Notes

n.1The latter designation‍—which is also the actual title of some of the texts or recensions belonging to this group of texts, named after one of the protagonists of these sūtras, Śuka (Pāli: Subha), the son of Taudeya‍—originated with Yamada Ryūjō, who surveyed all the texts belonging to this group in 1935; see Kudo 2004, viii. For a synopsis of all the texts that constitute the Śukasūtra class, see Kudo 2004, Introduction and specifically pp. xx–xxii (Bibliography and Abbreviations); see also Kudo 2008, 366–68.

n.2Tibetan: mdo sde, sa; theg dman gyi mdo mang. For a full list of the text’s location, classification, and context in the different Kangyur editions, see Resources for Kanjur and Tenjur Studies, online database by the Tibetan Manuscripts Project Vienna (TMPV), located at the Department of South Asian, Tibetan and Buddhist Studies, University of Vienna, accessed 2 December, 2017, http://www.rkts.org/cat.php?id=339&typ=1.

n.3See Bruno Galasek-Hul and Lama Kunga Thartse Rinpoche, trans., The Exposition of Karma (Karma­vibhaṅga), Toh 338 (84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha, 2023).

n.4Although Transformation of Karma is thematically closely related to the longer (Mahā-)Karma­vibhaṅga, it is quite different in terms of style and lexicon. Since these are two essential criteria for the determination of a text’s school-affiliation, we avoid jumping to conclusions about its potential school-affiliation.

n.5Cf. Priestley 1999, ch. 5: “The Reality of the Pudgala,” specifically p. 83.

n.6See Bareau 1955, app. I, 289.

n.7For a list of the Chinese translations, see Kudo 2004, Bibliography, p. xx.

n.8See the chapter concordance in Kudo 2008, 370–72. Mr. Yi Ding, who kindly consulted us on the Chinese translations, suggests that Taishō 80 may be an even closer match than Taishō 81. Another interesting text, extant in Chinese, Tibetan, and Sogdian, the Sutra of the Causes and Effects of Actions (shan wo yin guo jing; Taishō vol. 85, no. 2881), although very different in content, shows some structural resemblance to Transformation of Karma (see MacKenzie 1970). It was, probably like the majority of Buddhist literature in Sogdian, translated from the Chinese.

n.9The Mvy lists Sanskrit vipariṇatam as translation equivalent of Tibetan rnam par ’gyur ba (cf. Sakaki 7315). Cf. also the Sanskrit equivalents for rnam par ’gyur ba provided by Negi, 3047. Negi (3047, II, 6.) cites the title of this work as the only instance of rnam par ’gyur ba to render Sanskrit vibhaṅga. Perhaps the Tibetan title could also be interpreted as meaning “The Dharma Scripture on the Ripening of Karma,” if we interpreted Tibetan rnam par ’gyur ba as non-standard rendering of Sanskrit pariṇāma or pariṇāmana (see BHSD, s.v. pariṇāma and parṇāmana). In Sanskrit, pariṇāma seems to cover two distinct lexical fields: change and transference. The concept of transference of merit (Skt. puṇyapariṇāma) played an important role in the practices of Central Asian lay Buddhists, especially in the context of pilgrimage and pilgrimage sites (among the Uyghurs in particular; see Jens Wilkens, “Buddhismus bei den Türkischen Völkern in Zentralasien,” in Hutter, Manfred, Der Buddhismus II (Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 2016), 482.

n.10Cf., e.g., the Mvy, s.v. vibhaṅga (Sakaki 1372, 1425). Cf. also the work immediately preceding this one in the Kangyur, the Karma­vibhaṅga (Toh 338). Sanskrit vibhaṅga is also found rendered as rnam par dbye ba in Tibetan, probably hinting at a confusion or the interchangeable usage of Sanskrit vibhaṅga and Sanskrit/Pāli vibhajana, vibhāga, meaning “division,” “classification,” “distinction,” “distribution,” or “detailing.” Cf. also Edgerton, BHSD, s.v. vibhaṅga. In the old canonical texts of Buddhism in Pāli, the opposite term of vibhaṅga is uddesa: “indication in outline” (CPD, s.v. uddesa 2.). Thus vibhaṅga was understood as detailed explanation of a teaching given in outline, and later may have taken on the sense of commentary and developed into a genre designation.

n.11See Resources for Kanjur and Tenjur Studies: https://www.istb.univie.ac.at, accessed 2 December, 2017. Similarly, the only reference in Negi’s Tibetan-Sanskrit dictionary (Negi, 1259) for Tibetan chos kyi gzhung (Skt. dharmagrantha) is to the title of Toh 339.

n.12The Sanskrit word vibhaṅga can also mean “classification,” etc. Thus, the words chosen by L. Feer (Feer 1883, 252: partage) and Sylvain Lévi (Lévi 1932: classification) in the titles of their translations.

n.13See The Exposition of Karma , Toh 338.

n.14This is an eighteenth-century copy of a manuscript kept in the Shelkar monastery; it is also known as the London Kangyur or British Museum Kangyur after its current location.

n.15See Resources for Kanjur and Tenjur Studies, accessed 4 December, 2017, http://www.rkts.org/cat.php?id=339&typ=1.”

n.16See Herrmann-Pfandt 2008, 155: No. [282].

n.17See The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language (website), last accessed May 21, 2020, https://ahdictionary.com/word/search.html?q=karma). Equally problematic are the definitions of the individual senses themselves, and that the Dictionary entry treats the Buddhist and the Hindu understanding of the term karma indiscriminately.

n.18Cattāri kammāni. Atth’ āvuso kammaṃ kaṇhaṃ kaṇha-vipākaṃ. Atth’ āvuso kammaṃ sukkaṃ sukkavipākaṃ. Atth’ āvuso kammaṃ kaṇha-sukkaṃ kaṇha-sukka-vipākaṃ. Atth’ āvuso kammaṃ akaṇhaṃ asukkaṃ akaṇha-asukka-vipākaṃ, kammakkhayāya saṃvattati (DN III, 230). Trans. by Walshe 1995, 492.

n.19Abhidh-k-bh(P), 234,26–235,3, ad AKK 4.59 c,d: kṛṣṇa­śuklādibhe­dena punaḥ karma caturvidham || 4.59 || asti karma kṛṣṇaṃ kṛṣṇavipākam | asti karma śuklaṃ śuklavipākam | asti karma kṛṣṇaśuklaṃ kṛṣṇa­śuklavipākam |asti karmākṛṣṇa­maśuklama­vipākam | yat tatkarma karma­kṣayāya saṃvartata iti |. Trans. by Pruden 1988–91, 635.

n.20Trans. by Pruden 1988–91, 635.

n.21See The Exposition of Karma , Toh 338.

n.22See Kudo 2004, ix, xx–xxi.

n.23See Simon 1970. This version may be identical with the title no. 280: las rnam par ’byed pa chung ngu in the Denkarma (Tib. lhan kar ma) catalog (Herrmann-Pfandt 2008, 154). It is represented by the Tibetan translation H343 in the Lhasa Kangyur (despite the misleading entries in the dkar chag), S287 in the Stok Palace manuscript Kangyur, B346 in the Berlin manuscript Kangyur, and N784 in the Narthang Kangyur’s supplementary (kha skong) volume, as well as by a Dunhuang version (PT944). 84000 hopes to add an English translation to this collection in future.

n.24Simon 1970, 161. These characteristics seem to be shared by all the witnesses of the of the Karma­vibhaṅga mentioned above in n.­23.

n.25Maggi 1995, 20.

n.26Lévi 1932, 235, n. 1: “Cf. Kandjour, Mdo XXVI, 468a, texte très voisin, mais différent.”

n.27Kanakura, Yenshô, Munetada Suzuki, and Hakuju Ui. 1934. A Complete Catalogue of the Tibetan Buddhist Canons (Bkaḥ-ḥgyur and Bstan-ḥygur) (= Chibetto daizōkyō sōmokuroku). Sendai: Tôhoku Imperial Univ., p. 63, no. 339: que 闕, translator unknown.

n.28For translations and short comments on these terms, see glossary entries: “ignorant of the Dharma,” “ghost,” “monks and nuns.”

n.29Equivalent to Skt. “tathāgata.”

n.30See McKeown 2010, 1–96 (for a discussion of yang dag par gshegs pa, see pp. 10, 19, 23, 24, 29).

n.31Mr. Yi Ding states the following in two emails to the translator: “Based on my impression, I don’t think that anyone in Japan has raised the question whether D 339 [the las kyi rnam par ’gyur ba zhes bya ba’i chos kyi gzhung] is a translation from China, which might indicate that there are no obvious giveaways. Also, Ch-1, Ch-2 and Ch-3 are too different from D 339; Ch-4 and Ch-6 were translated into Chinese at a very late stage when there was virtually no known cultural exchange between Tibet and China,” (May 29, 2017), and “[…] among the Chinese translations, Taishō no. 80 is the closest to D 339 but not close enough for a direct relationship. And I totally agree that D 339’s language is pre-reform and very idiosyncratic,” (June 1, 2017). For a complete list of the Chinese translations, see Kudo 2004, Bibliography, p. xx. We are very grateful to Mr. Yi Ding (Stanford University) for providing us with his comments and information about the Chinese translations as well as the Japanese scholarly literature on the group of (Mahā-)Karma­vibhaṅga texts, in particular the works written in Japanese by Noriyuki Kudo (see bibliography).

n.32Cf. Apple & Apple 2017, 83: “Cristina Scherrer-Schaub (2002) has proposed that Tibetan translation practices began as early as 763 C.E. with the arrival to Tibet of the Indian scholar Śāntarakṣita.”

n.33See Herrmann-Pfandt 2008, 155. The catalog lists a text with an almost identical title (las kyi rnam par ’gyur ba bstan gyi gzhung) and the same length (270 ślokas and 1 bam po correspond almost exactly to the 23 folios of Toh 339 in the Degé edition.

n.34The reader should keep in mind that these dates should not be accepted without skepticism, for much of the early history of Tibet and the history of the transmission of Buddhism to Tibet remains obscure, due to a lack of reliable historical sources. Also, we should not forget that this does not tell us anything about the history of the transmission of the Karma­vibhaṅga­nāma­dharma­grantha before its translation into Tibetan, let alone the history and geographical origin of its composition.

n.35See Feer 1883, pp. 250–79.

n.36Sylvain Lévi mentioned in the introduction to his edition and translation of the MahāKarma­vibhaṅga that Feer’s translation contained some “grave errors” (Lévi 1932, 4).

n.37According to D, S ’di skad bdag gis thos pa dus gcig na|. V.l. Y, K, L ’di skad bdag gis thos pa’i dus gcig na|.

n.38According to Feer, part one starts at this point.

n.39This form of the name according to D shu ko; vv.ll., S sho ko; L sho go.

n.40Part of ancient Indian etiquette when interacting with prominent and respected religious leaders was to never position oneself directly in front of the person, but to stand or sit slightly to one side. Also, when leaving, one would first circumambulate the teacher clockwise, i.e., with one’s right shoulder toward the teacher, before leaving from the side.

n.41A, D gau ta ma khyod la bdag cung shas shig [C cung shes shig] ’dri na; S, Z go’u ta ma khyod la | bdag cung shas shig ’dri na |. The spelling of the quantifier cung shas here is unusual, and we have not seen it elsewhere so far (usual spelling is cung zad or chung zad). However, all Kangyur editions that we have consulted use this spelling. Moreover, the entire sentence strikes us as rather unusual in this context of a sūtra introduction.

n.42Tibetan kye here probably translates the Middle Indic/Buddhist Sanskrit expression bho (contracted form of the vocative of Sanskrit bhagavant; cf. PED, s.v. bho: “sir, friend, you, my dear [… ].”

n.43Tibetan ngan pa in this context means “ignorant” or being without knowledge or understanding of the Dharma and‍—more specifically in this context of the teachings on karmic cause and effect and Buddhist ethics‍—knowing which actions to choose and which to avoid, including respect for and belief in those who possess such knowledge and understanding. L. Feer (1883, 254), in accord with the context, translates this as C’est par les actes qu’on est dans le mal de (l’ignorance). See 1.­20 below for the detailed account of this category.

n.44The Tibetan is unclear (D 299.a,6: kye gau ta ma las kyi rnam par smin pa gang gi phyir na sems can sna mang por ’gyur); more literally perhaps “Sir Gautama, [how] do beings become varied due to karmic ripening?” The Tibetan syntax bears some resemblance to a corresponding sentence in the Sanskrit Mh-karmav (Lévi 1932, 29): kasya nu bho gautama karmaṇo vipākenedaṃ satvānāṃ nānātvaṃ prajñāyate (“How, sir Gautama, can one understand the apparent diversity of human beings in terms of (or by way of) karmic results of actions?”), which has guided our translation here.

n.45This translates a unique version of the otherwise familiar stock phrase found at the opening of many sūtras (khyod nyon la dge bar shin tu yid la zung shig). L. Feer translates the Tibetan dge bar (shin tu yid la zung shig) literally as “virtuously” (cf. Feer 1883, 253). However, it is probably just equivalent to the Sanskrit sādhu- or Chinese shan zai 善(哉) here of the commonly found stock phrase. Cf. Mvy. (Sakaki 6315) for the standard rendering of the common Sanskrit version of this phrase: dena hi śṛṇu sādhu ca suṣṭhu ca manasikuru (Tib. de’i phyir legs par rab tu nyon la yid la zungs shig).

n.46Tibetan de’i phyir (Skt. tena hi?), “now then,” which Feer (1883, 253) has translated as “I will speak on this subject” (Je vais parler sur ce sujet).

n.47D tshe rabs kyi las las gyur te; S, L have a sentence terminating particle instead: las gyur to.

