Did we adopt Hindu/Indian deities and practices?

[Varis]

There where no tsa/lung/tigle at all in India at the time of the older translations. So they certainly didn't reject it. In fact there was no defined "highest yoga tantra" either.

The Nyingma as a school did not come about until the introduction of the Sarma teachings to Tibet. That's why they're called the "old translation school". If there were no new translations there would be no old translations by default.

[heart]

There where no tsa/lung/tigle at all in India at the time of the older translations. So they certainly didn't reject it. In fact there was no defined "highest yoga tantra" either.

The Nyingma as a school did not come about until the introduction of the Sarma teachings to Tibet. That's why they're called the "old translation school". If there were no new translations there would be no old translations by default.

The transmissions of the Kama where there for several hundred years before the Sarma, that is the heart of what is called the Nyingma, the early translation.

/magnus

[nyonchung]

Interested to now that there was no tsa/lung/tigle at all in India at the time of the older translations. So they certainly didn't reject it. In fact there was no defined "highest yoga tantra" either.

There was certainly Yogatantra (and there is a late Dunhuang document giving an intersteing depiction of the nine vehicles by an Indian master- soory in French:
- Formulaire sanscrit-tibétain du Xe siècle
-édité et traduit par Joseph Hackin (1924) - Paris, Librairie Orientaliste Paul Geuthner
https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k ... rk=21459;2
The Pelliot doc.
https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b ... rk=42918;4

Then what about Buddhaguhya? a contemporary of king Tridé Tsugten / Meg Agtsom (697/700-755)
He is present in both "old" and "new" traditions
His rNal 'byor rtogs pa'i gegs sel zhes bya ba, was found by Atisha (982-1054) in Samyé and is said to be close to the "new" yoga-tantras while being "ancient translation" - Khal kha dzA ya pa NDi ta thob yig - vol. 1 - p. 334
Pls note this is mentioned by a gelug scholar, Dzaya Pendita 1 Lobzang Tendzin Trinlé (1642-1715)

And what about the Guhyasamāja? the early transmissions have both "ancient" and "new" connections, and this is intimtaely connected with some of the Eight Vidyadharas

[heart]

Then what about Buddhaguhya? a contemporary of king Tridé Tsugten / Meg Agtsom (697/700-755)
He is present in both "old" and "new" traditions
His rNal 'byor rtogs pa'i gegs sel zhes bya ba, was found by Atisha (982-1054) in Samyé and is said to be close to the "new" yoga-tantras while being "ancient translation" - Khal kha dzA ya pa NDi ta thob yig - vol. 1 - p. 334
Pls note this is mentioned by a gelug scholar, Dzaya Pendita 1 Lobzang Tendzin Trinlé (1642-1715)

And what about the Guhyasamāja? the early transmissions have both "ancient" and "new" connections, and this is intimtaely connected with some of the Eight Vidyadharas

There are overlaps between Nyingma and Sarma traditions like guhyasamaja and manjushri nama samgiti. Just means that these tantras are older than chakrasamvara, hevajra and so on and later been classified as highest yoga tantra.

/magnus

[nyonchung]

As for Vajrayogini, Shinjé Shemar the lineages go well before Virupa ... as do the kye rdo rje nas gling ma lineage 8 generations before Drogmi (so around 825 - we are still in the snga dar times ...
And what hinduism is there in the Kye rdo rje system?, the name hinduism was not even known...

There are no "overlaps between Nyingma and Sarma traditions" since it's just a question of translations, its the same Guhyasamaja for instance
On the other hand, the Dunhuang document I mentioned above shows that "nyingma" (here bka' ma) litterature was known to an Indian master active in Gansu as late as 1050 (there is reference to identifiable descendants of the royal family)
the list of 36 tantras is quite interesting and nine yanas systems is pretty different from the usual one

Unfortunely, the personnal name of this master is not given

[heart]

As for Vajrayogini, Shinjé Shemar the lineages go well before Virupa ... as do the kye rdo rje nas gling ma lineage 8 generations before Drogmi (so around 825 - we are still in the snga dar times ...
And what hinduism is there in the Kye rdo rje system?, the name hinduism was not even known...

There are no "overlaps between Nyingma and Sarma traditions" since it's just a question of translations, its the same Guhyasamaja for instance
On the other hand, the Dunhuang document I mentioned above shows that "nyingma" (here bka' ma) litterature was known to an Indian master active in Gansu as late as 1050 (there is reference to identifiable descendants of the royal family)
the list of 36 tantras is quite interesting and nine yanas systems is pretty different from the usual one

Unfortunely, the personnal name of this master is not given

I have nom idea what you are trying to say so its difficult to respond.

