- [[<span class="smw-highlighter" data-type="4" data-state="inline" data-title="Warning" title="Some use of "|]]
- "
- In your query was not closed by a matching "
- "
- [[.">Some use of "" in your query was not closed by a matching "".|]]
This article by Gregory Forgues provides a comprehensive overview of the Indian commentaries on the Bodhicaryāvatāra (BCA). It details thirteen commentaries composed by Indian authors, highlighting how the BCA was used both as a Mahāyāna practice manual and a debate manual. The article traces the evolution of the BCA from its earliest known version in Dunhuang manuscripts to later Sanskrit recensions and Tibetan translations. It explores the various commentators, their approaches, and the historical context of their works. The article also discusses the two main traditions of the BCA transmission to Tibet, emphasizing the influence of Candrakīrti's thought on later scholars. It concludes by examining the continuous evolution of the root text and its Tibetan translations in relation to the various Indian commentaries, illustrating the complex history of the BCA's transmission from India to Tibet.
This article is invaluable for researchers, scholars, and students interested in Buddhist philosophy and in the Bodhicaryāvatāra as well as its commentarial tradition. It provides a detailed historical and textual analysis that offers insights into the development and interpretation of this central Buddhist text. The article's exploration of different versions and translations of the BCA, along with its examination of various commentaries, allows readers to understand the nuances and evolving interpretations of the text over time. Furthermore, the article's discussion of the two waves of transmission to Tibet helps contextualize the BCA within broader historical and cultural frameworks. By offering this comprehensive overview, the article serves as an excellent starting point for further research into the Bodhicaryāvatāra, its commentaries, and its significance in Buddhist thought and practice.
by Greg Forgues
1. The Indian Commentaries on BCA
Apart from the anonymous Bodhicaryāvatāraṭippaṇi, all Indian commentaries on Śāntideva’s renowned text, the Bodhi(sattva)caryāvatāra (BCA), are found in the Tengyur.[1] Unfortunately, all original Sanskrit versions of these texts have been lost, with the exception of most of Prajñākaramati's Bodhicaryāvatārapañjikā, some passages of Vibhūticandra's Bodhicaryāvatāratātparyapañjikāviśeṣadyotanī, and the Bodhicaryāvatāraṭippaṇi.[2] According to the great Tibetan scholar Butön (Bu ston), a hundred commentaries were composed in India on the Bodhicaryāvatāra, of which only eight were translated into Tibetan.[3] The scope of the thirteen commentaries composed by Indian authors shows how the BCA could be used both as a Mahāyāna practice manual in the context of the path and as a debate manual with regard to establishing the right view regarding the nature of reality. From this perspective, the text was, from the very beginning, the support for both a practice-oriented approach (sgom lugs), as taught by Suvarṇadvīpa Dharmakīrti, and a more intellectually minded approach (thos bsam gyi lugs), as can be found in word-by-word commentaries dealing with the Wisdom chapter in great detail.
1.1 Bodhisattvacaryāvatāravivṛttipañjikā (Byang chub sems dpa'i spyod pa la 'jug pa'i rnam par bshad pa'i dka' 'grel)[4]
While its author is unknown, the Bodhisattvacaryāvatāravivṛttipañjikā is probably the earliest of all extant BCA commentaries. It is based on a Sanskrit manuscript similar to that used by Kawa Paltsek (Ska ba dpal brtsegs, 8th c.) to produce the Dunhuang version of the BCA in nine chapters, according to which the author of the BCA is Akṣayamati. In this version featuring nine chapters, the second and third chapters of the longer version of the BCA are merged into one. Since the Dunhuang manuscripts date back to a period spanning the ninth to eleventh centuries, it must have been composed during or shortly before this period. The commentary provides a word-by-word explanation of the verses, emphasizing a detailed and precise interpretation of the text. The commentary also seems to share patterns of intertextuality with Jñānagarbha's Satyadvayavibhaṅga and Sthiramati's Sūtrālaṃkāravṛttibhāṣya.[5] Most central treatises related to the Yogācāra-Madhyamaka, such as the Tattvasaṃgraha, are quoted or relied upon. It begins with an explanation of Nāgārjuna's verses of homage to the Buddha in the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā. Some chapters are explained quite elaborately and some are summarized, while the Śikṣāsamuccaya (hereafter SSC) is extensively quoted throughout the main text. The chapter on wisdom is considered from what will be later defined in Tibet as a Svātantrika-Mādhyamika perspective.[6] The last chapter on dedication is only briefly considered.
1.2 Bodhisattvacaryāvatāravivṛtti (Byang chub sems dpa'i spyod pa la 'jug pa'i shes rab le'u dang bsngo ba'i dka' 'grel)[7]
The Bodhisattvacaryāvatāravivṛtti consists of a short commentary mainly on the Wisdom chapter of the Dunhuang shorter version of the BCA. Its content is almost identical with the two last chapters of the Bodhisattvacaryāvatāravivṛttipañjikā. Like this commentary, the author is unknown.
1.3 Prajñāparicchedapañjikā (Shes rab le'u'i dka' 'grel)[8]
The exact author of this commentary is unknown, but it must have been composed at the latest during the early eleventh century, since it was translated by Ngok Loden Sherab (Ngog blo ldan shes rab, 1059–1109). The Prajñāparicchedapañjikā is a short commentary specifically on the Wisdom chapter of the BCA, as suggested by its title. It provides concise word-by-word explanations of the verses in the ninth chapter, emphasizing the philosophical aspects of the text without relying on quotes or external references. Some sentences of this text are found in Vibhūticandra's Bodhicaryāvatāratātparyapañjikāviśeṣadyotanī.
