Introduction

i.1The Prophecy for Bhadra the Illusionist contains a colorful and often humorous narrative. Shades of this narrative, in which a powerful magician attempts to humiliate the Buddha Śākyamuni and winds up the fool, are also found in the Pali Buddhist tradition, and the appeal of this particular story as Buddhism spread through Central Asia is apparent in its loose retelling in Khotanese literature. Its central theme is the Buddha’s miraculous powers, here compared to the lesser powers of an illusionist named Bhadra. The sūtra is an emblematic example of adbhutadharma, or “account of miraculous events,” one of the nine or twelve classic categories of the Pali and Sanskrit sūtras. The latter portion of the text, in which the Buddha prophesies Bhadra’s future awakening, exemplifies the genre of vyākaraṇa, or “prophecy,” as expressed in the sūtra’s title.

i.2The sūtra opens at Vulture Peak Mountain in Rājagṛha, where the Buddha is residing with his saṅgha of monks and bodhisattvas. Down in the city, the accomplished illusionist Bhadra hatches a plan to test and humiliate the Buddha in order to win over the people of Magadha. Bhadra approaches the Buddha and offers to host him for the midday meal the following day. His plan is to expose the Buddha, since if the Buddha does not know his malicious intentions, it will prove the Buddha’s lack of omniscience. Over the course of the night, Bhadra conjures up the illusion of a resplendent courtyard filled with food and drink and servants. Just then, the Four Great Kings appear and ask for permission to create a second courtyard in which to offer a meal to the Buddha, and then Śakra and his host of gods ask if they may create a third. Bhadra grants them permission but begins to grow apprehensive. Then, when he tries to unravel his illusory display, he cannot. Śakra explains that since even a tiny offering to a buddha will inevitably lead to nirvāṇa, Bhadra’s offering cannot be withdrawn.

i.3In the morning, the Buddha and his retinue proceed as planned to the reception in the city, whereupon Bhadra, seeing how the Buddha is revered by the gods, feels remorse for his initial devious intentions. Through the Buddha’s power, Bhadra, Śakra, and the Four Great Kings each simultaneously perceive the Buddha seated at their own conjured courtyards. Bhadra, defeated, bows to the Buddha and confesses his intentions, and the assembly partakes of the illusory feast.

i.4The Buddha then conjures a series of visions in order to train Bhadra, beginning with three householders who show him how the Buddha can be in many places at once. The visions increase in intensity until Bhadra sees nothing but the Buddha everywhere he looks, at which point he attains samādhi. Bhadra again repents and asks the Buddha a series of questions, to which the Buddha responds with a teaching on illusion and emptiness.

i.5Later, Bhadra again visits the Buddha at Vulture Peak Mountain and requests that he explain the bodhisattva path. The Buddha responds with a teaching in which he enumerates forty-three sets of four qualities that characterize the path of bodhisattvas. The Buddha then smiles, and when Ānanda asks why, he responds with a prophecy about Bhadra’s future awakening. Bhadra then takes refuge in the Buddha, proclaiming that the Buddha teaches the Dharma while undifferentiated from suchness (Skt. tathatā, Tib. de bzhin nyid). When questioned by Ānanda, Bhadra elaborates on his statement in riddle-like language. Ānanda replies that while Bhadra once bewildered others with his illusions, now he bewilders them with his wisdom. Bhadra counters that the Buddha himself is also a bewilderer‍—he teaches that there is no self, but does so using terminology like “sentient beings,” and he does not perceive birth and death, yet still he speaks of it.

i.6Bhadra then requests to go forth as a monk, and the Buddha instructs Maitreya to perform the ceremony. The sūtra concludes with the Buddha giving Bhadra the prophecy, referenced in the sūtra’s title, regarding his future full awakening.

i.7“Illusion” in this sūtra translates the Sanskrit māyā (Tib. sgyu ma) and refers, literally or by analogy, to a magical illusion, which is insubstantial by nature but appears before the eyes due to the magical abilities of a magician or illusionist. The term māyā also carries the connotation of “deceit,” “trickery,” or “deception”; for instance, it is listed as one of over fifty mental events (Skt. caitta, Tib. sems byung) in both the Sarvāstivāda-Vaibhāṣika and Yogācāra systems of Abhidharma, where it refers to the volition to deceive or manipulate others or to fraudulently boast about one’s spiritual attainment.

i.8A māyākāra (literally “illusion maker”) is akin to a street magician who performs a spectacle of magic tricks before a crowd in order to turn a profit or boost their own influence and reputation. In the context of Buddhist literature, however, these magic tricks are more than just sleight of hand: the illusionist creates incredible magical spectacles of elephants, thrones, marvelous pavilions, and so forth that, while insubstantial in nature, visually appear before the eyes of its spectators, who are thus deceived into taking these conjurations as real and solid things. In truth, however, these appearances, like a hologram or a projection of light, have no tangible substance. While the illusions of an illusionist are considered real magic, that is to say, they are created from supernatural abilities acquired through meditative concentration or other spiritual disciplines, such magical abilities are considered a sort of mundane, worldly magic, particularly in comparison to the abilities resulting from genuine spiritual attainment, and even more so to the realization of an arhat or a buddha.

i.9Such magical illusion is often referred to in early Buddhist sources as a metaphor for the illusory or insubstantial and momentary nature of phenomena. Phenomena are described as being like illusions, which initially appear to be solid and real but under close scrutiny and examination are impermanent, dependent, and transient. From the perspective of the Mahāyāna, they lack an inherent nature (Skt. niḥsvabhāva, Tib. rang bzhin med pa). Like magical illusions, phenomena lack any substantiality beyond the spectacle. Within the Mahāyāna, “illusion” was regularly included in conventional lists of eight or ten similes for how phenomena lack an inherent nature.

i.10While illusionists are frequently mentioned in this context throughout the Kangyur, The Prophecy for Bhadra the Illusionist is unique in that the illusionist is the central figure and interlocutor of the entire sūtra. The story is set up to accomplish two things regarding the theme of magical illusion: one, it establishes the superiority of the Buddha’s miraculous power over the limited and mundane magic of Bhadra the illusionist, and two, it retains and elaborates upon the metaphorical understanding whereby all phenomena are considered to be magical illusions.

i.11In this sūtra, as elsewhere, the term illusion carries a pejorative connotation. Even though Bhadra is said to have great powers, his power of illusion is only ever referred to using the term māyā (Tib. sgyu ma) or the term nirmita/nirmāna (Tib. sprul pa, “conjuration”), while the Buddha’s supernatural power is usually referred to as prātihārya (Tib. cho ’phrul, “miraculous display”). However, at one point in the sūtra, when Maudgalyāyana attempts to warn him of Bhadra’s trickery, the Buddha responds by comparing his own power to that of Bhadra, using the same word, māyā , for both, yet he explains that while Bhadra’s power of illusion is “limited” (phyogs gcig pa), his own is “pure” (yang dag pa). Since the Buddha has fully and completely realized the insubstantial nature of all phenomena and the truth that phenomena are primordially unborn, his power to create illusions, which are in this way no different from ordinary perceived reality, is unlimited.

i.12At the climax of the story, the inspired and newly converted Bhadra gives a short discourse on the ultimate nature of phenomena using the convoluted language that has characterized his speech at various points throughout the text. When Ānanda teases Bhadra for the bewildering language with which he expresses the Dharma, he audaciously turns the accusation back onto the Buddha himself, referring to the Buddha as the “great bewilderer.” He justifies this by pointing out that while teaching selflessness, the Buddha speaks using terms like “sentient beings,” and while denying the birth and death of all phenomena, he nevertheless often refers to birth and death. This is an important summation of the narrative, which once again returns to its theme of juxtaposing Bhadra’s mundane powers of illusion with the miraculous displays of the Buddha. In some ways, the Buddha’s powers bewilder his followers, too, such as when he creates emanations of himself earlier in the narrative to simultaneously receive offerings from Bhadra, Śakra, and the Four Great Kings. From the ultimate view, the Buddha’s teachings may appear deceptive, because he teaches using conventional terminology for phenomena. This, however, is a form of skillful means, since he knows that all phenomena ultimately lack inherent nature.

i.13So, although Bhadra’s initial use of powers of illusion to deceive, trick, and swindle people is presented here with a conventional negative connotation, the power to deceive through illusion is not necessarily considered in a negative light in this discourse. Rather, illusion serves as an instructive symbol that illustrates the relative and insubstantial nature of phenomena. The Buddha’s miraculous displays, while being at one level no different from the illusionist’s conjurations, do not have the same negative connotations, because they are always done with an intention to inspire and teach. In this way, conjuring illusions is an example of skillful means. Such illusions illustrate the true nature of reality; their source is not mundane sorcery but a quality of awakening, demonstrating the realization of suchness as the true nature of reality.

i.14The theme of conversion via the display of supernatural power is often encountered in Buddhist literature. The narrative of this sūtra echoes a similar story in the Pali canon: the episode of Sirigutta and Garahadinna attributed to Buddhaghosa in his commentary on the Dhammapada. There, as in The Prophecy for Bhadra the Illusionist, the Buddha knowingly walks into a trap set by the non-Buddhist ascetic Garahadinna (in revenge for being victim to the same trap set by the Buddhist Sirigutta), although in this case the trap is not a magical illusion but a simple trench filled with live coals thinly disguised by the mats that Garahadinna expects the Buddha to sit on. When the Buddha sits down, however, the mats and coals become lotus flowers on which the Buddha and his saṅgha take their seats.

i.15A Khotanese version of the Bhadra story contained within an untitled collection of Buddhist texts (date uncertain) has been translated into English by Ronald Emmerick. This version contains a narrative loosely parallel to that found in the Tibetan, although it paraphrases or leaves out most of the doctrinal elements.

i.16The Prophecy for Bhadra the Illusionist is quoted several times in the Tengyur. In two cases, one or more of the sets of four qualities of bodhisattvas are cited, and in the case of Jñānavajra’s commentary on the Sūtra on the Descent into Laṅkā (Toh 107), the superiority of the Buddha’s miraculous power is addressed.

i.17According to the colophon, The Prophecy for Bhadra the Illusionist was translated into Tibetan by the Indian scholars Jinamitra and Prajñāvarman and the Tibetan Yeshé Dé, which dates the translation to the late eighth or early ninth century. This is confirmed by its inclusion in the imperial catalogs: the Denkarma (ldan dkar ma) lists it under the Heap of Jewels (Ratnakūṭa) and under the category of four hundred and thirty śloka or one bampo; in the Phangthangma (’phang thang ma) it is not listed as a Heap of Jewels text but in another section of texts all containing one and a half bampos (bam po phyed dang gnyis). This is not unusual, as there are only nine texts listed under the Heap of Jewels in this catalog.

i.18While there is no extant Sanskrit original, there are two translations found in the Chinese Tripiṭaka. The earlier Chinese version was made by Dharmarakṣa (竺法護) in the third or fourth century ᴄᴇ (Taishō 324), the other by Bodhiruci (菩提流志; Taishō 310), along with many of the other texts in the Heap of Jewels collection, between 706 and 713 ᴄᴇ. Bodhiruci’s later version is much shorter, omitting most of the sets of four found in Dharmarakṣa’s translation and in the Tibetan.

i.19An English translation of the Tibetan text was published in 1938 by Konstantin Régamey, who included a complete edition of the Tibetan with reference to the Chinese translations. An abridged translation of Bodhiruci’s Chinese by C. C. Garma Chang is included in A Treasury of Mahāyāna Sūtras (1983). An anonymous translation from the Chinese, also of Bodhiruci’s translation, can be found online.

i.20This English translation follows the Degé Kangyur wherever possible. When a variant reading has been preferred, this is explained in an endnote. In addition to the two Chinese translations, the Tibetan of the Comparative Edition (dpe bsdur ma), the Gondhla collection (thirteenth–fourteenth centuries), and the Stok Palace Kangyur have also been consulted.