The Monastic Garb of the Four Joden Communities
The members of the four monastic communities following the Vinaya tradition of Śākyaśrī (1127–1225) can be easily identified by an element of their monastic dress that they are shown wearing. Unlike in India, Tibetan monastics wear an additional sleeveless waistcoat or vest (stod ’gag) as an upper undergarment, which we also find depicted in paintings and statues. However, as can be seen from brief references in Tibetan biographies (see below), the members of the four communities wore a specific monastic dress, and their depiction in art suggests that they did not wear the normal vest, but a more distinctive one that only partially covered the right chest and left the right shoulder bare. Some variations of the specific Joden vest discussed below more closely resemble a sleeveless piece of cloth draped around the torso, leaving the right chest and shoulder bare, and to complicate matters, this kind of cloth is also found in some depictions of non-Tibetan monks, as the discussion below will show. This raises the question of whether this piece of cloth represents a vest at all, or whether it is an attempt to depict the uttarāsaṅga upper garment (bla gos), one of the three robes permitted for an Indian monk, and thus to portray the Joden monks as adherents to the dress rules of the Indian Vinaya. In addition, there are also a few examples of members of the Joden communities depicted in the robes of Indian monks without a vest, which also raises the question of whether they followed the dress rules of the Indian Vinaya.
The following section on the historical background of the four communities have been extracted from the following paper: Heimbel, Jörg. “The Jo gdan tshogs sde bzhi: An Investigation into the History of the Four Monastic Communities in Śākyaśrībhadra’s Vinaya Tradition.” In Franz-Karl Ehrhard and Petra Maurer (eds.), Nepalica-Tibetica: Festgabe for Christoph Cüppers. 2 vols. Beiträge zur Zentralasienforschung 28.1–2. Andiast: International Institute for Tibetan and Buddhist Studies GmbH, vol. 1, 187–242.
Historical Background
Śākyaśrī’s sojourn in Tibet from 1204 to 1214 had a major impact on the development of Buddhism, one of his important contributions being the establishment of a Vinaya ordination lineage of the prātimokṣa precepts. When he returned to his native Kashmir in late 1214, he left behind a group of disciples whom he had trained in the practice of the Vinaya, founding an important new monastic community. Successive divisions in this original group led to the formation of four different assemblies, which became known as the Tsokde Zhi (Tshogs sde bzhi) or Joden Tsokpa Dezhi (Jo gdan tshogs pa sde bzhi).
In the early years of the existence of the original monastic community after Śākyaśrī’s return to Kashmir, three of his disciples were highly important as leaders of the group: Tsangsowa Sönam Dze (gTsang so ba bSod nams mdzes), Lhodrak Jangchub Pel (lHo brag Byang chub dpal, 1183–1264), and Tsoda Dorje Pel (mTsho mda’ rDo rje dpal). Śākyaśrī’s original Vinaya community split after the death of Tsangsowa Sönam Dze, when Jangchub Pel and Dorje Pel, according to Tibetan sources, wished to separate and each established their own community. Each of these two newly formed groups split again, eventually resulting in a total of four communities. The two groups associated with Dorje Pel were the Tsamik Tsokpa (Tsha mig tshogs pa) and Jedzing Tsokpa (Bye rdzing tshogs pa), while the two groups associated with Jangchu Pel were the Gendün Gangpa (dGe ‘dun sgang pa) and the Chölung Tsokpa (Chos lung tshogs pa).
Initially, they were mobile encampments (sgar pa) with no fixed abode or means of support until they were endowed with offerings of land or temples. Their earliest settlements were found in the wider region of Nyemo (sNye mo) in eastern Tsang (gTsang), and it is from these places that the communities took their names. Over time, they branched out into other sub-communities and settled in various locations beyond the borders of the wider region of Nyemo: Members of the Tsamik Tsokpa settled at the Tse Tsokpa (rTse tshogs pa) at Neu Dong (sNe’u gdong), members of the Jedzing Tsokpa at the Tsongdü Tsokpa (Tshong ’dus tshogs pa) at Drachi (Grwa phyi), members of the Gedün Gangpa at the Gyelling Tsokpa (rGyal gling tshogs pa) at Dranang (Grwa nang), and members of the Chölung Tsokpa at Pökhang (sPos khang) in Nyang (Myang).
The communities were important centres of Vinaya practice and became a major source for the transmission of Śākyaśrī’s monastic ordination lineage, known as the Bardül or Middle Region Vinaya (bar ’dul; also kha che lugs or paṇ chen sdom rgyun). This lineage was the last of three ordination lineages introduced into Tibet, the other two being the Medül (sMad ’dul) and the Tödul (sTod ’dul). The former had been established by the eighth-century Indian Buddhist scholastic Śāntarakṣita during the reign of Trisong Detsen (Khri srong lde btsan, r. 754–797) and was later revived from eastern Tibet with the full monastic ordination of Lachen Gongpa Rapsel (Bla chen dGongs pa rab gsal, 832–915 or 892–975) and his disciples from central Tibet. This lineage thus became thus known as the Eastern Tibetan or Lowland Vinaya (smad ’dul) lineage. The latter lineage, which was known as the Western Tibetan or Highland Vinaya (stod ’dul), was introduced by the East Indian scholar Dharmapāla, who had visited Guge (Gu ge) in Ngari (mNga’ ris) at the invitation of Lha Lama Yeshe Ö (lHa Bla ma Ye shes ’od, 947–1019/24).
The Bardül lineage transmitted by Śākyaśrī became the chief ordination lineage in the Karma Kagyü (Karma bKa’ brgyud) and Sakya (Sa skya) schools and was also received by some eminent Geluk (dGe lugs) masters, including Tsongkhapa (Tsong kha pa, 1357–1419), the Fifth Dalai Lama (1617–1682), and both the First Panchen Lama (Paṇ chen Bla ma Blo bzang chos kyi rgyal mtshan, 1570–1662) and the Second Panchen Lama (Paṇ chen Bla ma Blo bzang ye shes, 1663–1737). Moreover, it was also transmitted at Zhalu (Zha lu) monastery, and Jonang (Jo nang) masters such as Dölpopa Sherap Gyeltsen (Dol po pa Shes rab rgyal mtshan, 1292–1361) also took ordination in it.
