ཤེས་ཕྱིན་ཁྲི་པ།
The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Ten Thousand Lines
Notes
Daśasāhasrikāprajñāpāramitā
འཕགས་པ་ཤེས་རབ་ཀྱི་ཕ་རོལ་ཏུ་ཕྱིན་པ་ཁྲི་པ་ཤེས་བྱ་བ་ཐེག་པ་ཆེན་པོའི་མདོ།
’phags pa shes rab kyi pha rol tu phyin pa khri pa zhes bya ba theg pa chen po’i mdo
The Noble Mahāyāna Sūtra “The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Ten Thousand Lines”
Āryadaśasāhasrikāprajñāpāramitānāmamahāyānasūtra
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
ᴛʀᴀɴsʟᴀᴛᴇᴅ ɪɴᴛᴏ ᴛɪʙᴇᴛᴀɴ ʙʏ
- 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 Translation
The Noble Mahāyāna Sūtra
The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Ten Thousand Lines
The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Ten Thousand Lines
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. |
Notes
On the distinctions between the three promulgations, see Jamgon Kongtrul’s concise explanation in TOK Book 5, pp. 145–156. The three essenceless natures, comprising the imaginary, dependent, and consummate natures, which are not discussed in the present sūtra, are analyzed in Asaṅga’s Yogacārabhūmi, F.162. See also Jamgon Kongtrul’s presentation from the Indo-Tibetan perspective in TOK, Book 6, Pt. 2, pp. 563–574.
The setting of the mind on enlightenment (bodhicittotpāda, byang chub sems bskyed pa) for the sake of all sentient beings, which marks the onset of the bodhisattva path and culminates in the actual attainment of buddhahood, distinguishes the compassionate bodhisattva path from that of the śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas who are both preoccupied with their own emancipation from cyclic existence. See Dayal (1932): 50–79, Williams (1989): 197–204, and Padmakara Translation Group (1994): 218–234. The śrāvakas are pious attendants who listen to the teachings that the buddhas taught by word of mouth, and place great emphasis on destroying the mistaken belief in personal identity by overcoming all afflicted mental states. In the course of determining their own emancipation from cyclic existence, they may achieve in succession the fruit of entering the stream to nirvāṇa, the fruit of being tied to only one more rebirth, the fruit of being no longer subject to rebirth, and the fruit of arhatship. By contrast, the pratyekabuddhas are hermit buddhas who pursue their path to individual enlightenment in solitude or in small groups, without relying on a teacher and without communicating their understanding to others. Following a natural predisposition for meditation through which they comprehend the twelve links of dependent origination in forward and reverse order, they are said to surpass the śrāvakas in the sense that they realize the emptiness of external phenomena, composed of atomic particles, in addition to realising the emptiness of personal identity. However, unlike bodhisattvas, they fail to realize that the internal phenomena of consciousness are also without inherent existence. Only the bodhisattvas resolve to attain manifestly perfect buddhahood or omniscience, in order to benefit all sentient beings.
The sūtras themselves frequently allude to proponents of the Vinaya and to upholders of the lesser vehicles (śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas) who would have balked at their unrelenting deconstruction of phenomena and buddha attributes, and sought to oppose them. See, for example, 33.13.
References to the veneration and importance of the written word, embodied in these sūtras which are said to have primacy over all the twelve branches of scripture, may be found below. See 17.1, 21.2–21.3, and 33.69.
This evidence is presented in Falk (2011): 13–23, and in Falk and Karashima (2012): 19–61. Earlier significant contributions to research on birch-bark Kharoṣṭhī manuscripts include Saloman (2000), Nasim Khan, M. and M. Sohail Khan, 2004 (2006): 9–15, and Strauch (2007–08).
See glossary entry “Pāli Canon.”
Salomon (1990): 255–273.
Lokakṣema’s Chinese version of The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Eight Thousand Lines has been translated into English and annotated in Karashima (2011).
In addition to Conze’s detailed synopsis (1960: 31–91), all twenty-three texts preserved in the shes phyin division of the Kangyur are conveniently summarized in Brunnholzl (2010): 34–35.
Gareth Sparham, trans., The Perfection of Wisdom in One Hundred Thousand Lines, Toh 8 (2024).
See Padmakara Translation Group, trans., The Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-five Thousand Lines (Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikāprajñāpāramitā, Toh 9), 2023.
See Sparham, trans., The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Eighteen Thousand Lines, Toh 10 (84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha, 2022).
See Kawa Paltsek (ka ba dpal brtsegs) and Namkhai Nyingpo (nam mkha’i snying po), Pho brang stod thang ldan dkar gyi chos ’gyur ro cog gi dkar chag, Toh 4364, vol. jo, f. 295a.4.
Situ Paṇchen (si tu paṇ chen), sDe dge’i bka’ ’gyur dkar chag, pp. 336–337.
Such statements, expressed in the context of the sūtras of the second turning, accord with the profound view of fruitional Buddhist teachings, such as the Great Perfection (rdzogs pa chen po), on which see Dudjom Rinpoche (1991): 896–910.
These fields (kṣetra, zhing khams) include pure buddhafields and ostensibly impure fields which buddhas are engaged in refining. See also Williams (1989): 224–228.
In this text, we have opted to translate the epithet bhagavat (bcom ldan ’das) as “the Blessed One” when it stands alone in the narrative, and as “Lord” when found in the terms “Reverend Lord” (bhadantabhagavat, btsun pa bcom ldan ’das) and “Lord Buddha” (bhagavanbuddha, sangs rgyas bcom ldan ’das).
A clear interpretation of the corresponding introductory paragraph in The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Eight Thousand Lines (Aṣṭasāhasrikāprajñāpāramitā) can be found in Haribhadra’s Mirror Commentary on the Ornament of Clear Realization (Abhisamayālaṃkārālokā). See Sparham (2006): I, 171–181.
The accomplishment of dhāraṇī is acquired through the various dhāraṇīs which are enumerated in Dutt (1934): 212–213; also Conze (1975): 160–162. On the implications and importance of dhāraṇī for the oral transmission of Buddhist teachings, see Ronald Davidson’s “Studies in Dhāraṇī Literature I: Revisiting the Meaning of the Term Dhāraṇī.” Journal of Indian Philosophy 37 no. 2 (April 2009): 97–147. The one hundred and eleven meditative stabilities are listed below, 12.12. The dhāraṇī gateways and gateways of meditative stability are also discussed in Lamotte: The Treatise on the Great Virtue of Wisdom, vol. IV, pp. 1522–1542.
Although all six extrasensory powers are enumerated below, 2.13, the distinction is that the first five extrasensory powers are attainable by śrāvakas, pratyekabuddhas, and even by non-Buddhists, whereas the sixth is indicative of the termination of all rebirth in cyclic existence and can therefore be attained only by manifestly perfect buddhas.
Various aspects of the knowledge that engages in subtlety (sūkṣmapraveśajñāna, phra ba la ’jug pa’i mkhyen pa) of conduct and so forth are listed in The Extensive Exegesis of the Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in One Hundred Thousand Lines, Twenty-five Thousand Lines, and Eighteen Thousand Lines (Śatasahāsrikāpañcaviṃśatisāhasrikāṣṭādaśasāhasrikāprajnāpāramitābṛhaṭṭīkā), which is attributed to either Dāṃstrasena or Vasubandhu. See Sparham (2022): 1.123.
The names given in the following list correspond to Dutt (1934): 5 and Kimura I: 1. We have not followed the variants found in Konow’s reconstruction (1941): 93–94.
Grahadatta (gzas byin) occurs in F. 2a line 5 and KPD (31: 532). The Sanskrit is omitted in Konow’s reconstruction (1941: 93). Note, however, that this name does not occur in The Transcendent Perfection in Eighteen Thousand Lines, (KPD 29: 5) which reads Guhagupta (phug sbas), nor is it found in The Transcendent Perfection in Twenty-five Thousand Lines (KPD 26: 6, and Dutt 1934: 5) or in The Transcendent Perfection in One Hundred Thousand Lines (KPD 14: 6), both of which read Śubhagupta (skyob sbed).
This key term is repeated for emphasis in the Tibetan, as is sometimes the case when a topic is flagged up for discussion in philosophical texts or works on logic.
The terms bodhisattva (“enlightened being”) and mahāsattva (“great being”) occur throughout the Sanskrit and Tibetan texts most frequently in the singular, although we have adopted the convention of rendering them consistently in the plural in order to circumvent the issues of gender which would otherwise arise in an English translation. For a useful synopsis of the bodhisattva ideal, see Williams (1989): 49–54.
Here the text reads lnga—five—but see below, 2.13 (KPD 31: 561), where all six extrasensory powers are outlined.
Cf. Kimura I: 29–30 and Conze (1975): 45–47, where a narrower classification of phenomena is introduced without the detailed exposition that will follow in the present text.
See Konow (1941): 13. Jamgon Kongtrul’s synopsis of the twelve sense fields is contained in TOK Book 6, Pt. 2: 537–540.
Konow (1941): 13–14. On the eighteen sensory elements, see Jamgon Kongtrul, TOK Book 6, Pt. 2: 531–537.
This passage listing the four noble truths, the twelve links of dependent origination, and the thirty-seven aspects of enlightenment is also translated in Konow (1941): 14–17, with reconstructed Sanskrit on pp. 96–97. The four noble truths, specifically, are the focus of the first turning of the doctrinal wheel. For an outline of the relevant Pāli and Sanskrit sources, see Dayal (1932): 156–160.
Jamgon Kongtrul offers an extensive explanation of the twelve links of dependent origination from the Indo-Tibetan perspective in TOK Book 6, Pt. 2: 575–611.
The four applications of mindfulness are detailed in the present sūtra, 8.13. These and the following enumerations are included in the thirty-seven aspects of enlightenment, see glossary entry.
See also the translation of this listing of the three gateways to liberation in Konow (1941): 17–18, and the reconstructed Sanskrit on p. 97.
This listing of the four meditative concentrations, the four immeasurable aspirations, and the four formless absorptions is also translated in Konow (1941):18–19, with reconstructed Sanskrit on pp. 97–98. For Pāli and Sanskrit sources, see Dayal (1932): 225–231. The four meditative concentrations and their fruits are specifically examined in Jamgon Kongtrul, TOK Book 6, Pt. 2: 427–436.
This listing of the eight aspects of liberation, the nine serial steps of meditative absorption, and the nine contemplations of impurity is also translated in Konow (1941): 19–23, with Sanskrit reconstruction on pp. 98–99. On the eight aspects of liberation, see also Sparham (2012 IV): 68–69.
The nine serial steps of meditative absorption are summarized in Jamgon Kongtrul, TOK Book 6, Pt. 2: 428–429.
This listing of the ten recollections and the six aspects of perception is also translated in Konow (1941): 23–24, with reconstructed Sanskrit on p. 99. The ten recollections are examined in Bodhi (1993): 333–336.
The foregoing eleven aspects of knowledge (ekadaśajñāna, shes pa bcu gcig), which are all defined individually here, are also translated in Konow (1941): 24–26, with reconstructed Sanskrit on pp. 99–100.
