of which will be studied elsewhere. The broad strokes are already known thanks to the work of

314

annuaire 1969

Maspéro and Chinese and Japanese scholars. Many documents were brought together by Chen Guofu (Daozang yuanliu kao, 2nd edition). Yet we may add others to this and above all, it is necessary to translate and analyze them. In the historical texts, we read only brief mentions on the subject of “parishes” (zhi). The detailed descriptions of their functioning are all the work of sacred books, notably the Regulations or Codes. It is thus not certain that the institutions and the usages that they stipulate always really existed. We thus drew out the conceptions that the Daoists had of them. The essential elements are repeated on two planes, that of men, real, and that of divinities or “immortals,” a fictive, mythical, or legendary plane. We have each time made visible their parallelism (reunion of men, feasts—reunion of divinities; registers taken in the parish—by the divinities). The contrast between these two planes is not with regard to a particular meaning. If the bureaucratic organization of the divinities appears like the ideal projection or elaboration of real institutions, it also happens that the real institutions are the realizations, sometimes only desired, sometimes effected, of the fictive models of legendary themes. On both planes, we wanted to research the antecedents, not specifically Daoist, real institutions and conceptions common to the entire Chinese society, including the Confucian literati. The majority of elements elaborated by our Daoist movements are attested before them. From this fact, and contrary to the opinion of great historians, the latter appear much less like a novelty. The Taoists were conscious of them. Lu Xiujing 陸修靜 (406–477) said that in instituting the “parishes” (zhi) and functions, the Celestial Master was imitating “the administration of the world” (yangguan) and that the ritual vestments of the Daoists were the equivalent of the vestments of the court which marked the hierarchy of grades and functions. Tao Hongjing 陶弘景 (456–536) said the same thing apropos of requests received and transmitted by the functionaries of the Three Heavens. The bureaucratic organization is not valid only for the practical administration of the parishes and the parishoners, which was natural. It is above all conceived as indispensable on the religious plane as well. The faithful are grouped by families, each of which is attached to a determined parish. Going to a parish which one was not raised in is a strongly condemned fault. The registers should be held both in each family and in the parish. All changes of civil status ought to be inscribed in them (births, deaths, marriages). The new inscriptions

annuaire 1969

315

or the rectifications are made to the court of three great reunions or annual feasts. The latter are also the occasion for contributions, in nature dues by the faithful, notably in cases of a change in civil status, and a communal repast (the “cuisines,” chu) which aim to expiate sins and eliminate the blemishes in case of malady or death, to establish access to a new function, an advancement in the religious hierarchy, or to obtain a favor from the divinities. At the time of these feasts, the master of the parish also diffuses the teaching, which consists above all in recalling the Regulations or Codes, which are sacred and revealed texts, and have the value of talismans. They consist of obligations and prohibitions. The documents often insist on the frequent infractions of the rules on the part of the faithful. On the plane of social realities, they seem to indicate a rivalry between masters and small subsects (chapels) which tried to attract clientele. This setting concords with the indications of Tao Hongjing (Zhengao 真誥) on the various masters who were quarreling over the monopoly of revealed texts in the form of rare or unique manuscripts. Despite this being the case, on the plane of conceptual models, the relation between the master, parish chief, and the faithful is expressly qualified as the type of rapport which reigns between the host (who accommodates, zhu “master”) and the hosted (accommodated, ko “clients, invitees, strangers, travelers”). We will encounter this relationship again. The real registers have as a counterpart the registers held by the divinities. The Daoists insist: if the civil status of the faithful must be held up to date with exactitude, it is because the efficacy of the requests addressed to the divinities depends on it. The registers of the divinities serve to determine the destiny of each of the faithful. They carry the same name as the real registers (mingzi “registers of Life or Destiny”). In these registers, figured in the first place are the date and the place of birth, which forms an essential element of the “Destiny proper (to each)” (benming). If the indications are inexact, the functionaries of the beyond cannot determine the destiny of the faithful. The latter also depend on the calculation of merits and faults, the computation of which determines the advancement in grade both in the real hierarchy of the parish functions and in the path of sanctity and of a life beyond the grave. The requests, on the other hand, must be accompanied by pledges of faith (xin), objects which establish a contractual link between the faithful, the host or master who is the delegate of the supreme God and serves as intermediary, and the divinities who preside over the destiny.

316

annuaire 1969

These contributions are also called “pledges of Life or Destiny” (mingxin). The dates of three great feasts are also in a relationship with other lists of annual feasts (the five la, the three yuan), the dates and functions of which concord. After this introduction to the ensemble, we examined in detail all the aspects of parishes and “pure chambers” as buildings and as religious functions. The technical and precise information are few in number. The documents above all provide representations. The number of “parishes” is symbolic; there are 24 or 36 of them. The total makes up part of an entire series of numerical speculations, the 36 “quarters” (fang) of the Yellow Turbans, the 36 “sky-caves” (sojourns of immortals, dongtian), the 120 functionaries, the 1200 regulations. The cipher 24 is undoubtedly attached to the enigmatic expression 3, 5, 7, 9 (the sum of which makes 24), a formula often employed which is applied simultaneously to the layout of the world, the rhythm of creation, and to certain religious practices (sexual and respiratory). According to certain texts, this cipher 24 responds to the 24 “breaths” (qi), periods of fifteen days along one year, which were personified as divinities, messenger of the Supreme God. The series of 24 parishes also were attached to the duodenary cycle and the 28 zodiac constellations. Their creation is motivated by the redemptive work of the “New Laojun” and his representative, the Celestial Master. It was rendered necessary in order to propagate the reign of the “Three Heavens” (santian) by which they wanted to save the world from the influence of the “Six Heavens” (liutian), the harmful influence of which brought humanity to decadence. The only historical indication that we can take from the list of the 24 parishes clings to the fact that nearly all the places where they are situated are found in Sichuan. This region was the center of activity of the Five Bushels of Rice movement in the iind and iiird centuries of our era, whereas since the ivth century at least, the center was displaced to the Southeast of China. On the conceptual plane, these places are in the majority mountains and often caves, the most important being the “central” and mythic mountain of Gunlun. These holy places are the parishes, the administrative and religious seats of the great divinities. The descriptions of these sites present them as an ideal projection of Daoist communities (schools, initiations, male and female adepts and masters). They concord with the representations concerning the guan1, phalansteries, and the guan2, monasteries, that we examined thereafter.

annuaire 1969

317

The “parishes” and the “pure chambers” are sometimes confounded, but in general the first are grander, more important, reserved for the masters, whereas the second are small and situated in an enclosure in the homes of the faithful. The technical descriptions insist on the extremely reduced space of these chambers and on the necessity to keep them “pure” of any stain (mundane activities, childbirth, death) in separating them from ordinary habitations. One retires there in order to meditate, fast, gather one’s thoughts, confess sins, all these acts serving essentially to enter into a contract with the Daoist divinities. We translated and commented on the technical notes from the Zhoushi mingtongji 周氏冥通記, the Zhengao 真誥, the Taizhen ke 太真科, and the Dongshen badi yuanbian jing 洞神八帝元變經 (Daozang 876) which carries an outline. In the last work, the construction is called shenshi “divine chamber,” a term which generally designates the alchemical crucible and the womb of the embryo of immortality. The theme of the world—closed, inviolate, and sacred—is thus well underscored. Three other words complete the same semantic field: “thatched roof ” (maowu), “square impluvium” (fangliu) and “round enclosure” (huandu). These terms are ancient (Liji 禮記, Zhuangzi 莊子) and make allusion to the crude, simple, poor habitation of the sage, Confucian as well as Daoist. They also carry the notion of a return to a primitive age. It is there a regression analogous to that which operates in the “divine chamber” on the mystic plane. This utopian projection accords with the texts relative to the “parishes” and the “pure or calm chambers” when they affirm that the latter are indispensable for bringing about the victory of the Three Heavens over the reign of the Six Heavens, a victory which consists in the reestablishment of the perfect state of the elected people (zhongmin). The description from the Taizhen ke 太真科 introduces a novel element which is confirmed by the indications of an historian on the subject of buildings realized, or at least envisaged, for the master Kou Qianzhi 寇謙之 by his patron, the emperor of Wei (around 423–442). This is the addition of a tower. It serves to greet, invite, and meet the divinities, and implies a hierarchy. Only the masters can go up there. In the case of Kou Qianzhi, the master prepares himself for an apotheosis to the third level of the cave which he inhabits, whereas the disciple is lodged on the second level. In the residence of Tao Hongjing 陶弘景, the master “remains (in a state of inviolate purity, chu)” at the most elevated level, the disciple prefers “living” ( ju) in the middle, whereas the faithful, visitors, clients, strangers “arrive” (zhi) only at the bottom.

318

annuaire 1969

By this trait, these constructions of “parishes” are connected with “phalansteries” (guan1) and the monasteries (guan3). Our goal was not to retrace the evolution of the institutions. The documents hardly make it possible to add to what we already know. Under the influence of Buddhism, undoubtedly, the Daoist church adopted celibacy and founded monasteries (since the beginning of the vith century, it seems). We have, however, drawn up a chronological list of the appearance of the new terms which designate the Daoist buildings. The adoption of this terminology is in fact significant. We desired to explain the choice of words in searching out the association of ideas which they imply. Why, in order to designate their parishes, phalansteries, temples, or monasteries, the Daoists initially chose the word guan1 “inn, private mansion, residence of a civil servant,” then the word guan3 “tower used to see a long distance,” is a fact which does not arise of itself. By this choice, they signified a complete ensemble of concepts which effectively prove to be characteristics of their religious preoccupations. As it happens, these concepts are quite ancient. The most pertinent trait is the desire to enter into communication with the “foreigners” under all sorts of aspects. We compared this to the Japanese notion of marebito まれびと, a word which designates equally well the real foreigners (voyagers, saints, trevelling specialists, keepers of techniques) as the often anonymous divinities to which one renders worship, sometimes in one’s own home, in treating them with honor as the invitees, sometimes in small road-side pagodas. The constructions studied (zhi, jingshi, guan1, guan3) serve in the same manner to await the masters or the divinities and to receive them in order to be linked with them. The different meanings that these words have taken in the course of history or in the particular milieus form a system or coherent group. We took up the antecedents or, at the very least, the literary models that the Daoists certainly knew as well as we. The poem Gaotang fu 高唐賦 of Song Yu 宋玉 and the legendary texts relative to the guan3, towers intended to attract the immortals, for example, concern the religious aspect. It is necessary to add a concrete aspect. The various terms characterize also the sojourn of a master who attracted to himself disciples (one might say schools). The Buddhist interferences ( jingshe translating vihāra) and the Confucian were evoked. On the other hand, the same terms are found in the utopian administration of the Zhouli 周禮 where they designate the breaks, the relays or inns

annuaire 1969

319

along the road intended for various kinds of travelers. We think that research on these conceptual antecedents clarify the motivations of the later Daoists and show that the institutions and concepts that they elaborated are not new and are inserted perfectly into an ensemble particular to the entire Chinese society.

ANNUAIRE DU COLLÈGE DE FRANCE 70TH YEAR (1970) Study of the Chinese World: Institutions and Concepts M. Rolf A. Stein, Professor I. Popular cults in organized Daoism We proposed to systematically pursue the analysis of Daoist movements of the first seven centuries of our era. Despite many remarkable works which appeared on this subject, these movements are still quite poorly understood. They present, moreover, a particular interest for many reasons. We know for the first time of a group of facts that is roughly speaking perpetuated up to our own day. On the other hand, although it presented a novel character for certain institutions, the religious Daoism of the first centuries remains strongly faithful to the classical religion of the four or five centuries before our era. Moreover, certain traits of these Daoist movements are found among the aboriginals in China, who borrowed them all in assimilating them undoubtedly into the indigenous institutions. Finally, we may here present a preview of the possibilities of comparison of certain institutions of these Daoist movements with the institutions of Tibetan tantrism. We had intended to examine the “Feast of Cuisine” which is inserted into a complete group of feasts and reunions, regular or occasional, of both social and religious character. Despite being obligatory in certain cases and within certain limits, these feasts also gave way to abuses that the Daoist “codes” severely punish. Moreover they cannot be separated from the calendar of the religion called “popular” which is common to the entire Chinese society. This is why we were obliged to initially study the notion of “excessive worship” (yinsi 淫祀) that the Daoists have in common with the Confucians. This hunt occupied us all year. We will approach the “feasts of cuisine” next year. We examined successively and separately the literature of the Confucian literati and that of the Daoists. In the first, we were obliged to go back to the classics. In fact, despite the chronological shift of nearly ten centuries, these ancient texts remain pertinent for our problem

322

annuaire 1970

from the fact that any educated person was to have read them. To define what we were intending by yinsi, we examined the theories of the classical texts and real cases from which we drew up a chronological list covering eight centuries (although we would be able to extend it to the xxth century). This list demonstrates the remarkable persistence of the incriminated practices despite the laws, decrees, or orders constantly sent out by the authorities (from the emperor to the local magistrate) and despite the criticisms always renewed from the literati (and the Daoists). The examination of these real cases permits us to narrow the theoretical definition by the analysis of the character of the divinities and of the genre of activities proper to these cults. The epithet yin (etymologically: water infiltration, excessive rain) may be applied to the sexual domain, but this is only a particular, relatively rare case. It implies then a union which does not respect the rites, the norms, and is by this fact prohibited. While outwardly characterizing the cults, it is above all in the domain of music and sung poetry that this term is defined best and most often. It is then applied often to a religious comportment that the official religion scorns or holds in suspicion: popular and aboriginal rites, recourse to mediums. This field of connotations implicates “novelty” (xin) opposed to tradition, “vulgarity” (su) opposed to “distinction” (ya), and “aberration” (xie) in opposition to the norm or rectitude (zheng). The last pair of oppositions implies, on the religious plane, two contradictory attitudes that simultaneously characterized the entire Chinese civilization for the entire course of its history: from one side, a “correct,” reserved attitude, keeping to oneself, distance maintained, prudence of approach, decency even; from the other, a behaviour of effusiveness, of letting go, spontaneity, communion. The first attitude is often a characteristic of Confucianism, and the second of Daoism. Yet we noted thereafter that the true dividing line passed rather between official and semi-official behavior, codified institutions and “popular” customs (which are not limited to the people, but are partaken by all the layers of society). The Daoists organized into churches have, in this domain, continued the classical orthodoxy. We thus emphasized that the difference between the official and obligatory cults and the forbidden “excessive” or “unregulated” (yin) cults is not of kind, but of degree or limit. This characteristic explains a certain hesitation or ambiguity that reigns in relation to the application of the principle. The limits tolerated remain always imprecise and may vary according to the individual, like the (already shown) famous

annuaire 1970

323

conversation attributed to Confucius which justified the necessity of effusiveness in a popular feast faced with criticism from a disciple more royalist than the king (Lunyu 論語 X, 8). The theory that we find in the classics (Liji 禮記, Lunyu 論語, Zuozhuan 左傳) is coherent. The cult (with sacrifice) is only admitted to the extent where, by its social and religious status, the individual who practices it has affinities of a categorical or classificatory type with the divinity. Social status: the more or less elevated rank that an individual occupies in the social hierarchy authorizes him to render worship to more or less important divinities or to a greater or lesser number of divinities. Religious status: a bond of kinship ought to exist between the individual who renders worship and the divinity who receives it. Both the social and religious hierarchy is expressed by the importance or the nature of animal sacrifice (man, [horse and] ox, sheep and pig) and by their quantity. Any worship which does not correspond to these criteria is “excessive” (yin). The principal is applied above all to the cult of the ancestors or of the gods of the soil. To infringe on these rules, it is, on the hierarchical plane, an act of usurpation and of lese-majesty (whence the hostility of the authorities towards the non-codified cults and sects, and the constant presence of severe laws against the “excessive worship” in all the penal codes the entire span of history). On the religious plane, this is an act of irreverence, an abuse of familiarity towards a too important or too distant divinity. Whereas the worship allowed holds for the interested a gain in “happiness” ( fu: merit, favor accorded in return for a gift offered), the “excessive” worship deprives one of it. It is above all envisaged as a communal repast, like a reunion of a family, clan, or local group which excludes strangers. The “excessive cults” are then defined negatively by opposition to regular cults. For the dead, the regular cults address themselves to the ancestors of the interested family, and only within the limit of a certain number of generations. A member of the family serves as representative or support (shi, a sort of medium). Hymns and music—regular, correct, distinguished (ya)— reign there. The “excessive” worship is rendered to the dead other than the ancestors who incarnate themselves in the professional mediums (wu). Music and poesy—irregular and “excessive” (yin)—reign there. For the gods of the soil, the regular worship is addressed to the god of the local soil from the restricted community which surrounds it. The “excessive” cult is addressed to other gods of the soil and to other divinities of nature. The regular cult limits the offerings in kind and quantity, and restrains the circle of participants to the feast of communion.

324

annuaire 1970

The “excessive” cult consists in making unlimited and ruinous offerings (notably in distributing the remainders of food) and in extending the circle of participants to strangers. These principals explain the repeated criticisms of the literati. They view: 1) The appearance of new worship rendered to the divinized dead, beneficent or maleficent heroes (generally dead of violent deaths), associated with the gods of the soil; or also the worship of eminent personages (Confucius, Laozi, etc.) beyond that of their place of birth or death (commemorative chapels being permitted such that they remain localized); 2) The use of mediums, the effusiveness of enthusiasm with dances accompanied by the drum, the mix of participants who suppress the normal barriers (separation of the sexes); 3) The ruinous expenditures, either by the excessive prolongation of feast days, or by the display of luxury, or again by the kind or number of victims and the quantity of the repasts. The real case that we studied demonstrates, on one hand, the perpetual resurgence of these cults and their utilization by semi-religious semi-political movements, and on the other hand the perplexity of the literati as to the limits admitted. The case of Ying Shao (died 145 after J. Ch.) is significant: he does not rise up against the principal of worship, but against its exaggeration. He permits it twice a year (probably at the she days, near the spring and autumn equinoxes) and only at the place where the late hero has his stronghold. The continuation of our research demonstrated that we had reason to make this preliminary inquiry. All the elements, without exception, are met in the texts from various movements of religious Daoism of the first seven centuries. Often, these texts borrow even verbatim passages from the classics and Confucian texts. Already the Laozi Xiang’er zhu 老子想爾注, which we have agreed to date to the iind century, prohibits and severely punishes too abundant sacrifices (repeated or comprising surpluses, remainders), which imply abusive (xie, incorrect) communications with the divinities. Similarly, the Taipingjing 太平經 rails against the “excessive” cults which address themselves to the souls of the dead other (than those of the ancestors, strangers, tuo gui). We naturally translated (in correcting the errors of Ware) and analyzed the famous attacks of Ge Hong 葛洪 against these cults (ch. 4, 9, and 14). As we know, being completely Daoist, he has the attitude typical of a literati and a functionary. One part of his strong headed, “rationalist” critiques is borrowed verbatim from the Lunheng 論衡 and the Qianfu lun 潛夫論 (sarcasm apropos of the worship of trees, stones, etc., propagated by

annuaire 1970

325

charlatans). In addition, his attitude is as ambiguous as that of the literati. For the great alchemical undertaking of Long Life, he is obligated to make a great sacrifice not only to the grand divinities of Heaven, but also to the minor divinities like the gods of the soil, well, hearth, and doors (ch. 4). Yet elsewhere (ch. 14), Ge Hong 葛洪 critiques both the great imperial sacrifices of the Qin and Han, which also aimed at Long Life, and the popular cults the aim of which was the healing of maladies and the elongation of life. To this is added the critique of the practices of contemporary and rival Daoist movements, the “adepts from the Li school (who claim)” (Lijia dao). We are in fact aware of quite a great number of Daoist prophets or messiahs, partly divinized, who carried the name of the Li family the entire length of the first seven centuries (Li A, Li Tuo, Li Hong, etc.). However, the criticism here aims precisely at the “feasts of cuisine,” not them as such, but to the extent that they give place to the exaggerations (too convivial, too much expenditure, luxurious food). It is identical to that of the Daoist “codes” (such as the Lu xiansheng daomen kelue 陸先生道門科略) which, on the one hand, require these feasts on certain occasions and within certain limits, and on the other rise up against the abuses. Ge Hong ranks the adepts of Li among a hundred movements which he does not name. We remarked that, two centuries later, Tao Hongjing 陶弘景 addresses similar critiques to “adepts from the Bo school (who claim)” (Bojia dao) who, in his time, were widespread in the Zhejiang. We do not know who this Bo was, but the critique is addressed to popular cults, with animal sacrifice (whereas the “adepts of Li” did not kill animals), abusive (undoubtedly ecstatic) communication with the minor divinities of “demoniacal” type, ruinous expenses, excessive feasts, employment of sorcerer-mediums. Many Daoist adepts of the Maoshan school (or their familiars) initially belonged to these movements of Bo. We naturally posed the problem of knowing if these critiques could serve to identify the fights between rival schools, subsects (chapels) or movements. The rivalries and differences of dogma and ritual certainly existed, but the documents hardly allow us to specify them. In any case, the critique of “excessive worship” cannot be traced back to this kind of distinction, no more than to the differences of era or area of diffusion. It is common to the literati and the Daoists and remains permanent. We sometimes considered a dialectical movement, an unstable and ambiguous situation of nature, where popular religion and organized religion are both opposed and linked.

326

annuaire 1970

In this context we must rapidly explain another domain of critiques where the same ambiguity reigns. It concerns the sexual practices which we attribute willingly to the “Three Zhang,” i.e. to the first “celestial masters” (tianshi). The critique is common to Ge Hong 葛洪 (ivth century), Kou Qianzhi 寇謙之 (in the North, vth century), Tao Hongjing 陶弘景 (in the South, vith century) and to many other schools (e.g. that of the Xiang’er zhu 想爾注 which come from the movement of the celestial masters). In all these milieus, the critique is only addressed to certain abuses; those practices are considered useful and even necessary within certain limits. Yang Liansheng demonstrated the ambiguity of Kou Qianzhi in this regard, and Liu Cunyan emphasized that the same ambiguous attitude still characterizes the Daoists from the xth to the xiiith century. We pursued this inquiry, which led us far, but we already noted certain facts that we will meet again apropos of “cuisines” (a link from the sexual practices with the cult of ancestors—they seek to procure a good descendant—and with the rites of expiation of sins and of healing). After this detour, we translated some extracts of Daoist texts which are related to these “excessive cults” (Daotian lun 道天論, Taishang dongyuan shenzhou jing 太上洞淵神咒經). We found there the same definitions from the classics that formed our point of departure and we note that the accent is placed on the religious plane: the prohibitions aim at preventing the disorders created by the minor divinities. The analysis of other texts permitted us to see that, whatever their provenance, the lists of abuses critiqued were inserted in the context of a coherent account concerning the destiny of humanity. The texts in question are quite poorly redacted (or poorly preserved) and we only see their structure in a condition that does not take account of the actual sequential order. The most coherent and consistent account is that of the Santian neijie jing 三天內解經 (Daozang, No 1196). It is less complete in the Lu xiansheng daomen kelue 陸先生道門科略 (No 1119) and in the Laojun yinsong jiejing 老君音誦戒經 (No 784). All these works are from the vth century, but the theme in question appears already in the Zhengyi fawen tianshijiao jiejing 正一法文天師教 (No 788), which we agree to date from the iiird century. A golden age is followed by a period of decadence (the era contemporary with the text). A master (the supreme god or a delegate) appears to restore the situation. He promulgates a doctrine of salvation which carries codes or regulations (the former like where our lists of prohibitions are inserted) and promises to the elect the reestablishment of the golden

annuaire 1970

327

age if they obey the codes (which are addressed as much to divinities as to men). The first work (No 1196) proceeds as follows. It opposes “olden times, high antiquity” (xi shanggu) where order and harmony reigns, to “now, low antiquity” ( jin xiagu) where disorder and mélange reigns. The present epoch of Evil is dominated by the “Six Heavens” (liutian). As in many other texts, this term “Six Heavens,” originators of Evil, is opposed to that of the “Three Heavens,” originators of Good. Yet the theme of opposition 3 : 6 also appears in other forms. It is initially evoked in a curiously furtive form: in the first times, the Supreme God (Laojun) appears, is divided into three breaths (sanqi) that become Sky, Earth, and Water (which correspond to the Three Functionaries, sanguan, of the Daoist religion, but here it is a question of the 1200 functionaries). Laojun is at the same time the Mediatory Breath. He transforms and expands himself over nine countries as nine persons, three men and six women. There will not be any more question of them. In contrast, the theme 3 : 6 is reprised elsewhere. To the “Six Heavens” of Evil are opposed, not the “Three Heavens,” but Three Schools (dao). They are agents of Good, but their group is not uniform. One, that of Non-action, is exclusively yang and prevails in “China” (zhongguo), the other is exclusively yin (this is Buddhism) and prevails among the eighty-one countries of the West (hu). Only the third seems well balanced and restrained. This is that of “purity and moderation” (qingyue) which prevails in South and Southeast China (Chu and Yue). This third school performs the function of mediator between the two extremes. We rapidly defined them. This group of three schools is not visibly sufficient to clarify the “Six Heavens.” The account resumes in presenting various emissaries of the Supreme God (Yu Ji and his Taiping jing and others) who do not succeed. Finally, in 142 of our era, a new messenger-mediator (zhong shi), Zhang Daoling 張道陵, illustrates the “Three Heavens” and rectifies the “Six Heavens” in separating the “True” and the “False” (zhen wei). As in the second text (No 1119), the “new” religion and its “new” Laojun are opposed to the “aged or ancient” breaths of the Six Heavens. Yet Evil still recovers, and only the third work (No 784) envisages the reestablishment of Good thanks to the new method given to Kou Qianzhi (who received it in 415, according to the annals of Wei). It is into this general schema that are inserted the lists of excesses that are sometimes (in the first text and partially in the second) opposed to the permitted and obligatory institutions. The prohibitions and the obligations

