A Tibetan Inscription from Rgyal Lha-Khaṅ; and a note on Tibetan Chronology from A.D. 841 to A.D. 1042

Abstract

According to the Deb-ther Sṅon-po of ẖgos Lo-tsa-ba the lha-hhaṅ of Rgyal Lug-lhas in Hphan-po was founded by Sna-nam Rdo-rjedbaṅ-phyug in a.d. 1012 during the early years of the restoration of Buddhism after its suppression by Glaṅ-dar-ma. The outline of that revival, known in Tibetan as- Bstan-pa phyi-dar—the Later Spreading of the Doctrine—is vague and the details scanty and uncertain. From the Deb-sṅon (Deb-ther Sṅon-po) it can be gathered that, although in Central Tibet the religion could be practised only in secret, in parts of the kingdom remote from the capital—such as Mṅa-ris in the west and Khams in the east—there remained communities of Buddhist teachers untouched by the persecution.

bcan pos who were not khri: Royal titulature and the succession to the throne in the Tibetan Empire

“…Even though it has been demonstrated that Tibetan language remained in use in Central Asia after the fall of the Tibetan Empire, the subject matter of the texts identified as post-imperial differs considerably from that of the texts discussed in the paper 3 . Neither do we have unambiguously dated post-imperial documents comparable in their content and language to those under discussion; for instance, the pillar inscription of Rgyal-lug-lhas, tentatively dated to 1012 by Richardson (1957: 65), markedly diverges in its linguistic traits and thematic interests from the imperial inscriptions 4 . Any hypothesis arguing for the post-imperial date of the sources used in the paper would have to indicate persons or institutions that could have had not only (propagandic) interest but also financial means to sponsor the literary activity of the circles in Central Asia that were primarily concerned with composing eulogies to the Tibetan royal family or creating prayers dedicated to Tibetan bcan po s. There is no reason why any of the non-Tibetan rulers in Central Asia should commission such works after the demise of the Tibetan polity and should even pay the scribes for writing eulogies to its rulers.…”

“…The use of the name Dar-ma in Xin Tangshu would therefore indicate that the information concerning this person came to the ears of Chinese historiographers only after his death. 55 Events that followed the death of Khri Gcug-lde-brcan were discussed in more detail by Richardson 1957Richardson , 1998e [19711998f [1988; Petech 1994;Vitali 1996: 541-51;and Yamaguchi 1996. I think that without any external or new evidence such as archaeological finds or discovery of hitherto unknown OT documents, the study of the Tibetan history of the period following the death of Khri Gcug-lde-brcan on the basis of post-imperial works alone is juggling with dates with no foothold in reality.…”