The Oldest History of the Kadampa School?

Dromtönpa

It is not from want of desire that I have reneged on my duty to post once a month as I too boldly promised twenty years ago. Lately I have been feeling the strain and am doing all I can to make my work space more “ergonomic,” I believe this has helped reduce the deep pain in my shoulder a little, so here we go. This is only a test.*

(*Today’s blog is offered in honor of Helmut Eimer, master of academic research on Atisha, always critical and always helpful to me with research questions, and for this I believe calling him a friend is fully justified. Thanks are owed to José Cabezón for useful information used here.)

If most peoples’ interests could only be made to align nicely with those of us who try our best to read Tibetan literature in the original language, many recent manuscript finds would be making headlines in the mainline news sites of the worldwide web. We tried to survey some of the most interesting ca. 1200 CE textual caches a few years ago. Limiting ourselves to the Matho alone, we can find more than enough amazing material to keep us busy and entertained right up until the grim reaper makes his move or until the turn of the coming century, whichever comes first.

That the pre-1200 Matho cache might contain the beginning page of a history of the Kadampa teachers of the Stages of the Path is news so exciting that enthusiasm swells my chest and tries to pop open my skull. After all, it is generally believed that no such history was ever written during the entire era of Kadampa flourishing (late 11th to early in the 15th centuries). The first Kadam histories were written in the 15th century when the Gelugpa School was on the rise. It is as if they were written in retrospect on behalf a monastic tradition that couldn't be bothered to write histories of itself.*

(*Of course much turns around the question of what constitutes a Tibetan historical genre, but I follow what has been said about this in the introduction to Tibetan Histories, its 2020 [2nd] edition available here.)

Yet so far as I know nobody on our planet has written about the fragment in question, v349. One likely reason it has been avoided so far is the script. Most Matho fragments are in early styles of cursive script, some more difficult than the others. The small percentage of non-Tibetan students who have mastered cursive script will still struggle with these specific ways of writing it. In fact, everyone will have problems here and there making out the readings, they often require double-checking and rethinking. 

This script situation helps justify providing the transcription—you will see it soon enough—that was made through the pairing of two pairs of eyes. One pair belongs to a talented young scholar from Tsang Arig by the name of Pentsok W. Rtsang, while the other belongs to myself. The idea is that four eyes can better read through the difficulties than two can. Even while we decided to preserve some of its peculiar spelling practices, we have striven to put forward a text that can be (relatively speaking) readily understood. [I have inserted now and then my suggested ways of reading terms and names that may otherwise remain too opaque.] Since the photographs are instantly available on the internet (just tap here and find volume 349), you may consult it with ease in cases of doubt. We see no reason to go into piddling discussions about ambiguous readings, missing ligatures and what not.

Much of what is in this early source is unique to it, or in cases of parallel accounts appears to supply significantly different information. This is just the kind of tinder that kindles the fire of historical investigation. But hey, I didn't start the fire, and don't intend to do so now. I will just note that the story of the expulsion of a monk for having alcoholic beverages is quite different here. It usually happens in Bodhgaya, and not as you find here. The Five Questions presented to Atisha by the ruler of western Tibet is a matter of particular interest, and José Cabezón will soon publish an essay on that very topic that I haven't read but do look forward to. The fragment ends soon after the first meeting of Atisha with Dromtön (in 1044?), but it presumably would have continued with a few 12th-century teachers of the Stages of the Path. I will not give everything away and spoil its surprises, and in fact I decided not to give any Englished version today, so for now my work is done. 

Matho fragment v349 

[Recto of an isolated folio labelled "1" (scan image 1)]

Note on transcription: I sometimes insert in square brackets my own emended readings in cases when I believe it might be helpful (easily recognized and systemic "misspellings" are left as is). The paragraphing is my own. There is no title supplied, although there is a statement about the subject to be covered, immediately after the homage statement, We bow to the Lamas. As it promises, 'We shall relate a mere corner of the history of the Stages of the Path teachings that are held in common.' 

For the original transcription by Pentsok, look here assuming the link will take you there.

 

࿓ // ! // bla ma rnams la phyag 'tshal lo // 

thun mong lam gyi rim pa'i // lo rgyus zur tsam brjod par bya // 

de la slob dpon thogs myed kyis 'gon po byams pa la sgrubs pas // lo bcu gnyis nas zhal [m]thong nas byis pa'i rdzu 'phrul gyi stobs gyis dgas ldan [~dga' ldan] du phyin nas // 'gon po byams pa la lha'i drod skad cig byams pa'i chos lnga gsan mngon par rtogs pa rgyan gyi snyan rgyud kyi gdams ngag 'di yang mnyan nas // de nas mi yul du byon tsam na mi lo bcu gnyis song ngo // 

slob dpon thogs myed kyis // slob dpon dbyig gnyen la bshad // 

des slob dpon glog ros stan pa la / des 'phags pa grol ba'i sde [Ārya Vimuktisena] de la / des so so rnam grol sde [Pudgala Vimuktisena] la / des mchog gi sde [Prasena] la / des [']dul ba'i sde [Vinītasena] la / des rnams par snang mdzad bzang po [Vairocanabhadra] la / des gseng ge bzang po [Haribhadra] la / des rin cen bzang po [~rin chen bzang po, Ratnabhadra] la / des bzang po'i mdo la / des gser gling pa [Suvarṇadvīpin] la bshad / de yan cod [~yan chod] sa la gnas pa 'phags pa'i gang zag yin [/] des jo bo rje la bshad / jo bo sbyor lam pa yin gsung[s] / 

