Tibet (Myth, Religion and History)

by Tsewang Gyalpo Arya | 2019 | 70,035 words

This essay studies the history, religion and mythology of Tibet, and explores ancient traditions and culture dating back to more than 1000 BC. This research study is based on authoritative texts and commentaries of both Bon (Tibet's indigenous religion) and Buddhist masters available in a variety of sources. It further contains a comparative study ...

4. Nyatri Tsanpo as descendant of Indian Shakya kings

This is the later Buddhist theory of Nyatri Tsanpo as descendent of Indian Shakya Kings and King Vichitravirya [Tib: Drang srong rgyas pa] of Mahabharata. Herein the lineage of the king was traced to the Pandu [Tib:sKya seng, sKyab seng or sKyab seng ge] and Drithrastra or Kaurava [Tib:dMag rgya pa] of Mahabharata, and they are said to have come from the Shakya lineage. Nyang ral chos 'byung, Bu ston and Blue Annals ascribe to the origin of the king to Indian kings of the Shakya lineage. No mention is made of the Mahabharata war. However, bKa' chems Ka khol ma, Ma ni bka' 'bum, Lha las 'Phul byung gi bstod pa, rGyal rabs gsal ba'i me long, the Fifth Dalai Lama's dPyid kyi rgyal mo'i glu dbyang, of the Shakya lineage connect it to the Mahabharata epic. Nyang ral and Bu ston supported the theory of a strange prince of Vatsa who was cast into the Ganges River. He fled to Tibet where he was made king by the natives.

While Nyang ral had the grandson of King 'Char byed of Vatsa, Bu ston has the son of King 'Char byed, born with a strange features. 'Gos Lo tsa ba in the Blue Annals relied on the prophecy mentioned in Manjushrimulatantra and concludes that the kings were of the Shakya Licchavi race. Tibetan school texts in India published by Sherig Parkhang, has the version based on this Indic origin. Let us now examine what the scriptures and scholars of this school.

Manikabum, [Tib: Ma ni bka' 'bum],

Manikabum[1] is supposed to be the work of the seventh century King Srongtsan Gampo talks of King sKyab seng of the Shakya lineage. One of his younger sons fled to Tibet and descended on the Mount Lha ri rol po where people proclaimed his as their king.

The scripture briefly mentions the origin of the king in a few lines:

"When there was no difference of king and subject in Tibet, there in the Shakya lineage were: Great Shakyan, Shakya Lichhavi, and Shakya Ri bgrag. From them came sKyabs seng, whose one of the younger sons fled to the Himalayas with his platoon. From the summit of Lha ri rol po mountain of Yarlung in Tibet, he descended through lha skes [god's staircase] to the four Tsan sgo. The people proclaimed him as a King, who descended from the sky; they received him in a throne and took him on their shoulder to the land. Therefore, the name, Napeenthroned king, this was the first king of Tibet."[2]

Here the shakya lineage was traced to sKyab seng, the Pandava of Mahbharata. But in the Mahbharata epic, we could not find any of the Pandava fleeing to Tibet. In most of the theories, it was the youngest son of dMag brgya pa [Drithrastra of Kaurava], or one of his regiment leaders, who was said to have fled to the Himalayas and landed in Tibet.

Lha las phul 'byung bstod pa[3] : [Ind: Devtisayastotratika]

Lha las phul 'byung bstod pa is a eulogy to Buddha written by sLob dpon bde byed bdad po [Acharya Shankraswami], and translated by Indian saint Sarvazanyadeva and lotsawa Bande Rinchen, and edited by Lotsawa Bande Paltseg Rakshita. sLob pon She rab go cha [Ind:Prajnavarman] composed the detail commentary of the text [Tib:bsTod pa rgya cher bShed pa]. This commentary was translated into Tibetan by Indian mKhan po Zanadana and Lotsawa dGe slong Rinchen bZang po [958-1055].

