lines as before 1959, was indeed unable to maintain its rule in the same
terms over an exile population of much more mixed religious denom-
inations and regional origins. This was not without sometimes violent
tensions, which could not be fully resolved until the end of the 20th
century despite all the skill of the 14th Dalai Lama. His constant con-
cern was twofold: on the one hand, to secure the support of the inter-
national community for the Tibetan cause; on the other, to preserve the
unity of the Tibetan people against those who could understand it only
in the context of their chimera of mass conversion to a single state re-
ligion—the Gelug school, as understood by its exclusivist elements.

The situation cannot be fully understood without discussing the lit-
tle-studied question of the funding of the various branches of Tibetan
religion in exile. What had been a quasi-feudal system in Tibet, with
land allotted to monasteries to ensure the monks' subsistence or even
with support from the central state, had to be replaced by a system
based purely on patronage. Its main sources were (and still are) either
in the wider Chinese world (Taiwan...) or in the West. In this context,
the lamas who were most adept at securing funding from foreign
sponsors (such as Düjom Rinpoché) could be perceived or portrayed
by their enemies as traitors to the Tibetan cause.

These are the background elements that must be considered to un-
derstand the spirit in which Düjom Rinpoché wrote *The Nyingma
School of Tibetan Buddhism*. For the man who had become the head of a
school that was regaining its freedom in turmoil, with the power of a
large popular following and an abundance of resources provided by
foreign disciples, the time was perhaps not ripe for extreme precision.
In this text, Düjom Rinpoché has undoubtedly sacrificed some of his
immense erudition to the need to produce a standard historical ac-
count and doctrinal synthesis sufficiently simple and consensual to en-
able the federation of the Nyingma school. Indeed, this school, more
than other Tibetan currents, had been characterized over the centuries
by factionalism and even outright anarchy. The Nyingmapas had
never lived under a unified central authority. The story remains to be
told, however, of the balances that had to be struck between the vari-
ous currents of central and eastern Tibet within the now unified
Nyingma school, not to mention the ways in which Tibetans had to
deal with the reality of Tibetan Buddhism outside Tibet, in the Hima-
layas, of which they were not necessarily fully aware or well in-
formed.<fnref n="1" />

<footnote n="1">¹ One might also wonder whether bDud 'joms *rin po che* owed part of his position, in addition to his immense personal talents, to the fact that he was both a man trained in the best traditions of central Tibet and the *sprul sku* of an eastern Tibetan master (bDud 'joms gling pa, 1835–1904), whose</footnote>
Now that the reader is aware of the context in which *The Nyingma School of Tibetan Buddhism* was written, a sketch of the history of the Nyingmapas from the introduction of Buddhism into Tibet to the time of Rigdzin Gödem, as presented in this source, will be more in order.

## An Overview of Düjom Rinpoché's Global Narrative

First of all, the Nyingmapas, contrary to what most other schools of Tibetan Buddhism officially<fnref n="1" /> believe, do not regard Buddha Śākyamuni as the only or even the main source of Buddhism in our world. Instead, there is a strong focus on a primordial Buddha Küntuzangpo, or All-Good, Samantabhadra,<fnref n="2" /> whose teachings are described as having been mystically transmitted to various celestial beings in the otherworldly realms before reaching ours through various channels.<fnref n="3" />

Düjom Rinpoché summarizes—largely on the basis of Rigdzin Pema Trinlé's (1641–1717) *The Biographies for the Sūtra Initiation Lineage*—the way in which the three classes of “inner tantras” were transmitted through masters belonging to the Indian world in a broad sense (including Nepal, Kashmir, etc.): the Mahāyoga lineages come first (pp. 458-484),<fnref n="4" /> then the Anuyoga (pp. 485-489), then the Atiyoga or Dzogchen (pp. 490-501).

revelations had many followers not only in Central Tibet but far and wide in the Himalayas.

<footnote n="1">¹ The conviction is perhaps more sincere in the dGe lugs school and less consistent in the others, which may trace some of their tantric teachings to the visions of realized beings who are not always said to merely rediscover and reveal teachings originating in the historical Buddha's predication.</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² Gyurme Dorje and Kapstein 1991, pp. 447-450. This is the "contemplative transmission (or Mind-transmission) of the Victors" (rgyal ba dgongs brgyud). The commonly accepted translation (or retro-translation) of Kun tu bzang po by the Sanskrit "Samantabhadra" is somewhat problematic, since we do not have any truly Indian text with a Primordial Buddha Samantabhadra. In all attested Indian Buddhist literature, Samantabhadra is always only a bodhisattva. However, we have bowed to the prevailing usage and adopted "Samantabhadra" everywhere as the equivalent of Kun tu bzang po.</footnote>

<footnote n="3">³ Gyurme Dorje and Kapstein 1991, p. 451. The exalted individuals through whom the teachings reached our world first transmitted them through what is called the "Symbolic Lineage of the Awareness Holders" (rig 'dzin bdra brgyud, ibid., pp. 453-456) before they were passed on in a more ordinary form that Gyurme Dorje calls the "Aural Lineage of [Mundane] Individuals" (gang zag snyan brgyud, ibid., pp. 456-457).</footnote>

<footnote n="4">⁴ This passage is in fact divided into two narratives: one for the general transmission (pp. 458-474) and one for each of the *Eight Pronouncements* (pp. 475-484). General information on the *Eight Pronouncements* will be</footnote>
In the second part of the Mahāyoga section we find the idea of eight sages called the Eight Vidyādharas, each of whom is the main repository of one of the *Eight Pronouncements (bKa' brgyad)*. Padmasam-bhava's quest for these eight teachings and the way in which he became the unique central master of them all is one of the recurring themes of his revealed biographies.

All of this Indian background to the Nyingma tantric traditions is very poorly documented. In the present state of research, it is generally impossible to discern from these traditional narratives what may refer to factual reality, although there is no strong reason to discard them as a whole (as some hypercritical representatives of the “neo-conservative orthodox”<fnref n="1" /> trend of the second spread of Buddhism in Tibet have imprudently dared to do).<fnref n="2" />

Following this general Indian background, Düjom Rinpoché presents the political situation in Tibet at the time of the “Three Ancestral Religious Kings”: Songtsen Gampo,<fnref n="3" /> Trisong Detsen<fnref n="4" /> and Ralpachen.<fnref n="5" />

After a few elements of Buddhism spread in Tibet under Emperor Songtsen Gampo, says Düjom Rinpoché, his fifth successor, Emperor

found in our vol. 2, in the description of rGod ldem's *bKa' brgyad rang byung rang shar*.

<footnote n="1">¹ On “neoconservative orthodoxy,” see Davidson 2008, pp. 151-154.</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² Despite the above-quoted statement about “the out of hand and often contemptuous dismissal by Western scholars of important elements of Tibetan religious culture both ancient and modern (...) and the reductionism with which such scholars explain them according to their often unexamined philosophical assumptions,” it must be said that the most violent reductionist attacks on the rNying ma pas’ reconstruction of their Indian tantric lineage were actually made by Tibetan purists. Their method, somewhat ruthless from the point of view of our academic philology, was to assume that *whatever they had the Sanskrit originals of was authentic*, while *whatever they did not have or could not decipher the Sanskrit originals of was dubious, if not probably fabricated by the Tibetans themselves*. Other, more interesting arguments focused on the inclusion of purely Tibetan elements (typically on the side of demonology) in texts supposedly translated from Indian languages. However, these arguments themselves demonstrate at most the presence of *additions* in these tantric texts. Many well-known examples show that such texts were never well fixed in India either but, on the contrary, were in constant evolution. From this point of view, the argument is not conclusive: above all, it shows that the idea of enriching texts over the generations was *not yet* considered anathema during the first centuries of Buddhism in Tibet, and only became so at the time (around the 14th century) when the Indian source dried up and the Tibetans wanted to compile a single, definitive canon.</footnote>

<footnote n="3">³ Srong btsan sgam po, ca. 609/623–650.</footnote>

<footnote n="4">⁴ Khri srong lde'u btsan, reigned ca. 740/755–797.</footnote>

<footnote n="5">⁵ Ral pa can, ca. 806 CE–838.</footnote>
Trisong Detsen, invited to Tibet the Indian master Śantarakṣita. But it
is said that the building of the Samyé monastery met with obstacles:
Tibetan spirits resisted the introduction of Buddhism. This made the
invitation of Padmasambhava necessary in order to tame them. After
these obstacles were overcome thanks to Padmasambhava's power,
Emperor Trisong Detsen could invite to Tibet a large number<fnref n="1" /> of Bud-
dhist masters from India and various other places, <fnref n="2" /> including
Vimalamitra.<fnref n="3" />

These Indian (etc.) masters then started a systematic work of trans-
lation, under the patronage of Emperor Trisong Detsen, seen as both
the patron and, in a sense, the regulator of this enormous task, since
Tibetans envision him going so far as to issue rules for the standardi-
zation of Buddhist terminology. The result was a considerable mass of
texts in Tibetan translation, both exoteric (or even technical) and tan-
tric. These "old translations" formed the core of the so-called "Old
School,"<fnref n="4" /> as opposed to those that emerged during the Tibetan renaissance in the 11th century. Trisong Detsen is also seen (by both the Tibetans and the Bönpos) as having proscribed the Bön religion in favor of Buddhism.<fnref n="5" />

<footnote n="1">¹ In the most developed of the revealed biographies of Padmasambhava from the 14th and the 15th centuries, one reads dozens of names of masters and scholars invited from all the countries around Tibet (not only the Indian world) and lists of the texts they translated in association with Tibetan translators whose names are given too. Such a list of translated texts (in French) with their Tibetan translators and the *panditas* who guided them can be found, e.g., in Toussaint 1933, pp. 330-338.</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² The *bKa' thang* literature insists on the fact that they came from all over Asia and insist on the idea that texts were translated from all sorts of languages, including Chinese, etc.—an idea that tended to be rejected by later neoconservative orthodoxy.</footnote>

<footnote n="3">³ He is the only case of an Indian master other than Padmasambhava being presented as the source of texts included in Rig 'dzin rGod Idem's revelations. Part of the *dGongs pa zang thal* (see description in vol. 2, in the section about rGod Idem's works) is said to be an "oral transmission" stemming from him, although a consistent narrative seems to be lacking about the way in which sNa nam rDo rje bdud 'joms received these teachings and about how they were compiled as a single corpus to be hidden together in Zang zang lha brag to be later rediscovered by Rig 'dzin rGod Idem.</footnote>

<footnote n="4">⁴ This is what is meant by the phrase “Old [school of the] earlier translations” (snga ’gyur rnying ma).</footnote>

<footnote n="5">⁵ From a more critical point of view, Bon is rather a Tibetan religion that emerged in the so-called "dark age" between the collapse of the Imperial dynasty (ca. 842) and the "Tibetan Renaissance" in the 11th century. Its connections with an earlier non-stricto sensu Buddhist religion that would have existed prior to the introduction of Buddhism in the 8th century are</footnote>
Düjom Rinché then contents himself with a brief evocation of a
persecution of Buddhism in Tibet by the Emperor Langdarma,<fnref n="1" /> fol-
lowed by a rebirth in the 11th century, contemporary with the second
spread of Buddhism, while alluding throughout the text to a number
of elements that are quite inconsistent with this idea of a "dark age" of
virtual extinction of Buddhism in Tibet. The Nyingmapas have indeed
internalized this idea of persecution followed by the virtual extinction
or complete degeneration of Buddhism in Tibet, which is so damaging
to their claim of uninterrupted oral lineages since imperial times.
There is every reason to believe that the cause lies with the tertön lin-
eages, which had to justify their activities by portraying Padmasam-
bhava as having foreseen the persecution and hidden the most pro-
found teachings so that they could be preserved and survive the long
Dharma winter intact as seeds in the frozen ground, so to speak.

In this respect, the Nyingmapas tend to do two contradictory things at once. On the one hand, they insist on the excesses of the later tradition in its neo-conservative orthodox version, which wants to believe that Buddhism in Tibet had died out or had completely decayed before its reintroduction by the masters of the second diffusion. On the other hand, they recycle this neo-conservative orthodox discourse insofar as it legitimizes the discovery of the termas, perhaps with a polemical intention directed against the resistance of the upholders of the lineages of uninterrupted Oral Tradition. This is not mere speculation: as already mentioned, Gö Lotsāwa's *Blue Annals*, although compiled as late as the fifteenth century, testify to a surprising state of affairs in which the Kama lineages are widely presented without any discussion of their authenticity and as quite flourishing, while the Terma traditions are almost ignored.

This shows that the present situation, in which a Nyingmapa who
would deny the authority or value of the termas as a whole is some-
thing unimaginable, is the result of a process that may not have
reached its full maturity before Ratna Lingpa (1403–1478), who ap-
pears, on the one hand, as the first compiler of a comprehensive

unknown and hence, although it is possible that the conversion of Tibet to
Buddhism implied a limitation put to previously existing ritual practices,
it is difficult to believe that what was maybe suppressed by Khri srong
Ide'u btsan was exactly what was revived as the organized Bon religion as
we know it. However, a vision of the Bon canon as being a collection of
plagiarized Buddhist texts would be overly simplistic, as it can be shown
that Buddhists also borrowed from Bon sources, in such a way that the
formation of the Bon religion and the rNying ma school of Tibetan Bud-
dhism is to some extent a perfect example of "dependent origination"—a
mutually dependent production.

<footnote n="1">¹ Glang dar ma, r. 838–842. Gyurme Dorje and Kapstein 1991, pp. 523-527.</footnote>
Nyingma tantric canon and, on the other, as an accomplished tertön himself.

Before we return to a discussion of Düjom Rinpoché's *The Nyingma School of Tibetan Buddhism* (below in chapter 6), let us complete and discuss this first aspect of his narrative.

❖
# Chapter 5: The Padmasambhava Epic and the Standard
Explanation of the Termas

Stéphane Arguillère

(IFRAE / Inalco)

In addition to translating texts, another outcome of the activities of Padmasambhava and the other foreign masters was the training of disciples who then carried on the tradition. The narrative that has become standard in the Nyingma school emphasizes Padmasambhava's twenty-five disciples as the main channels through which the tradition was passed on to later generations. These masters trained disciples, thus establishing transmission lines that continued as unbroken lineages of masters and disciples up to the present day, which the Nyingmapas call the "uninterrupted Oral Tradition."<fnref n="1" />

A careful study of the oldest sources, as we shall see, tends to show that over the centuries all the memories of the Nyingmapas have been organized into a grand synthetic narrative with Padmasambhava as the central figure. Many of the elements presented in the revealed biographies of Padmasambhava<fnref n="2" /> certainly have some historical value, but it is not uncommon to find elements in older sources that contradict some aspects of the grand narrative. The main flaw of the revealed biographies of Padmasambhava as historiographical sources, to put it in a nutshell, is an excessive unification of all the perhaps genuinely factual elements they may contain. Everything revolves around Padmasambhava alone, and almost everything takes place at the court of Emperor Trisong Detsen, much like the novels of the Round Table Cycle. This leads to many anachronisms and factual errors.

It would indeed make sense to propose a literary study of these biographies, drawing parallels between Trisong Detsen and King Arthur, and Padmasambhava and Merlin. The comparison also works in the sense that on both sides we have a literary genre that has remained productive for centuries, with numerous authors taking up the same characters, and so on. The difference, however, is that the "Padmasambhava Cycle" contains much more genuine historical information. In a sense, these texts could be called historical novels: if they contain many inaccuracies, it is not so much because they *invent facts*, but because their central purpose is to *make sense of scattered events*, to give a unified, clear meaning to what must have been much more chaotic and shapeless in reality. The revealed biographies of Padmasambhava turn a

<footnote n="1">¹ *bKa' ma*.</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² The various *bka' thang*.</footnote>
forest of small, unrelated circumstances into a stirring, easily under-
stood epic, although in reality these facts probably did not present
themselves as a coherent whole that would be satisfactory to the dev-
otee.

These narratives provide the framework for the beliefs associated
with the termas (gter ma). As we have seen above, the Nyingmapas
believe that many tantric teachings were also hidden as "treasures,"
either in a material form as texts buried in caves and other places from
which they were later retrieved, or sometimes in the deep layers of the
mind streams of his disciples. In a way that seems to have become
more systematic over the centuries, the treasures discoverers were
considered to be the reincarnations of Padmasambhava's direct disci-
ples. It was believed that they had then authentically received the
transmissions of the texts they would later rediscover. In this way,
proper master-disciple transmission of the hidden treasures—crucial
in a tantric Buddhist context where no one can officially start a new
teaching and where everything one teaches is supposed to have been
received from one's masters—would be guaranteed by their recollec-
tion of the past life during which these teachings were received from
Padmasambhava and a few other masters.

It is interesting to note,<fnref n="1" /> however, that in the earliest biographical
materials about Rigdzin Gödem, there is no explicit allusion to such
recollection. It can be said to be implicit, in that, as we have just seen,
it is indeed mentioned that in the 8th century, when Padmasambhava
was in Tibet, Rigdzin Gödem was Nanam Dorjé Düjom, one of his
twenty-five disciples. In this context, as we have read in the previous
chapters, the Northern Treasures would be teachings he received from
Padmasambhava and which he retrieved in the 14th century when he
was reborn as Rigdzin Gödem.

However, in the original documents, there is no mention of Rigdzin
Gödem *remembering* the time when he received these teachings, as we
have with some later tertöns.<fnref n="2" /> In its fullest and most characteristic

<footnote n="1">¹ This thoughtful comment was originally made by Jay Valentine on an earlier version of this chapter. This paragraph and the two next ones are a summary of a discussion at the FCHNT weekly seminar, based on Jay Valentine's suggestion.</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² For comparison, we can refer to gTer ston rDo rje gling pa (1346–1405), who was practically a contemporary of Rig ’dzin rGod ldem and who left behind much more autobiographical material (mainly collected in volume 11 of rDo rje gling pa 2009). When we look at this material, we notice two things. First, he clearly and strongly identifies himself with Vairocana (Bee ro tsa na), the translator. Second, he hardly reports any memories from his past life as Vairocana. He is the reincarnation of Vairocana, so he has</footnote>
form, such an idea may belong to a later stage in the development of Nyingma thought. The idea that memories are awakened at the time of terma discovery may be one of those posterior ideas that we anachronistically think we have read in texts where we merely *expected* to find them.

In the context of Rigdzin Gödem’s early biographies, much more emphasis is placed on following the prophetic instructions of the guides and his dreams. In Rigdzin Gödem’s time, we are still in an atmosphere of treasure hunting in physical places where the texts and other blessed items are *materially* concealed. Of course, these hidden treasures are protected in such a way that they can only be accessed—or safely accessed—by magical means. However, when early sources speak of “fake tertöns,” they are not always referring to *people who produce fake materials*, but often to *daring adventurers who try to make a name for themselves by unearthing works that they were not predestined<fnref n="1" /> to reveal*. It was clearly considered possible at some point to produce terma material that was authentic as such, but without the full legitimacy to do so, which to some extent also challenges the theory based on memory of received teachings.

We lack a global narrative that would explain how the Northern Treasures were originally concealed as a collection that possessed some form of unity—be it an internal consistency that made it as a whole a self-sufficient system for practice, or otherwise, for example, as a corpus prophesied to meet some specific needs. In the present living tradition of the Northern Treasures, there is indeed such a sense of insularity, of being something specific and somewhat isolated within the wider Nyingma family. But this seems to have more to do with the fact that the Northern Treasures is one of the few ancient institutions of the Nyingma school of Tibetan Buddhism that has managed not to return to the common fold after so many centuries.

The original core of the Northern Treasures was later supplemented by further revelations from the subsequent reincarnations of Rigdzin Gödem<fnref n="2" /> and by a few other treasure revealers,<fnref n="3" /> as well as the legacy of

authority over the discovered texts, but the theme of recollection is absent or barely present.

<footnote n="1">¹ *sKal ldan*. This term is often translated as "fortunate beings," but *skal* is actually *the share one is entitled to* in a distribution (e.g., an inheritance). So the *skal ldan* are not just "fortunate," they are actually predestined—not by divine choice, for sure, but by their course in previous lives.</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² In our reference corpus (CNT 2015): *Rig 'dzin* Legs ldan rje's (or bDud 'joms rdo rje, 1452?-1565) revelations in vol. 33 and *Rig 'dzin* sKal bzang padma dbang phyug's (ca. 1720-1771) in vols. 53-54.</footnote>

<footnote n="3">³ In our reference corpus (CNT): part of bsTan gnyis gling pa's revelations (1480-1535—the *Lung phag mo zab rgya*, in vol. 17); those of mNga' ris *pan*</footnote>
the uninterrupted Oral Tradition,<fnref n="1" /> and some other major terma cycles<fnref n="2" /> that were originally unrelated to Rigdzin Gödem.

<figure><img src="image_9.png" /></figure>

chen Padma dbang rgyal (1487–1542, in vols. 30-32 and 34), of Byang bdag bKra shis stobs rgyal (1550–1602, in vol. 35) and of Gar dbang rdo rje (1640–1685, in vol. 16). To some extent, the *Secret Visions* of the Fifth Dalai Lama (1617–1682) can be considered Byang gter in a broader sense, but they have not been included in CNT 2015 (perhaps because the transmission has become rare). In the same way, the 'Khor gdong monastery masters envision their New Treasure (*gter gsar*: those of 'Khor gdong *gter chen* Nus Idan rdo rje, 1802–1864 and of mGon po dbang rgyal, 1845–1912) as belonging to the Northern Treasures in the sense that all of those who practice them do so within an otherwise fully Byang gter framework—but since this has not become the common system in rDo rje brag, they are also not included in CNT.

<footnote n="1">¹ Not included in CNT—common rNying ma material that did not require reediting.</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² In our reference corpus: rGya zhang khrom's (11th century) 'Jam dpal tshe bdag (vols. 18-27) and Padma las 'brel rtsal's (1291–1319) gZa' rgyud (vols. 28-29). In an 8-vol. collection of Byang gter ritual materials, the sNga 'gyur byang gter chos skor las 'don cha'i skor (supposed to be the complete rDo rje brag liturgy) published in Shimla in 1997–, another well-represented cycle is Karma gling pa's (14th century) Zab chos zhi khro dgongs pa rang grol (vol. 7). However, the way and historical period in which it was inherited by the rDo rje brag masters is so far undocumented (this point is discussed below). The Hayagrīva cycle revealed bu rGya gong ri pa gter ston Sangs rgyas dbang chen was also included under the name rTa mgrin gsang sgrub (sNga 'gyur byang gter chos skor las 'don cha'i skor, s.d., 2000?, vol. 3, pp. 193-212). See below for more detail.</footnote>
# Chapter 6: An Overview of the Kama and Terma Traditions up to Rigdzin Gödem's Time According to Düjom Rinpoché

Stéphane Arguillère
(IFRAE / Inalco)

If we now return to Düjom Rinpoché's history of the Nying-mapas, we come to the part that interests us most: the history of the Nyingma tradition in Tibet after Padmasambhava and his direct disciples,<fnref n="1" /> which is basically divided into two major sections. The first is devoted to the uninterrupted oral lineages,<fnref n="2" /> while the second one deals with the hidden treasures.<fnref n="3" /> This division becomes rather artificial at a certain point,<fnref n="4" /> since the two streams merge into one school in which there are no longer practitioners of the Kama who are not also practitioners of various termas, while it also becomes clear to all (if it was ever in doubt) that the Kama should be regarded as the background and reference for the termas.

