THE ACTION PHURPA (’PHRIN LAS PHUR PA) FROM THE EIGHTFOLD BUDDHA WORD, EMBODYING THE SUGATAS (BKA’ BRGYAD BDE GSHEGS ’DUS PA), REVEALED BY NYANG-REL NYIMA ÖZER (1124–1192, TIB. MYANG RAL NYI MA ’OD ZER)
CATHY CANTWELL
CONTACT: Principal Investigator: Prof. Dr. Carmen Meinert BuddhistRoad | Ruhr-Universität Bochum | Center for Religious Studies (CERES) Universitätsstr. 90a | 44789 Bochum | Germany Phone: +49 (0)234 32-21683 | Fax: +49 (0) 234/32- 14 909 Email: BuddhistRoad@rub.de | Email: carmen.meinert@rub.de Website: https://buddhistroad.ceres.rub.de/ BuddhistRoad is a project of
SPONSORS:
The BuddhistRoad project has received funding from the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (grant agreement No 725519). The project Nyang ral’s Codification of rNying ma Literature and Ritual has received funding from the German Research Foundation (DFG) (ref. No ME 2006/3-1). BuddhistRoad Paper 7.2. Cantwell, “The Action Phurpa (’phrin las phur pa)”
Abstract
This paper presents the main findings of an in-depth textual study of the core sections of the “’phrin las phur pa [[[Action]] Phurpa]” part of Nyang-rel Nyima Özer’s (Tib. Myang ral Nyi ma ’od zer) revealed corpus of the bKa’ brgyad bDe gshegs ’dus pa [The Eightfold Buddha Word, Embodying the Sugatas]. This research suggests that at least this part of the Eightfold Buddha Word revelation represents the survival of ____________
1 Note that both the spellings nyang ral and myang ral are witnessed widely in Tibetan sources, but older sources invariably use, myang ral. Although our project title had used nyang ral, I now follow Per Sorensen (personal communication, 16th July 2019), who informed me that, “Myang is without any doubt the correct and original spelling”, adding that early post-dynastic sources almost always use, myang, and that the variant reading, nyang, occurs later, perhaps from the thirteenth century.
2 This work was supported by the DFG Germany under Grant number ME 2006/3–1, Nyang ral’s Codification of rNying ma Literature and Ritual, at the Center for Religious Studies (CERES) of the Ruhr-Universität Bochum, 2017–2019. The research builds on work begun under an earlier research project, Dunhuang Phur-pa Texts, supported by the UK. Arts and Humanities Research Council at the Oriental Institute, University of Oxford, 2004–2007. The major output of the earlier reseach was Cathy Cantwell and Robert Mayer, Early Tibetan Documents on Phur pa from Dunhuang (Vienna: Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften Verlag, 2008), and the new edition in the current
publication incorporates some of Robert Mayer’s work from our earlier book. I would like to acknowledge the help of Lopon P. Ogyan Tanzin, who acted as consultant to the project in Bochum, with whom I read and discussed the entire text. I must also thank my colleague, Dylan Esler, for fruitful discussions during the Bochum project period, and Karma Phuntsho for provision of clearer images than those available on the EAP website of the Phurdrup Gonpa (phur sgrub dgon pa) manuscript version of the text. I should also mention that some of this work was presented at the International Association for Tibetan Studies conference in Paris in July 2019, and I am grateful to those who gave me feedback at that event. Further thanks are due to Klaus-Dieter Mathes for his detailed comments. 3 Currently, Associate Faculty Member, Oriental Institute, University of Oxford, and Honorary Research Fellow, School of Anthropology and Conservation, University of Kent.
an archaic form of practice on the tantric deity, Vajrakīlaya. Its six sections constitute a coherent whole covering complementary aspects of the tantric rituals, while the second section parallels in its entirety a text from the archaeological recovered manuscripts from a Library Cave in Dunhuang (IOL Tib J 331.III), which dates back over a century before Nyang-rel’s time. Here, a critical edition of that second section of Nyang-rel’s Action Phurpa is presented, taking account of all current extant versions, and supported by consideration of the accompanying materials found in the five other sections.
1. Introduction
The bKa’ brgyad bDe gshegs ’dus pa, KD [The Eightfold Buddha Word, Embodying the Sugatas] is structured around a system of eight wrathful tantric deities or herukas, each associated with a Tibetan vidyādhara or tantric master, who received transmission from Padmasambhava and demonstrated miraculous signs of accomplishment. The story is told in Chapter 19 of Nyang-rel’s hagiography of Padmasambhava, the Zangs gling ma [[[Wikipedia:Copper|Copper]] Island].4 This eightfold structure remains significant in later centuries and subsequent lamas had their own Eightfold Buddha Word revelations. In particular, we may note Nyang-rel’s 13th century successor, Guru Chöwang (Tib. Gu ru Chos dbang); the 14th century Rindzin Gödem (Tib. Rig ’dzin rGod ldem), whose revelations formed the basis for the Jangter (Tib. Byang gter) tradition; the 15th to 16th century Pema Lingpa (Tib. Padma Gling pa); and Samten Déchen Lingpa (Tib. bSam gtan bDe chen Gling pa) from a similar period.5 In ________ ____
4 Kong sprul’s version of the Zangs gling ma gives additional details, see Yeshe Tsogyal, The Lotus-Born: The Life Story of Padmasambhava, revealed by Nyang Ral Nyima Öser, translated from Tibetan by Erik Pema Kunsang (Boston, London: Shambhala, 1993), 124–127, but even the versions which Doney identifies as the oldest specify the textual heritage associated with each of the eight deities, along with Padmasambhava’s bestowal of empowerment on the eight named students, and their subsequent accomplishments. See therefore the text reproduced in Lewis Doney, The Zangs gling ma: The First Padamasambhava Biography. Two Exemplars of the Earliest Attested Recension (Andiast: Switzerland: International Institute for Tibetan and Buddhist Studies, 2014), 283–285, ms.ZLi, 59r–60v.
5 Dudjom Collected Writings Volume Ca: 90–91 explains the bka’ brgyad revelations of these five prominent early revealers, beginning with Nyang-rel, as the five great heart BuddhistRoad Paper 7.2. Cantwell, “The Action Phurpa (’phrin las phur pa)”
the most extensive thirteen volume collections of Nyang-rel’s Eightfold Buddha Word, there are detailed elaborations of the eightfold system as a whole and its peaceful and wrathful maṇḍalas, while each section is given its own root tantra, found also in the rNying ma rgyud ’bum, NGB [[[Ancient Tantra Collection]]]. There are additionally further individual sections on each of the eight deities, as well as a good deal of related instructions and practices. The principal root tantras in the Eightfold Buddha Word—unlike their versions in the Ancient Tantra Collection— have a large number of interlineal annotations.6 In the case of the Phurpa Tantra, the annotations virtually double the length of the text in some editions. Despite their absence from the Ancient Tantra Collection versions, there seems to be some evidence that the annotations are likely to go back to the archetype of the extant versions, suggesting that they may have been very early, and quite possibly included in Nyang-rel’s revelation of the tantra.7 In this paper, I focus on the other part of the collection which is specifically devoted to Phurpa, the phrin las phur pa [[[Action]] Phurpa] text, and which is closely related to a text we have studied previously from the Dunhuang (敦煌) tantric manuscripts. In the early 20th century, there was an archaeological discovery of a Library Cave at Dunhuang, in which were found many well-preserved manuscripts in different languages, including Tibetan, dating back to the early 11th century or earlier. Shortly after Robert Mayer and I had published a book on those manuscripts amongst the cache relating to the tantric deity Vajrakīlaya (Tib. rdo rje phur pa), and to associated rituals involving ritual daggers or pegs (Tib. phur pa), 8 I discovered within the Action Phurpa part of the Tsamdrak (Tib. mTshams brag) edition of _________ ___
revelations; his own compilation draws upon theirs and the works of four further revealers.
6 An exception is the Kyirong lama four volume edition of the bDe gshegs ’dus pa (W1KG9588 vol. 2: 257–310). Here, the Phurpa root tantra does not carry the annotations, but in this case, it is most likely that the root tantra has been added from a locally found version of the rNying ma rgyud 'bum rather than a transmission of the bDe gshegs ’dus pa itself.
7 I refer to the work of my colleague Dr Dylan Esler on the root tantra. 8 Cathy Cantwell and Robert Mayer, Early Tibetan Documents on Phur pa from Dunhuang (Vienna: Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften Verlag, 2008), Chapter 5–6.
Nyang-rel Nyima Özer’s Eightfold Buddha Word revelation texts a precise parallel to the longest Dunhuang Phurpa text on which we had devoted two chapters of our book. This text, classified as IOL Tib J 331.III, is held in the Stein Collection at the British Library. Apart from transmissional corruptions, the only substantial differences between IOL Tib J 331.III and the section within the Eightfold Buddha Word are different opening titles and framing of the manual. While the Dunhuang version of the text is anonymous, Nyang-rel’s version is presented as his treasure re-discovery of a text composed by the late Imperial period Indian master, Vimalamitra (8th c.). Moreover, the parallel passage within Nyang-rel’s revelation is embedded within materials which are closely connected to it. Our study of IOL Tib J 331.III had already pointed out substantial parallels between it and several Ancient Tantra Collection texts, and there were obvious connections with rituals of the later Vajrakīlaya traditions, yet there were also uncertainties over the exact content of rituals mentioned briefly, and the connotations of some of the text’s abbreviated instructions. The substantial additional materials found in Nyang-rel’s Action Phurpa promised to illuminate the terse wording of IOL Tib J 331.III, at least as understood a few generations later. In the event, a close study (see below 7–18) seems to indicate that the entire Action Phurpa is likely to pre-date Nyang-rel himself. The parallel text also raises questions about the nature of Nyang-rel’s revelatory activity, which I discuss in other publications.9 _________
___
9 (1) Cathy Cantwell, “Myang ral Nyi ma ’od zer (1124–1192): Authority and Authorship in the Coaslescing of the rNying ma Tantric Tradition”, in Rethinking Scholastic Communities across Medieval Eurasia, ed. Pascale Hugon and Birgit Kellner, in a Special Edition of Medieval Worlds. (2) Cathy Cantwell, “Early teachings on the Four Phurpas in the light of the Eightfold Buddha Word (bka’ brgyad bde gshegs ’dus pa) revelation of Myang ral Nyi ma ’od zer (1124-1192), and the Relationship between the Revelatory (gter ma) and Transmitted (bka’ ma) Textual Traditions,” in New Directions in Gter ma Studies, ed. Jue Liang and Changhong Zhang, forthcoming Special Issue of the Journal of Tibetology (http://en.cnki.com.cn/Journal_en/F-F094-ZAXK-2010-00.htm), Sichuan University, Chengdu.
2. The Character and Significance of the Action Phurpa of the Eightfold Buddha Word
My research suggests that this Action Phurpa part of the Eightfold Buddha Word revelation represents the survival of an archaic form of practice on the tantric deity, Vajrakīlaya, and is thus of significance in providing a window into the genesis of the Vajrakīlaya traditions of practice. It is worth saying that before embarking on the current research project, my working hypothesis had been that only the section which parallels the Dunhuang text was old, that is, the second Supreme Pacification ritual section, and that Nyang-rel had added the accompanying commentarial sections. I now believe this hypothesis to have been mistaken—on the contrary, an assessment of this Action Phurpa has led me to the conclusion that the entire text of around one hundred and seventy pages is in fact a coherent work likely to pre-date Nyang-rel, and that Nyang-rel most probably incorporated the text as a whole into his Eightfold Buddha Word, possibly, but not necessarily, with some editing or re-ordering. My conclusion is based on two types of evidence: that of the structure and presentation of the text, and that of its content.
2.1. The Structure and Presentation of the Text
As explained below (see page 42–45), a systematic comparison of variants between the extant Eightfold Buddha Word versions of this text suggests that the Kathok blockprint (KAḤ) shares a number of transmissional errors with the X and Y manuscripts, implying that they most probably share a hypearchetype not shared with the Tsamdrak and Phurdrup Gönpa (TSH/PH) manuscripts, which represent a transmission in Bhutan. TSH/PH present the six sections as separate texts, each with their own title page; while the KAḤ and the X/Y group present the whole Action Phurpa as a single text with six sections. Since the Eightfold Buddha Word versions most probably represent two separate transmissions, it is not possible to ascertain which of the two is earlier on stemmatic grounds in the cases where the two groups have different
readings.10 In this specific instance, however, it seems more likely that the division into separate texts was a feature only of the Bhutan branch of the transmission. This is because there are a number of indications throughout which suggest that the work is envisaged by both versions as a single whole, and its sections are framed together as revealed. The original authorship, not only of the root Supreme Pacification section equivalent to the Dunhuang manuscript, but also of the text as a whole, is said on a number of occasions to have been Vimalamitra’s. The attribution is given at the end of each section, apart from the short commentary section, and in that case, the attribution after the following long commentary most probably includes both commentaries.11 There is also a reference to Vimalamitra as the author within the text of the short commentary. It is possible that in a few cases, the authorship attribution is intended to apply only to the second root section, but a few of the attributions are clearly referring to one or more of the other sections. Thus, we can conclude that the whole text seems to be presented as a single work. The final colophon at the end of the series appears to apply to the full group. This specifies that the text is from King Trisong Detsen’s (Tib. Khri srong lde’u btsan) manuscript, which was concealed as a precious treasure. It would seem clear that this claim must refer to the text as a whole, not only to the collection of supplementary recitations given in the final invocation manual.12 It is a little uncertain whether the title given before the concluding comment about the King’s manuscript is intended to apply to the text as a whole or to the invocation manual alone.13 Here, we find the title referring to the manual of pointing out teachings on Consecrations through the Phurpa Practice by Vimalamitra, which would not seem quite appropriate merely to refer to _________
___
10 If the probable stemma is incorrect, and in fact the three groups of TSH/PH; KAḤ and X/Y descend separately from the archetype, this would on the contrary show more clearly that it is the Bhutan group which changed the presentation of the text. 11 This sādhana with its commentary composed by the Indian scholar Vimalamitra (bi ma la mi tras sgrub thabs dang ’grel bar bcas pa mdzad, with minor variants). 12 rgyal po khri srong lde’u btsan gyi phyag dpe: rin po che’i gter du sbas ste rgyas btab pa’o: gter rgya: sbas rgya: gtad rgya: (KAḤ version; minor variants in other versions). 13 slob dpon bi ma la mi tra mdzad pa’i byin rlabs phur pa’i sgrub pa pra khrid kyi mdo byang rdzogs so: (KAḤ version; minor variants in other versions).
the invocation manual (Tib. bskul byang) just completed, although it is just possible that it does. There is also the fact that the final part of the invocation manual refers back to the previous section, saying that for the meditations (which should accompany the ritual recitations), the explanations of the visualisations are necessary14—doubtless indicating those given in the previous visualisation section, referred to by the same term in its title, namely mngon par rtogs pa. Another indication that the series of sections cohere as a single work is the overall title as, Byin rlabs phur pa’i sgrub pa [Consecrations through the Phurpa Practice].
This title is given on a title page at the beginning of the series in the KAḤ, X, Y version. It is omitted as a separate title in the TSH/PH version, integrated only into its title for the opening preliminary section. Yet clearly, it is appropriate for the whole text, and recurs elsewhere, such as in the TSH/PH version title for the visualisation section. 15 Furthermore, the division into separate texts in TSH and PH would seem somewhat artificial. The titles given on their title pages seem to derive primarily from the titles given at the end of each section. It would appear that these titles have been repeated at the beginning simply as part of a policy to present each section as a separate unit with a title page. This scenario would seem much more likely than the possibility that a hypearchetype of KAḤ, X and Y removed initial titles and merged six separate texts into one. There is also the fact that the six different sections depend upon each other. While section two, the Supreme Pacification manual which corresponds to the Dunhuang manuscript, can be seen as the root or main text, it is inconceivable that it could have been an entirely autonomous text. It must have relied on other materials, since the sometimes terse instructions refer to rituals not given within it, and there would seem no good reason to doubt that the full text we find in the Eightfold Buddha Word was presented by Nyang-rel as a single unit representing an integrated teaching of Vimalamitra’s. _____
_______
14 dgongs pa ni mngon par rtogs pa’i ’grel ltar bya’o (KAḤ version; TSH PH give ’brel rather than ’grel, and if this is not a simple spelling error, it may slightly change the sense, but would still seem to indicate that it is the earlier visualisation section which should be used). 15 byin rlabs phur pa’i sgrub pa’i mngon par rtogs pa, TSH450.
2.2. Content: An Archaic Form of Practice on the Tantric Deity, Vajrakīlaya
The practice has much in continuity with the Vajrakīlaya tradition, but it also has distinctive features in its arrangement of the maṇḍala, not sharing the usual layout. The deity descriptions do not exactly correspond to the standard Vajrakīlaya maṇḍala of deities, not even in relation to the central deities. Briefly, the standard arrangement has the central dark blue three-faced, six-armed Vajrakīlaya heruka deity, the right face white and the left face red, holding nine- and five-spoked vajras in his right hands, a fire-ball and trident in his left hands, while rolling a ritual dagger (Tib. phur pa) between his two lower hands. He unites with his consort, the light blue Khorlo Gyédepma ('khor lo rgyas 'debs ma), and they are surrounded by two or more circles of further deities, one circle of the Ten Wrathful Deities (Tib. khro bcu) and another circle of deified ritual phurpa or "supreme son" (sras mchog) deities. Outside these circles are four female door-keepers at the porches of the maṇḍala palace, and a standard set of Vajrakīlaya guardian deities (phur srung).16 Now, these standard forms are given elsewhere in the Eightfold Buddha Word texts, both in the root Phurpa Tantra (see page 4–6 above; its Chapter 1 and 2 give full descriptions of the deities)17 and in short sections of the other Eightfold Buddha Word texts which discuss all eight wrathful heruka deities.18 In contrast, as described here in the visualisation section (KAḤ133–137; TSH426–430; PH269,1–269,3; X739–744; Y772–778), for the central deities, first there is a white form of Vajrasattva with a right blue and left red face, and six hands carrying the implements of the five families and embracing the consort.19 The ________
____
16 For a summary of the standard forms and their variants, see Cathy Cantwell, Introduction, 2020, 9–11.
17 There is a slight anomaly in the most likely earliest reading for the main deity’s face colours given in Chapter 1, where the right face is red and left face white, reversing the typical colours (the sde dge NGB version corrects this, while the South Central NGB and Kyirong versions have a further variant, giving the right face as green). Apart from this, the appearance of the deities conforms to the usual range of variation on the standard theme.
18 See the descriptions, for example, in the rtsa ba’i rgyud kyi rgyal po (TSH vol. 1: 68–70); and the ’byed pa lde’u mig gi rgyud (TSH vol. 2: 130–131). 19 In the Vajrakīlaya traditions, Vajrakīlaya is frequently said to be a wrathful manifestation of Vajrasattva, and the jñānasattva deity in the heart often takes the form of
three right hands thus respectively hold a vajra, a wheel, and a sword. The first left hand holds a bell and embraces his consort, and the other left hands are holding a jewel and a lotus. After this form dissolves into light, a resultant form of the green Karma Heruka arises, with a right white and left red face; the three right hands holding a wheel with fire sparking, a three-pronged vajra and a battle axe, and the three left hands embracing the consort, holding a crossed vajra at the heart, a skull-cup with blood, and rolling a Mt. Meru phurpa. In the Supreme Pacification manual, the central deity is referred to simply as, Heruka, but the four deities in the immediate retinue are named (KAḤ64; TSH354; PH243,2; X668–669; Y703; DUN2v). Their names correspond to four of the standard list of the khro bo bcu, the Ten Wrathful Deities (Tib. khro bcu) in the standard Vajrakīlaya retinue, but the standard positioning does not place them as a set of four in the cardinal directions, associated with the respective buddha families as they are here. Moreover, their colouring
and implements as described in the visualisation section also seem a little different from any of the standard depictions, although they share the standard three-faced, six armed heruka form in union with the consort. The main maṇḍala deities are completed with the set of four female door-keepers at the four maṇḍala palace doorways. Here, they apparently each have three human faces,20 along with six arms, and in their first right hands, they hold the characteristic implements (respectively the iron hook, noose, iron chains and bell), embracing their consorts with their first left hands. Although the visualisation is complicated a good deal by the generation of the inner body, speech, and mind deities and the jñānasattva within the main deity’s body, not to mention the further generation of offering goddesses and messengers etc., the relatively simple maṇḍala arrangement is confirmed also in the preliminary section which describes the maṇḍala structure to be laid out in the practice site with phurpa seats for each of the main deities. In the standard arrangement, there is often a further nirmāṇakāya circle of __________
__
a white or blue Vajrasattva. So, this visualisation would seem in keeping with the general Vajrakīlaya imagery, although I have not come across the kind of initial visualisation of Vajrasattva which we find here. 20 They are often bird-headed or have other animal heads in the Vajrakīlaya tradition, although less frequently, human deity heads also occur.
supreme sons (Tib. sras mchog) or deified phurpa implements, generated from the central deity couple. In this text, we find the same category, but here the focus is simply on generating the central ritual phurpa as the supreme son, whose appearance is described in the Supreme Pacification manual itself (KAḤ65; TSH355; PH242,3; X669; Y704; DUN3r), as well as in greater detail in the other sections.
It is worth noting that the set of the Ten Wrathful Deities which usually arise as the central retinue of the main Vajrakīlaya deity here occur with their standard mantras in the invocation manual in the context of the preliminary rites for demarcating the symbolic boundaries of the practice site with the implantation of phurpas on the ground where the maṇḍala is to be erected (KAḤ164–165; TSH457–458; PH vol. Nya1,3–2,3; X771– 772; Y805–806).22 They continue to have this role in sacralising the site also in the Vajrakīlaya traditions, but it is interesting that in this text, they are only given attention in these preliminary rites.23 The group were well-established in the immediate circle of the maṇḍala in the early Vajrakīlaya tradition—including both root tantras 24 and early ___
_________
21 Note that there are verses for inviting the assembly of material phurpa deities of the cardinal directions given in the invocation manual (KAḤ172–175; TSH464–466; PH Volume Nya3,3–5,1; X779–783; Y813–817), but the emphasis in the other sections is on the central figure.
22 Note also that according to the visualisation section (KAḤ131; TSH425; PH267,3; X736–737; Y770), the ten emanations (not named in this section) take the form of deified phurpas. This form does occur for the central group in some Vajrakīlaya cycles, but the heruka deity form with legs is much more usual, see Cantwell 2020: Chapter 11, 284–285, note 22.
23 They are twice briefly mentioned again in the invocation manual. First, they occur in one of the recitations for generating the deities (phyogs bcu’i khro rgyal yab yum mthu chen rnams:, KAḤ181; TSH470; PH Volume Nya5,3; X788; Y823), including verses for the phurpa deities of the different buddha families. Second, they occur in the verses for generating majestic splendour in the ritual phurpa, which focuses on the ‘supreme son’ deity, and they are here noted as accompanying him (phyogs bcu khro rgyal yab yum sras dang bcas:, KAḤ187; TSH474; PH Volume Nya7,2; X794; Y829). It seems likely that the connotation in these cases remains an association with the circle of material phurpas.
24 They are found also in other early Nyingma sources apart from the Vajrakīlaya tradition, such as in the central wrathful maṇḍala of the important Mahāyoga tantra, the ’Phags pa thabs kyi zhags pa padma ’phreng gi don bsdus pa, see Cathy Cantwell and Robert Mayer, A Noble Noose of Methods, the Lotus Garland Synopsis: A Mahāyoga Tantra and its Commentary (Vienna: Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften Verlag, 2012), 358–362.
commentaries and practice texts, and indeed, as mentioned above, they are found elsewhere in this position in Nyang-rel’s Eightfold Buddha Word, both in his Vajrakīlayatantra and in the materials on the eight deities in the earlier volumes of the collection. This standard maṇḍala arrangement persisted right through the tradition historically, apparently unlike the set of deities found in our text.25 One cannot go so far as to suggest that the group of deities found here—with a group of just four from the khro bcu set in the immediate circle around the main green Karma Heruka deity—are earlier than the standard group, since we witness that standard group in many very early texts. But it would seem clear that the arrangement found in our text represents a similarly early or an earlier formulation before the tradition became relatively fixed in its standard maṇḍala layout.
At this stage, little can be safely said about the historical development: clearly, both the set of deities found in this text and the standard formulation pre-date Nyang-rel, and we have no firm evidence beyond this. What is clear is that the standard set became ubiquitous in Vajrakīlaya traditions in Tibet, both within transmitted and revealed sources, while it appears that the set in our text were lost to view, at least in the mainstream Vajrakīlaya traditions. Further research is, however, desirable into the specifically Eightfold Buddha Word traditions. It may be that some of these apparently unique features live on in this corner of tantric practice. Unfortunately, it was not possible to review the vast Eightfold Buddha Word literature of the later tradition within the scope of our short project.
____________
25 I am not certain about this, since I have not sufficiently examined the later texts representing various branches of the Eightfold Buddha Word practices. At present, I can only say that the arrangement found here is not witnessed so far as I know within the specific Vajrakīlaya traditions, although it is possible that it may be found in one or other of the Eightfold Buddha Word traditions.
Standard Arrangement of the Ten Wrathful Deities around the central deity in Vajrakīlaya Maṇḍalas
Simple Maṇḍala Arrangement of Principal Deities in the Supreme Pacification Manual
2.3. Further Considerations
Unlike many of the root Vajrakīlaya tantras, which contain abundant obscure passages and apparently disordered materials, 26 despite its antiquity, this text appears to be a relatively coherent set of tantric ritual instructions, which would be accessible to practitioners familiar with the Vajrakīlaya traditions. There are a number of mostly minor inconsistencies, however, between the different sections. For instance, there are small discrepancies between a few of the visualisations described in the long commentary and in the visualisation section, such as the implement of the deity Mahābala, given as a five spoked vajra in the long commentary, but a crossed vajra in the visualisation section (KAḤ99, 136; TSH392, 429; PH257,2, 268,3; X704–705, 742; Y738, 776). 27 It is possible that these inconsistencies have resulted from transmissional errors. It is clear that the Eightfold Buddha Word hypearchetype was not perfect. Besides the omission of necessary text in the second section, which is found in the Dunhuang manuscript (see below page 32–34), there are a few similar examples in other parts of the text, such as an apparent omission of the expected description of the body heruka in the head (KAḤ139; TSH432; PH270,1; X745; Y779). Alternatively, there is another possibility which might explain at least some of the discrepancies between different parts of the text. Although
____________
26 See Cathy Cantwell and Robert Mayer, The Kīlaya Nirvāṇa Tantra and the Vajra Wrath Tantra: Two Texts from the Ancient Tantra Collection (Vienna: Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften Verlag, 2007), 37–41, 79–84. Such obscure passages are found within some chapters of Nyang-rel’s Vajrakīlaya root tantra for the Eightfold Buddha Word; again, I refer to the work of my colleague Dr Dylan Esler on the root tantra: “The Root Phur pa Tantra of Myang ral’s bKa’ brgyad bDe gshegs ’dus pa (KD) Corpus: A Thematic Overview and Philological Analysis,” BuddhistRoad Paper 7.1 (2020).
27 Lopon P. Ogyan Tanzin, with whom I discussed this discrepancy, commented that either of these implements may be considered appropriate. Mahābala generally has a vajra, and a five-spoked vajra would seem appropriate in the context of the meaning given to it in the long commentary, where it is related to the act of overcoming Devapūtra Māra. On the other hand, in the context of this text, Mahābala, usually positioned in the below direction, has taken over the north, and thus, Amoghasiddhi’s crossed vajra weapon given in the visualisation section would seem to fit.
we find here a fairly coherent work in which the different sections complement each other, it is possible that some of the materials may have been collated from different sources which were not necessarily fully consistent with each other. This seems perhaps even probable in the case of some of the materials included in the invocation manual. The longest section by a considerable margin, the invocation manual gathers together the recitations needed at various points of the rites. Some are doubtless generic, used for different tantric deity practices, to be slotted into the appropriate niche in our ritual, and some appear to derive from a broader Vajrakīlaya repertoire than the specific visualisations of our text. If there was an original single author for this Action Phurpa text, he surely acted more as a compiler of many of the liturgies supplied in this section. Under such circumstances, a Tibetan editor/compiler may slightly adapt a generic liturgy to suit the specific practice, but will not invariably do so. In the Nyingma tantric tradition, logical consistency in maṇḍala formations and so on may take second place to the principle of
recourse to time-honoured potent tantric verses, and these may be reapplied to different practices. Thus, a highly valued tantric chant may be used on many occasions, even where its descriptions do not altogether fit with the main practice into which it is slotted.28 In this case, the main ritual given in section two of the text requires numerous insertions for the various ritual actions which are simply mentioned or summarised. It is possible that before the invocation manual had been compiled, memorised passages of common rituals performed regularly in the context of different deity practices—such as for demarcating the symbolic boundaries of the site and so forth—might have been used. Also, more specific liturgies in the context of Vajrakīlaya practice, such as verses for inviting the assembly of deities, might have been wellknown by practitioners specialising in these rites. Yet there is no doubt that a manual of such necessary inserts would be a desirable or even essential addition to the text, and it is likely that such inserts might have been gathered at an early stage of the transmission of the text. It would
____________
28 An example from a recent period is Dudjom Rinpoche’s use of a Fulfilment (Tib. bskang ba) recitation from the revelations of Padma gling pa for two of his Vajrakīlaya cycles, even though the maṇḍala of deities does not quite fit in either case Cantwell 2020: Chapter 10, 263).
seem clear that this section had been incorporated into the text as a whole by the time that Nyang-rel transmitted it in his Eightfold Buddha Word. Yet we should not be altogether surprised to witness a number of apparently slightly inappropriate recitations, or some written in a style which seems somewhat out of keeping with the rest of the text. One striking example of a difference in style is a eulogy to the deity which is given both in the visualisation section and in the invocation manual (KAḤ141–142, 175–176; TSH433–434, 466–467; PH vol. Ja 270,2– 271,2; X747, 783–784; Y781–782, 817–818). Its imagery seems a little awkward, for instance, using the example of a poisonous plant to illustrate the action of controlling rather than destruction, and the main
object of praise seems to be Samantabhadra in wrathful form or Chéchok Heruka (Tib. che mchog), rather than the Karma Heruka of our text. It would seem that these verses were nonetheless considered suitable; given their repetition, it is unlikely that they could have been corrupted simply through scribal error. Perhaps this text was always envisaged within the context of a wider Eightfold Buddha Word maṇḍala, in which Chéchok may act as the central deity for the group.29 In any case, we have here a text supplying all the materials needed for the Supreme Pacification ritual, ranging in content from erudite scholarly explanations of the structure of the practice and the meditation methods to miscellaneous liturgies to be chanted, including some which seem not quite appropriate for our particular maṇḍala of deities, and others which seem comparitively unpolished.
____________
29 For instance, from Nyang-rel’s Eightfold Buddha Word collection, the rtsa ba’i rgyud kyi rgyal po (KAḤ vol. 1: 273–352; TSH Volume 1: 13–83) or the ’byed par byed pa lde mig gi rgyud (KAḤ vol. 2: 279–498; TSH vol. 1, 3–197). In the case of our Action Phurpa text, the chances that it had been envisaged within an Eightfold Buddha Word context are strengthened by the opening homage to kun bzang khro bo’i rgyal, and the composer’s eulogy at the beginning of the long commentary, addressing kun bzang he ru ka (KAḤ56, 84; TSH344, 378; PH vol. Ja 240,1, 253,1; X660, 689; Y694, 723).