n.48The diction of this paragraph is challenging, and our translation is uncertain. Due to the similarity of this passage with another variant of this group of terms in Karma­vibhaṅga (Toh 338, 1.­2) and in order to make the text more intelligible, we tentatively assume that tshe rabs kyi las las gyur te was supposedly intended to render Skt. karmasvaka, sbyin pa’i rnams kyang las Skt. karmadāyāda, skye ba’i rnams kyang las Skt. karmayoni, so sor rgyu ba yang las Skt. karmabandhu, and sems can rnams ni las kyis rnam par bsgyur Skt. karmapratisaraṇa. This rendition here seems to be closer to the parallel version in the Pāli canon (MN III, 203,4–6): Kammassakā, māṇava, sattā kammadāyādā kammayonī kammabandhū kammapaṭisaraṇā. Kammaṃ satte vibhajati yad idaṃ hīnappaṇītatāyāti. Translation Bhikkhu Ñāṇamoli and Bhikkhu Bodhi 2009, 1053, paragraph 4: “Student, beings are owners of their actions, heirs of their actions; they originate from their actions, are bound to their actions, have their actions as their refuge. It is action that distinguishes beings as inferior and superior.” Cf. the standard renditions in Mvy of these otherwise well-known terms: Tib. las bdag gyir byed pa renders Skt. karmasvakaḥ (Sakaki 2313); las kyi skye gnas pa renders karmayoniḥ (Sakaki 2315); las kyi bgo skal la spyod pa renders karmadāyādaḥ (Sakaki 2314); las brten par bya ba renders karmapratisaraṇam/karmapratiśaraṇam (Sakaki 2316). Feer (1883, 253) translates: “Manava, les êtres provenant des actes de leurs existences (antérieures), le don et tout ce qui s’y rattache étant un acte, la naissance et tout ce qui s’y rattache étant un acte, la cause individuelle de chaque être étant un acte, Manava, les êtres se transforment par l’effet des actes.”

n.49We have retained the agricultural metaphor here. An alternative translation of Tibetan las rnam par smin pa’i ’bras bu may be: “the result of one’s acts” or “karmic punishment and reward” (cf. The Hundred Deeds (Toh 340). A slightly different translation is offered by L. Feer (1883, 253): “It follows that, according to the good, the evil or the in-between (good and bad), the varieties of beings are associated with many different kinds of acts, with many different kinds of sufferings, with many different kinds of views; I will say, for example: the [respective] fruit results from [either] a black act or a white act. Thus, Manava, by the effect of black acts, a being is born (goes) in a bad direction, such as Narakas, Animals, Yaxas (sic), roamers (?), Asuras, etc. Those who have done white acts are reborn among gods or humans.” (Il s’ensuit que, selon le bien, le mal ou l’entre-deux (du bien et du mal), beaucoup d’espéces d’ètres sont liés à beaucoup d’espéces d’actes, à beaucoup d’espéces de douleurs, à beaucoup d’espéces de vues; je veux dire, par exemple: le fruit résultant d’un acte noir et d’un acte blanc. Ainsi, Manava, par l’effet des actes noirs, un être naît (pour aller) dans la mauvaise direction, telle que le Naraka, les animaux, les Yaxas, les rôdeurs, les Asuras, etc. Ceux qui ont fait des actes blancs renaissent parmi les dieux et les hommes.) It is noteworthy that this particular Tibetan translation deviates strongly from parallel passages in related texts in Sanskrit and Pāli, respectively: karma māṇava satvān vibhajati. yad idaṃ hīnotkṛṣṭamadhyamatāyām. tadyathā … . (Mh-karmav paragraph 30); Kammaṃ satte vibhajati yadidaṃ hīnappaṇītatāyāti (MN III, 203). Both of these may be translated as “Living beings are differentiated by their actions, namely, [with regard to their] inferiority or superiority.” (Sanskrit adds “mediocrity.”) The diction in the Shelkar (London) Kangyur (L 353b,2–3) version of the related Karma­vibhaṅga (Toh 338) is clearer: sems can rnams kyi las sna tshogs dang| nyon mongs pa sna tshogs dang| lta ba sna tshogs dang| spyod pa sna tshogs rig nas| las nag po dang| dkar po rnams kyi ’bras bu rnam par smin pa brjod par bya ste|, “having discerned the manifold actions, defilements, views, and modes of conduct of sentient beings, I will describe the resultant ripening (or the ripening of the result, Skt. phala-vipāka) of black and white acts.”

n.50Tibetan ngan song, Sanskrit apāya, is synonymous with Sanskrit durgati, more commonly translated as the “lower realm(s).”

n.51Tibetan ring du ’khyams pa. Feer (1883, 254) seems to have missed the mark: C’est par les actes qu’on nait parmi les rôdeurs, “It is through acts that one will be born as a prowler” (Germ. Herumtreiber). See the glossary for the term “ghost.”

n.52Here, the asuras, or demigods, are counted among the unfortunate rebirth destinies, or lower realms, which are more commonly known as Tibetan ngan ’gro gsum, the “three lower realms” (hells, animal realms, and ghosts).

n.53This is a free translation of the Tibetan, which reads literally: “through/due to the “ripening” of an action/actions” (las kyi rnam par smin pas), and which we have otherwise translated as “karmic ripening” throughout (See the glossary, s.v. las kyi rnam par smin pa, for a more detailed explanation). We have also abbreviated the Tibetan in our English translation. The sentences after the first one start with las kyis which we interpret to be short for las kyi rnam par smin pas.

n.54Tibetan ma rabs kyi rigs su ’gyur ba. According to Lama Kunga Rinpoche, “In colloquial Tibetan, ma rabs refers to a person who is very vulgar, rude, mostly low-class, and uneducated, with very bad manners; and whose mere presence causes nothing but trouble for everyone around, by being loud and disrespectful.”

n.55D ngan par; L, S ngan por.

n.56We understand “the Dharma” to be implied here, as becomes clear in 1.­21. Tibetan shes rab, Sanskrit prajñā, is a notoriously difficult term to translate. Common translations include “wisdom,” “gnosis,” “insight,” “cognition,” “discriminating awareness,” etc. In this particular text, context most often suggests a sense of the word that expresses an analytical quality (or aspect) of one’s mental faculty that is based on prior knowledge or learning of a moral code. Feer (1883, 254) translates Tibetan shes rabs chen po as “extensive knowledge” (une connaissance grande et etendue). See the glossary entry on shes rab for an explanation.

n.57Tibetan gzugs yod pa’i lha is an uncommon term for Sanskrit rūpāvacaradeva (Tib. gzugs yod pa na spyod pa’i lha).

n.58Tibetan las bzhin du mi ’gyur bar skye ba yang yod (possible Skt. astyapi karmamukhā aniyatopapattiḥ). However, later in the text (at 1.­7), the Tibetan reads: las kyis bzhin mi ’gyur bar skye ba yang zhe na|. See also 1.­35. The karmic category spoken of here is that of Sanskrit (a)niyata, i.e., determined, fixed, definite, or inevitable, which means that the karmic result cannot be altered or averted, i.e., it is certain to be experienced in this life, in a future life or, in the case of the evil actions that bring immediate karmic retribution, immediately after death. Furthermore, its experience corresponds to the moral quality of the action. Cf. Abhidh-k-bh(P), ad AKK IV.54. Tr. by Leo M. Pruden (Pruden 1988–91, 629): “Action accomplished through intense defilement or through intense faith, with regard to the field of qualities, continually, and the murdering of a father and a mother, are determinate.”

n.59Feer (1883, 254) translates: “It is through actions that rebirth occurs without change; it is through actions that rebirth occurs with change.” (XXIII. C’est par les actes que la naissance se produit sans changement; XXIV. C’est par les actes que la naissance se produit avec changement.)

n.60According to D, L, S ma bsams par byas pas; vv.ll. Y, K ma bsams par byas pa ma|; U ma bsams par bya bas. Feer (1883, 254) translates: “When one has carried out actions without thinking about them (or having intended them; Tib. bsams pa), there will nonetheless be rebirth.” (Quand on a fait des actes sans les méditer, la naissance se produit tout de même). However, Tibetan skye bar ’gyur ba here as in the following three categories may be a dittography. The paragraphs corresponding to this category later in the text (cf. 1.­38–1.­40 below) make no mention of any specific kind of rebirth as the karmic result of (unintended) actions, but rather generally qualify or define actions with regard to the absence or presence of intention.

n.61Tibetan ’dus pa (literally “collect,” “accumulate”; “assemble”) in gang zag las ’di lta bu ’dus pas na has a technical sense when applied to karmically relevant actions (see also BHSD, s.v. upacita and Lévi 1932, 9, 47–48, n. 8). The differentiation between the technical expressions “action that is carried out” (Skt. karma kṛtaṃ) and “action that is accumulated” (Skt. karmopacita) is explained in detail in Vasubandhu’s Abhidharma­kośabhāṣya, verse IV,120 (see Abhidh-k-bh at AKK IV,120 Abhidh-k-bh(P) 271,20-272,3 = Pruden 1988–91, 701–702): “Action ‘done’ (Skt. kṛta) is distinguished from ‘accumulated’ (Skt. upacita) action. What are the characteristics and conditions of accumulated action? 120. Action is termed ‘accumulated’ by reason of its intentional character, by its completion, by the absence of regret and opposition, by its accompaniments, and by its retribution.” Although the phrase “to accumulate an action” is not natural English, we have kept this rather clumsy literal translation to indicate the specialized meaning of ’dus pa (Skt. upacita) here and throughout this translation. Sylvain Lévi opted for a more elegant solution in his French translation of the closely related Karma­vibhaṅga (Toh 338, 1.­48) by employing a translation equivalent that expresses the sense of ’dus pa in accordance with Vasubandhu’s definition: “Quel est l’acte qui, étant fait, n’est pas aggravé?” (Lévi 1932, 121).

n.62The syntax of the Tibetan in this sentence (and below) is obscure. The meaning of the karmic categories can be more clearly understood from the parallel passages in the Karma­vibhaṅga (Toh 338, 1.­48–1.­50).

n.63In light of the explanations of the items listed in the full paragraphs later in the text, we have translated them in a way that tries to bring out the fact that both the former and the latter states (of happiness and unhappiness) are seen as being related by a combination of certain actions.

n.64According to D (phyi nas bde bar) gyur pa’i las; v.l. H (phyi nas bde bar) ’gyur ba’i las. Here, the sentence structure differs from the preceding, parallel sentence, which reads phyi nas mi bde ba’i las. We have attempted to make this difference recognizable in our English translation.

n.65It is not clear why the Tibetan reads sems can gang zag thams cad here.

n.66While the sentence structure is generally the same as in the preceding sentences, here the word las (“action”) is missing, so that the subject of the sentence becomes gang zag (“person”). Although it may be the case that las should be supplied in this and the following sentences, we have translated according to the syntax as it is. Feer (1883, 255) translates: “For such an individual the [life]time is exhausted (but) the actions are not.” (Pour tel individu, le temps est épuisé, l’acte ne l’est pas). An individual’s actions not being exhausted means that this person still must experience the karmic consequences in the future.

n.67Tibetan lus bde la.

n.68According to D, L gang zag lus mi bde la sems bde bar ’gyur ba’i las kyang yod|. The editor, in consultation with the translator, settled for this perhaps less accurate but less wordy translation. The Kangyur editions of K, Y, J, N, C read: “well in body as well as in mind.” (Vv.ll. K, Y gang zag lus kyang bde ba sems kyang bde bar ’gyur ba’i las ba yang yod|; J, N, C gang zag lus kyang bde la sems kyang bde bar ’gyur ba’i las kyang [J, C ba yang] yod|; H gang zag lus mi bde la sems kyang mi bde bar ’gyur ba’i las ba’ang yod|).

n.69According to D, S, Z; L reads gang zag lus kyang bde la sems kyang ’gyur ba yang yod| (which could be a scribal omission). K, Y, J, N, C read: “unwell in body as well as in mind.”

n.70According to D, L, S, Z; K, Y, J, N, C omit this sentence.

n.71According to S, Z gzugs legs pa dang; v.l. D, L gzugs ngan pa [L: ngan ba] dang|. Feer (1883, 255) translates: “The individual who has accumulated such actions and who was born in the region of bad beings(?), will be physically beautiful, agreeable, with a charming complexion, good-looking, with a body that is pleasing to the sight, by virtue of his karma.” (L’individu qui a accumulé tels et tels actes et qui est né sur le terrain des êtres-pervers sera physiquement beau, agréable, d’un teint charmant, de bonne mine, avant un corps agréable á la vue en vertu de son karma).

n.72Meaning in a lower realm of saṃsāric rebirth (Tib. sems can ngan pa’i sar yang skyes te|).

n.73According to D phyi rol gyi yul sa’i don ngan du ’gyur ba, which agrees with the reading and the content of the corresponding paragraph (see 1.­63 below). V.l. S, Z, L phyi rol gyi yul sa’i don du ’gyur ba yang yod do||, “there is (or will be) benefit for the external environment(?),” must be an error. Feer (1883, 255) translates: “Manava, it is like this: through following the path of the ten negative actions, one will arrive at a bad destination, the adverse region[s] [of rebirth?]. (Manava, cela est ainsi: c’est parce qu’on a suivi le chemin des dix actions vicieuses, c’est à cause de cela que l’on arrive au but mauvais de la région adverse).

n.74According to D, L, S, Z tshe thung. V.l. C ’thung (possibly w.r. for thung).

n.75In classical Tibetan, the verb is generally impersonal, and the expression zhe na is often found in philosophical discourses or in treatises in which a (hypothetical) opponent’s position is presented before being refuted. Thus, common translations are “if someone asks (or says),” or “if it is asked (or said).” We have chosen a translation that is reflective of the sūtra’s narrative frame and its dialogic structure. In the following paragraphs, we have therefore treated Tibetan zhe na simply as signifying a question.

