Notes
n.1Laṅkāvatāra (lang kar gshegs pa, Toh 107).
n.2Ed. Nanjio 1923, pp. 261–63; for a translation, see Suzuki 1932, pp. 223–25. For the most up-to-date assessment of this sūtra, see Jia 2015. We are aware of a thesis dedicated to the study of dhāraṇīs in the Laṅkāvatāra, but we could not gain access to it: Lee-li Tay (鄭麗莉), “A Study of Dhāraṇī based on the Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra” (master’s thesis, Fo Guang University [佛光大學], Taiwan, 2011).
n.3Hidas 2021, p. 82, the second dhāraṇī in item no. 12 in Cambridge University Library Ms. Add. 1326.
n.4Note that there is a discrepancy among various databases for cataloging the Toh 945 version of this text within vol. 100 or 101 of the Degé Kangyur. See Toh 945, n.4, for details.
n.5The Tibetan reads padme devai.
n.6The Tibetan reads muṃcche danade.
n.7The Tibetan reads bhanajva.
n.8The Tibetan reads mande pramade.
n.9A highly tentative translation might run as follows: “It is thus— O Lotus, O Lotus Goddess, hine hine hine culu culu culu hule hule hule yule yule yule pale pale pale O One Who Releases, O One Who Chops, O One Who Splits, O One Who Breaks, O One Who Crushes, O One Who Smashes, O Sun svāhā.” Whether padmadeve is a vocative of a female noun is highly questionable. From “O One Who Chops” up to “O One Who Smashes,” the words might equally be quasi-imperatives. “Sun” is expressed with the common epithet “Day Maker.”
n.10Instead of what we translate here as “to uphold” in order to capture the ambiguity of the original, Tatakaragupta, when discussing a similar dhāraṇī said to encapsulate The Perfection of Wisdom in One Hundred Thousand Lines (see The Dhāraṇī of “The Perfection of Wisdom in One Hundred Thousand Lines,” Toh 576/932),11 is more explicit when he replaces the verb with kaṇṭhasthīkṛ (“to place it in one’s throat”), which is the Sanskrit idiom for “to learn by heart.” He also spells out the benefit as the “meritorious karmic fruit” (puṇyaphala) of memorizing the parent text. This sentence is then followed by a fascinating short discussion, which merits to be quoted in full: “Surely, this is an exaggeration! No, one should not say this. For countless thus-gone ones have empowered this dhāraṇī to serve as a method for gaining the equipment of merit for women, immature people, and simpletons, as well as for learned people whose minds are confused, just like the pole of a snake-charmer[, which is preprepared by the expert snake charmer to be effective even when he is no longer present,] for removing poison; however, it is not a method for gaining the knowledge conveyed by The [Perfection of Wisdom in] One Hundred Thousand Lines. This should be understood to apply in other cases [i.e., where the text is abbreviated into a dhāraṇī] as well” (nanv atyuktir eveti. na caitad vaktavyam. yataḥ strībālamūrkhān paryākulitamatīn paṇḍitān praty api puṇyasaṃbhārasādhanatvenāsaṃkhyeyatathāgatair adhiṣṭhiteyaṃ dhāriṇī, yathā viṣaharatvena gāruḍikaṃ stambhaḥ; na tu lakṣāpratipāditajñānasādhanatvena. evam anyatrāpi boddhavyaḥ). In his note to this dhāraṇī, he reiterates the point about “to uphold” meaning “to memorize” and promises as the reward the fruit of reciting the text (pāṭhaphala).
n.11Śatasāhasrikāprajñāpāramitādhāraṇī (Toh 576/932).
n.12The Tibetan has “human or nonhuman,” but all Sanskrit sources indicate that this is a scribal error.
n.13The word for “and others” is not transmitted in the Sanskrit, but it has an apposite meaning.