Multitude of Constituents
Toh 297
Degé Kangyur, vol. 71 (mdo sde, sha), folios 297.a–301.b
Imprint
Translated by the Āli Kāli Translation Group under the patronage and supervision of 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha
First published 2023
Current version v 1.1.1 (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
In this short discourse, also found in a similar form in the Pali canon, the Buddha gives a teaching to Ānanda in which he confirms the suggestion that all negative experiences arise from being foolish, not from being learned, and goes on to summarize for Ānanda what distinguishes a learned person from a foolish one. The learned person, he says, is learned in the constituents, in the sense fields, in dependent origination, and in knowing what is possible and impossible. He then elaborates briefly on each.
Acknowledgements
Translated from Tibetan by the Āli Kāli Translation Group, consisting of Zsuzsa Majer in collaboration with Karma Dorje (Rabjampa), with assistance from William K. Dewey. Edited and introduced by George FitzHerbert and finalized by members of the 84000 editorial team.
The translation was completed under the patronage and supervision of 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha.
Introduction
Multitude of Constituents1 is a short discourse found in similar but not identical form in the Pali canon (Bahudhātukasutta, MN 115), in which the Buddha confirms Ānanda’s suggestion that all danger and negative experiences arise from a lack of education, childishness, or foolishness (Tib. byis pa, Skt./Pali bāla), and not from being skilled, or learned (Tib. mkhas pa, Skt./Pali paṇḍita).
The Buddha encourages Ānanda to develop the qualities of the learned and to relinquish those of the foolish. He enumerates these qualities in four categories: being learned in the constituents; being learned in the sense fields; being learned in dependent origination; and being learned in what is possible and impossible. Each of these four categories is then elaborated in turn.
In the section on the “constituents,” from which the sūtra takes its name, the term constituent has been chosen to translate the multivalent Sanskrit/Pali term dhātu, and its Tibetan equivalent khams,2 sometimes also translated into English as “element” or “domain.” In the context of this discourse, the term is used in a manner similar to dharma (Tib. chos) to refer to the many facets of experience and the world that is experienced. These constituents together constitute all experience, from the physical world to sensory and mental experience; to areas such as attitude, affect, and right and wrong; as well as to temporality (past, present, and future) and the three realms (Tib. khams gsum, Skt. tridhātu), which together make up the whole of saṃsāra. In total, sixty-two constituents are enumerated in this discourse. They are presented in an order that reflects the pedagogical orientation of the text, with the most numerous category listed first (the eighteen constituents of the senses), followed by multiple further categories of six, four, three, and finally two.
In the second and third sections, the twelve sense fields and the twelve links of dependent origination are listed respectively.
The fourth section, on knowing what is possible and impossible, or what is tenable and untenable, consists of twelve pairs of contrasting hypotheticals presented as examples, of which only the first eight have parallels in the Pali canon version of the discourse. Knowing what is possible and what is impossible is typically considered the first of the “ten powers” of a buddha, though no allusion is made to this in the sūtra itself.
