SACRED TOPOLOGY OF THE BUDDHIST UNIVERSE

Sacred Topology of Early Ireland and Ancient India

Religious Paradigm Shift

edited by

S

ACRED

T

OPOLOGY OF THE

B

UDDHIST

U

NIVERSE

:

T

HE

B

UDDHAKúETRA

C

ONCEPT IN THE

M

AHĀSĀðGHIKA

-L

OKOTTARAVĀDIN

T

RADITION

D

AR

I.

Z

HUTAYEV

Institute of Oriental Studies, Moscow

To J. K.

1. Preliminary Remarks

The subject of the sacred topology of the Buddhist universe is

truly enormous and cannot be covered in so short a paper, even if we

were to run very cursorily over its most salient points.

1

For one thing, every school of Indian Buddhism (both early and

Mah

āyā

na) had its own sacred topology, or rather set of sacred

topologies, functioning on many levels. First of all, the various

topological systems, both within a single school and across schools,

differed in the spatial scope and dimensionality of their objects. There

existed the sacred topology of this Earth and equivalent cosmological

objects, called cakravàlas

(Pàli cakkavà×a), with Mt. Meru (or Sumeru;

Sineru in P

ā

li) in the centre and the traditional “continents” (

dv

ī

p

a,

Pàli dãpa) surrounding it. Hereinafter I will call this cosmological unit

(the

cakrav

ā

l

a

, the Earth and its counterparts existing all over the

Universe) a “world” and any combinations of such units

“world-systems” or the like. There also existed the sacred topology of

Jambudv

ī

pa, the continent which is the locus of human civilisation as

we know it and which is usually identified with the historical Indian

subcontinent, with its complex network of pilgrimage sites (

t

ī

rtha

),

“power-places” (

p

ī

ñ

ha

), pure and impure

topoi

, etc. There were also, as

1 _{Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit (BHS) texts are cited using the system of abbreviations}

we shall see in some detail, sacred topologies that dealt with more

macroscopic objects.

This network of sacred topologies of cosmological objects of

varying

sizes

was complemented by a system that could be called

vertical,

although probably not strictly vertical in a geometrical sense.

That is the system of

planes of existence,

of which, e. g., the Therav

ā

da

tradition enumerates thirty-one (Nyanatiloka 1980

s.vv.

loka,

deva;

Story 1972), from the gods of the Ar

ū

pa-loka (formless realms) to the

denizens of hells (niraya

or naraka), such as the lowest of them all, the

Av

ī

ci. Although this system (shared in one or another form by all

schools of Buddhism) is to some extent based on the moral

qualifications and spiritual nature of the inhabitants of its various

components and not primarily on geography, cosmology or topology,

there is a definite spatial and sacred topological aspect to many of

those “realms” and their relative situation with regard to one another.

There were also huge differences in the theoretical level of

discourse: elaborate Abhidharmic discussions, such as the celebrated

third chapter of Vasubandhu’s

Abhidharmako÷a

,

called the

Lokanirde÷a,

‘Description of the World’,

vs.

more or less popular

expositions, with such utopian visions as the larger and smaller

Sukhàvatãvyåhas

or such didactic literature for the laity as late

mediaeval Tibetan and Mongolian “visits to hell

.

”

Last but not least, there also exists the very complex

problematic of the relations between Buddhist and Brahminical

place-lore, mundane and otherworldly, e. g., the respective roles in these

traditions of such holy

topoi

of India as the Ganges and Benares or the

roles and identities of the lokapàlas

,

the guardians of the cardinal and

intermediate points of the world.

As can be seen, the field is vast.

2

2 _{For a general introduction to the field, see the monograph by Kloetzli (1983).}

buddhak

ù

etra

is the sphere, or field, of the activities of a single

Buddha. It is the locus where one

and only one

(this is of importance

to the model) Buddha may arise at a given time.

Again, the theme of buddhakùetras

is vast and multifaceted.

Suffice it to say that one of the largest Buddhist denominations in

Japan and China – Amidaism, or Pure Land Buddhism, which is

focused on the Western “paradise” (actually, the buddhakùetra) of the

Buddha Amit

ābha,

– relies on the buddhakùetra

theory as the

foundation of its worldview and soteriology. The huge (400+ pages)

Mah

ā

y

ā

na s

ū

tra, the

Karuõàpuõóarãka (Yamada 1968) is largely

devoted to the theme of buddhakùetras

.

This important BHS text has

been very insufficiently investigated and I intend to make its study a

high priority in my further research into Buddhist sacred topology. The

Therav

ā

din exegetical and scholastic tradition also has its own theory

of Buddha-fields (P

ā

li

buddhakkhetta)

3

_{that it tries to retroactively}

apply in interpreting P

ā

li canonical texts, which, unlike the canonical

texts of some other Buddhist denominations, do not seem to make any

use of this concept.

4

In the present paper, I would like to address the subject of

buddhakùetras

by attempting a comprehensive analysis (including a

new English translation and extensive commentary) of what is, to all

appearances, the earliest text expounding the Buddha-field theory: a

passage (Mv I.121.6-126.15) forming the bulk of the sixth chapter

(bhåmi)

5

3 _{Exposed systematically in Buddhaghosa’s}

Visuddhimagga (Vism 414). Three progressively larger fields, or spheres, of a Buddha’s influence are singled out: the “field of his birth” (jàtikkhetta), the “field of his authority” (àõàkhetta) and the “field of his range” (visayakkhetta). Whereas the latter of these is “infinite, immeasurable” (anantamaparimàõaü;all terms here as translated by I. B. Horner in Conze 1964: 115), the first two have definite spatial boundaries. The Visuddhimagga exposition is quite often utilised in the commentarial literature, where it is either repeated verbatim (e.g. Sp I.159-160, PsA I.367-368; cf. also AA III.135) or a free paraphrase of it is given (AA II.9, MA IV.114).

of the Da÷abhåmika section of the Mahàvastu (Mv),

a vast

4 _{The only canonical occurrence of the word that I have been able to locate is in an}

extremely late text, the Apadàna (Ap II.429). In this passage, the “field of the Buddha” is likened to a well-cultivated field (bhaddaka khetta) bearing abundant fruit. Also, the Milindapa¤ha, not considered canonical by the majority of Theravàdin traditions, makes a passing reference (Miln 176) to a “supreme gift, unexcelled in this buddhakkhetta” (imasmiü buddhakkhette asadisaü paramadànaü), obviously using the word in the sense of a cosmological unit.

5 _{The entire chapter is found at Mv I.121.1-127.12. Its very short initial (Mv}

compendium of religious materials in BHS belonging to the Early

Buddhist school of the Mah

ā

s

ā

ïghika-Lokottarav

ā

din-Madhyade

ś

ikas.

6

_{Besides its early date, archaic nature and}

non-Mah

ā

y

ā

na provenance, this passage provides a comprehensive

religious model that, although probably not a direct ancestor of the

future Mah

ā

y

ā

na and Therav

ā

da elaborations, is very instructive for

interpreting the latter and their development (it also shows some paths

not

taken in the future development of the Buddha-field concept). As a

first step towards approaching that model, my goal has been to place

the text embodying it and its various component parts, macrostructural

and microstructural, in as many contexts as I could: religious,

historical-literary and, as far as I was able, cultural.

2. The Topological Model as Embodied in the Text

The

Da÷abhåmika

section of the Mv,

7

theory and the passage framed by them is apparently totally unconnected with the rest of the chapter. Yet, the semantic and other links between various segments of the Mahàvastuas a whole and theDa÷abhåmikaspecifically are far from trivial and require serious further investigation. I omit these two passages from my translation in the Appendix and from any discussion in the paper.

a doctrinal exposition

inserted into what is basically an extended biography of the Buddha

Śā

kyamuni, is the earliest Buddhist text devoted to the “ten stages of

the Bodhisattva” – the ten stages of the adept’s spiritual growth toward

Buddhahood. There is an extensive literature, both canonical and

non-canonical, devoted to this doctrine in the Mah

ā

y

ā

na tradition, the

standard Mah

ā

y

ā

nist scripture expounding it being the Mah

ā

y

ā

na

Da÷abhåmika-såtra

(Da÷abhåmã÷vara)

(Vaidya 1967; transl. Honda

1968).

In the Mv, we have this teaching in its earliest form, relying

heavily in the construction of the new doctrine (and the text

embodying it) on standard “H

ī

nay

ā

nist” doctrines and textual

materials, similar to those found in the P

ā

li canon. It should be noted

that the heavy indebtedness of such an innovative (in more senses than

one) work to the “conservative Buddhist” or even “common Buddhist”

heritage is much more apparent from minute textual analysis than

immediately. The present paper (and especially the notes to the

translation) bears abundant witness to this phenomenon as exemplified

6 _{The last component of the school’s name as traditionally used in scholarly}

literature (madhyade÷ika) represents a folk etymology and only occurs in very late Mahàvastu MSS. All other sources, including early MSS. of Lokottaravādin

literature, use some combination of the stems madhya- ‘middle’ and uddeśika -‘reciter’ (madhyodde÷ika, madhyudde÷ika, etc.) instead (Roth 1985, de Jong 1985).

by the buddhakùetra

passage

.

The Da÷abhåmika from the Mv

is cast in the form of a dialogue

between two of the Buddha’s disciples, K

ā

ty

ā

yana and K

āś

yapa,

during the First Buddhist Council at Ràjagçha following the Buddha’s

Parinirvàõa. Mah

ā

k

ā

ty

ā

yana, the convener of the Council, carefully

questions Mah

ā

k

āś

yapa, the carrier in memory of the ten stages

exposition, about its every detail; Mah

ā

k

āś

yapa answers. In terms of

the textual structure, a single question-answer exchange (the question

being frequently, but not always, in prose, the answer in verse) is the

minimal compositional unit, and a linear sequence of such units, each

of them setting forth a single topic or subject, essentially constitutes

the whole text of the Da÷abhåmika

.

The Buddha-field text consists of five such question-answer

pairs. In the first of them (a question + 3 ÷lokas), K

āś

yapa states that

there exist such phenomena as the buddhakùetra

and the upakùetra

(a

supplementary or subordinate field) and specifies their size.

The minimal constitutive unit in this particular model of the

Universe is the

“world-system” (lokadhàtu;

Pàli

id

.), a cosmological

formation consisting of a very large number of individual worlds

(cakravàla).

8

The term used in our passage is the nominalised adjective

trisahasra

. It is equivalent

The problem of lokadhàtus

and the teachings of different

Buddhist schools regarding their various types and the relative sizes of

the latter is quite complex. At the very least, we have separate, and

somewhat differing, “theories” of lokadhàtus in the Theravàdin,

Sarvàstivàdin,

Mahàsàïghika and

Mahàyàna traditions. Also, some

uses of the various members of such classifications are rigorously

terminological, while some are not, depending on the genre and

functions of the text.

9

_to

_{trisàhasramahàsàhasra-lokadhàtu}

_(lit.

‘three-thousand great-thousand world-system’), a term common in the

Mv itself and in other BHS, particularly

Mahàyàna, texts.

10

8 _{R. Kloetzli collectively calls the various lokadhàtu}

-based models the “sàhasra -cosmology” or “cosmology of thousands” (Kloetzli 1983: 51).

One can

agree with Luis Gómez (1996: 331) that the more widely accepted

meaning of the term is that of a system of “one thousand times one

thousand times one thousand” cakravàlas, i. e., consisting of a billion

worlds. However, he goes on to quote several other, rather divergent,

9 _{See Appendix, notes 34, 81.}

10 _{Connected in some way with the Pàlitisahassã mahàsahassã lokadhàtu (e.g. AN}

interpretations from various sources, some of them multiplying the

number of worlds in such a lokadhàtu to truly astronomical

proportions. Franklin Edgerton (1953 (II)

s.v.

tri-sàhasra-mahàsàhasra) correctly pointing out the vagueness of the meaning of

mahàsàhasra in BHS, does not give any precise numerical equivalent

of trisàhasra

°

.

However that may be, the size of a single buddhakùetra

is given

in our text as 61

trisahasras

(ekaùaùñiü trisahasràõi).

11

It has been previously stated (Edgerton 1953 (I)

s.v.

upakùetra;

Jones 1949-1956: 95, n. 4) that there are no other occurrences of

upakùetra in the BHS corpus. The concept

of

upakùetras

certainly

received no development in later and more “mature” expositions of the

Buddha-field theory. However, the word itself is attested as a technical

term in the sacred topology of Buddhist Tantrism. Of course, its

signification and functions in the Vajrayàna literature are vastly

different. Yet, I would like to point out a fascinating passage in the

Hevajratantra

(I.7.10-18; Farrow & Menon 1992: 75-78; Tripathi &

Negi 2001: 69-71), describing the “meeting-places” (melàpakasthàna)

between the adept and yoginãs

.

Whether by accident or not, that

passage brings together many of the motifs that we meet with in

studying the buddhakùetra

concept in the context of the Ten Stages.

Among the

topoi

enumerated there are pãñhas

,

upapãñhas,

kùetras,

upakùetras

and eight further types of sacred topological objects.

Collectively, “they are the twelve bhåmis” (età dvàda÷abhåmayaþ)

and the Lord (nàtha) is called “the Lord of the Ten Stages”

(da÷abhåmã÷vara)

An

upakùetra

is said to contain “four times that [number]” (ato caturguõaü) of

worlds, i. e., 61

×

4 = 244 trisàhasramahàsàhasra-lokadhàtus.

12

11 _{Such a number of lokadhàtus, though somewhat unusual from the point of view}

of Buddhist sacred numerology, seems, nevertheless, to have been firmly rooted in the Mahàsàïghika-Lokottaravàdin tradition; see Appendix, note 81, citing an example where this number of trisàhasramahàsàhasra-lokadhàtus appears in the context of the Buddha’s first sermon and acts as a synonym for “[our] buddhakùetra” or “[his] buddhakùetra.”

because of these and no others (ebhir anyair na

kathyate). Having absolutely no expertise in the field of Buddhist

Tantrism, I can make no further comment on this very remarkable

collocation.

12 _{The commentaries (Kçùõàcàrya’s Yogaratnamàlà and Ratnàkara÷ànti’s}

In the second textual segment (question + 2 stanzas in the

rathoddhatà metre), it is ascertained that Buddhas arise (‘appear’, BHS

utpadyanti

) only in some (keùucid eva) Buddha-fields and that many

koñi-nayutas (= 10

18

_{) of kùetras are “empty of the most excellent of}

men” (÷ånyakàni puruùapravarehi). The reason given for this is the

following: “For rare is the bearer of the noble marks, / One of

intelligence attained through a long time…” (durlabho hi

varalakùaõadhàrã / dãrghakàlasamudàgatabuddhã

…

).