In the commentary translation we find:

"Following the defeat at Mahabharata war with the Pandava, one called Rupati along with one of the king's platoons disguised as women fled and settled in the Himalayan hills. Descendents of this settlement is known even today as Bod.[4] "

The above excerpt from the text has been used widely by the later scholars as a source to trace the origin of Tibetan race and sometime the origin of Tibetan king to India. The name Rupati frequently comes up in most of the theories as one who escaped to Tibet and became the first king of Tibet, but the text here implies the origin of the Tibetan race and not the single person of a king. The original translation of the text in Tibetan compiled in the sDe dge bstan 'gyur and book form in LTWA edition has 21 sholokas[5]. There is no direct mention about Rupati and his journey to the Himalayas. However, the Tibetan translation of the commentary has a brief account of some Rupati having fled to the Himalayas with his platoons disguised as women after the war. It is unclear if the original Indian commentary has this account or not.

Chos 'byung me tod snying po sbrang rtsi'i bcud by Nyang ral nyi ma 'od zer [1124-1192 CE]:

The text [ Chos 'byung me tod snying po sbrang rtsi'i bcud by Nyang ral nyi ma 'od zer][6] is popularly known as Nyang ral chos 'byung. It discusses several theories prevalent at the time and supports one theory which he said came from the mouth [Tib:Zhal nas][7] of 7th century King Srongtsan Gampo.

According to the text:

King 'Char byed of Vatsa in India had a prince Shar ba, who had two sons. The younger one's lineage had a strange son with bird's eyes and bulging eyelids, broad forehead, turquoise eyebrows, elevated nose, conch shell teeth, webbed hand like a duck's limbs, and with a majestic look. The king saw this as a bad omen and ordered the child to be killed. The ministers could not execute this regicide, and they cast him away into the Ganges River in a copper cauldron with enough food for sustenance. A farmer in Magadha found him and raised him in the forest. When the prince grew up into a fine lad and came to know about his origin. He was greatly disturbed and fled north and reached the Mount Lha ri gyang tho of Tibet. From there he surveyed the land Yar mo sna bzhi, the center of the Snow land and God Yar lha sham po, and through the radiance of fortune and dMu ladder, he descended on the Mount lHa ri yol ba [lha ri rol po]. Then he went to bTsan thang sgo bzhi[8]. Around that time, Tibetans have reached the last of the seventh stages of evolution from the monkey father, and the twelve regions were never at peace and were involved in constant internal conflict. When the twelve wise men asked him from where he came, the prince said he was "bTsan po" and not able to understand the Indian language pointed his finger in the sky. They found him strange and majestic and decided to show him to the populace. They made a wooden throne and carried him on their shoulder to the town. The people and the Bonpos said he came from sky to rule the earth and was suitable as their king, and was named gNya' khri btsan po[9].

This is the account supported by Nyang ral in the text as origin of the first king of Tibet. Nyang ral quotes the lHa las phul byung gi bstod pa as source of Mahabharata theory and narrates the feud between Pandavas and Kauravas. However, he rejects the theory as far too distant from the actual history[10]. He also rejects the Theurang origin, Indian king Bimbisara's lineage, and the king coming from heaven as claimed by Bonpos. He supports the theory of a discarded Indian prince of Vatsa with strange features. He attributes this theory as being said by King Srongtsan gampo. But Srongtsan Gampo's Manikabum [p-396] briefly says one of the younger sons of Shakya sKyabs seng, fled to the Himalayas with his platoon and the people in Tibet proclaimed him as their king.

Kachem Kaholma [Tib:bKa' chems ka khol ma]

Kachem Kaholma is another important text attributed to King Srongtsan Gampo, about which we have discussed in Chapter two. Herein two sons of King Shar ba were sKyabs senge and dMag rgya pa. Nyang ral does not mention the two names. He says the younger son's lineage had a son with strange features of avis, and was cast away in the Ganges River, and his flight to Tibet where people proclaimed him as their king. But Kachem Kakholma says sKyabs senge and dMag brgya pa were the two sons of King Shar ba and goes onto narrate the Mahabharata war and dMag brgya pa's defeat and his strange son, Rupakye, and how the prince was cast away in the Ganges River and how he fled to Tibet and was uplifted to the thirteenth stages of heaven. There he became the ancestors of the nine universal gods and four divine brothers. Later, with his prayers, he descended to become the king of Tibet.

Therefore, Nyang ral's theory and attribution of his theory to King Srongtsan Gampo is not valid. Although Manikabum and Kachem Kakholma have different versions, both are connected to one of the chief protagonists of the Mahabharata epic, sKyab seng or dMag rgya pa -the Pandavas or the Kauravas. But Nyang ral does not speak of the Mahabharata war; rather, he rejected Mahabharata theory as far too distant. This is contradictory.

