Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

The Sūtra on Wisdom at the Hour of Death

Translation of འཕགས་པ་འདའ་ཀ་ཡ་ཤས་ཞས་བྱ་བ་ཐག་པ་ཆན་པའ་མད (འཕགས་པ་འདའ་ཀ་ཡེ་ཤེས་ཞེས་བྱ་བ་ཐེག་པ་ཆེན་པོའི་མདོ)

Language
English
Translators
Casey Kemp, Tom Tillemans
Extent
23 passages, 1,991 words
Text
complete digital text
Source
84000 · Translated by Tom Tillemans’ class in the University of Vienna’s program of Buddhist Translation Studies… · CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 (84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha). Shown whole and unaltered, with its notes, on a…

Contents

Text

84000's introduction

intro.1

While the Buddha is residing in the Akaniṣṭha realm, the bodhisattva mahāsattva Ākāśagarbha asks him how a bodhisattva should view the mind at the point of dying. The Buddha replies that when death comes a bodhisattva should develop the wisdom at the hour of death. He explains that a bodhisattva should cultivate a clear understanding of the nonexistence of entities, great compassion, nonapprehension, nonattachment, and a clear understanding that, since wisdom is the realization of one’s own mind, the Buddha should not be sought elsewhere. After these points have been repeated in verse form, the assembly praises the Buddha’s words, concluding the sūtra.

intro.2

This sūtra, brief though it is, addresses central Mahāyāna concepts in relation to practices to be carried out at the hour of death. When the Buddha is asked how the mind should be viewed when a bodhisattva is at the point of dying, he replies by giving pith instructions on the nature of phenomena and the mind, and instructs that a bodhisattva should accordingly engender specific clear understandings. The Buddha points out that all phenomena are pure, subsumed within the mind of enlightenment, and naturally luminous. Entities are impermanent, and the realization of mind is wisdom. Consequently, a bodhisattva should arouse a clear understanding that no entities truly exist, a clear understanding of great compassion, a clear understanding of nonapprehension, a clear understanding of nonattachment, and a clear understanding that the Buddha should not be sought anywhere other than in one’s own mind. Although he refers to these instructions as the wisdom at the hour of death, the implication is that these teachings can be cultivated and realized throughout a bodhisattva’s lifetime in order to prepare for death and attain liberation.

intro.3

The Sanskrit title of the sūtra is found transcribed in all Kangyurs as Ārya-ātajñāna-nāma­mahā­yāna­sūtra.¹ This transcription, however, appears to have been truncated; as Sanskrit, it is not readily comprehensible, and certainly not equivalent to the Tibetan ’da’ ka ye shes. Another version of the Sanskrit title occasionally given is Atijñānasūtra,² which, although certainly understandable, yields a meaning quite different from that of the Tibetan. The more likely Sanskrit phrase that would capture ’da’ ka ye shes is atyayajñāna (“wisdom at the time of passing away”), and this has been proposed as a revision of the Sanskrit title in several modern catalogs.³

intro.4

There is no extant Sanskrit text to our knowledge, although it is clear that there was such an original at one time—the Tibetan colophon to Śāntideva’s commentary mentions that the Indian abbot Dharmarāja collaborated with Pakpa Sherab (’phags pa shes rab) in the translation of the commentarial text. The sūtra translation preserved in the Kangyur, however, has no colophon with the usual mention of the Tibetan translators and Indian paṇḍits, and was most likely made not from the Sanskrit but from an earlier Chinese translation, as the early ninth-century Denkarma (ldan dkar ma) catalog explicitly includes the Atyayajñāna in a list of sūtras translated into Tibetan from Chinese. Its inclusion in the Denkarma allows it to be dated to the first decades of the ninth century at the latest, and possibly earlier if it was indeed known to King Trisong Detsen (see below). The putative Chinese version, however, does not seem to have survived and the sūtra does not seem to figure in the Chinese canon.

intro.5

There are two commentaries on this text written by Indian authors in the Degé Tengyur, one attributed to Śāntideva (ca. eighth century) and the other to Prajñāsamudra (dates unknown).⁴ There are also six known Tibetan commentaries, four of which were written by seventeenth- to nineteenth-century Gelukpa (dge lugs pa) scholars, the longest and most detailed being one by the seventh Dalai Lama, Kalsang Gyatso.⁵ Our translation mainly follows the commentary of Prajñāsamudra and, to a lesser degree, that of Choné Drakpa Shedrub (co ne grags pa bshad sgrub, 1675–1748).

intro.6

The Atyayajñāna is included in lists of sūtras known as the Five Royal Sūtras and Ten Royal Sūtras, two sets of profound, relatively short, and pithy works⁶ traditionally said to have been translated on Padmasambhava’s recommendation and used for daily practice by the eighth-century Tibetan king Trisong Detsen (khri srong lde btsan). Their use is said to have contributed (along with other practices) to the king’s life being extended by thirteen years beyond the limit predicted by astrological reckoning. The texts recounting this incident list the applications or uses of each of these texts; in the case of the Atyayajñāna, this is meditation or cultivation (sgom pa). In the same accounts the sūtra is described as being of definitive meaning.⁷ Another Tibetan tradition explains that the Five Royal Sūtras each present the condensed, essentialized meaning of five of the major canonical texts, all much longer, known as the Five Sets of One Hundred Thousand.⁸ From this viewpoint, the Atyayajñāna represents the essence of the Mahā­pari­nirvāṇa­sūtra (Toh 119–120). Yet another, more prosaic explanation sometimes found for the epithet “royal” being applied to these works is simply that each of them, compared to other works on similar themes, is of paramount importance.

intro.7

The Atyayajñāna is considered particularly important in several Tibetan Buddhist traditions, including Dzogchen (rdzogs chen) and Mahāmudrā. Roger Jackson points out that it seems to be the only sūtra from the Kangyur that is included in indigenous Tibetan lists of Indian canonical texts on Mahāmudrā. As a search of the data reveals, the Atyayajñāna is quoted by well-known Tibetan authors of all schools—including Gampopa (sgam po pa, 1079–1153), Sakya Paṇḍita (sa skya paN+Di ta, 1182–1251), Karmapa Rangjung Dorje (rang byung rdo rje, 1284–1339), Longchen Rabjampa (klong chen rab ’byams pa, 1308–64), Shākya Chogden (shAkya mchog ldan, 1428–1507), Drukpa Padma Karpo (’brug pa pad+ma dkar po, 1527–92), Tāranātha (tA ra nA tha, 1575–1634), and the Fifth Dalai Lama, Ngawang Lobzang Gyatso (ngag dbang blo bzang rgya mtsho, 1617–82). The most frequent excerpt quoted is from the final verses on the mind (1.14):

intro.8

Since the mind is the cause for the arising of wisdom,
Do not look for the Buddha elsewhere.

intro.9

Unsurprisingly, this brief yet well-known sūtra has been translated into English a number of times. Several translations can be found on the internet, including a translation by Ruth Sonam and at least one anonymous version. Published translations include those by Roger Jackson (2009), Sherab Raldri (2010), Tony Duff (2011), and Erick Tsiknopoulos (2019). A translation of the sūtra together with translations of Prajñāsamudra’s and Śāntideva’s commentaries has been published online by Samye Translations (formerly Lhasey Lotsawa, 2015). We hope that our translation will contribute to readers’ appreciation of this remarkable and justly celebrated work.

1

Homage to all buddhas and bodhisattvas!

Thus did I hear at one time. The Blessed One was residing in the palace of the king of the gods in the Akaniṣṭha realm,⁹ and was teaching the Dharma to the entire assembly there.

The bodhisattva mahāsattva Ākāśagarbha paid homage to the Blessed One and asked, “Blessed One, how is the mind to be viewed for a bodhisattva at the point of dying?”

The Blessed One replied, “Ākāśagarbha, a bodhisattva, when the time comes to die, should cultivate wisdom at the hour of death. Wisdom at the hour of death is as follows:

“All phenomena are naturally pure. So, one should cultivate the clear understanding that there are no entities.

“All phenomena are subsumed within the mind of enlightenment. So, one should cultivate the clear understanding of great compassion.¹⁰

“All phenomena are naturally luminous. So, one should cultivate the clear understanding of nonapprehension.

“All entities are impermanent. So, one should cultivate the clear understanding of nonattachment to anything whatsoever.

“When one realizes mind, this is wisdom. So, one should cultivate the clear understanding of not seeking the Buddha elsewhere.”

The Blessed One then spoke the following verses:

“Since all phenomena are naturally pure,
One should cultivate the clear understanding that there are no entities.

“Since all phenomena¹¹ are connected with the enlightened mind,
One should cultivate the clear understanding of great compassion.¹²

“Since all phenomena are naturally luminous,
One should cultivate the clear understanding of nonapprehension.

“Since all entities are impermanent,
One should cultivate the clear understanding of nonattachment.

“Since the mind is the cause for the arising of wisdom,
Do not look for the Buddha elsewhere.”

After the Blessed One had spoken,

2

the whole assembly, including the bodhisattva Ākāśagarbha and others, were overjoyed and full of praise for the Buddha’s words.

Notes

notes.1

1. In all Kangyurs, both printed and manuscript, the only minor variation being that the initial a of -āta- is shortened in the Peking and Yongle Kangyurs. The Tōhoku Catalog entry for the sūtra (but not the commentaries) also has this title.

notes.2

2. See Rhaldri (2010) and Jackson (2011).

notes.3

3. Including the Tōhoku Catalog’s (1934) Sanskrit transliteration of the titles of the associated commentaries (though not of the sūtra itself); the catalog of the Nyingma Edition of the Degé Kangyur published by Dharma Publishing (1977–83); and Tadeusz Skorupski’s Catalogue of the Stog Palace Kanjur (1985).

notes.4

4. See bibliography.

notes.5

5. See bibliography for some of these. Also Khomthar Jamlö (2014), vol. 1, p. 4, and vol. 6, pp. 1–2, for comments and a partial list; vol. 4 contains the two Indian commentaries and five of the six known Tibetan ones. See also Jackson (2009), p. 7, n. 17.

notes.6

6. See Khomthar Jamlö (2014), vol. 1, pp. 2–3, and Jackson (2009), p. 3. Lists of both sets can also be found in bod rgya tshig mdzod chen mo (ed. Zhang Yisun) and dung dkar tshig mdzod chen mo, s.v. rgyal po mdo lnga and rgyal po mdo bcu.

notes.7

7. The accounts are found in the longer biographies of Guru Padmasambhava, e.g. in the twelfth-century Zanglingma (chapter 18) and the fourteenth-century Padma Kathang (chapter 70). For these, see bibliography under Nyangrel Nyima Özer and Orgyen Lingpa, respectively.

notes.8

8. See Khomthar Jamlö (2014), vol. 1, p. 3; Jackson (2009), pp. 5–6; and Jackson’s source, Lopez (1988), pp. 29–30 and 143. Lopez, in turn, is quoting (and translates at length) an eighteenth- to nineteenth-century Gelukpa author, Tendar Lharampa (bstan dar lha ram pa). The term ’bum [chen] sde lnga—although it does not seem to have been particularly widespread—was used at least as early as the tenth century.

notes.9

9. This appears to be the only Kangyur sūtra to be set in Akaniṣṭha (although a number of tantras are, too). As well as referring to the highest level of the realm of form, Akaniṣṭha here, according to the Indian and Tibetan commentaries, is also to be equated with the Ghana­vyūha (stug po bkod pa) buddhafield and indicates that the Buddha is present here in his saṃbhoga­kāya form, perceptible only to bodhisattvas on the highest levels.

notes.10

10. Prajñāsamudra’s commentary here explains that all phenomena of saṃsāra and nirvāṇa indeed have no true “outer” existence but are one’s own very mind of enlightenment, and that “great compassion” means applying all three levels of compassion, namely, (1) compassion that perceives sentient beings (sems can la dmigs pa’i snying rje) regarding their suffering; (2) compassion that perceives phenomena (chos la dmigs pa’i snying rje) regarding the impermanent, suffering, empty, and selfless nature of all phenomena; and (3) compassion that does not apprehend anything (dmigs pa med pa’i snying rje), and thus cultivating emptiness. The three together include all of the Buddha’s teaching.

notes.11

11. Although the subject “all phenomena” is omitted in this verse, it is implicit, as can be seen in the parallel construction in the preceding and following verses, each beginning with chos rnams. Significantly too, the earlier prose passage expressing this idea had chos thams cad (“all phenomena”) as the subject.

notes.12

12. Prajñāsamudra, commenting on this verse, first cites a passage from the Laṅkāvatāra­sūtra to the effect that the nature of phenomena is like illusions that are nonexistent, and then with reference to what he has said regarding the equivalent passage in prose (see note 11), comments: “When one has cultivated in this way [i.e., with an understanding of the illusory nature of phenomena], one gives rise to compassion which does not apprehend anything; this is the best type of compassion.” Degé F.173b.2–3: de ltar bsgoms na dmigs pa med pa’i snying rje skye ste / snying rje’i mchog yin no.