Property:Abstract
From Bodhicitta
This is a property of type Text.
T
The ''Commentary on Enlightened Attitude'' (''Bodhicittavivaraṇa''), which is attributed to the tantric Nāgārjuna (fl. 200 CE), takes the ultimate enlightened attitude (''bodhicitta'') as a direct realization of emptiness, and follows a positive approach to the ultimate, like the sūtras of and commentaries on the third wheel of the doctrine (''dharmacakra''). Taking this as Nāgārjuna's final position, the ''Commentary on Enlightened Attitude'' gains an important status for those who see in the third wheel of the doctrine teachings of definitive meaning. The present paper shows that 'Gos lo tsā ba gzhon nu dpal (1392-1481) and his disciple the Fourth Zhwa dmar pa Chos grags ye shes (1453-1524) follow this approach, but take positive descriptions of the ultimate in the third wheel of the doctrine as the result of a direct experience of emptiness beyond the duality of perceiving subject and perceived object. Standing in the Great Seal (Mahāmudrā) tradition of the Dwags po bka' brgyud, an ultimate existence of mind, such that self-awareness or the perfect nature exists as an entity, is not accepted by them. ([https://thlib.org/?tid=T5695#/sources/128180 Source Accessed Sep 24, 2025]) +
This doctoral thesis is the foundational study underlying Andrew Skilton's body of published scholarship on the ''Samādhirājasūtra'' (SRS). Its core textual contribution is a critical edition and English translation of Chapter 17 of the sūtra—the chapter titled "The Entranceway to the Samādhi that is Taught by Many Buddhas," which recounts, through a chain of the Buddha's past lives, a long succession of buddhas and kings connected through the transmission of the samādhi teaching.
Beyond the edition itself, the thesis laid the groundwork for the recensional and chronological framework Skilton went on to develop across a series of journal articles in the years following, including:
*"Dating the Samādhirāja Sūtra" (''Journal of Indian Philosophy'' 27, 1999), which cites the thesis directly for supporting textual and manuscript detail;
*"Four Recensions of the Samādhirāja Sūtra" (''Indo-Iranian Journal'' 42, 1999), presenting in full the argument that the SRS circulated in four distinct textual recensions;
*"The Gilgit Manuscript of the Samādhirāja Sūtra" (''Central Asiatic Journal'' 44, 2000);
*"State or Statement? Samādhi in Some Early Mahāyāna Sūtras" (''The Eastern Buddhist'' 34.2, 2002), which develops the argument that the term samādhi in texts like the SRS often denotes the scriptural text itself rather than a meditative state or practice.
The 1997 thesis thus functions as the primary, book-length study behind this later cluster of publications, combining a critical edition and translation of Chapter 17 with the broader philological and recensional analysis Skilton subsequently distributed across separate articles. +
No abstract given. Here are the first relevant paragraphs:
My interest in the ''samādhi'' lists of the Mahāyāna scripture called ''Akṣayamatinirdeśa'' and of the Sanskrit-Tibetan Buddhist dictionary called ''Mahāvyutpatti'' was aroused by my present enterprise in translating the ''Akṣayamatinirdeśa'' from Tibetan and Sanskrit fragments. I was intrigued that the ''sūtra''<i>'</i>s ''samādhi'' list, which was ignored by the Tanjur commentary dubiously attributed to Vasubandhu, had only a few items obviously in common with the ''Mahāvyutpatti'' list, and yet the ''sūtra''<i>'</i>s list in its Tibetan version and the ''Mahāvyutpatti'' set had exactly the same number of items, namely 118. Wondering if there was any order to be found in these hundred-odd names of ''samādhis'' or whether they were an arbitrary, careless listing, I initially tried grouping them by shared words, such as ''dharma'', or by states, such as experiences of light.[1] The trouble with this method, as later was revealed, is that it depends upon a personal attempt limited by a here-now consciousness. The approach adopted in this paper resorts to an ancient work to suggest the method to be employed.<br> In the process of determining various quotations and references to the ''Akṣayamatinirdeśasūtra'' in later works for a separate report,[2] I noticed in the ''Mahāyāna-Sūtrālaṃkāra'', Chap. IV, a list of 22 similes for generating the mind of enlightenment, associated with various terms of the Buddhist path, and at the end referring to the ' ''Akṣayamatisūtra''.' Sylvain Lévi, who edited the ''Sūtrālaṃkāra'', with customary scholarship attempted, although unsuccessfully, to locate the passage either in the ''Akṣayamatinirdeśasūtra'' or in the ''Akṣayamatiparipṛcchāsūtra'', respectively in the ''Mahāsamnipāta'' and ''Ratnakūṭa'' scriptural classes of the Chinese canon.[3] By my work on the ''Akṣayamatinirdeśa'' I knew that the ''Sutrālaṃkāra'' list did go with this ''sūtra'', not with a particular passage but rather with the eighty topics called ''akṣaya'' of this scripture, grouping them into twenty-two. Now, I too had looked into the small ''sūtra'' in the Tibetan ''Ratnakūṭa'', which stresses sets of ten and among these presents a list only by numbers one to ten of generations of mind along with ten associated named ''samādhis''.[4] This then suggested the method. The way this ''sūtra'' associates generations of mind by numbers with ''samādhis'' does not appear relevant to the ''Akṣayamatinirdeśa'' list of ''samādhis''. But the fact that it makes such an association does seem relevant. It suggested a try to see if the twenty-two generations of mind which the ''Sūtrālaṃkāra'' claimed were based on the ''Akṣayamati'' somehow fit the ''samādhi'' list in that ''sūtra''.
<h5>Notes</h5>
#For general information about ''samādhi'' lists from the Chinese Buddhist canon see Lewis R. Lancaster, ''Samadhi Names in Buddhist Texts: Malalasekera Commemoration Volume'', Colombo 1976, pp. 196—202.
#This essay is due to appear in a volume being published in India.
#Sylvain Lévi, ed., ''Asaṅga: Mahāyāna-Sūtrālaṃkāra'', Paris 1907, p. 17, n. 20.
