Buddhist Sanskrit in the Kalacakra Tantra
by John Newman
Vajrayana Buddhist texts were composed in at least three Indian languages: Sanskrit, Apabhrarpsa, and an East Indian dialect usually referred to as “Old Bengali.” By far the greatest part of [[Vajrayana literature}} was written in Sanskrit, the lingua franca of pan-Indic culture. This is not surprising—the Vajrayana, like
Buddhism as a whole, developed among diverse linguistic communities, and it is only to be expected that Indian Vajrayana Buddhists used the common language of educated discourse to communicate their ideas.
The Sanskrit of the Vajrayana literature, however, is not the Sanskrit of Papini. According to M. Winternitz: “The Sanskrit in which the [[[Buddhist Tantras]] are written, is, as a rule, just as barbarous as their contents”
(Winternitz 1933:401). The question remains as to the exact nature of this linguistic “barbarism”—is it due simply to incompetence on the part of Vajrayana Buddhist authors, or does some other factor, such as Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit, come into play here?1
Perhaps the earliest Western comment on the Sanskrit of a Vajrayana text is L. de la Vallee Poussin’s description of the language of Nagarjuna’s Panorama: “Il est.. .redig^en Sanscrit, dans une langue riche de termes techniques et de
particularites grammaticales ou prosodiques, mais qui, du point de vue phonetique, est correcte et n’exige pas les vastes connaissances
et la surety de main que suppose l’edition du Lotus ou celle du Mahavastu” (de la Vallee [[Wikipedia:Louis de La Vallée- Poussin|Poussin]] 1896:VII). In other words, the Sanskrit of the Pancakrama does not always follow Paninian norms, but it is not what we today would call Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit, or Buddhist Ar$a.2
Some scholars reject the influence of Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit on the language of Vajrayana texts. D.L. Snellgrove, describing the Sanskrit of the Hevajra Tantra, says: “The language need not be graced by the term Buddhist Sanskrit. It is just bad Sanskrit” (Snellgrove 1959:xi). C.S. George, after a meticulous study of the first portion of the Cai^maharofana
Tantra, appears to concur with Snellgrove: “The language of the Cavdumaharofa^a Tantra].. .is Sanskrit. Although the vocabulary is often technical, this seems hardly sufficient grounds to confuse the issue of language by describing it as
‘Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit’ or even ‘Buddhist Sanskrit.’ The subject matter is Buddhist, but the language is Sanskrit, close indeed to the Sanskrit of the Epics” (George 1974:14).
Other scholars, on the contrary, discern a relationship between the Sanskrit of the Vajrayana literature and Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit. B. Bhattacharya says: “The Sadhanamdla is written in Sanskrit, but
the Sanskrit used here is far from what we usually understand by the word. It is the Sanskrit of the Buddhists,—similar to that employed in the Mahdvastu Avadana, the Lalitavistara, the Sik$asamuccaya, the Karandavyuha, the Saddharma-Pur^rika,
and similar works” (Bhattacharya 1925:viii). T. Skorupski, commenting on the language of the Sarvadurgatiparisodhana Tantra, says: “The text of this Tantra, like many other works of this kind, has many peculiarities of Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit. To a
Sanskrit scholar who is not acquainted with this kind of literary work and who has no sympathy for Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit many grammatical endings will appear simply as wrong” (Skorupski 1983 :118).
Most pertinent to the present essay is H. Hoffmann’s description of the Sanskrit of the Paramadibuddha—the Kalacakra mulatantra\ “[The Kalacakra mulatantra] is not only written in Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit but in a very corrupt [[barbarian Sanskrit]] of a semi-Indian region in the far north-west” (Hoffmann 1973:136). A characterization such as this, however, must be evaluated in light of what the Kalacakra tradition itself has to say about the question of “correct” language.3
In what follows we edit and translate the Sanskrit and Tibetan of a passage from the Vimalaprabhda, the great commentary on the Sri Kalacakra (the Kalacakra laghutantra). This passage describes the language of the Paramadibuddha, the [[Sri Kalacakra]], the Vimalaprabha and, by extension, the entire early Kalacakra literature.4 The Sanskrit text of this passage was first published seventy years ago,5 but Western scholars have not given it the attention it deserves.6
te$arp ca susabdavadinarp susabdagrahavinaSayarthasa- rapatam asritya kvacid vrtte ’pasabdah/ kvacid vftte yatibhangah/ kvacid avibhaktikarp padam/ kvacid varpa- svaralopab7/ kvacid vftte dirgho hrasvah hrasvo ’pi8 dirghafi/ kvacit pancamyarthe saptami
caturthyarthe $a$lhi/ kutracit parasmaipadini9 dhatav atmanepadam at- manepadini parasmaipadam/ kvacid ekavacane bahuvacanarp bahuvacana ekavacanam/ purplirige napurpsakalingarp10 napuipsake puiplirigam/ kvacit talavya&akare dantyamurdhanyau”/ kvacin
murdhanye dantyatalavyau11/ kvacid dantye talavyamurdhanyau/ evam anye ’py anusartavyas tantradesakopadeseneti12/ tatha mulatantre bhagavan aha/
sucandra sarvabuddhanarp deyarp nitye$tavastukam/ si§yebhi$ ca gurunarp ca bharyaduhitfputrakam//(l) gandho bhavati medinyaip toye rupaip raso ’nale/ vayau sparso ’k$are Sabda dharmadhatur19 mahanabhe//(2) gandhadhupadidipebhih khanapanadivasasaih/
pujayitva sada mudraip14 guror dadati satsutab//(3) ity evam adayo ’nye ’py apaSabda'5 yoginavagantavya agamapafhad16 iti/ evarp pkayam api su- sabdabhimananasaya17 likhitavyaip
mayarthaSaranatam18 a- srityeti/ atha yena yena prakarena kulavidyasu sab- dabhimanak$ayo bhavati19 tena tena prakareparthasa- rapatam asritya buddhanarp bodhisattvanarp dharma- desana desabha$antarepa20 sabda£astrabha$antarena mok$artham/
Vimalaprabha I.321
