Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

འཕགས་པ་ད་བཞན་གཤགས་པའ་གསང་བ་བསམ་གྱས་མ་ཁྱབ་པ་བསྟན་པ་ཞས་བྱ་བ་ཐག་པ་ཆན་པའ་མད notes: Notes

The Secrets of the Realized Ones notes

Language
English

Notes

notes.1

1. For example, Étienne Lamotte once called the Vimalakīrti­nirdeśa “perhaps the crown jewel of the Buddhist literature of the Great Vehicle,” in L’Enseignment de Vimalakīrti (Lamotte 1987, p. v), while more recently Jonathan Silk has made a softer claim, describing it as “one of the most radiant stars in the firmament of Mahāyāna sūtra literature,” on the back cover of Vimalakīrtinirdeśa: The Teaching of Vimalakīrti (Gómez and Harrison 2022). On the appreciation (or lack thereof) of the Lalitavistara as a literary work, see Silk 2022, especially pp. 285 and following. We would also like to acknowledge here our indebtedness to Gómez and Harrison’s translation of the Vimalakīrti­nirdeśa. We have used many of their translation choices of terms and phrases in this translation, as well as their explanations for our glossary.

notes.2

2. For the Sanskrit text of these passages, see Study Group on Buddhist Sanskrit Literature 2005, which also includes the Tibetan and Chinese translations. For a translation from Tibetan of the above passages, see Robert A. F. Thurman, trans., The Teaching of Vimalakīrti , Toh 176, and (2017).

notes.3

3. The relevant passages are noted in the body of the translation. For the Sanskrit editions of these works, see the following: Lévi 1907; La Vallée Poussin 1903; and Tucci 1971; and for a translation of the final work, which is not extant in Sanskrit, see Gareth Sparham, trans., The Long Explanation of the Noble Perfection of Wisdom in One Hundred Thousand, Twenty-Five Thousand, and Eighteen Thousand Lines , Toh 3808 (2022).

notes.4

4. The relevant passages are cited in the body of the translation. For the former, a partial Sanskrit manuscript has recently been identified in Tibet, on which see Wang et al., 2020. A complete translation of it was made from Tibetan into English by Bhikkhu Pāsādika and published serially in the journal Linh-Son publication d’études bouddhiques, beginning with “The Sūtrasamuccaya – An English Translation from the Tibetan Version of the Sanskrit Original (I).” For the latter, the classical Sanskrit edition is Cecil Bendall’s Çikshāsamuccaya: A Compendium of Buddhistic Teaching; it has also been translated into English on two occasions: Cecil Bendall’s and W. H. D. Rouse’s Śikṣā Samuccaya (1922) and Charles Goodman’s The Training Anthology of Śāntideva (2016).

notes.5

5. The relevant passages are cited in the body of the translation. Sanskrit edition: Bunyiu Nanjio, The Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra (1923); English translation: Daisetz Teitaro Suzuki, The Lankavatara Sutra: A Mahayana Text (1932).

notes.6

6. The relevant passages are cited in the body of the translation. It is also possible that the Tathāgataguhya reworks the passages as they are found in the Bodhisattvapiṭaka, or that both texts share a common source or sources. Parts of both passages are also quoted in the Śikṣāsamuccaya and Sūtrasamuccaya, and there they are explicitly attributed to the Tathāgataguhya. A Sanskrit edition of the Bodhisattvapiṭaka will be published in Liland et al. (forthcoming).

notes.7

7. The relevant passages are cited in the body of the translation. For the list of citations of the sūtra in this text, see Lamotte 1970, p. 1638, n. 1. On the question of authorship and the nature of this important work, see Zacchetti 2021.

notes.8

8. For a recent approach to the study of Buddhist literature as a form of literature, see Shaw 2021. A classic in the field of literary studies of the Bible is Robert Alter’s The Art of Biblical Narrative (2011).

notes.9

9. See, for example, Anesaki 1911, and Radich 2015, especially p. 105 ff.

notes.10

10. See Lamotte 1966 and Zin 2009.

notes.11

11. For an English translation of the former, see Walshe 1995, p. 114; for the latter, see Bodhi and Ñāṇamoli 1995, p. 326.

notes.12

12. This translation is based on the Sanskrit, for which see Vaidya 1987, p. 50 (or p. 54 of the second edition); for an alternate English translation based on the Tibetan translation, see The Play in Full, Toh 95, , (Dharmachakra Translation Committee 2013).

notes.13

13. See Hopkins 1915, pp. 10, 31, 61, and 142–48.

notes.14

14. See

notes.15

15. For a study and translation of this passage, see Bodhi 1978.

notes.16

16. This translation is based on the Sanskrit, for an alternative translation of which, see Gómez and Harrison 2022, p. 71; another alternative translation, based on the Tibetan translation, may be found in The Teaching of Vimalakīrti, Toh 176, (Thurman 2017).

notes.17

17. For a discussion of the different versions, see The Good Eon (Bhadrakalpika), Toh 94, – (Dharmachakra Translation Committee, 2022).

notes.18

18. For the quotation in the latter, see The Long Explanation , Toh 3808, (Sparham 2022). It is also worth comparing this statement with what is found in The Teaching of Vimalakīrti, Toh 176, - (Thurman 2017).

notes.19

19. See .

notes.20

20. On this point, see the remarks by Cecil Bendall on Cambridge MS Adds. 901, 1365, and 1617 in his Catalogue of the Buddhist Sanskrit Manuscripts in the University Library, Cambridge (1883), pp. 15–17, 70–73, and 140–41.

notes.21

21. Winternitz 1933, pp. 394–95 and 635.

notes.22

22. Lewis 2000, pp. 15–16; Tuladhar-Douglas 2014, pp. 86 and 130 ff., especially pp. 132–33, and ch. 4, n. 46.

notes.23

23. The bibliographic information for these articles by Ikuma and for several more by other Japanese and Chinese scholars may be found in the bibliographic entry for this sūtra on the website of the Open Philology project.