#''Ārya-akṣayamati-paripṛcchā-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra'', ''Kanjur'', ''Dkon-brtsegs'' (édition of Peking canon, Japanese photographic edition, Vol. 24, p. 206, fol. 2).
No abstract given. Here are the first relevant paragraphs:
The ''Scripture on the Production of Buddha Images (Zuo Jo xingxiangjing)'' is a short text that actively encourages the dissemination of Buddhist icons by enumerating the marvelous rebirths that await those who produce them. Unfortunately, we know virtually nothing of the provenance of the ''Scripture on the Production of Buddha Images'': there are no extant Sanskrit or Tibetan versions, and the identity of the translator was lost at an early date. Be that as it may, an examination of the rather archaic language of the text, together with evidence provided by early Chinese Buddhist catalogues, suggest that the text was translated toward the end of the Eastern Han dynasty (25-220 C.E.) or shortly thereafter. This places the text among the earliest known Buddhist scriptures translated into Chinese.
. . . This translation of the ''Zuo Jo xingxiangjing'' is based on the text found in the ''Taisho daizokyo'' (T 692: 16. 788a-c), consulting the parallel but somewhat less obtuse translation done in the Eastern Jin (''Zaoli xingxiang Ju.baa jing'', T 693:16.788c-790a). (Sharf, introductory remarks, 261–62; 264) +
The Selfless Removal of Pain: A Critical Glance at Śāntideva's Argument in Bodhicaryāvatāra 8: 101–3 +
No abstract given. Here are the first relevant paragraphs:
I want to undertake a critical examination of the coherence of one of the arguments given by Śāntideva and his commentators on the ''Bodhicaryāvatāra''—one of the appeals to rationality—for a logical inconsistency in removing the pain, the actual physical pain, of myself alone and ignoring pains of others. +
No abstract given. Here are the first relevant paragraphs:
Stories 23–25 [of the Divyāvadāna] constitute a cycle of stories about the monk Saṅgharakṣita, but their ordering and relation to each other require some explanation.[347] Each of these stories has close parallels in the ''Mūlasarvāstivāda-vinaya'', which can offer some context. Only some of the original Sanskrit for these materials is extant,[348] but Tibetan and Chinese translations are available.[349] Story 23 begins abruptly, including some of the frame story that precedes it in the ''Mūlasarvāstivāda-vinaya''. Likewise in the ''Mūlasarvāstivāda-vinaya'', story 23 is followed immediately by story 25, and story 24, which is a continuation of the framestory that preceded story 23, appears immediately after that.[350] (Rotman, preliminary remarks, 135)
<h5>Notes</h5>
347. For summaries of the story, see Mitra 1981: 64–65 and Panglung 1981: 8–9.<br> 348. Although a version of chapters 23–25 of the ''Divyāvadāna'' appears in the ''Mūlasarvāstivāda-vinaya'', the text of the narrative found in Nalinaksha Dutt's edition of the text (MSV iv, 27–51, 52–72), as well as in S. Bagchi's (1967–70: ii, 86.13–99.7, 99.8–109.8), is not from the manuscript finds in Gilgit, as is the rest of the text. It is, in fact, a reconstruction based on the ''Divyāvadāna'' itself. Folios 43–49, which correspond to Divy 335.7–388.3, were, as Vogel and Wille (GM-Saṅgh 247) explain, entrusted "for inspection to Sir. A. Stein and committed by him to L. D. Barnett, the librarian of the British Museum, who in turn forwarded them for treatment to S. Lévi. After the latter's publication in 1932 of folios 49v3 to 55v10 [''Journal Asiatique'' 220: 26ff.], they remained untraceable until 1949 when, along with some photographs of the Stein Collection, they were delivered anew to the British Museum and deposited there under the shelf-mark Or. 11878A. Since the leaves were not available when he was preparing his edition of the Vinayavastu, N. Dutt resorted by way of a stopgap to reprinting—with some changes and transpositions—the abridged ''Divyāvadāna'' parallel and Lévi's specimen respectively; so did, relying on him, S. Bagchi. After Raghu Vira had obtained a microfilm of them as early as the mid-1950s, they were ultimately included in then ten-volume facsimile reproduction of the New Delhi Collection [GBM 6, nos. 686–707]." V. Näther published an edition and German translation of the missing text in 1975; Vogel and Wille published a revised edition of the text and an English translation in 1996. Nevertheless, as Vogel and Wille (GM-Saṅgh 248) note, "The whole former part of the ''Nāgakumārāvadāna'' and roughly the first quarter of the ''Saṃgharakṣitāvadāna'' have been lost in the original Sanskrit."<br>349. Helmut Eimer (1983) has critically edited from the Tibetan the Pravrajyāvastu portion of the ''Mūlasarvāstivāda-vinaya'', which contains versions of the ''Nāgakumāra-avadāna'' (1983: 247.17–260.22, 302.1–306.25) and the ''Saṅgharakṣita-avadāna'' (1983: 260.23–301.27). Ware (1938) has edited and translated into English the first part of the ''Nāgakumāra-avadāna'', from both Tibetan and Chinese.<br>350. See Dutt's comments at the bottom of MSV iv, 46. According to Vogel and Wille (GM-Saṅgh 248), "Owing to a mistake by its compiler, the'' Divyāvadāna'' also gives the final portion of the tale of the present relative to the ''Nāgakumārāvadāna'', which is hardly comprehensible by itself . . ." In fact, at the end of that story, as Cowell and Neil (Divy 346n8) observe, "all the mss. add here 23 (for 24?)," indicating some discrepancy in ordering.
