འཕགས་པ་ཚ་དང་ཡ་ཤས་དཔག་ཏ་མད་པ་ཞས་བྱ་བ་ཐག་པ་ཆན་པའ་མད notes.50

notes.50

50. One hundred and eight names for this buddha are not given in this sūtra or in any other. This mention might possibly refer to another, lost sūtra, or perhaps be a corruption of repeating these actions 108 times (as one of the mentions in one of the Chinese translations seems to suggest). Alternatively—but plausibly only for the other version of the text, the “three oṁ” version (Toh 674 and 849)—this could also be a peculiarly worded reference to the dhāraṇī having 108 syllables, which is the case if the two instances of the final and initial a in the Tibetan transliteration are elided into ā as they should be according to the rules of euphonic combination in classical Sanskrit (and as they are in the Sanskrit versions). Indeed, in the paragraph that follows and in , “the one hundred and eight names” does seem to refer to the dhāraṇī, and could therefore be interpreted as “the-one-hundred-and-eight-syllable appellation” of Buddha Aparimitāyur­jñāna. On the other hand, here in Toh 675 and in the other “two oṁ” versions of the text (the Dunhuang manuscripts, the Khotanese, and all the Chinese versions), the dhāraṇīs have far fewer syllables, yet this mention is present nevertheless (although in the case of the Dunhuang manuscripts only in the equivalent of the following paragraph, not in this one). The possible discrepancy was used by some Sarma authors (see introduction, ) as proof that the “two oṁ” dhāraṇī was incomplete, but they may not have been aware of the existence of Sanskrit manuscripts and Chinese translations featuring the “two oṁ” version.