This is the third chapter of the Degé Kangyur Catalog, which describes the publication history of the Degé Kangyur. Authored by the Degé Kangyur’s main editor, the eighth Tai Situ Chökyi Jungné, at the conclusion of the five-year project in 1733, it is a document rich in historical detail. First it covers the history of the Degé region and the royal family of Degé. Then it offers extensive praise for the qualities of Tenpa Tsering, the king of Degé and throne holder of Lhundrup Teng Monastery, who was the project’s main sponsor. After that is an erudite history of previous collections of translated Buddhist scriptures in Tibet since the time of the earliest translations during the Tibetan imperial period, and finally it describes the editorial process and practical challenges involved in producing a xylograph Kangyur of such quality.
Translated by the Subhāṣita Translation Group. The translation, along with all ancillary materials, was produced by Lowell Cook and Benjamin Ewing. Khenpo Tashi Pal, Andrew West, Alexander Berzin, and Ryan Conlon also contributed with advice and helpful comments.
The translation was completed under the patronage and supervision of 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha. Rory Lindsay and George Fitzherbert edited the translation and the introduction, and Ven. Konchog Norbu copyedited the text. Martina Cotter was in charge of the digital publication process.
The translation of this text has been made possible through the generous sponsorship of Chan Wing Fai, Lam Wai Ling, Chan Oi Yi, Chan Tung Mei, Chan Yu Ka, Chan Sui Li, Chan Ya Ho, Chan Yu Lin, Zhong Sheng Jian, and Lin Miao Jun.
Much more than just a table of contents, what is known as the Degé Kangyur Catalog1 takes up the entirety of the 103rd and final volume of the Kangyur. It is presented in five chapters. The first three give a detailed history of Indian Buddhism, its arrival in Tibet, and the production of the Degé Kangyur. The final two constitute the catalog itself, in which all the texts included in the canon are listed, and the merits of producing a Kangyur are extolled. The Catalog was written by the eighth Tai Situ Chökyi Jungné (1700–74), widely known as Situ Paṇchen, who presided over the entire project as its chief editor. Presented here is the third chapter, which concludes Situ Paṇchen’s history of Buddhism in Tibet with an account of how this Kangyur in particular was produced at the royal palace-monastery of Degé, in eastern Tibet, between the years 1729 and 1733 of the Western calendar. The chapter is presented in two parts. Part 1 presents a family history and a descriptive eulogy of the Degé Kangyur’s main initiator and sponsor, Tenpa Tsering (1678–1738), the king of Degé. Part 2 starts with a scholarly history of previous Kangyur collections in Tibet, and then gives an account of the editorial and practical challenges involved in the production of the Degé Kangyur itself.
Part 1 focuses on Tenpa Tsering himself as the “main initiator,” or sponsor, for the production of the Degé Kangyur. It is divided into three subsections: “Location,” meaning an account of the Degé region in general, and the palace-monastery of Lhundrup Teng in particular; “Family Lineage,” which presents a genealogical history of the Degé royal family; and “Qualities,” in which Tenpa Tsering’s own extensive sponsorship activities are described, and he is praised as an exemplary Buddhist ruler.
Following a pattern common to several of the subsections in this chapter, “Location” begins from a broad perspective, first presenting the entire Tibetan region, then gradually focusing more specifically on the Degé area, and concluding with a description of Lhundrup Teng monastery itself. In his general introduction to Tibet and the origins of the Tibetan people, Situ Paṇchen draws particularly on Feast for Scholars, by the sixteenth-century Karma Kagyü historian Pawo Tsuklak Trengwa, and in a way that both echoes and supplements that work, interweaves his discussion with citations from scriptural prophecies and canonical commentaries on the Indian epics.
“Family Lineage” traces the genealogy of the royal house of Degé to the mythic “pure divine tribe of Go,” (sgo lha sde dkar po), many generations before Tenpa Tsering. As stated by Situ Paṇchen, this section was largely based on a family record drawn up by the secretary of the Degé royal family at the time. Among the many notable forebears of Tenpa Tsering were, for example, one who, it says, served Drogön Chögyal Phakpa as his chamberlain (Tib. gsol dpon), received his own official seal from Kublai Khan, and appears to have been instrumental in the merging of religious and secular authority that characterized various scions of the Degé family in later generations. While the Sakya affiliation of many of these figures is apparent, Situ Paṇchen also notes the numerous Kagyü and Nyingma lineage connections of this illustrious family line, and the support that Tenpa Tsering’s antecedents had given the Dharma without sectarian bias (Tib. ris med).2 Lhundrup Teng itself, the Sakya Ngor monastery that was the actual site of production of the Degé Kangyur between 1729 and 1733, is described as both the “palace of the kingdom” and as an exemplary monastery.
The subsection “Qualities” is an effusive praise of the personal qualities of Tenpa Tsering himself. Tenpa Tsering was both the ruler (Tib. sa skyong, mi’i dbang po) of the Degé kingdom, and the hereditary throne holder (khri chen) of Lhundrup Teng monastery, a position he inherited from his uncle. In this section, Situ Paṇchen portrays Tenpa Tsering very much as an ideal Tibetan religious king who supported the Dharma and protected his subjects without exploitation or oppression. He begins by listing Tenpa Tsering’s generous sponsorship activities, such as commissioning statues, supporting construction projects at nearby monasteries (including the main assembly hall at Situ Paṇchen’s own Palpung monastery), and the production of texts, and then moves on to describe his qualities as an archetypal benevolent Dharma king. Here Situ Paṇchen cites a number of texts from the classical Indian genre known as nītiśāstra, or “ethical treatises,” which prescribe proper ethical behavior in the world, and the proper conduct of rulers in particular. Citing such treatises, Situ Paṇchen portrays Tenpa Tsering and his entire royal court as embodying an idealized vision of moral rulership reminiscent of the great Indian emperor and patron of the Dharma, Aśoka.
The second part of chapter 3 deals with the Degé Kangyur project itself. This, again, is divided into three subsections: “The Time of the Production of the Kangyur,” “The Manner in Which Source Texts Were Collected and Edited,” and “The Practicalities of Printing the Kangyur.”
Far more than giving a single calendar date, “The Time of the Production of the Kangyur” dates the initiation of the Degé Kangyur project using a variety of methods, beginning on a scale of eons and ending with the time of day. Again displaying the breadth of his learning, when dating this momentous event, Situ Paṇchen discusses four different traditions of calculating the Buddha’s birth and death. He also references Chinese, Indian, Mongolian, and Tibetan calendars, and the astrological systems of three different tantric cycles. He only then dates the beginning of the project in relation to more mundane events—seven years after the enthronement of the Yongzheng Emperor, and when Tenpa Tsering had reached the age of fifty-two.
Situ Paṇchen explains Tenpa Tsering’s initiation of this momentous project very simply as being the result of many lifetimes of good karma. Only sidelong allusion is made to the wider political and economic context that likely facilitated it. The Royal Genealogy of Degé, a text authored nearly a century after the Catalog by one of Tenpa Tsering’s descendants and successors as the ruler of Degé, states that during Tenpa Tsering’s tenure as the king of Degé, the kingdom grew considerably in territory, and it clearly indicates that this growth and the attendant ascent of Tenpa Tsering himself in power, prestige, and wealth was connected to Degé’s pivotal role in the wider Qing-Tibetan politics of the period.3 The Royal Genealogy of Degé says that when Tenpa Tsering was granted imperial titles by the Qing (first in 1728 and then in 1733), he was “empowered to act as general ruler of Dokham,” and received large quantities of silk and silver as gifts.4 Such events are only hinted at in the Catalog itself, as when, for example, Situ Paṇchen mentions that “his reserves of wealth increased sizably.”5 A little later he also mentions in passing that “even when the divinely mandated emperor Mañjughoṣa gained dominion over these Tibetan lands”— a reference to Qing emperor Yongzheng—Tenpa Tsering’s subjects continued to praise him as before.6
In “The Manner in Which Source Texts Were Collected and Edited,” the focus moves away from the subject of patronage, and on to the scholarly and practical challenges that Situ Paṇchen faced in collating and printing the Kangyur. Some readers might assume that the texts of the Kangyur have long existed in a singular, organized format that was transmitted from India to Tibet. This, however, is not the case. As Situ Paṇchen shows, the Tibetan canons we have today are an amalgamation of different scriptural collections produced by generations of translators and editors. This subsection therefore begins with a discussion of the translation activities undertaken during the Tibetan imperial period (629–841
As Situ Paṇchen explains, it was only after many more years of translation activity (known as the period of the “later diffusion of the teachings”) that all the translated canonical texts were then assembled, collated, and copied as a single collection for the first time. This happened in the early fourteenth century under the inspiration and guidance of Chomden Rikpai Raldri (1227–1305).8 The creation of this first canon, referred to by Situ Paṇchen as the Narthang Kangyur (and known in contemporary scholarship as the no-longer-extant Old Narthang manuscript Kangyur), involved comparing over twenty-five different collections of texts in various genres, all of which had to be found in monastic libraries scattered across Tibet.9 Situ Paṇchen then describes how this Old Narthang Kangyur provided the basis for the Tshalpa Kangyur, which in turn provided the basis for what became known as the Lithang Kangyur, produced in xylograph in the early seventeenth century in the eastern Tibetan kingdom of Jang Satham.10
This subsection also offers a remarkably transparent window into Situ Paṇchen’s own editorial and philological process. He tells us that although the Lithang Kangyur was used as the primary basis for the Degé edition, three other Kangyur collections were also consulted. These included what he calls the “authentic Kangyur”11 used by Anyen Pakṣi, a thirteenth-century disciple of Sakya Pandita, and the Lhodzong Kangyur, which belongs to the Thempanga recensional branch.12 This latter point is notable because in the centuries after the Old Narthang manuscript Kangyur was compiled, two major recensional branches developed, the Tshalpa line and the Thempangma line, with their own distinct aspects. In consulting both the Lithang and Lhodzong, members of the former and latter respectively, Situ Paṇchen creates a hybrid collection with features from both lines. He tells us that based on these other Kangyur collections he was able to correct minor errors like spelling mistakes and misordered pages, and that he also inserted “authentic sūtras and tantras” that were not present in the Lithang collection. In his editing process, Situ Paṇchen also consulted Sanskrit editions for some of the major tantras, such as the Guhyasamāja and Hevajra, along with their commentaries. He tells us that this extensive editorial process was an effort to establish the Degé Kangyur as a “trustworthy” edition of the Kangyur that is “superior to earlier editions.”
“The Practicalities of Printing the Kangyur” is a rare discussion of the material considerations involved in such a large printing project as the Degé Kangyur. Here, Situ Paṇchen gives us insights into the logistics of the project, including training, housing, and feeding hundreds of craftsmen and sourcing massive quantities of wood, paper, and ink. He also describes a workflow that involved teams of scribes and editors, multiple reviews, and hundreds of carvers. It can be easy for those of us looking at the Degé Kangyur on our computers to forget that we are reading the product of many thousands of wooden printing blocks hand-carved in mirror-writing!
This chapter draws to a close with concluding verses of praise that re-center Tenpa Tsering as the primary patron for the production of this Kangyur.
Although it is only twenty-seven folio sides in length, this chapter is remarkable for the wide range of topics it covers. Situ Paṇchen cites scriptural prophecies, historical works, and family records; he references esoteric astrological systems; and he even gives a history of the Tibetan script. Also notable throughout is the influence of classical Indian literary aesthetics as illustrated by the original Sanskrit composition with which Situ Paṇchen opens the chapter. The concluding verses also make reference to the legendary origin story of the four Vedic texts, which are said to have emerged out of Brahmā’s four mouths. Such erudite references certainly add to the sense of grandeur with which the historical information in this chapter is presented.
Our translation is based on the Degé Kangyur and the modern typeset Pedurma edition, though the latter was found to have many typographical errors. Given that the Catalog is specific to the Degé edition, there are, naturally, no variant readings to be found in other recensions of the Kangyur. Concerning the dating of this 103rd volume, since Tai Situ describes the consecration ceremony of the Kangyur conducted on its completion by the head of the Sakya Ngor tradition, the text must have been finalized soon after 1733, when all the other volumes had been fully completed.
While there are no English translations of the Degé Kangyur Catalog in full, it has been the focus of a significant amount of scholarship. Principal among these is Schaffer’s The Culture of the Book in Tibet, which deals extensively with the physical and social aspects of the Degé Kangyur’s production. Schaeffer’s work was very helpful in decoding some of the difficult passages in “The Practicalities of Printing the Kangyur” section of this chapter. In their article, “Notes on the Lithang Edition of the Tibetan bKa’-gyur,” Jampa Samten Shastri and Jeremy Russell present translations of the three section colophons of the Tshalpa Kangyur (also found in the Lithang Kangyur), which have a great deal of overlap with the subsection “The Manner in Which Source Texts Were Collected and Edited.” The subsection “Family Lineage” also has considerable overlap with the The Royal Genealogy of Degé, an early nineteenth-century text examined by Josef Kolmaš.
[F.98.b]The following stanza is in the anuṣṭubh meter, which has eight syllables per verse quarter, and it is bound by a prastāra known as pathyā, a particular viṣamavṛtta.
This account, which describes how all those source texts still extant today of all the genuine scriptures of our teacher—the peerless, perfect, and complete Buddha, the Lord of the Śākyas—that have appeared in this Cool Land since the first introduction of the holy Dharma until the present were put into print through the sponsorship of the Lord of Men, Tenpa Tsering, and family, is divided into two sections: an account of the history of the main initiator,14 and an account of the virtuous activities undertaken.
The first is discussed from three perspectives: location, family lineage, and qualities.
The location in general is Tibet, the land of the north, encircled by ranges of snowy mountains. The Root Manual of the Rites of Mañjuśrī states:
- After the lake has receded from the Land of Snows
- It will be covered by groves of sāla trees.15
As stated in this prophecy, Tibet was first a lake that gradually dried up, giving way to dense forest. At one point, a monkey blessed by the Great Compassionate One arrived from the land of Potalaka. It is said that the Tibetan people are descended from his union with a cliff ogress.
However, the commentary to The Praise Surpassing Even That of the Gods states:
“Viṣṇu is known to have annihilated the family of Duryodhana and others.”16
“Viṣṇu asked Duryodhana, ‘Would you rather bring the eighteen armies or Vāsudeva alone?’[F.99.b] “He replied, ‘I will bring the armies,’ thus becoming Viṣṇu’s enemy. “Then, when Viṣṇu arrived at the battleground on the side of Pāṇḍu, Arjuna looked around and said, ‘I could never kill my own kinsmen, so how could I kill these armies of my kinsmen, even if they wish to capture the kingdom?’ “When Arjuna turned his back on the battle, Viṣṇu cried out, ‘You are a fool!
“Teaching him with these and many other verses of nihilist views, Viṣṇu deceived him by displaying various forms, and, taking the form of Arjuna’s charioteer, the family of Duryodhana and its eighteen armies were wiped out. As this battle was being fought, a king by the name of Rūpati, along with a single contingent of troops, dressed up as women and escaped to the snowy mountains. Their descendants remain there today and are known as the Tibetans.”17
So, with this and other accounts, there are a variety of different ways to explain [the origins of the Tibetan people]. Nevertheless, that the people of this land are protected by the blessings of the Noble Great Compassionate One is beyond doubt.
As human beings gradually availed themselves of the environment and settled the land, the forests in the central regions slowly disappeared, and villages, hamlets, and towns with royal palaces, temples, and the like came to adorn the landscape throughout, as it is now.
With regard to the virtuous qualities of the land in general, the Dharma king Songtsen Gampo praised it thus:18
- “As such, noble beings will appear
- With the best of retinues, scriptures of the Teacher,[F.100.a]
- And statues of the Teacher really present too.
- Even the mountains here possess great qualities.
- Cakrasaṃvara naturally dwells on Tsari Tsagong,
- Where even the rocks in the rivers are precious jewels.
- Five hundred arhats dwell on Mount Tisé,
- Where rivers of nectar are also to be found.
- Self-arisen syllables dot the cliffs of Gyeré,
- Where the handprints of ḍākinīs can be found.
- Lake Mapham is the abode of a bodhisattva nāga king,
- And its rivers possess immense qualities too.
- Bodhisattva nāga ministers reside in Lake Tri Shö,19
- Bringing benefit to all with its great rivers.
- In Lake Namtso Chukmo dwell bodhisattvas,
- While on the Thanglha range are five hundred arhats.
- On an island in Lake Nuptso20 lives a bodhisattva nāga king,
- While on Mount Hawo21 are many arhats.
- With high peaks and pure earth, Tibet is fully encircled by snowy mountains.
- Its speech is pure and its language melodious, comparable to Sanskrit.
- The language of its people is fully capable of translating the Dharma.
- Vast and well bordered, this land is endowed with all virtuous qualities.
- Such is the Land of Snows, a central land.”22
And also:
- “Pastures near and pastures far, it has the virtues of grasslands.
- Land for building and land for farming, it has the virtues of land.
- Water for drinking and water for irrigation, it has the virtues of water.
- Stones for building and stones for milling, it has the virtues of stones.
- Wood for building and wood for burning, it has the virtues of wood.”
So it has been described, as replete with ten virtues. In particular, it is a land thoroughly protected by the blessings of bodhisattvas who have dwelt on it—learned and realized masters, as well as emanated Dharma kings, and the incarnations of countless well-gone ones. As in the Teacher’s prophecy, it is a perfect place23 for the teachings of the Victorious One to shine brightly in this degenerate age.
According to the Secret Mantra Vajrayāna, in the Vajraḍāka Tantra, it says:
- “In the land of Tibet there is Sahajā,
- A goddess with a peaceful, lucid form.
- She holds the crocodile banner in her hand
- And dwells on the rocky cliffs as her home,
- Bearing the womb of spontaneous arising.”24[F.100.b]
As such, the land of Tibet is said to be one of the twenty-four sacred places, and among the localities of Tibet itself there are all kinds of vajra sacred sites where accomplished yogic masters have formed extraordinary, inner interdependent connections associating all the secret points with physical sites.
Imbued with the aforementioned qualities, this Cool Land, or the “land of the red-faced ones” as it is described in the sūtra The Questions of Vimalaprabha,25 is said to comprise “Tibet” and “Greater Tibet.” As for the region of Greater Tibet, a set of similes is given for Tibet at large: the three districts of Ngari up in the west are like a reservoir; the four horns of Ütsang in the center are like an irrigation channel; and the six ranges of Dokham down in the east are like a field.26 This location, which is called the land of Ling, falls in lower Dokham, amid what is known as the Zalmo range, one of the six mountain ranges, and between the Drichu and Shardachu27 Rivers among the four great rivers. Many great accomplished vajra masters—such as Deshek Phakmo Drup, the one bearing the name of Kathokpa Dampa, the siddha Saltong Shogom, the accomplished lord Karma Pakṣi, the bodhisattva Pomdrak, and others—consciously took rebirth in this area and continue to watch over it.
With so many learned and accomplished bodhisattvas who have graced this land with their feet and conferred their blessings upon it, the inhabitants are naturally inclined toward virtue. The land is protected by great bhūtas who have sworn oaths before Ācārya Padmasaṃbhava and others and favor the forces of good. Above all, the land is brilliantly illuminated by the practice of the Well-Gone One’s teachings. In light of all this, this land is more than worthy of copious praise.
Furthermore, the actual location for this vast virtuous deed [the production of this Kangyur] is the great monastic college of Palden Lhundrup Teng. Lhundrup Teng is located at the center of a number of remarkable geomantic signs: the mountain on its right resembles a poised turquoise dragon, the mountain to its left resembles a lion jumping in the sky, the mountain behind it resembles a crystal stupa, the mountain in front of it resembles a bowing elephant,[F.101.a] and the current of its golden river leisurely flows to the west, the direction of magnetizing.
The monastic community is in the lineage of the venerable great Sakyapas, father and sons, and excellently upholds the immaculate lineage of all the key points of the definitive secret as taught by the venerable and omniscient Vajradhara Künga Sangpo. Spending time in both the wheel of study and reflection, and the wheel of diligent practice,28 they uphold and do not let fade the light of the profound yogas of generation and completion, the infinite activities of the maṇḍalas, and the profound instructions of ripening and liberating and so on, and are worthy of many tributes of praise.
This great palace of the kingdom, filled to overflowing with priceless collections of precious items—cast statues and painted images of the well-gone ones, many volumes of the three scriptural baskets, and more—is a great temple, evidently comparable to how the ratnakūṭa vihāras29 were said to be in the noble land of India.
I will now present the particularities of the family lineage of the Lord of Men, Tenpa Tsering, who came from this land. This will be done according to the narrative compiled by his own secretary, Jamyang Gawai Lodrö, which was based on documents from their archives.
In general, there are said to be five peoples in this region of Greater Tibet: the four great ancestral clans—the Dra, the Dru, the Dong, and the Ga—plus the pure divine tribe of Go.
The last of these, it is said, consisted of the eighteen tribes of Nguchen Gyalmo. These are, namely, the Gar, Ké, and Göl; the Sung, Ser, and Drom; the Chi, Bu, and Shak; the Shöl, Tak, and Chang; the Jé, Sing, and Ram; and the Chuk, Po, and Bu.
Among those, in the Gar lineage, there were two brothers by the names of Garchen Yeshé Sangpo and Gar Dampa. According to the secretary’s writings, the latter was connected with Phulung monastery in Powo and so on,[F.101.b] so unless the account is inaccurate, it is clear that this refers to Gar Dampa Chödingpa, who is said to have been an emanation of the Sinhalese master Āryadeva.
Gar Dampa Chödingpa’s ancestors were all practitioners of Vajrabhairava, and he too made a sacred commitment to Bhairava from a young age. He traveled to Drigung where he took Jikten Sumgyi Gönpo as his teacher30 and became an accomplished yogic master. He later traveled to Tsari where he continued his practices of Secret Mantra. While dwelling in the Gar cave in Dakpo, he summoned all of Tibet’s deities and demons. They launched an assault on him with a multitude of weapons that should have reduced his body to ash; nevertheless, his fearless attitude compelled them all to take refuge in him and dedicate their lives to him. Performing a wide range of other beneficial activities, he eventually made his way to Powo. Since the Dharma had not spread there before, he inculcated faith in the people with his miraculous powers and skillful means. After he laid the foundation for Phulung Rinchen Ling monastery, he passed away. Then his nephew Orgyen, along with some others, came from Kham to oversee its continuation. A family lineage31 thereby gradually emerged known as the Phulung Dépa Thokawa, which continued in later times.
As for Garchen Yeshé Sangpo, he became ruler of the Langdodruk area. One of his two sons, Sönam Rinchen, served at the lotus feet of Drogön Chögyal Phakpa and was made his chamberlain. He was also granted an official seal and edict and so on from the emperor Kublai Khan, investing him with a position of great importance. In the later part of his life, Sönam Rinchen looked after some one thousand monks at the Samar Yangön monastery.32 His nephew, Ngu Guru, had nine sons, one of whom was Tongpön Dawa Sangpo, who as a result of the priest-patron33 relationship with the emperor ascended to the position of tongpön of Samar.34 One of Tongpön Dawa Sangpo’s two sons, Ngu Gyalwa Sangpo, had a son called Pema Tensung. He, in turn, had a son named Karchen Jangchup Bum, whose son, Ngu Chödorwa, was a mahāsiddha in the great esoteric Nyingma tradition. His brother, Gendün Gyaltsen, had a son named Gönpo Sung, whose family lineage in the Samar area remains unbroken until today.[F.102.a]
A son of Karchen Jangchup Bum by the name of Dechen Sönam Sangpo traveled to Kathok Dorjeden to perform funerary rites on behalf of his late mother. When he did not return, the other brothers planned to summon him back. However, Karmapa Chödrak Gyatso and his student Ngu Chödorwa prophesied, “He may not return, but he will eventually rule a sacred site, blessed by a mahāsiddha, constructed in the shape of the eight auspicious symbols. His descendants will be all the greater for it.” This prophecy came to pass exactly as foretold when Sönam Sangpo eventually went before the great lord of Ling in Jakra.35 It was also around this time that the name Degé is said to have come into usage.
The second of Sönam Sangpo’s four sons, Bothar,36 extended an invitation to the great lord of accomplishment Thangtong Gyalpo and received him amid devotion and offerings. This mahāsiddha made a nāga pond at the foot of the northern slope of the shadowed side of a mountain in Ngülda miraculously disappear. A temple, complete with statues and the supports to house them, was then constructed on this site. It was thus that the original foundation for the Dharma community and its doctrine at glorious Lhundrup Teng was first laid. The auspicious circumstances for a second temple also spontaneously came together and one of Bothar’s two sons, Lama Palden Sengé, established a monastic community on the sunny side of the mountain, where another temple had previously been located. This is what is known today as the Nyingön monastery.
The other son of Bothar, Gyaltsen Bum, had four sons. One of those four, A Nga, had around seven sons of his own. One of these was Joden Namkha Lhunsang, who had made a strong sacred commitment to Vajrabhairava and attained signs of accomplishment, such as his retinue perceiving him as Vajrabhairava and a spontaneous flow of iron pills coming from his tongue upon completing one billion recitations.[F.102.b]
Gyaltsen Bum’s brother Yagyal Phel had three sons, one of whom, Degé Künga Rinchen, initiated a period of flourishing prosperity by constructing a temple37 for the monastic estate of Lhundrup Teng. Once, while in the midst of a practice session, his entire bedchamber was transformed into a mass of flames that could be clearly seen by all. He had two younger brothers, Pön Namkha and Dorjé Lhundrup. The current Lama Tashi Gyatso and others descend directly from the latter of these two, while the former had a son named Lhunthup, who in turn had six sons.
The eldest of these six was the siddha Künga Gyatso, who was renowned as being an emanated display of Rikzin Gödemchen. He gained signs of accomplishment through both new and old tantric systems in general and, in particular, through the practices related to the old tantras. By revealing the hidden nature of reality and perceiving the falsehood of appearances, he soon became famous for various displays of miraculous activities such as squeezing solid rock as if it were clay and taming hordes of malevolent spirits.
The third son of Lhunthup was known as Lama Damchö Lhundrup or Jampa Phuntsok. Due to the strength of his past meritorious karma ever increasing, he primarily held positions of political power and gained authority over a great number of religious communities irrespective of lineage.38 The fifth son was Lama Lhasung,39 who devoted himself exclusively to his religious vows. The sixth son was Lama Karma Samdrup, a devotee of the Karma Kaṃtsang tradition who lived at Wönpo Tö. The second and fourth sons presided over Lhunthup’s estate and the sons of the former, that is of Pön Luphel, included Pönchen Künga Phuntsok. When Sakyong Dampa Jampa Phuntsok passed away, Pönchen Künga Phuntsok ascended to the throne and upheld the wholesome ways of both religious and secular traditions.