328

annuaire 1970

no longer aim solely at the practices of the popular cults, but also the institutions of various Daoist movements. In the latter case, the sociological background is undoubtedly characterized by the rivalry of schools and masters and by the always renewed tendency toward purification which may manifest itself in the same interior of each of the various movements. Yet what interests us before all else, in view of the inquiry to come on “feasts of cuisine,” is that certain popular cults are not only not prohibited, but obligatory provided of certain limitations: worship of ancestors (but only to five great annual feasts and within the limit of the restricted family), the corresponding abuse being the worship of “other” (foreign) divinities who eat “the rest”; worship of the god of the soil and hearth on the 2nd and 8th month; healing of maladies only by confession and rites of ransom. Parallel texts confirm these indications. There also these rules rely directly on the classical texts from which they borrow, sometimes verbatim, passages (Daozang No 1196, 207, and 1191). II. Elements constitutive of the bonpo literature The preceding inquiries notably demonstrate to us the possibility, and even the necessity, of simultaneously utilizing many corpuses despite their chronological variation (Dunhuang manuscripts, relatively modern texts) and despite their membership to very different milieus (lamaist, bonpo, and Mosso). This year’s course was dedicated to the confirmation of this experience in new domains. We also wished to specify how the transmission or the continuity of the tradition was able to operate, which ancient elements were utilized later for the constitution of organized Bon, and in what measure they could be qualified as bonpo of the ancient epoch. This notion of antiquity is very relative and vague. It is attached to documents from Central Asia and Dunhuang. We have presented them up to now as very archaic, and certain of them give this impression. Yet contrary to the Chinese manuscripts, the Tibetan manuscripts other than the Buddhist texts are virtually undated, and no specific study has yet brought a means of dating them by their linguistic or paleographic characteristics. The terminus a quo is as unknown as the terminus ad quem. The date of 1035 that Pelliot suggests for the second is completely uncertain (Fujieda, Rona-Tas). The “Annals” stop at the date 763 and the “Chronicles” at the same era, but their redaction

annuaire 1970

329

could have occured later. A list of kings (PT 1286) stops with Glang dar ma, and prayers are dedicated to him (PT 0134). These manuscripts are thus later than c. 840. The list of kings from the “SanskritTibetan formulary” edited by Hackin stops at the second half of the xth century. One century later, we are already in the “classical” period with the songs of Mi la ras pa. There is thus almost no solution of continuity. We are forced to to fill the vaccuum by the rare indications furnished by later chronicles. We then note that in the xth and xith centuries, the Buddhist authors were able to observe and combat the bonpo rituals (Rwa lo tsa ba, Ug pa lung pa, and Mi la ras pa) and that many Buddhist monks of that era had initially been Bonpo belonging to a traditionally bonpo clan (the Khyung clan notably). It was in 1017 that the bonpo Klu dga’ would have “invented” the “hidden texts.” It was also he who would have carried out the Buddhist adaptation of the Klu ‘bum (in which we often discovered archaic fragments). We then researched the documents characteristic of these contacts and amalgams, and we translated and analyzed them. The first was a long song of Mi la ras pa which imitated a bonpo healing ritual. It would have been composed on the occasion of one such rite at which Mi la ras pa would have assisted. We are not sure of the authenticity of the song and still less of the account of the circumstances. Yet if we accept it, the song may have been noted down in the second half of the xith century by the monk Byang chub rgyal po. The prayers and the rite are, in this era, already expressly qualified as bonpo. The account which follows the song proves that it already is a question of assimilated Bon. Underscored there is the similarity of Bon and Buddhism in terminology and ritual forms, and the rite is qualified as a sgrub gshen and snang gshen. However, these terms are not yet encountered, as far as I know, in the bonpo Dunhuang texts. By contrast, they are typical of the great sum of assimilated Bon, the Gzi brjid. We verified in detail that many of the technical terms of the song analyzed were effectively found in this work (which was only compiled in 1380, but the materials of which are more ancient, as the song of Mi la ras pa justly proves). On the other hand, we equally discovered many other terms which are already attested in certain Dunhuang manuscripts, notably in the divination texts. It is difficult to decide if this proves the relative antiquity of the first or the relative modernity of the second. The ritual described by Mi la ras pa keeps an important place in divination. The formula that the soothsayer uses to call for a bonpo rite (bon gcig byed) is identical to that from the Dunhuang

330

annuaire 1970

manuscripts on divination (bon byed, bon byas, e.g. PT 1047). As for the sequences of the ritual, they concord entirely with the accounts from the Klu ‘bum (divination to determine the cause of harm, offering of ransom and expiation). The relatively modern character of this ritual emerges also from the fact that, as in the Klu ‘bum, it is a question of the healing of a malady, whereas, in the analogous rituals from Dunhuang, it is a question of assuring the survival (beyond the grave) of the dead. One ritual phrase of Mi la ras pa is perhaps an allusion to these archaic rituals. At the end of the rite of healing, the faithful proclaim: “the patient has returned from the dead.” Likewise the indication that an account (gleng mo, lo rgyus) must be declaimed at the end of the rite, at the occasion of a feast, and the fragments from an account of a precedent set at the beginning of the world concord with the fact that one part of the Dunhuang funerary rituals (but also the healing rites of the Klu ‘bum) are presented under the form of mythic precedents. The song of Mi la ras pa represents an effort to adapt a bonpo ritual by the insertion of a symbolic interpretation conforming to Buddhism. Yet a Dunhuang manuscript already proceeds in the same manner. Given its exceptional interest, we translated it in its entirety (PT 0239, with a variant from London S. 504). It is composed of two parts. The first (already summarized by M. Lalou), purely Buddhist, is dedicated to Avalokiteśvara and the births in the six domains of existence (gati). The absence of the formula oṃ ma ṇi padme hūm may date this text prior to the year one thousand, if the indication of Pelliot, according to whom this mantra does not appear before this date, is confirmed.a The second part also begins with a purely Buddhist text (l. 1–18), passing then to an adaptation of a bonpo funerary ritual in six sequences. The adaptation consists in formulating a Buddhist wish in favor of the dead (sngo ba = pariṇāma, transfer of merit from one who pronounces it to another). He is told that, rather than having recourse to the bonpo ritual, it is better to rely on Buddhism. Sometimes it is suggested to abandon the ancient rite, sometimes an element of it is preserved leaving him to find a Buddhist meaning thanks to a symbolic interpretation (e.g. the sacrificed horse which must carry the

a Actually it exists prior to this date. See C. Regamey, “Motifs vichnouites et śivaïtes dans le Kāraṇḍavyūha” in Etudes tibétaines dédiées à la mémoire de Marcelle Lalou, (Paris, 1971), 411–32, unseen by Stein.—C.S.-S.

annuaire 1970

331

dead in the beyond is compared to the horse savior Balaha, a form of Avalokiteśvara). The entire six sequences of the ritual are found in the great bonpo funerary ritual (PT 1042), but the latter is more complete and the order of the sequences is not the same. The bonpo character of the ritual adapted already comes out from this comparison. It is already expressly confirmed by the adapter, who opposed the sacred texts of the “black men” (non-Buddhists), the “black funerals,” the “Bon invocations,” and the “demonic accounts” to the sacred texts of “the divine white religion” (Buddhism), the “customs of the white man” (Buddhist), the “white funerals.” The technical term smrang (“statement”) that we encounter here is often utilized in the Gzi brjid of organized Bon. Its translation lends itself to controversy. If we have translated it here as “invocation,” it is what the text fortunately gives in some verses apropos of the sacrificial sheep (skyibs lug) which must be killed and guide the dead on a difficult path. As it happens, this citation is a fragment of a long account that we find in other Dunhuang manuscripts of stylistically archaic character, whereas other fragments or allusions were preserved in the “modern” accounts of the Klu ‘bum and the Mosso ritual. We are thus assured of the unity of a vast ensemble, the known elements of which are chronologically very removed from one another and come from different milieus. The indication from the song of Mi la ras pa is confirmed: the rite was accompanied by a recitation which evoked the origin and functions of diverse animals which figure therein. The manipulation of the compilers or scribes finds itself clarified. Sometimes only the account is retained, sometimes only the sequences of the rite are indicated. Further, the account, at least partially in verse, is readily reduced to a fragment which may make up a ritual formula. Finally, for the Buddhist compiler of ms. PT 0238, the accounts or invocations (over the sheep, horse, yak) are bonpo. The bonpo priests evidently may have utilized texts of independent origin, but we cannot prove it. The translation of ms. PT 0238 occupied us for quite a long time. It permitted us to specify the unfolding of the funerary rite and the sense of many technical terms (notably dbon lob which indicated a relationship via the women and gnyen sris which also refers to a relative, the two becoming tied in with animal sacrifices). PT 0238 represents the effort of the Buddhists to combat the bonpo rites (with animal sacrifice). They empty them of their content and only preserve certain forms as symbolic titles. The latter are found

332

annuaire 1970

later in part in the lamaist rituals (figurines of animals in paste, set for the freedom of a dedicated domestic animal). A different attitude is revealed by another Dunhuang manuscript, PT 1038, which we translated and analyzed afterwards. This is a fragment of eighteen lines dedicated to the traditions related to the origins of the Tibetan kings. What is peculiar about it is that the author gives, side by side, many versions without making a choice or without selecting one of them as the best. He juxtaposes many indigenous, non-Buddhist variants, but not specifically characterized as bonpo, and Buddhist legends. He acknowledges his perplexity (“whatever it is, is not clear”) and employs formulas like “one says, another . . .” and “a second form is, a third . . .” We have located the various versions in the classical chronicles where we find the same juxtaposition, but where such or such a version is expressly qualified as bonpo (e.g. in the Hu lan deb ther and the Chos ‘byung Mkhas pa’i dga’ ston of Dpa’o Gtsug lag phreng ba). This juxtaposition of versions among which one does not choose is also characteristic of the Klu ‘bum. Does the espousal of tolerance imply a relatively recent date for the manuscript PT1038? The tradition attributes this policy already to Srong btsan sgam po, but that very ancient date undoubtedly only rests on a pious fiction. Many accounts mentioned in our manuscript are also found in the manuscript PT 1286 (trans. Bacot DTT, 81) which should be later than c. 840. The Buddhist version, which qualifies the Tibetans as demons “with red faces,” is found in the “Prophesy of Khotan” of which a Chinese version exists thanks to Facheng 法成 (770–858), who traveled to Shazhou between 833 and 838, then to Ganzhou around 842–846, and again to Shazhou around 855–858. Our manuscript might then date to the second half of the ixth century. It might be owing to a Bonpo, as the common expression Spu rgyal Bod (Tibet) is transformed (intentionally or by a scribal error?) into Spu rgyal Bon. The theory which (by an excessive play of words?) explains the name of Tibet (Bod) by the Bon religion was reprised by the later bonpo chroniclers (Rgyal rabs Bon of 1439 which cites to this effect the anterior, but of unknown date, bonpo sūtras). If certain versions of this text are markedly Buddhist and if others are sometimes expressly qualified as bonpo, a third possibility of classification is presented for the others. This would be the category of the indigenous tradition, not specifically attached to an organized church, that is sometimes qualified as “religion of men” (mi chos) or

annuaire 1970

333

that is sometimes attached to “tales” and to “songs or enigmas” (sgrung lde’u). A late text suggests this. The Dunhuang documents that we have studied permit us to pass nearly without resolving the continuity from the ancient epoch which they represent to the classical and modern epoch. We already find there the effort of assimilation and mixing which characterizes the classical era. An oral transmission is possible, but the written transmission must play an important role in the preservation of phrases and fragments which remain linguistically and stylistically archaic. In order to confirm this impression, which we already had the preceding years, we proceeded to a discovery of archaic fragments in modern texts. Up to here, the Klu ‘bum gave the richest harvest, but very interesting fragments were found in small, anonymous, and undatable rituals which are sometimes called “grimoires,” and which scholars generally scorn. The experience shows that their humble and minor character undoubtedly has the value of having been less purified than others. One of these texts, a lamaist ritual dedicated to the great gods of the earth (sacred mountains), brings about a syncretism analogous to that which we saw initiated in the Dunhuang manuscripts. It identifies the name of a sacred mountain that we find already in these manuscripts, Thang lha Ya zhur as the name of a Buddhist divinity (Zur phud lnga pa = Pancaśikha). Yet the indigenous name is said to derive, not from Bon, but from the “religion of men” (mi chos). In many of these manuals, and in various passages from the Klu ‘bum, we encountered fragments of origin accounts which characterize the Dunhuang rituals. We applied ourselves to identifying them. We can on occasion follow in detail the processes of deformation which inevitably affected these fragments written down by scribes incapable of comprehending them, but who did not succeed in eliminating the archaic expressions. The Dunhuang texts permit us to explicate the modern texts, and inversely the latter permit us to fill the lacunae of the former. One of these modern manuals makes up part of a whole collection of small texts retrieved by Bacot. Yet, one of them carries a “pictogram,” indubitably Mosso. The collection thus certainly comes from the Mosso where Bacot carried out a long investigation. As slender as this discussion thread is, he confirms that the Mosso rituals, which we compared fruitfully to the Tibetan texts, must be elaborated by using, at least partially, Tibetan models, and that to a relatively modern era.

334

annuaire 1970

After this detour to the modern texts that allow us to measure the persistence of the tradition and the fusion of bonpo, Buddhist, and “popular” elements, we must return to the Dunhuang manuscripts. We lacked the time to consider a considerable problem which they posed, i.e. the presence of foreign words which appear there as epithets or technical terms. These words are in fact found in the bonpo “classics” where they are identified as belonging to the sacred language of the Bonpo, that from the land of Zhang zhung from which Bon would have originated. We will tackle this problem on another occasion. We preferred to quickly indicate the interest of a category of Dunhuang literature in which we find these words from the Zhang zhung language and which poses new problems of composition from various elements, bonpo or not. This is the quite considerable corpus of divination texts that we already had the occasion of using apropos of the song of Mi la ras pa. It is quickly apparent that this literature must be examined very close to the perspective of the linguistic and stylistic form and from the perspective of the themes utilized. We will revisit this next year. This year, we then proceeded to a classification of various divination manuals according to precedent and exterior aspect. F.W. Thomas, who was the first and only one to study them, desired to explain certain differences of form by the provenance of different regions (Turfan and Dunhuang). In reality, the difference is of a typological, and not a geographical, order. Yet this observation does not exclude the presence of foreign influences. Without speaking of a Turkic manuscript from Central Asia, which has certain traits in common with the Tibetan manuals, we find Indian elements (“dice” in the form of parallel and equal surfaces with four rectangular faces carrying the ciphers 1 to 4; divinatory works by “dice,” Kevali, and by the cries of the crow, Kākajarita, which was translated into Tibetan from the beginning of the ixth century). China also seems present in the divination by the dong tse. This word, which designates the “coins [sapèques],” seems to be Chinese (< tongzi?) and the manual in question refers expressly to Kong tse (< Confucius who became, above all in the bonpo tradition, the patron of divination techniques). As the case from the manual by the cry of the crow demonstrates, the foreign contribution does not exclude a properly Tibetan part which was attached to it. Another type of manual is very peculiar. There, the oracles are defined by the combination of a series of terms which form two coordinates. These terms belong to a foreign, non-Tibetan language. One

annuaire 1970

335

long manuscript represents this type (PT 1047), but the terms are also encountered, sporadically, in another type of manual in which the oracles emanate from the mouth of a divinity. Finally, the type which we especially wish to discuss is characterized by the indication of three groups of ciphers (from 1 to 4) that undoubtedly represent the throws of “dice” and of which there are 64 combinations. The text is generally composed of one part in verse and another in prose. We distinguished many sub-groups according to the mode of indicating the ciphers. In comparing the different manuscripts, we attempted to discover the system of qualification of the oracles into good, middling, and bad. We observed that the order of succession of the oracles and the values attached to the ciphers differed from one text to another. Save in some cases, no order seemed to reign in the combination of ciphers. Certain anomalies seem due to the negligence of the scribe. Certain sequences seem to indicate that a following text was cut out and that the pieces were, arbitrarily, affected by various “throws.” Despite the typological differences, all the manuals formed a corpus to the extent that the same elements of content (themes and motifs, personages from the pantheon) are encountered in all the manuscripts. The reading is effective only on condition of using them all. – fin –

BIBLIOGRAPHY OF ROLF A. STEIN (1911–1999)1 Abbreviations AA BEFEO BSOAS HJAS JA RHR TP ZS

Arts asiatiques (Paris) Bulletin de l’École française d’Extrême-Orient (Hanoi, Paris) Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies (London) Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies (Cambridge, MA) Journal asiatique (Paris) Revue de l’histoire des religions (Paris) T’oung Pao (Leiden) Zentralasiatische Studien (Bonn)

1939: “Leao-tsche.” TP, XXXV: 1–154. “Trente-fois fiches de divination tibétaines.” HJAS, IV: 297–372. 1941: “Notes d’étymologie tibétaine.” BEFEO, XLI: 203–231 [publ. 1942]. 1942: “Jardins en miniature d’Extrême-Orient, le Monde en petit.” BEFEO, XLII: 1–104 [publ. 1943]. “À propos des sculptures de boeufs en metal.” BEFEO, XLII: 135–138 [publ. 1943]. 1947: “Le Lin-yi, sa localisation, sa contribution à la formation du Champa et ses liens avec la Chine.” Han-hiue, Bulletin de Centre d’études sinologiques de Pékin, II: 1–335. 1951: “Mi-ñag et Si-hia, géographie historique et légendes ancestrales.” BEFEO, XLIV (1947–1950), Fasc. 1, Mélanges publiés en l’honneur du Cinquantenaire de l’École française d’Extrême-Orient: 223–259. 1952: “Chronique bibliographique: récentes études tibétaines.” JA, CCXL: 79–106. “Présentation de l’œuvre posthume de Marcel Granet: ‘Le Roi boit.’ ” Année Sociologique, 3e serie: 9–105 [publ. 1955]. 1953: “Chine.” In Symbolisme cosmique et monuments religieux, Musée Guimet, Catalogue de l’exposition, 31–40. Paris: Musée nationaux. 1956: L’épopée tibétaine de Gesar dans sa version lamaïque de Ling. Paris, Annales du musée Guimet, Bibliothéque d’études, LXI. 1957: “L’habitat, le monde et le corps humain.” JA, CCXLV: 37–74. “Architecture et pensée religieuse en Extrême-Orient.” AA, IV: 163–186.

1

This list omits book reviews and “necrologiques”

338

bibliography of rolf a. stein “Les religions de la Chine.” In Encyclopédie française, Paris, tome 19: 54.3– 54.10. “Le liṅga des danses masquées lamaïques et la théorie des âmes.” Liebenthal Festschrift, Sino-Indian Studies V, 3–4, edited by Kshitis Roy, 200–234. Santiniketan: Visvabharati.

1958: “Les K’iang des marches sino-tibétaines, exemple de continuité de la tradition.” Annuaire de l’École pratique des Hautes Études, Ve section, Paris, 1957–58: 3–15. “Peintures tibétaines de la vie de Gesar.” AA, V, 4: 243–271. 1959: Recherches sur l’épopée et le barde au Tibet. Paris: Bibiothéque de l’Institut des Hautes Études chinoises, XIII. Les tribus anciennes des marches sino-tibétaines. Paris: Bibiothéque de l’Institut des Hautes Études chinoises. 1960: “Lamaïsme.” In Le Masque, Catalogue de l’exposition, décembre 1959–septembre 1960, Musée Guimet, 42–45. Paris: Éditions des Musées nationaux. 1961: Une chronique ancienne de bSam-yas: sBa-bžed, édition du texte tibétaine et résumé française. Paris, Bibiothéque de l’Institut des Hautes Études chinoises. “Le théâtre au Tibet.” In Les théâtre d’Asie, 245–254. Paris: CNRS. 1962: La civilisation tibétaine. Paris: Dunod. [Revised and augmented, Paris: 1981]. In English: Tibetan Civilization. Translated by J.E. Stapleton Driver, London, Faber & Faber and Stanford University Press, 1972. [Note that the English translation is based on the 1962 first French edition, and does not incorporate the substantial additions and revisions of later French editions]. “Une source ancienne pour l’histoire de l’épopée tibétaine, le Rlaṅs Po-ti bse-ru.” JA, CCL: 77–106. 1963: “Remarques sur les mouvements du taoïsme politico-religieux au 11e siecle aprés Jésus-Christ.” TP, L, 1–3: 1–78. “Deux notules d’histoire ancienne du Tibet.” JA, CCLI: 327–333. 1964: “Une saint poète tibétain.” Mercure de France, juillet-août 1964: 485–501. 1966: “Nouveaux documents tibétains sur les Mi-ñag/Si-hia.” Mélanges de sinologie offerts à Monsieur Paul Demiéville, vol. I:281–289. Paris: Bibliothéque de l’Institut des Hautes Études chinoises, XX. Leçon inaugurale, Collège de France, Chaire d’étude du monde chinois: Institutions et concepts. Paris: Collège de France. 1968: “Religions comparées de l’Extrême-Orient et de la Haute-Asie.” In Problèmes et méthodes d’histoire des religions, École pratique des Hautes Études, Ve section—Sciences Religieuses, 47–51. Paris: Presses universitaires de France. 1969: “Un example de relations entre taoïsme et religion populaire.” In Fukui hakase shōju kinen Tōyō bunka ronshū, 79–90. Tōkyō. “Les conteurs au Tibet.” France-Asie 197: 135–146. 1970:

bibliography of rolf a. stein

339

“Un document ancien relatif aux rites funéraires des Bon-po tibétains.” JA, CCLVIII: 155–185. “La légende du foyer dand le monde chinois.” Échanges et communications: Mélanges offerts à Claude Lévi-Strauss, edited by Jean Poullon et Pierre Miranda, 1280–1305. The Hague: Mouton. 1971: “Illumination subite ou saisie simulanée, note sur la terminologie chinoise et tibétaine.” RHR, CLXXIX: 3–30. In English: “Sudden Illumination or Simultaneous Comprehension: Remarks on Chinese and Tibetan Terminology.” In Sudden and Gradual Approaches to Enlightenment in Chinese Thought, edited by Peter Gregory, 41–65. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, Studies in East Asian Buddhism 5. “La langue žaì-žuì du Bon organize.” BEFEO, LVIII: 231–254. “Du récit au rituel dans les manuscrits tibétains de Touen-houang.” In Études tibétaines dédiées à la mémoire de M. Lalou, edited by Ariane Macdonald, 479–547. Paris: A. Maisoneuve. 1972: Vie et chants de ‘Brug-pa Kun-legs, le yogin, translated from the Tibetan, with annotations. Collection UNESCO d’œvres représentatives. Paris: G.-P. Maisoneuve et Larose. 1973: “Le texte tibétain de ‘Brug-pa Kun-legs.” ZS, 7: 9–219. “Un ensemble sémantique tibétain: créer et procréer, être et devenir, vivre, nourrir et guérir.” BSOAS, XXXVI: 412–423. 1974: “Vocabulaire tibétain de la biographie de ‘Brug-pa Kun-legs.” ZS, 8: 129– 178. 1976: “Préface.” In Choix de documents tibétains conservés à la Bibliothéque nationale complété par quelques manuscrits de l’India Office et du British Museum, présentés par Ariane Macdonald et Yoshiro Imaeda, tome I, 5–8. Paris: Bibliothéque nationale. 1977: “La gueule du makara: un trait inexpliqué de certains objets rituels.” In Essais sur l’art du Tibet, edited by Ariane Macdonald et Yoshirō Imaeda, 53–62. Paris: A. Maisonneuve. 1978: “À propos des documents anciens relatifs au phur-bu (kīla).” In Proceedings of the Csoma de Körös Memorial Symposium, edited by L. Ligeti, 427–444. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó. “Bemerkungen zum Geser Khan.” ZS, 12: 137–146. 1979: “Religious Taoism and Popular Religion from the Second to Seventh Centuries.” In Facets of Taoism: Essays in Chinese Religions, edited by H. Welch and A. Seidel, Yale University Press: 53–81. “Introduction to the Gesar Epic.” In The Epic of Gesar, vol. 1, 1–20. Thimpu, Bhutan: Kunsang Tobgyel. 1980: “Une mention du manichéisme dans le choix du bouddhisme comme religion d’État par le roi Khri-sroì lde-bstan.” In Indianisme et Bouddhisme, Mélanges offerts à Mgr Étienne Lamotte, 329–338. Louvain-La-Neuve: Publications de l’Institut Orientaliste de Louvain. 1981:

340

bibliography of rolf a. stein “Bouddhisme et mythologie. Le problème.” In Dictionnaire des mythologies et des religions des sociétés traditionnelles et du monde antique (under the direction of Yves Bonnefoy), vol. 1, 127–29. Paris: Flammarion. “Porte (gardien de la): un exemple de mythologie bouddhiste, de l’Inde au Japon,” In Dictionnaire des mythologies et des religions des sociétés traditionnelles et du monde antique (under the direction of Yves Bonnefoy), vol. 2, 280–294. Paris: Flammarion. In English: “The Guardian of the Gate: An Example of Buddhist Mythology, from India to Japan.” In Asian Mythologies, edited by Yves Bonnefoy et al., 122–36. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1993. “Saint et Divin, un titre tibétain et chinois des rois tibétains.” Numéro spécial—Actes du Colloque international (Paris, 2–4 octobre 1979): Manuscrits et inscriptions de Haute-Asie du Ve au XIe siecle, JA, CCLIX, 1 et 2: 231–275.

