(LEXICOGRAPHICAL, SYNTACTICAL AND MATERIAL.)
ཀུག་ see ཀྱུ་.
ཀུན་གྱིས་ཁྲེལ་བའི་རྒྱུ་, 32. Not so much ‘a matter of shame to all’ (= all the
people who look at or into the matter, the beholders, the general
public, or even humanity in general), but rather ‘a matter of all (of
them) being ashamed,’ i.e. the people doing the shameful acts, the
people concerned, engaged in this conduct, not the public in general.
ཀུན་སློང་, 29. Here thought, conception, wish (cf. D. opwelling). (Desg.
‘all-enveloping,’ i.e. ‘natural corruption or sin,’ p. 8b, but ཀུན་སློང་ =
ཉོན་མོང་གི་སློང་, ‘excitement of passion’ on p. 1044a). See also S. Ch. D.,
p. 29b, समुत्पाद, but Schroeter, p. 2b, ‘approbation, assent, the
consenting to any proposition.’
ཀོ་ཀོ་ see གླུད་.
ཀྱང་, 30. Here equal to ཡིན་ན་ཡང་, ‘yet, however, nevertheless.’
ཀྱུ་, 20. Not as a separate word in J., who gives ཀུག་ and ཀྱོ་བ་, the
latter after Schmidt. This is the word occurring in the compound ཞབས་ཀྱུ་
the Tibetan u-vowel, the ‘foot-hook’ (not merely honorific of ཀྱུ་ as
Hannah seems to suggest in his Grammar of the Tibetan Language, p. 4),
which J. has under ཞབས་, on p. 472a, together with a queried meaning
‘spur’ (of the foot: ‘ein Sporn’), taken from Csoma. This latter
meaning is unknown to my informants. Bell gives: hook ཀུག་; fishhook ཉ་
ཀུག་, but iron hook ལྕགས་ཀྱུ་. Henderson gives both ཁུག་ and ཀྱུ་ for hook,
and also ལྕགས་ཀྱུ་ alone for iron hook. My informants deny the correctness
of ཁུག་. Desg. knows ཀུག་ (པ་) only as a verb, not as a subst.; he
mentions ཀྱུ་ as a separate word, subst. hook, and does not mention ཀྱོ་བ་.
The various articles in the three Dicts. sub ཁུག་ are interesting but
the meaning hook is not given in any of them. S. Ch. D. translates ཀྱོ་བ་
with ‘अङ्कुश, a pointed iron hook, a large pin to pierce with,’ whilst
Macdonell in his Sk. dict. translates the Sk. word as ‘hook, goad,
stimulus, remedy.’ (See below s.v. འདྲེན་པ་.) J. under ཀུག་ gives also
ལྕགས་ཀུག་, an iron hook, and ཉ་ཀུག་, a fishing hook, but my informants say
that the colloquial for fish hook is rather ཉ་འཛིན་ཡའི་ (or པའི་) ལྕགས་ཀྱུ་
or simply ཉ་འཛིན་ (pr. nyendzin), just as a meat hook (to hang up meat
on) is ཤ་འཛིན་ (pr. shendzin). The ཡ་ in the above represents the
pronunciation of the more illiterate people.
One of my informants is, however, of opinion that ལྕགས་ཀྱུ་ does not mean
an iron hook at all, but hook in general even though it might be made
of silver, copper, gold, etc. He compares it with the word wall, ལྕགས་
རི་, which is not necessarily made of iron, and though of stone or earth
is still called ‘iron-mountain.’ Women’s ornaments such as earrings,
chains, or necklaces (སྐེ་འཕྲེང་, pr. kenthang, not in the Dicts. or Bell.