/magnus

[Varis]

The transmissions of the Kama where there for several hundred years before the Sarma, that is the heart of what is called the Nyingma, the early translation.

/magnus

Yes but prior to the Sarma there were a collection of different movements and lineages in Tibet, none of which called themselves the Nyingma. It wasn't until the introduction of the Sarma teachings that these different movements coalesced and became known as the Nyingma school in opposition to the Sarma. The 11th century Nyingma scholars spent a lot of time defending the early translations from the Sarmapas assertions of the superiority of the new tantras.

There are even legends from that time about encounters between Sarmapas and Nyingmapas in which the latter accuse the former of introducing Hindu practices. Ra Lotsawas encounter with Langlab Jangchub Dorje is one of them.

[nyonchung]

simply, the distinction about translations hides the continuity
but on a timeframe, some so called "new" lineages like Vajaravarahi, Shinjé (and more if you check) can be traced back to 825 (and probably earlier) this is during the snga dar, the time of early translations ...

And , even, regarding the bde mchog lU yi lugs places Saraha ten names before Telopa (born around 950?) so, taking into account that some of these siddhas are ovious contemporaries, say 5 generations, and back to 825 or so
And Hevajra probably appears a bit before the Cakrasamvara ...

Conversely, you have an Indian master teaching (probably in Tsongkha) somewhere between 1030 and 1050 a list of 36 tantras, some of them belonging to the early translations, other to the new translations (and it vindicates the indianity of some disputed "ancient" tantras)
This is more than overlapping ... this is coming as a continuity from the same source (
Think 8 Vidyadharas, too, and specially about the "tantric" Nagarjuna

Still, I don't really see what's "hindu" (if this makes sense) in the Hevajra

[heart]

The transmissions of the Kama where there for several hundred years before the Sarma, that is the heart of what is called the Nyingma, the early translation.

/magnus

Yes but prior to the Sarma there were a collection of different movements and lineages in Tibet, none of which called themselves the Nyingma. It wasn't until the introduction of the Sarma teachings that these different movements coalesced and became known as the Nyingma school in opposition to the Sarma. The 11th century Nyingma scholars spent a lot of time defending the early translations from the Sarmapas assertions of the superiority of the new tantras.

There are even legends from that time about encounters between Sarmapas and Nyingmapas in which the latter accuse the former of introducing Hindu practices. Ra Lotsawas encounter with Langlab Jangchub Dorje is one of them.

We are using the word Nyingma so we know what we are talking about but that is not really what this discussion is about.

/magnus

[Varis]

We are using the word Nyingma so we know what we are talking about but that is not really what this discussion is about.

/magnus

Yes but my initial point was that when the Sarma teachings were introduced into to Tibet one of the initial objections of Nyingma scholars to those teachings was that they believed that the new tantras included tirthika innovations. In fact, 11th century Tibetan discourse was permeated with people accusing each other of introducing tirthika practices even among the Sarmapas.

This demonstrates a clear awareness amongst Buddhists that Buddhist tantrikas had been drawing inspiration from Saivite tantras.

[heart]

We are using the word Nyingma so we know what we are talking about but that is not really what this discussion is about.

/magnus

Yes but my initial point was that when the Sarma teachings were introduced into to Tibet one of the initial objections of Nyingma scholars to those teachings was that they believed that the new tantras included tirthika innovations. In fact, 11th century Tibetan discourse was permeated with people accusing each other of introducing tirthika practices even among the Sarmapas.

Never heard a Nyingma lama say that, what is your source?

/magnus

[nyonchung]

The transmissions of the Kama where there for several hundred years before the Sarma, that is the heart of what is called the Nyingma, the early translation.

/magnus

Yes but prior to the Sarma there were a collection of different movements and lineages in Tibet, none of which called themselves the Nyingma. It wasn't until the introduction of the Sarma teachings that these different movements coalesced and became known as the Nyingma school in opposition to the Sarma. The 11th century Nyingma scholars spent a lot of time defending the early translations from the Sarmapas assertions of the superiority of the new tantras.

There are even legends from that time about encounters between Sarmapas and Nyingmapas in which the latter accuse the former of introducing Hindu practices. Ra Lotsawas encounter with Langlab Jangchub Dorje is one of them.

We are using the word Nyingma so we know what we are talking about but that is not really what this discussion is about.

