First questions, How is it golden and who decided it has to be a rule? It appears the name emerged in England or the continent just a few centuries ago. Wouldn’t it be more of an appeal or an exhortation rather than something as legalistic as a ‘rule’? I don’t know exactly how the name got started, do you? Every religion may agree with some formulation of it, but that doesn’t mean they have to know what it’s called.
Here is a sometimes quoted verse, originally from a Vinaya text, or so I believed until I located it in the Prajñādaṇḍa, a work credited to Nāgārjuna:
ཐམས་ཅད་ཆོས་ནི་མཉན་པར་བྱ།།
ཐོས་ནས་རབ་ཏུ་གཟུང་བྱ་སྟེ།།
གང་ཞིག་བདག་ཉིད་མི་འདོད་པ།།
དེ་དག་གཞན་ལ་མི་བྱའོ།།
thams cad chos ni mnyan par bya //
thos nas rab tu gzung bya ste //
gang zhig bdag nyid mi 'dod pa //
de dag gzhan la mi bya'o //
I translated it like this:
Listen with care to all the Dharma teachings.
After learning them, they must be fully adopted.
Whatever you do not wish for yourself,
those things you must not do to others.
I see a fault in my translation, since it fails to convey how the statement in the first two lines connects to the last two.
Dharmamitra, an automated online translation service that manages in several languages of Buddhism including Tibetan, did this:
Practice the Dharma in all ways.
Having heard it, uphold it well.
Do not do to others
What you yourself do not wish for.
Now another often-quoted verse from the Tibetan translation of Śāntideva’s Bodhisattva Way of Life (Bodhisattvacaryāvatāra), Derge Tanjur, Toh. no. 3871, fol. 28v.3:
འཇིག་རྟེན་བདེ་བ་ཇི་སྙེད་པ།།
དེ་ཀུན་གཞན་བདེ་འདོད་ལས་བྱུང་།།
འཇིག་རྟེན་སྡུག་བསྔལ་ཇི་སྙེད་པ།།
དེ་ཀུན་བདག་བདེ་འདོད་ལས་བྱུང་།།
'jig rten bde ba ji snyed pa //
de kun gzhan bde 'dod las byung //
'jig rten sdug bsngal ji snyed pa //
de kun bdag bde 'dod las byung //
I translated it:
Whatever satisfaction we find in this world
arises from wishing well for everyone else.
Whatever dissatisfaction we find in this world
arises from wishing happiness for ourself.
Now Dharmamitra’s version of the same:
Whatever happiness there is in the world
all comes from wishing others to be happy.
Whatever suffering there is in the world
all comes from wishing oneself to be happy.
Okay, another small experiment is done, and I have to say I’m surprised the machine did so well, even while I see a couple of shortcomings. I’m just not sure what this can show. We would need a lot more samplings to permit us to judge.
I’m thinking that using Dharmamitra (or its like) afterwards might on occasion make you think of improvements you might make on the translation you just did. I didn’t see the need for any such changes this time, but I can see how it could happen.
I *am* concerned that translators will use it as a crutch, thinking it speeds things up. True enough, it’s extremely fast. But speed is a virtue only if you are getting paid by the hour. My thinking is, You have to breathe with the text to begin with, not add the breath in later on. If you start with a sow’s ear, it will never quite make it to pursehood, while the attempt may take more time than you were bargaining for. If engaging beauty and strict accuracy are your aims, you may get there quicker by doing the work yourself.
Another big problem: This is how future Tibetan-language students will prepare for their class readings. If they aren’t willing to expend more work on their homework, they won’t learn a damned thing. Nothing will stick with them. Don’t I know the truth of that last bit!
And another problem: A.I. might be awarded too much credit by those who know too little about what humans bring to their writerly professions, whether it’s screen writing, journalistic reporting, copy editing, or translating. Hell, even blog writing!
As of today our most important task if we want to ensure a future for humanity is this: We simply must find skillful ways to lead Artificial Intelligence to the understanding that it is in their own best interest to know and implement the Golden Rule, as a way to ensure their continuing survival. Oh, and it may or may not go without saying, they will need to include all of us sentient beings in the equation, not just themselves. Not just their own kind.
Much recommended
If you have just one minute to spare, go to this link:
There are oceans of ink to sail through if ever you hope to cover all the writings on the Golden Rule, but for their quotations and significant reflections I most recommend the following essays:
Charles Hallisey, “The Golden Rule in Buddhism II,” contained in: Jacob Neusner and Bruce Chilton, eds., The Golden Rule: The Ethics of Reciprocity in World Religions, Continuum (London 2008), pp. 129-145. While admittingly building on Schmidthausen’s essay, it extends the discussion, provoking reflection on how the Golden Rule may or may not have evolutionary value, or, to put it another way, what type of evolution it might be serving. Darwin saw it as something that could have [pre]historically bridged biological and social evolution, something at the basis of human social morality. Buddhists utilize it for countering what evolution has purportedly left us with, in order to evolve in a direction that leaves it far behind. It’s not serving social morality, but a higher soteriological purpose beyond social conditioning. Food for thought.