3. Summaries of the Six Sections of the Action Phurpa (’phrin las phur pa) of the Eightfold Buddha Word
3.1. The Preliminary Section (KAḤ56–62; TSH343–349; PH Vol. Ja 239,1–241,1; X659–666; Y694–700)
The initial section preceding the main root section on the Supreme Pacification is given a title of sgrub thabs [or sgrub pa] mdor bsdus pa [Abbreviated Practice or sādhana], but while it summarises much of the ritual action of the main text, it cannot be considered a short version of the practice itself. Rather, this text is more of a preface, including the necessary background to the ritual and visualisation practices. It starts by introducing the topic of the second section, and proceeds to the ritual maṇḍala to be set up, as well as noting the necessary preliminary rituals, such as the earth ritual and the demarcation of the outer and inner boundaries.30 Having thus prepared the ritual space, the colours for the maṇḍala are consecrated and the parts of the maṇḍala are described. As remained standard in Vajrakīlaya practice, there is a central blue triangle,
but here it has a door.31 The triangle is given a circular border of a white garland of skulls, and around its rim there is a four-spoked wheel, the spokes of which point in the four cardinal directions. The palace walls outside the wheel create a square with four porched doors. A large iron phurpa is put in the central triangle as a materialisation of the central heruka deity, while further phurpas, respectively of silver, gold, copper and iron, are placed on each of the four spokes, clearly as the supports for the four main retinue deities. Four Khadira wood phurpas are established at the palace doors, doubtless as supports for the four doorkeepers. At the intermediate directions, items for the different wrathful rituals are laid out: 21 phurpas in the north-east for the striking rituals; a maṇḍala for a controlling and destructive (Tib. dbang drag) burnt offerings ritual in the south-east; a maṇḍala for the four rituals in the south-west, with a skull-cup, presumably for the suppression ritual mentioned later in the section, in which the ashes from the burnt
____________
30 These rites remain standard in major practice sessions (sgrub chen) on a tantric deity in Nyingma tradition. 31 The door is confirmed also in the invocation manual. See both occurrences, KAḤ57, 166; TSH345, 459; PH vol. Ja 240,1–239, 2, vol. Nya 3,1; X661, 774; Y695, 807.
offerings rite are buried; 21 sharp wooden sticks (Tib. rtsang), along with poisonous and dangerous tormas in the north-west. Key points of the section two rituals are then listed. For the ‘perfection of recitation’ (see edition, 89–92), as well as mentioning the approach practice, the benefit of self and of others is said to be accomplished through changing the ending (of the mantra) and thus effecting the four different ritual actions. Some concluding rituals not specified in section two are noted here: the burnt offerings ritual and burial of the skull-cup with the ashes. 3.2. Section 2: The Supreme Pacification ritual (KAḤ62–77; TSH351– 365; PH Vol. Ja 242,1–247,2; X666–682; Y700–716)
This is the section corresponding to IOL Tib J 331.III, outlining rites for the seven perfections. A full edition and translation is given below.
3.3. The Short Commentary (KAḤ77–84; TSH367–375; PH Vol. Ja 248,1–251,1; X682–689; Y716–722)
Entitled Phun sum tshogs pa don gyi man ngag la ’grel [Commentary in terms of Pith Instructions of the Key Points of the Perfections], this commentary interprets the structure of our ritual manual. It is worth noting here that parts of these two commentaries are written in an almost scholastic form, with structured explanations in line with more general non-tantric analyses of teachings. For instance, the short commentary opens with the structuring principle of the five limbs of initial analysis (Tib. rtsis ’go yan lag lnga) found in Buddhist śāstra literature, apparently deriving from traditions at Nālandā. 32 In subsequent generations, the texts classified as root revelation are often rather raw visionary works, and may be somewhat disordered—further practice manuals and commentaries may then be composed by the revealer or those to whom the lineage is passed.33 In this case, however, there would be nothing to distinguish the content from scholarly texts of the bka’ ma transmissions. The first five points are followed by four aspects of the initial verses of the manual, focusing on the indication of the ultimate and natural qualities of the phurpa teachings. The seven perfections (Tib.
____________
32 See the Tony Duff Illuminator Dictionary entry.
33 See Cathy Cantwell 2020: Chapter 14.
phun sum tshogs pa) into which the remainder of the manual is divided are then each broken down further. There are four aspects to the form of the ritual phurpa: its substance, measurement, shape, and the direction of its point. The consecration perfection is sub-divided into eight,34 and it is explained which lines in the manual relate to each of these eight. There is: (1) the three kāya consecration; (2) consecration as the five families; (3) consecrations of enlightened body, speech, and mind; (4) the single pointed heart/mind primordial wisdom consecrations; (5) consecrations of the wrathful deities of each of the families; (6) consecrations of all the sugatas of the ten directions; (7) consecration as the great lord; (8) consecration as the perfected lord of enlightened body, speech, and mind.
This list has been useful in the textual analysis of the Supreme Pacification manual, since it cites the lines which begin and end each section, including one section break where all versions of the Eightfold Buddha Word have omitted the cited lines. The recitation perfection is classified into five:
(2) the essence mantra to be recited;
(3) radiating and re-absorbing (light-rays); (4) the number (of mantras) for the approach (Tib. bsnyen pa); (5) the method for absorbing the samādhi. The perfection of ritual action is introduced with reference to two sets of meditations appropriate in the context of wrathful rites: the three enlightened attitudes (Tib. dgongs pa gsum) and the three clarities (Tib. gsal ba gsum) (see edition 96, note 399). A list of thirteen parts to the rites follows, and it includes some preliminary points, such as marking out the four maṇḍalas, which are not specified in the manual itself. The short commentary ends with a brief reference to the final three perfections, of the place, timing, and the practitioner.
3.4. The Long Commentary (phun sum tshogs pa rgya cher ’grel ba; KAḤ84–126; TSH377–417; PH Vol. Ja 252,1–265,3; X689–732; Y722– 766)
Positioned next in the series of sections, the long commentary supplies a detailed analysis of much of the wording in our manual, and elaborates
____________
34 The initial list appears to be corrupted in TSH and XY—some items are missing and the list is not in the correct order. However, it seems most likely that this problem was present in the archetype, and KAḤ corrected it in line with the following outline of each section.
on the rituals and the associated meditations. It includes some reference to mantras and ritual actions not given in the manual, which would be familiar to tantric practitioners of these traditions. It begins with a discussion of this practice as combining the heart sādhana with action, and both peaceful and wrathful practice, by putting Karma Heruka at the centre of the maṇḍala. After commenting on the opening verses of section two, it expands at some length on the verse following the bodhicitta generation, which relates to the heruka’s heart (see edition 54, note 42). Here, the yogin should first meditate on himself as the Karma Heruka, with a sun disc at the heart on which is a green letter hūṃ, radiating light-rays, and the limbs of the merit accumulation
(prostrations, offerings, confessions, generating bodhicitta etc.) should be performed. Then the primordial wisdom accumulation is achieved through realising the natural wisdom qualities of the deity’s mind. An objection is raised to the applicability of the phurpa imagery, since a phurpa should be used for striking, but here it is explained that this enlightened heart is called “phurpa” since it strikes all discursive thoughts. The commentary then works through the seven perfections of our text, initially, however, re-ordering them in accordance with their logical order in the development of the practice, thus starting with the practitioner, the place, and the time, before proceeding with the (phurpa) form, the ritual action, consecrations, and recitation. The practice will
then inevitably bring siddhis, for the Samaya Lord, Vajrasattva, will not transgress his sacred word. In elaborating on the materials, shape and length of the ritual phurpa, the symbolic significances of the different types of materials and parts of the phurpa are supplied. The stage of consecrations is divided into those for one’s own benefit and those for the benefit of others. One’s own benefit is accomplished through the consecrations of oneself and the phurpa as the three kāyas. The dharmakāya consecration involves meditating on emptiness, while the sambhogakāya consecration generates the maṇḍala of deities, here expanded on with the initial generation of the vajra enclosure, a description of the celestial palace and the symbolic meanings of its features. The central Karma Heruka deity, his central retinue of four and the door-keepers are described along with their symbolic associations. Further, there is mention of the four mudrās, hūṃ syllables at the three
bodily centres and between the breasts, creating vajra body, speech and mind, and the inner jñānasattva deity. The appropriate meditation for the offerings and dissolution is outlined, and this leads into the nirmāṇakāya consecration of the phurpa as the ‘supreme son’ wrathful deity, whose attributes are interpreted in accordance with their tantric symbolism. The five family consecrations are explained with reference to the herukas of the five families consecrating oneself on the crown of the head, and the consecration of the phurpa through the five seed syllables. Up to here, the consecrations are accomplished through the yogic meditation, while the actual phurpa consecration follows with its body, speech and mind consecrations through the three syllables at the three parts of the phurpa
(edition 73–74) and the subsequent consecrations of the wrathful deities of the various families. Then there are consecrations for the benefit of others, referring to the series of hand mudrās listed in the Supreme Pacification ritual, through which the buddhas assemble, majestic powers are generated in the phurpa, and radiating sparks of fire transform the universe. The phurpa is then to be pelted with mustard seed miniature wrathful deities, and fumigated with gu gul incense. For the perfection of recitation, the commentary first outlines the meditation with the jñānasattva at the heart, and then discusses the different parts of the mantra. The perfection of ritual actions begins with a lengthy expansion of the lines of the root manual which refer briefly to the ritual of the site and the demarcation of the boundaries (edition 93–94), giving details of the associated meditations. The text moves on to the ritual preparations, indicating how the substances specified in the root manual
for the effigy relate to the tantric elixirs and their other symbolic connotations. The summoning ritual is then described, with the appropriate groups of goddesses emanated in turn to summon the obstacles, to bind and dissolve them into the effigy, and to make them joyful. The stages of the stabbing rite are explained in relation to the three clarities, and the planting of each of the phurpas into a different body part is in turn interpreted. The role of the mantras and mudrās of Mahābala, Vajra Teeth and Vajra Club are mentioned, as well as the pelting with mustard seeds and the incense fumigation. Details are given of the meditations to accompany the ritual of suppression beneath Mt. Meru. Although it seems slightly out of place, at this point the
commentary supplies further meditations for the rite of slaying, and in particular the sequence through which the consciousness of the negative forces is established in the consort's womb, and transforms into Vajra Bearer (Tib. rdo rje ’dzin pa). Finally, the closing rituals are discussed, and there is some attention given to the perfections of the timing, the place, and the practitioner. 3.5. The Visualisation Section (phun sum tshogs pa’i mngon par rtogs pa; KAḤ126–160; TSH419–450; PH Vol. Ja 266,1–277,2; X732–768; Y766–801)
Next is found a set of notes on the visualisations and meditations which should accompany the rituals. Unlike the two commentaries above, these notes do not work through our manual systematically, but rather focus on the specifics of visualisations needed to perform the deity generation and a number of the particular ritual actions mentioned in the text. They not only describe in detail the appearance of the different deities of the maṇḍala, but also work through complex sequences for emanating and dissolving deities and mentally performing the ritual processes. There is some repetition of material already covered in the long commentary, although this section tends to give more detailed description, while the
long commentary gives more attention to the symbolic import of the practices it covers. The section begins with a brief review of the preparations for conducting the wrathful ritual, which will be found elsewhere, while here the descriptions of the visualisation stages are given. For the initial ritual practice as summarised in the Supreme Pacification rite, first are explained the meditations for the four Immeasurables, and then a visualisation of oneself as Karma Heruka is to be performed according to the Great Perfection (Tib. rdzogs pa chen po) method, here presumably indicating an instantaneous visualisation. Then the maṇḍala of deities is projected into the sky in front, and emanating one’s ordinary body from the heart of the deity, prostrations and offerings are to be made. Appropriate recitations for confessions, going for refuge, supplication, and generating bodhicitta are given. For the ultimate bodhicitta, a version of a standard śūnyatā mantra is supplied. A series of meditations for the three kāya consecrations is given. After the dharmakāya consecration on emptiness, there are three
preparatory samādhis, beginning with a samādhi on demarcating the boundaries and establishing the vajra pavilion, and suppressing the worldly protectors of the ten directions. This is followed by a samādhi on generating the celestial palace, including visualisation of the elements which form the foundation arising in turn, and then the structure of the palace itself. The causal samādhi 35 consists of the meditation for generating Vajrasattva (see above, page 10–11). Then, the fruition sambhogakāya and nirmāṇakāya samādhis are described. For the sambhogakāya, there is the visualisation of the main maṇḍala of deities, including a visualisation of the mind, speech, and body herukas, as well as the jñānasattva deities, all of which are within the bodies of the
maṇḍala deities. Offering goddesses are then generated, offerings made and an invocation of the primordial wisdom maṇḍala. The five family herukas perform empowerment into the natural condition of the five primordial wisdoms, a torma is offered to dispel obstacles, and praises to the central deity are recited.36 There is then a samādhi for presenting the elixir (Tib. bdud rtsi sbyin pa’i ting nge ’dzin), through which the essence juice of the five families is imbibed by the deities and consecration is received. The nirmāṇakāya samādhi focuses on generating the phurpa as the ‘supreme son’ (Tib. sras mchog) deity, involving a meditation on the sexual union of the central deities and the arising of the deified phurpa deity from their bodhicitta fluid. Its consecration as the five primordial wisdoms is effected with five seed syllables at different parts of the phurpa, while the body, speech and
____________
35 This set of three preparatory samādhis (sbyor ba dang po’i ting nge ’dzin) is not quite equivalent to the standard Mahāyoga set of three samādhis, which is doubtless also part of the general background to our text. Although not apparently specified in the Action Phurpa text, one annotation in IOL Tib J 331.III mentions the three samādhis (see edition 54, note 38), and the context makes it probable that the annotation is referencing the standard set. Moreover, the set are discussed explicitly in the two short manuscripts which preceed IOL Tib J 331.III in the Stein collection IOL Tib J 331.I and II; see Cantwell and Mayer, Early Tibetan Documents on Phur pa from Dunhuang, 72. Here, although the third preparatory samādhi is given a similar name to the third in the standard set (here, rgyu rkyen gyi ting nge ’dzin), instead of applying to the seed syllable and its generation of the entire maṇḍala, including the palace, it is concerned only with the Vajrasattva generation.
36 In fact, the central Lord here seems to be Samantabhadra in wrathful form or Chéchok (che mchog) Heruka, see above page 18.
mind consecration is to be performed next, but the text simply says that it can be done as previously given.37 For the consecration relating to qualities and action, there is then the consecration in the single-pointed heart primordial wisdom, with the phaṭ syllables on the blade embodying the action and the hūṃ syllables embodying the qualities. This is followed by a further sequence of invitations to the wrathful deities of the maṇḍala, praises and offerings. The text moves next to the meditations needed for the mantra recitation practice. Here, alternative possible sequences are given, but in either case, it seems that there is a double focus on oneself as the deity, with the jñānasattva at the heart,
and the phurpa as the phurpa wrathful deity outside. For the recitation, the nine seed syllables are given, while the words, māraya phaṭ are to be added for the period when benefitting others. The nine syllables are often given in the Vajrakīlaya traditions as the life-force seeds in the heart of the jñānasattva. The recitation ends with the dissolution of the deities apart from the central Karma Heruka, and there is a further sequence for offering tormas and elixir, and entrusting the deities with ritual actions. For the visualisations needed when performing the wrathful rites for the benefit of others, the text reviews the sambhogakāya meditations given above, adding a meditation on the deities of each of the five families
dissolving respectively into the crowns of the heads of the main five maṇḍala deities. Following the nirmāṇakāya consecration of the phurpa wrathful deity, the visualisations for the series of hand mudrās given in the root section (see edition 79–87) are described in detail, and the phurpa is empowered for the ritual performance. Next are given the visualisation sequences for the ritual of summoning the obstacles, followed by the striking ritual and the ritual of transference. Here, the meditations on absorbing the vital qualities of life into one’s own heart, on purifying defilements and liberating the consciousness are given at length, including discussion of the stabbings of the different body parts of the effigy, and the subsequent mantras and mudrās, already expanded upon in the long commentary. Finally, the meditations for the suppression ritual are supplied, with the visualisation of Amoghasiddhi
____________
37 It would appear that the visualisation section is here cross-referencing the description given in the long commentary (KAḤ106; TSH398; PH259,2–258,3; X711; Y744–745; see above page 23).
