A Text-Historical Note on Hevajratantra II.v. 1-2 - JIABS 1985 - van der Kuijp.pdf

7/29/2019 A Text-Historical Note on Hevajratantra II.v. 1-2 - JIABS 1985 - van der Kuijp.pdf

1/10

THE JOURNALOF THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF

BUDDHIST STUDIES

E D I T O R - I N - C H I E FA.K. Narain

University of Wisconsin, Ma dison, USA

E D I T O R SL.M.Joshi

Punjabi UniversityPatiaUi, India

Alexander W. M acdonaldUniversitede Paris X

Nanterre, France

Hardwell SmithCarleton CollegeNorthjield, Minnesota, USA

Ernst SteinkellnerUniversity of Vienna

Wien, AustriaJikido Takasaki

University of TokyoTokyo,Japan

Robert ThurmanAmherst College

Amherst, Massachusetts, USAA S S I S T A N T E D I T O R

Roger JacksonUniversity of Michigan

Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA

Volume 8 1985 Number I


2/10

C O N T E N T S

I . A R T I C L E SJ. Na gar juna ' s A rgu m en ts Agains t M ot ion , by KamaleswarBhattacharya 72 . Dharani a n d Pratibhdna: M em ory and E loquenc e of theBodhisa t tvas , by Jens Braarvig 173 . T h e Concep t o f a "Crea to r God" in Tan t r i c Bu ddh i sm ,by Eva K . Dargyay 314 . Direct Perception (Pratyakja) in dGe- iugs-pa In t erp ret at io n s of S a u t r a n t i k a , ^ / l n w ^ C . Klein 4 95. A Text-H is tor ica l N ote on Hevajratantra I I : v: 1-2, bylj>onard W.J. van der Kuijp 8 36 . Sim ul taneo us Rela tion (Sahabhu-hetu): A Study in B uddhis t Th eo ry of Cau sa t ion , by Kenneth K. Tanaka 91

I I . B O O K RE V IE W S A N D N O T I C E S

Reviews:1. The Books o/Kiu- Te or the Tibetan Buddhist Tantras: A Preliminary Analysis, by David ReigleDzog Chen and Zen, by Na m kha i N orbu(Roger Jacks on) 113

2 . Nagarjuniana. Studies in the Writings and Philosophy ofNdgdrjuna, by Chr . L in d tne r(Fe rn and o To la and Ca rm en Dragone t t i) 115

3 . Selfless Persons: Imagery and Thought in Theravada Buddhism, by Stev en Collins(Vijitha Ra japak se) 117


3/10

4 . Self and Non-Self in Early Buddhism, by Jo aq uin Perez-R e m o n(Vij i thaRajapkse) 1225 . The World of Buddhism, edi ted by He inz Becher t a ndRichard Gombr ich(Roger Jack son ) 126

Notices:1. Tibetan Blockprints in the Department of Rare Booksand Special Collections, compi led by LeonardZwilling(Rena H agga r ty) 134O B I T U A R Y 1 3 5L I S T O F C O N T R I B U T O R S 13 8


4/10

A Te xt -His tor ica l N ote onHevajratantra II .v.l 2

by Leonard W.J. van der Kuijp

I t has be en s om e tw enty- four years s ince D. Snel lgrove p ub l i shed his edi t ions and t ransla t ion of the Hevajratantra.l Sincei ts appearance, l i t t le has been wr i t ten on th is tant ra and i t sassociated l i terature. What fol lows is but a footnote to his t ransla t ion and edi t ions of the Hevajratantra II :v : 12, w hich in itsSanskr i t , T ibe tan , and Engl i sh ver s ions r eads :atha vajrl mah drdja Hevajrah sarvadah prabhu fy II (1)sarvdkdrasvabhdvdtmd mariialam samprakdsayet IIsukhdvatydin samdslnah sarvdhdrasvarupatah IIcittavajrasya bijena nispanno man4aleivarah II (2)de nas rgyal po rdo rje 'dzin IIgtso bo kye rdor kun sbyin pas IIrnam kun rang bzhin bdag nyid kyi IIdkyil 'khor dag ni yang dag gsungs II (1)rnam pa thams cad rang bzhin gyis IIbde ba can na yang dag bzhugs IIthugs kyi rdo rje sa bon gyis IIrang gi dkyil 'khor bskyed pa ste II (2)And now the Ad am antine O ne , the mighty K ing and Lord H eva-jra, the giver of all things and the substance of all forms, discourses on the mandala.He reposes there in bliss as the essence of all forms, for he isLord of the Marpdala and has emanated from the seed of theVajra of Mind.