Note: I couldn't identify Glog-ros-stan-pa, but José Cabezón suggested it would likely be Blo-gros-brtan-pa (Sthiramati), and this appears to be the correct solution. Of interest here is its statement that, while all the members of the lineage leading up to Jowo Jé were saints with direct vision of the truth, the Jowo himself was a person belonging to the prior and preliminary Stage of Application.

jos 'bi kra ma la shi lar phal rtsen pa'i sde bar [~phal chen pa'i sde par] rab tu byung nas yod pa la / jo bo la pan byi ta (paˆ∂ita) mtshan gsum par ming thogs skad / rab tu byung nas nyes byas phra zhing phra bas kyang ma gos pas gnas [b]rtan 'dul ba 'dzin pa bya bar ming thogs / phyi rig pa dang nang rig pa dang gso ba rig pa dang bzo rig dang / rig pa'i gnas lnga la [m]khas pas pan byi ta chen por yang ming thogs so // gsang sngags kyi rgyud sde bzhi shes yi dam lha'i zhal [m]thong pas rnal 'byor pa chen por yang ming thogs so // 

gnas de na jo bo'i bla ma rta dbyangs chung ngun bya ba gcig yod pas / khong la gangs sngags [~gsang sngags] kyi rdzas cig la chang dgos nas chang gcig khyer nas yong bas / btsun pa kun gyis tshor nas / dge 'dun gros byas pas rta dbyangs chung ngun skrod par byas nas 'gan de chol pa [g]sungs [~srungs? ~rungs?] pas / bla ma na re ra kri ta 'gan de sung ba ci yin gsung [/] 

jo bos drang por bshad pa khong na re [/] bla mas chang kher [~khyer] nas song zer nas de skrod pa'i 'gan de sungs pa [~rungs pa?] yin byas pas / bla ma na re 'o ra kri ta nga la dge 'dun gyis chad pa'i las byar mi rung [/] dge 'dun thugs tsham [~tshal?] na nga rgya sgo la 'gror mi rung bas / lcag ri [~lcags ri] la skras tshugs gcig gsung nas skras [r]tsugs [~gtsug] nas gshegs so // 

jo bos kyang sting nas 'brengs nas phyin / bla mas chu bo 'gang ga la 'ding pa bting nas de'i khar bzhugs nas spyi bo nas rta skad rtser re re bzhud do // 

jo bos grub thob tu [m]khyen nas chu la [b]rgal nas bla ma'i zhal nas 'o ra kri ta de nas tshur ma 'ong gsung ngo // 

jo bos bla ma la zhus pa bla ma lags ngan bu la 'gro sa ni ngan song gsum las med na ci tsug dgyi zhus pas / bla ma'i zhal nas khyod khyod rang gyis [~gi] yul mtha' 'khob du spyugs la sems can gyi don gyis gsung ngo // 

jo bos / log nas thang khob [~mtha' 'khob] bod yul du 'gro ba la bod la phan thogs sam mi thogs / jo mo sgron ma la gsol pa btab pas / jo mo sgron ma'i zhal nas khyod kyis thogs gsung ngo // 

da bod yul du 'gro dgos rno nas yod pa la mnga' ris nas lha bla ma byang chung 'od bya bas / lo tsa ba nag tsho tshul khrims rgyal ba dang / rgya rtsen seng [~brtson seng?] [g]nyis la [g]ser mang po [b]skur nas / khyed [g]nyis kyis pan byi ta [m]khas pa gcig spyan drong la shog gsung bas // khong [g]nyis kyis gsan nas rgya gar du phyin nas da lta pan byi ta su che dris pas / jo bo che zer nas jo bo la khong [g]nyis kyis gser mang po phul nas bod yul du gshegs par zhu ba phul lo gnang ngo [//] jo bos dpe ca [~dpe cha] yang cha cas [~cha chas] su byas nas rgya rtson seng [~rgya brtson seng] sngun la btang bas lam bar du gshi' 'o [~shi'o] // 

°

Verso of an isolated folio labelled "1" (scan image 2)

nag tsho tshul khrims rgyal ba dang jo bo gnyis kyis 'ongs nas me pa la'i yul gyi mang dang gi gnas [b]rtan 'on ba la spyod pa [b]sdus pa'i sgron ma bshad do // 

de nas tho li[ng] du phyin nas bla ma byang chub 'od dang phrad pa dang / lha bla ma byang chub 'od kyis jo bo la dri ba lnga dris pa ni [/] jo bo lags / nged bod la la na re / theg pa che chung nya [~gnyis? ~gsum?] dang po nas yod zer la / la la na re / de ma nges [/] theg pa chung ngu la yang [~mang?] chen po'i blo skye zer / de gang bden pa lags zhus pas [/] 

jo bo'i zhal nas 'o bod kyi pan bi tas chos bsams nas 'dug gyis ngas de la lan gcig phyi [~phyin?] nas bya'is gsung zhing des 'gre yang dri ba de nged bod la la na re / bsgom dgos la / la la na re / sgom mi dgos rtogs pas chog zer [/] de gang bden zhus / 

mang [~yang] nged bod la la na re / thabs shes rab zung du 'brel dgos zer / la la na re / mi dgos ma [~ya?] res chog zer de gang bden / 

bo de sa ta'i bsdom pa'i rten du so sor thar pa'i sdom pa dgos zer la mi dgos zer [/] de gang bden / 

yang nged bod la tshangs par spyod gsang ba shes rab kyi dbang skur gnang zer / la la na re / ma gnang zer [/] de gang bden / de'i lan du byang chung lam gyi sgrol ma [~sgron ma] gsungs so // 

