A Ritual Manual for the Uṣṇīṣavijayā Dhāraṇī is a short work in which the Buddha Amitāyus teaches the uṣṇīṣavijayā dhāraṇī along with its benefits and a number of short rites for its recitation.
This text was translated by Catherine Dalton, who also wrote the introduction.
The translation was completed under the patronage and supervision of 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha.
The generous sponsorship of May, George, Likai, and Lillian Gu, which helped make the work on this translation possible, is most gratefully acknowledged.
A Ritual Manual for the Uṣṇīṣavijayā Dhāraṇī opens in Sukhāvatī, where the Blessed One Amitāyus is residing. Amitāyus addresses the bodhisattva Avalokiteśvara, informing him that there are beings who suffer from illnesses and short lifespans, and introducing the uṣṇīṣavijayā dhāraṇī as a remedy for such painful circumstances. Avalokiteśvara immediately asks Amitāyus to pronounce the dhāraṇī, which the Tathāgata does from within a state of samādhi.
After he pronounces the dhāraṇī, Amitāyus explains the benefits of reciting the uṣṇīṣavijayā dhāraṇī, noting that it purifies evil deeds and extends the lifespan of someone who recites it and follows the rite that is explained in the text.
The rite itself involves the creation of a maṇḍala in which the Tathāgata Uṣṇīṣa Arisen from the Natural Essence is drawn in the center of an eight-spoked wheel and surrounded by eight other uṣṇīṣa buddhas. These are surrounded by a sixteen-petaled lotus on which are drawn uṣṇīṣa buddhas with names correlated with the sixteen emptinesses. These are surrounded by four Uṣṇīṣavijayā goddesses and four other goddesses. The maṇḍala is to be surrounded with different types of offerings, with a thousand of each offering item set around the maṇḍala, and the dhāraṇī recited a thousand times. The text concludes by stating that the performance of this rite will extend one’s lifespan, cure illness, and prevent untimely death. The last line of the text mentions that this is the “first chapter,”1 but no further chapters appear.
This work is one among a group of texts in the Kriyātantra section of the Tibetan Kangyurs that contain the uṣṇīṣavijayā dhāraṇī and its related rituals (kalpa). The present text is one of four short dhāraṇī texts—three of which have the same title—that present the uṣṇīṣavijayā dhāraṇī with its ritual manual (kalpa).2 These four works share a similar narrative opening (nidāna) up through the presentation of the dhāraṇī proper, and several among them also share additional passages (though the present text does not). The present text, moreover, shows evidence of having been edited to improve upon some of the awkward readings found in the other members of this group of texts. These changes—which include using a more standardized spelling of Amitāyus’ name and the change of the name of a samādhi from an obscure name to one that is more common—along with the content of the ritual section describing a maṇḍala of eight uṣṇīṣa buddhas surrounding a central uṣṇīṣa buddha, confirm what we know from the colophon (see i.13) about the date of its translation: this work, in comparison to the other uṣṇīṣavijayā dhāraṇī works preserved in the Tibetan canon, began to circulate considerably later.
Evidence for the later circulation not only of the Tibetan translation but probably of its Sanskrit source, too, comes in its use of a greater number of oṁs in the main dhāraṇī. All the other texts in the Uṣṇīṣavijayā group—Toh 594, 595, 596, and 597/984, as well as the Dunhuang manuscripts—include only three oṁs in the dhāraṇī. In this text, and in the Sanskrit edition prepared by Gergely Hidas based on Nepalese manuscripts that date from the seventeenth century onwards, oṁ appears no less than nine times. The Tibetan translation of this text being of a significantly later date than the other works of the group, as its colophon indicates, may possibly demonstrate a change in the circulation of the uṣṇīṣavijayā dhāraṇī that is also reflected in extant Nepalese Sanskrit versions of the texts. This shift is described in the colophon of the version of Toh 597 found in the Phukdrak (phug brag) Kangyur,3 where a note stating that the texts with only three oṁs are to be considered more correct also claims that although there may have been Sanskrit sources with as many as nine oṁs, the twelfth-century translator Sumpa Lotsāwa reported that all the Sanskrit texts he had seen contained only three, and that the Sanskrit manuscripts of the texts held at Sakya monastery had no more than that. Because Sumpa Lotsāwa4 is known to have lived and studied in Nepal, his comment on the “correct” number of oṁs in the Sanskrit manuscripts available to him offers a glimpse into the evolution of the text in the Nepalese tradition.
There are many Sanskrit witnesses of the uṣṇīṣavijayā dhāraṇī proper.5 Moreover, what we will call—simply for the purpose of distinguishing it from the present group of dhāraṇī-kalpas—the “primary” uṣṇīṣavijayā dhāraṇī text (Toh 597, which is titled Sarvadurgatipariśodhana-uṣṇīṣavijayā-dhāraṇī rather than Uṣṇīṣavijayā-dhāraṇī-kalpasahitā)6 survives in at least one incomplete early manuscript.7
While our text seems no longer to be extant in Sanskrit, there is at least one surviving Sanskrit uṣṇīṣavijayā dhāraṇī work that is closely related to it and belongs to the same group of related dhāraṇī texts described above. This Sanskrit work shares the same opening narrative and some of the ritual material with the texts from this group.8
The primary uṣṇīṣavijayā text was first translated into Chinese by Buddhapāli in the late seventh century, and then at least five times subsequently.9 Several ritual manuals for the dhāraṇī’s recitation were also translated into Chinese, but our text does not appear to be among them.10 One ritual manual (Taishō 978), translated into Chinese by Dharmadeva between 973 and 981, is among the group of uṣṇīṣavijayā dhāraṇī texts to which the present work belongs.11 Another ritual manual surviving in Chinese is similar to our text in that it describes a maṇḍala of eight uṣṇīṣa buddhas. The eight buddhas themselves are, however, not the same as those described in the present text, a set that indeed appears unique within the Tibetan canon.12 The primary uṣṇīṣavijayā text was significant in East Asia, and one scholar has even identified it as the most important esoteric Buddhist scripture translated into Chinese in the seventh century.13 Practices connected with the uṣṇīṣavijayā dhāraṇī were important in China, in particular in conjunction with funerary rites, where the dhāraṇī was written on pillars near tombs, especially from the mid-Tang to Ming dynasties (ca. 800–1600
The uṣṇīṣavijayā dhāraṇī also appears to have been popular in Dunhuang. A number of Tibetan manuscripts from Dunhuang include just the dhāraṇī on its own, both in Tibetan transliteration (dhāraṇīs, like mantras, are commonly left untranslated in Tibetan texts) and in Tibetan translation. The primary uṣṇīṣavijayā dhāraṇī text (Toh 597) also appears in several Dunhuang manuscripts.16 Several drawings from Dunhuang show maṇḍala (altar) arrangements corresponding to uṣṇīṣavijayā dhāraṇī texts.17
In Nepal, uṣṇīṣavijayā dhāraṇī rituals continue to be performed as part of modern Newar Buddhist practice, where their practice is sometimes prescribed for Wednesdays in particular.18 Practices connected to the uṣṇīṣavijayā dhāraṇī likewise continue in modern Tibetan Buddhism. The so-called Tongchö (stong mchod)—the thousandfold offering practice of Uṣṇīṣavijayā, a version of which is mentioned briefly in our text—is currently performed in Tibetan monasteries, sometimes using a ritual manual composed by the nineteenth-century polymath Jamyang Khyentsé Wangpo. Other notable Tibetan works on the uṣṇīṣavijayā dhāraṇī and its associated practices include commentaries by the great Sakya lama Butön (bu ston rin chen grub, 1290–1364) and the fourth Panchen Lama, Losang Chökyi Gyaltsen (blo bzang chos kyi rgyal mtshan, 1570–1662).
