mercredi 18 octobre 2023

About Avadhūtipa, Damarupa and missing links

Damarupa & Avadhūtipa, Treasury of Lives, Sakya Ngor, 1400 - 1499, Rubin Museum of Art

Damarupa, or Ḍamarupa, who is part of the Lamdré (lam ‘bras) transmission of the Sakya school is considered a mahāsiddha, and a student of Khāṇapa, who is considered a student of Virūpa. Khāṇa(pa) is part of the 84 mahāsiddhas, but not Damarupa. Damarupa is instrumental in the upward attribution of the 'Vajra Verses' to Virūpa. The Indian transmission of the “whispered lineage” going down to the Tibetan Drokmi lotsāva (992? - d.1043/1072) is said to have reached him going progressively back in time via Gayadhara (10-11th century), Avadhūtipa, Damarupa, the Lamdré Khāṇapa and the Lamdré Virūpa. Five of the 'Vajra Verses' are said to have been brought out from Oḍḍiyāna by Lamdré Khāṇapa later on[1].

From: Taking the Result as the Path (Cyrus R. Stearns, Tibetan Classics 4)

For clarity, and if that wasn't clear until now, I myself belong to the category of sentient beings with afflictions and impure appearances.

In Taking the Result as the Path (Cyrus R. Stearns, Tibetan Classics 4), the “Vajra Verses” of Lamdré Virūpa are attributed to a Virūpa having lived in the 7-8th century). Compare with Gayadhara’s lifetime (10-11th century) and with the trio Lamdré Avadhūtipa, Damarupa and Lamdré Khāṇapa to fill up a gap of 300 years… Lamdré Avadhūtipa and Damarupa carry a heavy responsibility in maintaining the lineage uninterrupted, but since it is a “whispered lineage”, there is a lot of leeway for instructions through visions, dreams, travels to Oddiyana , heavenly ascents etc. Frankly we don’t know where or when the “Vajra Verses” were written, but it’s safe to assume their final version in Tibetan translation dates at the earliest from the time of Sachen Nyingpo and his sons (12th-13th century), which is already quite a bit closer to the Virūpa of the Amṛtasiddhi.

Gayadhara and Damarupa (detail HA352)

Do we know Lamdré Avadhūtipa and Damarupa from other sources than Sakya literature? Representations of this duo seem to date from the 15th-16th century onwards. Nothing in Mahāsiddha hagiographies. Even the website The Treasury of Lives can’t do better than to publish a thangka with the both of them (see above).

I was hoping to discover more about Damarupa’s life from the website Maṇḍalas Life, but nothing there either. I haven’t looked into Tibetan sources, apart from TBRC not listing him as an author. The Sakya Research Center mentions three works (13th-16th century) in which Damarupa is mentioned[3]. I admit it’s not a thorough search, but I have a hunch it may not be worth the effort. Drop me a line if you know more about Damarupa in more ancient settings. The best bet is Taranatha's Life of Krsnacarya-Kāṇha (David Templeman, LTWA, 1989), where Damarupa seems to have been inspired by a certain Dhumapa (p. 53-54), but that hagiography dates from the 16th century. 

Lamdré Avadhūtipa, top right (detail HA352)
Vajradhara, Nairātmyā and Lamdré Khāṇapa at the right

Next step is to look into Lamdré Avadhūtipa, who at least must have met or seen Damarupa to receive the transmission. There are mixed results. Dīpamkara Śrījnāna Atiśa (982-1054) is said to have studied with a tantric yogi Avadhūtipa from the age of 11 years onwards, and during 7 years, studying Madhyamaka and Tantric practices.
Historical information for Avadhūtipa is elusive in that there are at least four individuals with this name in works preserved in the Tibetan Tengyur. Tibetan historians writing after the fourteenth century also provide varied accounts of his life and his relationship to Atiśa. therefore limit the references about Avadhūtipa and his teachings to works written by Atiśa, the early Kadampa biographies of Atiśa, and the early Kadampa commentaries on Atiśa’s Middle Way.” Jewels of the Middle Way: The Madhyamaka Legacy of Atisa and His Early Tibetan Followers, James B. Apple
From this Avadhūtipa, Atiśa received “the special instruction (upadeśa) of apratiṣṭhita [madhyamaka] darśana[5]. So this one shared the same view as "Advayavajra Avadhūtipa". They seem pretty close.
In another work translated while in India, Atiśa’s Open Basket of Jewels directly cites Avadhūtipa three times. The first citation emphasizes the nondifference between gnosis and the dharmadhātu, the second citation advocates practicing the vehicle of secret mantra and attaining Mahāmudrā, and the third citation prescribes not judging others while continuously meditating on emptiness. As we shall see, the nondifference between gnosis and the dharmadhātu (the realm of reality) will be a major source of controversy between Atiśa and his students trained in Tibet.” (Jewels of the Middle Way)
James B. Apple published fragments of translations from Atiśa’s Open Basket of Jewels in his article Atiśa’s Open Basket of Jewels: A Middle Way Vision in Late Phase Indian Vajrayāna, 2010. Atiśa’s Avadhūtipa seems to be the “Advayavajra Avadhūtipa” who met Śrī Śabaripāda.
My lama, the great venerable [one], the lord of yogis, Avadhūtipa[6] [Nāropa?!], with previously acquired supernatural cognition, had a vision and heard [Nāgārjuna’s] teaching, seeing him while dwelling on Śrī-Parvata. A disciple of the Ārya, the Venerable Nāgābodhi, who is renowned as Śrī Śabaripāda, also always listened to the dharma.”
This small passage of Atiśa could well have led to the many spin-offs about Maitripa and Śrī Śabaripāda. Avadhūtipa is not really a name and can simply design anyone living like an avadhūta. Any association with Lamdré Avadhūtipa? We find yet another (?) Avadhūtipa in the Kālacakra milieu.
Kālacakrapāda the Elder had many students, among whom were three known as Kālacakrapāda the Younger: Avadhūtipa, Śrībhadrabodhi and Nālandāpa; also Nāropa, Sādhuputra, Ratnakaragupta, Mokṣakaragupta, Vinayākaramati, Siṃhadhvaya and Anantajaya.” (Kalacakra.org)
Avadhūtipa is also sometimes said to be another name of Maitripa/Advayavajra, and Marpa is said to have met with Avadhūtipa.
Mar pa is said to meet him again during his second, and last, journey to India, when Nāropa was in the practice and unavailable.656 At that time, Maitripa was in the charnel ground of the Mountain Blazing like Fire, in the east of India. The text states that it was at that time that Maitrepa–called Avadhūtipa–accepted Mar pa as his disciple; he gave him the same transmissions as before and induced in him profound meditation experiences. 656 Tāranātha & Templeman, 11-13.” (A Lineage in Time : The Vicissitudes of the rNgog pa bka’ brgyud from the 11th through 19th centuries, Cécile Ducher, 2019, p. 182)
I looked in the English translation of Tāranātha’s The Seven Instruction Lineages, but the name “Avadhūtipa” is not to be found there on the indicated pages. I believe Padma Karpo[7] does mention it, but the name given to Maitrīpa by Śavaripa was “Advayavajra Avadhūtipa”. So it may not be the same individual as Lamdré Avadhūtipa. A more likely candidate would be an Avadhūtipa in Nepal, whose disciples hung out with members of the Bharo clan. This Avadhūtipa is also called “Paiṇḍapātika the Great” (bsod nyoms pa), a kṣatriya native from Eastern Bengal (BA p. 390-391), specialised in Vajravārāhī (phag mo gzhung drug)[8]. That was in the 11th century. But we would still have only Damarupa and Lamdré Khāṇapa to bridge the gap with Lamdré Virūpa from the 7-8th century. “Paiṇḍapātika the Great” or one of his students could make a likely candidate for Lamdré Avadhūtipa. Interestingly, texts on Kālacakra have been written both by Kālacakrapāda (many) and by Paiṇḍapātika (one).

Atiśa’s and Marpa’s Avadhūtipa seems to correspond more or less to Advayavajra/Maitripa. But does Lamdré Avadhūtipa, especially when he’s associated with Damarupa? There also is the story of Gayadhara impersonating Maitrīpa, pretending to be Maitrīpa to 'Gos Khug pa Lhas-btsas (11th), a student of Atiśa, while trying to sell instructions to him (Luminous Lives, Cyrus R. Stearns, p. 95[9]). If hagiographs themselves give away this sort of information, we better be careful. Who can trust Gayadhara? Or according to Tāranātha (1575-1634), who can trust "the silly Tibetans"? 
"After that, the Tibetans, when recounting the story of the debate with Śāntipa, give the meaning quite incorrectly and in Aryadeśa there are not even any oral accounts of it. The following is said about Tibet—“Bhotā Svana Bāktya Sāmaya Coteka Siddhi Sādhaka Kya,” which means, “What the Tibetans say is like the sounds of dogs barking, or like the sound of a Siddha or Sādhaka who has abandoned his vows". One should know how the common lies of the silly Tibetans have been thus compiled." The Seven Instruction Lineages
Gayadhara and Drokmi (detail HA18330)

What to do with Damarupa? Frankly the Lamdré lineage looks quite “interrupted” to me, if it has to go all the way back to Lamdré Kāṇhapa[10] and to his guru, Lamdré Virūpa, in the 7-8th century. Iconographically Damarupa & Avadhūtipa could be brothers and they even look a lot like Virūpa, but the gap… the gap. Especially with interdisciplinary projects like the Haṭhayoga Project, academics specializing in Tibetan matters really ought to look more seriously into ways of dating Tibetan texts and considering apocrypha, pseudepigrapha, revelations and their attributions, because otherwise anything attributed to a 7-8th century Virūpa, a Padmasambhava (or rather his or king Trisong Detsen’s “direct students” or “translators”) etc. in Tibetan materials would always or often predate Indian, Chinese, Nepalese, Mongolian etc. materials.

Lamdré lineage going all the way back to Lamdré Virūpa (HA352)

***

[1] The Life of Mahasiddha Virūpa, Lama Choedak Yuthok, Sakya Losal Choe Dzong, Canberra, Australia.

[3] sna tshogs thob pa'i gsan yig [2007] (557) lam 'bras lam gsan yig [2007] (139), attributed to 'phags pa blo gros rgyal mtshan/ (1235–1280)

bde stong mchog gi sgra sgrog Da ru pa gong dkar lam 'bras bla brgyud [dig], attributed to theg chen chos rje kun dga' bkra shis/ (1349–1425)

DA ma ru pa gong dkar ba rnam thar I_B1 [xyl] (38a) attributed to rgya ston byang chub dbang rgyal/ (1470–ca. 1540/50s)

Also: David Templeman, Taranatha's Life of Krsnacarya-Kāṇha, Library of Tibetan Works & Archives (1989)

"[Dhumapa] also performed the ācārya's offices and also took the time to beat the drum known as a pataha and to blow the various musical instruments. He became known as Dhumapa due to the sound of the music he made. It is said that by meditation on the yoga of Vajranairātma, he was able to attain the very highest state, and that supported by the Hevajra Tantra he attained siddhahood." (p. 53-54) 

[5] Colophon to the Sūtrasamuccayasañcayārtha, from Jewels of the Middle Way

[6] James Apple adds the note : "Jo bo rje’i gsung ’bum (806.18) adds nā ro pa". The original text seems to mention only Avadhūtipa. This needs to be looked into further.

[7] Pad ma dkar po 1527-1592) in his 'Brug pa'i chos 'byung.

[8] Passed on to lDong ngar ba, who bestowed it on Paiṇḍapātika junior, that we know from the Bharo clan, where he was a house priest.

[9]At that point, Lord Gayadhara was staying in Gro mo. They met on the banks of a river and ['Gos, Lo tsa ba] asked about his story. [Gayadhara] replied, "I am the Victor Maitrīpa." Since he was expert in Dharma and also had great oral instructions, ['Gos Lo tsa ba] was pleased, and invited him. On the path as they traveled to Tibet, the translator heard the news that all the Mon people from before were waiting along all the paths, saying, "All those we said were ghosts passing by last year were a Tibetan translator carrying much gold. He invited a paṇḍita, and is returning."

When the translator and his attendant discussed it, [Se] Shes rab smon lam, who was a disciple of Mgos, said, "If the masters, the translator and the paṇḍita, do not live it would be like the eyes of all Tibetans being blinded at the same moment. I will go impersonating the master." The translator and Se both exchanged clothes. It is said that the translator escaped by impersonating a beggar, and that Se escaped without being killed due to the force of his devotion to the master and his fine awakening of the enlightenment mind.

In general, there has been no one in Tibet except Se Shes rab smon able to sacrifice his life for the sake of the master. So it has been stated.


When the translator and the paṇḍita reached Tibet, they met all the previous disciples of Lord Gayadhara in 'Go yul, and [it was revealed] that he was not the Son of the Victors, Maitripa. Mgos said, "The master has lied to me." The lord replied, "Don't you want the Dharma? I am more expert in the Dharma than Maitrīpa." And Mgos was also extremely pleased with the Dharma.”

[10] “The dating of Kṛṣṇācārya is full of problems, few of which are capable of a final resolution. According to the Western tradition the Buddha's Parinirvāṇa was approx. 560 B.C. According to the Tibetan tradition it was 948-947 B.C. (See Roerich, G. The Blue Annals p.22). According to the Tibetan reckoning Kṛṣṇācārya’s birth was approx. 475 A.D. which is far too early to be consistent with the internal references in this text,_e.g. the consecration of Somapurī . If the Western dating were adopted (and the Tibetans certainly do not) this would bring his birth to about 1060 A.D. which is a more workable date, but still not consistent with the dating of certain internal references such as the aforementioned Somapuri consecration, King Devapala, the fact that Maitrīpa (n. 178) is said to be a rebirth of Kṛṣṇācārya (n. 179) and that Maitripa's dates are 1007/1010-1085 A.D. See Snellgrove, D.L. The Hevajra Tantra, Pt.I, p.13, n.4.” David Templeman, Taranatha's Life of Krsnacarya-Kāṇha, Library of Tibetan Works & Archives (1989)

Aucun commentaire:

Enregistrer un commentaire