Nyang ral concludes the accounts by saying,

"He was the first King of Tibet, gNya' khri btsan po, who came after one thousand year plus since the passing away of Buddha Shakyamuni. During his reign came the art of storytelling, anecdotes, composition, decrees, public performance of drama and play, song performance, dance with drum, and entertainment."[11]

Putting Buddha's Parinirvana at 480 BCE as per Indian tradition[12], it would mean Nyatri Tsanpo came around 520 CE. If the Chinese and Japanese date 947 BCE[13] for Buddha's Parinivana is taken, then Nyatri Tsanpo came at 53 CE. Now, if Nyatri Tsanpo is put at 127 BCE as per Tibetan official version, then Buddha's time has to be 1127 BCE. But it is widely accepted that Buddha's Parinivana was in 480 BCE. So, Nyang ral's assertion of Srongtsan Gampo as the source of his theory and Nyatri Tsanpo's dating both are doubtful and deviate from the historical chronology.

lDe'u chos 'byung by lDe'u mKhas pa[14] :

From the three different accounts about the origin of Tibetan king, let us examine what the Buddhist tradition of lineages [Tib: bGrags pa[15] cho lugs gdung rgyud las chad pa] says about the origin of the king. Here we find the description of how the five Pandava brothers were born as the sons of Gods. According to this theory, after the defeat of Kaurava in Mahabharata war, Ru pa skye, the ninety-ninth son of Dritarashtra [Tib:dMag brgya pa or Yul 'knor srung], was captured and cast away into the Ganges River. He fled and on reaching Tibet's border, he met twelve wise men and six tribes of Tibet. Thinking that he came from sky, they proclaimed him as King and received him on a throne made on their napes, and named him gNya' khri btsan po, nape-enthroned-king. Let us examine what the text says exactly.[16]

The text explains the three main lineages of Indian Shakya kings, and traces the lineage of dMag brgya pa and sKyabs sen ge to the Shakya Ri brag pa. The former has ninety-nine sons and including him, they were hundred; therefore, the name dMag brgya pa -the hundred warriors. They are called Kaurava in the original Indian epic Mahabharata. On the other hand, sKyab seng had five hundred queens, but no sons. Despite his best effort through religious and secular rituals to appease gods and people, the king could not have any sons. A clairvoyant sage told him that because of the King's past deed [karma] of shooting a deer copulating with his partner, he could not father any child. But the sage offered him the boon of five non-human sons: 1) Dharma god's son, sNga tshog pa [Yudhisthira]; 2) Sun god's son, gSer khrab can [Karna]; 3) Wind god's son, Mi 'jigs stan [Bhim]; 4) Indra's son Tha bkar [Arjun] and 5) Ashwini's son, Mi tsug pa [Nakula or Sahadeva]. The king was overjoyed to have five strong sons without having to raise them from the infancy.

He took them to his palace and adorned them in princely attires and asked them what special skill that they possess. sNga tsog pa said he can glide in sky, penetrate into the earth and float on water. gSer khrab said he can get anything that the king points to. Mi 'jigs stan said he could acquire anything that the king wishes. Tha dkar said he can attain victory over the war of hundred. Mi tshug pa said he can push the son of any demon. The king was impressed and in order to test their claim, he commanded Tha bkar to contain the war of hundred. The prince went and killed dMag rgya pa and his sons, ninety nine in total, and brought last young prince Rupakye [Tib:Ru pa skyes] as a prisoner. sKyab sen ge complimented Tha dkar, but he told them to treat Rupakye as well as one of their brothers. When the brothers disagreed, the king had Rupakye cast away into the Ganges River with enough foods to sustain him. King Bimbisara's cattle herder found him. Bimbisara knew about the sutra prophesying Rupakye as an emanation of Avalokitesvara. He requested Rupakye to stay at his palace to be worshiped. Rupakye refused on the ground that if sKyab sen ge come to know this, then the king would also be in trouble. So, he was hidden in the hills and worshiped there. Later, sKyab sen ge came to know about the sacred prophesy relating to Rupakye as an emanation of Avalokitesvara and asked his sons to invite Rupakye back. They came to know about his where about under king Bimbisara's protection. They went with trumpet and music to invite him back. But Rupakye thought this was a trap to kill him and he fled. When he reached the border between India and Tibet, he met twelve wise men and the six tribes of Tibet looking for a king. When the people asked him from where he came, the prince unable to understand the language, pointed his finger to the sky. Thinking that he had come from the heavenly sky, the wise men and the six tribes decided to make him their king. They made a throne and carried him on their nape. They named him gNya' khri btsan po. The author concluded the account by noting that "As King Rupakye was from Shakya lineage [Tib:gdun rgyud rgyal po], and also an emanation of Avaloketisvara, the theory is called Superior Buddhist theory." While the title has "bsGrags pa" [proclaimed or established] as spelling for the theory, the author used "Drags pa" [superior or famous] as a later spelling.