 

de yang dang po theg pa gcig pa'i lan ni / chung ngu 'bring dang mchog 'gyur ba'i skyes bu gsum du shes par bya zhes gsungs so // 

sgom dgos pa'i lan ni / de ltar de nyid goms byas nas / rims kyi drod sogs thob 'gyurd te / rab dga' la sogs thob gyur nas / sangs rgyas byang chung yun mi ring zhes gsungs so // 

thabs shes rab zung du 'brel dgos pa'i lan ni / thabs dang bral ba'i shes rab dang / shes rab bral ba'i thabs dag kyang / gang tshe chi ba [~'chi ba, mchi ba?] zhes gsungs pa / des na nyi ba [~gnyis ga] byang mi [~chi? ~ci?] bya zhes gsungs so // 

bo de sa ta'i sdom pa'i rten du so sor thard pa'i sdom pa dgos pa'i lan ni / so so thard pa ris bdun gyi thog tu sdom pa dang ldan la / bo de sa ta'i sdom pa'i skal ba yod kyis gzhan du myin zhes gsungs so // 

tshangs par spyod pa la gsang ba shes rab kyi dbang gnang pa'i lan ni / gsang ba shes rab dbang skur ni tshangs par spyod par blang mi blang [~bya?} zhes gsungs so // 

dus de tsam na dge bshes ston pa khams na yo ga stod 'grel gsung gyin yod pa la / khams pa'i tshong pa kun na re / stod mnga' ris na jo bo ti pang ka ra bya ba'i pan byi ta chen po gcig byon nas 'dug go zer / dge bshes ston pa dad pa dung skyes nas dpe cha kun mi la byin nas byang lam nas mar byin no // 

de'i dus su jo bo'i zhal nas nga'i ku su li pa gla ba [~zla ba] gsum nas yong gnyis nas yong gcig nas yong tha ma sang yang yong gsung ngo // 

phyis de 'ongs nas phrad ma thag tu gcig la gcig zings kyis 'jus [~'dzus?] so // 

dge bshes ston pas jo bo dang phrad nas ma grongs yan chad du rtsi mar gyi mar me la bzhugs su gcug pa myin pa mun pa la bzhugs su ma gcug go / 

de nas dge bshes ston pas dbus su [g]shegs par zhu phul nas gnang nas mar byon no // mar byon pa'i lam ka'i gnas 'gon thams cad la sngun la bang chen [b]tang nas / sang khyed kyi gnas su pan byi ta chen po gcig 'ong bas khyed sna len [~sne len?] byed dgos byas so // gnas 'gon thams cad kyis sna len byas so // de'i dus su zhabs thog byas tsad la yon tan sna re ma byung pa med gsung ngo // 

dge bshes ston pa dang jo bo gnyis lam bar du nyal tsa na bar du yol bas bcad nas nyal ba la 'or gcig jo bo'i zhal nas ku su li pa gsung nas 'bod pa la / ci dgyi zhus pas nga la da lta rgya gar na slob ma gcig dril bu sil zhing gsol ba 'debs kyi 'dug gsung ngo / des jo bo la mngon par shes pa gsum yod par shes pa yin gsung ngo / 

Note: The three superknowledges Atisha is credited with are famously found in the Thirty Verses of Praise by Dromtön, verses 17-19; English in Chattopadhyaya's book p. 374.

de nas myang stod du yon ston chos kyi dbang phyug la chos bshad pas / 

(The passage below the final line appears to define the three clairvoyances mentioned directly above it, even in the absence of a connecting line: 

gzhan gyi sems dang / lha'i rna ba dang / rdzu 'phrul yul dang [continuation missing].)

Bibliographical notes

On the Four Caches, look here. 

For the Matho (མ་སྤྲོ་) cache in Ladakh (ལ་དྭགས་):

There is quite a lot of literature on historical works about the Kadampas in German, English and Japanese by such scholars as Helmut Eimer, Ulrike Roesler, and Maho Iuchi, among others. There is even a very large new volume about Kadampa history in Tibetan language. All of these things would have been typed into a long bibliographical list if only I had the energy.

An interesting matter for thought is this: Today the one and only standard account of the lives of the teachers who transmited the teachings on the Stages of the Path is this one —

Tshe-mchog-gling Yongs-’dzin Ye-shes-rgyal-mtshan (1713-1793), Byang-chub Lam-gyi Rim-pa’i Bla-ma Brgyud-pa’i Rnam-par Thar-pa Rgyal-bstan Mdzes-pa’i Rgyan Mchog Phul-byung Nor-bu’i Phreng-ba (1787). 

This monumental work in two volumes is known to have replaced at least one earlier and currently unavailable work on the subject written in the previous century or two. It may be that our Matho fragment represents the original behind them all. For more details on the genre, consult with Tibetan Histories (nos. 295, 462, 539, 1215 & 1218).

It is interesting to consider that a search of BDRC only pulled up one rather close match to the account of the Five Questions, and that is in the perhaps 13th century Kagyu history by Rdo-rje-mdzes-'od, Bka’-brgyud-kyi Rnam-thar Chen-mo Rin-po-che’i Gter-mdzod Dgos-’dod ’Byung-gnas, “a collection of lives of the successive masters in the transmission lineage of the ’Bri-gung Bka’-brgyud-pa tradition in the Nepal Tibet borderlands,” D. Tsondu Senghe (Bir 1985), in 526 pp. at p, 270 & ff., this publication said to be “reproduced from a rare manuscript from Limi Dzing Pegyeling.” There is no way to be sure just yet, but is it possible this early Kagyu writer had use of the text the Matho fragment belonged to? We can still ask the question even if we don't at the moment the ability to answer it.

