‡aõkaranandana’s Sarvaj!asiddhiA Preliminary Report 1

VINCENT ELTSCHINGER

1. ‡aõkaranandana’s works

According to recent studies, 2 ‡aõkaranandana must be credited with at least sev-enteen works. Thirteen of them are independent treatises dealing with various topicsrelated to the Buddhist epistemologists’ philosophical agenda (see the titles below, §2.2.3). Four of them consist of rather lengthy commentaries on Dharmakœrti’s works:Vini†cayånusåriñœ (now lost), 3 Vårttikånusåriñœ, Sambandhaparœkßånusåriñœ and a com-mentary on the Vådanyåya (now lost, title unknown). 4 Among these seventeen works,four have (at least partially) survived in Tibetan translation by making their way intothe bsTan ’gyur: the twenty-one stanzas of the larger Pratibandhasiddhi, 5 the Apohasid -dhi (stanzas and prose commentary), 6 the Vårttikånusåriñœ (incomplete) 7 and the Sam -bandhaparœkßånusåriñœ (incomplete). 8 Despite ‡aõkaranandana’s generally acknowl-edged historical and philosophical importance, only one of his works has receivedscholarly attention and been edited to date, namely the Œ†varåpåkarañasaõkßepa. 9 Thereasons for such a situation are obvious: on one hand the Tibetan translations are dis-hearteningly difficult, and those among them that consist of commentaries have nei-ther served as a basis for reading Dharmakœrti nor been studied as possibly witnessingoriginal ideas; on the other hand the absence of any Sanskrit manuscript of a mi†raka(except for the †åradå manuscript which formed the basis of Krasser’s edition) has pre-vented scholars from poking their nose into the allegedly quite illegible manuscriptBühnemann described but left unedited (= MS A, see below, § 2.2). Things are, how-ever, rapidly changing for the better. As a result of an agreement between the Austrian

ta is reported to have studied and translated (togeth-er with Saõgha†rœ) two commentaries on the Våda -nyåya, i.e., the one by ‡åntarakßita and one by “Bramze chen po” (= ‡aõkaranandana).

5 D No. 4257 (!e 302b1-303a7), P No. 5755 (Ze325a7-326b1).

6 D No. 4256 (!e 281a6-302b1), P No. 5754 (Ze302b3-325a7).

7 D No. 4223 (Pe 1-293a7), P No. 5721 (Pe 1-338a8).8 D No. 4237 (!e 21b4-35a3), P No. 5736 (Ze 27a1-

44a3).9 See Krasser 2002.

1 Most sincere thanks are due to Ms. CynthiaPeck-Kubaczek, Dr. Helmut Krasser, Prof. ThomasOberlies, Prof. Francesco Sferra and Dr. T!ruTomabechi.

2 See Bühnemann 1980, Krasser 2001: 490-493,Eltschinger (forthcoming 2, §§ 2-3).

3 On this work, see Eltschinger (forthcoming 2, §2.1.4). ‡aõkaranandana refers his readers at least fourtimes to his own commentary on the Pramåñavini† -caya (in Br¢hatpråmåñyaparœkßå MS 11r2-3 and 14r6-7, andin Vårttikånusåriñœ D 86a6 and D 115a1-2).

4 On this work, see Krasser 2001: 490-493, Jackson1987: 113 and Much 1991: I.xxvii, n. 24. Sa skya Pañ"i-

1

Academy of Sciences (Vienna) and the China Tibetology Research Center (Beijing), Ihave had the opportunity to work on a preliminary study (of copies) of several (most-ly incomplete) Sanskrit manuscripts from the Tibetan Autonomous Region. This firstscrutiny has revealed materials one would not even have dreamt of little more than fiveyears ago. They have allowed me to unearth important parts of the larger and shorterPratibandhasiddhi, of the larger, medium-sized and abridged Pråmåñyaparœkßå, of theApohasiddhi and, last but not least, of the Dharmålaõkåra. But this was not all. At thattime (spring 2005), after returning from a trip to Rome and Naples where she gainedaccess to some treasures from the Tucci Collection, my Viennese friend and colleagueBirgit Kellner very kindly put a photograph of the rectos of what was supposed to be‡aõkaranandana’s Sarvaj!asiddhisaõkßepa at my disposal. 10 Some weeks later, France-sco Sferra generously provided me a photograph of the versos, thus completing thatspring’s rich harvest of new materials for the study of ‡aõkaranandana. It is now timeto present the first results of a still cursory inquiry into Tucci’s as well as Såõkr¢tyåyana’sphotographs of an important Sanskrit manuscript (= MS B) which has proved to con-tain not just a Sarvaj!asiddhisaõkßepa, but also ‡aõkaranandana’s larger Sarvaj!asiddhi.The present essay aims first at throwing some light on the circumstances of Tucci’s andSåõkr¢tyåyana’s discovery (§ 2). In its second part, I shall provide two diplomatic edi-tions of the forty-eight kårikås as they appear in the codices photographed in Õor. Ishall first give a transcription of MS A 25r4-27r6 (§ 3.2), and then a synoptic diplomat-ic edition by adding the stanzas as they can be extracted from the twenty-five folios ofMS B (§ 3.3). After some metrical considerations (§ 4) and text-critical remarks (§ 5),I would like to present some doctrinal features as they can be grasped from a firstglance at ‡aõkaranandana’s Sarvaj!asiddhi (§ 6). Though I have not been able to solveall the problems raised by the transcriptions, I hope that these new materials will con-tribute to a better understanding of ‡aõkaranandana’s intellectual personality anddoctrinal stance. 11

scholar, i.e., ‡aõkaranandana’s close relationship toAbhinavagupta and the assumption of a conversion.According to Krasser, ‡aõkaranandana (940/950-1020/1030), first a ‡aiva philosopher (probablyalready leaning toward Buddhism) in the line of Abhi-navagupta (who quotes him favourably), converted toBuddhism shortly after the latter’s final work (theŒPVV, around 1014-1015) and then wrote those of hisworks that direct sustained fire against theism (thetwo Œ†varåpåkarañas, but also the Vårttikånusåriñœ; seeKrasser 2001: 494-505). My preliminary study of thenew manuscript resources has led me to call bothhypotheses into question, based both on a new rela-tive chronology of ‡aõkaranandana’s works and by ananalysis of most of these works’ initial and concludingverses. Whereas Gnoli’s hypothesis relies in my opin-ion on an inaccurate reading of a crucial ŒPVV pas-sage (II.19916-20) as well as on an incorrect depiction ofthe P r a j ! å l a õ k å r a’s doctrinal stance (decidedlyBuddhist idealist; see Eltschinger [forthcoming 2, §§4.7 and 5.3]), Krasser’s relative chronology is contra-dicted by ‡aõkaranandana’s own cross-references asthey can be grasped from the texts (see Eltschinger[forthcoming 2, § 5.4]). I would suggest that all the

10 Listed as such in Sferra 2000: 409.11 It may not be out of place to say a few words

about the still rather obscure issue of ‡aõkaranan-dana’s dates and confessional identity (for a survey ofrelevant research, see Eltschinger [forthcoming 2, §1]). To scholars like Vidyabhusana, Stcherbatsky andFrauwallner, ‡aõkaranandana (on this name, seeFrauwallner 1933: 41 [/1982: 488] and Krasser 2001:489-490) was known only through the bsTan ’gyur andTåranåtha’s narrative (see Vidyabhusana 1920: 344-345 and Stcherbatsky 1993: 40-42). Raniero Gnoli wasthe first scholar who tried to situate ‡aõkaranandana(9th-10th cent.) on a sound philological foundation.Echoing Tibetan biographical accounts but basinghimself on quotations and remarks scatteredthroughout Abhinavagupta’s ŒPVV, Gnoli attemptedto prove that ‡aõkaranandana, initially a Buddhistphilosopher, eventually converted to ‡aivism, a con-version which quotations from the P r a j ! å l a õ k å r awould clearly bear witness to (see Gnoli 1960: xxiii-xxvi). Whereas Bühnemann (1980) did not venture totouch upon ‡aõkaranandana’s biography, Krasserturned Gnoli’s hypothesis upside down while main-taining the paradigm inherited from the great Italian

Vincent Eltschinger

2

2. Two Sanskrit palm-leaf manuscripts in Õor

2.1. As is well known from Råhula Såõkr¢tyåyana’s (1893-1963) first and secondreports, the Sa skya pa monastery of Õor (founded 1429) in gTsaõ (southern CentralTibet) is to be counted among those that hosted a very large number of Sanskrit palm-leaf manuscripts. The great Indian scholar visited Õor three times (in the summer of1934, notably from September 17-22, 1936, and in August 1938) in search of palm-leafmanuscripts. Though he regularly faced administrative difficulties there as well as ill-will, he succeeded in making a rich reaping of handwritten copies and photographs.The extent to which Såõkr¢tyåyana was able to photograph Sanskrit manuscripts dur-ing his 1934 trip remains unclear, but we know from his first report that he at leastnoticed the presence of two codices containing works by the Kashmirian philosopher‡aõkaranandana. The first one contained a Praj!ålaõkårakårikå, a Sarvaj!asiddhikåri -kå and an Âgamapråmåñyakårikå (sic) whose author Såõkr¢tyåyana was unable to iden-t i f y. 1 2 The second consisted of a S a r v a j ! a s i d d h i s a õ k ß e p a explicitly ascribed to‡aõkaranandana. 13 To his second report he appended a chart listing the manuscriptshe had been able to photograph or to copy. 14 Item No. 30 consists of a Praj!ålaõkåra 15

and item No. 40, of a Sarvaj!asiddhisaõkßepa. 16 During his fourth and last trip to Tibet(1938), Såõkr¢tyåyana spent sixteen days in Õor photographing (and copying?)Sanskrit manuscripts, though his report provides no further information concerningthe results of this enterprise.

and Scharfe 2002: 139-140 for a summary). Accordingto Tåranåtha, Haribhadra belonged to a Kashmirianb r å h m a ñ a family renowned for its erudition.Haribhadra was defeated in a debate, had to convertto Buddhism (naõ pa la z^ugs 18214-15) and became anexpert in the Buddhist dharma (chos kyaõ mkhas parmkhyen pa’i pa ñ"i tar gyur 18215). His son Ratnavajrawas an upåsaka (dge bs!en 18216) who studied all thebranches of knowledge in Kashmir (including ofcourse the a d h y å t m a v i d y å) and then moved toMagadha in order to develop his scholarship further.There he was awarded the famous p a t t r å o fVikrama†œla and taught the mantrayåna (sõags kyi thegpa 18220), Dharmakœrti’s seven treatises on pramåña(tshad ma sde bdun 18220-21) as well as Maitreya’s fiveworks (Byams pa’i chos lõa 18221). At the end of his lifehe returned to Kashmir, where he defeated and con-verted a large number of heretics (mu stegs maõ po z^igrtsod pas sun phyuõs nas saõs rgyas kyi bstan pa la dkod1 8 22 2- 1 8 31). The story ends with the mention ofRatnavajra’s son (Mahåjana) and grandson (Sajjana).Of course I do not intend to imply that ‡aõkaranan-dana and Ratnavajra were one and the same person,but I would like to draw attention (on the basis of anadmittedly late and not always reliable testimony) tothe fact that the depiction of ‡aõkaranandana as a*m a h å b r å h m a ñ a, an u p å s a k a and a specialist inBuddhist p r a m å ñ a may find an interestingKashmirian parallel in the story of Ratnavajra, or atleast this is food for thought.

12 Såõkr¢tyåyana 1935: 42.13 Såõkr¢tyåyana 1935: 42.14 = S2 in Much 1988.15 Såõkr¢tyåyana 1937: 56.16 Såõkr¢tyåyana 1937: 56.

works at our disposal testify to a Buddhist persuasion(see Eltschinger [forthcoming 2, § 4]) and that noth-ing pleads for stronger a “conversion” thanbe(com)ing an upåsaka. Very important in this con-nection (and as a source of most features of Tibetanbiographical accounts) is the translators’ colophon ofthe larger Pratibandhasiddhi (D !e 303a5-7/P Ze 326a6-8,edited and translated in Krasser 2001: 499). ‡aõkara-nandana is depicted there as an upåsaka born to theBrahmin caste, renowned as the “second Dharma-kœrti” (Chos grags g#is pa) and very fond ofBuddhism. This might explain away the puzzle of thisauthor’s unambiguously ‡aivite name, his frequentdesignation as a bha™™a and finally the fact that, con-trary to Arca™a/(Bhadanta) Dharmåkaradatta, we areaware of no Buddhist religious name for ‡aõkaranan-dana.(1) In my opinion, Abhinavagupta already knew‡aõkaranandana’s main treatises at the very begin-ning of his career, which suggests that we have tosearch for a new terminus post quem (the only one nowavailable might be Dharmottara [740-800 ?], whom‡aõkaranandana is reported [ŒPVV II.1610-11] to havecriticised). My favourite but admittedly conjecturalhypothesis is to regard ‡aõkaranandana (born maybearound 920) as a senior (about one generation) con-temporary of Abhinavagupta and one of his manynon-‡aivite teachers (Abhinavagupta calling ‡aõkara-nandana guru in MVV 1.431 [quoting Praj!ålaõkå -rakårikå 1.4cd, MS A 15v3-4]; on Abhinavagupta’s early“bee-like” [yathå bhr¢õga#] curiosity about Buddhist,Jaina and Vaißñava teachers, see TÅ 8.206, 13.335 and13.345cd-346ab). (1)In this connection, I cannot helpmyself mentioning a story found in Tåranåtha’s rGyagar chos ’byuõ (Schiefner 1868: 18210-18311; see Chatto-padhyaya 1980: 301-302 for an English translation,

‡aõkaranandana’s Sarvaj!asiddhi. A Preliminary Report

3

2.2.1. Can we throw some more light on the way Såõkr¢tyåyana dealt with these twomanuscripts? According to Much, 17 the photographs taken during the 1934 expeditionhave been preserved on glass negatives only, whereas the ones taken subsequently (i.e.,in 1936 and 1938) exist as film negatives. According to Much (1988: 16-17), the manu-script classified as Õor XXXVIII.3-5.173-175 and as No. 30 in the list of photographedor copied manuscripts has been preserved both on glass and on film negatives, thusindicating that Såõkr¢tyåyana photographed it (at least) twice, once in 1934 and againin 1936 or 1938. We can be certain that the second photograph is the one that coversBandurski’s Xc 14/4 (b), Xc 14/5 (a) and Xc 14/5 (b). These three items in Ban-durski’s Übersicht actually refer to a single manuscript, photographs of which are pre-served on film negatives at the Bihar Research Society (Patna; handlist of film nega-tives 54, 55). According to the identifying labels placed by Såõkr¢tyåyana at the top ofthe folios, Xc 14/4 (b) [10 folios, 1-10v] consists of Õ[or] Praj!ålaõkårakå 1, Xc 14/5 (a)[20 folios, 11r-30v] of Õ Praj!ålaõkårakå 2 and Xc 14/5 (b) [7 folios] of Âgamasiddhi. 18

The first set of photographs taken by Såõkr¢tyåyana 19 was that which allowed GudrunBühnemann (1980) to describe the manuscript (as to its contents only) and to traceSanskrit fragments scattered thoughout Kashmir ‡aiva works back to ‡aõkaranan-dana’s treatises.

2.2.2. Besides these two photographs taken by the Indian scholar, the Library of theIstituto Italiano per l’Africa e l’Oriente (Rome) holds still another set of photographs

readable. The folios on plate 3 are totally illegible.Some rare parts of the folios appearing in the first rowof plate 4 may still be deciphered. Plates 3 and 4 are,however, of no help with regard to the Sarvaj!asid -dhikårikå# (folios 25-27, right row).

19 These photographs consist of 4 plates contain-ing 2 rows each. The second rows of plates 1 and 2(labelled Praj!åla$ 1 A and Praj!åla$ 1 B) exhibitrespectively 15 and 16 folios in the followingsequences: (“cover” + label-)2v- 3r- 4r- 5r… 1 5r a n d(“cover” + label-)1v-2r-3v-4v…15v. As for the first rowsof plates 3 and 4 (labelled Praj!åla$ 2 A a n dPraj!åla$ 2 B), they contain 18 folios of which thefirst 16 consist of folios 16-31 of MS A (folio 31rappears on both plates, its verso being an empty“cover” page). The two last folios of rows 1 as well asthe 11 first folios of rows 2 on plates 3 and 4 consist ofa Tarkarahasya (Såõkr¢tyåyana 1935: 42, XXXVII.3.170[Tarkarahasya .. nevårœ 10_ ! 2_ 50 7 complete]; Much1988: 19, No. 15, handlist of film negatives 15, 16; seeBühnemann 1983: 185-187). These 13 folios of theTarkarahasya are labelled (rows 1 of plates 3 and 4,before the penultimate folio) Tarkarahasya 3. As forthe last 6 folios of rows 2 on plates 3 and 4, theybelong to a still unidentified Nyåya™œkå (label insertedbetween the 11th and 12th folios of rows 2; Såõkr¢tyå-yana 1935: 42, XXXVII.2.169; Much 1988: 20, No. 17,handlist of film negatives 38). Due to the fact thatSåõkr¢tyåyana’s photographs are out of focus, thereading becomes increasingly difficult from approxi-mately folio 11 to folio 20. Although the last six folios(= Nyåya™œkå) are almost completely illegible, theremaining folios in rows 2 are for the most part quitelegible.