As a colloquial word the dengbu might perhaps be left out in writing)
may have golden or silver hooks, གསེར་གྱི་ལྕགས་ཀྱུ་ or དངུལ་གྱི་ལྕགས་ཀྱུ་. Example:
སྐྱེ་དམན་འདི་ལ་སྐྱེ་འཕྲེང་ཡག་པོ་ཅིག་འདུག། དེ་ལ་གསེར་དང་དངུལ་གྱི་ལྕགས་ཀྱུ་བཞི་འདུག་, this
woman has a very fine necklace which has four golden and silver hooks
(or clasps). Schroeter’s dict., p. 361b, already gives ལྕགས་ཀྱུ་ as hook
only. The expression ལྕགས་ནག་ in the sense of mineral, given by Desg.,
307a, would make us think that ལྕགས་ཀྱུ་ might perhaps mean metal hook,
but see below. S. Ch. D. adds to the confusion. Under ལྕགས་ཀྱུ་ he gives:
(1) iron pin to guide and punish elephants; fish-hook; (2) name of a
plant. (His next entry seems improbable, elephant driving and elephant
driver for one and the same word). But under ཀྱུ་ he defines ལྕགས་ཀྱུ་ as
‘iron hook, an angle, a fishing-hook.’ J. has ལྕགས་ཀྱུ་ under ལྕགས་ and
gives ‘an iron hook, esp. fishing-hook, angle; often fig.’ and in his
illustration he translates ཆོས་ཀྱི་ལྕགས་ཀྱུ་ simply as ‘hook of grace.’ He
marks the word as belonging to the book language. It is curious to note
that Schlagintweit in his Rgyal-rabs (title, or introductory verse)
translates the word ལྕགས་ཀྱུ་ with ‘eisernen Hacken’ (p. 25), whilst
Schiefner renders the same word correctly on the next page by ‘Hacken’
alone. But in his new translation of the Rgyal-rabs, H. A. Francke
(J.P.A.S.B., Vol. VI, n. 8, p. 397) writes again ‘Iron Hook.’
There is still another compound with ཀྱུ་, namely མཐེབ་ཀྱུ་, the name for a
component part of the elaborate torma cake structure. It indicates a
small piece of dough in the form of the top of the thumb. From all
these examples it might be hazarded that the element ཀྱུ་ means primarily
‘curve, curved’ or ‘curvature,’ and has no substantial meaning like
‘hook’ or the like. My teachers, however, think that ཀྱུ་ by itself is a
substantive ‘hook.’ So it is not clear whether J. is right as against
the other Dicts. in not entering the word separately. The above
discussion is in any case better entered under the word ཀྱུ་, whether
this is really an independent word or not. The fact that S. Ch. D.
gives a Sk. equivalent for ཀྱུ་ alone, pleads for its separate existence.
My teachers opine that ཀྱུ་ as a separate word may occur alone, but their
nearest approach to framing a sentence illustrating such a use was one
in which they spoke of a wooden hook (made by a jungleman to fish or
hunt with) as ཤིང་གི་ལྕགས་ཀྱུ་ or more briefly ཤིང་ཀྱུ་. So the example was not
decisive.
Additional Note—Cf. the example in Csoma’s Grammar, p 109: གསེར་གྱི་ལྕགས་
སྒྲོག་, golden fetters or chains, lit.: golden iron ropes. See also
Ramsay, ‘Western Tibet’, p. 62:
‘To hook—ngiákuk táng ches, properly applicable only to a fish caught
with a hook, but also used generally’, and:
‘Hook—ngiákuk (fish hook), kuk kuk (a hook of any kind)....’
Query: Is the use of ལྕགས་ merely conventional in several words, as in
ལྕགས་ཁྲ་, cage (Bell, Walsh ‘Tromowa Dialect’), ལྕགས་ཟམ་ (iron) bridge,
etc.? And is the use of ལྕགས་ perhaps analogous to that of honorific
prefixes? Cf. the Dutch guilder (gulden) which is made of silver,
though its name is derived from ‘gold.’
ཀྱོ་བ་ see ཀྱུ་.
དཀའ་བ་, 7. Difficult, but here rather with some of the meaning of the
English ‘hard’ (hard lines?), the French ‘dur’, perhaps L. ‘arduus.’
The meaning is somewhat that the invocation should not be undertaken
lightly (God’s name should not be spoken ‘in vain’). Conceptions like:
grave, serious, weighty, not lighthearted, or commonplace, or flippant,
suggest themselves here. It is ‘a serious matter’ to invoke these
teachers.
བཀའ་དྲིན་སེམས་པ་, 42. To think with kindness of or towards, or about (ལ་).
སྐལ་ལྡན་, 11. We have taken this word in the general sense given by J.