1.4 Bodhisattvacaryāvatāraduravabodhapadanirṇayanāmagrantha (Byang chub sems dpa'i spyod pa la 'jug pa'i rtogs par dka' ba'i gnas gtan la dbab pa zhes bya ba'i gzhung) by Kṛṣṇapāda[9]
Kṛṣṇapāda was a Newar Buddhist scholar and disciple of Śāntibhadra active in the late tenth to mid-eleventh century. He is known to have composed several works on Madhyamaka and may have been one of Atiśa's teachers.[10] The Bodhisattvacaryāvatāraduravabodhapadanirṇaya is a very short commentary in eleven pages, mainly focusing on the ritual to take the bodhisattva vow. It is based on the longer version of the BCA in ten chapters. The ninth chapter is presented as being about ultimate bodhicitta, while all others are considered to be about relative bodhicitta. Nāgārjuna, Candrakīrti, Candragomin, and Daṃṣṭrasena are mentioned in the section of the commentary about the presentation of the six perfections. Candrakīrti's Pradīpodyotananāmaṭīkā is quoted at the beginning of the commentary, and Bhāvaviveka's Madhyamakaratnapradīpa is quoted as well. The name Śāntirakṣita is mentioned as the teacher of another tradition. Śāntideva is presented as a tantric master adept of Mahāmudrā. At the end of his commentary, Kṛṣṇapāda refers to several other commentaries without citing any title, indicating thereby that the commentarial literature on the BCA must have included a large number of works.[11]
1.5 Bodhisattvacaryāvatāraṣaṭṭriṃśatpiṇḍārtha (Byang chub sems dpa'i spyod pa la 'jug pa'i don sum cu rtsa drug bsdus pa) by Suvarṇadvīpa Dharmakīrti[12]
Suvarṇadvīpa Dharmakīrti (or Suvarṇadvīpa Dharmapāla), also simply referred to as Serlingpa (Gser gling pa) by Tibetans, was a renowned Buddhist scholar and teacher in the tenth century. Dharmapāla, originally named Senasena and born into a royal family on the island of Suvarṇadvīpa (Sumatra), traveled to India where he encountered his mentor, Mahāśrīratna. In India, he received the name Dharmakīrti. Renowned for his scholarly achievements, he attracted numerous disciples from India. He became the teacher of Atiśa Dipaṃkaraśrījñāna (982–1054), one of the most influential figures in Tibetan Buddhism. The Bodhisattvacaryāvatāraṣaṭṭriṃśatpiṇḍārtha, which was requested by Atiśa and Kamalarakṣita, is an extended summary based on eighty-one verses of the BCA. This text, as well as its abridged version, the Bodhisattvacaryāvatārapiṇḍārtha, was meant as a support for purifying practices such as lojong (blo 'byong). In this longer anthology, the selected verses follow an outline of eleven key points that are further divided into thirty-six sections. In both texts, the first four verses of the ninth chapter are found as an excerpt of the Wisdom chapter.[13] The version of the text in the Tibetan translation of this anthology, as well as the one below, mainly corresponds to the Dunhuang version of the BCA. However, selections by Suvarṇadvīpa include new verses not found in the Dunhuang version.[14]
1.6 Bodhisattvacaryāvatārapiṇḍārtha (Byang chub sems dpa'i spyod pa la 'jug pa'i don bsdus pa) by Suvarṇadvīpa Dharmakīrti[15]
Suvarṇadvīpa Dharmakīrti, as previously mentioned, was a key figure in the transmission of Buddhist teachings to Tibet through his student Atiśa. Suvarṇadvīpa's work aims at further distilling Śāntideva's complex teaching. The text includes a selection of thirty key verses from the root text. These thirty verses are also found in the Bodhisattvacaryāvatāraṣaṭṭriṃśatpiṇḍārtha, which is an extended version of the Bodhisattvacaryāvatārapiṇḍārtha. The succinct nature of this commentary makes it accessible for readers seeking a very condensed version of the Bodhicaryāvatāra. It summarizes the root text's main ideas in a practical and straightforward way.
1.7 Bodhisattvacaryāvatārabhāṣya (Byang chub sems dpa'i spyod pa la 'jug pa'i bshad pa) by Atiśa Dipaṃkaraśrījñāna[16]
The Bodhisattvacaryāvatārabhāṣya is attributed to Atiśa Dipamkaraśrījñāna.[17] Despite the absence of direct biographical evidence linking Atiśa to the composition of a commentary on the BCA, it is clear that the BCA significantly influenced his works. Atiśa's major texts, such as the Bodhimārgadīpapañjikā and the Madhyamakopadeśaratnakaraṇḍoghaṭa, include numerous references and quotations from the BCA, illustrating its impact on his philosophical and doctrinal expositions. Additionally, Atiśa's teacher Dharmapāla (i.e., Serlingpa) authored two anthologies of the BCA, further establishing the text's significance for his tradition. The Bodhisattvacaryāvatārabhāṣya is available in the Ganden, Narthang, and Peking editions of the Tengyur but is absent in the Cone and Derge editions. Unlike other BCA commentaries, which are found in the Madhyamaka section, the Bodhisattvacaryāvatārabhāṣya is classified under the Ngo mtshar bstan bcos section of the Narthang Tengyur.[18] The Bodhisattvacaryāvatārabhāṣya consists, in fact, of two texts separated by a colophon-like sentence since the bhāṣya itself is followed by another text.[19] The commentary itself begins with a dialogue between Mañjuśrī and Akṣayamati, followed by a teaching based on the ten Bodhicaryāvatāra chapters. Atiśa aligns these ten chapter titles of the Bodhicaryāvatāra with the "five paths to liberation" and the "ten stages," providing a unique structural framework for understanding the text. The most striking aspect of this work is its integration of multiple traditions into a single text based on the BCA. In this commentary, which is both a Mahāyāna doctrinal and practice manual based on Serlingpa's Bodhisattvacaryāvatārapiṇḍārtha and Bodhisattvacaryāvatārapiṇḍārtha, the two anthologies of the Bodhicaryāvatāra mentioned above, Atiśa brings together the Lamrim gradual tradition that distinguishes between beings of different capacities, Dharmarakṣita's lojong approach referred to as the Wheel of Sharp Weapons (Mtshon cha 'khor lo), and Serlingpa's tradition of the Bodhicaryāvatāra. Atiśa's commentary also reflects the influence of Yogācāra literature, specifically the "five paths" from texts like the Mahāyānasūtrālaṃkāra, Abhisamayālaṃkāra, and Abhidharmasamuccaya together with that of the ten stages as presented in the Daśabhūmikasūtra, a central text in Candrakīrti's Madhyamakāvatāra. The commentary includes quotes of seven verses from the ninth chapter of the Bodhicaryāvatāra without any additional commentary.
With regard to the second text, Spyod pa la 'jug pa 'khor lo lta bu'i lam lan bcu dgur 'khor ba, it is worth noting that a reference is made to the dialogue between Mañjuśrī and Akṣayamati found in the bhāṣya itself, which probably explains why the two texts were put together. Like the previous text, it also pursues the metaphor of the wheel, which, in the present case, must be turned nineteen times. The text distinguishes seven worldly paths, ten supramundane paths, and the physical and Dharma bodies in relation to relevant BCA chapters of the BCA.
Taken together, the two texts composed by Atiśa provide a very condensed and practical teaching on the entire bodhisattva path that brings together all major traditions and views of his teachers within the overarching framework of the Bodhicaryāvatāra.
1.8 Bodhisattvacaryāvatārasaṃskāra (Byang chub sems dpa'i spyod pa la 'jug pa'i legs par sbyar ba) by Kalyāṇadeva[20]
Kalyāṇadeva was a Buddhist monk and scholar active in the eleventh century. His contributions to Buddhist literature include several commentaries, with his work on the BCA being particularly noted for its clarity and practical focus. The Bodhisattvacaryāvatārasaṃskāra by Kalyāṇadeva is another commentary on the ten chapters of the BCA. It is less exhaustive than Prajñākaramati's work but still comprehensive. This commentary provides an explanation based on the verses of all ten chapters of the root text, offering clear and concise interpretations. It includes fewer citations compared to Prajñākaramati's work, primarily sticking to the text's literal meaning. Its ninth chapter thus includes only eight quotes from sūtras and śāstras together with four citations of sūtra titles. The second verse seems to follow the translation of the Dunhuang version, although the root text used in the commentary corresponds to the longer version of the BCA. The simplicity and clarity of Kalyāṇadeva's commentary make it accessible for readers seeking an uncomplicated understanding of the Bodhicaryāvatāra. It avoids extensive philosophical discussions, making it a practical guide for practitioners.