/magnus

Legends,
The main lineage that preserved early translations tantras is the Zur one - if not from a tertön's help (Ratna Lingpa) it would have disapearred from Zur Ugpalung itself
Texts were found here and there (by Atisha, Sakya Pendita), but their linéeage transmission was broken (just read Nyangrel Nyima Özer on the subject) plus a few family lines of specific yidams (the Sakya Phurpa being the most famous). Like it or nor, termas saved the nyingmapa teachings

As for Langlab Jangchub Dorjé (two teachers bear this name) he is the disciple of Dré Atsara (again two bearing this name) and there are serious chronological questions
As for all the period in between 843 and 973 (or any date you like to mark the beginning of snga dar) for most Tibetant this 130 years is quashed into 70 years one.
For instance, if one looks closely into the traditions around another important figure, Nub Yönten Gyatso, one may find that there are necessarily two Nub Sanggyé Yeshé
Interesting point is that Yönten Gyatso had an Indian master (and the Dunhuang doc shows that Indians had "old" transmissions (and that possibly some "old" texts were actually translated between 843 and 973 ...)
Yönten Gyatso transmitted part of the bka' ma, notably to Zurchen Shakya Jungné (1002-1062)

Many "old" lineages were disregarded due to the poor degree of practice, illiteracy (again read Nyangrel), even Khön Könchog Gyelpo felt ashamed at one point of his nyingma heritage, and you are missing a key point, that many families of ngagpas (starting with the illustrious Khön Sakyapas) adopted the "new" traditions (another good example, the family of Lhodrag Lekyi Dorjé, Tsongkhapa's master), one reason being that the "old" tantras were not easily accessible ... and that, anyway, full "old" buddhist cursus was not anymore available ... not to mention the rarity of texts.

Oh this one came in between:

"Buddhist tantrikas had been drawing inspiration from Saivite tantras" this has to be demonstrated - which tantras namely? did any 11th Tibetan polemist had a clear knowledge of Shaiva tantras? I doubt this.
Regarding Tibetan polemics, who wrote that, exactly?
There are a few shaiva imports, but later (some alchemic texts)

[Varis]

Never heard a Nyingma lama say that, what is your source?

/magnus

When I have some time I'll find them for you and post them here.

"Buddhist tantrikas had been drawing inspiration from Saivite tantras" this has to be demonstrated - which tantras namely? did any 11th Tibetan polemist had a clear knowledge of Shaiva tantras? I doubt this.
Regarding Tibetan polemics, who wrote that, exactly?
There are a few shaiva imports, but later (some alchemic texts)

You should read the Saiva Age by Dr. Sanderson.
There's a commentary to the Chakrasamvara Tantra (covered in the aforementioned paper) that recommends the guru externally pose as a Saiva Siddhantika and initiate Brahmin boys into Saivite mandalas while secretly initiating the talented ones into Vajrayana. It's easy to infer that the Indian Buddhist Vajrayanis were intimately familiar with Saivite tantra considering you can't initiate someone into something you haven't been initiated into yourself.

[nyonchung]

Never heard a Nyingma lama say that, what is your source?

/magnus

When I have some time I'll find them for you and post them here.

"Buddhist tantrikas had been drawing inspiration from Saivite tantras" this has to be demonstrated - which tantras namely? did any 11th Tibetan polemist had a clear knowledge of Shaiva tantras? I doubt this.
Regarding Tibetan polemics, who wrote that, exactly?
There are a few shaiva imports, but later (some alchemic texts)

You should read the Saiva Age by Dr. Sanderson.
There's a commentary to the Chakrasamvara Tantra (covered in the aforementioned paper) that recommends the guru externally pose as a Saiva Siddhantika and initiate Brahmin boys into Saivite mandalas while secretly initiating the talented ones into Vajrayana. It's easy to infer that the Indian Buddhist Vajrayanis were intimately familiar with Saivite tantra considering you can't initiate someone into something you haven't been initiated into yourself.

a commentary to, not the root tantra, and such literature has to be taken with with a pinch of salt, since many siddhas and sadhakas weren't brahmin and please can tell me how can a non-brahmin initiate brahmins? - it's not easy to fool somebody about one's cast, even nowadays (a brahmin will probably laugh at this suggestion) - and it had been demonstrated in other places that this proximity is not that great (Dycskowski, some of Shaiva and Yogini tantras are pretty late and largely postdate Hevajra and Cakrasambhava) and (I just checked the table of contents) we may fall in a classical chronological trap, not to mention mistaking form with content
It seems that in the the case of Kathmandu valley, who played a key role in Vajrayana transmission, Buddhists had for long the upper hand in manipulating external forms
Buddhism was probaly iconic before Shaivism, and as for Bhairava cult, it's largely a descendant of the yaksha-cult and of both local and clan/family deities - kuladevatas are still actively worship under Shaiva, Shakta, Vaishnava or occasionaly Bauddha disguise in Nepal, and in large swaths of India, but rarely mentioned

[Varis]

a commentary to, not the root tantra, and such literature has to be taken with with a pinch of salt

Nonsense. Most of the tantras are in coded language with the exception of a few like the Kalachakra. They can't be understood without commentary, period.