A divine being about to fall from heaven and be reborn as a pig laments his fate, and Śakra, out of compassion, convinces him to take refuge in the Buddha. As a result of his taking refuge, the divine being is reborn among the gods of Tuṣita heaven, a realm even higher than the one Śakra inhabits. +
No abstract given. Here are the first relevant paragraphs:
''The Sutra of the Dialogue of the Girl Candrottarā'' was probably composed about the third or fourth century A.D., about the same time as the sequel to ''The Sutra of the Teaching of Vimalakīrti'', which is known as ''The Sutra of the King Who Was Annointed on the Head'' (''Ting-wang ching'' or ''Kuan-ting-wang ching'').[53] The Chinese translation of the ''Candrottarā'' was undertaken by Jñānagupta of Sui, a North Indian monk from Gandhara, and by the Chinese monk Chih-te in 591. The Tibetan translation was begun in the ninth century by Jinamitra.<br> The text is mainly in prose with several long sections of verse. The ''Candrottarā'' has few discourses on Mahāyāna teachings, focusing instead on a series of dialogues between Candrottarā, Śāriputra, and various Bodhisattvas, not all of which have been translated below in their entirety. A noteworthy feature in the ''Candrottarā'' is the portrayal of Vimalakīrti as a rather weak individual who is afraid of threats from other men. In ''The Sutra of the Teaching of Vimalakīrti'' (''Vimalakīrtinirdeśa'') (see Chapter 6), on the other hand, Vimalakīrti is an immensely powerful Bodhisattva of unmitigated energy, who devastates the arguments of the monk Śāriputra. In ''Candrottarā'', ("On top of the moon") Vimalakīrti's daughter, who is named Candrottarā, in an apparent reversal of roles with the Vimalakīrti of ''The Sutra of the Teaching of Vimalakīrti'', has the same eloquence and incisive wisdom with regard to the Dharma as her father. The ''Candrottarā'' may be viewed as a sequel to the ''Vimalakīrtinirdeśa''. (Paul, Introduction to ''The Sutra of the Dialogue of the Girl Candrottarā'', 190–91) +
Of all the Buddhist texts which teach the principle known as the Tathāgatagarbha, none is as popular as this sutra. Queen Śrīmālā, the central figure in the text, represents a portrait of the ideal Buddhist laywoman as a teacher and philosopher who is committed to assisting all beings through the supreme teaching of the Tathāgatagarbha.<br> The text emphasizes total devotion to the Tathāgatagarbha or Buddha nature which is the means for universal salvation (Ekayāna). Each individual has this potential Buddha within his or her mind but must nurture and develop the awareness of this potentiality so that one may "give birth" or realize this nature of the Buddha. This theory of Buddha nature or Tathāgatagarbha became increasingly popular in China and Japan, particularly in Zen Buddhism where the notion of universal Buddha mind (Busshin) was identified with the mind that understands Emptiness (mushin).<br> ''The Sutra of Queen Śrīmālā Who Had the Lion’s Roar'' inspired first the Indian royal patronesses of Buddhism and then the court ladies in China and Japan. The popularity of this text undoubtedly was due not only to the portrayal of a woman as both a compassionate and helping human being, but also as an example of a human being in her struggle to exist and understand the world in freedom.<br> Although the text is no longer available in Sanskrit, fragments are cited in other Buddhist Sanskrit texts, attesting to the text's wide circulation throughout India at one time. In addition, both the Chinese and Tibetan collections of scripture have preserved redactions of the text. Commentaries on the ''Śrīmālā Sutra'' are extant only in Chinese and Japanese. According to the Chinese commentator Chi-tsang, monks at one time studied and composed commentaries in this sutra in great numbers from the time of the North-South dynastic periods through the Sui (that is, from approximately 440-618 of the common era).<br>Gunabhadra, the central Indian ''Tripiṭaka'' master (ca. 394-468) who translated the older of the two Chinese redactions (one of which was the source of the following translations), was a Central Indian scholar who departed for Canton in 435 via Ceylon, bringing the first Buddhist idealist (Vijñānavādin) texts with him. His translations of these texts were virtually neglected until the late Wei dynasty, when Ratnamati, Bodhiruci, and others came to China to translate texts from the same school of thought. He translated, among others, the ''Great Dharma Drum'' (''Mahābherihārakaparivarta''), which is a Tathāgatagarbhan text, and the ''Saṃdhinirmocana-sūtram'' and ''Laṇkāvatāra-sūtram'', both considered Vijñānavādin in doctrine.<br> Queen Śrīmālā and her historicity still remain obscure. In other Buddhist literature she is sometimes identified with King Prasenajit's wife, Mallikā, instead of with his daughter as described in the Śrīmālā sutra. According to the Sarvāstivādin books of discipline (''Vinaya'') which are preserved in the Chinese, Śrīmālā was the daughter of a village administrator who was raised by the king. Because she loved to pick flowers for her hair, she was known as Śrīmālā, which means "Beautiful Flower Garland." One day when King Prasenajit was visiting her guardian, Śrīmālā, through her foresight, ordered the palace gates closed during the period of his stay. Later, King Prasenajit discovered that his enemies had attempted to seize the palace and assassinate him but had failed in their plot because of Śrīmālā. He immediately asked her to be his queen, and she accepted. From that time on, Queen Śrīmālā compassionately ruled over the kingdom with her husband.<br> In the following sutra Queen Śrīmālā, with her eloquence or "lion's roar," receives the prediction that she will become a Buddha, and all of her kingdom subsequently practices according to the Buddha's teaching. (Paul, "Introduction to Selections from ''The Sutra of Queen Śrīmālā Who Had the Lion's Roar''," 289–91)
No abstract given. Here are the first relevant paragraphs:
The first paper in the volume contains a lengthy introduction to the ''Samādhirāja-sūtra'' and a translation of its first four chapters. This translation of the ''King of Samādhis'' is the result of an experiment in group translation, the members of the group consisting of faculty, visiting scholars, and advanced graduate students at the University of Michigan from 1982 to 1983. An effort was made throughout the introduction and translation to make the presentation of these materials accessible to the interested nonspecialist, while still maintaining rigorous scholarly standards. The introduction contains detailed bibliographic information about the sūtra, its classical versions and its modern editions, translations and studies. A text of capital importance for the Mahāyāna philosophical school called Mādhyamika, this sūtra is quoted extensively in śāstric literature. These quotations are documented in detail. Furthermore, an outline summary of the whole sūtra is given, chapter by chapter. It is hoped that the availability of some portions of the sūtra in English translation might prompt others to undertake translations of the remaining chapters in the near future.<br> For reasons explained in detail in Part I, the text taken as a basis for