“In order to destroy the attachment to correct language of those (brahman sages22 who) advocated correct language, (Kalki Yasas) relied on the meaning.29 In some verses (of the Sri Kalacakra) there are ungrammatical words. In some verses the
caesuras are lacking. Some have words without case endings. In some, letters and vowels are elided (BHSG 2.3, 2.17, 2.72, 2.84 ff., 2.90, 3.106, 3.122, 3.118). In some verses long vowels are short, and short vowels are long (BHSG 1.10, 3.1-46). In some the locative case is used for the ablative case (BHSG 7.82), and the genitive case is used for the
dative case (BHSG 7.63; Whitney 294b, 297a; Holtzmann 297). In some a middle voice is attributed to a root that possesses an active voice, and an active voice is attributed to one that possesses a middle voice (BHSG 37.22
ff. 8c 37.10 ff.; Whitney 529a, 774; Holtzmann 530, 774). In some the plural number is used for the singular number, and the singular number is used for the plural number (BHSG 1.10, 1.101, 25.4). The neuter gender is used for the masculine gender, and
the masculine gender is used for the neuter (BHSG 1.10, 6.1; cf. Holtzmann 263). In some the dental (so) and the cerebral ($a) are used for the palatal letter fa; in some the dental and the palatal are used for the cerebral; in some the palatal and the
cerebral are used for the dental (BHSG 2.56 ff.; Holtzmann 63). There are also other such things that must be understood in conformity with the instructions of the tantra teacher. Likewise, the Bhagavan (Buddha) said in the basic tantra (the Paramadibuddha):
Sucandra, disciples should constantly offer desired things— wives, daughters, and beloved sons—to all the Buddhas and gurus.//(l)
Odor arises from earth, form from water, taste from fire, tactiiity from wind, sound from the unchanging, the sphere of phenomena from the great sky.//(2)
Constantly worshipping the mudra with perfumes, incense, lamps, and so forth, and food, drink, clothing, and so forth, the noble son gives her to the guru.//(3)
A yogi should understand ungrammatical words like these, and others too, by reading the sacred texts. Likewise, I (Kalki Puodarika) must write the (Vimalaprabhda) commentary relying on the meaning, in order to destroy conceit in correct language.
Thus, Buddhas and bodhisattvas teach the Dharma for the sake of liberation—relying on the meaning, they use the different vernaculars and the different languages of the grammatical treatises, whichever eliminate conceit in
family, learning, and correct language.”
It should be noted that I have translated the Sanskrit of this passage in accordance with the Tibetan translation. An exception to this is the verses cited from the mulatantra, where the Tibetan faithfully reproduces the grammatical solecisms of the Sanskrit.24
As Bu ston points out, the genitives sarvabuddhanam in verse la, gurunam in lc, and guroh in 3d must all be glossed as datives (Bu ston 1324:611/5—6). In lc the first ca is syntactically redundant, and siyyebhify is a Vedic form of the instrumental plural for the a-stems (BHSG 8.110; Whitney 329d).
All the locatives in the second verse—medinyam, toye, anale, and so forth—are to be taken as ablatives (Bu ston 1324:611/4— 5). In 2c sabda is lacking a case ending.
In 3a 8c b adi should properly come at the end of the compounds. In 3a -dlpebhih is, again, a Vedic form of the instrumental plural for the a-stems. In 3b -vasasaih, vasas, neuter, is treated as an a-stem (BHSG 16.26; Whitney 1315). In 3d the plural dadati should properly be dadati, singular (BHSG 28.11).
It is important to note that the language described above is not Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit (Buddhist Ar$a). As F. Edgerton explains, Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit “is a blend of Middle Indic with Sanskrit, but its basis, or substratum, is Middle
Indic; the Sanskrit features are secondarily and superficially laid on” (Edgerton 1956:134). Edgerton stresses that Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit “originally was, or was based on, an ancient, pre-Christian, Middle Indic vernacular. That is, it is not, and never was, Sanskrit” (Edgerton 1954:2). In particular, “[BHS] vocabulary is to a very large extent not Sanskrit, but
Middle Indic” (ibid)', and “[Middle Indic words] stamp the language of the [BHS] works containing them as based upon another dialect than Sanskrit” (BHSG 1.37). “Even the latest Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit texts still retain numerous words, lexical items, which show their vernacular origin” (Edgerton 1956:134).
The language of the Kalacakra literature, on the other hand, is Sanskrit. As the passages cited in this essay exemplify, it is not based on a Middle Indic dialect; it contains very few Middle Indic words.25
The grammatical “rules” given in the Vimalaprabha can indeed be applied to the language depicted by Edgerton in his Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit Grammar, but many of these features are also common to the Sanskrit of the
Mahabharata, the Purapas, and the Hindu tantras (cf. Goudriaan 1981:27-28). Moreover, these grammatical irregularities are not the outcome of a natural linguistic development from an earlier Prakrit—they appear to have been deliberately introduced into the Kalacakra literature.
Early Buddhist traditions record that the Buddha authorized his followers to recite the buddhavacanam in their individual dialects in order to convert the unconverted (cf. BHSG 1.6-1.13; Edgerton 1954:5-6; 1956:130-133). In the same spirit,
concern for the meaning rather than the words of the Dharma is often exhibited in the early Kalacakra literature. For example, in the Paramadibuddha the Buddha says:
yena yena prakarepa sattvanarp paripacanam/ tena tena prakarepa kuryad dharmasya desanam//(5) yogi SabdapaSabdena dharmarp grhpati yatnatah/ de$a£abdena labde ’rthe SastraSabdena tatra kim
One should teach the Dharma in whatever fashion completely matures sentient beings.