Trichen Sangyé Tenpa,[F.103.a] who is said to have been an emanated display of Chokro Lui Gyaltsen in several treasure texts, gained unparalleled authority through the vast power of his good deeds and ascended the throne of the monastic seat at Lhundrup Teng. There, he glorified and venerated the teachings of the Well-Gone One without sectarian bias, restored and reinvigorated a great number of temples and monastic communities, and brought welfare to the kingdom with a vision of kindness and just rule of law. Through the wholesome ways of the two traditions, he inspired virtue in all of his subjects.
Sangyé Tenpa’s paternal half-brother, Orgyen Tashi, had a son, Sakyong Lama Sönam Phuntsok, who ascended the throne next. Sönam Phuntsok possessed a discerning outlook, a tolerant disposition, a broad mind, and other qualities of righteous men.40 His brother Pön Wangchen Gönpo’s son is the Lord of Men, Tenpa Tsering, who currently holds the throne and reigns over the kingdom. It is he who was the patron for accomplishing this vast virtuous activity [of producing the Kangyur].
In this section, I will describe the qualities of the patron, King Tenpa Tsering, exactly as I have witnessed them, devoid of any flattery.
Conditioned by an ocean of good deeds accumulated across many lifetimes, he was of a virtuous disposition from a young age. He was respectful to those deserving of respect, such as the gurus and elders. In his practice sessions of the generation and completion stages for many yidam deities of the New and Old schools, he was never lax in his diligence with respect to the number of recitations and his prayers. Even before he was appointed to the throne and when he was not especially wealthy, he would make offerings to the Three Jewels and commission representations of body, speech, and mind with a courageous spirit.41 These limitless offerings and commissions included numerous high-quality thangkas painted with the images of each of the thousand buddhas of the Fortunate Eon, featuring their retinues of female buddhas, disciples, and attendants, as well as a copy of the Kangyur, the collected teachings of the Victorious One, produced out of precious substances.[F.103.b]
Even when holding an elevated position as ruler, Tenpa Tsering is firm and unrelenting in his commitments, just as described in The Staff of Wisdom: A Treatise on Ethics:42
- “Sublime beings do not make many commitments,
- Yet if they commit themselves to something difficult,
- It is as if the pledge were carved in stone;
- Even in the face of death or other perils, they will not waver.”
He possesses an extremely discerning outlook, the likes of which even the most prudent cannot fathom. Even when his reserves of wealth increased sizably,43 he was imbued with humility through and through and was never overtaken by arrogance. As described by the master Nāgārjuna:44
- “When lowly beings find a scant amount of wealth,
- They swell with pride, disparaging all others.
- The noble, however, may acquire wealth and riches,
- Yet remain bowed like ripened rice plants.
In the same way, he has not engaged in karmically objectionable matters such as “subduing enemies and protecting friends,” nor does he hoard his wealth. Rather, he spends freely on matters of Dharma, with stipends for the saṅgha, offerings to the Three Jewels, and the construction of representations of body, speech, and mind. He is rich with all of the qualities of a noble person.
At the great monastic seat of Ewaṃ Chöden in Tsang, he commissioned the restoration of the communal housing along with countless statues and supports, such as the great stūpa that was constructed by Shapdrung Palchokpa, making them like new. He also commissioned countless new works such as:
● a high-quality edition of The Collected Works of the Five Eminent Sakya Forefathers in sixteen volumes;[F.104.a]
● an extremely high-quality collection of the two hundred and seven volumes of the Tengyur produced in silver;
● an extremely well-crafted and high-quality edition of the Kangyur, the collected words of the Victorious One, in vermillion ink, complete with book covers made out of pure gold and silk binding strings;
● a set of statues of the thousand buddhas made from red sandalwood, each about a handspan in height;
● another set of larger statues of the thousand buddhas made from the paste of red sandalwood powder;
● a stūpa made out of white and red sandalwood with superb craftsmanship, containing a set of eight relics;
● a set of statues of the forty-five Dharma kings, lotsāwas, and paṇḍitas made out of sandalwood clay, each over a cubit high;
● a set of statues of the lineage gurus of the Path and Result constructed entirely out of white sandalwood paste, each measuring a single handspan;
● another set of statues of the fifty lineage gurus of The Precious Oral Instructions of the Path and Result made out of gold and copper, each over a cubit and five finger-breadths high;
● some three hundred extremely high-quality statues of gurus, yidams, buddhas, bodhisattvas, Dharma protectors, wealth deities, and others cast in gold and copper;
● a small assembly hall at Lhundrup Teng complete with gañjira;
● an assembly hall at Jakra complete with victory banners;
● an assembly hall for the monastic community at Pomdzang;
● a temple and monastic gathering hall for us at Palpung; and
● a reliquary stūpa for Lama Kunchöpa with gañjira.
And this work is still ongoing. Additionally, every year he gives substantial offerings, in a way that accords with the Dharma, to monks who embody profound yogic practices. The particular vast offerings and gifts he makes are equivalent to accumulating many billions of recitations of the main and essence mantras of yidam deities while staying entirely in strict retreat, and other such things. As The Wish-Fulfilling Vine: A Collection of Jātaka Tales states:46[F.104.b]
- “The wealth of people, when clutched in tightened fists, is like a drop of quicksilver.
- Yet, when given to the poor and helpless to fulfill their needs, its glory flourishes.
- Through the merit of providing groves, temples, stūpas, and consecrated statues of the blessed ones,
- The renown of the wealthy endures without fading, beautifying everything around.”
In his great wisdom, he benevolently rules his subjects with altruistic intentions and an honest heart, avoids misleading people with deception, and conducts himself with mindfulness and fearlessness in all his actions. As the master Nāgārjuna has said:47
- “A great altruistic intention is the way of the wise,
- Nondeception is the way of the honest,
- While mindfulness free from fear
- Is said to be the way of kings.”
In this way he governs the land such that there is perfect abundance, as described in Cāṇakya’s Treatise of Ethical Advice to the King:48
- “The king should act akin to a gardener
- Who gathers just the petals of flowers
- Arranged in rows in his garden,
- Without severing their roots.
In this way, and by exclusively pursuing the Dharma, he possesses a flexible and gentle character as further described by Cāṇakya:49
- “The lord of the land should not
- Scowl with rage without just cause.
- The king should act not like a penniless servant
- But instead should uphold the Dharma.”[F.105.a]
His adversaries voluntarily bow to him of their own accord, without needing to be subdued, and he rules his royal subjects without force. Even when the divinely mandated emperor Mañjughoṣa gained dominion over these Tibetan lands,50 his subjects continued to sing praises for the special qualities of the Lord of Men. He acted out of kindness in granting many of his subject households new plots of land. With such things he has captured the hearts and minds of everyone, both high and low, with his sublime character. In short, during this age, when the darkness of the degenerate times is all but impenetrable, he is one who embodies enlightened activities, like the return of the Dharma King Aśoka.
The second and third sons of the Lord of Men, Tenpa Tsering, have authentically taken up the ascetic discipline of ordination whereas the first has ascended to political power.51 All three of them possess a natural inclination toward virtue, unfaltering steadiness, open and impartial perspectives, and vast insight into the two traditions of learning. They embody the qualities described in The Treatise of Ethical Advice of Masurakṣa:52
- “Possessed of intellect, stable and deep;
- Learned in the brilliant Dharma and the treatises;
- Composed and truthful in speech;
- Intent on benefiting the royal entourage;
- Of mighty lineage and flexible outlook;
- Full of devotion to the gurus,
- And loving kindness toward all people—
- One with such a character is a true prince.”
His excellent queen accords with descriptions from The Play in Full:
- “She should not be arrogant or slothful. She should comport herself fittingly.
- She should be without any pride or willfulness, like a servant.
- She should not be attracted to alcohol, tastes, sounds, or fragrances;
- She should be free of greed and covetousness, satisfied with her fortune.
His ministers accord with the words of Masurakṣa:54
- “Clear in speech, abundant in intelligence,
- Well versed in the treatises on ethics,
- Gentle in character yet scrutinizing,
- Just so should royal ministers conduct themselves.”
His doctors are in accord as well:55
- “Acquainted with the art of healing,
- Eloquently conversant in both Dharma and learning,
- Well trained in the practical applications,
- Skilled in healing just like Dhanvantari,
- And well versed in all signs of disease—
- Such is the doctor a king should see.”
His secretaries are in accord as well:56
- “Knowledgeable in grammar and astrology,
- Clear in penmanship and swift in hand,
- Intelligent and clear with words—
- Such a scribe will be rich and renowned.”
His chief ministers are in accord as well:57
- “Of noble birth, excellent disposition, and talented,
- Diligent in the pursuit of truth and Dharma,
- And dignified in physical appearance—
- Such are advisors fit for a king.”
His military commanders are in accord as well:58
- “Trained in weaponry and endowed with strength,
- Trained in riding like a bird,
- Brimming with courage and resolution—
- Understand this is how commanders ought to be.”
His chefs are in accord as well:59
- “Privy to ancestral traditions and dexterous,
- Learned in treatises and skilled in cooking,
- Hygienic and full of affection—
- This is how a chef should be.”
His envoys are in accord as well:60
- “Intelligent, articulate, and wise,
- Able to relate to the thinking of others,
- Resolute, and who speak as commanded—
- Such should the royal messengers behave.”
In short, he is well endowed with all aspects of a king in accord with the treatises.
The virtuous activity of publishing the Victorious One’s teachings will be explained according to the time of production, the process of collecting and editing the manuscripts, and the practicalities of printing.
In general, this great Fortunate Eon is made up of three phases: the age of formation, the age of remaining, and the age of destruction. Within the age of remaining, there are twenty intermediate periods: the long decline, the long rise, and the eighteen cyclical periods between. Currently, we are in the later part of the long decline. In terms of the stages of the existence of the Sage’s teachings, which are divided into groups of three 500-year periods, we are now in the latter half.
Learned people have come to many conflicting conclusions regarding the number of years that have elapsed since our Teacher, the Fourth Guide, the Lord of the Śākyas, displayed his emanation in our world. According to the tradition of The White Lotus Instructions, which is commonly used today, our teacher was born 2,689 years ago in the year of Raudra, the male iron monkey year (960
This is the third chapter of the Degé Kangyur Catalog, which describes the publication history of the Degé Kangyur. Authored by the Degé Kangyur’s main editor, the eighth Tai Situ Chökyi Jungné, at the conclusion of the five-year project in 1733, it is a document rich in historical detail. First it covers the history of the Degé region and the royal family of Degé. Then it offers extensive praise for the qualities of Tenpa Tsering, the king of Degé and throne holder of Lhundrup Teng Monastery, who was the project’s main sponsor. After that is an erudite history of previous collections of translated Buddhist scriptures in Tibet since the time of the earliest translations during the Tibetan imperial period, and finally it describes the editorial process and practical challenges involved in producing a xylograph Kangyur of such quality.
Translated by the Subhāṣita Translation Group. The translation, along with all ancillary materials, was produced by Lowell Cook and Benjamin Ewing. Khenpo Tashi Pal, Andrew West, Alexander Berzin, and Ryan Conlon also contributed with advice and helpful comments.
The translation was completed under the patronage and supervision of 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha. Rory Lindsay and George Fitzherbert edited the translation and the introduction, and Ven. Konchog Norbu copyedited the text. Martina Cotter was in charge of the digital publication process.
The translation of this text has been made possible through the generous sponsorship of Chan Wing Fai, Lam Wai Ling, Chan Oi Yi, Chan Tung Mei, Chan Yu Ka, Chan Sui Li, Chan Ya Ho, Chan Yu Lin, Zhong Sheng Jian, and Lin Miao Jun.
Much more than just a table of contents, what is known as the Degé Kangyur Catalog1 takes up the entirety of the 103rd and final volume of the Kangyur. It is presented in five chapters. The first three give a detailed history of Indian Buddhism, its arrival in Tibet, and the production of the Degé Kangyur. The final two constitute the catalog itself, in which all the texts included in the canon are listed, and the merits of producing a Kangyur are extolled. The Catalog was written by the eighth Tai Situ Chökyi Jungné (1700–74), widely known as Situ Paṇchen, who presided over the entire project as its chief editor. Presented here is the third chapter, which concludes Situ Paṇchen’s history of Buddhism in Tibet with an account of how this Kangyur in particular was produced at the royal palace-monastery of Degé, in eastern Tibet, between the years 1729 and 1733 of the Western calendar. The chapter is presented in two parts. Part 1 presents a family history and a descriptive eulogy of the Degé Kangyur’s main initiator and sponsor, Tenpa Tsering (1678–1738), the king of Degé. Part 2 starts with a scholarly history of previous Kangyur collections in Tibet, and then gives an account of the editorial and practical challenges involved in the production of the Degé Kangyur itself.
Part 1 focuses on Tenpa Tsering himself as the “main initiator,” or sponsor, for the production of the Degé Kangyur. It is divided into three subsections: “Location,” meaning an account of the Degé region in general, and the palace-monastery of Lhundrup Teng in particular; “Family Lineage,” which presents a genealogical history of the Degé royal family; and “Qualities,” in which Tenpa Tsering’s own extensive sponsorship activities are described, and he is praised as an exemplary Buddhist ruler.