‘the pious,’ though it may equally well be rendered by ‘the fortunate
ones,’ i.e. those who were fortunate enough to hear Tsoṅ kʽa pa’s
preaching or that of his two pupils. One of my informants suggests,
however, that སྐལ་ལྡན་ should here be taken more literally as ‘sharers’,
‘share-havers’ in Tsoṅ kʽa pa’s message and consequently should here be
understood as his ‘followers.’
སྐུ་གླུད་ see གླུད་.
སྐེ་འཕྲེང་ see ཀྱུ་.
སྐྱབས་རེ་ས་, 19. May either be taken as two separate words ‘protection and
hope’ or as a compound ‘hope for protection,’ ‘protection-hope.’ More
accurately ‘the spot (place = persons in this case) in whom I place my
hope for protection, to whom I resort or go, in whom I trust, for
protection.’ (cf. D. heul, toeverlaat).
སྐྱིད་གླུ་ see མགུར་མ་.
སྐྱེ་སྒོ་ see སྒོ་.
སྐྱེ་བ་, 4. This is an illustration of the meaning of སྐྱེ་བ་ under J.’s 4th
sub-heading, 1st division. དད་པ་སྐྱེས་ ‘faith has been born,’ but here
rather ‘becomes active,’ ‘sprouts,’ ‘waxes strong,’ or ‘grows, flames
up, intensifies, awakens, arises, stirs.’ The idea is not, as in a case
of Christian conversion, of a state of previously non-existent faith,
suddenly arising, but of an existing faith becoming strongly energised,
leaping up (‘an outburst of faith’). The colloquial དད་པ་སྐྱེས་ can be
suitably translated by ‘to inspire faith to.’ For instance བླ་མ་འདི་ལ་དད་
པ་སྐྱེས་ཀྱི་ (མི་) འདུག་, that lama inspires me with (no) faith. A free
translation of དད་པ་སྐྱེ་བ་ is consequently ‘to have faith in,’ but in our
passage the additional meaning of ‘renewed’ is implied. Therefore we
may also render ‘they call up my faith’ or ‘renewed faith comes up in
me.’ See the use of this expression in the Tibetan Primer III, p. 7, 1.
8. དེ་ནས་ཁོ་ (read ཁོས་) རྒྱལ་པོ་དེ་ཤིན་ཏུ་བཟང་པོར་ཤེས་ཏེ་དད་པ་སྐྱེས་ཏེ་ཕྱག་གྲངས་མེད་འཚལ་
ནས་རྒྱལ་པོས་གནང་བ་དེ་རྣམས་བདག་ག་ལ་ཞུ ། Then he, recognising that the king was
very good, and having gained faith in him, and having prostrated
himself numberless times, (asked) how can I request (i.e. take, accept)
such (gifts) given by the king.
སྐྱེད་སྒོ་ see སྒོ་.
སྐྱེད་པ་, 50. To generate, the generation, production. སེམས་བསྐྱེད་པ་ ‘that
which has been produced in the soul,’ ‘the (completed) productions of
the soul’; with དང་ = with; ‘with thoughts of, assuming, observing an
attitude of, with a mental attitude of or disposition to.’ འགྲོ་བ་རྣམས་
བྱམས་སྙིང་རྗེས་དྲངས་པའི་སེམས་བསྐྱེད་ (དང་) is one elaborate substantive, a
‘the-beings-with-kindness-having-drawn-soul-disposition.’
སྐྱོ་བ་, 28. Here not in J.’s sense ‘to be weary,’ but as Desg. and S. Ch.
D. have it ‘sadness, grief, sorrow,’ or adj. ‘sad’, etc. In seeing a
half-naked beggar, it may be said: མི་འདི་སྐྱོ་བ་ལ་ཁོ་ལ་དུག་ལོག་ཡང་མི་འདུག་. Here
the word is adjective: ‘that unhappy (unfortunate, wretched, miserable)
man has not even a coat.’ [དུག་ལོག་ (Bell) = J. དུག་པོ་ = གོས་ལག་ = ཆུ་པ་ =
Desg. ཆོ་པ་, coat, garment, dress; not alone ‘man’s coat,’ as J. has it,
but for both sexes—J. s.v. ཆུ་པ་. ཆུ་པ་ and ཆོ་པ་ both missing in S. Ch.
D. གོས་ལག་ is pronounced both golak and gölak. Walsh, Vocabulary Tromowa
Dialect, s.v. coat ‘go’ and ‘golag.’ My teachers do not know a word དུག་
པོ་ for coat in Tibetan. Desg. has a དུགས་པོ་, overcoat. S. Ch. D. དུག་པ༌
or དུག་པོ་ ‘old coat or garment patched up and mended.’]
ག་གདན་ see གདན་.
ཁ་རྩོད་ see གཤགས་འགྱེད་པ་.
ཁ་གཤགས་འགྱེད་པ་ see གཤགས་འགྱེད་པ་.
ཁུག་ see ཀྱུ་.
ཁོ་བོའི་རྗེས་མཇུག་གྲོགས་པོ་རྣམས་, 45. My followers and friends (cf. citizens and
compatriots), i.e. followers who are also my friends; the same people
under two qualifications, not two different groups of people, the
friends and the followers. See རྗེས་མཇུག་པ་.
ཁོ་མི་གླུད་ཡིན་ see གླུད་.
ཁྱེད་ 18, ཁྱོད་ 12, 23. The difference in form is not accidental. མགོན་ཁྱོད་
is a stereotyped ལབ་ལུགས་, manner of speech, expression. ཡབ་སྲས་ཁྱེད༌, l.
18, is a normal honorific form. The form ཁྱོད་ was described to me as one
of intimacy, of utter confidence, as distinct from familiarity and lack
of respect. This seems an almost exact parallel to the use of (thou),
tu, du in (English), French and German in addressing parents, God, and
relations. The following example was given, a quotation from the བླ་མ་
མཆོད་པའི་ཆོ་ག་, a little ritual gelukpa book, leaf 12a: ཁྱོད་ནི་བླ་མ་ཁྱོད་ནི་ཡི་
དམ་ཁྱོད་ནི་མཁའ་འགྲོ་ཆོས་སྐྱོང་སྟེ ། ‘As thou art our lama, our yi-dam, our ḍākinī,
our dharmapāla ...’ (prayer addressed to Tsoṅ kʽa pa). Likewise, in the
little prayerbook རྗེ་བཙུན་སྒྲོལ་མའི་གདུང་འབོད་ (to Tārā) we find a few cases of
ཁྱོད་ (e.g. p. 5b) amidst many cases of ཁྱེད་. In the term ཡབ་སྲས་ཁྱེད་ the
hon. form of the first two syllables of course determines the hon. form
of the last. The ‘intimate’ form ཁྱོད་ was further described as ‘the
language of religious transport, ardour, fervour,’ དད་པའི་ཡུས་.
ཁྲེལ་གད་ (རྒྱབ་པ་) see ཁྲེལ་བ་.
ཁྲེལ་དགོད་ see ཁྲེལ་བ་.
ཁྲེལ་བ་, 32. According to the Dicts. ‘to be ashamed.’ Desg. and S. Ch. D.
do not support J.’s meaning ‘piety’ and his third meaning ‘disgust,
aversion.’ My oral information rejects these second and third meanings,
yet see below. ཀུན་གྱིས་ཁྲེལ་བའི་རྒྱུ་, freely translated ‘is a matter of (cause
for) shame to all,’ literally ‘a-by-all-shame-feeling-cause,’ i.e. all
should feel ashamed. The shame, it should be understood, must be felt,
not by all who behold the bad behaviour, but by all who are guilty of
it. The exact meaning of the root ཁྲེལ་ from which the verb is derived is
not yet satisfactorily dealt with in the Dicts. which are supplementary
as well as contradictory in their data. The compounds exhibit a great
variety of shades of meaning. That of ཁྲེལ་མེད་, for instance, may perhaps
cover so wide a range as ‘shameless, impudent, self-willed, stubborn,
stiff-necked, arrogant, insolent, ungrateful, loveless, heartless,
harsh, cruel, wanton, ruchlos, frech.’ Some of the compounds and
applications clearly indicate that ཁྲེལ་ must also mean ‘sexual modesty,
chastity,’ others that it must mean ‘bashfulness, shyness, timidity’
(in this sense ཁྲེལ་མེད་ ‘brazen, forward, unabashed, saucy, bold,
audacious’). ཁྲེལ་ seems to come very near to the D. ‘schroom’ which is
more ‘diffidence’ than ‘scruple,’ but ཁྲེལ་མེད་ may in some cases mean
‘unscrupulous’ or ‘without a conscience.’ In this sense it comes near
to ‘impious.’ The German subst. ‘Scheu’ may be also compared. It is
also averred that in certain combinations a positive statement with ཁྲེལ་
མེད་ is practically identical with the English exclamation: how dare
you! how can you!