Note that the sequence here does not accord with that given above, 1.23, in that the three aspects of meditative stability should precede the three degrees of the five faculties.
This passage on the gradation of the three degrees of the five faculties which unrealized beings, trainee bodhisattvas, and buddhas respectively have, and on the three degress of meditative stability, is also translated in Konow (1941): 26–28, with reconstructed Sanskrit on pp. 100–101.
This listing of the eight sense fields of mastery and the ten total consummations of the elements is also translated in Konow (1941: 28–30, with reconstructed Sanskrit on pp. 101–102. Cf. Sparham (2012 IV): 70–76. Among them, as cited in Negi (1993-2005): 5395. the eight sense fields of mastery originate through engagement with the aforementioned eight aspects of liberation (vimokṣapraveśsikānyabhibhvāyatanāni, zil gyis gnon pa’i skye mched rnams ni rnam par thar pa ’jug pa las byung ba can yin la). They are the basis for the control and transcendence of the world system of desire. See Nāṇamoli (1979): 866.
This distinction between lesser and greater external forms is made not on the basis of physical size but with reference to their impact on consciousness. See Bodhi (1993): 153. Some sources (e.g., Dorje 1987: 374) more explicitly distinguish greater and lesser external forms on the basis of sentience and non-sentience.
The missing text in this section can be found in Negi (1993-2005): 5396–5397.
The last two sense fields of mastery, as given here, repeat two of the eight aspects of liberation (see above, 1.33). More generally, however, this listing makes a fourfold distinction between those who perceive inner form observing greater and lesser external forms, and those who perceive inner formlessness observing greater and lesser external forms. Cf. Negi (1993-2005): 5395–5397.
For a detailed presentation of the ten total consummations of the elements and their impact in the context of meditative concentration, see Nāṇamoli (1979): 122–184.
For variant listings and commentary on the eighteen aspects of emptiness that follow, see Konow (1941): 30–34, and the reconstructed Sanskrit on pp. 102–104. Cf. also the more detailed explanations in Lamotte: The Treatise on the Great Virtue of Wisdom, vol. IV, pp. 1669–1767. Sparham (2006 I), pp. 107–110, lists twenty aspects of emptiness. With regard to the last in our list—the emptiness of the essential nature of non-entities (abhāvasvabhāvaśūnyatā, dngos po med pa’i ngo bo nyid stong pa nyid)—here we have followed Konow (1941), p. 30, in reading this compound as a genitive (tatpuruṣa). The Tibetan appears to do the same. This is at variance with Lamotte, The Treatise of the Great Virtue of Wisdom, vol. IV, pp. 1765–1767, who clearly reads the compound as a co-ordinative (dvandva): “emptiness of non-existence and existence itself.”
There are variant readings for this passage concerning entities, non-entities, essential nature, and extraneous entities to be found in the three longer versions of the sūtra, on which see Konow (1941): 35–37.
Since the term “entities” (bhāva, dngos po) specifically denotes the conditioned phenomena of the psycho-physical aggregates, this would seem to preclude Lamotte’s translation (op. cit. p. 1762) of dngos po as “existence,” although “existents” could be an acceptable alternative. Similarly, the term “non-entities” (abhāva, dngos po med pa) denotes unconditioned phenomena and is therefore incompatible with Lamotte’s “non-existence.”
Here we have opted to translate svabhāva (ngo bo nyid) as “essential nature” and in other contexts as “inherent existence,” rather than as “self-existence” (Konow 1941: 30) or as “existence in itself” (Lamotte, op. cit. p. 1762).
The attributes listed here in this first chapter are the causal attributes cultivated by bodhisattvas, in contrast to the fruitional attributes possessed by buddhas, which are outlined below in the second chapter.
Ch. 1: nidānaparivarta, gleng gzhi’i le’u.
For various interpretations of this term, see Dayal (1932): 324, note 64.
The listing of the ten powers of the tathāgatas is analyzed in Konow (1941), pp. 37–39, with reconstructed Sanskrit on pp. 105–106. The full explanation of these powers derives from the passage at 2.257–2.386 in The Teaching on the Great Compassion of the Tathāgata (Tathāgatamahākaruṇānirdeśa, Toh 147, also known as The Sūtra of Dhāraṇīśvararāja, Dhāraṇīśvararājasūtra), in which the ten powers are described as the first ten of thirty-two actions of a tathāgata. Cf. also Dayal (1932): 20; and Sparham (2012 IV): 80.
This listing of the four assurances is translated and analyzed in Konow (1941): 39–40, with reconstructed Sanskrit on pp. 106–107. The full explanation of the assurances derives from the passage at 2.387–2.424 in The Teaching on the Great Compassion of the Tathāgata (Tathāgatamahākaruṇānirdeśa, Toh 147) in which the four assurances are described as the eleventh to fourteenth of thirty-two actions of a tathāgata. See also Dayal (1932): 20–21; and Sparham (2012 IV): 80–81.
On the Pali and Sanskrit sources relevant for great loving kindness and great compassion, see Dayal (1932): 227–228 and 178–181 respectively. The training in the relevant meditations is presented in Padmakara Translation Group (1994): 198–213.
See the analysis of the eighteen distinct qualities of the buddhas in Konow (1941): 41–44, which discusses the etymology of āveṇika and compares alternative listings; also Dayal (1932): 21–23 and Sparham (2012 IV): 82.
These are the three theoretical understandings of the goal to be realized, which, as mentioned above, i.3, constitute the first three sections of the eightfold progression outlined in the Ornament of Clear Realization. The present sūtra explicitly associates them with the śrāvakas, bodhisattvas and buddhas respectively. See also Konow (1941): 44, and the reconstructed Sanskrit on p. 107.
The listings of the six transcendent perfections, and the six extrasensory powers and five eyes that follow, are also translated and discussed in Konow (1941): 44–48. In particular, on Sanskrit sources relevant to the six transcendent perfections, which are central to the present sūtra, see Dayal (1932): 165–269, and on their cultivation, Padmakara Translation Group (1994): 234–261.
The first five extrasensory powers, on which see above, 1.3 and 1.11, may be acquired by śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas, whereas the last may only be acquired by bodhisattvas who attain manifestly perfect buddhahood. For a more detailed explanation, see below, 10.40–10.47; also Lamotte, The Treatise on the Great Virtue of Wisdom, vol. IV, pp. 1486–1494.
This following list of the major physical marks that identify the buddha body of emanation actually comprises thirty-three major marks. A more standardized listing of the thirty-two major marks can be found in chapter 63 of The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in One Hundred Thousand Lines (Śatasāhasrikāprajñāpāramitāsūtra), KPD 25: 105–111; in chapter 62 of The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-five Thousand Lines (Pañcaviṃśatīsāhasrikāprajñāpāramitāsūtra, Toh 9, 62.76 ff., see Padmakara Translation Group, 2023), and Kimura (2006) VI–VIII, p. 61; and in chapter 73 of The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Eighteen Thousand Lines (Aṣṭadaśasāhasrikāprajñāpāramitāsūtra, Toh 10, 73.89 ff., see Sparham, 2022). The lists presented in the two longer versions are identical, while the wording of the last mentioned varies slightly although the meaning corresponds. This standard list of thirty-two is reinterated but for a few almost insignificant differences in the Abhisamayālaṃkāra and its Spuṭārtha commentary, pp. 86–87, and Sparham (2012 IV): 84–90 and 254–256). However, the present listing of thirty-three is markedly different in that it includes the eyeballs, aureole, and moonlike face (29–31), for which the aforementioned sources substitute the lion-like torso (siṃhapūrvārdhakāyatā) and even teeth (samadantatā). There are also a few discrepancies in the order in which the marks appear in our text. Lists also appear in the Lalitavistara (Toh 95, 7.99 and 26.147–26.175, see Dharmachakra Translation Committee, 2013), Rāṣṭrapālaparipṛcchā (Toh 62, 1.356 ff., see Vienna Buddhist Translation Studies Group, 2021), Mahāyānopadeśa (Toh 169), Mahāvastu, and Ratnagotravibhāga. For a comparative analysis of the early Indic sources, see also Konow (1941): 48–57, and the reconstructed Sanskrit on pp. 108–10. The meritorious reasons underlying each of the Buddha’s thirty-two major marks are given in the Lalitavistara (26.145–173, see above), and in the Mahāyānopadeśa (Degé Kangyur, vol. 59, folios 297a et seq.). They are also discussed in Lamotte: The Treatise on the Great Virtue of Wisdom, vol. IV, pp. 1568–1570.
dper na shing bal gyi ’da’ ba’am/ ras bal gyi ’da’ ba lta bu. This simile is a recurring, modular phrase in the canonical literature, the Sanskrit being in such forms as tad yathā tūlapicur vā karpāsapicur vā (Divyāvadāna 210.14-15) or tūlapindhur vā karpasapindhur vā (Śrāvakabhūmi 174.kha.462); similar examples are found in Pali. See also glossary entries.
The aureole is also mentioned as one of the eighty minor marks, and its omission here would serve to restore the list to thirty-two.
For a detailed analysis of this listing of the minor marks in relation to other Indic sources, see Konow (1941): 57–81, and the reconstructed Sanskrit on pp. 110–112. In fact only seventy-eight minor marks are listed here, in contrast to the standard listings of eighty, which are found in chapter 63 of The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in One Hundred Thousand Lines (Śatasāhasrikāprajñāpāramitāsūtra), KPD 25: 111–117; in chapter 62 of The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-five Thousand Lines (Pañcaviṃśatīsāhasrikāprajñāpāramitāsūtra, Toh 9, 62.79, see Padmakara Translation Group, 2023) and Kimura (2006) VI–VIII, pp. 64ff., and in chapter 73 of The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Eighteen Thousand Lines (Aṣṭadaśasāhasrikāprajñāpāramitāsūtra, Toh 10, 73.93, see Sparham, 2022). The lists presented in the two longer versions are identical, while the wording of the last mentioned varies slightly, albeit without significant differences in meaning. That standard list of eighty is largely reinterated in the Abhisamayālaṃkāra and its Spuṭārtha commentary, pp. 89–90 (see also Sparham (2012 IV): 90–96 and 257–262; Conze (1975): 661–664; and Tsepak Rigdzin (1986): 165–166). The only differences, other than in the order, between the list given in those three sūtra recensions and the Abhisamayālaṃkāra is that the latter combines the purity and cleanliness of the body (21 and 23) in a single mark (21) while adding the perfection of the body (sku rnam par dgu pa, 23), and it also subsitutes the thick and long earlobes (68) with long and extended arms. However, our present text contains many more divergent readings. In fact, twenty-six items of the standard list are missing and several others appear to be combined or else only tentatively identified. About half of them do correspond to the standard Sphuṭārtha listing, although they are frequently presented in a different order. The Sanskrit terms given in parenthesis generally follow the terminology of The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-five Thousand Lines and the Sphuṭārtha, although Konow’s reconstructions have also been included when the original is unlocatable. This passage may also be compared to that found in Conze (1975): 586–587, which struggles to present a clear enumeration of eighty. The following notes 76–146, which all refer to discrepancies in the various listings of the minor marks, will be of interest to specialists rather than the general reader.
This is listed as number 1 in The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-five Thousand Lines and the Sphuṭārtha.
This is numbered 30 in The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-five Thousand Lines and 31 in the Sphuṭārtha listing.
This term is reconstructed in Konow (1941): 59. We have tentatively identified it with pṛthucārumaṇḍalagātratā (sku che zhing mdzes pa), numbered 25 in The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-five Thousand Lines and in the Sphuṭārtha listings.
This is numbered 21 in The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-five Thousand Lines and the Sphuṭārtha listings.
This is numbered 22 in The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-five Thousand Lines and the Sphuṭārtha listings.
This term is probably equivalent to sku gzhon sha can, numbered 28 in The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-five Thousand Lines and the Sphuṭārtha listings.
This term, reconstructed in Konow (1941): 59–60, may possibly be equivalent to mṛṣṭagātratā (shin tu sbyangs pa, sku byi dor byas pa), which is numbered 19 in The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-five Thousand Lines and the Sphuṭārtha listings.
Again, this term has been reconstructed in Konow (1941): 60. It may possibly be equivalent to anupūrvagātratā (sku rim gyis gzhol ba), which is numbered 20 in The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-five Thousand Lines and the Sphuṭārtha listings; or else to adīnagātratā (sku zhum pa med pa, 29).
Here the text actually reads, “Their fingers and toes are long and tapering” (dīrghānupūrvāṅgulitā, sor mo rnams ring ba dang byin gyis phra ba dag), but this is a repetition of item 11, and, as Konow (1941): 60 points out, the reading given in translation is preferable, corresponding to item 5 in The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-five Thousand Lines and the Sphuṭārtha listings.
This term is numbered 4 in The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-five Thousand Lines and the Sphuṭārtha listings.
This term is numbered 6 in The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-five Thousand Lines and the Sphuṭārtha listings.
This term is numbered 7 in The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-five Thousand Lines and Sphuṭārtha listings.
This term is numbered 9 in The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-five Thousand Lines and the Sphuṭārtha listings.
This is equivalent to item 18 (sku shin tu legs pa) in The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-five Thousand Lines and the Sphuṭārtha listings. Konow (1941): 60 alternatively suggests adīnagātratā (sku zhum pa med pa, 29).
This term is equivalent to item 19 (“well-refined”, sku shin tu sbyangs pa, sku byi dor byas pa) in The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-five Thousand Lines and the Sphuṭārtha listings. Konow (1941): 60 alternatively suggests equivalence with suvibhaktāṅgapratyaṅgatā (yan lag nyin lag spa bar mdzes pa, 32).
This is equivalent to item 23 (sku shin tu rnam par dag pa) in The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-five Thousand Lines. Konow (1941): 60 reconstructs the Sanskrit more literally as viśuddhāyatanatā.
Here the Sanskrit is reconstructed in Konow (1941): 60, but this item appears out of place in a list of physical characteristics.
This term is numbered 41 (kun spyod pa shin tu gtsang ba) in The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-five Thousand Lines and the Sphuṭārtha listings.
Konow (1941): 61 and 65 suggests that “splendor” may tentatively be associated with the last (80th) of the minor marks.
This term is equivalent to item 40 (kun nas mdzes pa) in The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-five Thousand Lines and the Sphuṭārtha listing (here through 105 it says “listing” not “listings”; the latter resumes at 106).
This term is numbered 47 in The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-five Thousand Lines and the Sphuṭārtha listing.
Here we follow the Sanskrit reconstructed in Konow (1941): 61.
This term is numbered 48 in The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-five Thousand Lines and the Sphuṭārtha listing.
The reconstructed Sanskrit follows Konow (1941): 61.
This term is numbered 52 in The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-five Thousand Lines and the Sphuṭārtha listing
This term is numbered 38 in The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-five Thousand Lines and the Sphuṭārtha listing.
This term may be equivalent to 33 (phyal zlum pa, “well rounded abdomen”) in The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-five Thousand Lines and 34 in the Sphuṭārtha listing.
This term is numbered 39 in The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-five Thousand Lines and the Sphuṭārtha listings.
This term is numbered 30 in The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-five Thousand Lines and the Sphuṭārtha listings. Konow (1941): 61 reconstructs the Sanskrit as citapāṇipādatā.
Here the Sanskrit is reconstructed according to Konow (1941): 61, who suggests equivalence with aviṣamapādatā (zhabs mi mnyam pa med pa, item 10 in The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-five Thousand Lines and the Sphuṭārtha listings).
This term is numbered 43 in The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-five Thousand Lines and the Sphuṭārtha listings.
This is probably equivalent to gambhīrapāṇilekhatā (phyag gi ri mo zab pa), item 45 in The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-five Thousand Lines and the Sphuṭārtha listings.
This term is numbered 46 in The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-five Thousand Lines and the Sphuṭārtha listings.
This term is numbered 42 in The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-five Thousand Lines and the Sphuṭārtha listings.
Here the Sanskrit is reconstructed according to Konow (1941): 62, who suggests equivalence with vitimiraśuddhalokatā (snang ba rab rib med cing rnam par dag pa), item 33 in The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-five Thousand Lines and the Sphuṭārtha listings.
Here again, the Sanskrit has been reconstructed according to Konow (1941): 61.
This term is also enumerated above as item 31 in the list of the thirty-two major marks. Here, the Sanskrit is reconstructed according to Konow (1941): 62. It may tentatively be compared with susnigdhabhuvatā (smin ma snum pa dang ldan pa), item 66 in The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-five Thousand Lines and the Sphuṭārtha listings.
Sanskrit reconstructed according to Konow (1941): 62.
Here the Sanskrit corresponds to the Sphuṭārtha listing (item 71). The corresponding item (70) in The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-five Thousand Lines is supariṇāmitalāṭatā (zhal dpral ba legs par grub pa dang ldan pa). However, Konow (1941): 62 reconstructs the Sanskrit as apagatabhrūkuṭimukhatā and then suggests a tentative equivalence with ślakṣṇabhruvatā (smin ma ’jam pa dang ldan pa), item 65 in The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-five Thousand Lines and the Sphuṭārtha listings.
Again the Sanskrit has been reconstructed in Konow (1941): 62, who suggests equivalence with surabhikeśatā (dbu skra dri zhim pa), item 79 in The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-five Thousand Lines and the Sphuṭārtha listings.
Sanskrit reconstructed in Konow (1941): 62.
This and the two immediately following items are numbered 11–13 in The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-five Thousand Lines and the Sphuṭārtha listings.
This is numbered 73 in The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-five Thousand Lines and the Sphuṭārtha listings, where the Tibetan is given as dbu shin tu rgyas pa.
This is numbered 53 in The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-five Thousand Lines and the Sphuṭārtha listings.
This is numbered 55 in The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-five Thousand Lines and the Sphuṭārtha listings.
This is numbered 59 in The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-five Thousand Lines and the Sphuṭārtha listings.
This is numbered 51 in The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-five Thousand Lines and the Sphuṭārtha listings.
This is numbered 50 in The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-five Thousand Lines and the Sphuṭārtha listings.
The Sanskrit is reconstructed in Konow (1941): 63, who suggests a tentative comparison with sitāsitakamalanayanatā (spyan dkar nag ’byes shing pad ma’i ’dab ma ltar ’dug pa), item 63 in The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-five Thousand Lines and the Sphuṭārtha listings, despite the fact that the latter refers to the eyes and not the body hairs.
Sanskrit reconstructed in Konow (1941): 63.
This term is numbered 61 in The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-five Thousand Lines and the Sphuṭārtha listings.
This term is numbered 24 in The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-five Thousand Lines and in the Sphuṭārtha listings.
Sanskrit reconstructed in Konow (1941): 63.
Sanskrit reconstructed in Konow (1941): 63. This may tentatively be identified with vṛttakukṣitā (phyal zlum pa), item 34 in The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-five Thousand Lines and the Sphuṭārtha listings.
This term is numbered 36 in The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-five Thousand Lines and the Sphuṭārtha listings.
This term is numbered 37 in The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-five Thousand Lines and the Sphuṭārtha listings.
This term is numbered 35 in The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-five Thousand Lines and the Sphuṭārtha listings.
Sanskrit reconstructed in Konow (1941): 64. This may tentatively be equivalent to suvibhaktāṅgapratyaṅgatā (yan lag dang nyin lag spa bar mdzes pa), item 32 in The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-five Thousand Lines and the Sphuṭārtha listings, substituting the joints for the limbs.
This term is not found in other versions, although Konow (1941): 64 reconstructs the Sanskrit as citasandhi. It may possibly be equivalent to pīnāyatabhujatā (phyag ring zhing rgyas pa), item 67 in The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-five Thousand Lines and 68 in the Sphuṭārtha listings, substituting the joints for the arms.
Sanskrit reconstructed in Konow (1941): 64.
This term has also been included above as item 30 in the listing of the thirty-two major marks.
The Sanskrit has been reconstructed in Konow (1941): 64, who makes a tentative comparison with cārugāmitā (mdzes par bzhud pa), item 16 in The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-five Thousand Lines and the Sphuṭārtha listings.
The Sanskrit of this and the three items that immediately follow (i.e., items 65–68) is reconstructed in Konow (1941): 64.
The Sanskrit of this and the following entry is reconstructed in Konow (1941): 64.
The Degé Kangyur here reads spyi gtsug bltar mi mngon pa, but for the same item in the list in ch. 29 (29.57) the other, more common variant rendering of the term spyi gtsug bltar mi mthong ba. Other Kangyurs, including the Stok Palace (vol. 48, F.29.a.1) have the latter reading in the present chapter, too.
The Sanskrit is reconstructed in Konow (1941): 64. Note that this item appears to combine three otherwise distinct items, namely, bluish black hair like a bumble bee (bhramarasadṛsakeśatā, dbu skra bung ba ltar gnag pa dang ldan pa, item 74), soft hair (ślakṣṇakeśatā, dbu skra ’jam pa, item 76), and long thick hair (citakeśatā, dbu skra stug pa, item 75).
This is numbered 78 in The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-five Thousand Lines and the Sphuṭārtha listings.
The Sanskrit is reconstructed in Konow (1941): 64. Cf. items 11 and 12 in the listing of the thirty-two major marks, which are similar, albeit with reference to the body hair rather than the hair of the head.
This is numbered 77 in The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-five Thousand Lines and the Sphuṭārtha listings.
The Sanskrit of this and the immediately following item is reconstructed in Konow (1941): 65. These two are collectively enumerated as item 80 in The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-five Thousand Lines and the Sphuṭārtha listings.
In the context of the eighty minor marks, the palms and soles are said in many such lists to be marked with auspicious symbols such as the svastika and śrīvatsa. This is presumably in addition to the thousand-spoked wheels mentioned above and in most lists of the thirty-two major marks. The mention of the palm and sole markings in lists of the thirty-two major marks in the Lalitavistara and Rāṣṭrapālaparipṛcchā both mention svastikas in addition to wheels. In the list of the eighty minor marks in the Lalitavistara (7.103), however, the equivalent to this mention of markings on the palms and soles refers instead to Prince Siddhartha’s hair as curling into shapes such as the svastika and śrīvatsa.
