Introduction to Fulfilment

Introduction to Fulfilment

by Adam Pearcey

Each of what came to be regarded as the “three sets of vows” (sdom gsum) has its own methods of overcoming breaches of discipline, all of which involve confession in some form. According to the prātimokṣa, some faults, contraventions of the pārājika, are considered so grave that expulsion from the community is the only option, while lesser offences can be expiated. The bodhisattva vows can be restored, if necessary, by taking the vows once again—although Longchen Rabjam (1308–1364) apparently claimed that this could only be done a maximum of three times.[1] Tantric commitments (samaya) are said to be easier to restore, but some scholars, such as Tsongkhapa (1357–1419) believed that restored commitments are weaker than those which have never degenerated at all, and make progress slower.[2]

The Clarification of Commitments (Samayavivyakti; dam tshig gsal bkra), a classic exposition of samaya by the Indian master Vīlāsavajra/ Līlāvajra (sgeg pa’i rdo rje), devotes an entire chapter to the topic of “methods for restoring samaya once it has deteriorated” (nyams na bskang ba’i thabs rnams). The word kangwa (bskang ba) here simply means “to restore,” and there is no indication given in the text that it might refer to a particular practice in its own right. Yet in a commentary to Vīlāsavajra’s work by the Tibetan master, Tsangtön Dorje Gyaltsen (gtsang ston rdo rje rgyal mtshan, 1137–1227) of Katok, we find the following passage describing methods for restoring broken samaya:

If the samaya related to (enlightened) body declines, then offer all your food, wealth and possessions to your guru or to those of your companions in relation to whom the [commitment] has declined, and confess sincerely. The guru should then grant approval. Should you be unable to find these [objects of your confession], then confess to a hundred of their equals. Should you be unable to find even these, then perform the fire ritual (sbyin bsregs), feast offering (tshogs mchod), and restoration practice (bskang ba) as many times as you can before three of their equals.[3]

Here then, around the turn of the thirteenth century, the term ‘restoration practice’ (bskang ba) appears to denote a practice that ranks alongside the fire ritual and the feast offering as a means to repair broken samaya. So what is bskang ba here?

The Tibetan term skong/bskang ba literally has the meaning of “to fill.” It is said to be the equivalent of the Sanskrit paripūraṇa, meaning “the act of filling.” In this context, it is tempting to understand it as meaning simply to “restore” or “replenish” the tantric vows and commitments, yet, as the Great Tibetan Dictionary (tshig mdzod chen mo) indicates, there is another element to the term as it is understood by Tibetans. “Bskang ba,” the dictionary tells us, is “the future of ‘to fulfil’ (skong ba) understood in the sense of ‘to satisfy’ (tshim pa) or ‘to make whole’ (tshang bar byed pa).”[4] So who is being satisfied here? And how?

Kangwa (bskang ba) is well known as a generic term for certain dharmapāla rites, popular in both Buddhism and Bön, in which various substances are offered in order to “satisfy the noble hearts/minds” (thugs dam bskang) of the chosen deities (yi dam) or guardian spirits (srung ma), who are then requested to grant attainments or entrusted with activity ('phrin bcol). Some scholars have concluded that such rites are indigenous to Tibet and have no clear Indian precedent.[5] Closely related to the kangwa is the rite of kangso (bskang gso), which the lexicographer Dungkar Lobzang Trinlé (1927-1997) defined as: “A ritual practice of both the Bönpo and Buddhist traditions, in which, having confessed any degenerations and breakages that might have occurred in one’s commitments (samaya) to the particular deities on whom one relies and to the guardians and so on, [this commitment] is restored (kha bskang ba) and healed (slar gso byas pa).”[6] So the notion of restoring vows and commitments is clearly present in such rituals alongside the notion of gratifying or pleasing the deities through various offerings.

These twin themes of (1) gratification of deities and (2) restoration of vows are also present in the feast offering or ‘feast circle’ offering (gaṇacakra), which, as we just saw, was also mentioned among the methods of restoration. And this apparent similarity led at least one Tibetan scholar to clarify the difference between them. Dodrupchen Jigme Tenpe Nyima (1865–1926), an influential Nyingma lama, offered the following “brief supplementary note” in a colophon to a fulfilment practice that he composed for the Yumka Dechen Gyalmo practice within the Longchen Nyingtik:

The term ‘fulfilment’ is explained as follows. If we distinguish between the feast and the fulfilment offering, then the feast offering is mainly a practice of pleasing the guru and the deities of the maṇḍala with the nectar of food and drink. Then, the fulfilment is so called, because it perfectly pleases or satisfies the deities by means of the blessing of a vast wealth of sensual delights created by the mind and those actually arranged. This is how the difference between feast and fulfilment can be understood. Furthermore, it also refers to the purification based on the vast practice of the instructions on the “great remorseful purification” of the faults of broken samaya which earn the displeasure of the deities of the maṇḍala. In this respect, “fulfilment” can be taken to mean the healing of one’s own samaya or the healing of the wisdom minds of the deities. Generally, feast and fulfilment are not entirely unrelated...

Following this clarification, therefore, we can note the following features of fulilment practice:

1. Gratification of the deities (lha rnams mnyes pa)

2. Restoration/Healing (gso ba):

a. Of one’s own commitments (rang gi dam tshig)
b. Of the deities’ wisdom-mind/intention (lha’i dgongs pa)

Fulfilment rites are sometimes combined with confessional practices. The most popular such text is the so-called Narak Kong Shak, or "Confession and Fulfilment That Empties the Hells from Their Very Depths," which combines elements of Guru Chökyi Wangchuk’s (1212–1270) revelation called Kagye Sangwa Yongdzok together with the Kagyé Drakpo Rangjung Rangshar of the Northern Treasures and which was seemingly compiled in its present form by Jamgön Kongtrul (1813–1899) for inclusion in the Rinchen Terdzö.

Explore the Series

Further Reading

Canzio, Ricardo. “Étude d’une ceremonie de propitiation Bonpo: Le Nag-zhig bskang-ba: structure et exécution” in A.M. Blondeau & Kristofer Schipper, eds., Essais sur le rituel, I (Colloque du centenaire de la section des sciences religieuses de l’Ecole Pratique des Hautes Études). Louvain-Paris: Peeters, 1988. pp. 159172

Dorje, Gyurme. “The rNying-ma Interpretation of Commitment and Vow” in T. Skorupski (ed.), The Buddhist Forum: Volume II, 1992. pp. 71–95

gtsang ston rdo rje rgyal mtshan. "gsang ba sngags kyi dam tshig gi rim pa mdor bsdus pa." In bka' ma shin tu rgyas pa (kaH thog). Chengdu: KaH thog mkhan po 'jam dbyangs, 1999. Vol. 89, pp. 503-534

Jamgön Kongtrul. The Treasury of Knowledge Book 5: Buddhist Ethics. Ithaca: Snow Lion, 2003.

Pearcey, Adam. Skong Bshags: Practices of Confession and Atonement in Tibetan Buddhism. Unpublished M.St. Dissertation, University of Oxford, 2013

Skorupski, Tadeusz and Dorje, G. and Nima, T., eds. An Encyclopaedic Tibetan-English Dictionary. Volume One: Letter Ka-Nya. Beijing; London: The Nationalities Publishing House & The School of Oriental and African Studies, 2001.

Tsongkhapa. Tantric Ethics: An Explanation of the Precepts for Buddhist Vajrayāna Practice. Trans. Gareth Sparham. Boston: Wisdom, 2005.

Version: 1.0-20250226