མ་རྟག་པ་ཉད་ཀྱ་མད notes: Notes

The Sūtra on Impermanence (2) notes

Language: English

Notes

notes.1

1. These verses are also found nearly verbatim in the Anityavarga (“Chapter on Impermanence”) in the Udānavarga.

2. These manuscripts are CTRC Box 111, No. 5, folios 13a2–14b2 and CTRC Box 1112, No. 5, pp. 23–24. Ven. Vinītā has edited and translated the first of these mss. and provided a transliteration of the second. See Bhikṣuṇī Vinītā 2010, pp. 170–206.

notes.3

3. National Archives, Kathmandu: NAK 3/589, No. 8, 35a36b = NGMPP A 131–9, A 861/13 (dated 1860 ce), and NAK 3/641, No. 396, 376v = NGMPP A 131–10 (undated, but likely from the nineteenth century). Further information on these mss. may be found in Hidas 2021, pp. 368–77 and 378–89. Both of these are Dhāraṇīsaṃgraha collections. Neither of these manuscripts has been studied and thus neither transliterations nor editions are available.

notes.4

4. Folios 222b10–223b4 of a Dhāraṇīsaṃgraha manuscript from the private collection of Mr. Padmajyoti Dhakhwa of Patan. The colophon was added later and does not provide an exact date, stating simply that the manuscript was copied “80 years ago by Pandit Ratna Bahadur Vajracharya.” It is not clear, however, when this colophon was added and thus it is impossible to calculate when it was copied. It seems very likely, though, that the manuscript was copied in the latter half of the nineteenth century. See Shakya 1988 for a transliteration. However, this transliteration contains many variances in readings from the actual manuscript and it is unclear whether these are misreadings or silent emendations by Shakya. The edition of the Anityatāsūtra found in the appendix of this translation is partially based upon this manuscript.

notes.5

5. Société Asiatique, no. 14(36) in Filliozat 1941/42. Filliozat notes that the Anityatāsūtra witness here is part of a larger collection which she describes as “Recueil de dhāraṇī, stotra, çataka, etc.” (“a collection of dhāraṇī, stotra, śataka, etc.”) dating from 1823 (Filliozat 1941/42, pp. 17–34). Although she does not state it, this is almost certainly a witness of the Dhāraṇīsaṃgraha collection. A transliteration has been published in Bhikṣuṇī Vinītā 2010.

notes.6

6. Royal Asiatic Society, London: Hodgson Collection, Ms. no. 55 (H. 147), 60a2–62a1. This is from a Dhāraṇīsaṃgraha manuscript dated 1791 ce. The witness was edited in Yamada 1972. However, this edition is now rather dated and a number of misreadings are to be found. The edition of the Anityatāsūtra found in the appendix of this translation is partially based upon this manuscript.

notes.7

7. Tōyō Bunko, Tokyo, Ms. No. 13.7. This manuscript is undated and has not been studied as far as we are aware. Further information may be found in Hidas 2021, pp. 360–67.

notes.8

8. Tokyo University Library, Tokyo. Kawaguchi and Takakusu Collection, Ms. 416 No. 8. 46a3–47b4. Like the above witnesses, this Anityatāsūtra is again a component work within a Dhāraṇīsaṃgraha collection. No date is provided for this manuscript, but it is listed as “modern” in the catalog notes, which would suggest it was copied in the nineteenth century ce. This is confirmed when it is compared with the witnesses held by the Royal Asiatic Society, which is an earlier witness in the same manuscript copying tradition. This witness was edited in Yamada 1972 and Kimura 1985. However, both Yamada and Kimura’s editions are now dated and a number of misreadings and unexplained variances are to be found. Nonetheless, both editions provide helpful information, Kimura’s especially concerning a number of textual parallels. The edition of the Anityatāsūtra found in the appendix of this translation is partially based upon this manuscript. The manuscript has been digitized and the Anityatāsūtra folios may be found here.

notes.9

9. For information on the Dhāraṇīsaṃgraha see Hidas 2021, which is a study on several manuscripts of this work.

notes.10

10. See the edition of the Anityatāsūtra in the appendix for further information on the relationship between these two manuscript witnesses.

notes.11

11. mi rtag pa nyid kyi mdo rdzogs so and ity āryānityatāsūtraṃ samāptaṃ.

notes.12

12. These colophons are: Lg29.4, mdo, Ha-L15 9b4–11b3: myi rtag pa nyid kyi mdo’ rdzogs s+ho / rgya gar kyi mkhan po ka ma la gub tra dang / zhu chen gyi lo tsha ba dge’ slong rin chen bzang pos bsgyur zhing zhus te gtan la phab pa / Lg59.4, mdo, Ha-L97 10b1–12a6: mi rtag pa nyid kyi mdo rdzogs s+ho / rgya gar gyi mkhan po ka ma la gub tra dang / zhu chen gi lo tsha ba rin chen bzang pos sgyur cing zhus te / gtan la phab pa / Ng22.51, mdo, za 308b5–310a8: myi rtag pa nyid kyi mdo’ / rdzogs s+ho / rgya gar gi mkhan po ka ma la kub ta dang / zhu chen gi lo tsa ba dge slong rin chen bzang pos bsgyur cing zhus te / gtan la phab pa /

notes.13

13. See Sakya Pandita Translation Group, trans., The Sūtra on Impermanence (1) , Toh 309 (84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha, 2021).

notes.14

14. See, for example, the Jarāmaraṇasutta (SN I 71 (SN 3.3)) and Vepullapabbatasutta (SN II 191–193 (SN 15.20)) in the Saṃyuttanikāya, and the Mahāsudassanasutta (DN II 169–199 (DN 17)) in the Dīghanikāya.

notes.15

15. See, for example, (the Mūlasarvāstivāda) Mahāparinirvāṇasūtra (MPS 48.14) and NidSa 7.3,4.

notes.16

16. Brough 1962, p. 41.

notes.17

17. Such as those found in and .

notes.18

18. Sanskrit: “Oṃ, homage to the Omniscient One.”

notes.19

19. Both the great community of monks and their number is omitted in Tibetan. The Chinese reads 1,250: 千二百五十人, while the Sanskrit variously reads 1,300 or 1,250 in the Nepalese and Potala transmissions, respectively. It seems that at some point there was a corruption in the Sanskrit transmission where the number diverged from the Chinese, and I have emended the Sanskrit edition to follow the Chinese and CTRC: mahatā bhikṣusaṃghena sārddhan ‹ardha›trayodaśabhir bhikṣuśataiḥ. Interestingly, the great community of monks is included in the other Anityatāsūtra preserved in the Kangyur, Toh 309, which shares the same opening frame narrative reading: dge slong gi dge ’dun chen po dang thabs cig tu.

notes.20

20. Sanskrit omits.

notes.21

21. Cf. MPS 48.14; NidSa 7.3,4; DN II 198.18–23; SN II 178; and SN III 147.

notes.22

22. Tibetan omits.

notes.23

23. Tibetan omits.

notes.24

24. Tibetan omits.

notes.25

25. Tibetan reads “even for them life concludes in death, for there is nothing that is born that will not die” (gson pa’i mtha’ yang ’chi bar ’gyur ba ste/ skye nas ’chi bar mi ’gyur ba med do).

notes.26

26. Tibetan omits.

notes.27

27. Tibetan omits.

notes.28

28. Tibetan omits.

notes.29

29. Referring to fruit harvested from the ground, i.e., not cultivated through agriculture. Skt. carries the sense of plucked, released, i.e., fallen. Tib. carries the sense of fruit already on the ground.

notes.30

30. Tibetan reads “even for them life concludes in death, for there is nothing that is born that will not die” (gson pa’i mtha’ yang ’chi bar ’gyur ba ste/ skye nas ’chi bar mi ’gyur ba med do).

notes.31

31. Tibetan omits.

notes.32

32. kāmāvacarāḥ (gods of the realm of desire) is omitted in Tibetan but necessary in context with the next two sections, which go on to elaborate the certain death of gods in the form realm and the formless realm.

notes.33

33. Tibetan omits.

notes.34

34. Literally “those gods possessing form.”

notes.35

35. Tibetan omits.

notes.36

36. Tibetan omits.

notes.37

37. The Tibetan switches the order of sudṛśa and sudarśana, reading shin tu mthong ba dang | gya nom snang dang. Note: this is the case in the translated passage in note 39.

notes.38

38. The Tibetan in this section treats each consecutive level of the form realm deities as its own paragraph with the requisite introductory phrase and the running refrain of the sūtra (“Those … even for them life concludes with death…”). Degé contains all four sections, 1.8a–d, but Peking omits 1.8a & b. This fourfold way of interpreting this passage is not ideal as it conflates the gods of the Pure Abodes into the enumeration of the gods of the fourth dhyāna as can be seen in 1.8d below. The translation of the Tibetan (Degé) is: 1.8a “Those gods of the form realm who have obtained the first dhyāna—those who attend Brahmā, those stationed before Brahmā, and those Great Brahmā gods—even for them life concludes with death, has its limit in death, for there is nothing that is born that will not die. 1.8b “Those gods who have obtained the second dhyāna—those of limited radiance, those of immeasurable radiance, and those who are radiant—even for them life concludes with death, has its limit in death, for there is nothing that is born that will not die. 1.8c “Those gods who have obtained the third dhyāna—those of limited splendor, those of immeasurable splendor, and those of complete splendor—even for them life concludes with death, has its limit in death, for there is nothing that is born that will not die. 1.8d “Those gods who have obtained the fourth dhyāna—those who are unclouded, those with abundant merit, those with great fruition, those who have a nature that is free from perception, and [those gods of the Pure Abodes]: those who are relatively not great, those without trouble, those of excellent appearance, those of excellent observation, and those who are highest—even for them life concludes with death, has its limit in death, for there is nothing that is born that will not die.”

notes.39

39. Tibetan omits.

notes.40

40. Literally “those gods without form.”

notes.41

41. Sanskrit: traidhātukam idam. This sentence is omitted in the Tibetan.

notes.42

42. Tibetan omits.

notes.43

43. Tibetan: yid du ’ong ba. This is not present in any Sanskrit witness where only kāya (“body”) is mentioned and is also omitted in Chinese.

notes.44

44. That is, subject to death.

notes.45

45. Tibetan omits.

notes.46

46. tshogs na spyod pa (vargacārin), omitted in all Sanskrit witnesses and Chinese. This is the second, less famous but more gregarious, of the two classes of pratyekabuddha.

notes.47

47. Again, “pleasing” is only found in the Tibetan and is missing from both the Sanskrit and Chinese. See .

notes.48

48. Tibetan omits.

notes.49

49. āśravajñānaprahāṇavaiśāradyam. A less precise translation would be “confidence in their knowledge of the abandonment of negative influences.” This is a problematic phrase within this interpretation of the caturvaiśāradya that is unique to The Sūtra on Impermanence. The equivalent in the standard list of the four confidences would be sarvāśravakṣayajñānavaiśāradyam (s.v. this entry in Mvy 130 (S. 132)), “confidence in the knowledge of exhausting negative influences,” which seems to be the intended meaning of āśravajñānaprahāṇavaiśāradyam. However, prahāṇa in Sanskrit Buddhist literature generally, and in Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit, is not related to the Sanskrit term prahāṇa (“abandonment”), but rather the Pali term padhāna (“effort”), an important technical term. It seems that whoever added this explanation of the four confidences in the Sanskrit transmission of The Sūtra on Impermanence conflated the correct BHS usage of prahāṇa for the standard Sanskrit usage. This may bolster the conclusion we take from the manuscript evidence that these four terms laying out the four confidences were possibly later additions to the text.

notes.50

50. Once again, “pleasing” is only found in the Tibetan and is missing from both the Sanskrit and Chinese. See and .

notes.51

51. The order of the description of buddhas is slightly different between the Sanskrit and Tibetan, and the Sanskrit adds a passage laying out the four confidences. It seems that this was a later addition in an effort to make the four confidences clearer to the reader. Interestingly, the explanation provided in the Sanskrit is a unique list that differs in wording from the four confidences. See the noted discussion on caturvaiśāradyaviśaradā in of the Sanskrit critical edition (note ). The translation of the Tibetan (Degé) is: 1.12 “Those tathāgatas, arhats, complete and perfect buddhas, mighty with the ten powers, confident in the four confidences, worthy of admiration, their bodies strong-limbed and firm like Nārāyaṇa, roaring a true lion’s roar—even for them their pleasing bodies are subject to being given up.”