The Root Manual of the Rites of Mañjuśrī
Introduction

The Mañjuśrīmūlakalpa (henceforth MMK) is a scripture devoted to Mañjuśrī, the bodhisattva of wisdom. It is a vaipulya sūtra‍—only a few large sūtras can claim this title‍—that was later classified as a tantra of the Kriyā class. Reflecting its status as a sūtra, the chapter colophons found in the MMK variously identify the work as a Mahāyāna sūtra, a bodhisattvapiṭaka (bodhisattva basket),1 and bodhisattvapaṭalavisara (full bodhisattva collection). The phrase “bodhisattva basket” is significant as it implies that the MMK is part of the Bodhisattva Basket, in contradistinction to the Śrāvaka Basket in the binary classification made by Asaṅga in the Abhidharmasamuccaya. While the Tibetan translations of the MMK refer to it as a “tantra,” the Sanskrit text refers to itself as a kalpa (“manual of rites”), a kalparāja (“king of rites”), and a mantratantra (“mantra treatise”). The term mantratantra, used throughout the MMK to refer to its own content and to tantric teachings in general, could also be understood as “mantra systems/methods,” or the “art of mantras.”

Parts of what we know today as the MMK were in circulation by at least the beginning of the eighth century ᴄᴇ, as evidenced by Chinese translations.2 From this time onward the text was probably compiled in stages by bringing together different writings on Mañjuśrī, whether from the earlier sūtra tradition or more recent ritual texts, thus creating the mūlakalpa of Mañjuśrī, i.e., the root (mūla) or standard textbook of his ritual (kalpa). The MMK also draws from non-Buddhist sources, thereby demonstrating the exchanges that took place between various religious traditions during the period when it was compiled. The Śaiva mantras and mudrās taught in the MMK are specifically held in high regard (35.­139–42). The MMK would in turn serve as a touchstone for other Buddhist Kriyā tantras, as is demonstrated by the Tārāmūlakalpa (Toh 724), a large part of which is a “clone” of the first 13¾ chapters of the MMK; the correspondence‍—apart from the substitution of the names of the chief deities‍—is almost verbatim.

The teachings of the MMK are presented as the direct speech of Buddha Śākyamuni, who introduces them as “Mañjuśrī’s” (mañjuśriya) in the dual sense that they either originate from or directly relate to Mañjuśrī. Despite being presented as the direct speech of the Buddha, some of the teachings are in fact given by Mañjuśrī or Vajrapāṇi as part of their dialogue with Śākyamuni. The venue for the teachings is the magically created pavilion “above the Pure Abode” (śuddhāvāsopari), and the audience comprises all Buddhist deities, the deified saints who once lived on earth, the infinite hosts of the most prominent divine and semi-divine beings, and all the classes of nonhuman beings.

The MMK has been likened to an encyclopedia of knowledge,3 and the description of the audience is one of the many types of valuable information found in the MMK. The list of attendees, which includes more than 1,300 names,4 was possibly intended to serve as a “Who’s Who” of Buddhism, and illustrates the extent and structure of the Buddhist pantheon. The deities are listed in groups according to a hierarchical order, while the list of the Buddhist saṅgha in attendance blends the traditional with the historical in its inclusion of the names of many beings that regularly featured in Buddhist literature prior to the MMK. Its other “encyclopedic” content includes astrology (with lists and descriptions of personified astrological categories); geography; types of languages and their geographical distribution; history (presented, in the narrative context of the MMK, as prophecy), including lists of kings and accounts of historical events that emphasize the history of the Buddhist religion; types of persons based on medical categories; types of dreams; and many other subjects. Much of its main ritual content is also presented in encyclopedic format, as is seen in the descriptions of hundreds upon hundreds of different mudrā gestures, mantras, and other ritual elements arranged into categories. This encyclopedic character of the MMK is reflected in the size of the glossary accompanying this translation, which includes more than 2,000 entries.

As a Kriyā tantra and a ritual text (kalpa), the MMK is primarily concerned with ritual. Unlike most other Kriyā tantras, though, the MMK not only describes ritual procedures, it also explains the principles behind them whereby one reaps their benefits, be it the ultimate benefit of awakening and liberation, or a desired temporal benefit. Kriyā (ritual performance), when skillfully used as an instrument of karman (activity), becomes the tool for gathering the accumulations of knowledge and merit indispensable for awakening,5 or for achieving any other desired goal, providing that this goal does not violate one’s bodhisattva conduct or samaya. The mechanism of the mutual dependence of kriyā, karman, and phala (result) is the core of a system that could be regarded as a Kriyā doctrine of the MMK, a doctrine that also applies to other tantras of the same class. The employment of this mechanism allows the practitioner to eventually break the chain of dependent origination (pratītyasamutpāda) and win liberation. In addition to explaining this theory, the MMK also contains didactic material in regard to karman‍—this time understood as the principle of retribution‍—such as in the statement, “One creates karma laughing, but experiences it crying” (hasadbhiḥ kriyate karma rudadbhir anubhūyate, 53.­288).

A soteriological orientation predominates in the MMK, and awakening to buddhahood is considered the most important outcome of its rites. The goals of the rites found in the MMK are typically listed as threefold‍—supreme, middling, or minor‍—and depend on the specific aspirations of the practitioner. The supreme goal is full awakening (samyaksambodhi) thus all rites in the MMK are ultimately aimed at liberation. The MMK explains this goal of liberation using another triad: the liberation of the fully realized buddhas, of the pratyekabuddhas, or of the śrāvakas. The highest goal‍—that of fully realized buddhahood‍—is always inspired by the bodhisattva wish to benefit others.

On a more mundane level, the MMK prescribes a wide array of distinct mantras for different purposes, to be used in different contexts, and employed at specific times; it even prescribes a mantra for the time of death that will enable the dying person “to take the final refuge in the supreme body of the dharmadhātu” (54.­99). The many worldly applications of mantras in the MMK usually come with the stipulation that mantras should not be used selfishly or to cause others harm.

The most fundamental principle of Kriyā practice is that the mantra and the deity are one and the same. It is in this spirit that some deity emanations are given names such as “One Syllable,” and some mantras are referred to as a cakravartin (wheel-turning monarch/universal emperor), or “Great Lord of Wrath” (mahākrodharāja). Being identical with the deity, the mantra is fundamental to all rituals and essential to their efficacy, while other kriyā elements, such as the mudrā, the maṇḍala, the homa (fire offering), and so forth, serve to enhance and amplify its power. A second, and closely related core principle explained in the MMK is that a mantra is inseparable from and coextensive with the mind (cittāyata, 38.­43), or, as the MMK phrases it, “there is no mantra without mind” (na mantraṃ cittavarjitam, 38.­43). This threefold unity of the deity, the mantra, and the mind is the secret behind the magical power of the ritual.

Among the numerous mantra deities that appear in the MMK, prominence is given to the supramundane classes that manifest as the activity of the Buddha. One such class is the esoteric uṣṇīṣa deities, the best known among them being the eight “uṣṇīṣa kings.” As the name suggests, they emanate from the uṣṇīṣa protuberance on the Buddha’s head, and so embody the nature of awakening itself. The deities referred to as uṣṇīṣa, tathāgata-uṣṇīṣa, cakravartin, uṣṇīṣa-cakravartin, vidyā-cakravartin, and so on, always represent the highest level of realization, be they male or female, peaceful or wrathful. Some of the most powerful among these are the ekākṣara (one syllable) mantras, and this epithet is often used as the proper name (One Syllable) of a given deity who might be one of the uṣṇīṣa deities, or One Syllable emanations of Mañjuśrī, Yamāntaka, or Vajrapāṇi.

The reader may at first feel daunted by the presence in the English translation of terms left in the original Sanskrit. However, terms such as uṣṇīṣa, cakravartin, vidyā, vidyārāja, or vidyārājñī serve multiple functions and often convey more than one meaning simultaneously, something not easily captured in English. On the most basic level, these five terms are generic names referring to categories of mantra deities and of the corresponding mantras. Apart from this dual classificatory function, they are also employed as epithets whose literal meanings are given in the accompanying glossary. As class names, these terms define groups that lack clear boundaries and often overlap‍—uṣṇīṣa deities, a group virtually conflatable with cakravartins, is a subgroup of vidyārājas, who in turn are a subgroup of vidyā deities in general. Accordingly, the terms vidyārāja/-jñī apply also to cakravartins and to uṣṇīṣa deities. As it would be too confusing to vary the translation depending on context, and often impossible to decide which meaning prevails in a particular context, these terms have been left, for the most part, in their Sanskrit form.

The present translation is based on the published Sanskrit text (Śāstrī 1920–25), which represents the most complete version of the MMK in existence. This text is a transcript of the Trivandrum manuscript, which, according to Isaacson,6 could be as old as the eleventh century, and, judging by its script, is likely to have originated in Nepal. There are a few other extant Sanskrit manuscripts of the MMK, most of which, if not all, were produced in Nepal. None of them is complete, and none has the chapters in the same order. Their variant readings have nevertheless been included in the critical apparatus of the partially edited Sanskrit text that accompanies this translation.

Apart from the Sanskrit manuscripts, the MMK exists also in canonical Tibetan and Chinese translations. Each of them is much shorter than the extant Sanskrit version and includes a different selection of chapters. The Tibetan translators’ colophon tells us that the Tibetan translation was completed, “by the Indian preceptor and spiritual teacher Kumārakalaśa and the monk translator Śākya Lodrö (shAkya blo gros),” most likely in the mid-11th century. The translation presented here is from the Sanskrit, but has been revised against the Tibetan text of the Pedurma (dpe bsdur ma) comparative edition of the Degé Kangyur. It includes only the chapters that exist in the Tibetan translation: thirty-seven out of the total of fifty-five7 chapters that comprise the extant Sanskrit version of the Trivandrum manuscript. The discrepancies between the extant Sanskrit and Tibetan versions of the text are reflected in the sequence of chapters in this translation. The Tibetan translation omits chapters 18-23, so they have been omitted here as well, necessitating a jump from chapter 17 to 24. Similarly, because the Tibetan translation omits chapters 39-49 we have also left them out of this translation, which is reflected in the jump from chapter 38 to 50. The last two chapters included in this translation, 53 and 54, are combined into a single chapter in the Tibetan translation, which is enumerated as chapter 36 in the Tibetan text. Finally, the extant Sanskrit version includes an additional chapter at the end of the text that is omitted in the Tibetan version, and so is omitted here.

There is no known commentary on the MMK in existence, compounding the problem of translating its difficult and often corrupt Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit (BHS) language, and interpreting many of its obscure passages, whose exact meaning, it seems, was often missed even by the canonical translators in Tibet, one of whom was an ethnic Indian.

Regarding the general Mahāyāna content of the MMK, its teachings are applicable to and can be practiced by everyone. However, when it comes to its esoteric content, the MMK itself clearly states:

“This Dharma treasury of the tathāgatas is extremely occult, as it depends in every respect on mantras. It must not be taught to those who have not received the samaya from the master, or those who do not understand the samaya. Why is this? This is because it is secret. It is an occult teaching; it is a teaching [arising from] omniscience. No beings should ever reject or take it lightly” (54.­5 ).