1983: “Tibetica Antiqua I: Les deux vocabulaires des traductions indo-tibétaines et sino-tibétaines dans les manuscrits Touen-Houang.” BEFEO, LXXII: 149–236. “Notes sur l’esthétique d’un lettré chinois pauvre du XVIIe siecle.” Revue d’esthétique, nouvelle série no 5, Autour de le Chine: 35–43. 1984: “Allocution.” In Les peintures murales et les manuscrits de Dunhuang (Colloque franco-chinois organisé à la Fondation Singer-Polignac à Paris, les 21, 22 et 23 fevrier 1983), edited by M. Soymié, 17–20. Paris: Éditions de la Fondation Singer-Polignac. “Quelques découvertes récentes dans les manuscrits tibétains.” In Les peintures murales et les manuscrits de Dunhuang, 21–24. Paris: Éditions de la Fondation Singer-Polignac. “Tibetica Antiqua II: L’usage de métaphores pour des distinctions honorifiques à l’époque des rois tibétains.” BEFEO, LXXIII: 257–272. 1985: “Tibetica Antiqua III: À propos du mot gcug-lag et de la religion indigène.” BEFEO, LXXIV: 83–133. “Souvenir de Granet.” Études chinoises, IV, 2: 29–40. 1986: “Tibetica Antiqua IV: La tradition relative au dèbut du bouddhisme au Tibet.” BEFEO, LXXV: 169–196. “Avalokiteśvara/Kouan-yin, un exemple de transformation d’un dieu en déesse.” Cahiers d’Extrême-Asie, II: 17–80. 1987: Le monde en petite: jardins en miniature et habitations dans la pensée religieuse d’Extrême-Orient. Paris: Flammarion. In English: The World in Miniature: Container gardens and Dwellings in Far Eastern religious Thought, translated by Phyllis Brooks. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1990. “Un genre particulier d’exposés du tantrisme ancien tibétain et khotanais.” JA, CCLXXV, 3–4: 265–282. 1988: “Tibetica Antiqua V: La religion ingène et les bon-po dans le manuscrits de Touen-houang.” BEFEO, LXXVII: 27–56. “La mythologie hindouiste au Tibet.” In Orientalia Iosephi Tucci memoriae dicata, 1407–1426. Rome: Istituto italiano per il Medio ed Estremo Oriente. Grottes-matrices et lieux saints de la déesse en Asie Orientale. Paris: Ecole française d’Extrême-Orient.

bibliography of rolf a. stein

341

“Les serments des traités sino-tibetains (8e-9e siecles).” TP, LXXXIV: 119– 138. 1990: “L’épopée de Gesar dans sa version écrite de l’Amdo.” In Indo-Tibetan Studies (Papers in honour and appreciation of Professor David L. Snellgrove’s contribution to Indo-Tibetan Studies), edited by Tadeusz Skorupski, Buddhica Brittanica, Series continua II, 293–304. Tring, U.K: The Institute of Buddhist Studies. 1992: “Tibetica Antique VI: Maximes confucianistes dans deux manuscrits de Touen-houang.” BEFEO, 79, 1: 9–17. 1993: “The Guardian of the Gate: An Example of Buddhist Mythology, from India to Japan.” In Asian Mythologies, edited by Yves Bonnefoy et al., 122–36. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1993. 1995: “La soumission de Rudra et autres contes tantriques.” JA, 283, 1: 121–160.

SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHY Acker, William Reynolds Beal, and Yanyuan Zhang. Some T’ang and Pre-T’ang Texts on Chinese Painting, Translated and Annotated. Sinica Leidensia, v. 8, 12, Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1954. A.M. = Macdonald, Ariane. “Une lecture des Pelliot tibétain 1286, 1287, 1038; 1047 et 1290, Essai sur le formation et l’emploi des mythes politiques dans la religion royale de Sroṅ-bcan sgam-po.” In Etudes tibétaines dédiées à la memoire de Marcelle Lalou, 190–391. Paris: A Maisoneuve, 1971. Aris, Michael. Bhutan, the Early History of a Himalayan Kingdom. Aris & Phillips Central Asian studies, Warminster, England: Aris & Phillips, 1979; pt. IV, Four Important Sources (microfiches). Bacot, Jacques. “Reconnaissance en haute Asie septentrionale par cinq envoyés ouigours au VIIIe siècle.” Journal Asiatique 2 (1956): 137–153. Bacot DTT = Bacot, Jacques, Frederick William Thomas, and Gustave Charles Toussaint. Documents de Touen-houang relatifs à l’histoire du Tibet. Annales du Musée Guimet. Bibliothèque d’études; t. 51. Paris: P. Geuthner, 1940. Bacot, Jacques, F.W. Thomas and Ch. Toussaint, Documents de Touen-houang relatifs à l’histoire du Tibet, Annales du Musée Guimet. Bibliothèque d’études; t. 51. Paris: P. Geuthner, 1940. Balbir, Jagbans Kishore. L’histoire de Rāma en tibétain d’apres des manuscrits de Touen-houang. Paris: A. Maisoneuve, 1963. Bang, Willy, and Annemarie von Gabain. Türkischen Turfan-Texte II. Berlin: Verlag der Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1931. ——. Türkischen Turfan-Texte V. Berlin: Verlag der Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1931. Bannières et peintures de Touen-houang conservées au Musée Guimet, Mission Pelliot 15, Paris: Impr. nationale, 1976. Bareau, André. “Le Dipaṃ karajâtaka des Dharmaguptaka.” In Mélanges de sinologie offerts à Monsieur Paul Demiéville, I, 1–16. Paris: Presses universitaires de France, 1966. Beckwith, Christopher I. “The revolt of 755 in Tibet.” in Contribution on Tibetan language, history and culture, edited by Ernst Steinkellner and Helmut Tauscher. Proceedings of the Czoma de Körös Symposium, 1981, vol. I, 1–16. Wien: Arbeitskreis für Tibetische und Buddhistische Studien, 1983. Bizot, L. Le figuier à cinq branches, Paris: l’École française d’Extrême-Orient, 1976. Blondeau, A.-M. “Le Lha ‘dre bka’ thang,” in Études tibétaines à la mèmoire de Marcelle Lalou, 29–126. Paris: A Maisoneuve, 1971. ——. “Les religions du Tibet,” in Histoire des Religions, Encyclopédie de la Pléiade, vol. III, 239–247. Paris: Gallimard, 1970–76. Burnouf, Eugène. Les Lotus de la Bonne Loi, vol. II, Paris: Imprimerie nationale, 1852. Chen, K. “Filial Piety in Chinese Buddhism,” Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies, 28 (1968): 81–97. Choix I = Choix de documents tibétains conserves à la Bibliothèque Nationale, presented by Ariane Macdonald (Spanien) and Yoshiro Imaeda, Tome I. Paris: Bibliothèque nationale, 1978. Choix II = Choix de documents tibétains conserves à la Bibliothèque Nationale, presented by Ariane Macdonald (Spanien) and Yoshiro Imaeda, Tome II. Paris: Bibliothèque nationale, 1979.

344

select bibliography

Clauson, Gerard. An Etymological Dictionary of Pre-Thirteenth-Century Turkish. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1972. Coblin, W.S. (1991a). “Notes on Old Tibetan rje-blas,” In Tibetan History and Language (Studies dedicated to Uray Geza on his Seventieth Birthday), edited by Ernst Steinkellner, 63–110. Vienna: Wiener Studien zur Tibetologie und Buddhismuskunde, Heft 26, 1991. —— (1991b). “A Study of the Old Tibetan Shangshu Paraphrase,” Part I: Journal of the American Oriental Society 111.2 (1991): 303–322; Part II: Journal of the American Oriental Society 111.3 (1991): 523–539. Corpus Scriptorum Mongolorum, IV, Ulan Bator: Shinzhlėkh Ukhaan, 1959. Couvreur, Séraphin. Les Quatre Livres. Ho Kien Fou: Imprimerie de la Mission catholique, 1910. de Jong, J.W. “Review of N. Simonsson, Indo-Tibetische Studien.” Indo-Iranian Journal 3 (1959): 216–19. ——. “Review of Tribus” in Indo-Iranian Journal 3 (1959): 75–78. ——. “Encore une fois le fonds Pelliot tibétain no. 610,” Central Asiatic Journal 12 (1968): 1–7. ——. “An Old Tibetan Version of the Rāmāyaṇa.” T’oung Pao 58 (1972): 190–202. ——. “The Tun-huang manuscripts of the Tibetan Rāmāyaṇa story.” Indo-Iranian Journal 19 (1977): 37–88. de Körös, Czoma. Analyse du Kandjour. Translated by L. Feer. Paris: E. Leroux, 1881. Demiéville, Paul. “Compte-rendu de E. Leumann, Maitreya-Samiti.” Bulletin de l’École française d’Extrême-Orient 20, no. 4, (1920): 158–169. ——. Le concile de Lhasa. Paris: Bibliothèque de l’Institut des hautes études chinoises, 1952. ——. “La Yogācārabhūmi de Sangharakṣa.” Bulletin de l’École française d’ExtrêmeOrient 44, no. 2 (1954): 339–346. ——. “L’introduction au Tibet du bouddhisme sinisé d’après les manuscripts de Touen-houang.” In Contributions aux etudes de Touen-houang, 1–16. Gèneve-Paris: Droz, 1979. Demiéville, Paul and Wang Fanzhi. L’œvre de Wang le zélateur: (Wang Fan-Tche). Suivi des instructions domestiques de L’aïeul : (T’ai-Kong Kia-Kiao): poèmes populaires des T’ang (Viiie–Xe Siècles). Bibliothèque de l’Institut des hautes études chinoises, v. 26. Paris: Collège de France, Institut des hautes études chinoises, 1982. Des Retours, R. “Les insignes en deux parties ( fu) sous la dynastie des T’ang.” T’oung Pao 41, nos. 1–3 (1952): 1–148. ——. Le traité des examens. Paris: E. Leroux, 1932. ——. “Les insignes en deux parties ( fou) sous la dynastie des T’ang (618–907).” T’oung Pao 41 (1952): 1–148. Dung dkar Blo bzang ‘phrin las. Dung dkar mtshig mdzod chen mo. Beijing: China Tibetology Publishing House, 2002. Early Ch’an in China and Tibet. Edited by Whalen Lai and Lewis R Lancaster. Berkeley Buddhist studies series, v. 5. Berkeley: Asian Humanities Press, 1983. Edgerton, Franklin. Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit Grammar and Dictionary. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1953. Reprint, Delhi: 1970 and 1972. Eimer, Helmut. 1983.1. “Die Auffindung des Bka’ chems Ka Khol Ma.” In Contributions on Tibetan language, history and culture; Steinkellner and Tauscher, ed., Proceedings of the Czoma de Körös Symposium, 1981, vol. I, 45–52. Wien: Arbeitskreis für Tibetische und Buddhistische Studien, 1983. ——, 1983.2. Rab tu ‘byuṅ ba’i gži, Die tibetische Übersetzung des Pravajyāvastu im Vinaya der Mūlasarvāstivādins, Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz, 1983. Eliasberg, Danielle. “Les signatures en forme d’oiseau dans les manuscripts chinois de Touen-houang.” In Contributions aux etudes sur Touen-houang, edited by M. Soymié, 29–44. Genève-Paris: Droz, 1979.

select bibliography

345

Emmerick, R.E. Tibetan Texts Concerning Khotan. London Oriental Series. London: Oxford University Press, 1967. Filliozat, Jean. “Les deva d’Aśoka, dieux ou divines majestés.” Journal asiatique 2 (1949): 225–247. Finot, L., and H. Huber. “Le Pratimokṣasūtra des Sarvastivadins.” Journal asiatique (1913): 465–558. Forte, Antonino. Political Propaganda and Ideology in China at the End of the Seventh Century: Inquiry into the Nature, Authors and Function of the Dunhuang Document S.6502. Napoli: Istituto universitario orientale, 1976. Francke, A.H. “gZer Myig. A Book of the Tibetan Bonpos. Tibetan text according to the Berlin-Manuscript.” Book VII. Translated from the Tibetan. Book VIII. Edited and translated, Asia Major, New Series, I, pt. II, (1949): 163–188. Fujieda, Akira [藤枝晃], “Toban shihai-ki no Tonkō” [吐番支配期の敦煌]. Tōhōgakuhō [東方学報] 31 (1961). ——. “Tonkō hatsugen Chibetto-go bunsho shishaku” [敦煌発現チベット語文書試釈]. Yūboku Shakai Tankyū [遊牧社会探究] 23 (1963). Gauthiot, Robert, and Paul Pelliot. Le Sūtra des Causes et des Effets du Bien et du Mal, t. II, Paris: P. Geuthner, 1926. Dge ‘dun Chos ‘phel. The White Annals. Dharamsala, 1978. Granet, Marcel. Danses et légendes de la Chine ancienne. Paris: F. Alcan, 1926. Great Dictionary = Tibetan-Tibetan-Chinese Dictionary, Bod Rgya tshig mdzod chen mo; Zang Han da ci dian 藏漢大辭典, compiled by Zhang Yisun 张怡荪. Beijing: Nationalities Publishing House, 1985–6. Haarh, Erik. The Yar-Lung Dynasty. A Study With Particular Regard to the Contribution By Myths and Legends to the History of Ancient Tibet and the Origin and Nature of Its Kings. København: Gad, 1969. Hackin, Joseph. Formulaire sanscrit-tibétain du Xe siècle. Paris: Paul Geuthner, 1924. Halkias, Georgios. “Tibetan Buddhism Registered: A Catalogue from the Imperial Court of ‘Phang Thang.” The Eastern Buddhist 36 (2004): 46–105. Hamilton, J., “Le colophon de l’Irq Bitig,” Turcica 7 (1975): 7–19. Herrmann-Pfandt, Adelheid. Die lHan kar ma: ein früher Katalog der ins Tibetische übersetzten buddhistischen Texte, kritische Neuausgabe mit Einleitung und Materialien, Serial Denkschriften der philosophisch-historischen Klasse 367, Serial Beiträge zur Kultur- und Geistesgeschichte Asiens 59, Wien: Verlag der österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 2008. Hoffmann, Helmut. “Gšen, eine lexikographische-religionswissenschaftliche Untersuchung,” in Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft 98 (1944): 340–58. ——. Quellen zur Geschichte der tibetischen Bon-Religion. Mainz: Verlag der Akademie der Wissenschaften und der Literatur; in Kommission bei F. Steiner, Wiesbaden, 1950. ——. Die Religionen Tibets; Bon und Lamaismus in Ihrer Geschichtlichen Entwicklung. Freiburg: K. Alber, 1956. ——. Märchen Aus Tibet. Düsseldorf: E. Diederichs, 1965. Huth and Weber, “Das buddhistiche Sūtra der ‘Acht Erscheinungen.’” Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft 44 (1891): 577–91. Imaeda, Yoshiro. “Documents tibétains de Touen-houang concernant le concile du Tibet.” Journal asiatique 263 (1975): 125–146. ——. “Toward an interpretation of the word chis.” In Tibetan Studies in honour of H. Richardson, 131–132. Oxford: Aris & Phillips, 1979. ——. “L’identification de l’original chinois du Pelliot tibétain 1291—traduction tibétaine du Zhangguoce.” Acta Orientalia Hungarica (Academiae Scientarium Hungaricae) 34, nos. 1–3 (1980): 53–68. ——. “Un extrait tibétain du Mañjuśrīmūlakalpa dans le manuscripts de Touenhouang.” In Nouvelles Contributions aux etudes de Touen-houang, edited by M. Soymie, 303–320. Genève: Droz, 1981.

346

select bibliography

——. Histoire du cycle de la naissance et de la mort. Paris: Droz, 1981. ——. “Chugoko-Indo koten,” Koza Tonko, vol. VI, Tonko kogo bunken 4, no. 2 (1985): 557–573. Jao Tsung-i [饒宗頤], “La conception de la piété filiale et les airs bouddhiques de Touen-houang” (in Chinese), Dunhuang Studies [敦煌學] 1 (1974): 69–78. Kalinowski, Marc, “La literature numéromantique dans le manuscripts de Dunhuang” (unedited paper presented at conference in Hong Kong, June, 1987). Kaltenmark, Max. Lao Tseu et le taoïsme. Paris: Editions du Seuil, 1965. Karmay, Samten Gyaltsen. The Treasury of Good Sayings: A Tibetan History of Bon. London: Oxford University Press, 1972. —— (1975a). “A Discussion on the Doctrinal Position of rDzogs-chen.” Journal asiatique 263 (1975): 147–56. —— (1975b). “A general Introduction to the History and Doctrines of Bon.” Memoires of the Research Department of the Toyo Bunko 33 (1975): 171–218. —— (1975c). “A gZer-mig Version of the Interview between Confucius and Phyva Keṅ-tse lan-med,” Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 38, no. 3 (1975): 562–580. ——. “The Ordinance of Bla-ma Ye-shes-‘od.” In Tibetan Studies in Honor of Hugh Richardson, 150–162. London: Oxford University Press, 1979. ——. “King Tsa-Dza and Vajrayāna.” In Tantric and taoïst studies in honour of R.A. Stein, edited by M. Steickmann, vol. I, 192–294. Bruxelles: Institut belge des hautes études chinoises, 1981. ——. “Un témoignage sur le Bon face au bouddhisme à l’époque des rois tibétains.” In Contributions on Tibetan and Buddhist Religion and Philosophy, Proceedings of the Csoma de Körös Symposium held at Velm-Vienna, Austria, 13–19 September 1981, vol. 2, Wien, 1983. [Translated into English as: “Early Evidence for the Existence of Bon as a Religion in the Royal Period.” In The Arrow and the Spindle: Studies in the History, Myths, Rituals and Beliefs in Tibet, 157–68. Kathmandu: Mandala Book Point, 1998.] ——. “L’apparition du Petit Homme Tête-Noire.” Journal asiatique 274 (1986): 79–138. [Translated into English as: “The Appearance of the Little Black-headed Man.” In The Arrow and the Spindle: Studies in the History, Myths, Rituals and Beliefs in Tibet, 245–81. Kathmandu: Mandala Book Point, 1998.] ——. “L’âme et la turquoise: un rituel tibétain,” L’Ethnographie 83 (1987): 97–130. [Translated into English as: “The Soul and the Turquoise: a Ritual for Recalling the bla.” In The Arrow and the Spindle: Studies in the History, Myths, Rituals and Beliefs in Tibet, 310–38. Kathmandu: Mandala Book Point, 1998.] ——. “Early Evidence for the Existence of Bon as a Religion in the Royal Period.” In The Arrow and the Spindle: Studies in the History, Myths, Rituals and Beliefs in Tibet, 157–68. Kathmandu: Mandala Book Point, 1998. Karmay, Samten Gyaltsen and Yasuhiko Nagano 長野泰彦, eds. A Catologue of the New Collection of Bonpo Katen Texts. Osaka: National Museum of Ethnology, 2001. ——. The Call of the Blue Cuckoo: an Anthology of Nine Bonpo Texts on Myths and Rituals. Osaka: National Museum of Ethnology, 2002. ——. A Survey of Bonpo Monasteries and Temples in Tibet and the Himalaya. Osaka: National Museum of Ethnology, 2003. ——. A Lexicon of Zhangzhung and Bonpo Terms, ed. S.G. Karmay and Yasuhito Nagano. Osaka: National Museum of Ethnology, 2008. Kawagoe Eishin 川越英真. dKar chag ‘Phang thang ma. Sendai: Töhoku indo chibetto kenkyü kai, 2005. Kimura, Ryūtoku [木村隆徳]. “Tonkō shutsudo no Chibetto-bun Zen-bun no Seikaku” [敦煌出土のチベット文禅文の性格]. Kōza-Tonkō [講座．敦煌] 8 (1980): 409–440.

select bibliography

347

—— “Tonkō Chibetto-go Zen bunken mokuroku shoko” [敦煌チベット語禅文献目録初稿]. Tōkyō Daigaku Bunkabu Bunka Kōryū Shisetsu Kenkyū Kiyō [東京大学文学部文化交流研究施設研究記要] 4 (1981): 93–. Kvaerne, Per. “The Bstan rcis of Ñi ma bstan ‘jin. Acta Orientalia 33 (1971): 205–282. ——, “Review of Études tibétaines dédiées à la mémoire de Marcelle Lalou,” Journal asiatique 259, 3–4 (1971): 391–4. ——. “Aspects of the Origin of the Buddhist Tradition in Tibet.” Numen 19, no. 1 (1972): 22–40. ——. “The Canon of the Tibetan Bonpos.” Indo-Iranian Journal 16, no. 1, (1974): 18–56. ——. Tibet, Bon Religion, a Death Ritual of the Tibetan Bonpos. Iconography of Religions 12–13. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1985. Kychanov, E.I. Gimn svyaščennīm predkam Tangutov (“hymn to the sacred ancestors of the Tangut,” Xixia ms.), Pis’mennye pamjatniki Vostoka (1968): 217–231. Lai, Whalen, and Lewis R Lancaster, eds. Early Ch’an in China and Tibet. Berkeley Buddhist studies series, 5. Berkeley: Asian Humanities Press, 1983. Lalou, Marcelle. “Les Cent Mille Nāga.” In Festschrift Moriz Winternitz, 79–81. Leipzig: Otto Harrassowitz, 1933. ——. “Notes à propos d’une amulette de Touen-houang.” Mélanges chinois et buddhiques 4, (1935–36): 139–145. ——. “Le culte des nāga et la thérapeutique.” Journal asiatique 230 (1938): 1–20. ——. Catalogue, Inventaire des manuscripts tibétains de Touen-houang conservés à la Bibliothèque nationale (Fonds Pelliot tibétain), I–III. Paris: Adrien-Maisonneuve, 1939–61. ——. “Documents tibétain sur l’expansion du Dhyāna chinois,” Journal asiatique 231 (1939): 505–523. ——. “Les chemins du mort dans les croyances de Haute Asie,” Revue d’Histoire des Religions (1949): 42–48. ——. “Rituel bon-po des funérailles royales,” Journal asiatique 240, no. 3 (1952): 339–361. ——. “Les texts bouddhiques au temps de Khri-sroṅ lde bcan.” Journal asiatique 241 (1953): 313–353. ——. Rituel bon-po des funérailles royales. Paris: Société Asiatique, 1953 [= Journal asiatique 240, no. 3 (1952): 339–361.] ——. “Revendications des fonctionnaires du grand Tibet au VIIIe siècle.” Journal asiatique 243 (1955): 171–212. ——. “Fiefs, poisoins et guérisseurs.” Journal asiatique 246 (1958): 157–201. ——. “Sūtra du bodhisattva ‘Roi de la Loi.’ ” Journal asiatique 249 (1961): 321–332. ——. “Catalogue des principautés du Tibet ancien.” Journal asiatique 253 (1965): 189–215. Lamotte, Etienne. Le Traité de la Grand Vertu de Sagesse, t. I. Louvain : Publications universitaires, 1944. ——. Histoire du Bouddhisme indien. Louvain: Publications universitaires, 1958. ——. L’enseignement de Vimalakīrti. Louvain: Publications universitaires, 1962. ——. La Concentration de la Marche héroïque. Bruxelles: Institut Belge des Hautes Etudes Chinoises, 1965. Laufer, Berthold. Klu Bum bsdus pai sñiṅ po, Eine verkürzte Version des Werkes von den Hunderttausend Nâga’s, Ein Beitrag zur Kenntnis der tibetiscen Volksreligion, Helsingfors: Société finno-ougrienne, 1898. ——. “Ein Sühngedicht der Bonpo, aus einer Handschrift der Oxford der Bodleiana.” Denkschriften der Kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Philosophisch-Historische Classe 46.7 (1900): 1–60. Li An-che. “Bon: the Magico-Religious Belief of the Tibetan-Speaking People,” in Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 4 (1948): 31–42.

