Jiabs 10-2

THE JOURNAL
OF THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION Of

BUDDHIST STUDIES
CO-EDITORS-IN-CHIEF
Gregory Schopen
Indiana University
Bloomington, Indiana, USA
EDITORS
Peter N. Gregory
University of Illinois
Urbana-Champaign, Illinois, USA
Alexander W. Macdonald
Universite de Paris X
Nanterre, France
Roger Jackson
Fairfield University
Fairfield, Connecticut, USA
Ernst Steinkellner
University of Vienna
Wien, Austria
JikidoTakasaki
University of Tokyo
Tokyo,Japan
Robert Thurman
Amherst College
Amherst, Massachusetts, USA
:l'olume 10
ASSISTANT EDITOR
Bruce Cameron Hall
College of William and Mary
Williamsburg, Virginia, USA
1987 Number 2
THE JOURNAL OF THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATIO:t-.
OF BUDDHIST STUDIES, INC.
This Journal is the organ of the International Association of Buddhist Studies
Inc. It is governed by the objectives of the Association and accepts scholar!;
contributions pertaining to Buddhist Studies in all the various disciplines such
as philosophy, history, sociology, archaeology,
psychology, textual studIes, etc. The ]lABS IS pubhshed tWIce yearly in the
summer and winter.
Manuscripts for publication (we must have two copies) and correspondence
concerning articles should be submitted to the ]lABS editorial office at the
address given below. Please refer to the guidelines for contributors to the
]lABS printed on the inside back cover of every issue. Books for review should
also be sent to the address below. The Editors cannot guarantee to publish
reviews of unsolicited books nor to return those books to the senders.
The Association and the Editors assume no responsibility for the views
expressed by the authors in the Association's Journal and other related
publications.
Andre Bareau (France)
M.N. Deshpande (India)
R. Card (USA)
B.C. Cokhale (USA)
Gregory Schopen
]lABS
c/o Dept. of Religious Studies
230 Sycamore Hall
Indiana University
Bloomington, IN 47405
USA
EDITORIAL ADVISORY BOARD
Joseph M. Kitagawa (USA)
Jacques May (Switzerland)
Hajime Nakamura Uapan)
John Rosenfield (USA) .
John C. Huntington (USA) David Snellgrove (U.K.)
P.S. Jaini (USA) E. Zurcher (Netherlands)
Both the Editors and Association would like to thank Indiana Univer'
sity and Fairfield University for their financial support in the produc-
tion of the Journal. .
The Editors wish to thank Mr. Kevin Atkins for his invaluable help
in the preparation of this issue. .
Copyright The International Association of Buddhist Studies 1987
ISSN: 0193-600X
Indexed in Religion Index One: Periodicals, American Theological Li-
brary Association, Chicago, available online through BRS (Biblio:
graphic Retrieval Services), Latham, New York, and DIALOG I n f o ~ : i
mation Services, Palo Alto, California.
Composition by Publications Division, Grote Deutsch & Co., Madison, WI 53704.
Printing by Thomson-Shore, Inc., Dexter, MI 48130.
CONTENTS
1. ARTICLES
pure Land Buddhist Hermeneutics:
Honen's Interpretation of
Nembutsu, by Allan A. Andrews 7
2 .. Sa-skya Pal).<;iita, the White Panacea and the Hva-shang
Doctrine, by Michael Broido 27
Indian Commentaries on the Heart Sidra: The Politics
ofInterpretation, by Malcolm David Eckel 69
Notes on Nagarjuna and Zeno in Motion,
by Brian Galloway 80
'5. Note on a Chinese Text Demonstrating the Earliness
of Tantra, byJohn C. Huntington 88
>.6. The Inscription on the Ku.;;an Image of Amitabha and
the Character of the Early Mahayana in India
by Gregory Schopen 99
Background Material for the First Seventy Topics in
Maitreya-natha's Abhisamayalarhkara,
by Gareth Sparham 139
II. BOOK REYIEWS
The Genesis of an Orientalist: Thomas William Rhys Davids
and Buddhism in Sri Lanka,
by Ananda Wickremeratne
(A.P. Kannangara) 161
The Legend of King Asoka: A Study and Translation
of the "Asokavadana, " by John S. Strong
(Bardwell Smith) 165
3. Nagarjuna: The Philosophy of the Middle Way
by David]. Kalupahana
(Karen Christina Lang)
4. Tibet-Bon Religion: A Death Ritual of the Tibetan Bonpos,
by Per K vaerne
(Michael Aris)
III. SPECIAL SECTION
Title/ Author Index ofVols. 1-10, compiled
by Bruce Cameron Hall
167
181
pure Land Buddhist Hermeneutics:
Borren's Interpretation of lVembutsu 1
'by'Allan A. Andrews
.1. 'Introduction
How do Buddhists understand and interpret the dharma? Several
:recent studies have explored this question. Robert A. F. Thur-
man, in his article "Buddhist Hermeneutics,"2 correctly notes,
One can hardly set out to win liberation and enlightenment, or
even to live properly in an ethical'sense, until one has decided
which of these teachings [ofthe Buddha] isright, and what ways
lead to their realization. Thus, it is clear that the hermeneutical
enterprise in the [Buddhist] tradition is an essential part of praxis
on whatever level, an essential vehicle on the way of enlighten-
ment. We should note that since the various scriptural passages
are contradictory on the surface, scriptural authority alone will
not fully settle the hermeneutical questions, since the scriptures
are in a sense the basis of discussion (Thurman 1978, 23).3
Thurman than claims, and attempts to substantiate on the
basis of the Madhyamika philosophical views of the Tibetan
master Tsong Kha pa (1357-1419), that,
In the final analysis, rationality (yukti), inference (anumiina) , or
philosophic logic (nyiiya) becomes the highest authority (pramii'fJa)
for deciding which scriptural passage is ultimately valid (Thur-
man 1978, 23) .
. . In a response entitled, "Chinese Buddhist Hermeneutics:
Case of Hua-yen", Peter N: Gregory points out that Chinese
relied less on logic for their hermeneutics, especially
Madhyamika logic of negation, and more on the construction
7
8 JIABS VOL. 10 NO.2
of hierarchical of scriI?tures (p'ar:-chiao, hangyo),
which served theIr need to mterpret m affirmatIve terms which
teachings were more valid than others (Gregory 1983,231-34).
In this paper I propose to look at an instance of
tion in the Japanese Buddhist tradition. The instance is Honen's
interpretation of the value of the Pure Land scriptures and
especially his view of the nemblltsll teachings of the Sidra on the
Buddha, of Limitless 4 I hope to .demonstrate although
Honen s hermeneutIcs embrace a WIde range of pnnCIples, ulti-
mately they where based on neither reason nor on a doctrinal
classification, but upon the authority of a revered teacher, and
in the final analysis on Honen's own experience of certainty of
salvation achieved through the guidance of that teacher.
II. Honen's Use of Doctrinal Analysis
Honen's interpretation of the Pure Land scriptures is to be
found in his Senchaku hongan nembutsu shu (Senchaku shu or
jyaku shu),5 "Treatise on the Nembutsu Selected by the Original
Vow", composed in 1198. Honen opens this work with a sweep-
ing doctrinal analysis segregating all scriptures and doctrines
into two categories, the dharma-gate of the sages and the Pure
Landdharma-gate
6
(Ohashi 1971,88-93). Unlike schemata based
on stages in the teaching career of Sakyamuni Buddha which
had dominated Chinese Buddhist hermeneutics (Thurman
1978,29-31; Gregory 1983, 232-33),7 this analysis is founded
on an historical view of the flowering and decline of the Buddhist
faith; that is, on the widely accepted doctrine of the three periods
of the dharma-the ages of perfect dharma, superficial dharma,;
and degenerate dharma.
8
Honen maintains that the world has
entered the age of degenerate dharma, when the true teachings
have largely been lost and the spiritual capacities of sentient
beings have deteriorated as well, and therefore that the scrip-
tures and doctrines on gaining enlightenment through learning
and discipline-that is, the dharma-gate of the sages-are no
longer applicable and only the teachings on Pure Land rebirth--::.
i.e., those of the Pure Land dharma-gate, which were intended
by Sakyamuni for the age of degenerate dharma-remain valid.
9
Thus Honen's hermeneutical principle for designating the<
PURE LAND HERMENEUTICS 9
''pure Land teachings and scriptures as. more
"ttruer) than all others was a doctrInal claSSIfcatlOn whICh,
to those that had dominated Chinese Buddhist her-
(and indeed until Honen's
iBm
e
), asserted on the basIs of a BuddhIst VIew of hIstory that
scriptures were more appropriate to the age and effica-
tious than others. .
III. Honen's Interpretation of the Nembutsu of the Eighteenth Vow
As is well known, Honen interpreted the nembutsu of the
sutra on the Buddha of Limitless Life's eighteenth vow, the "original
vow", as invocational nembutsu, that is, as calling upon the name
of Amida Buddha with the utterance, "namu Amida Butsu".
Moreover, Honen interpreted this nembutsu as sufficient by itself
for achieving salvation through rebirth into Amida Buddha's
Pllre buddha-land. This interpretation and its logic are revealed
IIlost clearly in the third chapter of the Senchaku shu, entitled
Showing that Amida Tathagata Made Nembutsu, and
NoOther Works, the Practice of the Rebirth Original Vow".
Honen opens this chapter with the citation of three proof texts,
thefirst of which is the "rebirth original vow", the eighteenth
yow of the Sutra on the Buddha of Limitless Life:
When I become a Buddha, if there should be sentient beings
anywhere in the ten regions of the universe having sincere and
deep faith and aspiration to be reborn into my buddha-land and
who, by making even ten reflections [on me], are not reborn
there, then I will not accept perfect enlightenment (Ohashi
1971, 101).10
This scriptural passage has been considered by Pure Land
13uddhists since Honen as the most important Buddha-dharma
:bfall. They see it as the supreme expression of Buddha wisdom
and compassion and as a virtual guarantee of the eventual sal-
vation of all sentient beings. Of course what was at issue for
Honen in this passage was the meaning of "reflections" (i.e.,
Buddha-reflections), because he saw this term as defining the
practice by means of which beings could gain rebirth in the
10
JIABS VOL. 10 NO.2
Pure Land. The original term, nen (Chinese, nien) is rather am-
biguous.
11
It can mean "to recollect", "keep in mind", "think
about", and even "one instant". My English rendering is in-
tended to convey this ambiguity. Although Honen's understand_
ing of the meaning of this term is implied in the two other proof
texts with which he opens this chapter (citations of the Chinese
Pure Land master Shan-tao), before considering these passages
let us first examine Honen's explicit, unequivocal interpretation
of the eighteenth vow as invocational nembutsu.
In order to clarify the meaning of the nembutsu of the
eighteenth vow as invocational nembutsu, Honen examines sev-
eral of the sidra's forty-eight vows to show that with each vow
Dharmakara Bodhisattva (i.e., Amida. Buddha during his
bodhisattva career) selected from among the qualities of countless
buddha-lands only the pure qualities or characteristics which
he wanted his buddha-land to possess. Honen maintains:
As for the eighteenth, the Nembutsu Rebirth Vow, we find that
among all those buddha-lands there were some for which the
rebirth-practice was generosity, some for which it was moral con- .
duct, some for which it was patience and humility, some for
which it was tireless effort, some for which it was meditation and
some for which it was wisdom (such as faith in the highest truth) .. ~
Or there were various lands for each of which there were several
practices, such as erecting reliquaries and dedicating images, sup-
porting monks, or even being filial to parents and revering
teachers and elders ... Yet all the above practices from generosity
and moral conduct to filial piety were rejected and only the
exclusive utterance of the Buddha's name was chosen ... (Ohashi
1971, 104).
With the phrase "exclusive utterance of the Buddha's name"12
Honen leaves no doubt that in his view the meaning of nen in
the eighteenth vow, and therefore the practice Amida Buddha
(Dharmakara) selected for earning Pure Land rebirth, is invoca-
tional nembutsu alone, and not some kind of meditation upon
the Buddha.
IV. Contemporary Views of N embutsu
This interpretation of nembutsu as solely sufficient invoca-
'tion of the Buddha's name was widely at variance with the gen-
erally accepted view of nembutsu in Honen's time. The prevailing
view was based on the tenth century Tendai treatise on nembutsu,
. the Essentials of Pure Land Rebirth.
13
This work attempted to
integrate the Tendai meditative form of nembutsu based upon
the Mo-ho chih-kuan
l4
ofTendai (T'ien-t'ai) founder Chih-i (538-
597), with the devotional forms of nembutsu found in the popular
pure Land scripture, Sutra of Contemplation on the Buddha of Limit-
less Life
l5
(Andrews 1973, 107-20). The Essentials maintained
that authentic nembutsu is contemplative nembutsu, a rigorous
exercise consisting of visualizing the magnificent form of Amida
Buddha in order to achieve nembutsu samiidhi, a deep enlighten-
ment experience. Invocational nembutsu, calling upon the name
of Amida Buddha, was considered a practice which should ac-
company contemplative nembutsu in order to bring about a more
intense meditative state. As an independent practice, the Essen-
tials considered invocational nembutsu as suitable for only the
least spiritually capable of persons, and especially as a sort of
last resort for such people as a way to gain rebirth into the Pure
Land of Amida when they are about to die and fall into hell or
some other painful transmigratory state.
16
Moreover, while the
Essentials acknowledged nembutsu as the best of all practices for
achieving Pure Land rebirth, it taught that nembutsu was most
effective when accompanied by other practices such as perform-
ance of good deeds and observance of monastic precepts (An-
drews 1973, 72-75, 90-91).
This view of the true meaning and proper use of nembutsu
is reflected in an interesting document contemporary with
Honen, the Kofukuji sojo, or Kofukuji Temple Petition for the Suppres-
sion of Sole Nembutsu Practice, submitted to the throne in protest
of Honen's movement in 1205. It includes a criticism of Honen's
interpretation of nembutsu typical of the view of establishment
Buddhism in that age. In Article Seven of the Petition, "The
Error of Misunderstanding Nembutsu", we find the following
charge:
First, the Buddha reflected upon has a name and a person. With
regard to the person there is the phenomenal and the noumenal
aspects. With regard to the nembutsu itself, there is vocal nembutsu
and mental nembutsu. The mental nembutsu includes both reflec-
tion upon and contemplation of the Buddha. Contemplation can
12
]IABS VOL. 10 NO.2
be either non-meditative or meditative, performed with either
deluded or enlightened mind. The d e g r e e ~ of shallowness and
depth are manifold; the shallow is inferior, the deep superior.
Thus to invoke the name orally is neither contemplative nor
meditative nembutsu; it is inferior and superficial nembutsu. ' ..
Concerning the passage, "even ten reflections", of that
[eighteenth] vow, this is provided for the most inferior beings.
With contemplative nembutsu as the foundation, yet extending
all the way down to invocational nembutsu, with many Buddha_
reflections as the primary teaching, yet not discarding even ten
reflections, this shows the great compassion and power of the
Buddha. The way of easy guidance and sure rebirth is by con-
templative nembutsu and many Buddha-reflections (Kamata and
Tanaka 1971, 38-39)Y
For the author of the Kofukuji Petition, 18 as for most contem-
porary clerics, nembutsu was primarily a meditative practice. In-
vocational nembutsu-callingupon the name of a Buddha-was
considered merely an aid to meditation on the Buddha's form
("phenomenal aspect") or essence ("noumenal aspect"). By itself,
invocation was considered a practice suitable only for those most
burdened with bad karma, and then only marginally effective
for their Pure Land rebirth in certain circumstances. To totally
reject the efficacy of other practices as Honen did in the Senchaku
shu was considered by establishment Buddhism of the time as
absolutely blasphemous and heretical. Honen's position was
therefore audacious and even foolhardy. 19
V. Honen's Hermeneutics: The Appeal to Reason
What was the basis of Honen's bold reinterpretation of nem-
butsu as solely invocation and sufficient for Pure Land rebirth?20
In other words, what were his hermeneutical principles? As we
indicated above, in the final analysis ?onen had recourse to the
authority of a revered teacher for his different and challenging
interpretation of nembutsu. Yet he does not dispense with reason
entirely as a means of discovering the Buddha's meaning. The
initial justification we find in the Senchaku shu for his interpre-
tation is based on reason. Following his assertion, which we have
examined above, that Amida choose only nembutsu as the practice
of the original vow, Honen poses this question from a hypothet-
ical interlocutor: .
It seems correct to survey the various vows, applying the
principle of [Amida's] rejecting the gross and evil and choosing
the good and refined. But why in the case of the eighteenth vow
did Dharmakara [i.e., Amida Buddha] reject all the other prac-
tices and exclusively choose only the single practice of nembutsu
as that of the rebirth original vow?
Honen responds:
The holy one's21 intentions are difficult to fathom and not
easy to set out, but I will attempt to explain them by means of
two principles-(l) that of superiority versus inferiority and (2)
that of ease versus difficulty.
First, with respect to superiority versus inferiority, nembutsu
is superior while the other practices are inferior because the
Buddha's name is the bearer of infinite karmic merits. All of
Amida Buddha's inner meritorious qualities, such as his four
kinds of wisdom, three Buddha-bodies, ten powers of com-
prehension, and four certainties, and all of his outer meritorious
functions, such as his Buddha-marks, his brilliance, his dharma-
preaching and his saving of sentient beings, each and everyone
of these resides in Amida's name. Thus the karmic merit of his
name is superior. The other practices are not like this. Each
practice has only its own merit. Thus the other practices are
inferior. ...
Thus, is it not because the karmic merit of the Buddha's
name is superior to the merits of the other practices that the
inferior practices were rejected and the superior adopted as the
practice of the original vow? (Ohashi 1971, 104-05)
Although Honen is literally telling us why he thinks Amida
Buddha choose the invocation of his name as the original vow's
practice for Pure Land rebirth, he is also revealing some of the
reasoning he pursued in coming to the conclusion that nen of
the eighteenth vow meant only calling upon Amida's name. He
reasoned that to call upon Amida's name gains for the cultivator
all the karmic merit of Amida himself-all the merit implied in
his Buddha-wisdom and compassion and all the merit achieved
in Amida's use of these as well. Other practices, reasoned Honen,
merely earn for the cultivator a limited amount of merit frorn
the cultivator's performance of that particular meritorious deed
or act itself.
To return to Honen's reasoning:
Regarding the principle of ease versus difficulty, nembutsu
is easy to cultivate while all other practices are difficult to culti-
vate .... Because nembutsu is easy it can be used by all sentient
beings, but because all other practices are difficult, they cannot
be used by all those with various spiritual abilities. And thus was
it not for the purpose of bringing about the universal rebirth of
all sentient beings that the difficult practices were rejected and
the easy adopted as the practice of the original vow?
Let us suppose that donating images and founding temples
had been made the practices of the original vow. Then those in
poverty would have no hope of rebirth. But the poor and lowly
are much more numerous than the rich and high-born. If wisdom
and intelligence had been made the condition of the original
vow, then the dull and foolish would have no hope of rebirth.
Yet the dull and foolish are much more numerous than the
intelligent. If wide learning and experience had been made the
condition of the original vow, then those with little learning and
experience would have no hope of rebirth. Yet the unlearned
are much more numerous that the learned. If moral conduct
and observance of the precepts had been made the practices of
the original vow, then those who violate or who have not adopted
the precepts would have no hope of rebirth. Yet those who violate
the precepts are much more numerous than those who observe
them. We should see that it is the same with the various other
practices. It is important to understand that if any of those prac-
tices had been made the condition ofthe original vow, then those
gaining rebirth would be few and those not reborn would prob-
ably be many.
Thus it was that Amida Tathagata, conceiving in the distant
past when he was the monk Dharmakara a great and universal
compassion, in order to embrace all sentient beings selected not
the donation of images, the founding of temples or any other
of the sundry practices for his rebirth original vow, but only the
single practice of the nembutsu of calling upon his name (Ohashi
1971, 105-06).
We find here once again that although Honen is ostensibly
explaining why Amida decided to select invocational nembutsu
PURE LAND HERMENEUTICS
15
asthe practice for rebirth, he is revealing as well the reasoning
that went into his own decision to interpret the nembutsu of the
VOW as easy invocation of the name. In short, Honen reasoned
that the compassion of Amida would not exclude even the least
spiritually capable of sentient beings, those capable of no other
good deed to call upon Amida Bu?dha in
This passage IS Justly famous for affirmmg the umversahty of
pure Land salvation. It is also a remarkable expression of
Honen's insight in discerning this breadth and of his courage
in teaching it.
VI. Honen's Hermeneutics: The Appeal to Scripture
Recourse to reason was not the only way in which Honen
arrived at and justified his interpretation of the eighteenth vow.
In fact, reason was for him and his contemporaries a rather
unreliable tool. As Honen says, "the holy one's intentions are
difficult to fathom and not easy to set out. ... " A more reliable
. criterion for interpreting scripture was recourse to alternative
scripture. Toward the end of the third chapter of the Senchaku
shu Honen poses this hypothetical question:
The Sidra [on the Buddha of Limitless Life] says "ten reflections",
while the interpretations [of the Sutra]22 have "ten utterances".
What is the difference between reflections and utterances (Ohashi
1971, lOS)?
He responds:
The terms reflection and utterance
23
are one and the same. How
do we know this? In the section of the Contemplation Sutra
24
on
the lower rebirth of the lower grade of beings it says, "Urged to
call unceasingly, he completes ten reflections; when he calls 'namu
Amida Butsu', by calling on the Buddha's name he sets aside
with each reflection the evil deeds generated during eight billion
eons of transmigration". According to this passage it is clear that
utterance is the same as reflection a.nd reflection the same as
utterance.
What is happening here is that Honen is interpreting one
passage of scripture on the basis of another. Both constituted
for him Buddha-preachments,25 and therefore ttue Buddha_
dharma. The passage in question is the eighteenth vow of the
Sutra on the Buddha of Limitless Life; the passage being used as a
guide to its meaning is that on the rebirth of the worst of sentient
beings26 as described in the Contemplation Sutra. The Contempla_
tion Sutra describes how such a person, even though he is des-
tined for hell because of extremely bad karma, gains salvation
on his death bed by calling upon the Buddha ten times. In this
passage the term "reflection" (nen) is clearly used in such a way
as to mean invocational nembutsu, in for example, "urged to call
unceasingly he completes ten reflections", and "by calling on
.. the Buddha's name he sets aside with each reflection .... " By
justifying his interpretation in this way, Honen reveals one of
the bases for this interpretation-the authority of an alternative
scrIpture.
VII. Honen's Hermeneutics: The Appeal to the Teachings of a Revered
Master
What were Honen's hermeneutical criteria? On what basis
did he interpret the all important nembutsu of the eighteenth.
vow as invocation? We have already seen that he had recourse
to several criteria-the use of his own limited human reason
and the authority of an alternative Pure Land scripture. As his
most important hermeneutical criterion,. however, Honen useg
a quite different standard-the judgement of an authoritative
teacher. In the,final analysis Honen based his interpretation of
the eighteenth vow upon the teachiIlgs of the T'ang Chinese
Pure Land master, Shan-tao Qap. Zenda, 613-681).
As we have mentioned, Chapter Three of the Senchaku sku
opens with three scriptural citations, the eighteenth vow of the
Sutra on the Buddha of Limitless Life (whkh we have already .
examined), and two quotations, actually paraphrases, of this
vow by Shan-tao. Here is the way Honen presents these:
In the first volume of the Siitra on the Buddha of Limitless Life
it is written: "When I become a Buddha, if there should be
sentient beings anywhere in the ten regions of the universe having
sincere and deep faith and aspiration to be reborn into my
buddha-land and who, by making even ten reflections [on me],
are not reborn there, then I will not accept perfect enlighten-
ment" ..
Qupting this passage, the Amida Buddha Contemplation
Method
27
has: "When I become a Buddha, if there should be
sentient beings anywhere in the ten regions of the universe aspir-
ing to be reborn into my buddha-land who call upon my name
with at least ten utterances, in dependence on the power of my
vow, and are not reborn into my land, then I will not accept
perfect enlightenment".
Quoting the same passage, the Hymns to Rebirth
28
has: "When
I become a Buddha, if there should be sentient beings anywhere
in the ten regions of the universe who call on my name with at
least ten utterances and are not reborn [into my land], then I
will not accept perfect enlightenment." That Buddha, having
perfected buddhahood, now resides in his land. Thus we should
know that the vows he originally made were not in vain, and that
sentient beings who call upon him will assuredly be reborn into
his land (Ohashi 1971, 101).
Having presented these three proof texts, Honen does not
. comment upon the relationship of the second and third of these
(the two passages by Shan-tao) to the first (the eighteenth vow)
until the end of Chapter Three, where he poses the question
. and answer we examined above about the discrepancy between
."reflection" and "utterance". We have seen that he considered
the former to mean the latter, that is, Buddha-reflection to mean
utterance of the name of the Buddha. However, there at the
.beginning of Chapter Three we see that it is strongly implied
in this juxtaposition of the text of the eighteenth vow with these
paraphrases of it by Shan-tao that based upon Shan-tao's rendering
Honen had already interpreted the nembutsu of the eighteenth
vow as invocation.
Who was this Shan-tao whose understanding of the
~ i g h t e e n t h vow Honen seemed to value so highly? Shan-tao was
a prominent Pure Land master of the early Tang period (618-
907) who taught and evangelized in the vicinity of the capital,
Changan. Although he was a specialist in Buddha contempla-
tion, having composed the important treatise Amida Buddha Con-
templation Method (cited above) on the subject of this demanding
18
JIABS VOL. 10 NO.2
discipline, he was also concerned with the salvation of the aver_
age, karmicaUy burdened lay person. Especially important for
Honen's thought and for us, he was the first Pure Land Buddhist
thinker to explicitly relate the eighteenth vow to the Contempla_
tion Sidra's passage on the rebirth of the worst of beings, and thus
the first not only to interpret explicitly and unequivocally the
n;embutsu of the vow as invocation, but also to assert that every
instance of this invocation, every utterance of the name of Amida
Buddha, is therefore endowed with the compassionate, saving
power of Amida's vow.
We have already seen two important passages in which this
position was set out. The first of the two passages by Shan-tao
which Honen cites at the beginning of Chapter Three has,
.. .if there are sentient beings ... who call on my name with at
least ten utterances in dependence on the power of my vow . ...
The emphasized phrase (my emphasis of course) is not literally
stated in the vow, but is Shan-tao's contribution. The second of
the two passages concludes, as we have seen, in this fashion:
That Buddha, having perfected buddhahood, now resides in his
land. Thus we should know that the vows he originally made
were not in vain, and that sentient beings who call upon him will
assuredly be reborn into his land.
The assertion here is that because Amida'svow has been fulfilled
in his acceptance of perfect enlightenment, the condition of
that acceptance-rebirth for all those who call upon Amida-has
also been fulfilled.
29
Honen first encountered Shan-tao's writings in Genshin's
Essentials oj Pure Land Rebirth. Later he found Shan-tao's detailed
commentary on the Contemplation Sutra
30
and there discovered
his teachings on the unfailing efficacy of the invocational nem-
butsu of the original vow (Tamura, 1972,90-92). This discovery,
in 1175, was crucial to Honen's teachings and career, for it
brought about his conversion to the Pure Land path. In the
conclusion to the Senchaku shu Honen reveals:
A long time ago in my own humble searchings when I first
19
o'pened this scripture [of Shan-tao's Commentary on the Contempla-
tion Sutra] and came generally to comprehend its fundamental
truths, I immediately ceased cultivation of other practices and
took refuge in nembutsu. From that day to this, whether for my
own practice o_r for teaching others, I have madenembutsu my
sole concern (Ohashi 1971, 162) .
... Here we have Honen's own confession that it was in Shan-tao's
teachings that he found the true meaning of the original vow,
a powerful influence upon his subsequent career.
Honen openly admits that his reliance upon Shan-tao was
total. In answer to the following hypothetical question:
the various masters of the Kegon, Tendai, Shingon, Zen, Sanron
and Hoss6 schools have written many works on the Pure Land
dharma. Why do you rely exclusively on the one master Shan-tao
and not on these other masters?
.Honen responds:
Even though these other masters have composed Pure Land
works, they do not base themselves upon the Pure Land way,
but rather only upon the way of the sages.
31
Thus I do not rely
on them. Master Shan-tao bases himself exclusively on the Pure
Land way and not upon the way of the Sages. Thus I rely solely
upon Shan-tao (Ohashi 1971, 158).32
Finally, so profound for H(>nen were the teachings on nem-
butsu of Shan-tao, so impressive the impact of these upon him,
that he was convinced that Shan-tao had been a very manifesta-
'tion, an avatara, of Amida Buddha himself.33 In the conclusion
< (:lfthe Senchaku shu we find this eulogy:
When we reverently seek the fundamental reality we realize that
it is the Dharma Prince of the forty-eight vows [Amid a Buddha].
The teaching arising form his ten eons-long path to perfect en-
lightenment is reliance on the nembutsu. When we humbly search
for the derived manifestation we find that it is the Path Master
of sole nembutsu practice [Shan-tao]. The message of his perfectly
realized samadhi is complete faith in Pure Land rebirth. Though
the fundamental reality and the derived manifestation
34
are not
identical, their guidance to emancipation is one (Ohashi 1971, 162).
In the final analysis, the "ten reflections" of the eighteenth
, vow meant to Honen ten utterances of that prayer of hOmage
to Amida Buddha because, many years before he had composed
the Senchaku shu, Honen realized in utterance of that prayer of
homage the fulfillment of his own personal search for an assured
means of rebirth into the Pure, Land. 35
VIII. Conclusions
To summarize, we have seen several hermeneutical princi_
ples at work in Honen's reinterpretation of the nature and pOwer!
of nembutsu: 1) A doctrinal analysis based upon a Buddhist view,'
of history; 2) recourse to imperfect but helpful human reason;'
3) the use of scriptural authority; 4) reliance upon the authority
of an enlightened teacher; and 5) the weight of personal reli-
gious experience-an experience of certain salvation. One mayi
question whether Honen's personal experience was a her-
meneutical principle or merely a compellinginfluence upon his
views. I would suggest that in so far as Honen advances this
experience as evidence of the correctness of his interpretation,
as we have seen him do above, it becomes for him a criterion
of interpretation, that is, a hermeneutical principle.
In conclusion, although Honen does use reason to justifr;;
his interpretations, reason is much less important and
in his eyes than scriptural authority or the teachings of an
lightened master. In general, there s'eems to be little
here for the rational inference and philosophical logic
Robert Thurman sees as the highest authority for deciding scrip.:)!
tliral validity. Doctrinal analysis of the kind Peter Gregory
typical of Chinese Buddhist hermeneutics is important for]
Honen, but only to establish the priority of Pure Land teachIngs 1
and scriptures in general. -It is clear that Honen relies most
1
;
heavily upon the authority of an enlightened master, a
whose teachings were instrumental in his own conversion to the]
Pure Land path and to his own assurance of salvation. And;j
we have examined only one instance of interpretation,;:
by Honen, this interpretation was his major contribution to
age and to Japanese religious
We cannot generalize any farther from this single instance]
"'j
with any confidence, yet the important place of patriarchal au-
thority and personal experience in Honen's thinking raises a
number of questions. Is a preference for these hermeneutical
principles peculiar to Honen, to the new Buddhism of which
Hon
en
was precursor, toJapanese Buddhism in general, to the
pure Land tradition as a whole? Would close examination of
important interpretations of other Buddhist thinkers reveal a
similar hermeneutics? We would like to suggest that the case of
Honen is not exceptionaL The more we know about the career
ofa Buddhist thinker, especially the nature of his or her crucial
religious experiences, the more clearly would we see that such
experiences were central to that figure's thinking, and in particu-
lar to his or her interpretation of scripture.
In the religious life we find again and again that human
reason must give way before sacred power, or that at best, reason
is but a means to try and make understandable what is ultimately
beyond reason.
REFERENCES
. AKAMA TSU Toshihide 1966
Zoku Kamakura Bukkya no Kenkyft (Further studies on Kamakura Period
Buddhism). Kyoto.
ANDREWS, Allan A. 1973
... The Teachings Essential for Rebirth: A Study of Genshin's Ojayashu. Tokyo.
COATES, Harper Havalock and Ryugaku Ishizuka 1925
Honen the Buddhist Saint: His Life and Teachings. Kyoto.
GREGORY, Peter N. 1983
"Chinese Buddhist Hermeneutics: The Case of Hua-yen", journal of the
American Academy of Religion, 5112, 231-50.
lKAWAJokei, ed. 1967
Hanen ShOnin den zenshu (The complete biographies of Honen Shonin).
Reviseded. Takaishi, Osaka Pref. .
INAGAKI, Hisao, trans. 1966
Zenda's Exposition on the Merit of the Samiidhi of Meditation on the Ocean-like
Figure of Amida Buddha. Kyoto.
rNAGAKI, Hisao, trans. 1984
"Shan-tao's Method of Meditation on Amida Buddha", Ryukoku Daigaku
ronshu, no. 425, 20-41.
ISHII Kyodo, ed. 1955
Shawa shinshu Hanen ShOnin zenshu (Showa Period revision of the com plete
works of Honen Shonin). Tokyo.
22
JIABS VOL. 10 NO.2
KAMATA Shigeo and TANAKA Hisao, eds. 1971
Kamakura kyu-Bukkyo [Nihon shiso taikei 15] (Traditional Kamakura Period
Buddhism [A collection of Japanese thought, Vol. 15]). Tokyo.
MOCHIZUKI Shinko 1942
ChUkoku jodo Kyorishi (History of Pure Land Doctrines in China). Kyoto.
MORRELL, Robert E. 1983
"Jokei and the KOfukuji Petition," japanese journal of Religious Studies
1011,6-38.
NAKAMURA Hajime, HAYASHIMA Kyosho and KINO Kazuyoshi, trans.
1963
j8do sambukyo (The three part Pure Land scripture), 2 vols. Tokyo.
OHASHI Toshio (Shunno), ed. 1971
Honen-Ippen [Nihon shiso taikei 10] (Honen and Ippen [A collection of
Japanese thought, Vol 10]). Tokyo.
SHIGEMATSU Akishisa 1964
Nihon j8dokyo seiritsu katei no kenkyu (Studies on the process of establish_
ment of Japanese Pure Land Buddhism). Kyoto.
T. 1924-32
Taisho shinshU daizokyo (Taisho Period revised edition of the Chinese
Buddhist Canon). Ed. by Takakusu Junjiro, 100 vols. Tokyo.
TAMURA Encha 1956
Honen ShOnin den no kenkyu (Studies on the biographies of Honen Shanin);
Kyoto.
Teihon Shinran 1976
Teihon Shinran ShOnin zenshu, 5; Shuroku hen, 1 (The authentic complete
works of Shinran Shonin, V; Compilation section, I). Ed. by the Shinran
Shonin zenshu kankokai. Kyoto.
THURMAN, Robert A.F. 1978
"Buddhist Hermeneutics", journal of the American Academy of Religion,
4611 19-40.
NOTES
1. An earlier version of this paper was delivered to the Japan-American
Buddhist Studies Conference commemorating one hundred years of Bud-
dhism in Hawaii held in Honolulu, July, 1985.
2. Hermeneutics is the science of interpretation, especially of the mean-.
ing of scripture. The term ultimately derives from the name of the Greek'
deity, Hermes, messenger of the gods.
3. Bracketed additions are mine.
4. T. 360 (Taisho shinshu daizokyo text no.), Fo-shuo Wu-liang-shou ching
(Jap., Bussetsu Muryoju kyo), the most influential Chinese version of the larger
Sukhiivatf-vyuha-sutra.
5. T. 2608. We will use the version annotated by Ohashi Toshio (Ohasqi
1971).
6: Shodo mon and Jodo mon, respectively.
, 7. This method of ,evaluation assumed that the sutras which Sakyamuni
had presumably later in his teaching .career (such as, for exam?I?,
he Lotus Sutra) contamed more advanced doctrmes for more advanced dlSCl-
;t Ies. Each school tended, naturally, to place its texts at the end of this pro-
p ess
ion
, that is at the end of the Buddha's life or teaching career, and claim
its doctrines were therefore truer than those of other schools. One of the
inost influential of Chinese schemata, that of the T'ien-t'ai master Chih-i
(538-597), was accepted by much of Japanese Buddhism in Honen's day.
8. Shi5bi5, zoho and mappo, respectively.
9. As Honen acknowledges, this analysis was actually developed by the
chinese Pure Land master Tao-ch'o (Jap., Doshaku, 562-645).
10. It is interesting and significant that Honen omits from his citation
of this vow its last phrase, "excepting those who have committed the five
irredeemable evils and slandered the true Dharma" (T. 360, XII, 268a).
11. Extant Sanskrit versions of the Sutra on the Buddha of Limitless Life
indicate that nien is a translation of citta, "mind", "thought", "consciousness",
(Nakamura et al. 1963, I, 283, n. 136). Of course Honen had no access to
Sanskrit originals.
12. Moppara shi5 Butsugo.
13. T. 2682, Ojo yoshu.
14. T. 1911, Jap., Maka shikan, "Geat Quiescence and Insight".
15. T. 365, Fo-shuo kuan Wu-liang-shoujo ching (Jap., BussetsukanMuryoju
Butsu kyo.
. 16. This view of the function of invocational nembutsu was based upon
a passage of the Sutra of Contemplation on the Buddha of Limitless Life describing
the rebirth of an extremely evil person by calling upon the name of Amida
Buddha (see treatment below, p. 11). One tendency of the Essentials of Pure
Land Rebirth, however, was to consider almost everybody then living to be
such a person because Sakyamuni's buddha-world had by then entered the
age of degenerate dharma (Andrews 1973,44-45).
17. For an alternative rendering see Morrell 1983, 30-31.
18. The Hosso priest Jokei, 1155-1213 (Morrell 1983,7-15).
19. He was of course exiled for this stand in 1207. As Morrell noted,
the one intolerable religious attitude in this eclectic age was intolerance (1983,
13).
20. Honen's interpretation was undoubtedly influenced by the growing
popularity of invocational nembutsu. However, here we will be concerned with
how Honen himself justified his interpretation of scripture, rather than with
the historical influences at work upon him.
21. Amida Buddha's.
22. Interpretations of the eighteenth vow of the sutra by Chinese master
Shan-tao. See below.
23. Nen and shi5, respectively.
24. Sutra of Contemplation on the Buddha of Limitless Life. See ns. 15 and 16.
25. Both the Sutra on the Buddha of Limitless Life (which presents Amida's
vow) and the Contemplation Sutra are considered sermons of
Sakyamuni Buddha.
24
JIABS VOL. 10 NO.2
26. This passage, called gebon geshO, "lowest rebirth of the lowest class"
in Pure Land doctrinal discussions, is possibly the most important passage fo;
the history of Pure Land Buddhism next to the eighteenth vow itself. For the
text see T. 365, XII, 346.
27. T. 1959, Kuan-nien A-mi-t'ojo hsiang-hai san-mei kung-te fa-men (Jap.
Kannen Amida Butsu sakai sammai kudoku hOmon). See the translation of
(1966 and 1984).
28. T. 1980, Wang-sheng li-tsan chiehGap., Ojo raisan gel.
29. See also Shan-tao's Commentary. on the Sutra of Contemplation on the
Buddha of Limitless Life, T. 1753, section four on non-meditative practices
XXXVII, 272a-b and 277 a-c. '
30. T. .1753, Kuan Wu-liang-shoujo-ching shu Gap., Kan Muryojubutsu kyo
sho).
31. The reference here is to the dharma-gate of the sages and the Pure
Land dharma-gate discussed above.
32. We should note that in the first chapter of the Senchaku shu Honen
specified Shan-tao as one of the patriarchs of his Pure Land School (Ohashi
1971,93).
33. This view of Shan-tao did not originate with Honen, but had appar-
ently been current in China (Mochizuki 1942, 182-83).
34. Honji and suijaku, respectively.
35. There is evidence of an even closer nexus between Honen and Shan-
tao. Honen's biographies, including those compiled shortly after his death,'
relate that after his conversion experience in 1175 Shan-tao appeared to him
in a dream and commended him for propagating the exclusive cultivation of'
nembutsu. Such an event would have meant to Honen a personal transmission
of the dharma from master to disciple and a clear mandate to interpret the
nembutsu of the original vow as he did. This episode is related in, for example,
the Genku shOnin Shinikki (Teihon Shinran 1976, V, 177) and the lchigo
monogatari (Ikawa 1967, 774a), both composed before 1227, and of course in
the forty-eight chapter biography (Coates' and Ishizuka 1925, 205-06).
Another early text, the Mukan shOsoki, records that the dream occurred in
. 1198 (Ishii 1955, 862). The Shinikki ("The Private Life of Saint Genku") has:
After considering carefully for awhile this [discovery of Shan-tao's teachings],'
while sleeping he had a dream .... He climbed a high mountain and immediately
saw the living Shan-tao. From the hips down he 'was golden, from the hips up
[he appeared] as usual. The eminent priest said, "Even though you are of humble
status, the nembutsu has arisen everywhere under the heavens. Because you will
spread the sole invocation of the name to all sentient beings, I have come. I am
Shan-tao". Because of this, he propagated this dharma and year by year it came
to flourish more and more until there was nowhere to which it had not spread
(Teihon Shinran, V, 177).
Tamura (1956, argues against the actual occurrence of this event,
proposing that it was invented to generate a patriarchal line of transmission
. between Honen and Shan-tao for the developing Pure Land School, but
Shigematsu (1964, 447-87) and Akamatsu (1966, 204-05) consider the account
credible.
Japanese and Chinese Terms
Chih-i 1/
Fo-shuo kuan Wu-liang-shou-fo ching (Bussetsu Kan
:MuryojuButsu kyo) 1h !i,I .:ff-1"\
F
o-shuo Wu-liang-shou ching
: (BusSetsu Muryoju kyo) "b. t M::
Gebon gesho f f 'i..
Genku Shonin shinikki ;t 'il .t. f-- r1
Genshin
}Icm
en
!.1:
Honji, suijaku JF.- M .f J.f..
monogatari -" W
Jakel It .A:1 . '
Kofukuji sojo 1iit .q-
25
Kuan-nien A-mi-t'o-fo hsiang-hai san-mei kung-te fa-men (Kanen
Amida Butsu sokai sammai kudoku homon)
',f!%, 1r- 1A,f1 * p.j
;I{uan Wu-liang-shou-fo-ching shu
: (Kan Muryojubutsukyo sho) it!, t Jr- :-!:
Mo-ho chih-kuan (Maka it ;:. Jt
Moppara sho Butsugo ..t t
.Mukan shoso ki .
Namu Amida Butsu !:. ;:r, fit 1?\
Nembutsu 1; 4p.
Nen (nien)
_r,r;. If; uc
OJO yoshu J."f. ':J. :t- Jf:.-
p'an-chiao (hangyo) 1')
hongan nembutsu shu it:!" t j(
(Z_endo) t
Shobo, zoho, mappo if.. ;J:.. . f! :f. *
Shodo mon, J odo mon 1i it M 1f f-
T ... aisho shinshu daizokyo h-.if. *1f f-./A'
Tao-ch'o (Doshaku) li 1l \
Tendai (Tien-t'ai) f:.-- '(j _ ' >. _
Wang-sheng li-tsan chieh (Ojo raisan ge) 'f ;f{J pt ';fJ
Sa-skya PalJ-Qita, the White Panacea
cind the H va-Shang Doctrine *
hyMichael Broido
1. Introduction
ngo-bo ... skyes-pa'i dus-naldkar-po
chig-thub gcig-shes kun-grol song-basi
-sGam-po-pa
l
rjod-byed tshig-gisteng-du glegs-bam mangl
Ibrjod-bya don gcig ston-la thams-cad 'khrill
Ide phyir gcig-shes kun-grol bka '-rgyud-kyil
Ibla-ma'i zhabs-la rnam-kun phyag bgyi'ol
-Padma dKar-po'
According to Sa-skya Pal).<;iita, the White Panacea (dkar-po
'chig-thub) is a mahiimudra doctrine newly adopted by unnamed
,persons, evidently the bKa'-brgyud-pas as specialists in
and bearing a suspicious relationship with the nox-
t.ious doctrines of H va-shang Mahayana, the Chinese Ch'an mas-
ter defeated by Kamalsaslla at the bSam-yas debate.
3
As a result
;:of this debate, the Buddhist doctrines officially permitted in
'}fibet were those of the gradual, staged (rim-gyis-pa'i) variety;
"and Sa-skya Pal).<;iita is complaining that doctrines of the sudden
(cig-car-ba'i) variety are being reintroduced into Tibet by the
'bKa'-brgyud-pas and the rNying-ma-pas.
", The colloquial use for dkar-po chig-thub is of a medical plant,
.perhaps ginseng. Now the point of the analogy between ginseng
and mahiimudra is not merely that just as ginseng cures all dis-
mahiimudra cures all defects of the personality. When the
bKa'-brgyud-pas use the word on their own account, as does
Zhang Tshal-pa (1123-93) in his important mahiimudra work
phyag-che,n lam-mchog mthar-thug,4 the idea is rather that once
the disease, whatever it was, has been cured by means of ginseng
there is no need to take any further medicine to cure it, and similarly
27
28
JIABS VOL. 10 NO.2
0r:ce mahamud:a has been attained th.ere is no need to do any_
thmg further m order to remove defllements. Thus, following
attainment it is unnecessary and useless to enquire what the
defilements were; in this form the analogy is connected with an
old Buddhist one, according to which the person who is suffering
from a disease wants it cured, and does not want to be told its
name. Ginseng (mahamudra) is the cure. In more specifically
vajrayana language, the White Panacea (dkar-po chig-thub) is thus
connected with seals (mudra).
However, in the sDom-gsum rab-dbye Sa-skya Pa1).<;iita ignores
the views of the bKa'-brgyud-pas and takes the word to stand
for a complete quietism, a "do-nothing" attitude towards the
doctrine, and claims further that this is the heresy of the Hva-
shang. The present paper presents Padma dKar-po's replies to
some of these attacks, mainly as given in his Phyag-chen gan-
mdzod. Evidence will be given for the following theses:
A. The term dkar-po chig-thub was used by Zhang Tshal-pa
in the Phyag-chen lam-mchog mthar-thug in the sense of "(mahamudrii
as) the only cure for defilements" (kleSa, nyon-mongs), that is, to
convey the idea that once mahamudra has been attained, there
is no more effort to be made, and the practitioner should act
effortlessly (anabhogacarya, lhun-gyis grub-pa'i spyod-pa). The text
of the dKar-po chig-thub chapter of this work is in Appendix A,
and a summary is in Section 1 below; it is straightforward, and
the thesis stated here is plainly supported by it. From the mate-
rials given in Appendix A we see also that the notions of "same-
ness" (mnyam-pa-nyid) and non-duality are precisely not dealt
with under the White Panacea (dkar-po chig-thub) but in an
earlier chapter of the Lam-mchog mthar-thug.
B. There is no evidence for the systematic use of dkar-po
chig-thub by bKa'-brgyud-pas earlier than Zhang Tshal-pa. The
word has certainly been used once or twice by sGam-po-pa, but
not in any technical sense or as part of a doctrinal scheme.
C. dKar-po chig-thub used by Padma dKar-po only when
replying to the attacks of Sa-skya Pa1).<;iita and to questions from
people in other traditions. Pad rna dKar-po never uses the term
on his own account. It plays no independent role in the bKa'-
brgyud-pas' own rather complex conception of.mahamudra (part
of which is sketched below). Nevertheless, Padma dKar-po does
THE WHITE PANACEA 29
: accept the ~ h e s i s expressed by Zhang Tshal-pa (see A above) in
"terms of thIS word.
D. In the sDom-gsum rab-dbye, Sa-skya Pa1)<;iita is not working
~ i t h any clear conception either of the White Panacea (dkar-po
chig-thub) or of the Hva-shang doctrine.
E. Notwithstanding Padma dKar-po's qualified acceptance
ofthe dKar-po chig-thub notion (C), he rejects completely the
thesis that his tradition merely follows the views of the Hva-
shang.
F. In rejecting this identification of the bKa'-brgyud-pa
view with that of the Hva-shang, Padma dKar-po mainly follows
the orthodox position as setout in the third Bhavanakrama.
Though he does not give a full exposition of the Hva-shang
"doctrine (as he sees it) he does set out certain matters (indepen-
dently of KamalaSlla) on which he is in agreement with the
fIva-shang. Thanks to the valuable work of Japanese and other
scholars, ably summarized and continued in a recent article by
Luis Gomez, we now have a fair idea, independent of Kamalaslla,
of what the views of Ho-shang Mo-ho-yen reallywere.
5
In section
3, I set out some of these views of Mo-ho-yen, following Gomez,
"andcompare them with observations about the Hva-shang which
Padma dKar-po puts forward in his Phyag-chen gan-mdzod and
elsewhere. In making this comparison, the crucial point to be
grasped on the bKa'-brgyud-pa side is the particular notion of
"no mental activity" (amanasikara) which is in use, namely that
based on the ideas of Maitripa.
6
Padma dKar-po contrasts this
notion ofamanasikara with the view of the Hva-shang, and shows
that they are incompatible. The failure to grasp this essential
point is probably the most serious defect in the polemic of Sa-
skya Pa1)<;iita (insofar as it is directed towards the bKa'-brgyud-
"" pas).
G. Sa-skya Pa1)<;iita and others identify the "quick entry to
the path" (cig-car 'jug-pa'i lam) of the bKa'-brgyud-pas with the
"sudden gate" (cig-car 'jug-pa'i sgo, ston-mun) of the Chinese.
According to Padma dKarcpo, this identification is confused;
the two views differ in two quite general ways, independently
()f the point about "no mental activity" (amanasikara) briefly
.". mentioned under F. First, the Hva-shang view is a view about
the nature of goal-attainment in Buddhism quite generally, while
the view which Padma dKar-po does hold is a view about the
30
JIABS VOL. 10 NO.2
path, and not the goal, applying only to certain people and not
others. Second, the Hva-shang view is part of the hetuyiina and
has no application to the vajrayiina, while Padma dKar-po's cig_
car jug-pa'i lam is part of the vajrayiina' and is irrelevant to the
hetuyiina.
7
These points about the Hva-shang view, as made by
Padma dKar-po, seem to be adequately confirmed by the Tun_
huang materials.
H. As is well-known, Sa-skya Pal).<;iita objected to the bKa'_
brgyud-pa view according to which there is a mahiimudrii in the
sutras as well as the tantras. According to G, it might seem as
though Padma dKar-po is going to be in difficulty defending
this bKa-brgyud-pa view, at least for the "sudden" (cig-car) type
of person. Padma dKar-po's general defence of the notion of
mahiimudrii in the sutras has been presented elsewhere.
8
But his
notion oj a sudden type oj person applies only to the tantras, indeed,
only to the anuttarayogatantras; so in the sutras the problem never
anses.
K. Of the detailed mahiimudrii doctrines propagated by the
bKa' -brgyud-pas, Sa-skya Pal).<;iita has attacked the "five aspects"
(lnga-ldan) system of the'Bri-gung-pas with particular force. I
suggest that these attacks may be explained by personal animos-
ity of the Sa-skya-pas towards Phag-mo Gru-pa rDo-rje rGyal-po,
the originator of the "five aspects" system.
2. The bKa'-brgyud-pas on the White Panacea
2.1 sGam-po-pa used the phrase dkar-po chig-thub occasion-
allt but there is rio reason to think he associated any technical
sense with the word. It is not found where we might expect it
(in relation to the subject-matter) in the sGom-tshul zhus-lan. Gen-
erally speaking, sGam-po-pa avoided as far as possible the use
of specialized technical terms. For example, if anything in Bud-
dhism is ever invented by anybody sGam-po-pa was the inventor
of the lhan-cig skyes-sbyor (sahajayoga) system of mahiimudrii.
(While the idea of a goal common to both sutras and tantras goes
back to Naropa,10 sGam-po-pa was the first person to teach them
both on a parallel basis). YetsGam-po-pa himself avoids the
term lhan-cig-skyes-sbyor, preferring to substitute a brief explana-
tion of what it stands for. Similarly he avoided the words dkar-po-
chig-thub and yid-la mi-byed-pa (amanasikiira) , preferring just to
directly whatever it was that he wanted to say.
The standard bKa' -brgyud-pa source for dkar-po-chig-thub,
a.nd the one usually mentioned by bKa'-brgyud-pa writers and
scholars, is the chapter of that name in Zhang Tshal-pa's Phyag-
'rgya chen-po. lam-mchog m.thar-thu.g. There is not the
reason to thmk that what IS descnbed by Zhang Tshal-pa III thIS
famous work has anything to do with quietism or with the views
MHo-shang Mo-ho-yen (regardless of whether the Ho-shang
was really a quietist or not). As we see from the text, given in
Appendix A, the whole chapter is a series of aphorisms listing
the various stages of Buddhist practice and saying what has to
be the case for them to be complete. This question of completeness
is adumbrated for the momentofabhisambodhi
ll
(v. 1), for [refuge
in] the three jewels (vv. 2-4), for bodhicitta (vv. 5-6), for the six
paramitas (vv. 7-9), for the two accumulations of merit and
awareness (v. 10), for the four stages of (vv. 11-12), for
the stages of generation and completion in sadhana practice
(v. 13), for various paths and bodhisattva-levels (v. 14), for the
three buddhakayas (v. 15), and for the four stages of view, culti-
Ovation, action and goaP2 (v. 16). The very last verse alone is not
this topic of completeness; but it emphasizes that right up
:to buddhahood, karma and its ripening continue to exist and it
is necessary to renounce evil and to accumulate merit. The
White Panacea doctrine, as thus set out by Zhang Tshal-pa, is
'clearly a doctrine applying both to the vajrayana and to the
lah,ar],ayana. And in the vajrayana, it applies to both the "sudden"
and "gradual" types, as Padma dKar-po understood these terms,
,since the difference between these two types is primarily in the
specific content of their practices, and not in the generalities
adumbrated by Zhang Tshal-pa or in their both having to
traverse an extended path.
I have gone to some trouble to exhibit this text, not only
because of its intrinsic interest but because it is older than Sa-skya
Par;l(;lita's criticisms and is therefore not open to the charge of
having been produced as a way of averting those criticisms.
2.2 The bKa'-brgyud-pas have used mahamudra in various
ways:
(a) for one of the four mudriis
(b) as a synonym of, or close varient on, madhyamaka
32
JIABS VOL. 10 NO.2
(c) as a name of various techniques of meditation
(d) as a name for various systems of meditation practice
(a) Mudra means "seal," and mahainudra means "the great
seal"; the Tibetans use it in this sense in both masculine and
feminine forms. While the karmamudra is a real woman and the
jnanamudra is a visualized image, the word mahamudra does not
stand for any particular thing which symbolizes something else;
it is the sealing or binding together of items experienced in
nirvikalpajnana with that nirvikalpajnana itself and as such has
ground, path and goal phases (see (b) below). The Tibetans
emphasize the notion of "not going beyond" as part of "seal"
(phyag-rgya); as Guenther has rightly pointed out, on the basis
of Padma dKar-po's Gan-mdzod itself, this idea goes back to
Mi-la-ras-pa. This is the point at which the dkar-po chig-thub
notion connects with the notion of mahamudra as one of the four
mudras.
(b) For the bKa'-brgyud-pas, mahamudra has another, re-
lated sense similar to one sense of madhyamaka. In particular
there is a sutra-mahamudra and a tantra-mahamudra, and they
represent the same attainment (only the methods involved are
different.)13 This point has been strongly disputed by the si-
skya-pas; there is also a slight difference here with the dGe-Iugs.
In the tantras, mahamudra is often described as "the origin of all
dharmas" and identified with the dharmakiiya. This does not mean
that all the dharmas originate from mahiimudra in the sense of
some causal theori
4
but that the dharmas, as concepts or descrip-
tions of the items of experience, have mahamudra as their place
of origination (skye-gnas). (There is an important element of
metaphor in this phrase.) In the tantras, this is symbolized by
taking mahamudra to be the yonE or bhaga or dharmodaya. The
parallel with madhyamaka is emphasized by the parallel way in
which the tantras (and sometimes the sutras) take Prajnaparamita
as a deity and as the dharmodaya. In as much as mahamudra is
the place of origin of the dharmas-the descriptive part of e x p e r i ~
ence-the realisation of mahamudra as the great seal means just
letting the mind rest in its experiencing without becoming attached
to the labelling concepts which arise in the course of experience;
concepts which are, as the bKa'-brgyud-pas well understood, a
necessary part of experience (including seeing things properly,
;, aramiirthatas) and not something to be swept away into some
'P
ort
of chaos of disconnected appearances. dKar-po chig-thub is
way of expressing this same idea.
: The bKa' -brgyud-pas hold that mahiimudrii, regarded as the
place o.f origin of all dha.rmas, is the ground, and goal of
the entIre process of freemg oneself from delusIOns. For Padma
dKar-po, ground-mahiimudrii is the integration of the two satyas
(bden gnyis zung-'jug), path-mahamudra is the integration of in-
: sight and means (thabs-shes zung-'jug) , and goal-mahiimudrii is the
integration of the two buddhakiiyas (sku gnyis zung-jug). He uses
exactly the same language for the description of madhyamaka as
ground, path and In. _each case_ a
(paramiirtha-satya, praJna-paramzta, dharmakaya) IS mtegrated WIth
items of particular sorts falling under certain general categories
(sar[tvr:ti-satya, upiiya, rupakiiya).15a .
The seal (mudrii) is the understanding that in each case,
items of that general category depend on the feature-universal
for their identity as items of that category. Put this way, the
may seem trivial; but it is given content, especially
in the case of the two satyas, by the identification of paramartha-
with the radiant light, of upaya with the bodhisattvas' upaya-
kauSalya, and of the rupakaya with the nirmiirpakaya and sam-
bhogakaya of the Buddha. Dol-po Shes-rab rGyal-mtshan, by
contrast, took mahiimudra as itself subject to the two satyas (further
identified as gzhan-stong and rang-stong) rather than as the prin-
ciple which subjects the ordinary items of experience to the satyas.
Since in this way he had nothing to keep the two aspects of
mahiimudrii together, the temptation to reject one (rang-stong =
sar[tvr:ti-satya) and keep the other (gzhan-stong = paramartha-satya)
was irresistible; but then, as Padma dKar-po pointed out, the
integration (zung-'jug) has disintegrated.
16
. (c) As ground and goal, madhyamakalmahiimudra is essentially
one, though of course it will have various aspects. As path, it is
very various, and there is a tendency to use madhyamaka more
strictly of the sutra-level methods and mahiimudra of the tantra-
level methods. All the many techniques of the upaya-marga which
may lead to the goal of mahiimudra may ipsissimo facto be thought
of as falling under path-mahiimudra; and this was how phrases
like "mahiimudra meditation" (phyag-chen sgom-pa) were used by
the early bKa'-brgyud-pas. Accordingly it is senseless to com-
34
JIABS VOL. 10 NO.2
plain, as Sa-skya Pal).Q.ita does in the sDom-gsum rab-dbye, that
the dkar-po chig-thub is not one but many. dKar-po chig-thub-
re
5
_ maining in mahamudra as the place of <;>rigin, of the dharmas_is'
precisely what holds the many together as one, and so is not
itself subject to the notions of one and many (gcig dang du bral), I);
even in a putely conventional logical sense.:
(d) Sa-skya Pal).Q.ita's complaint is formulated semi-explicitly'-
as an attack on the "five aspects" system of mahamudra meditation:
(phyag-chen lnga-ldan). This system was a speciality of the 'Bri-;
gung-pas, and there appears. to be pi{
headed about the attack as dIrected agamst the ongmator of
the dgongs-gcig doctrine. It may become slightly more
prehensible (though not really excusable) if we recall that th(t
lnga-ldan system was actually originated not by 'Bri-gung
pa 'Jig-rten mGon-po, but by his teacher Phag-mo Gru-pa rD6:':<
rje rGyal-po; while it was practiced especially in the 'Bri-gunglt
it was also handed down !n the other bKa'
tradItIOns, and we have works on It from the hands of
dKar-po,18 Si-tu Chos-kyi 'Byung-gnas
I9
and many others. Novi'l
Phag-mo. Gru-pa was the principal pupil of sGam-po-pa; bu(1
before him,.he been to many teachers studie1J
many doctnnes, and m partIcular had learned the entIre lam-'brafj
system from Sa-chen Kun-dga sNying-p020; this is why theriJ
are various bKa'-brgyud-pa transmissions of the lam-'bras, such'l
as that. recorded by Padma dKar-po.21 the of
po-pa m 1153, Phag-mo gru-pa sought Sa-chen out m order to.#
ask him questions; but Sa-chen refused to see him,22 and
then the name of Phag-mo Gru-pa has riot been heard of much;!
the tradition, in spite of his vast elsewhere.
IS temptmg to speculate that Sa-skya Pal).Q.Ita s attack on
lnga-ldan system may have been motivated by animosity towards'
Phag-mo Gru-pa, rather than towards sGam-po-pa or
pa.
23
'j
2.3 Another way of considering the connection
Padma dKar-po's view of dkar-po chig-thub and the Hva-shangj
view is to look at his account of the latter and consider whetherJ
it involves the former or not. In chapter 5 of the
. gan-mdzod Padma dKar-po considers at considerable
passage from the sDom-gsum rab-dbye in which the varietyo!1
t
which Sa-sky,a Pal)<;lita is is identified with
i"Chinese rDzogs-chen. 24 dKar-po chzg-thub IS not even men-
tioned in. Padma dKar-po's discussion of these n:>tions; pr?of
r"llough, It would seem, that he uses the dkar-po chzg-thub notIOn
r6nly when it is imposed on him by others, as by Sa-skya Pal)<;lita
'barIier in the sDom-gsum rab-dbye.
" In fact the refutation of Sa-skya Pal)<;lita's remarks is surpris-
"ing1y straightforward, even though it has a slight twist to its tail.
Padrna dKar-po starts by pointing out that Sa-skya Pal)<;lita has
,gotthe actual story of the bSam-yas debate wrong, according
'to Karnalaslla's own account.
25
At a first debate, KamalasIla and
:the Hva-shang were not present,26 the rtsen-min (gradual, rim-
gyis) persuasion being represented by Ye-shes dbang-po, sBa'
'dral-dbyangs and others, while the sudden persuasion (ston-min,
fig-car) was represented by Jo Byang-chub and Sru Yang-dag.
27
On this occasion the rtsen-min (gradual persuasion) "pleased the
iki
n
g."28 A second debate was then held between the principals
29
"the sudden persuasion was refuted by reasoning and scrip-
ture; the Hva-shang and his pupils remained defenseless, and
'I{arnalasila was garlanded with flowers."30 It is difficult to imag-
'lne a rnore conventional account.
But as I said, there is a twist at the end. The doctrine of
the Hva-shang is a pure Mahayana doctrine, having nothing to
:Cio with the vajrayiina, while the Indian cig-car-ba doctrine of
j:'ilopa, Wiropa and Padma dKar-po is a vajrayiinp doctrine.
There is no cig-car-ba notion applying to the sutras. Samathfj and
vipasyanii, though not part of the upiiya-miirga (and in that sense
nOt vajrayiina techniques) are nevertheless based on the Vairo-
paniibhisambodhi-tantra
3
! and so require abhi!ieka. In any case, the
point is academic; though the lhan-cig-skyes-sbyor method of
riwhiimudrii includes the elementary forms of samathfi and vip-
afyanii,32 nobody seriously supposes that a cig-car-ba would prac-
.tice these elementary techniques. The important point here is
that according to the bKa'-brygud-pas, a cig-car-ba can attain
insight immediately following abhi!ieka; this has been denied by
Pal)<;lita, in passages quoted by Padma dKar-po else-
where in the Gan-mdzod.
33
But this point is in no way affected
by the repudiation of the Hva-shang view, of course.
Padma dkar-po describes the relation between the Hva-
silang view and the vajrayiina thus:
34
36
JIABS VOL. 10 NO.2
The objector (Sa-skya Pal)<;lita) claims that the Chinese tradition
is a form of rdzogs-chen, but this is not observed. It is a sutra-Ievel
bhiivanakrama, while rdzogs-chen atiyoga is nothing of the sort. Had
it been, rdzogs-chen [which the Hva.:shang w.as speaking of),
Kamalaslla would have been unable to refute It by referring to
the sutras and to the Vairocanabhisambodhitantra. Accordingly the
two methods [of the Hva-shang and of KamalasllaJ both belong
to the
Padma-dKar-po continues
35
with a long quotation from the third
Bhiivanakrama which specifically refutes the Hva-shang'S view.
He then considers the contrast between his views of the cig-
car
_
balthod-rgal-balrim-gyis-pa distinction as a distinction of different
paths (and the persons who follow them) within a certain con-
ception of what all those paths are based on and are leading to
(viz. mahiimudra), and the view attributed to the Hva-shang by
Sa-skya Pa1).Q.ita (probably wrongly, according to Padma dKar-'
po) according to which everybody would be a cig-car-ba. Padma
dKar-po was strongly opposed to the latter view
36
; and here
37
he points out that if the arguments in the sDom-gsum rab-dbye
have any force at all, it is only against this view held neither by
the bKa'-brgyud-pas nor, probably, by the Hva-shang.
38
He then
39
mentions various internal inconsistencies in Sa-
skya Pa1).<;lita's exposition of the lam-'bras doctrine, but it would
take us too far afield to go into all this here. The chapter (and
the whole work) conclude with a discussion of more specific
point of dispute concerning the relation between samathii and
vipasyana and related matters.
3. The Essence of Mahamudra as the Medicinal Plant dKar-po
chig-thub [Removing All DefilementsrO
Here we give a translation of most of the section of the
Phyag-chen gan-mdzod in which Padma dKar-po treats the White
Panacea (dkar-po chig-thub) doctrine. The treatment revolves en-
tirely around criticisms of the bKa'-brgyud-pas appearing in the
sDom-gsum rab-dbye, whose verses are quoted (without acknow-
ledgment, save by a "kha-cig ni ... " or similar).
"In his commentary on the Hevajra-tantra,41 the great translator
[Mar-paJ said
THE WHITE PANACEA
37
All dharmas,42 from the most subtle through to motion, are not
established on. their own account. Having thus understood sahaja-
prak(ti as the view, one cultivates it, and this is samiihita, etc. How-
ever, if what is cultivated issamiihita without it is
[merely] a simulacrum of sahaja-jiiiinao It has been said to me and
others that from the viewpoint of one who understands mahiimudra
thus, alfdharmas of sa'I7Jsiira and niroiil]a arise from it:' and are its
emanationso Accordingly, even a man with little merit who, having
understood that the whole of view, cultivation of the view and
action aremahiimudrii and having cultivated [the view] for a long
time, will attain realizationo So what is the point of paying attention
to anything else? So it has been taught.
"So at the time of understanding there is no need to consider
any other dharma than mahiimudrii. And in Acarya Jiianaklrti's
Tattviivatiira we find:
Though the Exalted One has the nature [bdag-nyid] of dharmakiiya,
vajra-bodhicitta is also the essence [ngo-bocnyid] of the tathiigataso
Further, prajiiiipiiramitajiiiina is non-dual and is to be realised by
the tathiigataso The inseparable union of mahiimudrii
44
is the same,
and it has the nature of mahiikarul]ao Since it has the nature of
bodhicitta, it is the natural yoga
44a
of all merit. Thus, its cultivation
leads completely to countless resultso Accordingly, the cultivation
of non-dual mahiimudrii is what all yogins who attain countless re-
sults have in commono So the Exalted One taught that there is
but one vehicle, as it taught with certainty in the Buddhasangztisutrao
There is no vehicle separate from the dharmadhiitu, the essence of
the awareness of non-dual mahiimudriio"
Here Padma dKar-po expresses what he wants to say in quota-
tions, hardly using his own wordso He now introduces the first
()f two quotations which he will attack, both from Sa-skya
Pal)c;lita's sDom-gsum rab-dbye, without however mentioning
either the author or the work.
"Others, however, have said
45
:
Some say that the three kiiyas arise as an effect from the dkar-po
chig-thubo However an effect cannot arise from a single [cause];
and one which did would be single, like the nirodha of the sriivakaso
"These remarks are inconsistent [rang-la gnod-do]; the middle
one contradicts the first and last. Why is that? It is unanimously
agreed that no effect can arise from a single thing, and yet here
the nirodha of the sriivakas is called an effect which arises from
a single cause."
38
JIABS VOL.lONO. 2
In any case, these arguments of Sa-skya Pal).Qita are irrelev_
ant, since we are not talking about causation in a technical sense
Padma dKar-po now gives a series of nine quotations which
simultaneously illustrate four points. :First, there is one place of
origin of all dharmas, which has been called many different
names, mahamudra, sems-nyid, etc. (a point dealt with in more
detail under the next quotation from the sDom-gsum rab-dbye).
Second, various paths or methods originate there. Third, they
all have one common effect or product: Fourth, it is essential
not to go beyond this one mahamudra. All these topics belong
to dkar-po chig-thub, but the last is especially characteristic.
"The wrongness of this [view expressed by Sa-skya Pal)<;iita] is
shown by Saraha
46
;
Mind alone is the seed of everything, from which proceed whatever
exists and whatever is at rest. Homage to mind, which, like a
wish-fulfilling gem, grants the desired result!
"And again by Saraha
47
:
From one root grow two branches,
And from these two grows one fruit.
"Avalokitesvara says48;
The hero-stage, the is pure, but is not the path/
of freedom. There is only one wholly pure stage:
g
the buddhas
say, from which liberation follows.
"And in the Kiilacakratantra
50
:
This single thing
5l
is fivefold; the abhisambodhi of the highest
exalted ones is of twenty kinds, and has the character of many,\
different sorts of illusion. By means of this same bliss in instant.
there is the (desired) result, and not by action of any other nature ....
(svabhiiva). Here the means is unchanging, instantaneous (sic) and;
is in that which enters the sahaja-dharmadhiitu.
From bliss there is the further wish for bliss, instantaneous, sahaja,
and wanting nothing else; they arise from the skandhas but also
from an instant of bliss, from pure dharmas
52
and from what
pure, like the roots, leaves, flowers and fruit from the sowing
a single pure seed.
"And from other examples. For instance the Yogznzsanciirya:
Only from great bliss, only from experiencing it, comes the dance
of the multifold.
53
"And many other tantra-passages make the same point. But we
find it also in the sidra literature, as for instance:
"and
There is mainly one inseparable vehicle, for it is inseparable (sic)
from the dharmadhiitu.'54
Since it is inseparable from the dharmadhiitu, it is not suitable for
different types
55
; differences between distinctions in the dharmas
are dependent [on the dharmadhiitu]. ,
"Further there is a contradiction with perception. Further still,
it would follow that all the arguments establishing that there is
just one ultimate vehicle are wrong."
The next quotation from the sDom-gsum rab-dbye is directed
the 'Bri-gung-pa tradition of mahiimudra called lnga-ldan,
ill which five aspects of mahiimudra are stressed, viz. bodhicitta-
devakiiya-mahiimudra, devotional mahiimudra,
abh4eka-mahiimudra and vidya-mahiimudra. Obviously, as Padma
ciKar-po will point out, it does not mean that these are five
different mahiimudras
56
:
Some say that after cultivating dkar-po chig-thub there must be a
dedication of merit. But in that case there are two chig-thub. Indeed,
if there is to be refuge, generation of bodhicitta, meditation on
deities and yidams, etc., there must be many chig-thub. So this notion
of chig-thub cannot be the teaching of the buddhas, and it is a
clinging to substantiality and is the opposite of the Muni's cele-
brated voidness!7
"This objection is childish [Padma dKar-po replies]. It would
make just as much sense to say, within your own [tradition], that
it is impermissible to arrange the two kramas in order. It is a mere
conversational device to say that everything can be viewed only
as paramiirtha-[satyaJ. On the same level, in your own tradition
one would have to say that [all generation of bodhicitta] is gener-
ation of paramiirtha-bodhicitta. "
Padma dKar-po now gives numerous quotations from Indian
sources (Guhyasamaja, Hevajra, Kalacakra, Vimalaprabh
a
Samputa, I)akarnava, Prajiiaparr:mita)
for each of these fIve aspects of mahamudra how it is
treated as standing for the whole; on Sa-skya PaI).Q.ita's view it
would follow that all these Indian sources were foolishly Con_
fused. It would be tedious to reproduce all these quotations; I
will give one example of each type.
"The following example of bodhicitta-mahi'imudrii would be
wrong
58
:
Bodhicitta in its sa'f!lvrti and paramartha. forms is generated by .
means of the marJlj,alacakra and the svadhz!i(hanakrama
"Also the following example of devakiiya-mahiimudrii would be
wrong
59
:
The true abode of the deity and the mantras is in their nature of
being ni!iprapafica. .
"So would be the following example of devotional mahiimudrii
60
:
Maitreya said: How should the buddhas and bodhisattvas look upon'
the vajracarya who has given abhi!ieka for Guhyasamaja, the body, ,
speech and mind of all the buddhas and tathiigatas? Son of a good
family, all the buddhas and bodhisattvaS should look upon him as
upon boddhicitta-vajra. Why is that? Because the acarya is equal to
bodhicitta itself, the two are inseparable.
"And similarly mahiimudrii may be expressed in terms of abh4eka
61
:
Power is transferred by the great bliss of knowledge of things as
they are, in the of mahiimudra; the mar],qala has no other
origin."
The examples of vidya-mahamudra are too complex to be pursued
here.
62
Padma dKar-po also gives examples of various other
types of mahamudra (not specially associated with the lnga-ldan'
system). It may be obtained in the mode of gshis, 63 in the mode
of gnas-lugs,64 by purification, etc. The essential point is that
what is thereby attained is always the same, even though the
methods differ; and so once one method has been pursued to c
THEWHITE PANACEA 41
.the end, there is no need to take up another. This is the point
. f the verse quoted after the title of this paper; similarly Padma
quotes the I)akarr]ava
65
:
By cultivating one instruction, all instructions are understood. Just
as by attaining one bhumi, all bhumis are attained, so by attaining
one instruction, all instructions are attained.
"And in a sutra:
Though in the various realms of the world I have spoken various
sutras using various words, the intent
66
is the same. Meditating on
one saying is like meditating on all.
"and in the Prajiii.ipi.iramiti.i:
Fully knowing the sutras on one dharma, one fully knows the sutras
on all dharmas.
seek for another means after having attained this mahi.imudri.i
would be like looking for the same elephant which one had
already found and abandoned [and this is the point of the White
Panacea]. The sense of this is already found slightly in the Pra-
jiii.ipi.iramiti.i and in the- dohas.
This concludes the second chapter of the Phyag-rgya chen-po man-
ngag-gi bshad-sbyar rgyal-ba'i gan-mdzod, summarizing the content
of the notion of mahi.imudri.i."
4. A Direct Comparison Between the Views of Ho-shang Mo-ho-yen
and Kun-mkhyen Padma dKar-po
In the previous section we saw how Sa-skya Pal)Q.ita distorted
the views of the bKa'-brgyud-pas; but it has not been possible,
in the absence of Chinese comment on his sDom-gsum rab-dbye
J
to consider to what extent he has also distorted the views of
Mo-ho-yen. In this section we will bypass Sa-skya Pal)Qita al-
together, and make a direct comparison between the views of
Mo-ho-yen and those of the bKa' -brgyud-pas as represented by
Padma dKar-po. We will not be particularly interested in those
points of similarity which they shared with the rest of the Bud-
42
JIABS VOL. 10 NO.2
dhist world (since it hardly seems necessary to reply to Sa-skya
Pa1)Qita's charge
67
that they were not Buddhists at all). Rather,
we will be concerned with points on which they agreed in oppos_
ition to Sa-skya and with on which they simply'
disagreed. We wIll find Important pomts of both types. To the
extent that there are points of great importance, concerning
their respective "sudden" doctrines, on which the bKa'-brgyud_
pas differed from Mo-ho-yen, it seems that Sa-skya Pa1)Qita was
simply wrong in his sweeping identification of the two. On the
other hand there are points of similarity; and while it would be
of interest to see whether these are shared also by the r N ying -ma-
pas, that would go beyond the scope of this paper.
The comparison is made possible by the analysis of Tun-
huang and other fragments of old works plausibly attributed to
Mo-ho-yen by Japanese scholars, and surveyed recently by Luis
Gomez [G83]. Gomez notes a very interesting inconsistency in
the materials thus attributed to Mo-ho-yen: the Chinese lan-
guage Tun-wu ta-sheng cheng-li chueh (Pelliot 4646), claiming to
be a report of the bSam-yas debate, is a very polemical work,
while the works of which Tibetan fragments are extant seem
much less extreme and polemical. Given that Kamalaslla was
also a participant in the debate, a direct comparison between
him and Mo-ho-yen might well emphasize the Cheng-li chueh;
but that is not our purpose here. With the one exception of the
attack on Sa-skya Pa1)Qita, the works of Pad rna dKar-po on which
I will rely are not polemical at all, and are written for members
of his own tradition; and these seem more appropriately com-
pared with the Tibetan-language fragments assembled and.
translated in Appendix 2 of [G83]. They are also more likely to'
be relevant for a quite different reason: whatever the actual
views of Mo-ho-yen, translations of his works into Tibetan are.
more likely to have influenced Tibetan perceptions of him
68
than the probablt9 untranslated Cheng-li chueh; for Chinese was
not a language widely appreciated in Tibet.
On the whole, the Cheng-li chueh passages quoted by Gomez
do show Mo-ho-yen as radically different from Padma dKar-po.
The following points would be totally unacceptable to Padma
dKar-p07o:
A. If one sees conceptions as no conceptions, one sees the
Tathagata. To understand this single thought is in itself the
:::gr:eatest merit., by far all the merits that one could
..... btain by cultlvatmg good dharmas ... (p. 90)
.0 B. You claim that common persons should not follow this
For whom, then, were these teachings left by the bud-
dha.s? (p. 91)
i C. The defect in conceptualization is that it has the power
10 hinder the original omniscience of all living beings ... (p.
g1}7!
D. The duality of need and non-need, etc., have meaning
only in the relative realm. (p. 98)12
E. A being of sharp faculties does not need medicine to be
cured or a boat to cross the river (of sarr;sara) (p. 98)73
.. F. The sudden approach has been taught for the pfthagjana
also. (p. 99)74
G. When conceptualizations are given up, there is an au-
tomatic attainment of all virtues. (p. 99)15
There remains, indeed, only one striking feature in common
between the Mo-ho-yen of the Cheng-li chileh and Padma dKar-
po: the insistence that wisdom and means cannot exist in isola-
tion from one another.
The comparison becomes more interesting when one looks
at the Tibetan fragments. Rather than quoting isolated sen-
tences, I will hang a more continuous discussion on the
metaphor of the white and black clouds which is used by Mo-ho-
yen.
76
The central idea behind the metaphor is that good and
bad thoughts both have to be given up, so that the nature of
mind is not obscured, just as both black and white clouds must
be absent if the sun is not to be obscured. This metaphor is not
wholly repugnant to Padma dKar-po; and yet when we look
more carefully at what it means to Mo-ho-yen and to Padma
dKar-po, we see that there is still not very much in common.
.. First, even in the Tibetan fragments, Mo-ho-yen still insists
that sooner or later, everybody has to practice the sudden way
of abiding in no-mind.
77
But for Padma dKar-po, there are
certainly people who will attain buddhahood through the prac-
tice of the gradual path alone. They attain it, typically, in the
intermediate state, and by the methods of the upaya-marga.
There is no parallel to this in
Accordingly, for Padma dKar-po the metaphor, if it is rele-
vant, is relevant only to the "sudden" type of person. Now this
kind of person does indeed suffer from attachment to concepts.
whether good or bad, and where there is such attachment,
concepts (or the attachment to them) obscure mind or the
radiant light. To this extent Mo-ho-yen's metaphor does apply.
But the central point of the cig-car-ba notion (for Padma dRar_
po) is that the concepts need not merely play the role of obs
cu
_
rations. The mind, or the radiant light, can also illuminate the
concepts themselves, which now become the object of mental
activity. And the cig-car-ba is able to see the nature of the concepts
and by means of this insight to liberate himself. For the cig-car-ba
then, Mo-ho-yen's metaphor, while not exactly wrong,
the point. A more apt analogy would be that of a man standing
on a mountain peak and seeing the clouds below him, illumi-
nated by the sun. The rim-gyis-pa, by contrast, is like a man
standing at the bottom of the same mountain totally unable to
see the sun (at any rate if he is not on the path of insight1
S
). All
he can do is to perform meritorious actions.
A point on which the Tibetan fragments of Mo-ho-yen are
very unclear (at least as Gomez is able to render them) is the
general nature of the path. Is there a path at all, according to
Mo-ho-yen? In some passages he seems to write as though there'
is no path. Elsewhere, it seems more as though the path just is
the practice of non-conceptualization, etc. Now if there is no
path at all, we certainly have a sharp contrast with Padma dKar- .
po, for whom there is a path, even for the type.
79
But
if non-conceptualization is the path, then we have something
corresponding, in Padma dKar-po, to a rather low level of prac-
tice, and not to the amanasikiira doctrine of Maitripa; this point
is reviewed more carefully in Appendix B.
In spite of these important differences between the
yen of the Tibetan fragments and Padma dKar-po, we do find
some points of similarity which are more specific than merely
having the Mahayana in common, e.g.
so
:
One should not contrive [conceptualizations]; rather, one should
not pursue them, one should not oppose them. It should be so .
that there is no artificial constructionS I [of conceptualizations].
Why is this? When the mind abides in them no more it
should then not be made not to abide. When the mind does not
examine, it should not be made not to examine. To do so would
be to contrive [further conceptualizations].
And further
82
:
It is not a matter of whether one should accept or reject all
dharmas or anything else; rather it is a matter of not giving rise
to concepts or acceptance or rejection. . . .If concepts arise, one
should not think arlYwhere of being or non-being, purity or im-
purity, emptiness or the absence thereof, etc. One does not think
of non-thinking either. ... But if one were to experience non-
examination and does not act according to these concepts, or
accept them or become attached to them, then every instant of
mind is liberated at every moment. 83
In spite of the imperfections of the materials available to Gomez
and others (and in spite of the imperfections of my understand-
ing of Padma dKar-po), this kind of more detailed comparison
really does show up the hollowness and emptiness of Sa-skya
PaI)<;lita's invective. Because Sa-skya Pa1).<;lita has not taken any
trouble to make clear in exactly what ways the mahiimudrii is like
. the Chinese or the Hva-shang view, he can be refuted by point-
to any difference one can find; and of course Padma dKar-po
has no difficulty in finding important and substantial differ-
ences. Nevertheless, there are interesting parallels; and these
do emerge more naturally from the Tibetan fragments of Mo-
ho-yen than from the Cheng-Ii chueh, rather as one would expect
from Gomez' characterization of these two sources.
For a number of years now, it has been fashionable, in the
study of Chinese Buddhism, to emphasize those features which
are held to be indigenous rather than imported from India. The
distinction is perfectly reasonable; but to my mind, the insistent
.emphasis has now become an orthodoxy which demands re-
examination if it is not to stultify further progress. In particular,
it has become fashionable to talk as though Indian Buddhism
was concerned entirely with paths, stages and scholasticism,
while only in China do we find a concern with direct experience.
And as regards Tibetan Buddhism, since most scholars are famil-
iar only with the varieties represented by writers such as
PaI)<;lita-thoroughly scholastic, and considering only the
graded path-there has grown up the tendency to identify it
with the scholastic .tendencies in Indian Buddhism, and to con-
nect any element in Tibetan Buddhism which stresses direct
experience with China. In this way, contemporary scholars risk
repeating the very mistakes of Sa-skya Pa:(lQita.
Really, there is no alternative to a s ~ i n g , separately for each
system of doctrine or doctrinal notion found in the Tibetan
literature: did this come from India? did it come from China?
or is it a Tibetan innovation? Sa-skya Pal).Q.ita is a poor guide
here, but Padma dKar-po is not quite unbiased either. He strove
continually to demonstrate that the essential elements of his
tradition derive from India, and are not Tibetan (or Chinese)
innovations. And it has to be said that within the Tibetan cultural
context, he was completely successful. After the time of Padma
dKar-po, the charge that the bKa'-brgyud-pa doctrines are
merely Tibetan or Chinese innovations was never seriously
raised again. While we have no need to take everything he says
at its face value, it does seem to me that a number of the points
he made have stuck.
1. The main bKa-brgyud-pa doctrines are squarely based
on the works of Naropa, Maitripa and Ansa. These are Indian.
historical personages, whose historical connection with early
Tibetan bKa-brgyud-pas (especially Mar-pa Chos-kyi BIo-gros)
can hardly be doubted.
84
To this argument, stressed so much
by Padma dKar-po, we might add the gloss that many of the
principal works of these three Indians upon which the bKa-
brgyud-pas rely are still available in Sanskrit versions from India
and Nepal, and thus transmitted independently of the Tibetans.
For instance, almost all the works of Maitripa described by.
Padma dKar-po as belonging to the Amanasikara cycle are avail-
able in Sanskrit in the AdvayavajrasarIJgraha (see Appendix B):
2. That the vajrayana part of the bKa' -brgyud-pa doctrines
can have come from China is impossible. Padma dKar-po's ar-
gument, that even the standard Tibetan accounts of the bSam-
yas debate provide no room for the possibility that the Hva-
shang doctrine could be a form of rdzogs-chen, applies with equal
force to any other advanced form of vajrayana and is really
decisive. In any case, there is no reason to think that the anut-
tarayogatantras of the late translation (gSar-ma) type were ever
practiced in China except in circles directly connected with
Tibetan culture. Far from the Chinese having brought them to
Tibet, it was the Tibetans who brought them to China.
3. In the case of the non-vajrayana form of mahamudra, the.
:ituation is Just as clear. The cig-car-ba notion (as used by the
'bKa'-bryud-pas) is simply irrelevant here. The S'Lltra doctrine of
JIlahamudra is the doctrine of the Samadhirajasutra.
85
Nevertheless, once these essential points have been taken
~ ( ) n board, Padilla dKar-po is not unsympathetic to the possibility
'of some parallelism or mutual influence between Chinese ideas
; arid those of the bKa-brgyud-pas. What possibilities are there?
,. 1. It is possible that the reception in Tibet of bKa'-brgyud
ideas on the tantras may have been assisted by the presence of
Chinese ideas on the sutras. Possibly Maitripa's amanasikara doc-
trine, for instance, bears some relation to ideas which have cir-
culated in China at some time. Conceivably such ideas could
have originated independently in China, rather than being
brought there from India; and conceivably they may have passed
into Tibet from China. But in order to find out if this is so, we
need research, not dogmatic claims about the nature of Chinese
and Tibetan Buddhism.
2. As regards the rNying-ma tradition, the argument that
'its vajrayana doctrines originated in China is explicitly refuted
by Padma dKar-po and this refutation is equally decisive.
86
The
non-vajrayana parts of the rNying-ma doctrine do seem to have
undergone Chinese influence, recorded, for instance, in the
bSam-gtan mig-sgron. Since this influence occurred at a period.
long before the bKa' -brgyud tradition developed in Tibet, a
favourable reception for the ideas of Maitripa and others may
indeed have been prepared by the presence in Tibet of just
these ideas. Only very detailed research, such as is hardly being
undertaken at the moment, can establish whether this is so or
not. Meanwhile, the polemics (as Roger Jackson has rightly
called them) of Sa-skya Pal)<;iita throw very little light on these
difficult problems .
. Postcript: Was There a White Panacea Doctrine in the Early Transmis-
sion Period?
After this article had been completed in the summer of 1986,
,there appeared in this journal a note [K86] by Leonard van der
Kuijp, in which it is pointed out that (contrary to what Roger
Jackson claimed in U82]), Sa-skya Pal).<;iita was not the first per-
son to equate dkar-po chig-thub with some form of Chinese Bud_
dhism; Nyang-ral Nyi-ma'i Od-zer (1124:-:1192 or 1136-
1
2
0
4)
did so in his Chos-'byung (NC). Van der Kuijp also gives saIne
more speculati:e grounds for thinking that the association may
go back to earlIer works such as the sBa-bzhed.
Van der Kuijp's note suggests a variant approach to this
problem, and one which is certainly worth investigating. In par-
ticular, it would be desirable to understand better the explana_
tions of dkar-po chig-thub which he quotes from Sa-skya Pal).<;iita's
TG and other sources, concerning which he says "Striking is
the number of 'buzz-words' used in these characterizations; such
terms as rang-ngo, sems ngo-'phrod, and rtogs are 'loaded' with
specific connotations found especially in the rNying-ma-pa
rdzogs-chen tradition as well as certain mahamudra teachings of
the Dwags-po bKa'-brgyud-pa schools and sects." It would be
most desirable to know just with what specific connotations these
"buzz-words" are "loaded." As far as I know, ngo 'phrod-pa quite
standardly means "to show the nature (of a thing)" Qaschke,
Das). Consider then the following passage from Sa-skya
. Pal).<;iita's sPring-yig, quoted by van der Kuijp:
rgya-nag mkhan-po na-re / 'khor-ba skye-ba'i rgyu rang ngo rang-gis
ma-shes-pas Zan / rang-ngo rang-gis shes-na 'tshang-rgya / de'i phyir
sems ngo-'phrod-na dkar-po chig-thub yin / .' .. zer-nas
This seems to mean simply: The Chinese abbot said: "The reason
for sa'f(lsiira to arise is that one does not know one's own [mind];
to know one's own mind is to rise into buddhahood. Thus if.
the nature of mind is known, there is dkar-po chig-thub . ... " Is
there more to the remark than this?
The association with the Nyang-ral Chos-'byung is sugges-
tive rather than interesting for its own sake; after all, sGam-po:<
pa, who died in 1153 while Nyang-ral was still a young man,
had used the term dkar-po chig-thub, and so the association does
not, by itself, show that this term applied literally (rather than'
by mere analogy) to any form of Chinese Buddhism. Jackson's;
remarks [in J82, p. 96 (2) and (3)] that there is no evidence fOf;
it still, strictly speaking, holds true. However, towards the end
of his paper van der Kuijp suggests a much more promising.
;) roach when he says that various accounts of the bSam-yas
"seem. to indicate that the associatio.n of chift.-thub
;"ih the Chmese goes back to. pre-phYI-dar TIbetan htera-
WI e .. " As we will see, this does not make it at all plausible,
tur . . 1 . h h "h . h' b
:;:he specu ates m t e same sentence, t at t ere mIg tjust e
substance to Sa-paI:l's linkage of some of the Dwags-po
those by the
> eight-century TIbet. StIll, van der KUlJP deserves credIt for
out the alternative possibility, namely that dkar-po chig-
have been used of a Chinese doctrine quite different
.frbIn that of the bKa' -brgyud-pas.
. Padma dKar-po has made this very point in his chos-'byung,
'in discussing the origins of the bSam-yas debate:
Far away in lHo-brag mKhar-chu the pupils of Ho-shang
Mahayana were increasing. He spread the doctrine that virtuous
action of body and speech do not lead to buddhahood, but
amanasikiira does; this was called ston-mun. dPal-dbyangs and sBa
Ratna and others followed the Acarya to som.e
extent; in Chinese this [view] was called rtsen-min. In Tibetan it
is called cig-car-ba and rim-skyes-pa. Thus a dispute arose as to whether
these [Chinese and Tibetan terms] are consistent [with each other].
The King decreed that it should be done according to the method
of the Aciirya. At this the ston-mun-pas became angry, and said
that the rtsen-min-pas ought to be killed.
89
pidma dKar-po's remark is ambiguous. On the face of it, it does
':seem as though he is dividing the rtsen-min view into cig-car and
rim-skyes. This seems to be consistent with everything he has said
Phyag-chen gan-mdzod, as I have discussed at such length
inthis article, about how his cig-car doctrine (and the khregs-chod
;0 some of Padmasambhava's followers) is not the (ston-mun)
doctrine of the H va-shang. Yet the remark could just be taken
as meaning that ston-mun = cig-car, rtsen-min = rim-skyes; and it
)5.this ambiguity, it seems, that led directly to the bSam-yas
The urgent problem, according to this view, is to work
put just what that Chinese doctrine was.
. Suppose, then, that evidence became available that the term
dkar-po chig-thub was applied at an early date to some form of
phinese Buddhism. What light would it throw on Jackson's main
claims concerning Sa-skya PaI)<;iita? There are two possibilities:
(a)The Chinese used the term similarly to the bKa'-brgyud_pa
and (b) they used it quite differently. . S;
a) If the Chinese used dkar-po chig-thub similarly to the bKa',
brgyud-pas, then the evidence presented in the present paper
shows decisively that this use does not apply directly to the
doctrines of Ho-shang Mo-ho-yen. The hypothesis accepts Sa-
skya Panc;lita's association of bKa'-brgyud-pa doctrine With
China; but the evidence then vindicates Jackson's view that
ging Ho-shang Mo-ho-yen into the matter is polemical. ..... .
. In any case, the supposed similari.ty in the us.e dkar-Po1
chzg-thub can extend only to the non-vaJrayana applIcatIons. On
the Tibetan side, these applications consist of the perfectly
thodox and innocuous limitation principles relating to the
. stages and paramitas given by Zhang Tshal-pa (see Appendni
A). Plainly, these have nothing to do with the elements ill
Chinese Buddhism which various Tibetans have complained
about.
b) If the Chinese used dkar-po chig-thub quite differently.
from the bKa' -brgyud-pas, then it is Sa-skya Pa.Q.c;lita's attacks
on the bKa'-brgyud-pas which stand convicted of polemic; there
is no longer any reason to associate them with Ho-shang Mo-holi
yen any more than with any other Chinese doctrine. This poinf:
applies regardless of whether the hypothesized Chinese White,
Panacea doctrine was similar to the doctrine ofRo-shang Mo-ho.!
yen or not. As we will see later in this Postscript, this seems
more likely of the two possibilities.
Be this as it may, it cannot justify van der Kuijp's intemper;Z::
ate attack on Jackson'S conclusions. The substance of jackson's'
comments on Sa-skya Pa.Q.c;lita is vindicated by the analysis jus(
given. On the doctrinal points underlying them, jackson sUIll7;
marized his views in the following paragraph U82 p. 95-6],iri;:
reading which we should remember that he was using the word,
"White Panacea" strictly of the bKa'-brgyud-pa doctrine of that,
name:
i-:';):;
It is quite possible that Chinese views exercised an influence orf.
subsequent Tibetan schools, but if they did, it is far more likely:
that they affected the rNying rna tradition, which unquestionablYfi
originated at a time when Chinese masters were active in Tibe,t::
The White Panacea--quite apart from being mentioned nowhere
as a gter ma-based teaching-is in the mainstream of the Bka'
brgyud tradition. Zhang Rinpoche was a disciple of sCorn pa,
who was in turn a direct disciple of sCam po pa. He was, thus,
squarely in the lineage that reached back through Mi la ras pa
and MaT pa to the Indian siddhas Maitripa .... Til6pa and
Naropa. The White Panacea, therefore, belongs to the second
diffusion of Buddhism in Tibet, whereas direct Chinese influence
was only marked during the first; and the White Panacea's deter-
minable antecedents are Indian, not Chinese. It is true that there
exist the further possibilities (a) that there may have been Chinese
influence on the Indian siddhas, and/or (b) that there may have
been current in Zhang Rinpoche's time left-over Chinese ideas
that may have inspired him. There is no evidence at present for
either possibility; even if there were, the probability that both
Hva-shang Mahayana and Zhang Rinpoche taught the same doc-
trine, known as the White Panacea, would be remote.
,;;Every single statement in this paragraph of Jackson's is sup-
,1;ported by the evidence gathered in the present paper.
,
"f/,
.,....Many of these matters were further taken up in the Jordan
/Lectures, delivered by David Seyfort Ruegg at SOAS in London,
'in the Spring of 1987. These lectures on the bSam-yas debate
'%cussed mainly on the older Tibetan chos-'byung materials, and
doctrinal sources; unfortunately, Prof. Seyfort Ruegg
.unable to say much about the influence of the debate on
}rhesubsequent development of Buddhism in Tibet. He did
the following points relevant to this paper:
"\ (a) The word dkar-po chig-thub is found not only in early
'TIbetan sources, as already mentioned, as a Chinese doctrine
with the Hva-shang; a similar word is found in the
and is there said to be a doctrine described in
,:theMahiiparinirviirpasfdra. The Sanskrit is a!Jada. The Alternative
Tradition of the sBa-bzhed even claims that Santaraksita criticized
$uch a doctrine as "a defilement of view" (Ita-ba'i A
in the bSam-gtan mig-sgron confirms Padma dKar-po's
!ppint that dkar-po chig-thub was something separate from the
:,vajrayiina doctrines that were circulating at the same time .
:'.. (b) Agada means simply "medicine" or "medical treatment,"
this metaphor no doubt applies both to the Hva-shang's
52
JIABS VOL.IO NO.2
doctrine and to the later bKa'-brgyud one. Nevertheless thet .
seems to be no reason to think that the two doctrines have matt:.
in common that this general typological similarity. e
In the hetuyana, according to Padma dKar-po, there is the
ordinary progress through the bodhisattva-levels and paths, and
the usual instantaneous abhisambodhi. See Appendix D (taken
from ch. VII of his commentary on the Abhisamayalarikara). In
his fourth Jordan seminar, Prof. Seyfort Ruegg gave a valuable
analysis of these materials, as they appear in Haribhadra's Aloka
on the same chapter. He also gave an account of the vyutkrantika
i
(thod-rgal-ba) as he appears in the same class of literature. This
account confirms that Padma dKar-po's notion of the thod-rgal-ba
is indeed not based on these sutra-level sources,just as one would.
expect from the vajrayana sources which he does quote (see note
7).
In Memoriam
bKa' -brgyud-pa scholarship has suffered by the recent death
of the 'Brug-pa scholar mKhan-po Nor-yang (Ngag-dbang Dri:
med Zla-zer), who was associated during his whole life with
Ngag-dbang bDe-chen 'Gyur-med rDo-rje (Thugs-sras Rin-po-
che), spending the earlier part of his life at Padma dKar-po'S'
foundation of gSang-sngags Chos-gling, and living in Darjeelin{
after 1959. mKhan-po Nor-yang was particularly expert on the
Zab-mo Nang-gi-don. "bKa'-brgyud" means "oral transmission/';
and mKan-po Nor-yang did not write much. He preferred noi
to teach at length, but made brief obser"ations intended to help
the student to develop his own understanding of a complex
doctrine or text. On madhyamaka he held the striking view t h a t ~
there is quite literally no such doctrine and that the only way
to read madhyamaka texts is in the light of one's own understand;'
ing. Some of the opinions mentioned in this paper withollf
specific references are either opinions he held himself or poini(
which he regarded as generally valid for the bKa'-brgyud-pa
traditions.
"J< , Er'mIX A
i!;f'P
Zhang Tshal-pa's Phyag-chenlam-mchog mthar-thug
THE CHAPTER ON SAMENESS (MNYAM-PA-NYJD)
1. Iide-ltar lta-ba'i gnas-lugs dangl Isgom-pa spyod-pa dam-tshig dangl
I'bras-bu-la-sogs chos-mams kunl lrang-gi sems-kyi cho-'phrul yinl
2. Isems-nyid rang-rig gsal-ba'i ngangl Igsal-tsam-nyid-na rang-bzhin stongl
Imkha' ltar ris-du-chad-pa-medl Iphyogs-med mtha' dbus ngos-bzung medl
3. Ide-lta-bu-yi sems-nyid-lal Iblta-bya-lta-byed gnyis-med-pasl Ilta-ba
med-cing rtogs-pa'ang medl Ibsgom-bya sgom-byed gnyis-med-pasl
4. Ibsgom-pa-med-cing nyams-myong cangl Igoms-bya goms-byed gnyis-med-pasl
Igoms-pa-med-cingma-goms-medl /yengs-pa yengs-mkhan gnyis-med-pasl [29b5]
5 .. lma-yengs-med-cing yengs-pa 'ang med/ /spyad-rgyu sfryod-mkhan gnyis-med-pas/
Ispyod-pa-med-cing spyad-pa'ang medl Ithob-bya thob-byed gnyis med-pasl
6. Ibsgrub-pa-med-cing 'thob-pa'ang medl Inam-mkha' stong-pa'i dkyillta-burl
Irgyu dang 'bras-bu gnyis-med-pasl /skyed-pa-med-cing smin-pa-medl
7. Iye-nas stong-pa'i sems-nyid-lal /sgrib-pa-med-cing byang-ba'ang medl
Ibems min rig-stong dbyer-med-pasl lye-shes med-cing mi-shes-medl
8. Ide-ltar lta-sgom-spyod-pa dangl Idam-tshig dang ni 'bras-bu-mamsl
Isems-nyid od-gsal ngo-bor nil Imnyam-par shes-pa'i sgom-chen-lal
Iblta-bya lta-byed zhen-med-pasl Izhen-med lta-ba'i rgyal-po yin/
9. Ibsgom-bya sgom-byed zhen-med-pas/ Izhen-med bsgom-pa'i rgyal-po yinl
Ispyad-bya spyod-byed zhen-med-pasl Izhen-med spyod-pa'i rgyal-po yinl
Ithob-bya thob-byed zhen-med-pasl Izhen-med 'bras-bu'i rgyal-po yinl
Imnyam-pa-nyid-kyi le'u ste bcu-gcig-pa'o/I
i:;THE CHAPTER ON THE WHITE PANACEA (DKAR-PO CHIG-THUB)
;fTsib-ri sPar-ma nga, 30a5
1. lirang-sems rtogs-pa'i skad-cig-marl Idkar-po'i yon-tan ma-lus-pal
Ibsgrubs-pa med-par dus-gcig rdzogs/
2. /sems-nyid bar-snang lta-bu-la/ Isku-gsum ye-nas lhun-gyis grub/
Isangs-rgyas dkon-mchog de-ru-rdzogs/
3. Isems-nyid spros-bral 'dod-chags-brall /dam-chos dkon-mchog de-ru rdzogs/
lrang-bzhin skye-med phyir mi-ldog/ /mam-rtog sna-tshogs grogs-su sharf
Idge-'dun dkon-mchog de-ru rdzogs/
4. Ide-ltar dkon-mchog-gsum-po yang/ /rang-sems rigs-par rdzogs-pas-nal
/gzhan-la skyabs-su-'gro ma-dgos/ /nges-pa'i skyabs-'gro de-ru rdzogs/
54
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
1L
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
JIABS VOL. 10 NO.2
Isems-nyid spros-dang-bml-ba-Ial izhe- 'dod rang-don gzhi-med-pasl
Ismon-pa byang-sems de-ru rdzogsl [30b4]
Ithams-cad 'khrul-bar go-ba-yisl Idmigs-pa-med-pa'i snying-rje shari
Igzhan-don lhun-gyis grub-pa-yisl l'jug-pa'i byang-sems de-ru rdzogsl
Isems-nyid bar-snang lta-bu-Ial I'dzin-chags bdud-dang-bml-bas-nal
pha-rol-phyin-pa rdzogsl Imtshan-ma'i dri-ma dag-pas-nal
Itshul-khrims pha-rol-phyin-pa rdzogsl
Istong-pa-nyid-Ia mi shag cingl Ikhong-khro'i sa-bon bcom-pas-nal
Ibzod-pa'i pha-rol-phyin-pa rdzogsl Irig-stong rgyun-chad-med-pa'i phyir'
Ibrtson-'grus pha-rol-phyin-pa rdzogsl [31a1]
Irtse-gcig ye-nas lhun-grub-pasl Ibsain-gtan pha-rol-phyin-pa rdzogsl
!log-rtog mtshan-ma mng-grol-basl Ishes-mb pha-rol-phyin-pa rdzogsl
Icir snang grogs-su shar-ba-yisl Ithabs-chen bsod-nams tshogs-chen rdzogsl ;
Ignyis-su med-pa'i don rtogs-pasl lye-shes tshogs-chen de-ru rdzogsl'
Isems-nyid bar-snang lta-bu lal Ilus-kyi dri-ma gtan-med-pasl
Ibum-pa'i dbang-chen de-ru rdzogsl Ingag-gi dri-ma ye-dag-pasl
Igsang-ba'i dbang-chen de-ru rdzogsl
Iyid-kyi dri-ma'i gnas-med-pasl Ishes-rab ye-shes de-ru rdzogsl
Icha mnyam dri-ma'i gnas-med-pasl Ibzhi-pa'i dbang-mchog de ru-rdzogsl
lrang-rig rang-gsa I go-ma- 'gagsl Isku mdog phyag-mtshan cir yang snangl
Ibskyed-rim mtha'-dag de-ru rdzogsl Igsal-ba'i ngos-bzung med-pa-yisl
Irdzogs-pa'i rim-pa de-ru rdzogsl [31 a6]
lrang-sems od-gsal gnyis-su medl !lhag-gis rtogs-pas mthong-ba'i laml,
Irgyun-chad-med-pa bsgom-pa'i laml I'bad-rtsol-med-pa mthar-phyin-Iamt';
Igang yang 'gag-med drod-rtags mchogl Isa-Iam drod rtags de-ru rdzogsl
Ici yang ma-yin chos-kyi skul Ici yang snang-ba sprul-pa'i skul
/Cir snang chos-skur longs-spyod-pasl I'bras-bu sku-gsum de-ru rdzogs
lrang-rig bar-snang lta-bu-Ial Iphyogs-ris-med-pas lta-ba rdzogsl .
Idmigs-zhen-med-pas bsgom-pa rdzogsl Iblang-dor-med-pas spyod-pardzogsl;
Inyams-pa-med-pas dam-tshig rdzogsl Ilhun-gyis grub-pas 'bras-bu rdzogsl.
Isems-nyid od-gsal stong-pa-Ial /snga phyi dUs-gsum phyogs-cha-medl ..
Iji-srid bdag 'dzin yod-kyi barl !lta-sgom-spyod-'bras-dam-tshig yodl
lIas dang las-kyi rnam-smin yodl Isdig spangs bsod-nams bsags-pa geesl
Idkar-po gcig-thub-tu bstan-pa'i le'u bcu-gnyis-pa'oll
We see that almost the entire chapter is taken up with various statements
about how the three jewels, the six paramitas and other aspects of the Buddhist
path are complete when various conditions are satisfied: the whole subject of
the chapter is not going beyond this completeness. Zhang Tshal-pa makes this
point even more explicit in an earlier passage (26a6):
Idbyings-Ias mi-'da' don rtogs nasi Ibsrung du med-de dam-tshig mchogl
Idkar-po chig-thub bya-ba yinl . ..
::,U_Ia_rni-byed-pa'i chos-skoT n!i-shu-rtsa-lnl!a, S33b2 (cf., also Pl6a).
for the works (gSan-Ylg 58bl) are m square brackets. For further mfor-
see his bsTan-bsgyur dKar-chag, 48bl-49a6. The detailed correspon-
the various listings is not always obvious, and they all seem to
J,"'ntain various lacunae. From the Zhwa-lu bstan-bsgyur the amanasikara works
into all the other editions of the bstan-bsgyur. Information from
catalogue is recorded in curly brackets { }. Most of these works
.lin:available in Sanskrit .in the AdvayavajrasaTIJgraha; Sanskrit titles in round
'bfa,ckets ( ) are from thIS source. The order and numbering and the very
;,l!Iformative headings given here are those of Padma dKar-po. Bu-ston's titles
information not given in the later catalogues; evidently his classifica-
'ticin
was
based on slightly different principles from Padma dKar-po's.
i<, According to Bu-ston, the works are all by Maitripa (dKar-chag 48b5-6;
iJisdn-yig 58b6); "Maitripa," and "Advayavajra" are names for
person (dKaT-chag, lbld.). Both Bu-ston and Padma dKar-po record
'thatBu-ston learnt this cycle of works from 'Phags-od Yon-tan rGya-mtsho,
.11Sfavourite teacher, from whom he learnt the Paiicakrama and many other
Ifxc1es.
1. thun-mong grub-mtha bstan-pa rin-po-che'i 'Phreng-ba (tattva-ratnavalZ)
[thung-mong-gi lta-ba ston-pa rin-po-che'i phreng-baJ {2240}
2. de'i don sngags dang sbyar-ba do-ha-di {dohanidhi-nama-tattvopadesa
2247}
[thun"mong dang sngagsston-pa do-ha-tiJ
3. rtsod-spong yid-la mi-byed-par bstan-pa'am bdag-med gsal-ba
[sgra-la skyon spong-ba yid-la mi-byed-pa ston-paJ {2249}
( amanasikiiradhiira)
khyad-du (?) gsod-pa bzlog-pa'iphyir lta-ba ngan-sel [-lar
7
lta-ba ngan-sel-gyi dran-pa 2231}
[lta-ba ngan-sel-gyi dka'-'grel dran-pa, dKar-chag 47b2]
las dang-po-pa'i bya-ba mdor-bsdus (kudn(i-nirghiitadhikarma)
[las dang-po-pa'i bya-ba ston-pa lta-ba ngan-sel] {2229}
,.ne'af!S-La<m dbang-dang-'brel-bar bstan-pa-la
7. dbang nges-bstan
[dbang bzang-ngan 'byed-pa dbang nges-bstanJ {sekanirdefa, 2252}
8. dgos-pa mdor-bsdus (sekatanvaya-saTIJgraha)
[dbang-gi dgos-pa mdor-bsdus-paJ {2243}
56 JIABSVOL. 10 NO.2
9. dbang-gi pra-khrid (sic) 'ami bya-ba mdor-bsdus
{dbang-gi lag-len ston-pa dbang-gi prakr:ta (sic)] {2244}
10. dbang rnam-dag (panciikiirah) {2245}
{chos thams-cad rnam-dag-gi don ston-pa rang-bzhin lnga-pa]
rgyas gdab-kyi don-la
11. phyag-rgya lnga-pa (panca-mudrii-viviirafJa) {2242}
{lha'i rnal-'byor-sogs ston-pa de'bzhin-gshegs-pa'i phyag-rgya lnga_paJ
12. dga' bcug lnga-pa (premapancaka?) {2246?} ...
{snang-stong dbyer-med ston-pa dga'-gcugs lnga-pa]
13. mi-phyed lnga-pa (nirbheda-pancaka) {2238}
{sangs-rgyas sems-can dbyer-med-du ston-pa mi-phyed lnga-pa]
zung-' Jug de-nyid lta-ba shan-'byed-pa-la
14. dbu-ma drug-pa
{sngags-kyi lta-ba ston-pa dbu-ma drug-pal {2230}
15. lhan-skyes drug-pa {spyod-pa ston-pa lhan-skyes drug-pal
2232} (in ADVS but untitled)
lta-ba de dang-ldan-pa'i zung-'Jug bshad-pa-la
16. theg-chen nyi-shu-pa (mahiiyiina-vin:tSika) {2248}
{gang-zag gsum-gyi sgom-thabs ston-pa theg-chen nyi-shu-pa]
17. de-nyid nyi-shu-pa (tattvavin:tSika)
{sku-gsum ston-pa de-kho-na nyi-shu-pa] {2250}
rab-tu mi-gnas-pa ston-pa-la
18. bde-chen gsal-ba (mahiisukhaprakiiSa) {2239}
{bskyed rdzogs tha-mi-dad-du ston-pa bde-chen gsal-ba]
19. zung-Jug nges-bstan (yuganaddhaprakasa) {2237}
{thabs-shes-rab dbyer-med ston-pa zung-Jug gsal-ba]
lta-ba'i go-rim dpe dang sbyar-ba-la
20. rmi-lam nges-bstan (svapnanirukti)
[lta-ba dpes bstan-pa rmi-lam nges-bstan] {2233}
21. sgyu-ma nges-bstan (miiyiinirukti)
[spyod-pa dpes bstan-pa sgyu-ma nges-bstan] {2234}
zab-don bsdu-ba-la
22. de-nyid bcu-pa (tattvadasaka) {2236}
[spyod-pa'i don gtan-la dbab-pa de-kho-na-nyid bcu-pa]
23. de-nyid rab-tu bstan-pa (tattvaprakasa) {2241},
[gang-zag gsum-gyi rtogs thabs ston-pa de-kho-na-nyid rab-tu bstan-paJ
zab-mo'i khyad-par phra-mo ston-pa-la
THE WHITE PANACEA
24. rab-tu mi-gnas-par gsal-bar ston-pa (aprat4WinaprakiiSa) {2235}
[lta-ba'i don gtan-la 'bebs-pa rab-tu mi-gnas-par ston-paJ
'25. mi-rtogs-pa rtogs-par-byed-pa 88
57
dKar-po then goes on to mention other verse works by Maitripa, the
by Saroruha and other secondary works. These works were all
by Maitrlpa (S34a2) to Vajrapal).i, Ti-phu, and Mar-pa (separately);
dKar-po gives lineages descending independently from eaCh of these
(and at 34b2 he forgets to mention that Ras-chung learnt the cycle froin
Bu-ston gives only the Ti-phu/ Ras-chung lineage (gSan-yig 57b4).
list of books not the lineage information) is also found in
dKar-po there sketches three different conceptions of amanasikara.
it can be the denial that there is any abiding-place or foundation (gnas
rten-gzhi) for the object of perception. This view is based on the
1fl.'I"I,aa,'va. Though it is perfectly adequate as a conception of samathii, for
person (Padma dKar-po says, Ila2), at the present level it is just
to be rejected. Second, amanasikara can be a quite general repudiation
events and mentation as cittabhisa1lJ.Skara-manaskara (sems-byung sems-
sems mngon-par-'du-byed-pa'i las-te, etc.); this view is said to be
on the Hevajra-tantra, though the lines quoted by Padma dKar-po are
the present form of that tantra. This second notion of amanasikiira seems
to the quietism attacked by Sa-skya Pal).c;iita. According to Padma
(K4al), Sa-skya Pal).c;iita has confused the limited application of the
at an elementary level with a quietism of the second form. In any
for more advanced persons, both these forms are rejected by Padma
The third form of amanasikara accepts, appropriate mental activity
yid-la byed-pa) , namely that where the initial A (of amanasikara)
for "unoriginatedness" skye-ba-med-pa'i don-du byas-te . .. ). This
found in the Maiijufrf-nama-sarigiti and its great commentary. (Padma
quotes a siltra and a tantra explanation from this commentary, em-
the Indian origin of the view that mahamudra is found in both siltraS
. This is the version of the amanasikara doctrine found in the works
and accepted by .the bKa' -brgyud-pas. Of course it remains to be
what constitutes appropriate mental activity. Padma dKar-po's views
have been set out in [B85].
, Accordingly, we see that most of the sources for Maitripa's amanasikara
and most of his works on it clearly belong to the vajrayana. N everthe-
basic notion seems to be applicable both to the hetuyana and to the
first chapter of the Phyag-chen gan-mdzod (P) contains an extremely
account of all the main sources of the mahamudra doctrine, accord-
to the traditions drawn upon by Padma dKar-po. A translation of this
and indeed of the whole work, would be a great step forward for
studies. Much of the material presented is quite different from that
in sGam-po-pa bKra-shis-rnam-rgyal's Phyag-chen zla-zer, of which a
u'o,,,.uuu was recently published. Valuable though it is, the Zla-zer is merely
of aphorisms and man-ngag. The Gan-mdzod is a work of re-
that is, it provides an articulated structure, within which the
. of traditional details can be seen as intelligibly ordered.
58
JIABS VOL. 10 NO.2
APPENDIXC
Amanasikiira in the Siitras
Padm'1- dKar-po on ch.6 of the Abhisamayalarikara: A, I58a-I59a. The passa ....
a6 suggests that even here in the sutras he has the Maitripa notion of
kara in mind (see Appendix B). 1-
I58a!: Iiskyabs drug-pa ni . . .[phar-phyin drug dang] sangs-rgyas rjes-su dran-pa'
mthar-gyis-pa'i mngon-rtogs-sogs-pal chosl dge-'dunl tshul-khrims gtong-bal lha rjes-s I
dran-pa'i mthar-gyis-pa'i mngon-rtogs drug. . . u
a6: I'dir bstan rjes-su-dran-pa'i don nil chos thams-cad dngos-po-med-pa'i ngo-bo-nyid:
du yid-la-byed-pas dran-pa-med cing yid-Ia-byed-pa-med-pa ste! yid-Ia mi-byed-pa'i
sgra amanasikaral A yang-dag-pa 'i don-du-byas-nas yang-dag-pa yid-Ia-byed-pa dangl
A dgag tshig-tu byas-nas yid-Ia-mi-byed-pa zhes bya'ol ........
bI: /chos thans-cad dngos-po-med-pa'i ngo-bo-nyid-du yid-Ia-byed-pa des de-bzhin!
gshegs-pa-Ia gzugs-sogs-su yid-Ia-mi-byed-pa dangl mtshan dang dpe-byad-Ia-sogs-pa;,
tshul-khrims-kyi phung-po-sogs-sul stobs-bcu-sogs-sul
yid-Ia-mi-byed-pas sangs-rgyas rjes-su dran-pa rnam-pa lnga dran-pa nyer-bar-bzhag;
pa-sogsl Ibyang-chub yan-lagl 'Phags-lam brgyad-pa-rnams-kyi sgom-pa rim-pa-bzhin
mos spyod mthong bsgom-du'ol
b3: Ide-bzhin dge-mi-dge lung-ma-bstan yid-la-mi-byed-pas chos-kyi gsum (sic)
bzhin skyes-bu zung bzhir phye-ba'i phyir mi-ldog-pa yid-la-mi-byed-pa dge-'dun-gyii
sems dang-po bskyed-pa-nas gzung-ste ma-nyams-pal skyon-med-pal ma-'dres-pal nag:'
nog-med-pal mchog-tu-'dzin-pa med-pal dbang- 'byor-bal mkhas-pas bsngags-pal shin;iu
rdzogs-pal ting-nge- 'dzin sgrub-par-byed-pa'i tshul-khrims-pa gnas-tel de-dag
mi-byed-pa tshul-khrims-kyil chos dang zang-zing gtong-ba'il 'dod;
pa'i lha rigs drug-tu skye-ba'i rgyun zhugs phyir ongl gzugs dang gzugs-med-pa ni
spyod-pa'i phyir-mi-ong-ba yid-la-mi-byed-pa lha'il mdo-sde-gzhan-las lha'i rigs
rjes-su drang-par bya-stel dga'-ldan-pa dang gnas-gtsang-ma-pa'ol"
APPENDIXD
The Moment of Abhisambodhi in the Sutras
Padma dKar-po on ch. 7 of the Abhisamayalankara: A, 159a-160b.
159a4: Iiskabs bdun-pa-la bzhi lasl dang-po rnam-par-smin-pa ma-yin-pa'i zag-pa-/
med-pa'i chos thams-cad skad-cig-ma gcig-Ia mngon-par rtogs-pa nil chos-kyi
rang-gi ngo-borl . . ...
THE WHITE PANACEA
dngos gcig dngos-po kun-gyi ngo-bo-nyidl
Idngos kun dngos-po-gcig-gi ngo-bo-nyidl
Igang-gi dngos-gcig de-bzhin-nyid mthong-bal
Ide yi dngos kun de-bzhin-nyid-du mthongl
59
phyir mang-po gcig-tu sdud-par ma-zad-kyil sbyin-pa-la sogs-pa'i
t" cshes dmigs-par-bya-ba't skad-cig re-res kyang dngos-po so-sor nges-par 'dzin-te phyin-
(159b) dngos-po sbyin-sogs-nas dpe-byad bzang-mo'i bar thams-
" CI '
I!Jcati-kyi zag-pa-med-pa'i bsdus-pa'i phyir thub-pa byang-chub-
;sems-dpa'i skad-ctg-ma gctg-pa-yt mngon-par-rdzogs-par byang-chub-pa'i rtogs-pa 'di
-par -bya' 01
"i59b2: lji-ltar zag-pa-med-pa'i chos-gcig-la dmigs-pa'i bsgom-pa-la zhugs-pa-na zag-
chos-thams-cad sdud-par nus zhe-nal don 'di-la 'jig-rten-pa'i dpes bstan-
ji-ltar skyes-bus sngon bzo-bo zo chun-gyi rrpud thams-
ll'cad rdog stabs getg-gts bskyed-pa-thams-cad ag-car gul-ba ltar! sngon-gyt smon-lam-
'gyis 'phen-pa dang/ chos-kyi dbyings-kyi mthus skad-cig-ma gcig kho-na-la zag-pa-med-
Ypa'i ye-shes-su dmtgs-na ngs-mthun-pa thams-cad shes-pa de-bzhin-nol

';i159b4: Ignyis-pa rnam-par-smin-pa'i zag-pa-med-pa'i chos-thams-cad skadccig-ma
\Igcig-
la
mngon-par rtogs-pa nil de'i rjes gang-gi tshel skyes-pa.: mi-mthun-pa'i
;,:phyogs-thams-cad-dang-bral-bas-na rnam-par-byang-ba t phyogs-kyt chos-dkar-po-
ii'hams-cad-kyi rang-bzhin shes-rab-kyi pha-rol-tu-phyin-pa rnam-par-smin-pa chos-
gnas-skabs-su de'i tshe skad-cig-ma gcig-la mngon-par-rtogs-par
lJyang-chub zhes-bya-ba t ye-shes-sol
Ii) "
;Ygsum-pa mtshan-nyid-med-pa'i chos-thams-cad skad-cig-ma gcig-la mngon-par rtogs-
nil de'i og-tu sbyin-pa-la-sogs-pa'i spyod-pa-yis gnas-skabs-na rmi-lam-lta-bur
;;phitng-po-lnga'i chos-kun-la nye-bar-gnas-nas rmi-lam 'drar rtogs-nas kun-nas nyon-
dang rnam-par-byang-ba'i ngo-bo'i chos-rnams mtshan-nyid-med-pa-nyid-du
1skad-cig-ma ni gcig-gis rtogs-pa'ol
'NC;/;
:;j60a2: /bzhi-pa gnyis-su-med-pa'i mtshan-nyid-du chos-thams-cad skad-cig gcig-la
,;:(sic) mngon-par-rtogs-pa nil de'i og-tu yun-ring-mo-nas bar-chad-med-par gnyis-su
Ishang-ba spang-ba-la goms-pa dbang-du-gyur-pas gnyis-su snang-ba'i bag-chags
:4rungs-phyung-ba'i byang-sems-kyi rmi-lam dang ni de mthong-ba-nyid gnyis-kyi tshul-
i'lumi-mthong-ba ltar! chos-rnams gzung-ba dang 'dzin-pa gnyis-su-med-pa de-ltar-bu-
iyi chos-nyid yin-no, zhes chos-thams-cad-kyi de-nyid skad-cig-ma gcig-gis mthong-ba
'Sllad-cig-ma gcig-gis mngon-par-rdzogs-par byang-chub-pa yin-nol
mngon-par-rdzogs-par byang-chub-pa'i skabs-te bdun-pa'oll
60
]IABSVOL.IONO.2
APPENmXE
Structure of the Phyag-chen gan-mdzod
rjod-byed tshig-gi phyag-rgya chen-po-la gnyis
gzhung p h y a g ~ r g y a chen-po'i rab-dbye-la gsum
bshad-bya tshig-gi skor-la gsum
grub-sde bdun, 4a2 (Jiiiinasiddhi, etc.)
snying-po skor-drug, 12a3 (Saraha Doha, etc.)
yid-la mi-byed-pa'i chos-skor nyi-shu-rtsa-lnga, 16a3 [See Appendix B]
gdams-ngag nyams-len-gyi skor, 19a2
rtogs-pa byin-rlabs-kyi skor, 19b5
lhan-cig skyes-sbyor gtso-bor 'don-pa'i rgyu-mtshan, 21 b3
brjod-bya don-gyi phyag-rgya chen-po-la gnyis
bshad-bya phyag-rgya chen-po-la gnyis
gzhan-gyi phyin-ci log-tu bshad-tshul, 26a6
ma-nor-ba bka'-brgyud-pas bstan-tshul-la bzhi
phyag-rgya [bzhi'i] mam-grangs-las gang yin-pa, 29a3
phyag-chen de rang-gi ngo-bo ci-lta-bu yin-pa, 32a2
nges-tshig mdo-rgyud gnyis-kar bstan-tshul, 35a6
de dkar-po chig-thub-tu 'gro-ba'i gnad bshad-pa, 40b3 [see Section 3]
'chad-byed bla-ma'i man-ngag-la gsum
lhan-cig skyes-sbyor-gyi don dang tha-snyadbshad-pa, 47a5
de gtan-la gang-du phab-na rtogs myur-ba'i gnad bshad-pa, 77a2
ji-ltar gtan-la 'bebs-pa'i tshul zhib-mor bshad-pa-la gsum
sems-nyid lhan-cig skyes-pa chos-sku'i gnad-kyis lta-ba gtan-la dbab-pa-la gnyis
gnas-lugs phyag-rgya chen-po bshad-pa, 84a6
'khrul-lugs phyag-rgya chen-po bshad-pa, 84b6
snang-ba lhan-skyes chos-sku'i od-kyi gnad-kyis sgom-pa nyams-su blang-ba-la gsu1it
[cig-car-ba, 96b5]
thod-rgal-ba [mal-'byor bzhi 'gros-te], 102b5
rim-gyis-pa'i lam, 123M
snang-sems dbyer-med lhan-skyes-kyi gnad-kyis 'bras-bu mthar-phyin bya-ba, 153a5
rtsod-pa spang-ba-la gnyis
dngos-su rtsod-pa, 162M [see Section 2]
sgyu-thabs-kyis rtsod-pa'i lan, 172a2
BIBLIOGRAPHY
ADVS: Advayavajrasa7IJgraha (GOS)
HT: Hevajra-tantra (ed. Snellgrove)
KT: Kalacakratantra (ed. Lokesh Chandra)
- .-,
Works by sGam-po-pa bSod-nams Rin-chen (rtsib-ri spar-ma, vol. nga),
DS: Duscgsum mkhyen-pa'i zhus-lan
PG: Phag-gru'i zhus-lan
GT: sGom-tshul zhus-lan
THE WHITE PANACEA
Works by Sa-skya PaI).<;iita (Sa-skya bka'-'bum)
;DS:sDorn-gsum rab-dbye
TG: Thub-dgong
s
rab-gsal
Works by Bu-ston (IRa-sa ed.)
o .
bKa'-drin rjes-su .dran-par 'i gsan-yig
ike: bsTan-bsgyur-gyz dkar-chag yzd-bzhzn nor-bu dbang-gi rgyal-po'i phreng-ba
Works by Padma dKar-po (gsung-'bum, gNam-'brug sPar-rna ed.)
!,'\
i: rnNgon-par rtogs-pa'i rgyan-gyi 'grel-pa rje btsun byams-pa'i zhal-lung
C:Chos-'byung bstan-pa'i padma rgyas-pa'i nyin-byed
G:dBu-rna gzhung-lugs-gsum gsal-bar byed-pa'i nges-don grub-pa'i shing-rta
&:Klan-ka gzhom-pa'i gtam
M: dGe-bshes mar-yul-pa'i dris-lan legs-par bshad-pa'i gzhi
NR: Ngam-ring mkhan-po'i brgal-lan
'Nr: rNam-rtog chos-sku'i dris-lan snying-po'i don-gsal
1': Phyag-rgya chen-po man-ngag-gi bshad-sbyar rgyal-ba'i gan-mdzod
PI,;: Phyag-rgya chen-po lnga-ldan-gyi khrid-dmigs yid-kyi snye-ma
iz: Phypg-chen zin-bris
'S:bKa-'brgyud-kyi bka'-'bum gsil-bu-rnams-kyi gsan-yig
1': sKyid-shod stag-lung-ma'i zhus-lan
61
'ZG; Jo-bo Niiropa'i khyad-chos bsre-'pho'i gzhung-'grel rdo-rje 'chang-gi dgongs-pa
:gsgl"bar byed-pa
;NC: Chos-'byung me-tog snying-po'i sbrang-rtsi'i bcud or Nyang-ral Chos-'byung by
Nyang-ral Nyi-ma;i Od-zer (see [K86] for details)
tr: Phyag-chen lam-mchog-gi mthar-thug by Zhang Tshal-pa, see Appendix A
Phyag-chen lhan-cig skyes-sbyor dngos-gzhi 'i khrid-yig cung-zad spros-pa sems-
kyirdo-rje'i nges-gnas gsal-bar byed-pa by 'Jam-dpal dPa'-bo (rTsib-ri sPar-rna
kitanya)
tB79] M. M. Broido, "The term dngos-po'i gnas-Iugs in Padma dKar-po's
'Hgzhung-'grel" in Tibetan Studies in Honour of Hugh Richardson: Proceedings
'\",of the 1979 Oxford Conference on Tibetan Studies; ed. Aris and Kyi
(Oxford: 1 979) 59-66.
[:884] M. M. Broido, "Padma dKar-po on Tantra as Path and Goal,"
Tib. Soc. 4 (l984) 5-46.
[B85] M. M. Broido, "Padma dKar-po on the two Satyas," ]IABS 8,2 (l985)
!. 7-59.
[BR83] ]. Broughton, "Early Ch'an Schools in Tibet," in [GG83].
[GG83] R. Gimello and P. Gregory (eds.) Studies in Ch 'an and Hua-yen, Kuroda
Institute Studies in East Asian Buddhism No. 1.
(?83] L. O. Gomez, "The Direct and Gradual Approaches of Zen Master
,,', Mahayana: Fragments of the Teachings of Mo-ho-yen" (in [GG83]).
[G67] H.V. Guenther, Tibetan Buddhism in Western Perspective (Emeryville:
1977).
62
JIABS VOL. 10 NO.2
[GN] H.V. Guenther, Yuganaddha (np., nd.).;
[HB85] A. W. Hanson-Barber, "'No Thought' in Paa Tang Ch'an and Earl;
Ati-Yoga," JIABS 8 (1985) 61-73.
Y
,
U82] R. J acksan, "Sa-skya Pal)Q.ita's Account of the bSam-yas Debate: Risto'
as Polemic," JIABS 5,2 (1982) 89. rx,
[K86] L. vander Kuijp, "On the Sources for Sa-skya Pal)Q.ita's notes on thf
'bSam-yas debate,'" JIABS 9,2 (1986)147-53.
[YS83] Yanagida Seizan, "The Li Tai Fa Pao Chi," in Early Ch'an in Ch'/
Ina
and Tibet (Berkeley: 1983).
NOTES
*Research supported in part by the Spalding Trust.
1. PG 4b2.
2. T 22b5.
3. Sa-skya Pal)Q.ita has also identified the White Panacea (dkar-po chjg._i
thub) with Chinese doctrine in the Thub-dgongs rab-gsal. I shall make lesslls'{
of this source, though Padma dKar-po has discussed some points from itir?
his gzho,"!-pa'i gta.m. Sa-skya Pal)Q.i,ta's attacks on Chinese (rgya-nagi
i
;
BuddhIsm are dIscussed III Roger Jackson s useful U82). The section
Thub-dgongs rab-gsal most relevant to the present paper follows
on the section translated by Jackson, and is called "The Non-Buddhist tradition';
which follows them" (i.e., the Chinese: de'i rjes-su 'brang-ba phyi-rabs-pa'i
As this section title suggests, Sa-skya Pal)Q.ita there tries to make it appdi
i
;
that his Tibetan opponents are not really Buddhists at all. Throughout
part of the Thub-dgongs rab-gsal, there is a repeated, slogan-like
of the dkar-po chig-thub with Chinese Buddhism (e.g., 'di rgya-nag-gi
chig-thub-kyi rjes-su 'brang-ba yin-gyi sangs-rgyas-kyis gsungs-pa'i phyag-rgya chen,'h:
i
ma-yin-te, 50a5; ... rgya-nagmkhan-po'i dkar-po chig-thub dangkhyad-parcung-ziJ.p
med-pa, 51a3). As in the sDom-gsum rab-dbye, so also here Sa skya Pal)Q.ita
no attempt to state what he understands by dkar-po
4. See Appendix A.' \"Ij\
5. There is also a considerable literature on the possibility that
shang Mo-ho-yen may have belonged to the Pao Tang school of
[HB85] and [BR83). These works give relevant references to the bKa'-th.an,g'.
sde-lnga. Yanagida Seizan has shown [YS83 30-32] that Tsung-mi and
have criticized this school along lines broadly comparable with the
of Mo-ho-yen which are conventional in Tibet. :t!:ii
6. See Appendix B.
7. Padma dKar-po sets out the Indian sources for the three personalifX:;
types cig-car-ba, thod-rgal-ba and rim-gyis-pa in some detail in P (4a2 f.).
sources are all vajrayana works,
(a) cig-car-ba: Guhyasiddhi, ch. 1; Jnanasiddhi ch. 18;
Tattvasiddhi (Kyeralipa); King Do-has;
(b) thod-rgal-ba: Guhyasiddhi, ch. 3; Prajnopayaviniscayasiddhi, ch.
Jnanasiddhi ch. 19; Queen Dohas; rTse-mo Dohas; iii.'

,-/'
THE WHITE PANACEA
?uhfyasiddhi, ch. 4; Jiianasiddhi ch. 20; People Dohas.
Ii:;,:, the postscnpt or further comments on these sources.
63
I,' ,See - d' P d dK . .
In the hetuyana, accor mg to a rna ar-po, there IS the ordmary prog-
through, the bodhisat:va-Ievels and paths, and the usual instantaneous
'l:fwhisambodhz. See D. . '. .
i:l:\,> 8. See [B85], whIch also con tams a faIrly detaIled account of the czg-car-
distinction, a.s used by Padma
9. PG 4b2 (see the mtroductory quotatIOn); DK Ib2.
10. See [B85], p. 16 note _46. Padma dKar-po th: use of
',thi:,word mudra (phyag-rgya) m the sutras at P 35a, but the Issue here IS not so
whether the word mahiimudrii appears in the siltras or not but whether
'F()al-attainment in siltras and tantras is the same.
11. See also Appendix D, where this point is taken explicitly (from the
;1'dbhisambodhi chapter of the Abhisamayiila7ikiira). ,
;1;';:, ',,12. For sGam-po-pa and Padma dKar-po on view (lta-ba), cultivation (of
(sgom-pa), action (spyod-pa) and goal (,bras-bu) , see [B85].
!:;::> 13. As usual, the vajrayiina involves abh4eka and the upiiya-miirga, the
does not. See also note 9.
14. The repudiation of the idea of the dharmakiiya as the origin of dharmas
j;in':a causal sense is a central theme of Maitripa's form of the amanasikiira
;:aoctrine, according to Padma dKar-po. See Appendix B, That causal concep-
i11iorileads to a mentalism which is contrary to the madhyamaka.
lOY! , 15. See [B85] and also [B84].
15a. See P. F. Strawson, Individuals (Methuen 1959) on sortal and charac-
universals (pp. 168-172), and on feature-universals (p. 202). In [B 79, ,
these are ap.plied to the two satyas, to mahiimudrii and to
vaJrayiina notIOns, as dIscussed by Padma dKar-po at ZG 14bl and
Here in the last paragraph of p. 63 the words "and sems is a
should be struck out. Padma dKar-po's discussion is based
!prt'the parallel between the two satyas and a flower (sortal) and its perfume
'(feature) (HT II.ii.35-36), and on the connection mahiimudriilparamiirtha-satyal
dngos-po'i gnas-lugs. For a more detailed discussion see my "The Simile
and its Perfume," to appear.
See [B85] again. Nineteenth century gzhan-stong-pas such as Kong-
zsprulabandoned this view of Shes-rab rGyal-mtshan's. They used dbu-ma
(Great Madhyamaka) for an experience-oriented madhyamaka, in which
is identified with the radiant light, in contrast to a mere
and while gzhan-stong is still retained to describe the fact that the
:,firdiant light is not merely a great blankness and so on, the correlation of
}zhan-stonglrang-stong with the two satyas is dropped, and so they were able to
a notion of integration (zung-'jug) very similar to that of Padma dKar-po.
1(:, 17. A similar use of gcig dang du bral and similar phrases is very common
writings, especially those of Klong-chen-pa.
iI'{;t 18. See PL. '
19. lNga-ldan-gyi khrid-yig Si-tu chos-kyi 'byung-gnas-kyis mdmd-pa, 6 ff.
ngag mdzod vol. 9).
Phag-mo Gru-pa told sGam-po-pa that Sa-chen had recognised him
:,ashaving attained the signs of heat characterising the darsanamiirga. (As this

anecdote is recorded in the Phag-gru'i zhus-lan, sGam-po-pa pretends not"!
believe him.) It is interesting to consider Sa-skya Pat:J.Q.ita's criticisms
bKa'-brgyud-pa view of the relation between the darsanamiirga follow'}';
abh4eka and that following the laukikiigradharma (DR 54ab) in [he light of
well-known story. ':
21. SY 460; the transmission from Sa-chen to Phag-mo Gru-pa is
corded explicitly there, as well as being the subject of various
the Phag-gru'i zhus-lan and elsewhere. . n:
22. On Sa-chen Kun-dga' sNying-po's to meet Phag-rno';;
Gru-pa after the death of sGam-po-pa, see Padma dKar-po s Chos-'byung 271';:'
de-nas yar byon-te thugs-la bla-ma Sa-skya-pa chen-po de chos dri-ba-la dgyes-pas
nga la (?) bshod rgyu thogs-pa-med snyam byon/ de res dri-ba tsam yang mi-mdzad-par"
spyan rtsa 'gyur 'dug-pas/ bla-ma de myur 'grongs-par mkhyen/ ... This incident is:'
recorded too in the Blue Annals and in some of the hagiographies
Gru-pa.:
23. The political prominence of the Phag-mo-gru-pas and the threat;
whic.h later represente.d to the. Sa-skya paramount.cy did not .exist
the lIfetIme of Sa-skya PalJQ.Ita, and m any case had nothmg to do wIth Phagcllloi
Gru-pa rDo-rje rGyal-po himself.
24. P 161M, DR 51a4:
de-lta'i phyag-rgya chen-po dangllrgya-nag lugs-kyi rdzogs-chen-lal
Iyas 'bab dang ni mas 'dzag gnyisllrim-gyis-pa dang cig-car-ball
Iming 'dogs bsgyur-ba ma-gtogs-pal/don-la khyad-par dbye-ba medl etc.
The terms yas"'bab and mas-'dzag are connected with the heat practices (gtum:Tljo:'
ca'fJdiili) of the sampannakrama (cf. also note 20). . '.,
25. P 162a6.
26. P 163b3.
27. P ibid.
28. lhas-sras kyang dges-so, ibid. b5.
29. ibid.
30. rigs-pa dang-lung-gis cig-car-ba bkag ste/ Hva-shang slob-ma-dang-bcas-pai
spos-pa-med-par byas/ me-tog-gi 'phreng-ba yang slob-dpon Kamala-la phul-lo/, ibid}
164a2."
31. Even for KamalasHa, as in the second Bhiivaniikrama, P 164b5.';
32. Phyag-chen zin-bris 4al ff. and 'Jam-dpal dPa'-bo on it. See also
pendix B. - :;;
33. P 26ab & C.,2
1
34. P 165f1. Another ve.rsion of the argument that if the Hva-shang;
method had been rdzogs-chen, it could not have been refuted by the typeot:
argument used by KamalasHa, is given by Padma dKar-po at M 16a2. '
35. P 165bl-168a2.
36. See [B85].!;
37. P 168b6. '0 :
38. On the basis of the materials provided by Gomez, it is not reallr;:
clear whether, in the Tibetan sense, the Ho-shang held that everybody
" "1;

,"',j'
j{>!'
THE WHITE PANACEA
65
1':Z;;i -ba or not. He does seem to have thought that everybody would eventually
practice the sudden method, but at least in the more moderate Tibetan
he concedes that this is not appropriate for everyone in the condition
b"'IiadUally are now.
P 169a3 ff.
ttft't(40. rphyag-rgya chen-po] de chig-thub 'gro-ba'i gnad (as the section
;!t;'ding): P43b-50a. cf. AppendIx E.
,;fiea. . b' 'd b f d I T'b
;;2<,1"41. Similar 0 servatIOns are sal to e oun In other ear y I etan
on the Hevajra-tantra, such as the Rin-chen rgyan-'dra' (by rNog
and the yanfdag-pa:! tshad-ma (by rNgog .
The ambIgUIty of dharma here can cause confusIOn. A Madhyamlka
;:;i,:ilItake it in a linguistic sense, as a property ascribed to something, as in
Taking it as a separate item, as in the Abhidharma, leads to mentalism;
;':hile the early bKa'-brgyud-pas probably were not mentalists (sGam-po-pa
not), the way they expressed their views can encourage this confusion.
j'skIlote 14. .
::/:<43. I.e. from mahiimudrii.
'rl',;' 44. phyag-rgya chen-po'i gnyis-su med-pa'i sbyor-ba (*mahiimudrii-advayayoga).
rang-bzhin-gyi rnal- 'byor (*prak,ti-yoga); the wordsrnal-'byor and sbyor-
7b4(note 44) are very similar and have more to do with inseparable union than
[!*ithWhat is generally called "yoga" in the West. That Padma dKar-po uses
in this way was first pointed out by Guenther [G67, p. 85]; see
\,'tbmments in note 76 of [B84].
DR 69al, P 45b2.
1);:1:\46. Dohakosa 43, translated [G67 p. 164]. This translation is broadly
but nothing in the texts justifies Guenther's song-and-dance about
of the particle -nyid in the Tibetan and its absence in the
even the Tibetans apparently bow down to sems as well as sems-
In,yid. .
'\';:,' 47. Dohakosa 110, very similar to an important verse in the bKa' yang-dag-
:'paXtshad-ma, and as such commented upon at length by Padma dKar-po in
;ttfl:gzhung-'grel (129a5). This verse is typical of Padma dKar-po's conception
L,Qfmahiimudrii as ground (single), path (multiple) andgoal (single). Cf. numer-
,'ousreferences in [B85] where, in discussing the difference between the sutras
ia'I1,?the tantras, he says they have the same single ground and goal but the
a great variety of paths.
Quoted also by 'Jam-dpal dPa'-bo in his PZGon PZ 4bal; the passage
iSs6inetimes said to be from the work Rin-chen Padma dKar-po.
49. The words "only one stage" (rim-pa gcig-pu) here refer to mahamudra.
;fso. KT V.62 and V.57.
;Y:'" .. S1. I.e., the single bliss of the buddhakiiya in the previous line, KT V.61d
Z(buddhasya kiiyo bhavati . .. ekasaukhya, etc.).
;':f.S2. KT 111.97-8 and especially the Vimalaprabhii on them. See my "Kill-
sir,rg,Lying, Stealing and Adultery: A Problem ofInterpretation in the Tantras,"
!;lgappear in the Proceedings of the 1984 Kuroda Institute Conference on Buddhist
:!Jf!1"rn
eneu
tics, ed. Lopez.
53. du-ma'i gar.
66 JIABSVOL.IONO.2
54. chos-kyi dbyings-la dbyer-med-phyirllgtso-bo'i theg-pa dbyer-ma-mchisl- th'
quotation is probably from the Mahiiyanasutriilarikiira. ' . IS
55. Probably different types (kula, gotra) of people.
56. Indeed, there is something pig-headed in Sa:skya PaI;lc;lita's ascriptio
of such a view, even only by implication, to the author of the dgongs_gct
doctrine; perhaps this does something to explain Padma dKar-po's impatie g
. m
dismissal of It.
57. DR 69a3, continuing the passage n. 45; P 42b6.
58. HT II.iv.29.
59. HT Lv.l1.
60. GST XVII, prose following v.51.
61. HT ILii.31.
62. is essentia:ly the of mahiimudra by
means of an mner cogmtlOn (vzdya, ng-pa). ThIS IS an Important topic which:
has been treated badly in the literature, and needs fuller treatment than is
possible here. . .
63. gshis is the capacity of things to be cognised in paramartha-satya. See
[B85].
64. gnas-lugs: literally, the way things are, but here a technical term
related to non-dual cognition [B 79].
65. P 46b1.
66. don, artha.
67. E.g., "The outsiders' method following the Chinese" (rgya-nag-
lugs . .. kyi rjes-su 'brang-ba phyi-rabs-kyi lugs, TG 50b2 ff.).
68. This will particularly apply to observations about Mo-ho-yen's views!
in contemporary Tibetan writings such as the bSam-gtan mig-sgron.::
69. However Pelliot 823 may be a translation of parts of the Cheng-liy<
chiieh: see [G83, p. 86]. In assessing the "Tibetan-language fragments" iri
contrast to the Cheng-Ii chiieh I have therefore ignored the fragments froni
Pelliot 823. .
70. Page references are to Gomez' article [G83].
71. This remark directly contradicts the .central doctrine of the bKa',;.
brgyud-pas concerning mahiimudra, viz. that, properly seen, concepts simply
the dharmakaya. See [B85a]. Padma dKar-po was often asked questions about
this doctrine, and devoted several short works to it, e.g., NT and NR. . ......
72. For Padma dKar-po, this kind of distinction between relative
absolute realms is unintelligible. The differences remain whatever they
what changes is how they are taken.
73. For Padma dKar-po, cig-car-ba and rim-gyis-pa alike need medicine;
but what is medicine for one is poison for the other.
74. For Padma dKar-po, most prthagjanas are rim-gyis-pa.
75. Padma dKar-po's attitude towards virtue is quite conventional.
cig-car-ba is what he is partly because of the previous accumulation of virtue.'
This brings us to one of the oddest features of Sa-skya PaI;lc;lita's equating of;
the bKa-'brgyud-pas with the Ch'an master Mo-ho-yen. What would be Padma:.
dKar-po's view of somebody who simply sat down and renounced concepts.
(or who renounced attachment to concepts, to bring the proposal nearer t6.
History does not record, but I suspect that such behavior would
egarded as bizarre in the extreme; partly because of the importance of
previous accurr;ulation virtue, ,and partly overriding
" ' d for the bla-ma s adhliithana. (The Brug-pas are speCIalIsts III guruyoga.)
76. [G8S], p. 114 (from Stein 709, second fragment).
77. [G83]; p. 110 (from Stein 709).
i/;.<:. 78. More accurately, what the rim-gyis-pa cannot see is the clouds as
}I;iluminated by the (i.e., th.e obscurations by own perceptions
) Ithose obscurauons). It IS perfectly possIble for a nm-gYls-pa to reach the
of insight (darsanamarga). He may, in that case, change into a cig-car-ba;
this does not normally happen-the distinction is not in principle one of
:.hsuctessive stages (gnas.-skabs, avastha). He can remain a rim-gyis-pa, proceeding
;;:throug
h
the appropnate paths (marga) and levels (bhumi). Being on the path
insight, he has that insight; but his inner nature is not such that he can use
insight to cure his own defilements, and this is why he still has to proceed
. 'through the usual stages and why he cannot be given the entire path at once.
/::'Interms of my analogy, then, a rim-gyis-pa who is not on the path of insight
not see the sun at all and has no insight of any kind. A rim-gyis-pa on
;:'the path of insight does have occasional glimpses of the sun, but they are not
ls'tifficient to illuminate the clouds (properly).
79. It is easy to get confused by the words "sudden" and Hgradual." For
';'Padma dKar-po, the cig-car-ba is a person who has moments of genuine
(like the sun shining through the clouds) and is presented with the
path in one go, as it were. Nevertheless his goal arises in stages Cbras-bu
rim-pal The rim-gyis-pa has no moments of full insight (other than
directly due to and is presented with the path in stages (see
';pteceding note) but for him goal-attainment is sudden (cf. Appendix D). Indeed,
view is mainly a matter of goal-attainment (rather than of
,i::stages of the path), then its analogy with the bKa'-brgyud-pa view is with the
!. rJl'1I:gyis-pa and not with the cig-car-ba. But I will not pursue this point, since
;}tlle whole of Sa-skya Pal).<;lita's observations then became irrelevant; for Sa-skya
has quite uncritically adopted the traditional view that ston-mun is to
identified with cig-car.
[G83] p. 117 (from Stein 709, second fragment).
k }:' 81. bcos-pa, see notes 47 and 70 to Appendix 2 of [G83]. Gomez rightly
; stresses that these works are translations from Chinese, not Sanskrit; still,
;:.kcos-pa stands, in many madhyamaka texts, for the difficult terms krtaka and
See [B8S] for Padma dKar-po on these terms. The connection of
r)hese terms with artificiality in the mahamudrii context has been made by
,;guenther [GN 101] in relation to a passage of Maitripa's amanasikiira writing
}},also quoted by Padma dKar-po (P 27b) who attributes it to the workdBang-bskur
(work 7 in Appendix B; ADVS pp. 32-3).
i,' 83. But Mo-ho-yen's next sentence goes beyond what Pad rna dKar-po
'lw,ould accept: "By cultivating the mind in this way, one awakens perfectly as
as one is free from all false concepts and all past habitual tendencies."
(;.;';1. 84. And in this respect the Dwags-po bKa'-brgyud is unlike the dGe-lugs,
trace their mahiimudrii doctrines to a vision of by Tsong-kha-

85. The tradition that sGam-po-pa was an incarnation of the bOdhisatt
Candraprabhakumara, guardian of the Samadhiraja, was so well
that in many texts "Zla-'od gZhon-nu" is used, without explanation, for sG e
po-pa rather than for the original Candraprabhakumara. am;,
86. See [HB85] for a comparison between Pao Tang Ch'an and earl:
rdzogs-chen, based on the rDo-rje sems-dpa' nam-mkha' ehe rtsa-ba'i rgyud skye}
med-pa, which concludes their incompatibility on similar grounds. a
87. Padma dKar-po lists three lta-ba ngan-sel works: thabs khyad-du gsod-/
bzlog-pa'i phyir lta-ba dang/ lta-ba ngan-se.l-gyi dran-pa dang/ las
pa'i bya-ba mdor-bsdus/ ... ; III 5 the extra work IS numbered 4, Other source'
make no reference to this third work. s,
88. This work, numbered 25 in 5, appears in all versions of Padm
dKar-po's list but does not seem to appear in the other lists.;
89. de'i ring (lho-brag mkhar-chu)-la rgya'i ha-shang Mahiiya1'}a'i slob-ma
tel Ius ngag-gi chos-spyod dge-ba-byas-pas sangs-mi-rgya-ba dang/ yid-la-mi-byed_pas
sangs-rgya zer-ba'i lugs-dar/ de-la ston-mun-du grags/ dpal-dbyangs dang/ sba ratna_'
la-sogs-pa nyung-shas shig mkhan-po'i rjes-su 'brang/ de-la rtsen-min rgya'i shad yin!
bod-skad-du cig-car-ba dang rim-skyes-la (read: -paY ur/ de-dagma-mthun-parrtsod-'
pa-na/ rgyal-pos iiciirya-bodhisatva'i lugs bzhin-du gyis shig gsungs-pas/ ston-mun-pa:'
rnams khros-te/ rtsen-min-pa ril gsod zer/ (C, 164b).
Commentaries on the Heart Sidra:
!xpe Politics of Interpretation
::byMalcolm David Eckel
Edward Conze opens one of his many articles on the Perfec-
"tion
of
Wisdom Literature by saying that "the Heart Sidra is
,;@ilsily the best known of all Prajnaparmita texts".! There are few
quarrel with Conze's judgment. The text certainly
'functions for many people as a statement of the essence of the
and if the Heart Sidra itself were reduced to an es-
ience, it would be the phrase "Form is Emptiness, and Emptiness
"it1<orm". For someone who now looks back on the growth of
tradition and tries to understand the central prob-
,!!ttpS of the tradition in their original context, it seems only
natural to ask how this most essential of phrases was understood
Indian commentators whose works are preserved in the
i'Iibetan canonical tradition. Certainly it clarifies the problem of
rUhderstanding to know how the phrase was understood by those
in the most direct historical and linguistic proximity
Hb. the text.
if.(,But to approach the Indian commentators in the hope that
:,they will somehow yield the "original" meaning of the text is to
'i#yite disappointment. Like us, the commentators were crea-
'stires of their own time. They had their own interests and preoc-
,"cppations that forced them not to misinterpret the text but to
for their own purposes. What we discover when we open
'\thelndian commentaries on the Heart Sidra is not the pristine
(lIleaning of the sidra itself, stripped of all the imaginative accre-
imposed by later centuries, but what a distinctive group
.commentators thought it meant. And what they thought it
,Weantwas shaped as much by the preoccupations of their own
A,"L':_,..
69
time as it was by the words of the sutra itself.
By I mean n?t only the ?bvious concepts:
and theones that occupIed the mmds of the mtellectuals who":
commented on the Mahayana sutras and whose commentarie 'j
gained enough notoriety or prestige to be preserved, but
the idea of commentary itself. As commentators and interpreters':
in our own right: we are so used to the assumption that teXtsi
are meant to be mterpreted that we overlook how rare it is in;
many traditions to interpret a text and rarer still to have the \
interpretation preserved. The act of interpretation itself involves.
a distinctive and rather narrow conception of the function ofa.
text. Judging by the record of Hsuan-tsang's visit to India, the':
Heart Sutra, and in particular the mantra contained in the
few lines, had a much broader function than to serve simply as:
an object of interpretation. Hsuan-tsang tells a story of the::
i
philosopher Bhavaviveka.
2
Bhavaviveka was the kind of
who was well versed in the art of interpretation, but in
tsang's story Bhavaviveka did not not interpret the Heart
He used it as a chant to generate a vision of the bodhisattva;
A valokitdvara.j
The chant did not work its effect without the addition of;
some related physical discipline. Bhavaviveka reinforced
chant with a period of fasting. But in time the chant
him the vision he wanted and an answer to one of his most.
vexing questions. Bhavaviveka may, at some other time, have',
sat with a group of students and commented on the text of
sutra. About that part of the story Hsuan-tsang has nothing tPl(
say. But Hsuan-tsang's story does make it clear that when we;
focus exclusively on "interpretation", as if that were the
way someone could stand in relation to a text, we may fatallyJ
distort its function. Interpretation may be only one of the many
things that are done with a text. The fact that it is also what we;:
are accustomed to doing with a text should not blind us to
the other ways a text can function. .:,{
When a text like the Heart Sutra can serve such a rangeo{;;
functions, from acting as a chant to summon a celestial
to providing a focus of worship,3 we should view the existeIl(e,;c
of commentaries on the text with a certain sense of wondermen,
i
3
and even with suspicion. This is a use of the text that
understand, but it should provoke a host of different questions;;:
COMMENTARIES ON THE HEART SDTRA 71
;"'Why, of all the possible to the Heart Sidra can be
tC'ut did the commentators enoose thIS one? Why are the com-
cleritators apparently clustered within a narrow historical
Was it only in this period that the text was available, or
it only in this period that the conditions were ripe for its
interpretation? And why, in all that has been said and written
bout this text, has the Tibetan canonical tradition chosen to
these and preserve in a context that makes
:;0 the commentanes themselves not Just a source of new com-
'rnentary, but also a focus of veneration? I will not answer all
';,thesequestions here, but I would like to make some comment
.l,2fmy own not just on the interpretation found in the text of
tthe Indian commentaries, but on the complex and overlapping
,"functions performed by the text in the work of the commentators
I will leave it to some other scholar in a later gener-
to ask why we choose to spend such effort writing commen-
'ldiries on commentaries on a phrase from an Indian text.
The Tibetan canon preserves the text of seven Indian com-
;':rrtentaries on the Heart Svira, attributed to the authors Vim-
Jiianamitra, VajrapaI).i, Prasastrasena, Kamalaslla,
;;IHparpkarasrljiiana (more commonly known as Ansa), and Sri
Mahajana.
4
As far as one can determine from Tibetan historical
the seven commentaries come from the period between
middle of the eighth century and the middle of the eleventh
;jtentury, a period that encompasses both of the "diffusions" of
:the Dharma into Tibet. Many of the commentators were teachers
;;ofTibetan students or played some other significant role in the
'::dissemination of Buddhist ide'as in Tibet. Vimalamitra, for
f,example, is treated as one of the chief teachers of the rdzogs
0i;hen tradition of the rNying-ma school.
s
He is linked to the con-
;,troversy over gradual and sudden enlightenment associated with
:(the so-called council of bSam-yas, an event in which KamalaSIla
;'is reported to have defeated a Chinese monk in debate and
the dominance of his own gradualist interpretation
!,9fthe Buddhist path in Tibet.
6
The controversy is described in
now well-known work on the stages of meditation
',t:",.;
72
JIABS VOL. 10 NO.2
(Bhiivanakrama) and is reflected in two other works by Vi '.'
alamitra on the same subject: "The meaning of the SUddrtJ.:
practice of non-conceptuality" (Cig car ),ug pa rnam par mi rt
en
, og
pa'i bsgom don) and "The meaning of the gradual practice" (Ril1;
gyis ),ug pa'i sgom donp Both Vimalamitra and Kamalasil!
flourished at the end of the eighth century. a
At the other end of this brief historical' spectrum is Ansa'
Atisa served as abbot of the monastic college at Vikramasn'
under the reign of two PaJa kings who bridged the late decadei
of the tenth century and the early decades of the eleventh. s
his later years, after he had achieved considerable prominence,
as a scholar and monastic leader, Ansa was invited to Tibet to
take part in the re-establishment of monastic scholarship as-,
sociated with the "second diffusion of the Dharma". Incollabora_'
tion with Rin-chen-bzang-po he translated a number of works
of Indian origin. After he had become established in Central
Tibet, he wrote an independent work, "The Lamp for the Path
to Enlightenment" (Bodhipathapradlpa) , that later served as the
source for the analysis of the path now dominant in the
pa school of Tibetan monasticism.
g
..
If the lives of these three scholars are any measure, the
commentaries on the Heart Siltra preserved in the
Canon are the product of a historical milieu in which a commen-
tator was not simply an isolated scholar, but the bearer of a'
distinctive lineage of practice, a monastic official, and, as a result;
also a political figure. This combination of interests is reflected
in the use they made of their commentaries on the Heart Sutra.
Along with the normal discussion of ontology and metaphysics
is a discussion of practice and discipline, matters that would
have been of as much concern in the formation of a monastic
;
curriculum as in the adjudication of philosophical disputes. It
is often said that the categories of Buddhist philosophy are
inseparable from questions of practice, but the connection is
seldom as clear as it is in the commentaries produced by
seven commentators on the phrases of the Heart Siltra. "
On the level of ontology or metaphysics the comments on
the phrase "Form is Emptiness, and Emptiness is Form" reflect
the dispute between Madhyamaka and Y OgadTa philosophers
about the nature of Emptiness. From the time of Bhavaviveka
in the sixth century there had been a running controversy be-
COMMENTARIES ON THE HEART SDTRA 73
the philosophers of these two schools about the proper
to relate the of one school to the of the
MadhyamIkas spoke of two truths (or realItIes), the ul-
and the conventional, and explained that the two truths
;:t1
6u1d
be used to strike a balance between extremes. A person
follow a middle path by affirming the reality of things
<tonventionally but denying their reality ultimately. Yogacara
also a of.balance, but expressed it
;lria concept of three natures. II Thmgs were understood as
'having three natures or "characteristics", their imagined nature,
dependent nature, and their absolute nature. To avoid the
complete affirmation or denial, the texts of the
)'ogacara tradition explained that imagined nature did not exist,
. absolute nature did exist, and dependent nature (which was the
;t()Illbination of the two) existed insofar as it was absolute and
:(fidnot exist insofar as it was imagined.
/ The juxtaposition of these two views of reality yielded many
c:ontrasts, but the most important had to so with the existence
'ofabsolute nature itself. Did absolute nature exist or not? A
;'Madhyamika would be content to say that it existed convention-
but not ultimately; but if the Yogacara vision of reality was
'interpreted as meaning that absolute nature existed ultimately,
the two schools were at loggerheads. It is this second interpre- ,
la.tion of the Yogacara position that generated Bhavaviveka's
!.attack on the Yogacara in the sixth century, and it is this second
)riterpretation that is reflected in the commentaries of the eighth
particularly in the commentary on the relationship be-
tjVeen Emptiness and Form.
, , The commentator J fianamitra explains the phrase in a way
.that is consistent with the position of the Madhyamaka:
Now, in order to define Emptiness he says: "Form is Emptiness,
and Emptiness is Form". If one does not understand that what
is called "Form" is Emptiness, one is deluded and perceives and
conceptualizes Form, or designates [it] with words. To say that
[Form] is Emptiness means that the nature of Form is Emptiness.
It has no identity in the past, the present, or the future, and
cannot be grasped .... There is no place for any extreme or any
entity. This is why [Form] is called "Emptiness".
"Emptiness is Form" means that Emptiness also cannot be
grasped and is designated conventionally as "Form" ,12
What makes this explanation consistent with the explanation
we might expect from a Madhyamika such as Bhavaviveka is
that Jnanamitra makes no attempt to speak of Emptiness as
something that exists or remains after concepts have been re
c
'
moved. He explains only that Emptiness is subject to the same;
analysis as Form, and the application of analysis to the concept'
of Emptiness then closes the circle: Form is Emptiness, but
Emptiness too is empty and is no different from Form. " ,
F or an explanation of the passage that use of Y ogac-
ara categories we look to the commentary of Sri Mahajana:
"Form is Emptiness, and Emptiness is Form" is a brief statement';
of the objectification [involved] when one thinks about Reality
(tattva). "Emptiness is not different from Form, and Formis not':
different Emptiness" is a more extended statement. First of all,!
when one considers Form, one admits that it is Empti-!
ness .... "Emptiness is not different from Form" means that de-;
pendent nature, which is the imagination of what is unreal, is .,'
empty of imagined duality. To be empty of duality in a sense,
that leaves its existence intact is the nature!
of Form.
13
'"
Here Mahajana uses the standard terminology of the three Ila-,'
tures to equate Emptiness with absolute nature that is left behiIld.
when the dualities of imagined nature are removed. The point:
is clinched, for those who know the technical terminology of
this controversy, by a term that I have translated as "leaving its
existence intact". The term is paryudiisa-pratis.edha, sometimd
translated as "nominally bound negation". 14 By this Sri: Mahajana:
means that the negation involved in the claim that Form is;
empty means only that Form is empty of the dualistic concepts
wrongly imposed on it, not that it does not exist at all. This is.'
a basic feature in the Y ogacara understanding of Emptiness. It
also is a feature about which Bhavaviveka, as a Madhyamika;;
had many critical things to say.
Someone may wonder why I have quoted two of the lesser'
known commentators on this passage to illustrate the interpre",'
tive approaches of the Madhyamaka and Yogacara
especially when we have commentaries from such respected
representatives of the Madhyamaka as KamalaSlla and Atisa.
The answer to this question reveals something important about
COMMENTARIES ONTHE HEARTSUTRA 75
commentators themselves. We know from their other writ-
:";,ing
s
that KamalaSIla Ansa .were aware of the
'roblems reflected III the dIspute between Yogacara and
iJLadhyamaka. Kamalaslla himself made important contribu-
;rlohS to the understanding of this dispute, if not to its solution.
':We find, however, that Kamalaslla and AtiSa used their com-
('mentaries on the Heart Sidra not to promote the cause of
/Madhyamaka ontology, but to clarify their thinking on a ques-
tion that was essentially epistemological. They took the text as
'lin occasion to explain how a person could gain a correct under-
ic,istanding of the insight expressed in the phrase "Form is Emp-
'"-tiness, and Emptiness is Form", and relate that understanding
.. to other stages on the path to enlightenment. Being epistemolog-
,ital, the question was also political in the broad sense of the
term. It had to do not just with the ontology of Emptiness, but
with how a person should study the text and who had the authority
to establish its interpretation.
" Bhavaviveka dealt with this question in his own way at the
of his argument against the Y ogacara, an argument that is
in his commentary on the Madhyamakakarikas and in his
compendium of Indian philosophy, the Tarkajvala. He starts
: the argument with a Yogacara objection:
It is said in scripture that the ultimate cannot be investigated
and is not accessible to logical reasoning (tarka-gocara). For this
reason, the ultimate cannot be expressed by inference (anurnana) .
. He then gives his own reply:
This is wrong. Inference that follows scripture (agama) negates
all concepts and brings about non-conceptual insight. The ulti-
mate, then, is not an object (vi:jaya) of inference. But [inference]
has priority, because there is no other way of investigating what
is true and false. IS
In Bhavaviveka's system this argument served as a justification
for the rationality of the process leading to the ultimate under-
standing of Emptiness. In the hands ofBhavaviveka's intellectual
,heirs, notably the eighth-century Madhyamika Jfianagarbha, it
led to the definition of ultimate truth as the truth that is cons is-
with reason.
16
76
]IABSVOL.IONO.2
KamalasIla echoes Bhavaviveka's concern for reason in h'
lS
commentary on the Heart Sidra. The commentary is not Ion
but it gives a clear impression of the problem that
Kamalaslla to the text. Kamalasila says:
By the power of the Buddha, Sariputra asks Avalokitesvara how
to train. The intent of the question is [to ask] what is achieved
by training. What is achieved is certainty. This [certainty] IS
[gained] through the means of (pramiirja) . ... Th{
point of [Avalokitesvara's] reply is: 0 Sariputra, the three-fold
assembly of bodhisattvas should train with the knowledge that
comes from inference whose object is ultimate truth. One does
not [train] with perception, because [ultimate truth] is not the
object of visual perception, because there is no means of knOWl_
edge for which it is an object, and because there is no ability [to
produce effective action]. [Furthermore,] one already has trained
in yogic perception, and there is no need for [further] training.
One should train [instead] with knowledge that comesfrom
inference about the ultimate. It is through the knowledge that
comes from inference that one develops certainty about the Per-'
fection of Wisdom, which is like an illusion and is
EmptinessY
KamalaSIla then goes on to describe what he has in mind whell
he speaks of the inference whose object is ultimate truth:
First, [an effect] does not arise ultimately from any connecti()n
with a cause. When analyzed, it is impossible [for an effect to',
arise from a cause], because it cannot arise from itself, frorri'
something else, from both, or from neither. It also is impossible,
for an effect to arise that either exists or does not exist.
18
;"
This is Kamalasila's only attempt to explain the meaning of
Emptiness in this brief commentary. Someone who comes to
the text in search of a new interpretation of the phrase "Form.
is Emptiness" is bound to be disappointed. But the passage does
tell a great deal about the context in which KamalaSlla thought'
the interpretation of the Sidra should be made. It was a context
dominated by the rules of rational analysis. . ..
Ansa's commentary also focuses on an epistemological
lem, but not specifically on the role of reason. He uses
considerable professorial ingenuity to explain how the Heah
COMMENTARIES ON THE HEART SUTRA 77
reflects, in its cryptic phrases, a system of discip-
0Hn
e
that governs the of a
Heplaces. IS Emptl.ness III the mIddle
Path of VlSlon (darsana-marga), the thIrd of the five paths
irsed in the Abhisamayalart}kara and later works to outline the
as whole. His is most in his
ilexplanatlOn of the word III the fifth sectl?n the
J'tekt.Atlsa takes the word III ItS temporal sense, meamng after
l'th
at
" or "subsequently", and understands it as a reference to
tI&e whole Path of Practice (bhiivanii-miirga)-a reference, in
to the last nine of the ten bodhisattva stages (bhumi).
;{l. I could cite more examples of Ansa's attempt to squeeze
,';bceans of meaning from the simplest phrases. But perhaps it is
to return instead to one of the questions with which I began
t;This essay. Why would Kamalaslla and Ansa write such commen-
at all? I think it is not too far-fetched to think that behind
;(KamalaSila's defence of reason, and Atisa's imaginative attempt
in the Heart Sutra the system of a graded path of study,
lies a problem of authority, a problem that was sharpened
slbythe conciseness and simplicity of the text itself. The sutra is
precisely because it reduces the complexity of the path
c;'t8a few simple concepts. It is the kind of text that is particularly
to a form of interpretation that emphasizes the sud-
and simplicity of enlightenment. To seminary deans
monastic officials like Kamalaslla and Ansa this simplicity
j;presented a challenge. They seem to have felt a need to pull in
{the reins and insist that the study of Emptiness can only be
or institutionalized in a system of rational and
;Xprderly study.
';{, What was the source of the challenge? The presence of
:Ximalamitra in the list of commentators on the sutra gives us
'l()ne possible answer. Vimalamitra was a Tantric master who
\defended a form of practice known as "the sudden practice of
:hon-conceptuality". When AtIsa's commentary is compared to
;;Yimalamitra's, it is clear that Ansa had Vimalamitra very much
Wmind. Atisa does not spend much time actually refuting Vim-
What he does instead is place Vimalamitra's comments
(Jnthe context of his own conception of the path, as if to say
remarks about the Heart Sutra are acceptable
as they go, but have to be placed in the right system of
study befo.re they can properly be understood. KamalaSIla als
was an enthusiastic defender of the gradual and systematic
suit of enlightenment. We might very well imagine that
. KamalasiJa and Ansa wrote their commentaries on the Heart
SzUra in response to a challenge that stemmed from Tantric
exegesis, like the exegesis found in Vimalamitra. But this should
not be understood as meaning that Kamalaslla and Ansa har-
bored any deep antipathy to the Tantric traditon as such. They
both were !antra and recognized the validity
of the Tantnc tradItIOn III Its own sphere. What they resisted
was an interpretation of the Heart Sidra that either slighted the
claims of reason or collapsed the system of categories that made.
of the vast corpus of Perfection of Wisdom Literature a graded
path to enlightenment.
Regardless of the immediate cause that provoked
KamalaSIla and Ansa to compose their commentaries, it is clear.
that we have in the corpus of Indian commentaries on the Heart
Siltra more than just an analysis of the ontological problems.
that in other contexts so occupied the minds of Mahayana
philosophers. The commentaries also give us a glimpse of the
politics of interpretation that concerned this small group of
philosophers in their other roles as teachers, monastic officials,
and defenders of a tradition of authoritative interpretation.
NOTES
1. E. Conze, "Prasastrasena's Arya-Prajiiaparamita-hrdaya-tika," in
Buddhist Studies in Honour of I.B. Horner, ed. L. Cousins et al. (Dordrecht:
1974) 51-61.
2. S. Beal, trans., Si-yu-ki: Buddhist Records of the Western World (1884;
reprint ed. Delhi: 1969) vol. 2, 223-225.
3. As G. Schopen has shown in "The Phrase 'sa pr:thivzpradeSaS caityabhilto
bhavet' in the Vajracchedikii: Notes on the Cult of the Book in Mahayana/
Indo-Iranian Journal 17 (1975) 147-181.
4. The seven commentaries make up Otani nos. 5217-5223 of
Peking Tibetan Tripi(aka (PIT). References to the commentaries in this article
are based on the reprint edition of the Peking Tibetan Tripitaka (Tokyo
Kyoto: 1957), volume 94, folios 285-350. . .....
5. As has been pointed out by D.S. Ruegg in The Literature of the
Madhyamaka School of Philosophy in India (Wiesbaden: 1981) 107.
6. L.O. Gomez, "Indian Materials on the Doctrine of Sudden
COMMENTARIES ON THE HEART SUTRA 79
in W. Lai and L.R. Lancaster, eds., E(J,rly Ch'an in China and Tibet
:i/Berkeley 1983) 393-434. _ '. . . .' .
+L' 7. The fIrSt Bhiivanakrama IS edIted by C. TUCCI m Mznor BuddhlSt Texts
fiI (Serie Orientale Roma 9) (1958) 185-229, the third Bhiivaniikrama in Minor
;2;.Bud
dhist
Texts III. (Seri;e Orientale Roma 43) (1971). Vimalamitra's works are
in The .!rzpzt
aka
, Otam nos,' 5306 and _ .
C)1 8. H. Elmer, Berzchte uber das Leben des AtlSa (Dipar(l.karasrZJnana), (Wles-
1977), and Rnam Thar Rgyas Pa: Materialen zu einer Biographie des AtiSa
2 1979).. " ,
9. H. Elmer, Bodhzpathapradzpa: Ezn Lehrgedzcht des AtlSa (Dipar(l.karasri-
F'f0
na
) in der tibetischen Uberlieferung (Wiesbaden: 1978).
,iL 10. An early version of the controversy is found in M.D. Eckel,
ii"Bhavaviveka's Critique of Yogacara Philosophy in Chapter XXV of the Praj-
in C. Lindtner, ed., Miscellanea Buddhica (Copenhagen: 1985)
5. For a later version of the same controversy see M.D. Eckel,Jiiiinagarbha's
Commentary on the Distinction Between the Two Truths (Albany: 1986).
(; II. This brief summary of the positions of both schools is based on
;.Bh.vaviveka's outline of the argument. Bhavaviveka based his own presenta-
>t:ion of the Yogacara position on such early Yogacara texts as the Madhyiin-
.tavibhiiga, but he recast the position in a way that highlighted the differences
; between the two schools.
" '12, PIT, vo!' 94, 305a/6-305b/2.
:> 13. PIT, voL 94, 344b/8-345a/4.
!;{:;'!'{
":;:". 14. B.K. Matilal, Epistemology, Logic, and Grammar in Indian Philosophical
''Analysis (The Hague: 1971) 162-165. The distinction between paryudiisa
prat4edha and its opposite (prasajya pratisedha) is discussed in a number of
works on Mahayana philosophy. See, for example, my "Bhavaviveka's
,Qritique," 71 andJiiiinagarbha's Commentary, 126. The most complete explana-
;tionof the concept is still Y. Kajiyama's An Introduction to Buddhist Philosophy:
,AnAnnotated Translation of the Text of the Tarkabhiis,ii of Moks.iikaragupta (Kyoto:
1966) 38-39. On the idea that the negation "leaving existence intact" see C.M.
;t-Jagao, "'What Remains' in Stmyata: A Yogacara Interpretation of Emptiness",
Kiyota, ed., Mahayiina Buddhist Meditation: Theory and Practice (Honolulu:
::1(78) 66-82.
i" 15. The translation is adapted from my "Bhavaviveka's Critique," pp.
,;73--74. The argument is repeated at the end of Bhavaviveka's response to the
"'yogacara in the fifth chapter of the Tarkajviilii. An edition and translation of
by Lindtner and myself is in preparation.
16. Eckel, Jiiiinagarbha's Commentary, 71.
17. PTT, voL 94, 331b/8-332b/3.
....... 18. The first argument against the ultimate arising of things is found
in,the first chapter of Nagarjuna's Millamadhyamakakiirikiis and throughout
'the subsequent Madhyamaka tradition. The second argument is mentioned
WAtHa in the Bodhipathapradipa as one of the four great proofs of Emptiness .
See Eimer, Bodhipathapradipa, 128-9. English translation in R. Sherburne,
:trans., A Lamp for the Path and Commentary by Atlsa (London: 1983), 136.
Notes on N agarjuna and Zeno on Motion
by Brian Galloway
(1) In interpreting Nagarjuna's Mulamiidhyamikakiirikii 2.lb
gatiigatavinirmukta'f!l, gamyamiinam na gamyate, we find that t h ~
law of the excluded middle applies: I a thing must be eitherA
or not-A, in this case either gata or agata. A thing proved to be
neither can hardly exist and can at any rate have no relation t()
gam. Candrakirti starts, to be sure, with a third possibility, that
of gamyamiina; but he concludes,
na ca gata-agata-vyatirekerJa t'"(t'iyam aparam adhva-jatan:t pasyiimo
gamyamanam nama; yatas ca evan:t gamyamanan:t na gamyate, gamyata
iti na praffiayate tasman nasti gamyamanam. ato na tad gamikriyaya
avisyate; na gamyata iti: nasti gamyamane 'pi gamanam.
2
[emphasis
added] .
N ow as far as words are concerned, there may seem to be a
contradiction between niisti gamyamiinam 'there is no [point just
now] being gone over' and niisti gamyamiine 'pi gamanam 'there
is no going over even at [the point supposedly] being gone over"
which implies that there is such a point. All we wish to do here
is to show that for Candraklrti there is a sense in which there
is no gamyamiina, because by the law of the excluded middle
motion must occur only in either the gata or the agata portion
of the road. For as Buddhapalita states,
hdi la gal te hgro ba sig yod par gyur na, de sori ba la ham, ma sori ba
la yod par hgyur.
3
"Here if there is any going-over, it must occur either at t h ~ i
gone-over or at the not-gone-over.".
(2) The na gamyate is interpreted as na vidyate or niisti (but
not in a heavy-handed annihilationist sense). But actually Nagar-.
80
NAGARJUNAAND ZENO 81
making a rather clever pun here,4 intending both "is not
:"IUn . 'bl " ( . - - ) d ... "1 h
pOSSI e na an . IS not over_ . _ t e
that the gamyamiina IS not logICally
to the law of the excluded mIddle, accordmg to
a must eit?er gata or agata. In.the sense that the
'iifr6neover" IS not (m splte of words) bemg gone over, he
to the argument m (3) below. In this context we
1lhst keep in mind, as both T.R.V. Murti and later K. Bhatta-
make clear,s Nagarjuna is. not in Stanza 2 the
?tihipg that goes by rather the ZaGl over whICh It moves, not the
but the path gone over by the goer, a point seemingly
';triissed by Sprung,6 who conflates having been moved over with
JtiJ,ying moved; he suggests, as an "alternate" translation of gatar(i
'1hag
am
yate, has moved does not move," but this is not the
whICh is "what has been moved over is not being
over."
Nagarjuna's fundamental argument in MMK 2.1, pace
iBhattacharya, can be most conveniently and clearly explained
;jfiathematico-physically. (This is just what Candraklrti attempts
with his foot analogy, as we shall see later.) Consider a
bounded by-points a and b containing a fixed point
'(Qot equal to a or b. A moving point x moves from left to right
the segment. When can we say that c is being gone over
pyx? When x is to the left of c (Fig. 1), i.e., has not yet reached
;t
l
'fhelatter is not being gone over. When x is to the right of c,
,!:e.:, has passed through it (Fig. 2), c is not being gone over.
:fiJ:J.ally, when the two coincide, i.e. x = c, only an instant of
'tiwee1apses, that is, a time of zero duration, and there can be
no,Illotion in space during a time of zero duration. Besides, at
the two points are identical, are one, and so there
Gillbe no traversing or going over. There is no room for motion
to there being no time for it. Thus we cannot find
:9i1tanything about motion here, just at the precise point where
occur (if anywhere). Candraklrti, in the quotation
says just this: niisti gamyamiine 'pi gamanam ("there is no
Ming even on the being-gone-over," i.e., there is no going even
point supposedly being gone over, no motion even at the
point supposedly being just now moved over). This is just what
intends, of course, since he is attempting to show
of the conception of motion. In short, there is no
82
JIABS VOL. 10 NO.2
gamyamana because (a) it is neither gata nor agata and,
neither of these, it cannot be anything else either; and (b)
is no gamana even at the point of sl.}pposed motion and th/'li\
there can be no gamyamana. If it is objected that the point
at one timeagata and at another time gata, but that
calls it gatagatavinirmukta, the reply is that Nagarjuna does noh!
call c gatagatavinirmukta; rather he calls the gamyamiilJ\
gatagatavinirmukta. But in Figs. 1 and 2 the point c is nti{i'1
gamyamana; and it is not really gamyamana when x = c eithei:;',,;;
for the road, it of agata and an agata portion; nothing':\j
IS left over except a pomt of zero length and hence nonexistent?
a point is really only an abstraction and not found in
Vyavaharikavat, however, Nagarjuna does not deny that the roaiiii
is being gone over; to deny this would be to fly in the
the sarIJvr:tisatya, the conventional reality that in
never denied. Nagarjuna denies that the point at which
supposedly occurs is being gone over; this is matter of
thasatya. Finally, if of the interval (a, b) the gata portion (a, e) iIi'i;,
some sense represents the past and the agata portion (e, b) th2"iJ
future, then of the point x = c we can say with Bareau thatiir:'j
is sans passe ni futur en fonction desquels il puisse se
r;
.
It was after the foregoing was written that the present
consulted the work of Siderits and O'Brien,9 mentioned
ably by Bhattacharya, to see whether indeed they had
monstrated nothing, because of philological limitations."l0
examination, their argument on this point turns out to be pef-X:
fecdy sound; they even have a line diagram like the
somewhat less strictly mathematicaL Bringing upthe
ical limitations of others is of course valid in general; but afterl
all, we all have them; the present writer for instance knows
Greek and is thus forced to depend on what he devoutly
to be the competent translations of others; he does,
have enough of the language of mathematics to have a
of whether a mathematization of Candrakirti's argumentsif;,i
valid. In any case, what philological limitations are meant in
present case? The Sanskrit of Siderits and O'Brien turns OUtt8i}(;
be quite competent..7:;;i
It is difficult, on the other hand, to agree with
O'Brien that Zeno's four paradoxes constitute a coherent

;:;?!i
1
:'

'of them. can .bedisproved fai:-ly easily.ll B.ut in t?e arrow
::!'tado
x
Zeno IS qUIte correct and hIs argument IS precIsely that
and Candraklrti. The cannot move where it
[;,\ipot, and the length of space where It IS has no further length
motion might be possible; and a given point on the arrow
move where it is not, nor where it is, because there is
for motion in a point of space. Here is Aristotle's
of Zeno as quoted by Burnet: 12

(.'i:;:: ,The arrow in flight is at rest. For if everything is at rest when it
occupies a space equal to itself, and what is in flight at any
'2, ' ' moment always occupies a space equal to itself, it cannot move.

i;ijbre the inexactness of Zeno's method of expressing himself
conceal that he has struck at the very concept of motion
.;:itself. It is doubtless incorrect to call a moving object "at rest,"
follows from its being at a particular point at every
so the identity of motion and rest explodes
'rhenotion of motIOn.
Burnet, it makes no difference that the arrow has
we can just as well speak of amoving point, thought of
arrow's tip or as any fixed point along the arrow's length;
'ifuepoint will occupy the point where it is on the flight path at
in time. Now it will not do to assume first that "motion"
viable concept and then attempt to calculate the rate of
at a point as Vlastosl
3
does. Zeno's argument is on a
level entirely. He shows that the whole idea of any motion
and absurd. Aristotle's formulation is important
:.Mte: "Neither moving nOr resting are possible in the 'now' [i.e.,

IJ,;.Bo it is not true what Bhattacharya says, that the argument
ipfNagarjuna "has nothing to do with Zeno's arrow paradox",
motion their arguments are precisely the same. The
between them concerns rest, as Murti has pointed out
his customary insight and clarity:
''{ ,
'.;: . That exists whose opposite exists, e.g. darkness and light, or this
i'l, side and the other side. Logically therefore, a denial of motion
kd' involves that of rest as well. It is here precisely that Nagarjuna
, proves himself a truer dialectician than Zeno.
15
As for the foot analogy, neither Bhattacharya on the one hanel'
nor Siderits and O'Brien on the other have got it right. Th}
latter are not correct in stating that Candraklrti's foot analog
e
",
as given in the extant texts, has the walker going backward';;;
there has been no textual error. What Candraklrti states is
the area covered by the .foot cann?t be as "being gone";
over" because the foot Itself consIsts of partICles, and we must;.
choose one of those particles to examine. Taking the atom at.}
the tip of the toe, we find that everything behind it has
gone over as far as that atom is concerned and everything ill 0
front has not. In a separate examination, we find that from the (
standpoint of the atom at the heel, again everything in front6f
it been gone over point of view and
behmd It has. Then Candrakirti meets another possIble objec_ii
that aton: it.self has le?gth, by pointing to its divisibility:::
If the atom IS not m Itself a pomt, we can look at an ever smaller'S
portion of it. LogicaIly, he is getting at the (lengthless) pOint
i
by, essentially, a series of nested intervals. The divisibility of;
matter is by no means necessary to his argument. He only divides;.',
matter in order to arrive logically at the mathematical
which can be seen as the limit of an infinite number of nested'
intervals that decrease sufficiently fast: consider the interval (0, 1),'.\;
then the ("nested") one (0, 0.5), then (0, 0.25) and so on.
atoms have spatial extension" (Bhattacharya) is not at all
tial to Candraklrti's argument. Candraklrti is not talking about\I
matter but about motion. His arguments are best seen in
of a point, which means that atoms without spatial extension?,!
would have been even better for his argument. His foot analogys;
shows that we can arrive at a point in spite of the spatial extension'
(assumed by the Buddhist audience to whom his works are ad-..
dressed) of the atom, because as long as it has spatial extension':
it will be infinitely divisible and thus we can arrive at a point asl;'
the limit of a series of nested intervals anyway.
tury mathematicians would have criticised him for not makir:g't
his argument explicitly in terms of a point; twentieth-century;;;
mathematicians would however be inclined to give him gooel,
marks for approaching a point as the limit of an infinite numbel';{,
of nested intervals and in general defining a point as the limit,:;
of a
By Buddhist standards, of course, there is no real
......... tuS -of the point being gone over, or to any mathematical
because a point is only an abstraction, a figment of the
.;ROagination (nasti gamyamanam). But we can imagine it. And if
:.!F 'do so even then we find that motion over it is inexplicable
'we.' _
gamyamane 'pz gamanam).

:";,
)/,\';i. M

iN:>O'.TES
r
/)-,'
:J\i'"
;w 1. One knows that this is a matter of controversy in some circles; but
Ruegg, "The Uses .. . ",]IP 5 (1977) 1-7l.
2. Bauddha Bharati Series 16, ed. Dwarika Das Shastri (Varanasi:

'Iv: ". 3. Mulamadhyamakavr:tti, ed. M. Walleser (Bibliotheca Buddhica XVI),
;.lSt.-petersbourg: 1913) 34. Breaks off in Chapter 13.
;;/ 4. See J. Hopkins, tr., "Analysis of Going and Coming," (Dharamsala:
;'1974) 25.
:i} 5. T.R.V. Murti, The Central Philosophy of Buddhism (London: 1960) 178
:ff; K. Bhattacharya's article in]IABS 8(1) (1985) 7-15.
)i: i. 6. M. Sprung, Lucid Exposition of the Middle Way, (Boulder, Colorado:
:1979) 76 n. 6. He also translates Candraklrti's gata11} ti'ivad gamyata iti na yuJyate
:('Ii
the
gone-over then is being gone over' does not make sense") as "it is not
)ienable to say what has been traversed is in motion" (pp. 76-77). But no-one
'fuaintains that what has been traversed is in motion. He gives an alternate
tritnslation in the footnote on p. 77; "past motion moves," but this is not what
'Candraklrti's opponent says nor is it maintained by anyone. Sprung's belief
.'that Nagarjuna's "Sanskrit terms are both spatial and temporal, inextricably"
(p .. 76 n.) is not borne out by the precise way in which Nagarjuna uses the
,langUage; in particular, the distinction between active and passive, which in
,iolloquial Sanskrit is often brought to naught (and where indeed gata fre-
quently means the active "gone") is strictly observed, I believe, by Nagarjuna;
aUeast it is difficult to make sense of his writing if one neglects it.
That we have to do this verse not primarily with a moving object or with
'P0vement as an abstraction but with the loci over which motion may occur-
for instance gatah does not mean something that has 'gone (moved) or
,something that has been 'gone to' (reached), but something that has been gone
oyer (traversed)-has been missed by most translators. As quoted by M.
Tachikawa ("A Study of Buddhapalita's Mtllamadhyamakavr:itti" (1) Uournalof
the Faculty of Literature of Nagoya University 63, March 1974]), J. May gives us
accompli ne comporte pas mouvement" and M. Walleser has
':im Gegangenen eben ist nicht Gehen" (this from his 1911 work, and in his
of the following year we find "das Gegangene geht nicht"). Robinson
as quoted by Tachikawa has gone is not arrived at", and Streng gives us
!:tjlat-which-is-already-gone-to is not that which is 'being gone to'" (Emptiness
1967] 184). Tachikawa himself understands it properly e.g. "we
must not forget that Indian commentators allude or declare that 'gamyamiiiii';
indicates that which is being traversed" (p. 10). He quotes Avalokitavrata1U!}
this word: sa phyogs gari na rkari pa hdeg pa hjogpahi mtshan iiid kyi gyo
snari ba de . .. "the ground whereon there is movement in the form of
up and placing down one's feet". (The gyo will be ga-hogya naro g.yo
7. Bhattacharya asks how Nagarjuna can do this (op. cit. p. 9).,"::'
8. Bareau, quoted in Bhattacharya, op. cit., p. 8; see also the
A. w, .. Schubring, and Ch. v.
Induns ,II! (Die der Menschhelt 13), (Stuttgart: 1964)
Bareau s mterpretatIOns of the MMK 2 are not, perhaps, the exact words'f!:
the ancient authorities, but they are certainly not bizarre; as regards timeaoa'*
motion he seems to have drawn on MMK 19 also. It is not clear to
Bhattacharya objects in Bareau's presentation. a'i'
9. M. Siderits and J. O'Brien, "Zeno and Nagarjuna on
Philosophy East and West 26(3) (July 1976),281-299.''':;.
10. Bhattacharya, op. cit, p. 8. . .:,;
11. In the "racecourse", Zeno says that the mover from point a to poihC;;
b must first go half the distance, then half the remaining (one-fourth oftM
i
'!
total), then one-half of that (one eighth), and so on; and that
infinite number of such distances must be traversed, and because each wilrl;
take a finite amount of time to traverse, it will take an infinite amount oftilIle']
to get to b, i.e., one will never get there. In fact, however, the time can
by calculated. If a point moves at 1 meter per second from Po to PI> thenit'!
will require 1/2 second to go the first 112 meter, IJ4. second to go the next 1/4
and so on; the total time will

1/2 + 1/4 + l/S + IJI6 + IJ32 + ...
n=
which even though it contains an infinite number of terms nevertheless
to a finite sum (it is a convergent series-technically, a geometric seriesw[tlt"!
ratio r = 1/2, and when I r I < 1 a geometric series converges to a finite SUnI);/;;
The Achilles and the tortoise paradox is not much more difficult to
with. By the formula s = vt (distance equals velocity times time)
calculate as follows. Let Achilles's velocity be v A and the tortoise's VT, and
the head start enjoyed by the tortoise be h. The time taken by AChilles\b'.:
reach the tortoise's original starting point h units ahead of him will be
But in this time the tortoise will have moved vT(hlv A), and Achilles must
traverse this distance, which he will do in a time vT(hlv A) I v A- Continuingil\l;
this way we obtain Achilles's total time
%A + v
T
%A
2
+ v
T
2
%A
3
+ v
T
3
%A
4
+ ... =h i
n = 1
This too is a geometric series, with ratio r = vTlv A, and if Achilles runs
than the tortoise, this will be less than one, and the series will converge.
convinced ourselves of this, we can then adopt the simpler method of
equations of motion of the form t = slv, notion that we can put v A = VT + k,
\.PY .se the two speeds are constant and hence differ by a constant; and SA
.be
cau
,.e'c:.:::, _ h Thus
.
equations in two unknowns and thus solvable for SA and t by ordinary
iiaigebra. .
:<:7,As for the stadium paradox, this is based on not understanding that two
i!b6dies moving the same line in 0pP.osite at same speed
).;:;"vewith veloCItIes v and -v; by subtractIon one obtams theIr relatzve speed
7W,ihrespect to each other, 2v, while their velocities with respect to a stationary
?:6bserver are just v and -v.
;\c
i
'12. J. Burnet, Early Greek Philosophy (London: 1930) 319.
C. Vlastos's attempt to disprove the arrow paradox (in Paul Edwards,
of Philosophy, vol. 8, pp. 374-375) will not hold water; he
itternpts to find the velocity of the arrow at a point by dividing the distance
(j"aversed (zero) by the time taken to cover this distance (zero), obtains, natur-
:hlljenough, the indeterminate form 010, and concludes, apparently, that Zeno
is'wrong to state that the arrow cannot move at a point. But a mathematical
(010) cannot tell us anything about physical or philosophical reality;
Jt'ca.n tell us that our mathematical tool has been badly chosen. Naturally we
.c'ii1
not
use algebra to find the speed at a point of a moving body; this has
since before Newton and Leibniz, whose invention of the differ-
and integral calculus had the purpose, in part, of providing a method
:'fiJi-rmding such a speed. In the case of a body moving with constant velocity
:.0/'Vye of course do not need the calculus; we can reason a priori that if it has
v always, it must have the velocity v at any particular point. Of
.fptfse one can insist on using the calcUlus anyway: for example, a body
trl()ying on the number line with a constant velocity of 20 between the points
5attd 15 will have the position function s = 20t + 5; and the velocity function,
Pydifferentiation, using the power rule, will be dsldt = 20; in this (trivial)
Case the velocity dsldt is constant (in the general case it will be a function of
. (he position s or the time t).
':;; 14. Quoted by Vlastos, op. cit., p. 375.
,':>:r' _' J5. Murti, op. cit., p. 182.
fi. 16. Candraklrti: ariguly-agra-avasthitasya paramii'Yfor yalp purvo desalp sa tasya
carama-paramii'Yfor ya uttaro ddalp sa tasya agate
(loc. cit.). Here purvo ddalp means the length previously traversed,
Ihllsgatalp; uttaro ddalp is the length in front, to be traversed afterwards, later,
gIlls agata. (The de la Vallee Poussin edition as quoted by Bhattacharya op.
ezl.goes not differ in this passage.)
Note on a Chinese Text Demonstrating
the Earliness of Tantra .
by John G. Huntington
1. Introduction
Although divided by two closely related OpInIOns, most
scholars working on the history of Buddhism resolve the issul
of the date of the beginning of Tantra by placing either its!
"origin" or its "emergence" in the seventh or eighth century,'
For one substantial group of scholars, the seventh century
has become tantamount to the absolute date for the "origin" <if
Tantra, and suggestions of earlier Tantra meet with
rejections by them. For a second large group, perhaps even"
majority of Buddhologists, it is accepted that Tantra probablyl
existed prior to the seventh century, but there is not enougn;;
evidence for it to be studied and it is accepted as one of those
areas of human knowledge that is beyond our reach. For this:
second group, suggestions of pre-seventh century Tantra meet
with skeptical interest but strong reservations as to the possibility.
of really knowing anything substantial about it. In effect, these;
scholars also seem to deny the existence of early Tantra on thf;
grounds that any possible study of it is, by definition,
temologically unacceptable. For a remaining few individualst
among whom I number myself, the idea of either a
century "origin" or "emergence" is simply erroneous. Tantrf
appears to these few to have conspiciously
roots even in the pre-Sakyamuni period and, from both
and iconographic studies, would seem to have been integrate9/
into some aspects of Buddhism at a verly early date. "f!
It is my purpose in this article to support the position of;'
the few in an epistemologically acceptable manner by
to the attention of the scholarly community a Buddhist
(0,.,;
88
THE EARLINESS OF T ANTRA 89
sage that irrefutably places fully developed Mahavairocana
'"p'a
s
". . d k T . d" 1 . .
Tantra an nown antnc me ItatIOna practICes mto a
i::y,leh earlier time-frame than the seventh century.
passage in question is a devayoga mal)c;lalic meditation
(1,1;'l1tained in the version of the Suvar1!aprabhiisasutra (SPS) that
into Chinese between the third and tenth years
Hsuan-shih era under the Bei Liang (i.e" 414-421) and
tX
g
6wJisted as no. 663 of the Taisho daizokyo. The passage contains
of an advanced understanding of the practices of the
from the. Mahiivairocanasutra (MVS). and
::*ceeptance of practIces as seco?d n,ature. does
)Iiofprove the eXIstence of the practICes m East ASIa, It does
Xg6nclusively demonstrate that such practices were known in the
of origin of the SPS version that served as the source for
(the Bei Liang translation, presumably India proper or the Indic
(specifically the Bactro-Gandharan regions or
''Kashmir) ,
J'rZThe Problem of the Seventh Century ';Emergence"
,;'\: The continuing attribution of the development of Tantra
f,tgthe seventh or even eighth century seems to have originated
iiriToganoo Shoun's argument based on "negative evidence",
Fa-hsien (fifth century), Hiu-shen (sixth century), and
fJsuan-tsang (seventh century) did not mention the MVS, but
ltsing (second half of the seventh century) did, the text had to
'baye been written in the mid-seventh century. I In his argument,
toganoo ignores the fact that an Indian pa1!dita by the name
,ofPuI)yodaya (Pul)yopaya) arrived in China in 655 and tried
introduce Tantric texts but was prevented from doing so by
other than Hsuan-tsang/ who was primarily interested in
Jhe "Ideation Only", Vijiianavadin School (Fachsiang or Dhar-
School), and who, therefore, had not even been look-
ing for Tantric texts in India.
s That the various Chinese travelers did not come across Tan-
,tile texts is not surprising, since the texts were (and, in formal
practice, still are) part of a very conservative esoteric
open only to initiates to the system. Indeed, the trad-
history of the Tantras states that they were transmitted
90
JIABS VOL. 10 NO.2
in secret fr?m the time were first revealed. Thus, it
seem that tnere would be little reason for the Chmese pilgrim':
who were not specifically searching for initiation to the Tantra
s
!;
to find them, and it was only after he had become well
to the Tantric masters at Nalanda that I-tsing was
to them.
Another aspect ofToganoo's reasoning reflects a common11
held opinion with which I am in complete disagreement. fl'
holds that, in general, very shortly after any given text wal;
created, it was written down and translated into Chinese.
ing to him,3 the one version of the Amoghapasa-sutra (APS) whicW
mentions the MVS several times and must therefore be
than the MSV, was in Louyang no later than 693. Moreover, hi
holds the AP S to be the model for the
graha-sutra (STTSS). However, possibly unknown to Toganoo:;
the great Indian teacher of Vairocana cycle Tantras, Sui'
bhakarasirhha brought the illustrations for the STTSS
to the academic world as the Gobushinkan from the Onjo-ji copy:!
of 855) with him to China in 716. This would have
the creation of the three sutras into less than a fifty year
Yet, by any measure we can discover, whether in Japan, Nepal;.;
or Tibet, the esoteric teaching tradition was extremely
. tive in the development of ritual and introduction of "neW;':'
teachings. How then could the whole system have develope4:
anew and spread to historically-documented locations frorn]
Kashmir (where Subhakarasirhha studied the STTSS), to
Lanka (where Amoghavajra was initiated into the MSV),
from Nalanda (where Subhakarasirhha and I-tsing studieg;
esoteric Buddhism) to the Konkan (where the MSV/STTSS was'
practiced)-virtually all of the Indic subcontinent-in less thar{',
fifty years? .,0(1'
It is my opinion that this rapid development did not occuf:;
and that, in fact, there had been a very long period of develop:;.
ment. My research into art and iconography suggests that
tric systems developed very slowly, taking centuries rather
decades. For example, relative to Mahavairocana practices, I hav:-
shown that specific iconographic characteristics demonstratS:
that the sixth century Aurangabad Caves numbers 6, 6A,
7, very probably constitute a dual ma'f}q,ala, virtually identicalig.1!
concept to the dual ma'f}q,ala of Shingon Buddhism.
5
This
;Ti
places the of th: text two centuries earlier
Toganoo's the0.ry and raIses seriOUS doubts the whole
of the East development of the of the tW?
If,. as I beheve,.Chen esoterI-
kfisrn was tra?-smltted mtact to Chma based on sIxth
practICes, the. whole problem. of m .the
t&1lahiivairocana cycles IS pushed back mto a much earlIer tIme
the fifth or even the fourth century at the latest, with
"proto" cycle development having had to take
;:;place even earlIer.
.,;".
"
The "MaIJ<;lala" of the SuvarIJaprabhasa-sutra
stated, there is unequivocal textual evidence that the
marpj,ala of the MVS was known in the early fifth century.
the most conservative inferences to be drawn from the
that will follow demand thatthe MVS itself be assigned
early fourth century date. And, 1 insist, based on internal
of the marpc!alas in the texts, that there is at least a
possibility that it might be earlier, even much earlier.
6
::rrhe version of the Suvarrpaprabhasottamaraja-sutra (SPS) that was
\frrst translated into Chinese between the third and tenth years
Shih (414-421) under the Northern Liang by Dhar-
contains an unmistakable meditation in (1 emphasize
\:iri,not on) a marpc!ala. While most of the sutra is a lengthy polemic
jipnthe benefits that will accrue to an earthly king who supports
and the teachings of the sutra by virtue of the protec-
of the four heavenly kings (lokapala) , the sutra's primary
content is the universality of Sakyamuni, in which
life is said to be eternal,8 In the introduction to Chapter 2,
.While the Bodhisattva Mahasattva Sraddhaketu is meditating on
length of life of the Buddha Sakyamuni, his house becomes
;yast, extensive, made oflapis lazuli, adorned with treasures, and
appear four divine seats and on those seats appear, in the
in the south Ratnaketu, in the west Amitayus
in the north (?)-susabda [Divyadundubisvara]. Then the
of the four directions impart their esoteric knowledge
:(about the length of Sakyamuni's life) to him through medita-
means.
9
92
JIABS VOL. 10 NO.2
To anyone knowledgeable about the maTJqalas of the MVS'
and the STTSS, this arrangement and apparent sequence ofth i
meditation is immediately familiar. Th,e house was transformed
into the palace of the "eight-petalled lotus hall," the
are essentially the tathagatas of the maTJqala of Mahavairocan
and, true to still current medjtational practices, the practitioner-a,
in this case the Bodhisattva Sraddhaketu, is to envision himself'
in the center of the ma?:ujala-identical to Vairocana-wherehei
receives the "offering" of the jiiiina of the Buddhas.
1o
The whole'
passage in question reads as follows:
At <?ne time, in Rajag-rha, therewas a Mahasattva Bodhisattvi{
named Sraddhaketu who had done many good deeds. He won_if
dered why Sakyamuni Buddha's life span was so short that he'
<;>nlylived for eighty years. The Mahasattva remembered that'
Sakyamuni Buddha had said that there were two virtues that!
give long life spans. The first virtue was not to kill anything and);
the second one was to give food to others. [Yet, during his
lives], Sakyamuni Buddha had obtained many virtues. He did::
not kill anything and also gained ten virtues. He gave unlim_i,'
ited public food and even satisfied beings with his own flesh and!;
blood. [Therefore, how could it be that his life span was so
ited?] The Mahasattva prayed. At that instant, the floor of
room he was in suddenly became filled with gems and,as in\
buddhalwtras, the room became filled with clouds of fragrance;t
From the four walls, there appeared the four Buddhas;
on the east, Ratnaketu on the south, Amitayus on
west and (?)-susabda (Ch. Wei-miao-sheng, "Torrent of Excel-
lent Sound") on the north. [The Buddhas] radiated great'
light over Rajag-rha, the three thousand great chiliocosms, and)
all in all directions. At that time, because of the'
[four] Buddhas' divine power, the people in the three thousand;;
great chiliocosms gained heavenly happiness; and, even those;i,
possessing not a single virtue, attained all virtues. All the benefits',;
of the world were distributed. The Mahasattva, seeing the four i
Buddhas, piously made anjalimudrii and prayed to them. He asked;
the four Buddhas, why, if Sakyamuni Buddha possessed innuni-'
erable virtues, did he live only eighty years? They said, "Y0l,l}
should not concern [literally "stick"] yourself with this
Have you not seen that no one can tell the life span of a
except for the Buddhas themselves?"ll"
It will be noted that the names for the Buddhas of the ma1!dala
c-;
SP S slightly different from those of either the MVS
1Cjits compamon, the STTSS, but they are close enough that
can be no error in the intention of represent-
':iiig the mandala of Mahavalrocana III the SPS.12
?'J'",i, '

yt:',DirectIOn:
Center

;i;:,< East
.. 'South
West
'::; ':: orth
. ...
has:
1,rCenter
,ii' ..... East
t:':( South
;::

Chinese: Sanskrit:
(practitioner [Sraddhaketu] identical to Vairocana)
A-ch'u
A

Pao-hsiang
B
Ratnaketu
Wu-liang-shou
C
Amitayus
Wei-miao-sheng
D
(?)-susabda
Pi-lu-che-na
E
Pao-ch'uang
F
K'ai-fu-hua-wan(
Wu-liang-kuang
Tien-ku-Iei-yin
I
has:
t,i\\')
Vairocana
Ratnadhvaja
Samkusumitaraja
Amitabha
Divyadundubhime-

\r:i:': Center
Eas t

South
West
i?/' ;'North
:Vi
Pi-lu-che
A-ch'u
Pao-sheng]
Shih -tzu -tsai -wang
K
Pu-k'ung-cheng-chiu
L
Vairocana

Ratnasambhava
Lokesvarraraja
Amoghasiddhi
1R't.first reading, these names may not seem to be very closely
However, both "Voice
Divine Kettle Drum Cloud", and Wei-miao-sheng, "Tor-
Excellent Sound", convey essentially the same meaning,
both refer to the teaching nature of Amoghasiddhi. K'ai-fu-
',hua-wang or Samkusamitaraja, "Ruler of the Blossoming
l?wer", is an explanation for the nature of Ratnasambhava,
(or Treasure) Born", who demonstrates the ability of the
\ipdividual to practice as a monk, which is symbolized by the
.. wetaphor of rebirth on a newly opening lotus blossom. And, in
itheSukhavatfvyiiha-siitras, Lokesvararaja is the. name of the
before whom Dharmakara, the youth who was to be-
.)some Amitayus/Amitabha, took the vows which were to lead to
theprediction of his Buddhahood, and is thus a direct reference
")-,
94
JIABS VOL. 10 NO.2
to Amitabhal Amitayus. Given this it is easy to recog);
nize that the alternate names are sImply epIthets of the familiar
Buddhas of the marpjala and that aC,tually there are no real
discrepancies. ,S
The description of Sraddhaketu's room, the of
four Buddhas, and their imparting knowledge to Sraddhaketu
i
in unison parallels the imparting of the jiiana of the four Bud:
dhas to the initiate in the Shingon ritual. In the Shingon ritual'
the initiate, dressed as Vairocana and seated before a ma'fJ4ala:.
has the water (symbolizing their respective jiiana) from the four'
subsidiary vases of the ma'fJdala poured into the central vasf
which is, in turn, emptied over the imparting';
the knowledge from the four Buddhas dIrectly mto hIm. Indeed;'
the meditation in the SPS is so close to being identical to tht
practice of the Mahiivairocana that the SP S could not have been3
written without knowledge of it. Regrettably, the details of
ma'fJdala are not spelled out, so it is not possible to determine;
just how close to the detailed Shingon version of the
the SPS ma'fJdala really is. However', that is the nature of
ences to maw/alas in Buddhist literature, where they are
quently referred to by just naming the progenitor (Jirya) or,att
the most, a few of the central deities. . ..... i ..
What we are left with is the problem of the earliness of
Vairocana cycle. Since the ma'fJdala of Vairocana is mentioned:
in the Bei Liang version of the SPS, it must be assumed thati
knowledge of the ma'fJdala pre-existed the formulation of
version of the SP S and that by the time of the formulation of;
the SPS the meditational practice had already become so wei!,;
accepted that its inclusion was meaningful to at least the commu:Zf
nity of monks in which the SP S was formulated. Thus,
that the SPS had at least a modest history during which it
importance and acceptance before being taken off to
. be translated (see my comments above), we can chart the history:
of the concept of the SPS ma'fJdala as follows:;;:
Bei Liang translation 414-421
I

minimum of about fifty
Formulation of SPS version (mid 4th century)
(man,rjala in accepted practice)
minimum of about fifty

THE EARLINESS OFT ANTRA
95
. I
formulation of Vairocana manqala text (early 4th century)
(some sort of "proto-Mahavairocanasutra?)
I minimum of about fifty years?
. formulation of Vairocana meditations (mid-third century)
I minim urn of abou t fifty years?
"Core concepts"
(probably much earlier but
early third century at the latest)
While this proposed date will be an anathema to some, for
!.bthers it simply falls into a pattern of accumulating evidence
,i\fdtan increasingly earlier date for Tantra.
13
One real problem
!i:f9rthe study of the earliness of the literature of Tantra is that
of the texts that we have are not early but are rather
But, as anyone who has worked on the MVS knows, it is
a great compilation of concepts and ideas, some of
presumably belonging to remote antiquity. I do not pro-
to suggest here that the MVS, intact, as we know it from
century translations into Chinese, existed in the third or
century. On the contrary, while I do think that the origin
Iffofthe MSV is much earlier than the seventh century date pro-
by Toganoo (discussed above), I argue that the circa fifth
!/Q[sixth century text presently known is an outgrowth of com-
and "accretions" that spanned centuries. Initially there
of not necessarily related practices which, in turn, had
developed from diverse "core concepts" of vastly greater
,:.:

.. That this development took place is demonstrable even from
ma'fJriala of the Mahiivairocana itself. It is generally
that there is a sequence of development to the Tantric
stlityrature consisting of the MVS, followed by the Amoghapasasiltra
iY(Which mentions the MVS several times), followed by the Tatt-

However, in the MVS ma'fJriala, the
Amoghapasa figures prominently in the quarter of
Presumably, he was added after the formula-
his Amoghapafasutra and therefore long after the formu-
of the "core" or "basic" MVS. While the MVS must await
analysis before its layers may be understood, I think
it is appropriate to insist that it is unrealistic to see it as a
:lm.onolithic entity with a discrete point of origin. Simply put, it

96
JIABS VOL. 10 NO.2
makes much more sense to understand a long period of develo
p
_':
ment and to expect a layering of accretions to the text. Such
view of the literature would solve many problems.
If such a view is accepted, then it'is possible to accOUnt fa
the mid-second century image of a Buddha attended-it har
been PadmapaI).i and Va}rapaI).i,_ an identifYini,
charactenstIC of the MVS, found at Ahlcchattra.
16
Dated in th '.
year 32 of the era (about 152 C.E.), it would be
graphically problematic in the extreme if the whole concept
the particular trinity is un;,il the century .. '
However, by acceptmg the Idea of proto -MahavaIrocana cycle)
practices in Buddhism, the figure falls into a pattern of the earlyJ
development and existence in the Mathura region of several
recognizable cults of Buddhism. Moreover, if it is for.
what I think it is, a trinity of a Buddha (presumably Sakyamuni/.:;
Vairocana) with PadmapaI).i and VajrapaI).i Bodhisattvas as at-;
tendants, it is archaeological evidence that at least the "core:.
concept" of Mahavairocana cycle practices in Buddhism had.
even earlier origins than the second century date of the stone
image. While it is not widely known by art historians, thereis!
an early literary tradition in Buddhism that refers to the making;
of images in a variety of materials, except, however, monolithic'
stone.
17
Accordingly, although the date of the image of ca. 152
C.E. is tentative pending the final resolution of the date of the,
era, its existence in stone suggests a relativley long tra.-<
dition of making such images in other materials before it was'
appropriate to translate it into monolithic stone.
i
.
How old was this tradition? I am convinced that the artistiC'
record will demonstrate a pervasive presence of Tantric, of'
perhaps "proto Tantric" methodologies having "emerged" in<
the second century B.C.E. At that point, it is not too much of.
an act of faith to suggest that the Atharvavedic prototypes of
Tantra did indeed have real significance in early Buddhism and.
in the formulation of early Buddhist Tantra.
IV. Conclusions
It is surprising that this passage on the four tathagatasof'
the mar],qala has gone unnoticed until now. What it does for
THE EARLINESS OFT ANTRA 97
studies" is to provide a basis for insisting
!, .. ;,,,{:; .o..rig
lll
of Tantra was much earlIer than the usually Cited
'\J,e " " Ob' I . h'
century emergence. . VlOUS y, smce t IS text was
between 414 and 421 and contained this information
time; the "origin of the Mahavairocana mafJdala per se
be earlier that.. Since cannot be later than
. yet It that the of
;t)!Maha.valrocana IS already m well estabhshed practICe, It must
the MSV or at least the "core" ideas for it were in existence
,:rlilJater than the early fourth century and probably earlier.
"x /<'
i-f< ;j,""',-
\""
::,
...... 1. Toganoo Shoun, Himitsu bukkyo-shi [History of Esoteric Buddhism]
1933), 17. There is reas?n to that I-tsing would have
.;been introduced to the esotenc Tantnc tradItIOn whereas others who had
before him rr:ight not have had th: opportunity. He stayed at. Nalanda
i'Jorten years, certamly long enough to wm the confidence of a Tantnc master.
English version of this widely accepted theory, see M. Kiyota, Shingon
i:':!lliiildhism: Theory and Practice, (Los Angeles and Tokyo: 1978) 19-20.
'(';:,1/;" 2. See K. Ch'en, Buddhism in China: A Historical Survey (Princeton: 1964)

\/ij;)/;,i( Ibid. pp. 19-20.
l'ii,,(, 4. A full analysis of the texts will demonstrate that there are actually
problems with this, especially since the Amoghapasa-dhiiranisutra (T. 1096,
ffJt;apslated by Li Wu-ch'an in c.E. 700) has a full ma1JlJala cycle of its own, one
\,Which is clearly an outgrowth of the system of secondary ma7Jqalas of individual
that grew up around the deities in the various quarters of the
.
{,J. 5. See my "Cave Six at Aurangabad; A Tantrayana Monument?" in
';#aliidarfana: American Studies in the Art of India, J.G. Williams (ed.) (New Delhi,
and Calcutta: 1981) 47-55.
';::.. 6. I hope to produce a comparative study of certain Buddhist and other
mawjalas demonstrating my arguments on this point in the
,relatively near future.
'l< 7. T. 663; K 1465.
8. T. 663, Chapt. 2.
:,'\,';",!,
:It 9. T. 663, p. 326, A.
.. ' 10. Ryujun Tajima. Deux grands ma7Jqalas et La doctrine de l'esoterisme Shin-
1959) 170-172.
;;... 11. See footnote 8. I wish to express by gratitude to my student Yin-fen
for her preliminary draft of the translation; however, the final transla-
:'j;,tion and any faults it may contain are my responsibility.
98
JIABS VOL. 10 NO.2
12. It is not relevant to the thesis of this article whether any of the I ..... .
. . 'j N . h J N b I ater
verslOnsoftheSPShaveslmlarnamesornot. elt er. 0 e ,Suvarnabh- ,'.
tamasutra, Das Goldglanz-Sutra, ein Sanskrittext des
zig: _1937); pas Goldglanz-Sutra, ein .. Sanskrittext Xl:
Mahayana-Buddhzsmus, Du tzbztzschen Ubersetzungen mzt eznem Worterbuch, 2 vo(
(Leiden and Stuttgart: 1944 and Leiden: 1950); and Suvar1Jabhiisottamasut s'"
Das ein Sanskrittext des I-tsing's chinesis::;'
Verszon und zhre. Ubersetzung, 2 vols. (Lelden: nor Emmerick (The!;
Sutra of Golden Lzght (London: 1970)) have dealt wIth the earlIest extant Chine ;,
version in any detail. However, it is only the Bei Liang version that presen;e;
the necessary documentation of the early mawiala. Accordingly, in this
no notice is taken of alternate and expanded sections that exist
the later versions. y
13. See, for example, A. Wayman's arguments for the date of tht
GuhyasamaJatantra in his Yoga of the GuhyasamaJatantra: The Arcane Lore of
Verses (Delhi: 1977) 97-99. ,
14. Kiyota, op. cit., 23-24.
15. Ryujun Tajima, op. cit., 87-89. , .
16. For the trinity from Ahichattra, see S.L. Huntington withJ.C. Hun?'
tington, The Art of Ancient In.dia: Buddhist, Hindu and Jain (Tokyo: 1985) 153-
155. '"j
17. I have dealt at length with these traditions concerning early images'
elsewhere. See "Origin of the Buddha Image, Early Image Traditions and ..
the Concept of Buddhadarsanapu1Jya", in Studies in Buddhist Art of South Asia,';
A.K. Narain (ed.) (New Delhi: 1985) 24-58. For a specific list of materials
see, L. Hurvitz, trans., Scripture of the Lotus Blossom of the Fine Dharma
Lotus Sutra) (New York: 1976) 39."1
List of Significant Characters
Inscription on the Image of
Character of the Early
In IndIa
Gregory Schopen
i'"),,,
. In August, 1977, an inscribed image pedestal was recovered
Y;()m Govindnagar, on the western outskirts of Mathura City, I
:r\vhich made available for the first time Indian epigraphical evi-
for the early phases of that "movement" which we have
i:tbme to call "the Mahayana." The inscription contained an un-
reference to the Buddha Amitabha and what appears
/i'iobe an early form of the donative formula invariably associated
the Mahayana in later inscriptions (see below p.120). It
contained a precise date: "the 26th year of the Great King
Assuming that 78 A.D. marked the beginning of the
Era, this would give 104 A.D.2
significance of this find is clear if it is kept in mind
",that the earliest known occurrences of the term mahayana in
;iridian inscriptions all date to the 5th/6th century: one from
8;,ullaighar, in Bengal, dated 506 A.D., one from Jayarampur,
:liiOrissa, ascribed to the 5th or beginning of the 6th century-
of which also refer to Avalokitdvara-and a fragmentary
))1scription from Ajama.3 The earliest known epigraphical refer-
to Amitabha prior to the Govindnagar inscription occurred
fin a fragmentary slab inscription from Sand which Majumdar
to the end of the 7th century, and even here the reference
not to an independent image of Amitabha but occurs in what
appears to have been an extended hymn of praise to Avalokitd-
Moreover, the "classical" Mahayana donative formula oc-
rrednowhere before the 4th/5th century.s At Mathura itself
;},i
99
100
JIABSVOL.IONO.2
the not occur. at all, and, prior td:
the Govmdnagar the earlIest Mathuran
reference t? a Mahayana figure that w.e occurred in a 5th
century epigraph and was to Avalokitesvara.
6
At Mathura ...
everywhere else, the earliest occurrence of the Mahayana d;n::,
tive formula cannot be dated before the 4th/5th century. Th'
Govindnagar inscription therefore predates anything else thai
we had for "the Mahayana"-whether from Mathura or from:
India as a whole-by at least two or three centuries. . ......
Happily, the importance of the Govindnagar inscription'
was almost immediately recognized and it was quickly pUblished.
by H. Nakamura, B.N. Mukherjee, and by R.e. Sharma more
than once.
7
Several art historians also were quick to utilize it::
J.C. Huntington, on several occasions, J. Guy and SJ. Czuma
have all referred to it as evidence for their individual arguments.B'
I myself have discussed it very briefly in terms of its relationship
to the "classical" Mahayana donative formula.
9
".
Unhappily, the two most widely and'easily available editions:
of the inscription differ markedly at crucial points. Neither
altogether reliable and are in different .misleading.f.
A good deal of the second hne and both the begmnmg and end
of the fourth line, are-along with individual a'k.aras
not well preserved, but neither Mukherjee nor Sharma is very'
careful in indicating this. Sharma in particular has made a
number of silent "corrections" and emendations in his text ot
the inscription. Mukherjee does this as well, but in addition
omits syllables, and in one case an entire word, from his text..;
These silent "corrections," emendations and omissions have,6f...
course, misled on occasion those who have used either
myself included. But the sometimes misleadiIfg editions account:
only in part for the fact that several scholars have tried to geK:
out of the inscription much more than is in it, and have
looked much of what it actually contained. This, it seems,
result of the fact that the inscription has not been read and:
interpreted in anything like its proper context. At the very leasf'
. it has to be read as a piece of epigraphy and evaluated
and interpreted in comparison with other inscriptions:
from Mathura, as well as contemporary or near contemporary:
inscriptions from-especially-Gandhara, and other Buddhis(
sites. il.
Before the inscription can be properly evaluated, therefore;
THE AMIT ABHA INSCRIPTION 101
th'I'ngs are required: the text it contains must be reliably
.
and the te.xt must be fixed firmly m the ?f
::ftlie other BuddhIst epIgraphs are contemporary_wIth
it"d both preceded and followed It, not only at Mathura, but m
and at the other Indian Buddhist sites as well. I have
to do both here. .

{r "

My edition of the inscription is based on both the published
mJhotographslo on a set of taken by my col-
who very sent to me
made It pOSSIble for me to dIsagree wIth some of hIS
My edition is-in part as a reaction to those already
conservative one. I have tried to avoid "reconstruc-
:tions" or emendations unless there was very strong support from
tiIffiown parallels. This has resulted in something less than a
text, but it is, in compensation, a text which I hope is
)!a.t1east an accurate reflexion of what remains on the stone and
can legitimately be taken as certain.
,\)\;;\,:1" '
The Text:
p. .L. 1 mah(ii)rajasya (sar(L) 20 6 va 2 di 20 6
'/' "\,
2 (etaye pu[r}vaye) sax-cakasya satthavahasya P[i}t[-x](rp)[-x}
. 'balakattasya niittikena
L. 3 buddha(pi)la(na) putra(rp)a bhagavato bud-
:;4Sya amitiibhasya pratimii ii )Pi[tii](. . .)
L. 4 [Sa](rva)buddhapujiiye im(e)na k(u)salam(u)lena
anut(t)ara(r(L) bud( dh)ajniinar(L prii(pnva)r(L(tu)(. . .)
::N6tes to the Text
".e(These "notes," in fact the rest of section II, may be skipped
those few readers who are not particularly interested in the
<paleography or the minutiae of Indian Epigraphy. It is here,
that I justify my reading of the inscription and indicate
"JJllY understanding of its grammar.)
if: M reads the king's name as Huvash(ka)s(ya), SII as
;:-:: ,
Y;';;'"

:
102
JIABS VOL. 10 NO.2
but there be l.ittl.e that is -ve-.
a10ara in our IS. vIrtually IdentICal wIth the read'
by Luders as -ve-: agam m .. the name of th: same kIng, in Mi'
No. 180. There m fact Luders says of thIS that it \,i'i
distinctly -ve-" (p. 206 _n.2; cf. MI.No. 176 and EI, pI. I
No. 125, from Mathura), both -vedzka). The -y- of -sya has bee';
lost where a bit of stone has been chipped
Although indistinct the is fairly and-althought
at first 20 8-the 20 6 IS vIrtually certam (cf. esp. MI
72 and OJha pI. LXXI, top column 3).\:
. M. reads the month as (va)4. Though somewhat
va is sure, but M's 4 is unsupportable. S, oddly enough,
not read any number at all after va in his edition,
translation "of the second month" presupposes a 2. In
though faint, a numeral 2 after va is fairly sure.)\
, //
Line 2
The first part of line 2 is difficult to read. As a result of
fact that the stone has been rounded off the upper portion 6[
the first six or eight has been lost, as well as the
signs for several other in the line. Numerous parallell!
from Mathura would lead us to expect, immediately after
date, something like etasyan:t purvvayam (MI No. 15), asyan:t
vayyam (MI No. 30), etasa purvaya (MI No. 150), etc. S reads'
etasya purvaya, but the conjunct -sya occurs four times in this'
line and a comparison of the third in the line with any,
of these makes it virtually certain that it cannot be that. M's
is much more likely. It is virtually certain that the following'
is pu-, not pu-. As a close parallel for my (etaye puroaye)
MI No. 182-etaye purvay[eJ-may be cited. ,.,.r
The next four which appear to constitute the firX
proper name, are relatively sure except for the second
a conjunct. S reads satvakasya, but his -tva-, as a glance at the'
numerous instances of that conjunct in inscriptions
Mathura would indicate, is extremely unlikely. The bottom por:!
tion is almost certainly -c-, the upper portion could be any of
several letters -r},t,n- but almost certainly not -n-. M reai
sancha(? )kasya. It appears impossible to interpret the
factorily in its present state. ;1
M's reading of the next five as satthavahasya, seems-?
THE AMITABHA INSCRIPTION 103
from the long a after v-sure (cf. EHS 68). S's sarthavahasya
correspond with what can be on the .stone, e.spe-
of these and IS essentIally a sIlent
j,i"Qrrnahzatl0n.
next three are very problematic. In additon to
that virtually all vowel markers that would have occurred
the have been rounded off, the stone on which
and third of these are written is both abraded
There appears to be a trace of an i-matra on the
but it is far from certain. Neither S's pautreyta nor
pitriyta is verifiable, but we would expect here the instrumen-
talof a term of relationship. Pitrna, which is attested in literary
ji
O
)1fCeS, is possible and might be reconciled with what remains
6Elhe (BHSG para. 13.38), but pitryta in epi-
;graphical sources has generally been interpreted as gen. pI.
(EHS 118-19).
';".My reading of the remainder of line 2 agrees with M. S's
ik(i)rtasya sres.thisya nattikena does not correspond with what is
readable in the photographs.
;\ .. ,

:19'iLine 3.
!];/The first two syllables of line 3 are fairly surely buddha- but
J.vertical groove has been worn right through the middle of
the third Enough remains of this to suggest a p-
"Mth what appears to be a fairly distinct i-matra. Then follows a
UlSvithout-as far as I can see-any vowel matra, which is followed
In turn by what appears to be (na). If, as seems to be the case,
thIS is yet another proper name, it has no case ending. S reads
balena, but that the fourth is not -le- is clear iEit
is compared with the certain -le- in the middle of the next line.
Moreover we would expect a gen. here not an inst. M in fact
has read a gen., buddhabalasya, but he seems to query it, and
the fifth is -sya is extremely unlikely, as a comparison
Fith the numerous clear instances of -syain our inscription will
show.
;',Similar difficulties are also encountered in the next word.
Teads putreyta, but I can see no e-matra after -tr-, although the
syllable could be read -yte. M reads putrayta, but this, like my
putra(yt)a, creates grammatical problems. We should expect here,
of course, an inst.
104
]IABSVOL.IONO.2
Fortunately, the rest of line 3 is clear. M reads the dono ,:
name as Samraksh(i)tena, but this is wrong. is
tain and so S has read it.
M omits -sya after buddha-, but this probably resulted fro
a slip of the pen. It is very clear in the photographs. Itt?
M has assumed that the -pi of prati-1th(a)pi[taj was the last
written in line 3. He reads the first extant of
4 then as -tao But this, as we shall see, is not possible. S assUllles'
on the other hand, that at least one syllable. has been lost at
end of line 3 reads The Ill.tende? reading is,
of course, not III doubt. That a -ta III fact or IlltentlOn followed
prati.<jth(a)Pi- is virtually certain (cf. MI Nos. 4, 23, 27, 29, 74
94, etc.). What is not certain is if more than one has
lost at the end of line 3. This is compounded by the fact that
at least one syllable also seems to have been lost at the beginning
of line 4.
Line 4.
The fourth and final line presents a number of difficulties,"
and the readings ofM and S differ markedly. Both the beginning
and end of the line are damaged, the corners of the base appar,
ently having again gotten rounded off and the stone somewhat
abraded. The bottom portion of several has also been
lost by the same process. It is not certain whether line 4 begati
with the first extant In fact, there are some indications
that at least one syllable has been lost at the beginning of the:
line. To judge from what remains of the inscription, each line
began more or less at the same distance from the edge of the
stone-although line 1 may have been slightly. indented. The
first ak-1ara of each line appears to have been written more or
less directly beneath the first of the line immediately
above it. If this had been the case for line 4 as well, it would
appear very likely that one has disappeared. M has ig-
nored this possibility, as well as the possibility that one or more
have been lost at the end of line 3. He reads the first
extant ak-1ara of line 4 as ta and takes it as the final syllable of
the prati.<jth(a)Pi- which now ends line 3. But this is not just
problematic in terms of the likelihood of syllables having been:
lost both at the end of line 3 and at the beginning of line 4; it is.
also problematic from a strictly palaeographic point-of-view.
'ahara in questior: be .ta. very clear
of -t- occur our mscnptlOn, wIth a vowel
and a companson of the first akJara of hne 4 wIth any
)f,Nf'.th
ese
it out. In fact it is virtually certain that t?is
;J(fi' st aharals a conjunct. The lower part of the akJara looks lIke
f If l'd" h 'd If h b f h " "
;}.wiRorn
an
V at on Its ng t SI e. t e ottom 0 t e v were
closed to a triangle-this is not perfectly clear in
could only be taken Brahml v._
'i{likelihood that the lower part of our akJara IS mdeed a Brahml
;Tv
is
supported in fact by a number of considerations. On at least
t{hv
o
other occasions-in (purvaye) in line 2; in bhagavato in line
,3--o
ur
scribe has written his v in much the same way. In these
"'ihstances, too, what should be the right leg of the triangle, if it
i;jphere at all, is not at all strongly cut (this is especially the case
in the Huntington photos). Oddly enough the upper part of
ahara also confirms the strong likelihood that the lower
;cpart is a v. It cannot easily be anything else than a superscribed
I'.;r-, and our scribe uses exactly the same, somewhat distinctive,
>iform of superscribed -r- when he attaches it-again to v-in the
;da.rnaged but certain sarva-Iater in this same line. A very similar
cform-again attached to v-can be seen in at least two other
i'JIlscriptions from Mathura dated in reign (MI Nos.
?:3Land 126).
,', If, however, the first extant akJara of line 4 is rva-and this
:'seems fairly sure-then it is equally sure that this cannot be the
;beginning of the first word of the line. Something had to have
;preceded it either in this line or at the end of line 3, and this
'1sjust one more indication that at least one or more syllables
have been lost. If numerous parallels from Mathura allow us to
sure that one of these lost syllables was the final ta of
.prat4th(a)pi[ta}, other but equally numerous parallels allow us
t() be equally sure of what another of those syllables was.
.... There is no doubt about the five akJaras that follow (rva) in
line 4. They can only be read as -buddhapuJaye, although both
M and S read -pu-. With the virtual certainty that at least one
syllable-and probably more-came before (rva) we would then
" have: x( rva )buddhapuJaye. Just this ill uch makes it virtually certain
that the intended reading was some form of a formula that
?ccurs in at least nine inscriptions
l2
and, more impor-
:tantly, in at least eight other inscriptions from Mathura. The
formula occurs assarva[pjuddhapujart[thja[mj inM1 No. 29 (dated;
in the 51st year of as sarvabudhapujaye in M1 No. 80
(classified by Luders as as sarvabudhap(u)[ja](y)e in
M1 No. 86 (also classified by Luders as' it also occurs
in M1 No. 89 (which Luders classifies as Sunga) as savabudhanarn
pujaya; as sa[rjva(bu)[dhajpucaye in M1 No. 123 (dated in
270th year of an unspecified era but again classified by LUders
as as [sajrvabuddhapujaye in MI No. 157 (dated in the
16th year of as sarvabudhapujaye in M1 No. 187; and
as savabudhapujaye in an inscription recen'tly discovered at
daban. The same basic formula also occurs as savabudhanam
pujaye in an inscription from KausambI "in Brahm! characteis
of about the first century A.D.;" as savabudhapujaya in a Brahmi
inscription from Nasik; and as sarvabudhiinan; pujatham in a 1st
century inscription from Sravastl. 13
These parallels indicate that the formula sarvabuddhapujaye
had a wide geographic distribution in the; first centuries of the
Common Era and that it was an attested set phrase in Mathuran
inscriptions both before our inscription (in perhaps both the
Sunga and periods, and in the 16th year
and shortly after it (in the 51st year of This frequent'
and attested occurrence of the formula at Mathura, taken to::
gether with the still extant in our inscription, makes it
virtually certain that a sa- in fact or intention preceded the (rvaf
at the beginning of line 4, and that the whole should be
structed as [saj(rva)buddhapujaye. S, too, reads sarva at the begin-
ning of the line-(sarva) buddha pujaye- but he does so with no
indication of the problems involved and without any supportive
argument. This is not only methodologically unacceptable, but
in regard to this particular formula it is especially unsatisfactory.
The presence of this formula in our inscription is-as we shall
see-extremely important for what it can tell us about the early
history of that "movement" we now call "the Mahayana." .
The three that follow [sa](rva)buddhapujaye are, apart
from the vowel matra of m-, clear and unproblematic. M's (1)1mtna
is at least in part almost certainly the result of a printing error;
i.e., t for e; but his (I) and his capitalization are inexplicable.S
reads imena and this is undoubtedly correct although the e-matrii
of m- is not absolutely sure, especially on the Huntington photo-'
graphs. . ..
-M and S read the next six aks,aras in exactly the same way
"cept in regard to the length of the -u attached to m-. S read
short, M as long. In fact theu-matra here-as well as in the
of the k- which begins this collocation-is simply not clear.
In both cases the u-matra would have occurred beneath the
in places which have now been chipped or rounded off.
Both M and S read the next two aks,aras as sarva. The sa- is
and the following aks,ara, though damaged, is almost cer-
tainly -rva-. It has almost exactly the same upper portion as the
ifirs
t
extant aks,ara of the line, the same elongated vertical stroke
same-though slightly shorter-horizontal top bar, here
sandwiched between the bottoms of two aks,aras in the line above
it. The left leg and the start of the bottom stroke of a BrahmI
Vare clear underneath it, but again, as with the first extant
aMara of the line, little trace of the stroke that should have
formed the right leg is discernible, although the stone in part
has been chipped away here .
. After sa(rva)- M reads (satana) and S (satva). As the use of
parentheses by both would suggest, the stone has to a large
pegree peeled away here and the reading is not entirely sure.
it is, however, certain that there were only two aks,aras here and
lhat, as a consequence, M's (satana) is impossible. What remains
9fthe two aks,aras is fairly surely the upper part of a sa- and the
tIpper part of a tao The long a-matra attached to the t is quite
distinct. -(sat)[vJa can therefore be accepted with reasonable cer-
and this, in turn, is a reading of some significance:
sar(va)(sat)[vJti can hardly be anything but the grammatical sub-
ject of this final sentence.
. The next four aks,aras are almost certainly anut(t)ara(rlJ). The
tight leg of the subjoined -t- in the third aks,ara has been chipped
away, but enough remains to indicate its former presence. Apart
from this, the only question is whether there is an anusvara after
-ra. In Professor Huntington's photographs, as well as in those
published by S, a dot above and slightly to the left of the -ra
appears to be fairly sure, although it is not so well defined as
the one above the na that occurs a few aks,aras later in this same
line. Moreover, its placement to the left of the ra is easily ac-
counted for: there is a subscribed -y- on the aks,ara immediately
above the ra which takes up the space where the anusvara would
normally go. Although neither S or M reads an anusvara, I think
108
]IABSVOL.IONO.2
it probable that we must. Note that the following compound.......::
whichanuttara would modify-ends in a clear anusvara.
There are very clearly four after anut(t)ara(n:t). I\.f
has unaccountably read only the last two. He reads only jiiiinarn ..
S reads buddha jiiana'f(l, and while -jiiana'f(l is virtually
-ii- is, however, only partially visible-the dh- of buddha-, if indeed
it had been present, has all but disappeared. The collocation
buddha occurs three other times in our inscription. "A comparison
of our two in line 4 with these o.ther occurrences Would
seem to suggest that the original reading in line 4 was bUda-
only. Note that in the other occurrences the dh- is attached to
the d- in such a way that it occurs on exactly the same level as
the u-matra of the preceding bu-. This was clearly not the case.
here. It is, of course, not unlikely that even if the original reading
was buda- this was only a scribal error for buddha-. Unfortunately
there are no parallels to help us out here. The "classical" form
of the formula involving anuttara-jiiana, though frequent, is
much later, and apart from two exceptions there is never any-
thing between anuttara- and -jiiana. One of the exceptions re-
ferred to occurs in an inscription on the base of a small bronze
image of the Buddha from Dhanesar Khera. Smith and Hoey
say that the inscription is "probably not later than A.D. 400,'
and certainly not later than A.D. 500." Sircar dates it to "about'
the beginning of the fifth century A.D."14 Here instead of the;
"classical" anuttara-jiiana the inscription has anuttara-pada-jiiana.
It is then just possible, but only that, that buda-if that was the
original reading in our line 4--may have been a scribal error
not for buddha-, but for pada. This, however, seems unlikely.
The other exception-a 7th century inscription on a small
bronze Buddha from the Terai area of Southeastern Nepal.....:..:
indirectly supports the reading bud(dh)a-. It inserts not buddhac,
but a comparable epithet, sarvajiia, between anuttara- and -jiiana:
[a Jnuttara-sarvva-jiia-jiianavaptaye. 15
The final of the line present serious problems. There
are at least three which are extant-in whole or in part-
after -jiiana'f(l. It is possible that there were more: the bottom
right hand corner of the front of the pedestal has been knocked.
entirely off. Of the three that remain, only the first is
clearly readable, and even it is slightly damaged. Confronted
.' with this situation, we should not be surprised that the readings
Sand M are conjectural. S rea?s but this not
:;i"nly does not make any sense grammatIcally, It IS also completely
.:\econcilable with what remains of the ak<jaras. A glance at
,/festhasya in line 2, or kwala- in line 4 makes it unmistakably
that the first of our final ak<jaras cannot possibly be sra-
;,'6r involve a palatals in any way. Moreover, the second of these
:;U,haras-however it be read-is just as dearly a conjunct. These
make it certain that S's reading must be rejected.
"ii1's reading-"pratp(i)m (should be praptim) (bha)(va)(tu)"-has
. 'the merit of being in part at least more reconcilable with what
'remains of the ak<jaras, but it too is problematic. If-as seems
!;fairly surely the case-sar(va)(sat)[vJa is the subject of the sen-
,'tence, then M's (bha)(va)(tu) will not work. For it to do so it
Would have to be plural and we would have to have a com ple-
;'Jhent that would express a state of being or condition as in, for
a 4th or 5th century inscription from Kanheri where
:'\ve find: anena sarvvasatva buddha bhavantu.
16
Moreover, the last
temaining ak<jara in line 4 would have to have been bha to fit
M's reading, but enough remains to make it certain that it could
'hot have been that (cf. bha, twice in line 3).
..... Again, if sar(va)(sat)[vJa is subject of the final sentence of
(our inscription, then anut(t)ara(11J) bud( dh)ajiiana11J would appear
'io be not nominative neuters, but accusatives, and therefore the
6bjects of a transitive verb--bud( dh)ajiiana11J as a bahuvrzhi seems
very unlikely. The numerous-though later-"classical" occur-
ences of anuttarajiiana- in Buddhist inscriptions, though always
:incompound, might also lead us to expect an accusative con-
.struction, although in these occurrences anuttarajiiana- is invar-
constructed as the object of some form of a derivative of
V,iiP in a genitive tatpuru!ia: anuttarajiianavaptaye. We would ex-
pect then that the final ak<jaras of line 4 contained a transitive
verb. Moreover, since our inscription most certainly does not
read sarvasatvena or sarvasatvanam or the like, but almost cer-
tainly sarvasatva, we would also expect that transitive verb to be
and the Kanheri inscription just cited, as well as everything
we know about the syntax of Buddhist donative inscriptions
would lead us to expect further that that finite transitive verb
would have been perhaps in the optative, more probably in the
imperative mood. Finally, both context and the numerous later
OCcurrences of anuttarajiiana would make it fairly sure that the
110
JIABS VOL. 10 NO.2
finite, probably imperative verb that ended our inscription w
probably a derivative of the root .Viii !hese expectations
be to at least some degree reconCIled wIth what remains of the
aksaras. ':
.' The first of final in line 4, though'
slIghtly damaged, IS almost certamly pra-. One can compare it'
with prii- in MI Nos. 46, 74, 124, 133, and 178, and with th '.
two occurrences of pra- in the line immediately above it. Th:'
second ak)'ara-which M read as -tp(i)rh and corrected to -Ptim-is
again almost certainly a conjunct, one element of which appears'
to be a -p-. The anusviira, if that is .what it is, is not directly
above the ak)'ara, although there IS ample room for It there, but;
above the space between the ak)'ara and the one that follows it.
Only a fraction of the last ak)'ara remains. It might, but only.
very conjecturally, be taken as a t-. Taken together, this would
allow us to read priix-(p)-X-r(l(t)-x, which with the greatest reserve
might be reconstructed as pra(pnva)r(lt(u). ,Such a reconstruction
would at least conform to what remains of the ak)'aras and to
both the grammatical and syntactical requirements. It would
also give a good reading for what seems to be the required
sense. Still, it remains very tentative, and I know of no exact
parallels that would support it.
17
It must also be kept in mind
that one or more ak)'aras may.have followed those that remain ..
This simply cannot be determined.
III.
Although the general purport of the inscription is clear, as,:
well as a good deal of its specific phrasing, there are a numbe((
of elements which are not. At least two of the proper nouns'
and two of the kinship terms are unclear because the condition'
of the stone does not allow for a sure reading. The same applies.
to the final verb of the final sentence in our inscription. A third ..
kinship term-niittikena-is problematic in a different way: al-\
though there is no doubt about the reading, neither its meaning'.:
nor its form is well attested. IS A translation that is sure on all
but these points can, however, be made:
The 26th year of the Great King the 2nd month, the"
26th day. On this day by the (father) of the trader
THE AMIT ABBA INSCRIPTION 111
(Sax-caka), the grandson of the merchant Balakatta, the (son of
Buddhapila), an image of the Blessed One, the Buddha Amitabha
was set up for the worship of all buddhas. Through this root of
merit (may) aU living things (obtain) the unexcelled knowledge
of a buddha.
l Two things are immediately clear about our inscription: it
as I have said, both an unambiguous reference to the
\"Buddha Amitabha, and an equally unambiguous and unexpec-
"tedly early date. Again, as I have already said, the earliest known
;'tererence to Amitabha in Indian epigraphical sources prior to
i:()llrinscription occurred in a 7th century epigraph from Sanci.
l'What is not so clear, of course, is what this means. Both Mukher-
Sharma, for example, have seen the inscription as evi-
for the early presence of "the Dhyiinz Buddha Tradition."
latter, in fact, explicitly declares that "the most important
;PQint is that it [our inscription] establishes the prevalence of the
tphyiinz Buddha Tradition just in the beginning of the second
A.D."19 Sharma also makes clear what he means by "the
;JJhyiinz Buddha Tradition" by his frequent citations of V.S. Ag-
,:rawala's "Dhyanl Buddhas and Bodhisattvas"2o: he means that
;elaborately schematic construct in which the five "iidibuddhas"
provided each with a corresponding bodhisattva,
"buddha, mudrii, viihana, etc., and which B. Bhattacharya has ar-
gued does not occur anywhere in the literature prior to the 8th
century.2! Unfortunately, while he cites Agrawala's paper,
Sharma does not cite de Mallmann's refutation of the argument
presents there for the early existence of the dhyiinz
buddha complex at Mathura.
22
This need not be surprising, how-
ever, since the points made by de Mallmann against Agrawala
are equally applicable to both Sharma's and Mukherjee's re-
marks. The primary difficulty is that all three ignore certain
facts. There is, of course, no doubt that Amitabha has an impor-
tant role in "the Dhyiinz Buddha Tradition," but there is also no
doubt that he had an important role as an independent figure,
and there is no doubt either that his role as an independent
figure was primary and continued to be primary. His role in
thedhyiinz buddha complex can only be documented in late liter-
ature of a very specific and restricted kind. His role as an in de"
pendent figure, however, is easily.documented from the very
beginnings of Mahayana sidra lIterature, not only in the
Sukhiivattvyuha but in other early texts like the Pratyutpan_
nabuddhasar(tmukhavasthitasamadhi
23
and Samadhiraja
24
, as well as
perhaps, the Ajitasenavyakara7j,anirdeSa.
25
These texts attest
only to his early independent character but also indicate that
his primary association is not with the dhyanz buddha
which these texts know nothing about-:-but with Sukhavati, his
"buddhafield," as a place of potential 'rebirth. And these texts
are almost certainly nearly contemporaneous with our inscrip_
tion. Moreover, Amitabha's role as an independent figure COlh-
pletely free of any connection with "the Dhyanz Buddha Tradic
tion" continues to be amply attested throughout what might be
called "the middle Mahayana" period in texts like the
guru-sutra,26 the Buddhabaladhiinapratihiirya
27
-'-both of which are
concerned in part with the ritual use and making of images-the
Karu7j,apu7j,darzka,28 the 29 etc.
What is perhaps even more important is the fact that Amitabha's
independent role continues to be primary in texts which were
almost certainly written after the dhyanz buddha complex might
have been articulated in at least some form. This is the case,
for example, in Mahayana Avadana texts like the Rate
namalavadana and the Kalpadrumavadanamala.
30
This is also the
case for the the Rasmivimalavisuddhap-
rabhii, the Samantamukhapravesa, the Dasa- and Saptabuddhaka-
sutras, the Sitatapatra, etc., many of which are known by ar-
cheological and epigraphical evidence to have circulated widely
until at least the 10th century.3! These texts, if they know
Amitabha at all, know him as the resident Buddha of Sukhavati,'
not as one of the complex of dhyanz buddhas. In fact in this late
literature Amitabha, rather than gaining in importance as we
might expect if the dhyanz buddha conception had had any im-
pact, actually is mentioned less and less. The entire focus has
shifted to his buddhafield, to Sukhavati itself, as a place of
rebirth. Moreover, exactly the same pattern can be traced for
the buddha of the buddhas incorporated int?
the dhyanz buddha complex-from the very early
sutra,32 through the whole of Middle Mahayanasutra literature,33
up to the late Sarvakarmavara7j,avisodhanz-dhara7j,z.34 From the
was. prin:arily, in fact almost exclusively,
figure wIth hIS own buddhafield. And he re-
so even after "the Dhyanf Buddha Tradition" had been
.::.' . ."t.lc.ulated.
'rear
is not to say that Amitabha does not occasionally appear
of a "group" of buddhas in Middle Mahayana sidra liter-
He-like but these "appearances" occur
!'}fa part of what appears to be no more than a set narrative
In this. set narrative. piece, buddhas from various ,?ud-
number vanes but they commonly have a direc-
association-:--eome together in one place (on two occasions
i;:ieis an individual's house) to impart a specific teaching. Their
is with a. more or
/.stereotyped set of transformatIOns and photlC events. ThIS
;,'qevice appears to be designed to signal the degree of the signifi-
":cance of the teaching involved, a way of narratively indicating
'i,itssignificance. In the Suvarryabhiisottama-sutra, both Amitabha
;i'and appear to a bodhisattva as two of a "group" of
which the text earlier called "the buddhas in the four
They transform the bodhisattva's house in typical
X.fashion and then in unison impart the "explanation of the meas-
of the life of the Lord Sakyamuni" (bhagavatalr sakyamuner
;;ayuh.pramaryanirde.sa7IJ).35 In the Vimalakfrtinirde.sa, both Amitabha
again appear as two members of a "group" of
named buddhas who together with "the innumerable
.tathagatas of the ten directions" are said to come to Vimalaklrti's
;jHouse whenever he wishes them to "precher l'introduction a la
,lpi (dharmamukhapravesa) intitulee Tathiigataguhyaka,"36 In the
both again appear as two members of a group
,2fsix directional bLfddhas who come together in a great assembly
)(mahasannipata) at Sakyamuni's request. Their appearance trans-
i'(forms the audience. They then in unison deliver a specific
Ahliraryf.
37
\ Though different in detail all three "events" are clearly built
fj1p.on the same basic narrative frame and all three serve the
/same purpose: they all are used to indicate the importance of
"teaching" or pronouncement by narratively indicat-
.jug that it comes from and is taught be "all the buddhas from
the directions." This directional emphasis is a constant.
h
S
? too is the fact that the place where all the directional buddhas
come together-Vimalakirti's house, the house of the Suvarn';;(
bodhisattva, the Assembly of Sakyamuni-is explicitly or ias,;
plicitly assimilated to a buddhafield.38 nt ..
Thurman, referring only to the Vimalaklrti,39 and Hu}!
tington, only to SuvarTJa,40 failed to
the narratIve structure and mtent of theIr passages and tried (;
see in them the descriptions of maTJqalas in a specific
sense; the latter, in fact, wants his passage to represent eve
more specifically "the Mar::u;iala of Vairocana," and, therefor:r
the "Dhyani Buddha Tradition." But neither Thurman nor
tington seems to have been aware of the fact that their individual'-
passages had parallels elsewhere in Mahayana sidra literature;
and that they were only variants of a standard narrative structur{
which has a consistent literary function but no demonstrable;
connection with tantric maTJqalas. Moreover, both ignore thefact'
that the passages themselves both explicitly and implicitly assiIlli.;
late the places where the directional buddhas temporarily reside
not to maTJqalas, but to buddhafields. To this can be added
fact that in neither case can the list of buddhas be reconciled
any specific established maTJqala without convoluted and
stantiated "equations."41 But perhaps the most telling point is;
the fact that in both cases what would be the one essential indi:
cation of a tantric connection is simply not there. Neither passage
knows a thing about the buddha Vairocana, and it is hard to see,
how one could have a description of "the Mal)<;l.ala of V
without Vairocana himself.
42
Oddly enough, Vairocana does ap.;'
pear in the Ratnaketuparivarta passage as one of the six
tional buddhas, but even here it is quite clear that he is no more,'
important than any of the other five, and he is clearly not the
central figure of the group. He is simply the buddha "froIn'
below," "from the nadir" (adhastad), a Jnanarasmiraja being the
Buddha "from above," "from the zenith" (agradigbhagiit). .'
It is, of course, significant that a text like the Rat:.)
naketuparivarta, a text which is both relatively late and clearly
knows the Buddha Vairocana, knows nothing of the dhyiint
buddha tradition.
43
That even when Amitabha occurs as one ()f
a "group" of directional Buddhas in Mahayana sidra literatu:r:ei,
that "group" has no connection with the dhyiini buddha traditio
ll
is equally significant. All of this, in fact, would seem to indicate
that not only was Amitabha's role as a dhyiini buddha seconda.ry
THE AMITABHA INSCRIPTION
115
it was even then very"little known outside of a very
scholastic literature and had little, if any, impact on
literature as a whole even after it had been formally
" This, in turn, makes it very difficult to see how the
inscription can be referring to Amitabha in this
Huntington has questioned the association of the
inscription with the dhyiini buddha form of
from a different, but equally important, point-of-view.
image was, as far as we can tell, a single image
alone. The inscription tells us that much. It was
of a set. But, as Huntington points out, "the separate
___ of a single image as an object of devotion is completely
keeping with any known pancajina [i.e., dhyiini buddha]
Unfortunately, however, Professor Huntington's
... r,"'''1r", is-thougIi in different ways-equally prob-
sees our inscription as "a key document in the
of Sukhavati cult Buddhism." He elsewhere in the same
uses the terms "the Sukhavati cults" and "the cult of
"45 but he nowhere gives these terms anything like a
meaning and it is difficult, as a consequence, to know
he intends. If he means by "Sukhavati Cult" or "the Cult
. " the kind of" we know from Chinese
, epigraphical, and art historical-then it is still difficult
how our inscription can be used to establish an Indian
" of the same thing.
our Chinese sources make it abundantly clear that the
crucial element involved in these cults was the intent
rebirth in Sukhavati. Religious activity of all sorts was
to this end. E. Zurcher says: "On September 11, 402
Hui-yuan assembled the monks and laymen of his commu-
before an image of the Buddha Amitabha in a vihiira on
side of the mountain [Lu-shan], and together with
made the vow to be reborn in SukhavatL .. the "vow before
has been taken in later times to mark the beginning
Pure Land sect."46 At Lung-men it is not simply the
of numerous images of Amitabha which testify to the
there of a Sukhavati Cult-Amitabha, in fact, is only
.of a series of Mahayana buddhas imaged there. Nor does
116 JIABSVOL.IO NO.2
the expression there by donors of a wish "que tous les hi
doues de vie ... s'elevent ensemble a l'intelligence COlTecte." '.
"goal'; has nothing specifically to do with a cult of Amitab
but in' Gupta and post-Gup
IndIa-pan-Mahayana. It IS, rather, the frequently express
"wish" of donors that their meritorious acts result in rebirth'
Sukhavatl which establishes and specifically characterizes t'
Sukhavatl Cult at Lung-men (see inscription Nos. 8, 26,31,3
42, 90, 120, 135, 154, 168, 172, 179, 191, 195, 196, 197,23
248, 268, 269, 270, 274, 275, 282, 201, 375, 405, 406, 49
464).47 In fact, the desire to achieve rebirth in Sukhavati w
and always remained the pr-imary definitional component of
these "cults." Curiously enough, our inscription knows nothi"
of this. It explicitly expresses the donor's intentions, but the
intentions have nothing to do with rebirth in SukhavatL Rath
they are in part-as we shall see-the same intentions that w
expressed by numerous donors in early India who almost c
tainlyhad no connection with a "Sukhavatl Cult," and in pa
the same intentions that were later expressed by all Mahayanil
who, again, had no demonstrable connection with a "Sukhava
Cult." Professor Huntington asserts in the face of this that 0';
inscription "contains several advanced features of the cult [
Sukhavatl]''' He says "the accumulation of roots of me'
kuSalamula, and the hearing of the highest buddha knowledg
anuttarabuddhajiiiina, are features of the later forms of the cuI
as evidenced by the Wei, Tang and Sanskrit versions of the
called 'Larger Sukhavatlvyiiha Siitra.' "48 But even if this 1
were true, our inscription contains neither. Our inscription sa
nothing about "the accumulation of roots of merit," but rather.
in typical epigraphical fashion-expresses the donor's wish
divest himself of his "roots of merit" by "transferring" them
all living things. And while it is not perfectly clear exactly
it is our inscription hopes will be done in regard to
dhajiiiina, it most certainly is not "be heard." Professor
tington was here, at least in part, misled by Sharma's
. tural-and, as we have seen, impossible-reading of the
syllables of our inscription. It is absolutely certain that
syllables cannot be read as sriivita'Y(l,.
If, then, our inscription cannot be taken as evidence for the
,i!',;','1,',1"',1,Y existence at Mathura of "the Dhyani Buddha tradition,"
",ear , . b k 'd f' I d' .
if it cannot e ta en as eVl ence or an ear y In Ian verslOn
Sukhavati: Cult," still-when put in its proper context-it
us, perhaps, some important things about the early
i'Zthases of what we have come to call "the Mahayana." As a first
this direction we might. start again some remarks
Sharma, Mukherjee, and Huntmgton. All three
form or another want to claim that our inscription estab-
the "prevalence" or "popularity" of Amitabha-however
conceived-in the period in Northern India and
tiilMathura in particular.
49
But when put in the context of what
{is'actually known so far of North Indian epigraphy our inscrip-
rather than establishing the "popularity" of Amitabha
establishes something very like the opposite. There is not
'a'single undisputed reference to Amitabha anywhere in our
corpus of inscriptions from Gandhara and
if,torthwest India-neither before, during, or after the
f.Reriod. Epigraphically, he did not exist.
50
There is not a single
to Amitabha in any of the dozens of inscriptions we
from other sites in Northern KausambI,
etc.-until the 7th century inscription from Saud. Until
litlien, epigraphically, he did not exist at Saud, and again, he
;}l:ever existed at our other sites. About Amitabha's "popularity"
we can be even more precise.
" If we use Das' "list" together with biders' collection of in-
from Mathura, and supplement both with more recent
it would appear that we have at least 159 separate
;;llpage inscriptions from Mathura that are dated in, or can be
.. a,ssigned to, the Period. Of these, at least 26 are so frag-
ilrientary that their sectarian affiliation cannot be determined.
51
'Qfthe remaining 133, at least 85 are Jain and record the erection
;OfJain images,52 4 are connected with the Naga cults, 53 and 1
the establishment of an image of Karttikeya.
54
Only 43
of the I 33-or less than one third of the inscriptions-are Bud-
i.cJhist.
55
This means, of course, that, to judge by the in-
118
JIABS VOL. 10 NO.2
scriptions known so far from Mathura, Buddhism itself was
d h
., . ere;,
an . t en a mmonty movement/:
i
{*,
If it is clear-in so far as we can judge from known ins
tions-that Buddhism generally was a distinct minority
ment in Mathura, it is equally sure that any
associated with Amitabha was even more distinctly a
movement within that minority movement itself. There
f 1
1 d b b h" 1" " 1 . .1n
act Itt e ou t a out t e popu ar or preva ent" BUddhii'1
cult form in Mathura. Of the certainly Buddhist
tions we have, 19 are either fragments or do not
"person" being imaged. 56 Of remaining 24, at least 11
t}le installation of an image of Sakyamuni under titlesJ:25'!
Sakyamuni,57 3 Buddha,58 2 Pitamaha
59
and 1 Sakyasi11J,ha.60J}1%
others record the setting up of images of what they call
the bodhisattva."61 And while there has been a good deal
cussion as to what this can mean-and there will be more
62i
;iit1
has been clear for a long time that many of the images whitKAi
to as "b?dhisattvas" in their
tIOns are IConographICally buddhas. Moreover, a declSlve
porary document has recently come to light which
the fact that in Mathura the terms buddha and
were used interchangeably. The document in question
bi-scriptual epigraph of the Period from
Here, what in the BrahmI part of the inscription is calle4sif
bodhisattva, is, in the part, said to be a b(u)dhasa
"an image of the Buddha."
63
S:;:i
These inscriptions would seem to indicate that the "pop/Vi']
lar," "prevalent"-indeed, overwhelmingly
figure" in the Buddhist community of Mathura was!
Sakyamuni, Sakyamuni either as a fully enlightened buddhapf:'
in his bodhisattva aspect. Apart from these inscriptions
only two others. One refers to an image of KiSyapa
one of the previous "historical" buddhas who is also known fr9111.
two later inscriptions from J aulian. 64 The other is
inscription from Govindnagar which refers to Amitabha.
the material known so far would seem to indicate-KasyaN
Buddha, though known, was peripheral to the concerns
Buddhist community at Mathura, the same surely appliest9i
Amitabha. Neither appears to have received anything like wid,y:
spread support or patronage. Both appear to have been of
to a very small part of an already restricted community.
not only was the concern for the Buddha Amitabha
very limited during Period, it also had-to
. by the available evidence-absoilltely no impact on the
. development of Budd,hism at Mathura, or almost
else in Northern India. We have, in fact, noticeably
inscriptions from Mathura, but enough
that any "cult of Amitabha" that had occurred in the
Period did not survive into the Gupta Period. This is
. surprising in light of the fact that our Gupta inscrip-
Mathura amply attest to the prominent presence of
there at that time. We have, for example, an
from Mathura which is dated to the end of 5th cen-
which records the installation of an image of Arya-
and the emergence of Avalokitesvara
.n"lhpY"P in the 5th/6th century-but not before-is easily
Not only do we have the Mathura inscription
end of the 5th century. We also have references to
from Sarnath, J ayarampur and Gunaighar in the
century, and from Sand and North Pakistan in the 7th.
65
have other evidences, to be discussed in a moment,
clearly establish the emergence of the Mahayana at
and almost everywhere else in India, during the 5th/
''''"TllY'', but nowhere do we have the slightest indication
"Cult of Amitabha" was associated with the emergence
" . presence of the Mahayana there. In fact when
finally hear of Amitabha again-at Sanci in the late 7th
reference to him is not as an independent "cult
but occurs, as we have seen, as a part of an extended
of praise of AvalokiteSvara. After this, Amitabha, epig-
, disappears entirely from India, even though we con-
to find dozens of individual Mahayana inscriptions up
the 13thcentury.66
, then, the concern with Amitabha recorded in our inscrip-
represents the beginnings of at least a part of that movement
call "the Mahayana," it is clear that that 'movement in
.......... 1"1 was, and remained for several centuries, a very
minority movement that received almost no popular
and that when it did finally emerge fully into the public
as an independent movement the concern with
120 JIABS VOL. lO NO.2
longer an active focus. B,:t is also sonil
to that not onlr was the mitIal. concern wIth'
Amitabha not a major and endunng movement, It also Was
. d ,Ot/l
an mdepen ent
Between the end of the Period and the rniddl/
t
l1
the Period, the people involved in the Mathuran
commumty and the patterns of patronage changed-as they
in almost all Buddhist communities in India-in some profo
u
rla1
ways. The changes at Mathura were manifested-as they
the appearance of Avalokitesvara as a cult figur:?1
by a deCided drop m the of lay donors-particularJj
women-and a correspon.dmg nse m monk donors, by the
den appearance of a specIfic group of monks who called them'
selves siikyabhik4us, and by the appearance of a very specific an.1l
characteristiC We want here to focus on
the last of these mamfestatIOns.:,',1
There are 15 inscriptions from Mathura which date to tlt\.;C1
Gupta Period in which the donative formula is clear.67 In
the 15-or 3/5ths-the donative formula is some variant Ofthl!!
following formula:
68
',I'
yad atra pUrJ,yarIJ tad bhavatu sarvvasatviiniim anuttarajiiiiniiv.a..-.... .. ,.-..',
taye (M! No. 186)
"may whatever merit there is in this be for the
the by_ all living things":._
ThIs formula Is-as has been shown
characteristic of, and specific to, the Mahayana.
69
It is,
of some intere.st that our inscription from G?vindnagar
a formula whICh, although not the same, IS almost
forerunner to it or a prototype for it. Professor Sharma,
ever, ignores the differences between the Govindnagar
the. Mahayan.a donativ. e and
. m our mscnptIOn "the creed of AnuttaraJnana whIch
very popular in the Gupta Period is met with for the first
in the KushaI).a Period."70 But even if many of the
are of a minor-if not entirely verbal-nature, still this
least one fact: w.ith one which
m the same dIrectIOn as our Govmdnagar mscnptIon, the an .. u .... 'r . ,f ...i.',
tarajiiiina formula always occurs by itself, and never in
tion with other formulae. This is the case in at least 65
inscriptions from all parts of India, ranging in date from
{I
to the- 12th/13th century. This pattern, then, is invari-
over very large expanses of territory and equally large
of time, and reflects . .the standard usage of the
as a completely independent movement. In the Gov-
inscription, however, the anuttararJ} buddhajiiiinarJ} for-
is used in conjunction with another, much older formula,
points very much in another direction. Before the anut-
buddhajiiiinarJ} statement our inscription says that the image
was set up [sa](rva)buddhapujiiye, "for the worship
Buddhas." The Govindnagar inscription therefore is vir-
unique in that it uses its version of the anuttar-jiiiina for-
with another formula. Even more important, however, is
that that other formula has absolutely nothing to do
the Mahayana and is in fact a recurring element in earlier
which are explicitly associated with named non-
groups. The formula sarvabuddhapujiiye-sometimes
, sometimes as a part of longer formulae-occurs in at
.9 inscriptions, one of which is from Mathura
all of which probably predate our inscription from Gov-
.71 It also occurs in at least 8 other BrahmI inscriptions
Mathura-2 from the Suilga Period, 3 from the
and 3 from the Kusan, only 1 of which is later than the
inscription 72-and in one inscription each from
KausambI, and Nasik, all three of which date to the
. "rpntlrrv A.D.73
earliest of the inscriptions from Mathura dates from
and records the gift of one Ayala which was made
the worship of all buddhas . .. for the acceptance of the
teachers" (MI No. 89), and Mahopadesaka, accord-
Hiders, "must be considered to be the name of a [Bud-
school, although in literature it does not seem to have
up until now." One of the inscriptions records
of an image by a monk that was made "for the acceptance
Samitiya teachers" and "for the worship of all the buddhas"
No. 80); another, a gift made again "for the worship of all
," but "for acceptance of the Mahiisaghiyas (Mahiisiin-
" (MI No. 86). Of the inscriptions, one dated in 16th
of records again the gift of an image by a monk
was made "for the worship of all buddhas" and, again, "for
,ac(:ep,taIlce of the Mahiisaghiya (Mahiisiinghika) teachers" (MI
122
JIABSVOL.IONO.2
No. 157). The remaining four inscriptions from Mathura tl1J@
contain the formula do not specifically designate a
group as recipient. At Mathura, then, whenever a religious ar,f.
d k
"f h h' f "II ' ddh ". actA
was un erta en or t e wors lp 0 a au as m
with a specific group, that group was invariably a named
Mahayana school: either the Mahopadesakas, the Samitiyas>;
-twice-the Mahasiirighikas. The pattern in the
scriptions is
Only 2 of the 9 inscriptions which contain til:};'
formula sarvabuddhapujiiye also contain the name of a BUddhist
school: in th.e Lion Capital, which dates
the very begmnmg of the Common Era,74 the. SUdas
a
'
gave a piece of land for, in part, "the worship of all
and "for the acceptance of the Sarviistiviidins" (KJ XV); and;;
Bhagamoya, King of Apaca, "established" the relics of
Blessed One, Sakyamuni," in 19-20 A.D. for "the worship of
all buddhas" and "for the acceptance of the KiiSyapiyas" (II] ..
108). In addition to these two inscriptions which:!
explicitly name a school, at least three more use a set phrase;
which my colleague Richard S(ilomon and I have shown
recdy dependent on a passage found in at least two
Hlnayana canonical literature, in the Ekottariigama translated'
into Chinese and in the Gilgit text of the Vinaya of the Millasar"';
viistiviidins.
75
The Taxila Copperplate ofPatika, which datestoi
the end of the 1st century B.C., is typical of these inscriptions,'
It records the fact that atra [dejse patikoapratithavita bhagavata'j
sakamurtisa sarirarJ} [prajtithaveti [sarJ}ghajramarJ} ca sarvabudhana:
puyae, "here on a (previously) unestablished spot Patika establishes"
a relic of the Blessed One Sakyamuni, and a monastic iiriima, for ..
the worship of all buddhas" (KJ XIII; BEFEO 67, 6; 74,37), it
In the inscriptions which contain the formula
vabuddhapujiiye and in which there is any indication of sectarian
association it is clear therefore-as it was in the Brahm! inscriptions.
from Mathura-that undertaking religious acts "for the worship;
of all buddhas" was invariably associated with non-Mahayan<t,
groups: the Sarviistiviidins, the KiiSyapiyas, etc. 76 What this
for our inscription from Govindnagar is in some ways obvious:.
the setting up of the earliest known image of a Mahayana buddlw;
was undertaken for a purpose which was specifically and explicitlYi
associated with established non-Mahayana groups. This, in tUrrl,i?
THE AMIT ABBA INSCRIPTION 123
strongly suggest that the concem with Amitabha which
our inscription in the 2nd centUry AD. was not only,
.... have seen, very limited and uninfluential-a minor preoccu-
. also was not a part of a wholly independent movement.
itself half in old and established idioms, and half in
finished new formulae that would come to characterize
cult of Amitabha, but the Mahayana as a whole; it dictated
uu._u .. u,vu of a new image, but for-in part at least-an old
purpose.
is interesting to notice that the "exception" referred to
the one other instance where the anuttarajiiiina formula
in conjunction with another formula, suggests that at
.. at least the movement we now call "the Mahayana"
not yet achieved complete independence even as late as the
quarter of the 5th century AD. The inscription in ques-
,-"."v recently discovered at Govindnagar-is dated in the
115 of -'-presumably-the Gupta Era, and therefore in AD.
After the date the inscription reads in Sharma's clearly
transliteration: 77
1. ......... . asyii'TIJ . . . divasa puvvayiiim [sic] bhagavatalp
ou siikyamunelp
. pratimii prat4thiipitii sa'TIJghavarmarj,ii yad atra
tan miitiipirtriit [sic] purvvagamatkr:tvii sartvasatviina
. sarvvaduMhaprahararj,iiyii-[rd.-prahiirj,iiyii-] nuttara-
navacm:ave [rd.-iiviiptaye] . . . (BAM 223n. 148)
... on this day an image of the Blessed One, the One Pow-
from the Ten Powers, Sakyamuni, was set up by the monk
varman. What here is the [resulting] merit [may that
_r1'Hr',n put his parents foremost-for the abandoning of
of all living things, for the obtaining of the unex-
knowledge."
This inscription is atypical in several ways. It uses the for-
asyii'TIJ . . . divasa puvvayiii'TIJ [sic] .. . pratimii prat4thiipitii which
.. everywhere in earlier inscriptions, but, apart
a few transitional Gupta inscriptions,18 nowhere in "class-
Mahayana epigraphs. The latter inscriptions invariably
the phrase deyadharmmo =yam at the head of their formula,
... there is no trace of it here. The epithet dafabalabalin used
of Sakyamuni is never found in Mahayana image inscrip-
. When the donor is a monk in Mahayana inscriptions he
124
jIABSVOL.IONO.2
is never referred to as ;;t bhik:$u, as he is here, but almost alwa
as a sakyabhik:$u; very rarely some other title is used.
79
This
tion, then, is quite not aJei
may in fact represent-like our Amltabha InSCnptIOn but at a
much later date-a stage or sector of that movement we call "th
Mahayana" that had not yet achieved complete independencee
Its mechanical fusion of an older formula-sarvadukhaprahii'YJiiyd
(cf. MI Nos. 29, 8 I)-with what became the "classical" Mahayana
formula might at least suggest this.
VII.
That a new "movement" should look like this in the
ning is not very surprising. What is a little more surprising
the fact that--epigraphically-the "beginning" of the
in India is not documentable until the 2nd century A.D., and,
that even as "late" as that it was still an extremely limited minoriti
movement that left almost no mark on Buddhist epigraphyof
art and was still clearly embedded in the old established
of earlier Buddhist groups. What is even more surprising still
is the additional fact that even after its initial appearance in the
public domain in the 2nd century it appears to have remained
an extremely limited minority movement-if it remained at all
that attracted absolutely no documented public or popular support
for at least two more centuries. It is again a demonstrable fact
that anything even approaching popular support for
Mahayana cannot be documented until the 4th/5th century A.D.,'
and even then the support is overwhelmingly by monastic, not
lay, donors. In fact, prior to our inscription from Govindnagat
there was simply no epigraphic evidence for the
Mahayana at all. This, in the end, is the real significance of
Govindnagar inscription when seen in its proper context: it
establishes the presence of the very beginnings of "the'
Mahayana" as a public movement in the 2nd century A.D., anq,
indicates, by its total isolation and lack of influence, the tenuouS)"
hesitant, and faltering character of those "beginnings." .!rr.;
All of this of course accords badly with the accepted anqr
long current view-based almost exclusively on literaIJ:
sources-that the movement we call "the Mahayana" appeare%:
THE AM IT ABHA INSCRIPTION 125
somehow fully formed and virtually.finishe? at
$!.beginnmg of the Common Era. Common sense Itself mIght
suspected such view:, but Indian. epigraphy makes it very
that "the Mahayana as a publIc movement began-to
an old line of T.S. Eliot's-"not with a bang, but a
It that, although there was-as we
iiom Chinese translatlons-a and early htera-
there was no early orgamzed, mdependent, pubhcally sup-
movement that it could have belonged to. It suggests,
'hl
fact
, that if we are to make any progress in our understanding
we may have to finally and fully realize that the history of
'Mahayana literature and the history of the religious movement
that bears the same name are not necessarily the same thing.
I would think, should raise some interesting questions.
80
\!fABBREVIATIONS
=R.C. Sharma, Buddhist Art of Mathuri'i (Delhi: 1984)
= Bulletin de Ncole franqaise d'extreme-orient
=F. Edgerton, Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit Grammar (New Haven: 1953)
Liiders, Bharhut Inscriptions (Corpus Inscriptionum Indicarum, Vol.
II), rev. E. Waldschmidt & M.A. Mehendale (Ootacamund: 1963)
K. Das (Bajpayee), Early Inscriptions of Mathuri'i-A Study (Calcutta: 1980),
)j{:,;:Appendix B, 161-239
itHS =Th. Damsteegt, Epigraphical Hybrid Sanskrit. Its Rise, Spread, Characteris-
;;1;.'lics and Relationship to Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit (Leiden: 1978)
itI""Epigraphia Indica
';GI = J.F. Fleet, Inscriptions of the Early Gupta Kings and Their Successors (Corpus
).,;.;,)nscriptionum Indicarum, Vol. III) (Calcutta: 1888)
lm==lndo-lranian Journal
iJAIH = Journal of Ancient Indian History
'.JIi\BS = Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies
Wt= Journal of Indian Philosophy
::JlJPHS = Journal of the United Provinces Historical Society
iKI =S. Konow, Kharosh(M Inscriptions With the Exception of Those of Asoka (Cor-
Inscriptionum Indicarum, Vol. II, Part I) (Calcutta: 1929)
Uiders, A List of Brahmi Inscriptions from the Earliest Times to About
q:., A.D. 400, with the Exception of Those of Asoka (Appendix to Epigraphica
;J;'Indica, Vol X) (Calcutta: 1912)
W=B.N. Mukherjee's edition ofthe Amitabha Inscription inJAIH II (1977-
',;.;, 78) 82-4.
,;W=H. Liiders, Mathuri'i Inscriptions, ed. K.L. Janert (Gottingen: 1961)
Pek = The Tibetan Tripitaka (Peking Edition), ed. D.T. Suzuki (Tokyo-Kyot:
f
1955-61) 0:;
S =R.C. Sharma's edition a. f the Inscription in BAM 232 n. 169.
WZKS = Wzener Zeztschrijt fur dze Kunde Sudaszens ' '.
NOTES
1. For one version of the rather sad story of the Covindnagar site
BAM 92-3. ; ,t,:
2. The date of is, of not yet settled, and the assumptionq:
that the era named after hIm began m 78 A.D. lIttle more than a good workli{",:!
hypothesis; cf. most recently C. Fussman, "Un buddha inscrit des debutsd;',)
notre ere" BEFEO 54 (1985) 44. <i)
" 3 .. D.C .. Bhattacharya, "A Newly from Tipp:>.::
era, Indzan Hzstorzcal Quarterly 6 (1930) 53 (lmes 3, 5); S. RaJaguru, "]ayaram:'r!
pur Copper-Plate Inscription ofthe Time of Copachandra," The Orissa Histo;_;J
ical Research Journal, 11:4 (1963) 227 (lines 29-30); C. Yazdani, Ajanta, ParL.
IV: Text (London: 1955) 112 and n.4.. '
4. J. Marshall, A. Foucher, and N.C. Majumdar, The Monuments'if
Saiichi (Delhi: 1940), Vol. I, no. 842./,
5. G. Schopen, "Mahayana in Indian Inscriptions," IIJ 21 (1979) I-Hl';:',
I am now working on a more complete and revised treatment of this material.';;:'
6. P.R. Srinivasan, "Two Brahmi Inscriptions from Mathura,"
(1971) 10-12 (lines 3 &
7.cf. M. Shizutani, Indo bukkyo himei mokuroku (Kyoto: 1979) no. 1823;/;.
B.N. Mukherjee, "A Mathura Inscription of the Year 26 and of the Periodbf;
Huvishka," JAIH 11 (1977-78) 82-4; R.C. Sharma, "New Buddhist Sculptures';
from Mathura," Lalit Kala 19 (1979) 25-6; BAM 232 n. 169. ".}>"
8. ].C. Huntington, "A Gandharan Image of Amitayus' Sukhavati>?
Annali dell' Instituto Orientale di Napoli 40 (1980) 651, 672;
"Mathura Evidence for the Early Teachings of Mahayana," to be published,l
in a volume of papers read at an International Seminar on Mathura at Mathuia\
in January 1980, pp. 4-5a of type-script; S.L. Huntington with contributions'
by ].c. Huntington, The Art of Ancient India. Buddhist, Hindu, Jain (TokY()L;!
1985) 114; 630 n. 6; J. Guy, "A Kushan Bodhisattva and Early Indiaqi
Sculpture," Art Bulletin of Victoria (Australia) no. 24 (1983) 43 and n. 20; SJ.:'
Czuma, Kushan Sculptures: Images from Early India (Cleveland: 1985) 75 n.2.'},
9. G. Schopen, "Two Problems in the History of Indian BUddhisnl:;
The Layman/Monk Distinction and the Doctrines of the Transference of;
Merit," Studien zur Indologie und Iranistik 10 (1985)
10. Sharma published a photograph of our inscription in both Lalit Kala;
19 (1979) pI. XLII, fig. 18 and in BAil1 fig. 151. Both in his text (e.g. p. 23H;
and in the "Description of Illustrations" (p. 280-1), however, Sharma
the Amitabha pedestal, which is in actuality his fig. 151, with his fig. 154,;
which is the photograph of a completely unrelated inscription

THE AM IT ABHA INSCRIPTION
127
153, p. 226. Mukherjee too, at least in part, worked from a photograph
;",10 ... ,
):"<82).
i:,(::;.'ll. My references throughout this section are to Sharma's edition in
and do not refer to his earlier publications at alL
10;:('12. For references, see below n. 7l.
For references, see below n. 73.
V.A. Smith & W. Hoey, "Ancient Buddhist Statuettes and a Candella
;t;topper-plate from the of the Asiatic Society of Bengal
155-62; D.C. Smar, Kmg HanraJa of Bundelkhand," The journal
Madras 18 (1949) 185-87; Sircar, "Copper Coin of
EI (1 95-98. .
i
l
:?'; J5. D.C. SlrCar m Monthly Semmars at the Centre, Thursday, the 18th
JAIR (1969-70) 280-81; S. Czuma, "A Gupta Style
1"Sro
nze
Buddha, The Bulletm of the Cleveland Museum of Art (Feb. 1970) 54-67.
:;-",16. J. Burgess, Report on the Elura Cave Temples and the Brahmanical and
;.Jdina Caves in India 1883) no. 9.. ...
If a donative formula contams a filllte verb It IS an Imp era-
.Iliveform ofYbhu or ERS 129-31; KI, cxv; etc.). The occurrence of
or optative form from other roots is very rare in inscriptions,
more common in literary donative formulae: e.g ... . pujii11J. kr:tvii
ca _ _kuSalamulenaq,hye mahadhane mahiibhoge kule
(S. Bagchl, Mulasarvastzvadavznayavastu, VoL II. (Dharbhanga: 1970)
j:Jl79,21).
';;;;1,18. On niittika, see H. Hiders, "On Some Brahmi Inscriptions.in the
'f/L'ucknow Provincial Museum," journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain
(1912) 160; D.C. Sircar, Indian Epigraphical Glossary (Delhi: 1966)
;l!212,s.v. naptr:ka; EHS 21 and n. 131,63.
:ipi! 19. BAM 23l.
'.,,, 20. V.S. Agrawala, "Dhyani Buddhas and Bodhisattvas," jUPRS 1l.2
1-13 (reprinted in V.S. Agrawala, Studies in Indian Art (Varanasi: 1965)
:;137--146.
:';(.21. B. Bhattacharya, The Indian Buddhist Iconography (Oxford: 1924)
rix:Xi y; Iff.
':6';'22. M.-T de Mallmann, "Head-dresses with Figurines in Buddhist Art,"
Z,Ndian Art and Letters, ns. 2l.2 (1947) 80-89.
23. P.M. Harrison, The Tibetan Text of the Pratyutpanna-Buddha-
>:Sa'rr.tmukhiivasthita-Samadhi-Sutra (Tokyo: 1978) 3a-c, 3e-f (cf. P.M. Harrison,
,.;'Bllddhanusmrti in the Pratyutpanna-Buddha-Sarp.IDukhavasthita-Samadhi-
6 (1978) 42ff.)
24. N. Dutt Gilgit Manuscripts, Vol. II (Srinagar: 1941) 32.3; 165.9; Vol.
J:lLPart II. (Calcutta: 1953) 271.11; 350.15; 450.3; etc. (On Amitabha in the
and the following texts see G. Schopen, "Sukhavatl as a
:,yeneralized Religious Goal in Sanskrit Mahayana Sutra Literature," IIj 19
\(1977) 177-210).
;25. N. Dutt, Gilgit Manuscripts, Vol. I (Srinagar: 1939) 106.12; 107.3;
li'J26.6. What is not sure in regard to the AjitasenavyakararJa is not whether it
to Amitabha, but to what period it dates. Dutt (p. 73) says "it represents
the semi-Mahayanic form of Buddhism," and there are a number of passa
which would support this. But whether that means it is early has yet to
determined.
e
26. Dutt, Gilgit Manuscripts, Vol. 1. 14.5 f.
27. 'phags pa saris rgyas kyi stobs bskyed pa'i cho 'phrul rnam par 'phrul b
bstan pa ies byaba theg pa chen po'i mdo, Pek. Vol. 34, 192-2-8, 192-5-6 (cf. G
a
Schopen, "The Five Leaves ofthe Buddhabaladhanapratiharyavikurval)anirdes :
sutra Found at Gilgit," ]IF 5 (1978) 319-36, esp. 323). a
28. 1. Yamada, Karu17iipuTJriarzka, Vol. II. (London: 1968) 106.1-117.7"
29. 'phags pa 'jam dpal gyi saris rgyas kyi iiF gi yon tan bkod pa ies bya
theg pa chen po'i mdo, Pek. Vol. 23, 126-5-1; 131-5-8f; 133-3-2f; 134-3-1; 135-5.
7; etc.
30. K. Takahata, Ratnamiilavadana (Tokyo: 1954) 62.20; 63.9; 279.21'
and index s.v. sukhavatz (on both the Ratnamalit and the Kalpadruma see J.8:'-
Speyer, Avadanaqataka (St. Petersburg: 1906-09; reprinted The Hague: 1958).
xxi ff. For Amitabha in the Kalpadruma see esp. xxvii-xxviii; xci. There are'
according to Speyer (p. xcix), several references to "the five dhyanz-buddhai
in the VicitrakarTJikavadana which is one of the so-called Vratavadanas, aU of
which "are obviously quite late Mahayana works" (M. Winternitz, A History oJ'
Indian Literature, Vol. II. (Calcutta: 1927) 292.and n.
31. On these texts and the references found in them to Amitabha! .
Sukhavatl see G. Schopen, "The Text on the 'Dharal)l Stones from':
Abhayagiriya': a Minor Contribution to the Study of Mahayana Literature id'
Ceylon," ]lABS 5 (1982) 99-108; Schopen, ','The Generalization of an Old;
Yogic Attainment.in Medieval Mahayana Sutra Literature: Some Notes oli;
Jatismara,"]lABS 6 (1983) 146 n. 48; Schopen, "The
and Dharal)ls in Indian Inscriptions: Two Sources for the Practice:;
of Buddhism in Medieval India," WZKS 29 (1985) 119-49.;'
32. 'phags pa de Min gsegs pa mi 'khrugs pa'i bkod pa ies bya ba theg pa
po'i mdo, Pek. Vol. 22, 128-1-1 to 160-2-5; cf. now J. Dantinne, La splendeu"r.
de l'inebranlable (Akjobhyavyuha), t.!. (Louvain-La-Neuve: 1983). Also see, foreariy,
references, R. Mitra, A:j(asahasrika (Calcutta: 1888) 365.7-369;
457-58; etc.; P.L. Va,idya, Samadhirajasutra (Darbhanga: 1961) XI. 60;
68; XXXIV. 48; XXXVI. 1; N. Dutt, Gilgit Manuscripts, Vol. I 107.4 (the"
AjitasenavyakaraTJa). .i
33. For references to in Middle Mahayana Sutra literature:,
see 1. Yamada, KaruTJapuTJriarzka, Vol. I. (London: 1968) 234 ff; to whichL;
would add: Et. Lamotte, L'enseignement de VimalaMrti (VimalaMrtinirdesa) (Lou:;
vain: 1962) 64, 85, 279, 360-67 and ns; N. Dutt, Paiicavi'r(L5atisahasrika Pra}
iiaparamita (London: 1934) 91; E. Conze, Gilgit Manuscript of the
rikaprajiiaparamita, Chapters 55 to 70 (Roma: 1962) 63, 21; 65.4f; 66.9; 80.8f;h
MaiijuSrzbuddhakCietraguTJavyuha, Pek. Vol. 34, 122-2-4 = C. Bendall,(
SikCiasamuccaya (St. Petersbourg: 1897-1902; repr. Tokyo: 1977) 14.15; Bud.,
dhabaladhanapratiharya,Pek. Vol. 34,192-2-8; Y. Kurumiya, Ratnaketuparivarta,
(Kyoto: 1978) 121.1f; 176.20; Kusumasan;caya-sutra, Pek. Vol. 37, 67-5-
8f
fC
Ratnajaliparipr:ccha, Pek. Vol. 33, 245-3-4, 3-5; Yamada,
16l.6-178.4. ,.
34. 'Phags pa yas kyi sgrib pa thams cad rnam par sbyori ba zes bya ba'i gzuris,
8, 162-1-3ff; cf. Pek. Vol. 7,189-2-3;
28, 262-4-1;.
that the finallme of the Sarvakarmavara1].amsodhanz m the Pek. edItIon
de biin gsegs pa de iiid byon nas 'di skad du rigs kyi bu tshur ria'i gan du sog
",rea b" / h f h h . 'kh h .
'ltl1fskyan gSU1i ar gyur ro , t e. name 0 t. e tat agata-mz rugs pa- avmg
e"ft';'dentallydroppedout; cf. Nymg Marepnnt of the Derge, Vol. 36, 916-1, etc.)
J. Nobel, Suvar1].abhasottamasiitra. Das Goldglanz-Sutra, ein Sanskrittext
ahiiyana-Buddhismus (Leipzig: 1937) 6.lff; R.E. Emmerick, The Sidra of
i;FtlieGoldenLight Note that of the measure
ii,t'&nifeof the Lord Sakyamum gIven by the dIrectIOnal buddhas responds to
problem preoc:upied of several Middle
ri'hM3h
a
yana texts: How could Sakyamum have dIed If m fact he really was
was said to be?" The same problem-in different terms-had already
the authors/compilers of the Mahiiparinibbana-sutta. It was also a
of the compilers of Saddharmapu1].(jarzka. Chapter XV"of
Saddharma, whIch some have taken as the central chapter (Mus says Ie
t'{::&lltrasoit essentiellement contenu dans Ie seul chapitre XV," P. Mus "Le
pare," BEFEO 28 (1928) 178ff.) has exactly the same title as the chapter
the Suva'f7'!t which contains our passage-
exactly the same problem. The same problem again is a central
Y:'r1:o
ccu
pation of the Buddhabaladhiinapratihiirya; cf. Schopen,]IP 5 (1978)
9
2
36.
'0,36. Lamotte, L'enseignement de vimalak'irti, 279-80; R.A.F. Thurman, The
i:f.to& Teaching of Vimalakzrti (University Park: 1976) 61. Note that according
'ltd Lamotte "l'introduction a la loi (dharmamukhapravesa) intitulee
taught by the directional Buddhas is the Tathagatacin-
(T. 310, 312) to which the Vimalak'irti makes a second allusion
IV. Sect. l. Thurman calls this into question in part at least for the
iWijUItearnazing reason that "it does not seem quite certain that so man y tathagatas
tc,lvtuld be required to expound the same text" (p. 128 n. 23).
Kurumiya, Ratnaketuparivarta 12lff. Note that the dhiira1].z given by
buddhas in Ch. VI. is the same text "entrusted" to Brahma,
etc., by Sakyamuni in Ch. XI. and is in this sense at least implicitly
with the text as a whole.
'5'38. Lamotte, L'enseignement 280 (Ch. VI. Sect. 14.8); Thurman, The Holy
gfaching, 61; although the term buddhaks.etra does not actually occur in the
text of the SuvaT1).a it does in the "early" Chinese version (T. 663)
by Huntington (see next n. 42); Kurumiya, Ratneketu 123.4 & n. 3.
Thurman, The Holy Teaching, 128 n. 23.
,};i,i, 40. J.C. Huntington, "Note on a Chinese Text Demonstrating the Ear-
JIABS 10(1987) 8 Off.
Huntington himself (p. 93), after a table giving the various names,
.;,npt'es that "at first reading, these names may not seem to be very closely
l,reIated. "
,Thurman refers to the "cosmic maI;lQ.ala" in the Guhyasamajatantra,
too Vairocana has a crucial role. See y, Matsunaga, The Guhyasamaja
(Osaka: 1978) 4ff.
'f' ;.;::;,\:
43. Dutt, Gilgit Manuscripts, Vol. IV. (Calcutta: 1959)i, dates the R
naketu, on the basis of the Chinese translation of it attributed to Dharmarak
to "about the fourth century A.D." at the latest. Kurumiya, however, poi
out that the attribution to has been put in doubt; see Ratnak
xi-xiv. e u,
44. Huntington, "Mathura Evidence for the Early Teachings
Mahayana," p.5 (type-script).
Mahayana," pp. 5-5a.
46. E. Zurcher, The Buddhist Conquest of ChiTl;a. The Spread and Adaptati
of Buddhism in Early Medieval China, Vol. 1. (Leiden: 1972) 219. on
47. For an overview of these inscriptions see K.K.S. Ch'en, Buddhism .,;
China. A Historical Survey (Princeton: 1964) 170-80; a much older but
invaluable treatment of the Lung-men material is E. Chavannes, Mission ar':;
cheologique dans la chine septentrionale, t. I., deuxieme partie (Paris: 1915) 320--:'
561, in which almost 500 separate inscriptions are translated. The quotation{\
given here is from, and the numbers refer to, Chavannes. ,i.
Mahayana," p. 5a.
49. Sharma, BAM 231-32; Mukherjee, 83; etc.
50. The only possible exception to this is the inscription published in J.
Brough, "Amitabha and AvalokiteSvara in an Inscribed Gandharan Sculpture,'"
Indologica Taurinensia 10 (1982) 65-70. Butthis inscription is very problematic:
"(Presumably) about one-third of the inscription, or possibly slightly more"',:
has been lost, according to Brough. He goes on to say that "the inscriptiori':
is of a somewhat unusual form"-in fact, the syntax there is extremely odd::'
R. Salomon, who is working on the innscription now, is of the opinion that!
there is no reference in it to Amitabha at all, and, while we must await hiiX
published conclusions, this seems very likely. It is also worth noting thatJ.:'
Huntington has argued that the Mohammed Naristele is "a representation,
of the SukhavatI paradise of Amitayus" (J.e. Huntington, "A
Image of Amitayus' SukhavatI," Annali dell' Institutio Orientale di Napoli 40;
(1980) 651-72; etc.), but this identification has already been called into ques::'i
tion from an art-historical point-of-view (see R.L. Brown, "The Sravasti Mira-:
cles in the Art of India and DvaravatI," Archives of Asian Art 37 (1984) 81ff.)!
and it is open to other types of criticism as well. Huntington, for example,
on the basis of his figure 4, assumes that the stele represents an instance.'
where the historical Buddha shows a buddhafield to the monk Ananda. He.
is aware of the possibility "that Abhirati either predated Sukhavat! or, at the.
latest, developed simultaneously with it," and that as a consequence "it wilI.
be necessary to be certain that the Mohammed Nari stele does not represent
Abhirati" (p. 657, my emphasis). He thinks that this is "rather easily deter,;
mined" and cites as his primary evidence the fact that in the one instance tha:t'
he is aware of where someone "grants" a vision of Abhirati to someone else,:;
it is not Sakyamuni who shows the buddhafield to Ananda, but "Vimalakirtj
himself who displays Abhirati to the assembly." On this "evidence" he rules;:
Abhirati out. Unfortunately, the Vimalakirti passage is not the only one
to someone else. In the
;'1k
bh
ya
v
yuha Itself, Subhutl shows It to Ananda (Pek. Vol. 22. 148-4-4ff.),
"'{this raises no difficulties for Huntington. However, in what appears to
;;b
u
'. very old passage found in all the larger "redactions" of the Prajiiaparamita
Altasahasrikii, the etc.-it is
i.slyarnUlll who shows Abhlrau to Ananda, whlCh fits exactly with what Hun-
sees on the Mohammed Stele (the earliest of the
:j)'assag
e
, and the best preserved, IS m E. Conze, The Gdgzt Manuscnpt of the
55-70 (Roma: 1962) 80-8l. Conze,
specifiC regard to the Al(a, has held that the passages were later
Y'dditions, but Lancaster has shown that they were already in the earliest Han
see L. Lancaster, An Analysis of the
Thesis, The University of Wisconsin, Madison, 1968, p. 316). In
to these considerations, it might also be noted that Huntington sees
i\TajrapaI).i in the stele and, although VajrapaI).i has no connection with
he has a formally expressed connection with (see Pek.
;VoL 22, 134-4-8; Dantinne, La splendeur de l'inrfbranlable, 106-07). Moreover
presence of a woman in the stele and therefore in Sukhavati creates
;i>roblerns for Huntington, but women have a conspicuous place in Abhirati
La splendeur, 194-96 & n. W). Just this much is enough to show
TIllar Huntington's argument does not meet his own conditions, i.e., that "it
::'wiIIbe necessary to be certain that the Mohammed Nari stele does not represent
;:c.2\bhirati." There is, in fact,- probably more "evidence" to suggest that it repre-
than there is to suggest that it represents Sukhavati. But in
;.truth it probably represents neither.
{;.51. Das' Dated: Undated: 10, 11, 12, 15, 17,
86,88,96,100,103,104,109,110,119,124,127,128,129, 130, 131,
(1\132, 135, 136.
;:,..52. Das' Dated: 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8,12, 13, 16, 18,21,22,23,
;24,25,28,29, 33, 37, 38, 39, 41, 43, 45, 47, 50, 52, 53, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59,
'60,61, 65, 56, 67, 68, 69, 70, 72, 75, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93,
'i95,97, 98, Undated: 3,21,55,56,57,58,59,62,63,64,67,68,
71, 72, 73, 74, 76, 77,78,79,80,81,94,98, 113,122.
53. Das' nos. Dated: 11, 49, Undated: 52.
i.1'('',
54. Das' Dated: 15.
/ .55. Das' Dated: 1 (MI No. 172,F), 3 (Sircar EI 34,F), 9 (MI
No. 154,F), 10 (MI No. 128), 17 (MI No. 80, Luders classifies as Ksatrapa),
19 (MI No. 157),20 (MI No. 150),26 (MI No. 73), 30 (MINo. 74), 31 (MI
No. 136), 35 (MI No. 28,F), 40 (MI No. 103,F), 42 (MI No. 24), 46 (Agrawala
.';]UPHS No. 21,F), 48 (MI No. 126), 54 (MI No. 180), 62 (MI No. 134), 63
. ..(MINo. 29), 71 (Sircar EI No. 30,F), 95 (SrivastavaEI No. 37). Undated:
l(MI No. 135),9 (MI No. 76,F); 19 (MI No. 41,F), 51 (MI No. 26,F), 53 (MI
No. 95,F), 54 (MI No. 90), 83 (MI No.3), 84 (MI No.2), 85 (MI No.4), 99
JlYIINo. 183), 108 (SrivastaJUPHS ns. 7-1 have not been able to see this
inscription so I leave it out of account), 117 (MI No. 153,F), 120 (Agrawala
-.,!UPHS 10), 121 (AgrawalaJUPHS 21,F), 125 (MI No. 121,F), 134 (MI No.
:n,F). To which should be added: MI No.2, MI No. 81, BAM 181 n. 41, BAM
lSI n. 42(F), BAM 191 N. 63, BAM 232 n. 169,jAIH 13, 2S7ff.
56. All those inscriptions which are marked with an F in the preced"':
note, plus nos. 17 (which Liiders classifies as and 62 (which ding;
not indicate who the image is of) of Das' Dated.
57. MI Nos. 4, 29, ISO, IS3, and BAM 191, n.63..,
5S. MI Nos. 74, 135, Das, Undated no.l0S.;::?;
'\"<.,.,/
59. MI No. SI, Dated no.96..;J.
60. MI No.3.
61. MI Nos. 2, 24, 73, 126, 12S, 134, 136, 150, 157; BAM 181
jAIH 13. "::
62. see JPh. Vogel, "Epigraphical Discoveries at Sarnath," EI 8 (1905.1):'
06) 173-?9; L. Bachhofer, (Miinchen: 1929) 103; J.f.f
van Lohmzen-de Leeuw, The Scythwn Penod. An Approach to the History, Art'!;
Epigraphy and Palaeography of North India from the 1st Century B.C. to thdrd
'
Century A.D. (Leiden: 1949) 177-79; B. Rowland, "Bodhisattvas or Deified}
Kings: A Note on Gandhara Sculpture," Archives of the Chinese Art Society ol
America 15 (1961) 6-12; B. Rowland, "Rome and the Kushans: Images()[':
Princes and Gods," F oreward to JM. Rosenfield, The Dynastic Arts of the Kuslul:rts'
(Berkeley: (for Rosenfield's .own vie,w see pp. 23S-44); N.
Idea and Image zn Indwn Art (New DelhI: 1972) 9-52; A.L. Basham, "Thei
Evolution of the Concept of the Bodhisattva," The Bodhisattva Doctrine in Bud/
dhism, ed. L.S. Kawamura (Waterloo: 19S1) 29-31; etc. (This is meantasB
representative, not an exhaustive bibliography). ..ii;
63. B.D. Chattopadhyaya, "On a Bi-scriptual Epigraph of the
Period from Mathura," jAIH 13 (19S0-2) 277-S4; B.N. Mukherjee, "A Nott
on a Bi-scriptural Epigraph of the KushaI).a Period from Mathura," lAIR 13)
(1980-2) 285-86.,,';;
64. V.S. Agrawala, "A New Inscribed Image of Kasyapa Buddha froini,
Mathura," jUPHS 10.2 (1937) 35-3S; Konow, KJ, XXXVI. 9, 11 (d. ].PII.';
Vogel, "The Past Buddhas and Kasyapa in Indian Art and E pigra phy,"
Festschrift F. Weller (Leipzig: 1954) SOS-16. ':;.
65. See Srinivasan cited in n.6, Bhattacharyya and Rajaguru cited
n.3, Marshall et al. cited in n.4, and add D.R. Sahni, Catalogue of the Museum
i
of Archaeology at Sarnath (Calcutta: 1914) D(f)2 (p. 239); O. von Hiniiber, "Zti'
i
einigen Felsinschriften in Brahm! aus Nordpakistan," Ethnologie und Geschichte:[
Festschrift fur K. jettmar, Hrsg. P. Snoy (Wiesbaden: 1983) 272-79 (the date c;r
these inscriptions is problematic; cf. Jettmar, Zentralasiatische Studien 16 (1982y':
296 and journal of Central Asia IV.2 (19S1) n.15); S. Konow, "Arigom Sarada
Inscription. Laukika Samvat 73," EI 9 (1907/08) 300-02; N.G. Majumdar,
"Nalanda Inscription of Vi pula sri mitra," EI21 (1931-32) 97-101; etc. . >
66. See Schopen, "Mahayana in Indian Inscriptions," 14 and add: VY
Vidyavinoda, "Two Inscriptions from Bodh-gaya," EI 12 (1913-14) 27-30;
D.C. Sircar, "Indologica1 Notes. No. 24--Inscriptions on the Bronze Images)
from Jhewari in the Indian Museum,"jAIH 10 (1976-77) 111-12; D. Mitral
Bronzes from Bangladesh: A Study of Buddhist Images from District Chittagong (Delhi:,
1982) 17-21,39,42,43,44, etc.; R.D. Banerji, "Four Sculptures from
dimau," Archaelogical Survey of India. Annual Report 1911-12 (Calcutta: 1915('
THE AMIT ABHA INSCRIPTION
133
'{D.R. Sahni, "Saheth-Maheth Plate of Govin&:handra; [Vikrama] Samvat
6
6
"111 (19}l112) 20-26; etc. In regard to Sukhavati:, I know of only
,', 'ossible reference (see N.G. Majumdar, "Nalanda Inscription ofVipulas-
'&a" EI 21 (1931/32) 99, vs.12) but that it is actually Sukhavatl that is
to here is not clear. This inscription dates to the 12th century .
. 67. MI Nos. 8*,67*,78, 179*, 184, 185*, 186*; Srivastava EI 37*; Fleet
Sircar EI 34; Srinivasan EI 39*; BAk[ 223 n.148*, 226, n.153, 226
54,228 n.159., '
<68. Those inscriptions marked with an asterisk in n.67.
69. Schopen, "Mahayana in Indian Inscriptions," 4ff.; Schopen, Studien
"ndologie und Iranistik 10 (1985) 37ff., especially ns.87 and 88 which correct
ig'n1e
D
f the statements made in the first paper cited here; cf. M. Shizutani,
Inscriptions in the Gupta Period," Indogaku bukkyogaku kenkyu 10.1
says that "the title sak!'abhik$u ... does not
any BuddhIst lr:scrI?tJons ofthe penod except a Kushana
from Mathura (Luders no. 134), "but Luders (MI p. 76) has shown
may rest assured that the reading sakyabhik$usya [in the inscription
to in Shizutani] is due merely to arbitrary alteration," and that "the
evidently been altered in the facsimile").
i'mO. Sharma, Lalit Kala 19 (1979) 26.
Konow, KI XIII (pp. 28-29), XV (p. 48), XVII (p. 52), XXVII (p.
(p. 87); S. Konow, "Charsadda KharoHhJ: Inscription of the Year
Onentalia 20 (1947) 109; R. Salomon, "The Bhagamoya Relic Bowl
IIJ 27 (1984) 108; G. Fussman, "Nouvelles inscriptions saka: ere
ere d'AZes, ere Vikrama, ere de Kani$ka," BEFEO 67 (1980) 6;
"Nouvelles inscriptions saka (III)," BEFEO 74 (1985) 37.
i;/::iIS 72. Sunga: MI Nos. 89, 187; K$atrapa: MI Nos. 80, 86, 123; KU$an: MI
157, BAM 181 n.4l. D.C. Sircar ("Mathura Image Inscription of
tiyaslldeva," EI 30 (1953-54) 181-84), in editing an inscription dated in the
or 67th year of Kani$ka, has suggested (182, 184 n.4) that this inscription
originally have read, in part, piljartha sarvabuddhiina, but this seems
:;\Wilikely.
i:(/ , 73. BAM 180 n.38; A. Ghosh, "Buddhist Inscription from Kausambi,"
(1961-62) 14-16; E. Senart, "The Inscriptions in the Caves at Nasik,"
90, no.18.
n.. 74. cf. R. Salomon, "The K$atrapas and Mahak$atrapas of India," WZKS
it? (1973) 11; A.K. N arain, The Indo-Greeks (Oxford: 1957) 142ff.
;875. R. Salomon & G. Schopen, "The Indravarman (Avaca) Casket In-
Reconsidered: Further Evidence for Canonical Passages in Buddhist
}pscriptions," JIABS 7 (1984) 107-23.
::',. 76. We do not actually know who was included in the category sar-
although all our actual evidence indicates that probably from the
beginning-certainly before Asoka-the Indian Buddhist community knew
actively worshipped a plurality of buddhas which included at least the six
)!former" buddhas. We also know that Kasyapa, at least, was known in KU$an
Mathura. Vogel seems to have connected the term sarvabuddha exclusively
:With this group (Asiatica (Leipzig: 1954) 816; he gives here a survey of the
134
JIABS VOL.IO NO.2
evidence for the early plurality of the buddhas). The Jains also knew as' '
of former jinas and it is therefore to note a parallel
formula sarvabuddhapuJiiye, arahatapuJiiye ( for the worshIp of the arhat"):
occurs frequently in Jain inscriptions from Mathura as the sole stated
for which a religious donation was made. (G. Buhler, "Further Jaina Inse
tions from Mathura," EI 2 (1894) nos. II, V, IX, XXIII, XXX, XXXII). np:
77. Sharma's text is full of mistakes. (The same is true of Sharm /
transcripti.on of the same published in J.G. Williams, The Art
Gupta Indza Emptre and Provmce (Pnnceton: 1982) 6B n.31) I have ignorl
several, marked two of the most bizarre with sic, a'nd corrected two. The
inscription needs to be re-e?ited, but the published photographs (BAM
142 & 143) are so bad that It cannot be done from
78. V.N. "Two Image Inscriptions from Mathura,"
(1967) 153-154 (dated III the 125th year of the Gupta Era); Srinivasan,E;t
(1971) 9-12 (either 148 or 178 of the Gupta Era).
79. Schopen II] 21 (1978) 8-9 and n.18; Mitra, BronzesJrom Bangladesh;.
39,43.'//;:
80. I would like to thank Richard Salomon for having read a draftlir
the present paper and for having let me profit from his always valuabii
observations.' '
The K u ~ a n Amitabha Inscription
Right side enlargement of The Kus.an Amitabha Inscription.
Left side enlargement of The K u ~ i i n Amitiibha Inscription.
r
tT .....
j): ::r
lk F!ii umon i-5 our oldest .source for the l.XJrd 0{ the
BudOhd. We- ,gre .g cf.grit.!d publishing 1exts )
c)ictionaries primers 10 incredSe public ,gw,gre.ne0S of &c\3fist
uteDture.lf in ow- books) pbsewrite for ...
our list of publicMions if order book dll""F .. c.t frcm us.
&tte.r still) (unhe.r our work be..corrur1!j j member. ;111 members
receive. 10 % disCDW"lt Oft. but Spcn.sorif"8 members C;Jrt
.Q k hoot<. ever.!:!. !:jedr.
PQU T(n SoCILT'i,
BR.Odtx..Jd'1 House,
Nf),,:m;wN ROd D J
HUJLD-I- ON THdMlS,

RC.q 1t.N
:
1 ...... .i600
5 . . . .. .12500;
Sponsoring Membership:
1 lbr ...... .1500
5 Lfedrs ..... .i6500.
Materi.al for the First
'6fthe Seventy TOpICS
1riMai trey a -natha' s Abhisamayalar(ikara
I.
Bodhicitta (enlightenment mind) or cittotpada (generation of
is the first of the seventy topics (Tib. don bdun bcu) under
Maitreya-natha
2
(310-390)3 discusses the concealed mean-
,t,fug
4
of the Prafitii Siitras in his classic Mahayana text the Abhi.
U-Iedevotes three verses (sloka) to the topic, only the first of
18)-explaining what cittotpada is and how it is to
pertinent to the limited aim of this paper. The
two verses (Abhi: 19-20), listing the twenty-two divisions
in correspondence with the stages of the path, go
the scope of the present paper.
:!!;\ The verse itself presents no linguistic problems either in
;fheoriginal Sanskrit or in Tibetan. The Sanskrit (cittotpiidaly,
samyaksambodhi-karnata, samiisa-vyiisataly, sa ca yathiisiitra11J,
[ra,cocyate) literally translated reads:
'T,,:'" -
Generation of mind is a desire for perfectly complete
enlightenment for the sake of others.
That and that are spoken of briefly and extensively
according to the [PaTica] siltra.
6
c' In this paper an attempt will be made (1) to supply the context
Jqr the verse within the Prajiiii tradition in general and the Abhi
iparticular; (2) to give some background to the traditional
of the verse by briefly explaining some of its metaphysical
and (3) to present two small translations-from
:tlaribhadra's (fl. mid-ninth century) Aloka and Tsong Kha pa's
.{J357-1419)gSer Phrengwhich explain the meaning of the verse.
139
II.
Broadly speaking, Prajiia literaty-re passes through th "ei
d I

stages of eve opment: revelatIon (buddha-vacana)-the period';%
the Prajiia sutras;1 systematization-the period of Nagaljuna's to);?,;
150-250) and Maitreya-natha's Abhi;8 and scholaSticisrn4[J
stretching from Arya-vimuktisena's (c. 500)9 VXtti through the
dynasty into the fourteenth century Tibetan
Our familiarity with the Prajiia S. utras is without dOubt thit;:
e!
legacy of the late Dr. Edward Couze's tireless
popularize these basic Mahayana texts. II He translated, mOr'?'
or faithfully, large parts of the A.\'(a, Paiica and Sata
most Important of the longer sutras) as well as the Heart Siltfa;;
(Prajiia-hr:daya-sutra), Diamond Sutra (Vajracchedika-prajiia)
other smaller condensations important in the daily religious life:}
of ordinary Buddhists throughout Southeast and North ASia.J';f
Dharmamitra (c. 850-900), the celebrated
Haribhadra,12 appears to be the first writer to clearly
two lineages of exegesis of the Prajiia Sutras. In his
he makes reference to a "profound" (gambhira) and "vast"
tara) traditionY This division is worked out in detail by
t
4#,il
Tibetan Tsang Kha pa (gSer Phreng:3b.1-6b.l).
his traditional explanation the "profound" tradition begins Witllft;
the mythological being Maiijusri, emerges in the human realriill
with the "Six Collections of Reasons" (Tib. rigs tshogs drug) 14
passes down through Buddhapalita (c. 500), Candrakirti (c. 65Q,:.f
Santideva (695-743), etc. The "vast" lineage springs from MaG';;
treya, the mythological being who taught Asanga (i.e., Maitreya::')
natha) the "Five Texts of Maitreya" (Tib. byams gzhung sde
in TU.\'ita. Asanga brought these books back to the human
where the tradition continues with Vasubandhu (fl. 320-350),:'1;
Arya-Vimuktisena, Bhadanta-Vimuktisena (c. 650)/6
dra, Dharmamitra and Abhayakaragupta (1077-1130), etc::i{R
These two lineages of exegesis are differentiated in
of their expressed subject matter (Tib. dngos bstan). In the "PF9!:;}
found" tradition commentaries take the actual meaning of
Prajiia Sutras, i.e., sunyata (emptiness), as subject matter,
in the "vast" lineage the expressed subject matter is the
meaning, i.e., the seventy topics. (See notes 4 and 8.)
As a systematization of the topics of the major Prajiia
THE ABHISAMA Y ALAMKARA
141
the Abhi occupies a pivotal position between the less-
and quasi-mythological Mahayana Sutras on the
and the emergence of distinct philosophical and
Mahayana schools. on tht.: other. In this respect its
to the later commentanes of Arya-Vimuktisena, etc., is
11i6h,ghly analagous to Kiirikiis and the later
texts. Abhl seven hundred years of
speculatIOn (the PraJiiii Sutras) and systematizes it
an edifice comparable in size and grandeur to the cosmos'
Divine Comedy. Furthermore, the clearly delineated
fiiiAerstructure of the text-mirroring and formalizing the ten-
of the Prajiiii Sutras to present the same ideas in more
'lipd less condensed fashion-becomes a distinct literary
by most later writers in the tradition.!7
Abhl has Itself been somewhat neglected by western
Apart from Obermiller's pioneering efforts in the
part of this centuri8 and the important spadework by
CGonze and Tucci there has been a singular lack of interest in
lthiS$mall yet arguably most influential of all the works associated
Specific questions raised in the Abhi have been
into deeply by some of the more distinguished names
Buddhist scholarship. Amongst modern Amer-
Dr. D. S. Ruegg!9 for his work on gotra (lineage),
:tliefourth of the seventy topics, as well as Dr. Jeffrey Hopkins20
associates at the University of Virginia for their work
:6rimental states (Tib. sams gzu:gs) , the eighth topic, deserve
mention. There is a critical edition of the first
of the Vr:tti by C. Pen sa. Also worthy of note are the
contributions of Japanese scholars such as U. Wogihara.
recently Hirofusa Amano and Keikai Mano,. etc., have
!mfde available excellent critical tools for some of the important
However, contemporary scholars have not dealt with the
a total integrated work.
2
!
on and explaining in detail the Abhi's seventy
,topics in conjunction with the Paiica, Arya-Vimuktisena's Vr:tti
the beginning of a scholasticism where, by and large,
later writer incorporates the work of earlier writers into a
(,generally accepted orthodoxy, building up and increasing in
{gimension a massive edifice of metaphysical belief. Arya-Vim uk-
fisena is followed by Bhadanta-Vimuktisena and then the most
!,-;. "
142
JIABS VOL. 10 NO.2
important of al! Indian exegetes,
a bnef explanatIOn of the Abhz wIth explanato\1
transitional passages, is the basic text for many later comlll
ry
<
taries (particularly in Tibetan tradition) while his
accepted, together with Arya-Vimuktisena's V'(tti as
in doctrinal matters.
23
The vast tradition ends in India with
intricate speculations of Abhayakaragupta arid
and continues in a highly systematized fashion in Tibet with
encyclopaedist Bu-ston (1290-1364) and later in the worksly
the scholastic reformer Tsong Kha pa and his disciples. 0;.
Concerning the structure of the Abhi and the context of
opening verse defining cittotpiida within the text itself, one
instead of the more usual linear development of ideas, a
tinctly concentric pattern; i.e., the Abhi sets out its subject matter
numerous in. the same. order, each
the same matenalm successIvely greater detaIl. The eIght
jects (padiirtha) of verses three and four
padiirthaih samudiritii: (1) sarviikiirajiiatii (2) miirgajiiatii (3)
iiatii tatah (4) sarviikiiriibhisambodho (5) milrdhapriipto (6)
vikah (7) (8) dharmakiiyas ca te
sulate the seventy topics (beginning with cittotpiida) taughtiu
i
;
verses five to seventeen. Verses eighteen to the penultimateartf
in turn a more detailed presentation of each of the seventy)
topics listed in the preceding thirteen verses. .
These three sections (Abhi:3-4 listing the eight subjects,",
Abhi:5-17 listing the seventy topics and Abhi: 18-penultimate/
detailing the seventy topics) comprise the body of the text. They
are preceded by a traditional excursus (Abhi: 1-2) setting forth
the subject matter (abhidheya), purpose (prayojana) and so forth'
and a homage to Prajiiii as mother of all iirya beings.,:
The homage describes the first three of the eight subjects
(the sarviikiirajiiatii, miirgajiiatii and sarvajiiatii):
Homage to the mother of the Buddha together with the
collection of Hearers and Bodhisattvas:
The knower of all by which Hearers and those
desiring peace are led to peace,
The knower of paths by which those who benefit the
world accomplish the welfare of mankind,
And that by possession of which the Sages speak
this various (doctrine) in all aspects.
24
THE ABHISAMAyALAMKARA 143
is a feminine abstract noun meaning literally "the state
that which The "knower': in prefer-
to "knowledge IS Jarnng, but IS retamed to aVOId a poten-
misleading between is kno.wn ,vneya) and
. kno,,:,s In BuddhIst h.terature .a
to "a knowmg conSCIOusness IS
f:';:"n 'e' rally demed. Hence knower does not refer to an agent
j:;rge '.' . .
!;:Jjut
to
a conSCIousness ItSelf.]
\!:'g:::Since the three knowers (jnata) include the remaining five
this homage is .itself said to teach the subject
of the entIre text. And smce the second two knowers
margajnata and sarvajna.ta) are themselves inc.luded in the
of all aspects, the WIsdom of Buddhas, thIS first of the
subjects incorporating the entire Mahayana doctrine is of
fyrimary import.ance. (See also figure one.).
:!,,;The great Importance of the first abhzsamaya (the knower
:::6fall aspects) is attested to in the opening verses (Abhi: 1-2)
the aim or purpose of the Abhi is stated to be "ease of
A;,'rinderstanding and cultivating the path of the knower of all
iifispects taught by our Teacher in the (sidras)".26 Thus the position
cittotpada as first of ten phenomena exemplifying the path of
knower of all aspects (Tib. rnam mkhyen gyi mtshon byed kyi
bcu) becomes highly significant. It reflects the theory that
;;i&ittotpiida is not only the start of, but also the demarcator of
i;i1v.fahayana, and that it alone, not penetration of reality or any
fi'pther higher yogic practice, is the final arbiter of Mahayana
27 According to many Tibetan writers this theory of citto-
:\tpada as entrance into the Mahayana (Tib. theg chen 'jug sgo)
the positioning of the verse at the beginning of the
?third and most detailed presentation of the seventy topics. It
Wtay also be an indication that the author of the Abhi accepted
(in this case cittotpada) alone and not prajna (i.e., under-
\standing of fiinyata) as the sole unique factor in delineation of
Mahayana path.
28
III.
For Indian writers like Haribhadra this verse raises two
: (1) what is cittotpada? and (2) how is it to be defined?
The first question they consider within a division of conscio/
2
ness (vijiiiina) into citta (main mind) and caitta (mental
the second by of the cittotpiida's two objects of
vatIOn (iilambana, Tib. dmzgs pa). . <'('
The division of consciousness into mind and mental fact;
is found texts.
29
It i.s, however, the. Vijiiiinaviida,
its deep m the of perceptIOn, .that
the theory m an attempt to dIscover' better termmology to deJ
scribe the intricacies of human awareness.,,;;,
In Asanga's Abhidharmasamuccaya-which, together Witt"
Vasubandhu's Abhidharmakosa-kiirikii, is the main source for the'i
theory-a categorization of .an.d more
dehneated aspects of speCIfic perceptIOns wIthm a theory or:
main mind and of fifty-one secondary mental factors is dei:
line with the idea of specific (Tib. thun mOi!gl
ma ym pa z byed las). Each mental factor IS defined by a
function carried out under the purview of mind as the main"
cognitive event. This idea is exemplified in later Tibetan schoj1:
las tic texts by a manager and a staff of special
store-keeper, foreman, secretary and so forth, where
subservient to and work under the authority and directionof;
the manager.
Asanga admits fifty-one mental factors and defines twenty?:,
six of them in terms of afflictive states (kleSa) , eleven in terms:,
of wholesome states (kausala), and four in terms of
states.
31
Of the remaining ten mental factors-the five, vedani')l
(feeling), cetanii (intention), samjiiii (discrimination), sparta
tact) and manasi-kiira (mentation), and the five, prajiia
gence), samadhi (stabilization), chanda (longing),
nation) and smr:ti (recollection)-Asanga says that only the firs'(;
five are omnipresent (Tib. kun 'gro) and absolutely prerequisite;!
to cognition, while the remaining five are present when
is assertainment of an object (Tib. yut nges). . i.
Tsong Kha pa says that Arya-Vimuktisena arrived at th"
,conclusion that cittotpada was mano-vijiiana (mental
ness, a main mind) by a process of exclusion (gSer Phreng:93a.2).'0
He eliminated the five sense consciousnesses because they
only externals, and the seventh and eighth consciousness
Cittamatra system (i.e., the and the
because they are, theoretically, incapable of being virtuous state,s2j
He was thus left with the sixth, mental consciousness
as an instance of cittotpada. Tsong Kha pa also
",tays that Arya- and Haribhadra felt
the face of desIgnatIOns such as kamata (desIre, Abhz: 18),
(intention, Sutralarhkara ) and prarjidhana (resolve,
cittotpada as a main mind in order to
the pnmary slgmficance of the term.

is, however, a theoretical basis for the idea. Within
:ifI1eframework of the Mahayana path there are ultimate citto-
conventional cittotpada, corresponding to the
ii',a'hdmethod of the path. Just as the anantarya-marga (unmter-
;;ilipted path) is said to be a main mind even though its primary
is the mental factor of wisdom or intellect (prajna),
':gihlilarIy the conventional cittotpada is a main mind even though
characteristic is compassion (kr:pa). Viewed from two
'iYkilgles-as wisdom realizing emptiness directly and as com pas-
feeling pity for sentient beings-the main mind called citto-
is the substantial cause that evolves into a Buddha's knower
aspects (sarvakarajnata). 32
cittotpada is a main mind or mental factor is a
jJgrtestion largely confined to scholastic manuals. The question
:i1pfthe definition of cittotpada within a consideration of its objects
',;'()fobservation (alambana) is discussed more widely in religious
since it has a direct bearing on Buddhist religious attitudes.
1:l;<,All Indian and Tibetan Mahayana writers appear to agree
a fully qualified cittotpada requires two objects of observa-
(1) the enlightenment the practitioner hopes to attain for
benefit of others and (2) the benefit of others itself. The
'iformer is viewed as the tool or cause for the achievement of the
Hence the enlightenment directly sought by bodhisattvas
rupakaya, comprising the sambhogakaya which proclaims
Mahayana for all time and the limitless emanations of the
i'njrmarjakayawhich accomplish the welfare of others.
33
IV.
Aloka:24.1-25.13
i\ '. It is said,
{'/
146
]IABSVOL.10NO.2
There, first, because of the potency of
lineage (gotra)
The seed of compassion is awakened,
And with the full complement of practice and thought
The mind of enlightenment is apprehended.
According to this, bodhicitta (the mind of enlightenment)
of emptiness and compassion arises through the potency of':
lineage (gotra) and so forth, because of taking on fully
bodhisattvas' commitments (samvara). One makes a resolve";
(prarpidhiina): "Having become a perfectly complete
I strive for the sake of others' well-being by teaching the
of the three vehicles, etc." [And one thinks:] "It shall be brought')
to completion through practice". [Bodhicitta] is, therefor,ei'i
characterised as a desire to attain enlightenment having in
the welfare of others. And it has a cause and effect [division]:;
for it says [in the Bodhicaryavatara] "
Just as a division into wanting to go and goer
is set out,
Similarly a division of these two [bodhicittas] in accord
with that enumeration is to be known by scholars.
Hence bodhicitta is twofold: (1) resolve (prarpidhiina) and (2)
gaging (prasthiina).34
However, [the Sutralamkiira] says:
The intention (cetana) of bodhisattvas which has great
enthusiam (mahotsaha) ,
Great undertaking (maharambha), great purpose
(mahartha)
Then great emergence (mahodaya), and which has
Two aims, is the birth of a mind (citta-sambhavaft).
This is perhaps [saying] that cittotpada is a [main] mind
associated intention and the discernment of a special object.
[Objection:] Desire for perfectly complete enlightenmenl<!:'
(samyaksar(l,bodhi-kamata, [Abhi: IS.I]) is a yearning (prarthana)
that [enlightenmentJ-themental factor (caitasika) of
(chanda) for virtuous phenomena. How could that [desire]
cittotpada?
(Response:] True. However, there is no fault for the following
:bteas
on
. Here the result [cittotpiida] is being indicated by the cause
\,.[desire to others] one sees leaderless
m the ocean of mIsery and mtends to hft It up has a
characterized as a longing for virtuous phenomena.
cfr.is on account of that that he or she generates the thought to
'.b{a Buddha. [Hence, cittotpiida is designated desire] in order
';Hlatit will be known that all virtuous phenomena increase for
;bddhisattvas with such a longing and yearning.
'it Alternatively, the resolve (prartidhiina) or yearning is desire
';for perfectly complete enlightenment, and the cittotpiida which
.unctions simultaneously with it is taught by way of that yearn-
ling. This is ye.arning i.s at the time of
from thIS pomt of VIew It IS tenable [to call czttotpiida
?esire] since that [bodhi] mind is produced simultaneously with
resolve .
. ... . What, then, is this perfectly complete enlightenment? What
'is the well-being of others? What is the nature of the desire,
towards what purpose is cittotpiida directed?
l?i; I will answer in accord with the Parica Sidra. In it, the brief
;'explanation of perfectly complete enlightenment says:
',',;:'
Sariputra, a great bodhisattva wishing to fully enlighten all
phenomena in all respects should apply himself to practice of
the perfection of wisdom.
;the extensive explanation of it says:
Sariputra, a great bodhisattva abiding here in the perfection of
wisdom through the mode of non-abiding should make complete
the perfection of giving (danaparamita) through the mode of non-
benevolence since what is given, the giver and the receiver are
not observed ...
'The brief explanation of the well-being of others says:
A great bodhisattva who wishes to place in complete nirvar]a as
many beings as there are in worlds as numerous as the sands of
the river Ganges in each of the ten directions, in anirvar]a where
there is no remaining aggregate (anupadhisqa), should practice
:he perfection of wisdom.
148
JIABS VOL. 10 NO.2
The extensive explanation of this says:
A great bodhisattva who wishes to plac,e in benevolence those wh"
are miserly, in ethical conduct those who are immoral, in patienc
o
those beings who are malicious, should practice the perfectio e
of wisdom. n
The Abhi therefore says:
Generation of mind is a desire for perfectly complete
enlightenment for the sake of others.
That and that are spoken of briefly and extensively
according to the (Parica) Sutra.
v.
gSer Phreng: 92b.5-94a.6
WHAT IS Cittotpiida
35
Explanation of the Other Masters [Asanga and Vasubandhu];
Asanga, in his Bodhisattvabhumi, says: "cittotpiida is thl
bodhisattvas' finest resolve (Tib. smon lam)". He is therefore o f t h ~
opinion that cittotpiida is in its nature a resolve. And Vasubandhu
comments in his commentary on the Alamkiira
36
that, "cittotpiida
is an intention that has three qualities and is concerned with
two objects". He thus takes the position that it is in its nature
an intention (Tib. sems pa). In the Sutriilamkiira it says:"
The resolve of the steadfast ones
Is an intention together with longing.
Thus it describes the resolve [i.e., cittotpiida] as an intention
by longing. It seems, therefore, that Asanga's opinion and th<
opinion of Vasubandhu are equivalent.
Level One
Level Two
Level Three

THE THREE WISDOMS I
To be known Tobedone The result
Chapters 1-3 Chapters 4-7 ChapterS
1 ,--------------------------------------------
SARVAKARAjNATA
(OMNISCIENCE)
To be known
Chapter 1 (the ten
topics of omniscience)
MARGAjNATA
(KNOWER OF PATHS)
Means of Attainment
(Bodhisattva path)
Chapter 2
SARVAjNATA
(KNOWER OF ALL)
To be avoided
(Hlnayana path)
Chapter 3
l ,--------------------------------------------
CITTOTPADA
(Bodhicitta)
The heart of the
path
Topic 1
A VA V ADA NIRVEDABHAG]Y AlYGA
(Advice) (U nderstanding of)
emptiness)
To refine cittotpada The result of
advice
Topic 2 Topics 3 + 4
PRACTICES
To implement
advice
Topics 5 - 10
l '- --------------------- -------------------------------------
See Chart Two
i-J
::r::
M

::r::
H
CJ)
>
a:::

>,

>,

......

<.0
CITTOTPADA: THE HEART OF THE PATH
GENERAL EXPLANATION
PHYSICAL AND NATURE OF BODHICITI A BENEFITS
MENTAL BASES
,
I
Instances Definition ~ s
Other Views Arya&
Haribhadra
D
r-- r--
c
\
--
'-
EXPLANATION OF THE
SPJ-IU7;'ARTHA
, ~ .
>-'
V<
o
'-<
>-<
>-
td
\fl
-<
o
r-'
o
z
Q.
l ~
THE ABHISAMAY ALAM:KARA 151
Explanation Based on the Present Text [Abhi]
This has two parts: explanations of those who concur with
and explanations of those who differ from
of those who concur with Arya-Vimuktisena. [In his
explains citta (mind) and utpada (gener-
in the followmg manner. He says:
Citta (mind) is consciousness (vijiiana) since it is a particular
ness (vibuddhi). Of the [eight] consciousnesses it is mental con-
sciousness (mano-vijiiana) because that which is concerned with
wholesome phenomena would be [of that sort]. Utpada (genera-
tion) lets it be known that something has been generated anew.
Hence it is to indicate the initial thing, [i.e.,] when the mind
[newly] realizes the phenomenon.
thus takes the view that a mental conscious-
'ness suited to be a basis for wholesome phenomena is an instance
since he considers the five sense consciousnessesto
only with externals, and the alaya-v&"iuina and
to be neutral (Tib. lung ma bstan). Furthermore, in
why desire for enlightenment [in the Abhi] seems to
.'gecittotpada, he structures an argument [in resolution of which]
that "desire" (kamata) is merely used to designate citto-
tpada but is not cittotpada itself.
;,tyc Bhadanta-Vimuktisena gives a similar instance [of cittotpada]
'ihhis Varttika and Haribhadra, both here [in his Sphutartha] and
ihhis Aloka quotes the argument set out by Arya-Vimuktisena
that desire is merely used to designate [cittotpada]
{vhich is in fact a [main] mind.
e
l
Abhayakaragupta in his Marmakaumudz also presents the
[of Arya-Vimuktisena], and the Panjika sets
forth mental consciousness as an instance.
j Dharmamitra, in his Prasphuta-pada does follow Arya-Vimu-
ktisena, but is a bit obscure. He says:
According to some, [the word desire is used] for cittotpada in
order to teach the primary thing in the actual cittotpada, i.e.,
longing and so on. According to others it is imputed to that aid
.which increases cittotpada, i.e., benevolence and so on. And ac-
cording to others it is imputed to the result, i.e., the path that
all traverse.
152
jIABSVOL.IONO.2
Explanations of those differing from Arya-Vimuktisena.
dhasri
37
[in his Pradfpavali] contradicts Arya-Vimuktisena
Haribhadra. He says:
Since yearning is itself awareness it is enough that such a
nation is used: Others say that the name of the cause is given
the result or the name of the simultaneous aid is given, but
does that establish its true character?
Since he is asserting yearning (prarthana) to be a mind he
asser,ting mind and msntal factors to be substantially the same.
and
Santipa,38 in his Suddhamatf, says:
This thingcittotpada is a mind, i.e., mental [consciousness]
and it is desire.
Therefore, cittotpada is characterised as a desire focused on
fectly complete enlightenment for the benefit of others.
He thus asserts [cittotpada] to be both mental consciousness
longing.
Why do Arya-Vimuktisena and Haribhadra feel
to state that it is a mind?
They contend that if it were a mental factor the basic "''''.lUU-''
cation of the word would be lost. For Haribhadra in
there is the underlying suspicion that the last line of the
ing verse from the Sutralamkiira is talking about a mind.
The intention (cetana) of bodhisattvas which has great
enthusiasm,
Great undertaking, great purpose
Then great-emergence, and which has
Two aims is the birth of a mind (citta-sambhavalp).
For he quotes this in his Aloka in the context of
tisena's argument and says:
This is perhaps [saying] that cittotpada is a [main] mind
associated intention and the discernment of a special object.
to con)ecturin?" that. this quotation teaches that
;Cittotpada IS a mmd aIded by _ . ,
In the verse from the Sutralamkara, "great enthusIasm'
i;"eans being armed with enthusiastic perseverence and not be-
depressed at having to work diligently for a long time.
undertaking" means accomplishing, by enthusiastic per-
?bverence for the task at hand, what one is armed for. "Great
means it is the ben:fit of [both] and others,
:ina "great emergence means It goes to great enlIghtenment.
first two [i.e., great enthusiasm and undertaking] teach that
'fiproduces [enlighten.ment], the third [i.e., great. purpose]
teaches the purpose It fulfills, and the fourth [l.e., great
ernergence] teaches that [cittotpada] is in charge of enlighten-
'.\
'rllent.

:k":.,,
'<\><
1. Abbreviations and List of Principal Indian and Tibetan Sources
abbreviations for Tib. titles of Indian works are first given in paren-
followed by the author. An asterisk before the Sanskrit indicates the
twork is no longer extant in the original.)

iP. The Tibetan Tripitaka, Peking Edition. Reprinted under the supervision of
r,;;: the Otani University, Kyoto. Ed. by D. T. Suzuki, 168 vols. (Tokyo and
Kyoto 1955-1961).
i[Tib. Tibetan
e;Abhi Abhisamayiilamkara-niima-prajiiiipiiramitii upadeSaSiistrakiirikii (mngon par
rtogs pa'i rgyan) (Maitreya-natha) P. 5187. Ed. in Sanskrit and Tib. by T.
'1" Stcherbatsky and E. Obermiller (Bibliotheca Buddhica, 23) (St.
:;: Petersburg 1939); trans. with Sanskrit-Tib. index by E. Conze (Serie
';!: Orientale Roma, 1) (Roma 1963). The Sanskrit edition of the Abhi found
, in Unrai Wogihara's Aloka has been used for this paper. Wogihara's
of the I hads bheenfjfoltlotwed even thfough he to
ave lila vertent y omitte t e Irs wo verses rom consl era IOn
(Aloka: 1,7-10) and begun his enumeration from verse three.
14tasiihasrikii-prajiiiipiiramitii-vyiikhyiibhisamayiilamkara-iilokii (rgyan gyi
snangba) (Haribhadra) P.5189. Ed. by U. Wogihara (Tokyo 1932-1935).
" , Cf. the earlier edition by G. Tucci (Geakward Oriental Series, 62) (Baroda
? 1932).
/A,fi
a
14iasiihasrikii-prajiiiipiiramitii (rgyad stong ba) P. 734.
tg
Ser
Phreng Shes rab kyi pha rol tu phyin pa'i man ngag gi bstan beos mngon par
rtogs pa'i rgyan 'grel ba dang beas pa'i rgya eher bshad pa. 'Legs bshad gser gyi
phreng ba' shes bya ba (Tsong Kha pa) P.6150. A blockprint edition in the
library of the Buddhist School of Dialectics, Dharmsala, Indian has b ';' ..
. een
used for thIS paper.
Kiirika (rtsr: ba :hes rab) (Nagarjuna) P.52.
* M armakaumudf As.\asahasnka-praJnaparamzta-vr:ttzmarma-kaumudf (gnad
'ad) (Abhayakaragupta) P.5202. .
Paiica Paiicavimsatisiihasrikii-prajiiiipiiramitii (nyi khri) P.73 1.
* Paiijika (snying po mchog) (San:;
tipa > Ratnakarasanti) P.5200." '.,
*Prad'ipiivali Abhisamayiilamkara-bhagavat'i-prajiiii-piiramitii-upadesa-siistra_ ...... .
vr:tti-prajiiii-prad'ipiival'i (shes rabsgronme'iphreng ba) (Buddhasrl) P.5298'/
* Prasphu\apadii
prasphu\apadii (tshig gsal) (Dharmamitra) P .5194.
Prajiiii Prajiiiipiiramitaii (sher ph yin).).
Efatniivc:l'i (rin chen 'phreng ba) (Nagarjuna) P.5658 ..
Sata Satasiihasrikii-prajiiiiparamita (bum) P. 7 3 0 "f
* Sphu\artha Cgre(
ba don gsal) (Hanbhadra) P.5191. Partial reconstruction, Hirofusa'
Amano, A study on the Abhi-Vr:tti (Japan Science Press, 1975). Cf.
(Bibliotheca Indo-Tibetica, 2) Sarnath 1977.
* Suddamat'i Abhisamayalamkarakarikiivr:tti-suddamat'i (dag ldan) (Santipa)
P.5199.
Sutriilamkara Mahiiyana-sutriilamkiira-niima-kiirika (mdo sde rgyan) (Maitreya:'
natha) P.5521.
*Viirttika
karaviirttika (nyi khri rnam 'grel) (Bhadanta-Vimuktisena) P.5186.;.
Vitti Paiicavimsatisiihasrika-prajiiaparamita-upadesa-sastra-abhisamayiila- .
mkiirvr:tti (nyi khri snang ba) (Arya-Vimuktisena) P.5185. The firsf
abhisamaya ed. by C. Pensa (Serie Orientale Roma, 37) (Roma 1967) ....
* * *
Abhidharmakosakarikii (mdzod) (Vasubandhu).
Abhidharmasamuccaya (mngon par kun btus) (Asanga).
Bodhisattvabhumi (byang sa) (Asanga).
Bodhicaryiivatara (spyod )'ug) (Santideva).
Dharmadharmatavibhangakiirika (chos dang chos nyid rnam 'byed)
natha).
Madhyamakavatiira (dbu ma la 'jug pal (Candrakirti).
Madhyiintavibhangakiirika (dbu mtha' rnam 'byed) (Maitreya-natha).
Mahiiyiinottaratantrasiistra (rgyud bla mal (Maitreya-natha).
Sutriilamkarabhiisya (rgyan gyi 'grel ba) (Vasubandhu).
Sunyatiisaptatikarikii (stong nyid bdun bcu pal (Nagarjuna).
Vaidalyasutra (zhib mo rnam 'thag) (Nagarjuna).
Vigrahavyiivartanikarika (rtsod bzlog) (Nagarjuna).
(rigs pa drug bcu pal (Nagarjuna).
2. For convenience, in this paper Maitreya-natha and Asanga are
THE ABHISAMAyALA1>IKARA 155

different names for the same person. The former refers to Asariga in an
[;J
s
lted state directly inspired by Maitreya, while the latter refers to Asariga
: ,.exa I . A d b D . .
.;j;;f a persona capacIty. s suggeste y r. Kawamura of the Umversity of
be a bahuvrfhi meaning whose lord
Dr. of Nagasa.ke Umversity however pO.mts out that
YJi'ne would expect, m that case, to find It at least once together wIth the noun
;}rnodifies, while such an instance is not forthcoming. A survey of traditional
',ltnd modern discussions of this problem is found in D.S. Ruegg; La Theone
Tdthagatagarbha et du Gotra (Paris: 1969) 50-55.
;'j:/ 3. Dates for Indian authors are taken from K. Potter, Bibliography of
Philosophy (Delhi: 1971) and rGya gar chos 'byung,
:.'i,aiua Chimpa and A. Chattopadhyaya (SImla: 1970). The date 310-390 IS
'\assodated with Asariga not Maitreya (who is, one should point out, traditionally
by the name Maitreya-natha).
4. T'ib. sbas don means the hidden or concealed meaning; i.e., the se-
:;Au
ence
of the clear .. See :. Obermiller, :'The
;': Doctrine of PraJna as exposed m the Abhz of Maitreya , Acta Orzentalza 11
i:(1932) 7 341. An is. as. Since sbcis don. is
;:hlntrasted wIth dngos don (explrcit meanmg)-whlCh IS emptmess-an esotenc!
contrast becomes possible. The detailed explanation of the path (the
would then be understood as concealing the ultimate nature (the
:i'esoteric). See also note 8 below.
;:; .... ' 5. A. Wayman has compared the twenty-two cittotpadas to other samadhi
'i;lists.
6. The clumsiness of "that and that" is not evident in the Sanskrit in
the feminine sa evidently refers to the feminine kamata (desire for
'1el1lightenment), and the masculine sa to parartha (the benefit of others).
'; 7. See E. Conze, Selected Saying From the Perfection of Wisdom (London:
12-14. New sutras were revealed in the classical period, but the most
;"rmportant are prior to the Kankiis and Abhi .
. :.' 8. gSer Phreng 6a: "Therefore one can say, with Dharmamitra, that in
; regard to the subject matter of the Prajiia there is the essential meaning (snying
:;po'i don)-the ultimate truth, and the vast-the sequence of the clear realiza-
,':lions. The former is dealt with in the "Six Collections of Reasons" and the
'latter in the Abhi" .
. ::; 9. Arya-Vimuktisena was probably a contemporary of Bhaviviveka who
ca. 570-590. See Taranatha, p. 177.
:, 10. The tradition continues even today, though on a much smaller scale,
"amongst Tibetan refugees in India as a recent publication of Khensur Perna
,Gyaltsen, bLo gsal dga' bskyed sning gi nor bu (Mundgod: 1980) makes abundantly
(dear. The culmination of the Tibetan scholastic tradition, however, is to be
;found in the works of Tsong Kha pa and his disciples in the fourteenth and
i;early fifteenth century .
. { 11. For an exhaustive bibliography of the works of E. Conze see Prajiia
Related Systems: Studies in Honour of Edward Conze, ed. by Lewis Lancaster
::(Berkeley: 1977).
'f, 12. Dharmamitra's exact dates are unclear. Since his Prasphutapada is a
: commentary on Haribhadra's Sphutartha it is likely he flourished slightly after
him, towards the end of the ninth century. See D.S. Ruegg, "Thegotra, eka _',i
and tathiigata theories," Prajiia and Related Systems, p. 284. yana,
13. Prasphutapada, P.5194, vol. 91, 65.2.8-66.3.2:de la snying po'i do'.',
mdo sde zab mo 'am gsal par bstan cing 'Phags pa klu sgrub kyi zhal snga nas ::1;
ma rtsa ba'i shes rab la sogs par . .. gang du rn.nffon rtogs pa'i don bstan pa
rab tu rgyas pa dang zab par ldan pas . . . don dz nyzd -phags 'fa byams pa . '. . .......
14. Karikiis, Vigrahavyavartanzkarika, RatnavalZ, Sunyatasaptatikarilw,
and Vaidalyasutra. j
15. Abhi, Sutralamkara, Madhyantavibhangakarika, Dharmadharmatavibha {J
gakarika and Mahayanottaratantra-sastra. n.: .. _
16. Contemporary with Candraklrti (flourished ca. 650). See Taranath ....
a, ,,,'
p.212'.i'
17. In fact, the Abhi presents the same subject matter six times in basicaII ':
same order: the hO.mage,
Slon (Abhz:5-17), detaIled explanatIOn (Abhz:18-penulumate), and condensa_'
tion into three categories in the last verse.
18. Besides his "Doctrine of Prajiia," Obermiller's Analysis of the AMi'
Calcutta Oriental Series, 27 (London: 1933-1936) stands out as a
of Prajiia scholarship.'
19. See particularly part 1, chapter 3, "La Theorie du gotra dans L'Abhi'
et Ses Commentaires" and part 2, chapter 2, "La Theorie de L'eveil Universel',
et de L'ekayana dans Les Commentaries de l'Abhi in his La Thiorie.. .. "
20. J. Hopkins et aI., Meditative States in Tibetan Buddhism: The Concentra).";
tions and Formless Absorptions (London: 1983); with Denma Locho Rinpoche'\
and L. Zahler, "The Seventy Topics" (unpublished manuscript); with G. New-;;
land, "Achieving Through Armor" (unpublished manuscript), etc. "The Se3;
venty Topics" is described as a translation of Mi pham bla ma'i zhallung withy
a transcription of an oral explanation. "Achieving Through Armor" is a trans-,;
lation of the samnaha (Tib. go sgrub) section of bSod nam grags pa's Phar phyin
. spyi don.
21. Obermiller is the exception but unfortunately his untimely death,
prevented the completion of his work. "
22. An assessment shared in common by Obermiller, Conze and Ruegg;.""
23. Arya-Vimuktisena and Haribhadra are collectively referred toas'f
'Phags seng in the Tib. tradition and their common assertions as 'Phags sengi
gi lugs. Although there are occasional divergences in their view both are
to be Yogacarya-Svatantrika-Madhyamika (Tib. mal 'byor spyod pa'i dbu ma raig.>
rgyud pal. . .. ;
24. ya sarvajiiataya nayaty upaSamar(! santa4irpalJ, sravakan, ya margajiiatay"d;
jagad-dhita-kt:tar(! lokartha-sampadika, sarvakaram idar(! vadanti munayo viSvar[! yay4.)
sar(!gatalJ" tasyai sravaka-bodhisattva garpino buddhasya Matre namalJ,. Tib.
tion of jiiata is shes pa or the more usual honorific mkhyen pa. It is explained:
as shes byed and not as shes bya. The translation "knower" or "exalted knower'.);
is borrowed from J. Hopkins.>J
25. Sphutartha, p.5: de la thams cad mkhyen pa nyid gsum gyis ni don brgyM;'.
bsdus la, de dag kyang shes rab kyi pha rol tu phyin pa yin zhing. . .........
26. Abhi: 1-2 sarvakarajiiata-margalJ, sasina yo 'tra deSitalJ, ... sukheng,:'
pratipatsirann ity arambha-prayojanam. ,,\'v;

"'i'i('.27. This theory of cittotpiida as the entrance into Mahayana informs the
lines of homage in (.a Madh!amakiivatiira
slated in part by J. Hopkms, Compasswn m Tzbetan Buddhzsm (London:
l(tran I'd I
also partial ation by L. e (Museon,
and Dlgnaga.and Dharmaklrtl s (Czttamiitr:n) apparent
with comp.asslO_n the .pnmary of Buddha's ..
states that IS basIc to all Mahayana paths. In thIS form It IS a
held by all Mahayamsts.
This analysis is particularly important in understanding the develop-
r<eht of Tib. ideas after Tsong Kha pa, In the dGe lugs pa explanation of
the theory of cittotpiida is carried a step further and it
that there is no difference between Hlnayana and Mahayana paths in
view (Tib. lta ba), only in terms of method (Tib. thabs). [See Tsong
'('.Kha. pa's sNag rim chen mo, t:anslated in part by J. Hopkins, Tantra in Tibet
';'(bondon: 1977).] Although TIbetans generally regard the Abhi as a Sviitantrika-
!fUadhyamika teaching, and although it cannot be characterized as a uniquely
f0rriisangika text, there are a number of distinctly Priisangika passages (e.g.,
,;4bhi:37), so both aspects of the assertion that cittotpiida is the entrance into
lri:Mahayana are applicable to a greater and lesser degree.
dGe 'dun grub, in his mDzod tik thar lam gsal byed (Varanasi: 1973)
',9,8 quotes "a sidra" which in Tib. says: sems las byung ba mad par ni, sems ni nam
mi ste. Nyi ma .dang ni 'od zer bzhin. See also E. Frauwallner, History
i:50/ lr:dian P hzlosophy (DelhI: 1:' 84) 164. ..
Lobsang Gyatso, Rzgs lam che ba blo rzgs kyz rnam gzhag nye mkho kun
:;btus(Dharmsala, 1974) 121 ff.
":, 31. vitarkah (coarse investigation), viciirah (subtle investigation), middham
V (sleep ) and kaukl;tyam (regret). See Mahiivyutpatti: 1980-1984.
32. This explanation is based on a conversation with H.H. the Fourteenth
.Oalai Lama in June, 1985. Although the iinantarya-miirga is clearly an instance
cittotpiida (Tib. don dam sems bskyed) a clear spriptural reference to
Ditnecessarily being a main mind (Tib. rtso sems) has not been found.
;';.';. 33. For the idea that the is the main goal of bodhisattvas see
;;Wsong Kha pa's Lam rim chen mo, gSung bum ed. (New Dehli: 1980), vol. Pa,

t< .. ,. An investigation of Indian and Tib. views about resolve (pradrJidhiina)
/flnd engaging (prasthiina) cittotpiida, though necessary, is beyond the scope of
,;this paper. A summary of the views of earlier Indian writers on the criteria
iE,orthe division is to be found ingSer Phreng:94b.I-96a.2. It concludes: "There-
resolve cittotpiida is posited on the small path of accumulation (tshog lam)
:'ahd engaging cittotpiida from the middle [path of accumulation] ... This mas-
'ttr[Haribhadra] also quotes from Santideva in explaining resolve and en gag-
[cittotpiida], so Indian scholars also arrived at this same point of view [i.e.,
:}hat resolve and engaging cittotpiida are delineated in terms of the small and
paths of accumulation, respectively]". This and other relevant passages
Tibetan tradition have been masterfully analysed by Lobsang Dargyay
;icnhis article "The View of Bodhicitta in the Tibetan Tradition", in The
Doctrine in Buddhism, ed. L.S. Kawamura (Waterloo, Ontario: 1981),

I: p.u.p. drop 11 points to note 34.
}i,:!f"
t':1
158
JIABS VOL. 10 NO.2
. 34. Alokii 24;4- 0.
tn-yiina-dharma-desanadzbhzr yatna'T(L kuryam ztz prar}zdhana'T(L kr:tva pratzpattyil sa" ::
piidayed. iti pariirthiilambanal! sa-hetu-phalal!
laks,ar}o "gantu-kiimasya gantuS ca yathaii pratzyate, tathii bhedo 'nayor .}a;<:,
yathiisar(!khyena pawf,itail),." iti prar}idhi-prasthiina-svabhiivo dvividhas
. Tsong Kha pa interprets this "cause and effect" (sahetu-phalal),) as rei .....
ring to the resolve and engaging cittotpiida (gSer
99b.2) "This is the way the mind is generated. [One thinks] 'In the future{:
will become a Buddha and for the sake of sentient beings I shall teach
doctrines of the three vehicles, etc., presevering exactly in accordance With!
individual aptitudes'. This wish is. th.e first cau.sal cittotpiida. Then, '1 shall:
complete the full means of accomplrshmg the enlrghtenment thus wished for;';;
is the way in which the resultant, engaging cittotpiida arises".;
Alternatively, the cause and effect could be the two stages of achievemenT\
implied by the two iilambana: first, the enlightenment to be attained for tM
benefit of others, and second, the benefit itself. .
35. Subtitles are based on the sa bcas (outline) of the text of gSer
See chart 2. .. ;;
36. Lobsang Dargyay "The View of Bodhicitta", p. 104, says Tsong
pa conjectured that for Vasubandhu citta-sambhava (Tib. sems las 'byung)
riilamkiira:4.1) was used to mean not that cetanii was "a birth or arising of
[bodhi]citta", but rather the "origin of [bodhi]citta". Dargyay thus translateS'
cittotpiida as "rising mind" and says, Ibid., pp. 106-107: ,.

'/j' '
The Tibetan scholars ... concluded that mind is lucid, motionless and merl'
perceiving. When the wish for enlightenment arises in the Bodhisattva this mo,;:
tionless citta becomes elevated, moved. The cause for this 'Rising Mind' (cittotpa)i;
is the wish for enlightenment <prarpidhi). This wish is a mental factor (caitta) not'
mind as such. . <:;

37. Buddhasrljfi.ana -> Bl.lddhajfi.anapada -> Buddhajfi.ana: a
pIe of Haribhadra, flourished mid-ninth century. < J
38. Santipa -> Ratnakarasanti, flourished late eleventh, early twelfth';
century.
lABS MEMBERSHIP APPLICATION FORM

.

;;,,,,;:t:<:J;;'

TYPE (circle one) Full, Student, Life, Institutional Subscriber

for which application is being made ... ______________ _
,
,;rrO' Please check this box if you do not want your name and address included
')\ in our mailing list when it is given out.
:',",:), :,\
:".i,:{Payments may be made in either US Dollars or J apanese Yen. lABS members
subscribers who wish to pay in US dollars (no Yen to this address please!)
i:";Cshould send their payments to:
'::!;ewis Lancaster, Treasurer,
:;
FULL MEMBER
:',;!'<!!oDept. of Oriental Languages STUDENT MEMBER
:";}':;fheUniversity of California INSTITUTIONAL SUBSCRIBER
CA 94720 USA LIFE MEMBER

$25.00
$15.00
$50.00
$500.00
)i
f
', lABS members and subscribers who wish to pay in Japanese Yen (no Dollars
this address please!) should send their payments to the lABS account
by Dr. Akira Yuyama, Regional Secretary for Asia:
i:1
f
:;No.041-4502280
Gakkai
(Ordinary Account)
\.Toranomon Branch of the
.!.{" Mitsubishi Bank

:/)jAPAN
FULL MEMBER
STUDENT MEMBER
INSTITUTIONAL
SUBSCRIBER
LIFE MEMBER
5,500
3,300
11,000
100,000
'
;:'::Back issues are available to individual members for $17 per issue ( 3,740)
:;"qr $25 per volume ( 5,500). Life members may purchase back issues at a
rate of$12.75 per issue ( 2,805) or $18.75 per volume ( 4,125).
,:',-Prospective individual members from economically developing countries may
the Treasurer for subsidized rates.
Journal issues are sent in September and December of each year, via
special fourth-class rate. If members and subscribers do not notify the lABS
in Berkeley of address changes sufficiently in advance, we can not
"Jibe responsible for lost issues.
'\'
International Journal for
Philosophy of Religion
Editors
Bowman L Clarke; Frank: R. Harrison III, The University of
Georgia, USA
The organ of no single institution or sectarian school
philosophical or religious, the International Journal f o ~
Philosophy of Religion provides a medium for the exposition
development, and criticism of important philosophical i n ~
sights and theories relevant to religion in any of its varied
forms. It also provides a forum for critical, constructive, and
interpretative consideration of religion from an objective
philosophical point of view.
Articles, symposia, discussions, reviews, notes, and news in
this journal are intended to serve the interests of a wide
range of thoughtful readers, especially teachers and students
of philosophy, philosophical theology and religious thought.
Subscription Information ISSN 0020-7047
1987, Volume 21-22 (6 issues)
Institutional rate: Ofl. 222.00/US$92.00 inc!. postage/handl-
ing
Private rate: Ofl. 85.00/US$35.50 inc!. postage/handling
Private subscriptions should be sent direct to the publishers
Back Volume(s) Available
Volumes 1-20 (1971-1986)
Martinus Nijhoff Publishers
Price per Volume
excl. postage
Of!. 95.00/US$38.00
(Vols.1-14)
Ofl.75.00/US$28.00
(Vols. 15-18)
Ofl. 80.00/US$27.50
(Vols. 19-20)
II. REVIEWS
The Genesis of an Orienta list: Thomas William Rhys Davids and Bud-
dhism in Sri Lanka, by Ananda Wickremeratne. New Delhi: Motilal
Banarsidass, 1985.
Like most of the great Orientalists, Rhys Davids has scarcely
received his biographical due. He has been aptly described as
the most influential Pali scholar of modern times. He founded
the Pali Text Society, and set in train its vast output of editions
and translations. Several of these were from his own hand, besides
the ones he produced under other auspices. The general works
in which he popularised Buddhism stand unsurpassed, in author-
ity, eloquence and prestige. His interpretations of Buddhist ideas,
designed to conform to the scientistic and rationalist ideas of his
time, have had an enduring influence, in the West and also in
Sri Lanka and elsewhere in Asia. Yet, there have been only two
brief sketches of his life, those contributed by Chalmers to the
Dictionary of National Biography and the Proceedings of the British
Academy.
For the present pioneering work Wickremeratne has used
a variety of sources, chiefly Rhys Davids's own publications, and
unpublished records of the Sri Lankan government, the Colonial
Office, and the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain. But these
sources are not likely, by themselves, to throw much direct light
on Rhys Davids's private life and innermost thoughts. Unfortu-
nately Rhys Davids's dalJghter, Miss Vivian Rhys Davids, appears
to have refused to allow Wickremeratne to read such of her
father's papers as were in her possession. Her aim, Wickre-
meratne suggests, was to discourage him from investigating the
premature end of her father's career as a civil servant in Sri Lanka.
Despite this considerable obstacle, Wickremeratne casts
much valuable light on Rhys Davids. Somewhat more than half
this book is devoted to a detailed examination of Rhys Davids's
period of ten years in Sri Lanka. Wickremeratne surveys his
activities as a well-informed administrator, his archaeological re-
searches, his close acquaintance with Buddhist monks, his study
of Pali with the learned and captivatingly unaffected Yatramulle
Unnanse, and his earliest ventures in scholarly publication.
Wickremeratne then turns to the circumstances in which
Rhys Davids left Sri Lanka. Various exculpatory hints as to these
161
162
JIABS VOL. 10 NO.2.
have been put about by friends and admirers in order to protect
his reputation from those who might have been expected to assail
it, the same pious motive which seems to have prompted Miss -
Rhys Davids's attitude to Wickremeratne's researches. But, as so
often in cases such as this, the facts assumed to be safely em-
balmed in suppressed private papers were easily established from
official records, and appear, at any rate in a latter-day perspective,
to be far less discreditable than might have been feared. As Wic-
kremeratne soon discovered, Rhys Davids was in fact dismissed
the Civil Service.
The charges were (a) that he improperly imposed fines on
his subordinates for minor lapses, and on the owners of cattle
caught trespassing; and (b) that he misappropriated some of the
monies. Rhys Davids could and did cite statutory and common
law as well as administrative precedents in support of his actions.
He may have exceeded his powers in some instances, with harsh
consequences for the Sinhalese villagers involved. Nevertheless
he emerges from Wickremeratne's pages .not as a tyrant or a
peculator but rather as the victim of a fateful train of cir-
cumstances. He had fallen foul of his immediate superior,
Twynam, who seems to have been a pettifogging martinet, by a
somewhat cavalier attitude towards administrative detail. By his
tactlessness on one or two occasions he also lost the opportunity
of winning the golden opinion of no less a person than Gregory,
the governor, who shared his enthusiasm for Sinhalese archaeol-
ogy. On receiving Twynam's report on the matter of the fines
Gregory hurried forward the official inquiries. Besides some ear-
lier displeasure with Rhys Davids, he was anxious to leave no
room for suspisions in Sri Lanka that a white official's ir-
regularities were being covered up.
When Gregory recommended Rhys Davids's dismissal the
officials at the Colonial Office gave conflicting advice to Lord
Kimberley, the Secretary of State for the Colonies. He in turn
finally decided, with considerable misgivings, to follow that of
his Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Knatchbull Hugg)'sen. The
latter's arguments were that Gregory, as the man on the spot,
should be supported in his decision, and that it was of overriding
importance to safeguard the reputation for fairness and probity
of British officials in Sri Lanka. Wickremeratne's examination of
this episode, an historian's rather than a judge'S or counsel's is
probably the best part of his book.
Wickremeratne next deals with the years during which, hav-
ing returned to England, Rhys Davids established himself as an
REVIEWS 163
Orientalist. This part of the book covers the publication not only
of his general surveys of Buddhism but also of his scholarly
articles, the establishment of the Pali Text Society, his period as
the Secretary of the Royal Asiatic Society, and his role in the
early moves to establish an institution for Oriental Studies in
London.
Rhys Davids's ideas on Buddhism take up the final part of the
. book. They were shaped by his personal background and experi-
ence. His father, with whom he was intimate, was a Welsh Non-
conformist Minister with a scholarly interest in English ecclesias-
tical history. This background could have helped, Wickremeratne
suggests, to form Rhys Davids's preference for Buddhism as
against Hinduism. Some passages in Davids's writings might also
suggest that it shaped his sympathy for Theravada as against
Mahayana and for Early Buddhism as against the Buddhism
practised in the Asian societies of his day.
Wickremeratne points out that in order to prepare for entry
to the Indian Civil Service, Rhys Davids went to Germany, where
a university education was cheaper than in Britain, and where
it was also possible to earn something as a private tutor. He
joined the University of Breslau where his Sanskrit studies under
Stanzle laid the foundations of his career as an Orientalist. Un-
fortunately there were no sources available to Wickremeratne
for a closer look either at Rhys Davids's boyhood or at his German
years, during which latter he must have encountered some of
the influences which formed him: not only the methods of Bibli-
cal criticism but also the theological rationalism and anti-
metaphyscial ideas then gaining ground in Germany.
A similar difficulty has also limited Wickremeratne with re-
gard to Rhys Davids's reactions to Sri Lankan Buddhism. For
even the diaries, quotations from which occupy a whole chapter
of this book, are not private documents in which Rhys Davids
might have set down his personal reactions. They were official
records of his day-to-day activities which he was required to sub-
mit to his superiors. There is also little reference in this book to
the influence upon Rhys Davids's approach to Buddhism of the
scientific and anthropological thought of his time. He refers ap-
provingly in his writings to ideas of Huxley and Comte. He also
writes, with marked effusiveness, of Tylor's Primitive Cultures,
which emphasised the underlying affinities of all cultures and
religions whether classical or primitive.
In some shrewd glimpses Wickremeratne shows that Rhys
Davids's response to Buddhism was deeply personal as well as
that of a scholar glad of the chance to break new ground. "Was
Rhys Davids a Buddhist?i" asks Wickremeratne. Rhys Davids
himself, as Wickremeratne records, sidestepped the question.
Wherein he was shrewd. For nowhere in the ancient texts are
good equivalents of the terms 'Buddhist' or 'Buddhism' to be
found any more than of 'Hindu' and 'Hinduism', these being the
coinage of modern missionaries, who misread South Asian religi-
ous traditions in the light of Christian ideas.
In the concluding part of his work Wickremeratne shows
how Rhys Davids's admiration for Buddhism and his interpreta_
tion of Buddhist ideas accorded well with the apologetical needs
of English-educated Buddhist in Sri Lanka. Three generations
of Protestant missionaries had criticised Buddhism. On the other
hand there were Colonel Olcott and the Theosophists. The
Sinhala Buddhists welcomed them as allies in Buddhist work,
but were greatly concerned over their 'esoteric' approach to Bud-
dhism. For this.consisted in ignoring the texts and giving entirely
new meanings to Buddhist terms so as to reconcile them with
the bizarre mish-mash ofTheosopy. Then there was the ineffable
Annie Besant, with her espousal of revivalist Hindu orthodoxy
and her claims, which had something to do with the factional
disputes among the Theosophists, that Buddhism was a not very
distinctive part of Hinduism.
With the ideas and attitudes of these various critics and
perverters of Buddhism, as they might have appeared in Sri
Lankan eyes, Rhys Davids's own approach was markedly at vari-
ance. In his general works his emphases were quite other than
those which the missionaries had made in order to ridicule Bud-
dhism. He rejected Theosophy, plainly regarded Buddhism as
the most significant tradition in South Asian religion, and wished
to keep it in the forefront of European scholarly attention.
As a Sri Lankan, and an historian familiar with the records
and archives, Wickremeratne has been well-placed to explore
this and the other themes in Rhys Davids's life upon which he
has concentrated. He seems to have worked under difficulties,
but he has made ~ substantial contribution to the study of Rhys
Davids.
A.P. Kannangara
REVIEWS 165
'The Legend of King ASoka,' A Study and Translation of the
"ASokavadana," by John S. Strong, Princeton: Princeton Univer-
sity Press, 1983. Appendix. Glossary. Bibliography. Index. 336
pages.
Since this book has been reviewed a number of times already,
the present review will focus upon various of its features which
have not, to my knowledge, received attention elsew;here. How-
ever, for those who are unfamiliar with this volume, a summary
of its contents may be useful.
The book consists basically of two parts, as the sub-title in-
dicates, roughly 160 pages of discussion about Asoka and the
legends which gradually grew up around him, followed by the
author's translation of the ASokavadana itself. As John Strong
makes clear, this text is a product of the various Hlnayana, though
non-Theravada, circles in Northwest India probably around the
second century A . D ~ and quite possibly of Sarvastivadin origin.
The text is part of the voluminous Sanskrit anthology of Buddhist
legends called the Divyavadana, though it may also be found
separately, e.g., in two Chinese translations. While the text re-
flects the world of the second century A.D., it also represents
legends which are much older and essentially was intended to
help Buddhists seek solutions to the problems of maintaining
.the ideals of the Buddhist tradition in a pluralistic age and in
the absence of the historical Buddha. As Strong develops at con-
siderable length in later chapters, this is the dharmalogical task
of relating the tradition to everyday life and activity. Specifically,
as he indicates in his Preface, the central questions were: "What
is the nature of Buddhist kingship? What is the relationship
between the state and the Buddhist monastic community? What
role does the king play in this? What is the religious nature of
practices such as merit making? What role does devotion play in
Buddhism?"
Among the many interesting points made by Strong is his
statement that the legends about Asoka influenced the reading
of the famed Asoka Edicts, which were not finally translated
authoritatively until 1837, as well as the fact that many interpre-
ters did not "take seriously into account the literary form and
religious intent of the legends qua legends." He makes it clear
that it was, in fact, by means of these embellished Asoka legends
that second century Buddhists preached the Dharma, proselytized
for converts, stressed the merits of dana (of giving to the Buddhist
community), and further articulated the role of kingship and its
relationship to the Buddhist religion.
One of the book's central points is that in the Asokavadana
we are presented with a complex portrayal of Asoka, as great
king and as simple layman, as "an impetuous monarch to be
feared or maligned" and as "the mythical ideal of the cakravartin."
It is this very ambiguity which makes the ima,ge more believable,
especially in relationship to a clearly imperfect world. This re-
viewer has no quarrels with that interpretation. When a sharp
contrast is drawn between this text and the Sinhalese chronicles
(Mahiiva11JSa), some questions do arise. For instance, an avadiina
is rightly seen as "a narrative of the religious deeds of an indi-
vidual and is primarily intended to illustrate the workings of
karma and the values of faith and devotion." In contrast, in
Strong's words, a va11JSa "is a lineage or chronicle ... primarily
concerned with giving the sacred pedigree of a country (such as
Sri Lanka), or of a particular Buddhist sect, or of a holy object."
While often true of chronicles, the Mahiiva11JSa is more complex
than this and it would not be difficult to show that many of the
greatest kings in Sri Lanka history are portrayed in strongly
ambiguous terms. One finds an important instance of this in the
treatment of Dutthagami1).i, but the portrayal of Parakramabahti
I (1153-1186) in this sense is both more extended and, humanly
speaking, more convincing. Indeed, it is this portrayal which is
more parallel to what one finds of Asoka in the Asokiivadiina than
perhaps any other one might cite. Also, while the treatment is
not extensive, one can note in these chronicles a slightly more
complex depiction of Asoka than this book suggests, but Strong
is correct in saying that once Asoka has undergone his "conver-
sion" he is perceived in basically ideal terms. The same is also
true of how many Sinhalese monarchs are portrayed, but else-
where one finds strongly realistic accounts of kings who are other-
wise considered great. Inother words, because they are a complex
work, compiled over centuries, one would expect the chronicles
to be somewhat varied in treatment, despite the obvious fact that
they were generated by monks from within the Mahavihara tra-
dition and thus had their own forms of partiality:
However many parallels exist between an avadiina and a
va11JSa or chronicle, Strong is right to draw a sharp line between
them. In the Asokiivadiina, for instance, there is a basic integrity
to the text which has taken various legends about the central
figure and woven them into an entire picture to be used by the
Buddhist community as it sought to relate ideals of kingship, of
the Buddhist sangha, of the emerging portrayals of the Buddha
REVIEWS
167
. himself, and of enriched practices for the laity to the ambiguous
world of real kings, monks, and laymen. While chronicles clearly
have threads of interpretation, they lack the same kind of aes-
thetic and interpretive capacity. one finds in a text like the
Aokiivadiina, which does not have to be as concerned about the
facts of history but which seeks to relate the classic Buddhist
ideals to new historical contexts. The presence of the Buddha in
this world, the nature and meaning of a cakravartin king, and
the increasing practice of merit-making were central to the ques-
tions this text addressed. Strong's analysis is extremely useful in
a discussion of the larger dharmalogical issues which were alive
in the second century A.D. And, as he reminds us, the primary
concerns implicit in the text were "the attraction of new converts,
the reinforcement of the faith of established followers, and the
encouragement of both devotion and donation. And all of this
was best accomplished by the telling of popular, appealing stories
about the religious exploits of others," especially in this case
about Asoka. As such, this text is a vital one to historians of religion
and, as Strong concludes, "belongs to the whole of Buddhism."
Bardwell L. Smith
Niigiirjuna. The Philosophy of the Middle Way, translated with an
introduction by David J. Kalupahana. Albany, New York: State
University of New York Press, SUNY Series in Buddhist Studies,
1986. xv 412 pages.
The blurb on the back of this book credits it with showing
that Nagarjuna's ideas are not original, not an advancement from
the early Buddhist period, and that he was not a Mahayanist. As
Professor Kalupahana rightly notes in his preface to this new
translation of Nagarjuna's Mulamadhyamakakiirikii (MK), his posi-
tion is controversial. He argues that since "sophisticated
Mahayana sutras" such as the Saddharmapuf).Q.arlka were unavail-
able to Nagarjuna, he used the early discourses in the Nikiiyas
and the Agamas to criticize the sectarian views of "metaphysicians
like the Sarvastivadins and Sautrantikas" and the "more popular
religious teachers like Asvaghosa, who overemphasized the func-
tion of 'faith' in the emerging belief in a transcendent Buddha"
(pp.xiv-xv).
Kalupahana bases his argument on "a careful reading" of
Hajime Nakamura's Indian Buddhism (Osaka: 1980), but his read-
ing of Nakaniura has not been careful enough. He cites p. 159
of Nakamura's book as his source for the statement that early
versions of the VaJracchedika-pra}fiaparamita and the Kasyapa-
parivarta do not mention bodhisattvas (pp. 24, 95 n. 60). Nakam-
ura's statement about the omission of however, refers
only to the opening lines of the sutras, which repeat stock phrases
from early Buddhist sutras, and not to the body of these works,
in which bodhisattvas are mentioned. Kalupahana's claim that
Nagarjuna had no access to the SaddharmapurJ,rJarzka or to biog-
raphies of a transcendent Buddha, like the Mahavastu, which
"probably were not yet written" (pp. 23-24) is also not supported
by Nakamura, who refers to a first century C.E. prototype ofthe
SaddharmapurJ,rJarzka which Nagarjuna might have known (p.
186), suggests a second century B.C.E. date for the Mahavastu
(p. 130), and notes that "the exalted figure of the Buddha" is
the subject of Asvaghosa's Buddhacarita (p. 133), though his au-
thorship of the Mahayanasraddhotpadasatra (is this the source of
Kalupahana's claim that Asvaghosa overemphasizes faith?) (pp.
232-3) is doubtful. This is not to say that Nakamura's dates for
these works are definitive or that Nagarjuna read any of them.
The problem with Kalupahana's assertion that "N akamura's work
shows it futile to attempt to discover a pure Mahayana text that
Nagarjuna might have been able to depend upon" (p. xiv) rests
with his unclear standards of purity, since Nakamura does sup-
port a pre-Nagarjuna dating for several Mahayanasutras, includ-
ing the Kasyapaparivarta (KP) (p. 210).
Kalupahana himself admits that Nagarjuna was "probably
aware" of the KP, although he wonders whether it was
"Mahayanistic" originally (p. xiv). He describes its negative and
positive descriptions of the middle path as "an abbreviation of
the Kaccayanagotta-sutta" (p. 25). This description is misleading.
The KP's lengthy discussion of the middle path (52-63 of A.
von Stael-Holstein's edition [Shanghai: 1926]) is not an abbrevi-
ation of the Kaccayanagotta-sutta and does not contain "two dis-
courses" (the section numbers 61 and 62-not 60 and 61 as
Kalupahana indicates in n. 17 of p. 94-are added by the editor
and can be disregarded) which explain the middle path positively
"in terms of the twelve factors of the human personality
(dvadasariga)" and "in negative terms as 'non-ceasing, non-arising,
etc.'" (p. 7). Both descriptions are part of a single discussion
which defines the true analysis of the middle path as understand-
ing that each of the twelve members and their cessation are
REVIEWS 169
non-dual (advaya, gnyis ma yin). Kalupahana, moreover, ignores
KP 65, which closely parallels MK XIII.8 and has been cited as
evidence of Nagarjuna's knowledge of Mahayana siitras.
Although the MK is the subject of Kalupahana's book, he
accepts Nagarjuna's ,:uthorship of the Vigrahavyiivartanz (p. 92)
and the Ratniivalz (RA) (p. 165). He seems unaware that in this
latter work Nagarjuna defends the Mahayana (mentioned by
name in RA III.l, IV.67-70, 78-84, 86, 89, 93, 98, V. 40) against
the criticism of orthodox disciples (sriivaka) , and discusses the
importance of faith, (RA I . ~ - 5 , IV.97-98), the transcendent
character of the Buddha (RA IILl-12), and the career of the
bodhisattva (RA III.16, 22; IV.67, 90-91, 93; V.I-99).
Kalupahana regards the MK as "a grand commentary" on
the Kacciiyanagotta-sutta, in which the metaphysical views of the
Sarvastivada and the Sautrantika schools are the extremes and
dependent arising (pratztyasamutpiida) the middle position (pp.
20-21). His introduction to the MK divides its subject matter
into four sections: causation and change, covering chapters I-
n (pp. 31-7), the non-substantiality of phenomena (dharma-
nairiitmya), covering chapters III-XV (pp. 37-51), the non-sub-
stantiality of the human personality (pudgala-nairiitmya), covering
chapters XVI-XXVI, (pp. 51-78), and the conclusion, namely,
chapter XXVII (pp. 78-80). His point that Nagarjuna did not
repudiate "dependently arisen phenomena or dependent aris-
ing" but instead demonstrated "the inconsistency in explaining
causally conditioned phenomena in terms of self nature" (p. 50)
bears repeating, though perhaps not quite as often as Kalupahana
does throughout his introduction and in his comments on indi-
vidual verses. Nagarjuna drew on many early canonical texts;
including the Kacciiyanagotta-sutta, and Kalupahana rightly draws
attention to the parallels between his ideas and early canonical
literature. But it is an oversimplification to consider his
philosophical system as built entirely on these early Buddhist
sources. Nagarjuna's philosophy makes the rejection of the con-
cept of svabhiiva its cornerstone. The early Buddhist siittas, with
the exception of the Pa#sambhidiimagga (Ps 178), never mention
the importance of seeing all phenomena as empty and without
an independent nature (nihsvabhiiva), unlike early Mahayanasiitras.
My dissatisfaction with Kalupahana's translation of the MK
begins with his translation of the dedication verses and extends
to his translations of the last verses of chapter XXVII. Due to
limited space, however, I must confine myself to pointing out
just a few instances of disagreement. About the eight negations
in the dedication verses, he says "modern interpreters of Nag
ar
_
juna, probably following Candrakirti ... have assumed that all
these terms refer to one doctrine, namely, dependent arising
(part'ityasamutpada) (sic);" the Svatrantika standpoint, on the other
hand, interprets these eight negations as refutations of "the false
views primarily the themes of substantial existence
(astitva) and nihilistic non-existence (nastiva)" and dependent aris-
ing as the middle position, "the right view" which
results in "the appeasement of obsessions" (prapancopasama) and
"the auspicious" (siva) (pp. 101-3). Unfortunately, Kalupahana
provides no supporting textual evidence, and neither
Bhavaviveka's Prajnaprad'ipa nor Ch'ing Mu's Chung Lun inter-
prets the dedication verses in this way.'
Kalupahana's interpretation of MK XVII also is at odds with
these commentaries. His text of MK XVII.l reads Atma-(sic, read
Atma) san:tyamakan:t cetah paranugrahakan:t ca yat, maitram sa dharmah
(sic, read dharmas) tad bijan:t phalsya (sic, readphalasya) pretya ceha
ca, which he translates as "self-restraint as well as benefitting
others-this is the friendly way and it constitutes the seed that
bears fruit here as well as in the next life." Kalupahana considers
maitram part of the correlative clause rather than the relative
clause. This interpretation, which assumes that sa does not mark
the beginning of the correlative clause, receives no support from
the Tibetan translation of the verse (cited in the Prasannapada
red. L. de La Vallee Poussin, St. Petersberg: 1903-13], p. 303 n.
1) or the commentaries of Candrakirti (Prasannapada [PP], pp.
303-4) and Bhavaviveka (Prajnaprad'ipa, Tibetan Tripitaka Pek-
ing edition, V. 95, f. 212a). This verse identifies dharma with a
mind that is self-restrained, benevolent towards others, and amic-
able; dharma, in the sense of moral practice (which Kalupahana
recognizes in his translations of VIII.5 and XXIV.6, 33-35), is
the topic of this verse, not a "friendly way." Kumarajlva's trans-
lation of XVIIa-c, which differs considerably from the Sanskrit
text, should be used with caution in interpreting Nagarjuna's
thinking. It reads (TaishO v. 30, p. 21b)jen neng chiangfu hsin,
Ii i yii ch'ung sheng, shih ge wei tz'u shan
a
, which says "a person who
can control his mind, and benefit all beings, this is called compas-
sionate virtue." Since Ch'ing mu glosses tz'u shan bas fu tee "good
virtue/merit" (21c), "friendly way" does not quite fit the Chinese
verse either.
Kalupahana disregards commentators' views also when he
associates verses 13-20 with Nagarjuna's presentation of the right
view of karma and its result (p. 249, 254). Candrakirti,
REVIEWS
171
Bhavaviveka, and Ch'ing mu regard vv. 13-19 as the views of
Nagarjuna's Buddhist opponents; according to Candrak'irti and
Bhavaviveka, Nagarjuna's response begins with v. 21 (PP, p. 324,
prajnaprad'ipa, f. 21Sa) and with v. 20, according to Ch'ing mu
(p. 22c). ,. ... .
Kalu pahana s mIsunderstandmg of the term pancadha also
leads him astray. His text of MK XXII.S reads tattvar;yatvena yo
niisti m'(gyamar}as ca pancadha, upadanena sa katharl} prajnapyate
tathiigatah, which says "how can the Tathagata, who is not identical
or different when he is examined in five ways [with regard to
the five appropriating aggregates (pancopadanaskandha)] be de-
fined in relation to appropriation?" but which he translates as
"he who, sought for in the fivefold manner, does not exist in the
form of a different identity, how can that Tathagata be made
known through grasping?" Kalupahana comments that the sub-
stantialist explanation implies that the Tathiigata has become "a
different entity, that is, a tathagata having his own-nature
(svabhava) with no relation to the person in bondage. However,
examining the fivefold aggregates, no such entity can be discov-
ered." (p. 306) This interpretation ignores the fact that
tattvanyatvena is a dvandva compound inflected in the neuter sin-
gular as a collective of two abstracts, "identity and difference,"
and should not be rendered as '''different indeniy' (sic) since it
occurs in the singular." The fivefold examination (exemplified
in XXII. 1), moreover, is not -concerned with the aggregates per
se. This method examines and rejects the various relations that
might exist between a self/person/tathagata/appropriator (x) and
the five appropriating aggregates/appropriation (Y), namely, x is
identical to y, x is different from y, x contains y, y contains x, x
possesses y.
This misunderstanding also affects Kalupahana's transla-
tions of MK XXVII.4-S. For example, his text of XXVII.S reads
Evarl} niinya upadaniin na copadanam eva sah, atma niisty anupiidiinah
(sic, read anupadano) napi nasty e ~ a niScayah, which Kalupahana
renders as "thus, he is neither different from grasping nor iden-
tical with it. A self does not exist. Yet, it is not the case that a
person who does not grasp does not exist. This much is certain."
He argues that this verse should be interpreted in a positive
manner because in XXVII.7 "Nagarjuna was clearly asserting an
empirically known (=f5(hyeta) anupadiinah (that is, a person freed
from grasping), while at the same time rejecting an atman differ-
ent from both grasping and non-grasping" and because
Kumarajiva renders the verse in that way (p. 3S1). But in
172
JIABS VOL. 10 NO.2
XXVII.7, (5l:h)leta is used in a conditional sense and Nagarjuna
makes a hypothetical statement rather than a clear assertion,
namely that a self without appropriation would be perceived
(gr:hetya) if it were different from that appropriation. Though
Kalupahana interprets anupiidiina as "a person freed from grasp_
ing," neither Nagarjuna nor Ch'ing mu uses,anupiidiina in this
sense. Kumarajiva's translation of X X V I I . 8 a ~ closely renders
the Sanskrit text and has a series of negative statements, chin wo
bu li shou, i bu chi shih shou,Jei wu shou fei wu
d
, which says, "now
the self is not different from the appropriation nor is it [identical
with] that appropriation. It is not the case that it has no appro-
priation [and] it is not the case that it does not exist." I'm unable
to see how his translation can support Kalupahana's positive
reading of the Sanskrit verse.
Kalupahana also claims that Nagaruna rejects the self as a
substantial entity "based on empirical evidence, namely, the per-
ception of an individuality consisting of the five aggregates", but
that he did not necessarily reject an "empirical personality." He
cites S 1.135, in which the five aggregates are called a person,
(eva11} khandhesu santesu hoti satto ti sammuti), and compares this
concept of a person to William James' explanation of an empirical
self (p. 381). Yet the ordinary person's experience of the five
aggregates as a "perceived individuality" or a person remains a
conventional OpInIOn (sammuti); and according to the
Abhidharma's analysis of the impermanent mental and physcial
phenomena that comprise the five aggregates, "in reality no per-
son is perceived" (puggala na upalabbhati saccikaahaparamatthena .
ti, Kv 1.1). Kalupahana describes this Kathiivatthu passage as a
rejection of the Sautrantikas' conception of a person (p. 24);
Buddhaghosa's commentary, however, identifies the Puggalava-
dins as Vajjiputtakas and Sammitiyas and takes satto, puggalo j'ivo
and attii as synonyms (Kv-A, 8). Kalupahana may mean that
Nagarjuna conventionally (samvr:tyii) accepts the existence of a
self/person/perceived individuality in the context educating ordi-
nary people about moral behavior, which Candrakirti's comments
on MK XVIII.6 support (PP, p. 356-57).
Many modern interpreters of Nagarjuna's philosophy com-
pare his views with those of Western philosophers. Kalupahana,
who interprets Nagarjuna in the light of James' pragmatism, is
no exception. He comments that MK XVIII. 9 indicates empirical
methods by which one arrives at a conception of truth rather
than a description of characteristics of truth. He argues convinc-
ingly that the Kacciiyanagottasutta's statement that the knowledge of
REVIEWS 173
who has the right view does not depend upon another
(aparapaccaya iia'fJam eviissa ettha hoti, S. 2.! 7) behin:I
NagarJuna's use of the term aparapratyaya. But hIS eVIdence IS
less convincing for other terms; the fact that this sutta "has no
reference to any conceptual proliferation" surely indicates that
Nagarjuna drew on other sources. Moreover, by his reluctance
to associate calm (santi) with meditative experience, Kalupahana
ignores the importance of meditation as a method of knowing
truth. He concludes his commentary on this verse with the obser-
vation that the Buddha's statement, "truth is one; there is no
second," refers to the "pragmatic criterion of truth based on the
notion of dependent arising, not an absolute truth that transcends
all forms of duality and plurality." (pp. 271-72) But this
verse occurs in the context of a repudiation of all
divisive speculative views (the text never mentions dependent
arising), and both the Mahi'iniddesa (Nd I, p. 292) and Buddha-
ghosa's (Pj II, vo. 2, p. 555) note that the one
truth refers to nibbana. James' pragmatic criterion of truth as
what "works" or has "cash value" seems inadequate when applied
to nirva'fJa.
Because they neglect the rich and extensive commentarial
literature both on the Nikayas and on Nagarjuna's works,
Kalupahana's arguments lack force. Even though the traditional
commentators are not infallible, if given a choice between Can-
drakirti's interpretation and Kalupahana's, my inclination is to
trust tradition. Moreover, Kalupahana's judgement that Can-
drakirti "moved towards a Vedantic interpretation'; of the MK
(p. xv) reflects more the absolutist interpretation of this material
by T.R.V. Murti and others, which Kalupahanajustly criticizes,
than the material itself.Certainly, the extensive Prasangikaliter-
ature produced by Tsong kha pa and his followers does not
support such an interpretation, and modern Western interpreters
also hold quite diverse opinions on this matter.
The book takes almost no account of the recent spate of
articles and books published on Madhyamaka; there is just one
reference to a publication later than 1980, a 1984 article of
Nakamura's. Kalupahana's unfamilarity with the works of con-
temporary scholars on Madhyamaka weakens the book. For
example, he reports that A.K. Warder first raised the question
of whether Nagarjuna was a Mahayanist in Indian Buddhism (p.
7) but is unaware both of Warder's more detailed treatment of
this thesis in "Is N agarjuna a Mahayanist?" in The Problem of the
Two Truths in Buddhism and Vedanta (Dordrecht: 1973) and the
174
JIABS VOL. 10 NO.2
criticism of it by Jacques May, "Chiigan" in Hobogirin V, (Tokyo:
1979), D. Seyfort Ruegg in The Literature of the Madhyamaka School
in India (Wiesbaden: 1981) and Chr. Lindtner in Nagarjuniana
(Copenhagen: 1982). '
This edition of the MK also could have been improved if
Kalupahana had consulted ].W. de Jong's;edition of the MK
(Niigiirjuna, Mulamadhyamakakiirikiih" Madras: 1977). The numer_
ous misprints and missing diacritics, moreover, make the Sanskrit
text of little value, and plague the indices as well.
Professor Kalupahana has raised the right question when
he asks which sources Nagarjuna relied upon in the formation
of his philosophy of the middle way. He provides considerable
evidence of the Kacciiyanagottasutta's influence on Nagarjuna, al-
though his arguments against the influence of early Mahayana
sutras remain unconvincing, at least to this reader. I cannot
recommend his work as a philologically sound translation of the
MK but his provocative and original commentary should interest
some readers.
Karen Christina Lang
Chinese Terms
NOTES
1. On the views of these commentators and others see
Mushashi Tachikawa " 'Pratityasamutpada' in the Dedication of
the Mulamadhyamakakarika," in Dr. K. Kunjunni Raja Felicitation
Volume (Adyar: Adyar Library and Research Centre, 1984), pp.
639-53.
REVIEWS
175
Tibet-Bon Religion: A Death Ritual of the Tibetan Bonpos, by Per
J{vaerne. State Univ. Groningen, Inst. Religious Iconography,
Iconography of Religions, XII. 13. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1985. xii +
34 pp., plates i-xlvii. ISBN 90 04 07083 4. No price.
It may well be wondered why this little book should receive
notice in ajournal devoted to Buddhist studies, since it describes
the death ritual of a religion which vehemently asserts itself to
be non-Buddhist and at times even anti-Buddhist. Anyone famil-
iar with the developoment of Bonpo studies in recent years, how-
ever, particularly as these have been pursued with great profit
by Per Kvaerne, will know that this religion is so completely
suffused with Buddhist doctrine that it can be regarded simply
as another, somewhat eccentric, form of Tibetan Buddhism. The
Bon religion claims historical priority over the teachings of
Sakyamuni for reasons that have yet to be properly revealed. It
must surely have had something to do with the fact that in the
competitive spiritual climate of Tibet in the eleventh and twelfth
centuries, to assume the appearance of being utterly different
in origin from the emerging Buddhist schools immediately placed
the Bonpos on a level at once above and beyond their rivals, all
of whom looked to the same foreign source for their legitimacy.
True, the source of the Bon religion was also asserted to be
foreign, but it was said to have been implanted in Tibet and
become naturalized there long before Sakyamuni's teachings
were introduced. The tendency among scholars now is to discount
the face value of these claims while admitting that the Bonpos
do maintain a stratum of genuine pre-Buddhist beliefs and prac-
tices deeper than that preserved by their rivals, but one that has
been wholly turned toa "Buddhist" purpose. For their part the
Buddhists admit only with some reluctance to their continuing
observance of some pre-Buddhist practices.
K vaerne's descriptive analysis of a death ritual of the Bonpos
as it took place at their main refugee centre in India in 1981
does not alter this picture in any way, but instead adds some fine
detail. He analyses the structure and purpose of the second, most
interesting of three independent rites which together make up
the whole business of helping the dead find salvation beyond
the round of existence: (1) 'Pho-ba, the "transference (of con-
sciousness)," (2) byang-chog, the "ritual of the byang-bu (a 'tablet'
containing a drawing of the deceased)," and (3) cremation, fol-
lowed by the klong-rgyas ("extended vastness") ritual. In the byang-
chog the officiating lama uses the byang-bu, which holds the con-
176
JIABS VOL. 10 NO.2
sciousness of the deceased, to lead him step by step to final
liberation. Firstly a "ransom" (glud) is offered to the malignant
spirits to persuade them not to disturb the ritual. The conscious_
ness of the deceased is then summoned to enter the byang-bu, to
which a set of offerings are made. A series of initiations or con-
secrations are then bestowed on the byang-bu; at the end of which
it is conducted through the thirteen spiritual stages of "an un-
changing spiritual hero" (g.yung-drung sems-dpa', approximating
to byang-chub-sems-dpa', bodhisattva). Finally the lama, in a state of
meditation, transfers the consciousness to the final state of liber-
ation, and the byang-bu is then dismantled and the drawing is
burnt. (It is not clear to me how this second act of 'pho-ba relates
to the one that has already taken place before the byang-chog.)
The complex details of the whole process are very ably sum-
marized by Kvaerne with the help of numerous illustrations. He
takes pains to point out those features which are genuinely variant
or ancient. In this way, some aspects of the ritual fall into the
category of adaptations from standard Buddhist practice, while
others are traced back to pre-Buddhist observances. This latter
group includes the ransom offering, the use of tsag-li ("ritual
cards") for the presentation of offerings and other purposes, and
the choice of a yak, horse and sheep to show the consciousness
the way to liberation. But it seems only the role of these animals
really separates the Bonpos from their Buddhist counterparts:
the ransom and the use of tsag-li (etymology ?) are well known
to Buddhist tradition, too. .
Well known, too, is the offering of "the smell of singed
objects" (gsur) , which Kvaerne seems to have missed. The term
appears in the untranslated title he supplies (p. xii) for the second
of the three texts used in this version of the byang-chog, all com-
posed by the abbot of sMan-ri, Shes-rab dGongs-rgyal (b. 1784):
Tshe-'das-kyi gsur-bsngo snang-ba'i 'dod-dgu gter mdzod, "The Treas-
ury of All Desires in which There Appears the Dedication of
Merit [Associated with] the gSur of the Deceased" (my transla-
tion). Panglung Rinpoche has recently affirmed that "the gsur
forms an essential part in the funeral ritual of the Bon-pos today"
and that the first appearance of the term is found in a pre-Bud-
dhist funeral liturgy preserved in a Tun-huang text studied by
R.A. Stein: see Jampa L. Panglung, "On the Origin of the Tsha-
gsur Ceremony," in Barbara Nimri Aziz and Matthew Kapstein,
Soundings in Tibetan Civilization: Proceedings oj the 1982 Seminar of
the International Association for Tibetan Studies Held at Columbia
University (New Delhi: 1985), pp. 268-71, at p. 271. The Buddhist
REVIEWS 177
"use of gsur was the subject of an interesting controversy sum-
marized by Panglung. It is a pity that his study appeared too late
to encourage Kvaerne to notice and explore the Bonpo use of
gsur in their death ritual.
The book is otherwise typical of K vaerne's solid and stimulat-
ing approach to Bonpo history, doctrine and ritual. The first
three chapters, which provide a brief historical background to
the byang-chog ritual and its setting, will be useful to students
wanting a basic introduction to this religion. The book also stands
witness to the extraordinary cultural resilience of the Bonpos in
exile, best exemplified in the life and work of their abbot, Sangye
Tendzin, who acted as the officiating lama in this performance.
of the ritual. It is difficult to see how Bonpo studies in the West
could have developed so much in recent years without the encour-
agement and co-operation provided by this fine scholar-adminis-
trator, and also by the monastery's head teacher, Tendzin Nam-
dak. (It was the abbot Sangye Tendzin, incidentally, who kindly
lent his copy of the book to your reviewer, who had managed to
lose the copy sent to him by this journal.)
Michael Aris
180
Prof. Allan A. Andrews
Dept. of Religion
University of Vermont
481 Main St.
Burlington, VT 05405
Dr. Michael Aris
Indian Institute of Advanced
Study
Simla, U.P.
India
Prof. Michael Broido
Magdalen College
Oxford OXI 4AU
England
Prof. Malcolm David Eckel
Center for the Study of
World Religions
Harvard University
42 Francis Ave.
Cambridge, MA 02138
Mr. Brian Galloway
P.O Box 83
Berkeley, CA 94701
Dr. Bruce Cameron Hall
1343 Via Zurita
Claremont, CA 91711
Prof. John C. Huntington
Dept. of History of Art
The Ohio State University
100 Hayes Hall
108 North Oval Mall
Columbus, OH 43210-1318
JIABS VOL. 10 NO.2
CONTRIB UTORS
Dr. A.P. Kannangara
44 Eton Rise
Eton College Road
London N.W.3
England
Prof. Karen Christina Lang
Dept. of Religious Studies
Cocke Hall
University of Virginia
Charlottesville, VA 22905
Prof. Gregory Schopen
Dept. of Religious Studies
230 Sycamore Hall
Indiana University
Bloomington, IN 47405
Prof. Bardwell Smith
Dept. of Religion
Carleton College
Northfield, MN 55057
Mr. Gareth Sparham
Dept. of Asian Studies
Asian Center
University of British Columbia
Vancouver, B.C.
Canada
An Index to Volumes 1-10
The Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies:
By Bruce Cameron Hall
The first ten volumes of The journal if the International Associa-
f<,"iibn of Buddhist Studies contain articles, book reviews, obituaries,
addresses, of an.d oth.er items
"News and Notes sectIOn. The followmg IS an mdex to
fi)thes
e
items, primarily by titles, secondarily by personal names.
and names are given as they appear on the actual piece,
?ipotin the table of contents of each number of the journal, in
where the two disagree. Entries are alphabetized by letter,
f
not
word, and initial articles (a, an, the, Ie, la, les) are printed
,irt parentheses and ignored in alphabetizing.
i;. The main entries are title entries for all items printed in the
j()'urnal, volumes 1-10, except for a very few extremely ephem-
eral items printed in the "News and Notes" section with no
;/attribution of authorship. Each main entry gives the full title of
!',the ,article or the book reviewed, the name of the author or
editors, translators, and reviewers, if applicable- .
with the particular piece, and the location in the journal
number, year and pages. Cross-references are given
as, for example, with rejoinders and sur-
rejoinders to book reviews.
'. The index also includes four block entries-Conference Re-
'ports, Conferences, Obituaries, and Presidential Addresses-
.with sub-entries listed chronologically. These sub-entries are
riot repeated as title entries, except those which have a distinct
'title, such as presidential addresses with a title other than "Pres-
idential Address .... " Items, other than conference reports,
printed in the "News and Notes" section are identified by an
asterisk before the title. Titles of books reviewed are italicized
0 distinguish them from titles of articles, etc. Personal names
Rfauthors, etc., are given in large and small capital letters.
.... Name entries, which will always direct the reader to the
lIlain title entry, list the names of authors (and translators and
of articles, reviews, books reviewed, obituaries, etc., and
the names of subjects of obituaries. They give cross-references,
to the title entries, by a short form of the title
181
182
jIABSVOL.10NO.2
(omitting subtitles articles). N arne begin
the person's name m tne fullest form occurnng anywhere
the Journal, followed, in bra.ckets, by variant fo:-ms
occur. Cross-reference are gIven where the alphabetIc
of a name is not obvious. Dates in after a
name mean that the person has been the subject of an obituary.il
in the
I have tried to make this index accurate, clear, and
use. I would welcome additions or corrections.<;
INDEX TO JIABS 1-10.
ABE, Masao see:
Zen and Western Thought.
(The) Abhidharmika Notion of Vijiiiina and its Soteriological
Braj M. SINHA. 311 (1980) 54-67.'
AIKINS, Carroll see:
Buddhist Wisdom.
Alex Wayman Replies to Geshe Sopa. Alex WAYMAN. 311 (1980) 93-97.
Alone with Others: An Existential Approach to Buddhism. Stephen BATCHELOR.!;,
Review by Roger JACKSON. 7/2 (1984) 208-216.1'
AMORE, C. see:
Lustful Maidens and Ascetic Kings.
ANACKER, Stefan see:
Seven Works of Vasubandhu.
ANAND KRISHNA. See KRISHNA, Anand.
ANDREWS, Allan A. see:
Pure Land Buddhist Hermeneutics.
(An) Anthology of Buddhist Tantric Songs, A Study of the Caryiig'iti. Per KVAERNE,,'\
Review by Satya Ranjan BANERJEE. 111 (1978) 77-79. .
(An) Approach to Dagen's Dialectical Thinking and Method of Instantiatio.r"
(A Comparative Study of ShO-bO-gen-zo-ku-ge). Shohei ICHIMURA.9/2 ..
(1986) 65-99. .
ARAKI, James T. see:
Roof Tile of Tempyo.
Archaeological Excavations at Piprahwa and Ganwaria and the
of Kapilavastu. KM. SRIVASTAVA. 311 (1980) 103-110.
INDEX 183
1$, Michael . s:e:'
.... . Tibet-Bon Rehg1.On.
"ONSON, Harvey B. see.' .
; Love and Sympathy in Theraviida Buddhism.
'f;iJ!A.scent and Two-Directional Activity in Buddhist Thought. Presiden-
'\.tial Address for the Sixth Conference of the lABS. Gadjin M. NAGAO.
7/1 (1984) 176-183. .
dka and Buddhism-A Re-examination: Presidential Address Given on the
i'.,,:} Occasion of the Fourth Conference of the lABS, Madison, Wisconsin,
1980. A.L. BASHAM. 5/1 (1982) 131-143.
;!,;t[he)Autobiography of a 20th Century Rnying-ma-pa Lama. Alexander W.
:,q:\MACDONALD. 4/2 (1981) 63-75.
Material for the First Seventy Topics in Maitreyanatha's
:',;.Abhisamayiilamkiira. Gareth SPARHAM. 1012 (1987) 139-158.
H. W. see:
i VaJrayana in Gostana-dda.
NERJEE, Satya Ranjan see:
of Buddhist Tantric Songs.
P.V. see:
Vinaya-sutra and his Own Commentary on the Same.
Professor Dr. P.L. Vaidya [1891-1978J.
Andre see:
Royaumes de l'Himalaya, histoire et civilisation.
A.L. see:
if?i; Asoka and Buddhism-A Re-examination.
to' Sarpbodhi in Asoka's 8th Rock Edict.
Edward W. see:
Obituary: Edward Conze [1904--1979].
;/:> Prajiiiipiiramitii Literature.
(31ATCHELOR, Stephen
:.;y Alone with Others.
see:
J3ECHERT, Heinz see:
'>'c'u,
Obituary: Ernest Waldschmidt (1897-1985).
Obituary: Etienne Lamotte (1903-1983).
World of Buddhism.
the Prajiia Schools: The Earliest Chinese Commentary on the
' .. riM. Whalen LA!. 611 (1983) 91-108.
,BEMENT, Michael B. see:
Comparative Ethics in Hindu and Buddhist Traditions.
Judith A. see:
'. Syncretic Religion of Lin Chao-en.
:j.'",
t:
"/",
BERNBAUM, Edwin see:
Way to Shambhala.
BHAGWAN DASH, Vaidya see:
Tibetan Medicine.
BHATTACHARYA, Kamaleswar see:
Nagarjuna's Arguments against Motion.
BICKNER, Robert J. see:
Buddhism and Society in Southeast Asia.
Three Worlds According to King Ruang.
BLOSS, Lowell W. see:
Female Renunciants of Sri Lanka.
Bodhi and Arahattaphala. From early Buddhism to early Mahayana.
WERNER. 4/1 (1981) 70-84.1'
Bodhicaryiivatiira 9: 2 As A Focus For Tibetan Interpretations of the Two TruthS"
in the Prasangika Madhyamika. Michael J. SWEET. 2/2 (1979) 79-89:!iZ
(The) Bodhisattva Doctrine in Buddhism. Leslie S. KAWAMURA, editor.
by L.M. JOSHI. 6/1 (1983) 148-151. ...... ..
>:-;;"
(The) Bodhisattva Ideal of Theravada. Shanta RATNAYAKA. 8/2 (1985);
85-110.';/
(The) Bodymind Experience in japanese Buddhism. A Phenomenological
Kukai and Dagen. David SHANER. Review by William WALDRON. 9/2;
(1986) 155-156. ..
BOND, George D. [BOND, George] see:
Buddhism in Life.
Theraviida Meditation.
Two Ways of Perfection.
Word of the Buddha.
BONGARD-LEVIN, G.M. see:
New Buddhist Sanskrit Texts from Central Asia.
(The) Books of Kiu-Te or the Tibetan Buddhist Tantras. David REIGLE.
by Roger JACKSON. 8/1 (1985) 113-115.
BRAARVIG, Jens see:
Dhiirarpf and Pratibhana.
Brief lectures on the Origins and Development of Chinese Buddhology.
Zhongguo foxue yuanliu luejiang.
BROmO, Michael see:
Padma dKar-po on the Two Satyas.
Sa-skya Pandita, the White Panacea and the Hva-shang Doctrine.
BROUGH, John (1917-1984).
INDEX
Harry M. see:
Dhamma: Western Academic and Sinhalese Buddhist Interpretations.
Spiritual Discipline in Hinduism, Buddhism, and the West.
Rod see:
'
185
uddhist Path to Liberation.
Michael CARRITHERS. Review by Paul GRIFFITHS. 7/2 (1984)
216-218. .
.
. fron: Kara-tepe in Old Termez (Uzbekistan): A Preliminary Com-
Illunication. Bons J. ST A VISKY. 3/2 (1980) 89-94.
Lions-The Li1!es if the Eighty-Four Siddhas. James B. R 0 BINSO N. Review
:i;'A;' by Jose CABEZON. 411 (1981) 111-113.

A select bibliography. SATYAPRAKASH, editor. Review by Roger
[:;}./ JACKSON. 2/2 (1979) 112.
h
1
BuddhisIll and Belief in Atma. Y. KRISHAN. 7/2 (1984) 117-135.
;. '.
and Music. 411 (1981) 127.
r, .
and Political Power in Korean History. S. KEEL 111 (1978) 9-24.
h
and Society in Southeast Asia. Donald K. SWEARER. Review by Robert
J. BICKNER. 511 (1982) 126-127 .
. ,tBuddhisIll and the Caste System. Y. KRISHAN. 911 (1986) 71-83.
Imperialism and War: Burma and Thailand in Modern History. Trevor
';\:: LING. Review by Somchintana THONGTHEW-RATARASARN. 3/2
:.:f (1980) 109-111.
::!0;Juddhism in Life: The Anthropological Study of Religion and the Sinhalese Practice of
it., Buddhism. Martin SOUTHWOLD. Review by George D. BOND. 8/2 (1985)
f( 133-135.
and Freudian Psychology. Padmasiri DE SILVA. Review by Gary W.
{<! HOUSTON. 411 (1981) 114-115.
if
and Western Philosophy. Nathan KATZ; editor. Review by Keith E. YAN-
DELL. 6/2 (1983) 141-144.
<Buddhist and Western Psychology. Nathan KATZ, editor. Review by Paul GRIF-
FITHS. 7/2 (1984) 219-223.
,'Buddhist Architecture of Western India. (c. 250 BC-AD 300). S. NAGARAJU.
Review by Phil WAGONER. 4/2 (1981) 109-111.
'Buddhist-Christian Empathy. Joseph]. SPAE. Review by Roger Tashi CORLESS.
, 411 (1981) 115-118.
{Buddhist Hybrid English: Some Notes on Philology and Hermeneutics for
Buddhologists. Paul]. GRIFFITHS. 4/2 (1981) 17-32.
I
Buddhist Images of Human Perfection. Nathan KATZ. Review by Winston KING.
711 (1984) 169-173.
186 JIABS VOL.IO NO.2
(The) Buddhist Path to Liberation: An Analysis of the Listing of Stages.
BUCKNELL. 7/2 (1984) 7-40.
(The) Buddhist "Prodigal Son": A Story of Mis.perceptions. Whalen LAL
(1981) 91-98.
(A) Buddhist Marco PALLIS. Review'by D. Seyfort RUEGG.
(1984) 159-162.
Buddhist Studies. J.W. DE JONG, edited by Gregory SCHOPEN. Review
Frank E. REYNOLDS. 4/2 (1981) 106-107.
Buddhist Wisdom: The Mystiry of the Self. George GRIMM, translated
German) by Carroll AIKINS. Review by Roger JACKSON. 2/2 (1979) 111.
BURRILL, Bruce see:
Bruce Burrill Replies [to Jeffrey HOPKINS].
Tantric Distinction.
CABEZON, Jose Ignacio Uose I.; Jose] see:
Buddha's Lions.
Concepts of Truth and Meaning in the Buddhist Scriptures.
Histoire du Cycle de la Naissance et de la Mort.
Introduction to the Buddhist Tantric Systems.
Lamp for the Path and Commentary.
Love and Sympathy in Theravada Buddhism.
Pratltyasamutpadastutisubhiis.itahr:dayam.
Santideva: Mystique bouddhiste des VIle et VlIIe siecles.
Can Meditational Practice be Measured? A Report on a Quantitative
Jacques MAQUET. 211 (1979) 84-90.
CARRITHERS, Michael see:
Buddha.
CARTER, John Ross see:
Dhamma: Western Academic and Sinhalese Buddhist Interpretations.
Threefold Refuge in the Theravada Buddhist Tradition.
(A) Catalogue of the sTog Palace Kanjur. Tadeusz SKORUPSKI. Review by
Cameron HALL. 9/2 (1986) 156-16l.
Chandi Borobudur: A Monument of Mankind. Dr. SOEKMONO. Review
Douglas J. RASMUSSEN. 211 (1979) 108-109.
Changing the Female Body: Wise Women and the Bodhisattva
Some Mahiiratnaku(asutras. Nancy SCHUSTER. 411 (1981) 24-69.
CHAPPLE, Christopher see:
Dharma and Gospel.
CHAU (CMu), Thfch Thien see:
Literature of the Pudgalavadins.
Reponses des Pudgalavadin aux Critiques des Ecoles Bouddhiques.
INDEX
187
tNG, Lu see:
foxue yuanliu liiejiang.
Aspects of Interaction and Reinterpretation. W. PACHOW. Re-
by Whalen W. LAI. 5/1 (1982) 124-126.
e Religio";s in Western Languages: A Comprehensive and Classified Bibliography
'of Publications in English, French and German through 1980. Laurence G.
'tHOMPSON. Review by Yves HERVOUET. 911 (1986) 121-122.
f!t --,':,!
litiM6Yung vs. Chang Jung (on Sunyata); The Pen-mo Yu-wu Controversy in
China. Whalen LA!. 1/2 (1978) 23-44.

Yuishiki (Madhyamika and Vijnaptimatrata). Gadjin NAGAO. Review
John KEENAN. 3/2 (1980) 105-107.
and AyoniSomanaskiira in the Ratnagotravibhiiga: A Precedent for
1/;' . the Hsin-Nien Distinction of The Awakening of Faith. William GROSNICK.
. . 6/2 (1983) 35-47.

Peter see:
Festivals in South India and Sri Lanka.
i.'"
7CLEARY, Thomas see:
ShObagenza: Zen Essays by Dagen.
;;:(, '
Terry see:
. Tibetan Buddhist Medicine and Psychiatry.
;t(A)Clue to the Authorship of the Awakening of Faith: Redaction
t'. of the Word" Nien". Whalen W. LA!. 311 (1980) 34-53.

'fC()LLlNS, Steven see:
Selfless Persons.
on Zen. M. KIYOT A. [Review of Zen Comments on the Mumonk(m,
,'i' byZenkei SHIBAYAMA, translated by Sumiko KUDO.] 112 (1978) 57-62.
,-,':;
;'Cornparative Ethics in Hindu and Buddhist Traditions. Roderick HINDERY. Re-
view by MichaelB. BEMENT. 211 (1979) 103-106.
;t'
and Buddhist Studies. Robert J. MILLER. 5/2 (1982) 136.
:t'-S,,-,',
'('the) Concept of a "Creator God" in Tantric Buddhism. Eva K.
;'; DARGYAY. 811 (1985) 31-47.
<,;
,(The) Concepts of Truth and Meaning in the Buddhist Scriptures. Jose I.
.... CABEZON.411 (1981) 7-23.

'CONFERENCE REPORTS [Chronological]:
Report on the Proceedings of the First Conference of the LA.B.S., Col-
umbia University, New York, September 15-17, 1978. 1/2 (1978)
85-91.
188
JIABS VOL. 10 NO.2
A Report on the 2nd Conference of the lABS Held at Nava
Mahavihara, Nalanda, Bihar, India: January 17-19, 1980
anda
'
(1980) 127-129. . 3/r
".',\'
A Report on the 3rd Conference of the lABS. 4/1 (1981) 123-127.'}
Report on the 4th Conference of the l-ABS, University of Wisco
.
MadIson, WI, U.S.A. August 7-9, 1981. Rena
(1982) 144-152. "Iil
Report on the 5th Conference of the lABS, Hertford College, Univers{;i
of Oxford, Oxford, England, August 16-21, 1982. Rena HAg-i!"
GERTY. 611 (1983) 167-169. ,,'
Report on the Sixth Conference of the lABS, Held in Conjunction
the 31st CISHAAN, Tokyo and Kyoto, Japan, August 31. Ren
HAGGERTY.7!l (1984) 184-195. ' a.
J"f,
7th Conference of the International Association of Buddhist Studies [An-'
nouncementJ. 7/2 (1984) 230-231. ","
"
8th Conference of the International Association of Buddhist Studies [An:;;
nouncement].911 (1986) 144.
CONFERENCES of the lABS [Chronological]:
1st. New York, New York, USA. 15-17 September 1978.
2nd. Nalanda, Bihar, India. 17-19 January 1980.
3rd. Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada. 18-22 August 1980.
4th. Madison, Wisconsin, USA. 7-9 August 1981.
5th. Oxford, England. 16-21 August 1982.
6th. Tokyo and Kyoto, Japan. 31 August-7 September 1983.
7th. Bologna, Italy. 8-13 July 1985.
8th. Berkeley, California, USA. 8-10 August 1987.
*Constitution and By-Laws of the International Association of Buddhist;.
Studies. 511 (1982) 153-159.
Contemporary Lay Buddhist Movements in Japan, with Special Reference t()
the Lotus Sutra. Tsugunari KUBO. 6/1 (1983) 76-90.
Contributo alto Studio Biografico dei Primi Gter-Ston. Ramon PRA TZ. Review by
Leonard W.J. VAN DER KUIJP. 6/1 (1983) 151-154. ' ,
CONZE, Edward (1904-1979) see:
Memoirs of a Modern Gnostic.
Prajnaparamita Literature.
COOK, Francis H. see:
Enlightenment in Dagen'S Zen.
*Copy of Report Elaborated For Union Academique Intemationale Bruxelles:A:
Critical Pili Dictionary. K.R. NORMAN. 311 (1980) 130-131.
CORLESS, Roger Tashi see:
Buddhist-Christian Empathy.
INDEX
189

Joe see: .
.. ". Buddha Coms.

c urrents in Early Buddhism. S.N. DUBE. Review by N.H. SAMTANI. 411
:Wross
108-110.
jj(tl!e) Cycle o/Day Night. Namkhai NORBU, translated by John M.
ReVIew by A.W. HANSON-BARBER. 9/1 (1986)122-123.

Eva K. see:
Concept of a "Creator God" in Tantric Buddhism.
:}'I,(',
:;}"ARGYAY, Lobsang see:
"p Tsong kha pa's Understanding of Prasangika Thought.
See BHAGWAN DASH, Vaidya.
:bE JONG, ].W. see:
Buddhist Studies.
)6 ].W. de Jong Replies [to Diana Y. PAUL].
Meditation on Emptiness.
':t Philosophy of Mind in Sixth Century China.
'>:
Paul (1894-1979) see:
Repertoire du Canon Bouddhique Sino-japonais.
,1'/
'bE SILVA, Lily see:
;ilParitta.
i6isILVA, Padmasiri see:
;'" " Buddhist and Freudian Psychology.
i:; Tangles and Webs.
liThe) Development of Language in Bhutan. Lopon NADO. 5/2 (1982) 95-100.
Western Academic and Sinhalese Buddhist Interpretations: A Study of a
Religious Concept. John Ross CARTER. Review by Harry M. BUCK. 8/2
(1985) 135-137.
and Pratihhiin{l: Memory and Eloquence of the Bodhisattvas. Jens
'>;;" BRAARVIG. 8/1 (1985) 17.:...29.
and Gospel: Two Ways of Seeing. G.W. HOUSTON (editor). Review by
. Christopher CHAPPLE. 911 (1986) 123-124.
Dharmasrl on the Sixteen Degrees of Comprehension. Leon HURVITZ. 2/2
(1979) 7-30.
9iana Paul Replies [to ].W. DE JONG]. Diana Y. Paul. 911 (1986) 133-135.
Direct Perception in dGe-Iugs-pa Interpretations of Sautrfmtika. Anne C.
KLEIN. 811 (1985) 49-81.
(The) Doctrine of the Buddha-Nature in the Mahayana MahiiparinirviiTJa-Sutra.
Ming-Wood LIU. 5/2 (1982) 63-94.
Dagen Casts off "What": An Analysis of ShinJin Datsuraku. Steven HEINE.
9/1 (1986) 53-70.
190
JIABS VOL.IO NO.2
DRAGONETTI, Carmen see:
Misce!lcmea Buddhica.
Niigiirjuna's Filosofiske Vaerker.
Nagarjuniana.
of Najarjuna.
(The) Dragon Girl and the Abbess of Mo-Shan: Gender and Status
Ch'an Buddhist Tradition. Miriam L. LEVERING. 511 (1982)
DUBE, S.N. see:
Cross Currents in Early Buddhism.
DURT, Hubert see:
Repertoire du Canon Bouddhique Sino-Japonais.
Dynamic Liberation in Yogacara Buddhism.Alan SPONBERG. 211 (1979)
Dzog Chen and Zen. Namkhai NORBU, edited by Kennard LIPMAN.
by Roger JACKSON. 811 (1985) 113-115.
EARHART, H. Byron see:
Gedatsukai: Its Theory and Practice.
Early Buddhism and Christianity: A Comparative Study of the
the Community, and the Discipline. Chai-Shin YU.Review by
RAJAPAKSE. 9/2 (1986) 162-165
Early Buddhism and the Urban Revolution. Balkrishna Govind
5/2 (1982) 7-22.
Early Chinese Buddhist Understanding of the Psyche: Chen Hui's ..
tary on the Yin Chih Ju Ching. Whalen LAI. 9/1 (1986) 85-103.
ECKEL, Malcolm David see:
Indian Commentaries on the Heart Sutra.
ELLINGSON, Ter see:
Paritta.
Enlightenment in Dagen's Zen. Francis H. COOK. 6/1 (1983) 7-30.
Essays in Gupta Culture. Edited by Bardwell L. SMITH. Review by Holly Baker
REYNOLDS. 10/1 (1987) 157-161. ....
EUSDEN, John Dykstra see:
Zen & Christian.
(An) Exceptional Group of Painted Buddha Figures at Ajanta. Anand.
KRISHNA. 411 (1981) 96-100.
(An) Excursus on the Subtle Body in Tantric Buddhism (Notes Contextualizing
the Kalacakra). Geshe Lhundup SOPA. 6/2 (1983) 48-66. .
Fausboll and the Pali Jatakas. Elisabeth STRANDBERG. 3/2 (1980) 95-101.
(The) Female Renunciants of Sri Lanka: The Dasasilmattawa. Lowell W.
BLOSS. lOll (1987) 7-31.
INDEX
191
E. Todd see:
'Fundamentals of Tlbetan Medlcme.
:On Knowing Reality.
''Tantra in . . .
:Tibetan BuddhlSt Medlcme and Psychzatry.
-tibetan Medicine.
Yoga of Tibet.
'NER, Peter G. see:
Reconstruction of the Madhyamakavatara's Analysis of the Person.
Buddhism: A Guide to Audio-Visual Resources for Teaching Religion. Robert
MCDERMOTT, editor. Review by Roger JACKSON. 5/2 (1982) 121-

Freudian Unconscious and Bhavariga. O. H. de A. WIJESEKERA. 1/2
63-66. .
,
David (1903-1984).

to Yogacara: An Analysis of MMK, XXIVI18 and MV,
Gadjin M. NAGAO. 2/1 (1979) 29-43.
%:FRYE, Stanley see:
l'h Sutra of the Wise and Foolish.
of Tibetan Medicine. T. J. TSARONG et al. Review by E. Todd
FENNER. 5/2 (1982) 124-126.
Gerard see:
;;,:,):.Symbolisms of the Buddhist Stupa.
Brian see:
.{:\: Notes on Nagarjuna and Zeno on Motion.
0;; . Yogacara Analysis of the Mind.
Richard A. [GARD, R.A.J see:
,,' *On Buddhist Research Information.
) *On Buddhist Text Information.
'Gedatsukai: Its Theory and Practice (A Study of a Shinto-Buddhist Syncretic School
. in Contemporary Japan). Minoru KIYOT A. Review by H. Byron
EARHART. 6/1 (1983) 154-157.
(CELBLUM, Tuvia see:
Obituary: David Friedman (1903-1984).
Generalization of an Old Yogic Attainment in Medieval Mahayana Sutra
Literature: Some Notes on Jatismara. Gregory SCHOPEN. 6/1 (1983)
109-147.
Genesis of an Orientalist: Thomas William Rhys Davids and Buddhism in Sri
Lanka. Ananda WICKREMERA TNE. Review by A.P. KANNANGARA.
10/2 (1987) 161-164.
192
JIABS VOL. 10 NO.2
Geshe Sopa Replies to Alex Wayman. GesheSOPA. 311 (1980) 98-100.
GIMELLO, Robert M. see:
Studies in Ch'an and Hua-yen.
Giuseppe Tucci (1894--1984). Luciano PETECH. 7/2 (1984) 137-142.
as article, not obituary.]
GOKHALE, Balkrishna Govind [GOKHALE, B.G.] see:
Early Buddhism and the Urban Revolution.
Religion and Legitimation of Power in Sri Lanka.
Religion and Legitimation of Power in Thailand, Laos and Burma.
Religion and the Legitimation of Power in South Asia.
GOMBRICH, Richard see:
Temporary Ordination in Sri Lanka.
World of Buddhism.
GREGORY, Peter N. see:
Place of the Sudden Teaching within the Hua-yen Tradition.
Studies in Ch'an and Hua-yen.
GRIFFITHS, Paul J. [GRIFFITHS, Paul] see:
Buddha.
Buddhist and Western Psychology.
Buddhist Hybrid English.
Heart of Buddhism.
Zen and Western Thought.
GRIMM, George see:
Buddhist Wisdom.
GROSNICK, William see:
Cittaprakr:ti and Ayonisomanaskara in the Ratnagotravibhaga.
Nonorigination and Nirvarpa in the Early Tathagatagarbha Literature.
GUDMUNSEN, Chris see:
Wittgenstein and Buddhism.
GUENTHER, Herbert V. see:
Matrix of Mystery.
Tasks Ahead.
Tibetan Buddhism in Western Perspective.
GUDaprabha's Vinaya-sutra and his Own Commentary on the Same. P.V.,
BAPAT. 1/2 (1978) 47-51.
GYATSO,Janet see:
Signs, Memory and History.
Tsong Khapa's Speech of Gold in the Essence of True Eloquence.
HAGGERTY, Rena see:
*International Buddhist Directory.
*(A) Report on the 4th Conference of the lABS.
INDEX 193
Report on the 5th Conference of the lABS.
*(A) Report on the Sixth Conference of the lABS.
*Tibetan Blockprints in the Department of Rare Book;; and Special Collections.
see:. .._ .
of EnlIghtenment III V1.Jnapttmiitratii.
Bruce Cameron see:
{::' "." Catalogue of the sTog Palace Kanjur.
. Index to Volume 1-10, Journal of the International Association of Buddhist
i
,iV Studies.
;;:. Meaning of Vijiiapti in Vasubandhu's Concept of Mind.
+;.
Jane see:
Meditator's Diary.
A.W. see:
. Cycle of Day and Night.
Identification of dGa'rab rdo rje.
Matrix of Mystery.
"No-Thought" in Pao-Tang Ch'an and Early Ati Yoga .
; Seven Works of Vasubandhu.
;;BARRlSON, Paul see:
. Who Gets to Ride in the Great Vehicle?
HARVEY, Peter see:
"Signless" Meditations in Piili Buddhism.
" Symbolism of the Early Stupa.
HAYES, Richard P. see:
Heart of Buddhist Philosophy.
"(The) Heart of Buddhism. Yoshinori TAKEUCHI. Review by Paul GRIFFITHS.
. 711 (1984) 162-164.
(Ihe) Heart of Buddhist Philosophy: Diimiiga and Dharmakirti. Amar SINGH.
Review by Richard P. HAYES. 9/2 (1986) 166-172.
HEINE, Steven see:
Dagen Casts Off "What".
Multiple Dimensions of Impermanence in Dagen's "Genjakaan".
ShObagenza: Zen Essays by Dagen.
HERVOUET, Yves see:
Chinese Religions in Western Languages.
HINDERY, Roderick see:
Comparative Ethics in Hindu and Buddhist Traditions.
Histoire du Cycle de la Naissance et de la Mort. Yoshiro IMAEDA. Review by Jose
1. CABEZON. 5/1 (1982) 118-121.
HOLT,John C. see:
Pilgrimage and the Structure of Sinhalese Buddhism.
/
HOPKINS, Jeffrey see:
Jeffrey Hopkins Replies [to Bruce Burrill].
Meditation on Emptiness.
Practice and Theory of Tibetan Buddhism. '3
Reason as the Prime Principle in Tsong kha pa's Delineation of Deity Yo c ~ ~
as the Demarcation Between Sutra and Tantra.ga,
Tantra in Tibet.
Yoga of Tibet.
HORNER, Isaline Blew [HORNER, LB.] (1896-1981) see:
Keci, "Some," in a Pali Commentary.
HOUSTON, Gary W. [HOUSTON, G.W.] see:
Buddhist and Freudian Psychology.
Dharma and Gospel
Sources for a History of the bSam yas Debate.
Tangles and Webs.
Wings of the White Crane.
Zen & Christian.
Hu-Jan Nien-Ch'i (Suddenly a Thought Rose): Chinese Understanding of Minci:
and Consciousness. Whalen LA!. 3/2 (1980) 42-59.
HUNTINGTON, John C. see:
Note on a Chinese Text Demonstrating the Earliness of Tantra.
HURVITZ, Leon see:
Dharmasrl on the Sixteen Degrees of Comprehension.
ICHIMURA, Shohei see:
Approach to Dagen's Dialectical Thinking and Method ofInstantiation.
New Approach to the Intra-Madhyamika Confrontation over the
Svatantrika and Prasangika Methods of Refutation.
Study on the Madhyamika Method of Refutation and Its Influence on.
Buddhist Logic. ".
(The) Identification of dGa' rab rdo rje. A.W. HANSON-BARBER. 9/2 (1986).
55-63. '.
IMAEDA, Yoshiro see:
Histoire du Cycle de la Naissance et de la Mort.
Mission Paul Pelliot.
Index to Volumes 1-1 0 ,Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies ..
Bruce Cameron Hall. 10/2 (1987) 181-216. .
Indian Commentaries on the Heart Sutra: The Politics of Interpretation.
Malcolm David ECKEL. 10/2 (1987) 69-79.
Indrabhuti's "Confession of Errors in the Roots and Branches of the Vaj-.
rayana": A Critical Edition, English Translation and Discussion. Nathan
KATZ. 2/2 (1979) 31-44. .
INDEX
195
Indravarman Inscripti?r; Further Evi-
dence for Canomcal Passages III BuddhIst InscnptlOns. Richard SALO-
MON & Gregory SCHOPEN. 711 (l984) 107-123.

Yasushi see:
of Tempyo.
,C-,
ASSOCIATION OF BUDDHIST STUDIES. See:
CONFERENCE REPORTS.
/.,. CONFERENCES.

Association of Buddhist Studies: General Membership, Sum-
;/:C' mer 1979. 2/2 (1979) 117-132. .
;;:( [See also *List of Members of I.AB.S.]
1
'h';o!'lntemationaIBuddhistDirectory. Review by Rena HAGGERTY. 9/2 (1986) 190.
>Yntroduction it la connaissance des hlvri ba de Thailande. Anatole-Roger
(;:; PELTIER. Review by Pierre-Bernard LAFONT, translated (from
. French) by Roger JACKSON. 3/2 (1980) 107-109".

}.(An) Introduction to the Buddhist Tantric Systems. F.D. LESSING & A WAYMAN.
:; Review by Jose CABEZON. 2/2 (1979) 104-106.
fl"
the Buddhist Notion of "Cause Necessitates Effect" (Paticcasamuppiida) Sci-
i,,? entific? AD.P. KALANSURIYA. 1/2 (1978) 7-22.
::Cfhe) Issue of the Buddha as Vedagfi with Reference to the Formation of the
Dhamma and the Dialectic with the Brahmins. Katherine K. YOUNG.
;, 5/2 (1982) 110-120.
'J'e,."
:i(The) Inscription on the Image of Amitabha and the Character of the
i" Early Mahayana in India. Gregory SCHOPEN. 10/2 (1987) 99-134.
;'J.W.deJongReplies [to Diana Y. PAUL].J.W. DEJONG. 911 (1986) 135-136.
JACKSON, Roger see:
Alone with Others.
Books of Kiu-Te or the Tibetan Buddhist Tantras.
Buddhism: A select bibliography.
Buddhist Wisdom.
Focus on Buddhism.
Introduction it la connaissance des hlvri ba de Thailande.
Literature of the Pudgalavadins.
Living Buddhist Masters.
Memoirs of a Modern Gnostic.
Mysticism and Philosophical Analysis.
Rain of Wisdom.
Religions of Tibet.
Sa skya paI.ldita's Account of the bSam yas Debate.
Songs of Spiritual Change.
196
JIABS VOL. 10 NO.2
Spiritual Discipline in Hinduism, Buddhism, and the West.
*Terms bf Sanskrit and Pali Origin Acceptable as English Words.
Tibetan Buddhism in Western Perspective.
Wings of the White Crane.
World of Buddhism.
JAGCHID, Sechin see:
Mongol Khans and Chinese Buddhism and Taoism.
(The) Jaina Path of Perfection. Padmanabh S. JAIN!. Review by Frances
SON. 3/2 (1980) 112-115.
JAIN!, Padmanabh S. see:
Jaina Path of Pefection.
Obituary: John Brough (1917-1984).
JOHANSSON, Rune E.A. see:
Rune E.A. Johansson's Analysis of Citta.
JOSHI, Lal Mani GOSHI, L.M.] (1935-1984) see:
*L.M. Joshi: a Brief Communication.
Bodhisattva Doctrine in Buddhism.
Study of the Twenty-two Dialogues on Mahiiyana Buddhism.
KALANSURIYA, A.D.P. see:
Is the Buddhist Notion of "Cause Necessitates Effect"
Scientific?
KALUPAHANA, David]. see:
Nagarjuna: The Philosophy of the Middle Way.
Way of Siddhartha,
KALUPAHANA,Indrani see:
Way of Siddhartha.
Buddha Coins-The Official Iconography of Sakyamuni & Maitreya.
Joe CRIBB. 3/2 (1980) 79-88.
KANNANGARA, A.P. see:
Genesis of an Orienta list.
KASHYAP, Bhikkhu Jagdish see:
Studies in Pali and Buddhism.
KATZ, Nathan see:
Buddhist and Western Philosophy.
Buddhist and Western Psychology.
Buddhist Images of Human Perfection.
Indrabhuti's "Confession of Errors in the Roots and Branches of the
Vajrayana" .
Word of the Buddha.
KATZ, Steven T. see:
Mysticism and Philosophical Analysis.
INDEX
'WAMURA, Leslie S. see:
( Bodhisattva Doctrine in Buddhism.
'i,"Some," in a Pali Commentary. LB. HORNER. 1/2 (1978) 52-56.
S. see:
uU'.uuu ... and Political Power in Korean History.
,:,'
see:
Minoru [KIYOTA, M.] see:
Comments on Zen.
Gedatsukai: Its Theory and Practice.
Mahayana Buddhist Meditation.
Modern Japanese Buddhology.
Shingon Buddhism: Theory and Practice.
Shingon Mikkyo's Twofold Ma7!4ala.
Sutra of Contemplation of the Buddha of Immeasurable Life.
Tantric Concept of Bodhicitta.
see.:
Direct Perception in dGe-lugs-pa Interpretations of Sautrantika.
197
'Kokan Shiren and Muso Soseki: "Chineseness" vs. "Japaneseness" in Thir-
teenth and Fourteenth Century Japan. David POLLACK. 7/2 (1984)
143-168.
KORNFIELD, Jack see:
Living Buddhist Masters.
KOSEKI, Aaron K. see:
"Later Madhyamika" in China.
Prajiiaparamita and the Buddahood of the Non-Sentient World.
Shingon Buddhism: Theory and Practice.
KRISHAN, Y. see:
Buddhism and Belief in Atma.
Buddhism and the Caste System.
198
JIABS VOL. 10 NO.2
KRISHNA, Anand see:
Exceptional Group of Painted Buddha Figures at A j a n ~ a .
KRUEGER, John R. see:
Sutra of the Wise and Foolish.
KUBO, Tsugunari see:
Contemporary Lay Buddhist Movements in Japan.
KV AERNE, Per see:
Anthology of Buddhist Tantric Songs.
Tibet-Bon Religion.
*L.M. Joshi: a Brief Communication. Robert A.F. THURMAN. 7/2
232. [See also obituary by N.H. SAMTANI & Robert Alexander
THURMAN, 811 (1985) 135-137.]
LAFONT, Pierre-Bernard see:
Introduction it la connaissance des hlvri ba de Thailande.
LAI, Whalen W. [LAI, Whalen] see:
Beforethe Prajna Schools.
Buddhist "Prodigal Son".
Chinese Buddhism: Aspects of Interaction and Reinterpretation.
Chou Yung vs. Chang Jung (on Sunyatii).
Clue to the Authorship of the Awakening of Faith.
Early Chinese Buddhist Understanding of the Psyche.
Hu-Jan Nien-Ch'i (Suddenly a Thought Rose).
Nonduality of the Two Truths in Sinitic Madhyamika.
Wonhyo (Yuan Hsiao) on the NirvaI).a School.
LAMOTTE, Etienne (1903-1983).
(A) Lamp for the Path and Commentary, by AtISa. Richard SHERB URNE. Review
by Jose I. CABEZON. 7/2 (1984) 224-226.
LANCASTER, Lewis R. see:
LANG, Karen Christina see:
Niigiirjuna: The Philosophy of the Middle Way.
"Later Madhyamika" in China: Some Current Perspectives on the History of
Chinese Prajftiipiiramitii Thought. Aaron K. KOSEK!. 5/2 (1982) 53-62.
(The) Legend of King Asoka: A Study and Translation of the "Asokiivadiina". John
S. STRONG. Review by Bardwell SMITH. 10/2 (1987) 165-167.
LESSING, F.D. see:
LEVERING, Miriam L. see:
Dragon Girl and the Abbess of Mo-Shan.
(The) Life and Times of Para martha (449-569.). Diana Y. PAUL. 511 (1982)
37-69.
INDEX 199
Nl)TNER, Chr.
Miscellanea Buddhzca .
. Niigiirjuna's FilosoJzske Vaerker.
Nagarjuniana.
Trevor see:
Buddhism, Imperialism and War.
Kennard see:
Dzog Chen and Zen.
of Members of the I.A.B.S. 112 (1979) 92-103. [See also *International
of Buddhist Studies: General Membership.]
Literature of the Pudgalavadins. Thich Thien CHAU, translated (from
French) by Roger JACKSON. 711 (1984) 7-16.
Ming-Wood see:
Doctrine of the Buddha-Nature in the Mahayana Mahiiparinirvii1Ja-Sutra .
. Problem of the Icchantika in the Mahayana Mahiiparinirvii1Ja-Sutra.
Buddhist Masters. Jack KORNFIELD. Review by Roger JACKSON. 2/2
(1979) 112.
Donald S., Jr. see:
Report on Religious Activity in Central Tibet, October 1985.
Sympathy in Theravada Buddhism. Harvey B. ARONSON. Review by
Jose Ignacio CABEZON. 3/2 (1980) 103-105.
See CHENG, Lli.
Maidens and Ascetic Kings (Buddhist and Hindu Stories 'of Life). C. AMORE
Larry D. SHINN. Review by Beth SIMON. 4/2 (1981) 99,-101.
Alexander W. see:
Autobiography of a 20th Century Rnying-ma-pa Lama.
Royaumes de l'Himalaya, histoire et civilisation.
World Conqueror and World Renouncer.
;'MACDONALD, Ariane see:
)Madhyamika and Vijnaptimatrata. See Chukan to Yuishiki.
Mahamaudgalyayana's Sermon on the Letting-in And Not Letting-in (of Sen-
. sitive Influences). E. WALDSCHMIDT. 111 (1978) 25-33.
(The) Mahasarp.ghika and the Tathagatagarbha (Buddhist Doctrinal History,
Study 1). A. WAYMAN. III (1978) 35-50 .
. Mahayana Buddhist Meditation: Theory and Practice. Minoru KIYOT A, editor.
- Review by Joseph M. KITAGAWA. 211 (1979) 106-108.
-Marginalia to Sa-Skya PalJdita's Oeuvre. Leonard W.J. VAN DER KUIJP. 7/1
(1984) 37-55.
200
JIABS VOL.IO NO.2
Matrix of Mystery: Scientific and Humanistic Aspects of rDzogs-chen Thought.
V. GUENTHER. Review by A.W. HANSON-BARBER. 8/2
138-140.
MAQUET, Jacques see:
Can Meditational Practice Be Measured?
MCDERMOTT, Robert A. see:
Focus on Buddhism.
MCMULLIN, Neil see:
Sanmon-Jimon Schism in the Tendai School of Buddhism.
(The) Meaning of Vijiiapti in Vasubandhu's Concept of Mind. Bruce Cameron
HALL. 9/1 (1986) 7-23.
Meditation on Emptiness. Jeffrey HOPKINS. Review by ].W. DE JONG.
(1986) 124--128.
(A) Meditator's Diary. Jane HAMILTON-MERRITT. Review by Vijitha
RAJAPAKSE. 6/2 (1983) 144--146.
MEMBERSHIP OF lABS. See:
*List of Members of I.A.B.S.
*International Association of Buddhist Studies: General Membership.
(The) Memoirs of a Modern Gnostic. Edward CONZE. Review by Roger
JACKSON. 4/2 (1981) 102-106. """'
MetapsychologyoftheAbhidharma. ShantaRATNAYAKA. 4/2 (1981) 76-88.
MILLER, Beatrice D. see:
Women in Buddhism.
MILLER, Robert]. see:
*Computing and Buddhist Studies.
MILLER, Roy Andrew see:
Obituary:Turrell V. Wylie (1927-1984).
Miscellanea Buddhica. See: Nagarjuna's Filosofiske Vaerker and Miscellanea
Buddhica.
Mission Paul Pelliot: Choi.-y; de Documents tibetains conserves Ii la Bibliotheque
Nationale, complete par quelques manuscrits de l'India Office et du British
Museum. Ariane MACDONALD & Yoshiro IMAEDA. Review by Alexan-
der W. MACDONALD. 1/2 (1978) 76-77.
Modern Japanese Buddhology: Its History and Problematics. Minoru
KIYOT A. 7/1 (1984) 17-36.
(The) Mongol Khans and Chinese Buddhism and Taoism. SechinJAGCHID.
2/1 (1979) 7-28.
Morality in the Visuddhimagga. Damien KEOWN. 6/1 (1983) 61-75.
MULLIN, Glenn H. see:
Songs of Spiritual Change.
INDEX 201

Dimensions of Impermanence in Dogen's "Genjokoan." Steven
lHEINE. 4/2 (1981) 44-62.
fif!;!icis
rn
and Philosophical Analysis. Steven T. KATZ, editor. Review by Roger
2/2 (1979) 112.
Lopon see: ' .
t5i'{' Development of Language m Bhutan.
tWAGAO, Gadjin M. [NAGAO, GadjinJ see:
Cc'}' Ascent and Descent.
,,!,' Chukan to Yuishiki.
:tr ,From Madhyamika to Yogacara.
Presidential Address [1 st lABS Conference J.
S. see:
(;Buddhist Architecture of Western India.
The Philosophy of the Middle Way. David]. KALUPAHANA. Review
i',by Karen Christina LANG. 10/2 (1987) 167-174.
Arguments against Motion. Kamaleswar BHATTACHARYA. 811
&< (1985) 7-15.
FilosoflSke Vaerker and Miscellanea Buddhica. Chr. LINDTNER. Re-
}\"view by Fernando TOLA & Carmen DRAGONETTI. lOll (1987) 161-
ij;', 163.
Nagaryunzana: Studies in the. Writings and Philosophy of Nagarjuna. Chr.
1< LlNDTNER. Review by Fernando TOLA & Carmen DRAGONETTI.
811 (1985) 115-117.
"-'r'">
NALANDA TRANSLATION COMMITTEE:
Rain of Wisdom.
NAMDOL, Gyaltsen see:

NARAIN, A.K. see:
"Our Buddha" in an Asokan Inscription.
Nature in Dogen's Philosophy and Poetry. Miranda SHAW. 8/2 (1985) 111-132.
(M New Approach to the Intra-Madhyamika Confrontation over the Svatan-
trika and Prasailgika Methods of Refutation. Shohei ICHIMURA. 5/2
(1982) 41-52.
New Areas of Research For Archaeologists and Buddhologists. G. TUCCI.
111 (1978) 71-74.
New Buddhist Sanskrit Texts from Central Asia: An Unknown fragment of
the Mahayana MahiiparinirviiTJasutra. G.M. BONGARD-LEVIN. 4/2
(1981) 7-16.
Nirvana and Metaphysical Experience. Ismael QUILES, S.]. 211 (1979) 91-98.
202
JIABS VOL. 10 NO.2
Nonduality of the Two Truths in Sinitic Madhyamika: Origin of the
Truth'. Whalen W. LA!. 2/2 (1979) 45-65.
Nonorigination and Nirva'{fa in the Early Tathqgatagarbha Literature.
GROSNICK. 4/2 (1981) 33-43.
NORBU, Namkhai see:
Cycle of Day and Night.
Dzog Chen and Zen.
NORMAN, K.R. see:
*Copy of Report Elaborated For Union Academique
Bruxelles.
Obituary: !saline Blew Horner (1896-1981).
Note on a Chinese Text Demonstrating the Earliness of Tantra.
HUNTINGTON. 10/2 (1987) 88-98.
Notes on Nagarjuna and Zeno on Motion. Brian GALLOWAY. 10/2
80-87.
Notes on the Buddha's Threats in the Dfgha Nikiiya. A. SYRKIN. 7/1
147-158.
Notes on the Ratnaku(a Collection. K. Priscilla PEDERSEN. 3/2 (1980)
Notes on the Textcritical Editing of the Bodhisattvavadanakalpalata.
WILSON. 3/1 (1980) 111-114.
"No-Thought" in Pao-Tang Ch'an and Early Ati Yoga. A.W.
BARBER. 8/2 (1985) 61-73.
OBITUARIES (Chronological):
Professor Dr. P.L. Vaidya [1891-1978]. P.V. BAPAT. 111 (1978) 91-92.
Yamaguchi Susumu [1895-1976]. 112 (1978) 104-107.
Paul Demieville [1894-1979].2/1 (1979) 110-113.
Edward Conze [1904-1979]. Edward W. BASTIAN. 2/2 (1979) 116.
lsaline Blew Horner (1896-1981). K.R. NORMAN. 5/2 (1982)
Giuseppe Tucci (1894-1984). Luciano PETECH. 7/2 (1984)
[Printed as article, not obituary.]
John Brough (1917-1984). Padmanabh S. JAIN!. 7/2 (1984)
Lal ManiJoshi (1935-1984). N.H. SAMTANI & Robert Alexander Farrar ,
THURMAN. 811 (1985) 135-137. [See also *L.M. Joshi: a Brid
Communication. Robert A.F. THURMAN. 7/2 (1984) 232.]
Daivd Friedman (1903-1984). TuviaGELBLUM. 8/2 (1985) 149-150. '
Etienne Lamotte (1903-1983). Heinz BECHERT. 8/2 (1985) 151-156.
Ernst Waldschmidt (1897-1985). Heinz BECHERT. 9/1 (1986) 147-149.
Turrell V. Wylie (1927-1984). Roy Andrew MILLER. 911 (1986) 150-,
155.
INDEX
203
ETTI, V. see: . .
..... .... Practice and Theory of Tzbetan BuddhISm.
Buddhist Research (B.R.I.) of the Institu.te for Advanced
Studies of World RehglOns (IASWR), New York. Richard A. GARD.
2/2(1979) 113-115.
':Buddhist Text Information (B.T.I.) of the Institute for Advanced Studies
r of World Religions (IASWR), New York. R.A. GARD. 111 (1978)
87-90.
nowing Reality: The Tattvartha Chapter of Asanga's Bodhisattvabhumi. Janice
Dean WILLIS. ReviewbyE. Todd FENNER. 311 (1980) 117-119.
n the Sources for Sa skya PaI;l<;lita's Notes on the Bsam yas Debate. Leonard
''; W.]. VAN DER KUIJP. 9/2 (1986) 147-153.
rlginalPurity and the Focus of Early Yogacara.John P. KEENAN. 511 (1982)
'ii> 7-18.
llr Buddha" in an Asokan Inscription. A.K. NARAIN. III (1978) 57-64.
\:;HOW, w. see:
Chinese Buddhism: Aspects of Interaction and Reinterpretation.
Study of the Twenty-two Dialogues on Mahayana Buddhism.
Thousand Buddhas.
dKar-po on the Two Satyas. Michael BROmO. 8/2 (1985) 7-59.
A Historical and Religious Study of the Buddhist Ceremony for Peace and
Prosperity in Sri Lanka. Lily DE SILVA. Review by Ter ELLINGSON.
711 (1984) 164-168.
see:
Prolegomena to an English Translation of the Sutrasamuccaya.
Diana Y. see:
Diana Paul Replies [to ].W. DE JONG].
Life and Times of Paramartha.
Philosophy of Mind in Sixth Century China.
Women in Buddhism.
K. Priscilla
Anatole-Roger see:
HH'ruaUCE:Wn it la connaissance des hlvri ba de Thailande.
Luciano see:
Guiseppe Tucci (1894-1984). [Printed as article].
PEZZALI, Amalia see:
on Internatio.nal Seminar: of Indian Thought.
Santideva: Mystzque bouddhzste des. VIle et VlIIe szecles. .
Philosophy of Mind in Sixth Century China: Paramlirtha's 'Evolution
Diana Y. PAUL. Review by j.W. D:J;: JONG. 9/1 (1986) 129-133
Diana Paul Replies (133-135), and: ].W. de Jong Replies .
Pilgrimage and the Structure of Sinhalese Buddhism. John C. HOLT
(1982) 23-40. .
(The) Place of the Sudden Teaching within the Hua-yen Tradition: An
tigation of the Process of Doctrinal Change. Peter N. GREGORY.
(1983) 31-60.
POLLACK, David see:
Kokan Shiren and Muso Soseki.
Practice and Theory of Tibetan Buddhism. Geshe Lhundup SOPA & Jeffrey
KINS'. Review by V. OLIVETTI. 1/2 (1978) 69-72.
PRADHAN, P. see:
Presidential Address at the 2nd lABS .Conference.
Prajnaparamita and the Buddahood of the Non-Sentient World: The
Assimilation of Buddha-Nature and Middle Path Doctrine. Aaron
KOSEKI. 311 (1980) 16-33.
(The) Prajiiaparamita Literature. Edward CONZE. Review by Edward W.
TIAN. 2/2 (1979) 99-102.
of Acarya Tsong kha pa. Gyaltsen
DOL & Ngawang SAMTEN. Review by Jose Ignacio CABEZON.
(1982) 127-128.
PRA TZ, Ramon see:
Contributo aUo Studio Biografico dei Primi Gter-Ston.
Elements in Himalayan Buddhism: The Institution of
Ramesh Chandra TEWARI. 1011 (1987) 135-155.
PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESSES (Chronological):
Gadjin M. NAGAO. Presidential Address, 1st lABS Conference,
York, 1978. 112 (1978) 79-85.
P. PRADHAN. Presidential Address, 2nd lABS Conference, Nalanda,
1980.411 (1981) 128-142. . ..
Herbert V. GUENTHER. Presidential Address, 3rd lABS ConferenceH
Winnipeg, 1980.412 (1981) 115-123. ["Tasks Ahead."]
A.L. BASHAM. Presidential Address, 4th lABS Conference, Madison"
1980.511 (1982) 131-143. ["Asoka and Buddhism-A
nation."]
INDEX
205
Walpola RAHULA. Presidential Address, 5th lABS Conference, Oxford,
'. . 1982.6/1 (1983) 162-166.
Gadjin M. NAGAO. Presidential Address, 6th lABS Conference, Toyko
& Kyoto, 1983.711 (1984) 176-183. ["Ascent and Descent: Two
Directional Activity in Buddhist Thought."]
Problem. of the Icchantika in the Mahayana Mahiiparinirvana SIdra. Ming-
e . .
. Wood LIU 7/1 (1984) 57-8l.

F.:'i;;;;blegomena to an English Translation of the Sutrasamuccaya. Bhikkhu
5/2 (1982) 101-lO9.
for an Index of Publications in Buddhist Studies. 5/2 (1982) 137.
Land Buddhist Hermeneutics: Honen's Interpretaion of Nembutsu.
""ji/, Allan A. ANDREWS. 10/2 (1987) 7-25.
Ismael, S.]. see: .
Nirvana and Metaphysical Experience.

:S;MGiA.HULA, Telwatte see:
iff,":. Rasavahinz and Sahassavatthu.

:tvRAHULA, Walpola see:
:((f.:> Presidential Address ... Fifth Conference ....
Rain of Wisdom. Translated by the NALANDA TRANSLATION COM-
MITTEE, underthe directionofChogyam TRUNGPA. Review by Roger
l;,'Z: . JACKSON; 6/2 (1983) 149-156.
Vijitha see:
0;"'" Early Buddhism and Christianity.
Meditator's Diary.
f. Self and Non-Self in Early Buddhism.
Selfless Persons.
if; Wittgenstein and Buddhism.
:,;'(The) Rasavahinz and the Sahassavatthu: A comparison. Telwatte RAHULA.
". 7/2 (1984) 169-184.
9USMUSSEN, Douglas]. see:
Chandi Borobudur.
RATNAYAKA, Shanta see:
Bodhisattva Ideal of Theravada.
Metapsychology of the Abhidharma.
Two Ways of Perfection.
(The) Realm of Enlightenment in Vijiiaptimatrata: The Formulation of the
"Four Kinds of Pure Dharmas." Noriaki HAKAMAYA, translated (from
Japanese) by John KEENAN. 3/2 (1980) 21-4l.
Reason as the Prime Principle in Tsong kha pa's Delineation of Deity Yoga
as the Demarcation Between Sutra and Tantra. Jeffrey HOPKINS. 7/2
(1984) 95-115.
206
JIABSVOL.IONO.2
(A) Reconstruction of the Madhyamakiivatiira's Analysis of the Person
G. FENNER. 6/2 (1983) 7-34. .
REIGLE, David see:
Books of Kiu-Te or the Tibetan Buddhist Tantras.
Religion and Legitimation of Power in Sri ianka. Bardwell L. SMITH,
Review by B.G. GOKHALE. 2/2 (1979) 107-108:
Religion and Legitimation of Power in Thailand, Laos and Burma. Bardwell
SMITH, editor. Review by B.G. GOKHALE. 2/2 (1979) 107-108 ..
Religion and the Legitimation of Power in South Asia. Bardwell L. SMITH,
Review by B.G. GOKHALE. 2/2 (1979) 107-108.
(The) Religions of Tibet. Guiseppe TUCCI, translated (from German and
by Geoffrey SAMUEL. Review by Roger JACKSON. 411 (1981) 1
Religious Festivals in South India and Sri Lanka. Guy R. WELBON &
YOCUM, editors. Review by Peter CLAUS. 7/2 (1984) 226-229.
Repertoire du Canon Bouddhique Sino-Japonais. Edition de TaisM. Fascicule "n.rl.'>";J;
du Hobogirin. Edition Revisee et Augmentee. Paul DEMIEVILLE,
DURT & Anna SEIDEL. Review by Lewis R. LANCASTER. 5/2
128-131.
Reply to Professor MacDonald. S.J. TAMBIAH. 211 (1979) 102-103.
(Les) Reponses des Pudgalavadin aux Critiques des Ecoles ~ V ~ ~ L " U U
Thich Thien CHAU (Chau). 1011 (1987) 33-53.
*Report on an Educational Television/Film Series on Tibetan Buddhism.
(1982) 138-140.
(A) Report on Buddhism in the People's Republic of China. Alan
511 (1982) 109-117.
Report on Religious Activity in Central Tibet, October 1985. Donald S.
Jr. & Cyrus R. STEARNS. 9/2 (1986) 101-107.
*(A) Report on the International Seminar: Aspects of Indian Thought.
PEZZALI. 6/2 (1983) 157.
REPORTS ON CONFERENCES. See CONFERENCE REPORTS.
REYNOLDS, Frank E. see:
Buddhist Studies.
REYNOLDS, Holly Baker see:
Essays in Gupta Culture.
REYNOLDS, John M. see:
Cycle of Day and Night.
REYNOLDS, Mani B. see:
)3INSON, James B.
!' Buddha's Lzons.
see:
INDEX 207
;'j!?oof
Tile
ofTempyo. Yasushi INOUE, translated (from Japanese) by James
ARAKI. Review by John P. KEENAN. 6/2 (1983) 146-147.
''jRoyaumesde l'Himalaya, histoire et civilisation: Ie Ladakh, Ie Bhoutan, ie Sikkim,
r leNepal. AlexanderW. MACDONALD. Review by Andre BAREAU. 6/2
, (19S3) 147-149. .
D. Seyfort see:
'.' Buddhist spectrum.

E.A. johansson's Analysis of Citta: A Criticism. Arvind SHARMA. 411
f,'!.;\'>.{19S1) 101-107.
':','
UNIVERSITY TRANSLATION CENTER:
Sutra of Contemplation of the Buddha of Immeasurable Life.
": ,
Richard see:
'i'j;,,::. Indravarman (Avaca) Casket Inscription Reconsidered.
in Asoka's 8th Rock Edict. A.L. BASHAM. 211 (1979) 81-83.
N.H. see:
.Cross Currents in Early Buddhism.
;1;'i?J, Obituary: Lal ManiJoshi (1935-1984).
7/">,;""
Ngawang see:
Pratityasamutpadastutisubhi4itahr:dayam.
Geoffrey see:
.t
ic
Religions of Tibet.
Sanmon-Jimon Schism in the Tendai School of Buddhism: A Prelimi-
nary Analysis. Neil MCMULLIN. 711 (1984) 83-105.
i'
;i,San/idem: Mystique bouddhiste des VIle et VIlle siicles. Amalia PEZZALI. Review
,; by Jose CABEZON. 311 (1980) 115-117.
lr\t'
James A. see:
,", Transpersonal Psychological Observations in Theravada Buddhist
Meditative Practices.
,
the White Panacea and the Hva-shang Doctrine. Michael
f BROmO. 10/2 (1987). 27-68.
:,Sa skya Pal)<;l.ita's Account of the bSam yas Debate: History as Polemic. Roger
" JACKSON. 511 (1982) 89-99.
SATYAPRAKASH see:
Buddhism: A Select Bibliography.
:SCHOPEN, Gregory see:
..... Buddhist Studies.
Generalization of an Old Yogic Attainment in Medieval Mahayana Sutra
Literature.
208
JIABS VOL. 10 NO.2
Indravarman (Avaca) Casket Inscription Reconsidered.
Inscription on the K u ~ a n Image of Amitabha and the Character of
Early Mahayana in India.
Text on the "DharaI.11 Stones from Abhayagiriya."
SCHUSTER, Nancy see: \,
Changing the Female Body.
SEIDEL, Anna see:
Self and Non-Selfin Early Buddhism. Joaquin PEREZ-RAMON. Review
RAJAPAKSE: 8/1 (1985) 122-126.
Selfless Persons: Imagery and Thought in Theravada Buddhism. Steven
Review by Vijitha RAJAPAKSE. 8/1 (1985) 117-122.
Seven Works ofVasubandhu: The Buddhist Psychological Doctor. Stefan
Review by AW. HANSON-BARBER. 911 (1986) 136-138.
SHANER, David see:
Bodymind Experience in Japanese Buddhism.
SHARMA, Arvind see:
Rune E.A Johansson's Analysis of Citta.
SHARMA, Jagdish P. see:
SHAW, Miranda see:
Nature in Dagen's Philosophy and Poetry.
SHERBURNE, Richard see:
Lamp for the Path and Commentary.
SHIBA YAMA, Zenkei see:
Comments on Zen.
SHIH, Heng-chih see:
Yung-ming's Syncretism of Pure Land and Ch'an.
Shingon Buddhism: Theory and Practice. Minoru KIYOT A Review by Aaron K.
KOSEKI. 112 (1978) 72-76.
Shingon Mikkya's Twofold MarJrjala: Paradoxes and Integration. MinoTl}::
KIYOTA. 1011 (1987) 91-116.
SHINN, Larry D. see:
Lustful Maidens and Ascetic Kings.
ShObOgenza: Zen Essays by Dagen. Thomas CLEARY. Review by Steven HEINE.
9/2 (1986) 173-176.
"Signless" Meditation in Pali Buddhism. Peter HARVEY. 911 (1986) 25-52.
Signs, Memory and History: A Tantric Buddhist Theory of Scriptural Trans:'
mission. Janet GYATSO. 9/2 (1986) 7-35.
INDEX 209
See DE SILVA.
ON, Beth see:. . .
<,!-ustjul Maidens and Ascetzc Kzngs.
Relation (Sahabhu-hetu): A Study in Buddhist Theory of Causa-
.. tion. Kenneth K. TANAKA. 811 (1985) 91-11l.
II, Amar see:
.p.Seart of Buddhist Philosophy.
hA, Braj M. see:
,ccAbhidharmika Notion of Vi:jiiiina and its Soteriological Significance.
(:;(1(>", _:/ _
Sixteen Aspects of the Four Noble. Truths and Their Opposites. Alex
3/2 (1980) 67-76.
Tadeusz see:
of the sTog Palace Kanjur.
ITH, Bardwell L. see:
'f P'WH in Sri WnM .
. Religion and Legitimation of Power in Thailand, Laos and Burma.
Religion and the Legitimation of Power in South Asia.
Syncretic Religion of Lin Chao-en.
Aspects of Theravada Buddhism in Nepal. Ramesh Chandra
TEWARI. 6/2 (1983) 67-93.
see:
Buddhist Poems in Tamil. G. VIJAYA VENUGOPAL. 2/2 (1979) 93-97.
Comments on Tsong kha pa's Lam rim chen mo and Professor Wayman's
Calming the Mind and Discerning the Real. Geshe SOPA. 3/1 (1980) 68-92.
[See: Alex Wayman Replies to Geshe Sopa (93-97), and: Geshe Sopa
Replies to AlexWayman (98-100).]
of Spiritual Change. Glenn H. MULLIN. Review by Roger JACKSON.
6/2 (1983) 149-156.
Geshe Lhundup [SOPA, Geshe] see:
Excursus on the Subtle Body in Tantric Buddhism.
Geshe Sopa Replies to Alex Wayman.
Practice and Theory of Tibetan Buddhism.
Some Comments on Tsong kha pa's Lam rim chen mo and Professor
Wayman's Calming the Mind and Discerning the Real.
Special Theory of Prat'ityasamutpiida.
Tibetan "Wheel of Life."
a History of the bSam yas Debate. G.W. HOUSTON. Review by Robert
A.F. THURMAN. 4/2 (1981) 107-109.
210 ]IABSVOL.10NO.2
SOUTHWOLD, Martin see:
BuddhiSm in Life.
SPAE, Joseph J. see:
Buddhist-Christian Empathy.
SP ARHAM, Gareth see:
Background Material for the First Seventy Topics in
Abhisamayalamkara. .
(The) Special Theory of Pratityasamutpada: The Cycle of Dependent
tion.Geshe Lhundup SOPA 911 (1986) 105-119.
Spiritual Discipline in Hinduism, Buddhism, and the West. Harry M. BUCK.
by Roger JACKSON. 5/2 (1982) 121-124.
SPONBERG, Alan see:
Dynamic Liberation in Yogacara Buddhism. .
Report on Buddhism in the People's Republic of China.
SRIVASTAVA, K.M. see:
Archaeological Excavations at Piprahwa and Ganwaria and the
cation of Kapilavastu.
STAVISKY, Boris J. see:
"Buddha-Mazda" from Kara-tepe in Old Termez (Uzbekistan).
STEIN, Aurel see:
Thousand Buddhas.
STEARNS, Cyrus R. see:
Report on Religious Activity in Central Tibet, October 1985.
(The) Story of Vyasa and Kaslsundarl. L. ZWILLING. 111 (1978) 65-70.
STRANDBERG, Elisabeth see:
Fausboll and the Pali and Jatakas.
STRONG, John S. see:
Legend of King Aloka.
Studies in Ch'an and Hua-yen. Robert M. GIMELLO & Peter N.
editors. Review by John JORGENSEN. 9/2 (1986) 177-180.
Studies in Pali and Buddhism (A homage volume in memory
Kashyap). AK. NARAIN & L. ZWILLING, editors. Review by
P. SHARMA 2/2 (1979) 109-111.
Studies in Traditional Indian Medicine in the Pali Canon: Jlvaka and
Ayurveda. Kenneth G. ZYSK. 511 (1982) 70-86.
(A) Study of the Earliest Garbha Vidhi of the Shingon Sect. Dale Allen
DARO. 9/2 (1986) 109-146.
(A) Study of the Madhyamika Method of Refutation, Especially of its
to that of Kathavatthu. Shohei ICHIMURA. 3/1 (1980) 7-15.
INDEX 211
of the Theories of Yavad-bhavikata and Yathavad-bhavikata in the
Ah-yueh YEH. 7/2 (1984) 185-107.
of the Twenty-two Dialogues on Mahayana Buddhism. W. PACHOW.
Review by L.M. JOSHI. 6/1 (1983) 157-159.
1/',<""'-'
on the :r:-radhyam.ika Method of Refutation and Its Influence on
Logrc. Shohe! ICHIMURA. 4/1 (1981) 87-95.
"Suicide" Problem in the Pali Canon. Martin G. WILTSHIRE. 6/2 (1983)
!C5
'
i' .124-140.
Sutra of Contemplation of the Buddha of Immeasurable Life. RYUKOKU
TRANSLATION CENTER. Review by Minoru
KIYOTA. 8/2 (1985) 140-142.
Sutra of the Wise and Foolish' (mdo bdzaris blun), or, The Ocean of Narratives
i:;f. (uliger-iin dalai). Stanley FRYE. Review by John R. Krueger. 8/2 (1985)
l:r 143-145.
",
Donald K. see:
;,T. . Buddhism and Society in Southeast Asia.
;'iSWEET, Michael]. see:
0', Bodhicaryavatara 9:2 As A Focus For Tibetan Interpretations of the Two
Truths In the Prasangika Madhyamika.
:"
Symbolism of the Early Stupa. Peter HARVEY. 7/2 (1984) 67-93.
of the Buddhist Stupa. Gerard FUSSMAN. 9/2 (1986) 37-53.
Syncretic Religion of Lin Chao-en. Judith A. BERLING. Review by Bardwell
." L. SMITH. 4/2 (1981) 101-102.
A see:
,lr>
j> Notes on the Buddha's Threats in the D'igha Nikaya .
. TAKEUCHI, Yoshinori see:
l;,,; Heart of Buddhism.
iTAMBIAH, S.]. see:
. Reply to Professor MacDonald.
World Conqueror and World Renouncer.
TANAKA, Kenneth K. see:
i Simultaneous Relation (SahabhU-hetu).
Tangles and Webs. Padmasiri DE SILVA. Review by Gary W. HOUSTON. 411
. (1981) 113-114. .
Tantra in Tibet, The Great Exposition of Secret Mantra. ] effrey HOPKINS. Review
by Todd FENNER. 5/1 (1982) 127-130.
(The) Tantric Concept of Bodhicitta: A Buddhist Existential Philosophy. Minoru
KIYOTA. Review by Dale TODARO. 1011 (1987) 164-168.
212 JIABS VOL. lO NO.2
(The) Tantric Distinction: An Introduction t? Tibetan Buddhism. Jeffrey
edited by Anne C. KLEIN .. Review by Bruce BURRILL. 9/2 (l9S
S
'L
181-183. [See: Jeffrey Hopkins Rephes(184-187), and: Bruce B
Replies (187-188).] ..' umn,
Tasks Ahead: Presidential-Address Given on the Occasion of the Third C .>tt
ference of the International Association of Buddhist Studies.
GUENTHER. 4/2 (1981) 115-123. .j.,;
Temporary Ordination in Sri Lanka. Richard GOMBRICH. 7/2 (1984) 41-65.;'1
*Terms of Sanskrit and Pali Origin Aheptable as English Words. RoT.
JACKSON. 5/2 (1982) 141-142. get
(A) Text-Historical Note on Hevajratantra II:v: 1-2. Leonard W.J. VAN DER'
KUIJP.811 (1985) 83-89. .:
(The) Text on the "Dharal).l Stones from Abhayagiriya": AMinor Contributio
ll
:
to the Study of Mahayana Literature in Ceylon. Gregory SCHOPEN./
511 (1982) 100-108. . .
TEWARI, Ramesh Chandra see:
Pre-Buddhist Elements in Himalayan Buddhism.
Socio-Cultural Aspects of Theravada Buddhism in Nepal.
Theraviida Meditation: The Buddhist Transformation of Yoga. Winston KING. Re_."
view by George D. BOND. 511 (1982) 121-124.
THOMPSON, Laurence G. see:
Chinese Religions in Western Languages.
THONGTHEW-RATARASARN, Somchintana see:
Buddhism, Imperialism and War.
(The) Thousand Buddhas: Ancient Buddhist Paintings from the Cave-Temples oj
Tun-huang on the Western Frontier of China. Aurel STEIN. Review by W.
PACHOW. 4/2 (1981) 112-114. .
Three Worlds According to King Ruang: Thai Buddhist Cosmology. Frank
REYNOLDS & Mani B. REYNOLDS. Review by Robert]. BICKNER
5/2 (1982) 132-133. .
(The) Threefold Refuge in the Theraviida Buddhist Tradition. John Ross CARTER
Review by Winston KING. 7/1 (1984) 169-173. .
*Tibetan Blockprints in the Department of Rare Books and Special Collections [Uni-;
versity of Wisconsin, Madison]. Leonard ZWILLING. Review by Rena'
HAGGERTY. 811 (1985) 134.
Tibetan Buddhism in Western Perspective. Herbert V. GUENTHER. Review by
Roger JACKSON. 112"(1978) 67-69.
Tibetan Buddhist Medicine and Psychiatry: The Diamond Healing. Terry CLlF-t
FORD. Review by Todd FENNER. 8/2 (1985) 145-147.
INDEX 213
Medicine: With Special ReJerence to Yogtisataka. Vaidya BHAGWAN
DASH. Review by E. Todd FENNER. 111 (1978) 81-83.
Text Processing System. 9/2 (1986) 189.
Tibetan "Wheel of Life": Iconography and Doxography. Geshe SOP A.
(1984) 125-145.
',..,.;ho1 __ VI!" Religion: A Death Ritual oj the Tibetan Bonpos. Per KV AERNE. Review
by Michael ARIS. 10/2 (1987) 175-177.
Robert Alexander Farrar [THURMAN, Robert A.F.] see:
*L.M. Joshi: a Brief Communication.
Obituary: Lal Mani Joshi (1935-1984).
Sources Jor a History oj the bSam yas Debate.
Tsang Khapa's Speech oj Cold in the Essence oj True Eloquence.
Way to Shambhala.
see:
Study of the Earliest Carbha Vidhi of the Shingon Sect.
Tantric Concept oj Bodhicitta.
Fernando see:
Miscellanea Buddhica.
Niigiirjuna's Filasofiske Vaerker.
Nagarjuniana.
of Nagarjuna.
Psychological Observations on Theravada Buddhist Meditative
. Practice. James A. SANTUCCI. 2/2 (1979) 66-78.
see:
T.J. see:
Fundamentals oj Tibetan Medicine.
Speech oj Cold in the Essence oJTrue Eloquence: Reason and Enlighten-
ment in the Central Philosophy oj Tibet. Robert A.F. THURMAN. Review
by Janet GYATSO. 9/1 (1986) 138-142.
Tsang kha pa's Understanding of Prasangika Thought. Lobsang DARGYA Y.
.... 1011 (1987) 55-65.
TUCCI, Giuseppe [TUCCI, G.] (1894-1984) see:
New Areas of Research For Archaeologists and Buddhologists.
Religions oj Tibet .
.Two Ways oj Perfection: Buddhist and Christian. Shanta RATNAYAKA. Review
. by George BOND. 2/2 (1979) 103-104
VAIDYA, P.L. (1891-1978)
Vajrayana in Gostana-dda. H.W. BAILEY. 111 (1978) 53-56.
214
JIABS VOL. 10 NO.2
VAN DER KUIJP, Leonard W.J. see:
Contributo aUo Studio Biografic die Primi Gter-Ston.
Marginalia to Sa-skya PalJdita's Oeuvre.
On the Sources for Sa skya PaQ.dita's ,Notes on the Bsam yas
Text-Historical Note on Hevajratantra II:v:I-2.
VIjAYAVENUGOPAL, G. see:
Some Buddhist Poems in Tamil.
WAGONER, Phil see:
Buddhist Architecture of Western India.
WALDRON, William see:
Bodymind Experience in Japanese Buddhism.
WALDSCHMIDT, Ernest [WALDSCHMIDT, E.] (1897-1985) see:
Mahamaudgalyayana's Sermon on the Letting-in And Not Letting-in
Sensitive Influences.)
WAYMAN, Alex [WAYMAN, A.) see:
Alex Wayman Replies to Geshe Sopa ..
Mahasamghika and the Tathagatagarbha.
Sixteen Aspects of the Four Noble Truths and Their Opposites.
Yogacara and the Buddhist Logicians.
(The) Way of Siddhartha: A Life of the Buddha. David J. &
KALUPAHANA. Review by Roger JACKSON. 7/2 (1984)
(The) Way to Shambhala. Edwin BERNBAUM. Review by Robert A.F.
MAN. 5/2 (1982) 133-135.
WELBON, Guy R. see:
Religious Festivals in South India and Sri Lanka.
WERNER, Karel see:
Bodhi and Arahattaphala.
Who Gets to Ride in the Great Vehicle? Self-Image and Identity Among
Followers of the Early Mahayana. Paul HARRISON. 1011 (1987) 67-89.
WICKREMERA TNE, Ananda see:
Genesis of an Orienta list.
WIJESEKERA, O.H. de A. see:
Freudian Unconscious and Bhavanga.
WILLIAMS, Bruce see:
Zhongguo foxue yuanliu lUejiang.
WILLIS, Janice Dean see:
On Knowing Reality.
WILSON, Frances see:
Jaina Path of Perfection.
Notes on the Textcritical Editing of the Bodhisattviivadiinakalpalatii.
INDEX 215
Martin G. see:
;' .. ' . "suicide" Problem in the Pali Canon.
gs of the White Crane: Poem of Tshangs dbyangs rgya mtsho (1683-1706). G.W.
HOUSTON. Review by Roger JACKSON. 6/2 (1983) 149-156.
. .
genstein and Buddhism. Chris GUDMUNSEN. Review by Vijnitha
311 (1980) 122-126. .
in Buddhism: Images of the Feminine in Mahayiina Tradition. Diana K.
;i;\,i;i';.PAUL. Review by Beatrice D. MILLER. 3/1 (1980) 120-121.
>'
(Yiian Hsiao) on the NirvaI)a School: Summation Under the "One
Doctrine. Whalen LA!. 8/2 (1985) 75-83.
>y:
::t':(fhe) Word of the Buddha: the r,ipitaka and its Interpretation in TheraviidaBuddhism.
tl." George D. BOND. ReVIew by Nathan KATZ. 7/1 (1984) 173-175.
j:<<,-::::') ..,:>- .'
Conqueror and World Renouncer, A Study of Buddhism and Polity in Thailand
against a Historical Background. S.J. T AMBIAH. Review by Alexander W.
MACDONALD. 211 (1979) 99-101. [See: Reply to Professor MacDonald
(102-103).]
World of Buddhism. Heinz BECHERT& Richard GOMBRICH (editors).
Review by Roger JACKSON. 8/1 (1985) 126-133.
Turrell V. (1927-1984).
Susumu (1895-1976).
[:!YANDELL, Keith E. see:
;.: Buddhist and Western Philosophy.

i:iYEH, Ah-yueh see:
"i; Study of the Theories of Yiivad-bhiivikatii and Yiithavad-bhiivikatii in the
:{'#? Abhidharma-samuccaya.
;"Y()CUM, Glenn E. see:
i; Religious Festivals in South India and Sri Lanka.
::t-\.) Yogacara Analysis of the Mind, Based on the Vijiiiina section of Vasuban-
>( dhu's PaiicaskandhaprakaraTJa with GUI)aprabha's Commentary. Brian
/ GALLOWAY. 3/2 (1980) 7-20.
and the Buddhist Logicians. Alex WAYMAN. 211 (1979) 65-78.
J(The) Yoga of Tibet, The Great Exposition of Secret Mantra-2 and 3. Jeffrey
HOPKINS. Review by Todd FENNER. 511 (1982) 127-130.
Katherine K. see:
Issue of the Buddha as Vedagii.
see:
Early Buddhism and Christianity.
of Nagarjuna. Fernando TOLA & Carmen
DRAGONETTI. 6/2 (1983) 94-123.
216
JIABS VOL. 10 NO.2
Yung-ming's Syncretism of Pure Land and Ch'an. Heng-chih SHIH I'
(1987) 117-135. 0/1
Zen & Christian: The Journey Between. ] ohn Dykstra EUSDEN. Review by G Vo}
HOUSTON. 6/1 (1983) 159-161.- ,
Zen and Western Thought. Masao ABE. Review by Paul]. GRIFFITHS.
(1987) 168-171. ,L
Zen Comments on the Mumonkan. See Comments on Zen.
Zhongguo foxue yuanliu lUejian (Brief lectures on the origins and developm
of Chinese Buddhology). Lii CHENG Review by Bruce
3/2 (1980) 111-112. .
ZWILLING, Leonard [ZWILLING, L.] see:
Story of Vyasa and Kaslsundarl.
*Tibetan Blockprints in the Department of Rare Books and Special Collections.'
ZYSK, Kenneth G. see:
Studies in Traditional Indian Medicine in the Pali Canon.
GUIDELINES FOR CONTRIBUTORS TO JIABS
including footnotes, should not exceed

in length; two clear copies be submitted. Book reviews should
dinarilyexceed 1,000 words and Items for Notes and News should not
;. . d 500 words. Manuscripts should be typed, doublespaced, preferably on
Footnotes should be at the of the manuscript. Material
should follow the by the MLA Style Sheet
handbook .. Ma.tenal m any European
will be consIdered for pubhcatlOn. Summanes m EnglIsh are reqmred
is in a language other than English.
Italicize all foreign terms and linguistic citations, except proper names.
and Brackets: Use square brackets to enclose editorial or
material inserted .in a or .
names: Names of ASIan ongm should be glVen m standard transcnp-
'llib,H(see below) and in Chinese, Japanese, Korean and Vietnamese, the sur-
precede the given name, except where modern writers or public
have established known preferences for the of their
For well-known place names, use the estabhshed forms.
- Sanskrit, Pali and Other South Asian Languages: For
iiS;rtjskrit and Pali use the standard system given in A.L. Basham, The Wonder
India, Appendix X; for other South Asian languages use any available
;ii1rldard transliteration system which is consistent and intelligible.
>,j5,"Chinese, japanese, Korean: Chinese characters may be used in consultation
\Wlththe Editors in the body of the text but always preceded by the appropriate
for Chinese use the modified Wade-Giles system as found in
of Syllabic Headings" in the American edition of Mathews' Chinese-
Dictionary; for Japanese use the system of Kenkyusha's New Japanese-
Dictionary, but with an apostrophe after syllable-final n before vowels;
iJor,Korean use the system given in McCure-Reischauer, "The Romanization
Korean Language," Transactions of the Korean Branch, Royal Asiatic
'S?ciety, 29(1939), 1-55.
;i';;;Tibetan, Mongolian: For Tibetan use the transcription proposed by
i,T;jVylie, "A Standard System of Tibetan Transcription," Harvard Journal of
iWian Studies, 22 (1959), 261-7; for Mongolian use the appropriate system
i(rmAntoine Mostaert, Dictionnaire Ordos, 769-809.
:i;""!he ]lABS encourages contributors to send their articles on computer disks,
by one paper copy. Please clearly label the disk with format,
of relevant files, and the word-processor or program used to create
i;tljHiles. In addition, please translate the article to ASCII code on the same
possible. For more information regarding electronic contributions, write
itlie .. .e.d.itor.

Jiabs 10-2

Transféré par

Informations du document

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Jiabs 10-2

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

THE JOURNAL

OF THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION Of

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi