ChatGPT Interpretative Notes (Norbu. Dzogchen (1996)
sNa tshogs rang bzhin m i gnyis kyang
Cha shas nyid du spros dang bral
Ji bzhin ba zhes mi rtog kyang
rNam par snang mdzad kun tu bzang
Zin pas rtsol ba'i nad spangs te
lHun gyis gnas pas bzhag pa yin
This is the famous six-line Dzogchen verse from the Rig pa’i khu byug, often rendered in English as The Cuckoo of Awareness or The Cuckoo’s Song of Total Presence. ([Keith Dowman][1])
A careful working translation would be:
“Though the nature of the manifold is nondual,
its particular aspects are beyond conceptual elaboration.
Though it is not conceptualized as ‘just so,’
all appearances are Samantabhadra.
Since it is already possessed, the disease of striving is abandoned;
remaining in spontaneous presence, one is settled just as it is.” ([Keith Dowman][1])
Line by line, very literally:
sNa tshogs rang bzhin mi gnyis kyang
“Although the nature of the diverse manifold is nondual”
Cha shas nyid du spros dang bral
“its very parts/aspects are free from elaboration”
Ji bzhin ba zhes mi rtog kyang
“although one does not conceptualize it as ‘just as it is’”
rNam par snang mdzad kun tu bzang
“all appearing manifestation is Samantabhadra” or “appearance is wholly excellent / all-good.” This line is famous because rNam par snang mdzad can also evoke Vairocana, while kun tu bzang is Samantabhadra, so there is likely deliberate wordplay here. ([Rangjung Yeshe Wiki][2])
Zin pas rtsol ba'i nad spangs te
“because it is already had / already present, one abandons the sickness of effort”
lHun gyis gnas pas bzhag pa yin
“by abiding spontaneously, it is left as it is” or “one rests in natural spontaneous presence.” The closing line is closely tied to the Dzogchen idea of lhun grub, spontaneous presence. ([Rangjung Yeshe Wiki][3])
In plainer language, the verse is saying: multiplicity does appear, but its nature is not truly divided. Because reality is already complete, there is no need to fabricate, analyze, or attain it through strain. The point is recognition and resting, not constructing. That is why “the disease of striving” is such a central phrase here. ([Keith Dowman][1])
A slightly more elegant poetic rendering could be:
“Though all variety is nondual in nature,
each facet is free of conceptual complexity.
Without fixing it as ‘this is how it is,’
all appearance is Samantabhadra.
Since this is already present, give up the sickness of effort;
rest naturally in spontaneous presence.” ([Keith Dowman][1])
The heart of it is very Dzogchen: no duality, no conceptual fixation, no striving, just recognition of what is already fully present 🌿
I can also give you a word-by-word grammatical breakdown of each line, if you want.
[1]: https://keithdowman.net/dzogchen/cuckoos-song-of-total-presence.html?utm_source=chatgpt.com "The Cuckoo's Song of Total Presence"
[2]: https://rywiki.tsadra.org/index.php/Awareness_Cuckoo_Scripture?utm_source=chatgpt.com "Awareness Cuckoo Scripture"
[3]: https://rywiki.tsadra.org/index.php/lhun_gyis_gnas_pas_bzhag_pa_yin?utm_source=chatgpt.com "lhun gyis gnas pas bzhag pa yin"
YES
Wonderful 🌿 Let’s do a tighter grammatical and semantic breakdown.
Your text, normalized, is:
sNa tshogs rang bzhin mi gnyis kyang
cha shas nyid du spros dang bral
ji bzhin pa zhes mi rtog kyang
rnam par snang mdzad kun tu bzang
zin pas rtsol ba’i nad spangs te
lhun gyis gnas pas bzhag pa yin
This six-line verse is the core of the Rig pa’i khu byug / Awareness Cuckoo Scripture, and the transmitted versions match your lines very closely. ([Rangjung Yeshe Wiki][1])
Line 1: sNa tshogs rang bzhin mi gnyis kyang
sna tshogs = diversity, multiplicity, manifold variety.
rang bzhin = nature, intrinsic mode, essential character.
mi gnyis = non-dual, not two.
kyang = although, even though.
