Notes

n.1Aside from Supari­kīrtita­nāma­dheyaśrī­rāja, who appears in the Śikṣāsamuccaya, and Bhaiṣajyaguru, the other five names of these thus-gone ones are sourced from Davidson 2015, who relies upon Chandra 1999. Chandra cites Lohia 1994, where we also find back-translations that are not attested in any Sanskrit source. I have consulted both Chandra 1999 and Lohia 1994, and neither source contains any information on the Sanskrit names for these thus-gone ones’ buddhafields. In some cases there are relatively obvious options for the back-translation of a given buddhafield, and in others the options are too varied to present a clear and preferable Sanskrit equivalent.

n.2See Dharmachakra Translation Committee, trans, The Detailed Account of the Previous Aspirations of the Blessed Bhaiṣajya­guru­vaiḍūrya­prabha , Toh 504.

n.3Schopen 1978, 1.

n.4Schopen, 22.

n.5Foshuo guanding jing (佛說灌頂經, “The Sūtra on Empowerments,” Taishō 1331), whose twelfth fascicle has the subtitle Foshuo guanding ba chu guo zuisheng si de du jing juan dishi er (佛說灌頂拔除過罪生死得度經卷第十二, “Section 12, The Sūtra on the Empowerment that Uproots Misdeeds and Achieves Liberation from Life and Death”).

n.6Yaoshi liuli guang qi fo benyuan gongde jing (藥師琉璃光七佛本願功德經). This Chinese translation has been translated into English in Raoul Birnbaum’s study of the traditions associated with Bhaiṣajyaguru in China, The Healing Buddha (see Birnbaum 1979, pp. 173–220).

n.7The passages quoted and their location in the present translation are indicated in n.­34, n.­38, n.­41. One passage quoted in the Śikṣāsamuccaya (Bendall 1902, p. 13) does not seem to be present in the text, at least not in this version of it. See also Schopen 1978, pp. 26 and 126-7.

n.8Zwilling 1980, 417. Zwilling also argues that The Detailed Account of the Previous Aspirations of the Seven Thus-Gone Ones represents a “tantrification” of the Bhaiṣajyaguru cult by arguing that the “appending” of a series of dhāraṇīs to the core text (the Bhaiṣajya­guru­sūtra) was likely a later development that reflected the incursion of tantric ritual techniques into a Mahāyāna text. This claim is dubious, as the use of dhāraṇīs, though indicative of the emergence of an esoteric Buddhist ritual culture, is wholly appropriate to Mahāyāna Buddhism.

n.9Yoshimuri 1950, 131.

n.10Dkar chag ’phang thang ma 2003, 11.

n.11See his chos ’byung F.152.b; and Eimer 1989, text no. 134.

n.12The three treatises by Śāntarakṣita are Toh 3132, 3133, and 3134. See van der Kuijp 2004, 5, and Zwilling 1980, 417.

n.13See van der Kuijp, 4–8, on the early history of this ritual tradition in Tibet and its place in the Mongol Yuan court.

n.14This fact has been discussed by van der Kuijp, and we can now add to his comments that the sūtra itself was definitely among the Tibetan texts printed at the court of the Yuan‍—a reprint of this Yuan edition is contained in the Qianlong Dazangjing, or the Dragon edition of the Chinese Buddhist Canon.

n.15van der Kuijp, 8.

n.16Uspenski 1997, 34–35.

n.17Bhaiṣajya­guru­vaiḍūrya­prabha’s name is of course attested in the Sanskrit manuscripts of the Bhaiṣajya­guru­sūtra from Gilgit, and Supari­kīrtita­nāma­dheyaśrīrājā’s name is attested in Śāntideva’s Śikṣāsamuccaya (169.13).

n.18Davidson 2015, 156–57. It should be noted that Davidson himself follows Chandra, with some minor adjustments. This translation prefers Davidson’s reading of mkhas pa gzi brjid kyi sgra dbyangs kyi rgyal po as Kuśala­tejonir­ghoṣa­rāja over Chandra’s reading paṇḍita­tejaḥsvara­ghoṣa­rāja.

n.19Chandra 2000, 523.

n.20Lohia 1994, 159–60.

n.21V, G: vādyasvara­vṛkṣamūle; SC: vādyasvare vṛkṣamūle.