On the identification of this final item in the list of minor marks, see Konow (1941): 65–66.
At this point in the text, phenomena are assessed in terms of whether they belong to one or other of the following categories: virtuous, non-virtuous, non-specific, mundane, supramundane, contaminated, uncontaminated, conditioned, unconditioned, common, and uncommon. For an alternative translation, see Konow (1941): 85–88 and the reconstructed Sanskrit on pp. 111–112.
The text at this point omits the listing of the mundane phenomena, as found in Dutt (1934): 166, and Conze (1975): 121. See glossary entry “mundane phenomena.”
The conclusion to chapter two appears not to be replicated in the Sanskrit editions of Kimura I and Dutt (1934); or in Conze (1975).
Ch. 2: sarvadharmaparivarta, chos thams cad kyi le’u.
Our text here misreads ming for mig.
These diverse synonyms for the self are identified within the Sāṃkhya tradition. See Vimuktisena’s definition in Sparham (2006: I): 92.
Tib. ming gi brdas tha snyad du ’dogs pa kho nar zad. Skt. nāmasaṃketamātreṇa vyavahriyate.
Ch. 3: nirabhiniveśaparivarta, mngon par zhen pa med pa’i le’u.
This and the following paragraphs have been adapted in the renowned Prajñāpāramitāhṛdayasūtra.
Ch. 4: yogaparivarta, rnal ’byor gyi le’u.
This passage occurs in Dutt (1934): 99; also Conze (1975): 90, where the interlocutor is Subhūti rather than Śāradvatīputra.
We have not translated the seemingly redundant repetition on D49a, commencing (line 4) de bzhin du ma rig pa … and continuing down to (line 5) rga shi’i bar gyi tshig bla dags byang chub sems dpa’ ma yin.
The text (F. 51b, line 2) reads smon pa ma mchis.
Ch. 5: bodhisattvādhivacanaparivarta, byang chub sems dpa’i tshig bla dags kyi le’u.
The initial linking part of this sentence appears not to be found in Dutt. For the second part, see Dutt (1934): 150–151; also Conze (1975): 111.
This reading follows Dutt (1934): 154. cf. Conze “1975”: 113.
The attentiveness of the śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas is considered to be over-scrupulous in the sense that, unlike the attentiveness of the bodhisattvas, it is object-oriented and not non-referential.
Dutt (1934): 155 reads aparāmarṣaṇatā, whereas the prevailing consensus, accepted by Conze and others, would suggest the reading aparāmarśaṇatā. The Tibetan equivalent, mchog tu ’dzin pa med pa denotes an absence of dogmatic assumptions, which may be made with respect to either ethical discipline or philosophical opinions. See Conze (1973): 242; also Nyima and Dorje (2001): 1146–1147.
This reading follows our text, which omits the negative particle throughout. For a different interpretation, see Conze (1975): 114, which follows Dutt: na rūpaśūnyatayā rūpaṃ śūnyaṃ…
This linking sentence has affinity with Dutt (1934): 116, lines 5–6.
This paragraph has not yet been mapped, but the final sentence may be implied in the first line of the translation found in Conze (1975): 95 (missing in Dutt (1934): 116).
Ch. 6: śikṣāparivarta, bslab pa’i le’u.
For an understanding of this expression, see respective glossary entry.
This follows Dutt (1934): 158, which reads evaṃ rūpaṇi mārakarmāṇi (bdud kyi las de lta bu de dag).
Our text reads mi snang ba’i cha. Dutt (1934): 160 reads “mother and father” (mātāpitṛ). See also Conze (1975): 115.
This passage is reminiscent of Dutt (1934): 172, and Conze (1975): 126, where similar words are attributed to Śāradvatīputra rather than Lord Buddha.
Cf. Dutt (1934): 172, also Conze (1975): 126, where Subhūti asks this question of Śāradvatīputra.
Cf. Dutt (1934): 172, also Conze (1975): 126, where Śāradvatīputra utters these words in response to Subhūti.
The Sanskrit (Dutt (1934): 172) here reads acittatvāt tatrāpi citte asaṃga, and the Tibetan sems ma yin pa’i phyir…sems de la chags pa med do.
Ch. 7: anupalambhaparivarta, mi dmigs pa’i le’u.
Cf. Dutt (1934): 119, and also Conze (1975): 95 and Sparham (2006 I): 56, where the ensuing dialogue takes place between Subhūti and Śāradvatīputra.
Emptiness in all its finest aspects (sarvākāraguṇopetaśūnyatā, rnam pa thams cad kyi mchog dang ldan pa’i stong pa nyid), mentioned here and in Maitreya’s Supreme Continuum of the Great Vehicle (Mahāyānottaratantraśāstra), is later identified in the context of Tibetan Great Madhyamaka (dbu ma chen po) with the extraneous emptiness (gzhan stong) through which the pristine purity of all enlightened attributes is emphasized. See Dudjom Rinpoche (1991): 206–207.
Although the negative particle is missing in D84a, line 5, see Dutt (1934): 73, also Conze (1975): 76. The Chengdu dpe bsdur ma edition (KPD: 31: 733, note 1), indicates that other printed editions of the Tibetan text do include the negative particle.
The Tibetan reads lus gang gis bdag lus la dmigs par bya’o snyam pa’i lus de yin no snyam pa. By contrast, Dutt (1934): 73, line 4 reads katamaḥ sa kayaḥ yena kāyena kāyakarma samārabheya. The latter is translated by Conze (1975): 75, as “what is the body by which deeds of the body could be undertaken?”
Ch. 8: nyāmāparivarta, skyon med pa’i le’u.
Tib. sems can thams cad dang lhan cig thun mongs du byas nas.
Dutt (1934): 176 replaces this term with vyupaparīkṣaṇā (“tolerance”). See also Conze (1975): 129.
The integration of these six aspects of the transcendent perfection of tolerance, here abbreviated, can be found elaborated in Dutt (1934): 177–178: also Conze (1975): 130.
The structure of this sentence is suggested in Dutt (1934): 180 (kiyata bodhisattvo mahāsattvo mahāyānasaṃprasthitato), although the question is asked of Pūrṇa. Cf. Conze (1975): 131.
The double negative, as found in our text in this and the following sentences, is not apparent in Dutt (1934): 183, line 10, or in Conze (1975): 134.
Cf. Conze (1975): 134
D93a line 1 has a double negative mi shes pa mi ’jug la, where shes pa mi ’jug la would seem to be required.
This linking paragraph has not been located in Dutt (1934) or Conze (1975).
Ch. 9: nirdeśaparivarta, bstan pa’i le’u.
These six ways in which the trichiliocosm are said to shake are as follows: when the eastern side is ascendant the western side is low, when the western side is ascendant the eastern side is low, when the southern side is ascendant the northern side is low, when the northern side is ascendant the southern side is low, when their extremes are ascendant their center is low, and when the center is ascendant the extremes are low. See below, 23.44.
The Tibetan here reads sgyu ma’i chos nyid nye bar bzung na chos rnams kyi chos nyid de yin pa. Dutt (1934): 187, lines 18–19, reads dharmataiṣā subhūte dharmāṇām māyādharmatāmupadaya. Conze (1975): 138 translates: “For such is the true nature of dharmas that in fact they are illusory.”
The Tibetan reads rnam par gzhag pa (“in absorption”). However, Dutt (1934): 189, line 14, reads avikṣepaṃ (“undistracted”).
The expression le’u dang po would ordinarily refer back to the first chapter of a text, but it is clear from the present context that it denotes a passage found in the first part of the present chapter. Incidentally, there are similar instances of opaque cross-referencing throughout this text which may residually point toward another version.
The expression le’u gong ma ji skad bstan pa here refers back not to an earlier chapter, as one might expect, but to the previous part of the present chapter. See above, n.190.
The full list is not explicitly enumerated in Dutt (1934): 83, or in Conze (1975): 79, as a preamble to the detailed explanation that follows.
This passage is omitted in Dutt (1934): 86, line 9.
Ch. 10: abhijñāparivarta, mngon par shes pa’i le’u.
According to traditional Indian cosmology, our human world of “patient endurance” (sahālokadhātu, mi mjed ’jig rten gyi khams) is said to comprise four continents, namely, Pūrvavideha in the east, Jambudvīpa in the south, Aparagodānīya in the west, and Uttarakuru in the north. A single world system (cakravāla) extends from the realms of the hells, anguished spirits, and animals through those human abodes, and through the celestial domains of the six god realms belonging to the world system of desire, the seventeen god realms of the world system of form, and the four activity fields of the world system of formlessness. In association with the four meditative concentrations, this single world system multiplies incrementally: The chiliocosm comprises one thousand such parallel worlds, the dichiliocosm one thousand of these, and the great trichiliocosmone thousand of these yet again. For an analysis of the divergent traditions associated with this cosmology, see Kloetzli (1983): 23–90.
A slightly different enumeration of the five fetters associated with the higher realms (gong ma’i cha dang ’thun pa’i kun tu sbyor ba lnga), comprising attachment to form, attachment to formlessness, agitation/hyperactivity, dullness, and pride, is found in Nyima and Dorje (2001): 486.
These three fetters are generally enumerated as the fetter of inertia due to false views about perishable composites, the fetter of moral and ascetic supremacy, and the fetter of hesitation. See Nyima and Dorje (2001): 33; also Nordrang Orgyan (2003): 169.
This metaphor of the tall and erect sāl tree (shing sā la chen po lta bu) could suggest that bodhisattvas will be pillars of society in their respective classes. However, the metaphor, which recurs frequently in the present sūtra, may well have originated from a textual corruption of the expression mahāsālakula (rigs che shing mtho ba), suggesting that the bodhisattvas will be born into “great and important families.” The latter reading is found in The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-five Thousand Lines, on which see, e.g., Dutt (1934): 42, 64, 80 and 94.
This linking paragraph appears to be absent in Dutt (1934): 128, and in Conze (1975): 100.
This sentence also appears to be absent in Dutt (1934): 128, and in Conze (1975): 100.
As in classical Greek, Sanskrit nouns and verbs are respectively declined and conjugated according to singular, dual, and plural forms.
This paragraph and the immediately following paragraph appear to be identical in meaning, but for some minor grammatical features, perhaps indicative of unwarranted repetition.
See previous note.
This alludes to the anecdote of a non-Buddhist mendicant named Śreṇika Vatsagotra (Pali: Vacchagotta), who despite his narrow and limited scope acquired faith in the Buddha’s omniscience, because he did not perceive or appropriate anything at all. The anecdote is mentioned as significant in all the long Prajñāpāramitā sūtras in passages discussing the Buddha’s omniscience, i.e. (as well as here in chapter 11 of the Daśasāhasrikā) in chapter 1 of the Aṣṭasāhasrikā (Toh 12); chapter 8 of the Aṣṭadaśasāhasrikā (Toh 10, 8.35–8.38, see Sparham, 2022); chapter 5 of the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā (Toh 9, 5.52–5.54, see Padmakara Translation Group 2023); and in chapter 5 of the Śatasāhasrikā (Toh 8). The Prajñāpāramitā sūtras themselves give little further detail, and Śreṇika Vatsagotra’s questioning of the Buddha does not seem to appear in full in any canonical text in Tibetan translation; it is, however, related in a number of Pali texts and āgamas in Chinese; see particularly Majjhimanikāya, 71–73; Saṃyuktāgama, SA 962–964 and SA2 196–198. Nāgārjuna’s Mahāprajñāpāramitāśāstra gives further details, see Lamotte 2010 vol. 1, p. 58 n119. A useful summary is set out in Conze’s introduction to the long sūtra, see Conze (1975): 12–13.