So very literally: “Although the nature of multiplicity is nondual …” or “Though the intrinsic nature of the manifold is not two …” ([Rangjung Yeshe Wiki][1])
A subtle point here: the line does not deny appearances. It says that even the diverse manifold, in its own nature, is nondual. That is very characteristic of early Dzogchen: diversity is not rejected; its nature is simply not split. ([Rangjung Yeshe Wiki][1])
Line 2: cha shas nyid du spros dang bral
cha shas = parts, aspects, particular divisions, facets.
nyid du = precisely as, in themselves, as such.
spros dang bral = free from elaboration, beyond conceptual proliferation.
Literal sense: “The very aspects themselves are free from elaboration.” Dowman renders this as the individuality of things being free from conceptual elaboration, while the Rywiki commentary explains spros dang bral as beyond discursive elaboration or linguistic definition. ([Keith Dowman][2])
So line 1 and 2 together say something quite beautiful: the many are nondual in nature, and even their apparent particulars are not ultimately captured by conceptual construction. ([Rangjung Yeshe Wiki][1])
Line 3: ji bzhin pa zhes mi rtog kyang
ji bzhin pa = “as it is,” suchness, the way it actually is.
zhes = called, said to be, “as.”
mi rtog = nonconceptual, not mentally fabricated, not discursively grasped.
kyang = although, even though.
Very literal: “Although it is not conceptualized as ‘suchness’ / ‘as-it-is-ness’ …” The Rywiki commentary explicitly glosses ji bzhin pa as “that-which-is,” the thing as it is in its essence, and says it is not something to be objectified by thought. ([Rangjung Yeshe Wiki][1])
This is important: the verse is not merely saying “do not think.” It is saying that even “suchness” itself should not harden into an object of thought. That is a very Dzogchen move. ✨ ([Rangjung Yeshe Wiki][1])
Line 4: rnam par snang mdzad kun tu bzang
This is the densest line.
rnam par snang = full appearance, manifest display, complete appearance.
mdzad = making, producing, effecting, manifesting.
Together rnam par snang mdzad is also the Tibetan name of Vairocana.
kun tu bzang = Samantabhadra, “All-Good,” “Universally Excellent.”
So this line can be read at least two ways:
First, more descriptively: “All manifest appearance is Samantabhadra.”
Second, with the name-play preserved: “Vairocana [or the total illuminator] is Samantabhadra.”
The Rywiki commentary explicitly notes that this line seems to involve wordplay on rnam par snang mdzad as Vairocana and kun tu bzang as Samantabhadra, which is especially striking given the traditional role of Vairocana/Vairotsana in transmitting the text. ([Rangjung Yeshe Wiki][1])
So the meaning is not just “things appear.” It is closer to: the entirety of display is already the expression of primordial awakened reality. ([Rangjung Yeshe Wiki][1])
Line 5: zin pas rtsol ba’i nad spangs te
zin pas = because it is already possessed, already obtained, already encompassed.
rtsol ba = effort, striving, exertion.
nad = sickness, disease.
spangs te = having abandoned, casting aside.
Literal sense: “Since it is already obtained, one abandons the disease of striving.” Both Rywiki and Dowman reflect this same core sense: since it is already complete, striving is an illness to be dropped. ([Rangjung Yeshe Wiki][1])
This is one of the great Dzogchen lines. The problem is not lack. The problem is the assumption of lack, which generates effortful searching. 🌿 ([Rangjung Yeshe Wiki][1])
Line 6: lhun gyis gnas pas bzhag pa yin
lhun gyis = spontaneously, naturally, of itself; often tied to lhun grub, spontaneous presence/perfection.
gnas pas = by abiding, by remaining, in abiding.
bzhag pa yin = it is left, one leaves it, it is settled, it is placed.
Literal sense: “It is left in spontaneous abiding,” or more naturally, “One rests by simply abiding spontaneously.” Dowman’s version, “one continues spontaneously in the calm state of contemplation,” reflects this. Rywiki’s translation gives “Just remain in effortless abiding.” ([Rangjung Yeshe Wiki][1])
This is not passivity in the ordinary sense. It means no contrivance is added. One does not improve what is already self-present. ([Rangjung Yeshe Wiki][1])
So if I put the whole verse into a more precise flowing translation, I would give:
Though the nature of multiplicity is nondual,
its very facets are free from conceptual elaboration.
Though it is not grasped conceptually as “suchness,”
all manifest display is Samantabhadra.
Since it is already present, abandon the disease of striving;
leave it in spontaneous abiding. ([Rangjung Yeshe Wiki][1])
And the philosophical movement of the verse is:
Multiplicity appears.
Its nature is nondual.
Its particulars are beyond conceptual construction.
Suchness cannot be turned into an object of thought.
Display itself is already awakened display.
Therefore striving is neurosis, and resting in spontaneous presence is the point. ([Rangjung Yeshe Wiki][1])
One small philological note: your pasted line has m i gnyis, but the standard reading is mi gnyis. Also ji bzhin ba is more commonly given here as ji bzhin pa in the witnesses cited above. ([Rangjung Yeshe Wiki][1])
If you’d like, next I can do one of two things: a very literal word-by-word gloss in interlinear format, or a more Dzogchen-philosophical commentary on each line.
[1]: https://rywiki.tsadra.org/index.php/Awareness_Cuckoo_Scripture "Awareness Cuckoo Scripture - Rangjung Yeshe Wiki - Dharma Dictionary"
[2]: https://keithdowman.net/dzogchen/cuckoos-song-of-total-presence.html "The Cuckoo's Song of Total Presence"
I've attached the Norbu text from where I copied the Tibetan Six Vajra verses [I had attached the Norbu PDF]
Perfect — now we can anchor it directly in Norbu’s version 😊
In your uploaded Dzogchen: The Self-Perfected State, the verse appears in Chapter Five exactly as:
sNa tshogs rang bzhin mi gnyis kyang
Cha shas nyid du spros dang bral
Ji bzhin ba zhes mi rtog kyang
rNam par snang mdzad kun tu bzang
Zin pas rtsol ba'i nad spangs te
lHun gyis gnas pas bzhag pa yin
And Norbu / Shane render it as:
“The nature of phenomena is nondual,
but each one, in its own state, is beyond
the limits of the mind.
There is no concept that can define
the condition of ‘what is’
but vision nevertheless manifests:
all is good.
Everything has already been accomplished,
and so, having overcome the sickness of effort,
one finds oneself in the self-perfected state:
this is contemplation.”
That helps clarify a few things nicely. In this book, line 2 is being understood not so much as “parts/aspects are free from elaboration” in a technical philological way, but as “each one, in its own state, is beyond the limits of the mind.” And line 4 is taken in the broad experiential sense: “vision nevertheless manifests: all is good,” which leans hard into kun tu bzang as “all-good,” while still preserving the rich Samantabhadra resonance in the Tibetan.
Norbu also explicitly says the Six Vajra Verses contain the principles of base, path, and fruit, and at the same time the way of seeing, way of practicing, and way of behaving. He says the first two verses explain the primordial base and the way of seeing in Dzogchen.
So if we now read your six lines in a Norbu-shaped way, the sense is:
Though phenomena appear as many, their nature is nondual.
Each thing, exactly as it is, cannot be captured by mind.
Reality cannot be pinned down by concept.
Yet display still appears, and this display is intrinsically good / complete.
Since nothing is lacking, striving is a sickness.
What remains is simply the self-perfected state, contemplation.
This also confirms that your copied Tibetan was accurate to Norbu’s printed text, including Ji bzhin ba and lHun gyis with the capitalized line starts as printed there.
What is especially helpful here is that Norbu’s commentary makes the verse less like an abstract metaphysical statement and more like a practical Dzogchen instruction: stop trying to define reality from outside, stop straining, and recognize that the display of experience is already arising from the primordial state.
I can now do one of two useful things for you: either give you a line-by-line breakdown using Norbu’s own interpretive angle, or a more philological breakdown showing where Norbu’s translation is expansive compared with the Tibetan.
Please, both.
Absolutely 🌿 Here are both, side by side: first Norbu’s own interpretive arc, then a more philological look at where his English opens the Tibetan out.
Norbu presents the Six Vajra Verses as a summary of Dzogchen in terms of base, path, and fruit, and also as way of seeing, practicing, and behaving. He says the first two lines concern the primordial base and the way of seeing.
Using Norbu’s interpretive angle first:
Line 1: sNa tshogs rang bzhin mi gnyis kyang
Norbu renders this as “The nature of phenomena is nondual.” His emphasis is not on denying multiplicity but on saying that the countless phenomena that appear all share one indivisible real condition. In his commentary, he stresses that this nonduality is not something outside us; it is “the true condition of every individual.”
Line 2: Cha shas nyid du spros dang bral
He translates this as “but each one, in its own state, is beyond the limits of the mind.” Here Norbu is clearly reading the line experientially rather than narrowly lexically. His point is that each phenomenon, just as it is, cannot be fully enclosed by conceptual mind. This fits his broader insistence that Dzogchen’s way of seeing is not philosophical theorizing but recognition of one’s own actual condition.
Line 3: Ji bzhin ba zhes mi rtog kyang
Norbu gives: “There is no concept that can define the condition of ‘what is’.” This is very much his style: he hears ji bzhin ba as “what is” or reality as-it-is, and mi rtog not merely as “nonconceptual” in a technical sense, but as a refusal of conceptual capture. Reality cannot be pinned down by thought.
Line 4: rNam par snang mdzad kun tu bzang
He renders: “but vision nevertheless manifests: all is good.” This is quite interpretive. Rather than foregrounding the names Vairocana or Samantabhadra, he lets kun tu bzang bloom into “all is good,” meaning the display itself is not something fallen from the base. It manifests, and its manifestation is already within the goodness or completeness of the primordial state. That matches his larger explanation of “clarity” as the spontaneous manifestation of perception prior to conceptual judgment.
Line 5: Zin pas rtsol ba’i nad spangs te
Norbu gives: “Everything has already been accomplished, and so, having overcome the sickness of effort…” This is central for him. The problem is not that reality is absent, but that we strain after what is already complete. In the same book he explains the nature as “self-perfected” and spontaneous from the beginning, which is exactly the doctrinal background for reading striving as a sickness.
Line 6: lHun gyis gnas pas bzhag pa yin
He finishes: “…one finds oneself in the self-perfected state: this is contemplation.” This is very Norbu. He reads the line not just as “rest naturally” but as entry into the self-perfected state itself, and identifies that with contemplation. So the verse ends not with a technique but with a mode of abiding: relaxed presence in what is already complete.
Now the more philological side 😊
Line 1 is straightforward enough.
sna tshogs means multiplicity, diversity, manifold appearances; rang bzhin is nature; mi gnyis is nondual; kyang is “although / though.” A more literal rendering is: “Though the nature of multiplicity is nondual…” Norbu’s “The nature of phenomena is nondual” is elegant and faithful, just a little smoother and less visibly concessive than the Tibetan.
Line 2 is where expansion begins.
cha shas literally means parts, aspects, portions, facets. nyid du adds “as such / in themselves.” spros dang bral literally means “free from elaboration,” often in the sense of being beyond conceptual proliferation. So a closer rendering would be something like: “its very aspects are free from elaboration.” Norbu’s “each one, in its own state, is beyond the limits of the mind” is not wrong in spirit, but it is looser and more explanatory. He is unpacking spros dang bral into a meditative meaning rather than staying with the terse technical idiom.
