Notes

n.1Kīrtimukha Translation Group, trans., The Prophecy for Bhadra the Illusionist (Bhadra­māyākāravyākaraṇa, Toh 65), 1.­5-1.­89.

n.2See Padmakara Translation Group, trans., The Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-five Thousand Lines , Toh 9 (2023).

n.3See Padmakara Translation Group, trans., The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Ten Thousand Lines , Toh 11 (2018).

n.4This text is presented in the Kangyur as a single, long sūtra, although many of its 45 chapters are independent works. See the 84000 reading room section of the Buddhāvataṃsaka .

n.5David Fiordalis and Dharmachakra Translation Committee, trans., The Secrets of the Realized Ones , Toh 47 (84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha, 2023).

n.6Norwegian Institute of Palaeography and Historical Philology, trans., The Collected Teachings on the Bodhisatva , Toh 56 (84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha, 2023).

n.7Kīrtimukha Translation Group, trans., The Prophecy for Bhadra the Illusionist , Toh 65 (2024).

n.8See Karen Liljenberg and Ulrich Pagel. trans., The Great Lion’s Roar of Maitreya , Toh 67 (2023).

n.9See UCSB Buddhist Studies Translation Group, trans., The Teaching on the Inconceivable Scope of a Buddha , Toh 79 (2024).

n.10See Dharmachakra Translation Committee, trans., The Good Eon , Toh 94 (2022).

n.11See Roberts, Peter Alan. trans., The White Lotus of Compassion , Toh 112 (2023).

n.12See Peter Alan Roberts, trans., The White Lotus of the Good Dharma , Toh 113 (2018b).

n.13See Dharmachakra Translation Committee, trans., The King of the Array of All Dharma Qualities , Toh 114 (2018).

n.14See Peter Alan Roberts, trans., The King of Samādhis Sūtra , Toh 127 (2018a).

n.15See Dharmachakra Translation Committee, trans., The Absorption of the Miraculous Ascertainment of Peace , Toh 129 (2020c).

n.16See Dharmachakra Translation Committee, trans., The Four Boys’ Absorption , Toh 136 (2024a).

n.17See Dharmachakra Translation Committee, trans., The Ratnaketu Dhāraṇī , Toh 138 (2020a).

n.18See Anne Burchardi, trans., The Teaching on the Great Compassion of the Tathāgata , Toh 147 (2020).

n.19See Dharmachakra Translation Committee, trans., The Questions of Sāgaramati , Toh 152 (2020b).

n.20See the Dharmachakra Translation Committee, trans., The Questions of the Nāga King Anavatapta , Toh 156 (2024b).

n.21See the Dharmachakra Translation Committee, trans., The Questions of the Kinnara King Druma , Toh 157 (2020d).

n.22See Jens Braarvig and David Welsh, trans., The Teaching of Akṣayamati , Toh 175 (2020).

n.23See Robert A. F. Thurman, trans., The Teaching of Vimalakīrti , Toh 176 (2017).

n.24See Mahamegha Translation Team, trans., The Great Cloud (1) , Toh 232 (2022).

n.25See UCSB Buddhist Studies Translation Group–2, trans., Victory of the Ultimate Dharma , Toh 246 (2021).

n.26See Dharmachakra Translation Committee, trans., The Application of Mindfulness of the Sacred Dharma , Toh 287 (2021).

n.27See Venerable Khenpo Kalsang Gyaltsen and Chodrungma Kunga Chodron, trans., The Exemplary Tale of Sumāgadhā , Toh 246 (2024).

n.28The English translations of these terms are found in the English translations of Lamotte’s, Burnouf’s, and La Vallée Poussin’s respective works.

n.29The Tibetan reads here shing a mra srung ba’i tshal. This issue is discussed in detail at the end of the Introduction.

n.30Pd H N S U legs par spras pa. D legs par smras pa.

n.31“This great earth teetered, tottered, and tremored in six different ways: it quivered, quavered, and quaked; it shifted, shuddered, and shook. The west rose up and the east sank down. [The east rose up and the west sank down.] The south rose up and the north sank down. The north rose up and the south sank down. The middle rose up and the ends sank down. The ends rose up and the middle sank down.” (Prāti­hārya­sūtra, translated in Rotman 2008: 174).

n.32S mi rnams kyi ni. D mi rnams kyis ni.

n.33byin gyi rlabs te (adhyatiṣṭha, see Schopen 1978: 322 fragment [1288]). We have translated byin gyi rlabs (adhiṣṭhāna) in this text as ‘sovereign power.’ Conze used the expression ‘sustaining power.’ The term is often translated as ‘blessings.’ However, as explained in Eckel 1994: 90–93, Gómez 2011: 539, 541, and Fiordalis 2012: 104, 118, adhiṣṭhāna conveys the notions of control (of one’s environment as a result of meditative absorption), authority, or protection (see Abhi­dharma­kośa VII.51, cf. Poussin 1925: 119ff). As can be seen in the present text, adhi­ṣṭhāna is also used to convey the idea of transformation through exerting one’s control over objects, people, and places. It seems to us that ‘sovereign power’ covers all these shades of meaning as well as the various usages of the Sanskrit term. For example, satyādhiṣṭhāna, ‘the sovereign power of truth,’ and adhi­ṣṭhānādhisthita, ‘empowered by the sovereign power (of the Tathāgata)’‍—which in tantric initiation may also refer to being empowered as a sovereign.

n.34In the following sentences, we have chosen to follow the Sanskrit construction. We have thus translated kecid... kuśala­mūlotsukā vaineyāḥ as “some to be converted strive for the roots of virtue...” instead of the Tibetan kha cig... dge ba’i rtsa ba la spro ba bskyed pas ’dul, literally, “some are to be converted through striving for the roots of virtue...”

n.35dri ba in the sense of yi ger ’dri ba. See Schopen 2005: 32ff.

n.36The Tibetan reads smin par bya ba, which literally means “that which raises, that which ripens.” The Sanskrit equivalent is bālacūrṇa (see Schopen 1978: 326 §1291). However, an alternative and possibly better reading would be the Āyurvedic tonic called balācūrṇa, a powder made with herbs such as sida cordifolia.

n.37See glossary for lists of these qualities. Divine sight and hearing are qualities that are part of the abhijñās (“superior knowledge”).

n.38bsnyan gnas (Tib.) or upavāsa (Skt.) is the fast day during the Poṣadha (Pāli uposatha), which includes the recitation of the Prāti­mokṣa­sūtra, the confession of faults, and the restoration of vows (e.g., the eight vows for lay followers).

n.39Translated on the basis of the Tibetan. The Sanskrit is based on a yāvad construction: “The Tathāgata appears in the world, for the benefit of many beings, for the happiness of many beings and so on, up to manifesting and propagating the Three Jewels to men and gods.”

n.40Tib. gzugs brnyan, Skt. pratibimba. The images appearing in the mirror are nothing but reflections.

n.41This passage was translated from the Sanskrit fragments. As Schopen points out, the Tibetan cannot be followed here since the syntax of the sentence is problematic: “by introducing sems can here as the logical subject of the sentence, [the Tibetan] has completely changed the meaning of the passage” (1978: 333). D reads: yang lha’i bu dag sngon gyi smon lam gyis de bzhin gshegs pa mya ngan las ’das nas lo stod lon pa’am/ mya ngan las ’das nas bskal par lon pa’am/ mya ngan las ’das nas bskal pa bye bar lon yang sems can rnams kyis mchod par bya ba dang / bkur stir bya ba dang / ring bsrel gyi mchod rten byed du gzhug pa dang / sku gzugs byed du gzhug pa dang / mtshan nas brjod pa dang / dam pa’i chos ’dzin pa dang / mchod pa byed pa’i sems can ’jig rten gyi khams sna tshogs na gnas pa rnams thar par mdzad de sems can dmyal ba dang / dud ’gro’i skye gnas dang / gshin rje’i ’jig rten dang / mi khom pa dang / ngan song dang / ngan ’gro log par ltung ba thams cad dang / sdug [F.149.b] bsngal thams cad las yongs su thar par mdzad nas rim gyis bla na med pa yang dag par rdzogs pa’i byang chub kyi bar du mngon par rdzogs par ’tshang rgya bar ’gyur na/ Unfortunately, the other Kangyurs we consulted are not helpful here. Schopen suggests reading the long Sanskrit compound °saddharmedharaṇa­pūjanā (1978: 332 §1296) as a dative: °pūjanān nānā-. This emendation is justified by the fact that the loss of a final dental followed by the same consonant is frequent in the Gilgit manuscripts (1978: 336, n9). We have chosen to follow Schopen’s suggestion. However, it should be added that another problem is involved with Schopen’s reading: the verb mokṣayanti has no object in the emended Sanskrit sentence. Schopen therefore also has to add the logical object satvān to the sentence on top of his emendation of the compound °saddharmedharaṇa­pūjanā. An alternative reading based on the principle of lectio difficilior would be to accept Schopen’s emendation °saddharmedharaṇa­pūjanān but to read it as a bahuvrīhi (accusative plural) instead of a tatpuruṣa (dative singular). The preceding satvānām could be read in this case as a partitive genitive: “those who have veneration, etc. (i.e., °pūjanān = bahuvrīhi acc. plu.) among sentient beings (satvānām = partitive genitive).” The complete sentence would read: “Moreover, gods, although a thousand years, an eon, or ten million eons may have elapsed since the tathāgatas attained parinirvāṇa, on account of their former vows, they liberate from all the hells, animal births, the world of Yama, downfalls into inopportune existences, unfortunate destinies, and bad rebirths those who among beings worship them, venerate them, construct relic stūpas, create images, recite their names, and preserve and venerate the holy Dharma...”

n.42See Sasaki 1986: “[anutpattika­dharma­kṣānti] represents the fact that emptiness or the absolute experience is beyond the thinkable, and therefore in the failure of the intellect, designation is impossible. One can only refer to being unborn (anutpattika) in the absolute sense. The inclination or willingness to make this absolute statement is called kṣānti... Buddhist kṣānti, however, is a willing acceptance of the unborn” (138–139).

n.43In the Tibetan text, rgyal po (-rāja) is missing.

n.44S (347a.5) byang chub sems dpa’ instead of D (155a.2) byang chub sems dpas.

n.45D (155b.1) ’tsho ba’i khams ni rtag tu lus kyis par shes pa la gnas so does not make sense. We followed the alternative reading found in most other Kangyurs: ’tsho ba’i khams ni rtag tu lus kyi rnam par shes pa la gnas so.

n.46This metaphor is probably used here to explain the dynamics of cause and effect in relation to karma. Asaṅga uses the same metaphor to explain rebirth (see Abhi­dharma­samuccaya II.1 trans. in Rahula 2001: 94), and it is found in similar contexts in the Tibetan commentarial literature.