as Karma Heruka, suppressing the negative spirits with Mt. Meru, as well as appropriate recitations for the concluding torma offerings and entrustment of the ritual action. 3.6. The Invocation Manual (phun sum tshogs pa’i ’phrin las bskul byang; KAḤ160–221, TSH453–503, PH Vol. Nya 1,1–16,3; X768–828, Y801–864)
The set of practice texts is concluded with a fifty plus page manual, supplying ritual formulas, liturgies, detailed instructions and further additions to augment the practices. As mentioned above (see page 17), some of the material here might represent generic ritual categories, added to supplement the main deity practice, yet there seems little doubt that the manual was compiled for the particular practice, so that the text as a whole would include sufficient instructions and recitations to enable a practitioner to enact the rituals fully. Having mentioned the perfections of the practitioner, the place and the time, the manual starts by giving attention to the necessary preliminaries, including setting up the maṇḍala
and gathering the ritual materials. There is some repetition of information given already in the preliminary section, but here there is a more comprehensive list of the substances required, and discussion of preparatory practices such as sūtra readings etc. Details are given of the rituals to delineate the outer and inner boundaries of the sacred space, and here, the appropriate visualisations and liturgies are supplied. Recitations follow for consecrating the area where the maṇḍala is to be built, for drawing the maṇḍala lines and for consecrating the colours to be applied to the different features of the maṇḍala. The different ritual specialists are mentioned, and the opening meditations, after which is given the liturgy for generating the elements constituting the basis of the maṇḍala palace, followed by the palace itself and the main maṇḍala deities.38 After a resumé of mantras for the consecrations mostly given in
____________
38 Here, the central heruka figure is not named and the recitation does not give his colouring or implements. The retinue deities are named but there would appear to be a discrepancy in giving Amṛtakuṇḍalin (the khro bcu deity generally given in the north) instead of the expected Mahābala. It is uncertain whether this is due to transmissional error, perhaps based on familiarity with the standard khro bcu arrangement, or whether the verses may have been applied from another source when the manual was compiled.
the visualisation section, there are verses for generating the maṇḍala of the material phurpas. Recitations for prostrations and the different types of offerings are given next. More information is given on various types of phurpas than is found in the other sections, and then there are further lengthy recitations for inviting the deities of the different buddha families, and for dissolving them into and consecrating the phurpa, generating majestic splendour in it. Here, the description of the ‘supreme son’ deity appears to combine features of the dark blue four-armed phurpa deity described in the root section (see edition, 67–72) with the green Karma Heruka deity, who has three faces, six arms and different implements. There are further verses for empowering the phurpa, and cleansing it of any defilement. A section on the recitation perfection
supplies additional mantras for the four ritual actions. There is a summary of some of the actions for the wrathful ritual, with verses given for emanating the messengers and summoning the obstacles into the effigy. A long recitation, evoking the qualities of the phurpa, is given for the stabbing ritual, followed by Vajra Claw’s mantra, and then verses for striking the different parts of the body, and for the series of mantras and mudrās, as well as for the incense fumigation and pelting with mustard seeds, which are performed after the slaying ritual. Additional recitations are given for stabbing rites in connection with the four ritual actions. The
text then supplies appropriate verses to recite for the suppression ritual which should prevent any reversal of the ritual action. There is a verse for slicing up the effigy, further verses on fumigating and pelting with mustard seeds, and then verses for the different types of wrathful tormas and other wrathful offerings. Some notes are given on the subsequent burnt offerings ritual, in which the remains of the effigy are burnt, and buried in a skull-cup. A recitation is given for the dance of suppression which accompanies such burial rites. A long section focuses on the imbibing of siddhis which are to be consumed at the end of the practice
session, enjoining the deities of the different buddha families, and then those connected with the material phurpas, to be present and bestow the siddhis. Finally, the invocation manual contains a ritual for the initiation of students. The emphasis here is on entrusting the different types of ritual phurpas and other ritual implements into the hands of the students, such that the students become empowered to meditate and become
inseparable from the deity’s body, speech and mind, and to perform the visualisations and different ritual actions in turn. Also, there are empowerment verses relating to the various tormas, the gu gul incense and the mustard seeds, initiating the students into the full range of ritual components of the practice.
4. Versions of the Action Phurpa of the Eightfold Buddha Word
Since Nyang-rel’s Eightfold Buddha Word became an important cycle of tantric practice throughout the Nyingma (Tib. rnying ma) tradition, there are numerous practice compilations, but not so many collections survive which include the root tantras and the revelatory texts themselves. It is salutary to reflect that there were doubtless many manuscript collections of the Eightfold Buddha Word cycle in Nyingma monastery libraries throughout Tibet, but following the devastation of the Chinese invasion and Cultural Revolution in the 20th century, we are left with a small number of witnesses. That said, the contemporary dedication of Tibetans
to restoring their literary heritage has led to the surfacing of further texts (including our X and Y manuscripts—see below) which are now continually becoming available, and in due course, it may become possible to clarify the puzzles resulting from the partial evidence currently accessible to scholarship. At the time of writing, this Action Phurpa text is found within five extant collections, which essentially break down into three versions:
4.1. The Kathok (Tib. Kaḥ thog) Printed bKa’ brgyad bDe gshegs ’dus pa in 13 vols (KAḤ), TBRC W1KG12075.
The Byin rlabs phur pa’i sgrub pa [Consecrations through the Phurpa Practice], vol. 9: 55–221, is presented as a single text with six sections, the second of which is the Zhi ba’i mchog brtan g.yo ba’i cho ga [Supreme Pacification, the Ritual for the Animate and Inanimate World] vol. 9: 62–77, corresponding to the Dunhuang text IOL Tib J 331.III. Bibliographic Note on the collection: “Reproduced from the sole known surviving set of prints from the Kaḥ-thog blocks from the library of H.H. Dudjom Rinpoche.”
Although I have assumed that this version represents the Kathok prints, it has to be said that the Buddhist Digital Resource Center (BDRC) images more closely resemble a manuscript collection than a blockprint reproduction. Not only does each volume have a handwritten contents list—which could have been added—but the appearance and shape of the lettering and the fact that many of the lines are not very straight, might suggest the possibility that this was a handwritten copy of the prints rather than a simple reproduction. If so, errors in the hand copying might account for the relatively high level of scribal errors for a blockprint.39
4.2. The Tsamdrak (Tib. mTshams brag) bKa’ brgyad bDe gshegs ’dus pa in 13 Vols (TSH), TBRC W22247 There are six texts constituting the Action Phurpa, texts labelled, shu– khe, vol. 9: 343–503, the second of which is the Byin brlabs phun sum tshogs pa phur pa’i bsgrub pa bi mā las mdzad pa zhi ba’i mchog [g]tan spo ba’i cho ga [[[Phurpa]] Practice for the Perfection [of] Consecrations Composed by Vimala(mitra), the Supreme Pacification (through) the
Ritual of Permanent Transference], vol. 9: 351–365, corresponding to the Dunhuang text IOL Tib J 331.III. Bibliographic Note on the collection: “represents the redaction of Gongra Lochen Zhenpen Dorje (1594–1654) preserved at Tsamdrak Monastery in Bhutan.” 4.3. The Phurdrup Gönpa (Tib. phur sgrub dgon pa) bKa’ brgyad bde gshegs ’dus pa Version (PH), EAP310/3/1/7 and EAP310–3–1–8 There are six texts constituting the “Action Phurpa”, texts labelled, shu– khe, EAP images vol. Ja: 239,1–277,2, and vol. Nya 1,1–16,3. The second is the Byin brlabs phun sum tshogs pa phur pa’i bsgrub pa bi mā
____________
39 Tibetan blockprints are not always carefully edited or corrected, however: a twelve volume xylograph print edition of bDud ’dul rdo rje’s collected revelations from Seng ri sgar in the Kaḥ thog area has numerous spelling errors: Chapter 5 in Cathy Cantwell, Dudjom Rinpoche’s Vajrakīlaya Works: A Study in Authoring, Compiling and Editing Texts in the Tibetan Revelatory Tradition (Sheffield: Equinox, 2020), 117. A feature which might seem to strengthen the likelihood that the Eightfold Buddha Word collection is indeed a printing, despite appearances, is that the annotations on the root tantras are positioned on the main lines, and only slightly smaller than the main text.
las mdzad pa zhi ba’i mchog [g]tan spo ba’i cho ga [[[Phurpa]] Practice for the Perfection [of] Consecrations Composed by Vimala(mitra), the Supreme Pacification (through) the Ritual of Permanent Transference], Volume Ja: Text labelled, su, EAP images 242,1–247,2, corresponding to the Dunhuang text IOL Tib J 331.III.
4.4. An dbu med Manuscript bKa’ brgyad bDe gshegs ’dus pa Collection in 8 Volumes (X), TBRC W2PD17479
The Byin rlabs phur pa’i bsgrub pa [Consecrations through the Phurpa Practice]), vol. 6: pdf 659–828, is presented as a single text with six sections, the second of which is the Zhi ba’i mchog gtan g.yo ba’i cho ga) [[[Ritual]] of Movement [into] the Permanent Supreme Pacification], vol. 6: pdf 666–682. Provenance unknown.
4.5. An dbu med Manuscript bKa’ brgyad bDe gshegs ’dus pa Collection in 9 Volumes (Y), TBRC W2PD20239
The Byin brlabs phur pa’i bsgrub pa [Consecrations through the Phurpa Practice], vol. 6: 693–865, is presented as a single text with six sections, the second of which is the Ritual of Movement [into] the Permanent Supreme Pacification, vol. 6: pdf 700–716. Provenance unknown. The Kathok blockprint (KAḤ) and the Tsamdrak manuscript (TSH) represent the most extensive Eightfold Buddha Word collections in 13 volumes, and in both cases our text is found in vol. 9, although the two versions carry significant variants. The Kathok blockprint was
apparently the only printed version (vol. 1: Preface), although as noted above, the extant copy appears in the BDRC images to resemble a handwritten manuscript. It shows some sign of editorial work to modernise or regularise spellings and punctuation, but it carries some serious scribal lapses from which the editorial work was apparently unable to recover. The two Eightfold Buddha Word collections from Bhutan, the Tsamdrak manuscript in 13 volumes and the Phurdrup Gönpa manuscript in ten volumes, give a different layout to the material, each section presented as a separate text with its own title page. Two dbu med manuscript collections of the Eightfold Buddha Word have recently become available—one in a total of eight volumes, which I have labelled
X, and the other, which I have labelled Y, in slightly larger writing in nine volumes. In both, our text is found in vol. 6. Unfortunately, although BDRC has supplied an excellent colour reproduction of the manuscripts, they give no information on their provenance, not even a note as to where or from whom they acquired the copies. One possible clue may come from the colophon added to the Phurpa root tantra found in vol. 2 of X (p.762), apparently saying that the copy—at least of that root tantra—derived from one belonging to Rindzin Künzang Shérap (Tib. Rig ’dzin Kun bzang shes rab), who is surely the Rindzin Künzang Shérap (1636–1698, TBRC ID P655) who was the first throne-holder of the Pelyül (Tib. dPal yul) Monastery. Possibly, then, this manuscript collection X may come from Pelyül.
5. Stemmatic Relationships between the Six Versions of the Second Section of the Action Phurpa Text, with Reference also to Readings in the Other Sections of KD
5.1. The Two Main Branches of the Transmission
A stemmatic analysis of the second section corresponding to IOL Tib J 331.III unsurprisingly shows that the Dunhuang version stands alone, and that the Eightfold Buddha Word versions must all have shared a hypearchetype which the Dunhuang text does not. When one has a bipartite stemma, it may be impossible to tell which of the two readings are the earliest, but in this case, there are some indicative errors shared by the Eightfold Buddha Word versions which cannot have been the
earlier reading (improved by the Dunhuang transmission). Most strikingly, in the case of two omitted passages necessary to the text (KAḤ66, 67; TSH356, 357; PH243,3; X671; Y705; DUN3v–4r, 4v; see edition 75–76, 79–80), the commentarial material which follows in the Eightfold Buddha Word versions cites some of the missing lines, demonstrating that the lines must still have been there when the commentary was written. Amongst the many other variants between the two editions, several seem most likely to represent shared errors of KD: ’og tu: DUN steng du
bzhugs pa: DUN bzhags pa’
stag: DUN ltag bskul: DUN bsgul phur: DUN bur DUN inserts lha ’I DUN omits dur khrod du dbug/dbugs: DUN bkug DUN omits rdo rje rgya gram gyi lus: DUN sus rnams: DUN gnyis ltag/stag: DUN lhag bskyed: DUN bkyed.
In most of these cases, either the KD reading is less coherent or appropriate for the context, and/or the commentary in other parts of the Action Phurpa text would seem to favour the DUN reading. In one case—KD’s insertion of rdo rje rgya gram gyi—it appears that an annotation has intruded into the main text. The textual assessment has been helped also by the existence of parallel passages in a number of Ancient Tantra Collection texts, and especially the version of the text in the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud [[[Tantra]] of the Perfections of Ritual Action]. Virtually the whole text is included within its Chapters 8 to 11.40 The sections are ordered differently and the tantra is broken up by the addition of chapter openings and endings, but is otherwise the same. Of course, these NGB tantras are separate texts from ours, and the archetype of our Action Phurpa text need not have shared all their readings of the shared material, yet where these NGB sources support the DUN reading in our text, it would seem to increase the likelihood of the presence of the reading in our archetype.
The Dunhuang text has a number of significant scribal errors and other variants too. It omits the section title and first words for the perfection of consecrations (DUN2r, see edition 60, note 88), which are clearly needed to introduce the topic. It also omits a long string of mantras (DUN2v, see edition 64, note 129), although in that case, it is uncertain whether the mantras have been added or subtracted. Although they are needed at this point in the ritual, there are other necessary
____________
40 Cantwell and Mayer, Early Tibetan Documents on Phur pa from Dunhuang, 76–87.
mantras found only in the other sections of the text in KD. Variant readings most probably in error in DUN include:
DUN omits mgo yan chad: DUN man chad DUN omits ral pa DUN omits ma ra na DUN inserts rgyab DUN omits ’khor lo ’bar ba rab tu DUN omits gtor ma nag.
There are also many further variants, such as a longer version of a mantra (DUN9v, see edition 119, note 647), where it is uncertain which version is the archetypal reading.
5.2. The Kaḥ thog KD Version (KAḤ)
The relationship between the Eightfold Buddha Word versions themselves is less clear. There is no doubt concerning the identification of the three main versions outlined above (page 29–32), but what is a little less certain is whether two out of three form a separate line of descent. First, to consider the three main versions in turn, the Kathok print has recensional differences from the other versions: an attempt has been made to render the mantras with obvious Sanskrit equivalents into their correct spelling, and other spellings have been corrected into their standard forms. Although less clear in section two, there would seem to be further instances of editorial intervention in the other sections of the text. In particular, at least two lists appear to have been re-worked to achieve a more logical or consistent order. KAḤ’s list of the eight subsections of the consecration perfection in the short commentary (KAḤ80, TSH371, PH Volume Ja 249,2, X684–685, Y718, see page 21, note 34 above) conforms to the discussion below.41 KAḤ’s version of a list apparently of seven points in connection with the consecration perfection in the invocation manual (KAḤ179, TSH469, PH vol. Nya 6,2, X786, Y821) resolves an incoherency in the numbering, by dividing
____________
41 KAḤ’s list of the sub-sections of the recitation perfection in the short commentary (KAḤ82) also differs from the other versions, reversing the order of two of the categories, although in that case, KAḤ most likely has a transmissional error, since its order neither conforms to the discussion, nor to any obvious logic.
one of the five points listed into two, and by adding a further point based on the recitations given below. It is conceivable that KAḤ has preserved an earlier reading corrupted in the other versions, but this seems less likely than the explanation of editorial work in KAḤ, in part because other evidence suggests the likelihood of KAḤ sharing a hypearchetype with X and Y, which would exclude the possibility of it preserving archetypal readings corrupted in exactly the same manner by the TSH/PH group and the X/Y group. Moreover, in the case of the list in the invocation manual, KAḤ’s list does not seem exactly to correspond to the text following, and one wonders whether the problem may be simply that the archetype had an error only in the number given—it seems quite likely that five points were intended.