Line 3 also expands.
ji bzhin ba means “as it is,” “suchness,” or “the way it is.” zhes means “as / called / saying.” mi rtog literally means “does not conceptualize” or “nonconceptual.” So a more compact rendering would be: “Though it is not conceptualized as ‘as-it-is-ness’…” Norbu’s “There is no concept that can define the condition of ‘what is’” is interpretive prose. It captures the point beautifully, but it adds “define” and turns the line into a philosophical sentence.
Line 4 is the most expansive of all.
rnam par snang mdzad can suggest “manifest display,” but it is also the Tibetan name of Vairocana. kun tu bzang is Samantabhadra, literally “all-good” or “universally good/excellent.” A more literal rendering might be “all manifest display is Samantabhadra” or perhaps “Vairocana is Samantabhadra,” depending on how one hears the line. Norbu instead gives “vision nevertheless manifests: all is good.” That beautifully captures the experiential import, but it downplays the likely proper-name resonance and turns the line into a phenomenological teaching. That is a very deliberate interpretive choice.
Line 5 is still interpretive but closer.
zin pas means “because it is already possessed / already obtained / already complete.” rtsol ba’i nad is literally “the disease of striving/effort.” spangs te means “having abandoned.” So literally: “Since it is already obtained, having abandoned the disease of striving…” Norbu’s “Everything has already been accomplished” is slightly broader than zin pas, but it expresses the doctrinal force well.
Line 6 is also expanded.
lhun gyis means spontaneously, naturally; it resonates with lhun grub, spontaneous perfection or self-perfectedness. gnas pas means by abiding, remaining. bzhag pa yin means “it is left / placed / settled.” A fairly literal rendering would be: “it is left in spontaneous abiding” or “one rests in spontaneous abiding.” Norbu’s “one finds oneself in the self-perfected state: this is contemplation” is not literal, but it is doctrinally rich. He is reading the line through his larger explanation that the nature is “self-perfected” and that true practice is contemplation, not construction.
So, in a sentence: Norbu’s translation is less a strict philological trot and more a living Dzogchen commentary built into English. He consistently chooses to bring out the experiential and contemplative force of the verse, especially on nonconceptuality, display, and effortless abiding, even where the Tibetan is terser and more technical. ✨
If you’d like, the next best step would be for me to make you a three-column version: Tibetan | literal gloss | Norbu-style interpretive sense.
Yes
Absolutely 🌿 Here’s a clean three-column style presentation, using Norbu’s text as the anchor and keeping the middle column fairly literal while the third reflects Norbu’s interpretive current. The book’s Part Two introduces the Six Vajra Verses as a six-line summary of the essence of Dzogchen, transmitted by Śrī Siṃha to Vairochana.
1. sNa tshogs rang bzhin mi gnyis kyang
Literal gloss: “Though the nature of multiplicity is nondual”
Norbu-style interpretive sense: “The nature of phenomena is nondual” — all the many appearances are not truly divided in their real condition.
2. Cha shas nyid du spros dang bral
Literal gloss: “Its very aspects / parts as such are free from elaboration”
Norbu-style interpretive sense: “but each one, in its own state, is beyond the limits of the mind” — every distinct appearance, precisely as it is, escapes conceptual fencing-in.
3. Ji bzhin ba zhes mi rtog kyang
Literal gloss: “Though it is not conceptualized as ‘just-so’ / ‘as-it-is’”
Norbu-style interpretive sense: “There is no concept that can define the condition of ‘what is’” — even suchness cannot be turned into an object the mind neatly captures.
4. rNam par snang mdzad kun tu bzang
Literal gloss: “All-manifest display is Samantabhadra / all-good”
Norbu-style interpretive sense: “but vision nevertheless manifests: all is good” — display still arises, but not as a fall from reality; manifestation itself is already within primordial completeness.