The Sakya school preserved different branches of Śākyaśrī’s ordination lineage: one that was transmitted directly from Śākyaśrī to his disciple Sakya Paṇḍita (1182–1251) and another transmitted through the abbots of at least two of these four communities, namely the Chölung Tsokpa and the Tsamik Tsokpa. For instance, eminent Sakya masters, such as Danyi Chenpo Zangpo Pel (bDag nyid chen po bZang po dpal, 1262–1324) and his sons Jamyang Dönyö Gyeltsen (’Jam dbyangs Don yod rgyal mtshan, 1310–1344) and Lama Dampa Sönam Gyeltsen (Bla ma dam pa bSod nams rgyal mtshan, 1312–1375), took full monastic ordination in the lineage of the Chölung Tsokpa. Ngorchen Künga Zangpo (Ngor chen Kun dga’ bzang po, 1382–1456), on the other hand, received ordination in the lineage as passed down through the abbots of the Tsamik Tsokpa via his teacher Sharchen Yeshe Gyeltsen (Shar chen Ye shes rgyal mtshan, 1359–1406), who in turn had taken his full monk’s vows from Tashi Tsültrim (bKra shis tshul khrims), the eleventh abbot of the Tsamik Tsokpa.
The monastic purists of the four Joden Tsokpas distinguished themselves as upholders of very strict monastic conduct by practices such as observing the ascetic discipline (brtul zhugs) of the “single mat” (stan/gdan gcig). This single-mat discipline demanded that food be eaten no more than once a day, with the whole day’s food consumed in a single sitting at midday. One finds this discipline included as the fifth (stan gcig, aikāsanikaḥ) of the Mahayāna tradition’s “twelve qualities of a purified ascetic” (sbyangs pa’i yon tan bcu gnyis, dvādaśadhūtaguṇāḥ) listed in the Mahāvyutpatti. In the Indian Buddhist context, these were ascetic practices “the Buddha authorized monks to adopt voluntarily for the purpose of cultivating contentedness with little detachment, energy, and moderation. These austerities are not enjoined on monks and nuns by the Vinaya, but are rather optional practices that monastics were sanctioned to adopt for limited periods of time in order to foster sensory restraint” (Buswell and Lopez 2013: 256).
Comparison of Vests
Fig. 1 on the left shows a Tibetan lama wearing the normal vest of a Tibetan monk and a robe that covers only his left shoulder. Fig. 2 on the right shows a Tibetan lama from the Joden communities with the special vest that only partially covers the right chest and leaves the right shoulder uncovered. The lama’s right shoulder is also uncovered by the robe.
Fig. 3 on the left shows a Tibetan lama wearing the normal vest of a Tibetan monk and a robe covering both of his left shoulders. Fig. 4 on the right shows a Tibetan lama from the Joden communities wearing the special vest that only partially covers his right chest and leaves his right shoulder uncovered, while his robe covers both shoulders.
Examples of Depictions of Joden Community Lamas
Fig. 5 shows two members of the Joden communities wearing their distinctive vests on a mural in the assembly hall of the Gyelling Tsokpa. The two masters might be the aforementioned Jangchub Pel and Dorje Pel.
In Fig. 6 all the Tibetan masters, both major and minor figures, are shown wearing the distinctive vest of the Joden communities. The main figure of the painting is most likely Lhodrak Jangchup Pel (lHo brag Byang chub dpal, 1183–1264), the aforementioned eminent disciple of Śākyaśrī, who played a prominent role in leading the original monastic community after Śākyaśrī’s return to Kashmir. He is surrounded by eight successive abbots of the Gedün Gangpa (whose names are given by inscriptions) and an unidentified member of the community in the lower centre.
Jangchup Pel was the first abbot in the line of Śākyaśrī’s ordination lineage as transmitted by the Gedün Gangpa, and the painting thus shows the first nine successive abbots of the community. The Gedün Gangpa abbots are considered to be manifestations of the Sixteen Arhats and were closely associated with the Karmapas, many of whom received full ordination in Śākyaśrī’s lineage as transmitted by Jangchub Pel through the abbots of the Gedün Gangpa. As the main figure is shown holding a khakkhara (‘khar gsil) staff of a Buddhist monk in his left hand, he is apparently being worshipped as a manifestation of an arhat, and he may be the manifestation of Nagasena (Klu’i sde), who holds such a staff in his left hand and a vase in his extended right, the latter being missing from the depiction of the main figure.
For instance, the first Gedün Gangpa abbot to grant full monastic ordination to a Karmapa was Zhönnu Jangchup (gZhon nu byang chub), the third abbot of the community, who fully ordained the Third Karmapa Rangjung Dorjé (Rang byung rdo rje, 1284–1339). He is shown in the painting as the second minor figure on the left (see below Chart, no. 3), and his inscription on the right even seems to begin by referring to him as an arhat (dgra bcom pa). The unidentified master shown with a halo in the lower centre has been suggested by Jackson (2009: 112) to be the Fifth Karmapa, who received full monastic ordination from the larger figure seated to his left, Nyakpuwa Sönam Zangpo (gNyag phu ba bSod nams bzang po, 1341–1433), the 8th abbot of Gedün Gangpa (tenure: 1384–1399), who was recognised as a manifestation of the Arhat Bakula.
The Gendün Gangpa also had connections with Sakya, where, for instance, the Lamdre (Lam ’bras) master Penden Tsültrim (dPal ldan tshul khrims, 1333–1399) obtained monastic ordination when the Gendün Gangpa stayed there in residence in 1340. However, as mentioned above, the monks of the Sakya school usually took ordination from the abbots of two other Joden communities. In addition, as mentioned below, the Gendün Gangpa was also related with Pelkhor Chöde (dPal ’khor chos sde) at Gyantse (rGyal rtse).
Diagram Fig. 6
- Lhodrak Jangchub Pel (lHo brag Byang chub dpal)?
- Tsangpa Wangchuk Drakpa (gTsang pa dBang phyug grags pa)
- Zhönnu Jangchup (gZhon nu byang chub)
- Gyelse Dültsepa Jangchub Zangpo (rGyal sras ’Dul tshad pa Byang chub bzang po)
- Jamyang Döndrup Pel (’Jam dbyangs Don grub dpal)
- Khetsun Yönten Gyeltsen (mKhas btsun Yon tan rgyal mtshan)
- Khenchen Peldruppa (mKhan chen dPal grub pa)
- Nyakwön Sönam Zangpo (gNyag dbon bSod nams bzang po)
For a discussion of this painting, see Jackson 1999: 120–122, pl. 18; Jackson 2009: 109, 112–113, fig. 5.23. Note that Jackson took what appears to be the inscription of minor figure no. 3 as the inscription of the main figure, which does not appear to bear any inscription. Jackson (1999: 120) already noted the unusual dress of the successive Joden abbots: “Note that (…) the Tibetan monks here are shown observing the prohibitions of sleeves, going so far as to avoid even the typical ceremonial vests worn by most Tibetan monks and lamas.”