°

The frontispiece 

is a detail of the central figure of a thangka in the permanent collection of The Israel Museum (Jerusalem) no. B68.0239. The name label (not seen here) reads: ’brom rje dge bsnyen chos ’phel la na [mo], or, འབྲོམ་རྗེ་དགེ་བསྙེན་ཆོས་འཕེལ་ལ་ན་མོ།  This indicates that he was a Buddhist layman with the given name Chömpel. It is not his usual name, but a scriptural passage in the Karuṇāpuṇḍarīka Sūtra that contains the name Layman Chömpel is believed to prophesy his future existence. While very early texts often call him by the epithet Geshé Tönpa (Dge-bshes Ston-pa), his usual given name is Gyelwai Jungne (Rgyal-ba'i-'byung-gnas). It is more or less the norm to regard the first Tibetan member in an Indic lineage to be the one who founded that lineage. It seems unfair when Indians are not regarded as founders even the ones who were residing in Tibet. But I am not sure if identifying someone as a founder is such an interesting issue. After all, founders of these lineages had no idea they were founding anything. They were just teaching Buddhist Dharma. Dromtön was not the only disciple of Atisha, but he stood out because of his large role in founding Reting Monastery in 1056. It was only by the year 1075 or so Tibetans became conscious that there was such a school as the Kadam that had a founder (see the English of the Blue Annals, p. 269). Padampa, when in Tingri during the last two decades of the 11th century, was well aware of the Kadam school as something that existed in Central Tibet (this confirms the statement in the Blue Annals). He had critical words for them, but more on that another time. Of interest is a relevant passage from the Golden Rosary of Lives of Narthang that basically says all the monastics and laypeople who came to take refuge at Nyetang [while Atisha still lived] were called Refuge Takers (Skyabs-'gro-ba), and only later on came to be known as Kadampa (Bka'-gdams-pa).

སྤྱིར་བན་སྐྱ་ཐམས་ཅད་སྐྱབས་འགྲོ་ལ་གཉེ་ཐང་དུ་སྐྱབས་འགྲོ་བ་ཞེས་གྲགས་བཀའ་གདམས་པར་ཕྱི་ནས་གྲགས་པ་ཡིན་གསུང་། 

A note on some names of Atisha

On another matter, here I have used "Atisha" as the name by which he is best known to an international audience. There has been a decades-long discussion about how Atisha should be properly spelled and interpreted, initiated by Helmut Eimer who concluded "Atiśa" (with no length mark on the "i") is correct. After long hesitation, the international scholarly community began to follow his lead in leaving off the length mark. Recently there has been a move that I basically agree with (even while I make no demands) to start spelling his name in the form it very likely was originally, which is something like Adhesha (some early Tibetan texts spell it A-dhe-sha or the like). I have been keeping some notes about this in Tibskrit meant to be provoke further thinking, not to settle the issue. I will just copy it here:

Kano, TSM,* has a discussion on p. 83 of what might possibly be the more original form of his name, Adhīśa, actually attested in Tibetan script form as A-dhe-sha, or [just possibly] A-rhe-sha). Jo-bo A-dhe-sha is attested in NTSP,** section NGA, fol. 76r.6 (and it's used in an Indian episode to refer to Atiśa). I later noticed more occurrences in the Snar thang gser phreng (digitally typed version) at fol. 132v: ston pas a dhe sha khu ston gyis mi gtong bas thabs legs kyis bgyi 'tshal (other instances on fol. 135r, 147v, 149r, 156v). But I have wondered if this is possibly not meant as a proper name at all, but just the Sanskrit ādeśa, like upadeśa a word for deeply spiritual instructions. On the other hand Adhīśa, 'Supreme Lord,' is still today a possible boy's name in India that often appears in the form of Adheesh. I was also thinking that Adhīśa could be the very thing that was calqued in the Tibetan form Jo-bo Rje. Well, yes, that would make the combination "Jo-bo Rje A-ti-sha" oddly redundant, wouldn't it?

(*Kano Kazuo, "The Transmission of Sanskrit Manuscripts from India to Tibet: The Case of a Manuscript Collection in the Possession of Atiśa Dīpaṃkaraśrījñāna (980-1054)," contained in: Carmen Meinert, ed., Transfer of Buddhism Across Central Asian Networks (7th to 13th Centuries), Brill (Leiden 2016), pp. 82-117, at p. 83. **Mchims Nam-mkha'-grags, Snar thang gser 'phreng (a descriptive rather than an actual title), a manuscript supplied at TBRC no. W2CZ7888.)

More Than We Imagined: Early Zhijé Histories

 

I know this must look like a shallow dip into deep and cloudy waters. Perhaps it is just that. I woke up one morning with an odd idea. I thought of constructing a list that would form the basis for a small library of Zhijé lineage histories prior to around 1300 CE. Given that time restraint, I eventually narrowed in on about eight items. In line with the larger Tibetan Histories bibliography, they were placed in chronological order by date of composition.* I have to say, it was a lot of work. I began to wonder, why put all that effort into making a list not guaranteed to be useful or inspiring to all that many of us on our blue planet? 

