 Okay, so my presentation will be focusing on one text, one tangu text, the Tang 231, and explore its connection with Tibetan Buddhism in general, and also the development of Buddhist epistemology in Tibet in particular. So here's my presentation outline. I'll first do a very brief introduction of who I am as a scholar and how I got to this subject, which is further a part of my larger dissertation project, that's an introduction. And also then we'll focus on the text itself. I'll discuss the title, the author of the text, the structure of the text, what they further into the text and examine some important features of the text as well, of the content. That's the text. And then we'll put the text in the trends of Tibetan, of the developments of Tibetan Buddhism in the 11th and 12th centuries and see its significance in that connection. And then we have to conclude. So that's basically why the contents I'm going to present today. So let's get started. Introduction. I know there's two trends in Buddhist studies. So I saw two trends in Buddhist studies in the last decade or so. One is the advancement in making sense of tangu Buddhist texts. So we have now the cyber language and also we try to read tangu Buddhist texts and we try to compare them with their Chinese originals or Tibetan originals. For the Chinese part, we have almost done the work for the Tibetan side. We have mainly the cyber, those texts that came from a tongue-trick origin, a rather tongue-trick origin. That's the trend one. And trend two. This is for Tibetologists and those who are interested in Tibetan studies. So the advancement in understanding the pre-sakya Buddhist epistemological tradition in Tibet. And this is also important. So in the last decade, scholars have tried to understand some manuscripts that can represent an early Gadamba Buddhist epistemological tradition in Tibet. So Buddhist epistemological tradition in Sanskrit, Brahmāna, in Tibetan, Seima. It discusses all kind of episodes of awareness of valid and if it's valid, how does it work? So this is a very brief introduction of these two trends. But then these two trends, there is a connection between these two trends, we'll get you there. But for each trend, there is a limit. So trend one, the limit is that there's some texts belong to Tibetan scholastic traditions are difficult to understand. So this text includes, of course, the Uma texts, the Manigamaka texts, and also some Prakna Paramita texts, and also the Brahmāna texts I'm going to talk about. These exoteric texts, if we may call them, are not that hard to understand in terms of the content, not compared to exoteric texts, but they're really hard in terms of language because in the scholastic tradition, especially in Tibet, you have very long sentences. You have their special principles in writing texts. And then when you read them, it's really hard, especially when they're presented not in Tibetan, but in Kaggle translations. So that's the limit of the trend one. And the limit for the second trend is that we lack sources. So of course, we had already many manuscripts from 15th century, 14th century, from central to that, that can provide some information. And some of them are really important, but we still lack sources in general. So what is the connection between these two trends then? And I see the limits of the first trend can be partly fixed by the advantages of trend two because they're from the same period and same tradition. So if you understand the Tibetan tradition, then it helps you understand the Tangu tradition. So that's the first connection. Then the limit of trend two can also be partly fixed by the advantages of trend one because in Tangu collections, it preserves Tangu translations of Tibetan texts whose Tibetan originals are not yet available. So by combining these two trends and their advantages, let's form a coherent organism. And that is my dissertation project to study Tibetan Buddhist epistemological tradition in the Tangu state. Okay. So let's continue. Let me talk about this. The identity of Tang 235. Remember, this presentation is about Tangu, the manuscript Tang 231, but why am I talking about Tang 235 now? Because it's connected. It's the start point. So the Tang 235 has this title. If we translate it, it means value reasoning, something like that, dispelling the obstruction of mind. Interestingly, there is a text written by this guy, Chaba Chikisenge, who was the sixth avat of the sample monastery in central Tibet. He wrote this text. His major work in Buddhist epistemology, Temma Igimuse. And if we translate Temma Igimuse to English, then it becomes epistemology, the scholar