The Kama section is divided according to the three inner classes of tantra, beginning with the Atiyoga, which is further divided into its sections: “The Mental and Spatial Classes”<fnref n="5" /> together, with curiously

<footnote n="1">¹ Gyurme Dorje and Kapstein 1991, pp. 529-880.</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² *Ibid.*, pp. 529-739. For some reason, the corresponding title does not appear until p. 597, i.e., after the chapter on rDzogs chen, even though this chapter deals mostly with materials considered to belong to bKa' ma. The status of the *Bi ma snying thig* is somewhat ambiguous in this regard: its texts are said to have been hidden and rediscovered many times, but not in a way that resembles the “Padmasambhavian” *gter chos*. This chapter concludes with Klong chen rab 'byams (1308–1364).</footnote>

<footnote n="3">³ *Op. cit.*, pp. 741-880.</footnote>

<footnote n="4">⁴ Probably around Ratna gling pa's (1403–1478) time—just after rGod Idem's death—as he appears to be the main artisan of this final integration of the two lines or styles in the rNying ma tradition. This remains to be researched, and there is much material available, including extensive biographies of Ratna gling pa. This figure, incidentally, is of key importance to us because, although later masters of the Northern Treasures fully adhered to the spirit of what we can imagine was his synthesis, Ratna gling pa, for some reason (perhaps simply because he had no access to them), did not include Byang gter materials in the Nyingma tantric canon (*rNying ma rgyud 'bum*), despite the fact that it is full of other *gter ma* scriptures.</footnote>

<footnote n="5">⁵ This refers to *sems sde* and *klong sde*, the “Mind Series” and “Space Series” according to the terminology adopted in our volumes.</footnote>
few elements after Dzeng Dharmabodhi<fnref n="1" /> and his 12th-century disci-
ples; and then "The Esoteric Instructional Class of Atiyoga, Innermost
Spirituality,"<fnref n="2" /> itself divided into a Padmasambhava tradition—in fact,
transmitted only through the hidden treasures—and a Vimalamitra
tradition, which is the one actually described in this chapter.<fnref n="3" /> The au-
thor presents the two of them as culminating in Rigdzin Gödem's older
contemporary, Longchen Rabjam (1308–1364), whose biography he
presents in some detail.<fnref n="4" />

Then begins an account of the Kama tantric lineages, which, in the translation, is curiously titled "The Distant Lineage of Transmitted Precepts." Its eleven sub-sections deal with 1. "The Lineage of Nyak"; 2. "The Lineage of Nup"; 3. "The Lineage of the Zur Family"; 4. "Biographies of the Rog Tradition"; 5. "Dotokpa's Lineage of the Zur Tradition"; 6. "Biographies of the Kham Tradition"; 7. "Miscellaneous Lineages of the Zur and Kham Tradition"; 8. A biography of Rongzom Chökyi Zangpo; 9. "The Traditions of Vajrakīla"; 10. "The Lineages of the Empowerment of the Sūtra which Gathers All Intention"; and 11. "Later Lineages of the Transmitted Precepts". It would be inappropriate to present all this history here; we can assume that the reader is familiar with it from Düjom Rinpoché and content ourselves with adding or correcting it in the next chapter, based on Rigdzin Pema Trinlé's *The Biographies for the Sūtra Initiation Lineage*.

Then comes the presentation of the hidden treasures, which consists
of two parts: a general presentation of the terma system, followed by
short biographies of twenty-four tertöns. The most important of these

<footnote n="1">¹ 'Dzeng sgom Dharmabodhi (1052–1168). Although the lineage of these teachings never completely died out, they were perceived as less interesting when the *sNying thig* systems came to the fore.</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² *rDzogs chen snying thig*. "Heart Drops of Great Perfection" according to our terminology. Note that bDud 'joms rin po che ignores the non-*snying thig* sections of the *man ngag sde*. They are admittedly poorly documented in terms of historiography.</footnote>

<footnote n="3">³ Gyurme Dorje and Kapstein 1991, pp. 554-575. This division, leaving aside any discussion of its historical value, is important at least as a doxographic point or as a name for two different, though complementary, groups of texts. In the specific Northern Treasures tradition, we'll find a slightly different idea: that of three different "oral transmissions" (*snyan brgyud*), adding a Vairocana tradition to the Padmasambhava and Vimalamitra branches of the *sNying thig* teachings.</footnote>

<footnote n="4">⁴ *Op. cit.*, pp. 575-596. We will return to this figure below, for although Klong chen pa and Rig 'dzin rGod Idem most likely never met, it is reasonable to assume that the latter was aware of the former's existence and of the importance of his work, though certainly not of their precise content.</footnote>
for our purposes are Nyangral Nyima Özer (pp. 755-759),<fnref n="1" /> Guru Chöwang (p. 760-770) and his consort Jomo Menmo (pp. 771-774), and then of course Rigdzin Gödem himself (pp. 780-783). Orgyen Lingpa (pp. 775-779),<fnref n="2" /> Sangyé Lingpa (1340–1396; pp. 784-788)<fnref n="3" /> and Dorjé

<footnote n="1">¹ See below for a brief account of Nyang ral Nyi ma 'od zer and Hirshberg 2016 for more detail. His importance has already been stressed as regards the construction of a grand unified rNying ma historical narrative through his *bKa' thang zangs gling ma*, to which we could add his *Chos 'byung me tog snying po*, although its authenticity is disputed—precisely because its historical assumptions sometimes contradict the *bKa' thang*. In addition, his major *gter ma* cycle *bKa' brgyad bde gshegs 'dus pa*, unlike the later *Eight Pro-nouncements* cycles (like Rig 'dzin rGod Idem's), is full of rich doctrinal material which must also have contributed to the structuring of ideas among the rNying ma pas.</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² Yar rje O rgyan gling pa, 1323–ca. 1355. The date of his death is unknown, but it is said to have occurred soon after a conflict with Ta’i si tu Byang chub rgyal mtshan, who gained full power over central Tibet around 1350. Dan Martin (1997, p. 56, no. 87) argues that the colophon of the *Padma bka’ thang*—a text that includes an injurious prophecy about Byang chub rgyal mtshan—suggests it was written in 1352. We can assume that the whole plot of Ta’i si tu Byang chub rgyal mtshan’s anger, O rgyan gling pa’s flight to the south, and his subsequent death likely took place over the course of a few years. Moreover, Klong chen pa’s exile in Bhutan was around 1354 and his return around 1360: these are likely to be the years when the tam-ing of the unruly rNying ma pas took place. We can then assume that O rgyan gling pa died between 1354 and 1360, probably closer to 1354. For Northern Treasures studies, the only relevant issue would be to know whether Rig ‘dzin rGod Idem was aware of his *Padma bka’ thang* or *bKa’ thang shel brag ma*, which is a much larger and more comprehensive Pad-masambhava narrative than Nyang ral’s *bKa’ thang zangs gling ma*. No ev-idence of this has yet been found and, curiously enough, although the *bKa’ thang shel brag ma* in the form in which we have it (“the most popular re-cension,” as Doney 2016 calls it, explaining the 16th-century alterations of the original text) prophesies masters contemporary with (Rin chen gling pa, Klong chen pa, etc.) or even much later (e.g., bsTan gnyis gling pa) than rGod Idem. However, himself does not seem to be the subject of any pre-diction.</footnote>

<footnote n="3">³ Cf. Doney 2016. A thorough study of Sangs rgyas gling pa’s autobiog-raphy (Sangs rgyas gling pa 2006, sPrul sku sangs rgyas gling pa’i gter ‘byung chen mo) would be a valuable contribution to our understanding of *gter stons’* activities in the time of Rig ‘dzin rGod Idem. Doney 2016, pp. 72-73, n. 13, summarizes a whole controversy about the relationship between the *bKa’ thang* of O rgyan gling pa and that of Sangs rgyas gling pa, which began between Emil Schlagintweit (1899) and Berthold Laufer (1911) and ended with Vostrikov (1994 [orig. pub. 1936]), to which Anne-Marie Blondeau (1980) gave an epilogue. Preliminary research in the *gTer ‘byung chen mo* did not show any trace of Rig ‘dzin rGod Idem. The above-</footnote>
Lingpa (1346–1405; pp. 789-792)<fnref n="1" /> are of interest to us as contemporaries of Rigdzin Gödem. Among the later ones, Ratna Lingpa (1403–1478; pp. 793-795)<fnref n="2" /> is important for the reasons given above; some were later holders of the Jangter traditions like Thangtong Gyalpo (1361/1365–1480/1486; pp. 802-804), Ngari Panchen Pema Wangyal (1487–1542; pp. 805-808), Lhatsün Namkha Jigmé (1587–1650; pp. 818-820), or the Fifth Dalai Lama (1617–1682; pp. 821-824), or excellent specialists of them like Terdak Lingpa (1646–1714; pp. 825-834).<fnref n="3" />

❖

mentioned passage of Sangs rgyas gling pa's *Lung bstan bka' rgya ma* contains a prophecy about treasure discoveries in Zang zang lha brag. However, the *gter ston*, whose name is not given but who is presumably rGod Idem, is surprisingly presented as a reincarnation of gNubs chen Sangs rgyas ye shes, rather than sNa nam rDo rje bdud 'joms.

<footnote n="1">¹ See mainly Ehrhard 2008. There is also a wealth of untapped biographical material on this contemporary of Rig 'dzin rGod Idem (e.g., vol. 11, pp. 1-212 in rDo rje gling pa 2010, *O rgyan rdo rje gling pa'i chos sde*). A preliminary survey of this volume (see Arguillère 2025b) suggests that rDo rje gling pa was not aware of Rig 'dzin rGod Idem's existence. He revealed a biography of Padmasambhava (Doney 2016, pp. 73-74; rDo rje gling pa 2010, vol. 15) in which Rig 'dzin rGod Idem's name does not appear in the context of the prophecies about *gter stons*.</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² There is a very large biography (Ratna gling pa, 1977–1979, *Ratna gling pa'i rnam thar*) filling vol. 1 (pp. 1-687) of Ratna gling pa's *gTer chos* (1977–1979). Ratna gling pa was born very close to Rig 'dzin rGod Idem's death, so interactions between the two of them are impossible. However, studying Ratna gling pa would be valuable in understanding the further structuring of the rNying ma school and perhaps how Rig 'dzin rGod Idem was regarded in this context.</footnote>

<footnote n="3">³ *gTer* bdag gling pa is often seen in the context of the founding of sMin sgrol gling monastery as a rival to Padma 'phrin las and rDo rje brag. There is some truth to this, and these two figures were in some ways competitors, albeit members of the Fifth Dalai Lama's close circle. However, an examination of the record of teachings received by *gTer* bdag gling pa and of his work gives a more nuanced impression: *gTer* bdag gling pa received all the Northern Treasures and was clearly interested in that tradition, including its post-Rig 'dzin rGod Idem developments. On the other hand, he incorporated them into a synthesis in which they were not given the most central place, contrary to what was the case with rDo rje brag. We will return to this whole context in vol. 5, which will present the history of the Northern Treasures around the time of the Fifth Dalai Lama.</footnote>
**Chapter 7: An Outline of Rigdzin Pema Trinlé's (1641–
1717) *The Biographies for the Sūtra Initiation Lineage*'**

Stéphane Arguillère
(IFRAE / Inalco)

It was already stated, we can define the “Northern Treasures” in the narrowest sense as being the revelations of Rigdzin Gödem and his successive incarnations. In a slightly broader sense, the “Northern Treasures” also include parts or the whole of the revelations of later treasure discoverers,<fnref n="1" /> especially the subsequent incarnations of Rigdzin Gödem.

These tertöns will be dealt with in later volumes of this series, and there is no need to discuss them now. However, in an even broader sense, when Tibetans speak of “the Northern Treasures,” or, more accurately, “the tradition of the Northern Treasures [in] Dorjé Drak” (*Byang gter rdo rje brag lugs*), they mean the whole of these, combined with the heritage of earlier tradition, both uninterrupted Oral Tradition and hidden treasures. In this broadest sense, the “tradition of the Northern Treasures [in] Dorjé Drak” as a whole could be defined as: *a complete synthesis of the whole of Buddhism, in a Nyingma style, achieved at Dorjé Drak and constructed around the revelations of Rigdzin Gödem as its core*.

The topic of the present volume is to explore globally this entire legacy of pre-Gödem materials. We are aware that this development is partly anachronistic, since we are telling the story of materials that definitely predate Rigdzin Gödem, but with some of which, in the present state of research, we cannot know to what extent he was familiar. It is difficult to reconstruct what was passed down in the lineages of Rigdzin Gödem’s disciples prior to the sixteenth century—when the large number of tantric lineages compiled by Ngari Paṇchen and Lekdenjé’s father, Jamyang Rinchen Gyaltsen,<fnref n="2" /> coalesced into what would soon become the “Dorjé Drak System.”

<footnote n="1">¹ The case of *gter stons* such as bsTan gnyis gling pa (1480–1535; see Achard 2004 and Achard & Arguillère 2024) and Gar dbang rdo rje (1640–1685) will be dealt with separately, in the chronologically relevant section. What-ever this may mean, the parts of their *gter chos* that were included in the *rDo rje brag lugs* are supposed to belong to a—problematic—original whole called “the Northern Treasures,” while this is not the case for the material we will be dealing with in this and the following chapter.</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² ‘Jam dbyangs rin chen rgyal mtshan, 1445 or, more probably, 1473–1558. This interesting figure was a compiler of rNying ma traditions, which he passed to his sons. His biography is on p. 381-424 of Padma ‘phrin las’ (1641–1717) *The Biographies for the Empowerment of the Gathering of Intentions*</footnote>
Biographical material indicates that Rigdzin Gödem was trained in the termas of Nyangral Nyima Özer and Guru Chöwang. Unfortunately, it has not yet been possible to convincingly reconstruct the history of these two (more or less interrelated) traditions from the time of the tertöns to that of Rigdzin Gödem and this must be left to future research to determine more precisely. Present-day Jangter masters do not claim a tradition passing through Rigdzin Gödem when they teach traditions from Nyangral Nyima Özer or Guru Chöwang.

In the course of our research, it has become clear that Rigdzin Gödem was also a specialist of the two major Dzogchen Nyingthik systems, the *Bima Nyingthik* and the *Khandro Nyingthik*. If we are not mistaken about Meban Rinchen Lingpa's role in that context, it is easy to reconstruct Gödem's very short lineage for the *Khandro Nyingthik* and to make reasonable assumptions about the *Bima Nyingthik* as well.

However, in the present-day Dorjé Drak tradition, there is no more official claim of a lineage passing through Rigdzin Gödem for the *Bima Nyingthik* and the *Khandro Nyingthik* than for the revelations of Nyangral Nyima Özer and Guru Chöwang. So, it must be clear that we are now, to some extent, doing two different things at once: on the one hand, trying to reconstruct the landscape of the Nyingma school as it was at the time in which Rigdzin Gödem was trained by his masters and, on the other hand, attempting to trace the sources—maybe unconnected to the first generations of Jangter masters—of what *later* became central for the “Dorjé Drak system.” In order to spare readers a long anachronical flashback about these earlier traditions, these matters will be summarized here and not at the point of the Jangter history (16th century) in which their introduction in the Dorjé Drak system is better documented. Presenting now their earlier stages is also a good way to give some elements of background about the state of matters in the “Nyingma school” (if such a thing already properly existed then) up to Rigdzin Gödem’s time.

On the side of the uninterrupted Oral Tradition, the standard account of the lineage is Rigdzin Pema Trinlé's *The Biographies for the Sūtra Initiation Lives of the Lineage Masters of The Gathering of Intentions*<fnref n="1" />

<footnote>(Padma 'phrin las 2015, *Dus pa mdo dbang gi bla ma brgyud pa'i rnam thar*). We will have to return to him in a forthcoming volume of this series.</footnote>

<footnote n="1">1 Padma 'phrin las 2015, *Dus pa mdo dbang gi bla ma brgyud pa'i rnam thar*, vol. 41, pp. 1-437; also in *bKa' ma shin tu rgyas pa* (henceforth KSG), vol. 109 (around 580 pages, without page numbers). This is henceforth quoted (following Dalton 2016) as *The Biographies for the Sūtra Initiation Lineage*. According to it colophon (CNT, vol. 41, p. 437), this history was composed in 1681 (A year *lcags mo bya*, which was its author's 41st year) as an appendix (*rgyab chos*) of Padma 'phrin las' *magnum opus*, the commentary on the empowerment ritual for *The Gathering of Intentions* contained in the three</footnote>
which will be followed as the main thread in this chapter, not only because it is the most informative source available, but also because, as one of Rigdzin Pema Trinlé's main writings, it is one of the many fine jewels in the crown of Northern Treasures literature.

Now, as far as the terma lineages are concerned, a great deal of earlier material, which is not considered to be Jangter even in the second sense, has been amalgamated into the transmissions passed down by the masters of the Northern Treasures as part of the Dorjé Drak system—in particular:

1. The *Mañjuśrī Master of Life*<fnref n="1" /> cycle, most of which is a series of rev- elations of Gya Zhangtrom<fnref n="2" /> (11th c.);

2. *The Poisonous Razor of the Fierce Planetary Spirit*,<fnref n="3" /> a terma of Pema Ledreltsal (1291–1319);

3. Karma Lingpa's (14th c.) *The Peaceful and Wrathful Deities: Self-Liberated Contemplation*.<fnref n="4" />

There are, incidentally, a very few cycles in which Gödem himself appears in later records of teachings received not as the treasure discoverer, but as a member in a line of transmission—typically *Mañjuśrī's Dzogchen*, which we be discussed below.<fnref n="5" />

previous volumes of CNT. I will also be using this text, *A Ford to the Ocean of Mañdalas* (Padma 'phrin la, 2015, 'Dus pa'i mdo'i bdang gi cho ga khrigs su byas pa'i dkyil 'khor gyi rgya mtsho'i 'jug mngogs, CNT, vols. 38, 39 and 40), which Dalton refers to as *rGya mtsho'i 'jug mngogs*, without, it seems, proposing a standard translation. This text will henceforth be called *A Ford to the Ocean of Mañdalas*.

<footnote n="1">¹ *Jam dpal tshe bdag*. See below chapter 11.</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² rGya zhang khrom rDo rje 'od bar. See Esler 2022a, “Yamāntaka’s Wrathful Magic.”</footnote>

<footnote n="3">³ *gZa' rgod dug gi spu gri*. Discussed in Chapter 14 below.</footnote>

<footnote n="4">⁴ Karma gling pa is a 14th-century figure whose precise dates are difficult to determine (see Cuevas 2003). There is no trace of his presence in CNT. However, an eight-volume compilation of the rDo rje brag liturgy (*sNga 'gyur byang gter chos skor las 'don cha'i skor*, Dorjé Drak Monastery, ca. 2000, which seems to be an extension of the four-volume collection of the same title [1997], BDR: MW26672), contains a full volume (vol. 7, 498 pages) of Karma gling pa's *Zab chos zhi khro dgongs pa rang grol*. See Chapter 16 below. Incidentally, we also found unexpected traces of another cycle in the rDo rje brag liturgy (much more modest: a single *sādhana* text): *rTa mgrin gsang sgrub*. See Chapter 12 below for a note on this cycle and its discoverer in the 12th century, Gong ri Sangs rgyas dbang chen.</footnote>

<footnote n="5">⁵ In Chapter 12 of this volume and in vol. 2 in the context of Rigdzin Gödem's masters.</footnote>
The fact that the *official* junction of the lineages does not occur until the 16th century does not imply that Gödem himself, his predecessors, or his immediate successors were not well versed in some of these traditions. It is not uncommon for Tibetan historiographers to begin the transmission of a lineage to an institution when that institution became fully autonomous in terms of granting its empowerments and oral transmissions. This does not mean that the corpus was not studied and practiced earlier in that institution. It is probable that an earlier centrality within the institution, spanning decades or even centuries, prompted the initiative to obtain a comprehensive, official, transmission at the earliest opportunity.

Be that as it may, and acknowledging that we know virtually nothing of the association of the Jangter masters with these traditions prior to the brothers Ngari Panchen and Lekdenjé, their histories are summarized in the present volume so as to set a complementary historical background (with some critical reflections) to Gödem's biography, in addition to what can be found in available global histories of the Nyingma school or of its Dzogchen traditions.

We will first discuss the Kama aspect.

*Presentation of Pema Trinlé's
The Biographies for the Sūtra Initiation Lineage*

Pema Trinlé's above-mentioned *The Biographies for the Sūtra Initiation Lineage* is a Dorjé Drak-centered history of the transmission of *The Gathering of Intentions*, understood as the "root tantra" of the Anuyoga class.<fnref n="1" /> *The Gathering of Intentions* is in fact, to some extent, a metonymy

<footnote n="1">¹ The context of *The Gathering of Intentions* and its history is clearly presented in Dalton 2016, which, along with Cuevas 2003, serves in many ways as a model for our Byang gter research. Both works renew our global vision of the rNying ma teachings by introducing a historian's approach to matters that have long been understood mainly on the basis of non-historical rNying ma doxographies. Dalton presents a movement characterized by a constant reworking of rNying ma doctrinal syntheses. This includes not only the emergence of new ideas, but also the mere *oblivion* or *disuse* of earlier doctrines and texts that were once central, *without them having been refuted or even explicitly nuanced by later thinkers*. The only thing that could be added to this book, apart from a more in-depth investigation of the question of the origins of the tantra that is its main subject (and in particular the discussion of *bru zha'i skad* initiated by Kapstein 2017), would be a discussion of the more or less explicit assimilation of Anuyoga to the "mother tantras" (*ma rgyud*). In the context of the traditions derived from the second spread of Buddhism in Tibet, this assimilation implies that *Anuyoga* would be a system in which the tantric body techniques of *sampannakrama*</footnote>
(more accurately: a synecdoche) for the whole of the “uninterrupted Oral Tradition,” as the lines through which *The Gathering of Intentions* has been transmitted are the same ones through which many other materials also were passed. Indeed, in this text, Rigdzin Pema Trinlé uses as well historiographical materials connected to *The Vajra Bridge of the Oral Transmission of the Dzogchen Space Section*,¹ the Heart Drops, Vajrakīla, etc., and his purpose is clearly to describe the sources of all the non-terma traditions of the Nyingmapas.

This text has already been extensively studied in Jake Dalton's *The Gathering of Intentions*. We will build on the chapter he devotes to the specific developments of this tantra in Dorjé Drak (pp. 78-96). While his approach is focused on the uses of the tantra itself, and while that chapter of his book deals mainly with Pema Trinlé's agenda in the historical context of "Nyingmapa Politics in the Seventeenth Century" (op. cit., pp. 88-96), ours is of course more concerned with the way in which the Jangter / Dorjé Drak masters received what they considered

are central. However, this feature is not evident in the basic text of the *mDo dgongs 'dus*. This is important because the rNying ma school must also be described, to some extent, as the fruit of the encounter between traditions from the first spread of Buddhism in Tibet (which were certainly poor in such techniques, as they are regarded by Indologists as not having existed yet in the 8th century Indian world) and traditions from the second spread, the prestige of which was linked to the introduction of these techniques. The problem with which Dalton is concerned—that of the functions successively attributed (or not) to the *mDo dgongs 'dus* in the rNying ma pas' doctrinal syntheses—cannot be fully addressed without also considering the reasons why the Old School of Tibetan Buddhism persists in implicitly presenting as a tantra rich in body techniques a text that, in fact, presents none.

¹ Or, in short, *The Vajra Bridge of the Space Section: Klong sde'i rdo rje'i zam pa*, in NKG (and KSG), vols. 18-19. It is difficult to be sure what exactly is Padma 'phrin las' source for the history of this cycle, since *The Vajra Bridge* in its available version does not seem to include the chronicle he quotes. This chronicle is not mentioned by So bzlog ba Blo gros rgyal mtshan as one of the main *bka' ma* sources he uses (Gentry 2020, p. 234, n. 252). *The Vajra Bridge of the Space Section* in the quoted edition begins with a large treatise that includes three narratives (*lo rgyus*) about its lineage—developed, middle-sized and abbreviated—down to “Kun bzang,” who seems to be the author of this large text. This person, identified as disciple of 'Dzeng Dharmabodhi (BDRC: P4518) is Kun bzang rdo rje (BDRC: P2JM124)—see Roerich 1978, pp. 188-189. Roerich speculates that he was born in 1151, while BDRC proposes 1130. Be that as it may, the mere fact that the history of this branch of the rDzogs chen is known after 'Dzeng Dharmabodhi only through mere lists of its lineage holders is a strong hint of the relative antiquity of Padma 'phrin las' source and leads one to wonder why Sog bzlog pa seems not to be using it.
to be a complete transmission of the Kama aspect of the Nyingma traditions as a whole.