Ch. 11: asthitiparivarta, mi gnas pa’i le’u.
The listing of the hundred and eleven meditative stabilities that follows appears to be a unique listing, which in many instances partakes of the short list found in The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-five Thousand Lines (see Dutt (1934): 142–144) but which sometimes adopts instead the readings found in the more detailed exegetical list (Dutt (1934): 198-203; also Conze (1975): 148–152). In addition there are a small number of items that are not found in either of these lists. Cf. Nordrang Orgyan (2008): 3752–3754, which offers a somewhat alternative listing according to the Avataṃsakasūtra. The following notes 222–279 will be of interest only to specialists. At some point it would be worthwhile to produce a comprehensive table, juxtaposing the listings of these meditative stabilities, as found in all texts within the genre.
This meditative stability is omitted in Dutt (1934): 142, but found in the longer list (Dutt (1934): 198).
This meditative stability is found in the longer list (Dutt (1934): 198), but replaced in the shorter list (Dutt (1934): 142) with sarvadharmamudrā.
Though the Sanskrit is attested in Negi (1993-2005): 3410, other sources including Mahāvyutpatti suggest “Surveying the Pinnacle” (vilokitamūrdha, spyi gtsug rnam par lta ba). Dutt (1934): 142, 198–199, and Conze (1975): 151 are in conformity with the latter.
This meditative stability is found in the longer list (Dutt (1934): 199), but replaced in the shorter list (Dutt (1934): 142), with samāhitāvasthāpratiṣṭha.
This meditative stability is found in the shorter list (Dutt (1934): 142), but replaced in the longer list (Dutt (1934): 199), with raśmipramukta.
This also occurs in the form balavīrya (Dutt (1934): 142), while the longer list (Dutt (1934): 199) reads balavyūha.
This meditative stability is found in the shorter list (Dutt (1934): 142), but replaced in the longer list (Dutt (1934): 199) with niruktinirdeśapraveśa.
This meditative stability is attested in the longer list (Dutt (1934): 199), whereas the shorter list (Dutt (1934): 142) replaces adhivacanasaṃpraveśa with āsecanakapraveśa (“Anointment”), and digvilokita with digvalokita.
This meditative stability is found in the shorter list (Dutt (1934): 142), but replaced in the longer list (Dutt (1934): 199) with ādhāraṇamudrā.
This meditative stability is found in the shorter list (Dutt (1934): 142), but replaced in the longer list (Dutt (1934): 199) with tejovati.
This meditative stability is found in the shorter list (Dutt (1934): 142), but replaced in the longer list (Dutt (1934): 199) with apramāṇamāvabhāsa.
This meditative stability is found in the shorter list (Dutt (1934): 142), but replaced in the longer list (Dutt (1934): 199) with asaṅgānāvaraṇa.
This meditative stability is found in the shorter list (Dutt (1934): 142), but replaced in the longer list (Dutt (1934): 199) with sarvadharmapravṛttisamuccheda.
This and the following meditative stabilities are found in the shorter list (Dutt (1934): 142), but omitted in the longer list (Dutt (1934): 200).
This meditative stability is found in the longer list (Dutt (1934): 200), but replaced in the shorter list (Dutt (1934): 142) with vipulapratipanna.
Both the shorter list (every other note in this section says “list”; there’s a second instance in this note) (Dutt (1934): 142) and the longer list (Dutt (1934): 200) insert samantāvabhāsa after prabhākara.
This meditative stability is found in the shorter list (Dutt (1934): 142), but replaced in the longer list (Dutt (1934): 200) with śuddhasāra.
This meditative stability is found in the longer list (Dutt (1934): 200), but replaced in the shorter list (Dutt (1934): 143), with aratikara.
This meditative stability is found in the longer list (Dutt (1934): 200), but omitted in the shorter list (Dutt (1934): 143).
This meditative stability is found in the shorter list (Dutt (1934): 143), but replaced in the longer list (Dutt (1934): 200) with vajramaṇḍala.
This meditative stability is found in the shorter list (Dutt (1934): 143), but replaced in the longer list (Dutt (1934): 200), with akṣayāpagata.
This is attested in the shorter list (Dutt (1934): 143) as anirjita, and replaced in the longer list (Dutt (1934): 200) with aniñjaya.
Candravimala is attested in both the shorter and longer lists (Dutt (1934): 142 and 200). The Tibetan zla ba’i sgron ma would suggest candrapradīpa.
This accords with the short list (Dutt (1934): 143), whereas the longer list (Dutt (1934): 200) suggests śuddhaprabhāsa.
The longer list (Dutt (1934): 201) inserts vajropama here.
This accords with the short list (Dutt (1934): 143), whereas the longer list (Dutt (1934): 201) suggests samantāloka.
This accords with the longer list (Dutt (1934): 201) but is omitted in the short list (Dutt (1934): 143).
This accords with the short list (Dutt (1934): 143), whereas the longer list (Dutt (1934): 201) suggests sarvadharmodgata.
The longer list (Dutt (1934): 201) reads only samākṣara.
This meditative stability is found in the longer list (Dutt (1934): 201), but replaced in the shorter list (Dutt (1934): 143), with anigara.
This meditative stability is found in the longer list (Dutt (1934): 201), where it is immediately followed by aprakāra. The latter is replaced in the shorter list (Dutt (1934): 143), with prabhākara.
This meditative stability is found in the longer list (Dutt (1934): 201), but omitted in the shorter list (Dutt (1934): 143).
This accords with the short list (Dutt (1934): 143), whereas the longer list (Dutt (1934): 201) suggests nāmanimittapraveśa.
This accords with the short list (Dutt (1934): 143), whereas the longer list (Dutt (1934): 201) suggests only timirāpagata.
This is attested in the short list (Dutt (1934): 143), but omitted in the longer list (Dutt (1934): 202).
This accords with the short list (Dutt (1934): 143), whereas the longer list (Dutt (1934): 202) reads cittasthitiniścitta.
This accords with the short list (Dutt (1934): 143), whereas the longer list (Dutt (1934): 202) reads anantaprabhāsa.
This accords with the short list (Dutt (1934): 143), whereas the longer list (Dutt (1934): 202) reads sarvadharmātikramaṇa.
This meditative stability is found in the short list, though out of order (Dutt (1934): 143), and replaced in the longer list (Dutt (1934): 202) with paricchedakara.
This meditative stability is found in the short list, though out of order (Dutt (1934): 143), and omitted in the longer list (Dutt (1934): 202).
This and the following meditative stabilities are found in the longer list (Dutt (1934): 202), but omitted in the shorter list (Dutt (1934): 143).
This meditative stability is found in the short list (Dutt (1934): 143), and rendered in the longer list (Dutt (1934): 202) as ākārābhinirhāra.
This meditative stability is found in the long list (Dutt (1934): 202) as ekākāravyūha, but omitted in the short list (Dutt (1934): 142).
This meditative stability is found in the short list (Dutt (1934): 143), but replaced in the longer list (Dutt (1934): 202) with nirvedhikasarvabhāvatalādhikāra.
This meditative stability is found in the short list (Dutt (1934): 143), but replaced in the longer list (Dutt (1934): 202) with nirghoṣo/kṣaravimukta. At this point the short list also inserts tejovatī.
This meditative stability is found in the longer list (Dutt (1934): 202), but replaced in the short list (Dutt (1934): 143) with lakṣanupariśodhana.
This meditative stability is found in the longer list (Dutt (1934): 202), but replaced in the short list (Dutt (1934): 143) with anāvilakṣānti.
This reading is attested in the short list (Dutt (1934): 143), but replaced in the longer list (Dutt (1934): 202) with sarvākaravaropeta.
This meditative stability is found in the short list (Dutt (1934): 143), but replaced in the longer list (Dutt (1934): 203) with dhāraṇīpratipatti.
Not attested in either list.
This meditative stability is found in the longer list (Dutt (1934): 203) as sarvarodhanirodhapraśamana and followed immediately by anusārapratisāra. In the short list (Dutt (1934): 143) it appears in the form rodhanirodhapratirodha.
Attested as such in the short list (Dutt (1934): 143), after which it is followed by vidyutprabha.
Attested as such in the short list (Dutt (1934): 144) and rendered in the longer list (Dutt (1934): 203) as sarvākāraprabhākara.
Not attested in either list. The shorter list (Dutt (1934): 144) instead reads anayavinayanayavimukta.
Attested as such in the short list (Dutt (1934): 144), but rendered in the longer list (Dutt (1934): 203) as araṇasamavasaraṇa.
Not attested in either list, though rendered in the long list (Dutt (1934): 203) as anilāniketa, and in the short list (Dutt (1934): 144) as anilaniyata.
This is attested in the short list (Dutt (1934): 144) while the longer list (Dutt (1934): 203) omits the suffix gaganakalpa.
Note the different construction in Dutt (1934): 148, which reads “they lack the conviction that physical forms are empty of physical forms” (rūpaṃ rūpeṇa śūnyam).
Conze (1975): 180 follows Dutt (1934): 228 in reading the conclusion with a negative particle—“will not attain emancipation; will not come to a halt”—whereas Dutt himself acknowledges that there are other Sanskrit manuscripts without the negative particle, which would therefore interpret the final line positively, as does our Tibetan text.
Ch. 12: samādhiparivarta, ting nge ’dzin gyi le’u.
This distinctive enumeration of the ten levels is not related to the familiar set of ten bodhisattva levels, but rather is a particular set of ten stages associated with prajñāpāramitā literature. This set of ten levels charts the progress of an individual practitioner who sequentially follows the path of a śrāvaka, pratyekabuddha, and then a bodhisattva on their way to complete buddhahood. The first three levels pertain to an ordinary person preparing themselves for the path; the next four (4-7) chart the path of śrāvaka; level eight aligns with the practices of a pratyekabuddha; level nine refers to the path of bodhisattva; and finally, level ten is the attainment of buddhahood. There are a number of variations of this set of ten levels in Buddhist literature and numerous ways to interpret it, about which see Dayal (1932): 270–291; Conze (1975): 163–178; Lamotte (1988): 628-629; Nordrang Orgyan (2003): 2508; and, Sparham (2006 I): 296–297.
Scribal repetition—the words mi ’gyur ba zhig na…nges par ’byung bar (F. 138b, line 5, KPD 32: 114, lines 1–3) are repeated.
F. 138b, line 7 (KPD 32: 114, line 10) reads sbyin pa (“generosity”), but contextually tshul khrims (“ethical discipline”) would seem to be preferable.
Two distinct enumerations of the sixty aspects of buddha speech (gsung dbyangs rnam pa drug bcu) are found in Nordrang Orgyan (2003): 3572–3574. See also Jamspal et al, (2004): 156–158; and Sparham (2006 I): 132–133.
