Unraveling the Intent
Chapter 7
Toh 106
Degé Kangyur, vol. 49 (mdo sde, ca), folios 1.b–55.b
Imprint
Translated by the Buddhavacana Translation Group (Vienna)
under the patronage and supervision of 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha
First published 2020
Current version v 1.0.24 (2024)
Generated by 84000 Reading Room v2.25.1
84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha is a global non-profit initiative to translate all the Buddha’s words into modern languages, and to make them available to everyone.
This work is provided under the protection of a Creative Commons CC BY-NC-ND (Attribution - Non-commercial - No-derivatives) 3.0 copyright. It may be copied or printed for fair use, but only with full attribution, and not for commercial advantage or personal compensation. For full details, see the Creative Commons license.
Table of Contents
Summary
In Unraveling the Intent, the Buddha gives a systematic overview of his three great cycles of teachings, which he refers to in this text as the “three Dharma wheels” (tridharmacakra). In the process of delineating the meaning of these doctrines, the Buddha unravels several difficult points regarding the ultimate and relative truths, the nature of reality, and the contemplative methods conducive to the attainment of complete and perfect awakening, and he also explains what his intent was when he imparted teachings belonging to each of the three Dharma wheels. In unambiguous terms, the third wheel is proclaimed to be of definitive meaning. Through a series of dialogues with hearers and bodhisattvas, the Buddha thus offers a complete and systematic teaching on the Great Vehicle, which he refers to here as the Single Vehicle.
Acknowledgements
Translation by the Buddhavacana Translation Group.
The text was translated by Gregory Forgues and edited by Casey Kemp. With special thanks to Harunaga Isaacson, Matthew Kapstein, Klaus-Dieter Mathes, Jonathan Silk, Lambert Schmithausen, Tom Tillemans, and William Waldron for their helpful comments and advice.
The translation was completed under the patronage and supervision of 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha.
The generous sponsorship of Qiang Li (李强) and Ya Wen (文雅), which helped make the work on this translation possible, is most gratefully acknowledged.
Text Body
Unraveling the Intent
Chapter 7
At that time, the bodhisattva Paramārthasamudgata asked the Blessed One, “Blessed One, when I was alone in a secluded place, I had the following thought: ‘The Blessed One also spoke in many ways of the defining characteristic specific to the five aggregates, mentioning the defining characteristic of their arising, disintegration, abandonment, and comprehension.137 In the same way, he spoke of the twelve sense domains, dependent arising, and the four kinds of sustenance. The Blessed One also spoke in many ways of the defining characteristic of the four noble truths, mentioning the comprehension of suffering, the abandoning of the cause of suffering, the actualization of the cessation of suffering, and the practice of the path. The Blessed One also spoke in many ways of the defining characteristic specific to the eighteen constituents, mentioning their varieties, manifoldness, abandonment, and comprehension. The Blessed One also spoke in many ways of the defining characteristic specific to the four applications of mindfulness, mentioning their adverse factors, antidotes, practice, their arising from being non-arisen, their remaining after they arose, and their maintaining, resuming, or increasing. Similarly, he also spoke in many ways of the defining characteristic specific to the four correct self-restraints, the four bases of supernatural powers, the five faculties, the five forces, and the seven branches of awakening. [F.16.b] The Blessed One also spoke in many ways of the defining characteristic specific to the eight branches of the path, mentioning their adverse factors, antidotes, and practices, their arising from being non-arisen and remaining after they arose, and their maintaining, resuming, or increasing.’
“When the Blessed One further said, ‘All phenomena are without an essence,138 unborn, unceasing, primordially in the state of peace, and naturally in the state of nirvāṇa,’ what was the underlying intent of the Blessed One? I would like to ask the Blessed One about this point: what was the Blessed One thinking when he said, ‘All phenomena are without an essence, unborn, unceasing, primordially in the state of peace, and naturally in the state of nirvāṇa’?”
The Blessed One replied to the bodhisattva Paramārthasamudgata, “Paramārthasamudgata, this reflection of yours arose virtuously and appropriately. It is excellent indeed. You are asking this for the benefit and happiness of many beings, out of compassion for the world, and for the welfare, benefit, and happiness of all beings, including gods and humans. Your intention is excellent when questioning the Tathāgata on this specific point. Therefore, listen, Paramārthasamudgata. I will explain to you what my underlying intent was when I declared, ‘All phenomena are without an essence, unborn, unceasing, [F.17.a] primordially in the state of peace, and naturally in the state of nirvāṇa.’139
“Paramārthasamudgata, the essencelessness of all phenomena has three aspects. Having in mind essencelessness regarding defining characteristics, essencelessness regarding arising, and essencelessness regarding the ultimate, I thus taught what is called the essencelessness of all phenomena.
“Paramārthasamudgata, what is the essencelessness of all phenomena with regard to defining characteristics? It is the imaginary defining characteristic [of phenomena]. Why? Because as much as this defining characteristic is nominally and conventionally posited, it is not posited140 on the basis of an essence or a distinctive [characteristic].141 Therefore, it is called the essencelessness of all phenomena with regard to defining characteristics.
“Paramārthasamudgata, what is the essencelessness of all phenomena with regard to arising? It is the other-dependent defining characteristic of phenomena. Why? Because this is [the defining characteristic] arising on account of causes other [than itself] and not by itself. Therefore, it is called essencelessness with regard to arising.
“Paramārthasamudgata, what is the essencelessness of all phenomena with regard to the ultimate? Phenomena arising in dependence upon causes, which lack an essence on account of lacking an essence in terms of arising and also lack an essence on account of lacking an ultimate essence. Why? Because, Paramārthasamudgata, I showed that the referential object conducive to purification within phenomena is the ultimate, but the other-dependent defining characteristic is not the referential object conducive to purification. Therefore, this essencelessness is called essencelessness with regard to the ultimate.
“Moreover, Paramārthasamudgata, the actual defining characteristic of phenomena should also be referred to as essencelessness with regard to the ultimate. Why? Because, Paramārthasamudgata, the selflessness of phenomena is called the essencelessness of phenomena, which is the [F.17.b] ultimate, but the ultimate is characterized by142 the essencelessness of all phenomena. Therefore, it is called essencelessness with regard to the ultimate.143
“Paramārthasamudgata, it is like this: consider essencelessness with regard to defining characteristics to be exactly like a [nonexistent] sky flower; consider essencelessness with regard to arising, as well as essencelessness with regard to the ultimate in one of its aspects, to be exactly like a magic illusion;144 consider essencelessness with regard to the ultimate in its other aspect, which consists in the selflessness of phenomena and pervades everything, to be exactly like space, which consists in the essencelessness of form and pervades everything.145
“Paramārthasamudgata, with this threefold essencelessness in mind, I taught what is called the essencelessness of all phenomena. Paramārthasamudgata, having in mind essencelessness with regard to defining characteristics, I taught, ‘All phenomena are without an essence, unborn, unceasing, primordially in the state of peace, and naturally in the state of nirvāṇa.’ Why? Because, Paramārthasamudgata, what lacks a specific defining characteristic is unborn. What is unborn is unceasing. What is unborn and unceasing is primordially in the state of peace. What is primordially in the state of peace is naturally in the state of nirvāṇa. For what is naturally in the state of nirvāṇa, there is nothing in the slightest that passes into the state of nirvāṇa. Therefore, having in mind essencelessness with regard to defining characteristics, I taught, ‘All phenomena are without an essence, unborn, unceasing, primordially in the state of peace, and naturally in the state of nirvāṇa.’