Following a pattern common to several of the subsections in this chapter, “Location” begins from a broad perspective, first presenting the entire Tibetan region, then gradually focusing more specifically on the Degé area, and concluding with a description of Lhundrup Teng monastery itself. In his general introduction to Tibet and the origins of the Tibetan people, Situ Paṇchen draws particularly on Feast for Scholars, by the sixteenth-century Karma Kagyü historian Pawo Tsuklak Trengwa, and in a way that both echoes and supplements that work, interweaves his discussion with citations from scriptural prophecies and canonical commentaries on the Indian epics.
“Family Lineage” traces the genealogy of the royal house of Degé to the mythic “pure divine tribe of Go,” (sgo lha sde dkar po), many generations before Tenpa Tsering. As stated by Situ Paṇchen, this section was largely based on a family record drawn up by the secretary of the Degé royal family at the time. Among the many notable forebears of Tenpa Tsering were, for example, one who, it says, served Drogön Chögyal Phakpa as his chamberlain (Tib. gsol dpon), received his own official seal from Kublai Khan, and appears to have been instrumental in the merging of religious and secular authority that characterized various scions of the Degé family in later generations. While the Sakya affiliation of many of these figures is apparent, Situ Paṇchen also notes the numerous Kagyü and Nyingma lineage connections of this illustrious family line, and the support that Tenpa Tsering’s antecedents had given the Dharma without sectarian bias (Tib. ris med).2 Lhundrup Teng itself, the Sakya Ngor monastery that was the actual site of production of the Degé Kangyur between 1729 and 1733, is described as both the “palace of the kingdom” and as an exemplary monastery.
The subsection “Qualities” is an effusive praise of the personal qualities of Tenpa Tsering himself. Tenpa Tsering was both the ruler (Tib. sa skyong, mi’i dbang po) of the Degé kingdom, and the hereditary throne holder (khri chen) of Lhundrup Teng monastery, a position he inherited from his uncle. In this section, Situ Paṇchen portrays Tenpa Tsering very much as an ideal Tibetan religious king who supported the Dharma and protected his subjects without exploitation or oppression. He begins by listing Tenpa Tsering’s generous sponsorship activities, such as commissioning statues, supporting construction projects at nearby monasteries (including the main assembly hall at Situ Paṇchen’s own Palpung monastery), and the production of texts, and then moves on to describe his qualities as an archetypal benevolent Dharma king. Here Situ Paṇchen cites a number of texts from the classical Indian genre known as nītiśāstra, or “ethical treatises,” which prescribe proper ethical behavior in the world, and the proper conduct of rulers in particular. Citing such treatises, Situ Paṇchen portrays Tenpa Tsering and his entire royal court as embodying an idealized vision of moral rulership reminiscent of the great Indian emperor and patron of the Dharma, Aśoka.
The second part of chapter 3 deals with the Degé Kangyur project itself. This, again, is divided into three subsections: “The Time of the Production of the Kangyur,” “The Manner in Which Source Texts Were Collected and Edited,” and “The Practicalities of Printing the Kangyur.”
Far more than giving a single calendar date, “The Time of the Production of the Kangyur” dates the initiation of the Degé Kangyur project using a variety of methods, beginning on a scale of eons and ending with the time of day. Again displaying the breadth of his learning, when dating this momentous event, Situ Paṇchen discusses four different traditions of calculating the Buddha’s birth and death. He also references Chinese, Indian, Mongolian, and Tibetan calendars, and the astrological systems of three different tantric cycles. He only then dates the beginning of the project in relation to more mundane events—seven years after the enthronement of the Yongzheng Emperor, and when Tenpa Tsering had reached the age of fifty-two.
Situ Paṇchen explains Tenpa Tsering’s initiation of this momentous project very simply as being the result of many lifetimes of good karma. Only sidelong allusion is made to the wider political and economic context that likely facilitated it. The Royal Genealogy of Degé, a text authored nearly a century after the Catalog by one of Tenpa Tsering’s descendants and successors as the ruler of Degé, states that during Tenpa Tsering’s tenure as the king of Degé, the kingdom grew considerably in territory, and it clearly indicates that this growth and the attendant ascent of Tenpa Tsering himself in power, prestige, and wealth was connected to Degé’s pivotal role in the wider Qing-Tibetan politics of the period.3 The Royal Genealogy of Degé says that when Tenpa Tsering was granted imperial titles by the Qing (first in 1728 and then in 1733), he was “empowered to act as general ruler of Dokham,” and received large quantities of silk and silver as gifts.4 Such events are only hinted at in the Catalog itself, as when, for example, Situ Paṇchen mentions that “his reserves of wealth increased sizably.”5 A little later he also mentions in passing that “even when the divinely mandated emperor Mañjughoṣa gained dominion over these Tibetan lands”— a reference to Qing emperor Yongzheng—Tenpa Tsering’s subjects continued to praise him as before.6
In “The Manner in Which Source Texts Were Collected and Edited,” the focus moves away from the subject of patronage, and on to the scholarly and practical challenges that Situ Paṇchen faced in collating and printing the Kangyur. Some readers might assume that the texts of the Kangyur have long existed in a singular, organized format that was transmitted from India to Tibet. This, however, is not the case. As Situ Paṇchen shows, the Tibetan canons we have today are an amalgamation of different scriptural collections produced by generations of translators and editors. This subsection therefore begins with a discussion of the translation activities undertaken during the Tibetan imperial period (629–841
As Situ Paṇchen explains, it was only after many more years of translation activity (known as the period of the “later diffusion of the teachings”) that all the translated canonical texts were then assembled, collated, and copied as a single collection for the first time. This happened in the early fourteenth century under the inspiration and guidance of Chomden Rikpai Raldri (1227–1305).8 The creation of this first canon, referred to by Situ Paṇchen as the Narthang Kangyur (and known in contemporary scholarship as the no-longer-extant Old Narthang manuscript Kangyur), involved comparing over twenty-five different collections of texts in various genres, all of which had to be found in monastic libraries scattered across Tibet.9 Situ Paṇchen then describes how this Old Narthang Kangyur provided the basis for the Tshalpa Kangyur, which in turn provided the basis for what became known as the Lithang Kangyur, produced in xylograph in the early seventeenth century in the eastern Tibetan kingdom of Jang Satham.10
This subsection also offers a remarkably transparent window into Situ Paṇchen’s own editorial and philological process. He tells us that although the Lithang Kangyur was used as the primary basis for the Degé edition, three other Kangyur collections were also consulted. These included what he calls the “authentic Kangyur”11 used by Anyen Pakṣi, a thirteenth-century disciple of Sakya Pandita, and the Lhodzong Kangyur, which belongs to the Thempanga recensional branch.12 This latter point is notable because in the centuries after the Old Narthang manuscript Kangyur was compiled, two major recensional branches developed, the Tshalpa line and the Thempangma line, with their own distinct aspects. In consulting both the Lithang and Lhodzong, members of the former and latter respectively, Situ Paṇchen creates a hybrid collection with features from both lines. He tells us that based on these other Kangyur collections he was able to correct minor errors like spelling mistakes and misordered pages, and that he also inserted “authentic sūtras and tantras” that were not present in the Lithang collection. In his editing process, Situ Paṇchen also consulted Sanskrit editions for some of the major tantras, such as the Guhyasamāja and Hevajra, along with their commentaries. He tells us that this extensive editorial process was an effort to establish the Degé Kangyur as a “trustworthy” edition of the Kangyur that is “superior to earlier editions.”
“The Practicalities of Printing the Kangyur” is a rare discussion of the material considerations involved in such a large printing project as the Degé Kangyur. Here, Situ Paṇchen gives us insights into the logistics of the project, including training, housing, and feeding hundreds of craftsmen and sourcing massive quantities of wood, paper, and ink. He also describes a workflow that involved teams of scribes and editors, multiple reviews, and hundreds of carvers. It can be easy for those of us looking at the Degé Kangyur on our computers to forget that we are reading the product of many thousands of wooden printing blocks hand-carved in mirror-writing!
This chapter draws to a close with concluding verses of praise that re-center Tenpa Tsering as the primary patron for the production of this Kangyur.
Although it is only twenty-seven folio sides in length, this chapter is remarkable for the wide range of topics it covers. Situ Paṇchen cites scriptural prophecies, historical works, and family records; he references esoteric astrological systems; and he even gives a history of the Tibetan script. Also notable throughout is the influence of classical Indian literary aesthetics as illustrated by the original Sanskrit composition with which Situ Paṇchen opens the chapter. The concluding verses also make reference to the legendary origin story of the four Vedic texts, which are said to have emerged out of Brahmā’s four mouths. Such erudite references certainly add to the sense of grandeur with which the historical information in this chapter is presented.
Our translation is based on the Degé Kangyur and the modern typeset Pedurma edition, though the latter was found to have many typographical errors. Given that the Catalog is specific to the Degé edition, there are, naturally, no variant readings to be found in other recensions of the Kangyur. Concerning the dating of this 103rd volume, since Tai Situ describes the consecration ceremony of the Kangyur conducted on its completion by the head of the Sakya Ngor tradition, the text must have been finalized soon after 1733, when all the other volumes had been fully completed.
While there are no English translations of the Degé Kangyur Catalog in full, it has been the focus of a significant amount of scholarship. Principal among these is Schaffer’s The Culture of the Book in Tibet, which deals extensively with the physical and social aspects of the Degé Kangyur’s production. Schaeffer’s work was very helpful in decoding some of the difficult passages in “The Practicalities of Printing the Kangyur” section of this chapter. In their article, “Notes on the Lithang Edition of the Tibetan bKa’-gyur,” Jampa Samten Shastri and Jeremy Russell present translations of the three section colophons of the Tshalpa Kangyur (also found in the Lithang Kangyur), which have a great deal of overlap with the subsection “The Manner in Which Source Texts Were Collected and Edited.” The subsection “Family Lineage” also has considerable overlap with the The Royal Genealogy of Degé, an early nineteenth-century text examined by Josef Kolmaš.
[F.98.b]The following stanza is in the anuṣṭubh meter, which has eight syllables per verse quarter, and it is bound by a prastāra known as pathyā, a particular viṣamavṛtta.
This account, which describes how all those source texts still extant today of all the genuine scriptures of our teacher—the peerless, perfect, and complete Buddha, the Lord of the Śākyas—that have appeared in this Cool Land since the first introduction of the holy Dharma until the present were put into print through the sponsorship of the Lord of Men, Tenpa Tsering, and family, is divided into two sections: an account of the history of the main initiator,14 and an account of the virtuous activities undertaken.
The first is discussed from three perspectives: location, family lineage, and qualities.
The location in general is Tibet, the land of the north, encircled by ranges of snowy mountains. The Root Manual of the Rites of Mañjuśrī states:
- After the lake has receded from the Land of Snows
- It will be covered by groves of sāla trees.15
As stated in this prophecy, Tibet was first a lake that gradually dried up, giving way to dense forest. At one point, a monkey blessed by the Great Compassionate One arrived from the land of Potalaka. It is said that the Tibetan people are descended from his union with a cliff ogress.
However, the commentary to The Praise Surpassing Even That of the Gods states:
“Viṣṇu is known to have annihilated the family of Duryodhana and others.”16
“Viṣṇu asked Duryodhana, ‘Would you rather bring the eighteen armies or Vāsudeva alone?’[F.99.b] “He replied, ‘I will bring the armies,’ thus becoming Viṣṇu’s enemy. “Then, when Viṣṇu arrived at the battleground on the side of Pāṇḍu, Arjuna looked around and said, ‘I could never kill my own kinsmen, so how could I kill these armies of my kinsmen, even if they wish to capture the kingdom?’ “When Arjuna turned his back on the battle, Viṣṇu cried out, ‘You are a fool!
“Teaching him with these and many other verses of nihilist views, Viṣṇu deceived him by displaying various forms, and, taking the form of Arjuna’s charioteer, the family of Duryodhana and its eighteen armies were wiped out. As this battle was being fought, a king by the name of Rūpati, along with a single contingent of troops, dressed up as women and escaped to the snowy mountains. Their descendants remain there today and are known as the Tibetans.”17
So, with this and other accounts, there are a variety of different ways to explain [the origins of the Tibetan people]. Nevertheless, that the people of this land are protected by the blessings of the Noble Great Compassionate One is beyond doubt.
As human beings gradually availed themselves of the environment and settled the land, the forests in the central regions slowly disappeared, and villages, hamlets, and towns with royal palaces, temples, and the like came to adorn the landscape throughout, as it is now.
With regard to the virtuous qualities of the land in general, the Dharma king Songtsen Gampo praised it thus:18
- “As such, noble beings will appear
- With the best of retinues, scriptures of the Teacher,[F.100.a]
- And statues of the Teacher really present too.
- Even the mountains here possess great qualities.
- Cakrasaṃvara naturally dwells on Tsari Tsagong,
- Where even the rocks in the rivers are precious jewels.
- Five hundred arhats dwell on Mount Tisé,
- Where rivers of nectar are also to be found.
- Self-arisen syllables dot the cliffs of Gyeré,
- Where the handprints of ḍākinīs can be found.
