in particular found much to criticize. Interestingly, the
Sa skya tradition also became involved in its own re-
form movement. Ngor chen Kun dga’ bzang po
(1382–1456) founded the monastery of Ngor E wam
chos ldan in 1429 and established it as the most im-
portant tradition of esoteric Lam ’bras instruction,
supplemented by the personality and work of Tshar
chen Blo gsal rgya mtsho (1502–1566).
The sixteenth century was a high-water mark for
scholarship in other traditions as well. Karma pa VIII,
Mi bskyod rdo rje (1504–1557), questioned the basis
for Dga’ ldan pa confidence and provided a critique of
the Rnying ma as well. The Bka’ brgyud pa historians
Dpa’ bo Gtsug lag phreng ba (1504–1566) and ‘Brug
chen Pad ma dkar po (1527–1592) forcefully estab-
lished their readings of Tibetan history and the tantric
movement. Mnga’ ris pan chen Pad ma dbang rgyal
(1487–1542) formulated the classic Rnying ma state-
ment of the triple discipline. Sog bzlog pa Blo gros rgyal
mtshan (b. 1552) compiled the statements of Rnying
ma opponents and established a defense of Rnying ma
and treasure legitimacy.
The Dalai Lamas and Rnying ma revitalization
in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries
The Tibetan religious landscape changed dramati-
cally again in the seventeenth century. Clans in the
provinces of Dbus and Gtsang had been warring
for several decades, and each had its associated reli-
gious affiliation. In Dbus, the fifth Dalai Lama—
affectionately known to Tibetans as the Great Fifth (Za
hor ban de Ngag dbang blo bzang rgya mtsho,
1617–1682)—had developed a base of power in ’Bras
spung Monastery. The Great Fifth Dalai Lama was ex-
traordinarily learned, with teachers from the Dga’ ldan,
Sa kya, Zha lu, and Rnying ma traditions. He was also
highly ambitious and built on the previous Dalai
Lamas’ Mongolian connections, finally using the mil-
itary might of Gushri Khan’s Qoshot Mongols to so-
lidify control over Tibet in 1642, inaugurating the reign
of the Dalai Lamas.
Some traditions favored by the Great Fifth were
greatly benefited. Because of his strong Rnying ma
connections (he was one of the very few Dgan’ ldan
pa treasure finders) the Rnying ma tradition pros-
pered. This was an important time for treasure tradi-
tions, with visionaries like Mi ’gyur rdo rje
(1647–1667) and U rgyan gter bdag gling pa
(1616–1714) revealing new textual cycles. Likewise,
Rnying ma scholarship flourished, with scholars like
Lo chen Dharma s ́r(1654–1717). Virtually all the
greatest Rnying ma monasteries were built during this
period—Rdo rje brag (1632), Kahtog (originally 1159
but resurrected in 1656), Dpal yul (1665), O rgyan
smin grol gling (1670), Rdzogs chen (1685), and Zhe
chen (1735). Despite a short-lived suppression from
1717 to 1720, the Rnying ma tradition in the eigh-
teenth century was graced by exceptional figures as
well, especially the historian Kah tog rig ’dzin Tshe
dbang nor bu (1698–1755) and the Omniscient ’Jigs
med gling pa (1730–98). ’Jigs med gling pa was to
dominate Rnying ma meditative traditions for the
next two centuries with his Klong chen snying thig
revelations.
Conversely, traditions not favored by the Great Fifth
experienced significant problems. Most notoriously,
he suppressed the Jo nang order, which had been un-
dergoing a revival through the profound influence of
Jo nang Taranatha (1575–1634), an erudite scholar and
historian. However, after 1642 the monastery was
placed in Dga’ ldan pa hands, the literature of the Jo
nang pa was suppressed, and the order survived only
in a few minor convents in far northeastern Tibet. The
works of scholars critical of Tsong kha pa or his disci-
ples were also suppressed, so that copies survived only
in rare collections. The unfortunate sectarianism dis-
played by the Dga’ ldan pa at this time was embodied
in the literary form of the monastic syllabus (yig cha),
the obligatory textbook of sectarian principles. Sectar-
ianism was occasionally mitigated by open-minded
Dga’ ldan scholars like Lcang skya rol pa’i rdo rje
(1717–1786).
This period was the great printing period for Ti-
betan Buddhism. Despite Tibetan forays into wood-
block printing as early as the thirteenth century in
Mongolia, the entire Tibetan canon (Bka’ ’gyur and
Bstan ‘gyur) was not completely printed until the eigh-
teenth century. The first Bka’ ’gyur editions were
printed under Chinese patronage, which continued
through the eighteenth century (Yongle, 1410; Wanli,
1606; Kangxi, 1684–1692, 1700, 1717–1720; Qianlong,
1737). Editions produced in Tibet included the Li tang
(1608–1621), Snar thang (1730–1732), Sde dge (1733),
Co ni (1721–1731), and the Lha sa (1930s). The Bstan
’gyureditions include the Qianlong (1724), Sde dge
(1737–1744), Snar thang (1741–1742), and Cho ni
(1753–1773). In this same period, the collected works
of the Sa skya masters were printed in Sde dge (ca.
1737), and ’Jigs med gling pa reorganized and ex-
panded the Old Tantric Canon; it was eventually
printed from 1794 to 1798.TIBET