“Paramārthasamudgata, having in mind essencelessness with regard to the ultimate, [F.18.a] which is characterized by selflessness, I taught, ‘All phenomena are without an essence, unborn, unceasing, primordially in the state of peace, and naturally in the state of nirvāṇa.’ Why? Because essencelessness with regard to the ultimate, which is characterized by selflessness, indeed abides permanently and immutably. As the nature of phenomena, it is unconditioned and free from all afflictions. What permanently and immutably abides as the very nature of phenomena, being unconditioned, is unborn and unceasing due to being unconditioned. Because it is free from all afflictions, it is primordially in the state of peace and naturally in the state of nirvāṇa.146 Therefore, having in mind essencelessness with regard to the ultimate, which is characterized by selflessness, I taught, ‘All phenomena are without an essence, unborn, unceasing, primordially in the state of peace, and naturally in the state of nirvāṇa.’
“Paramārthasamudgata, I did not designate three kinds of essencelessness because those in the world of beings consider that the imaginary essence and the other-dependent essence, as well as the actual essence, are different by nature.147 Rather, I did so because they superimpose an imaginary essence on the other-dependent essence and the actual essence and because they designate the other-dependent essence and the actual essence as the defining characteristics of an imaginary essence. While they designate them in this way, their minds,148 which are saturated with designations, become confined to such designations and predisposed149 toward them. On this basis, they wrongly conceive the other-dependent essence and the actual essence as the defining characteristics of an imaginary essence. [F.18.b] Wrongly conceiving them in this way, with their wrong conception of the other-dependent essence as the defining characteristic of an imaginary essence acting as a cause and condition, they will give rise in the future to an other-dependent essence.150 As a result of this, they will be afflicted by the afflictions of defilements, karma, and birth. Because they will not pass beyond saṃsāra, they will transmigrate and wander among hell beings, animals, hungry ghosts, gods, demigods, and humans for a very long time.
“Among these beings, Paramārthasamudgata, some do not produce roots of virtue from the very beginning. They do not clear obstructions or bring their mental continuums to maturity. Their confidence in my teaching is limited and they have not accomplished the accumulations of merit and gnosis. I impart to those beings the teaching on essencelessness with regard to arising. Once they have heard this teaching, they understand that conditioned phenomena arising in dependence on causes are of an impermanent, unstable, and unreliable nature. They develop aversion and repulsion towards conditioned phenomena. Once they have done this, they turn away from wrongdoing. Not committing any wrongdoing, they establish themselves in virtue. With this as a cause, they produce the roots of virtue that were yet to be produced. They clear obstructions that were yet to be cleared. They bring their mental continuums, which were not yet mature, to maturity. As a result, their confidence in my teaching becomes vast, and they will accomplish the accumulations of merit and gnosis.
“Although such beings have produced in this way roots of virtue up to the accomplishment of the accumulation of merit and gnosis, they [F.19.a] do not understand essencelessness with regard to arising just as it is, as the essencelessness with regard to defining characteristics and the essencelessness with regard to the ultimate in its two aspects. For this reason, they will not be completely repulsed by all conditioned phenomena, completely free from desire, or completely liberated. They will not be completely liberated from all the afflictions of defilements, karma, and birth. It is therefore for them that the Tathāgata imparts the teaching on the essencelessness with regard to defining characteristics and the essencelessness with regard to the ultimate. He does so in order to make them feel repulsion towards all conditioned phenomena, as well as to free them from desire, to completely liberate them, and to take them perfectly151 beyond the afflictions of defilements, karma, and birth.
“Once they have heard this teaching, they do not wrongly conceive the other-dependent essence as the defining characteristic of an imaginary essence. As a result, they accept the essencelessness with regard to arising as the essencelessness with regard to defining characteristics and the essencelessness with regard to the ultimate in its two aspects. They discern and understand it exactly as it is. It is like this: Their minds,152 which are no longer saturated with designations, are not confined to these designations or predisposed toward them. As a result, by attaining the powers of wisdom in this life and perfectly cutting off the continuity [of the aggregates] into a future existence, they will put an end to the other-dependent defining characteristic. On this basis, they will be completely repulsed by all conditioned phenomena, completely free from desire, and completely liberated. [F.19.b] They will be completely liberated from all the afflictions of defilements, karma, and birth.
“Moreover, Paramārthasamudgata, even those belonging to the lineage of the hearers’ vehicle attain nirvāṇa, the unsurpassable happiness, through this very path and journey,153 as do those belonging to the lineage of the solitary realizers’ vehicle and the lineage of the tathāgatas. This is why it is the single path of purification for hearers, solitary realizers, and bodhisattvas. Since there is only a single purification, there is no other. Therefore, with this in mind, I taught the Single Vehicle. Yet, it is not the case that those in the world of beings are not of various types corresponding to their capacities, be they weak, average, or sharp in accordance with their nature.
“Paramārthasamudgata, even if they were to exert themselves as all buddhas did,154 individuals belonging to the hearers’ lineage with the state of peace as their sole journey could not reach the heart of awakening and attain the unsurpassable, complete and perfect awakening. Why? Because, having limited compassion and a great fear of suffering, they belong to a lineage that is by nature inferior. Thus, having limited compassion, they avoid striving for beings’ welfare. Being afraid of suffering, they stay clear from the conditioning process of the mental factors.155 However, I did not teach that avoiding striving for beings’ welfare and staying clear from the conditioning process of the mental factors was the unsurpassable, complete and perfect awakening. Therefore, these individuals are called those who have the state of peace as their sole journey.
“I taught that hearers who evolve toward awakening belong to the [F.20.a] category of bodhisattvas because, liberated from the obscuration of defilements and inspired by the tathāgatas, they liberate their minds from the obscuration of cognitive objects. It is [only] because they first liberated themselves from the obscuration of defilements for their own sake that the Tathāgata designated them as the lineage of hearers.
“Thus, Paramārthasamudgata, there are beings with various degrees of confidence in my Dharma and my Vinaya, which are well proclaimed, well imparted, pure in their intention, and well communicated. In this teaching, Paramārthasamudgata, the Tathāgata, having in mind the three kinds of essencelessness, teaches through a discourse of provisional meaning: ‘All phenomena are without an essence, unborn, unceasing, primordially in the state of peace, and naturally in the state of nirvāṇa.’
