Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

སངས་རྒྱས་ཕལ་པ་ཆ་ཞས་བྱ་བ་ཤན་ཏ་རྒྱས་པ་ཆན་པའ་མད notes.5: The Stem Array

The Ten Bhūmis; The Chapter on the Scale of Life; The Dwellings of Bodhisattvas; The Stem Array; The Stem Array notes.5

Language
English

The Stem Array

notes.5.1

1. See colophon, .

notes.5.2

2. Pekar Zangpo, mdo sde spy’i rnam bzhag (2006), 18.

notes.5.3

3. This depiction of Śākyamuni as a Vairocana emanation has its precedent in a sūtra that was never translated into Tibetan but exists in Chinese translation: the Brahma­jāla­sūtra. This sūtra introduces the Buddha Vairocana as the primordial buddha who is the source of ten billion Śākyamunis who exist simultaneously in ten billion different worlds. This sūtra should not be confused with the Brahma­jāla­sūtra that exists both in the Pali canon and in the Tibetan Kangyur (Toh 352).

notes.5.4

4. See Peter Alan Roberts, trans., The Ten Bhūmis , Toh 44-31.

notes.5.5

5. There is evidence for Mahāyāna sūtras originating in northern India. In his Genealogies of Mahāyāna Buddhism, Joseph Walser argues that the “core portion” of The Perfection of Wisdom in Eight Thousand Lines (Toh 12, Aṣṭa­sāhasrikā­prajñā­pāramitā) was most probably written in the second half of the first century in Mathura, which is located in present-day Uttar Pradesh. He also offers the tentative conclusion that it was written by “a Sarvāstivādin monk residing at Buddhadeva’s Guhavihāra outside of Maṭ.” See Walser (2018), 242.

notes.5.6

6. Osto notes that Etienne Lamotte, Edward Conze, and Nalinaksha Dutt all regard the Mahāsāṃghika as the source of the Mahāyāna tradition. See Osto (2008), 157, n. 5. Paul Williams argues that at least some Mahāyāna sūtras emerged from the Mahāsāṃghika: “There can be no doubt that at least some early Mahāyāna sūtras originated in Mahāsāṃghika circles. In the lokottaravāda supramundane teachings we are getting very close to a teaching well-known in Mahāyāna that the Buddha’s death was also a mere appearance; in reality he remains out of his compassion, helping suffering humanity, and thence the suggestion that for those who are capable of it the highest religious goal should be not to become an Arhat but to take the Bodhisattva vows, embarking themselves on the long path to a supreme and totally superior Buddhahood.” See Williams (2009), 21. This view has been contested by a number of scholars, however, including Paul Harrison, who maintains in his “Searching for the Origins of the Mahāyāna: What Are We Looking For?” that it is impossible to draw a clear connection between the Mahāyāna and a single sect, maintaining instead that the Mahāyāna was a loose set of related movements that cut across Buddhist India. For a fine summary of scholarship concerning the origins of the Mahāyāna, see Osto (2008), 105–16.

notes.5.7

7. Toh 127. See translation in Peter Alan Roberts, trans., The King of Samādhis Sūtra , 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha, 2018.

notes.5.8

8. Osto (2008), 108–9.

notes.5.9

9. Bodhi­sattva­gocara­upāya­viṣaya­vikurvāṇa­nirdeśa, Toh 146. See English translation in Jamspal 2010.

notes.5.10

10. See Satyaka Sūtra, folios 98.b–130.a.

notes.5.11

11. See Satyaka Sūtra, folios 132.b–133.a.

notes.5.12

12. Saddharma­puṇḍarīka­nāma­mahāyāna­sūtra, Toh 113. See translation in Peter Alan Roberts, trans., The White Lotus of the Good Dharma , 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha, 2018.

notes.5.13

13. This is found in chapter 4 of the Satyaka Sūtra, titled “The Teaching as a Single Yāna” (theg pa gcig tu bstan pa’i le’u). See Satyaka Sūtra, folios 94.b–98.b.

notes.5.14

14. Osto (2008), 5.

notes.5.15

15. ’phags pa bzang po spyod pa’i smon lam gyi rgyal po (Ārya­bhadra­caryā­praṇidhāna­rāja, Toh 1095).

notes.5.16

16. Osto (2008), 6, 113.

notes.5.17

17. Termed the Navadharma (“Nine Dharmas”) or Navagrantha (“Nine Texts”), these works are (1) Prajñāpāramitā, (2) Gaṇḍa­vyūha, (3) Daśabhūmi , (4) Samādhirāja , (5) Laṅkāvatāra, (6) Saddharma­puṇḍarīka , (7) Lalitavistara , (8) Suvarṇa­prabhāsa , and (9) Tathāgatagūhya . See Lewis (1993), 327, n. 15.

notes.5.18

18. Osto (2008), 4.

notes.5.19

19. Osto (2008), 129.

notes.5.20

20. Osto (2008), 4.

notes.5.21

21. Ōtake (2007), 93–94.

notes.5.22

22. The Stok Palace (vol. 34, folio 310.a), Lhasa (vol. 46, folio 341.b), Choné (vol. 94, folio 284.a), and Narthang (vol. 40, folio 340.a) editions read shin tu rgyas pa chen po’i mdo sangs rgyas phal po che zhes bya ba/ byang chub sems dpa’i sde snod kyi nang nas sdong pos brgyan pa zhes bya ba chos kyi rnam grangs chen po las. This could be translated, “the great Dharma discourse called the Gaṇḍa­vyūha from within the Bodhisattva­piṭaka called the vast Buddhāvataṃsaka Sūtra,” which suggests that the Buddhāvataṃsaka is a type of text known as a Bodhisattva­piṭaka. Urga (vol. 38, folio 362.a) has sangs rgyas phal po che zhes bya ba/ shin tu rgyas pa chen po’i mdo las/ byang chub sems dpa’i sde snod cing / sdong pos rgyan pa zhes bya ba, which could be translated as “the Bodhisattva­piṭaka and Gaṇḍa­vyūha from the Mahāvaipulya sūtra called the Buddhāvatamska,” although cing grammatically should follow a verb, not a noun, and it could well be an error for kyi nang when that is pronounced “chi nang.” This, like the aforementioned colophon from Dunhuang, suggests that both Bodhisattva­piṭaka and Gaṇḍa­vyūha are titles for one and the same work. By contrast, the Degé (vol. 38, folio 362.a) and Kangxi (vol. 60, folio 263.a) read shin tu rgyas pa chen po’i mdo/ sangs rgyas phal po che zhes bya ba las/ byang chub sems dpa’i sde snod kyi nang / sdong pos brgyan pa zhes bya ba chos kyi rnam grangs chen po las. This could be rendered, “From the Mahāvaipulya sūtra called the Buddhāvataṃsaka, from within the Bodhisattva­piṭaka, the great Dharma discourse called the Gaṇḍa­vyūha,” meaning that the Gaṇḍa­vyūha is from the Bodhisattva­piṭaka, a collection of bodhisattva teachings, and has been included in the Buddhāvataṃsaka. In other words, the Gaṇḍa­vyūha is contained in the Bodhisattva­piṭaka that is contained in the Buddhāvataṃsaka—a statement that would not seem to make much sense.

notes.5.23

23. Osto (2008), 4.

notes.5.24

24. Osto (2008), 130.

notes.5.25

25. Osto (2008), 11.

notes.5.26

26. Osto (2008), 5.

notes.5.27

27. Osto (2008).

notes.5.28

28. Van Norden (2019).

notes.5.29

29. Fontein (1967), 117. Fontein (2012), 1. See also Revianur (2018), 577.

notes.5.30

30. Fontein (1967), 118.

notes.5.31

31. Fontein (1967), 120–21.

notes.5.32

32. si tu chos kyi ’byung gnas, folio 205.a.

notes.5.33

33. D. E. Osto, “The Supreme Array Scripture,” accessed July 6, 2021.

notes.5.34

34. Toh 352 in the Kangyur.

notes.5.35

35. rnam par snang mdzad chen po mngon par rdzogs par byang chub pa rnam par sprul pa byin gyis rlob pa shin tu rgyas pa mdo sde’i dbang po’i rgyal po.

notes.5.36

36. sems kyi rgyal pos dris nas grangs la ’jug pa bstan pa, folios 348.b–393.b.

notes.5.37

37. According to the Sanskrit. There is no division into chapters in the Tibetan, see Introduction . In Śikṣānanda’s eighty-fascicle Chinese translation (hereafter, “the Chinese”), this is presented as the thirty-ninth sūtra in twenty-one fascicles, from 60 to 80. Each fascicle bears the title 入法界品 (ru fa jie pin), number 39, and a serial number ranging from 1 to 21; for example, fascicle 60 is entitled 入法界品第三十九之一 (ru fa jie pin di san shi jiu zhi yi), the first segment of the thirty-ninth sūtra, Entry into the Realm of the Dharma.

notes.5.38

38. According to the Sanskrit and such Kangyurs as the Degé, which have shes pa dam pa’i ye shes. Lithang and Choné Kangyurs have shes rab dam pa’i ye shes. Yongle and Kangxi have ye shes rab dam pa’i ye shes.

notes.5.39

39. According to the Sanskrit. The Tibetan has brtan pa dam pa’i ye shes.

notes.5.40

40. According to the Sanskrit and the Chinese. The Tibetan blo gros chen po’i gzi brjid appears to translate from mahāmatitejas.

notes.5.41

41. This is followed in the Sanskrit by Samanta­prabha­tejas, which would have been translated into Tibetan as kun nas ’od gyi gzi brjid. The Chinese appears to have conflated these three similar names into one as 普吉祥威力 (pu ji xiang wei li).

notes.5.42

42. Construction from the Tibetan. Not present in the Sanskrit or the Chinese.

notes.5.43

43. According to the Sanskrit, the Chinese, and most Kangyurs, which have shin tu rnam par lta ba’i myig. Yongle, Lithang, Kangxi, and Choné have rnam par dag pa’i in error for rnam par lta ba’i. In the Sanskrit this is followed by Avalokitanetra, which is absent in both the Chinese and the Tibetan, most likely the result of a scribal omission due to the similarity of the names.

notes.5.44

44. In the Sanskrit and the Chinese this is followed by “the bodhisattva Samanta­netra,” which is not present in the Tibetan.

notes.5.45

45. The Sanskrit has “bodhisattva mahāsattva.” The Chinese ends all names with “bodhisattva.”

notes.5.46

46. The Sanskrit has “bodhisattva mahāsattva.”

notes.5.47

47. The Sanskrit has “bodhisattva mahāsattva.”

notes.5.48

48. According to the Sanskrit and the Chinese. Not present in the Tibetan, probably as the result of an accidental omission in the process of copying, because of the names being similar.

notes.5.49

49. The Sanskrit has “bodhisattva mahāsattva.”

notes.5.50

50. Occurs last in the list of -ketu names in Sanskrit.

notes.5.51

51. The Sanskrit has “bodhisattva mahāsattva.”

notes.5.52

52. According to the Sanskrit and the Chinese. The Tibetan omits dhātu.

notes.5.53

53. The Sanskrit has “bodhisattva mahāsattva.”

notes.5.54

54. The Sanskrit has “bodhisattva mahāsattva.”

notes.5.55

55. The Sanskrit has “bodhisattva mahāsattva.”

notes.5.56

56. The Sanskrit has “bodhisattva mahāsattva.”

notes.5.57

57. The Sanskrit has “bodhisattva mahāsattva.”

notes.5.58

58. According to the Sanskrit. The Tibetan ye shes ri bo’i blo appears to be translated from jñāna­parvata­buddhi. The Chinese reads 須彌光覺 (xu mi guang jue).

notes.5.59

59. In the Sanskrit the order of Vimala­buddhi and Asaṅga­buddhi are reversed.

notes.5.60

60. The Chinese translation uses the term 成就 (cheng jiu), which means “accomplished.” Sanskrit: abhiniryāta.

notes.5.61

61. The Sanskrit samantabhadra­bodhi­sattva­caryā­praṇidhāna could also be interpreted, as is similarly found in Osto, as “the prayer for the bodhisattva conduct of Samanta­bhadra,” though this would more regularly be written as bodhi­sattva­samantabhadra­caryā­praṇidhāna.

notes.5.62

62. According to the Sanskrit. The translation of the word vijñaptiṣu, which would have been translated as rnam par rig byed, appears to have been inadvertently omitted in the Tibetan, either from the Sanskrit manuscript it was translated from or at an early stage in the copying of the text. The Chinese translation has 至處無限 (zhi chu wu xian, “who had been to countless places”).

notes.5.63

63. According to the Sanskrit and the Chinese. The Tibetan appears to have inadvertently omitted “of the buddhas.”

notes.5.64

64. According to the Sanskrit guṇa. The word yon tan (the translation of guṇa) is absent in the Tibetan, and absent in the Chinese as well.

notes.5.65

65. According to the Sanskrit anigṛhīta. The Tibetan translates as the vague mi gnas pa, which could be interpreted as “not dwelling” or “unlocated.” Similarly, the Chinese describes their manifestations as 無所依止 (wu suo yi zhi, “nondwelling”) because they are in accordance with the aspirations of beings.

notes.5.66

66. According to the Sanskrit and the Chinese. The Tibetan inadvertently omits “wisdom.”

notes.5.67

67. According to the Sanskrit. The Tibetan appears to have translated tshogs from a manuscript in which gagaṇa (“space”) was corrupted to gaṇa (“crowd,” “class,” “group”) so that it meant “the range of activity of the crowd of tathāgatas.” The Chinese omits the description “that is as extensive as space.”

notes.5.68

68. According to the Tibetan sgo (“gateway”). The Chinese translation has 門 (men, “door”) as well. The available Sanskrit appears to have sukha (“bliss”) in error for mukha (“door”).

notes.5.69

69. According to las in the Stok Palace, Kangxi, Lithang, Yongle, and Choné Kangyurs. The others have la.

notes.5.70

70. According to the Sanskrit vihāra and the Chinese. The Tibetan appears to have inadvertently omitted it.

notes.5.71

71. According to the Sanskrit kāya and the Chinese. The Tibetan appears to have inadvertently omitted it.

notes.5.72

72. According to kyis in Degé and most Kangyurs. Lithang and Choné have kyi.

notes.5.73

73. According to the Sanskrit. The Tibetan appears to have kyi in error for kyis in all versions. The Chinese has 隨順 (sui shun, “according to”).

notes.5.74

74. According to the Sanskrit. The Tibetan has rgyan (“adornment”).

notes.5.75

75. According to the Sanskrit and the Chinese. The Tibetan has rgyan (“adornment”). The Chinese translates this as “how he had practiced.”

notes.5.76

76. The Tibetan has interpreted the compound as bsgrub pa dang / rnam par ’phrul pa, meaning “attainments and miraculous manifestations.”

notes.5.77

77. According to the Sanskrit dakṣina, and yon in Stok Palace, Yongle, Narthang, and Lhasa. Other Kangyurs have yon tan (“qualities”). The Chinese translates as 布施功德 (bu shi gong de, “the merit of generosity”).

notes.5.78

78. According to the instrumental particle in most Kangyurs, including Stok Palace, but absent in Lithang and Choné.

notes.5.79

79. These three qualities (i.e., extensive as space, beyond example, and having adornments) appear only in the Tibetan. The Sanskrit and the Chinese have mahā­karuṇāśarīra and 大悲為身 (da bei wei shen), both of which mean “the body of great compassion,” which is absent in Tibetan.

notes.5.80

80. According to the Sanskrit. The Tibetan has a genitive particle that connects this description with the following one.

notes.5.81

81. The Tibetan here and elsewhere translates jagat as ’gro ba (“beings”) instead of its meaning as “world.” The Chinese translates as “the world” to describe the precious jewels as “the best of the world.”

notes.5.82

82. According to the Sanskrit. The Tibetan has a genitive particle that connects this description with the following one.

notes.5.83

83. According to the Sanskrit rāja and rgyal po in Stok Palace, Narthang, and Lhasa. Other Kangyurs have rgyal ba.

notes.5.84

84. According to the Sanskrit divyātmabhāva interpreted in Tibetan as “bodies of divine materials.” The Chinese interprets it as 天身雲 (tian shen yun, “clouds of divine bodies”).

notes.5.85

85. According to the Tibetan. In Sanskrit this is divided into two descriptions: “Adorned by a rain from clouds of every flower, adorned by a profusion of a treasure of excellent flowers.” The Chinese has 華樹 (hua shu, “flowering trees” or “flowers and trees”).

notes.5.86

86. According to the Tibetan. “Trees” is absent in the available Sanskrit. The Chinese has 衣樹雲 (yi shu yun, “clouds of clothes and trees”).

notes.5.87

87. According to the Sanskrit. The Tibetan translates paṭala, here meaning “a mass or assemblage,” as na bun (“mist”). The Sanskrit śarīra here has the meaning of “world” or “universe” but was translated into Tibetan by its more general meaning of “body,” creating a meaningless sentence. The Chinese reads 一切大地 (yi qie da di), literally “all great lands,” which can mean the “world” or “universe,” either singular or plural. It describes the following clouds of incense as 一切如眾生形 (yī qiè rú zhòng shēng xíng, “in forms of all sentient beings”). Cleary has “form of all beings” while Osto has “body of the entire world.”

notes.5.88

88. According to the Sanskrit jala and the Chinese 網 (wang). The Tibetan appears to have translated from rāja (“king”). The word “powder” is absent in the Chinese.

notes.5.89

89. According to the Sanskrit bimba. The Tibetan translates as ’bru, which could be taken to mean “grain.” Not present in the Chinese.

notes.5.90

90. According to the Sanskrit adhitiṣṭha. The Tibetan translates it as byin gyis brlab pa (“blessed”). The Chinese presents all these items as part of the manifestation without adding verbs to each.

notes.5.91

91. In the Sanskrit this is followed by “manifested the circles of followers in all buddha realms,” which is absent in the Tibetan and the Chinese.

notes.5.92

92. According to the Sanskrit and Tibetan later in the sūtra. At this point the Sanskrit omits tejo, while the Tibetan omits rgyal po (rāja).

notes.5.93

93. According to the Sanskrit. Tibetan has bdug spos (“incense”) instead of rgyal mtshan (“banners”). The sentence then repeats, so this is apparently an error.

notes.5.94

94. According to the Sanskrit and the Chinese. The Tibetan omits “flowers” and has a second repetition of the same sentences, so this omission is apparently an error.

notes.5.95

95. According to the Sanskrit. The Tibetan here is particularly corrupt and descends into gibberish: mdangs ’byung bas thams cad kyi rdul gyi kha dog dang ’dra ba’i (“through shining with light they are like the color of dust/atoms”). The Chinese does not mention “pores” and describes such jewels as “brilliant.”

notes.5.96

96. According to the Sanskrit and the Chinese. The Tibetan appears to have an inadvertent omission of the last two syllables of its name (rgyal mtshan).

notes.5.97

97. According to the Sanskrit and the Chinese. The Tibetan appears to have an inadvertent omission of “clothing.”

notes.5.98

98. According to the Sanskrit and the Chinese. The Tibetan appears to have an inadvertent omission of “clothing.”

notes.5.99

99. According to the Sanskrit and the Chinese. The Tibetan appears to have an inadvertent omission of “clothing.”

notes.5.100

100. The Sanskrit has the adjective pāṇḍu (“white”).

notes.5.101

101. According to the Mahāvyutpatti, the Sanskrit śilā should be translated as man shel (“crystal”), though here it was anomalously translated as khra bo’i rdo (“multicolored stone”), which may be why the adjective “white” in the Sanskrit was omitted. The Chinese translates śilā as 白玉 (bai yu, “white jade”).

notes.5.102

102. Lithang and Choné have sprin (“clouds”) in error for spyan (“eyes”).

notes.5.103

103. Sanskrit: sarva­ratna­dharma­dhātvabhimukha­dvāra­śikhara­mahā­maṇi­ratna­kūṭāgārān, “kūṭāgāras of every precious material with gateways that looked out upon the realm of phenomena and pinnacles of great jewels.” The Chinese is the same as the Tibetan.

notes.5.104

104. According to the Sanskrit and the Chinese. The Tibetan has two sentences, the first including rin po che’i gos ’od ’phro ba (“light rays from precious clothing”), and the second bdug spos sna tshogs kyis rnam par bdugs pa (“light rays perfumed by incenses and perfumes of all kinds”). The Chinese describes this as 香 (xiang, “incenses”) without mentioning clothing.

notes.5.105

105. According to the Tibetan sems can thams cad rab tu ’dzud pa, which could also mean “entered into all beings.” The Chinese of the Sanskrit sarva­sattva­prasthāna, according to Cleary, means that the sounds are “of the abodes of all beings.” According to Osto it means the sounds “of all beings.” Prasthāna can mean “to set out for” or “origin.” The Chinese describes the head adornment as 出一切眾生發趣音摩尼王嚴飾冠 (chu yi qie zhong sheng fa qu yin mo ni yan shi guan, “crowns gloriously adorned with kings of jewels that emitted the sounds of all sentient beings”).

notes.5.106

106. According to the Sanskrit and the Chinese. The Tibetan appears to have inadvertently omitted part of the name: rnam par snang mdzad kyi [dpal gyi smon lam gyi] snying po.

notes.5.107

107. The Tibetan uses sgra bsgrags pa throughout this passage, but the Sanskrit has mostly pramuñcan (“emits”) and also has nigarjan (“roars”) twice.

notes.5.108

108. According to the Tibetan skad and the Chinese 語言 (yu yan). The Sanskrit has “mantras.”

notes.5.109

109. The Sanskrit has nigarjan (“roars”).

notes.5.110

110. In the Sanskrit the sentence ends with an additional description that is absent from the Tibetan and the Chinese: “…and with their bodhisattva bodies adorned with networks of kings of jewels that illuminated all realms.”

notes.5.111

111. According to the Tibetan. The Sanskrit has “gifts of clothing.” The Chinese mentions only recipients of generosity.

notes.5.112

112. According to the BHS abhirocana. The meaning in Classical Sanskrit would be “delighting.” Osto translates this from the Chinese as “illumination,” and Cleary translates it as “pleasing.” The Tibetan mngon par mos par byed pa would literally be “cause to have aspiration.”

notes.5.113

113. According to the Sanskrit vyūha. The Tibetan translates as rgyan, and the Chinese as 莊嚴 (zhuang yan, “adornments,” “jewelry”).

notes.5.114

114. According to the Sanskrit anāyūha and the Chinese 終無所來 (zhong wu suo lai). The Tibetan has the obscure len pa med pa.

notes.5.115

115. This and the previous quality are combined in the Sanskrit and the Chinese.

notes.5.116

116. According to the Sanskrit and the Chinese. The word “wisdom” is inadvertently missing from the Tibetan.

notes.5.117

117. According to the Sanskrit and the Chinese. Missing from the Tibetan.

notes.5.118

118. According to the BHS vṛṣabhitā.

notes.5.119

119. According to the Sanskrit carita­vikurvita, which is translated into Chinese as 妙行 (miao xing). The Tibetan has sbyong ba’i rnam par ’phrul pa.

notes.5.120

120. According to the Tibetan mngon du ’dor ba. The Sanskrit parākrama means “exertion,” “strength,” and so on. The Chinese translates according to the Sanskrit as 勇健 (yong jian).

notes.5.121

121. According to the BHS vijñapti, translated in Chinese as 示現 (shi xian). Tibetan translates as dmyigs pa (archaic spelling of dmigs pa).

notes.5.122

122. From the Tibetan grub pa. The Sanskrit nirvṛtta could mean happiness, peace, extinction, or the state of nirvāṇa.

notes.5.123

123. The order of the first and second qualities in this list is reversed in the Sanskrit.

notes.5.124

124. According to the Sanskrit and the Chinese. “Dream-like” appears to have been inadvertently omitted from the Tibetan.

notes.5.125

125. Both epithets (i.e. agrayuga bhadrayuga; mchog gi zung, bzang po’i zung) refer to Śāriputra and Maudgalyāyana. Not mentioned in the Chinese.

notes.5.126

126. According to the Sanskrit. The Tibetan omits “wisdom.” The Chinese has “eyes of wisdom.”

notes.5.127

127. According to the Sanskrit vṛkaśṛgāla and the Chinese 豺狼 (chai lang). The Tibetan translates as “wolves and foxes.”

notes.5.128

128. According to the Tibetan. The Sanskrit has sodyāna­maṇḍalam (“a circle of gardens”). The Chinese is similar to the Sanskrit.

notes.5.129

129. According to the Sanskrit and the Chinese. The Tibetan has “They had perfected the nature and branches of omniscient wisdom.”

notes.5.130

130. According to the Sanskrit. The Tibetan translates vidyā (“the science of medicine”) as vidyamantra, and grahana (“the acquisition of that knowledge”) as “the collecting of herbs.”

notes.5.131

131. According to the BHS avatīrṇa. Tibetan translates literally as zhugs pa (“enter”).

notes.5.132

132. According to the BHS niryāta. Tibetan translates literally according to the alternative meaning of “emerge” as byung ba.

notes.5.133

133. According to the Tibetan mthong and the Chinese 見 (jian). The Sanskrit has prajānanti (“know”).

notes.5.134

134. According to the Tibetan. The Sanskrit has gotra (“classes,” “types,” or “families”). The Chinese has “skilled in identification of all hidden treasures.”

notes.5.135

135. According to the Sanskrit śilpasuśikṣita. The Tibetan has (in Yongle, Kangxi, and Choné) don rtags (“signs or proof of meaning”). Other Kangyurs such as Degé and Stok Palace have dan in error for don.

notes.5.136

136. According to the syntax of the Sanskrit. The Tibetan syntax is obscure.

notes.5.137

137. According to the Tibetan. The Sanskrit akalperyāpatha means “improper conduct” or “improper ascetic practices.”

notes.5.138

138. According to the Sanskrit and the Chinese. Omitted in the Tibetan.

notes.5.139

139. According to the Tibetan lus, presumably translated from kāya. The present available Sanskrit has kārya (“activities”), but kāya when this is repeated.

notes.5.140

140. According to the Sanskrit, Chinese, and Yongle, Narthang, and Lhasa versions of the Tibetan. Degé, Stok Palace, and other Kangyurs have sems can (“being”) in error for sems (“mind”).

notes.5.141

141. The Tibetan translates inconsistently as shes (“know”).

notes.5.142

142. According to the BHS meaning of varṇa, the Pali vaṇṇa, and the Chinese 相 (xiang). The Tibetan translates according to the most common meaning of the Sanskrit varṇa as an archaic term for color: kha dog mdog.

notes.5.143

143. According to the Tibetan. The Sanskrit is confusing, as the bodhisattvas are plural nominative, but there is a third-person singular for the verb “does not see.” Possibly the bodhisattvas should be in the plural accusative, in which case the verse could mean “[The world] does not see the great gathering of bodhisattvas / who have arrived from countless millions of realms to see the Jina.” The Chinese uses the second-person plural.

notes.5.144

144. According to the Sanskrit compound cittagocara. The Tibetan interprets it as “mind and range.” The Chinese translates it as 境界 (xin jing jie) rather than the usual term 心境界 (xin jing jie), omitting 心 (xin), the word for “mind,” probably to keep the same number of words in each line of the verses.

notes.5.145

145. According to the Sanskrit aparājitāḥ and the Yongle pham myed and Narthang pham med. Other Kangyurs have the incorrect pham byed.

notes.5.146

146. The order of this and the subsequent verse are reversed in the Tibetan translation; this inverse order is preserved here. The Chinese matches the order of the Sanskrit.

notes.5.147

147. According to the BHS anirvṛta. The Tibetan translates as grub pa med pa (“without production”). The Chinese has translated the second part of this verse as 知無變化法, 而現變化事 (zhi wu bian hua fa, er xian bian hua shi, “they know the unchanging instructions on Dharma, but manifest changing events”).

notes.5.148

148. According to the Tibetan. The Sanskrit can be translated as “the Buddha does not have a region.”

notes.5.149

149. According to the Tibetan, presumably from deśānugaḥ. The Sanskrit can be translated as “the Buddha does not go into a direction (diśānugaḥ).” The Chinese translation of this verse has considerable wordplay, using the common translation of the Sanskrit diśānugaḥ as 無量 (wu liang), which has the connotation of being inconceivable, without any quantifiable, measurable, or ascertainable feature, including direction and realm, contrary to its antonym 有量 (you liang). The verse in Chinese can be understood as “the state of enlightenment is neither 無量 nor 有量; the great Muni has gone beyond both.”

notes.5.150

150. Literally, “does not go beyond.” According to the Sanskrit, the Stok Palace, and the Degé las. Yongle, Lithang, Kangxi, and Choné have pas. The Chinese does not have the negative.

notes.5.151

151. According to the Sanskrit. The Tibetan has plural.

notes.5.152

152. According to the Sanskrit instrumental and Yongle, Narthang, and Lhasa yis. Other Kangyurs have the genitive yi. “Looking through” is implied.

notes.5.153

153. There is a play on words in the Sanskrit, as varṇa has many meanings, including “color” as well as “class,” “caste,” “nature,” “character,” and “quality.” This play on words is lost in English and in the Tibetan. The Chinese interprets the term as 願 (yuan, “aspirations”).

notes.5.154

154. This verse is translated according to the Tibetan. The Chinese is similar to the Tibetan.

notes.5.155

155. According to the Sanskrit second-person plural. The Tibetan is ambiguous. The Chinese has “the various activities of the bodhisattvas” as the subject.

notes.5.156

156. According to the Sanskrit, Stok Palace, and Narthang bu’i.

notes.5.157

157. According to the Sanskrit śodhana, Chinese 清淨 (qing jing), and the Stok Palace sbyong. Other Kangyurs apparently have has spyod in error for sbyong.

notes.5.158

158. According to the Sanskrit pramocana. The Tibetan has ’grel ba in error for ’grol ba.

notes.5.159

159. According to the Tibetan. The Sanskrit vinīyante means “guided” or “trained.”

notes.5.160

160. According to the Tibetan. The Sanskrit reads saṃbuddha. The Chinese is the same as the Sanskrit.

notes.5.161

161. According to the Sanskrit suvicitra. Tibetan has bris (“written,” “drawn”) in error for bres.

notes.5.162

162. The second half of the verse is in accordance with the Tibetan.

notes.5.163

163. According to the Sanskrit mahā. Stok Palace, Narthang, and Lhasa have chen, which matches the Sanskrit and the Chinese 大 (da, “great”). Degé and others have can; Yongle has cen.

notes.5.164

164. According to the Sanskrit. Presumably for lack of room in the Tibetan verse, “of buddhahood” is omitted. The Chinese has 無上覺 (wu shang jue, “supreme, unsurpassable enlightenment”).

notes.5.165

165. According to the Tibetan, which has two synonymous adjectives, while the Sanskrit and the Chinese have one adjective.

notes.5.166

166. According to the Sanskrit and the Chinese. The Tibetan has rtag par apparently in error for brtags par (“examine” as in Stok Palace).

notes.5.167

167. According to the Sanskrit. The Tibetan reads de la sems skye med par bsam, which appears to mean “He thinks that the mind is birthless.” The Chinese translation appears to evolve around the word 思 (si), which functions both as a noun and a verb, meaning “thoughts,” “to think,” “that which/who thinks,” and so on: 智者應如是, 專思佛菩提; 此思難思議, 思之不可得 (zhi zhe ying ru shi, zhuan si fo pu ti; ci si nan si yi, si zhi bu ke de, “The wise one should be like this, dedicating his mind to the enlightenment of buddhahood. This mind is inconceivable; it is not knowable or obtainable [by contemplation]”).

notes.5.168

168. According to the Sanskrit and the Chinese. The Tibetan has either misread baddha (“bound”) as buddha or was translating from a manuscript containing that error. The result in Tibetan is “Although the buddhas continuously appear, the world remains fruitless.” The Chinese has 凡夫嬰妄惑，於世常流轉 (fan fu ying chang liu zhuan, yu shi chang liu zhuan, “Ordinary beings suffer from illusions and confusions, continuously wandering in the world”).

notes.5.169

169. According to the Sanskrit. The Tibetan omits jñāna­vikrānta (ye shes kyis rnam par gnon pa), which was present in the earlier version of the name. Earlier in the Degé we find non pa rather than gnon pa.

notes.5.170

170. Literally “hundreds of ten millions.”

notes.5.171

171. According to the Sanskrit puṇyatīrtha (literally, “merit worthy”), a term used for places of pilgrimage etc., translated into Tibetan obscurely as bsod nams stegs. The Chinese has translated this line as 普生三世福 (pu sheng san shi fu, “He is the universal source of merits of the three times”).

notes.5.172

172. According to the Tibetan. “That brings joy when seen” is not present in the Sanskrit or the Chinese. This perhaps derives from a variant of pradyota (“light”) as pramudita.

notes.5.173

173. Literally jinaurasāḥ (“offspring of the jinas”), translated into Tibetan as rgyal sras, which is usually the Tibetan for jinaputra (“sons of the jinas”). The Chinese translates it literally as 佛子 (fo zi, “sons of the Buddha”).

notes.5.174

174. According to the Sanskrit. The Tibetan appears to have translated from a corrupted manuscript in which akṣaya was replaced by jñāna. The Chinese has expanded the second part of this verse into two: “gives teaching unceasingly and widely” and “displays unimpeded discriminating knowledge” as the second and third lines.

notes.5.175

175. The Sanskrit has just the one verb udita, which is doubled in the Tibetan to shar shing ’byung (“arisen and appeared”). This reads as byung in Yongle, Lithang, Kangxi, Narthang, and Choné, which appears more correct for a past passive participle. The Stok Palace version has byang, which is an error for byung.

notes.5.176

176. According to the Sanskrit vośodhanaḥ and the Tibetan sbyong in Stok Palace, Yongle, Kangxi, Narthang, Choné, and Lhasa. Degé has spyod. The Chinese interprets it this as 成就智慧身 (cheng jiu zhi hui shen, “has attained wisdom body”).

notes.5.177

177. According to the Tibetan ’od snang gsal ba of Stok Palace, Narthang, and Lhasa. Other Kangyurs have ’di snang gsal ba. The Sanskrit is candrabhāsvara (“moonlight”). The Chinese interprets this verse as, “On seeing the supreme two-legged being, if one can develop vast motivation, they will always be able to meet the buddhas and increase their power of wisdom.”

notes.5.178

178. According to the Tibetan, which gives the same name as earlier. The Sanskrit gives an alternate version of his name, Dharmadhātutalabhedajñānābhijñārāja, which is the version translated into Chinese.

notes.5.179

179. According to the Sanskrit śruti and the Narthang and Lhasa thos. Other Kangyurs, including Stok Palace and Degé, have mthong (“see”). The Chinese has expanded this verse into two contrasting scenarios: “remain in the lower realms but always able to hear the names of the buddhas” versus “born in higher realms but temporarily unable to hear the names of the buddhas.”

notes.5.180

180. According to the Sanskrit and the Chinese. The Tibetan appears to have unintended omissions resulting in “the teaching of the succession of buddhas in the atoms of all the buddha realms…”

notes.5.181

181. According to the Sanskrit and the Chinese. The Tibetan appears to have misinterpreted “facing the bodhimaṇḍas” as meaning “the location of manifesting the essence, enlightenment.” The Chinese translates as 佛坐道場 (fo zuo dao chang, “the bodhimaṇḍas where the buddhas reside”).

notes.5.182

182. According to the Sanskrit arambaṇataleṣu, which the Tibetan translates as “grounds focused on.”

notes.5.183

183. According to the Sanskrit sama and the Chinese. The Tibetan has “in the atoms of all realms.”

notes.5.184

184. According to the Sanskrit jina and the Stok Palace, Yongle, Lithang, Kangxi, Narthang, Choné, and Lhasa rgyal. Degé has rgal.

notes.5.185

185. According to the Sanskrit tatra and the Stok Palace de na. Narthang and Lhasa have ni. Degé and other Kangyurs have nas (“from”).

notes.5.186

186. According to the Sanskrit syntax. In the Tibetan, “conduct” is separated from “delightful.” In the Chinese translation, verses 6 and 7 are a continuation of verse 5, sharing the same subject—the bodhisattvas. The equivalent of this line appears as the first line in verse 6, 皆住普賢行 (jie zhu pu xian xing), which can be understood as “all maintain excellent conduct” or “all maintain the conduct of Samanta­bhadra.”

notes.5.187

187. The Tibetan translates sāgara here as the gang chen mtsho (“ocean that is big”) as opposed to rgya mtsho elsewhere. Lithang, Choné, and Lhasa appear to have “corrected” it to gangs chen mtsho (“ocean of great snow”). The Chinese has 海 (hai, “ocean”).

notes.5.188

188. According to the Tibetan and the Chinese.

notes.5.189

189. According to the Tibetan. The Sanskrit has sugati (“a happy state”) in the accusative. The Chinese translation has 身雲 (shen yun, “cloud bodies”) as the subject of the first line, a term that denotes the numberless bodies of buddhas. The Chinese omits “the sugatas.”

notes.5.190

190. According to the Sanskrit bhūyasyā mātrayā and the Stok Palace and Degé brnan. Yongle, Lithang, Kangxi, and Choné have bstan. Not present in the Chinese.

notes.5.191

191. According to the Sanskrit sama and the Chinese. The Tibetan khongs su chud pa could mean “comprised within.”

notes.5.192

192. According to the Tibetan and the Chinese. Here the Tibetan is presumably translated from a manuscript that read nāmavarṇa (“name and color”) instead of the present Sanskrit editions that have nānābala (“various powers”). The Chinese has “name” and “color” as two features.

notes.5.193

193. According to the Sanskrit pratiṣṭhāna, the Chinese 住處 (zhu chu), and the Stok Palace, Narthang, and Lhasa gzhi. Other Kangyur have zhing (“realms”).

notes.5.194

194. According to the Sanskrit vyañjana. The Tibetan translates as yi ge (“letters”).

notes.5.195

195. According to the Sanskrit, the Chinese, and the instrumental kyis in the Stok Palace, Yongle, Kangxi, Narthang, Urga, and Lhasa Kangyurs. Degé has kyi. Also, the following part of the sentence is missing in all Kangyurs. The Chinese has “the great assemblies of bodhisattvas saw…”

notes.5.196

196. According to the Sanskrit and the Chinese. There has been an accidental omission of most of this and the following sentence in Tibetan.

notes.5.197

197. According to the Sanskrit and the Chinese. “Directions” is not present in Tibetan.

notes.5.198

198. According to the Sanskrit kāya. The Tibetan is inconsistent, as in conjunction with “beings” it translates kāya as lus (“body”). The Chinese translates literally as “body” (身, shen): “bodies of all realms,” “bodies of all beings,” omitting the word “directions.”

notes.5.199

199. According to the Sanskrit saṃjñāgata. The Tibetan translates as mying (“name”).

notes.5.200

200. There is the inadvertent scribal omission of a few words here so that this and the following direction in the list have been combined.

First 200 of 2,254 passages. Read on