ཤེས་རབ་ཀྱི་ཕ་རོལ་ཏུ་ཕྱིན་པ་སྟོང་ཕྲག་བརྒྱ་པ།
The Perfection of Wisdom in One Hundred Thousand Lines
Notes
Śatasāhasrikāprajñāpāramitā
འཕགས་པ་ཤེས་རབ་ཀྱི་ཕ་རོལ་ཏུ་ཕྱིན་པ་སྟོང་ཕྲག་བརྒྱ་པ།
’phags pa shes rab kyi pha rol tu phyin pa stong phrag brgya pa
The Noble Perfection of Wisdom in One Hundred Thousand Lines
Āryaśatasāhasrikāprajñāpāramitā
Toh 8
Degé Kangyur, (’bum, ka), folios 1.b–394.a; (’bum, kha), folios 1.b–402.a; (’bum, ga), folios 1.b–394.a; (’bum, nga), folios 1.b–381.a; (’bum, ca), folios 1.b–395.a; (’bum, cha), folios 1.b–382.a; (’bum, ja), folios 1.b–398.a; (’bum, nya), folios 1.b–399.a; (’bum, ta), folios 1.b–384.a; (’bum, tha), folios 1.b–387.a; (’bum, da), folios 1.b–411.a; and (’bum, a), folios 1.b–395.a (vols. 14–25).
Imprint
Translated by Gareth Sparham
under the patronage and supervision of 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha
First published 2024
Current version v 1.0.17 (2024)
Generated by 84000 Reading Room v2.26.1
This is a partial publication, only including completed chapters
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
The Perfection of Wisdom in One Hundred Thousand Lines is the longest of all the Prajñāpāramitā sūtras and fills no fewer than twelve volumes of the Degé Kangyur. Like the other two long sūtras, it is a detailed record of the teaching on the perfection of wisdom that the Buddha Śākyamuni gave on Vulture Peak in Rājagṛha, setting out all aspects of the path to enlightenment that bodhisattvas must know and put into practice, yet without taking them as having even the slightest true existence. Each point is emphasized by the exhaustive way that, in this version of the teaching, the Buddha repeats each of his many profound statements for every one of the items in the sets of dharmas that comprise deluded experience, the path, and the qualities of enlightenment.
The provisional version published here currently contains only the first thirteen chapters of the sūtra. Subsequent batches of chapters will be added as their translation and editing is completed.
Acknowledgements
The text was translated by Gareth Sparham, partly based on the translation of The Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-Five Thousand Lines by the late Gyurme Dorje and the Padmakara Translation Group. Geshe Lobsang Gyaltsen, 80th Abbot of Drepung Gomang monastery, and Geshe Kalsang Damdul, former Director of the Institute of Buddhist Dialectics, kindly provided learned advice.
The translation was completed under the patronage and supervision of 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha. Nathaniel Rich and John Canti edited the translation, John Canti wrote the provisional introduction, and Ven. Konchog Norbu copyedited the text. Celso Wilkinson, André Rodrigues, and Sameer Dhingra were in charge of the digital publication process.
The translation of this text has been made possible through the generous sponsorship of those who offered leadership gifts to inaugurate our campaign, The Perfection of Wisdom for All. In chronological order of contributions received, these include:
Yan Xiu, Yan Li, Li Yifeng, and Wang Issa; Thirty, Twenty, Jamyang Sun, and Manju Sun; Anonymous; Ye Kong and family, Chen Hua, and Yizhen Kong; Wang Jing and family; Joseph Tse, Patricia Tse, and family; Zhou Tianyu, Chen Yiqin, Zhou Xun, Zhuo Yue, Chen Kun, Sheng Ye, and family, Zhao Xuan, Huang Feng, Lei Xia, Kamay Kan, Huang Xuan, Liu Xin Qi, Le Fei, Li Cui Zhi, Wang Shu Chang, Li Su Fang, Feng Bo Wen, Wang Zi Wen, Ye Wei Wei, Guo Wan Huai, and Zhang Nan; Ang Wei Khai and Ang Chui Jin; Jube, Sharma, Leo, Tong, Mike, Ming, Caiping, Lekka, Shanti, Nian Zu, Zi Yi, Dorje, Guang Zu, Kunga, and Zi Chao; Anonymous, Anonymous; An Zhang, Hannah Zhang, Lucas Zhang, and Aiden Zhang; Jinglan Chi and family; Anonymous; Dakki; Kelvin Lee and Doris Lim.
We also acknowledge and express our deep gratitude to the 6,145 donors who supported the translation and publication of this text through contributions made throughout the campaign period.
Text Body
The Translation
The Perfection of Wisdom in One Hundred Thousand Lines
Abbreviations
| Bṭ1 | Anonymous/Daṃṣṭrāsena. shes rab kyi pha rol tu phyin pa ’bum gyi rgya cher ’grel (Śatasāhasrikāprajñāpāramitābṛhaṭṭīkā) [Bṛhaṭṭīkā]. Toh 3807, Degé Tengyur vols. 91–92 (shes phyin, na, pa). |
|---|---|
| Bṭ3 | Vasubandhu/Daṃṣṭrāsena. ’phags pa shes rab kyi pha rol tu phyin pa ’bum dang / nyi khri lnga sgong pa dang / khri brgyad stong pa rgya cher bshad pa (Āryaśatasāhasrikāpañcaviṃśatisāhasrikāṣṭādaśa-sāhasrikāprajñāpāramitābṭhaṭṭīkā) [Bṛhaṭṭīkā]. Degé Tengyur vol. 93 (shes phyin, pha), folios 1b–292b. |
| C | Choné (co ne) Kangyur and Tengyur. |
| D | Degé (sde dge) Kangyur and Tengyur. |
| Edg | Edgerton, Franklin. Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit Dictionary. New Haven, 1953. |
| Eight Thousand | Conze, Edward. The Perfection of Wisdom in Eight Thousand Lines & Its Verse Summary. Bolinas, Calif.: Four Seasons Foundation, 1973. |
| Ghoṣa | Ghoṣa, Pratāpachandra, ed. Śatasāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā. Asiatic Society of Bengal. Calcutta, 1902–14. |
| Gilgit | Gilgit Buddhist Manuscripts (revised and enlarged compact facsimile edition). Vol. 1. by Raghu Vira and Lokesh Chandra. Bibliotheca Indo-Buddhica Series No. 150. Delhi 110007: Sri Satguru Publications, a division of Indian Books Center, 1995. |
| K | Peking (pe cing) 1684/1692 Kangyur |
| LSPW | Conze, Edward. The Large Sutra on Perfection Wisdom. Berkeley and Los Angeles, California: University of California Press, 1975. First paperback printing, 1984. |
| MDPL | Conze, Edward. Materials for a Dictionary of the Prajñāpāramitā Literature. Tokyo: Suzuki Research Foundation, 1973. |
| MW | Monier-Williams, Monier. A Sanskrit-English dictionary: Etymologically and Philologically Arranged with Special Reference to Cognate Indo-European Languages. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1899. |
| Mppś | Lamotte, Étienne. Le Traité de la Grande Vertu de Sagesse de Nāgārjuna (Mahāprajñā-pāramitā-śāstra). Vol. I and II: Bibliothèque du Muséon, 18. Louvain: Institut Orientaliste, 1949; reprinted 1967. Vol III, IV and V: Publications de l’Institut Orientaliste de Louvain, 2, 12 and 24. Louvain: Institut Orientaliste, 1970, 1976 and 1980. |
| Mppś English | Gelongma Karma Migme Chodron. The Treatise on the Great Virtue of Wisdom of Nāgārjuna. Gampo Abbey Nova Scotia, 2001. English translation of Étienne Lamotte (1949–80). |
| Mvy | Mahāvyutpatti (bye brag tu rtogs par byed pa chen po. Toh. 4346, Degé Tengyur vol. 306 (bstan bcos sna tshogs, co), folios 1b-131a. |
| N | Narthang (snar thang) Kangyur and Tengyur. |
| PSP | Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā. Edited by Takayasu Kimura. Tokyo: Sankibo Busshorin 2007–9 (1-1, 1-2), 1986 (2-3), 1990 (4), 1992 (5), 2006 (6-8). Available online (input by Klaus Wille, Göttingen) at GRETIL. |
| S | Stok Palace (stog pho brang bris ma) Kangyur. |
| Skt | Sanskrit. |
| Tib | Tibetan. |
| Toh | Tōhoku Imperial University A Complete Catalogue of the Tibetan Buddhist Canons. (bkaḥ-ḥgyur and bstan-ḥgyur). Edited by Ui, Hakuju; Suzuki, Munetada; Kanakura, Yenshō; and Taka, Tōkan. Tohoku Imperial University, Sendai, 1934. |
| Z | Zacchetti, Stefano. In Praise of the Light. Bibliotheca Philologica et Philosophica Buddhica, Vol. 8. The International Research Institute for Advanced Buddhology. Tokyo: Soka University, 2005. |
| le’u brgyad ma | shes rab kyi pha rol tu phyin pa stong phrag nyi shu lnga pa (Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikāprajñāpāramitā) [Haribhadra’s “Eight Chapters”]. Toh 3790, vols. 82–84 (shes phyin, ga, nga, ca). Citations are from the 1976–79 Karmapae chodhey gyalwae sungrab partun khang edition, first the Tib. vol. letter in italics, followed by the folio and line number. |
Notes
Evidence mentioned in the traditional histories for the same teaching to have been recorded in sūtras of different length is that the interlocutors are the same, and that all versions contain the same prophecy made about Gaṅgadevī, related in chapter 43 of the present text. See Butön, folios 73.b–74.a.
The six “mother” Prajñāpāramitā sūtras (yum drug), so called because they include all eight implicit topics of the Abhisamayālaṃkara, are the five long sūtras (in one hundred thousand, twenty-five thousand, eighteen thousand, ten thousand, and eight thousand lines, Toh 8–12), along with the Verse Summary (Ratnaguṇasaṅcayagāthā, Toh 13), which is said to have been taught subsequently in the Magadha dialect.
Butön, folio 99.b; translation in Stein and Zangpo, p. 229.
See The Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-Five Thousand Lines (Toh 9) introduction, and The Perfection of Wisdom in Eighteen Thousand Lines (Toh 10) introduction.
See Falk 2011; Falk and Karashima (2012 and 2013); and Salomon 2018, pp. 335–58.
This hypothesis, favored by most modern scholars as well as by traditional Nepalese exegetes, is also supported by the fact that one of the seven Chinese translations of the Eight Thousand, the Dao xing jing (道行經), or Dao xing banruo jing (道行般若經; Taishō 224), was the earliest ever of the Prajñāpāramitā texts to be translated (by Lokakṣema and others in 179 ᴄᴇ)—a century before the first “long” group of sūtras was brought to China from Khotan. Nevertheless, traditional scholarship in both China and Tibet favored the idea that the Eight Thousand was an abridgement or extract of the long sūtras. See Zacchetti 2015, p. 177.
See von Hinüber 2014 and Zacchetti 2015, p. 187. Critical editions of parts of the manuscript have been published by Conze (1962 and 1974), Zacchetti (2005), and Choong (2006).
See Conze 1978, pp. 34–35 and 40, and Conze 1974.
See Zacchetti 2005, pp. 19–22.
See Suzuki and Nagashima 2015.
Since the longer texts are prose works, “line” (śloka) in this context is simply a unit of measure of thirty-two syllables, rather than implying a verse couplet as in some other contexts.
According to Zacchetti (2015, p. 176), the mentions come in a list of Prajñāpāramitā scriptures at the beginning of the Jin’gang xian lun (金剛仙論, Taishō 1512).
This point was emphasized by Zacchetti (2005, pp. 42–50), and is further discussed in Zacchetti 2015, pp. 185–87.
Da banruoboreboluomiduo jing (大般若波羅蜜多經, Taishō 220).
For a more detailed account of the successive Chinese translations of The Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-Five Thousand Lines, see the introduction to The Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-Five Thousand Lines (Toh 9), i.11–i.21.
More so than the Sanskrit of the Twenty-Five Thousand matches the Tibetan of the Kangyur version, for the case of the Twenty-Five Thousand is complicated by the existence of two different versions in Tibetan, one in the Kangyur (Toh 9) and the other in the Tengyur (Toh 3790); the Sanskrit matches the “eight-chapter” Tengyur version most closely. For more detail, see the introduction to The Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-Five Thousand Lines (Toh 9), i.35–i.39.
See Martin 2012. The blog posts of Dan Martin (Yerushalmi) on the topic of these early, imperial period translations have been most helpful in our explorations of it. Note that the word bla, which has many possible connotations, could also be understood as meaning “early” or “primary.” In Ngawang Zangpo 2010, bla ’bum is rendered “Master Copy.”
Although given the clan name Nyang (nyang) in Butön’s History, in the Padma Kathang (pad+ma bka’ thang, a fourteenth-century treasure text revealed by Orgyen Lingpa), and in a number of later works, other early texts say he was of the Lang (rlangs or sometimes glang) family. Alaksha Tendar mentions both clan names (folio 5.b). Khampa Gocha was among the earliest ordained Tibetan monks (but not one of the “seven men who were tested”). He is also sometimes referred to as Lang Khampa Lotsāwa, and may (according to Amyé Shab) be the same person as Lang Sugata Gocha (rlangs su ga ta go cha) or Lang Déwarshekpa Gocha Sungpa (rlangs bde bar gshegs pa go cha bsrungs pa); see van der Kuijp 2013, pp. 178–79.
Butön, folio 146.a. See also Nishioka, p. 68, # 105.
A draft translation of the relevant passage is provided by Martin 2012.
Rongtönpa, folios 3.a–3.b; Minling Terchen, folio 198.a; Alaksha Tendar, folios 5.b–6.b; Kongtrul, p. 227.
Degé dkar chag, chapter 2, folios 88.b–89.a; chapter 3, 2.2.12; chapter 4, folios 117.a–117.b.
Narthang dkar chag rgyas pa, folio 24.a et seq., or Pedurma vol. 106, pp. 113–18 (the latter being considerably easier to read). See bibliography entry under Olkha Lelung Lobsang Trinlé.
The Narthang catalog agrees on folio 24.a, but the summarized list of six manuscripts on folio 25.a (see below) suggests that the first translation was made in the reign of Tridé Tsuktsen, Tri Songdetsen’s father.
The Tibetan word dum bu, literally “piece” or “portion” is used in these descriptions, and although it may denote volumes, the meaning may be some other physical division into parts.
According to most accounts, although Rongtönpa’s (folio 3.a) could be read as referring rather to the queen’s blood being used. The Tibetan mtshal (meaning “vermilion,” or just “red”) added to khrag (“blood”) most likely serves simply as an honorific, or denotes red ink made with blood, or might possibly even imply that vermilion was added to blood to make red ink.
See van Schaik 2002.
The translations of these often-cryptic names are tentative. They are made on the assumption that each starts with a king’s name or moniker.
The Tibetan bye in this name could also be understood to mean “sand” or “million.”
Presumed to be Namdé Ösung (gnam sde ’od srungs), a son of Langdarma; for details see Dungkar’s dictionary, p. 1217.
Narthang catalog, folio 25.a. The mention of here of a “Darma” sponsoring the production of a Hundred Thousand, if it refers to Langdarma, is one among other pieces of historical evidence suggesting that Langdarma may not have been as hostile to Buddhism as the widespread traditional account relates.
Rongtönpa, folios 3.b.5–4.a.2.
We have so far been unable to identify this person further, or the period in which he lived; his revised version seems to be anterior to Ngok’s revision, but the chronology needs further investigation.
Rongtönpa had already said earlier (folio 3.a) that there were many copies of even the first, shortest translation to be found in Central Tibet. Indeed, Martin 2012 reports on the finding in Drepung by the contemporary Tibetan scholar Kawa Sherab Sangpo of one such “red manuscript” four-volume set.
Narthang catalog, folio 25.a.7.
Rongtönpa, folios 4.a.6–4.b.6.
Degé Kangyur dkar chag, F.117.a. The absorptions mentioned in the dkar chag are (1) shes rab sgron ma, (2) snang ba gsal ba, and (3) zla ba’i sgron me.
Rongtönpa, folio 5.a.4.
Rongtönpa, folios 3.b–4.a. One clue that the seventeen versions he mentions belong to the imperial period and precede Ngok’s revision is that the tenth was produced by Lhalung Pelkyi Dorje (lha lung dpal gyi rdo rje), presumably the same as the well-known ninth-century figure said to have assassinated Langdarma (see Treasury of Lives).
Narthang catalog, folio 25.a.7. From the sequence of the passage concerned it would seem that this version must have appeared before the time of the thirteenth-century Chomden Rikpai Raltri (bcom ldan rig pa’i ral gri, 1227–1305). The best known Yarlung Jowo is Shākya Rinchen Dé, fifteenth-century author notably of a history, but not known for his work on the editing or production of Kangyurs. He is therefore probably not the person referred to here, nor is it likely to be the famous Yarlung Lotsāwa Drakpa Gyaltsen (1242–1346). Another Yarlungpa is mentioned as a Narthang scholar who may have been responsible for an early Tengyur or its catalog. See Schaeffer and van der Kuijp 2009, p. 36, and Almogi 2021, pp. 177–78.
Rongtönpa, folio 5.b.
Neither of the two copies of the Hemis Kangyur, the fifth of the Kangyurs that add the extra chapters, is complete enough at the end of the final volume to show whether or not there was a colophon.
’di ni bsam yas dang lha sa’i rig zing mtshams mi ’da’ la sogs pa la gtugs nas/ zhus dag lan bcu drug byas pa’i rgyan gong gi ’bum nag mtshams mi ’da’ la phyi mo byas nas/ dag par gtugs pa’i ’bum sdig ma ’dres zhes bya ba’i gser ’bum bcu gnyis dum/ lo tsa ba chen po thams cad mkhyen pa bu ston rin chen grub kyi thugs dam la phyi mo bgyis nas/ mkhas chen rin chen rgyal mtshan pas bzhengs pa la ma phyi bgyis pa’o. In Tibetan literature overall, such a large number of figures with the name Rinchen Gyaltsen are recorded that it would be difficult to identify this one with certainty. However, if the moniker “great scholar” is taken as a specific one, there was a fifteenth-century scholar at Sangphu referred to as mkhas dbang rin chen rgyal mtshan.
On the differences between the Kangyur and Tengyur versions, see the introduction to The Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-Five Thousand Lines, i.35–i.39.
In the Twenty-Five Thousand, ch. 26 has the title “The Hells,” and ch. 27 “The Purity of All the Dharmas.”
The reservation here is that, at a fine-grain level, the Abhisamayālaṃkāra only fits the order of the Twenty-Five Thousand fully in the version of the sūtra in the Tengyur (Toh 3790) and not in the Kangyur version (Toh 9); see n.46.
On Smṛtijñānakīrti, see his biography in Treasury of Lives.
This commentary has been translated and published by 84000, and will be linked to the present text. See The Long Explanation of the Noble Perfection of Wisdom in One Hundred Thousand, Twenty-Five Thousand, and Eighteen Thousand Lines (Toh 3808), 2022; details of its authorship attribution, etc., can be found in the introduction.
This commentary (Toh 3807) is currently being translated by 84000 and, when ready, will be linked to the present text. For its authorship attribution, see as follows: Denkarma folio 5.a; see also Hermann-Pfandt 514. Phangthangma, p. 54; see also Kawagoe 767. Chomden Rikpai Raltri, folio 70.b.3; see also Schaeffer and van der Kuijp 2009, p. 263. Butön, folio 156.a.
For details of these Tibetan lineages of prajñāpāramitā study, see Kongtrul, pp. 227–28, translated in Stein and Zangpo 2013, pp. 258–60; see also Brunnhölzl 2010, vol. 1, pp. 43–46.
Dolpopa explicitly emphasized the importance, in his opinion, of the Bṛhaṭṭīkā commentarial tradition over that of the Abhisamayālaṃkāra.
bka’ yang dag pas, here and in the Twenty-Five Thousand, is one Tibetan rendering in the canonical texts of the Skt. samyagājñā, the other being the more widespread yang dag pa’i shes pas (“by perfect understanding”), as in the equivalent phrase in the Eighteen Thousand, 1.2 and as recommended in Mahāvyutpatti 1087. See also The Jewel Cloud (Toh 231), 1.2 and n.21. Vetter, p. 67, n. 53, says it “deviates from the translation” of it as a verb (kun shes pa, “fully understand”).
Bṭ1: “It means thus, in the order explained above, those who possess the inspired eloquence that was unimpeded are simply in possession of the good quality of being extremely skillful at the ‘inexhaustible’ many types of means for teaching the doctrine to beings.” Vetter, p. 29, n. 66, says “one would rather expect a kṣaya belonging to pratisaṃvid,” suggesting as an alternative translation “had comprehended the teaching, the inexhaustible mode of the detailed and thorough knowledges.”
Edgerton s.v. kuhana: “hypocrisy, specifically display of behavior designed to stimulate laymen to give gifts.”
“Realized and integrated” renders rtogs pa khong du chud pa. Cp. Kimura, 1–1:1, gambhīradharmakṣāntipāraṅgatair; Ghoṣa, Gilgit gaṃbhīradharmakṣāntiparamagatiṃ gatair, “gone to the furthest state that is a forbearance for the profound ultimate attribute.”
By contrast, Bṭ1 renders this compound “they had overcome karma and afflicted mental states so they had overcome the hostile forces” and says it “means they had eliminated the enemy—karma and afflicted mental states.”
Bṭ1: “ ‘Difficult for all śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas to understand’ teaches that śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas cannot understand the knowledge, aspiration, and range of practice of those bodhisattvas.” So too Vetter, p. 70.
The correct reading is uncertain. Kimura, 1–1:1 anantakalpakoṭīniḥsaraṇakuśalair; Gilgit 1v2–3 (Zacchetti, p. 366; Vetter, p. 72), anantakalpa(ko)[ṭī]nirdeśajñānanirḥsaraṇakuśalair; Ghoṣa p. 4 anantakalpakoṭinirdeśajñātibhiḥ saraṇyākuśalair? Edg s.v. niḥsaraṇa, citing Mvy 853, which cites this same passage (like Kimura) only with niḥsaraṇa (as in Bṭ3, 20a4 (1.110), nges par ’byung ba), suggests ye shes kyi (not ye shes kyis) might go with ’byung ba; cp. yid ’byung ba (nirvid) (“disgust,” “renunciation”) in the sense of a mental emancipation from something otherwise believed to be real and a problem. Bṭ1, p. 650, also has kyi ’byung (“of”) and, like Bṭ3, says the ’byung ba here rendered “emancipation” means just that the bodhisattvas “have finished with and gone beyond” eons of teaching and working for beings, so, because of their practice of perseverance, at this level are effortless.
This and the next are in an inverted order in D, which has not been followed here.
Here and in the Twenty-Five Thousand, D reads shes pa phra ba, whereas the Ten Thousand has phra ba mkhyen pa. The Long Explanation (Toh 3808 1.123) here lists various aspects of this “subtle knowledge” or “knowledge that engages in subtlety” (which it renders as ye shes phra ba) with regard to conduct and so forth.
Gilgit (Zacchetti, p. 367) and Ghoṣa, p. 5, pratītyanirdeśakuśalair; Vetter: “skilled in teaching dependent on the audience.” The brten pa rtogs pa is a don ’gyur. Emend Urga bden pa to brten pa. Bṭ1 glosses bden pa (emend to brten pa) rtogs pa with gzhan gyis rtogs par bya ba’i phyir bstan pa.
Gilgit, Ghoṣa omit. Bṭ1 glosses it with “…stopping those actions and afflicted mental states of self and others through skillful means.”
Bṭ1: “They do not ultimately view such scriptural doctrine as an existing thing, but conventionally, on account of their skill in the ‘ways of the doctrine,’ the various forms of teaching the levels and perfections and dharmas on the side of awakening and so on, they are fearless and are not scared, whatever the audience, when they differentiate and teach those doctrines.”
This renders Gilgit yathātmyāvatāraṇākuśalaiḥ. Bṭ1 says this “teaches the skill in entry into the range of the knowledge of the tathāgatas. The range of the knowledge of the tathāgatas, furthermore, is twofold: the correct comprehension of the ultimate nature of things and the correct comprehension of the conventional nature of things. As for the correct comprehension of the ultimate nature, ultimately all phenomena are simply just the true nature, beyond causal signs and ideas. As for the correct comprehension of the conventional nature, it is the unsurpassed conduct of the blessed buddhas—bringing beings to maturity, purifying a buddhafield, and so on. That is the meaning of being skilled in bringing about correct comprehension of the range of the tathāgatas.”
Ghoṣa, p. 6, sarvabuddhotpādopasaṃkramaṇakuśalair; Bṭ1, p. 660: “This is teaching that having traveled to whichever world system in which the buddhas appear, they are skilled in worshiping and serving them.”
Ghoṣa, p. 6, aparimitabuddhādhyeṣaṇakuśalair; Bṭ1, p. 660: “This means that having gone into the presence of all those blessed lord buddhas, as many as there are, maintaining themselves in innumerable, immeasurable world systems, they request them to turn the wheel of the Dharma, and request those thinking to enter into final nirvāṇa to stay for a long time.”