The question of what, or who, exactly, Uṣṇīṣavijayā is is a complex one that cannot be clearly answered here. In short, like a number of uṣṇīṣa deities, she is sometimes identified as a protective deity, in this case a goddess, emanated from the Buddha’s uṣṇīṣa. Indeed, Uṣṇīṣavijayā is clearly depicted as a goddess in a number of short sādhanas included in Indian anthologies such as the Sādhanamāla, compiled from the works of many authors probably during the period of the Pāla kings (eighth to twelfth century).19 Three closely similar sādhanas of a three-faced, eight armed form of the goddess are included in the Tengyur, one in each of the three related anthologies translated from the Indian collections into Tibetan in the eleventh to fourteenth centuries respectively,20 two of them translated earlier than this text. A variety of other forms are depicted or described in Chinese, Japanese, Tibetan, Mongolian, and Kashmiri sources.21 In the later Tibetan tradition Uṣṇīṣavijayā can even appear as one of a group of three long-life deities along with the Buddha Amitāyus and White Tārā. However, the present text is the only one of the uṣṇīṣavijayā works in this section of the Kangyur to use the name Uṣṇīṣavijayā to refer clearly to a goddess. The present text contains an homage to Uṣṇīṣavijayā (whereas the other texts in the series pay homage to the buddhas and bodhisattvas), and the maṇḍala described in the rite here includes four different Uṣṇīṣavijayā goddesses surrounding the central maṇḍala of uṣṇīṣa buddhas. In contrast, while the dhāraṇī itself does use the feminine vocative form throughout, in the other uṣṇīṣavijayā texts in this section of the Kangyur, the name uṣṇīṣavijayā is not rendered into Tibetan in the feminine, and the word uṣṇīṣavijayā is used only to refer to the name of the dhāraṇī—the dhāraṇī of the crown victory.22
The range of possible answers to the question of what the name Uṣṇīṣavijayā refers to is enlarged even further by the existence of a group of related texts widely used in Southeast Asia, sharing the Pali title Uṇhissa-vijaya-sutta (or in some cases simply Uṇhissa-vijaya) but found in a number of different forms, some in Pali but others in Siamese, Lao, Yuon, and Khmer. Some refer at least briefly to the story of the god Supratiṣṭhita (Pali Supatiṭṭhita) which, although it does not feature in the present text, is the frame story or a secondary narrative element in others of the group. But instead of the dhāraṇī of the Sanskrit and Tibetan texts these Southeast Asian texts contain a set of verses (gāthā) to be recited whose content is unrelated to that of the Sanskrit dhāraṇī. The gāthā are also found alone in several ritual compilations. Even in the vernacular versions, the verses are written in Pali. In these texts, in their own opening lines, it seems to be the verses themselves that are referred to as the Uṇhissa-vijaya.23
According to its colophon, this text was translated into Tibetan by Lotsāwa Neten Palkyi Nyima Gyaltsen Sangpo at Tharpa Ling in accordance with the instructions of Ne’u Khenpo. Tharpa Ling is a monastery near Zhalu in Central Tibet, and Tharpa Lotsāwa Nyima Gyaltsen, active in the late thirteenth and early fourteenth centuries, was one of Butön’s teachers. This translation was therefore among the last translations to be included in the canon. One Uṣṇīṣavijayā-dhāraṇī-vidhisahitā is listed in the ninth century imperial Phangthangma catalog. While the dating means that it cannot refer to the same Tibetan translation as the present text, it is certainly a work of a similar type, and its inclusion in the Phangthangma, along with the records of uṣṇīṣavijayā texts at Dunhuang, indicate the early presence in Tibet not just of the uṣṇīṣavijayā dhāraṇī, but also of some of its associated rites.24 Nonetheless, as noted above, its contents make it clear that the present text began to circulate later than the other similar uṣṇīṣavijayā texts included in the canon—even those that include associated rites.
The present translation is based on the Tibetan translation of the text found in the Tantra Collection (rgyud ’bum) section of the Degé Kangyur,25 in consultation with the Stok Palace Kangyur and the notes in the Comparative Edition of the Kangyur (dpe bsdur ma). The text is stable across all the Kangyurs consulted, with the same title and colophon and only minor variants. We also consulted Hidas’ edition and translation of the surviving Sanskrit Uṣṇīṣavijayā-dhāraṇī text for the passages that are parallel with the present text.
The main dhāraṇī is not identical in every detail across the five different versions in the Degé Kangyur (Toh 594–598), and the existence of further variations across different Kangyurs and versions in extra-canonical collections further complicates the picture. Reference to the dhāraṇī as presented in Hidas’ edition of the Sanskrit yields useful orthographic confirmation, but may be misleading as a model given that the ten different Nepalese Sanskrit manuscripts on which it is based are of much later date than any of the present Tibetan witnesses. Here and in the other works in the group we have therefore chosen to transcribe the dhāraṇī as it appears in the Degé version of each text, making only minor choices of orthography and adding annotations to point out the most significant discrepancies.
Over the centuries, the textual transmission of the dhāraṇī has preserved the major portion of it with remarkable fidelity. Nevertheless, the few anomalies to be seen across all these closely related texts are a reminder that here, as with other dhāraṇī works, some variations over time and place are to be expected.
[F.248.a]Homage to Uṣṇīṣavijayā.
26Thus did I hear at one time. The Blessed One was residing in Sukhāvatī. The blessed, thus-gone, worthy, perfectly awakened Buddha Amitāyus was staying joyfully in the grove of the excellent secret palace, Dharma Proclamation.27 He said to the bodhisattva, the great being, Noble Avalokiteśvara, “Child of noble family, there are beings who suffer, are afflicted with diseases, and have short lifespans. To help them, one should uphold this dhāraṇī called the crown victory of all tathāgatas and teach it extensively to others for the sake of long life.”
Then the bodhisattva, the great being, Avalokiteśvara arose from his seat, joined his palms,[F.248.b] and said to the Blessed One, “Blessed One, please teach the dhāraṇī called the crown victory of all tathāgatas. Well-Gone One, please teach it!”
Then the Blessed One looked upon the circle of his perfect28 retinue, entered the samādhi called the splendor beheld everywhere, and pronounced this dhāraṇī called the crown victory of all tathāgatas:
“oṁ namo bhagavate sarvatrailokyaprativiśiṣṭāya buddhāya te namaḥ | tadyathā | oṁ bhrūṁ bhrūṁ bhrūṁ | śodhaya śodhaya | viśodhaya viśodhaya | asamasamantāvabhāsaspharaṇagatigaganasvabhāvaviśuddhe29 | abhiṣiñcantu māṃ sarvatathāgatāḥ sugatavaravacanāmṛtābhiṣekair mahāmudrāmantrapadaiḥ | oṁ30 āhara āhara mama31 āyuḥsandhāraṇi | śodhaya śodhaya | viśodhaya viśodhaya | gaganasvabhāvaviśuddhe | uṣṇīṣavijāyapariśuddhe | sahasraraśmisañcodite | sarvatathāgatāvalokini | ṣaṭpāramitāparipūraṇi | sarvatathāgatamāte32 | daśabhūmipratiṣṭḥite | sarvatathāgatahṛdayādhiṣṭhānādhiṣṭḥite | oṁ33 mudre mudre mahāmudre | vajrakāyasaṃhatanapariśuddhe | sarvakarmāvaraṇaviśuddhe | pratinivartaya mamāyurviśuddhe | sarvatathāgatasamayādhiṣṭhānādhiṣṭhite | oṁ muni muni mahāmuni | vimuni vimuni mahāvimuni | mati mati mahāmati | mamati mamati34 mahāmamati| sumati sumati mahāsumati35 | tathatābhūtakoṭipariśuddhe | visphuṭabuddhiśuddhe | oṁ36 he he | jaya jaya | vijaya vijaya | smara smara | sphara sphara | sphāraya sphāraya | sarvabuddhādhiṣṭhānādhiṣṭhite | oṁ37 śuddhe śuddhe | buddhe buddhe | vajre vajre mahāvajre | suvajre | vajragarbhe | jayagarbhe | vijayagarbhe | vajrajvālagarbhe | vajrodbhave | vajrasambhave | vajre | vajrini | vajram bhavatu me śarīraṃ sarvasatvānāñ ca kāyapariśuddhir bhavatu | me sadā38 sarvagatipariśuddhiś ca39 | sarvatathāgatāś ca māṃ40 samāśvāsayantu | oṁ41 budhya budhya | siddhya siddhya | bodhaya bodhaya | vibodhaya vibodhaya | mocaya mocaya | vimocaya vimocaya |[F.249.a] śodhaya śodhaya | viśodhaya viśodhaya | samantān mocaya mocaya | samantaraśmipariśuddhe | sarvatathāgatahṛdayādhiṣṭhānādhiṣṭhite | oṁ42 mudre mudre mahāmudre | mahāmudrāmantrapadaiḥ svāhā.43
“Child of noble family, this dhāraṇī of the crown victory of all tathāgatas is the destroyer44 of the great cudgel of death, the purifier, the destroyer of evil deeds. Anyone who wants a long lifespan should read this dhāraṇī aloud following the rite that I will explain here.
“Smear a wide clearing on the ground with earth and substances derived from a cow. Sprinkle it with saffron-infused water. Adorn it with a canopy45 above, and let that hang down. At the center draw46 an elaborately ornamented eight-spoked wheel with white powder. At the center of that is Uṣṇīṣa Arisen from the Natural Essence. Then, install these tathāgatas on each of the spokes of the wheel in order, starting in the east: Uṣṇīṣa Arisen from the Sky-Like Feast Gathering, Uṣṇīṣa Arisen from the Essence of the Earth, Uṣṇīṣa Arisen from the Essence of Jewels, Uṣṇīṣa Arisen from Nutritious Food, Uṣṇīṣa Arisen from the Boundless Essence, Uṣṇīṣa Arisen from the Essence of Splendor, Uṣṇīṣa Arisen from the Sound of a Drum, and Uṣṇīṣa Arisen from a Breeze.