the translation is the version preserved in the Buddhist Sanskrit manuscripts of Nepal. Since many Mahayana sūtras do not survive in their Indian-language originals, Tibetan and Chinese translations provide us with valuable textual materials for the study of Indian Mahāyāna Buddhism. Even in cases like that of the ''King of Samādhis'', for which we still possess a Sanskrit version, careful and judicious use of the Tibetan and Chinese translations can aid our reading of the text. It is important, however, for modern scholars to avoid creating their own new, conflated text of a sūtra. Often scholars will fail to adequately distinguish the various recensions of a given text, using translations not to shed light on one version but to actually rewrite the text. The study in Part I cautions against such a method, and shows in the notes to its translation one
approach to the comparative use of classical translations of Indian Buddhist texts. (Gomez and Silk, preface, viii–ix)
No abstract given. Here are the first relevant paragraphs:
''The Collection of Jewels'' (''Mahāratnakūṭa'') is an anthology which now includes forty-nine tales, also called assemblies, fourteen of which were independent texts at one time. ''The Collection of Jewels'' referred originally to the Kāśyapa assembly, which is one of the oldest discourses on Emptiness now accepted as Mahāyānist and incorporated as the forty-third assembly. This anthology of forty-nine tales, translated into Chinese by Bodhiruci of the T'ang dynasty between 706 and 713, approximately 600 years after the composition of the Kāśyapa assembly, is now collectively designated ''The Collection of Jewels''. The original compilation of forty-nine texts may have taken place in either China or Central Asia.[53] Due to the diversity of texts incorporated in ''The Collection of Jewels'', there was no single place of composition.<br> The twenty-ninth tale or assembly is "The Tale of King Udayana of Vatsa."[54] King Udayana[55] of Kauśāmbi had two wives. His chief queen, Śyāmāvatī, was a devout Buddhist. His second queen, Anupamā Māgandika,[56] wanted to slander the chief queen because she was jealous. Due to Anupamā Māgandika's lying and flattery, King Udayana tried to kill Śyāmāvatī by shooting three arrows at her. Śyāmāvatī then entered concentration (samādhi) and forgave the king. Instead of injuring her, the three arrows remained suspended over the king's head. Astonished and perplexed, the king repented and went to see the Buddha to find out why women are evil. The Buddha explained that one must know man's evil ways before one can know woman's, but from the discourse which follows, women are viewed as a problem of insurmountable proportions.<br> Ironically, although Śyāmāvatī in the following tale was the most innocent and holy character in the story, the Buddha is made to present a scathing indictment of all women by the author of this text. The king is a "straw man" for the monks who projected their own insecurities and weaknesses onto women, as will be evident in the following story. Relationships with women are generalized first as being evil and the source of suffering. One should enter into worthwhile relationships, which exclude those with women. Second, relationships with women draw energy away from valuable relationships with monks and Brahmans. Those who deal with women have misplaced values since they view their relationships with women as valuable rather than as corrupting the valuable. Third, relationships with women are all-consuming and preclude involvement in other relationships. Fourth, attraction toward women is extremely powerful and implies a natural force which draws men and women together only to end in destruction. The author vacillates between woman's deception as the cause for the strong attraction and helplessness of the male, on the one hand, and a man's desire for self-inflicted pain, on the other.<br> Women are given tremendous power in "The Tale of King Udayana of Vatsa." They manipulate and confuse men with their powers of deception. Yet men's self-inflicted pain is somewhat contradictory in view of their victimization by women. The monk's jealousy becomes evident, especially in the passages in which women are depicted as powerful competitors for attracting potential followers to the Buddha's teaching. In "The Tale of King Udayana of Vatsa" we find a vituperative polemic against women which demonstrates a polarization of women on one side and the Buddha's Dharma on the other. For the monk, his situation demanded the exclusion of women in order to practice the rules of celibacy. His lifestyle has been projected on society at large in the following tale in which women and the desire to associate with them should be totally rejected. The severity of this "monkish" attitude and the one-sided nature of the rhetoric is especially noticeable when the author extols the benefits of filial piety but glosses over the duties to mother, sister, and wife in contrast to the compulsion to denigrate sexuality at all costs. (Paul, "Introduction to 'The Tale of Udayana of Vatsa' from ''The Collection of Jewels''", 25–27)
No abstract given. Here are the first relevant paragraphs:
There are several works of literature transmitted in the Tanjur related to Śāntideva’s masterpiece Bodhicaryāvatāra (Bca), and unfortunately nearly all of them have been lost in their original Sanskrit versions (on them cf. Dietz: Śāntideva’s Bca – das Weiterwirken des Werkes dargestellt anhand der Überlieferungsgeschichte des Textes und seiner Kommentare [Lecture script) {Buddhismus in Geschichte und Gegenwart 3: Śāntideva’s “Eintritt i.d. Leben zur Erleuchtung.” Hamburg 1999, p. 27-41}, p. 35 sq. [IV. Die Kommentare zum Bca]; Ejima: Nyūbodaigyōron no chūshaku bunken ni tsuite {Indogaku Bukkyōgaku Kenkyū /Journal of Indian and Buddhist Studies 14,2 (1966), p. 644-48}; Williams: On Prakṛtinirvāṇa / Prakṛtinivṛta i.t. Bca {Altruism and reality. Studies i.t. philosophy of the Bca. Richmond 1998, p. 1-28 = *Asiatische Studien / Etudes Asiatiques 46,1 (1992), p. 516-50}, p. 3 sq. [1. Indian commentaries]). There are (in order of appearance):
1. The Bodhicaryāvatāra-Pañjikā (byaṅ chub kyi spyod pa la ‘jug pa’i dka’ ‘grel, Q 5273, 221 (la / mdo ‘grel 26), 45a7-325a5; facsimile ed. vol. 100) [1] by Prajñākaramati (Śes rab ‘byuṅ gnas blo gros) is a extensive commentary on the chapters 1-9 of the Bca. Besides its Tibetan carrier the text also survived in the original Sanskrit through a few very precious antique palm leaf manuscripts kept in Kolkata (cf. this former blog contrib), which has been edited three times: the 9th chapter in 1898 by La Vallée Poussin (1869-1938); the full text by the same in 1901-14 for the Bibliotheca Indica series and later again by Vaidya (1891-1978)[2] in 1960 for the Buddhist Sanskrit Text series; due to folio loss unfortunately there are two large lacunae, 3,22-4,45 and 8,109-186 [end of the 8th chapter) haven’t made it.[3] Prajñākaramati lived at the end of the 1st millennium and was a teacher and a so-called “gatekeeper” (an examiner?) of the famous Vikramaśīla university considered to be located in the Bhagalpur district of modern Bihar (cf. Bose: Indian teachers of Buddhist universities.
