the buddhist way into tibet 331
period can be considered, in the words of M. Kapstein, as a “demonstra-
tion of the imperial agency of a universal legislator”.^49 As the country is
transformed from a wild, uncultured territory into a ma alised space,
so the king is transformed from a divine ancestor and mountain-hero
into a buddha and bodhisattva.
- The Standardisation of the Language
In the Tibetan case language can serve as an evaluation scale for the
“buddhasisation” of the country during the royal period. The reason
for this at rst sight astonishing argument is the fact that the transla-
tion activities of the rst Tibetan translators were monopolised by the
state. The above already mentioned sGra-sbyor-bam-po-gnyis-pa, in the
rst place an instruction manual for translators and a lexicographi-
cal commentary to the Mahvyutpatti, at the same time lays down the
normative principles the translators had to adhere to. The version of
the text that is preserved in the Tibetan bsTan-’gyur, the canonical col-
lection of commentaries to the scriptures attributed to the Buddha (the
so-called bKa’-’gyur), opens with an authoritative decision (bkas-bcad) on
the part of the emperor Khri-lde-srong-btsan to codify the norms and
rules of translating the Buddhist scriptures into the Tibetan language.
The codi cation implies the xed use of already established terms
that must be entered in a register of words.^50 The register of words
had to be approved of by the bTsan-po and the council of ministers.
The translation procedures for Buddhist scriptures were thus highly
bureaucratised, as early as the eighth century.
Buddhist scriptures were translated and distributed even in the earli-
est times of the snga-dar. The earliest stras to be translated were the
Ratnamegha and the La kvatra, both with respect to the concept of
cakravartin being of political in uence during the time of the Chinese
empress Wu Zetian (625–705; r. 690–705). Scherrer-Schaub
mentions that their “presence is attested during the VIIth and VIIIth
(^49) Kapstein 2000, p. 64.
(^50) bsTan-’gyur, Toh. No. 4347, vol. co, fol. 131v (line 1ff.): theg-pa-che-chung-las-’byung-
ba’i-rgya-gar-gyi-skad-las-bod-kyi-skad-du-bsgyur-cing-ming-du-btags-pa-rnams-dkar-chag-tu-bris-
te/nam-du-yang-gzhung-lugs-de-las-mi-bsgyur-zhing-kun-gyis-bslab-tu-rung-bar-gyis-shig.... For
a translation and detailed discussion of the diplomatic language used in the text, see
Scherrer-Schaub 2002, pp. 278f.