Pema Trinlé insists on the idea that since *The Gathering of Intentions* provides the overall doxographic structure of the nine layered vehicles, its study covers the entirety of (Nyingma) Buddhist tantrism. This explains why his *Biographies for the Sūtra Initiation Lineage* presents a general history of the Kama lineages, designed to establish Dorjé Drak's authority in this field.

The text as such would call for a whole series of remarks concerning the way in which Pema Trinlé conceives and implements the profession of historian in a context marked by the development of a philological and critical approach within the Nyingma school. He could not be unaware, for example, of Sokdokpa Lodrö Gyaltsen's (1552–1624) strongly philological apology for the Nyingma school.<fnref n="1" /> However, these remarks will be more appropriate when we come to present the life of that author in the relevant volume of this series, to characterize the 17th-century cultural and social context in which his work was composed.

At this point, it will suffice to emphasize the quality of Rigdzin Pema Trinlé's composition. He preserves faith in the Nyingma traditions without the kind of rationalizations that would be characteristic of modernity. However, in the syntheses he carefully outlines, he gives the greatest weight to the stories of the best attested antiquity, even when they do not perfectly coincide with those that, in his own time, had already become most popular among the Nyingmapas. Pema Trinlé is also very careful about chronological consistency, although he is not overly critical of, for instance, the assumption of extremely long life spans. Overall, this text can be described as religiously conservative, but very well informed about the whole movement of critical philology in his time and the efforts of the Nyingmapas to respond to polemics in this field.<fnref n="2" />

<footnote n="1">¹ See especially Gentry 2020. Some passages in Padma 'phrin las' account of Padmasambhava's life (2015, *Dus pa mdo dbang gi bla ma brgyud pa'i rnam thar*, CNT, vol. 41, p. 25-49) may indicate that he was well informed of So bzlog pa's analyses and speculations. For example, both use the same (admittedly quite commonplace) solution to explain away the inconsistencies: that Padmasambhava manifested himself differently to various "beings to be tamed." As for the above-mentioned biography of Padmasambhava, its presence in the *Dus mdo rnam thar* despite his virtual absence in *A Ford on the Ocean* is a hint that, in spite of its title, the *Dus mdo rnam thar* is a general history of the bKa' ma as envisioned by Padma 'phrin las.</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² This second aspect is well documented in Gentry 2020, who emphasizes the role of Sog bzlog pa Blo gros rgyal mtshan (1552–1624). This author is not mentioned by Padma 'phrin las, surely because he was not in favor</footnote>
Once the lineages are reconstructed on the basis of this text, it is easy to compare them with what appears in ritual texts and practice manuals and to look for more information in the biographies, when they are available. Of course, this work could not be thoroughly done in the present volume, not only because of the immense amount of research required, but also because the reader would have been drawn into a mass of details—"the trees" that would have you "miss the forest"—which, even for the specialist, are better presented in separate, dedicated articles than in a large general book.

Dalton<fnref n="1" /> rightly points out the possible historical distortions in Pema Trinlé's account of the transmission when the author wishes to insist on the greater centrality and legitimacy of the branch of the lineage through which he received it.<fnref n="2" /> But we need not concern ourselves with this apologetic and perhaps ideological aspect of this writing, since our purpose here is precisely to reconstruct something of the history of the Northern Treasures—including the history of what this branch of the Nyingma school was the heir to, and, one might say, its specific claims—without having to take sides in the competition that may exist or have existed between various sub-schools of the Nyingmapas.

*Structure of The Biographies for the Sūtra Initiation Lineage*

After a short preface,<fnref n="3" /> this text is divided into three sections:

1. A general history of the origins of Buddhism, and especially the tantric teachings in India;<fnref n="4" />

2. Origins of the Ancient Tradition of the earlier translations;<fnref n="5" />

3. The biographies of the successive lineage masters.<fnref n="6" />

with the Fifth Dalai Lama, but Padma 'phrin las is clearly aware of the controversies. He is, however, more concerned with establishing a plausible, traditional-sounding narrative than with engaging in debate with other scholars.

<footnote n="1">¹ Dalton 2016, pp. 80-82 and further in the same chapter.</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² As Dalton 2016, p. 80, phrases it: "Pema Trinlé begins by following the usual path from Nubchen Sangyé Yeshé, through the early Zurs, up to Drölmawa Drotön Samdrup Dorjé (1294–1375), teacher to Zurham. From Drölmawa, however, three different lineages diverge."</footnote>

<footnote n="3">³ NKG, vol. 44, pp. 4-7; CNT, vol. 41, pp. 2-4.</footnote>

<footnote n="4">⁴ NKG, vol. 44, pp. 7-66; CNT, vol. 41, pp. 4-49. In fact, this consists of a life of Buddha Śākyamuni (CNT, vol. 41, pp. 6-25) and a life of Padmasambhava (CNT, vol. 41, pp. 25-49).</footnote>

<footnote n="5">⁵ *sNga 'gyur rnying ma'i lugs*. KSG, vol. 44, pp. 66-74; CNT, vol. 41, pp. 49-55.</footnote>

<footnote n="6">⁶ NKG, vol. 44, pp. 74 to the end; CNT, vol. 41, pp. 55-437.</footnote>
Of course, this type of Tibetan presentation of history is always schematic and idealized. Still, Pema Trinlé's text is very informative about all sorts of Nyingma figures prior to, or contemporary to, Rigdzin Gödem and the first generations of his followers.

Our aim in the coming chapters will thus be to use the relevant materials to fill the large gap between the legends of Padmasambhava and Nanam Dorjé Düjom, on the one hand, and the biography of Rigdzin Gödem, on the other hand, with both general elements of contextual background and with more directly relevant information about the traditions that he or his close associates may have received. Our aim is primarily to characterize the specific trends in the Nyingma family of Tibetan Buddhism that were finally inherited by the Dorjé Drak masters and, secondarily, to sketch the background situation of the Nyingma nebula in the time of Rigdzin Gödem.

<figure><img src="image_10.png" /></figure>
# Chapter 8: The Uninterrupted Oral Tradition
## Heritage of the Northern Treasures Masters
## and the Early Termas: 8th to 10th centuries

Stéphane Arguillère
(IFRAE / Inalco)

*The Indian Origins:
Questions about the More or Less Central Status of Padmasambhava*

espite the fact that Pema Trinlé's *The Biographies for the Sūtra Initiation Lineage* devotes some pages to the life of Padmasambhava,<fnref n="1" /> he is not even mentioned in *A Ford to the Ocean of Mandalas*, the authors' extensive exegesis on the empowerment for *The Gathering of Intentions*. Here is the beginning of the human lineage in India as described in *A Ford to the Ocean of Mandalas*,<fnref n="2" /> starting<fnref n="3" /> with a common lineage for the “three yogas” (i.e. *Mahā, Anu, Ati*):

1. Garab Dorjé and Princess Rinchen Saldrön;

2. The “Great Master” Rabtu Salwa and “the King of Zahor”;

3. “The King of Siṅhala” (*Sing ha la'i rgyal po*);

4. The monk Sokyadewa;

<footnote n="1">¹ CNT, vol. 41, pp. 25-49. Since this biography was used as a supplementary source for the footnotes of the Padmasambhava chapter in this volume, we will not discuss it here. It would be interesting to compile a list of its very eclectic sources. In addition to various *gter ma* biographies of Padmasambhava, *The Biographies for the Sūtra Initiation Lineage* mentions (CNT, vol. 41, pp. 26-27) as sources for a biography of Padmasambhava "born from the womb" (*mngal skyes*, not miraculously born in a lotus): *phur pa'i phyogs kyi yi yig rnying 'ga' zhig*, which may correspond to Sog bzlog pa's sources and *gTer ston ba mkhal smug po'i gter ma rnam thar rtsa 'grel*. This *gter ston* is BDRC P635 (13th century according to BDRC). According to Gu ru bKra shis 1990, p. 489: 'di lta bu'i lo rgyus mang du snang yang gter ston ba mkhal smug po'i 'khrungs yul lho brag pa yin zer | rnam thar zhib rgyas ma rnyed | gter chos gu ru rin po che mngal skyes kyi rnam thar dang | gsol 'debs bar chad lam sel | de'i 'grel ti ka bcas dang | rdo rje phur pa'i chos skor las tshogs | rdzogs rim dang bcas spyan drangs pa yin par snang ngo |'. The texts alluded to by Gu ru bKra shis, and in particular the biography of Padmasambhava "born from the womb," have not yet resurfaced.</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² CNT, vol. 38, p. 11 ff.</footnote>

<footnote n="3">³ CNT, vol. 28, pp. 12-14.</footnote>
5. The Master Gekpé Dorjé, a.k.a. Dorjé Drakpo Tsal;<fnref n="1" />

6. The "Minister of Religion" (or "pious minister") Deva;

7. The Abbot Chögyalkyong.

The last figure is the “abbot from Druzha” who passed it to Nubchen Sangyé Yeshé.

In *The Biographies for the Sūtra Initiation Lineage*, after this common lineage, come separate ones for each of the “three yogas.”<fnref n="2" /> In each case, we can notice that *all* of them pass through Nubchen Sangyé Yeshé, but *none* through Padmasambhava (if we set aside speculations about various other Indian siddhas being in fact none other than him). Nanam Dorjé Düjom plays no role at all. The only significant difference between them is that in the case of the separate lineage of Dzogchen, it reaches Sangyé Yeshé through three generations of Tibetan masters prior to him<fnref n="3" /> and not from Chögyalkyong or the “Abbot from Druzha” Chetsenkyé.

Interestingly, the next section of *The Biographies for the Sūtra Initiation Lineage*—about the origins of the “Ancient tradition of the earlier translations”—restarts<fnref n="4" /> “in heaven” with the primordial Buddha Samantabhadra teaching to his own emanations in the *sambarohakāya*, who then emanate as the Six Munis and the Twelve Teachers. This explanation is then followed by a praise to Padmasambhava, allusively presented as the one through whom the teachings of the twelve non-human teachers were transmitted to this world, and a laudation of the

<footnote n="1">¹ rDo rje drag po rtsal—a wrathful form of Padmasambhava—is the main figure of the *Thugs sgrub* cycle in rGod Idem's *gter chos* (see vol. 2 for a description). “rDo rje drag po rtsal” has been understood at least from the time of Nyang ral Nyi ma 'od zer as Padmasambhava's initiatory name. However, sGeg pa'i rdo rje does not seem to have been identified with Padmasambhava in general rNying ma historiography.</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² Here is, as one more example, the lineage described for the *Mahāyoga* (CNT, vol. 41, pp. 14-15): 1. *Chos sku* Kun tu bzang po; 2. The Buddhas of the five families; 3. Vajrasattva; 4. “The master of Secrets” (Vajrapāṇi); 5. *Slob dpon* Ku ku rā dza; 6. King Jah (or Dzaḥ); 7. King Śa tra pu tri; 8. The king of Oḍḍyāna Siṅharāja; 9. King Uparāja; 10. his daughter Gomadevī; 11. Maitrika Māla; 12. *Ācārya* Jinamitra; 13. *Slob dpon* rDo rje bzhad pa; 14. *Slob dpon* Nyin byed seng ge; 15. *Slob dpon* bDe ba gsal mdzad; 16. *Slob dpon* Śākyabodhi; 17. *dGe* slong So kya de ba; 18. *Slob dpon* sGeg pa'i rdo rje, a.k.a. rDo rje drag po rtsal; 19. *Chos blon* De ba; 20. the “*mkhan po* of Bru zha” Che btsan skyes. Here again, we reach gNubs Sangs rgyas ye shes without passing through Padmasambhava.</footnote>

<footnote n="3">³ Bee ro tsa na, g.Yu sgra snying po, gNyags Jñānakumāra, and Sog po dPal gyi ye shes.</footnote>

<footnote n="4">⁴ CNT, vol. 41, p. 49 ff.</footnote>
Nyingma tradition as a whole, ending with a series of verses.<fnref n="1" /> This entire passage, which is definitely intended to respond to anti-Nyingma polemics, does not tell us how Padmasambhava is supposed to fit into the unbroken oral transmission of the tantric lineage. As mentioned above, he is completely absent in *A Ford to the Ocean of Mandalas*, while he is extremely central in Chöying's account of the Northern Treasures tradition. This deserves further exploration, but there is definitely an implicit tension in Rigdzin Pema Trinlé's *The Biographies for the Sūtra Initiation Lineage*, in which this long biography gives Padmasambhava a key role, while he is almost completely absent from the rest of the volume.

The third section of *The Biographies for the Sūtra Initiation Lineage* presents biographies of the successive masters.

It should first be noted that in *The Biographies for the Sūtra Initiation Lineage*, the author mentions one of the lineages that he has reconstructed in *A Ford to the Ocean of Mandalas* as being "the way in which the general [transmission of] the [various] vehicles befell [to their spiritual heirs] in connection with the empowerment of *The Gathering of Intentions*,"<fnref n="2" /> distinguishing it from "the specific transmission of [each of the] three yogas."<fnref n="3" /> He then explains that the first has already been sufficiently explained in the empowerment ritual text and that he will now focus on the second one. However, instead of dividing this entire section according to the three higher classes of tantras, he begins with a description of the common transmission of the three.

In the following pages, the aspects that are not sufficiently documented in the existing literature<fnref n="4" /> will be further developed.

*First Generations of Tibetan Masters (until the second diffusion of the Dharma in Tibet): the Great Importance of Nub Sangyé Yeshé*

Unfortunately for our purposes, Dalton (2016) does not devote much of his critical inquiry to the early generations of Tibetan masters and most of the story he tells restarts with Zurpoché,<fnref n="5" /> who appears as the seventh generation after Vairocana of Bagor.<fnref n="6" /> Since we do not have

<footnote n="1">¹ CNT, vol. 41, pp. 52-55.</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² CNT, vol. 41, p. 55: *spyr 'dus pa mdo'i dbang dang rjes su 'brel ba'i theg pa'i babs tshul*.</footnote>

<footnote n="3">³ Loc. cit.: *bye brag yo ga gsum gyi brgyud tshul*.</footnote>

<footnote n="4">⁴ Gyurme Dorje and Kapstein 1991; Dalton 2016.</footnote>

<footnote n="5">⁵ Zur po che Śākya 'byung gnas (1002–1062).</footnote>

<footnote n="6">⁶ Bee ro tsa na—NKG/KSG, vol. 44, pp. 157-212; CNT, vol. 41, pp. 115-156. For a short hagiography of this figure, see Gyurme Dorje and Kapstein 1991, pp. 538-540, or Barron 2005, pp. 49-50; a complete English rendering of the largest hagiography, the *Bee ro'i 'dra 'bag chen mo*, is found in Jinba</footnote>
much space for most of these figures either, we are left with the short
hagiographies found especially in Dudjom Rinpoché.

If we reconstruct the lineage as described in the text, starting from
the first generation of Tibetan masters, we find:

1-2. Vairocana and Yudra Nyingpo;

3. Nyag Jñānakumāra or Yeshé Zhönnu;<fnref n="1" />

4. Sokpo Pal gyi Yeshé;<fnref n="2" />

5. Nubchen Sangyé Yeshé (844–first half of the 10th cent.);<fnref n="3" />

6. Nub Khulungpa Yönten Gyatso (d.u.);<fnref n="4" />

7. Nub Yeshé Gyatso (son of Yönten Gyatso, d.u.);<fnref n="5" />

8. Gyatön Lodrö Jangchub;<fnref n="6" />

9. Gyatön's disciples Thogar Namkhadé<fnref n="7" /> and Zhutön Sönam Sākya.<fnref n="8" />

This list is extremely interesting because it corresponds closely to what
we find in Yamāntaka-related sources (studied below) and testifies to
an early transmission of Indian tantric materials that is rarely men-
tioned in more popular accounts of the early decades of what would
become the Nyingma tradition.

Palmo 2004. Also see Hanson-Barber 1984 (although this dissertation is
maybe rather a reflection of Buddhist piety than a genuine scientific con-
tribution).

<footnote n="1">¹ NKG/KSG, vol. 44, p. 212-218; CNT, vol. 41, pp. 156-161. See also Gyurme Dorje and Kapstein 1991, pp. 601-605, a biography very similar to that by Padma 'phrin las, except that bDud 'joms *rin po che* does not associate him so closely with Vairocana, perhaps because he preferred to present Vairocana mostly in the context of the rDzogs chen Klong sde lineage on the basis of the chronicles found in the *rDo rje zam pa*.</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² NKG/KSG, vol. 44, p. 218-224; CNT, vol. 41, pp. 161-165, followed by a retrospective account (*ibid*., pp. 165-169) of the way in which gNyags Jñānakumāra received the entire *dbang gi chu bo bzhi*, which he would later give to gNubs chen Sangs rgyas ye shes.</footnote>

<footnote n="3">³ NKG/KSG, vol. 44, p. 224-245; CNT, vol. 41, pp. 169-185. For Sang rgyas ye shes' dates, see Esler 2022b, p. 88, where Esler decides 844 for his birth and suggests (p. 92) that "it seems quite possible, (...) that Sangs rgyas ye shes witnessed the first five, perhaps six, decades of the 10th century."</footnote>

<footnote n="4">⁴ NKG/KSG, vol. 44, pp. 246-263; CNT, vol. 41, pp. 185-193.</footnote>

<footnote n="5">⁵ NKG/KSG, vol. 44, pp. 263-265; CNT, vol. 41, pp. 193-195.</footnote>

<footnote n="6">⁶ NKG/KSG, vol. 44, pp. 265-266; CNT, pp. vol. 41, pp. 195-196. Mentioned among Zur po che's masters in Gyurme Dorje and Kapstein 1991, p. 619.</footnote>

<footnote n="7">⁷ Padma 'phrin las does not devote a special development to this figure or the next.</footnote>

<footnote n="8">⁸ Mentioned among Zur po che's masters in Gyurme Dorje and Kapstein 1991, p. 619.</footnote>
Vairocana, Nyak Jñānakumāra and Sokpo Palgyi Yeshé

Vairocana of Bagor surely is a historical figure who actually played a decisive role in many fields in the introduction of Buddhism in Tibet. However, although hundreds of pages of English literature (academic or not) have been written about him on the basis of a large number of Tibetan texts, we must admit that it is still difficult to distinguish between what belongs to history and what belongs to legend. This is also true of Yudra Nyingpo of Gyalmorong<fnref n="1" /> who is closely associated with this narrative. The source regarded as the most authoritative among the Nyingmapas regarding Vairocana's life, *The Great Image*,<fnref n="2" /> is clearly a composite work, the latest layers of which belong to the 14th century.<fnref n="3" /> Moreover, *The Great Image* is more of a cosmic opera, written in the style of Buddhist scripture, than a proper biography. The story of Vairocana's life barely fills more than 40% of the whole,<fnref n="4" /> is clearly legendary, and is intended to teach the reader Dzogchen (and Buddhism in general) rather than to present a truly concrete personal image of the great translator, despite its title.

The earliest Bön sources, such as the recently translated *Drenpa's Proclamation*, confirm his existence and his activities in the time of Padmasambhava and Trisong Detsen, but they do not present him as the author of a very ambitious synthesis of Buddhist and Bön texts, as later

<footnote n="1">¹ rGyal mo g.Yu sgra snying po, a name often misunderstood as “Queen Yudra Nyingpo,” while it applies to a male figure from rGyal mo rong (Jean-Luc Achard, oral communication, January 2025).</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² *Bee ro'i 'dra 'bag*. Complete translation in Jinpa Palmo 2004.</footnote>

<footnote n="3">³ This text contains prophecies extending to such a late period and as the discovery of this final version is ascribed to rGod Idem's contemporary rDo rje gling pa (1346-1405; see rDo rje gling pa 2009, vol. 16). The colophon is not very explicit about when the *gter ma* was revealed. Some lines at the end present a continuous oral line of translation for some generations after Bee ro tsa na and a sort of postface states that the purpose of the text is to unify and standardize diverging versions. As it is not clear whether it is rDo rje gling pa or a later editor who wrote these concluding verses, it can be interpreted as meaning either as the purpose of rDo rje gling pa's *gter ma* version of this text (in contrast to earlier ones), or as the purpose of this specific edition (in contrast with other versions of rDo rje gling pa's *gter chos*). It is possible that earlier version of the *Bee ro'i 'dra 'bag* existed: see Arguillère 2024d about the curious mention of *rGyal sras* bZod pa receiving a transmission of the *Bee ro'i 'dra 'bag* from Klong chen pa. However, it is also not impossible that rDo rje gling pa's dates have to be moved slightly earlier, since prophecies indicate that he was to be born in 1322. If this were the case, Klong chen pa may have received rDo rje gling pa's version.</footnote>

<footnote n="4">⁴ Jinpa Palmo 2004, pp. 92-192.</footnote>
sources would. In fact, in this context he is portrayed merely as adapt-
ing Bön rituals to the specific syntax of Buddhist tantric liturgies.<fnref n="1" />

It is not unlikely that further research will lead to the conclusion
that Vairocana was not associated with the court of King Trisong Det-
sen or with Padmasambhava, but that the obscure story of his exile to
Gyalrong and his association with Yudra Nyingpo should actually be
taken to mean that he was in fact active in that region (which remains
to be determined precisely in context). As seen above, a characteristic
of the terma biographies of Padmasambhava is a tendency to combine
people and events that may belong to different times and unrelated
milieus into a unified, coherent narrative that makes great religious
sense but may not fully reflect actual facts.

The most reasonable way to deal with the question of Vairocana's
activities may be to begin with the canonical translations of the
Nyingma tantras that can be more or less safely attributed to him (i.e.,
avoiding, at least initially, the hidden treasures), and to pay careful
attention to the Indian masters with whom he is associated in this lit-
erature. Of course, one might think that Vairocana of Bagor—the fig-
ure known from the traditional narratives—was not really the transla-
tor of all these Dzogchen materials. But, from the point of view of
sound methodology, we are actually looking for the individual, who-
ever he was, who translated these texts as the real referent of the name
“Vairocana of Bagor” and on that basis we should re-examine the nar-
rative content of texts such as *The Great Image*. This reading would help
to balance the legend-laden materials such as the chronicles of the
Space Series section of Dzogchen.

The same can be said, although with less sources on both sides, for
the two next figures in the lineage, Nyak Jñānakumāra and Sokpo
Palgyi Yeshé. Further research about these great ancestors of the
Nyingma tradition would be highly desirable but it is not directly rel-
evant in the present chapter.

Nyak Jñānakumāra, like Vairocana of Bagor, was included in the
legend of Padmasambhava. In this context, he figures, alongside
Sokpo Pal gyi Yeshé, Vairocana himself, and Nubchen Sangyé Yeshé,
among the twenty-five disciples of the Great Ācarya of Oddiyāna, in a
way that seems to collapse decades into a kind of mythic simultaneity.
It must be remembered that, even according to the revealed biog-
raphies of Padmasambhava himself, the “Precious Guru” spent no
more than a few years in Tibet, so his miraculous longevity cannot be
invoked when it comes to claiming that he was the teacher of Tibetan
masters belonging to different generations. Therefore, although they
are all regarded as disciples of Padmasambhava, it seems more

<footnote n="1">¹ Kvaerne and Martin 2023, p. 320.</footnote>
plausible to think of these three figures as masters who followed one another in history.

According to traditional accounts, Nyak Jñānakumāra was present at the funeral of King Muné Tsenpo, the direct successor of King Trisong Detsen, whose reign was very short (797?-799?). It is said that it was on this occasion that he received teachings about Vajrakīla from Vimalamitra,<fnref n="1" /> which seem to be the main source of the magical powers he reportedly displayed for the sake of protecting the Dharma.