17 Much 1988: 13, n. 9.18 Såõkr¢tyåyana’s photographs are divided into

four plates, each plate containing two rows. Plates 1and 2 consist of 17 folios in the first row + 6 folios inthe second row, i.e., 23 folios labelled (at the top ofthe left row) Pra. Vå. ~œ. 3 (= Xc 14/4 [a] in Bandurski1994: 36; these folios seem to be parts of Praj#å-karagupta’s Pramåñavårttikålaõkåra), and 10 folios inthe second row labelled Õ Praj!ålaõkårakå I. Plates 3and 4 consist of 15 folios in the first row + 5 folios inthe second row, i.e., 20 folios labelled (at the top ofthe left row) Õ Praj!ålaõkårakå 2, and 7 folios in thesecond row labelled Õ Ågamasiddhi (followed by anunclear numeral). Even a cursory glance at plates 3and 4 reveals that the six first folios labelled Ågamasid -dhi belong to another manuscript and are the same asthose labelled Nyåya™œ on Såõkr¢tyåyana’s first photo-graphs (see below, n. 19). As for the last of the folioslabelled Ågamasiddhi, it is nothing other than the lastfolio of the section labelled Praj!ålaõkårakå 1 and 2.The remaining folios amount to 31 rectos and 31 ver-sos numbered 2-31 in the right margin of the versos(two or three akßaras as well as the right margin offolio 1v are missing; see below § 2.2.3). Though mostof the numerals are illegible, close comparative scruti-ny reveals the following haphazard sequence of foliosat the beginning: 1r-2v-3v-4r-5r… on plate 1, and 1v-2r-3v-4v-5v… on plate 2. Folios 2v and 2r have beenplaced in the wrong row, and folio 3v has been pho-tographed twice with the result that folio 3r does notappear anywhere! The following sequence is also tobe noted on plate 3: 11r-12r-13r-14r-16r-17r-18r-15r-19r-20r-21r-22r-23r-25r-24r. The sequence of rectos is cor-rect on plate 4. These four photographs are blurred.Significant parts of folios 1-10 on plates 1 and 2 are still

Vincent Eltschinger

4

of the same codex. Giuseppe Tucci (1894-1984) took these photographs (or had some-one take them) in Õor on 20 July 1939, i.e., less than one year after Såõkr¢tyåyana’s lastvisit to Õor. Tucci’s collection has preserved both the negatives 20 and rather poor oldprints 21 from the same. 22 As Francesco Sferra has kindly informed me, “someone (cer-tainly not Tucci) wrote on the envelope of the negatives the title Dharmakårikå and asmall piece of paper put in the folder of the photographs two titles: Praj!ålankårKårikå (sic) and Sarbaj!asidhi Kårikå (sic).” 23 These rather clumsy headings can be eas-ily explained provided one knows that the codex contained inter alia aDharmålaõkårakårikå, a Praj!ålaõkårakårikå and a Sarvaj!asiddhikårikå (see below, §2.2.3). It is to be noted that, as Såõkr¢tyåyana before him, Tucci was unable to identifythe author of the treatises contained in the codex. This is indeed hardly surprising:The (elsewhere most usual) name “(Bha™™a†rœ)†aõkaranandana” does not appear inany of the thirteen micro-colophons (e.g.: …ÙÙ 8 ÙÙ laghupratibandhasiddhikårikå ÙÙÙÙ… [MS A 2v5]) contained in the manuscript.

2.2.3. MS A (complete) consists of thirty-one palm-leaf folios. Folios 1r (with twoshort lines in Tibetan: Luõ grub pa [= Ågamasiddhi, in dbu med script] and ‡er phyin gyirgyan [= Praj!åpåramitålaõkåra !]) and 31v (blank) are “cover” pages. With the excep-tion of folio 1 (two or three akßaras are missing at the right end of the folio due to dam-age), all are in good condition. According to Såõkr¢tyåyana (1935: 42), the size of MSA is 11_ ! 2 inches, i.e., approximately 28.8 ! 5.1 cm. As for the script, Såõkr¢tyåyana(ibid.) labels it mågadhœ; 24 our manuscript’s script type is indeed very close to thatfound on palm-leaf manuscripts of the Bhikßuñœvinaya, 25 of the Vimalakœrtinirde†a 26 andof the Abhisamåcårikadharma, 27 i.e., it corresponds to what is commonly referred to as“proto-Bengali” or “proto-Bengali-cum(-proto)-Maithili” and can be ascribed to thetwelfth or thirteenth century. The manuscript lacks a colophon indicating the placeand/or date of copying. Folio numbers are indicated by numerals written close to thewritten text in the right margins of the versos. Each folio counts six lines with a single

on the whole, though some akßaras at the right arestill recognizable). Though a little better at the top,the first row of plate 2 is similar. As for the folios situ-ated on the second rows of plates 1 and 2, they aregenerally legible up to the 8th or 9th row (and even fur-ther on plate 2), but then become increasingly illegi-ble (beginning with the left ends); folio 31 (not tomention the six folios from the Nyåya™œkå locatedbelow it) is almost completely illegible on both plates.

23 Electronic communication, 14 September 2007.24 On this designation, see Bandurski 1994: 19-20.25 See Roth 1970, especially p. xxvi, as well as the

famous but still unpublished charts compiled byGustav Roth. The main difference is that most mediali are written in a devanågarœ-like manner.

26 See SGBSL 2004a and 2004b. The Sanskrit MSends with a colophon (MS 78r3-6; see SGBSL 2004a:511; see also the facsimile of MS 78r in SGBSL 2004b:limin.) referring to sa$vat 12 in the reign of Gopåla(most probably Gopåla III, A.D. 1128-1143 or A.D.1143-1158), which might (provided the colophon isgenuine) correspond to A.D. 1140 or A.D. 1155 (seeSGBSL 2004b: 18). The editors hold the script of thisVimalakœrtinirde†a manuscript for very close to that ofa manuscript of the Praj!åpåramitåratnaguñasa!caya -gåthå dated A.D. 1174 (SGBSL 2004b: 18).

27 See Matsunami 1998.

20 7 ! 11 cm, envelope 21/P, MS 1.17, CD MT047,P010001 and P020001.

21 MS 3.71 and MS 3.72, folder No. 36.2 2 Tucci’s photographs are divided into two

plates. The first plate (P010001) contains two rows of18 rectos + one at the bottom (placed between thetwo rows). The second plate (P020001) contains tworows of 17 folios + one at the bottom (placed betweenthe two rows). The two plates also contain the afore-mentioned six folios from the mysterious Nyåya™œkå(see above, n. 19), but placed after the 31 folios of ourmanuscript. It is to be noted that Tucci did notinclude the “cover” pages, i.e., folios 1r and 31v, in hisphotographs. Though most of the numerals are illeg-ible, comparative scrutiny reveals the followingsequence of folios in the first row of plate 1: 1v-2v-3v-4r-5r…18r. As for plate 2, its first row presents thefolios in the following haphazard sequence: 2r-3r-4v-5v…14v-16v-17v-18v-15v. In the second rows (19r-31rin P010001; 19v-30v in P020001) of the two plates,folios 24 and 25 appear in reversed order. The photo-graph being out of focus, the folios appearing in thefirst row of plate 1 are increasingly difficult to read(the first two folios are quite legible except for themarginal additions; from folios 3 to 10, increasinglylarger parts of the left ends of the folios are illegible;from folio 10 on, I would hold the folios for illegible

‡aõkaranandana’s Sarvaj!asiddhi. A Preliminary Report

5

(often quite carelessly designed) quadrangular string-hole area situated after the firsttwenty to twenty-five akßaras and interrupting lines three to four, with the followingexceptions: folios 10r, 10v and 21v have only five lines (string-hole area interruptinglines three to four), whereas folios 30r, 30v and 31r have seven lines each (string-holearea interrupting lines three to six, lines three to five in the case of 31r). The string-hole areas of folios 21r and 29r interrupt lines two to four, whereas the string-hole offolio 5r interrupts lines three to five. The average breadth of the string-hole area isaround three to four akßaras (never less than two, never more than six). The averagenumber of akßaras per line is sixty-five (60 in 8r1, 70 in 26v1, but 65 in 4r1, 66 in 29r1, 68in 6v1/25r1). As Bühnemann aptly demonstrated, this manuscript contains the follow-ing thirteen works of ‡aõkaranandana: 28

1. Pratibandhasiddhikårikå# (1v1-2r6)2. Laghupratibandhasiddhikårikå# (2v1-5)3. Sükßmapråmåñyakårikå# (2v5-3r5)4. Madhyapråmåñyakårikå# (3r5-4r1) 29

5. Br¢hatpråmåñyakårikå# (4r1-9v3) 30

6. Anyåpohasiddhikårikå# (9v3-11v4) 31

7. Dharmålaõkårakårikå# (in three chapters, 11v4-13v2, 13v2-14v3, 14v4-15v1) 32

8. Praj!ålaõkårakårikå# (in three chapters, 15v1-19r3, 19r3-20v4, 20v4-25r4)9. Sarvaj!asiddhikårikå# (25r4-27r6)10. Svalpasarvaj!asiddhikårikå# (27r6-27v6) 33

11. Œ†varåpåkarañakårikå# (27v6-29r3)12. Saõkßipte†varåpåkarañakårikå# (29r3-29v3) 34

13. Ågamasiddhikårikå# (29v3-31r7)

The end of each text (2r6, 2v5, 3r5, 4r1, 9v3, 11v4, 15v1, 25r4, 27r6, 27v6, 29r3, 29v3, 31r7)is marked by a small colophon indicating the (generally correct) number of stanzas(for an example, see above, § 2.2.2) and the title. In those texts (Dharmålaõkåra andPraj!ålaõkåra) that are divided into chapters (three chapters only), the ends of thechapters (13v2, 14v3, 15v1; 19r3, 20v4, 25r4) are indicated by an ordinal number followedby the number of stanzas (e.g., …ÙÙ ÙÙ dvitœya# ÙÙ 57 ÙÙ… [20v4]).

Beginning 35 (1v1-2):

o$ namo buddhåya ÙÙ ta$ va(n)de sugata$ sadå prayatadhœs sanœti*vådå(tma)kastattvaj!ånavidhau <padårthaniyate (pra)tya(kßa)tå(lakßañe) ..**(nmårggånu)gat(ai)r (ja -

the one through which ‡aõkaranandana himselfrefers his readers back to his own work (Dharmå -laõkåra MS 20v6-7); D !e 302a7/P Ze 325a6, MS A 11v4

(colophon) and Anyåpohasiddhi MS 19r8 (colophon)also record the title Anyåpohasiddhi.

32 The first chapter consisted of a Kßañabhaõgasi -ddhi (see Eltschinger [forthcoming 2, §4.4]), the sec-ond one of a Nairåtmyasiddhi (Dharmålaõkåra MS 16v1-

2, colophon) and the third one of a Kßañikatvabådhå -bhåvasiddhi (Dharmålaõkåra MS 31r7-31v1, colophon).

33 The mi†raka was entitled Sarvaj!asiddhisaõkßepa(see below, § 2.3).

3 4 The m i † r a k a was entitled Œ † v a r å p å k a r a ñ a -saõkßepa (see Krasser 2002).

35 For editorial conventions, see below, § 3.1.

28 As Bühnemann already suspected and Krasser(2001) and the present author (forthcoming 2) havemade clear, these 13 treatises originally consisted ofmi†rakas combining didactic stanzas and prose com-mentary. In other words, MS A contains all the stan-zas of these 13 independent treatises. The only non-versified segment I have come across in the manu-script is: …ÙÙ ÙÙ ity antara†loko ÙÙ ÙÙ… (folio 19r3,Praj!ålaõkårakårikå#).

29 The mi†raka may have been entitled Pråmå -ñya(parœkßå)saõkßepa (Eltschinger [forthcoming 2, §2.2.3]).

30 In the ŒPVV (II.2214) this work is called Prå -måñyaparœkßå.

31 Though D !e 281a6/P Ze 302b3 and ŒPVV I.29218

name this work Apohasiddhi, the title Anyåpohasiddhi is

Vincent Eltschinger

6

yåya) niyata$ (dustœrth)ikå(påkr¢t)au (yasyåya)$ ja> + + +***[1v2]mas suvitato nirbådhamudghoßyate ÙÙ (= Pratibandhasiddhi, k. 1; see D !e 302b1-2/P Ze 325a8-325b1). 36

End (31r6-7):

itipravacanå†rayagrahañanœtisaddar†anapravr¢ttaku†alåd aya$ bhavatu (sa) .. (dh)åtussa(d)å priye pi nijavastuni [31r7] praka™a(m) å{tra}tmabhåvå†raye prahåñapara(y)å dhiyåparama†åntisanni†raya#* ÙÙ 49 ÙÙ ÙÙ ågamasiddhikårikå ! ! ..ÙÙ ÙÙ * = Ågamasid -dhi, k. 49.

2.3.1. Let me turn now to the second manuscript 37 (= MS B). This codex is knownto me through three sets of photographs, two by Råhula Såõkr¢tyåyana and one byGiuseppe Tucci.

2.3.1.1. Såõkr¢tyåyana’s first set of photographs divides itself into four plates. Thefirst two plates (= Xc 14/9, Bandurski 1994: 41) are labelled Õ Sarvaj!asiddhikå. I A andÕ Sarvaj!asiddhikå. I B and contain, distributed in two rows each, 35 folios (1r-18r, 19r-36r; 1v-18v, 19v-36v 38). Folio 1r consists of a “cover” page with three lines in dbu medscript to the right of the string-hole area. Plates 3 and 4 (= Xc 14/10 [a] and [b]) exhib-it two labels each: at the top of the left rows, Õ Sarvaj!asiddhikå. 2 A and Õ Sarvaj!asid -dhikå. 2 B (= Xc 14/10 [a], Bandurski 1994: 41-42), with nine folios below (= MS B 37r-45r; 37v-45v); after the ninth folio in the left rows, Õ Sahopalambha. I (twice; = Xc 14/10[b], Bandurski 1994: 42), with seven folios after the label in the left rows and eighteenfolios in each row to the right. The manuscript labelled Sahopalambha is incomplete(see Bandurski 1994: 42 for its pagination) but must have contained at least two works,for on folio 36v4-5 (i.e., the fourth folio from the bottom of the right row, containingonly five lines instead of seven), one can still read the following colophon:

… Ù Ù Ù Ù s a ( h o ) p a l a m b h a p r a k a r a ñ a m‡ nåma samåptam iti ÙÙ ÙÙ kr¢ti 2riya($) mahåpañ"itacakracü"åmañijitå[36v5]ripådånåm ÙÙ 39

2.3.1.2. The collection of the Institute for South Asian, Tibetan and BuddhistStudies (University of Vienna) has eighteen xerox copies of a set of photographs takenby Råhula Såõkr¢tyåyana; these copies are labelled “MS 1” and “‡aõkaranandana:Sarvaj#asiddhi$” on the cover of a red folder. 40 Careful analysis of these eighteencopies suggests that Såõkr¢tyåyana’s second set of photographs distributed the sametwo manuscripts onto four plates, the first two plates (sixteen xerox copies withapproximately five folios each) being respectively labelled Sarvaj!asi(ddhi?) I A and

dhisaõkßepa, ‡aõkaranandana).38 Folio 15 is lacking in all photographs (see

below, § 2.3.3). Note should be made of the followingsequence of folios in the left rows of plates 1 and 2: 1-7-2-3-4-5-6-8-9…

39 Conjectural identifications of this Sahopalambhawith Jitåri’s Sahopalambhasiddhi in Much 1988: 28(item No. 45) and Bandurski 1994: 42 (item Xc 14/10[b]).

40 Of these xerox copies, folios 2r-6r, 8r, 18r-24r,37-45r, 1v-6v, 16 v-24v, 34v-45v are almost entirelyillegible.

36 The text between <…> is nearly illegible; myreading is based on lines 1-2 of a still undescribed andunedited (incomplete) MS of the Pratibandhasiddhi aswell as on the Tibetan version of the stanza. *Theother MS’s reading is sannœti°, which is to be preferredboth for metrical reasons (†årdülavikrœ"ita) and incomparison with the Tibetan rendering (dam pa’itshul); **the illegible akßara is ta in the other MS;***the missing akßaras are ya"iñ"i.

3 7 Såõkr¢tyåyana 1935: 42, Õor XXXVII.1.168;Såõkr¢tyåyana 1937: 56, No. 40 (Sarvaj!asiddhisaõkße -pa, ‡aõkaranandana); Bandurski 1994: 41, Xc 14/9and Xc 14/10 (a); Much 1988: 28, No. 43 (Sarvaj!asid -

‡aõkaranandana’s Sarvaj!asiddhi. A Preliminary Report

7

Sarvaj!asi(ddhi?) I B (with no “Õ[or]” preceding). Plates 1 and 2 must have containedtwo rows with twenty folios each. My comparative analysis has revealed that thesequence of folios is correct: 1a (“cover” page)-2r-3r… 21r, 1v-2v-3v… 21v, 22r-23r-24r…(41r), 22v-23v-24v… (41v). The xerox copies inspected contain two more pages (17-18), each exhibiting four more folios (42-45?) that undoubtedly belong to the samemanuscript and are labelled Sarvaj!asi(ddhi?) 2 A and Sarvaj!asi(ddhi?) 2 B (with no"Õ[or]" preceding). These four folios are immediately followed by labels with the noteSahopalambha I (augmented with neither A nor B). 41

From the above, it is obvious that the Viennese xerox copies and Xc 14/9-Xc 14/10(a) refer to one and the same manuscript that amounts to forty-four extant folios. It isalso obvious that these xerox copies on the one hand and Xc 14/9-Xc 14/10 (a) on theother are based on two different sets of photographs (one with [2 ! 40] + [2 ! 4], onewith [2 ! 35] + [2 ! 9]) of this one codex. From the above we can safely conclude that,as in the case of MS A, Såõkr¢tyåyana took (at least) two photographs of MS B. It is verylikely that both sets of photographs were taken after the 1934 expedition, i.e., in 1936 42

and/or 1938, because both seem to have been preserved on film negatives (and not onglass negatives). Much’s items No. 42 (Sarvaj!asiddhikårikå, handlist of film negatives55) and No. 43 (Sarvaj!asiddhisaõkßepa, handlist of film negatives 57) might very wellcorrespond to these two sets of photographs of MS B. 43 It is to be noted, however, thatBandurski’s Übersicht does not contain any item that might correspond toSåõkr¢tyåyana’s second set of photographs. In order to determine the relative chronol-ogy of the two sets, we are left with no other possibility than to inspect the folios insearch of the tiny holes left by nails and drawing pins. Whereas the folios on the xeroxcopies do not seem to have been pierced anywhere, the ones appearing on Xc 14/9and Xc 14/10 (a) exhibit little black dots at the exact position where Såõkr¢tyåyana hadpreviously inserted nails, which suggests that the set of photographs at my disposal onxerox copies was taken prior (in 1936?) to the photographs classified as Xc 14/9 andXc 14/10 (a) (in 1938?).

