The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Ten Thousand Lines
Designation of a Bodhisattva
Toh 11
Degé Kangyur, vol. 31 (shes phyin, khri pa, ga), folios 1.b–91.a, and vol. 32 (shes phyin, khri pa, nga), folios 92.b–397.a
- Jinamitra
- Prajñāvarman
- Yeshé Dé
Imprint
Translated by the Padmakara Translation Group
under the patronage and supervision of 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha
First published 2018
Current version v 1.40.27 (2024)
Generated by 84000 Reading Room v2.26.1
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
While dwelling at Vulture Peak near Rājagṛha, the Buddha sets in motion the sūtras that are the most extensive of all—the sūtras on the Prajñāpāramitā, or “Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom.” Committed to writing around the start of the first millennium, these sūtras were expanded and contracted in the centuries that followed, eventually amounting to twenty-three volumes in the Tibetan Kangyur. Among them, The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Ten Thousand Lines is a compact and coherent restatement of the longer versions, uniquely extant in Tibetan translation, without specific commentaries, and rarely studied. While the structure generally follows that of the longer versions, chapters 1–2 conveniently summarize all three hundred and sixty-seven categories of phenomena, causal and fruitional attributes which the sūtra examines in the light of wisdom or discriminative awareness. Chapter 31 and the final chapter 33 conclude with an appraisal of irreversible bodhisattvas, the pitfalls of rejecting this teaching, and the blessings that accrue from committing it to writing.
Acknowledgements
Translated by the Padmakara Translation Group under the direction of Jigme Khyentse Rinpoche and Pema Wangyal Rinpoche. The text was translated, introduced, and annotated by Dr. Gyurme Dorje, and edited by Charles Hastings and John Canti with contributions from Greg Seton.
This translation has been completed under the patronage and supervision of 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha.
Work on this text was made possible thanks to generous donations made by Dzongsar Jamyang Khyentse Rinpoche; respectfully and humbly offered by Judy Cole, William Tai, Jie Chi Tai and families; by Shi Jing and family; by Wang Kang Wei and Zhao Yun Qi and family; and by Matthew, Vivian, Ye Kong and family. They are all most gratefully acknowledged.
Text Body
The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Ten Thousand Lines
Designation of a Bodhisattva
Then, the venerable Śāradvatīputra asked the Blessed One, “Reverend Lord! When you say that great bodhisattva beings who continue to engage in union with the transcendent perfection of wisdom deserve respect, then, Reverend Lord, what constitutes that phenomenon designated by the term ‘bodhisattva,’ that is to say, the one who at all times continues to engage inseparably in union with the transcendent perfection of wisdom? If one were to ask why, it is because I do not consider any phenomenon that may be designated by the term ‘bodhisattva.’”151
The Blessed One addressed the venerable Śāradvatīputra as follows: “Śāradvatīputra, do you think [F.39.b] that physical forms constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!” he replied.
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the eyes constitute a bodhisattva, and similarly, do you think that the ears, nose, tongue, body, and mental faculty constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that sights constitute a bodhisattva, and similarly, do you think that sounds, odors, tastes, tangibles, and mental phenomena constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the sensory element of the eyes, the sensory element of sights, and the sensory element of visual consciousness constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the sensory element of the ears, the sensory element of sounds, and the sensory element of auditory consciousness constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the sensory element of the nose, the sensory element of odors, and the sensory element of olfactory consciousness constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the sensory element of the tongue, the sensory element of tastes, and the sensory element of gustatory consciousness constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the sensory element of the body, the sensory element of tangibles, and the sensory element of tactile consciousness constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the sensory element of the mental faculty, the sensory element of mental phenomena, and the sensory element of mental consciousness [F.40.a] constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the earth element constitutes a bodhisattva, and similarly, do you think that the water element, the fire element, the wind element, the space element, and the consciousness element constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that fundamental ignorance constitutes a bodhisattva, and in the same vein, do you think that [other links of dependent origination], up to and including aging and death, constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that anything other than physical forms constitutes a bodhisattva, and similarly, do you think that anything other than feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that anything other than the eyes constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Similarly, do you think that anything other than the ears, nose, tongue, body, and mental faculty constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that anything other than sights constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Similarly, do you think that anything other than sounds, odors, tastes, tangibles, and mental phenomena constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that anything other than the sensory element of the eyes constitutes a bodhisattva, and in the same vein, do you think that anything other than [the other sensory elements], up to and including the sensory element of the mental faculty, constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that anything other than the earth element [F.40.b] constitutes a bodhisattva, and similarly, do you think that anything other than the water element, the fire element, the wind element, the space element, and the consciousness element constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that anything other than fundamental ignorance constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra! In the same vein, do you think that anything other than [the other links of dependent origination], up to and including aging and death, constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the real nature of physical forms constitutes a bodhisattva, and similarly, do you think that the real nature of feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the real nature of the eyes constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the real nature of the ears, nose, tongue, body, and mental faculty constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the real nature of the sensory element of the eyes constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra! In the same vein, do you think that the real nature of [the other sensory elements], up to and including the real nature of the sensory element of mental consciousness, constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the real nature of fundamental ignorance constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra! In the same vein, [F.41.a] do you think that the real nature of [the other links of dependent origination], up to and including aging and death, constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that anything other than the real nature of physical forms constitutes a bodhisattva, and similarly, do you think that anything other than the real nature of feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that anything other than the real nature of the eyes constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Similarly, do you think that anything other than the real nature of the ears, nose, tongue, body, and mental faculty constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that anything other than the real nature of the sensory element of the eyes constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra! In the same vein, do you think that the anything other than the real nature of [the other sensory elements], up to and including anything other than the real nature of the sensory element of mental consciousness, constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that anything other than the real nature of fundamental ignorance constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra! In the same vein, do you think that anything other than the real nature of [the other links of dependent origination], up to and including aging and death, constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!” he replied.
Then Blessed One asked, “Śāradvatīputra, to what purpose have you said that physical forms do not constitute a bodhisattva, and in the same vein, that [all those other phenomena], up to and including the link of aging and death, do not constitute a bodhisattva? Why do you say that a bodhisattva is not anything other than physical forms, and that nor indeed does the real nature of physical forms constitute a bodhisattva, [F.41.b] and in the same vein why do you say that nor does the real nature of [all those other phenomena], up to and including the link of aging and death, constitute a bodhisattva? Why do you say that a bodhisattva is not anything other than the real nature of physical forms, and in the same vein that a bodhisattva is not anything other than the real nature of [all those other phenomena], up to and including the link of aging and death?”
Then, the venerable Śāradvatīputra asked the Blessed One, “Reverend Lord, if sentient beings are invariably unfound and not apprehended, how could they become bodhisattvas! How could physical forms become bodhisattvas! How could bodhisattvas become anything other than physical forms! In the same vein, how could [all the remaining phenomena] up to and including the link of aging and death, become bodhisattvas! How could bodhisattvas become anything other than [all those remaining phenomena], up to and including the link of aging and death! How could the real nature of physical forms become bodhisattvas! How could bodhisattvas become anything other than the real nature of physical forms! In the same vein, how could the real nature of [all those remaining phenomena], up to and including the link of aging and death, become bodhisattvas! How could bodhisattvas become anything other than the real nature of [those remaining phenomena], up to and including the link of aging and death! These would be impossible!”