A compound, difficult to define exactly, is ཁྲེལ་གཞུང་མེད་ in which གཞུང་
has the meaning, not given in the Dicts. of straight, straightforward,
honest, true, dependable, the French ‘droit’ (cf. rectitude). The whole
expression may mean ‘abandoned,’ or simply ཁྲེལ་མེད་. Example ཁྲེལ་གཞུང་མེད་
པའི་མི་དེ་ཡི་ཚེ་དེ་དོན་མེད་རེད་, ‘the lives of these abandoned (shameless, etc.)
men are useless.’ An old sweetheart who has cast off her lover may be
called ཁྲེལ་གཞུང་མེད་ ‘the brazen, perfidious girl.’ Desg. gives གཞུང་ in
this sense as equal to བཟང་, ‘good, just, generous.’ This may be
Schmidt’s གཞུངས་པ་ ‘sincere, orderly.’ In the sentence ཕ་མ་ལ་སྐུ་དྲིན་འདི་འདྲ་
ལོག་པ་དེ་ཁྲེལ་མེད་ཀྱི་སེམས་རེད་, ‘to render your parents kindness in this way
shows a lack of gratitude,’ my teachers explain the word as
‘ungrateful, loveless, harsh.’
As far as the further meanings of ཁྲེལ་, as given in J. (see above), are
concerned, Pʽun Tsʽogs maintains that ཁྲེལ་སེམས་ཅན་ = ཆོས་སེམས་ཅན་, ‘pious,’
but Karma denies it, and the former also states that ཁྲེལ་ཡོད་པ་ = ཞེན་པ་
ལོག་པ་, which latter expression Desg. and S. Ch. D. know as ‘to be
disgusted with.’ But J. and the others render the former expression
with ཁྲེལ་, as ‘chaste’ or ‘modest,’ or as ‘to be chaste,’ etc. Both of
my teachers are at one about the expression ཞེ་ཁྲེལ་བ་ ‘to be weary,
tired, sick of.’ Examples: ལྟོ་ཆས་འདི་ལ་ཞེ་ཁྲེལ་སོང་, I am tired of this food.
(ལྟོ་ཆས་, pr. tobché, see Henderson’s Manual, Voc., p. 48, s.v. food;
there written ལྟོབ་ཆས་.) མི་འདི་ལ་ཞེ་ཁྲེལ་སོང་, ‘I have got tired of this man.’
The sentence ཆོས་ཐོས་པས་རྒྱུད་གྲོལ་ནས ། ཁྲེལ་ཡོད་ངོ་ཚ་ཤེས་ was explained to me as:
Having understood the doctrine, and having been delivered (saved), I am
now weary of the world, have renounced the world, know the world for
vanity, have turned away from it. For J.’s ཁྲེལ་གད་, ‘scornful laughter’,
the synonym ཁྲེལ་དགོད་ was given to me, as well as the explanation ‘a
laugh to make the other feel ashamed,’ ‘to make another feel small.’ We
may therefore think of ironic, sarcastic, malicious laughter, or of
derision and Schadenfreude. ཁྲེལ་གད་རྒྱབ་པ་, to laugh at another, at the
expense of another, in order to make him ridiculous. This word ཁྲེལ་
furnishes a very striking test of the present state of Tibetan
lexicography, the word གདན་ will furnish another.
For words like these a comprehensive collection of authentic
illustrations is imperative before finer shades and the exact range of
meanings can be fixed. ངོ་ཚ་, commonly translated as ‘shame,’ a synonym
for ཁྲེལ་, is a similarly uncertain word. Compare the translations in J.
and S. Ch. D. of this same sentence: ཁྲེལ་བ་དང་ངོ་ཚ་བ་མེད་, J.: ‘he has no
shame nor dread’; S. Ch. D.: ‘he has no shame or modesty.’