notes.24

24. Étienne Lamotte, “Vajrapāṇi en Inde,” pp. 140–44, wherein Lamotte gives a three-page summary of the past-life story told in chapter 5 of the sūtra (according to the chapter divisions of the eleventh-century Chinese translation, which seems to follow those of the Tibetan translation), in which Brahmā and Vajrapāṇi each take a vow. The former vows to request each of the thousand buddhas of this fortunate era to teach the Dharma, and the latter vows to become the constant companion of each and every one of these buddhas. However, it seems as though Lamotte did not finish reading the sūtra, because after his synopsis of the story he claims that no mention is made in the sūtra of when or how Vajrapāṇi attains future awakening as a buddha, but this information is given in a later chapter of the sūtra (chapter 16 according to the Tibetan chapter divisions).

notes.25

25. Shingan 2021.

notes.26

26. Szántó 2021.

notes.27

27. Shāstri 1917, pp. 17–21.

notes.28

28. Denkarma, folio 295.b; see also Herrmann-Pfandt 2008, pp. 18–19. Phangthangma 2003, p. 6.

notes.29

29. For the description, see Marcel Lalou 1961, p. 200. The scan of this Dunhuang manuscript can be seen here. We have not yet identified the quotations of the sūtra in this manuscript or noted them in this translation.

notes.30

30. On this date and various scholarly opinions on the accuracy of its attribution to Dharmarakṣa, see the entry on Taishō 310 in the Chinese Buddhist Canonical Attributions database.

notes.31

31. For more on this version of the text, see Taishō 312 in the Chinese Buddhist Canonical Attributions database. See also the entry on K 1486 in Lewis R. Lancaster’s Descriptive Catalogue of the Korean Buddhist Canon.

notes.32

32. “Acceptance” (bzod pa, kṣānti) likely refers here to anutpattika­dharmakṣānti, “acceptance of the fact that things do not arise,” which is said to constitute a definitive understanding of the emptiness of all phenomena. Possibly the same expression is used to describe Vimalakīrti in the Vimalakīrti­nirdeśa, section 2.1, the Sanskrit for which reads prati­labdhakṣāntika. The Tibetan translation here and there is identical: bzod pa thob pa.

notes.33

33. The Tibetan translation reads mngon par shes pa’i ye shes gyis rnam par rtsen pa, which we understand to be translating a Sanskrit compound similar to abhijñā­jñāna­vikrīḍita.

notes.34

34. The Tibetan translation here is identical to what is also found in the Vimalakīrti­nirdeśa, section 1.3, for which the underlying Sanskrit is likely nihatamāra­pratyarthika. The Tibetan renders this compound as a dvandva, “x and y,” whereas one could interpret it differently to say that the adversaries actually are Māra in all his forms. The idea behind the translation of “Māra in all his forms” is that Buddhist literature generally recognizes several types of Māra. See, for instance, the entry on Māra in Buswell and Lopez, The Princeton Dictionary of Buddhism.

notes.35

35. This appears to be a minor translation variant upon a phrase also found in the Vimalakīrti­nirdeśa 2.1, where it describes Vimalakīrti: sarva­buddha­stutastomita­praśaṃsitaḥ.

notes.36

36. A similar statement describing the bodhisattva is found in The Play in Full (Toh 95), .

notes.37

37. A similar expression is found among the opening descriptions of the bodhisattvas in the Vimalakīrti­nirdeśa, section 1.3: sarva­parṣadanabhi­bhūtavaiśaradya­vikrāmibhiḥ. Comparing the two passages, the Tibetan here suggests a reading of sarva­parṣadabhi­bhūta­vaiśaradyakulaśaḥ.

notes.38

38. zla ba dang nyi ma mog mog por byed pa; literally “they darkened the sun and the moon.” This expression is also used to describe an eclipse.

notes.39

39. “The three times” refers to the past, present, and future.

notes.40

40. Following Stok palace chos zab mo rnam par nges pa ye shes kyis ston pa la mkhas pa. Degé has a vertical line after rnam par nges pa, but this doesn’t require that we split the phrases into two.

notes.41

41. This sentence and the preceding one are quoted in the Sūtrasamuccaya. For an English translation, see Pāsādika 1978b, p. 28. The Tibetan expression found here, dkon mchog gsum gyi rigs rgyun mi ’chad par byed pa, is identical to one also found in the Vimalakīrti­nirdesa, section 1.3, for which the Sanskrit reads triratnavaṃ­śānupacchetṛbhiḥ. The same expression is attested later in the Sanskrit manuscript of the Tathāgataguhya, too.

notes.42

42. Following Stok Palace mtha’ yas rnam par gnon pa. Degé lacks this name but instead reads blo gros mtha’ yas, which duplicates and transposes the next name: mtha’ yas blo gros. Yet, blo gros mtha’ yas is the name of a bodhisattva found later in chapter 4, for which the extant Sanskrit equivalent is Anantabuddhi.

notes.43

43. This sentence is quoted by Kamalaśīla in the third Bhāvanākrama. For the passage in Sanskrit, see Tucci 1971, p. 12.

notes.44

44. This sentence is quoted by Kamalaśīla in the third Bhāvanākrama. For the passage in Sanskrit, see Tucci 1971, p. 12.

notes.45

45. The fragmentary Sanskrit manuscript kept in the library of the Asiatic Society in Bengal, MS G10765, preserves a block of text that begins with the second half of this sentence and runs to the beginning of folio 104.b of the Tibetan translation.

notes.46

46. The Sanskrit manuscript suggests the alternative that the supply here is of “serving” (sevana) companions in what is good.

notes.47

47. This sentence is cited by Kamalaśīla in the third Bhāvanākrama. For the passage in Sanskrit, see Tucci 1971, pp. 12–13.

notes.48

48. The Lankāvatāra Sūtra asks about the meaning of the fact that Vajrapāṇi always accompanies the Buddha, using different terminology from what is found here, but touching on a similar theme. See Nanjio, pp. 240 and 242, for the Sanskrit, and the English translation in Suzuki, pp. 207 and 209.

notes.49

49. The Sanskrit manuscript reads pratibhātu, perhaps an imperative form of pratibhā, “to shine light on,” but which is connected to the concept of pratibhāna, commonly translated as “eloquence” or “inspired speech.”

notes.50

50. The first block of text in the Sanskrit manuscript ends here, right in the middle of this sentence at the following point: “… Blessed One, through the majestic pow-.” The next line of the manuscript continues another fragmentary passage beginning slightly further in the text on folio 105.b of the Tibetan translation.

notes.51

51. Here the text seems to use the term “mystery” (bsam gyis mi khyab pa) or “inconceivable thing or quality,” acintya in Sanskrit, as almost a synonym for the term gsang ba (“secret”). This may help us to understand these terms better and even to see how they came to be combined so closely in the iteration of the title of this sūtra.

