Introduction

i.1One Hundred and Eight Names of Youthful Mañjuśrī Accompanied by His Dhāraṇī-Mantra is a text that combines two genres of Buddhist literature: dhāraṇī and praise. As a praise it further belongs to a subgenre of praises in the Kangyur that list one hundred and eight names, or epithets, belonging to specific deities.

i.2The text opens with homage and praise to the buddhas of the ten directions, followed by two brief praises to Mañjuśrī‍—one to Youthful Mañjuśrī and one to Mañjughoṣa. Then Mañjuśrī himself articulates a Sanskrit dhāraṇī, attributed to Mañjughoṣa. In awe of the miracles that occur in the wake of the dhāraṇī’s enunciation, an assembly of gods recites one hundred and eight unique names in praise of Mañjuśrī that had been revealed to them by “the highest of the gods.” Upon its conclusion, Mañjuśrī expresses his pleasure, blesses the gods who spoke the praises, and provides assurance that in their devotion they need not fear him.

i.3The text then introduces the figure of the Tathāgata, who is depicted as laughing. He turns his face to the east and proceeds to speak the remainder of the text, first explaining the benefits of reciting, contemplating, or simply hearing the dhāraṇī. These benefits range from the dispelling of suffering, the success of all one’s endeavors, and the purification of all one’s sins to the attainment of the various bodhisattva grounds and eventually buddhahood. He then proceeds to explain the benefits of reciting the one hundred and eight names: they invoke the masters of vidyāmantra, who offer their protection, as do the lords of the gods, the yakṣas and rākṣasas, and, most significantly, the buddhas, bodhisattvas, and “bearers of vajra weapons.” He furthermore states that persons of exceptional wisdom can attain buddhahood through daily recitation of the names, and finally, in a short benedictory passage, the Tathāgata praises the dhāraṇī itself.

i.4The Tibetan translation lacks a colophon and hence offers no information regarding the transmission or translation of the text into Tibetan. However, Tibetan versions of the text were found at Dunhuang, indicating that the text had been translated and was in circulation by the late eighth or early ninth century.

i.5While no Sanskrit manuscript appears to be extant, a Sanskrit text can be partially reconstructed from Chinese transliterations of the dhāraṇī and the praise portions of the text as preserved in the Chinese canon. Two separate texts‍—Taishō 1177A and Taishō 1186‍—contain Chinese transliterations of the Sanskrit dhāraṇī of the present text. Taishō 1177A also preserves Sanskrit transliterations of the introductory and concluding material and appends an additional nine-section dhāraṇī and three mantras. It also includes a detailed preface stating that it was translated into Chinese by Vajrabodhi (671–741 ce) in 740. Vajrabodhi’s Korean disciple Hyecho is credited with assisting in this earlier Chinese translation. Taishō 1186 was translated in 996 ce and presents only the dhāraṇī portion of One Hundred and Eight Names of Youthful Mañjuśrī Accompanied by His Dhāraṇī-Mantra, with minor variations from the version preserved in Taishō 1177A. In addition to these two texts, Taishō 1177B preserves the litany of names of the Sanskrit text in Chinese transliteration. The Tibetan versions, however, transliterate only the dhāraṇīs.

i.6This English translation is based on Toh 639 in the Degé Kangyur, in consultation with the variant readings recorded in the Comparative Edition (Tib. dpe bsdur ma) and the Phukdrak (phug brag) Kangyur recension. In several instances our translation was clarified through consultation with Rolf Giebel’s (2011) Sanskrit reconstructions of the transliterations found in the three Taishō texts referred to above. In addition, we have compared Toh 639 to its reiteration within the Dhāraṇī section of the Degé Kangyur (Toh 873). All major divergences have been recorded in the notes.

i.7In the body of the translation, the dhāraṇī is rendered in Sanskrit diacritics based on the Tibetan transliteration found in Toh 639. In the provisional translation of the dhāraṇī, however, we have at times assumed emended readings derived from our consultations with the Comparative Edition and Phukdrak version, as well as with Giebel’s Sanskrit reconstructions.