Oh, well. There won't be any grand conclusions about the historical significance of these history books in today's blog. But yes, I do plan to use them as a basis for another one about Padampa's birthplace and childhood, just not quite yet. It shouldn't be too surprising if looking at the earliest histories makes us reconsider what the later ones have been telling us. But more on that later, since my ideas are still in the testing phase.**

(*I suppose my initial impulse came out of a need to integrate them into Tibetan Histories in a future edition. The 2020 expanded 2nd edition is here for free download. **Oh, and not to forget, I need to write down why I now believe the date of Padampa's death must be moved back by 12 years, from the 1117 you see everywhere to 1105 CE. Not as trivial a move as it may seem.)

 

To be short and concise, I will refer to the list and the histories listed in it as a single entity with capitals: "The Library."

Before getting too serious about the histories in The Library, a very rapid review with the help of a slide I've shown before. It outlines the Middle and Later Lineages that descended from Padampa. 

For present purposes we can limit ourselves to the three major Middle Transmissions, leaving aside the three minor ones. And we can ignore all but the Kunga lineage of the Later Transmission. That means just four transmissions — the Ma, So, Kam and Kunga — make up the subject matter of The Library in its entirely. 

So, here you see the first four in The Library made up of eight items. A few words about each one and our time is over.

—Z1—

I justify putting the women's history, a collective biography of Padampa's woman disciples, as number one simply because it is the first discrete titled historical text that appears in the entire Zhijé corpus known to me. Indeed it is to be counted among the dozen earliest Phyi-dar (roughly post-1000 CE) Tibetan history-genre texts we know of. Composed by Kunga, its composition ought to predate his death in 1124. It exists in a Matho Monastery fragment (more on Matho in a minute) scribed before 1200. It comes down to us in basically two versions, one that combines precepts with biographical information, and another with biographies only. Our oldest datable textual witness, the fragment in Matho, belongs to the former group, combining biographical information with precepts.

Here I display before your eyes a sample of the Matho fragment without saying more for now, just in order to impress on you the somewhat mind blowing fact that we do have a pre-1200 manuscript. For more, I can send you back to a recent blog on the subject.*

(*See “Women Disciples of Padampa: Very Early Ladakhi Zhijé Fragments from Matho,” June 06, 2024.)

—Z2—

Now for no. 2. Astounding but true, also found nested among the Matho fragments is a fairly complete untitled history of the Middle Transmission's Kam (སྐམ་) lineage. Unlike most of the Matho fragments that are in truth fragments, this one is in a still-intact booklet format, just that both beginning and end are missing. As it is a Matho text, its scribing and therefore necessarily its composition were both prior to 1200.

—Z3 & Z4— 

I will say little about 3 and 4 in my list. No. 3, dating to late in the 12th century, is arguably only the longer of many historical forewords, both earlier and equally early, in the Zhijé Collection (so perhaps I should not have included it at all), while no. 4 is the best known of the early Zhijé histories as its content is largely copied into the Blue Annals, long available in English translation.

—Z5—

So I will move ahead to my number 5, the set of Middle Zhijé histories preserved in eastern Bhutan at Drametsé Monastery. Although there are three distinct and quite short texts, I have bunched them all together under the same number in The Library, distinguishing them by adding letters a, b and c if needed.

The rough date of composition of all three of these small Middle Lineage histories is surely early 13th century, perhaps even the first quarter of the 13th century. I have written a blog essay about the Ma (རྨ་) lineage history, so will not discuss its provenance and authorship again here.*

(*Middle Zhijé in Four Matho Fragments, posted July 27, 2025.)

 

I will just say I think it possible the Drametsé manuscript as a whole was directly scribed in the pre- or early-Mongol era, and is not a somewhat later copy. It is difficult at this point to be state firmly.

It looks like this in the photographs taken at Drametsé Monastery by the team of Karma Phuntsok under the British Library sponsored Endangered Archives Project (try this link).

—Z6—

No. 6 in The Library is something quite unknown to Tibetology and Tibetan tradition alike. It suddenly came to my attention during the winter months of 2024 when I had the good fortune to be enabled to spend some winter weeks in Rome looking at the Tucci Tibetan collection in the reading room of the IsIAO.*

Just two days before my departure, Elena de Rossi Filibeck gave me an offprint of an article she had published. There, in a footnote on its first page, was a title I immediately recognized as a work of Padampa. For an entire day I thought I ‘discovered’ it, but this turned out to be untrue, as Elena had already done a complete catalog on this manuscript set that she then freely and generously shared with me. This manuscript set, too, has been subject of a Tibetologic blog.** 

(*If you wish to explore the Giuseppe Tucci collection, your constant companion will be Elena de Rossi Filibeck, Catalogue of the Tucci Tibetan Fund in the Library of IsIAO, in 2 volumes. The fresh new book by Michela Clemente promises to answer the questions we have about how Tucci got his books: In Search for the Provenance of the Books of the Tucci Tibetan Collection. **See “Padampa in the Vatican?” March 22, 2024.) 

 

—Z7—

Just briefly, I would like to say that the 1277 history by Nyedowa (1268-1328), no. 7, is of a respectable length, and written by an author of not just this, but two other intriguing histories, one on the history of medicine,* and another on the Kālacakra Tantra.

(*On Nyedowas's medicine history, see this Tibetologic blog. The study by Brambilla on his Kālacakra history is not yet published.)

—Z8—

I suppose the biographies authored by Chu-sgom-pa ought to be dated to around 1300 with question mark. The composer has no known dates and a problematic identity; I doubt he has to do with the 'Chus-pa sub-lineage that anyway preceded Zhigpo. This is brief and contains only minimal sketches on Padampa and so on, so I leave it aside for the time being.