83


5/10

84 J IA B S V O L . 8 N O . 1In his edi t ion of the Tibetan of these two verses, Snel lgrovehas no ted tha t bo th "are omit ted in the Nar thang ed i t ion ." Sincehe has also used the Beij ing pr int of the revised translat ion of

th e Hevajratantra by 'Gos Lo- tsa-ba-Gzhon-nu-dpal (1392-1481) ,the inclusion of these verses in th is pr int of the Bka '- 'gyursuggests that these const i tu ted one of his revisions of the ear l iert rans la t ion by Gayadhara and 'Brog-mi Lo- tsa-ba Sakya-ye-shes(993-1050) .* T h e pa lmleaf ma nus cr ip t o f K anh a 's Yogarat-namala, a com m en ta ry on the Hevajratantra and ed i ted bySnellgrove, a lso omits these two verses.3The f irs t indicat ion of the existence of these two verses in

cer tain manuscr ipt t radi t ions of the Sanskri t version of theHevajratantra was given by the great Sa-skya-pa scholar andprac t i t ione r Ngor -chen Kun-dga ' bzang-po (1382-1456) . Theauthor o f a number of major works re la t ing to th is tan t ra , 4Ngor -chen had appa ren t ly found th ree Sansk r i t manusc r ip t s(rgya-dpe) presumably in Sa-skya m ona stery w hich co nta ine dthese verses. A transcr ipt ion of the Sanskri t text , i ts t ranslat ionby Ngor-chen, and a few addit ional notes are found in theSde-dge pr int of h is col lected works under the t i t le of A Translation of the Second Chapter ofthe Fundamental Tantra. The Sansk r i ttext given by Ngor-chen differs only slightly from the aboveedit ion by Snel lgrove:

Verse 1: hevajra for hevajrah, -dtma for -alma, -prakasaye for-prakasayet.

Verse 2 : sukhavatyam for suMiavatyarn.T h e tex t has a space , occup ied by a do t ted l ine , be tw een hevajraandprabhuh which could suggest a purposive edi tor ia l correct ionof a miscut which had included the visarga. To be sure , theseva r i an t s a r e unp rob lemat ic .M ore in te res t ing , how ever , is the Tib e tan t rans la t ion ofthese verses g iven by Ngor-chen :

de nas rgyal chen rdo rje 'dzin IIkun stsol khyab bdag kye rdo rje IImam pa kun gyi rang hzhin bdag IIdkyil 'khor yang dag rab gsal ba II (I)


6/10

HEVAJRATANTRA 85mi mnyam pa yi bde ba can IIrnam pa kun gyi rang bzhin las IIthugs kyi rdo rje'i sa bo n gyis IIphun sum tshogs pa'i dkyil 'khor dbang II (2)

The t ransla t ions of the f i rs t verse by Ngor-chen and 'GosLo-tsa-ba show only minor differences. 'Gos Lo-tsa-ba evidentlyprefe r red to un de rsc ore the sub jec t o f d iscourse by in t ro du c ingthe ins t rumenta l par t ic le (kun-sbyin)-pas, whereas the Sanskr i t(a l l in the nominat ive case-ending) and Ngor-chen 's t ransla t ion(no case-ending, hence nominat ive) have nothing to th is effect .Fu r the rmore , N gor -chen ' s r end i t ion o f samprakdsaye(t) by yang-dag rab-gsal-ba is pe rh ap s semantical ly p refera ble to 'Gos Lo-tsa-ba's yang-daggsungs. Manaalam is tran slat ed by th e latter as dykil-'khor-dag (ni), which is yet an ot he r ins tan ce of the pecu l iar function of the particle dag, so lucidly analysed by M. Hahn. 6Snellgrove's translation of this verse stands to be corrected ona few points:

And now, the Adamantine One, the mighty King, Hevajra, thegiver of all, the Lord, may (he) he clarify the mandala (having)the nature of the essence of all forms.N go r-ch en 's t ransla t ion of the second verse is som ew hat m or eproblematic, and so is the one by 'Gos Lo-tsa-ba. The first pdda,sukhavatya{a)m samdsinaf} is re nd ere d by Ng or-che n as mi-mnyam-pa-yi bde-ba-canl, and 'Gos Lo-tsa-ba t ransposed the f i rs t andsecond pdda-s. The la t te r t rans la ted -svarupatah with an instrum e n t a l -gyis, ra ther than the correct abla t ive -las. Marulalesvarafyis wrongly rendered by 'Gos Lo-tsa-ba as rang-gi dkyil-'khor, "hisow n maniala," whe reas Ngo r-che n cor rec t ly has dykil-'khordbang,"the lord of the manaala." Again, Snel lgrove 's- t ransla t ion of th isve r se needs to be somew ha t amended :

Reposing in Sukhavati, (he is) the lord of the maniala, perfected(or: generated) by the seed of the adamantine mind from theessence of all forms.