Fig. 7 shows Tashi Tsültrim (bKra shis tshul khrims, fl. 14th century), the eleventh abbot of the Tsamik Tsokpa, wearing the special vest and surrounded by Indian and Tibetan masters representing the lineage of full monastic ordination as transmitted by the community he led. The Tibetan masters among the smaller figures representing the ordination lineage are also shown wearing the vest of the Joden communities. For a discussion of this painting, see Jackson 2010: 137–139, fig. 7.5. According to Jackson 2010: 222, n. 256. the partially illegible inscription at the centre bottom reads: don gyi slad du mtshan nas smos te| ?? ?? [illegible] mkhan chen? rin po che? bkra shis tshul khrims la phyag ‘tshal lo| mchod do| skyabs su mchi’o||.
Fig. 8 also shows Tashi Tsültrim (bKra shis tshul khrims, fl. 14th century) wearing the Joden community vest, but this time as a minor figure in a painting depicting two unidentified Tibetan masters as the main figures (Fig. 9). The painting was commissioned by Jangpuka Lama Künga Lekpa (Byang phug pa Bla ma Kun dga’ legs pa) as an object for his personal practice (thugs dam). On Künga Lekpa, see Heimbel 2017: 119, 128, 222–223, Jackson 2010: 187, 189–190, fig. 8.7.
Fig. 10 depicts Khenchen Chödrup Sengge (mKhan chen Chos grub seng ge, 1451–1528), who led the Gedün Gangpa as 12th abbot, as a minor figure wearing the vest of the Joden communities. The central figure of the painitng (Fig. 11), as explained by Fermer et al. (2024: 218–219),
depicts the deity Hevajra with sixteen arms in the skull-cup bearing form (Kye rdor thod pa can; Skt. Kapāladhara), with three legs stretched out stamping evenly across the four Māras (i.e. bkram gdan la bzhugs pa). This is the common leg posture for the tantric deity to be visualised by the Dzongpa (rDzong lugs) and Gongkar (Gong dkar lugs) traditions. The Ngorpa (Ngor pa), on the other hand, follow a different meditative system and show Hevajra in the dancing posture (gar ‘khrab) with three of his legs stamping on the four Māras piled one above another (i.e. brtsegs gdan la bzhugs pa). The sixteen-armed Hevajra is surrounded by the succession of masters representing the Instructional System of Hevajra (Kye rdor man ngag lugs; i.e. the Lamdre).
Chödrup Sengge is here shown as a lineage master of that system in the tradition of his teacher Dorje Denpa Künga Namgyel (rDo rje gdan pa Kun dga’ rnam rgyal, 1432–1496). On Chödrup Sengge and a discussion of this painting, see Fermer et al. 2024: 218–219, fig. 201.
Fig. 12 shows an unidentified Tibetan lama wearing the vest of the Joden communities. As a minor figure, he is depicted as a disciple of the main figure of the painting (Fig. 13), Dorje Denpa Künga Namgyel (rDo rje gdan pa Kun dga’ rnam rgyal, 1432–1496). Dorjedenpa is depicted as the lineage master of the Lamdre tradition of Gongkar (Gong dkar) monastery, which he founded in 1464. The minor figure, as in Fig. 10, may therefore be his disciple Khenchen Chödrup Sengge (mKhan chen Chos grub seng ge, 1451–1528), who led the Gedün Gangpa as 12th abbot.
Fig. 14 shows another unidentified Tibetan lama wearing the Joden community vest. He is depicted at the feet of his master Jetsün Künga Gyeltsen (rJe btsun Kun dga’ rgyal mtshan, fl. 16th century). Jetsün Künga Gyeltsen is probably depicted as a lineage master of the Lamdre tradition of Gongkar (Fig. 15), and the painting is only one of two surviving ones from the set; see Fermer et al. 2024: 233–234.
Figs. 16–22 are all portraits of Tibetan lamas in statue, depicted wearing the specific vest of the Joden communities. The lama in Figs. 16–19 can be identified by inscription as Chöje Sengge Gyeltsen (Chos rje Seng ge rgyal mtshan, fl. 14th/15th century). He may be the Sengge Gyeltsen of the monastery of Taktsang Chökhor Gang (sTag tshang Chos ’khor sgang) in the transmission line of the Kadam Lekbam (bKa’ gdams glegs ‘bam); see Ehrhard 2002: 46–47, Sernesi 2015: 419–420. What makes the depiction of his vest unique is that the image of a master is shown in the centre. Although Fig. 20 does not appear to have an inscription to identify the lama, the specific vest with the same image in the centre suggests that it could also be Sengge Gyeltsen. Fig. 21 is identified by inscription as Shākya Chörap (Shākya chos rab, fl. 16th century). He was an abbot of the Gendün Gangpa, which had settled at Gyelchen Ling (rGyal chen gling), an estate belonging to their patrons from the Yargyab (Yar rgyab) rulers in Lhokha (lHo kha). As a result, from around the 17th century, the Gendün Gangpa also became known as Gyelling Tsokpa (rGyal gling tshogs pa). Fig. 22 shows an unidentified masters wearing the special vest of the Joden communities.
Here are the inscriptions for Figs. 16–19, first in Tibetan and then in Wylie transliteration (with decoded abbreviations). The inscription of Fig. 19 is partly problematic.
༄༅།། ཆོས་ཀྱི་བརྗེ་སེང་གེ་རྒྱལ་མཚན་ལ་ན་མོ།།
࿓࿔།། ཆོས་ཀྱི་རྗེ་སེང་གེ་རྒྱལ་མཚན་དཔལ་བཟང་པོའི་སྐུ་འདྲ་ལ་ན་མོ།།
࿓࿔།། ཆོས་ཀྱི་རྗེ་སེང་གེ་རྒྱལ་མཚན་ལ་ཕྱག་མཚལོ།།
࿓࿔།། ཆོས་རྗེ་སོང་གེའི་ཐུགས་དགོངས་རྫོགས་བྱོའི་ཁྱར། རྟན་པའི་རྒྱལ་གུ་པས་གཞེངས།།
@@|| chos kyi brje seng ge rgyal mtshan la na mo||
@@|| chos kyi rje seng ge rgyal mtshan dpal bzang po’i sku ‘dra la na mo||
@@|| chos kyi rje seng ge rgyal mtshan la phyag mtshal lo||
@@|| chos rje song ge’ithugs dgongs rdzogs byo’i khyar| rtan pa’i rgyal gu pas gzhengs||
As Figs. 23–26 show, xylographs also depict Tibetan masters as members of the Joden communities wearing the special vest. In the illustrations of the transmission line of the Kadam Lekbam (bKa’ gdams glegs ‘bam), as shown in its first printed edition, four Tibetan masters are depicted in this way. These four are identified by inscription as Ratnākaraśanti, Künga Lödro (Kun dga’ blo gros), Lekpa Rinchen (Legs pa rin chen), and Künga Lekpa Rinchen (Kun dga’ legs pa bkra shis), who probably flourished during the 15th and 16th centuries. See BUDA by BDRC W4CZ1021 (vol. kha, fols. 215b–216a), Sernesi 2015: 420–421.