1.9 Bodhicaryāvatārapañjikā (Byang chub kyi spyod pa'i dka' 'grel) by Prajñākaramati[21]
Prajñākaramati was a scholar-monk, teacher, and gatekeeper at Vikramaśīla Monastery. His exact dates are not well documented, but his work is estimated to have been written between the late tenth and early eleventh centuries, which would make him a contemporary of Ratnākaraśānti, Jñānaśrīmitra, Nāropā, and possibly of Atiśa.[22] He is known for his deep understanding of Buddhist philosophy and his extensive contributions to the commentarial literature of Mahāyāna texts. Prajñākaramati's Bodhicaryāvatārapañjikā is a comprehensive commentary on the first nine chapters of the longer version of the BCA,[23] of which several Sanskrit manuscripts are extant.[24] It provides an in-depth explanation of Śāntideva's text and is one of the most influential commentaries on the Bodhicaryāvatāra, as it was considered in Tibet to be authoritative regarding the meaning of the root text and, therefore, the most important Indian commentary. In this work, the author meticulously explains each verse of the root text, offering detailed expositions on the philosophical and practical aspects of the text. Prajñākaramati uses numerous citations from other Buddhist scriptures and treatises, integrating a wide array of doctrinal sources into his commentary, which is famous for its scholarly rigor and extensive citations. It often presents multiple interpretations and discusses divergent theses, providing a broad spectrum of perspectives. This commentary is particularly valuable for its detailed treatment of the ninth chapter, which deals with the Madhyamaka philosophy of emptiness (śūnyatā). Among the many sources quoted in this chapter are major works by Nāgārjuna, Vasubandhu, Candrakīrti, and Śāntarakṣita. Out of sixty-nine quotations from sūtras, twenty-one can be found in the Śikṣāsamuccaya. In addition, half of the Śikṣāsamuccaya kārikās are quoted in Prajñākaramati's commentary.[25] Prajñākaramati's understanding of Madhyamaka is strongly influenced by Candrakīrti, while his critique of non-Buddhist positions originates from Śāntarakṣita's Tattvasaṃgraha.
1.10 Bodhisattvacaryāvatārapañjikā (Byang chub sems dpa'i spyod pa la 'jug pa'i dka' 'grel) by Vairocanarakṣita[26]
Vairocanarakṣita was a Buddhist scholar of Vikramaśīla University who lived during the eleventh century.[27] Originally from Dakṣiṇa Kośala (Orissa), little is ascertained about his life apart from the fact that he was a contemporary of Atiśa and a student of Abhayākaragupta. He spent some time in Nepal between 1101 and 1106, and he later stayed in Tibet during the 1140s and 1150s. He is also known to have been the teacher of Lama Zhang Tsöndru Drakpa (Bla ma Zhang brtson 'grus grags pa, 1123–1193). According to Lama Zhang's hagiography of his master’s life, Vairocanarakṣita visited Tibet five times and he would have traveled to Xi Xia. His views may have been influenced by Prajñākaramati, since they both composed a commentary on the BCA, the SSC, and Candragomin's Śikṣyalekha. Vairocanarakṣita's Bodhisattvacaryāvatārapañjikā deals with all ten chapters of the root text. It is comparable in scope to Kalyāṇadeva's Saṃskāra. It includes a moderate number of citations and provides explanations for each verse. Chapter 9 thus includes twenty-three quotes from sūtras and śāstras, of which eighteen are found in Prajñākaramati's commentary. It aligns closely with the literal meaning of the root text, similar to Kalyāṇadeva's approach.
1.11 Bodhicaryāvatāratātparyapañjikāviśeṣadyotanī (Byang chub kyi spyod pa la 'jug pa'i dgongs pa'i 'grel pa khyad par gsal byed) by Vibhūticandra[28]
Vibhūticandra was a prominent thirteenth-century Buddhist scholar from Vikramaśīla and Jagaddala Monasteries in East India.[29] His teachers were Vikhyātadeva, *Dharmadāsa (Chos 'bangs), and the Kāśmīri scholar Śākyāśrībhadra (1140s–1225), who became his main teacher.[30] In 1204, he accompanied Śākyaśrībhadra to where he stayed for about eleven years, delving into the study of tantras and Mahāyāna scriptures with his teacher. During their stay in Tibet, they met central figures of Tibetan Buddhism at the time, including Drigung Jikten Gönpo ('Bri gung 'Jig rten mgon po, 1143–1217), Jetsun Drakpa Gyaltsen (Rje btsun Grags pa rgyal mtshan, 1147–1216), the senior teacher of Sakya (Sa skya) Monastery, and his nephew, Sakya Paṇḍita Kunga Gyaltsen (Sa skya Paṇḍita Kun dga' rgyal mtshan, 1182–1251). Vibhūticandra played an important role in the transmission and interpretation of Buddhist texts in Tibet. He eventually returned to Nepal where he studied and practiced the Kālacakratantra. Vibhūticandra's commentary on the Bodhicaryāvatāra includes both a detailed analysis of the text and a hagiography of Śāntideva. It covers all ten chapters of the Bodhicaryāvatāra, incorporating numerous citations from sūtras and other Buddhist texts. It provides extensive explanations and often discusses various philosophical interpretations. Vibhūticandra's commentary is distinguished by its inclusion of a short biography of Śāntideva and its detailed analytical approach. The work stands out for its comprehensive coverage and its efforts to contextualize Śāntideva's teachings within a broader historical and doctrinal framework. In his analysis of chapter 9, Vibhūticandra uses forty quotes drawn from various sūtras and śāstras, most of them also found in Prajñākaramati's Bodhicaryāvatārapañjikā, with whom he stands in agreement on most topics.[31]
1.12 Bodhicaryāvatāraṭippanī
The Bodhicaryāvatāraṭippanī is a short anonymous text that is extant in Sanskrit but was not, apparently, translated into Tibetan. It was first noted by Bendall and later documented by La Vallée Poussin.[32] Liland studied the text and suggested that it presents similarities with Vairocanarakṣita's Bodhicaryāvatārapañjikā.[33] The palm-leaf manuscript of this commentary consists of twenty-seven folia in the Prachalit Newari script. According to Liland, the manuscript dates back to the thirteenth–fourteenth centuries.[34]
2. The Bodhicaryāvatāra from India to Tibet: A Tale of Two Diffusions through Two Traditions?
As we have seen above, the Indian commentarial tradition of the Bodhicaryāvatāra can be divided into two groups related to the earlier and later diffusions of Buddhism into Tibet. To better understand the reception of the text in Tibet, it is crucial to consider how homogeneous these two groups are in terms of their textual sources, doctrines, and related networks of scholars. From this perspective, one can summarize the distinct nature of the two waves of transmission of the text to Tibet by the emergence of a network of scholars profoundly influenced by Candrakīrti's thought.
This historical process is discernible in (1) the continuous evolution of the source texts observable in the Tibetan translations of the Bodhicaryāvatāra and its commentaries, (2) the doctrinal content of these commentaries, and (3) the social and doctrinal cohesion of the scholars involved in the transmission of the text during the second diffusion.
2.1 The Continuous Evolution of the Root Text and Its Tibetan Translations
The various versions of the root texts and the related necessity to update the Tibetan translations to match the more recent Sanskrit version of the text.
The Bodhicaryāvatāra has been preserved and transmitted through various cultures and languages, resulting in multiple versions of the text. These versions differ in length, structure, and sometimes content, reflecting the complex history of the text's transmission.[35]
- The catalogs of early translations at the time of the Tibetan empire mention Kawa Paltsek's translation of the Bodhicaryāvatāra. The Denkarma (Ldan dkar ma) or Lhenkarma (Lhan dkar ma) and the Pangtangma ('Phang thang ma)[36] (#631) catalogs mention two bundles (bam pos), with the Denkarma indicating that the text includes six hundred ślokas. The Sanskrit manuscript used for the translation was from Kashmir (or from Eastern India according to Tāranātha). It is authored by Akṣayamati, not Śāntideva.
