“The Knot Tied with Space”: Notes on a Previously Unidentified Stanza in Buddhist Literature and Its Citation

by James B. Apple

Introduction

This article identifies and analyzes a previously unidentified, yet well-known, stanza found in a number of Madhyamaka (“Middle Way Philosophy”) commentaries composed by South Asian Mahåyåna Buddhists and then discusses its meaning for traditional Buddhist scholars. The identification

of this renowned verse within a prominent Mahåyåna sËtra provides not only important philological data but furnishes important clues for how pre-modern Indian Buddhist scholars understood and utilized Mahåyåna Buddhist sËtras in their scholastic treatises. A provisional translation of this stanza reads:

“The leader of the world has taught that nirvåˆa does not exist in nirvåˆa. A knot tied with space is released through space itself.”1 The popularity of this verse is demonstrated by its citation in over ten modern publications since the 1913 publication of La Vallée Poussin’s critical edition of Candrak¥rti’s Prasannapadå.2

Department of Religion and Classics, 2500 University Drive NW, Calgary, Alberta, Canada T2N 1N4. Email : jbapple@ucalgary.ca. 1 See Table 1 for Sanskrit, Tibetan, and Chinese versions of this verse. 2 The verse is cited, but not identified, by at least ten modern authors on Madhyamaka philosophy. See Dasgupta 1974: 18; Merton 1975: 282; Gómez 1977: 22; Stcherbatsky 1978: 221; Sprung et al. 1979: 263; Huntington 1983: 100; 1989: 201n28; Eckel 1985: 74; Lindtner 1985;

Although the verse has previously been unidentified, some scholars (e.g., Scherrer-Schaub 1992) have surmised, based on its content, that it was located somewhere within the Perfection of Wisdom literature. Indeed, the 18,000-verse Perfection of Wisdom does briefly mention an åkåßagranthi, a “knot tied in

space.”3 However, the exact stanza under analysis here is found in the first verses of Chapter Eleven of the AvaivartikacakrasËtra (‘The Discourse on Irreversibility’).4 The AvaivartikacakrasËtra is a significant, yet previously unstudied, self-proclaimed early Mahåyåna scripture that focuses on the concept that bodhisattvas (“Buddhas-in-training”) cannot be turned back – are irreversible – (avaivartika) from the attainment of full Buddhahood.5 The concept of the irreversible (avaivartika) bodhisattva is considered to be one of the most vital subjects in the historical development of Mahåyåna Buddhism

due to the concept’s prevalence in early (pre-third century) Mahåyåna literature.6 The AvaivartikacakrasËtra provides the earliest and most comprehensive discussion of this concept among Mahåyåna scriptures outside the Prajñåpåramitå literature. The sËtra is also notable for its advocacy of ekayåna, its use

of narrative displacement, and its rhetoric of ‘word-play’ through semantic elucidation, or nirukti. 7 By virtue of its preservation and transmission in South, Central, and East Asia over many centuries, one may infer that this text was an influential Mahåyåna sËtra in Buddhist culture. The full version of the Avaivartikacakra

Scherrer-Schaub 1991: xlvi; 1992; Bugault 2002: 335; Brunnhölzl 2014. The verse is identified by either Lhakpa Dhondup or Lobsang Dorje Rabling in Tsong-kha-pa’s citation as found in his Ocean of Reasoning commentary (Samten and Garfield 2006: 533). However, Samten and Garfield, along with their research associates, neither identify the Sanskrit

version of the verse nor its citation in any Indian commentary. 3 ÓryåΣ†adaßasåhasrikå – prajñåpåramitå – nåma – mahåyåna - sËtra (Derge chapter 58, 175a): …byis pa bdag nyid kyis ni mkha’ la mdud pa bor… 4 I follow the chapter divisions of the AvaivartikacakrasËtra found in DharmarakΣa’s Chinese translation. Tibetan versions of this sËtra do not provide individual chapter divisions. 5 On the AvaivartikacakrasËtra see Apple 2008, Handurukande 1973. 6 See Apple 2004; 2011. 7 See Apple 2009. On ekayåna see Apple 2015a: 13–43.

mahåyåna-sËtra is no longer extant in any Indic language but is preserved in Chinese, Tibetan, Manchu, and Mongolian translations. Three translations of this sËtra are preserved in Chinese, with the earliest being the Aweiyuezhizhe jing 阿惟越致 遮 經 (T. 266) translated by DharmarakΣa in 284 C.E. in Dunhuang (敦 煌).8 The ninth-century Tibetan translation, the phyir mi ldog pa’i ’khor lo zhes bya ba theg pa chen po’i mdo, is preserved in several

Dunhuang fragments and is found in all Tibetan Kanjurs, including Derge (no. 240) and Peking (no. 906). Table 1 compares the extant Chinese and Tibetan versions of this stanza from the AvaivartikacakrasËtra against the Sanskrit version of the verse as preserved in Candrak¥rti’s Prasannapadå, providing

clear evidence for its identification. The columns of the table list in chronological order, from left to right, a Chinese version along with four Tibetan translations of the verse followed by the Sanskrit version of the verse. The first column on the left represents the third-century Chinese of the Dunhuang-based translator DharmarakΣa. Although the earliest of versions, its meaning does not correlate with that of the extant Tibetan or Sanskrit. A translation of DharmarakΣa’s Chinese version reads:

世尊所演 説 假 號名泥 洹 喩之若虚 空 度 於無所 有

“The World-Honored One explained that nirvåˆa is a conventional designation. It is a metaphor, like space, liberation without existence.”9 DharmarakΣa may have been working with an early recension of the sËtra or one that was preserved in middle Indic rather than Sanskrit. Accounts in the secondary literature mention that a

8 Among the three extant translations the first is the Aweiyuezhizhe jing 阿惟 越致遮經 (T. 266), translated by DharmarakΣa in four juan on the 14th day, 10th month, 5th year of Tai Kang (泰 康), Western Jin dynasty (西 晉) (November 8, 284 C.E.) in Dunhuang (敦煌). The second translation is the Butuizhuanfalun jing 不退轉法輪經 (T. 267), translated during the Northern Liang dynasty ( 北 涼 ) (412–439 C.E.). The third translation is the

Guangboyanjing butuizhuanlun jing 廣博嚴淨不退轉輪經 (T. 268), translated by 智厳 Zhi-yan during the 4th year of Yuan Jia (元嘉), Liusong dynasty (劉 宋) (427 C.E.) in Zhi-yuan Monastery (枳園寺) in Yang-du (楊都). 9 Aweiyuezhizhe jing 阿惟越致遮經 (T. 266, 213c14–15). I would like to thank and acknowledge Seishi Karashima, who discussed this verse with me at IRABS, Hachioji, Japan on May 19, 2015. Any errors are solely my own.

Bråhm¥ manuscript of the AvaivartikacakrasËtra was brought by monks from Kucha to DharmarakΣa in Dunhuang.10 As the work of Daniel Boucher and Seishi Karashima has clearly demonstrated, DharmarakΣa’s translations exhibit frequent confusions of readings from the Indic manuscripts, based on the difficulties of reading kharoΣ†h¥ script or misinterpreting Prakrit words and phrases through confusing long and short vowels, not distinguishing aspirated

and unaspirated voiced consonants, misconstruing labials, and so forth.11 In addition, DharmarakΣa also based his translations on the understanding of his predecessor in Chinese Buddhist translation Zhi Qian ( 支 謙 , ca. 220-257 C.E.), and borrowed phrases from his works for his own translations. Based on

these factors, DharmarakΣa most likely understood granthi in its secondary meaning as “expression,”12 hence translating with 假號名 , instead of, for instance, 結網 “knot,” found in his translation of the Lotus SËtra.13 He may also have misunderstood åkåßenaiva as åkiñcayana eva, hence giving us 無所有, “without existence,” rather than 虛 空 “space.”14 In brief, the differences of DharmarakΣa’s translation from other versions are most likely due to a

number of intercultural and historically complex problems of translation between Buddhist India/Central Asia and China that I will not focus on here. The next four columns of the table represent Tibetan versions of the stanza found in the sËtra or as preserved in Mahåyåna scholastic commentaries. The Tibetan sËtra versions of the verse include the pre-ninth-century Dunhuang Tibetan and the ninth century Kanjur Tibetan archetype attributed to the translators

Dånaߥla, Jinamitra, Munivarman, and Ye shes sde. The Mahåyåna scholastic commentaries represented on this table include the Tibetan Tanjur translations of the Madhyamakaßåstra commentaries of Bhåviveka’s Prajñåprad¥pa translated in the 10 See Chandra 2012: 18.

11 See Boucher 1998, 2008, and Karashima 1992. 12 Cone 2001: 21. 13 Zhengfahua jing 正法華經 (T.263, 74a19); Cf. Karashima 1998:219. 14 Cf. Nakamura 1983: 681a, s.v. 所 有 , p. 1329b 無 所 有 . DharmarakΣa translates 虛空 in the compound 虛空界 “the sphere of the sky,” equivalent to åkåßadhåtu, in his translation of the Lotus SËtra, see Karashima 1998:513.

ninth century by Jñånagarbha and Cog-ro klu’i rgyal mtshan, and the Tibetan version of Candrak¥rti’s Prasannapadå translated in the twelfth century by Mahåsumati and Pa tshab Nyi ma grags. The fifth column provides the Sanskrit as preserved in La Vallée Poussin’s edition of the Prasannapadå, which is based on eighteenth-century manuscripts from Nepal. Although expressing similar meaning, all four Tibetan examples are slightly different translations of

the verse that matches with the general meaning of the Sanskrit version. The eighteenth-century Sanskrit reads,15 anirvåˆaµ hi nirvåˆaµ lokanåthena deßitaµ / åkåßena k®to granthir åkåßenaiva mocita˙ // As mentioned above, a possible translation of the Sanskrit version is: “The leader of the world has taught that nirvåˆa does not exist in nirvåˆa. A knot tied with space is released through space itself.” In my translation of the Sanskrit version of this

verse, I follow the Tibetan Dunhuang and Tibetan translation of Candrak¥rti’s Prasannapadå, which takes “anirvåˆaµ” as “nirvåˆa does not exist” (mya ngan ’das med) and then takes the accusative used for a locative (myang ’das su) for nirvåˆaµ. Alternatively, one could read this negation as “non-nirvåˆa is nirvåˆa” or “nirvåˆa is not nirvåˆa.” The phrase åkåßena k®to granthir may be literally translated as “a knot made with space” or “a knot tied with space.”

The majority of Euro-North American translations of this verse have translated the instrumental singular of åkåßa as “with or by space” while only Eckel (1985) has translated the phrase as “tied in space.” As indicated below, åkåßa in ancient India should not necessarily be correlated with notions of space in modern mathematics or physics. That is, because åkåßa in ancient India was considered an element (i.e., åkåßadhåtu), with physical qualities similar to the Western concept of ether, it would be

15 I would like to thank and acknowledge Anne MacDonald, who kindly checked three of the six most reliable Sanskrit manuscripts for variants, that is, ms P (Oxford), ms D (Rome), and ms B (Nepal). These manuscripts did not contain any major variants. See MacDonald 2015 for sigla and descriptions of these Prasannapadå manuscripts. The Potala ms (MacDonald ms Q) has the reading, as noted on the table, åkånaiva for åkåßenaiva (Yonezawa 2010: 135).

conceivable for a knot to be made or tied with space.16 Be that as it may, as discussed below, åkåßa in our stanza should be understood as a metaphor (d®Σtånta). Having briefly identified this verse and provided several philological details, I will now discuss the contextual meaning of the verse in the AvaivartikacakrasËtra and how it was understood among notable South Asian Mahåyåna Buddhist commentators.

The Context of the Verse in the AvaivartikacakrasËtra The “knot-tied-with-space” verse, well-known to both traditional and modern scholars of Buddhism, occurs at a key juncture in the AvaivartikacakrasËtra. The AvaivartikacakrasËtra depicts the Buddha teaching the “wheel of the irreversible doctrine”

(avaivartikadharmacakra) where, as in the Lotus SËtra, all beings are destined for Buddhahood. In the AvaivartikacakrasËtra the Buddha articulates to Ónanda that when he teaches ßråvaka stages of mainstream Buddhist attainment, stages such as the Stream-enterer (srota-åpanna), Once-returner (sak®dågåmin), Non-returner (anågåmin), and Arhat, he is actually making reference to irreversible bodhisattvas. An irreversible bodhisattva is a

bodhisattva of high stature who can no longer turn back from the attainment of full Buddhahood. In Chapters Two through Ten of the sËtra, the Buddha articulates to Ónanda how individuals in ßråvaka stages of the path are actually irreversible bodhisattvas. According to the normative representation of

this sËtra, the Buddha, through his skill-in-means (upåya), creates notions or perceptions (saµjñå) of stages of traditional mainstream Buddhist categories of progression, such as the Followers-of-Dharma (dharmånusårin), Once-returner (sak®dågåmin), Non-returner (anågåmin), Arhat, or Pratyekabuddha as a way of encouraging beings to progress towards attaining the ßråvaka goal of nirvåˆa. However, as the Buddha explains, rather than heading toward the attainment of nirvåˆa, all his disciples are actually irreversible from anuttara-samyak-saµbodhi, unsurpassable complete full awakening.

16 Note that, despite my exclusionary statement to disassociate åkåßa from modern notions of space, Einstein’s general theory of relativity requires space to be endowed with ether. See Einstein 1920.

The key juncture where our verse occurs is at the beginning of Chapter Eleven of the AvaivartikacakrasËtra, immediately after chapters where the Buddha has deconstructed and redefined the status categories of Arhat (Chapter Eight), Íråvaka (Chapter Nine), and Pratyekabuddha (Chapter Ten). Individuals who had status within these categories were thought to have attained nirvåˆa, or perhaps had the conceptual notion or perception of such an attainment. The context

is particularly clear in Chapter Ten, where the Buddha explains to the audience how a bodhisattva-mahåsattva is a pratyekabuddha. In this chapter the Buddha instructs that all dharmas, from form to consciousness, including the five aggregates, are uncontaminated, unproduced, unceasing, and perpetually without signs. They are intrinsically empty, inconceivable. Not only all dharmas, but nirvåˆa as well, is unproduced, and unceasing; the word nirvåˆa is

merely a name.17 The Buddha indicates that saµsåra and nirvåˆa are extremes which do not exist, that words are also uncontaminated, unproduced, unceasing, and perpetually without signs, and that conceptions do not exist. He explains that all things are like a plantain tree: without essence, unproduced,

unceasing, similar to space.18 Finally, the Buddha indicates that the five aggregates have the nature of an illusion, being like a mirage. It is at this point, at the very beginning of Chapter Eleven, that Ónanda announces with amazement to the audience that nirvåˆa is “not nirvåˆa,” and then provides the metaphor of the knot untied in space.

Knots and Space in Mahåyåna sËtra literature

The verse that Ónanda utters utilizes two important images

17 All chapter and verse references are to my Tibetan critical edition and translation of the AvaivartikacakrasËtra (Apple, forthcoming) For example, Chapter 10, paragraph D, verse 6 (Derge 268b5): /chos kun mya ngan ’das pa ste/ /ming tsam gyis ni brjod par zad/ /ma skyes shing ni ma ‘gags te/ /de dag

tshig gis yongs su brjod/ “All dharmas are in nirvåˆa and through only names are they indicated. Unproduced and unceasing, these are proclaimed by words.” 18 E.g., AVC, Chapter 10, paragraph F, verse 5 (Derge 270b2): /chu shing phung po snying po med/ /rtag par shin tu snying po med/ /ma skyes shing ni ma ’gags pa/ /nam mkha’ dang ni mtshungs ’dra ba/. “[Things are] like a plaintain tree, without essence, always without an essence, unproduced and unceasing, similar to space.”

found in Buddhist literature: space and knots. In Indian literature more broadly, space, or åkåßa, is among several terms found in the ‰gveda and Bråhmaˆa literature denoting “empty space, sky, air” or the unlimited (Ruegg 2010: 6). A number of Buddhist commentators will explain, based on a semantic etymology

(nirukti), that space is called åkåßa because things ‘shine strongly’.19 This etymology-based understanding of space regards it as something similar to ancient and medieval Western notions of ether, a glowing medium that supports the material elements (mahåbhËta). The radiance of space will also be a metaphor for the brilliant aspects of buddhahood that shine like the sun or “space” åkåßa (Conze 1962: 164–165). In addition to these etymologybased

connotations, space (Tib. nam mkha’) has several different contextual meanings in Buddhist discourse. As Jacques May has noted, Buddhists most often refer to space as either an element (åkåßadhåtu, nam mkha’i khams), an unconditioned dharma (asaµsk®ta), or as a type of analogue or metaphor (upamåna, d®Σtånta).20 Among Abhidharma traditions, the Sarvåstivådins will define space as “that which does not hinder [[[material form]]; and that which is not

hindered by matter or material form].”21 They will differentiate two kinds of space, one that is the conditioned (saµsk®ta) element (dhåtu) and the other that is unconditioned (asaµsk®ta). The conditioned element of space (åkåßadhåtu), a type of visible matter, is externally a cavity exemplified by a gate (dvåra) or window (våtåyana), or internally (ådhyåtmika) as the cavity in the mouth (mukha) or nose (nåsikå).22 Unconditioned space is immaterial and

enables material objects to exist and move. However, the Våts¥putr¥yas and Sammat¥yas deny that space is an

19 Candrak¥rti’s Catu˙ßataka†¥kå (Suzuki 1994: 180.5): rËpåntaråbhåvo bh®ßam asyånta˙ kåßante bhåvå ity åkåßam…; Yaßomitra’s AKV bh®ßam asyånta˙ kåßante bhåvå ity åkåßam ity apare; Abhayåkaragupta’s Munimatålaµkåra (Li and Kano 2015: 39) bhṛßam asyāntaḥ kāßante bhāvā ity ākāßaṃ gaganam/…Noted in La Vallée Poussin, at AK. 1.6, page 8: “where there is no matter (rËpa), nothing opposes the arising of material factors: the absence of matter receives the name of åkåßa, because things will shine strongly.” 20 May 1959: 498, s.v. åkåßa; Cf. Ruegg 2010: 177. 21 AK 1.5d (Sangpo 2012: 209). 22 AK 1.28ab (Sangpo 2012: 251).

asaµsk®tadharma. Space for the Sautråntikas is not real but “merely the absence of tangible things” (spraΣ†avya-abhåvamåtra). As Dhammajoti demonstrates, the ontological status of space was highly controversial among the various traditions of Abhidharma (Dhammajoti 2009: 491–496). Six mainstream Buddhist schools will classify åkåßa as an unconditioned dharma. Yogåcåra-based traditions will also count space among the unconditioned dharmas and as a denomination for the ultimate.23 Among Madhyamakas, Candrak¥rti will count space among four formless unconditional dharmas as well as among three

unconditional dharmas.24 However, as discussed below, for Madhyamakas and Candrak¥rti, space is a mere nominal designation whose existence as an element (dhåtu) is not accepted. For Madhyamakas, space, like all things, lacks any instrinsic nature (svabhåva) or essence (åtman) and is empty (ßËnya). An

influential sËtra for Madhyamaka adherents that illustrates the lack of essence in the element of space is the Pit®putrasamågama, as cited in Íåntideva’s ÍikΣasamuccaya. Íåntideva cites a long excerpt from this sËtra to demonstrate that even though all things lack essence and lack intrinsic nature, relations of cause and effect are not negated.25 In

23 E.g., Sthiramati’s PañcaskandhakavibhåΣå (Kramer 2013, fol. 61b4–5): asaµskr†aµ katamad iti / yan na hetupratyayapratibaddhasvarËpaµ tad asaµsk®tam ucyate/ åkåßam apratisaµkhyånirodha˙/ pratisaµkhyånirodhas tathatå cety asaµsk®taprabhedapradarßanaµ/ åkåßaµ katamad ity åkåßasvarËpåvabodhårthaµ praßna˙ /

yo rËpåvakåßa iti tatsvarËpa nirdeßa˙ / See also Kramer 2012: 127–128; Kramer 2013: 4a4–b1, 61b6. Kramer 2012 notes “remarkable divergences” among Abhidharma works for what counts under the category of “the unconditioned.” See La Vallée Poussin 1928: 75–77 for mere denomination for the ultimate. 24 Candrak¥rti, Pañcaskandhaprakaraˆa (Lindtner 1979: 113): gang gzugs can ma yin pa la yang rnam pa gnyis te/ ’dus byas dang ’dus ma byas pa’o// de la gzugs can ma yin pa ’dus byas la yang rnam pa gsum ste/ sems dang sems las byung ba dang/ sems dang mi ldan pa’o/ /gang yan gzugs can ma yin pa ’dus ma byas pa ni rnam pa bzhi ste/ nam mkha’ dang/ so sor brtags pa’i ’gog pa dang/ so sor brtags pa ma yin pa’i ’gog pa dang/ chos rnams kyi chos nyid do//; (Lindtner

1979: 145) ’du ma byas gsum bzhad par bya ste/ de la nam mkha’ gang zhe na/ gang gzugs rnams kyi go ’byed cings gzugs med pa ni nam mkha’o/ /… 25 ÍikΣasamuccaya (Bendall 1902: 244): tatra yathå niråtmånaß ca sarvadharmå˙/ karmaphalasaµbandhâvirodhaß ca ni˙svabhåvatå ca yathåd®Σ†asarvadharmâvirodhaß ca/ tathå pit®putrasamågame darßitam/.

the citation, the six elements (Σa∂dhåtu), six spheres of tangible objects (Σa†sparßåyatana), and the eighteen sensory objects that affect the mind (aΣ†ådaßamanopavicåra) are shown to be empty. Among the elements, the element of space is discussed as follows, “There comes a time when all that bears

form becomes space. And why is that? Because the element of space is indestructible, firm, immovable. Great King, just as the element of nirvåˆa is unconditioned, so too should the element of space be perceived as present everywhere. For in time a man, Great King, might cause to be dug in a certain dry

spot a well or a pond or a pit or pool, what do you think, Great King? Has the space come from anywhere? [The Great King] said, “No, Blessed One.” The Blessed One said, “For instance, the man, Great King, might fill up again that well or pool or what not, what do you think, Great King? Has that space gone

anywhere? [The Great King] said, “No, Blessed One. And why so?” “Because the element of space has nothing to do with going or coming, nor with manhood or womanhood.” The Blessed One said, “So, Great King, external space is immovable, unchanging. Why is that? The element of space is empty of the element of space. The element of space is devoid of the element of space, it does not dwell in manhood or womanhood. Thus, in this way, it must be perceived as it is by correct discernment.”26

26 English translation modified from Bendall 1922. ÍikΣasamuccaya (Bendall 1902: 249): bhavati samayo yad rËpaµ bibharti sarvam åkåߥbhavati/ tat kasya heto˙/ akΣayo hy åkåßadhåtu˙ sthiro ’cala˙/ tad yathå mahåråjåsaµsk®to nirvåˆadhåtu˙/ evam evåkåßadhåtu˙ sarvatrånugato draΣ†avya˙/ tad yathåpi nåma

mahåråja puruΣotthale deße udapånaµ vå ku†akaµ vå kËpaµ vå puΣkariˆ¥µ vå khånayet/ tat kiµ manyase mahåråja yat tatråkåßa˙ kutas tad ågatam iti/ åha/ na kutaßcid bhagavan/ bhagavån åha/ tad yathåpi nåma mahåråja sa puruΣa˙ punar eva tad udapånaµ vå yåvat puΣkariˆ¥µ vå pËrayet/ tat kiµ manyase mahåråja yat

tad åkåßaµ kvacid gatam iti/ åha/ na kvacid gataµ bhagavan/ tat kasya heto˙/ na hy åkå- [250] ßadhåtur gamane vågamane vå pratyupasthita˙/ na str¥bhåvena na puruΣabhåvena pratyupasthita˙/ bhagavån åha/ iti hi mahåråja båhyåkåßadhåtur acala˙/ avikåra˙/ tat kasya heto˙/ ßËnyo hy åkåßadhåtur åkåßadhåtutvena/

virahitåkåßadhåtur åkåßadhåtutvena/ na puruΣabhåvena na str¥bhåvena pratyupasthita˙/ evam eva yathåbhËtaµ samyakprajñayå draΣ†avyaµ/. The Sanskrit citation correlates to the Tibetan translation of the Pit®putrasamågama (yab dang sras mjal ba zhes bya ba theg pa chen po’i mdo, D.61, 132a-133a): /rgyal po chen po gzugs zhig na thams cad nam

In brief, for Madhyamakas the element of space (åkåßadhåtu) is empty, and as indicated below, is a dependent designation. Space as a metaphor (d®Σtånta) occurs quite often in Mahåyåna Buddhist discourse. As discussed by McMahan (2002: 76-81), space in this literature may connote vastness, the infinite,

“undiffereniatedness, formlessness, sameness, extension in all directions, and non-resistance” (77). In the Ratnaguˆasañcayagåthå, the boundless knowledge of the Buddhas is compared to the boundlessness of space. Space has the quality of sameness, of being unbroken, and of lacking differentiaton or multiplicity (77). In the 8,000-verse Perfection of Wisdom (AΣ†a), as McMahan clarifies (2002: 77), “the Mahåyåna itself is identified with space in that

it is infinite, immeasurable, and self-idenitical everywhere. Perfect wisdom is said to be like space in that it is pure, unconditioned, deep, not able to be measured, calculated, or compared.” The Perfection of Wisdom, like space, is said to be stainless, non-substantial, and inconceivable. As mentioned

above, the state of buddhahood will also be compared to space. A verse frequently cited in this regard by Madhyamaka scholars is from the ÓryasarvabuddhaviΣayajñånålokålaµkåra, where Mañjußr¥ praises

mkhar ’gyur ba’i dus de yod do/ /de ci’i phyir zhe na/ nam mkha’i khams ni zad mi shes pa’i phyir ro/ /de ni nang gi nam mkha’i khams zhes bya bar shes par bya ste/ gnas shing mi g.yo ba’o/ /rgyal po chen po ’di lta ste/ dper na ’dus ma byas ni mya ngan las ’das pa’i dbyings te/ de bzhin du nam mkha’i khams

kyang thams cad du song bar blta bar bya’o/ /rgyal po chen po ’di lta ste/ dper na mi zhig gis thad la khron pa ’am/ rdzing bu [133a] ’am/ khron rings sam/ rdzing zhig brkos na/ rgyal po chen po de la ji snyam du sems/ de’i nam mkha’ de ga las ’ongs/ gsol pa/ bcom ldan ’das de ni ga las kyang ma mchis so/ /rgyal po chen po ’di lta ste/ dper na mi des khron pa nas rdzing gi bar de dag phyir bkang na/ rgyal po chen po de la ji snyam du sems/ de’i nam mkha’ de

gang du song / gsol pa/ bcom ldan ’das de ni gang du yang ma mchis te/ de ci’i slad du zhe na/ nam mkha’i khams ni ’gro ba’am ’ong ba ’am ’ong bar nye bar gnas pa ma lags/ bud med kyi dngos po dang/ skyes pa’i dngos por nye bar gnas pa ma lags pa’i slad du’o/ /bka’ stsal pa/ rgyal po chen po de ltar na phyi

rol gyi nam mkha’i khams ni mi g.yo mi ’gyur ba’o/ /de ci’i phyir zhe na/ nam mkha’i khams ni nam mkha’i khams kyis stong zhing/ nam mkha’i khams ni nam mkha’i khams dang bral ba ste/ nam mkha’i khams ni bud med kyi dngos por nye bar mi gnas/ skyes pa’i dngos por nye bar mi gnas kyis/ de ltar yang dag pa ji lta ba bzhin du yang dag pa’i shes rab kyis rtogs shig/.

the Buddha with the following words: “A buddha has the characteristics of space and space has no characteristics. Homage to you who is without object and released from causes and effects.”27 Along these lines, the Vajramaˆ∂adhåraˆ¥, as cited in Candrak¥rti’s Prasannapadå, states that liberated beings pass

away with their “minds situated in space” (åkåßasthitena) (MacDonald 2015, vol. 2: 195–196). Space, therefore, connotes emptiness (ßËnyatå), the state of buddhahood, perfect wisdom, and nirvåˆa. Conze (1962: 165) provides a brief analytical synopsis of the comparison of space and nirvåˆa based on the

Milindapañha: Both exist, though their form, location, age and measure are unascertainable. Both are unobstructed, supportless and infinite, without origin, life or death, rise or fall. In meditation space can be considered as a sort of likeness of the emptiness which is the ultimate reality. A vast

capacity, it is not nothing. Not subject to conditions or restrictions it is free from obstructions and obstacles, and cannot resist, fetter, entrance, estrange, or lead astray. It is everywhere, and everywhere is it the same. In it nothing is wanted, nothing owned. In perfect calm it remains by itself

outside time, change and action. Nothing can be predicated of it, nothing adheres to it as its attribute. The other image found in our verse is that of a knot. A knot (Skt. granthi, Prk. gaˆ†hi, Tib. mdud pa) in Buddhist discourse generally connotes an entanglement in false doctrines or speculation, like

di††higaˆ†hi, the tangle of false views, or the attachment to things as real (idaµ satyåbhiveßa), one of the four “bodily knots” (kåya grantha) that appears in the Nikåya literature.28 Only a few extant sources relate knots with space. The

27 SarvabuddhaviΣayajñånålokålaµkåra (Kimura et al., IV, §37, verse 15): åkåßalakΣanå buddhå åkåßaµ cåpy alakΣaˆam/ kåryakåraˆanirmukta nirålamba namo

’stu te//15// Bhåviveka, Prajñåprad¥pa, chapter 25 (Eckel 1985: 73); The Madhyamakaratnaprad¥pa (Lindtner 1981: 77; Derge 262b1), as noted by Lindtner, reads thams cad for sangs rgyas: /thams cad nam mkha’ mtshan nyed de/ /nam mkha’ la yang mtshan nyid med/ /mtshan nyid mtshan gzhi nges grol ba/ dmigs med khyod la phyag ’tshal lo/. 28 Cone 2001: s.v. grantha. Fuller 2005, “bodily tie”. Cf. MacDonald 2015, vol. 2, 174–75n338.

Ratnaguˆasamcayagåthå (22.5), for example, states that: “In want of food, indulging in imagination, sentient beings always wander about in birth-and-death, their minds attached. Both I and Mine are dharmas that are unreal and empty. The spiritually childish are bound by this Self which is a knot of space.”29

The Samantamukhaparivarta also states that although misknowledge and attachment do not exist, childish beings conceive of attachment “just as one makes knots in space.”30 In a number of Mahåyåna sËtras, knots are related to the problem of reification and conceptuality through saµjñå, or notions.31 The South Asian commentators who discuss the “knot-tied-with-space”

29 Yuyama (1976: 89): åhårakåma parikalpayamåna sattvå˙ saṁsårasaktamanasas sada saṁsaranti| ahumahyadharma ubhiyeti abhËtaßËnyå åkåßagaˆ†hi ayu åtmana

baddha bålai˙ / ≈ (Yuyama 1976: 180) sems can zas dang ’dod las yong su rtog byed cing/ /’khor bar chags pa’i yid dang ldan rnams rtag tu ’khor/ /bdag dang bdag gi chos gnyis yod min stong pa ste/ /byis pa rnams kyis bdag la nam mkha’i mdud ’di bcings //22.5//. 30 Órya-samantamukhaparivarta-nåma-mahåyåna-

sËtra (Derge 55, 190b ; Chang 1983: 142): [1] ma rig pa las gti mug byung/ /ma rig pa yang yod ma yin/ /gang na gti mug yod min pa/ /de na gang yang rmongs pa med/ [2] /rmongs med sems can rmongs gyur cing/ /chags med chags par 'du shes pa/ /ji ltar byis pas nam mkha' [191a] la/ / mdud pa bor bas gsog bzhin

no/. 31 Braarvig (1993: 60n1) says regarding the AkΣayamatinirdeßa, “In this enumeration of the five skandhas perception, saµjñå, is called knots, since it binds experience to the distinguishing marks of the objects.” Vimalak¥rtinirdeßa, (chapter, VIII: Advayadharmamukhapraveßaparivarta, Sanskrit MS 50b7 -

51a2, §10: siµhamatir bodhisatva åha: idaµ såsravam idam anåsravam iti dvayam etat/ yat puna˙ samatådharmapråpta˙ såsravånåsravasaµjñaµ na karoti na våsaµjñåpråpta˙ na cåsaµjñåsamatåyåµ samatåpråpta˙ na saµjñågranthita˙/ ya evaµ praveßo ’yam advayapraveßa˙/. Tibetan, Kanjur ma 218a7-b: byang chub sems dpa’ seng ge blo gros kyis smras pa/ ’di ni zag pa dang bcas pa/ ’di ni zag pa med pa’o zhes bya ba de ni gnyis te/ gang mnyam pa nyid kyis chos thob pas zag pa dang/ zag pa med pa’i ’du shes su mi byed/ ’du shes med par gyur pa yang ma yin/ mnyam pa nyid la mnyam pa nyid thob pa yang med cing ’du shes kyi

mdud pa med pa de ltar gang ’jug pa de ni gnyis su med par ’jug pa’o//. Translation Thurman (1976: 74): “The bodhisattva Siµhamati declared, ‘To say, “This is impure” and “This is immaculate” makes for duality. One who, attaining equanimity, forms no conception of impurity or immaculateness, yet is not utterly without conception, has equanimity without any attainment of equanimity - he enters the absence of conceptual knots. Thus, he enters into nonduality.’” verse will relate the knots with attachment and reification.

South Asian Mahåyåna Buddhist Commentaries The “knot-tied-with-space” verse of the AvaivartikacakrasËtra is cited in Madhyamaka commentaries in the context of the twenty-fifth chapter of Någårjuna’s Madhyamakaßåstra, which analyzes nirvåˆa. Throughout the chapters of his Madhyamakaßåstra, Någårjuna deconstructs essentialist understandings of a variety of topics, including, in Chapter Five, the elements (e.g. earth, air, fire, water) and the element of space (åkåßadhåtu). Along these lines, Någårjuna will state in the Ratnåval¥, Because the phenomena of forms are only names, space too is only a name; Without the elements how could forms exist? Therefore even “name-only” does not exist.32 Therefore, for Någårjuna, the element of space is a dependent arising that is conventionally designated. In his Catu˙ßataka, Någårjuna’s disciple Óryadeva, also refutes the real existence of space, a position later

supported by Candrak¥rti in his Catu˙ßataka†¥kå.33 In the twenty-fifth chapter of the Madhyamakaßåstra, Någårjuna employs a dialectic that indicates the ultimate purport of dependent-arising to analytically dissolve all conceptual reifications or dichtomizing constructions of nirvåˆa as existent, non-existent, both existent and non-existent, or neither existent nor non-existent. For Någårjuna, nirvåˆa is also a conventional designation, one utilized to

indicate the cessation of all mental constructions. As the last verse of this chapter states (25.24): sarvopalambhopaßama˙ prapañcopaßama˙ ßiva˙ | na kvacit kasyacit kaßcid dharmo buddhena deßita˙ || 24 || The stilling of all apprehensions, the stilling of all hypostatizing elaborations, is [[[Wikipedia:Absolute (philosophy)|ultimate]]] welfare; No

32 Ratnåval¥ 1.99 (Hahn 1982: 38): rËpasyåbhåvamåtratvåd åkåßaµ nåmamåtrakam/ bhËtair vinå kuto rËpaµ nåmamåtrakam apy ata˙ /99// Tib. //gzugs kyi dngos po ming tsam phyir/ /nam mkha’ yang ni ming tsam mo/ /’byung med gzugs lta ga la yod/ /de phyir ming tsam nyid kyang yin/. 33 See Catu˙ßataka†¥kå ad Catu˙ßataka 9.5 (Suzuki 1994: 180–183).

Dharma whatsoever was ever taught by the Buddha to anyone. The earliest extant Indian Buddhist commentary to cite the “knot-tied-with-space” verse in relation to this work of Någårjuna’s is Bhåviveka’s sixth-century commentary to Någårjuna’s Madhyamakaßåstra, the Prajñåprad¥pa. Bhåviveka is also the

earliest known Madhyamaka commentator to utilize ågama, the words of the Buddha preserved in Buddhist scriptural sources, along with reasoning (yukti) to articulate his Madhyamaka philosophy. As ShØtarØ Iida (1966: 80) has pointed out, “the function of reasoning, yukti, is to gain a correct understanding of

ågama and not a verification of ågama”, as ågama, the word of the Buddha is authoritative for all Buddhists. Although Bhåviveka cites the “knot-tied-with-space” verse as ågama, he does not state its textual source. Bhåviveka comments: As we said at the start of the chapter, this chapter’s purpose has been to

demonstrate the emptiness of nirvåˆa by refuting our opponents’ arguments. Such statements as the following are therefore established: “The Lord of the world taught that nirvåˆa is not nirvåˆa. A knot tied with space is released through space itself.” 34 Bhåviveka follows this citation by quoting the

Brahmaparip®cchå, AΣ†asåhasrikåprajñåpåramitå, Bodhisattvapi†aka, and La∫kåvatåra sËtras. The citations from these discourses indicate the illusion-like nature of nirvåˆa. As indicated above, Candrak¥rti cites the “knot-tied-withspace” verse in his Prasannapadå, which has preserved the Sanskrit version of the verse. However, Candrak¥rti cites the verse as spoken by the Bhagavan (Poussin 1970: 540: uktaµ ca bhagavatå), instead of the literal context of the

AvaivartikacakrasËtra, where the verse is spoken by Ónanda at the beginning of Chapter Eleven. This style of citation demonstrates that Candrak¥rti considered all the content of a Mahåyåna sËtra as

34 See Prajñåprad¥pamËlamadhyamakav®tti (D 3853, 248a): de la ’dir rab tu byed pa’i don ni pha rol po dag gis rab tu byed pa’i dang por sgrub pa smras pa’i skyon [248b] brjod pas mya ngan las ’das pa ngo bo nyid med pa nyid du bstan pa yin no/ /de’i phyir/ mya ngan ’das med mya nga ’das/ /’jig rten mgon pos bstan pa mdzad/ /nam mkha’ mdud pa bor byas pa/ /nam mkha’ nyid kyis bkrol ba bzhin/ /zhes bya ba dang…; Eckel 1985: 74.

“word of the Buddha” (buddhavacana) regardless of who is actually speaking, akin to the way SubhËti proclaims the prajñåpåramitå under the might (anubhåva) or sustaining power (adhiΣ†håna) of the Buddha (see Conze 1973). Like other Madhyamaka thinkers, Candrak¥rti considers space to be nominally existent. In

his Prasannapadå, 35 Pañcaskandhaprakaraˆa,36Catu˙ßataka†¥kå,37 and MadhyamakåvatårabhåΣya,38 he quotes the same sËtra passage to illustrate this point: Oh monks, these five are mere names (ming tsam), mere terms (tha snyad tsam), mere designations (btags pa tsam), and these are as follows: the past, the

future, space, nirvåˆa, and the person.39 Avalokitavrata, the late seventh-century commentator on Bhåviveka’s Prajñåprad¥pa, comments on this section by making an important connection between the “knot-tied-with-space” verse from the AvaivartikacakrasËtra and another famous verse in Mahåyåna Buddhist literature, which I will discuss in the following paragraphs. Avalokitavrata states in his Prajñåprad¥pa†¥kå (D 3859, ZA 304a): As for indicating nirvåˆa as essencelessness, when others inquire as to what good qualities exist for this 35 Prasannapadå (La Vallée Poussin 1970: 389.5–6): tadyathå- pañcemåni bhikΣava˙ saµjñåmåtraµ pratijñåmåtraµ vyavahåramåtraµ saµv®timåtraµ yaduta at¥to ’dhvå anågato ’dhvå åkåßaµ nirvåˆaµ pudgalaßceti/. De Jong 1949: 42–43: “Il y a, O, Moines, cinq choses qui ne sont que des noms, des désignations, des expressions de la vie quotidienne et (43) qui ne relèvent que du plan mondain, à savoir, le passé, l’avenir, l’espace, l’individu et le Nirvåˆa.” 36 Pañcaskandhaprakaraˆa

(Lindtner 1979: 116–117): btags pa tsam la yod do zhes nye bar brjod do/ /de yang bcom ldan ’das kyis/ dge slong dag lnga po ’di rnams ni ’du shes tsam dang/ dam bca’ ba tsam dang/ kun rdzob tsam dang/ tha snyad tsam dang/ ’di lta ste ’das pa’i dus dang/ ma ’ongs pa’i dus dang/ nam mkha’ dang/ mya ngan las ’das pa dang/ gang [117] zag ces bya ba’o/ zhes de ltar ’du shes tsam du mngon par bsgrubs nas…. 37 Catu˙ßataka†¥kå, folio 155 b; also Lang, 2003: 161,

§239 (I). 38 MadhyamakåvatårabhåΣya (La Vallée Poussin 1912: 246.12–16): …dge slong dag lnga po ’di rnams ni ming tsam tha snyad tsam btags pa tsam ste/ gang ’di lta ste/ ’das pa’i dus dang ma ’ongs pa’i dus dang/ nam mkha’ dang mya ngan las ’das pa dang/ gang zag go zhes bya ba dang/ …. 39 Translation from the MadhyamakåvatårabhåΣya, see note 41 above.

teaching as they might claim that “this is proved only by lifeless argumentative treatises,” 40 here trustworthy scriptural sources are also established. In this way, from among the unlimited (mtha’ dag) Mahåyåna sËtras the teaching is established that: “The Lord of the world taught that nirvåˆa is not

nirvåˆa. A knot tied with space is released through space itself.” For example, an artisan with a long string for sewing that has tangles from thread being squeezed together in space is released through space itself. In the same way, the Bhagavan, the completely awakened one, teaches entities that do not

exist, such as nirvåˆa and so forth, as fraudulent conventional existents, and those are indicated ultimately to have no nature. As it is said, “there is nothing to eliminate for this, there is nothing at all to be added, reality is to be viewed as reality, when seeing reality one is liberated.”41 The explanation is like this.42 The verse that Avalokitavrata cites to explain the passage from the AvaivartikacakrasËtra is what Jikido Takasaki refers to as

40 Translation of phrase based on Donnelly 1997: 269. 41 This is a citation of Abhisamayålaµkåra 5.21 = Ratnagotravibhåga. See Takasaki 1966: 300; Wangchuk 2007, pp. 199–200, no. 11; Kāyatrayastotra-nāma-vivaraṇa, Sku gsum la bstod pa shes bya ba’i rnam par ’grel pa, D: Tohoku n° 1124, D72a3. ’di la

bsal bya ci yang med // gzhal bar bya ba gang yang med // yang dag nyid la yang dag lta // yang dag mthong na rnam par grol. 42 Prajñåprad¥pa†¥kå (D 3859) 304a: /mya ngan las ’das pa ngo bo nyid med pa nyid du bstan pa la/ yon tan ci yod pa dang/ de bstan pa ’di la gzhan dag na re rtog ge skam po’i bstan bcos

tsam nyi tshes bsgrubs so zhes zer ba bsal ba’i phyir ’dir yid ches pa'i lung gi khungs kyang bsgrub par bya ste/ de’i phyir/ theg pa chen po’i mdo sde mtha’ dag las/ /mya ngan ’das med mya ngan ’das/ /’jig rten mgon po bstan pa mdzad/ /nam mkha’ mdud pa bor byas pa/ /nam mkha’ nyid kyis bkrol ba bzhin/

/zhes bya ba gsungs pa dag grub pa yin te/ dper na bzo mkhan skud pa ring pos ’drubs kyi las byed pa’i skud pa de/ nam mkha’ la ’jur mdud ’cha’ ba nam mkha’ nyid las ’grol ba de bzhin du bcom ldan ’das mngon par rdzogs par sangs rgyas pas kyang mya ngan las ’das pa la sogs pa dngos po yod pa ma yin pa dag kun rdzob kyi tha snyad du yod par bstan pa mdzad cing/ de dag nyid don dam par ngo bo nyid med par yang bstan pa mdzad de/ ji skad du/ ’di la bsal bya cung zad med/ /bstan par bya ba’ang ci yang med/ /yang dag nyid du yang dag lta/ /yang dag mthong na rnam par grol/ /zhes bshad pa lta bu’o.

“one of the most famous verses in Mahåyåna literature.” The verse is cited in various forms by scholars such as AßvaghoΣa, Någårjuna, and Sthiramati and is found in variant forms in over a dozen different texts, such as the Prat¥tyasamutpådah®dayakårikå (vs.7), the Ratnagotravibhåga (1.154) and the

Abhisamayålaµkåra (5.21). 43 In the history of Indian and Tibetan scholasticism, Madhyamaka- and Yogåcåra-oriented thinkers will cite this verse as a source to authenticate their understanding of reality. Madhyamakas like Bhåviveka, Bodhibhadra, and Atißa will cite this verse to indicate that nothing is

removed from dependentarising and nothing is added due to emptiness.44 Yogåcåra-based thinkers like Jñånaßr¥mitra will argue that nothing is removed nor is anything added to the tathågatadhåtu. The source of the citation will also often differ between commentators, with Madhyamakas citing the stanza based on

works attributed to Någårjuna and Yogåcåra-oriented thinkers citing the Ratnagotravibhåga. Authors from both traditions will cite the verse from the Abhisamayålaµkåra. We can infer that Avalokitavrata cites a version of the verse from the Abhisamayålaµkåra based on philogical evidence derived from comparing the Sanskrit and Tibetan translations of the verse.45 The Abhisamayålaµkåra (V.21) states:

43 See Jamieson 2000: 52, note 4 for a list of texts in addition to the nine listed by Takasaki (1966: 300) and La Vallée Poussin (1932; 1:394), as well as Lindtner (1982; 26: 168n4). 44 See Bhåviveka’s MRP (D 262a5), the verse is cited in Atißa’s BMPP (282b; Sherburne 2000: 248 [[[Tibetan]] only]) in a

series of stanzas attributed to his teacher Bodhibhadra, and Atißa provides an exegesis on this verse in A General Explanation of, and Framework for Understanding, the Two Realities (bden gnyis spyi bshad dang/ bden gnyis ’jog tshul) (Apple 2015b). See Brunnhölzl 2014: 901-951 for selected Indian and

Tibetan comments on Uttaratantra 1.154-55 and Abhisamayålaµkåra 5.21. 45 As Mathes (2007: 558–560) notes and discusses, the verse in the Ratnagotravibhågavyåkhyå (RGVVS 76,1–2) reads as follows: nåpaneyam ata˙ kiµcid upaneyaµ na kiµcana / draΣ†avyaµ bhËtato bhËtaµ bhËtadarߥ vimucyate //.

The stanza in the Abhisamayålaµkåra (5.21) is: nåpaneyam ata˙ kiñcit prakΣeptavyaµ na kiñcana / draΣ†avyaµ bhËtato bhËtaµ bhËtadarߥ vimucyate // Skt. prakΣeptavyaµ is often translated as bsnan par bya in Tibetan and the Skt. upaneyaµ is commonly rendered as gzhag par bya. As Avalokitavrata cites the verse as bstan par bya (em. bsnan par bya), he is quoting the Abhisamayålaµkåra.

There is nothing to be removed from this, there is nothing at all to be added. The real should be seen as real, when seeing reality one is liberated. Haribhadra comments in his Abhisamayålaµkårav®tti on V.21: For this reason, liberation is not possible due to a habitual adherence to entities; one should

ascertain that forms and so forth, as things dependently arisen, in fact exist [only] conventionally and that they lack an ownbeing and so forth. In doing so, one has not, with regard to any phenomenon, either removed or added anything by way of [wrong] denial or reification. When you see reality due to

eliminating mistakes, in the same way as an illusory elephant conquers another one, you become liberated.46 In commenting on Haribhadra’s commentary, the eleventhcentury scholar Dharmak¥rtißr¥ of Suvarˆadv¥pa (fl. c. 1000), which is located in present day Sumatra in western Indonesia, connects this very

verse from the Abhisamayålaµkåra with the “knot-tiedin-space” verse in the AvaivartikacakrasËtra. Dharmak¥rtißr¥ states in his Durbodhålokå commentary: To remove the view of non-existence the text says “reality” and so forth and stating “reality” is the reality through dependent-arising. One should see and understand forms and so forth just as they are known. What is the reason for this? “when seeing reality one becomes liberated.” Meditating on objective reality one abandons the mental afflictions along with their latencies and becomes a Buddha. The exact meaning of this verse is … immediately after [[[Haribhadra]]] states “For this reason,” [the text states that] liberation due to a habitual adherence to entities is not possible and in this way a cause that is unsuitable for awakening is denied. A nature that is imputed as ultimately existent and so forth invalidates selflessness. When removing a superimposition of intrinsic existence by a valid cognition that has the character of [the reasoning of] one and the many

46 AAV 72.1–3: yasmåd evaµ bhåvåbhiniveßena mukter anupapattir ato apavådasamåroparËpam apanayanaprakΣepaµ kasyacid dharmasyåk®två idam eva prat¥tyasamutpannaµ saµv®tyå tathyarËpaµ rËpådi ni˙svabhåvådirËpato nirËpaˆ¥yam vañca måyågajena aparamåyågajaparåjayavad viparyåsaniv®tyå tatvadarߥ vimucyata iti.

and so forth, one removes [it] by seeing reality, and when any dharma such as a Self and the like is undermined it is understood that it is not produced conventionally or ultimately because an aggregate such as form arises from the twelve links [of dependentarising], beginning with ignorance and so forth.

One should ascertain and meditate that the aggregate of form and so forth are dependent-arising and at the conventional level their real nature is conventionally empty, without intrinsic nature, having a nature equivalent to an illusion. How is this illustrated? The text states “In this way” and so on, stating that an illusory elephant conqueors another illusory elephant. Just as a false elephant subjugates [another] in a conflict, likewise an erroneous false path serves as a cause to abandon mistakes which are produced from mental afflictions that arise from a false view of a Self. When one sees

reality, one perceives and is resolutely intent on all-pervading selflessness; one will be liberated and will attain correct wisdom. According to our position, all things are like an illusion, and for that reason, since illusory afflictions and so forth are eliminated by an illusory path, there is not an

impermanent entity that will be an antidote that is discordant with reality. Therefore, for us, the previously mentioned liberation does not have an unacceptable fault; such is the intention. Thus, “The Lord of the world taught that nirvåˆa is not nirvåˆa. A knot tied with space is released through space itself,” and so forth is what is being transmitted.47

47 Abhisamayålaµkåradurbodhålokå: [D233a; P264a] med par lta ba bsal ba ni yang dag ces bya ba la sogs pa smos pa yin te/ yang dag pa nyid du zhes bya ba ni rten cing ’brel bar ’byung ba nyid kyis yang dag pa ste/ ji lta ba bzhin du grags pa’i gzugs la sogs pa blta (lta P) bar bya zhing shes par bya’o/ /des

cir ’gyur zhe na/ yang dag mthong na rnam par grol/ /zhes bya ba yin te/ rang gi ngo bo nyid sgom (bsgom P) par byed pa ni nyon mongs pa bag chags dang bcas par spangs pas sangs rgyas su ’gyur ro/ /tshig le’ur byas pa ’di nyid kyi don ni /gang gi phyir zhes bya ba la sogs pa smos pa yin te/ gang gi phyir

bshad ma thag pa’i dngos po la mngon par zhen pa las grol bar mi ’thad cing byang chub pa mi rung ba rgyu de’i phyir skur pa ’debs pa ste/ bdag med pa la gnod pa byed pa’i don dam par yod pa la sogs pa dang (P) sgro ’dogs pa’i ngo bo ste/ ngo bo nyid yod par dogs pa bsal na gcig dang du ma’i rang bzhin la sogs pa’i tshad mas de kho na nyid mthong bas bsal cing chos gang la yang bdag la sogs pas gnod pa kun rdzob dang don dam par ma byas par ’di nyid shes par gyur pa na ma rig pa la sogs pa

As Mathes (2008: 327) observes, “ “nothing should be removed” refers to dependent arising, and “nothing should be added,” to the phenomena’s emptiness – its quality of lacking an independent existence.” The example of an illusory elephant conquered by another illusory elephant illustrates that both the

habitual adherence to entities and the remedy for it, namely the correct wisdom of dependent-arising that perceives emptiness, exist at the level of conventional reality. Both the cause of purification and the object of wisdom that enables purification is emptiness (Mathes 2008: 328). As emptiness is

ever-present, nothing needs to be added. As Mathes (ibid.) concludes, “the objects of all defilements, namely the Self of a person and phenomena, do not need to be removed, since they have been wrongly superimposed by virtue of all the defilements and therefore are non-existent throughout beginningless time.” In this way, this verse is interpreted according to the teaching of dependent-arising (prat¥tyasamutpåda) that removes the two extremes of

permanence (Íåßvatånta, rtag mtha’) –that things and persons ultimately exist (paramårthasat, don dam par yod pa) – and the extreme of annihilation (ucchedånta, chad mtha’) that things and persons do not even conventionally exist (vyavahårasat, tha snyad du yod pa). As explained by ScherrerSchaub, for the Madhyamaka, “Things in the world are not real

yan lag bcu gnyis las kun tu ’byung ba yin pa’i phyir gzugs kyi phung po la sogs pa ste/ gzugs kyi phung po la sogs pa rten cing ’brel bar ’byung ba yin zhing kun rdzob tu yang dag pa’i ngo bo nyid de tha snyad du dben pa rang bzhin med pa ste/ sgyu ma dang mtshungs pa’i ngo bor brtag par bya zhing bsgom par bya’o/ /’dis cir ’gyur zhe na/ de ltar zhes bya ba la sogs pa smos pa yin te/ sgyu ma’i glang pos sgyu ma’i glang po gzhan zhig pham par byas pa (bya ba P) bzhin du zhes bya ba ni ji ltar brdzun gyis glang po dang [P264b1] ’thab pa ni zil gyis mnan pa de bzhin du phyin ci log pas zhes brdzun gyi lam gyis brdzun gyi bdag tu lta ba las skyes pa’i nyon mongs pa las skyes pa’i phyin ci log spong ba’i rgyus na de kho na nyid mthong ba na ste/ thams cad du ’gro ba’i bdag med pa mthong zhing mos pa ni rnam par grol bar ’gyur te/ yang dag pa’i ye shes thob par ’gyur ro/ /bdag cag gi phyogs ltar na chos thams cad sgyu ma lta bu yin la de bas na nyon mongs pa la

sogs pa’i sgyu ma lam gyi sgyu mas ldog pa yin pas dngos po de kho na nyid la re bar mi mthun pa’i phyogs dang gnyen por gyur pa med do/ /de’i phyir kho bo cag la sngar smras pa’i thar pa mi ’thad pa’i nyes pa yod pa ma yin no zhes bya bar dgongs so/ /mya ngan ’das min mya ngan ’das/ /’jig rten mgon gyis bstan pa ni/ /nam mkhas (mkha’ P) byas pa’i mdud pa ’di (ni P)/ / nam mkha’ nyid kyis bkrol ba yin / zhes bya ba la sogs pa gang gsungs pa yin no/ [P264b5].

because they are not produced by intrinsic natures; nor are they totally non-existent, because they are produced by conditions. If the conventional did not have an illusory nature, defilements could not be eliminated. The view of emptiness liberates and the falsity of the conventional allows followers to

cultivate the path and remove defilements.”48 For the Madhyamaka understanding of these verses one must recall D.S. Ruegg’s articulation of prat¥tyasamutpåda as being “two-faceted,” or having two sides that correspond to the doctrine of the two realities (dve satye) articulated in

Madhyamakaßåstra 24.8–10.49 One facet concerns the transactions (vyavahåra) of the world and its surface reality (saµv®tisatya); the other facet is the ultimate reality (paramårtha) without which there is no realization of nirvåˆa.50 On the surface reality of worldly transactions everything is done by relations. This is the aspect that the Madhyamaka thinker Candrakårti designates as såmv®ta˙ prat¥tyasamutpåda˙. This side of prat¥tyasamutpåda refers to

interdependent dharmas in a field of conditionality that have transactional validity on the surface level, but whose real nature, in virtue of the fact of their dependent arising, consists precisely in being non-substantial and therefore empty of own-being (Ruegg 1981: 43). What arises in conditioned dependence is therefore “essentially (svabhåvata˙) pacified (ßåntaµ)” (MMK 7: 16) but is projected by superimpositions or reifications arising from, and perpetuated by, mis-knowledge. From the side of the ultimate

48 Scherrer-Schaub (1991: xlvi): “Le vrai enseignment du prat¥tya-samutpåda qui écarte les deux extrêmes en vue de la délivrance de tous les étres. Les choses du monde ne sont pas réelles, parce qu'elles ne naissent pas par nature propre; ni fausses, parce qu'elles sont produites par conditions. La vue de

la vacuité délivre et la fausseté de la saµv®ti permet aux disciples de pratiquer le chemin, de ‘faire ce qui est à faire.’” 49 Madhyamakaßåstra (24. 8–10; translation modified based on Siderits and Katsura 2013: 272–73): “(8) The Dharma teaching of the Buddha relies upon two realities: conventional

reality and ultimate reality. (9) Those who do not understand the distinction between the two realities do not understand the reality in the profound teachings of the Buddha. (10) Without relying on conventions, the ultimate cannot be indicated. Without attaining the ultimate, nirvåˆa is not realized.”

