Sarah Harding_As for the Blessing of Vajravārāhī | Mahamudra | Vajrayana

“As for the Blessing of Vajravārāhī, Marpa Lhodrakpa does not have it.

” by Sarah Harding In the beginning, my work translating the Pakmo Namshe[1] by the 2nd Pawo Rinpoche Tsuklak Trengwa (dPa’ bo gtsug lag Phreng ba, 1504-1566) presented several surprises. I had always believed that this was a commentary about the secret practice of Vajravārāhı based on the sādhana by the Sixth Karmapa Tongwa Dönden (mThong ba don ldan, 14161453) that we had all practiced in three-year retreat. I had certainly used it as such. But as soon as I came across the actual words of the sādhana within the text, it was clearly not that. Tsuklak Trengwa gives the title of the sādhana as simply dPal rdo rje rnal ‘byor ma’i gsang ba’i grub thab, or Srı Vajrayoginı Guhya Sādhana, authored by Nāropa and translated by Marpa. Well that’s easy, I thought, because there’s a three-folia verse text in the Peking Tengyur by Nāropa, or rather Mahā Nāḍapāda, with just that Sanskrit name.[2] Great—only that was not it. Then I actually opened and looked at every single text attributed to Nāropa in the Tengyur, and could not find a match. Then for weeks there were random feverish searches on TBRC under every conceivable word, like “yoginī,” “secret,” “vajra,” “pig,” and so on. Finally one fine day brought up the Miscellaneous Works (gsung thor bu) of the First Karmapa, Dusum Khyenpa (Dus gsum mkhyen pa, 1110-1193), and there I found it among several other secret Vajrayoginī practices, 29 folios and with no author, under the title dPal rdo rje rnal ‘byor ma’i gsang bsgrub [rdo?] rje btsun mo lhan skyes.[3] That was what I call a researcher’s moment of glory. It’s been all down hill from there. The second big surprise was the nature of the text. I was looking forward to translating Pakmo Namshe because I understood it to be a practice commentary. Pawo Tsuklak Trengwa even says, “It is this sādhana exactly as presented by the bhagavatī herself that will be expounded here.” But after the first fifty pages I realized that it’s really a rebuttal, a giant   1 

polemic in defense of Kagyu practices. I’ve since found that many if not most Kagyu commentaries on Vajrayoginī written during this period, the 15th-16th centuries, are similarly on the defensive. At first I thought that if I could make it through the history section, just fourteen folios, then finally there would be the Dharma. But that naiveté was again shattered when a few pages into the so-called “actual instructions,” even in the section on the location in which to practice, (Mountain peaks and charnel grounds/ Lone tree trunks and empty caves/ Hermitages and isolated places,… ) the narrative bends around to start sections with that red warning flag of “mkhas pa kha chig gis,” and somehow launches into another tirade. The one most shocking for me was the quote early on that is the title of this paper, “As for the blessing of Vajravārāhı, Marpa Lhodrakpa does not have it.” I mean, what? There’s been great controversy about mahāmudrā and maybe some suspicious creative innovations by lineage masters, such as evidenced by the accusations leveled at Gampopa. But Marpa? And he doesn’t even have the blessing? As I figure it, we’re screwed. So I decided to jump right in to the fray and try to figure out what’s going on here. Truly it is a can of worms, and I barely got the lid off. In order to make some use of the considerable time and energy that I already spent on Pakmo Namshe, although my work on it has now been set aside, I will present excerpts primarily from my translation of that, and some from other researches, especially Sakya Paṇḍita, Gorampa, Padma Karpo, Tashi Namgyal, and Lowo Khenchen. I’ll also make available a polished translation of the history section. What follows is basically a travelogue of my confusions, or my ‘khrul pa’i thob yig. Separating the issues

To get right to the sore point here, Tsuklak Trengwa’s shocking quotes are drawn from Sakya Paṇḍita’s sDom gsum rab dbye, written around 1232, when he was about fifty. It has been translated by Jared Rhoton as A Clear Differentiation of the Three Codes, which

 

includes the Tibetan. You probably know that this text is a scathing assessment of the state of Buddhism and particularly Vajrayāna in Tibet, barely disguised as a discussion of the three levels of vows. Sapaṇ’s primary motivation is certainly to clearly differentiate those three levels and to point out absolutely every incident and indiscretion of crossing-over, inaccuracy, hybridity, and misapplication. But the polemic goes far beyond just that, and with his searing logic, Sapaṇ calls into question many issues of lineage, appropriation, false advertising, false gurus, false empowerments and everything else false about particularly the Kagyu, though of course he is unbiased. (So “Keepin’ the Dharma pure.”) The two quotes that Tsuklak Trengwa references are as follows, taking the whole verses from sDom gsum rab dbye for context: As for the blessing of Vajravārāhı, Marpa Lhodrakpa does not have it. For a holder of Marpa’s lineage to open the Dharma door using Vārāhı contravenes even their own tradition, not to mention that of tantra. The second verse reads, Later on, Vajravārāhı’s blessing, a dream-based [tradition of] bodhichitta, instantaneous creation in meditation of the yidam, the white single sufficient remedy, and many such perverse teachings that contravene the buddhadharma are spreading around these days. First we have to briefly consider the mahāmudrā controversy within Kagyu which forms the background and overall picture of the Vajravārāhı issue. This in itself is a huge subject and there is considerable research already in English, so I refer the reader to those books and articles. There is of course the biggest bugaboo in Tibetan history constantly recurring here: the legend of debates held at Samyeling during the imperial period where the Chinese Chan monk referred to as Hvashang (upadhyaya) Moheyan and his perverse ideas of instant enlightenment were soundly, roundly, and forever defeated by the Indian scholar   3 

then they must be preceded by a highest yoga tantra empowerment. so I can refer back to it with irony. Although officially trumped by the gradual path perspective of Kamalashīla. that is Jamgön   4  . While no Kagyu would ever admit to being in league with the “instantaneanists”.Kamalashīla (fl. which would then render any mere blessing insufficient. and was known to have directly quoted known terrorists—I mean Hvashang Moheyanists. Worse yet. Enlightenment by a Single Means. as in David Jackson’s book where you can read all about it. But the pesky little idea keeps trying to resurface. since he appeared to develop something like his own system of mahāmudrā teachings. cannot be approached conceptually or through any other method. A special target was Gampopa. especially because it would actually be a substantive topic. The issue of the Vajravārāhı blessing and empowerment emerged within this greater context. amanasi) as the only way to directly experience ultimate reality. From our late nineteenth-century perspective. and occasionally identical. ensuring that Tibet would forever more be a gradualist Buddhist country and indebted only to India for the Dharma. they have often had to defend themselves against just such accusations. being inconceivable. sometimes calling it the dkar po chig thub—the single white remedy—or. which. and while we can avoid investigating the whole mahāmudrā controversy. because if they are Vajrayāna in nature. to that used in systems such as mahāmudrā. (Okay well maybe just a little. Skt. there is one issue that is directly relevant to our subject: where do the mahāmudrā teachings fall in the threetiered scheme of sdom gsum. Gampopa even used the “mental nonengagement” word. the language of the Hvashang’s argument is close.) Moheyan’s main argument focused on the idea of mental nonengagement or inaction (yid la mi byed pa. and promoted the idea that mahāmudrā realization was in itself sufficient. 713-763). especially in systems such as dzogchen and mahāmudrā. This post-debate debate that has never ended is too big of a topic for this paper so I will not indulge it.