n.76“Factors” is our translation of Tibetan chos (bcus na/ni) in this context (literally: “when (or because) ten factors are present”). D, L chos bcus na; S, Z chos bcus ni (later chos bcus na throughout). Feer (1883, 256) translates Tibetan chos bcus as “ten conditions” (Ici, tu me demandes par l’effet de quel genre d’actes le temps de la vie est court. Je te dirai que dix conditions font que la vie est courte. ‍— Quelles sont ces dix? Si tu les demandes (les voici), “Here, you ask me, through the effect of which kind of act one’s lifespan is short. I will tell you that there are ten conditions that make one’s life short. What are the ten? If you wish to hear them, they are as follows.”) In an earlier draft of this translation, we chose to translate chos with “factors,” which, while not wrong, seemed too vague. Feer’s choice of “conditions,” on the other hand, does not seem to capture the idea that the respective actions enumerated in the text are major factors able to produce a karmic result, and not just conditions that need to be present for a result manifest. Chos in this text appears to be a different way of saying “(karmically relevant) action.”

n.77According to D (de la ji ltar las kyis tshe thung bar ’gyur zhe na| chos bcus na tshe thung bar ’gyur zhe na| bcu gang zhe na|), “if you ask,” (zhe na) is at the end of each subset, thus apparently interpreting the whole to be Śuka’s question. We think, however, that the sentence beginning with chos bcus constitutes the Buddha’s answer to the initial question, and not a new question or part of the first one. This interpretation may be corroborated by the vv.ll. K, Y, N, U, L, S, Z chos bcus na [L | shad after na] [S, Z ni] tshe thung bar ’gyur te [H ste].

n.78According to D gcod pa; L, S, Z bcad pa (perfective of verb gcod, “having taken life; killed; murdered”); v.l. K, Y bcod (seems to be a relatively common variant of gcod).

n.79According to D, L, S, Z srog gcod du bcug pa|. V.l. N srog gcod du bcod pa|.

n.80According to D, L, S, Z smon pa; vv.ll. J smin pa; N sman pa.

n.81The Tibetan here uses mi mdza’ ba, which is synonymous with dgra bo “enemy, foe” used in the preceding item.

n.82The Tibetan is not entirely clear, but cf. (Toh 338, 1.­8), for a similar content and context, where the meaning of ’thab mo is unmistakably that of battle. A, D read thab mo [C, H, S, Z: ’thab mo] la lta zhing dad pa dang bcu ste|. The preferable reading, however, seems to be that of C, H, S, Z: ’thab mo “quarrel, fight; battle.” Z, moreover, has just ’thab mo la lta zhing dad pa dang|. Feer’s (incorrect) translation (1883, 256) may result from reading thab (mo) without considering the vv.ll.: “Having one’s desires and one’s view focused on the hearth (where the meat is cooking?) …” (porter ses désirs et ses regards sur le foyer (où cuit la viande?) …).

n.83D, S, Z: sems can rnams la skyabs byas. V.l. L, Y, J, K, N, C: sems can rnams skyabs byas (without la).

n.84Tibetan thal mo (la sogs pas), literally “the palm of one’s hand.”

n.85This translates the obscure Tibetan mya ngan bsring ba rnams (D). See the Glossary of Terms, s.v. “monks and nuns” for a discussion of this term and a possible literal meaning. Vv.ll. L mya ngan sring ba rnams; S, Z mya ngan srid pa rnams.

n.86Tibetan zas mi zhu ba za ba. However, cf. a very similar passage in the Sanskrit text of the Mh-karmav, paragraph 4, (Lévi 1932, 37): “giving [someone] indigestible foods ([…-]pradānaṃ tathāparijīrṇabhojanaṃ).”

n.87According to D, L ’tshog [S, Z tshog] tu mi gzhug pa; N mchog tu mi gzhug pa.

n.88The Tibetan means literally “not aspiring (or desiring) to beat” (’tshog pa la mi smon pa).

n.89Tibetan rim gro byed pa, in contexts like this, can have two main senses: (1) honoring, worshiping (also in form of rites and rituals), reverence; and (2) service, to serve, attend to (or upon), to aid, to see after. We have adopted the latter sense, considering the context of illness. Exact translation into English is complicated by the fact that the Tibetan seems to carry both senses at the same time: tending to or caring for someone with respect or reverence because he or she is in an elevated position, which demands one’s respect and reverence (parents, clerics).

n.90The Tibetan is unclear (zas zhu nas za ba) and could perhaps also be interpreted as “[only] eating food that one has begged for (or received).” But based on a corresponding and very similar passage in the Sanskrit text of the Mh-karmav, paragraph 4 (Lévi 1932, 37), we are somewhat confident that Tibetan zas zhu ba must mean “digestible foods,” and the passage here originally (i.e., in the source text for the Tibetan translation) perhaps meant “providing them with digestible food.” Cf. also the preceding 1.­10 above.

n.91Feer (1883, 257) politely rendered Tibetan mi sdug pa into French idiomatically: “a moderately pleasant [i.e., unpleasant] situation” (Comment, diras-tu, arrive-t-on par l’effet des actes à une situation peu agréable.). Lévi (1932, 37, n. 2) has identified the corresponding paragraph of the Karmavibhaṅga (Toh 338, 1.­15) with relief 21 of the hidden base of the Borobudur (cf. ibid. for references), carrying the inscription “virūpa” (possibly meaning “deformed” or “ugly”). All consulted editions of Transformation of Karma (A, D, L, S, Z) read mi sdug pa. The Karmavibhaṅga (Toh 338, F.278.b) reads kha dog mi sdug pa, “complexion, color; appearance” (corresponding to Skt. durvarṇa; Lévi 1932, 37); L mdog mi sdug pa.

n.92According to S, Z khro ba| gnod bcas pa| (two items are needed here in order to parse ten items in this paragraph). D khro ba gnod bcabs pa|; vv.ll. L khro ba gnong(?) (read gnod) bcas pa|. The reading and the interpretation of this passage, however, is not clear. Is D khro ba gnod bcabs pa meant to constitute one term, two terms, or three terms (“anger, harming, disparaging”)? Feer (1883, 257) interpreted this phrase as containing two expressions: “enmity and concealed [bcabs pa, perfective of the Tibetan verb ’chab pa (Skt. mrakṣa, “resentment”)] hostility” (l’animosité; l’hostilité secréte). The related Karmavibhaṅga (Toh 338) in its corresponding 1.­15 even contains four terms: anger (khro ba), enmity (’khon du ’dzin pa), resentment (’chab pa), and spite (’tshig pa), as does the Mh-karmav (Lévi 1932, 37: krodhaḥ, upanāhaḥ, mrakṣaḥ, pradāśaḥ [read paridāghaḥ?], cf. Kudo 2009, 52; the last term, however, is doubtful, since the following Mh-karmav, paragraph 6, which contains the antipodes of the first three terms mentioned in Mh-karmav, paragraph 5, does not contain the opposite of pradāśaḥ). The Khotanese Karma­vibhaṅga (Maggi 1995, 67) gives a curious interpretation of the apparent juxtaposition of terms signifying anger and jealousy or jealous disparagement (Tib. khro ba gnod bcabs pa?): “[The] first act is (if) he should see the advantage of a man being angry and violent, harsh (and such) that envy of the other (man) arises in him because of it.” (Note that the different terms here seem to constitute one “act” and not individual acts as in Transformation of Karma).

n.93D ’khon du ’dzin pa; Y, K, L, S, Z khon du ’dzin pa|.

n.94The Tibetan is not entirely clear here. D and L (gtum pa pha ma rnams la ngan du smra ba|) do not seem to separate gtum pa from the following act (reviling ones’ parents), while S, Z do (shad | between gtum pa and the following sentence). Alternatively, one could perhaps interpret the passage to mean “being haughty (gtum pa is Old Tibetan for gzu lum(s) che ba), one is not welcoming (Tib. ngan du smra; Skt. durāgata) toward one’s parents, toward monks and nuns.” Parsing the Tibetan in this way, however, would leave one with fewer than ten acts in this category.

n.95According to D, which reads mya ngan bsrings pa in both instances: mya ngan bsrings pa rnams la ngan du smra ba|; L, S, Z mya ngan bsrings [L: srings] pa rnams la ngan du smra ba| mya ngan srid pa’i spyad pa kun la ngan du byed pa|.

n.96D mya ngan bsrings pa’i spyad pa kun la ngan du byed pa|; L, S, Z mya ngan srid pa’i spyad pa kun la ngan du byed pa|. A corresponding passage in the Karmavibhaṅga (Toh 338) of the London manuscript Kangyur (mdo sde, ci, 357a,6,7) reads ’phags pa’i yongs su spyad pa ma rung bar byed pa dang|, “destroying the dwelling (or property, shrine) of a noble one.” Our translation follows the parallel passage of the London manuscript which seems clearer. However, the exact meaning of (yongs su?) spyad pa (Skt. paribhoga) here remains ambiguous, and the collocation with the predicate ngan du byed seems to carry moral overtones (Skt. duṣ + √kṛ? Or cf. the Tibetan expression spyod ngan byed, “to misbehave”).

n.97According to the Mvy Tibetan mchod rten should be used to translate both Sanskrit stūpa and caitya (see Sakaki 6999, 7000). The Sanskrit word caitya can refer to a stūpa, but also to a shrine, sacred place or any sacred object. We have therefore rendered mchod rten with the broader term caitya in this translation to retain and express this ambiguity, except where it is clear that specifically a stūpa is referred to.

n.98Feer, in his French translation of Transformation of Karma, uses the Sanskrit reconstruction samyaggata to render Tibetan yang dag par gshegs pa, whereas the standardized rendering of Sanskrit tathāgata is de bzhin gshegs pa (Sakaki 3). Feer (1883, 257, n. 2) comments: “ ‘He who has come, once and for all,’ one of the epithets of the Buddha. I use the Sanskrit word which corresponds to the Tibetan term of our text. It seems to me preferable to a translation that could otherwise only be bizarre.” (“ ‘Celui qui est venu réellement, venu une fois pour toutes,’ une des épithétes du Buddha. J’emploie le mot sanskrit auquel correspond le terme tibétain de notre texte. Il me paraît préférable à une traduction qui ne pourrait être que bizarre.”). However, as far as we know, samyaggata is not usually used as an epithet of the Buddha in Indic Buddhist texts (in the Sanskrit and Pāli texts we have searched, samygaggata is exclusively an adjective). The Sanskrit adjective samyaggata (Pāli sammaggata) generally means “behaving properly,” or “(being) of correct or perfect conduct.” In our interest to preserve the text’s idiosyncratic character, we would have liked to adopt Feer’s very original choice of samyaggata for our translation. However, we chose Tathāgata instead, which is what one would expect in the Sanskrit original.

n.99Feer (1883, 257) translates: “To refuse to keep a caitya of the Samyaggata (i.e., Tathāgata) clean.” (le refus de la propreté au caitya du Samyaggata). In a parallel paragraph to this one, (Toh 338, 1.­15) has two different sentences: “soiling stūpas and monasteries and the site of a stūpa,” and “extinguishing offering lamps at stūpas and images.” Literally, Tibetan ’od gcod pa can also mean “eliminate the luster (or brightness).” We have decided to follow the reading of the Karmavibhaṅga (Toh 338, F.278.b: mar me gsad pa).

n.100According to S, Z rngan chan byed pa (archaic for brnyas thabs “to despise; treat contemptuously”; cf. BGT, s.v.). Vv.ll. D, L dngan can byed pa (Old Tibetan orthography for ngan (see Rnam rgyal tshe ring 2001, s.v. dngan can); J, N, C, H mngon can. The passage seems corrupt: Karmavibhaṅga (Toh 338, 1.­15, (F.278.b)) reads A, D phyas ’dogs pa [vv.ll. J phyas ’drogs; K phyes ’dogs], which is obscure. The Karmavibhaṅga (Toh 338) of the London manuscript Kangyur has dbang za ba, which has the sense of feeling entitled to despise, belittle, or humiliate, and to manipulate or exploit others (cf. BGT, s.v.). The Mh-karmav is clear: Sanskrit avahasanam (Lévi 1932, 38) means “ridiculing someone.”

n.101This is a free translation of Tibetan ci la yang mi gtsang bar byed pa|, literally “making everything dirty.”

n.102The sentence “Through [the presence of] these ten factors one will…,” is omitted here (chos ’di bcus … -r’gyur ro).

n.103Feer (1883, 258) translates Tibetan bzang po as “prosperity” (situation prospère). But context and a parallel passage in the Karma­vibhaṅga (Toh 338, 1.­16 (F.278.b): mdzes pa as the antonym of kha dog mi sdug pa) suggest “beautiful” as the more appropriate translation.

n.104D mya ngan las [T, K omit las] bsrings pa rnams; L, S, Z mya ngan bsrings par rnams.

n.105See above, 1.­12, D, L dngan; vv.ll. J, N, H mngan; C ngan.

n.106The Tibetan (D ci la yang gtsang bar byed pa ste|) says literally “making everything clean”; vv.ll. Y, K gcad par byed pa; J, N, C gcod par byed pa.

n.107Note that this paragraph includes only eight items. Some of the following paragraphs also include less than ten items. We will not note this in every case, but only when it is connected to linguistic problems, or when there is a conflict between different readings of the various Kangyur editions.