“Draw a sixteen-petaled lotus directly on the outside of this and install, on each petal and in proper order, the following tathāgatas arisen from the sixteen drops: Uṣṇīṣa Arisen from Inner Emptiness,47 Uṣṇīṣa Arisen from Outer Emptiness, Uṣṇīṣa Arisen from Outer and Inner Emptiness, Uṣṇīṣa Arisen from the Emptiness of Emptiness, Uṣṇīṣa Arisen from Ultimate Emptiness, Uṣṇīṣa Arisen from the Emptiness of Compounded Phenomena, Uṣṇīṣa Arisen from the Emptiness of Uncompounded Phenomena, Uṣṇīṣa Arisen from Beginningless and Endless Emptiness,[F.249.b] Uṣṇīṣa Arisen from the Emptiness of Nonrejection, Uṣṇīṣa Arisen from the Natural Emptiness, Uṣṇīṣa Arisen from the Emptiness of All Phenomena, Uṣṇīṣa Arisen from the Emptiness of Own-Characteristics, Uṣṇīṣa Arisen from the Emptiness of the Unobserved, Uṣṇīṣa Arisen from the Emptiness of Nonentities, Uṣṇīṣa Arisen from the Emptiness of Own-Essence, and Uṣṇīṣa Arisen from the Emptiness of Own-Essence of Nonentities.
“Make a maṇḍala with seats for the tathāgatas and offer them whatever flowers are in season. Set up a throne in the upper half of it and place upon it a caitya of Vairocanagarbha in a water vessel. Also place there a piece of paper or a leaf with the syllables of the mantra and the practitioner’s name on it and a vase filled with water.
“Place four vases in the four directions surrounding the lotus and decorate them with silken tassels, parasols, and pennants. To the east place the goddess Uṣṇīṣavijayā Who Conquers All Obstacles. In the south is the goddess Uṣṇīṣavijayā Who Conquers Death. In the west is the goddess Uṣṇīṣavijayā Who Conquers Afflictive Emotions. In the north is the goddess Uṣṇīṣavijayā Who Conquers Illnesses of the Aggregates. In the southeast is Life-Granting Vajra Garland. In the southwest is Mahāmāyā. In the northwest is Golden Light. In the northeast is Life-Granting Golden Garland.
“Fill four vessels with perfumed water, hang flower garlands on them, and place them there also. Around these draw three images with colored powder. In the first line arrange one thousand molded images made with wet clay that is free from hairs and the like. If one thousand are not possible, it is essential to set out at least one hundred. Make offerings in the four directions with utmost honor and respect.
“A dharmabhāṇaka who maintains a vow[F.250.a] not to speak any other words should recite this dhāraṇī. Each time they recite the dhāraṇī, they should make offerings to the head of the caitya and consecrate it. After reciting one thousand times, they should wave their hand at the head of the central caitya and make offerings of flowers, incense, lamps, scented water, food offerings, and so forth. One thousand of each of these offerings should be arranged in lines around the caitya. Make sure that the line of lamps burns without being blown out by the wind for as long as it takes to finish the rite, and maintain equipoise and strict purity.
“If the rite is performed in this way, a lifespan of seven days will thereby become seven years, a lifespan of seven years will become a supremely long life, one will be free from illness and live for a hundred years, and one will never meet an untimely death. If one follows some other procedure to perform the rite, it will not work.”
This was the first chapter.48
This ritual manual was translated in Glorious Tharpa Ling Temple by the learned Lotsāwa Neten Palkyi Nyima Gyaltsen Sangpo following the instructions of the genuine spiritual friend, the sublime monk and unparalleled teacher of the Vinaya Piṭaka, Ne’u Khenpo.
A Ritual Manual for the Uṣṇīṣavijayā Dhāraṇī is a short work in which the Buddha Amitāyus teaches the uṣṇīṣavijayā dhāraṇī along with its benefits and a number of short rites for its recitation.
This text was translated by Catherine Dalton, who also wrote the introduction.
The translation was completed under the patronage and supervision of 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha.
The generous sponsorship of May, George, Likai, and Lillian Gu, which helped make the work on this translation possible, is most gratefully acknowledged.
A Ritual Manual for the Uṣṇīṣavijayā Dhāraṇī opens in Sukhāvatī, where the Blessed One Amitāyus is residing. Amitāyus addresses the bodhisattva Avalokiteśvara, informing him that there are beings who suffer from illnesses and short lifespans, and introducing the uṣṇīṣavijayā dhāraṇī as a remedy for such painful circumstances. Avalokiteśvara immediately asks Amitāyus to pronounce the dhāraṇī, which the Tathāgata does from within a state of samādhi.
After he pronounces the dhāraṇī, Amitāyus explains the benefits of reciting the uṣṇīṣavijayā dhāraṇī, noting that it purifies evil deeds and extends the lifespan of someone who recites it and follows the rite that is explained in the text.
The rite itself involves the creation of a maṇḍala in which the Tathāgata Uṣṇīṣa Arisen from the Natural Essence is drawn in the center of an eight-spoked wheel and surrounded by eight other uṣṇīṣa buddhas. These are surrounded by a sixteen-petaled lotus on which are drawn uṣṇīṣa buddhas with names correlated with the sixteen emptinesses. These are surrounded by four Uṣṇīṣavijayā goddesses and four other goddesses. The maṇḍala is to be surrounded with different types of offerings, with a thousand of each offering item set around the maṇḍala, and the dhāraṇī recited a thousand times. The text concludes by stating that the performance of this rite will extend one’s lifespan, cure illness, and prevent untimely death. The last line of the text mentions that this is the “first chapter,”1 but no further chapters appear.
This work is one among a group of texts in the Kriyātantra section of the Tibetan Kangyurs that contain the uṣṇīṣavijayā dhāraṇī and its related rituals (kalpa). The present text is one of four short dhāraṇī texts—three of which have the same title—that present the uṣṇīṣavijayā dhāraṇī with its ritual manual (kalpa).2 These four works share a similar narrative opening (nidāna) up through the presentation of the dhāraṇī proper, and several among them also share additional passages (though the present text does not). The present text, moreover, shows evidence of having been edited to improve upon some of the awkward readings found in the other members of this group of texts. These changes—which include using a more standardized spelling of Amitāyus’ name and the change of the name of a samādhi from an obscure name to one that is more common—along with the content of the ritual section describing a maṇḍala of eight uṣṇīṣa buddhas surrounding a central uṣṇīṣa buddha, confirm what we know from the colophon (see i.13) about the date of its translation: this work, in comparison to the other uṣṇīṣavijayā dhāraṇī works preserved in the Tibetan canon, began to circulate considerably later.
Evidence for the later circulation not only of the Tibetan translation but probably of its Sanskrit source, too, comes in its use of a greater number of oṁs in the main dhāraṇī. All the other texts in the Uṣṇīṣavijayā group—Toh 594, 595, 596, and 597/984, as well as the Dunhuang manuscripts—include only three oṁs in the dhāraṇī. In this text, and in the Sanskrit edition prepared by Gergely Hidas based on Nepalese manuscripts that date from the seventeenth century onwards, oṁ appears no less than nine times. The Tibetan translation of this text being of a significantly later date than the other works of the group, as its colophon indicates, may possibly demonstrate a change in the circulation of the uṣṇīṣavijayā dhāraṇī that is also reflected in extant Nepalese Sanskrit versions of the texts. This shift is described in the colophon of the version of Toh 597 found in the Phukdrak (phug brag) Kangyur,3 where a note stating that the texts with only three oṁs are to be considered more correct also claims that although there may have been Sanskrit sources with as many as nine oṁs, the twelfth-century translator Sumpa Lotsāwa reported that all the Sanskrit texts he had seen contained only three, and that the Sanskrit manuscripts of the texts held at Sakya monastery had no more than that. Because Sumpa Lotsāwa4 is known to have lived and studied in Nepal, his comment on the “correct” number of oṁs in the Sanskrit manuscripts available to him offers a glimpse into the evolution of the text in the Nepalese tradition.
There are many Sanskrit witnesses of the uṣṇīṣavijayā dhāraṇī proper.5 Moreover, what we will call—simply for the purpose of distinguishing it from the present group of dhāraṇī-kalpas—the “primary” uṣṇīṣavijayā dhāraṇī text (Toh 597, which is titled Sarvadurgatipariśodhana-uṣṇīṣavijayā-dhāraṇī rather than Uṣṇīṣavijayā-dhāraṇī-kalpasahitā)6 survives in at least one incomplete early manuscript.7
While our text seems no longer to be extant in Sanskrit, there is at least one surviving Sanskrit uṣṇīṣavijayā dhāraṇī work that is closely related to it and belongs to the same group of related dhāraṇī texts described above. This Sanskrit work shares the same opening narrative and some of the ritual material with the texts from this group.8
The primary uṣṇīṣavijayā text was first translated into Chinese by Buddhapāli in the late seventh century, and then at least five times subsequently.9 Several ritual manuals for the dhāraṇī’s recitation were also translated into Chinese, but our text does not appear to be among them.10 One ritual manual (Taishō 978), translated into Chinese by Dharmadeva between 973 and 981, is among the group of uṣṇīṣavijayā dhāraṇī texts to which the present work belongs.11 Another ritual manual surviving in Chinese is similar to our text in that it describes a maṇḍala of eight uṣṇīṣa buddhas. The eight buddhas themselves are, however, not the same as those described in the present text, a set that indeed appears unique within the Tibetan canon.12 The primary uṣṇīṣavijayā text was significant in East Asia, and one scholar has even identified it as the most important esoteric Buddhist scripture translated into Chinese in the seventh century.13 Practices connected with the uṣṇīṣavijayā dhāraṇī were important in China, in particular in conjunction with funerary rites, where the dhāraṇī was written on pillars near tombs, especially from the mid-Tang to Ming dynasties (ca. 800–1600
The uṣṇīṣavijayā dhāraṇī also appears to have been popular in Dunhuang. A number of Tibetan manuscripts from Dunhuang include just the dhāraṇī on its own, both in Tibetan transliteration (dhāraṇīs, like mantras, are commonly left untranslated in Tibetan texts) and in Tibetan translation. The primary uṣṇīṣavijayā dhāraṇī text (Toh 597) also appears in several Dunhuang manuscripts.16 Several drawings from Dunhuang show maṇḍala (altar) arrangements corresponding to uṣṇīṣavijayā dhāraṇī texts.17
In Nepal, uṣṇīṣavijayā dhāraṇī rituals continue to be performed as part of modern Newar Buddhist practice, where their practice is sometimes prescribed for Wednesdays in particular.18 Practices connected to the uṣṇīṣavijayā dhāraṇī likewise continue in modern Tibetan Buddhism. The so-called Tongchö (stong mchod)—the thousandfold offering practice of Uṣṇīṣavijayā, a version of which is mentioned briefly in our text—is currently performed in Tibetan monasteries, sometimes using a ritual manual composed by the nineteenth-century polymath Jamyang Khyentsé Wangpo. Other notable Tibetan works on the uṣṇīṣavijayā dhāraṇī and its associated practices include commentaries by the great Sakya lama Butön (bu ston rin chen grub, 1290–1364) and the fourth Panchen Lama, Losang Chökyi Gyaltsen (blo bzang chos kyi rgyal mtshan, 1570–1662).