A yogi zealously grasps the Dharma through grammatical and ungrammatical words. When one gets the meaning from the local words, what is the use of technical terms? (6)
Likewise, the verse introduction to the Vimalaprabha says:
5abda£abdavicarapa na mahati sarvajnamargarthinam nanade$akubha$ayapi mahataip marge pravrttib sada/ sattvanam adhimukticittavaSatab sarvajriabha$a para anya vyakarape surahiracita £abdadivadarthinam//(37)
apasabdad artham api yogi grhpati de&abha$atab/ toye payo nivistarp pibanti harpsas tad uddhftya//(38) paramarthatattvavijaye na vyanjana^arapata27 sada mahata28/ deSasarpjnabhir arthe jnate kiip $astra£abdena//(39) jnanarp tad eva na bhavati udite yasyapaSabdaSabdab29 syub/ sarvajnasya na bha$a ya sa pradeSiki jagati//(40)30
Those intent on the path to omniscience do not greatly discriminate between grammatical and ungrammatical words. They always enter the path of the great ones, even through the lowly languages of various countries. The Omniscient One’s language is Other,’1 in accordance with the dispositions of sentient beings. Quite different is the language of those intent on arguing about the words and so forth the gods and nagas arranged in the grammars.//^?)
A yogi grasps the meaning even from vernaculars and ungrammatical words. Swans draw out and drink the milk mixed in the water.//(38)
In the realm of ultimate reality great ones never rely on the letters. What is the use of technical terms when one understands the meaning through the local expressions?//(39)
That which grammatical and ungrammatical words can express is not gnosis. That which is parochial to the world is not the language of the Omniscient One.//(40)
Puotfarika, the author of the Vimalaprabha, tells us that his father YaSas introduced “ungrammatical words” and so forth in the text of the Sri Kalacakra “in order to destroy the attachment to correct language of those (brahman sages) who advocated correct language.”
Likewise, the irregular Sanskrit of the Vimalaprabha is intended to “destroy conceit in correct language.” Excessive esteem for Sanskrit appears to have had a deleterious effect on some members of the Buddhist community during Pundarika’s time:
anena pradeSikasaipskrtaikavacanena buddho32 pi pradeSiko bhavati sarvasattvarutasvabhavinya sarvajnabha$aya vina/ iha aryavi§aye Sabdavadinan tirthikanam papditanam abhimanarp dr?tva balamatinarp bauddhanam abhiprayafa/ yatha brahmahariharadayab sarpskrtavaktaro
brahmapavaispa- vaSaivadinam i§|.adevatab tath^smakam ya isfadevata bud- dhabodhisattvab sarpskrtavaktaro bhavantiti/ iha na ca te anena pradeSikasarpskftaikavacanena sarvasattvarutair dharmadeSakab sarpgitikaraka bhavanti buddhabodhisattvab sarvajnabha§aya vina/
atodevajatipratibaddha pradeSika bha$a” buddhabodhisatt- vanarp na syad iti nanasattvarutadharmadesakatvat/’4 “If he did not use the omniscient language that has the nature of the utterances of all sentient beings, if he used only this parochial
Sanskrit speech, then the Buddha would be parochial as well. Here in the land of the Aryans,95 foolish Buddhists see the arrogance of the scholarly heterodox proponents of correct language, and come to believe: ‘Just as the chosen deities of the brahmans, Vai$navas,
£aivas, and so forth—Brahma, Hari, Hara, and so forth—speak Sanskrit, so too our chosen deities, the Buddhas and bodhisattvas, speak Sanskrit.’ But here, these Buddhas and bodhisattvas do not use the utterances of all sentient beings to teach and redact’6 the Dharma
solely by means of this parochial Sanskrit speech, without using the omniscient language. Therefore, Buddhas and bodhisattvas do not use a paro chial language that is entangled with birth as a god, because they teach the Dharma using the utterances of various sentient beings.”
We are not dealing with simple bad Sanskrit in the Kalacakra literature because the irregular grammar employed in the Sri Kalacakra and the Vimalaprabha is not the result of incompetence. The authors of these texts, YaSas and Pundarika, demonstrate considerable knowledge
of the full range of brahmanical learning, including grammar, prosody, and poetics. They compose correct, even elegant, Sanskrit when they so desire. Moreover, in the Vimalaprabha Puodarika sometimes even points out the irregular forms appearing in the Sri Kalacakra, and explains how they deviate from standard usage.
For example:
(1) Comment on the declension of kalayoge in Sri Kalacakra
I. 26d: kalayoga itipancamyarthe saptami {Vimalaprabha (S) B 3 lb/3; U 77.19); the locative is used for the ablative.
(2) Comment on the declension of jndnadhdtau in Sri Kalacakra
II. 24a: iha farire apanavayur jndnadhdtor bhavati atrapi pan- camyarthe saptami {Vimalaprabha (S) B 57b/7; U 168.26); the locative is used for ablative.
(3) Comment on the number of safsandhih in Sri Kalacakra II.25d: satsandhir iti bahuvacane ekavacanam {Vimalaprabha (S) B 58a/2; U 169.12-13); the singular is used for the plural.
(4) Comment on mahi in Sri Kalacakra II.25d: mahiti hrasvo bhuparydyak {Vimalaprabha (S) B 58a/3; 169.14); short vowel for long.
(5) Comment on antrameghah in SriKalacakra II.34b: antramegha ’ntra ity avibhaktikampadaip, antrani megha bhavantiti (yimalaprabhd
(5) B 60a/I; U 174.27-28); antra is lacking a case ending.
(6) Comment on the declension of karne in Sri Kalacakra II.79c: karne ity agamapdthat pahcamyarthe saptami {Vimalaprabha (S) B 75b/2; U 213.11); the locative is used for the ablative.
The fact that the Sanskrit of the early Kalacakra literature is strewn with irregular grammatical forms presents special problems for the editor and translator. If these forms were used consistently, it would be simple enough to learn to
recognize and understand them. Unfortunately, this is not the case. The irregular forms appear in verses and prose passages that are otherwise written in standard Sanskrit,37 and sometimes an irregular form is disguised in such a way that it can be interpreted meaningfully, but wrongly, as though it were standard usage.
An example of this is halac chunyeyu in Sri Kalacakra 1.4a, which the Tibetans consistently translate as dus kyis stongpa mams las. Kalat as an ablative of instrumental use is not extraordinary, but the locative funyepu as an ablative would be extremely problematic if we did not have the Tibetan translation (cf. Holtzmann 301).