- The oldest extant version of the Bodhicaryāvatāra is found in four Dunhuang manuscripts dating back to the ninth to eleventh centuries. It is authored by Akṣayamati, a name that is associated with Śāntideva. This Dunhuang version, which corresponds to Kawa Paltsek's translation, has only nine chapters, as it combines the second and third chapters of the later version into one. The chapter resulting from this different structure makes more sense in a way, since its content includes the entirety of the ritual called the Supreme Worship. In this version of the Bodhicaryāvatāra, the entire text contains only 702.5 verses.[37] The order of these verses is in some cases different from that of the more recent version of the text. It also includes verses not found in the canonical version of the text.
- The Bodhicaryāvatāra was translated into Chinese by Tiān Xīzāi 天息災 in 985 CE.[38] This translation is known as Pútíxíng Jīng 菩提行經 (Taisho No. 1662) and consists of eight chapters, containing 767 verses. The Chinese version omits the end of the second chapter as well as the entirety of the third and fourth chapters of the extant Sanskrit text corresponding to the Tibetan canonical version. It includes the use of reductio ad absurdum (prāsaṅga) argumentation. Since it is in content similar to the Tibetan canonical translation, it is probable that the missing verses were lost after the text was translated into Chinese.
- The extant Sanskrit versions corresponding to the canonical Tibetan version (see below) have 912 or 913 verses and are authored by Śāntideva.[39] Some of the verses not found in the earlier Dunhuang version of the text have been added for doctrinal reasons or have been drawn from the Śikṣāsamuccaya, which was composed at some point between the redaction of the two BCA versions.[40] Most divergences with the Dunhuang version occur between the fifth and ninth chapter of the text.[41] For example, seventy verses have been added to the Wisdom chapter to refute rival non-Buddhist ideas such as doctrines about Īśvara or Sāṃkhya's theories.[42] In these passages, the author uses more frequently reductio ad absurdum (prāsaṅga) argumentation than in the Dunhuang version of the text. In addition, the Dunhuang version of the text compared to late Sanskrit recensions seems to have been more focused on one's individual practice. This is indicated by the usage of the first-person pronoun in the older version of the text as opposed to the third-person pronoun commonly found in the longer and more recent version of the BCA.[43] The version of the Bodhicaryāvatāra found in the Tibetan Buddhist canon includes in total ten chapters in 913 verses and went through three stages of translation and revision. One hundred fifty years after Kawa Paltsek had produced the first translation, Rinchen Zangpo (Rin chen bzang po, 958–1055) and Śākya Lodro (ShAkya blo gros, 10th–11th c.) retranslated the text.[44] One hundred years later, the Nepalese scholar Sumatikīrti and the translator Ngok Loden Sherab produced a third translation and documented in the colophon of this translation the history of the translations of the canonical version of the Bodhicaryāvatāra. The scholar Butön mentions in his commentary that he found discrepancies in the canonical translation compared to the Sanskrit manuscript in his possession. The two most recent translations would have used a Sanskrit manuscript from Madhyadeśa. It is worth noting that the canonical version of the Bodhicaryāvatāra recommends reading the Śikṣāsamuccaya, possibly indicating that it was composed after this work.[45] However, the earlier Dunhuang version does not contain this phrase.[46] Based on similar evidence, Akira Saitō and Chikō Ishida suggested that the source text of the Dunhuang version may have been composed before the Śikṣāsamuccaya, which, in turn, may have preceded the source text(s) of the Tibetan canonical version of Śāntideva's work.[47]
- The Tibetan canonical version of the text was further modified by Sazang Mati Panchen (Sa bzang ma ti paN chen, 1294–1376), who consulted the Indian commentaries as well as texts from India. In the colophon of his own commentary to the Bodhicaryāvatāra, he gives a short account of the translation history of the text and then explains: "I also corrected some inaccuracies that arose in the course of time in the root text by consulting Indian texts and commentaries."[48] Interestingly enough, another scholar called Ngakgi Wangpo (Ngag gi dbang po) produced a new translation and edition of the Sanskrit root text.[49] This bilingual text is found in a collection of commentaries on the Bodhicaryāvatāra available on BDRC. Some of the texts in this eight-volume collection are well known, but a significant number of commentaries are less known and should be further analyzed. Among those texts is Ngakgi Wangpo's Sanskrit edition together with a new Tibetan translation of the BCA as can be seen in this sample image of the text:
- In the colophon, the author explains: "The Sanskrit in this glorious text has been arranged by the indolent Ngakgi Wangpo, a fond admirer of the Sanskrit language, after consulting three authentic Sanskrit manuscripts, and Gendun dar (Dge 'dun dar) was the genius scribbler. Regarding the Tibetan, Butön Rinpoche did sporadic changes to Ngok's translation in his Tīka. They are integrated as parts of the main scripture in this writing because they appear to be very consistent with the Sanskrit manuscripts."[50] Butön is known to have questioned the quality of the Tibetan later version of the text in the following terms: "It is said that after looking at all the earlier and later translations, Tsang Nakpa rearranged this text in a way that made sense to his mind. However, there are many instances that are inconsistent with the Sanskrit manuscript and commentary. Though I diligently sought for a legitimate copy of Ngok's translation, I could not find one. Therefore, I have explained in the established manner when there is no major contradiction in meaning, but I have rendered those that couldn't be left uncorrected differently by consulting the Sanskrit manuscript and commentary. At a glance, some of my explanations may appear not that easy but they are in accordance with the Sanskrit manuscript. Therefore, they are ultimately reliable."[51]
It is worth noting that Tibetan scholars were well aware of the existence of various versions of the Bodhicaryāvatāra. Tāranātha, a prominent Tibetan scholar and historian, mentions three recensions of the text:[52]
- The Kashmiri Recension included over 1000 verses and featured a praise verse authored by Śāntideva himself.
- The Eastern Indian Recension had 700 verses, lacked the expression of worship and praises (mchod brjod) but supplemented it with that of the Mūlamadhyamakakārikās.[53]
- The Madhyadeśa Recension included 1000 verses and could have been the basis for the canonical Tibetan translation mentioned above.
Notes
- ↑ This paper is based on the following scholarship: Siglinde Dietz, "Śāntidevas Bodhicaryāvatāra: Das Weiterwirken des Werkes dargestellt anhand der Überlieferungsgeschichte des Textes und seiner Kommentare," in Śāntidevas „Eintritt in das Leben zur Erleuchtung“, vol. 3 of Buddhismus in Geschichte und Gegenwart (Hamburg: Universität Hamburg, 1999), 25–41, https://www.buddhismuskunde.uni-hamburg.de/pdf/4-publikationen/buddhismus-in-geschichte-und-gegenwart/bd3-k02dietz.pdf; Andreas Kretschmar, trans., Drops of Nectar: Khenpo Kunpal's Commentary on Shantideva's Entering the Conduct of the Bodhisattvas, eds. Judith S. Amtzis and John Deweese (Kathmandu: Padma Karpo Translation Committee, 2004), 1:19–24, https://www.yumpu.com/en/kunpal.com; and Frederick Liland, "The Transmission of the Bodhicaryāvatāra: The History, Diffusion, and Influence of a Mahāyāna Buddhist Text" (master's thesis, University of Oslo, 2009), 17–20, https://www.duo.uio.no/bitstream/handle/10852/24076/Liland_2009.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y.
- ↑ The commentaries based on word explanations of Śāntideva's root text are: 1, 2, 3, 8, 9, 10, 11. The only commentaries on the shorter version of the BCA are the Bodhisattvacaryāvatāravivṛttipañjikā and the Bodhisattvacaryāvatāravivṛtti.
- ↑ See Amalia Pezzali, Śāntideva: Mystique Bouddhiste des VIIe et VIIIe siècles (Florence: Vallecchi Editore, 1968), 11.
- ↑ For available editions of the text in the Tibetan canon, see http://www.rkts.org/cat.php?id=3218&typ=2. In Tibetan, the commentary is 122 pages long. No translator is mentioned in the text colophon. On the commentaries based on the Dunhuang version of the BCA, see Akira Saito, A Study of Akṣayamati (=Śāntideva)'s Bodhisattvacaryāvatāra as Found in the Tibetan Manuscripts From Tun-huang, Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (C), Project Number 02801005 (Tsu, Japan: Miye University, 1993), 22ff. Regarding the doctrinal content of this commentary and its inclusion in the Tengyur by Butön in 1334, see Akira Saito,『入菩薩行論解説細疏』のシャーンティデーヴァ理解 [Interpretations of Śāntideva's Philosophy as Found in the Anonymous Commentary, *Bodhisattvacaryāvatāravivṛtti] ," in Indian Thoughts and Buddhist Culture, Essays in Honour of Professor Junkichi Imanishi on His Sixtieth Birthday (Tokyo: Shunjūsha, 1997), 582–94 and Akira Saito,『入菩薩行論解説細疏』の思想的立場をめぐって [On the Ideological Stance of the 'Explanatory Commentary on the Bodhisattva's Way of Life'], Journal of Indian and Buddhist Studies 45, no. 2 (March 1997): 877–83. For specific doctrinal issues, see also Chikō Ishida, "On Philosophical View of the Bodhisattvacaryāvatāra," Journal of Indian and Buddhist Studies 52, no. 2 (March 2004): 32–37. https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/ibk1952/52/2/52_2_923/_pdf/-char/en. For an edition of the eighth chapter, which corresponds to the ninth chapter in the longer version of the BCA, see Saito, Study of Akṣayamati, 57–85.
- ↑ This cursory analysis was done with Buddhanexus.
- ↑ Saito suggests that on the basis of the explanations given by the author of the commentary, Śāntideva's view is close to that of Jñānagarbha. See Akira Saito, A Study of the Dūn-huáng Recension of the Bodhisattvacaryāvatāra, A Report of Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research C, Project Number 09610021 (Tsu, Japan: Mie University, 2000), 99.
- ↑ For available editions of the text in the Tibetan canon, see http://www.rkts.org/cat.php?id=3222&typ=2. On the commentaries based on the Dunhuang version of the BCA, see Saito, Study of Akṣayamati, 22ff. In Tibetan, the commentary is 21 pages long. No translator is mentioned in the text colophon. Regarding the content of this commentary and its inclusion in the Tengyur by Butön in 1334, see Akira Saito, "Bu ston on the sPyod 'jug (Bodhisattvacaryāvatāra)," in Transmission of the Tibetan Canon, vol. 3 of Proceedings of the 7th Seminar of the International Association for Tibetan Studies, Graz 1995, ed. Helmut Eimer (Vienna: Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1997), 79.
- ↑ For available editions of the text in the Tibetan canon, see http://www.rkts.org/cat.php?id=3221&typ=2. The Sanskrit text was translated by Paṇḍita Minyam Khölpo (Paṇḍita Mi mnyam khol po) and Loden Sherab (Blo ldan shes rab) upon a request made by Litön Dorje Gyaltsen (Li ston rdo rje rgyal mtshan). In Tibetan, the commentary is 39 pages long.
- ↑ For available editions of the text in the Tibetan canon, see http://www.rkts.org/cat.php?id=3220&typ=2. The Sanskrit original text was translated into Tibetan by Kṛṣṇapāda himself and by the translator Chökyi Drakpa (Chos kyi grags pa). In Tibetan, the commentary is 11 pages long.
- ↑ See David Seyfort Ruegg, The Literature of the Madhyamaka School of Philosophy in India (Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz, 1981), 107.
- ↑ A sentence of this commentary is found with a few changes in the commentary by Tokme Zangpo (Thogs med bzang po, 1295–1369) entitled Spyod 'jug gi 'grel pa legs bshad rgya mtsho: bstan bcos 'byung ba'i rgyu nyid dang / pha rol tu phyin pa drug bsnyad pa dang / bka' drin rjes su dran pa'i phyag 'tshal ba dang zhes bya ba gsum po ni bstan bcos 'di'i lus yin par skye bo chen po dag bzhed do //. The commentary is also quoted in Gemang Khenchen Yönten Gyatso's (Dge mang mkhan chen yon tan rgya mtsho, 19th c.) Yon tan rin po che mdzod kyi 'grel pa bden gnyis gsal byed zla ba'i sgron me: kha cig gis bsod nams mngon par 'du bya ba dang ldan pa'i sems bskyed pa ni 'jug pa byang chub kyi sems zhes brjod la / bsod nams mngon par 'du bya ba dang mi ldan pa'i sems bskyed pa thams cad smon pa can no zhes brjod pa de dag drang ba ma yin te / 'dir ni de ltar sems sbyangs pa'i gang zag byang chub tu smon lam btab cing / bslab pa la gnas pa de'i bslab pa mi 'jig par rjes su bsrung ba pa rol tu phyin pa drug la spyod pa de nyid sems bskyed pa 'phel ba dang / 'jug pa'i byang chub kyi sems so zhes blo'i pha rol tu phyin pa dag 'chad de ba. The following quote is also used by Longchenpa (Klong chen pa, 1308–1364) in his Rdzogs pa chen po sems nyid ngal gso'i 'grel pa shing rta chen po: dman pa kha cig ni dngos por 'dzin pa'i dbang gis 'gyod cing yid la gcags pas gzhan gyi drung [95b] du nyes pa bshags shing / phyis sdom pa'i rigs kyis nyes ba de las ring zhig na ldang ba yang yod do // bar ma kha cig ni rig sngags kyi lha byang chub sems dpa' nam mkha'i snying po la sogs pa ma nyes par byas te / lha'i rjes su gnang ba thob pas ltung ba las ldang ngo // dam pa kha cig ni gang gis ltung ba brjod pa de nyid la byang chub kyi sems su shes pas tshogs med par gnas te / ji ltar 'phags pa'i chos thams cad 'byung ba med par bstan pa zhes bya ba theg pa chen po'i mdo las gsungs pa / 'jam dpal byang chub sems dpa' gang gis las med cing rnam smin med pa de las kyi sgrib pa rnam par dag pa thob po zhes bya ba la sogs pa lta bu'o //
- ↑ For available editions of the text in the Tibetan canon, see http://www.rkts.org/cat.php?id=3223&typ=2. The Sanskrit text was translated by Atiśa Dipaṃkaraśrījñāna and Lotsawa Tsultrim Gyalwa (Lo tsA ba Tshul khrims rgyal ba, 1011–1064). For a detailed presentation and study of the two texts composed by Suvarṇadvīpa Dharmakīrti on the Bodhisattvacaryāvatāra, see Helmut Eimer, "Suvarṇadvīpa's 'Commentaries' on the Bodhicaryāvatāra," in Studien zum Jainismus und Buddhismus: Gedenkschrift für Ludwig Alsdorf, eds. Klaus Bruhn and Albrecht Wezler (Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner, 1981), 73–78. In Tibetan, the commentary is 8 pages long.
- ↑ For a complete list of the verses, see Eimer, "Suvarṇadvīpa's 'Commentaries'," 75–77.
- ↑ See Chikō Ishida, "On the Proper Location of the Verses on the Equality of Self and Other in the Bodhicaryāvatāra," in A Collection of Articles in Honor of Doctor Zuiei Ito's Seventieth Birthday (Tokyo: Sankibo Busshorin, 2013), 24.
- ↑ For available editions of the text in the Tibetan canon, see http://www.rkts.org/cat.php?id=3224&typ=2. The Sanskrit text was translated by Atiśa Dipaṃkaraśrījñāna and Lotsawa Tsultrim Gyalwa. For a detailed presentation and study of the two texts composed by Suvarṇadvīpa Dharmakīrti on the Bodhisattvacaryāvatāra, see Helmut Eimer, "Suvarṇadvīpa's 'Commentaries' on the Bodhicaryāvatāra," in Studien zum Jainismus und Buddhismus: Gedenkschrift für Ludwig Alsdorf, eds. Klaus Bruhn and Albrecht Wezler (Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner, 1981), 73–78. In Tibetan, the commentary is 3 pages long.
- ↑ For available editions of the text in the Tibetan canon, see http://www.rkts.org/cat.php?id=3936&typ=2. In the Narthang edition, the two texts are numbered as follows: N4670 and N4670a. See also: (1) Atiśa, "Byang chub sems dpaʼi spyod pa la ʼjug paʼi rnam bshad," in Gsung 'bum a ti sha (Krung go'i bod rig pa dpe skrun khang, 2006), 898–909, Buddhist Digital Resource Center (BDRC), purl.bdrc.io/resource/MW1GS66286_5A47BC; (2) Atiśa, "Spyod 'jug 'khor lo lta bu'i lam rgyud la ji ltar skye ba'i rim pa," in Gsung 'bum a ti sha (Krung go'i bod rig pa dpe skrun khang, 2006), 868–98, Buddhist Digital Resource Center (BDRC), purl.bdrc.io/resource/MW1GS66286_49D16F.
- ↑ For a short introduction and an edition of the Bodhisattvacaryāvatārabhāṣya, see Kaie Mochizuki, "Zum Bodhisattvacāryāvatārabhāṣya des Dīpaṃkaraśrījñāna," Journal of Institute for the Comprehensive Study of Lotus Sutra 25 (1999): 39–121.
- ↑ According to Mochizuki, this unusual classification suggests that the Bodhisattvacaryāvatārabhāṣya was either unknown or not included in the canon at the time of its compilation in Tibet. However, the text was included in the Ganden, Narthang, and Peking editions of the Tengyur. Kyotön Mönlam Tsultrim (Skyo ston smon lam tshul khrims, 1219–1299) also has a text in the same tradition based on the dialogue between Akṣayamati and Mañjuśrī.
- ↑ Mochizuki took this division as possibly indicative of a compilation of two distinct recensions of the text with a shorter and more extended version, but we are dealing here, in fact, with two distinct texts.
- ↑ For available editions of the text in the Tibetan canon, see http://www.rkts.org/cat.php?id=3219&typ=2. In Tibetan, the commentary is 179 pages long. The text was translated by Śrīkumāra and Gewai Lodrö (Dge ba'i blo gros, 11th c.).
- ↑ For available editions of the text in the Tibetan canon, see http://www.rkts.org/cat.php?id=3217&typ=2. The text was translated into Tibetan by Marpa Chökyi Wangchuk (Mar pa chos kyi dbang phyug, 1012–1096), Nyen Darma Drakpa (Gnyan dar ma grags pa), and revised by Yönten Gyamtso (Yon tan rgya mtsho). In Tibetan, the commentary is 494 pages long.
- ↑ On Atiśa and Prajñākaramati, see Kevin Vose, Resurrecting Chandrakīrti: Disputes in the Tibetan Creation of Prāsaṅgika (Boston: Wisdom Publications, 2009), 23.
- ↑ The tenth chapter on dedication is not included in this commentary.
- ↑ See Louis de la Vallée Poussin, ed., Bouddhisme: Études et matériaux; Ādikarmapradīpa, Bodhicaryāvatāraṭīkā (London: Luzac, 1898), http://storage.lib.uchicago.edu/pres/2006/pres2006-1329.pdf and Louis de la Vallée Poussin, Bodhicaryāvatārapañjikā: Prajñākaramati's Commentary to the Bodhicaryāvatāra of Çāntideva; An Introductory Treatise on the Duties of a Buddhist (Calcutta: Asiatic Society of Bengal, 1901–14). See also P. L. Vaidya, ed., Bodhicaryāvatāra of Śāntideva with the Commentary Pañjikā of Prajñākaramati (Darbhanga: Mithila Institute of Post-Graduate Studies and Research in Sanskrit Learning, 1960), https://archive.org/details/bTkp_bodhicharya-avatara-of-shantideva-bauddha-sanskrit-granthamala-12-mithila-institute-darbhanga/mode/2up. See also Phanindranath Bose, Indian Teachers of Buddhist Universities (Adyar, Madras: Theosophical Publishing House, 1923), 50, https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.205826/page/n5/mode/2up and Sukumar Dutt, Buddhist Monks and Monasteries of India: Their History and Their Contribution to Indian Culture (London: Allen and Unwin, 1962), 358, https://archive.org/details/buddhistmonksandmonasteriesofindiatheirhistorycontributiontoindianculturesukumardutt_202002/page/n3/mode/2up. A few folios of the original text are missing in the Sanskrit manuscript. See also recent Sanskrit manuscripts of the text in Junqi Wang et al., "A Fragment of Saṃghāṭasūtra Interpolated in the Manuscript of the Bodhicaryāvatārapañjikā (ZX0617–ZB20)," Journal of Buddhist Studies 18 (Dec. 2021): 87–95; Junqi Wang et al., "A Preliminary Report on A Palm-leaf Manuscript of Prajñākaramati's Bodhicaryāvatārapañjikā (1)*," Journal of Buddhist Studies 19 (Dec. 2022): 97–119; and Junqi Wang et al., "A Diplomatic Edition of Prajñākaramati's Bodhicaryāvatārapañjikā Commentaries on the BCA 4.15-48," Journal of Buddhist Studies 20 (Dec. 2023): 81–100. For the digital Sanskrit text, see GRETIL https://gretil.sub.uni-goettingen.de/gretil.html.
- ↑ See Amod Lele, "Ethical Revaluation in the Thought of Śāntideva" (PhD diss., Harvard University, 2007), 21, https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/159489216.pdf.
- ↑ For available editions of the text in the Tibetan canon, see http://www.rkts.org/cat.php?id=3906&typ=2. In Tibetan, the commentary is 128 pages long. The text was translated by Vairocanarakṣita himself.
