Notes

n.1Braarvig 2010 and Braarvig 2000.

n.2Note also the intriguing addition to the colophon as found in the Stok Palace Kangyur, where an additional sentence is added: “It was revised as well as possible in consultation with several volumes” (glegs bam du ma la gtugs te ci nus kyis zhus dag bgyis). This may perhaps refer to the existence of earlier Tibetan draft translations, but it is unclear to us precisely what this statement entails.

n.3ltar mtshan read as rgyal mtshan ltar following the Choné edition of the Kangyur (Pedurma, p. 715, n. 3).

n.4The Tib. translations uniquely read “freedom from” (Tib. bral ba). This is not attested in the Chinese translations or the extant Skt. witness.

n.5This translation follows the reading “peace” (zhi ba) attested in the majority of Tib. versions. The Degé reads “field” (zhing).

n.6Tentative translation. Tibetan: bgyi dang bgyid dang bgyi ba’i rang bzhin dang / gzung dang ’dzin pa nam yang ma mchis la/ sems can rnams kyang rtag par ma mchis zhing / de la chos spyod ji ltar ma mchis ’gyur. The Sanskrit reads kriya akriyā akaraṇā ca bhave graha agrāha eta ubhau na bhave / satva pi tatra na kadāci bhave dharme hi āraṃbaṇa naiva bhave. Jens Braarvig (2010) offers the following translation: “Activity and nonactivity are noncauses. As for grasping nor nongrasping, neither of them exist. Living beings never exist there, because there is no physical basis to be found among the dharmas.”

n.7Following the Sanskrit: yatra na śaikṣa na bhave arhaṃ pratyekabuddha na bhaveya kvaci. The Tibetan reads, “Where there are no students or worthy ones, there could not be any solitary buddhas” (de la slob dang dgra bcom ma mchis te / rang rgyal ji ltar ma chis pa ma lags shing).

n.8’grel read as ’grol following Kangxi and Choné editions of the Kangyur (Pedurma, p. 724, n. 1).

n.9Though the Tibetan translation is consistent in reading thob (“attain”) across all the versions consulted, the extant Sanskrit holds a potential clue to this enigmatic line. The Sanskrit verb is derived from √dṛś, “to see,” which is typically translated into Tibetan with mthong, a form scribes often confuse with thob. The Sanskrit could reasonably be translated as “see awakening as similar to attachment,” which makes sense contextually. It is also worth noting that the extant Sanskrit does not include an equivalent for “I.”

n.10Reading mi rtag rnam par mi rtag as mi brtag rnam par mi brtag.

n.11thos pa read as thob pa following the Yongle, Lithang, Kangxi, Narthang, Choné, and Lhasa editions (Pedurma, p. 744, n. 1).

n.12The term translated here as “visible form” is rūpa (Tib. gzugs), which is the same term translated above as “form.” In the previous context, the term rūpa referred to one of the five aggregates, whereas here rūpa refers to the object of the eye faculty. This distinction merited the use of a slightly different translation in the two contexts.

n.13ri’i sgra’i tshig read as de’i sgra’i tshig following the Choné edition (Pedurma, p. 748, n. 10).

n.14There is a play on the verb √budh and its past participle buddha that is lost in translation here. The extant Skt. reads abudhyamānā sarvadharmāḥ abuddhā ananubuddhā asaṃbuddha … (Tib. chos thams cad ni ’tshang rgya bar byed pa med pa ste / sangs rgyas pa med / rjes su sangs rgyas pa med / rdzogs par sangs rgyas pa med).

n.15The name Mañjuśrī means Gentle Splendor.

n.16bsod nams read as bsod snyoms following the Narthang and Lhasa editions (Pedurma, p. 775, n. 3).

n.17’grel read as ’grol following the Yongle, Kangxi, Narthang, Choné, Urga, and Lhasa editions of the Kangyur (Pedurma p. 778, n. 5).

n.18This translation follows the reading mi zad pa as attested in the Yongle, Lithang, Kangxi, Narthang, Choné, Urga, and Lhasa editions of the Kangyur (Pedurma p. 782, n. 4). The Degé reads mi bzad pa.

n.19Tibetan: ma mchis pa’i sdug sngal.