50 Note that Kamalaߥla explains prat¥tyasamutpåda in his Íålistambha†¥kå (Schoening 1995, vol. 1: 242ff.) in terms of its ultimate (243–267) and conventional (269ff.) facets.

reality of prat¥tyasamutpåda that is closely linked with ßËnyatå, “emptiness,” nothing is actually produced. This is the side of original non–production (ådyanutpåda), where dharmas are unarisen (anutpanna) and unexistinguished (aniruddha), originally calm (ådißånta) and naturally nirvåˆa-ised

(prak®tiparinirv®ta). Dharmas are without marks (alakΣaˆa) and, in consequence, inexpressible (anirvacan¥ya, anabhilåpya) and inconceivable. For Någårjuna and his followers, the Buddha taught saµsåra and nirvåˆa in order to lead beings away from suffering and rebirth. Beings have been conditioned to realistic

views (bhåvad®Σti) of existence and non-existence from beginningless lifetimes. Nirvåˆa is a conventional designation to help overcome and turn away from attachments to saµsåra. According to this reading, those who lack insight into reality, who presume a duality of saµsåra and nirvåˆa, are able to realize

through the deep understanding of dependent-arising that things are unproduced and are able to abandon attachment to nirvåˆa as a reified nothingness. As Bugault puts it, for Någårjuna and his followers, “nirvåˆa is not the idea that we have of it; it is the lucid extinction of all ideas: the transformation is a move from the reified idea of extinction to the extinction of ideas, with its affective corollary to pass from the desire of extinction to the

extinction of desire” (Bugualt 1992: 141–2). Interpreted from this angle, “space” in the Avaivartikacakra’s metaphor of the “knot-tied-with-space” verse is ever-present emptiness, the originally calm (ådißånta) and naturally nirvåˆa-ised (prak®tiparinirv®ta) facet of dependentarising. The knots are dependent-arisings that are false and mistaken, as well as empty. They are conceptual fabrications whose nature is emptiness – and it is this emptiness by which they can be unbound. Thus, for the Madhyamaka followers of the Avaivartikacakra’s verse, the knot that is entwined by space is untangled by space itself.

Avaivartikacakra sūtra, Chapter 11, verse 1, comparison Dharmarakṣa Chinese [284 c.e., Taishō 266, 213c14-c15] Dunhuang Tibetan [IOL Tib J 53, pre-9th century]

Kanjur Tibetan [9th century; translators: Dānaśīla, Jinamitra, Munivarman, Ye shes sde] Tanjur Tibetan [[[Bhāviveka]], Prajñāpradīpa, trans: 9th century, Jñānagarbha, Cog-ro klu] Tanjur Tibetan51 [[[Candrakīrti]], Prasannapadā: 12th cent., Mahāsumati, Pa-tshab Nyima grags] Sanskrit52 [[[Wikipedia:Louis de La Vallée-Poussin|Poussin]]; Nepal; ca. 18th century]

世 尊 所 演説

假 號 名 泥 洹

喩 之 若 虚空

度 於 無 所有

mya ngan ’da’ myin mya ngan ’dar /

/’jig rten mgon po su ni gsungs /

/nam ka la ni mdud pha por: /

/de yang nam mka nyId gyis bkrol /

mya ngan ’das med ’das pa53zhes/

/’jig rten mgon po54 brjod pa mdzad/

/nam mkha’55 mdud56 pa bor na57 ni /

nam mkha’58

mya ngan ’das med mya ngan ’das

/’jig rten mgon pos bstan pa mdzad /

/nam mkha’ mdud pa bor byas pa /

/nam mkha’ nyid kyis bkrol ba bzhin /

/ mya ngan’das med myang ’das su

/ ’jig rten mgon gyis bstan pa ste /

/nam mkha’ mdud pa bor ba ni / /

nam mkha’ nyid kyis bkrol ba yi anirvāṇaṃ hi nirvāṇaṃ

lokanāthena deśitaṃ /

ākāśena kṛto granthir

ākāśenaiva59 mocitaḥ //

51 Candrakīrti, Mūlamdhyamakavṛtti-prasannapadā-nāma (Toh. 3860; ’a, 191b7-192a1): bcom ldan ’das kyis kyang… 52 La Vallée Poussin.. Osnabrück: Biblio Verlag, 1970:540. 53 ’das pa D F J K L N S T Tacha V: myang ’das He Hi; ngan ’das Ba 54 po L S T V: pos Ba D F He Hi J K N Tacha 55 mkha’ Ba D F He Hi J N S T Tacha: mkha’i K; namkha’ L V 56 T reads {d}mdud with editorial marks. 57 na Ba J K L N S T Tacha V: nas D F He Hi 58 mkha’ Ba D F He Hi J N S T Tacha: mkha’i K; namkha’ L V 59 ākānaiva, Potala Manuscript, Yonezawa (2010:135)

Notes

Bibliography and Abbreviations

Indian Sources AAV = Abhisamayålaµkåraßåstraviv®ti Abhidharmakoßakårikå, by Vasubandhu. Chos mngon pa’i mdzod kyi tshig le’ur byas pa. Pk 5590, vol. 115. Tibetan translation by Jinamitra and Dpal brtsegs. Sanskrit edited by V.V. Gokhale (1946). “The Text of the Abhidharmakoßakårikå of Vasubandhu.” Journal of the Bombay Branch, Royal Asiatic Society 22: 73–102; (1947) 23: 12. See Sangpo 2012 for English translation. AbhidharmakoßabhåΣya, by Vasubandhu. Chos

mgnon pa’i mdzod kyi bshad pa. Pk 5591, vol. 115. Tibetan translation by Jinamitra and Dpal brtsegs. Sanskrit edited by P. Pradhan (1967. Reprint 1975). AbhidharmakoßabhåΣya of Vasubandhu. Patna: K.P. Jayaswal Research Institute (Tibetan Sanskrit Works Series, vol. VIII.). French translation and annotation by Louis de La Vallée Poussin (1971). L’Abhidharmakoßa de Vasubandhu. Nouvelle éd. anastatique présentée par Étienne Lamotte. Bruxelles: Institut belge des Hautes êtudes chinoises, 6 tomes. (MCB, XVI). English translation by Leo M. Pruden (1989), vols. I to IV, Asian Humanities Press, Berkeley. Index compiled

by A. Hirakawa (1973–1978). Index to the AbhidharmakoßabhåΣya. Part I: Sanskrit-Tibetan-Chinese. Part II: Chinese-Sanskrit. Part III: Tibetan-Sanskrit. Tokyo: Daizo Shuppan, 3 vols. See Sangpo 2012 for English translation. AbhidharmakoßabhåΣyavyåkhyå, by Yaßomitra. Chos mgnon pa’i mdzod kyi ’grel bshad. Pk 5593, vol. 116. Tibetan translation by Vißuddhasiµha and Dpal brtsegs. Sanskrit edited by Swami Dwarikadas Shastri (1971). Abhidharmakoßa & BhåΣya of Ócårya Vasubandhu with Sphu†årthå Commentary of Ócårya Yaßomitra. Bauddha Bhårat Series, No. 5. Våråˆas¥: Bauddha Bhårat¥, 4 vols. Abhisamayålaµkåra. Shes rab kyi pha rol tu phyin pa’i man ngag gi bstan bcos mngon par rtogs pa’i rgyan zhes bya ba’i tshig le’ur bya pa. Pk 5184, vol. 88. Tibetan translation by Go mi ’chi med and Blo ldan shes rab. Sanskrit edited by Th. Stcherbatsky and E. Obermiller (1929).

Abhisamayålaµkåraprajñåpåramitopadeßaßåstrakårikå.Leningrad. (Bibliotheca Buddhica, XXIII, fasc. 1.) Delhi: Sri Satguru Publications, 2nd edition, 1992.

English translation by E. Conze (1954). Abhisamayålankåra. Introduction and Translation from Original Text with Sanskrit-Tibetan Index. Roma: Istituto Italiano per il Medio ed Estremo Oriente. Abhisamayålaµkåradurbodhålokå, by Dharmak¥rtißr¥. Mngon par rtogs pa’i rgyan ces bya ba’i ’grel pa rtogs par dka’ ba’i snang ba zhes bya ba’i ’grel bshad. Tôh. no. 3794. Dergé Tanjur, vol. JA, folios 140v.1–254r.7. Pk 5192, vol. 91. Tibetan translation by

D¥paµkaraßr¥jñåna and Rin chen bzang po. Abhisamayålaµkåraßåstraviv®ti, by Haribhadra. Shes rab kyi pha rol tu phyin pa'i man ngag gi bstan bcos mngon par rtogs pa'i rgyan zhes bya ba'i 'grel pa. Tôh. no. 3793. Dergé Tanjur, vol. JA, folios 78v.1–104r.7. Pk 5191, vol. 90. Tibetan translation by Vidyåkaraprabha and Dpal brtsegs. Revised by Go mi ’chi med (Amaragomin) and Blo ldan shes rab. Edited Sanskrit Manuscript by Hirofusa Amano.

Abhisamayålaµkåra-kårikå-ßåstra-viv®ti: Haribhadra’s Commentary on the Abhisamayålaµkåra-kårikå-ßåstra edited for the first time from a Sanskrit Manuscript Kyoto, Heirakuji-shoten, 2000. Sanskrit edited by Råmaßa∫kara Tripå†h¥. Prajñåpåramitopadeßaßåstra Abhisamayåla∫kårav®tti˙ Sphu†årthå Ócårya Haribhadraviracitå; Saµsk®tarËpåntarakåra˙ sampådakaß ca Såranåthah: Kendriya-Tibbati-ucca-Siksha-Samsthanam, 1977. AK = Abhidharmakoßa AΣ†ådaßasåhasrikåprajñåpåramitå-nåma-mahåyånasËtra. ’Phags pa shes rab kyi pha rol tu phyin pa khri brgyad stong pa zhes bya ba theg pa chen po’i mdo. Tôh.

no. 10. Dergé Kanjur, vols. KA through GA (vols. 29–31). Tibetan translation by Ye shes sde. AVC = AvaivartikacakranåmamahåyånasËtra. Aweiyuezhizhe jing 阿惟越致 遮經 (T. no. 266, 1) translated by DharmarakΣa (284 c.e.). Butuizhuanfalun jing 不 退 轉 法 輪 經 (T. no. 267, 1) translated during the Northern Liang dynasty (北涼) (412– 439 C.E.). Guangboyanjing butuizhuanlun jing 廣博 嚴 淨不 退轉輪經 (T. no. 268, 1) translated by 智厳 Zhi-yan (427 C.E.).

’Phags pa phyir mi ldog pa’i ’khor lo zhes bya ba theg pa chen po’i mdo. Tóh. no. 240. Dergé Kanjur, vol. ZHA, folios 241v.4–301v.7. Tibetan translation by Jinamitra, Dånaߥla, Munivarma, Ye shes sde. Catu˙ßataka†¥kå = Bodhisattvayogåcåracatu˙ßataka†¥kå, by Candrak¥rti. Byang chub sems dpa’i rnal ’byor spyod pa bzhi brgya pa’i rgya cher ’grel pa. Tôh. no. 3865. Dergé Tanjur, vol. YA, folios 30v.6–239r.7. Tibetan translation by SËkΣmajåna and Pa tshab Nyi ma grags. See Suzuki 1994. Madhyamakåvatåra, by Candrak¥rti. Dbu ma la ’jug pa. Tôh. no. 3861. Dergé Tanjur 3861, vol. ’A, folios 201bl–219a7. Pk 5262 ’a 245a2–264b8. Tibetan translation by Tilakakalaßa and Pa tshab Nyi ma grags. Revised by Kanakavarman and Pa tshab Nyi ma grags. Tibetan edited by La Vallée Poussin (1907–12). MadhyamakåvatårabhåΣya, by Candrak¥rti. Dbu ma la ’jug pa'i bshad pa. Tôh. no. 3862. Dergé Tanjur, vol. ’A, folios 220v.1–348r.7. Tibetan translation by Tilakakalaßa and Pa tshab Nyi ma grags. Revised by Kanakavarman and Pa tshab Nyi ma grags. Tibetan edited by La Vallée Poussin (1907–12). Mahåyånottaratantraßåstra. Theg pa chen po rgyud bla ma’i bstan bcos. Tôh. no. 4024. Dergé Tanjur, vol. PHI, folios 54v.1– 73r.7. Tibetan

ranslation. by Sajjana and Blo ldan shes rab. Sanskrit edition and English translation by H. S. Prasad, E. H. Johnston, and Eugène Obermiller. The Uttaratantra of Maitreya: containing introduction, E.H. Johnston’s Sanskrit text, and E. Obermiller’s English translation. Delhi: Sri Satguru Publications (1991). MËlamadhyamakakårikå, by Någårjuna. Dbu ma rtsa ba'i tshig le’ur byas pa shes rab. Tôh. no. 3824. Dergé Tanjur, vol. TSA, folios 1v.1–19r.6.

Tibetan translation by Jñånagarbha and Cog ro Klu’i rgyal mtshan. Revised by Hasumati and Pa tshab Nyi ma grags. Revised again by Kanaka and Pa tshab Nyi ma grags. For Sanskrit see La Vallée Poussin 1903–13. For English translation see Katsura and Siderits 2013. 194 The Indian International Journal of Buddhist Studies 17, 2016

Munimatålaµkåra, by Abhayåkaragupta. Thub pa’i dgongs pa’i rgyan. Tôh. no. 3903. Dergé Tanjur, vol. A, folios 73v.1– 293r.7. Pk 5299, vol. 101. Tibetan translation by Abhayåkaragupta and Blo gros brtan pa. See Li and Kano 2015. Pañcaskandhaprakaraˆa by Candrak¥rti. Phung po lnga’i rab tu byed pa. Tôh. no. 3866. Dergé Tanjur, vol. YA, folios 239v.1–266v.7. Tibetan translation by D¥pa∫karaßr¥jñåna and Tshul khrims rgyal ba. See Lindtner 1979.

PañcaskandhakavibhåΣå by Sthiramati. Phung po lnga’i rab tu byed pa bye brag tu bshad pa. Tôh. no. 4066. Dergé Tanjur, vol. SHI, folios 195v.6–250r.7. Tibetan translation by Jinamitra, Í¥lendrabodhi, Dånaߥla and Ye shes sde. See Kramer 2013. Pitåputrasamågamana-nåma-mahåyånasËtra. ’Phags pa yab dang sras

mjal ba zhes bya ba theg pa chen po’i mdo. Tôh. no. 60. Dergé Kanjur, vol. NGA, folios 1v.1–168r.7. Tibetan translation by Í¥lendrabodhi, Jinamitra, Dånaߥla, and Ye shes sde. Prajñåpåramitåratnaguˆasaµcayagåthå. ’Phags pa shes rab kyi pha rol tu phyin pa sdud pa tshigs su bcad pa. Tôh. no. 13. Dergé

Kanjur, vol. KA, folios 1b1–19b7. Sanskrit edition by E. Obermiller, Prajñåpåramitå–ratna–guˆa–saµcaya– gåthå. Bibliotheca Buddhica no. 29 (1937). Reprinted with a Sanskrit–Tibetan–English index by Edward Conze, Indo– Iranian Reprints no. 5 (1960). Prajñå–påramitå–ratna– guˆa–saµcaya–gåthå. Edited with an introduction, bibliographical notes, and a Tibetan version from Tunhuang by Akira Yuyama, Cambridge University Press (Cambridge, 1976).

Prajñåprad¥pa, by Bhåviveka. Prajñåprad¥pamËlamadhyamaka- v®tti. Dbu ma’i rtsa ba’i ’grel pa shes rab sgron ma. Tôh. no. 3853. Dergé Tanjur 3853, vol. TSHA, folios 45b4– 259b3; Pk 5253, tsha 53b3–326a6. Tibetan translation by Jñånagarbha and Cog ro Klu’i rgyal mtshan. Prajñåprad¥pa†¥kå, by Avalokitavrata. Shes rab sgron ma rgya cher ’grel pa. Tôh. no. 3859. Dergé Tanjur vols. WA, ZHA and ZA; D 3859 wa 1–287a7, zha 1–338a7, za 1–341a7; Pk

5259 wa 1–333a6, zha 1–394&5, za 1–406a8. Tibetan translation by Jñånagarbha and Cog ro Klu'i rgyal mtshan. Prasannapadå, or MËlamådhyamakav®ttiprasannapadå, by Candrak¥rti. Dbu ma rtsa ba'i 'grel pa tshig gsal ba. Tôh. no. 3860. Dergé Tanjur, vol. ’A, folios 1v.1-200r.7. Tibetan translation by Mahåsumati and Pa tshab Nyi ma grags. Revised by Kanakavarman and Pa tshab Nyi ma grags. Sanskrit edited by La Vallée Poussin (1903-13). Saddharmapuˆ∂ar¥kanåmamahåyånasËtra. Zhengfahua jing 正法華 經 (T. no.263, 9) translated by DharmarakΣa (286 C.E.). Miaofalianhua jing 妙法 蓮華經 (T. no.262, 9), translated by Kumårajiva (406 C.E.). Dam pa’i chos padma dkar po zhes bya ba theg pa chen po’i mdo. Tôh. no. 113. Dergé Kanjur, vol. JA, folios 1v.1–180v.7. Tibetan translation by Surendrabodhi and Sna nam Ye shes sde. Samantamukhaparivarta-nåma-mahåyånasËtra. ’Phags pa kun nas sgo’i le’u zhes bya ba theg pa chen po’i mdo. Tôh. no. 54. Dergé Kanjur, vol. KHA, folios 184v.6–195r.7. Tibetan translation by Jinamitra, Surendrabodhi, and Ye shes sde. SarvabuddhaviΣayåvatårajñånålokålaµkåra-nåmamahåyånasËtra. ’Phags pa sangs rgyas thams cad kyi yul la ’jug pa’i ye shes snang ba’i rgyan zhes bya ba theg pa chen po’i mdo. Tôh. no. 100. Dergé Kanjur, vol. GA, folios 276r.1–305r.7. Tibetan translation by Surendrabodhi and Ye shes sde. See Kimura et al., 2004. ÍikΣåsamuccaya, by Íåntideva. Bslab pa kun las btus pa. Tôh. no. 3940. Dergé Tanjur, vol. KHI, folios 3r.2–194v.5. Tibetan translation by Jinamitra, Dånaߥla, and Ye shes sde. Revised by Kashmiri Tilakakalaßa and Blo ldan shes rab. Cecil Bendall, ed., Çikshåsamuccaya: A Compendium of Buddhistic

Teaching. Bibliotheca Buddhica no. 1 (St. Petersburg 1897–1902). YuktiΣåΣ†ikåv®tti, by Candrak¥rti. Rigs pa drug cu pa’i ’grel pa. Tôh. no. 3864. Dergé Tanjur, vol. YA, folios 1v.1–30v.6. Tibetan translation by Jinamitra, Dånaߥla, Í¥lendrabodhi, and Ye shes sde. See Scherrer-Schaub 1991.

Secondary Sources Apple, James. 2004. “An Assembly of Irreversible Bodhisattvas. Twenty Varieties of the Saµgha: A Typology of Noble Beings (Órya) in Indo-Tibetan Scholasticism (Part 2).” Journal of Indian Philosophy 32: 211–279. Apple, James B. 2008. Stairway to Nirvåˆa: A Study of the Twenty Saµghas

based on the works of Tsong-kha-pa. Albany: State University of New York Press. Apple, James B. 2009. "Wordplay: Emergent Ideology through Semantic elucidation. A Rhetorical Technique in Mahåyåna Buddhist formations." Bulletin for the Institute of Oriental Philosophy 25: 161–173. Apple, James B. 2011. “On Avaivartika and Avaivartikacakra in Mahåyåna Buddhist Literature with special reference to the Lotus SËtra.” Bulletin of The Institute of Oriental Philosophy, 27: 119–147. Apple, James B. 2015a. “The Single Vehicle (ekayåna) in the Avaivartikacakra sËtra and Lotus sËtra.” Bulletin of the Institute of Oriental Philosophy 30: 13–43. Apple, James B. 2015b. “An Early Bka’-gdams-pa Madhyamaka Work Attributed to Atißa D¥paµkaraßr¥jñåna.” Journal of Indian Philosophy, 1–107, DOI 10.1007/s10781-015-92756. Apple, James B. forthcoming. A Critical Edition and Annotated Translation of the AvaivartikacakrasËtra.

84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha. Khyentse Foundation, http://84000.co/. Boucher, Daniel. 1998. “Gåndhår¥ and the Early Chinese Buddhist Translations Reconsidered: The Case of the Saddharmapuˆ∂ar¥ksËtra.” Journal of the American Oriental Society 118, 4: 471–506. Boucher, Daniel. 2008. Bodhisattvas of the forest and the formation of the Mahåyåna a study and translation of the RåΣ†rapålaparip®cchå-sËtra. Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press. Braarvig, Jens. 1993. AkṣayamatinirdeśasËtra. Two vols. Oslo: Solum.

Brunnhölzl, Karl. 2014. When the Clouds Part: The Uttaratantra and its Meditative Tradition as a Bridge between Sutra and Tantra. Boston: Snow Lion. Bugault, Guy. 1992. “Någårjuna: Examen Critique du Nirvåˆa.” Asiatische Studien: Zeitschrift der Schweizerischen Asiengesellschaft = Études asiatiques :

revue de la Société Suisse-Asie 46: 83–146. Bugault, Guy. 2002. Stances du Milieu par Excellence. Madhyamaka-kårikås. Paris: Gallimard. Chandra, Lokesh and Nirmala Sharma. 2012. Buddhist Paintings of Tun-Huang in the National Museum. New Delhi: Niyogi Books. Cone, Margaret. 2001. A Dictionary of Påli.

Oxford: Pali Text Society. Conze, Edward. 1962. Buddhist Thought in India. London: Allen & Unwin. Conze, Edward. 1973. 1990 (fourth printing). The Perfection of Wisdom in Eight Thousand Lines & Its Verse Summary. Four Seasons Foundation: San Francisco. Conze, Edward. 1975. The Large Sutra on Perfect Wisdom, with the divisions of the Abhisamayåla∫kåra. Berkeley: University of California Press. D = Tshul khrims rin chen. Bstan ’gyur (sde dge). Tibetan Buddhist Resource Center W23703. 213 vols. Delhi: Delhi karmapae choedhey, gyalwae sungrab partun khang, 1982–1985. http://tbrc.org/link?RID=W23703.

Dasgupta, Shashi Bhushan. 1974. An Introduction to Tantric Buddhism. Berkeley, Calif: Shambhala. Dhammajoti, Kuala Lumpur. 2009. Sarvåstivåda Abhidharma. Fourth Revised Edition. Hong Kong: Centre for Buddhist Studies, University of Hong Kong. Donnelly, Paul B. 1997. “A Tibetan Formulation of Madhyamaka Philosophy: A Study and Translation of Tsong-kha-pa’s Ocean of Reasoning.” Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Wisconsin-Madison.

Eckel, Malcolm D. 1985. “Bhåvaviveka’s Critique of Yogåcåra Philosophy in Chapter XXV of the Prajñåprad¥pa.” In Miscellanea Buddhica, Indiske Studier 5, edited by Christian Lindtner, 24–75. Copenhagen: Akademisk Forlag. Einstein, Albert. 1920. “Ether and the Theory of Relativity.” Republished in G.B.

Jeffery and W. Perrett, trans., Sidelights on Relativity (Methuen, London, 1922), pp. 3-24. Fuller, Paul. 2005. The Notion of Di††hi in Theravåda Buddhism. The Point of View. London: RoutledgeCurzon. Gómez, L. O. 1977. “The Bodhisattva as Wonder-worker.” In Lewis R. Lancaster and Luis O. Gómez, eds.

Prajñåpåramitå and Related Systems: Studies in Honor of Edward Conze, 221-261. Berkeley: University of California. Handurukande, Ratna. 1973. “Avaivartacakra-Nåma-MahåyånaSËtra.” Encyclopaedia of Buddhism, 2.3: 400–402. Colombo: Government of Ceylon. Huntington, Jr., C. W. 1983. “The System of

the Two Truths in the Prasannapadå and the Madhyamakåvatåra: A Study in Mådhyamika Soteriology.” Journal of Indian Philosophy 11: 77–106. Huntington, C. W. 1989. The Emptiness of Emptiness. An Introduction to Early Indian Mådhyamika. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. Iida, ShØtarØ. 1966. “Ógama

(scripture) and yukti (reason) in Bhåvaviveka.” In Kanakura Hakushi koki kinen Indogaku BukkyØgaku ronshË, edited by Kanakura Hakushi Koki Kinen RonbunshË KankØkai, EnshØ Kanakura, and Yukio Sakamoto, 79–96. Kyoto: Heirakuji Shoten. Jamieson, R. C. 2000. A Study of Någårjuna’s Twenty Verses on the Great Vehicle (Mahåyånaviµßikå) and his Verses on the Heart of Dependent Origination (Prat¥tyasamutpådah®dayakårikå) with the Interpretation of the Heart of Dependent Origination (Prat¥tyasamutpådah®dayavyåkhyåna). New York: Peter Lang. Jong, J.W. de. 1949. Cinq chapitres de la Prasannapadå. Paris: Librairie orientaliste P. Guethner.

Karashima, Seishi 辛嶋 静志. 1992. The Textual Study of the Chinese Versions of the Saddharmapuˆ∂ar¥kasËtra in the Light of the Sanskrit and Tibetan Versions. TØkyØ: Indogaku BukkyØgaku SØsho HenshË Iinkai. Karashima, Seishi 辛 嶋 静 志. 1998. A Glossary of DharmarakΣa’s Translation of the Lotus sutra.

Tokyo: The International Research Institute for Advanced Buddhology, Soka University. Katsura, ShØryË and Mark Siderits. 2013. Någårjuna’s Middle Way: The MËlamadhyamaka-kårikå. Boston: Wisdom. Kimura et al, 2004. Study Group on Buddhist Literature, Jñånålokålaµkåra: Transliterated Sanskrit Text Collated with Tibetan and Chinese Translations. Tokyo: The Institute for Comprehensive Studies of Buddhism, Taisho University. Kramer, Jowita. 2012. “Descriptions of

Feeling’ (Vedanå), ‘Ideation’ (Saṃjñå), and ‘the Unconditioned’ (Asaṃskṛta) in Vasubandhu’s Pañcaskandhaka and Sthiramati’s Pañcaskandhakavibhåṣå.” Rocznik Orientalistyczny 65 (1): 120–139. Kramer, Jowita, ed. 2013. Sthiramati’s PañcaskandhakavibhåΣå. Beijing: China Tibetology Publishing House; Vienna: Austrian Academy of Sciences Press. Lang, Karen C. 2003. Four Illusions: Candrak¥rti’s Advice to Travelers on the Bodhisattva Path. Oxford: Oxford University Press. La Vallée Poussin, Louis de. 1903-13. Reprint 1970. MËlamadhyamakakårikås (MådhyamikasËtras) de Någårjuna avec la Prasannapadå Commentaire de Candrak¥rti. Bibliotheca Buddhica IV, Osnabrück: Biblio Verlag. La Vallée Poussin, Louis de. 1907-12. Madhyamakåvatåra par Candrak¥rti. St. Petersbourg: Imprimerie de l’Academie des Sciences. La Vallée Poussin, Louis de. 1928. Vijñaptimåtratåsiddhi: La Siddhi de Hiuan-Tsang. Paris: P. Geuthner. 200 The Indian International Journal of Buddhist Studies 17, 2016

La Vallée Poussin, Louis de. 1932. “Notes et bibilographie bouddhique, Mélanges chinois et bouddhiques. Paris. I: 377-424. Li, Xuezhu and Kazuo KanØ. 2015.

“Critical Edition of the Sanskrit text of the Munimatålaµkåra chapter 1 (fol. 48r4– 58r5): Explanation of skandha, dhåtu, and åyatana based on Candrak¥rti’s Pañcaskandhaka. The Mikkyo Bunka (Journal of Esoteric Buddhism) 234: 7-44 (120–83). Lindtner, Christian. 1979. “Candrak¥rti’s Pañcaskandhaprakaraˆa, I. Tibetan Text.” Acta Orientalia 40: 87–145. Lindtner, Christian. 1981. “Atißa’s Introduction to the Two Truths, and its Sources.” Journal of Indian Philosophy 9: 161–214. Lindtner, Christian. 1982. “Adversaria Buddhica,” Wiener Zeitschrift für die Kunst Südasiens 26: 167-194.

MacDonald, Anne. 2015. In Clear Words: The Prasannapadå, Chapter One vol. I: Introduction, Manuscript Description, Sanskrit Text; vol. II: Prasannapadå, Tibetan Text. Wien: Verlag der österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. Mathes, Klaus-Dieter. 2007. “Can sËtra mahåmudrå be justified on the basis of Maitr¥pa’s ApratiΣ†hånavåda?” In B. Kellner, H. Krasser, H. Lasic, M.T. Much, H. Tauscher (eds.), Pramåˆak¥rti˙. Papers dedicated to Ernst Steinkellner on the Occasion of his 70th Birthday. Part 2. Wiener Studien zu Tibetologie und Buddhismuskunde 70 (2): 545–566. Mathes, Klaus-Dieter. 2008. A Direct Path to

the Buddha Within. Boston: Wisdom. May, Jacques. 1959. Candrak¥rti Prasannapadå Madhyamakav®tti: (commentaire limpide au Traité du Milieu): douze chapitres, traduits du sanscrit et du tibétain en français, et accompagnés d’une introduction, de notes et d’une édition critique de la version tibétaine. Paris: Libr. d’Amérique et d'Orient. McMahan, David L. 2002. Empty Vision: Metaphor and Visionary Imagery in Mahåyåna Buddhism. London: RoutledgeCurzon. Merton, Thomas. 1975. The Asian Journal of Thomas Merton. New York: New Directions.

Nakamura, Hajime 中村 元. 1983. BukkyØgo daijiten 佛教語 大 辞典. TØkyØ: TØkyØ Shoseki. Pk = The Tibetan Tripi†aka: Peking Edition. 1957. Tokyo-Kyoto: Tibetan Tripitaka Research Institute. Edited by Daisetz Teitaro Suzuki. Ruegg, David Seyfort. 1981. The Literature of the Madhyamaka School of Philosophy

in India. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz. Ruegg, David Seyfort. 2010. The Buddhist Philosophy of the Middle: Essays on Indian and Tibetan Madhyamaka. Boston: Wisdom Publications. Samten, Ngawang and Jay L. Garfield. 2006. Ocean of Reasoning: A Great Commentary on Någårjuna’s MËlamadhyamakakårikå. New York: Oxford University Press. Sangpo, Lodrö and Louis de La Vallée Poussin. 2012. Abhidharmakoßa-BhåΣya of Vasubandhu: The Treasury of the Abhidharma and Its

(Auto) Commentary. Four vols. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass. Scherrer-Schaub, Cristina Anna. 1991. YuktiΣaΣ†ikåv®tti. Commentaire à la soixantaine sur le raisonnement ou Du vrai enseignement de la causalité par le Maître indien Candrak¥rti. Bruxelles: Institut Belge Des Hautes Études Chinoises. Scherrer-Schaub, Cristina Anna. 1992. “Tendance de la pensée de Candrak¥rti, Buddhajñåna, et Jinakriyå.” Buddhist Forum 3: 249–272. Schoening, Jeffrey D. 1995. The

Íålistamba SËtra and Its Indian Commentaries. Wien: Arbeitskreis für Tibetische und Buddhistische Studien Universität Wien. Sprung, Mervyn et al. 1979. Lucid Exposition of the Middle Way: The Essential Chapters from the ‘Prasannapadå’ of Candrak¥rti. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Stcherbatsky, Theodore. 1978, reprint. Original 1927. The Conception of Buddhist Nirvåˆa: with Sanskrit text of Madhyamaka-Kårikå. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass. 202 The Indian International Journal of Buddhist Studies 17, 2016

Suzuki, Koshin 鈴 木 晃 信. 1994. Sanskrit Fragments and Tibetan Translation of Candrak¥rti’s Bodhisattvayogåcåracatu˙ßataka†¥kå. Tokyo: Sankibo Press. Takasaki, JikidØ. 1966. A Study on the Ratnagotravibhåga (Uttaratantra). Roma: ISMEO. Tôh = Tohoku Catalogue. Tohoku Imperial University (SENDAI), 1934. A Complete Catalogue of the Tibetan Buddhist Canons-Bka˙-˙gyur and Bstan-˙gyur. Edited by Ui Hakuju, Suzuki Munetada, Kanakura Yenshô, Tada Tôkan. [With an index.]. Thurman, Robert A. F. 1976. The Holy Teaching of Vimalak¥rti: A Mahåyåna Scripture. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.

Bhikkhu Anålayo,

1-24 The Gradual Path of Training in the D¥rgha-ågama, From Sense-restraint to Imperturbability Bhikkhun¥ Dhammadinnå,

25-74 The Funeral of Mahāprajāpatī Gautamī and Her Followers in the Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinaya Bruce J. Stewart,

75-146 Sa skya pa Perspective on Self-cognizing Direct Perception Based on Sa skya Paṇḍita’s Tshad ma rigs gter and his auto-commentary Along with Go-rams pa, Gyag ston and Glo-bo mkhan’s sub-commentaries Gaganjot Kaur,

147-165 Buddhist Meditation: A Brief Examination of Samatha and Vipassanā in Theravāda Tradition James B. Apple, 1

67-202 “The Knot Tied with Space”: Notes on a Previously Unidentified Stanza in Buddhist Literature and Its Citation James Duerlinger and Siddharth Singh,

203-270 Śāntarakṣita and Kamalaśīla on the Nyāya-Vaiśeṣika Theory of a Self Tomoko Makidono,

271-305 Dge rtse Mahåpa˜∂ita’s Interpretation of the Bsam yas Debate

Source

[[Category:]]