24 Groundless Paths Bal10 (1345-1439; a disciple of both Buton and Dolpopa) However, as is often the case in the Tibetan tradition, Tsongkhapa does not acknowledge these Tibetan scriptural sources.11 By contrast, he often refers explicitly to Ngog Lotsawa (usually calling him “the great being”) According to the colophon of LSSP, it is based on the oral teachings that Tsongkhapa received from the two Sakya masters T o n d ru b R inchen12 (1309-1385) and Rendawa Shonnu Lodro Tsongkhapa also received extensive instructions on the AA and its c o m m e n taries from Nyaon Kunga Bal and at N yetang D ew achen13 M onastery (based on a com m entary w ritten by Jamkya N am ka Bal,14 one o f Nyalshigs nine m ajor students, w ho were am ong the key persons to transm it the teachings on the AA during the thirteen th century in Tibet) As Sparham puts it, the LSSP is “looking th ro ug h the Buton and N yaon commentaries, as it were, at the earlier Tibetan and Indian com m entarial tradition.”15 T hroughout, LSSP exhibits a very th oro ug h twofold com m entarial stru c ture of treating each one o f the seventy points o f the AA th ro u g h usually starting with (1) presenting the pertinent general topic and then (2) explain ing the verses o f the AA pro per throu g h a three-tier format Said form at consists of (2a) the Vivrtis introductory passage for a given section followed by (2b) a w ord-for-w ord com m entary on the AAs verses (usually based on A ryavim uktisenas Vrtti or direcly on the prajnaparam ita sutras) and (2c) a subcom m entary on H aribh ad ras Vivrti (often based on the latters Alokd) For the m ost part, PSD consists o f materials u n d e r (1) and PBG, o f m ateri als un d er (2b), but both PSD and PBG also include passages from (2c) Also, there is a certain degree of overlap between the contents o f PSD and PBG and the headings in the latter are almost always identical to those in the form er (though PBG omits som e of them ) Somewhat surprisingly, LSSP (and thus the corresponding sections o f PBG) often om it m ore or less extensive pas sages o f the actual text o f the AA and, in some o f these cases, replace certain words o f the AA by synonym s or glosses Thus, neither LSSP n o r PBG can be considered as w ord-by-w ord com m entaries in the strict sense.16 C om pared to the size o f LSSP in term s o f page num bers, PSD and PBG make up thirty-one and eleven percent, respectively However, w ithout the above-m entioned duplications o f parts o f PSD in PBG, the actual contents of these two texts together total only thirty-nine percent o f LSSP Introduction 25 Topic/Chapter LSSP PSD/PBG Percent Intro, an d knowledge o f all aspects 69317 Knowledge o f the path Knowledge o f entities 186/59 25/9 152 41/17 25/11 60 21/9 35/15 C om plete training in all aspects 332 100/43 30/13 C u lm inating training 149 56/21 37/14 Serial training 4/1 44/11 Instantaneous training 3/3 33/33 101 48/21 47/21 Total pages 1494 461/164 31/11 Total contents 1494 461/127 31/8 D harm akaya PSD often abbreviates an d /o r omits large parts of LSSPs detailed general topics and supplem entary issues In particular, it leaves out m any quotations, most of LSSP s discussions o f positions that are controversial between differ ent masters, and all o f the latter s polemics against other masters, schools, and earlier Tibetan com m entators on the AA (probably an expression of Patrul Rinpoches well-known nonsectarian attitude) There are also significant om is sions in term s o f M adhyam aka versus Mere Mentalists in the section on the disposition (the dharm adhatu) and in the explanation o f emptiness accord ing to the Vijrianavadins (in the section on the equipm ent of wisdom), which could suggest Patrul Rinpoches tacit disagreement with LSSPs treatm ent of Yogacara in these contexts.18 Also, PSD often rearranges and/or switches some of the headings and contents o f LSSP to other places in its presentation As for PSD an d PBG consisting alm ost exclusively o f excerpts from LSSP, certain circles w ithin the N yingm a School (such as the m ajor m onastic col leges at the Dzogchen an d N am drol Ling monasteries) hold th at LSSP was actually com posed by Longchen Rabjam pa (1308-1363) and later became presented u n d e r Tsongkhapa s name However, others, such as the c o n te m p o rary great N yingm a scholar and D zogchen m aster Alak Zenkar R inpoche,19 not agree with this.20 The late Dzogchen K henpo Tubten Tsondru P iintso s21 (1920-1979) SN says: There is an oral tradition of the great Dzogchen Khenpos that says the following The D harm a Lord, Patrul Rinpoche, composed his General Topics, W ord Commentary, and Progressive Stages o f Meditation of prajriaparamita