Adyar 1923, p. 50 sq. [4. Prajñākaramati); Dutt: Buddhist monks and monasteries of India. London 1962, p. 358 sq. [b. Vikramaśīlā]. Towards the patronage of the Pālas in general cf. the introduction chapter of: Huntington: Leaves from the bodhi tree. The art of Pāla India (8th-12th centuries). Seattle (etc.) 1990; and most recently: Sanderson: The Śaiva age {Einoo (Ed.): Genesis and development of Tantrism. Tokyo 2009, p. 41-349 [!]}, p. 87 sq. [The Pāla emperors and the great monasteries of eastern India]). In the colophons of the survived mss at the Asiatic Society of Bengal the author is called prajñākara (no. 3830) next to prajñākaramati (no. 3829, cf. Hara Prasada Shāstri: Descriptive catalogue of the Sanskrit mss i.t. Government Collection 1: Buddhist mss. Calcutta 1917, p. 49 sq.), which Bose claims to be common (cf. op.cit., p. 52). Furthermore he is titulated paṇḍitabhikṣu, which was an academic title in the university.
2. The Bodhisattvacaryāvatāra[4]-Vivṛttipañjikā (byaṅ chub sems dpa’i spyod pa la ‘jug pa’i rnam par bśad pa’i <bka’i ] dka’> ‘grel, Q 5274, 221, 325a5-396a5) is an anonymous commentary on the shorter version of the Bca [5], and therefore employs 9 chapters while commenting also on the Pariṇāmanā, the 9th chapter of the Bca in its short version.[6] Saito writes that the author comments the text the from a Yogācāra-Mādhyamika point of view (cf. Saito: Śāntideva in the history of Mādhyamaka philosophy {Sankarnarayan/Yoritomi/Joshi (Eds.): Buddhism in India and abroad. Mumbai (etc.) 1996, p. 257-63}, p. 259). An edition of the 8th chapter of this text (commenting on the Prajñāpāramitāpariccheda) based on the Derge Tanjur (D. 3873, La 338a7-349a4) with variants could be found in Saito’s research report {A study of Akṣayamati (=Śāntideva)’s Bodhisattvacaryāvatāra as found in the Tibetan manuscripts from Tun-huang} from 1993, p. 57 sq.
3. The Bodhisattvacaryāvatāra-Saṃskāra (byaṅ chub sems dpa’i spyod pa la ‘jug pa’i legs par sbyar ba, Q 5275, 222 (śa / mdo ‘grel 27), 1-106a6) by Kalyāṇadeva (Dge ba’i lha), the “edition” of the Bca, is another commentary on the long version, but not as exhaustive and rich of citations as Prajñākaramati’s Pañjikā.
4. The Bodhisattvacaryāvatāra-Duravabodhanirṇaya-nāmagrantha (byaṅ chub sems dpa’i spyod pa la ‘jug pa’i rtogs par dka’ ba’i gnas gtan la dbab pa źes bya ba’i gźuṅ, Q 5276, 222, 106a7-112b4), “book with the name: discussion of difficult (portions)” by Kṛṣṇapāda (Kṛṣṇa ba) is, like the name suggests, a non-continuous commentary. The author was a Newar brahmin and disciple of Śāntibhadra, a Newar scholar of the 11th century (cf. Lo Blue: The role of Newar scholars in transmitting the Indian Buddhist heritage to Tibet (c. 750-c. 1200) {Karnay/Sagant: Les habitants du toit du monde (Festschrift A.W. MacDonald). Nanterre 1997, p. 629-58}, p. 639).
5. The Bodhisattvacaryāvatāra-Pañjikā (byaṅ chub sems dpa’i spyod pa la ‘jug pa’i dka’ ‘grel, Q 5277, 222, 112b4-186b7) by Vairocanarakṣita (Bai ro tsa na kṣi ta) is by its extend somewhat comparable to Kalyānadeva’s Saṃskāra. The author, also known as Vairocanavajra, was a contemporary of Atiśa (982-1054) and also a inhabitant of the Vikramaśīla university (cf. Schaeffer: The religious career of Vairocanavajra – a 12th century indian Buddhist master from Dakṣina Kośala {Journal of Indian Philosophy 28 (2000), p. 361-84}).
6. The Prajñāparicchedapañjikā (śes rab le’u’i dka’ ‘grel, Q 5278, 222, 186b7-210a5) is, like the name suggests, a commentary of the 9th chapter of the Bca.
7. The Bodhisattvacaryāvatāra-Vivṛtti (byaṅ chub sems dpa’i spyod pa la ‘jug pa’i rnam par bśad pa, Q 5279, 222, 210a5-223b2) is nearly identical with the last two chapters of the Vivṛttipañjikā (Q 5274, see above), and thus also refers to the shorter version of the Bca.
8. The Bodhisattvacaryāvatāra-Ṣaṭtriṃśat-piṇḍārtha (byaṅ chub sems dpa’i spyod pa la ‘jug pa’i don sum cu rtsa drug bsdus pa, Q 5280, 222, 223b2-227b5), and the
9. Bodhisattvacaryāvatāra-Piṇḍārtha (byaṅ chug sems dpa’i spyod pa la ‘jug pa’i don bsdus pa, Q 5281, 222, 227b5-229a7) are abridgements and consist of selected stanzas of the Bca (cf. Eimer: Suvarṇadvipa’s “commentaries” on the Bca {Bruhn/Wetzler: Studien zum Jainismus und Buddhismus (Festschrift Alsdorf). Wiesbaden 1981, p. 73-78}). The author is called in the colophon “Suvarṇadvipī Lama Dharmapāla” (Gser gliṇ gi bla ma chos skyoṅ), but that just refers to Atiśa’s teacher from Sumatra, Suvarṇadvīpa Dharmakīrti (Gser gliṅ pa chos kyi grags pa, cf. Eimer: Berichte über das Leben des Atiśa (Dīpaṃkaraśrījñāna). Wiesbaden 1977, p. 14, fn. 9).