I continued the listing with more of the still not well enough known, unavailable or undatable materials. Our set of eight isn't set in stone. I even went on to list some newly available histories that were composed after 1300. I will not describe any of these other texts today. I imagine you may find more interesting some reflections instigated by this early body of historical literature. Next time, my friends, next time.

Postscripts

As you may have noticed in the opening slide, this is part of a presentation, since revised, originally meant for the International Association for Tibetan Studies meeting that had been scheduled to take place in Kathmandu in late August 2026. Due to inter- and intra-miscommunications of Beijing and Kathmandu there was an episode of political ball fumbling resulting in the in-person conference getting cancelled and moved onto Zoom. The local Nepalese press and, later on, the international news stories about the cancellation were in large part off the mark and were indeed part of the problem. No, Beijing did not demand the conference be cancelled. She was planning how best to leverage the IATS — the world's only truly international conference on Tibet — in the interest of mainstreaming her false state narrative about Tibet and his history. For a discussion of all this, one that I believe to be largely correct in its assessments, see Robbie Barnett's essay: "Cross-border Interference or Garbled Messaging: China, Nepal, and the Cancellation of the World's Largest Tibetan Studies Conference." Look here for it.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

I intend to put up the full texts of The Library eventually. It nears completion, and as soon as it is in shape to share I will link to it here. With OCR busy doing so much to make Tibetan texts searchable in some degree, it is still just a fact that so many pre-Mongol-era Tibetan works, particularly those we now have in cursive manuscripts, are not yet searchable. That means transcribing them is something Human Skilled Intelligence* is needed to do, either from scratch or by skillfully correcting the substandard job OCR makes of it.** Besides, good transcriptions can then be put to use as "training data" so in the future the not-so-super intelligence we will continue to understand as being artificial can possibly get a little better at doing what it does. Even with all our credible doubts, might this massive accumulation of knowledge bring something beneficial to living sentient beings? Is that naive?

(*I didn't invent the HSI concept, but I hesitate to advertise it by giving out links until I know more about it. It appears to be free, but there is the ever present danger of monetization. Everywhere, that is, except here in Tibeto-logic blog with its general rule that nothing unfree will be put on offer.)

(**That its output is substandard everyone has to know, including the experts tasked with developing Tibetan cursive OCR. Take as witness the recent Zoom presentation by Rachael M. Griffiths, “From Manuscript to Searchable Text: A Computational Pipeline for Unlocking the Pagan Tibet Corpus.”*** Among its conclusions is this one: Human effort and expertise cannot be replaced.)

(***I supply the full title here so you can search for it, as it may soon be posted online.)

A Great List of Online Resources for Tibetan Studies

Sunbird Sipping Nectar

Somehow it escaped my attention until just today, but a fantastic listing of online resources for Tibetan Studies has been there at the University of Virginia’s Tibetan and Himalayan Library for as long as two years now. Why did no one tell me? Just go there and scroll down through the many attractions the web has to offer, nicely divided into types. That means if you are looking for online dictionaries, you get a discreet list of them with tappable links to get to the one of your choice in the twinkling of an eye, likewise with sites that offer downloadable PDFs and OCRable texts.

To get there go here:  https://thlib.org/terms/reference-resources/#/

In case the link fails you, try a websearch for “Key Tibetan Reference Resources.” I must warn you ahead of time, it may trigger your manic-depressive mood swings, at first feeling overwhelmed by how much is out there that you will never be able to see or download or understand... followed by a sense of elation about how much is out there and so quickly available to yourself and to others. Me? I find myself in between, yet I was thrilled to see, for instance, that the Library of Tibetan Works and Archives has made their rare manuscripts available online (to find it go to that link I just gave you and look for it for yourself).*

It is embarrassing to admit, but the listing at Tibetan and Himalayan Library is so much better arranged, so much more comprehensive, and so much more up-to-date than what you see in my sidebar, I’m thinking about how I might give most of it a toss out the window. On second thought, dead links are a sad fact of the internet and you find their tombstones everywhere, so why not let things be? What do you think? Either way it looks like work. 

(*One thing I observed while inspecting the THLib listing is just how few blogs specifically about Tibet are out there.**  Why don’t you start one up? I heard they are about to become cool again.)

[**But, well, they haven’t listed Tibetan-written or Tibetan-language blogs for some reason. ཁབ་བརྡ་, to give just one example, would have been a very obvious one to include. I would have left out all those travel blogs, too, just as they did.]

While I’m making referrals I thought I would point you toward Alexander A. Smith’s new video series on Tibetan history.  

If the video doesn’t immediately pop up on your screen, try this link to the channel named Armchair Academics. Especially since YouTube offerings overall have become so dreadful in recent months, it is encouraging to see things of real education value for a change.

• If you have more suggestions to make, please let us know in the comments. I also thought about the Starr Library at Columbia University. It has particularly rich listings of Tibetan studies resources of various kinds. For some reason it is not findable in the listing of listings in THLib, so I think it should be added. It is through it that you get access to the Tibet Mirror newspaper database, as well as the papers of Lama Anagarika Govinda, to mention two of its superbly fascinating offerings.

Disclaimer: All the creators of the resources mentioned in this blog are good friends, it is true, but they never asked me to praise or criticize them, let alone make links to their digital realms, and they don’t receive monetary benefits from this any more than I do. Well, maybe a little more, I have no idea, really. I’ll ask them.