n.22Tib. de'i smon lam chen po drug pa ni gang gi tshe bdag ma 'ongs pa'i dus na bla na med pa yang dag par rdzogs pa'i byang chub mngon par rdzogs par sangs rgyas pa de na sems can gang dag mgon med par gyur pa/ lus la gdung ba'i me 'bar ba dang / seng ge dang / stag dang / dom dang / dred dang / sbrul gdug pa'i nang du chud de/ srog la bab ste 'jigs skrag nas mgon med de/ smre sngags sna tshogs 'don pa de dag bdag gi mthus/ bdag gi ming yid la gnas shing / bdag gi ming lan bdun yid kyis brjod pas de dag byang chub kyi mthar thug gi bar du lus la gdung ba'i me thams cad zhi bar gyur cig /seng ge dang / stag dang / dom dang / dred dang / sbrul gdug pa de dag kyang byams pa la gnas par gyur cig /'jigs pa med pa dang / zhi ba'i gnas la gnas par gyur cig ces btab bo/ The agentive construction bdag gi mthus (lit. “by my power”) in this particular aspiration prayer is particularly challenging to render in English translation without some slight modifications in the way that it is distributed throughout the passage. I have added the English phrases as “[m]ay it render” and “may it lead them” to the translation in this passage in order to distribute the Tibetan phrase bdag gi mthus, which is performing three different verbal actions.

n.23The phrase containing the adornments of this thus-gone one is actually a part of his name, but it has been rendered as a description here in keeping with the convention established in this translation and other research on this textual tradition for the Sanskrit back-translations of the names of the seven thus-gone ones.

n.24Tib. bsil ba’i dngos po thob par gyur cig lit. “May they attain the cool state.” The English translation here adopts an idiomatic, rather than literal, translation of bsil ba’i dngos po (Skt. *śītībhāva) over a literal translation. This phrase appears to refer to both the physical “cooling” of individuals caught up in the fires that consume the world at the end of an eon and the psychological or mental “cooling” of the fires of mental anguish and suffering brought on by one’s previous karmic deeds.

n.25Tib. phan tshun pha ma ltar byams pa la gnas par gyur cig. The phrase “love a child” is added here for clarity.

n.26The consonant doubling in suvarṇṇe that we find in the text has been resolved.

n.27The consonant doubling in sarvārththeṣu that we find in the text has been resolved.

n.28This is the point where the current text’s overlap with Toh 504 begins (See The Detailed Account of the Previous Aspirations of the Blessed Bhaiṣajya­guru­vaiḍūrya­prabha , 1.6).

n.29C: ka gzhu; D: ka zhu; N, H: sa gzhi; S: gzhi; U: gzhu. The Choné preserves what is likely the most accurate reading here of ka gzhu, which is defined as a part of a pillar and interpreted here to mean the capital of a pillar. The reading sa gzhi (“earth” or “ground”) in the Narthang and Lhasa Kangyurs may also be accurate, but because this is a list of qualities of the central structure in Bhaiṣajyaguru’s buddhafield, not a description of its natural environment, the Choné reading is likely more accurate. In the Degé reading of Toh 504, the equivalent term here is pu shu, “parapet” (see The Detailed Account of the Previous Aspirations of the Blessed Bhaiṣajya­guru­vaiḍūrya­prabha , 1.21). This section is unfortunately quite different in the Sanskrit versions of the text.

n.30D, S: sems can de dag ni bdag nyid kyang du ma yongs su mi spyod na/; N, H: sems can de dag ni bdag nyid kyang du ma yongs su mi spyod na/; V: aneke ca sattvāḥ ye svayameva na paribhuñjanti; G: aneke ca sattvā ye svayameva na paribhuñjanti; SC: aneke ca te satttvā ye svayam evātmana na paribhuṃjanti. The Sanskrit suggests that the Tibetan term du ma (Skt. aneke) modifies sems can de dag (Skt. sattvāḥ).

n.31Toh 504 has ’jig pa (destroy, undermine) instead of ’dzin pa (hold).

n.32D: mi’i rnyed pa rnyed pa na; S, J: mi’i rnyed pa rnyed na; V, G: manuṣyajanma­pratilābhaṃ pratilapsyante; SC: manuṣya­pratilābhaṃ lapsyanti. The Sanskrit editions from Vaidya and Dutt suggest that the Tibetan mi’i rnyed pa should read mi’i skyes pa, while Schopen’s edition matches the Tibetan and does not mark any variants. Notably, Toh 504 reads mi’i skye ba rnyed na (Toh 504, 278.a). This translation follows the Vaidya and Dutt editions.

