{ མགུལ་གླུ་
,, གླུ་ = ,, { བཞེས་ (sic.) གླུ་ (??)
{ གསུང་གླུ་
,, གཞེས་ = ,, { གསུང་གཞེས་
{ མགུལ་གཞེས་ (rare) ??
འགོལ་བ་ see གོལ་ས་.
འགོལ་ས་ see གོལ་ས་.
འགྱེ་བ་ and འགྱེད་པ་, 38. Attention must be drawn to the fact that Desg.
identifies འགྱེད་པ་ with འགྱེ་བ་ as against J.’s distinction between the
two forms as neutral and active. Also that Desg.’s explanation of གཡུལ་
འགྱེད་ etc., as ‘to put (the enemy) to flight in battle,’ seems more
probable than J.’s ‘to fight a battle,’ etc. The explanation of འགྱེད་པ་,
by འཕམ་ in the note on གཤགས་འགྱེད་པ་, q.v., seems to support this
supposition. S. Ch. D. gives as a meaning of འགྱེད་པ་ ‘to institute, set
going’ and translates accordingly འཐབ་མོ་འགྱེད་པ་ as ‘to start a combat,’
as against J. ‘to combat’ alone. Also གཡུལ་འགྱེད་པ་པོ་ ‘one who gives
battle.’ Desg. s.v. གཡུལ་ (p. 923): གཡུལ་འཐབ་ or གཡུལ་འགྱེད་ ‘to fight in
battle, to combat.’ Cf. also J. s.v. གཡུལ་. S. Ch. D. copies J. as
against Desg. གཡུལ་འགྱེད་པ་, ‘to fight a battle.’ These words འགྱེ་བ་ and
འགྱེད་པ་, again, need further investigation supported by quotations (as
well as the word གཡུལ་ with which they are used).
རྒ་བ་, 33. To be old, the state of being old, old age. Example སྐེ་རྒ་ན་
འཆིའི་སྡུག་བསྔལ་ཡོད་, ‘the being born, growing old, being ill, dying are
sorrows,’ or ‘birth, old age, illness and death are sorrowful.’ Cf. the
treatment of the first four words in J. རྒས་པའི་, with following verb, to
be translated as ‘of old age,’ literally: of (belonging to, attendant
on) having become old; for instance, the joys, sorrows, etc., of the
state of having become old (of old age) = རྒས་པའི་སྐྱིད་པོ་ (or སྡུག་པོ་). This
is not the subst. རྒས་ or རྒས་པོ་ of Desg. J. treats རྒ་བ་ as a verb with
རྒས་ as a past tense, taking རྒད་པ་ and རྒན་པ་ as adjectives from which
the usual substantives in པོ་, མོ་, etc., are made. Desg. gives the four
forms རྒ་, རྒད་, རྒན་ and རྒས་ as substantives and has no verb ‘to be old.’
J.’s analysis seems the more accurate one. J.’s རྒས་ཀ་ ‘old age’ is
absent in Desg., whilst this latter has a རྒས་ without affix as ‘old
man,’ ‘old age.’ This word S. Ch. D. has as = རྒ་བ་ ‘old, ripe’; whilst
he adds རྒས་པ་ = རྒད་པོ་ ‘aged, old; exhausted, infirm; an old man.’ This
group needs proper quotations for final settlement.
My oral information on some of these points is as follows: The use of
རྒས་ alone, as ‘old, ripe’ is denied. རྒས་པ་ does not mean རྒད་པོ་ ‘old,’
because རྒས་པ་ requires a ལོ་ ‘grown old in years’ in that sense. As an
independent adjective, however, it means ‘worn out, exhausted, thin,
lean, aged, grown older,’ and is in that case an equivalent for རྒད་པོ་.
Troubles make a man རྒས་པ་ ‘age him’; make him as if old. Age makes a
man རྒད་པོ་, old, i.e. really old. For the use of རྒས་ཀ་ the following two
illustrations were given: རྒས་ཀའི་དུས་ལ་ལས་འདི་འདྲ་མ་བྱེད་ ‘don’t do such work
(or things: or don’t behave in that manner) in your old age;’ རྒས་ཀ་ཤི་
བའི་དུས་ལ་བསམ་བློ་ངན་པ་མ་ཐོང་, ‘don’t think bad (evil) thoughts in your old
age when (whilst) death is drawing near.’
རྒད་, རྒན་, རྒས་ see རྒ་བ་.
རྒྱ་ (or རྒྱལ་) སྒོ་ see སྒོ་.
རྒྱན་མཁན་པོ་ see རྒྱན་པ་.
རྒྱན་ཆ་ see རྒྱན་པ་.
རྒྱན་རྣམས་ see རྒྱན་པ་.
རྒྱན་པ་ and བརྒྱན་པ་, 54. The treatment of these words in the Dicts. seems
unsatisfactory. None of the Dicts. give a passive verb རྒྱན་པ་ or བརྒྱན་པ་
‘being adorned, being decked out, embellished,’ etc. J. has only རྒྱན་ as
a subst. ‘ornament, decoration,’ and a verb བརྒྱན་པ་ ‘to adorn, decorate,
provide with.’ According to this his own example ཉ་མགོ་ས་ཡིས་བརྒྱན་པ་
should not mean, as he says, ‘the letter nya (ཉ་) being provided with
an S above it’ (= སྙ་), but rather something like ‘to adorn the letter
nya with a sa as a topletter.’
Desg. knows a verb རྒྱན་པ་ or རྒྱན་རྒྱབ་ (or བྱེད་ or བཀོད་) with the meaning of
‘to adorn,’ with a past tense བརྒྱན་, ‘ornavi, ornatus, orné,’ whatever
that means. He and J. quote also a རྒྱན་གྱིས་བརྒྱན་པ་ ‘adorned,’ in which the
རྒྱན་ has clearly a substantival value, like in རྒྱན་མེད་པ་, ‘without
adornment, unadorned.’
S.v. བརྒྱན་ Desg. says: ‘praet. verbi རྒྱན་པར་, ornatus, et v. act. ornare,
orné, orner,’ and he adds བརྒྱན་པ་ or ཆ་ ‘ornament.’ Bell has རྒྱན་ཆ་ for
ornament. But J. knows no བརྒྱན་པ་ or ཆ་ as substantives and refers
expressly to the unprefixed རྒྱན་ for the substantives. He further
equates རྒྱན་ཆ་ and རྒྱན་རྣམས་ ‘ornaments’ (plural). Under འདོགས་པ་, ‘to put
on,’ we find further རྒྱན་འདོགས་པ་, to put on gay clothes, finery (s.v.
རྒྱན་, the same expression is translated as ‘to adorn one’s self,’) and
རྒྱན་བཟང་པོ་བཏགས་པ་, ‘beautifully attired’ (Mil.). If these translations
are idiomatically true we should expect (བ) རྐྱན་ to have a wider sense
than the English ornament, rather anything beautiful or fine, whether
ornaments (in the sense of trinkets) or not. The word adornment would
fit better. (Cf. D. tooi, G. Schmuck.)
Desg. gives no example of རྒྱན་པ་ with a clearly active value of the verb
‘to ornament,’ but both in J. and Desg. such examples are given under
བརྒྱན་པ་. Desg. gives as synonyms ལེགས་བྱེད་ and མཛེས་བྱེད་ and it is a
question whether in these expressions བྱེད་ can have the neuter sense of
‘to act as’ = ‘to be’ (like in རྒྱལ་པོ་བྱེད་པ་). S. Ch. D. (who has several
misprints in his syns. for རྒྱན་) quotes s.v. འགོད་པ་ (292b) a བརྒྱན་དགོད་པ་,
‘to arrange ornaments (tastefully); to decorate, adorn, to construct or
adjust grammatical forms, sentences, (Zam.).’ This latter use of བརྒྱན་
is evidently the clue to the expression, quoted elsewhere by Desg. and
S. Ch. D.: རྒྱན་མཁན་པོ་, अलंकारपण्डित, one versed in rhetoric, a clever
orator. The equation རྒྱན་པ་ = བཞག་པ་ (in the modern language, v. Bell,
to put, place), given by S. Ch. D. is denied by both my teachers,
though confirmed by Desg.; they know of no Tibetan word of this
spelling and sound with the meaning bejewelled, adorned, decorated, as
is the correct translation of the Sk. equivalent cited, मण्डित. Yet may
རྒྱན་ (པ་) perhaps mean ‘an ornamented object’, hence ‘die, dice’; hence
again Desg. ‘objets mêlés pour tirer les sorts’, and lastly ‘stake’ (in
gambling) and ‘lot’? This first meaning is not in the Dicts. but would
settle the question discussed a few lines lower down, and explain those
combinations with རྒྱན་ which refer to gambling and divination. In
connection with the immediately following articles in S. Ch. D., རྒྱན་
བཞག་མཁན༌, ‘one who joins in a wager, gambler’ [one who puts up his
jewels, ornaments for a stake?], and རྒྱན་དོར་བ་ or བཞག་པ་, ‘a dice-rogue,
a gamester, one who throws dice,’ etc., it should be ascertained
whether there is a Tibetan word with རྒྱན་ which means die, dice, or
whether the combinations refer to the staking of ornaments and jewels
in gambling.
S.v. བརྒྱན་པ་ S. Ch. D. gives no news, treating this word, however, as a
verb, and referring to རྒྱན་ for the subst.
As a result of this little investigation we come to the conclusion that
it is legitimate to inquire whether there is not a Tibetan verb རྒྱན་པ་
(more likely than བརྒྱན་པ་) with the passive or neuter sense of ‘being
decked out, being ornamented or adorned, showing gaily.’ What would
render such a word exactly in English is difficult to see, unless we
coin a verb ‘to splendiferate,’ but D. pronken (pronken in vollen
luister) comes near to it. Other related words would be: to blaze
forth, to shine out, to cut a dash, or else to swagger, to swank, to
preen, to strut, or again to be graced with or by, to show forth, etc.,
but especially ‘to display’ in the technical zoological sense.
An instructive illustration in this matter is furnished by the
following two sentences, both with the same meaning: ཐང་ཀ་རི་མོས་བརྒྱན་
འདུག་, or ཐང་ཀ་འདི་ལ་རི་མོས་བརྒྱན་འདུག་, of which the best idiomatic
translation is: O, what a fine picture!; how fine is the painting
(drawing) of (in) (this) picture!
But the psychological translation is in the first case: ‘This picture
is by-lines-(fine)-displaying’, and in the second case: ‘To this
picture there is a by-the-lines-(drawings)-ornamentation (or display).’
རྒྱལ་སྒོ་ see སྒོ་.
རྒྱལ་བ་, 6. According to J., III, also ‘superior, excellent, eminent.’