n.108Tibetan dbang chung ngu, from Buddhist Sanskrit alpeśākhya (Pāli appesakkha); cf. CPD, s.v. appesakkha; BHSD, s.v. alpeśākhya. The word originally meant “unrespected, insignificant; of little esteem” (It has been accepted that the Middle Indic form of the term is derived from an original Sanskrit form alpa-/mahā-yaśas-ka). The respective Sanskrit form of the word (alpa-/mahāśakya vs. alpe-/maheśākhya) can be an indicator of a text’s school affiliation (see O. von Hinüber, “Die Bestimmung der Schulzugehörigkeit buddhistischer Texte nach sprachlichen Kritertien,” 1985, in Bechert 1985). The form alpa-/mahāśakya is surmised by F. Edgerton to have originated as a folk-etymological alteration of alpe-/maheśākhya (see BHSD, s.v. mahāśakya). It is predominantly found in the texts affiliated with the Sarvāstivādins. The traditional derivation or analysis of the term is alpa-īśa-ākhya (with maheśākhya being an analogical formation), perhaps meaning literally “named after an insignificant chief or master, or low origin” (see Apte, s.v.). This meaning is reflected in the standardized Tibetan translation as given in the Mvy. (Sakaki 6412): dbang chung bar grags pa. The Tibetan form present here, however, dbang chung ngu appears to be closer to Sanskrit alpaśakya, or perhaps even Chinese shao shi 少勢.

n.109It is not clear whether Tibetan thob pa should be rendered into English in the sense of “achievement” (HTOED semantic field 01.15.16.02 n.: success), “acquisition” (HTOED semantic field 02.06.08 n.: acquisition), or rather “profit, gain” (HTOED semantic field 01.15.14 n.: advantage). Given the apparent context of social prestige in this paragraph, we have leaned toward the first in our translation.

n.110“Criticism” is our rendition of Tibetan sgra bstod pa med pa, sgra bstod being a variant of sgras (b)stod.

n.111For Tibetan sri zhu mi byed pa, cf. Dan Martin’s entry in the Rangjung Yeshe Dictionary, sri zhu: “ ‘reverence’ (for elders, parents, etc.). Coblin in JAOS 111, p. 317. As translation of a Sinitic concept, see Stein, Tibetica Antiqua I 163, 195. khrus dang sku mnye dang dril phyis byed pa. bka’ drin bsam nas bkur sti byed pa. Btsan-lha.” However, sri zhu is an ancient Tibetan term that may or may not exactly correspond content-wise to Chinese xiao 孝, “filial piety.”

n.112According to D mya ngan bsrings pa; vv.ll. L srings pa; J, N, C bsings pa.

n.113It is also possible to translate this sentence as “causing the roots of unwholesome states to arise in those who have little power.” However, it may be more likely that the meaning of the passage has been that which is preserved in the Karmavibhaṅga (Toh 338) of the London manuscript Kangyur (mdo sde, ci, 357b,6): dge ba’i rtsa ba chung ngu yang dag par phar ’dzin du ’jugs pa dang| dge ba’i rtsa ba chen po’i rgyun gcod pa dang, “Causing someone to overly(?) esteem small (or weak) roots of wholesome states, while cutting off a stream of strong roots of wholesome states.” Cf. also the extant Central Asian Sanskrit fragment from Eastern Turkestan (the Śukasūtra; cf. Lévi 1932, 235f.): [mahā-]śakyāt kuśalamūlād vicchandanam alpaśakyānāṁ pudgalānāṁ paribhavaḥ, “cutting [oneself or another?] off from powerful roots of wholesome states; contempt for persons with little power.”

n.114The “roots of unwholesome states” are the three mental poisons: greed, hate, and delusion.

n.115Tibetan yang dag par gshegs pa’i mchod rten dang gnas byed pa|. Tibetan gnas here likely means “a holy place” or “object of veneration” (Sanskrit caitya ; cf. BHSD, s.v. caitya ). The Śukasūtra fragment (Lévi 1932, 235f.) reads tathāgata­bimbakaraṇam “making an image (or statue) of the Tathāgata.” The las rnam par ’byed of the London manuscript Kangyur (mdo sde, ci, 358a,3) reads de bzhin gshegs pa’i mchod rten gyi khang pa byed pa dang|, which could mean (depending on what one assumes to have been the cultural milieu of the text) “erecting a raised platform on which a stūpa can be built,” or, literally, “building a caitya -hall (a house or a cave?) for a stūpa.”

n.116Translating D, L, S, Z dbang chung ngu; v.l. Y, K des chung ngu. The Karmavibhaṅga (Toh 338) of the London manuscript Kangyur (mdo sde, ci, 358a,3-4) reads dge ba’i rtsa ba chung ngu rgyun mi gcod pa dang| dge ba’i rtsa ba chen po yang dag par ’dzin du ’jug pa’o|. The Śukasūtra-fragment (Lévi 1932, 235) reads alpaśakyāt kuśalamūlāt vicchandanam, “separating [oneself or another?] from weak roots of wholesome states,” and mahāśakye kuśalamūle samādāpanam, “encouraging/motivating [oneself or another?] [to make an effort] with regard to the strong roots virtue,” respectively.

n.117Tibetan pha ma la pha mar mi ’dzin pa| seems pleonastic. Tibetan mar/phar mi ’dzin pa translates the (Buddhist?) Sanskrit idiomatic expression amātajñaḥ/amātajñatā and apitṛjña/apitṛjñatā respectively (or as one compound, amātāpitṛjñatā; see Mh-karmav, paragraph 9; cf. Negi 3497, II).

n.118Tibetan [phar] mi shes pa = phar mi ’dzin pa, cf. Negi 3497, II.

n.119According to D, S, Z dge sbyong (Skt. śramaṇa “renunciate, ascetic”); v.l. L, Y, K: dge slong (Skt. bhikṣu “mendicant”). This phrase may translate Sanskrit aśrāmaṇyatā (see Lévi 1932, 235).

n.120D, L, S, Z rigs kyis btsun pa, which should nevertheless be corrected to rigs kyi btsun pa (see also below 1.­17).

n.121D, S, Z bsti stang; vv.ll. L, Y, K, N, C sti stang; J sti stong.

n.122This passage seems corrupt. D nams [K, N, C, H rnams] kyang mgron [Y, J, K, N ’gron] mi gnyer ba|; L nams kyang mgon mi gnyer ba|, “not offering protection”?; S, Z nams kyang mgron du mi gnyer ba.

n.123According to D, L, S, Z. N adds nga ba dang, H adds pha ma dang before mkhan po dang|.

n.124Here and throughout, we have opted for a literal translation of Tibetan thar par zhugs pa rnams (Skt. pravrajitāḥ; see Negi, 2004, II). See also “those who have entered the path of liberation” in the glossary.

n.125(Realm of the asuras) The vv.ll. might support emendation to rigs kyi btsun pa: N, H: kyi instead of D kyis. Sanskrit or Pāli abhijāta (“noble birth”) is well attested (cf. pw and CPD, s.v.).

n.126We are not entirely sure what spag here means; cf. however BGT, s.v. spags (perfective of spog): 2) (rnying) sta gon byas pa “to make preparations.”

n.127It is unclear to what exactly the Tibetan term thar par spyod pa refers; perhaps “lay Buddhist practitioners?”

n.128A similar sentence in the Śukasūtra-fragment (Lévi 1932, 235) reads kule jyeṣṭhānupālakatvam āsanāt paryutthānam āsanenābhinimantraṇam (mātāpitroḥ śuśrūṣā) “respecting/preserving [the right or custom?] of seniority in the family, getting up from one’s seat [and] offering the seat [to the elder?]; (obeying/revering one’s parents).”

n.129According to D, L gzhan; S, Z gzhun, “those who have been tamed?”

n.130Y, N, J, K, C omit Tibetan ma byin par len pa “stealing.”

n.131Tibetan gtsug lag khang can also mean “house/building where the Buddhist scriptures (Tib. gtsug lag = sde snod; Skt. tripiṭaka) are kept.”

n.132Tibetan mchod cing spyod pa kun gcod pa|. The suffix cing (zhing, shing) here seems to indicate coordination of what appear to be the verbs mchod and spyod, the former in the sense of “to venerate,” with the specialized sense “to make offerings,” and “to honor” (cf. BGT, s.v. mchod pa), here rendered as nouns.

n.133The Tibetan uses the same word here (thob pa) as in 1.­14 and 1.­15 above, where we translated it as “achievement.” We think, however, that the context in this paragraph demands the sense of (material) obtaining (HTOED semantic field 02.06.08 n.: acquisition).

n.134Literally “Rejoicing when [something] was not obtained (or acquired) by others.”

n.135According to D mu ge byung [U ’byung] du smon pa; L, S, Z mu ge byung na smon pa; v.l. J, C smod “to loathe, deprecate,” does not fit this context. The D reading may be confirmed by the reading in the Śukasūtra-fragment (Lévi 1932, 235): durbhikṣāyācanā ca|.

n.136J adds la don: ’tsho ba la sbyin pa, instead of D ’tsho ba sbyin pa|.

n.137Feer (1883, 260) translates Tibetan mkhan po as savant, “scholar.”

n.138The structure of this sentence seems to be parallel to D 302a,1: mkhan po dang bla ma thar par zhugs pa rnams la gzhan la yang, where thar par zhugs pa rnams is replaced (abbreviated?) by ltag ma (or lhag ma). D, Y, H mkhan po dang bla ma ltag ma [A, p. 875, line 5: lhag ma!] dang gzhan rnams la, which may mean “the head teacher and all others (i.e., all those who are thar par zhugs pa following in the order of their rank / seniority).” S mkhan po dang| bla ma dang| ltag ma dang gzhan rnams la. The v.l. of L, Z mkhan po dang| bla ma dang| lhag ma dang| gzhan rnams la (if one understands lhag ma to mean “rest.” But lhag ma can have a meaning similar to ltag ma), although “the monastic preceptor, the teacher, the rest, and all others,” seems to make less sense. For D bla ma [bla] ltag/lhag ma, cf. also Negi, 3910: bla lhag pa (Skt. adhikaḥ; upacayaḥ; ādhikyaṃ).

n.139The meaning of Tibetan rim par spyod pa is not entirely clear (“service,” “veneration,” “attendant/servant?”), but given the context, it seems to express the same as mchod cing spyod pa “offerings and service” in the previous paragraph. The parallels of the word formation to Tibetan rim gro, “veneration,” can hardly be accidental. Feer (1883, 260) translates: “[providing them with the possibility of] the regular exercise of their practices” (L’exercice régulier de leurs pratiques).

n.140Tibetan mal stan; Sanskrit śayanāsana; Chinese 臥具.

n.141D gsos sman; L, S, Z gso sman; and J gsol sman are not different in meaning.

n.142Tibetan g.yog here probably means “servants,” but could also just mean “service.”

n.143Feer (1883, 260) (mis)understood Tibetan gzhan gyis don thob par nan tan du bsgrubs pa to mean “To regard one’s own success as others’ success” (regarder comme ses propres succès les succès d’autrui.) Or should we translate “assisting (= translating nan tan tu bsgrubs pa as nan tan sgrub pa = Skt. adhiṣṭhāna) others in obtaining wealth?” Our translation may be confirmed by the reading in the Śukasūtra-fragment (Lévi 1932, 236): parasya lābhodyogaḥ.

n.144Reading D lo legs par smon pa| (Y, K lo legs pa smon pa|) may again be confirmed by the Śukasūtra-fragment (Lévi 1932, 237): subhikṣāyācanā ca (vv.ll. L, S, Z lo legs par ston pa|).

n.145Tibetan ngan pa. We have added “of the Dharma” here. According to our interpretation, it becomes clear in this paragraph that ngan pa refers to people with poor or no understanding or knowledge of the Dharma, and that it must mean the opposite of knowing, following, and applying the Dharma (cf. Negi, 935, II, s.v. ngan pa, for ngan pa in the sense of Sanskrit ajñaḥ, “not knowing, devoid of knowledge; stupid, foolish,” etc.).

n.146D, L gang zag su yang rung ste|; S, Z gang zag su’ang ste ’dri mi shes pa|. Perhaps D, L gang zag su yang rung ste could also be interpreted as “not knowing how to ask a qualified (Tib. rung as free morpheme) person questions.” However, Tibetan ’dri mi shes pa here seems to have the same sense as the Sanskrit suffix -jña has in Sanskrit (a)mātṛjñaḥ and (a)pitṛjña (i.e., Tibetan mar/phar mi ’dzin pa, cf. 1.­16 (F.301.b) above), “not appreciating.” This sentence makes the impression of being a summary, or abbreviation, of a similar sentence in a parallel passage in the Karmavibhaṅga (Toh 338, F.280.a): de ni ’di la la la zhig dge sbyong ngam bram ze gzhan dag la chos ni gang yin| chos ma yin pa ni gang yin| bdag gis ci zhig byas na legs par ’gyur zhes mi ’dri’i| (see also Mh-karmav paragraph 13). Thus, Tibetan rung, “qualified” or “appropriate,” here might refer to śramaṇas and brahmins, explicitly mentioned in the Karmavibhaṅga (Toh 338).

n.147According to D, L gtsigs; v.l. N btsigs. The most apparent and straightforward reading seems to be ma gtsigs par smra ba, also because it has an attested possible Sanskrit equivalent in asambaddha[-pralāpa?], “incoherent/inconsequential [palaver?],” in the Yogācārabhūmi, cf. Yokoyama & Hirosawa 1996, s.v. 不相應 bu xiang ying.

n.148D, S, Z ma gtsigs [N: btsigs] par smra ba la dge bar stod [L, Y, K, C, H: bstod] pa|.

n.149We have added “in the Dharma.”

n.150Tibetan shes rab chen po. Again, we understand “the Dharma” to be implied.

n.151This attempts to translate the very concise Tibetan rim par ’dri shes pa.