“Among such beings, Paramārthasamudgata, some have produced roots of virtue, purified their obscurations, and brought their mental continuum to maturity. They have much confidence in my teaching and have accomplished the accumulations of merit and gnosis. Once they have heard my teaching, they understand my explanations in accordance with my underlying intent exactly as it is. Moreover, they recognize that this teaching is the truth.156 Through their wisdom, they realize its meaning exactly as it is. By also engaging in the practice of this realization, they will very quickly attain the ultimate state. They will develop faith in these teachings, and think, ‘Amazing! The Blessed One is completely and perfectly awakened. Through him, one becomes perfectly awakened with respect to all phenomena.’
“Among such beings, some have not produced roots of virtue, purified their obscurations, and brought their mental continuums to maturity. Their confidence in my teaching is limited and [F.20.b] they have not accomplished the accumulations of merit and gnosis. They are honest and sincere. Unable to evaluate and refute157 [others’ views], they do not consider their own as supreme. Once they have heard my teaching, although they do not understand my explanations in accordance with my underlying intent exactly as it is, they still develop confidence and faith in these teachings: ‘The Tathāgata’s discourse is profound and has the appearance of profundity. [Because] emptiness is the topic of this discourse, it is difficult to perceive and difficult to understand. Being beyond judgment, it does not belong to the domain of speculation. It can [only] be known by intelligent scholars well versed in the subtle.’158 They think, ‘We do not understand the meaning of this sūtra and these teachings that were taught by the Blessed One. Profound is the awakening of the Buddha and the nature of phenomena. Only the Tathāgata understands them. We, however, do not. The Dharma taught by the tathāgatas arises according to the various inclinations of beings. Their gnosis159 and perception are infinite, whereas ours are merely like the [shallow] hoofprints left by a cow.’ Filled with devotion for these discourses, they also write them down. Having written them down, they also keep them in mind, read them, propagate them, venerate them, expound them, recite them, and chant them aloud. However, because they do not understand these profound teachings in accordance with my underlying intent, they are unable to engage themselves in the various aspects of practice. As a consequence of this, they will further develop their accumulation of merit and gnosis, and those whose mental continuums are still immature will bring them to maturity.
“Other beings have not perfectly completed these stages up to the great accumulation of merit and gnosis. [F.21.a] They are dishonest and insincere. Capable of evaluating and refuting [others’ views], they consider their own as supreme. Once they have heard my teaching, they do not understand my profound explanations in accordance with my underlying intent exactly as it is. Although they have confidence in this teaching, they wrongly conceive it according to its literal meaning: ‘All phenomena are only without an essence, only unborn, only unceasing, only primordially in the state of peace, and only naturally in the state of nirvāṇa.’ As a consequence of this, they acquire the view that all phenomena are inexistent and the view that they are without defining characteristics. Then, once they have acquired these views, they negate all phenomena by [negating] all defining characteristics, thereby negating the imaginary defining characteristic as well as the other-dependent and actual defining characteristics. Why is it said that they negate all three defining characteristics? Because, Paramārthasamudgata, if the other-dependent and actual defining characteristics are accepted, then the imaginary defining characteristic also will be distinctly perceived. Now, those who consider the other-dependent and actual defining characteristics as inexistent have already negated the imaginary defining characteristic. This is why they are called those who negate all three defining characteristics. They consider my teaching to be the truth while considering some nonsense to be its meaning. Those who consider my teaching to be the truth while considering some nonsense to be its meaning cling to my teaching as the truth while at the same time clinging to some nonsense as its meaning. Since they have confidence in my teaching, they will progress by developing virtuous qualities. However, because they wrongly conceive some nonsense to be the meaning of my teaching, they will stray from wisdom. Straying from wisdom, [F.21.b] they will stray from the vast and immeasurable virtuous qualities.
“Others hear from those beings that my teaching is the truth while some nonsense is its meaning. Then, delighted by this view, they accept that my teaching is the truth and some nonsense is its meaning. Thus, they wrongly conceive my teaching as the truth with some nonsense as its meaning. As a consequence of this, you should know that they will likewise stray from virtuous qualities.
“Others who take no delight in this view are overcome by fear and anxiety when they hear that all phenomena are without an essence, unborn, unceasing, primordially in the state of peace, and naturally in the state of nirvāṇa. They then say, ‘These are not the words of the Buddha but the words of Māra!’ Thinking in this way, they reject this discourse, disparage it, denigrate it, and criticize it. As a consequence of this, they will obtain the great misfortune as well as the great karmic obscuration [of rejecting the truth].160 This is precisely why I said, ‘Those who mislead the multitude of beings into obtaining the great karmic obscuration, who consider all defining characteristics as inexistent and teach some nonsense as the meaning of my teaching, are burdened with great karmic obscuration [of rejecting the truth].
“Paramārthasamudgata, among such beings, some have not produced roots of virtue, purified their obscurations, and brought their mental continuum to maturity. Their confidence in my teaching is limited, and they have not accomplished the accumulations of merit and gnosis. They are dishonest and insincere. Although they are unable to evaluate and refute [others’ views], they consider their own as supreme. When they hear my teaching, they neither understand my explanations in accordance with my underlying intent exactly as it is, nor do they develop confidence in this teaching. They accept that my teaching is not the truth and its meaning is some nonsense. They say, ‘These are not the words of the Buddha [F.22.a] but the words of Māra!’ Thinking in this way, they reject this discourse, disparage it, denigrate it, criticize it, and distort [its meaning]. In many ways, they apply themselves to discarding, undermining, and subverting this discourse, considering as enemies those who are devoted to it. From the very beginning, they are affected by the karmic obscuration [of rejecting the truth]. As a consequence of this, they also cause [others] to be obscured by this karmic obscuration. Although it is easy to determine the beginning of this karmic obscuration, it is difficult to know how many myriad eons it will last.
“Thus, Paramārthasamudgata, those are the various degrees of confidence in my Dharma and my Vinaya,161 which are well proclaimed, well imparted, pure in their intention, and well communicated.”
Then, at that moment, the Blessed One spoke these verses:
Then, the bodhisattva Paramārthasamudgata said to the Blessed One, “Blessed One, the speech expounding the underlying intent of the buddhas is subtle, extremely subtle, profound, extremely profound, difficult to understand, and extremely difficult to understand. How marvelous, how wonderful it is!
“This is how I understand the meaning of the words spoken by the Blessed One: The phenomenal appearance of conditioned phenomena, namely, the basis of the imaginary defining characteristic, the object of conceptualization,162 is nominally and conventionally posited as an essential characteristic or a distinctive characteristic,163 for example as the aggregate of form, its arising, its cessation, its abandonment, or the comprehension of this aggregate. What is posited in this way is the imaginary defining characteristic. For this reason, Blessed One, you referred to essencelessness with regard to the defining characteristics of phenomena. The phenomenal appearance of conditioned phenomena, namely, the basis of the imaginary defining characteristic, the object of conceptualization, is the other-dependent defining characteristic. For this reason, Blessed One, you referred to essencelessness with regard to both the arising of phenomena and the ultimate in one of its aspects.