Bṭ1, p. 661: “This teaches that they possess the result from having completed the meditative stabilities that are the cause of the extrasensory powers. It means they are skilled, through the power of having earlier meditated on many types of meditative stabilities, at reveling in the various types of miraculous powers and working in various ways for the welfare of beings.”
Ghoṣa, p. 6, and Kimura, 1–1:1, Sārthavāha. This is also the form found in the Twenty-Five Thousand.
This name is not attested, except perhaps in Gilgit, 1v11, where the illegible letter that Zacchetti, p. 367, n. 6, renders as pā (following Ghoṣa’s bhadrapāla) may in fact be ba.
Here and in the following the names have been rendered as ending in -mati in accord with the Tib blo gros, not as expected with the Skt possessive ending -matin.
mthu dam pas rnam par gnon pa in place of rab kyi rtsal gyis rnam par gnon pa.
Ghoṣa, p. 6; Kimura, 1–1:2, has Anupamacintin.
Gilgit, 2r3, Vyūharāja (rnam par bkod pa’i rgyal po).
dgongs pa is honorific for dran pa; cf. Bṭ1, p. 662, dran pa mngon du gzhag pa bstan pa’i phyir.
’phrul gyi spyan is the pre-reform translation of divyacakṣus (“divine eye”).
For all the parts of the body mentioned in this paragraph, the Tib reads ’od zer bye ba khrag khrig brgya stong drug cu drug cu. The translation does not repeat drug cu (“sixty”) because it signifies that sets of that number of rays of light are emitted from each one of the paired parts of his body or individual members in the list. Ghoṣa omits ṣaṣṭiṣaṣṭi each time.
On the specific number hundred thousand ten million billion see the enumeration spelled out in detail, beginning from one and going up to an anabhilāpyānabhilāpya, below (2.164).
In both the Skt and Tib, in each of the six sets of three words the same verb is used with the same prefixes indicating greater intensity.
This reading (also in the Twenty-Five Thousand and the Tengyur version of the Twenty-Five Thousand) appears to render mṛduka and snigdha not literally, but in accord with what they are attempting to convey; cf. Mppś (English translation), pp. 376–77, “the Buddha first shows his miraculous power to the beings of the trisāhasramahāsāhasralokadhātu; then, when their minds are softened (mṛduka, snigdha), he preaches the Dharma to them. This is why he shakes the earth in six ways.” Bṭ1, p. 667: “Even when it shakes in six ways, beings do not become alarmed, scared, and so on, and the mountains, ground, vegetation, and so on become easily traversable, verdant, and delightful.” On nyams su bde ba cf. Negi s.v. nyams bde ba.
log par ltung/lhung ba, vinipāta.
This D reading, absent from K, N, and so on, is supported by both Ghoṣa and Gilgit and in large part by the Eighteen Thousand.
This renders Ghoṣa, p. 21, prakṛtyātmabhāvaḥ (prakṛtyā ātmabhāvaḥ), literally “his own body, in its basic nature.” Cf. Kimura, 1–1:6, ātmabhāvaṃ prākṛtam, “an ordinary body” (Zacchetti, pp. 266–67, n. 202, citing Lamotte, vol. 1, p. 517, “corps ordinaire”).
This renders Ghoṣa, p. 21, śuddhāvāsakāyikādevanikāyā ābhāsvarā brahmakāyikāḥ; cp. Kimura, 1–1:6, śubhakṛtsnā ābhāsvarā brahmakāyikā. Here and in the Twenty-Five Thousand the name kun snang dang ba (ābhāsvara) refers to the third of the three divisions of the gods of the second meditative concentration in the form realm. The rendering ’od gsal ba (ābhāsvara) is more frequent; dang ba is perhaps gdangs for svara. That the order is unusual here is corroborated by the detailed explanation in Mppś (English translation), pp. 409–12.
Nakamura (2014, p. 516) renders these “strewing [flowers] near [to Buddha], strewing [flowers] in front [of Buddha] and strewing [flowers] all around [Buddha].” The Tib says, literally, “strew down on, strew over, and strew right over.”
Again, in each of the three words the same verb is used with prefixes indicating greater intensity. Ghoṣa, p. 22, lambante sma pralambante sma abhipralambante sma.
This is the spelling, not bṛha(t) in Ghoṣa (the only place these divisions are attested to our knowledge).
A literal rendering is “in the form of a youth” (kumārabhūta). Bṭ1, pp. 674–74: They are “bodhisattvas seated in the presence of the Blessed One Śākyamuni, among whom some naturally have few attachments and from first producing the thought are celibate and have completed the ten levels, and some are bodhisattvas who have attained a standing on the eighth level and above free from effort and conceptualization. They are like young princes, and they are suitable to be given the empowerment as the regent (rgyal tshab) of a blessed lord buddha, a Dharma king, because they are standing at the level of a successor of a Dharma king.”
der nyams par gyur ta re renders Ghoṣa, p. 30, ma tatra kṣanethāḥ.
“Since” renders upādāya, rendered phyir in Tib, in the sense that the perfection comes after what is preceded by it (phyi ru).
“False imagination” renders yongs su rtog pa. Kimura, 1–1:28, vikṣiptacittān; Ghoṣa, p. 56, avikṣepāśaṅkaraṇatām (“no disturbance and nothing that makes you anxious”); Gilgit (Zacchetti), p. 376, dhyānamadānāsvādanatām, and the Twenty-Five Thousand and the Eighteen Thousand, which share the same reading, all differ.
Emend skye ba, “birth,” to C skyo ba (Ghoṣa, Kimura, Gilgit udvega), “disillusionment.”
Kimura, 1–1:29, aśuci (“uncleanliness”).
This renders advaya (in all editions of the Hundred Thousand) in place of Ghoṣa, Kimura, and Gilgit anvaya; Twenty-Five Thousand, ka 28a7 (2.5), rjes su ’gro ba; Eighteen Thousand, ka 12a5 (2.4), and Bṭ1, p. 703, rjes su rtogs pa.
Ghoṣa yathāruta; Gilgit yathāva(t); Bṭ1, p. 705, and Bṭ3 4.55: “have an understanding and knowledge of all the languages and speech of hell beings, animals, ghosts, gods, humans, and Brahmā deities.”
Cf. the entry on vitakka by Bhikkhu Anālayo in Encyclopedia of Buddhism, edited by G.P. Malalasekera et al, vol. 8 (2009), pp. 14–15 s.v. vitakka and jhāna. The “initial application of mind” (Tib rnam par rtog pa; Skt vitarka) and “sustained application of mind” (Tib rnam par dpyod pa; Skt vicāra) are necessary before reaching the stillness of the second meditative concentration. These are not gross conceptual states that give rise to lust or hatred. The author makes a rather nice association of the two terms with the way the mind works when somebody is going to say something. It may be fully articulated within the mind before it is said, or it may not be. In both cases there is a deep mental effort, as it were, not a gross level of thinking, necessary to get out what you want to say, and in that sense there is a level of effort in the first concentration absent on the higher levels.
This renders PSP, 1–1:30, anājñātamājñāsyāmīndriya, “the faculty of coming to understand what one has not yet understood” (cf. Abhidharmakośa 2.4), but both Ghoṣa and Gilgit have ājñāsyāmītīndriya, “the ‘I will come to know’ faculty.”
The translators read ājñātāvīndriya.
Ghoṣa, p. 67, and Gilgit sarvvākāravaropetaṃ sarvvajñajñānam abhisamboddhukāmena. Cp. Kimura, 1–1:30 (le’u brgyad ma, 27b7), which has been edited to perfectly fit with the Abhisamayālaṃkāra: sarvajñatāṃ jñānena darśanena cāvalokyātikramitukāmena bodhisattvena mahāsattvena prajñāpāramitā bhāvayitavyā, mārgajñatāṃ paripūrayitukāmena sarvākārajñatām anuprāptukāmena.
Bṭ1, p. 722: “This teaches the result of the bodhisattvas’ knowledge of all aspects of the path, because bodhisattvas perfect the knowledge of all aspects of the path, and having understood the thoughts and behavior of beings, establish what is beneficial for beings.”
The explanation at Bṭ3 4.80 and Bṭ1, p. 722, reads the compound sarvavāsanānusaṃdhikleśaprahāṇa as a dvandva to mean “abandon all propensities, connections, and afflicted mental states”: “It teaches the result of the knowledge, furnished with the best of all aspects, of a knower of all aspects. Propensities left by action, propensities left by afflicted mental states, and propensities left by life [Bṭ3 “birth”] are the three sorts of propensities; connections to action, connections to afflicted mental states, and connections to life are the three sorts of connections, because the connections on account of dependent origination are three. The meaning is that they ‘want to abandon’ all ‘propensities,’ all ‘connections,’ and all ‘afflicted mental states.’ ” See The Precious Discourse on the Blessed One’s Extensive Wisdom That Leads to Infinite Certainty (Toh 99), 3.162, and Mppś (English translation) vol. 5, p. 2029, n. 399.
This scripture sometimes says “five” and sometimes “six” extrasensory powers (abhijñā). Bṭ1 says the sixth is “knowledge of the extinction of contaminants/inflows.”
Bṭ1, p. 725: “It says this because bodhisattvas are focused on the welfare of all beings. So, because they have to work for their welfare, they correctly understand what thoughts they are thinking and what conduct they have faith in and so on.”
This differs slightly from both the Twenty-Five Thousand 2.9, and the Eighteen Thousand 2.7. Cf. PSP, 1–1:32, and le’u brgyad ma, ga 28b7 ff.
Only D Hundred Thousand has this reading, supported by Z, p. 377, sthātukāmena; the Twenty-Five Thousand, Eighteen Thousand, and le’u brgyad ma have spyod.
This renders spos.
D omits.
Ghoṣa, Gilgit, and PSP omit.
At Twenty-Five Thousand 2.19 the same Tib is rendered into English as “all worlds within the whole infinity of the realm of phenomena and the very reaches of the realm of space.”
This renders snying po byang chub. The bodhimaṇḍapa is the “choice ring” (like the cream, which is the essence of the milk, that makes a rim on a bucket) within which enlightenment occurs.
sems bskyed pa gcig gis. In other instances in the text, sems bskyed pa (cittotpāda) has been interpreted as an abbreviated form of the technical term byang chub kyi sems bskyed pa (bodhicittotpāda), and thus sems bskyed pa has been rendered “setting of the mind on enlightenment,” but in the present context this term seems more likely to mean simply “just by having the thought.”
Bṭ1, p. 732: “Who want to understand the ultimate and conventional aspect and defining characteristic of all conditioned and unconditioned phenomena.” The Twenty-Five Thousand, ka 32a3 (2.26), adds de bzhin nyid.
Bṭ1, p. 732: “It is true that there is no difference in the real nature but it is still divided threefold on account of a differentiation of its basis and the entry into it. The entry into it is threefold because of the entry into by the bodhisattvas’ knowledge of all aspects of paths, the blessed lord buddhas’ all-aspect omniscience, and the śrāvakas’ and pratyekabuddhas’ omniscience. Among them, the thoroughly established nature of inner and outer phenomena such as forms and sounds and so on is called ‘the real nature of all phenomena’; the unmistaken real nature, the one and only real nature, suchness, the unchanging real nature, and the genuine, definitive real nature are the real nature of all phenomena, and are simply synonyms for the unmistaken realization by the bodhisattvas’ knowledge of all aspects of paths. So, it is teaching that they want to comprehend by entering into it with the bodhisattvas’ knowledge of all aspects of paths.”
Alternatively, the dharmadhātu is the “dharma constituent” under which rubric all phenomena are subsumed. Bṭ1, p. 733: “The essential nature of the dharmakāya (‘body of qualities/ultimate attributes’) is the basis of all the dharmas (‘qualities’), the powers, the fearlessnesses, and so on, of a buddha, hence it is called the ‘realm of phenomena/dharma constituent.’ So it is saying that those who want to comprehend such a realm of phenomena /dharma constituent by entering into it as knowers of a tathāgata’s all-aspect omniscience should train in the perfection of wisdom.”
Bṭ1, p. 733: “The nirvāṇa without any remaining aggregates of the śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas is called the suchness at the very limit of reality. So it means that those who want to comprehend such a suchness at the very limit of reality by entering into it with a śravaka’s or pratyekabuddha’s omniscience should train in the perfection of wisdom. It is teaching that they want to attain the qualities of an eighth-level bodhisattva.”
This renders asaṃkhyeya and aprameya, two fabulously high numbers.
Ghoṣa oṣadhi.
This renders the Tib literally, but it makes better sense to take the earlier words in the Skt compounds (which both end in saṃcaya, “collection”)—the trees and so on, and the rocks and so on—as incorporated in the last words (“forests” and “land”).
“Such that” renders the zhes (*iti) at the end; the Twenty-Five Thousand supplies ’dod pas, “wanting” or “wishing that.”
The translators read eva in place of Ghoṣa, p. 90, evam. “Based on” renders gnas pas (niśrāya).
The translators perhaps read a form of saṃbhū in place of Ghoṣa, p. 91, samāpad.
Alternatively, sarvvadharmmaprajñānatānupalambhayogena means “by way of not apprehending a wisdom that knows all phenomena.”
Bṭ1, p. 736: “The attributes (guṇa, yon tan) are twofold: ultimate attributes and conventional attributes. The ultimate attribute is the intrinsically pure nature of the dharma body. The conventional attributes are the powers, fearlessnesses, eighteen distinct qualities, and so on.
Bṭ1, p. 736: “ ‘Conditioned phenomena’ (saṃskṛta) are made (kṛta) from the coming together and assembly (saṃ-) of causes and conditions. There are contaminated and uncontaminated ones. Of them, the contaminated are phenomena included in the three realms. The uncontaminated are in essence the path of the noble ones. The correct knowledge of those phenomena in their ultimate and conventional modes insofar as it has got to the limit of, has comprehended, them, is ‘perfection’ that has ‘gone beyond.’ ”
Bṭ1, p. 736: “The contaminated are form and so on, those in regard to which afflicted mental states arise. The uncontaminated are the levels, the perfections, the nirvāṇas and so on, which is to say, those in regard to which afflicted mental states do not emerge.”
Bṭ1, p. 737: “Virtuous phenomena are nonattachment, nonconfusion, nonhatred and so on. Nonvirtuous phenomena are attachment, confusion, hatred and so on.”
Bṭ1, p. 737: “Ordinary phenomena are from the end of the level of practice on account of belief on down. Extraordinary phenomena are from the first level on up to the buddha level.”
Bṭ1, p. 737: “The material phenomena appear and are to be seen and are obstructing. Immaterial phenomena (without form) do not appear and are not to be seen and are not obstructing.”
Bṭ1, p. 737: “Determinate phenomena—phenomena that can be prophesied/are objects of moral inquiry (vyākṛta)—are what are suitable to be prophesied, such as, ‘With a thought without attachment, without hatred, and without confusion, the practices of generosity, discipline, and so on cause obtaining a high status and many enjoyments.’ and so on. Indeterminate phenomena—phenomena that are cannot be prophesied /are not objects of moral inquiry—are the results of the practice of art and music and so on, in regard to which there is no certainty at all about whether they will bring happiness or suffering.”
Bṭ1, p. 737: “The phenomena that are certain (niyata) are the certainties of being in a śrāvaka, a pratyekabuddha, or a bodhisattva lineage. Phenomena that are not certain are those that come about relative to spiritual friends and bad friends.”
Bṭ1, pp. 737–38: “The phenomena to do with escaping (’byung ba, Ghoṣa, Gilgit nairyānika) are those with the nature of escaping from the three realms: the śrāvaka results of stream enterer and so on; the levels of bodhisattvas, the first level and so on; the thirty-seven dharmas on the side of awakening [note that Āryavimuktisena (Pensa, p. 20) only lists this]; and the perfections and so on that serve to cause the attainment of nirvāṇa. Those to do with no escaping are the opposite of these, the phenomena that serve to cause saṃsāra.” “To do with escaping” or “causes emergence” is the definition of the truth of the path, the fourth of the four truths of the noble ones.
Bṭ1, p. 738: “The phenomena that aid getting worse (’grib pa’i tshul can; Ghoṣa, Gilgit hānabhāgīya) are afflictive obscurations and obscurations to knowledge. Phenomena [that aid getting] better (khyad par gyi tshul can, viśeṣabhāgīya) are those that serve to counteract those two obscurations.”
Bṭ1, p. 738: “The phenomena of ordinary beings are the experiences (spyod pa) of the mistaken view of the impermanent as permanent, suffering as happiness, the unclean as clean, and the selfless as a self. The phenomena of the noble ones are the opposite of those: the views of impermanence, suffering, uncleanliness, and selflessness.”
Bṭ1, p. 738: “The phenomena of those in training are the phenomena from stream enterer to non-returner, and of those not in training—the phenomenon that is the result of a worthy one.”
Bṭ1, p. 738: “The phenomena of śrāvakas are the entry in, and so on, by way of the four truths of the noble ones, and the phenomena of pratyekabuddhas are the entry in, and so on, by way of the realization of dependent origination.”
Bṭ1, p. 738: “The phenomena of bodhisattvas are a bodhisattva’s practices from the level of practice on account of belief up to the tenth level. The phenomena of buddhas are in the form of the result of those included in the buddha level: the five transcendental knowledges, the powers, the fearlessnesses, and so on.”
Bṭ1, p. 739: “ ‘Want to go beyond all phenomena’ summarizes all the phenomena spoken of before, which is to say, the correct realization of the ultimate and conventional characteristic marks of all the phenomena spoken of before.”
“The very limit of nonarising” renders ma skye ba’i mthar phyin pa; Ghoṣa, Gilgit anutpattikoṭim anuprāptukāmena. Bṭ1: “These are explaining that bodhisattvas at the tenth level, in order to attain the good quality of realizing the ultimate characteristic mark of all the phenomena spoken of earlier, have to practice the perfection of wisdom, which is to say, the ultimate characteristic mark is called ‘suchness,’ ‘the very limit of nonarising,’ and ‘the very limit of reality.’ It means they want to go to the very limit of those.”
Bṭ1, p. 739: “Because of their transcendental knowledge, force, and miraculous power, the bodhisattvas abiding on the tenth level are distinguished as superior to śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas, so being the main, the supreme, the best ones they ‘have precedence.’ So, those who want to attain such a quality should train in the perfection of wisdom. That is the meaning.”
Bṭ1, pp. 739–40: “Through their force of the empowerment and miraculous powers attained by bodhisattvas on the tenth level, even in one moment, minute, and second, they have the capacity to offer unsurpassed, inconceivable service.”
nang gi ’khor du ’gyur pa, =adhyātmaparivāra? Ghoṣa atyantaparivāra, Gilgit abhyantaparivāra. Bṭ1, p. 740: “Bodhisattvas on the tenth level, because they are obstructed by a single birth on the buddha level and because they are simply a cut of the sheerest cloth (dar las chod pa tsam) away from the transcendental knowledge of a knower of all, are close by in the circle of a buddha, so they are ‘in the intimate retinue.’ ”
Bṭ1, p. 740: “Because bodhisattvas on the tenth level have become like buddhas, they are the place worshiped and respected by those among the gods who have the greatest force and magical power—Indra, Brahmā, and so on. So it means wanting to have a retinue of many like those.
Gilgit (Zacchetti, p. 383): dane ’navagṛhītcittena.
Bṭ1, p. 741: “The bodhisattvas at the tenth level are unobstructed when it comes to explaining the doctrine and applying themselves to the welfare of beings. What they apply themselves to is achieved so it is not in vain. Their establishing beings in the five bases of meritorious action is not in vain.”
Tib sngon gyi sbyor ba dang ldan pa is a literal rendering of pūrvvayogasahagatā (caryā), “together with, connected with the past” (= “formerly”).
Gilgit, p. 383, ṛddhividhivikurvitam; Ghoṣa, p. 99, ṛddhivikurvvitum.
“Retain” renders yang dag par gzung, sandhāraya (“to bear [in mind] perfectly”).
Tib dbyang kyis bsnyad pa; literally “the melodious narrations.”
This renders Tib ched du brjod pa literally. Skt udāna also means those statements made by all the buddhas (about impermanence, attachment, the path, and so on) that cause pleasure to rise up in the hearer.
Ghoṣa sattvebhyo ’kṣuṇṇadharmmaṃ deśayeyaṃ (“a doctrine that has not been stomped down on”); Gilgit omits. Tib kṣud (“to tread down on”). Bṭ1, p. 745: “Having taught that those who want to obtain the qualities and greatness of bodhisattvas on the tenth level should then persevere at the perfection of wisdom, to teach that those who want to obtain the qualities and greatness of buddhas should persevere at the perfection of wisdom, it says ‘who want to train in the tathāgatas’ way of carrying themselves’ and so on…An ‘elephant’ is nāga in Sanskrit and nāga also refers to the best, the most excellent, the chief [MW s.v. nāga, “the best or most excellent of any kind”], and also refers to an elephant, a snake, and a buddha. In this context, the manner or method of the seeing of the blessed lord buddhas is to ‘look down as an elephant looks.’ [The following is also at Bṭ3 4.175] They do not look up at what is above, look down at what is below, look to the sides at what is to the right or left, twist their neck to look at what is behind, concentrate to look at what is far off, or look without concentrating at what is close by. This says that however they are carrying themselves and however they are looking, they ‘look down as an elephant looks’ because they look at all beings and all dharmas in all world systems.”
The meditative stability “that has stretched out like a lion” or “yawned like a lion” is described in detail in 8.443.
Bṭ1, p. 746: This “teaches the result of bringing to maturity. Having trampled with an overwhelming presence, through the force of that they have established [beings] in the good doctrine; they have brought them to maturity.”
Here and below, the reference to “thousand-spoked wheels” on the soles of the feet is a reference to the image or motif of a thousand-spoked wheel on the soles of the Buddha’s feet.
Add brjod du med pa’am; Ghoṣa anabhilāpya.
These are the names in Ghoṣa. Edgerton s.v. vṛhatphala treats vṛha(t) as an alternative for bṛhat (“big”).
Delete shing (“tree”) that is not supported by either Gilgit bodhimaṇḍam upasamkkrameyam or Ghoṣa, p. 113, bodhimaṇḍam upasaṃkramyayām, and makes better sense of the following paragraph where both have bodhivṛkṣatale (“on the ground of the Bodhi tree”). Kimura 1–1:49 keeps bodhimaṇḍadrumamūlam (“foot of the tree at the seat of enlightenment”) for both and changes the verb from “approach” to “spread out the mat at.”
These are the names in Ghoṣa. Edgerton s.v. vṛhatphala treats vṛha(t) as an alternative for bṛhat (“big”).
This is problematic. “Is without an entourage of queens” is supported by Gilgit 16v5 bodhisattvasyāmaithunasaṃyoga-prasthānatāyai and made explicit by Haribhadra at PSP, 1–1:52, maithunadharmaparivarjanena (“given up his entourage of queens”), and most tellingly the following lhag bcas (te) that strongly suggests the reason for the gods being overjoyed. Alternatively, keeping in mind the dbul bar bya’o rendered “we will give” [the begging bowls] just above, it may have the sense of “we will have presented them an entourage of queens,” supported by Ghoṣa, p. 116, bodhisattvasya maithunasaṃyogaprasthānatāyai. Here the la don (de la) and the absence of a byed sgra (-s) ending on the word preceding dbul might support this alternative translation, based on the thought that, of the twelve deeds, the gods are overjoyed at the marriage deed of Śākyamuni as the prince Siddhārtha prior to the great renunciation. Cf. Bṭ1, pp. 749–50: “ ‘Still, in order to establish beings in awakening these [bodhisattvas] practice celibacy. They do not engage in any sexual acts,’ and so on, teaches the pure aspiration and pure behavior of bodhisattvas practicing like that. As for ‘Blessed One, do bodhisattva great beings definitely have a father, a mother, a wife, sons, and daughters?’ and so on, having given the above description of the good qualities of the bodhisattvas, following on from the sons and daughters of good families having made the commitment to be the mother and father and so on of those bodhisattvas, and the Four Great Kings making the commitment to supply the entourage of queens, in response to Śāradvatīputra’s inquiry about whether bodhisattvas definitely have to have girls and so on, the Blessed One explains that actual bodhisattvas do not enjoy the five sorts of sense objects out of attachment, but abiding in conventional truth, without attachment, and with skillful means, through the four ways of gathering a retinue they gather beings together and use the five sorts of sense objects in order to establish them in the doctrine.”
“Enjoyment” renders rnam par spyod pa. Ghoṣa, p. 117, and Gilgit, p. 387, vihārapratilabhda.
K and N, supported by Ghoṣa and Gilgit, only have these first two alternatives, probably supported by Bṭ1, p. 750: “teaches that…‘they practice,’ and ‘they do not practice’ cannot ultimately be apprehended.” The translation here follows D that is Eighteen Thousand.
The Skt versions have darśana (“the seeing”); Tib mthong ba could also mean that. “Not really exist” renders yod pa ma yin pa (asat).
Here sgyu ma (“illusion”) is rendering kṛtrimaṃ, more usually bcos ma (“fabricated,” “artificial”).
Z, p. 206, n. 45: “Because naming is artificial in the cases of (of: with regard to) each single dharma; they [i.e. the states described in the preceding paragraph], having been imagined, are designated with an accidental appellation that is falsely imagined, and on the basis of [this] appellation they are clung to.”