348

select bibliography

Li Fang-kuei. “The Inscription of the Sino-Tibetan Treaty of 821–822.” T’oung Pao 44, nos. 1–3 (1956): 119–138. ——. “A Sino-Tibetan Glossary from Tun-huang.” T’oung Pao 44, nos. 4–5 (1961). Liebenthal, Walter. “Lord Atman in the Lao-tzu.” Monumenta Serica 27 (1968): 381–84. Ligeti, Lajos M. “A propos du ‘Rapport sur les rois demeurant dans le Nord.’ ” In Études tibétaines dédiées à la mémoire de Marcelle Lalou, 166–189. Paris: Librairie d’Amérique et d’Orient. Lokesh Chandra and Lopön Tenzin Namdak. Catalogue of the bon po Kanjur and Tanjur, Indo-Asian Studies, II. New Delhi, 1965. Ma, Ming-ta, “P.T. 1291 hao Touen-houang tsan-wen wen-chou yi-kie ting-wou.” Touen-houang-hiue tsi-k’an 6 (1984–2): 14–24. Macdonald (Spanien), Ariane “Préambule à la lecture du rGya Bod yig-chaṅ.” Journal asiatique 251 (1963): 53–159. ——. “Une lecture des Pelliot tibétaine 1286, 1287, 1038; 1047 et 1290, Essai sur le formation et l’emploi des mythes politiques dans la religion royale de Sroṅ-bcan sgam-po.” In Etudes tibétaines dédiées à la memoire de Marcelle Lalou, 190–391. Paris: A Maisoneuve, 1971. Macdonald (Spanien), Ariane and Yoshiro Imaeda. Choix de documents tibétaines conserves à la Bibliothèque nationale, t. I and II, Paris: Bibliothèque nationale, 1978–9. Martin, Dan. Unearthing Bon Treasures: Life and Contested Legacy of a Tibetan Scripture Revealer, with a General Bibliography of Bon. Leiden: Brill, 2001. Meile, Pierre. “Misā devehi chez Aśoka.” Journal asiatique 237 (1949). Moriyasu, Takao. “La nouvelle interpretation des mots Hor et Ho-yo-hor dans le manuscript Pelliot tibétain 1283.” Acta Oreintalia Hungarica 34, (1980): 171–84. Müller, Friedrich Wilhelm Karl. Uighurica I. Berlin: Verlag der Königlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1909. Nakamura, Hajime. A Survey of Mahāyāna Buddhism with Bibliographical Notes. Tokyo: KUFS Publication, 1980. Nam mkha’i Nor bu. Bod kyi lo-rgyus las ‘phros-pa’i gtam. Dharamsala: LTWA, 1981. Nishida Tatsuo. Seika no monji (“The Xixia Writing), Tokyo: Taishūkan Shoten, 1967 ——. 西田龍雄, Sei-ka bun Kegon-kyō 西夏文華厳經 vol. III, Kyoto: Kyoto daigaku bungaku bu, 1977. Nobel, Johannes. Suvarṇ aprabhāsottama-sūtra, Das Goldglanz-sūtra, vol. I (Chinese version of Yijing, trans. and ed.) and vol. II (edition of the translation by Chos grub), Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1958. Obata, Hironobu [小畠宏允]. “Chibetto no Zenshū to Zō-yaku gikyo ni tsuite [チベットの禅宗と蔵訳偽経について].” Idogaku Bukkyōgaku Kenkyū [印度学仏教学研究] 23, no. 2 (1975): 170–171. Obermiller, Eugéne. History of Buddhism by Bu-ston. Heidelberg: O. Harrassowitz, 1931–2. Okimoto, Katsumi [沖本克己]. “Zen-shū-shi ni okeru gikyō, Hō-ō-kyō ni tsuite [禅宗史における偽經、法王經について].” Zen-shū Bunka Kenkyū Kiyō [禅宗文化研究紀要] 10 (1978). Ōtani, 1930 = A Comparative Analytical Catalogue of the Kanjur Division of the Tibetan Tripitaka, Kyoto: Ōtani University, 1930–2. Pelliot, Paul. “Autour d’une traduction sanscrite de Tao-tö king.” T’oung Pao 13 (1912): 351–430. ——. “Notes à propos d’un Catalogue du Kanjur.” Journal Asiatique 4 (1914): 111–50. ——. Histoire ancienne du Tibet. Paris: Librairie d’Amérique et d’Orient, 1961.

select bibliography

349

Peri, N. “Compte-rendu de Matsumoto Bunzaburo, Miroku jōdō ron.” Bulletin de l’École française d’Extrême-Orient 11, (1911): 3–4. Dkar chag ‘phang thang ma, Sgra sbyor bam po gnyis pa. Beijing: Mi rigs dpe skrun khang, 2003. Przyluski, Jean. La légende de l’empereur Açoka. Paris: P. Geuthner, 1923. Rare Tibetan Historical and Literary Texts from the Library of Tsepon Shakabpa, New Delhi, 1974. Regamey, Constantin. “Motifs vichnouites et śivaïtes dans le Kāraṇḍavyūha.” In Etudes tibétaines dédiées à la mémoire de Marcelle Lalou, 411–32. Paris: A Maisoneuve, 1971. Renou, Luis, and Jean Filliozat. L’inde classique, t. I., Paris: A. Maisoneuve, 1947. Richardson, Hugh. Ancient Historical Edicts at Lhasa. London: Royal Asiatic Society, 1952. ——. “Tibetan inscriptions at Zva-hi Lha Khang.” Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society (1952): 133–54; (1953): 1–12. ——. “A Tibetan Inscription from rGyal lha-khaṅ; and a note on Tibetan Chronology from A.D. 841 to A.D. 1042.” Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society (1957): 57–78. ——. “A New Inscription of Khri Srong Lde Brtsan.” Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society (1964): 1–13. ——. “The Inscription at the Tomb of Khri Srong Lde Brtsan.” Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society (1969): 28–38. ——. “The rKong-po Inscription.” Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society (1972): 30–39. ——. “The Dharma that Came Down from Heaven: a Tun-huang Fragment.” In Buddhist Thought and Asian Civilization, Essays in Honor of Herbert V. Guenther, edited by L.S. Kawamura and K. Scott, 219–229. Berkeley: Dharma Publishing, 1977. ——. “The Sino-Tibetan treaty inscription of A.D. 821/823 at Lhasa.” Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society (1978): 137–62. ——. “The first Tibetan chos-byung,” The Tibet Journal 5, no. 3 (1980): 62–73. ——. A Corpus of Early Tibetan Inscriptions. London: Royal Asiatic Society, 1985. Rockhill, W.W. The life of the Buddha, and the Early History of his Order. London: Trübner & co., 1884. Roerich, George N. The Blue Annals. Motilal Banarsidass Pub, 1996. Satō Hisashi [佐藤長]. Chibetto rekishi chiri kenkyū [チベット歴史地理研究]. Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten, 1978. Schaeffer, Kurtis R. and Leonard W.J. van der Kuijp, eds. An Early Tibetan survey of Buddhist Literature: The Bstan pa rgyas pa rgyan gyi nyi ‘od of Bcom ldan ral gri, Harvard Oriental Series 64, Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2004. Scherrer-Schaub, Cristina A. “Enacting Words. A Diplomatic Analysis of the Imperial Decrees (bkas bcad) and their Application in the sGra sbyor bam po gñis pa Tradition.” Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies 25, no. 1–2 (2002): 263–340. ——. “Sa-cu: Qu’y a t-il au programme de la classe de philologie bouddhique?” In Tibetan Studies. Proceedings of the 5th Seminar of the International Association of Tibetan Studies, edited by Ihara, Shoren and Yamaguchi, Zuiho, vol I, 209–220. Narita: Naritasan Shinshoji, 1992. Schmidt, Isaac Jacob. Der Index des Kandjur. St. Petersburg, 1845. Schmidt-Glintzer, Helwig. Das Hung-ming chi und die Aufnahme des Buddhismus in China, Wiesbaden: Steiner, 1976. Schuessler, Axel. “Another Note on Old Tibetan rje-blas.” Linguistics of the TibetoBurman Area 21.2 (1998): 3-4. Schuh, Dieter, “Die Darlegungen des tibetischen Enzyklopädisten Koṅ-sprul Blo-gros mtha’-yas über Osttibetische Hochzeitsgebräuche.” In Serta Tibeto-Mongolica: Festschrift F. Walther Heissig, edited by Walther Heissig, Rudolf Kaschewsky, Klaus Sagaster, and Michael Weiers, 295–349. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1973.

350

select bibliography

Schumacher, Wolfgang. Die Edikte des Kaisers Aśoka. Konstanz: C. Weller, 1946 Simonsson, Nils. Indo-tibetische Studien. Die Methoden der tibetischen Übersetzer, Uppasala: Almqvist & Wiksells, 1957. Snellgrove, David L. The Nine Ways of Bon. London: Oxford University Press, 1967. Snellgrove, David L., and Hugh Richardson. A Cultural History of Tibet. New York: F.A. Praeger, 1968. Snellgrove, David L, and Tadeusz Skorupski. The Cultural Heritage of Ladakh. Warminster, Eng: Forest Grove [or: Aris & Phillips, distributed by International Scholarly Book Services], 1977. Soymié, Michel. “L’entrevue de Confucious et de Hiang T’o,” Journal asiatique 242 (1954): 311–392. ——. “Les Dix jours de jeûne de Ksitigarbha.” In Contributions aux études sur Touenhouang, 135–159. Genève-Paris: Droz, 1979. Stein, R.A. “Review of Snellgrove & Richardson, A Cultural History of Tibet.” Journal asiatique 240 (1952): 100. ——. “Review of Snellgrove & Richardson, A Cultural History of Tibet.” Oriens 10, no. 2 (1957): 372. ——. “Les religions de la Chine.” In Encyclopédie française, t. 19: 54.3–54.10. Paris: Société nouvelle de l’Encyclopédie française, 1957. ——. Recherches sur l’épopée et le barde au Tibet. Paris: Bibiothéque de l’Institut des Hautes Études chinoises, 1959. ——. Les tribus anciennes des marches sino-tibétaines. Paris: Bibiothéque de l’Institut des Hautes Études chinoises, 1959. ——. Tribus = Les tribus anciennes des marches sino-tibétaines. Paris: Bibiothéque de l’Institut des Hautes Études chinoises, 1959. ——. “Une source ancienne pour l’histoire de l’épopée tibétaine, le Rlaṅs Po-ti bse-ru.” Journal asiatique 250 (1962): 77–106. ——. “Review of The Nine Ways of Bon.” Asia Major, New Series, 14, no. 1 (1968): 124–9. ——. “Un document ancien relatif aux rites funéraires des bon-po tibétains.” Journal asiatique 258 (1970): 155–185. ——. “Du récit au rituel dans les manuscripts tibétains de Touen-Houang.” In Études tibétaines à la mèmoire de Marcelle Lalou, edited by Ariane macdonald, 479–547. Paris: A. Maisoneuve, 1971. ——. “La langue žaṅ-žuṅ du Bon organisé.” Bulletin de l’École française d’ExtrêmeOrient 58 (1971): 231–254. ——. “Un ensemble sémantique tibétain: créer et procréer, être et devenir, vivre, nourrir et guérir.” Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 36, no. 2 (1973): 412–423. ——. “Une mention du manichéisme dans le choix du bouddhisme comme religion d’État par le roi Khri-sroì lde-bstan.” Indianisme et Bouddhisme, Mélanges offerts à Mgr Étienne Lamotte, 329–338. Louvain-La-Neuve: l’Institut Orientaliste de Louvain, 1980. —— (1981a). “’Saint et divin,’ un titre tibétaine et chinoise des rois tibétains,” Journal asiatique 269 (1981): 231–75. ——. Civil. Tib. = La civilization tibétain, 2nd edition, Paris: le Sycomore, 1981. —— (1981b). La civilisation tibétain, 2nd edition, Paris: le Sycomore, 1981. [Original 1962 edition translated into English as Stein, Rolf A. Tibetan Civilization. Translated by J.E. Stapleton Driver. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1972.] ——. “Tibetica Antiqua I: Les deux vocabulaires des traductions indo-tibétaine et sinotibétaine dans les manuscripts des Touen-Houang.” Bulletin de l’École française d’Extrême-Orient 72 (1983): 149–236. ——. “Tibetica Antiqua 2: L’usage de métaphores pour des distinctions honorifiques à l’époch des rois tibétaines.” Bulletin de l’École française d’Extrême-Orient 73 (1984): 257–272.

select bibliography

351

——. “Tibetica Antiqua III: A propos du mot gtsug-lag et de religion indigène.” Bulletin de l’École française d’Extrême-Orient 74 (1985): 83–133. ——. “Tibetica Antiqua IV: La tradition relative au début de bouddhisme au Tibet.” Bulletin de l’École française d’Extrême-Orient 75 (1986): 169–196. ——. Le monde en petit: jardins en miniature et habitations dans la pensée religieuse d’Extrême-Orient. Paris: Flammarion, 1987. [Translated into English as: The World in Miniature: Container gardens and Dwellings in Far Eastern Religious Thought. Translated by Phyllis Brooks. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1990.] ——. “La mythologie hindouïste au Tibet.” In Orientalia Ioseph Tucci memoriae dicata, Serie Orientale Roma LVI, v. 3, 1407–1426. Rome: Istituto italiano per il Medio ed Estremo Oriente, 1988. ——. “Tibetica Antiqua V: La religion indigène et les bon-po dans les manuscrits des Touen-Houang.” Bulletin de l’École française d’Extrême-Orient 77 (1988): 27–56. ——. “Les serments des traités sino-tibétains (viiie-ixe siècles).” T’oung Pao 74 (1988): 119–138. ——. “Tibetica Antiqu VI: Maximes confucianistes dans deux manuscrits de Touenhouang.” Bulletin de l’École française d’Extrême-Orient 79 (1992): 9–17. Suzuki, D.T. Index to the Lankāvatara sūtra. Kyoto: The Sanskrit Buddhist Texts Publishing Society, 1934. ——. The Lankavatara Sutra, a Mahayana Text, London: Routledge, 1986 [1932]. Takasaki, Jikido. “Some Problems of the Tibetan Translations from Chinese Material.” In Proceedings of the Csoma de Körös memorial Symposium, 459–467. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó, 1978. Takeuchi, Tsuguhito. “A Hitherto Unnoticed Passage from the Shih Chi in the Old Tibetan Chronicle.” In preparation. [Published as: “A Passage from the Shih Chi in the Old Tibetan Chronicle,” Soundings in Tibetan Civilization, edited by Barbara Nimri Aziz and Matthew Kapstein, 135–145. New Delhi: Manohar, 1985.] ——. “A Passage from the Shih Chi in the Old Tibetan Chronicle.” In Soundings in Tibetan Civilization, edited by Barbara Nimri Aziz and Matthew Kapstein, 135–45. New Delhi: Manohar, 1985. Taube, Manfred. Die Tibetica der Berliner Turfan-Sammlung, Altorientalische Forschungen V, Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 1977. ——. “Zu einigen Texten der Tibetischen brda-gsar-rniṅ-Literatur.” Asienwissenschaftliche Beiträge. Berlin, 1978: 169–201. ——. “Einige Namen und Titel in tibetischen Briefen der Berliner Turfan-Sammbung.” In Proceedings of the Csoma de Körös memorial Symposium, 487–96. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó, 1978. ——. Die Tibetica der Berliner Turfan-sammlung. Schriften zur Geschichte und Kultur des Alten Orients; Berliner Turfantexte X, Berlin: Akademie-Verlag, 1980. Tekin, Sinasi. Maitrisimit nom bitig: die uigurische Übersetzung eines werkes der buddhistischen Vaibhāṣika-schule. Berlin: Akademie-Verlag, 1980. Terjék, József “Fragments of the Tibetan sūtra of ‘The Wise and the Fool’ from TunHuang,” Acta Orientalia Hungaricae, 22.3 (1969): 289–334; 24.1 (1970): 55–83. Thomas, Frederick William. Tibetan Literary Texts and Documents Concerning Chinese Turkestan. vol. I, London: The Royal Asiatic Society, 1935. ——. Nam, an Ancient Language of the Sino-Tibetan Borderland. London: Oxford University Press, 1948. ——. Tibetan Literary Texts and Documents Concerning Chinese Turkestan. vol. II. London: The Royal Asiatic Society, 1951. ——. Tibetan Literary Texts and Documents Concerning Chinese Turkestan. vol. III. London: The Royal Asiatic Society, 1954. ——. AFL = Ancient Folk-Literature from North-Eastern Tibet. Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 1957. ——. Ancient Folk-literature from Northeastern Tibet. Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 1957.

352

select bibliography

——. Tibetan Literary Texts and Documents Concerning Chinese Turkestan. vol. IV. London: The Royal Asiatic Society, 1963. Thomas TLTD = Tibetan Literary Texts and Documents Concerning Chinese Turkestan. I–IV. London: The Royal Asiatic Society, 1935–1963. Thomas, Frederick William, and J.L. Clauson. “A Second Chinese Buddhist Text in Tibetan Characters.” Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society (1927): 281–306. Thomas, Frederick William, and L. Lionel Giles, “A Tibeto-Chinese Word and PhraseBook.” Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies (1948): 753–769. Thomsen, V. “Dr. M.A. Stein’s Manuscripts in Turkish ‘runic’ script from Miran and Tun-huang.” Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society (1912): 181–227. Tibetan-Mongolian Dictionary. Corpus Scriptorum Mongolorum IV. Ulanbator, 1959. Tōyō Bunkō, 1979 = A Catalogue of the Tibetan manuscripts collected by Sir Aurel Stein (by a team directed by Yamaguchi Zuihō), Pt. 3, Tokyo: Tōyō Bunkō, 1979. Tsuchihashi Shukō. “Tonkō-hon ni mirareru shuju no bosatsu kaigi.” In Saiiki bunka kenyū VI. Kyoto, 1963. Tucci, Giuseppe. Indo-Tibetica, III. Rome: Reale Accademia d’Italia, 1935. ——. “The Validity of Tibetan Historical Tradition,” India Antiqua: a Volume of Oriental Studies Presented by His Friends and Pupils to Jean Philippe Vogel, 309–322. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1947. ——. Tibetan Painted Scrolls. Rome: Libreria dello Stato, 1949. ——. The Tombs of the Tibetan Kings. Rome: Istituto italiano per il Medio ed Estremo Oriente, 1950. ——. “The Sacral Character of the Kings of Ancient Tibet.” East and West 6, no. 3 (1955): 197–205. ——. Preliminary Report of Two Scientific Expeditions in Nepal. Rome: Istituto italiano per il Medio ed Estremo Oriente, 1956. ——. Minor Buddhist Texts II. Rome: Istituto italiano per il Medio ed Estremo Oriente, 1958. ——. “Die Religionen Tibets.” In Tucci and Heissig, Die Religionen Tibets und der Mongolei. Stuttgart: W. Kohlhammer, 1970. Uebach, Helga. “Zur Identifizierung des Nel-pa’i č’os-‘byuṅ.” In Tibetan Studies, edited by M. Brauen and P. Kvaerne, 219–230. Zurich: Völkerkundemuseum der Universität Zürich, 1978. Ueyama Daishun [上山大峻]. “Chibetto-yaku Ryōga-shishi-ki ni tsuite [チベット訳楞伽師資記について].” Bukkyōgaku Kenkyū [仏教学研究] 25–26 (1968): 191– 210. ——. “Chibetto-yaku kara mita Ryōga-shishi-ki seiritsu no mondai-ten [チベット訳から見た楞伽師資記成立の問題点].” Indogaku-bukkyōgaku kenkyū 21, 2 (1973). ——. “Chibetto-yaku Tongo-shinshū-yōketsu no kenkyū [チベット訳頓悟真宗要訣の研究].” Zen-bunka kenkyū-sho kiyō [禅文化研究紀要] 8 (1976). ——. “Études des manuscripts tibétains de Tun-houang relatifs au Bouddhisme de Dhyāna: bilan et perspectives” Journal asiatique supplement (1981): 287–295. ——. “Kodai Chibetto ni okeru zen-aku gō-hō shisō rufu no ichi men.” In Tōhō-gaku ronshū in honor of Ono Shōnen. ——. “Tonkō ni okeru in-nen ron no shōsō.” Bujjyō-gaku kenkyū 39–40 (1984). ——. “Tonkō shutsudō Daijō-kyō San-yō-gi kō.” In Bukkyō-gaku ronshū in honor of Nakamura Zuiryū, 1985. Uray, Géza. “Traces of a Narrative of the Old Tibetan Chronicle in the Mkhas pa’i dga’ ston.” Monumenta Serica 26 (1967/1969): 498–505. ——. “The narrative of legislation and organization of the Mkhas-pa’i dga’-ston.” Acta Orientalia Hungarica 26, no. 1 (1972): 11–68.

select bibliography

353

——. “L’annalistique et la pratique bureaucratique au Tibet ancien.” Journal asiatique 263 (1975): 157–170. ——. “The Old Tibetan Sources of the History of Central Asia up to 751 A.D.: a Survey.” Prolegomena to the Sources on the History of Pre-Islamic Central Asia, edited by J. Harmatta, 275–306. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó, 1979. ——. “L’emploi du tibétain dans les chancelleries des états du Kan-sou et de Khotan postérieurs à la domination tibétaine.” Journal asiatique 269.1–2 (1981): 81–90. Verhagen, Pieter Cornelius. A History of Sanskrit Grammatical Literature in Tibet. Volume 1: Transmission of the Canonical Literature. Leiden: Brill, 1994. ——. “Studies in Tibetan indigenous grammar (3): Sanskrit nīpata, Tibetan tshigphrad.” In Tibetan Studies. Proceedings of the 7th Conference of the International Association for Tibetan Studies, Graz 1995, edited by Helmut Krasser, Michael Torsten Much, Ernst Steinkellner, and Helmut Tauscher, vol. II: 1011–1022. Wien: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1997. Vostrikov, A. I. Tibetan Historical Literature. Calcutta: Indian Studies: Past & Present, 1970. Wang Yao 王尧 and Chen Jian. Dunhuangben Tufan lishi wen shu (敦煌本吐蕃历史文书). Beijing: Minzu chuban she, 1980. Wang Zhongmin, “Taigong jiajiao 太公家教,” Hanxue, Bulletin du Centre d’ Etudes Sinologiques de Pekin 2, no. 4, (1949): 355–362. Ware, J. “Notes on the Fan-wang ching.” Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies 1, no. 1 (1936): 156–161. Wayman, Alex. “The Human Body as Microcosm in India, Greek cosmology, and sixteenth-century Europe.” History of Religions 22, no. 2 (1982): 172–190. Wen Yu. “Review of F. Thomas, Nam, an Ancient Language of the Sino-Tibetan Borderland.” T’oung Pao 40 (1950): 199–207. Wieger, Léon. Histoire des croyances religieuses et des opinions philosophiques en Chine. Hsien-Hsien: Imprimerie de Hien-hien, 1917. Wylie, Turrell. “’O-lde-spu-rgyal and the introduction of Bon to Tibet.” Central Asiatic Journal 8, no. 2 (1963): 93–103. Xu Guolin 許國霖, Dunhuang shishi xiejing tiji and Dunhuang zalu 敦煌石室寫經題記與敦煌雜錄. Shanghai: Shang wu yin shu guan, Min guo 26, 1937. Yamaguchi Zuihō [山口瑞鳳]. “Reviews.” Tōyō gaku-hō 54, no. 4 (1972): 78–87. ——. “Chibetto no bukkyō to Shiragi no Kin ōsho [チベットの仏教学と新羅の金和尙].” Shiragi Bukkyō Kenkyū [新羅仏教研究] Tokyo (1973). ——. “Riṅ-lugs rBa dPal dbyaṅs, bSam-yas shūron wo meguru ichi mondai [. . . をめぐる一問題].” Bukkyō ni okeru Hō no kenkyū [仏教における法の研究], Recueil en honneur de Hirakawa Akira [平川彰]. Tōkyō: Shunjūsha, Shōwa 50, 1975. ——. “敦煌チベット文語の解釈について,” Tōkyō daigaku bunka-bu Bunka kōryū kenkyū shisetsu kenkyū kiyō 1 (1976). ——. “Katsubutsu ni tsuite [活仏について].” In Butsu no kenkyū [仏の研究], in honor of Tamaki Kōshirō [玉城康四郎], 285–304. Tokyo, 1977. ——. “Toban ōkoku bukkyō-shi nendai-kō [吐蕃王国仏教史年代孝].” Naritasan bukkyō kenkyū-sho kiyō [成田山仏教研究所紀要] 3 (1978). ——. Sontsen gampo ō no jūroku-jō-hō no kyōko-sei to To-ban no keihō (Zui tō tei-koku to Tō-Ajia sekkai) ソンツェンガムポ王の「十六条法」の虚構性と吐蕃の刑法（隋唐帝国と東アジア世界） III, 1979. ——,「吐蕃王國成立と法令・制度」, Tōdai-shi kenkyū hōkō, II, (1979). ——. “Nikan-hon Yaku-go-shaku kenkyū [に巻本訳語釈研究].” Bukkyō kenkyūsho [仏教研究所] 4 (1979): 1–24. ——. “Sasu kanjin ni yoru Toban futa-gundan no seiritsu [沙州漢人による吐蕃二軍団の成立と mKhar tsan 軍団の位置].” Tōkyō daigaku bungaku-bu bunka kōryū

354

select bibliography

kenkyū shisetsu kenkyū kiyō [東京大学文学部文化交流研究施設研究紀要] 1 (1980): 13–48. ——.「沙州漢人による吐蕃二軍団の成立」, Tōkyō daigaku bunka-bu Bunka kōryū kenkyū shisetsu kenkyū kiyō 5 (1982): 135–63. ——. Toban ōkoku seiritsu-shi kenkyū 吐蕃王国成立史研究. Tokyo: Iwanami shoten, 1983. Yanagida. Early Ch’an in China and Tibet. Edited by Whalen Lai and Lewis R. Lancaster. Berkeley: Asian Humanities Press, 1983. Yoshioka Gihō. Dōkyō to Bukkyō, I. Tokyo: Nihon gakujutsu shinkōkai, Shōwa 34, 1959. ——. “Bukkyō no eikyō ni yoru Dōkyō-kai no keisei.” Nihon bukkyō-gakkai nempō 32, 1959/1967. Zürcher, Erik. “Prince Moonlight, messianism and eschatology in early medieval Chinese Buddhism.” T’oung Pao 68, nos. 1–3 (1982): 1–75.