The Blessed One replied, “Śāradvatīputra, it is so! It is so! Śāradvatīputra, since great bodhisattva beings apprehend no sentient beings, they should train in the transcendent perfection of non-referential wisdom.
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designation of physical forms constitutes a bodhisattva?” [F.42.a]
“No, Reverend Lord!” he replied.
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designations of feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designation of physical forms as permanent or impermanent constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designations of feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness as permanent or impermanent constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designation of physical forms as happiness or suffering constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designations of feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness as happiness or suffering constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designation of physical forms as a self or not a self constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designations of feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness as a self or not a self constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designation of physical forms as empty or not empty constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designations of feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness as empty or not empty constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designation of physical forms as with signs or signless constitutes a bodhisattva?” [F.42.b]
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designations of feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness as with signs or signless constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designation of physical forms as having aspirations or lacking aspirations constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designations of feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness as having aspirations or lacking aspirations constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designation of physical forms as calm or not calm constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designations of feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness as calm or not calm constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designation of physical forms as void or not void constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designations of feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness as void or not void constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designation of physical forms as afflicted or purified constitutes a bodhisattva?”[F.43.a]
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designations of feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness as afflicted or purified constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designation of physical forms as arising or ceasing constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designations of feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness as arising or ceasing constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designation of physical forms as entities or non-entities constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designations of feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness as entities or non-entities constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designation of the eyes constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designations of the ears, nose, tongue, body, and mental faculty constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designation of the eyes as permanent or impermanent constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designations of the ears, nose, tongue, body, [F.43.b] and mental faculty as permanent or impermanent constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designation of eyes as imbued with happiness or suffering constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designations of the ears, nose, tongue, body, and mental faculty as imbued with happiness or suffering constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designation of the eyes as a self or not a self constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designations of the ears, nose, tongue, body, and mental faculty as a self or not a self constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designation of the eyes as empty or not empty constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designations of the ears, nose, tongue, body, and mental faculty as empty or not empty constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designation of the eyes as with signs or signless constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designations of the ears, nose, tongue, body, and mental faculty as with signs or signless constitute a bodhisattva?”[F.44.a]
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designation of the eyes as having aspirations or lacking aspirations constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designations of the ears, nose, tongue, body, and mental faculty as having aspirations or lacking aspirations constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designation of the eyes as calm or not calm constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designations of the ears, nose, tongue, body, and mental faculty as calm or not calm constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designation of the eyes as void or not void constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designations of the ears, nose, tongue, body, and mental faculty as void or not void constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designation of the eyes as afflicted or purified constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designations of the ears, nose, tongue, body, and mental faculty as afflicted or purified constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra! [F.44.b] Do you think that the designation of the eyes as arising or ceasing constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designations of the ears, nose, tongue, body, and mental faculty as arising or ceasing constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designation of the eyes as entities or non-entities constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designations of the ears, nose, tongue, body, and mental faculty as entities or non-entities constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designation of sights constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designations of sounds, odors, tastes, tangibles, and mental phenomena constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designation of sights as permanent or impermanent constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designations of sounds, odors, tastes, tangibles, and mental phenomena as permanent or impermanent constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designation of sights as imbued with happiness or suffering constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designations of sounds, odors, tastes, tangibles, and mental phenomena as imbued with happiness or suffering constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designation of sights as a self or not a self constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do [F.45.a] you think that the designations of sounds, odors, tastes, tangibles, and mental phenomena as a self or not a self constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designation of sights as empty or not empty constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designations of sounds, odors, tastes, tangibles, and mental phenomena as empty or not empty constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designation of sights as with signs or signless constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designations of sounds, odors, tastes, tangibles, and mental phenomena as with signs or signless constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designation of sights as having aspirations or lacking aspirations constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”[F.45.b]
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designations of sounds, odors, tastes, tangibles, and mental phenomena as having aspirations or lacking aspirations constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”[B5]
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designation of sights as calm or not calm constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designations of sounds, odors, tastes, tangibles, and mental phenomena as calm or not calm constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designation of sights as void or not void constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designations of sounds, odors, tastes, tangibles, and mental phenomena as void or not void constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designation of sights as afflicted or purified constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designations of sounds, odors, tastes, tangibles, and mental phenomena as afflicted or purified constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designation of sights as arising or ceasing constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”[F.46.a]
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designations of sounds, odors, tastes, tangibles, and mental phenomena as arising or ceasing constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designation of sights as entities or non-entities constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designations of sounds, odors, tastes, tangibles, and mental phenomena as entities or non-entities constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designation of the sensory element of the eyes constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designations of the sensory element of the eyes, the sensory element of sights, and the sensory element of visual consciousness constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“In the same vein, do you think that the designations [of all the remaining sensory elements], up to and including the sensory element of mental consciousness, constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designations of the sensory element of the eyes, the sensory element of sights, and the sensory element of visual consciousness as permanent or impermanent constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“In the same vein, do you think that the designations [of all the remaining sensory elements], up to and including the sensory element of mental consciousness as permanent or impermanent, constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that [F.46.b] the designations of [all the sensory elements], starting from the sensory element of the eyes, the sensory element of sights, and the sensory element of visual consciousness, and continuing in the same vein as far as [the designation of] the sensory element of mental consciousness, as imbued with happiness or suffering, constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that that the designations of [all the sensory elements], starting from the sensory element of the eyes, the sensory element of sights, and the sensory element of visual consciousness, and continuing in the same vein as far as [the designation of] the sensory element of mental consciousness, as a self or not a self, constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designations of [all the sensory elements], starting from the sensory element of the eyes, the sensory element of sights, and the sensory element of visual consciousness, and continuing in the same vein as far as [the designation of] the sensory element of mental consciousness, as empty or not empty, constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designations of [all the sensory elements], starting from the sensory element of the eyes, the sensory element of sights, and the sensory element of visual consciousness, and continuing in the same vein as far as [the designation of] the sensory element of mental consciousness, as with signs or signless, constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designations of [all the sensory elements], starting from the sensory element of the eyes, the sensory element of sights, and the sensory element of visual consciousness, and continuing in the same vein as far as [the designation of] the sensory element of mental consciousness, as having aspirations or lacking aspirations, constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designations of [all the sensory elements], starting from the sensory element of the eyes, the sensory element of sights, and the sensory element of visual consciousness, and continuing in the same vein as far as [the designation of] the sensory element of mental consciousness, as calm or not calm, constitute a bodhisattva?”[F.47.a]
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designations of [all the sensory elements], starting from the sensory element of the eyes, the sensory element of sights, and the sensory element of visual consciousness, and continuing in the same vein as far as [the designation of] the sensory element of mental consciousness, as void or not void, constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designations of [all the sensory elements], starting from the sensory element of the eyes, the sensory element of sights, and the sensory element of visual consciousness, and continuing in the same vein as far as [the designation of] the sensory element of mental consciousness, as afflicted or purified, constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designations of [all the sensory elements], starting from the sensory element of the eyes, the sensory element of sights, and the sensory element of visual consciousness, and continuing in the same vein as far as [the designation of] the sensory element of mental consciousness, as arising or non-arising, constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designations of [all the sensory elements], starting from the sensory element of the eyes, the sensory element of sights, and the sensory element of visual consciousness, and continuing in the same vein as far as [the designation of] the sensory element of mental consciousness, as entities or non-entities, constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designations of fundamental ignorance and, in the same vein, of [all the other links of dependent origination], up to and including aging and death, constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designations of fundamental ignorance and, in the same vein, of [all the other links of dependent origination], up to and including aging and death, as permanent or impermanent, constitute a bodhisattva?”[F.47.b]
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designations of fundamental ignorance and, in the same vein, of [all the other links of dependent origination], up to and including aging and death, as imbued with happiness or suffering, constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designations of fundamental ignorance and, in the same vein, of [all the other links of dependent origination], up to and including aging and death, as a self or a non-self, constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designations of fundamental ignorance and, in the same vein, of [all the other links of dependent origination], up to and including aging and death, as empty or not empty, constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designations of fundamental ignorance and, in the same vein, of [all the other links of dependent origination], up to and including aging and death, as with signs or signless, constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designations of fundamental ignorance and, in the same vein, of [all the other links of dependent origination], up to and including aging and death, as having aspirations or lacking aspirations, constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designations of fundamental ignorance and, in the same vein, of [all the other links of dependent origination], up to and including aging and death, as calm or not calm, constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designations of fundamental ignorance and, in the same vein, of [all the other links of dependent origination], up to and including aging and death, as void or not void, constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designations of fundamental ignorance and, in the same vein, of [all the other links of dependent origination], up to and including aging and death, as afflicted or purified, [F.48.a] constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designations of fundamental ignorance and, in the same vein, of [all the other links of dependent origination], up to and including aging and death, as arising or ceasing, constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatīputra, do you think that the designations of fundamental ignorance and, in the same vein, of [all the other links of dependent origination], up to and including aging and death, as entities or non-entities, constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!” he replied.