We find the author emphasizing the superiority of the theory several times in the text. It says Rupakye was a king from the Indian Shakya lineage, and emanation of Avalokitesvara.

Therefore, the theory was superior. It further adds that Nyatri Tsanpo's origin is noble, because it can be traced to the Indian kings. Because of these superior qualities, the theory can be said as Lha-rabs. Justification was further made why it was "Lha rabs" and the prophecy about Rupakye "Ru pa skyes kyi lung bstan" was mentioned to support the nomenclature:

"Why can it be said as Lha rabs? The accounts of the seven kings upward from the popularly elected kings [Mang po'i bkur ba'i rgyal po] and particularly from the sutra prophesying Rupakye as manifestation of Avaloketisvara says that in the future an emanation of Avaloketisvara will be born as Rupakye to king dMag rgya pa. He will do great deed for the welfare of all sentient beings in land of Maganir. Since no god is superior to Avaloketisvara [Thugs rje chen po], this is known as sTod Lha rabs."[17]

The theory attributes the origin of the Tibetan king to the youngest sons of dMag brgya pa, Dritrashtra of Mahabharata. However, we know that Indian epic Mahabharata does not say anything about any Rupakye and his flight to Tibet. Nowhere in the Mahabharata's narrations can we find the name of Rupakye among the Kaurava's warriors; or for that matter, any warriors fleeing to Tibet. This brings us to speculate the presence of the Mahabharata epic in Tibetan version. g.Yang mo mtso in her "gNga' khri brtsan po'i zhib 'jug" and Tsering Namgyal in "sKya seng bu lnga'i rtogs brjod kyi 'grel pa" have reproduced one connected with the explanation of Sa kya legs bshad, in which it was noted at the end of Mahabharata war, two people from one of the platoons of defeated Kauravas fled to Tibet[18]. But no Rupati or Rupakye or Rupa skyes is mentioned in the text. Tsering Namgyal has provided detail explanation of the epic written in Tibetan by Lha smon ye shes tshul khrims [1913-1977], here also we don't find anyone escaping to the Himalayas or to Tibet after the war.

Blue Annals:

'Gos lo tsa ba gzhon nu dpal [1392-1481 CE] wrote the text in between 1476-1478 CE. His work is said to be based on the works of three prominent scholars: 'Tshal pa kung dga' rdo rje, Bu ston and Nelpa Pandita Grags pa smon lam tshul khrims. The text is widely referred by the later scholars and also well-known to foreign scholars too because of the English translation by George N. Roerich. The text refers to sLob pon She rab go cha's commentary on "Devtisayastotratika" [Tib:lHa las phul 'byung stod pa] and says that in the beginning of the Kali-yuga [degeneration era], before the appearance of the Teacher, Muni [Buddha], when the Pandava brothers of Mahabharata war came to be victorious, a king named Rupati fled along with his platoon to the snowy Mountains disguised as women and settled in the region. Descendants of this settlement is said to be bod, Tibetans. This statement is used by the later scholars to trace the origin of the Tibetan race and sometime to trace the Tibetan kings.

On the origin of Tibetan king's lineage, based on the Indian text Manjushrimulatantra [Tib:'Jam dpal rtsa rgyud], 'Gos lo tsa ba says,

"Now, though there is no agreement as to whether gNya' khri btsan po belonged to the race of the Maha Sakyas or the 'Village' Sakyas, or the SakyaLicchavis, the prophecy contained in the Manjusrimulatantra concerning the period from Srongbtsan till Dar-ma is very clear. In this chapter of the Manjusrimulatantra it is said: '(he) appeared in the Licchavi race.' Thus it is correct to state that the kings (of Tibet) belonged to the Licchavi race."[19]

As we can see, on the origin of Tibetan race and Tibetan kings, 'Gos Lo tsa ba relied on Devatisayastotratika and Manjusrimulatantra. From the former, he traced the Tibetan race to Rupati theory, and from the later he traced the lineage of the Tibetan king to Shakya Licchavis.