5. Zin pas rtsol ba’i nad spangs te
Literal gloss: “Since it is already attained/present, the disease of striving is abandoned”
Norbu-style interpretive sense: “Everything has already been accomplished, and so, having overcome the sickness of effort…” — the problem is not absence of the state, but the anxious efforting that assumes it is missing.
6. lHun gyis gnas pas bzhag pa yin
Literal gloss: “By remaining in spontaneous abiding, it is left/rested”
Norbu-style interpretive sense: “…one finds oneself in the self-perfected state: this is contemplation” — not manufactured meditation, but resting in what is already spontaneously present.
Now, if I compress the whole thing into one flowing three-part form:
Tibetan
sNa tshogs rang bzhin mi gnyis kyang
Cha shas nyid du spros dang bral
Ji bzhin ba zhes mi rtog kyang
rNam par snang mdzad kun tu bzang
Zin pas rtsol ba’i nad spangs te
lHun gyis gnas pas bzhag pa yin
Literal-leaning English
Though the nature of multiplicity is nondual,
its very aspects are free from elaboration.
Though it is not conceptualized as “as-it-is,”
all manifest display is Samantabhadra, the All-Good.
Since it is already present, abandon the disease of striving;
leave it in spontaneous abiding.
Norbu-style interpretive sense
The many are not truly two.
Each thing, in its own condition, is beyond the mind’s limits.
Reality cannot be defined by concept.
Yet vision manifests, and this display is wholly good.
Because nothing is lacking, effort is a sickness to be dropped.
What remains is the self-perfected state: contemplation.
And the key difference between the middle and right “columns” is this: the literal gloss stays close to the compressed Tibetan idiom, while Norbu opens it into a lived Dzogchen instruction. He is not just translating words; he is drawing out the experiential force of the verse — especially the impossibility of conceptual capture, the primordial goodness of display, and the dropping of effort. Part Two of the book explicitly frames the verses as a summary of base, path, and fruit, which is exactly why his English is so interpretive and practice-oriented.
If you’d like, I can next turn this into an even more study-friendly format with four lines under each verse: Tibetan, Wylie, literal gloss, and commentary.
OK
Good 🌿
That four-part format would look like this:
Tibetan
Wylie
Literal gloss
Short commentary
For example, line 1 would become:
Tibetan: སྣ་ཚོགས་རང་བཞིན་མི་གཉིས་ཀྱང
Wylie: sna tshogs rang bzhin mi gnyis kyang
Literal gloss: Though the nature of multiplicity is nondual
Commentary: The many appearances are not denied, but their actual nature is not divided into two.
And line 4:
Tibetan: རྣམ་པར་སྣང་མཛད་ཀུན་ཏུ་བཟང
Wylie: rnam par snang mdzad kun tu bzang
Literal gloss: All-manifest display is Samantabhadra / All-Good
Commentary: Norbu renders this more experientially as “vision nevertheless manifests: all is good,” bringing out the goodness and completeness of display rather than emphasizing the proper-name resonance alone.
If you want, I’ll lay out all six verses that way in one clean study sheet.
YES
Absolutely 🌿 Here is a clean study sheet for all six verses.
Norbu’s book presents these as the Six Vajra Verses, a concise summary of Dzogchen, and gives the interpretive translation we discussed.
1
Tibetan: སྣ་ཚོགས་རང་བཞིན་མི་གཉིས་ཀྱང་
Wylie: sna tshogs rang bzhin mi gnyis kyang
Literal gloss: Though the nature of multiplicity is nondual
Commentary: Variety appears, but its actual nature is not split into subject and object, self and other, samsara and nirvana as truly separate realities.
2
Tibetan: ཆ་ཤས་ཉིད་དུ་སྤྲོས་དང་བྲལ་
Wylie: cha shas nyid du spros dang bral
Literal gloss: Its very aspects, as such, are free from elaboration
Commentary: Each distinct appearance cannot finally be captured by conceptual proliferation. Norbu opens this out as: each thing, in its own state, is beyond the limits of mind.
