November 04, 2012


The first gTer-ston/bton is said to be gTer-ston Sangs-rgyas-bla-ma. See, for example, Kong-sprul’s gSan yig (p. 275). Actually his treasures are said to be re-discovered by mKhyen-brtse’i-dbang-po. 


  1. He is supposed to date from the earlier half of the life of Lochen Rinchen Zangpo, so that would mean he was active in the last 4 decades of the 10th century, right? But what I was wondering is if you think the gTer-bton spelling is the more authentically old one, or would it be just an alternative spelling meant to promote an alternative etymology (and way of understanding it). Are the various verbal forms of 'don-pa and ston-pa related?


  2. Dear Dan,

    I wonder if the term gter ston/bton is as old as Sangs-rgyas-bla-ma himself. Presumably not. I also don’t know which spelling is earlier or more authentic. The common spelling is undoubtedly gter ston, I think.

    I have never thought of the possible etymological link between bton and ston. But ’don pa “to take/draw put” and “to illustrate/teach” seem somehow related. By why the past form bton and imperative form ston?