The third question-answer dyad (the question + 5 ÷lokas) deals

with the question of why two Buddhas do not arise in a single

buddhakùetra

.

Mah

ā

k

āś

yapa introduces the notion of the “task of a

Buddha” (buddhakarman)

13

_{and the practically synonymous term}

buddhadharma (used in both sg. and pl.). J. J. Jones translates the

latter term as “conditions of Buddhahood” and simply “Buddhahood”

(1949-1956 (I): 96); yet the context and other considerations

14

The notion that two Buddhas cannot arise simultaneously (P

ā

li

apubbaü acarimaü) in a single well-determined cosmological

segment is attested in the P

ā

li canon (AN I.28; MN III.65) and may

considerably predate the buddhakùetra

theory. The cosmological term

used in such P

ā

li contexts is usually “world-system” (lokadhàtu). The

Milindapa¤ha

(Miln 236-239), in discussing this tenet, gives some

much less benign reasons for two Buddhas not arising at the same time

than does the Mv,

and actually compares the putative case of two

Tath

ā

gatas simultaneously existing in a single cosmological entity to

two people trying to climb into a boat (nàvà) intended for one

suggest

an interpretation along the lines of “duties of the Buddha,” with the

word

dharma

used here very similarly to its Brahminical meaning

(“duties of a householder,” “duties of a king” – and here “duties of a

Buddha”). It is the “very nature of the Buddhas” (buddhàna dharmatà)

to completely fulfil (paripåreti) these tasks, or duties. If a single

“all-seeing one” (cakùumant) were incapable (asamartha) of fulfilling these

duties, then two “noble-minded Tath

ā

gatas” (mahatmànau

…

tathàgatau) would arise in a single Buddha-field. However, the idea of

such an incapability (asamarthasadbhàva) is to be rejected (‘(people)

reject it’, BHS

varjayanti

), therefore two Buddhas are never

“co-located”.

13 _{As translated by J. J. Jones (1949-1956 (I): 96).I would suggest the alternate}

translations “deeds, work, actions of a Buddha,” “duties of a Buddha” and the like. See Appendix, note 38, for lexical and doctrinal parallels in Theravàdin and (Måla-)Sarvàstivàdin literature.

(ekapurisasandhàraõã).

The fourth, and central, segment of the passage (question + 29

÷lokas) contains a partial description of the Universe structured

according to the buddhakùetra

model. It is extremely formulaic and

has a high degree of text predictability. The description is given in

answer to K

ā

ty

ā

yana’s question: what other buddhakùetras

(i.e. in

addition to our own Buddha-field, called Sah

ā

) are there “at this

present time” (samprati), where Buddhas now (etarhi) are teaching

Dharma?

The first 12 ÷

lokas

are built according to the pattern: “In the

region of the world X, there is the buddhakùetra

called Y. In it, there is

the Buddha named Z.” Five buddhakùetras (with their respective

Buddhas) are placed in the eastern quarter of the world (purastime di÷o

bhàge); three in the southern (dakùiõasmiü di÷o bhàge); one in the

western quarter (pa÷cimasmiü di÷o bhàge); one in the northern quarter

(uttarasmiü di÷o bhàge); one in the nadir of the world (heùñimasmiü

di÷o bhàge); and one in the zenith of the world (upariùñà di÷o bhàge).

Jones, I think erroneously, takes the names of the buddhakùetras

for

ordinary adjectives, epithets of the respective Buddha-fields, and

translates: “a well-laid-out, a healthy, a resplendent Buddha-field,

etc.,” whereas the correct translation would be “the Buddha-field

[called]

Sunirmita,

Kçtàgada,

Vibhåùita, etc.” This is borne out by

similar passages in Mah

ā

y

ā

na texts, e. g. in the Karuõàpuõóarãka

.

There follows an extremely poetical passage – poetical, here, in

the sense of the usual microstructural elements of oral literature, such

as formulas, formulaic expressions and slightly varying refrains,

building up the exposition and creating a meditative, magical

atmosphere in the text. It is also distinctively Mah

ā

s

ā

ïghika, forcefully

stressing the infinity of the Universe, the infinity of the number of

Buddhas and establishing the central narrative of the Mah

ā

s

ā

ïghika-Lokottarav

ā

din tradition – the biography/narrative of the Buddha

buddha,

a generic Buddha, any and every Buddha, whose number is

infinite and whose careers and teachings are completely identical all

over the Universe on the synchronous plane and throughout time along

the temporal axis. So, the number of Buddhas of the past is limitless

and, at any given moment of time, the number is limitless of those:

15

1. who are vowing [to reach] Enlightenment (praõidhentàna bodhàya); 2. who are [acquiring] the property of not lingering (avaivartikadharmàõàü); 3. who have reached the Stage of Consecration (abhiùekabhåmipràptànàü); 4. who are dwelling in Tuùitas (tuùiteùu vasantànàü);

5. who are descending from Tuùitas (tuùitebhya÷ cyavantànàü); 6. who are lying in [their] mothers’ wombs (màtu kukùau ÷ayantànàü); 7. who are standing in [their] mothers’ wombs (sthitànàü màtuþ kukùau tu); 8. of the heroes being born (jàyamànànàü vãràõàü);

9. of the world-protectors [that have been] born (jàtànàü lokanàthànàü); 10.who are being taken up on the hip (aïkeùu gçhyamàõànàü);

11.who are taking the [seven] strides (pàdàni vikramantànàü); 12.who are laughing the great laugh (mahàhàsaü hasantànàü); 13.who are surveying the regions of the world (di÷àü vilokayantànàü); 14.who are being carried in [people’s] arms (aïkena dhàriyantànàü); 15.who are being lifted up by Gandharvas (= gods; upanãyamànànàü gandharvaiþ);

16.who are going forth from the cities (purebhyo niùkramantànàü);

17.who are approaching the root of the Bodhi [tree] (bodhimålam upentànàü);

18.who are achieving the knowledge of a Tathàgata (pràpnuvantànàü tathàgataj¤ànaü);

19.who are setting in motion the Wheel of Dharma (dharmacakraü pravartentànàü);

20.who are saving koñis of beings (satvakoñã vinentànàü); 21.who are roaring the lion’s roar (siühanàdaü nadantànàü); 22.who are abandoning the life-forces (àyuþsaüskàraü utsçjantànàü); 23.of the heroes passing away into Nirvàõa (nirvàyantànàü vãràõàü); 24.who are lying, having attained Nirvàõa (nirvçtànàü ÷ayantànàü);

25.of the heroes being burned [on their funeral pyres] (dhyàpiyantànàü vãràõàü).