This view has seemingly prevailed these days and been accepted without question. and essence tradition. since the tradition of Indian mahāsiddhas is replete with such teachings. In one article. the blending of the Sūtras with the Tantras is something that definitely started in India and not in Tibet. The pristine awareness of mahāmudrā only arises from empowerment. “…it should be noted that sūtra-based mahāmudrā teachings have Indian roots which can be clearly identified. true to form. Such pursuits were followed by Tibetans and currently by westerners alike. To sum up. But even Kongtrul could not assert this classification without admitting its controversial nature.” The assertion is that mahāmudrā. Sakya Paṇḍita and his supporters are still primarily concerned with not mixing up apples and oranges. that the term mahāmudrā is basically synonymous with perfection of wisdom. There has been a multiple-defense strategy developed by the Kagyus. The claim. We can see that. mahāmudrā is classified into three: sūtra tradition.” That notwithstanding. is revealed only in the fourth empowerment of a highest yoga tantra empowerment. “Mahāmudrā is not designated in the tradition of the perfections. which supposedly started with Gampopa.Kongtrul’s perspective. again. Klaus-Dieter Mathes concludes. A second favorite is to defend   5  . from which I’d like to mention just three tactics. as taught. as the experience of blissemptiness. First is to try to provide Indic sources for mahāmudrā teachings in non-tantric form. This is really not too difficult. is considered totally misguided. as the highest in the set of four mudras. and that even beginners can practice it without empowerment. for example. which I won’t develop here. the Kagyu lineages holders felt the need to present further lines of defense. quoting. sometimes redundant or even contradictory. Sakya Paṇḍita. mantra tradition. at Nitartha and other canonizing institutions. who said. Essence mahāmudrā presents even more issues.

for instance. Kongtrul says: [Gampopa] taught his regular disciples the Kadampa stages of the path and the meditative absorption from the sūtra tradition that is adorned with the name mahāmudrā. Thus.Gampopa’s choices based on his omniscient skillfulness and compassion. He taught the uncommon mahāmudrā of the mantra connected to Lama Mila’s path of methods to his extraordinary disciples. As a result it became widely known as the single path for all predestined seekers. which I’ll call the prophecy-proof. expounded mainly on the quintessential instructions on mahāmudrā. Tashi Namgyal (whichever one wrote Phyag chen zla ba’i ‘od zer—not going there!) says. and   6  . The teachers of this meditational lineage up to Milarepa meditated mainly on the key instructions of the Mantrayāna mysticism while at various times incorporating vital instructions on mahāmudrā from the discourses on the yogas of inner heat and lucid awareness. That is to cite Gampopa’s previous life as the healer Candraprabha Kumarabhuta and his special connection with the Samādhirāja Sūtra. perhaps a bit sectarian. so since it was a sūtra. The Samādhirāja Sūtra is claimed as a major source of the Kagyu mahāmudrā tradition. having been moved by immeasurable compassion. it is proved! Another version is more based on lineage. The last is a reference to another sub-strategy. the great master Gampopa. also employed by Tsuklak Trengwa. In connection with this there appeared to be a special causal link established in the past. and since Gampopa is in it. Yet. wherein is also found a prophecy of the future life of Gampopa. which may be briefly mentioned.

Therefore this is the tradition of the perfections. it is a gradualist excuse for teaching supposedly instantaneous mahāmudrā. The system of guidance in calm abiding and higher insight taught these days that is shared with the causal vehicle of the perfections comes from the lineage of Lord AtıŸa. So. In other words. What I love about this second defense of sūtra mahāmudrā is that it is based on the claim that Gampopa. I would like to return to Tashi Namgyal for what he says is Gampopa’s own version. He recounts from Gampopa’s works three different lists of three approaches. “According to   7  . It makes me wonder if this line of reasoning worked on the very reasonable Sakyas? Finally. blame the Kadampas! Mikyö Dorje attempts to clarify: The authentic spiritual power of mahāmudrā in the Kagyu. standing outside both sūtra or tantra. Lord Gampopa and the protector Pakmo Drupa have given this the name of “joined coemergent mahāmudrā” (phyag chen lhan cig skyes sbyor) just for the sake of those disciples in the degenerate age who would like a “really high” vehicle. These are instructions arising primarily from the Kadampa tradition. ” [Gampopa] considers mahāmudrā to be a separate path and independent of the sūtras and tantras. is only attained by actualizing the example and authentic ultimate pristine awareness by means of the higher three supreme empowerments.Dakpo Rinpoché induced the realization of mahāmudrā even in beginners who had not received empowerment. mahāmudrā constitutes a separate and autonomous path. the lineage of the great Nāropa that began with Vajradhara. Therefore. was able to determine the level and capacity of the disciples and employ appropriate stages to guide them. Tashi Namgyal concludes. in his infinite wisdom and compassion.” He goes on to say. In all three. It is the esoteric instruction of The Lamp for the Path to Enlightenment. Kamalashila and Hvashang Mohayen united at last.

the practice of Lord Gampopa himself.” some contend. devotion to preliminary exercises. what kind of empowerment. That’s our so-called “phyag chen mngon ‘gro” we’re talking about. all Vajrayoginī material ultimately derives from Chakrasa˙vara tantras. The lack of sources is often mentioned in these debates. But then. “the Sow-Head and other initiations are also found here. Thus. So back at square one.” On that. due to the fact that many superior and inferior minds are going to benefit from it. Tashi Namgyal continues. Sakya Paṇḍita argues: “But. So. That is. Vajrayoginī was literally snatched out of his arms—one can easily imagine why. even if mahāmudrā is proved to be Indian and sūtra-based. now we need empowerment because some mashuguna affixed preliminaries. To me it seems that part of the problem of sources must certainly stem back to the fact that there is no Vajrayoginī cycle of tantra per se. since much of my research proved totally inconclusive. and methods of enhancing experiences. the problem is that: In recent times meditators of mahāmudrā sought to make adjustments according to both the sūtras and the tantras. since any empowerment requirement would be vitiated. and from whence? Lineage I’ll take the whence first. or proved to be autonomous. They have incorporated [in the mahāmudrā tradition] many practices that require preparations such as the…empowerment that sows the seed of a spiritual blossom. yes. It is for that reason that it is not contradictory to regard mahāmudrā as identical with the common and profound path of the sūtras and tantras. the case could be closed. for instance. the ripening empowerment conferral is unnecessary.”   8  .

saying. which started with Telopa receiving it directly from the Æākinī in Uḍḍiyāna. Telopa fully transmitted it to Nāropa. And again: Without even seeing the explanation in the Vajrayāna. They have not been expounded in any tantra. are not exactly initiations. they could be found there. responds as follows: Many Tibetan scholars refute [Vajravārāhı practices] and claim that they are not based on all the tantras.Rites like these. There are plenty of rejoinders. while admitting that not all the sources made it to Tibet. not seeing even these few tantras extant these days in Tibet. Tsuklak Trengwa. [Darmakīrti's] expression “Just because it is not seen does not [mean] it doesn’t exist” is germane here. She bestowed all the creation and completion [practices] just as the guru had foretold. and even if. just because they [personally] have not even seen the parts of the tantra that do exist now in Tibet and merely because they are not compatible with their own interests. they proclaim that there is no explanation that is based on all the tantras. This is not a scholarly attitude. In the Pakmo Namshe. Tsuklak Trengwa goes on to describe the lineage of the transmission. “Go to the   9  . who also received it again directly from Vajrayoginī. Then it passed to Marpa. Then she prophesied. as Tsuklak Trengwa explains it: [Marpa] went to the charnel ground of Sosadvıpa and met the glorious Innate Mother in person. She conferred the four empowerments by means of symbols. they are still not initiations but authorizations. perchance. however. and opened her heart with a crystal hooked knife to display the mantra wheel.