2.3.1.3. Pictures of this codex have been preserved in still another set of two photo-graphs (rectos and versos) taken by Tucci in Õor on 21 July 1939. 44 The Tucci collec-

with the following sequence: 1v- 2r- 3r… 16r; 1B has only14 folios (17r- 1 8r- 1 9r… 30r). Both 2A and 2B include13 folios each (2v- 3v- 4v… 14v; 16v- 1 7v- 1 8v… 28v), andtwo folios (29v- 3 0v) appear at the bottom between 2Aand 2B. It is to be noted that Tucci’s photographs con-tain no “cover” page at all (whence the sequence on1A: 1v- 2r…). Both pictures are severely out of focus. Interms of legibility, this may be summarized as follows.Folios 1v (1A) and 2v (1B) are quite readable; this mayalso be said of folios 2r (1A) and 3v (1B), althoughsome fuzziness appears at the very left of these folios.Fuzziness increases at the left of folios 3r- 5r (1A) and4v- 5v (1B), where it reaches the string-hole area. Fromfolios 6r (1A) and 6v (1B), what had been fuzzy beforebecomes illegible (folios 8r and 8v are illegible up tothe string-hole area, and fuzziness has reached themiddle of the space between the string-hole area andthe end of the written block). This proceeds to folios1 6r (1A) and 14v (1B), which are totally illegible. Thesituation is incomparably better in rows 2A and 2B.Folios 17r- 2 3r (2A) as well as 16v- 2 2v are quite legible,which may be also said of folios 24r- 2 6r (2A) and 23v-

41 As far as I can see, nothing indicates that theMS B ended with folio 45. At any rate, the manuscriptlabelled Sahopalambha I is in another hand (with atleast seven lines on folio 1b, one string-hole areainterrupting lines 3-5, proto-Bengali script, badlyworn in the centre; folio 1r is the “cover” page exhibit-ing one line [at the top left, about ... of the folio] indbu med script and other inscriptions that I cannotread). As the xerox copies at my disposal make clear,plates 3 and 4 are also divided into two rows (3A/3B,4A/4B), 3B and 4B being most likely to contain atleast five folios from the manuscript labelled Saho -palambha I. One can reckon the number of folios fromthis Sahopalambhaprakaraña that may have appearedon plates 3 and 4 to have been about 25 to 35.

42 Såõkr¢tyåyana 1937: 56, item No. 40 in the list ofphotographed or copied manuscripts: Sarvaj!asiddhi -saõkßepa, ‡aõkaranandana, 100 †lokas, complete.

43 See Much 1988: 27-28.4 4 Tucci’s photographs are divided into two plates

(1 and 2), and each plate into two rows (1A/1B,2A/2B). They exhibit no label. 1A contains 15 folios

Vincent Eltschinger

8

tion keeps two negatives (7 ! 11 cm) classified as 22/U and 22/Z 45 that supposedly con-tain a Sarvaj!asiddhisaõkßepa. Though the photographed manuscript contains thirtyfolios instead of forty-five, it is assuredly the same codex that Såõkr¢tyåyana had at leastseen in 1934, when he reported the existence of a complete Sarvaj!asiddhisaõkßepa inÕor, 46 and that he then photographed twice.

2.3.2. Closer inspection of the photographs has revealed, however, that the saidcodex did not contain just a Sarvaj!asiddhisaõkßepa, but also (and mainly) a largerSarvaj!asiddhi, 47 of which the Saõkßepa was meant to be an abridged version, as is mostoften the case in ‡aõkaranandana’s literary production. Though the photograph is outof focus and hence almost illegible in the lower part, it is certain that a third text by‡aõkaranandana started after the Sarvaj!asiddhisaõkßepa, i.e., the larger Œ†varåpåka -raña. Contrary to the MS A, this codex contains the stanzas together with ‡aõkaranan-dana’s own commentary thereon. Interestingly enough, the order of texts in MS Bclosely matches the sequence observed in MS A, i.e., Sarvaj!asiddhi, Sarvaj!asiddhi -saõkßepa, Œ†varåpåkaraña.

2.3.3. MS B (incomplete) consists of forty-four folios. Folio 1a (with two or threehalf lines in dbu med script at the right end 48) is a “cover” page. The photographs showthat the upper right corner (of the rectos) is increasingly worn (almost intact on 1; halfof one to two akßara(s) are missing at the end of 11r1, 12r1, 14r1, 23r1, 25r1, 27r1, 30r1-2,and at the end of lines 9v8, 27v8, 30v8). The reading of (parts of) several folios is madedifficult due to stains of unknown (liquid) origin (6r, 9r, 17r, 21r, and especially 19r and20r; 5v, 16v, 18v, and especially 19v and 20v). According to Såõkr¢tyåyana, the size ofMS B amounts to 10_ ! 2 inches, i.e., approximately 28 ! 5 cm. As for the script,Såõkr¢tyåyana labels it varttula; 49 MS B’s script type is doubtless some variant of proto-Bengali or proto-Bengali-cum(-proto)-Maithili, of which I have found no close parallelto date. Beside corrections of one or two akßaras scattered in the upper and lower mar-gins of the MS, some additions appear (two-thirds of a line at the bottom of 10r, twolines at the bottom of 11r, one line at the bottom of 7v, ten akßaras at the bottom of 9v[centre], ten or eleven akßaras at the top of 26v [centre]). The text of MS B has beenwritten with a strong slant to the right. The photographs of this incomplete codex failto exhibit a colophon indicating the place and/or the date of copying. Folio numbersare indicated by numerals written in the right margins of the versos, close to the writ-ten text. It is to be noted that folio 15 is lacking. Because of the increasingly severedamage to the right margins, the numbering can no longer be read from 30v onward.Note should also be made that someone (most probably some member of Tucci’s 1939expedition) has numbered the rectos in roman numerals (1-29) at the centre of thelower margins. Each folio counts 8 lines (with no exception) and has a single rectan-gular or sometimes trapezoid string-hole area situated after approximately twenty-fiveakßaras (generally between 22 and 27, slightly more at the beginning of the MS) and

47 This seems to have been the opinion of Pañ"itJagdœ†var Påñ"ey. Cf. Much 1988: 28: “According toPañ"it Påñ"ey this is ‡aõkaranandana’s Sarvaj!asid -dhikårikå together with ‡aõkaranandana’s own com-mentary.”

48 On the xerox copy (page 1), only two half linesappear; according to Bandurski (1994: 41), “Titelblattmit 3 Zeilen in tib. dBu med.”

49 On this designation, see Bandurski 1994: 19-20.

2 5v (2B), though a slight fuzziness starts appearing oftheir left ends. In folios 27r- 3 0r (2A), the readingbecomes increasingly difficult up to the string-holearea. The same holds true of folios 26v- 2 8v ( 2 B ) .Folios 29v- 3 0v (down inbetween the two rows) can beconsidered almost totally illegible.

45 Respectively CD No. MT023 and MT051.46 Såõkr¢tyåyana 1935: 42, Õor XXXVII.1.168; vart -

tula script, 10_ ! 2 inches, number of folios not indi-cated, 7 lines (sic), complete.

‡aõkaranandana’s Sarvaj!asiddhi. A Preliminary Report

9

interrupting lines three to six (with no exception). The average breadth of the string-hole area is six to seven akßaras (from five to eight) at the bottom, and four to sixakßaras at the top. The average number of akßaras per line is around seventy-five (from70 to 82). Stanzas (or parts of stanzas) are preceded and isolated by a significant (fromtwo to three akßaras) blank space between two double dañ"as (…end of the commen-tary ÙÙ ÙÙ stanza…).

MS B contains at least three mi†raka works of ‡aõkaranandana. First, the Sarvaj!a -siddhi (1v1-26v4), which ends with the following words:

… Ù Ù ÙÙ samå(p)tå sarvvaj!asi " # d d hi2# • k r ¢ ti 2# bha™(™)a†rœ†aõkaranandanasya ÙÙ Ù Ù

Next, the Sarvaj!asiddhisaõkßepa (26v4-30v2), which begins (26v4) with no siddhamthus:

… namo buddhåya ÙÙ vistaroditasarvvaj!asa$sådhanavidhåv api Ù punas tatsiddhaye… 50

and ends as follows (30v2):

… Ù Ù ÙÙ sarvvaj!asiddhisa$kßepa# samåpta# kr¢ti 2r bha™™a†rœ†aõkaranandanasya ÙÙ Ù Ù

And third, the Œ†varåpåkaraña 51 (30v2-???), which begins in the following way:

namo buddhåya ÙÙ du#khå(ghrå 2)[ 3 0v3]t a j a g a d d hi 2tåhitamati# †åstaikaive†varoni 2rvvåñåya hita$ saheya # m amuto ya# sarvvam åkhyåtavån*… 52

The end of this third text is no longer found in MS B, but stanzas 10, 13 and 16 canstill be identified on folios 34r, 35r and 36r respectively (the text contains 27 stanzas inMS A). The miserable condition of Såõkr¢tyåyana’s photographs makes any transcrip-tion of the end of 45v impossible. In contrast, the beginning of MS B is quite legible(1v1):

namo buddhåya ÙÙ kåyavåõmånasair bhaktyå na(t)å sarvvårthadar†ina$ o tat -pratikßepamü"hånå$ tatsiddhi2# kr¢payocyate • (= SSk 1)

2.4. To summarize, we may assume that Õor monastery owned at least two manu-scripts containing works of ‡aõkaranandana: one (= MS A, 31 folios) consisted of the(complete) stanzas of thirteen independent treatises; the other (= MS B, 45 folios atleast, folio 15 missing) consisted of the (incomplete) Sarvaj!asiddhi, the (complete)Sarvaj!asiddhisaõkßepa, and (at least more than half of) the larger Œ†varåpåkaraña. Thefirst manuscript was photographed twice (1934 [glass negative] and 1936 or 1938 [filmnegative]) by Såõkr¢tyåyana, and once by Tucci (1939 [film negative]). The second alsoseems to have been photographed by Såõkr¢tyåyana twice (1936 and/or 1938 [film neg-atives]), and once by Tucci (1939 [film negative]). I am not aware of a Tibetan trans-lation of any of these works.

5 2 Œ † v a r å p å k a r a ñ a, k . 1ab; this † å r d ü l a v i k r œ " i t astanza appears at MS A 27v6-28r1.

50 Sarvaj!asiddhisaõkßepa, k. 1ac1 (MS A 27r6).51 Not to be confused with the Œ†varåpåkaraña -

saõkßepa edited by Krasser (2002).

Vincent Eltschinger

10

2.5. Of the three sets of photographs of MS A at our disposal, Såõkr¢tyåyana’s firstset (glass negative) is by far the best (at least with regard to the Sarvaj!asiddhikårikå#,i.e., MS A 25r4-27r6). Whereas Såõkr¢tyåyana’s second set (film negative) is of absolute-ly no use, Tucci’s photographs may prove very helpful, first and foremost with regardto other parts of the manuscript (especially for large parts of the Praj!ålaõkårakårikå#,of which only the last stanzas are decipherable in Såõkr¢tyåyana’s first photographs).My diplomatic edition of MS A 25r4-27r6 relies both on Såõkr¢tyåyana’s and Tucci’s pho-tographs.

Tucci’s photographs of MS B, badly out of focus, do not allow more than, say, folios1v-5 and 16v-28v to be deciphered (as well as the right ends of folios 6-14). From folio6 on, decipherment becomes increasingly difficult, especially to the left of the string-hole area. From this point on, the reading quite often turns into a mere attempt at cor-roborating the readings of MS A rather than to pick out the MS B’s own (possibly orig-inal) readings (from folio 13 on the photographs become so badly blurred that somestanzas or parts of stanzas cannot even be localized despite the fact that a blank spacebetween two double dañ"as normally precedes them, making them generally quite eas-ily to recognize). The two sets of photographs by Såõkr¢tyåyana, though of almost nouse for substantial parts of MS B, have proved very useful in compensating for the mis-erable quality of Tucci’s photographs around folios 8v-14v/10r-16r. Note should also bemade of the fact that SSk 25b2d is missing in MS B due to the lack of folio 15. This makesediting SSk 25d very difficult, for in MS A 26r two akßaras have as yet resisted all myattempts at identifying them. As for the folios in the right rows, i.e., MS B 16v-26v, theyare again legible except for some stains of unknown origin on the manuscript itself.

A few words may not be out of place regarding my synoptic diplomatic edition ofthe stanzas (§ 3.3). Contrary to the MS A, the MS B contains a mi†raka in which thestanzas are split into syntactic units that comply with ‡aõkaranandana’s didactic andpolemical purposes. This synoptic diplomatic edition conforms to these fragmentedstanzas, and aims at allowing one to read the text in meaningful segments, rather thanretaining the units defined by mere metrical schemes. In order to make variant read-ings (see below, §§ 4-5) more apparent, I have deemed it useful to reproduce the MSA’s stanzas without hesitating to split them in an admittedly artificial way. To give butone example, let us consider SSk 12cd in MS A (24v4-5):

åryasatyamatis tadvad adhyåropåt sukhœkr¢ta$ ÙÙ

In the text commented upon by ‡aõkaranandana, SSk 12cd is split into two units,i.e., SSk 12c (MS B 6v1) and SSk 12d (MS B 6v7-8):

… ÙÙ åryasatyamatis ta(d)va(t) ÙÙ … ÙÙ adhyå(ropå) .. .(œkr¢ta)$ ! …

Rather than elaborating a new set of conventions, I have simply divided MS A’s SSk12cd into two, although da is a single akßara (no viråma or initial a).

‡aõkaranandana’s Sarvaj!asiddhi. A Preliminary Report

11

3. Diplomatic edition of MS A 25r4-27r6

3.1. Editorial conventions

.. illegible akßara

. illegible part of an akßara( ) contain unclear akßara(s) or part(s) of an akßara{ } contain akßara(s) cancelled by means of one/two stroke(s) (normally writ-

ten above the akßara){{ }} contain akßara(s) cancelled by means of erasure$ % contain akßara(s) cancelled both by means of one/two stroke(s) (normally

written above the akßara) and by means of erasure{ } contain akßara(s) that have been corrected by an added akßara, but have

not been deleted either by means of one/two stroke(s) or by means of era-sure

< > contain added akßara(s) in the MS (the position is indicated directly afterthe added akßara[s])

& ' contain akßaras rewritten in a style exhibiting queue-like oblique strokesextending to the right at the bottom of the akßara’s vertical line, as in &atan -må°' (MS A 26v4), &vi°' (MS A 25v5) or &dvaya$' (MS A 26v6)

<< >> contain akßara(s) that are difficult to read because of damage (stains, etc).! empty space in the manuscript equivalent to the size of approximately one

akßara+ akßara missing due to damage( sign of insertion (kåkapåda) added above the line# string-hole areaÙ dañ"aÙÙ double dañ"a• dañ"a having the form of a dot (in MS B only)" line-filler (in three variants: dañ"a, slashed dañ"a, broken dañ"a)! sic!! metrically incorrect (added at the end of the påda)å2 å written (mainly before the string-hole or at the end of lines) as a right-

flowing stroke extending from the top of the akßara, as in °r arthå2 (MS A25v4)

i2 - in MS A: medial i without a left vertical line- in MS B: medial i with a left vertical line (devanågarœ-like i)

e2, o2 devanågarœ-like e, o$2 inserted devanågarœ-like visarga (two dots added between two akßaras, most

often slightly above and below the line) as in hett!o<#2> kå° (MS A 26r3) orin dhœ<#2> kena (MS A 26v6)

m* m plus viråma, as in °danam* (MS A 26v2) (see McDonald 2005: xxii, n. 24)m‡ m plus a vertical zigzag stroke as in kim‡ (MS B 22v1) or °tåm‡ (MS B 25r2)* viråmat final t without viråma, as in °õgåt (MS B 17v4)0 viråma lacking<Ù>, <ÙÙ> dañ"a or double dañ"a added directly above the line<Ù>, <ÙÙ> dañ"a or double dañ"a added directly below the line) below* above

Vincent Eltschinger

12

3.2. Sanskrit text of the Sarvaj#asiddhikårikå$ (MS A 25r4-27r6)

Folio 25r

[25r4] (…) ÙÙ kåyavåõmånasair bhak(ty)å2

[25r5]natvå sarvårthadar†inam* Ù tatpratikßepamü"hånå% tatsiddhi$ kr¢payocyateÙÙ j#åtakårañasadbhåvå sambhaviny anyakåryavat0 Ù sarvårthavißayå sa%vit så hi sa%-bhava ucyate ÙÙ avinirmukta "

[25r6]yatnasya kåraña% vr¢ttabhåvane Ù yathåvasåya% yad yatra vedanam* sa%-pravarttyate ÙÙ kåmonmådådivat tasya tadå tattva% ta(du)dbha{{.. ..m*}}<våt l.6> Ù vedy-ate yan na tad bhåvya% tad dhi dr¢†ya% na kalpitam* ÙÙ tad atråj#åyamå "