3
Tibetan: ཇི་བཞིན་བ་ཞེས་མི་རྟོག་ཀྱང་
Wylie: ji bzhin ba zhes mi rtog kyang
Literal gloss: Though it is not conceptualized as “just-so” or “as-it-is”
Commentary: Even suchness cannot be turned into a mental object. Reality is not grasped by pinning a concept onto it, even a refined spiritual concept.
4
Tibetan: རྣམ་པར་སྣང་མཛད་ཀུན་ཏུ་བཟང་
Wylie: rnam par snang mdzad kun tu bzang
Literal gloss: All-manifest display is Samantabhadra, the All-Good
Commentary: This line is wonderfully rich. It can suggest awakened display itself, and it also carries the resonance of Samantabhadra. Norbu renders it more experientially as: “vision nevertheless manifests: all is good.”
5
Tibetan: ཟིན་པས་རྩོལ་བའི་ནད་སྤངས་ཏེ་
Wylie: zin pas rtsol ba’i nad spangs te
Literal gloss: Since it is already attained/present, the disease of striving is abandoned
Commentary: The core problem is not that the state is absent, but that effort assumes absence. Dzogchen repeatedly treats compulsive spiritual striving as a symptom of non-recognition.
6
Tibetan: ལྷུན་གྱིས་གནས་པས་བཞག་པ་ཡིན་
Wylie: lhun gyis gnas pas bzhag pa yin
Literal gloss: By remaining in spontaneous abiding, it is left as it is
Commentary: This is relaxed, uncontrived resting in spontaneous presence. Norbu renders the end more interpretively as entry into “the self-perfected state: this is contemplation.”
Here is the full set again in one uninterrupted block:
སྣ་ཚོགས་རང་བཞིན་མི་གཉིས་ཀྱང་
ཆ་ཤས་ཉིད་དུ་སྤྲོས་དང་བྲལ་
ཇི་བཞིན་བ་ཞེས་མི་རྟོག་ཀྱང་
རྣམ་པར་སྣང་མཛད་ཀུན་ཏུ་བཟང་
ཟིན་པས་རྩོལ་བའི་ནད་སྤངས་ཏེ་
ལྷུན་གྱིས་གནས་པས་བཞག་པ་ཡིན་
And the full Wylie:
sna tshogs rang bzhin mi gnyis kyang
cha shas nyid du spros dang bral
ji bzhin ba zhes mi rtog kyang
rnam par snang mdzad kun tu bzang
zin pas rtsol ba’i nad spangs te
lhun gyis gnas pas bzhag pa yin
A compact flowing translation, staying fairly close to the Tibetan, would be:
Though the nature of multiplicity is nondual,
its very facets are free from elaboration.
Though it is not conceptualized as “as it is,”
all manifest display is Samantabhadra, the All-Good.
Since it is already present, abandon the disease of striving;
leave it in spontaneous abiding.
And Norbu’s published interpretive rendering is:
“The nature of phenomena is nondual,
but each one, in its own state, is beyond
the limits of the mind.
There is no concept that can define
the condition of ‘what is’
but vision nevertheless manifests:
all is good.
Everything has already been accomplished,
and so, having overcome the sickness of effort,
one finds oneself in the self-perfected state:
this is contemplation.”
One small textual note: the printed Norbu version uses ji bzhin ba, which is what you copied, though some other presentations give ji bzhin pa. The sense does not change much in practice.
I can next turn this into a memorization sheet with pronunciation help under each line.
Yes
Gladly 🌿 Here’s a memorization sheet with simple pronunciation help under each line. I’ll keep it practical rather than hyper-scholarly, so it’s easier to recite.
This is based on the Norbu/Shane text you uploaded.
1
Tibetan: སྣ་ཚོགས་རང་བཞིན་མི་གཉིས་ཀྱང་
Wylie: sna tshogs rang bzhin mi gnyis kyang
Pronunciation: na-tsok rang zhin mi-nyi kyang
Memory cue: “The many are not-two.”