རྣམ་པར་རྒྱལ་བ་, ‘most excellent, illustrious.’ This may be the meaning
here. Whether there is a connection between the word as used here and
the རྒྱལ་བ་ title of the Dalai Lamas may be left undecided.
རྒྱུད་, 30. Here character, heart, disposition, etc. It is curious that
this meaning, given by J. and Desg., is absent in S. Ch. D.
སྒོ་, 39, 40. Door. Though the average Tibetan house (if it be not a mere
hut) has two doors, a front door and a back door, they are not on a
principle located in the eastern and western sides of the house. For
the text the words east and west have no special significance; they are
simply used དཔེ་འདྲ་པོ་, by way of speech, as an example, illustration or
comparison.
The front (main, public) door is called གཞུང་སྒོ་ or རྒྱ་ (or རྒྱལ་) སྒོ་. The
first word is interpreted as the ‘main,’ ‘public,’ or ‘middle’ door;
the second as the ‘wide’ or ‘royal’ door. The back door is called ལྟག་སྒོ་
(in J. s.v. ལྟག་པ་), which is explained as ‘the door for horses and
cattle.’ The སྐྱེད་སྒོ་ quoted by J., p. 29b, is unknown to my informants.
They only know a སྐྱེ་སྒོ་, ‘the door leading to birth, or re-birth.’
སྒོ་གསུམ་ see གསུང་.
སྒྲིམ་པ་ see གོལ་ས་.
བརྒྱན་པ་ see རྒྱན་པ་.
ངེས་པར་ (དུ་) see ཅིས་ཀྱང་ and ངེས་སོ་.
ངེས་སོ་, 16. With terminative: ‘there is certainty for’ = ‘it is certain’
= ‘I am sure of’, ‘I know for certain that’, ‘it is surely, truly so.’
A has ངས་ for ངེས་ in B.
Here, however, ངེས་སོ་ = ངེས་པར་ = ངེས་པར་དུ་ = ངོ་ཐོག་ = ངོན་ནས་ = ‘indeed,
truly, really, forsooth.’ Compare also ཅིས་ཀྱང་.
ངོ་ཆོད་ see ཅིས་ཀྱང་.
ངོ་རྟོག་ see ཅིས་ཀྱང་.
ངོ་ཐོག་ see ཅིས་ཀྱང་ and ངེས་སོ་.
ངོ་མ་ see ཅིས་ཀྱང་.
ངོ་མོ་ see ཅིས་ཀྱང་.
ངོ་ཚ་ see ཁྲེལ་བ་.
དངོས་ནས་ see ཅིས་ཀྱང་.
མངོན་པར་རྟོགས་པ་ see སྤྲོས་བྲལ་.
ཅི་མྱུར་ see མྱུར་.
ཅིས་ཀྱང་, 48. (Also ཅིས་ནས་ཀྱང་). Here rather with the meaning ‘without
fail, for sure, indeed, surely’ in addition to J.’s ‘anyhow, by all
means.’ It is said to be synonymous with ངེས་པར་དུ་ and colloquial ངོ་ཐོག་,
as, for instance, in: ངོ་ཐོག་ཕེབ་རོགས་གནང་, ‘I ask (you) to come without
fail, indeed, surely, for sure, so that I may count on it.’ Also རྟེན་
ལྡན་. Cf. Desg. in addition to J.—J. (p. 129b) has the spelling ངོ་རྟོག་.
Bell s.v. ‘certainly’ ངོ་ཐོག་ (syn. རྟེན་ལྡན་); s.v. ‘indeed’ (syn. རྟེན་རྟེན་);
s.v. ‘surely’ ངེས་པར་; s.v. ‘actual’ ངོ་ཐོག་; s.v. ‘real’ ངོ་ཐོག་ (syn. དངོས་
ནས་); s.v. ‘really’ ངེས་པར་. Desg. ངོ་ཐོག་ཡིན་ ‘natural, not manufactured,’
but ངོ་ཐོག་ (next article) ‘certitude’ = ངོ་མ་, ངོ་མོ་ or ངོ་ཆོད་. S. Ch. D.
ངོ་ཐོག་ ‘true, genuine, really.’ རྟེན་ལྡན་ and རྟེན་རྟེན་ are not in the Dicts.
ངོ་མོ་ and ངོ་ཆོད་ are not endorsed by my authorities. See also ངེས་སོ་.
ཅེས་པ་, colophon. According to J. = ཅེས་སྨྲས་པ་, ‘that which has been
spoken,’ i.e. ‘speech, word,’ etc. Corresponds very closely to D. ‘het
gesprokene, het gezegde’ or L. ‘dictum.’ Here, however, the meaning may
be extended to ‘piece of writing’ (D. ‘het geschrevene,’ L. ‘scriptum’)
or perhaps even more generally ‘the above, the foregoing.’
The other use of the expression, as an abbreviation for ཅེས་བྱ་བ་, ‘the
so-called,’ is here, of course, not applicable.
གཅིག་པུ་ (or པོ་) see དྭངས་མར་.
ལྕགས་ཀྱུ་ see ཀྱུ་.
ལྕགས་ནག་ see ཀྱུ་.
ལྕགས་རི་ see ཀྱུ་.
ཆགས་སྡང་, 22. In J. ‘love and hatred,’ but here better ‘attraction (for
the pleasant) and repulsion (for the unpleasant),’ in other words:
‘non-attachment (to weal and woe), indifference (to the ups and downs
of life),’ or again ‘bondage’ (to emotions, impressions, etc.). S. Ch.
D. has ‘passion for, passionate attachment.’ It is the German ‘Lust und
Unlust.’
ཆུ་གཏེར་ see གཏེར་.
ཆུ་པ་ see སྐྱོ་བ་.
ཆོ་པ་ see སྐྱོ་བ་.
ཆོས་ཀྱི་དབྱིངས་ see སྤྲོས་བྲལ་.
ཆོས་ཚུལ་བཞིན་, 34. To be construed: ཆོས་ + ཚུལ་བཞིན་ (པ་ or དུ་), and not as
ཆོས་ཚུལ་ + བཞིན་, etc.
ཆོས་མཛད་ (མཁན་), 43. Here most likely in the stricter sense those who
have devoted, given, themselves (entirely) to the religious life, i.e.
those who have entered the order, the དགེ་སློང་ or even གྲྭ་པ་, learners,
pupils, lay-brothers. Cf. however, J. s.v. ཆོས་བྱེད་པ་, p. 163a, and Desg.
who has a subst. ཆོས་མཛད་, ‘lamaist dignity, rank,’ p. 333b.
ཆོས་ཟབ་, 10. Stands here for ཟབ་པའི་ཆོས་, or ཆོས་ཟབ་མོ་, ‘the deep,
profound, doctrine, teaching, religion.’ Perhaps an allusion to the ཟབ་
ལམ་, the ‘profound doctrine of Buddhism as explained in the Tantras’
(S. Ch. D. s.v. ཟབ་ལམ་). J. renders it ‘a term of Buddhist mysticism,
doctrine of witchcraft,’ whilst Desg. translates the term as ‘doctrina
magica.’ ཆོས་ཟབ་ instead of ཟབ་ཆོས་ perhaps for metrical reasons; in
ordinary speech the inversion seems not usual. See also ཟབ་པ་.
ཆོས་སེམས་ཅན་ see ཁྲེལ་བ་.
མཆོད་གདན་ see གདན་.
འཆང་བ་, 46. ‘To hold, to keep, to stick to, adhere to.’ མ་འཆང་བར་ ‘not
keeping (it) so, not preserving, maintaining (it) in that (the same)
state, not letting (it) continue in the same way, not keeping up the
state of, not persisting in (the same way)’ etc.
Freely translated by its reverse: rectifying, redressing, correcting,
changing (one’s attitude, condition, action, etc., previously referred
to).
འཆད་ཉན་པ་ see བཤད་ཉན་.
མཇུག་ see རྗེས་མཇུག་པ་.
འཇུག་ see རྗེས་མཇུག་པ་.
རྗེས་མཇུག་པ་, 45. Not in the Dicts., lit. ‘after-track,’ is here,
‘followers, pupils, disciples, adherents.’ Though འཇུག་ is sometimes
used for མཇུག་, see J. 177a, last line, the word རྗེས་འཇུག་, ‘affix, final
consonant,’ a grammatical term, is of course different, as well as J.’s
adj. ‘following, coming after.’
The word has also the meaning ‘orphan’ (those left behind). See also
under ཁོ་བོའི་, etc.
བརྗོད་པ་ see མཚན་བརྗོད་པ་.
ཉ་ཀུག་ see ཀྱུ་.
ཉོན་མོངས་, 37. Here ‘sin’ or ‘vice’ are to be understood as either the
three sins, or vices, or failings, or defects, or frailties, ཉོན་མོངས་
གསུམ, ‘lust, anger and stupidity’ (in the conventional rendering), འདོད་
ཆགས་, ཞེ་སྡང་, གཏི་མུག་, or the five sins, ཉོན་མོངས་ལྔ་, namely the three
mentioned above with the addition of ང་རྒྱལ་ ‘pride’ and ཕྲག་དོག་ ‘envy’ as
fourth and fifth.
See also དགྲ་ཉོན་མོངས་.
མཉེན་ see བཤེས་གཉེན་.
སྙིང་པོ་ see བྱང་ཆུབ་སྙིང་པོ་.
སྙིང་རུས་བྱེད་པ་ see བརྩོན་པར་བགྱིད་པ་.
སྙོམས་ལས་འཛིན་པ་, 13. Equals སྙོམས་ལས་བྱེད་ (or དྲན་) པ་ = ‘to be ease-loving,
indolent, lazy.’
གཏིང་ནས་, 28. ‘From the bottom’ (sc. of the heart), hence expressions
like སྐྱོ་བ་གཏིང་ནས་སྐྱེས་ may be simply translated ‘a deep pity (or sadness)
arises, I become very sad, I am very sorry.’ See also སྐྱོ་བ་.
གཏེར་, 55. Here perhaps better ‘treasure heap’ than mere ‘treasure,’ or
perhaps even ‘treasury.’ S. Ch. D. gives as meanings: ‘treasure’ and
‘store-place,’ in this deviating from J. and Desg. S. Ch. D.’s example
ཆུ་གཏེར་, ‘the repository of water, the ocean’, seems to prove his
additional explanation.
རྟག་དཔྱད་ see རྟོག་དཔྱོད་.
རྟེན་རྟེན་ see ཅིས་ཀྱང་.
རྟེན་ལྡན་ see ཅིས་ཀྱང་.