The question of what, or who, exactly, Uṣṇīṣavijayā is is a complex one that cannot be clearly answered here. In short, like a number of uṣṇīṣa deities, she is sometimes identified as a protective deity, in this case a goddess, emanated from the Buddha’s uṣṇīṣa. Indeed, Uṣṇīṣavijayā is clearly depicted as a goddess in a number of short sādhanas included in Indian anthologies such as the Sādhanamāla, compiled from the works of many authors probably during the period of the Pāla kings (eighth to twelfth century).19 Three closely similar sādhanas of a three-faced, eight armed form of the goddess are included in the Tengyur, one in each of the three related anthologies translated from the Indian collections into Tibetan in the eleventh to fourteenth centuries respectively,20 two of them translated earlier than this text. A variety of other forms are depicted or described in Chinese, Japanese, Tibetan, Mongolian, and Kashmiri sources.21 In the later Tibetan tradition Uṣṇīṣavijayā can even appear as one of a group of three long-life deities along with the Buddha Amitāyus and White Tārā. However, the present text is the only one of the uṣṇīṣavijayā works in this section of the Kangyur to use the name Uṣṇīṣavijayā to refer clearly to a goddess. The present text contains an homage to Uṣṇīṣavijayā (whereas the other texts in the series pay homage to the buddhas and bodhisattvas), and the maṇḍala described in the rite here includes four different Uṣṇīṣavijayā goddesses surrounding the central maṇḍala of uṣṇīṣa buddhas. In contrast, while the dhāraṇī itself does use the feminine vocative form throughout, in the other uṣṇīṣavijayā texts in this section of the Kangyur, the name uṣṇīṣavijayā is not rendered into Tibetan in the feminine, and the word uṣṇīṣavijayā is used only to refer to the name of the dhāraṇī—the dhāraṇī of the crown victory.22
The range of possible answers to the question of what the name Uṣṇīṣavijayā refers to is enlarged even further by the existence of a group of related texts widely used in Southeast Asia, sharing the Pali title Uṇhissa-vijaya-sutta (or in some cases simply Uṇhissa-vijaya) but found in a number of different forms, some in Pali but others in Siamese, Lao, Yuon, and Khmer. Some refer at least briefly to the story of the god Supratiṣṭhita (Pali Supatiṭṭhita) which, although it does not feature in the present text, is the frame story or a secondary narrative element in others of the group. But instead of the dhāraṇī of the Sanskrit and Tibetan texts these Southeast Asian texts contain a set of verses (gāthā) to be recited whose content is unrelated to that of the Sanskrit dhāraṇī. The gāthā are also found alone in several ritual compilations. Even in the vernacular versions, the verses are written in Pali. In these texts, in their own opening lines, it seems to be the verses themselves that are referred to as the Uṇhissa-vijaya.23
According to its colophon, this text was translated into Tibetan by Lotsāwa Neten Palkyi Nyima Gyaltsen Sangpo at Tharpa Ling in accordance with the instructions of Ne’u Khenpo. Tharpa Ling is a monastery near Zhalu in Central Tibet, and Tharpa Lotsāwa Nyima Gyaltsen, active in the late thirteenth and early fourteenth centuries, was one of Butön’s teachers. This translation was therefore among the last translations to be included in the canon. One Uṣṇīṣavijayā-dhāraṇī-vidhisahitā is listed in the ninth century imperial Phangthangma catalog. While the dating means that it cannot refer to the same Tibetan translation as the present text, it is certainly a work of a similar type, and its inclusion in the Phangthangma, along with the records of uṣṇīṣavijayā texts at Dunhuang, indicate the early presence in Tibet not just of the uṣṇīṣavijayā dhāraṇī, but also of some of its associated rites.24 Nonetheless, as noted above, its contents make it clear that the present text began to circulate later than the other similar uṣṇīṣavijayā texts included in the canon—even those that include associated rites.
The present translation is based on the Tibetan translation of the text found in the Tantra Collection (rgyud ’bum) section of the Degé Kangyur,25 in consultation with the Stok Palace Kangyur and the notes in the Comparative Edition of the Kangyur (dpe bsdur ma). The text is stable across all the Kangyurs consulted, with the same title and colophon and only minor variants. We also consulted Hidas’ edition and translation of the surviving Sanskrit Uṣṇīṣavijayā-dhāraṇī text for the passages that are parallel with the present text.
The main dhāraṇī is not identical in every detail across the five different versions in the Degé Kangyur (Toh 594–598), and the existence of further variations across different Kangyurs and versions in extra-canonical collections further complicates the picture. Reference to the dhāraṇī as presented in Hidas’ edition of the Sanskrit yields useful orthographic confirmation, but may be misleading as a model given that the ten different Nepalese Sanskrit manuscripts on which it is based are of much later date than any of the present Tibetan witnesses. Here and in the other works in the group we have therefore chosen to transcribe the dhāraṇī as it appears in the Degé version of each text, making only minor choices of orthography and adding annotations to point out the most significant discrepancies.
Over the centuries, the textual transmission of the dhāraṇī has preserved the major portion of it with remarkable fidelity. Nevertheless, the few anomalies to be seen across all these closely related texts are a reminder that here, as with other dhāraṇī works, some variations over time and place are to be expected.
[F.248.a]Homage to Uṣṇīṣavijayā.
26Thus did I hear at one time. The Blessed One was residing in Sukhāvatī. The blessed, thus-gone, worthy, perfectly awakened Buddha Amitāyus was staying joyfully in the grove of the excellent secret palace, Dharma Proclamation.27 He said to the bodhisattva, the great being, Noble Avalokiteśvara, “Child of noble family, there are beings who suffer, are afflicted with diseases, and have short lifespans. To help them, one should uphold this dhāraṇī called the crown victory of all tathāgatas and teach it extensively to others for the sake of long life.”
Then the bodhisattva, the great being, Avalokiteśvara arose from his seat, joined his palms,[F.248.b] and said to the Blessed One, “Blessed One, please teach the dhāraṇī called the crown victory of all tathāgatas. Well-Gone One, please teach it!”