10. The Bodhicaryāvatāra-tātparyapañjikā-Viśeṣadyotanī-nāma (ppbyaṅ chub kyi spyod pa la ‘jug pa’i dgoṅs pa’i ‘grel pa khyad par gsal byed ces bya ba]], Q 5282, 222, 229a8-343a4), was written and also translated by Vibhūticandra (rnal ‘byor zla ba). Karunaratne claims that the text is a sub-commentary on Prajñākaramati’s Pañjikā (cf. Bca-tātparyapañjikā-viśeṣadyotanī-nāma {Malalasekera (Ed.): Encyclopedia of Buddhism. Vol. 3: Bhārini-deva – Caura-vidhvaṃsana-n°. Sri Lanka 1971, p. 184 sq.}. In the beginning the text contains a short hagiographic biography of Śāntideva, which also survived in its Sanskrit original (cf. ms no. 9990 again i.t. Government Collection of the Asiatic Society of Bombay [what a precious collection they have got there, it taken scanned and put online would give a glorious major impulse for worldwide studies], no. 52 i.t. catalogue (op.cit., p. 51); examined by Jong as a review of Pezzali’s Śāntideva (Firenze 1968): La légende de Śāntideva {Indo-Iranian Journal 16,3 (1975), p. 161-82 = Buddhist Studies [Collected minor works]. Berkeley 1979, p. 119-40}). Master Vibhūticandra is not a minor figure, he was an important Kālacakra scholar and accompanied Śākyaśrībhadra (1127-1225) after Vikramaśīla was invaded in the 1190s first to the monastery of Jagtatalā in East Bengal, and then to Tibet in 1203 (cf. Bandurski: Übersicht über die Göttinger Sammlungen der von Rāhula Sāṅkṛtyayana in Tibet aufgefundenen buddhistischen Sanskrit-Texte {Bandurski u.a. (Eds.): Untersuchungen zur buddhistischen Literatur. Göttingen 1994, p. 9-125}, p. 22). The dates of his birth and death are unknown (cf. Das Gupta: Vibhūticandra of the Jagaddala Mahāvihāra {Indian Culture 5 (1938-39), p. 215-17}; Vogel: Lunar eclipses of the early 13th century predicted by the Buddhist master Vibhūticandra {Kollmar-Paulenz/Peter (Eds.): Tractata Tibetica et Mongolica (Festschrift Sagaster). Wiesbaden 2002, p. 305-11}; Stearns: The life and legacy of the Indian Mahāpaṇḍita Vibhūticandra {Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies 19,1 (1996), p. 127-71}).
These representations of Sanskrit works that have been lost suggest that there existed a vast literature on the Bca and maybe this again is only a cutout. Dietz points out that in the Duravabodhinirṇaya there are many references to unknown commentaries and subcommentaries (op.cit., p. 38). The Buddhist Sanskrit literature related to the Bca is a fascinating, challenging subject. A closer examination of the auxiliaries i.t. Tanjur remains a desideratum and could make a subject on its own.
<h5>Notes</h5>
#Cf. the usual catalogues: Suzuki: The Tibetan Tripitaka. Catalogue & Index. Tokyo 1962, p. 639 sq.; *A comparative analytical catalogue of the Tanjur division of the Tibetan Tripitaka kept i.t. Otani Univ. Library. Kyoto 1965 ff. The other Tanjur editions could be located as always through the usual catalogues or a query at the general catalogue in Vienna.
#Obituary by B.V. Bapat i.t. Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies 1,1 (1978), p. 91 sq.
#Sometime some more Sanskrit mss which survived in Tibet are mentioned, cf. Martin: Tibskrit 2008, p. 1666: “KCDS [Microfilm catalogue of the Tibetan Cultural Research Center, Beijing], p. 150. Sanskrit palmleaf manuscript now belonging to the Potala”; Petech: Medieval history of Nepal (c. 750-1482). Roma 1984, p. 98: “23) Ms. of Prajñākaramati’s commentary on the Bca. Ṅor monastery in Tibet”, footnote: “… although the ms. seems to be listed in RS, XXI, 37 (no. 110) [refers to: Sāṅkrityāyana: Sanskrit palm-leaf mss. in Tibet {The Journal of the Bihar and Orissa Research Society 21 (1935), p. 21-43}, but no. 110 (p. 37) refers to a ms of the mūla). From a hand-copy made by Professor G. Tucci in 1939″ [not listed in: Sferra: Sanskrit mss and photos of Sanskrit mss in Guiseppe Tucci’s collection {Balcerowicz / Mejor (Eds.): On the understanding of other cultures (Festschrift Schayer). Warsaw 2000, p. 397-413}].
#In Tibetan the title Bodhisattvacaryāvatāra (sometimes refered to as “Bsa”) appears next to Bodhicaryavatāra. Lindtner claims that the longer version is original, Rachewiltz: The Mongolian Tanjur version of the Bodhicaryātāra. Wiesbaden 1966 [review] {Buddhist Studies Review 15,2 (1998), p. 238-40}, p. 239: “Moreover it is more important, the full title of the poem is Bodhisattvacaryāvatāra (rather than Bodhicaryāvatāra). This form is also supported by the Mongolian … Obviously, our poem is not an introduction to the life of bodhi, but to the career of a bodhisattva. The source of the abbreviated title probably the author himself.” But it’s a fact that the title Bca and even not a single time the longer version occurs everywhere in the Sanskrit transmission: India Office Library [incorporated into the British Library] ms no. 7713 colophon (cf. Keith: Catalogue of the Prākrit mss i.t. library of the India Office 2: Brahmanical and Jaina mss. Oxford 1935, p. 1394), Minaev’s own ms “M” (cf. Spasenie po učeniju pozdnějšich buddhistov according to the teachings of the late Buddhist) {Zapiski Vostočnago Otdělenija Imperatorskago Russkago Archeologičeskago Obščestva [Memoirs of the Oriental Section of the Imperial Russian Archaeological Society) 4 (1889), p. 153-228}, p. 154); i.t. colophons of the mss no. 78 & 79 of Filliozat’s catalogue of the Sanskrit stocks of the French national library (Catalogue du fonds sanscrit 1: nos. 1 à 165. Paris 1941, p. 63); in no. 8067 i.t. Government Collection of the Asiatic Society of Bengal (op.cit., no. 19, p. 21) etc. etc. That the longer version of title is to be found also in Mongolian for me is no argument, that the Mongolian version of the text (and so its title) derived from the Tibetan has been found out already by Weller (cf. Über den Quellenbezug eines mongolischen Tanjurtextes. Berlin 1950 [Abhandlungen d. Sächsischen Akademie d. Wissenschaften zu Leipzig, phil.-hist. Klasse; 45,2]. On the Monglian translations in general see: Sagaster: Übersetzungen vom Tibetischen ins Mongolische und umgekehrt).