ཁྲེལ་མེད་ see ཁྲེལ་བ་.
ཁྲེལ་གཞུང་མེད་ see ཁྲེལ་བ་.
ཁྲེལ་ཡོད་པ་ see ཁྲེལ་བ་.
ཁྲེལ་སེམས་ཅན་ see ཁྲེལ་བ་.
ཁྲོད་ see གངས་རིའི་ཁྲོད་འདི་ན་ and འབྲོག་.
མཁྱེན་པ་ see མཁྱེན་བརྩེ་.
མཁྱེན་བརྩེ་, 55. J.’s queried མཁྱེན་བརྩེ་, quoted from Gyal-rabs: ‘prob.:
omniscient-merciful,’ cannot with any certainty be decided from this
passage.
Desg. has མཁྱེན་བརྩེ༌ = ཐུགས་རྗེ་ = ‘knowledge of the heart, i.e. pity,
mercy.’
S. Ch. D. ‘omniscient mercy.’
According to my teachers these are two different words here, knowledge
and mercy; not a compound. མཁྱེན་པ་ is here hon. form of ཤེས་པ་ to know.
But a subst. མཁྱེན་ is not recorded in the Dicts. Desg. has a མཁྱེན་པ་ =
ཤེས་པ་ = རིག་པ་ ‘science, knowledge,’ and S. Ch. D. also gives མཁྱེན་པ་ as
‘knowledge.’ In compounds མཁྱེན་ has usually the verbal value of
‘knowing.’ The entries s.v. མཁྱེན་ in the Dicts. need careful comparison
and deserve close study.
མཁྱེན་པ་ is often used in an emphatic sense, to know all, to know through
and through, to know with supernatural knowledge (as, for instance, to
know what happens from a distance), cf. the English adj. ‘knowing.’
The shades of meaning: wise, learned, intelligent, sensible, careful,
cautious, clever, need further analysis.
འཁྲུག་པ་, 35. The value of this word is clear from the Dicts., but there
is a difficulty in choosing suitable English words to fit each case in
rendering. Such words as the following may be found useful under
various circumstances: to be disturbed, upset, disordered (cf.
disordered brain), unbalanced, deranged, convulsed, in turmoil,
tumultuous (a soul in tumult), in revolt, turbulent, wild, seething, in
uproar, in the throes of (passion, etc.).
And even so none of the above expressions furnishes an easy, idiomatic
and close rendering for རྒྱུད་ཁོང་ནས་འཁྲུགས་པའི་མི་, the man whose very
character is an utter chaos.
འཁུར་བ་, 21. Ordinarily to carry, but here to carry back, i.e. to repay,
render, return.
Example: ཕ་མའི་དྲིན་འཁུར་དགོས་, You must render your parents their kindness.
The verb འཇལ་བ་, primarily ‘to weigh’, is equally so used; see J. s.v.
4. For the above example the word ལན་ would ordinarily be inserted, ཕ་
མའི་དྲིན་ལན་འཁུར་དགོས་, but this would lessen the force of the illustration
for our purpose as ལན་ means here ‘return,’ and དྲིན་ལན༌, ‘a kindness in
return.’ The above sentence can be expressed in three ways: ཕ་མའི་དྲིན་
(with or without ལན་), འཁུར་ (or འཇལ་, or ལོག་), དགོས་.
གངས་རི་མ་, title. Mother Snow Mountain. The affixes to རི་ are according
to J. བོ་ and ག་; Desg. adds ངོ་; S. Ch. D. only བོ་; Bell and Henderson
no affix. Of these བོ་ gives a definite sense of greatness to the
mountain. (See S. Ch. D., Grammar, Introduction, p. 18). Here the
particle མ་ is not an inherent part of the substantive, but is added to
give a feminine sense to the word, which here means something like
‘Mother Mountain,’ the big mountain being as it were the mother of all
smaller hills and heights around it. My informants were definitely of
opinion that, here, ‘Mother Mountain’ and not ‘Lady Mountain’ was
meant. So we should not understand the expression as ‘Her Majesty or
Ladyship the Snow Mountain.’ The meaning though grammatically important
remains better neglected in the translation.