KAḤ has numerous transmissional errors, and it is virtually inconceivable that any of the other versions could have copied or descended from it. Examples in the second section of the text include:
gtan: KAḤ brtan g.yas: KAḤ g.yon mthe bong gshibs: KAḤ mthe bong gnyis gshibs byin: KAḤ byin rlabs ma ra na phaṭ: KAḤ mā ra ya phaṭ KAḤ omits ci ran cig ti ka ya wak tsitta: KAḤ wāk tsitta dgu: KAḤ bsgu bcol: KAḤ btsal bskor ba’o: KAḤ bskrod pa’o
In other sections of the text, errors include:
thod: KAḤ ’od (KAḤ57, TSH345, X661)42 ’phro ’du bstan pa dang: bsnyen pa’i grangs bstan pa dang: KAḤ bsnyen pa’i grangs bstan pa dang: ’phro ’du bstan pa dang: (KAḤ82, TSH373, X687) byang chub sems la dga’ ba ni bya ba ni: KAḤ byang chub sems dpa’ zhes bya ba ni: (KAḤ82, TSH373, X687; here, the root manual is cited, and KAḤ’s error is clear) gnas: KAḤ gdab (KAḤ89, TSH383, X694) rtse zur gsum: KAḤ rtse thung gsum (KAḤ90, TSH384, X695)
____________
42 Here and in the examples below, I only note pagination for one witness of each of
the three versions, but the other witnesses have been checked.
BuddhistRoad Paper 7.2. Cantwell, “The Action Phurpa (’phrin las phur pa)”
rang bzhin gyi: KAḤ gzhan gyis (KAḤ101, TSH394, X707) drag po’i: KAḤ drug po’i (KAḤ103, TSH396, X709) KAḤ inserts yon tan (KAḤ104, TSH396, X709) rdul: KAḤ sdug bsngal (KAḤ122, TSH413, X729) thams cad: KAḤ rnams cad (KAḤ122, TSH413, X729) śrī heruka: KAḤ heruka śrī (KAḤ129, TSH423, X735) sems: KAḤ byang chub sems (KAḤ133, TSH426, X739) gzugs: KAḤ gdugs (KAḤ142, TSH434, X748) gze mas, KAḤ gzims; X/Y gzi mas (KAḤ148, TSH440, X756, Y789; here, it seems likely that KAḤ inherited X/Y’s already corrupted reading, but corrupted it further) mthing ka: KAḤ nag (KAḤ150, TSH441, X758) sked/rked: KAḤ rkang (KAḤ152, TSH443, X759) ’du byed: KAḤ ’du shes (KAḤ156, TSH446, X763) gsung mchog: KAḤ phrin las (KAḤ184, TSH471, X791)
5.3. The Transmission Represented by the Bhutanese Manuscripts (TSH and PH)
The two manuscripts from Bhutan must have shared a hypearchetype which the other versions do not. Taking the Action Phurpa text as a whole, we have noted the recensional differences in the presentation of TSH and PH: the text is broken up into six separate texts, each given their own title, title page and text identification letter. The TSH/PH version also gives three sets of symbolic lettering (mkha’ ’gro brda yig) on its first title page (TSH343; PH vol. Ja 239,1), and then a further set at the beginning of the visualisation section (TSH420; PH vol. Ja 267,1). The other versions do not carry any such symbolic lettering at the start of their integrated text, although they do share TSH/PH’s set before the visualisation section (KAḤ126, X732, Y766), and they also give a similar set before their versions of the long commentary (KAḤ84, X689, Y722). It is hard to be certain, but it would appear likely that at least some of these instances stem from the KD archetype, and surely the set marking the visualisation section. But the others have either been lost in KAḤ, X and Y, or added in TSH/PH. There are many further examples where TSH/PH gives a distinctive reading, but not many within the second section of the text which can be clearly identified as shared errors. Variant readings which seem clearly to be in error in TSH/PH include:
zhi: TSH PH zhing
rang gi: TSH PH rang nyid
’greng: TSH PH ’breng
rked: TSH PH skyed
TSH PH omit phur pa
sta/stwa re’i ltag: TSH PH rta gri’i stag
phul: TSH PH shul.
Clear errors in other sections of the text include don drug rather than don yod sgrub found in KAḤ X Y, and brgyud rather than rgyu (KAḤ83, TSH374, PH vol. Ja250,1, X688); also, omission of yab (TSH380, PH vol. Ja 253,2); padma zur gsum for smad zur gsum (KAḤ94, TSH387, PH vol. Ja254,3, X699); dmar po for mang po (KAḤ95, TSH389, PH vol. Ja 256,1, X701); ’phreng for ’phrad (KAḤ109, TSH401, PH vol. Ja261,1, X714); sug pa’i for srub ma’i (KAḤ162, TSH456, PH vol. Nya1,2, X770); gnas for gnar and mahā for badzra (KAḤ196–197, TSH482, PH vol. Nya9,3, X803); gsung gnyis sbyang for gā’u gnyis sbyar (KAḤ219, TSH501, PH vol. Nya15,3, X826). They also share omissions of the following necessary lines: dkyil ’khor la dkyil ’khor (XY dal) thim nas: (KAḤ102, TSH394, PH258,1, X707); de bzhin gshegs pa bzhugs par byin gyis brlab par bya ste: dang po lag gi ’du byed kyis brlab par bya ste: (KAḤ150, TSH441, PH Volume Ja273,3, X757). There are many other instances where major differences in the readings of TSH/PH and KAḤ/X/Y might represent corruption in either line. For example, TSH and PH omit: hūṃ: phyag rgya bzhi dang ldan pas dbang bskur bas: (KAḤ216, TSH498, PH Volume Nya16,1, X823), which most probably represents a scribal omission, but since the line is repeated, it is just possible that this might represent a dittographical error in KAḤ/X/Y.
The differences between the two manuscripts from Bhutan are so small that at least on the basis of this short collated section, together with selected readings of the larger text, it is even possible that either could have been copied from the other. For example, for duṣṭan in a mantra, PH gives du stan, but TSH gives only stan. TSH gives rta gri where PH gives sta gri. Here, TSH may be corrupting PH’s reading, but alternatively, PH may be correcting TSH’s reading, even unreflectively. Similarly, PH alone gives gnyid for bdag nyid, and ’am gsum ’am for
’am gsum ’bum, but the correct readings could have been conjectured in TSH.43 To demonstrate the shared descent, the stemma diagram gives a hypearchetype c, but it is possible that there is no c, and that TSH descends from PH, or that PH descends from TSH.
5.4. The Transmission Represented by the Unidentified Manuscripts (X and Y)
Third, the dbu med manuscripts I have labelled X and Y share many readings unlikely to have been in the archetype, and must have shared a hypearchetype which the other versions do not. I have not identified any obvious recensional interventions in these copies, but they were clearly made with care, and are remarkably free from major transmissional errors, apart from those apparently shared with KAḤ. The writing in X seems rather neater and smaller than that of Y, and there are slightly less errors in X. They have many features in common which are typical of dbu med manuscripts, such as abbreviations and contractions, and they share rubrication in red ink of section beginnings or significant lines.44 They also share some of their own distinctive spelling conventions, such as consistently spelling mthe or mthe’u without the prefixed letter ma, and frequently giving the word, dal (for maṇḍala), rather than dkyil ’khor. Variant readings in the second section which seem likely to be in error (or at least not archetypal readings) in X/Y include:
skur: X Y sku dkrol: X Y bkrol X Y insert bo khro bo: X Y khro mo bdag: X Y dag gsor: X Y bsor
In the other sections of the text, variants which clearly seem to indicate shared errors include ldan for ldab/bldabs (KAḤ163, TSH457, X770,
____________
43 In the long commentary (TSH393, PH256,3), TSH omits dga’ bas rdo rje lcags sgrog bsnams pa dang:, which would seem to make it unlikely that PH copied or descended from TSH, yet the line is necessary here, since one needs all four door-keepers and TSH gives only three, so even this omission could have been conjectured by PH. 44 The style of rubrication is shared, but X and Y frequently make different decisions about which words, phrases or lines to rubricate.
Y804), and gzhengs for dben (which KAḤ corrupts to dbyen; KAḤ168, TSH461, X776, Y809). In other cases, the X/Y variants do not always represent errors, but nonetheless, would seem to illustrate their separate descent from the other two lines, such as in the following examples: KAḤ114 brtan ma, TSH405 sgran pa, X719 Y753 sbran ma (here, only KAḤ makes good sense, and was perhaps attempting to correct a corrupt reading)
KAḤ143 oṃ badzra kī li kī li kī la ya hūṃ; TSH435 oṃ badzra kro ta ki li ki la ya hūṃ; X750 Y783 oṃ badzra ki li ki la ya hūṃ (the mantra is not given in the root section, so it is hard to choose between the three versions) KAḤ inserts thal gyi; X Y insert la gyi, X with a cross above (it seems that X/Y probably originally shared an error with KAḤ, and either corrupted it further, or KAḤ sought to emend it to something meaningful. But here X has realised the error, and noted it for deletion; KAḤ155, TSH445, X763, Y796)
KAḤ180 gcum; TSH469 cung; X787 Y822 lcim (we witness three different readings, none of which make good sense) KAḤ190 dri’i khrus; TSH477 dril lo: de nas khrus; X797 Y833 dril khrus (any of these three readings could work, but they have different meanings).
Although sharing many readings, X and Y both have their own individual errors too, making it unlikely that either copied the other directly. Single errors of X in the second section not shared by Y include:
nag: X nan
bsnyen: X bsnyan
sum: X omits
Elsewhere in the text, X gives sgo for rtsangs/rtsang (KAḤ58, TSH346, X662, Y696), a visual error owing to copying from an dbu med source. Single errors of Y in the second section not shared by X include:
bstan: Y omits bstan: Y bsten na: Y omits gsung thugs: Y gsuṃ ba’i bar du: Y bar du du lnga’i: Y omits pa rtse mo: Y omits lan: Y len
gyi/gyis: Y omits Y inserts la la: Y nas
Y also has a significant omission in the long commentary, omitting: byang chub sems la dga’ ba ni bya ba ni: (KAḤ88 TSH382 X693 Y726), and also omits gsum (KAḤ93 TSH387 X699 Y732).
5.5. The Proposed Stemma
Thus, we have the three lines of descent, and none of the copies are worthless witnesses.45 The next question is whether or not there is a further hypearchetype from which two out of three of the versions descend? Here, there is less certainty, yet as will be explained below, the most likely relationship between the three KD lines of transmission is that KAḤ and X/Y descend from a hypearchetype which was not an ancestor of TSH/PH. If, on the other hand, the apparent shared errors of KAḤ and X/Y can be explained by clever editorial work in the TSH/PH line, conjecturing a reading lost in hypearchetype b, or coincidental spelling variants etc. in KAḤ and X/Y, then we may have a situation of the three main versions all descending separately from b.
____________
45 Even TSH and PH have occasional minor variants, which may make it worth consulting both in cases of uncertain readings. For instance, in the short commentary, TSH gives sdeng, where PH gives gdeng, which is surely the intended reading representing the Bhutan transmission (see Edition 96 note 399). Here, however, it remains uncertain whether sdeng or gdeng was earlier: gdeng could have been conjectured.
Figure 1. Diagram of the Probable Stemma of The Supreme Pacification (through) the Ritual of Permanent Transference (zhi ba’i mchog gtan spo ba’i cho ga) from the Action Phurpa (’phrin las phur pa) section of the Eightfold Buddha Word, Embodying the Sugatas (bka’ brgyad bde gshegs ’dus pa).
a origo
b (a bde gshegs ’dus pa
transmission)
DUN, The
Dunhuang
manuscript
IOL Tib J
331.III
c (a Bhutanese
transmission)
d
KAḤ, The Kaḥ thog blockprint
version
Y, An dbu med
manuscript
version
e
X, An dbu med
manuscript
version
TSH, The
mTshams brag
manuscript
version
PH, The Phur
sgrub
manuscript
version
5.5.1. Evidence for Hypearchetype d
As mentioned above, there appear to be some errors shared by KAḤ and the X/Y group, but they are not entirely conclusive and thus the stemma is probable but not certain. Instances within the second section of the text include:
spo: KAḤ X Y g.yo
’das: KAḤ X Y ’dus
lcags sam: KAḤ X Y omit
nyid: KAḤ X Y omit
namkha’: KAḤ X Y mkha’
man chad: KAḤ X Y yan chad (DUN omits)
yan chad: KAḤ man chad; X Y man chad du (these two examples follow one another, and it is clear that there has been a transposition, but not obvious which is more appropriate. DUN has an omission on the first instance, but agrees with TSH/PH’s placement on the second.)
smug: KAḤ X Y smug nag
rdo rje: KAḤ X Y omit
sarba pa phaṃ: KAḤ X Y sarba pa; TSH sarba pā phaṃ; DUN sa rba pa pam (omission of phaṃ)
karma badzra: KAḤ X Y badzra karma
phur pa slar: KAḤ X Y sa slar; DUN slar phur pa
man chad mar: KAḤ yan chad yar; X Y yan chad mar (perhaps KAḤ
and X/Y shared the error of yan chad mar, and then KAḤ corrected mar to make it more coherent?)
An advantage of the readings in the second section is that we have the Dunhuang manuscript testament which can help us to establish the likely archetypal reading where KAḤ X Y and TSH/PH have different
readings. In the other sections, an apparent scribal corruption in KAḤ X Y might in some cases indicate corruption in the archetype, corrected in TSH/PH, and under such circumstances, a hypearchetype d would not be necessary to account for the corruption. However, there are a large number of apparent shared errors of KAḤ X Y throughout the text, and it would seem unlikely that TSH/PH made a wholesale attempt at editing and restoring corrupt text, especially since they preserved their own scribal corruptions apparently without attempting to correct them. But two examples of transmissional error in KAḤ X Y stand out, since it
would seem unlikely that TSH/PH could have inherited these readings and recovered from them:
(1) KAḤ X Y omit in the long commentary:
khrag mthung gi thugs ye shes kyi phyag rgya la de bzhin gshegs pa thams cad thabs [PH+kyi] ’dus pa’i rtags so: rked pa sor gcig la rgya mdud bya ba ni: (KAḤ93, TSH387, PH Volume Ja254,3, X699, Y732). This seems to have been an eyeskip error in KAḤ X Y, so that two points have been elided into one. The points relate to the two knots on the phurpa. The first knot is said to symbolise an embodiment of the tathāgatas’ upāya, while the knot at the waist symbolises an embodiment of the tathāgatas’ prajñā. Both knots are mentioned in the root text of the second section, so we would expect them both to be given.
(2) KAḤ X Y omit in the invocation manual:
longs spyod rdzogs pa’i skur byin gyis brlab pa dang: sprul pa’i skur byin gyis brlab pa dang (KAḤ189, TSH475–476, PH Vol. Nya7,3, X796, Y831).
Again, this appears to represent an eyeskip error: in reviewing the categories in the ritual, these points are needed, and they seem to be omitted in error in KAḤ X Y.