རྟེན་པ་, 49. (Pf. and ft. བརྟེན་). Has here simply the primary meaning ‘to
adhere to,’ more colloquially, ‘to stick to,’ or ‘to keep to, hold fast
to, to heed, to observe.’ May, however, here be also taken as Desg.’s
‘to believe in, to trust’ (in the sense of ‘to rely on’) according to
his example ཁྱེད་ཀྱི་གསུང་ལ་རྟེན་པས་, ‘I believe, trust (in) your words’ (p.
420a), or otherwise: to put reliance on (what another says, states,
preaches, teaches).
རྟོག་པ་, 32. (Pf. བརྟགས་). May almost be translated here as ‘to
contemplate, to consider’ (‘if one comes to think about it’ or ‘if one
looks into that matter’), but not merely as ‘to behold, to see.’
རྟོག་དཔྱོད་, 47. Evidently the same as J.’s. བརྟགས་དཔྱོད་ ‘examination, trial’
(214b). J. has a verb བརྟག་དཔྱོད་ (or རྟོག་གཞིག་) གཏོང་བ་, occurring in the
Padma tʽaṅ yig and in Milaraspa, with the meaning ‘to examine, search
into, see whether or whether not.’ J. has also the forms རྟོག་དཔྱོད་ and
བརྟག་དཔྱད་, both subst. ‘examination,’ s.v. དཔྱོད་པ་, ‘to examine,’ p.
329a.
Desg. gives རྟོག་དཔྱད་ as syn. with རྟོག་པ་, ‘to consider, test, judge’;
བརྟགས་དཔྱོད་, ‘examination, judgment.’
S. Ch. D. རྟོག་དཔྱོད་ (= བསམ་མནོ་, or མནོ་བསམ་) ‘consideration, examination,
trial,’ and (558a) བརྟག་དཔྱད་ (= ཞིབ་དཔྱད་), ‘examination, careful weighing
of all the details of a case, deliberation.’ S. Ch. D. seems to treat
རྟོག་དཔྱོད་ and བརྟག་དཔྱད་ as two quite different words. S.v. དཔྱོད་པ་ he has
further རྟོག་དཔྱོད་པ་, ‘to examine anything,’ and བརྟག་དཔྱད་, ‘investigation,
inquiry.’
རྟོགས་པ་ see སྤྲོས་བྲལ་.
ལྟ་བ་ 51. This word seems here to mean ‘vision, illumination, (direct
mystical) contemplation, the seeing face to face.’ In our passage it is
the direct vision (the ‘vision direct’), proper to, inherent in,
characteristic of, belonging to, the knowledge pertaining to the
actionless (or undifferentiated) state, the
‘passive-state-knowledge-vision.’ See also སྤྲོས་བྲལ་.
ལྟག་སྒོ་ see སྒོ་.
ལྟོ་ཆས་ see ཁྲེལ་བ་.
ལྟོ་གདན་ see གདན་.
ལྟོབ་ཆས་ see ཁྲེལ་བ་.
སྟོང་པ་ཉིད་ see སྤྲོས་བྲལ་.
བརྟག་དཔྱད་ see རྟོག་དཔྱོད་.
བརྟག་དཔྱོད་གཏོང་བ་ see རྟོག་དཔྱོད་.
བརྟགས་དཔྱོད་ see རྟོག་དཔྱོད་.
བསྟན་པ་ (གཉིས་) see ལམ་རིམ་.
བསྟན་པ་འཛིན་པ་, 23. ‘To follow, to keep to the teaching; to be or remain
true, faithful to the teaching, to hold fast to it, to stick to it.’
See also རྟེན་པ་.
ཐབས་ see འདུལ་ཐབས་.
ཐམས་ཅད་མཁྱེན་པ་ཆེན་པོ་དགེ་འདུན་གྲུབ་དཔལ་བཟང་པོ་, lit.
‘Great-all-knowing-clergy-perfection-good-glory,’ corresponds to a Sk.
Mahā-sarva-jña-saṁgha-siddhi-shrī-bhadra. See for literature about him:
Schulemann, Geschichte der Dalailamas, pp. 91–92, note 11, and S. Ch.
D.: The Hierarchy of the Dalai Lamas, J.A.S.B., Vol. LXXIII, Pt. I,
extra No., p. 81.
ཐུགས་ནི་ཟབ་ཡངས་མཁྱེན་བརྩེའི་གཏེར་, 55. This is here, in my opinion, not a sort
of Hottentottenpotentatentantenattentater-like formation. I take the
ཟབ་ཡངས་ to refer to the ཐུགས་, a profound and wide mind, whilst the མཁྱེན་
བརྩེ་ only refers to the གཏེར་, the treasury of omniscient mercy. It is
not likely that the qualities of width and depth form part of an
enumeration of which the remaining items are love and knowledge or even
(as a compound) omniscient-mercy. See the various component words in
this glossary.
ཐུགས་རྗེ་ see མཁྱེན་བརྩེ་.
ཐུགས་གཟུ་བོ་ see བློ་གཟུ་བོ་.
མཐེབ་ཀྱུ་ see ཀྱུ་.
མཐོན་པོ་ see ལམ་མཐོན་པོ་.
འཐབ་མོ་འགྱེད་པ་ see འགྱེ་བ་.
དག་སྣང་, 43. J.’s entry under this entry is as follows: “དག་ (པའི༌) སྣང་
(བ་) Schr. ‘good opinion’ (?), prob.: a pure, sound view or knowledge
Glr.; in Mil. it has a similar meaning.” He adds an oral sentence:
“*dhag-náṅ jón-wa* C. to lead a holy life.” (sic. jón = jóṅ?) Schroeter
has (135b): “དག་སྣང་, a good opinion, a good conception of any thing, a
conceit, a thought.” [Based on an Italian ‘concetto’?] He has two
further entries ‘དག་པའི་སྣང་བ་, to form a good opinion of any
individual,’ and ‘དག་སྣང་སྤྱོང་ (read: སྦྱོང་) བ་, to form a good opinion, or
to conceive well of any one.’
In our passage we are inclined to take སྣང་ as སྣང་བ་, as ‘view, thought,
idea, conception,’ etc., and སྦྱོང་བ་ = ‘to exercise, practise, perform’,
or even ‘to entertain, cherish (thoughts).’ དག་ we take as དག་པ་,
‘pure’—the connection with thought not the opposite of false,
erroneous, but of bad, cruel, unkind. So here the expression seems to
mean ‘to think with goodwill, with kindness (of others),’ not the
colloquial ‘to have a good opinion of, to think well of.’ To think
‘good’ is here the opposite of to think ‘evil,’ but the idiomatic value
of the expression ‘to think well of’ (as the opposite of ‘to think
poorly of’) would make the latter rendering misleading. The real value,
then, of the expression as used in this passage, seems to be: ‘to think
good, kind thoughts of,’ i.e. purely, or saintly in the sense of
kindly, lovingly, benevolently, in a friendly manner, with sympathy,
but not, as J. seems to suggest, intellectually correct. We may expand
the rendering into ‘with a holy mind, with thoughts of saintliness,
thinking saintly thoughts.’ Compare J.’s colloquial phrase quoted
above. So, as to the interpretation of the line in which the compound
occurs, we take it that it means to enjoin, in contrast with the
previous line in which it is said that beings in general must be
thought of with kindness, that religious people (instead of the mere
laymen) must be thought of in a still better, higher manner, namely
with holiness and saintliness.
One of my informants was first inclined to take དག་སྣང་སྦྱོང་བ་ as ‘to
teach, to preach the true knowledge.’ Though he later on sided with the
explanation adopted above, the opinion should be recorded, but it
should be added that a second informant rejected this view of the first
one.
Attention should be drawn to the meaning of སྣང་དག་, ‘the soul’ (with
spellings སྣང་ and ནང་; དག་, རྟགས་, བརྟག་, སྟག་, s. J.). Also the curious
expression ‘to be indifferent’ སྣང་དག་མ་བཏང་བ་, S. Ch. D.; and སྣང་དག་མི་
བྱེད་པ་, Bell. These expressions not in Desg.
དག་སྣང་སྦྱོང་བ་ see དག་སྣང་.
དང་པོ་ see དཔེ་.
དྭངས་མར་, 27. Adverb: ‘purely, first class, first rate.’ Not in J. but
in Desg., yet here in a slightly different application. About S. Ch.
D.’s ‘gravy’ and ‘relish’ see below. དྭངས་མ་ with the genitive seems to
mean ‘acme’, ‘essence’, the typical embodiment of something, like in
expressions as ‘a first class liar, a thief pure and simple, the very
devil, satan himself, nothing short of an angel, a saint in propria
persona.’ དགྲ་བོའི་དྭངས་མ་, ‘the very enemy.’ In the colloquial དྭངས་མ་, ཡང་
རྩེ་ and ཨང་གི་དང་པོ་ may have the same meaning. The latter is something
like pidgin-English ‘number one’ or the kitchen Malay equivalent
‘nommer satu.’ Other equations are གཅིག་པོ་ (or པུ་), also རང་, the
Anglo-Indian ‘pukka.’
The word དྭངས་ may mean soup or gravy in the following case, when there
is question of singling out the liquid portion from a mixture of broth
and liquid. The primary meaning seems in that case rather to be liquid
as contrasted to solid. ང་ལ་དྭངས་བླུགས་རོགས་གནང་ = give me (only) the
liquid (not the solid stuff), pour out to me (only) the liquid. But
this དྭངས་ has no final མ་. A common word for soup which is not in the
Dicts. is ‘rü thang’, probably རུས་ཐང་, or ཐང་ alone. This latter word
is in J. with the meaning of ‘potion’, a medical term, and in S. Ch. D.
as ‘potion, plain decoction, or mixture to be drunk after a medicinal
pill has been taken.’ The word རུས་ཐང་ means originally bone-soup, but
has acquired also the more general meaning ‘soup.’ ཐང་ can be applied
to meat-soup, ཤ་ཁུ་, but ཤ་ཐང་ cannot be used. It might be that ཐང་ and
དྭངས་ are really the same word.
དད་པ་སྐྱེས་ see སྐྱེ་བ་.
དམ་པོ་, 30. Might here, in connection with ambition, be translated as
‘fierce,’ an extension of its primary meaning ‘strong.’
དུག་པོ་ see སྐྱོ་བ་.
དུག་ལོག་ see སྐྱོ་བ་.
དུགས་པོ་ see སྐྱོ་བ་.
དུས་ནམ་ཡང་, 24. For ever, always.
དུས་མྱུར་བ་ see མྱུར་.
དོན་ཆུང་ཆུང་ see དོན་རེ་ཆུང་.
