A Buddhist Polemic Against Bon Sacrifice — ITJ 0990

A short Buddhist doctrinal text from the Dunhuang cave library (IOL Tib J 990, India Office Library, British Library), preserved on a single sheet in Old Tibetan. The text argues that the gods are pleased by ethical conduct — virtue, purity, non-violence, and the abandonment of strife — rather than by the blood sacrifices of the Bon tradition.

The document preserves both sides of one of the great theological debates of imperial Tibet: the Buddhist claim that moral transformation pleases the divine, and the Bon counter-claim that local and household gods require propitiation through the sacrifice of living creatures. The text is damaged at both beginning and end, but the argumentative structure survives intact.

First English translation. Translated from Old Tibetan by the New Tianmu Anglican Church, 2026.

[…] thus, previously, from which scripture […]

It is so: if a person practices virtuous dharma, the gods also [rejoice] […] is also not fitting.

If all were to be considered as one — now, as for my gods not being pleased and the obstacles of their displeasure: what are they, one may ask? When filth, impurity, corpse-pollution, defilement, and harmful actions arise, these become obstacles to the gods’ pleasure. Thus it is said.

From the dharma of the gods, it comes forth: “Do not commit adultery!” Thus it says. If one removes filth from one’s presence, it is fitting that the gods rejoice.

From the dharma of the gods: “The life of all sentient beings shall not be taken.” Thus it says. If one removes both defilement and corpse-pollution from one’s presence, it is fitting that the gods rejoice.

“Abandon the strife of harm, anger, and folly; rely upon the dhāraṇī of joy, delight, and openness.” Thus it says. “Untie the knot of enmity; remove harm from one’s presence.” Then the gods are manifestly pleased.

If one considers these ways, there is no cause for displeasure or offense. There is, indeed, no offense.

Some say: “The gods are offended — they must be propitiated with dry rites. Our door-gods and local gods are propitiated with living creatures. Because the ritual of invocation is not in accord, they become displeased and offended.”

Those who speak thus also exist. But the complete Buddha —

[…]

Colophon

This is a Good Works Translation of IOL Tib J 990, a Buddhist polemical text in Old Tibetan from the Dunhuang cave library (sealed c. 1000 CE), now held at the British Library. The text is written on a single sheet — recto only, 14 lines — and is damaged at both the beginning and the end.

The text preserves a Buddhist argument against Bon sacrificial practices: the dharma of the gods (lha chos) prescribes ethical conduct — purity, non-violence, the abandonment of strife — while the Bon position holds that local and household deities require propitiation through animal sacrifice (srog chags). The term skam chos (“dry rites”) in line 12 likely refers to Bon ritual practices without blood sacrifice, suggesting that even within the Bon tradition, distinctions existed between different modes of propitiation.

The central rhetorical structure follows a pattern of Buddhist precept followed by its consequence: the dharma of the gods forbids adultery, killing, and strife; observing these precepts removes the causes of divine displeasure. The Bon counter-argument (lines 11–13) is presented as a minority position (“some say”) before the Buddhist refutation, which is lost to damage at the end of the manuscript.

This text is significant for preserving both sides of the Buddhist-Bon debate in a single document, written at a time when the two traditions were in active theological competition across the Tibetan Empire.

Translated from Old Tibetan. The OTDO transcription (Takeuchi, Hill, et al.) served as the primary source text. Square brackets indicate damaged or uncertain readings in the source. No reference English translation was consulted; this is, to the best of our knowledge, the first English translation of this text.

Translated from Old Tibetan by the New Tianmu Anglican Church, 2026.

🌲

Source Text: IOL Tib J 990

Old Tibetan source text from IOL Tib J 990 (India Office Library, British Library). Digital transcription accessed via Old Tibetan Documents Online (OTDO) at https://otdo.aa-ken.jp/archives?p=ITJ_0990, maintained by Tsuguhito Takeuchi (Kobe City University of Foreign Studies), Nathan W. Hill (SOAS University of London), and colleagues. Presented here for reference, study, and verification alongside the English translation above.

(r1) [---] [-ngd?] [de?] zhes snga na gzhung gang las [---]
(r2) lags te / / myis chos dge ba bgyis na / / lha yang [dgyes?] [---] pas [---]
(r3) ba’i yang myi rigs / / yang rnams gcig du na / / da ltar bdag gi lha rnams myi dgyes shing ’thur ba’i bgegs
(r4) gang lags shes bgyis na / / stsang shab dang rtsog ngan dang ro bag smye bag dang bkyon bar rnams byung na / / lha myi
(r5) dgyes pa ’I bgegs su ’gyur ro zhes ’byung na / / lha chos las ’byung ba / / lan g.yem ma bgyid cig ces
(r6) ’byung ste / / stsang shab kyI drung phyung zhing mchis na / / lha dgyes pa’I rigs / / lha chos las sems
(r7) can no cog gI srog myi gcad do zhes ’byung ste / / smyes bag dang ro bag gnyIs ka’I drung phyung zhing mchis na /
(r8) lha dgyes pa’I rigs / / gnod khro glen ba’I ’thab rtsod ni spangs / / dga’ dgu yangs pa’I gzungs ni bsten ces
(r9) ’byung ste / / mkhon gyI mdud pa ni bshig / / bkyon bar gyi drung ni phyung na / / lha dgyes par mngon te / / tshul
(r10) ’dI rnams gzigs na yang / / myi dgyes shing ’thur ba’I gcugs ma mchis te / / myi ’thur bar yang gda’ / /
(r11) kha cig na re / / lha rthur’thur
(r12) skam chos su gsol / / bdag cag gI sgo lha dang / / yul lha ni srog chags kyIs gsol te / / brjod pa’I cho ga
(r13) myi ’thun bas / / myi dgyes shing ’thur bar ’gyur ro zhes mchi ba dag kyang mchis grangste / / yong sangs rgyas
(r14) [---]

Source Colophon

Source text: IOL Tib J 990, India Office Library collection, British Library, London. Single sheet, recto only, 14 lines. Originally recovered from the Mogao Caves, Dunhuang, Gansu Province, China (sealed c. 1000 CE).

Digital transcription accessed via Old Tibetan Documents Online (OTDO) at https://otdo.aa-ken.jp/archives?p=ITJ_0990, maintained by Tsuguhito Takeuchi (Kobe City University of Foreign Studies), Nathan W. Hill (SOAS University of London), and colleagues. OTDO content is made available for academic use.

Reference: Enoki (1962: C53). The cataloguer describes the text as “Anti-bon polemic.”

🌲