GENERAL INDEX Note: Tibetan terms are listed according to the first letter of the root, according to the Wylie system. A mdo chos ‘byung 63 ‘A zha (see also: Tuyuhun) 77–8, 165 A.M. (see: Macdonald, Ariane) abuse 32–3, 38, 195, 211–2, 321, 323, 325–6, 328 Academy of the Sons of the State (China) 273 Account of the Ages 55, 119, 122–3, 127, 131, 134–5, 147, 171–2, 175, 188 adret 63–4 agnatic line 147, 303 Alchi (inscription) 144, 161 Amdo (A mdo) xvi, 102, 239, 341 Amoghavajra 211 ancestors 22, 46, 62–3, 71, 73–5, 77, 86, 113, 122, 127, 136–7, 140, 148, 159, 165, 167–9, 173, 175, 189–90, 192, 195, 197, 201–2, 208, 216, 222, 224, 134–5, 237, 312, 323–4, 326, 328 Ancient Religion 121, 129, 131–2, 134–5, 187, 201–2, 231, 233–6, 241 ‘Ang te’u 262, 265 Annals xxvii, 77–8, 97–8, 117, 129, 216, 233, 328 (see also: Chinese Annals) Annals of Khotan 68, 93 antelope 262–3 ‘Anxi 安息 92, 94 apocrypha 3, 6, 8, 11, 13, 15–6, 22, 54, 83, 85, 89, 91, 95, 128, 131, 168, 170, 173, 175, 187, 190, 203, 214, 246–8, 290, 303 Ar rje gtsug gsum 150 arrow 10, 63, 69, 98, 103, 109, 144–5, 147, 152–5, 161, 171, 322, 346 Asura cave 228 Aśoka 136, 157, 221–2, 224–5 Aśokāvadāna 136 Aśvaghoṣa 128 Atiśa 4, 15, 239 Avalokiteśvara 179, 194, 210, 216, 221–5, 230–1 Ayuḥpatti-yathākāra-pariprcchā-sūtra 3

āgama 4, 166 Āryadeva 292 ‘Ba’ de’u 51 Bacot, Jacques xv–xvi, 143, 333 bad epoch 176 Bal yul 49, 260 (see also: Lho bal) Bal po 4, 80 Balbir, J.K. 94 Dbal bon Rom po 259 Sba bzhed 5–6, 12, 53, 57, 81, 92, 97, 118, 123, 140, 149, 165, 167–9, 181, 194, 196, 201, 214, 217, 219, 222, 224–5, 239, 242, 277 Ban Gu 班固 294 Bang and Gabain 91 Baopuzi 抱朴子 290, 299 Bar Shan (king) 173 barbarians 79–81, 86, 113, 166, 195 Bayang jing 八陽經 3, 10–1, 13–8, 24, 26–8, 31–4, 38–42, 46–9, 53–4, 56, 58–65, 67, 70, 81, 90–1, 130, 162, 249 Beijing 194 (see also: Peking) Bhadrakalpa-sūtra 209 Bhaiṣajyaguru 57, 210 Bhavya 292 Bhāvanakrāma 16 Bhutan 148 Bird 7, 99–102, 104–5, 107, 147, 155, 238, 265, 267, 270, 282, 312 Bird of ill-omen (than bya) 270 Bla chen Dge rab gsal (Dgongs pa rabs gsal) 243 Bla yug ‘Geg pu pa 104 Bla yug bka’ stsal pa 104 black heads 161, 170, 313 black men 45, 125, 233, 331 blacks 156 bleedings 238 Blo sems mtsho 222 Blon po bka’ thang 106–9, 123, 217 Blondeau, A.M. xviii, xxix, 117, 244 Blue pandit 239 blue paper 192, 228–9

356

general index

Bod 43, 48, 50, 80, 86, 106, 113, 132, 140, 144, 161, 177–8, 180–2, 193–4, 198, 202, 216, 218, 221, 224, 235–6, 332 Bod kyi rgyal rabs 194, 218 Bodhidharmatara 8 Bodhisattva xiii, 5–6, 24, 32, 57, 111, 157, 161, 181, 192–5, 210–2, 216, 222, 224, 227, 309 body xiii, 7, 10, 59, 71, 100, 154, 159, 167, 175, 184–6, 192, 200, 222, 242, 252, 258, 265, 278–82 Bon/bon 34–5, 54, 110, 117, 122–6, 139, 151, 129, 167, 177–8, 180, 188, 221, 231–4, 236–45, 247, 248, 250–61, 265–9, 272, 291, 304, 328–34 bon po, Bon po, bonpo, Bonpo vii–viii, xi, xxix, 15, 21, 29, 32–5, 45, 59, 62–3, 108, 110, 122–5, 148, 151–5, 165–6, 177–8, 181–2, 187–8, 222, 224, 228, 231–57, 159–61, 263, 265–7, 269, 271–2, 290–309, 311, 313, 328–47 Bon po bka’ thang 228 Brahmā (Tshangs pa) 187, 203 “Net of Brahmā” sūtra (see: Fanwang jing) Bramajāla-sūtra 89 Brang ti 196 brass 103, 105, 171 brave xxvii, 7, 98–100, 103, 105–6, 108–10, 132–3, 150, 160–1, 189, 203, 214 Brāhmaṇas 291–2 breath (prāṇ a, qi) 72, 163, 316, 327 ‘Bri gung (pa) ‘Jig rten mgon po (see ‘Jig rten mgon po) ‘Bri gung dgongs gcig 237 ‘Brom khong 92 ‘Brong gnyan lde ru, king 150 ‘Brong zi 135 Bru sha 151 Bu cu (Sayings of Wuzhu) 168 Bu ston (1290–1364) 3, 12–3, 95, 216, 219, 223, 228 Buddha 6, 11–3, 24, 27–30, 34, 47, 50–2, 54, 57–8, 60, 70, 72, 94, 128, 130, 131, 133, 147, 166, 168, 183–4, 192, 194, 199, 203–12, 216, 221, 223–8, 234–5 Buddhaguhya 128, 211, 214, 216, 224–5 Buddhāvataṃ saka sūtra 4, 209 Buddhist clergy/monks 35–6, 118, 141, 168, 190, 205, 233, 250–1, 293, 329

Buddhist kings 26, 44, 78, 84, 101, 128, 135, 181, 188, 195, 202, 204–5, 229 Buddhist texts xxv–xxvi, 4, 7, 12, 24–5, 43–7, 71, 84, 119, 156, 165–6, 179–80, 196, 214–5, 230–2, 296, 311, 328, 330, 351–2 Buddhist vocabulary/terminology 5, 19–22, 24–5, 29–30, 43, 56, 58, 68–9, 70, 83, 87, 93, 119, 133, 143, 188, 213, 239 Buddhologist 132 Bukhara 51 Dbu nag mi’u dra chags 151 Dbu ru 106–7 ‘Bum pa 48, 156 Bya rung kha shor stūpa 102 Byang ‘brog 263, 269 Byang chub ‘od 161 Byang chub rgyal po 329 Byang ka/kha sna brgyad 262, 269 Dbyar mo thang 92–3 Cakravartin 205, 212 Calendar 32, 42, 175, 321 Calling the dead 307 Candragarbha, Prophesy of 48, 51, 93, 194 Candraputra 35 Lcang bu inscription 196, 229 Caste 152, 180 castle 80, 82, 145–6, 176, 271 Catalogues 204, 8–10, 12–3, 45, 48, 79, 102, 123, 185, 193, 199, 206–7, 210, 213–4, 226–7, 244, 302 Catechism 213–4 Cefu yuangui 冊府元龜 155 celestial kings 54, 91 Celestial Master 157, 302, 314, 316, 326 Central Asia 4, 71, 79, 81, 117, 157, 241, 328, 334 Certificate 7, 41 (see also: yig tshang) Chad pa 35, 251 Chan text 6–7, 10–1, 15, 19, 22–3, 25, 27, 30, 37–9, 42, 53, 66, 83, 88 (see also: Chan Writing; ITJ 709.11) Chan Writing (ITJ 709.11) 10, 37, 66, 83, 100 Chan 禪 xxv, 3, 5–8, 11, 14, 24, 29, 36–9, 83, 88, 91, 125, 166, 168, 170, 190, 213 chaos 311 charisma 21, 68–70 charm 12, 210, 290–1, 300, 302–3

general index Chavannes 289 Chen Guofu 314 Chen, K. 66 Che’u yag (see: Zhou Yi) Chims phu catalogue 2 Chinese Chinese Annals 98, 110, 114, 125, 145, 162, 165, 224, 273 Chinese vocabulary (Chin. voc.) 4–6, 8–19, 23, 25–7, 29–33, 36–7, 39, 41–3, 47, 50, 53–4, 56, 58–62, 64–5, 67, 69–70, 83–5, 91, 184, 203 Chos grags 45, 127 Chos grub (Facheng, c. 770–858) 4, 8–10, 13, 16, 44, 50, 52, 85, 94–5, 186, 205, 214, 248–9 Chos kyi rgyal po’i mdo (see Fawang jing) Chos kyi spyi po 131 Chos la ‘jug pa’i sgo 217, 221 Chos ‘byung Mkhas pa’i dga’ ston 50, 106, 165–6, 169, 191, 194, 196, 223, 252 Chu mig ring mo (monastery) 239 Chu rlung rdzu ‘phrul ma (Chu lcam) 151–2 Chunqiu fanlu 春秋繁露 163 Chunqiu 春秋 66 Ci’u yag 41, 275, 282 Cintāmaṇī dhāraṇī 219 civil servants 27, 81, 90, 92, 318 civilization xvii, 78, 128, 165, 271, 325, 338, 349–51 civilizing heroes 134 clothing 101, 132 cognatic line 148 colonial language 93, 139, 158 colophon 3–4, 6–7, 9, 13, 15, 36, 48, 89, 91, 94, 96, 127, 176–7, 193, 195–6 Confucian xi, xvii, xx, 11, 19, 41, 64, 66, 71, 82, 84, 122, 167, 169, 190, 215, 273–5, 277, 279, 281, 283, 314, 317–8, 321–2, 324, 341, 351 Confucius 孔子 (Kong tse) 38, 63, 131, 165, 167, 179, 186–7, 265, 275–80, 323–4, 334, 346 contracts 285, 288–90, 299–301, 303 copper 103, 105, 107, 109 cosmogonies 290–6, 304–5 cosmography 300 creation 52, 83, 110, 122, 180, 186, 293–4, 313, 316 Cu yag gyi yi ge (ITJ 748) (see: Zhou Yi) cuisine 315, 321, 325–6, 328

357

custom xi, 28, 44–6, 62, 65, 73–4, 76, 80, 86, 98, 111, 113, 127–9, 131–2, 134, 140–3, 159, 162, 169, 175, 183, 189, 197, 200, 203, 219, 229, 232, 234–6, 274, 322, 331 Da fangbian fo bao’en jing 大方便佛報恩經 (Thabs mkhas pa chen po sangs rgyas drin lan bsab pa’i mdo) 95 Da foding jing 大佛頂經 (Śūryaṃ gama-sūtra; Gtsug tor chen po las bdud kyi le’u bstan pa) 95 Dadai liji 大戴禮記 312 Dafangbian fo bao’en jing 大方便佛報恩經 89 Dags (place) 253 Dagyab 62, 127 Dali (’Jang) 80, 92, 171, 293 Dao 17, 27–8, 44, 74–5, 122, 130, 136, 162, 171, 236, 278 Daode jing 道德經 27, 167–8 Ldan dkar catalogue 4, 8–10, 12, 40, 45, 79, 85, 89, 93, 95–6, 126, 131, 199, 204, 206–7, 210, 212–4, 226–7 Daoism xiv, xvii, 167, 169, 213, 228, 277, 286, 321–2, 324 Daoist xi, 27, 33, 54, 66, 137–8, 175, 213, 225, 285–6, 288–91, 299–302, 313–19, 321–2, 324–8 Dar ma (king) 181, 195 (see also: Glang dar ma) “Dar ma fallen from the sky” 49, 139–40, 166, 189, 208, 216, 220, 224–5, 227–9 Dar yul 239 Das, Sarat Chandra 29, 54, 98, 127, 159, 237, 242 Datong fang guang jing 大通方廣經 40, 96 Davy 286 de Jong, J.W. 2–4, 16, 29, 94 death 8, 31, 36–7, 52, 58, 61, 102, 122–4, 130, 140, 165, 173–4, 188, 203–4, 238, 257–9, 265, 299, 305, 314–5, 317, 324, 347 decline (of Buddhism) 50–1, 122, 140, 166, 172, 175, 194–5, 204, 281, 288 Demiéville, Paul xvi, xxiii, 33, 59, 82, 97–8, 210 demiurge 293 demon 32–5, 53–4, 57, 60–2, 64, 69, 133, 179–80, 237–8, 241, 246–9, 254, 260, 262–3, 268, 272, 291, 300–1, 308, 332

358

general index

demon (bdud) 33–4, 53–4, 57, 95, 260, 263, 268–70, 272, 308 demon (srin) 21, 33–4, 59–61, 87, 173, 180, 248–9, 262–3, 268–70, 273, 308 demonic 325, 331 devotion 66, 286–7 Lde (see: Yar lung) Lde gtsug mgon 150 Lde Pru bo gnam gzhung rtsan 150 Lde’u Yang dkar 150 dhamma 136 Dharma fallen from the sky (see: dar ma fallen from the sky) Dharmakīrti 183 dhāraṇī 12, 71, 210, 219, 221, 223–4, 226, 239 dhāraṇ i sūtra 11–2, 16 Diagnosis, Diagnoses 253–4, 264–5 Dialogue of the Two Brothers (PT 1283.1) 18, 31, 38, 43, 88, 57, 128, 203 dictionary xxv, 1, 4, 17, 23, 29 , 35, 41, 45, 51–2, 54, 62, 65, 74, 97–8, 123, 126–7, 149, 154, 156, 159, 163, 172, 182, 184–5, 149, 169–71, 276, 344–5, 352 Dīpaṃ kara, Buddha 209–10 diploma xxvi, 2, 22, 101, 164, 349 divination 32–3, 35–6, 38, 46, 54, 56, 61–2, 72, 77–8, 87, 107, 110, 120, 123, 125, 127, 142, 146, 149, 153–4, 156, 161, 167, 170–2, 176, 178, 187, 233, 236, 238, 246–7, 250, 252–3, 271, 275–7, 282, 309, 329–30, 334, 337 divine king 100, 192 diviner 31, 33–4 Divyāvadāna 136 doctor 255, 264–5, 272, 305 Dong Zhongshu 董仲舒 (179–104 BC) 163, 294 Dongshen badi yuanbian jing 洞神八帝元變經 317 dragon 245, 303, 312 Dru gu 35, 130 drum 155, 208, 212, 226, 238, 269, 307, 324 Dunhuang 4–5, 8–9, 14–5, 22, 52, 71, 91, 97, 135, 155, 166, 188, 195 Dunhuang manuscript xxviii, 97, 101, 110, 117, 124, 127–8, 149, 156, 165, 175, 191, 195, 197, 202, 207, 212, 2214, 216, 226, 231–2, 234, 236, 242–6, 248, 250, 252, 255–6, 258–61,

263–9, 272–3, 275–6, 290, 292, 304–9, 328, 330–4 dur gshen 252, 254, 257–8, 266 Dus srong, king 144 (see also: Khri ‘Dus srong) Bdud lung nag po Dgu lung 263 Ldum bu 130 Dwags po 244 Dza (yakṣa) 181 edict of 814 4, 8–9, 16, 19, 22 egg, cosmic 35, 238. 251, 295–6 Eight Appearances 12 (see also: Bayang jing) eight Buddhas 13, 54, 57 elevated, height 28, 64, 67, 86, 97, 130, 132, 138, 142–5, 155–6, 161, 171, 184, 190, 317, 323 emperor, Chinese 165–6, 168–9, 276–7, 299–300, 317, 322 ensign (yi ge, yig tshang, Ch. gaoshen) xxvii, 97–9, 101–10, 287–9 Erkes 287 eternal 29–30, 42, 64, 70, 102, 137–8, 141, 143, 146, 160, 162, 164, 204 etymological 16, 23, 35, 41, 52, 83, 236, 293, 305, 322, 344 etymology 2, 23, 54, 56, 63, 69, 80, 83, 85, 126, 163, 182, 186–7, 236, 245, 251–2, 311 Evil Age 157 evil 31–3, 38, 54, 57, 59–60, 73–4, 88–90, 126–9, 133–4, 136–7, 157, 163, 172, 174, 210, 216, 246, 248, 256, 266, 279, 282, 296, 227 evil religion 33, 133 excessive worship (yinsi 淫祀) 60, 321–6 eyes 72, 100, 212, 217, 248, 279 eyes, opening of 71–2, 77 Fabricated law 50–2, 93–4 face 7, 100, 156, 303 Facheng 法成 (see: Chos grub) faith (Ch. xin) 34, 149, 195, 215, 224, 285, 288–9, 315 false religion 33, 247 false teachers 32, 246–7, 249 Fangguang jing 方廣經 227 Fanwang jing 梵網經 (“Net of Brahmā” sūtra) 3, 13–4, 18–9, 39–40, 42, 47, 52–3, 61, 67, 69, 88, 207, 209 fasting 303, 317 fasting for the dead (tshe, Ch. zhai) 57, 165, 170, 175, 303

general index Fawang jing 法王經 (sūtra “King of the Law”) 3, 6, 8–9, 11, 13, 15, 17, 19, 24, 40, 49, 54, 56, 88 feasts, feasting 59, 77, 175, 314–6, 321, 323–5, 328, 330 feasts of cuisine 321, 325, 328 feather female 125, 248, 252, 311, 316 Fengdu 酆都 299 Fifth Dalai Lama (Ngag dbang blo bzang rgya mtsho 1617–82) 167, 252, 297 filial piety 21, 38, 46, 64–7, 127–8, 203, 279, 282, 343 fish 97–8, 105, 274–5, 280, 282, 290, 303, 306, 312 Five Bushels of Rice movement 316 Five Prohibitions 213 Foshuo Tiandi Bayang shenzhou jing 佛說天地八陽神呪經 (see: Bayang jing) Four āgama 4 (see also: vinaya) Four Horns 106 fox 98, 110 Franke, O. 287 (Fo shuo) Fumu ‘enzhong jing (佛說) 父母恩重經 89 functionary xxvii, 7, 79–80, 82, 92, 97–8, 101, 105, 107, 232–3, 290, 214–6, 327 funeral 32, 62, 123–5, 146, 233, 245, 247, 257, 267, 308, 331 Sgam po Phya 148–9, 152 Gansu 14, 80 Ganzhou 92, 249, 332 Gaṇ ḍavyūha 40 Gaotang fu 高唐賦 318 Garuḍa 306, 312 Gautama 198–9, 201 Dga’ ldan 291 Dga’ yul 59, 263–4 Mgar clan 120, 130 Ge Hong 葛洪 324–6 Gesar (Ge sar) xvi–xvii, xxiv, 106, 155, 337–9, 341 Dge ‘dun Chos ‘phel 79 Glang dar ma (c. 308–42, r. 838/ 841–842) 9, 48, 240 Gling Khri rtse 93 Go cu 92 Go ‘phang, king 90, 125, 127, 133, 233 god 22, 28, 34–6, 54–9, 61–2, 64, 71–8, 81, 94, 102, 110, 120, 122–5, 128–31, 133–62, 164, 169, 173–5, 178–82, 186–9, 194–5, 199–201, 204–5, 208–9,

359

212, 214, 235, 237–8, 241, 248–51, 253–5, 260–1, 296, 299–301, 310–1, 3313, 315–6, 323–8, 333 god(s) of the land/soil 54, 64, 71, 73–7, 148, 249, 253–4, 323–5, 328, 333 god(s) of the mountain 78, 143 god(s) of the road 35–6, 120 god(s) of the sky 54, 147 gods, manner of 139, 158–9, 162, 204 Gokhale, V.V. 292 gold 7, 87–8, 97–9, 102–3, 105, 184, 192–3, 217, 222, 228–9, 263, 281, 301–3 golden age 136, 288, 326 golden book 221–2, 228 golden door 103, 105 Golden Nail (Pole star) 146 golden stūpa/caitya 221, 223 Dgongs pa rab gsal (see: Bla chen Dge rab gsal) Mgon tshung Phya 260, 264 Mgon tsum Phyva 150 ‘Gon btsun Phya 261 good conduct 127–8, 131, 133, 136, 140, 169, 173, 189, 208, 217, 276 good religion 32, 44, 46, 51, 131–7, 140, 142, 169, 192, 194, 201–4, 235 ‘Gos Khug pa lha btsas (11th century) 184 Grags pa rgyal mtshan (1147–1216) 194 grand precepts (bka’ ‘gros chen po) 108 Granet xxiii, 286, 289 Great Academy (China) 273 great religion 31, 124 Gri gum, king 154–5, 157, 237–8, 240 grimoires 333 Grub mtha’ shel gyi me long 156, 167, 187, 237, 252, 259 Sgra sbyor bam po gnyis pa xxvi, 2, 45, 183, 214 Sgro lag 239 Rgwa lotsāba 292 Gu ge 125, 150 Guazhou 48, 71, 92, 125 Guhyasamājatantra 184 Guhyagarbha tantra (see also: Gsang ba’i snying po) 185 Gung rgyal 154 Gunlun 300, 316 Güshi Khan (Gushri Khan) 156 Dgu sul 263 Rgya, land of 259–60, 263, 270

360

general index

Rgya Bod yig tshang 93, 97, 150, 177, 186, 240 Rgya bon Leg dang rman pa 254 Rgya Sha cu pa 79 Rgyal ba’i byang chub 239 Rgyal bon Thod dkar 149, 177 Rgyal bu Don grub kyi mdo 4 Rgyal Gtsug ru 150 Rgyal lha khang inscription 243, 349 Rgyal po bka’ thang 180, 228, 244 Rgyal rabs Bon 152, 177, 180, 242–3 Rgyal rabs gsal ba’i me long 252 Rgyal Stag snya gzigs 129 Rgyud bzhi 62–3 Rgyud gsum pa (tantra) 35, 156, 184, 250 Rgyud sde spyi rnam 228 Ha lo (eight sisters flower) 102 Haarh, E. 117, 135–6, 234, 252, 265 hair 175, 312 Han (era) 194 healing ritual 34, 267, 296, 305, 308–9, 325, 328–30 heart 58, 288 heaven 25, 35, 46, 58, 63, 73–6, 86, 113, 122, 125, 129, 133–4, 137, 139, 142–5, 148, 154–9, 161–4, 169–71, 173, 175, 178, 182, 189, 204, 233, 248, 287, 289, 290, 313 (see also: sky) heaven of the Thirty-Three 130 Heavenly God (gnam lha) 35, 120, 204, 251 helmet 98 Helmet, strong/mighty/eternal 112, 121, 129, 137–8, 141, 143, 149, 153–6, 160–1, 177, 190, 204–5 heretic 11, 14, 24, 30–4, 36, 41, 45, 47, 53–4, 60–1, 137–9, 206, 233, 238, 240, 246–7, 251, 292 hierarchy 7, 97, 102, 105, 107–8, 132, 145, 158, 161, 314–5, 317, 323 Hindu xxv, 45, 57, 125, 136, 167, 203, 205, 238, 241, 247, 292, 294 Hoffman, Helmut 240, 252 holy and divine 52–3, 55, 70, 162, 171, 178, 212 Holy Religion 47, 51, 166, 193–5, 218, 221–2 Hong Bian 48, 52, 71 Hor 92, 106, 156 horse 18, 35, 62, 69, 99–102, 106, 132, 142, 144, 148, 174, 203, 238, 245, 257, 262–3, 265–8, 270–1, 277, 280, 306, 323, 330–1

Houji 86 Hu lan deb ther 332 Huinan zi 淮南子 (139 BC) 312 hunting 59, 175, 257, 262–3, 269, 306, 321 Imaeda, Yoshiro xxix, 10, 19, 37, 40, 73, 79, 82, 85, 90–1, 96, 101, 114, 195, 273 immutability 127, 141, 146 India xxviii, 4, 13, 25, 40, 49–50, 66, 72, 81, 99–100, 134, 157, 165–6, 186, 194–5, 216, 218, 222–4, 240–1, 251, 288, 290, 293, 295, 311 Indian monks 1 Indian vocabulary (Ind. voc.) 5, 7–11, 13–9, 24–33, 37, 39, 41–3, 50, 52–6, 58–60, 64–5, 67–71, 82–3, 85, 89–91, 93–5, 127, 184, 203 Indrabhūti 181 Indrabodhi 239 inscription xxvii, 29–30, 44, 46, 53, 71, 76–7, 81, 86, 97, 101, 111–4, 117–8, 121, 124, 128, 132, 136–42, 144–5, 148, 157, 159, 161–2, 164–5, 170, 173, 178, 191–3, 196–7, 199–202, 204, 209, 215–6, 224, 229–30, 233–6, 314 insignia 7, 41, 65, 79, 119, 171 invokers 242, 254 Iran, Iranian 240, 292, 294–5 iron bird 104–5 iron ensign 109 Īśvara 238 jade 7, 287, 289–90, 295, 299, 302–3 “Jade Capital” (yujing) 299 Jambhala (yakṣa) 181 ‘Jang (Nanzhao, Yunnan) 80, 93, 171, 293 ‘Jangs khyab (Kun tu bzang po) 25 Ljang 93, 108 Jâschke 65, 80 jātaka 66, 94, 183 Jātakamāla 183 Jesus, Manichaean 36 Jewel 7, 100, 160–1, 192, 289, 302 ‘Jig rten mgon po (1143–1217) 125, 237, 292 Jin guangming 金光明 (Suvarṇ aprabhāsa) 25 Jin Heshang 金和尚 6 Jinamitra 16, 226 Jincheng 金成, princess 77, 115, 165, 194, 273

general index Jingang sanmei jing 金剛三昧經 (“Vajra samādhi sūtra”) 3, 13, 29, 89, 91 Jinshi suo 金石索 276 Kailāsa, Mount 161 Kam bcu (Gansu) 93 Kanjur 2–4, 6–7, 9–10, 13–5, 17–8, 23, 27–8, 31–3, 40–5, 48–53, 56, 58, 61–2, 64–5, 67, 79, 85, 88–9, 91, 95–6, 128–9, 131, 156, 162, 184, 195, 200, 203–10 212–3, 226–7, 248–50, 348 Karaṇḍavyūha (Zab ma tog bkod pa) 225, 227 Karmapas 185, 292 Karmavibhaṅga 43, 223 Karmay, Samten G. xxix, 12, 34, 102, 125, 179, 185, 195, 207, 217, 228, 228, 233, 240, 242–3, 245–7, 250, 253–6, 265, 272 Karoṣtḥ i 157 Karuṇ ā-puṇ ḍarīka sūtra 204, 210, 212 Kashgar 51 Bka’ ‘gyur (see Kanjur) Bka’ chems ka khol ma 219, 221, 344 Kākajarita 334 Kālacakra 292 Kāsyapa 204 Skab shen Thi’u 258 Skad gsar bcad 1, 5 Skar chung inscription 191, 193, 196–7, 235 Kevali 334 Kha che (Kashmir) 238, 310 Khaghan (Khan) 78, 156 Mkhar (Mgar) Btsan snya ldom bu 130 Mkhar tshan 92 Khmer 157, 184 Khotan 2, 4, 9, 11–2, 44, 47–8, 50–1, 53, 68, 79, 81, 93–5, 135, 166, 176, 181, 193–4, 310, 332, 340, 344, 353 Khra ‘brug 219, 229 Khri ‘Dus srong (676–704) 192 Khri bom, castle 80 Khri bshos 130 Khri Dog rje gtsug blon 150 Khri ga 14 Khri Grags pa Lde, king 161 Khri gtsug lde brtsan (= Ral pa can; c. 806–838, r. 815–838) 8, 78, 68, 80, 87, 102, 131, 141, 148, 150, 191, 194–5, 204, 212, 217 Khri lde gtsug brtsan (704/5–754/5) 150, 165, 192–4, 203, 212

361

Khri lde srong brtsan (r. 799–815) 1, 30, 44, 137–8, 141, 159, 191–2, 203, 211, 216, 223, 236 Khri se btsan po, king 221 Khri srong brtsan 43, 191–2, 197 (see also: Srong btsan sgam po) Khri srong lde brtsan (r. 755– c. 797/804) 4, 7–8, 30, 49, 112, 126, 128, 131–2, 139–40, 165, 167, 169, 179, 181, 192–9, 201, 203, 205, 207–8, 221–8, 220, 222–5, 229, 237, 240, 245 Khri srong lde brtsan, inscriptions & edicts of 44, 72, 76, 81, 87, 93, 100–1, 118, 139, 159, 192, 201–2, 207, 229 Khri sum rje, minister 53 Khri sum rje, of Zhang 93, 171 Khri Sum rje Stag snar 82, 93 Khva rtse 161 Khyung po clan 240 Khyung po, Khams 240 Khyung po Bon zhig 240 Khyung po Jo sras 240 Khyung po Rgyal ba Thod dkar hernitage 177 Khyung po rnal ‘byor 240 Khyung po Spung sad zu tse 129 Kim Ha shang 166, 168–9 Kimura Ryūtoko xxv, 3, 6–10, 100 king as protector of Buddhism 2, 32, 218 (see also: Buddhist kings) king as bodhisattva 32, 111, 157, 181, 192–5, 212, 216, 222, 224 King Kong (孔王) 212 King of Law sūtra (see Fawang jing) King Tsa/Dza 181–2, 195, 208, 211, 216, 222–4, 228 King Wen (wang) 70, 74, 86, 113, 275 King Wu 74–5, 86, 113 king, Chinese 131, 135 kinglets 75, 135, 142, 152, 170, 176–80, 182, 204, 218 Kïcanov 80 Klong chen chos ‘byung 228 klu 60, 69, 75–7, 102, 151–2, 226, 239, 242, 249, 255, 262–3, 265–7, 269, 271, 294, 296, 305, 308–11, 313 Klu ‘bum 63, 123, 149, 151, 232, 239, 245, 255–8, 260–6, 271–2, 290–2, 295–7, 304–10, 312–3, 229–33 Kokonor 14 Kong sprul Blo gros mtha’ yas (1813–1899) 152–3 Kong tse ‘phrul chung, Kong tse ‘phrul gyi bu 131, 275–7

