The Perfection of Wisdom in One Hundred Thousand Lines

1. It is also known by the shortened name The Hundred Thousand (Tib ’bum). It should be noted that the customary honorific “Noble” (’phags pa, corresponding to Skt ārya) is not appended to the title, nor to the colophon or chapter colophons, in any Kangyurs; nor is the text called a “sūtra” or “Mahāyāna sūtra.”

2. Evidence mentioned in the traditional histories for the same teaching to have been recorded in sūtras of different length is that the interlocutors are the same, and that all versions contain the same prophecy made about Gaṅgadevī, related in chapter 43 of the present text. See Butön, folios 73.b–74.a.

3. The six “mother” Prajñāpāramitā sūtras (yum drug), so called because they implicitly include all eight topics of the Abhisamayālaṃkāra, are the five long sūtras (in one hundred thousand, twenty-five thousand, eighteen thousand, ten thousand, and eight thousand lines, Toh 8–12), along with the Verse Summary (Ratnaguṇasaṅcayagāthā, Toh 13), which is said to have been taught subsequently in the Magadha dialect.

4. Butön, folio 99.b; translation in Stein and Zangpo, p. 229.

5. See The Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-Five Thousand Lines (Toh 9) introduction, and The Perfection of Wisdom in Eighteen Thousand Lines (Toh 10) introduction.

6. See the 84000 Knowledge Base page on the Degé Kangyur’s Perfection of Wisdom section.

7. See Falk 2011; Falk and Karashima (2012 and 2013); and Salomon 2018, pp. 335–58.

8. This hypothesis, favored by most modern scholars as well as by traditional Nepalese exegetes, is also supported by the fact that one of the seven Chinese translations of the Eight Thousand, the Dao xing jing (道行經), or Dao xing banruo jing (道行般若經; Taishō 224), was the earliest ever of the Prajñāpāramitā texts to be translated (by Lokakṣema and others in 179 ᴄᴇ)‍—a century before the first “long” group of sūtras was brought to China from Khotan. Nevertheless, traditional scholarship in both China and Tibet favored the idea that the Eight Thousand was an abridgement or extract of the long sūtras. See Zacchetti 2015, p. 177.

9. See von Hinüber 2014 and Zacchetti 2015, p. 187. Critical editions of parts of the manuscript have been published by Conze (1962 and 1974), Zacchetti (2005), and Choong (2006).

10. See Conze 1978, pp. 34–35 and 40, and Conze 1974.

11. See Zacchetti 2005, pp. 19–22.

12. See Suzuki and Nagashima 2015.

13. Since the longer texts are prose works, “line” (śloka) in this context is simply a unit of measure of thirty-two syllables, rather than implying a verse couplet as in some other contexts.

14. According to Zacchetti (2015, p. 176), the mentions come in a list of Prajñāpāramitā scriptures at the beginning of the Jin’gang xian lun (金剛仙論, Taishō 1512).

15. This point was emphasized by Zacchetti (2005, pp. 42–50), and is further discussed in Zacchetti 2015, pp. 185–87.

16. Da banruoboreboluomiduo jing (大般若波羅蜜多經, Taishō 220).

17. For a more detailed account of the successive Chinese translations of The Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-Five Thousand Lines, see the introduction to The Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-Five Thousand Lines (Toh 9), i.11–i.21.

18. More so than the Sanskrit of the Twenty-Five Thousand matches the Tibetan of the Kangyur version, for the case of the Twenty-Five Thousand is complicated by the existence of two different versions in Tibetan, one in the Kangyur (Toh 9) and the other in the Tengyur (Toh 3790); the Sanskrit matches the “eight-chapter” Tengyur version most closely. For more detail, see the introduction to The Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-Five Thousand Lines (Toh 9), i.35–i.39.

19. See Martin 2012. The blog posts of Dan Martin (Yerushalmi) on the topic of these early, imperial period translations have been most helpful in our explorations of it. Note that the word bla, which has many possible connotations, could also be understood as meaning “early” or “primary.” In Ngawang Zangpo 2010, bla ’bum is rendered “Master Copy.”

20. Although given the clan name Nyang (nyang) in Butön’s History, in the Padma Kathang (pad+ma bka’ thang, a fourteenth-century treasure text revealed by Orgyen Lingpa), and in a number of later works, other early texts say he was of the Lang (rlangs or sometimes glang) family. Alaksha Tendar mentions both clan names (folio 5.b). Khampa Gocha was among the earliest ordained Tibetan monks (but not one of the “seven men who were tested”). He is also sometimes referred to as Lang Khampa Lotsāwa, and may (according to Amyé Shab) be the same person as Lang Sugata Gocha (rlangs su ga ta go cha) or Lang Déwarshekpa Gocha Sungpa (rlangs bde bar gshegs pa go cha bsrungs pa); see van der Kuijp 2013, pp. 178–79.

21. Butön, folio 146.a. See also Nishioka, p. 68, # 105.

22. A draft translation of the relevant passage is provided by Martin 2012.

23. Rongtönpa, folios 3.a–3.b; Minling Terchen, folio 198.a; Alaksha Tendar, folios 5.b–6.b; Kongtrul, p. 227.

24. Degé dkar chag, chapter 2, folios 88.b–89.a; chapter 3, 2.2.12; chapter 4, folios 117.a–117.b.

25. Narthang dkar chag rgyas pa, folio 24.a et seq., or Pedurma vol. 106, pp. 113–18 (the latter being considerably easier to read). See bibliography entry under Olkha Lelung Lobsang Trinlé.

26. The Narthang catalog agrees on folio 24.a, but the summarized list of six manuscripts on folio 25.a (see below) suggests that the first translation was made in the reign of Tridé Tsuktsen, Tri Songdetsen’s father.

27. The Tibetan word dum bu, literally “piece” or “portion,” is used in these descriptions, and although it may denote volumes, the meaning may be some other physical division into parts.

28. According to most accounts, although Rongtönpa’s (folio 3.a) could be read as referring rather to the queen’s blood being used. The Tibetan mtshal (meaning “vermilion,” or just “red”) added to khrag (“blood”) most likely serves simply as an honorific, or denotes red ink made with blood, or might even imply that vermilion was added to blood to make red ink.

29. See the introduction to The Aparimitāyurjñāna Sūtra (2) (Toh 675), i.8.

30. See van Schaik 2002.

31. The translations of these often-cryptic names are tentative. They are made on the assumption that each starts with a king’s name or moniker.

32. The Tibetan bye in this name could also be understood to mean “sand” or “million.”

33. Presumed to be Namdé Ösung (gnam sde ’od srungs), a son of Langdarma; for details see Dungkar’s dictionary, p. 1217.

34. Narthang catalog, folio 25.a. The mention here of a “Darma” sponsoring the production of a Hundred Thousand, if it refers to Langdarma, is one among other pieces of historical evidence suggesting that Langdarma may not have been as hostile to Buddhism as the widespread traditional account relates.

35. Rongtönpa, folios 3.b.5–4.a.2.

36. We have so far been unable to identify this person further, or the period in which he lived; his revised version seems to be anterior to Ngok’s revision, but the chronology needs further investigation.

37. Rongtönpa had already said earlier (folio 3.a) that there were many copies of even the first, shortest translation to be found in Central Tibet. Indeed, Martin 2012 reports on the finding in Drepung by the contemporary Tibetan scholar Kawa Sherab Sangpo of one such “red manuscript” four-volume set.

38. Narthang catalog, folio 25.a.7.

39. Rongtönpa, folios 4.a.6–4.b.6.

40. Degé Kangyur dkar chag, F.117.a. The stabilities mentioned in the dkar chag are (1) shes rab sgron ma, (2) snang ba gsal ba, and (3) zla ba’i sgron me.

41. Rongtönpa, folio 5.a.4.

42. Rongtönpa, folios 3.b–4.a. One clue that the seventeen versions he mentions belong to the imperial period and precede Ngok’s revision is that the tenth was produced by Lhalung Palgyi Dorjé (lha lung dpal gyi rdo rje), presumably the same as the well-known ninth-century figure said to have assassinated Langdarma (see Treasury of Lives).

43. Narthang catalog, folio 25.a.7. From the sequence of the passage concerned it would seem that this version must have appeared before the time of the thirteenth-century Chomden Rikpai Raltri (bcom ldan rig pa’i ral gri, 1227–1305). The best known Yarlung Jowo is Shākya Rinchen Dé, fifteenth-century author notably of a history, but not known for his work on the editing or production of Kangyurs. He is therefore probably not the person referred to here, nor is it likely to be the famous Yarlung Lotsāwa Drakpa Gyaltsen (1242–1346). Another Yarlungpa is mentioned as a Narthang scholar who may have been responsible for an early Tengyur or its catalog. See Schaeffer and van der Kuijp 2009, p. 36, and Almogi 2021, pp. 177–78.

44. Rongtönpa, folio 5.b.

45. Neither of the two copies of the Hemis Kangyur, the fifth of the Kangyurs that add the extra chapters, is complete enough at the end of the final volume to show whether or not there was a colophon.

46. ’di ni bsam yas dang lha sa’i rig zing mtshams mi ’da’ la sogs pa la gtugs nas/ zhus dag lan bcu drug byas pa’i rgyan gong gi ’bum nag mtshams mi ’da’ la phyi mo byas nas/ dag par gtugs pa’i ’bum sdig ma ’dres zhes bya ba’i gser ’bum bcu gnyis dum/ lo tsa ba chen po thams cad mkhyen pa bu ston rin chen grub kyi thugs dam la phyi mo bgyis nas/ mkhas chen rin chen rgyal mtshan pas bzhengs pa la ma phyi bgyis pa’o. In Tibetan literature overall, such a large number of figures with the name Rinchen Gyaltsen are recorded that it would be difficult to identify this one with certainty. However, if the moniker “great scholar” is taken as a specific one, there was a fifteenth-century scholar at Sangphu referred to as mkhas dbang rin chen rgyal mtshan.

47. On the differences between the Kangyur and Tengyur versions of the Twenty-Five Thousand, see the introduction to The Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-Five Thousand Lines, i.35–i.39.

48. See the introduction to The Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-Five Thousand Lines, i.111–i.113.

49. In the Twenty-Five Thousand, ch. 26 has the title “The Hells,” and ch. 27 “The Purity of All the Dharmas.”

50. The reservation here is that, at a fine-grain level, the Abhisamayālaṃkāra only fits the order of the Twenty-Five Thousand fully in the version of the sūtra in the Tengyur (Toh 3790) and not in the Kangyur version (Toh 9); see n.47.

51. On Smṛtijñānakīrti, see his biography in Treasury of Lives.

52. For an explanation of these various names (a complex topic), see the introduction to The Long Explanation of the Noble Perfection of Wisdom in One Hundred Thousand, Twenty-Five Thousand, and Eighteen Thousand Lines (Toh 3808), i.7–i.13.

53. This commentary has been translated and published by 84000, and will be linked to the present text. See The Long Explanation of the Noble Perfection of Wisdom in One Hundred Thousand, Twenty-Five Thousand, and Eighteen Thousand Lines (Toh 3808), 2022; details of its authorship attribution, etc., can be found in the introduction.

54. This commentary (Toh 3807) is currently being translated by 84000 and, when ready, will be linked to the present text. For its authorship attribution, see as follows: Denkarma folio 5.a; see also Hermann-Pfandt 514. Phangthangma, p. 54; see also Kawagoe 767. Chomden Rikpai Raltri, folio 70.b.3; see also Schaeffer and van der Kuijp 2009, p. 263. Butön, folio 156.a.

55. For details of these Tibetan lineages of Prajñāpāramitā study, see Kongtrul, pp. 227–28, translated in Stein and Zangpo 2013, pp. 258–60; see also Brunnhölzl 2010, vol. 1, pp. 43–46.

56. Dölpopa explicitly emphasized the importance, in his opinion, of the Bṛhaṭṭīkā commentarial tradition over that of the Abhisamayālaṃkāra.

57. The three approaches provide much of the framework for the commentary on the three long sūtras, The Long Explanation of the Noble Perfection of Wisdom in One Hundred Thousand, Twenty-Five Thousand, and Eighteen Thousand Lines (Toh 3808). A very brief summary is given here but for more details see Sparham (2022b), i.46. The term “three approaches” is also applied in other commentaries, e.g., Haribhadra’s Abhisamayālaṃkārāloka (Toh 3791), to the sūtras being of three different lengths; see Brunnhölzl (2010), vol. 1 p. 35.

58. See Sparham (2022b), i.50.

59. See Sparham (2022b), 2.17 and n.247.

60. Kimura’s Sanskrit edition is divided into eight sections corresponding to the eight topics, as is the Tibetan “eight-chapter” Tengyur version.

61. It should be noted that only the three long sūtras start with the Buddha’s statement to Śāriputra and the subsequent teaching to him (and in the Ten Thousand, Toh 11, the same material prompted by an initial question from Śāriputra). In contrast, in the Eight Thousand, Toh 12, the Buddha’s request to Subhūti is the initial passage and the briefer equivalent of the Śāriputra chapter only comes afterward.

62. The distinction is found in Pali in the Aṅguttaranikāya (AN 1.89) and in Sanskrit and Tibetan in several Mahāyāna sūtras, including the Śūraṃgamasamādhisūtra (Toh 132, Degé Kangyur vol. 55, mdo sde, da, F.305.b). Detailed accounts of how Śāriputra became a disciple of the Buddha are to be found in The Chapter on Going Forth (Toh 1-1) and The Ratnaketu Dhāranī (Toh 138). Interestingly, The Chapter on Going Forth (1.399) adds a “foremost” distinction that we have not identified elsewhere, that of being foremost among those with great pratibhāna (“confidence” or “inspired eloquence”).

63. See Lamotte 2001, p. 508.

64. The Eight Thousand (Toh 12), in contrast, starts with the Buddha’s request to Subhūti. See n.61.

65. The second of these distinctions is mentioned in the present sūtra (4.52, 6.174). Both distinctions are found in Pali in the Aṅguttaranikāya (AN 1.201–2) and in Sanskrit and Tibetan in several Mahāyāna sūtras, including the Śūraṃgamasamādhisūtra (Toh 132, Degé Kangyur vol. 55, mdo sde, da, F.305.b). The first of the two is dakṣineyānām agryaḥ in Sanskrit, and the second usually araṇavihāriṇām agryaḥ, rendered in Tibetan (Mvy 6366) as nyon mongs pa med par gnas pa rnams kyi mchog, “foremost among those dwelling free of afflicted mental states,” but also sometimes araṇyavihāriṇām agryaḥ, interpreted as “dwelling in seclusion.”

66. Ekottarāgama (Taishō 125) and other works detailed in Lamotte 1962, p. 155, n.27.

67. The Majjhimanikāya (MN 139) mentions his dwelling in nonconflict at the end of an explanation of that topic. He and his nephew Saddha are mentioned in the Aṅguttaranikāya (AN 11.14); and his meditation is commended by the Buddha in the Udāna (Ud 6.7). The Theragāthā (1.1) contains a verse on him that is said to refer to his practicing in retreat in Rājagṛha, and the prose legend associated with it in Dhammapāla’s commentary, the Paramatthadīpani (see Rhys Davids 1913, pp. 1–6), states that he was the younger brother of the benefactor Anāthapiṇḍada, that he was inspired to go forth during the dedication of the Jetavana presented to the Buddha by his brother, and that he attained the state of arhat through the practice of loving kindness. The legend also includes the story of how King Bimbisāra promised him a hermitage but then forgot to build it, causing a drought since the gods did not want to let him suffer in the open as he meditated.

68. The story is in the Vinayakṣudrakavastu (Toh 6, Degé Kangyur vol. 11, ’dul ba, da, F.92.a), and relates the story of Subhūti remaining in meditative seclusion in Rājagṛha instead of coming to greet the Buddha in Sāṃkāśya on his descent from Trāyastrimśa. The narrative is reproduced in the Dazhidu lun 137a (see Lamotte 2001, pp. 208, et seq.) and is also mentioned in Lamotte 1962, p. 155, n.27; it appears in abridged form in Tāranātha’s biography of the Buddha compiled from Vinaya sources. On MSV works in Chinese, see previous note n.66.

69. For examples, see The Ratnaketu Dhāraṇī (Toh 138, 3.66); The Dharma Council (Dharmasaṅgīti, Toh 238, 1.399); The Acceptance That Tames Beings with the Sky-Colored Method of Perfect Conduct (Toh 263, 7.37); and especially chapter 4 of Unraveling the Intent (Toh 106), in which Subhūti discusses with the Buddha the ultimate single nature common to all dharmas. But see also n.72.

70. See The White Lotus of the Good Dharma (Toh 113), chapter 6.

71. As in The Prophecy Concerning Strīvivarta (Toh 190), most of which comprises a discussion between the bodhisattva Strīvivarta and Subhūti, drawing on the latter’s two characterizations as a worthy recipient of offerings and a specialist in the profound; and in Subhūti’s reasons for not wishing to call on Vimalakīrti in chapter 3 of The Teaching of Vimalakīrti (Toh 176), drawing on his role as a recipient of offerings.

72. The stories in Pali commentaries (and alluded to in some Kangyur texts, too) that outline Subhūti’s other distinction, of being “foremost among those worthy of receiving offerings,” relate that when on his alms round he would stop outside each house and meditate deeply and at length on loving kindness for the householder before receiving any donation of food. This other detail, according to which‍—even in a quite different area than his unceasing pursuit of emptiness and the ultimate view‍—it is again apparent that he is uncompromisingly ready to take the Buddha’s teachings to their utmost limits, nicely rounds out what we can glean of his personal character.

73. See The Play in Full 6.53, 15.27, 15.123, 18.31, 23.52, and particularly 25.24.

74. See Dharmachakra Translation Committee, trans., The Heart of the Perfection of Wisdom, the Blessed Mother (Toh 21), 2022.

75. See Dharmachakra Translation Committee (2022), i.4 et seq.

76. bka’ yang dag pas, here and in the Twenty-Five Thousand, is one Tibetan rendering in the canonical texts of the Skt. samyagājñā, the other being the more widespread yang dag pa’i shes pas (“by perfect understanding”), as in the equivalent phrase in the Eighteen Thousand, 1.2 and as recommended in Mahāvyutpatti 1087. See also The Jewel Cloud (Toh 231), 1.2 and n.21. Vetter, p. 67, n. 53, says it “deviates from the translation” of it as a verb (kun shes pa, “fully understand”).

77. Bṭ1: “It means thus, in the order explained above, those who possess the inspired eloquence that was unimpeded are simply in possession of the good quality of being extremely skillful at the ‘inexhaustible’ many types of means for teaching the doctrine to beings.” Vetter, p. 29, n. 66, says “one would rather expect a kṣaya belonging to pratisaṃvid,” suggesting as an alternative translation “had comprehended the teaching, the inexhaustible mode of the detailed and thorough knowledges.”

78. Edgerton s.v. kuhana: “hypocrisy, specifically display of behavior designed to stimulate laymen to give gifts.”

79. “Realized and integrated” renders rtogs pa khong du chud pa. Cp. Kimura, 1–1:1, gambhīra­dharma­kṣānti­pāraṅgatair; Ghoṣa, Gilgit gaṃbhīra­dharma­kṣānti­paramagatiṃ gatair, “gone to the furthest state that is a forbearance for the profound ultimate attribute.”

80. By contrast, Bṭ1 renders this compound “they had overcome karma and afflicted mental states so they had overcome the hostile forces” and says it “means they had eliminated the enemy‍—karma and afflicted mental states.”

81. Bṭ1: “ ‘Difficult for all śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas to understand’ teaches that śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas cannot understand the knowledge, aspiration, and range of practice of those bodhisattvas.” So too Vetter, p. 70.

82. The correct reading is uncertain. Kimura, 1–1:1 ananta­kalpa­koṭīniḥsaraṇa­kuśalair; Gilgit 1v2–3 (Zacchetti, p. 366; Vetter, p. 72), ananta­kalpa(ko)[ṭī]nirdeśa­jñāna­nirḥsaraṇa­kuśalair; Ghoṣa p. 4 ananta­kalpa­koṭi­nirdeśa­jñātibhiḥ saraṇyākuśalair? Edg s.v. niḥsaraṇa, citing Mvy 853, which cites this same passage (like Kimura) only with niḥsaraṇa (as in Bṭ3, 20a4 (1.110), nges par ’byung ba), suggests ye shes kyi (not ye shes kyis) might go with ’byung ba; cp. yid ’byung ba (nirvid) (“disgust,” “renunciation”) in the sense of a mental emancipation from something otherwise believed to be real and a problem. Bṭ1, p. 650, also has kyi ’byung (“of”) and, like Bṭ3, says the ’byung ba here rendered “emancipation” means just that the bodhisattvas “have finished with and gone beyond” eons of teaching and working for beings, so, because of their practice of perseverance, at this level are effortless.

83. This and the next are in an inverted order in D, which has not been followed here.

84. Here and in the Twenty-Five Thousand, D reads shes pa phra ba, whereas the Ten Thousand has phra ba mkhyen pa. The Long Explanation (Toh 3808 1.123) here lists various aspects of this “subtle knowledge” or “knowledge that engages in subtlety” (which it renders as ye shes phra ba) with regard to conduct and so forth.

85. Gilgit (Zacchetti, p. 367) and Ghoṣa, p. 5, pratītya­nirdeśa­kuśalair; Vetter: “skilled in teaching dependent on the audience.” The brten pa rtogs pa is a don ’gyur. Emend Urga bden pa to brten pa. Bṭ1 glosses bden pa (emend to brten pa) rtogs pa with gzhan gyis rtogs par bya ba’i phyir bstan pa.

86. Gilgit, Ghoṣa omit. Bṭ1 glosses it with “…stopping those actions and afflicted mental states of self and others through skillful means.”

87. Bṭ1: “They do not ultimately view such scriptural doctrine as an existing thing, but conventionally, on account of their skill in the ‘ways of the doctrine,’ the various forms of teaching the levels and perfections and dharmas on the side of awakening and so on, they are fearless and are not scared, whatever the audience, when they differentiate and teach those doctrines.”

88. This renders Gilgit yathātmyāvatāraṇā­kuśalaiḥ. Bṭ1 says this “teaches the skill in entry into the range of the knowledge of the tathāgatas. The range of the knowledge of the tathāgatas, furthermore, is twofold: the correct comprehension of the ultimate nature of things and the correct comprehension of the conventional nature of things. As for the correct comprehension of the ultimate nature, ultimately all phenomena are simply just the true nature, beyond causal signs and ideas. As for the correct comprehension of the conventional nature, it is the unsurpassed conduct of the blessed buddhas‍—bringing beings to maturity, purifying a buddhafield, and so on. That is the meaning of being skilled in bringing about correct comprehension of the range of the tathāgatas.”

89. Ghoṣa, p. 6, sarva­buddhotpādopasaṃkramaṇa­kuśalair; Bṭ1, p. 660: “This is teaching that having traveled to whichever world system in which the buddhas appear, they are skilled in worshiping and serving them.”

90. Ghoṣa, p. 6, aparimita­buddhādhyeṣaṇa­kuśalair; Bṭ1, p. 660: “This means that having gone into the presence of all those blessed lord buddhas, as many as there are, maintaining themselves in innumerable, immeasurable world systems, they request them to turn the wheel of the Dharma, and request those thinking to enter into final nirvāṇa to stay for a long time.”

91. Bṭ1, p. 661: “This teaches that they possess the result from having completed the meditative stabilities that are the cause of the extrasensory powers. It means they are skilled, through the power of having earlier meditated on many types of meditative stabilities, at reveling in the various types of miraculous powers and working in various ways for the welfare of beings.”

92. Ghoṣa, p. 6, and Kimura, 1–1:1, Sārthavāha. This is also the form found in the Twenty-Five Thousand.

93. This name is not attested, except perhaps in Gilgit, 1v11, where the illegible letter that Zacchetti, p. 367, n. 6, renders as pā (following Ghoṣa’s bhadrapāla) may in fact be ba.

94. Here and in the following the names have been rendered as ending in -mati in accord with the Tib blo gros, not as expected with the Skt possessive ending -matin.

95. mthu dam pas rnam par gnon pa in place of rab kyi rtsal gyis rnam par gnon pa.

96. Ghoṣa, p. 6; Kimura, 1–1:2, has Anupamacintin.

97. Gilgit, 2r3, Vyūharāja (rnam par bkod pa’i rgyal po).

98. dgongs pa is honorific for dran pa; cf. Bṭ1, p. 662, dran pa mngon du gzhag pa bstan pa’i phyir.

99. ’phrul gyi spyan is the pre-reform translation of divyacakṣus (“divine eye”).

100. In both the Skt and Tib, in each of the six sets of three words the same verb is used with the same prefixes indicating greater intensity.

101. This reading (also in the Twenty-Five Thousand and the Tengyur version of the Twenty-Five Thousand) appears to render mṛduka and snigdha not literally, but in accord with what they are attempting to convey; cf. Mppś (English translation), pp. 376–77, “the Buddha first shows his miraculous power to the beings of the tri­sāhasra­mahā­sāhasra­loka­dhātu; then, when their minds are softened (mṛduka, snigdha), he preaches the Dharma to them. This is why he shakes the earth in six ways.” Bṭ1, p. 667: “Even when it shakes in six ways, beings do not become alarmed, scared, and so on, and the mountains, ground, vegetation, and so on become easily traversable, verdant, and delightful.” On nyams su bde ba cf. Negi s.v. nyams bde ba.

102. log par ltung/lhung ba, vinipāta.

103. This D reading, absent from K, N, and so on, is supported by both Ghoṣa and Gilgit and in large part by the Eighteen Thousand.

104. This renders Ghoṣa, p. 21, prakṛtyātmabhāvaḥ (prakṛtyā ātmabhāvaḥ), literally “his own body, in its basic nature.” Cf. Kimura, 1–1:6, ātmabhāvaṃ prākṛtam, “an ordinary body” (Zacchetti, pp. 266–67, n. 202, citing Lamotte, vol. 1, p. 517, “corps ordinaire”).

105. This renders Ghoṣa, p. 21, śuddhā­vāsakāyikā­devanikāyā ābhāsvarā brahmakāyikāḥ; cp. Kimura, 1–1:6, śubhakṛtsnā ābhāsvarā brahmakāyikā. Here and in the Twenty-Five Thousand the name kun snang dang ba (ābhāsvara) refers to the third of the three divisions of the gods of the second meditative concentration in the form realm. The rendering ’od gsal ba (ābhāsvara) is more frequent; dang ba is perhaps gdangs for svara. That the order is unusual here is corroborated by the detailed explanation in Mppś (English translation), pp. 409–12.

106. Nakamura (2014, p. 516) renders these “strewing [flowers] near [to Buddha], strewing [flowers] in front [of Buddha] and strewing [flowers] all around [Buddha].” The Tib says, literally, “strew down on, strew over, and strew right over.”

107. Again, in each of the three words the same verb is used with prefixes indicating greater intensity. Ghoṣa, p. 22, lambante sma pralambante sma abhipralambante sma.

108. This is the spelling, not bṛha(t) in Ghoṣa (the only place these divisions are attested to our knowledge).

109. A literal rendering is “in the form of a youth” (kumāra­bhūta). Bṭ1, pp. 674–74: They are “bodhisattvas seated in the presence of the Blessed One Śākyamuni, among whom some naturally have few attachments and from first producing the thought are celibate and have completed the ten levels, and some are bodhisattvas who have attained a standing on the eighth level and above free from effort and conceptualization. They are like young princes, and they are suitable to be given the empowerment as the regent (rgyal tshab) of a blessed lord buddha, a Dharma king, because they are standing at the level of a successor of a Dharma king.”

110. der nyams par gyur ta re renders Ghoṣa, p. 30, ma tatra kṣanethāḥ.

111. “Since” renders upādāya, rendered phyir in Tib, in the sense that the perfection comes after what is preceded by it (phyi ru).

112. “False imagination” renders yongs su rtog pa. Kimura, 1–1:28, vikṣiptacittān; Ghoṣa, p. 56, avikṣepāśaṅkaraṇatām (“no disturbance and nothing that makes you anxious”); Gilgit (Zacchetti), p. 376, dhyānamadānāsvādanatām, and the Twenty-Five Thousand and the Eighteen Thousand, which share the same reading, all differ.

113. Emend skye ba, “birth,” to C skyo ba (Ghoṣa, Kimura, Gilgit udvega), “disillusionment.”

114. Kimura, 1–1:29, aśuci (“uncleanliness”).

115. This renders advaya (in all editions of the Hundred Thousand) in place of Ghoṣa, Kimura, and Gilgit anvaya; Twenty-Five Thousand, ka 28a7 (2.5), rjes su ’gro ba; Eighteen Thousand, ka 12a5 (2.4), and Bṭ1, p. 703, rjes su rtogs pa.

116. Ghoṣa yathāruta; Gilgit yathāva(t); Bṭ1, p. 705, and Bṭ3 4.55: “have an understanding and knowledge of all the languages and speech of hell beings, animals, ghosts, gods, humans, and Brahmā deities.”

117. Cf. the entry on vitakka by Bhikkhu Anālayo in Encyclopedia of Buddhism, edited by G.P. Malalasekera et al, vol. 8 (2009), pp. 14–15 s.v. vitakka and jhāna. The “initial application of mind” (Tib rnam par rtog pa; Skt vitarka) and “sustained application of mind” (Tib rnam par dpyod pa; Skt vicāra) are necessary before reaching the stillness of the second meditative concentration. These are not gross conceptual states that give rise to lust or hatred. The author makes a rather nice association of the two terms with the way the mind works when somebody is going to say something. It may be fully articulated within the mind before it is said, or it may not be. In both cases there is a deep mental effort, as it were, not a gross level of thinking, necessary to get out what you want to say, and in that sense there is a level of effort in the first concentration absent on the higher levels.

118. This renders PSP, 1–1:30, anājñātamājñāsyāmīndriya, “the faculty of coming to understand what one has not yet understood” (cf. Abhidharmakośa 2.4), but both Ghoṣa and Gilgit have ājñāsyāmītīndriya, “the ‘I will come to know’ faculty.”

119. The translators read ājñātāvīndriya.

120. Ghoṣa, p. 67, and Gilgit sarvvākāravaropetaṃ sarvvajñajñānam abhisamboddhukāmena. Cp. Kimura, 1–1:30 (le’u brgyad ma, 27b7), which has been edited to perfectly fit with the Abhisamayālaṃkāra: sarvajñatāṃ jñānena darśanena cāvalokyātikramitukāmena bodhisattvena mahāsattvena prajñāpāramitā bhāvayitavyā, mārgajñatāṃ paripūrayitukāmena sarvākārajñatām anuprāptukāmena.

121. Bṭ1, p. 722: “This teaches the result of the bodhisattvas’ knowledge of all aspects of the path, because bodhisattvas perfect the knowledge of all aspects of the path, and having understood the thoughts and behavior of beings, establish what is beneficial for beings.”

122. The explanation at Bṭ3 4.80 and Bṭ1, p. 722, reads the compound sarva­vāsanānusaṃdhi­kleśa­prahāṇa as a dvandva to mean “abandon all propensities, connections, and afflicted mental states”: “It teaches the result of the knowledge, furnished with the best of all aspects, of a knower of all aspects. Propensities left by action, propensities left by afflicted mental states, and propensities left by life [Bṭ3 “birth”] are the three sorts of propensities; connections to action, connections to afflicted mental states, and connections to life are the three sorts of connections, because the connections on account of dependent origination are three. The meaning is that they ‘want to abandon’ all ‘propensities,’ all ‘connections,’ and all ‘afflicted mental states.’ ” See The Precious Discourse on the Blessed One’s Extensive Wisdom That Leads to Infinite Certainty (Toh 99), 3.162, and Mppś (English translation) vol. 5, p. 2029, n. 399.

123. This scripture sometimes says “five” and sometimes “six” extrasensory powers (abhijñā). Bṭ1 says the sixth is “knowledge of the extinction of contaminants/inflows.”

124. Bṭ1, p. 725: “It says this because bodhisattvas are focused on the welfare of all beings. So, because they have to work for their welfare, they correctly understand what thoughts they are thinking and what conduct they have faith in and so on.”

125. This differs slightly from both the Twenty-Five Thousand 2.9, and the Eighteen Thousand 2.7. Cf. PSP, 1–1:32, and le’u brgyad ma, ga 28b7 ff.

126. Only D Hundred Thousand has this reading, supported by Z, p. 377, sthātukāmena; the Twenty-Five Thousand, Eighteen Thousand, and le’u brgyad ma have spyod.

127. This renders spos.

128. D omits.

129. Ghoṣa, Gilgit, and PSP omit.

130. At Twenty-Five Thousand 2.19 the same Tib is rendered into English as “all worlds within the whole infinity of the realm of phenomena and the very reaches of the realm of space.”

131. This renders snying po byang chub. The bodhimaṇḍapa is the “choice ring” (like the cream, which is the essence of the milk, that makes a rim on a bucket) within which enlightenment occurs.

132. sems bskyed pa gcig gis. In other instances in the text, sems bskyed pa (cittotpāda) has been interpreted as an abbreviated form of the technical term byang chub kyi sems bskyed pa (bodhicittotpāda), and thus sems bskyed pa has been rendered “setting of the mind on enlightenment,” but in the present context this term seems more likely to mean simply “just by having the thought.”

133. Bṭ1, p. 732: “Who want to understand the ultimate and conventional aspect and defining characteristic of all conditioned and unconditioned phenomena.” The Twenty-Five Thousand, ka 32a3 (2.26), adds de bzhin nyid.

134. Bṭ1, p. 732: “It is true that there is no difference in the real nature but it is still divided threefold on account of a differentiation of its basis and the entry into it. The entry into it is threefold because of the entry into by the bodhisattvas’ knowledge of all aspects of paths, the blessed lord buddhas’ all-aspect omniscience, and the śrāvakas’ and pratyekabuddhas’ knowledge of all the dharmas. Among them, the thoroughly established nature of inner and outer phenomena such as forms and sounds and so on is called ‘the real nature of all phenomena’; the unmistaken real nature, the one and only real nature, suchness, the unchanging real nature, and the genuine, definitive real nature are the real nature of all phenomena, and are simply synonyms for the unmistaken realization by the bodhisattvas’ knowledge of all aspects of paths. So, it is teaching that they want to comprehend by entering into it with the bodhisattvas’ knowledge of all aspects of paths.”

135. Alternatively, the dharmadhātu is the “dharma constituent” under which rubric all phenomena are subsumed. Bṭ1, p. 733: “The essential nature of the dharmakāya (‘body of qualities/ultimate attributes’) is the basis of all the dharmas (‘qualities’), the powers, the fearlessnesses, and so on, of a buddha, hence it is called the ‘realm of phenomena/dharma constituent.’ So it is saying that those who want to comprehend such a realm of phenomena /dharma constituent by entering into it as knowers of a tathāgata’s all-aspect omniscience should train in the perfection of wisdom.”

136. Bṭ1, p. 733: “The nirvāṇa without any remaining aggregates of the śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas is called the suchness at the very limit of reality. So it means that those who want to comprehend such a suchness at the very limit of reality by entering into it with a śravaka’s or pratyekabuddha’s knowledge of all the dharmas should train in the perfection of wisdom. It is teaching that they want to attain the qualities of an eighth-level bodhisattva.”

137. This renders asaṃkhyeya and aprameya, two fabulously high numbers.

138. Ghoṣa oṣadhi.

139. This renders the Tib literally, but it makes better sense to take the earlier words in the Skt compounds (which both end in saṃcaya, “collection”)‍—the trees and so on, and the rocks and so on‍—as incorporated in the last words (“forests” and “land”).

140. “Such that” renders the zhes (*iti) at the end; the Twenty-Five Thousand supplies ’dod pas, “wanting” or “wishing that.”

141. The translators read eva in place of Ghoṣa, p. 90, evam. “Based on” renders gnas pas (niśrāya).

142. The translators perhaps read a form of saṃbhū in place of Ghoṣa, p. 91, samāpad.

143. Alternatively, sarvva­dharmma­prajñānatānupalambhayogena means “by way of not apprehending a wisdom that knows all phenomena.”

144. Bṭ1, p. 736: “The attributes (guṇa, yon tan) are twofold: ultimate attributes and conventional attributes. The ultimate attribute is the intrinsically pure nature of the dharma body. The conventional attributes are the powers, fearlessnesses, eighteen distinct qualities, and so on.

145. Bṭ1, p. 736: “ ‘Conditioned phenomena’ (saṃskṛta) are made (kṛta) from the coming together and assembly (saṃ-) of causes and conditions. There are contaminated and uncontaminated ones. Of them, the contaminated are phenomena included in the three realms. The uncontaminated are in essence the path of the noble ones. The correct knowledge of those phenomena in their ultimate and conventional modes insofar as it has got to the limit of, has comprehended, them, is ‘perfection’ that has ‘gone beyond.’ ”

146. Bṭ1, p. 736: “The contaminated are form and so on, those in regard to which afflicted mental states arise. The uncontaminated are the levels, the perfections, the nirvāṇas and so on, which is to say, those in regard to which afflicted mental states do not emerge.”

147. Bṭ1, p. 737: “Virtuous phenomena are nonattachment, nonconfusion, nonhatred and so on. Nonvirtuous phenomena are attachment, confusion, hatred and so on.”

148. Bṭ1, p. 737: “Ordinary phenomena are from the end of the level of practice on account of belief on down. Extraordinary phenomena are from the first level on up to the buddha level.”

149. Bṭ1, p. 737: “The material phenomena appear and are to be seen and are obstructing. Immaterial phenomena (without form) do not appear and are not to be seen and are not obstructing.”

150. Bṭ1, p. 737: “Determinate phenomena‍—phenomena that can be prophesied/are objects of moral inquiry (vyākṛta)‍—are what are suitable to be prophesied, such as, ‘With a thought without attachment, without hatred, and without confusion, the practices of generosity, discipline, and so on cause obtaining a high status and many enjoyments.’ and so on. Indeterminate phenomena‍—phenomena that are cannot be prophesied /are not objects of moral inquiry‍—are the results of the practice of art and music and so on, in regard to which there is no certainty at all about whether they will bring happiness or suffering.”

151. Bṭ1, p. 737: “The phenomena that are certain (niyata) are the certainties of being in a śrāvaka, a pratyekabuddha, or a bodhisattva lineage. Phenomena that are not certain are those that come about relative to spiritual friends and bad friends.”

152. Bṭ1, pp. 737–38: “The phenomena to do with escaping (’byung ba, Ghoṣa, Gilgit nairyānika) are those with the nature of escaping from the three realms: the śrāvaka results of stream enterer and so on; the levels of bodhisattvas, the first level and so on; the thirty-seven dharmas on the side of awakening [note that Āryavimuktisena (Pensa, p. 20) only lists this]; and the perfections and so on that serve to cause the attainment of nirvāṇa. Those to do with no escaping are the opposite of these, the phenomena that serve to cause saṃsāra.” “To do with escaping” or “causes emergence” is the definition of the truth of the path, the fourth of the four truths of the noble ones.

153. Bṭ1, p. 738: “The phenomena that aid getting worse (’grib pa’i tshul can; Ghoṣa, Gilgit hānabhāgīya) are afflictive obscurations and obscurations to knowledge. Phenomena [that aid getting] better (khyad par gyi tshul can, viśeṣabhāgīya) are those that serve to counteract those two obscurations.”

154. “Attributes,” used here in place of “phenomena,” renders the same word (chos, dharma).

155. Bṭ1, p. 738: “The phenomena of ordinary beings are the experiences (spyod pa) of the mistaken view of the impermanent as permanent, suffering as happiness, the unclean as clean, and the selfless as a self. The phenomena of the noble ones are the opposite of those: the views of impermanence, suffering, uncleanliness, and selflessness.”

156. Bṭ1, p. 738: “The phenomena of those in training are the phenomena from stream enterer to non-returner, and of those not in training‍—the phenomenon that is the result of a worthy one.”

157. Bṭ1, p. 738: “The phenomena of śrāvakas are the entry in, and so on, by way of the four truths of the noble ones, and the phenomena of pratyekabuddhas are the entry in, and so on, by way of the realization of dependent origination.”

158. Bṭ1, p. 738: “The phenomena of bodhisattvas are a bodhisattva’s practices from the level of practice on account of belief up to the tenth level. The phenomena of buddhas are in the form of the result of those included in the buddha level: the five transcendental knowledges, the powers, the fearlessnesses, and so on.”

159. Bṭ1, p. 739: “ ‘Want to go beyond all phenomena’ summarizes all the phenomena spoken of before, which is to say, the correct realization of the ultimate and conventional characteristic marks of all the phenomena spoken of before.”

160. “The very limit of nonarising” renders ma skye ba’i mthar phyin pa; Ghoṣa, Gilgit anutpattikoṭim anuprāptukāmena. Bṭ1: “These are explaining that bodhisattvas at the tenth level, in order to attain the good quality of realizing the ultimate characteristic mark of all the phenomena spoken of earlier, have to practice the perfection of wisdom, which is to say, the ultimate characteristic mark is called ‘suchness,’ ‘the very limit of nonarising,’ and ‘the very limit of reality.’ It means they want to go to the very limit of those.”

161. Bṭ1, p. 739: “Because of their transcendental knowledge, force, and miraculous power, the bodhisattvas abiding on the tenth level are distinguished as superior to śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas, so being the main, the supreme, the best ones they ‘have precedence.’ So, those who want to attain such a quality should train in the perfection of wisdom. That is the meaning.”

162. Bṭ1, pp. 739–40: “Through their force of the empowerment and miraculous powers attained by bodhisattvas on the tenth level, even in one moment, minute, and second, they have the capacity to offer unsurpassed, inconceivable service.”

163. nang gi ’khor du ’gyur pa, =adhyātmaparivāra? Ghoṣa atyantaparivāra, Gilgit abhyantaparivāra. Bṭ1, p. 740: “Bodhisattvas on the tenth level, because they are obstructed by a single birth on the buddha level and because they are simply a cut of the sheerest cloth (dar las chod pa tsam) away from the transcendental knowledge of a knower of all, are close by in the circle of a buddha, so they are ‘present in the intimate retinue.’ ”

164. Bṭ1, p. 740: “Because bodhisattvas on the tenth level have become like buddhas, they are the place worshiped and respected by those among the gods who have the greatest force and magical power‍—Indra, Brahmā, and so on. So it means wanting to have a retinue of many like those.

165. Gilgit (Zacchetti, p. 383): dane ’navagṛhītcittena.

166. Bṭ1, p. 741: “The bodhisattvas at the tenth level are unobstructed when it comes to explaining the doctrine and applying themselves to the welfare of beings. What they apply themselves to is achieved so it is not in vain. Their establishing beings in the five bases of meritorious action is not in vain.”

167. Tib sngon gyi sbyor ba dang ldan pa is a literal rendering of pūrvva­yoga­sahagatā (caryā), “together with, connected with the past” (= “formerly”).

168. Gilgit, p. 383, ṛddhi­vidhi­vikurvitam; Ghoṣa, p. 99, ṛddhi­vikurvvitum.

169. “Retain” renders yang dag par gzung, sandhāraya (“to bear [in mind] perfectly”).

170. Tib dbyang kyis bsnyad pa; literally “the melodious narrations.”

171. This renders Tib ched du brjod pa literally. Skt udāna also means those statements made by all the buddhas (about impermanence, attachment, the path, and so on) that cause pleasure to rise up in the hearer.

172. This is supplied based on Bṭ1, p. 743, ’jig rten gyi khams dag gi bar; cf. Edgerton, s.v. lokāntarikā, “interstice(s) between the worlds.”

173. Ghoṣa sattvebhyo ’kṣuṇṇadharmmaṃ deśayeyaṃ (“a doctrine that has not been stomped down on”); Gilgit omits. Tib kṣud (“to tread down on”). Bṭ1, p. 745: “Having taught that those who want to obtain the qualities and greatness of bodhisattvas on the tenth level should then persevere at the perfection of wisdom, to teach that those who want to obtain the qualities and greatness of buddhas should persevere at the perfection of wisdom, it says ‘who want to train in the tathāgatas’ way of carrying themselves’ and so on…An ‘elephant’ is nāga in Sanskrit and nāga also refers to the best, the most excellent, the chief [MW s.v. nāga, “the best or most excellent of any kind”], and also refers to an elephant, a snake, and a buddha. In this context, the manner or method of the seeing of the blessed lord buddhas is to ‘look down as an elephant looks.’ [The following is also at Bṭ3 4.175] They do not look up at what is above, look down at what is below, look to the sides at what is to the right or left, twist their neck to look at what is behind, concentrate to look at what is far off, or look without concentrating at what is close by. This says that however they are carrying themselves and however they are looking, they ‘look down as an elephant looks’ because they look at all beings and all dharmas in all world systems.”

174. The meditative stability “that has stretched out like a lion” or “yawned like a lion” is described in detail in 8.443.

175. Bṭ1, p. 746: This “teaches the result of bringing to maturity. Having trampled with an overwhelming presence, through the force of that they have established [beings] in the good doctrine; they have brought them to maturity.”

176. Here and below, the reference to “thousand-spoked wheels” on the soles of the feet is a reference to the image or motif of a thousand-spoked wheel on the soles of the Buddha’s feet.

177. Add brjod du med pa’am; Ghoṣa anabhilāpya.

178. These are the names in Ghoṣa. Edgerton s.v. vṛhatphala treats vṛha(t) as an alternative for bṛhat (“big”).

179. Delete shing (“tree”) that is not supported by either Gilgit bodhimaṇḍam upasamkkrameyam or Ghoṣa, p. 113, bodhimaṇḍam upasaṃkramyayām, and makes better sense of the following paragraph where both have bodhivṛkṣatale (“on the ground of the Bodhi tree”). Kimura 1–1:49 keeps bodhi­maṇḍa­druma­mūlam (“foot of the tree at the seat of enlightenment”) for both and changes the verb from “approach” to “spread out the mat at.”

180. These are the names in Ghoṣa. Edgerton s.v. vṛhatphala treats vṛha(t) as an alternative for bṛhat (“big”).

181. This is problematic. “Is without an entourage of queens” is supported by Gilgit 16v5 bodhi­sattvasyāmaithuna­saṃyoga-prasthānatāyai and made explicit by Haribhadra at PSP, 1–1:52, maithuna­dharma­parivarjanena (“given up his entourage of queens”), and most tellingly the following lhag bcas (te) that strongly suggests the reason for the gods being overjoyed. Alternatively, keeping in mind the dbul bar bya’o rendered “we will give” [the begging bowls] just above, it may have the sense of “we will have presented them an entourage of queens,” supported by Ghoṣa, p. 116, bodhisattvasya maithuna­saṃyoga­prasthānatāyai. Here the la don (de la) and the absence of a byed sgra (-s) ending on the word preceding dbul might support this alternative translation, based on the thought that, of the twelve deeds, the gods are overjoyed at the marriage deed of Śākyamuni as the prince Siddhārtha prior to the great renunciation. Cf. Bṭ1, pp. 749–50: “ ‘Still, in order to establish beings in awakening these [bodhisattvas] practice celibacy. They do not engage in any sexual acts,’ and so on, teaches the pure aspiration and pure behavior of bodhisattvas practicing like that. As for ‘Blessed One, do bodhisattva great beings definitely have a father, a mother, a wife, sons, and daughters?’ and so on, having given the above description of the good qualities of the bodhisattvas, following on from the sons and daughters of good families having made the commitment to be the mother and father and so on of those bodhisattvas, and the Four Great Kings making the commitment to supply the entourage of queens, in response to Śāradvatīputra’s inquiry about whether bodhisattvas definitely have to have girls and so on, the Blessed One explains that actual bodhisattvas do not enjoy the five sorts of sense objects out of attachment, but abiding in conventional truth, without attachment, and with skillful means, through the four ways of gathering a retinue they gather beings together and use the five sorts of sense objects in order to establish them in the doctrine.”

182. “Enjoyment” renders rnam par spyod pa. Ghoṣa, p. 117, and Gilgit, p. 387, vihāra­pratilabhda.

183. K and N, supported by Ghoṣa and Gilgit, only have these first two alternatives, probably supported by Bṭ1, p. 750: “teaches that…‘they practice,’ and ‘they do not practice’ cannot ultimately be apprehended.” The translation here follows D that is Eighteen Thousand.

184. Alternatively, “physical forms are not empty of emptiness, and emptiness is not other than form.”

185. The Skt versions have darśana (“the seeing”); Tib mthong ba could also mean that. “Not really exist” renders yod pa ma yin pa (asat).

186. Here sgyu ma (“illusion”) is rendering kṛtrimaṃ, more usually bcos ma (“fabricated,” “artificial”).

187. Z, p. 206, n. 45: “Because naming is artificial in the cases of (of: with regard to) each single dharma; they [i.e. the states described in the preceding paragraph], having been imagined, are designated with an accidental appellation that is falsely imagined, and on the basis of [this] appellation they are clung to.”

188. This renders mngon par zhen. Although this is the expected translation, here and in the Twenty-Five Thousand the translators usually render forms of abhiniviś with mngon par ’chags. An alternative translation: “From convention they are settled down on as real.”

189. An alternative translation: “They do not falsely project them, and they are not settled down on as real.”

190. Gilgit, 18r9–10; Ghoṣa omits.

191. The translators render svabhāva by ngo bo here to differentiate it from prakṛti; just below where the distinction is not necessary, they use rang bzhin for svabhāva. Ghoṣa, p. 129, anutpāda­prakṛtikāḥ svabhāvaśūnyāḥ.

192. The translators render the gerundives in -tavya by bzla’o and here, the future first person singular -syāmi, with bzla bar bya’o.

193. The Twenty-Five Thousand, ka 47a (2.95), has byang chub (“path of enlightenment”). Bṭ1 (p. 755) glosses “bodhisattva” as “enlightenment.”

194. “Practice” renders chos (dharma).

195. This is also the reading in the Stok Twenty-Five Thousand, ka 61b2; the Eighteen Thousand, supported by Ghoṣa, p. 132; and Z, p. 391. Kimura and the D Twenty-Five Thousand differ.

196. “There are” renders yod pas, likely a rendering of āgamya (“thanks to”).

197. In the translation of the Twenty-Five Thousand, “discerned” takes yod pa to be the Tib translation of Gilgit, Kimura, and Ghoṣa’s prajñāyante.

198. Z suggests “metaphorically” as a translation for paryāyeṇa (rnam grangs kyis). In the Twenty-Five Thousand this is rendered “in a manner.”

199. LSPW uses “endeavor” and “join” for yuj and its derivatives; brtson does mean “to endeavor, make an effort,” but as Z notes, Kumārajīva’s Chinese translation of this includes the meaning “compliant with,” that is, fitting, or logically established.

200. “Flowing along together” renders lhan cig kun tu rgyu (saha samavasaratīti).

201. “Does not obstruct” renders thogs par byed pa (rūpayati) (more usually gzugs su yod pa/rung ba), the Abhidharma definition of form; each of the following is the definition of the respective aggregate.

202. “Without conjunction or disjunction” (’du ba dang ’bral ba) (=there is nothing together and there is nothing apart) renders ayogāviyoga (a secondary formation from yuj cognate with English “yoke,” and from which English gets the loan word “yoga”). The passive past participle yukta of the same root (yuj) has been rendered “engaged.” The sense of yuj is of different things coming or being together. The Tib renders yoga/viyoga here with the nonvoluntary/intransitive forms of coming/being together and separating/being separate. In the immediately following sections yojayati (“they cause X to engage with Y” or “they associate X with Y”) is a causal formed from the same root. The Tib renders it with the voluntary/transitive form of ’du (bsdud) and the voluntary/transitive ’byed (“to make separate”).

203. “Yogic practice” renders rnal ’byor (yoga).

204. Bṭ1, pp. 761–62: “From ‘Śāradvatīputra, bodhisattva great beings who practice accordingly are said to engage with the perfection of wisdom, but, even though they practice the perfection of wisdom in that manner, they do not observe that hey are either “engaged” or “not engaged” with physical forms’ up to ‘In this way, Śāradvatīputra, because all phenomena are without conjunction or disjunction, bodhisattva great beings are said to engage with the perfection of wisdom’ is an explanation presenting in a different form their entering into the defining mark of engagement on account of having abandoned the notion that they are engaging or not engaging, because they themselves have no notion that they are those who are doing something and because they do not have the wrong view of a self. From ‘Moreover, Śāradvatīputra, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, they neither cause emptiness to engage with nor to disengage from emptiness,’ up to ‘They neither cause wishlessness to engage with nor to disengage from wishlessness, nor the yogic practice of wishlessness’ is the three gateways to liberation. It teaches the defining mark of engaging as the abandonment of the notion of causing engagement or causing disengagement. Were there to be some attribute ‘emptiness’ that is an existent thing it might be possible to cause engagement and cause disengagement with something other than that emptiness, but because some attribute ‘emptiness’ that is an existent thing is not established at all they do not cause emptiness to engage with emptiness, nor disengage from it. Take ‘nor the yogic practice of emptiness with the emptiness meditative stability. It is saying that the meditative stability that is an existent thing also does not exist, so they do not cause the meditative stability to engage with it or disengage from it. Construe signlessness and wishlessness in the same way. ‘If you ask why, it is because there is neither conjunction nor disjunction in emptiness,’ and so on, teach the reason why the three gateways to liberation are not existent things.” Cf. Bṭ3 4.293.

205. “Enter into” (’jug) and the immediately following “understanding” (khong du chud) both render forms of the same verb avatṝ (Z, p. 394; PSP 1–1:66).

206. This means the emptiness of the defining marks particular to specific dharmas. This emptiness comes after “the emptiness of all phenomena” in the list of emptinesses. Bṭ1, p. 762: “It teaches that they neither engage with nor disengage from the five aggregates and so on, because their own intrinsic defining characteristics are not established.”

207. “Associate with” (sbyor) and the earlier “cause to engage” (bsdud) render the same word yojayati, a causal form of yuj. Each of the phenomena, starting with physical forms, is a basis for designating a “bodhisattva.” The negation is of the bodhisattva, at any level, and when enlightened, causing the engagement of any of the phenomena, that are the basis on which they are labeled a person, with its definition, for instance, or with a particular time period and so on.

208. Z, p. 394 (22v11), [try]adhvasamatāśūnyatām upādāya. Ghoṣa, p. 168, “because of the sameness of the [three] times” (adhvasamānatā upādāya); PSP, 1–1:67, “because of the emptiness of time” (adhvaśūnyatām upādāya).

209. PSP, 1–1:67, evaṃ yujyamānaḥ; Gilgit, Ghoṣa evaṃ yukta (Eighteen Thousand, ka 31b3 (3.36), brston), “engage.”

210. Ghoṣa, p. 168, and Z, p. 395 sarvajñatā; the Twenty-Five Thousand’s rnam pa thams cad mkhyen pa is Kimura, 1–1:67, sarvākārajñatā.

211. Here, and in all the following, the eva (Tib nyid: “the very,” “the actual”) has not been rendered separately in English.

212. Ghoṣa, p. 175, adhyātmaśūnyatām eva. It is not possible to write stong pa nyid nyid in Tib.

213. This is the reading in all versions, including the S Hundred Thousand, ka 180a7. It is also the reading in the following mtshan ma med pa section. In the smon pa med pa section that follows that, however, it reverts to listing all the fruits, starting from the fruit of having entered the stream, and leaves out “omniscience” (sarvajñatā).

214. “Stable” and “unstable,” or “secure” and “insecure,” render sāra and durbala. The Eighteen Thousand, 33a7 (3.41), has snying po can and nyam chung ba, “strong” or “weak.”

215. Gilgit, 24v8, but with nopaiti; the Eighteen Thousand, 33b2 (3.42), has khas mi len (“does not assert”) (since the plural “bodhisattva great beings” is used, this is “do not assert”) in place of mi dmigs pa (“does not apprehend”). Ghoṣa omits.

216. Gilgit, 25r4–5, and the Eighteen Thousand, 3.43 put “the emptiness of nonarising” after “the emptiness of all phenomena” in the list of emptinesses. (In the Eighteen Thousand these are actually rendered “the emptiness of all dharmas” followed by “the emptiness of the unproduced.”) They both, together with Ghoṣa, p. 250, omit “the emptiness of nonceasing.” Kimura, 1–1:72, tacks on the emptinesses of bhāva, abhāva, svabhāva, and parabhāva in place of these two emptinesses. The order in the list, from “the perfection of generosity” down to “the very limit of reality,” is problematic.

217. “Different sorts of miraculous ability,” the different kinds of them, or performances of them, renders rdzu ’phrul gyi rnam pa; Ghoṣa, p. 252, and Kimura, 1–1:72, ṛddhividhi.

218. This renders Ghoṣa, p. 252, sarvvākāraṃ sarvvābhijñā upalapsyate, not as “all extrasensory powers” but as “extrasensory powers that know all.”

219. “Have been born” renders skyes par gyur pa (upapanna).

220. The reading here, Gilgit, 25v4–5, pradakṣiṇī­bhavanti (mthun par ’grub po), is discussed by Z, p. 232, n. 142; Bṭ1, p. 772, glosses “without being falsely imagined” as “establish without hesitation or doubt.”

221. Dutt, p. 55, and Ghoṣa, p. 256, doṣa; Z, p. 398, roga (“sickness”).

222. Bṭ1, p. 774, says “conjoin” and “separate,” and “come together” and “not come together” are synonyms.

223. Here the “phenomenon” (dharma) is a property‍—specifically, something’s emptiness‍—and the “phenomena” in “realm of phenomena” means the totality of all those properties taken together. Everything (confusingly called sarvadharmāḥ, “all phenomena,” by which is meant sarvadharmiṇaḥ, “all things that have a property”) has the property of, or is qualified by, its emptiness.

224. This borrows from Z’s translation, p. 359, n. 178.

225. The Twenty-Five Thousand, 2.155, renders this, “This is because they do not observe anything at all by which anything could be comprehended, and also because they do not engage with the notion that the realm of phenomena is empty, and nor do they engage with the notion that it is not empty.” Taking the thing that has a phenomenon = property (dharma), or the thing that has a property/phenomenon (dharmin) as the realm of phenomena, and taking empty and not empty as the possible properties qualifying it, in the absence of the thing being qualified (or because the thing being qualified and the qualification are ultimately the same) they could not “associate” or join the two together.

226. It is not clear whether the emphasis is on the fact that beings, as the object of empathy, are unproduced, or that bodhisattvas as practitioners of the perfection of wisdom are unproduced, an ambiguity retained in LSPW and Z’s translation “through the fact of the nonproduction of a being.” The Twenty-Five Thousand, 2.160, has “based on [the truth that] beings are nonarising.”

Gilgit, 27r9, and Kimura 1–1:79. Ghoṣa, p. 266, has “perfection of wisdom” in place of “emptiness.”

227. It is not clear whether the emphasis is on the fact that beings, as the object of empathy, are unproduced, or that bodhisattvas as practitioners of the perfection of wisdom are unproduced, an ambiguity retained in LSPW and Z’s translation “through the fact of the nonproduction of a being.” The Twenty-Five Thousand, 2.160, has “based on [the truth that] beings are nonarising.”

Gilgit, 27r9, and Kimura 1–1:79. Ghoṣa, p. 266, has “perfection of wisdom” in place of “emptiness.”

228. This renders bsnyen bkur byed par ’gyur (ārāgayati).

229. This last statement from PSP, 1–1: 80, tasyāpi pañutarāṇīndriyāṇi bhavanti, is only found in D. All the other editions of the Hundred Thousand, as well as D Twenty-Five Thousand, ka 2.163, omit. Gilgit, 27v7, and Ghoṣa, p. 266, omit.

230. PSP, 1–1: 80, avipramuṣita; LSPW, “of which he never loses sight”; Ghoṣa, p. 267, avipranaṣṭa.