Both the texts are authoritative ancient Sanskrit texts, but the Tibetan translation of the commentary are said to be inconsistent with the original[20]. Moreover, the person of Rupati, although it is mentioned in the commentary of lHa las phul 'byung stod pa, it is not reflected in the Mahabharata epic. Regarding the prophesy in Manjusrimulatantra text, it was found that what was supposed to be Nepal has been wrongly taken as Tibet. Therefore, any theory leaning on the translation or interpretation of Devatisayastotratika and Manjusrimulatantra should be not be taken at its face value without close examination.

History of Buddhism in India and Tibet by Bu sTon[21] [1322 CE]

[Translated by E. Obermillar]

The Tibetan text and the English translation are widely found in the bibliography of many writings by Tibetan and foreign scholars. Regarding the origin of Tibetan race, it writes:

"As concerns the way how the human generation first appeared in Tibet, we read in the Commentary on the Devaticayastotra that at the time when the five Pandavas were fighting with the 12 armies of the Kauravas, the Rupati with 1000 warriors, in the disguise of women, fled into the rocky district of the Himalayas. Of these (the Tibetans) are considered to be the offspring. In the Tibetan legends it is said that (the Tibetans) are the descendants of a monkey and the fiendess of a rock. A detailed account of this is to be found elsewhere.[22]

"As regards the genealogy of the Tibetan kings, some say that (their ancestor) was the 5th descendant of Pransenjit the king of Kosala, according to some it was the 5th descendant of the youngest, feeble son of Bimbisara. Still others say that at the time when the Tibetans were oppressed by 12 petty chiefs of the demons and Yaksas, the king of Vatsa, Udayana, had a son born to him, whose eyelids were overhanging and whose fingers were connected with a web. The king was frightened and ordered him to be put into a leaden box and thrown into the Ganges (The boy) was however found by a peasant who brought him up. When he grew older, and the story (how he was found) was related to him, he became full of grief and fled to the Himalayas. Gradually he passed by the Lha ri Yol ba and came out into the plain of Tsan with the 4 gates. The Bon priests who came from the Mu-thag and Mu-ka declared that he was a god. After they had asked him who he was and he replied:-"I am a mighty one" -they inquired from where he came and he pointed with his finger to the sky. After their efforts to comprehend the language of each other turned to be unsuccessful, the Bonpos placed him on a wooden throne which they loaded on the necks of four men and said: -We shall make him our lord. -From this he derived his name of Na-thi-tsenpo "the neck-chaired Mighty one". It was he who became the first king of Tibet."[23]

Bu ston quotes Lha las phul 'byung stod pa and the Tibetan monkey theory as a possible source of the Tibetan race. Regarding the Tibetan king, he narrates the theory of King of Vatsa, Udayana, and the prince with strange features [overhanging eyelids, webbed fingers etc.], and his being thrown in the Ganges River and his reaching Mount Lha ri yol ba of Tibet, pointing his finger to the sky and people proclaiming his as king is all same. But here it is the son of the King Udayana, and whereas Nyang ral has him as the grandson of Udayana, lDe'u mKhas pa and Kachem Kakhoma says he was dMag brgya་pa's son, and Manikabum has him as sKyab seng's son who fled to Tibet. While Bu ston referred to lHa las phul 'byung gi bstod pa to shed light on the Tibetan race, he did not take Mahabharata epic to connect it to the origin of the king.

rGyal rabs gsal ba'i me long

rGyal rabs gsal ba'i me long by Sa skya pa bsod nams rgyal tsan [1312-1375 CE]: The book has holds respectable place in the Tibetan historical archives. There is an English translation of the book as "The Clear Mirror, A Traditional Accounts of Tibet's Golden Age".

Although the author has referred to Kachem Kakholma of King Srongtsan Gampo as the source, the narration is totally different:

"From Indian King Ashoka, who is a descendant of Indian king Shakya Ri drag pa, and from the successive kings came two kings: sKyab ding and dMag brgya pa. When there was a dispute, King dMag rgya pa had three sons. The youngest son, who was endowed with divine features, lost royal power. As prophesied by the deities, he was expelled to Tibet in woman's grab. In Bu ston's writing, mention is made about an extraordinary prince as the middle of the five princes of the King of Kosala or as the middle of the Bimbisara's five princes or as the prince of Vatsa's King 'char byed. However, all agreed to the king as gNya' khri tsan po. From Bod kyi yig tsang, first he descended on Lha ri rol po tse and when he found that Yar lha shampo was higher and Yar lung as the best land, he descended on bTsan thang gong ma'i ri. Cattle herders saw this and asked him from where he has come. He pointed his finger to the sky. Assuming that he came from sky they carried him on a throne on their nape and he was known by gNya' khri btsan po. Two thousand years after the passing away of Buddha, this was the first king of Tibet. He built the fort 'Um bu gla mkhar."[24]

The author acknowledged Srongtsan Gampo's Kachem Kakholma as his source and has made some reference to Bu ston also. But we have a different and new narration here. sKyab ding[25] and dMag rgya-pa, [Pandava and Kaurava Drithrashtra of Mahabharata] are shown as coming after King Ashoka [born 294 BCE]. Mahabharata is widely known to have happened before Buddha; therefore, much ahead of King Ashoka. dMag brGya pa was known to have ninety-nine sons; therefore, the name 'Hundred warriors". Here we find another version that he had three sons and that the youngest was expelled dressed in woman's garb. While in most of the accounts, it was one of the ninety-nine sons of dMag brgya pa who fled to Tibet or as one of the generals of dMag brgya pa army who fled along with his platoon to Tibet disguised as women. Another thing, first Tibetan king coming two thousand years after Buddha does not make sense[26]. Chronology or the dating system of the author seems different. Most importantly, although the author mentions Kachem Kakholma as his source, the material content of the theory is totally different.

dPyid kyi rgyal mo'i glu dbyang

dPyid kyi rgyal mo'i glu dbyang by Fifth Dalai Lama Ngwang Losang Gyatso [1617-1682 CE]: The text is popularly known and well referred to by scholars and layman alike.

The author mentions Srongtsan Gampo's Kachem Kakholma and Manikabum as his source and writes:

"Thereafter, there came many small princely states. But as the land was not blessed by Avaloketishvara, and there was no king to rule the people. Thinking that this would make the spread of Dharma difficult in the land, a blessed son was born to King dMag brGya pa of Mahasammata [Tib:Mang pos bkur ba'i rgyal po] lineage. The prince had remarkable features like: bulging eye, turquoise eyebrows, conch shell teeth and webbed hand like a part of a wheel. The father took it as an emanation of a demon and disowned him. Guided by Avaloketishvara's rays of wisdom, he reached the peak of Mount lHa ri gyang tho. From there he observed that the land of Yarlung as having the best of heavenly qualities on the earth. Beautiful Mount Yar lha Sham po was like a crystal moon. He went to lHa ri rol po tse Mountain, and from there descended through heavenly staircase and headed toward the Tsan thang sgo bzhi. Twelve wise men including Bonpos, who were looking after cattle, saw him and asked from where he had come. He pointed his finger to the sky, people thought that he had come from heaven and fit to be a king. So, he was put on a throne and people carried the throne on their napes, and he became gNya' khri btsan po. In Blue Annals, he was known as Khri btsan po 'od lde. He built Yum bu bla sgang palace."[27]

The author claims Srongtsan gampo's Kachen Kakholma and Manikabum as his source, but here also the contents are different. In the former, it was dMag brGya pa son, who fled to Tibet and created the genealogy of Bon gods and descended to Mount lHa ri rol po. The text here does not say anything about Rupakye and his divine nature. Manikabum refers to one of the younger sons of sKyabs seng having fled to Tibet along with his platoon. Therefore, the author's reference to the two texts of Srongtsan gampo on this matter is not very fitting and out of context.