[On the other hand]. In Marpa’s rnam thar.” After seeing the tooth at Vajra Seat. Refuting the misconceptions of sDom gsum rab dbye was one of the two reasons that Padma Karpo gives for writing this commentary. On the one hand. there is the pressure to prove that it is in the original Indic tantric sources originating from the Buddha. I think this is interesting in its specificity. speech. But this is perhaps one source of the problem. he says. why then must we prove tantric origins? Tsuklak Trengwa even says. one does not gain spiritual powers from tantras without the esoteric instructions. Marpa found and brought out the esoteric instructions of creation and completion. and five-deity Vajrayoginī separately through a sindura mandala. since. in that case. seven. My confusion here is that there are two transmission situations in these discussions. then a symbol empowerment by means of the mandala of the guru’s body. If. they were tiring him out. and mind. in this same section: In short. Vajradhara or. it stands outside of the tantric literature. written in Singhalese letters in vermilion on Palmyra leaves.Vajra Seat [in Bodhgaya] to see our Teacher’s eye-tooth and go to Tibet. accomplished adepts who extract the essence of the esoteric instructions and practice them without relying on the tantras are beyond count. Vajrayoginī herself is a good enough proxy to the buddha and that is the lineage that must be continued. just as the guru and the dakini had revealed. Another rebuttal comes from the omniscient Padma Karpo (1527-1592) in his commentary to the Vajrayoginī practice called the Formless or Bodyless Æākinī. it states clearly that he received Chakras˙avara empowerments and then fifteen. His response to the our chosen verse about Marpa is as follows:   10  . always. in this case. On the other hand.

but not by you…” It is important to remember that most of the rebuttals to sDom gsum rab dbye come way after the fact. no matter what Vajravārāhı explains. Therefore whether or not there existed the Six Dharmas after Mila and whether Marpa had an initiation rite for Vajravārāhı is known by us. I’ll return to Padma Karpo later.’” [He] also said “if it is in accordance with the tantra. the opponent falls into the position of defeating himself. It is only in the   11  . [just] this empowerment of four symbols is the rebuttal. Chökyi Drakpa (1453-1524) some two and a half centuries later. Although suspicions arose. that of a character called Kor Nirūpa (sKor Ni rū pa). In this. it is appropriate to accept it.Worrying about the reasons for [Marpa] having it or not is like [worrying about] whether a rabbit’s horns are sharp or dull. I believe such is the case with one major lineage issue that Tsuklak Trengwa takes by the horns. Yet this person is not mentioned by name in sDom gsum rab dbye. attributed to Tsurbu Gukshrıwa (mTshur bu Gug shrı ba): Ananda was familiar (rgyus) with Shakyamuni. Therefore he made out that the sources were not clear in the Chakrasa˙vara root and explanatory tantras. Meantime. He himself said. Jared Rhoton put the first documented written reply to a few passages as coming from the fourth Zhamar. you Sakyapas are familiar with Virūpa. “It is said ‘this has the activities of empowerment of the Sow-Headed (Vārāhīshīr˝ha) and so forth. Therefore.” Since it cannot be stated definitively whether it is in accordance or not in accordance. one more happy quote for good measure. Whatever has been presented of the opponents’ position in this debate (phyogs snga ma) has not sunk in (things pa). So it may often be the case that they are responding not to Sakya Paṇḍita per se but to some later commentators. they were entirely based on thinking that this kind of fourfold empowerment of symbols was untenable. and we Dvagpo Kagyus are familiar with Nāropa and Marpa. the rebuttal (rtsod spong) [shows] a lack of understanding.

He sent his pupils to request initiations of other teachers. Leaving his old body to be cremated. he became known as Kor Nirūpa. While in Nepal. Kor Nirūpa. [the custom] developed of winning access to the doctrine through instructions expounded by a master from whom initiation had been requested. he met a young Tibetan named Korchungwa (sKor chung ba. ‘What if I were to perform the Sow-Head initiation?’ [The latter] conferred the Sow-Head blessing and then expounded the Six Doctrines of Nāro[pa]. also known as Dampa sKor). he consented when Kong Neruwa inquired of him. and because Dakpo had urged that every group [of students] must have its own bestower of initiations. Gorampa explains that the custom of granting uninitiated beginners access to tantric practice by conferring the Sow-head blessing (Vārāhīshīr˝ha or phag mgo’i byin rlabs). even though the initiation of Chakrasmvara had not been [previously] obtained. he is two guys. This person’s dates are given as 1008-1081. the door to the Six Doctrines being opened merely by a conferral of the Vajra Sow-Head blessing. In any case. He met Karopa and his wife. he then went to Tibet as a nineteen year-old. and would sometimes wear Indian clothes and sometimes Tibetan. in his seventy-fourth year. he was known as Nirūpata Naljorpa. while some ḍākinıs prophesied his journey to Nepal. who were briefly visiting Tibet. such as the one by Gorampa Sönam Senge (1429-1489) composed in 1463.” So who is this guy? Actually.e. and one might imagine that it was on this occasion that he was “recognized” as his old disciple. dying   12  .commentaries. From that time onward. and decided to “take up residence” (grongs ‘jug ‘pho ba) in this better body. and other precepts. who is to blame for Sapaṇ’s accusation concerning Marpa.. He taught in Tibet for twenty-one years. who in turn was a disciple of Maitrīpa. A disciple of Karopa. “originated in the time of Gampopa Dakpo Lhaje Sönam Rinchen (1079-1153). Karopa told him to go to Tibet. Most of them did not return but settled [elsewhere]. that we learn that it was he. In 1081. the Great Seal. i.

“The Dharma-perverter called Kor Nirūpa made a fake empowerment called Vārāhı Empowerment of Four Symbols (Phag mo brda bzhi’i dbang). That is why it is explained that [Nirūpa] told him. he became known as “Amanasi Man. This must be why Tsuklak Trengwa launches unexpectedly into a the following full-scale defense of him that follows directly on the quote about Marpa: Also certain of [Sakya Paṇḍita's] followers say. the explanatory tantra Unimaginable. however [this is not] the tradition of Vārāhı’s Empowerment of Four Symbols.” The scholar-adept Khyungpo Naljor requested them all from him. the author of a major commentary on Saraha’s dohas. The great Kor Nirūpa was a direct disciple of the mighty master Maitrıpa and was a great lotsāwa. In the Blue Annals.” They rush to utter such meaningless chatter. From Lord Maitrıpa he received and brought out Chanting the Names. Furthermore. In any case. “I currently have disciples in number equal to three measures of white mustard seeds. and Secret Nondual Tantra. This also brings up the questionable authorship of the latter two of Saraha’s doha trilogy and the suspicion that Kor Nirūpa was somehow associated with their forgery. the root tantra Completely Nondwelling. Since he taught primarily on those. were all brought out by him. are commentaries on the view and meditation of mahāmudrā without mental engagement (yid la mi byed pa). the Seven Texts of Accomplishments.   13  . Unpolluted.in 1102. Kor Nirūpa’s Five Tantras are well-known and all of them.” [He also] certainly brought out many cycles of Vārāhı. That is refuted. Gö Lotsāwa equates him with Prajñāshrījñānakīrti. Khyungpo Naljor. but in terms of perfecting all the teachings there is no one better than you. this name is definitely tarnished in some circles through association with the suspect mahāmudrā lineage of Maitrīpa. and the Twenty-four Dharma Cycles of Amanasi-kara. moreover. Thus. the Six Cycles of Essence. even without the Vajravārāhı blessing issue.