Here the Tibetan would imply Sanskrit abhijñeyaṃ, rather than the ājñeyaṃ, which is attested in Dutt.
This sentence appears to be missing in Dutt (1934): 235; but it is included in Conze (1975): 184.
See Dutt (1934): 236, line 6: na labhyate nopalabhyate; also KPD 32: 126, note 1, according to which the Peking edition includes the missing phrase: cing dmigs su med pa yang ma yin no.
Ch. 13: gaganopamaparivarta, nam mkha’ lta bu zhes bya ba’i le’u.
See Conze (1975): 186. Dutt (1934): 240, reads na nāma…nānāma—probably a misprint for na māna nānmāna.
dngos po med pa. Dutt (1934): 240, line 21, however, reads svabhāva, and this is followed by Conze (1975): 186.
Tib. re zhig. See KPD 32: 728, note 4, regarding the transposition of the particle zhig and shig in the different editions.
According to Dutt (1934): 256 and Conze (1975): 194, this remark takes the form of a rhetorical question, presaging Śāradvatīputra’s question of almost identical wording, which follows below.
On the term āratā āramitā (“far-removed”), as found in Dutt (1934): 256–257, see also Sparham (2006 I): 144. Conze (1973): 110 suggests “abstained” for ārata.
Our text reads ’grib pa med pa, implying the Sanskrit avyaya (“imperishable”). However, Dutt (1934): 258 reads rūpasya vyaya (“the perishing of physical forms”), for which reason Conze (1975): 195 and Sparham (2006 I): 145 both follow the latter interpretation.
It should be noted that Dutt (1934): 259 and Conze (1975): 195 read advaya (“non-dual”) for avyaya (“imperishable”) in every case in this and the two following paragraphs.
See glossary on the “five degrees of enlightenment.”
This reading follows the Tibetan: ma skyes pa’i chos la btags pa mi ’dod do. However, following Dutt (1934): 260, which reads na…anutpannasya dharmasya prāptimicchāmi, the sentence could be rendered as “I do not hold that there are attainments with respect to things that are non-arising.”
F.154b., line 1, inverts this phrase as stong pa nyid kyi ngo bo nyid (“the essential nature of emptiness”).
This reading follows the Tibetan: khyod chos ma skyes so/ chos ma skyes so/ zhes bya bar brjod par spobs sam. However, Dutt (1934): 261, line 14, suggests that the verb is in the third person (pratibhāti), for which reason the passage could be read as “Is it intelligible to say that things are non-arising?” Cf. Conze (1975): 196–197. The Tibetan could also be read more colloquially: “Do you dare to say that things are non-arising?”
Ch. 14: anāgamanāgamanaparivarta, ’ong ba dang ’gro ba med pa’i le’u.
See glossary entry “Pure Abodes.”
This refers to the realization of the arhats and others who have reached the finality of existence and gained release from further rebirths within cyclic existence. They are incapable of setting their minds on enlightenment and remaining in the world for the benefit of sentient beings. Even so, they may, for the remainder of their final lifetime, still focus on the intent of the Mahāyāna.
This differs from the enumeration found in The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-five Thousand Lines (Kimura II-III: 2), in that calm (śāntataḥ, zhi ba) is omitted, but the list is supplemented with the inclusion of “vacuous” and “unreliable.” On this passage, see also the commentary in Sparham (2008 II): 5–6 and 83–84.
The expression le’u bar ma here denotes the middle of the present chapter, rather than an intermediate or foregoing chapter in the text. For other instances of problematic internal cross-referencing, see above, notes n.190 and n.191.
Alternatively, “is there no labeling or designation of physical forms?”
Ch. 15. kṣāntipāramitāparivarta, bzod pa’i pha rol tu phyin pa’i le’u.
In Kimura II–III: 15, this paragraph precedes an abbreviated listing of the aspects of emptiness.
Kimura II–III: 18 adds “inspired eloquence that is concentrated” (samāhitapratibhāna). See also Conze (1975): 212.
Kimura, II–III: 35 reads Dīpavatī, as does Conze (1975): 220.
Our sūtra here refers to itself under the formal title of the Prajñāpāramitā cycle: Bhagavatīprajñāpāramitā, bcom ldan ’das ma shes rab kyi pha rol tu phyin pa.
The first six of these, extending from Caturmahārājakāyika to Paranirmitavaśavartin, designate the hierarchy of the gods within the world system of desire, whereas the twelve realms subsumed in their threefold strata under the names Mahābrahmā, Ābhāsvara, Śubhakṛtsna, and Bṛhatphala designate the hierarchy of the gods within the world system of form, attainable through the four meditative concentrations. See also glossary entries “four formless absorptions” and “Pure Abodes.”
For the last mentioned, Kimura II–III: 37 reads utpathagata, which Conze (1975): 222 interprets as “staying on a highway.”
Kimura II–III: 38 reads prajñāyante in each of the previous and following instances, although our Tibetan text differentiates between ’byung ba (“emerge”) and mchis lags (“exist, are discerned”).
Ch. 16: vikalpaparivarta, rnam par rtog pa’i le’u.
See Kimura II–III: 143.
The twelve aspects pertain to the four noble truths—suffering, the origin of suffering, the cessation of suffering and the path that lead to the cessation of suffering. The twelve aspects are specifically identified as follows: suffering is this, it can be diagnosed, it has been diagnosed; the origin of suffering is this, it can be abandoned, it has been abandoned; the cessation of suffering is this, it can be verified, it has been verified; the path leading to the cessation of suffering is this, it can be cultivated, and it has been cultivated. The three times at which the wheel of the sacred doctrine is turned denote the past, present, and future.
Again the Sanskrit expression is prajñāyante (Tib. mchis lags).
Brahmapariṣadya here stands in lieu of Brahmapurohita, whereas in Kimura II–III: 83 it replaces Brahmakāyika.
Anabhraka (sprin med) is here rendered as mi che ba.
Puṇyaprasava (bsod nams ’phel) is here rendered as chung che.
Ch. 17: anuśaṃsāparivarta, phan yon gyi le’u.
The phrase “genuinely and methodically” renders don dang tshul las or arthataś ca nayataś ca, as found in Kimura II–III: 149.
Here the Tibetan text misreads tshig for tshul.
Kimura II–III: 160 attributes this purity simply to prakṛtyasaṃkliṣṭa (“naturally unafflicted states”). See also Conze (1975): 295.
Kimura II–III: 162 instead reads dharmadhātuparigṛhītām upādāya.
Kimura II–III: 163 instead reads dvayasviśuddhi (“purity of duality”) in the nominative case, not in the instrumental, as our Tibetan text suggests. The Sanskrit could therefore suggest the following alternative reading: “the purity of duality is neither attained nor emergently realized.” See also Conze (1975): 297. From another perspective, the terms “attainment” (prāpti, thob pa) and “clear realization” (abhisamaya, mngon rtogs) may be considered the objective and subjective polarities of the dualistic dichotomy that is rejected here.
Kimura II–III: 163, line 21, reads asaṃkleśāvyavadānadharmasamatām upādāya, suggesting that duality arises “due to the sameness of affliction and purification.”
This marks the conclusion of the second section of our discouse, concerning the theoretical understanding of the aspects of the path.
At this point, the third section of the sūtra begins, concerning the theoretical understanding of omniscience as the goal. In Kimura II–III: 167, it is Subhūti who addresses Śāradvatīputra, and the final clause is missing. See also Conze (1975): 299. The definitive aggregates of the buddhas, otherwise known as the five uncontaminated aggregates (zag med phung po lnga), comprise ethical discipline, meditative stability, wisdom, liberation, and liberating gnosis. See above, 6.22.
The expression “conceptual notions based on mental images” (mtshan ma las) suggests a dualistic thought process. Kimura II–III: 168 simply reads na vikalpam āpadyate—“they do not entertain conceptual notions,” or “conceptual notions do not occur”—and makes no mention of mental images. However, a similar construction, taking the form nimittaḥ (mtshan mar), does occur in the following paragraph.
Kimura II–III: 170 reads jñātā (“cognized”), See also Conze (1975): 301. However our Tibetan text clearly reads bskyed do (“produced”).
Ch. 18: viśuddhiparivarta, rnam par dag pa’i le’u.
The amended reading here follows Kimura II–III: 172, line 17: saṅgaś cāsaṅgaś ca.
This interpretation is based on Kimura II–III: 173, which reads na sasaṅgā asaṅgā iti saṃjanīte. See also Conze (1975): 303. However, the expression is contracted in the Tibetan text to chags zhes bya bar yang dag par shes so (“they undertaand that… are with attachment”).
Tib. ngal ba’i skal pa can du ’gyur. Skt. klamatasya bhagī syāt.
Kimura II–III: 178 reads atyanta viśuddham iti dharmaṃ deśayiṣyati, which would suggest: “…will teach the sacred doctrine that [phenomena] are absolutely pure.” Cf. Conze (1975): 306.
Ch. 19: kartṛkākartṛkaparivarta, byed pa po dang byed pa po med pa’i le’u.
This marks the start of the fourth section of the sūtra, concerning the training in clear realization of all the aforementioned phenomena, meditative experiences, and attributes. While the Tibetan text reads mtha’ yas pa (“infinite”), Kimura IV: 1 reads asat (“non-existent”). Cf. Conze (1975): 312.
The Tibetan text reads gtan zad cing byang ba’i phyir (“…owing to perpetual exhaustion and refinement.”). Kimura IV: 2 has atyanta kṣayakṣīnatāṃ upādāya, which Conze (1975): 312 renders as “because all dharmas are extinguished in absolute extinction.”
Kimura IV: 2 reads cyuty upapattyanupalabdhitāṃ upādāya, and our Tibetan text has ’chi ’pho ba dmigs su med pa’i phyir.
The Tibetan reads chu ’bab pa. Kimura IV: 2 has udakaskandha, which Conze (1975): 313 renders as “mass of water.”
Kimura IV: 2 reads: nimitta (“mental images”). Cf. Conze (1975): 313: “sign.” In contrast, our text reads dngos po med pa (“non-entities”).
The Tibetan reads: gos pa (“contaminants”, “stains”). However, Kimura IV: 2 reads ākāśa (Conze (1975): 313: “space”).
The Tibetan text reads phyin ci log par rtogs pa’i phyir (“owing to incontrovertible realization”), whereas Kimura IV: 3 has virāgānupalabdhitāṃ upādāya (“owing to the non-apprehension of dispassion”). Conze (1975): 313 suggests “because its dispassion cannot be apprehended.”
The Tibetan reads kun nas ldang ba ma mchis pa (“without obsession”), whereas Kimura IV: 3 has: asthāna (Conze (1975): 313: “which takes its stand nowehere”), rather than the expected paryupasthāna.
The Tibetan reads mtshan ma dmigs su med pa (“non-apprehension of mental images”), in contrast to Kimura IV: 3, which reads: avitathatā’bhisaṃbhodhitāṃ upādāya (Conze (1975): 313: “because the non-falseness is not fully understood”).
The Tibetan reads spang du ma mchis pa (“not to be forsaken”), whereas Kimura IV: 3 reads: apramāṇa (Conze (1975): 314: “unlimited”).