Then the Blessed One looked upon the circle of his perfect28 retinue, entered the samādhi called the splendor beheld everywhere, and pronounced this dhāraṇī called the crown victory of all tathāgatas:
“oṁ namo bhagavate sarvatrailokyaprativiśiṣṭāya buddhāya te namaḥ | tadyathā | oṁ bhrūṁ bhrūṁ bhrūṁ | śodhaya śodhaya | viśodhaya viśodhaya | asamasamantāvabhāsaspharaṇagatigaganasvabhāvaviśuddhe29 | abhiṣiñcantu māṃ sarvatathāgatāḥ sugatavaravacanāmṛtābhiṣekair mahāmudrāmantrapadaiḥ | oṁ30 āhara āhara mama31 āyuḥsandhāraṇi | śodhaya śodhaya | viśodhaya viśodhaya | gaganasvabhāvaviśuddhe | uṣṇīṣavijāyapariśuddhe | sahasraraśmisañcodite | sarvatathāgatāvalokini | ṣaṭpāramitāparipūraṇi | sarvatathāgatamāte32 | daśabhūmipratiṣṭḥite | sarvatathāgatahṛdayādhiṣṭhānādhiṣṭḥite | oṁ33 mudre mudre mahāmudre | vajrakāyasaṃhatanapariśuddhe | sarvakarmāvaraṇaviśuddhe | pratinivartaya mamāyurviśuddhe | sarvatathāgatasamayādhiṣṭhānādhiṣṭhite | oṁ muni muni mahāmuni | vimuni vimuni mahāvimuni | mati mati mahāmati | mamati mamati34 mahāmamati| sumati sumati mahāsumati35 | tathatābhūtakoṭipariśuddhe | visphuṭabuddhiśuddhe | oṁ36 he he | jaya jaya | vijaya vijaya | smara smara | sphara sphara | sphāraya sphāraya | sarvabuddhādhiṣṭhānādhiṣṭhite | oṁ37 śuddhe śuddhe | buddhe buddhe | vajre vajre mahāvajre | suvajre | vajragarbhe | jayagarbhe | vijayagarbhe | vajrajvālagarbhe | vajrodbhave | vajrasambhave | vajre | vajrini | vajram bhavatu me śarīraṃ sarvasatvānāñ ca kāyapariśuddhir bhavatu | me sadā38 sarvagatipariśuddhiś ca39 | sarvatathāgatāś ca māṃ40 samāśvāsayantu | oṁ41 budhya budhya | siddhya siddhya | bodhaya bodhaya | vibodhaya vibodhaya | mocaya mocaya | vimocaya vimocaya |[F.249.a] śodhaya śodhaya | viśodhaya viśodhaya | samantān mocaya mocaya | samantaraśmipariśuddhe | sarvatathāgatahṛdayādhiṣṭhānādhiṣṭhite | oṁ42 mudre mudre mahāmudre | mahāmudrāmantrapadaiḥ svāhā.43
“Child of noble family, this dhāraṇī of the crown victory of all tathāgatas is the destroyer44 of the great cudgel of death, the purifier, the destroyer of evil deeds. Anyone who wants a long lifespan should read this dhāraṇī aloud following the rite that I will explain here.
“Smear a wide clearing on the ground with earth and substances derived from a cow. Sprinkle it with saffron-infused water. Adorn it with a canopy45 above, and let that hang down. At the center draw46 an elaborately ornamented eight-spoked wheel with white powder. At the center of that is Uṣṇīṣa Arisen from the Natural Essence. Then, install these tathāgatas on each of the spokes of the wheel in order, starting in the east: Uṣṇīṣa Arisen from the Sky-Like Feast Gathering, Uṣṇīṣa Arisen from the Essence of the Earth, Uṣṇīṣa Arisen from the Essence of Jewels, Uṣṇīṣa Arisen from Nutritious Food, Uṣṇīṣa Arisen from the Boundless Essence, Uṣṇīṣa Arisen from the Essence of Splendor, Uṣṇīṣa Arisen from the Sound of a Drum, and Uṣṇīṣa Arisen from a Breeze.
“Draw a sixteen-petaled lotus directly on the outside of this and install, on each petal and in proper order, the following tathāgatas arisen from the sixteen drops: Uṣṇīṣa Arisen from Inner Emptiness,47 Uṣṇīṣa Arisen from Outer Emptiness, Uṣṇīṣa Arisen from Outer and Inner Emptiness, Uṣṇīṣa Arisen from the Emptiness of Emptiness, Uṣṇīṣa Arisen from Ultimate Emptiness, Uṣṇīṣa Arisen from the Emptiness of Compounded Phenomena, Uṣṇīṣa Arisen from the Emptiness of Uncompounded Phenomena, Uṣṇīṣa Arisen from Beginningless and Endless Emptiness,[F.249.b] Uṣṇīṣa Arisen from the Emptiness of Nonrejection, Uṣṇīṣa Arisen from the Natural Emptiness, Uṣṇīṣa Arisen from the Emptiness of All Phenomena, Uṣṇīṣa Arisen from the Emptiness of Own-Characteristics, Uṣṇīṣa Arisen from the Emptiness of the Unobserved, Uṣṇīṣa Arisen from the Emptiness of Nonentities, Uṣṇīṣa Arisen from the Emptiness of Own-Essence, and Uṣṇīṣa Arisen from the Emptiness of Own-Essence of Nonentities.
“Make a maṇḍala with seats for the tathāgatas and offer them whatever flowers are in season. Set up a throne in the upper half of it and place upon it a caitya of Vairocanagarbha in a water vessel. Also place there a piece of paper or a leaf with the syllables of the mantra and the practitioner’s name on it and a vase filled with water.
“Place four vases in the four directions surrounding the lotus and decorate them with silken tassels, parasols, and pennants. To the east place the goddess Uṣṇīṣavijayā Who Conquers All Obstacles. In the south is the goddess Uṣṇīṣavijayā Who Conquers Death. In the west is the goddess Uṣṇīṣavijayā Who Conquers Afflictive Emotions. In the north is the goddess Uṣṇīṣavijayā Who Conquers Illnesses of the Aggregates. In the southeast is Life-Granting Vajra Garland. In the southwest is Mahāmāyā. In the northwest is Golden Light. In the northeast is Life-Granting Golden Garland.
“Fill four vessels with perfumed water, hang flower garlands on them, and place them there also. Around these draw three images with colored powder. In the first line arrange one thousand molded images made with wet clay that is free from hairs and the like. If one thousand are not possible, it is essential to set out at least one hundred. Make offerings in the four directions with utmost honor and respect.
“A dharmabhāṇaka who maintains a vow[F.250.a] not to speak any other words should recite this dhāraṇī. Each time they recite the dhāraṇī, they should make offerings to the head of the caitya and consecrate it. After reciting one thousand times, they should wave their hand at the head of the central caitya and make offerings of flowers, incense, lamps, scented water, food offerings, and so forth. One thousand of each of these offerings should be arranged in lines around the caitya. Make sure that the line of lamps burns without being blown out by the wind for as long as it takes to finish the rite, and maintain equipoise and strict purity.
“If the rite is performed in this way, a lifespan of seven days will thereby become seven years, a lifespan of seven years will become a supremely long life, one will be free from illness and live for a hundred years, and one will never meet an untimely death. If one follows some other procedure to perform the rite, it will not work.”
This was the first chapter.48
This ritual manual was translated in Glorious Tharpa Ling Temple by the learned Lotsāwa Neten Palkyi Nyima Gyaltsen Sangpo following the instructions of the genuine spiritual friend, the sublime monk and unparalleled teacher of the Vinaya Piṭaka, Ne’u Khenpo.
rab tu byed pa dang po’o. Butön uses the phrase rab byed dang po in his list of canonical translations to distinguish this text from the others in the group; see Butön F.173.b.
The four texts are Toh 594, 595, 596, and the present text, Toh 598. The first three share the same title: Crown Victory of All Tathāgatas: The Uṣṇīṣavijayā Dhāraṇī with Its Ritual Manual (de bzhin gshegs pa thams cad kyi gtsug tor rnam par rgyal ba zhes bya ba’i gzungs rtog pa dang bcas pa). The fourth has an ever-so-slightly different title: Crown Victory of All Tathāgatas: A Ritual Manual for the Uṣṇīṣavijayā Dhāraṇī (de bzhin gshegs pa thams cad kyi gtsug tor rnam par rgyal ma’i gzungs zhes bya ba’i rtog pa).
The text is F 631, Phukdrak Kangyur, vol. 117 (rgyud, dza), F.224.a–231.a. It should be noted, however, that the version of the dhāraṇī preserved in F 631 differs from the dhāraṇī in the present text much more substantially than any of the versions in the mainstream Kangyurs.
Probably Sumpa Lotsāwa Dharma Yontan (sum pa lo tsA ba dhar ma yon tan), a translator and teacher of Sakya Jetsun Drakpa Gyaltsen, but possibly his uncle, also called Sumpa Lotsāwa, Palchok Dangpö Dorje (dpal mchog dang po’i rdor rje). Both studied in Nepal. See Treasury of Lives.
Hidas 2020, p. 141. See also Hidas 2021b, which catalogs a number of Indic dhāraṇīsaṃgraha collections, many of which include the uṣṇīṣavijayā dhāraṇī.
The surviving Sanskrit work seems, more properly, to be titled the Sarvagati (rather than Sarvadurgati)-pariśodhana-uṣṇīṣavijayā-dhāraṇī, but either way the title provides evidence of the relationship between the Uṣṇīṣavijayā and Sarvadurgatipariśodhana corpuses. For more on this relationship see J. Dalton 2016 and forthcoming. The point here, however, is simply that Toh 597 is titled the Uṣṇīṣavijayā-dhāraṇī rather than the Uṣṇīṣāvijayā- “dhāraṇī with its ritual manual” (kalpasahitā).
The Sanskrit of this work is preserved in what Gregory Schopen calls the “Los Angeles Manuscript,” though it appears to be held currently in Japan. This is an early manuscript from Bamiyan-Gilgit that Schopen transcribed and translated into English in an unpublished work, which we are grateful to Jacob Dalton for sharing. In addition to being incomplete, probably due to the loss of a folio, the manuscript lacks several passages that are found in the Tibetan translation of Toh 597 and contains a few passages that are absent in that translation, including two passages that are found in Toh 594. Nonetheless, the Sanskrit manuscript is by and large the same work that is translated into Tibetan as Toh 597. More recently, the Sanskrit of the very same manuscript was studied by Gudrun Meltzer in a 2007 “limited distribution report” (Silk 2021, p. 108), to which we have not had access, as well as by Unebe Toshiya, who published the Sanskrit along with a Japanese translation in a 2015 article.