of the darkness in mind. So these two titles seem to match. And scholars had suspected that the Tangu might be just a translation of the Tibetan text. But previously, scholars did not try to engage in a textual study of both. But last year, having engaged in that textual study meticulously, I successfully identified the Tangu text with the Tibetan originals. So now, we're sure. Yes, they are identical. The Tangu text was a translation of the Tibetan text. And this is important because this then becomes the start point of our search. Why? Now let's do this. The left side is the chronology of the sample tradition of Buddhist epistemology. It starts with Wolochawa, Lodenshera. The second abbot of the sample monastery, who actually initiated the whole scholastic tradition of Buddhist epistemology in Tibet in the Chida period. And then we have this guy, Chava Chekisengge, who was the sixth abbot and also a central figure. And we have Chava students, Sonoma Zindresengge, and other people. Now this is the chronology of the sample tradition of Buddhist epistemology. And on the right side, we have this of the Tangu Buddhist epistemological text. What do you have? We have Tang 231, which I will be talking about soon. And we have Tang 235. And we have Tang 236, where many of them are Buddhist epistemology. Now we know that Tang 235 is a translation of Chava's work. So we established this connection. And also we have other connections. In Tang 231, they both quote, they both refer to Wolochawa, they mentioned Wolochawa in the text. So they're loosely connected. Now, if we have these three connections at least, then I'll give a hypothesis. I hope we don't have too many hypotheses today, but I have my own hypothesis on this, which is, I think probably all Tangu Buddhist epistemological texts have this sample origin. So if that is the case, then Tang 233, we have a sample right of author. Tang 231 also has a sample author. Tang 236 also has a sample author. But these authors are too late, unidentified. So our work, if we want to substantiate this hypothesis or improve it, then we have to study text one by one, this text one by one, and check if they really belong to the sample tradition. So that's why I am studying this text now. So the text of Tang 231, we want to see now if it belongs to the sample tradition. Now, let's first take a look at its title and author. Title is this in Tangut. And if we translate it, it's clarifying the menial phrases of the Nyaya Rindu, or clarifying the menial words. The title of the reconstruction can be Rikpe Tipei, Tsidusewa. The author is this guy, who is Central Tibetan Green Master Monk, Western Conqueror. So here, Western and Conqueror, these two characters formed the name Western Conqueror. Normally, we see this Conqueror, this character, which is Shi, Shi Li's Shi in Chinese, go together with Sheng. So Sheng Shi means the victorious one, which is the Buddha. But here, it's a little weird because it's just Hui and Shi, so Western Conqueror. So we can probably reconstruct the name as Xierge, or Ye Xiege, or something like that. So that's the title and author and the structure. The first opening verse also says, I pay homage to the only one. I will explain a little bit the meaning of the words. I like that. It's the first part. Second part, a discussion of the seven treatises of Dharma purity. And this is interesting because in Chinese, in Chinese, in Ming, in Chinese, here to beat their tradition, we don't often see the discussion of the seven treatises of Dharma purity. This is quite a Tibetan thing to arrange the seven treatises of Dharma purity in two parts, the three major ones and the four branch ones. And the third part is an explanation of the key concept. This is a body part, the explanation of key concepts in Buddhist epistemology. Based on the three chapter divisions of the Nyaya Bindu, the first one is the Xianqian, the Pratyaksha in Tibetan, the second one is Zili Suiliang, Sanskrit, Swaata, and Maana, Tibetan, and Zili Suiliang, Sanskrit, Swaata, and Maana, Tibetan, and Zili Suiliang. So this is the basic structure, but here, if we just have a general impression of the structure, it may seem to have some connection with the Tibetan Sanghu tradition, but we don't know for sure, so we have to go deeper. Now this is the section I love the best. So we're going deeper in the text and trying to find clues and see if these clues can prove whether these texts belong to the Sample tradition. My perspective is, my start point is to find those references, because this author in this text refers to many masters in Tibetan history and let's see if these masters have connections