The Tibetan reads chags pa med pa nyid kyi phyir (“owing to the absence of attachment”), whereas Kimura IV: 4 has ākāśasvabhāvasamatāṃ upādāya (Conze (1975): 314: “because [all dharmas] in their own-being are the same as space”).
Here the Tibetan reads dmigs su med pa nyid kyi phyir (“owing to the non-apprehension of all things”), whereas Kimura IV: 4 has sarvaniḥphalārthatāṃ upādāya (Conze (1975): 314: “because it brings forth no fruits”).
The Tibetan reads ldog pa med pa nyid kyi phyir (“owing to the absence of distinguishing counterparts”), whereas Kimura IV: 4 has ānimittatāṃ upādāya (Conze (1975): 314: “because [all dharmas] are signless”).
Here, the Tibetan reads chos thams cad dmigs su med pa nyid kyi phyir (“owing to the non-apprehension of all things”), whereas Kimura IV: 4 has mahāśūnyatā’nupalabdhitāṃ upādāya (“owing to the non-apprehension of great emptiness”).
The Tibetan reads ’dus ma byas kyi chos dmigs su med pa’i phyir (“owing to the non-apprehension of unconditioned phenomena”), whereas Kimura IV: 5 has prakṛtiśūnyatā’nupalabdhitāṃ upādāya (“owing to the non-apprehension of the emptiness of inherent existence”).
The Tibetan reads stong pa’i rnam pa dang dben pa’i rnam pa dmigs su med pa’i phyir (“owing to the non-apprehension of the aspects of emptiness and the aspect of voidness”), whereas Kimura IV: 6 has dṛṣṭikṛtānupalabdhitāṃ upādāya (Conze (1975): 316: “because no false views are apprehended”).
The Tibetan reads zhi ba’i rnam pa dmigs su med pa’i phyir (“owing to the non-apprehension of the aspects of calmness”), whereas Kimura IV: 6 has vitarkānupalabdhitāṃ upādāya (Conze (1975): 316: “because no discoursings are apprehended”).
The Tibetan reads gnod sems dang bzod pa dmigs su med pa’i phyir (“owing to the non-apprehension of malice and tolerance”), whereas Kimura IV: 7 has vyāpādānupalabdhitāṃ upādāya (Conze (1975): 316: “because no ill will is apprehended”).
The Tibetan reads chos thams cad kyis mi brdzi ba’i phyir (“owing to their uncrushability by all things”), whereas Kimura IV: 7 has sarvadharmānupalabdhitāṃ upādāya, which Conze (1975): 316 renders as “on account of the nonapprehension of all dharmas.”
Here the Tibetan reads chos thams cad kyis brdzi ba med pa’i phyir dang lam gyi rnam pa shes pa de la zhum pa med pa nyid kyi phyir (“owing to their uncrushability by all things and owing to their undauntedness with respect to the understanding of the aspects of the path”). Kimura IV: 7 has only the second phrase: mārgajñatā’ navalīnatām upādāya (also Conze (1975): 316 “on account of the uncowedness in the knowledge of all the modes of the path”).
The Tibetan reads skad thams cad du de bzhin du gsung ba’i chos nyid yin pa’i phyir (“owing to the reality divulged as such in all languages”), whereas Kimura IV: 8 has sarvabuddhabhāṣitatathtām upādāya, rendered in Conze (1975): 317, as “on account of the suchness that is taught by all the buddhas.”
Cf. Kimura IV: 8: sarvadharmasarvākārabhisaṃbodhanatām upādāya; also Conze (1975): 317.
Apte (1965): 621 also suggests the possible readings of “camphor” and “cream” for pīyuṣa.
The Tibetan reads rnam par grol ba (“emancipation”), whereas Kimura IV: 69 reads vivikta, rendered in Conze (1975): 353: as “detachment.”
The Tibetan reads ’dzin pa med pa (“non-grasping”), whereas Kimura IV: 69 has śānta (“quiescence”).
Kimura IV: 69 reads vimoca (“emancipation”); also Conze (1975): 353.
Kimura IV: 69 reads suniścita (“well determined”); also Conze (1975): 353.
The Tibetan reads zhum pa med pa’i mtshan nyid (“undauntedness”), whereas Kimura IV: 69 has supratiṣṭhita (“well established”), which Conze (1975): 353, renders as “well established.”
Kimura IV: 69 reads asaṃhārya (“non-captivation”); also Conze (1975): 353: “something to which no one else has a claim.”
The Tibetan reads sgrib pa med pa (“unobscured”), whereas Kimura IV: 69 has pratyakṣa (“directly perceived”). Cf. Conze (1975): 353: “before the eye”.
Kimura IV: 75 reads na prajñāyate, equivalent to the Tibetan ma mchis pa lags, which may also be rendered as “are unperceived.”
Ch. 20: guṇaparivarta, yon tan gyi le’u.
The term “physical forms” is omitted in the Tibetan, but found in Kimura IV: 78, which reads tad rūpan na samanupaśyāmi.
“Two thousand” (viṃśativarṣaśatika, lo nyis stong)—a remarkable hyperbole.
The krośa or “earshot” is a measurement equivalent to five hundred arm spans.
The Tibetan reads de dag sbyin pa rlom sems su byed/ sbyin pa des rlom sems su byed/ spyin pa la slom sems su byed do/ Cf. Kimura IV: 91, which has sa tena dānena manyate| tad dānaṃ manyate| dānaṃ mameti manyate.
Note the scribal repetition in F. 234a, where lines 4–5 (khyod...ma rtog shig) are repeated in lines 7–8 (khyod..ma rtog shig).
Ch. 21: pūrvīnimittaparivarta, snga ltas kyi le’u.
The expression rigs pa’i chos (“appropriate attributes”) would correspond to ucitadharma, whereas Kimura IV: 100 reads: āryasya dharmasya. It is therefore possible that the unusual expression rigs pa’i chos could be a mistranscription of ’phags pa’i chos, sublime attributes.
We have opted to translate vibhāvanā (rnam par ’jig pa) as “non-cultivation” in order to retain the contrast with bhāvanā (sgom pa) which the text implies. On the other hand, the Tibetan has a markedly less passive connotation, and could be rendered as “deconstruction,” “destruction,” “annihilation,” “elimination,” or “unraveling,” with respect to false appearances. In certain contexts the term can also imply “clear understanding” or “clear ascertainment” (resulting from the annihilation of false appearances). Cf. Kimura IV: 109; also Conze (1975): 373. Ratnākāraśānti, in his Commentary on the Transcendent Perfection in Eight Thousand Lines, also reads avibhāvitam aprahīṇam. no hīti nāprahīṇam| prahīṇam evety arthaḥ|. Here the double negative suggests a reading akin to the sense of deconstruction, etc. Thanks to Greg Seton for this observation.
This refers to the five aspects of concomitance (samprayuktaka, mtshung ldan) between mind and its mental states, which may concern (i) location or support, (ii) objective referent, (iii) sensum, (iv) time, and (v) substance. See Jamgon Kongtrul TOK Book 6, Pt. 2: 490–491. Kimura IV: 112 omits this phrase and reads simply: rāga sahatiaś cittotpādaiḥ. Cf. Conze (1975): 374: “he does not partake of thoughts connected with greed…”
Here F. 246b, line 3, simply repeats de bzhin nyid, but see Kimura IV: 112, where the full reading ananyatathatā (“unaltered real nature”) is given.
Ch. 22: bhāvanāparivarta, bsgom pa’i le’u.
The expression thugs kyi phrin las chung ba, here rendered as “mind inclined toward carefree inaction,” corresponds to Kimura: IV: 115, which reads alpotsukatāyāṃ cittaṃ. Edgerton (1953): 69, interprets this to mean “unconcerned mind,” “unworried mind,” or “indifferent mind.” In any case, it denotes the silence and stillness of the Lord Buddha during the weeks that immediately followed his attainment of buddhahood, as he considered whether to teach or not to teach.
Kimura IV: 117, line 4, here reads kadācit, “at any time.”
The Tibetan reads bdag gzugs so (“I identify with physical forms”). Cf. Kimura IV: 118, mama rūpaṃ, which Conze (1975): 377 renders as “mine is form.”
Here the Tibetan reads bdag gi sbyin pa’i pha rol tu phyin pa’o (“I possess the transcendent perfection of generosity”). Cf. Kimura IV: 118, ahaṃ dānapatir.
Kimura IV: 125, line 25, reads nānātvasaṃjñānāṃ caranto nānātvopalabdhyā. However, Conze (1975): 379 interprets this as nānātmasaṃjñānāṃ caranto nānātmopalabdhyā, “coursing in the notion of not-self and the non-apprehension of not-self.”
Ch. 23: aparigrahāvivāsāpariccheda, yongs su gzung ba med pa dang spang ba med pa’i le’u.
The expression appears to be omitted in Kimura IV: 183.
The authentic provision of merit (puṇyasambhāra, bsod nams kyi tshogs) and the authentic provision of gnosis (jñānasambhāra, ye shes kyi tshogs) are accumulated by bodhisattvas on the path to omniscience, and their fulfilment constitutes the fruition of the entire path according to the Great Vehicle, resulting in the maturation of the buddha body of form and the buddha body of reality respectively.
The missing text supplied in this and the following paragraphs can be found in Kimura IV: 186–187.
The Sanskrit in this and the following refrains reads bahu bhagava bahu sugata.
See Kimura IV: 169, which reads ekam api divasaṃ.
Ch. 24: ādiprasthānaparivarta, dang po ’jug pa’i le’u.
Kimura IV: 192 reads parijaya kartavyaḥ, which Conze (1975): 424, renders as “make a complete conquest of.”
On the sixty-four crafts (comprising the thirty designated arts, the eighteen requisites of musical performance, the seven harmonious tones of the musical scale, and the nine dramatic moods) and the eighteen great fields of knowledge, please see respective glossary entries. On all these and related matters, see Jamgon Kongtrul TOK Book 6, Pt.1: 311–315.
This paragraph marks the end of the fourth section of the sūtra concerning training in the clear realization of all phenomena and attributes.
At this point the sūtra moves into its fifth section, concering the culminating training in the paths of engagement, insight, and cultivation.
On these eight unfavorable conditions for Buddhist practice, see respective glossary entry.
These refer to the sixty-two false views, see glossary entry.
Ch. 25: upāyakauśalyaparivarta, thabs la mkhas pa’i le’u.
Kimura V: 36–37 indicates that this is the subject of the sentence, despite the genitive particle in the Tibetan (de dag gi), placing them in apposition to those who develop enlightened mind.
Our Tibetan text reads ci nas sems su mi ’gyur zhing sems las gzhan du spyod par mi ’gyur ba (“they do not engage with mind and do not engage with anything other than mind”). The Tibetan spyod pa is implied in the first clause though not explicitly stated. The Sanskrit is clearer (Kimura V: 37: yathā tac cittam anyatra cittena caren nānyatra cittena) in that the verb caren covers both clauses. It has been alternatively suggested, based on a reading of the Sanskrit, that the dedication of merit should be made with “the mind (cittam) coursing from one mind to another mind.”
These words are omitted in our text, and supplied from Kimura V: 49, lines 21–23.