Figs. 27–29 show variations of the Joden communities vest, the depiction of which differs slightly from those above. Fig. 27 shows Śākyaśrī in the centre, flanked by Jangchub Pel on his proper right and Pökhang Jamyang Rinchen Gyeltsen (sPos khang ’Jam dbyang Rin chen rgyal mtshan, 1348–1430; Fig. 28) on his proper left, all three wearing this vest, which actually looks more like a sleeveless piece of cloth draped around the upper body, leaving the right chest and shoulders bare. This triad represents the monastic ordination lineage of the Chölung Tsokpa and is the main image in the Khengyü Lhakhang (mKhan brgyud lha khang) in the great Kumbum stūpa (sKu ’bum) at Pelkhör Chöde (dPal ’khor chos sde), Gyantse (rGyal rtse). Pökhang Jamyang Rinchen Gyeltsen is also depicted with the same variation of the vest in a mural in another chapel of the Kumbum (Fig. 29, location unknown) and as a miniature (Fig. 30) in his 1423 commentary on the sDom gsum rab dbye of Sakya Paṇḍita (1182–1251).
There are also murals in the Khengyü Lhakhang, including that of Dorje Pel, the other major disciple of Śākyaśrī and the originator of the Tsamik Tsokpa and Jedzing Tsokpa, who is shown surrounded by masters from the ordination lineage of the prātimokṣa precepts and the exposition lineage of the Vinayasūtra (’Dul ba mdo rtsa’i bshad brgyud). Note that he is shown wearing the more common vest of the Joden communites introduced above (Fig. 31). In addition, Drachompa Yönten Lodrö (dGra bcom pa Yon tan blo gros), the 9th Gedün Gangpa abbot and contemporary of Pökhang Jamyang Rinchen Gyeltsen, is shown surrounded by ordination abbots of the Gendün Gangpa lineage. Fig. 32–34 show most likely some of the surrounding lineage masters mentioned in this paragraph (although sPos khang Thub bstan shes rab 2020 describe them as: rgyal rtse dpal ‘khor mchod rten nang gi spos khang mkhan brgyud ldebs bris zur cig). For more images of the Khengyü Lhakhang, see the Western Himalaya Archive Vienna (WHAV).
Fig. 28. Detail of sMon bzang 2018, vol. 1.
Fig. 29. Detail of sMon bzang 2018, vol. 1.
Fig. 30. Detail of W3CN2601 (fol. 2a)
Fig. 31. After WHAV (PM09 1001,14203)
Fig. 32. Detail of sPos khang Thub bstan shes rab 2020
Fig. 33. Detail of sPos khang Thub bstan shes rab 2020
Fig. 34. Detail of sPos khang Thub bstan shes rab 2020This artistic programme of the Khengyü Lhakhang is described in the biography of Rapten Künzang Pak (Rab brtan kun bzang ’phags, 1389–1442), the founder of Pelkhör Chöde (1418) and its Kumbum (1428), as follows (’Jigs med grags pa, Rab brtan kun bzang ’phags kyi rnam thar, pp. 130.21–131.7):
མཁན་རྒྱུད་ལྷ་ཁང་གི་དབུས་ན། པཎ་ཆེན་ཤཱཀྱ་ཤྲི་བྷ་དྲ། མཁན་ཆེན་བྱང་ཆུབ་དཔལ། འཇམ་དབྱངས་རིན་ཆེན་རྒྱལ་མཚན་ཏེ་སྐུ་གསུམ་གྱི་སྐུ་གཟུགས་འབུར་དུ་དོད་པ་དང་། ཐུབ་པ་ཆེན་པོ་ལ་བསྟན་པ་གཏན་རབས་ཀྱི་རྒྱུད་པས་བསྐོར་བ་དང་། མཁན་ཆེན་རྡོ་རྗེ་དཔལ་ལ་སོ་ཐར་སྡོམ་བརྒྱུད་དང་། འདུལ་བ་མདོ་ཙའི་བཤད་རྒྱུད་ཀྱིས་བསྐོར་བ། དགྲ་བཅོམ་པ་ཡོན་ཏན་བློ་གྲོས་ལ། དགེ་འདུན་སྒང་ཚོགས་པའི་མཁན་བརྒྱུད་ཀྱིས་བསྐོར་བ་སོགས་སྐུ་གཟུགས་བརྒྱད་ཀྱིས་ལྷག་པའི་བཅུ་ཕྲག་དགུ་བཞུགས།
mkhan rgyud lha khang gi dbus na| paN chen shAkya shri bha dra| mkhan chen byang chub dpal| ‘jam dbyangs rin chen rgyal mtshan te sku gsum gyi sku gzugs ‘bur du dod pa dang| thub pa chen po la bstan pa gtan rabs kyi rgyud pas bskor ba dang| mkhan chen rdo rje dpal la so thar sdom brgyud dang| ‘dul ba mdo tsa’i bshad rgyud kyis bskor ba| dgra bcom pa yon tan blo gros la| dge ‘dun sgang tshogs pa’i mkhan brgyud kyis bskor ba sogs sku gzugs brgyad kyis lhag pa’i bcu phrag dgu bzhugs|
The inscription from the Kumbum itself, describing the artistic programme, has been recorded by Tucci 1989: vol. 2, pp. 84–86:
… བང་རིམ་བཞི་པའི་ཤར་གྱི་གློ་འབུར་ལྷོ་མའི་དབུས་ན་པཎ་ཆེན་ཤཱ་ཀྱ་ཤྲི་མཁན་ཆེན་བྱང་ཆུབ་དཔལ་འཇམ་དབྱངས་རིན་ཆེན་རྒྱལ་མཚན་གསུམ་གྱི་སྐུ་འདྲ་ཁྲི་རྒྱབ་ཡོལ་དང་བཅས་པའི་སྦྱིན་བདག་ཆ་ལུ་པ་དཔོན་ཆེན་དབང་ཆེན་དར་གྱིས་སྦྱར་ནས་བཟོ་སྦྱངས་མཁས་པ་ལྷ་རྩེ་པ་དཔོན་ནམ་མཁའ་བཟང་པོ་དཔོན་སློབ་ཀྱིས་བཟབས། རི་མོའི་བཀོད་པ་ནི། མཚུངས་མེད་ཤཱ་ཀྱའི་རྒྱལ་པོ་ལ་བསྟན་པ་གཏད་རབས་ཀྱིས་བསྐོར་བ། གུང་གི་གཡས་ཚར་ལ་བསྙེན་རྫོགས་སྡོམ་བརྒྱུད་མཁན་ཆེན་རྡོ་རྗེ་དཔལ་པ་ལ་འདུལ་བའི་བཤད་ཁའི་བརྒྱུད་པས་བསྐོར་བ། དགྲ་བཅོམ་པ་ཡོན་ཏན་བློ་གྲོས་ལ། དགེ་འདུན་སྒང་པའི་མཁན་བརྒྱུད་རྣམས་ཀྱིས་བསྐོར་བའི་རི་མོ་ཡིད་ཀྱི་གླང་པོ་འཆིང་བར་བྱེད་པའི་ཞགས་པ་འདི་མཁར་ཁ་པ་དཔོན་བཙུན་དོན་གྲུབ་སྐྱབས་དཔོན་སློབ་རྣམས་ཀྱིས་བཟབས་ཤིང་། འདིའི་དགོས་ཀྱི་སྦྱིན་བདག་རྫོང་དཔོན་གྲགས་པ་འབུམ་གྱིས་མཛད། …
… bang rim bzhi pa’i shar gyi glo ‘bur lho ma’i dbus na paN chen shAkya shri mkhan chen byang chub dpal ‘jam dbyangs rin chen rgyal mtshan gsum gyi sku ‘dra khri rgyab yol dang bcas pa’i sbyin bdag cha lu pa dpon chen dbang chen dar gyis sbyar nas bzo sbyangs mkhas pa lha rtse pa dpon nam mkha’ bzang po dpon slob kyis bzabs| ri mo’i bkod pa ni| mtshungs med shA kya’i rgyal po la btsan pa gtad rabs kyis bskor ba| gung gi g.yas tshar la bsnyen rdzogs sdom brgyud mkhan chen rdo rje dpal pa la ‘dul ba’i bshad kha’i brgyud pas bskor ba| dgra bcom pa yon tan blo gros la| dge ‘dun sgang pa’i mkhan brgyud rnams kyis bskor ba’i ri mo yid kyi glang po ‘ching bar byed pa’i zhags pa ‘di mkhar kha pa dpon btsun don grub skyabs dpon slob rnams kyis bzabs shing| ‘di’i dgos kyi sbyin bdag rdzongs dpon grags pa ‘bum gyis mdzad| …
The biography of Rapten Künzang Pak mentions further commissions at Pelkhör Chöde relating to Śākyaśrī and his Vinaya communities; see ’Jigs med grags pa, Rab brtan kun bzang ’phags kyi rnam thar (pp. 67.5–9, 90.12–14).
ཁ་ཆེ་པཎ་ཆེན་ནས་བཟུང་སྟེ། རྩ་བའི་བླ་མ་སྟན་གཅིག་པ་འཇམ་དབྱངས་རིན་ཆེན་རྒྱལ་མཚན་དང་དགྲ་བཅོམ་པ་ཡོན་ཏན་བློ་གྲོས་ཀྱི་བར་དུ་བྱོན་པའི་རྣམ་དག་མཁན་རྒྱུད་རྣམས་དང་། དཔལ་ལྡན་ས་སྐྱ་པའི་གདུང་རྒྱུད་བཟང་པོ་རིམ་པར་བྱོན་པ་རྣམས་དང་། གཞན་ཡང་བླ་མ་རྒྱུད་པ་ཇི་སྙེད་ཀྱི་སྐུ་འདྲ་གསར་དུ་བཞེངས་པ་དང་།
kha che paṇ chen nas bzung ste| rtsa ba’i bla ma stan gcig pa ‘jam dbyangs rin chen rgyal mtshan dang dgra bcom pa yon tan blo gros kyi bar du byon pa’i rnam dag mkhan rgyud rnams dang| dpal ldan sa skya pa’i gdung rgyud bzang po rim par byon pa rnams dang| gzhan yang bla ma rgyud pa ji snyed kyi sku ‘dra gsar du bzhengs pa dang|
ཁྱམས་ཆེན་གྱི་སྟེང་འཁོར་གཡབ་༼དཀར་ཆག་རྙིང་པ་ན། སྐྱེས་རབས་ཀྱི་ཞིང་ཁམས་སྣ་ཚོགས་བཞུགས་ཞེས་ཉེ་བར་བསྡུས་པ་སྣང་༽བར་བསྐོར་གྱི་ལོགས་དང་བཅས་པ་ལ་སྐུ་གཟུགས་རི་མོར་བཀོད་པ་བཞུགས་པ་ནི། གཙང་ཁང་ཆེན་མོའི་༼གཡས་ཕྱོགས་ཞལ་ཤར་གཟིགས་ཀྱི་༽ཞལ་རས་ལྷ་ཁང་གི་གདོང་ཆུང་ལ་ཁ་ཆེ་པཎ་ཆེན་ལ་བསྙེན་རྫོགས་སྡོམ་པའི་བླ་མ་རྒྱུད་པས་བསྐོར་བ་བཞུགས།
khyams chen gyi steng ‘khor g.yab {dkar chag rnying pa na| skyes rabs kyi shing khams sna tshogs bzhugs zhes nye bar bsdus pa snang} bar bskor gyi logs dang bcas pa la sku gzugs ri mor bkod pa bzhugs pa ni| gtsang khang chen mo’i {g.yas phyoogs zhal shar gzigs kyi} zhal ras lha khang gi gdong chung la kha che paṇ chen la bsnyen rdzogs sdom pa’i bla ma rgyud pas bskor ba bzhugs|
In another painting (Fig. 39), members of what appears to be the Tsamik Tsokpa are depicted as minor figures wearing this vest/cloth (e.g., Figs. 35–38). They surround the two main figures, Ngorchen Künga Zangpo (Ngor chen Kun dga’ bzang po, 1382–1456) and his disciple and successor to the throne of Ngor, Müchen Könchok Gyeltsen (Mus chen dKon mchog rgyal mtshan, 1388–1469), both of whom can be identified by an inscription. The lineage thus represents Ngorchen’s own line of monastic ordination, which he received via his teacher Sharchen Yeshe Gyeltsen (Shar chen Ye shes rgyal mtshan, 1359–1406), who in turn had taken his full monk’s vows from Tashi Tsültrim (bKra shis tshul khrims), the 11th abbot of the Tsamik Tsokpa. The depited lineage appears to run from left to right in the upper register, then drops down in the right-hand column (the masters in the left-hand column await further identification). For various aspects of this painting, see Jackson 2010: 31, fig. 2.12, 192, fig. 8.9; Jackson 2011: 19, 22 fig. 1.21, 50, 52, fig. 2.20; Jackson 2012: 215, n. 150.
