Notes

n.1For a summary of the Pali, Sanskrit, and Chinese sources of this teaching, see Chung 2006, pp. 76–78, and Anderson 1999, pp. 15–16. See also Bronkhorst 1993, p. 80, n. 200.

n.2Although the precise historical relationship between these four texts has not been fully confirmed, it is highly likely that the episode in Toh 1 and Toh 6 share the same source; that Toh 301 is a compilation of extracts from Toh 1 relating the Buddha’s life as a whole (naturally including this episode); and that Toh 337 is a very short extract of this episode alone.

n.3The section corresponding to the present sūtra is found in the Degé Kangyur vol. 4 (’dul ba, nga), folios 42.b.3-44.a.5

n.4The section corresponding to the present sūtra is found in the Degé Kangyur vol. 10 (’dul ba, tha), folios 247.b.3-294.a.2.

n.5The corresponding section is found in mdo sde, sa, 60.a.1-61.b.3

n.6This text is found in the Degé Kangyur, vol. 34 (shes phyin, ka), folios 180.b.1-183.a.6, in the section of “Thirteen Late Translated Texts.” This group of works is traditionally placed in the Perfection of Wisdom section but is not, in fact, related to that genre. The texts were translated from Pali in the fourteenth century at the monastery of Tharpa Ling by a Sri Lankan monk, Ānandaśrī, and the Tibetan translator Nyima Gyaltsen Pel Zangpo. According to Skilling (1993, p. 97), this was during the first decade of the fourteenth century; Skilling has compared this particular text against the extant Pali Dhamma­chakkappavattana­sutta (1993, pp. 103-106), and concludes that the Tibetan follows the Pali version but contains some significant omissions that he attributes to an erroneous manuscript or translation errors.

n.7This text is found in the Degé Kangyur, vol. 73 (mdo sde, ha), and the episode in question begins on folio 97.b. The translation (Jamspal and Fischer, 2020, 2.385) is to be found in the section The Story of Wealth’s Delight, the twelfth story in Part Two.

n.8The relevant section is found in Degé Kangyur, vol. 46 (mdo sde, kha), folios 200b.1-201a.4. For the translation, see Dharmachakra Translation Committee (2013), 26.60 - 26.78.

n.9For a summary of modern scholarship on the four truths, see Anderson 1999, pp. 168-211. Chung 2006 provides a detailed comparison of the Chinese Sarvāsti­vāda, Sanskrit Mūla­sarvāsti­vāda, and Sanskrit Catuṣpariṣat­sūtra versions (the latter being from a manuscript found in Turfan, see Kloppenborg 1973), followed by another juxtaposition of the Sanskrit Saṃyuktāgama version with the Tibetan of the present Tibetan text‍—which Chung takes as representing a “separate tradition” without assuming, as we tentatively have, that it is an extract from the Tibetan translation of the Saṅgha­bheda­vastu.

n.10See Bronkhorst 1993, pp. 71-85. See also Anderson 1999, pp. 15-23.

n.11E.g. Anderson 1999, pp. 64-67, and Bodhi 2000.

n.12E.g. Sastri 1938, pp. 479-480, and Kloppenborg 1973, pp. 24-27.

n.13The equivalent section in Toh 1 begins at this point (p. 42b.3) and in Toh 301 (p. 60a.1).

n.14At this point, the corresponding passage in the Lalita­vistara­sūtra begins (Lefmann, p. 417; Dharmachakra Translation Group, 26.65).

n.15Here “things” translates the Sanskrit dharma (Pali: dhamma, Tibetan: chos). Some commentaries suggest that dharma is used here in the sense of “truth.” For example, the Puggala­paññattipa­karaṇa-mūlaṭīkā says: ananussutesu dhammesūti ca ananussutesu saccesūti attho. However, teachings on the four truths also present them not so much as general statements of what is “true,” but more as four categories into which all phenomena can be classified and distinguished in terms of their function with regard to suffering, i.e. in constituting it, causing it, being beyond it, or being the means to end it, respectively.

n.16The Tibetan here and in most other versions of this repeated passage places the first person pronoun nga with this phrase. However, in the various Sanskrit versions (typically pūrvam ananuśruteṣu dharmeṣu) there is no indication of whether the phrase means the Buddha had not himself previously heard these dharmas or whether they had more generally never been heard before by anyone.

n.17The Saṅgha­bheda­vastu does not include “realization” (Tibetan: rtogs pa) in this or the following several repetitions of this phrase. Instead the list only includes “insight (jñāna), knowledge (vidyā), and understanding (buddhi)” (Gnoli 1977, p. 135). Skilling (1993), pp. 105 and 194, discusses the significance of the four to seven “epithets of insight” found in the parallel versions of this passage in Sanskrit, Pali, and Tibetan but his notes do not include this difference between the Sanskrit of the Saṅghabhedavastu and its Tibetan translation, nor the version in the Karmaśataka (see Introduction i.­4).

n.18Before the phrase “This is the origin of suffering,” Toh 337 in the Degé Kangyur includes the phrase “This is suffering.” However, here we have omitted it, as it is absent in all other versions of this passage, including the recensions of this sūtra in the Yongle, Lithang, Coné, Narthang, and Peking Kangyurs; the Sanskrit of the Saṅgha­bheda­vastu; and the Tibetan of both Toh 1 and Toh 301 in D and other Kangyurs.

n.19At this point Toh 337 includes the words “the knowledge of…” However, we have omitted this, since the phrase is absent in Toh 1 and Toh 301, as well as the Saṅgha­bheda­vastu.

n.20At this point Toh 337 includes the words “the knowledge of…” However, we have omitted this, since the phrase is absent in Toh 1 and Toh 301, as well as the Saṅgha­bheda­vastu.

n.21The three phases refer to the three stages of (1) identifying the four truths, (2) understanding how to relate to each of the four truths, and (3) knowing that the respective goals of the four truths have been accomplished. When these three stages are applied to each of the four truths, there are twelve aspects in all. For a classical explanation of this enumeration by Haribhadra (eighth cent.), see Sparham 2008, p. 264. See also Anderson 1999, p. 70. Note that these twelve aspects are unrelated to the alternative enumeration of sixteen aspects associated with the four truths (four for each truth). The sixteen aspects counteract sixteen incorrect views associated with the four truths. On the sixteen aspects, see Buswell 2013, p. 304-305. For a classical account by Candrakīrti (c. 570-650 ᴄᴇ), see May 1959, p. 212-216.

n.22At this point, the corresponding passage in the Lalita­vistara­sūtra ends (Lefmann, p. 418, and The Play in Full, Toh 95, 26.78).

n.23This name means “Kauṇḍinya who has understood.”

n.24The equivalent passages in the Saṅgha­bheda­vastu, Toh 1 ch. 17, (vol. nga, F.44.a.5) and the Abhi­niṣkramaṇa­sūtra, Toh 301, (F.61.b.3) end at this point.