and he said ‘I have something like this” and that’s how the four-symbol empowerment came to be. Therefore. [when] it says in the great commentary to the sDom gsum of dGa’ sdod (?) “Dakpo Rinpoche did not give his disciples the empowerments. how can he also be a disciple of Gampopa? Even if the event under discussion.” one can not determine that it is Kong Niruwa. Then it passed to Kor Nirūpa. And no one has ever heard such talk as this from him. that would make Gampopa twenty-three years old (if the dates 1079-1153 are correct for him).One minor point here is that in the biography of Khyungpo Naljor. because this does not teach the four symbols. the similar statement is what makes Khyungpo doubt Kor Nirūpa. and causes him to leave for India. and even if he is at the very least a disciple of Maitrīpa’s disciple Korapa. But Tsuklak Trengwa leaves out that part. That’s why the ever-omniscient Padma Karpo had this to say. and thus all the teachers in Tibet. requesting Gampopa’s permission to bestow the Vajravārāhı blessing. At that time included among the disciples was Kong Niruwa. But this lineage is not this tradition. There’s a much bigger problem here with all this character-assassination and counter-commendation. [but] it’s a lie [because the empowerment] was given to Rechungpa and the other disciples of Mila. One of his disciple’s brought it to Tibet. so he was losing disciples to others. You can go ahead and ascribe such talk to Dakpo. that is. You should know that the old man damaged his prāna [saying such things]. after first pointing out that the discussion originating from sDom gsum rab dbye did not even concern the correct Vārāhı transmission: The Small Red Lady (dMar chung ma) was by Tri Saraha. and so I will too. happened in the very last year of Kor Nirūpa’s life in 1102. While Tsuklak Trengwa claims Kor Nirūpa as a disciple of Maitrīpa. The chances of ordering around a 40-year old disciple of Maitrīpa some quarter century before the founding of Dakpo Kagyu seems remote.   14  .

If it were somehow proved that Kor Nirūpa. including Kor Nirūpa’s system as quoted above as well as that of Saraha’s dohas. And finally. are not the Vārāhı empowerment in question. the questions of lineage can now be gingerly laid aside. What is the Four Symbol empowerment? The focus of the objection by Sakya Paṇḍita is specifically aimed at something called “Vārāhı Empowerment of Four Symbols (phag mo brda’ bzhi’i dbang). I’ll try to only address to what I believe to be the most substantive. to bickering over the exact shape of the mandala. “Opening the door of doctrine with the Vajravārāhı blessing originated with Kong Neruwa and. but his faithful commentator Gorampa who was confused.But maybe it was not old man Sapaṇ. since it was not extant until then. he says. Meaning Aside from the question of lineage. But for sure I’m confused. he again makes out that. many more objections and defenses concerning the Vajravārāhı empowerment question.” If Kor Nirūpa postdates Marpa (which we’re pretty sure is not true anyway) then he basically has nothing to do with Marpa. But these. there are many. It seems to me that while there are still some doctrinal issues remaining on what constitutes empowerment. it is contradictory to consider it Marpa’s transmission. But in Gorampa’s direct commentary on our namesake verse here. why can’t Gorampa even spell his name correctly? (And yes. Tsuklak Trengwa follows a path of investigation that mentions some possibilities. the disciple of Maitrıpa and Korapa. I searched in vain among many lists of Gampopa’s disciples for a “Kong Neruwa”). ranging from the most abstract theoretical issues of what empowerment means. had a flawed lineage. then maybe one could say Marpa did not have Vajravārāhı’s proper blessing. The only one not so dismissed he calls sKu gsung thugs   15  .

then. Lowo Khenchen Sonam Lundrup (Glo bo mkhan-chen bSod nams lhun grub. Of those two.” The mere droplets of the sophists cause great bloating. In particular. 1456-1532). and mentions that this name is also applied to the Two-face Yoginī (Zhal gnyis ma) Blessing. 504) and ” [if there is] the blessing. in the Sampuṭa [Tantra] it says “Having obtained the empowerment and permission (bkas gnang)” and so on. This means the following: the tantras teach both empowerment conferral (dbang bskur) and blessing (byin rlabs).” (vs. The difference between blessing and empowerment It seems fair to give time to another Sakya lama. accomplishes the goal. have the ability to tame those of sharp faculties. who in 1489 wrote a commentary on sDom gsum rab dbye addressing just these issues. he explains the great benefits: These empowerments of four symbols. It is explained that a vajra master who accomplishes awareness and knows the constitution and mindstream of those to be tamed and teaches them. 505) and “The blessing of Vajravārāhı. I quote at length because this unusual version seems quite interesting: [Sakya Paṇḍita made statements such as] “The guidance called Nāropa’s Six Dharmas were nothing but that until after Mila did not exist” (vs.kyi rgyud mdzad ma. Don’t give credence to the arrogant bastards who make [droplets] into great oceans of Dharma. Without really defending it. So there are the authentic empowerment conferral and the blessing permission (byin rlabs bkas gnang). Marpa of Lhodrak does not have it. it is not the empowerment”. This is not advising that “you should just confer [empowerment] on as many listeners as you can get. the authentic empowerment conferral is a method to sow the seeds of fivefold awareness in   16  .

The lineage from Tsami and Galo has both the empowerment permission (dbang bka’) and explanation permission (bshad bka’) and so forth that previously appeared in Tibet for sure. In that viewpoint. Therefore. The Vārāhı blessings of the lineage of esoteric instructions of the Nāro tradition were received by Marpa. once matured by the empowerment. As to the question of whether there is a blessing of Vajravārāhı or not. and secret contingency… As for blessing. the Dharma Lord Sakya Paṇḍita in no way could say that “there is no empowerment of Vajravārāhı. the blessing of White Vārāhı and so forth. or for the sake of maintaining and increasing [those qualities] that have already arisen. The Dharma Lord Sapaṇ received the Three Cycles of Vārāhı that are taught in the Garland from Shākya Shrī. inner. great and lesser dBu bcad ma. Marpa Lotsāwa also presumably received the four empowerments blessing of Vārāhı of Lord Nārotapa. In particular. The basis of refinement and that which refines is unmistakably set up by means of the rites of outer.the unimpaired vajra body. Maitrī mkha’ spyod. in order to engender the qualities that have not [yet] arisen in those individuals possessed of the sacred pledges. this Blessing of Four Symbols of Vārāhı. the Chakrasa˙vara explanatory tantra Abhidhāna explains the complete four empowerments of Vajravārāhı. Khyab ‘jug gsang ba and Kurmpatra both [had] explained both the thirtyseven and the thirteen-deity mandalas. But thinking that the tradition of the Nyingma mantra. Now there is nothing but the manuals (yig cha). [is the reason for] saying that Marpa of Lhodrak does not have the Vajravārāhı blessing. the method for imbuing the blessings of Body. It is said that there are many fourfold empowerments from the Garland and from Kriya. so those also exist. Speech and Mind are done according to the rites of the individual lineages. Nāropa. in the Sarma tradition of the secret mantra of Tibet. who gave them to Mila and so on.”   17  . was not received by Marpa and not given to Mila and so on. [We] don’t know if Lord Marpa received these or not. there are many [cases] concerning the blessing of Vajravārāhı: the greater and lesser Don grub ma.