This text has been edited on the basis of ten Nepalese Sanskrit manuscripts and translated into English in Hidas 2020. From among the works belonging to this group that are preserved in the Tibetan canon, the Sanskrit text is most closely parallel, though not identical, with Toh 595.
The first translation is Taishō 967, followed by Taishō 968–971 and Taishō 974 (Chou 1945, p. 322).
According to Chou, the ritual manuals surviving in Chinese are Taishō 972–973 (Chou 1945, p. 322). Hidas 2020 notes that the full set of Uṣṇīṣavijayā-related texts found in the Taishō canon includes Taishō 968–974, 978, and 979.
Hidas mentions that Taishō 978 “stands closest to the Nepalese tradition” of the Sanskrit work that he has edited, which is also how he describes the relationship between the Sanskrit work and Toh 595 (Hidas 2020, p. 156n6–7). A comparison of Toh 595 and Taishō 978 shows that while neither exactly matches the Sanskrit text that Hidas edited, the Tibetan and Chinese are indeed translations of the same Sanskrit work and contain identical material apart from the Chinese translation’s inclusion of a single, very short passage about a toothbrush that is absent in the Tibetan translation (Toh 595) but present in some of the other uṣṇīṣavijayā texts in the Tibetan canon.
See J. Dalton forthcoming for a description of the maṇḍala of uṣṇīṣa buddhas in Amoghavajra’s Uṣṇīṣavijayā ritual manual, and Hodge 2003, pp. 113–14 for the uṣṇīṣa buddhas from the Mahāvairocana-abhisaṃbodhi-tantra.
Sørensen 2011b, p. 386. See also Silk 2021 for further mention of the uses of the uṣṇīṣavijayā dhāraṇī, often alongside the Heart Sūtra, in China.
Copp 2005, p. 4. For further details see Copp 2005, which addresses the topic of dhāraṇīs in medieval China using the uṣṇīṣavijayā dhāraṇī as a case study.
See IOL Tib J 307/PT 54, PT 6, and PT 368 for Tibetan translations of the work, IOL TIB J 322 and IOL Tib J 349/3 for a Tibetan translation of the dhāraṇī alone (not the whole text), and IOL Tib J 466/2, IOL Tib J 547, IOL Tib J 1134, IOL Tib J 1498, PT72, and PT73 for Tibetan transliterations of the Sanskrit dhāraṇī alone (J. Dalton and van Schaik 2006; accessed through The International Dunhuang Project: The Silk Road Online).
The three are Toh 3377, 3248, and 3580, translated respectively by Khampa Lotsāwa Bari Chödrak (khams pa lo tsA ba ba ri chos grags, eleventh century), Patshap Lotsāwa Tsültrim Gyaltsen (pa tshab lo tsA ba tshul khrims rgyal mtshan, twelfth century), and Yarlung Lotsāwa Trakpa Gyaltsen (yar klungs lo tsA ba grags pa rgyal mtshan, late thirteenth or early fourteenth century).
The single instance in the other four texts in this section of the Kangyur in which one might interpret the term uṣṇīṣavijayā to refer to a goddess is a sentence in one of the rites included in both Toh 594 and 595 in which it is stated that, having properly followed the rite for reciting the dhāraṇī, “in the early morning at dawn you will see the face of the Bhagavatī, and she will give you whatever accomplishments you desire.” The specific identity of this Bhagavatī is not mentioned in the passage, but one might well presume that she is Uṣṇīṣavijayā herself.
These Southeast Asian texts are not included in the official Pali Canon of the Theravāda tradition and are unknown in Sri Lanka. In mainland Southeast Asia, however, they are popular in rituals for extending life and in funeral rites. Whether they reflect the diffusion of texts and practices directly from India prior to the relatively recent evolution of Theravāda orthodoxy, or were transmitted via Chinese along with Chinese migrations and cultural influence in the region, remains an open question. For a detailed study of these texts and their possible origins, see Cicuzza (ed.) 2018.
Phangthangma (2003), p. 23. While the phrase cho ga dang bcas pa (Skt. vidhisahitā) is functionally equivalent to the phrase rtog pa dang bcas pa (Skt. kalpasahitā), we unfortunately have no way of knowing whether this text was or resembled the primary uṣṇīṣavijayā dhāraṇī text (Toh 597) with a ritual manual attached to it, or if it resembled the present text or any of the other works in the modern canons titled Uṣṇīṣavijayā-dhāraṇī-kalpasahitā (i.e., Toh 594 or 595); Toh 596 is too short to correspond with the text identified in the Phangthangma as having 120 ślokas, and as just noted it cannot be the present text because, in addition to representing a separate ritual system later than the other texts in this group, the present Tibetan translation was not made until the thirteenth century. The Phangthangma also lists what may be a copy of the dhāraṇī alone, outside the framework of a sūtra (Phangthangma, p. 31). The other imperial catalog, the Denkarma, lists only the primary uṣṇīṣavijayā dhāraṇī text, identified clearly as the text included in the later canons as Toh 597 by its full title in that catalog: the Sarvadurgatipariśodhana-uṣṇīṣavijayā-dhāraṇī (Lalou 1953, p. 327).
Unlike many dhāraṇī texts (including Toh 597), which tend to appear both in the Tantra Collection and the Dhāraṇī Collection sections of the Kangyurs, the texts in the genre of dhāraṇī-kalpas seem to appear exclusively in the Tantra Collection section of the Kangyurs.
The first part of this text through the presentation of the dhāraṇī itself is parallel with the opening passages of Toh 594, Toh 595, and Toh 596, though the latter text has made a number of emendations that improve upon some readings from Toh 594 and Toh 595, while making others even less smooth and more complicated. This opening section of the present text both lacks a line slip error that was transmitted in each of the three other works in this group of four, and also shows evidence of having been edited. In the present text the dhāraṇī itself has also been edited, with vowel sandhi applied between words, which has not been done in any other recensions of the dhāraṇī in this group of parallel texts.
chos yang dag par sdud pa’i phug chen po’i khang bzangs kyi tshal. The Sanskrit in the closely parallel text edited by Hidas reads dharmasaṃgītimahāguhyaprāsāde (Hidas 2020, p. 152). The Tibetan phrase is awkward, and it seems that there may have been some textual corruption. What has been rendered in Tibetan as phug seems to be guhya in the Sanskrit parallel; perhaps the Tibetan translators were reading guhā—which does translate to phug—rather than guhya. Although we cannot be sure that the surviving Sanskrit witnesses represent the older reading, they provide a more coherent reading than the one in our Tibetan witnesses, so we have translated this word following the Sanskrit, rather than the Tibetan witness.
The phrase uṣṇīṣavijāyāpariśuddhe follows here in in Toh 595, 596, and 598, and in Hidas’ Sanskrit edition.
Hidas’s edition of the Sanskrit reads sarvatathāgatamātre, a plausible variant unattested in Tibetan sources.
The passage mamati mamati mahāmamati| sumati sumati mahāsumati is unique to Toh. 598. Toh 594, 595, 596, and 597/984, as well as Hidas’ Sanskrit edition, all read mamati | sumati.
There is some variation in this phrase across the Tibetan and Sanskrit sources. Toh 594, 596, and 597 read sadā me; Toh 595, 598 (this text), and Toh 984 read me sadā; and Hidas’ Sanskrit edition has mama sadā. The meaning is the same in all cases.
Hidas has translated the dhāraṇī based on his edition, and rather than retranslate it, we give his translation here. Substantive variants between the Sanskrit basis for his translation and the Degé have been noted above. “Oṁ veneration to the glorious Buddha distinguished in all the Three Worlds. Namely, oṁ bhrūṃ bhrūṃ bhrūṃ, purge, purge, purify, purify, O Unequalled Enveloping Splendor Sparkle Destiny Sky, O the One of Purified Nature, O the One Purified by the Topknot Victory, let all Tathāgatas consecrate me with consecrations of the nectar of the excellent Sugata’s words along with great seals and mantrapadas, oṁ bring, bring, O the One who Nourishes Life, purge, purge, purify, purify, O the One Purified by Sky Nature, O the One Purified by the Topknot Victory, O the One Impelled by Thousand Rays, O the One Beholding all Tathāgatas, O the One Fulfilling the Six Perfections, O Mother of all Tathāgatas, O the One Established in the Ten Stages, O the One Empowered by the Empowerment of the Heart of all Tathāgatas, oṁ O Seal, O Seal, O Great Seal, O the One Purified by the Firmness of the Vajra Body, O the One Purged of all Obscurations Resulting from Actions, turn back for me O Life-purged One, O the One Empowered by the Empowerment of the Vow of all Tathāgatas, oṁ muni muni, mahāmuni, vimuni vimuni, mahāvimuni, mati mati, mahāmati, mamati, sumati, O the One Purified by Truth and the True Goal, O the One Purged by a Burst Open Mind, oṁ he he, triumph triumph, succeed succeed, recollect recollect, manifest manifest, expand expand, O the One Empowered by the Empowerment of all Buddhas, oṁ O Pure One, O Pure One, O Awakened One, O Awakened One, O Vajra, O Vajra, O Great Vajra, O Vajra-essence, O Victory-essence, O Triumph-essence, O Vajra-flame-essence, O Vajra-born, O Vajra-produced, O Vajra, O the One with a Vajra, let my body become a vajra and that of all beings, let there be body-purification for me and purification of all destinies, O the One Empowered by the Empowerment of the Heart of all Tathāgatas, let all Tathāgatas provide encouragement, oṁ awake awake, succeed succeed, awaken awaken, wake up, wake up, liberate liberate, release release, purge purge, purify purify, liberate completely, O the One Purified by an Enveloping Ray, O the One Empowered by the Empowerment of the Heart of all Tathāgatas, oṁ O Seal O Seal, O Great Seal, O Great Seal and Mantrapada svāhā” (Hidas 2020, p. 154).