“This is how I understand the meaning of the words spoken by the Blessed One: this very phenomenal appearance of conditioned phenomena, namely, the basis of the imaginary defining characteristic, the object of conceptualization, is devoid of any actuality or essence as that which has an imaginary defining characteristic.164 [F.23.a] On account of this, this essencelessness or selflessness of phenomena, true reality, the referential object conducive to purification, is the actual defining characteristic. For this reason, Blessed One, you referred to the essencelessness of phenomena with regard to the ultimate in its other aspect.
“One should proceed in exactly the same way with the remaining aggregates as well as with each of the twelve sense domains, the twelve factors of conditioned existence, the four kinds of sustenance, and the six and eighteen constituents.
“This is how I understand the meaning of the words spoken by the Blessed One: The phenomenal appearance of conditioned phenomena, namely, the basis of the imaginary defining characteristic, the object of conceptualization, is nominally and conventionally posited as an essential characteristic or a distinctive characteristic, for example as the noble truth of suffering or the comprehension of suffering. For this reason, Blessed One, you referred to essencelessness with regard to the defining characteristics of phenomena. The phenomenal appearance of conditioned phenomena, namely, the basis of the imaginary defining characteristic, the object of conceptualization, is the other-dependent defining characteristic. For this reason, Blessed One, you referred to essencelessness with regard to both the arising of phenomena and the ultimate in one of its aspects.
“This is how I understand the meaning of the words spoken by the Blessed One: This very phenomenal appearance of conditioned phenomena, namely, the basis of the imaginary defining characteristic, the object of conceptualization, is devoid of any actuality or essence as that which has an imaginary defining characteristic.165 [F.23.b] On account of this, this essencelessness or selflessness of phenomena, true reality, the referential object conducive to purification, is the actual defining characteristic. For this reason, Blessed One, you referred to the essencelessness of phenomena with regard to the ultimate in its other aspect.
“As with the noble truth of suffering, one should proceed in exactly the same way with the other truths. As with the truths, so one should proceed in exactly the same way with each of the applications of mindfulness, the self-restraints, the bases of supernatural powers, the faculties, the forces, the branches of awakening, and the branches of the path.
“This is how I understand the meaning of the words spoken by the Blessed One: The phenomenal appearance of conditioned phenomena, namely, the basis of the imaginary defining characteristic, the object of conceptualization, is nominally and conventionally posited as an essential characteristic or a distinctive characteristic, for example as correct concentration,166 its adverse factors and antidotes, its practice, its arising from being non-arisen, its remaining after it arose, and its maintaining, resuming, increasing, or expanding. For this reason, Blessed One, you referred to essencelessness with regard to the defining characteristics of phenomena. The phenomenal appearance of conditioned phenomena, namely, the basis of the imaginary defining characteristic, the object of conceptualization, is the other-dependent defining characteristic. For this reason, Blessed One, you referred to essencelessness with regard to both the arising of phenomena and the ultimate in one of its aspects.
“This is how I [F.24.a] understand the meaning of the words spoken by the Blessed One: This very phenomenal appearance of conditioned phenomena, namely, the basis of the imaginary defining characteristic, the object of conceptualization, is devoid of any actuality or essence as that which has an imaginary defining characteristic. On account of this, this essencelessness or selflessness of phenomena, true reality, the referential object conducive to purification, is the actual defining characteristic. For this reason, Blessed One, you referred to the essencelessness of phenomena with regard to the ultimate in its other aspect.
“Blessed One, thus it is said, for example, that dried ginger should be added to all medicinal powders and elixirs. Likewise, this teaching of definitive meaning expounded by167 the Blessed One in reference to the statement, ‘All phenomena are without an essence, unborn, unceasing, primordially in the state of peace, and naturally in the state of nirvāṇa,’168 should also be added to all the discourses of provisional meaning.169
“Blessed One, it is like this: for example, the canvas for a painting, whether blue, yellow, red, or white, is identical for all painted figures and thus perfectly clarifies their contours. Likewise, this teaching of definitive meaning expounded by the Blessed One in reference to the statement, ‘All phenomena are without an essence, unborn, unceasing, primordially in the state of peace, and naturally in the state of nirvāṇa,’ is identical in all discourses of provisional meaning and thus perfectly clarifies their interpretable intent.
“Blessed One, it is like this: for example, adding clarified butter to all sorts of stews, meat dishes, and porridge is delicious. Likewise, it is delightful to add to all discourses of provisional meaning this teaching of definitive meaning expounded by the Blessed One in reference to the statement, ‘All phenomena are without an essence, unborn, unceasing, primordially in the state of peace, and naturally in the state of nirvāṇa.’ [F.24.b]
“Blessed One, it is like this: for example, space is identical everywhere and, [being empty and free from all obstruction,] does not hinder any endeavor. Likewise, this teaching of definitive meaning expounded by the Blessed One in reference to the statement, ‘All phenomena are without an essence, unborn, unceasing, primordially in the state of peace, and naturally in the state of nirvāṇa,’ is identical in all discourses of provisional meaning and does not hinder any endeavor in the course of the hearers’, solitary realizers’, or bodhisattvas’ vehicle.”
Following these words, the Blessed One complimented the bodhisattva Paramārthasamudgata: “Excellent, Paramārthasamudgata, this is excellent! You have understood my explanation in accordance with the Tathāgata’s underlying intent. Your examples of the dried ginger, painting, clarified butter, and space perfectly illustrated its point. Paramārthasamudgata, so it is, and not otherwise. Therefore, keep in mind this teaching in this way.”
Then, the bodhisattva Paramārthasamudgata spoke again to the Blessed One: “In the deer park of Ṛṣivadana in Vārāṇasī, the Blessed One first set in motion the wonderful wheel of Dharma by teaching the four noble truths to those who were engaged in the hearers’ vehicle. Not a single god or human in the world had previously ever turned such a wheel of Dharma. However, this turning of the Dharma wheel by the Blessed One was surpassable and adapted to the circumstances. Being of provisional meaning,170 it became a topic of dispute. Then, for those who were engaged in the Great Vehicle, [F.25.a] you turned the second, even more wonderful, wheel of Dharma in the form of a teaching on emptiness: ‘All phenomena are without an essence, unborn, unceasing, primordially in the state of peace, and naturally in the state of nirvāṇa.’ However, this turning of the Dharma wheel by the Blessed One was surpassable and adapted to the circumstances. Being of provisional meaning, it became a topic of dispute. Then, for those who were engaged in all vehicles,171 you turned the third wonderful Dharma wheel of excellent discernment in reference to the statement, ‘All phenomena are without an essence, unborn, unceasing, primordially in the state of peace, and by nature in the state of nirvāṇa.’172 This turning of the Dharma wheel by the Blessed One was unsurpassable and not limited to the circumstances. Being of definitive meaning, it did not become a topic of dispute.
