Notes

n.1The story of the Buddha’s return to Kapilavastu is the principal theme of The Meeting of Father and Son (Pitā­putra­samāgama, Toh 60); it is also related in The Chapter on a Schism in the Saṅgha (chapter 17 of the Vinayavastu, Toh 1), Degé Kangyur, vol. 4, F.91.b et seq.; see Miller (forthcoming). See also Buswell 2014, p. 598.

n.2For more on this term, see the introduction to The Chapter on Going Forth, Toh 1-1, i.37.

n.3The analogy is also mentioned in brief in The Application of Mindfulness of the Sacred Dharma (Saddharma­smṛtyupasthāna, Toh 287); see Dharmachakra Translation Committee 2021, 2.1478.

n.4The mention comes in verse 20 of the fourth chapter (on carefulness) of the Bodhi­caryāvatāra (Tib. byang chub sems dpa’i spyod pa la ’jug pa), Toh 3871. Of the many English translations, see for example Wallace and Wallace 1997, p. 40.

n.5In the case of Rāhula’s going forth, Śuddhodana’s initial distress at the loss of a royal heir is made clear in the Mahāvastu (vol. III, ch. 23).

n.6The story is found in several canonical texts including, in the Kangyur, in The Finer Points of the Monastic Discipline (Vinaya­kṣudraka­vastu, Toh 6), vol. 10 (’dul ba, tha) F.119.b–F.120.a, and in The Teaching to Nanda on Entry into the Womb (Nanda­garbhāvakrānti­nirdeśa, Toh 57), Degé Kangyur, vol. 41 (dkon brtsegs, ga), F.206.a–F.206.b (see Kritzer, forthcoming); and in Pali, the Dhammapada Aṭṭakathā (for an English translation, see Burlingame 1996, pp. 169−72).

n.7See Ṭhānissaro Bhikkhu.

n.8’dul ba phran tshegs kyi gzhi, Degé Kangyur, vol. 10 (’dul ba, tha), F.119 et seq.

n.9dga' bo la mngal na gnas pa bstan pa, Degé Kangyur, vol. 41 (dkon brtsegs, ga), F.207.b et seq.; see Kritzer (forthcoming).

n.10Covill 2007.

n.11Denkarma, folio 301.a. See also Herrmann-Pfandt 2008, pp. 160–61, no. 294.

n.12Phangthangma 2003, p. 22.

n.13Tome 88, Eldeb 29, No. 1088 (27), f. 338.a–341.b.

n.14Mongolian Kanjur, vol. 88. f. 338.a–341.b, cf. also Ligeti 1942, p. 293.

n.15The Chinese translation of the sūtra was identified by James Gentry, who also compared it with the Tibetan text.

n.16Butön 1988, p. 214.

n.17Tauscher 2008, p. 70. rgya gar gi mkhan po dar ma ka ra ba dang | lo tsa ba ban dhe rtsangs te ben dras zhus te | gtan la phab pa ||.

n.18Cf. Chibetto Daizōkyō Tanjūru Kandō Mokuroku 1930–32, Skorupski 1985, although these other colophons do not record that Dharmākara worked with Devendrarakṣita. Cf. http://www.rkts.org/cat.php?id=328&typ=1.

n.19Tib. snod (Skt. bhājana), which has the following meanings: “pot, vessel, container, receptacle, recipient.” Here the term is used metaphorically to refer to the recipients of the Buddha’s teachings.

n.20Tib. thob par byed pa. The Stok Palace Kangyur reads thog par byed pa.

n.21This translation follows the reading in Phukdrak, Tib. dregs pa ’joms pa. Degé, the Comparative Edition, and Stok Palace have grags pa ’joms pa.

n.22Cf. the reading in the Stok Palace Kangyur version, bskal pa brgyar, “one hundred eons.”

n.23Tib. sa bor. The Stok Palace Kangyur version has bor.

n.24Tib. ’di skad du. The Stok Palace Kangyur has ’di snyam du.

n.25Tib. brgya la rkyen zhig gis. Translation tentative.

n.26Tib. brgya la rkyen zhig gis. Translation tentative.

n.27Cf. http://www.rkts.org/cat.php?id=328&typ=1.