with the Sample tradition. Now we first have this guy, this Ngok, and this character means master, okay? So master Ngok, and we also have master Hio, and we have master R, and we have this guy. This person, this figure, his name is not phonetically transcribed. His Tibetan religious name is translated, so these characters mean Fa, Shang, Shi, so Dharma, Hai, Master, Fa, Shang, Shi. So can we make any connections here? Of course. So the first one is easy. So master Ngok, Shi, Bi, Ngok, Lu, Cao, Lu, Deng, Xie, Rang, there's no problem. The second one, this Qiong, well, the only person I can think of in the entire Tibetan intellectual history who is good at Tibetan, who is good at Buddhist epistemology is this guy, Kim Rui-Chun-Chuan, who was a student of World Health. And then by the same token, we identify this master R with R, Cheng Tu Ye Xie, flourished in the mid-12th century, also a sample master. And this guy, this Fa, Shang, Shi, this Dharma, Hai, Master, we identify him with Xiang Ce-Bong, Che, Bi, La, Ma, who flourished also early 12th century, was a student, a direct disciple of Ngok, Lu, Cao, and we have a further clue. In one place in the text, it says that master R does not agree with master Qiong, at one point, because master Qiong proposes a four-fold typology and master R proposes only a three-fold typology. So master R disagrees with master Qiong in that point, on that point. So if that is true, then it matches perfectly the relative chronology here, because R, Cheng Tu Ye Xie, was later than Qiong. Now, on this point, on this stage, I think we can be relatively safe to conclude that this text is indeed a sanghu text composed by a sanghu author. Now, what does this mean? What is the significance of this finding? Let's then put this text back in the Tibetan intellectual history. I'm doing a comparison here. This is the Tang 231, we have seen the content. And then this text, this cema de kuna ni du ba, is also a very important text in sanghu tradition. They're similar in many places, in many places. We all see they're similar. At the very beginning of this text, the Tang 231, and also at the very beginning of the te du, they share the exactly same passage that discusses the seven treatises of dharma qi of the word by word translation. The Tang 231 seems to be a word by word translation of cema de kuna ni du ba. That's the similarities here, but there are also differences. For example, we know the author, of course, is different. Western conqueror cannot be this guy. It's not Jeba Shen Lu Chang Chu, who is the author of the te du. And then also, the basic text that these two texts bay themselves on. The Tang 231 bases itself on the Nyaya Vindu, which is shorter. The cema de kuna ni du ba bases itself on Pramana Vinicitaya, which is longer. And more philosophically sophisticated. And talking about references, we know that the cema de kuna ni du ba calls this person, and the Tang 231 calls this person. Some of them are identical, but notice here, Jeba Chu is quoted 99 times in cema de kuna ni du ba. But this person is completely not seen in Tang 231. So what does that mean? That means the author of Tang 231 is either a person who lived before Jeba's time or his contemporary. Because if he was Jeba's contemporary, then when Jeba wrote his important work, cema igimensei, the work was not yet an influential one. So that can make sense. So that's the significance. Because if Tang 231 was actually composed earlier than cema de kuna ni du ba, then it represents a trend or a development before the Chava's time. So it represents a pre-Chava Sangpu philosophy system, philosophical system on Buddhist epistemology. So let's reach to the conclusion. The first conclusion, the first point is the content of Tang 231 substantiate as one proof of the hypothesis that the epistemological transition flourishing in Tang 231 might have a Sangpu origin, that's the first point. Then the second point is the Tang 231 was likely composed by a contemporary of Chava, because it's unlikely that he was earlier than Chava and could also quote from those masters. So I think he could be, he might be likely to be a contemporary of Chava. And this then shows features of pre-Chava epistemology in the Sangpu tradition, which is important because we lack sources as such. And finally, then the Tang 231 discovered with many manuscripts in Haruhoto who really used as a primer in Buddhist epistemology. While the Minse, the Tang 235, discovered with only one manuscript was probably reserved for students with higher intellect. That's all. Thank you. All right, thank you very much. Choyong for your very fascinating presentation.