Literal sense: Though the nature of multiplicity is nondual.
2
Tibetan: ཆ་ཤས་ཉིད་དུ་སྤྲོས་དང་བྲལ་
Wylie: cha shas nyid du spros dang bral
Pronunciation: cha-shé nyi-du trö dang dral
Memory cue: “Each part is beyond mental elaboration.”
Literal sense: Its very aspects, as such, are free from elaboration.
3
Tibetan: ཇི་བཞིན་བ་ཞེས་མི་རྟོག་ཀྱང་
Wylie: ji bzhin ba zhes mi rtog kyang
Pronunciation: ji zhin-wa zhé mi tok kyang
Memory cue: “Suchness cannot be thought into a concept.”
Literal sense: Though it is not conceptualized as “as-it-is.”
4
Tibetan: རྣམ་པར་སྣང་མཛད་ཀུན་ཏུ་བཟང་
Wylie: rnam par snang mdzad kun tu bzang
Pronunciation: nam-par nang-dzé kün-tu zang
Memory cue: “Display is all-good.”
Literal sense: All-manifest display is Samantabhadra, the All-Good.
5
Tibetan: ཟིན་པས་རྩོལ་བའི་ནད་སྤངས་ཏེ་
Wylie: zin pas rtsol ba’i nad spangs te
Pronunciation: zin-pé tsol-wé né pang-té
Memory cue: “Drop the sickness of striving.”
Literal sense: Since it is already present/attained, the disease of striving is abandoned.
6
Tibetan: ལྷུན་གྱིས་གནས་པས་བཞག་པ་ཡིན་
Wylie: lhun gyis gnas pas bzhag pa yin
Pronunciation: lhün-gyi né-pé zhak-pa yin
Memory cue: “Rest in spontaneous abiding.”
Literal sense: By remaining in spontaneous abiding, it is left as it is.
Here it is as a recitation block:
སྣ་ཚོགས་རང་བཞིན་མི་གཉིས་ཀྱང་
na-tsok rang zhin mi-nyi kyang
ཆ་ཤས་ཉིད་དུ་སྤྲོས་དང་བྲལ་
cha-shé nyi-du trö dang dral
ཇི་བཞིན་བ་ཞེས་མི་རྟོག་ཀྱང་
ji zhin-wa zhé mi tok kyang
རྣམ་པར་སྣང་མཛད་ཀུན་ཏུ་བཟང་
nam-par nang-dzé kün-tu zang
ཟིན་པས་རྩོལ་བའི་ནད་སྤངས་ཏེ་
zin-pé tsol-wé né pang-té
ལྷུན་གྱིས་གནས་པས་བཞག་པ་ཡིན་
lhün-gyi né-pé zhak-pa yin
A few quick pronunciation notes may help a lot 😊
In this style of simplified pronunciation, zh sounds like the “s” in “pleasure,” ny sounds like the “ny” in “canyon,” ü is like the German/French rounded vowel, and lh is a breathy lateral sound, though for memorization you can get close enough with a light “l+h.” Also, written Tibetan and spoken Tibetan do not match neatly, so this is only an approximate recitation aid, not a strict phonology chart.
A very simple chunking method for memorization would be:
First pair:
na-tsok rang zhin mi-nyi kyang
cha-shé nyi-du trö dang dral
Second pair:
ji zhin-wa zhé mi tok kyang
nam-par nang-dzé kün-tu zang
Third pair:
zin-pé tsol-wé né pang-té
lhün-gyi né-pé zhak-pa yin
That gives you three two-line units instead of six isolated lines, which is usually easier to hold in memory.
And one more thing: Norbu’s English rendering is especially helpful for remembering the movement of the verses: nondual nature, beyond mind, no concept can define it, yet vision manifests, effort is sickness, rest in the self-perfected state.
I can also make you a call-and-response version next, with one line of Tibetan followed by one short English cue for chanting practice.