- ↑ His alternative names are Vairocanavajra and Vairocana. On Vairocanarakṣita/Vairocanavajra, see Kurtis Schaeffer, "The Religious Career of Vairocanavajra – A Twelfth-Century Indian Buddhist Master from Dakṣiṇa Kośala," Journal of Indian Philosophy 28 (2000): 361–84; Takamichi Ishida, 後伝期における Vairocanarakṣita の役割について — 『入菩 薩行 論 』 流伝の 一 断面 [On the Role of Vairocanarakṣita in the Later Propagation Period (Phyi dar): An Aspect of the Transmission of the Bodhisattvacaryāvatāra], Report of the Japanese Association for Tibetan Studies 50 (2004): 31–48; and Kazuo Kano, "Two Short Glosses on Yogācāra Texts by Vairocanarakṣita: Viṃśikāṭīkāvivṛti and *Dharmadharmatāvibhāgavivṛti," in part 1 of Sanskrit Texts from Giuseppe Tucci's Collection, ed. Francesco Sferra (Rome: Istituto Italiano per l'Africa e l'Oriente, 2008), 343–80.
- ↑ For available editions of the text in the Tibetan canon, see http://www.rkts.org/cat.php?id=3225&typ=2. This text was translated into Tibetan by Vibhūticandra himself according to the colophon of the Narthang edition of the text. In Tibetan, the commentary is 186 pages long.
- ↑ On Vibhūticandra, see Cyrus Stearns, "The Life and Tibetan Legacy of the Indian Mahāpaṇḍita Vibhūticandra," Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies 19, no. 1 (Summer 1996): 127–71; Claus Vogel, "Lunar Eclipses of the Early Thirteenth Century Predicted by the Buddhist Master Vibhūticandra," in Tractata Tibetica et Mongolica: Festschrift für Klaus Sagaster zum 65. Geburtstag, eds. Karenina Kollmar-Paulenz and Christian Peter (Wiesbaden: Harrasssowitz Verlag, 2002), 305–11; and Jan-Ulrich Sobisch, Three-Vow Theories in Tibetan Buddhism: A Comparative Study of Major Traditions from the Twelfth through Nineteenth Centuries (Wiesbaden: Dr. Ludwig Reichert Verlag, 2002): 21–23.
- ↑ Śākyāśrībhadra and Vibhūticandra were connected through Jagaddala Vihāra. See Ruegg, Literature of the Madhyamaka, 117.
- ↑ On the influence of Prajñākaramati on Vibhūticandra, see Yasunori Ejima, "Nyūbodaigyōron no Chūshakubunken nitsuite"「入菩提行論」の註釈文献について [Commentaries on Śāntideva's Bodhicaryāvatāra], Journal of Indian and Buddhist Studies 14, no. 2 (1966): 190–94, referred to in Akira Saito, "Facts or Fictions: Reconsidering Śāntideva's Names, Life, and Works," Journal of the International College for Postgraduate Buddhist Studies 22 (2018), 155n26.
- ↑ See Liland, "Transmission of the Bodhicaryāvatāra," 18, 74.
- ↑ See Liland, "Transmission of the Bodhicaryāvatāra," 77–92. We are indebted to Prof. Péter-Dániel Szántó for making his critical edition of the text available to us.
- ↑ See Liland, "Transmission of the Bodhicaryāvatāra," 89.
- ↑ On the different versions of the text, see Akira Saito, A Study of Akṣayamati (=Śāntideva)'s Bodhisattvacaryāvatāra as Found in the Tibetan Manuscripts From Tun-huang, Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (C), Project Number 02801005 (Tsu, Japan: Miye University, 1993); Akira Saito, 初期本『入菩薩行論』にみるシャーンティデーヴァの思想：第8「知恵の説示」章を中心として [Shantideva's Thought as Seen in His Early Book 'On the Bodhisattva's Conduct': Focusing on Chapter 8 'Explanation of Wisdom'], Tōkai bukkyō 39 (1994): 98–114; Akira Saito,『入菩薩行論解説細疏』のシャーンティデーヴァ理解 [Interpretations of Śāntideva's Philosophy as Found in the Anonymous Commentary, Bodhisattvacaryāvatāravivṛtti], in Indian Thoughts and Buddhist Culture, Essays in Honour of Professor Junkichi Imanishi on His Sixtieth Birthday (Tokyo: Shunju-sha, 1997), 582–94; Akira Saito, 『入菩薩行論解説細疏』の思想的立場をめぐって [On the Ideological Stance of the 'Explanatory Commentary on the Bodhisattva's Way of Life'], Journal of Indian and Buddhist Studies 45, no. 2 (March 1997): 877–83; Akira Saito, "Remarks on the Tabo Manuscript of the Bodhisattvacaryāvatāra," in Tabo Studies II: Manuscripts, Texts, Inscriptions, and the Arts, eds. C. A. Scherrer-Schaub and E. Steinkellner (Rome: Instituto Italiano per l'Africa e l'Oriente, 1999), 175–89; Akira Saito, "An Inquiry into the Relationship between the Śikṣāsamuccaya and the Bodhi(sattva)caryāvatāra," Studies in Indian Philosophy and Buddhism 17 (2010): 17–24; Akira Saito, シャーンティデーヴァの＜廻向＞論 ―新旧『入菩薩行論』最終章を中心として― (1) [Shantideva's Theory of "Rotation" - Focusing on the Final Chapter of the Old and New Theory of the Bodhisattva's Journey - (1)], Journal of Naritasan Institute for Buddhist Studies 40 (2017): 57–69; Akira Saito, "Facts or Fictions: Reconsidering Śāntideva's Names, Life, and Works," Journal of the International College for Postgraduate Buddhist Studies 22 (2018): 145–64; Chikō Ishida, "Some New Remarks on the Bodhicaryāvatāra Chap. V," Journal of Indian and Buddhist Studies 37, no. 1 (Dec. 1988): 476–79; Chikō Ishida, "Notes on the Deśanā-ritual in the Bodhicaryāvatāra: Evidence of Its Revision," in Taga Ryūgen Hakushi Koki Kinen Ronshū [Buddhist Thought and History: A Volume in Honour of Dr. R. Taga on His 70th Birthday] (Tokyo: Sankibō Busshorin, 2001), 199–216; Chikō Ishida, "On the Proper Location of the Verses on the Equality of Self and Other in the Bodhicaryāvatāra," in A Collection of Articles in Honor of Doctor Zuiei Ito's Seventieth Birthday (Tokyo: Sankibo Busshorin, 2013): 15–28; Kretschmar, Drops of Nectar, 1:9–18; Vose, Resurrecting Chandrakīrti, 21; and Liland, "Transmission of the Bodhicaryāvatāra," 26ff.
- ↑ For the Denkarma (ca. 812 CE), see Adelheid Hermann-Pfandt, Die lHan kar ma: Ein früher Katalog der ins Tibetische übersetzten buddhistischen Texte (Vienna: Osterreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 2008), 367, https://austriaca.at/6041-0inhalt?frames=yes. For the Pangtangma (9th c.), see Georgios Halkias, "Tibetan Buddhism Registered: A Catalogue from the Imperial Court of 'Phang Thang," Eastern Buddhist 36, no. 1–2 (2004): 72 and Eishin Kawagoe, dKar chag 'Phang thang ma (Sendai: Tohoku Society for Indo-Tibetan Studies, 2005), 30.