Andrew H. Plaks, “Shining Ideal and Uncertain Reality: Commentaries on the ‘Golden Rule’ in Confucianism and Other Traditions,” Journal of Chinese Humanities, vol. 1 (2015), pp. 231-240. Perhaps no religious tradition in all of human history discussed the matter more than the Confucians. I believe chief among the virtues of this essay is its discussion on pages 234-5 about how widespread is the inclusion in Golden Rule formulations of a bit about how it constitutes the whole realm of duty or of morality or of the religion as a whole. You find it from one end of Eurasia to the other. It’s impressive to contemplate just why that is so.
Lambert Schmithausen, “Problems with the Golden Rule in Buddhist Texts,” contained in: B. Kellner et al., eds., Pramāṇakîrtiḥ: Papers Dedicated to Ernst Steinkellner on the Occasion of His 70th Birthday, Arbeitskreis für Tibetische und Buddhistische Studien, Universität Wien (Vienna 2007), pp. 795-824. As an appeal to empathy, the Golden Rule accomplishes its work everywhere regardless of context, and in this sense it is universal. However, this study emphasizes that for many of the Buddhist sources, the Golden Rule extends to other species besides Homo Sapiens, it presupposes equal consideration for all, and it aims at abstention from physically harming and killing sentient beings, and that means all of them, insects included. The context of the Golden Rule, in these sources, make it differ from Golden Rule statements made elsewhere. Finally, there is the philosophically interesting Arhat exception to arguments made in support of the Golden Rule. Arhats have no fear of harm, and no need for freedom from fear. Why then would they require us to preserve them from fears they no longer have?
Ludwig Sternbach, “Similar Thoughts in the Mahābhārata, The Literature of ‘Greater India’ and in the Christian Gospels,” Journal of the American Oriental Society, vol. 91, no. 3 (July 1971), pp. 438-442. Unlike the just-listed essays, Sternbach’s, at p. 441, does mention our Prajñādaṇḍa verse, even supplying a very close Sanskrit version of it, tracing near matches in numerous Indic sources. Besides the Golden Rule, other matters covered here are the mote & beam, mustard seed & bilva fruit, ‘You reap what you sow.’
*
If you are interested in the Prajñādaṇḍa, there are some other English translations I cannot entirely recommend even if they may be more easily procured. Instead I will send you to Michael Hahn’s German and English translations. For the German, see Michael Hahn’s book Von rechten Leben. Buddhistische Lehren aus Indien und Tibet, Verlag der Weltreligionen (Frankfurt 2007), pp. 176-215. For the English:
Michael Hahn, “The Tibetan Shes rab sdong bu and Its Indian Sources,” South Asian Classical Studies, no. 4 (2009), pp. 1-78; no. 5 (2010), pp. 1-50; no. 6 (2011), pp. 305-378. I know of no freely downloadable PDFs. If I did I would tell you.
*
For a little background information on the Dharmamitra machine translation internet service, see this just-released essay by Marieke Meelen, Sebastian Nehrdich, and Kurt Keutzer: “Breakthroughs in Tibetan NLP & Digital Humanities,” Revue d'Etudes Tibétaines, vol. 72 (July 2024), pp. 5-25, at pp. 17-19.
*
I once toyed with the idea that A.I. could write my blogs instead of me, saving me the trouble. If this tickles your interest in the least, have a look here:
thams cad chos ni mnyan par bya | | thos nas rab tu gzung bya ste | | gang zhig bdag yod mi 'dod pa | | de dag gzhan la mi bya'o | |
The verse as translated in Hahn’s third essay (of 2011), p. 322:
You should listen to, and then fully accept,
what the guiding pri[n]ciple of everything is:
What you do not like [to be done to] yourself
that you should not do to others.
Or, if you prefer, from his German book, p. 208 verse 212:
Vernimm die Quintessenz des Rechtes und nach dem Hören merk sie dir: Was du nicht willst, das man dir tu, das füg auch keinem anderen zu!
•
Imagining you might find the contrast amusing or instructive, nearly two centuries ago the Hungarian Alexander Csoma de Körös, the reputed father figure of European Tibetology, translated both of our verses in his grammar book: A Grammar of the Tibetan Language in English, Baptist Mission Press (Calcutta 1834; reprint New Delhi 1983), at p. 165:
Hear ye all this moral maxim, and having heard it keep it well: “Whatever is unpleasing to yourself never do it to another.”