There is even a painting of an Indian monk-scholar wearing this particular vest. Fig. 40 shows three monks who may represent the transmission line of the Graduated Path (Lam rim) and the painting would therefore be part of a larger set.
Each master has an inscription that allows him to be identified. The inscription is only partially legible, but when read together with the same wording as the opening praise for these three masters’ biographies as included in the lineage history of the Graduated Path written by Tsechok Ling Yongdzin Yeshe Gyeltsen (Tshe mchog gling Yongs ’dzin Ye shes rgyal mtshan, 1713–1793), it can be reconstructed as follows:
Inscription of the figure in the upper centre:
རྒྱལ་བའི་མན་ངག་ཀུན་འཛིན་ཀུ་ས་ལི།
rgyal ba’i man ngag kun ‘dzin ku sa li|
Inscription of the figure at the bottom right from the viewer’s point of view:
འགྲོ་ཀུན་བརྩེ་བས་རྗེས་འཛིན་དགེ་བ་ཅན།
‘gro kun brtse bas rjes ‘dzin dge ba can|
Inscription of the figure at the bottom left of the viewer:
བྱང་ཆུབ་ཐུགས་ལ་མངའ་བརྙེས་གསེར་གླིང་པ།
byang chub thugs la mnga’ brnyes gser gling pa|
The identity of the three masters shown can thus be established as Kusālipa the Elder (upper centre), Kusālipa the Younger (bottom right), and Suvarṇadvīpa Dharmakīrti (gSer gling pa Chos kyi grags pa, bottom left), of whom it is Kusālipa the Elder who is depicted with the specific vest. For the biographies of these three masters, see Tshe mchog gling Yongs ’dzin Ye shes rgyal mtshan, Lam rim bla brgyud, vol. 1, pp. 220.5–235.5.
Figs. 41–43, and possibly also Fig. 44, show Śākyaśrī wearing both types of clothing. Fig. 41 shows him in the assembly hall of the Tsongdü Tsokpa, the branch of the Jedzing Tsokpa, wearing what appears to be a Tibetan monk’s robe and the variation of the vest of the Joden communities, which looks like a sleeveless piece of green cloth draped around his torso, leaving his right chest and shoulders bare. Fig. 42 and Fig. 43, a statue from the Potala, and possibly also Fig. 44, show him wearing the other type of vest introduced above.
It should not be forgotten that there are other Indian masters depicted with this sleeveless piece of cloth. Fig. 45, for instance, shows an Indian master who, although resembling Śākyaśrī, is, according to HAR (57609), a mahāsiddha and belongs to a set of paintings depicting the Eighty-four Mahāsiddhas according to the system of Vajrāsana. Figs. 46–48 show Asaṅga (Thogs med) as a mahāsiddha in monastic appearance from a set of paintings depicting the Eighty-four Mahāsiddhas according to the system of Abhayākaragupta, each painting depicting three mahāsiddhas. On the reverse of the first painting (Fig. 46) is an inscribed verse identifying the upper figure as Asaṅga:
࿓࿔། །ནགས་ཀྱི་ཚུལ་དུ་དཀའ་ཐུབ་མཛད། །བྱམས་པ་ཞལ་གཟིགས་བསྟན་བཅོས་བརྩམས། །འཕགས་པ་ཐོགས་མེད་ཅེས་བྱ་བའི། །བླ་མ་དེ་ལ་ཕྱག་འཚལ་ལོ། །
@@| |nags kyi tshul du dka’ thub mdzad| |byams pa zhal gzigs bstan bcos brtsams| |’phags pa thogs med ces bya ba’i| |bla ma de la phyag ‘tshal lo| |
A painting from another set, depicting the Eighty-four Mahāsiddhas according to the system of Vajrāsana, also shows a siddha in monastic appearance (Fig. 49) at the bottom left, who has been identified by HAR (65349) as the aforementioned Suvarṇadvīpa. In addition, in other paintings depicting monk-mahāsiddhas as minor figures, some are also shown with a piece of cloth draped around the torso (Figs. 50–53), and the main figure of Fig. 50 is also depicted in this way and identified as Padmasambhava (HAR 71949). The main figure of Fig. 54 wearing this piece of cloth is even identified as Śāntideva (HAR 15431). As mentioned above, this raises the question of whether this piece of cloth represents a vest at all, or whether, also in the case of these monk-mahāsiddhas, it is an attempt to depict the uttarāsaṅga upper garment (bla gos), one of the three robes permitted for an Indian monk. But as these preliminary observations show, the more specific implications of the depiction of these masters in these robes await further investigation.
Fig. 55 shows as the two main figures most likely Śākyaśrī and an early Tibetan disciple in his Vinaya ordination lineage, surrounded by episodes from Śākyaśrī’s life. Śākyaśrī is shown as an Indian monk, not wearing a Tibetan monk’s robe. The depiction of his Tibetan disciple, wearing neither the Tibetan monk’s robe nor the special robe worn by members of the Joden communities, seems to suggest that he was following the dress rules of the Indian Vinaya. As Jackson (2010: 137) clarifies, the painting belonged to a larger set: “A label on the back identifies the painting as to be hung “second on the left” (Tib. g.yon gnyis pa), i.e., second to the right for a normal viewer, which marks this painting as the fifth thangka in a multi-painting set.” The set may therefore have depicted the abbots of one of the four communities of Śākyaśrī’s ordination lineage. For more details on this painting, see Jackson 2010: 135–137, Jackson 2011: 2–4, 53–54.