notes.52

52. In the Śikṣāsamuccaya, a quotation is given ostensibly from the Ratnamegha Sūtra that discusses the concept of kāyakuhanā or “artifice of the body,” as well as verbal and mental forms of artifice, such as flattery (lapanā) and dissimulation (Bendall 1902, pp. 267–68), which are described as actions of body, speech, and mind that are intended to persuade donors and patrons to give gifts.

notes.53

53. We see here a play on words between yongs su mi rtog pa (aparikalpa), rendered in the previous sentence as “involuntarily,” and rnam par mi rtog (avikalpa), rendered here as “[they] do not form concepts.” Both terms involve the lack of any supposition or application of false ideas or dualistic thinking onto the true nature of reality.

notes.54

54. The second text block of the Sanskrit manuscript picks up right at the end of this sentence with the words ojo dadāti, “he [the bodhisattva] gives his physical vitality,” which is strangely affixed to part of the line that construes with the previous text block. In any case, the Sanskrit fragment makes it clear that the bodhisattva is being spoken of here in the third-person singular masculine form, he/him, and the Tibetan translation reflects this, too, but for the sake of style and inclusivity we have rendered the sequence using the plural, they/them. This tension between the default masculine pronouns and the attempt at a more inclusive rendering persists throughout the sūtra.

notes.55

55. The mention made here of covering the cosmos with a jeweled parasol is quite similar to the opening marvel in the first chapter of the Vimalakīrti­nirdeśa ().

notes.56

56. The translation here reflects the extant Sanskrit manuscript insofar as the Tibetan text seems to have taken the offering of flowered parasols with the previous sentence, whereas the Sanskrit suggests that we read it together with the offering of the baskets of flowers, but it also partly reflects the Tibetan translation in the parsing of this and the next three sentences.

notes.57

57. This paragraph is one of several that is quoted in the Śikṣāsamuccaya. For the Sanskrit passage, see Bendall 1902, pp. 158–59.

notes.58

58. Beginning with this sentence and running until the end of this past life story and then a bit further, there is a parallel found in chapter 9 of the Bodhisattvapiṭaka (Toh 56). A comparison of the Sanskrit manuscript and the Tibetan translation of that text with the preserved fragments of the Sanskrit of this sūtra as well as its complete Tibetan translation reveals numerous differences in the precise language despite great similarities between the two texts. For instance, in the Bodhisattvapiṭaka, the Buddha tells this story to Śāriputra in first-person voice, while in this sūtra Vajrapāṇi tells the story to Śāntamati. For this reason, we have based the translation of this section primarily on the Tibetan translation of this sūtra and any available Sanskrit fragments.

notes.59

59. The terms “air” (vāta, lung), “heat” (pitta, mkhris pa), and “phlegm” (śleṣman, bad kan) refer to the three doṣas, the basic categories or properties of the human body and mind according to the traditional Indian medical system known as Ayurveda, which also influenced the development of traditional Tibetan medicine.

notes.60

60. The end of this sentence marks the end of the second text block of text in the Sanskrit manuscript.

notes.61

61. In the Bodhisattvapiṭaka, Śakra first speaks in prose for about a paragraph before continuing with a series of six verses, three of which are similar but not identical to what is found in this sūtra.

notes.62

62. Here Vajrapāṇi resumes his narration of the story, but the text suggests that he does so with a verse. Therefore, we have rendered it as such in the translation. In the Bodhisattvapiṭaka, too, the voice shifts in the final verse from Śakra to the narrator, which in that text is the Buddha himself.

notes.63

63. Here we have two verb forms, mi sems and mi rtog, which are likely translating the Sanskrit expressions na vicintayati and na vikalpayati, “he does not ponder” and “he does not ruminate,” respectively.

notes.64

64. From this sentence through the penultimate sentence of the following paragraph, the Śikṣāsamuccaya also preserves the Sanskrit, for which see Bendall 1902, p. 159.

notes.65

65. The Vimalakīrti­nirdeśa may owe something here again to the sūtra, or vice versa, since the language used to describe this medicine-made girl is the same language the goddess uses therein to describe the flowers to Śāriputra. In section 6.14 of the Vimalakīrti­nirdeśa, the goddess says that the flowers do not form ideas (na kalpayanti) and they do not form conceptions (na vikalpayanti). For an alternative translation of the passage made from Tibetan see The Teaching of Vimalakīrti, Toh 176, (Thurman 2017). Though the Sanskrit preserved in the Śikṣāsamuccaya appears corrupted here, the Tibetan translation of these two sūtra passages is nearly identical, and again, we can take note of the use of the terminology related to the term vikalpa (rnam par rtog pa), and also its connection here (and there) to the forming or fashioning (kalpana) of bodies. Winternitz 1933, p. 394, n. 5 notes that this image appears to be a counterpart to the narrative trope of the “poison girl” (viṣakanyā). This trope is mentioned in the Arthaśāstra and in later narrative literature such as the Kathāsaritsāgara, as well as in modern Indian literature and film.

notes.66

66. With the first half of this sentence, the series of close parallel passages found in chapter 9 of the Bodhisattvapiṭaka (Toh 56) appears to come to an end.

notes.67

67. This same list of metaphors for the body is found in the Vimalakīrti­nirdeśa, chapter 2, for which the Sanskrit reads tṛṇakāṣṭhakuḍyaloṣṭa­prati­bhāsasadṛśah. The Tibetan translation of the two passages is identical except for the fourth member of the list, for which the Tibetan translation of the Vimalakīrti­nirdeśa gives bong ba and here the translation of the Tathāgataguhya has lam, or “road,” which seems as though it may be an error or corruption. The Vimalakīrti­nirdeśa explains that all these things are examples of “inanimate” (jaḍa) objects. In general, it is worth comparing the descriptions of the Dharma body here in this sūtra with the descriptions of the physical body and of the Dharma body at the end of chapter 2 of the Vimalakīrti­nirdeśa, sections 2.9–12. For a translation from Tibetan, see The Teaching of Vimalakīrti, Toh 176, - (Thurman 2017).

notes.68

68. The Śikṣāsamuccaya quotes the sūtra from the beginning of this sentence up to and including this word, and then it selectively includes several more terms from this long list of attributes of the realized one’s speech. For the Sanskrit, see Bendall 1902, p. 126.