It is worth repeating that Nanam Dorjé Düjom, otherwise so dear to the Northern Treasures, plays no role in the uninterrupted Oral Tradition lineages (Kama). The really central figure for the transmission of *The Gathering of Intentions*—and all sorts of other tantric materials<fnref n="2" /> that were to become part of the heritage of the Northern Treasures masters—is definitely Nubchen Sangyé Yeshé.

Nubchen Sangyé Yeshé, Nub Khulungpa Yönten Gyatso,
and Nub Yeshé Gyatso

We know more about Nubchen Sangyé Yeshé than we do about his predecessors, thanks largely to Dylan Esler's research mentioned above.<fnref n="3" /> The chronology, however, remains somewhat fuzzy, certainly in part because of the general Nyingma tradition's concern to establish a unified narrative of its origins and thus to place Sangyé Yeshé within the circle of Padmasambhava's close disciples. Not only is Sangyé Yeshé later than generally assumed in Tibetan historiography, but he was in fact the *terminus a quo* of a very lively school of tantric Buddhism that flourished during the so-called "dark age" and later merged into the common Nyingma heritage. It is interesting that the Northern Treasures masters became important heirs to these "non-Padmasambhavian" lines of Nyingma Buddhism.

After Esler's careful scrutiny of the hagiographical materials in the context of his study of *The Lamp for the Eye of Contemplation*, a desiratum

<footnote n="1">¹ The association of gNyags Jñānakumāra with Vimalamitra is further supported by a common translation work of a Mahāyoga tantra, the *Zhi ba lha rgyud chen po* (NG, vol. 21, pp. 580–622), according to the colophon of this text. Jñānakumāra also appears as the author of two texts found in the *rNying ma bka' ma*: the *'Phrul gyi me long dgu skor gyi 'grel pa'* (KSG, vol. 86, pp. 254-282, the commentary of a short, versified text, the *'Phrul gyi me long dgu skor*, placed just above in the same volume, KSG, vol. 86, pp. 245-253, unrelated to the homonymous Bon scripture), and the *gSang sngags lung 'grel* (KSG, vol. 93, pp. 439-483).</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² His role is also central in the *'Jam dpal tshe bdag* tradition, discussed in Chapter 11.</footnote>

<footnote n="3">³ Esler 2020 and Esler 2022b.</footnote>
for more historically exploitable clues would now be an examination
of the large commentary on *The Gathering of Intentions* attributed to
Sangyé Yeshé.<fnref n="1" /> Another interesting thread to follow would be that of
his translations, especially of the Yamāntaka corpus.<fnref n="2" />

The best Tibetan historians seem to have been aware of the fact that
Nubchen Sangyé Yeshé lived later than Emperor Trisong Detsen. Gö
Lotsāwa Zhönnu Pal, for example, distinguishes between the imperial
time when the *Secret Essence* (or *Sangwa Nyingpo*)<fnref n="3" /> was translated and
a later period during which *The Gathering of Intentions* was:<fnref n="4" />

After most of them had passed away, the royal laws became abro-
gated. During the time of the spread of the general upheaval, Nub
Sangyé Yeshé Rinché attended on many learned men residing in
India, Nepal, Druzha<fnref n="5" /> (Gilgit), and elsewhere, and thoroughly mas-
tered the *Do Gongpa Düpa* [i.e., *The Gathering of Intentions*], which had
been translated into Tibetan by his teacher the translator of Druzha
Chetsenkyé.

As Esler rightly remarks, unlike most of the earlier and later tradition,
Pema Trinlé does not *explicitly* make Sangyé Yeshé a direct disciple of
Padmasambhava in *The Biographies for the Sūtra Initiation Lineage*. He
seems to be aware that there were a few generations between the two
figures but seemingly avoids addressing the issue.

It may not be Sangyé Yeshé *alone* who has been inserted into a gen-
uinely all-8th century context. It is not impossible that Vairocana and
Nyak Jñānakumāra too were artificially connected to Padmasambhava
and Trisong Detsen. If they were not later figures, at least perhaps they
were much less connected to Padmasambhava or even to Emperor
Trisong Detsen than the post-Nyangral Nyima Özer mainstream
Nyingma narratives assume. In fact, the same lineage for *The Gathering
of Intentions* appears in, e.g., *The Blue Annals*,<fnref n="6" /> which does not mention
Padmasambhava either, nor even, which is more curious, Vairocana,
Jñānakumāra, or Sokpo Pal gyi Yeshé. In the *Blue Annals*, Sangyé Yeshé
is connected to “Ru Dharmabodhi, Vasudhara and the *upādhyāya* of
Druzha.” The connection to Vairocana, Jñānakumāra, and Sokpo Pal

<footnote n="1">¹ NKG/KSG, vol. 50 and 51.</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² On the question of the *three* translations of a *Zla gsang nag po* in NG, vol. 25 (the same tantra, but growing over time), see Arguillère 2024b, pp. 310-312 and appendix 2 pp. 367-372. Unfortunately, neither of the two revised versions of the tantra has a clear colophon identifying its authors.</footnote>

<footnote n="3">³ *gSang ba'i snying po de kho na nyid nges pa*, in NG, vol. 21, pp. 2-326.</footnote>

<footnote n="4">⁴ Roerich 1978, p. 104</footnote>

<footnote n="5">⁵ Bru zha.</footnote>

<footnote n="6">⁶ Roerich 1978, p. 159.</footnote>
gyi Yeshé, however, is asserted elsewhere in the same chronicle—but precisely in a context in which Gö Lotsāwa expresses doubts about the chronology:<fnref n="1" />

> ...Some say that he lived in the time of Trisong Detsen, some say that he lived in the time of Ralpachen, and again some say that he lived in the time of Tri Tsekpé Pal.

The connection between Sangyé Yeshé and the undocumented Nepalese master (called “king”) Vasudhara is much better established than any link with Padmasambhava and his direct or indirect disciples. Vasudhara seems to be the main source also for all the abundant Yamāntaka materials passed through Sangyé Yeshé, the lineage of which, in its earlier part, is identical with that of *The Gathering of Intentions* and in the same way unconnected (or only partly and maybe artificially connected) to Padmasambhava. We shall return to this point in the context of the history of *Mañjuśrī Master of Life* (Chapter 11).

Sangyé Yeshé's successor Nub Khulungpa Yönten Gyatso is difficult to date. His biographies<fnref n="2" /> do not contain allusions to any datable figure. It is said that his son Nub Yeshé Gyatso was the father of Lhajé Hūmchung, who “taught witchcraft to the venerable Mila”—Milarepa (1028?–1111?).<fnref n="3" /> We can provisionally suppose that Yönten Gyatso was born in the first half of the 10th century and Yeshé Gyatso in the second half. Nub Yeshé Gyatso's disciple Gyatön Lodrö Jangchub<fnref n="4" /> would

<footnote n="1">¹ Roerich 1978, p. 108.</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² Düjom Rinpoché (Gyurme Dorje and Kapstein 1991, pp. 614-615) more or less copies Pema Trinlé's *The Biographies for the Sūtra Initiation Lineage*. What is most remarkable in this biography is that it mentions an Indian master (“Dhanadhala”) from whom Yon tan rgya mtsho received teachings and empowerments. This, together with the existence (see Arguillère 2024b, pp. 310-312) of two apparently successive revisions of Sangyé Yeshé's translation of the *Zla gsang nag po*, conveys the strong feeling that the idea of a complete decadence of Buddhism in Tibet after the collapse of the imperial dynasty, as described in Tibetan traditional sources, is to a large extent a myth.</footnote>

<footnote n="3">³ Gyurme Dorje and Kapstein 1991, p. 615, contains a short account of Ye shes rgya mtsho expressing the same idea. These details are important in relation to Sangs rgyas ye shes' other main legacy connected to Yamāntaka. Mi la ras pa's dates are not established with certainty. Biographers place his date of birth between 1028 and 1052. See Quintman 2013 for details.</footnote>

<footnote n="4">⁴ rGya ston Blo gros byang chub is mentioned in Roerich 1978, p. 159. His disciples are said to be named Tho gar Nam mkha' sde and Zhu ston bSod nams śā kya.</footnote>
then be the link with the early 11th century in which his disciple Zurpoche Śākya Jungne (1002–1062) lived.

Although Gö Lotsāwa is aware of all these lineage details, he writes that “between Sangyé Yeshé and Zurpo, the eldest, there was one teacher only.” This means that there was one person that was both a direct disciple of Sangyé Yeshé and a direct master of Zurpoché.<fnref n="1" /> This would imply that Sangyé Yeshé lived to a very old age (quite late in the 10th century), if not maybe to the amazing longevity that tradition attributes to him. A “direct disciple” might, however, be someone who merely received a transmission as a child; the information does not have to be taken as meaning someone that he fully trained.<fnref n="2" />

This summary of what can be deduced from both Pema Trinlé and Gö Lotsāwa tends to prove that Nubchen Sangyé Yeshé and his successors played a much more important role than is generally recognized in the early transmission of the tantric materials that later coalesced into the Nyingma school of Tibetan Buddhism.

<figure><img src="image_11.png" /></figure>

<footnote n="1">¹ Roerich 1978, p. 109.</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² Padma 'phrin las does not seem to be fully convinced on this point and remarks the incoherence of his sources ('Dus pa mdo dbang gi bla ma brgyud pa'i rnam thar, in CNT, vol. 41, p. 185). He tells the life of more than one master between gNubs Sangs rgyas ye shes and Zur po che (op. cit., pp. 186-196).</footnote>
# Chapter 9: Zurpoché, Zurchungwa, his Disciples, and Drophukpa in the Context of the “Tibetan Renaissance”

Stéphane Arguillère & Cécile Dacher<fnref n="1" />

(IFRAE / Inalco)

from the point we are now reaching, the heirs of the earlier traditions—which seem to have been much more composite than is generally realized—were no longer alone in Tibet and had to cope with the new trends of Buddhism introduced during the so-called “Tibetan Renaissance.”<fnref n="2" /> The renaissance of Buddhism in Tibet in the 11th century was a time of decentralized efflorescence. Many individuals went south to receive teachings from Indian and Newar gurus, thus giving rise to a Later Spread<fnref n="3" /> of the teaching in Tibet. The incoming wave was both philosophical, with many mahāyānic Sanskrit commentaries being translated and studied,<fnref n="4" /> and religious, with the transmission in Tibet of many classes of tantric practices that were developing in India, foremost among them the highest yoga tantras (niruttaratantra). Many lineages that came to be called “new” (gsar ma) developed at that time, foremost among them the Kagyü, Sakya and Kadam lineages. Transmissions that had survived the time of fragmentation that followed the downfall of the Tibetan Empire and had

<footnote n="1">¹ Cécile Dacher is the main author of §§ 1-4, while Stéphane Arguillère is the author of the remaining part of the chapter. This book is overall the result of collaborative work.</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² The term was coined by Ronald Davidson's (2008) already classical book.</footnote>

<footnote n="3">³ *sPyi dar*.</footnote>

<footnote n="4">⁴ It is unclear which doctrinal treatises (*śāstra*) had already been translated during the Early Spread. The rNying ma pas do not seem to have struggled to maintain their older translations of *common* material or were not successful in doing so. Their main concern was to prevent their own *specific* tantric heritage from falling into disuse. However, the expanded redactions of the revealed biographies of Padmasambhava present lists of translated Buddhist texts in all genres and the Dunhuang documents contain fragments of many of these. Be that as it may, these earlier translations were generally replaced by later ones promoted as standard versions by the compilers of the canonical and paracanonical corpora. This erased most traces of earlier non-tantric literature in Tibet, giving the feeling that the heirs of the Early Spread, who later became specialists in tantric ritual and meditation, were, from the outset, indifferent to philosophy—perhaps another anachronistic assumption. Traces of early translations of philosophical materials should be sought through exacting philological inquiries, not only in the Dunhuang documents, but, as Esler 2022b has begun to do, on the basis of quotations in works by pre-11th-century authors.</footnote>
spread in the interval also continued to be practiced, especially in fam-
ily lineages. These, by contrast with the new schools, were called “old”
(rnying ma). Meanwhile, the Bön religion began to organize its canon
of scriptures, claiming a completely different origin and no connection
with Buddhism understood as the posterity of Buddha Śākyamuni, de-
spite the fact that their ideas and practices are very similar to those of
the Nyingmapas.

In the 12th century, traditions would begin to coalesce in a more
discernible way. In the case of the Kagyü school, for example, what
had started as a family and eremitic lineage, with Marpa (1000–1081)
and non-monastic disciples such as Ngok Chödor (1023–1090) and Mi-
larepa (1028–1111), grew to become monastic and more centralized
with Gampopa (1079–1153) and his disciples. They eventually
founded several Kagyü sub-lineages, foremost among them the Karma
Kagyü, Drikung, Drukpa and Tsalpa.<fnref n="1" /> The Kadampas were followers
of Atiśa’s (982–1054) teachings. They built several institutions, often
monastic and increasingly scholastic, in Central Tibet (mostly in the
region of Penyul to the north of Lhasa). Their style of Buddhism was a
balance between the pāramitānaya (non-mantric Mahāyāna Bud-
dhism) and tantranaya, with an emphasis on a gradual path and mind
training.<fnref n="2" /> The Sakyapas became a powerful family institution in west-
ern Central Tibet (gTsang). Although they inherited Nyingma prac-
tices coming from their Khön ancestors, they incorporated many of the
highest yoga tantras that had developed in India in the 11th century.
Their “five forefathers” (gong ma Inga) created a powerful institution
with both monastic and non-monastic lines of transmission, as well as
a pronounced tradition of learning.<fnref n="3" />

It is in that general context that Zurpoché flourished. With him, we
reach a figure who is much better known than the previous three fig-
ures in the lineage. As *The Biographies for the Sūtra Initiation Lineage* is
one of the main sources Düjom Rinpoché copies or summarizes, there
is little need, in the present context, to add anything here to his account
of Zurpoché.<fnref n="4" /> Zurpoché’s most curious features are his association
with Drokmi Lotsāwa (992–1072/74) in the context of his fondness for
the Sakyapas’ teaching of *The Path with Its Fruit*<fnref n="5" /> and his friendly

<footnote n="1">¹ See for example Sørensen and Hazod 2007; Ducher 2021a; Kumagai 2022.</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² Roesler 2019.</footnote>

<footnote n="3">³ Dhongthog and van Schaik 2016.</footnote>

<footnote n="4">⁴ Gyurme Dorje and Kapstein 1991, pp. 617-635 and notes. A shorter biography of Zur po che is also found in Roerich 1978, pp. 110-113. It does not contradict the larger narrative found in Pema Trinlé's *The Biographies for the Sūtra Initiation Lineage* and reproduced by Düjom Rinpoché.</footnote>

<footnote n="5">⁵ Lam 'bras.</footnote>
relationships with the Bönpo Ketsewa, with whom, it is said, they
planned to build a temple in common.

His association with Drokmi, combined with some aspects of the
hagiographies of Zurpoché, gives the feeling that he was extremely in-
terested in the inner yogas of the completion phase, of which Drokmi
was, in his time, one of the most advanced proponents. The second
aspect is documented in details only in Bön sources that would require
further investigation. The only concern of their authors seems to be
their desire to present some of the Dzogchen of the Nyingmapas as
borrowings from Bön sources in a way that cannot, to date, be properly
verified. A more accurate and factual understanding of the way in
which early Nyingmapas and early Bönpos exchanged texts, doctrines,
and practical instructions would indeed be illuminating.

Both aspects of this very central figure in the Nyingma nebula of his
time suggest that at least some of the Nyingma masters played an ac-
tive role in the Tibetan renaissance of the 11th century. Until now it
has been assumed that the early Nyingmapas were merely passive re-
cipients of the new knowledge brought to Tibet by the masters of the
Later Spread of Dharma, which they merged with their own earlier
traditions. But such an understanding of cultural history is probably
simplistic. It is to be hoped that the patient historical reconstruction of
the concrete exchanges between the representatives of the many tradi-
tions of the time will gradually lead us to understand how the various
schools were built up by synthesizing their own materials through nu-
merous intelligent and active interactions (rather than mechanical "in-
fluences" or even "borrowings").

Maybe more interesting even than Zurpoché's association with the
Sakya and Bön traditions is the fact that, according to Pema Trinlé,<fnref n="1" />
Zurpoché's father travelled to India and remained there for ten years
(prior to Zurpoché's birth, we can suppose, so in the late 10th century).
This contradicts again both the unified tale of the origins of the
Nyingma School in the 8th century and the legend of a complete col-
lapse of Buddhism in Tibet during the "dark age." In fact, it may indi-
cate that the "Zur tradition" or "Zur system" (zur lugs) was, to some
extent, the fruit of their own studies in India in the late 10th century,
as much or maybe even more than a heritage from Nubchen Sangyé
Yeshé or, a fortiori, from the teachings introduced in Tibet at the time
of Emperor Trisong Detsen.

The narrative about the connection of Zurpoché to Nubchen Sangyé
Yeshé's disciples is somewhat fuzzy and gives the feeling that it is not
utterly impossible that all of this was later made up into a lineage. Be

<footnote n="1">¹ *The Biographies for the Sūtra Initiation Lineage*, in CNT, vol. 41, p. 196.</footnote>
that as it may, here is the lineage from Zurpoché to Drophukpa as presented by Rigdzin Pema Trinlé:

10. Zurpoché Śākya Jungné (1002–1062);<fnref n="1" />

11. Zurchungwa Sherab Drakpa (1014–1074);<fnref n="2" />

12-13: The “four pillars” and Drophukpa (zur wön) Śākya Sengé<fnref n="3" />
(1074–1134⁴ or 1135⁵).

Düjom Rinpoché also provides a sufficient biographical account of Zurpoché's successors.<fnref n="6" />

Zurpoché's biography, as well as many elements of the lives of the next generations of his posthumous followers, give the sense that these masters set up systems of practice focusing on the deity Yangdak Heruka, which some may have called "a Nyingma Hevajra" (or Cakrasamvara) in a way that would mingle earlier Nyingma materials with some inspiration at least from *The Path with Its Fruit*, which Zurpoché studied with Drokmi Lotsāwa. This, again, should be nuanced on the basis of the idea that the Zurs may have been heirs of teachings that they themselves collected in India in the 10th century.

However, so far, the literature that has resurfaced about Yangdak is scarce, except for a bulky text known as the *Great Secret Commentary on Yangdak*,<fnref n="7" /> which, despite its attribution to Padmasambhava, fits

<footnote n="1">¹ *The Biographies for the Sūtra Initiation Lineage*, in NKG/KSG, vol. 44, p. 266-308; in CNT, vol. 41, pp. 196-227.</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² *The Biographies*, in NKG/KSG, vol. 44, p. 308-334; in CNT, vol. 41, pp. 227-255. Many elements of his life are actually narrated in Zur po che's hagiography. This section includes an excursus on 'Gos khug pa lHas btsas' 11th century polemics against the rNying ma pa with Padma 'phrin las' replies. Roerich 1978, p. 646, mentions a "sthavira Shes rab grags pa" who invited Ācārya sGom pa (a nephew of sGam po pa, b. 1116 according to Roerich 1978, p. 463) to sTod lung in the 1050s. Another lineage described by Padma 'phrin las' (NKG/KSG, vol. 44, p. 358-359; CNT, vol. 41, p. 265), which will not be followed here, reads as follows: Zur chung ba; Mar pa lho brag pa; Shangs nag; gSang bdag sGro phug pa; Nya ri rgya ston. This is somewhat odd chronologically. Padma 'phrin las' calls all these bar skabs kyi brgyud tshul mi 'dra ba'i tshul and then shifts to what he calls dngos brgyud. This lineage is awkward if Mar pa is to be understood as Mar pa Chos kyi blo gros; it is completely unheard of in other sources (this last remark is by Cécile Ducher, September 17 2024).</footnote>

<footnote n="3">³ *The Biographies*, in NKG/KSG, vol. 44, p. 334-343; in CNT, vol. 41, pp. 255-262.</footnote>

<footnote n="4">⁴ According to Roerich 1978 and BDRC.</footnote>

<footnote n="5">⁵ According to Gyurme Dorje and Kapstein 1991 (loc. cit.).</footnote>

<footnote n="6">⁶ Gyurme Dorje and Kapstein 1991, p. 645-655.</footnote>

<footnote n="7">⁷ *Yang dag gsang 'grel chen po'. Its actual title is *dPal khrag 'thung chen po'i sgrub thabs yang dag grub pa* and it is found in NKG, vol. 47, pp. 6-585. It presents</footnote>
quite well with what we would expect from the early Zurs. What is most perplexing about this "Zur system" remains the absence of any explicitly attributed textual remnants of the early Zurs' productions, despite their enduring reputation as a tradition that left a lasting imprint on the Nyingmapas' intellectual and spiritual history. Actual knowledge of their ascribed teachings in the contemporary Nyingma tradition is based on much later works, such as Yungtönpa Dorjepal's (1284–1365) commentary on the *Sangwa Nyingpo*,<fnref n="1" /> which is the text generally referred to when Nyingma masters discuss the specific views of the "Zur system."

A possible explanation of the reason why quite little early Nyingma literature about deities other than Vajrakīla and Yamāntaka was preserved could be that most of it got absorbed into the enormous *Kagyé* systems of Nyangral and Chöwang. Indeed, as regards Yangdak Heruka, in the *Eight Pronouncements* he is the third deity, corresponding to the “mind” aspect, with his mandala in the east. It is probable that the materials<fnref n="2" /> passed from Tertön Drupchen Ngödrup to Nyang ral in the 13th century where compilations or summaries of these earlier traditions.

## A Side Note on Rongzom Chökyi Zangpo

Rongzom Chökyi Zangpo (1012–1088? 1042–1136?)<fnref n="3" /> admittedly plays no role at all in the history of the Nyingma school as described by Rigdzin Pema Trinlé. However, we cannot completely ignore him,

itself as a commentary written by Padmasambhava on a work of Hūṃkāra. It contains a lot of body techniques, sexual yogas, etc., which would not be expected in an 8th century text. There is a small narrative section in it (pp. 235-238), in which gNubs Sangs rgyas ye shes appears as the last figure. A note in the Tibetan edition mentions that this is "clearly an addition by gNubs chen...," but we might understand it otherwise as an element of proof that the whole text was composed *not earlier* than the second half of the 10th century and most probably in a Zur context. It also contains (p. 397) another short narrative about the circumstances of its translation, attributed to gNubs Nam mkha' snying po. However, it must have been composed—or at least developed and enriched—at the time of the "Tibetan Renaissance," and it does not seem to be a document of the imperial period. This text would certainly deserve careful analysis.

<footnote n="1">¹ g.Yung ston pa rDo rje dpal, 1999, *dPal gsang ba snying po'i rgyud don gsal byed me long*, in KSG, vol. 28, pp. 1-589.</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² The bKa' brgyad bka' ma rdzong 'phrang, the vestiges of which are preserved mainly in KSG, vol. 67, with some elements in vol. 13.</footnote>

<footnote n="3">³ Dominic Sur's biographical note on this figure (Sur 2021) is informative. See also Köppl 2008 and Sur 2017.</footnote>
since he is recognized in retrospect as one of the most fundamental
early masters of this tradition. This paragraph is added here mainly to
justify why we barely mention him. The reason is that whatever the
importance of Rongzom in his own time and milieu, it seems that his
present fame is largely due to a much later rediscovery of his writings.
Contemporary Nyingma scholars tend to follow Gö Lotsāwa's as-
sumption<fnref n="1" /> that when Longchenpa's original commentary on the
*Sangwa Nyingpo* (1352)<fnref n="2" /> deviates from the Zur system, it does so fol-
lowing Rongzom's commentary. However, in Longchenpa's text as it
actually stands, Rongzom is the object of a critical appreciation that is
not entirely laudatory. It can be shown<fnref n="3" /> that the lineage connections
from Rongzom to Longchenpa, for example, were forged by later au-
thors and do not correspond to historical reality. This does not mean
that Rongzom was not a genius or a great spiritual master, but rather,
that the history of how his works were received, especially their in-
creased fame in more recent periods (from the time of Jigmé Lingpa
and Ju Mipham), should be reconstructed to understand their actual
influence throughout earlier centuries in specific, traceable contexts.