The Pali canon version of the discourse, the Bahudhātukasutta (MN 115), has a slightly different framing narrative, in places presents items in a different order, and is somewhat shorter than the version contained in the Tibetan Kangyur. The core structure and contents of the discourse, however, are shared. The Pali version has been translated into English (Bhikkhu Sujato 2018) and several other modern languages.3
No extant Sanskrit version of the text has been identified. The Sanskrit title given in the Degé and Lithang Kangyurs, Dhātubahutakasūtra, appears to be a back-translation from the Tibetan khams mang po pa.4 Kangyurs of the Themphangma line, such as the Stok Palace Kangyur, give the preferable Sanskrit form Bahudhātukasūtra, which more closely matches the Pali title and has been adopted here.5
A Chinese translation of the discourse was made in the late fourth century ᴄᴇ by Gautama Saṅghadeva (Duo jie jing 多界經, Taishō 26-181)6 as part of the translation of the Madhyamāgama. Another translation, using the Sanskrit title Bahudhātukasūtra, was made by Faxian in 998 (Fo shuo si pin famen jing 佛說四品法門經, Taishō 776).7
The text carries no colophon in most Tibetan Kangyurs of the Tshalpa and Themphangma lineages.8 However, two Kangyurs of the independent or mixed group, the Phukdrak Kangyur and the Namgyal Kangyur, include a colophon stating that it was translated and finalized by the Indian preceptor Surendrabodhi and the senior editor-translator Bandé Yeshé Dé.9 This indicates a translation made during the height of the Tibetan imperial patronage of Buddhism in the late eighth to the early ninth century ᴄᴇ. That it was indeed translated during the “early diffusion” (snga dar) is confirmed by the fact that it appears in the early ninth-century Denkarma imperial catalog, where it is listed among Hīnayāna sūtras (Tib. theg pa chung ngu’i mdo).10
The sūtra was also reproduced in full by Śamathadeva in his commentary to the Abhidharmakośa, the Abhidharmakośaṭīkopāyikā, which is no longer extant in Sanskrit. The Tibetan translation of this text (chos mngon pa’i mdzod kyi ’grel bshad nye bar mkho ba, Toh 4094), believed to date from the eleventh century,11 includes a parallel alternative translation of the discourse in full.12 This later translation from Sanskrit closely matches the Kangyur version and was likely made with reference to the older translation, but in places presents clarifications. No other canonical commentaries on the text in Tibetan have been identified.
The Tibetan text concludes with a series of alternative titles for the discourse, namely “The Four Parts,” “The Mirror of the Dharma,” and “The Great Drum of Deathlessness.”
This English translation was made from the Tibetan as found in the Degé Kangyur, in consultation with the variant readings recorded in the Comparative Edition (dpe bsdur ma) and the Stok Palace Kangyur. Significant divergences from the Pali version, and from the Tibetan version of the discourse found in Toh 4094, have been observed in the notes.
Text Body
Multitude of Constituents
The Translation
Homage to Mañjuśrī Kumārabhūta.
Thus did I hear at one time. The Blessed One was staying in Śrāvastī, in Jeta’s Grove, Anāthapiṇḍada’s Park. At that time, Venerable Ānanda withdrew into seclusion. Once he was settled in meditation, the following thought arose in his mind: “Whatever dangers arise, all of them arise from foolishness, not from being learned. Whatever calamity,13 whatever harm, contagious illness, or conflict arises, all of them arise from foolishness, not from being learned.”14
In the afternoon, Venerable Ānanda rose from his meditation and went to where the Blessed One was. He bowed his head to the feet of the Blessed One, and then sat down to one side. Once seated to one side, Venerable Ānanda said to the Blessed One, “Honorable One, today I went into seclusion, and while settled in meditation, the following thought came to my mind: ‘Whatever dangers arise, all of them arise from foolishness, not from being learned. Whatever calamity, whatever harm, contagious illness, or conflict arises, all of them arise from foolishness, not from being learned.’ ” [F.297.b]
“Ānanda, it is thus! It is thus! Whatever dangers arise, all of them arise from foolishness, not from being learned. Whatever calamity, whatever harm, contagious illness, or conflict arises, all of them arise from foolishness, not from being learned.15 Ānanda, consider this analogy: if a house made of dried reeds or a house made of hay, or a pile of dry straw, is set on fire, it will indeed be burnt.16 In the same way, whatever dangers arise, all of them arise from foolishness, not from being learned. Whatever calamity, whatever harm, contagious illness, or conflict arises, all of them arise from foolishness, not from being learned.
“Ānanda, in the past, whatever dangers arose, all of them arose from foolishness, not from being learned. Whatever calamity, whatever harm, contagious illness, or conflict arose, all of them arose from foolishness, not from being learned. Ānanda, in the future, whatever dangers may arise, all of them will arise from foolishness, not from being learned. Whatever calamity, whatever harm, contagious illness, or conflict may arise, all of them will arise from foolishness, not from being learned.