notes.69

69. On the suspicion (perhaps wrong) that the Tibetan here, lung bstan pa la thogs pa, may be rendering the phrase kṣunavyākaraṇā, found in the passage quoted in the Śikṣāsamuccaya. For the Sanskrit, see Bendall 1902, p. 126. See also Edgerton’s entries on kṣuṇa and kṣūna.

notes.70

70. The previous four phrases are quoted in a passage in the Śikṣāsamuccaya. For the Sanskrit, see Bendall 1902, p. 126.

notes.71

71. Reading brlang following the Narthang and Zhol editions of Kangyur. Pedurma p. 320, n. 20.

notes.72

72. This phrase, kha ’og tu lus ’khrus par mi byed pa’i tshigs, appears to correspond to the phrase prati­jñottāraṇ­avacanā in the Śikṣāsamuccaya. For the Sanskrit, see Bendall 1902, p. 126. See also Edgerton’s entry on uttāraṇa, which discusses this phrase.

notes.73

73. This phrase, mngon pa’i nga rgyal gyi brda sprod pa’i tshig, appears to correspond to the phrase ābhi­mānikavyākaraṇ­avacanā in the quotation in the Śikṣāsamuccaya. For the Sanskrit, see Bendall 1902, p. 126.

notes.74

74. The last several words in this list are hard to discern as specific numbers and have therefore been given as a list increasing by powers of three.

notes.75

75. Here the sūtra is playing on two of the primary uses of the word dharma. It refers in a general way to “things” or “phenomena” and their component factors, but is also often used to mean “quality” or “attribute,” as it does here and elsewhere in the phrase buddhadharmāḥ, “the qualities of a buddha.”

notes.76

76. The sign of auspiciousness meant here is the svastika.

notes.77

77. The voice shifts back to the Buddha of the present narrating the story of the past, but he seems to continue in verse so we have likewise rendered it in verse.

notes.78

78. This sentence and the preceding question are quoted in the Sūtrasamuccaya where they are connected to the passage noted in . See Pāsādika 1978a, part 1, p. 26.

notes.79

79. This whole paragraph is quoted in the Śikṣāsamuccaya. For the Sanskrit, see Bendall 1902, p. 316.

notes.80

80. Here again the reader can note the different sense of the word dharma, which is sometimes translated both here and above as “quality,” and left untranslated here in the expression “king of the Dharma.” One might consider translating the latter as “righteous king,” but that would likely not exhaust the range of meanings of the word dharma here.

notes.81

81. Another fragmentary passage from the Sanskrit manuscript begins in the middle of this sentence and continues nearly to the end of this chapter.

notes.82

82. The Tibetan translation here includes a sentence with a pair of names not found in the Sanskrit manuscript. The striking similarity of these names with the previous pair suggests that the Tibetan may have been an alternate translation of the previous name incorporated at some point into the text. Since this is not clear, however, we have included this pair in our translation, too, while giving the prince’s name, dri ma med pa’i ’od, as Vimalaprabhāsa, which is attested as an equivalent in the Lalitavistara, to signal the similarity with the previous pair. This name could also be Vimalaprabhā. The name of the tathāgata, spyan legs pa, is not attested, so far as we know, as a translation of the name Sunetra, but the meaning is the same.

notes.83

83. The Sanskrit manuscript reads gaganadhātusamā here, which suggests that we interpret nam mkha’ in the Tibetan translation as nam mkha’i khams. Also, the Sanskrit has jina (“victor”), whereas the Tibetan has sangs rgyas (“buddha”). The translation follows the Sanskrit.

notes.84

84. This sentence explains the name of the tathāgata, which is attested as Roca in the Sanskrit manuscript. Negi’s entry on the Tibetan term mos pa, used to translate the name here, makes it clear that the term translates both adhimukti (“strong inclination”) and ruci (“light”), but also “zest” or “longing.”

notes.85

85. The third portion of this sūtra preserved in Sanskrit ends in the middle of this sentence.

notes.86

86. The translation of this sentence reflects an emendation of the Tibetan text, which reads de bzhin (“thus”) whereas every other sentence has de bzhin gshegs pa (“the realized one(s)”) in the same position in the sentence. It has been translated as if it read the latter.

notes.87

87. The fourth segment of the text preserved in the Sanskrit manuscript begins in the middle of this sentence and continues for about ten pages of the Tibetan translation.

notes.88

88. The *Mahā­prajñā­pāramitopadeśa quotes this passage among several in a compilation of quotes and paraphrases from this sūtra in describing the secret of the Buddha’s body, speech, and mind. See Lamotte 1981, p. 560.

notes.89

89. The Sanskrit here reads dhṛtarāṣtrahaṃsa­rāja, perhaps referring to the story in the Mahābhārata explaining King Dhṛtarāṣṭra’s blindness. The Tibetan simply reads ngang pa’r rgyal po ngang skya (“light orangish white like the king of swans”).

notes.90

90. The translation here reflects some of the particular syntax of the Tibetan translation. The Sanskrit suggests that we could alternatively translate this passage as follows: “Moreover, in this respect, the realized one would not be produced by a body or a mind” (na ca tatra tathā[ga]taḥ kāyena vā cittena vā vyāvṛto bhaved). Both translations would seem to be resolvable around the same basic idea, however.

notes.91

91. The number here follows the Sanskrit manuscript. The Tibetan translation says here that he circled him three times, but slightly down further the Tibetan agrees with the Sanskrit that he circles the Buddha Padmaśrīrājagarbha seven times.

notes.92

92. Following Degé. The Sanskrit manuscript says he only walked around him once.

notes.93

93. The translation here reflects the Tibetan translation, which also suggests a possible emendation of the third line of the verse in the Sanskrit manuscript from buddhānantaṃ na paśyāmi to mūrddhānante na paśyāmi or something similar.

notes.94

94. The equivalent verse in the Sanskrit manuscript has some variances with the Tibetan here. They both have “moral conduct” (śīla, tshul khrims), “concentration” (samādhi, ting nge ’dzin), and “liberated knowledge and vision” (vimuktir jñānadarśana, rnam grol ye shes mthong), but the Sanskrit lacks “liberation” (vimokṣa, rnam grol) and includes “wisdom” (prajñā, shes rab) and “knowledge” (jñāna, ye shes). It is not entirely clear whether the Tibetan translators were working from a different iteration of the verse here or if perhaps the translation reflects the challenge of squeezing the Sanskrit into seven syllable lines of Tibetan.