n.152D, S, Z chos kyi snod gang zag rnams mi ’jigs pa la goms [L gom] par byed pa| (Z mhkas pa’i gang zag rnams la is dittography) is not exactly clear. Feer (1883, 261) translates: “Assure the safety of those who are worthy recipients of the Dharma” (assurer la sécurité de ceux qui sont des vases de la loi). However, the grammar more naturally seems to call for the translation “One cultivates a lack of fear (literally self-confidence) toward those persons who are worthy receptacles of the Dharma.” This means that one should become unafraid of approaching teachers to ask them questions or request teachings (cf. also 1.­90 below). A parallel sentence in the corresponding Karma­vibhaṅga (Toh 338, 1.­26 (F.280.a)) reads slightly differently but seems to have the same meaning: chos smra ba rnams la mi ’jigs pa nye bar sgrub pa|, “one praises the confidence of the Dharma-reciters.” The Sanskrit of Mh-karmav reads: dharma­bhāṇakānāṃ vaiśāradyaṃ varṇayati, “She or he praises the skill (or proficiency) (Skt. vaiśāradyaṃ according to the meaning of the word in Classical Sanskrit) of the Dharma-reciters.”

n.153According to D (ngan [C: mngon] par smra ba la dge’o zhes mi stod pa|); L, S, Z omit this sentence.

n.154Feer (1883, 261): “to a high degree” (à un haut degré).

n.155Tibetan bya ba’i mi rigs par lta ba seems to render Sanskrit akriyādṛṣṭi/-vāda (Pāli akiriyadiṭṭhi), “the theory of nonexistence of (bad or good) action,” here (cf. CPD, s.v.; Mh-karmav, paragraph 15). Feer (1883, 261): “having views relating to actions that are inappropriate (avoir des vues relatives à des choses qu’il n’est pas convenable de faire)?

n.156D mya ngan bsrings pa; L, S, Z mya ngan bsring ba.

n.157Our interpretation of Tibetan ’dod pas log par spyod du bcug pa, lit. perhaps “having made [someone] conduct himself or herself wrongly (or illicitly) out of desire.” Feer (1883, 261), like the Tibetan, does not specify what “deleterious” or “harmful” (accomplir des actes nuisibles) behavior amounts to. We think that it most probably means the same as Tibetan ’dod pas log par g.yem pa (Skt. kāmamithyācāra, Tib. spyod pa often used to translate Skt. ācāra, etc.) “sexual misconduct.” (Cf. the Mh-karmav, paragraph 19).

n.158D, S, Z yid kyis; L ’dod yid kyi ngan pa, “evil deed of a wanting (or craving) mind.”

n.159Translating D ’dod pa sna tshogs kun g.yos pa’i las byas pa; v.l. Y, K ’dod pas. Cf. the corresponding sentences in paragraph 16 of Mh-karmav (Lévi 1932, 44) and Karmavibhaṅga (Toh 338, 1.­28).

n.160Tibetan smon lam, Sanskrit praṇidhāna “vow.” This most likely refers to the Buddha when he was still a bodhisattva. It might, however, refer to bodhisattvas in general. In the Mahāyāna, Sanskrit praṇidhāna constitutes one of the ten powers of a bodhisattva: (the powers of bodhisattvas in Mahāyāna literature were perhaps inspired by the older list of the ten powers of a buddha; apart from being listed, there are unfortunately no clear explanations about what exactly these powers comprise; cf. Har Dayal 1975, 148) the aspirations or vows of bodhisattvas are made with such concentration and commitment that they are guaranteed to be realized. Here, the Tibetan word mthu (Skt. anubhāva) is used instead of Tibetan stobs (Skt. bala), which is generally used in lists of the ten powers of bodhisattvas (Tib. byang chub sems dpa’i stobs bcu’i min la; Skt. bodhisattvabalāni, cf. Mvy. (Sakaki 759)). The phrase here probably does not refer to any standard doctrinal list. This particular statement may refer to the Sanskrit Siṃhajātaka (cf. Kudo 247, Note 17; cf. also Mh-karmav, paragraph 16 (Lévi 1932, 44), where the title Siṃhajātaka is given); the edition of the respective Jātakas mentioned by Kudo are now available, edited by the late Michael Hahn: Hahn, M., Haribhaṭṭa in Nepal: Ten Legends from His Jātakamālā and the Anonymous Śākyasiṃhajātaka. Tokyo: The International Institute for Buddhist Studies of the International College for Postgraduate Buddhist Studies, 2007.

n.161This passage is probably corrupt. We have translated according to what we think is conjecture in D: bram ze khyad par byed pa| kha ngan par byas pa’i lan gyis spre’ur skyes pa lta bu. V.l. S, Z bram ze ched [L, Y, J, K, N, C: chad] par byed pa kha ngan par byas pa’i las kyis spre’ur skyes pa lta bu, “harassing/seizing (killing?) a brahmin?” does not seem to make sense in this context. Feer (1883, 261) translated: “abusing a brahmin” (maltraiter un Brahmane). Like the previous item in this paragraph, this one, too, is reminiscent of the corresponding passage of the Karmavibhaṅga (Toh 338, 1.­29) (Tib. bram ze char ’bebs spre’ur skye par gyur pa ste), which tells the story of the brahmin Varṣakāra’s lot (see Mh-karmav paragraph 16, Lévi 1932, 44, 45); we should therefore read it as one sentence. The brahmin’s name (Varṣākāra), whose story is most probably alluded to here, was either forgotten, unknown, or not deemed important by the compilers, translators, or authors of this text. But it is also possible that S, Z bram ze ched [L, Y, J, K, N, C: chad] par byed pa is a corruption of the Tibetan version of the brahmin’s name: bram ze char ’bebs?

n.162Tibetan ring du ’khyams pa’i ’jig rten du skye bar ’gyur te|, alternatively perhaps “being reborn in the world of long wandering”? Feer (1883, 262) translates: “rebirth as a prowler (or roamer)” (rôdeur), which remains equally vague. See the glossary for an explanation of the term ring du ’khyams pa.

n.163Tibetan dad pa certainly cannot mean “faith” here; Jäschke, s.v. dad pa, records dad pa as a secondary form of ’dod pa “to wish.”

n.164The object of the previous sentence (“base/ bad things”) is probably implied here too. A corresponding passage in the Mh-karmav, paragraph 17 (Lévi 1932, 46) reads lobho, viṣamalobho, mithyājīvo, “greed/lust,” “very strong greed/lust [or (morally) wrong desire; for Skt. viṣama, adj. in the sense “very strong,” see Apte, s.v.], “wrong livelihood.” The Tibetan (A, p. 817, lines 19, 20) reads ’dod chags dang mi rigs par ’dod pas log par ’tsho ba, “wrong livelihood by means of passion and very strong (or inappropriate) passion for sensual pleasure.”

n.165Feer (1883, 262): “being exclusively preoccupied with oneself” (un moi dont on se préoccupe (exclusivement).

n.166See Jäschke, s.v. zla bo.

n.167Tibetan bdag la mi srid pa’i nga, literally “the conceit of nonexistence with regard to the self (Skt. ātman).” Feer (1883, 262) translated: “An ‘I’ (the self, Skt. ātman) that cannot exist in the ‘I’ (the individual)” (un moi qui ne peut exister dans le moi), and further commented (ibid., note 3): “The ‘I’ [nga] of which the whole paragraph speaks is the ego of pride; the second ‘I’ in this sentence [nga] is, I believe, the philosophical ego/ self. The sentence would mean that pride, which is misplaced in any case, is even more so in an elusive/ impermanent being that is without duration, which has only an ephemeral existence. (Le moi dont il s’agit dans tout le paragraphe est le moi de l’orgueil; le second moi dont il s’agit dans cette phrase est, je crois, le moi philosophique. La phrase signifierait que l’orgueil, déplacé de toutes les manières, l’est encore plus dans un être fugitif, sans durée, qui n’a qu’une existence éphémère.) We cannot easily emend this to a more orthodox reading, e.g., bdag la sred pa’i nga (For bdag la sred pa = Skt. ātmatṛṣṇā, see Negi, s.v.); the reading mi srid pa’i is found in all consulted Kangyur editions (A, D, L, S, Z)‍—whether belonging to the Tshalpa or the Thempangma group. This obscure phrase may thus very well be Transformation of Karma’s definition of Sanskrit mithyāmāna or mithyādṛṣṭi. Therefore, we think, contrary to Feer’s interpretation that the “I” or the/a self (Tib. nga; Skt. ātman) cannot exist in the “I” or in “me” (Tib. bdag; the person/individual, the pudgala?), that this is precisely the content or the object of the conceit (Tib. nga) or the wrong view (cf. Priestley 1999, ch. 5: “The Reality of the Pudgala,” especially p. 83). If our interpretation is correct, this statement might hold the key for identifying the school-affiliation of this text (i.e., a Pudgalavāda school, or more precisely, the Sāṃmatīyas or Vātsīputrīyas).

n.168With regard to content, these different terms for various kinds of pride or conceit seem not too far removed semantically from the definitions given in Vasubandhu’s Pañcaskandhaka (māno ’timāno mānātimāno ’smimāno ’bhimāna ūnamāno mithyāmānaś ceti |). The actual terms, however, are markedly different from those found in other lists, including the Mahāvyutpatti (Mvy. Sakaki nos. 1946–52); cf. Engle 2009, 375 (p. 234 for the English translation). We have attempted here to strike a balance between an overly literal translation and superimposing the standardized meanings of the later, more established scholastic terminology. Feer’s (1883, 262) translation of this passage is overly literal: “Being exclusively preoccupied with oneself; an ego that rises above the moon; an ego that rises above superiors; an ego (which claims to be) even superior to superiors; a self that cannot exist in the self.” (un moi dont on se préoccupe (exclusivement); un moi qui s’élève au-dessus de la lune; un moi qui s’élève au-dessus des supérieurs; un moi (qui se prétend) supérieur même aux supérieurs; un moi qui ne peut exister dans le moi).

n.169This translation is based on a parallel passage in the Karmavibhaṅga (Toh 338, 1.­39; Mh-karmav paragraph 18), which reads “dedicating the roots of wholesome states of one’s positive actions to rebirth in the world of the asuras.” (legs pa spyad pa’i dge ba’i rtsa ba).

n.170Tibetan ’dod pa drug na spyod pa’i lha. In the Abhidharma, the term spyod pa, which here translates Sanskrit avacara “sphere (of activity),” usually designates the state of consciousness of the rebirth-mind that is produced by the respective action, as differentiated from the actual or physical realm of rebirth (Skt. dhātu) that is considered to be the result or the outer manifestation of the respective rebirth-mind (cf. Gethin 1998, 121f.). However, here the expression is probably synonymous with Sanskrit rūpadhātu “the realm of (subtle) materiality.” Furthermore, the text uses a modification of the technical term for “sense-sphere” (Tib. ’dod pa drug na spyod pa; Skt. kāmāvacara), which also comprises the human realm, etc., mentioned in the previous paragraph. This is the reason why we cannot translate ’dod pa [drug] na spyod pa as “sense-sphere” here. Interestingly, this category is absent from Summary of the Fifty-one Karma Categories in 1.­8–1.­63.

n.171Tibetan brtson ’grus su bsdams pas, literally perhaps “By being bound/tied to diligence/perseverance,….” Feer (1883, 261f.): “If one does not deviate from the path of the ten virtues, and (moreover) one remains firmly attached to heroism, … (Si l’on ne s’écarte pas du chemin des dix vertus, et que (de plus) on reste attaché fermement à I’héroisme,…).

n.172It is perhaps noteworthy that the six perfections are generally associated with the Mahāyāna: giving (Skt. dāna), morality (Skt. śīla), patience or forbearance (Skt. kṣānti), effort (Skt. vīrya), concentration (Skt. dhyāna), and wisdom (Skt. prajñā). These differ from the ten perfections (Pāli pāramī) taught in Pāli Buddhism. We do not know which precise list of perfections our text refers to here. While the four boundless states leading to rebirth in the form realm is a standard Abhidharma teaching, the mention of the practice of the six perfections as constituting a cause for rebirth in the form realm is unusual. In any case, the six perfections plus the four boundless states appear to constitute the ten “factors” that are to be practiced in this paragraph. The role of the ten virtuous courses of action, however, is unclear. The Tibetan syntax seems to suggest that they should be observed while at the same time one practices the six perfections and the four boundless states.

n.173From here on until 1.­64, the individual paragraphs do not contain the phrase bcu gang zhe na, “What are the ten (factors)?”

n.174D mi g.yo ba ’dzin pa bzhi’i chos spyad; L, Z mi g.yo ’dzin pa bzhi’i chos spyod [S spyad] pa. According to Lama Kunga Rinpoche, this is a descriptive or alternative expression for Tibetan gzugs med pa’i snyoms par ’jug pa bzhi, or the “four meditative absorptions associated with the formless realm” (Skt. ārūpyāvacara­dhyāna or arūpa­samāpatti).

n.175The names of the four meditative absorptions also deviate slightly from their standardized forms listed in the Mvy. (cf. Sakaki 3109–13).

n.176D rig; v.l. H, N, K, S, Y, Z reg; v.l. L. rags pa’i ming. We have adopted the v.l. reg/ rags “tangible/coarse,” “material.” According to Lama Kunga Rinpoche’s explanation, this essentially signifies the transcendence of “name (Tib. ming) and form (Tib. chos sna tshogs)” (Skt. nāmarūpa).

n.177We have chosen to translate Tibetan brjod du med pa, literally “inexpressible,” by two adjectives.

n.178According to D, L mi ’dzin; S, Z ’dzin.

n.179Tibetan mi g.yo. Lama Kunga Rinpoche suggested “stillness” as an alternative translation for “imperturbability.”

n.180Tibetan stengs gi (v.l. H steng gi) is a postposition meaning “above” or “depending upon,” which we have translated here according to the context as “produced by.”