Another example is Pupdarika’s usage of the words vivarta and saifivarta in his comment on Sri Kalacakra 1.4. These terms usually mean “evolution” and “devolution,” respectively (cf. AbhidharmakoSa 3.90), but the Vimalaprabha exactly inverts their
meaning: lokadhatutpado nirodho veditavyah samvarto vivartakdlas ceti; jig rten gyi khams 'byung ba dang 'gag pa chags pa dang jig pa’i dus kyang rig par bya’o {Vimalaprabha (S) B 22a/6; U 54.18-19; (T) 425/4). On first glance the Tibetans
seem to have blundered in translating sarpuarta as chags pa and vivarta as jig pa, but this idiosyncratic usage is confirmed by Pupdarika’s use of saifivarta in apposition to utpada and utpatti: atah samvartdd utpddakdlavasat £unye$v iti; des na chags pa ni 'byung ba’i dus kyi dbang gis stong pa mams las shes pa {Vimalaprabha (S) B 22a/6; U 54.19; (T) 425/4); and
kalayogat prajatam samvartotpattikalavasdt; dus kyi sbyor ba dag las rab tu skyes shes pa chags pa skye ba’i dus kyi dbang gis (Vimala- prabhd (S) B 28a/l; U 68.12; (T) 457/7 [comment on SriKalacakra I.lid]).
The linguistic peculiarity of the Kalacakra literature once again underscores our dependence on Tibetan translations and Indian and Tibetan commentaries for correct editing and translation of the Vajrayana literature in Sanskrit. Without their aidwe would be at a loss to establish the Sanskrit texts, not to speak of understanding their meaning.38
The language of the early Kalacakra literature is not Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit (Buddhist Ar$a), nor is it simply substandard Sanskrit. It is Sanskrit into which various types of nonstandard forms
have been intentionally introduced. Most of these irregularities are common to Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit and late classical Sanskrit. While some of these solecisms have a pedagogic purpose, for the most part they are designed to counteract
pedantic arrogance. How far these findings can be applied to other Vajrayana texts will be an important subject for future research.
APPENDIX: Rare Vocabulary from the Kalacakra Literature I
Although the Kalacakra literature contains negligible Middle Indic vocabulary, it does present Sanskrit words that are either rare or unattested elsewhere. (Here we are not concerned with technical terminology, which is notorious
for being poorly represented in current dictionaries.) Unless otherwise noted, the following words are not found (with these meanings, at least) in the lexicons of Bohtlingk and Roth, Bohtlingk, Schmidt, Monier- Williams, Apte, or Edgerton.
(1) ekalolibhuta m. (Tib. gcig tu 'dres par gyur pa) “become blended into one”: e$am niravaranata samarasatvam ekalollbhutatvam sunyam ity ucyate; 'di mams sgrib pa dang bral ba nyid dang ro mnyam pa nyid dang gcig tu 'dres par gyur pa nyid la stong pa zhes brjod do (Vimalaprabha (S) B 19a/2; U 47.22—23; (T) 407/3—4). “Their
quality of being free from obscuration, of having a single taste, of being blended into one, is called
‘void’.” (The things “blended” here are various aggregates, elements, faculties, and so forth that are components in the Kalacakra abhidkarma.) -loll- appears to be derived from \/lud or V/uZ; cf. lolita. Schmidt lists ekalolibhava in the sense of “Begehren" [[[desire]]] (Schmidt 125, 318).
(2) kalka m. (Tib. rigs) “clan”: atah, kalasaguhya-prajndjndnabhifekatah sar- vavarrianam ekakalko bhavati! sa kalko 'sy&stiti kalki! tasya gotraip. kalkigotram vaj- rakuldbhi$ekatah sakalamantrinam iti nitarthah; bum pa dang gsang ba dang shes rab ye shes kyi dbang bskur ba 'di las rigs thams cad rigs gcig tu 'gyur rot rigs de 'di la yod pa'i phyir rigs Idan no/ de'i rigs ni rigs Idan gyi rigs te sngags pa mtha’ dag rdo rje'i rigs kyis dbang bskur ba’i phyir ro zhes bya ba nges pa’i don to! (Vimalaprabha (S) B 8b/3—4; U 22.8-10; (T) 345/2-3). “The
vase, secret, and wisdom-gnosis initiations make all the castes into a single clan. Because he possesses that
clan, he is Kalki. The definitive meaning of this is: ‘His lineage is the lineageof Kalki because all mantra adepts are initiated into the vajra family.’” Similarly, Sri Kalacakra I.158ab:
so ’yaip srimanjuvajrah suravaranamito vajragotrena kalki dattva. vajrabhi^ekam sakalamunikulany ekakalkam kariyyatl
“He (i.e., ManjuSri YaSas) will be Sri Manjuvajra, saluted by the best of gods, Kalki by means of the vajra lineage. Having given them the vajra initiation, he will make all the families of sages into a single clan.”
The usual meanings of kalka—“dregs”, “filth”, “feces”, “sin”, and so forth—are clearly inapplicable here. This usage of kalka is unique to the Kalacakra literature (cf. Newman 1985:64 & n. 4; 1987a:94). For discussion of other etymologies of kalka and kalkH-in see: Schrader (1937).
(3) pratisena f. (Tib. pra phab pa) “prognostic image”: pratyafyah svacittaprati- bhaso yogzndm gagane pratibhdfate kumdrikdya ddariadau pratisenavad iti; gzhon nu ma mams kyis me long la sogs pa la pra phab pa bzhin du mal ’byor pa mams kyi rang gi sems kyi 'od gsal mngon sum du nam mAAo’ la snang ba {Vimalaprabhd (S) B 16b/6; U 42.23-24; (T) 394/3—
4). "Like a maiden’s prognostic image in a mirror and so forth, the clear light of the yogis’ own minds appears manifest in the sky.” The “sky” here refers to the void. (Note: I take kumarikayah as a genitive singular against the
Tibetan instrumental plural.) Vimalaprabhd I.1.35ab (U 4.21-22) notes that mahamudra is similar to the eight prognostic images (a^faprasenopamd). In his Paramarthasamgraha-nama-sekoddesalikd Naro refers to the Pratisendvatdratantra on the eight kinds of prognostication:
pratisendvatdratantre kila darpanakhadganguslhapradipacandra-suryodakakundane- trefv avastuyu (read: atfasu) pratisendvatara uktah (Carelli 1941:49.6-7). “Indeed, the Pratisendvatdratantra speaks of the manifestation of prognostic images in the eight: mirror, sword, thumb, lamp, moon, sun, water well, and eye.” Pratisena appears to be a Sanskritized form of
(Prakrit?) prasena (m. or n.), -nd (f.): “eine Art Gauklerei” [a kind of conjuring] (Bohtlingk 176.2). Edgerton, following Bohtlingk, lists prasena with a query and also cites Mahdvyutpatti #4268: prasenam; gsal snang (BHSD 389.1). Edgerton
translates gsal snang as “bright light, or bright clear," but it is most likely the old orthography for dag snang, “a mystic vision.” It is interesting to note that prasenam appears in the Mahdvyutpatti in the section on tantric terminology {Mahdvyutpatti #4234- 4387).
