ལྔ་བ་ཆེན་པོ་ལ་སྐུ་རྩེད་ཞུ་བ།

There are several anecdotes circulating among Tibetan intellectuals, in which the Great Fifth is made fun of by people around him, particularly because of his rNying-ma affiliation. The following text for “tea offering” (ja mchod) is a “literary caricature” (ascribed to dGe-bshes Bar-skor-rab-’byams-pa), which pokes fun at the Great Fifth:

རྟེན་འབྲེལ་བཅུ་གཉིས་ཐོག་མ་ཐུགས་སུ་ཆུད།།

དགེ་འདུན་ཉི་ཤུའི་དང་པོའི་ཚོགས་ཀྱིས་བསྐོར།།
མཚན་ཉིད་གསུམ་ལས་བར་པའི་དབང་དུ་སོང་།།
མགྲིན་བཟང་དབང་པོའི་ཞལ་དུ་མཆོད་པ་འབུལ།།

He who possesses (lit. internalized) the first of the twelve [members] of dependent arising;
He who is encircled by the entourage of the first kind out of the twenty types [of saṃgha];
He who is under the influence of the middle (or second) of the Three Natures;
To the lord of the “sweet-voiced” that [we] make [this] offering!

Notes:
(a) 1st of the 12 members of dependent arising = ignorance (ma rig pa)
(b) 1st kind among the 20 types of saṃgha = dull-witted ones (dbang po rtul po)
(c) 2nd svabhāva = Dependent Nature (gzhan dbang)
(d) “sweet-voiced” = donkey (bong bu)

ཨ་ཡིག་དབྱེ་བ་བརྒྱད།

Tibetan grammarians (bSod-nams-rtse-mo and Sa-paṇ) speak of eight kinds of a:

(a) “inexpressible three [types of] a” (brjod du med pa’i a gsum):
1. bar tsheg srog gi a = yi ge so so’i bar du ’jug pa (i.e. inherent a accompanying each syllable)
2. dang kyog gi a = dbu khyud = dang por ’jug pa glang po che’i sna lta bu (i.e. heading a)
3. shad kyi a = mtha’ mar ’jug pa rnam par gcod pa (i.e. visarga)
(b) yan lag gi a = 4 = i, u, e, and o
(c) rtsa ba’i dbye gzhi’i a (i.e. a, which is the basis of all)

See the Thon mi’i zhal lung (pp. 68–72).

+ བརྙན།

1. gzugs brnyan “image, reflection” (Bod.rgya)
2. sku brnyan “image” (Bod.rgya)
3. snang brnyan “image” (Bod.rgya)
4. grib brnyan “shadow” (Bod.rgya)
5. mgo brnyan “mask” (Bod.rgya)
6. skra brnyan “wig” (Bod.rgya)
7. sgra brnyan “echo” (Bod.rgya)
8. sgron brnyan “shawdow cast by lamp” (Bod.rgya)
9. nyi brnyan “reflection of the sun (in water)” (Bod.rgya)
10. phyag brnyan (archaic) “attendent” (Bod.rgya)
11. glog brnyan “film/cinema” (Bod.rgya)
12. ’dra brnyan “image” (Bod.rgya)
13. gdong brnyan “mask” (Bod.rgya)

བརྟེན། བསྟེན།

An attempt is made here to distinguish between the two homophonous words (i.e. brten pa & bsten pa):

(a) x + la brten “to let (something) rest on x” or “to be based on x.”

(b) x + bsten “to rely on x.” 

It is true, as pointed by Christof Spitz, that we do not need la don with bsten. Cf. Thon mi’i zhal lung (p. 37): smṛ ti bla mar bsten pa’i lo tsā ba “translator, who relied on Smṛti as a guru.”

སྒྲའི་ཚེར་མ།

sGra’i-tsher-ma (“Grammar Thorn”) is considered by some to be a name of Smṛtijñānakīrti. Cf. Smith 2001: 315, n. 599; The Blue Annals, vol. 2, p. 252. See also Tshe-tan-zhabs-drung, Thon mi’i zhal lung (p. 36). But why was he called so? A nickname given by Tibetans? Or could it be a Tibetan translation of a name in Sanskrit?

But interestingly, the expression sgra’i tsher ma occurs also in Rong-zom-pa’s Dam tshig mdo rgyas (p. 294), where it, however, has nothing to do with sgra in the sense of “grammar” but in the sense of “noise,” and hence it is clearly understood there in the sense of “noises that are thorns [to the ears],” that is, so to speak, “sound/noise pollution.”

  

བསྐལ་པ་གསུམ།

Perhaps nothing special but still here are three kinds of “being remote or far removed” (bskal pa chen po gsum) mentioned (RZ 2: 203):

(a) rang bzhin gyis bskal pa “far-removed by nature [from the domain of cognition],” e.g. “hungry ghost (ltog ’dre)

(b) gnas kyis bskal pa “spatially far-removed [from the domain of cognition],” e.g. Brahmā (Tshangs-pa)

(c) dus kyis bskal pa “temporally far-removed [from the domain of cognition],” e.g. not given there.

Compare the idea of “four causes of non-cognition” (mi shes pa’i rgyu bzhi) explained in Kun-dpal, ’Jam dbyangs bla ma’i zhal lung (p. 143):

(1) gnas kyis bskal pas mi shes pa (i.e. non-cognition of a knowable due to its spatial remoteness)
(2) dus kyis bskal pas mi shes pa (i.e. non-cognition of a knowable due to its temporal  remoteness)
(3) rgyu thug med kyi ’bras bu thug med mi shes pa (i.e. non-cognition of a knowable due to its subtlety/detail/minuteness?)
(4) sangs rgyas kyi chos rab tu mang po mi shes pa (i.e. non-cognition/non-possession of a knowable due to its transcendentality?)

The texts reads gnas/dus kyi instead of gnas/dus kyis.