Yunnan’s Old Tibetan Inscription

Photo taken by myself a few years back

This is a tomb inscription for a political figure of importance in 8th-century Yunnan-Tibet relations. I won’t even try to tack it up against a historical backdrop, you can attempt this for yourself by consulting the literature listed later on.* For now I just supply a very rough transcription only, not an exact one, followed by one meant to be more precisely scientific. You will want to consult the original rubbings, or photos in any case. Finally, an attempt at accurate English-ization.

(*What you see are my own photos taken in 2016 at the museum in Lijiang, with the display glass creating photographic challenges. Just to give an idea of distances, by today’s roads Lhasa and Lijiang are over 1700 kilometers apart. It’s like driving from Frankfort to Lisbon. But where the European would mean 22 hours of driving, the Tibetan stretch of highway would take at least 32.) 

Takata believes the inscription must predate 788 CE, placing it among the earliest datable stone inscriptions in Tibetan. The translation is redone here with reference to the translation in his essay, p. 162. I have to point out that the differences are not likely to seem very meaningful. For the OTDO transcription of the text, look here. I think if I’ve brought more attention to the existence of this pivotal piece of history carved in stone, it will be enough to justify this blogging attempt.

As for its provenance, the museum label tells us it was excavated at “Gezi village in Shigu township of Lijiang in March 1992.” The out-of-this-world artwork is worthy of its own close study, I would agree, but I choose to stick to the text. Here is my smoothed-out version of the Tibetan-language inscription in normal Wylie followed by the Tibetan script:

Click to enlarge

mtsho rum long la dag thog ma / rgya 'bangs las rgya rje gtan gyi rjer myi rung nas // btsan po lha sras la glo ba nye ste // blon skyes bzang la / phyag 'tshal nas pho tshed zang mang ni / gser chen pho stsald // long la dag gtsang cen stsald pa las lo dgu bcu lon de gum ba'i mchad pa /

མཚོ་རུམ་ལོང་ལ་དག་ཐོག་མ། རྒྱ་འབངས་ལས་རྒྱ་རྗེ་གཏན་གྱི་རྗེར་མྱི་རུང་ནས། །བཙན་པོ་ལྷ་སྲས་ལ་གློ་བ་ཉེ་སྟེ། །བློན་སྐྱེས་བཟང་ལ། ཕྱག་འཚལ་ནས་ཕོ་ཚེད་ཟང་མང་ནི། གསེར་ཆེན་ཕོ་སྩལད། ། ལོང་ལ་དག་གཙང་ཅེན་སྩལད་པ་ལས་ལོ་དགུ་བཅུ་ལོན་དེ་གུམ་བའི་མཆད་པ་

Now a transliteration, line by line (reversed letter “i” not noted), with an attempt at scientific exactitude:

1. mtsho: rum: long: la dag: thog: ma / rgya: 'bangs: las:
2. rgya: rje: gtan: gyi: rjer: myi: rung: nas // btsan: po: lha: sras: la:
3. glo: ba: nye ste // blon: skyes: bzang: la: / phyag: 'tshal: nas: pho: tshed zang
4. mang: ni / gser: chen pho: stsald // long la: dag gtsang cen stsald pa: las lo
5. dgu bcu lon de gum ba'i mchad pa

And finally, here is my translation, presented with no sense of perfection or finality:

[This is the tomb of] Long-la-dag of mTsho-rum. The origin [of the affair is as follows]: the Chinese subjects no longer accepted the Chinese monarch as being qualified to be a stable (or permanent) monarch; therefore, [Long-la-dag] pledged his allegiance* to the Tibetan Emperor, a descendent of gods (lha-sras, ~devaputra), and made obeisance to the councilor Skyes-bzang [d. 757]. As a result, Pho Tshed-zang-mang was granted a great gold letter (mark of rank) and Long-la-dag was given an official rank of gtsang-chen. Finally, attaining the age of ninety, he died. [Here is] his tomb...

(*Actually used here is that endearing Old Tibetan phrase literally meaning '[getting] near to the lungs,’ that in effect means to develop a warm relationship, to grow fond of someone. May I point out that the heart and lungs together occupy the same chest?)

 

Bibliocracy

For the text of the relevant inscription — the OTDO dates it to post-757 CE — look here. 

Megan Bryson, “Tsenpo Chung, Yunnan wang, Mahārāja: Royal Titles in Narratives of Nanzhao Kingship between Tibet and Tang China,” Cahiers d'Extrême-Asie, vol. 24 (2015), pp. 59-76. Most highly recommended of all.

Édouard Chavannes, “Documents historiques et géographiques relatifs à Li-kiang,” T'oung Pao, series 2, vol. 13 (1912), pp. 565-653. This ought to be made available at the Brill website (brill.com).

___, “Une inscription du royaume de Nan-Tschao,” Journal Asiatique, series no. 9, vol. 16 (1901). Look here. It was thanks to the late Helga Uebach's bibliography that I could locate these two essays by Chavannes.

Lewis Doney, Dependency at the Centre & Periphery of the Tibetan Empire: Sayings, Doings and Interagency, Bonn Center for Dependency and Slavery Studies, Working Paper 12 (2023), in 25 pages.  Link here.

Nathan Hill, Old Tibetan Inscriptions, Old Tibetan Documents Online Monograph Series no. 2, Research Institute for Languages & Cultures of Asia and Africa, Tokyo University of Foreign Studies (Tokyo 2009). At p. 10 is an edition of the text, with references to the literature, including some not listed here. Look here.