Tsuklak Trengwa still insists that this is not true of those of highest acumen. and [therefore] he refuted it. Blame it on the Drigungpas. While it appears to be true that officially the blessing is given only after the receipt of a fullfledged authentic empowerment. and adding on the concluding [auspicious verses] at the end were done by the old Dri[gungs] sentinels (‘gri rgan gyi chos sgo ba). In that way one won’t waste disciples. [Sakya Paṇḍita] was thinking that it was a shame to bestow the Sarma instructions of Nāropa’s Six Dharmas through opening the door of a great counterfeit Dharma. When they come to understand. This does not constitute an authentic empowerment conferral. It is also not the true pure tradition of the Nyingma. Mirror (me long) and so forth that have a symbol blessing attached. and it is not the lineage coming from Marpa Lotsāwa. entering ritual. they should be given the extensive ripening empowerments and guided gradually according to the three guidance manuals (zin bris rnam gsum). but only for those who need the gradual maturation that is affected in the highest yoga tantra empowerment. He turns the argument around to gain the final moral high ground: A vajra master who has accomplished mahāmudrā will mature such a [disciple of highest acumen] through blessing and teaching the path of creation and completion.The sDom gsum rab dbye [is a reference to] the Nyingma tradition of the Sow-headed One (Phag-mgo). who at present have many discursive thoughts. The taking of the vows of the five families and so on. distributing the vase water upon entering the main part. I can live with that. In the case of disciples who would [only] later become suitable recipients. the prelude (sta gon).   18  . then they will practice because of the desire to become enlightened in a short time for the sake of sentient beings. the Archer (mda’ gzhu).

[When those masters] guide people in that way. Therefore. The actual blessing which comes from the oral instructions is talking about maturing those of sharp faculties. mandala). in whom the awareness will be born just by the blessings of meditative absorption such that they will have complete confidence without any doubts—that’s what’s called maturing the being. These pseudo-masters draw a picture of a nice house in the sand (i. and gather beside it many wealthy brutes who would not produce even a tiny thought of the difficulty of attaining this free and endowed [human life] even [if they] were to meet a thousand   19  . there are some with most excellent faculties who will [anyway] become matured and liberated in the same instant just by seeing the face of the master or by a blessing. sweet essence as the milk. a pool filled with the waters of sophistry.e. there is the generation of elaborations such as entering into the mandala and the empowerments of five families. There are many [such as these] in Tibet.” disciples must be guided according to the measure of their being. in the blessing from the oral instructions of Lord [Tongwa] Dönden. Though [given] the maturing [empowerment]. It is to satisfy those self-proclaiming as dull or sharp faculties. many pseudo-masters practice Dharma with the hook of enticing material goods. without any recourse to giving guidance according to the measure of a disciple’s mind. [they will think] this is the so-called “ocean of milk of Vajrayāna” and will grasp on to this white. Those [people] spread this pile of ignorance and make their living as masters. Maturing them through wordy rituals with many elaborations to perform makes them happy. Those of sharp faculties.As it is explained in such sayings as “the great medicine of the instantaneous [approach] is great poison for a gradualist. Therefore. After pouring even the last droplet of the water that has washed a thousand times the vessel of the milk of secret mantra. the disciples become disturbed. [Some] individuals are naturally characterized by great discursiveness or are [stuck] in the mire pit of various views in this life.

“I’ve never seen any sandalwood. [they] tie on blindfolds and leave them there while they read through the mandala ritual. So please take care.” I guess because I myself would rather be described as “mature” rather than “ripe”. say. By just this they gather disciples and make a living. Tsuklak Trengwa continues: Of course it is wonderful that you all hold empowerment to be so highly valuable. This seems to me to be the only really meaningful subject. But if you don’t recognize the empowerment itself. But the only result that will manifest for those masters is that. They do not see whether or not [the disciples] are maturing. what it is and what actually happens when one is matured by it and so forth. However.” [When it is] said that in the future there will be those who praise the Dharma as a livelihood but don’t practice the Dharma—there is danger that it could happen here. and the man replies. and flicking drops of water and such.buddhas. [But] it is obvious that those disciples do not manifest any difference at all before and after. Limiting [the empowerment] to twenty-five [disciples] or whatever. if they happen to have mantra vows. The last discussion concerns a description of a proper empowerment and how it really should mature the disciple. These days here in Tibet it appears that [people] are howling like the wind about whether such [empowerments] cause maturation or not. So who is mature? So what exactly is smin byed as in smin byed kyi dbang? Personally I prefer to translate the term as “maturing. some quirky devil on my shoulder couldn’t help whispering that it does sound an awful lot like the maturing process for. they will accrue the downfall of proclaiming secrets along with some material goods. then it’s like the story in the sūtra: A man was singing the praises of sandalwood for making a living. an American fifth-grader (maybe not so   20  . once in a while beating the drum. ringing the bell. Later someone asks “do you have some sandalwood?”.

by doing it in those stages. In the Highest [Yoga Tantra]. at first the disciple’s fortune is examined by the preparatory “tagön” (lta gon). the conferral of the five awareness empowerments refines away the impure five aggregates and introduces the five aggregates as the five families. the descent of the timeless awareness [being] bestows the deity’s blessing on their being. then you don’t even understand the meaning of maturation. Once their mindstream is stabilized. Bound by the vows of the common five families and the arousing of the vajra mind of awakening. Understanding the environment and its contents as the five families frees them from an ordinary outlook and is the attainment of the vase empowerment. In the [vase empowerment]. Otherwise. Pawo Tsuklak Trengwa describes each stage of maturing in response to the attacks: If you hold that position. If [the disciple] is known to be suitable. there is the danger of losing faith. [they will] fear failing the sacred pledges and the blessings will change their mindstream. then they are suitable to receive the vase empowerment. They toss the flowers and their special deity is identified. [Then] lack of faith will not arise upon seeing the male and female deities. they are matured appropriately to be shown the mandala. the empowerment of the mantra. they are brought into the colored sand mandala and the sacred pledges are proclaimed. they gain confidence and faith in both the guru and the mandala. Rather. Even the least of them gets a little [experience] of the timeless awareness of bliss-emptiness.   21  . he or she is allowed in. Giving the blessing of Vajrasattva’s yogic conduct (brtul zhugs). when there is only maturing [through] extensive elaborations. and the empowerment of a [vajra] master all make [the disciple] temporarily suitable to be a master. By presenting and explaining the mandala to someone matured in that way.different than a monk). By those [rites]. if they see the manifestation of the male and female deities [in union].