Other examples of apparent shared errors in KAḤ X Y would seem to add weight to the hypothesis of a hypearchetype d:
shar lho: shar phyogs (KAḤ58, TSH346, PH vol. Ja239,2, X662, Y696) ’chad: KAḤ phyed; X Y phyad
gtams KAḤ X Y bsdams (KAḤ109, TSH401, PH261,1, X714) ’khyil KAḤ X Y ’khyal (KAḤ109, TSH401, PH261,1, X715) sems can: KAḤ X Y omit (KAḤ134, TSH427, PH269,1, X739, Y773) dbul: KAḤ X Y bsdus (KAḤ145, TSH437, PH272,1, X752, Y785) KAḤ X Y insert mchod (KAḤ148, TSH439, PH273,2, X755, Y788) mched: KAḤ X Y mchod (KAḤ153, TSH444, PH274,2, X761, Y794) bya ba: KAḤ X Y badzra ba (KAḤ157, TSH447, PH275,3, X764, Y798)
ngar bskyed: KAḤ X Y rang bskyed (KAḤ157, TSH464, PH275,3, X764, Y798)
lnga yis: KAḤ X Y las mkhan gcig gis (KAḤ167, TSH460, PH Vol. Nya 3,1, X774, Y808)
stsal ba’i KAḤ X Y grangs kyang (KAḤ208, TSH492, PH vol. Nya 13,2, X815, Y852)
de nas zhal [PH zhas] zas la rol lo: KAḤ X Y omit (KAḤ211, TSH494– 495, PH Vol.Nya 13,3, X818, Y855)
KAḤ X Y insert hūṃ: phyag rgya bzhi dang ldan pas dbang bskur bas (KAḤ216, TSH498, PH Vol. Nya 16,1, X823, Y859; in this case, however, it is uncertain if this is an omission in TSH and PH or a dittographical error in KAḤ X Y)
5.5.2. Counter-evidence for Hypearchetype d
It would seem that there is enough evidence of shared errors between KAḤ and X/Y for a tripartite descent to appear less likely. But the possibility of hypearchetype d could be altogether excluded if an affiliation between TSH/PH and X/Y could be demonstrated. As discussed above when considering KAḤ, there are many occasions when the KAḤ reading appears preferable, although in most such cases, it is where the other versions have non-stardard spellings etc. which could have been in the archetype. The following examples represent the strongest evidence of possible shared errors between TSH/PH and X/Y in the second section:
dus phun sum tshogs pa dang: TSH PH X Y omit (this line is needed, but it could have been conjectured by KAḤ)
rakta dang: TSH PH X Y raktas; DUN rag ta dang (here, TSH PH X Y appear to have omitted dang, although it is possible that KAḤ might have introduced dang since the list continues with dang after the other items) sngags dang phyag rgya bya: TSH PH X Y phyag rgya dang sngags bya; DUN sngags dang phyag rgya (this appears like an indicative error. It is nonetheless conceivable that KAḤ might have corrected it, since sngags dang phyag rgya would seem to be a more conventional ordering.) srin mo: TSH PH X Y sring mo (here, DUN, KAḤ, the long
commentary, and the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud, agrees with the more likely reading, srin mo—see Edition page 127, note 739. It is possible that TSH/PH and X/Y independently introduced sring mo, or that the KD archetype had already done so, and KAḤ corrected it.) gdon: TSH PH X Y gnod; DUN gdon par (here, either gdon or gnod could fit. It seems possible that gdon was the archetypal reading at this point, but we need not assume a shared corruption between TSH/PH and
X/Y since all versions of both the long commentary and the invocation manual give gnod.)
The evidence of these examples does not seem strong enough to conclude that TSH/PH and X/Y had a hypearchetype not shared by KAḤ. The other possible affiliation is between KAḤ and TSH/PH, but despite the fact that X/Y not infrequently have good readings absent in the other two lines, these are generally where KAḤ and TSH/PH have corrupted the text in different ways. Also, KAḤ and TSH/PH often share modernised spellings (e.g. where X/Y give la stsogs, while KAḤ TSH PH give la sogs), but they could have corrected them independently. The strongest examples of apparent shared errors between KAḤ and TSH/PH in the second section are: mngag: KAḤ TSH PH man ngag (here, X/Y’s mngag could be intended as an abbreviation of man ngag rather than a preservation of mngag since there are numerous abbreviation
s in X/Y, so this one is not fully convincing as a shared error) gzas: KAḤ TSH PH bzas ma: KAḤ ma’ang; TSH PH ma yang In other sections of the text, we find: khro mang: KAḤ TSH PH khro mo (KAḤ146, TSH438, PH273,1, X753, Y786)
mkhar: KAḤ TSH khar (KAḤ158, TSH447, PH276,1, X765, Y798) gtor: KAḤ TSH gtong (KAḤ160, TSH449, PH276,2, X767, Y801) In these cases, the appropriate reading could have been conjectured in X/Y. There would seem, then, to be little evidence supporting an affiliation between KAḤ and TSH/PH.
6. Editorial Policy
A diplomatic edition of IOL Tib J 331.III has already been presented46 and readers interested in the particular features of the Dunhuang manuscript, including additional comments on its annotations and their placement in the text, can consult this previous work. 47 Here, the
____________
46 Cantwell and Mayer, Early Tibetan Documents on Phur pa from Dunhuang, Chapter 6.
47 The previous work contains also detailed information on the manuscripts which accompany it in the Stein Collection, and on the lengthy parallels with NGB texts, and
primary aim has been to represent rather the Eightfold Buddha Word version. However, where it is abundantly clear that the KD hypearchetype must have been in error, such as in the case of the omitted passages (see above page 32), while the Dunhuang manuscript preserves the earlier reading, I have given the DUN reading in the edition. In other cases, where the KD and DUN readings are at variance but there is uncertainty over which represents the archetypal reading, I have given KD’s reading, while drawing attention to DUN’s alternative in the apparatus and the translation. Furthermore, where the DUN reading is given in at least one of the three branches of KD’s transmission, I have tended to assume that it most probably represents a survival of the earlier
reading.48 I have also used stemmatic logic in assessing the most likely KD hypearchetypal readings where possible, such as in cases where TSH/PH and either KAḤ or X/Y share a reading. But while seeking to eliminate obvious scribal corruptions and where possible, to restore archetypal readings, this has not been done in a wholly mechanical manner. We know that the archetype already incorporated errors, and it is clearly worthwhile to seek to represent the intended meaning for the textual tradition. Thus, on some occasions, I have given a reading in the
edition which was less likely to have been present in the archetype, for instance, where other sections of the text would seem to support it (see the example of gdon/gnod discussed above). In any case, the edition draws attention to meaningful variants, both in the apparatus, and also in the translation. For the Nyingma textual tradition is not monolithic, and will happily tolerate diversity of understandings in its different transmissions. The aim of producing a readable text in line with the Nyingma traditions also means that there seemed little point in restoring all the non-standard spellings given in the archetype, especially where they have been corrected in one line of the transmission, and I have
____________
links with the broader Vajrakīlaya heritage; see Cantwell and Mayer, Early Tibetan Documents on Phur pa from Dunhuang, Chapter 5. The new edition nonetheless integrates many notes from the earlier edition which have relevance to the text beyond simply its Dunhuang instantiation.
48 In fact, whether there is a hypearchetype d or not, where KAḤ and TSH/PH (or TSH/PH and XY) give different corrupted readings, and an apparently uncorrupted reading is found in DUN and XY (or DUN and KAḤ), then we can be fairly confident that this uncorrupted reading is most likely the earlier.
relied on KAḤ’s careful editing in representing many of the mantra syllables, where their intended Sanskrit equivalents would seem clear. I have integrated edition, apparatus, translation and commentarial notes in a presentation which may be unconventional, yet in this context of an archaic text which it seems the tradition has lost sight of, it seems justifiable. This presentation maximises transparency in the editorial decision making, facilitates readers in making their own judgements of the relative merits of the editorial choices, and creates a translation which recognises alternatives without heavy-handedly favouring more apparently coherent readings, which may later turn out to be mistaken.
Critical Edition of the Second Section of the Action Phurpa: the Supreme Pacification (through) the Ritual of Permanent Transference
The Versions of the Text
(1) The Kathok KD version (KAḤ), TBRC W1KG1207 zhi ba’i mchog brtan g.yo ba’i cho ga, vol. 9: 62–77, section two of, byin rlabs phur pa’i sgrub pa, 55–222.
(2) The Tsamdrak KD version (TSH), TBRC W22247 Bka’ brgyad bde gshegs ’dus pa las: byin brlabs phun sum tshogs pa phur pa’i bsgrub pa bi mā las mdzad pa zhi ba’i mchog [g]tan spo ba'i cho ga, text labelled, su, vol. Ta: 351–365.
(3) The Phurdrup Gonpa
phur sgrub dgon pa KD (PH), EAP310/3/1/7 bka’ brgyad bde gshegs ’dus pa las: byin brlabs phun sum tshogs pa phur pa’i bsgrub pa bi mā las mdzad pa zhi ba’i mchog [g]tan spo ba’i cho ga, vol. Ja: text labelled, su, EAP images 242,1–247,2.
(4) The version from an eight volume dbu med manuscript KD collection (X), TBRC W2PD17479
zhi ba’i mchog gtan g.yo ba’i cho ga, vol. 6: pdf 666–682. As in many dbu med manuscripts, there are numerous abbreviations and contractions, as well as other typical manuscript copy features, such as numerals for numbers (1 for gcig etc.)—I have not burdened the apparatus by listing them here, and only note the actual variants.
(5) The version from a nine volume dbu med manuscript KD collection (Y), TBRC W2PD20239 zhi ba’i mchog gtan g.yo ba’i cho ga, vol. 6: pdf 700–716. Similar considerations to X (see above).
(6) The Dunhuang manuscript version (DUN), IOL Tib J 331.III
Note archaisms used in the Dunhuang manuscript: Virtually all the gi gu are reversed (all apart from phyir 1v.1, ni 6r.4, two instances of phyir 8r.3, and ni 11v.1). la stsogs for la sogs (but phun sum tshogs pa is given consistently); rin po ce (and ce for che in other words also); pa’ for pa; myi/mye for mi/me; ’phral ba for dpral ba; buddha is transliterated, ’bu ta (4v). The reversed gi gus and the multiple instances of the ya btags etc. have not been noted in the edition, so as not to overburden the apparatus, except where variant readings and annotations are noted. In those cases, the Dunhuang spellings are given in Tibetan, but note that in discussion, I follow t he convention of capitalising the reversed gi gu in transliteration.
1(KAḤ62) (TSH351) (PH242,1),2 (DUN1r) (X666)3 (Y700)4 5ཞི་བའི་མཆོག་ ༼ག༽ཏན་6 སྤོ་བའི་ཆོ་ག་བཞུགསྷོ༔7
(TSH/PH +From the Eightfold Buddha Word, Embodying the Sugatas, this is the Phurpa practice for the perfection [of] consecrations composed by Vimala[[[mitra]]],) The Supreme Pacification (through) the Ritual of Permanent Transference. (KAḤ For this Supreme Pacification, the Ritual for the animate and inanimate world) (XY For this Ritual of Movement [into] the Permanent Supreme Pacification) (DUN This is the
____________
1 DUN: ann., ༄།།སྤྱྀ་དེ་བཞྀན་གཤེགས་པ་ཐམས་ཆད་ཐུགས་རྗེ་འྀ་དབང་གྀས་སེམས་ཅན་ཞྀ་བས་མྱྀ་འདུལ་བ་འྀ་ དྲག་པ་འྀ་ལས་བྱ་བར་བསྟན་༐; [This] teaches about performing the destructive ritual actions by means of the compassion [of] all the tathāgatas universally for those sentient beings who cannot be tamed through pacifying.
2 TSH PH Text identification, upper folio, centre: su. The PH numbers refer to the EAP image numbers, followed after the comma by the sheet number, 1, 2 or 3 (each EAP image has three sheets which I have numbered from the upper to lower sheet). 3 666 of the pdf; 4v.6 of the specific text; as in KAḤ, X and Y, our text forms a section of a longer text, the other sections corresponding to the related materials found in TSH’s and PH’s separate texts accompanying this text (found before and following it). 4 700 of the pdf; 4v.7 of the specific text; see note above.
5 TSH PH give a title page, inserting before the specific title: ༁ྃ༔ བཀའ་བརྒྱད་བདེ་གཤེགས་ འདུས་པ་ལས༔ བྱིན་བརླབས་ཕུན་སུམ་ཚོགས་པ་ཕུར་པའི་བསྒྲུབ་པ་བི་མཱ་ལས་མཛད་པ་. 6 TSH PH is likely to intend གཏན་ here; this spelling is given in the preliminary section
before this one, where the subject matter is given as, ཞི་མཆོག་གཏན་སྤོ་ཡི་ཆོ་ག་ (TSH vol. 9: 344.2; PH vol. Ja: 240,1.2); note that here too, KAḤ gives, ཞི་མཆོག་བརྟན་གཡོའི་ཆོ་ག་; X and Y are also consistent with their version of the title here, giving, ཞི་མཆོག་གཏན་གཡོའི་ཆོ་ག་ (X vol. 6: 660.2–3; Y vol. 6: 694.2–3).
7 ཞི་བའི་མཆོག་༼ག༽ཏན་སྤོ་བའི་ཆོ་ག་བཞུགསྷོ༔: KAḤ ཞི་བའི་མཆོག་བརྟན་གཡོ་བའི་ཆོ་ག་ལ་; X Y ཞི་བའི་
མཆོག་གཏན་གཡོ་བའི་ཆོ་ག་ལ་; DUN: ༄། །ཞྀ་བ་འྀ་མཆོག་འཕོ་བ་འྀ་འཕྲྀན་ལས་བསྡུས་པ་འོ། (It is probable
that the earlier reading contained spo ba or 'pho ba, which are the active and passive forms of the same verb, with the sense of transferring the consciousness. This is the most meaningful reading here, while KAḤ’s brtan g.yo seems unlikely. In an dbu med source, spo can appear as g.yo, so X/Y’s reading may represent an intermediate reading on the basis of a scribal error, while KAḤ’s brtan g.yo was perhaps then incorrectly conjectured from tan g.yo or gtan g.yo.).
Supreme Pacification, the Concise Ritual Action of Transference; or: This is the Concise Ritual Action which [effects] Transference [into] the Supreme Peace.)
(TSH352) (PH243,1) (Y701) 8 བཅོམ་ལྡན་འདས་དཔལ་ཁྲག་འཐུང་གི་རྒྱལ་པོ་ལ་ཕྱག་ འཚལ་ལོ༔9
I prostrate to the Victorious Transcendent Glorious (Heruka) King of the Blood Drinkers!
10ཧཱུྃ་11 12ཤིན་ཏུ་13 ཁྲོ་བོར་14 (X667) གཏུམ་པ་15 ལ༔16
Hūṃ! For the extremely wrathful and furious,
____________
8 TSH PH insert །. 9 བཅོམ་ལྡན་འདས་དཔལ་ཁྲག་འཐུང་གི་རྒྱལ་པོ་ལ་ཕྱག་འཚལ་ལོ༔: DUN omits. 10 DUN: ann., དུར་ཁྲོད་ཀྱྀ་བགེགས་མ་ཏང་ཀ་རུ་ཏྲ་ལྟ་བུ་; [For] the charnel ground obstacles like Matanga Rudra.
11 ཧཱུྃ་: KAḤ inserts །; DUN omits.
12 This verse has a precise parallel which we find in several NGB texts. It is found in the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud's Chapter 8 (M Vol. Chi 1023.4–5), beginning the long parallelling with this text (see Cantwell and Mayer 2008: 68 note 3). It occurs in the Phur pa bcu gnyis’s Chapter 7, which is the chapter on the taming of Rudra (D vol. Pa 206r–v: ཤིན་ཏུ་ཁྲོས་ཤིང་གཏུམ་པར་འགྱུར། །ཞི་བས་ཕན་པར་མི་འགྱུར་ཏེ། །ཤེས་རབ་ཐབས་སུ་སྦྱོར་མཛད་ པ། །ཁྲོ་བོར་དེ་བཞིན་གཤེགས་ཀུན་མཛད།།). It is also found in Chapter 3 of the Myang ’das, the chapter which sets the scene for the detailed account of the taming of Rudra in Chapter 4. In the Myang ’das, a close parallel to the first line (in D vol. Zha 47v.1–2: ཤིན་ཏུ་ཁྲོས་ཤིང་ གཏུམ་པར་འགྱུར།) is followed some lines below (D Vol. Zha 47v.6–7) with: ཤིན་ཏུ་གདུག་ཅིང་ གཏུམ་པ་ལ། །ཞི་བས་ཕན་པར་མི་འགྱུར་ཏེ། །ཤེས་རབ་ཐབས་ཀྱི་ངོ་བོ་ལས། །ཁྲོ་བོར་དེ་བཞིན་གཤེགས་ཀུན་མཛད།.
13 ཏུ་: DUN དུ་. 14 ཁྲོ་བོར་: DUN ཁྲོ་ཞྀང་ (Note that the DUN reading is given in the citation of these lines in the invocation manual, KAḤ171, TSH463, PH Volume Nya3,3, X779, Y812.). 15 གཏུམ་པ་: DUN གཏུམ་བ་. 16 DUN: ann., དེ་བཞྀན་གཤེགས་པ་འྀ་མཛད་སྤྱོད་སྟོན་; the tathāgatas’ engagement in action is demonstrated.