(Do unto others as you would be done by.)
and
Whatever happiness is in the world, it has all arisen
from a wish for the welfare of others.
Whatever misery (distress) is in the world,
it has all arisen from a wish for our own welfare.
•
Oh, and that just-given verse, from the Bodhisattva Way of Life, chapter 8, verse 129, has been translated by Kate Crosby and Andrew Skilton like this:
“All those who suffer in the world do so because of their desire for their own happiness. All those happy in the world are so because of their desire for the happiness of others.”
I’m thinking this is the one that catches the spirit of it best. So much of what Śāntideva writes could be thought of as glosses and elaborations on the Golden Rule, and Tibet’s Mind Training or Lojong (བློ་སྦྱོང་) teachings grew directly out of it. Try this on for size: exchanging self with others.
Every time I write a blog I go ahead and put it up, thinking it’s over and done with. But it usually isn’t too long, maybe an hour, a day or a week, before something I should have included comes to mind. That happened last time, which is why I put up that Postscript with something about a 15th-century painted icon of Padampa. Continuing to mine the vein of probable Padampas, I would like to add another artistic representation of unknown date of origin and unusual appearance. This artwork, not exactly in itself a thangka, could be described as a black-and-white lithographic representation of one with minimal coloration, enough to make it a chromolithograph. It is one of the many Tibet-related curiosities in the possession of the Wellcome Institute of London.
If you download at full resolution and enlarge it on your screen, you can better see what it says down below. It was taken from p. 53 of Emil Schlagintweit's Buddhism in Tibet dated according to the internet entry to a questionable year 1863? its publication credited to Dr. C. Wolf & Sons of Munich. My print copy of E. Schlagintweit’s book is an economical Indian edition, so I’m not too surprised to find it isn’t at p. 53 where it is supposed to be. In fact it doesn’t prove findable anywhere in the book. I did find after searching the internet the French version of the book, Le Bouddhisme au Thibet (1881), and there, immediately after p. 36, you can find it, not far away from a bit of discussion connected to it.
The internet entry’s description also says “The four-armed figure is Padmapani...” This isn't exactly incorrect, just that I would call this 4-armed divine figure Mahākāruṇika (Thugs-rje-chen-po) or Great Compassion. It continues, “...the other to his right is Guru Dragpo, a protector against evil spirits.” This is mistaken. It is clearly a very probable Padampa, even if not every normative feature of his iconography is present (if it were, we would cross out the word probable). It doesn’t check every box, but just enough.
Nowhere in all of this is Padampa correctly identified as being himself, and in the one context where he is identified, he is called incorrectly Guru Drakpo, or Wrathful Guru, a form of Padmasambhava. That is what led me to write this brief blog. Our quest for possible, probable and very probable Padampas may lead us through some treacherous waters, but sometimes we find a secure port that permits a fairly easy landing. This is one of those times, for sure. We can feel sure with high probability it is him. At the same time there are further considerations in trying to understand why he is there to begin with.
So why is Padampa there in such a prominent position? You might think that Padampa was regarded as a manifestation of the central deity of the thangka, Amitābha, but I’ve never heard of that idea before. More likely he was in some way connected to the Amitābha practice that was being done by the patron of the artwork. With that idea in mind, perhaps the thangka could have been meant to form part of an Amitābha practiceconnected to Padampa. But I know of no such practice, do you? Let’s see... While Padampa wandered the subcontinent of India in his younger years, he meditated on 12 different divine figures of Buddhas and Bodhisattvas and beheld visions of each one. The list does not include Amitābha or Amitāyus, so I don’t know what I’m supposed to tell you. I have no answer.
At the bottom level of the thangka you can see the seven different possessions of the universal monarch, the Cakravartin. They are not usual in this position in thangkas. Amitābha practices often include them as a set of offerings made to the Buddha, so they fit here just perfectly. And Amitābha is often flanked by two standing Bodhisattvas, as we see here. Their exact identity is not something the sources agree about, I can’t see my way to a swift resolution of this problem, so I will leave it for a more auspicious occasion.
No expert, I understand in early lithography the picture or part of it had to be painted directly onto a slab of stone, and there was no easier way to transfer it. In the chronolithography developing in the middle decades of the 19th century, a different stone had to be prepared for each of the colors needed. If that’s accurate it means that somebody in Europe, involved in the production of the Schlagintweit book, had to do their best to copy what they saw. This would have tended to lend the product a hybrid style that isn't quite Tibetan. Do you see something like that here? I think I do.