Folio 25v

[25v1]ne pi jånœyåm iti varttayan* Ù sa%vitti% tatra jånåti yatheda% tattvato jagat*ÙÙ yatheccha% varttamånasya dr¢ß™åv iß™åprasiddhita$ Ù bhråntis syåt sarvavißayß nakatha%cid akalpanß<t ÙÙ*l.1> Ù avastusa%vidbhinnatvåt ta

[25v2]dbuddher vastubuddhitå Ù buddhyånurüpyåd gråhyo rtho nåtmavain!itryayo-gata$ ÙÙ kårañatve pi sa%vedyas sa%vittåv eva {{.. (..)}}<so2 :l.2> sya ca Ù bhåsamånatvamåtmaiva na<Ù> sa%vit så tu<Ù> tena ca ÙÙ boddhus syåd boddhr¢bhåve2 "

[25v3]nyac chaktatva iva tatra ki% Ù vedyavedanatå tasmån na tadbhåve pi vi #dyate Ù<ÙÙ> j#ånam ådheyam atråto vikarttavya% na vastu tu Ù tasya tu sv{{e}}animittåtsyåd abhåvåd arthahetutå ÙÙ så $vå% cårvågda "

[25v4]r†inå% j#åne yoginå% na katha%cana Ù bhåsamånåt(m)atå buddh{{i}}erarthå2 # nåm atadåtmanå% ÙÙ tådrüpyåt så svahetos tadarthåpekßå na sa%vida$ Ù årya-satyamatis tadvad adhyåropåt sukhœkr¢

[25v5]ta% Ù<ÙÙ> tadadhyåropa&vl.5'igame pa†yato du$khatågati$ Ù tatråniß™atayå j#eyå†cakßurådimater iva ÙÙ tadbuddhåv a({nya}<nyå)l.6>vigame båhy$å%arüpådayo matå$ ÙÙtathå samudaye buddhir anyahetunirœkr¢tau ÙÙ

[25v6]Ù tr¢ßñå ’vidyo{{..}}&t(th)il.6'tatvena nirodhe ca svahetuje Ù<ÙÙ> karttur bhokturvibhinnasya †ünyatvåt kåryakårañapravåhamåtrasa%vittim åhur nairåtmyagåminœm*Ù<ÙÙ> mokßavartmånugantavyam idam eveti dar†a "

Folio 26r

[26r1]yan* Ù pramåñasiddhatåm åha tanmülaiva tata† ca dhœ$ Ù<ÙÙ> kårañatvam atoj#e2ya% s&vl.1'aprå!måñåc ca tat sakr¢t0 Ù ekatråpi tathåsiddhau tajjåtœye tathågat{e}<il.1>$Ù<ÙÙ> hetutvam agatau sådhya% såmånyasya vi "

[26r2]†eßaña% Ù na hett!vabhåvas tenåtra tadabhåve py abådhana%<ÙÙ> tathåpratœternairåtmyadar†ino na virudhyate Ù vr¢tti$ pårårthyaparamå så hi hetau phalodbhava$ÙÙ{<Ù>} vi†iß™ahetunirvarttyaphalaj#ånå "

[26r3]t pratikßaña% Ù tanmåtrahett!o<$2l.3> kåryasya tattvaj#ån nåsty asambhava$

Ù{Ù} så # kßåtkåro vikalpe pi smarttavyotprekßañœyayo$ ÙÙ (< p a r a s a n t å n a g a j # å n a-(he)t(u)bodhåc ca (t)å(dr¢†am*) *l.1> nånirüpitam aj#åta% na cåsa%vin nirüpå!,!!ñå Ùvyavaså "

[26r4]yo vikalpo nåpy asyedam iti dhœs tata$<ÙÙ> arthåvabhåsasvåtantryå " # t sa nabhrånti$ parå†rayåt0 ÙÙ arthåbhåsåvikalpatve na bhedo (rth)åtmasa%vido$ Ù< Ù Ù >

abhütåropa(h)å(n)åc ca yathå(v)a "

‡aõkaranandana’s Sarvaj!asiddhi. A Preliminary Report

13

[26r5]stv eva kalpanåt0 Ù santånasyånusan(dh)ånåd asa%sarggo na bhedadhœ$ Ù<ÙÙ>

phalåbhåvåd vinå†itva% nå†aco{{..}}<..l.5> dhigamyate Ù svade†akålavarttyarthaprakå†onubhavas sa ca ÙÙ båhyahetus sadartha$ syåt tada "

[26r6]nyas sarvagocara$ Ù tatsvarüpapratœtyaõga% lakßaña% tasya hetuta$ Ù{Ù} pratœ-tau månabahutå kalpanåbhråntyapohate Ù<ÙÙ> {pra}vastupratyavabhåsasya yathå(vast-va)napo(d)itapratœtivr¢ttes tadvastusa%vittvapari "

Folio 26v

[ 2 6v1] p ü r a ñ å t0 Ù< Ù Ù > sahåvabhåsåt tatkålasa%vittir avikalpikå Ù nåtiprasaõgåttaj#!eya% vastvabhåve tadå bhrama$ Ù<ÙÙ> arvåg åbhogato bhåvi kalayann anulomata$ Ùsüryodayådinå vidyåd a{{..}}<tœl.1>ta% ca tato nya

[26v2]thå ÙÙ asa%vittåv aheto$ syåt kåle2 hetau na vedana% Ù arthakålagrahårthedhœr yathaiva% sarvavedana% ÙÙ tac ca vedanam arthasya svåtmana† ca {{.e}}&sval.2've-danam* arthapratyakßatå satyå yathaiva% sarvavedana% ÙÙ anape

[26v3]kßyånapekßatvåt sarvasyaika% vihanyate Ù<Ù> kriyåvad grahaña% naiva vidhir aù nta&val.3'tå% {{.. .å}}<yatal.3>$ ÙÙ såkalyagrahañe so sti nånyeßåm agraho pi vå Ù svatan-trœbhütasa%vittes sarvvånubhavakåmina$ ÙÙ kå

[26v4]latrayå†raya% na syåd ananta{%}m anirüpita% Ù iyattåj#ånalabhye pi " # sar-vatvapratyayo bhavet* ÙÙ &atanmål.4'trå2pratyayo rthånå%!! rüpa% vij#åtam eva tu Ùvidyånantyatayånantya% pratividyeßu yo va "

[26v5]det0<ÙÙ> strœtvena måtara% tulyå% jåyeti †ayana% nayete!! Ù sarvågatau na

gamyeta tatra buddher asambhava$ ÙÙ sarvåpratœtau gamyete na pramåñåpramåñate{{Ù}}Ù anumånådyanumånatva%!! †abda† caiva% na vedaye "

[26v6]t0 ÙÙ sarva$ sarva% vijånåti pratyakßeña tu ka†cana<Ù> j#eyam utpådavat pürvå-paråntaparihåñimat0 ÙÙ anantam iti dhœ<$2

l.6> kena så{{.. ..}}&dvaya%l.6' nn!åparåpi ki% Ùviruddhånå% sakr¢d buddhir vviruddhå pråpyakåriña$ ÙÙ nai

Folio 27r

[27r1]va% sarvårthasa%vittir må bhüc chåbde py asambhava$ Ù ata evoßñasa%vitteradåho rasaved{a}<i2

l.1>ne Ù<ÙÙ> anåsvådanam asty eva% nyåyåbhå(s)apratikriyå <Ù>ÙÙ dr¢†ya-syaikanivr¢ttau syån nånyeßåm aparasya tu Ù<ÙÙ> pra

[27r2]måñapari†uddhårthavåditvåd apy ani†cite Ù sårvvaj#ye tadvi2paryåsån netonye sarvadar†ina$ Ù<ÙÙ> båhyåbhåve pi sårvaj#yahetüttha% sarvadar†anam* paracittå-†raya% hanti naivehådvayadar†itå ÙÙ va†i "

[ 2 7r3]no våsanådheyarüpakålußyavarjit{a}< å2l . 3>% pa†yato dhiyam advaitaså #

rvaj#ye tv avirodhinœ ÙÙ ÙÙ suramanujådibhi$ padam adr¢ß™am ana({va})n(t)ya!sama%sakalajagaddhitårtham avagamya jagadga{mi}<dil.3>

[27r4]ta% Ù akhilasurådhidaiva{ta}tavareña hi yena (bhr¢)tå bhavati (m)ati. .i2 #våya kila tatra †ivaiva tata$ ÙÙ ta% stumas ta% namasyåmas sugata% sarvadar†inam* Ù åsaugatapadapråptes (sa na<$2

l.4>) syåc chara[27r5]ña% mahat0 ÙÙ paurvåparyavicårañåkßamadhiyå% (sa%)vådabådhotthito2<Ù>

doßa$ svå†raya eva du${kha}<pa)l.6>rihara$ syåd atra nånyodita$ Ù (sa tv) eva% sunirü-pita$ (<(su))l.6>parikr¢tas tœ(rth)yås tadåsa#jane!! du "

[ 2 7r6] $ s s!ambhåvitam åtmavaibhavam amœ (mu)#cantu nirvastuka% ÙÙ ÙÙsarvvaj#asiddhikårikå$ ÙÙ 46 ÙÙ

Vincent Eltschinger

14

3.3. Synoptic diplomatic edition

SSk 1 (MS A 25r4-5/MS B 1v1)kåyavåõmånasair bhak(ty)å2 [25r5] natvå sarvårthadar†inam* Ùtatpratikßepamü"hånå% tatsiddhi$ kr¢payocyate ÙÙ

kåyavåõmånasair bhaktyå na(t)å sarvvårthadar†ina% •tatpratikßepamü"hånå% tatsiddhi2$ kr¢payocyate •<ÙÙ>

SSk 2 (MS A 25r5/MS B 1v1)j#åtakårañasadbhåvå sambhaviny anyakåryavat0 Ùsarvårthavißayå sa%vit så hi sa%bhava ucyate ÙÙ

j#åtakårañasadbhåvå sambhavißya!ny anyakåryavat!! •

sarvvårthavißayå{(rtha)vißayå} samvit sa hi sambhava ucyate ÙÙ

SSk 3ab (MS A 25r5-6/MS B 2r2)avinirmukta " [25r6] yatnasya kåraña% vr¢ttabhåvane Ù

ÙÙ avinirmukta{sya}yatnasya kåraña% vr¢ttabhåva(n)e ÙÙ

SSk 3cd-4ab (MS A 25r6/MS B 2r5-6)yathåvasåya% yad yatra vedanam* sa%pravarttyate ÙÙkåmonmådådivat tasya tadå tattva% ta(du)dbha{{.. ..m*}}<våt l.6> Ù

ÙÙ yathåvasåya% yad yatra vedana% sampravarttyate[2r6] kå(m)onmå(d)ådivat tasya tadå tatva!% tadudbhavåt

SSk 4cd (MS A 25r6/MS B 2v6)vedyate yan na tad bhåvya% tad dhi dr¢†ya% na kalpitam* ÙÙ

ÙÙ # vedyate yan na tad bhåvya% tad (dh)i dr¢†yan na kalpita% ÙÙ

SSk 5 (MS A 25r6-v1/MS B 3r2)tad atråj#åyamå " [25v1]ne pi jånœyåm iti varttayan* Ùsa%vitti% tatra jånåti yatheda% tattvato jagat* ÙÙ

ÙÙ tad atråj(#)åyamåne pi2 jånœyåm iti varttayan0 !sa%vitti% tatra jånåti yatheda% tattvato jagat0 ÙÙ

SSk 6 (MS A 25v1/MS B 3r6)yatheccha% varttamånasya dr¢ß™åv iß™åprasiddhita$ Ùbhråntis syåt sarvavißayå na katha%cid akalpanå<t ÙÙ*l.1> Ù

ÙÙ yathe # ccha% varttamånasya dr¢ß™åv iß™({i}<å*l.6>)prasiddhita$ !bhrånti$ syåt sarvvavißayå na katha#cid akalpanåt ÙÙ

SSk 7ab (MS A 25v1-2/MS B 4r5)avastusa%vidbhinnatvåt ta[25v2]dbuddher vastubuddhitå Ù

‡aõkaranandana’s Sarvaj!asiddhi. A Preliminary Report

15

ÙÙ avastu # samvid bhi2nnatvåt tad(bu)ddher vvastubuddhi2tå ÙÙ

SSk 7cd (MS A 25v2/MS B 4v5)buddhyånurüpyåd gråhyo rtho nåtmavain!itryayogata$ ÙÙ

ÙÙ buddhyånurüpyåd gråhyo rtho nåtmavaicitryayogata$ ÙÙ

SSk 8ab1 (MS A 25v2/MS B 4v7)kårañatve pi sa%vedyas sa%vittåv eva {{.. (..)}}<so2 :l.2>

ÙÙ kårañatve pi2 sa%vedyas sa%vittåv eva sa$ ÙÙ

SSk 8b2d1 (MS A 25v2/MS B 5r3)sya ca Ù

bhåsamånatvam åtmaiva na<Ù>

ÙÙ asya ca !bhåsamånatvam åtmaiva na ÙÙ

SSk 8d2a (MS A 25v2/MS B 5r6)sa%vit så tu<Ù>

ÙÙ sa%vi2t så tu {{..}}

SSk 8d2b-9ab (MS A 25v2-3/MS B 5r6)tena ca ÙÙ

boddhus syåd boddhr¢bhåve2 " [25v3]nyac chaktatva iva tatra ki% Ù

ÙÙ tena ca ÙÙboddhu$ syåd boddhr¢bhåve nyach! chaktatva iva tatra ki% ÙÙ

SSk 9cd-10ab (MS A 25v3/MS B 5v2)vedyavedanatå tasmån na tadbhåve pi vi # dyate Ù<ÙÙ>

j#ånam ådheyam atråto vikarttavya% na vastu tu Ù

ÙÙ vedyavedanatå tasmån na (<ta*l.1>dbhåve pi vidyate !j#ånam å{de}<dhe*l.1>yam atråto vi2karttavya% na vastu tu ! ÙÙ

SSk 10cd-11ab (MS A 25v3-4/MS B 5v8)tasya tu sv{{e}}animittåt syåd abhåvåd arthahetutå ÙÙså $vå% cårvågda " [25v4]r†inå% j#åne yoginå% na katha%cana Ù

ÙÙ tasya tu svanimi2t(t)åt syåd abhåvåd arthahetutå •så cårvvågdar†i2nå% j#åne yoginå% na katha#cana<ÙÙ>

SSk 11cd-12ab (MS A 25v4/MS B 6r4)bhåsamånåt(m)atå buddh{{i}}er arthå2 # nåm atadåtmanå% ÙÙtådrüpyåt så svahetos tadarthåpekßå na sa%vida$ Ù

Vincent Eltschinger

16

ÙÙ bhåsamånåtmatå buddher arthånå{gya}<(m a)*l.1> # tadåtmanå% •tådrüpyåt så svahetos tadarthåpekßå na samvida$ ÙÙ

SSk 12c (MS A 25v4/MS B 6v1)åryasatyamatis tadvad

ÙÙ åryasatyamatis ta(d)va(t) ÙÙ

SSk 12d-13ab (MS A 25v4-5/MS B 6v6-7)adhyåropåt sukhœkr¢[25v5]ta% Ù<ÙÙ>

tadadhyåropa&vl.5'igame pa†yato du$khatågati$ Ù

ÙÙ adhyå[6v7](ropå) .. .(œkr¢ta)% !(tada)dhyå(ropa)viga .e (pa)†yato d(u)$kha(t)ågati$<ÙÙ>

SSk 13cd-14ab (MS A 25v5/MS B 7v1-2)tatråniß™atayå j#eyå† cakßurådimater iva ÙÙtadbuddhåv a({nya}<nyå)l.6>vigame båhy$å%arüpådayo matå$ ÙÙ

ÙÙ tatråniß™atayå j#eyå† cakßurådimater iva !tadbu{ddhyåvanyå}<ddhåv anyå*l.1>vagame båhyarüpådayo ma[7v2](tå)$ (ÙÙ)

SSk 14cd-15a (MS A 25v5-6/MS B 7v5)tathå samudaye buddhir anyahetuniråkr¢tau ÙÙ[25v6]Ù tr¢ßñå ’vidyo{{..}}&t(th)il.6'tatvena

ÙÙ tathå samudaye buddhi2r anyahetuniråkr¢tau •(t)r¢ # ßñåvidyotthi2tatvena ÙÙ

SSk 15b (MS A 25v6/MS B 7v8)nirodhe ca svahetuje Ù<ÙÙ>

ÙÙ ni2rodhe ca svahetuje •

SSk 15cd-16ab (MS A 25v6/MS B 8r3)karttur bhoktur vibhinnasya †ünyatvåt kåryakåraña-pravåhamåtrasa%vittim åhur nairåtmyagåminœm* Ù<ÙÙ>

ÙÙ (karttur .okt .)r (v)vi2bhi2nnasya †ünyatvåt kå(r). (kå)raña(Ù)-pravåhamåtrasa%vittim åhur nnairåtmyagåminœ% ÙÙ

SSk 16cd-17a (MS A 25v6-26r1/MS B 8v1)mokßavartmånugantavyam idam eveti dar†a " [26r1]yan* Ùpramåñasiddhatåm åha

ÙÙ mokßavatmå!nugantavyam idam eve(")!i dar†ayan*pramåñasiddhatåm åha ÙÙ

‡aõkaranandana’s Sarvaj!asiddhi. A Preliminary Report

17

SSk 17b (MS A 26r1/MS B 9r4)tanmülaiva tata† ca dhœ$ Ù<ÙÙ>

ÙÙ tanm(ül)aiva (tata)† ca dhœ$ ÙÙ

SSk 17c (MS A 26r1/MS B 9r8)kårañatvam ato j#e2ya%

ÙÙ kårañatvam ato j#e(ya)% ÙÙ

SSk 17d1 (MS A 26r1/MS B 9v1)s&vl.1'aprå!måñåc ca tat

ÙÙ svapramåñåc ca tat ÙÙ

SSk 17d2-18ab (MS A 26r1/MS B 9v3)sakr¢t0 Ù

ekatråpi tathåsiddhau tajjåtœye tathågat{e}<il.1>$ Ù<ÙÙ>

ÙÙ sa(kr¢)teka # tråpi2 tathåsiddhau tajjåtœye tathågati$ ÙÙ

SSk 18cd (MS A 26r1-2/MS B 9v4-5)hetutvam agatau sådhya% såmånyasya vi " [26r2]†eßaña% Ù

ÙÙ he[9v5]tutvam agatau sådhya% (s)åmånyasya vi†eßaña% ÙÙ

SSk 19a (MS A 26r2/MS B 10r5)na hett!vabhåvas tenåtra

ÙÙ (na) hetvabhåvas tenåtra ! ÙÙ

SSk 19bc1 (MS A 26r2/MS B 10r5)tadabhåve py abådhana%<ÙÙ>

tathåpratœter

ÙÙ tadabhåve py abådhana%ta&.'åpratœte$ ! ! ÙÙ

SSk 19c2d-20ab (MS A 26r2/MS B 10v7-8)nairåtmyadar†ino na virudhyate Ù

vr¢tti$ pårårthyaparamå så hi hetau phalodbhava$ ÙÙ{<Ù>}

ÙÙ nairåtmyadar†ino na virudhya{nte}<te)l.8> •

(vr¢)tti2$ pårå(rth)yaparamå så hi2 hetau " [10v8] phalodbhava$ ÙÙ

SSk 20cd-21ab (MS A 26r2-3/MS B 12r1)vi†iß™ahetunirvarttyaphalaj#ånå " [26r3]t pratikßaña% Ùtanmåtrahett!o<$2

l.3> kåryasya tattvaj#ån nåsty asambhava$ Ù{Ù}

Vincent Eltschinger

18

ÙÙ vi2iß™ahetunirvvarttyaphalaj#ånåt pratikßañam‡ !tanmåtrahe(to$ kå)rya(sya ta) .. j#ån nå(sty asa) .. va$ ÙÙ

SSk 21cd (MS A 26r3/MS B 12v4-5)så # kßåtkåro vikalpe pi smarttavyotprekßañœyayo$ ÙÙ

ÙÙ [12v5] såkßåtkåro vikalpe pi smarttavyotprekßañœyayo$ •

SSk 22ab (MS A *26r1/MS B 12v6)(<parasantånagaj#åna(he)t(u)bodhåc ca (t)å(dr¢†am*)*l.1>

ÙÙ para # santånagaj#ånahetubodhåc ca (t)å(dr¢†am‡) •

SSk 22cd (MS A 26r3/MS B 13r1)nånirüpitam aj#åta% na cåsa%vin nirüpå!,!!ñå Ù

ÙÙ nånirüpitam aj#åta% na cåsamvin nirüpañå ÙÙ

SSk 23ab (MS A 26r3-4/MS B 13r5-6)vyavaså " [26r4]yo vikalpo nåpy asyedam iti dhœs tata$<ÙÙ>

ÙÙ vyavasåyo vika[13r6]l(p)o (n)åpy asye .. m iti dhœs tata$ •

SSk 23cd1 (MS A 26r4/MS B 13v2-3)arthåvabhåsasvåtantryå " # t sa na bhrånti$

ÙÙ (a)rthåvabhåsasvåtantryåt sa na bhrånti$ Ù(Ù)

SSk 23d2 (MS A 26r4/MS B 13v5)parå†rayåt0 ÙÙ

ÙÙ parå†rayåt ÙÙ

SSk 24ab (MS A 26r4/MS B 13v6-7)arthåbhåsåvikalpatve na bhedo (rth)åtmasa%vido$ Ù<ÙÙ>

ÙÙ [13v7] arthå{va}bhåsåvikalpatve na bhedo rthåtmasa%vido$ ÙÙ

SSk 24c (MS A 26r4/MS B 14r7)abhütåropa(h)å(n)åc ca

ÙÙ abhütåropahånåc ca ! ÙÙ

SSk 24d (MS A 26r4-5/MS B 14r8-v1)yathå(v)a " [26r5]stv eva kalpanåt0 Ù

ÙÙ [14v1] yathåvastv eva kalpanåt ÙÙ

‡aõkaranandana’s Sarvaj!asiddhi. A Preliminary Report

19

SSk 25ab1 (MS A 26r5/MS B 14v4)santånasyånusan(dh)ånåd asa%sarggo

ÙÙ santånasyånusandhånåd asa%sargga$ ÙÙ

SSk 25b2d (MS A 26r5/MS B 15, missing!)na bhedadhœ$ Ù<ÙÙ>

phalåbhåvåd vinå†itva% nå†aco{{..}}<..l.5> dhigamyate Ù

SSk 26 (MS A 26r5-6/MS B 16r4)svade†akålavarttyarthaprakå†o nubhavas sa ca ÙÙbåhyahetus sadartha$ syåt tada " [26r6]nyas sarvagocara$ Ù

ÙÙ svade†akålavarttyartha(pra)kå(†o ’nu)bhava # $ sa ca •båhyahetu$ sadartha$ syåt tadanya$ sarvvagocara$ ÙÙ

SSk 27 (MS A 26r6/MS B 16v3)tatsvarüpapratœtyaõga% lakßaña% tasya hetuta$ Ù{Ù}pratœtau månabahutå kalpanåbhråntyapohate Ù<ÙÙ>

ÙÙ tatsvarüpapratœtyaõga% lakßa # ña% tasya hetuta$ •pratœtau månabahutå kalpanåbhråntyapohate ÙÙ

SSk 28 (MS A 26r6-v1/MS B 17r2-3){pra}vastupratyavabhåsasya yathå(vastva)napo(d)ita-pratœtivr¢ttes tadvastusa%vittvapari " [26v1]pürañåt0 Ù<ÙÙ>

ÙÙ vastupratyava[17r3]<<(bh)åsasya .. .. .. .. .. (p)o>>("!)ita-pratœtivr¢ttes tadvastusa%vi(t)tvapari # pürañåt ÙÙ

SSk 29 (MS A 26v1/MS B 18r1)sahåvabhåsåt tatkålasa%vittir avikalpikå Ùnåtiprasaõgåt ta! j#eya% vastvabhåve tadå bhrama$ Ù<ÙÙ>

ÙÙ sahåvabhåsåt tatkålasamvittir avi{bhåsikå}<kalpikå*l.1> •

nåtiprasaõgåt taj j#eya(%) vastvabhåve ta("!)å bhrama$ <ÙÙ>•

SSk 30 (MS A 26v1-2/MS B 18r5-6)arvåg åbhogato bhåvi kalayann anulomata$ Ùsüryodayådinå vidyåd a{{..}}<tœl.1>ta% ca tato nya[26v2]thå ÙÙ

ÙÙ arvvåg åbho[18r6]gato bhåvi kalayann anu{(m)oda}lomata$ •süryodayådi2nå # vi2dyåd atœta# ca tato ’nyathå ÙÙ

SSk 31 (MS A 26v2/MS B 18v2-3)asa%vittåv aheto$ syåt kåle2 hetau na vedana% Ùarthakålagrahårthe dhœr yathaiva% sarvavedana% ÙÙ

ÙÙ asa%vi[18v3]ttåv aheto$ syåt kåle hetau na vedana% •a(rtha)kålagrahårthe # dhœr yathaiva% sarvvavedana% ÙÙ

Vincent Eltschinger

20

SSk 32 (MS A 26v2/MS B 18v7)tac ca vedanam arthasya svåtmana† ca {{.e}}&sval.2'vedanam*arthapratyakßatå satyå yathaiva% sarvavedana% ÙÙ

ÙÙ tac ca vedanam arthasya svåtmana† ca svavedana% (•)arthapratyakßatå satyå yathaiva% sarvvavedana% ! ! ! ÙÙ

SSk 33ac (MS A 26v2-3/MS B 19r6)anape[26v3]kßyånapekßatvåt sarvasyaika% vihanyate Ù<Ù>

kriyåvad grahaña% naiva

ÙÙ anapekßyå # napekßatvåt sarvvasyaika% vihanyate •kri2yåvad grahaña% naiva ÙÙ

SSk 33d-34ab (MS A 26v3/MS B 19v1-2)vidhir a # nta&val.3'tå% {{.. .å}}<yatal.3>$ ÙÙ

såkalyagrahañe so sti nånyeßåm agraho pi vå Ù

ÙÙ vidhir antavatå% yata$ osåkalyagrahañe so sti nånyeßåm a[19v2]<<graho pi vå ÙÙ>>

SSk 34cd-35ab (MS A 26v3-4/MS B 19v6)svatantrœbhütasa%vittes sarvvånubhavakåmina$ ÙÙkå[26v4]latrayå†raya% na syåd ananta{%}m anirüpita% Ù

ÙÙ svatantrœbhütasamvitte$ sarvvånubhavakåmina$ •kålatrayå†raya% na syåd anantam anirüpita% ÙÙ

SSk 35cd-36ab (MS A 26v4/MS B 19v8-20r1)iyattåj#ånalabhye pi " # sarvatvapratyayo bhavet* ÙÙ&atanmål.4'trå2pratyayo rthånå%!! rüpa% vij#åtam eva tu Ù

ÙÙ [20r1] iyattåj#ånalabhye pi sarvvatvapratya{d}ye bhavet •

atanmåtråpratyayo rthånå%!! rüpa% vij#åtam eva tu ÙÙ

SSk 36cd-37ab (MS A 26v4-5/MS B 20v3)vidyånantyatayånantya% pratividyeßu yo va " [26v5]det0

<ÙÙ>

strœtvena måtara% tulyå% jåyeti †ayana% nayete!!Ù

ÙÙ vidyånanta # tayånantya% prativi2dye(ß)u yo vadet •

strœtvena måtara% tulyå% jåyeti †ayana% nayet ÙÙ

SSk 37cd (MS A 26v5/MS B 21r3)sarvågatau na gamyeta tatra buddher asambhava$ ÙÙ

ÙÙ sarvvågatau na ga(m)yeta (ta)tra buddher asambhava$ (•)

SSk 38ab (MS A 26v5/MS B 21v4)sarvåpratœtau gamyete na pramåñåpramåñate {{Ù}}Ù

‡aõkaranandana’s Sarvaj!asiddhi. A Preliminary Report

21

ÙÙ sarvvåpratœtau gamyete2 (na) pramåñåpramåñate ÙÙ

SSk 38c (MS A 26v5/MS B 21v8-22r1)anumånådyanumånatva%!!

ÙÙ [22r1] anumånådyamånatva% ÙÙ

SSk 38d (MS A 26v5-6/MS B 22r2)†abda† caiva% na vedaye " [26v6]t0 ÙÙ

ÙÙ †abda† caiva% na vedayet ÙÙ

SSk 39ab (MS A 26v6/MS B 22r3)sarva$ sarva% vijånåti pratyakßeña tu ka†cana<Ù>

ÙÙ sarvva$ sarvva% vi2jånåti pratyakßeña tu ka†ca # na ÙÙ

SSk 39cd-40ab (MS A 26v6/MS B 22v1)j#eyam utpådavat pürvåparåntaparihåñimat0 ÙÙanantam iti dhœ<$2

l.6> kena så{{.. ..}}&dvaya%l.6' nn!åparåpi ki% Ù

ÙÙ j#eyam utpådavat pürvvåparåntaparihåñimat0 Ùanantam iti dhœ$ kena sådvaya% {sa}nåparåpi kim‡ ! ÙÙ

SSk 40c (MS A 26v6/MS B 22v8)viruddhånå% sakr¢d buddhir

ÙÙ vi2ruddhånå% sakr¢d buddhi2$ ÙÙ

SSk 40d (MS A 26v6/MS B 22v8)vviruddhå pråpyakåriña$ ÙÙ

ÙÙ vi2ruddhå pråpyakåriña$ •

SSk 41ab (MS A 26v6-27r1/MS B 23r2)nai[27r1]va% sarvårthasa%vittir må bhüc chåbde py asambhava$ Ù

ÙÙ naiva% sarvvårthasamvittir mmå bhüc chåbde py asambhava$ ÙÙ

SSk 41cd-42a1 (MS A 27r1/MS B 23r3)ata evoßñasa%vitter adåho rasaved{a}<i2

l.1>ne Ù<ÙÙ>

anåsvådanam

ÙÙ ata evoßñasamvitter adåho rasavedine oanåsvådana% •

SSk 42a2b (MS A 27r1/MS B 23r8)asty eva% nyåyåbhå(s)apratikriyå <Ù>ÙÙ

Vincent Eltschinger

22

ÙÙ asty eva% nyåyåbhåsapratikriyå ÙÙ

SSk 42cd (MS A 27r1/MS B 23v1)dr¢†yasyaikanivr¢ttau syån nånyeßåm aparasya tu Ù<ÙÙ>

ÙÙ dr¢†yaisyaikanivr¢ttau syån nånyeßåm aparasya tu ÙÙ

SSk 43 (MS A 27r1-2/MS B 24r1)pra[27r2]måñapari†uddhårthavåditvåd apy ani†cite Ùsårvvaj#ye tadvi2paryåsån neto nye sarvadar†ina$ Ù<ÙÙ>

ÙÙ pramåñapari†uddhårthavåditvåd apy ani†cite (•)sårvvaj#ye tadviparyån!,!! neto nye sarvvadar†ina$ ÙÙ

SSk 44 (MS A 27r2/MS B 24v6)båhyåbhåve pi sårvaj#yahetüttha% sarvadar†anam*paracittå†raya% hanti naivehådvayadar†itå ÙÙ

ÙÙ (b)åhyåbhåve pi sårvvaj#yahetüttha% sarvvadar†ana% Ùparacittå # †raya% hanti2 naivehådvayadar†itå ÙÙ

SSk 45 (MS A 27r2-3/MS B 25r2)va†i " [27r3]no våsanådheyarüpakålußyavarjit{a}<å2

l.3>%pa†yato dhiyam advaitaså # rvaj#ye tv avirodhinœ ÙÙ ÙÙ

ÙÙ va†i2no våsanådheyarüpakålußyavarjji2tåm‡ •

pa†yato dhi2yam advaitasårvvaj#y{asya}<e2 tv a*l.1>virodhi2nœ ÙÙ

SSk 46 (MS A 27r3-4/MS B 26v1-2)suramanujådibhi$ padam adr¢ß™am ana({va})n(t)ya!sama%

sakalajagaddhitårtham avagamya jagadga{mi}<dil.3>[27r4]ta% Ùakhilasurådhidaiva{ta}tavareña hi yena (bhr¢)tå

bhavati (m)ati. .i2 # våya kila tatra †ivaiva tata$ ÙÙ

ÙÙ suramanujådibhi$ padam adr¢ß™a[26v2]m ananyasama%(s)aka(la)jagaddhi2tårtham avagamya jagadgadita% (•)

a(kh)i2(la)surådidaivatavareña hi2 yena kr¢tåbhavati mati$ †ivåya kila tatra †i2vaiva tata$ ÙÙ

SSk 47 (MS A 27r4-5/MS B 26v2-3)ta% stumas ta% namasyåmas sugata% sarvadar†inam* Ùå saugatapadapråptes (sa na<$2

l.4>) syåc chara[27r5]ña% mahat0 ÙÙ

ta% stumas tam namasyåma$ sugata% dharmmaså(dha)dar†ina%!!

å2 saugatapadaprå[26v3](p)tes sa na$ (syåc cha)raña% (maha)t0 Ù

SSk 48 (MS A 27r5-6/MS B 26v3-4)paurvåparyavicårañåkßamadhiyå% (sa%)vådabådhotthito2<Ù>

doßa$ svå†raya eva du${kha}<pa)l.6>rihara$ syåd atra nånyodita$ Ù

‡aõkaranandana’s Sarvaj!asiddhi. A Preliminary Report

23

(sa tv) eva% sunirüpita$ (<(su))l.6>parikr¢tas tœ(rth)yås tadåsa#jane!!

du " [27r6]$ss!ambhåvitam åtmavaibhavam amœ (mu)#cantu nirvastuka% ÙÙ

paurvvåparyavi(c)årañåkßamadhiyå% sa%våda(b)å # dho(tth)i2todoßa$ svå†raya eva dußparihara$ syåd atra nånyodita$ Ù

sa tv eva% sunirüpita$ supari(kr¢)tas tœrthyås tadåsa#jane!!

du$[26v4]sa%bhåvitam å(tma)vaibhavam amœ mu#cantu nirvva(stu)ka% ÙÙ

Colphons (MS A 27r6/MS B 26v4)ÙÙ sarvvaj#asiddhikårikå$ ÙÙ 46 ÙÙ

ÙÙ samå(p)tå sarvvaj#asi " # ddhi2$ • kr¢ti2r bha™™a†rœ†aõkaranandanasya ÙÙ ÙÙ ÙÙ

4. Metrical considerations

Of the forty-eight stanzas of the Sarvaj!asiddhi, one consists of a narda™aka verse(SSk 46), one of a †årdülavikrœ"ita verse (SSk 48) and the remaining forty-six stanzasare anuß™ubhs. The narda™aka verse is metrically correct regardless of the variant read-ing adopted (a n a n ( t ) y a°+a n a n y a° in SSk 46a, °å d h i°+°å d i° in SSk 46c and(bhr¢)tå+kr¢tå in SSk 46c again). As for påda c in the †årdülavikrœ"ita stanza, it appearsto be metrically correct ante correctionem in MS A, but metrically incorrect in MS B andMS A post correctionem; SSk 48c recovers its metrical correctness provided one readsparikr¢ta° instead of suparikr¢ta°. Of the forty-six anuß™ubh verses, sixteen include vipulås:

11 pådas are ma-vipulås (3c, 7a, 7c, 19a, 19c, 21a, 23c, 28c, 29a, 29c, 38a);4 pådas are na-vipulås (6c, 13a, 20a, 27c);1 påda is a bha-vipulå of ma-bha structure (14a). 53

SSk 2b in MS B 1v1 (sambhavißyany anyakåryavat) has nine feet and should be readsambhaviny anyakåryavat as in MS A 25r5. SSk 22d in MS A 26r3 (na cåsa$vin nirüpåñå)has a long seventh foot and should be read na cåsa$vin nirüpañå as in MS B 13r1. SSk36a in MS A 26v4 and MS B 20r1 (atanmåtråpratyayo ’rthånå$) has nine feet; a correctmetrical scheme is regained provided one drops the initial a. SSk 37b in MS A 26v5

(jåyeti †ayana$ nayete) counts nine feet and should be read jåyeti †ayana$ nayet as inMS B 20v3. SSk 38c in MS A 26v5 (anumånådyanumånatva$) has nine feet and shouldbe read anumånådyamånatva$ as in MS B 22r1. SSk 43c in MS B 24r1 (sårvaj!ye tad -viparyån) is too short and should be read sårvaj!e tadviparyåsån as in MS A 27r2. SSk47b in MS B 26v2 (sugata$ dharmaså(dha)dar†ina$) has ten feet and most probablyshould be read sugata$ sarvadar†ina$ as in MS A 27r4.

5. Text-critical remarks

Of the variant readings encountered, at least eight are trivial and maybe easilyexplained away on the basis of metrical (!!) and/or orthographical/grammatical (!)considerations: sambhaviny + sambhavißya!ny (SSk 2), tattva$ + tatva!$ (SSk 4ab),°vain!nitrya° + °vaicitrya° (SSk 7cd), °vartmå° + °vatmå!° (SSk 16cd), eveti + eve(")!i(SSk 16cd), °anapo(d)ita° + °ana(p)o(")!ita° (SSk 28), nayete!! + nayet (SSk 37ab), °anu -månatva$!! + °amånatva$ (SSk 38c), anan(t)ya!sama$+ ananyasama$ (SSk 46).

sion, see Schneider 1996: 248.53 On this rather rare structure of the bha-exten-

Vincent Eltschinger

24

Six of the eight non-trivial variant readings seem to testify to a decision or at leastto (an) argument(s) that neatly favours one against the other:

1) natvå + na(t)å (SSk 1): Though natå may theoretically be construed with tatsid -dhi#, I can see no reason why we should’t read an absolutive, as is most often the casein ‡aõkaranandana’s maõgalas, e.g. Br¢hatpråmåñyaparœkßå, k. 1ab [MS A 4r1; MS* 1r1]:buddha$ sadharma$ (sad!!dharma$ MS A) atha såryagaña$ prañamya bhaktyå matena(na tena MS*) †iraså manaså vacobhi#…; Anyåpohasiddhi, k. 1ab [MS A 9v 3-4; cf. D !e281a6-7/P Z e 302b4]: prañamya sarvaj!am apetaviplava$ trikålavartyarthayathårtha -dar†inam…; Œ†varåpåkaraña, k. 1ac1 [MS A 27v6-28r1]: du#khåghråtajagaddhitåhitamati††åstaika eve†varo nirvåñåya hita$ saheyam amuto yas sarvam åkhyåtavån Ù tan natvå… Iwould read, therefore, kåyavåõmånasair bhaktyå natvå…

2) så + sa (SSk 2): I hold ‡aõkaranandana’s own comment ayam eva ca sambhavaucyate (MS B 1v3) as a strong argument in favour of sa.

3) °pratyayo + °pratyaye (SSk 35cd): On the basis of the beginning of ‡aõkaranan-dana’s own commentary (astu veyattåvaccheda eva sarvvapratipatti#… tathåpi… MS B20r1), we can safely regard SSk 35cd1 as an (absurd) hypothesis which in ‡aõkaranan-dana’s opinion does not contradict an omniscient being’s cognizing everything in itsown particular nature (cf. SSk 36a2b: ’rthånå$ rüpa$ vij!åtam eva tu). I would read,therefore: iyattåj!ånalabhye ’pi sarvatvapratyaye, and (very provisionally) translate:“Even if the notion of the universality were to be reached through the [previous calcu-latory] cognition of the quantity [of the objects cognized]…”

4) °surådhidaivata° + °surådidaivata° (SSk 46): In the absence of any commentary,to argue for one or the other reading is difficult. I think °vareña should be understoodin the sense of “better than” rather than in the sense of “best among”, if it is true thatyena must be construed with ta$ stuma#… sugata$ (SSk 47). Given the fourth påda’sobvious pun on ‡iva (who is likely to be considered as the supreme deity), I tend toreject as commonplace the interpretation suggested by °ådi° (i.e., “better than all thedeities such as the Suras”) and to prefer the reading akhilasurådhidaivatavareña (“bet-ter than [even] the deity that is superior to all the Suras”, i.e., ‡iva) This interpretationwould, then, parallel Råmånuja’s understanding of adhidaivata in Bhagavadgœtå 8.4(GBh 2315 - 6: adhidaivatam - devatoparivartamåna#, indraprajåpatiprabhr¢tikr¢tsnade -vatoparivartamåna#…).

5) (bhr¢)tå + kr¢tå (SSk 46). To construe yena bhr¢tå bhavati mati#…†ivå makes nosense in my opinion. Though SSk 46c2d remains rather obscure to me (†ivåya is likelyto be read adverbially), I would read kr¢tå.

6) sarvadar†inam* + dharmmaså(dha)dar†ina$!! (SSk 47): Though the MS B’s read-ing is metrically incorrect and makes no sense as such (to the best of my knowledge,sådha is only made use of [in Buddhist philosophical contexts] in compounds such asdu#sådha [PVSV 1231]), I cannot entirely rule out a possible dharmadar†ina$, for‡aõkaranandana refers quite often to the Buddhist dharma in maõgalas or conclusivestanzas (e.g., Ågamasiddhi, k. 1 (MS A 29v3): pratyakßœkr¢tya yas samyagbhe(da)$? dharm -mådigocara$ Ù dide†a ta$ namasyåmas sugata$ sarvavedinam ÙÙ); still I would read, espe-cially in the present context, sarvadar†ina$.

In the case of the two non-trivial variant readings, I have to postpone any decisionor even guess at the present state of my investigations: anyåvigame + anyåvagame (SSk14ab); 54 vidyånantyatayå + vidyånantatayå (SSk 36cd). 55

55 “Because the cognition is infinite”/“Because ofthe infinity of the cognition” (vidyånantatayå) seems

54 Note, however, that vigama already occurs inSSk 13ab.

‡aõkaranandana’s Sarvaj!asiddhi. A Preliminary Report

25

6. ‡aõkaranandana’s Sarvaj#asiddhi: a short survey of doctrinal contents

6.1. Let us consider first the beginning of ‡aõkaranandana’s Sarvaj!asiddhi. As aseries of pioneering studies by Ernst Steinkellner have shown, 56 Dharmakœrti rejectsthe Naiyåyikas’ and the Såõkhyas’ inference of an effect (kåryånumåna) from its cause(as a logical reason, kårañahetu) on the grounds that obstructions (pratibandha) mayimpede the causal process, but tries his best to safeguard the rationality of some kindof “entelechial/progressive/proleptic” causality. This he carries out by reinterpretingthe logical reason “complete cause” as a logical reason consisting of an essential prop-erty (svabhåvahetu). To put it in less technical terms, Dharmakœrti allows one to inferthe possibility (sambhava) of the rise of the effect or, equivalently, the fitness (yogyatå)of a complete cause for giving rise to its effect (provided no obstruction takes place inthe meantime). Most interesting is indeed Steinkellner’s interpretation ofDharmakœrti’s attitude with regard to the so-called kåryånumåna. According toSteinkellner, Dharmakœrti is attempting to provide a sound rational basis for theBuddhist path toward salvation/awakening, or, to put it in other words, to preserve thethinkableness of the progression toward Buddhahood. Though Dharmakœrti himselfdoes not provide any textual evidence for this interpretative assumption, manyBuddhist as well as non-Buddhist works bear witness to the Buddhist epistemologists’growing tendency to apply this logical theorem to questions pertaining to humanactions, as well as to religious and soteric practices. In this connection, one may men-tion Devendrabuddhi, 5 7 A r c a ™ a, 5 8 Kamala†œla and Dharmottara, 5 9 the pseudo-‡åntarakßita’s T a t t v a s i d d h i, 6 0 P r a j # å k a r a g u p ta6 1 and Våcaspatimi†ra. 6 2 As I haveargued elsewhere, 63 these later Buddhist philosophers’ commitment to establish thepossibility and rationality of key Buddhist doctrines forms the cornerstone of theirmanner of tackling religious matters and construing their own intellectual self-under-standing. Together with Kamala†œla’s digressive commentary on TS 3337(/3338), 64 Ihold ‡aõkaranandana’s own commentary on SSk 2 as one of the most interestingexplicit witnesses on this attitude (MS B 1v1-2r2

65):

[…] j!åtakårañasadbhåvå sa$bhavißyany ! 6 6 anyakåryavat* • s a r v v å r t h a v i ß a y å -{(rtha)vißayå}samvit sa hi sambhava ucyate ÙÙ

iha pr¢thi 2vyådaya# sannipati(t)å dr¢ß™åõkuranirvarttana†aktayas tadbhåve kåla -parivåsenåõkuropalambhåt* tad aya$ j!åtakårañayoga iti 2 sambhavœ bhavati 2 •

j!åtakårañayogasya nißpådenå(rth)itåyå$ tatkårañasa(mbhara)ñe(nåbhi)nirvarttanåt ! tad yathaivamådikåryasambhavi 67 kathyate j!åtakårañatvå # {d

ya}<t ta*l.1>thå de†akålasvabhåvaviprakr¢ß™årthasåkßåtkåri 2j!åna$ sambhavi ukta ! 68{ma}vij!åtakårañatvåt ! ayam eva ca sambhava (u)cyate yad i

da$ j!åtakåraña$ (n)åma ida$ pramåñådhi 2gata$ sarvvårthopalambhakåraña # mi2ti pratyaye sambhavi sårvvaj!ya$ na ca †a†avißåñådi 2vad apratœ<ta*l.1>m apy asambhavi

62 See Steinkellner 1991: 735, n. 47, 1999: 354-355.63 See Eltschinger 2007.64 See TSP K869,23-875,23/‡1052,20-1060,16 and

Eltschinger 2007: 153-157. 65 For editorial conventions, see below, § 3.1.66 Recte: sambhaviny.67 To be read °kårya$ sambhavi ?68 Recte: ukta$.

to fit the context better than “Because it is the infini-ty of the cognition” (vidyånantyatayå, abstract noun +abstract suffix).

56 See Steinkellner 1991, 1999 and forthcoming.57 See Inami/Tillemans 1986: 126, n. 10.58 See Funayama 1995: 187.59 See Eltschinger 2007: 141-158.60 See n. 56 above.61 See Franco 1997: 6-8, 109ff and 176ff.

Vincent Eltschinger

26

syåtÙ (ta)t tu <sa*l.1>magråñå$ tatkårañånå$ yogyatvåvagama# Ù

(s)a (h)i (yukty)eva ! 69 teßu bhavati2 nåma(gre 2ßv) ! 70 iti 2 • idånœ$ pari(<pr¢*l.1>ß™a)sårv -vaj!ya " # nivarttakasåmagryapratilambhena pratœtyasambhavaprasaõgåt ! na copab -dha ! 71tatkålanivarttana†aktiyogånå$ kvaci(t) samagråñå$ yogya(tå)

numånena ki!cit0 ! anupa{bdha}labdhatadyogånå(m c)ånumåna<sa)l . 8>mbhava# •

tathå # hi 2 dr¢ß™eßu pr¢thivyådißu keßuci 2d aõkurayogye 2(ßu ! 72) anyatathåvidhopambheyadi -ta ! 73sa$skårava†ena na pratyakßeña pratœti 2s tadå(†ra)y(å2)m* Ù

pürvvånubhütarüpå(nusa)rañena yogyatåm avabuddhyate ! 74 bodhya(tayå)pareña na tupravr¢ttau ka†cid ati†ayo ’ya$ bhütånåm ayogyatvåt ! sa$bharañasya ca yogyatånumå -napürvvatvenåpravr¢tte# pråk tadbhåvåd asamagratvåd a

yogyatvåt • tasmåd upalabdhakåryayogasya pr¢thivyådi 2ßu 75 †a†avißåña(vaicitrye)ñåõku -ra(sa)$bhavi(t)åyå($) ni(rvvicit)sasya ! 76 bhavi(ßyatk)ålanistrapaprati2kßepeñai({ka}ka) .... pr¢thivyådœn pråtisvik({å})e 2na rüpeñåvagamya ta(tsamr¢)

(ddh)œkarañaphalå pravr¢ttir (bha)vati • tathe(h)åpi sårvva(r)j!ya ! 7 7h e t ( u ) -{ ( † å ) } < † œ*l . 1>lapraj!åsamådhœn avagamya tathå pravr¢tti# sårvvaj!asambhavapratœtyåsama(rth)yate • yadi (punas t)e (kvac)it sa(n)nipatitå la(bhya)nte bhave(d y)ogyatånumåna$siddhe tu ta

ddhetutve ta(ttve) syåt teßå$ taddhetutvasamarthanam eva tu tœrthikåpagadånå$ mürd -dhani pådanyåsa iti 2 tad eva yatnena samarthanœya$ […]

6.2. Kumårila’s in-depth criticism of omniscience and other types of extraordinaryperception is likely to be the main reason why such issues gained prominence in (oreven entered) the sphere of Buddhist philosophy and apologetics. Until the turn of theseventh century, omniscience rarely leaves the supposedly firm ground of Buddhistdogmatics, where it is regularly connected with buddhological concepts such as theelimination of the j!eyåvaraña at the very end (and as a result) of a Bodhisattva’scareer. 78 Dharmakœrti’s answer to the mœmå$saka challenge does not exhaust itself in aformal refutation. 79 To oversimplify the problem, let’s say that Dharmakœrti chose tolimit the scope of omniscience rather than to defend what Sara McClintock has nicelytermed “full-blown omniscience”. 80 According to Dharmakœrti, to become an omnis-cient Buddha and hence a pramåña-like trustworthy person does not imply one’s know-ing everything (which would amount to his followers’ sarvasarvaj!atå), but ratherone’s having rationally ascertained and then put into practice a religious path enablingone to teach what is soteriologically relevant (upayuktasarvaj!atå). 81 Put in otherwords, Dharmakœrti fuses the issue of omniscience with his treatments of the yogin’scareer and type of cognition, first on a purely epistemological level, 82 and then in a

79 As it can be found, e.g., in PVSV 8,16-10,12 and164,13-24, or in NB 3.71-73.

80 McClintock 2002: 125, et passim.81 On the distinction between sarvasarvaj!atå

and upayuktasarvaj!atå (which goes back to PV 2.29-33), see Bühnemann 1980: viii-x.

82 See PV 3.281-286 and PVin 1.27,7-28,8. Theissue of a yogin’s cognition, or at least of some kind ofsupra-mundane perception, had already been dealtwith both in the so-called hetuvidyå section of theYogåcårabhümi (see Yaita 2005: 107-108 [10*,22-11*,2])as well as in Dignåga’s Yogåvatåra (see Frauwallner1959: 144[/820]-145[/821]) and Pramåñasamuccaya(1.6cd; see Hattori 1968: 27).

69 Recte: yuktyaiva.70 Recte: nåsamagreßv.71 Recte: copalabdha°.72 Recte: °yogyeßv.7 3 Recte: ° o p a l a m b h å h i t a s a $ s k å r a °, or ° o p a l a m -

bhenåhitasa$skåra°.74 Recte: avabudhyate.75 To be read upalabdhakåryayogapr¢thivyådi2ßu ?76 Recte: nirvicikitsasya.77 Recte: sårvaj!a°.78 On omniscience in Buddhism, see Griffiths

1990 and Kawasaki 1992; on the Buddhist epistemol-ogists’ attitude and proof strategies, see Bühnemann1980, Jackson 1991, McClintock 2002.

‡aõkaranandana’s Sarvaj!asiddhi. A Preliminary Report

27

series of buddhological statements. 83 Though most of the first part of ‡aõkaranan-dana’s Sarvaj!asiddhi remains a mutus liber for want of a legible commentary, I thinkwe can safely assume that it was well in line with Dharmakœrti’s epistemological stand-point and proof strategy.