These two verses are conceptual ly harmless for the in tent of


7/10

86 J I A B S V O L . 8 N O . 1Hevajratantra I I :v , but the evidence suggests that they are la terinser ts . All of Snellgrove's manuscripts of the Sanskri t versionof the Hevajratantra appa r en t l y con t a i ned t hem , even t he fif-teenth century one f rom "the pr ivate l ibrary of KaisherS ham she r i n Ka t hm andu . " I t wou l d appea r , t hough , t ha t i nview of thei r absence in the ear ly Sanskr i t commentar ia l l i teratu re , they were p robab ly added to the f i f th chap te r dur ing theth i r te en th or fou r tee nth ce ntu ry . T h e fact tha t a ll of Snel lgrove ' smanuscr ip t sources o f the Hevajratantra conta in these wouldseem to indicate that his texts al l go back to this par t icularvers ion. None of the ear ly Sa-skya-pa commentar ies on th ist an t ra , inc lud ing the one by B la -ma dam-pa Bsod-nams rgya l -m tsha n (1312-1375 ) co m m en t on these ver ses , a l tho ug h theydo on occasion refer to d i f ferent Sansk r i t m an usc r ip ts rgya-dpe.

Ngor-chen ' s d iscovery was e i ther not known to h is immedia te con temporar ies , o r was s imply ignored by them due tothe prevai l ing s t ra ined re la t ions . Thus, these verses were notcom m en t ed upon by M khas - g r ub Dge - l egs dpa l - bzang - po( 13 75- 14 3 8 )

7or Bo-dong Pan-chen Phyogs- las rnam-rgya l( 13 76 - 14 4 5) .8 At the same t im e , how ever , it ap pe ar s tha t pe rha psNgor-chen himsel f rea l i sed thei r quest ionable authent ic i ty , forhe explici t ly stated that the t ranslat ions of the Hevajratantra by'Gos Lo-tsa-ba Khug-pa Lhas-btsas (11th cent .) , G.yi- jo Lo-tsa-ba , and Shong Lo- tsa-ba a lso d id not include them. Whi le theavai lable eviden ce s t rongly sugg ests tha t Ng or-c he n was th e firs tto have drawn at tent ion to these two verses, i t remains diff icul t

to expla in why 'Gos Lo- tsa-ba Gzhon-nu-dpal fa i led to credi thim with this discovery and why he obviously chose to t ranslatethem anew. Possib ly , the answer should be sought in the factthat he might not have been very sa t i sf ied wi th Ngor-chen ' sren di t ion a l t ho ug h, as was sho wn , h is own t ransla t ion is a lso farf rom unprob lemat ic . On the o ther hand , the poss ib i l i ty shou ldalso not be ru led out that h is was an independent d iscovery .Cer ta in ty r eg ard ing th i s m at te r may perh ap s be ga ined wh enhis b io gra ph y is reco vered f rom i ts p lace of co nce alm ent .T h e Hevajratantra II :v : 1-2 was also noticed by the an on ymous s tudy of the d i f ferent readings found in the var ious Bka ' -'gyur-s , which was co m ple ted in 1918. 9 In th i s impor tan t work ,i t i s pointed out that , whi le absent in the Snar- thang pr in t , i t i sfound in the pr in ts of the Urga (Khu-r i ) and Co-ne Bka ' - 'gyur-s .


8/10

HEVAJRATANTRA 87The latter also hold for those of the Beijing, Sde-dge, and LhasaBka'- 'gyur-s as well .10