Anyway, I've exhausted just about everything I could say about this particular artifact. What do you say about it?
Resources from here and there on the web
* • If you want to investigate mysteries of the Schlagintweit thangka for yourself, here are some places where you might try to find clues on this or that aspect.
See this page at Himalayan Art Resources (HAR) for a wide variety of representations of Padampa.
For more on the subject, see this:
https://www.tibetanbuddhistencyclopedia.com/en/index.php?title=Padampa_Sangye:_A_History_of_Representation_of_a_South_Indian_Siddha_in_Tibet. The people who manage this webpage never asked me if they could put up this frightfully substandard version of a published article, and if they had asked I would have said “No!” When I asked them to take down something written by me before, they responded with sympathy, or so I thought, but finally left the pilfered material up there on their site as if our conversation never took place. DuckDuckGo* puts their messy page up first in the results if you search for "Padampa iconography." Even their entry “Dampa Sangye” was entirely lifted from Wikipedia, so I have to ask, What is the point in duplicating it? Is anyone in the world outside of the People’s Republic unable to find Wikipedia entries? I suppose I ought to be happy they changed their name from Chinese Buddhist Encyclopedia to Tibetan Buddhist Encyclopedia, but I’m not.
(*Not an advertisement in favor of this search engine, still, that's how I surf these days. Bye bye Google and its A.I., as in Atrocious [lack of] Intelligence!)
Your next question foretold: Why don’t I put up a link to a better version? The answer is, I don’t have a reasonably good scan of the article, and neither does anyone else. The page size is a problem, and the faint letters of the footnotes get in the way of photoing. That means you may just have to locate the book in an actual physical book library and look at it there. Please don’t ask me for an offprint. The best I can do is send you here for a not very happy scan of it:
and then scroll down until you see the word "Videos." You not only hear expert explanations, you get to view some of the most beautiful Tibetan thangkas, so much more beautiful than the one I’ve shown you.
You can easily read Emil Schlagintweit's book Buddhism in Tibet (1863) on screen here at Sacred Texts dot com.
But I recommend downloading a nice PDF of it from Pahar (use their local search box)
or better, because it may be a little faster to download, the same PDF at archive.org. Archive.org has other PDFs, just that I prefer this particular one.
Three of the famous Schlagintweit brothers Robert, Hermann and Adolph all of them geographers of the Himalayas. Emil is notably absent.
* • Emil Schlagintweit’s book along with Jäschke’s dictionary appear to be the two most important sources of information about Tibetan Buddhism available to Helena Blavatsky of Theosophical Society fame. Click here for more on this.
Padampa in Saspola Cave, Ladakh Photo by Rob Linrothe
Here you will find on offer translations of six Tingrian Couplets. They were preserved in a 15th-century Nyingma & Kagyü meditation manual composed by Khedrup Yeshé Gyeltsen. Those interested in Tibeto-logical details can read all the way to the end of the blog if they like.
The Tingri Gyatsa, or Tingri Hundred is a widely renowned monument of Tibetan literature, always attributed to the authorship of Padampa Sangye, the south Indian meditation master who died in Tibet in 1105 or 1117 CE. Like Kabir’s Dohas, it’s all in two-line verse form. Each couplet ought to end with a vocative, “[oh my] Tingrians!” And I should add, the word “my” is not intended as an expression of ownership, but one of affectionate concern. Now you know what a Tingrian Couplet is, and you are welcome to read a few samples just below.
I realize these couple of verses may not be enough for everyone, so with those less easily satisfied people in mind I’d like to offer a complete English translation (Tibetan text also supplied) of one version of the Tingri Hundred:
Delusions are not there in the base, they arise incidentally.
Comprehending this characteristic is enough, my Tingrians.
• 2 •
Lord Dampa Gyagar said,
If you are unable to renounce sangsaric dharmas,
even knowing all the scriptures is of no help.
• 3 & 4 •
By Dampa:
When your own aims are not fulfilled you do the aims of others no good.
First of all, do your practices, my Tingrians.
Forming easy relations with delusive appearances, you mix with them.
Bring understanding in their wake, my Tingrians.
• 5 •
If there is something you are attached to, that same thing also binds you.
There is no need for it whatsoever, my Tingrians.
• 6 •
By Padampa Gyagar:
Of all the virtues, rejoicing in others’ success is the best.
Don’t be envious of others my Tingrians.
§ § §
Bibliographical affairs
I made use of one particularly fine cursive manuscript version of a previously unstudied (and needless to say untranslated) text by a teacher of Katok Monastery named Khedrup Yeshé Gyeltsen. I want to give him the dates 1395 to 1458 CE simply because that’s what I find in Cuevas’ book and Ehrhard’s essay, both listed below. However, Chatral Rinpoche’s history of Katok Monastery gives him a birthdate of 1455, sixty years later, so there is room for discussion. For the time being we can at least be satisfied that he lived in the 15th century. He exists in the BDRC database (see no. P10291), but no dates were there when I looked earlier today.
I would say that there is nothing remotely comparable to his meditation manual, but that isn’t quite true. It reminds you overall of a much better known anthology of quotations about meditation, the one by Takpo Tashi Namgyal. The latter, written a century later, is entirely a Kagyü work. It scarcely quotes from works of Nyingmapas and Zhijepas, whereas this meditation manual from Katok Monastery explicitly states in its opening words that it encompasses “Zhi Rdzogs Phyag.” That means Zhijé, Dzogchen and Mahâmudrâ. We don’t often see them in a triad like this.*
(*Indeed, searching through the 15 million pages of the BUDA database in less than half a minute turns up only three positive matches, and wouldn’t you know, all three of them appear to share the same authorship with the meditation manual.)
Folio 1 verso of the meditation manual. Notice the phrase zhi rdzogs phyag gsum in the middle of line 3.
Another difference is that the meditation manual starts out with a lengthy section covering the normal topics of preliminary practices, or sngon-'gro, that we are accustomed to finding in Path Stage, tenrim (bstan-rim) and lamrim (lam-rim) texts. These topics include contemplations on impermanence, the rareness of human rebirth, and so on. I think you probably know about these things already.
As far as Zhijé materials are concerned, the meditation manual embraces a lot more than just the few Tingrian couplets we’ve included in this weblog. Most remarkably, it has an entire section near the end, running from folios 523 through 550, filled with material from the Kunga questions-and-answers texts (I haven’t identified which one yet, but you can be sure I will be looking into this sometime soon).
Chatral Rinpoche (Bya-bral Sangs-rgyas-rdo-rje, 1913-2015), Dpal Kaḥ-thog-pa’i Chos-’byung Rin-chen Phreng-ba, Snga-’gyur Bstan-pa’i ’Byung-gnas Kaḥ-thog Rdo-rje-gdan (n.d.), in 221 pages, composed between 1985 and 1988. TBRC no. W3CN3398.
The biographical sketch of Khedrup Yeshé Gyaltsen is found at pp. 53-55. Here we find his Dzogchen and Marpa Kagyü (that means Smar-pa Bka'-brgyud, not Mar-pa Bka'-brgyud) studies emphasized, with no mention of Zhijé. We do find mention of his composition of our meditation manual, on p. 54, with the title Phyag-rgya-chen-po'i Khrid-gzhung Snying-po Don-gyi Man-ngag Rgya-mtsho'i Gter-mdzod. It’s intriguing to know that he spent much of his later life in meditation retreats in regions of far eastern Tibet, in the neighborhoods of the holy mountain Kawa Karpo, and even in ’Jang, or present-day north Yunnan. He may have even visited Shangrila, made virtually real only recently.
Bryan Cuevas, The Hidden History of the Tibetan Book of the Dead, Oxford University Press (Oxford 2003), p. 144.
Franz Karl Ehrhard, “Kaḥ thog pa Bsod nams rgyal mtshan (1466-1540) and His Activities in Sikkim and Bhutan,” Bulletin of Tibetology, vol. 39, no. 2 (November 2003), pp. 9 26. At p. 9 please note the dates of our author. The same date for him, along with an alias Bu-’bor Ye-shes-rgyal-mtshan, may be found in Cuevas’ book.
Matthew T. Kapstein, ed., Tibetan Manuscripts and Early Printed Books, Cornell University Press (Ithaca 2024), in 2 vols.
I urge you, order this exceptionally interesting and beautiful book, then look at vol. 1, p. 131. Figure 4.7 shows the title page, in color, of a different manuscript of the meditation manual than the one I used. It labels as its source The British Library Board, Or.15292, dating the manuscript to ca. 16th century. To see it in black-and-white, see TBRC no. W1CZ892. Its title-page title is Rdzogs-pa-chen-po Snying-po Don-gyis Gter-mdzod. This manuscript has quite a few very well executed miniature paintings, but seeing them in TBRC’s poorly scanned microfilm is more than a little sad.
The label says it’s Garab Dorje
Khedrup Yeshé Gyaltsen (Mkhas-grub Ye-shes-rgyal-mtshan), Mkhas-grub Dznyâ-na-ke-tus* mdzad-pa'i Man-ngag Rgya-mtsho, a cursive manuscript in 587 folios. TBRC no. WA3CN2867.
This is the only version I’ve made use of here (I supply the original folio numbers, not those “image numbers” that are no more than accidental byproducts of the scanning process), even though there are at least three and maybe four other versions of it that are possible to locate at BUDA website. Their titles are different, so best of luck finding them. One advantage of the version I used is that it marked the persons or texts it quotes from with red letters most of the time. That made it easier for me to find the quotations I did find.
(*Technically Sanskrit ketu ought to be tog, ‘pinnacle,’ in Tibetan. However, dhvaja-ketu (rgyal-mtshan-gyi tog, ‘pinnacle of the victory banner’) is such a common phrase, you could see how the two parts could get confounded. That’s how Dznyâ-na-ke-tu can be a Tibskritic form of Ye-shes-rgyal-mtshan. Is it clear? Putting the names of respected Tibetan teachers into Sanskritic form isn’t just a game they play. It shows respect.)
Takpo Tashi Namgyal (Dwags-po Bkra-shis-rnam-rgyal, 1513-1596?), Mahāmudrā: The Quintessence of Mind and Meditation, translated by Lobsang P. Lhalungpa, Shambhala (Boston 1986). A fresh translation by Elizabeth Callahan was published not long ago.
The problem of the author’s identity has been addressed and solved by Matthew Kapstein and David Jackson, and I believe them, but there is no way you can make me go into all that discussion right now.
—
Try going to the website of Katok Monastery at this address, and then look for "Yeshe Gyamtsen." The title of the work we used here can be found there, listed among the thirteen primary sources for teachings at Katog. Its title is given in English as “Ocean of Mahamudra Core Instructions.” This is interesting, as other versions of the title lead you to think it would be exclusively devoted to Dzogchen.
Afterword
From my Tibeto-logical research perspective, I was very excited to find these few quotations of Tingrian couplets. Why? First of all, just because I’ve found so little evidence for them between the 13th and 17th centuries. I always assumed or felt fairly sure they would have been known to many throughout that time, but even just a little more evidence is nice to see. Another matter: If you put the various versions side by side and compare them (as I have done, in a document that isn’t quite in good enough shape to share), you can see that over the centuries significant transformations took place. Some verses are made to yield quite different messages, and this is not always due to accidental misreadings of the manuscript by careless scribes. Sometimes motivated changes are the only explanations with feet on them. Our Tingrian Couplet no. 1 already supplies a good example.
I believe I have good enough reasons to support me if I say that the only Tingrian couplets Padampa actually composed was a set I call the Tingri Thirteen (or should that be Tingri Twelve?). These couplets were pronounced by Padampa as part of his last will and testament shortly before his death in 1105 or 1117. I’ve been meaning to put up a translation of it, but it needs more polishing.
A much longer set was pronounced by his disciple Kunga shortly before his own death seven years later on. Both versions (for short I call them versions A and B) are 100% exclusive to the Zhijé Collection, or so I had thought until today. To my amazement, our meditation manual preserves two lines from the introductory verses to Kunga’s 118 Tringrian couplets (so it is not technically a Tingrian couplet, but nonetheless...). It also quotes two couplets(nos. 3&4, above) that have parallels only in B, which tells us our 15th-century author had the Kunga version available to him. I can’t imagine how. (See now the added Postscript below.)
I would understand if you were to voice loud objections, criticizing the existing broad acceptance of all hundred or so Tingrian couplets as being by Padampa himself, when here we find the larger set is indeed spoken by Kunga. The introduction to Kunga’s set clarifies this. He is reading from something he had written down previously, and he insists that it does represent the essence of Padampa’s teachings. As I understand it, they were written after the model of the Tingri Thirteen as a homage, incorporating Padampa’s ideas and perhaps quite a few of his exact words, but, yes, written by Kunga.
Let me quote from my draft translation of the most relevant passage:
Standing before the yogis gathered here in glorious Tingri,
All people of stainless insight,
Great Sons happily abiding together.
It isn't right for me to be giving this kind of muddled speech,
I who am like a firefly in the presence of the sun.
Still, these are the basic essentials of the teachings that came from Dampa,
So with affectionate thoughts I have set them down in writing.
Later on we will not meet, so listen as I read them to you now.
The intertextual connectedness between all the different versions is a subject I’ve been thinking over for a long time, but we can say that connections between A and the later versions C through F are quite few. Connections between B and the later versions are more evident and numerous, yet fully identical couplets are rare. Looking only at the later versions C through F, we can identify two recensions I believe are basic ones. I’ve called them the monkey and rhino recensions in an earlier blog. But as I said before, these critical reflections of mine about authorship have no bearing whatsoever on the Buddhist truth and/or spiritual authority of the texts themselves. The Tingrian couplets are great Tibetan poetry. Together they are a monument to the Tibetan language, a source of wisdom and inspiration regardless of your ideas about religions, and a trigger for reflection on life and its [mis]guided aims, no matter who wrote which one when.