གངས་རིའི་ཁྲོད་འདི་ན་, 25. In this snow-mountain-mass, i.e. monastery. རི་ཁྲོད་
as monastery in J. s.v. རི་ but not s.v. ཁྲོད་. Bell has རི་ཁྲོད་ as ‘cell
(of hermit).’
Here the expression seems rather to indicate Gendundub’s own monastery
(be it Daipung, Tashilhunpo or Namgyalchöde) than Galdan, spoken of in
the second verse. See Schulemann, Gesch. der Dalailamas, pp. 92 fll.
See འབྲོག་ and ཤར་.
གོ་ལག་ see སྐྱོ་བ་.
གོལ་ས་, 33. J. འགོལ་ས་, error, mistake. In Desg. འགོལ་ས་ or འགོལ་བའི་གནས་,
solitary spot (s.v. འགོལ་) and ལམ་གོལ་ (s.v. གོལ་), ‘has lost his way’;
and also འགོལ་སར་གནས་སུ་ to put apart; འགོལ་ལམ་, a separate road, a side
road (route détournée). According to Desg. only the past form of འགོལ་
བ་, i.e. གོལ་བ་, means to have erred, gone astray, both physically and
morally. S. Ch. D. copies J., but adds to J.’s འགོལ་ས་, the place where
two roads separate: ‘so as to create doubt in the mind regarding the
right path.’ Schroeter (p. 451a) has two entries འགོལ་བ་, ‘remote,’ and
འགོལ་བའི་གནས་, ‘a closet.’ J. has the latter expression as ‘a hermitage,’
and Desg., as above, ‘solitary spot.’ In our passage ལམ་གོལ་ས་ does not
mean ‘the mistake as to the road,’ or Anglice ‘the error of his ways.’
In our passage ལམ་གོལ་ has to be taken together in the sense of ལོག་ལམ་ =
ལམ་ལོག་ = ལམ་ངན་, the wrong road (in a religious sense, in contrast to
the ལམ་མཐོན་པོ་ of l. 31). ལམ་གོལ་ས་ is here to be understood as a
‘wrong-road-place,’ as the spot or place (ས་ = ས་ཆ་) which is, or
proves to be, the wrong road, i.e. the place where one realizes that
the road on which one is, is the wrong road, or, perhaps better, that
the road is a wrong road (= place) to be in, a wrong-road-spot, indeed.
The meanings, recorded in the Dicts. for compounds with or without
initial འ་ of འགོལ་བ་, seem logical, as one who has separated himself
from the road, is astray, is mistaken, is (in moral or intellectual
matters) in the wrong, in error.
Note this example of the use of the verb: ལན་རིག་པ་བསྒྲིམས་ནས་རྒྱབ་མ་གཏོགས་
འགོལ་ཡོང་ངོ་, answer very carefully otherwise you will make a mistake.
[རིག་པ་བསྒྲིམས་ནས་, ‘having twisted, squeezed, screwed up your brains??’ =
adv., carefully, attentively.]
གོས་ལག་ see སྐྱོ་བ་.
གླུ་ see མགུར་མ་.
གླུད་, 40. Ransom. Is here rather གླུད་ཚབ་, well defined by S. Ch. D., s.v.
The meaning of གླུད་ཚབ་ is probably ‘the ransom (which is thrown to the
evil spirit) as a substitute for, representative of (the person on
whose behalf the offering is made),’ J.’s མི་གླུད་ ‘a man’s image which in
his stead is cast away in the གཏོར་མ༌,’ a ransom in effigy. There are,
however, uses of གླུད་ in which the primary sense is perhaps rather
‘effigy’ than ‘ransom.’ In a ritual describing the construction of the
torma cake it is said that the སྐུ་གླུད་ (together with many other moulds)
must be imprinted on the dough or paste. Here the word seems to mean no
more than ‘a mould constituting an effigy of the body.’ Though all the
torma-cake material is thrown away after it has served its purpose,
these imprinted effigies do not seem to serve specially as ransoms like
the གླུད་ཚབ་ and མི་གླུད་ quoted above.
As to J.’s queried ཁོ་མི་གླུད་ཡིན་ (and the slightly different མི་ཁོ་གླུད་ཡིན་),
this is explained as follows. The first phrase means: he is a lü in
human form (a man-lü, cf. werwolf; D. een lü in menschenvorm,
menschelijke gedaante). མི་ཁོ་ means ‘that man, there (with a pointing
out by word or finger).’ For instance: that man John, that king ཀོ་ཀོ་.