Then, the Blessed One addressed the venerable Śāradvatīputra in the following words: “Śāradvatīputra, why do you say that the designation of physical forms does not constitute a bodhisattva, and similarly, that the designations of feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness do not constitute a bodhisattva? Why do you say that the designation of physical forms as permanent or impermanent does not constitute a bodhisattva? Similarly, why do you say that the designation of physical forms as imbued with happiness or suffering, their designation as a self or not a self, their designation as empty or not empty, their designation as with signs or signless, their designation as having aspirations or lacking aspirations, their designation as calm or not calm, their designation as void or not void, their designation as afflicted or purified, their designation as arising [F.48.b] or ceasing, and their designation as entities or non-entities [do not constitute a bodhisattva]? In the same vein, why do you say that these same designations, made with respect to feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness, up to and including their designation as entities or non-entities, do not constitute a bodhisattva?
“In like manner, why do you say that the designation of the eyes does not constitute a bodhisattva, and similarly, that the designations of the ears, the nose, the tongue, the body, and the mental faculty do not constitute a bodhisattva? Likewise, why do you say that the designation of the eyes as permanent or impermanent does not constitute a bodhisattva, and similarly, that the designations of the ears, the nose, the tongue, the body, and the mental faculty as permanent or impermanent does not constitute a bodhisattva? In the same vein, why do you say that these [remaining] designations made with respect to the eyes, up to and including their designation as entities or non-entities, do not constitute a bodhisattva, and similarly, that these [remaining] designations made with respect to the ears, nose, tongue, body, and mental faculty, up to and including their designation as entities or non-entities, do not constitute a bodhisattva?
“In like manner, why do you say that the designation of sights does not constitute a bodhisattva, and similarly, that the designations of sounds, odors, tastes, tangibles, and mental phenomena do not constitute a bodhisattva? Why do you say that the designation of sights as permanent or impermanent does not constitute a bodhisattva, and similarly, that the designations of sounds, odors, tastes, tangibles, and mental phenomena as permanent or impermanent do not constitute a bodhisattva? In the same vein, why do you say that the [remaining] designations made with respect to sights, up to and including their designation as entities or non-entities, do not constitute a bodhisattva, and similarly, that the [remaining] designations made with respect to sounds, odors, tastes, tangibles, and mental phenomena, up to and including their designation as entities or non-entities, do not constitute a bodhisattva?
“Why do you say that the designation of the sensory element of the eyes, [F.49.a] the sensory element of sights, and the sensory element of visual consciousness does not constitute a bodhisattva, and similarly, that the designations [of the remaining sensory elements], up to and including the sensory element of mental consciousness, do not constitute a bodhisattva? Why do you say that the designation of the sensory element of the eyes, the sensory element of sights, and the sensory element of visual consciousness as permanent or impermanent, does not constitute a bodhisattva, and, in the same vein, that the designations of the [remaining] sensory elements, up to and including the sensory element of mental consciousness, [as permanent or impermanent], do not constitute a bodhisattva? In the same vein, why do you say that the [remaining] designations made with respect to the sensory element of the eyes, the sensory element of sights, and the sensory element of visual consciousness, up to and including their designation as entities or non-entities, do not constitute a bodhisattva, and similarly, that the [remaining] designations made with respect to the [other] sensory elements, up to and including the designation of the sensory element of mental consciousness, as entities or non-entities, do not constitute a bodhisattva?
“Why do you say that the designation of fundamental ignorance does not constitute a bodhisattva, and in the same vein, that the designations [of the remaining links of dependent origination], up to and including aging and death, do not constitute a bodhisattva? In like manner, why do you say that the designation of fundamental ignorance as permanent or impermanent does not constitute a bodhisattva, and, in the same vein, that the designations [of the other links of dependent origination], up to and including the link of aging and death, as permanent or impermanent, do not constitute a bodhisattva?152 In the same vein, why do you say that the [remaining] designations made with respect to fundamental ignorance, up to and including its designation as entity or non-entity, do not constitute a bodhisattva, and similarly, that [the remaining] designations made with respect to the [other links of dependent origination], up to and including the designation of aging and death, as entities or non-entities, do not constitute a bodhisattva?”
Then, the venerable Śāradvatīputra replied to the Blessed One, “Reverend Lord, if [F.49.b] physical forms are invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of physical forms become a bodhisattva? The same goes for feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of physical forms as permanent or impermanent is invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of physical forms as such become a bodhisattva? The same goes for feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of physical forms as imbued with happiness or suffering is invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of physical forms as such become a bodhisattva? The same goes for feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of physical forms as a self or not a self is invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of physical forms as such become a bodhisattva? The same goes for feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of physical forms as empty or not empty is invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of physical forms as such become a bodhisattva? The same goes for feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of physical forms as with signs or signless is invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of physical forms as such become a bodhisattva? The same goes for feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of physical forms as having aspirations or lacking aspirations is invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of physical forms as such become a bodhisattva? The same goes for feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of physical forms as calm or not calm is invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of physical forms as such become a bodhisattva? The same goes for feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of physical forms as void or not void is invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of physical forms as such become a bodhisattva? The same goes for feelings, perceptions, [F.50.a] formative predispositions, and consciousness!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of physical forms as afflicted or purified is invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of physical forms as such become a bodhisattva? The same goes for feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of physical forms as arising or ceasing is invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of physical forms as such become a bodhisattva? The same goes for feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of physical forms as entities or non-entities is invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of physical forms as such become a bodhisattva? The same goes for feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness!