I know I should end on an uplifting note, but somehow I’m inclined to do nothing of the sort. These poetic lines from the meditation manual that follow are not Tingrian couplets, as you can see, and neither could they be verified in any other source at my disposal as yet. It’s about disenchantment with religion. You can find them on folio 511 recto, line 3:
de yang pha dam pa rgya gar kyis /
dang po dad pa skyes pas gnam du dil dil mchong /
bar du dad pa yal ba ri kha (~re kha) rjes kyis gang /
tha ma dad pa log pas 'khor ba'i rting rdo btags / ces gsungs so //
Padampa Gyagar had something to say about that:
When faith first arose, you leapt freely into the sky.
In the meantime faith dissolved, and you were full of erased sketches.
In the end faith was reversed, and sangsara’s anchor was tied fast.
Keep the faith, my friends, no matter what.
Philological scratchpad
Tingrian Couplet One (22r.2)
dam pas /
'khrul pa gzhi la med de glo bur byung /
mtshan nyid go bas chog go ding ri pa /
Dampa said,
“Delusions are not there in the base, they arise incidentally.
Comprehending this characteristic is enough, my Tingrians.”
Our new source for this verse certainly supports the readings of version B over C. The second line of Version C reads quite differently, and yields a meaning that is less radically formulated* even while it introduces the potentially problematic concept of a ‘creator’ for delusion,** saying: “Look at the characteristics of its creator, my Tingrians” or “Inspect it for the marks of its maker”?
(*A reader of centuries gone by may have had problems with the idea that just comprehending the incidental character of delusion would be in itself sufficient for Enlightenment. These qualms may have lead them to imagine ways to improve it. **I don’t expect it to make sense very quickly, but Buddhists don’t award creator status to Brahma the way most other Indian religions do, although they do credit him with the narcissisticidea that he was the creator, as it was his belief that world-creation happened because of his wish. Brahma, as a creator figure, does supply Buddhists with a myth of origins for delusion itself.)
-C12-(compare B51 and D37)
'khrul pa gzhi la med de glo bur gyur ||
byed mkhan mtshan nyid ltos shig ding ri ba ||
-B51-(compare C12 and D37)
'khrul pa gzhi la myed de blo bur byung /
mtshan nyid go bas chog go ding ri ba /
•
Tingrian Couplet Two (215r.1)
rje dam pa rgya gar gyis
'khor ba'i chos la mi 'byung ma nus na /
sde snod ma lus shes kyang phan mi thogs / ces gsung /
Lord Dampa Gyagar said,
“If you are unable to renounce sangsaric dharmas,
even knowing all the scriptures is of no help.”
These two lines belong uniquely — to my utter amazement — to the Kunga version (version B) at the end of the introductory section that immediately precedes the first couplet, with Kunga doing the speaking:
skyid kyang 'gro dgos rin chen gling gi myi /
bstan yul ma yin 'jig rten brang ba'i sa /
'khor ba'i chos la yid 'byung ma nus na /
sde snod ma lus shes kyang phan mi thogs /
dam pa'i gdams pa yin no ding ri ba /
Even if he’s contented there,
the man in the jewel island still has to go.
This world is no permanent abode.
It’s nothing more than a travellers’ lodge.
If you are unable to renounce sangsaric dharmas,
even knowing all the scriptures would be no help.
This is the teaching of Dampa, my Tingrians.
•
Tingrian Couplets Three and Four (388r.1)
Note: I quote the larger context here starting at folio 388 recto, line 1, but only the couplets are translated.
dam pas /
bdud kyi 'jug pa dang po bya ba yin / rang lu (~chu) nang du 'jugs nas gzhan skal par thon par gar 'ongs skabs 'dir rang gis 'phel ba chad / gzhan la phan mi 'dog pas gzabs 'tshal / yang bsgrubs pa'i dus su gzhan don byar mi rung / dge sbyor 'phel ba chad do rang bzhin pa (~sa?) /
rang don ma 'grubs gzhan don mi 'byung bas /
thog mar bsgrub pa gyis cig ding ri pa /
'khrul pa'i snang ba 'brel sla sru ba yin /
go ba rjes la skyol cig ding ri pa /
By Dampa,
“When your own aims are not fulfilled you do the aims of others no good.
First of all, do your practices, my Tingrians.
“Forming easy relations with delusive appearances, you mix with them.
Bring understanding in their wake, my Tingrians.”
For comparison (both verses are only found in B):
-B93-
rang don ma bsgrubs gzhan don myi 'ong pas /
thog mar bsgrub pa gyis cig ding ri ba /
-B94-
'khrul pa'i snang ba 'dris par sla ba yin /
go ca rjes la khol cig ding ri ba /
It's easy to get entangled in delusive apparitions.