Footnotes and references:

[1]:

This two volume text is supposed to be written by King Srongtsen Gampo. "The collection as a whole is considered a treasure text (gter ma), specific portions of where consecutively discovered by three treasure revealers (gter ston) from the middle of the twelth to the middle of the thirteenth century."-Alison Melnick and Christopher Bell

[2]:

Mani bka' 'bum, p-396

[3]:

Lha las phul byung gi bstod pa, bKa' bgyud nyam skyong tsog pa, CIHTS Varanasi, 1983 [The work of Acharya Prajnavarman]

[4]:

"Ru pa ti zhes bya ba'i rgyal po dpung gi tshogs gcig dand bcas pa g.yul 'gyed pa'i tshe, bud med kyi cha lugs su byas te bros nas ri kha ba can ri khrod du zhugs te, gnas pa'i rigs ls deng sang na yang bod ces bya bar grags pa yin no". [Lha las phul byung gi bstod pa rgya cher bshad pa, page 141, ltwa]

[5]:

Khyad par 'phags pa'i bstod pa rgya cher bshad pa dang, lha las phul byung gi bstod 'greal, LTWA, 2016

[6]:

Also known by Nyang ral chos 'byung is one the oldest written records on Tibetan history by Nyang ral Nyi ma 'od zer (1124-1192) in 12th century.

[7]:

"rGyal po srong btsan sgam po'i zhal nas 'di ni rgya gar gyi bad sa la'i rgyal po 'Char byed la, sras ryal po Shar ba 'o. De la sras gnyis byung ba'i nu bo'i rgyud la, btsun mo la dam pa la sras shig btsas te…" p-156

[8]:

A place near Tsed thang in Lhokha

[9]:

Nyang ral chos 'byung, p-156

[10]:

ibid, 156,157

[11]:

Nyang ral nyi ma 'od zer, p-158

[12]:

1) Upinder Singh, A History of Ancient & Early Medieval India, p-257 2) S.Vernon McCasland & others, Religion of the World, p-549

[13]:

George N. Roerich, The Blue Annals Part I, p-18

[14]:

It is a 12th century text written by Geshe lDe'u, based on Rinchen pung pa, can lnga, lo rgyus chen mo by Khu ston btson 'grus of 11th century etc. It was edited and some commentary made by mKhas pa Jonama and further explanation added by another scholar in early 13th century. This is reflected in the text and in Blue annals. [mKhaspa lDe'u, rGya bod kyi chos 'byung rgyas pa, page -xv, Institute of Tibetan Classics, 2013]

[15]:

It is written as bsGrags pa, which means "known, open, proclaimed etc". But in the explanation part the spelling is Drags-pa, which means "better" or "superior".

[16]:

mKhas pa lDe'u, rGya bod kyi chos 'byung rgyas pa, page -150

[17]:

Lha rabs: Lha means gods. Rabs means accounts or history. Therefore, Lha-rabs means "accounts or history of gods" and sTod means early or upper. sTod Lha rabs many mean "early accounts of gods".

[18]:

"De'i dpung tshogs gcig na re rang gi rje bob sod mkhan gayi 'bangs byed pa las rang shi sla'o zhes te, nged rang gnyis ri brags su 'dong ngo zer nas bod kyi yul du bros pas na, Bod 'di'i rnams nga'i mi rigs yin pas phyi thag ring zhing gzhung bzang pa'i rgyu mtshan de skad do" 1) g.Yang mo mtsho, p-763, 2) Tsering Namgyal, p-12

[19]:

Blue Annals, p-36

[20]:

G.N. Roerich in the introduction to Blue Annals says, "the Tibetan text of the Tantra ''Phag-pa 'jma-dpal rtsa-ba'i rgyud, sNar-thang bKa'-'gyur, rGyud, vol.XI/da, fo. 453a gives Lha-ldan instead of Nepala of the Sanskirt text, and translates Himadri by Gangs-can-ri. 'Gos lo-tsa-wa understood Lha-lden to refer to Lhasa, and Gangs-can-ri to Tibet."

[21]:

Bu ston chos 'byung was written by Bu ston Rin chen drup in 1322. It was translated by E. Obermiller as "History of Buddhism in India and Tibet".

[22]:

Bu-ston, p-181

[23]:

ibid, p-181 ff

[24]:

rGyal-rabs gsal-ba'i me-long, mi-rigs dpe-bskrun khang. p-68-69

[25]:

Here the speling is sKyabs ding, instead of sKyabs seng in Kaholma and Manikabum, p-68

[26]:

cf Chapter 4, p-14, Nyang ral has said "after one thousand years plus"

[27]:

dPyid kyi rgyal mo'i glu dbyang, p-11-12

Like what you read? Consider supporting this website: