A letter to the editors of the Buddhist canon in fourteenth-century Tibet: the yig mkhan rnams la gdams pa of Bu ston Rin chen grub.

• Author: Schaeffer, Kurtis R.

In the summer of 1364, at the monastery of Zhwa lu in midwestern Tibet, Bu ston Rin chen grub, scholar, artist, teacher, abbot, and zealous collector of manuscripts containing the word of the Buddha, died at the age of seventy-four. (1) During the elaborate rituals of homage and mourning, the Bka' 'gyur, that part of the Tibetan Buddhist canon which contains the Buddha's word in translation, was recited three times. There could have been no more appropriate act of devotion toward Bu ston, for he had dedicated a large part of his life to the compilation and production of Buddhist canonical collections and had designed the temple at Zhwa lu Monastery in which the Bka' 'gyur was housed. (2) While his physical remains were distributed as relics throughout Tibet, India, China, and Nepal, the physical manifestations of his religiously motivated scholarly efforts were eventually to spread as far (farther even) in the form of the Tibetan Buddhist canons.

Bu ston's love of learning and his desire to propagate the teachings of the Buddha and the Buddhist masters through textual scholarship--just one facet of his contributions to the spread of Buddhist culture in Tibet--are discussed by his biographer and close disciple Sgra tshad pa Rin chen rnam rgyal (1318-88) in A Handful of Flowers. Sgra tshad pa repeatedly stresses his master's passion for and expertise in such matters. We are told that at the age of four or five, he learned to read perfectly the Tibetan printed script under the tutelage of his mother, not by using a speller as it seems was the norm, but through copying out and there-upon immediately reciting the Atajna Sutra. (3) The five-year-old Bu ston then strove to learn the cursive script, and was so distraught when he could not do so that his patron deity, Manjughosa, showed him favor and blessed him with the ability to read this version of the Tibetan script. (4)

Sgra tshad pa elaborates on the theme of textual learning and scholarship in Bu ston's life in a number of ways. He evokes visions of a scholar at work in the center of his entourage: "Even surrounded by all the scribes and creating many different types of translations and compositions. [Bu ston] dictated without faltering so that the hand of each [scribe] was not empty." (5) In particular, he focuses on the increasing importance of editorial activities for Bu ston. In 1332 Bu ston was called upon in a vision by the Sa skya pa master, Rje bstun Grags pa rgyal mtshan (1147-1216). Grags pa rgyal mtshan urged Bu ston not only to compose commentaries on the sutras and tantras, but also to edit: "Edit the word of the Buddha and the treatises in general, and the tantras in particular. Earlier I thought to edit my own works, but I did not finish. Now you must edit them." (6) Bu ston took his Sa skya pa ancestor's injunction to heart, placing editorial work at the center of his scholarly activities.

Sgra tshad pa later praises his master's work as a mature scholar in his fifties, writing: "Through translation and editorial work he has grown the magnificent life-giving tree, the foundation of the Buddhist teachings." (7) Indeed, references to books, editing, translating, and textual scholarship abound not only in Bu ston's life story by Sgra tshad pa, but in songs of praise by later Tibetans as well. Writing in 1485, Sakya mchog Idan (1428-1507) praises Bu ston for editing the words of the Buddha anew, and for setting the Himalayas ablaze with the light of the Buddha's kindness by producing canonical volumes. (8)

Just three years prior to his death, Bu ston exhorted his close student, Sgra tshad pa, to take up the editorial revision of several of his own manuscripts, with a concern that the work he had initiated at Zhwa lu Monastery continue, and, it sounds, with an almost manic concern that his reputation as a textual scholar not be tarnished after his death. Sgra tshad pa relates how, in a short-tempered mood, his mentor issued these words of warning to him:

My own collection of manuscripts--the grammatical and tantric works--must be brought to completion, [for] if I should die, when scholars and peers look at them they will say, "These manuscripts of his were not even edited once!" and they will scoff. When the ignorant look at them, they will scurry about as if their bladders are filled with urine! (9) It is perhaps fitting, then, that the earliest and most detailed work that describes the process of editing and copying Buddhist manuscripts in Tibet currently known to us is a small letter written by Bu ston. That Bu ston was instrumental in the formation of the Tibetan canonical collections is now well known; during the first half of the fourteenth century, in the wake of nearly six centuries of translation and transmission of Buddhist literature from India and elsewhere to Tibet, the intertwining processes of collation, authentication, and canonization were in full swing. Recent scholarship has drawn a complex picture of the proliferation of canonical collections in Tibet, a picture based primarily on the text-critical study of the relationship between the various recensions of the collections. (10) One scholar has recently likened the passage of the multitude of Buddhist manuscripts through Zhwa lu and other monasteries to the shape of an hourglass; (11) to these centers of learning were gathered copies of sutras, tantras, poetic songs, and treatises on logic and epistemology from all around Tibet, and through the efforts of scholars like Bu ston, they were transformed into a highly organized body of literature which could then, in a manner of speaking, be mass-produced and reintroduced into the region at large.

We have as yet made far less progress in the study of the actual events, the day-to-day activities that went into the creation of such an enormous body of Buddhist literature. (12) The economic, social, political, or institutional realities that constituted the making of a canon are still only poorly known. Who paid for the work? What sorts of laborers were involved and how many, and how might the systems of management that were no doubt necessary for the successful completion of such a large project have been organized? Further, what range of religious significance did the making of a canon hold, either for its patrons, its readers, its editors and scribes, or for the manual laborer who delivered the paper to the monastery? (13) More specifically, what steps did the actual work of editing, copying, or proofreading involve? (14) Bu ston was renowned for his textual scholarship, which included making fundamental translations (gzhi 'gyur), revising or editing translated works (zhu chen), and filling in gaps in faulty texts (hor khong/kong gsob pa). (15) Under what social circumstances and with what material resources did he go about these activities?

It is to these sorts of questions that the letter written by Bu ston to editors of Buddhist texts provides the beginnings of an answer. The two-page letter, containing detailed instructions to the virtuous friends, or kalyanamitras, and distinguished scholars overseeing a manuscript-copying project, is undated and contains no proper names. Though it is thus impossible to say with certainty to whom Bu ston was addressing his instructions, it is quite likely that he was in correspondence with the managers in charge of copying the reorganized Bstan 'gyur at Zhwa lu monastery. In the catalogue to his Bstan 'gyur, Bu ston tells us that in mid-1334 the secular ruler of the Zhwa lu region, the nobleman Sku zhang Kun dga' don grub, (16) funded the project, and "invited the most learned scribes in the regions of central and midwestern Tibet." Three kalyanamitras, Sakya seng ge, Dar ma byang chub, and Gzhon nu 'phel, came to Zhwa lu to oversee the endeavor. (17) It is in all likelihood that these same scholar-craftsmen, in charge of instructing and managing the workers involved in the production of this manuscript version of the Bstan 'gyur, were the initial recipients of Bu ston's letter.

It is certainly possible that this letter was sent to some other editors, perhaps those in charge of the production of a Bka' 'gyur at Tshal Gung thang, the consecration of which Bu ston oversaw at Gung thang in 1351 at the invitation of Tshal pa Kun dga' rdo rje, alias Dge ba'i blo gros (1309-64). (18) I believe, however, that it is more likely that Bu ston was writing to the scholars working on the Bstan 'gyur at his home institution of Zhwa lu for the following--admittedly tenuous--reasons. First of all, arguing from negative evidence, we have no definite statement at our disposal that Bu ston actually played a role in the making of the Bka' 'gyur of 1347-49 at Tshal Gung thang; the scribal colophons of the Tshal Bka' 'gyur preserved in the Li thang block-print Bka' 'gyur list the names of many scholars, and Bu ston is not among them. (19) Secondly, Bu ston employs similar terms for his scholarly audience in both his letter to editors and his Bstan 'guyr dkar chag, including yon tan mkhan po, "distinguished scholar," (20) and dge ba'i bshes gnyen. (21) These scholars are also said to have received gifts (rdzong) in both the letter and the Bstan 'gyur dkar chag. (22) Finally, passages in the letter itself referring to common phrases in sutras make it clear that Bu ston was giving instructions for canonical literature.

This small correspondence provides us a window into the workshop of the creators of a collection of Buddhist literature that would exert a profound impact on the history of Buddhism in Tibet for the next six hundred years. In what follows I will translate this letter and provide a brief commentary upon it. Bu ston opens his letter thus:

Homage to the Virtuous Friends of All People: An appeal to the ear of virtuous friends, the religious stewards and distinguished scholars who are producing the great treatises, and a request that you work in accordance with the instructions I have given...