“Ānanda, in this way, in the past, in the future, and in the present, those who encounter danger are the foolish, and those who are free of danger are the learned. Those with calamity are the foolish, and those without calamity are the learned. Those with harm are the foolish, and those without harm are the learned. Those with contagious illness are the foolish, and those without contagious illness are the learned. Those with conflict are the foolish, [F.298.a] and those without conflict are the learned. Ānanda, you should know that danger, as well as calamity, harm, contagious illness, and conflict, are from foolishness, they are not from being learned.
“So, Ānanda, you should understand the qualities of the foolish and the qualities of the learned, and having understood the qualities of the foolish and the qualities of the learned, you should abandon the qualities of the foolish, and adopt the qualities of the learned. Ānanda, you should train in this way.”
“Honorable One, how are the foolish classified as ‘foolish’?”
“Ānanda, the foolish are not learned in the constituents, are not learned in the sense fields, are not learned in dependent origination, and are not learned in what is possible and impossible. Ānanda, in that way, the foolish may be classified as ‘foolish.’ ”
“Honorable One, how are the learned classified as ‘learned’?”
“Ānanda, the learned are learned in the constituents, are learned in the sense fields, are learned in dependent origination, and are learned in what is possible and impossible. Ānanda, in that way, the learned may be classified as ‘learned.’ ”
“Venerable One, how is it that the learned are learned in the constituents?”
“Ānanda, the learned know and see the eighteen constituents correctly just as they are—the constituent of the eye, the constituent of form, and the constituent of visual consciousness; the constituent of the ear, the constituent of sound, and the constituent of auditory consciousness; the constituent of the nose, the constituent of smell, and the constituent of olfactory consciousness; the constituent of the tongue, the constituent of taste, and the constituent of gustatory consciousness; the constituent of the body, the constituent of touch, and the constituent of tactile consciousness; and the constituent of the intellect, the constituent of mental phenomena, and the constituent of mental consciousness. [F.298.b] Ānanda, in this way they know and see the eighteen constituents correctly, just as they are.
“Moreover, they know and see these six constituents correctly, just as they are—the constituent of earth, the constituent of water, the constituent of fire, the constituent of wind, the constituent of space, and the constituent of consciousness. In this way, they know and see these six constituents correctly, just as they are.
“Moreover, they know and see these six constituents correctly, just as they are—the constituent of desire, the constituent of malice, the constituent of hostility, the constituent of renunciation, the constituent of the absence of malice, and the constituent of the absence of hostility.17 In this way, they know and see the six constituents correctly, just as they are.
“Moreover, they know and see these six constituents correctly, just as they are—the constituent of pleasure, the constituent of pain, the constituent of happiness, the constituent of sadness, the constituent of equanimity, and the constituent of ignorance. In this way, they know and see the six constituents correctly, just as they are.
“Moreover, they know and see these four constituents correctly, just as they are—the constituent of sensation, the constituent of perception, the constituent of formation, and the constituent of consciousness.
“Moreover, they know and see these three constituents correctly, just as they are—the constituent of desire, the constituent of form, and the constituent of formlessness.18
“Moreover,19 they know and see these three constituents correctly, just as they are—the constituent of form, the constituent of formlessness, and the constituent of cessation.
“Moreover, they know and see these three constituents correctly, just as they are—the constituent of the past, the constituent of the future, and the constituent of the present.
“Moreover, they know and see these three constituents correctly, just as they are—the constituent of the inferior, the constituent of the intermediate, [F.299.a] and the constituent of the superior.
“Moreover, they know and see these three constituents correctly, just as they are—the constituent of the virtuous, the constituent of the nonvirtuous, and the constituent of the neutral.
“Moreover, they know and see these three constituents correctly, just as they are—the constituent of learning, the constituent of no learning, and the constituent of neither learning nor no learning.
“Moreover, they know and see these two constituents correctly, just as they are—the constituent of the contaminated, and the constituent of the uncontaminated.
“Moreover, they know and see these two constituents correctly, just as they are—the constituent of the conditioned, and the constituent of the unconditioned.
“Ānanda, it is in this way that the learned are learned in the constituents.”
“Honorable One, how is it that the learned are learned in sense fields?”
“Ānanda, the learned know and see the twelve sense fields correctly, just as they are—the sense field of the eye and the sense field of sight; the sense field of the ear and the sense field of sound; the sense field of the nose and the sense field of odor; the sense field of the tongue and the sense field of taste; the sense field of the body and the sense field of touch; the sense field of the mind and the sense field of mental phenomena. Ānanda, it is in this way that the learned are learned in the sense fields.”
“Honorable One, how is it that the learned are learned in dependent origination?”
“Ānanda, the learned know and see dependent origination correctly, just as it is, in forward and reverse order, in this way:
“When this is present, this will arise, and when this arises, this will occur. In this way, through the condition of ignorance, there is formation; through the condition of formation, there is consciousness; through the condition of consciousness, there is name and form; through the condition of name and form, there are the six sense fields; through the condition of the six sense fields, there is contact; through the condition of contact, there is sensation; through the condition of sensation, there is craving; [F.299.b] through the condition of craving, there is grasping; through the condition of grasping, there is becoming; through the condition of becoming, there is birth; through the condition of birth, there is old age and death, sorrow, lamentation, suffering, unhappiness, and disturbance— this mass of nothing but suffering.
“And so, too, when this is not present, this will not arise, and with the cessation of this, this will cease. In this way, through the cessation of ignorance, formation ceases; through the cessation of formation, consciousness ceases; through the cessation of consciousness, name and form cease; through the cessation of name and form, the six sense fields cease; through the cessation of the six sense fields, contact ceases; through the cessation of contact, sensation ceases; through the cessation of sensation, craving ceases; through the cessation of craving, grasping ceases; through the cessation of grasping, becoming ceases; through the cessation of becoming, birth ceases; through the cessation of birth, old age and death, sorrow, lamentation, suffering, unhappiness, and disturbance—this mass of nothing but suffering—ceases.”.
“Ānanda, it is in this way that the learned are learned in dependent origination.”
“Honorable One, how is it that the learned are learned in what is possible and impossible?”
“Ānanda, the learned know and see correctly, just as it is, that what is possible is possible, and what is impossible is impossible.
“Ānanda, this is impossible and does not happen: that the ripening of any negative behavior of the body, or any negative behavior of the speech or mind, will produce things that are desirable, pleasant, joyful, or attractive. This is impossible. This is possible: that the ripening of any negative behavior of the body, or any negative behavior of the speech or mind, will produce things that are undesirable, unpleasant, unjoyful, and unattractive. This is possible.
“Ānanda, this is impossible and does not happen: that the ripening of any positive behavior of the body, or any positive behavior of the speech or mind, will produce things that are undesirable, unpleasant, unjoyful, and unattractive. [F.300.a] This is impossible. This is possible: that the ripening of any positive behavior of the body, or any positive behavior of the speech or mind, will produce things that are desirable, pleasant, joyful, and attractive. This is possible.
“It is impossible and does not happen that having engaged in negative behavior of the body, or having engaged in negative behavior of the speech or mind, that by these causes and conditions, after the body has been destroyed, one will be reborn among the gods of the joyful higher realms. This is impossible. It is possible that having engaged in negative behavior of the body, or having engaged in negative behavior of the speech or mind, that by these causes and conditions, after death, when the body has been destroyed, one will be reborn among the hell beings who have fallen into the lower states of rebirth. This is possible.
“It is impossible and does not happen that having engaged in positive behavior of the body, or having engaged in positive behavior of the speech or mind, that by these causes and conditions, after death, when the body has been destroyed, one will be reborn among the hell beings who have fallen into the lower states of rebirth. This is impossible. It is possible that having engaged in positive behavior of the body, or having engaged in positive behavior of the speech or mind, that by these causes and conditions, when the body has been destroyed, one will be reborn among the gods of the joyful higher realms. This is possible.
