Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

The Great Rumble

Translation of འཕགས་པ་སྒྲ་ཆན་པ་ཞས་བྱ་བ་ཐག་པ་ཆན་པའ་མད (འཕགས་པ་སྒྲ་ཆེན་པོ་ཞེས་བྱ་བ་ཐེག་པ་ཆེན་པོའི་མདོ)

Language
English
Translator
Lowell Cook
Extent
17 passages, 2,510 words
Text
complete digital text
Source
84000 · Translated by the Subhashita Translation Groupunder the patronage and supervision of 84000: Translating the… · 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

The Buddha’s disciple Ānanda is on an alms round in Śrāvastī when he notices an immaculate palace. He wonders whether it would be more meritorious to offer such a palace to the monastic community or to enshrine a relic of the Buddha within a small stūpa. He poses this question to the Buddha who describes how the merit of the latter far exceeds any other offerings one could make. The reason the Buddha cites for this is the immense qualities that the buddhas possess.

intro.2

The Great Rumble is a short Mahāyāna sūtra that details the benefits to be derived from the construction and worship of stūpas and statues of the buddhas. The sūtra begins in Śrāvastī where Ānanda is on an alms round and notices an immaculate palace. He wonders whether it would be more meritorious to offer such an enormous palace to the monastic community or to enshrine buddha relics within tiny stūpas and create miniature statues of the buddhas. He poses this question to the Buddha, who responds that the latter would be of greater merit due to the immeasurable qualities of the buddhas. The Buddha’s answer asserts the superiority of buddhas over stream enterers, once-returners, non-returners, and arhats—those who have attained the four results of the śrāvaka path. It also emphasizes the benefits to be gained generally from the creation and worship of stūpas.

intro.3

In his reply, the Buddha proposes scenarios in which greater and greater gifts to the saṅgha can be made, yet the answer remains the same—enshrining relics in stūpas or creating statues of the buddhas will always be more meritorious. The repetitiveness here is characteristic of the sūtra literature which has its origins in the oral tradition. When the sūtras were committed to writing, the South Asian scribes deliberately omitted repetitive material and marked elided sections with the phrase iti yāvad … iti peyālam, a scribal insertion indicating passages that have already been given in full previously in the text, and which are understood to be repeated in full each time the iti peyālam was inserted. This technique served as a means for conserving scribal resources such as palm leaves, ink, and other media. In the Tibetan translation, the elided section is marked with the first and last words of the passage, framed with the phrases ces/zhes bya nas … ces/zhes bya ba’i bar du, “from (phrase X) up to (phrase Y).” That convention has been followed in this English translation, where such passages have been marked with ellipses.

intro.4

The language of grand scales used throughout the sūtra serves to express the inexpressible qualities of the buddhas and to calculate the incalculable amount of merit gained from venerating them. This is made concrete when the Buddha tells the story of Ajātaśatru, who became the king of Magadha by murdering his father, the king Bimbisāra. He was also involved in creating a schism in the saṅgha and plotting to kill the Buddha with Devadatta, the Buddha’s cousin, who is depicted in Buddhist literature as envious of the Buddha and his teachings. Though Ajātaśatru later reformed to become a devout disciple of the Buddha, this sūtra notes that he was to be briefly reborn in the hells, since patricide is one of the five misdeeds of immediate retribution. Ajātaśatru would nevertheless be freed from this state, and he was prophesied by the Buddha to become a pratyekabuddha by the name of Vijayasena. Again, the sūtra implies that Ajātaśatru’s worshiping of the Buddha and his immeasurable qualities in the form of relics lightens his otherwise weighty negative karma.

intro.5

The title of the sūtra appears to be derived from a moment at the close of the discourse, when the ground shakes in six different ways as a testament to the power of the Buddha’s teaching. At that point Ānanda asks how the sūtra should be remembered, and the Buddha replies that it can be titled either The Drum of Amṛta or The Great Rumble, titles that seem to reflect the sound of the earth quaking.

intro.6

The Great Rumble survives only in Tibetan translation; there are no extant Sanskrit witnesses, nor was it translated into Chinese. The translation presented here is based on the version preserved in the Degé Kangyur, which was supplemented with reference to variant readings in the Comparative Edition (dpe bsdur ma) and Stok Palace Kangyurs. The Great Rumble is listed in the Phangthangma and Denkarma catalogues, the two extant scriptural catalogs from the Imperial Period (629–841 ce).¹ The Tibetan translation of the sūtra can thus be dated roughly to the early ninth century, the period when the Denkarma catalog was compiled. The colophon notes that the sūtra was initially translated by the Tibetan monk Gewa Pal (dge ba dpal), with the assistance of the Indian preceptor Viśuddhasiṃha, before then being finalized by the Indian preceptor Vidyākarasiṃha and the Tibetan monk and senior translator Devacandra. All four of these translators were active in the early ninth century.