དོན་རེ་ཆུང་, 40. ‘Exceedingly stupid, meaningless, useless, silly,
senseless.’ The particle རེ་ has an emphatic value, but it is difficult
to define its precise scope in English. Oral information is vague on
the subject, and seems to point towards a possibility that the རེ་ is a
syllable of exclamation or turns the expression, of which it forms
part, into an exclamation. དོན་རེ་ཆུང་. ‘Oh, how silly!’ An equivalent is
དོན་ཆུང་ཆུང་ཡིན་ = དོན་མེད་. དོན་ཆུང་ alone is not used, and དོན་ཆུང་ཆུང་ demands
a final རེད་ or ཡིན་.
S. Ch. D. (502a) translates ཁྱོད་བོད་རྣམས་སྙིང་རེ་རྗེ་ as: ‘I pity you, ye
Tibetans’; perhaps better ‘What a pity, O ye Tibetans.’ Compare the
list of words with wedged-in རེ་ in J. s.v. རེ་ p. 533b.
དྲིན་ཆེ་བ་, 16. Also དྲིན་ཆེན་, adjective ‘kind.’ According to S. Ch. D. also
‘very kind, great boon, and the great or greatest benefactor.’ S. Ch.
D.’s wording is unsatisfactorily indefinite and his examples, taken
from J., fit the text badly. J. does not define the combination དྲིན་ཆེ་བ་
though he has an example བཀའ་དྲིན་ཆེ་བ་ with the meaning ‘greatest
benefit.’ Two colloquial examples are: དྲིན་ཆེ་བའི་ཡབ་ཡུམ་གཉིས་, ‘the two
(very) kind parents,’ and མི་འདི་དྲིན་ཆེན་ཡིན་, that man is (very) kind.
In form དྲིན་ཆེ་བ་ is a comparative, ‘kinder.’ ཆེན་པོ་ is one of those
adjectives which have a comparative and superlative of their own as:
Great. Many. Good. Small. Bad.
positive ཆེན་པོ་ མང་པོ་ ཡག་པོ་ ཆུང་ཆུང་ སྡུག་པོ་
comparative ཆེ་བ་ མང་བ་ (or ང་) ཡག་ག་ ཆུང་ང་ སྡུག་ག་
superlative ཆེ་ཤོས་ མང་ཤོས་ ཡག་ཤོས་ ཆུང་ཤོས་ སྡུག་ཤོས་
In practice, however, as shown by the above examples, the form is used
for an ordinary quality in the positive degree though implying an
amount of abundance or fullness of the quality referred to. Bell (p.
33) and Hannah (p. 129) have described these degrees of comparison.
Short and partial notes in S. Ch. D.’s grammar (p. 31) and Henderson
(p. 23). See J. Dict. s.v. ཤོས་, p. 564. དྲིན་ཆེ, J. 262b (as equal to དྲིན་
ཅན་) is not acknowledged by my informants.
དྲིན་ཆེ་ is objected to by my teachers because they say it never occurs
alone but requires a final བ་, except in the superlative form དྲིན་ཆེ་ཤོས་
which, of course, is another thing. See, however, S. Ch. D. བཀའ་དྲིན་ཆེ་,
p. 654, J. p. 13. As to the ཆེན་ or ཆེན་པོ་ in many Tibetan adjectives,
this is better regarded as an enclitic particle, exactly corresponding
to the English termination -ful. As little as the English -ful really
means ‘full’, does the Tibetan ཆེན་ (པོ་) as a termination of adjectives
really mean ‘great.’
Bell has དྲིན་ཆེན་པོ་ for ‘kind.’
The word དྲིན་ལན་ and its uses merit a separate inquiry. In this place we
shall limit ourselves to stating that the entry gratitude (S. Ch. D.,
Ramsay, Schroeter) seems incorrect. The confusion has most likely come
about because a དྲིན་ལན་ is an answer to kindness (return gift, etc.) and
so betokens gratitude.
དྲིན་ཆེན་ (པོ་) see དྲིན་ཆེ་བ་.
དྲིན་ཇི་བཞིན་, 21. Ellipse for: according to (or, in the measure of)
whatever kindness (you have shown to me).
དྲིན་ལན་ see དྲིན་ཆེ་བ་.
དྲུང་འཁོར་ see བརྩེ་.
གདན་ see བྱང་ཆུབ་སྙིང་པོ་.
གདུག་པ་, 35. The three Dicts. are not at one as to the exact shades of
meaning of གདུག་པ་.
J. has, subst.: ‘anything hurtful, or any injury, mischief, harm,
done.’
Desg., subst.: ‘dommage, perte, mal.’
S. Ch. D. no substantive.
J., adj. (= གདུག་པ་ཅན༌), ‘noxious, mischievous, dangerous.’ Desg., adj.
only གདུག་པ་ཅན་, not གདུག་པ་ alone: nuisible (noxious), and a གདུག་ =
གདོག་, deteriorated.
S. Ch. D., adj.: གདུག་པོ་, vicious, mischievous, deleterious, poisonous.
In J. and S. Ch. D. further applied meanings as: wild, hideous
(screams); ferocity (in beasts), deleterious (smell), fierce (woman).
In our passage the expression གདུག་སེམས་ཅན་ may be rendered by malign,
wicked, evil, evil-minded, spiteful, with sufficient correctness.
གདུག་པ་ཅན་ see གདུག་པ་.
གདུག་པོ་ see གདུག་པ་.
གདུག་སེམས་ཅན་ see གདུག་པ་.
གདུང་བ་ see གདུང་དབྱངས་.
གདུང་དབྱངས་, Colophon. J. renders this word as ‘a song expressive of
longing or of grief, an elegy (Mil.)’; but this definition is not quite
typical of our present poem. S. Ch. D. has ‘a song of longing grief.’
J.’s example མོས་གུས་གདུང་བ་དཔག་མེད་སྐྱེ་, where གདུང་བ་ means (spiritual)
love, seems to point out to a meaning more apposite here. So we would
prefer a translation: paean, hymn of praise (D. lofzang), or psalm
instead of elegy. Other words to be considered: song of thanksgiving,
memorial song, lament, plaintive song (jammerklacht?), memorial verses,
an in memoriam, a memorial, etc. See also དབྱངས་.
The dge rgan, however, explains the word indeed in J.’s manner, but
states that the longing and grief are not the worldly sentiments but
religious ones. The longing and grief are concerned with the sorrows of
the world and a yearning after spiritual realities, but not with the
memory of the three teachers mentioned in the poem. If this is true,
the above hypothesis is likely to be a wrong one and in my translation
of the colophon the words there used should in that case rather run ‘as
a song of yearning for the higher life’ (cf. the G. ‘Weltschmerz’).
གདོག་ see གདུག་པ་.
འདུལ་ཐབས་, 37. Steps, measures, to subdue or tame, etc. འདུལ་ཐབས་བྱེད་པ་,
to take such measures.
འདོགས་པ་ see རྒྱན་པ་.
འདྲེན་པ, 20. (Fut. དྲང་). If the ལྕགས་ཀྱུ་ (see ཀྱུ་) is here to be thought of
as a goad (like the one of the mahout) then the verb should be
understood as sub J. 2, ‘to conduct, lead, guide’ (by prodding). My
teachers take it as ‘to draw,’ or ‘pull.’ Pictorial representations
might decide the point. My teachers think rather of a rod with a hook
at the end, like the episcopal staff, and not of angling with a
fishhook or prodding with a goad.
སྡུག་ཡུས་, 33. Or simply ཡུས་, here: ‘the loss of temper, wrath, angry
explosion or outburst.’ This sense is not given in the Dicts., though
J.’s 4, ‘ardour, fervour, transport’ comes near it. སྡུག་ཡུས་ is the same
as ཡུས་, but for the fact that the former word shows the cause, an
outburst on account of trouble, vexation, worry, pain, sorrow. (སྡུག་)
ཡུས་བཤད་ (སྟོན་ or བྱེད་) པ་ = to show (or to lose) one’s temper, to flare
up, to burst out, to break loose, to explode in anger, wrath. ཕ་མ་ལ་སྡུག་
ཡུས་མ་བཤད་, ‘don’t show temper to your parents.’ དཔོན་ལ་ཡུས་མ་བཤད་, ‘don’t
lose your temper before (or with) the master.’ དེ་རིང་ཁོས་ང་ལ་ཡུས་མང་པོ་བསྟན་
སོང་, ‘to-day he has entirely lost his temper before (or to) me.’ It is
synonymous, in this sense, with the word འུ་ཐུག་ which is also dealt with
inadequately in the Dicts. q.v. མི་སུ་ལ་ཡང་འུ་ཐུག་མ་སྟོན་, ‘don’t lose your
temper to anyone, to whomsoever.’ ཁྱོད་ཀྱིས་འུ་ཐུག་བཤད་དགོས་པའི་དོན་མེད་, ‘there
is no reason (no need, or it is senseless) to lose your temper.’ (Cf.
D. uitvallen, uitvaren, uitvoeteren, opstuiven, uitbarsten.)
གནམ་ལ་སྙེག་འདྲ་བ་, 2. Either ‘as if rising towards the sky,’ in which case
འདྲ་བ་ refers to all the previous words, or: as if rising whilst in the
sky, in which case the འདྲ་བ་ would only refer to སྙེག་པ་.
གནས་པ་ see བློ་གཟུ་བོ་.
མནོ་བསམ་ see རྟོག་དཔྱོད་.
རྣལ་འབྱོར་སོགས་, 9. I have not received an explanation of the ‘etc.’ (སོགས་)
in this place and I ignore what kind of category is alluded to here. It
seems not probable that the ’18 classes of science’ can be meant,
which, in the Mahāvyutpatti (Ed. M.A.S.B.), form group XXIV, p. 20.
Group L, (p. 59), furnishes more likely material, but Yoga is missing
in it.
སྣང་དག་ see དག་སྣང་.
དཔལ་ལྡན་, 56. ‘Glorious, noble,’ also ‘having abundance.’ Twice
mentioned in J.’s article but not translated, perhaps because the
meaning is so evident. Curious that neither Desg. nor J. specially cite
this compound to which S. Ch. D. gives 7 lines, besides mentioning
several combinations.
དཔལ་བླ་མེད་, 52. Is this one word?
དཔལ་འབར་བ་, 53. ‘Glory- or splendour-burning,’ i.e. ‘to blaze with
glory,’ or, more tamely, ‘to be famous, renowned, celebrated’; the
latter quoted by J. from Cs. s.v. འབར་བ་ (It may also be taken as
glory-spreading, i.e. getting more famous). Desg. quotes a geographical
name དཔལ་འབར་, Chinese Pienpa. The expression is not in Desg. or S. Ch.
D., and in J. only as taken from Cs., so that the latter’s explanation
needs verification. The literal translation ‘to blaze with glory’ fits
here better.