‡aõkaranandana’s work starts with an in-depth theoretical discussion of the mainproblems raised by Dharmakœrti’s allusive treatment of yoginå$ j!ånam. 84 In otherwords, it addresses the vexing question whether an initially conceptual and non-vividcognition can be made perceptual and vivid through sustained mental cultivation. 85

Unlike a conceptual cognition’s non-vivid mode of appearance, 86 a yogin’s cognitionappears vividly (sphu™a, passim) and hence is of a non-conceptual character. Just likeDharmakœrti and his followers, ‡aõkaranandana first compares this cognition with theextremely vivid images that occur in the minds of people beset by love, sorrow, fear ormadness. 87 But unlike the woman longed for in the lover’s mind or the putrefyingcorpse of the a†ubhå practitioner, the objects cultivated by a mystic are absolutely real(bhüt[årth]a). 88 In the first part of his Sarvaj!asiddhi, ‡aõkaranandana attempts todemonstrate that a yogin’s cognition fits both criteria of Dharmakœrti’s well-known def-inition of perception. 89 This is indeed the conclusion ‡aõkaranandana arrives at 90

after having insisted that the mystic’s cognitions do not superimpose anything on real-ity. 91 But as if the perceptibility of properties (impermanence, selfnessness, etc.) werenot vexing enough a problem, ‡aõkaranandana addresses the question of a yogin’salleged ability to perceive past and future (atœtånågata, passim) objects at length.Though it is as yet not possible to know how ‡aõkaranandana commences the discus-sion, it seems likely that one of the strategies he opts for consists of a thorough criti-cism of his opponents’ definitions of perception. This is indeed the point under discus-sion from SSk 27 (= MS B 16v4) onward. In order to show that the perception of objectsremote in time also fits Dharmakœrti’s definition, which lays emphasis on the proper-ties of perception, i.e., non-conceptuality and non-erroneousness, 92 ‡aõkaranandanadiscards both the naiyåyika 93 and the mœmå$saka 94 definitions by showing that causal

86 Note åkåro vikalpåvasthåyåm asphu™o ’vabhå -samåna# MS B 2r7; MS B 3r2.

87 Note kåma†okabhayonmåda MS B 2v4; kåmon -mådådivat MS B 2r6; kåmonmådådyavasthå MS B 2r7.

88 For Buddhist explanations of the unreality ofobjects cultivated in a†ubhabhåvanå or the kr¢tsnåy -atana, see Eltschinger (forthcoming 4, §4, n. 112).

89 PVin 1.4ab1: pratyakßa$ kalpanåpo"ham abhrån -tam.

90 Note tad evam avikalpaka$ yogij!ånam, tathå’bhråntam api MS B 17v5.

91 Note na ca yogivij!ånåny åropakåñi MS B 17v3-4.92 I.e., its (vastu)såkßåtkåritva (MS B 16v4, MS B

16v8, MS B 17r2). Note kalpanåbhråntyapohate SSk 27d= MS B 16v3, kalpanåpo"habhrånta MS B 17r2, tad åhavikalpo ’vastunirbhåsåd visa$vådåd upaplava# pratya -kßåbha (= PVin 1.33ac1) iti, tad avikalpatayå vastuprati -bhåsatva$ yathåpratibhåsam arthatathåbhåva† cåbhrån -tatvena kathita# MS B 17r5-6; note also tathå hy abhilå -pasa$sargayogyataiva vikalpalakßañam MS B 17r8.

93 Note indriyårthasa$nikarßotpanna$ pratyakßam(NyåSü 1.1.4) iti MS B 16v6.

9 4 Note satsamprayoga indriyåñå$ buddhijanma(MœSü 1.1.4) iti; satsamprayoge purußasya indriyåñå$ bu -ddhijanmeti MS B 21v4.

8 3 Most conspicuously in PV 2.131cd-144 and205cd-210.

8 4 On y o g i p r a t y a k ß a, see Steinkellner 1978,McDermott 1991, Woo 2003, Dunne 2006, Eltschinger(forthcoming 4). Taking for granted that ‡aõkara-nandana’s Sarvaj!asiddhi predates the Sarvaj!asiddhicomposed a few decades later at Vikrama†œla(J#åna†rœmitra, Ratnakœrti), it is likely that it is thefirst Buddhist philosophical treatise to address theissues of omniscience and yogic awareness on thepurely epistemological level of direct perception(pratyakßa). J#åna†rœmitra’s dates might be 980-1040(Steinkellner/Much 1995: 92); on his Sarvaj!asiddhi(now lost), see Steinkellner 1977. Ratnakœrti’s datesmight be 990-1050; on his S a r v a j ! a s i d d h i, seeBühnemann 1980b as well as Goodmann 1989. Jitåri’s(940-1000?) now lost Sarvaj!asiddhi might have beenknown to ‡aõkaranandana. At least two treatises orchapters have been dedicated to omnisciencebetween Dharmakœrti and ‡aõkaranandana, i.e.,(Bhadanta) ‡ubhagupta’s S a r v a j ! a s i d d h i ( s e eWatanabe 1987) and ‡åntarakßita’s/Kamala†œla’s A -t œ n d r i y a d a r † i p u r u ß a p a r œ k ß å (= TS[P] 26, seeMcClintock 2002).

85 Note asphu™åkårasphu™œkarañaparyantå bhåvanåMS B 2r6.

Vincent Eltschinger

28

accounts of pratyakßa undergo undesired consequences. 95 These fallacious characteri-zations, which all insist upon the presence of the causes of perception, cannot excludethe perception of past and present objects. 96 Among the topics related to direct per-ception, one may also note that ‡aõkaranandana answers various objections pertain-ing to (a)pråpyakåritå. 97 From MS B 19r5 on, the Kashmirian master discusses issuessuch as number (saõkhyå), quantity (iyattå) and infinity (ånantya), which are intrinsi-cally linked to objections pertaining to the interpretation of sarva in sarvaj!atva, orthe question whether an omniscient person’s cognition operates successively (krame -ña) or simultaneously (yaugapadyena).

As Dharmakœrti most clearly spells out in his PVin (1.27,9-12), the career of a yoginexhausts itself (at least from a purely gnoseological point of view) in the traditionalthreefold pattern of †rutamayœ, cintåmayœ and bhåvanåmayœ praj!ås. 98 Although onemay come across doctrinal topoi such as kalyåñamitra, sevå or the nine- or twelvefoldword of the Buddha, 99 the Buddhist epistemologists have hardly anything to sayregarding the first stage of discernment/wisdom, and rather lay emphasis on the sec-ond and third stages. Discernment born of reflection consists in a yogin’s rationallyascertaining, mostly by means of inferences, the intellectual contents that he will sub-sequently subject to mental cultivation. To put it in Dharmottara’s terms, the reflect-ing yogin aims at bringing out and providing his cognition with pramåñapari -†uddhårthas which most regularly consist of (the sixteen real aspects of) the fournoble(s’) truths, and especially selflessness/unsubstantiality (anåtmatå/nairåtmya)conceived of as the antidote to the erroneous clinging to personality. 100 I assume‡aõkaranandana is conforming to these views when he deals with the four noble(s’)truths (åryasatya MS B 6v1 = SSk 12c) by showing first that painfulness (du#khatå MS B6v7 = SSk 13b) is caused by one’s superimposing (adhyåropa MS B 6v6-7 = SSk 12d and13a) erroneous aspects on reality. 101 As for the origin (samudaya MS B 7v5 = SSk 14c)of suffering, it consists of craving (tr¢ßñå MS B 7v5 = SSk 15a), which in turn is caused bynescience/ignorance (avidyotthita, ibid.). Whereas ‡aõkaranandana contents himselfwith a short statement on the third noble(s’) truth (nirodhe ca svahetuje MS B 7v8 = SSk15b), he dedicates SSk 15cd-16 and their commentary to the path toward liberation(mokßavartman MS B 8v1 = SSk 16c) and to (the mental cultivation of) nairåtmya (MS B8r3 = SSk 16b; MS B 24r4, 24r6). That ‡aõkaranandana closely follows Dharmakœrti’ssoteriological ideas as they can be grasped from PV 2 (Pramåñasiddhi) is particularlyobvious in SSkk 15cd-17a. 102 ‡aõkaranandana’s indebtedness to Dharmakœrti and hisfollowers is seen again in stanza 43 and the following, where expressions such asp r a m å ñ a p a r i † u d d h a, p r a m å ñ a p a r i † u d d h å r t h a and p r a m å ñ a p a r i † u d d h å r t h a v i ß a y a t v arecur in nearly every line. 103 The Buddhist epistemologists’ treatment of the cintåmayœ

100 See, e.g. NB~ 70,1 (together with DhPr 67,15-16), PVin~ D117b1/P135a8, PVin_ D123a1-2/P142a2-3;see Eltschinger (forthcoming 3, § 2.3)

101 Erroneous aspects such as åtman or sukha arereferred to in almost every line in MS B 7r. Here, theconstituents of being are said to be å t m å d -hyåropavißayœkr¢tå eva MS B 7r5.

1 0 2 kartur bhoktur vibhinnasya †ünyatvåtkåryakårañapravåhamåtrasa$vittim åhur nairåt -myagåminîm ÙÙ mokåavartmånugantavyam idam evetidar†ayan Ù pramåñasiddhatåm åha…

1 0 3 E.g., p r a m å ñ a p a r i † u d d h a MS B 23r2, 23r6,pramåñapari†uddhårtha MS B 23r1, 24r2 and pramåña -

95 Note, e.g., tasmåd dhetuniyamena lakßañåbhi -dhåne pratyakßasyånekapramåñatvaprasaõga# MS B17r2.

96 As ‡aõkaranandana himself has it, lakßañam apica pratyakßasyåbhidhœyamåna$ nåtœtånågatavißaya$vij!ånam avacchinatti (MS B 16v3-4).

97 In and near SSk 40d, MS B 22v8, 23r2.98 Note also Dignåga’s Yogåvatåra 1 (Frauwallner

1959[/1982]: 144[/820]): †rutvå †åstram udåra$ni†cityåpi paramårthika$ tattvam Ù mr¢dvåsanopaviß™a#su†råddho yogam årabhate ÙÙ (sic).

99 See Eltschinger (forthcoming 1, § 3.4) andEltschinger (forthcoming 4, § 2.1).

‡aõkaranandana’s Sarvaj!asiddhi. A Preliminary Report

29

praj!å also (if not mainly) aims at making clear that not all intensively cultivated men-tal contents can bring about liberation, but just those that have been previously ascer-tained by means of pramåñas. In other words, they address the problem of relativism,a point which ‡aõkaranandana makes particularly clear when introducing SSk 43 inthe following way: athåpi syåd bhåvanålambasarvårthavißayavij!ånayogitayå sarvaj!atvekapilådayo ’pi katham asarvaj!å#. 104 ‡aõkaranandana’s answer of course intends toshow that, contrary to the Buddhist tenets, heretical doctrines such as the Såõkhyas’pradhåna/prakr¢ti are invalidated by pramåñas (pramåñabådhita MS B 24r3, 24r4) andreaveal their proponents’ being besieged with passions such as covetousness (< rågådi -viparœtatva MS B 24r4). 105

The mystic’s cognition that Dharmakœrti is dealing with has been brought about bya nearly endless process of cultivational. The omniscience ‡aõkaranandana has inmind presupposes mental cultivation (bhåvanå, passim) in the very same way. Bhåvanåmay be characterized as pauna#punyena pravartanam (MS B 2v4; MS B 2v7) and is iden-tified with the mystic’s endeavour/effort (yatna MS B 2r3 et passim, prayatna MS B 3r3

et passim) and uninterruptedly repeated practice (< abhyåsanairantarya MS B 2r4).According to ‡aõkaranandana as well as his predecessors, this process extends overmany successive lifetimes, 106 which may be interpreted in terms of the traditionalBuddhist assumption of three immeasurable cosmic periods. 107 As for the cognitionthat is arrived at at the very end of the cultivational process (bhåvanåjanita$ j!ånamMS B 24v3), it is to be analysed in terms of a gnoseological superiority born of a (yogic)endeavour 108 stretching over an extremely long timespan.109 This cognition is charac-terized as omniscience as such, 110 but also as the cognition of supersensory things, 111 atype of cognition that Dharmakœrti had already exemplified with a vulture’s seeing ofremote objects (gr¢dhrådidüradar†anavat MS B 25v1). 112 It is to be emphasized that,again just like Dharmakœrti, ‡aõkaranandana holds the yogin’s cultivational endeavourand its resultant cognition as mirroring a concern with alleviating other beings’ suffer-ing. 113 To put it in other words, the yogin’s endeavour is to be equated with the careerof a compassionate (karuñåvat MS B 25r3) Bodhisattva. 114

Before concluding this short and admittedly very incomplete depiction, let memention that ‡aõkaranandana finally addresses the vexing issue of an idealisticaccount of omniscience. SSkk 44-45 and their commentary (= MS B 24v6-25r7) areindeed devoted to answering the following question: eva$ tåvad båhyårthåbhyupagame -na sårvvaj!ya$ samarthitam… athedånœm asati båhye ’rthe ’panœte gråhyagråhakabhåv<e>katha$ sarvaj!o bhagavån upapadyata iti samarthayitum ucyate (MS B 24v6-7). Suffice it

1 0 9 Note a t i c i r a k å l a p r a v a r t i t a p r a y a t n a p r e r i t a y ådhiyå MS B 22r4.

110 Note the following expressions: sarvadar†itåMS B 24v8, sarvaj!atva MS B 24r1 et passim, sårvaj!yaMS B 1v4 et passim, sarvårthavißayå sa$vid MS B 2r2,sarvårthavißayaj!åna MS B 3r6, sarvavißaya$ vij!ånamMS B 24r8-v1; note also sarvadar†in MS B 24r7, sarvaj!aMS B 24v7 et passim, sarvadar†aka MS B 24v6.

111 Note de†akålasvabhåvaviprakr¢ß™årthasåkßåtkåri -j!åna MS B 1v3; anindriyabhütårthavißayaparij!åna MSB 24v2.

112 See PV 2.33.113 Note also SSk 20a: vr¢tti# pårårthyaparamå.114 Note kåruñikatayaiva bhagavatå$ du#khaika -

mayånå$ kåmadhåtvavacaråñå$ sattvånåm anugrahå -rtha$ sabhågatayotpåde devebhya# prañidhiva†åd ava -

pari†uddhårthavißayatva MS B 24v3. The expressionpramåñapari†uddha also occurs at MS B 7r5 in the con-text of ni†caya.

104 MS B 24r1-2.105 Note also MS B 24r3-4: tad ito båhyånå$ sarveßå$

devånå$ manußyåñå$ vå pramåñabådhita$ vacanamanityånåtmådike ’rthe viparyayeña pratipådanåt…

106 Note bhåvanå hy anekajanmåbhyåsalabhyatvenaphalaparyantå bhavati MS B 2r3-4.

107 Note ata eva paropakårakarañodyatå dånådi -parigr¢hœtå†ayån eva sattvån iha krameñåsaõkhyeya -trikalpåvadhinåvasareña bhavyatåm upanayanti MS B26r5-6.

108 Note j!ånåti†ayayoga# prayatnaja# MS B 25v3;yatnalabhyåti†aya MS B 25v7; note also prayatnajenaj!ånena sarvaj!atvam MS B 25v2.

Vincent Eltschinger

30

to say that, just as I believe he did in his Praj!ålaõkåra, ‡aõkaranandana provides ushere with his final epistemological standpoint. According to him, realistic or pluralis-tic accounts of reality rely on latent tendencies 115 and are ultimately erroneous; 116 asfor the Buddhas who dwell in advayadar†ana (MS B 24v8, 25r3), they see their cogni-tion as ultimately devoid of the filth of the natures that arise through latent tenden-cies; 117 he who has established himself in discernment only perceives his own cognition,bereft of the transformations produced by latent tendencies. 118

Bibliography and Abbreviations

Sigla

D sDe dge Tibetan Tripi™aka bsTan ’gyur preserved at the Faculty of Letters. Edited by JikidoTakasaki, Zuiho Yamaguchi, Noriaki Hakamaya, Y. Ejima: University of Tokyo. Tokyo1977-1981.

IKGA Institut für Kultur- und Geistesgeschichte Asiens/Institute for the Cultural andIntellectual History of Asia (Austrian Academy of Sciences, Vienna).

K See TS(P) [2].MS(S) Manuscript(s).P Daisetz T. Suzuki: The Tibetan Tripitaka, Peking Edition, Kept in the Library of the

Otani University, Kyoto. Tokyo/Kyoto 1957: Tibetan Tripitaka Research Institute.SSk(k) Sarvaj!asiddhikårikå(s).

Primary Sources

Dharmottarapradœpa of Durvekami†raDhPr Pañ"ita Dalsukhbhai Malvania: Pañ"ita Durveka Mi†ras’s Dharmottarapradœpa (Being a

sub-commentary on Dharmottara’s Nyåyabindu™œkå, a commentary on Dharmakœrti’s Nyåya -bindu. Patna, K.P. Jayaswal Research Institute 1971.

Gœtåbhåßya of RåmånujaGBh ‡rœkå#cœ Prativådibhayaõkara$ Añña%garåcårya$: Gœtårthasa$graharakßå, gœtåbhåßya -

tåtparyacandrikå ca. Madras 1941: The Liberty Press (‡rœmadvedåntade†ikagrantha-målå 2).

Œ†varapratyabhij!åvivr¢tivimar†inœ of AbhinavaguptaŒPVV Pañ"it Madhusüdan Kaul Shåstrœ: The Œ†varapratyabhij!å Vivr¢tivimar†ini by Abhinava -

gupta. 3 volumes. Delhi 1987: Akay Book Corporation (Reprint of the Kashmir Seriesof Texts and Studies edition, Bombay 1938 [vol. 60], 1941 [vol. 62], 1943 [vol. 65]).

tam upalabhamånasya… praj!åvyavasthitasya MS B25r3. The Sarvaj!asiddhi ends with ‡aõkaranandana’sanswer to the following objection: yad api strœ†üdrasåd -hårañamatitayå brahmådidevatrayavaidharmyeña mar -ttyatehådhyåropyate. tatråpi karmådimülatvåd brahmå -didevatrayasya tatparikßaye ’pagamåt sarvatra marañad -harmatvam avi†iß™am. tathå j!ånasyåpi teßå$ tathåbhü -tasthånånurüpasya niyatavißayasya karmamülatayaivot -patter gr¢"hrådidüradar†anavat katha$ sarvaj!atvam.kim atra pramåñam iti cet (MS B 25r6-25v1).

tœrñånåm icchayaiva manußyajanmagrahañam… MS B25v5.

115 These latent tendencies are most likely to bethe Buddhist idealists’ dvayavåsanå (see Eltschinger2005: 169-171 and n. 52).