notes.95

95. This verse and the next one are quoted in the Sūtrasamuccaya, where they are connected to the passage noted in . See Pāsādika 1978b, part 3, p. 28.

notes.96

96. This verse and the next one are quoted in the Sūtrasamuccaya in a different section from the one in which the preceding verses are quoted. See Pāsādika 1981, p. 27.

notes.97

97. Here, the state of the buddhas is the “inconceivable (or mysterious) state” (acintyaṃ sthānam [sic]) and “the place of the secrets” or “the secret place” or “hidden place” (guhyasthānaṃ [sic]).

notes.98

98. The beginning of this paragraph is cited explicitly in the *Mahā­prajñā­pāramitopadeśa. On this passage therein, see Lamotte 1970, p. 1681.

notes.99

99. The Tibetan translation includes the phrase “and the actions of the body” (sku’i phrin las te). It is not in the Sanskrit manuscript and could represent an interpolation. There seems to be a slight discrepancy or corruption here in the Sanskrit manuscript, which does not include this passage, but begins the next sentence with the phrase “the purity of actions that is the secret of the body…” (kāyaguhya­karma­pari­śuddhir).

notes.100

100. Following the Tibetan translation. The Sanskrit manuscript reads kāyaguhya­karma­pari­śuddhir [sic] here, which could be translated “the purity of actions that is the secret of the body,” but it then reads tathāgata­kāya­karma­pari­śuddheḥ [sic] in the next sentence, which suggests the possibility of a corruption here.

notes.101

101. Following the Sanskrit phrase here, tathāgata­kāyaguhyācintya­nirdeśe nirdiśyamāne [sic]. The Tibetan has de bzhin gshegs pa’i gsang ba bsam gyis mi khyab pa bstan pa ’di bshad pa na, “when this teaching on the mystery and secret of the realized ones was being taught.” The phrasing here is identical to the order of the words in the Tibetan translation of the full title of the sūtra, and the word order is supported by the Sanskrit manuscript.

notes.102

102. The Sanskrit manuscript differs from the Tibetan translation here in that the former says that eight thousand bodhisattvas attained acceptance.

notes.103

103. This sentence is quoted, but without explicit reference to the Tathāgataguhya, and placed in the voice of the Buddha in a passage in the Lankāvatāra Sūtra, for which see Nanjio, pp. 142–43 and 240, for the Sanskrit, and the English translation by Suzuki, pp. 123–24 and 207. This passage is also quoted twice in Candrakīrti’s Prasannapadā, where it is explicitly said to come from the Tathāgataguhya Sūtra. The first citation is in the commentary on chapter 18, verse 7 of the Mūla­madhyamakakārikā; the second citation is in the commentary on chapter 25, verse 24, the last verse in the chapter on the analysis of nirvāṇa. For the Sanskrit text, see La Vallée Poussin 1903, pp. 366–67 and 539–40. There are slight differences between the sentence as it is quoted in the Prasannapadā and the passage as found in the Sanskrit manuscript and the Tibetan translation of this sūtra, but after quoting this sentence, Candrakīrti appears to continue to cite or paraphrase this sūtra. In neither case, however, does there seem to be an exact equivalency to what is found in the extant Sanskrit manuscript or the Tibetan translation. In this respect, it would be interesting to compare the Prasannapadā with the earlier Chinese translation of the sūtra. After the first quotation of the sentence above, Candrakīrti says, “How, then, is the teaching of the Dharma taught by the Blessed One to all the various kinds of folk who are ready to the trained, beginning with gods (sura), asuras, humans (nara), kinnaras, siddhas, vidyādharas, and uragas (i.e., nāgas)? With the mere utterance of speech for a single moment, [a speech that is] a great light, reddish like the sun in autumn, a light that removes the darkness from the minds of those beings (tatajjanamanastamoharaṇī), opens the manifold thickets of the lotuses of their intellects, dries up the oceans and rivers of old age and death, and surpasses the magnitude of the light rays from the seven suns of the fiery conflagration [at the end] of the eon.” Then follows the quotation of the three metaphors in verse from this sūtra for which the references are given when they occur. What follows the second quotation by Candrakīrti of the sentence above is the following: “Moreover, all beings, whose aspirations and constituent elements vary, understand the speech that comes from the Realized One variously in accordance with their level of dedication. And each and every one of them has the thought, ‘The Blessed One is teaching this Dharma to us; we are hearing the Realized One’s teaching of the Dharma.’ In this regard, the Realized One does not form an idea; he does not form a concept. For, indeed, Śāntamati, the Realized One is devoid of all vain imaginings or lingering traces of the web of thoughts and concepts.” This second passage seems quite similar to parts of the passage that follows this one in the main text and part of a passage found a few paragraphs further below in the sūtra. After what was just translated, the second quotation in the Prasannapadā continues with a verse and several more lines that pursue a similar theme, at the end of which Candrakīrti says, “All of this has been explained at length in ‘The Chapter on the Secret of the Speech of the Realized One’ (tathāgata­vāgguhya­parivarta).” The main statement above is also quoted at the beginning of The Long Explanation of the Noble Perfection of Wisdom in One Hundred Thousand, Twenty-Five Thousand, and Eighteen Thousand Lines—see section 1.8—where again the quotation appears to differ slightly from the passage as found in the extant Sanskrit manuscript of this sūtra.

notes.104

104. The Mahāyāna­sūtrālaṃkāra­bhāṣya makes reference to a list of sixty such qualities, which it attributes to The Teaching of the Lord of Guhyakas (Guhyakādhi­pati­nirdeśa). The Mahāyāna­sūtrālaṃkāra­bhāṣya then defines or explains many of the terms. See Lévi, pp. 79–80, for the Sanskrit, and Jamspal et al., pp. 156–58, for an English translation of the passage. The different iterations of this list contain a few variations.

notes.105

105. The Tibetan reads snyan cing ’jebs pa, for which the Mahāyāna­sūtrālaṃkāra­bhāṣya has valgu. The Sanskrit manuscript reading of varṇa, perhaps meaning “praiseworthy,” would seem to be a corruption of valgu.