n.33Tib. gsal ba; Skt. vyakta. The Sanskrit vyakta comes from vyañj, which means “to make evident.” Thus vyakta carries the sense of “clear,” “apparent,” “evident,” which is close to what we mean in English when we say that someone is “bright,” meaning that for them things are clear and evident and that they have the ability to make other things apparent or evident, just as a light makes things clear and evident.

n.34The three paragraphs ending with this one are quoted in the Śikṣāsamuccaya; see Bendall 1902, p. 175.

n.35V, G: amaṅgalaśataṃ; SC: śataṃ alakṣmīṇām; N, H, S: bkra mi shis pa brgya; D: bkra mi shis pa brgyad.

n.36D: rkang lag brgyad pa; S: rkang lag brgya pa; V, G: śatapada; SC: śatapāda. The Stok Palace Kangyur and both Sanskrit witnesses read “centipedes” here instead of “spiders.” Toh 504 also reads “centipedes” (Toh 504, 279.b).

n.37D, S: mchod pa byas na; V, G, SC: pūjā kartavyā.

n.38This paragraph is quoted in the Śikṣāsamuccaya; see Bendall 1902, p. 174.

n.39V, G, SC: idaṃ buddhagocaraṃ śrutvā; D: sangs rgyas rnams kyi sangs rgyas kyi spyod yul ’di thos na; S, Y, K: sangs rgyas rnams kyi sangs rgyas kyis spyod yul ’di thos na. The translation follows the Sanskrit editions of the Bhaiṣajya­guru­sūtra in this instance.

n.40V, G, SC: tathāgatasyaiṣo ’nubhāvo draṣṭavyaḥ; D: de bzhin gshegs pa’i mthu yin par blta’o.

n.41The three paragraphs ending with this one are quoted in the Śikṣāsamuccaya; see Bendall 1902, pp. 174–5.

n.42Tib: mi de dang lhan cig skyes pa’i lha; SC: puruṣasya sahajā pṛṣṭ[h]ānubaddha devatā; G, V: sattvasya sahajā­nubaddham eva.

n.43V, G: tatra ye te mitrajnātisālohitāḥ; SC: ye tasya. The Tibetan does not provide the subject here, so the translation supplies it from the Vaidya and Dutt Sanskrit editions.

n.44This passage has been taken as referring to revival after actual death or, alternatively, to recovery from coma or near-death. The paradox of designating as having actually died someone who is subsequently revived is no doubt part of what underlies Ānanda’s question below, in Toh 504, 1.51, and in the passage on untimely death that follows. For a discussion of different interpretations see Schopen 1978, pp. 354–7.

n.45Both the Sanskrit and the Tibetan texts switch here to “kṣatriya king” in the singular. The English translation reads this in the plural to maintain proper subject agreement in number throughout this section.

n.46Some of the names for these yakṣa generals that are provided in the Sanskrit editions of the text do not seem to be standard Sanskrit, and may reflect the preservation of local, vernacular yakṣa traditions in the text. The Tibetan renderings for these names, which may in fact offer the proper translation of these nonstandard Sanskrit names, are provided in the glossary entries.

n.47Here, and in the next four names, we see that the suffix la is translated as ’dzin in Tibetan.

n.48V, G: kṛtajñatām anusmara­māṇānāṃ sarva­sattvānāṃ; SC: kṛtajñatām anusmara­māṇaḥ sarvasatvānāṃ; D: byas pa g.zo zhing rjes su dran la sems can thams cad la; S: byas pa g.zo zhing rjes su dran la /sems can thams cad la. The reader should note that this is the point where the current text’s (Toh 503) overlap with the Bhaiṣajya­guru­vaiḍūrya­prabharājaṃ sūtraṃ (Toh 504) ends.

n.49D, S: gzungs de bzung ngam/; Y, K, N, H, gzungs de gzung ngam /. In this case the term bzung (alt. gzung) might refer to physically holding the text instead of (or in addition to?) the more common understanding of this term as “bearing in mind.”

n.50Tib. gzungs ’di ’chang ngam/.

n.51D, S:’dri ba de la. Here the Tibetan ’dri ba is substituted for the long form yi ger ’dri ba, which translates the Sanskrit lekhana. When the term ’dri ba appears on its own, it more commonly translates forms of the Sanskrit verbal root √pṛc or “to ask, question.”

n.52Y, J, K, C, S: sems yid bde ba; D: sems dang yid bde ba.

n.53Tib. rdo rje ’dzin. In this case “Vajra Bearer” is presumably a reference to Vajrapāṇi.