The line Mv I.124.15

yathà saüsàracakrasya pårvà koñã na

15 _{This list diverges significantly from Jones’ translation (Jones 1949-1956 (I):}

praj¤àyate

…

“As the starting-point of the wheel of Saüsàra is not to

be discerned…” gives us a hint of the probable origin of the formulaic

refrains on which this text-segment is built

16

_{and perhaps even of the}

structural prototype of the latter. According to (PED

s.v. ko

ñ

i

), the Pā

li

expressions roughly corresponding to the formulas used, namely

pubba/purima-koñi, pubbà/purimà ko

°

“starting-point” (or: “past”) and

pacchimakoñi, pacchimà ko

°

“end-point,” “end-limit” (or: “future”),

both frequently juxtaposed with pa¤¤àyati

(=

praj¤àyate in our text)

,

“are used only of saüsàra.” While this statement may be too sweeping

(

cf

., e. g., AN V.113 purimà

…

koñi na pa¤¤àyati avijjàya

“

…

of avijjà,

ignorance”, V.116

purimà

…

koñi na pa¤¤àyati bhavataõhàya

“

…

of

craving for existence”), their extremely close association both with the

concept of Saüsàra and with the lexeme saüsàra

is evident. The same,

although less categorically, can be said of the BHS koñi

when it is

modified by pårva,

antara,

apara,

aparànta

.

17

In the Pā

li tradition,

this (in my opinion, quite archaic) nexus finds one of its most striking

manifestations in the phrase anamataggàyaü

…

saüsàro pubb¨koñi na

pa¤¤àyati avijjànãvaraõànaü

sattànaü taõhàsaüyojanànaü

sandhàvataü saüsàrataü; as rendered by Bhikkhu Bodhi, “…this

saüsàra is without discoverable beginning. A first point is not

discerned of beings roaming and wandering on hindered by ignorance

and fettered by craving” (Bodhi 2005: 37, 38

et al.

).

18

In turn, this elaborate cliché serves as the principal

building-block for a whole series of P

ā

li suttas,

19

_{primarily for the 20 texts}

making up the Anamatagga-saüyutta

of the Saüyutta-nikàya

(SN

II.178-93). The Anamatagga collection

20

16 _{See also Appendix, note 68.}

seems to have been highly

prominent in early Theravā

da as a quite distinct and authoritative

religious text. It is quoted as an authority in the Abhidhamma (Kvu 29)

and, in the Ceylonese chronicles (Mvs XII.31, Dpv VIII.6), we have

the

thera

Rakkhita preach, or teach (Mvs

katheti,

Dpv

deseti

), it while

17 _{See Edgerton 1953 (II)}

s.vv.aparānta-koñi, pūrva-koñi.

18 _{The etymology and precise meaning of anamatagga (approx.: “whose end(s) are}

unthinkable;” BHS anavarāgra, Tib. thog ma dang tha ma med pa; cf. AMg. aõavadagga/aõavayagga) are extremely doubtful; for a recent discussion of these, see (Cone 2001 s.v.anamatagga).

19 _{SN III.149-152 (two consecutive texts), V.225-227 (one text), V.440-441 (one}

text; a variation on the cliché is used: …na pa¤¤àyati sattipahàrànam asipahàrànam parasupahàrànam“…is not discerned of blows with spears, blows with swords, blows with axes”).

20 _{Called the Anamatagga-dhammadesanā at DhA II.32 and the}

standing in the sky (Mvs nabhe ñhito, Dpv vehàsaü abbhugantvàna),

thereby converting tens of thousands of people to Buddhism.

Although the Mv passage under scrutiny bears little superficial

resemblance to the Pā

li

Anamatagga

beyond the virtual identity of

their refrains

,

the deeper semantic and structural parallels between the

two texts are rather striking.

The

Anamatagga

consists of twenty short suttas (or

text-segments, if treated as an integral whole), each of them containing the

above-mentioned cliché in its opening and closing portions. Each sutta

emphasises the limitlessness of Saüs

ā

ra and the lack of any bounds to

the suffering of the beings (

satta

) subject to it through a simile, many

of the latter exemplifying the great (to be more precise, infinite)

number (or amount, or age, or extent, or the like) of some component

of the Universe. Thus, in the Tiõakaññha-sutta

(SN II.178) and the

Pathavã-sutta

(SN II.179), the similes illustrate the infinite number of a

person’s ancestors: mother (màtà), mother’s mother (tassà

…

màtu

…

màtà), etc., and father (pità)

,

father’s father (tassa

…

pitu

…

pità), etc.,

respectively. The simile in the Sàsapa-sutta (SN II.182) exemplifies

the infinite length of a kappa

;

that in the Gaïgà-sutta

(II.183-184), the

infinite number of kappas elapsed

.

Similarly, the Mv passage can be divided into a comparable

number of segments: 16 ÷lokas containing the formulaic refrains, or,

from another point of view, 31 portions of the text (a ÷loka or a pàda

long) ending in one of those refrains. Each of these structural units

consists of the expressions pårvà/aparà/antarà

+

koñã na praj¤àyate

and the designation of the persons (or cosmological entities) whose

number is infinite. Furthermore, what the Anamatagga-saüyutta

refers

to as being limitless in number, as that of which “the limit is not to be

discerned,” is primarily unenlightened beings

(satta) subject to

transmigration. In Mv, the persons thus characterised are essentially

Buddhas in the various stages of their spiritual careers, virtually =

enlightened

beings,

bodhi-sattva.

21

It is virtually doubtless that the Mah

āsā

ïghika-

Lokottaravā

dins

had an

*

Anavaràgra-saüyukta (or

*-

paryàya) of their own, probably

Such deliberate shifts in the

meaning and functions of traditional materials are not unknown both in

the Buddhist and in the wider early Indian tradition.

21 _{In fact, episodes No. 1 to 17 (from praõidhentāna bodhāya to bodhimūlam}

as part of their

*

Saüyuktàgama. Of course, it is impossible to tell to

what extent it served as a model, or prototype, for this

16-÷loka

passage. However, there

is

a minor indication that the latter might have

deliberately drawn on a text not dissimilar to the P

ā

li

saüyutta. The

first

siloka of the verses summing up the first of the two vaggas into

which the Anamatagga is divided ends in

iti vuttam mahesinà

“thus

has been said by the Great Seer” (SN II.185). The identical words

(BHS

iti uktaü

maharùiõeti) conclude the whole buddhakùetra

text

(Mv I.126.15). And, although the Mv as a whole abounds in formulaic

markers of this general type, this exact expression, as far as I was able

to ascertain, occurs in this place and in this place only.

22

The final question-answer pair (question + 3 stanzas in the àryà

(?) metre)

23

This portion of the text is extremely corrupt and probably

cannot be satisfactorily understood in principle based on Senart’s

sources (late Nepalese MSS.) alone. Nevertheless, it does contain a

trope that seems to me to be vaguely Anamatagga

-

like: the countless

number

of

beings

(satva) in need of instruction by the Buddha is

emphasised via a grand simile involving a hypothetical situation.

deals with the problem: if there is such a number of

Tath

ā

gatas and if one Buddha leads an infinite number of beings to

Nirv

ā

õa

,

then will they not in a relatively short time lead all living

beings to Nirv

ā

õa?

Will not the world then become absolutely and

entirely empty, devoid of any living beings? The answer is that no

matter how many worlds and world-systems there are or may ever be,

the number of unenlightened beings

(pçthagjana) to be taught and

saved by a Buddha is still greater.

3. Conclusion

In conclusion, I would like to point out certain mechanisms and

factors that seem to have contributed significantly to shaping the

Mahàsàïgika

buddhakùetra text in the form we have it, yet are not

immediately apparent and have to be uncovered by special, often

intertextual, analysis. They belong to what I may call the

“archaeology” of the text. Most of this material has been spelled out in

great detail in the notes to the Appendix.

The centrepiece of the buddhakùetra

passage, the 29-÷loka

22 _{But see Appendix, note 94.}

23 _{At least, they can be scanned as àryàs. On the other hand, Senart refers to them}

description of the world according to the Buddha-field model, differs

strikingly in style and structure from the surrounding text. Its highly

formulaic style, the heavy reliance on refrains and repetitions, its

intense use of alliteration (something which is left beyond the scope of

this paper) and other similar features are hardly paralleled by anything

in the entire Da÷abhåmika; they also seem to suggest that the original

functions of this piece were ritual, “liturgical” and/or even magical.

24

A manuscript reading in its last stanza, which was emended by Senart,

but which I propose to restore,

25

The particular arrangement of the Buddha-story (the

“meta-text” or “text-generating mechanism”

gives us the tentative name for the

ritual in which such a text could have been used: ÷àstupåjà

,

“the

Worship of the Teachers.”

26

As can be seen from my notes, the

Mahàsàïghika-Lokottaravàdins greatly enlarge the list of events accompanied by

great earthquakes, extending it to very many episodes in the above list.

My searches in the Mv have admittedly not been exhaustive;

furthermore, the earthquakes are mentioned in texts of varying genres,

dominating the entire Mv)

found in the second half of this “påjà” seems to presuppose, or can be

even said to be dictated by, something that is, on the face of it, not

present in the text at all: the Buddhist “theory” of earthquakes. A

comparatively early form of the latter can be found in the famed

eight-member

màtikà

in the Pàli

Mahàparinibbànasutta

(DN II.107-109)

and its counterparts belonging to other Early Buddhist schools; the

parallel

Sarvàstivàdin passage (MPS 17.3-22), although using

somewhat different language, enumerates the identical eight causes of

great earthquakes. The last six of these are the key events of the

Buddha-story, from the descent into the mother’s womb to the

Parinirvàõa (= episodes 5, 8-9, 18, 19, 22, 23-24 in our text). The

Theravàdin tradition, both canonical and exegetical, then utilises the

earthquake “theory” to define and structure its sacred universe,

the

suttas (DN II.12-15, MN III.118-124), the commentaries, as well as

Buddhaghosa in his Visuddhimagga,

going to great lengths to state

exactly in how many worlds the earth shakes on such occasions. The

extent of the first type of the Theravàdin

buddhakkhetta,

the “field of

[a Buddha’s] birth” (jàtikkhetta), is defined precisely with reference to

these earthquakes.

24 _{Literature of the type we may call magical was rather prominent in the}

Mahàsàïghika tradition; see, e.g., Zhutayev 1999: 71-72.

in prose and in verse, with reference to different Buddhas and

Bodhisattvas. Still, I believe that the role played by the “great

earthquake” concept in the constitution of our text (and the

buddhakùetra theory) cannot be denied.

Underlying the seemingly unremarkable names of twelve

Buddhas

27

_{currently teaching in different Buddha-fields all over the}

Universe is a concept of paramount importance, not only to Buddhist,

but to Ancient Indian culture as a whole: the concept of the

Mahàpuruùa,

the Great Man. Judging by the parallels adduced in my

notes, these names refer not so much to the standardised “marks”

(lakùaõa) or “secondary signs” (anuvya¤jana) of the Great Man

28

Finally, the names of the buddhakùetras

themselves

(“Well-Fashioned,” “Made Free from Disease,” “Free from

Thorns/Difficulties,” “Having [Indra’s] Tree as Its Banner,” etc.) seem,

collectively, to refer us to the ideal of a site that is well-constructed,

(ritually) purified and made comfortable in every way. Another, more

discursive, expression of this ideal (or concept) can be found in the

prologue to the Da÷abhåmika

(Mv I.75.1-76.4), with Kà÷yapa

presiding over the Arhats who prepare the venue for the First Buddhist

Council.

as to

the much wider field of names/epithets of the Buddhas, especially

those extolling their bodily perfections, names that, already in the Mv,

were well on their way to becoming

microtexts.

All of these points require serious further investigation, as the

whole field (pun intended!) of buddhakùetras

requires serious further

investigation.

References

Bagchi, S., ed., 2003-2004,

Mahāvastu Avadā

na

, 3 vols,

Darbhanga: The Mithila Institute of Sanskrit Learning.

Baruah, B., 2000,

Buddhist Sects and Sectarianism,

New Delhi:

Sarup & Sons.

Basak, R., ed., 1963-1968,

Mah

ā

vastu Avad

ā

na

, 3 vols., Calcutta:

Sanskrit College (Bengali trans.).

Bechert, H., ed., 1985,

Zur Schulzugehörigkeit von Werken der

Hī

nay

ā

na-Literatur

, 1. Teil, Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.

27 _{Judging by Edgerton’s dictionary (1953 (II)), which substantially contains the}

BHS onomasticon, the great majority of these names do not occur anywhere else in the BHS corpus, particularly as the names of Buddhas.

Bodhi, Bhikkhu, ed., 2005,

In the Buddha’s Words: An Anthology

of Discourses from the P

ā

li Canon

,

Somerville: Wisdom Publications.

Burnouf, E., trans., 1852,

Le Lotus de la Bonne Loi, traduit du

sanscrit, accompagné d’un commentaire et de vingt et un mémoires

relatifs au Buddhisme

,

Paris: à l’Imprimerie nationale (Bibliothèque

orientale 9).

Chaññha Saïgàyana CD-ROM, [1999], Version 3.0, Igatpuri:

Vipassana Research Instutute.

Cone, M., 2001,

A Dictionary of Pāli: Part I (

A-Kh)

,

Oxford: PTS.

Conze, E., ed., 1964,

Buddhist Texts through the Ages

,

New York:

Harper & Row.

Dayal, H., 1932,

The Bodhisattva Doctrine in Buddhist Sanskrit

Literature

, London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Tr



bner & Co.

de Jong, J.W., 1985, ‘

Madhyadeśika

,

Madhyoddeśika

and

Madhy’-uddeśika

’, in: Bechert, H., ed., 1985, 138-143.

Dutt, N., 1978,

Buddhist Sects in India

, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.

Edgerton, F., 1953,

Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit Grammar and

Dictionary

, 2 vols, New Haven: Yale University Press.

Farrow, G. W. & Menon, I., transl., eds., 1992,

The Concealed

Essence of the Hevajra Tantra: With the Commentary

Yogaratnamàlà

,

Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.

Gómez, L. O., transl., intr., 1996,

The Land of Bliss: The Paradise

of the Buddha of Measureless Light: Sanskrit and Chinese Versions of the

Sukhàvatãvyåha

Sutras,

Honolulu & Kyoto: The University of Hawai’i

Press & Higashi Honganji Shinshå

Ō

tani-Ha.

Gethin, R., transl., 2008,

Sayings of the Buddha: A Selection of

Suttas from the

Pàli

Nikàyas

,

Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Honda, M., 1968, ‘Annotated Translation of the

Da÷abhåmika-såtra’, in: Sinor, D., ed.,

Studies in South, East, and Central Asia.

Presented as a Memorial Volume to Prof. Raghu Vīra,

New Delhi:

International Academy of Indian Culture, 115-276.

Jones, J. J., trans., 1949-1956,

The Mah

ā

vastu,

3 vols, London.

Kloetzli, R., 1983,

Buddhist Cosmology: From Single World

System to Pure Land: Science and Theology in the Images of Motion and

Light

,

Delhi-Varanasi-Patna: Motilal Banarsidass.

Mäll, L., 2005,

Studies in the

Aùñasàhasrikà

Praj¤àpàramità

and

Other Essays

, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass (1

st

Indian ed.).

Nyanatiloka, 1980,

Buddhist Dictionary: Manual of Buddhist

Terms and Doctrines

, Kandy: Buddhist Publication Society.

Oldenberg, H., 1988,

The Religion of the Veda

,

transl. by S. B.

Shrotri, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass (repr. 1993).

Roth, G., 1985, ‘The Readings

Madh’-

uddeśika

,

Madhyoddeśika

and

Madhyadeśika

in the Scriptures of the Ārya

-Mah

ā

s

ā

üghika-Lokottaravādins including Notes on

daśa

-baddhena

and

pañca-baddhena

ga

õ

ena

’, in: Bechert, H., ed., 1985, 127-137.

Rowell, T., 1934-1937, ‘The Background and Early Use of the

Buddha-Kùetra Concept’, in:

Eastern Buddhist (OS)

6 (1), 199-246; 6 (4),

379-431; 7 (2), 132-176.

Senart, É., 1875,

Essai sur la

l

é

gende

du Buddha, son

charactŠre

et

ses origines

,

Paris: à l’Imprimerie nationale.

Senart, É., ed., 1882-1897,

Le

Mahƒvastu

: Texte sanscrit publi‚

pour la

premiŠre

fois et accompagn‚ d’introductions et d’un commentaire

,

3 vols, Paris: à l’Imprimerie nationale.

Stcherbatsky, Th., 1923,

The Central Conception of Buddhism and

the Meaning of the Word “Dharma”

, London: Royal Asiatic Society.

Story, F., 1972,

Gods and the Universe in Buddhist Perspective:

Essays on Buddhist Cosmology and Related Subjects

,

Kandy: Buddhist

Publication Society (The Wheel Publication No. 180/181; 2

nd

_{repr. 1983).}

Strong, J. S., 1994,

The Legend and Cult of Upagupta: Sanskrit

Buddhism in North India and Southeast Asia

,

Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.

Tripathi, R. S. & Negi, T. S., eds., 2001,

Hevajratantram with

Muktàvalã Pa¤jikà of Mahàpaõóitàcàrya Ratnàkara÷ànti,

Sarnath: Central

Institute of Higher Tibetan Studies (Bibliotheca Indo-Tibetica Series 48).

Vaidya, P. L.,

ed

., 1967, Da÷abhåmikasåtra,

Darbhanga: The

Mithila Institute of Sanskrit Learning (Buddhist Sanskrit Texts 7).

Waldschmidt, E., 1950-1951,

Das

Mahàparinirvàõasåtra

: Text in

Sanskrit und Tibetisch, verglichen mit dem

Pàli

nebst einer übersetzung

der chinesischen Entsprechung im Vinaya der

Målasarvàstivàdins

, auf

Grund von Turfan-Handschriften herausgegeben und bearbeitet

, Band

1-3, Berlin: Akademie-Verlag.

Wayman, A., 1997, ‘øàkyamuni, Founder of Buddhism’, in: id.,

Untying the Knots in Buddhism: Selected Essays

, Delhi: Motilal

Banarsidass, 3-36.

Yamada, Isshi, ed. 1968, Karuõàpuõóarãka, 2 vols, London:

School of Oriental and African Studies.

Yuyama, Akira, 2001,

The

Mahàvastu-Avadàna

in Old Palm-Leaf

and Paper Manuscripts

, 2 vols, Tokyo: The Centre for East Asian Cultural

Studies for UNESCO.

Zhutayev, D. I., 1999, ‘Indian Roots of the Buddhanàma-såtra

Literature: Towards a History of the Form’, in: Ivanov, Vyach. Vs., ed.,

Ancient Cultures of East and South Asia

(in Russian), Moscow: MSU

Publishers, 54-76.

Appendix:

Ś

R

Ī

-MAH

Ā

VASTU-AVAD

Ā

NA

Da

ś

abh

ū

mika, Chapter 6 (Mv I.121.6-126.15):

Text, New English Translation, Notes

The present paper is to a very large extent a close textual reading

of the buddhakùetra passage from Mv. The standard English translation of

the latter is that by J. J. Jones (1949-1956); the relevant passage is

translated at (Jones 1949-1956 (I): 95-99). Although a serious achievement

for its time, that translation is now out of date, mostly due to objective

reasons: the complete unavailability to the scholars of the time of any

other

Mah

ā

s

ā

ïghika texts in Indic languages, as well as the general

paucity of sources from which a translator could draw parallels to

(frequently obscure and/or corrupt) Mv passages. Also, the methodology

adopted by Jones in his translation seems to me to some extent arbitrary:

he often sacrificed accuracy and faithfulness of the

form

of the text to

personal considerations of stylistic smoothness and “legibility.” In view of

this, I have attempted a new translation of the buddhakùetra text,

accompanied by extensive notes.

Like Jones, I have worked from the only existing critical edition of

Mv (Senart 1882-1897). More recent Indian editions, such as those by R.

Basak (1963-1968) or S. Bagchi (2003-2004), are simple reprints of

Senart’s text, unfortunately, omitting his

apparatus criticus

. Undoubtedly

a great feat of the nineteenth-century philology, Senart’s edition is now

outdated almost to the point of being unusable

per se

, without having

constant recourse to the manuscript readings rejected by the editor and

provided in the footnotes. It is also based on extremely late Nepalese

manuscripts. In the recent decades, new and much earlier manuscripts

have been discovered, primarily those published in facsimile by Yuyama

(2001), which was, unfortunately, inaccessible to me. Before a new critical

edition of the text appears, taking into account these manuscripts and other

specimens of the Mah

ā

s

ā

ïghika-Lokottarav

ā

din textual tradition that have

surfaced during the last half-century, any translations from (and studies of)

Mv, including the present one, must of necessity be of a provisional

nature.

BHS Text:

evam ukte àyuùmàn mahàkà÷yapaþ àyuùmantaü

29

_{mahàkàtyàyanam}

uvàca || kùetram iti

30

_||

tataþ sthaviraþ kàtyàyanaþ mahàkà÷yapam athàbravãt |

÷ruyatàü lokanàthànàü kùetraü tatvàrthani÷ritaü ||

upakùetraü ca vakùyàmi teùàü paramavàdinàü |

tàni ni÷amya vàkyàni ÷àsanaü ca naravara ||

ekaùaùñiü trisahasràõi buddhakùetraü parãkùitaü |

ato caturguõaü j¤eyam upakùetraü tathàvidhaü ||

evam ukte àyuùmàü mahàkà÷yapaþ àyuùmantaü

mahàkàtyàyanam uvàca || kiü punar bho jinaputra sarveùu

buddhakùetreùu utpadyanti samyaksaübuddhà utàho keùucid eva

utpadyanti || evam ukte àyuùmàn mahàkàtyayana

31

mahàkà÷yapaü gàthàbhir adhyabhàùe ||

àyuùmantaü

kiücid eva bhavati apari÷ånyaü

kùetram apratimaråpadharehi |

kùetrakoñinayutàni

32

÷ånyakàni puruùapravarehi ||

bahåni

29_{âyuùmant(Pāli āyasmant), lit. “long-lived one,” “old.” “Respectful appellation of}

a bhikkhu of some standing” (PED s.v. āyasmant). A close semantic counterpart of sthavira(Pāli thera), “elder.” Cf. immediately below: tataþ sthaviraþ kātyāyanaþ…

30_{kùetram iti. Both Senart (1882-1897 (I): 470-471) and Jones (95, n. 3) explain}

this passage by textual corruption. While “quelque trouble dans la tradition” (Senart) is obviously observable here, this “slip,” whether it originated in oral or in written transmission, is highly symptomatic and revealing of the way the text was structured from the perspective of the (oral) performer (Zhutayev 2004: 133).