The Tibetan text reads ’dzin pa (“holder”), while the parallel Sanskrit text edited by Hidas reads -nivāraṇī (“destroyer”) (Hidas 2020, p. 153). Moreover, three of Hidas’ Sanskrit witnesses here read -harā, also meaning “destroyer” (ibid., p. 161n142). Given the lack of sense in the Tibetan passage and the consistency of meaning in the Sanskrit witnesses, this translation follows the Sanskrit reading.
This translation is based on the reading bla bres following the Narthang and Lhasa Kangyurs rather than the reading bla res from the Degé.
Literally “place” (gdab). Below, the verb ’bri (“draw”) is used, so we have used “draw” to translate gdab here as well.
The sixteen uṣṇīṣa buddhas listed here are named after the sixteen emptinesses, the classical set of sixteen types of emptiness described in many Mahāyāna philosophical texts.
The buddha residing in the western buddha realm of Sukhāvatī, he is also sometimes known as Amitābha.
One of the “eight close sons of the Buddha,” he is also known as the bodhisattva who embodies compassion. In certain tantras, he is also the lord of the three families, where he embodies the compassion of the buddhas. In Tibet, he attained great significance as a special protector of Tibet, and in China, in female form, as Guanyin, the most important bodhisattva in all of East Asia.
In Buddhist literature, this is an epithet applied to buddhas, most often to Śākyamuni. The Sanskrit term generally means “possessing fortune,” but in specifically Buddhist contexts it implies that a buddha is in possession of six auspicious qualities (bhaga) associated with complete awakening. The Tibetan term—where bcom is said to refer to “subduing” the four māras, ldan to “possessing” the great qualities of buddhahood, and ’das to “going beyond” saṃsāra and nirvāṇa—possibly reflects the commentarial tradition where the Sanskrit bhagavat is interpreted, in addition, as “one who destroys the four māras.” This is achieved either by reading bhagavat as bhagnavat (“one who broke”), or by tracing the word bhaga to the root √bhañj (“to break”).
The Tibetan translates both stūpa and caitya with the same word, mchod rten, meaning “basis” or “recipient” of “offerings” or “veneration.” Pali: cetiya.
A caitya, although often synonymous with stūpa, can also refer to any site, sanctuary or shrine that is made for veneration, and may or may not contain relics.
A stūpa, literally “heap” or “mound,” is a mounded or circular structure usually containing relics of the Buddha or the masters of the past. It is considered to be a sacred object representing the awakened mind of a buddha, but the symbolism of the stūpa is complex, and its design varies throughout the Buddhist world. Stūpas continue to be erected today as objects of veneration and merit making.
The term dhāraṇī has the sense of something that “holds” or “retains,” and so it can refer to the special capacity of practitioners to memorize and recall detailed teachings. It can also refer to a verbal expression of the teachings—an incantation, spell, or mnemonic formula—that distills and “holds” essential points of the Dharma and is used by practitioners to attain mundane and supramundane goals. The same term is also used to denote texts that contain such formulas.
A secret palace in Sukhāvatī.
A speaker, reciter, or preacher of the Buddhist scriptures or teachings.
A goddess.
A ritual manual.
A goddess.
A goddess.
A goddess.
Small images of caityas, deities, and the like, made from clay. More commonly translated into Tibetan as tsha tsha.
A Tibetan teacher and author active in the thirteenth century, associated with Tharpa Lotsāwa and best known for his historical works, although he also appears in some lineage records for the transmission of the Pratimokṣa vows, as suggested in the colophon of this text. Also known as Nelpa Paṇḍita Drakpa Mönlam Lodrö (nel pa paN+Di ta grags pa smon lam blo gros).
A Tibetan translator active at the monastery of Tharpa Ling in the late thirteenth and early fourteenth centuries, also widely known as Tharpa Lotsāwa (thar pa lo tsA ba). He was one of the teachers of Butön Rinchen Drup (bu ston rin chen grub) and translated a number of tantric works in the Kangyur and Tengyur as well as a set of sūtras from the Theravāda tradition.
In a general sense, samādhi can describe a number of different meditative states. In the Mahāyāna literature, in particular in the Prajñāpāramitā sūtras, we find extensive lists of different samādhis, numbering over one hundred.
In a more restricted sense, and when understood as a mental state, samādhi is defined as the one-pointedness of the mind (cittaikāgratā), the ability to remain on the same object over long periods of time. The Drajor Bamponyipa (sgra sbyor bam po gnyis pa) commentary on the Mahāvyutpatti explains the term samādhi as referring to the instrument through which mind and mental states “get collected,” i.e., it is by the force of samādhi that the continuum of mind and mental states becomes collected on a single point of reference without getting distracted.
Here the classical set of sixteen types of emptiness described in many Mahāyāna philosophical texts corresponds to a group of sixteen uṣṇīṣa buddhas. The sixteen are listed as (1) inner emptiness, (2) outer emptiness, (3) outer and inner emptiness, (4) the emptiness of emptiness, (5) ultimate emptiness, (6) the emptiness of compounded phenomena, (7) the emptiness of uncompounded phenomena, (8) beginningless and endless emptiness, (9) the emptiness of nonrejection, (10) natural emptiness, (11) the emptiness of all phenomena, (12) the emptiness of own-characteristics, (13) the emptiness of the unobserved, (14) the emptiness of nonentities, (15) the emptiness of own-essence, and (16) the emptiness of own-essence of nonentities.
Traditionally, five substances derived from a cow and used for ritual purposes: dung, urine, butter, yogurt, and milk.
Amitāyus’ pure realm.
A frequently used synonym for buddha. According to different explanations, it can be read as tathā-gata, literally meaning “one who has thus gone,” or as tathā-āgata, “one who has thus come.” Gata, though literally meaning “gone,” is a past passive participle used to describe a state or condition of existence. Tatha(tā), often rendered as “suchness” or “thusness,” is the quality or condition of things as they really are, which cannot be conveyed in conceptual, dualistic terms. Therefore, this epithet is interpreted in different ways, but in general it implies one who has departed in the wake of the buddhas of the past, or one who has manifested the supreme awakening dependent on the reality that does not abide in the two extremes of existence and quiescence. It is also often used as a specific epithet of the Buddha Śākyamuni.
One of the thirty-two signs, or major marks, of a great being. In its simplest form it is a pointed shape of the head like a turban (the Sanskrit term, uṣṇīṣa, in fact means “turban”), or more elaborately a dome-shaped extension. The extension is described as having various extraordinary attributes such as emitting and absorbing rays of light or reaching an immense height.
One among a list of eight uṣṇīṣa buddhas mentioned in this text that do not appear elsewhere in the canon.
One among a list of sixteen uṣṇīṣa buddhas named after the sixteen emptinesses.
One among a list of sixteen uṣṇīṣa buddhas named after the sixteen emptinesses.
One among a list of eight uṣṇīṣa buddhas mentioned in this text that do not appear elsewhere in the canon.
One among a list of sixteen uṣṇīṣa buddhas named after the sixteen emptinesses.
One among a list of sixteen uṣṇīṣa buddhas named after the sixteen emptinesses.
One among a list of eight uṣṇīṣa buddhas mentioned in this text that do not appear elsewhere in the canon.
One among a list of sixteen uṣṇīṣa buddhas named after the sixteen emptinesses.
One among a list of sixteen uṣṇīṣa buddhas named after the sixteen emptinesses.
One among a list of sixteen uṣṇīṣa buddhas named after the sixteen emptinesses.
One among a list of sixteen uṣṇīṣa buddhas named after the sixteen emptinesses.
One among a list of sixteen uṣṇīṣa buddhas named after the sixteen emptinesses.
One among a list of sixteen uṣṇīṣa buddhas named after the sixteen emptinesses.
One among a list of sixteen uṣṇīṣa buddhas named after the sixteen emptinesses.
One among a list of sixteen uṣṇīṣa buddhas named after the sixteen emptinesses.
One among a list of sixteen uṣṇīṣa buddhas named after the sixteen emptinesses.
One among a list of sixteen uṣṇīṣa buddhas named after the sixteen emptinesses.
One among a list of eight uṣṇīṣa buddhas mentioned in this text that do not appear elsewhere in the canon.
One among a list of eight uṣṇīṣa buddhas mentioned in this text that do not appear elsewhere in the canon.
One among a list of eight uṣṇīṣa buddhas mentioned in this text that do not appear elsewhere in the canon.