“Blessed One, when sons or daughters of noble family have heard the teaching of definitive meaning taught by the Blessed One in reference to the statement, ‘All phenomena are without an essence, unborn, unceasing, primordially in the state of peace, and naturally in the state of nirvāṇa,’ they develop devotion for this teaching and commission its transcription into writing. Once it has been put into writing, they keep it in mind, read it, venerate it, propagate it, expound it, chant it aloud, contemplate it, and apply it in their practice. As they do so, how much merit will they produce?”
The Blessed One answered, “Paramārthasamudgata, these sons and daughters of noble family will produce immeasurable and [F.25.b] incalculable merit. Although it is difficult to illustrate this with examples, I will briefly explain it to you. Paramārthasamudgata, it is like this: Compared to the amount of earth, the amount of dirt at the tip of a fingernail does not come close to a hundredth, a thousandth, a one hundred thousandth of it, or anything implying calculation, partition, numeration, analogy, or comparison. Compared to the amount of water contained in the four great oceans, the amount of water contained in the hoofprint of an ox does not come close to a hundredth, a thousandth, a one hundred thousandth of it, or anything implying calculation, partition, numeration, analogy, or comparison. Likewise, Paramārthasamudgata, compared to the amount of merit accumulated by developing confidence in my teaching of definitive meaning up to applying it in one’s practice, the amount of merit accumulated by developing confidence in my teaching of provisional meaning … up to applying it in one’s practice does not come close to a hundredth, a thousandth, a one hundred thousandth of it, or anything implying calculation, partition, numeration, analogy, or comparison.”
The bodhisattva Paramārthasamudgata inquired, “Blessed One, what is the name of this teaching as a Dharma discourse that unravels the Tathāgata’s intent?173 How should I keep it in mind?”174
The Blessed One answered: “Paramārthasamudgata, this is a teaching of definitive meaning on the ultimate. Therefore, keep it in mind as The Teaching of Definitive Meaning on the Ultimate.”
As the Blessed One expounded this teaching of definitive meaning on the ultimate, six hundred thousand beings produced the mind directed at the unsurpassable, complete and perfect awakening;175 three hundred thousand hearers purified the Dharma eye from impurities and contaminations; one hundred and fifty hearers who were without attachment liberated their minds from all outflows; and seventy-five thousand bodhisattvas attained the acceptance that phenomena are non-arisen. [F.26.a]
This was the chapter of the bodhisattva Paramārthasamudgata—the seventh chapter.
Abbreviations
| Bd | Bardan (Zanskar) canonical collection |
|---|---|
| C | Choné xylograph Kangyur |
| Cbeta | Chinese Electronic Buddhist Association, (www.cbeta.org) |
| Cz | Chizhi Kangyur |
| D | Degé xylograph Kangyur |
| Dd | Dodedrak Kangyur |
| Dk | Dongkarla Kangyur |
| Do | Dolpo canonical collection |
| F | Phukdrak manuscript Kangyur |
| Go | Gondhla (Lahaul) canonical collection |
| Gt | Gangteng Kangyur |
| H | Lhasa xylograph Kangyur |
| He | Hemis I Kangyur |
| J | ’jang sa tham/Lithang xylograph Kangyur |
| Kʙ | Berlin manuscript Kangyur |
| Kǫ774 | Peking 1737 xylograph Kangyur |
| L | London (Shelkar) manuscript Kangyur |
| Lg | Lang mdo Kangyur |
| Mvyut | Mahāvyutpatti |
| N | Narthang xylograph Kangyur |
| Ng | Namgyal Kangyur |
| Np | Neyphug Kangyur |
| O | Tawang Kangyur |
| Pj | Phajoding I Kangyur |
| Pz | Phajoding II Kangyur |
| R | Ragya Kangyur |
| S | Stok manuscript Kangyur |
| Saṃdh. | Saṃdhinirmocanasūtra |
| Saṃdhdh | Dunhuang manuscript: Stein Tib. n°194 (49 folios) and Stein Tib. n°683 (1 folio) (Hakamaya 1984–1987) |
| T | Tokyo manuscript Kangyur |
| Taishō 676 | 解深密經, translated by Xuanzang (596–664 ᴄᴇ) |
| TrBh | Sthiramati’s Triṃśikāvijñaptibhāṣyam |
| U | Urga xylograph Kangyur |
| V | Ulaanbaatar manuscript Kangyur |
| VD | Degé; xylograph of the Viniścayasaṃgrahaṇī of the Yogācārabhūmi from the Tengyur |
| VG | Golden; xylograph of the Viniścayasaṃgrahaṇī of the Yogācārabhūmi from the Tengyur |
| VP | Peking; xylograph of the Viniścayasaṃgrahaṇī of the Yogācārabhūmi from the Tengyur |
| VinSg | Viniścayasaṃgrahaṇī of the Yogācārabhūmi |
| X | Basgo manuscript Kangyur |
| YBht P ’i | Tibetan translation of Acarya Asanga’s Yogācārabhūmi from the Peking Tengyur (n°. 5540, sems-tsam, ’i 143aI-382a5 (vol. I l l : 121-217) |
| Z | Shey Palace manuscript Kangyur |
Bibliography
Tibetan Sources
’phags pa dgongs pa nges par ’grel pa zhes bya ba theg pa chen po’i mdo (Āryasaṃdhinirmocananāmamahāyānasūtra). Toh 106, Degé Kangyur vol. 49 (mdo sde, ca) folios 1.b–55.b.
’phags pa dgongs pa nges par ’grel pa zhes bya ba theg pa chen po’i mdo. 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. 49, pp. 3–131.
Asaṅga. rnal ’byor spyod pa’i sa (Yogācārabhūmi). Toh 4035, Degé Tengyur vol. 127 (sems tsam, tshi) folios 1.b–283.a
Asaṅga. rnal ’byor spyod pa’i sa rnam par gtan la dbab pa bsdu ba (Yogācārabhūmiviniścayasaṃgraha). Toh 4038, Degé Tengyur vol. 130 (sems tsam, zhi), folios 1.b–289.a; vol. 131 (sems tsam, zi), folios 1.b–127.a.
Buddhabhūmisūtra (sangs rgyas kyi sa’i mdo). Toh 275, Degé Kangyur vol. 68 (mdo sde, ya), folios 36.a–44.b.
Kamalaśila. bsgom pa’i rim pa (Bhāvanākrama). Toh 3915, Degé Tengyur vol. 110 (dbu ma, ki), folios 22.a–41.b; Toh 3916, Degé Tengyur vol. 110 (dbu ma, ki), folios 42.a–55.b; and Toh 3917, Degé Tengyur vol. 110 (dbu ma, ki), folios 55.b–68.b.