“Reverend Lord, if the eyes are invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of the eyes become a bodhisattva? The same goes for the ears, nose, tongue, body, and mental faculty!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of the eyes as permanent or impermanent is invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of the eyes as impermanent become a bodhisattva? [F.50.b] The same goes for the ears, nose, tongue, body, and mental faculty!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of the eyes as imbued with happiness is invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of the eyes as imbued with suffering become a bodhisattva? The same goes for the ears, nose, tongue, body, and mental faculty!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of the eyes as a self is invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of the eyes as a non-self become a bodhisattva? The same goes for the ears, nose, tongue, body, and mental faculty!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of the eyes as empty is invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of the eyes as not empty become a bodhisattva? The same goes for the ears, nose, tongue, body, and mental faculty!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of the eyes as with signs is invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of the eyes as signless become a bodhisattva? The same goes for the ears, nose, tongue, body, and mental faculty!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of the eyes as having aspirations is invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation [of the eyes] as lacking aspirations become a bodhisattva? The same goes for the ears, nose, tongue, body, and mental faculty!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of the eyes as calm is invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of the eyes as not calm become a bodhisattva? The same goes for the ears, nose, tongue, body, and mental faculty!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of the eyes as void is invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of the eyes as not void become a bodhisattva? The same goes for the ears, nose, tongue, body, and mental faculty!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of the eyes as afflicted is invariably non-apprehensible, [F.51.a] how could the designation of the eyes as purified become a bodhisattva? The same goes for the ears, nose, tongue, body, and mental faculty!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of the eyes as arising is invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of the eyes as ceasing become a bodhisattva? The same goes for the ears, nose, tongue, body, and mental faculty!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of the eyes as entities is invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of the eyes as non-entities become a bodhisattva? The same goes for the ears, nose, tongue, body, and mental faculty!
“Reverend Lord, if sights are invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of sights become a bodhisattva? The same goes for sounds, odors, tastes, tangibles, and mental phenomena!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of sights as permanent is invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of sights as impermanent become a bodhisattva? The same goes for sounds, odors, tastes, tangibles, and mental phenomena!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of sights as imbued with happiness is invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of sights as imbued with suffering become a bodhisattva? The same goes for sounds, odors, tastes, tangibles, and mental phenomena!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of sights as a self is invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of sights as a non-self become a bodhisattva? The same goes for sounds, odors, tastes, tangibles, and mental phenomena!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of sights as empty is invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of sights as not empty become a bodhisattva? The same goes for sounds, odors, tastes, tangibles, and mental phenomena![F.51.b]
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of sights as with signs is invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of sights as signless become a bodhisattva? The same goes for sounds, odors, tastes, tangibles, and mental phenomena!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of sights as having aspirations153 is invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of sights as lacking aspirations become a bodhisattva? The same goes for sounds, odors, tastes, tangibles, and mental phenomena!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of sights as calm is invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of sights as not calm become a bodhisattva? The same goes for sounds, odors, tastes, tangibles, and mental phenomena!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of sights as void is invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of sights as not void become a bodhisattva? The same goes for sounds, odors, tastes, tangibles, and mental phenomena!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of sights as afflicted is invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of sights as purified become a bodhisattva? The same goes for sounds, odors, tastes, tangibles, and mental phenomena!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of sights as arising is invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of sights as ceasing become a bodhisattva? The same goes for sounds, odors, tastes, tangibles, and mental phenomena!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of sights as entities is invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of sights as non-entities become a bodhisattva? The same goes for sounds, odors, tastes, tangibles, [F.52.a] and mental phenomena!
“Reverend Lord, if the sensory element of the eyes is invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of the sensory element of the eyes become a bodhisattva? The same applies to [all the other sensory elements], starting from the sensory element of sights and the sensory element of visual consciousness, up to and including the sensory element of mental consciousness!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of the sensory element of the eyes as permanent is invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of the sensory element of the eyes as impermanent become a bodhisattva? The same applies to [all the other sensory elements], starting from the sensory element of sights and the sensory element of visual consciousness, up to and including the sensory element of mental consciousness!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of the sensory element of the eyes as imbued with happiness is invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of the sensory element of the eyes as imbued with suffering become a bodhisattva? The same applies to [all the other sensory elements], starting from the sensory element of sights and the sensory element of visual consciousness, up to and including the sensory element of mental consciousness!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of the sensory element of the eyes as a self is invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of the sensory element of the eyes as a non-self become a bodhisattva? The same applies to [all the other sensory elements], starting from the sensory element of sights and the sensory element of visual consciousness, up to and including the sensory element of mental consciousness!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of the sensory element of the eyes as empty is invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of the sensory element of the eyes as not empty become a bodhisattva? The same applies to [all the other sensory elements], starting from the sensory element of sights and the sensory element of visual consciousness, up to and including the sensory element of mental consciousness!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of the sensory element of the eyes as with signs is invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of the sensory element of the eyes as signless become a bodhisattva? [F.52.b] The same applies to [all the other sensory elements], starting from the sensory element of sights and the sensory element of visual consciousness, up to and including the sensory element of mental consciousness!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of the sensory element of the eyes as having aspirations is invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of the sensory element of the eyes as lacking aspirations become a bodhisattva? The same applies to [all the other sensory elements], starting from the sensory element of sights and the sensory element of visual consciousness, up to and including the sensory element of mental consciousness!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of the sensory element of the eyes as calm is invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of the sensory element of the eyes as not calm become a bodhisattva? The same applies to [all the other sensory elements], starting from the sensory element of sights and the sensory element of visual consciousness, up to and including the sensory element of mental consciousness!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of the sensory element of the eyes as void is invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of the sensory element of the eyes as not void become a bodhisattva? The same applies to [all the other sensory elements], starting from the sensory element of sights and the sensory element of visual consciousness, up to and including the sensory element of mental consciousness!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of the sensory element of the eyes as afflicted is invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of the sensory element of the eyes as purified become a bodhisattva? The same applies to [all the other sensory elements], starting from the sensory element of sights and the sensory element of visual consciousness, up to and including the sensory element of mental consciousness!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of the sensory element of the eyes as arising is invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of the sensory element of the eyes as ceasing become a bodhisattva? The same applies to [all the other sensory elements], starting from the sensory element of sights and the sensory element of visual consciousness, up to and including the sensory element of mental consciousness!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of the sensory element of the eyes as an entity is invariably non-apprehensible, [F.53.a] how could the designation of the sensory element of the eyes as a non-entity become a bodhisattva? The same applies to [all the other sensory elements], starting from the sensory element of sights and the sensory element of visual consciousness, up to and including the sensory element of mental consciousness!