“It is impossible and does not happen that two perfect and complete buddhas appear simultaneously in a world. This is impossible. For one to appear is possible.
“It is impossible and does not happen that two universal monarchs [F.300.b] appear simultaneously in a world. This is impossible. For one to appear is possible.
“It is impossible and does not happen that a woman exercises the sovereignty of a universal monarch, or Śakra himself, or Brahmā himself, or Māra himself, or reaches buddhahood in unsurpassed and perfectly complete awakening. This is impossible. For a man this is possible.
“It is impossible and does not happen that a person who perfectly sees the truth intentionally kills their father, their mother, or an arhat, or causes a schism in the saṅgha, or draws blood from the body of a tathāgata out of malice. This is impossible. This is possible for ordinary people.
“It is impossible and does not happen20 that a person who perfectly sees the truth intentionally kills a living creature, and having abandoned the precepts becomes degenerate, and insteads seek outsiders as worthy recipients of offerings, views outsiders as the teacher, believes in purification through auspicious signs and ceremonies,21 considers knowledgeable ascetics and brahmins to be those who know what is to be known and who see what is to be seen, adopts the views and ideas of other ascetics and brahmins, and experiences an eighth existence.22 This is impossible. This is possible for ordinary people.
“It is impossible and does not happen that someone whose mind is thoroughly afflicted, whose wisdom has been weakened, who has turned toward degeneration, who is not beyond suffering, and who has not abandoned the five obscurations could become thoroughly settled in the four applications of mindfulness. This is impossible. It is possible that someone whose mind is thoroughly afflicted, whose wisdom has been weakened, who has turned toward degeneration, who is not beyond suffering, [F.301.a] but who has abandoned the five obscurations, could become thoroughly settled in the four applications of mindfulness. This is possible.
“It is impossible and does not happen that someone whose mind is thoroughly afflicted, whose wisdom has been weakened, who has turned toward degeneration, who is not beyond suffering, and who has not abandoned the five obscurations could, by thoroughly settling their mind in the four applications of mindfulness, cultivate the seven branches of awakening. This is impossible. It is possible that one whose mind is thoroughly afflicted, whose wisdom has been weakened, who has turned toward degeneration, and who is not beyond suffering, but who has abandoned the five obscurations, could thoroughly settle their mind in the four applications of mindfulness and cultivate the seven branches of awakening. This is possible.
“It is impossible and does not happen that someone whose mind is thoroughly afflicted, whose wisdom has been weakened, who has turned toward degeneration, who is not beyond suffering, and who has not abandoned the five obscurations could, by thoroughly settling in the four applications of mindfulness and cultivating the seven branches of awakening, realize individual awakening and reach buddhahood in unsurpassed and perfectly complete awakening. This is impossible. It is possible that one whose mind is thoroughly afflicted, whose wisdom has been weakened, who has turned toward degeneration, and who is not beyond suffering, but who has abandoned the five obscurations could, by thoroughly settling in the four applications of mindfulness and cultivating the seven branches of awakening, realize individual awakening and reach buddhahood in unsurpassed and perfectly complete awakening. This is possible.
“Ānanda, it is in this way that the learned are learned in what is possible and impossible.”
“Honorable One, what is the title of this Dharma discourse? How should it be remembered?”
“Ānanda, remember this Dharma discourse as The Four Parts, [F.301.b] or as The Mirror of the Dharma, or as The Great Drum of Deathlessness, or as Many Constituents. Therefore, ‘Many Constituents’ is the simple designation of this Dharma discourse.”
This concludes The Sūtra “Multitude of Constituents”.