Colloquially འབར་བ་ is ‘to thrive, to prosper, to do well.’ འབར་འདུག་,
‘he is doing well, is well-to-do, thriving.’ འབར་སོང་, he has become
rich, has made a success of his life, has come out top dog, has made
good, has become wealthy, opulent, is safe, got his ship home, has ‘got
there,’ made his pile, is now a man of position. (Fr. est arrivé. D. is
binnen, heeft zijn schaapjes op het drooge.)
དཔེ་, 53. Here དཔེ་ = དཔེ་བྱད་ or དཔེ་བྱད་བཟང་པོ་, technically ‘the eighty
symmetrical parts, proportions, or points of beauty’ (Cs.,
Mahāvyutpatti); or beauties, lesser signs (de Harlez); proportions
(Schiefner). See the references under མཚན་ and མཚན་དཔེ་. J. (s.v. དཔེ༌,
p. 327b) gives the full expression ‘the eighty physical perfections of
Buddha,’ དཔེ་བྱད་བཟང་པོ་བརྒྱད་ཅུ་, and དཔེ་བྱད་ alone ‘proportion, symmetry,
beauty.’ J. has the entry དཔེ་ ‘symmetry, harmony, beauty (in certain
phrases)’ but S. Ch. D. omits this. Our passage is an example of this
use, but the syllable དཔེ་ is really an abbreviation here and not a full
and independent word. Desg. seems to be mistaken in saying: དཔེ་བྱེད་
(sic, misprint for བྱད་) or མཚན་དཔེ་, ‘proportion, symmetry, the 80
marvels of the body of the Buddha.’ So དཔེ་བྱད་ཅན་ means indeed
‘symmetrical, showing 80 marvels,’ but these meanings would not be
applicable to མཚན་དཔེ་ཅན་ which could only mean ‘showing the 32 signs
and 80 beauties.’
For the rest Desg.’s 2nd article s.v. དཔེ་ adds to J.’s data, and his
དཔེ་སྲོལ་ and དཔེ་ཚུལ་ ‘custom, rule, example’ are new. In Desg. ‘custom,
rule’ tally with S. Ch. D. ‘way of doing, method’ which J. has as
‘pattern, model,’ but which he translates more freely in his examples.
J. s.v. བྱད་ ‘proportion, symmetry, beauty,’ quotes a དཔེ་བྱད་ from the
Dzl. in the same sense. According to this དཔེ་ would be equal to བྱད་
which seems improbable and is denied by my informants. An example of
the use of དཔེ་ཚུལ་ is the following: དེ་རིང་སང་གི་དགོན་པའི་ལོ་གསར་གྱི་འཆམ་དེ་དང་
པོའི་དཔེ་ཚུལ་རེད་, the new year’s dance of now-a-days in the monastery is in
imitation of the old way, is after the ancient pattern, the old manner,
follows the old example. དཔེ་ཚུལ་ is here not exactly ལུགས་སྲོལ་ ‘custom’
but rather: ‘(with) the (ancient) method (as) an example.’
Note the use of དང་པོའི་ in the above example as ‘old, ancient.’
དཔེ་འདྲ་པོ་ see སྒོ་.
དཔེ་བྱད་ see དཔེ་.
དཔེ་བྱེད་ (= བྱད་) see དཔེ་.
དཔེ་ཚུལ་ see དཔེ་.
དཔེ་སྲོལ་ see དཔེ་.
སྤྲི་ན་དཀར་པོ་, 2, 5. The white cloud is a figure often occurring in
Tibetan poetry. If used as an emblem of holiness or spiritual loftiness
in connection with eminent persons, this expression may perhaps contain
a stereotyped allusion to the name of the tenth and supreme bhūmi or
stage of the Bodhisattva, the dharma-megha, ‘cloud of virtue,’ ཆོས་ཀྱི་
སྤྲིན་. See Mahāvyutpatti, ed. A.S.B., p. 11. Here evidently not J.’s
(336a) ‘emblem of transitoriness,’ though the point might be argued on
the basis of the final remark s.v. གདུང་བྱངས་, see above.
སྤྲོས་བྲལ་, 51. This word corresponds according to S. Ch. D. to a Sk.
nishprapañca (or apañca, aprapañca) which in Macdonell’s Sk. Dict. is
rendered by ‘unevolved, exempt from multiformity.’ We may, therefore,
think of expressions like ‘the undifferentiated, homogeneous,
absolute.’ The word dhātu being the Sk. equivalent for Tib. དབྱིངས་ the
whole expression དབྱིངས་སྤྲོས་བྲལ་ must correspond to a Sk. aprapañca dhātu.
The same Sk. Dict. translates the word dhātu as ‘layer, component part,
element.’ In Tibetan དབྱིངས་ means, according to J.: (1) ‘the heavens’;
(2) ‘height’; (3) ‘extent, region, space, in metaphysics an undefined
idea.’ According to the etymology སྤྲོས་བྲལ་ should mean ‘passive,
actionless, quietistic, inert,’ but according to the etymology of its
Sk. prototype rather ‘undifferentiated, monadic.’ One of my informants
compares it with ཆོས་ཀྱི་དབྱངས་, dharma dhātu, and སྟོང་པ་ཉིད་, shunyatā, the
void, the absolute. In this connection one should compare J.’s
statements (215a) that in modern (Tibetan) Buddhism the term མངོན་པར་
རྟོགས་པ་ (अभिसमय), ‘clear understanding or perception’ means the same as
སྟོང་པ་ཉིད་, and further (259b) that དོན་དམ་, originally परमार्थ, has, in
later times, also become equivalent to སྟོང་པ་ཉིད་. It seems that the old
metaphysicians reached regions and distinctions where their followers
could no longer join them, and hence the process became ‘omne ignotum
pro སྟོང་པ་ཉིད་.’ For practical purposes the rendering ‘absolute,’ or
‘motionless’ might be used for སྤྲོས་བྲལ་, whilst the word དབྱིངས་ might be
rendered by ‘principle, state, region.’ If occurring in a specimen of
the more technically and theoretically philosophical literature of
Northern Buddhism, a more precise rendering and more careful definition
might be required. Taking the following རྟོགས་པ་ as ‘knowledge,
perception, cognition,’ then the whole expression becomes in English
‘the knowledge of the motionless state (or region, or principle)’
or—more pedantic but perhaps truer—‘the knowledge of (that is:
pertaining to, inherent in) the monadic state.’ Other equivalents: ‘a
state of stillness, the still state’ and, mystically, ‘the wisdom of
the silence.’
One of my informants, the dge rgan, knows of a colloquial use of སྤྲོས་བྲལ་
= རེ་བ་མེད་ = ‘hopeless,’ but my second authority ignores this use. The
following two examples were given: འདི་ཤེས་པ་སྤྲོས་བྲལ་རེད་, ‘it is labour
lost (hopeless) to [try and] know this.’ You cannot hope to know this.
(N.B.—Note the elliptic construction ‘hopeless to know’ for ‘to try to
know, to study and so come to know.’) ཡི་གེ་ཡག་པོ་ཀློག་ཤེས་ཀྱི་མི་འདུག་སུམ་རྟགས་ཤེས་
པ་སྤྲོས་བྲལ་རེད་, ‘As he does not even know how to read well (or properly),
it is hopeless (lost labour), for him to (or: how can he?) study
grammar’ (Not: how can he pretend to know grammar?).
N.B.—The Tibetan does not ‘read’ but ‘reads books’; he does not ‘write’
but ‘writes letters,’ he does not ‘go’ but ‘goes to the shop.’ In
short, he is a very objective being.
ཕ་, 8. ‘Father.’ It is not clear why in the same line the same person
is referred to by the ordinary ཕ་ and then by the honorific ཡབ་, unless
ཡབ་སྲས་ is a standard expression which cannot be changed whilst the
first ཕ་ is used for the sake of variety in expression.
The same double use of the honorific and ordinary terms for father
occurs in Laufer’s ‘Ein Sühngedicht der Bonpo’, line 41.
ཕྱོགས་, 5. In expressions like ལྡིང་བའི་ཤར་ཕྱོགས་ན་ the བའི་ is explained as
equivalent to སའི་, ‘of the place where.’ So the phrase མི་དེ་འགྲོ་བའི་ཕྱོགས་
འདི་ལ་ should be understood as ‘towards where the man has gone, to the
place where the man has gone,’ འགྲོ་སའི་ཕྱོགས་འདི་ལ་.
ཕྱོགས་པ་, 14. Here verb, infinitive, connected with Gendundub in
instrumental (agentive) or genitival relation: to turn, move towards,
to tend to.
ཕྱོགས་སུ་ལྷུང་བ་, 46. Lit. ‘to fall aside,’ but here, as applied to the mind
(ཡིད་), simply to be deflected, to go astray, to fall, sin (mentally),
to deviate from the right path (religion, the right), to lapse (from
virtue), etc.
འཕུང་བར་འདོད་པ་, 29. ‘To wish the ruin, the undoing, destruction of, to
be bent on the perdition of, to wish evil to’ = མེད་པར་འདོད་པ་.
བྱང་ཆུབ་སྙིང་པོ་, 17. The bodhimaṇḍa, according to the Dicts. historically
and geographically Gaya, where the Buddha attained nirvāṇa. Here,
however, it means rather the state implied by the locality,
‘illumination, the essence of purification, final sainthood’ literally
‘the quintessence of bodhi.’ In Christian language Golgotha (or the
Cross) is similarly used in a metaphorical sense. In living Tibetan བྱང་
ཆུབ་ (bodhi) is not understood as ‘wisdom’ but as ‘saintliness, purity.’
There is, it seems, a confusion in the group of Tibetan [and Chinese!]
renderings of bodhimaṇḍa (bodhi-essence) and bodhi-maṇḍala
(bodhi-round), and their synonyms, a confusion which may already have
its origin in India itself. The treatment of these words in the Dicts.
is not satisfactory. J. and S. Ch. D. give s.v. བྱང་ཆུབ་སྙིང་པོ་ this word
as synonymous with རྡོ་རྗེ་གདན་, Vajrāsana, but under སྙིང་པོ་ S. Ch. D. has
the entry: ‘བྱང་ཆུབ་སྙིང་པོ་, the spirit of the Bodhisattva, i.e.
Buddhahood.’ This is the sense meant in our passage, though it may be
doubted whether བྱང་ཆུབ་ really stands here for བྱང་ཆུབ་སེམས་དཔའ་ as S. Ch.
D. interprets it instead of only for bodhi. The Mahāvyutpatti (A.S.B.,
p. 44) has Bodhimaṇḍa = བྱང་ཆུབ་སྙིང་པོ་, and Cs. translates, ‘the essence
of sanctity or holiness (name of the holy place at Gaya).’ I yet
believe that here a confusion of maṇḍa and maṇḍala must be thought of.