- ↑ See Chikō Ishida, "Some New Remarks on the Bodhicaryāvatāra Chap. V," Journal of Indian and Buddhist Studies 37, no. 1 (Dec. 1988): 476–79; Chikō Ishida, "Notes on the Deśanā-ritual in the Bodhicaryāvatāra: Evidence of Its Revision," in Taga Ryūgen Hakushi Koki Kinen Ronshū [Buddhist Thought and History: A Volume in Honour of Dr. R. Taga on His 70th Birthday] (Tokyo: Sankibō Busshorin, 2001), 199–216; Chikō Ishida, "On the Proper Location of the Verses on the Equality of Self and Other in the Bodhicaryāvatāra," in A Collection of Articles in Honor of Doctor Zuiei Ito's Seventieth Birthday (Tokyo: Sankibo Busshorin, 2013), 15–28; Akira Saito, A Study of Akṣayamati (=Śāntideva)'s Bodhisattvacaryāvatāra as Found in the Tibetan Manuscripts From Tun-huang, Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (C), Project Number 02801005 (Tsu, Japan: Miye University, 1993); and Akira Saito, "Bodhi(sattva)caryāvatāra and Śikṣāsamuccaya," Indo Tetsugaku Bukkyōgaku [Hokkaido Journal of Indological and Buddhist Studies] 16 (2001): 1–28.
- ↑ See Louis de la Vallée Poussin, "Bouddhisme: Notes et Bibliographie," Le Muséon 4 (1903): 313ff. and Liland, "Transmission of the Bodhicaryāvatāra," 37ff.
- ↑ See La Vallée Poussin, "Bouddhisme: Notes et Bibliographie," 314, and for a general overview, see Liland, "Transmission of the Bodhicaryāvatāra," 77–92. Some differences between the Sanskrit version and the Tibetan canonical translation are significant. It is therefore doubtful that the extant Sanskrit version was the Vorlage for this Tibetan version of the text. See Vesna and Alan Wallace, trans., A Guide to the Bodhisattva Way of Life (Bodhicaryāvatāra) (Ithaca, NY: Snow Lion Publications, 1997), 8.
- ↑ See Akira Saito, "An Inquiry into the Relationship between the Śikṣāsamuccaya and the Bodhi(sattva)caryāvatāra," Studies in Indian Philosophy and Buddhism 17 (2010): 17–24.
- ↑ See Ishida, "Notes on the Deśanā-ritual," 200.
- ↑ See Akira Saito, "Śāntideva in the History of Mādhyamika Philosophy," in Buddhism in India and Abroad: An Integrating Influence in Vedic and Post-Vedic Perspective, eds. Kalpakam Sankarnarayan, Motohiro Yoritomi, and Shubhada A. Joshi (Mumbai: Somaiya Publications, 1996), 259. On this point, see also Jay L. Garfield, Stephen Jenkins, and Graham Priest, "The Śāntideva Passage: Bodhicaryāvatāra VIII.90–103," in Moonpaths: Ethics and Emptiness, ed. The Cowherds (New York: Oxford University Press, 2016), 56.
- ↑ See Mieko Kajihara, "On the Pariṇāmanā Chapter of the Bodhicaryāvatāra," Journal of Indian and Buddhist Studies 40, no. 2 (March 1992): 1060. Some traces of first-person discourse are also found in the canonical version of the text in its last chapter. See also Saito, "Śāntideva in the History of Mādhyamika," 258–9.
- ↑ See Saito, "Remarks on the Tabo Manuscript," 176. See also Liland, "Transmission of the Bodhicaryāvatāra," 30.
- ↑ For a recapitulation of the chronology of the various versions of the BCA in relation to the SSC, see Akira Saito, "Facts or Fictions: Reconsidering Śāntideva's Names, Life, and Works," Journal of the International College for Postgraduate Buddhist Studies 22 (2018): 145–64.
- ↑ See BCA 5.104–106. On this point, see, for example, Ishida, "Notes on the Deśanā-ritual," 209.
- ↑ See Akira Saito, "Notes on the Interpretation of Bodhi(sattva)caryāvatāra V.104–106," in Gedenkschrift J. W. de Jong, eds. H. W. Bodewitz and Minoru Hara (Tokyo: International Institute for Buddhist Studies, 2004), 135–47 and Paul Harrison, "The Case of the Vanishing Poet: New Light on Śāntideva and the Śikṣā-samuccaya," in Indica et Tibetica: Festschrift für Michael Hahn, Zum 65, Geburtstag von Freunden und Schülern überreicht, eds. Konrad Klaus and Jens-Uwe Hartmann (Vienna: Arbeitskreis für Tibetische und Buddhistische Studien Universität Wien, 2007), 215–48. Interestingly enough, Ishida, in his 2013 article "On the Proper Location of the Verses on the Equality of Self and Other in the Bodhicaryāvatāra," notes on page 19 that Vibhūticandra doubted that BCA 7.16 had been authored by Śāntideva.
- ↑ Byang chub sems dpa'i spyod pa la 'jug pa'i rnam par bshad pa gzhung don rab gsal snang ba, 2-1-420: bar skabs su cung zad ma dag par song ba rnams bdag gis kyang rgya dpe dang 'grel ba la gtugs te dag par bgyis pa'o// See https://online.adarshah.org/index.html?kdb=matipanchen&sutra=JSMP3&page=2-19.
- ↑ Unfortunately, it has not been possible yet to identify this person.
- ↑ Byang chub sems dpa'i spyod pa la 'jug pa'i gzhung (W3CN23405, Vol. 8, fol. 76a, http://purl.bdrc.io/resource/W3CN23405): dpal ldan gzhung 'di'i rgya skad ni/snyom las pa ngag gi dbang pos legs par sbyar ba'i skad la mos pa gtsor byas te/ rgya dpe rnam par dag pa gsum la gtugs nas legs par bkod pa'i yi ge pa ni dge 'dun dar zhes bya la/ bod skad ni rngog 'gyur la bu ston rin po che'i TI kar 'gyur bcos tsag tsig 'byung ba rnams rgya dpe dang shin tu mthun par mthong bas gzhung gi dkyus su sbyar te bris pa yin no//.
- ↑ Byang chub sems dpa'i spyod pa la 'jug pa'i 'grel pa byang chub kyi sems gsal bar byed pa zla ba'i 'od zer (WA1904, fol. 500, http://purl.bdrc.io/resource/WA1904): bu TIka gi mjug tu gzhung 'di gtsang nag pas 'gyur snga phyi thams cad bltas nas khong rang gi thugs la gang bde bsgrigs pa yin nam zhes grags la/ rgya dpe dang 'grel pa dang mi mthun pa mang po snang yang / rngog 'gyur zang ma cig 'bad de btsal kyang ma rnyed pas/ don la 'gal ba chen po med pa rnams grags pa bzhin bshad/ mi bcos su mi rung ba rnams rgya dpe dang 'grel pa dang bstun nas logs su gtan la phab/ bshad pa kha cig 'phral la bde bde 'dra med kyang / rgya dpe dang 'grel pa dang mthun par yod pas phugs yid brtan thub par yod do zhes gsungs so//.
- ↑ See La Vallée Poussin, "Bouddhisme: Notes et Bibliographie," 315 for a detailed analysis of the passage. For an overview of the passage, see J. W. de Jong, "La légende de Śāntideva," Indo-Iranian Journal 16 (1975): 181. See Saito, Study of Akṣayamati, 17–20 for a discussion of these three versions of the text.
- ↑ De Jong, "La légende de Śāntideva," 181; and Saito, Study of Akṣayamati, 17, citing Tāranātha.
