Great Perfection.pdf

6 introduction
During the reign of Khri gTsug-lde-btsan (805–838), it is said that certain
types of tantras, particularly Ma rgyud were forbidden to be translated into
Tibetan. 19 All this shows that during the royal period, tantras were looked
upon with suspicion and their spread subjected to restriction despite the
fact that they were a flourishing faith in the Buddhist monastic universities
in India at the time. However, what surprises us is that the “Religious
Council” presided over by the abbot of bSam-yas was a very powerful and
fastidious body which certainly tried to control the spread of tantric teachings
in the country. The other main task of this body was to maintain the
monastic communities on the basis of the Vinaya as pure as possible like
the tradition of the Mùlasarvàstivàda itself. All this explains why the early
Buddhist catalogues, like the lDan dkar ma mentions hardly any tantras or
the Mahàvyutpatti contains such a small number of tantric terms.
In spite of the watchfulness of the “Religious Council”, one would expect
that certain people followed the tantric teachings all the same and as
will be seen it became the dominant faith during the period following the
collapse of the monastic institution and the central authority.
The role of the semi-legendary figure, Padmasambhava, in introducing
Tantrism into Tibet has been an object of much eulogy in retrospect by
the rNying ma pa, but there is no good evidence for proving what he
really taught in Tibet apart from the reference in BZh according to which
he taught the Kìla cycle and this is supported by a Tun-huang document,
but again there it already appears like a mythical story. 20 In the narration
of BZh, he is in fact invited by •àntarakßita as his aid and his role appears
only as an “exorcist”, but his “exorcism” soon provoked displeasure among
the ministers and he was finally obliged to leave Tibet even before bSamyas
was founded. 21 His part in establishing Buddhism therefore looks very
insignificant. This, moreover, concords with the generally unfavourable attitude
towards Tantrism in this period.
chags (chag, PT: cag) gi dkyus su bsnan no (PT: bsnand to)/ gsang sngags kyi rgyud (PT: sngags
kyi rgyud ) rnams gzhung gi (PT: gis kyang) gsang bar bya ba yin tel snod du ma gyur ba rnams la
bshad cing bstan du yang mi rung la/ bar du bsgyur cing (PT: zhing) spyod du gang gis kyang/ ldem
po dag du bshad pa ma khrol (PT: khrel ) nas sgra ji bzhin du ’dzin cing log par spyod pa dag kyang
’byung (PT: byung)/ sngags kyi rgyud kyi nang nas thu zhing bod skad du bsgyur (PT: sghyur) ba dag
kyang byung zhes gdags kyi (PT: gda’s kyis)/ phyin chad gzungs sngags dang rgyud blad nas bka’ stsal
te/ sgyur du bcugs pa ma gtogs pa/ sngags kyi rgyud dang sngags kyi tshig thu zhing bsgyur du mi
gnang ngo/ (PT: phyin cad kyang gzung sngags dang/ bla nas bka’ stsald te sgyur du bcug pa la ma
gtogs par sngags kyi rguyd dang sngags kyi tshig thu zhing sgyur du myi gnang ngo)/ GB p. 73–4–5.
19 KhG Ja, f. 132b7–133al. In the mid-eleventh century, the mother tantras were again
a target of attack (Cf. Karmay 1980, p. 17).
20 BZh p. 26; PT 44.
21 BZh pp. 18, 20, 26–27.