362

general index

Dkong tse ‘phrul (see Kong tse ‘phrul gyi bu) Skos bon gtsug sras 151 Skos rje ‘og sko 151 Kou Qianzhi 寇謙之 317, 326 Kukkurarāja 222 Kulu 292 Kumārajīva 29, 89 Kun grol pa 240 Kun tu bzang po (Samantabhadra) 25, 131, 224 Kuo Li-ying 23 Kushana inscriptions 157 Kva cu 92 Kvaerne, Per xxix, 237, 240–2, 245, 272 Kvan 82 Kya cu (Guazhou) 92 Skye shi’i lo rgyus 37, 40, 46, 49, 60 Kyi rje btsan po 179 Skyi lde ru bran 129 Skyin tang, god 172 Ladakh 80, 144, 150, 157, 161 Lalou, M. xxv, 5, 9, 44, 79, 90, 94, 176, 231, 237, 245, 265, 273 Lalou catalog 9, 48, 54, 85, 89 Lamaist, Lamaism 63, 152, 231, 236, 242–5, 250–2, 267, 272, 291–2, 304, 307, 311, 328, 332–3 Laṅkāvatāra-sūtra xxv, 39, 52, 205, 208 Laojun yinsong jiejing 老君音誦戒經 226 Laojun 327 Laozi 老子 168, 276–7, 324 (see also: Li Laojun) Laozi 老子 164, 168 Laozi huahu jing 老子化胡經 167–8, 175, 213 Laozi jing 老子經 167–8, 194, 225 Laozi Xiang’er zhu 老子想爾注 324 Law of Heaven 134, 157, 162 Le’u ke tse 168 Legs byin, paṇḍita 225 Legs tang Rmang po 258–9 Leng qie shi zi ji 楞伽師資記 5, 12, 15, 17, 19, 23–7, 38–9, 42, 53, 61 leopard 103, 110 letters 7, 101, 126, 164, 192–3, 222, 228–9, 234, 286, 302 Le’u rje Zing po 150 Le’u tshe kyang 167–8 Lha lde 157

Lha ri gyang do 145 Lha rje Ltang dkar 150 Lha Tho tho ri 49, 140, 214, 216, 220–6, 228, 244, 252 Lha’u Gyang dkar 150 Lhan kar palace 79, 101 Lhasa 10, 16, 77, 81, 192–3 (see also: Treaty of Lhasa) Lhe’u rje Zin dags/tags; Le’u rje Zing po 150, 176 Lhe’u Yang ka rje 150 Lho Bal 4, 12, 79–81, 86, 112–3, 166, 195 Lho/Lto clan 80, 176, 182, 261 Lhri lde sram po 151 Li (country) 4, 12, 81 Li Bsam glang 12, 277 Li byin 222–3 Li Dza, king 221 Li ffng-kuei 96 Li Laojun 李老君 276–7 Li Shan 李善 163 Li shi gur khang Dictionary 4 Li the se, king 222, 226 Li tsa byi Dri ma med pa 222 Li yul 79, 193 Lidai fabao ji 歷代法寶紀 66, 168 Liji 禮記 41, 66, 273, 275, 277, 280, 312, 317, 323, 325 Ling ka’i khan po dang slob ma’i mdo 5 Lingzhou (Lingwu 靈武) 92–3 lion 100–2, 107, 145 literati 115, 164, 190, 286, 288, 314, 321–2, 324–5 Liu Cunyan 326 Lo rgyus chen mo 80, 228 Long shan 112 long 龍 80, 249, 313 Lop nor 73, 77 Ltam 253 Lu shang 呂尚 274 Lu xiansheng daomen kelue 陸先生道門科略 225–6 Lu Xiujing 陸修靜 (406–477) 314 Lung sgra 257 Lunheng 論衡 324 Lunyu 論語 32, 36, 276, 279, 323 Ma Ming-t’a 273 Ma ṇ i bka’ ‘bum 178–9, 217–8, 221, 228–9 Rma da 254, 257–8 Rma rin chen mchog 185

general index Rman dang, god 172 Macdonald, Ariane xxviii, 59, 71, 77–8, 90, 102–5, 117–227, 129–39, 141–50, 154–5, 157–8, 162, 164–7, 169–77, 180–2, 187–8, 234, 275, 256, 260, 276–7 Madhyavyutpatti (see: Sgra sbyor bam po gnyis pa) Mahābala 58, 71 Mahābhārata 62 Mahābrahman 186 Mahāmegha-sūtra 212 Mahāsammata 206 Mahāvairocanasūtra 23 Mahāvyutpatti (Mhvy) 1–2, 5–6, 9–10, 19, 23–4, 27, 29–31, 36, 40, 43, 44–5, 48, 50–1, 53, 55, 60, 62, 65–6, 69–71, 82–3, 94, 126–8, 158, 182–4, 186, 189, 204, 206, 214 Mahāyāna 42, 49, 191, 205, 210, 213, 226–7, 348 Mahāyāna, Chan master 7, 36 Mahāyāna Sūtrālaṃ kāra 183 Mahāyāna Uttaratantra 206 Mahāyoga 185, 228 Maheśvara 148 Maitreya 12, 204, 206, 210, 212–3, 344 Mang slon Mang rtsan, king 216 Mani 32, 126, 128, 168 Manichaean, Manichaeism 32, 36, 241, 295 Mañjuśrī 90, 186–7, 194, 210, 223–4 Mañjuśrīmūlakalpa (ITJ 380) 181, 195, 211, 213, 224 Maoshan school 325 Mar Mani (see: Mani) marriage 61, 77–8, 120, 128, 148, 151–3, 165, 170, 187, 260, 271, 287, 314 marriage divination 33, 38, 247 marriage, rites of 110, 125, 136, 153, 254–5 masculine 17, 63–4, 162, 253, 294–5 Maspero xv, 286 Mauss xv, 286, 289 maxims 34, 37, 78, 88–9, 128, 133–4, 20, 208, 213, 235, 247, 273–5, 278 Maxims (PT 0992.5) 47–8, 34, 38, 57, 59, 65, 88–90, 95, 127, 172, 214 Mazdaist 295 Mchims 167, 253, 270 Mchims rje Ne dgu 179 Mdo gams 92

363

Mdzod phug 63, 123, 149, 154, 177, 257 mediums 123, 125, 247–8, 322–5 merit 7, 16, 28, 33, 48, 55–7, 64, 68, 70–2, 82, 86, 92, 100, 113, 117, 136, 156, 165, 171, 197, 200–1, 203, 227, 237, 247–8, 287–90, 296, 300, 315, 323, 330 Mes ag tshom (r. 704–754) 95 Mes mgo 168 Mi la ras pa, Milarepa (1040–1123) 34, 62, 240, 243, 264, 267–9, 329–31, 334 Mi nyag (Xixia) 80, 92, 148, 293, 312 Mimaki 23 Ming (era) 287–8 Ming Xilie 名悉獵 273 Mingsha 鳴沙 92 minister xiii, 53, 55, 68, 71, 88, 90, 93, 97, 101–3, 108–9, 118–20, 127, 129–30, 132, 135, 141–2, 144–5, 150, 158, 160–1, 166, 168, 171, 177–8, 181–2, 193, 201, 211, 217–9, 224, 239, 244, 261, 274–5, 280, 282 minor kings (see: kinglets) Mochizuki 51 Mongol, Mongolian xxiv–xxv, 45, 63, 127, 146, 156, 291–3, 344, 349, 352 monk 1, 7, 14, 22, 38, 58, 63, 90–1, 99, 101–2, 104, 107, 110, 118, 125, 141, 159, 167–8, 181, 190, 205, 211, 213, 215, 217–20, 243, 293, 329 moon 7, 35, 63, 70, 77, 100, 125, 144–6, 160, 162, 164, 171, 250–1, 280 Mosso (see: Na khi) mother 35, 38, 63, 65, 88, 128, 136, 165, 177, 186, 205, 214, 227, 240, 260, 264, 270, 297, 312 mountain, sacred 22, 28, 71, 73, 75–8, 152, 155, 157, 142–8, 154–5, 157–8, 160–1, 181, 190, 136, 241, 300, 316, 333 Smra yul thang brgyad 161–2 Mu cho ldem drug (name) 265–6, 272 Mu tig, prince 219 dmu 55, 77, 123, 147–56, 170, 177–8, 245, 253–5, 260, 269, 313 Dmu bon 153, 259 dmu cord (dmu thag/dag) 110, 123, 148, 153–6, 254–5 dmu ladder 154–5, 200, 219 Dmu rje btsun po 151–2 Dmu thag (god) 154 Rmu rje, king of Rmu yul 158

364

general index

Rmu yul (Ram Ri ngam) 158 Mullie 286 murder 217, 219, 237–8 Myang ro’i Pyed kar 178 Mying mtshan, Mye mtshang 263 “Mysterious Capital” (Xuandu) 299 Na khi (Naxi, Mosso) 245, 290, 292–6, 304–6, 312–3, 328, 331, 333 Na ro bon chung 243 Nakamura, H. 292 Nam language 78 nameless religion xi, xvii, xxiv, 124 Gnam chos 150 Gnam phyi gung rgyal, goddess 261 gnam ri 157 Gnam ri Slon mtshan, king 155, 158, 221 Gnam rje Mgon tsun 261 Rnal ‘byor rgyud kyi rgya mtsho la ‘jug pa’i gru gzings 220 Rnam par mi rtog pa, Chan master 213 Snang brgyad sūtra 12–3 (see also: Bayang jing) Nanzhao 80, 93, 142, 161, 171, 203 Nanzhou 292, 310 Snar thang 16 Naxi (see: Na khi) Ne’u paṇḍita 53, 80, 93, 97, 217, 219, 222, 251 Nel pa paṇḍita 251 Nepal, Nepalese 4, 49, 79–81, 106, 166, 195, 218, 222, 244, 310, 252 new language 3–4, 6, 13, 15, 83 new resolution 5 new vocabulary 6, 19 nexus and nexum 289 Ngag gshen ngag chig 257 Ngag khri 177 Ngam ri rab 158 Gnga’ khri 122 Nhanxi 51 Nine Bureaus (jiufu) 300 Nine Vehicles 185, 238, 241–2, 252 Nirvāṇa (see index of Sanskrit terms) Nobel, Johannes 95 non-Buddhist 21, 25, 47, 60, 62, 84, 119, 126, 135, 143, 175, 202, 231–2, 235–6, 247, 331–2 Nor bzang (see: Sudhana) Gnubs clan 150 nun 15, 18, 90, 207–8, 214 Nüqing 女青 299–200

Nüqing guiliu 女青鬼律 300 Nāgārjuna 46–7, 90, 128, 199–200, 206, 219 Nītiśastra 128 Nyang ral Chos kyi ‘od zer (1124–1192) 49 Nyang ral nyi ma ‘od zer (1136–1204) 53, 131, 179, 204, 206, 209–10, 217, 221–2, 228 Gnya’ khri (= Yab lha brdal drug) 145, 158, 179 Gnya’ khri btsan po 143, 148, 180, 237, 245, 260 Nyi ma’i dbang phyug Khri lde, king 161 Rnying ma 150, 185 Rnying ma pa 15, 124, 181–2, 247, 275 ‘O bon ‘Brang 259 ‘O lde spu rgyal, king 30, 177, 182, 202, 204, 225, 230 O rgyan 228 O rgyan rin po che 240 oaths (Ch. meng, shi) 125, 236, 269, 285, 287–90, 299, 301 ‘Od de gong rgyal 151 ‘Od srung, king (842/3–890) 9, 48, 71, 80, 195 officials xxvii, 7, 97, 108 Okimoto, Katsumi 沖本克己 7–9, 88 ‘Ol, country of 253 ‘Ol mo lun ring 151 old language (see also: Chinese vocabulary) 4 Old Tibetan Chronical (PT 1286–1287) xxvii, 12, 23, 28, 30, 37, 43–4, 46, 50, 60, 65–6, 72, 77–8, 8–, 86–7, 98, 101, 106, 108, 111, 117–21, 123, 129–32, 134, 136, 138–9, 141–2, 146, 150, 154–5, 158, 160–3, 176, 178–80, 196–7, 202–3, 214, 216, 233–5, 244–5, 261–2, 273 oracle 33–4, 36, 60, 78, 119–20, 138, 148–50, 156, 247, 254, 266, 268, 271, 334–5 Ordos 92 owl 270 Padma thang yig 216–7, 228, 252 Padmasambhava 155, 218, 239, 244 parish (zhi) 300–1, 313–8 Dpang skong chen po 96 Dpa’o Gtsug lag phreng ba 3–4, 50, 72, 77, 81, 92, 97, 106–10, 118, 168,

general index 180–4, 186, 189, 207, 215, 222–4, 244, 252, 307, 332 Dpal brtsegs 1, 4–5, 210, 216 Dpal dbyangs 10, 15, 23–4, 29, 70, 96, 128, 201, 214–5 Dpal khang pa (dictionary) 62 Spang kong 222 peacock 7, 99 Peiwen yunfu 佩文韻府 249 Peking 7 (see also: Beijing) Pema Tsering 199, 205–7 periodicization of Bon 240 Persia 32, 112, 114 phalansteries (guan) 313, 316, 318 Phan thang catalogue 2–3, 12 Phan yul sgrub mtshod 259 ‘Phan, emperess 80 ‘Phrul gyi me long dgu skor tantra 185 Phur pa 244 Phur pa gnam lcags spu gri ritual 102 Phya bla ‘bram shing 151 Phya bon The legs 259 Phya bzher 150 Phya Kha rje dang po 149 Phya rje Sgam po 148, 151 Phya tshe, god 154 Phya Ye mkhyen rgyal po 149 Phya’u Gyang dkar 150 Phyong rgyas inscription 76, 111–4, 137, 139, 196–7, 202 Phyug mtshams/tsams 92 pillars of heaven 145 pledge (Ch. zhi) 157, 285, 287–90, 299, 301–3, 315–6 popular cults 321, 325, 328 popular religion xi, 124, 236, 241, 248, 285, 325 Pra mo hva 102 Prajñāpāramitā 5, 43, 205–8 Prajāpati 295 Pratimokṣa-sūtra 207, 209 prayer 9, 41, 55, 60, 76, 138, 175, 195, 205, 212, 222, 226, 241, 329 Prayers (of De ga g.yu tshal) (PT 0016, ITJ 751) 30, 37, 55, 68, 76, 80, 92–3, 118, 128, 131, 138–9, 142, 148, 155, 158–60, 163–4, 166, 171, 173, 199, 204, 208, 235 Prayers of Mi pham 150, 156 Spra rje gtsug gsum 150 pre-Buddhist xxviii, 117, 130–1, 187, 231–4, 236–7, 241, 244 preta 21, 32–3, 60

365

priest 124, 152, 231–3, 236, 241–2, 246–248, 250, 255, 257, 295, 305 priests, gshen 64, 241 priests, bonpo 232, 308–9, 331, 242–3, 256, 306–9, 331 prince 7, 48, 59, 74, 80, 100, 132, 168, 192, 195, 219, 273 princess 77–8, 165, 194, 218, 273 prohibitions 201, 203–4, 209, 211, 213–6, 315, 326–7 prophesy 166–7, 173, 175, 193–5, 211, 213, 223 Prophesy of Khotan (ITJ 597, 598, 601.2; PT 0960) 11, 44, 47–8, 51–3, 79, 93, 166, 176, 181, 193, 332 Pryzluski 310 purāṇas 291–2 pure chambers 313, 316–7 Puxian 普賢 (Samantabhadra) 25 Spu de gung rgyal 122 Spu rgyal 129, 149, 177, 181–2, 204, 215 Spu rgyal Bod 161, 332 Spu rgyal Bon 176, 332 Spug 14, 182, 231 Spung sad zu tse 118, 120, 129, 244 (Phya bu) Spyi gtsug rgyal ba 150, 152 Qi dan 173 Qianfu lun 潛夫論 Qiang 79, 80, 93 Qianxian 59

324

Ra sa (Lhasa) temple 192 Ral pa can (see: Khri gtsug lde brtsan) Ram, Cult of 125 Rang byung rdo rje (Third Karmapa, 1284–1339) 185 ransom 254, 301, 328, 330 Ratnaśikhin, Buddha 210 ravine 144, 158, 160 Rāmāyaṇ a (PT 0981, 0982, 0983; ITJ 737) 11, 18, 42, 58, 94 Rdzogs chen 125, 241–2 Red ācarya 239 regent (see: Sde srid Sangs rgyas rgya mtsho) registers 288, 314–5 regular worship 323 religion 31–5, 42–4, 46–7, 50–2, 54, 59, 73, 76, 81, 84, 93, 100, 110–1, 117, 119, 120–6, 128–37, 139–40, 142, 151, 159–60, 164, 166–9, 173, 175, 187–9, 192–7, 199–205, 216–9, 221–2, 225,

366

general index

231, 233–7, 240–2, 244, 247–8, 252, 256, 265, 285, 310, 321–2, 325, 327, 331–3 (see also: good religion, Holy Religion, royal religion) religion, masters of 193 religious law 141, 185, 202, 216–9, 225 resolution 305 revealed texts 228, 241, 285, 290, 299, 301–2, 315 Richardson, Hugh 30, 49, 93, 112, 117, 127, 138–41, 170, 192, 196–202, 206, 236, 243, 151 Rig pa me tog, yogin 185 Rig ral (Rig pa’i ral khri) 4 Rin chen bzang po 5 Rin chen mchog 185, 239 Rkong 76, 253, 270 Rkong po inscription 76–7, 138, 145, 148, 159, 173, 202, 229 Rlangs clan 150 Rlangs Po ti bse ru 97, 150, 152 Rock 292 royal inscriptions 147, 164, 234 royal law 140, 185, 201, 203, 208, 215–20, 224, 227 royal religion xxviii, 119, 122, 124 Rtsang 150, 170, 178 Ru lag 106–8 Rwa lo tsa ba (c. 1050–1110) 243, 329 Ṛg veda 295 Sa skya Paṇḍita (1182–1251) 3, 296 Saddharmapuṇ ḍarīka 9 Sadharmaraja-sūtra 3 saint-king 151 salvation 175, 200, 205, 210, 219, 326 Samantabhadra 25, 131, 223–4 Saṃ ghavardhana, Prophesy of 194 Bsam yas (temple) 149, 167, 192–3, 217 Bsam yas (debate) 3, 6, 11 Bsam yas (inscription) 192, 202, 234 Sang shi (c. 750) 6, 96, 166–7, 169 Gsang ba(‘i) snying po 63, 185 Gsang ‘dus stong thun 184 Sangs rgyas rgya mtsho (see: Sde srid Sangs rgyas rgya mtsho) Sanskrit 2–4, 10–1, 14, 16, 22, 24, 27, 35, 40–1, 47, 49–50, 52, 66, 72, 95, 129, 149, 157, 168, 182–3, 185, 191, 198, 200, 207, 211, 247, 294, 311, 329 Santian neijie jing 三天內解經 326 Satō Hisashi 佐藤長 35 Schmidt, Isaac Jacob 6

Sde dge 3, 6, 13, 226, 264, 267, 290, 308 Sde srid Sangs rgyas rgya mtsho (1653–1705) 167, 178–9, 186–7 seal xxvii, 7, 76, 79, 97, 100–5, 108–10, 213, 221–4 seals of order (bka’i phyag rgya) 108, 111 second resolution 5 secret 126, 165, 185, 211–2, 228, 285, 302 Seng po mi chen, minister 244 Gser ‘od snang ba 25 (see also: Suvarṇ aprabhāsa) Gser lung ‘thun pa’i mdo 209 Serruys 286 Seven Buddhas 57, 203, 207–10, 212 sex 7, 63, 100, 287, 324 sexual 162, 269, 294, 316, 322, 326 Bshad mdzod 147, 152, 154, 158, 170, 180, 228, 245, 254 shaman, shamanic 248, 250, 252 Shancai 40 (see also: Sudhana) Shang fu 尚夫 274 Shangs pa bka’ brgyud 240 Shangshu Kongzhuan 尚書孔傳 85 Shangshu 尚書 19, 44, 85, 273 (see also: Shujing) (Foshuo) Shanwo yinguo jing (佛說) 善惡因果經 85 Shazhou 12, 48, 66, 71, 76–7, 79, 92–3, 97, 205, 209, 249, 332 Shel brag, gter ma of 180 Shenqiu houji 春秋後記 273 gshen (priests) 123, 125, 177, 233, 236–39, 241, 244, 251–4, 156–9, 261, 265–6, 271, 329 Gshen (clan) 237 Gshen chen Kun dga’ (996–1035) 239 Gshen rab mi bo 125, 177, 238, 240–1, 245, 252, 254–60, 271 Gshen rgur Klu dga’ 239 Gshen te thul 243 Gshen yul thang mo gru bzhi 261, 270 Shijie jing 十戒經 213 Shijing 詩經 162, 273 Shujing 書經 (PT 0986) 19, 44, 46, 62, 65–6, 70, 73–4, 76–7, 79–80, 82, 85–7, 96, 111–5, 127, 135, 139, 162, 170, 273, 287 Shuluo 疎勒 51, 94 Shuowen Dictionary 說文解字 163 Sichuan 166, 276, 316 siddha, bon po 241–2

general index sign 7, 65, 98–100, 108–9, 279, 281 sign of religion 100, 109 sign of the brave (dpa’ mtshan) 99, 108–9 signs of power 108 silken knot 217–8 silver 97, 108, 229, 301, 303 simian ancestor 179, 181 Simonsson, N. 2, 4–5, 95 sin 48, 54, 68, 71–2, 93, 166, 177, 209–10, 213–4, 226, 296, 300, 315, 317, 326 sinciput 10, 18, 130, 138, 141, 155, 183–4, 186–7, 254 Six Heavens 327 Siyi jing 思益經 (T. 586) 10 sky 17, 22, 63–4, 73, 81, 107, 144–8, 154–64, 166, 178–80, 197, 199, 203, 214, 221–8, 238, 244, 248, 251, 260, 264, 271, 279, 300, 311, 313, 316, 327 (see also: heaven, “Dar ma fallen from the sky”) Snellgrove, David 232–6, 240–5, 251 Bsod nams rtse mo 228 Sog bzlog pa (1552–1624) 63, 124 soil, gods of 64, 71–2, 74–7, 86, 248–9, 306, 323–5, 328 soldiers 7, 98, 108, 150, 155 Son of Heaven 163 Song era 289, 299, 302–3 Song Yu 宋玉 318 sorcerer 31, 34, 60, 123, 125, 155, 242, 246–50, 305 sovereign 12, 52, 65, 73, 103–4, 129, 133, 137, 141–2, 151, 155–6, 158, 161, 163, 170, 171, 178–9, 181, 194, 199–200, 205, 287 Soymié, M. 90 Srid pa rgyud kyi kha byang 151, 155, 259–60 Srong btsan sgam po (617?–649) 43, 49, 53, 78, 118–22, 128, 132, 139–40, 165, 168–9, 191, 194, 196–7, 202, 205, 208, 214, 216–25, 229030, 235, 245, 332 Stag gzigs 151 Steinkellner, Ernst 183–5 Sudhana 40 Suhṛlleka 199 Sum pa 38, 78, 95 Sum pa ma shags (PT 0992, 1382, 1399; ITJ 730) 38, 78, 90, 94, 133 Sumeru 7, 100, 139, 143, 145, 149, 160, 200, 264

367

sun 7, 35, 63, 70, 77, 100, 102, 125, 144–6, 160, 162, 164, 171, 222, 250, 255, 280, 296 Suvarṇ aprabhāsa-sūtra 4, 13, 16, 25, 44–5, 52, 95, 157, 186, 208, 226 Sūtra of Causes and Effects 34, 214, 246, 248–9 svastika 7, 100, 141, 293 symbol 7, 98, 100, 110, 148, 289, 293–5, 301, 303, 316, 330–1, 337 Śaivite 238, 292 Śakra 186 Śārdūlakarṇ āvadāna 294 Śākyamuni 12, 93, 210, 212, 226, 256 Śālistamba (Sa li ljang po) 167, 225 Śāntarakṣita (Zhi ba ‘tsho) 199, 222, 225, 229 Śīlavarman 196, 229 Śrīghoṣa, letter of 214–5 (see also: Dpal dbyangs) Śūraṃ gamasamādhi-sūtra 209 Śyāmājātaka 66 Ta nga ngur mo tang 264 Ta zhig 112 Tabo inscription 161 Taigong 太公 (The kong) 274–5, 280 Taiping jing 太平經 289, 324, 327 Taishang dongyuan shenzhou jing 太上洞淵神咒經 326 Taizhen ke 太真科 317 Taizhen yudi siji mingke jing 太真玉帝四極明科經 299 talisman 285, 300–3, 315 Tang Annals (see also: Tangshu) 114 Tang dynasty 12–3, 59, 97–8, 114, 168, 191, 215, 277, 289. 292, 299, 302–3 Tangshu 78, 97–8, 125, 155, 225 Tanjur (Bstan ‘gyur) xxi, 2–3, 9, 193, 259 tantra 16, 35, 45, 63, 108, 124, 150, 156, 181, 184–5, 187, 195, 206–7, 211, 222, 227–8, 250 tantric 12, 54, 72, 100, 126, 181–2, 195, 210–1 tantrist, tantrika 239, 241, 243, 255 Gtan bzang 263 Bstan ‘byung 240 Bstan ‘gyur (see Tanjur) Bstan rtsis 239 Tao Hongjing 陶弘景 (452/6–536) 302, 314–5, 317, 325–6 Tarkajvālā 292, 294 Taube, Helmut 4, 270–1