A survey of the lineages in which he appears in the Fifth Dalai Lama's *Record of Teachings Receives* indicates that he played a role in the transmission of early Vajrakīla materials (in the Kama line). The names that feature before and after him in the lineages are not very familiar and that must be indicating that he belonged to a geographically isolated line that merged only later in the Nyingma mainstream, in ways that remain to be properly researched.

*From Drophukpa to Yungtönpa and Drölmawa (14th century)*

After Drophukpa in the mid-11th century, *The Biographies for the Sūtra Initiation Lineage* becomes more complex as Pema Trinlé follows more than one line of transmission. As Dalton phrases it:<fnref n="4" />

<footnote n="1">¹ Roerich 1978, p. 157. Klong chen pa reportedly "used to say that the method of explaining the commentary of the *gSang snying 'grel pa spar khab* was unsatisfactory, but that the method of Rong zom was good." Rong zom's commentary (*rGyud rgyal gsang ba snying po'i 'grel pa rong zom chos bzang gis mdzad pa*) is preserved in NKG/KSG, vol. 25, p. 5-438.</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² Klong chen rab 'byams 2009, *rGyud gsang ba snying po'i 'grel pa*, vol. 23, pp. 53-565.</footnote>

<footnote n="3">³ The only source in which Klong chen pa seems to claim the spiritual her-
itage of Rong zom Chos kyi bzang po is the *dPal gsang ba snying po'i spyi
don yid kyi mu sel* (Klong chen rab 'byams 2009, vol. pp. 52-183). See Ar-
guillère 2007, pp. 45–46 (English enriched adaptation forthcoming) for a
presentation of the strong reasons to doubt the authenticity of this text.</footnote>

<footnote n="4">⁴ Dalton 2016, p. 80.</footnote>
Pema Trinlé begins by following the usual path from Nubchen Sangyé Yeshé, though the early Zurs, up to Drölmawa Samdrup Dorjé (1294–1375), teacher to Zurham. From Drölmawa, however, three different lineages diverge [...].

In fact, the account of the lineage pathways from “the early Zurs” to the time of Rigdzin Gödem’s life in *The Biographies for the Sūtra Initiation Lineage* is more complicated.<fnref n="1" /> It is from the last of these “early Zurs,” *Drophukpa*, that the lineage branches.<fnref n="2" /> Pema Trinlé actually distinguishes two main lines of transmission after *Drophukpa*:<fnref n="3" />

14. Kyötön Śākya Yeshé
(late 11th cent.？);

15. Dampa Yasé Repa or
Yasé Chenpo;

16. Len Śākya Zangpo
(12th cent.);<fnref n="6" />

17. Sé (or Amé) Dorjé
Dechen;

18. “The three Paldens.”

14. Zurnak Khorlo
(late 11th–early 12th century);<fnref n="4" />

15. Amé Sherab Lodrö
(late 11th–early 12th c.);<fnref n="5" />

16. Lachen Ralbu;

17. Metön Gönpo
(late 12th–early 13th cent.)<fnref n="7" />

18. Khepa Sochenpo<fnref n="8" />

<footnote n="1">¹ Padma 'phrin las, 2015, *The Biographies*, in CNT, vol. 41, pp. 263-264.</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² Dalton 2016, p. 187, n. 9, mentions the second line (through g.Yung ston pa rDo rje dpal) merely in passing, since he does not have the reasons that we have to be interested in this figure.</footnote>

<footnote n="3">³ Padma 'phrin las discusses an alternate lineage from sGro phug pa to mGar chung Shes rab 'od, which would not be relevant here.</footnote>

<footnote n="4">⁴ See, e.g., Roerich 1978, p. 110, which locates him in the Zur genealogy, but without elements allowing to calculate his dates. It seems that he was the grandson of one of Zur po che's younger brothers. Another mention of him in Roerich 1978, p. 125, does not allow to date him any better than in the very late 11th–early 12th century.</footnote>

<footnote n="5">⁵ Appears in the Zur genealogy of *The Blue Annals* (*loc. cit*.*) as A mi Sher blo, a grandson of another of Zur po che's brothers. Probably active in the end of the 11th century.</footnote>

<footnote n="6">⁶ Roerich 1978, p. 120: Glan Śā kya bzang po of Chu bar, connected to Zur chung pa as “the pillar of the [system of] Māyā” (i.e., *sGyu 'phrul drwa ba*). See also *op. cit.*, p. 157, without further connections that would help to date him more precisely. In the Fifth Dalai Lama's *gSan yig*, this intermediary link between *Dam pa* Ya se and A mes rDo rje bde chen is not mentioned.</footnote>

<footnote n="7">⁷ Mes ston mGon po. Mentioned in Roerich 1978, p. 131, as the foremost disciple of a “Zhig po of dBus,” who died in a year *shing mo yos* that Roerich calculates as 1195. Also mentioned in *op. cit.* p. 149 in the context of this same lineage.</footnote>

<footnote n="8">⁸ Dalton 2016, e.g., p. 215, calls him “Khepa Sechenpo” (*mKhas pa* Sre chen po). Appears as *Bla ma* Sro in Roerich 1978, p. 149. This figure is</footnote>
19. Drubtop Lhünpal;<fnref n="1" />

20. Bendé Wangchuk Gyaltsen;<fnref n="2" />

21. Zur Jampa Sengé (ca. 1280–ca 1310);<fnref n="3" />

22. Yungtönpa Dorjepal (1284–1365) “who also heard it from Nyemdowa.”

With Yungtönpa Dorjepal (1284–1365), we have reached Rigdzin Gödem’s time. Yungtönpa died when Rigdzin Gödem was twenty-eight years old. There is no indication that they ever met. However, Yungtönpa, born in Tsang, was a towering figure in the 14th-century Nyingma context. He was closely involved with the early stages of the Khandro Nyingthik as well as perhaps the main specialist of the Yamāntaka cycle Mañjuśrī Master of Life and many other Kama and Terma traditions that are central to Rigdzin Gödem’s teachings. According to later official Dorjé Drak narratives, the traditions passed through

consistently called So ston Shes rab rgyal mtshan in the Fifth Dalai Lama's Thob yig (1971: vol. 2, f°191a; vol. 4, f°255b).

<footnote n="1">¹ Roerich 1978, p. 149: in this lineage leading to g.Yung ston pa, we find in his place two names: Pa shi Śāk 'od and rTa nag bDud rtsi.</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² In the Fifth Dalai Lama's *Thob yig* (1971: vol. 4, f°315a), one [Ha sdings pa] dBang phyug rgyal mtshan was a master of the Jo nang pa Sa bzang ma ti paṇ chen (1294–1376) and his master sPang khang pa Grags pa rgyal mtshan (d.u.; see also *Thob yig* 1971, vol. 4, f°616b). Since the life of the next link in the present lineage is very short, this could be consistent if, for example, *Ban de* dBang phyug rgyal mtshan was born in the 1260s and would have lived during some part of the 14th century.</footnote>

<footnote n="3">³ See, e.g., in Gyurme Dorje and Kapstein 1991, p. 663-664. From Roerich 1978, p. 149, we know that he died at the age of 27. He was at least 15 (Gyurme Dorje and Kapstein 1991 p. 664: "...in his fourteenth year, he began to teach and acquired a reputation as a scholar") when he taught g.Yung ston pa. What is more, in Yung ston pa's versified autobiography, it is said that he went to the Zurs' seat, 'Ug pa lung, in his own 15th year, around 1298. (See Karma kam tshang gi brgyud pa rin po che'i rnam thar, p. 331: de nas bco lnga'i lo lon dus su ni | mkhas grub rtsod med nyi zla ltar grags pa | zur chen šā kya 'byung gnas zhes grags pa'i | gdan sa 'ug pa lung du phyin | .) So, Zur Byams pa seng ge must have been born around 1285 at the very latest. He was also (Roerich 1978, p. 151) a teacher of Drölmawa, born in 1295. By the same calculation, this may not have occurred before 1305, which is compatible with a death in his 27th year (Tibetan style), at the latest in 1311. This all must mean that he, as a lineage holder, granted empowerments and oral transmission to the young sons of important rNying ma families. Zur Byams pa seng ge is mostly known as the master of the above-mentioned sGrol ma ba ['Jam dbyangs] bsam grub rdo rje. Another disciple of his (and thus an elder contemporary of Rig 'dzin rGod Idem), sNgags 'chang Nam mkha' rin chen, wrote a large commentary on the Sangwa Nyingpo (preserved in vol. 29-30 of NKG and KSG).</footnote>
Yungtönpa mingled in a single stream with the transmissions of Rigdzin Gödem's termas only in the 16th century. But it would not have been impossible for Rigdzin Gödem to have received teachings from Yungtönpa, although there is no trace of this in known documents.<fnref n="1" /> Yungtönpa will be further discussed below, in Chapters 11, 13 and 14 (about the terma lineages).

Now, returning to Drölmawa Samdrup Dorjé (1294–1375), another important but poorly recorded figure in the background of Rigdzin Gödem's life, here is the relevant passage from Dalton's note:<fnref n="2" />

> Drölmawa was also one of Zur Jampa Sengé's two main students, the other being Yungtönpa Dorjepal (1284–1365), another notable member of the Len clan who wrote an authoritative commentary on the *Guhyagarbha* according to the Zur exegetical tradition and who, under the third Karmapa, was a major figure in the fourteenth-century Great Perfection Seminal Heart tradition. He also received the *Gathering of Intentions* transmission from Zur Jampa Senggé, who stood at the end of a completely different “Seal of entrustment” line that is quickly traced by Pema Trinlé as follows...

Little is known of Drölmawa Samdrup Dorjé's life, besides his dates of birth and death, which are quite well established. As Düjom Rinpoché phrases it:<fnref n="3" />

> Samdrup Dorjé's knowledge and enlightened activity are difficult to estimate. He meditated in total solitude, and in Chema Senggé he meditated one-pointedly on the Innermost Spirituality of the Great Perfection.<fnref n="4" /> He reached the limits of awareness, and savored the entire ocean of buddha-fields equally.

<footnote n="1">¹ As will be explained in Volume 2, the masters of rGod Idem are very difficult to identify from the way they are referred to in Nyi ma bzang po's *The Clarifying Ray of Sunlight*. Although we have a strong hypothesis as to who his rDzogs chen master was, those from whom he received the *gter chos* of Nyang ral and Chos dbang remain completely obscure. It could, of course, mean that they were very local, unknown masters. But it also happens that Tibetan people are called by many names, so that a figure who is actually famous is not easily recognized in some mentions either by later tradition or by Tibetologists.</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² Dalton 2016, p. 187, n. 9.</footnote>

<footnote n="3">³ Gyurme Dorje and Kapstein 1991, p. 668. For another, slightly longer, but not historically much more informative, account of sGrol ma ba, see Gu ru bKra shis, 1990, p. 291.</footnote>

<footnote n="4">⁴ *rDzogs chen snying thig*. The obscure phrase about reaching "the limits of awareness" is an awkward rendering of *rig pa tshad phebs*, the name of the</footnote>
However, the documented traces of this figure in Tibetan texts are suf-
ficiently numerous to allow for a monograph on this figure: he is the
author of a commentary on the *Sangwa Nyingpo* that could be studied
alongside Yungtönpa's as another witness to the Zur system.<fnref n="1" /> Another
text by him is found in the ten-volume *Mañjuśrī Master of Life* collec-
tion,<fnref n="2" /> which points to the fact that this cycle was not regarded with
suspicion by masters who might otherwise have been more or less
skeptical about the termas.<fnref n="3" /> The Fifth Dalai Lama's *Record of Teachings
Received* contains numerous references to Drölmawa Samdrup Dorjé,
showing that he received teachings from many masters, including
Jonangpas at the turn of the 13th and 14th centuries. There are indeed
many threads that future researchers could pull.

Drölmawa Samdrup Dorjé was a disciple of Lentön Sönam Gönpo,
who, according to Dalton, was active in late thirteenth to early four-
teenth century and composed a very large manual for the empower-
ment of *The Gathering of Intentions*.<fnref n="4" /> This text, mentioned in passing by
Dalton, should also be studied in depth to gain a clearer understand-
ing of Nyingma thought among social groups close (at least geograph-
ically) to Rigdzin Gödem during his youth.

Following the lineages after Samdrup Dorjé in this volume would
not make much sense,<fnref n="5" /> as later figures cannot have influenced Rigdzin
Gödem, even as mere background figures. However, it might be
worthwhile to trace these later lineages in another volume, examining
how they were incorporated into the mainstream Dorje Drak system.

<figure><img src="image_12.png" /></figure>

third *thod ral* vision. This passage suggests that bSam grub rdo rje must
also be included in sNying thig lineages.

<footnote n="1">¹ sGrol ma bsam grub rdo rje, 1982–1987, *dPal gsang ba'i snying po de kho na nyid nges pa'i rgyud kyi khog dbub rin po che 'bar ba'i gur*, in NKG/KSG, vol. 28, pp. 591–713.</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² sGrol ma bSam 'grub rdo rje, 2015, *bCom ldan 'das phyag rgya zil gnon gyi phrin las kyi rim pa gsal bar byed pa'i sgron me*, in CNT, vol. 20, p. 631-654.</footnote>

<footnote n="3">³ There even exists a so-called collection of his “Complete Writings”: *gSung ‘bum* (http://purl.bdrc.io/resource/MW3CN17890). This small (156 p.) volume includes the commentary of the *gSang ba snying po* plus a *sgrub thabs* for the peaceful mandala of the *sGyu ‘phrul drwa ba*, but not the *‘Jam dpal tshe bdag*-related text.</footnote>

<footnote n="4">⁴ Dalton 2016, p. 69: *‘Dus pa chen po’i mdo’i sgrub khrigs bzhin dbang byang lag len*, in KSG, vol. 61 & 62.</footnote>

<footnote n="5">⁵ Another lineage documented by Rig 'dzin Padma 'phrin las passes through sGrol ma ba: Glan *ston* bSod nams mgon po; Nyang *ston* dPal ldan rdo rje; sGrol chen 'Bro *ston* bSam 'grub rdo rje; Gyong khang gZi *ston* Śā kya bzang po; Shangs mda' *bla ma* Grags she.</footnote>
**Chapter 10: What is the Source of Rigdzin Gödem's Lineage for the *Bima Nyingthik*?**

Stéphane Arguillère
(IFRAE / Inalco)

e know from his disciples' biographies<fnref n="1" /> that Rigdzin Gödem taught them the two *Nyingthiks*. However, we do not have any explicit source about the lineage from which he received them, except, in Nyima Zangpo's<fnref n="2" /> *The Clarifying Ray of Sunlight*, the name of a master, Draklungpa Rinchenpal,<fnref n="3" /> who taught him “all Dzogchen.” If our hypothesis (summarized Chapter 15 below and in the chapter of Volume 2 about Gödem's masters) is correct, this Draklungpa is Meban Rinchen Lingpa (1389–1368),<fnref n="4" /> whose connection to the *Khandro Nyingthik* through both Pema Ledreltsal (the tertön who discovered it) and Gyalsé Lekpa (1290–1366)<fnref n="5" /> is very clear.

Many of Rigdzin Gödem’s terma cycles can be seen as further developments of prototypes from the earlier prestigious tertöns (especially Nyangral and Chöwang). His main Dzogchen cycle, the *Gongpa Zangthal*, demonstrates a precise and thorough knowledge of the two *Nyingthiks*.<fnref n="6" /> Such a deep knowledge is not evident among earlier

<footnote n="1">¹ Sangs rgyas dpal bzang (ca. 15th c.) 1983, *Bla ma rnams kyi rnam thar 'od kyi phreng ba*, p. 77. Reference kindly provided by Jay Valentine (email, 2025/02/25). These elements will be presented in our vol. 3.</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² Se ston Nyi ma bzang po (1386–?). Date of birth calculated by Jay Valentine (personal communication 2025/06/06). *The Clarifying Ray of Sunlight* is rGod Idem’s oldest and most authoritative biography.</footnote>

<footnote n="3">³ Brag lung pa Rin chen dpal. Nyi ma bzang po 2015, p. 16. Taking the passage in context, and assuming that the order of the text is somewhat chronological, Brag lung pa Rin chen dpal would have taught rGod Idem around the latter’s 25th year (1361). However, there are reasons (explained below) to suspect that, if Rin chen dpal is Rin chen gling pa, he may also be the one who taught rGod Idem *The Wheel of [Ritual] Activities of Black Leprosy* much earlier (around 1350). See below Chapter 15.</footnote>

<footnote n="4">⁴ About this figure, see Arguillère 2024a, “A King of Dharma,” and Arguillère 2024e, “Meban Rinchen Lingpa.”</footnote>

<footnote n="5">⁵ *rGyal sras* Legs pa. See Arguillère 2024c, “Gyelse Lekpa.” The issue of Padma Las ’brel rtsal’s dates has been settled in this article on the basis of unambiguous autobiographical statements by *rGyal sras* Legs pa.</footnote>

<footnote n="6">⁶ See Jean-Luc Achard’s description of this cycle in Volume 2 of this series.</footnote>
tertöns, with the exception of Pema Ledreltsal's<fnref n="1" /> circle. Pema Le-dreltsal, born in 1291, discovered the *Khandro Nyingthik* in 1313 and died in 1319. His revelations were still something very recent in Gö-dem's youth. The *Khandro Nyingthik* lineage quickly merged with that of the much earlier *Bima Nyingthik*,<fnref n="2" /> which makes sense since the for-mer mainly contains practical applications of principles that have their complete background in the latter. The *Bima Nyingthik* had been trans-mitted in the previous centuries in a lineage that does not seem to have interacted much with the milieus of the main treasure discoverers.

It has long been believed by most Tibetologists that visionary Dzog-chen, and especially the fully developed system of Thögal instructions and teachings, was something late, perhaps not much earlier than the time when this system is attested in the terma literature. The *Bima Nyingthik* would then be a creation of the mid-13th century and its ear-lier history a mere fiction. In the 1990s, Jean-Luc Achard stood more or less alone in defending part of the traditional historiography,<fnref n="3" /> alt-hough in a version that the Nyingmapas would have found unortho-dox, since he gave an important role to the Bönpos. Now that much more primary literature has emerged and has been seriously exam-ined, we can safely say that the system, whatever its earlier origins in the imperial period, was in any case complete at the beginning of the Tibetan renaissance.

We have no explicit information as to which of the *Bima Nyingthik* masters active in Rigdzin Gödem's time served as his lineage link. The passage from Setön Nyima Zangpo's above-quoted biography simply says that he received "all Dzogchen" from Draklungpa Rinchenpal, who was most probably Rinchen Lingpa. Therefore, it is very likely that this master taught him both *Heart-Drops*. It is unclear from whom Rinchen Lingpa himself learned the *Bima Nyingthik*. Tertön hagi-ographies, unlike those of scholarly monks, tend to underplay their masters, most likely to emphasize their direct connection to Pad-masambhava, and unfortunately Rinchen Lingpa is no more an excep-tion to this rule than Rigdzin Gödem. However, despite this missing link, the long lineage of which Rigdzin Gödem was a part is quite well

<footnote n="1">¹ Padma las 'brel rtsal, 1291–1319, the discoverer of the *mKha' 'gro snying thig*.</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² The first well-documented specialists of the *mKha' 'gro snying thig* after Padma las 'brel rtsal, Karmapa III Rang byung rdo rje, g. Yung ston pa, and Klong chen pa, were also very well-versed in the *Bi ma snying thig* and Klong chen pa's writings definitively established the idea that a synthesis of the "vast" *Bi ma snying thig* and the "profound" *mKha' 'gro snying thig* was required.</footnote>

<footnote n="3">³ Especially in his doctoral dissertation published as Achard 1999.</footnote>
known.<fnref n="1" /> It is not out of place to recall it briefly in the context of the Kama lineages inherited by the Northern Treasures masters, without discussing the parts of the lineage prior to Chetsün Sengé Wangchuk or presenting biographies for the named masters, which are easily found (e.g., in Nyoshül Khenpo's *A Marvelous Garland of Rare Gems*). The lineage is as follows:

Vimalamitra;
Nyang Tingdzin Zangpo (born ca. 777?);
Dangma Lhüngyal;<fnref n="2" />
Chetsün Sengé Wangchuk (ca. 997–1121);
Gyalwa Zhangtön Tashi Dorjé (1097–1167);
Khepa Nyibum (1158–1213);
Guru Jober (1196–1231);
Trülshik Sengé Gyabpa (1202–1265);<fnref n="3" />
Melong Dorjé (1243–1303);<fnref n="4" />
Kumarādza (1266–1343).

As there seems to have been interactions between Pema Ledreltsal's disciple Gyalsé Lekpa and Kumarādza<fnref n="5" /> and as Gyalsé Lekpa and Rinchen Lingpa knew one another well, it is possible that Rinchen Lingpa received the *Bima Nyingthik* from either Gyalsé Lekpa or Kumarādza himself, although this is not documented. There were some other competent masters for the *Bima Nyingthik* available in the same time period and in the same region; however, they held teaching before all the lineages were collected and unified by Kumarādza and then passed to Longchenpa (1308–1364). Rinchen Lingpa may have received the lineage from any of these.

<footnote n="1">¹ See Achard 1999, especially pp. 77-99, which also includes a general description of the seventeen tantras that are the basis of that specific tradition.</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² See Nyoshül Khenpo 1998, p. 221 (translated in Barron 2005, pp. 84-85).</footnote>

<footnote n="3">³ In the *Grub chen me long rdo rje'i rnam thar* (Longchenpa 2009, vol. 4, pp. 146-153, p. 149), although the text is not perfectly clear, it seems that Seng ge rgyab pa died when Me long rdo rje was 22 (1265). The text strangely mentions a snake year (1257? 1269?), but if we ignore this element and assume that he died in his sixty-fourth year (Nyoshül Khenpo 1998, p. 237; Barron 2005, pp.90-91), we can conclude that he was then born in 1202.</footnote>

<footnote n="4">⁴ Klong chen pa, *Grub thob me long rdo rje'i rnam thar*, in Klong chen pa 2009, vol. 4, pp. 141-145. He was also, according to this text, the disciple of Sangs rgyas ras pa, who might be BDRC P4172: Sangs rgyas ras pa Rin chen smon lam (1203–1280).</footnote>

<footnote n="5">⁵ See Arguillère 2024c “Gyelse Lekpa.”</footnote>
The texts of the *Bima Nyingthik*, said to be hidden at the Zhé Lhakhang by Chetsün Sengé Wangchuk, were rediscovered (more or less completely) by three people, generating two further lineages not recorded in most sources but detailed in the *Profound Quintessence*.<fnref n="1" /> Here is the way things are phrased in *The Blue Annals*:<fnref n="2" />

[Chetsün Sengé Wangchuk] ...then lived for fifty years and transformed himself into light without residues [1071]. His precepts were hidden in three secret places: at Uyuk, Langdrö Chepatak, and Jalgyiphu. Thirty years after the hiding of the precepts [1101?], Chegom Nakpo of Lower Rongnar discovered some of these hidden precepts, and practiced them himself, and taught them to many others. From Langdrö Chepatak, one called Shangpa Repa obtained hidden precepts and taught them to others. Again, when Zhang Tashi Dorjé who had been born in the Fire-Female-Ox year (...) (1097 A.D.) at Lado of Nültsö Linggu, was residing in Upper Nyang, the god Vajrasaddhu<fnref n="3" /> having transformed into a white man, wearing a white hat, appeared to him, and guided him from Upper Nyang, helping him on the way by providing him with night quarters and food.