- Lake Mapham is the abode of a bodhisattva nāga king,
- And its rivers possess immense qualities too.
- Bodhisattva nāga ministers reside in Lake Tri Shö,19
- Bringing benefit to all with its great rivers.
- In Lake Namtso Chukmo dwell bodhisattvas,
- While on the Thanglha range are five hundred arhats.
- On an island in Lake Nuptso20 lives a bodhisattva nāga king,
- While on Mount Hawo21 are many arhats.
- With high peaks and pure earth, Tibet is fully encircled by snowy mountains.
- Its speech is pure and its language melodious, comparable to Sanskrit.
- The language of its people is fully capable of translating the Dharma.
- Vast and well bordered, this land is endowed with all virtuous qualities.
- Such is the Land of Snows, a central land.”22
And also:
- “Pastures near and pastures far, it has the virtues of grasslands.
- Land for building and land for farming, it has the virtues of land.
- Water for drinking and water for irrigation, it has the virtues of water.
- Stones for building and stones for milling, it has the virtues of stones.
- Wood for building and wood for burning, it has the virtues of wood.”
So it has been described, as replete with ten virtues. In particular, it is a land thoroughly protected by the blessings of bodhisattvas who have dwelt on it—learned and realized masters, as well as emanated Dharma kings, and the incarnations of countless well-gone ones. As in the Teacher’s prophecy, it is a perfect place23 for the teachings of the Victorious One to shine brightly in this degenerate age.
According to the Secret Mantra Vajrayāna, in the Vajraḍāka Tantra, it says:
- “In the land of Tibet there is Sahajā,
- A goddess with a peaceful, lucid form.
- She holds the crocodile banner in her hand
- And dwells on the rocky cliffs as her home,
- Bearing the womb of spontaneous arising.”24[F.100.b]
As such, the land of Tibet is said to be one of the twenty-four sacred places, and among the localities of Tibet itself there are all kinds of vajra sacred sites where accomplished yogic masters have formed extraordinary, inner interdependent connections associating all the secret points with physical sites.
Imbued with the aforementioned qualities, this Cool Land, or the “land of the red-faced ones” as it is described in the sūtra The Questions of Vimalaprabha,25 is said to comprise “Tibet” and “Greater Tibet.” As for the region of Greater Tibet, a set of similes is given for Tibet at large: the three districts of Ngari up in the west are like a reservoir; the four horns of Ütsang in the center are like an irrigation channel; and the six ranges of Dokham down in the east are like a field.26 This location, which is called the land of Ling, falls in lower Dokham, amid what is known as the Zalmo range, one of the six mountain ranges, and between the Drichu and Shardachu27 Rivers among the four great rivers. Many great accomplished vajra masters—such as Deshek Phakmo Drup, the one bearing the name of Kathokpa Dampa, the siddha Saltong Shogom, the accomplished lord Karma Pakṣi, the bodhisattva Pomdrak, and others—consciously took rebirth in this area and continue to watch over it.
With so many learned and accomplished bodhisattvas who have graced this land with their feet and conferred their blessings upon it, the inhabitants are naturally inclined toward virtue. The land is protected by great bhūtas who have sworn oaths before Ācārya Padmasaṃbhava and others and favor the forces of good. Above all, the land is brilliantly illuminated by the practice of the Well-Gone One’s teachings. In light of all this, this land is more than worthy of copious praise.
Furthermore, the actual location for this vast virtuous deed [the production of this Kangyur] is the great monastic college of Palden Lhundrup Teng. Lhundrup Teng is located at the center of a number of remarkable geomantic signs: the mountain on its right resembles a poised turquoise dragon, the mountain to its left resembles a lion jumping in the sky, the mountain behind it resembles a crystal stupa, the mountain in front of it resembles a bowing elephant,[F.101.a] and the current of its golden river leisurely flows to the west, the direction of magnetizing.
The monastic community is in the lineage of the venerable great Sakyapas, father and sons, and excellently upholds the immaculate lineage of all the key points of the definitive secret as taught by the venerable and omniscient Vajradhara Künga Sangpo. Spending time in both the wheel of study and reflection, and the wheel of diligent practice,28 they uphold and do not let fade the light of the profound yogas of generation and completion, the infinite activities of the maṇḍalas, and the profound instructions of ripening and liberating and so on, and are worthy of many tributes of praise.
This great palace of the kingdom, filled to overflowing with priceless collections of precious items—cast statues and painted images of the well-gone ones, many volumes of the three scriptural baskets, and more—is a great temple, evidently comparable to how the ratnakūṭa vihāras29 were said to be in the noble land of India.
I will now present the particularities of the family lineage of the Lord of Men, Tenpa Tsering, who came from this land. This will be done according to the narrative compiled by his own secretary, Jamyang Gawai Lodrö, which was based on documents from their archives.
In general, there are said to be five peoples in this region of Greater Tibet: the four great ancestral clans—the Dra, the Dru, the Dong, and the Ga—plus the pure divine tribe of Go.
The last of these, it is said, consisted of the eighteen tribes of Nguchen Gyalmo. These are, namely, the Gar, Ké, and Göl; the Sung, Ser, and Drom; the Chi, Bu, and Shak; the Shöl, Tak, and Chang; the Jé, Sing, and Ram; and the Chuk, Po, and Bu.
Among those, in the Gar lineage, there were two brothers by the names of Garchen Yeshé Sangpo and Gar Dampa. According to the secretary’s writings, the latter was connected with Phulung monastery in Powo and so on,[F.101.b] so unless the account is inaccurate, it is clear that this refers to Gar Dampa Chödingpa, who is said to have been an emanation of the Sinhalese master Āryadeva.
Gar Dampa Chödingpa’s ancestors were all practitioners of Vajrabhairava, and he too made a sacred commitment to Bhairava from a young age. He traveled to Drigung where he took Jikten Sumgyi Gönpo as his teacher30 and became an accomplished yogic master. He later traveled to Tsari where he continued his practices of Secret Mantra. While dwelling in the Gar cave in Dakpo, he summoned all of Tibet’s deities and demons. They launched an assault on him with a multitude of weapons that should have reduced his body to ash; nevertheless, his fearless attitude compelled them all to take refuge in him and dedicate their lives to him. Performing a wide range of other beneficial activities, he eventually made his way to Powo. Since the Dharma had not spread there before, he inculcated faith in the people with his miraculous powers and skillful means. After he laid the foundation for Phulung Rinchen Ling monastery, he passed away. Then his nephew Orgyen, along with some others, came from Kham to oversee its continuation. A family lineage31 thereby gradually emerged known as the Phulung Dépa Thokawa, which continued in later times.
As for Garchen Yeshé Sangpo, he became ruler of the Langdodruk area. One of his two sons, Sönam Rinchen, served at the lotus feet of Drogön Chögyal Phakpa and was made his chamberlain. He was also granted an official seal and edict and so on from the emperor Kublai Khan, investing him with a position of great importance. In the later part of his life, Sönam Rinchen looked after some one thousand monks at the Samar Yangön monastery.32 His nephew, Ngu Guru, had nine sons, one of whom was Tongpön Dawa Sangpo, who as a result of the priest-patron33 relationship with the emperor ascended to the position of tongpön of Samar.34 One of Tongpön Dawa Sangpo’s two sons, Ngu Gyalwa Sangpo, had a son called Pema Tensung. He, in turn, had a son named Karchen Jangchup Bum, whose son, Ngu Chödorwa, was a mahāsiddha in the great esoteric Nyingma tradition. His brother, Gendün Gyaltsen, had a son named Gönpo Sung, whose family lineage in the Samar area remains unbroken until today.[F.102.a]
A son of Karchen Jangchup Bum by the name of Dechen Sönam Sangpo traveled to Kathok Dorjeden to perform funerary rites on behalf of his late mother. When he did not return, the other brothers planned to summon him back. However, Karmapa Chödrak Gyatso and his student Ngu Chödorwa prophesied, “He may not return, but he will eventually rule a sacred site, blessed by a mahāsiddha, constructed in the shape of the eight auspicious symbols. His descendants will be all the greater for it.” This prophecy came to pass exactly as foretold when Sönam Sangpo eventually went before the great lord of Ling in Jakra.35 It was also around this time that the name Degé is said to have come into usage.
The second of Sönam Sangpo’s four sons, Bothar,36 extended an invitation to the great lord of accomplishment Thangtong Gyalpo and received him amid devotion and offerings. This mahāsiddha made a nāga pond at the foot of the northern slope of the shadowed side of a mountain in Ngülda miraculously disappear. A temple, complete with statues and the supports to house them, was then constructed on this site. It was thus that the original foundation for the Dharma community and its doctrine at glorious Lhundrup Teng was first laid. The auspicious circumstances for a second temple also spontaneously came together and one of Bothar’s two sons, Lama Palden Sengé, established a monastic community on the sunny side of the mountain, where another temple had previously been located. This is what is known today as the Nyingön monastery.
The other son of Bothar, Gyaltsen Bum, had four sons. One of those four, A Nga, had around seven sons of his own. One of these was Joden Namkha Lhunsang, who had made a strong sacred commitment to Vajrabhairava and attained signs of accomplishment, such as his retinue perceiving him as Vajrabhairava and a spontaneous flow of iron pills coming from his tongue upon completing one billion recitations.[F.102.b]
Gyaltsen Bum’s brother Yagyal Phel had three sons, one of whom, Degé Künga Rinchen, initiated a period of flourishing prosperity by constructing a temple37 for the monastic estate of Lhundrup Teng. Once, while in the midst of a practice session, his entire bedchamber was transformed into a mass of flames that could be clearly seen by all. He had two younger brothers, Pön Namkha and Dorjé Lhundrup. The current Lama Tashi Gyatso and others descend directly from the latter of these two, while the former had a son named Lhunthup, who in turn had six sons.
The eldest of these six was the siddha Künga Gyatso, who was renowned as being an emanated display of Rikzin Gödemchen. He gained signs of accomplishment through both new and old tantric systems in general and, in particular, through the practices related to the old tantras. By revealing the hidden nature of reality and perceiving the falsehood of appearances, he soon became famous for various displays of miraculous activities such as squeezing solid rock as if it were clay and taming hordes of malevolent spirits.
The third son of Lhunthup was known as Lama Damchö Lhundrup or Jampa Phuntsok. Due to the strength of his past meritorious karma ever increasing, he primarily held positions of political power and gained authority over a great number of religious communities irrespective of lineage.38 The fifth son was Lama Lhasung,39 who devoted himself exclusively to his religious vows. The sixth son was Lama Karma Samdrup, a devotee of the Karma Kaṃtsang tradition who lived at Wönpo Tö. The second and fourth sons presided over Lhunthup’s estate and the sons of the former, that is of Pön Luphel, included Pönchen Künga Phuntsok. When Sakyong Dampa Jampa Phuntsok passed away, Pönchen Künga Phuntsok ascended to the throne and upheld the wholesome ways of both religious and secular traditions.
Trichen Sangyé Tenpa,[F.103.a] who is said to have been an emanated display of Chokro Lui Gyaltsen in several treasure texts, gained unparalleled authority through the vast power of his good deeds and ascended the throne of the monastic seat at Lhundrup Teng. There, he glorified and venerated the teachings of the Well-Gone One without sectarian bias, restored and reinvigorated a great number of temples and monastic communities, and brought welfare to the kingdom with a vision of kindness and just rule of law. Through the wholesome ways of the two traditions, he inspired virtue in all of his subjects.
Sangyé Tenpa’s paternal half-brother, Orgyen Tashi, had a son, Sakyong Lama Sönam Phuntsok, who ascended the throne next. Sönam Phuntsok possessed a discerning outlook, a tolerant disposition, a broad mind, and other qualities of righteous men.40 His brother Pön Wangchen Gönpo’s son is the Lord of Men, Tenpa Tsering, who currently holds the throne and reigns over the kingdom. It is he who was the patron for accomplishing this vast virtuous activity [of producing the Kangyur].
In this section, I will describe the qualities of the patron, King Tenpa Tsering, exactly as I have witnessed them, devoid of any flattery.
Conditioned by an ocean of good deeds accumulated across many lifetimes, he was of a virtuous disposition from a young age. He was respectful to those deserving of respect, such as the gurus and elders. In his practice sessions of the generation and completion stages for many yidam deities of the New and Old schools, he was never lax in his diligence with respect to the number of recitations and his prayers. Even before he was appointed to the throne and when he was not especially wealthy, he would make offerings to the Three Jewels and commission representations of body, speech, and mind with a courageous spirit.41 These limitless offerings and commissions included numerous high-quality thangkas painted with the images of each of the thousand buddhas of the Fortunate Eon, featuring their retinues of female buddhas, disciples, and attendants, as well as a copy of the Kangyur, the collected teachings of the Victorious One, produced out of precious substances.[F.103.b]
Even when holding an elevated position as ruler, Tenpa Tsering is firm and unrelenting in his commitments, just as described in The Staff of Wisdom: A Treatise on Ethics:42
- “Sublime beings do not make many commitments,
- Yet if they commit themselves to something difficult,
- It is as if the pledge were carved in stone;
- Even in the face of death or other perils, they will not waver.”
He possesses an extremely discerning outlook, the likes of which even the most prudent cannot fathom. Even when his reserves of wealth increased sizably,43 he was imbued with humility through and through and was never overtaken by arrogance. As described by the master Nāgārjuna:44
- “When lowly beings find a scant amount of wealth,
- They swell with pride, disparaging all others.