n.181Tibetan chos ’di bzhis.

n.182The Tibetan expression las kyis bzhin mi ’gyur bar skye ba, “[How] does action [lead] to an unchangeable rebirth that corresponds with the action?” is not the standard rendition of this karmic category (cf. also n.­58). Regarding content, this paragraph corresponds to paragraph 30 of the MahāKarma­vibhaṅga (Lévi 1932, 50). Cf. also Maggi 1995, 73–4, who translates the Khotanese as “[Which is the act by which it is not yet known] where [a man] takes birth?”

n.183The Tibetan des bdag cir smon lam btab is rather truncated. Literally perhaps “wherever (or whatever) one has aspired for oneself through that.” Cf. Karmavibhaṅga (Toh 338, 1.­53): “Having performed an action one says, ‘may I be reborn as such-and-such [Sanskrit Mh-karmav, paragraph 30 (Lévi 1932, 50) reads: amutra, “here or there”]!’ and by dedicating [his or her action], he or she will be reborn as that.” Feer (1883, 263–64) translated: “How is it possible, through the effect of acts, to be reborn almost [Tib. bzhin?] without change? If, after having carried out acts (which are) the roots of virtue, one says to oneself, ‘Why should I make a vow/aspiration?’ and through that vicious act being continually committed, by the effect of the acts, it is possible to be reborn almost without change.” (Comment arrive-t-on, par l’effet des actes, a renaître Presque sans changement? Si, après avoir fait des actes (qui sont) des racines de vertu, on se dit: Pourquoi formulerais-je un voeu? et qu’on fasse continuellement des actes vicieux, c’est ainsi que, par l’effet des actes, on arrive à renaître presque sans changement.) It appears that Feer did not interpret or understand ānantarya­karman to be a Buddhist technical term, nor did he have the Mh-karmav at his disposal to clarify the meaning of this passage.

n.184Cf. the parallel passages in Mh-karmav paragraphs 30-31 and Karma­vibhaṅga (Toh 338, 1.­53).

n.185Cf. Mh-karmav paragraph 31 and Karma­vibhaṅga (Toh 338, 1.­53).

n.186Tibetan says literally: yul gzhan du smon lam btab pa (“one has made an aspiration in another country”), which, however, cannot be the meaning here.

n.187D, L read las gang byas kyang rung ste| bzang po dang| ngan pa gar ’gyur ba ni ’di lta ste|. This sentence is unclear. We have instead followed the v.l. S, Z bzang po dang ngan par ’gyur ba ni ’di lta ste|.

n.188This paragraph is unclear. It seems to contain two different arguments: (1) The actions of making offerings and praying to the Three Jewels or other suitable fields of merit can result in determining or changing one’s future rebirth location, and (2) one will experience the karmic results of one’s (other) actions in another country (i.e., one’s actions cannot be effaced by rebirth in another country). This may refer to the dharma called avipranāśa in the interpretation of the Sāṃmitīyas. Cf. the parallel passage in the Mh-karmav, paragraph 32 (Lévi 1932, 50): “In what way does action lead to the ripening of a karmic result in a foreign country? Action which ripens in this very life as either a good or a bad karmic result for someone who has gone to another country is [called] action whose result ripens in another country.” (Read Sanskrit according to Kudo 2004, 88, 89: tatra katamat karma deśāntaravipākam ucyate | yat karma tasminn eva janmāntare deśāntaragatasya vipacyate śubham aśubhaṃ vā | tat karma deśāntaravipākaṃ). Feer (1883, 264) seems to have misinterpreted this paragraph (Le Buddha est convenable; la Loi est convenable; la Confrérie est convenable; il est convenable de se rendre complètement maître de la moralité. Quand on a bien réfléchi de manière à croire complètement ces (quatre propositions), qu’on a fait des dons et formulé un voeu pour un autre pays, que tous les actes qu’on a accomplis sont convenables, bons, que les mauvais deviennent blancs, quand il en est ainsi … c’est par de tels actes que l’on va dans un autre pays et qu’on s’y mûrit complètement.) This alludes to the famous story of the sea merchant’s son Maitrāyajña, or Maitrakanyaka in the Sanskrit avadāna literature and Mittavindika in the Pāli jātakas), who travels the sea with his friends to find riches, suffers shipwreck, and experiences the ripening of both his good and bad actions in foreign lands. Another version of this story can be found in Karma­vibhaṅga (Toh 338, 1.­55) and Mh-karmav, paragraph 32 (Lévi 1932, 51–65).

n.189The Tibetan means literally: “Someone may ask: ‘How/in what way is action done without intent?’ ” This paragraph corresponds to Mh-karmav paragraph 23.

n.190According to D, L, S, Z las; v.l. Y, K ltas|.

n.191D lus kyis ma byas pa; v.l. L, S, Z lus kyi ma byas pa, “not carried out physically.”

n.192D sems rgyus shing; L, S, Z sems rgyas shing.

n.193Reading according to D: ji ltar las bsams te byas pa gang zhe na|; v.l. K: bsams te ma byas pa, which is the same as in the preceding paragraph, and is likely to be a mistake here. V.l. Y: bsams te da byas pa.

n.194D, L, S, Z sems can las dmyal bar skyes te|; Y, K omit las. We do not understand the significance of las here (“reborn in hell, [fallen] from the realm of [human] beings?”).

n.195All consulted editions read skye ba’i lam here. The sentence as it stands would then read in English: “What is the path of rebirth for a person who has accumulated the corresponding action and is reborn as a hell being after the completion of the lifespan of the hells?” Two structurally very similar sentences, however, that begin the following two paragraphs read slar skye ba’i las instead. We have therefore emended this passage to slar skye ba’i las. The syntax remains challenging though, and the sentence is likely corrupt.

n.196We have taken the liberty to translate the Tibetan expression shin tu mi dga’ ba’i yid skyod pa|, “arousing a [state of] mind that is extremely unhappy,” more freely.

n.197The example-case alluded to here can be read in more detail in Karma­vibhaṅga (Toh 338, 1.­51) and Mh-karmav paragraph 29.

n.198D reads yi rangs; K, Y yid rangs. We follow the D reading here. Cf. also Mvy (Sakaki 2931): yi rangs ba (Skt. āttamanāḥ).

n.199According to Lama Kunga Rinpoche, Tibetan rigs gcig pa may mean “one’s own clan,” but the exact meaning is unclear.

n.200Tibetan shin tu bde zhing [L omits zhing] bzhon [Y, K gzhon (“young,” “youthful”?); C gzhen] pa mang po dang ldan pa|; Tibetan bzhon pa as a noun designates a mount of any kind as a means of transport (a horse, a mule etc.), but it can also mean “carriages.” We have decided to use both referents in our translation.

n.201The Tibetan here reads las kyi ’bras bu ni gang yin zhe na (“What is the karmic result?”) instead of las gang yin zhe na as in the previous sentences.text here deviates from the usual sentence structure.

n.202Translated according to D, L: dad cing rangs pa’i sems phyis skyes pa’i […]. V.l. Y, J, K, N, C dad cing rangs pa sems yid la skyes pa’i […].

n.203Translation follows D cis kyang; v.l. Y, K mis kyang.

n.204Feer (1883, 267) translates: “Born in such families, his enjoyments only increase at each [re-]birth” (Naissant dans de telles familles, ses jouissances ne font que s’augmenter à chaque naissance.) D, L, S, Z skyid pa de lta bu’i phyir skye; Y, J, K, N, C, H skyid pa de lta bu phyir skye.

n.205Here too, as in the following three sentences, Tibetan reads las kyi ’bras bu ni gang yin zhe na (“What is the karmic result?”) instead of las gang yin zhe na.

n.206The Tibetan here and in the following sentence leaves out the usual phrase gang zag las ’di lta bu ’dus pas, “a person, by accumulating the corresponding actions.”

n.207Free translation of Tibetan zas dang spyod pas ’tsho ba.

n.208This is again a nontechnical interpretation of the Tibetan phrase nyon mongs nas sdug.

n.209Tibetan reads nyid kyis here instead of bdag nyid kyis as in paragraph 1.­47 above, which has virtually the same sentence.

n.210As an exception we have here and in the following sentences translated Tibetan las not simply as action but with a phrase. Tibetan las here really means the potential of an action or intention to produce or ripen into a karmic result in the future. See “action” in the glossary. Cf. also BHSD, s.v. kṣaya, for a similar passage from the Mahāvastu and Edgerton’s translation.

n.211The parallel passage in the Karmavibhaṅga (Toh 338, 1.­123) here has so so’i skye bo phal ba, “ordinary person,” the standard translation equivalent of Sanskrit pṛthagjana. The Tibetan ma rabs is thus used here in a religious sense as the opposite of a noble person (Tib. ya rabs? or Skt. āryapudgala). In another context, however, the term designates a person of low social status, a commoner (Tib. ma rabs kyi rigs, as opposed to ya rabs kyi rigs). The grammar of this sentence also allows us to translate ma rabs kyis adverbially: “in a vile manner.” However, it is difficult to think of a concrete example from canonical Buddhist literature in which merit was acquired by rude, low, or vile actions, especially since this example alludes to the famous wheel-turning monarch Māndhātar. The crucial difference rather seems to be whether merit is dedicated to religious or worldly ends.

n.212The “wheel-turning monarch” (Tib. ’khor lo skor ba’i rgyal po) in this paragraph is likely a reference to the story of the mythical King Māndhātar, who is mentioned in the Mh-karmav, and whose full story can be found in the Pāli Jātaka (No. 258) and in the Divyāvadāna (Vaidya No. 17: Māndhātāva­dānaṃ).

n.213Tibetan ’gug pa, “crooked,” “bent,” “stooped” appears to be the Tibetan appropriation of the Sanskrit name of an Elder (Tib. gnas brtan) called Lekuñcika (Pāli Lakuntaka, “dwarf”), who features in the Pāli-Jātaka literature and in the Sanskrit Avadānaśataka No. 94 (for exact references, see DPPN, s.v. Lakuntaka Bhaddiya Thera), and who is described as having been short, ugly, and even hunchbacked (Skt. kuñcita means “bent” or “contracted”) as a karmic result of his deeds in former lives. Indeed, the Shelkar (London manuscript Kangyur) and the Stok Palace Kangyur editions of the Karmavibhaṅga (Toh 338) read le kun ci ka. The D edition has ka ra ma sha instead (Skt. Karmaśa‍—identity unknown; cf. Lévi 1932, 75, n. 3), while the extant Sanskrit edition gives the Arhats Śoṇottara and Jaṃghākāśyapa as examples (cf. Mh-karmav(K), paragraph 45).

n.214Tibetan rdo stobs; The Stok Palace and the Shey Palace manuscript Kangyur editions of the related Karmavibhaṅga (Toh 338, 1.­127) read “like the sthavira Śebala (Tib. she ba la).” The latter is perhaps a transliteration of a Sanskrit name śaivala . The Elder Śaivala is known from the Vinaya of the Mūlasarvāstivādins (see BHSD, s.v. śaivala ). Chinese da shi li: 大 (Tib. gnas brtan) 石 (Tib. rdo) 力 (Tib. stobs). The Saṅgha­bhedavastu has once Chinese (ming yue) da li (名曰)大力 for Sanskrit śaivala (see Thesaurus Literaturae Buddhicae, University of Oslo, Faculty of Humanities; Saṅgha­bhedavastu; permanent link: http://www2.hf.uio.no/common/apps/permlink/permlink.php?app=polyglotta&context=record&uid=f7fc0f5c-8285-11e1-ab97-001cc4df1abe). Perhaps the peculiar Tibetan translation of the elder’s name can be explained by a Chinese rendering of the Sanskrit name that interpreted (or read) -vala as -bala “strong”; “strength,” “power,” Chinese li 力. The Tibetan translators may then have rendered Chinese li with Tibetan stobs. However, we cannot explain Tibetan rdo. Another possibility may be that Sanskrit śaibala (or śaivala ) was interpreted by the Tibetan translators as śaila “stone-like”; “mountain,” “rock” plus bala “strength” and translated into Tibetan accordingly as rdo stobs.

n.215Tibetan mthong na mi sdug pa means literally “unpleasant to look at.”

n.216Our tentative translation of Tibetan phyi rol gyi yul sa rnams.

n.217For reasons that are unknown to us, Toh 339 lists only nine (non-)virtuous courses of action.

n.218According to D, S, Z srog gcod [bcad] na de’i lan gyis; L srog bcad na de’i lan gyi; v.l. Y, J, K, N, C, H srog gcod pa de’i las kyis. The following sentence has las kyis, but the remaining items of the list have again lan gyis, or ’bras bu and las kyi ’bras bu, which supports the reading of D, S, Z.

n.219What is probably meant by this is that the soil’s vitality or productivity will deteriorate or decay; cf. Abhidh-k-bh, ad AKK IV,85 (= Pruden 1988–91, 669–71).

n.220Translation follows D mtho dman; v.l. Yongle, K mthon sman.

n.221It is not known to us what specific illness the text refers to here. D na rkong; v.l. Yongle, K nad rkong. According to LC, s.v. rkong pa = za rkong which, according to an entry in dag yig: “za ’phrug che ba’i pags nad ’brum bu can zhig gi ming ste/ yul skad la lar yang zer/. a skin disease. […]” is some form of skin disease accompanied by strong itching and skin eruptions/pustules. See also BGT, s.v. (1) rkong: pags par za ’phrug skye ba’i nad cig, “a certain disease that causes itching of (on) the skin.” Cf. also Jäschke, s.v. rkong pa: “itch; […] Others describe it as a scabby eruption of the skin, chiefly affecting animals, but occasionally also men.” The Sanskrit equivalents (dadru, dadrū, dardu, dardū) given in Negi (145, II) appear to be Negi’s own translations into Sanskrit from the Tibetan, on the basis of the same definition as given in BGT.

n.222Missing from this list is the sixth nonvirtuous action, abusive language (Tib. tshig rtsub po mi dge ba’i las; Skt. pāruṣyavāda).

n.223Again, according to D, L, S, Z lan gyis; v.l. Y, J, K, N, C, H las kyis.

n.224D phyi rol gyi yul sa rnams; v.l. L, S, Z pha rol gyi yul sa rnams seems to have the same sense (one’s “environs”).

n.225According to Feer, part two starts at this point.

n.226A man pa, which is w.r. for D (unclear print), L, S, Z ma na ba (Skt. māṇava “young brahmin”).

n.227That the subject of this paragraph is the negative act of killing is implied; the Tibetan text here does not mention the word for killing (srog gcod pa).

n.228Translated according to D rmi lam na sdig pa mthong ba; v.l. Y, K rmi lam na sdig pa’i thod pa.

n.229Translated according to D, L, S, Z lam ngan par ltung; v.l. Y, J, K, N, C, H las (ngan par ltung).

n.230The Tibetan omits ngan pa rnam pa bcu here.

n.231The Tibetan is not entirely clear here (mi rigs par ’gro ba yin). It probably means that one walks around in a suspicious manner or in inappropriate places or at inappropriate times, as thieves would be expected to do. In fact, the Karmavibhaṅga (Toh 338, 1.­156) reads “one goes around at inappropriate times” (Tib. dus ma yin par rgyu ba).

n.232According to L, S, Z sdig pa’i grogs po kun gyis zin pa yin|; v.l. D sdig pa’i grogs po kun gyi nad kyis zin pa yin|, “one’s evil friends will be stricken with all kinds of diseases”?

n.233The Karma­vibhaṅga (Toh 338, 1.­156) has “One will be abandoned by virtuous friends” (Tib. dge ba’i bshes gnyen gyis rnam par spangs pa).

n.234According to L, S, Z khyim; vv.ll. D khyims; Y, J, K, N, C, H khrims: “one will be incapable of keeping moral discipline.” The reading of the Kangyur editions of the Thempangma line seems more plausible, given that the subject of this paragraph is stealing.

n.235According to D kun tu ngan du rjod [H, S, Z brjod] pa’i las (literally “thoroughly bad.”); v.l. Y rdzod.

n.236L, S, Z separate the two sentences (su’ang mi nyan pa’i tshig tu ’gyur ba| kun tu ngan du brjod pa’i las sems shing byed pa yin te|), thus treating them seemingly as separate items in the list. We have adopted the D reading here in order to retain ten list items.

n.237The Karmavibhaṅga (Toh 338, 1.­159) mentions thirty-six kinds.

n.238An alternative translation of Tibetan mngon par snang bzhin du may be “One’s wealth will dissipate like an apparition.” Cf., however, the Karmavibhaṅga (Toh 338, 1.­159): “In this life one’s wealth will be depleted” (tshe ’di la nor zad pa). Tibetan-Sanskrit dictionaries give abhilakṣita as a common Sanskrit equivalent for Tibetan mngon par snang ba (Negi, 1037; LC, 630), “marked with signs,” and “distinguished, renowned” in Buddhist Sanskrit (cf. BHSD, s.v.), which does not fit our context. Feer (1883, 272) translates: “One’s wealth (or resources) disappear at lightning speed” (Les richesses se dissipent avec la rapidite de l’éclair.)

n.239According to D, L, S, Z ma dad pa here. v.l. Y, J, K, N, C nad (“one will accumulate many illnesses”). Feer (1883, 272) translated according to the Tshalpa reading: “[one’s own?] diseases will accrete” (les maladies se multiplient). Cf. also Mh-karmav, paragraph 13: “(as a result of drinking alcohol) distrust (or disbelief; lack of respect) toward the Buddha, Dharma, and Saṅgha develops” (buddhe cāgauravo bhavati. dharme saṃghe cāgauravo bhavati).

n.240These terms were clearly defined by Vasubandhu (Pañcaskandhaka, p. 5): “Embarrassment (or shame).”

n.241D, L skyid pa sngan cad [S, Z chad] ma bsags pa|; vv.ll. Y, N sngan chad ma gsags|; K sngon chad ma gsags|; N ngan cad ma bsags|. Feer (1883, 272) translated: “The imperfect happiness which one enjoys does not increase; not only does this happiness not increase, but that which has been accumulated of happiness exhausts itself completely and no longer exists (le bonheur imparfait dont on jouit ne s’accroît pas; non seulement ce bonheur ne s’accroît pas, mais ce qui avait été accumulé de bonheur s’épuise complètement et n’existe plus).

n.242The shad in all the consulted editions (A, D, L, S, Z) might indicate that this was regarded as constituting two separate items (skyid pa ngan chad ma bsags pa| da yang mi sogs pa|).

n.243According to D zhan [K zhen] te nyam chung bar gyur pa| mya ngan gyi rtsa ba|; L, S, Z read zhan te ma mya ngan gyi rtsa ba, “one becomes feeble and a source of anguish for one’s mother,” which is obscure. The Karmavibhaṅga (Toh 338, 1.­159) reads: “one will become a source of suffering [for others]; one will become weak” (mya ngan gyi rtsa bar ’gyur ba dang| nyam chung bar ’gyur ba dang|)

n.244According to D, L spa; v.l. S, Z sba. Literally perhaps “one won’t take care to cover and beautify oneself.” (Tib. sba zhing mdzes pa’i bag mi byed pa). However, compare a similar sentence in the Karmavibhaṅga (Toh 338, 1.­159) that reads “one’s mindfulness with regard to women will fail” (bud med rnams la shin tu bag med par ’gyur ba). Feer (1883, 273) translated nos. 23–26 as “one does not know shame; one is unscrupulous, with no sense of shame; one does not have vigilance with regard to the charms of beauty”; (on ne connaît pas la honte; on n’a point les scrupules de la pudeur; on n’a point de vigilance à l’égard des charmes do la beauté).

n.245D rigs gcig pa; L, S, Z rigs gcig par. Feer (1883, 272): on rejette ses parents, ceux de la famille dont on est soi-même.

n.246Tibetan bla ma may alternatively mean “[one’s] teacher (or guru).”

n.247According to D smyon par gyur pa’i las, literally perhaps “(one will think about) actions that lead to drunkenness.” L, S, Z read smon par ’gyur ba’i las. Feer (1883, 273): “one has in mind only acts which lead to madness, and one commits faults of every kind” (on n’a en tête que des actes qui conduisent à la folie, et on ne commet que des fautes de toute espèce), thus reading smyon pa.

n.248D, L, S, Z bla ’og, which can be old Tibetan for steng ’og, “above and below”; v.l. Y bla ’od. According to Feer, part three starts at this point.

n.249A (wrongly) man pa; D (slightly unclear), L, S, Z ma na ba, Sanskrit māṇava “young brahmin.”

n.250Tibetan legs pa bcu, literally: “ten good [factors or things]”? Cf. Mh-karmav, paragraph 62ff. (Lévi 1932, 82, et passim): Sanskrit guṇa (or Pāli ānisaṁsa; Buddhist Sanskrit ānuśaṁsa, anuśaṁsā, and ānṛśaṁsa; Sanskrit ānṛśaṁsya); the Karmavibhaṅga (Toh 338, 1.­160) has phan yon “benefit, advantage.”

n.251The parallel passage in the Karmavibhaṅga (Toh 338, 1.­161 (F.294.a)) reads longs spyod che bar ’gyur ba, literally “one’s resources (or possessions; consumables) (Tib. longs spyod) will be abundant.”

n.252The parasol (Skt. chattra; Tib. gdugs) symbolizes protection and secular wealth or royalty (cf. Beer, Robert, The Encyclopedia of Tibetan Symbols and Motifs, Boston: Shambhala, 1999, 176–80).

n.253This rendering appears to be the more “natural” reading of the Tibetan (the verb gnod pa is classified as tha dad pa’i bya tshig in the BGT and is often seen to demand the la-don (la).) However, in the Buddhist literature translated from the Sanskrit, the construction gnod par ’gyur is often found to render Sanskrit vihanyamāna; viheṭhyati, i.e., in a passive sense. A possible alternative rendering of Tibetan ’jig rten la mi gnod par ’gyur might therefore be “one will be unharmed in the world,” expressing the idea of protection, implicit in the symbol of the parasol, as karmic retribution for raising a parasol at a caitya .

n.254Tibetan smon pa’i gnas su ’gyur may alternatively be translated as “one will become the focal point (or object of) [peoples’] prayers (or wishes).”

n.255According to D, S, Z ’jig rten gyi dbang por ’gyur| las sems shing byed par ’gyur|; L seems to read as one sentence: ’jig rten gyi dbang por ’gyur las sems shing byed par ’gyur. It is tempting, therefore, to accept the v.l. Y, J, K, N, C, H ’jig rten gyi dbang por ’gyur ba’i| las sems shing byed par ’gyur| (phyi phyir ’khor los [b]sgyur ba’i rgyal po thob par ’gyur|) and translate as one continuing sentence: “one will intend and carry out actions that lead to worldly power and eventually attain the state of a universal monarch.” Very similar also is Feer (1883, 274): “on a dans la tête et on accomplit des actes qui font arriver à la domination du monde; on finit par obtenir (la puissance d’) un roi Cakravartin.”

n.256Tibetan las sems shing byed par ’gyur|, literally “one intends an action and will carry [it] out.” All consulted editions seem to regard this as a separate sentence except for the Tshalpa v.l. provided in the apparatus of A (see following note).

n.257D phyi phyir ’khor los sgyur ba’i rgyal po; L, S, Z phyi phyir ’khor lo’i rgyal po.

n.258Translating the v.l. C lus la rdul mi chags pa yin instead of D lus rdul (mi chags pa yin).

n.259Tibetan ’jig rten gyi nang na me tog dang ’dra bar ’gyur|; a metaphor for physical beauty?

n.260D gzugs; Our translation follows the v.l. L, S, Z, Y, K gzungs “power,” “strength” (see Jäschke, s.v. gzungs).

n.261The meaning of this sentence is not clear. Alternative translations: “The body of the Buddha (Tib. thub pa’i gzugs) will spread throughout the ten directions [in the form of (or as)] moral discipline (Tib. khrims)”; or “the capability (L, S, Z, Y, K gzungs) of [keeping] moral discipline (or the rules) (of monastic conduct) will spread throughout the ten directions?” Feer (1883, 275): “a form that is adequate to the rules (of Buddhist moral discipline?) is spreading across the ten directions” (une forme adéquate à la régle s’étendant à travers les dix régions.) In Buddhism, perfect moral discipline (or ethics) has long been associated with fragrance or a fragrant body odor. Cf. also a parallel sentence in the Mh-karmav, paragraph 74 (Lévi 1932): daśa diśaḥ śīlagandhaḥ khyātim gacchati, “the fragrance of moral discipline will spread throughout the ten directions.” Very similar is the Karmavibhaṅga (Toh 338, 1.­167 (F.295.a): phyogs dang phyogs mtshams rnams su de’i tshul khrims kyi dri’i ngad ldan bar ’gyur ba).

n.262The Tibetan is not entirely clear. This translation is tentative. The Sanskrit Mh-karmav reads abhiga­manīyaś ca bhavati “one will be [easily] approached” (Lévi 1932, 100).

n.263The Tibetan is unclear (’jig rten gyi nang na rnyed par ’gyur); Tibetan rnyed par ’gyur is Sanskrit pratilabhate, labhyate, lapsyate? Cf., however, the parallel sentence in the Mh-karmav, paragraph 74 (Lévi 1932, 100 f.): lābhī ca bhavati iṣṭānāṃ dharmāṇām “one will acquire [all] desired qualities.” Very similar is the Karmavibhaṅga (Toh 338, 1.­167 (F.295.a): yid du ’ong ba’i chos rnams thob par ’gyur ba).

n.264The exact meaning of this sentence is unclear. The passage may be corrupt. D, S, Z ’khor gyi rnams gtong zhing nye bar ’gyur|; L ’khor gyi zhing nye bar ’gyur|; Y, J, K, N, C ’khor gyi rnams stong zhing [H bstod cing] nye bar ’gyur|. The Karmavibhaṅga (Toh 338, 1.­168 (F.295.b)), which reads g.yog ’khor mi phyed par ’gyur ba dang|, “one’s entourage will be undivided (or harmonious),” suggests emending gtong/ stong/ bstod to stongs/ bstongs, which is archaic Tibetan for phan pa’am grogs byed pa, or grogs byed pa’am gzhan dang mthun par ’jug pa: “to be friends; to assist [each other],” and “to be in harmony (or in accordance)” (cf. Rnam rgyal tshe ring 2001 and BGT, s.v. stong, bstongs). The connective zhing (cing) may indicate that two items should be counted here.

n.265The way this paragraph divides the items into ten is not entirely clear. The same is true for the corresponding paragraph in the Karmavibhaṅga (Toh 338, 1.­168; Mh-karmav paragraph 73, Lévi 1932, 98 ff.), despite its mention of ten items, too. Items in single phrases connected by the word “and” have been taken as two to make the full complement of ten items.

n.266Feer (1883, 275): “offering of butter” (l’offre du beurre).

n.267According to D, S, Z ’jig rten gyi nang na; v.l. L ’jig rten gyi mngon.

n.268Literal translation of Tibetan ’phrul gyi mig. The post-reform term for this is lha’i mig (or lha’i spyan; Skt. divyaṃ cakṣuḥ), “divine eye”; cf. Mvy (Sakaki 202). See also McKeown 2010, 52 f., specifically n. 75.