The nature of all phenomena is seen as the ultimate reality. [the disciple] has been matured as a suitable recipient of the third empowerment. and the concepts concerning characteristics of path and no path are diminished. In the revelation of all phenomena as primordially pure. The conferral of that secret empowerment blesses the three doors. If we look around at what’s going on now. we might be horrified with what seems to be a corruption   22  . to thoroughly integrate it without anxiety [indicates that the disciple] is matured as a suitable recipient of the fourth empowerment. Thoughts of desire have no power to bind. like adding yeast to grain. the eighty natural conceptions are blessed by bliss and then all phenomena are known as a single flavor in the essence of one’s own intrinsic awareness. However it has given me a new perspective on our current situation. so that the timeless awareness of clarity-emptiness enhanced by joy and happiness arises in their mindstream. maybe even with some of our own friends and colleagues. this is the attainment of the secret empowerment. bliss-emptiness. Free of attachment to [mere] shapes as deities. [the disciple] has been matured as a suitable recipient of the secret empowerment. This is the attainment of the third empowerment. The conferral of the fourth empowerment purifies fixation on one’s own intrinsic awareness and bliss-emptiness. like a maiden’s divination [powers]. Then the fetters of doubt are severed and the fourth empowerment is attained. Same here. Then when there are no concepts concerning characteristics about engaging the yogic conduct of a wisdom consort [according] to the guru’s orders. I assume that this little foray into what were once critically important issues has left you just about where you were to begin with. By the conferral of the third empowerment.Since the viewing of the body mandala and the secret substance taken from the “secret sky” and so forth no longer give rise to concepts concerning [ordinary] characteristics.

“oh. which had a level of complexity that is hard to maintain. But now we could just think of such people.   23  . he’s just pulling a Gampopa.of traditional forms of Buddhism that we have learned.” and try not to be a Sapan Stick-in-the-mud. Perhaps most of all with regards to Tibetan Buddhism and its tantric ritual forms. or “she’s cool as Marpa.

p. 10. 19. and no reason it couldn’t be by Naropa. (Reproduced from rare manuscripts from the library of zwa-dmar rin-po-che). rgyud ‘grel. 2.. Secret Sādhana.   24  . 2 of Selected Writings of the first zwa-nag karma-pa dus-gsum-mkhyen pa. 175 and 326. Jamgön Kongtrul Lodrö Tayé 2007. Sakya Pandita Kunga Gyaltshen 2002. (All page numbers of this text refer to the English numbered pages in Rumtek edition. 225. 1980. 175-232. Gangtok: dzongsar chhentse labrang. Lord of Yogins. arriving in the heart of Guru Telopa. 8. Peking 4668. ff. This title does not appear again within the text. p. 9. rdo rje phag mo’i byin rlab ni/ mar pa lho brag pa la med/ mar pa’i bryud pa ‘dzin bzhin du/ phag mos chos sgo ‘byed pa ni/ rgyud dang ‘gal ba lta ci smos/ rang lugs dang yang ‘gal ba yin. 6. Toni Huber 2003. 1b4-5. The Great Learned Nāropa. composed it. “The Secret Sādhana of Glorious Coemergent Yoginī that remains extremely hidden. verse 610. Mathes 2003. Brunnhölzl 2007. Phag mo’i rnam bshad. 5. In vol. 11. phyi nas phag mo’i byin rlabs dang/ sems bskyed rmi lam ma la sogs/ yi dam bsgom pa dkrongs bskyed dang/ dkar po chig thub la sogs pa/ sangs rgyas bstan dang ‘gal ba yi/chos log du ma deng sang ‘phel/ Ibid. dPal rje btsun rdo rje rnal ‘byor ma’i gsang ba’i sgrub thabs kyi rnam par bshad pa zab mo rnam ‘gyed. Naropa. phu 11a4-13b5. Sakya Pandita Kunga Gyaltshen 2002. known as Phag mo’i rnam bshad or Phag mo’i rnam bshad for short.” 3. Verse 504. Klaus-Dieter Mathes 2003. was exquisitely acquired from the mouths of Vajradhara and the ḍākinī. David Jackson 1994. 7.Footnotes: 1. Jackson 1994. It bears a clear colophon which reads. Jamgön Kongtrul Lodrö Tayé 2007. p. pages 162 and 321 (for the Tibetan). There is no real colophon. The title page in Tibetan reads dPal rdo rje rnal ‘byor ma’i gsang bsgrub [rdo?] rje btsun mo lhan skyes. 1975. TBRC W2365. f. p. 4. 212.

26.. 90. In Tsuklak Trengwa’s Condensed Essence (sNying po bsdus pa 149. 138-139. p. Sakya Pandita Kunga Gyaltshen 2002.” dpe byang bu can be “inscription written on a board. 21. Pawo Tsuklak Trengwa. 96. 119. This proverb can be found in Dharmakirti’s Tshad ma rnam ‘grel (ATG). (f. Ibid.11. Phag mo rnam bshad. Zla ‘od gzhon nu (“Youthful Moonlight”) in Tibetan. Ibid. 9 and 14). p. 2-3) and in various presentations in its derivative literature. Tibetan xylograph edition. p. Phag mo rnam bshad. 22. Pawo Tsuklak Trengwa.101F. chs.” 20. 6. 14. 13. [This] is the basic text (dper) of creation and completion.” 24. such as Lūyīpāda’s Herukābhisamaya. 212 15. and brought it out (to Tibet). and in exegetical literature. which appears in embryonic form in the Cakrasaṁvaratantra (e.. Takpo Tashi Namgyal 1986. the Saṁvarodayatantra (e. ff. mdo sngags gnyis ka las logs su gyur pa’i gseng lam zhig yin par bzhed cing.g. 114a3-4: rje sgam po pa nyid kyi phyag bzhes ltar smin byed kyi dbang bskur mi dgos shing/ 18.12. 96. Ibid. 6-7 in general and 109 in particular: “We will see how Vajravārāhī’s maṇḍala is carefully adapted from the sixty-two-deity maṇḍala of Cakrasaṁvara. 213. f. English 2002. Lus med mkha’ ‘gro’i chos sde’i rnam par bshad pa chos kyi nying khu   25  .. f.g. Rumtek. paṭalas 6-8). 25..g. p. 23..2a2-3) it says “yi ge bris pa’i dpe byang bu zhig rnyed de spyan drangs pas bskye rdzogs gnyis kyi dper snang. 16. Jamgön Kongtrul Lodrö Tayé 2007.. See Takpo Tashi Namgyal 1986. chs.g. p. 8 and 13). chs. Tsang Nyön Heruka 1982. vs. This would seem more like: “Marpa found a labeled text written in Singhalese letters in vermilion on Palmyra leaves. 19. 112. 101a2-6) īphyis kyi sgrub brgyud pa dag gis/ mdo snags gnyis ka dang sgo bstun pa’i dbang du byas nas/ smin byed du dbang dgos pa dang sngon ‘gro’i skor dang. Ibid 112. p.. 108b-110b. pp. the Abhidhānottaratantra (e.. 17. such as the Yoginīsaṁcāratantra (e. Ibid. or label”. 6-7.