- The noble, however, may acquire wealth and riches,
- Yet remain bowed like ripened rice plants.
In the same way, he has not engaged in karmically objectionable matters such as “subduing enemies and protecting friends,” nor does he hoard his wealth. Rather, he spends freely on matters of Dharma, with stipends for the saṅgha, offerings to the Three Jewels, and the construction of representations of body, speech, and mind. He is rich with all of the qualities of a noble person.
At the great monastic seat of Ewaṃ Chöden in Tsang, he commissioned the restoration of the communal housing along with countless statues and supports, such as the great stūpa that was constructed by Shapdrung Palchokpa, making them like new. He also commissioned countless new works such as:
● a high-quality edition of The Collected Works of the Five Eminent Sakya Forefathers in sixteen volumes;[F.104.a]
● an extremely high-quality collection of the two hundred and seven volumes of the Tengyur produced in silver;
● an extremely well-crafted and high-quality edition of the Kangyur, the collected words of the Victorious One, in vermillion ink, complete with book covers made out of pure gold and silk binding strings;
● a set of statues of the thousand buddhas made from red sandalwood, each about a handspan in height;
● another set of larger statues of the thousand buddhas made from the paste of red sandalwood powder;
● a stūpa made out of white and red sandalwood with superb craftsmanship, containing a set of eight relics;
● a set of statues of the forty-five Dharma kings, lotsāwas, and paṇḍitas made out of sandalwood clay, each over a cubit high;
● a set of statues of the lineage gurus of the Path and Result constructed entirely out of white sandalwood paste, each measuring a single handspan;
● another set of statues of the fifty lineage gurus of The Precious Oral Instructions of the Path and Result made out of gold and copper, each over a cubit and five finger-breadths high;
● some three hundred extremely high-quality statues of gurus, yidams, buddhas, bodhisattvas, Dharma protectors, wealth deities, and others cast in gold and copper;
● a small assembly hall at Lhundrup Teng complete with gañjira;
● an assembly hall at Jakra complete with victory banners;
● an assembly hall for the monastic community at Pomdzang;
● a temple and monastic gathering hall for us at Palpung; and
● a reliquary stūpa for Lama Kunchöpa with gañjira.
And this work is still ongoing. Additionally, every year he gives substantial offerings, in a way that accords with the Dharma, to monks who embody profound yogic practices. The particular vast offerings and gifts he makes are equivalent to accumulating many billions of recitations of the main and essence mantras of yidam deities while staying entirely in strict retreat, and other such things. As The Wish-Fulfilling Vine: A Collection of Jātaka Tales states:46[F.104.b]
- “The wealth of people, when clutched in tightened fists, is like a drop of quicksilver.
- Yet, when given to the poor and helpless to fulfill their needs, its glory flourishes.
- Through the merit of providing groves, temples, stūpas, and consecrated statues of the blessed ones,
- The renown of the wealthy endures without fading, beautifying everything around.”
In his great wisdom, he benevolently rules his subjects with altruistic intentions and an honest heart, avoids misleading people with deception, and conducts himself with mindfulness and fearlessness in all his actions. As the master Nāgārjuna has said:47
- “A great altruistic intention is the way of the wise,
- Nondeception is the way of the honest,
- While mindfulness free from fear
- Is said to be the way of kings.”
In this way he governs the land such that there is perfect abundance, as described in Cāṇakya’s Treatise of Ethical Advice to the King:48
- “The king should act akin to a gardener
- Who gathers just the petals of flowers
- Arranged in rows in his garden,
- Without severing their roots.
In this way, and by exclusively pursuing the Dharma, he possesses a flexible and gentle character as further described by Cāṇakya:49
- “The lord of the land should not
- Scowl with rage without just cause.
- The king should act not like a penniless servant
- But instead should uphold the Dharma.”[F.105.a]
His adversaries voluntarily bow to him of their own accord, without needing to be subdued, and he rules his royal subjects without force. Even when the divinely mandated emperor Mañjughoṣa gained dominion over these Tibetan lands,50 his subjects continued to sing praises for the special qualities of the Lord of Men. He acted out of kindness in granting many of his subject households new plots of land. With such things he has captured the hearts and minds of everyone, both high and low, with his sublime character. In short, during this age, when the darkness of the degenerate times is all but impenetrable, he is one who embodies enlightened activities, like the return of the Dharma King Aśoka.
The second and third sons of the Lord of Men, Tenpa Tsering, have authentically taken up the ascetic discipline of ordination whereas the first has ascended to political power.51 All three of them possess a natural inclination toward virtue, unfaltering steadiness, open and impartial perspectives, and vast insight into the two traditions of learning. They embody the qualities described in The Treatise of Ethical Advice of Masurakṣa:52
- “Possessed of intellect, stable and deep;
- Learned in the brilliant Dharma and the treatises;
- Composed and truthful in speech;
- Intent on benefiting the royal entourage;
- Of mighty lineage and flexible outlook;
- Full of devotion to the gurus,
- And loving kindness toward all people—
- One with such a character is a true prince.”
His excellent queen accords with descriptions from The Play in Full:
- “She should not be arrogant or slothful. She should comport herself fittingly.
- She should be without any pride or willfulness, like a servant.
- She should not be attracted to alcohol, tastes, sounds, or fragrances;
- She should be free of greed and covetousness, satisfied with her fortune.
His ministers accord with the words of Masurakṣa:54
- “Clear in speech, abundant in intelligence,
- Well versed in the treatises on ethics,
- Gentle in character yet scrutinizing,
- Just so should royal ministers conduct themselves.”
His doctors are in accord as well:55
- “Acquainted with the art of healing,
- Eloquently conversant in both Dharma and learning,
- Well trained in the practical applications,
- Skilled in healing just like Dhanvantari,
- And well versed in all signs of disease—
- Such is the doctor a king should see.”
His secretaries are in accord as well:56
- “Knowledgeable in grammar and astrology,
- Clear in penmanship and swift in hand,
- Intelligent and clear with words—
- Such a scribe will be rich and renowned.”
His chief ministers are in accord as well:57
- “Of noble birth, excellent disposition, and talented,
- Diligent in the pursuit of truth and Dharma,
- And dignified in physical appearance—
- Such are advisors fit for a king.”
His military commanders are in accord as well:58
- “Trained in weaponry and endowed with strength,
- Trained in riding like a bird,
- Brimming with courage and resolution—
- Understand this is how commanders ought to be.”
His chefs are in accord as well:59
- “Privy to ancestral traditions and dexterous,
- Learned in treatises and skilled in cooking,
- Hygienic and full of affection—
- This is how a chef should be.”
His envoys are in accord as well:60
- “Intelligent, articulate, and wise,
- Able to relate to the thinking of others,
- Resolute, and who speak as commanded—
- Such should the royal messengers behave.”
In short, he is well endowed with all aspects of a king in accord with the treatises.
The virtuous activity of publishing the Victorious One’s teachings will be explained according to the time of production, the process of collecting and editing the manuscripts, and the practicalities of printing.
In general, this great Fortunate Eon is made up of three phases: the age of formation, the age of remaining, and the age of destruction. Within the age of remaining, there are twenty intermediate periods: the long decline, the long rise, and the eighteen cyclical periods between. Currently, we are in the later part of the long decline. In terms of the stages of the existence of the Sage’s teachings, which are divided into groups of three 500-year periods, we are now in the latter half.
Learned people have come to many conflicting conclusions regarding the number of years that have elapsed since our Teacher, the Fourth Guide, the Lord of the Śākyas, displayed his emanation in our world. According to the tradition of The White Lotus Instructions, which is commonly used today, our teacher was born 2,689 years ago in the year of Raudra, the male iron monkey year (960
The Royal Genealogy of Degé (sde dge’i rgyal rabs), a history of the Degé royal family that was written nearly a century later in the 1820s by one of Tenpa Tsering’s successors, gives rather more emphasis to the Sakya affiliations of this royal family. The Royal Genealogy of Degé overlaps in many of its details with the family history given in the Catalog, but tends to be a bit more elaborate. For example, the The Royal Genealogy of Degé devotes a full seventeen folios to the life of Tenpa Tsering himself, who is presented as the fortieth generation incumbent of the royal house, and draws out his own extensive religious education, especially within the Sakya Ngor tradition. The Tibetan text is transcribed and introduced in Kolmaš 1968.
The very turbulent political situation in central Tibet in the early eighteenth century saw a number of Qing interventions in central Tibetan politics, which raised the political profile of the Degé region. In 1721 the Qing sent an army to Lhasa to end the Dzungar occupation there, and install the Seventh Dalai Lama Kelzang Gyatso. The Seventh Dalai Lama already had good relations with Degé, having previously been granted temporary asylum there in 1714, when his life was threatened by Lhazang Khan. The further civil war in central Tibet in 1727–28, from which Pholhané emerged victorious, led to the Seventh Dalai Lama temporarily leaving Lhasa, whereupon the Qing arranged for him to have a residence built in the territory of Degé. In the context of such events, the Qing initiated an attempt to reorganize nominal imperial administration in the frontier districts of eastern Tibet. While the regions of Kham west of the Drichu River (Ch. Jinshajiang) were recognized to be under the authority of the government at Lhasa, the territories east of the Drichu were to be formally incorporated within the Qing’s imperial bureaucracy. Practical local governance over these areas, however, was to be left in the hands of what were referred to in imperial documents as “local rulers” (Ch. tuzi). Tenpa Tsering, as the ruler of the largest and most prestigious Tibetan kingdom east of the Drichu, which had recently expanded its territories to the north and east, and had favorable relations with the Seventh Dalai Lama, was granted imperial titles by the Qing and made the titular ruler of much of eastern Tibet. On the imperial titles conferred, see Tenpa Tsering’s entry at The Treasury of Lives. Also Kolmaš 1968, pp. 37–39.
The Royal Genealogy of Degé states that he was “empowered to act as general ruler of Dokham and granted a golden seal, a hundred rolls of silk, and five thousand ‘ounces’ (Tib. srang) of silver.” The Royal Genealogy of Degé, fol. 27.a. Kolmaš 1968, pp. 118, 38.
According to Situ Paṇchen, the Phanthangma was the first of the two catalogs and the Denkarma was produced some years later. However, there is disagreement on this issue among both traditional Tibetan scholars and modern historians, as discussed by Herrmann-Pfandt 2008. In her introductory survey of these two catalogs, Herrmann-Pfandt provides an overview of the various opinions and proposes that the most likely dating for the Phanthangma is the year 806 (pp. xxiv–xxvi) while for the Denkarma she suggests the year 812 (pp. xviii–xxii).
Chomden Rikpai Raldri first produced a survey of translated scriptures, which has been presented with an introduction in Schaeffer and van de Kuijp 2021. In their introduction to this work, earlier canonical collation efforts in the thirteenth century are also discussed; see Schaeffer and van de Kuijp 2021, pp. 9–32. Whether such earlier efforts, before the compilation of the Old Narthang Kangyur, constituted what could be called a “Kangyur” as such remains a subject of scholarly debate. For a good general survey of the evolution of canonical collections see Harrison 1994 and Skilling 1997. For a summary treatment of the diversity of Kangyurs see Facts and Figures about the Kangyur and Tengyur.
Situ Paṇchen’s source for his discussion of how the Old Narthang Kangyur was compiled appears to be based on the individual section colophons found in the Tshalpa Kangyur, which were also carried over into the Lithang Kangyur. Only the Vinaya section colophon was also included in the Degé Kangyur, while the Sutra and Tantra section colophons were summarized by Situ Paṇchen in the Catalog.
The Kangyur known as the Lithang Kangyur was produced between 1610 and 1614 under the supervision of the Sixth Shamar (zhwa dmar) Rinpoché, with patronage from the king of Jang Satham. It was later moved to Lithang monastery during the upheavals of the 1640s. See Jampa Samten and Jeremy Russell 1987.
As Situ Paṇchen says, the Lhodzong Kangyur was compiled on the advice of the Fifth Dalai Lama by his regent Sönam Rabten (bsod nams rab brtan) (1595–1658) on the basis of the Gyantsé Themphangma (rgyal rtse them spang ma) recension and stored at Lhodzong (lho rdzong).
These two lines, presented on the chapter title page in the source text as a stanza of Sanskrit verse (with the note decribing their meter in small writing at the top of the page), are then rendered in Tibetan as the first of the five stanzas that follow.
Tib. bdag rkyen byed pa po. Lit. “producer of the primary condition.” While the general meaning could be rendered as “sponsor” or “patron,” Situ Paṇchen does not use the more common word for a material supporter of Dharmic activity, sbyin bdag, and instead employs this more unusual formulation, which emphasizes that the project was initiated by Tenpa Tsering himself.
These lines could not be found verbatim in the Degé Kangyur edition of The Root Manual of the Rites of Mañjuśrī as quoted here, but the following lines are found: kha ba can gyi nang dag tu/ /sA la’i nags ni yang dag ’byung.
The first line of this quote is the root text from Śaṃkarasvāmin’s Devātiśayastotra (Toh 1112), whereas the subsequent text is Prajñāvarman’s commentary on it from Devātiśayastotraṭīkā (Toh 1113).
The same section of Prajñāvarman’s commentary, concerning the figure of Rūpati as the putative ancestor of the Tibetans, is also cited (and eventually dismissed) by Pawo Tsuklak Trengwa in his Feast for Scholars, p. 158.