J. has, s.v. སྙིང་པོ་ (p. 198b) ‘snyiṅ-po-byaṅ c̀ʽúb- (or
byaṅ-c̀ʽub-snyiṅ-po)-la mc̀ʽís-pa, to become Buddha Thgy.’ Rockhill, Life
of the Buddha, p. 35, mentions the form byang-tchub-kyi-snying-po as
the equivalent for bodhimaṇḍa, and though Foucaux in the alphabetical
index to his translation of the Lalita Vistāra gives only the form
without ཀྱི་, yet in his text, in the places I verified (p. 239, five
times), there is the ཀྱི་ as with Rockhill.
In mentioning the word རྡོ་རྗེ་གདན་ a special reference must be made to the
element གདན་, commonly translated as bolster, cushion, seat, rug, etc.
J. is very detailed about it. He has: ‘a bolster, or seat composed of
several quilts or cushions, put one upon the other (five for common
people, nine for people of quality).’ Desg. simply ‘stuffed cushion.’
S. Ch. D. more general ‘a low seat, a divan, cushion, a bolster.’ As to
J.’s definition my authorities declare that this may be so perhaps ‘on
the Ladakh side,’ but is certainly not so in Tibet and in the
Darjeeling district. They do not know about the details of five and
nine cushions. They take the meaning far wider than bolster or cushion.
They say that anything used to support anything or to seat anybody may
be called གདན་, it may be a sheet of cloth, a carpet, a blanket, a
cushion, a bolster, a seat in general, anything used for lying or
sitting down on. The word has a meaning exactly opposite to the English
‘cover’ and can consequently be used in as many varied senses as the
latter. Etymologically—if the root of གདན་, as seems probable, means
‘to support’—the word would mean something like ‘bearer,’ ‘basis,’
‘bed,’ ‘floor,’ ‘upholder.’ We might think of ‘underwear,’ though in
English that particular word is used with quite another association of
ideas. In typography there is a word ‘underlay’ which corresponds
exactly to the meaning of གདན་. The word ‘bedplate’, used in
engineering, comes also near to it. It will be easily seen how an
applied meaning as ‘cushion, bolster,’ if given as the general sense of
the word, would in many cases be totally inadequate. The line of
associations to which ‘cushion’ belongs, and the line of associations
to which ‘seat, support, underlay’ belong, intersect at only one point
and for the rest have nothing in common. A table-cloth may be called
གདན་ because the food rests on it (ལྟོ་གདན་ is used in this sense; lit.
something like ‘food-sheet, that on which the food rests’). In a ritual
it is prescribed that the གདན་ for the offerings should be a spotless
piece of white cotton or other cloth, called མཆོད་གདན་, ‘offering
sheet,’ ‘that on which the offerings rest.’ Bell has ས་གདན་ for
‘carpet’; small cushion, placed on chair ཁ་གདན་; large cushion on
ground འབོལ་གདན་. This is a most interesting example illustrating the
fact that it is strictly necessary first to find out the root-idea of a
Tibetan word before translating it by words representing the incidental
applications of that root-idea. Whoever has handled Chinese
dictionaries knows how specially necessary this is in studying
Indo-Chinese languages. The Sanskrit equivalent, āsana, is derived from
the root ās, to sit or lie, but the Tib. root seems different.
Further notes on གདན་. Cf. J. མ་གདན་ (pr. magdàn), ground, basis,
foundation, p. 409a. Bell, apron པང་གདན་. Cs., Grammar, p. 170, l. 10,
translates གདན་ as couch (stuffed seat). Lewin, Manual, p. 123, first
word last line: ‘mat, seat’, in the same sentence taken over from Cs.’s
Grammar. Two synonyms for J.’s མ་གདན་, quoted above, are རྨང་གདན་ and
གཞི་གདན་. Bell also has ‘mat.’
བྱམས་སྙིང་རྗེ་, 50. Seems simply an amplified form for ‘love.’ Difficult to
be translated exactly, Sk. maitrīkaruṇā, may be treated as a compound,
loving-kindness, love and kindness, or pity. On the question of karuṇā,
especially, the learned have descanted profusely.
བླ་ (ན་) མེད་ (པ་), 52. Sk. अनुत्तर, unsurpassed, unexcelled, unrivalled,
supreme, incomparable, most high, highest. Not specially entered in J.
but illustrated by an example s.v. བླ་. Altogether absent in Desg. S.
Ch. D. བླ་མེད་རྣམས་ལ་, ‘to those who are supreme, or to the followers of
the Anuttara school.’ A curious entry! See S. Ch. D. also s.v. བླ་ན་.
བླ་མ་, 3. Here perhaps better ‘teacher’ than ‘priest’ or ‘superior.’ The
word may be here equally well taken in the singular as in the plural,
but the latter is perhaps more likely.
བླ་མེད་, see བླ་ན་མེད་པ་.
བློ་གཟུ་བོ་, 47. ‘Straight, upright, righteous mind.’ J.’s entry is a
little vague. I think he takes ཐུགས་ in his example ཐུགས་གཟུ་བོ་ as an
indication that གཟུ་བོ་ is also a honorific form. That, however, is not
the case. Compare also the quotation from Cs. in S. Ch. D., གཟུ་བོར་གནས་
པ་ ‘to be impartial and straightforward, to be on the side of honesty.’
I don’t find this example in Schmidt. Desg. ‘straight, upright,
(élevé,) just, honest.’ According to the above the word is an adj. and
the translation of the passage becomes ‘whether you persevere in a
straight (righteous) mind.’ The verb གནས་པ་ has then to be taken as ‘to
hold, adhere to, persevere in (an opinion, etc.).’ If however, we
should find that གཟུ་བོ་ can also be sbst. ‘righteousness,’
‘straightness,’ (not in any Dict.), then གནས་པ་ would have the other
meaning of ‘to dwell, reside’ and the phrase would have to be rendered
‘whether the mind (continues to) dwell(s) in righteousness.’ S. Ch. D.
renders ཐུགས་གཟུ་བོ་ as ‘honest mind,’ but the sense honest versus
dishonest seems not quite applicable in our passage. J. is vague here.
My informants gave the above definition ‘straight, upright’ as their
own but felt afterwards vague about this example which, though they had
framed it, they could not vouch for: མི་དེ་གཟུ་བོར་གནས་མི་གནས་ལྟོས་ཤིག་, ‘see
whether the man keeps straight or not.’ The framer honestly confessed
that whilst we were discussing the word he had been influenced by S.
Ch. D.’s Dict. in coining the sentence; a confession so instructive for
idiom-verifiers that I think it worth while to record it here.
Finally, Desg. supports S. Ch.’s second meaning ‘witness’ for གཟུ་བོ་.
He, however, does not give S. Ch.’s form གཟུ་དཔང་. The ordinary word for
witness is, of course, དཔང་ (པོ་). It is characteristic of S. Ch. D.
that he copies J.’s extract from Sch. under གཟུ་དཔང་ ‘witness,
mediator,’ but then immediately adds his own individual interpretation
which not only is likely to be correct, but which also nullifies and
contradicts the previous entry which he copied immediately above. He
himself says, ‘an honest and truthful witness.’ It often occurs that S.
Ch. D. brings modifications, extensions and even corrections to J.’s
statements, but at the same time he copies J. far too slavishly and so
contradicts himself in the pages of his own dictionary. Whether
meanings like ‘reliable, straightforward, correct, proper,’ etc., have
to be attached to གཟུ་བོ་ is as yet uncertain.
བློ་བཟང་གྲགས་པ་, 8. In Sk. Sumatikīrti. According to the Sk. dictionaries
the primary sense of ‘sumati’ is ‘benevolence.’ In present-day Tibetan
བློ་བཟང་ is rather ‘good-natured, kindhearted,’ as against དྲིན་ཆེན་པོ་
‘benevolent.’ So the Tibetan name has to be rendered as
Good-nature-fame, or Famous good-nature, the personal name of Tsoṅ kʽa
pa.
དབང་དུ་ (མ་) སོང་བ་, 22. (Not) fallen under the power (of)....
དབྱངས་, 54 and colophon. This word seems here hardly to mean ‘song,
singing tune,’ but rather ‘melody, melodiousness, sweetness,’ etc. This
tallies to a certain extent with Csoma’s translation of the title of
list LXI (p. 86) of the Mahāvyutpatti, ‘Names of the 60 sorts (or
divisions) of melody or melodious voices (or vocal sound).’ I take it
that this list refers to what is mentioned here in our text. How these
60 branches of melody are exactly to be understood I have not been able
to ascertain. The opinions of Pʽun Tsʽogs on the point are as follows.
The Buddha’s voice had such a variety of (magic?) qualities, sixty in
number, that they made him understood by all beings, whatever their own
languages. The Buddha was in this way simultaneously understood by men,
devas, nāgas, etc. In proffering this explanation Pʽun Tsʽogs takes ཡན་
ལག་ to mean rather ‘kind’ than ‘branch.’ As an alternative he suggests
that དབྱངས་ is an adjective synonymous with རིང་བུ༌, ‘high’ (as applied to
voice or rather tone) [or perhaps long, lengthened?] and that then
དབྱངས་ཡན་ལག་ would mean a ‘variety’ of tones or modulations. I myself am
inclined to think that if the Mahāvyutpatti list is not referred to, we
have here to do with some scholastic scheme of rhetorics, though if so
understood the exact value of དབྱངས་ is not clear and certainly not
sufficiently defined in the Dicts.
(Cf. S. Ch. D. s.v. ཟབ་ (p. 1092a), ཟབ་དབྱངས་ = मन्द्र, मन्द्रक, ‘a deep
voice, a musical tone.’ See also གདུང་དབྱངས་.)
དབྱིངས་ see སྤྲོས་བྲལ་.
དབྱིངས་སྤྲོས་བྲལ་ see སྤྲོས་བྲལ་.
འབར་བ་ see དཔལ་འབར་བ་.
འབོལ་གདན་ see བྱང་ཆུབ་སྙིང་པོ་.
འབྲོག་, 6. Here ‘solitude, wilderness’ and so = རི་ཁྲོད་ = དགོན་པ་,
‘monastery.’ Not associated with any of the meanings connected with
‘pasturing.’ Cf. S. Ch. D. འབྲོག་དགོན་ s.v. འབྲོག་.
The famous Galdan monastery was erected on a site called འབྲོག་པོའི་རི་. See
S. Ch. D., The Monasteries of Tibet, J.A.S.B., Vol. I, N.S. (1905), p.
108.
མི་ཁོ་ see གླུད་.