de yang rgyud dang mthun na blang du rung Find in Sakyapa 30. 1: 1-8 of the mahāmudrā collection Nges don phyag rgya chen po khrid mdzod (TBRC W23447). 2005. Nirūpata rNal ‘byor pa. “Drub pa” does not seem to mean siddhas here. 34. ibid. p. Skt. and (5) gSang ba gnyis su med pa’i rgyud. p. 27. Aprasahaprakāza. 5/f. gZhon nu dpal (BA 856-57) identifies these seven texts written by these figures as fundamental texts of Tantric Buddhist history. These were among the teachings that Vajrapāṇi transmitted to Nepal and Tibet. Skt. Vajra Vidya Institute Library. 29. Also see Schaeffer 2005. Gorampa. 96 (Tibetan p. p. 2217-23. p. 33. 184. Toh. ka 1b1-13b7 (Toh. This is dGe bshes kong ting Gug sri ba. with note 8 on p.). commenting on vs. Ibid. 5. (4) bshad rgyud bSam gyis mi khyab pa). Padma dkar po. 177). Phag rgya chen po’i man ngag gi bshad sbyar rgyal ba’i gan mdzod.2b4: sdom gsum rab dbye’i spyi ti ga byed pa dag thang chad do… and p. Mentioned in Jackson 1994. vol. 31. It appears to be taken off the verse in sDom gsum. 184 says Gorampa attributes this to Lama Shang Tsalpa (1123-1193). 32. 66-67. MañjuŸrīnāmasamgīti. perhaps to suit the argument. Grub pa sde bdun. Also see Deitle’s article (?)   26  . quoted in sDom pa gsum gyi rab tu bye ba’i dris lan lung gi tshad ma ‘khrul spong dgongs rgyan. sNying po skor drug. The quotation here is ‘di la phag mgo la sogs pa’i/ dbang bskur bya ba yod ces zer. 4. n. 52a2-3. 853. sDom pa gsum gyi rab tu dbye ba’i rnam bshad rgyal ba’i gsung rab kyi dgong pa gsal ba. p. Translated by Jared Rhoton in Sakya Pandita 2002. who would predate Sapan (1182-1251). 360) (2) rGyud kyi rgyal po dpal rnyog pa med pa. f. Sakya Pandita 2002 . These are: (1) ‘Jam dpal mtshan brjod. 4/ f. the seven are in Derge Tengyur. f. transmitted by Vajrapāṇi (11th cent. by Glo bo mkhan-chen bsod nams lhun grub (14561532) a Sakya master from Mustang. 28-37.3a1: de dar ba dgag par ‘dod pa 28. 36. 88a-b (p. 851. 35. rgyud vol. Quoted on p. Listed on page 7 and explained in detail on pages 7-28 in Padma dkar po. verse 11). Ibid. but is slightly changed. 295.27. 124. Roerich 1976. 37. DgK. p. (3) rtsa rgyud Rab tu mi gnas pa.

which seems to be the point here. Ga. 5a2-3). (4) That initiation is unnecessary for practice. 73b-   27  . (3) That the erroneous initiation of an indefinite number of neophytes constitutes a maturative rite. (2) that initiation in a defective mandala constitutes a maturative rite. (8) That the three lower classes of tantra are also equipped with the four initiations. According to BA. Kor Nirūpa). 37. Toh. vol. an explanatory tantra of Hevajra. All of them apparently concern yid la mi byed pa. p. rgyud ‘bum. Sakya Pandita Kunga Gyaltshen 2002. f. 42. 40. here is a list of a section of Gorampa’s outline that is superimposed on just a part of Sapaṇ’s verses in A Clear Differentiation: The Refutations of misconceptions about the process of maturation: (1) That a mere blessing may serve as a maturative rite. 41. ff. (Shangpa Texts. Padma Karpo says there are 25. the A-ma-na-si’i skor nyer drug is a set of 26 texts (DgT. then he should search for something better in India. according to Khenpo Trashi (personal communication to ATG). (5)That oblational and meditation-initiatives may serve as maturative rites. it is a strange defense of Kor Nirūpa.K. This was the statement that made Khyungpo Naljor decide to finally go to India. vol. 13. p. rgyud. page 3 7-on. Six of them available in Sanskrit. (10) that four alternatives obtain in initiation and (11) that initiatory pledges need not be kept. (9) That doors to Vajrayāna doctrine other than initiation are available. To give you an idea of the range. 39. twelve-armed manifestation. Roerich 845. 38-42. ff. Padma Karpo also explains three ways to understand the term yid la mi byed pa or amanasi-kara.38. Phag mo’i rnam bshad zab mo rnam ‘byed. Padma Karpo is defending the Bodyless Vajravārāhī. 1. (6) That practice may precede initiation (7) That maturation may be obtained from the master’s body-mandala. 2229-2254) most of which are attributed to Advayavajra (gNyis med rdo rje). 44.e. However the story in the biography confirms the transmissions that were passed on by Kor Nirupa. while according to him Sakya Paṇḍita is attacking the four-faced. Sampuṭanāmamahātantra. nos. Lus med mkha’ ‘gro’i chos sde’i rnam par bshad pa chos kyi nying khu. Since this was a cause for Khyungpo Naljor’s doubts. 3b3-4a1. since he wasn’t interested in common spiritual powers and because if he himself was as good as the greatest siddhī in Tibet (i. See Padma dkar po. ibid. 43. Dg. ibid. all listed in rGyal ba’i gan mdzod. 67. 274.

written by Kāṇha. 381). 369). p. Tsa mi (should be rTswa mi) Sangs rgyas grags pa. the most important commentary on the Hevajra tantra. 1376). abbot of Nālandā in the twelfth century. 46. Toh. 23-25 (ff. 45. p. it is not definite. However the root tantra is also known as Srīheruka-abhidhāna. pp. 49.   28  . This story is also referenced by Tsongkapa in The Great Treatise on the Stages of the Path to Enlightenment (vol. ff. Phag mo’i rnam bshad. 2332) by Telo and Nāro. Phag mo’i rnam bshad. p. 26-28 (ff. Ibid. Shākya Shrībhadra or Kha che paṇ chen Shākya Shrī. 54. 51.12a5-13a2) 52. a Kālachakra master who composed the Yogamālā (sByor ba’i phreng ba. Phreng ba. 48. 53. 74). Ka. Toh. vol.. Dg. 1127-1225. where it is attributed to the King of Absorption Sūtra. 2331) and bKa’ dpe phyi ma (Toh. and since some commentators reverse these two. rGyud ‘bum. could refer to the Yogamālā mentioned above. pp. K.158b (Toh.1. or to theYogaratnamālā (Toh. 290 47.112b5) as being from the earlier and later hapramāṇasamyak (“Kapey Sarnying” Ka dpe gsar rnying?) But that is probably a mistake for jñasamyakpramāṇa (bKa’ yang dag pa’i tshad ma. f. 123 (Phyag chen zla ba’i ‘od zer. respectively. which passed through to Nāropa and Marpa. and Rong po rGa lo (1203-1282?). in his immediate lineage. 25 (f. sDom pa gsum gyi rab tu bye ba’i dris lan lung gi tshad ma ‘khrul spong dgongs rgyan 53b355a1 50.13a4-6). Since this is mentioned as an explanatory tantra (bshad rgyud) it is probably Abhidhānottaratantra. See Jamgön Kongtrul Lodrö Tayé 2007.. 1183). Quoted in Takpo Tashi Namgyal 1986.13b5-14b1). 247a-370a (Toh.