1

Homage to all buddhas and bodhisattvas.

Thus did I hear at one time. The Blessed One was staying with a large saṅgha of monks in Śrāvastī, in Jeta’s Grove, Anāthapiṇḍada’s park. At dawn, the venerable Ānanda donned his lower and upper robes, took up his alms bowl, and went to Śrāvastī on his alms round.

2

As he was making his alms round through Śrāvastī, the venerable Ānanda noticed a palace with its interior and exterior swept and polished, its doors bolted shut, and its windows shuttered. Seeing this, he thought to himself, “What if someone were to build a palace like this one and offer it to the saṅgha of monks throughout the four directions, while someone else were to either create a statue of the Thus-Gone One the size of a thumb, or take a relic the size of a mustard seed after a thus-gone one’s parinirvāṇa and place it within a stūpa with a dome the size of an amalaki fruit, insert a central pole the size of a needle, and affix to it a canopy the size of a jujube leaf?² Between these two, whose merit would increase the most?”

Returning from his alms round in Śrāvastī, the venerable Ānanda ate his food. As he was abstaining from any subsequent food, he put away his alms bowl and robes, and washed his feet. He then went before the Blessed One, bowed his head at his feet, and sat to one side.

Seated to one side, the venerable Ānanda addressed the Blessed One: “Master, at dawn I donned my lower and upper robes, took up my alms bowl, and went to Śrāvastī on my alms round. As I went through Śrāvastī, Master, I noticed a palace with its interior and exterior swept and polished, its doors bolted shut, and its windows shuttered. Seeing this, I thought to myself, ‘What if someone were to build a palace like this one and offer it to the saṅgha of monks throughout the four directions, while someone else were to either create a statue of the Thus-Gone One the size of a thumb, or take a relic the size of a mustard seed after a thus-gone one’s parinirvāṇa and place it within a stūpa with a dome the size of an amalaki fruit, insert a central pole the size of a needle, and affix to it a canopy the size of a jujube leaf?

3

Between these two, whose merit would increase the most?’ This is the issue I present to the Blessed One.”

“Excellent, Ānanda. Excellent indeed,” responded the Blessed One to the venerable Ānanda. “Ānanda, you have asked, ‘What if someone were to build a palace like that one and offer it to the saṅgha of monks throughout the four directions, while someone else were to either create a statue of the Thus-Gone One the size of a thumb, or take a relic the size of a mustard seed after a thus-gone one’s parinirvāṇa and place it within a stūpa with a dome the size of an amalaki fruit, insert a central pole the size of a needle, and affix to it a canopy the size of a jujube leaf? Between these two, whose merit would increase the most?’ Your question is excellent and well articulated, and your inquiry virtuous. This being so, Ānanda, listen well and keep in mind what I am about to teach.

“Ānanda, what if someone were to build a palace like that one and offer it to the saṅgha of monks throughout the four directions, while someone else were to either create a statue of the Thus-Gone One the size of a thumb, or take a relic the size of a mustard seed after a thus-gone one’s parinirvāṇa and place it within a stūpa with a dome the size of an amalaki fruit, insert a central pole the size of a needle, and affix to it a canopy the size of a jujube leaf? Ānanda, the merit of the former would not even come close to a hundredth of the merit of the latter. It would not even come close to a thousandth, a hundred-thousandth, any number or fraction, or anything comparable or relative to that. Why? Because the thus-gone, worthy, and completely perfected buddhas possess these immeasurable qualities: they possess immeasurable discipline, immeasurable samādhi, immeasurable insight, immeasurable liberation,

4

and the immeasurable wisdom and vision of liberation.

“Ānanda, what if all of Jambudvīpa, measuring seven thousand leagues in length and breadth, were filled with stream enterers, once-returners, non-returners, arhats, and pratyekabuddhas, just like rice paddies, sesame fields, bamboo groves, reed groves, or sugar cane groves? And what if someone offered them as many robes, alms, sets of bedding, curative medicines, and other supplies as they desired for as long as they lived and then, when they all had passed into parinirvāṇa, created stūpas and venerated them with canopies, cymbals, banners, perfumes, incense, garlands, powders, and ointments? What if someone else were to either create a statue of the Thus-Gone One the size of a thumb, or take a relic the size of a mustard seed after a thus-gone one’s parinirvāṇa and place it within a stūpa with a dome the size of an amalaki fruit, insert a central pole the size of a needle, and affix to it a canopy the size of a jujube leaf? Ānanda, the merit of the former would not even come close to a hundredth of the merit of the latter. It would not even come close to a thousandth, or a hundred-thousandth, any number or fraction, or anything comparable or relative to that. Why? Because the thus-gone, worthy, and completely perfected buddhas possess these immeasurable qualities: they possess immeasurable discipline, immeasurable samādhi, immeasurable insight, immeasurable liberation, and the immeasurable wisdom and vision of liberation.