368

general index

Ten Faults 209, 214, 218–9 Ten Good Things 7 Ten Prohibitions 213–4 Ten Teachings of Kṣitigarbha 214 Ten Virtues 24, 46, 128, 140, 166–7, 169, 201, 203–4, 208–9, 212–6, 218–21, 223–5, 227 terminal epoch 175 Tha nga Bal mo thang 260 Tha nga brla ma 260 Tha nga pung ma thang 260 Tha nga Rgya mo thang 260 Thang ba dmu thang 260 Thang dmu mo thang 260 Thang lha Ya zhur 333 Theories of Origins 123, 125, 176 (see also: PT 1038) The’u yug, rgyal gshen 265 third resolution 5 Tho gar 222 Tho’u yug, sgal shen 257 Thod dkar, king 177–8, 180, 260 (see also: Rgyal Bon Thod dkar) Thod rgyal, king 122, 176–8 Thomas, F.W. 68, 72, 92, 94, 106, 127, 171–2, 174–5, 194, 231, 236, 253, 259, 261, 269, 306, 234 Thon mi Sambhota (Thu mi Sa ‘bo ra) 4, 222, 226 Thought 7, 10, 29, 44, 129, 160, 227, 282, 289, 317 three categories of kinga 206 three categories of men 313 Three Functionaries (sanguan) 290, 300, 327 Three Heavens 314, 316–7, 327 Three Principles (sanyuan) 300 Three Supreme Heavens 300 throat 7, 100 Thu’u bkvan 167 Thu’u bkwan blo bzang chos kyi nyi ma (1737–1802) 237–8 Tibet, different names for 180 Tibetan translation 2, 5, 9, 11–2, 27, 70, 88–9, 111–2, 162, 175, 246–8, 273, 294, 351 Tibetan translators 1, 26, 249, 274 Tibetan vocabulary 1, 4–5, 29, 53, 82, 84–5 tiger 7, 91, 97–9, 103, 105–6, 108–10, 150 tīrthika 2, 20, 53, 247 tomb 29–30, 44, 59, 63, 81, 98, 137, 150, 175, 202, 236, 256, 258, 261–2, 266–7, 285, 300, 306

tortoise 186–7, 312 translator 1–2, 6–8, 15, 17, 22–7, 30–1, 41, 45, 47, 52, 53, 56, 61–5, 69–70, 7407, 82–5, 94, 162, 176, 183, 205, 218, 222, 226, 246, 249, 274, 294 treasure (gter) 229, 231, 238–40, 242, 285, 301–3 treasure, revealed (gter ma) 180, 228, 239–40 Treaty of 821–2 (Treaty of Lhasa) 12, 65, 75–6, 79–81, 86, 92, 98, 101, 111–2, 119, 122, 125, 132, 135, 138, 140, 142, 145, 155, 158, 200, 202, 216, 225 Tripitạ ka 20, 60, 99, 127, 296, 207 Tsan bu du/dra 35 Tsan bu dwa/dra 251 Tsan zhu 280 Tsang shu 274 btsan po xiii, 7–8, 21, 26, 43, 53, 70, 78, 100, 112, 114, 129, 139, 141, 143, 148, 171, 176, 179–80, 191–2, 198–9, 212–3, 221, 290 Tshe ring dbang rgyal (c. 18th century) 29 Tsong ka 14 Tsong kha 273 Gtsug bzang 150 gtsug lag (see entry in index of Tibetan terms) Gtsug ri ‘bar ba 147 Gtsug rje 151–2 Tucci, G. xxvii, 3–4, 30, 81, 106, 108–10, 139, 196, 202, 244, 252, 260, 290, 309 Turfan 85, 92 (see also: ‘Anxi) Turkish 35–6, 90, 92, 157, 251, 262, 294 turquoise 88, 92, 97, 99, 105, 107–8, 263 Tuṣita 57, 156, 212 Tuyuhun (see also: ‘A zha) 78, 80, 165 ‘U ring (Dbu ring) 219 ‘U’i dum brtan 48, 87 ‘U’i dun brtan 9, 68 (see also: Glang dar ma) ubac 63–4 Uccuṣma 71 Uḍḍiyāṇa 4, 126, 181, 310 Ueyama Daishun 上山大峻 5–6, 9, 11, 19, 24, 26 Ug pa lung pa 329 Uighur 12, 14, 28, 41–2, 59–60, 62, 66, 88, 90–2, 94–5, 128, 173, 176, 226

general index Upāliparipṛcchā-sūtra 206 Uray, Géza xxvii, 77, 106, 108, 117, 120, 169, 215, 244 Usṇīsavijayā 71 Vaiḍūrya dkar po 179, 186 Vaiḍūrya g.ya’ sel 178, 183 Vaiḍūrya sngon po 62 Vajracchedikā 167, 225 Vajrapāṇi 194, 222–3, 228 Vajrayāna 206–7, 209–12, 222, 228 Veda 167–8, 186, 292, 294–5 Vedantic 293 Vedantin 45, 192, victory banner 7, 98 Vijayā (Rnam rgyal) 186–7 Vimala, Vimalamitra 185, 218, 222, 228 Vimalakīrti 23, 43 Vimalakīrtinirdeśa 29, 43 Vimalaprabhā-paripṛcchā 131 Vimalaprabhāvyākaraṇ a 180 Vimalavaiśāyana (Dri ma med pa) 204 Virtue/Efficacy (Ch. de, Tib. byin) 137–8, 141, 148, 160, 163, 171, 208, 315 Vocabulary of Dpal dbyangs (PT 1257) 23–4, 45, 57, 70, 96 Wanfo xia 萬佛峽 92 Wang Xi 王錫 10 Wang Yao 204, 273 washing the body 175 Wencheng 文成, Princess 57, 77, 165, 273 Wenwang 70 Wenxuan 文選 162–3, 273–4 Western land 178 white men 45, 124 white religion (chos dkar po) 46, 221, 331 whites 156 wild yak 308 wild/domestic 306 wisdom, political 130, 132, 134, 136, 189, 202 wise child 89, 127, 175–8 woman 63, 72, 110, 125, 152, 208, 254, 262, 264, 271–2 women 64, 134, 149, 217, 260, 312, 327, 331 World Order 136–7, 143, 147, 189 (see also: Gtsug) Wu Zetian 武則天 213

369

Wuliang ci 276 Wutai Shan 186–7 Xiangtuo 項託 276 Xiang’er zhu 想爾注 324, 326 Xiaozi jing 孝子經 66 Xiazhou 92 Xin Tangshu 新唐書 98, 155, 225 Xinjing, Sichuan 276 Xixia (see: Mi nyag) Xuanzang 27, 29, 96, 136 Xuanzong 玄宗 12, 277 Xunzi 荀子 164 Ya bla bdag drug, god 148, 181 Ya bla drug 180 Yab bla bdal drug Yab bla brdal drug, king 151 Yab lha brdal drug, god/king 179 Yamaguchi Zuihō 山口瑞鳳 2–3, 6, 12, 77–9, 81, 92, 96–7, 102, 118, 120, 154, 165–7, 181, 215 Yang ‘Ching 279 Yang ‘Tshing 274 Yang Liansheng 326 Yar river 28, 143–4 Yar klungs Sogs pa 179 Yar lha Sham po mountain 28, 143–5 Yar lung (Lde) 179, 253 G.yas ru 106–7 Yāma 63 Ye mkhyen 149, 153 Ye shes ‘od 5, 63 Ye shes dbyang 14 Ye shes rdo rje 45, 127, 156 Ye shes sde 1, 4–5, 9, 15, 43, 95, 226 Ye smon 151 Ye smon rgyal po (Sangs po ‘bum khri) 152 Yellow River 92, 300 Yellow Turbans 316 Yi Xia lun 167 Yid kyi khye’u chung 266 Yid la drang dkar 149 Yide, tomb of prince 59 Yijing 易經 41, 52, 66, 95, 127, 163–4, 167, 171, 275 Ying Shao 324 Yizhou 益州 (Chengdu) 6, 166 G.yo ru 106–7 Yod pa, god 260 Yol 35–6, 54, 126

370

general index

(Dpal gyi) Yon tan, minister-monk 102, 141, 181 Yu Ji 327 Yulin 榆林 92 Zab ma tog bkod pa 222 (see also: Karaṇ ḍavyūha) Zab mo, Hva shang 213 Zahor, Za hor 181, 223, 228 Zhang Daoling 張道陵 327 Zhang Khri sum rje 93, 171 Zhang Lha bzang 93 Zhang Lha bzang Klu dpal 171 Zhang zhung 78, 120, 154, 161, 177, 238, 240–3, 245, 252, 292, 334 Zhanguo ce 戰國策 (PT 1291) 18, 19, 55, 96, 115, 127 Zhengao 真誥 315, 317 Zhengyi fawen tianshijiao jiejing 正一法文天師教 326 Zhenyan kaojue 眞言要决 66

Gzer mig (Gzer myig) 147, 149, 177, 251–2, 255, 259–61, 265 Zhi ba ‘tsho (see: Śāntarakṣita) Zhong 253 Zhong cong 仲琮 273 Zhongni 66 Zhongyong 中庸 164, 279 Zhou era 286, 288 Zhou Yi 周易 15, 41, 171, 275–6 (see also: Yijing) Zhouli 周禮 98, 318 Zhoushi mingtong ji 周氏冥通記 302, 317 Zhuangzi 莊子 164, 168, 295, 317 Zhva’i lha khang inscription (812 AD) 97, 159, 204 Gzi brjid 63, 69–70, 254, 257, 261, 267, 331 Zu tse 129 (see also: Spung sad zu tse) Zuozhuan 左傳 66, 115, 273, 323 Zur phud lnga pa (Pancaśikha) 333

INDEX OF DUNHUANG DOCUMENTS India Office Library Tibetan J (ITJ) IT 26.2 ITJ 49 ITJ 172 ITJ 180.6 ITJ 192 ITJ 207 ITJ 208–211 ITJ 208.1 ITJ 208.2 ITJ 209 ITJ 210 ITJ 210.2 ITJ 211 ITJ 220 ITJ 222 ITJ 223 ITJ 234 (the Ten Virtues) ITJ 239 ITJ 247 ITJ 248 ITJ 250 ITJ 264 ITJ 265 ITJ 266 ITJ 267 ITJ 269 ITJ 280 ITJ 297 ITJ 298 ITJ 307.5 ITJ 345 ITJ 370.5 (Dar ma fallen from the Sky)

40 43 43 43 43 96, 226 96 226 226 226 226 226 226 13, 85, 248 40, 88 9, 88 46 46 226 226 96, 226 88 88 88 88 43 46 29 85, 249 220 37, 41

49, 139, 142, 235, 244 ITJ 380 (Mañjuśrīmūlakalpa) 181, 195 ITJ 43 203 ITJ 444 45 ITJ 452.2 226 ITJ 458 14, 31 ITJ 459 40 ITJ 463 14 ITJ 467 156 ITJ 474 175

ITJ 506 ITJ 592 ITJ 597 (prophesy) ITJ 598 (prophesy) ITJ 601.2 (prophesy) ITJ 606 ITJ 610 ITJ 617.2 ITJ 667 ITJ 675 ITJ 687 ITJ 699.2 ITJ 704.1 ITJ 709 ITJ 709.1–4 ITJ 709.5 ITJ 709.6 ITJ 709.11 (Chan Writing; Bsam gtan gyi yi ge)

xxvii, 7, 99, 102, 106–9, 111 51 51, 93, 193 93, 193 93, 193 213 43 128 45 200 205 48 39 37 10 10, 36 10 xxv, 7, 37, 39, 100

ITJ 710 (see Lengqie shizi ji) 15, 89, 273 ITJ 710.1 7 ITJ 711 (commentary to Rgyud sum pa tantra) 35, 184 ITJ 730 94 (see also: Sum pa shags) ITJ 733 172 ITJ 733–735 (“Account of the Ages”) 55, 171, 235 ITJ 735 171–3 ITJ 737.3 (Rāmāyaṇ a) 94 ITJ 739 72, 146, 261, 267 ITJ 740.1 36, 123, 156, 176, 154, 267–8 ITJ 742 12, 127, 276 ITJ 748 15, 41, 127, 275–6 ITJ 751 (see Prayers of De ga g.yu tshal) 30, 37, 68, 92

372

index of dunhuang documents India Office Library Chinese (I.O.)

I.O. 127 (Bayang jing) Pelliot tibétain (PT) PT 0001.5 PT 0016 (Prayers of De ga g.yu tshal)

PT 0017.1 PT 0017.2 PT 0021.1 PT 0021.2 PT 0022 PT 0024 PT 0033 PT 0037 PT 0043 PT 0044 PT 0047 PT 0055 PT 0066 (Rnga bo che’i mdo) PT 0078 PT 0092 PT 0098.4 PT 0100 PT 0106

PT 0106.2 PT 0116 PT 0116.2 PT 0116.5 PT 0116.6 PT 0116.7 PT 0116.8 (= P. Chin. 2799 & S. 5644) PT 0117.1 PT 0121.1 PT 0126 PT 0126.1 PT 0126.2 (History of the Dmu and the Phyva)

90 130 30, 55, 80, 92, 118, 128, 199, 104, 235 226 226 15 15 226 226 48, 199 44, 46, 202, 235 12 15, 244 44 54, 56, 61, 155 128–9, 200, 208, 226 210 13, 40, 96, 226 226 129, 148, 204 14–5, 17, 24, 26, 28, 31–3, 40, 56, 58, 60–2, 91 27–8, 53, 58, 60, 64, 67, 82 38–40, 68, 88–9, 95 55 9 38 38 6, 24, 36, 38 39 39 14, 38, 57, 172, 175, 313 59, 128, 177 72, 77, 123, 170, 145

PT 0127 PT 0127.1 PT 0130 PT 0131 PT 0134 PT 0209 PT 0218 PT 0220 PT 0230 PT 0235 PT 0238 PT 0239

PT 0263 PT 0389 PT 0398 PT 0443 PT 0454 PT 0458 PT 0498 PT 0507 PT 0610 PT 0611 PT 0623 (Jingang sanmei jing) PT 0624 PT 0699.1 PT 0728 PT 0729 PT 0730 PT 0735 PT 0742 PT 0743 PT 0744 PT 0745 PT 0746

PT 0747 PT 0748

87, 127, 175 276 9, 55, 68 9, 80, 195 9, 30, 55, 68, 195, 329 156 41 37, 49 9, 55, 71, 95 38 331 45, 53, 59, 65, 123–4, 232–3, 245–6, 250, 265, 167, 330 91 42 71 35, 54, 126 14, 56, 64, 67, 82 14, 40 210 45, 95 29 29 3, 89 9, 40, 88 8 48, 307 17, 63 14, 58 48 14, 26, 28, 31, 33, 40, 49, 58, 247 13–4, 40 13–4, 40, 53, 58, 64, 67 13–4, 31, 40, 60 14, 17, 27–9, 31–3, 42, 53, 56, 58, 60, 62–4, 67, 70, 82, 162, 246 14 14, 17–8, 28, 31, 33, 42, 48, 55–6, 58, 60–5, 67, 82, 162, 246

index of dunhuang documents PT 0749 (Bayang jing)

PT 0787.9 PT 0813 PT 0837 PT 0840 PT 0842 PT 0960 (Prophesy of Khotan) PT 0968 PT 0970–0974 PT 0972 PT 0977 PT 0981 PT 0982 PT 0986 (Shujing 書經) PT 0987 PT 0988 PT 0989 PT 0990 (History of Go ‘phang) PT 0991 PT 0992 (Maxims) PT 0992.1 PT 0992.2 PT 0992.3 PT 0992.4 PT 0992.5 PT 0992.7 PT 0992.8 PT 0992.9 PT 0994.1 PT 0997 PT 0999 PT 1038 (Theories of Origins)

PT 1040 PT 1042

14, 27–9, 32–3, 40, 42, 48, 53, 60, 62, 64, 67, 70, 82, 91, 162, 246–7 128 38, 88 15 181, 195, 211–2, 216 54 48, 93, 193 213 213 34, 57, 208, 213–4, 246 119, 213 46, 63, 94 7, 94 44, 46, 82, 85, 127, 170, 273 38, 41, 274–5, 281–3 38, 41, 274–5, 278, 281–3 38, 88 125, 127, 233 34, 133 14, 65, 94, 128, 155, 175, 265 18, 38, 89–90, 247 89 38, 89–90, 127 89, 128 34, 38, 57, 59, 65, 90 128 90 88, 90 90 92 9, 48, 55, 138 47, 72, 81, 117–8, 121–2, 176, 178, 182, 244, 261, 332 69, 125, 260, 263, 271 62, 266–7, 331

PT 1043 PT 1045 (raven divination) PT 1046 PT 1047 (Divination)

PT 1051 PT 1052 PT 1055 PT 1058 PT 1060 PT 1067 PT 1068 PT 1068.2 PT 1070 PT 1071 PT 1083 PT 1085 PT 1089 PT 1113 PT 1134

PT 1136 PT 1194 PT 1217 PT 1248 PT 1257 (Vocabulary of Dpal dbyangs) PT 1258 PT 1261 (Bilingual vocabulary) PT 1274 PT 1283

373 33, 150, 172, 176, 261, 267–8 176 268 17, 62, 78, 110, 117, 119, 120, 123, 142, 154, 170, 254, 268, 330, 335 268 146, 150 277 38 18, 35, 62, 150, 170, 262, 269 102–3 263, 306, 308 98, 125, 254, 257, 262 97 97 102 79, 102 79, 97 102 125, 130, 150, 172–4, 254, 257, 260–4, 267–8, 270, 306 125, 256, 258, 261–3, 266 125, 141, 254, 257, 263–4, 270, 306 102 63, 126 10, 19, 29, 41, 45, 96 91 (see also: Bayang jing) 53, 70, 96 59 18, 31, 38, 42, 57, 128

PT 1283.1 (see Dialogue of Two Brothers) 69, 88, 203 PT 1284 57, 59, 89–90, 175 PT 1284.2 38, 90

374

index of dunhuang documents

PT 1285

62, 64, 150, 172, 145, 152, 159–60, 162–3, 165, 167, 291, 306, 308

PT 1286 (List of principalities) PT 1286–1287 (Old Tibetan Chronicle) PT 1288 (Annals) PT 1289 PT 1290 PT 1291 (Zhanguo ce 戰國策) PT 1291.5 PT 1382 (Sum pa shags) PT 1399 (Sum pa shags) PT 1552.2 PT 1569 PT 1640 PT 2006 PT 2105 PT 2105.2 PT 2105.5 PT 2110 PT 2111 PT 2111.b PT 2122 PT 2206

102, 177 87, 117–8 117, 233 69, 125, 129–30, 158, 263, 269, 306–8 102–5, 117–9, 141, 146, 181 18, 96, 127 82

P. 972 P. 986 P. 1261 P. 2347 P. 2350 P. 2449 P. 3069 P. 3155 P. 3770 P. chin. 2054 P. chin. 2139 (prophesy) P. chin. 2298 P. chin. 2765 (= PT 1070) P. chin. 2943 P. chin. 2974 P. chin. 3395 P. chin. 3829

15 65 29 213 213 59 275 276 213 71

97 125 171 171 171

Stein Collection (S.) S. 207 S. 250 S. 504 S. 553 S. 731 S. 813 S. 1020 S. 2272 S. 2565.2 S. 3724 S. 3966 S. 4467 S. 5175.2 S. 5686 S. 6454 S. 6537

226 226 330 213 258, 306 276 4, 207 211 213 276 7, 213 89 213 276 213 38

93, 193 213

94 94 139 76 147 60 40 6–7, 88 9 14, 40 18, 38, 121, 128, 135, 211 88, 203 48, 55, 92 31, 33, 56, 246–7

Pelliot chinoise (P. chin.) P. 106 53

INDEX OF TIBETAN TERMS kun rdzob 19 kun snang dang ba 2 klu 60, 69, 75–7, 93, 149, 151–2, 226, 239, 249, 255, 262–3, 265–7, 269, 271, 294, 296, 305, 308–11, 313 (see also: Klu ‘bum in general index) klog pa 18 bka’ 7, 30, 72, 100, 108 bka’ khrims 217, 219 bka’ mchid 42, 50, 196 bka’ rtags 101, 104–5, 221, 223 bka’s/bkas bcad pa 4, 7 bkur sti 65, 67 bkrol lo 254, 257 mka’ mchid 42, 50, 196 rkun ma 110 skad gsar 1–2, 4–6 sku 7, 10, 30, 48, 55–6, 71, 92, 111, 114, 138, 175, 206, 237, 252, 260, 265–6 sku mkhar 109, 161 sku bla xiii, 22, 26, 55, 62, 71–8, 81, 119, 120, 122, 153, 170, 254 sku sri 71–2 sku lha 72–3, 202, 235 skos 73, 147–9, 151–3, 206, 223, 261, 270, 294 skyi ser 179 skye shi 10, 20, 30, 36–7, 40, 46, 49, 60, 133 bskos bzhag 152 khab dang dbyal 130, 271 khu ‘phang 179 khu dbon 74 khyo shug 64, 66 khrims yig 108 khrom rtags 109, 111 khrel (ltas) 64–5, 173 ‘khon 104–5 ‘khor ba 20, 36–7 ‘khyar bon 238 gab tse 266, 271 go ‘phang (dbu ‘phang) 155–6 (see also: King Go ‘phang) glud 154 glo bur 61, 198, 206

gri ‘dul 238 gri bshid 237–8 dge ba bcu 20, 24, 166–7, 204–5, 213–4, 216–22, 225 dge ba’i gnas 21 dge’o 2, 90 dgo 262–3, 269 mgon tshun 127, 148, 260, 264 mgon mtshun 62–3, 74, 148 mgon mtshun, lha mtshun 22 ‘grel pa 38–9, 187 rgan gyi lha 125 rgya rje Li 12 rgya rje Song 12 rgya bon 254, 259 rgyal khrims 185, 198, 203, 216–20 rgyal po’i lugs 46 rgyal phran gsil ma 179 rgyu’i Bon 238 sgo lnga 20, 184 sgo ni dar, myi ni btsan 67 sgrib lug 267 bsgyur bon 238, 240 ngan ‘gro 21 ngan pa 38, 110, 116–7, 134, 172, 176, 235 ngan pa bcu 20 ngan pa’i lam 21, 58 ngan song 21, 90, 258 dngas po 269 lnga phung 19 sngags 40, 42, 53, 108, 185, 211–2 sngon shad 2 sngun shad 2 bsngo 156 bsngo ba 55 chab dkar 240 chab gang 65, 140, 198 chab nag 238 chab srid 30, 44, 70, 76, 114, 120, 137–8, 142, 155–6, 217 chu gang 21, 46, 64–6, 127, 198 chu srin 87 chos 19–22, 24, 27–9, 41 chos kyi mkhan po 193 chos kyi sgo 10, 20, 38, 43

376

index of tibetan terms

chos kyi rnam grangs 10, 20, 43, 48 chos kyi dbu brnyes/snyes (see: dbu brnyes) chos kyi yi ge 14, 37, 39–44, 47–8, 50, 54, 89, 95, 193, 196, 213, 226 chos sku 239 chos khrims 132, 138, 202–3, 216–20 chos rtags 109, 111 chos dpe 49–50 chos yon po 21, 31, 33 chos (kyi) lam 17, 19, 27, 44, 46, 74–6, 86, 126, 130 chos lugs 11, 44, 46–7, 68, 73–4, 76, 86, 126–8, 136–7, 140–1, 159, 169, 189, 202, 224, 234–5 chos bzang 32, 34, 43–4, 46, 86, 112, 126, 130–2, 134–6, 139–40, 142, 166, 169, 189, 196–8, 201, 204, 234–5 chos gsum 20 ju tig 238 mjal dum 30, 80, 92–3, 138 mjug chad pa 7 ‘Jang 80, 92, 171, 293 ‘jig rten pa’i bden pa 19 rje blas 22, 81–2, 88, 95 rje blon 55, 79, 88, 138, 158, 160 rje sa 132 rje lha dpal 104 nyan 86, 253–4 gnyen 65, 156, 198, 331 gnyen lam 153 snying nye 74 te por 5 to dog 79 gtar du len pa 238 gter ma 180, 228, 239–40 gto 178–9, 187, 245, 253–5, 257, 264–6, 271–2 rtag pa 30, 42, 48, 69, 162, 258 rtags 7, 101–2, 104–5, 109, 111, 153, 221, 223, 266 rten ‘brel 221, 223–4 lta ba 10, 19, 27, 31, 54, 111, 169, 249 ltar bcos pa 50 ltas ba 19 bstan bcos 2, 44–5, 69, 207, 297 stag slag 109–110 stangs/dbyal 21, 63 stong sde 106, 170 ston pa 214, 240, 249, 255–6 ston min 50

tha mal pa 20, 173 than bya 270 thugs 7, 111, 129, 198, 222, 224, 260, 177 the’u rang 35 tho 28, 237, 267 mthu 68–71, 86, 113–4, 156, 239 mthu stobs 68–70 mthu rtsal 69, 156 mtho ris 11, 21, 41, 58–9, 90, 93–4, 248 dam pa’i chos 19–20, 31, 44, 47–8, 50–1, 88, 193, 196, 218 dam pa’i chos kyi lam 27 dar ma 37, 40–1, 47–9, 140, 166, 181, 195, 197–9, 203, 221, 225, 227, 229, 239–40, 329 dar phru 155 dum 80 (see also: mjal dum) de bzhin gshegs pa 7, 10, 19, 23, 90, 94 do ma 257, 266–7 dog 64 dong tse 276, 281, 334 don dam pa 19 drang 21, 24, 30–1, 46, 64, 88, 198, 248 dri 265–7, 272 drug 80, 92 bdud 33–4, 53–4, 57, 95, 260, 263, 267–70, 272, 308 bde ‘gro 21 bden 2, 10, 19, 23–4, 103, 198 mda’ dar 152–3 mdo 2, 4–5, 7, 9–10, 14, 20, 33, 37–43, 45, 47–8, 50, 54, 65, 85, 88, 90, 94–6, 108, 167, 193, 203, 209, 213, 218, 21–3, 226 mdos 123, 266 ‘dus ma byas 19 ‘dod rgyal 199 ‘dre 21, 32–4, 52, 60, 237, 247–9 ‘dre gdon 21, 32–3, 148 (b)rdol bon 237–8 sdig yul 14, 21, 58–9, 177 sdig lam 21, 59 sde snod gsum 20 gnam gyi ka ba 145 gnam gyi chos 44, 46, 73, 137, 159, 162, 235 gnam babs 49, 198–9 gnam ri phyva 157 gnam sa’i bar gyi yod do chog 25

index of tibetan terms gnam lha 35, 120, 204, 251 gnod sbyin 180 rnam par rtog pa 10, 19 snang 2, 4, 13, 25, 93, 150, 221, 252, 293, 329 snang brgyad 12–3, 146 dpa’ rtags 109 dpa’ bo 65, 98–9, 214 dpa’o 7 dpal 57 dpal yon 20, 28, 56 dpyad 247, 253–5, 257, 264–6, 271–2 spur khab 267 sprul 52, 152–3, 184, 206, 293, 349 spyan phye ba 71 spyi bo nas blugs 10 spyi gtsug 130, 150, 152, 183 pha rol 269 pha rol (du) phyin pa 19, 198 pha logs su phyin pa 19 pha se 269 phan yon 20 phas se 269 phan sod pa 20 phung po lnga 19 pho dge ba 20, 24 phya 55, 62–3, 77, 122–3, 147–54, 170, 177, 238, 252–3, 255, 259–62, 264, 268, 272, 313 phya thag 123, 148, 154 phyag rgya (“sign”) 7, 100–4, 108–9, 111, 221–2, 225 phvya 122–3, 137, 144–50, 152–5, 157–8, 160, 170, 172, 177–8, 180, 190, 346 phyva mkhan 149 phra men 229 phrag dag 69 ‘phags pa 10, 13–4, 20, 27–8, 34, 41, 53, 59, 88–9, 96, 160 ‘phra men ma 54 ‘phrul 14, 20–1, 26–8, 38, 41, 52–3, 57, 69–70, 78–9, 93, 95, 121, 130–1, 135, 139, 148, 150–2, 158–60, 167, 179, 185, 198–9, 202, 252, 261, 276, 294 ‘phrul gyi rgyal po 151, 198, 202, 277 ‘phrul gyi chos 27, 53, 130 ‘phrul gyi bu 275–7 ‘phrul gyi lha (btsan po) 21, 26, 78, 141