This renders mngon par zhen. Although this is the expected translation, here and in the Twenty-Five Thousand the translators usually render forms of abhiniviś with mngon par ’chags. An alternative translation: “From convention they are settled down on as real.”
An alternative translation: “They do not falsely project them, and they are not settled down on as real.”
Gilgit, 18r9–10; Ghoṣa omits.
The translators render svabhāva by ngo bo here to differentiate it from prakṛti; just below where the distinction is not necessary, they use rang bzhin for svabhāva. Ghoṣa, p. 129, anutpādaprakṛtikāḥ svabhāvaśūnyāḥ.
The translators render the gerundives in -tavya by bzla’o and here, the future first person singular -syāmi, with bzla bar bya’o.
The Twenty-Five Thousand, ka 47a (2.95), has byang chub (“path of enlightenment”). Bṭ1 (p. 755) glosses “bodhisattva” as “enlightenment.”
This is also the reading in the Stok Twenty-Five Thousand, ka 61b2; the Eighteen Thousand, supported by Ghoṣa, p. 132; and Z, p. 391. Kimura and the D Twenty-Five Thousand differ.
“There are” renders yod pas, likely a rendering of āgamya (“thanks to”).
In the translation of the Twenty-Five Thousand, “discerned” takes yod pa to be the Tib translation of Gilgit, Kimura, and Ghoṣa’s prajñāyante.
Z suggests “metaphorically” as a translation for paryāyeṇa (rnam grangs kyis). In the Twenty-Five Thousand this is rendered “in a manner.”
LSPW uses “endeavor” and “join” for yuj and its derivatives; brtson does mean “to endeavor, make an effort,” but as Z notes, Kumārajīva’s Chinese translation of this includes the meaning “compliant with,” that is, fitting, or logically established.
“Flowing along together” renders lhan cig kun tu rgyu (saha samavasaratīti).
“Does not obstruct” renders thogs par byed pa (rūpayati) (more usually gzugs su yod pa/rung ba), the Abhidharma definition of form; each of the following is the definition of the respective aggregate.
“Without conjunction or disjunction” (’du ba dang ’bral ba) (=there is nothing together and there is nothing apart) renders ayogāviyoga (a secondary formation from yuj cognate with English “yoke,” and from which English gets the loan word “yoga”). The passive past participle yukta of the same root (yuj) has been rendered “engaged.” The sense of yuj is of different things coming or being together. The Tib renders yoga/viyoga here with the nonvoluntary/intransitive forms of coming/being together and separating/being separate. In the immediately following sections yojayati (“they cause X to engage with Y” or “they associate X with Y”) is a causal formed from the same root. The Tib renders it with the voluntary/transitive form of ’du (bsdud) and the voluntary/transitive ’byed (“to make separate”).
“Yogic practice” renders rnal ’byor (yoga).
Bṭ1, pp. 761–62: “From ‘Śāradvatīputra, bodhisattva great beings who practice accordingly are said to engage with the perfection of wisdom, but, even though they practice the perfection of wisdom in that manner, they do not observe that hey are either “engaged” or “not engaged” with physical forms’ up to ‘In this way, Śāradvatīputra, because all phenomena are without conjunction or disjunction, bodhisattva great beings are said to engage with the perfection of wisdom’ is an explanation presenting in a different form their entering into the defining mark of engagement on account of having abandoned the notion that they are engaging or not engaging, because they themselves have no notion that they are those who are doing something and because they do not have the wrong view of a self. From ‘Moreover, Śāradvatīputra, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, they neither cause emptiness to engage with nor to disengage from emptiness,’ up to ‘They neither cause wishlessness to engage with nor to disengage from wishlessness, nor the yogic practice of wishlessness’ is the three gateways to liberation. It teaches the defining mark of engaging as the abandonment of the notion of causing engagement or causing disengagement. Were there to be some attribute ‘emptiness’ that is an existent thing it might be possible to cause engagement and cause disengagement with something other than that emptiness, but because some attribute ‘emptiness’ that is an existent thing is not established at all they do not cause emptiness to engage with emptiness, nor disengage from it. Take ‘nor the yogic practice of emptiness with the emptiness meditative stability. It is saying that the meditative stability that is an existent thing also does not exist, so they do not cause the meditative stability to engage with it or disengage from it. Construe signlessness and wishlessness in the same way. ‘If you ask why, it is because there is neither conjunction nor disjunction in emptiness,’ and so on, teach the reason why the three gateways to liberation are not existent things.” Cf. Bṭ3 4.293.
“Enter into” (’jug) and the immediately following “understanding” (khong du chud) both render forms of the same verb avatṝ (Z, p. 394; PSP 1–1:66).
This means the emptiness of the defining marks particular to specific dharmas. This emptiness comes after “the emptiness of all phenomena” in the list of emptinesses. Bṭ1, p. 762: “It teaches that they neither engage with nor disengage from the five aggregates and so on, because their own intrinsic defining characteristics are not established.”
“Associate with” (sbyor) and the earlier “cause to engage” (bsdud) render the same word yojayati, a causal form of yuj. Each of the phenomena, starting with physical forms, is a basis for designating a “bodhisattva.” The negation is of the bodhisattva, at any level, and when enlightened, causing the engagement of any of the phenomena, that are the basis on which they are labeled a person, with its definition, for instance, or with a particular time period and so on.
Z, p. 394 (22v11), [try]adhvasamatāśūnyatām upādāya. Ghoṣa, p. 168, “because of the sameness of the [three] times” (adhvasamānatā upādāya); PSP, 1–1:67, “because of the emptiness of time” (adhvaśūnyatām upādāya).
PSP, 1–1:67, evaṃ yujyamānaḥ; Gilgit, Ghoṣa evaṃ yukta (Eighteen Thousand, ka 31b3 (3.36), brston), “engage.”
Ghoṣa, p. 168, and Z, p. 395 sarvajñatā; the Twenty-Five Thousand’s rnam pa thams cad mkhyen pa is Kimura, 1–1:67, sarvākārajñatā.
Here, and in all the following, the eva (Tib nyid: “the very,” “the actual”) has not been rendered separately in English.
Ghoṣa, p. 175, adhyātmaśūnyatām eva. It is not possible to write stong pa nyid nyid in Tib.
This is the reading in all versions, including the S Hundred Thousand, ka 180a7. It is also the reading in the following mtshan ma med pa section. In the smon pa med pa section that follows that, however, it reverts to listing all the fruits, starting from the fruit of having entered the stream, and leaves out “omniscience” (sarvajñatā).
“Stable” and “unstable,” or “secure” and “insecure,” render sāra and durbala. The Eighteen Thousand, 33a7 (3.41), has snying po can and nyam chung ba, “strong” or “weak.”
Gilgit, 24v8, but with nopaiti; the Eighteen Thousand, 33b2 (3.42), has khas mi len (“does not assert”) (since the plural “bodhisattva great beings” is used, this is “do not assert”) in place of mi dmigs pa (“does not apprehend”). Ghoṣa omits.
Gilgit, 25r4–5, and the Eighteen Thousand, 3.43 put “the emptiness of nonarising” after “the emptiness of all phenomena” in the list of emptinesses. (In the Eighteen Thousand these are actually rendered “the emptiness of all dharmas” followed by “the emptiness of the unproduced.”) They both, together with Ghoṣa, p. 250, omit “the emptiness of nonceasing.” Kimura, 1–1:72, tacks on the emptinesses of bhāva, abhāva, svabhāva, and parabhāva in place of these two emptinesses. The order in the list, from “the perfection of generosity” down to “the very limit of reality,” is problematic.
“Different sorts of miraculous ability,” the different kinds of them, or performances of them, renders rdzu ’phrul gyi rnam pa; Ghoṣa, p. 252, and Kimura, 1–1:72, ṛddhividhi.
This renders Ghoṣa, p. 252, sarvvākāraṃ sarvvābhijñā upalapsyate, not as “all extrasensory powers” but as “extrasensory powers that know all.”
“Have been born” renders skyes par gyur pa (upapanna).
The reading here, Gilgit, 25v4–5, pradakṣiṇībhavanti (mthun par ’grub po), is discussed by Z, p. 232, n. 142; Bṭ1, p. 772, glosses “without being falsely imagined” as “establish without hesitation or doubt.”
Dutt, p. 55, and Ghoṣa, p. 256, doṣa; Z, p. 398, roga (“sickness”).
Bṭ1, p. 774, says “conjoin” and “separate,” and “come together” and “not come together” are synonyms.
Here the “phenomenon” (dharma) is a property—specifically, something’s emptiness—and the “phenomena” in “realm of phenomena” means the totality of all those properties taken together. Everything (confusingly called sarvadharmāḥ, “all phenomena,” by which is meant sarvadharmiṇaḥ, “all things that have a property”) has the property of, or is qualified by, its emptiness.
This borrows from Z’s translation, p. 359, n. 178.
The Twenty-Five Thousand, 2.155, renders this, “This is because they do not observe anything at all by which anything could be comprehended, and also because they do not engage with the notion that the realm of phenomena is empty, and nor do they engage with the notion that it is not empty.” Taking the thing that has a phenomenon = property (dharma), or the thing that has a property/phenomenon (dharmin) as the realm of phenomena, and taking empty and not empty as the possible properties qualifying it, in the absence of the thing being qualified (or because the thing being qualified and the qualification are ultimately the same) they could not “associate” or join the two together.
It is not clear whether the emphasis is on the fact that beings, as the object of empathy, are unproduced, or that bodhisattvas as practitioners of the perfection of wisdom are unproduced, an ambiguity retained in LSPW and Z’s translation “through the fact of the nonproduction of a being.” The Twenty-Five Thousand, 2.160, has “based on [the truth that] beings are nonarising.”
Gilgit, 27r9, and Kimura 1–1:79. Ghoṣa, p. 266, has “perfection of wisdom” in place of “emptiness.”
This renders bsnyen bkur byed par ’gyur (ārāgayati).
This last statement from PSP, 1–1: 80, tasyāpi pañutarāṇīndriyāṇi bhavanti, is only found in D. All the other editions of the Hundred Thousand, as well as D Twenty-Five Thousand, ka 2.163, omit. Gilgit, 27v7, and Ghoṣa, p. 266, omit.
PSP, 1–1: 80, avipramuṣita; LSPW, “of which he never loses sight”; Ghoṣa, p. 267, avipranaṣṭa.
This is a slightly abbreviated version of the passage associated with the (candidate for) stream enterer at PSP, 1–1: 81: santi śāradvatīputra bodhisattvā mahāsattvāḥ prajñāpāramitāyāṃ caranto ghañamānā vyāyacchantaḥ sattvaparipākāyopāyakauśalyabalena srotaāpattiphalaṃ sākṣātkurvanti, na ca tena manyante (where ghañamānā vyāyacchantaḥ? is rendered at le’u brgyad ma, ga 69a1–2, as sbyor ba la brtson par byed pa la, “persevering at the practice”). This is omitted from Gilgit, Ghoṣa, the other editions of the Kangyur, and from the Twenty-Five Thousand, 2.165, and the Eighteen Thousand, 3.59.
tshe’i tshul bzhin du gnas, literally “remaining in the mode of a life”; the Eighteen Thousand, 3.66, has “for as long as they live.”
Gilgit, 29r1. Cp. Ghoṣa, p. 271, probably a mistake.
Kimura, 1–1:82, tataś cyut[v?]ā; Ghoṣa, p. 271, and Gilgit, 29r5, omit.
Tib rnam par mnan pa means “to press down on,” but Gilgit, 29b4-5, viṣkadya viṣkandya; Ghoṣa, p. 273, viṣkadya; Kimura, 1–1, avaskandakena. The Eighteen Thousand, ka 40b2 (3.75), thod rgal du means “leaping above.”
PSP, 1–1: 84, maṇimuktāsuvarṇarūpyapravāḍa.
Ghoṣa, p. 276, and Gilgit, 30r6.
le’u brgyad ma, ga 72a1–5, and PSP 1–1: 84–85: yāvad daśakuśalakarmapatheṣu sattvān pratiṣṭhāpya brahmakāyikeṣu yāvad akaniṣṭheṣu deveṣūpapadyamānā nānābuddhakṣetreṣv anuttarāṃ samyaksaṃbodhim abhisaṃbudhyante. ity akaniṣṭhaparamaḥ. santi śāradvatīputra bodhisattvā mahāsattvā ye catvāri dhyānāni niṣpādya dhyānebhyaḥ parihīṇāḥ prathamaṃ dhyānam āsādya (the translators read āsvādya, ro myongs) brahmakāyikeṣu deveṣūpapadyante, te punar dhyānāni niṣpādyākaniṣṭheṣūpapadya nānābuddhakṣetreṣv anuttarāṃ samyaksaṃbodhim abhisaṃbudhyante. iti plutaḥ. santi śāradvatīputra bodhisattvā mahāsattvā ye brahmalokāc cyutvā śuddhāvāseṣūpapadyante, te śuddhāvāsānām ekaṃ vā dve vā sthāne vilaṅghyākaniṣṭheṣu deveṣūpapadya nānābuddhakṣetreṣv anuttarāṃ samyaksaṃbodhim abhisaṃbudhyante. Haribhadra connects this with the first two of the three akaniṣṭhaparama (“those intent on Akaniṣṭha”), namely, the pluta (“floaters”) and ardhapluta (“floaters over half”). This is omitted from Gilgit, Ghoṣa, the other editions of the Kangyur, and the Twenty-Five Thousand and Eighteen Thousand.
This line takes up again from the le’u brgyad ma, ga 72b5, and PSP, 1–1: 85 ekajātipratibaddhāś ca bodhisattvā mahāsattvās tatra tatra buddhakṣetreṣūpapadya nānābuddhakṣetreṣv anuttarāṃ samyaksaṃbodhim abhisaṃbudhyante, which Haribhadra connects with the sarvasthānacyuta (“those who die in every place”), the third of the three divisions of the akaniṣṭhaparama (“those intent on Akaniṣṭha”). The reader is supposed to connect this last sentence with all ten directions. It is omitted from Gilgit, Ghoṣa, the other editions of the Hundred Thousand in the Kangyur, and from the Twenty-Five Thousand and Eighteen Thousand, as are the following two paragraphs also found at PSP, 1-1: 86, and the le’u brgyad ma, ga 72b6–7.
D has omitted the snyoms par ’jug pa (PSP, 1-1: 86, dhyānārūpyasamāpattīr) as has le’u brgyad ma, ga 72b6, where this is rendered gzugs med par sgrub par byed pa.
Cf. Ghoṣa, p. 280, and Gilgit, 30v9, durgativinipātaṃ prapatanti; PSP, 1-1: 86, apāyadurgativinipāteṣu; and le’u brgyad ma, ga 73a7, ngan song ngan ’gro log par ltung ba rnams su.
Alternatively, “Śāradvatīputra, there are bodhisattva great beings standing in the six perfections who illuminate the darkness of beings with wrong views with the illumination of the buddhadharmas, and they never separate themselves from the illumination of the buddhadharmas up until they fully awaken to unsurpassed, perfect, complete awakening.”
This is PSP, 1-1: 87–88. Haribhadra, having connected the immediately preceding passage with “candidates for arhatship” (arhattvapratipannaka), connects this with pratyekabuddhas. Again, it is omitted from Gilgit, Ghoṣa, the other editions of the Kangyur, and the Twenty-Five Thousand 2.197 and Eighteen Thousand 3.96.
Ghoṣa, p. 281, and Gilgit, 31r5, ayaṃ śāradvatīputra bodhisattvānāṃ mahāsattvānām [sam]udayo buddhadharmmeṣu. PSP, 1–1: 87, omits.
“Basic” means an immorality not contingent on a prior commitment to a code of conduct.
Ghoṣa, p. 286, ātmabhāva; alternatively, “become possessed of the sort of personality.”
According to traditional Indian cosmology, our human world of Patient Endurance (sahālokadhātu, mi mjed ’jig rten gyi khams) is said to comprise four continents (caturdvīpa, gling bzhi), namely Pūrvavideha (lus ’phags) in the east, Jambudvīpa in the south, Aparagodānīya (ba glang spyod) in the west, and Uttarakuru (sgra mi snyan) in the north. A single world system (cakravāla) extends from the realms of the hells, anguished spirits, and animals, through the human abodes, and through the celestial domains of the six god realms belonging to the realm of desire, the seventeen god realms of the realm of form, and the four activity fields of the realm of formlessness. In association with the four meditative concentrations, this single world system multiplies incrementally: the thousandfold world system (sāhasralokadhātu, stong ’gi ’jig rten gyi khams) comprises one thousand such parallel worlds, the millionfold world system (dvisāhasramadhyamalokadhātu, stong gnyis pa ’jig rten gyi khams ’bring po) one thousand of those, and the great billionfold world (trisāhasramahāsāhasralokadhātu, stong sum gyi stong chen po’i ’jig rten gyi khams) one thousand of those yet again. For an analysis of the divergent traditions associated with this cosmology, see Kloetzli 1983, pp. 23–90.
“All within range” has been added to the English translation here and below to make the meaning easier to understand.
“Know” is supplied from Kimura 1–1:94–5; Ghoṣa, p. 297, jānāti / yat kañcit samudayadharmmaṃ sarvvaṃ taṃ nirodhadharmmeti viditvā.
This is the forbearance (kṣānti, bzod pa) for the truth that phenomena are nonarising, the realization that whatever the attainment, it has no intrinsic nature. An alternative translation is “receptiveness.”
This is the vow, while sitting under the Bodhi tree at the site of awakening, not to arise from meditation until perfectly and completely awakened.
Gilgit, 34r12, and Dutt āsannasthāyin. Twenty-Five Thousand, ka 75a3 (2.230); Eighteen Thousand, ka 48b5, (3.123); and le’u brgyad ma, ga 81a7, nye bar gnas. Ghoṣa, p. 300, āsattvasthāyin; Edg, s.v. āsattvasthāyin, “abiding until the coming into existence” of the buddhas.
Here, “in their final rebirth” renders srid pa tha ma pa (caramabhavika). A srid pa (bhava) is “an existence”; elsewhere rendered “process of rebirth” or just “existence.”
Ghoṣa, p. 301, janayitrī (“genetrix”).
Edg, s.v. pratyanubhavati (2) says “uncertain whether mg. is experiences, enjoys ... or gets”; cf. Daśabhūmikasūtra (Rahder, pp. 34–36).
The reading here has “broad” (yangs pa) without the Twenty-Five Thousand, ka 77a4-5, (2.236) “narrow” (dog pa’i sems la dog dog pa’i sems).
Gilgit, 35v2, has “collected” and “distracted” (saṃkṣipta and vikṣipta), and “circumscribed” and “expanded” (parītta and vipula), followed by “has gotten bigger” (mahadgata) and “immeasurable” (apramāṇa), apparently as opposites. The Twenty-Five Thousand 2.236 renders “has gotten bigger” (che bar gyur pa) by “evolving.” Kimura, 1–1:99, does not have apramāṇa.
This renders rnam pa dang bcas (sākāra) gtan tshigs dang bcas (Kimura, 1–1:100, sādṛśa; Gilgit, 35v11, sodeśa; Ghoṣa, p. 304, soddeśa) ngan rtags dang bcas (sadoṣa?). The Twenty-Five Thousand 2.237 accepts the variant reading found in KPD, vol. 26, n. 2 (Yongle and Peking), don rtags (sanirdeśaṃ), and renders it “indications.”
Bṭ1, p. 807: “Take ‘unlimited’ (ananta) with having forsaken the two limits (extremes) of superimposition and overnegation. They do not superimpose that there is ultimately an existent thing, and do not conventionally overnegate as nonexistence. ‘Because their minds are unattached (anavagṛhītacittatām upādāya)’ means they do not have a wrong view of, or settle down on, all three—the giver, the recipient, and the material gift— as existent things. Put it together as this: when they give without superimposing and overnegating, and when the three circles [i.e., the giver, the recipient, and the material gift] are purified, they cleanse the path to the knowledge of all aspects.”
Ghoṣa, p. 308, and Gilgit, 37r11–12, yathāprāvṛtaiś cīvarair bhagavantam abhicchādayanti sma; Kimura, 1–1:103, yathāvṛtaiś cīvarair abhicchādayām āsur. Tib renders abhicchādaya with yon du gsol ba, in the sense of making a payment for a received teaching. The sense of the Skt abhicchāday (“to cover”) is to cover or shower someone with gifts. All the Skt versions have nuns (bhikṣuṇī, dge slong ma) rather than monks, which makes good sense.
The Skt editions all have Mahāketu, not Mahāśrī; dpal is not attested as rendering ketu (the expected rendering is the Eighteen Thousand, ka 53b3 (3.147), me tog) in any of the reference works consulted. It is presumably an old translation, but has been translated literally.
In the Daśabhūmika, myi sgul ba (Acala?) is the rendering not of Akṣobhya but of Avicālya.
This is a literal translation. The Twenty-Five Thousand (2.248) renders this, “Let us generate the merits through which we will be reborn in those buddhafields.”
Emend D thug to K thub; Gilgit, 38r6, anavamardanīya; Ghoṣa, p. 311, anavamṛdya; Lokesh Candra, Sanskrit Tibetan Dictionary, International Academy of Indian Culture, 2007, s.v. anavamṛdya.
Tib de’i slad du is an honorific form of de’i phyir that means both “because of/on account of that/those” and “to that end” (Twenty-Five Thousand 2.255 (ka 82b4)) depending on context. Gilgit, 38r6, and Kimura, 1–1:105, tair; Eighteen Thousand, ka 54b (4.2), de dag gis, Large Sutra, p. 93; Ghoṣa, p. 311, tena.
Bṭ1, p. 812: “For the happiness of perfect separation” means, at the time of nirvāṇa, excellently separated from both afflictive obstruction and obstruction to knowing; Edgerton, s.v. visaṃyoga.
Twenty-Five Thousand 2.272 renders these “coral flowers, large coral flowers, crocuses, and mangosteen leaves.”
It is “outer” in the sense of the environment seen from the perspective of a perceiving subject.
Emend kyis to kyi.
Ghoṣa, p. 334, tadyathāpi nāma subhūte atītānāṃ buddhānāṃ bhagavatāṃ yāvad eva nāma mātraṃ tiṣṭhati; Kimura, 1–1:114, omits.
The “phenomena” are the aggregates, sense fields, and sensory elements listed in the previous paragraphs. To not “mentally construct” or “conceptualize” any phenomenon means without projecting onto any of them an intrinsic nature or absolute truth. The earlier list of phenomena is now expanded to include all the dharmas, including those associated with bodhisattvas and buddhas.
Ghoṣa, p. 372, samyakprahāṇabhāvanāyai supports reading phyir as a dative of purpose but it accidentally omits smṛtyupasthāna.
Ghoṣa, p. 381, tathā hi te sarvvadharmmā na saṃvidyante / yañ cābhiniviśeta / yena vābhiniviśeta / yatra vābhiniviśeta. Bṭ1, p. 823: “This means that the name that might be attached, the attachment on account of which it might be attached, and the thing that it might be attached to—they all do not ultimately exist.”
Again, this rendering of skyon med pa incorporates the creative etymology of nyāma from ni plus āma (“raw”). If derived from niyāma it is “the secure state of a bodhisattva.”
Bṭ1, p. 825, glosses “in physical forms” (gzugs la, rūpe) and “in a bodhisattva” with “basis and based on” (gzhi dang gnas).
gzugs med pa zhig; PSP, 1-1: 132, arūpo, Ghoṣa, p. 382, ārūpi.
In the Tibetan corresponding to this paragraph, both for this text and for the Twenty-Five Thousand (3.180), the many instances of Sanskrit dhātu have been translated as the Tibetan dbyings rather than khams, which would be much more usual in the context of the basic constituents of a sentient being including the sensory elements, etc. We have nevertheless interpreted chos kyi dbyings (dharmadhātu) in this passage as referring to the sensory element of mental phenomena rather than to the “realm of phenomena” in its wider sense; see the glossary definition for “realm of phenomena.” It is not clear why the Tibetan translators preferred the term dbyings here.
Ghoṣa, p. 471, and Kimura, 1–1:146, prajñapayitum is rendered gdags (“to designate”) but can be rendered literally by “make known”; a prajñapti (gdags pa) is a “designation,” “representation,” or “concept.”
byang chub kyi sems, Gilgit, 472, bodhicitta, in place of the Twenty-Five Thousand’s (3.181) byang chub sems dpa’i sems (“the mind of bodhisattvas”). Kimura, 1–1:147, omits.
“Shoulder ornament” renders dpung rgyan (keyūra), “upper arm bracelet,” which is a royal insignia of victory.
skyon chen po. le’u brgyad ma has rtse mo’i skyon; the Eighteen Thousand has skyon gyi spyi gtsug. Edg, s.v. mūdhāma, comments on Ghoṣa’s reading skyon med pa, nyāma. Note that when nyāma is understood as niyāma it means “secure,” “fixed,” “definite.”
Here “immaturity,” skyon chen po (mūdhāma), is contrasted with the “maturity,” skyon med pa (nyāma, niyāma), that comes below.
“Maturity” renders skyon med pa.
“Impediment” renders gcod pa; Gilgit, 52v12, nīcaraṇa?
All the Tib editions of the Hundred Thousand omit sems; Ghoṣa, Kimura, and Gilgit all have citta, as does the Twenty-Five Thousand (“mindsets of the śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas”).
The absence of thams cad shes pa here, not just from D but from all the other versions (including gser bri ma, kha 79a) is noteworthy. Below (kha 9b (5.389)) thams cad shes pa is included in the list.
Alternatively, “a direct eyewitness to the attributes who witnesses with the body,” as in the Vṛtti of Ārya Vimuktisena (Pensa edition, p. 44): “Non-returners who have attained the cessation absorption are called those who witness with the body because they witness a nirvāṇa-like dharma with their body. Why do they witness with their body? Because it is produced based on the body, since they are without thought (cittābhāva).”
“Without afflicted mental states” renders araṇa; raṇa generally means “conflict,” so a more literal translation of araṇa would be “without conflict.” The translation reflects the Tibetan, which is nyon mongs pa med pa.
“Even” renders kyang (api). “Those” is only added because of the requirements of English syntax, but this reading is corroborated by Gilgit, 53r10: śrāvakabhūmav api śīkṣitukāmenāyuṣmansubhūte iyam eva prajñāpāramitā prayatnataḥ, etc. However, Kimura, 1–1:155, śrāvakabhūmāv api āyuṣman subhūte śikṣitukāmena bodhisattvena mahāsattvena iyam eva prajñāpāramitā; Ghoṣa, p. 503, śrāvakabhūmāv api śikṣitukāmenāyuṣman subhūte bodhisattvena mahāsattvena; and the Eighteen Thousand (7.30) explicitly say “bodhisattva great beings,” a reading with substantively different implications.
This renders Gilgit, 53v3, and Ghoṣa, p. 504, na sthitaṃ na viṣṭhitaṃ nādhiṣṭhitaṃ, literally “do not stand, do not not stand, and do not stand above.” Kimura, 1-1:156, differs. Bṭ1, p. 851, explains the three words as follows: “ ‘Blessed Lord, even those names are unstable, intangible, and powerless’ and so on. Even those names bodhisattva and perfection of wisdom are not real bases fit to be spoken, so it is teaching the elimination of the two extremes of ‘stable’ and ‘unstable.’ Were a real basis to exist, there are two alternatives: it would, as a conditioned phenomenon like a physical form and so on, be stable in a place or region, or, as an unconditioned phenomenon like space and so on, not be stable in a place or region. Hence, it is teaching that, insofar as those names are without real bases, they are not stable, and hence they are also not not stable. ‘Intangible’ means they are not even unstable. ‘Powerless’ means they are not, having eliminated both the extremes of stable and unstable, powerful [=super-stable (adhisthita)], stable, as a real basis that is not stable and is not not stable. Thus, having briefly taught the elimination of the overreification and overnegation from the perspective of both a bodhisattva and a perfection of wisdom that have or do not have a real basis, and the practice separated from grasping at the two extremes of the name bodhisattva and the name perfection of wisdom being stable and not stable,” etc.
The order of terms beginning with “realm of phenomena” is the order found at Ghoṣa, p. 544, and Kimura, 1–1:159 (dharmadhātu, tathāgata/tathatā, bhūtakoṭi, dharmmasthititā, dharmmaniyāmatā). Twenty-Five Thousand 5.12 follows the order at Kimura, 1–2:56, but with dharmadhātu given twice in the same list.
The reading in Ghoṣa is kiṃ na tad ity ucyate (“Why is it not called that?), and na should probably be emended to ca.
Twenty-Five Thousand, ka 130a (5.13), has btags par bstan (“teach to be a designation”) in place of brtags par bstan.
Here “reason” renders don gyi dbang. It intends the nexus between a basis of designation (in this case all the phenomena beginning with physical forms) and a thing designated (in this case the bodhisattva, or, more exactly, the term bodhisattva), each avoiding overreification and overnegation, respectively.
Twenty-Five Thousand, ka 135a (5.22), adds the meditative stabilities and the extrasensory powers here; Ghoṣa, p. 565, omits.
N, K; D omits.
Bṭ1, p. 878: “There, in ‘they should not dwell in syllables,’ they should not dwell by viewing the syllables, the seed syllables a and so on, as existent things. ‘They should not dwell in syllable accomplishments.’ Syllable accomplishment is the production of the knowledge that causes the realization of the meaning, anutpāda (‘nonproduction’), after resorting to the seed syllable a, and so on, used as a dhāraṇī. This teaches that they should not stand there either. That dhāraṇī knowledge is a product of such explanations as ‘a is the door to all dharmas because they are unproduced from the very beginning.’ That statement of the seed syllable, furthermore, becomes a condition for full awakening when certain bodhisattva great beings with sharp faculties resort to and have meditated on the single meaning of nonproduction. It becomes a condition for full awakening when those with middling faculties resort to two syllables and have become familiar with two statements. And it becomes a condition for full awakening when many statements become a condition for full awakening when those with dull faculties resort to them and have become familiar with them. Hence it says ‘they should not dwell in singular expressions, dual expressions, or plural expressions.’ ”
“The notion that physical forms are impermanent” renders Ghoṣa, p. 568, rūpam anityam iti.
The inclusion of thams cad shes pa nyid in the list here is noteworthy. Ghoṣa, p. 601, omits.
The list omits thams cad shes pa nyid (“omniscience”).
“Investigate” renders Ghoṣa, p. 613, vyupaparīkṣa. The Tibetan is brtag (the future tense form of rtog pa). For an alternate rendering, see Twenty-Five Thousand 5.49: “determine that all phenomena are the emptiness … determine that there is no mental wandering.”
D tshad ma mchis par nges pa. Ghoṣa, p. 613, niyata (nges pa). The “immeasurable” here is enlightenment.
Ghoṣa, p. 615, and Kimura, 1–1:172, sarvvajñajñāne.
The list omits thams cad shes pa nyid.
LSPW, p. 135; Twenty-Five Thousand 5.55; le’u brgyad ma, ga 145b1; PSP, 1-1: 173; and Ghoṣa, p. 633, apārapāragatām.
Ghoṣa, p. 681, satatasamitam (khor zug rtag par); cf. Jäschke s.v. khor mo yug.
Bṭ1, p. 904: “Because of philosophical error they have a philosophical view of, and are intent on [or believe in], a physical form that is an existing thing. Because of perceptual error, they grasp the mental image of good or bad and so on. Because of mental error they are attached to [or settle down on] and possess the functioning reality (dngos po) of physical form. ‘They engage in the conditioning of physical forms.’ This means that when they thus, because of such philosophical error, perceptual error, and mental error, see a physical form that is an existing thing and practice like that, they make a physical form a conditioned thing that will arise and cease and so on and do not practice the perfection of wisdom.” Bṭ3 4.612, explaining the three in the different order found at Eighteen Thousand, ka 88a (9.6), says: “ ‘Possess’ (gnas, adhisthā), ‘form a notion’ (kun tu shes, saṃjñā), and ‘believe’ (mos, adhimuc) in form. They ‘possess’ because of mental (citta) error, ‘form a notion’ (’du shes, saṃjñā) because of perceptual error, and ‘believe’ (lta ba, dṛṣṭi) because of philosophical error.” See also Bṭ3, n.592.
“Actualize” renders mngon du bya ba. Ghoṣa, p. 764, sākṣāt karttuṃ (“directly witness”).
This renders the Tib based on Gilgit, 59v10–11, and Ghoṣa, p. 765, where there are just the separate statements (rūpaṃ) na carati and (rūpam) asya nimitte na carati. Alternatively, the lhag bcas in mi spyod de and the cing in mi spyod cing may suggest “they do not engage with physical forms, which is to say (de), they do not engage with mental images of physical forms; (cing) they do not engage with the notion that physical forms are permanent,” and so on, making clear that permanence and so on are the nimittas.
The eighteen sensory elements (dhātu) begin here because the set of twelve sense fields (āyatana), which come after the five aggregates (skandha), are complete.
The presence of thams cad shes pa nyid (sarvajñatā) here is noteworthy.
The translators evidently read upalabh in place of upe or understood upe as upalabh. The Mvy does not attest dmigs as a translation of upe in any of its forms.
This renders de; Twenty-Five Thousand, ka 152a (6.14), cing. Cf. Gilgit, 60r11–12, anupādattā; Ghoṣa, p. 825, and Kimura, 1–1:182, (tena) anupāttaḥ.
Alternatively, “assured of the crest of the victory banner.”
This meditative stability named excellently well established and the following meditative stabilities named well-engaging king of meditative stabilities, diffusion of light rays, without mistakes, because of the diffusion of light rays not making mistakes, and power of effort (rab tu bde bar gnas pa, ting nge ’dzin gyi rgyal po bde bar ’jug pa, ’od zer rab tu ’gyed pa, ’khrul pa med pa, ’od zer rab tu ’gyed pas ’khrul pa med par byed pa, and brtson pa’i stobs) are probably the result of a cascade of copying errors. They are missing from the list in the Twenty-Five Thousand; from Gilgit, 60v4–5, Ghoṣa, p. 826, and Kimura, 1–1:183; and are not found in the Mvy. In the later list (8.109) they are missing from Ghoṣa, p. 1267, and are omitted from the Choné Kangyur.
Eighteen Thousand 7.8, rājamudra. Missing from the Twenty-Five Thousand’s list, and from Gilgit, 60v6, Ghoṣa, p. 826, and Kimura, 1–1:183.
Eighteen Thousand 7.8, trimaṇḍalapariśuddha. Missing from the list in the Twenty-Five Thousand, and from Gilgit, 60v6, Ghoṣa, p. 826, and Kimura, 1–1:183.
This and the next are missing from the list in the Twenty-Five Thousand. They may simply be intended or accidental alternative renderings of siṃhavijṛmbhita, which can mean a lion’s yawn and a lion’s stretch. Mvy gives forms of prasṛ like prasāraṇa (“spreading,” “stretching out,” “extending”) for forms of rkyong, and gives glal as rendering forms of (vi)jṛmbh.
Myv attests both snrel zhi and snrel gzhi. Mvy snrel zhi snyoms par ’jug pa renders vyāstakrantakasamāpatti. dag yig gsar bsgrigs, Zi ling: Mtsho sngon mi rigs dpe bskrun khang, 2003, glosses this as “crowning” (thod rgal ba’i don), equating vyatyasta with vyāstakrantaka = vyākrantaka or vyutkrānta.
This is missing from the list in the Twenty-Five Thousand, and from Gilgit 60v7–8, Ghoṣa p. 826, and Kimura 1-1:183.
This is missing from the list in the Twenty-Five Thousand.
Skt MSS have śuddhāvāsa (pure abode) or śuddhābhāsa (pure illumination); however, Kimura gives śuddhasāra in a later list, and this is the reading adopted here.
This is missing from the list in the Twenty-Five Thousand.
This renders D jig pa, C ’jigs pa (“fearless”), also in the Twenty-Five Thousand, perhaps reading vibhaya in place of Gilgit, 60v10, and Ghoṣa vivarṇa; Kimura vivṛta.
This is missing from the list in the Twenty-Five Thousand.
This is missing from the list in the Twenty-Five Thousand. Gilgit, Ghoṣa, and Kimura omit.
This renders chos kyis ’phags pa (dharmodgata); cf. the Twenty-Five Thousand’s chos kyi ’phags pa, g.1083.
This and the following two meditative stabilities are missing the list in the Twenty-Five Thousand, and from Gilgit, Ghoṣa, and Kimura.
This, rnam par nges pa (*viniścaya), and the following meditative stability are missing from the list in the Twenty-Five Thousand.
Alternatively, where objective supports have been cut off. Gilgit, 60v14, āraṃbanaccheda; Ghoṣa, p. 831, and Kimura, 1–1:184, āvaraṇa (“obscuration”).
This meditative stability named entering into names and signs and the following named free from activity are missing from the list in the Twenty-Five Thousand.
nges par gnas pa, Kimura (consistently with tathatā) sthitaniścita. Cf. the Twenty-Five Thousand and Eighteen Thousand, ka 152ab (15.105), sems med par gnas pa, and Ghoṣa, p. 832, sthitaniścitta, (abiding without mentation).
This renders gnas su bya ba med pa, niradhiṣṭhāna (“without anything to serve as a foundation”).
This is missing from list in the Twenty-Five Thousand.
This and the next six meditative stabilities are missing from the list in the Twenty-Five Thousand. The name of the bodhisattva Ratnagarbha is rendered rin chen snying po (“Jewel Heart”).
This renders mngon par dmigs pa med pa; alternatively, “without a manifest objective support.”
This is missing from the list in the Twenty-Five Thousand.
This is missing from the list in the Twenty-Five Thousand.
This and the next four are missing from the list in the Twenty-Five Thousand.
This and the next two are missing from the list in the Twenty-Five Thousand.
This assumes kun tu rtog pa is derived not from saṃkḷp but from saṃvīkṣ.
This is missing from the list in the Twenty-Five Thousand.
I.e., of all phenomena.
“Fixated” renders chags par bya ba, Ghoṣa p. 842 abhiniviṣṭāḥ.
Skt vid means both “exist” and “know”; saṃvid has the same two meanings, perhaps intensified (“completely exist” or “completely know”). In Skt, therefore, the sentence means, at one and the same time: “As they are not known, so are they known. Thus, not being known, one says ‘ignorance,’ ” and, “As they do not exist, so do they exist. Thus, not existing, one says ‘not existing.’ ”
Ghoṣa, p. 863, adds “great loving kindness” here.
Gn1, p. 916: “when ordinary foolish people mistakenly see the nonexistent as existent they imagine and become fixated on all sorts of various things.”
Ghoṣa, p. 877, niryāti (“are not emancipated in” or “do not go forth to”); Kimura, 1–1:190, niryāsyati. The Tib ’byung ba has been rendered both by “go forth [to]” and by “emancipated [in],” depending on the context.
Ghoṣa, p. 905, saṃjñāsamajñāprajñaptivyavahāraḥ. Āryavimuktisena (Pensa 69, translated Sparham vol. 1, p. 75) says, “A saṃjñā (=notion, name) is the word for the causal sign (nimitta) of something; a samajñā (=symbol, denomination, literally ‘same knowledge’) is the word for the knowledge ‘me’ that goes in tandem with (sameta) the something (as in ‘I see the form with my eye,’ etc.). A prajñapti (=designation) is the representation (vijñāpana) within which there is settling on known and knowledge as object and subject. A vyavahāra (term, conventional expression) is [the Bodhisattva as mere] different (vividha) activity (vyavahāra) connected with things received or not received from others.”
“Denomination” renders nāmaprajñapti (ming du gdags pa); cp. dharmaprajñapti (“designation for something”). The idea is that a name, as much as the named, is also just designated.
“Are in their essential nature no essence” renders dngos po ma mchis pa’i rang bzhin (abhāvasvabhāvaḥ). In the list of emptinesses this abhāvasvabhāvaḥ is consistently rendered dngos po med pa’i ngo bo nyid (“essential nature of nonentities”).
“Find agreeable” renders mos pa (rocana); Conze has “find pleasure in.”
Cp. Ghoṣa, p. 923, tasyā yā teṣāṃ sarvvākārajñatāpratisaṃyuktānāṃ manasikārāṇām anutsarjanatā anikṣiptadhuratā iyaṃ bodhisattvasya mahāsattvasya vīryyapāramitā.
“Deny any opportunity for … to impede” (bgegs su ’gyur ba … skabs [alternatively] go mi ’byed pa, na … tad; avakāśaṃ dadati … ye paripanthakārāḥ).
This renders the past passive participle in active voice. Literally it says they have “been fully taken hold of” (yongs su zin pa, parigṛhīta), which in this context means that the bodhisattvas have been guided or mentored by a learned compassionate guru teaching the two truths, and by skillful means and great compassion (saṃparigraha). Cf. Abhisamayālaṃkāra 1.37.
Here the first “unconditioned” renders asaṃskṛta and the second anabhisaṃskāra (“not an enactment”). Ghoṣa, p. 994, asaṃskṛtaśūnyatānabhisaṃskāreti.
Gilgit, 66r11, smṛtyupasthānabhāvatāyai dharmaṃ deśayati; Ghoṣa, p. 1001, accidentally omits this statement here but attaches it to the end of the rest of the correct exertions and so on; Kimura, 1–2:11, omits.
Ghoṣa, p. 1036, as expected, has mahāmaitrī (“great loving kindness”) here, but both D and S omit it.
The Hundred Thousand and the Twenty-Five Thousand both render Kimura, 1–2:12, apagatasarvākārajñatāpratisaṃyuktair manasikāraiḥ prajñāpāramitāṃ bhāvayati upalabhate, tayā ca prajñāpāramitayā manyate, literally “bereft of attentions connected with all-aspect omniscience they contemplate the perfection of wisdom and apprehend it, and on account of that perfection of wisdom give rise to conceit.”
Ghoṣa prajñāpāramitāyāṃ carann anupāyakuśalo veditavyaḥ.
ngo bo dmigs pa.
This renders Ghoṣa, p. 1185, virecayati vichandayati; cp. Kimura, 1–2:14, just vivecayati.
rang bzor byas pa (“made up by [the forgers] themselves”); Ghoṣa, p. 1185, kuvitarkā (“from bad ideas”); Kimura and Gilgit, 67a5, kavikṛtāny (“composed by poets”).
Kimura, 1–2:14; Ghoṣa, p. 1186; and Gilgit, 67.9, upadiś, ācakṣ. Although here, and at Twenty-Five Thousand, ka 175b (7.57), bdud (māra) is qualified by the plural marker dag, only in the Twenty-Five Thousand are those doing the revealing and explaining qualified by the plural marker ’di dag ni. The reading here (except for the first plural marker) follows the Skt that has the evil associate not teaching others that such fake buddhas are indeed fake, not the fake buddhas not revealing themselves to be fake.
The Choné and Yungdrung versions of the Hundred Thousand omit these five aggregates, as do all other versions, including S. Twenty-Five Thousand 7.61 starts with mig, “eyes.”
Here ’dems is an incompleted voluntary form of gdam; Ghoṣa, p. 1190, avadaty anuśāsti.
“Basis” (gnas) and “word” (tshig) both render pada. “Actual entity denoted by/that is a word” renders padārtha. “Is without a basis/footing/place” renders padaṃ na vidyate. Cf. Kimura, 1–2:17, padaṃ na vidyate nopalabhyate (“a basis does not exist and cannot be apprehended”). The Sanskrit terms padārtha and its negative or opposite apadārtha are crucial to an understanding of the text. The Sanskrit pada, starting from its basic meaning of a footstep or track, also means a mark, standpoint, token, portion, sign, a matter, or a word; artha (or ārtha) has an even wider range of meanings including aim, purpose, cause, motive, use, object, and meaning. The Tibetan translators of this text and of the Hundred Thousand have rendered the two compounds as tshig gi don and tshig gi don med pa, of which the literal translations in English might be “the meaning of the word” and “the absence of meaning of the word.” However, don here must be understood as referring not to “meaning” in the sense of a definition of some kind, but rather to the actual thing denoted by the word. Note that the Tibetan of the Eighteen Thousand (11.2 et seq.) renders the two compounds gzhi’i don and gzhi med pa’i don, i.e., using a different interpretation of pada and a different analysis of the second compound.
The Twenty-Five Thousand omits these six elements, as does Ghoṣa, p. 1195, and Bṭ1, na p. 946.
Here “without any basis” renders padaṃ na vidyate, “because … are nonexistent” renders avidyamānatvāt, and “there is no actual entity denoted by the word” renders padārtho na vidyate.
This is the twentieth of the twenty “sub-eons” making up the third (eon of destruction) of the four subdivisions of a “great eon” (mahākalpa). The other three major divisions of a great eon are the eon of arising, of duration, and (after the eon of destruction), of voidness.
“False” renders asadbhūtatā (a-sadbhūta-tā =yang dag pa ma yin pa), rendered into Tib here as myed pa yang dag pa nyid (=asad-bhūta-tā), literally “the fact that they are really nonexistent.”
“Bases [of meritorious deeds] from having carried out one’s assigned duty” tentatively renders nyams su blang ba dang ldan pa’i [bsod nams kyi las kyi] dngos po, based on Ghoṣa, p. 1258, vaiyāvṛttasahagatam; cf. Edgerton vaiyāpatya. Although Gilgit, 70r2, and PSP, 1-2: 24, upāyakauśalam is supported by Eighteen Thousand 11.36 and le’u brgyad ma, ga 181b5, thabs mkhas pa (“skillful in what is connected with one’s assigned duties”), Ghoṣa’s auṣadhika (“[bases of meritorious deeds] to do with medicines”) is a good reading.
“Verbal abuse” renders zhe gcod pa (elsewhere tshig tsub pa) (paruṣa/pāruṣya). Shouting at the person so much it upsets them.
“Perverse pride” renders log pa’i nga rgyal (mithyāmāna). bod rgya tshig mdzod chen mo, s.v. log pa’i nga rgyal, “being full of oneself because of seeing what is bad in oneself as good.”
“Indeterminate” renders lung du ma bstan pa, “not taught in the scripture [as virtuous or nonvirtuous].”
This translation is based on the catasraḥ arūpyasamāpattaya[ḥ] (Gilgit 70r8). Tib gzugs myed pa bzhir skyes pa (“born in the four formless states”) appears to be a mistaken reading of samāpatti as meaning utpatti.
“With certainty” renders nges pa (niyata) in the sense of destined to progress to and attain their respective goals. Bṭ1, p. 959: “Thus it says ‘beings with certainty’ of the great number of beings, each ascertained as being in different lineages.” “Lead … to consummation” renders phul byed par ’gyur bas (agratām kariṣyati); cf. LSPW, pp. 168–69, “cause to achieve … the highest.” Edgerton s.v. kṛ says “Sometimes the Caus. of √kṛ is used for the simple verb or without a causal signification. ” This would then mean “is the culmination.” The first way of rendering this means the Blessed One thinks bodhisattvas are called great beings because they bring all the beings destined to different goals to the culmination or highest state (phul, agratā). The second means he thinks they are called great beings because they are the foremost or the culmination of all those progressing to different goals. Cf. Abhisamayālaṃkāra 1.42 that glosses this part of the Sūtra with samuddeśa (“the motivating aims”) and says the first of the aims is sarvasattvāgratācitta (“[setting] the mind on the consummation of all beings”).
“Equanimity” (sems mnyam pa nyid, samacittatā) here means a mind that sees all beings in the same way.
“Unadulterated” (ma ’dres pa, avyavakīrṇa) means not influenced by the thoughts of personal freedom that śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas have.
Gilgit, 71r14, ekanaya.
“On top of that” renders gong du. Ghoṣa mahāsattvenāttaryavaṃ [uttaram evaṃ?] cittam.
“Led to consummation” renders phul du ’gyur pa as meaning phul byed du ’gyur pa based on Ghoṣa, p. 1266, sarvvasattvānām agryatāṃ kārayiṣyati. Literally, the Tib suggests it is the mind of the bodhisattva that is in the consummate state, rather than being in that state because of leading all beings to it.
“Practice and engage in having an appreciation” renders mos pa’i rnal ’byor la brtson pa (ārāmatāyogānuyukta); alternatively, (Eighteen Thousand, ka 118b (11.67)) “be preoccupied with delight (kun tu dga’ ba’i) in.” Āryavimuktisena (AAV, cf. Sparham 2006–11 vol. 3, p. 69) says, “It uses both the word yoga and anuyoga (“yoga that follows”) to indicate [those who] practice (yoga), and then again engage in (anuyoga) the truth of suffering and origin, and the truth of cessation and path, respectively, in a temporal sequence.”
Ghoṣa, K, N, and C omit.
Ghoṣa, K, N, and C omit.
Alternatively, “that has followed the stream” (śroto’nugata).
This renders seng ge rnam par bsgying pa. Emend Ghoṣa, p. 1267, siṃhavikrīḍita to siṃhavijṛṃbhita.
Ghoṣa, K, N, and C omit this and the following one.
Ghoṣa, K, N, and C omit.
Alternatively, nyon mongs pa, raṇa means “conflict.”
Ghoṣa, K, N, and C omit.
Ghoṣa, K, N, and C omit.
Ghoṣa again has vivarṇa.
Ghoṣa, K, N, and C omit.
Ghoṣa, K, N, and C omit.
Ghoṣa, K, N, and C omit this and the following two meditative stabilities.
Ghoṣa, K, N, and C omit this and the following meditative stability.
Again, Ghoṣa, p. 1268, reads āvaraṇa (“obscuration”) in place of ālambana.
Ghoṣa, K, N, and C omit this and the following meditative stability.
Ghoṣa, p. 1268, sthitaniścitta.
Ghoṣa, K, N, and C omit this *sthitaniścita.
Ghoṣa, K, N, and C omit.
Ghoṣa, K, N, and C omit.
Ghoṣa, K, N, and C omit this and the next six meditative stabilities.
K, N, and C omit. Ghoṣa, p. 1269, sarvvākāravaropeta.
Following this in the earlier list 6.163 (kha 184b) but missing here is flash of lightning that does not cause pain.
Ghoṣa, K, N, and C omit.
This and the preceding one are the meditative stabilities at Ghoṣa, p. 835, araṇa-samavasaraṇa, and araṇa-saraṇa-sarvva-samavasaraṇa. Here the list at Ghoṣa, p. 1269, has only araṇasarvasamarasaraṇe!
Ghoṣa, K, N, and C omit this and the next four meditative stabilities.
D adds another meditative stability called dispelling the defects of speech here. Ghoṣa, K, N, and C omit it.
Ghoṣa, K, N, and C omit this and the next two meditative stabilities.
The sentence found here in Twenty-Five Thousand 8.64 is, “So if one were to ask why, it is because that mind is not mind and there is indeed no attachment to that which is not mind” (de ci’i phyir zhe na / ’di ltar sems ni sems ma mchis pa ste/ sems ma mchis pa de la yangs chags pa med do). This is cited below (8.144).
Here “physical forms would therefore be without attachment” (gzugs kyang chags pa myed do, rūpam asaktam) means that physical forms are not things that anybody could get attached to.
K, N. D omits “great loving kindness.”
In both the Eight Thousand (W83) and Twenty-Five Thousand (PSP, 1-2: 33) Subhūti says the line cited here: acittatvāt tatrāpi citte asakta iti; Lhasa Kangyur brgyad stong 17a7, sems med pa’i phyir sems de la ma chags shing [yongs su ma zin]. The earlier line in the Twenty-Five Thousand (ka 192a6 (8.64)) differs slightly: de ci’i phyir zhe na/ ’di ltar sems ni sems ma mchis pa ste/ sems ma mchis pa de la yangs chags pa med do (“So if you ask why, it is because that mind is not mind and there is indeed no attachment to that which is not mind”). Either this line has dropped out earlier from the Eighteen Thousand and the Hundred Thousand, or this is a cross-reference to another scripture.
“Nonexistent physical forms” renders gzugs myed pa, construing the compound arūpam as a tatpuruṣa (in Whitney’s nomenclature, a “descriptive compound”). The negative prefix a- is descriptive of rūpam, hence “a nonexistent form” is a type of form. Bṭ1 says: “It teaches that there the nonexistent mind is called nonexistent mind because of the nonexistence, in the mind of the realm of phenomena, the intrinsic defining characteristic of which is a thoroughly established phenomenon, of imaginary mind. In ‘but nonexistent physical forms also would be without attachment to physical forms,’ the nonexistent physical forms are called nonexistent physical forms because the physical forms of the realm of phenomena, the intrinsic defining characteristics of which are thoroughly established phenomena, are not imaginary existent physical forms. Hence, nonexistent physical forms, the intrinsic nature of which are thoroughly established phenomena, are ‘without attachment to’ imaginary ‘physical forms.’ If the compound were to be construed as a bahuvrihi (‘possessive compound’) it would mean ‘[physical form, ultimately, the emptiness of it] in which there is no physical form.’ ”
“Mounted upon” renders yang dag par gnas pa. Both the Hundred Thousand, the Twenty-Five Thousand, and the Eighteen Thousand render Kimura, 1–2:44, and Ghoṣa, p. 1329 samārūḍha as yang dag par gnas; also, earlier, Kimura 1–2:33, Ghoṣa, p. 1298, and Gilgit, 74r9, samārūḍha. The Hundred Thousand and the Twenty-Five Thousand also appear to render this word occasionally by gnas alone; le’u brgyad ma, ga 200a1, zhugs, and ga 200a2, ’dzeg pa; Abhisamayālaṃkāra, 1.45d, adhirohinī; and mngon rtogs rgyan, ka 4a6, ’dzegs.
Ghoṣa, p. 1303, adhivāsanatā; Gilgit, 73v9, omits. Kimura, 1–2:35, has vyupaparīkṣaṇā, as does Ghoṣa, p. 1325, below, rendered at 8.233 (F.109.a) just by rtog pa. Āryavimuktisena (AAV, Sparham 2006–11 vol. 1, p. 95): “They have perfection of patience armor when they endure, find pleasure in, and thoroughly investigate the dharmas of the knowledge of all aspects (they endure it at the initial occurrence, find pleasure from the second instant, etc., and thoroughly investigate by investigating from various angles).”
“Overwhelm” renders zil gyis gnon (abhibhū); alternatively, “eclipse” or “tower over.”
Ghoṣa, p. 1311, udānam udānayanti / nāmadheyañ ca kīrttayanti śabdam udīrayanti / ghoṣam anuśrāvayanti.
Ghoṣa, p. 1315, ākāśākāraliṅganimittaiḥ.
Ghoṣa, p. 1324, brjod, ākhyā (“describe”); ’chad, deśaya (“explain”); ston, prakāśaya (“teach”); ’grel, visarjaya (“interpret”); rnam par ’byed, uttānīkṛ (“analyze”); gsal bar byed, vivañc (“elucidate”).
Ghoṣa, p. 1325, has sarvvajñatā (“omniscience”) in place of “meditative concentrations,” and pariṇāmayati (“dedicate [the merits] to”) in place of “descend to.”
“Definitively discern” renders rab tu rtog (pratyavekṣ); alternatively, “understand analytically,” “contemplate.”
Bṭ1, p. 1014: “the mind is ‘undistracted’ by grasping at signs with respect to all phenomena, and absorbed.”
In both Skt and Tib the subject of the verb “engage” (pravṛt, ’jug) is “understanding”; thus, literally, this says “understanding does not engage with.”
“Undivided” renders ma ’dres pa (avyavakīrṇa); literally “not mixed with anything else.”
Here the translators render bhāvanāvibhāvanā by bsgom par rnam par bsgom pa. LSPW, p. 184, “a development in the sense of annihilation,” renders le’u brgyad ma, ga 200b1, bsgom pa rnam par gzhig pa’i don du; the Eighteen Thousand renders it variously as “investigation” or “disintegration” of meditation.
K, N, D omits the eighteen emptinesses.
This is related to the earlier list that was introduced by de ni (Ghoṣa, p. 1401, yad)—all the phenomena that are ultimately unfettered and unliberated (the portal of the Dharma)—the objects in which the bodhisattvas “dwell.”
Ghoṣa, p. 1405, niyojayiṣyati; Kimura, 1–2:58, parinirvāpayiṣyaty.
Below, 10.1, this question “because of just what” (ci tsam gyis na) is introduced simply by “how” (ji ltar na).
“Go forth” renders ’byung (niryā). It also means “to emerge from,” “to be emancipated from,” “escape,” and, later in this text, “the absence of a vehicle.”
“Nature” here renders prakṛti, rendered “inherent nature” when one in the list of emptinesses.
This translates D without emendation. Bṭ1, pp. 1034–35, says “ ‘the emptiness of that emptiness that is the emptiness of phenomena.’ That emptiness that is the emptiness when you say ‘phenomena are empty’ is also nonexistent as an inherent nature of emptiness, so, it, empty of an inherent nature, is called ‘the emptiness of emptiness.’ ” K, N have de in place of D des. Cf. Gilgit, 83v7–8, tatra katamā śūnyatā śūnyatayā sarvadharmāṇāṃ śūnyatā / tayā śūnyatayā śūnyā śūnyatā iyam ucyate śūnyatāśūnyatā, “Here, what is the emptiness of the emptiness on account of the emptiness of all phenomena? The emptiness empty of that emptiness. This is called ‘the emptiness of emptiness.’ ”
This definition of a physical form (rūpa) relates the word to a causal form of the verb rup; MW “to suffer violent pain.”
“Poisonous” renders gdug pa; Ghoṣa, p. 1410, āśīviṣa (“snake poison”).
“Gateway to arising” renders skye ba’i sgo (=āpattidvāra?); cf. Ghoṣa, p. 1410, āpaddvāra (“gateway to misfortune”).
“Not growing fainthearted” renders thub pa myed pa (anavasadya).
“Becoming completely collected” renders yang dag par ’dus pa (saṃgraha).
“Emergence” renders ’byung ba. Ghoṣa’s nairyāṇika is the definition of the truth of the path that “causes emergence” in the sense that it causes emancipation. It is not likely that ’byung ba here means actual emancipation.
“A liberation” renders rnam par grol ba (vimokṣa), of which there are eight. It is defined as “liberating” (rnam par ’grel pa, vimocanā).
The translators read niścita (“ascertained”) in place of Ghoṣa nicita.
“Direct perception” renders mngon sum (pratyakṣa); alternatively, in reference to the object of knowledge, pratyakṣa means “directly appearing,” “obvious.”
“Union” renders ’dus pa (sāṃyogika); Eighteen Thousand, ka 146a (15.29), ’dus pa las byung ba’i chos (“a phenomenon that has arisen from a union”) is a better translation.
These four render bhāva (“entity”), abhāva (“nonentity”), svabhāva (“essential entity” or, more literally, “entity from itself”), and parabhāva (“entity on account of something else”), respectively.
It is noteworthy here that the Tibetan translators render Ghoṣa, p. 1411, svabhāva ucyate prakṛtir aviparītaṃ as rang bzhin zhes bya ba ni ngo bo nyid ma nor ba, using rang bzhin to render svabhāva and ngo bo nyid to render prakṛti, the opposite of the usual usage of these two Tibetan terms in this text.
“Ranges over” renders spyod. The translators perhaps read anucarati in place of Ghoṣa, p. 1415; Kimura, 1–2:65; and Gilgit, 85r4, anubhavati (“experiences”).
Ghoṣa, p. 1415; Kimura, 1–2:66; Gilgit, 85r8; and the Eighteen Thousand, ka 148b, omit this meditative stability; the Twenty-Five Thousand, 226a (8.248), has “all phenomena are sealed with the unchanging seal.”
Ghoṣa, p. 1416, yatra samādhau niyatvā na bhidyate (“having become certain with respect to this meditative stability they are not split apart”); Eighteen Thousand 15.45 “meditative stabilities are not broken apart.” Cf. Kimura, 1–2:66, “are not split apart by any meditative stability.” Bṭ1, pp. 1044–45, “because it is not destroyed by the sides opposing…”
Ghoṣa, Kimura rājasupratiṣṭhānena (“like a king who has been well consecrated”).
There is no explanation of this in Bṭ1.
“Well-founded” renders ’dzugs; in the earlier lists ’jug and ’jugs.
There is no explanation of this and the following two meditative stabilities in Bṭ1.
Gilgit, 85v3, mudram[=ām] ādhārayati. Bṭ1, p. 1047: “ ‘If, among them, you ask what is the meditative stability named sealed with the seal, abiding in that meditative stability they are sealed with the seal of all meditative stabilities.’ When they are absorbed in that meditative stability they realize that the import of all the meditative stabilities is that all phenomena are, from the beginning, unarisen, and because it does not deviate from that meaning as it has been realized, like affixing a seal it is called ‘sealed with the seal.’ ”
There is no explanation of this in the Twenty-Five Thousand or Bṭ1, and Ghoṣa, p. 1417; Kimura, 1–2:67; and Gilgit, 85v5, omit it.
Bṭ1, p. 1048: “ ‘If, among them, you ask what is the meditative stability named permeation of space, abiding in that meditative stability space is permeated extensively with all the meditative stabilities.’ It is called ‘permeation of space’ because, when they are absorbed in this meditative stability, space is permeated with the forces and various miraculous displays of all the meditative stabilities, or, because the force of this meditative stability, like space, expands and permeates all meditative stabilities.”
Ghoṣa, p. 1417; Gilgit, 85v6; and Kimura, 1–2:67, omits. Bṭ1, p. 1048: “ ‘If, among them, you ask what is the meditative stability named vajra maṇḍala, abiding in that meditative stability they apprehend the maṇḍalas of all meditative stabilities.’ It is called ‘vajra maṇḍala’ because, when they are absorbed in this meditative stability, there is the achievement of the collection of meditative stabilities, which, like a vajra, cannot be pierced by hindrances like Māra and so on. Take ‘maṇḍala’ here in this context as a collection or many gathered together.”
The other lists, and Bṭ1, omit this meditative stability. Ghoṣa, p. 1417, and Gilgit, 85v6, have raṇajaha here; Kimura, 1–2:67, differs.
“Slip in” renders ’dzul. There is no explanation of this meditative stability in Bṭ1.
There is no explanation of this meditative stability in Bṭ1.
Jāschke, s.v. lham me (snang), lhan ne (snang), and lhang nge (snang), all as different forms of the same word meaning “clear and distinct.”
Ghoṣa, p. 1418, and Gilgit, 85v9, yatra samādhau sthitasya na cittaṃ na cetasikā dharmmā pravarttante.
There is no explanation of this meditative stability in Bṭ1.
There is no explanation of this and the next meditative stability in Bṭ1.
There is no explanation of this and the next meditative stability in Bṭ1.
Ghoṣa, p. 1420, samantāloko nāma; Bṭ1 kun tu lta ba (“total seeing,” “observing everything”).
There is no explanation of this and the next two meditative stabilities in Bṭ1.
There is no explanation of this and the next meditative stability in Bṭ1.
Kimura, 1–2:71; there is no explanation of this and the next meditative stability in Bṭ1.
This reading is corroborated by the explanation at Bṭ1, pp. 1061–62, and Gilgit, 86v11, cāraṃ na samanupaśyati.
There is no explanation of this meditative stability in Bṭ1.
There is no explanation of this meditative stability in Bṭ1.
“Stretch” renders rgyud (Bṭ1, p. 1064, rgyu?), apparently for pariccheda.
There is no explanation of this meditative stability in Bṭ1.
There is no explanation of this and the next seven meditative stabilities in Bṭ1.
The S Hundred Thousand, nga 137a4–5, Kimura, Ghoṣa, Gilgit, the Twenty-Five Thousand, the Eighteen Thousand, and Bṭ1 all have this and following meditative stability in a different order.
There is no explanation of this in Bṭ1.
Here the Skt dhāraṇīmati also means “possessing dhāraṇīs.”
Bṭ1, p. 1069: “Take ‘contradiction’ as obstruction on the side opposing meditative stability; take ‘refutation’ as hindrance that blocks meditative stability.”
S Hundred Thousand, nga 137a4–5, gdung ba med pa’i glog gi ’od (“nonafflictive lightning light”). Bṭ1, p. 1071, gives an explanation. Kimura, 1–2:74; Ghoṣa, p. 1425; and Gilgit, 87v10, all omit, and have mahāvyūha for the next entry, rgyan chen po.
There is no explanation of this in Bṭ1.
Bṭ1, p. 1073: “They do not even apprehend the foundation of all meditative stabilities—the transcendental knowledge that is the transformation of the basis-of-all consciousness (kun gzhi rnam par shes pa) devoid and purified of the object that is grasped and the subject that grasps.”
There is no explanation of this and the next four meditative stabilities in Bṭ1.
Again, D includes a second meditative stability here, dispelling defects of speech, with exactly the same explanation. There is no explanation of it in Bṭ1.
There is no explanation of this and the next two meditative stabilities in Bṭ1.
This renders Gilgit, 88r13, saṃghāṭīcīvarapātradharaṇe. The Sanskrit saṃghāṭīcīvara is rendered sbyar ma, more usually rnam sbyar (as at Eighteen Thousand ka 156a, (16.5)). The idea is that when they go out to beg with a begging bowl, they also wear uttarāsaṅga. The modern Tibetan chos gos (“religious garb”) that renders cīvara (“the robes”) usually refers exclusively to the outer robe (uttarāsaṅga).
The klama in Ghoṣa, p. 1429, śayitanidrāklamaprativinodite is rendered mya myo (perhaps rmya, “to feel dull,” “to lose energy”).
A more literal translation is “… mindful when breathing in, they are mindful, fully aware ‘I am breathing in.’ ”
“Epidermal skin, inner skin, flesh” renders bags pa (= pags pa), glog pa (= slog pa), and sha. Ghoṣa, p. 1439 tvak carma māṃsā. The differences likely derive from observations of the outer covering of a body made while skinning an animal.
“Viscera” renders nang grol. Eighteen Thousand ka 157a1 (16.9) glang pa (Mvy audarīyaka, “pertaining to the abdomen”); Ghoṣa, p. 1431, udarayantraṃ (?) suggests the abdominal walls. Kimura, 1–2:77, udaraṃ (“stomach”).
“Filthy excretions” renders dri ma (malā), explained by Monier-Williams, s.v. malā, as “any bodily excretion or secretion.”
rab rib snang ba, perhaps reading timirabhāsa in place of Ghoṣa, p. 1434, tirobhūtāni (“indistinct”), and Kimura, 1–2:80, tirovārṣikāṇi, which might be rendered “in which the years have disappeared.”
Cf. Ghoṣa, p. 1434, pūtīni cūrṇakajātāni pṛthivyāṃ pāṃśunā samasamībhūtāni. Tib zegs (ma) renders pūti; samasamībhūtāni, “have become the same and equal to.”
“Scrutiny” renders dpyod pa (mīmāṃsā), which refers to the investigation of a topic.
“Analysis of phenomena” renders dharmapravicaya (chos rnam par ’byed pa), which is another word for “wisdom” (prajñā).
“Understood analytically” renders pratyavekṣ, here rendered just by rtog; Edgerton s.v. pratyavekṣaṇā, “intellectual mastery.”
Bṭ1, p. 1090: “Having thus understood analytically that all phenomena are empty of their own defining characteristics and signless, they are not attached to and do not wish for anything at all. They cultivate a single-pointed stability of mind without ‘conditioning’ afflictive states of mind—karma that becomes the cause for birth in the three realms in order to obtain the pleasures of the three realms in future lives when reborn in the three realms. This is ‘called the meditative stability of wishlessness.’ ”
In the enumeration of the eleven knowledges in the second chapter (2.10-2.11), the eighth knowledge is “knowledge of nonduality.”
Ghoṣa, p. 1441, yat pratipakṣajñānaṃ; Kimura, 1–2:82, yat pratipatparijayajñānam; Gilgit, 90v6–7, yat pratipajjñānaṃ paricayajñānam. LC gives yongs su byang ba as well as ’dris pa as translations of parijaya (“mastery”).
“Transcendental knowledge” renders the Tib ye shes.
Cf. ka 40.a and ga 62.a. The Tib translation here of ājñātavin as yongs su shes pas pas rtogs pa is apparently based on ājñāta, “fully comprehended/er,” and vid, “knower, realizer,” in place of the possessive -vin.
Bṭ1, p. 1093: “Take ‘have not appeared’ (anavabhāsa) as the nonapprehending and absence of appearing of imaginary phenomena––object grasped and subject grasping and so on––when entering into the first level from the level of practice on account of belief (adhimukticaryābhūmi).”
“Those with physical forms observe physical forms” renders the Tib gzugs can gyis gzugs rnams mthong ba. Alternatively, and more interpretively, this might be rendered “those with [perceptions of] physical forms observe physical forms.”
Bṭ1, p. 1101: “The knowledge of whatever good and bad actions that beings did in the past, whatever ones they are doing in the present, and whatever ones they will do in the future by way of body, speech, and mind, as well as the nonerroneous knowledge of whatever maturations will come about from them, is called ‘the power of knowing the maturations of actions.’ ‘The undertakings of actions’ refers to what is experienced as pleasant in the present and as suffering in the future, or what is experienced as unpleasant at the present time but will be experienced as pleasant in the future. ‘The aspect of location’ refers to the places where the actions of beings were done and the objects [on which the actions were carried out], and the places where the maturations will come about and the objects [that will be experienced]. This is ‘as it pertains to place.’ (This is not a quote in the text.) ‘The aspect of cause’ refers to the cause of doing the action––a mind with associated virtuous roots or a mind with associated nonvirtuous roots. This is ‘as it pertains to cause.’ (Again, not sure why this is in quotation marks.)”
In most lists of the ten powers, the polysemous term dhātu (khams) is interpreted to mean the constituents or constitution of individual beings rather than the realms of saṃsāra. Bṭ1, p. 1102: “Because they dwell in and are based on the transient world, a being is called ‘a world.’ Take ‘constituent’ as the disposition or the basic nature of a being. The śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas do not know the inconceivably many and various types of dispositions or basic natures of beings. Tathāgatas, having decisively known without error the dispositions and latent tendencies of each separate individual, teach doctrines in accordance with those. Theirs is called ‘the power of the knowledge of the various constituents.’ ”
According to Bṭ1, p. 1102, “inclination” (mos pa, adhimukti) means their belief or faith.
“Acumen” renders dbang po (indriya).
Bṭ1, pp. 1102–3: “Beings in a lineage destined for perfection, destined to be wrong, or not necessarily destined enter into a path and attain the results in accord with each of those separate lineages, hence ‘path wherever it leads.’ Among them, those ‘destined for perfection’ are in a lineage that enters into the ārya path, those ‘destined to be wrong’ are in a lineage that enters into worldly views, and those ‘not necessarily destined’ are not limited to one; they are suitable to be led anywhere.”
“Ten million” renders the Skt koṭi (bye ba).
“Billion” renders the Skt niyuta (khrag khrig).
Here “holy life” renders the Tib tshangs par spyod pa. In other contexts, this is rendered “practiced celibacy.”
tshangs pa’i ’khor lo … rab tu bskor bar bya’o (brāhmaṃ cakraṃ pravartayāmi in the Sanskrit). The wheel is Brahmā’s emblem and the term “wheel of Brahmā” may therefore simply refer to the wheel of the Buddha’s teachings. Alternatively, Bṭ3 4.1003; glosses this as “turning the wheel like Brahmā” (tshangs pa bzhin du ’khor lo bskor), while the same phrase in the Ratnagotravibhāga is expanded by Dolpopa to “turning the wheel of Dharma in the realm of Brahmā” (tshangs pa’i gnas su chos kyi ’khor lo skor ba).
Bṭ1, p. 1109: “This is the knowledge without error of the teachings of the tathāgatas included in scriptural doctrine––the discourses, the sayings in prose and verse, and so on.”
Bṭ1, p. 1113: “Because the two––the ‘liberation’ and the ‘knowledge and seeing of liberation’––are not differentiated in their nature as liberation, they are counted as one.”
Bṭ1, p. 1114: “They are ‘preceded by transcendental knowledge’ because they have arisen from the cause of a knowledge employed earlier. ‘Informed by transcendental knowledge’ means not separated from transcendental knowledge, doing while having the knowledge.”
“Letters” renders yi ge (akṣara). Below, the letter or consonant cluster follows the order of the forty-two “signs” for sounds used in the Gandhara region. In Skt each is followed by -kāra, rendered into Tib as appropriate with forms of zhes bya ba, roughly equivalent to quotation marks in English. In the following this is rendered by italics.
That is, determined to be ultimately nonarising.
This construes sa as retroflex ṣa, the corresponding letter in the Arapacana alphabet.
In Tib this Skt va is also written as ba.
This is twenty-sixth in the alphabet in Stephen Baums and Andrew Glass, A Dictionary of Gāndhārī.
The twenty-first is śpa in A Dictionary of Gāndhārī.
Bṭ1, p. 1122, has stotra; Ghoṣa, p. 1451, has stave.
This is based on Bṭ1, p. 1122. Gilgit, 92r10, martya (“death”). On the sound conveyed by this sign see Gudrun Melzer, “An Arapacana Acrostic Poem in Gandhari: Bajaur Collection Kharoṣṭhī Fragment 5.” July 2020: 32. From Buddhist Manuscripts from Gandhara, Institut für Indologie und Tibetologie, Ludwig-Maximilians Universität, München.
Ghoṣa, p. 1451; Bṭ1, p. 1123 bhaṅga suggests the emendation of ’jigs (“fear”) to ’jig (“destruction”).
This represents ṭha.
The corresponding letter in the Arapacana alphabet is za. The translators of the Twenty-Five Thousand (n.299) says ysara is a word in the Prakrit Saka language rendered into Skt as jarā (“aging”); cf. Eighteen Thousand ka 167a (16.99), dza. Bṭ1, p. 1125, has ys or yas (the Skt root yas means to exert oneself energetically), and says, “In an Indian language ‘unhappiness’ is yskara. By way of the compounding of the letter ya with sa one realizes that ultimately all phenomena are not real bases, so unhappiness also cannot be apprehended. Hence the letter ys is the gateway to the realization that all unhappy phenomena are not apprehended.”
This is the word at Bṭ1, p. 1122.
This is the word at Bṭ1, p. 1122. Monier-Williams, s.v. ḍhakkana, “shutting of a door.” Tib g.yog(s) has the sense of putting something on, like a covering of clothes, or a specific burden or task you are saddled with. Bṭ1, p. 1126: “They do apprehend that they, covered by afflictive obscurations and governed by afflictive states of mind, die and are reborn until saṃsāra reaches its end.”
The list has been formatted in accord with the explanation at Bṭ1, p. 1128.
Earlier, 8.377, this question is introduced by “because of just what” (ci tsam gyis na): “Blessed Lord, because of just what should bodhisattva great beings be known to have entered perfectly into the Great Vehicle?”
“Sincere resolve” renders lhag pa’i bsam pa, adhyāśaya (“higher aspiration”).
The translators read bhūtatā. Ghoṣa, p. 1454, adbhūtatānupalabitām, “miraculous demonstrations of the doctrine,” fits the context better.
This means remaining in a forest retreat.
“Property” renders rdzas, which also means “substantial phenomena.” Kimura, 1–2:95, Gilgit, 95r7 sarvāsti; Ghoṣa, p. 1463 sarvvasva. Edgerton, s.v. asti, 2 “property.”
There are not eighteen listed, only seventeen. As it makes clear below (10.62), the way they are avoided is not quite the same, and all are not, except in the Kimura edition and the Abhisamayālaṃkāra, the objects of “avoid” in the same way.
Bṭ1, p. 1140: “From the feeling of contempt for another being haughtiness arises, so they should avoid haughtiness because, ultimately, such things as those for which one might feel contempt cannot be apprehended.”
Ghoṣa, p. 1456; Gilgit, 93r13 rāgadveṣamohādhivāsanatā; “tolerance” is Conze’s word for adhivāsanatā. The Hundred Thousand has nyam rangs su mi ’dor ba, and Bṭ1, p. 1141, has nyams rangs su mi ’dor ba; the Twenty-Five Thousand has nyam rang su gzhag pa yongs su spang, “reject the presentation of it as delightful” (?).
“Mind that has craving” renders sred pa’i sems (paritarsanacitta). Edgerton, s.v. paritarsana, notes that if the word is related not to tṛṣ but to tras it could mean “anxiety.”
“Penetrating understanding of the principle of reality” renders yang dag pa’i tshul rab tu rtog pa (bhūtanayaprativedha). Bṭ1, p. 1145, glosses this as “the realization, according to a single principle, that all phenomena are, ultimately, in their intrinsic nature not real bases.”
Cf. below, 10.102. Kimura, 1–2:90, sarvatrāpratihatajñānacittatā; Ghoṣa, p. 1457, apratihatajñānatā. “Transcendental knowledge” has been read from the Skt. The Tib simply reads thogs pa myed pa (“unimpeded”).
There are in fact twenty-one items enumerated here.
Omitted in Dutt 1934, p. 218.
This completes the explanation of the refinements of the second level.
This completes the explanation of the refinements of the third level.
Bṭ1, pp. 1137–38: “not engaging in the conditioning of (anabhisaṃskāra), not mentally constructing, any phenomenon that becomes a cause of saṃsāra.”
“Entity” renders dngos po (vastu); alternatively, “real basis.” This completes the explanation of the refinements of the fourth level.
Bṭ1, p. 1139, mentions royal, brahmin, and business families, and two sets of bodhisattvas who have been given alms and served there. It is unclear whether the caste of the families, or of the bodhisattva monks, explains why one set has been treated better or worse, or whether it is simply a matter of bodhisattvas becoming possessive about a family that gives them alms. Regardless, the families gain merit from giving alms and respecting the monk teachers, so the bodhisattvas should not be envious of other monk teachers and, on account of that envy, not visit those families.
All versions, including Stok Palace and the Hundred Thousand nga 172a6, support this reading.
This is absent from Ghoṣa. Kimura, 1–2:96, tatra kathaṃ subhūte bodhisattvena mahāsattvena vicikitsā parivarjayitavyā? tathā hi saṃdehāpagatāt sarvadharmān samanupaśyati, evaṃ hi subhūte bodhisattvena mahāsattvena vicikitsā parivarjayitavyā. Bṭ1, p. 1141: “They do not harbor two minds (yid gnyis mi za) about reality and unsurpassed, perfect, complete enlightenment.”
Kimura, 1–2:96, adds parivarjayitavyā but this is not supported by any of the Kangyur editions of the Hundred Thousand, or by Bṭ1.
This completes the explanation of the refinements of the fifth level, the number of which is uncertain. In Bṭ1 the eighteen are avoiding the paths of the ten nonvirtuous actions (10), avoiding pride in being superior (11), haughtiness (12), distorted views (13), doubt about reality and that there is a buddha (14 and 15) and not rejecting patience for desire, hatred, and delusion (16–18).
This is omitted from Kimura, Ghoṣa, and le’u brgyad ma. Cf. Gilgit, 95v10-12, ṣaṣṭhyāṃ bhūmau varttamānena ṣaḍ dharmmā parivarjayitavyāḥ katame ṣa[ḍ] yad uta ṣaṭ pāramitāḥ paripūrayitavyāḥ ṣaṭsu pāramitāsu sthitvā buddhā bhagavantaḥ śrāvakāḥ་pratyekabuddhāś ca pañcavidhasyajñeyāvarṇa[=arṇava]sya pāraṃgatā gacchanti gamiṣyante ca / katamasya pañcavidhasya yadutātītasyānāgatastāpratyupannasyānavaktavyasyāsaṃskṛtasya evam bodhisattvena mahāsattvena ṣaṭpāramitāḥ paripūrayitavyāḥ (“Six attributes should be avoided by those proceeding on the sixth level. Which six? The six perfections that should be perfected. While abiding in these six perfections, the blessed lord buddhas, the śrāvakas, and the pratyekabuddhas have gone, are going, and will go to the other shore of the five oceans of objects of knowledge. Of which five? Of the past, the future, the present, the inexpressible, and the unconditioned. Thus, bodhisattva great beings should perfect the six perfections.”) It is noteworthy that the six perfections are not those of bodhisattvas, and it suggests that, like the other attributes, they are to be avoided as attributes that can be apprehended. Those following the Abhisamayālaṃkāra, in accord with its central principle, stress that even though they cannot, ultimately, be apprehended they are attributes to be cultivated for the sake of others.
“Should not be in a greedy state of mind” renders kha za yag gi sems su myi bya; Ghoṣa, p. 1466, na saktacittena bhavitavyaṃ, explaining Ghoṣa, p. 1456, na yācanakaṃ vikṣepaḥ karttavyaḥ (“do not get upset at a beggar” or “do not cast out a beggar”). The Tib taken literally (“a mind to do with good food”) may be a reference to a well-known verse from the Suhṛllekha that says a practitioner should consider food like medicine (kha zas sman dang ’dra ba), and not eat it just for personal benefit, but only to keep the body alive to be of use to others. Gilgit, 95v14, has an alternative reading, prathamacittotpādam upādāya dānaṃ dātavyam/ na citta[ṃ] cittena bhavitavyaṃ, “do not make [bodhi]citta (“the mind [set on enlightenment]”) a citta (“a [mere] thought”),” that is to say, do not make the mind into just an empty promise. In this case (kha) za yag may be a mistaken rendering of Eighteen Thousand ka 175b gsog, “hollow, in vain.” Bṭ1 says it means “empty” or “futile.”
This completes the explanation of the refinements of the sixth level.
This completes the explanation of the twenty things that bodhisattvas should not do on the seventh level.
“Absence of habitual ideas about duality” renders gnyis la yongs su rgyu ba myed pa, Kimura, 1–2:99, advayasamudācāra. the Twenty-Five Thoushand renders this “they do not edge toward duality.” MDPL renders asamudācāra “habitual absence.”
That is, linking up to rebirth. Bṭ1, p. 1145: “The absence of linking up with a rebirth in saṃsāra on account of the force of the propensities left by afflictive mental states.” Bṭ1, p. 1177, explaining Hundred Thousand 11.32 (“bodhisattva great beings would not realize that all the propensities for afflicted mental states that cause linking up are nonentities and acquire all-aspect omniscience”), says “the propensities for cognitive obstruction and obstruction from afflictive mental states are themselves the causes for the arising of later afflicted mental states, hence they are called ‘propensities for afflictive mental states.’ ”
This follows the reading at Kimura, 1–2:100. Both the Twenty-Five Thousand and Eighteen Thousand follow the reading in Ghoṣa and Gilgit. This completes the explanation of the seventh level.
A maturation result lasts as long as the person lives.
This completes the explanation of the eighth level.
That is, assured of their attainments.
This completes the explanation of the ninth level.
The translators read kṛtavin as kṛtavid.
The question is at 8.377; “go forth” renders the Tib ’byung (from niryā). It also means “to emerge from” or “to be emancipated from,” and in niryāṇa can also be construed as “the absence of a vehicle.”
The translators read pravrajya (rab tu byung ba) in place of Kimura, Ghoṣa prahāṇa; the Eighteen Thousand has “abandonment.”
This is the reading at Ghoṣa, pp. 1487–88, and Gilgit, 98v14–15. Kimura, 1–2:108 has “attain emancipation” in place of “to arise” (perhaps “to take rebirth”?) in each instance. Bṭ 1, pp. 1160–61, associates this section with the different persons, arhats and so on, and the next section on the result with the resultant things they attain.
Cp. Gilgit, 99v2, acālyann asthānaṃ, “not moving, not resting.” Bṭ1 says that the very teaching that there is no emancipation from the three realms and no rest in all-aspect omniscience teaches that there is, conventionally. As in the Abhisamayālaṃkāra, Bṭ1 associates “having moved” with the ability of an opposing force to disturb an attainment.
This is myi gnas pa gnas pa’i tshul dang / myi bskyod pa’i tshul gyis; Kimura, 1–2:110, asthitam asthānayogena acālyayogena; Gilgit, 110r11, asthitasthānayogena acālyayogena; Ghoṣa, p. 1508, asthitasthānayogena.
Gilgit, 100r 13–14, atyantayātmā nopalabhyate; Ghoṣa, p. 1508, incorrectly, ’tyantatathātmā nopalabhyate; Kimura, 1–2:111, omits. “Beyond limits” and “utterly” both render atyanta; alternatively, an anta is “an extreme” and atyanta might be rendered “extremely.”
Ghoṣa, p. 1512, kasyānupalabdhyā sarvvaṃ nopalabhyate /dharmmadhātvanupalabdhyā nopalabhyate dharmmadhātus tat kasya hetor na hi subhūte dharmmadhātvanupalabdhir upalabhyate nopalabhyate. Skt anupalabdhi/anupalambha can be either a noun or a bahuvrihi adjective. Tib dmigs pa could be construed as either “what has an apprehending” or “an apprehending.” Here it has been rendered as a noun, and below in “the realm of phenomena that is not apprehended” as an adjective (seems to be a verb?), literally “the realm of phenomena of which there is no apprehending.”
“Great Vehicle” is derived from mahā-yā and “attains emancipation” or, more literally, “goes forth” from nir-yā.
“Space” renders ākāśa and “accommodation” avakāśa.
“Discerned” renders mchis, an honorific, attaching to the one being spoken to. Kimura, Ghoṣa, and Gilgit all have dṛś; Ten Thousand, 13.13, mi mngon lags. However, below (ga F.295.b, 11.107), the nonhonorific form put in the mouth of the Blessed One is myed, “are nonexistent.”
Degé again has the meditative stability called dispelling the defects of speech.
Gilgit, 103r5–6, sacet subhūte kāmadhātus tathā bhaviṣyad avitathā ananyathā aviparīto bhūtaṃ satyaṃ yathāvan nityo dhruvaḥ śāśvata avipariṇāmadharmābhāvo bhaviṣyat. Ghoṣa, p. 1534, and Kimura, 1–2:115, both have tathatā and so on. The last part translates Kimura’s ’vipariṇāmadharmī bhāvo. Ghoṣa has vipariṇāmadharmmā abhāvaḥ. Bṭ3, 4.1175-4.1182, in a detailed explanation, connects these with the three natures (trisvabhāva, ngo bo nyid gsum). Bṭ1 does not explain each word.
“Constructed, fashioned, and fabricated” render rnam par brtags pa ([vi]kalpita), rnam par bskyed pa (viṭhapita; Edgerton, s.v. viṭhapayati has viṭhāpita), and yongs su bsgrubs pa (sandarbhita).
This is the reading in all the editions recorded in the Comparative Edition (dpe bsdur ma), vol. 16, p. 601.
The translators render different forms of the same Skt root sphur, earlier (Hundred Thousand ka F.4.b, 1.6) by khyab par byas, “permeated,” and here by rgyas par ’gengs, literally “fill up widely.”
“Not apprehended” renders dmigs su myed do, a rare translation of na prajñāyate (the reading in Gilgit, Ghoṣa, and Kimura), “does not appear,” “does not make itself known.”
“Determinate” (vyākṛta); alternatively, “phenomena that can be prophesied/are objects of moral inquiry.”
These last four go with the four truths for the noble ones, the two results (suffering and nirvāṇa) and the two causes (the origin and the path).
Bṭ1, p. 1186, says to take “the maturation” with the result, and that which is “subject to maturation” as what will become the desired result.
Alternatively, “it is not wished for, and is not not wished for.”
Bṭ1, p. 1188: “According to the mistaken imagination of the world, a being, space, and the Great Vehicle are real bases, so the place where one is (gcig gi go) precludes any other and thus they do not accommodate a great deal.” “The place where one is” means their identity as it is mistakenly conceived of by ordinary folk.
“Unfathomable” renders dpag tu myed pa, apramāṇatā (“beyond measure”).
Here myed do (“are nonexistent”) in place of dmigs su myed do (“are not apprehended”).
“Inherent nature” renders prakṛti (rang bzhin).
Degé omits great loving kindness and great compassion.
This is the reading in Degé, probably a block carver’s mistake for ldan and mi ldan (saṃyukta and viyukta), “conjoined nor disjoined.”
“An actual bodhisattva even through the entirety [of all the attributes]” renders byang chub sems dpa’ nyid kyang ril gyis (bodhisattvam eva tāvat sakalam).
In the parallel passage in the Twenty-Five Thousand, “look for it though one might” is Gyurme Dorje’s felicitous rendering of lta yang, a common, idiomatic use of lta, used here to render the extreme conveyed by the superlative katama. Because of the repetition, it is conveyed just by “could there possibly be.”
This means a bodhisattva understood as the sum of all the phenomena, beginning with physical forms and ending with the eighteen distinct qualities of the buddhas.
“Are in their essential nature nonentities” renders dngos po ma mchis pa’i rang bzhin (abhāvasvabhāva). Below this is rendered dngos po med pa’i ngo bo nyid.
Both LSPW and the Twenty-Five Thousand render Kimura, 1–2:142, anantāparyantatayā as a dvandva, in the sense “because it is limitless and beyond all limits.”
Here dngos po med pa’i ngo bo nyid; earlier (ga F.338.b), dngos po ma mchis pa’i rang bzhin suggests that rang bzhin is sometimes used as an honorific (to the recipient).
ŚśP II-1:104, nāsti sāṃyogikaḥ svabhāvaḥ.
“Not eternal,” rtag pa ma yin pa, renders akūṭastha; Eighteen Thousand, ka 222.a, and le’u brgyad ma, ga 298.b.1, ther zug.
Earlier the question is phrased, “What physical forms that have come into being could there possibly be?”
“Have not come into being” renders anabhinirvṛtta (mngon par ma grub pa), and “have not been brought about by conditions” renders anabhisaṃskṛta (mngon par ’du ma byas pa).
“Without activity” renders ŚśP II-1:164 nirīhakāt; Kimura, 1-2:154, nirīhān (?).
The Twenty-Five Thousand adds from “the real nature” up to “the very limit of reality” here, but ŚśP II-1:195 and all of the editions of the Hundred Thousand referenced in the Comparative Edition (dpe bsdur ma) omit them.
“Without decline,” “without diminishing” renders nyam pa ma mchis pa; ŚśP II-1:196, and Gilgit, 118r1, asaṃmoṣa. The translators derive the word not from mṛṣ, “to forget” (bsnyel), but from muṣ, “to steal.”
“Perfection” renders pāramitā; “far removed,” āram itā; “gone to the other side,” pāram itā. Gilgit, 118r8, āram itaiṣāyuṣman śāriputra yad ucyate prajñāpāramiteti.
ŚśP II-2:65, pañcavidhā bodhiḥ. Bṭ1, p. 1233, says that this “is saying that insofar as the four—the fruit of having entered the stream and so on—and individual enlightenment, ‘the fivefold enlightenment,’ and unsurpassed enlightenment would have an essential nature that is not different, bodhisattvas, even without having meditated on, and without having achieved, all those five enlightenments in practice would have already attained them.”
Bṭ1: “Take ‘the inferior’ with (“as/to be”?) the realm of desire because it is worse than and lesser than the form and formless realms that are above.”
“Realization” (khong du chud pa yod pa) renders ŚśP II-2:66, samaya; cf. Kimura 1–2:164, abhisamaya, “clear realization.”
Here len pa suggests that the translators read a form of anupādā, not ŚśP II-2:66 and Kimura, 1-2:164, anutpādaya.
Here the Tib renders ŚśP II-2:66, yathā tathāgatena dharmacakraṃ pravartitaṃ na hy anutpannena dharmeṇa prāptiḥ prāpyate (with a vā between the last two words?).
Here the Tib renders Kimura, 1–2:164, but reverses the order: kiṃ punar āyuṣman subhūte anutpannena dharmeṇa utpannā prāptiḥ prāpyate, atha utpannena dharmeṇa anutpannā prāptiḥ prāpyate. The prāpti (“attainment”) is that on account of which something is attained (prāpyate).
Bṭ1, p. 1238: “We hold that both an attainment and a clear realization exist merely designated as worldly conventions onto the mere elimination of afflictive and cognitive obstructions, but not by way of the two—an entity obtaining a nonentity, and a nonentity obtaining an entity.”
“Failure to arise,” myi skye ba, renders anutpatti.
This renders Tib skyes pa as rendering a past passive participle (anutpanna), but the three Skt versions all have anutpāda, “are nonarising.”
“Have no fixed abode” is Edgerton’s suggestion for aniśrita, which he says means “unattached, free, independent, emancipated.” The śrāvakas rely on just four (three if a nun) necessities (niśraya): a ragged robe, a begging bowl, simple medicinal herbs, and a crude bed beneath a tree or the like. They have no permanent dwelling place. The idea seems to be that since Subhūti does not get stuck on anything, he is living the śrāvaka life perfectly.
Bṭ1, p. 1249, explains “they should refine” by saying, “It means they should, in that manner, realize they are refined.”
ŚśP II-2:87, sukhitā bhavantv anupādāya ca parinirvāntv iti.
Kimura, 1–2:169, tribhiḥ saṅgaiḥ sakto.
Cf. Eighteen Thousand ka 239.a.
Twenty-Five Thousand ka 376b, byang chub kyi lam ’di, “this path to enlightenment,” namely, all the practices from the perfection of generosity up to the eighteen distinct qualities of the buddhas. The idea is that they become the path to enlightenment when informed by the perfection of wisdom. “Power” renders mthu, Mvy skyes bu’i mthu (puruṣakāra). The translators appear to have translated the result, the activities that result in complete enlightenment, as indivisible from its cause, the perfection of wisdom that must inform them.
“The one that fully incorporates and perfectly incorporates” (yongs su sdud cing yang dag pa sdud pa) renders ŚśP II-2:93, parigrāhaka, saṃgrāhaka. A grāhaka is, literally, “one that seizes hold of,” that is to say, the one that informs all the virtuous activities to transform them into a path to enlightenment. Bṭ1, p. 1253, glosses “generator” (skyed pa, jānayitṛ) with “the cause that effects the completion of all the virtuous attributes incorporated in the three vehicles,” and glosses “the one that fully incorporates and perfectly incorporates” with “fully informs and fully pervades all the virtuous attributes incorporated in the three vehicles.”
“Practice this practice” (rnam par spyod pa dis rnam par spyod, viharati … anena vihāreṇa).
Here Bṭ1, p. 1255, says that “attention” means “conceptualization,” the apprehending of an entity that is not empty of its own essential nature.
“The attention will not cause fully awakening” renders yid la byed pa mngon par rdzogs par ’tshang myi rgya, manasikārānabhisaṃbodhanatā. Bṭ1, p. 1256, says that “because that attention is also, ultimately, nonexistent, becoming fully enlightened through that attention is also, ultimately, nonexistent.”
Alternatively, shes rab kyi pha rol tu phyin pa’i le’u (prajñāpāramitāparivata) is the name of the chapter (“The Perfection of Wisdom Chapter”).
Cf. ka 6.b.
ŚśP II-2:115, gnas gtsang ma’i lha’i bu, śuddhāvāsakāyikā devaputrās.
D has not been emended because all of the editions listed in the Comparative Edition omit the Vṛhatphala gods. ŚśP II-2:115, bṛhatphalā devāḥ.
“Specific instruction for coming to an authoritative conclusion about this exposition” renders gtan la bab par bstan pa.
This renders yang dag pa skyon med pa literally. The Tib translators, for consistency, rendered nyāma/niyāma/niyama/niyata with skyon (“fault”) and med pa (“nonexistent”), in place of nges pa (“restricted to,” “fixed in,” “for whom it is definite”), which would otherwise render the Sanskrit in question. The Skt samyaktva (ŚśP II–2:115, “the perfect state”), which is rendered by the Tib yang dag pa, indicates that here the intended meaning is “restricted to nirvāṇa,” which refers to the attainment of liberation by arhats and pratyekabuddhas.
de dag gi dge ba’i phyogs la bdag ni bar chad myi byed do (ŚśP II-2:116, na…antarāyaṃ karomi); Bṭ1, F.248.a2: “It means they should not just be left there.”
“Bad” renders sdig pa (agha).
“Disturbed” renders myi brtan pa (acala).
“Brittle” renders ’jig pa, prabhaṅgula (“destructible”).
“Contagious disease” renders ’go ba’i nad (upasarga). The Skt has been incorrectly rendered (in the Tibetan) as “headache.”
“Injury” renders gnod pa (vyābādha).
Bṭ1, p. 1267, has just “mind” in place of “the mind that dedicates.”
It is again noteworthy that the Hundred Thousand omits the cessation of the twelve links while the Twenty-Five Thousand and Eighteen Thousand include it at this point.
Tib rang byang chub. Perhaps this should be emended to rang sangs rgyas (“pratyekabuddhas”).
Bṭ1, p. 1276, differentiates this from the following one with the gloss, “Take it as the persons who first attain the result of having entered the stream.”
That is, who go from human family to divine family up to three sets of times.
samaśīrṣapudgala. Bṭ1, p. 1277: “those persons who are recipients of the fruit of having entered the stream, the extinction of whose life, karma, and afflictive mental states ‘align’—that is, occur simultaneously—and who unimpededly pass into the final nirvāṇa in the expanse of nirvāṇa where no remainder of the aggregates is left behind.”
āyuḥkṣaye kleśakṣaye. Bṭ1, p. 1277: “those persons who are recipients of the fruit of having entered the stream, the extinction of whose life or afflictive mental states occurs earlier or later.”
Bṭ1, p. 1277, differentiates this from the earlier one with the gloss, “Take this as the persons who are recipients of the result of having entered the stream who are candidates for actualizing the result of once-returner and are close to attaining the result of once-returner.”
Bṭ1, p. 1277: “Take this as the persons who are recipients of the result of having entered the stream who do not make the karma for descent into the three lower realms, and for whom even the maturation of the karma for descent to the lower realms that they have made earlier does not occur because they have meditated on the counteracting force.”
“Mental questioning” renders sems kyi rnam par rtog pa (cetaḥparivitarka).
Bṭ1, p. 1287, glosses yakṣa with mi’i tshig dang skad ma yin pa (“nonhuman words and language”).
“Explains, speaks about, teaches, details, elucidates, and gives conclusive instructions about” renders ’chad pa, rjod pa, ston pa, rnam par ’byed pa, gsal bar byed pa, gtan la phab par ston pa; ŚśP II-2:186, bhāṣate pravyāharati deśayati vibhajaty uttānīkaroti upadiśati.
“Things that are made up” renders skye ma (Kimura 2–3:12, nirmitopama, “like things that are conjured up”). Cf. dag yig gsar bsgrigs, s.v. ma, 9 ming la la’i mthar sbyar na dngos po de’i dbyibs dang khyad chos ston. Alternatively, emend skye ma to sgyu ma (ŚśP II-2:186, māyopama).
“Sublime” renders bzang ba (praṇītā).
“Extremely noble” renders shin tu ’phags pa.
“Being assisted by a spiritual mentor” renders dge ba’i bshes gnyen kyis yongs su zin pa (kalyāṇamitraparigṛhīta).
“Mentor” renders yongs su bzung ba, samparigraha. This is both great compassion and the mentor who gives instructions about it.
ŚsP II-3:36, avikṣiptāsamāhitayogena.
On the Skt yan nv aham with an optative construction, rendered na de la…gtor bar bya, see Edg, s.v. yan nu.
“Ground,” rendering gzhi, is not found in the Skt.
Here “reality of phenomena” renders chos rnams kyi chos nyid (dharmadharmatā), literally, following the conventions used in this translation, “the reality of phenomena (dharmatā) as it pertains to phenomena (dharma).” The phenomena (dharma) are everything beginning with physical forms. These are the conventional bases for their ultimate attribute (dharmatā), the emptiness of essential nature.
In the following sections, “without any dividing into two” and so on render advaidhīkāraṇena (rendered variously in Tib), and “do not train in order to enhance or diminish” and “accept or negate” render vṛddhaye na hānaye śikṣate and parigrahāya śikṣate nāntardhānāya; alternatively, “increase or decrease” and “get hold of or get rid of.”
This translation is based on Kimura 2–3:28, kuto bodhisattvena mahāsattvena prajñāpāramitā gaveṣitavyeti, as it is repeated below at 16.134. The corresponding section in the Twenty-Five Thousand at 16.38, “Where should one search for the bodhisattva great beings’ perfection of wisdom?” is supported by ŚsP II-2–3:124, bodhisattvānāṃ, and Abhisamayālaṃkāra 2.11. Below, however, Twenty-Five Thousand 16.49 follows Kimura 2–3:28.
The discourse here involving the “real nature” (de bzhin nyid, tathatā) and “reality of phenomena” or “reality” (chos nyid, dharmatā), together with the tathāgatas and the perfection of wisdom, conveys the following idea. The dharmatā of each phenomenon (chos, dharma), although the same from one perspective, differs in that it is being identified, by virtue of the very name, as the ultimate reality of that particular phenomenon. The tathatā, on the other hand, which is realized, or which is the defining real nature (tathatā) of the tathāgatas, is, by virtue of the very name, the ultimate reality of all taken together, or of all being understood (even in the conventional sense) together. The perfection of wisdom has been taken in a causal (or origin) sense and the tathāgata as a result. The perfection of wisdom, in the discourse of Subhūti, has been shown to be absolutely every phenomenon. The tathāgata is the knower of all, or, perhaps, the real nature of things when it is free of all obstruction.
Here “reality of physical forms” renders gzugs kyi chos nyid (rūpadharmatā); alternatively, “the reality of phenomena as it pertains to physical forms.”
“Such is” renders ’di ltar (in place of the usual ’di lta ste); cf. Edg, s.v. yad uta, which does not record this possible meaning.
“Inestimable” renders dpag tu med pa. Kimura 2–3:30, aparimāṇa, omitted in ŚsP II-3:178.
“Limitless” renders mtha’ yas pa (ananta); alternatively, “infinite.”
The Twenty-Five Thousand has rgya che ba (mahattā/mahatgata) as “extensive,” tshad med (apramāṇa) as “immeasurable,” and mtha’ yas (ananta) as “infinite.” The Hundred Thousand has rgya che ba (mahattā/mahatgata) as “great in extent”; tshad myed (apramāṇa) as “immeasurable”; dpag tu myed (aparimāṇa) as “unbounded”; dpag (parimāṇa) as “boundary”; mtha’ yas (ananta) as “infinite”; and mtha’ (anta) as “limit.” Note that in other contexts in the present translation, dpag tu myed is also rendered “inestimable.”
See the previous note. This section is in ŚsP, but there is no gloss in Bṭ1, pp. 1328–29.
ŚsP II-3:214. Kimura 2–3:33 omits “all-aspect omniscience” and has “the objective referent of the sphere of phenomena” as the first reason.
ŚsP II-3:214. Kimura 2–3:33 adds “objective referent” (dharmadhātvārambhaṇānantatayā), i.e., “the objective referent of the realm of phenomena is infinite.”
Alternatively, de bzhin nyid dang dmigs pa may mean “that which is the real nature and the objective referent”; cf. Bṭ1, p. 1330.
This is the end of chapter 24 and the beginning of chapter 25 in the Eighteen Thousand.
“Pronouncement” renders ched du brjod pa (udāna). Bṭ1, p. 1333: “ ‘Made the pronouncement,’ having felt great pleasure, were astounded, which is to say, nobody at all made them say it. Through the power of joy and pleasure they gave expression to the statement.”
“Attended upon” renders zham ’bring byed (zhabs ’bring ba). Negi, s.v. zham ring, gives Skt upasthā. ŚsP II-3:219, antika (“in the presence of”).
“In the capital city Padmāvatī” renders rgyal po’I khab padma yod pa’i nang; ŚsP II-3:219, padmāvatyāṃ (Kimura 2–3:35 dīpavatyām) rājadhānyām. Monier-Williams, s.v. padmāvatī, says “name of the city of Ujjayanī in the Kṛta-yuga.” Cf. the many tellings of the tale of Sumedha and Dīpaṃkāra set in Rammavatī (in the Pali rendering). Dīpaṃkāra’s wife before going forth to homelessness was Padumā. In that story Sumedha lays down his long hair, or his body, so Dīpaṃkāra and his followers can cross a muddy patch of road. In the Divyāvadāna (translated with the title “Dīpaṅkara Buddha and the Wise Brahmans Sumati and Mati” in Rotman 2008, pp. 246–54), the Buddha recounts his second meeting with Dharmaruci (incarnated as Mati), when they were both brahmin companions, during the time when the Buddha was Sumati, at the time of the Buddha Dīpaṃkāra. The gift of hair is the same but embedded within a complex web of miraculous giving.
“Perfect in wisdom and conduct” renders mkhyen pa dang rkang par ldan pa (vidyācaraṇasampanna).
“Favorably sustains” renders mthun par yongs su ’dzin pa (anuparigrāhikā).
This ends the second chapter in the Eight Thousand (“Śakra Chapter”).
“Find an opportunity to inflict harm on” renders glags rnyed (avatāraṃ labh).
That is, through perfect avoidance of those misfortunes. “Through perfect avoidance” renders yang dag par spang bas; ŚsP II-3:227, samyakparihāreṇa. The Tib translators understood parihṛ here as “to quit” or “to shun” (the weapons and poison and so on that cause death according to Bṭ1, p. 1331) in place of its other meaning, “to guard” or “to protect.” Note that the Twenty-Five Thousand (kha F.55.a, 16.83) has yang dag pa’i rim gros here, rendering Kimura 2–3:37, samyakparicaryayā (“with genuine acts of service”). Cf. Eighteen Thousand ka F.272.b, yongs su spyad pa.
tshangs ris; perhaps this should be emended to tshangs chen.
“Sorrow due to famine” renders mu ge’i zhugs ngam (durbhikṣakāntāra).
Gilgit 137v5–6, māṃ sa (ŚsP II-3:232, mānsa!) kauśika satkartavyaṃ…pūjayitavyaṃ manyeta yo bodhisattvaṃ. Kimura 2–3:39, imāṃ prajñāpāramitāṃ.
“Discipline” renders ’dul (vinī).
“Rival tīrthikas, tīrthika practitioners” renders mu stegs can gzhan dang / mu stegs spyod pa. Edg, s.v. caraka and tīrthika, says the recurring compound is the one found at ŚsP II-4–4, anyatīrthikacarakaparivrājako; Gilgit 138r11–12, anyatīrthikaparivrājako māro; Kimura 2–3:42, ānyatīrthikaḥ kulaputro vā kuladuhitā. Edg, s.v. tīrthika, wonders if the term mu stegs can gzhan, anyatīrthika (“rival tīrthikas”) suggests there were Buddhist tīrthikas, and s.v. caraka says the caraka are a separate sect and should perhaps go with the following parivrājaka (“wandering mendicants”) as a compound.
ŚsP II-4–4, kalahabhaṇḍanavigrahavivādān āpadyante. Here, “got into altercations and gratuitous insults,” ’khrug pa (kalahān), shags pa (bhaṇḍanān) come after ’thab pa (vigrahān), rtsod pa (vivādān). Edg gives “quarrel” for bhaṇḍana.
These render krodhavyāpādavihiṃsā.
“Encouraged to take up” renders yang dag par bskul ba (samādāpita).
“Attributes and advantages” renders yon tan dang legs pa (guṇānuśaṃsa).
“All forms of wrong view” renders lta ba’i rnam pa thams cad (sarvadṛṣṭigata); Edg, s.v. dṛṣṭigata, says it is basically the same as dṛṣṭi.
“In consecutive order and in reverse order” renders lugs dang mthun pa dang lugs dang myi mthun pa (anulomapratilomaṃ). Alternatively, “in a regular order and in an irregular order.”
“Possess attributes that do not decline” renders yongs su myi nyam pa’i chos can. Cf. ŚsP II, asaṃpramoṣadharma.
The translation “in the absence of which excellent form” is based on Gilgit 140v3, na ca rūpasaṃpadvinā sattvān paripācayiṣyāmi.
“The poor, the destitute, the supplicants, and beggars” renders phongs pa dang / nyam thag pa dang / ’dron po dang / slong ba; Kimura 2–3:52, kṛpaṇavanīkārthikayācanakebhyaḥ.
“Attached to their ego,” alternatively “attached to acting on the basis of a self,” renders bdag tu bgyi ba la mngon par chags pa (ahaṃkārābhiniveśa).
“Chant by heart” renders kha ton byed (svādhyāya). It means to repeat it to oneself aloud in order to commit it fully to memory, and having done so, to keep it in mind.
“Without being humiliated or injured” renders ma smas ma nyams (akṣataś cānupahataś ca).
Both the Twenty-Five Thousand and the Eighteen Thousand have “all-aspect omniscience,” which is what one expects, but none of the editions of the Hundred Thousand support the emendation, nor does ŚsP II-4:23, or even Kimura 2–3:54, sarvajñatācittena.
This renders khon med pa dang gcugs med pa. Jäschke, s.v. gcugs pa, records khon gcugs (“conceive a hatred”).
Here “placed” renders stsald (an honorific of the recipient), which renders the Skt pratiṣṭhāpayet; this is rendered below by bcug and blugs (based on putting the remains into a caitya and pouring the ashes and pieces of bone into a casket). “Cherished” renders mchod (again an honorific of the recipient), which renders the Skt pariharet, rendered below by gces pa.
“Within a container” renders snod du stsal te. ŚsP II-4:27, samudgate kṛtvā, perhaps suggests the relics are in a container that is taken out of the caitya to be carried in a procession; Kimura and Gilgit omit.
“Their physical body” renders nga’i sku (ātmabhāvaśarīra).
atyantadharmapūjā? Cf. ŚsP II-4:28, parinivṛtasyāpi ca kauśika śarīrāny evaṃ śarīrapūjā bhaviṣyati, na tv anyathadharmapūjāḥ (?). The idea is that the worship of the “doctrine,” the perfection of wisdom, the speech of the tathāgatas, is a better object of worship than the physical remains, because the body is only the basis for the physical being and mind.
“Within a container” renders snod du stsal te. ŚsP II-4:27, samudgate kṛtvā, perhaps suggests the relics are in a container that is taken out of the caitya to be carried in a procession; Kimura and Gilgit omit.
“Unbroken devotion” renders mos pa mi phyed pa (abhedyaprasāda); alternatively, prasāda (here mos pa) is rendered by “serene confidence.”
“Acts of service undertaken on behalf of senior family members” renders rigs kyi gtso bo la rim gro byed pa, ŚsP II-4:33, kule jyeṣṭopacāyakā (?). Earlier, 8.77 (ga F.60.b) renders kulajyeṣṭānupālitā (?) with rigs kyi nang na rgan pa la rim gro byed pa.
“Dwell with the perception of sense pleasures as a basic transgression” renders ’dod pa la kha na ma tho bar ’du shes shing / rnam par spyod pa, *kāmādīnavasasaṃjñino viharati (?).
Probably “commit to writing” has been left out by mistake.
“Happens” here renders yod. Below it is rendered “exist.” The translators probably read prabhāvyate (“is necessarily there”). They have perhaps rendered prajñāyate by gdags su yod (“exist as a designation”).
ŚsP II-4:54, saṃgrāmayiṣyāmas (“we will do battle with them”). The Tib brdal means “to scatter.”
“Medicinal plants” renders rtsi (oṣadhi). The logic behind connecting them with the shining of the full moon is probably because of an etymology of oṣadhi from the verbal root uṣ (“to burn”) as in uṣas (“the dawn”). In Tib rtsi also means the calculation to do with the movements of the heavenly bodies (astrology).
Here smye sha can (“having skin with black moles”), ŚsP puṣkasa; according to Edg, s.v. pulkasa, “the name of a despised mixed tribe.”
Kimura 2–3:74, parigṛhītā; Gilgit 148r3, anuparigṛhītā; ŚsP II 4–46, udgṛhītā (“taken up”).
“Engaging correctly” renders yang dag par brtson (saṃyukta).
“Endowed with luminosity” renders snag ba dang ldan pa, probably a translation of (dig) ālokajātā (“where light has been born”). Conze has “born of light.”
“Consummates” renders yongs su sgrub pa, *saṃvartayitā (“the one that causes to be fully accomplished”). It appears to be a gloss of, rather than an alternative rendering of, the earlier kun tu ’dren pa(pariṇāyakā). It is not attested in the Skt editions.
“Have done the practice for the purpose of becoming a tathāgata” renders de bzhin gshegs pa’i don du zhugs pa, ŚsP II-4:81, tathāgatapratipannās; Kimura 2–3:80, tathāgatapratimās (“are similar to a tathāgata”). Gilgit 149v13 is damaged.
“Reinforce that inspired eloquence” renders spobs pa nye bar bsgrub pa (pratibhānam upasaṃhartavyaṃ).
“Treasury” renders gter (nidhi).
“Greatly valued” renders dgos par bya ba (*prayas?), “a desideratum”; cf. Twenty-Five Thousand kha F.95.b, dgongs par bya ba.
“Maintain scrupulous conduct” renders gtsang sbra’i spyod pa dang ldan pa, caukṣasamācāra (“habitually clean”), explained by Haribhadra (cf. MDPL, s.v. caukṣasamācāra) as “extremely purified because of not doing any wrong.”
“With great conviction” renders mos pa rgya chen po (udārādhimuktika).
“Radiance” renders gsal ba; cf. Mvy, s.v. gsal ba, which gives paṭu as one meaning “(physically) adept”; ŚsP II-4:88, kathanīyata (“worth speaking of”).
“Discussing together” renders yang dag par (emend ’gro to bgro) bgro bar byed pa (saṃgāyamāna). Cf. MDPL, s.v. saṃgāyamāna, which glosses this as “ascertaining the meaning of the book.”
“Will have undertaken something” renders zhugs pa yin, ŚsP II-4:94, pratipanno bhaviṣyati.
“Not have confidence” renders myi rton pa, apratyaya; Edg, s.v. apratyaya, “discontent, ill-will.”
“Not think highly” renders btsun par myi bgyid pa, abahumānatā.
“Brought into being” renders bsgrubs pa, paribhāvita.
“Brought into being” renders yongs su bsgrub pa, paribhāvitatva.
“One that brings it about” renders yongs su sgrub pa, āhārika.
“The mental consciousness included in phenomena” (chos kyi khongs su gtogs pa’i yid, dharmāntargatena mānasena), means, of the twelve sense fields (āyatanas), it is not mental consciousness, but is a special consciousness included in mental phenomena.
“Panic” renders bag tsha ba (stambhita).
“Does not need to worry about” renders dogs pa ma mchis par bgyi (na pratikāṅkṣitavya); cf. Edg, s.v. pratikāṅkṣati, records (once) the meaning of Pali paṭikaṅkhin as “expecting (dangers).”
“Precious Jewels” here renders dkon mchog (bhāga). Earlier the same word, bhāga, was rendered by cha (“part” or “choice”).
The three miraculous powers (prātihāra) are the miraculous powers of meditative stabilization, miraculous wonderworking powers, and miraculous dharma-illuminating powers.
“That is logically what happens” renders gsha’.
“Present” renders nye bar gnas (pratyupasthita).
“Robe” renders gos, ŚsP II-4:107, cīvara; Kimura 2–3:94, vastra.
“Purple” renders leb rgan, māñjiṣṭha (“madder”).
“Longing” renders mos pa (spṛha).
“The unchanging nature of reality” renders chos myi ’gyur ba nyid (dharmaniyāmatā). Usually, in both the Degé version of the Hundred Thousand and the Twenty-Five Thousand, this is dharmanyāmatā rendered as chos kyi skyon med pa nyid (“the maturity of phenomena”).
“Without subtraction and without addition” renders dbri ba dang bsnan pa ma mchis pa, anāyūhāniyūha, from the verbal root wah (“nothing has been brought in and nothing has been taken out”).
This “thoroughly cultivated” renders yongs su bsgoms pa, which renders the same paribhāvita that was earlier rendered yongs su bsgrub pa (“brought into being”).
“Believe in my heart” renders the archaism glo ba mches pa (pratyaya).
Alternatively, Conze, translating the corresponding passage in the Eight Thousand, renders dharmatayā as “in accordance with dharma.”
“Gone far off” and “gone to the other side” render ring du song (āram itā) and pha rol tu phyin (pāram itā); “over here” and “over there” render tshur rol (apāra) and pha rol (pāra).
“There as the plain” and “there as the valley” are literal renderings of thang du ’dug pa and gshong du ’dug pa, which in turn render sthala (“prominent,” “conspicuous”) and nimna (“sunk down,” “inconspicuous”).
“Surveying” renders rnam par lta ba (*vilokita); cf. Kimura 2–3: 99, vibhāvaya, and ŚsP II-4:119, vivikta.
“Height and width” renders chu zheng (ārohapariṇāha). Perhaps chu is a collapsed or abbreviated form of [che] chu[ng].
Cf. ŚsP II-4:122, aprameyaguṇasamanvāgatā bhagavan prajñāpāramitā apramāṇaguṇasamanvāgatā (“endowed with good qualities that cannot be measured (as objects) and endowed with good qualities that are not instruments of measurement (as subjects)”).
“Boundless” renders mu myed pa (aparyanta).
“Pearl relics” renders ring bsrel; ŚsP II-4:122, Kimura 2–3:101, dhātu.
Here “learned,” rendering mkhas pa, appears to render anyatarānyataranīya (“worthy to be one from the other”), which is possibly to say the recipient of an intellectual heritage.
“Like Brahmā in conduct” renders tshangs pa mtshungs par spyod pa (sabrahmacārin), either living a life of celibacy or living a life of pure conduct.
“Even somebody like me” renders nga nyid kyang (aham eva tāvat).
“Maturity of the perfect nature” renders yang dag pa’i skyon med pa nyid (samyaktvanyāma/niyāma). MDPL, s.v. samyaktvaniyāma, glosses this with “certainty that he will win salvation by the methods appropriate to the Disciples.”
The subject, “the single being,” is omitted here and in all the comparisons until the phrase “the single being who is placed into unsurpassed, perfect, complete enlightenment” is given in the pratyekabuddha comparison below. “They would have done it” renders zhugs; cf. ŚsP II-4:126, pratipanno bhavati (the single person “has practiced”); Kimura 2–3:103, pratyupasthito bhavati (“has been established”).
“From this round of teaching” renders rnam grangs des (anena paryāyeṇa).
ŚsP II-4:141, Kimura 2–3:107.
The idea is that the topics (“the letter”) should be taught, but so should their ultimate nature (“the meaning”). The Stok version of the Hundred Thousand (ja F.323.b.2) has the same reading.
“Reflection” renders gzugs brnyan, perhaps reading pratibimba in place of prativarṇika, “counterfeit.”
“Will imagine” renders rtog par ’gyur in the sense of a wish that something is there when it is not; cf. ŚsP II-4:185, gaveṣiṣyante, Kimura 2–3:110, gaveṣiṣyanti (“seek for”).
“While cultivating” renders bsgoms dang, based on ŚsP II-4:214, bhāvayan, and Kimura 2–3:112, bhāvayamānaḥ.
“Derive their existence” renders yod par ’gyur (prabhāvyante, from the root prabhū).
“Swiftly” here has the negative connotation of not wanting to remain a bodhisattva for the sake of others.
Kimura 2–3:120, amī bhūtkaṇṭhitāḥ (=bhū? utkaṇṭhitāḥ) saṃsārād. Bṭ1, pp. 25–26: “As for the other bodhisattvas, they have become certain, their minds are on unsurpassed, perfect, complete enlightenment, so even if this perfection of wisdom is not taught to them they will not turn back. Some among those bodhisattvas want to quickly fully awaken to unsurpassed, perfect, complete enlightenment and be liberated from saṃsāra. They do not want to practice a bodhisattva’s great compassion. If they teach this perfection of wisdom to them in detail and cause them to enter into the practice, their merit increases even more than the former.” Conze, Large Sutra 1975, p. 267 is unsure about the meaning and gives a different interpretation.
“Basic necessities: robes, alms, bedding, and medications used to treat ill health” renders gos dang/ bsod snyoms dang/ mal cha dang/ nad kyi rkyen sman dang yo byad (cīvarapīṇḍpātraśayanāsanaglānapratyayabhaiṣajya-pariṣkāra). These are the basic necessities of an ordained person. The word is also used for “everyday necessities” in general. Cf. Edg, s.v. pariṣkāra.
“Source” renders ’byung ba, prabhava.
The idea is that the meritorious action is a foundation, somewhat like building up a store of goodwill. The bodhisattvas’ good deeds (the object in which one should rejoice) are supreme because whatever they do, they do for the sake of others, while ordinary good deeds, and even the meditation and so on of śrāvakas, is for a personal benefit.
“Transformed” renders rnam par gyur (vipariṇata); pariṇāma by itself is consistently rendered bsngo (“dedicate”).
“More belief” renders mos pa mang ba (adhimuktibahula).
“Gather together, compress into one, and take the measure” renders mngon par bsdus te/ gcig tu brjul nas/ tshad bzung; Kimura 2–3:128, abhisaṃkṣipya piṇḍayitvā tulayitvā.
“Focus their thoughts, as is their habit” renders sems shing bsams (samanvāhṛ).
“Not within the scope of mental images” renders mtshan ma’i yul ma yin.
“Bodies of theirs” renders bdag gi lus de dag; Kimura 2–3:131, ātmabhāvā[ḥ].
Emend gsod pa to bsod pa; Kimura 2–3:132, praṇīta.
“Transforms” renders ’gyur; Kimura 2–3:132, pariṇāma (“dedication, transformation”).
Bṭ1: “One’s own rejoicing and dedication and causing others to enter into rejoicing and dedication in that manner; the uncontaminated roots of virtue of those lord buddhas’ śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas.”
“Their natural condition” renders ngang tshul gang yin pa (yajjātika).
“Humbled” renders ’jum; Kimura 2–3:140, avaman. bod rgya tshig mdzod chen mo, s.v. ’jum pa, gives kheng ba btong ba as an old usage.
“Belief” renders mos pa; alternatively, “resolve.”
“Feeling an enthusiasm for” renders don du nyams su len; Kimura 2–3:142, autsukyam āpad.
“Rendering visual distortion nonexistent” renders rab rib ma mchis par dgyid pa; Kimura 2–3:142, vitimirakarī.
“Supreme” renders mchog tu bgyid pa (agrakārī); alternatively, “renders [them] supreme.” Bṭ1 comments, “It means that it is the foremost cause that brings about the attainment of enlightenment.”
Emend ba’i to ba (Kimura 2–3:142, sarvavāsanānusaṃdhikleśa); alternative translations such as “propensities for afflictive mental states that cause linking up” do not fit the context. Cf. the footnote to Hundred Thousand ka F.41.a–42.a, n.104.
“Protector” renders mgon dgyid pa (nāthakarī).
“Works as the ten powers” renders bstob bcu bgyid pa (daśabalakarī).
The canonical explanation (see, for example, The Sūtra of the Wheel of Dharma, Toh 337, 1.3–1.14 and n.21) is that the three times are when the Buddha (1) proclaims what the four truths are; (2) teaches that they must be comprehended, eliminated, realized, and cultivated; and (3) states that he himself has comprehended, eliminated, realized, and cultivated them. At the end of each truth The Sūtra of the Wheel of Dharma says, “I reflected thoroughly, the vision arose, and the insight, knowledge, understanding, and realization arose.” In explaining the twelve ways or aspects, Haribhadra (Wogihara 382, translated in Sparham, vol. 2, p. 264) explains this same canonical passage as follows: “Paying proper attention to phenomena not heard about before, a wisdom eye without outflows that directly perceives reality has dawned, knowledge free from doubt, an understanding of the way things are, and an intellectual awareness that is purified have dawned.” For each of the three times there are these four aspects: the Buddha directly perceives reality with an uncontaminated wisdom eye (= “the vision”), knows with an understanding free from doubt (= “the insight”), understands the way things are (bhūtārtha) (= “the knowledge”), and has a purified intellectual awareness (buddhi) (= “realization”).
“Emerge from” renders ’byung (prabhū, Kimura 2–3:143, prabhāvyante); “derive its dignity from” (Conze), “a category of” (Sparham).
“Clearly achieve” renders mngon par sgrub (abhinirhṛ). Other possible renderings include “consummate,” “bring into being,” and “find within oneself and produce.” Kimura 2–3:147, lines 23–28. This passage and the paragraphs that immediately follow appear to suggest that the very act of perception is incompatible with the practice of the perfection of wisdom, even if the perception is accurate. The Ten Thousand inverts the interpretation here.
“In vain” renders gsog (tucchā).
“Have conviction” renders yid ches pa, Mvy pratyayita. Kimura 2–3:146, reading pratyarpitā, understands: “Because they have caused the perfection of wisdom to be attained, they do not cause physical forms to be attained.”
Literally, the Tib says, “Because they have conviction in the perfection of wisdom, in which phenomena do they not have conviction?”
“Not enhance or diminish” renders che bar myi bgyid chung bar myi bgyid (na mahatkṛ nālpīkṛ) (literally, “neither makes bigger nor makes smaller”).
“Not gather together or scatter apart” renders ’du bar myi bgyid yangs bar myi bgyid. Eight Thousand 388 has na saṃkṣip na vikṣip.
“Does not make measurable or make immeasurable” renders tshad mchis par myi bgyid tshad ma mchis par myi bgyid.
“Not enlarge or compress” renders rgya chen por myi bgyid rgya chung ngur myi bgyid, Kimura 2–3:147, na parittīkṛ na vipulīkṛ.
“Not strengthen or weaken” renders mthu dang ldan par myi bgyid mthu ma mchis par myi bgyid (na balīkṛ na durbalīkṛ).
“As reality and as method” renders don dang tshul gyis, Kimura 2–3:149, arthataś ca nayataś ca.
“Incomparable” renders mtshungs par myed pa, Mvy apratisama; cf. Eighteen Thousand, kha F.59.a (35.2), “imponderable,” perhaps rendering apratisaṃdhi.
“Actual perfection of wisdom” renders shes rab kyi pha rol tu phyin pa nyid.
“Insentient” renders sems myed pa (usually bem po), jaḍa (“material,” “inanimate”).
“Make an effort at” renders brtson par bgyid (yogam āpad).
“There is a distinction that must be explained” renders rnam par phye zhing bshad dgos pa. Edg, s.v. vibhajya-vyākaraṇa, an explanation “distinguishing aspects beyond what the question itself immediately raised.”
The Tibetan reads “roast” (bsreg bar ’gyur ro), whereas Kimura 2–3, p. 151, reads prakṣepsyante (“they will be cast into”).
“Somehow or other” renders brgya la (kathaṃcit). Kimura 2–3:151, kadācit karhicit.
“Reject” renders phyir spang ba.
“Having ruined” renders nyams par byas; Kimura 2–3:151, upahatya.
“Misled” renders tshul ma yin pa (anaya).
“Calamity” renders ’jigs pa; Kimura 2–3:152, vyasana.
“Measure of the body” renders lus kyi tshad; Kimura 2–3:152, ātmabhāvasya pramāṇa. It means the amount of suffering and the length of time it is experienced.
That is, in the hells, in the animal realms, or in the world of Yama.
“Carried out fully” renders tshang par byas pa.
“So long” renders ’di srid du (iyacciram).
“Terrible form of life” renders ngan song, apāya (“when things have gone badly”).
“Mundane right view” renders ’jig rten gyi yang dag pa’i lta ba (laukikī samyagdṛṣṭiḥ).
“In how many ways” renders rnam pa du zhig gis, katamair ākāraiḥ.
“Act out of hatred” renders zhe sdang gi spyod pa can (dveṣacarita); cp. Kimura 2–3:152, doṣacaritāś (“conduct themselves badly”).
“The past limit that has the essential nature of a nonentity,” or, alternatively, “the past limit, which has the essential nature of a nonentity,” renders sngon gyi mtha’ dngos po myed pa’i rang bzhin, a literal rendering of (Kimura 2–3:154) pūrvānto ’bhāvasvabhāvo. It does not make sense in English to say “the past limit, the essential nature of a nonentity, is physical forms.” “The essential nature of a nonentity” renders dngos po myed pa’i rang bzhin (abhāvasvabhāva). If you take the negative prefix a at the start of the compound as qualifying the following (a dvandva compound), it means “the absence of the essential nature of an entity.” As a bahuvrihi compound (abhāvasvabhāvo yasmin), the sentence would then mean, “The past limit in which there is the absence of the essential nature of an entity is physical forms.”
Here “utter purity” renders yongs su dag pa (pariśuddhi). In the previous sections “purity” rendered rnam par dag pa (viśuddhi). Among the many senses of the prefixes vi- and pari- are “individualization” and “all-encircling,” respectively.
Note the change here from “emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness” to “the emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness gateways to liberation.”
Here, and in the following, the absence of the different stages of śrāvaka attainment is noteworthy.
Again, it is noteworthy that all of the attainments, starting from the fruit of having entered the stream, are spelled out here in place of just omniscience.
Again, “utter purity” here renders yongs su dag pa (pariśuddhi), as distinct from “purity” (rnam par dag pa, viśuddhi).
That is, linking up with a new set of aggregates in rebirth.
“Abiding nature of the reality of phenomena” renders chos kyi dbyings kyi gnas nyid (dharmadhātusthititā).
According to the Abhisamayālaṃkāra this begins the third section of the Sūtra, explaining the difference between the understanding of the foundational teachings by a śrāvaka and by a bodhisattva.
“Dedicated” renders yongs su bsngo ba (pariṇāmayitum); alternatively, “transformed.”
“Until the establishment of the good Dharma” renders dam pa’i chos gnas pa’i bar; alternatively, “for as long as the good Dharma remains.”
“Speak in praise” renders legs par brjod (varṇaṃ bhāṣ); “speak disparagingly” renders ma legs par brjod (avarṇaṃ bhāṣ).
“Want to buttress space with the sky” renders nam mkha’ bar nang la gdegs par ’tshal ba; Kimura 2–3:174, ākāśaṃ te antarikṣam utkseptukāmāḥ.
“Rush” renders od ma, Mvy piṇḍaveṇu (“lump bamboo”).
“Without conventional designations” renders tha snyad med pa; Kimura 2–3:180, avyāhāratā.
These are the eighth, fourteenth, and fifteenth days of the month in the lunar calendar.
Bibliography
Primary Sources in Tibetan and Sanskrit
shes rab kyi pha rol tu phyin pa stong phrag brgya pa (Śatasāhasrikāprajñāpāramitā) [The Perfection of Wisdom in One Hundred Thousand Lines]. Toh 8, Degé Kangyur vols. 14–25: (’bum, ka), folios 1.b–394.a; (’bum, kha), folios 1.b–402.a; (’bum, ga), folios 1.b–394.a; (’bum, nga), folios 1.b–381.a; (’bum, ca), folios 1.b–395.a; (’bum, cha), folios 1.b–382.a; (’bum, ja), folios 1.b–398.a; (’bum, nya), folios 1.b–399.a; (’bum, ta), folios 1.b–384.a; (’bum, tha), folios 1.b–387.a; (’bum, da), folios 1.b–411.a; and (’bum, a), folios 1.b–395.a.
shes rab kyi pha rol tu phyin pa stong phrag brgya pa (Śatasāhasrikāprajñāpāramitā) [The Perfection of Wisdom in One Hundred Thousand Lines]. 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, vols. 14–25.
Śatasāhasrikā prajñāpāramitā [The Perfection of Wisdom in One Hundred Thousand Lines]. Sanskrit texts based on Ghoṣa, Pratāpacandra, Çatasāhasrikā prajñāpāramitā: A Theological and Philosophical Discourse of Buddha With His Disciples in A Hundred Thousand Stanzas. Calcutta: Asiatic Society of Bengal, 1902–14 (chapters 1–12); and on Kimura, Takayasu, Śatasāhasrikā prajñāpāramitā, II/1–4, 4 vols. Tokyo: Sankibo Busshorin, 2009–14. Available as e-texts, Part I and Part II, on Göttingen Register of Electronic Texts in Indian Languages (GRETIL).
The Larger Prajñāpāramitā. Sanskrit edition (mostly according to the Gilgit manuscript GBM 175–675, folios 1–27) from Zacchetti, Stefano (2005). In Praise of the Light: A Critical Synoptic Edition with an Annotated Translation of Chapters 1-3 of Dharmarakṣa’s Guang zan jing, Being the Earliest Chinese Translation of the Larger Prajñāpāramitā. Bibliotheca Philologica et Philosophica Buddhica, Vol. 8. The International Research Institute for Advanced Buddhology. Tokyo: Soka University, 2005. Available as e-text on Göttingen Register of Electronic Texts in Indian Languages (GRETIL).
The Larger Prajñāpāramitā. Sanskrit edition (Gilgit manuscript folios 202.a.5–205.a.12, GBM 571.5–577.12) from Yoke Meei Choong, Zum Problem der Leerheit (śūnyatā) in der Prajñāpāramitā, Frankfurt: Europäische Hochschulschriften, Reihe 27, Bd. 97, 2006, pp. 109–33. Available as e-text on Göttingen Register of Electronic Texts in Indian Languages (GRETIL).
Secondary References in Tibetan and Sanskrit
shes rab kyi pha rol tu phyin pa stong phrag nyi shu lnga pa (Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikāprajñāpāramitā) [The Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-Five Thousand Lines]. Toh 9, Degé Kangyur vols. 26–28 (shes phyin, nyi khri, ka–a), folios ka.1.b–ga.381.a.
shes rab kyi pha rol tu phyin pa stong phrag nyi shu lnga pa (Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikāprajñāpāramitā) [The Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-Five Thousand Lines]. 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, vols. 26–28.
shes rab kyi pha rol tu phyin pa stong phrag nyi shu lnga pa (Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikāprajñāpāramitā) [The Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-Five Thousand Lines, the “eight-chapter” (le’u brgyad ma) Tengyur version]. Toh 3790, Degé Tengyur vols. 82–84 (shes phyin, ga–ca), folios ga.1.b–ca.342.a.
Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā prajñāpāramitā [The Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-Five Thousand Lines]. Sanskrit text based on the edition by Takayasu Kimura. Tokyo: Sankibo Busshorin 2007–9 (1–1, 1–2), 1986 (2–3), 1990 (4), 1992 (5), 2006 (6–8). Available as e-text on Göttingen Register of Electronic Texts in Indian Languages (GRETIL). Page references: {Ki.}
Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā prajñāpāramitā [The Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-Five Thousand Lines]. Dutt, Nalinaksha. Calcutta Oriental Series 28. London: Luzac, 1934. Reprint edition, Sri Satguru Publications, 1986. Available as e-text on Göttingen Register of Electronic Texts in Indian Languages (GRETIL). Page references: {Dt.nn}
Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā prajñāpāramitā [The Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-Five Thousand Lines]. Sanskrit text of the Anurādhapura fragment, based on the edition by Oskar von Hinüber, “Sieben Goldblätter einer Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā aus Anurādhapura,” in Nachrichten der Akademie der Wissenschaften in Göttingen, Phil.-Hist.Kl. 1983, pp. 189–207. Available as e-text on Göttingen Register of Electronic Texts in Indian Languages (GRETIL).
Aṣṭasāhasrikā prajñāpāramitā [The Perfection of Wisdom in Eight Thousand Lines]. Sanskrit text based on the edition by P. L. Vaidya, in Buddhist Sanskrit Texts, vol. 4. Darbhanga: The Mithila Institute, 1960. Available as e-text on Göttingen Register of Electronic Texts in Indian Languages (GRETIL). Page references (for chapters 73–75): {Va.nn}
Daṃṣṭrasena. shes rab kyi pha rol tu phyin pa ’bum pa rgya cher ’grel pa (Śatasāhasrikāprajñāpāramitābṛhaṭṭīkā) [“An Extensive Commentary on The Perfection of Wisdom in One Hundred Thousand Lines”], Toh 3807, Degé Tengyur vols. 91–92. Also in Tengyur Pedurma (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, vol. 54 (TPD 54), pp. 627–1439, and vol. 55, pp. 2–550.
Denkarma (ldan dkar ma; pho brang stod thang ldan dkar gyi chos ’gyur ro cog gi dkar chag). Toh 4364, Degé Tengyur vol. 206 (sna tshogs, jo), folios 294.b–310.a.
Phangthangma (dkar chag ’phang thang ma). Beijing: mi rigs dpe skrun khang, 2003.
Alaksha Tendar (a lag sha bstan dar). shes rab snying po’i ’grel pa don gsal nor bu’i ’od. sku ’bum: sku ’bum byams pa gling. http://purl.bdrc.io/resource/W7303. [BDRC bdr:W7303]. For translation see Lopez 1988.
Butön (bu ston rin chen grub). bde bar gshegs pa’i bstan pa’i gsal byed chos kyi ’byung gnas gsung rab rin po che’i mdzod. In gsung ’bum/_rin chen grub/ zhol par ma/ ldi lir bskyar par brgyab pa/ [The Collected Works of Bu-ston: Edited by Lokesh Chandra from the Collections of Raghu Vira], vol. 24, pp. 633–1056. New Delhi: International Academy of Indian Culture, 1965–71.
Chomden Rigpai Raltri (bcom ldan rig pa’i ral gri). bstan pa rgyas pa rgyan gyi nyi ’od. BDRC MW1CZ1041 (scanned dbu med MS from Drépung) and MW00EGS1017426 (modern computerized version).
Dolpopa (dol po pa shes rab rgyal mtshan). ’bum rdzogs ldan lugs kyi bshad pa. Jo nang dpe tshogs 43. Beijing: mi rigs dpe skrun khang, 2014. http://purl.bdrc.io/resource/W8LS18973 . [BDRC bdr:W8LS18973].
Karma Chakmé (gnas mdo karma chags med). yum chen mo shes rab kyi pha rol tu phyin pa’i ’bum tig. In gsung ’bum karma chags med (gnas mdo dpe rnying nyams gso khang), 34:223–50. [nang chen rdzong]: gnas mdo gsang sngags chos ’phel gling gi dpe rnying nyams gso khang, 2010. http://purl.bdrc.io/resource/MW1KG8321_A2E762 . [BDRC bdr:MW1KG8321_A2E762].
Kongtrül Lodrö Thaye (kong sprul blo gros mtha’ yas / yon tan rgya mtsho). shes bya kun khyab [“The Treasury of Knowledge”]. Beijing: Mi rigs dpe skrun khang, 2002. Translated, along with the auto-commentary, by the Kalu Rinpoche Translation Group in The Treasury of Knowledge series (TOK). Ithaca, NY: Snow Lion Publications, 1995 to 2012. Mentioned here is Ngawang Zangpo 2010 (Books 2, 3, and 4).
Minling Terchen Gyurme Dorje. zab pa dang rgya che ba’i dam pa’i chos kyi thob yig rin chen ’byung gnas dum bu gnyis pa. In vol. 2, gsung ’bum ’gyur med rdo rje. 16 vols. Dehra Dun: D.g. Khochhen Tulku, 1998. Buddhist Digital Resource Center (BDRC), purl.bdrc.io/resource/MW22096. [BDRC bdr:MW22096]
Nordrang Orgyan (nor brang o rgyan). chos rnam kun btus. 3 vols. Beijing: Krung go’i bod rig pa dpe skrun khang, 2008.
Olkha Lelung Lobsang Trinlé (’ol kha / dga’ sle lung blo bzang ’phrin las). Narthang Catalog (Detailed). bka’ ’gyur rin po che’i gsung par srid gsum rgyan gcig rdzu ’phrul shing rta’i dkar chag ngo mtshar bkod pa rgya mtsho’i lde mig. Scans in: Narthang Kangyur (snar thang bka’ ’gyur), vol. 102, pp. 663–909. Buddhist Digital Resource Center (BDRC), http://purl.bdrc.io/resource/W22703 [BDRC bdr:W22703]. Transcribed in: 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. 106, pp. 71–306.
Rongtönpa (rong ston shes bya kun rig). sher phyin ’bum TIk. Manduwala, Dehra Dun: Luding Ladrang, Pal Ewam Chodan Ngorpa Centre, 1985. http://purl.bdrc.io/resource/W1KG11807. [BDRC bdr:W1KG11807]. For translation see Martin 2012.
Zhang Yisun et al. bod rgya tshig mdzod chen mo. 3 vols. Subsequently reprinted in 2 vols. and 1 vol. Beijing: Mi rigs dpe skrun khang, 1985. Translated in Nyima and Dorje 2001 (vol. 1).
Secondary References in English and Other Languages
Almogi, Orna. “The Old sNar thang Tibetan Buddhist Canon Revisited, with Special Reference to dBus pa blo gsal’s bsTan ’gyur Catalogue.” Revue d’Etudes Tibétaines 58 (April 2021): 167–207. hal-03213584
Bongard-Levin, G. M., and Shin’ichirō Hori. “A Fragment of the Larger Prajñāpāramitā from Central Asia.” Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies 19, no. 1 (1996): 19–60.
Brunnhölzl, Karl (2010). Gone Beyond: The Prajñāpāramitā Sūtras, The Ornament of Clear Realization, and its Commentaries in the Tibetan Kagyü Tradition. 2 vols. Ithaca: Snow Lion, 2010 and 2011.
————(2012). Groundless Paths: The Prajñāpāramitā Sūtras, The Ornament of Clear Realization, and its Commentaries in the Tibetan Nyingma Tradition. Ithaca: Snow Lion, 2012.
Burchardi, Anne, trans. The Teaching on the Great Compassion of the Tathāgata (Tathāgatamahākaruṇānirdeśa, Toh 147). 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha, 2020.
Choong, Yoke Meei. Zum Problem der Leerheit (śūnyatā) in der Prajñāpāramitā. Frankfurt: Europäische Hochschulschriften, Reihe 27, Bd. 97, 2006, pp. 109–33.
Conze, Edward (1962). The Gilgit Manuscript of the Aṣṭādaśasāhasrikā-prajñāpāramitā: Chapters 50 to 55 corresponding to the 5th Abhisamaya. SOR 26. Rome: ISMEO, 1962.
————trans. (1973a). Materials for a Dictionary of the Prajñāpāramitā Literature. Tokyo: Suzuki Research Foundation, 1973.
————trans. (1973b). The Perfection of Wisdom in Eight Thousand Lines and Its Verse Summary. Bolinas, CA: Four Seasons Foundation, 1973.
————(1974). The Gilgit Manuscript of the Aṣṭādaśasāhasrikā-prajñāpāramitā: Chapters 70 to 82 corresponding to the 6th, 7th, and 8th Abhisamayas. SOR 46. Rome: ISMEO, 1974.
————(1975). The Large Sūtra on Perfect Wisdom: With the Divisions of the Abhisamayālaṅkāra. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1975.
————(1978). The Prajñāpāramitā Literature (Second edition). Tokyo: The Reiyukai, 1978.
Dayal, Har. The Bodhisattva Doctrine in Buddhist Sanskrit Literature. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1932. Reprinted Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1970.
Dharmachakra Translation Committee, trans. (2019a). The Jewel Cloud (Ratnamegha, Toh 231). 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha, 2019.
——— (2019b). The Precious Discourse on the Blessed One’s Extensive Wisdom That Leads to Infinite Certainty (Niṣṭhāgatabhagavajjñānavaipulyasūtraratnānanta, Toh 99). 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha, 2019.
———— (trans.) (2012). Indo-Tibetan Classical Learning and Buddhist Phenomenology. Book 6, Parts 1–2 of Jamgön Kongtrul, The Treasury of Knowledge. Boston: Snow Lion, 2012.
Falk, Harry. “The ‘Split’ Collection of Kharoṣṭhī texts.” ARIRIAB 14 (2011): 13–23.
Falk, Harry, and Seishi Karashima (2012). “A first‐century Prajñāpāramitā manuscript from Gandhāra – parivarta 1 (Texts from the Split Collection 1).” ARIRIAB 15 (2012): 19–61.
————(2013). “A first‐century Prajñāpāramitā manuscript from Gandhāra – parivarta 5 (Texts from the Split Collection 2).” ARIRIAB 16 (2013): 97–169.
Ghoṣa, Pratāpacandra, ed. Çatasāhasrikā prajñāpāramitā: A Theological and Philosophical Discourse of Buddha With His Disciples in A Hundred Thousand Stanzas. Calcutta: Asiatic Society of Bengal, 1902–14. Available as e-text on Göttingen Register of Electronic Texts in Indian Languages (GRETIL).
Herrmann-Pfandt, Adelheid. Die Lhan Kar Ma: Ein früher Katalog der ins Tibetische übersetzten buddhistischen Texte, Kritische Neuausgabe mit Einleitung und Materialien. Vienna: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 2008.
Hinüber, O. von. “Sieben Goldblätter einer Pañca-viṃśatisāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā aus Anurādhapura.” NAWG 7 (1983): 189–207.
Kimura, Takayasu, ed. Śatasāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā, II/1–4, 4 vols. Tokyo: Sankibo Busshorin, 2009 (II-1), 2010 (II-2, II-3), 2014 (II-4). Available as e-text (see links) on Göttingen Register of Electronic Texts in Indian Languages (GRETIL).
———— (ed.). Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā Prajñā-pāramitā, I–VIII, 6 vols. Tokyo: Sankibo Busshorin, 2007–9 (1-1, 1-2), 1986 (2-3), 1990 (4), 1992 (5), 2006 (6-8). Available as e-text on Göttingen Register of Electronic Texts in Indian Languages (GRETIL).
Kloetzli, Randy. Buddhist Cosmology. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1983.
Konow, Sten. The First Two Chapters of the Daśasāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā: Restoration of the Sanskrit Text, Analysis and Index. Oslo: I Kommisjon Hos Jacob Dybwad, 1941.
Lamotte, Etienne (1998). Śūraṃgamasamādhisūtra: The Concentration of Heroic Progress, An Early Mahāyāna Buddhist Scripture. English translation by Sara Boin-Webb. London: Curzon Press.
——— (2001). The Treatise on the Great Virtue of Wisdom of Nāgārjuna (Mahāprajñāpāramitāśāstra). English translation by Gelongma Karma Migme Chodron. Unpublished electronic text, 2001.
Martin [Yerushalmi], Dan. “1,200-year-old Perfection of Wisdom Uncovered in Drepung.” Tibeto-Logic (blog). Posted July 7, 2012.
Negi, J.S., ed. Tibetan Sanskrit Dictionary (bod skad dang legs sbyar gyi tshig mdzod chen mo). 16 vols. Sarnath: Central Institute of Higher Tibetan Studies, 1993–2005.
Nyima, Tudeng and Gyurme Dorje, trans. An Encyclopaedic Tibetan-English Dictionary. Vol. 1. Beijing and London: Nationalities Publishing House and SOAS, 2001.
Ngawang Zangpo, trans. Jamgön Kongtrul, The Treasury of Knowledge (Books Two, Three, and Four): Buddhism’s Journey to Tibet. Ithaca, NY: Snow Lion Publications, 2010.
Nishioka Soshū. “An Index to the Catalog Section of Bu ston’s Chronicle of Buddhism, I, II, III [in Japanese],” Tōkyō daigaku bungakubu bunka kōryū kenkyū shisetsu kenkyū kiyō 4 (1980): 61–92; 5 (1981): 43–94; 6 (1983): 47–201.
Padmakara Translation Group, trans. The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Ten Thousand Lines (Daśasāhasrikāprajñāpāramitā, Toh 11). 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha, 2018.
Patrul Rinpoche. Kunzang Lama’i Shelung: The Words of My Perfect Teacher. Translated by the Padmakara Translation Group. Revised second edition, 1998. London: International Sacred Literature Trust and Sage Altamira, 1994–98.
Salomon, Richard (2014). “Gāndhārī Manuscripts in the British Library, Schøyen and Other Collections.” In From Birch Bark to Digital Data: Recent Advances In Buddhist Manuscript Research, Edited by Paul Harrison and Jens-Uwe Hartmann. Vienna: Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften.
————(2018). The Buddhist Literature of Ancient Gandhāra: An Introduction with Selected Translations. Somerville, MA: Wisdom Publications.
Schaeffer, Kurtis L., and Leonard W. J. van der Kuijp. An Early Tibetan Survey of Buddhist Literature: The Bstan pa rgyas pa rgyan gyi nyi ’od of Bcom ldan ral gri. Harvard Oriental Series. Cambridge and London: Harvard University Press, 2009.
van Schaik, Sam. “The Tibetan Dunhuang Manuscripts in China.” Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London vol. 65, no.1, 2002: 129–139.
Sparham, Gareth, trans. (2006–2012). Abhisamayālaṃkāra with vṛtti and ālokā / vṛtti by Ārya Vimuktisena; ālokā by Haribhadra. 4 vols. Fremont, CA: Jain Publishing.
————(2022a), trans. The Perfection of Wisdom in Eighteen Thousand Lines (Aṣṭādaśasāhasrikāprajñāpāramitā, Toh 10). 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha.
————(2022b), trans. The Long Explanation of the Noble Perfection of Wisdom in One Hundred Thousand, Twenty-Five Thousand, and Eighteen Thousand Lines (*Āryaśatasāhasrikāpañcaviṃśatisāhasrikāṣṭādaśasāhasrikāprajñāpāramitābṛhaṭṭīkā, Toh 3808). 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha, 2022.
Stein, Lisa, and Ngawang Zangpo, trans. Butön’s History of Buddhism: In India and its Spread to Tibet, A Treasury of Priceless Scripture. Boston: Snow Lion, 2013.
Suzuki Kenta & Nagashima Jundo. “The Dunhuang Manuscript of the Larger Prajñāpāramitā.” In Buddhist Manuscripts from Central Asia: The British Library Sanskrit Fragments, vol. III/2, edited by S. Karashima, J. Nagashima & K. Wille: 593–821. Tokyo, 2015.
van der Kuijp, Leonard W. J. “Some Remarks on the Textual Transmission and Text of Bu ston Rin chen grub’s Chos ’byung, a Chronicle of Buddhism in India and Tibet.” Revue d’Etudes Tibétaines, no. 25 (April 2013): 115–93.
Zacchetti, Stefano (2005). In Praise of the Light: A Critical Synoptic Edition with an Annotated Translation of Chapters 1-3 of Dharmarakṣa’s Guang zan jing, Being the Earliest Chinese Translation of the Larger Prajñāpāramitā. Bibliotheca Philologica et Philosophica Buddhica, Vol. 8. The International Research Institute for Advanced Buddhology. Tokyo: Soka University.
————(2015). “Prajñāpāramitā Sūtras.” In Brill’s Encyclopedia of Buddhism, vol. 1, edited by Jonathan Silk. Leiden: Brill.
————(2021). The Da zhidu lun 大智度論 (*Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa) and the History of the Larger Prajñāpāramitā: Patterns of Textual Variation in Mahāyāna Sūtra Literature. Numata Center for Buddhist Studies: Hamburg Buddhist Studies 14, edited by Michael Radich and Jonathan Silk. Bochum / Freiburg: Projekt Verlag, 2021.