Mahāvyutpatti (bye brag tu rtogs par byed pa chen po). Toh 4346, Degé Tengyur vol. 204 (sna tshogs, co), folios 1.b–131.a.
Māyājāla (mdo chen sgyu ma’i dra ba). Toh 288, Degé Kangyur vol. 71 (mdo sde, sha), folios 230.a–244.a.
Tathāgataguṇajñānācintyaviṣayāvatāranirdeśasūtra (de bzhin gshegs pa’i yon tan dang ye shes bsam gyis mi khyab pa’i yul la ’jug pa bstan pa’i mdo). Toh 185, Degé Kangyur vol. 61 (mdo sde, tsa), folios 106.a–143.b.
Trisong Detsen (khri srong lde brtsan). bka’ yang dag pa’i tshad ma las mdo btus pa (Samyagvākpramāṇoddhṛtasūtra). Toh 4352, Degé Tengyur vol. 204 (sna tshogs, co), folios 173.b–203.a.
Vasubandhu. dbus dang mtha’ rnam par ’byed pa’i ’grel pa (Madhyāntavibhāgabhāṣya). Toh 4027, Degé Tengyur vol. 124 (sems tsam, bi), folios 1.b–27.a.
Wonch’uk. dgongs pa zab mo nges par ’grel pa’i mdo rgya cher ’grel pa (*Āryagambhīrasaṃdhinirmocanasūtraṭīkā) Toh 4016, Degé Tengyur vol. 118 (mdo ’grel, ti), folios 1.b–291.a; vol. 119 (mdo ’grel, thi), folios 1.b–175.a.
IOL Tib J 194. British Library, London. Accessed through The International Dunhuang Project: The Silk Road Online.
Other Canonical Sources for Samdh.
Bd3.7 vol. 3 (ta) pha, folios 1.b–84.a
C747 vol. 29 (mdo sde, ca), folios 1.b–71.a
Dd031-001 (mdo ca), folios 1.b–69.b
Dk034-001 (mdo na), folios 1.b–87.b
Do (mdo sde, da), folios 196.a–246.b
F156 vol. 68 (mdo sde, tsha), folios 1.b–72.a
Go19,01 vol. 19 (ka), folios 1.b–36.a
Gt028-001 (mdo na), folios 1.b–72.b
H109 vol. 51 (mdo sde, ca), folios 1.b–87.b
He64.6 (mdo, wa), folios 62.b–125.b
J51 vol. 44 (mdo sde, ca), folios 1.b–59.b
Kǫ774 vol. 29 (mdo sna tshogs, ngu), folios 1.b–60.b
L82 vol. 42 (mdo sde, na), folios 1.b–80.b
N94 vol. 51 (mdo sde, ca) folios 1.a–81.a.
Np012-001 (mdo na), folios 1.b–87.a
Pj043-001 (mdo ca), folios 1.b–62.b
Pz045-001 (mdo ca), folios 1.b–61.a
R106 vol. 49 (mdo sde, ca), folios 1.b–55.b
S106 vol. 63 (mdo sde, na), folios 1.b–80.b
U106 vol. 49 (mdo sde, ca), folios 1.b–55.b
X (mdo sde, wa), folios 66.a–132.a
Z137 vol. 59 (mdo, na), folios 1.b–93.a
Other Sources
Bhattacharya, Ramkrishna. “Uttarakuru: The (E)utopia of Ancient India.” Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 81, no. 1/4 (2000): 191–201.
Billeter, Jean-François. Trois essais sur la traduction. Paris: Allia, 2014.
Braarvig, Jens. “Dhāraṇī and Pratibhāna: Memory and Eloquence of the Bodhisattvas.” Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies 8, no. 1 (1985): 17–30.
Brunnhölzl, Karl. A Compendium of the Mahāyāna: Asaṅga’s “Mahāyānasaṃgraha” and Its Indian and Tibetan Commentaries. 3 vols. Boulder: Shambhala, 2018.
Buescher, Hartmut (2007). Sthiramati’s Triṃśikāvijñaptibhāṣya: Critical Editions of the Sanskrit Text and its Tibetan Translation. Vienna: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenachaften, 2007.
——— (2008). The Inception of Yogācāra-Vijñānavāda. Vienna: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 2008.
Buswell, Robert E., Donald S. Lopez, and Juhn Ahn. The Princeton Dictionary of Buddhism. Princeton University Press, 2014.
Chayet, Anne. “Pour servir à la numérisation des manuscrits tibétains de Dunhuang conservés à la Bibliothèque Nationale : un fichier de Jacques Bacot et autres documents.” Revue d’Etudes Tibétaines 9 (2005): 4–107.
Cleary, Thomas F. Buddhist Yoga: A Comprehensive Course. Boston: Shambhala, 1999.
Conze, Edward. The Large Sutra on Perfect Wisdom: With the Divisions of the Abhisamayālaṅkāra. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1975.
Cornu, Philippe. Soûtra du dévoilement du sens profond. Paris: Fayard, 2005.
Rhys Davids, T. W., and William Stede. The Pali Text Society’s Pali-English Dictionary. Chipstead: The Pali Text Society, 1921.
Dayal, Har. The Bodhisattva Doctrine in Buddhist Sanskrit Literature. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 2004.
Delhey, Martin. “The Yogācārabhūmi Corpus: Sources, Editions, Translations, and Reference Works.” In The Foundation for Yoga Practitioners. The Buddhist Yogācārabhūmi Treatise and Its Adaptation in India, East Asia, and Tibet, edited by Ulrich Timme Krag, 498–561. Harvard Oriental Series 75. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2013.
Eckel, Malcolm David. To See the Buddha: A Philosopher’s Quest for the Meaning of Emptiness. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1994.
Edgerton, Franklin (1937). “Buddhist Sanskrit saṃdha, saṃdhi(-nirmocana).” Journal of the American Oriental Society 5, vol. 2 (1937): 185–88.
——— (1953). Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit Grammar and Dictionary. Vol. 2, Dictionary. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1953.
Fiordalis, David V. “The Wondrous Display of Superhuman Power in the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa: Miracle or Marvel?” In Yoga Powers: Extraordinary Capacities Attained Through Meditation and Concentration, edited by Knut Axel Jacobsen, 96–125. Leiden: Brill, 2012.
Frauwallner, Erich. Die Philosophie des Buddhismus. Berlin: Akademie-Verlag, 1969.
Gómez, Luis O. “On Buddhist wonders and wonder-working.” Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies 33, no. 1–2 (2011): 513–54.
Hall, Bruce Cameron. “The Meaning of Vijñapti in Vasubandhu’s Concept of Mind.” Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies 9, no. 1 (1986): 7–23.
Hakayama, Noriaki (1984). “The Old and New Tibetan Translationsof the Saṃdhinirmocana-sūtra: Some Notes on the History of Early Tibetan Translation.” In Komazawa daigaku bukkyōgakubu kenkyū kiyō 42, 192–176, 1984.