116 Note våsanå†rayas tu tathåpratyayo bhrånta#MS B 25r1.

117 Note våsanådheyarüpakålußyavarjitå$ pa†yatodhiyåm MS B 25r2 = SSk 45.

118 Note svabuddhimåtra$ våsanåkr¢tavikåravirahi -

‡aõkaranandana’s Sarvaj!asiddhi. A Preliminary Report

31

Mœmå$såsütra of JaiminiMœSü ‡rœmajjaiminiprañœta$ Mœmå$sådar†anam. Ånandå†rama edition (7 volumes). Poona

1994.

Målinœvijayavårttika of AbhinavaguptaMVV Pañ"it Madhusüdan Kaul Shåstrœ: ‡rœmålinœvijayavårttikam of Abhinava Gupta. ‡rœnagar

1921: Kashmir Series of Texts and Studies 31.

Nyåyabindu™œkå of DharmottaraNB~ See DhPr.

Nyåyasütra of Gautama/AkßapådaNyåSü Anantalal Thakur: Gautamœyanyåyadar†ana with Bhåßya of Våtsyåyana (Nyåyacatur-

granthikå vol. 1). Delhi 1997: Indian Council of Philosophical Research.

Pramåñavårttika of DharmakœrtiPV 2 The verses as well as their numbering are taken from Tilmann Vetter: Der Buddha und

seine Lehre in Dharmakœrtis Pramåñavårttika. Der Abschnitt über den Buddha und die vieredlen Wahrheiten im Pramåñasiddhi-Kapitel. Vienna 1990: Arbeitskreis für tibetische undbuddhistische Studien Universität Wien.

Pramåñavårttikasvavr¢tti of DharmakœrtiPVSV Raniero Gnoli: The Pramåñavårttikam of Dharmakœrti. The First Chapter with the Auto-

Commentary. Roma 1960: Istituto Italiano per il Medio ed Estremo Oriente (SerieOrientale Roma 23).

Pramåñavini†caya of DharmakœrtiPVin 1 Ernst Steinkellner: Dharmakîrti’s Pramåñavini†caya, chapters 1 and 2. Beijing/Vienna:

China Tibetology Publishing House/Austrian Academy of Sciences Press (SanskritTexts from the Tibetan Autonomous Region 2).

Pramåñavini†caya™œkå of DharmottaraPVin~ Pramåñavini†caya™œkå (Dharmottara). D 4229, Dze 1b1-Tshe 178a3/P 5727, Dze 1b1-We

209b8.

Tantråloka of AbhinavaguptaTÅ(V) R.C. Dwivedi/N. Rastogi: The Tantråloka of Abhinavagupta with the Commentary of Jaya -

ratha. 8 volumes. Delhi 1987 (‡rœnagar 1918-1938): Motilal Banarsidass.

TattvasaõgrahaTS(P) [1] Embar Krishnamacharya: Tattvasaõgraha of ‡åntarakßita With the Commentary of

Kamala†œla. 2 vols. Baroda 1984: Oriental Institute.[2] Swami Dwarikadas Shastri: Tattvasaõgraha of Åcårya Shåntarakßita with theCommentary ‘Pa!jikå’ of Shri Kamalshœla. 2 vols. Varanasi 1981: Bauddha Bharati.

Secondary Sources

Bandurski, Frank1994 “Übersicht über die Göttinger Sammlung der von Råhula Såõkr¢tyåyana in Tibet aufge-

fundenen buddhistischen Sanskrit-Texte (Funde buddhistischer Sanskrit-Handschriften III)”. In Frank Bandurski et al. (eds.): Untersuchungen zur buddhistischerLiteratur. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, pp. 9-126.

Vincent Eltschinger

32

Bühnemann, Gudrun1980 “Identifizierung von Sanskrittexten ‡aõkaranandanas”. Wiener Zeitschrift für die Kunde

Südasiens 24: 191-198.1980b Der allwissende Buddha. Ein Beweis und seine Probleme. Wien 1980b: Arbeitskreis für

tibetische und buddhistische Studien Universität Wien (Wiener Studien zurTibetologie und Buddhismuskunde 4).

1983 “Tarkarahasya and Vådarahasya”. Wiener Zeitschrift für die Kunde Südasiens 27: 185-190.

Chattopadhyaya, Debiprasad1980 (ed.): Tåranåtha’s History of Buddhism in India, Translated from the Tibetan by Lama

Chimpa and Alaka Chattopadhyaya. Calcutta: K.P. Bagchi & Company.

Dunne, John D.2006 “Realizing the unreal: Dharmakîrti’s theory of yogic perception”. Journal of Indian

Philosophy 34: 497-519.

Eltschinger, Vincent2005 “Études sur la philosophie religieuse de Dharmakœrti: (2) L’å†rayaparivr¢tti”. Journal

Asiatique 293/1: 151-211.2007 “On 7th and 8th century Buddhist accounts of human action, practical rationality and

soteriology”. In Birgit Kellner, Helmut Krasser, Horst Lasic, Michael Torsten Much,Helmut Tauscher (eds.): Pramåñakœrti#. Papers dedicated to Ernst Steinkellner on the occa -sion of his 70th birthday. Part 1. Wien 2007: Arbeitskreis für tibetische und buddhistischeStudien Universität Wien (Wiener Studien zur Tibetologie und Buddhismuskunde 70),pp. 135-162.

(forthc. 1) “Studies in Dharmakœrti’s Religious Philosophy: (3) On Compassion and its Place in PV2”. To be published in the Proceedings of the Fourth Dharmakœrti Conference (Vienna,August 2005), edited by Helmut Krasser, Horst Lasic, Birgit Kellner, Eli Franco.

(forthc. 2) “Les œuvres de ‡aõkaranandana: Nouvelles ressources manuscrites, chronologie rela-tive et identité confessionnelle”. To be published in Annali dell’Istituto UniversitarioOrientale di Napoli.

(forthc. 3) “Studies in Dharmakœrti’s Religious Philosophy: (4) The Cintåmayœ Praj#å”. To be pub-lished in the Proceedings of the International Conference “Logic and Belief” (Warsaw, May2006), edited by Piotr Balcerowicz et al.

(forthc. 4) “Studies in Dharmakœrti’s Religious Philosophy: (5) On the Career and the Cognitionof Yogins”. To be published in the Proceedings of the International Symposium on YogicPerception, Meditation and Altered States of Consciousness (Vienna, August 27-30, 2006), edit-ed by Eli Franco and Dagmar Eigner.

Franco, Eli1997 Dharmakœrti on Compassion and Rebirth. Vienna: Arbeitskreis für tibetische und buddhis-

tische Studien Universität Wien.

Frauwallner, Erich1933(/1982) “Dignåga und anderes”. Pp. 237-242 in Festschrift für Moritz Winternitz. Leipzig 1933:

Otto Harrassowitz. See also Gerhard Oberhammer end Ernst Steinkellner (eds.): ErichFrauwallner. Kleine Schriften. Wiesbaden 1982: Franz Steiner Verlag (Glasenapp-Stiftung 22), pp. 484-489.

1959(/1982)“Dignåga, sein Werk und seine Entwicklung”. Wiener Zeitschrift für die Kunde Süd- undOstasiens 3: 83-164. See also Gerhard Oberhammer and Ernst Steinkellner (eds.): ErichFrauwallner. Kleine Schriften. Wiesbaden 1982: Franz Steiner Verlag (Glasenapp-Stiftung 22), pp. 759-841.

Funayama, Toru1995 “Arca™a, ‡åntarakßita, Jinendrabuddhi, and Kamala†œla on the Aim of a Treatise (pra -

‡aõkaranandana’s Sarvaj!asiddhi. A Preliminary Report

33

yojana)”. Wiener Zeitschrift für die Kunde Südasiens 39: 181-201.

Goodmann, Steven1989 A Buddhist proof for omniscience: The “Sarvaj!asiddhi” of Ratnakœrti. Ph.D. Thesis, Temple

University.

Griffiths, Paul J.1990 “Omniscience in the Mahåyånasütrålaõkåra and its Commentaries”. Indo-Iranian

Journal 33: 85-120.

Hattori, Masaaki1968 Dignåga, On Perception, being the Pratyakßapariccheda of Dignåga’s Pramåñasamuccaya.

Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press (Harvard Oriental Series 47).

Masahiro Inami and Tom J.F. Tillemans1986 “Another Look at the Framework of the Pramåñasiddhi Chapter of the Pramåña-

vårttika”. Wiener Zeitschrift für die Kunde Südasiens 30: 123-142.

Jackson, David1987 The Entrance Gate for the Wise (Section III). Sa-skya Pañ"ita on Indian and Tibetan

Traditions of Pramåña and Philosophical Debate. 2 volumes. Wien: Arbeitskreis für tibetis-che und buddhistische Studien Universität Wien (Wiener Studien zur Tibetologie undBuddhismuskunde 17).

Jackson, Roger1991 “Dharmakœrti’s Attitude toward Omniscience”. In M.A. Dhaky/Sagarmal Jain (eds.):

Pt. Dalsukh Bhai Malvania Felicitation Volume I. Varanasi: P.V. Research Institute(Aspects of Jainology 3), pp. 230-246.

Kawasaki Shinj!1992 Issaichi Shis% no Kenkyü (A Study of the Omniscient Being - sarvaj!a - in Buddhism). T!ky!:

Shunjusha.

Krasser, Helmut2001 “On the Dates and Works of ‡aõkaranandana”. In Raffaele Torella (ed.): Le parole e i

marmi. Studi in onore di Raniero Gnoli nel suo 70° compleano. 2 volumes. Roma: IstitutoItaliano per l’Africa e l’Oriente (Serie Orientale Roma 92), pp. 489-508.

2002 ‡aõkaranandanas Œ†varåpåkarañasaõkßepa, mit einem anonymen Kommentar und weiterenMaterialien zur buddhistischen Gottespolemik. 2 volumes. Wien: Verlag der Österreichis-chen Akademie der Wissenschaften (Beiträge zur Kultur- und GeistesgeschichteAsiens 39).

MacDonald, Anne2005 “Manuscript Description”. In Ernst Steinkellner/Helmut Krasser/Horst Lasic: Jine -

ndrabuddhi’s Vi†ålåmalavatœ Pramåñasamuccaya™œkå. Chapter 1. Part II: DiplomaticEdition. Beijing/Vienna: China Tibetology Publishing House/Austrian Academy ofSciences (Sanskrit Texts from the Tibetan Autonomous Region 1/II), pp. ix-xxxvi.

Matsunami Yasuo1998 “The Script of the Abhisamåcårika-Dharma Palm-leaf Manuscript”. In: A Guide to the

Facsimile Edition of the Abhisamåcårika-Dharma of the Mahåsåõghika-Lokottaravådin.Tokyo: The Institute for Comprehensive Studies of Buddhism, Taisho University, pp.131-154.

McClintock, Sara2002 Omniscience and the Rhetoric of Reason in the Tattvasaõgraha and the Tattvasaõgrahapa! -

Vincent Eltschinger

34

jikå. Unpublished PhD Thesis. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University.

McDermott, Charlene1991 “Yogic Direct Awareness as Means of Valid Cognition in Dharmakœrti and Rgyal-tshab.”

In Minoru Kiyota (ed.): Mahåyåna Buddhist Meditation. Theory and Practice. Dehli:Motilal Banarsidass, pp. 144-166.

Much, Michael Torsten1988 A Visit to Råhula Såõkr¢tyåyana’s Collection of Negatives at the Bihar Research Society: Texts

from the Buddhist Epistemological School. Wien: Arbeitskreis für tibetische und buddhistis-che Studien Universität Wien (Wiener Studien zur Tibetologie und Buddhismuskunde18).

1991 Dharmakœrtis Vådanyåya#. Teil I: Sanskrit-Text; Teil II: Übersetzung undAnmerkungen. Wien 1991: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften(Veröffentlichungen der Kommission für Sprachen und Kulturen Südasiens 25).

Roth, Gustav1970 Bhikßuñœ-Vinaya. Manual of Discipline for Buddhist Nuns. Patna: Kashi Prasad Jayaswal

Research Institute (Tibetan Sanskrit Works Series 12).

Såõkr¢tyåyana, Råhula 1935 “Sanskrit Palm-leaf mss. in Tibet”. Journal of the Bihar and Orissa Research Society 21/1:

21-43.1937 “Second Search of Sanskrit Palm-Leaf MSS. in Tibet”. Journal of the Bihar and Orissa

Research Society 23/1: 1-57.

Scharfe, Hartmut2002 Education in Ancient India. Leiden/Boston/Köln: Brill (Handbook of Oriental

Studies/Handbuch der Orientalistik, Section Two: India 16).

Schiefner, Antonius1868 Târanâthae de doctrinae buddhicae in India propagatione narratio. Contextum tibeticum e co -

dicibus petropolitanis edidit Antonius Schiefner. Petropoli (= Saint-Petersburg).

Sferra, Francesco2000 “Sanskrit Manuscripts and Photos of Sanskrit Manuscripts in Giuseppe Tucci’s

Collection. A Preliminary Report”. In Piotr Balcerovicz and Marek Mejor (eds.): On theUnderstanding of Other Cultures (Proceedings of the International Conference of Sanskrit andRelated Studies to Commemorate the Centenary of the Birth of Stanisˆaw Schayer (1899-1941).Warszawa: Instytut Orientalistyczny, Uniwersytet Warszawski (Studia Indologiczne 7),pp. 397-447.

SGBSL2004a Study Group on Buddhist Sanskrit Literature: Vimalakœrtinirde†a and J!ånålokålaõkåra,

Transliterated Sanskrit Text Collated with Tibetan and Chinese Translations. Tokyo: TheInstitute for Comprehensive Studies of Buddhism, Taisho University.

2004b Study Group on Buddhist Sanskrit Literature: Introduction to Vimalakœrtinirde†a andJ!ånålokålaõkåra. Tokyo: The Institute for Comprehensive Studies of Buddhism,Taisho University.

Stcherbatsky, Theodor [Fyodor Ippolitovich Shcherbatskoj]1930, 1932 Buddhist Logic. Containing a Translation of the Short Treatise of Logic by Dharmakœrti,

and of its Commentary by Dharmottara, with Notes, Appendices and Indices.Akademija Nauk SSSR 26,1 and 26,2. Leningrad 1932 (vol. I), 1930 (vol. II).Bibliotheca Buddhica XXVI (Reprint 1993. 2 volumes. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass).

‡aõkaranandana’s Sarvaj!asiddhi. A Preliminary Report

35

Steiner, Roland1996 “Die Lehre der Anuß™ubh bei den indischen Metrikern”. In Michael Hahn/Jens-Uwe

Hartmann/Roland Steiner (eds.): Suhr¢llekhå#. Festgabe für Helmut Eimer. Swisttal-Odendorf, pp. 227-248.

Steinkellner, Ernst1977 “J#åna†rœmitra’s Sarvaj#asiddhi$.” In Lewis Lancaster (ed.): Praj!åpåramitå and

Related Problems: Studies in Honour of Edward Conze. Berkeley 1977 (Berkeley BuddhistStudies Series 1), pp. 383-393.

1978 “Yogische Erkenntnis als Problem im Buddhismus”. In Gerhard Oberhammer (ed.):Transzendenzerfahrung, Vollzugshorizont des Heils. Das Problem in indischer und christlicherTradition. Arbeitsdokumentation eines Symposiums. Wien: Publications of the de NobiliResearch Library 5, pp. 121-134.

1991 “Dharmakœrti on the Inference of the Effect (kårya)”. In Li Zheng and Jiang Zhongxin(eds.): Papers in Honour of Prof. Dr. Ji Xianlin on the Occasion of his 80th Birthday. Jiangxi,pp. 711-736.

1999 “Yogic Cognition, Tantric Goal, and Other Methodological Applications ofDharmakœrti’s kåryånumåna Theorem”. In Shoryu Katsura (ed.): Dharmakœrti’s Thoughtand Its Impact on Indian and Tibetan Philosophy. Proceedings of the Third InternationalDharmakœrti Conference (Hiroshima, November 4-6, 1997). Vienna: Verlag der Österre-ichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, pp. 349-362.

(forthc.) “Is the Ultimate Cognition of the Yogin Conceptual or Non-conceptual? Part 2:Introducing the Problem in the Final Section of the Tantristic Tattvasiddhi withAnalysis and Translation”. To be published in Ch. Namai et al. (eds.): Proceedings of theInternational Conference on Esoteric Buddhist Studies (Koyasan University, Japan, Sept. 5-82006).

Steinkellner, Ernst and Michael Torsten Much1995 Texte der erkenntnistheoretischen Schule des Buddhismus (Systematische Übersicht über die bud -

dhistische Sanskrit-Literatur II). Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht (Abhandlungender Akademie der Wissenschaften in Göttingen).

van der Kuijp, Leonard1983 Contributions to the Development of Tibetan Buddhist Epistemology, from the eleventh to the thir -

teenth century. Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner Verlag (Alt- und Neu-Indische Studien 26).

Vidyabhusana, Satish Chandra1920 A History of Indian Logic. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.

Watanabe Shigeaki1987 “‡ubhagupta’s Sarvaj#asiddhikårikå”. Journal of Naritasan Institute for Buddhist Studies

10: 55-74 (in Japanese).

Woo, Jeson2003 “Dharmakœrti and his commentators on yogipratyakßa”. Journal of Indian Philosophy 31:

439-448.

Yaita Hideomi2005 Three Sanskrit Texts from the Buddhist Pramåña-Tradition - the Hetuvidyå Section in the Yo -

gåcårabhümi, the Dharmottara™ippanaka, and the Tarkarahasya. Narita: NaritasanShinshoji (Monograph Series of Naritasan Institute for Buddhist Studies 4).

Vincent Eltschinger

36