“Ānanda, the same may be said of the eastern continent of Videha, measuring eight thousand leagues in length and breadth,” including everything stated above, from “were filled with stream enterers…” up to “…wisdom and vision of liberation.³

5

“Ānanda, the same may be said of the western continent of Godānīya, measuring nine thousand leagues in length and breadth,” including everything stated above, from “were filled with stream-enterers…”

“Ānanda, the same may be said of the northern continent of Kuru, measuring ten thousand leagues in length and breadth,” including everything stated above, from “were filled with stream-enterers…”

“Ānanda, Śakra’s Palace of Victory is supported by eighty-four thousand pillars, each of which is made of exquisite blue beryl. Ānanda, the Palace of Victory is covered in gold dust, sprinkled with sandalwood water, decorated with golden lattice, and encircled with golden chimes. Ānanda, what if someone were to fill the trichiliocosm only with palaces like the Palace of Victory and offer it to the saṅgha of monks throughout the four directions, while someone else were to take a relic the size of a mustard seed after a thus-gone one’s parinirvāṇa…” and so forth as above.

“Ānanda, after Ajātaśatru, son of Vaidehī and king of Magadha, murders his father who is a stream enterer,⁴ and has engaged in the virtuous acts praised by the buddhas to fervently respect, venerate, serve, worship, honor, and supplicate the eight portions of the relics⁵ as a way of worshiping the relics of the Thus-Gone One, he will be reborn once in the hells, where those actions, those roots of virtue, and those past wholesome deeds will free him and prevent him from regressing to lower rebirth for the next twenty eons. He will then shave his head and beard, don the saffron robes, and go forth from his home into homelessness. He will manifest the state of a pratyekabuddha and become known as Vijayasena the pratyekabuddha. Why? Because the thus-gone, worthy, and completely perfected buddhas possess these immeasurable qualities:

6

they possess immeasurable discipline, immeasurable samādhi, immeasurable insight, immeasurable liberation, and the immeasurable wisdom and vision of liberation.

“You should understand, Ānanda, it is because the thus-gone, worthy, and completely perfected buddhas possess these immeasurable qualities that the result of worshiping them is also immeasurable.”

As this Dharma discourse was being taught, the vast earth began to quake in six ways: the east rose as the west sank, the west rose as the east sank, the south rose as the north sank, the north rose as the south sank, the center rose as the borders sank, and the borders rose as the center sank.

The venerable Ānanda then asked the Blessed One, “What is the name of this Dharma discourse, Blessed One? How should I remember it?”

The Blessed One replied, “Ānanda, remember this Dharma discourse as The Drum of Amṛta. You may also remember it as The Great Rumble.”

The venerable Ānanda then praised and rejoiced in what the Blessed One had taught. He bowed at the Blessed One’s feet and circumambulated him three times before leaving the Blessed One’s presence.

Colophon

This was translated by the Indian preceptor Viśuddhasiṃha and the translator Bandé Gewa Pal. It was edited and finalized by the Indian preceptor Vidyākarasiṃha and the chief-editor and translator Bandé Devacandra.

Notes

notes.1

1. Denkarma F.299.b; see also Herrmann-Pfandt, p. 119. Phangthangma 2003, p. 18.

notes.2

2. Ziziphus mauritiana. Tib. rgya shug; Skt. badara.

notes.3

3. Here and in the next two paragraphs we see the use of iti peyālam, the deliberate scribal practice of omitting repetitive material previously given in full in the same text.

notes.4

4. The karmic implications of killing a person with high spiritual accomplishment are considered heavier than those of patricide alone would be.

notes.5

5. The phrase “eight portions of the relics” (Tib. sku gdung gi brgyad cha) appears to describe the apportioning of the Buddha Śākyamuni’s relics after his passing. As described in The Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra, Śākyamuni’s relics were divided among eight kings who each lay claim to them after the parinirvāṇā of the Buddha (For a translation of the Pali version, see Walshe 1995, pp. 275–77). To satisfy them, Mahāmaudgalyāyana divided the relics into eight portions so that the kings could enshrine them in their own lands. Because this would have happened after the Buddha’s passing, and because Ajātaśatru’s death is believed to post-date the Buddha's parinirvāṇā, the passage here is taken as prophetic.