Little is yet known about Chegom Nakpo. Jean-Luc Achard was the first researcher to write about him and to place him in the eleventh century.<fnref n="4" /> Chegom Nakpo is mentioned in a text of Longchenpa's *Zabmo Yangtik*, the *Mirror of the Key Points*,<fnref n="5" /> as receiving the teachings from Chetsün Sengé Wangchuk and then passing them to Zhangtön.<fnref n="6" /> The way things are phrased imply that Chegom Nakpo was an *actual* disciple of Chetsün and did not meet him only in a vision. He should then have been born well before 1071—say around 1050—and died after 1097 to be Zhangtön's master—around 1120 at the earliest.

The only difference from the standard version of the lineage is that it later passes from Sengé Gyabpa to “Dawa Münsel,” and from him to Kumarādza.<fnref n="7" /> However, Dawa Münsel is just another name for

<footnote n="1">¹ Klong chen pa, *Zab mo yang tig*, in Klong chen pa 2009, vol. 11 and 12.</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² Roerich 1978, p. 193.</footnote>

<footnote n="3">³ This is rDo rje legs pa, a purely Tibetan deity whose name has been questionably sanskritized.</footnote>

<footnote n="4">⁴ Achard 1999, p. 82.</footnote>

<footnote n="5">⁵ Klong chen pa, 2009, sNyan brgyud kyi rgyab chos chen mo zab don gnad kyi me long, vol. 12, p. 115.</footnote>

<footnote n="6">⁶ Loc. cit.: lce btsun gyis dpe brgyud kyi snod 'thol du phyin pas | rong snar mda'i lce sgom nag po snod ldan du gzigs nas de la gnang ngo | khong las sprul sku rgyal ba zhang ston gyis zhus te | ...</footnote>

<footnote n="7">⁷ Klong chen pa, 2009, Grub thob me long rdo rje'i rnam thar, vol. 4, p. 147, in which the verse: *mnyam med sbas pa'i rnal 'byor thugs kyi sprul pa ni* | is accompanied by a note in smaller characters: *sprang smyon zla ba mun sel*. This</footnote>
Melong Dorjé. More interesting, it is also said that "the two of them" (probably Melong Dorjé and Kumarādza) received from Lama Yeshegön a lineage that had been passed down through the sons of Chegom Nakpo. Lobpön Yeshegön had received it from a "great realized being" who must be Yönten Gangpa. This, however, remains to be researched, since, Kumarādza, in his biography, is presented as receiving most of these teachings of the so-called *Secret Cycle* after Melong Dorjé's death (1303) and sometimes in the company of Orgyenpa (1229-1309).<fnref n="1" />

This *Secret Cycle* associated with Chegom Nakpo is understood in this context not as something slightly lower than the "Hyper-Secret Cycle" (*yang gsang bla med skor*, the Heart Drops), as is commonly the case in Dzogchen doxographies—but as a different *way* or *style* of teaching the Nyingthik, in which specific tantras, different from the better-known "Seventeen tantras" of the Heart Drops, are combined with these. The Fifth Dalai Lama describes these tantras in his *Record of Teachings Received*:<fnref n="2" />

> ...In terms of the root tantras [of this cycle], the outertantra is the
> *Great Complete Clarification of Drops*,<fnref n="3" /> the explanation of the precepts
> in ninety-five chapters. As for the particular tantras, those whose
> divisions explain the essence of all teachings are: *The Tantra of the
> Buddha Present in All Sentient Beings*, in eight chapters;<fnref n="4" /> *The Tantra
> of the Unique Son of All Teachings, The Contemplation of the Conqueror*

is further confirmed by the Fifth Dalai Lama's *Record of Teachings Received*, in which Zla ba mun sel appears as another name of Me long rdo rje, incidentally presented as being a treasure discoverer (1971, vol. 3, f°110b: *gter ston zla ba mun sel* | *me long rdo rje yang zer*...).

<footnote n="1">¹ P1448, the Third Karma pa's master. Ku ma rā dza was closely associated with both O rgyan pa and Karma pa Rang byung rdo rje, two figures who could also be sources of Rin chen gling pa's (and thus indirectly of Rig 'dzin rGod ldem's) knowledge of the *Bi ma snying thig*.</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² *Op. cit.* (1971) vol. 3, f°105ab.: *gnyis pa rtsa brgyud la* | *spyi rgyud thig le kun gsal chen po zhes bya ba man ngag gi bshad pa rgyud le'u dgu bcu rtsa bdun pa* | *sgos rgyud la nang gses kyis bstan pa thams cad kyi snying po sems can thams cad la sangs rgyas rang chas chen por bzhugs pa'i rgyud le'u brgyad pa* | *rgyal ba rdo rje sems dpa'i dgongs pa bstan pa thams cad kyi bu gcig pa'i rgyud le'u brgyad pa* | *ngo sprod sgras (sic) pa zhing khams bstan pa'i rgyud le'u bcu gsum pa* | *ye shes mar me'i rgyud dam sgron ma rnam par bkod pa'i rgyud le'u gsum pa* | *sangs rgyas rdo rje sems dpa'i dgongs pa tshig gsum <b> pa'i rgyud le'u gsum pa rnams* |</footnote>

<footnote n="3">³ Thig le kun gsal chen po'i rgyud, in NG, vol. 13, pp. 296-492.</footnote>

<footnote n="4">⁴ *bsTan pa thams cad kyi snying po sems can thams cad la sangs rgyas chen por bzhugs pa'i rgyud*, in NG, vol. 13, pp. 682-704, which presents it as a *gter ma* of lCe sgom nag po.</footnote>
Vajrasattva,<fnref n="1" /> in eight chapters; *The Presentation*<fnref n="2" /> of the Confrontation, *Which Shows all the Pure Lands*, in thirteen chapters; *The Tantra of the Lamp of Primordial Wisdom* or *Complete Array of All Lamps*, in three chapters;<fnref n="3" /> and *The Tantra of Vajrasattva's Contemplation in Three Words*, in three chapters.<fnref n="4" />

This list is relevant for Northern Treasures studies, for it can be proved
by further research that Gödem knew these tantras very well. Some of
them are even integrated in the Gongpa Zangthal, while others are often
quoted. From this point of view, the Gongpa Zangthal does not only
integrate Khandro Nyingthik and general Bima Nyingthik material, but
also these specific teachings that inspired Longchenpa's Profound
Quintessence or Zabmo Yangtik.

As for the lineage through Shangpa Repa,<fnref n="5" /> it was passed to Zhang-
tön Chöbar (bdr: P4574, 1053–1135), who in this context is always
called Zabtön Chöbar.<fnref n="6" /> His disciple for this tradition was Dampa
Gyertön, who then taught it to Kyemé Jokyab, who in turn passed it to
his son, Gyertön Jomé. Kyemé Jokyab and Gyertön Jomé then taught
this tradition to Nyentön Sherab Tsemo, who taught it to Rinpoché
Yönten Gangpa, who then gave it to Namkha Dorjé,<fnref n="7" /> who taught it to

<footnote n="1">¹ *Sangs rgyas thams cad kyi bstan pa bu gcig pa'i rgyud*, in NG, vol. 13, pp. 492-519, practically identical to the text found in both *Bi ma snying thig* and *dGongs pa zang thal*.</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² The Fifth Dalai Lama's spelling *sgras pa* has not been taken into account and the translation is based on the common one *spras pa*. This is the *Ngo sprod spras pa*, one of the seventeen tantras, which shows that the two cor-pora are not entirely distinct.</footnote>

<footnote n="3">³ *Ye shes mar me'i rgyud* or *sGron ma rnam par bkod pa'i rgyud*, in NG, vol. 13, pp. 780-795.</footnote>

<footnote n="4">⁴ *Sangs rgyas rdo rje sems dpa'i dgongs pa tshig gsum po*, in NG, vol. 13, pp. 764-780.</footnote>

<footnote n="5">⁵ Shangs pa *ras pa*, who seems to be the same person also called Shong pa *ras pa* in Klong chen pa, 2009, *sNyan brgyud don gyi me long*, vol. 12, p. 495.</footnote>

<footnote n="6">⁶ Or *Zab don* Chos 'bar in Ngag dbang blo bzang rgya mtsho 1970–1971, *Thob yig gaŋgā'i chu rgyun*, vol. 3, f°105b; vol. 4, f°59b, 70a, 222b. He is most commonly called Zhang *ston* Chos 'bar and is not to be confused with Zhang *ston* bKra shis rdo rje, although they are almost contemporary. They do not have the same masters and disciples and Zhang *ston* Chos 'bar has much clearer Sa skya connections. Thanks to Jean-Luc Achard (oral communication, January 2025) for this clarification.</footnote>

<footnote n="7">⁷ *Dam pa* dGyer ston; sKye med Jo skyabs; dGyer *ston* Jo me; gNyen *ston* Shes rab rtse mo; *Rin po che* Yon tan sgang pa; Nam mkha’ rdo rje. The latter, as most of the others in these “secondary” lineages, is completely unknown, except for the scarce information that can be found in Ku ma rā dza’s autobiography, copied in *The Blue Annals* (p. 199). This lineage is also</footnote>
Kumarādza. Kumarādza also received it from Kalden Chökyi Sherab,<fnref n="1" /> who had received it from Tönpa Rinchen Sengé.<fnref n="2" /> Be that as it may, all we can say is that the person—probably Rinchen Lingpa—who passed the *Bima Nyingthik* to Rigdzin Gödem must have received it from one or several of these masters who were active in the early 14th century.

❖

found in the Fifth Dalai Lama's *Record of Teachings Received* (loc. cit.), with interesting alternative spellings: *ice btsun seng ge dbang phyug* | *gu ru shangs pa ras pa* | *bla ma zab don chos 'bar'* | *dam pa dge ston yab sras'* | *gnyan ston shes rab rtse mo* | *drin can sprul sku mched gnyis'* | *rgyal sman nam mikha' rdo rje* | *rig 'dzin ku mā rā dza'* | *g.yung ston rdo rje dpal*. The fact that the lineage passes to g.Yung ston pa rDo rje dpal, not to Klong chen pa, is, incidentally, interesting.

<footnote n="1">¹ *sKal ldan Chos kyi shes rab.*</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² *sTon pa Rin chen seng ge.*</footnote>
# Chapter 11: Terma Lineages, First Part: Gya Zhangtrom's
Mañjuśrī Master of Life

Stéphane Arguillère
(IFRAE / Inalco)

In this and following chapters,<fnref n="1" /> three types of elements will be examined. Our first concern is to trace the three non-Jangter terma cycles still widely practiced in the Dorjé Drak system that precede Rigdzin Gödem (Gya Zhangtrom's Mañjuśrī Master of Life, Pema Ledreltsal's *Rahula*, and Karma Lingpa's *Peaceful and Wrathful deities*). Secondarily, it is also necessary to document the terma traditions that Rigdzin Gödem is said to have been taught in his biographies (termas found by Nyangral Nyima Özer and Guru Chöwang) or in other literature, such as records of teachings received that mention his name (e.g., *Mañjuśrī's Dzogchen*<fnref n="2" /> found by Tertön Sarben Chokmé). Similarly, a short presentation of Pema Ledreltsal's *Khandro Nyingthik* is provided because it appears that much of it got incorporated into Rigdzin Gödem's *Gongpa Zangthal*. Thirdly, it is necessary to provide more context for Rigdzin Gödem's biography within the broader Nyingma tradition. In particular, it is worth briefly mentioning other important tertöns, whether or not Gödem had any known connection with them and whatever the roles they played in the later Jangter / Dorjé Drak lineage.

For the sake of clarity, these elements are arranged in a chronological order, but the reader should be aware of their different status, as some are meant to reconstruct Rigdzin Gödem's own world, while other may be relevant only for later stages of development of the Jangter tradition. Complementary discussions will be presented in Volume 2 in the context of Rigdzin Gödem's masters, when his biography or the records of teaching received of later masters indicate that he more or less certainly received, and sometimes taught, other systems of revelations.

The Yamāntaka traditions of the Later Spread schools are much better known than those of the Nyingmapas. Cuevas' study of the “Rā Lotsāwa volume”<fnref n="3" /> provides an up-to-date synthesis on their various branches in Tibet. The situation is different for the Nyingma literature on Yamāntaka. The status of this deity in this school and the history of

<footnote n="1">¹ Chapters 11-12 and 14-16. Chapter 13 is devoted to the global situation at the turn of the 13th and 14th centuries.</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² We will return to *Jam dpal rdzogs chen* below (mainly in Chapter 12).</footnote>

<footnote n="3">³ Cuevas 2021a.</footnote>
the transmission of related literature and practices are virtually un-
known. However, a previous paper has provided an overview of the
subject.<fnref n="1" /> This chapter merely summarizes the aspects relevant to the
Dorjé Drak tradition.

There is no autonomous cycle associated with Yamāntaka in the
Northern Treasures proper. This situation can be interpreted in two
opposite ways. Either it is the result of a lack of interest in a deity that
would not be central to the Nyingmapas in general, at least after the
11th century; or perhaps it was not developed into an autonomous cycle
because a system already existed that was considered complete and sufficient.
The present state of affairs in the Nyingma school might lead one
to think that the first hypothesis is correct, since there are few Yamāntaka practitioners among the Nyingmapas today.<fnref n="2" /> However, when one
gets rid of anachronistic assumptions and, having become familiar
with the names of the main elements in this corpus, begins to notice
the occurrences in the hagiographies of elements related to Mañjuśrī
*Master of Life*—the main system, or group of systems, for the practice
of Yamāntaka in the Nyingma school—one finds them everywhere, at
least until the early 18th century.<fnref n="3" /> Therefore, the second explanation
ultimately seems more convincing.

<footnote n="1">¹ Arguillère 2024b.</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² This should be nuanced. Mi pham's (1846–1912) writings show a deep interest in Yamāntaka in general and *Mañjuśrī Master of Life* in particular. Dilgo Khyentsé's (1910–1991) autobiography (Jinpa Palmo 2008) is full of indications that this interest did not die out after Mi pham. It is altogether difficult to be sure whether the devotion to this deity ever really waned, or whether it is only rarely mentioned because of its association with destructive magic. This explanation is awkward, however, since the other most popular *yi dam* deities of the rNying ma pas have similar reputation in this area.</footnote>

<footnote n="3">³ See, for example, Arguillère 2007, p. 39, on the young Klong chen pa (1308–1364) practicing Yamāntaka rituals with Grags pa seng ge (1283–1349, considered in retrospect to be the first Zhwa dmar pa) to counter a spell cast against Karmapa Rang byung rdo rje (1284–1339), and *ibid*. pp. 78-79, on the Yamāntaka teachings received by Klong chen pa from a “Khang dmar pa,” who may in fact be the same Grags pa seng ge. See also *ibid*, pp. 75-77, for further Yamāntaka teachings received from a “Tshong ’dus pa” who, for various reasons, might be g.Yung *ston pa* rDo rje dpal (1284–1365). A close examination of the versified records of the teachings received contained in g.Yung *ston pa’s* biography reveals his deep interest in this cycle of Yamāntaka practice. In the same generation and maybe closer to rGod Idem, Rin chen gling pa’s great *gter chos* on Nāgarakṣa (a specific form of Yamāntaka) and the mention in rGod Idem’s life of his first signs of accomplishment achieved in the practice of that form of the deity are further indications of the importance of Yamāntaka to the 14th century rNying ma</footnote>
The Jangter masters became known as specialists of Mañjuśrī Master of Life in the 16th century at the latest. This cycle was already perceived in the 14th century as the most powerful system for aggressive magic, maybe in concurrence with Vajrakīla, which later completely overshadowed Yamāntaka in the general Nyingma school, but never fully in the Dorjé Drak tradition.<fnref n="1" />

It is interesting that the Jangter masters, although known as Vajrakīla specialists, found it proper to acquire proficiency in the vast and complicated system of Mañjuśrī Master of Life and that their posterity in our times published this large and well-edited set of 10 volumes (vol. 18-27 of *The Compilation of the Northern Treasures*) dedicated to Yamāntaka, although, technically speaking, they do not belong to the Northern Treasures.

Its later importance in this branch of the Nyingmapas is evident in Bogin's *The Illuminated Life of the Great Yolmowa* in which Yölmo Tülku's (1598-1644) conversion from monk to ngakpa status is illustrated, among other things, by his performance of the Mañjuśrī Master of Life rituals, easily recognizable in the illustrations by the large black zor (magic weapon torma) unique to this cycle.<fnref n="2" />

Most of the core material of Mañjuśrī Master of Life is associated with an early tertön, Gya Zhangtrom.<fnref n="3" /> There were three generations of masters between Nub Sangyé Yeshé (late 9th-early 10th century) and Gya Zhangtrom,<fnref n="4" /> whose disciple, Lhajé Nubchung, was the “black magic”

pas. These are merely a few examples of something that is constant in these biographies and yet has escaped the interest of Tibetologists, surely due to the fact that this deity has indeed fallen into some degree of disuse (despite the above-mentioned exception of Mi pham and his followers) in the post-Jigs med gling pa rNying ma school (except in Byang gter contexts).

<footnote n="1">¹ The story of Lang lab Byang chub rdo rje and his interactions with Rwa lo tsā ba (Gyurme Dorje and Kapstein 1991, pp. 713-714), which both imply the very disputable idea that Rwa lo tsā ba plagiarized rGya Zhang khrom's Mañjuśrī Master of Life and that the practice of Vajrakīla is more powerful than that of Yamāntaka (the saying translated in *op. cit.* p. 714 as "The preceptor of Yamāntaka was ruined by Kīla" actually has this much more general meaning) may rather be a reflection of this competition of the Yamāntaka and Vajrakīla traditions among the rNying ma pas. This would also explain the derogatory passage about rGya Zhang khrom inserted in the biography of Guru Chos dbang (*op. cit.*, p. 765).</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² Bogin 2013, pp. 126, 129, 133.</footnote>

<footnote n="3">³ rGya zhang khrom rDo rje 'od 'bar. Most of what can be known about this obscure figure is presented in Esler 2022a. Complementary information can be found in Arguillère 2024b, "Yamāntaka among the Ancients," which presents a compilation of available information about the lineages descending from rGya zhang khrom.</footnote>

<footnote n="4">⁴ Arguillère 2024b, p. 377.</footnote>
master of Milarepa (1028?-1111?).<fnref n="1" /> This places Gya Zhangtrom's birth in the second half of the 10th century or in the early years of the 11th century.<fnref n="2" />

It is difficult to ascertain to what degree the Jangter masters were involved in Yamāntaka rituals prior to the 16th century. Nyima Zangpo's biography of Rigdzin Gödem mentions that the first signs of accomplishments he obtained as a young teenager derived from a Yamāntaka practice: the obscure mention of a *Wheel of the [Ritual] Activities of Black Leprosy* actually alludes to a Yamāntaka tantra preserved in the Nyingma tantric canon. It is connected to Yamāntaka in the form of Nāgarakṣa, which, as such, is not typical of *Mañjuśrī Master of Life*.<fnref n="3" /> This is rather one of the many small hints of a connection with Rinchen Lingpa,<fnref n="4" /> who had a large cycle of revelations about this deity, indeed the largest of those sampled in the *Rinchen Terdzö*.

<footnote n="1">¹ *IHa rje* gNubs chung. Esler 2022a, “Yamāntaka’s Wrathful Magic,” p. 191, confirmed by Arguillère 2024b, “Yamāntaka among the Ancients,” pp. 299, 317-318, 374, etc. *IHa rje* gNubs chung was himself a *gter ston*, source of the *Yang zlog me'i spru gri* cycle sampled in the *Rin chen gter mdzod* (RT, 1976-1980, vol. 26, pp. 417-621) and included in the 8th and 9th volumes of the collection in CNT (CNT, vol. 25 and 26).</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² Esler 2022a, *loc. cit.*: “He (...) is said to have been born in a dragon year, though the prophecy from a text called the *Zab pa chos drug gi dkar chag [Index of the Six Profound Doctrines]* announcing his birth mentions a dragon or dog year. Based on this information, the year of his birth suggested by Gyurme Dorjé and Matthew Kapstein in their masterful translation of Dudjom Rinpoché's *Chos 'byung* is 1016 (a dragon year).</footnote>

<footnote n="3">³ Both of these practices, however, can certainly be traced back to the *Zla gsang nag po* tantra (three versions in NG, vol. 25, plus another major one in vol. 26) in terms of their earliest known roots. The main deity propitiated in this tantra is similar to that of the *'Jam dpal tshe bdag* system, Phyag rgya zil gnon. However, some auxiliary practices feature Nāgarakṣa for special purposes (especially combating leprosy).</footnote>

<footnote n="4">⁴ Nyang ral Nyi ma 'od zer (1124–1192) also had a *gter ma* for the practice Nāgarakṣa. It is documented only in the first text of the relevant section of the *Rin chen gter mdzod* (1976: vol. 29, pp. 1-3) with a lineage prayer that, very interestingly, runs through Padma las 'brel rtsal (1291–1319). So, as we will see, very close to Rig 'dzin rGod ldem. *Op. cit.*, p. 3: *de'i brgyud pa ni: o rgyan padma: mnga' bdag khri srong lde btsan: jo mo mtsho rgyal: mnga bdag myang ral pa can: mnga' bdag 'gro mgon: yar lung sprul sku: slob dpon gnas lugs: sprul sku las 'brel rtsal: bsod nams seng ge:...* This fragment, though enigmatic, is most interesting in presenting us, on the one hand, an unknown master of Padma las 'brel rtsal, *Slob dpon* gNas lugs. A quick</footnote>
This shows that Rigdzin Gödem was interested in Yamāntaka at least at some point in his life. Admittedly, we only know that he was concerned with a very specific form, mainly known as an antidote for leprosy. This tells us nothing about his possible interest in Mañjuśrī *Master of Life*.

The absence of any other reference to Yamāntaka in Gödem’s biographies may mean, as above, two opposite things. Either he had little interest in this deity as a specialist in Vajrakīla, which serves much the same purpose, or he, like many of his contemporaries with the same type of profile, was fully trained in Mañjuśrī *Master of Life* and felt no need to expand or consolidate this vast and venerable corpus.

However, Rigdzin Gödem’s name appears in a prayer composed by Jamgön Mipham in the context of ritual texts he devoted to the practice of Mañjuśrī *Master of Life*.¹ This lineage prayer is disconcerting because Ju Mipham, for some unknown reason (but surely on purpose), conflates two things that seem distinct and even unrelated:² Mañjuśrī

search in BDRC’s eTexts shows other occurrences of the same figure in the same lineage in the records of teachings received by both gTer bdag gling pa and the Fifth Dalai Lama, with the difference that in all these sources Gu ru Chos dbang is interspersed between *mNga’ bdag ’gro mgon* (Nyang ral’s son) and Yar lung *sprul sku*, who is most probably sMan lung pa Mi bskyod rdo rje. On the other hand, this establishes a link that was hitherto unknown between Padma las ’brel rtsal and a bSod nams seng ge, who must be Khro phu pa bSod nams seng ge, one of Klong chen pa’s masters also known to have given minor vows to g.Yung *ston pa* when he was a child (before g.Yung *ston pa*’s fifteenth year, i.e., 1298). On Khro phu pa bSod nams seng ge, see Arguillère 2007, pp. 73-75.

1. Mi pham 1984–1993, vol. 5, pp. 79-83, beginning: *om āh hūm* | *chos kyi dbying kyi zhing khams na* | (also in CNT, vol. 22, pp. 447-453). Whether this text can be used as a solid argument or not regarding Rig ‘dzin rGod Idem’s connection with Mañjuśrī *Master of Life*, it is precious because it allows one to spot another otherwise unknown master of Rig ‘dzin rGod Idem: rGa *ston* dPal ba (see in Volume 2 the presentation of what is known of rGod Idem’s masters).