in accordance with the com m entary o f the great 26 Groundless Paths Venerable Tsongkhapa, the Golden Garland That these three are based on said com m entary of Venerable Tsongkhapa [means n o th ing but that they] represent the pure assertions of the followers of the early translations because [the Golden Garland] is [actually] the prajnaparam ita com mentary by the Omniscient Longchenpa.22 Thus, to this day, certain N yingm a teachers consider Patrul Rinpoches texts on the AA simply as the authentic continuation o f their schools indig enous com m entarial tradition on this text According to them , it is justified for Patrul Rinpoche to use extensive passages o f LSSP in his PSD and PBG w ithout m entioning Tsongkhapas nam e since the latter has only copied Longchenpa and Patrul Rinpoche just gives back to the N yingm apas w hat is rightfully theirs anyway Haas reports further ramifications o f this position: Renow ned contem porary m K han pos such as m K han po rN am grol and m K han po Padm a Shes rab o f the rNying m a m onastery rN am grol gling teach that Longchenpa has com posed a com m en tary on the Abhisam aydlam kdra called Rin chen them skas (Jewel Staircase), which is referred to by him in his other scriptures, such as the Yid bzhin m dzod y b ut is not preserved.23 The rN ying m a pa scholars refer to the circumstance that m any o f Klong chen p a s works are lost and that one therefore can at least not exclude the possibility that dPal sprul com posed his com m entaries according to the model o f Klong chen pa s Abhisam aydlam kdra com m entary This a ssu m p tion can neither be proven n o r refuted However, one can take it for granted that both Tsong kha pa and dPal sprul would have referred to Klong chen pa at least sometim es if they had know n such a co m mentary Since there are no indications for that, such assum ptions seem to be rather signs o f h u rt rN ying m a pride m K han po Padm a Shes rab holds the opinion that dPal sprul com posed sPyi don and yBru gy rel for the rDza Ser shul dG on pa, a m onastery that com bined dGe lugs pa and rNying m a tra d i tions and in which dPal sprul is said to have taught frequently.24 Indeed, several sources confirm that the th ro n e holder Lha ram s p a ’i dGe bshes T h ub bstan rGyal m tshan was a student o f dPal sprul.25 However, concrete indications that dPal sprul taught him the Abhisam aydlam kdra could not be found.26 O ne could add here that it is not only T songkhapa and Patrul Rinpoche who neither m ention n o r quote a co m m en tary on the AA by Longchenpa, but none o f the existing N yingm a com m entaries does so either (n o r any of the Introduction 27 Kagyii, Sakya, or Gelug com m entaries that I have consulted) Furtherm ore, the title of the lost AA co m m en tary that is listed in L ongchenpas ow n index o f his com positions— A Clear Analysis o f the M ain Body o f the O rn a m e n t of Clear Realization—clearly suggests that it only deals with the “m ain body ” o f the AA, w hich all com m entaries explicitly identify as just the overview o f the eight topics o f the AA in its verses 1.3-17 Thus, it is h ardly conceivable that the size o f this com m entary w ould com e anywhere near the massive size and the detail o f LSSP, which com m ents on the entirety o f the AA and contains m any extensive discussions o f different positions and supplem entary topics O f course, the same in term s of size and detail with regard to the AA goes for L ongchenpas above-m entioned Jewel Staircase since his ow n index explicitly describes it as a general w ork on all five M aitreya texts and not as a specific com m entary on the AA alone Last, but not least, the overall style and form at o f LSSP seems m o re typical for Tsongkhapa than for Longchenpa, such as the emphasis on applying correct reasoning, the n u m erou s lengthy discussions of controversial positions between different m asters and schools, the frequent polemics against other masters and schools, and repeated praises o f his own explanations as being superior to others In sum, according to the co n te m porary N yingm a m aster Dzogchen Ponlop Rinpoche, w ithin the N yingm a tradition there is no dispute about Longchenpa having w ritten a com m en tary on the AA, b u t there is dispute as to w hether it is identical to LSSP.27 In any case, no m atter who the true a u th o r of LSSP is, as m en tio ned above, there is no d o u b t that this text greatly relies on m any exegetical tem plates for the AA that were in place before bo th Longchenpa and Tsongkhapa and did definitely not originate in either the N yingm a or the Gelug traditions In that vein, the above argum ent by some N yingm apas that LSSP belongs