མི་ཁོ་གླུད་ཡིན་ see གླུད་.
མི་གླུད་ see གླུད་.
མིག་བཟང་མ་ see ཡངས་.
མིག་ཡངས་ see ཡངས་.
མེད་པར་འདོད་པ་ see འཕུང་བར་འདོད་པ་.
མྱུར་, 52. J. མྱུར་བ་ adj., and མྱུར་དུ་ adv., ‘quick(ly), swift(ly).’ In Mil.
adj. མྱུར་པོ་. Desg. མྱུར་ and མྱུར་བ་ (ཉིད་), subst. ‘promptness,’ and མྱུར་པོ་
‘swift.’ As adv. མྱུར་བར་, or དུ་, or གྱིས་. S. Ch. D. མྱུར་བ་, verb, ‘to
hurry by, to pass on swiftly,’ (example དུས་མྱུར་བ་, ‘time quickly runs
away.’ [= tempus fugit]), and adv. quickly. Further adv. མྱུར་དུ་. Some
interesting compounds in S. Ch. D.: མྱུར་མ་ ‘a dancing woman,’ etc. Note
the expression ཅི་མྱུར་ ‘as speedily as possible,’ J.
According to my informants S. Ch. D.’s example དུས་མྱུར་བ་ is not good
Tibetan. It should either be དུས་མྱུར་པོ་ (or བ་) ཡིན་, lit. ‘time is
quick,’ or with another meaning also ‘the time is near’ (i.e. at hand,
coming quickly), or again དུས་མྱུར་པོ་དེ་, ‘the quick time.’ Time quickly
runs away, they say, should be expressed thus: དུས་མྱུར་བར་འགྲོ་གི་འདུག་.
Cf. also J., Desg.: སྨྱུར་བ་.
མྱུར་མ་ see མྱུར་.
ཙམ་གྱི་, 38. Here: ‘after only, as a result of only, in consequence of
only, mere, simple.’ But ཙམ་ has also the meanings: as soon as, simply
on (hearing), on the slightest (reproach, etc.) with a more prominent
stress on the time element, instantaneousness.
རྩེ་དྲུང་ see བརྩེ་.
རྩེ་པོ་ཏ་ལ་ see བརྩེ་.
རྩེ་ཞྭ་ see བརྩེ་.
རྩོད་པ་རྒྱབ་པ་ see གཤགས་འགྱེད་པ་.
བརྩེ་, 55. བརྩེ་ = བརྩེ་བ་, vb. ‘to love’ sbst. ‘love, kindness, affection,’
etc. Desg. has also a བརྩེ་, ‘acidity,’ which is also known to my
informants. His བརྩེ་དྲང་ ‘bodyguard of the Dalai Lama’ is held, by one of
my informants, to be a mistake for རྩེ་དྲུང་ (pronounce tsī-dung), the
monk-employees of the Tibetan government (and in a narrower sense: the
clerical staff, the clerks and secretaries amongst them) as contrasted
with the lay-employees of noble birth (not officials in general as with
S. Ch. D. 656a, but only those belonging to the nobility) who are
called དྲུང་འཁོར་. The word རྩེ་ in the compound is said to be derived from
the designation of the Potala palace where many of the government
offices are located, and which is called རྩེ་པོ་ཏ་ལ་, the Potala peak, but
most commonly, by the people, briefly རྩེ་, the peak. This explanation of
tsī-dung as a general class of lama government-employees is wider than
that given in Waddell’s table in his ‘Lhasa and its Mysteries,’ p. 165.
See also རྩེ་དྲུང་, ‘chief clerk or secretary’ in S. Ch. D. s.v. རྩེ་ཞྭ་
(1013b), the latter being the special name of the former’s hat.
བརྩེ་དྲང་ see བརྩེ་.
བརྩོན་པར་བགྱིད་པ་, 24. Equals བརྩོན་པར་བྱེད་པ་ (or གྱུར་བ་) ‘to apply oneself,
exert oneself, put one’s best energy into something’ = སྙིང་རུས་བྱེད་པ་, ‘to
be zealous, diligent.’ Also བརྩོན་འགྲུས་སྐྱེད་པ་ (བྱེད་པ་, རྩོམ་པ་).
ཚུལ་, 28. Here ‘conduct, behaviour’ pure and simple, without allusion to
the ཚུལ་ཁྲིམས་, ‘religious law, discipline, monastic rules.’
ཚུལ་བཞིན་ see ཆོས་ཚུལ་བཞིན་.
མཚན་, 53. Here technically the (thirty-two) characteristic signs or
marks of a ‘Great Man,’ the mahāpurusha. Mahāvyutpatti (Ed. A. S. B.),
LXIII, p. 92. De Harlez, ‘Vocabulaire Bouddhique Sanscrit-Chinois,’ no.
3. Schiefner, ‘Triglotte,’ no. 3. See de la Vallée Poussin,
‘Bouddhisme,’ pp. 241 et seq.
The transition of meaning of the word མཚན་ in modern Tibetan in such
expressions as མཚན་ལྡན་བླ་མ་, ‘a holy lama,’ or མཚན་ལྡན་མ་, ‘a woman of
good appearance and virtues’ (S. Ch. D.) should not be overlooked in
the interpretation of our passage for its psychological value. See also
དཔེ་.
མཚན་ལྡན་ see མཚན་.
མཚན་དཔེ་, 53. This is a compound substantive of an elliptic nature, and
means: ‘the [well known 32 primary] characteristics [and the 80]
beauties [of Buddhas]’ = མཚན་དང་དཔེ་བྱད་ (བཟང་པོ་). See also མཚན་ and དཔེ་.
མཚན་འཛིན་, 30. མཚན་ is here hon. of མིང་ ‘name,’ and the compound,
literally ‘name grasping,’ means ‘ambition, thirst for fame, glory,’
etc. (D. eerzucht, roemzucht), perhaps even ‘vainglory, pride, conceit,
egotism,’ i.e. the hugging of one’s own name and fame.
མཚན་བརྗོད་པ་, 7. To invoke by name, to address a prayer to by name.
Applied to both spiritual and human beings. རྒྱལ་པོའི་མཚན་བརྗོད་པ་, ‘to
address the king, speak to the king, direct, appeal to the king,’ but
always by calling him by his name. ‘O king help me’ is not a proper
example of མཚན་བརྗོད་པ་, but ‘O, thou, King George, help me!’ would be
one. To spiritual beings their names may be expressed in a paraphrase,
metaphor or symbol, but they must be expressed in some way. The prayers
to superhuman beings may be twofold, either an address containing
requests, etc., or a mere litany of names without any further subject
matter attached to them. The one is a recitation of names, the other a
direct address by name; the one a litany proper, the other an
invocation or prayer.
འཚོལ་བ་, 19. The form མི་འཚོལ་བས་ was paraphrased to me as འཚོལ་གི་མིན་ =
འཚོལ་མི་ཡོང་ = simple future, ‘not going to seek’ (D. niet zullende
zoeken).
ཞིབ་དཔྱད་ see རྟོག་དཔྱོད་.
ཞེ་ཁྲེལ་བ་ see ཁྲེལ་བ་.
ཞེན་པ་ལོག་པ་ see ཁྲེལ་བ་.
གཞན་བསྟན་ (པ་) འཛིན་པ་ see རང་བསྟན་ (པ་) འཛིན་པ་.
གཞུང་ see ཁྲེལ་བ་.
གཞུང་སྒོ་ see སྒོ་.
གཞུངས་པ་ see ཁྲེལ་བ་.
གཞེས་ see མགུར་མ་.
བཞག་པ་ see རྒྱན་པ་.
ཟབ་, 10, 55. ཟབ་ = ཟབ་པ་. J. vb., adj., subst. and adv. ‘to be deep,
deep, deeply, depth’; adj. ཟབ་པོ་ and མོ་. Desg. ཟབ་པོ་ and མོ་ adj. only.
S. Ch. D. ཟབ་པ་ vb. ‘to make deep, to deepen,’ also adj. and sbst.;
further in པོ་ and མོ་ only adj. Note the additional meaning ‘dense’
(also ཟབས་ ‘thickness’) in S. Ch. D., not in the two others. My
teachers deny that ཟབ་པ་ can be a verb ‘to deepen,’ or ‘to make deep.’
ཟབ་ must also be understood as ‘profound’ (wisdom, teaching, etc.). See
ཆོས་ཟབ་, also དབྱངས་, also ཐུགས་ནི་, etc.
ཟབ་ཡངས་ see ཐུགས་ནི་, etc.
གཟུ་བོ་ see བློ་གཟུ་བོ་.
གཟུ་དཔང་ see བློ་གཟུ་བོ་.
གཟུ་བོར་གནས་པ་ see བློ་གཟུ་བོ་.
འུ་ཐུག་ see སྡུག་ཡུས་.
ཡང་རྩེ་ see དྭངས་མར་.
ཡངས་, 55. = ཡངས་པ་ or པོ་, ‘wide, large.’ Desg. also ‘ample, abundant.’
S. Ch. D. only ཡངས་པ་. Note J. ‘*mig-yaṅ*’, C., W. liberal, generous,
bounteous,’ but Desg. མིག་ཡངས་པ་ ‘wide-eyes: envious, covetous, greedy.’
In S. Ch. D. ཡངས་པའི་མིག་ = विशालाक्षी, ‘large-eyes, a handsome woman, name of
a Goddess.’ Cf. also in the same dict. མིག་བཟང་མ་, ‘beautiful-eyes, a
very handsome woman, a nymph’s name.’ As to J.’s mig-yaṅ, one of my
teachers holds with him as against Desg., the other does not know the
expression.
ཡངས་པའི་མིག་ see ཡངས་.
ཡན་ལག་ see དབྱངས་.
ཡབ་སྲས་ (གསུམ༌), 8, 15, 16, 18. ‘Father (and) sons,’ or, as Csoma already
has it in his Grammar, p. 28, ‘teacher and pupils.’ With the addition
གསུམ་ ‘three,’ and also as here without this addition, a very well known
appellation of Tsoṅ kʽa pa and his two pupils (his spiritual sons). It
is likely that to the Tibetan mind the expression means something like
‘spiritual family (of three),’ namely of one father and two sons. See
introductory remarks. Free renderings like ‘spiritual trio’ or ‘teacher
triad’ and the like are apt enough for practical purposes. Cf. an
expression like the following: ཁྱོད་ཕ་བུ་གཉིས་ག་ནས་ཡིན་, ‘where have you
two, father and son, come from?’ (But the sentence has also the second
meaning ‘where do you live? where is your home?’).
In the light of the above, has the note on p. 98 of the J.A.S.B., Vol.