Notes
Bibliography
Source Text
khams mang po pa’i mdo (Dhātubahutakasūtra). Toh 297, Degé Kangyur vol. 71 (mdo sde, sha), folios 297.a.–301.b.
khams mang po pa’i mdo. Bka’ ’gyur (dpe bsdur ma) [Comparative Edition of the Kangyur], krung go’i bod rig pa zhib ’jug ste gnas kyi bka’ bstan dpe sdur khang (The Tibetan Tripitaka Collation Bureau of the China Tibetology Research Center). 108 volumes. Beijing: krung go’i bod rig pa dpe skrun khang (China Tibetology Publishing House), 2006–9, vol. 71, pp. 802–13.
khams mang po pa’i mdo (Bahudhātukasūtra). Stok Palace Kangyur vol. 74 (mdo sde, ’a), folios 145.b–152.b.
Olan iǰaγur-un sudur. Mongolian Kanjur vol. 87, folios 382.a–388.a. Edited by Lokesh Chandra. Śata-piṭaka Series 101–208. New Delhi: Sharada Rani, 1973–79.
Śamathadeva. chos mngon pa’i mdzod kyi ’grel bshad nye bar mkho ba (Abhidharmakośaṭīkopāyikā). Toh 4094, Degé Tengyur vol. 146 (mngon pa, ju), folios 1.b–278.a.
Tibetan Language References
Denkarma (pho brang stod thang ldan dkar gyi chos kyi ’gyur ro cog gi dkar chag). Toh 4364, Degé Tengyur vol. 206 (sna tshogs, jo), folios 294.b–310.a.
Western Language References
Bhikkhu Sujato, trans. Many Elements (Bahudhātukasutta, MN 115). Sutta Central, 2018.
Herrmann-Pfandt, Adelheid. Die lHan kar ma: ein früher Katalog der ins Tibetische übersetzten buddhistischen Texte. Vienna: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 2008.
Ligeti, Louis. Catalogue de Kanǰur Mongol Imprimé. Vol. 1, Catalogue. Bibliotheca Orientalis Hungarica III. Budapest: Société Kőrösi Csoma, 1942.
Skilling, Peter. Notes on the Kanjur Translation Project, 2009.
Skilling, Peter. “Conjured Buddhas from the Arthavargīya to Nāgārjuna.” In Archaeologies of the Written: Indian, Tibetan and Buddhist Studies in Honour of Cristina Scherrer-Schaub, edited by Vincent Tournier, Vincent Eltschinger, and Marta Sernesi, 711–52. Series Minor LXXXIX. Napoli: Università degli studi di Napoli, 2020.
Ui, Hakuju, Munetada Suzuki, Yenshō Kanakura, and Tōkan Tada, eds. A Complete Catalogue of the Tibetan Buddhist Canons: Bkaḥ-ḥgyur and Bstan-ḥgyur. Sendai: Tōhoku Imperial University, 1934.
Glossary
Types of attestation for names and terms of the corresponding source language
Attested in source text
This term is attested in a manuscript used as a source for this translation.
Attested in other text
This term is attested in other manuscripts with a parallel or similar context.
Attested in dictionary
This term is attested in dictionaries matching Tibetan to the corresponding language.
Approximate attestation
The attestation of this name is approximate. It is based on other names where the relationship between the Tibetan and source language is attested in dictionaries or other manuscripts.
Reconstruction from Tibetan phonetic rendering
This term is a reconstruction based on the Tibetan phonetic rendering of the term.
Reconstruction from Tibetan semantic rendering
This term is a reconstruction based on the semantics of the Tibetan translation.
Source unspecified
This term has been supplied from an unspecified source, which most often is a widely trusted dictionary.
