Published with license by Koninklijke Brill bv | doi:10.1163/15685322-11003004 © Channa Li, 2024 | ISSN: 0082-5433(print) 1568-5322 (online) T’oung Pao 110 (2024) 384–433 brill.com/tpao Tankuang and His Work in Tibetan Translation: Revisiting iolTib J 26 and the Mahādeva Narrative Channa Li ikga, Austrian Academy of Sciences Introduction In 2016, Jens W. Borgland published an excellent paper on the study of the Dunhuang manuscript iolTib J 26, offering a clear analysis of the structure of the text and providing an elegant English translation of the Mahādeva story.1 According to his analysis, the text of this manuscript is a treatise divided into two parts: the first part includes the story of Muktikā (1r1–3v6),2 followed by 1 Jens Wilhelm Borgland, “Mahādeva in Dunhuang: A Study of iolTib J 26,” Indo-Iranian Jour- nal 59 (2016): 1–47. In writing this article, I have had extensive communication with Jens W. Borgland, who provided me with numerous insightful comments. I wish to express my grat- itude for his solid knowledge, his generosity in sharing insights, and his broad-mindedness in helping me improve this essay. I would also like to acknowledge the invaluable help of the anonymous reviewers. Their detailed feedback and constructive suggestions have signifi- cantly contributed to improving the quality of this essay. All remaining mistakes are entirely my responsibility. Dunhuang manuscripts are usually referred to according to various numbering methods developed by the different institutions that house them. “iol Tib J” refers to Tibetan manu- scripts kept in the British liberary (previously kept in the India Office Library), while “Or. 8210/S” refers to the Chinese manuscripts in the British liberary. “Pelliot chinois” and “Pelliot tibétain” respectively refer to Chinese andTibetan manuscripts preserved in the Bibliothèque nationale de France, and “bd” refers to manuscripts preserved in the National Library of China. The majority of the Dunhuang manuscripts used in this article come from these hold- ing institutions. 2 It recounts that Rohikā, a female servant, was tasked with going back to her mistress’s home to fetch a pearl necklace. Yet Rohikā was captivated by the Buddha’s words and unwilling to depart from the Buddha’s preaching. The Buddha noticed her and sent a verse to her. Over- joyed, she left to pick up the necklace. However, while on her way back, she was killed by a cow, and reborn as a princess named Muktikā. For an introduction to the story, see Jampa Losang Panglung, Die Erzählstoffe des Mūlasarvāstivāda-Vinaya, Analysiert auf Grund der Tibetischen Über-setzung (Tokyo: Reiyukai Library, 1981): 82. See also Channa Li, “Reconstructing the Basic Structure of Tibetan Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinayavastu in Dunhuang,” in Proceedings of the Panel