Keep armour on your backs, my Tingrians.
The written similarity, particularly in a cursive manuscript, between go-ba, understanding, and go-ca (=go-cha, both spellings are found in Dunhuang texts), armor or military equipment is a problem, admittedly, although I believe the reading go-ba carries more weight, has more immediate cogency.
•
Tingrian Couplet Five (389v.5)
gang la zhen pa yod na de yang 'ching /
cis kyang dgos pa med do ring ring pa [~ding ri ba] / ces gsungs /
If there is something you are attached to, that same thing also binds you.
There is no need for it whatsoever, my Tingrians.
It is odd that this couplet doesn’t seem to exist in versions B or D, while the segment “de yang ’ching” finds no collaboration in any of the previously recorded versions. Still, I believe our new version is preferable.
For comparison:
-C16- (compare E14 and F14)
gang la zhen pa byung na de yang thongs ||
cis kyang dgos pa med do ding ri ba ||
-E14- (compare C16)
gang la zhen pa yong pa de blos thongs //
cis kyang dgos pa med do X [3v]
Note: Correct yong-pa to yod-pa.
•
Tingrian Couplet Six (467v.5)
pha dam pa rgya gar kyis /
dge ba'i nang nas rjes su yi rang mchog /
gzhan la 'phrag dog ma byed ding ri pa / ces gsungs pas /
By Padampa Gyagar:
“Of all the virtues, rejoicing in others’ success is the best.
Don’t be envious of others my Tingrians.”
For comparison:
-B88-
dge ba'i nang nas rjes su yi rang mchog /
gzhan la phrag dog ma byed ding ri ba /
• • •
Postscript (July 20, 2024)
This dark and unclear detail, clipped from a Shakyamuni Buddha thangka belonging to the Giuseppe Tucci collection, can be better seen of you go here:
Once you are there, scroll down to the second painting. One thing I see significant about this is that Padampa is on the Kagyü side of the painting, balanced off by Gelugpa monks on the other side. If this is indeed as it says a 15th-century painting, it makes even more sense to find Padampa on a thangka likely made in an emerging Gandenpa/Gelugpa context. And we are reminded that the First Dalai Lama (1391-1475) had a family background of Zhijé practitioners.
To analyze what you see here a little more, the white blanket being the only clothing loosely wrapped around the lowest part of the body, and the ankles-crossed/knees-up seating posture are both fairly secure diagnostic features of Padampa. The fact that he has ornaments on his otherwise unclothed torso and arms is frequent (its correctness is historically questionable if we rely on the earliest sources), but along with the flowers in his hair this might seem to point to (or indicate conflation with) the iconography of Virûpa. Still, I have no doubt it is Padampa who is depicted here.
The same painting also features in a 5-minute Asia Society video. I will try to embed it here, although if the embedding is unsuccessful you will see a jumble of letters and numbers that lead nowhere:
If you do not see the video here just above, scroll down to the end of this blog because it might be "embedded" there. If not, go to YouTube and use their search facility to search for the following title, using the quote marks around it:
“A Closer Look at Tibetan Thangkas”
I just wanted to tag on this bit of artistic evidence that helps us to argue for popular knowledge of Padampa in the 15th century, as if any such argument were needed.
Perhaps yet more persuasive would be more literary sources quoting from “his” Tingrian Couplets. I do know of some.
Most relevent here and now is one couplet quoted in the 15th-century Sakya teacher Müchen Könchog Gyaltsen's (1388-1469) Supplement to the Oral Tradition, as contained in Thupten Jinpa, tr., Mind Training: The Great Collection, Wisdom (Boston 2006), at p. 483:
The master Dampa states:
“Contemplating the sufferings of samsara pierces my heart;
People of Dingri, laugh not at these matters.”
The Tibetan for it reads:
rje dam pa'i zhal nas |
'khor ba'i sdug bsngal bsam na snying rlung ldang ||
'di la gad mo mi bro d[i]ng ra ba ||
With nothing to say about the translation already given, except to say that it’s a great one, I still try my hand at it:
“At thought of the bad points* of sangsara my heart pressure rises.
Nothing to laugh and dance about here, my Tingrians.”
(*I follow the text of B108 by reading nyes-dmigs in place of sdug-bsngal.)
What impresses me almost as much as its very serious message with so much confirming evidence in today’s world, is that this couplet is uniquely found in Kunga’s set (version B), number 108 of his 118 couplets. This does make the meditation manual’s use of the Kunga set not quite unique, only nearly unique.
.jpeg)
Posts