to their tra dition since it was com posed by Longchenpa could equally be applied to LSSP s dem onstrable great reliance on Nyalshig, Buton, an d N yaon by saying, “Give back the Kadampas, Sakyas, and Jonangpas what is theirs.” In addition, given the chronological order o f these five masters, if LSSP were by Longchenpa, it would follow that not only Tsongkhapa copied Longchenpa, but that both Nyaon and Buton did so too (or that Longchenpa copied Buton), and also that Longchenpa copied from Nyalshig However, no such allegations were ever raised by anybody within or outside o f the N yingm a School Last but not least, there is no obvious reason to distrust Tsongkhapa s colophon to his LSSP saying that he based his text on the oral instructions from the two Sakya masters T o n d ru b Rinchen and Rendawa, who are well-known as two o f his prim ary early teachers As for PSD and PBG, it is definitely striking that both lack any in tro d u c tory verses of paying hom age and com m itting to com pose the text as well as a colophon stating the authorship and the circumstances o f the com position, 28 Groundless Paths which are so custom ary in the tradition o f Indo-Tibetan Buddhist treatises Instead, bo th works start immediately with the first headings o f the tex tual layout that Patrul Rinpoche took over from LSSP.28 The only two other AA-related materials com posed by him that begin with an hom age and end with a colophon explicitly stating Patrul Rinpoches authorship are his Concise Enumeration o f the Paths and Bhum is o f Bodhisattvas and Brief Progressive Stages o f Meditation In the colophon o f the latter text, Patrul Rinpoche even nam es Tsongkhapa as his m ain source, whereas he does not so in any of his other AA works In sum, Patrul Rinpoche clearly does not sign as the author o f either PSD or PBG.29 This makes it very unlikely that he him self consid ered or claimed these two texts as being his own comm entaries, though it is attested by his followers that he used them w hen teaching on the AA In general, Patrul Rinpoche is well know n for having com posed texts and compilations of scriptural m aterials for his own studies and as aids for his students However, he obviously did not plan to actually publish all of these works (m any o f th em were only published after his death by his followers.) This seems to be one of the reasons why his collected works contain a n u m b e r o f com m entaries an d texts w ithout the custom ary introductory verses and a colophon Thus, in the case o f PSD and PBG, the m ost likely reason for their lack of explicit authorship, introductory verses, and colophon is that Patrul Rinpoche did not regard them as independent com m entaries o f his own It rather seems that he com posed these texts to present the m ajor them es of the very volum inous LSSP in a m ore accessible form in order to facilitate a synop tical study o f the topics of the AA proper This is supported by PSD and PBG consistently om itting LSSPs num erou s quotations, its extensive discussions o f controversial points between different masters and schools, and all o f its polemics against oth er masters and schools In sum, th ough PSD and PBG consist almost entirely o f excerpts from LSSP, they nevertheless possess great value from their own side as com m entarial works on the AA For Patrul Rinpoche consistently adheres to the principle o f specifically selecting and skillfully com bining essential passages from LSSP that are focused on u n ado rn ed inform ation rather than on disputes, polem ics, and lengthy scriptural sources PSD and PBG also exhibit a significant am o u n t o f creatively rearranging and newly blending distinct passages from LSSP T hrough all o f this, Patrul Rinpoches two texts assume a character of their own that clearly distinguishes th em from LSSP in terms o f style, for mat, stringency, and accessibility By virtue o f these features and their relative brevity, Patrul R inpoches two texts represent convenient tools to elucidate the m ain them es o f a complex w ork like the AA in a concise and yet c o m preh en sive m ann er.30 ... would follow that not only Tsongkhapa copied Longchenpa, but that both Nyaon and Buton did so too (or that Longchenpa copied Buton), and also that Longchenpa copied from Nyalshig However, no such... who neither m ention n o r quote a co m m en tary on the AA by Longchenpa, but none o f the existing N yingm a com m entaries does so either (n o r any of the Introduction 27 Kagyii, Sakya, or... both lack any in tro d u c tory verses of paying hom age and com m itting to com pose the text as well as a colophon stating the authorship and the circumstances o f the com position, 28 Groundless