II, N.S., no. 4, 1906, in Satis Chandra Vidyābhūṣana’s article on ‘the
Gyantse rock inscription’ to be rectified? My informants do not think
that the expression is used among the Sakyapas in the sense given in
that note.
ཡིན་ན་ཡང་ see ཀྱང་.
ཡུས་ see སྡུག་ཡུས་.
གཡུལ་ see འགྱེ་བ་.
གཡུལ་འགྱེད་ see འགྱེ་བ་.
རང་ see དྭངས་མར་.
རང་བསྟན་ (པ་) འཛིན་པ་, 26. This expression must here not be understood as
‘to follow one’s own teaching.’ རང་བསྟན་ is here not one compound word.
The meaning is: they who themselves follow the teaching, as against the
གཞན་བསྟན་པ་འཛིན་པ་, the others who (also) follow the teaching. See གཞན་
བསྟན་ (པ་) འཛིན་པ་, 27.
རི་ཁྲོད་ see འབྲོག་ and གངས་རིའི་ཁྲོད་འདི་ན་.
རི་འབྲོག་ see འབྲོག་ and གངས་རིའི་ཁྲོད་འདི་ན་.
རིག་པ་ see མཁྱེན་བརྩེ་.
རིག་པ་བསྒྲིམས་ནས་ see གོལ་ས་.
རིང་བུ་ see དབྱངས་.
རུས་ཐང་ see དྭངས་མར་.
རེ་ see དོན་རེ་ཆུང་.
རེ་བ་མེད་ see སྤྲོས་བྲལ་.
ལན་འཕམ་པ་ see གཤགས་འགྱེད་པ་.
ལམ་གོལ་ see གོལ་ས་.
ལམ་གོལ་ས་ see གོལ་ས་.
ལམ་མཐོན་པོ་, 31. ‘The high, elevated road,’ has a religious connotation,
the proper road that leads to heaven after death, the ‘narrow’ road of
Christianity. See below.
ལམ་དྲང་པོ་, 48. The straight road (metaphorically), the road of
righteousness, of straightness of mind. Cf. S. Ch. D. s.v. དྲང་ལམ་, p.
649a. The meaning of this expression and that of ལམ་མཐོན་པོ་, in line 31
(see above), are quite different. The other is the highroad (towards
heaven), the road of a high standard of moral conduct.
ལམ་རིམ་, 9. ‘Steps on the path,’ ‘degrees of advance,’ ‘steps towards
perfection,’ is the short title of many mystical writings and
especially of one by Tsoṅ kʽa pa, to which the words may allude here
without specially designating it. In this place the meaning does not
seem to be a specific work but merely ‘(religious) instructions,
teaching in general.’ The ལམ་རིམ་པ་གཉིས་ are here, according to my oral
information, to be taken as the two halves or divisions of the Kandjur
which is commonly divided into མདོ་ and སྔགས་, sūtra and tantra (or
mantra, or dhāraṇī). In this division the རྒྱུད་ or tantra section is
called སྔགས་, whilst all the rest, properly subdivided in six divisions,
is taken together as མདོ་, of which the real མདོ་སྡེ་ or sūtra-division
(the 5th in sequence in the Kandjur) is only one. Concerning Tsoṅ kʽa
pa’s study of the ‘Sūtras and Tantras’ see S. Ch. D., ‘Contributions,
etc. on Tibet,’ VI, in J.A.S.B., 1882, Vol. LI, Part I, no. 1, p. 53.
J., s.v. བསྟན་པ་, quotes a བསྟན་པ་གཉིས་: ‘with Urgyan Padma, etc., the
same as mdoi and sṅags kyi lam, v. mdo extr.’ This is seemingly the
same as our expression.
ལུས་ཅན་, 42. J. has = སེམས་ཅན་, ‘beings, creatures,’ but may not the idea
rather be all embodied creatures; with the etymological sense still
potent in connection with the Buddhist reincarnation theory? S. Ch. D.
gives a ལུས་ཅན་གནས་ = གྲོང་ཁྱེར་ = ‘town, city,’ which seems rather to point
to the meaning ‘man’ for ལུས་ཅན་. My informants don’t feel quite certain
whether to include the five other classes of beings (including animals)
amongst the ལུས་ཅན་, but are somewhat inclined to interpret the word as
མི་, ‘man,’ in general.
ཤ་འཛིན་ see ཀྱུ་.
ཤར་གངས་རི་མ་, title, 1. The author writes his poem in a place to the
west of a snow-capped mountain, to the east of which the Galdan
monastery is situated. See notes on འབྲོག་, དགེ་ལྡན་ and གངས་རིའི་ཁྲོད་འདི་ན་.
Which mountain or mountain chain is meant must be left undecided, even
if granting that modern cartography could show it if identified. Local
tradition, however, would most likely be able to point out a particular
mountain.
ཤེས་པ་ see མཁྱེན་བརྩེ་.
ཤོས་ see རིན་ཆེ་བ་.
གཤགས་ see གཤགས་འགྱེད་པ་.
གཤགས་འགྱེད་པ་, 38. This expression cannot yet be explained with
certainty. It may be taken here to mean, literally, ‘to send out
(distribute, give, put forward) justice, right,’ but the exact
idiomatic value of the phrase remains to be determined. It is not in
the Dicts., and unknown to my informants. We may take the possible
values of the expression as three, viz.: 1. གཤགས་འགྱེད་པ་ = རྩོད་པ་རྒྱབ་པ་ =
གཤགས་རྒྱབ་པ་ = ‘to dispute, argue, contend with words.’ This seems the
same expression as S. Ch. D.’s ཁ་གཤགས་འགྱེད་པ་ ‘to hold controversy,’ p.
1248. (Perhaps also ‘to challenge, to be challenged to dispute.’) 2. =
ལན་འཕམ་པ་ ‘to be defeated in argument, in dispute, to be silenced in
dispute.’
3. = ‘To make observations to, to remonstrate with, to use plain speech
to, to speak straight to, to rebuke, to reproach, to tell one the
truth.’ (Cf. the entry in J.’s *kʽa kye-c̀e* to abuse, to menace’ (p.
97b.)) This seems the sense required here and would be a logical
development of the primary meaning of the expression: ‘to spread out
the justice (right) of the case before someone,’ i.e. ‘to submit the
truth about it.’
S. Ch. D. has s.v. ཁ་གཤགས་ = ཁ་རྩོད་ ‘using rough language, controversy,
discussion, dispute.’ The other Dicts. lack this word.
The above is the result of an exhaustive discussion of the expression
with my teachers. Lexicographically (with a view to the entry quoted
from S. Ch. D.) the first explanation seems the best, but with
reference to the context, the last one deserves preference, and this is
the one chosen for the rendering.
It should be noted that in modern Tibetan there seems to be taking
place a shifting of the meaning of གཤགས་. Instead of as ‘right,
justice’ it seems to be understood by some modern Tibetans as ‘the
arguing about right or justice’ as in a court of law, and hence simply
as ‘dispute, argument, pleading.’ Example: ‘This is not the place to
argue your rights,’ ཁྱོད་གཤགས་རྒྱབ་སའི་ (or པའི་) ས་ཆ་འདི་རུ་མ་རེད་, lit. ‘to
hit out (རྒྱབ་) for the right,’ the verb meaning ‘to do (རྒྱབ་ for verba
loquendi) arguing (གཤགས་).’
བཤད་ཉན་, 38. Literally ‘speak-listen,’ has two meanings. The first,
quoted in J. from Schmidt in the form of འཆད་ཉན་པ་ (s.v. འཆད་པ་ pf. and
fut. བཤད་), is endorsed by my informants, ‘to listen to an explanation
(also, to a sermon, discourse, etc.)’. The second is, ‘to answer upon
hearing,’ i.e. ‘to answer (in invective, hotly, in remonstrance or
dispute) upon hearing (reproaches or unpleasant words).’ If a mother
chides her son for some fault, he may, instead of taking the rebuke in
humility, try to argue or to be impudent in return. The mother then may
say: ང་ཁྱོད་ཀྱི་ཨ་མ་ལ་བཤད་ཉན་མ་བྱེད་འདི་ལས་ངའི་གཏམ་ཉོན་, ‘Don’t argue, dispute,
bandy words with (don’t be impudent to, “no words with me!”) your
mother, but (འདི་ལས་, ‘rather, on the contrary, instead of this’) listen
to me.’ The expression may be rendered as ‘to flare up in answer (to a
reproach), to retort angrily (after admonition), to snap, yap back.’
བཤེས་གཉེན་, 41. ‘Friend’ and, as J. has it, abbr. for དགེ་བའི་བཤེས་གཉེན་ =
कल्याणमित्र = virtue-friend.
Here interpreted by my informants as ‘true, genuine priests or monks,
monks who come up to the mark, worthy of the name,’ but not technically
as ‘spiritual adviser’ as J. has it. Desg. s.v. བཤེས་, quotes only a
form with མཉེན་ and gives it the meaning ‘doctor, a lamaistic title.’
Under གཉེན་, however, he has བཤེས་གཉེན་, ‘ad scientiam adjuvans, monastic
dignity, teacher.’ S. Ch. D. adds ‘pious or holy friend, spiritual
friend or adviser.’ Compare also J. for the semi-homonym དགེ་བསྙེན་.
ས་ see ཕྱོགས་.
སེམས་པ་ see བསམས་ཤིང་ and བཀའ་དྲིན་སེམས་པ་.
སེམས་བསྐྱེད་པ་ see སྐྱེད་པ་.
གསུང་, 54. Here ‘speech’ in general, not ‘a speech,’ a slight extension
of J.’s meanings, unless his use of the definite article in ‘the
speech’ is a lapsus. The dicts. differ slightly and need co-ordination
in details. About the meaning there can be no doubt as the word is here
used in the series (hon.) སྐུ་, གསུང་, ཐུགས་, for ordinary ལུས་, ངག་, ཡིད་,
body, speech and mind, the so-called ‘three doors,’ སྒོ་གསུམ་.
གསུང་མགུར་ see མགུར་མ་.
གསུང་བ་, 10. Here is the sense of ‘to preach, to explain, to give an
exposition of, to expatiate on, to exhibit, to lecture on.’
བསམ་མནོ་ see རྟོག་དཔྱོད་.
བསམ་མི་ཁྱབ་, 12. Inconceivable, unthinkable, unimaginable, not to be
grasped by or in thought, beyond comprehension, realisation.
བསམས་ཤིང་བསམས་ཤིང་, 4. The repetition of the verb softens the meaning
into ‘quietly thinking’ or from སེམས་པ་ ‘to think,’ into ‘to muse, to
ponder’, etc.
ཨང་གི་དང་པོ་ see དྭངས་མར་.