notes.106

106. The Sanskrit reads luḍitā, which should likely be corrected to laḑitā. The Mahāyāna­sūtrālaṃkāra­bhāṣya reads lalitā. The Tibetan here reads ’brel pa, which seems to repeat the earlier term sahitā (“relevant”).

notes.107

107. This sentence contains what amounts to an expanded list of classical genres or categories of Buddhist literature, including the traditional lists of nine and twelve “divisions” (aṅga) of the Dharma.

notes.108

108. Following the Sanskrit manuscript. The Tibetan translation reads “one hundred thousand eons.”

notes.109

109. Following the Sanskrit manuscript here, which seems to read parivijñaptitā and should be emended to parivijñaptito. Vijñapti means “information” or an “announcement,” “request,” or “report.” Here, the English word “report,” used in the sense of the report a firearm makes when it is fired, gives the appropriate sense. The prefix pari- may suggest the idea that the echo is perceived as producing a “successive” sound, or perhaps that the sound is perceived as coming from “all around,” or perhaps it simply intensifies it—a “loud” report. In any case, the Tibetan translation here, gzhan rnam par rig par byed par yang, suggests an alternate reading of paravijñaptitaḥ, which then suggests another possible interpretation that the sound is perceived as coming from “another” (para, gzhan) direction or from “something (or somewhere) else” (para, gzhan), as it sometimes does when one hears a loud noise. In both cases, the analogy appears intended to show that the agency or source of the sound is ambiguous.

notes.110

110. The clever play continues here on the different senses of the word vijñapti or rnam par rig par byed pa, a “report” or “something informative.” The ambiguity of the compound in Sanskrit and Tibetan is such that the Buddha’s speech here can be said to inform the motivations of all beings, or it is informative of the motivations of all beings, or both at the same time.

notes.111

111. The following story about the extent of the Buddha’s voice can be fruitfully compared with the story of Abhibhū in the Pali Saṃyutta Nikāya, for a translation of which see Bodhi 2000, p. 250, and with the Buddha’s remarks on this story in the Pali Aṅguttara Nikāya, for a translation of which see Bodhi 2012, pp. 313–14.

notes.112

112. This sentence and part of the previous few sentences are cited or paraphrased in the *Mahā­prajñā­pāramitopadeśa. On this passage therein, see Lamotte 1976, p. 1985.

notes.113

113. In the middle of this sentence the fourth segment of text preserved in the Sanskrit manuscript comes to an end. The fifth segment of Sanskrit text, another long segment, resumes after about ten Tibetan pages.

notes.114

114. This part of the story is cited in a longer passage from the *Mahā­prajñā­pāramitopadeśa that mentions this story in the context of discussing the secrets of the Buddha’s body, speech, and mind in connection with this sūtra. See Lamotte 1981, pp. 560–61.

notes.115

115. This verse and the next two verses are quoted by Candrakīrti in the Prasannapadā. Here is the Sanskrit, as quoted in that text: yathāyantrakṛtaṃ tūryaṃ vādyate pavaneritam | na cātra vādakaḥ kaścinniścaranty atha ca svarāḥ. For the Sanskrit text, see La Vallée Poussin 1903, p. 366.

notes.116

116. Here is the Sanskrit of this verse, as quoted in Candrakīrti’s Prasannapadā: evaṃ pūrvasuśuddhatvāt sarvasattvāśayeritā | vāgniścarati buddhasya na cāsyāstīha kalpanā. For the Sanskrit text, see La Vallée Poussin 1903, p. 367.

notes.117

117. Here is the Sanskrit of this verse, as quoted in Candrakīrti’s Prasannapadā: pratiśrutkādayaḥ śabdā nādhyātmaṃ na bahiḥ sthitāḥ | vāgapyevaṃ narendrasya nādhyātmaṃ na bahịh sthitāḥ. For the Sanskrit text, see La Vallée Poussin 1903, p. 367.

notes.118

118. In the following list, the attempt has generally been made to follow the conventions of the Tibetan translation and repeat the common expression of the four noble truths in each sentence, and also to translate the equivalent expressions of the truths in the languages of the divine realms into English when the Tibetan also attempts to do so. Nevertheless, the meaning of many of the Tibetan translations is unclear, and thus the English translations should be viewed as somewhat tentative.

notes.119

119. Here, as in a few other instances in this list, the Tibetan translation simply transliterates what must have been found in the Sanskrit manuscript. This transliteration has been rendered here without an attempt to identify the possible sense, if any. One suspects that a word like ohita may be a non-Sanskritic form of the Sanskrit word avahita, which can mean “plunged into,” but this is speculative.

notes.120

120. Here, the transliteration of the Sanskrit manuscript has been reproduced as it is found in the Tibetan translation. The meaning, if any, of the underlying manuscript is unclear, but could perhaps be rendered as follows: “ ‘mine, mine’; in regard to ‘mine, mine’; the discipline of conceit (mānānunaya); and pursuing conceit (mānānugama).”

notes.121

121. The Sanskrit manuscript resumes in the middle of this sentence. The final term in the second list of terms reads muktavatānu­sandhi in the Sanskrit, which the Tibetan translation translates as grol ba’i bye brag phyed par mtshams sbyor ba, perhaps meaning “conducive to thoughts about freedom.” The presence of bye brag phyed par in the Tibetan translation suggests the Tibetans may have read muktamata, “thoughts about freedom,” instead of muktavatā, “a place characterized by freedom.” Also, it is interesting to note that the Tibetan here translates the term anusandhi, “conforming or conducive to,” with the term mtshams sbyor, whereas earlier in the same list the Tibetan transliterates the term in its rendering of haranusandhi, translated above as “what sounds like ‘hara!’ ” In both cases, we have interpreted the term anusandhi to mean that Vajrapāṇi is saying that there is an approximate correspondence between the actual expression in the language of the gods and the way he has rendered it, but this is a somewhat speculative interpretation. Perhaps in both cases the idea behind the term anusandhi is closer to the Tibetan translation of the second instance, “what conforms or is conducive to.”

notes.122

122. From this point through the remainder of Vajrapāṇi’s speech in this chapter, the Sanskrit manuscript reads kulaputra (“noble son”), whereas in the Tibetan translation Vajrapāṇi addresses him as zhi ba’i blo gros = Śāntamati. This seems to be a pervasive difference between the Sanskrit manuscript and the Tibetan translation.