———(1986). “A Comparative Edition of the Old and New Tibetan Translations of the Saṃdhinirmocanasūtra (I).” In Komazawa daigaku bukkyōgakubu ronshū 17, 616(1)–600(17), 1986.
———(1987a). “A Comparative Edition of the Old and New Tibetan Translations of the Saṃdhinirmocana-sūtra (II).” In Komazawa daigaku bukkyōgakubu kenkyū kiyō 45, 354(1)–320(35), 1987.
———(1987b). “A Comparative Edition of the Old and New Tibetan Translations of the Saṃdhinirmocana-sūtra (III).” In Komazawa daigaku bukkyōgakubu ronshū 18, 606(1)–572(35), 1986.
Hopkins, Jeffrey (1999). Emptiness in the Mind-Only School of Buddhism. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1999.
———(2002). Reflections on Reality: The Three Natures and Non-Natures in the Mind-Only School. Dynamic Responses to D̄zong-ka-b̄a’s “The Essence of Eloquence” 2. London: University of California Press, 2002.
———(2006). Absorption in No External World: 170 Issues in Mind Only Buddhism. Dynamic Responses to D̄zong-ka-b̄a’s “The Essence of Eloquence” 3. Ithaca: Snow Lion, 2006.
Kapstein, Matthew (1988). “Mi-pham’s Theory of Interpretation.” In Buddhist Hermeneutics edited by Donald Lopez. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press, 1988: 149–174
———. Reason’s Traces: Identity and Interpretation in Indian and Tibetan Buddhist Thought. Boston: Wisdom Publications, 2001.
Katō, Kojirō (2002). “Pratibimba in the Context of Vijñaptimātra Theory: A Comparative Study of the Śrāvakabhūmi and the Sandhinirmocanasūtra (Chap. VI).” In Studies in Indian Philosophy and Buddhism, 53–65. Tokyo: Tokyo University, 2002.
———(2004). “On the Terms vijñaptimatratā and vijñaptitathatā as Found in the Sandhinirmocanasūtra.” Journal of Indian and Buddhist Studies (=Indobukkyogaku Kenkyu) 52, no. 2 (2004): 38–40.
———(2006). “On the Tibetan Text of the Saṃdhinirmocanasūtra: Towards a Comparative Study of Manuscripts and Editions which belong to the East and West Recensions.” Journal of Indian and Buddhist Studies (=Indobukkyogaku Kenkyu) 54, no. 3 (2006): 1205–11.
———(2011). “On the Two Different Interpretations of paramārthaniḥsvabhāva in the Saṃdhinirmocanasūtra 7.6.” Journal of Indian and Buddhist Studies (=Indobukkyogaku Kenkyu) 59, no. 2 (2011): 976–81.
———(forthcoming). Critical edition of the Sandhinirmocanasūtra. PhD diss., University of Tokyo.
Kawasaki, Shinjo. “Analysis of yoga in the Sandhinirmocanasūtra.” Buzan Gakuho 21 (1976): 170–156.
Keenan, John Peter (1980). “A Study of the Buddhabhūmyupadeśa: The Doctrinal Development of the Notion of Wisdom in Yogācāra Thought.” PhD diss., University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1980.
——— (2000). The Scripture on the Explication of Underlying Meaning: Translated from the Chinese of Hsüan-tsang. BDK English Tripiṭaka 25-4. Berkeley: Numata Center for Buddhist Translation and Research, 2000.
Kritzer, Robert. “Rūpa and the Antarābhava.” Journal of Indian Philosophy 29 (2000): 235–72.
Lamotte, Étienne (1935). Saṃdhinirmocana sūtra: l’explication des mystères. Louvain: Bureaux du recueil, Bibliothèque de l’Universit́e, 1935.
———(1973). La somme du grand véhicule d’Asaṅga: Mahāyānasaṃgraha. Louvain: Université de Louvain, Institut orientaliste, 1973.
———(1970). Le traité de la grande vertu de sagesse de Nāgārjuna, Mahāprajñāpāramitāśāstra. Louvain: Université de Louvain, Institut orientaliste, 1970.
La Vallée Poussin, Louis de (1925). L’Abhidharmakośa de Vasubandhu. Paris: P. Geuthner, 1925.
———(1934–35). “Notes Bouddhiques：XX. Les Trois ‘Caractères’ et les trois ‘Absences de Nature Propre’ dans le Samdhinirmocana, Chapitres VI et VII.” Bulletin de la Classe des Lettres et des Sciences Morales et Politiques, Académie Royale de Belgique (1934–35): 284–303.
Lévi, Sylvain. Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi: deux traités de Vasubandhu : Viṁśatikā (La vingtaine) accompagnée d’une explication en prose, et Triṁśikā (La trentaine) avec le commentaire de Sthiramati. Paris: H. Champion, 1925.
Lin, Chen Kuo (1991). The Saṃdhinirmocana Sūtra: A Liberating Hermeneutic. PhD diss., Temple University, 1991.
———(2010). “Truth and method in the Saṃdhinirmocana Sūtra.” Journal of Chinese Philosophy 37 (2010): 261–75.
Lusthaus, Dan. Buddhist Phenomenology: A Philosophical Investigation of Yogācāra Buddhism and the “Ch’eng Wei-shih lun.” London: RoutledgeCurzon, 2002.
Mathes, Klaus-Dieter. “The Ontological Status of the Dependent (paratantra) in the Saṃdhinirmocanasūtra and the Vyākhyāyukti.” In Indica et Tibetica: Festschrift für Michael Hahn, edited by Konrad Klaus and Jens-Uwe Hartmann, 323–39. Vienna: Arbeitskreis für Tibetische und Buddhistische Studien Universität Wien, 2007.
Matsuda, Kazunobu (1995). “Sanskrit Text of the Bodhisattva’s Ten Stages in the Saṃdhinirmocanasūtra: Based on the Kathmandu Fragment of the Yogācārabhūmi.” Bulletin of the Research Institute of Bukkyō University 2 (1995): 59–77.
———(2013). “Sanskrit Fragments of the Saṃdhinirmocanasūtra.” In The Foundation for Yoga Practitioners: The Buddhist Yogācārabhūmi Treatise and Its Adaptation in India, East Asia, and Tibet, edited by Ulrich Timme Krag, 772–90. Harvard Oriental Series 75. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2013.
Muller, Charles A. “Woncheuk 圓測 on Bimba 本質 and Pratibimba 影像 in his Commentary on the Saṃdhinirmocana-sūtra.” Journal of Indian and Buddhist Studies 59, no. 3 (2011): 1272–80.
Nagao, Gadjin. Madhyāntavibhāga‐bhāṣya: a Buddhist Philosophical Treatise Edited for the First Time from a Sanskrit Manuscript. Tokyo: Suzuki Research Foundation. 1964.
Nance, Richard F. Speaking for Buddhas: Scriptural Commentary in Indian Buddhism. New York: Columbia University Press, 2012.
Obermiller, Eugéne. Analysis of the Abhisamayālaṃkāra. London: Luzac, 1933.
Powers, John (1991a). “The Term ‘Saṃdhinirmocana’ in the Title of the Saṃdhinirmocana-sūtra.” Studies in Central and East Asian Religions 4 (1991): 52–62.
———(1991b). “The Concept of the Ultimate (don dam pa, paramārtha) in the Sandhinirmocanasūtra.” Indian Journal of Buddhist Studies 3, no. 1 (1991): 1–24.
———(1991c). “The Concept of the Ultimate (don dam pa, paramārtha) in the Sandhinirmocana-Sūtra: Analysis, translation, and notes.” PhD diss., University of Virginia, 1991.
———(1992a). “Lost in China, Found in Tibet: How Wonch’uk Became the Author of the Great Chinese Commentary.” In Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies 15, no. 1 (1992): 95–103.
———(1992b). Two Commentaries on the Samdhinirmocana-Sutra by Asanga and Jnanagarbha. Studies in Asian Thought and Religion 13. Lewiston: Edwin Mellen Press, 1992.
———(1993a). “The Tibetan Translations of the Saṃdhinirmocanasūtra and Bka’ ’gyur Research.” Central Asiatic Journal 37, no. 3/4 (1993): 198–224.
———(1993b). Hermeneutics and Tradition in the Sandhinirmocana-sūtra. Leiden: Brill, 1993.
———(1995). Wisdom of Buddha: The Saṁdhinirmocana Sūtra. Tibetan Translation Series 16. Berkeley: Dharma Publishing, 1995.
———(1998). Jñānagarbha’s Commentary on Just the Maitreya Chapter from the Saṃdhinirmocana-Sūtra: Study, Translation and Tibetan Text. New Delhi: Indian Council of Philosophical Research, 1998.
———(2015). “Saṃdhinirmocanasūtra.”In Brill’s Encyclopedia of Buddhism, edited by Jonathan Silk et al., vol. 1, Literature and Languages, 240–48. Leiden: Brill, 2015.
Punnaji, Hingulwala. “A Study of the Practice of Recollections (Anussati) in Buddhist Meditation.” PhD diss., Huafan University.
Radich, Michael. “The Somatics of Liberation: Ideas about Embodiment in Buddhism from Its Origins to the Fifth Century C.E.” PhD Diss., Harvard University: 2007.
Rahula, Walpola. Abhidharmasamuccaya: The Compendium of Higher Teaching (philosophy) by Asanga. Fremont: Asian Humanities Press, 2001.
Sakuma, Hidenori S. Die āśrayaparivṛtti-Theorie in der Yogācārabhūmi. 2 vols. Stuttgart: Steiner, 1990.
Schmithausen, Lambert (1984). “On the Vijñaptimātra Passage in Saṁdhinirmocanasūtra VIII.7.” Acta Indologica 6 (1984): 433–55.
———(1987). Ālayavijñāna: On the Origin and the Early Development of a Central Concept of Yogācāra Philosophy. Tokyo: International Institute for Buddhist Studies, 1987.
———(2005). On the Problem of the External World in the “Ch’eng wei shih lun.” Studia Philologica Buddhica. Tokyo: The International Institute for Buddhist Studies, 2005.
———(2014). The Genesis of Yogācāra-Vijñānavāda: Responses and Reflections. Kasuga Lectures Series 1. Tokyo: The International Institute for Buddhist Studies, 2014.
Skilling, Peter (1994). “Kanjur Titles and Colophons.” In Tibetan Studies: Proceedings of the 6th Seminar of the International Association for Tibetan Studies, Fagernes 1992, edited by Per Kvaerne, 2:768–80. Oslo: The Institute for Comparative Research in Human Culture, 1994.
——— (2013). “Nets of Intertextuality: Embedded Scriptural Citations in the Yogācārabhūmi.” In The Foundation for Yoga Practitioners: The Buddhist “Yogācārabhūmi” Treatise and Its Adaptation in India, East Asia, and Tibet, edited by Ulrich Timme Kragh, 772–90. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2013.
Steinkellner, Ernst. “Who is Byaṅ chub rdzu ’phrul? Tibetan and non-Tibetan Commentaries on the Saṃdhinirmocanasūtra – A Survey of the Literature.” Berliner Indologische Studien 4/5 (1989): 229–52.
Takahashi, Kōichi. “A Premise of the trilakṣaṇa theory in the Sandhinirmocanasūtra.” In Journal of Indian and Buddhist Studies (=Indobukkyogaku Kenkyu) 54, no. 3 (2006): 85–92.
Takasaki, Jikido. A Study on the Ratnagotravibhāga (Uttaratantra): Being a Treatise on the Tathāgatagarbha Theory of Mahāyāna Buddhism. Serie Orientale Roma 32. Roma: Istituto italiano per il Medio ed Estremo Oriente, 1966.
Tillemans, Tom J. F. “On a recent translation of the Saṃdhinirmocanasūtra.” In Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies 20, no. 1 (1997): 153–64.
Tucci, Giuseppe. Minor Buddhist Texts Part III: Third Bhāvanākrama. Serie Orientale Roma 43. Roma: Istituto italiano per il Medio ed Estremo Oriente, 1971.
Vinay, Jean-Paul, and Jean Darbelnet. Comparative Stylistics of French and English: A Methodology for Translation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 1958.
Waldron, William S. The Buddhist Unconscious: The ālaya-vijñāna in the context of Indian Buddhist Thought. London: RoutledgeCurzon, 2003.
Ware, James. Review of Saṃdhinirmocanasūtra, l’explication des mystères, by Étienne Lamotte. Journal of the American Oriental Society 57, no. 1 (1937): 122–24.
Wayman, Alex. “The Mirror as a Pan-Buddhist Metaphor-Simile.” History of Religions 13, no. 4 (1974): 251–69.
Wedemeyer, Christian K. “Review of Jñānagarbha’s Commentary on Just the Maitreya Chapter from the Saṃdhinirmocanasūtra: Study, Translation and Tibetan Text, by John Powers.” Journal of the American Oriental Society 123, no. 3 (2003): 681–84.
Xing, Guang. The Concept of the Buddha: Its evolution from early Buddhism to the “trikāya” theory. RoutledgeCurzon Critical Studies in Buddhism. London: RoutledgeCurzon, 2005.
Yoshimizu, Chizuko (1996). “On the Four Kinds of yukti in the Tenth Chapter of the Saṃdhinirmocanasūtra.” Journal of Naritasan Institute for Buddhist Studies 19 (1996): 123–68.
———(2010). “The Logic of the Sandhinirmocanasūtra: Establishing Right Reasoning Based on Similarity (sārūpya) and Dissimilarity (vairūpya).” In Logic in Earliest Classical India, edited by Brendan S. Gillon, 139–66. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 2010.