“Reverend Lord, if fundamental ignorance is invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of fundamental ignorance become a bodhisattva? The same applies to [all the other links of dependent origination], up to and including aging and death!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of fundamental ignorance as permanent is invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of fundamental ignorance as impermanent become a bodhisattva? The same applies to [all the other links of dependent origination], up to and including aging and death!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of fundamental ignorance as imbued with happiness is invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of fundamental ignorance as imbued with suffering become a bodhisattva? The same applies to [all the other links of dependent origination], up to and including aging and death!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of fundamental ignorance as a self is invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of fundamental ignorance as a non-self become a bodhisattva? The same applies to [all the other links of dependent origination], up to and including aging and death!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of fundamental ignorance as empty is invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of fundamental ignorance as not empty become a bodhisattva? The same applies to [all the other links of dependent origination], up to and including aging and death!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of fundamental ignorance as with signs is invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of fundamental ignorance as signless become a bodhisattva? The same applies to [all the other links of dependent origination], up to and including aging and death!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of fundamental ignorance as having aspirations is invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of fundamental ignorance as lacking aspirations become a bodhisattva? The same applies to [all the other links of dependent origination], up to and including aging and death!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of fundamental ignorance as calm is invariably non-apprehensible, [F.53.b] how could the designation of fundamental ignorance as not calm become a bodhisattva? The same applies to [all the other links of dependent origination], up to and including aging and death!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of fundamental ignorance as void is invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of fundamental ignorance as not void become a bodhisattva? The same applies to [all the other links of dependent origination], up to and including aging and death!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of fundamental ignorance as afflicted is invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of fundamental ignorance as purified become a bodhisattva? The same applies to [all the other links of dependent origination], up to and including aging and death!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of fundamental ignorance as arising is invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of fundamental ignorance as ceasing become a bodhisattva? The same applies to [all the other links of dependent origination], up to and including aging and death!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of fundamental ignorance as an entity is invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of fundamental ignorance as a non-entity become a bodhisattva? The same applies to [all the other links of dependent origination], up to and including aging and death! As indicated [above] in the context of the psycho-physical aggregates, the same refrain should be applied extensively to all [those other phenomenological categories].”
The Blessed One replied, “Śāradvatīputra, it is so! It is so! Great bodhisattva beings who abide accordingly in this transcendent perfection of wisdom do not apprehend the designation of physical forms, and in the same vein, they do not apprehend [all the other designations concerning physical forms] up to and including the designation of physical forms as non-entities. Likewise, they do not apprehend the designations of feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness, and in the same vein, they do not apprehend [their further designations], starting from there and continuing up to the designation of consciousness as a non-entity. In the same vein, they do not apprehend the designation of fundamental ignorance, and they do not apprehend [the designations of the other links of dependent origination], up to and including the designation of aging and death. In the same vein, they do not apprehend the designation [of these links of dependent origination] as non-entities and so forth. As stated [above] in the context of the psycho-physical aggregates, the same refrain should also be applied extensively to all [those other phenomenological categories]. [F.54.a] It is in this way that they should train in the transcendent perfection of wisdom.”
This completes the fifth chapter from “The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Ten Thousand Lines,” entitled “Designation of a Bodhisattva.”154
Colophon
This translation was edited and redacted by the Indian preceptors Jinamitra and Prajñāvarman, along with the editor-in-chief and translator Bandé Yeshé Dé.
ye dharmā hetuprabhavā hetun teṣāṃ tathāgato bhavat āha teṣāṃ ca yo nirodho evaṃ vādī mahāśramaṇaḥ [ye svāhā]
“Whatever events arise from a cause, the Tathāgata has told the cause thereof, and the great virtuous ascetic has also taught their cessation.”
Abbreviations
| ARIRIAB | Annual Report of the International Research Institute of Advanced Buddhology. Tokyo: SOKA University. |
|---|---|
| ISMEO | Rome: Istituto Italiano per il Medio ed Estremo Orient |
| KPD | 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), 2006–2009. |
| LTWA | Library of Tibetan Works and Archives, Dharamsala, H.P., India |
| SOR | Serie Orientale Roma |
| TOK | ’jam mgon kong sprul, The Treasury of Knowledge. English translations of shes bya kun khyab mdzod by the Kalu Rinpoche Translation Group in The Treasury of Knowledge series (TOK, Ithaca, NY: Snow Lion, 1995 to 2012); mentioned here are Kalu Rinpoche Translation Group 1995 (Book 1) and 1998 (Book 5); Ngawang Zangpo 2010 (Books 2, 3, and 4); Callahan 2007 (Book 6, Part 3); and Dorje 2012 (Book 6 Parts 1–2). |
| TPD | bstan ’gyur dpe bsdur ma [Comparative edition of the Tengyur], 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). 120 volumes. Beijing: krung go’i bod rig pa dpe skrun khang (China Tibetology Publishing House), 1994–2008. |
Bibliography
Primary Sources
shes rab kyi pha rol tu phyin pa khri pa zhes bya ba theg pa chen po’i mdo, Daśasāhasrikāprajñāpāramitānāmamahāyānasūtra. Toh 11, Degé Kangyur, vols. 31–32 (shes phyin, ga), ff. 1b–91a; and nga, ff. 92b–397a.
shes rab kyi pha rol tu phyin pa khri pa zhes bya ba theg pa chen po’i mdo, Daśasāhasrikāprajñāpāramitānāmamahāyānasūtra. 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), 2006–2009, vol. 31, pp. 530–763 and vol. 32, pp. 3–763.
Dutt, Nalinaksha. Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā, edition of the recast Sanskrit manuscript (Part One). Calcutta Oriental Series, No. 28. London: Luzac & Co., 1934.
Kimura, Takayasu. Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā, edition of the recast Sanskrit manuscript (Parts One–Eight). Part One (2007), Parts Two–Three (1986), Part Four (1990), Part Five (1992), and Parts Six–Eight (2006). Tokyo: Sankibo Busshorin Publishing Co. Ltd., 1986–2007.
Secondary References
Sūtras
klu’i rgyal po rgya mtshos zhus pa’i mdo (Sāgaranāgarājaparipṛcchāsūtra) [The Questions of Nāga King Sāgara (1)]. Toh 153. Degé Kangyur vol. 58 (mdo sde, pha, fol. 116a–198a); also KPD 58: 303–491. English translation in Dharmachakra Translation Committee (2021).
dkon mchog sprin gyi mdo (Ratnameghasūtra) [The Jewel Cloud]. Toh 231. Degé Kangyur vol. 64 (mdo sde, va, fol. 1b–112b); also KPD 64: 3–313. English translation in Dharmachakra Translation Committee (2019).
dkon brtsegs/ dkon mchog brtsegs pa’i mdo (Ratnakūṭa). The “Heap of Jewels” section of the Kangyur comprising Toh 45–93, Degé Kangyur vols. 39–44. Also KPD: 39–44.
rgya cher rol pa (Lalitavistarasūtra) [The Play in Full]. Toh 95, Degé Kangyur vol. 46 (mdo sde, kha, fol. 1b–216b); also KPD 46: 3–527. English translation in Dharmachakra Translation Committee (2013).
chos yang dag par sdud pa’i mdo (Dharmasaṃgītisūtra). Toh 238, Degé Kangyur vol. 65 (mdo sde, zha, fol. 1b–99b); also KPD 65: 3–250. English translation in Tibetan Classics Translators Guild of New York (2024).
de bzhin gshegs pa’i snying rje chen po nges par bstan pa’i mdo (Tathāgatamahākaruṇānirdeśasūtra) [The Teaching on the Great Compassion of the Tathāgata]. Toh 147, Degé Kangyur, vol. 57 (mdo sde, pa, fol. 142a–242b); also KPD 57: 377–636. English translation in Burchardi (2020).