2. The great rNying ma scholar Ju Tenkyong, when asked this question (2024/10/15, oral communication to Stéphane Arguillère) confirmed that these two corpora are considered to be completely unrelated, '*Jam dpal tshe bdag* being pure Mahāyoga, while '*Jam dpal rdzogs chen*, as its name indicates, is Atiyoga (rDzogs chen). When it was suggested to him that Mi pham might have regarded '*Jam dpal rdzogs chen* as the innermost practice of '*Jam dpal tshe bdag*, whose empowerment ritual allows advanced rDzogs chen practice, he replied that this might make sense in theory, but it is completely unheard of among rNying ma scholars, and that the structure of the Mahāyoga empowerment rituals does not imply the actual existence of advanced *rdzogs rim* and *rdzogs chen* instructions, even though their content would allow for them.
*Master of Life* and *Mañjuśrī's Dzogchen*. In fact, this entire lineage is ap-
parently borrowed from the Fifth Dalai Lama's *Record of Teachings Re-
ceived*,<fnref n="1" /> where it is presented in connection with the tradition known as
*Mañjuśrī's Dzogchen*, which is associated with Tertön Sarben Chokmé
(see Chapter 12 below) and not with *Mañjuśrī Master of Life*. It is as if
Mipham considered *Mañjuśrī's Dzogchen* to be the innermost teaching
of *Mañjuśrī Master of Life*, even though the two cycles are nowhere else,
to our knowledge, explicitly linked. Mipham's intention remains a
mystery.<fnref n="2" />

Another element in the puzzle is a rather large commentary on the
Mañjuśrīnāmasaṃgīti or Litany of Mañjuśrī's Names attributed to
Rigdzin Gödem,<fnref n="3" /> which is a very interesting text in itself, as it is the
largest of Gödem's writings among those not presented as being ter-
mas. The Mañjuśrīnāmasaṃgīti is important in both contexts, Mañjuśrī
Master of Life and Mañjuśrī's Dzogchen. It may be an indication of
Rigdzin Gödem's interest in one or both of these cycles. However, the
authenticity of this text remains to be investigated.

Be that as it may, the centrality of *Mañjuśrī Master of Life* in the later
Jangter tradition as such is sufficient reason for a description of its
transmission<fnref n="4" /> to be relevant in the present context, especially since an
exploration of the Nyingma Yamāntaka materials in general and of
this cycle in particular leads to a wealth of unusual knowledge about
the ancient stages of development of what was to become the Nyingma
school.

In the *Canon of the Ancient Tantras* (NG), volumes 25 (803 pages), 26 (1081 pages), 27 (1179 pages), 28 (899 pages), and 29 (1023 pages) are entirely devoted to Yamāntaka. Volume 45 (977 pages) is also filled with Yamāntaka tantras, as is the second half of volume 44. There are

<footnote n="1">¹ Ngag dbang blo bzang rgya mtsho 1970–1971, *Thob yig gaṅgā'i chu rgyun*, vol. 3, f°91b.</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² A possible explanation is that some preliminary practices in the context of the combined *ICags sdig* and *ICags 'dra* have over the centuries been re-placed by elements borrowed from *'Jam dpal rdzogs chen*. Cf., e.g., Ngag dbang blo bzang rgya mtsho 2008, *'Jam dpal tshe bdag nag po'i las byang srid gsum rnam rgyal*, vol. 26, p. 31: *dang po 'jam dpal rdzogs chen nas bkang dang* | , etc.</footnote>

<footnote n="3">³ *'Jam dpal gyi 'grel pa zab mo*, in CNT, vol. 14, pp. 271-362 (see in Volume 2 with the description of Rigdzin Gödem's works and revelations). In addition to the question of the authenticity, two other questions need to be addressed: whether or not it is related to the *'Jam dpal rdzogs chen* cycle and why *'Jam mgon Mi pham* assumes that the *'Jam dpal rdzogs chen* lineage is also a *'Jam dpal tshe bdag* one. These three questions cannot be dealt with in the present volume.</footnote>

<footnote n="4">⁴ What follows in this chapter is a summary of Arguillère 2024b, “Yamāntaka Among the Ancients.”</footnote>
a few more scattered throughout other parts of the collection.<fnref n="1" /> In all, the Nyingmapas' Yamāntaka canonical corpus of tantric scriptures, not counting commentaries, practice manuals, ritual compositions, and even later termas,<fnref n="2" /> exceeds 6000 pages.<fnref n="3" /> To this must first be added, apart from the ten volumes of Mañjuśrī Master of Life, three volumes of the Oral Tradition of the Nyingmapas.<fnref n="4" /> This is supplemented by a four-volume anthology of relevant terma cycles in the Rinchen Terdzö, which, in addition to the 581 pages associated with Gya Zhangtrom's cycle, contains 652 pages of other texts that predate Rigdzin Gödem (Lhajé Nubchung, Nyangral, Guru Chöwang)<fnref n="5" /> or belong to the generation just before him or to his own (Rinchen Lingpa, Sangyé Lingpa).<fnref n="6" />

The main conclusions that can be drawn from a preliminary examination of this abundant literature are:

(1) Despite the traditional narrative adopted by both the Nyingma and Sarma schools about two successive and distinct waves of translations of Indian texts, the translational process that led to the present Nyingma tantric canon is not something that occurred only in the 8th century, and it may even not have been interrupted when the Later Spread began.<fnref n="7" />

(2) Although Yamāntaka is not a central deity in the Nyingma pantheon today, he was much more so during the formative period of the Nyingma school (8th–11th centuries).<fnref n="8" /> Mañjuśrī Master of

<footnote n="1">¹ Especially the tantras that are the background of the *bKa' brgyad* systems.</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² Termas can contain tantras. Many of these revealed tantras found their way into the various editions of the *rNying ma rgyud 'bum*.</footnote>

<footnote n="3">³ These do not seem to have been properly compared to what is found in the Kangyur or even to have been properly described.</footnote>

<footnote n="4">⁴ Three-faced Kṛṣṇayamāri in the form called 'Jam dpal gshin rje'i gshed kha thun nag po (vol. 4), very similar to Phyag rgya zil gnon, the main deity of 'Jam dpal tshe bdag with his surrounding maṇḍala; Raktayamāri (vol. 5-6), much more original; and Six-faced Kṛṣṇayamāri in the form 'Jam dpal gshin rje gdong drug nag po (end of vol. 6), also quite unfamiliar.</footnote>

<footnote n="5">⁵ For a short description, see Arguillère 2024b, pp. 317-319.</footnote>

<footnote n="6">⁶ For a short description, see Arguillère 2024b, pp. 319-320.</footnote>

<footnote n="7">⁷ See Arguillère 2024b, pp. 310-312 and appendix 2 pp. 367-372.</footnote>

<footnote n="8">⁸ In Arguillère 2024b, this is established through (1) the above-mentioned great quantity of Yamāntaka materials in the Nyingma canon (op. cit. pp. 307-310), despite the rarity of this practice nowadays except for Mañjuśrī Master of Life in the Byang gter branch; (2) an examination of the materials contained in the *rNying ma bka' ma* (Arguillère 2024b, pp. 312-314 with, as background, a catalog of the relevant part of the collection: https://fchnt.hypotheses.org/table-of-contents-of-the-three-volumes-of-jam-dpal-gshin-rje-in-the-rnying-ma-bka-ma); (3) an overview of the gter</footnote>
Life can somewhat be seen as the main compendium of these early strata of Yamāntaka worship in what was to become the Nyingma school, although it does not include all aspects of this early practice. This is typically the case with the Raktayamāri tradition, which was productive until the 11th century but declined afterward. This is the case also of the above-mentioned Nāgarakṣa practice, to which we will return in the context of Rinchen Lingpa's termas below and of Rigdzin Gödem's masters in the next volume.

(3) Contrary to what might be expected, the early Yamāntaka practices, as documented in the Nyingma tantric canon, the *Oral Tradition of the Ancients*, and the *Mañjuśrī Master of Life* corpus are not organized with reference to the overarching scheme of the *Eight Pronouncements*.<fnref n="1" /> Although later Nyingma tradition presents this structure as being the general framework of all the Mahāyoga practice, it seems not to be documented prior to the large *Eight Pronouncements* corpus found in the *Oral Tradition of the Ancients*, which was apparently compiled by Tertön Drubthop Ngödrup and then passed to Nyangral Nyima Özer, who then greatly enriched it with his own revelations.

(4) A careful examination of all the lineage accounts (histories or prayers) found in both the *Oral Tradition of the Ancients* and *Mañjuśrī Master of Life*<fnref n="2" /> reinforces the feeling that there was once a “Nubchen school,” so to speak, formed around Nub Sangyé Yeshé and perhaps quite unrelated to Padmasambhava and the Indian masters invited by Emperor Trisong Detsen, which later subsided into what became the Nyingma school. The way in which Nyangral Nyima Özer established the grand narrative that includes Nub Sangyé Yeshé as one of the twenty-five disciples of Padmasambhava is certainly a sign that this fusion was well underway in the 12th century.

The ten volumes of *Mañjuśrī Master of Life* are summarized in the quoted article (p. 326):

It would be difficult to provide a comprehensive overview of the corpus of 427 texts, spanning nearly 1,000 years, and

<footnote>ma tradition as sampled in the *Rin chen gter mdzod* (Arguillère 2024b, pp. 314-325).</footnote>

<footnote n="1">¹ See Arguillère 2024b, pp. 305-307 and the table of the *bKa' ma bka' brgyad rdzong 'phrang* (https://fchnt.hypotheses.org/table-of-contents-of-the-three-volumes-of-jam-dpal-gshin-rje-in-the-rnying-ma-bka-ma) on the FCHNT blog *Northern Treasures Histories*.</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² See Arguillère 2024b, pp. 331-333 and Appendices 3 and 4, pp. 372-380.</footnote>
comprising around 5,800 pages of modern, dense typography.
(...) The global architecture of the collection is as follows:

(1) The two first volumes contain the *Iron Scorpion* (*ICags* *sdig*), i.e., the system ascribed to Nub Sangyé Yeshé;

(2) The third volume contains the *Iron-Like* (*ICags* 'dra), the similar system connected to Padmasambhava;

(3) The fourth volume contains the combined practice of both (*Dril* s*grub*). The fifth volume contains many commentaries, especially by the Fifth Dalai Lama and Mipham, also uniting the *Iron Scorpion* and the *Iron-Like*;

(4) The sixth and seventh volumes contain a sub-cycle called *The Poisonous Bronze Tree* (*Khro chu dug sdong*);<fnref n="1" />

(5) The eighth and ninth volumes contain another sub-cycle: *The Flaming Razor of Ultimate Repelling* (*Yang zlog me'i spu gri*, or *Yang zlog nag po*);<fnref n="2" />

(6) The tenth volume contain ancillary ritual literature, covering practices connected to various secondary forms, including Raktayamarī and a black form called *The Black Dawn* ('*Char kha nag po*') as in Guru Chöwang's revelation, but said to be from Gya Zhangtrom), etc.

Overall, there are thus two major twin cycles (the *Iron Scorpion* and the *Iron-Like*); two cycles with somewhat more differences (*The Poisonous Bronze Tree* and *The Flaming Razor of Ultimate Repelling*); and a series of secondary Yamāntaka-connected practices not clearly belonging to any cycle.

An examination of the historiographical elements in the collection and of the lineage prayers, if we stick to the essentials, reveals many similarities with what we have already found in the context of Rigdzin Pema Trinlé's account of the lineages for *The Gathering of Intentions* stemming from Nubchen Sangyé Yeshé. After a few initial stages "in Heaven,"<fnref n="3" /> the lineage in our world is said to begin with Mañjuśrīmitra. Padmasambhava is inserted into the lineage at

<footnote n="1">¹ See Brown 2024.</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² For a description of this cycle, see Amanda Brown's forthcoming article (Brown 2026), based on her presentation at the First International Conference on the Northern Treasures (Paris, October 2024): "*The Ultimate Repelling* Yamāntaka Practice: A Shared Ritual Repertoire Among the rNying ma Byang gter and the 'Bri gung bKa' brgyud Traditions."</footnote>

<footnote n="3">³ *Chos sku* Kun tu bzang po; 'Jam dpal gshin rje gshed / Phyag rgya zil gnon tshe bdag nag po; Vajrapāṇi; *lHa'i bu* Tshangs pa (Brahmā); *lHa'i bu* Nyi ma; *lHa'i bu* bDe ba mchog ldan; *mKha' 'gro ma* Zla ba'i 'od zer.</footnote>
this point. Then we find Tsuklak Palgé<fnref n="1" /> and Vasudhara, Nubchen's Nepalese master.

From Nubchen Sangyé Yeshé, the lineage divides into a continuous oral lineage<fnref n="2" /> and a terma lineage. The former is of less interest to us (except in that it confirms Pema Trinlé's assumptions about the early lineage of *The Gathering of Intentions*). The terma lineage, which is that of Gya Zhangtrom's revelations, reads:<fnref n="3" />

(1) Gya Zhangtrom Dorjé Öbar;

(2) Dralté Sambhota;

(3) Drangben Tashidar;

(4) Gangpa Rikarwa;

(5) Gangpa Śākbum;

(6) Yungtönpa Dorjepal (1284–1365).

These figures are all unknown, except for the last one. The presence of Yungtönpa Dorjepal (1284–1365) at this point in the narrative is crucial.<fnref n="4" /> His biographies, either in Guru Tashi's *History of the Dharma*<fnref n="5" /> or in the compilations of hagiographies of the Karma Kagyü lineage,<fnref n="6" /> clearly show that he was the holder of virtually everything in the Nyingma tradition in his time (at least the Kama lineages and the traditions of Nyangral Nyima Özer and Guru Chöwang), which is also the period of Rigdzin Gödem's youth. Although he was certainly one

<footnote n="1">¹ The Wylie transliterations of all the names can be found in the table of equivalences at the end of this volume.</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² *IHa rje gNubs khu lung pa* Yon tan rgya mtsho; *de sras IHa rje* Ye shes rgya mtsho; *IHa rje gNubs Padma dbang rgyal*; *IHa rje gNubs bla chen* 'Jam dpal; *IHa rje gNubs rGya gar rdo rje*; *IHa rje gNubs Chos kyi ye shes*; *sNgags 'chang Khro bo 'bar ba*; then *mThu chen* Dar ma rgyal mtshan who also received and passed *Mañjuśrī Master of Life* (*gter ma*), so that the next generations are a combined *bka' ma* and *gter ma* lineage: *Bla ma* Yang dag rdo rje; *Rig 'dzin Phug pa sher rgyal*; *Gro ston* bSod nams 'bum [*legs*]; *Bla chen* Blo gros rgyal mtshan (perhaps *Sa bzang ma ti paṇ chen*, 1294–1376) and then *Phag ston* Śākya mgon po (late 14th century) who is credited for the final fusion of all the *bka' ma* and *gter ma* branches.</footnote>

<footnote n="3">³ Reconstructed on the basis of a lineage prayer found in CNT, vol. 20, p. 147f., confirmed by many other documents.</footnote>

<footnote n="4">⁴ Dalton 2016, p. 187, mentions this lineage only in a note and seems to have been more interested in another line described later by Padma 'phrin las, running through his contemporary sGrol ma ba bSam grub rdo rje (1294–1375).</footnote>

<footnote n="5">⁵ Gu ru bkra shis 1990, pp. 290-291.</footnote>

<footnote n="6">⁶ An extensive biography of g. Yung *ston pa* is found in the standard history of this lineage written by the 8th Situ Chos kyi 'byung gnas (1700–1774), *bKa' brgyud gser 'phreng* (Chos kyi 'byung gnas 1998, vol. 1, p. 453-502). For a presentation of this work see Dell 2023.</footnote>
of the most central Nyingma masters in the days of Longchenpa (1308-1364), he was somehow erased from the later memory of the school.<fnref n="1" />

In fact, his legacy is perhaps better preserved in the Karma Kagyü lineage than it is in the Nyingma tradition: he was a close disciple of Karmapa III Rangjung Dorjé (1284–1339) and the tutor of Karma pa IV Rölpé Dorjé (1340–1383, an important figure in the time of Rigdzin Gödem). However, the deep amalgamation of Kagyü and Nyingma materials that seems to have been at the heart of Karmapa Rangjung Dorjé’s project, and in which Yungtönpa played a central role as a collector of Nyingma lineages, was not so central to the later Karma Kagyü school.

Although Yungtönpa appears to have been well versed in all the tantric traditions of his time—he is even known to have been an important student of Butön Rinchendrup (1290–1364) regarding Kālacakra—he also played a key role in at least one more of the non-Jangter hidden treasures that have been incorporated into the Dorjé Drak heritage: Pema Ledreltsal’s *Khandro Nyingthik* or *Heart Drops of the Dākinī*.<fnref n="2" /> The legacy of Pema Ledreltsal was passed on to the Jangter not through a well-documented human lineage, but, as we will see below, in the unofficial form of its incorporation into the *Gongpa Zangthal*. In fact, although there is no trace of any connection between Rigzin Gödem and Yungtönpa in available sources, it is not an exaggeration to say that Yungtönpa was somewhere in the background, not too far away, specifically among the small group of individuals who were involved in the early *Khandro Nyingthik* history. We cannot rule out the possibility that he was in some way a source of Rigdzin Gödem’s knowledge of the aforementioned *Secret Cycle* of Dzogchen. And if Rigdzin Gödem ever practiced Mañjuśrī Master of Life, Yungtönpa was certainly the main authority on this cycle in Tsang

<footnote n="1">¹ The point seems to be that g.Yung ston pa is recorded as the author of the above-mentioned great commentary about the *gSang ba snying po*, according to the *zur lugs*, which was rejected by Klong chen pa and thus by the rNying ma mainstream, especially 'Jigs med gling pa's' (ca. 1729–1798) followers in eastern Tibet. It seems however (private oral communication by Khenpo Ju Tenkyong at the First International Conference on the Northern Treasures in Paris, October 2024) that this commentary deeply influenced later sMin sgrol gling masters such as *Lo chen Dharmaśrī* (1654–ca. 1717). It can therefore be said that the fame of g.Yung ston pa was overshadowed by that of Klong chen pa, but never died out. In Alexander Gardner's (2011) biography of g.Yung ston pa in *The Treasury of Lives*, it is evident that he relied solely on Tibetan sources. This demonstrates the extent to which g.Yung ston pa has been overlooked in Tibetological studies. An in-depth study by Prof. van der Kuijp is expected to soon fill this gap.</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² On the *mKha' 'gro snying thig*, see below Chapter 14 & 16.</footnote>
until his death when Gödem was about 28 years old. Therefore, there
may very well have been a direct (or indirect) but unrecorded relation-
ship between the two men.

It would be pointless to speculate further on this question in the
present state of our knowledge. However, Yungtönpa appears in more
than one of the lineages (*The Gathering of Intentions, Sangwa Nyingpo,
Mañjuśrī Master of Life...*) that were collected when the Dorjé Drak mas-
ters acquired their official lineage for all these in the 16th century from
Jamyang Rinchen Gyaltsen (1445/1473–1558) and his sons, the two
Ngari brothers. This may be a coincidence, or simply a late effect of
Yungtönpa's objective centrality to many of these traditions in the 14th
century, rather than the effect of a conscious preference. But it may also
have been done with the intention of reactivating old links with this
spiritual family, rather than as an absolute innovation.<fnref n="1" /> Therefore, one
should not underestimate the lineages that run through Yungtönpa in
a Jangter context.

It is a pity that few works attributed to Yungtönpa seem to have
survived. Dalton mentions<fnref n="2" /> his manual for the empowerment of *The
Gathering of Intentions*, but it has not resurfaced yet. So far, we have
only his large commentary on the *Sangwa Nyingpo*,<fnref n="3" /> an autobiog-
raphy,<fnref n="4" /> and a few pages in the *Khandro Nyingthik*.

<figure><img src="image_13.png" /></figure>

<footnote n="1">¹ In the lives of Byang gter figures such as the 'Khor gdong masters in the late nineteenth or early twentieth century, there are traces of a special interest in commentaries on the *gSang ba snying po* that do not conform to Klong chen pa's authority. This tendency not to regard Klong chen pa as the sole doctrinal authority on all matters of the rNying ma school seems to be common to the great monasteries of central Tibet (rDo rje brag and sMin sgrol gling) and appears to have gone largely unnoticed by Tibetologists, certainly because of the predominance of Khams pa scholars among their informants and other sources of inspiration. In Khams (with the exception of 'Khor gdong and perhaps the monasteries associated with dPal yul), the "Klong chen pa revival" initiated by 'Jigs med gling pa seems to have overshadowed everything else, which is not to say that there *was* nothing else, as we can see from the publication of major compilations of older material such as the various versions of the *bKa' ma shin tu rgyas pa*.</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² Dalton 2016, p. 187, n. 9: the *gTad rgya gsang mtshan ma'i dbang chog*. See also *ibid.*, p. 191, n. 25, on g.Yung *ston pa*'s specific doctrines.</footnote>

<footnote n="3">³ g.Yung *ston pa* rdo rje dpal ba, 1999, *dPal gsang ba snying po'i rgyud don gsal byed me long*, in KSG, vol. 28, pp. 1-589.</footnote>

<footnote n="4">⁴ g.Yung *ston pa* rDo rje dpal 2010, *rGyal ba g.yung ston ri khrod pa'i rnam thar*, vol. 25, pp. 143-212.</footnote>
Chapter 12: Late 11th–13th Century:
Tertön Sarben Chokmé, Nyangral,
Gongri Sangyé Wangchen, and Guru Chöwang

Stéphane Arguillère<fnref n="1" />
(IFRAE)

Tertön Sarben Chokmé's Mañjuśrī's Dzogchen

<figure><img src="image_14.png" /></figure>

Very little is known about Tertön Sarben Chokmé, presented as the rebirth of one of Padmasambhava's secret consorts called Shezangdrön<fnref n="2" /> or Shelzangdrön. Guru Tashi's *History of the Dharma*<fnref n="3" /> vaguely situates this treasure discoverer "in the time of Jetsün Mila (1028–1111?) and Ngok Lotsāwa (11th century)." Khyentsé Wangpo places him a little later "in the same time as Düsum Khyenpa,<fnref n="4" /> the first Karmapa (1110–1193).

It is difficult to derive factual information from the prophecies about him and his discoveries. The 17th-century commentary by Karma Migyur Wangyal<fnref n="5" /> on Jangdak Tashi Tobgyal's *Prayer to the One Hundred Treasure-discoverers* contains less than one line about him. The most developed extant account seems to be the Fifth Dalai Lama's (1617–1682) *Record of Teachings Received*,<fnref n="6" /> but even this is devoid of

<footnote n="1">¹ With complimentary research by Cécile Ducher.</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² Gu ru bKra shis 1990, p. 481-482, presents a short note on Sar *ban* Phyogs med, rather less informative than the Fifth Dalai Lama's *Record of Teachings Received*. For a more advanced (but less focused on Byang gter) state of this research, see Arguillère forthcoming (2026), "Mañjuśrī's rDzogs chen in the Context of The Fifth Dalai Lama's rNying ma Writings." In this article, Sar *ban* Phyogs med is finally dated to the early 13th century.</footnote>

<footnote n="3">³ Gu ru bKra shis 1990, p. 596 (merely mentions Sar *ban* Phyogs med in the context of a chronology).</footnote>

<footnote n="4">⁴ Gangs can gyi yul du byon pa'i lo paṇ rnam s kyi mtshan tho rags rim tshig bcad du bsdebs pa ma hā paṇ di ta sī la ratna'i gsung pa (in mKhyen brtse dbang po 1977–1980, bKa' 'bum, vol. 19, pp. 1-476), p. 9: rab byung gnyis pa rje la glu dang dus mkhyen sogs dang dus mtshungs par | ...</footnote>

<footnote n="5">⁵ Karma mi 'gyur dbang rgyal (d.u.), 1978.</footnote>

<footnote n="6">⁶ Ngag dbang blo bzang rgya mtsho 1970–1971, *Thob yig gaṅgā'i chu rgyun*, vol. 3, f°89a-91b. The Fifth Dalai Lama also makes allusions to Sar *ban* Phyogs med, for example, in the context of one of his manuals for the practice of 'Jam dpal tshe bdag: Ngag dbang blo bzang rgya mtsho 2015, *Zil gnon 'phrin las kyi rnam nges*, in CNT, vol. 22, p. 80 (also in Ngag dbang blo bzang rgya mtsho 2009, vol. 26, p. 263). However, the way in which the Fifth Dalai Lama combines an aspect of Sar *ban* Phyogs med's 'Jam dpal rdzogs chen</footnote>
extensive historical elements, although the author devotes some pages
to the texts discovered by Sarben Chokmé and their posterity (includ-
ing a list of texts written by Jangdak Tashi Tobgyal, which, to date, all
seem to be lost). Sarben Chokmé appears as the main discoverer of the
cycle called *Mañjuśrī's Dzogchen*, although allusions are found to Guru
Chöwang too in this context.