31

Sic! Probably, a misprint.

32_Koñi(Pāli

Translation:

Thus said, the venerable Mah

ā

k

āś

yapa said to the venerable

Mah

ā

k

ā

ty

ā

yana: “Kùetra?”

Then the elder K

ā

ty

ā

yana said to Mah

ā

k

āś

yapa thus:

“Let it be heard [what] the kùetra of the world-protectors [is],

based on the truth.

I shall also speak about the upakùetra of those supreme

teachers.

33

Pay heed to these words and the teaching, O best of men.

It is established that a buddhakùetra [encompasses] sixty-one

three-thousand [world-systems];

34

Likewise, it is to be known that an upakùetra is four times that

[number]”.

Thus said, the venerable Mah

ā

k

āś

yapa said to the venerable

Mah

ā

k

ā

ty

ā

yana: “What do you say, O son of the Conqueror: do

Samyaksaübuddhas arise in all buddhakùetras, or do they arise in

some only?” Thus said, the venerable Mah

ā

k

ā

ty

ā

yana addressed the

venerable Mah

ā

k

āś

yapa with the [following] gàthàs:

“Only a certain kùetra is not empty

Of those endowed with unsurpassable form;

Many koñi-nayutas of kùetras

Are empty of the most excellent of men.

33 _{paramavādināü, lit. “supreme proclaimers (of the Doctrine),” “supreme}

speakers.”

34 _{ekaùaùñiü trisahasràõi. Trisahasr¨/°srã “(consisting of) three thousand” is a}

durlabho hi varalakùaõadhàrã

35

dãrghakàlasamudàgatabuddhã |

sarvadharmaku÷alo atitejaþ

sarvasatvasukhatàdharasatvo iti ||

evam ukte àyuùmàn mahàkà÷yapa àyuùmantaü mahàkàtyàyanam

uvàca || khalu bho jinaputra ko hetuþ kaþ pratyayaþ

36

kùetre dvau samyaksaübuddhau nopapadyanti iti ||

evam ukte

àyuùmàn mahàkàtyàyana àyuùmantaü mahàkà÷yapaü gàthàbhir

adhyabhàùate ||

yaü ekasmiü

yat kàryaü naranàgena buddhakarma suduþkaraü |

tat sarvaü paripåreti eùà buddhàna dharmatà ||

35_{varalakùaõadhārī}

. The “marks” figuring so prominently in our text are the thirty-two “characteristic marks” (lakùaõa, Pāli lakkhaõa, Tib. mtshan), a standardised list of the physical peculiarities of the Great Man (mahàpuruùa, Pāli mahàpurisa, Tib. skyes bu chen po). The latter concept, quite a multifaceted one in Ancient Indian culture, acquires, in Buddhist literature, a very specific meaning: that of a person destined either, if he chooses the worldly life, to become a Universal Monarch (cakravartin, Pāli cakkavattin) or, if he renounces the world, to become a Buddha.

According to the Pāli Mahāpadānasutta (DN II.16), only these two destinies (gati) await a child endowed with the characteristic marks of the Mahāpurisa, not any others (ana¤¤à). In addition to the lists of primary lakùaõas, there exist mātçkās of 80 “secondary (minor) signs” (anuvya¤jana, Pàliid., Tib. dpe byad bzang po) of the Great Man (Mv II.43.8-44.13, Dharmas 84, Mvy 268-349). The standard Pāli

list of the 32 lakkhaõas can be found, e. g., at DN II.16-19, DN III.142-179 (a whole sutta, the Lakkhaõa-sutta, expounding the “marks” in detail), MN II.136-137. The two most stable lists in the BHS tradition are those found in the Dharmasaïgraha (Dharmas 83) and the Mahàvyutpatti (Mvy 235-267); individual texts (the Lalitavistara, the Gaõóavyūha, etc.) give their own, often quite divergent, lists. The Lokottaravàdin tradition is represented by two lakùaõa-texts, Mv I.226.16-227.3 (repeated at Mv II.29.19-30.6) and Mv II.304.14-307.7, both of which pose serious interpretation problems and require further investigation. For discussions and comparisons of the various lists of lakùaõas in different Indian Buddhist traditions, see (Edg. s.v. lakùaõa (4); Dayal 1932: 300-305; Wayman 1997: 6-7). As can be seen from the following notes, several of the Buddha-names used in the text below are either borrowed verbatim from lists of mahāpuruùa -marks or seem to be free variations upon them.

36

For rare is the bearer of the noble marks,

One of intelligence attained through a long time,

One whose

dharmas

are all good,

37

The being bringing happiness to all beings.”

one extremely powerful,

Thus said, the venerable

Mahākāśyapa said to the venerable

Mahākātyāyana

: “Now then, O son of the Conqueror, what is the

cause, what is the reason that, in a single kùetra, there do not arise two

Samyaksaübuddhas?” T

hus said, the venerable Mahākātyāyana

addressed the venerable Mah

ākāśyapa with the [following]

gàthàs:

“What deeds of a Buddha,

38

All of them he fulfils – such is the nature of the Buddhas.

extremely difficult to perform, are

to be done by the elephant among men,

39

37 _{sarvadharmaku÷alo}

. Jones (96): “who is adept in the consummate dharma.” I take dharma here to be used in its “theoretical” sense, that of one of the “subtle, ultimate, not further analysable elements” (Stcherbatsky 1923: 73) of reality. In Abhidharmic analyses, all dharmas (Pāli dhammas) can have three properties: ku÷ala(Pāli kusala) “good, wholesome, positive” vs. akuśala(Pāli akusala) “bad, unwholesome, negative” vs. avyākçta (Pāli avyākata) “morally (karmically) indifferent;” see, e. g., (Nyanatiloka 1980: s.v. kusala). All the dharmas of a Buddha are ku÷ala. The Mahāsāïghikas lacked an Abhidharma per se (cf. Dutt 1978: 58-59) and used the very term abhidharma to signify something entirely different (Zhutayev 2004: 106, n. 23); however, such “basic Buddhist” notions as these were obviously known to them.