phal po che’i mdo (sangs rgyas phal po che shin tu rgyas pa chen po’i mdo) (Avataṃsakasūtra Buddhāvataṃsakamahāvaipulyasūtra) [The Ornaments of the Buddhas]. Toh 44, Degé Kangyur vols. 35–38 (phal chen, vols. ka– a); also KPD 35–38. Translated Cleary (1984).
tshangs pa’i dra ba’i mdo (Brahmajālasūtra) [Sūtra of the Net of Brahmā]. Toh 352, Degé Kangyur vol. 76 (mdo sde, aḥ), fol. 70b–86a; also KPD76: 205–249. Translated from the Pali version in Bodhi (1978).
gzungs kyi dbang phyug rgyal po’i mdo (Dhāraṇīśvararājesūtra) [Sūtra of Dhāraṇīśvararāja]. An alternative title for Tathāgatamahākaruṇānirdeśasūtra. Toh 147, q.v. English translation in Burchardi (2020).
theg pa chen po’i man ngag gi mdo (Mahāyānopadeśa). Toh 169, Degé Kangyur vol. 59 (mdo sde, ba), fol. 259–307.
yul ’khor skyong gi zhus pa’i mdo (Rāṣṭrapālaparipṛcchā) [The Questions of Rāṣṭrapāla]. Toh 62, Degé Kangyur, vol. 42 (dkon brtsegs, nga), folios 227.a–257.a. English translation in Vienna Buddhist Translation Studies Group (2021).
shes rab kyi pha rol tu phyin pa khri brgyad stong pa (Aṣṭadaśasāhasrikāprajñāpāramitā) [Sūtra of the Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Eighteen Thousand Lines]. Toh 10, Degé Kangyur vols. 29–31 (shes phyin, khri brgyad, ka), f. 1b–ga, f. 206a; also KPD 29: p. 3–31: 495. Translated and edited in Conze (1975) and in Sparham (2022).
shes rab kyi pha rol tu phyin pa brgyad stong pa (Aṣṭasāhasarikāprajñāpāramitā) [Sūtra of the Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Eight Thousand Lines]. Toh 12, Degé Kangyur vol. 33 (shes phyin, brgyad stong, ka), fol. 1b–286a; also KPD 33. Translated in Conze (1973).
shes rab kyi pha rol tu phyin pa stong phrag brgya pa (Śatasāhasrikāprajñāpāramitā) [Sūtra of the Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in One Hundred Thousand Lines]. Toh 8. Degé Kangyur vols. 14–25 (shes phyin, ’bum, ka), f. 1b–a, f. 395a; also KPD 14–25. English translation in Sparham 2024.
shes rab kyi pha rol tu phyin pa stong phrag nyi shu lnga pa (Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikāprajñāpāramitā) [Sūtra of the Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-five Thousand Lines]. Toh 9, Degé Kangyur vols. 26–28 (shes phyin, nyi khri, ka), f. 1b–ga, f. 381a; also KPD 26–28. Annotated Sanskrit edition of the recast manuscript in Dutt (1934) and Kimura (1971–2009). Partially translated in Conze (1975) and fully translated in Padmakara Translation Group (2023).
shes rab kyi pha rol tu phyin pa rdo rje gcod pa’i mdo (Vajracchedikāprajñāpāramitāsūtra) [Sūtra of the Adamantine Cutter [in Three Hundred Lines]. Toh 16, Degé Kangyur vol. 34 (shes phyin, ka), f. 121a–132b; also KPD 34: 327–357. Translated in Red Pine (2001).
shes rab kyi pha rol tu phyin pa sdud pa tshigs su bcad pa (Prajñāpāramitāsañcayagāthā) [Verse Summation of the Transcendental Perfection of Wisdom]. Toh 13, Degé Kangyur vol. 34 (shes phyin, ka), f. 1b–19b; also KPD 34: 3–44. Translated in Conze (1973).
shes rab kyi pha rol tu phyin pa’i snying po (Prajñāpāramitāhṛdayasūtra) [Heart Sūtra of the Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom]. Toh 21, Degé Kangyur vol. 34 (shes phyin, ka), f. 144b–146a; also KPD 34, pp. 402–405. Translated in Red Pine (2004) and in Dharmachakra Translation Committee (2022).
Indic Commentaries
Asaṅga. chos mngon pa kun las btus pa (Abhidharmasamuccaya) [The Compendium of Abhidharma]. Toh 4049. Degé Tengyur vol. 236 (sems tsam, ri), fol. 44b–120a; also TPD 76: 116–313. Translated from French in Boin-Webb (2001).
rnal ’byor spyod pa’i sa’i dngos gzhi (Yogacaryābhūmivastu). Toh 4035–4037, Degé Tengyur vols. 229–231 (sems tsam, tshi–vi). This is the first of the five parts of the Yogacaryā Level, comprising three texts: Yogacaryābhūmi (Toh 4035) and its sub-sections: Śrāvakabhūmi (Toh 4036) and Bodhisattvabhūmi (Toh 4037).
Haribhadra. mngon rtogs rgyan gyi snang ba (Abhisamayalaṃkārāloka) [Light for the Ornament of Emergent Realization]. Toh 3791, Degé Tengyur vol. 85 (shes phyin, cha), f. 1b–341a; also TPD 51: 891–1728. Translated in Sparham (2006–2012).
Kalyāṇamitra. ’dul bag zhi rgya cher ’grel pa (Vinayavastuṭīkā) [Great Commentary on the Chapters on Monastic Discipline]. Toh 4113, Degé Tengyur vol. 258 (’dul ba, tsu), f. 177a–326a; also TPD 87: 481–883.
Maitreya. [shes rab kyi pha rol tu phyin pa’i man ngag gi bstan bcos] mngon par rtogs pa’i rgyan (Abhisamayālaṃkāra-[nāma-prajñāpāramitopadeśaśāstrakārikā]) [Ornament of Clear Realization]. Toh 3786, Degé Tengyur vol. 80 (shes phyin, ka), fol. 1b–13a; also TPD 49: 3–30. Translated in Conze (1954) and Thrangu (2004).
[theg pa chen po] mdo sde’i rgyan zhes bya ba’i tshig le’ur byas pa ([Mahāyāna]sūtrālaṃkārakārikā) [Ornament of the Sūtras of the Great Vehicle]. Toh 4020, Degé Tengyur vol. 225 (sems tsam, phi), f. 1b–39a; also TPD 70: 805–890 Translated in Jamspal et al. (2004).
theg pa chen po rgyud bla ma’i bstan bcos (Mahāyānottaratantraśāstra) [Ultimate Continuum of the Great Vehicle]. Toh 4024, Degé Tengyur vol. 225 (sems tsam, phi), f. 54b–73a; also TPD 70: 935–979. Translated in Holmes, Kenneth and Katia Holmes. The Changeless Nature. Eskdalemuir: Karma Drubgyud Drajay Ling, 1985. See also Takasaki, Jikido. A Study on the Ratnagotravibhāga (Uttaratantra). SOR XXXIII. Roma: ISMEO, 1966.