One among a list of sixteen uṣṇīṣa buddhas named after the sixteen emptinesses.
The central figure of the maṇḍala surrounded by a group of eight uṣṇīṣa buddhas mentioned in this text that do not appear elsewhere in the canon.
One among a list of eight uṣṇīṣa buddhas mentioned in this text that do not appear elsewhere in the canon.
One among a list of eight uṣṇīṣa buddhas mentioned in this text that do not appear elsewhere in the canon.
One among a list of sixteen uṣṇīṣa buddhas named after the sixteen emptinesses.
A goddess. See Introduction.
A goddess.
A goddess.
A goddess.
de bzhin gshegs pa thams cad kyi gtsug tor rnam par rgyal ma’i gzungs zhes bya ba’i rtog pa (Sarvatathāgatauṣṇīṣavijayānāmadhāraṇīkalpa). Toh 598, Degé Kangyur, vol. 90 (rgyud, pha), folios 248.a–250.a.
de bzhin gshegs pa thams cad kyi gtsug tor rnam par rgyal ma’i gzungs zhes bya ba’i rtog pa. bka’ ’gyur (dpe bsdur ma) [Comparative Edition of the Kangyur], krung go’i bod rig pa zhib ’jug ste gnas kyi bka’ bstan dpe sdur khang (The Tibetan Tripitaka Collation Bureau of the China Tibetology Research Center). 108 volumes. Beijing: krung go’i bod rig pa dpe skrun khang (China Tibetology Publishing House), 2006–9, vol. 90, pp. 819–26.
de bzhin gshegs pa thams cad kyi gtsug tor rnam par rgyal ma’i gzungs zhes bya ba’i rtog pa. Stok Palace Kangyur vol. 104 (rgyud, pa), folios 220.b–223.b.
de bzhin gshegs pa thams cad kyi gtsug tor rnam par rgyal ba zhes bya ba’i gzungs rtog pa dang bcas pa (Sarvatathāgatauṣṇīṣavijayānāmadhāraṇīkalpasahitā). Toh 594, Degé Kangyur vol. 90 (rgyud, pha), folios 230.a–237.b.
de bzhin gshegs pa thams cad kyi gtsug tor rnam par rgyal ba zhes bya ba’i gzungs rtog pa dang bcas pa (Sarvatathāgatauṣṇīṣavijayānāmadhāraṇīkalpasahitā). Toh 595, Degé Kangyur vol. 90 (rgyud, pha), folios 237.b–242.a.
de bzhin gshegs pa thams cad kyi gtsug tor rnam par rgyal ba zhes bya ba’i gzungs rtog pa dang bcas pa (Sarvatathāgatauṣṇīṣavijayānāmadhāraṇīkalpasahitā). Toh 596, Degé Kangyur vol. 90 (rgyud, pha), folios 242.a–243.b.
Denkarma (pho brang stod thang ldan dkar gyi chos kyi ’gyur ro cog gi dkar chag). Toh 4364, Degé Tengyur vol. 206 (sna tshogs, jo), folios 294.b–310.a.
Phangthangma (dkar chag ’phang thang ma). Beijing: mi rigs dpe skrun khang, 2003.
Butön (bu ston rin chen grub). chos ’byung [History of the Dharma] (bde bar gshegs pa’i bstan pa’i gsal byed chos kyi ’byung gnas gsung rab rin po che’i mdzod). In gsung ’bum/_rin chen grub/ (zhol par ma/ ldi lir bskyar par brgyab pa/) [The Collected Works of Bu-ston: Edited by Lokesh Chandra from the Collections of Raghu Vira], vol. 24, pp. 633–1056. New Delhi: International Academy of Indian Culture, 1965–71.
Bhattacharyya, Benoytosh (ed). Sādhanamāla. 2 vols. Baroda: Oriental Institute, 1925–28.
Bühnemann, Gudrun. “A Dhāraṇī for Each Day of the Week: The Saptavāra Tradition of the Newar Buddhists.” Bulletin of SOAS 77, no. 1 (2014): 119–36.
Chandra, Lokesh. “Comparative Iconography of the Goddess Uṣṇīṣavijāyā.” In Acta Orientalia Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae, vol. 34, nos. 1–3, pp. 125–37. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó, 1980.
Cicuzza, Claudio (ed). Katā me rakkhā, katā me parittā: Protecting the protective texts and manuscripts. Proceedings of the Second International Pali Studies Week, Paris 2016. Materials for the Study of the Tripiṭaka Volume 14. Bangkok and Lumbini: Fragile Palm Leaves Foundation and Lumbini International Research Institute, 2018.
Chou, Yi-liang. “Tantrism in China.” Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies 8, no. 3/4 (March 1945): 241–332.
Copp, Paul. “Voice, Dust, Shadow, Stone: The Makings of Spells in Medieval Chinese Buddhism.” PhD diss., Princeton University, 2005.
Dalton, Jacob P. (2016). “How Dhāraṇīs WERE Proto-Tantric: Liturgies, Ritual Manuals, and the Origins of the Tantras.” In Tantric Traditions in Transmission and Translation, edited by David Gray and Ryan Richard Overbey, 199–229. New York: Oxford University Press, 2016.
Dalton, Jacob P. (2016). Conjuring the Buddha: Ritual Manuals in Early Tantric Buddhism. New York: Columbia University Press, 2016.
Dalton, Jacob, and Sam van Schaik, ed. Tibetan Tantric Manuscripts from Dunhuang: A Descriptive Catalogue of the Stein Collection at the British Library. Brill’s Tibetan Studies Library 12. Leiden: Brill, 2006.
Hidas, Gergely (2014). “Two Dhāraṇī Prints in the Stein Collection at the British Museum.” Bulletin of SOAS 77, no. 1 (2014): 105–17.
Hidas, Gergely (2020). “Uṣṇīṣavijayā-dhāraṇī: The Complete Sanskrit Text Based on Nepalese Manuscripts.” International Journal of Buddhist Thought & Culture 30, no. 2 (December 2020): 147–67.
Hidas, Gergely (2021a). “Dhāraṇī Seals in the Cunningham Collection.” In Precious Treasures from the Diamond Throne: Finds from the Site of the Buddha’s Enlightenment, edited by Sam van Schaik et al., 87–94. London: The British Museum, 2021.
Hidas, Gergely (2021b). Powers of Protection: The Buddhist Tradition of Spells in the Dhāraṇīsaṃgraha Collections. Beyond Boundaries 9. Boston: de Gruyter, 2021.
Hodge, Stephen, trans. The Mahā-vairocana-abhisaṃbodhi Tantra: With Buddhaguhya’s Commentary. London: RoutledgeCurzon, 2003.
Lalou, Marcelle. “Les textes bouddhiques au temps du roi Khri-sroṅ-lde-bcan.” Journal Asiatique 241 (1953): 313–53.
Negi, J. S. Tibetan–Sanskrit Dictionary (bod skad legs sbyar gyi tshig mdzod chen mo). 16 vols. Sarnath: Dictionary Unit, Central Institute of Higher Tibetan Studies, 1993.
Schopen, Gregory (2005). “The Bodhigarbhālaṅkāralakṣa and Vimaloṣṇīṣa Dhāraṇīs in Indian Inscriptions: Two Sources for the Practice of Buddhism in Medieval India.” In Figments and Fragments of Mahāyāna Buddhism in India, 314–34. Honolulu: University of Hawai‘i Press, 2005.
Schopen, Gregory (unpublished). “Sarva(dur)gatipariśodhani-uṣṇīṣavijaya: The Los Angeles Manuscript.” Unpublished transcription and English translation.
Schmid, Neil. “Dunhuang and Central Asia.” In Esoteric Buddhism and the Tantras in East Asia, edited by Charles D. Orzech, Henrik H. Sørensen, and Richard K. Payne, 365–78. Leiden: Brill, 2011.
Silk, Jonathan. “The Heart Sūtra as Dhāraṇī.” Acta Asiatica 121 (2021): 99–125.
Sørensen, Henrik (2011a). “On Esoteric Buddhism in China: A Working Definition.” In Esoteric Buddhism and the Tantras in East Asia, edited by Charles D. Orzech, Henrik H. Sørensen, and Richard K. Payne, 155–75. Leiden: Brill, 2011.
Sørensen, Henrik (2011b). “Esoteric Buddhism in the Nanzhao and Dali Kingdoms (ca. 800–1253).” In Esoteric Buddhism and the Tantras in East Asia, edited by Charles D. Orzech, Henrik H. Sørensen, and Richard K. Payne, 379–92. Leiden: Brill, 2011.
Unebe Toshiya. “Bonbun Bucchō Sonshō daranikyō to shoyaku no taishō kenkyū” [Sarvadurgatipariśodhana-ūṣṇīṣavijayā nama dhāraṇī: Sanskrit text collated with Tibetan and Chinese translations along with Japanese translation]. Nagoya Daigaku Bungakubu Kankyū Ronshū 61 (2015): 97–146.
von Rospatt, Alexander. “Local Literatures: Nepal.” In Brill’s Encyclopedia of Buddhism, edited by Jonathan Silk et al., vol. 1, Literature and Languages, 819–30. Leiden: Brill, 2015.