notes.123

123. Ikuma 2020 compares the list of ethnic names with a similar list of names found in the Chinese translation of the *Abhidharma-mahāvibhāṣā.

notes.124

124. Following the Sanskrit manuscript. The Tibetan transliterates the term pilin or possibly pilina. The name and its referent are unclear. One is tempted to correct to Pulinda, but that term is already also present later in the list. Pilindagāma is given in the Pali Vinaya as the nickname of a village where the monk Pilindavaccha begged for alms. See Malalasekera, Dictionary of Pāli Proper Names, under ārāmikagāmā.

notes.125

125. Following the Sanskrit manuscript. The Tibetan transliterates the term soma. The name and its referent are unclear.

notes.126

126. Following the Sanskrit manuscript. The Tibetan transliterates the term dacipa. The name and its referent are unclear.

notes.127

127. Following the Sanskrit manuscript. The Tibetan transliterates the term pun dra, which looks like a legitimate variant reading.

notes.128

128. This is a conjectural emendation. Ikuma 2020 suggests emending to puruṣa. The Sanskrit manuscript reads puruca and the Tibetan gives a transliteration, phururava.

notes.129

129. Following the Tibetan transliteration here on the assumption that it is rendering a term in the manuscript on which the Tibetan translation is based. A corresponding term does not seem to be attested in the extant Sanskrit manuscript. The name and its referent are unclear.

notes.130

130. Following the Sanskrit manuscript. The Tibetan here gives sbal ka, which looks like a corruption of sā la ka.

notes.131

131. This name and its referent are unclear. The Sanskrit manuscript reads kṛviṣamukha. The Tibetan gives the transliteration/translation kri ba sha’i gdong da. Some kind of emendation seems necessary.

notes.132

132. This name and its referent are unclear. The Sanskrit manuscript reads paścānudhāyin, but the Tibetan translation of rjes su rgyug suggests a possible emendation to paścānudhāvin, which is what has been used as the basis for this translation.

notes.133

133. Many of these last several names and their referents are unclear, and it is also unclear whether some of the earlier names, such as “Downward-Facing People,” refer to actual or imaginary groups, or if the list descends intentionally into ambiguous characterizations. The conclusion of the list is also unclear, and the Tibetan translation suggests a number of possible emendations to the Sanskrit text. For instance, where the manuscript reads lokottarikāṇāṃ nāsikānām evaṃpramukhānāṃ…, the Tibetan translation of ’jig rten gyi bar na gnas pa’i yul la sogs pa… suggests lokāntarikāṇām. More work is needed to determine whether the Sanskrit word nāsikānām refers to a group of people or requires some kind of emendation. It does not seem to be represented in the Tibetan translation.

notes.134

134. From this sentence to the end of this paragraph is cited at the very beginning of The Long Explanation of the Noble Perfection of Wisdom in One Hundred Thousand, Twenty-Five Thousand, and Eighteen Thousand Lines (Toh 3808), at section .

notes.135

135. Following the Tibetan translation, which reads ’di ni gsung rmad du byung ba’o, for which the underlying Sanskrit ostensibly would be vāgadbhutam iyam. The extant Sanskrit manuscript actually reads vāgbhūtatā iyaṃ, which could be translated, “This is the true nature of a realized one’s speech.”

notes.136

136. Following the Sanskrit manuscript, which reads tathāgatasyācintyatā. The Tibetan translation has “the inconceivable nature of a realized one’s speech.”

notes.137

137. Following the Sanskrit manuscript. The Tibetan translation could be interpreted to say “the true nature of a realized one and the qualities of a realized one,” which seems like an attempt to interpret what is a difficult expression in the Sanskrit.

notes.138

138. Following the Tibetan translation. This sentence provides another good example of the kind of minor differences one sometimes finds between the extant Sanskrit manuscript and the Tibetan translation. Here, the Sanskrit manuscript reads only “incalculable worlds,” rather than the fuller expression found in the Tibetan translation, but notice how the slightly more restrained expression here in Sanskrit conforms a bit better with the next several sentences in both the Tibetan and the Sanskrit.

notes.139

139. Following the Sanskrit manuscript, which reads cittavismṛti. This phrase seems to be absent from the Tibetan translation, as the next Tibetan phrase reads thugs la ’gyur ba mi mnga’, which looks like a translation of the Sanskrit phrase cittapariṇāma or “alteration of mind,” which is absent in the Sanskrit manuscript.

notes.140

140. This phrase is added from the Tibetan translation. It seems to be absent from the Sanskrit manuscript, as stated in the previous note.

notes.141

141. Following the Sanskrit manuscript, which reads citta­saṃharṣanaṃ. This phrase seems to be absent from the Tibetan translation, as the next phrase reads thugs la ’grug pa or thugs la ’grul pa, “mental conflict” or “mental confusion.”

notes.142

142. This phrase is added from the Tibetan translation. It seems to be absent from the Sanskrit manuscript, as stated in the previous note.

notes.143

143. This phrase, thugs la sel ba mi mnga’, is added from the Tibetan translation. It seems to be absent from the Sanskrit manuscript.

notes.144

144. Following the Tibetan rnam par ’khrug pa, which suggests emending the Sanskrit manuscript to vikopana from its present reading, vilokana.

notes.145

145. This phrase follows the Tibetan. It is lacking in the Sanskrit manuscript.

notes.146

146. Following the Tibetan, which reads gzigs pas kun gzigs pa dang rnam par gzigs pa mi gzigs so. The Sanskrit manuscript, which reads only paśyanayā ca na paśyanāṃ paśyati, suggests that we understand kun gzigs pa (saṃpaśyanā?) and rnam par gzigs pa (vipaśyanā?) as the direct objects of the verb “to see.” On the face of it, the Sanskrit seems to say “he does not see seeing by means of seeing,” but perhaps the Sanskrit would tolerate some kind of emendation.

notes.147

147. This would seem to be one of the passages quoted explicitly from this sūtra in the Mahā­prajñā­pāramitopadeśa. For this passage, see Lamotte 1970, p. 1638.

notes.148

148. Following the Tibetan. The Sanskrit manuscript here has only “effortlessly” (anābhogena), whereas the Tibetan again lists all three adverbs as it has repeatedly above.

notes.149

149. Following the Tibetan. The Sanskrit manuscript, once again, has a slightly less elaborate sentence that nonetheless scans. It can be translated as follows: “In this way, noble son, the realized one is one whose knowledge has no foundation; his unattached knowledge and vision of the thoughts, actions, and motivations of all beings arises without impediment, and does so effortlessly and spontaneously.”