Since many siddhas and sadhakas weren't brahmin and please can tell me how can a non-brahmin initiate brahmins?

Who said that a non-Brahmin cannot initiate a Brahmin? Saiva Siddhantins don't believe this.

[Reindeer Milk]

"Buddhist tantrikas had been drawing inspiration from Saivite tantras" this has to be demonstrated - which tantras namely? did any 11th Tibetan polemist had a clear knowledge of Shaiva tantras? I doubt this.

A resounding yes. Elizabeth English summarizes this in her _Vajrayogini: Her Visualization, Rituals, and Forms_:

A formative influence upon the Vajrayoginī cult was that of non-dual Shaivism. Pioneering research in this area by Sanderson has shown that the highest Buddhist Tantras be startlingly reliant upon non-dual Shaiva sources; so much so that it amounts to no less than what he calls ‘pious plagiarism. Sanderson estimates that in the root text of the Chakrasamvara tradition, Laghusamvaratantra, ‘long passages, amounting to some two hundred verses, nearly a third of the whole, can be seen to have been redacted from Shaiva originals,’ which – since this part of Shaiva canon is itself only partly preserved – must indicate an impressive debt.

Many have since tried to inject other interpretations to critique Sanderson, but when you get into the meat of Sanderson's evidence for this, it leaves practically no doubt that this was the case.

His work can be found here: https://oxford.academia.edu/AlexisSanderson

[heart]

We are using the word Nyingma so we know what we are talking about but that is not really what this discussion is about.

/magnus

Legends,

So you are rejecting the transmissions of Guru Rinpoche, Vimalamitra, Nub Sangye Yeshe and Vairochana?

/magnus

[Nalanda]

BTW who is this "we"?

We are Buddhists. I assumed we all here are?

[Reindeer Milk]

You should read the Saiva Age by Dr. Sanderson.
There's a commentary to the Chakrasamvara Tantra (covered in the aforementioned paper) that recommends the guru externally pose as a Saiva Siddhantika and initiate Brahmin boys into Saivite mandalas while secretly initiating the talented ones into Vajrayana. It's easy to infer that the Indian Buddhist Vajrayanis were intimately familiar with Saivite tantra considering you can't initiate someone into something you haven't been initiated into yourself.

For reference to those reading: The Saiva Age: The Rise and Dominance of Saivism During the Early Medieval Period.

Relevant is the chapter titled The Development of Tantric Buddhism Through the Adoption and Adaptation of Saiva and Sakta Saiva Models, particularly the subsection titled The Yoginitantras and the Full Appropriation of Vidyapitha Saivism.

[nyonchung]

We are using the word Nyingma so we know what we are talking about but that is not really what this discussion is about.

/magnus

Legends,

So you are rejecting the transmissions of Guru Rinpoche, Vimalamitra, Nub Sangye Yeshe and Vairochana?
/magnus

egends was about the Langlab / Ra meeting, ... your logic is strange

If you read some of my posts before, I'm in the opinion that a good number of bKa' ma texts were certainly known in India (as demonstrated in the Dunhuang doc. I mentioned)
One of the problem, is that later nyingmapas (and most Tibetans actually ) confused greatly the situation by trying to crush a 60 year period they pretend never existed, the problem being that we have almost no contemporary sources, except for a copy of the sBa bshad and a few Dunhuang documents (some like the one I mentioned needs certainly to be re-evaluated, since great progress hade been made - the study I mentioned is more than 90 years old) and a few bönpo texts I think.
The Khulung lineages are pretty interesting since, if you put them in the proper chronological frame, show that (contrary to what Nyangrel Nyima Özer describes) there was still some Dharma scholarly activity in Tibet during the me ro period (Nub Yönten Gyatso is described sometimes as the last translater of the snga dar, but was certainly active after 1000 ...), that some Indians were travelling around (confirmed by the Dunhuang doc. and the Zur tradition - the Zur's ancestor was an Indian who travelled to mDo smad) and some Tibetans travelled to Nepal and Drusha

Otherwise Samten Karmay showed years back that the Phur pa lineage is well documented in a Dunhuang doc.