(4) li (Tib. li) “Khotan”: bo{a li ca cinadidesesu. . .sambhalavi^ayanta/ft; bod dang li dang rgya nag la sogs pa’i yul mams su. . .shambha la'i yul la thug pa'i bar du {Vimalaprabhd (S) B 40a/2; U 101.8; (T) 521/4). “In the
countries of Tibet, Khotan, and China and so forth. . .through to the land of Sambhala. . .” The context here is a discussion of the duration of daylight in various regions north of India. This passage of the Vimalaprabhd
is the source for the only other known occurrence of li in Sanskrit, Abhayakaragupta’s Kalacakrdvatdra: bhofa li ca cinadidesesu sambhalavijaydntam (Asiatic Society of Bengal MS G.4732 f. 6b/5). Li is an example of a very rare phenomenon, a Tibetan loanword in Sanskrit.
NOTES
1. For previous study of the language of Sanskrit Vajrayana texts see: Bhattacharya (1925:viii-x); Snellgrove (1959:viii-xi); George (1974:14-17); Tsuda (1974:6-27); Skorupski (1983:117-118).
2. D.S. Ruegg notes: “Arfa is indeed in several respects a more convenient (and a less linguistically questionable) term than Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit to designate the basically Middle Indo-Aryan language of much of
the Canon and could therefore be used instead by modern scholars, at least for certain stages of BHS” (Ruegg 1986:597). We add the qualification “Buddhist” to distinguish this language from the Jaina and brahmanical arfa-s (cf. Winternitz 1933:430; Goudriaan 1981:27).
3. As we will see, the Kalacakra literature is not written in Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit, and its language is not simply "very corrupt” or “barbarian” Sanskrit. Hoffmann has not presented any evidence to support his view that the Kalacakra originated in “a semi-Indian region in the far north-west.” The Vimalaprabha, in any case, was by its own account
written in India (see note 35). The earliest historically identified proponent of the Kalacakra, Atiia's guru Pipdo, was born in Java (Newman 1985:71-75; 1987b:96-106).
4. For discussion of this literature see: Newman (1985:52—54, 58, 63- 65, 73; 1987a; 1987b). I believe all of these texts were composed in India during the first few decades of the 11th century.
5. By H.P. Shastri (1917:78-79), under the heading “The Buddhist did not care for Correct Sanskrit.”
6. Indian scholars have noted its significance: B. Bhattacharyya (1924:iv) quotes Shastri’s Catalogue. P.C. Bagchi (1934:v) cites the Catalogue, and offers an English rendering and an interpretation (cf. Goudriaan 1981:27, n. 130). B. Banerjee gives a brief synopsis of this passage in English (Ban-dyopadhyaya 1952:73), and alludes to it in the introduction to his
recent edition of the Sri Kalacakra (Banerjee 1985:xxii). J. Upadhyaya refers to it in the introduction to his recent edition of the first two patalas of the Sri Kalacakra and the Vimalaprabha (Vimalaprabha (S) U xv, xxiv).
Tibetan scholars were well aware of the grammatical anomalies of the early Kalacakra literature. See: Bu ston (1324:610-612); mKhas grub (1434:444-448).
7. Vimalaprabha (S) N: -svarolopah.
8. Vimalaprabha (S) N: krasvah hrasvdpi.
9. Vimalaprabhd (S) D: paraspai-.
10. Vimalaprabha (S) D: napumsakarp.
11. Vimalaprabhd (S) N: danta-.
12. Vimalaprabhd (S) D: -defakeneti.
13. Vimalaprabhd (S) N: -dhaturn.
14. Vimalaprabhd (S) D: mahamudrarji.
15. Vimalaprabhd (S) N: adayo py apafabdas taddnye pi.
16. Vimalaprabhd (S) N: agarigama- (emendation deletes -iiga-).
17. Vimalaprabhd (S) D: su^abddbhimdnaip. ndia.
18. Vimalaprabhd (S) N: -lanataip, (emendation adds -ra-)
.
19. Vimalaprabha (S) N:bhavati.
20. Vimalaprabha (S) N: de$a- (emended to dtia-)-
21. Vimalaprabha (S) N 2Jb/4-22a/4; D J 76/1-9; cf. U 29.21-30.6.1 have standardized the sandhi, the orthography with respect to use of the avagraha and doubling of consonants after -r-, and have supplied the danfas. Unfortunately, the leaf containing this passage is missing from Vimalaprabha (S) B, by far the best of the three MSS available to me. The Tibetan for the passage quoted reads:
Vimalaprabha (T) 361/5-362/7: /sgra bzang po smra ba de dag mams kyi sgra bzang po la zhen pa spang ba’i slad du don la rton pa nyid la brten te/ tshigs su bead pa kha cig tu zur chag gi sgra dang/ tshigs su bead pa kha cig tu gcod mtshams nyams pa dang/ kha cig tu rnam dbye med pa’i tshig dang/ kha cig tu dbyangs dang gsal byed [better: ytg 'bru dang dbyangs] phyis pa dang/ tshigs bead kha cig tu ring po la thung ngu dang thung ngu la ring po dang/ kha cig tu Inga pa’i don la bdun pa dang/ bzhi pa’i don la drug pa dang/ kha cig tu gzhan gyi tshig can gyi byings la bdag nyid kyi tshig dang/ bdag nyid kyi tshig can la gzhan gyi tshig dang/ kha cig tu geig gi tshig la mang po'i tshig dang/ mang po’i tshig la geig gi tshig dang/ kha cig tu pho’i rtags la ma ning gi rtags dang ma ning gi rtags la pho’i rtags dang/ kha cig tu rkan las byung ba sha yig la so dang spyi bo las byung ba dang/ kha cig tu spyi bo las byung ba la so dang rkan las byung ba dang/ kha cig tu so las byung ba la rkan dang spyi bo las byung ba ste/ de Ita bu gzhan yang rgyud ston pa po’i man ngag gi rjes su ’brang bar bya’o/ de bzhin du rtsa ba’i rgyud las bcom Idan 'das kyis/
/zla bzang sangs rgyas thams cad dang/
/bla ma rnams kyi slob ma yis/ /chung ma bu mo bu sdug dang/ /rtag tu 'dod pa’i dngos po dbul/(l) /dri ni sa la ’byung ba ste/ /chu la gzugs dang me la ro/ /rlung reg ’gyur ba med la sgra/ /nam mkha’ che la chos kyi dbyings/(2) /dri dang spos sogs mar me dang/ /bza' dang btung sogs gos rnams kyis/ /rtag tu phyag rgya mchod byas te/ /dam pa’i bu yis bla ma'i dbul/(8)
/zhes gsungs te de Ita bu la sogs pa’i sgra zur chag gzhan yang rnal ’byor pas lung bklags pa las rtogs par bya’o/ de bzhin du 'grel bshad las kyang sgra bzang po'i mngon pa’i nga rgyal nyams par bya ba’i slad du bdag gis don la rton pa nyid la brten te bri bar bya ste/ mam pa gang dang gang gis rigs dang rigs pa [read: rig fia] dang sgra bzang po’i mngon pa’i nga rgyal zad par 'gyur ba’i rnam pa de dang des don la rton pa nyid la brten te yul gyi skad gzhan dang sgra'i bstan bcos kyi skad gzhan gyis sangs rgyas dang byang chub sems dpa' rnams thar pa’i don du chos ston to/
22. The “brahman sages" referred to here are the thirty-five million brahman sages of Sambhala. The story told in the Vimalaprabha of how Kalki YaSas converted them to the Vajrayana is translated in Newman (1985:59-63; 1987b:304-314). The passage on grammar edited and translated here immediately follows the conversion story, and makes up the end of the third uddesa of the first payola of the Vimalaprabha.
23. This refers to the first of the four pratisaranas; cf. Mahavyutpatti #1545-1549.
24. Vimalaprabha (T) usually translates the Sanskrit according to the meaning rather than the words: it does not attempt to reproduce grammatical irregularities, but provides the sense. In this instance, however, it “mechanically" reproduces the irregular grammar because the irregular grammar itself is part of the meaning.
25. In editing a passage of the Kalacakra mulatantra, Hoffmann creates “Middle Indic” out of correct Sanskrit forms metri causa (Hoffmann 1973:137, n. 3 & 7). This is difficult to justify given the fact that the verses of the Paramadibuddha are often hypercatalectic or catalectic: cf. verses 1 la, 13c, 15b in Reigle (1986:5-6, 9).
26. Sanskrit after Reigle (1986:5); cf. Vimalaprabha (S) U 24.27-30. These verses are part of a twenty-one and one-half verse quotation from the Paramadibuddha that appears towards the middle of the third uddesa of the Vimalaprabha. Vimalaprabha (T) 351/7-352/2:
/mam pa gang dang gang dag gis/
/sems can rnams ni yongs smin byed/
/rnam pa de dang de dag gis/
/chos ni bstan par bya ba yin/(5)
/sgra dang sgra nyams dag gi [read: gis] chos/
/rnal ’byor pa ni ’bad pas 'dzin/
/yul gyi sgra yis don rnyed pa/
/de la bstan bcos sgra yis ci/(6)
27. Vimalaprabha (S) D: -saranaia.
28. Vimalaprabha (S) N: mahatam.
29. Vimalaprabha (S) D: -sabdah sabdah.
30. Vimalaprabha (S) N 3a/6-3b/2; D 3a/2-5; cf. U 5.3-12; leaf missing in B. These are verses 37-40 of the first uddesa of the Vimalaprabha. Verse 37 is flawless tardulavikridila; 38-40 are arya. Pupdarika employs a wide variety of metres in the Vimalaprabha, and his Sri Paramarthaseva is composed of various kinds of tritfubh. Vimalaprabha (T) 307/5-308/2:
/kun mkhyen lam don gnyer ba rnams la sgra dang sgra min rnam dpyad chen po med/
/sna tshogs yul skad ngan pa yis kyang chen po rnams kyi lam la rtag tu ’jug/
/sems can rnams kyi mos pa’i sems kyi dbang gis thams cad mkhyen pa’i gsung gzhan la/
/lung ston dag la [better: brda sprod dag la] Iha klus bkod pa’i- sgra sogs rtsod pa don gnyer rnams kyi gzhan/(37)
/yul gyi skad dang zur chag sgra las kyang/
/rnal ’byor Idan pas don ni ’dzin byed de/
/chu la 'o ma nges par zhugs pa de/
/ngang pas rab tu phyung nas 'thung bar byed/(38)
/don dam de nyid yul la rtag tu ni/
/chen po rnams dag tshig la rton pa min/
/yul gyi mi [read: ming] rnams kyis ni don shes la/
/bstan bcos sgra dag gis ni ci zhig bya/(39)
/gang zhig zur chag sgra dang sgrar gyur pas/
/brjod pa de nyid ye shes ma yin zhing/
/gang zhig 'gro ba dag la nyi tshe ba/
/de ni thams cad mkhyen pa'i gsung ma yin/(40)
31. Here “Other” refers to the transcendent aspect of the Kalacakra triad: evarft sarvatra vajrayogo bdhye adhyatmani pare yogina ’vagantavya iti; de bzhin du rdo rje mal ’byor yang phyi dang nang dang gzhan thams cad la mal 'byor pas rtogsparbya’o (Vimalaprabha (S) B 17a/7— 17b/1; cf. U 44.10-11; (T) 398/2-3). “A yogi should realize the vajra yoga everywhere in the Outer, Inner, and Other.”
32. Vimalaprabha (S) B: sarvabuddho (emendation deletes sarva).
33. Vimalaprabha (S) B: omit bhdja (emendation adds).
34. Vimalaprabha (S) B 13a/7- 13b/l; cf. U 34.11-18. MS B spells saliva as sattva, and I have supplied the dandas, but otherwise I have retained its orthography in this and all other quotations from it. Vimalaprabha (T) 372/6- 373/4:
/sems can thams cad kyi skad kyi rang bzhin can thams cad mkhyen pa'i skad med par legs par sbyar ba’i skad nyi tshe ba gcig pu 'di yis yin na sangs rgyas kyang nyi tshe bar 'gyur rol ’phags pa’i yul 'dir sgra smra ba po mu stegs pa mkhas pa’i mngon pa’i nga rgyal dang ldan pa rnams (sic I] mthong nas/ ji Itar bram ze dang khyab 'jug pa dang zhi ba pa la sogs pa rnams kyi ’dod pa’i lha tshangs pa dang khyab ’jug dang drag po la sogs pa rnams legs par sbyar ba smra ba po yin pa de bzhin du bdag cag gi ’dod pa’i lha sangs rgyas dang byang chub sems dpa’ rnams legs par sbyar ba smra ba po yin no zhes pa ni/ sangs rgyas pa byis pa’i bio can rnams kyi bsam pa ste/ 'dir sangs rgyas dang byang chub sems dpa* de dag thams cad mkhyen pa’i skad med par legs par sbyar ba’i skad nyi tshe ba [add: gcig bu] ’di yis ma yin te sems can thams cad kyi skad kyis chos ston par byed pa po dang yang dag par sdud par byed pa po yin no/ de’i phyir sangs rgyas dang byang chub sems dpa’ rnams ni lha’i skye ba dang ’brel ba’i (add: skad] nyi tshe bas ma yin te sems can sna tshogs kyi skad kyis chos ston pa po yin pa'i phyir/
35. This is one of several instances in the Vimalaprabha in which Puptfarika writes “here in the land of the Aryans,” demonstrating that this text was written in India. (Elsewhere in the Vimalaprabha “the land of the Aryans” is clearly defined as India [cf. Newman 1985:61; 1987b;309-310J.)
36. samgitikdraka; yang dag par sdud par byed pa po. The use of this term to indicate the “redactor" of a text is not quite clear at BHSD 548, s.v. sarjigiti (3). It is often used in this sense in the Vimalaprabha: e.g., King Sucandra, an emanation of Vajrapani, redacted the Paramadibuddha, and Kalki YaSas, an emanation of Manjusri, condensed the Paramadibuddha and redacted it in the form of the Sri Kalacakra (Newman 1985:54, 63; 1987a:93-94).
37. Likewise Skorupski: “It must be said that one does get frustrated by the fact that the correct grammatical forms are used side by side with the hybrid forms. It is practically impossible to discern the principle of using the
correct grammatical forms instead of the hybrid ones or vice versa” (Skorupski 1983:118). The same can be said about the early Kalacakra literature, although, again, I do not think we are confronted with “hybrid forms” in the strict sense of forms that developed directly from Prakrit.
38. I agree completely with Snellgrove’s remark that we must be content with “a text that accords with the required sense as it may be ascertained from the Tibetan translation and the several commentaries” (Snellgrove 1959.x); cf. Tsuda (1974:6-16).
REFERENCES
Apte: Vaman Shivaram Apte, The Practical Sanskrit-English Dictionary: Revised & Enlarged Edition (Kyoto: Rinsen Book Company reprint [1957 ed.], 1986).
Bagchi (1934): Prabodh Chandra Bagchi (ed.), Kaulajfianamrnaya and Some Minor Texts of the School of Matsyendranatha (Calcutta: Metropolitan Printing & Publishing House, 1934) [[[Calcutta]] Sanskrit Series no. 3].
Bandyopadhyaya (1952): Biswanath Bandyopadhyaya [Biswanath Banerjee], “A Note on the Kalacakratantra and Its Commentary” Journal of the Asiatic Society: Letters 18 (1952) pp. 71—76.
Banerjee (1985): Biswanath Banerjee (ed.), A Critical Edition of Sri Kalaca- kratantra-raja (Collated with the Tibetan version) (Calcutta: The Asiatic Society, 1985) [[[Bibliotheca Indica]] Series no. 311).
Bhattacharyya (1924): Benoytosh Bhattacharyya, The Indian Buddhist Iconography (London: Oxford University Press, 1924).
Bhattacharya (1925): Benoytosh Bhattacharya (ed.), Sadhanamdla vol. 1 (Baroda: Oriental Institute reprint, 1968) [Gaekwad’s Oriental Series no. 26].
BHSG/BHSD: Franklin Edgerton, Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit Grammar and Dictionary (Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass reprint, 1972) vol. 1: Grammar, vol. 2: Dictionary.
Bohtlingk: Otto Bohtlingk, Sanskrit-Worterbuch in kiirzerer Fassung (Graz: Akademische Druck-U. Verlagsanstalt reprint, 1959).
Bohtlingk and Roth: Otto Bohtlingk and Rudolph Roth, Sanskri
t-Worterbuch (St. Petersburg/Leipzig: Kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1855 ff.).
Bu ston (1324): Bu ston Rin chen grub, dPal dus kyi 'khor lo’i bshad thabs sgra rig mkhas pa’i rgyan ces bya ba; Lokesh Chandra (ed.), The Collected Works of Bu-ston: Part 4 (NGA) (New Delhi: Internationa] Academy of Indian Culture, 1965) pp. 599-614 [$ata-pi(aka Series vol. 44].
Carelli (1941): Mario E. Carelli (ed.), Sekoddelafika of Nafapada (Ndropa) (Baroda: Oriental Institute, 1941) [Gaekwad’s Oriental Series no. 90].
de la Vallee Poussin (1896): L. de la Vallee Poussin (ed.), fctudes et textes tantriques: Pancakrama (Gand: H. Engelcke, 1896) [Recueil de travaux publics par la Faculty de Philosophic et Lettres de l’Universit6 de Gand, 16me fascicule].
Edgerton (1954): Franklin Edgerton, Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit Language and Literature (Banaras: Banaras Hindu University, 1954).
Edgerton (1956): Franklin Edgerton, “The Buddha and Language” Indian Historical Quarterly 32 (1956) pp. 129-135.
George (1974): Christopher S. George (ed. and trans.), The Candamahdrofaiita Tantra: A Critical Edition and English Translation,
Chapters I-VIII (New Haven: American Oriental Society, 1974) [[[American]] Oriental Series vol. 56].
Goudriaan (1981): Teun Goudriaan and Sanjukta Gupta, Hindu Tantric and Sakta Literature (Weisbaden: Otto Harrassowitz, 1981) [A History of Indian Literature 2.2].
Hoffmann (1973): Helmut Hoffmann, “Buddha’s Preaching of the Kalacakra Tantra at the Stupa of Dhanyakataka” German Scholars on India vol. 1 (Varanasi: The Chowkhamba Sanskrit Series Office, 1973) pp. 136-140.
Holtzmann: Adolf Holtzmann, Grammatisches aus dem Mahabharata (Hil- desheim/New York: Georg Olms Verlag reprint [1884 ed.], 1981). mKhas grub (1434): mKhas grub dGe legs dpal bzang, rGyud thams cad kyi rgyal po bcom Idan 'das dpal dus kyi ’khor lo mchog gi dang po’i sangs rgyas kyi rtsa ba’i rgyud las phyung ba bsdus ba’i rgyud kyi 'grel chen rtsa ba’i rgyud kyi rjes su 'jug pa stong phrag bcu gnyis pa dri ma med pa'i ’od kyi rgya cher bshad pa de kho na nyid snang bar byed pa zhes bya ba; Yab sras gsung 'bum: mKhas grub KHA (Dharamsala: Tibetan Cultural Printing Press (Shes rig bar khang], 1983).
Mahavyutpatti: Ryozaburo Sakaki et al (ed.), Mahavyutpatti (Tokyo: Suzuki Research Foundation, 1970).
Monier-Williams: Monier Monier-Williams, A Sanskrit-English Dictionary (Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass reprint [1899 ed.], 1981).
Newman (1985): John Newman, “A Brief History of the Kalachakra”; Geshe Lhundub Sopa (ed.), The Wheel of Time: The Kalachakra in Context (Madison, WI: Deer Park Books, 1985) pp. 51-90.
Newman (1987a): John Newman, “The Paramadibuddha (the Kalacakra mulatantra) and Its Relation to the Early Kalacakra Literature” IndoIranian Journal 30 (1987) pp. 93-102.
Newman (1987b): John Ronald Newman, The Outer Wheel of Time: Vajraydna Buddhist Cosmology in the Kalacakra Tantra (Ann Arbor, MI: University Microfilms International, 1987) [[[University of Wisconsin]] - Madison Ph.D. thesis].
Reigle (1986): David Reigle, “The Lost Kalacakra Mula Tantra on the Kings of Sambhala” [[[Kalacakra]] Research Publications no. 1] (Talent, OR: Eastern School, 1986).
Ruegg (1986): D. Seyfort Ruegg, "Review of Georg von Simson, Sanskrit- Wor- terbuch der buddhistischen Texte aus den Turfan-Funden 3” Journal of the American Oriental Society 106 (1986) pp. 596-597.
Schmidt: Richard Schmidt, Nachtrdge zum Sanskrit-Worterbuch in kurzerer Fas-
sung von Otto Bohtlingk (Leipzig: Otto Harrassowitz, 1928).
Schrader (1937): F. Otto Schrader, “The Name Kalki(n)” The Adyar Library Bulletin 1 (1937) pp. 17-25.
Shastri (1917): Hara Prasad Shastri, A Descriptive Catalogue of Sanscrit Manuscripts in the Government Collection Under the Care of the Asiatic Society of Bengal vol. 1, Buddhist Manuscripts (Calcutta: Asiatic Society of Bengal, 1917).
Skorupski (1983): Tadeusz Skorupski (ed. and trans.), The Saruadurga- tiparifodhana Tantra (Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1983).
Snellgrove (1959): D.L. Snellgrove (ed. and trans.), The Hevajra Tantra Part 2 (London: Oxford University Press reprint, 1980) [[[London]] Oriental Series vol. 6].
Sri Kalacakra: text as given in Vimalaprabhd (S) U.
Tsuda (1974): Shinichi Tsuda (ed. and trans.), The Samvarodaya Tantra: Selected Chapters (Tokyo: The Hokuseido Press, 1974).
Vimalaprabhd (S) B: Asiatic Society of Bengal MS G. 10766; palm leaf; old Bengali script; dated 39th regnal year of Harivarman of Bengal (11th- 12th cent.); described in Shastri (1917:79-82).
Vimalaprabhd (S) D: The Institute for Advanced Studies of World Religions film-strip no. MBB-1971-24-25; paper; devandgari; (Stony Brook, NY: The Institute for Advanced Studies of World Religions, 1971).
Vimalaprabhd (S) N: Asiatic Society of Bengal MS G.4727; palm leaf; old Newari script; description and extracts in Shastri (1917:73-79).
Vimalaprabhd (S) U: Jagannatha Upadhyaya (ed.), Vimalaprabhafikd of Kalki Sri Puntfarika on Sri Laghukalacakratantraraja by Sri MahjuSriyafa, vol. 1 (Sar- nath: Central Institute of Higher Tibetan Studies, 1986) [Bibliotheca Indo-Tibetica Series no. 9].
Vimalaprabhd (T): Lokesh Chandra (ed.), The Collected Works of Bu-ston: Part 1 (KA) (New Delhi: International Academy of Indian Culture, 1965) pp. 301-603 [$ata-pi(aka Series vol. 41].
Whitney: William Dwight Whitney, Sanskrit Grammar (Cambridge: Harvard University Press reprint of the 2nd [1889] edition, 1967).
Winternitz (1933): Maurice Winternitz, A History of Indian Literature vol. 2 (New Delhi: Oriental Books Reprint Corporation reprint, 1977).