arhat
- dgra bcom pa
- དགྲ་བཅོམ་པ།
- arhat
auspicious thread
- dge mtshan dang bkra shis
- དགེ་མཚན་དང་བཀྲ་ཤིས།
- kautukamaṅgala AD
Bandé Yeshé Dé
- ye shes sde
- ཡེ་ཤེས་སྡེ།
- —
constituent
- khams
- ཁམས།
- dhātu
constituent of learning
- slob pa’i khams
- སློབ་པའི་ཁམས།
- śaikṣadhātu
constituent of no learning
- mi slob pa’i khams
- མི་སློབ་པའི་ཁམས།
- aśaikṣadhātu
constituent of the conditioned
- ’dus byas kyi khams
- འདུས་བྱས་ཀྱི་ཁམས།
- saṃskṛtadhātu
constituent of the contaminated
- zag pa dang bcas pa’i khams
- ཟག་པ་དང་བཅས་པའི་ཁམས།
- sāsravadhātu
constituent of the unconditioned
- ’dus ma byas kyi khams
- འདུས་མ་བྱས་ཀྱི་ཁམས།
- asaṃskṛtadhātu
constituent of the uncontaminated
- zag pa med pa’i khams
- ཟག་པ་མེད་པའི་ཁམས།
- anāsravadhātu
dependent origination
- rten cing ’brel par ’byung ba
- རྟེན་ཅིང་འབྲེལ་པར་འབྱུང་བ།
- pratītyasamutpāda
eighteen constituents
- khams bco brgyad
- ཁམས་བཅོ་བརྒྱད།
- aṣṭādaśadhātu
five obscurations
- sgrib pa lnga
- སྒྲིབ་པ་ལྔ།
- pañcanivaraṇa
four applications of mindfulness
- dran pa nye bar gzhag pa bzhi
- dran pa nye bar bzhag pa bzhi
- དྲན་པ་ཉེ་བར་གཞག་པ་བཞི།
- དྲན་པ་ཉེ་བར་བཞག་པ་བཞི།
- catvāri smṛtyupasthānāni
- catuḥsmṛtyupasthāna
Honorable One
- btsun pa
- བཙུན་པ།
- —
impossible
- gnas ma yin
- གནས་མ་ཡིན།
- asthāna
individual awakening
- rang byang chub
- རང་བྱང་ཆུབ།
- pratyekabodhi
Jeta’s Grove, Anāthapiṇḍada’s Park
- rgyal bu rgyal byed kyi tshal mgon med zas sbyin gyi kun dga’ ra ba
- རྒྱལ་བུ་རྒྱལ་བྱེད་ཀྱི་ཚལ་མགོན་མེད་ཟས་སྦྱིན་གྱི་ཀུན་དགའ་ར་བ།
- jetavanam anāthapiṇḍadasyārāmaḥ AO
Mañjuśrī Kumārabhūta
- ’jam dpal gzhon nur gyur pa
- འཇམ་དཔལ་གཞོན་ནུར་གྱུར་པ།
- mañjuśrīkumārabhūta AO
perfect and complete buddha
- yang dag par rdzogs pa’i sangs rgyas
- ཡང་དག་པར་རྫོགས་པའི་སངས་རྒྱས།
- saṃyaksaṃbuddha
possible
- gnas
- གནས།
- sthāna
sense fields
- skye mched
- སྐྱེ་མཆེད།
- āyatana
settled in meditation
- nang du yang dag bzhag
- ནང་དུ་ཡང་དག་བཞག
- pratisaṃlayana
seven branches of awakening
- byang chub kyi yan lag bdun
- བྱང་ཆུབ་ཀྱི་ཡན་ལག་བདུན།
- saptabodhyaṅga
six sense fields
- skye mched drug
- སྐྱེ་མཆེད་དྲུག
- ṣaḍāyatana
three constituents
- khams gsum
- ཁམས་གསུམ།
- tridhātu
twelve links of dependent origination
- rten ’brel yan lag bcu gnyis
- རྟེན་འབྲེལ་ཡན་ལག་བཅུ་གཉིས།
- dvādaśāṅgapratītyasamutpāda
twelve sense fields
- skye mched bcu gnyis
- སྐྱེ་མཆེད་བཅུ་གཉིས།
- dvādaśāyatana
universal monarch
- khor los sgyur ba
- ཁོར་ལོས་སྒྱུར་བ།
- cakravartin
Venerable
- tshe dang ldan pa
- ཚེ་དང་ལྡན་པ།
- āyuṣmat
- āyuṣmān