‘That man’ alone would be མི་དེ་. But the second phrase would mean: ‘that
man so-and-so is a very devil.’ J.’s rendering of the first phrase as
‘he is a curse, an anathema, one deserving to be cursed’ seems too
strong. Rather ‘an unmitigated nuisance,’ for, though harsh, it may be
said by a mother of her own child when it is naughty and unruly. The
sense seems to be ‘devil’ (as may also be applied to children or wicked
grown-ups in English ‘they are true devils,’ D. ‘een paar baarlijke
duivels’) and seems to be a case of meaning-shifting from result to
cause (pale death!), the lü being the ransom thrown to the evil spirit,
Anglice devil. The association does not seem to be that of
worthlessness, hatefulness, something good for nothing, only fit to be
thrown away like a lü.
As to the above King Koko, this is a facetious name applied (something
like thingumbob) to such Tibetans as ape Chinese manners in dress and
in other ways. ཀོ་ཀོ་ is said to be a Chinese word for Tib. ཨ་ཇོ་ or ཇོ་ཇོ་,
elder brother. A Tibetan, strutting about in Darjeeling with Chinese
cap and coat may hear the sarcasm addressed to him: ཀོ་ཀོ་ལགས་ག་པ་ཕེབས་ཀྱི་
ཡིན་ནམ་ ‘Well Mr. Chinaman (or John Ch., Uncle Ch.) where are you going
to?’ (‘Mossioo’ of the mid-Victorian Punch and music hall ditties).
གླུད་ཚབ་ see གླུད་.
དགའ་ལྡན་ see དགེ་ལྡན་.
དགེ་ལྡན་, 6. Clearly printed in both copies, not དགའ་ལྡན་. This name, ‘the
virtuous,’ seems to refer to the Gelukpa sect, though the monastery
which is here meant is usually called དགའ་ལྡན་. The relation between the
two terms is not quite clear. Grünwedel, in his ‘Mythologie des
Buddhismus,’ etc., p. 72, speaks of ‘das Kloster dGa-ldan oder
dGe-ldan.’ Günther Schulemann in ‘Die Geschichte der Dalailamas,’ p.
65, speaks of the ‘Schule, die zuerst dGa-ldan-pa, dann aber
dGe-ldan-pa oder dGe-lugs-pa, ‘die Tugendsekte’, genannt wurde.’ Modern
Tibetans seem to know only the name དགའ་ལྡན་ for the famous monastery.
དགྲ་ཉོན་མོངས་, 37. This is an apposition. The enemies, the sins; the
enemies who are the sins; ‘these enemies of sins’ as in ‘these rascals
of boys.’ See ཉོན་མོངས་.
མགུར་མ་, title. Its hon. form is གསུང་མགུར་. As a single word the affix མ་
is required, which may disappear in compounds. Bell gives as meaning of
མགུར་མ་ ‘religious song,’ Henderson ‘hymn.’
As J. points out, the profane song is གླུ་ and the religious song མགུར་མ་.
A synonym for གླུ་ is གཞེས་ (not in the three Dicts. but in Bell and
Henderson s.v. song).
S. Ch. D.’s གླུ་གཞེས་ ‘sportive song’ is not supported by the data in J.
or Desg., nor by my informants. They take the second part of this
compound as a misprint for གཞེས་ and hold that གླུ་གཞེས་ is a double-form
with the meaning of either of its parts: song. The word མགུར་མ་ has one
honorific form, གསུང་མགུར་. The words གླུ་ and གཞེས་ have each various hon.
forms: གསུང་གཞེས (recorded in Bell) and གསུང་གླུ་. Desg. has a གསུང་མགུར་,
pleasant song, but my oral information does not support this special
meaning.
Note the difference between J. སྐྱིད་གླུ་ (s.v. སྐྱིད་), ‘song of joy,’ and
Desg. id. s.v. གླུ་ ‘chant érotique.’
In Redslob’s translation of the Psalms into classical Tibetan, the word
གསུང་མགུར་ is used for psalm.
The following table may be useful.