Ratnākāraśānti. shes rab kyi pha rol tu phyin pa brgyad stong pa’i dka’ ’grel snying po mchog (Aṣṭasāhasarikāprajñāpāramitāpañjikāsārottama). Toh 3803, Degé Tengyur, vol. 89 (shes phyin, tha), f. 1b–230a; also TPD 53: 711–1317.
Vasubandhu. chos mngon pa’i mdzod kyi bshad pa (Abhidharmakośabhāṣya). Toh 4090, Degé Tengyur vol. 242 (mngon pa, ku), fol. 26b–258a; also TPD 79: 65–630. Translated from the French in Pruden (1988–1990).
chos mngon pa’i mdzod kyi tshig le’ur byas pa (Abhidharmakośakārikā). Toh 4089, Degé Tengyur vol. 242 (mngon pa, ku), fol. 1b–25a; also TPD 79: 3–59. Translated from the French in Pruden (1988–1990).
Vasubandhu/Dāṃṣṭrasena. shes rab kyi pha rol tu phyin pa ’bum pa dang nyi khri lnga stong pa dang khri brgyad stong pa’i rgya cher bshad pa (Śatasahāsrikāpañcaviṃśatisāhasrikāṣṭādaśasāhasrikāprajnā-pāramitābṛhaṭṭīkā) [The Long Explanation of the Noble Perfection of Wisdom in One Hundred Thousand, Twenty-Five Thousand, and Eighteen Thousand Lines]. Toh 3808, Degé Tengyur vol. 93 (shes phyin, pha), fol. 1b–292b; also TPD 55: 645–1376. English translation in Sparham (2022).
Vimuktisena. shes rab kyi pha rol tu phyin pa stong phrag nyi shu lnga pa’i man ngag gi bstan bcos mngon par rtogs pa’i rgyan gyi ’grel pa (Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikāprajñāpāramitopdeśaśāstrābhisamayālaṃkāravṛtti) [Commentary on the Ornament of Clear Realization: A Treatise of Instruction on the Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-Five Thousand Lines]. Toh 3787, Degé Tengyur, vol. 80 (shes phyin, ka), f. 14b–212a); also TPD 49: 33–530. Translated in Sparham (2006–2012).
Indigenous Tibetan Works
Jamgön Kongtrül (’jam mgon kong sprul). shes bya kun khyab mdzod [The Treasury of Knowledge]. Root verses contained in three-volume publication. Beijing: Mi rigs dpe skrun khang, 1982; Boudhnath: Padma Karpo Translation Committee edition, 2000 (photographic reproduction of the original four-volume Palpung xylograph, 1844). Translated, along with the auto-commentary, by the Kalu Rinpoche Translation Group in The Treasury of Knowledge series (TOK). Ithaca, NY: Snow Lion Publications, 1995 to 2012. Mentioned here are Kalu Rinpoche Translation Group 1995 (Book 1) and 1998 (Book 5); Ngawang Zangpo 2010 (Books 2, 3, and 4); Callahan 2007 (Book 6, Part 3); and Dorje 2012 (Book 6 Parts 1-2).
Kawa Paltsek (ka ba dpal brtsegs) and Namkhai Nyingpo (nam mkha’i snying po). ldan dkar ma (pho brang stod thang ldan dkar gyi chos ’gyur ro cog gi dkar chag). Toh 4364, Degé Tengyur vol. 308 (sna tshogs, jo), f. 294b–310a; also TPD 116: 786–827.
Nordrang Orgyan (nor brang o rgyan). chos rnam kun btus. 3 vols. Beijing: Krung go’i bod rig pa dpe skrun khang, 2008.
Situ Paṇchen (si tu paṇ chen) or Situ Chökyi Jungné (si tu chos kyi ’byung gnas). sde dge’i bka’ ’gyur dkar chags. Degé Kangyur, vol. 103 (dkar chags, lak+S+mI and shrI), Toh 4568; also Chengdu: Sichuan Mi rigs dpe skrun khang, 1989.
Various, bye brag tu rtogs par byed pa (Mahāvyutpatti). Toh 4346, Degé Tengyur vol. 306 (sna tshogs, co), f. 1b–131a; also TPD 115: 3–254. Sakaki, Ryozaburo, ed. (1916–25); reprint, 1965.
Zhang Yisun et al. bod rgya tshig mdzod chen mo. 3 vols. Subsequently reprinted in 2 vols. and 1 vol. Beijing: Mi rigs dpe skrun khang, 1985. Translated in Nyima and Dorje 2001 (vol. 1).
Secondary Literature
Apte, Vaman Shivram. The Practical Sanskrit-English Dictionary. 3rd edition. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1965.
Bodhi, Bhikkhu, trans. The Sūtra on the All-Embracing Net of Views. Kandy: Buddhist Publication Society, 1978.
Boin-Webb, Sara, trans. Abhidharmasamuccaya: The Compendium of the Higher Teaching (Philosophy). By Asanga. From the French translation by Walpola Rahula. Fremont, CA: Asian Humanities Press, 2001.
Brunnholzl, Karl. Gone Beyond (Volume One): The Prajñāpāramitā Sūtras, The Ornament of Clear Realization, and Its Commentaries in the Tibetan Kagyu Tradition. Ithaca, New York: Snow Lion Publications, 2010.
Burchardi, Anne, trans. The Teaching on the Great Compassion of the Tathāgata (Tathāgatamahākaruṇānirdeśa, Toh 147). 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha, 2020.
Callahan, Elizabeth, trans. The Treasury of Knowledge (Book Six, Part Three): Frameworks of Buddhist Philosophy. By Jamgön Kongtrul. Ithaca, NY: Snow Lion Publications, 2007.
Cleary, Thomas, trans. The Flower Ornament Scripture. Boston and London: Shambhala, 1984.
Conze, Edward, trans. (1954). Abhisamayālaṅkāra. SOR 6. Rome: ISMEO.
———(1960) The Prajñāpāramitā Literature. New Delhi: Munishiram Manoharlal.
———trans. (1973). The Perfection of Wisdom in Eight Thousand Lines and Its Verse Summary. Bolinas, CA: Four Seasons Foundation.
———(1973) Materials for a Dictionary of The Prajñāpāramitā Literature. Tokyo: Suzuki Research Foundation.
———trans. (1975). The Large Sutra on Perfect Wisdom. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Davidson, Ronald. “Studies in Dhāraṇī Literature I: Revisiting the Meaning of the Term Dhāraṇī.” Journal of Indian Philosophy 37, no. 2 (April 2009): 97–147.
Dayal, Har. The Bodhisattva Doctrine in Buddhist Sanskrit Literature. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1932. Reprinted Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1970.
Dharmachakra Translation Committee, trans. (2013). The Play in Full (Lalitavistara). 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha.
———trans. (2019). The Jewel Cloud (Ratnamegha, Toh 231). 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha.
———trans. (2021). The Questions of Nāga King Sāgara (1) (Sāgaranāgarājaparipṛcchā, Toh 153). 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha.
———trans. (2022). The Heart of the Perfection of Wisdom, the Blessed Mother (Bhagavatīprajñāpāramitāhṛdaya, Toh 21). 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha.
Dorje, Gyurme, trans. (1987). “The Guhyagarbhatantra and its XIVth Century Tibetan Commentary Phyogs bcu mun sel.” 3 vols. PhD diss. University of London, School of Oriental and African Studies.
———trans. (2012). Indo-Tibetan Classical Learning and Buddhist Phenomenology. By Jamgön Kongtrul. Boston: Snow Lion.
Dudjom Rinpoche. The Nyingma School of Tibetan Buddhism: Its Fundamentals and History. 2 vols. Translated by Gyurme Dorje with Matthew Kapstein. Boston: Wisdom Publications, 1991.
Edgerton, Franklin. Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit Grammar and Dictionary. 2 vols. New Haven: Yale University Press,1953.
Falk, Harry (2011) “The ‘Split’ Collection of Kharoṣṭhī texts.” ARIRIAB 14 (2011): 13-23.
———(2012). In collaboration with Seishi Karashima, “A first‐century Prajñāpāramitā manuscript from Gandhāra- Parivarta 1 (Texts from the Split Collection 1),” ARIRIAB 15 (2012), 19–61.
Hikata, Ryfishé. “An Introductory Essay on Prajñāpāramitā Literature”, in Suvikrāntavikāamiparipṛcchā Prajñāpāramitā-Sūtra. Fufuoka: Kyūshū University, 1958, pp. ix–lxxxiii.
Jamspal, Lobzang et al., trans. The Universal Vehicle Discourse Literature. New York: American Institute of Buddhist Studies at Columbia University, 2004.
Jamieson, R.Craig. The Perfection of Wisdom. New York: Penguin Viking, 2000.
Jones, J.J. trans. The Mahāvastu (3 vols.) in Sacred Books of the Buddhists. London: Luzac & Co., 1949–56.
Kalu Rinpoche Translation Group, trans. (1995). The Treasury of Knowledge (Book One): Myriad Worlds. By Jamgön Kongtrul. Ithaca, NY: Snow Lion Publications.
———trans. (1998). The Treasury of Knowledge (Book Five): Buddhist Ethics. By Jamgön Kongtrul. Ithaca, NY: Snow Lion Publications.
Karashima, Seishi, trans. A Critical Edition of Lokakṣema’s Translation of the Aṣṭasāhasrikā Prājñāpāramitā, Bibliotheca Philologica et Philosophica Buddhica, XII. Tokyo, International Research Institute for Advanced Buddhology, Soka University, 2011.
Kloetzli, Randy. Buddhist Cosmology. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1983.
Konow, Sten. The First Two Chapters of the Daśasāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā: Restoration of the Sanskrit Text, Analysis and Index. Oslo: I Kommisjon Hos Jacob Dybwad, 1941.
Lamotte, Étienne. History of Indian Buddhism: from the Origins to the Śaka Era. Paris: Peeters Press, 1988.
Lamotte, Etienne (2010–2011). The Treatise of the Great Virtue of Wisdom. Translated from the French by Karma Migme Chodron.
Law, Bimala Chum. A History of Pāli Literature. London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner & Co., 1933.
McRae, John, trans. The Platform Sutra of the Sixth Patriarch (Liùzǔ Tánjīng). Berkeley: Numata Center for Buddhist Translation and Research, 2000.
Ñāṇamoli, Bhikkhu, trans. The Path of Purification by Buddhaghosa. Kandy: Buddhist Publication Society, 1979.
Nasim Khan, M. & M. Sohail Khan, “Buddhist Kharoṣṭhī Manuscripts from Gandhāra: A New Discovery,” The Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences 12, nos. 1–2 (2004 (2006)). Peshawar: 9–15.
Negi, J.S., ed.: Tibetan Sanskrit Dictionary (Bod skad dang legs sbyar gyi tshig mdzod chen mo). 16 vols. Sarnath: Central Institute of Higher Tibetan Studies, 1993-2005.
Ngawang Zangpo, trans. The Treasury of Knowledge (Books Two, Three, and Four): Buddhism’s Journey to Tibet. By Jamgön Kongtrul. Ithaca, NY: Snow Lion Publications, 2010.
Nyima, Tudeng and Gyurme Dorje, trans. An Encyclopaedic Tibetan-English Dictionary. Vol. 1. Beijing and London: Nationalities Publishing House and SOAS, 2001.
Padmakara Translation Group, trans. The Words of My Perfect Teacher. By Patrul Rinpoche. San Francisco: Harper Collins, 1994.
———trans. (2023). The Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-five Thousand Lines (Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikāprajñāpāramitā, Toh 9). 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha.
Pagel, Ulrich “The Dhāraṇīs of Mahāvyutpatti # 748: Origins and Formation,” in Buddhist Studies Review 24 no. 2 (2007), 151–91.
Pfandt, Peter. Mahāyāna Texts Translated into Western Languages. Cologne: In Kommission bei E.J. Brill, 1983.
Pruden, Leo M., trans. Abhidharmakośabhāṣyaṃ by Vasubandhu. Translated by Louis de La Vallée Poussin. English translation by Leo M. Pruden. 4 vols. Berkeley: Asian Humanities Press, 1988–1990.
Red Pine, trans. (2001). The Diamond Sutra: The Perfection of Wisdom; Text and Commentaries Translated from Sanskrit and Chinese. Berkeley: Counterpoint.
———trans. (2004). The Heart Sutra: The Womb of Buddhas. Shoemaker & Hoard.
Rigdzin, Tsepak. Tibetan-English Dictionary of Buddhist Terminology. Dharamsala: LTWA, 1993.
Salomon, Richard (1990). “New evidence for a Gāndhārī origin of the Arapacana syllabary.” Journal of the American Oriental Society 110 no. 2: 255–273.
———(2000). A Gāndhārī Version of the Rhinoceros Sutra: British Library Kharoṣṭhi Fragment 5B, Seattle and London: Univ. of Washington Press.
Schopen, Geoffrey. Figments and Fragments of Mahāyāna Buddhism in India. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 2005.
Sparham, Gareth, trans. (2006-2012). Abhisamayālaṃkāra with vṛtti and ālokā / vṛtti by Ārya Vimuktisena; ālokā by Haribhadra. 4 vols. Fremont, CA: Jain Publishing.
———trans. (2022a). The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Eighteen Thousand Lines (Aṣṭadaśasāhasrikāprajñāpāramitā, Toh 10). 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha.
———, trans. (2022b). The Long Explanation of the Noble Perfection of Wisdom in One Hundred Thousand, Twenty-Five Thousand, and Eighteen Thousand Lines ———, trans. (2024). The Perfection of Wisdom in One Hundred Thousand Lines (Śatasāhasrikāprajñāpāramitā, Toh 8). 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha.
Strauch, Ingo. (2007–2008), “The Bajaur collection: A new collection of Kharoṣṭhī manuscripts. A preliminary catalogue and survey.”
Thrangu Rinpoche, Khenchen et al, trans. The Ornament of Clear Realization. Auckland: Zhyisil Chokyi Ghatsal Charitable Trust Publications, 2004.
Tibetan Classics Translators Guild of New York, trans. The Dharma Council (Dharmasaṅgīti, Toh 238). 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha, 2024.
Vienna Buddhist Translation Studies Group, trans. The Questions of Rāṣṭrapāla (Rāṣṭrapālaparipṛcchāsūtra, Toh 62). 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha, 2021.
Williams, Paul. Mahāyāna Buddhism. London: Routledge, 1989.