Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften

Abstract:
The eleventh to thirteenth centuries in Tibet witnessed the development of religious schools based on the »New Transmissions« (gsar ’gyur) of Buddhist Tantras or the »Later Spread« (phyi dar) of Buddhism, in contrast to the »Early Transmissions« (snga ’gyur) of Tibetan Imperial times (seventh to ninth centuries CE). This period saw the beginnings of the system in which Buddhist monasteries became seats of religious and politico-economic authority throughout communities in Tibet. At the same time, in this culturally creative environment, followers of the »Ancient Transmissions« began to codify their textual heritage, resulting in the subsequent development of a rNying ma school, based especially on: i. the practice of the Inner Tantras (mahāyoga, anuyoga, atiyoga) and the Eight Sacred Word (bka’ brgyad) tantric deity cycles; ii. the related textual corpus of scriptures known as the »Ancient Tantra Collection« (rnying ma rgyud ’bum); iii. popular accounts of and rituals connected with the early tantric masters and their spiritual and magical feats, and especially the cult of the tantric guru and »second Buddha«, Padmasambhava, together with his key disciples; iv. the traditions of revelation, in which revealers identified as rebirths of the tradition’s cultural heroes continue to augment the textual heritage in each generation. Myang ral Nyi ma ’od zer was seminal to this development: himself a tantric revealer recognised as a rebirth of the emperor Khri srong lde’u btsan, he was responsible for a multi-volume revealed collection on the Eight Sacred Word deities, the Eightfold Sacred Word, Embodying the Sugatas (bka’ brgyad bde gshegs ’dus pa); was central to the lineage of the transmitted texts (bka’ ma) on the same deities; and produced the first full hagiography of Padmasambhava, while his immediate successors began the work of collecting the scriptures for the »Ancient Tantra Collection«, based on organising principles established in his work. This article probes how we should approach authority and authorship in this case. How far and in what sense should we consider Myang ral an »author« of the texts he revealed and why were the new claims to authority so compelling in this case? While Myang ral’s involvement with vision and ritual rather than logical argument or debate clearly distinguish him from mediaeval Tibetan scholastics – even those within his own tradition of Early Transmissions – yet his impressive work in compiling and systematising the heritage from his mentors would suggest that the contrast may not be as extreme as it would first appear.