38_buddhakarma

. Or: “work, actions of a Buddha;” Jones: “task of a Buddha” (J.: 96). This rather rare term (Pāli buddhakamma) occurs in a Pāli commentarial

formula (CpA 289, etc.) that is presumably quite late and not entirely congruent

with the classical Theravādin tradition: pa¤¤āya buddhabhāvasiddhi, karuõāya buddhakammasiddhi, pa¤¤āya sayaü tarati, karuõāya pare tāreti… “By means of wisdom, there is attainment of Buddhahood. By means of compassion, there is fulfilment of the duties of a Buddha (the doing of the Buddha-deeds). By means of wisdom, he saves himself. By means of compassion, he saves others…” However,

certain BHS and Pāli sources contain etymologically close formations, such as

buddhakçtya (Pàlibuddhakicca) and BHS buddhakàrya, lit.: “what is to be done by a Buddha.” Cf. the apparently specifically (Mūla-)Sarvāstivādin tradition (Divy 348.24-349.2, 350.27-29, 356.18-21, etc.) describing the famed Northern Buddhist teacher Upagupta as an alakùaõaka buddha, a Buddha lacking the (32) “marks” (“a saint living in the absence of a B[uddha] and ‘Buddha-work’, buddha-kàrya” (Edg. s.v. alakùaõaka)), of whom Śākyamuni predicts that he “will do the work of a Buddha” (buddhakāryaü kariùyati) a hundred years after the Master himself has entered Nirvāõa (mama varùaśataparinirvçtasya). For a discussion of the religious and cultural implications of both concepts (“the work of a Buddha” and “a Buddha without the marks”) in connection with Upagupta, see (Strong 1994: 23-24, 38-40).

asamartho yadi siyàd buddhadharmeùu

40

tato duve mahàtmànau utpadyete tathàgatau ||

cakùumàü |

taü càsamarthasadbhàvaü varjayanti maharùiõàü |

tasmàd duve na jàyante ekakùetre nararùabhau ||

na jàtu sàva÷eùeùu buddhadharmeùu ÷ruyyate |

nirvçtàþ puruùa÷reùñhà atãtàdhve jinàtmajà ||

anàgatà atikràntà saübuddhà ye ca sàüprataü |

kçtena buddhadharmeõa nirvàyanti narottamà iti ||

evam ukte àyuùmàn mahàkà÷yapaþ àyuùmantaü mahàkàtyàyanam

uvàca || katamàni bho jinaputra samprati anyàni buddhakùetràõi

yatraitarhi samyaksaübuddhà dharmaü de÷ayantãti || evam ukte

àyuùmàn mahàkàtyàyana àyuùmantaü mahàkà÷yapaü gàthàbhir

adhyabhàùe ||

“this is what is to be expected of them;” (Edg. s.v. dharmatà; PED s.v. dhammatà). The expression occurs, in an identical metrical position, in a three-śloka passage extolling reverence for the True Dharma (saddharma, Pāli saddhamma), whose BHS version is to be found at Ud XXI.11-13 and the Pāli one, at AN II.21 (the Udànavarga has Loc. instead of Gen.: eùā buddheùu…). This passage might have served as a structural prototype for the entire Mv compositional unit in question.

40 _{buddhadharmeùu. Cf. buddhadharmeõa (sg.) three ślokas below. Jones (96):}

“conditions of Buddhahood” (first occurrence), “Buddhahood” (second occurence). In this context, however, buddhadharma is closely juxtaposed with buddhakarman (cf. buddhakàrya, °kçtya/°kicca supra, note 38, and other similar formations), of which it is obviously a near-synonym. In the Pāli commentaries (VvA 319), we find

a very close counterpart to our second use of buddhadharma (kçtena buddhadharmeõa nirvāyanti...): …sumedho nāma sammāsambuddho loke uppajjitvā… katabuddhakicce parinibbute “…the Sammāsambuddha named

Sumedha, having arisen in the world,… and, after he had passed away into

If the all-seeing one were incapable of [performing]

the Buddha’s duties,

Then there would arise two noble-

minded Tathāgatas.

However, it is rejected that such incapability [can]

really exist in the great seers

41

Therefore two bulls among men are not born in a

single kùetra.

–

Never has it been heard, O sons of the Conqueror, that

in times past

The foremost of men have passed away into Nirv

ā

õa

with a remainder of their Buddha-duties [left

undone].

Future and past Saübuddhas, and those of the present time –

It is [only] after having completed the duties of a Buddha that

the superior men pass away into Nirvàõa.

Thus said, the venerable Mahàkà

ś

yapa

said to the venerable

Mahàkàtyàyana:

“What other

42

41 _{There exist several problems with this line, which must have undergone some}

kind of corruption (see Senart 1882-1897 (I): 471).

buddhakùetras, O son of the

Conqueror, are there at this present time where Samyaksaübuddhas

are now teaching Dharma?” Thus said, the venerable Mahàkàtyàyana

addressed the venerable Mahàkà÷yapa with the [following] gàthàs:

42 _{I.e., in addition to “our” buddhakùetra, the locus of human civilisation and the}

“sphere of activities” of the Buddha Śākyamuni. The name for this cosmological

purastime di÷o bhàge buddhakùetraü sunirmitaü |

tatra mçgapatiskandho nàmena jinapuïgavaþ ||

purastime di÷o bhàge buddhakùetraü kçtàgadaü

43

tatra siühahanur nàma

44

_{jino dvàtriü÷alakùaõaþ ||}

|

purastime di÷o bhàge buddhakùetraü vibhåùitaü

45

tatra lokagurur

|

46

_{nàma sarvadar÷ã mahàmuniþ ||}

purastime di÷o bhàge buddhakùetram akaõñhakaü

47

tatra j¤ànadhvajo

|

48

_{nàma ÷àstà ÷àsati pràõinàü ||}

purastime di÷o bhàge buddhakùetram avekùitaü

49

tatra kanakabimbàbho jino nàmena sundaraþ ||

|

43 _{“Made Free from Disease,” “Made Healthy,” “One Where Sanitation Has Been}

Established.” Jones (97) treats kçtāgadaü as an epithet: “a healthy Buddha-field.”

44 _{“Having the Jaws of a Lion,” “Lion-Jawed.” The name references a standard}

lakùaõa: Pālisãhahanu (No. 22) = BHS siühahanu(tà) (Dharmas 83, No. 25; Mvy 246 (Tib. 'gram pa seng ge 'dra ba); Mv II.306.4).

45 _{“Adorned,” “Decorated.” Jones (97) treats vibhūùitaü as an epithet: “a}

resplendent Buddha-field.”

46 _{“Teacher of the World,” “Instructor of Humankind.”}

47 _{“Free from Thorns,” “Free from Troubles, Difficulties.” The form akaõñhakaü in}

Senart’s text (the only v.l. given is suka°; the end of the word is not indicated) could be a simple misprint. Both Senart himself in his Index (1882-1897 (III): 529) and Edgerton (Edg. s.v.) cite the name in the form Akaõñaka. Cf., however, Pāli kaõñhaka, used as a variant form of kaõñaka(PED s.vv.). Jones (97) treats the name as an epithet: “a secure Buddha-field.”

48 _{“Having Knowledge as His Banner.” Commenting on the other occurrence of this}

stem-combination in the Mv (as part of a common noun – Mv I.153.11 j¤ànadhvajatvàt), Edgerton (Edg. s.v. j¤ànadhvaja (2)) wonders whether it is to be taken as a tatpuruùa or a bahuvrãhi, stating that it is “not recorded in Pali.”

However, a Pāli counterpart does exist (¤àõadhaja; SnA II.605) and, from the context, it is clearly to be taken as a bahubbīhi.

49 _{MSS. avekùat(r)taü. “Attended To,” “Well Looked After,” “Taken Care Of.”}