This paragraph is not found in Kimura V: 43, but see Conze (1975): 465.
This and the following two paragraphs are not found in Kimura V: 44, but see Conze (1975): 466.
Ch. 26: anumodanaparivarta, rjes su yi rang ba’i le’u.
In the paragraphs that follow there are considerable discrepancies between our text and the readings in Kimura V: 83ff.
Kimura V: 84 reads dānabuddhir eva bhavati parityāgabuddhir eva bhavati.
See the extensive list of such services and offerings in Kimura V: 87, lines 5–9.
F. 204b, line 5, reads bdag gis, as does the dpe bsdur ma edition, vol, 32, p. 506, line 15, whereas the genitive bdag gi would be preferable.
Ch. 27: samudāgamaparivarta, yongs su bsdu ba’i le’u.
This chapter marks the start of the sixth section of the sūtra, concerning training in serial clear realization with respect to the six transcendent perfections and the six recollections.
This phrase is omitted in our text, but Kimura VI–VIII: 30 reads daśasu dikṣu. Cf. also Conze (1975): 565.
These conventional disciplines would include the many vows adopted by fully ordained monks, the novitiate, and the laity.
Kimura VI–VIII: 31 reads vijñaptiśīla, which would imply ethical discipline pertaining to mind or consciousness.
Our text (F. 316a, line 3) has the oblique particle la, whereas Kimura VI–VIII: 35, line 22, establishes a simple genitive relationship between “words” and “tathāgatas.”
F. 316a, lines 6 and 7; also F. 316b, line 1, read ting nge ’dzin kyi pha rol tu phyin pa, in lieu of bsam gtan gyi pha rol tu phyin pa.
That is to say, those bodhisattvas will experience all the aforementioned meditative stabilities while maintaining their physical, meditative posture.
This paragraph marks the start of the seventh section of the sūtra, concerning instantaneous clear realization.
F. 324b, line 2, reads “say” (smra bar gyur to), whereas most other editions read “reproach” (smad par gyur to). See dpe bsdur ma, vol. 32, p. 553, note 6.
Ch. 28: vilakṣaṇaparivarta, mtshan nyid mi ’dra ba’i le’u.
This and the preceding two paragraphs are not found in Kimura VI–VIII, but see Conze (1975): 586.
See above, 2.33, and the notes concerning the discrepancy in this enumeration of the eighty minor marks. Cf. also Conze (1975): 586–587.
These are the basic forty-two vocalic and consonantal of the Sanskrit language, on the phonetic pronunciation and written representation of which, see Jamgon Kongtrul’s exposition in TOK Book 6, Pt. 1: 108–112.
This interpretation follows the Zhol edition (see KPD 32: 574, note 3), which reads yi ge dang yi ge med pa la ma gtogs pa’i chos gang yang med do. By contrast, F. 333b, line 5, suggests that “there is no doctrine unrealized (ma rtogs) in terms of syllables and the absence of syllables.” Cf. Kimura VI–VIII: 67–68; also Conze (1975): 587.
On the gradation of these fetters, which are respectively associated with the world systems of desire, form, and formlessness, see also above, 11.7 and notes 213, 214, and 302.
Cf. Conze (1975): 594.
Ch. 29: dharmadānaparivarta, chos kyi sbyin pa’i le’u.
See Kimura VI–VIII: 80, line 13. The Tibetan shin tu gsong ldong could also be interpreted to mean “utterly perforated.” Cf. Conze (1975): 594, “full of holes.”
This interpretation accords with the Tibetan text, which reads ’phags pa’i bden pa rnam pa gnyis las rnam par grol ba/ ’phags pa’i bden pa rnam pa gnyis ma yin par. Kimura VI–VIII: 82 has dvayato vinirmuktam āryasatyaṃ, advayato vinirmuktam āryasatyaṃ. Cf. Conze (1975): 595. As an alternative, the passage could read: “These [last two] noble truths are liberated from duality. These [first two] noble truths are not dualistic.”
Cf. Conze (1975): 595.
F. 349b, line 2, reads sangs rgyas kyi tshul.
Ch. 30: svabhāvaparivarta, rang bzhin gyi le’u.
At this point our text reverts to a passage, which the recast Sanskrit manuscript (edited in Kimura) would place in the fourth section of the sūtra, concerning the training in clear realization. The reason for its inclusion here is that it elaborates on the nature of irreversible bodhisattvas.
Kimura IV: 141 reads yat kiñcit pralāpī bhavati.
The Tibetan text (F. 352a, line 1) clearly reads “have not turned away from” (las phyir mi ldog pa) in this and the following refrains, whereas Kimura IV: 142 suggests the opposite: “have turned away from” (vinivṛttah). See also Conze (1975): 388, whose interpretation concurs with Kimura. The context (Kimura IV: 142) is the establishing of the branches of penetration (nirvedhaṅga, nges ’byed yan lag) associated with the path of preparation (prayogamārga, sbyor lam), which, from the practitioner’s perspective, connects the path of provisions with the path of insight.
These three modes of excellent physical conduct, four modes of excellent verbal conduct, and three modes of excellent mental conduct collectively constitute the ten virtuous actions, on which see above, 27.7.
Kimura IV: 155, line 9, reads nirodhasamāpattiphala.
The parallel Sanskrit passage (Kimura IV: 156, line 30) clearly indicates Vajrapāṇi rather than the vajra family (vajrakula). More specifically, the Sanskrit refererence is to the “five families of Vajrapāṇi” (pañcavajrapāṇikulāni), not the five hundred families. It has been suggested that the term “five hundred” (lnga brgya) may derive from a corrupt interpretation of the word satata that immediately follows.
This reference to the three dhāraṇīs is missing in Kimura IV: 162, but see Conze (1975): 403. The first of these, the Akṣayakaraṇḍadhāraṇī (mi zad pa’i za ma tog gi gzungs) and its benefits are discussed in a long passage comprising chapters 3 and 4 of The Questions of Nāga King Sāgara (1) (Sāgaranāgarājaparipṛcchā, Toh 153), from 3.8 to 4.53, with the actual Sanskrit syllables of the dhāraṇī on 4.11. Another interpretation of its inexhaustible applications in terms of all phenomena is found in The Teaching on the Great Compassion of the Tathāgata (Tathāgatamahākaruṇānirdeśasūtra, Toh 147), at 2.545–2.553. The corresponding meditative stability is numbered twenty-nine in the list presented above, 12.12. The second has the full title Sarvadharmasamavasaraṇasāgaramudrā (chos thams cad yang dag par ’du ba rgya mtsho’i phyag rgya). It comprises the forty-three arapacana syllables or letters, embracing all nuances of the sacred doctrine, which are explained individually in The Teaching on the Great Compassion of the Tathāgata, at 2.558–2.561. The corresponding meditative stability is numbered twenty-one in the aforementioned list. The third is the Padmavyūhādhāraṇī (padma bkod pa’i gzungs). We have not yet located the actual Sanskrit syllables of this dhāraṇī in the Kangyur, but its purport in highlighting the diversity of the twelve branches of the scriptures and so forth is described in The Teaching on the Great Compassion of the Tathāgata, at 2.562–2.564. All three dhāraṇīs are listed in the Mahāvyutpatti (nos. 750, 752, and 753). For an analysis of the relationship between the Mahāvyutpatti entries and the relevant sūtra sources, especially The Teaching on the Great Compassion of the Tathāgata and The Jewel Cloud (Ratnameghasūtra, Toh 231), see Pagel (2007), pp. 151–91.
Ch. 31: avaivartikaparivarta, phyir mi ldog pa’i le’u.
This chapter marks the final section of the sūtra, concerning the fruitional attributes of buddha body.
The Tibetan reads ’di nas sam/ ’dis sam/ ’di zhes. Note the dissimilar Sanskrit expression ityanta ita va neyanta iti va, in Kimura VI–VIII: 119, lines 29–30.
It is probable that the expression chos drug denotes the distinctive attributes of the six transcendent perfections, which are mentioned in this and the following paragraphs, although the term is not found in Kimura or Conze.
F. 371b, line 6, reads bzhon pa, whereas the Peking edition of the Kangyur reads stan, mats.
That is to say, in the community of bodhisattvas.
See Kimura VI–VIII: 133, line 30, which reads śukleṣu dharmeṣu sthitvā.
The final three paragraphs of this chapter are not found in Kimura (nor in Conze’s translation), but they are reminiscent of earlier references in the text to the sixfold trembling of the earth, which conclude sections of dialogue (see 23.44 and 28.19). In the context of The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Eight Thousand Lines, this trembling of the earth is said to occur during the teaching of the chapter on tathatā (de bzhin nyid).
The conclusion to the Kimura edition, VI–VIII: 179, mentions also the contributions of Maitreya, Ānanda, and Śakra.
Ch. 32: abhibodhanaparivarta, mngon par byang chub pa’i le’u.
The conclusion to the sūtra highlights the admonishments concerning its future transmission and the respect it should be awarded. The corresponding text in the recast Sanskrit manuscript is found in Kimura II–III, but for this initial linking paragraph which is missing in Kimura II–III: 150 and in Conze (1975): 288.
The Tibetan text reads btso bar ’gyur ro, “they will roast,” whereas Kimura II–III: 151, has prakṣepsyante (“they will be cast into”).
In Kimura II-III: 151 (also Conze (1975): 289), words akin to these are attributed to Śāradvatiputra. See glossary entry “five inexpiable crimes.”
Kimura II–III: 151–152 has the interjection Śāradvatiputra, instead of Ānanda, throughout this and the following paragraphs.
Kimura II–III: 152 attributes these lines to Lord Buddha.
Kimura II–III: 153 suggests that words akin to these are spoken by Śāradvatiputra.
These lines are not found in Kimura II–III: 153, or in Conze (1975): 291.
This linking paragraph is not found in Kimura II–III: 91, or in Conze (1975): 251.
Kimura II–III: 91 attributes this and the following paragraphs to Śakra, rather than to Ānanda. The eleven branches of the scriptures listed here, from sūtras to established instructions, of course exclude the twelfth branch, comprising the most extensive discourses (vaipulya, shin tu rgyas pa’i sde) of the Great Vehicle. Here specifically, the Sanskrit suggests an equality of merit whereas the Tibetan clearly emphasizes the superiority of the merit accrued by those who retain and above all set forth the transcendent perfection of wisdom in writing.
Kimura II–III: 100 has words akin to these spoken by Śakra in this and the following paragraphs.
This linking passage is not found in Kimura II–III 115, or Conze (1975): 265.
This and the following paragraph appear to be a repetition of lines F. 389b6–390a4, as indicated in the immediately preceding two notes. Cf. Kimura II–III 115; also Conze (1975): 265.
This linking paragraph appears to be missing in Kimura II–III: 119 and Conze (1975): 267.
Kimura II–III: 121 indicates that words akin to these are uttered by Subhūti rather than Lord Buddha.
This and the following paragraphs, which herald the entrustment, appear to be unique to this text, although there are some parallels to be found in Kimura V: 69–74 (cf. Conze (1975): 482–486).
Ch. 33: nigamanaparivarta, mjug sdud kyi le’u.
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