Notes

n.1Franklin Edgerton provides the alternative spellings of khakhara, khakharaka, khaṅkhara, and khaṅkharaka. See his Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit Grammar and Dictionary (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1953), 2: 201–2.

n.2Most references to the ringing staff tend to associate the staff with a monk. However, the bhikṣuṇī section of the Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinayavibhaṅga contains passages that refer to circumstances where fully ordained Buddhist nuns carry the ringing staff. See three passages in Chinese translation in Taishō XXIII 1443 933b16–17, 975b7–10, and 981b6. A relevant passage in the corresponding Tibetan translation, dge slong ma’i ’dul ba rnam par ’byed pa (Toh 5), is found in Degé Kangyur (’dul ba, ta), 215.a. On this Vinaya source, see Prebish (1994), pp. 96–97. There are also contemporary reports that receiving a ringing staff occurs during the bodhisattva vow ceremony that serves as a component of monastic ordination ceremonies, including those of fully ordained nuns, in China and Taiwan.

n.3See Revire (2015), pp. 172–217, for a recent historical and geographical survey with bibliographical references.

n.4Atiśa, ’Brom-ston, and Jinpa (2008), p. 143.

n.5For an account based on the Vinaya texts found in Chinese translation, see Gao (1993), pp. 9–23.

n.6The material that corresponds to Toh 335 ends at Taishō 785 XVII 725a14.

n.7Gao (1993), pp. 16–17, n. 19.

n.8The section of the De daoti cheng xizhang jing (Taishō 785) that lists twenty-five rules for how to properly use the ringing staff, the part which corresponds with Toh 336, is said to be “translated based on the Indian Tripiṭaka to make the future reader aware of its origin” (Taishō 785 XVII 725c6).

n.9Only the Phukdrak Kangyur contains a colophon, which says that the text was translated from Chinese by the famous translator Chödrup. This colophon seems to be a direct copy of the Dunhuang manuscript (see below).

n.10This manuscript, IOL Tib J 205, is recorded in La Vallée Poussin (1962), p. 74. Online images of the manuscript are available through The International Dunhuang Project: The Silk Road Online (IOL Tib J 205). The colophon in question reads: khar sil gyi mdo dang/ /cho ga ’di zhu chen gyi lo tsa pa ban de chos grub kyis rgya’i dpe las bsgyur cing zhus te/ gtan la phab pa//. See also Silk (2019), p, 235. Gao also regards Toh 335 and 336 as Tibetan translations from Taishō 785. See his “Pini zhong de ‘xizhang,’ ” p. 16, n. 19.

n.11Chomden Rikpai Raltri (1) F.26.b, (2) F.28.a; see also Schaeffer and van der Kuijp 2009, p. 161.

n.12On the Dunhuang manuscript of Taishō 785, see A Concordance to the Taishō Canon and Dunhuang Buddhist Manuscripts: Third (Provisional) Edition (Tokyo: International College for Postgraduate Buddhist Studies Library, 2015), p. 176.

n.13Reading bstan for bsten, which is corroborated by the Chinese.

n.14The Degé and Comparative Edition read here (272.b.2): dran pa nye bar gzhag pa’i don gyi spyod pa. This sentence introduces a variation (second occurrence) on a general phrase that appeared earlier (271.b.3, first occurrence) and appears again later (273.a.7, third occurrence): rjes su dran pa’i rnam par gzhag pa’i don gyi spyod pa. The general phrase is attested in the Dunhuang manuscript once (third occurrence); in the Stok Palace edition it appears twice (first and third occurrences). The change that appears here in the Degé (second occurrence) is apparently meant to bring the relevant part of the phrase in line with the well-known Buddhist term dran pa nye bar bzhag pa (Sanskrit: smṛtyupasthāna). At this point (second occurrence), the Stok Palace edition reads dran par gzhag pa’i don gyi spyod pa, which differs from both the general phrase and the Degé. In the Taishō edition, the same Chinese phrase appears in all three places: jian nian yi zhi zhi 建念義之志. It may be rendered as: “It is an emblem signifying the meaning of the establishment of recollection.” The Tibetan translator has rendered nian and jian separately as rjes su dran pa and rnam par gzhag pa, recognizing that it is different from the standard Chinese term nianzhu 念住 used to translate smṛtyupasthāna.

n.15The Dunhuang manuscript of the sūtra starts from here.

n.16Reading rnam par ’byed pa for rnam par byed pa, which is corroborated by the Chinese.

n.17The Degé reads dga’ ba med pa, “they are without joy” (or, at best, “they are not elated”). Here we follow the text of the Dunhuang manuscript: dka’ ba med pa. This agrees with the Chinese reading wunan 無難 (Taishō 785, XVII 724c6): it is executed “without difficulty.” Note the similarity in orthography between dga’ ba and dka’ ba.

n.18This sentence is not represented in the Chinese.

n.19The Degé reads dag pa gtsang ba dang, “pure and clean.” This curious expression, lacking any mention of a threefold attribute, does not appear in the Chinese. The reading of the Dunhuang manuscript is adopted here: zag pa gsum spong ba dang. It agrees with the Chinese text: duan sanlou 斷三漏 (Taishō 785 XVII 724c17–18), “discard the three contaminations.”

n.20Neither the Chinese nor the Dunhuang manuscript mentions “six.”

n.21The Chinese reads jian si zhengqin 堅四正勤 (Taishō 785 XVII 724c21), “making the four kinds of exertion firm.” This suggests reading brtan par in lieu of bstan par.

n.22This specific fivefold feature is not represented in the Chinese.