Fig. 56 is another example of members of a Joden community, the Gedün Gangpa, depicted in Indian monastic robes. The painting was commissioned in connection with the passing away of Zhönnu Jangchup, the 3rd abbot of the Gedün Gangpa. The painting consists of a double-sided thangka, showing on one side the construction of a stūpa at Gedün Gang and, on the other, the rituals and ceremonies performed during the consecration of the stūpa (Figs. 58–59). The painting also contains a long, unfortunately inaccessible inscription giving details of Zhönnu Jangchup’s life and explaining the events depicted in the painting. We learn that the stūpa was built as a reliquary shrine for Zhönnu Jangchup by Yönten Gyeltsen, the 6th abbot of the Gedün Gangpa. It is probably him who is depicted as the patron of the painting in the lower left corner, but surprisingly he is shown wearing the usual Tibetan monk’s vest rather than the special vest of the Joden communities (Fig. 57). Zhönnu Jangchup is recorded as having died at the site of his monastic foundation at Gedün Gang, and his “outer relics” (phyi rten), that is, sacred objects commissioned after his death in his memory, were erected in the vicinity of the monastery to the west of Chakri (lCags ri). It is thus possible, therefore, that the stūpa depicted in the painting represents this outer relic.
References to the Monastic Dress of the Joden Communities in Tibetan Sources
The fact that the members of the Joden communities wore a specific type of monastic dress, which differed from the normal dress of Tibetan monks, can be gleaned from mentions in Tibetan biographical and historiographical literature. Here are three such references that I have been able to find.
sPos khang ’Jam dbyangs Rin chen rgyal mtshan, dPal ldan bla ma’i rnam thar (p. 16.17–19):
འོ་སྐོལ་གཉིས་པོ་མཁན་ཆེན་བསོད་ནམས་གྲགས་པའི་སྤྱན་སྔར་སྡོམ་པ་ཐོབ་པ་ལ་ཁྱད་པར་མི་འདུག་ནའང་། ཕྱིས་འབྱུང་ཇོ་གདན་པའི་མཁན་བརྒྱུད་ཕྱར་བུ་གྱོན་པའི་ཁྲོད་དུ། བེམ་པོ་གྱོན་པ་ཆུག་པ་དེ་མི་མཛེས་པས། མཁན་ཆེན་པ་རང་གིས་མཁན་པོ་མཛད་དོ།།
‘o skol gnyis po mkhan chen bsod namms grags pa’i spyan sngar sdom pa thob pa la khyad par mi ‘dug na’ang| phyis ‘byung jo gdan pa’i mkhan brgyud phyar bu gyon pa’i khrod du| bem po gyon pa chug pa de mi mdzes pas| mkhan chen pa rang gis mkhan po mdzad do||
Kun dga’ grol mchog, Shāk mchog gi rnam thar (fol. 30a7–b1):
དེ་དུས་ཀུན་མཁྱེན་སྒ་དགོང་པ་སྐུ་ཆས་ཇོ་གདན་ཆོས་ལུང་པའི་ལུགས་ཀྱི་ཕྲག་དབྱུང་མ། དེའི་ཕྱི་ལ་སྣམ་སྟོད་དུར་ཁ་དར་ལྗང་གིས་མཐའ་ཆག་བྱས་པ་ཞིག་དང་། དབུ་ཞྭ་པཎ་ཞྭ་དམར་པོ་སྣེ་རིངས་ཅིག་གསོལ་འདུག་པས།
de dus kun mkhyen sga dgong pa sku chas jo gdan chos lung pa’i lugs kyi phrag dbyung ma| de’i phyi la snam stod dur kha dar ljang gis mtha’ chag byas pa zhig dang| dbu zhwa paṇ zhwa dmar po sne rings cig gsol ‘dug pas|
Si tu Paṇ chen Chos kyi ’byung gnas, Rang tshul drangs por brjod pa (fol. 45a7–b):
ལར་ཚོགས་སྡེ་བཞིའི་གྲས་འདི་རྣམས་ཇོ་སྟན་པའི་ཐིལ་རང་ཡིན་མོད་ཀྱི་དུས་ཕྱིས་ཛྷོང་གྷར་གྱི་སོག་དམག་སླེབ་པ་ནས་བཟུང་ཆ་ལུགས་མི་མཚུངས་པར་སོག་པོ་རྣམས་ཀྱིས་སྙད་འཚོལ་བའི་དོགས་པས་ཡིན་ཟེར་ཁག་དེར་བཞག་པའི་དོན་དུ་ཆ་ལུགས་དེར་མི་མོས་པ་དང་འབྱོར་ཆས་འདོད་པ་འགྲིགས་ནས་ཇོ་སྟན་པའི་ལུགས་ཀྱི་ཆེས་རྣམས་བོར་ཚར་ནས་སྔར་གྱི་གཙང་སིང་ངེ་བ་དང་བ་འདྲེན་པ་དེ་བསྡུས་གྲུབ་ནས་མི་འདུག་གོ།
lar tshogs sde bzhi’i gras ‘di rnams jo stan pa’i thil rang yin mod kyi dus phyis dzhong ghar gyi sog dmag slebs pa nas bzung cha lugs mi mtshungs par sog po rnams kyis snyad ‘tshol ba’i dogs pas yin zer khag der bzhag pa’i don du cha lugs der mi mos pa dang ‘byor chas ‘dod pa ‘grigs nas jo stan pa’i lugs kyi ches rnams bor tshar nas sngar gyi gtsang sing ge ba dang ba ‘dren pa de bsdus grub nas mi ‘dug go|
Bibliography
Works in Tibetan
Kun dga’ grol mchog (1507–1566). Shāk mchog gi rnam thar = Paṇḍi ta chen po shākya mchog ldan gyi rnam par thar pa zhib mo rnam par ’byed pa. Block-print, 108 fols. BUDA by BDRC W25586.
’Jigs med grags pa. Rab brtan kun bzang ’phags kyi rnam thar = rGyal rtse chos rgyal gyi rnam par thar pa dad pa’i lo thog dngos grub kyi char ’bebs. Lhasa: Bod ljongs mi dmangs dpe skrun khang, 1987.
sPos khang ’Jam dbyangs Rin chen rgyal mtshan (1348–1430). dPal ldan bla ma’i rnam thar ngo mtshar gtam gyi phreng ba. In sMon bzang dpe rnying ’tshol bsdu khang (ed.), sPos khang mkhan chen ’jam dbyangs rin chen rgyal mtshan zhabs kyi gsung ’bum. 5 vols. Lhasa: Bod ljongs bod yig dpe rnying dpe skrun khang, 2018, vol. 1, pp. 1–82.
sPos khang Thub bstan shes rab. Tshogs pa sde bzhi dang ‘brel ba’i gtsang chos lung tshogs pa dang nyang stod spos khang dgon gyi byung ba mdo tsam brjod pa sprin dkar zegs ma’i phreng ba. sPos khang rin chen rgyal mtshan gsung rab myur skyobs khang (ed.). Lhasa: Bod ljongs bod yig dpe rnying dpe skrun khang, 2020.