Tib. khri bshos rgya mtsho’i klu blon byang chub sems. In Feast for Scholars this line reads khri shod rgyal mo’i klu sman byang chub sems, or “bodhisattva nāga maidens of the queen of Tri Shö.”
The term “central land” does not refer only to a centrally located land, but to a land where the Buddhist teachings have been established.
The term “perfect place” is the fourth of the five perfections (phun tshogs lnga), a category used in tantric contexts. The five perfections are perfect teachings, perfect time, perfect teacher, perfect place, and perfect company.
The quotation here varies slightly from the Degé Kangyur version of the Vajraḍāka Tantra, which reads bod yul du ni lhan skyes te// rang byung gi nis kye gnas byung// chu srin rgyal mtshan lag na thogs// zhi zhing gsal ba’i gzugs can te// yul der gnas pa’i lha mo de// brag gi khyim la brten te gnas.
lha mo dri ma med pa’i ’od lung bstan pa’i mdo seems to be an alternative title for the Vimalaprabhaparipṛcchā (Toh 168), based on its reference in the Dungkar Dictionary, which describes it as being in volume ba of the Kangyur, four fascicles in length, and lacking a colophon.
This image, of the Tibetan plateau from the far west to the far east as a single irrigation system, is found in similar terms in Pawo Tsuklak’s Feast for Scholars, p. 149.
Tib. shar zla chu. The Dachu (zla chu) is one of the names by which the upper Mekong River, formed by the joining of the Dzachu (rdza chu) and Ngomchu (ngom chu) Rivers at Chamdo (chab mdo) is known. However, the Shardachu likely here refers to the eastern Dzachu (rdza chu), which flows through Sershu and Lingtsang to the east of Degé, and is known in Chinese as the Yalong. A historical kingdom of Ling or Lingtsang (gling tshang) in Kham is attested in many sources, particularly from the fourteenth century. In folklore, it is strongly associated with the legends of the Gesar epic (Tib. gling sgrung). Often this kingdom is localized by reference to the Drichu and the eastern Dzachu or Yalong River. Since Degé is located between the Drichu and this eastern Dzachu, it seems likely that Shardachu here refers to the eastern Dzachu (Yalong), rather than the Dachu (Mekong).
These are two of the “three wheels” (’khor lo gsum), that is, the wheel of study and contemplation (klog pa thos bsam gyi ’khor lo), the renunciation wheel of meditation (spong ba bsam gtan gyi ’khor lo), and the action wheel of practical deeds (bya ba las kyi ’khor lo).
Though it is not entirely clear what ratnakūṭa vihāra refers to here or why Situ Paṇchen wrote it in transliterated Sanskrit, we assume it refers to its literal meaning of "temples heaped high with jewels." It could, however, also possibly refer to a specific temple complex in India, though we know of no such place.
According to The Royal Genealogy of Degé, he also took Sakya Paṇḍita and others as teachers. Kolmaš 1968, p. 84.
The Degé Kangyur print appears to read dbon rgyud, indicating religious transmission lineage passed from uncle to nephew. However, the Comparative Edition (dpe bsdur ma) reads this as dpon rgyud, indicating a lineage of local rulers.
Kolmaš observes that it was during the time of Sönam Rinchen of the twenty-fifth generation that the secular and spiritual powers in the Degé royal family were first merged together. Kolmaš 1968, p. 34.
Tib. mchod yon. This traditional concept in Buddhist societies, often translated as the “priest-patron” relationship, became a dominant trope in Tibetan history, particularly from the thirteenth century, to describe the relations between Tibetan lamas and their secular, often imperial, patrons. For a survey of this concept’s origins in Indian Buddhist social history and the shortcomings of translating it as “priest-patron,” see Ruegg 2014, pp. 67–75.
Kolmaš notes that the Chinese title used for the office in charge of eastern Tibet during the Yuan period appears to have been named after Samar monastery. Kolmaš 1968, p. 66, n. 34.
Tib. rims gyis lcags ra na gling gi chen po bdag drung gi spyan sngar ’byor. The implication seems to be that Sönam Sangpo moved to Jakra and performed a ministerial function for the lord of Ling. In the next generation, as described in The Royal Genealogy of Ling, his son Bothar would expand their family’s territories at the expense of the kingdom of Ling, and establish the family center around the present site of Degé town.
On Bothar’s acquisition of territory from the kingdom of Ling in exchange for the marriage of his beautiful daughter, as told in the The Royal Genealogy of Degé, see Kolmaš 1968, p. 31.
According to The Royal Genealogy of Degé (folios 10.b–11.a), Jampa Phuntsok was revered by Guśri Khan and thereby the territories of Degé were greatly expanded. See Kolmaš 1968, pp. 33, 94, 167–68.
On Tenpa Tsering’s uncle and predecessor Sönam Phuntsok, who shortly before his death in 1714 offered temporary asylum at Degé to the fugitive Seventh Dalai Lama Kelzang Gyatso, as mentioned in The Royal Genealogy of Degé (folios 21.b–22.a) and the Seventh Dalai Lama’s biography. Petech 1972, p. 22; Kolmaš 1968, pp. 36, 110.
The representations of the Buddha’s body, speech, and mind are statues, texts, and stūpas, respectively.
This passing mention of Tenpa Tsering’s increased wealth likely references his expansion of the Degé kingdom, and the material resources he received based on his relations with the Seventh Dalai Lama and the Qing, especially from 1728.
This is a reference to a parable about a fox that painted or dyed itself blue and grew arrogant. In Elegant Sayings (1977) it is translated as: “When the lowly become wealthy or learned, / They think only of quarreling with others, / Like the fox who fell into a vat of indigo / And claimed to be a tiger.” This parable also appears in verse 18 of Nāgārjuna’s Nītiśāstrajantupoṣaṇabindu (Toh 4330, lugs kyi bstan bcos skye bo gso ba’i thigs pa) and is discussed in Frye 1994 pp. 49–50.
The divinely mandated emperor Mañjughoṣa here refers to the Qing emperor Yongzheng (r. 1722–35), under whom the Tibetan lands east of the Drichu were formally brought within the imperial administrative bureaucracy in 1728, albeit still under the practical supervision of local rulers, foremost among whom was Tenpa Tsering.
Despite this statement that the first son of Tenpa Tsering would take on his political duties, it was in fact his second son Phuntsok Tenpa (?–1751), who on Tenpa Tsering’s death in 1738 succeeded him in both his political and religious roles. Phuntsok Tenpa was in turn succeeded as both king and throne holder of Lhundrup Teng by Tenpa Tsering’s third son, Lodrö Gyatso (1722–74). Kolmaš 1968, pp. 50–52.
Tib. shar phyogs tong ku’i rgyal khams. Lit. “the eastern land of Tongku.” It is believed that the term “Tongku” is derived from the Chinese dong jing (東京) or “Eastern capital” but came to refer to the Chinese lands east of Tibet. Use of this term is attested as early as 960
res gza’ mnga’ lha. According to Khenpo Tashi Pal, this term refers to the day of Venus, or Friday.
Tib. rgyal ba’i bka’ ’gyur ro cog phyogs gcig tu bsgrigs pa. Situ Paṇchen uses the term kangyur (lit. “translated words”) here to describe the collection at the Phangthang palace.
There is some disagreement among historical sources concerning the name and title of this king. Tucci (1950, p. 19) gives a thorough discussion of the confusion surrounding the identities of the emperors Ralpachen and Senalek Jingyön and concludes that the name Tri Desongtsen refers to Senalek Jingyön, not Ralpachen.
The quotation is from the commentary to the Mahāvyutpatti, known as the Drajor Bampo Nyipa (sgra sbyor bam po gnyis pa), Toh 4347, folios 131.b–132.a. Both the Mahāvyutpatti and the Drajor Bampo Nyipa can be viewed side by side, along with some sections translated into English, on the website of the University of Oslo. See bibliography.
Here the Sanskrit term for grammatical conventions, vyākaraṇa, is transcribed in Tibetan as byA ka ra Na.
The story of how the scholar Jampaiyang came to leave Narthang and take up residence with the Mongol Khan Buyantu, from whence he sent material assistance for the creation of the Old Narthang Kangyur, including “a small chest full of ink,” is told in some detail by Zhönu Pel (1392–1481) in his Blue Annals (Tib. deb ther sngon po). This appears to have been prior to Buyantu Khan becoming the Yuan emperor known in Chinese as Renzong (r. 1311–20). For a translation and discussion of the relevant passage in the Blue Annals, see Harrison 1996, pp. 74–77.
As noted in the introduction, Situ Paṇchen’s account of how the Vinaya, Sūtra, and Tantra sections of the Old Narthang Kangyur were compiled appears to be based on the individual section colophons of the Tshalpa Kangyur, which were carried over into the Lithang Kangyur. Of these section colophons, only the Vinaya colophon was included in the Degé, while the others were summarized here. These colophons have been transcribed and translated in the appendices to Jampa Samten and Russell 1987.
We are reading this as gtsang ma’i in place of gtsang mi to accord with the known name of this individual.
Situ Panchen provides another more detailed account of these early translations and manuscripts in Chapter Two on folios 88.b–89.a; and for yet more detail drawn from a variety of sources see the introduction to The Perfection of Wisdom in One Hundred Thousand Lines, i.23–35.
As discussed by Jampa Samten, the blocks appear to have been moved to Lithang monastery during the upheavals of the 1640s. Jampa Samten and Russell 1987, p. 19.
According to Harrison, in total over a hundred copies of the Thempangma Kangyur were made during the reign of the Fifth Dalai Lama. Harrison 1996, p. 81.
Though produced in the kingdom of Jang, this Kangyur came to be housed at Lithang and is now commonly referred to as the Lithang Kangyur.
This refers to the later translation of the Sarvadurgatipariśodhana Tantra (Toh 485), which was completed in the thirteenth century. The first translation (Toh 483) was completed in the late eighth century.
ma mya dang sa stsogs dang ral gri la ral gyi. These are given as examples of spelling and pronunciation variations between regional Tibetan dialects.
These refer to particular features of the written script such as the shape of the vowels and the relative heights of different elements. See Cuppers et al. 2012, pp. 365–66.
Tib. bzang ja sbob rtse. Bricks of tea were packed in long bamboo baskets known as japobtse or jakhordruk. The value of these were used as the benchmark for calculating wages and expenses. See Chaix, p. 67, n. 7.
This verse relates Tenpa Tsering and his sponsorship of this Kangyur to the Hindu deity Brahmā. According to tradition, the four foundational texts of traditional Hinduism, the Vedas, emerged from Brahmā’s four mouths.
This is a list of the four pursuits of noble beings, or puruṣārtha. An important concept in Hinduism, these four traditionally encompass the proper goals of a human life.
The third Degé king, Pönchen A Nga (mid-fifteenth to early sixteenth century), was the head of the house of Degé in its thirty-third generation. He had two sons (though here it mentions seven), of whom the elder, Joden Namkha Lhunsang, took monastic vows and the younger, Yangyal Pal, took over the Degé kingdom. For more on his life see his entry at The Treasury of Lives.
Also known by his Sanskrit name, Śāntarakṣita (725–88), he was a Bengali monk and scholar and the first abbot at Samyé monastery. He was one of the most important figures in the establishment of Buddhism in Tibet.
A Kashmiri paṇḍita who was invited to Tibet during the late eighth and early ninth centuries. He worked with several Tibetan translators on the translation of a number of sūtras.
The great tantric master who helped establish Buddhism in Tibet. He would later become the central figure of the Nyingma tradition where he is known as Guru Rinpoché.
The seventeenth of the twenty-seven constellations, or nakṣatras, in Vedic astrology. In Tibetan it is known as Lhatsam (lha mtshams). This constellation is symbolized by the lotus.
Also known as Ga Anyen Dampa Künga Drakpa (rga a gnyan dam pa kun dga’ grags pa, 1230–1303), he was a student of Sakya Paṇḍita.
A vernacular language of northern India in the medieval period, in use between the fifth and twelfth century.
Arjuna is a central protagonist in the Sanskrit epic, the Mahābhārata. He is the third among the five sons of Pāṇḍu.
Āryadeva (third century ᴄᴇ) was a direct student of Nāgārjuna and an influential writer on Middle Way philosophy.
The historical Indian king of the Maurya dynasty who ruled over most of India ca. 268–232 ʙᴄᴇ. His name means “without sorrow.”
A central figure in the second spread of Buddhism from India to Tibet, Atiśa was born as a prince in the region of Bengal in 982 and passed away in Tibet in 1054.
This term in its broadest sense can refer to any being, whether human, animal, or nonhuman. However, it is often used to refer to a specific class of nonhuman beings, especially when bhūtas are mentioned alongside rākṣasas, piśācas, or pretas. In common with these other kinds of nonhumans, bhūtas are usually depicted with unattractive and misshapen bodies. Like several other classes of nonhuman beings, bhūtas take spontaneous birth. As their leader is traditionally regarded to be Rudra-Śiva (also known by the name Bhūta), with whom they haunt dangerous and wild places, bhūtas are especially prominent in Śaivism, where large sections of certain tantras concentrate on them.
Here appears to refer to local mountain guardian deities.
A Kashmiri paṇḍita who was invited to Tibet during the late eight and early ninth centuries. He worked with several Tibetan translators on the translation of a number of sūtras.
The first Degé king, Bothar Lodrö Topden (late fourteenth to mid-fifteenth century), was the head of the house of Degé in its thirty-first generation. He is remembered for establishing the site that would later become the center of the Degé kingdom. He had two sons, Lama Palden Sengé and Gyaltsen Bum. For more on his life see his entry at The Treasury of Lives.
The son of a Kashmiri merchant who was one of the earliest translators in Tibet.
A clan or tribe in Tibet. According to the Catalog, one of the eighteen tribes of Nguchen Gyalmo, belonging to the divine lineage of Go.
A clan or tribe in Tibet. According to the Catalog, one of the eighteen tribes of Nguchen Gyalmo, belonging to the divine lineage of Go.
Buton Rinchen Drub (bu ston rin chen grub, 1290–1364) was the abbot of Zhalu monastery and one of Tibet’s most famous scholars and historians.
Cakrasaṃvara is a deity from the highest yoga tantras and is especially popular among the new schools of Tibetan Buddhism.
Cāṇakya (375–283 ʙᴄᴇ) was an ancient Indian polymath.
The Cāṇakyarājanītiśāstra (Toh 4334) by Cāṇakya (fourth century ʙᴄᴇ).
A clan or tribe in Tibet. According to the Catalog, one of the eighteen tribes of Nguchen Gyalmo, belonging to the divine lineage of Go.
A Tibetan translator of grammatical texts from the late eighth through the early ninth century. A common alternate spelling of his name is lce khyi ’brug.
A clan or tribe in Tibet. According to the Catalog, one of the eighteen tribes of Nguchen Gyalmo, belonging to the divine lineage of Go.
Lived from 1210–89 and was the seventh abbot of Narthang monastery, serving from 1250 until his death.
It is believed that the term “Tongku” is derived from the Chinese dong jing (東京) or “Eastern capital” but came to refer to the Chinese lands east of Tibet. Use of this term is attested as early as 960 ᴄᴇ, before the creation of the modern political designation “China,” but it was used as an epithet for various Chinese empires over the course of centuries. For more on this term, see van Schaik 2013.
An area of central Tibet.
Chokro Lui Gyaltsen was a renowned translator during the imperial period.
See “Drogön Chögyal Phakpa.”
A Tibetan translator during the imperial period.
See “sixth Shamar.”
Chomden Rikpai Raldri (bcom ldan rig pa’i ral gri, 1227–1305) was a prominent scholar based at Narthang monastery who compiled an inventory of translated Buddhist texts and guided the compilation of the Old Narthang manuscript Kangyur (no longer extant), which is considered the first Kangyur compiled in Tibet. He was a student of Chim Chenpo Namkha Drak and the teacher of Jamgak Pakṣi.
See also “Chom Ralpa.”
A clan or tribe in Tibet. According to the Catalog, one of the eighteen tribes of Nguchen Gyalmo, belonging to the divine lineage of Go.
A monastery in Tsang, located west of present-day Shigatse.
An epithet of Tibet. Similar to Land of Snows (gangs can ljongs).
A traditional unit of length, measured from the elbow to the tip of the middle finger.
Along with Kongpo and Powo, Dakpo is one of the three main regions of southeastern Tibet.
See “Jampa Phuntsok.”
A Kashmiri paṇḍita who was invited to Tibet during the late eighth and early ninth centuries. He worked with several Tibetan translators on the translation of a number of sūtras.
A manuscript translation of The Perfection of Wisdom in One Hundred Thousand Lines that appears to have been named after Langdarma (glang dar ma u dum btsan), the king of Tibet who succeeded his brother Ralpachen and is traditionally blamed for the decline of Buddhism in Tibet in the late ninth century.
A son of Karchen Jangchup Bum.
The name of a kingdom in eastern Tibet. Its name literally means “happiness and goodness.”
A Tibetan imperial-era catalog of translated Buddhist scripture. According to Situ Paṇchen, compiled after the Phangthangma.
Pakmodrupa Dorjé Gyalpo (1110–70) was one of the three foremost students of Gampopa and the founder of the Pakdru Kagyü school. His younger brother was Kathokpa Dampa Deshek.
A Tibetan translator during the imperial period.
The god of medicine from the Indian Ayurvedic tradition.
A monk at the monastery of Latö Olgö who produced copies of the Vinaya.
Eighth- to ninth-century Tibetan monk, preceptor, and translator.
gsum pa/ rgyal ba’i gsung rab gangs ri’i khrod du deng sang ji tsam snang ba par du bsgrubs pa’i byung ba dngos legs par bshad pa’i yal ’dab/. Toh 4568-3, Degé Kangyur vol. 103 (dkar chag, lakṣmī), folios 98.a–112.a.
gsum pa/ rgyal ba’i gsung rab gangs ri’i khrod du deng sang ji tsam snang ba par du bsgrubs pa’i byung ba dngos legs par bshad pa’i yal ’dab. bka’ ’gyur (dpe bsdur ma) [Comparative Edition of the Kangyur], krung go’i bod rig pa zhib ’jug ste gnas kyi bka’ bstan dpe sdur khang (The Tibetan Tripitaka Collation Bureau of the China Tibetology Research Center). 108 volumes. Beijing: krung go’i bod rig pa dpe skrun khang (China Tibetology Publishing House), 2006–9, vol. 105, pp. 215–45.
Mahāvyutpatti with sGra sbyor bam po gñis pa. Bibliotheca Polyglotta, University of Oslo. Input by Jens Braarvig and Fredrik Liland, 2010. Last accessed September 21, 2023.
Losang Thrinlé (blo bzang ’phrin las). dung dkar tshig mdzod chen mo. Beijing: krung go’i bod rig pa dpe skrun khang, 2002.
Ngawang Lobsang Gyatso (ngag dbang blo bzang rgya mtsho). gsung ’bum/ ngag dbang blo bzang rgya mtsho. 28 vols. Beijing: krung go’i bod rig pa dpe skrun khang, 2009.
Tamdrin, Sampai Dondrup, Topden, Dondrup, Namsé, and Dorjé Khar (rta mgrin, bsam pa’i don grub, stobs ldan, don grub, rnam sras, and rdo rje-mkhar). bod kyi rtsom rig lo rgyus. Lhasa: bod ljongs mi dmangs dpe skrun khang, 2009.
Tsuklak Trengwa (gtsug lag ’phreng ba). chos ’byung mkhas pa’i dga’ ston. 2 vols. Beijing: mi rigs dpe skrun khang, 1986.
Almogi, Orna. “The Old sNar thang Tibetan Buddhist Canon Revisited, with Special Reference to dBus pa blo gsal’s bsTan ’gyur Catalogue.” Revue d’Etudes Tibétaines 58 (2021): 165–207.
Berzin, Alexander. “The Tibetan Calendar.” Accessed December 3, 2020.
Cabezón, José Ignacio, trans. The Just King: The Tibetan Buddhist Classic on Leading an Ethical Life. Boulder: Snow Lion, 2017.
Chaix, Rémi. “Construction Work and Wages at the Dergé Printing House in the Eighteenth Century.” Cross-Currents: East Asian History and Culture Review 19 (2016): 48–70.
Cüppers, Christoph, Leonard W. J. van der Kuijp, and Ulrich Pagel. Handbook of Tibetan Iconometry: A Guide to the Arts of the 17th Century. Leiden: Brill, 2012.
Frye, Stanley. Nagarjuna’s A Drop of Nourishment for People and its commentary The Jewel Ornament. Dharamsala: Library of Tibetan Works & Archives, 1994.
Geshe Sopa Lundhup, José Ignacio Cabezón, and Roger R. Jackson. Tibetan Literature: Studies in Genre: Essays in Honor of Geshe Lhundup Sopa. Ithaca: Snow Lion, 1996.
Gyilung Tashi Gyatso and Gyilung Thugchok Dorji. The Treasure of the Ancestral Clans of Tibet. Translated by Yeshi Dhondup. Dharamsala: Library of Tibetan Works and Archives, 2009.
Gyurme Dorje, trans. The Treasury of Knowledge Book Six, Parts One and Two: Indo-Tibetan Classical Learning and Buddhist Phenomenology. Boston: Snow Lion Publications, 2012.
Harrison, Paul (1996). “A Brief History of the Tibetan bKa’ ’gyur.” In Tibetan Literature: Studies in Genre, edited by José Ignacio Cabezón and Roger R. Jackson, 70–94. Ithaca: Snow Lion, 1996.
Harrison, Paul (1994). “In Search of the Source of the Tibetan Kanjur: A Reconnaissance Report.” In Tibetan Studies: Proceedings of the 6th Seminar of the International Association for Tibetan Studies, Fagernes 1992, edited by Per Kvaerne, Vol. 1: 295–317. Oslo: The Institute for Comparative Research in Human Culture, 1994.
Herrmann-Pfandt, Adelheid. Die lHan kar ma: ein früher Katalog der ins Tibetische übersetzten buddhistischen Texte. Vienna: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 2008.
Jampa Samten Shastri and Jeremy Russell. “Notes on the Lithang Edition of the Tibetan bKa’-’gyur.” The Tibet Journal vol. 12, no. 3 (Autumn 1987): 17–40.
Jamyang Khyentse Chökyi Lodrö. “Genealogy of the Dharma Kings of Derge.” Translated by Adam Pearcey. Lotsawa House, 2020.
Kolmaš, Josef. A Genealogy of the Kings of Derge: Sde-dge’i rgyal rabs. Tibetan Text Edited with Historical Introduction by Josef Kolmaš. Prague: Academia Publishing House of the Czechoslovak Academy of Sciences, 1968.
Martin, Dan. “The Highland Vinaya Lineage.” In Tibet After Empire: Culture, Society and Religion Between 850–1000: Proceedings of the Seminar Held in Lumbini, Nepal, March 2011, edited by Christoph Cüppers, Robert Mayer, and Michael Walter, 239–65. Lumbini: Lumbini International Research Institute, 2013.
Nāgārjuna, Sa-skya Paṇḍi-ta. Elegant Sayings. Emeryville CA: Dharma Publishing, 1977.
Ngawang Tsepag. “Traditional Cataloguing & Classification of Tibetan Literature.” The Tibet Journal, vol. 30, no. 2 (2005): 49–60.
Petech, Luciano. China and Tibet in the Early XVIIIth Century. Second, Revised Edition. Leiden: Brill, 1972.
Ribur Ngawang Gyatso, et al. “A Short History of Tibetan Script.” The Tibet Journal vol. 9, no. 2 (1984): 28–30.
Roerich, George, trans. The Blue Annals: Parts I and II. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Publisher, 2016.
Ruegg, David Seyfort. “The Temporal and the Spiritual and the So-Called Patron-Client Relation in the Governance of Inner Asia and Tibet.” In Patronage as Politics in South Asia, edited by Anastasia Piliavsky, 67–79. Delhi: Cambridge University Press, 2014.
Schaeffer, Kurtis R. The Culture of the Book in Tibet. New York, NY: Columbia Univ. Press, 2014.
Schaeffer, Kurtis R., et al., eds. Sources of Tibetan Tradition. New York: Columbia University Press, 2013.
Schaeffer, Kurtis R. and Leonard W.J. van der Kuijp. 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, MA: Harvard University Press, 2009.
Scherrer-Schaub, Cristina, “Enacting Words: A Diplomatic Analysis of the Imperial Decrees (bkas bcad) and their Application in the sGra sbyor bam po gñis pa Tradition”, JIABS 25/1-2 (2002): 263–340.
Schneider, Johannes. “A Buddhist Perspective of the Buddhavatara.” Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 96 (2015): 77-93. Accessed September 29, 2020. doi:10.2307/26858223.
Skilling, Peter. “From bKa’ bstan bcos to bKa’ ’gyur and bsTan ’gyur.” In Transmission of the Tibetan Canon, edited by Helmut Eimer, 87–111. Vienna: Austrian Academy of Sciences Press, 1997.
Smith, Ellis G, and Kurtis R. Schaeffer. Among Tibetan Texts: History and Literature of the Himalayan Plateau. Boston: Wisdom Publications, 2002.
Snellgrove, David. Indo-Tibetan Buddhism: Indian Buddhists and Their Tibetan Successors. Vol. II. Boston: Shambhala, 1987.
Sonam Dorje. “The Tenth Derge King, Tenpa Tsering.” The Treasury of Lives, accessed May 30, 2020.
Sonam Gyaltsen (bsod nams rgyal mtshan). The Mirror Illuminating the Royal Genealogies: An Annotated Translation of the XIVth Century Tibetan Chronicle: rGyal-rabs gsal-ba’i me-long. Translated by Per K. Sørenson. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1994.
Tucci, Giuseppe. The Tombs of Tibetan Kings. Rome: Is. M. E. O., 1950.
van Schaik, Sam (2011). Tibet: A History. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2011.
van Schaik, Sam (2013). “Ruler of the East, or Eastern Capital: What Lies behind the Name Tong Kun?” In Studies in Chinese Manuscripts: From the Warring States to the Twentieth Century, edited by Imre Galambos, 211–223. Budapest: Eötvös Loránd University, 2013.
Vetturnini, Gianpaolo. “The bKa’ gdams pa School of Tibetan Buddhism.” PhD diss, SOAS, 2007. http://himalaya.socanth.cam.ac.uk/collections/rarebooks/dow 349 nloads/Gianpaolo_Vetturini_PhD.pdf (revised 2013).