Appendix:Note: References to Ngor-chen ' s and Go-rams-pa Bsod-namsseng-ge's (1429-1489) writ ings are found in Vol. 9 and Vol. 15(1969) of the series of Sa-skya-pa texts mentioned in note 5.Ngor-chen1. Rgyud-kyi rgyal-po dpal kyai-rdo-rje'i byung-tshul dangbrgyud-pa'i bla-ma dam-pa-rnams-kyi rnam-par thar-pa ngo-mtsharrgya-mtsho, pp. 278 ff.W ritten in the first half of 1 405 . T h e bu lk of this text deals withthe origins of vajraydna and the different recensions of the textof the Hevajratantra. T h e b i o g r a p h i e s (rnam-thar)of the " l ineagel amas" more of ten than not merely consis ts of the mention ofthe i r names .2 . Rgyud-gsum gnod-'joms I de'i 'grel-pa, pp. 155 ff.T h e com m enta ry was wr i t ten towards the midd le o f the secondhalf of 1406. It is a polem ical text again st Ra tna ka ras an ti an dhis Tibetan fol lowers , who mainta ined that the Hevajratantrawas mentalist ic (sems-tsam-pa) in ph i losophica l persuas ion . T he seTibe tan fo l lowers inc luded Red-mda ' -ba Gzhon-nu b lo-gros(1348/49-1412) and Bo-dong Pan-chen .

3 . Dpal kyai-rdo-rje'i sgrub-thabs-kyi rgya-cher bshad-pa bskyed-rim gnad-kyi zla-zer, pp. 173 ff.Wri t ten around the middle of 1419. This work consis ts of adetailed exposit ion of the Hevajra "means of evoca t ion" (sd-dhana), an d is f requent ly polemical . Go -ram s-pa w rote a lengthytreat ise on the same problematic ent i t led the Dpal kyai-rdo-rje'isgrub pa'i-thabs-kyi rgya-cher bshad-pa bskyed-rim gnad-kyi zla-zer-lartsod-pa spong-ba gnad-kyi gsal-byed, pp. 282 ff. The latter is aser ies of repl ies to Mkhas-grub-r je ' s and Bo-dong Pan-chen 's(Nyi-zer Mkhan-po) object ions to Ngor-chen 's text . Among thelatest Sa-skya-pa texts dealing with the issues connected withthe generation of the deity in visualisation {bskyed-rim) is 'Jam-mgon A-myes-zhabs Ngag-dbang kun-dga ' bsod-nams ' (1597-1659/62) Dpal kyai rdo-rje'i phyi-nang-gi bskyed-rim-gyi rnam-par


9/10

88 J I A B S V O L . 8 N O . 1bshad-pa dge-legs nor-bu'i phreng-ba gsang-sngags mdzes-rgyan, Bir,1979 , pp . 231 .

4 . Dpal kyai-rdo-rje'i lus-kyi dkyil-'khor-la rtsod-pa spong-basmra-ba ngan-'joms pp. 135 ff. l-lta-ba ngan-sel, pp. 144 ff.Written during the first half of* 1426, these are two prints ofthe sa m e text , with som e intere st ing varian t read ing s. I t is apolemica l work dea l ing wi th the mar^ala of Hevajra , conceivedas a reply to an d crit ic ism of M khas -grub -rje ' s aside on th e sa m ein hisRg yu d thams-cad-kyirgyal-po dpal-gsang-ba 'dus-pa'i bskyed-rimdngos-grub rgya-mtsho, Collected Works of Mkhas-grub-rje, Lha-saZhol pr in t , Vol . Ja , Dha ram sala , 1981 , p p . 25 4 ff. T h e la t te rwrote a rep ly to Ngor-chen ' s work which , in the la te r l i t e ra ture ,is usually referred to as the Ngor-lan but whose actual t i t le isth e Phyin-ci-log-gi gtam-gyi sbyor-ba-la zhugs-pa'i sm ra-ba ngan-parnam-par 'thag-pa'i bstan-bcos gnam -lcags 'khor-lo, Collected Worksof Mkhas-grub-rje, Lha-sa Zhol pr in t , Vol . Kha , Dharamsala ,1981 , pp. 1 ff.

N O T E S1. See D.L. Snel lgrove, The H evajratantra, Parts I and I I , Lo ndo n Orie n

ta l Ser ies . Volume 6 , London: Oxford Univers i ty Press , 1959 .2. As a ru l e o f t humb , t he i n t e rdependency o f t he Sna r - thang and

Beij ing prints of the Buddhist canons can general ly be assumed in such caseswhere subsequent rev is ions were no t inc luded in the former . D.S. Ruegg has ,however, cogently argued for the necessi ty of consul t ing al l the prints of thedifferent Tibetan canons in his "The Study of Tibetan Phi losophy and i tsInd ian Sources . Notes on i t s His tory and Methods ," Proceedings of the Csomade Kbros Memorial Symposium (he ld a t Ma t ra f i i red , Hunga ry , 24-30 Sep tember ,1976), ed . L . Lige t i , Bib l io theca Orien ta l i s Hungarica XXIII , Budapest , 1978 ,p p . 3 7 7 - 3 9 1 . His s tudy should be ex tended to the Bka ' - 'gyur .

3 . These verses are also not met with in the palm-leaf manuscripts ofth e Hevajratantratfka (Vairocana, incompl. , 59 fols) , and the Hevajrapanjika(Sarorucha , incompl . , 25 fo ls . ) , and the Hevjrapanjikd (Kamalana th , compl . ,23 fols.), which were fi lmed by the Ne pa l-G erm an M anu scr ipt Pres ervat ionProject (respect ively, reel nos. C I4 /6 , E26 0/2, and C 26/4 ). 1 shou ld l ike tothan k my co l league at the N GM PP , Mr. Jayara j Acarya , fo r checking theseout for me.

4 . For a brief l is t ing of these see the Appendix.5 . See his Rtsa-rgyud brtag-gnyis-kyi-'gyur, in The Complete Works of the

Great Masters of the Sa-skya Sect of the [sic] Tibetan Buddhism, Vol. 9. The Complete


10/10

HEVAJRATANTRA 8 9

Works of Ngor-chen Kun-dga bzang-po, c o m p . B s o d - n a m s r g y a - m t s o , T o k y o :The Toyo Bunko , 1968 , no . 57 , p . 282 /3 / 3 -6 . In t he co lophon , Ngor -chen i sstyled "vibutpata'i lo-tsd-ba". I thin k that the vibutpata is a cor rup t ion oivibuddha,which renders this expression intel l igible: " the wise t ranslator."

6. See his "O n the Fun ct ion a nd Or igin of the Part icle Dag," in TibetanStudies, eds . P . Kvaerne and M. Brauen , Zurich , 1978 , pp . 137-147 . My fr iendChris toph Cuppers has drawn my a t ten t ion to the fac t tha t such a use of dagis a lso often m et with in the Ti be ta n t ran slat io n of the Samddhirajasutra; seefor instance his soon-to-be published cri t ical edi t ion of the SamddhirdjasutraIX:4a, 5a, 8a, e tc .

7. See his Dpal brtag-pa gynis-pa'i rnam -par bshad-pa rdo-rje mkha '-'gro-marnams-kyi gsang-ba'i-mdzod, Collected Works of Mkhas-grub-rje, Lha-sa Zhol p r in t ,Vol . Ja , Dha ram sala , 1981 , pp . 912 ff. T h e co lo pho n of th i s work says no th ingabout i t s da te o f composi t ion .8. See his Brtag-pa phyi-ma'i-rgyud bshad in Encycloped ia Tibetica. The Collected Works of Bo-dong Pan-chen Phyogs-las rnam-rgyal, Vol. 106, New Delhi :T h e T ibe t Hou se , 1973 , pp . 315 ff.

9 . See the Rgyal-ba'i bka'-'gyur rin-po-che'i 'bri-klog dang 'chad nan-byedmkhan-rnams-la nye-bar mkho-ba'i yi-ge gzhan-phan rnam-dag-gi gsal-byed me-long,N e w D e l h i : T h e T i b e t H o u s e , 1 9 8 2 , p p . 3 3 2 - 3 3 3 .

10. T h e b locks of the Sn ar- tha ng Bk a ' - 'gyur a t Shel -dk ar Mi- 'gyur rdo-r jeRd zon g, how ever , do conta in 'Gos Lo-tsa-ba 's rev ised t rans la t ion of the Hevaj-ralantra; see the Bka'-'gyur rin-po-che'i mtshan-tho publ i shed as Catalogue of theNarthang Kanjur, New De lh i : In t e rna t iona l Academy o f Ind i an Cu l tu re , 1983 ,p . 235. These b locks presumably were those of the rev ised Snar- thang Bka ' -'gyur of the 1730 's . Ngor-chen 's ca ta logue of the Bka ' - 'gyur a t Glo-bo Smon-tha ng (M ustang , Ne pal ) which he com ple ted in D ece m ber of 1447 , does no tconta in 'Gos Lo-t sa-ba 's rev ised vers ion e i ther . They are , however , found inthe Li - thang Kanjur , Rgyud-'bum vol . ka, fols . 258b-259a, which I f i lmed andca t a logued un de r a gen e rou s g ran t f rom the Deu t sche F o rschungs -geme inscha f t .

A Text-Historical Note on Hevajratantra II.v. 1-2 - JIABS 1985 - van der Kuijp.pdf

Documents

Transcript of A Text-Historical Note on Hevajratantra II.v. 1-2 - JIABS 1985 - van der Kuijp.pdf