#The shorter version of the Bca, also lost in its original Sanskrit version, is transmitted in Tibetan outer-canonically and has been found in Dunhuang on the Silk Road. It employs 9 chapters in 701 verses while the longer version consists of 10 chapters and 913 verses; chapter 2 and 3 of the longer version are combined here, the verses there which are related to the ritual of taking the bodhisattva vow (saptavidhānottarapūjā, cf. Gómez: Bodhicitta (thought of awakening) {Buswell: Encyclopedia of Buddhism. Vol. 1: A-L. New York 2004, p. 54-56}) are still absent here and there are other interesting differences, mainly in the 5th chapter. The short version has been examined and edited by Saito in research projects of Mie University (cf. A study of Akṣayamati’s (=Śāntideva’s) Bodhisattvavaryāvatāra as found in the Tibetan mss from Tun-huang. Project no. 02801005 [Research project report, 1993]; A study of the Dūn-huáng recension of the Bodhisattvacaryāvatāra. Project no. 09610021 [Research project report, 2000]), and there is a vast (mostly Japanese) literature on that subject and its issues like the Akṣayamati hypothesis (that the authors original name is Akṣayamati and not Śāntideva), the Tabo ms of the Bca (cf. Saito: Remarks on the Tabo ms of the Bodhisattvacaryavatāra {Scherrer/Schaub: Tabo Studies II. Manuscripts, texts, inscriptions, and the arts. Roma 1999, p. 175-89}) etc.
#That the 10th chapter of the Bca (in its vulgate long version) is not original has been brought forward the first time by La Vallée Poussin in the French translation of the text (Bodhicaryāvatāra. Introduction a la pratique des futurs bouddhas. Paris 1907, p. 143 sq. [Note finale]: “Il entrait dans mon intention de publier la traduction du dixième chapitre du Bca …”). But this has been doubted among others by Ruegg (The literature of the Madhyamaka school of philosophy in India. Wiesbaden 1981, p. 83: “The authenticity of this final chapter has been questioned on the ground that not all commentators have commented on it, but this point does not appear to be decisive.” La Vallée Poussin didn’t recognised that some of the 9-chapter-commentaries are referring to another version of the mūla consisting only of 9 chapters anyway, and furthermore the fact that the Pañjikā omits the 10th chapter of the mūla does not mean necessarily that Prajñākaramati also considers it not to be original (another theory is that the Prajñāpāramitā chapter of the Pañjikā was written first and later the commentary on the chapters 1-8 as an addition, cf. this previous posting here). Dietz seeks to conclude the discussion pointing out that the Pariṇāmanā is to be found in just all known copies and versions of text, even the shorter Tibetan version and also the shorter Chinese version (Taishō no. 1662, Putixingjing (菩提行經), in 782 verses and 8 chapters), and I think that this is a decisive argument (cf. Dietz, op.cit., 30).
No abstract given. Here are the first relevant paragraphs:
In his comprehensive study of the development of the ''tathāgatagarbha'' teaching, J. Takasaki also deals with the sūtra which bears the name of this Mahāyāna philosophical current.[1] The ''Tathāgatagarbhasūtra'' (''TGS'') has generally been referred to as the earliest expression of this doctrine and the term ''tathāgatagarbha'' itself seems to have been coined by this very sūtra. In this paper I intend to introduce the textual history and doctrinal content of the ''TGS'' and offer some speculations concerning the possible motivations lying behind its compilation. By pointing out some interesting parallels concerning the structure and formulations in the ''Saddharmapuṇḍarīkasūtra'' (''SP''), I shall then suggest that the ''SP'' and the ''TGS'' carry a similar compositional line. Finally, I shall determine the position and role of the ''TGS'' in Mahāyāna Buddhism as a sūtra presupposing the doctrine of the ''SP'' and providing its metaphysical foundation. (Zimmermann, introductory remarks, 143–44)
<h5>Notes</h5>
#Jikidō Takasaki 高崎直道, ''Nyoraizō shisō no keisei (Formation of the Tathāgatagarbha Theory)'', Tokyo 1974 (Shunjū-sha): pp. 40–68. +
This article by Karma Phuntsho provides a comprehensive overview of the ''Śikṣāsamuccaya''<i>'</i>s origins, spread, and influence. It traces the text's composition in eighth-century India, its early translations into Tibetan and Chinese, and subsequent transmission through various Buddhist lineages. The study explores the text's relationship with the ''Bodhicaryāvatāra'' and its importance in Tibetan Buddhism, particularly within the Kadam tradition. It also covers the ''Śikṣāsamuccaya''<i>'</i>s rediscovery by Western academics and subsequent scholarly analyses in the twentieth and twenty-first centuries.
