Page 44

Another potentially identity building activity for Mipham and the Rimé was the collection of texts. Rimé ecumenism was characterized by an openness to the positions of all the Tibetan schools while each teacher maintained a principal affiliation with their own school. They argued that all the Tibetan Buddhist schools led to the same result while they practiced and developed their respective lineages. In the case of Jamyang Khyentse, he advocated a Sakya perspective. For Jamgon Kongtrul, it was Kagyu. For Chogyur Lingpa and Mipham, it was Nyingma. In all cases, the teachers came together on the practice of Dzogchen, or the Great Perfection and an interest in King Gesar of Ling.

Collecting the texts of different lineages helped preserve the character of the lamas’ respective schools while asserting their essential equality at the same time. This form of identity building would turn out to be highly relevant because the lamas I encountered in Tibet and Chengdu were doing something similar. They were busy collecting, compiling, and editing collections of teachings that were in danger of being lost.