377

ban bon 293 Bod khams 193, 198 bon sku 239 bon po xi, xxix, 15, 21, 29, 32–5, 45, 59, 62–3, 108, 110, 122, 5, 148, 1515, 165–6, 177, 181–2, 224, 228, 231–57, 259–61, 263, 265–7, 269, 271–2, 348 bon mo 233, 246, 248–9 bya ba myed pa 42 bya gshen 256 bya ru 102, 155 byang chub sems dpa’ 24, 157 byams 21, 64, 198, 252, 260 byin 21, 30, 68–71, 86, 93, 112–4, 121, 126, 130, 137–8, 141, 156, 158, 160, 163, 171–2, 180, 183 byin (gyi) rlabs 68–70, 93, 126, 138, 183 byis pa 11, 20 bye’u 150 bla gter 229 bla mtsho 147 blun po 11, 20, 32–3, 81, 249, 281 dbang bskur 10, 69, 272 dbang thang gi yi ge 42 dbu brnyes/snyes/snyegs/bsnyengs 196, 219–23 dbu zhabs 85 dbon sras 194–5 ‘bul 21, 54–5, 72, 170 ‘brang rabs 267 ‘bras bu 28, 85, 128, 211 ‘bras bu’i bon 240 ma sangs 180 mi dge ba bcu 218 mi chos xxix, 128, 189, 300, 202, 213–7, 219, 220, 332–3 mi bden pa’i sems 19 mu 263, 265–6, 273 mu ‘jug 54 mu sman 73, 120, 268 mu stegs 33–4, 36, 45, 47, 53–4, 57, 167, 169, 205, 247 mu stegs can 10, 20, 32, 53 mur (‘)dug 2, 9, 10, 14, 20, 32–3, 41, 47, 53–4, 247 mo bon 21, 63–4, 247–8, 250 mo btab 21, 33, 253 mur dug, yon po 14 mya/mye ngan las ‘das pa 20, 28, 36, 51 (d)myal ba 14, 21, 58 myi bden 2

378

index of tibetan terms

myi bden pa’i ‘du shes 10, 19 myi bden pa’i sems 19 myi phal 173 myi(‘i) mgon 139, 198, 204 mye ngan 20 dmu 55, 77, 110, 123, 147–56, 170, 177–8, 245, 253–5, 259–80, 313 dmu thag (dmu dag) 110, 123, 148, 154, 254–5 dmu yad 154 rmog phru 155 smad lnga 20, 59, 184 sman 72–3, 120, 198, 255, 267–8 smon lam 55, 76, 226 gtsang gdang 24 gtsigs 87, 138, 196, 198 gtsug 28, 44, 96, 120–3, 126, 130–2, 135–9, 141–7, 149–54, 157, 159, 171, 183–4, 186–90, 197, 204, 234, 313 gtsug gi chos 20, 28, 130, 143 gtsug gi lha 28, 143, 145 gtsug lag xiii, 2, 12, 28–30, 44–5, 48, 74, 76, 86, 96, 112, 114, 117–9, 121–3, 125–41, 143, 145, 147, 149–51, 153, 155, 157, 159, 161, 163, 165–9, 171, 173, 175, 177–89, 197–204, 214, 216, 218, 230, 235–6, 276–7 btsan po xiii, 7–8, 21, 26, 43, 53, 70, 78, 100, 112, 114, 129, 139, 141, 171, 176, 179, 181–2, 198–9, 212–3 btsan zhing dar pa 67 rtsang 150, 170, 178 rtse rje 22, 73, 82, 96 tsha log 267 tshar bcad 2 tshu kha 269 tshe 57, 165 gtshug ri 147 mtshun la gtor ba

21

gdzung 9 mdzangs rtags 109 mdzangs pa 110 mdzod gsum 20 rdzu ‘phrul 52, 69, 70, 151, 167, 294 rdzus 69 rdzogs sho 5, 15–6 rdzogs so 5, 7, 15–6 wa zhu 110

zhal 7, 98, 100, 110, 130, 156, 170, 214 zhal bu 22, 74–6, 170 zhus sho 15, 91 bzhugs sho 15 bzhugs so 16 gzi brjid 69–70 (see also Gzi brjid in general index) gzi byin 21, 69, 156 gzugs khams 41 gzugs brnyan 11, 20, 51–2 gzugs yod 41 gzugs yod pa’i khams 41 gzed 269 bzang ‘gro 21 ‘ug pa 270 ‘od gsal (lha)

2, 161

ya lad 154 yang dag (min) 2 yang dag pa 10, 20, 24, 29, 31 yang dag pa’i don 19, 111 yang dag par gshegs pa 10, 19, 24, 29 yan lag 20, 43, 184 yab mes 168, 192, 194, 202, 222 yas 123, 178–9, 216, 233, 266 yi ge xxvii, 7, 9, 10, 14, 18, 20, 23, 33, 39–43, 47–50, 97–8, 101, 104, 109, 111, 167–8, 173, 192, 221, 274–5, 281–3 bka’ grims gyi yi ge 216, gtam gyi yi ge 96, yab mes gyi yi ge 222 sngags kyi yi ge 40, 42 (see also: chos kyi yi ge, Cu yag gyi yi ge, bsam gtan gyi yi ge) yi dags 21, 32–3, 60, 87 yig tshang 7, 41, 97, 101, 106, 108–110, 150 (see also: Rgya Bod yig tshang) yul rtags 109 yul gtsang ma 24 ye ni 17, 18, 33 ye ‘brog (yen ‘drog) 53, 61 yong 13, 16–8, 63, 73 yong dper bgyi na 18 yon tan 7, 20, 55–6, 59, 70, 86, 95, 100, 111, 114, 141 yong ni 17, 18, 63 yong yang 17–8 yon po 10, 14, 21, 30–3, 53–4, 88, 95 yon po (lta ba) 19 yon po’i mkhan po 21, 32, 246 g.yag snying 269

index of tibetan terms g.yung drung 10, 20, 23, 28–30, 87, 102, 111, 133, 137–8, 146–7, 159, 204 g.yung po 110 ri mo (che) 64–6, 108 ri mtho, sa gtsang 87, 144 ri rab lhun po 87 rigs kyi bu 20, 24 ru mtshon 109 rlabs 21, 68–70, 93, 130, 158, 160, 183 (see also: byin, byin rlabs, byin gyi rlabs) rlabs che ba 69 lam 10, 19, 27–8 (see also: chos lam, lha lam) lam spyad 27 lam lha 35–6, 120 lung sde bzhi 4 legs pa’i don 21, 56 legs pa’i dpal 20, 21, 56–7 legs so 2, 90 lo grung 105 lo rabs 254, 257 log pa 31, 33, 54, 64, 247, 248 log pa’i mkhan po 21, 33, 247 log par lta ba 14, 19, 30–1, 34, 53, 247 log par lta’o 54 log la ltas ba 19 sha 262–3, 269 shi kong (shigong 師公) 34 shing po byi 87 shid rabs 237 shri zhu 65 gshen 64, 123, 125, 147, 149, 177, 232–3, 236–45, 251–61, 264–6, 270–1, 306–7, 309, 329 gshog pa 266–7 bshad pa 38–9 bshid 237–9 sangs rgyas 13, 24, 27, 29, 40, 47–8, 50, 52–4, 58, 70, 87, 95, 128, 131, 133, 166, 197–8, 203, 206, 226, 234 sar bcad (tshar bcad) 1–2, 3, 5 sar chad 3–4 sung rab mdo sde 193 se sgo 267

379

so so’i skye bo 20 sogs dmar 238 sri gnon pa 238 sri zhu 38, 65–6, 90, 95, 127–8, 198, 282 sri zhu (che) 21, 64–5, 67 srid kyi sgo ni mtho (thob), myi ni btsan srid mtho 57, 132, 155; srid mtho / myi btsan 67 srid ni dard, sgo ni brtsan 21, 67 srid pa 65, 149, 151–2, 180, 251, 260, 265–6, 272, 394, 313 sribs/gdags 21, 61 srog lha 154, 267–8 gsar bcad 1, 3, 5 gsal bar rig pa 13 gsas 123, 148, 254 gsol 21, 54–5, 74–6, 104, 264 bsam gtan 39 bsam gtan gyi mdo 38–9 bsam gtan gyi yi ge 7, 39, 42, 100 bsams sgyu ma 19 bsod nams 11, 20–1, 55–6, 59, 68, 71, 95, 156, 228 bsod rnams kyi sku 10 hur 12, 166, 168, 225 lha bka’ 125, 138, 250 lha chos xxix, 34, 45–7, 51, 57, 90, 124, 128–30, 166–7, 169, 189, 194, 198, 200, 214, 216–7, 220, 232, 235 lha mchod 125 lha gnas 141 lha mda’ 153 lha dpal 56, 104, 135, 155 lha ma srin 21, 33, 60–1 lha btsun 21, 62 lha mtshun 46, 62 lha yul 59, 161, 200 lha la gtor ba 21, 62 lha lam 21, 59, 159 lha sras xiii, 7, 48, 55, 68, 92, 111, 134, 138–9, 149–50, 156, 161, 195, 198, 204 lha’i yang lha 147 lha’i lugs 44, 46, 134–5, 137–40, 159–60, 98, 200, 235 lho bal 4, 22, 79–81, 86, 112–3, 166, 195

INDEX OF SANSKRIT TERMS akuśala 20 adhiṣt ̣hāna 68–9 aṅga 184, 186 abhāsvara 2 abhijñā 186 abhūta 2 amṛta 34 avatāra 204 avyākṛta 214 asaṃ skṛta 19 asura 156 āgama 4, 166 ārya 28 īrṣyā

69

ujaska 70 uttamāṅga 184 udāra 69 ṛddhi

69–70

ojas 70 ojaska 70 kalyāṇamitra 166, 208, 229 kavyam 21, 62 kuśala 20 koṭṭapāla 82 kleśa 202 guṇa 20, 35–6 grantha 206 tathāgata 7, 19, 23–4, 39, 50, 93, 183 tīrthika 2, 20, 53, 247 tejas 70 tripiṭaka 20, 60, 99, 127, 196, 207 durgati 21 dṛsṭ ị 19 (see also: samyak-dṛsṭ ị ) deva 60, 128, 136–7, 147, 156–7, 212, 251, 311 deva-dharma 128 devadeva 157 devarāja 157 devātideva 147

Dharma 24, 36, 49, 131–2, 135–6, 206–7, 211, 216 dharma 10, 17, 19, 20, 24, 27, 28, 38, 41, 43, 47, 48, 50, 136, 169, 199, 203, 207–8, 216, 222, 234 dharmadhātu 206 dharmaparyāya 10, 20, 43 dharmamaṅgala 136 dharmamukha 38, 43 dharmaśāstra 203 dhāraṇī 11–2, 16, 71, 219, 221, 223–4, 226 naraka 21, 32 nidāna 54, 201, 214, 221, 225 nirmāṇa 52 nirmāṇika 52 nirmita 52 nirvāṇa 6, 20, 24, 27–8, 30, 36–7, 51, 133, 206, 221, 228 pañcamaṇḍala 20, 184 paramārtha 19, 23 pāramitā 19 pariṇāma 55, 185, 330 paryāya 2 (see also: dharmaparyāya) puṇya 20, 21, 56 puruṣa 294 prajñāpāramitā 5, 43, 205, 226–8 prajñāśataka 128–9, 140, 183, 200, 205 pratirūpa 20 pratirūpaka 50 pratyaṅga 184 prabhāva 70 prātiharya 69 pṛthag-jana 20 preta 21, 32–3, 60 bāla 11 buddha 24, 28, 166, 168, 235 (see also in general index: buddha) bodhisattva 6, 24, 62, 57, 111, 157, 161, 181–5, 210–2, 216, 222, 224, 227, 309 bhava 293 bhikṣu 34, 59, 172, 175, 214 bhūta 2, 23

index of sanskrit terms manuṣya-dharma 128 mantra 12, 54, 72, 130, 185, 210–2, 222–5, 255, 309, 330 mānava 204, 209 mārga 27, 50 mithyādṛiṣtị 19 yakṣa 35, 180–1 yādṛcchika 199 yuga 175 rājātirāja 157 rūpadhātu 41 lakṣaṇa 185 lokapāla 155 varāṅga 184 vikalpa 19 vijñānavādin 12 vinaya 5, 42, 47, 99, 140, 201, 203, 205–210, 216–7, 220, 243–4 Vimalaprabhā-paripṛcchā 131 Vimalaprabhāvyākaraṇ a 180 vihāra 126, 186, 318 vedāṅga 186 vyākaraṇa 206, 209 śaptāṅga 184 śālistamba 167, 214, 225

381

śāśvata 29, 102 śāstra 2, 38, 39, 45, 66, 69, 126, 183, 186, 199, 203, 205–7, 229 śīla 200, 203, 205 śraddhā 288 Śrutimūrdham 185 śrutiśiras 185 Śrutyārṣa-yukti 183 ṣaḍāṅga 184 saddharma 31, 44, 132, 136 satya 288 sanātana 29 samāpta 16 sambhogakāya 10 samyak 24, 29 samyak-dṛsṭ ̣i 31 saṃ vṛti 19 saṃ sāra 10, 20, 30, 36–7, 133, 205, 226 sūtra 2, 7, 9, 10, 14, 20, 37, 39, 40, 43, 45, 48, 49, 54, 138, 193, 196, 199, 203, 221–2 (see also individual sūtras under their respective headings) skandha 19 svarga 21 havyam 21, 62 homa 72

INDEX OF CHINESE TERMS an long 安龍 249 an xiang 安像 72 bai’e gui 拜惡鬼 246 baoshen 報身 10 Bayang 八陽 12 (see also: Bayang jing in general index) biezhuang 別莊 80 bieshu 別墅 80 bu jiaohua 不教化 69 buluo 部落 80 buwen 卜問 21, 33

gongyang 供養 21, 54 guanding 灌頂 10 guangwei 光威 70 guishen 鬼神 21, 59, 61, 62, 74 guoqu xiuyin 過去宿因 25

chanhui 懺悔 165 chenghuang 城隍 71, 77 chimei wangliang 魑魅魍魎 60 ci 慈 21, 64–5, 164 cijin 慈近 65 ciqin 慈親 65 cun sou 村藪 71

ji 記 39 jiao tian 教天 75 jiaohua ren 教化人 69 jiazi 甲子 87 jie’er 節兒 82 jili 吉利 21, 56 jin fu 今夫 18 jinci 金紫 97 jing 旌 98 jing 經 20, 37, 39, 43 jinglun 經論 193 jingtu 淨土 24 jisi 祭祀 74 jiu yi 舊訳 3 jun 君 73

dao 道 19, 46, 130, 162, 163, 236, 278 (see also: miaodao, waidao, wodao, shengdao) daoshi 道士 33, 54, 94 de 德 19, 20, 56, 70, 113, 163, 171, 278 di 帝 299 diyi ti 第一諦 19 di yu 地獄 14 diyu 地嶽 21, 58 du 讀 18, 33, 47, 213 dudu 都督 79 fa 法 22, 24, 44, 47 famen 法門 10, 20, 43 famen yaojiu 法門要決 38 fan 凡 16–8, 20 Fan 番國 8 fanyu 凡愚 11 fashi 法師 193 feng tian 奉天 46 Fo 佛 47, 166, 168, 225 fo jing lü 佛經律 47 fu 夫 16–8 fu 福 20, 56, 59, 70, 323 fu 符 97 gaoshen 告身 97 gongde 功德 21, 25, 28, 56

heng yao 橫夭 21, 61 Houtu 后土 75 huangtian 皇天 75 hupen 虎賁 98

kai yan 開眼, kai guang 開光, kai ming 開明 71 kongwu 空無 19 liri 曆日 42 liyi 利益 20 luming shu 祿(=錄)命書 42 lun 輪 36–9, 45 man qiu 謾求 32 manmo 蛮貊 22 men 門 67 (sha) men 7 men xing, ren gui 門興人貴 67 meng 孟 7 meng 盟 87, 171, 286–8, 299 miaodao 妙道 20 miaofa 妙法 44, 47, 193 mofa 末法 50

index of chinese terms neng quan 能詮 183 niepan 篞槃 37 poluomi 波羅蜜

19

qie fu 且夫 18 qingjing 清淨 24 renci 仁慈 164 rongyi 戎夷 22 rulai 如来 10, 19, 23, 24 rulai chan 如来禪 39 ruqu 如去 23 rutong 儒童 209, 276 sangji 喪祭 62 sanzang 三藏 20 sejie 色界 41 seyou 色有 41 shan fa 善法 44, 204, 209 shan nan zi 善男子 22, 24 shanchuan 山川 22 shanfa 善法 44, 204, 209 Shangdi 上帝 73 shanshen 善神 57 she 社 75 shen 神 20, 57, 73 shen po 神婆 125 shen shou 神壽 171 shen yu 神語 125 shen zhao 神着 125 sheng 聖 20, 27, 53, 159, 163–4, 171 Shengdao 聖道 27, 53 shengshen 聖神 21, 26, 70, 171 shengsi 生死 20, 36, 37 shengsi lun 生死輪 36, 37 shenzhi 神祇 73 shenzhou jing 神咒經 42, 57, 326 shi 誓 87, 171, 286–8 shigong 師公 34, 247, 249 shiguan 仕官 81 shimu 師母 248, 249 shishan 十善 20, 24, 166, 204, 209, 213 shiti 世諦 19 shiti 實体 23 shiwu 十惡 20, 213 shou 守 22 shun 順 21, 64–6 shuntian 順天 46, 73 Songchao 宋朝 12 taishou 太守 (prefect) 81 Tangchao 唐朝 12 tian zhong tian 天中天 209

383

tiandi 天地 61 tiandi shenming 天地神明 22, 74 tianshang 天上 21, 58 tongzi 銅子 276, 334 tunmen 頓門 50 waidao 外道 10, 14, 20, 47, 53, 54, 247 waidao tianmo 外道天魔 54 waidao xiejian 外道邪見 14, 54 wangnian 妄念 19 wangxiang 妄想 10, 19 wangxin 忘心 19 wei 威 70, 163 wei 偽 24 weide 威德 21, 70 weili 威力 70 wei (shenzhi) li 威(神)力 21 weishen (li) 威神(力) 70 wu/’e 惡 20, 54, 85, 209, 213, 246 wodao 恶道 21 wogui 恶鬼 21, 32, 60 wuti 五体 20 wuwei 無為 19 wuwo 吾我 167 wuyun 五蘊 19 wuzhu 巫祝 155 xian sheng seng 賢聖僧 53 xiangfa 像法 11, 20, 50–2, 93–4 xiangming shu 相命書 42 xianzu 先祖 75 xiao 孝 21, 64–7, 127 xiedao jian 邪倒見 31 xiejian 邪見 14, 19, 31, 47, 54 xiejing 邪經 32 xiemo waidao 邪魔外道 14, 53, 54 xieshen 邪神 32, 34, 54, 60, 246, 248 xieshi 邪師 21, 31–3, 54, 246–6 xin yi 新訳 3 xiu dao 修道 27 yan 嚴 65 yang 陽 61, 63, 162, 164 yanzhen 厭鎮 32 yaojue 要決 38, 39 Yijing 易經 41, 66, 127, 163, 164, 167, 177, 275 yin qing 銀青 97 yin 陰 17, 21, 61, 63, 162, 164, 296, 322, 327 yingxiang 影像 51–2 yinsi 淫祀 59–60, 321–2 yinyang 陰陽 21, 61, 63, 164 yu 愚 11, 20, 33

384

index of chinese terms

yuanliang 元良 74 yulu 語錄 37 yuzhou 宇宙 25 zhai 齋 57, 165, 170, 175 zhangfu 章服 98 zhangshi 章飾 98 zhen 真 24, 31, 327 zheng 正 24, 29, 30, 31 zheng Dao 正道 32 zhengfa 正法 31, 44, 47, 193–4 zhenru 真如 23

zhenshi 真實 23 zhong 忠 21, 64, 65, 127, 171 zhong 終 16 zhongyao 中夭 21, 61 zhou (governor) 82 Zhou Yi 周易 15, 41, 127, 171, 275, 276 zhu 注 38–39, 324, 326 zhuan 傳 39, 66, 85, 115, 213, 273, 302, 323 ziran 自然 42, 199 zu 祖 22, 62, 74, 75, 163

Die Macht des Steins

Rolf in the Woods

Rolf Klein Algorithmische Geometrie

Die Macht des Steins

Randall, Rolf 711 greift ein

Randall, Rolf 711 greift ein

Live unnoticed (Philosophia Antiqua)

Aristotle's Topics (Philosophia antiqua 74)

Aristotle on Memory and Recollection (Philosophia Antiqua)

Influences on Peripatetic Rhetoric (Philosophia Antiqua)

Logic and the Imperial Stoa (Philosophia Antiqua)

Pleasure and the Good Life: Plato, Aristotle, and the Neoplatonists (Philosophia Antiqua) (Philosophia Antiqua)

Akrasia in Greek Philosophy (Philosophia Antiqua)

UTOPIA ANTIQUA (Routledge Monographs in Classical Studies)

India Antiqua: A Volume of Oriental Studies

Aristotle's Theory of Predication (Philosophia Antiqua)

The Story of Rolf and the Viking's Bow

Erhabene Welten: Das Leben Rolf Nevanlinnas (Vita Mathematica)

Bokföring från början Rolf Johansson Claes Ridderström Caroline Östgren

In Platonis Dialogos Commentariorum Fragmenta Translation and Commentary (Philosophia Antiqua)

Le Philèbe de Platon: Introduction à l’Agathologie Platonicienne (Philosophia Antiqua)

Chrysippus' on Affections: Reconstruction and Interpretations (Philosophia Antiqua)

Theophrastus of Eresus Commentary Volume 6.1 (Philosophia Antiqua)

The Philosophy of Dionysius the Areopagite (Philosophia Antiqua)

Hypothetical Syllogistic and Stoic Logic (Philosophia Antiqua 87)

Wydawnictwo Militaria. #302. Rolf Michaelis.14. Waffen Grenadier Division der SS (Ukrainische Nr. 1) ''Galizien''

Die Macht des Steins. Die Chronik von Thomas Covenant dem Zweifler Band 2

The Notion of That Which Depends on Us in Plotinus and Its Background (Philosophia Antiqua)

Interpreting Aristotle's Posterior Analytics in Late Antiquity and Beyond (Philosophia Antiqua)

Theophrastus Against the Presocratics and Plato: Peripatetic Dialectic in the De Sensibus (Philosophia Antiqua)

Rolf Stein's Tibetica Antiqua

Die Macht des Steins

Rolf in the Woods

Rolf Klein Algorithmische Geometrie

Die Macht des Steins

Randall, Rolf 711 greift ein

Randall, Rolf 711 greift ein

Live unnoticed (Philosophia Antiqua)

Aristotle's Topics (Philosophia antiqua 74)

Aristotle on Memory and Recollection (Philosophia Antiqua)

Influences on Peripatetic Rhetoric (Philosophia Antiqua)

Logic and the Imperial Stoa (Philosophia Antiqua)

Pleasure and the Good Life: Plato, Aristotle, and the Neoplatonists (Philosophia Antiqua) (Philosophia Antiqua)

Akrasia in Greek Philosophy (Philosophia Antiqua)

UTOPIA ANTIQUA (Routledge Monographs in Classical Studies)

India Antiqua: A Volume of Oriental Studies

Aristotle's Theory of Predication (Philosophia Antiqua)

The Story of Rolf and the Viking's Bow

Erhabene Welten: Das Leben Rolf Nevanlinnas (Vita Mathematica)

Bokföring från början Rolf Johansson Claes Ridderström Caroline Östgren

In Platonis Dialogos Commentariorum Fragmenta Translation and Commentary (Philosophia Antiqua)

Le Philèbe de Platon: Introduction à l’Agathologie Platonicienne (Philosophia Antiqua)

Chrysippus' on Affections: Reconstruction and Interpretations (Philosophia Antiqua)

Theophrastus of Eresus Commentary Volume 6.1 (Philosophia Antiqua)

The Philosophy of Dionysius the Areopagite (Philosophia Antiqua)

Hypothetical Syllogistic and Stoic Logic (Philosophia Antiqua 87)

Wydawnictwo Militaria. #302. Rolf Michaelis.14. Waffen Grenadier Division der SS (Ukrainische Nr. 1) ''Galizien''

Die Macht des Steins. Die Chronik von Thomas Covenant dem Zweifler Band 2

The Notion of That Which Depends on Us in Plotinus and Its Background (Philosophia Antiqua)

Interpreting Aristotle's Posterior Analytics in Late Antiquity and Beyond (Philosophia Antiqua)

Theophrastus Against the Presocratics and Plato: Peripatetic Dialectic in the De Sensibus (Philosophia Antiqua)

Recommend Documents