Khagang Palchen Thar (Dpal-chen-thar), “South Jang or Ha Stele,” Tibet Journal, vol. 30, no. 2 (Summer 2005), pp. 61-68. 

Liang Yongjia, “Stranger-Kingship and Cosmocracy, or, Sahlins in Southwest China,” Asia Pacific Journal of Anthropology, vol. 12, no. 3 (2011), pp. 236-254.

Duncan J. Poupard, “Writings on the Wall: Powerful Inscriptions in the Sino-Tibetan Borderlands,” Asian Anthropology (2021), online publication. In actual fact about graffiti that use Dongba hieroglyphics, but anyway interesting: 

https://doi.org/10.1080/1683478X.2021.1889788.

Takata Tokio, “A Note on the Lijiang Tibetan Inscription,” Asia Major, vol. 19, nos. 1-2 (2006), pp. 161-170.

Helga Uebach (1940-2021), “Tibetan Officials in the 8th-Century Southeastern Part of the Empire,” contained in: C. Scherrer-Schaub, ed., Old Tibetan Studies, Brill (Leiden 2012), pp. 53-64.

Wang Yao (1928-2015), “Yunnan Lijiang Tufan gubei shidu zhaji” [=Notes on an Old Tibetan Inscription Found in Lijiang, Yunnan Province], Tang yanjiu (=Journal of Tang Studies), vol. 7 (2001), 421-427, 2 pls. Reference simply lifted from Nathan Hill, Old Tibetan Inscriptions. For references to a few more Chinese-language studies, check the OTDO.

Yamada Noriyuki. “The Mu Native Official’s Governance of the Tibetan World and His Sponsorship of Tibetan Buddhism,” contained in: Christian Daniels and Jianxiong Ma, eds., The Transformation of Yunnan in Ming China: From the Dali Kingdom to Imperial Province, Routledge (London 2020), pp. 111-136.

•

PS: For our amusement, I transcribe the museum’s English-language label, as given. I suspect it is based on the Chinese, rather than directly on the Tibetan, and if so this might go toward explaining why it preserves that Chinese term Tubo instead of translating it into what we all recognize was and is Tibet. It calls itself a synopsis rather than a translation, and so it is:

“The regional chieftain of Cuorong area was firstly elected by local people to supervise the local officers. However, the leader was not in a good relationship with officers of Han majority, he was getting on well with the emperor of Tubo, and eventually came over and pledged allegiance to Tubo. The emperor bestowed him a golden prize (the highest award). Thereafter, he died naturally at the age of ninety.”

Well, I hope you found it somehow instructive or otherwise worthwhile, if not I typed it out in vain. You might notice, for one thing, that the name of the Tibetan minister Skyes-bzang has entirely disappeared. And then we should say that the rank of gtsang-chen is hardly the highest ministerial rank, but rather very close to the lowest. Erased is the clear statement that the Chinese subjects were the ones unhappy with their ruler. Surely this is said with reference to the An Lushan Rebellion that started in 755 CE. Gone, too, is the suggestion that the Yunnan leader regarded the Chinese Emperor as less than permanent (gtan) or stable (brtan), depending on how we want to understand that syllable. Oh, and see how less than clear it is that it was, after all, the Tibetan Emperor (and not just any old emperor) who bestowed on Long-la-dag the ministerial rank of gtsang-chen.

This Tibetan inscription doesn’t in the least support those who nowadays toss about the Beijing-approved claims that Tibet was always part of China (with the vague repeated rhetoric “since ancient times”), just the opposite. And this holds true regardless of whose translation you turn to.

• • •

PPS (June 9, 2026)

One of the chief puzzles in the translation is what to do with the apparent proper name Pho Tshed-zang-mang. I am just sharing some thoughts here, but I suppose this might be following a traditional personal name-forming system known to long exist among the Nakhi people in northern Yunnan. According to Mathieu’s essay listed just below, names were formed from four single-syllable elements, the first one identifying the mother's clan name, then the father's personal name, thirdly the wife's clan name, and finally ego's personal name, in that order. The Pho in the Tibetan transcription (if that is what it really is) could indicate a known Nakhi matrilineal clan the Pu. Pho does not ever seem to function as a single-syllable clan name in Tibet, even if there is no way to feel entirely sure. Well, it is just a thought. For more look here:  

Christine Mathieu, “Matricultural Resilience in Historical Context: A Focus on the Naxi Nationality,” Matrix: A Journal for Matricultural Studies, vol. 2, no. 1 (March 2021), pp. 176-201.

On the other hand, Bryson’s essay (listed above) mentions how Nanzhou rulers’ names, in three syllables, began with the final element of their fathers’ name. And I must say the last two syllables, zang & mang, do have an Old Tibetan feel about them (they would look quite natural, whether together or separated, as part of a personal name during the imperial era), so I am not entirely sure it is necessary to turn to the Nakhi or the Nanzhou rulers after all.

Bryson also points out something we should have known. There is a song celebrating the political alliance in the Old Tibetan Chronicles. This courtly poetry ought to be revisited by our wizened Old Tibetanists before it is too late for them and for us.*

(*As so often happens, I was out looking for something else on the internet when an interesting collection of Old Tibetan sources on Yunnan popped up on my screen. It even includes an English translation (admittedly based on Jacques Bacot's century-old French translation) of the song we just mentioned. Just have a look at Ludwig M. Brinckmann, “Yúnnán in the Old Tibetan Annals: An Annotated Translation of Texts Related to Yúnnán in Tibetan Texts Discovered at Dünhuáng,” online publication [version: October 2024].)

 •  •  •