ཞི་བས་ཕན་པར་17 མི་འགྱུར་ཏེ༔18 no benefit comes by pacifying [them];19 20ཤེས་རབ་ཐབས་21 སུ་སྦྱོར་བ་ཡིས༔ through conjoining wisdom and means, 22ཁྲོ་བོས་23 དེ་བཞིན་གཤེགས་ཀུན་24མཛད༔
through the wrathful deity the tathāgatas are all activated (KAḤ wrathfulness activates all the tathāgatas; TSH/PH: the wrathful deity activates (his) tathāgata body; DUN: all the tathāgatas act in the wrathful deity).
ཧཱུྃ་25 ཁྲོ་ལ་ཁྲོས་པའི་རྒྱལ་པོ་ཡིས༔26
Hūṃ! Through the king of wrathfulness towards wrath,
ཁྲོ་བ་27 ཉེ་བར་ཞི་མཛད་པ༔28
wrath is (DUN: the wrathful one[s] are) fully pacified;
____________
17 ཕན་པར་: DUN ཕན་བར་. 18 ཏེ་: TSH PH སྟེ་. 19 DUN: ann., ཆོས་༼ཟ?༽བ་མོ་བཤད་པ་ལ་སྩོགས་པའ་; explaining the profound Dharma and so forth. 20 DUN: ann., ཀ་ཁ་; presumably indicating “one [is wisdom], two [is means]”. 21 ཐབས་: DUN ཐཐབས་. 22 DUN: ann., དྲག་པོ་འྀ་ལས་བརྩམ་བ་འྀ་དགོས་ཆེད་བསྟན་; demonstrates the necessity for commencing destructive action.
23 ཁྲོ་བོས་: KAḤ ཁྲོ་བས་; DUN ཁྲོ་བོར་ (note that in the long commentary, KAḤ86, KAḤ comments on khro bo, suggesting an error in giving khros ba here.). 24 ཀུན་: TSH PH སྐུ་ (Note that TSH463, PH Volume Nya3,3, give kun in their citation of the lines in the invocation manual; the parallel NGB texts also agree with kun, see page 51, note 12 above.).
25 ཧཱུྃ་: KAḤ inserts །.
26 ཡིས་: TSH PH ཡི་; DUN: ann., ཧེ་རུ་ཀ་འྀ་༼རང་?༽བཞྀན་བསྟན༐ ཁྲོ་བོ་གང་ཡང་རུང་བ་ལ་བྱ་; The heruka’s nature is demonstrated. [He has] the capability of every kind of wrathful deity. 27 ཁྲོ་བ་: DUN ཁྲོ་བོ་.
28 TSH: this line is inserted in small letters at the bottom of the page.
ཁྲོ་ཞི་29 ཆེ་ལ་ཕྱག་འཚལ་ལོ༔30
(I) prostrate to the Great Wrathful [and] Peaceful [[[deity]]] (TSH/PH the Wrathful and Great [[[deity]]]),
3132(KAḤ63) ཚད་མེད་སྙིང་རྗེ་བསྐྱེད་པ་དང༔ 33
generating limitless compassion and བྱང་ཆུབ་སེམས་ལ་དགའ་བ་ནི༔ 34
rejoicing in the bodhicitta,
སྔོན་དུ་འགྲོ་བའི་ལམ་མཆོག་སྟེ༔ 35
is the supreme path for the foundation,
____________
29 ཞི་: TSH PH ཞྀང་ (Note that we find exactly the same variant in TSH and PH‘s citation of these lines in the invocation manual, where the other versions give zhi, KAḤ171, TSH463, PH Volume Nya3,3, X779, Y813. In contrast, the long commentary’s citation gives zhing in all three versions apart from TSH/PH which give, zhi; KAḤ87, TSH381, PH252,3, X692, Y726).
30 ལོ: DUN ཏེ་; DUN: ann., ཀ་ཁ་; presumably indicating, both wrathful and peaceful. 31 DUN: ann., བསྒྲུབ་པ་པོས་སྔོན་དུ་བྱ་བ་འྀ་ལས་བསྟན་ ཕྱག་འཚལ་བ་འ།; The preliminary actions to be performed by the practitioner are demonstrated. [You] should prostrate.
32 A parallel for the next twelve tshig rkang is given in the Phur pa bcu gnyis’s Chapter 8 (D Vol. Pa 212v): ལས་ཀྱི་དཀྱིལ་འཁོར་དམ་པ་ནི། །དང་པོ་ཚད་མེད་སྙིང་རྗེ་བསྐྱེད། །བྱང་ཆུབ་སེམས་ ལ་དགའ་བ་ནི། །སྔོན་དུ་འགྲོ་བའི་ལམ་མཆོག་ཡིན། །སྒྲུབ་ [K བསྒྲུབ་] པ་པོས་ནི་ནན་ཏན་བྱ། །ཁྲག་འཐུང་ཐུགས་ལ་ [M ཐུགས་སུ་; TRK ཐུགསུ་] གནས་པ་ནི། །ཡེ་ཤེས་རྩེ་མོ་མཆོག་ཡིན་ཏེ་ [K སྟེ་]། །ཧཱུྃ་གསུམ་ [K འསུམ་] ལས་ནི་འདས་ [K བཟླས་] པའི་ཕྱིར། །རྩེ་མོ་མེད་པའི་ལས་ [TR ལུས་] སུ་བསྟན། །འདི་ [MTRK དེ་] ནི་གཟུགས་ [D གཟུག་, followed by a lacuna for one letter; M གཟུང་] དང་བྱིན་རློབ་ [M རླབས་; TRK བརླབས་] དང༌། །བཟླས་ བརྗོད་དང་ནི་འཕྲིན་ [D ཕྲིན་] ལས་དང༌། །དུས་དང་གནས་དང་བདག་ཉིད་དང༌། །ཕུན་སུམ་ [K གསུམ་] ཚོགས་པ་ བདུན་པོ་ཡིས་ [R ཡིན་]། །ལས་གང་བསྒྲུབ་ [D སྒྲུབ་; K འགྲུབ་] པ་འགྲུབ་ [M གྲུབ་] པར་བྱེད།.
33 DUN: ann., ཀུན་རྫོབ་དང་བྱང་ཆུབ་ཀྱྀ་སེམས་ལ་ཕན་འདོགས་དོན་དམ་པ་འྀ་བྱང་ཆུབ་ཀྱྀ་སེམས་རྣམ་གཉྀས་ དང་ལྡན།; Endowed with two aspects, to bring benefit with bodhicitta conventionally [and] ultimate bodhicitta.
34 DUN: ann., དོན་དམ་པ་འྀ་བྱང་ཆུབ་ཀྱྀ་སེམས་; Ultimate bodhicitta. 35 ལམ་མཆོག་སྟེ: DUN ལམཆོག་ཡྀན་ཏེ་ (deletion in error, presumably for metrical reasons).
36བསྒྲུབ་37 པ་པོས་ནི་ནན་ཏན་བྱ༔38
[in which] the practitioner should earnestly strive.
39ཁྲག་འཐུང་ཐུགས་ (DUN1v) ལ་40 (TSH353) གནས་པ་ནི༔41
[That which] abides in the blood-drinker[’s] heart,42 ཡེ་ཤེས་རྩེ་མོ་མཆོག་ཉིད་དེ༔43
is identical with the supreme primordial wisdom [[[phurpa]]] point;
____________
36 DUN: ann., བྱང་ཆུབ་ཀྱྀ་སེམས་རྣམ་གཉྀས་དང་འོག་ནས་འབྱུང་བ་འྀ་སྙྀང་པོ་; The two aspects of bodhicitta and as below, the essence [[[Wikipedia:syllable|syllable]]] of origination. 37 བསྒྲུབ་: KAḤ སྒྲུབ་.
38 DUN: ann., ཕྱག་རྒྱ་དང་ཏྀང་ངེ་འཛྀན་རྣམ་གསུམ།; The mudrās and the three samādhis. 39 Here, the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud’s Chapter 8 starts again to parallel the text, following a passage which does not resemble any of our content here. From this point, the remainder of the text—in a slightly different order— is contained in the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud’s Chapters 8 to 11, with little added material apart from bridging passages which introduce and conclude each section.
40 ལ་: DUN སུ་ (the long commentary agrees with su in its citation, KAḤ89, TSH383, PH254,1, X694–695, Y728).
41 DUN 1r: ann., ཧེ་རུ་ཀ་ཐུགས་ཀྱྀ་ཕུར་པ་འྀ་རང་བཞྀན་; the true nature of the heruka heart Phurpa.
42 The parallel passage in the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud— at least in mTshams brag and gTing skyes editions, which end the line with ’di, although sDe dge shares Tib J 331.III's reading of ni—might seem to suggest a reading of, “This abiding in the blood-drinker's heart” (mTshams brag NGB vol. Chi, 1028.7). This would make equally good sense of the Tibetan of this line, although perhaps would not fit entirely comfortably with the lines above in this case. The long commentary relates this section to the primordial wisdom accumulation, in which the primordial wisdom of emptiness is the naturally abiding [[[phurpa]]] point in the heart, the supreme point arisen from all the other primordial wisdoms, KAḤ89–90, TSH383–384, PH254,1, X694, Y727–728.
43 de: KAḤ TSH PH ste; DUN: ann., ཆོས་ཀྱྀ་དབྱྀངས་རྣམ་པར་དག་པ་འྀ་ཡེ་ཤེས་; the primordial wisdom of the dharmadhātu total purity.
ཧཱུྃ་གསུམ་ལས་ནི་འདས་44 པའི་ཕྱིར༔45
since the actions of the three-fold hūṃ (or: the three hūṃs,)46 are transcendent47 (KAḤ X Y embodied),
རྩེ་མོ་མེད་པའི་ལུང་དུ་48 བསྟན༔49
[it] is taught as the scriptural authority (DUN action) without any [[[phurpa]]] point.
དེ་ཡི་50 གཟུགས་དང་བྱིན་རླབས་51 དང༔
Of this [the sections are]: the form, the consecrations, བཟླས་བརྗོད་དང་ནི་འཕྲིན་52 ལས་དང༔
the recitation, the ritual action,
____________ 44 འདས་: KAḤ X Y འདུས་ (all versions of the long commentary agree with ’das, KAḤ90, TSH383, PH254,1, X695, Y728; and apart from KAḤ, which repeats ’dus, the invocation manual also gives ’das, KAḤ189, TSH475, PHvol.8,8,2, X796, Y831). 45 DUN: ann., སྐུ་གསུང་ཐུགས་ཀྱང་ཐུགས་ཙམ་དུ་; even [[[buddha]]] body, speech, and mind [are] only [[[buddha]]] mind.
46 This might refer to three hūṃs, but is rather more likely to indicate a three-fold hūṃ. The syllable is made up of the letter ha, the ū and the ṃ; these elements are discussed in many tantric sources. The first Vajrasattva text in the same Dunhuang manuscript. considered here (IOL Tib J 331.I: 1v), refers to different parts of the syllable, hūṃ, associating them with the various emotional defilements. There too the interlineal comments refer to [[[buddha]]] body, speech and mind. Unfortunately, the long commentary does not help with this point.
47 Here, the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud (M Vol. Chi, 1028.7) gives bzlas for ’das, suggesting a reading of, “on account of the recitation actions of the three-fold hūṃ...”.
48 ལུང་དུ་: DUN ལས་སུ་ (all versions of the invocation manual agree with DUN’s las su,
KAḤ189, TSH475, PHvol.8,8,2, X796, Y831). 49 DUN: ann., མདོ་རྒྱས་པ་འ་; as the extensive sutra. 50 དེ་ཡི་: TSH PH དེའི་; DUN དེ་ནྀ་. 51 རླབས་: TSH PH X བརླབས་. 52 འཕྲིན་: KAḤ Y ཕྲིན་.
དུས་དང་གནས་དང་བདག་ཉིད་53 དང༔
the time, the place and oneself;
ཕུན་སུམ་ཚོགས་པ་བདུན ་པོ་ཡིས༔54
the seven perfections, through which
བཏབ་ན་ཅི་འདོད་སྦྱིན་ནོ་ཞེས༔
when striking, it is said that whatever [one] wishes will be granted. དམ་ཚིག་ (PH242,2) བདག་པོས་རབ་གསུངས་ཏེ༔55
[This] is well taught by the Samaya Lord; འདས་ན་ལྷ་ཡང་བརླག་གོ་ཞེས༔56
(who) says that even a deity will be destroyed if [they] transgress, རང་གི་57 བཀའ་ (Y702) ལས་རང་མི་འདའ༔58
[so] he himself does not transgress [his] own sacred word. དེ་ལ་ཕུན་སུམ་ཚོགས་པ་བདུན་དུ་བསྟན་59 ཏེ༔60
Here, [it is] taught as the seven perfections (TSH the seven perfections are taught; DUN Regarding these perfections, taught as sevenfold):
གཟུགས་ཕུན་སུམ་ཚོགས་པ་དང༔
the perfection [of] form;
____________
53 བདག་ཉིད་: PH གཉིད་. 54 DUN: ann., དེ་བདུན་དང་ལྡན་བར་བྱ་ནས་; having become endowed with these seven. 55 གསུངས་ཏེ་: TSH PH གསུངས་སྟེ་; DUN གསུང་ཏེ་; DUN: ann., རྡོ་རྗེ་སེམས་པས་སྔོན།; by Vajrasattva previously. 56 གོ་ཞེས་: DUN པ་འྀ་ཕྱྀར་; DUN: ann., དེ་ལས་འདས་བཞྀན་དུ་ལས་མ་གྲུབ་ན་; in accordance with the transgression, if not accomplishing the action. 57 གི་: TSH PH ཉིད་; X Y གིས་.
58 DUN: ann., ལྷ་དམ་ཚྀག་ལས་འདས་ན་ལྷར་མ་རུང་བརྫུན་པོ་ཆེར་འགྱུར་བས་; if the deity transgresses samaya, [he would] become a great liar unsuitable [to be] a deity. 59 བདུན་དུ་བསྟན་: TSH PH བདུན་བསྟན་; Y བདུན་དུ་; DUN ནྀ་བདུན་དུ་བསྟན་. 60 DUN: ann., རྒྱས་པའྀ་; in detail.
བྱིན་རླབས་61 ཕུན་སུམ་ཚོགས་པ་དང༔ the perfection [of] consecrations; (X668) བཟླས་བརྗོད་ཕུན་སུམ་ཚོགས་པ་དང༔ the perfection [of] recitation; འཕྲིན་62 ལས་ (DUN2r) ཕུན་སུམ་ཚོགས་པ་དང༔ the perfection [of] ritual action; (TSH354) དུས་ཕུན་སུམ་63 ཚོགས་པ་དང༔64 the perfection [of] time; གནས་ཕུན་སུམ་ཚོགས་པ་དང༔ the perfection [of] place, and བདག་ཉིད་ཕུན་སུམ་ཚོགས་པའོ༔ the perfection [of] oneself. དེ་ལ་གཟུགས་ཕུན་སུམ་ཚོགས་པ་ནི༔65 Here, for the perfection of form, ཐུགས་ཀྱི་ཕྱག་རྒྱའི་དབྱིབས་ལ་66 བྱ་སྟེ༔ [it] should be rendered in the shape of the heart [[[deity’s]]] mudrā:67
____________
61 རླབས་: TSH PH X བརླབས་.
62 འཕྲིན་: KAḤ ཕྲིན་.
63 སུམ་: DUN omits.
64 དུས་ཕུན་སུམ་ཚོགས་པ་དང༔: TSH PH X Y omit (TSH at the turn of the page).
65 ཕུན་སུམ་ཚོགས་པ་ནི་: DUN ནྀ་; DUN omits ། .
66 ལ་: KAḤ X Y omit.
67 Lopon P. Ogyan Tanzin comments that thugs here must refer to the deity, and his mudrā would mean his form or body, so the implication is that the shape and attributes of the phurpa should reflect the deity's own form. The long commentary (KAḤ92, TSH386, PH255,2, X698, Y731) is not very explicit but seems to suggest that the phurpa’s shape expresses the mudrā of the primordial wisdom of emptiness which is the nature of the deity's heart (see page 54, note 42 above).
