TANTRIC BUDDHISM (INCLUDING CHINA AND JAPAN)10 V. TPS,pp. 189-108.
11 On the princes of Rin spuns and Karma bsTan skyon dban po, usually referred to as
sde srid, see ThG translated below and also quoted in A. Schiefner, Tiiraniitha ·s
Geschichte des Buddhismus in Indien (St. Petersburg, 1869), pp. vi-viii (followed by
G. Schulemann, Geschiohte der Dalai Lamas [Heidelberg, 1911], pp. 135-137);
rDsogs /dan gzon nu 'i dga' stan, fol. 90a f.; TPS, pp. 37a, 58-64, 256 n. 130, 651 b,
607-608; H. E. Richardson, The Karma pa Sect, JRAS, 1958, p. 156-157.
12 V. ThG 4a, below. A Jo nan pa monastery-'Dsi ka (spelling?) dgon pa-is said to
exist in the district of the same name which forms part of the rNa pa (?) region of A
mdo; G. N. Roerich (Blue Annals, p. 777) also speaks of Jo nan pas in the INa ba
region of southern A mdo. (It might seem that the PSJZ [ ed. L. Chandra, pt. 3, p. 146]
also refers to such a connexion with the A mdo region; but Jo nan there is presumably
an error for Jo non.)
13 V. KD za, 22a-b.
Taranatha's spiritual successor, the 17th in the line, was the first Khal kha rje btsun
dam paBlo bzail bstan pa'i rgyal mtshan, who lived from 1635 to 1723. Cf. Lokesh
Chandra, Eminent Tibetan Polymaths of Mongolia (New Delhi, 1961), pp. 15-17; C.
R. Bawden, The Jebtsundamba Khutukhtus of Urga (Wiesbaden, 1961 ).
14 Drmi lies kyi dka' 'grel (fol. lOa): mlion par rtogs pa 'i yon tan gyis mi dman pa 'i kun
mkhyenpa.
15 Many references to this school are naturally to be found in the various Chos 'byuns
and Grub mtha's. See in particular the Kalacakra chapter of the DN; KhG tsa, 36b;
andBrCh 127b.
16 Blo bzan chos kyi iii rna (1737-1802) was the second re-embodiment of the Thu'u
bkvan bla rna of dGon !uti in A mdo (founded in 1604) and the successor of Nag dban
chos kyi rgya mtsho ( 1680-1736).
Besides the A mdo editions of his gsuli 'bum, a print of it exists in ten volumes
made at the Zol par khan. And a separate edition of the ThG was made at sDe dge,
where it is also known as the Bod ohos 'byuli.
17 Despite certain ressemblances with earlier Indian masters, as noted above the author
of the ThG (fol. 1 Oa of the Jo nan pa chapter) and other Tibetan authorities reject the
idea that the Jo nan pas continued some Indian Buddhist tradition.-The connexion
between Dignliga and Bhartrhari has surprisingly not received the attention it
merits though pointed out by E. Frauwallner in 1933 (Festschrift Winternitz [Leipzig,
1933], p. 237). Cf. also my Contributions ti l'histoire de Ia philosophie linguistique
indienne (Paris, 1959), pp. 90-92, where some aspects of the question were briefly
discussed.
18 It is not always easy to determine exactly to what stage of development in the history
of these Brahma!).ical doctrines the outlines contained in the Tibetan Grub mtha's
correspond. The description of the Siirpkhya given in the ThG appears to derive from
Candrakirti's remarks in Madhyamakiivatiira 6. 121; this form of Siirp.khya was
briefly discussed by R. Garbe, Sdl!lkhya-Philosophie (Leipzig, 1917), pp. 391-392.
Other sources are the Tarkajviilii and Jfilinasri's commentary on the
Lalikiivatiirasiitra.--On similarities between the Sarpkhya and Bhartrhari, cf. E.
Frauwallner, WZKSO 3 (1959), p. 107-108.
As regards the Vedanta, it maintains in its theory of error the
anirvacanlyakhyiitiviida. But the word 'khrul snali cannot directly correspond to this
term; once in the Dasabhiimikasiitra, 'khrul ba corresponds to vivarta. On mithyiij-
iiiina, avidyii and the anirvaoanlya, see the Siimkarabhiisya on Brahmusiitra l. 3. 19;
- l. 22 and 3, 46; 3. 2. 6; etc.; cf. S. N. Dasgupta, History of Indian Philosophy, II,
pp. 8-12 and 185.-In Buddhist usage 'khrul snali and rna rig pa (avidyii) are not
usually synonymous.