This thorough examination offers a rich resource for those interested in the ''Śikṣāsamuccaya'' and its place in Buddhist literature. The detailed account of translations, commentaries, and scholarly works provides a detailed analysis of textual and historical resources related to the text. By discussing the text's relationship with other Buddhist works and its role in different traditions, the article also helps readers understand its significance in Buddhist thought and practice. The exploration of ongoing academic debates and recent scholarship demonstrates the text's continued relevance, making it an excellent starting point for both academic researchers and Buddhist practitioners. +
No abstract given. Here are the first relevant paragraphs:
This paper is but a brief prospectus of a larger, ongoing study of an early Mahāyāna sūtra, the ''Raṣṭrapālaparipṛcchā''. My interest in this text stems both from its provocative content and from the availability of an early Chinese translation that promises to tell us much about its Indian history. I will sketch some of the more interesting features of the text as well as note some of the data from the earliest Chinese translation that provide evidence for the shape of the Indian text in the late third century. (Boucher, preliminary remarks, 93) +
No abstract given. Here are the first relevant paragraphs:
The "thought of enlightenment," ''bodhichita'' in Sanskrit, is the
wish to attain enlightenment for the sake of al sentient beings.
Bodhichitta has two aspects, the relative and the absolute. Abso-
lute bodhichitta is the recognition of the Buddha-nature inherently present in each being and can be grasped only by those
who realize the void nature of al phenomena; since it is not easy
to understand fully, we usually begin with the practice of relative
bodhichitta, which is less difficult. +
No abstract given. Here is the first relevant paragraph:
The concept bodhicitta comes up frequently in Fa-tsang’s voluminous
writings. That, however, would not make it exceptional since, like Vasubandhu,
his Indian Buddhist model, Fa-tsang works with the full historical repertoire
of Buddhist concepts. And although bodhicitta warrants an entire text named
in its honor—''The Hua-yen Bodhicitta Treatise''[2],—one would still be overstating the case to claim that this is a central concept for Fa-tsang. Nevertheless, as promised by Fa-tsang, no matter which part, even down to a speck of dust in the entire universe, the character of the whole can be seen clearly in this bodhicitta component. +
Over twelve centuries of Buddhist civilization, the
Tibetan people have developed a comprehensive
system of ethical practices which they employ to train
themselves in "the altruistic mind of enlightenment"
(''bodhicitta''). These ethical practices are based in large
part on epistemological investigations which are
aimed at disclosing the nature of understanding and
the structure of perception, philosophical investiga
tions which have much in common with Western
philosophical traditions, including Phenomenology.
Where the Phenomenologists pursue such inquiries
without extensive consideration of the ethical conse
quences they might have, the Tibetan philosophers
are concerned with applying these philosophical in
sights to ethical domains, providing for their ethical
practices a sound philosophical basis, in addition to
the religious basis they also have. This cultural praxis
of the Tibetans is not merely a relic of South Asian
civilization recorded in written texts, but constitutes
a body of ordinary practices for the Tibetan people. +
The figure of Śāntideva, the putative eighth-century Indian Mahāyāna Buddhist philosopher-monk, has enjoyed a rapid and deserved surge of interest in the twenty-first century to date. Scholars of Buddhist ethics have experienced some frustration with a perceived lack of explicit ethical argument in classical Buddhist works; for this reason, Keown (2005) has gone so far as to claim that Buddhism is "morality without ethics." But Śāntideva's explicit ethical arguments give the lie to such claims, a fact increasingly recognized by Western philosophers (Cooper 1998) as well as scholars of Buddhist ethics (e.g., Clayton 2006, Siderits 2005).<br> Most studies of Śāntideva's work have tended to focus on the ''Bodhicaryāvatāra'', the pithier and more poetic of his two works; it has been more widely read in India, Tibet, and the West, and is now widely taught in courses on Buddhism and Buddhist ethics. The ''Śikṣāsamuccaya'', the other work attributed to Śāntideva, has been comparatively neglected in the West, even though it is a rich resource for ethical reflection in its own right (see for example Clayton 2006; Lele 2007; Mrozik 2007). Some of this neglect likely stems from an older view of the text as merely a collection of quotations with little original insight (e.g., Winternitz 1933); Paul Harrison (2007) has done much to correct this view. But another reason for the neglect, especially in a pedagogical context, stems front a lack of good translations. Until now, the only full English translation of the text was the nearly hundred-year-old translation of Cecil Bendall and W. H. D. Rouse (1922), which was serviceable but increasingly archaic and not easily available. The style of the ''Śikṣā'', composed primarily of a selection of quotes from sūtras and other texts, suggests a work intended to be suitable for beginners, and Bendall and Rouse's translation is decidedly not that now, if it ever was.<br> Charles Goodman has taken on the important task of rendering this valuable text into readable twenty-first-century English—not an easy task, given the often abstract and passive prose in the text's composite Buddhist and Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit. That in itself would be a major contribution, but Goodman's effort goes considerably further. He translates the Tibetan as well as the Sanskrit text and indicates where they differ, allowing a comparison of the different extant versions even for those who cannot read the source languages. He notes those passages which are shared with the ''Bodhicaryāvatāra''. And he does us the service of pointing to other translations of the sūtras that Śāntideva quotes, allowing them to be compared to their original context. As a result, the translation serves as a reference work on the ''Śikṣā'' in a way that even the original-language editions do not. (Lele, "Review," 403)
This article by Fredrik Liland provides a detailed overview of the ''Bodhicaryāvatāra''<i>'</i>s impact on Tibetan Buddhism. It traces the text's translation process from Sanskrit to Tibetan, detailing three major stages of translation and revision. The study highlights the text's influence on Tibetan Buddhist practices, particularly in the development of mental purification techniques and meditation manuals. It discusses the text's role in philosophical debates, especially regarding the interpretation of the ninth chapter on transcendental wisdom. The article also explores the ''Bodhicaryāvatāra''<i>'</i>s integration into monastic education and its continued relevance in contemporary Tibetan Buddhist practice.
This multifaceted analysis offers valuable insights into the text's historical, philosophical, and practical significance in Tibetan Buddhism. It illuminates the complex process of textual transmission and translation, demonstrating how a single text can shape religious thought and practice across centuries. The exploration of related philosophical debates showcases the importance of the ''Bodhicaryāvatāra'' in Tibetan Buddhism. By including contemporary examples showing how the text is used in education and daily practice, the article bridges historical analysis with current relevance, providing a comprehensive resource for understanding the enduring impact of this central Buddhist text in Tibetan culture and religious life. +