n.269Cf. n.­263 on the same sentence in 1.­74, above.

n.270Cf., however, the parallel passage in the Karmavibhaṅga (Toh 338, 1.­172 (F.296.a)): gzugs bzang bar ’gyur ba dang| mdzes shing mig tu sdug par ’gyur ba dang|, approximately “one’s body will be pleasing and beautiful, and a feast for the eyes.”

n.271Tibetan according to D dbang che zhing ’khor mang la ’khor snying nye bar ’gyur|; L, S, Z dbang che zhing ’khor ma la ’khor snying nye bar ’gyur (“while (or as) one will be a person of influence, one will be affectionate toward the female attendant?” This reading is likely corrupt). The parallel sentence in the Karmavibhaṅga (Toh 338, 1.­172 (F.296.a)) reads g.yog ’khor mi phyed ba “the retinue is cordial (or undivided).”

n.272Translated according to D, L ’dum; vv.ll. H zlum; S, Z bzlum. More concretely, this may mean that one will naturally be chosen as an arbitrator or mediator by all.

n.273More literally perhaps “one will transform into the body of a (or the) bodhisattva [i.e., the Buddha in one of his earlier existences as a bodhisattva] whose essence is [indestructible] like a diamond.” However, the Tibetan is ambiguous (byang chub sems dpa’ rdo rje snying po’i lus su ’gyur). The more “natural” reading of the Tibetan byang chub sems dpa’ rdo rje snying po is probably “the bodhisattva Vajragarbha.” However, the mention of a Mahāyāna (vajra-) bodhisattva figure in a sūtra that is‍—at least according to one edition, i.e., the Degé Kangyur‍—classified as belonging to the Hīnayāna (and which originally may have belonged to the canon of one of the Śrāvakayāna nikāyas) appears strange to us. The figure of the bodhisattva Vajragarbha is attested in some Mahāyāna sūtras that gained special importance in East Asian Buddhist traditions, specifically in the Avataṃsaka­sūtra, the Daśabhūmikasūtra, the Laṅkāvatāra­sūtra, and in the Sūtra of Perfect Enlightenment (Chinese Yuanjue jing 圓覺經; probably a Chinese composition). He also appears in the Buddhist tantric literature, e.g., as one of the sixteen vajra-bodhisattvas in the Kongōkai Mandara (Skt. vajra­dhātu-maṇḍala) of Dainichi Nyorai (Skt. Buddha Vairocana) of Japanese Esoteric Buddhism, and in the Hevajra Tantra. Perhaps this is an interpolation and thus reflects Chinese influence? The Karmavibhaṅga (Toh 338, 1.­172 (F.296.a)) reads lus rdo rje ltar mkhregs [vv.ll. ’khregs/khregs] par ’gyur ba dang|, “one will acquire an adamantine [literally, hard like stone (or diamond)] body” (v.l. L, S editions of Karmavibhaṅga (Toh 338): lus rdo rje’i tshogs ltar ’gyur ba dang|); MS[C] of the Mh-karmav(K) reads vajra­kāyaśarīraḥ (= Kudo 2004, 218) = Tibetan lus rdo rje tshogs ltar, “having a body that is like a collection(?) of stones (or diamonds).”

n.274Feer, in his translation (1883, 276), makes another subdivision of the text here (“II”), but thematically, the exposition continues in a similar fashion as before, and in the same manner as Mh-karmav paragraph 2./67. We have therefore used continuous numbering.

n.275Note that this list for unknown reasons contains only six items. Cf. the parallel passage in Toh 338, 1.­173.

n.276This paragraph contains only nine items.

n.277D, L, S bzhon pa “vehicle,” “mount.” V.l. Z gzhon pa “youth?”‍—gzhon pa here is probably a wrong (or alternative) spelling for bzhon pa.

n.278Translated according to the D reading mi zhan pa; v.l. K mi zhen pa.

n.279D g.yog bran dang ldan par ’gyur; translated according to v.l. L, S, Z g.yog bran dang ldan ba [S, Z pa] bde bar ’gyur. Cf. also Mh-karmav(K), paragraph 3 (Kudo 2004, 219; Sanskrit reconstructed): upasthānaiś cāsyavaikalyaṃ bhavati |.

n.280According to D, L snod spyad (v.l. Y spyed); S, Z snod spyod (w.r. for spyad?). A begging bowl (usually lhung bzed in Tibetan) is one of the utensils required for monks or novices entering the order. The Karmavibhaṅga (Toh 338, 1.­175) reads (1) and (2) as one sentence: “one will become like a container for all good qualities of the world” (’jig rten gyi yon tan gyi snod lta bur ’gyur ba dang|). Cf. also the Sanskrit of a Karma­vibhaṅga fragment edited by Takamichi Fukita (Fukita 1990, 5), which reads bhājanabhūto bhavati lokasya gunāṃ [w.r. for gunāṇāṃ], “one will become like a receptacle for the virtues of the world.” Interestingly, the edition of the same fragment (“MS[C]”) by Noriyuki Kudo omits lokasya (Kudo 2004, 220). The Tibetan is unclear: snod spyad dang ldan par ’gyur| ’jig rten gyi yon tan du ’gyur|. The Tibetan alone could be interpreted as containing two statements: “One will possess a (begging) bowl; one will become the good qualities of the world.” (Cf. also Mh-karmav(K), MS[C] paragraph 4/Mh-karmav 68).

n.281Translated according to D mnyen par ’gyur (cf. also Karmavibhaṅga (Toh 338, 1.­175) (= Mh-karmav(K), MS[C] paragraph 4/Mh-karmav 68): sems gyi rgyud mnyen par ’gyur ba dang|); v.l. N, H gnyen par ’gyur|: “[one’s mind] becomes a friend (or helpful).”

n.282It is also grammatically possible to translate as “devas and humans will delight (or be happy).”

n.283For unknown reasons this paragraph actually lists eleven items.

n.284Cf. the parallel sentence in Mh-karmav(K), MS[C] paragraph 5/Mh-karmav 69: pratibhānavān bhavati and Karmavibhaṅga (Toh 338, 1.­176): “one will be endowed with quick-wittedness (or presence of mind)” (spobs pa dang ldan par ’gyur ba dang|); Tibetan spobs and Sanskrit pratibhāna are in Buddhist Sanskrit literature associated with speech: “inspired (or insightful) speech” and “eloquence.”

n.285Tibetan ’khor ’du zhing mgu bar byed par ’gyur|. But cf. the parallel sentence in the Karmavibhaṅga (Toh 338, 1.­176) (= Mh-karmav(K), MS[C] paragraph 5/Mh-karmav 69): (’khor ’dun par ’gyur ba dang|) “one will win over the assembly [to one’s own side, through argument].”

n.286To the best of our knowledge, no Sanskrit equivalent is attested for the Tibetan term ’khor gyi rgyal po. Sanskrit maṇḍala in the sense of a political (or administrative) unit can designate a district or a country as part of a larger circle of neighboring states or kingdoms whose relationships to oneself and among each other are to be managed skillfully by the successful ruler.

n.287Tibetan mi tshugs pa seems to have two basic meanings (cf. BGT): 1. unharmed (Skt. anihata), 2. not independent; unable to be autonomous; not established through one’s own power. The sense that fits this context best is “unharmed,” here in the sense of “unrivaled,” “unchallenged.””

n.288Tibetan thar par zhugs, here denoting the activity rather than the person. It likely has the same meaning as Sanskrit pravrajita “Buddhist mendicant,” “monk or nun,” “renunciant.” Cf. Mh-karmav, paragraph 77 (= Lévi 1932, 104) and Karmavibhaṅga (Toh 338, 1.­180), which has the regular rab tu byung ba.

n.289Note that this paragraph actually lists eleven items.

n.290Translated according to v.l. S, Z shing khrod na gnas pa la mi dga’ ba med pa yin|; D, L shing khrod na gnas pa la mi dga’ ba yin|.

n.291Translated according to the Tibetan lha dang mi la dben pa yin|, for which an alternative translation may be: “one will be isolated from devas and humans.” Somehow this passage is reminiscent of one of the characteristics of a tathāgata: even the devas are unable to locate/find him (cf. Samyutta Nikāya I.12). Cf., however, the parallel passage in Mh-karmav, paragraph 77, and Mh-karmav(K), p. 222 (MS[C] paragraph 9): devā asya spṛhayanti, “devas will desire (or long for) one.” Cf. also the Karmavibhaṅga (Toh 338, 1.­180 (F.298.a)): lha dang mir smon pa med pa.

n.292Literal translation of D, S, Z dpral [L ’phral] ba’i dbyes legs par ’gyur|. A broad forehead is one of the eighty secondary physical characteristics of a great being or a buddha (Skt. aśīty anuvyañjanāni). See also Jäschke, s.v. dbyes, who seems to have taken it as a general characteristic of beauty, which appears to be the meaning here; perhaps “one will have a beautiful head/face?” Cf., however, a related sentence in the Mh-karmav(K), p. 223 (MS[C] paragraph 8/Mh-karmav paragraph 72): Sanskrit (vi)śuddha-lalāṭaḥ (Tib. dpral ba dag?), “a bright (or pure) forehead?” According to widespread popular South Asian belief, Brahmā (or some other deity) appears on the sixth day after a child is born to inscribe the child’s fate on her or his forehead.

n.293Translated per S mnyen; D sems mnyam par ’gyur, “equanimous?” Y, K mnyan; L, Z gnyen. Cf. Mh-karmav, paragraph 72 (Lévi 1932, 97): snigdhacchaviḥ, “shiny skin”; Mh-karmav(K), MS[C] paragraph 8 (Kudo 2004, 223): snigdhasantatiḥ, “supple mindstream?”

n.294Translated per the D, S, Z reading bzhon pa. V.l. L, Y, K, N gzhon pa “youth” (more likely an incorrect spelling of bzhon pa). Cf. Mh-karmav, paragraph 70 (Lévi 1932, 94): yāna.

n.295Translation per the D, L, S, Z reading khrod dben par gnas pa. V.l. Y, K dur khrod dben par gnas pa, “dwelling in the solitude of a cemetery (or burial ground).”

n.296According to D bsam gtan la dmigs pa’i sems su ’gyur ba| chung ngu byed pa|; similarly, Mh-karmav(K), paragraph 78 (Kudo 2004, 211f.): dhyāna­lambanaṃ cittam bhavati| na ca karma­kṛtyatām prāpnoti|. L, S, Z parse the sentence differently (which would lead to having only nine items in this paragraph): bsam gtan la dmigs pa’i sems su ’gyur ba chung ngu byed pa|, approximately perhaps “one limits one’s mental focus to the object of meditation?”

n.297Additional lus sangs rgyas la bsnyen pa of S is very likely a dittography.

n.298Asking for alms food is part of the life of a Buddhist mendicant or wandering ascetic.

n.299Translating D, S, Z reading nga rgyal. V.l. L, Y, J, K, N, C nga “I,” “ego.”

n.300One’s own benefit refers to the goal of the Buddhist path‍—one’s own liberation. The following sentences illustrate the benefit for others.

n.301The saṅgha is considered a “field of merit” (Skt. puṇyakṣetra). This sentence means that by living on alms food that others provide one with, one has provided them with an opportunity to accumulate religious merit. Only monks who keep strict ethical conduct, don’t break their vows, and actualize the teachings are said to be worthy of receiving alms food.

n.302Tibetan bstan pa’i chos commonly means “the Dharma of the teachings” as opposed to “the Dharma of realization.” We think, however, that this distinction represents a later categorization that cannot necessarily be applied to an early translation like this. Could this perhaps mean “commentaries?”

n.303Tibetan thar par zhugs pa’i tshul las mi ’gal bar byed par ’gyur|. If interpreted literally, one may also translate as “one will not deviate from the method of those who have entered the path of liberation.” It is, however, more likely that tshul here is short for tshul khrims.

n.304According to D, L, S, Z snang ba’i sems su ’gyur|. V.l. Y, K smad pa’i sems, “one will develop a humble attitude”; J, N, C smra ba’i sems. Cf., however, also Karmavibhaṅga (Toh 338, 1.­182 (F.298.a)): dma’ ba’i sems, and Mh-karmav, paragraph 79 (Lévi 1932, 105): nīcacittam (upasthāpitaṃ bhavati).

n.305Translated according to v.l. C, H slong mo “beggar; begging.” D, L, S, Z read slongs mo.

n.306Cf., however, the parallel sentence in the Karmavibhaṅga (Toh 338, 1.­182 (F.298.a)): “alms will manifest unobstructedly for the well-disciplined ascetic” (bsod snyoms kyis yongs su dul ba’i dge sbyong gi phyogs la mun pa med par snang ba’o). Cf., however, also Mh-karmav, paragraph 79 (Lévi 1932, 105): piṇḍapāta­paracittasya bhikṣoḥ sarvā diśo ’pratikūlā bhavanti gamanāya: “a monk whose thoughts are absorbed by collecting alms is free to go anywhere unhindered.”

n.307Translated per D, L, S, Z ’khor la; v.l. K ’khor lo.

n.308D ’jug pa; L, S, Z ’gro ba, but with the same meaning.

n.309Translated per D, L, S, Z sbyong ba; v.l. K, C, H spyod pa “to apply oneself”; “to act,” “to practice”; “to enjoy.”

n.310These items are permitted by the Vinaya for monks and nuns to possess and use without violating their precepts.

n.311D to’u te ya’i; L sto’u te yi’i; S, Z sto’u te ya’i.

n.312D phyag ’tshal zhing skyabs su mchi’o; L, S, Z phyag ’tshal skyabs [Z adds su] mchi’o.

n.313This is not an official abbreviation and it is not found in Bechert’s Abkürzungsverzeichnis; it was invented by the translator, attempting to follow and emulate Bechert’s system.