(Reproduced from rare manuscripts from the library of zwa-dmar rin-po-che). rgyud ‘grel. TBRC: W30282 3.   29  . Skt. Bir. 1974. 175-232. Pawo Tsuklak Trengwa (dPa’ bo gtsug lag Phreng ba). TBRC W23651. Rumtek. sDom pa gsum gyi rab tu dbye ba’i rnam bshad rgyal ba’i gsung rab kyi dgong pa gsal ba in vol. Peking 4668. mtsur phu’i grva chen po. sDom pa gsum gyi rab tu bye ba’i dris lan lung gi tshad ma ‘khrul spong dgongs rgyan in vol. Sikkim: Dharmacakra Center.Bibliography Gorampa Sönam Senge (Go rams pa bSod nams seng ge). Phag mo’i rnam bshad /dPal rje btsun rto rje rnal ‘byor ma’i gsang ba’i sgrub thabs kyi rnam par bshad pa zab mo rnam ‘gyed (“Revealing the Profound”) 1. Xylograph copy. A manuscript transcription of an ancient blockprint in the library of Nam mkha’ rdo rje by Kandro. N. 7 of gsung ‘bum/ bsod nams lhun grub. Kangra. 1980. Lowo Khenchen Sonam Lhundrub (Glo bo mkhan-chen bsod nams lhun grub). TBRC W00KG01660. 2009.: Kandro. rDo rje rnal ‘byor ma’i gsang sgrub. _____ sNying po bsdus pa (rDo rje rnal ‘byor ma lhan cig skyes ma’i bsked rim gyi lha khrid rnam bshad zab mo rnam ‘byed kyi snying po bsdus pa) (“Condensed Essence”). Srī Vajrayoginī Guhya Sādhana (“Secret Sadhana”). Dist. in vol. or Srī Vajrayoginī Guhya Sādhanā. Gangtok: dzongsar chhentse labrang. Mahā Nāḍapāda. phu 11a4-13b5.P. Dehra Dun: Sakya College. 1979. dPal rdo rje rnal ‘byor ma’i gsang bsgrub [rdo?] rje btsun mo lhan skyes. TBRC W23702. Printed from 16th century central Tibetan blocks. 2 of Selected Writings of the first zwa-nag karma-pa dus-gsum-mkhyen pa.D. Phag mo’i rnam bshad zab mo rnam ‘gyed. TBRC W11249-0439. 1975. 2. Seattle. H. 9 of The Collected Works of Kun-mkyen Go-rams-pa bsod-nams-seng-ge. ff. Naropa. WA: Nitartha International Publications.

Padma Karpo (pad ma dkar po). Tsangnyon Heruka Rupa’i Gyenchen. New York: AIBS. CBS. Hildegard. 213b.K. Rumtek. 20 (wa) of gsung ‘bum of kun-mkhyen padma-dkar-po. TBRC W10736 _____ Phag rgya chen po’i man ngag gi bshad sbyar rgyal ba’i gan mdzod. “On Maitrīpa and His Cycle of Twenty-five Works on Mental Nonengagement. 2002. n. David B. Tibetan xylograph edition. by Padmākara and Rin chen bZang po. Tantrarāja-Śrīlaghusamvara-nāma. ff. 1973-1974.d. pp. Karl. ENGLISH Brunnhöolzl. Boston: Wisdom Publications. Diemberger. New York: Columbia University Press. Rituals. xylo. rgyud ‘bum. Lus med mkha’ ‘gro’i chos sde’i rnam par bshad pa chos kyi nying khu in vol. Gray. Phyag chen zla ba’i ‘od zer. rgyud kyi rgyal po dpal bde mchog nyung ngu zhes bya ba. Life of Milarepa. Ku lu mun li ci ṭa ri’I sgrub sde. THUS.When a Woman Becomes a Religious Dynasty: The Samding Dorje Phagmo of Tibet. 381). 2005.   30  . Toh 368. Takpo Tashi Namgyal. 2007. 2007. and Forms. NY: Snow Lion Publications.125-190. vol. Dg.” In Straight from the Heart: Buddhist Pith Instructions. Sampuṭanāmamahātantra. 2007. English. Trans. 73b-158b (Toh. 108b110b. Darjeeling: Kargyud Sungrab Nyamso Khang. Ithaca. Ga. Elizabeth. vol Ka.246b. ff. Vajra Vidya Institute Library. rNal ‘byor gyi dbang phyug dam pa rje btsun mi la ras pa’i rnam thar thar pa dang thams cad mkhyen pa’i lam ston. Vajrayoginī: Her Visualizations. The Cakrasamvara Tantra (The Discourse of ⁄rī Heruka): A Study and Annotated Translation. rgyud ‘bum. Including Sahajavajra’s Commentary on the Ten Stanzas on True Reality. Dg.K.

“Where Exactly Are Caritra. A Clear Differentiation of the Three Codes: Essential Disstinctions among the Individual Liberation. PIATS 2003: Tibetan Studies: Proceedings of the Tenth seminar of the International Association for Tibetan Studies. Lopez. The Life of Marpa the Translator. Volume II The Medieval period: c. 2007.850-1895. ed. 2003. Mathes. Translated by Jared Douglas Rhoton. pp. Nālandā Translation Committee. Jamgön Kongtrul Lodrö Tayé. 2007.” in Tibetan Buddhist Literature and Praxis: Studies in its Formative Period. London: Routledge Taylor and Francis Group. David. Devikota and Himavat? A Sacred Geography Controversy and the Development of Tantric Buddhist Pilgrimage Sites in Tibet” in A. The Treasury of Knowledge. Lobsang P. Wien: Verlag. New York: Arkana. 1994. The Development of Buddhist Paramountcy. Book Eight Part Four. Toni. 221-227. 392-424.) The History of Tibet. George. 900-1400. Jackson. and Tantric Systems (sDom gsum rab dbye). Oxford: pp. Der Österreichischen Akaddemie der Wissenschaften. Roerich. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass. Translated by Sarah Harding. Sakya Pandita Kunga Gyaltshen. trans. 2nd. Esoteric Instructions. Edited by Donald S. The Blue Annals. Lhalungpa. NY: Snow Lion Publications. Roberts. The Life of Milarepa. Klaus-Dieter 2003. Enlightenment by a Single Means: Tibetan Controversies on the “SelfSufficient White Remedy” (dkar po chig thub). London: RoutledgeCurzon. Boulder: Prajñā Press. ____1997. 1992. 2002. 1949/1976. New Jersey: Princeton University Press. 1982. McKay (Hg. The Biographies of Rechungpa: The Evolution of a Tibetan Hagiography. 137-56. “Blending the Sūtras with the Tantras: The Influence of Maitrīpa and his circle on the Formation of Sūtra Mahāmudrā in the Kagyu Schools.   31  . Great Vehicle. trans. Peter Alan. “The Life of Tilopa” in Religions of Tibet in Practice. New York: State University of New York Press.Huber. Jr. Ithaca.

2005. Mahāmudrā: the Quintessence of Mind and Meditation. Translated by Lobsang P.Sakya Pandita. Davenport. Kurtis R. Tibetan xylograph edition. Rumtek. 2000. 1986. Boston & London: Shambhala. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Dreaming the Great Brahmin: Tibetan Traditions of the Buddhist PoetSaint Saraha. Boston: Wisdom Publications. NY: Snow Lion Publications. Stewart. Translated by John T. Schaeffer. Takpo Tashi Namgyal. Ordinary Wisdom: Sakya Pandita’s Treasury of Good Advice. The Life of Gampopa: Incomparable Dharma Lord of Tibet.   32  . Ithaca. 1995. Lhalungpa. Jampa Mackenzie.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful