འཕགས་པ་ཚ་དང་ཡ་ཤས་དཔག་ཏ་མད་པ་ཞས་བྱ་བ་ཐག་པ་ཆན་པའ་མད notes.79

notes.79

79. Whereas the equivalent phrases of this and the next two statements in Toh 674 (1.56–1.60) clearly refer to the merit related to the Aparimitāyur­jñāna Sūtra, here in Toh 675 the accumulation of merit “of” (or perhaps “relating to”) Aparimitāyur­jñāna himself (i.e. the tathāgata, not the text) is mentioned: tshe dang ye shes dpag tu med pa’i bsod nams kyi phung po’i tshad ni bgrang bar mi nus so. This could be interpreted most literally as Aparimitāyur­jñāna’s own merit, but presumably refers rather to the merit to be obtained by making offerings to him. This same difference between the two versions of the text is present in these three paragraphs, not only in the Degé Kangyur but also in the other Kangyurs, and does not therefore seem to be due merely to a one-off scribal error. The Nepalese Sanskrit and Khotanese manuscripts as well as the Dunhuang texts all match Toh 674 in referring to the sūtra, not the tathāgata.