This very idiosyncratic cycle seems to be based on the
*Mañjuśrīnāmasaṁgīti* and does not explicitly belong to any of the
known sections of Dzogchen. The description of the cycle in the Fifth
Dalai Lama's *Record of Teachings Received* shows that *Mañjuśrī's Dzog-
chen* once was a large corpus (around 47 texts are listed). Very little
seems to be still extant of it except for the practice manual composed
by the Fifth Dalai Lama himself and a large commentary on the
*Mañjuśrīnāmasaṁgīti* attributed to Padmasambhava. The anthology of
this cycle in the *Rinchen Terdzö<fnref n="1" />* consists only of the manual by the Fifth
Dalai Lama.

Rigdzin Gödem’s connection to this cycle is presumed mainly on
the basis of the Fifth Dalai Lama’s assumptions about the lineage (both
in his *Record of Teachings Received*<fnref n="2" /> and in the practice manual<fnref n="3" /> he
wrote). It is corroborated by Terdak Lingpa’s *Record of Teachings Re-
ceived*.<fnref n="4" /> Both seem to rely on Jangdak Tashi Tobgyal’s authority for the

with rGya zhang khrom's *Jam dpal tshe bdag* does not imply any clear as-
sumption about an earlier connection of these two systems. In fact, he uses
Sar *ban Phyogs med's* revelations to explain the peaceful Mañjuśrī practice
that is a preliminary to the Yamāntaka *bskyed rim* practice, and not explic-
itly in connection with the higher empowerments of *Jam dpal tshe bdag*.
The same idea is developed in his *Jam dpal zhi ba'i 'phrin las sangs rgyas
mngon sum ston pa'i lag bcangs* (Ngag dbang blo bzang rgya mtsho 2009,
vol. 26, pp. 386-395), which gives the details of this peaceful Mañjuśrī prac-
tice.

<footnote n="1">1 Ngag dbang blo bzang rgya mtsho 2009, *Jam dpal rdzogs pa chen po'i phrin las dang smin byed kyi cho ga*, vol. 26, pp. 249-301.</footnote>

<footnote n="2">2 Ngag dbang blo bzang rgya mtsho 1970–1971, *Thob yig gaṅgā'i chu rgyun*, vol. 3, p. f°91b: *chos sku kun tu bzang po* | longs sku *jam dpal rigs lnga* | sprul skuśākya thub pa | rdo rje dāki | rin chen dāki | padma dāki | karma dāki | de bzhin dāki | o rgyan dāki | *jam dpal dbyangs* | rdo rje *chang* | *jam dpal bshes gnyen* | śrī sinha | o rgyan chen po | rje khri srong lde btsan | jo mo she bza' sgron | gter ston chen po sar ban phyogs med | lung zin sar ban nyi ma'i snying po | sngags *chang dbang dar* | mgar ston rin chen *bum* | ri pa sangs rgyas dpal | rgya ban bla ma | bla ma sba ston dpal | rig *dzin rgod kyi ldem phru* |, followed by a common Byang gter lineage starting with sNgags *chang rDo rje mgon po*.</footnote>

<footnote n="3">3 Ngag dbang blo bzang rgya mtsho 2009, *Jam dpal rdzogs pa chen po'i phrin las dang smin byed kyi cho ga*, vol. 26, pp. 354-385.</footnote>

<footnote n="4">⁴ gTer bdag gling pa 1998, gSung 'bum, vol. 1 pp. 236-237.</footnote>
idea that Rigdzin Gödem was a lineage master of *Mañjuśrī's Dzogchen*.
However, we have no document to this effect before the 17th century.
This view may be somewhat confirmed by the existence of the afore-
mentioned *Mañjuśrīnāmasaṃgīti* commentary attributed to Rigdzin
Gödem,<fnref n="1" /> which is in fact a summary of the commentary ascribed to
Padmasambhava,<fnref n="2" /> itself included by the Fifth Dalai Lama in the list of
the texts belonging to this cycle. We will return to this text in Volume
2, in the context of the presentation of Rigdzin Gödem's works and
revelations. For now, suffice it to say that nothing in its content con-
firms or denies its authenticity and that the 2015 edition appears to be
based on only one manuscript source.<fnref n="3" />

The relevant aspect of this lineage in our context is the line of five
individuals—Sarben Nyimé Nyingpo, Ngakchang Wangdar, Gartön
Rinchenbum, Ripa Sanggyepal and Gyaben Lama—ending with one
who is presented as the direct teacher of Rigdzin Gödem: Lama
Batönpal or Gatönpal.<fnref n="4" /> He is not mentioned (at least under this name)
in the known biographies of Rigdzin Gödem. However, since this
name is a title rather than a personal name, Gatönpal could be one of
the masters we know under other names.

As already mentioned, Mipham (1846–1912) curiously presents<fnref n="5" />
this lineage in the context of *Mañjuśrī Master of Life*, with no explicit
reference to *Mañjuśrī's Dzogchen*, although his interest in this cycle is
known from a prayer<fnref n="6" /> he wrote about it. His source for the first part of

<footnote n="1">¹ Rig 'dzin rGod Idem 2015, 'Jam dpal gyi 'grel pa zab mo, in CNT, vol. 14, pp. 271-362.</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² One of the texts mentioned in the Fifth Dalai Lama's catalog of the cycle, 'Jam dpal mtshan brjod kyi don 'grel o rgyan padma 'byung gnas kyis gsang sngags kyi bskyed rdzogs gsum dang mthun par mdzad pa, is found in NKG (vol. 22, pp. 195-492). This text is the one summarized in the commentary attributed to Rig 'dzin rGod Idem. Other parts of this cycle could be present in this and other volumes of the NKG/KSG in its various editions.</footnote>

<footnote n="3">³ Rig 'dzin rGod Idem n.d., 'Phags pa 'jam dpal gyi don 'grel zab mo, in Khams sde dge rdzong sar bla ma lha khang du bzhugs pa'i dpe rnying, vol. 53, pp. 225-332.</footnote>

<footnote n="4">⁴ *Bla ma sBa ston dpal.*</footnote>

<footnote n="5">⁵ Mi pham 2015, *brGyud pa'i gsol 'debs*, in CNT, vol 22, pp. 391-393. This text is an appendix to a rather large text by Mi pham (Mi pham 2015, *dPal tshe bdag gi bsnyen yig lhan thabs dngos grub sgo byed*, in CNT, vol 22, pp. 325-390) and I suppose Mi pham is also the author of this appendix, as the lineage ends up with mKhyen brtse'i dbang po and as this text is also included in the available editions of his complete works. sBa *ston* dpal appears here with another spelling as *rGa ston* dPal ba.</footnote>

<footnote n="6">⁶ Mipham, 'Jam dpal rdzogs pa chen po gzhi lam 'bras bu dbyer med pa'i don la smon pa rig stong rdo rje'i rang gdangs, in Mi pham 1984–1993, vol. 5, pp. 79–83.</footnote>
this lineage prayer seems to be the aforementioned *Mañjuśrī's Dzogchen* manual by the Fifth Dalai Lama, since the exact same phrases appear in both texts. To make sense of Mipham's conflation, we can assume that he considers this to be a lineage of the Padmasambhava tradition<fnref n="1" /> of *Mañjuśrī Master of Life*. Further research would be required to understand fully how Mipham builds on the Fifth Dalai Lama's combination of the two cycles.

This would imply that there was a tradition of *Mañjuśrī Master of Life* in the early Jangter tradition much prior to what appears in most accounts of this tradition, which would make the line coming from Se-tön Rinchen Gyaltsen<fnref n="2" /> merge in a common Jangter / Drikung Kagyü line only in the 16th century. This would explain much of the central role that this *a priori* non-Jangter cycle has taken in the “Dorjé Drak system.” However, it remains to be understood whether there was really an unknown secondary line of *Mañjuśrī Master of Life* revealed by Sarben Chokmé or how his Dzogchen-connected revelations were grafted upon Gya Zhangtrom’s termas, despite the fact that we do not find Sarben Chokmé (at least under this name) in any of the lineages stemming from Gya Zhangtrom.

A passing remark in Jamgön Kongtrül's *Hundred Tertöns*<fnref n="3" /> (found in more or less the same form in various sources on this lineage) suggests that part of Sarben's cycle was later appended to *Mañjuśrī Master of Life* by the specialists of this system. This mainly refers to the preliminary practice of peaceful Mañjuśrī, as documented in the Fifth Dalai Lama's ritual compositions mentioned above. Thus, Sarben Chokmé's revelations would have only extrinsic connections (in terms of content) with *Mañjuśrī Master of Life* and Yamāntaka materials in general, but they may well have been transmitted in the same lineage.

The available sources (the commentary on the *Mañjuśrīnāmasaṁgīti* attributed to Padmasambhava and the Fifth Dalai Lama's manual) and any fragments of the original corpus that might resurface would certainly require close examination for many reasons: its unusual features in Dzogchen literature; the fact that Rigdzin Gödem's name appears in this context; and the Fifth Dalai Lama's special interest in this corpus (this manual is the largest text he wrote on Dzogchen). However, since there are no obvious similarities with Rigdzin Gödem's Dzogchen

<footnote n="1">¹ *Pad lugs*, what is also known as the “Ironlike” (*ICags ’dra*) in the context of *Mañjuśrī Master of Life*.</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² Se *ston* Rin chen rgyal mtshan (d.u.); maybe the same person as ’Jam dbyangs rin chen rgyal mtshan.</footnote>

<footnote n="3">³ Kong *sprul* Blo gros mtha’ yas 1976–1980, *gTer ston brgya rtsa*, vol. 1, p. 524 (in the context of a short note about Sar *ban* Phyogs med): *bar skabs nas tshe bdag mkhan po rnams kyis ’jam dpal zhi sgrub kyi rtsa bar bzhag pas dar rgyas che ba las kho bos kyang dbang rgyun tsam zhig thob bo*.</footnote>
cycles and since the authenticity of the commentary on the
Mañjuśrīnāmasaṃgīti attributed to Rigdzin Gödem is uncertain, this in-
vestigation was not considered urgent in the present context, for which
these remarks may suffice.

12th Century: Nyangral Nyima Özer (1124–1192)

Nyangral Nyima Özer<fnref n="1" /> does not appear in Rigdzin Pema Trinlé's *The Biographies for the Sūtra Initiation Lineage* because he is not considered a key figure in the lineage of the uninterrupted Oral Tradition. However, we must mention him where he fits chronologically, not only for the sake of historical clarity, but also because he may well be the primary creator of the hegemonic narrative and doctrinal framework within which Rigdzin Gödem and, much later, Rigdzin Pema Trinlé both understood their role and situation.

The reader is now fully aware that there was still no organized Nyingma order in the 12th century. Although there was never a truly centralized Nyingma school, later Nyingmapas share easily recognizable doctrinal and practical characteristics as well as this common narrative framework, which clearly make them all parts of a single family.

In an earlier period, the “old school” is to some extent a catch-all
category that brings together individuals, often forming family line-
ages, who in the 11th and 12th centuries continued to uphold doctrines
and ideals that had been disseminated or elaborated in Tibet since the
imperial period—what we call the Kama lineages. In the 11th century,
this diffuse movement, like the other traditions, began to become more
organized and new doctrines were revealed that were said to have
been taught by Padmasambhava and other tantric masters in the 8th
century and hidden to be revealed at a later, more appropriate time.
This “treasure” tradition did not start with Nyangral Nyima Özer, but
it is with him that it begins to present an aspect that is more familiar
to us. Nyangral Nyima Özer is hence remembered by the later tradi-
tion as the first great Treasure Revealer, and he seems to have pro-
foundly reshaped the old school. Although it may not have been until
the fifteenth century that the Kama and Terma currents fully merged
into something resembling today’s Nyingma school of Tibetan Bud-
dhism, it can be said that the result was indeed very similar to, and

<footnote n="1">¹ The richest available source for the history of his posterity seems to be Nyang ral Nyi ma 'od zer 1985, *mNga' bdag bla ma'i rnam thar*, a 310-page *dbu med* manuscript presenting "the biographies of the early masters in the transmission lineage of the *bKa' brgyad bde gshegs 'dus pa* teachings revealed by mÑa'-bdag Myan-ral Ñi-ma-'od-zer." Gu ru bKra shis summarizes this text in Gu ru bkra shis 1990, pp. 649-653.</footnote>
owed much to, Nyangral’s twelfth-century synthesis.

As the heir of a family tracing its pedigree back to the time of the empire, Nyangral may have had enough prestige to start doing something very distinct from what other traditions were doing at the time: namely, carefully tracing back their lineages to Indian lines and authority and, increasingly, monastic legitimation. Nyangral, instead, shaped a new tradition that built its legitimacy around the figure of Padmasambhava, whose biography he revealed as a treasure.<fnref n="1" /> He also revealed practices relating to Avalokiteśvara as well as Dzogchen and tantric cycles.<fnref n="2" />

Nyangral was born and revealed his teachings in the southern region of Tibet, Lhodrak, and established his seat in a place called Mawochok. He was followed there by his son, Namkha Pal (1171–1238), and Nyangral’s legacy continued in that place for many generations. Namkha Pal became the master of Guru Chöwang (1212–1270), who received Nyangral’s treasures and later claimed to be Nyangral’s main successor.<fnref n="3" /> Guru Chöwang would continue to define the new paradigm of the Nyingma movement, and he codified termas and their

<footnote n="1">¹ Doney 2014; Hirshberg 2016.</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² For details about the life of Nyangral and his contribution to the development of the treasure tradition, see Phillips 2004, especially pp. 114–156.</footnote>

<footnote n="3">³ In Nyangral 1985, *mNga’bdag bla ma’i rnam thar*, we find, after Nyangral’s life (pp. 1-164) and a large biography of Namkha’ dpal (pp. 165-245), those of his successors in the family line, all called *mNga’bdag*: Blo ldan ma (pp. 248-255; Gu ru bkra shis 1990, p. 650, says he was born in a *glang lo* which could be 1205, 1217, or 1229), bDud ’duI (pp. 255-260); died in his 60th year according to Gu ru bKra shis), mDo sde seng ge (pp. 260-265); Padma dngos grub (pp. 265-270); ‘Jam dpal nor bu (pp. 270-275—according to Gu ru bKra shis, he passed in his 70th year and was a master of sNe’u gdong Grags pa rgyal mtshan, who might be *Lo tsā ba* Grags pas rgyal mtshan [1352–1405], one of Bo dong paṇ chen’s masters—which makes ‘Jam dpal nor bu an older contemporary of Rig ’dzin rGod ldem); Kun dga’ rgyal mtshan (pp. 275-290), who passed away in his 67th year—according to Gu ru bKra shis, he met O rgyan gling pa (1323–ca. 1355), which also makes him a possible candidate to be the unidentified LCang ma pa—rGod ldem’s master for this tradition). From the time of this *mNga’bdag* on, the family line split into many branches. *dGe bshes* lHa bzang pa (pp. 290-298; lHa’i rgyal mtshan according to Gu ru bKra shis) was around forty when his father passed away; he lived to his 59th year according to Gu ru bKra shis; and bZang po lhun grub (pp. 298-309) who died in his 49th year according to Gu ru bKra shis. The last one seems to be the author of Kun dga’ rgyal mtshan’s biography and lHa bzang pa’s son (who had another son called lHun grub bzang po who died young). Gu ru bKra shis mentions a few more names.</footnote>
modes of revelation.<fnref n="1" />

Nyangral Nyima Özer belongs to a time when the two tendencies, Kama and Terma, had not yet fused, and his perhaps marginal status in his own time is obscured by his final success, which may not have been complete until centuries later.

Nyangral Nyima Özer should therefore be appreciated not only in the context of a linear construction of the Nyingma school, understood from a point of view in which what happened was a natural development of an earlier state of things (as if it had been a "school" from the beginning, merely developing its heritage over the centuries), but also in the context of a competition between two major trends of that tradition—a more conservative "Kama only" style and another style that accepted the validity of the termas and took them as practical keys to the Kama heritage. We have only indirect, but quite convincing hints of such a competition. The strongest one is the above-mentioned nearly complete absence of the terma tradition in Gö Lotsāwa's *The Blue Anals*.

The story is certainly more complex, with trends like the Heart Drops of Dzogchen and their system of texts being hidden and rediscovered many times, but without any explicit connection to Padmasambhava's agency, and so on. We get the feeling, from reading the oldest documents and trying not to make anachronistic assumptions, that for a very long time this was a dense forest of small autonomous traditions growing side by side, perhaps without a strong sense of a common identity. It is possible that these competing traditions resisted unification in part because of a "proprietary mentality" that made each ritual specialist very reluctant to pass on his lineage, as it was his family's main resource for generations to come, admittedly a very strong factor of fragmentation in Tibetan religious history. If we take seriously all the elements that have already been mentioned about Nubchen Sangyé Yeshé's foreign masters or about the Zurs getting some of their traditions directly from India in the 10th century and if we carefully consider the possibility that other figures such as Vimalamitra and Vairocana were less connected to the court of Emperor Trisong Detsen than is generally believed, then it might even be said that "Nyingmapa" was probably not originally a vocable expressing a sense of self-identity at all, but a term coined by the advocates of the new systems introduced in the 11th century to refer to people who not only were not yet organized as a school or sect, but who did not even recognize themselves as belonging to the same trend at all (the terms "Nyingma" or "Nyingmapa" are seldom if ever found in the writings of even relatively late authors such as Longchenpa).

<footnote n="1">¹ Gyatso 1993; 1994; Phillips 2004.</footnote>
Nyangral's work and activity definitely played a major role in the success of the second branch, the one that accepted the validity of the termas. How he could achieve such a success and whether it was largely posthumous or began during his lifetime remain to be carefully researched. The way in which Tibetans write history—in the form of the heroic biographies of exalted individuals—makes it very difficult to assess the social achievements of one given figure in his or her own time, and there is a tendency to confuse a largely posthumous success due to the quality of an author's writings and to the agency of a master's talented successors with the idea that this individual must have been socially successful in his or her own time. For example, this is typically the case with Rigdzin Gödem's older contemporary, Longchenpa (1308–1364), whose writings' central role in the later Nyingma school—a role largely justified by their outstanding quality—does not prove that he was known outside of a fairly narrow circle in his own time. We will face the same difficulty with Rigdzin Gödem himself, and it is one of the aspects about which the reader must be the most carefully critical of Tibetan historiography: it tends to completely erase most social realities and to misrepresent others, including those of a religious nature that seem to us to be the most directly relevant, even from a very Tibetan and Buddhist point of view.

If we now return to Nyangral, it is evident even from the *membra disjecta* of his works and revelations—a majority of which is probably lost forever, but what remains still fills many volumes—that he was not merely a tāntrika, but a man of deep and wide scholarship in all fields: history and philosophy as well as tantric ritual and meditation instructions.<fnref n="1" />

It is likely also that his strong social position made him completely independent and capable of visible achievements such as building temples or sponsoring his own disciples. Although it is not absolutely plain in details, there must have been a not purely religious reason why he and his descendants are all called “lord” or “sovereign.”<fnref n="2" /> However, it seems that his main achievement was the completion of

<footnote n="1">¹ A perfect example of his fine understanding of the various philosophical tenets of Buddhism and even Hinduism can be found in the more theoretical parts of the *bKa' brgyad bde gshegs 'dus pa* (Nyang ral 1978 or Nyang ral 1979–1980). Whether or not the *Chos 'byung me tog snying po* is a genuine writing of his, the fact that, at least in the *bKa' thang zangs gling ma*, he constructed the narrative synthesis which is basically the framework for the later rNying ma pas' unity, also shows not only a strong interest in history, but also a keen awareness of the fact that commonly shared myths of origin are the most necessary things for a social group to become united.</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² *mNga' bdag*.</footnote>
the *Eight Pronouncements* system,<fnref n="1" /> which may have been one of the earliest syntheses of all the “Old School” tantric transmissions.

A reasonable hypothesis, in the present state of our knowledge, is that there must have been an ongoing process of compiling and organizing the *Eight Pronouncements* that begun several generations earlier (in the 12th or even the 11th century), was greatly enhanced by Nyangral Nyima Özer, and further developed mainly by Guru Chöwang and then by Rigdzin Gödem, with some additions by contemporary or later tertöns. The crucial importance of the *Eight Pronouncements* for the Nyingma school in its formation is that it consists in bringing together into a single mandala all the tantric teachings derived from the “Eight Vidyādharas.” Although the central role in the background narrative is played by Padmasambhava, this may well be a metaphor for a work of gathering and unifying of originally separate tantric lineages by early Nyingma masters, elevated to the highest level of excellence by Nyima Özer.<fnref n="2" />

For later tradition (especially from Ngari Panchen Pema Wangyal on), Rigdzin Gödem’s revelations were an integral part—and the coronation—of the “Threefold *Eight Pronouncements*,”<fnref n="3" /> i.e., including those of Nyangral Nyima Özer and Guru Chöwang, using the doxographic scheme of the three inner yogas as an overarching framework: Nyangral Nyima Özer’s *Kagyé* cycle would be more Mahāyoga-oriented (i.e., with a larger component of “development phase” that includes elaborate ritual and visualization); Guru Chöwang’s cycle would be more Anuyoga-oriented (i.e., richer in inner yoga and body techniques). Gödem’s system is perceived as being more Atiyoga-connected (i.e., richer in properly Dzogchen-connected aspects).<fnref n="4" /> Indeed,

<footnote n="1">¹ Nyang ral’s *Eight Pronouncements* cycle includes 13 volumes in the 1979–1980 Bhutanese edition and the 1978 Sikkimese edition of the *bKa’ brgyad bde gshegs ’dus pa’i chos skor*. However, Nyi ma ’od zer’s presence is also clearly visible in the *bKa’ brgyad bka’ ma rdzong ’phrang* (KSG, vol. 67, with some elements in vol. 13). Although this corpus is considered to be *bka’ ma*, it seems that it is at least partly a *gter chos* of Grub thob dngos grub, the 12th-century revealer of the *Ma ni bka’ ’bum*, who passed this original *bKa’ brgyad* system to Nyang ral Nyi ma ’od zer.</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² It cannot be presumed that Nyang ral had a complete knowledge of visionary rDzogs chen and it may be the case that the junction of the Heart Drops lineages with the *gter ma* traditions was not achieved prior to Padma las ’brel rtsal.</footnote>

<footnote n="3">³ *bKa' brgyad rnam gsum*. This point was presented by *mKhan po 'Ju bsTan skyong* at the First International Conference on the Northern Treasures (October 2024).</footnote>

<footnote n="4">⁴ In fact, as we will see in the section of volume 2 devoted to the description of rGod ldem's works and revelations, the *bKa' brgyad rang byung rang shar* culminates, so to speak, with the rDzogs chen instructions of the *dGongs*</footnote>