Bod ljongs pho brang po ta la do dam khru’u (ed.). Bod kyi rtsa che’i rig dngos sku rten khag cig gi bzo rtsal ’byung khung rab gsal me long. Beijing: Krung go yul skor dpe skrun khang, 2006.
sMon bzang = sMon bzang dpe rnying ’tshol bsdu khang (ed.). sPos khang mkhan chen ’jam dbyangs rin chen rgyal mtshan zhabs kyi gsung ’bum. 5 vols. Lhasa: Bod ljongs bod yig dpe rnying dpe skrun khang, 2018.
Tshe mchog gling Yongs ’dzin Ye shes rgyal mtshan (1713–1793). Lam rim bla brgyud = Biographies of Eminent Gurus in the Transmission Lineages of the Teachings of the Graduated Path: Being the text of Byang chub lam gyi rim pa’i bla ma brgyud pa’i rnam par thar pa rgyal bstan mdzes pa’i rgyan mchog phul byung nor bu’i phreng ba by Tshe-mchog-gling Yongs-‘dzin Ye-shes-rgyal-mtshan. 2 vols. Gedan Sungrab Minyam Gyunphel Series, vols. 18–19. New Delhi: Ngawang Gelek Demo, 1970–1972.
Si tu Paṇ chen Chos kyi ’byung gnas (1699/1700–1774). Rang tshul drangs por brjod pa = The Autobiography and Diaries of Si-tu Paṇ-chen. Edited by Lokesh Chandra with a foreword by E. Gene Smith. New Delhi: International Academy of Indian Culture, 1968.
W3CN2601 = sPos khang ’Jam dbyangs Rin chen rgyal mtshan (1348–1430). sDom gsum gyi gzhung legs par bshad pa. Manuscript, dbu med, 212 fols. BUDA by BDRC W3CN2601.
Works in European Languages
BDRC = BUDA by BDRC. https://library.bdrc.io.
Buswell, Robert E. Jr. and Donald S. Lopez Jr. 2013. The Princeton Dictionary of Buddhism. Princeton and Oxford: Princeton University Press.
Christie’s 2023 = “Three Paintings from a rare Mahasiddha Set.” The Moke Mokotoff Collection, Lot 336. Christie’s, 13–26 SEP 2023, Online 22831. https://onlineonly.christies.com/s/moke-mokotoff-collection/three-paintings-rare-mahasiddha-set-336/191847 (accessed 28.06.2024).
Ehrhard, Franz-Karl. 2002. “The Transmission of Thig le bcu drug and the bKa’ gdams glegs bam.” In Helmut Eimer and David Germano (eds.). The Many Canons of Tibetan Buddhism. Leiden: Brill, 29–56.
Essen, Gerd-Wolfgang and Tsering Tashi Thingo. 1989. Die Götter des Himalaya: Buddhistische Kunst Tibets. Die Sammlung Gerd-Wolfgang Essen. 2 vols. München: Prestel.
Fermer, Mathias et al. The Gongkar Lamdre: Masters in Khyenluk Style. Dehradun: Gongkar Choede, 2024.
HAR = Himalayan Art Resources. https://www.himalayanart.org.
Hargesheimer 2024 = Hargesheimer. Kunstauktionen Düsseldorf GmbH. “Ein Thangka von drei Lama.” Asian Art, Lot number 143, Auction 139. https://www.kunstauktionen-duesseldorf.auction/asiatika/ein-thangka-von-drei-lama–id-26769-item.html (accessed 28.06.2024).
Heimbel, Jörg. 2013. “The Jo gdan tshogs sde bzhi: An Investigation into the History of the Four Monastic Communities in Śākyaśrībhadra’s Vinaya Tradition.” In Franz-Karl Ehrhard and Petra Maurer (eds.), Nepalica-Tibetica: Festgabe for Christoph Cüppers. 2 vols. Beiträge zur Zentralasienforschung 28. Andiast: International Institute for Tibetan and Buddhist Studies GmbH, vol. 1, 187–242.
———. 2017. Vajradhara in Human Form: The Life and Times of Ngor chen Kun dga’ bzang po. Lumbini: Lumbini International Research Institute.
Jackson, David P. 1999. “Some Karma Kagyupa Paintings in the Rubin Collection.” In Marylin M. Rhie and Robert A. F. Thurman, Worlds of Transformation: Tibetan Art of Wisdom and Compassion. New York: Tibet House in association with The Shelley and Donald Rubin Foundation, 75–122.
———. 2009. Patron and Painter: Situ Panchen and the Revival of the Encampment Style. Masterworks of Tibetan Painting Series. New York: Rubin Museum of Art.
———. 2010. The Nepalese Legacy in Tibetain Painting. Masterworks of Tibetan Painting Series. New York: Rubin Museum of Art.
———. 2011. Mirror of the Buddha: Early Portraits from Tibet. Masterworks of Tibetan Painting Series. New York: Rubin Museum of Art.
Pakhoutova, Elena. “A Wondrous Great Accomplishment: a Painting of an Event.” In Amy Heller (ed.), The Arts of Tibetan Painting: Recent Research on Manuscripts, Murals and Thangkas of Tibet, the Himalayas and Mongolia (11th-19th century). https://www.asianart.com/articles/pakhoutova/index.html
Sernesi, Marta. 2015. “Bibliography and Cultural History: Remarks on the Bka’ gdams glegs bam.” In Olaf Czaja and Guntram Hazod (eds.), The Illuminating Mirror: Tibetan Studies in Honour of Per K. Sørensen on the Occasion of his 65th Birthday. Contributions to Tibetan Studies 12. Wiesbaden: Dr. Ludwig Reichert Verlag, 411–444.
The Rubin = The Rubin Museum of Art.https://rubinmuseum.org
Tucci, Giuseppe. 1989. Gyantse and Its Monasteries. English Version of Indo-Tibetica IV.1, edited by Lokesh Chandra, from a first draft translation by Uma Marina Vesci. 3 vols. New Delhi: Aditya Prakashan. First published in Italian, Roma: Reale Accademia d’Italia, 1941.
WHAV = Western Himalaya Archive Vienna. https://whav.aussereurop.univie.ac.at.