notes.150

150. The Sanskrit manuscript reads sarva­satva­saṃjñaptiṃ ca karoti. The Tibetan renders this passage as sems can thams cad la sems rnam par rig par yang mdzad pa, apparently reading vijñapti rather than saṃjñapti. The term saṃjñapti can mean “information” (like vijñapti sometimes does) and also “appeasement” or “mollification,” but it may sometimes have the sense of a request or demand, as vijñapti can, too. The expression could thus be rendered a bit more literally, perhaps, as “he does what is requested by all beings.”

notes.151

151. Following the Tibetan bdag de bzhin gshegs pa la yid ches par mchi’o. Śāriputra’s whole response here is absent in the Sanskrit manuscript.

notes.152

152. Following the Tibetan. Śāriputra’s claim that he had not previously seen Vajrapāṇi is absent in the Sanskrit manuscript.

notes.153

153. Following the Sanskrit manuscript, which reads acintya­jñānābhi­jñādhiṣṭhānabalena ­samanvāgato. The Tibetan translation does not include a term for acintya (“inconceivable”), and its interpretation of the compound may be translated as follows: “endowed with the power of the empowering authority of supernormal faculties and knowledge.”

notes.154

154. This chapter develops a theme also explored in other Buddhist literature on the life of the Buddha. Compare, for instance, with the Mahāvastu, translated by Jones, vol. 2, pp. 114–29 and 182–99. Another, somewhat closer parallel to the portrayal here is found in the Lalitavistara, chapter 17, on the austerities of the Bodhisattva. In fact, in this section of the sūtra on the Buddha’s life, there are several similarities and even shared passages between this sūtra and the Lalitavistara, which have been studied in Ikuma 2018.

notes.155

155. Following the order of the Tibetan translation. The Sanskrit manuscript has an equivalent sentence, sūryam anu­pari­vartamāna (Tib. nyi ma yongs su sgyur ba), but includes it after the next group of types of clothing.

notes.156

156. Following the Sanskrit, which reads phalacīvaraṃ. The Tibetan translation gives shing leb gyon pa (“clothes made of wooden boards”), which suggests that the Tibetan translators understood phala to be synonymous with phalaka, which is found just above in the list of types of beds. Phala can be synonymous with phalaka, but it is also a general term for fruit or nut. This would give the translation “clothes made from fruits (or nuts),” but according to Meulenbeld’s dictionary of Sanskrit, plants named phala can be used more specifically for certain types of fruiting trees, such as the Indian nut palm, Areca catechu.

notes.157

157. Following the Sanskrit manuscript cīvaravasanaṃ. The Tibetan says rtsal tsi ra gyon pa (“wearing clothes made of cira grass”), but this seems to be an error, possibly resulting from a scribal error in the manuscript used for the Tibetan translation. For one thing, cira does not seem to be the name for a type of grass.

notes.158

158. Following the Tibetan translation shing shun gyi gos kyon pa. The Sanskrit manuscript appears to be lacking a corresponding expression.

notes.159

159. Following the Sanskrit manuscript and reading śyāmākabhakṣaṃ. The Tibetan translation is sre da za ba.

notes.160

160. The Sanskrit here reads kodravāhāraṃ, while the Tibetan reads nas shin te za ba, which may suggest a translation of “poor people’s grain.” Kodrava or Kodo millet is sometimes called “ditch millet,” and seems to have been associated with people who live in poverty and cannot afford more expensive grains. See the entry on kodrava in Monier Williams. Now, the next term found in the Tibetan translation is tsi tse, which is given by Lokesh Candra as a translation for kodrava, too, but the Sanskrit manuscript appears only to have a single term here. So, one wonders whether nas shin te refers to something else or if the Tibetan translation preserves alternate translations of a single Sanskrit term. We have chosen the latter option and not translated tsi tse separately.

notes.161

161. The Sanskrit term is lājāhāra for which the corresponding Tibetan translation seems to be bra yos za ba.

notes.162

162. Following the Sanskrit. The Tibetan translation suggests an alternative of “the most distinguished vows of the noble ones.”

notes.163

163. The name for this meditation is āsphānaka in Sanskrit, mkha’ khyab in Tibetan, and appānaka or appāṇaka in Pali. In the Mahāsaccaka Sūtta of the Majjhima Nikāya (Bodhi and Ñāṇamoli, p. 337), it is described as a type of meditation in which one does not breathe. It is also mentioned in the Mahāvastu (Jones, vol. 2, p. 124), as well as in The Play in Full (Toh 95), chapter 17, sections –, where a different explanation of this form of meditation is given. It is on the basis of this alternative explanation that it has been translated here as all-pervading meditation .

notes.164

164. Following the Sanskrit, which reads gośatakṣīra. The Tibetan translation says that the milk came from a thousand cows.

notes.165

165. Following the Sanskrit, first, in that the Tibetan translation includes not only gods, nāgas, yakṣas, and gandharvas, but also asuras, garuḍas, kinnaras, and mahoragas in this list of types of beings. Yet just below, this passage in the Tibetan translation accords with the extant Sanskrit manuscript in listing only the first four types of beings. However, in another respect we also follow the Tibetan translation here. It duplicates the beings’ request, seemingly for emphasis, whereas the Sanskrit manuscript only has a single request.

notes.166

166. Following the Tibetan translation, which includes this verse that is absent from the Sanskrit manuscript. It fits well with the order of progression up the various heavenly realms. Yāma’s Heaven is said to be above the Heaven of the Thirty-Three and below the Heaven of the Contented.

notes.167

167. This paragraph and the following speech have a close, nearly identical parallel in chapter 19 of The Play in Full (–). Other versions of this episode with the nāga king are found in the Mahāvastu, where he is called Kāla. See Jones, vol. 2, pp. 249 ff., 284 ff., and 354 ff.

notes.168

168. Following the Sanskrit, which reads vimuktipaṭṭabaddho, “he is bound with the paṭṭa of liberation.” Among its several meanings, paṭṭa can refer to a turban or diadem worn by a king or other royal person as a symbol of authority. The Tibetan translation has something rather different here: rnam par grol ba’i thabs brnyes pa, “he has acquired skill in the method of liberation.”

First 168 of 300 passages. Read on