(KAḤ64) སྐབས་འདིར་68 ལྕགས་སམ་69 ལྕགས་སྣ་70 ལྔ་འམ༔71
on this occasion, [make it from] iron, or five types of iron/metal or སེང་ལྡེང་ལ་སྩོགས་72 པ་ཚེར་མ་ཅན་གྱི་73 ཤིང་ལས༔74
Khadira (Acacia catechu) etc., thorny wood, out [of which],
____________
68 TSH PH insert ༔.
69 ལྕགས་སམ་: KAḤ X Y omit; DUN: ann., དྲག་པོ་འྀ་ཕུར་པ་འྀ་སྐབས་འདྀར་; For the occasion
of the destructive phurpa.
70 སྣ་: DUN omits.
71 DUN: ann., གནམ་ལྕགས་ཁྲོ་ཆུ་མྱྀ་སྤྲོ་ཐུང་བ་འྀ་མཚོན་ [སྡུར་(/རྡུར་)] མ་སྲོག་ཆགས་བསད་པ་འྀ་མཚོན་ཆ་
དུམ་བུ་ལྔ་འོ་; meteoric iron, molten [[[Wikipedia:iron|iron]]], [that from?] a weapon of [an] aggressive man, sdur/rdur ma [and] fragments [from?] a weapon which has killed beings makes five (only the first two categories of this list of five are completely clear here. sDur ma is of uncertain meaning. One possibility is that thur ma, needle/stick/spade, might be intended. It would not itself be altogether clear, although iron from old agricultural implements is sometimes included when making phurpas. sDur blang or sdur len can mean amber. The long commentary partially agrees with this list; it gives: meteoric iron; molten iron, the tip of a lance with which a being has been killed; an arrowhead with which a being has been killed; an [old] nail from a door; གནམ་ལྕགས་དང༔ ཁྲོ་ཆུ་དང༔ སྲོག་ཆགས་བསད་པའི་མདུང་རྩེ་དང༔ སྲོག་ཆགས་བསད་པའི་མདེའུ་དང༔ སྒོ་གཟེར་དང་ལྔ་ལ་བྱའོ་; KAḤ92, TSH386, PH255,2, X698, Y731.
Interestingly, the list has a clear parallel with that of the five types of iron/metal in the Myang ’da’s Chapter 8, D vol. Zha 54v.1. There we find meteoric iron [gnam lcags], iron mined from the ground [sa lcags], molten iron [khro chu], the tip of a weapon which has killed a human or horse [mi rta bsad pa'i mtshon rtse] and common iron [phal pa’i lcags]. In Chapter 13, the five are again referred to, D vol. Zha 61r, but not listed. Chapter 10 of the Phur pa bcu gnyis, D vol. Pa 215v, also lists the five types, but the list appears to be quite different! Nonetheless, the Phur pa bcu gnyis comparison is also interesting in specifying materials for making a kīla as ideally to be taken from weapons such as knives and arrowheads, as well as from meteors or thunderbolts, and to have qualities of cutting, sharpness, and hardness etc. It is also possible that the Phur pa bcu gnyis advocates the use of iron from an arrowhead that has pierced a person's heart, but the text is corrupt at that point, and the meaning ambiguous, D vol. Pa folio 216r; T vol. Dza p. 106.).
72 སྩོགས་: KAḤ སོགས་sogs.
73 གྱི་: Y གྱིས་.
74 ལས་: DUN ལ་.
སོར་བརྒྱད་དམ་75 བཅུ་གཉིས་པར་བྱ་སྟེ༔76
[you] make [the phurpa] eight or twelve inches, and མགོ་མཇུག་མ་ནོར་བར་77 ཤིང་གི་རྩ་བ་ལ་78 མགོ་བྱས་སྟེ༔79
without muddling the top [and] the bottom, make the head at (DUN towards) the roots of the wood,80 and
____________
75 DUN inserts སོར་.
76 བྱ་སྟེ་: DUN བྱས་ལ་.
77 ནོར་བར་: KAḤ ནོར་བ་; DUN ནོར་པར་.
78 ལ་: DUN ལོགས་སུ་.
79 སྟེ་: KAḤ X Y ཏེ་; DUN ལ་.
80 In making a ritual implement from wood, there is the principle that the implement should be made according to the way the tree originally stood, so the directions should be marked when the wood is first cut, and the implement is then fashioned in the ‘correct’ way up (information from Lopon P. Ogyan Tanzin, discussions 2014 and 2016). In the case of a phurpa, the chiseled face should be made at the eastern side in relation to the way in which the tree stood (see Dudjom Collected Writings, ཤར་ནས་བརྩམས་ཏེ་བཅད་ལ་, vol.
Da: 25). However, although one might expect the ‘head’ of the phurpa to be its top and its tip to be its lower end, our text here seems clear that the phurpa should have the head at the bottom— towards the roots— and the tip pointing towards the top of the original tree. The first of the following commentaries is too brief to help (རྩེ་མོ་ཕྱོགས་བསྟན་པ་ནི༔ མགོ་མཇུག་ མ་ནོར་བར་བྱས་ནས༔ TSH370, PH249,2) but the long commentary appears to confirm this understanding, apparently suggesting an equation between the ‘top’ (rtse mo) of the tree and the ‘tip’ (again, rtse mo) of the phurpa. Thus, we find: “The root of the wood (rtsa ba) must not be muddled with its top (rtse mo), meaning that the head (mgo bo) of the phurbu must not be muddled with its point (rtse mo)” (ཤིང་གི་རྩ་བ་རྩེ་མོ་མ་ནོར་བར་བྱ་བ་ནི༔ ཕུར་ བུའི་ [KAḤ པའི་] མགོ་བོ་དང་རྩེ་མོ་མ་ནོར་བར་བྱ་བའི་དོན་ཏོ༔ KAḤ93, TSH386–387, PH254,3, X698,
Y732). Lopon P. Ogyan Tanzin comments that although at first sight this may seem surprising, it may make sense because the root of the tree is heavier, and for the phurpa, the strength should be in the head at the top of the implement, because one is pressing down upon the negative forces. In fact, when uncertain which way up a piece of wood should be to make a ritual implement, a test is to put it into a stream, and the heavier end— which must be the lower direction of the tree— will sink a little more than the upper end.
མགོ་81 སོར་གཅིག་ལ་རྒྱ་མདུད༔
[make] a knot one inch [in size] at the head,
རྐེད་པ་82 སོར་གཅིག་ལ་རྒྱ་མདུད༔
[and another] one inch knot at the waist.
སྟོད་ཟུར་བརྒྱད༔83
the upper [part] has eight facets (or: is octagonal),
སྨད་ཟུར་གསུམ་དུ་བྱས་ལ༔
the lower is made with [a] three-sided [blade], and རི་རབ་ལྟར་བརྗིད་པར་འདུག་པ་ནི་84 གཟུགས་ཕུན་སུམ་ཚོགས་པའོ༔
being imposing like Mt. Meru,85 [it] is the perfection of form. བྱིན་རླབས་86 ཕུན་སུམ་ (PH243,2) ཚོགས་པ་ནི༔
For the perfection of consecrations,
ཐོག་མ་ཉིད་དུ་87 སྐུ་གསུམ་དུ་བྱིན་གྱིས་བརླབས་པར་བྱ་སྟེ༔88
[it]89 should be consecrated as the primordially existent three kāyas.
____________ 81 མགོ་: DUN omits.
82 རྐེད་པ་: KAḤ སྐད་པ་; TSH PH སྐྱེད་པ་; DUN རྐེད་པར་.
83 DUN: ann., རྀན་པོ་ཅེ་འབྲུ་བརྒྱད་ལྟ་བུར་འདུག་སྟེ་སྤྱྀ[ར་?] ཕུར་བུ་རྀན་པོ་ཅེ་འྀ་རྀགས་ཡྀན་བར་བཤད་; since
[this] is like eight jewel granules, it is explained as the general phurbu [of] the jewel family. (It is not clear whether this comment really clarifies the sense here; the association with the jewel family seems odd. The long commentary [KAḤ93, TSH387, PH254,3, X699, Y732] suggests that the eight facets indicate a jewel which fulfils the needs and wishes of sentient beings and symbolises accomplishing the benefit of beings through the eight liberations.) . 84 ནི ་: KAḤ X Y འདི་ནི་; X Y insert ༔.
85 See the discussion of the Mount Meru imagery, Cantwell and Mayer 2008: 16–17, 22–25.
86 རླབས་: TSH PH X Y བརླབས་.
87 X Y insert ༔.
88 བྱིན་རླབས་ཕུན་སུམ་ཚོགས་པ་ནི༔ ཐོག་མ་ཉིད་དུ་སྐུ་གསུམ་དུ་བྱིན་གྱིས་བརླབས་པར་བྱ་སྟེ་: DUN omits.
དང་པོ་ཁོ་ན་སྟོང་པ་ཉིད་དུ་ (DUN2v) བསྒོམ་སྟེ༔90
First, [having] meditated [on it] (DUN consecrated [it]) as emptiness alone,
ཆོས་ཀྱི་ (Y703) སྐུར་91 བྱིན་གྱིས་བརླབ་པའོ༔92
(it) is consecrated as the dharmakāya.
དེའི་འོག་ཏུ་93 རྒྱ་མདུད་གཞལ་ཡས་ཁང་དུ་བྱིན་གྱིས་བརླབ་པར་བྱ་སྟེ༔94
After this, the knot (DUN the knot above) should be consecrated as (DUN is visualised as) the Celestial Palace,
ཕྱོགས་བཞི་དབུས་དང་ལྔར་ཧཱུྃ་སྒྲིལ་95 མ་ལྔ་བཞག་སྟེ༔96
at the four directions and the centre, making five, five unified/connected97 hūṃs are established;
____________
89 Here, given the description of the elements of the phurpa implement below, the translation assumes the phurpa as the subject, although it is worth noting that the long commentary speaks of both oneself and the phurpa (KAḤ94, TSH388, PH255,3, X700, Y733).
90 བསྒོམ་སྟེ་: DUN བྱྀན་ཀྱྀས་བརླབས་ཏེ་; DUN ann. f.2r, བདག་དང་ཕུར་བུ་དང་ཆོས་ཀུན་; oneself and the phurbu and all phenomena.
91 སྐུར་: X Y སྐུ་.
92 གྱིས་བརླབ་པའོ་: KAḤ X Y གྱིས་བརླབས་པའོ་; DUN ཀྱྀས་བརླབ་པ་དང་; DUN ann., crossed through, བཛྲ་ཧེ་རུ་ཀ་ཡུམ་ཁྲོ་ཏྀ་ཤྭ་རྀ་; this comment occurs on the line below; almost certainly, it was written in the wrong place and crossed through when the error was noticed. 93 འོག་ཏུ་: DUN སྟེང་དུ་ (here, we cannot be certain if KD was in error, yet DUN’s upper knot would seem more appropriate in this context).
94 བྱིན་གྱིས་བརླབ་པར་བྱ་སྟེ་: KAḤ X Y བྱིན་གྱིས་བརླབས་པར་བྱ་སྟེ་; DUN དམྱྀགས་ཏེ་; DUN ann., ཕུར་བུ་འདྀ་ཉྀད་ནྀ་རྀ་རབ་ཙམ་ལ་དེ་འྀ་སྟེང་ན་ཕོ་བྲང་རྒྱ་ཆེ་བ་འ་; the phurbu itself is as big as Meru, and above it is the vast palace.
95 སྒྲིལ་gril: X Y བསྒྲིལ་.
96 DUN: ann., མ་ལས་ཉྀ་མ་འྀ་དཀྱྀལ་འཁོར་དུ་གྱུར་པ་འྀ་དབུས་སུ་; from [the syllable] ma, transformed into a sun maṇḍala, in the centre.
97 སྒྲིལ་མ་: We find the phrase, ཧཱུྃ་སྒྲིལ་མ་ (literally, a unified/concentrated/condensed/rolled up hūṃ), elsewhere. In the Dunhuang manuscript, the text above (IOL Tib J 331.II, 4r), which is not a Phurpa text and probably not
དབུས་སུ་ཧེ་རུ་ཀ༔98
in the centre [is] Heruka,
ཤར་དུ་ཁམས་གསུམ་རྣམ་རྒྱལ༔99
100in the east [is] Trailokyavijaya,
____________
originally found in an immediately preceding position to this text, also has hūṃ sgril ma, describing the syllable hūṃ after the body, speech and mind consecrations are dissolved. A perhaps closer parallel usage to that here is in the section on making the boundaries in the Sakya Phur chen (4.2), where we have a unified/rolled up hūṃ giving rise to mantra syllables and effecting a transformation into the vajra form. The word sgril ma in the Phur chen is commented on in A myes zhabs (189.2), as bsgril ba/bsgril ma (note that the MT ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud editions give bsgril and D gives sgril). Grags pa rgyal mtshan’s elaboration (in his rdo rje phur pa’i mngon par rtogs pa) of what is clearly the same practice, presents a hūṃ emerging from the deity, becoming unified with a hūṃ in the sky, and then dividing and dissolving again. In this case, the term, sgril ma is not used, but the word sbrel ma occurs in the corresponding place, describing the unification or connectedness of the hūṃs. It would thus seem that “unified” or “connected” is the most appropriate sense of the term sgril ma in this context. See also the elaborate discussion in the long commentary, of light-rays radiating and establishing the celestial palace and the five hūṃs with the nature of wrathful deities (KAḤ96, TSH389, PH256,1–257,1, X701, Y735).
98 DUN: ann., བཛྲ་ཧེ་རུ་ཀ་ཡུམ་ཀྲོ་དྷྀ་ཤྭ་རྀ་; Vajra Heruka, [and his] consort Krodhīśvarī.
99 གསུམ་རྣམ་རྒྱལ་: DUN སུམ་རྣམ་པར་རྒྱལ་བ་; DUN ann., ཧཱུྃ་ལས་ཏྲ་ལོག་ཀྱ་བྀ་ཛ་ཡ་མ་ཧ་ཀྲོ་དྷེ་ཤྭ་རྀ་ཧཱུྃ་ ཞེས་བརྗོད་པས་འཕྲོ་འདུར་གྱུར་ལས་དེ་ནས་སྐུར་གྱུར་གཞན་ཀུན་ཡང་དེ་དང་འདྲ་འོ་; from [a syllable] hūṃ
[comes the mantra] trailokyavijaya mahākrodhīśvarī hūṃ; through reciting this, [it] comes to radiate and reabsorb [[[Wikipedia:light|light]] rays]; then it transforms into the [[[buddha]]] body; and all the other [[[deities]]] are also similar to this (ie. in the way they arise). 100 The four deities listed here as arising in the four directions correspond to four of the standard list of the khro bo bcu, the ten Wrathful deities who form the immediate retinue of the Phurpa deity in the traditional cycles of practice on Phurpa as a yi dam deity (the positions and names of these deities tend to be reasonably constant across different Phurpa texts, even if their appearances and hand implements might vary). In the case of the second and third given here, they are situated in the appropriate direction associated with the khro bo bcu deities of the same names. Trailokyavijaya is generally situated in
ལྷོར་གཤིན་ (X669) རྗེ་གཤེད༔101
ནུབ་དུ་རྟ་མགྲིན༔102
in the west [is] Hayagrīva, བྱང་དུ་སྟོབས་པོ་ཆེ༔103
in the north [is] Mahābala, འདི་རྣམས་སོ་སོའི་སྙིང་པོ་དྲན་ཙམ་104 གྱིས་བསྐུལ་ཏེ༔105
[they] are enjoined, by appropriately recalling the essence [[[mantra]]] of each of them.
ཨཱོྃ་ཀརྨ་ཤྲཱི་106 ཧེ་རུ་ཀ་ཀཱི་107 ལི་ཀཱི་108 ལ་ཡ་མཧཱ་ཙནྜ་109 སརྦ་དུཥྚན་110 ཏ་ཀ་ཧ་ན་111 (TSH355)
ད་ཧ་པ་ཙ་ཧཱུྃ་ཕཊ༔ ཀ་རྨ་ཨ་112 མོ་ཀ་113 སི་ཏི་ཧཱུྃ་ཕཊ༔
____________
the north-eastern direction, although Vijaya is usually in the east. Mahābala/stobs chen is generally associated not with the north, as given here, but with the below direction. 101 DUN: ann., ཡ་མན་ཏ་ཀྲྀ་ད་བཛྲ་ཀྲོ་དྷ་ཧཱུྃ་; yamāntakṛt vajrakrodha hūṃ.
102 དུ་རྟ་མགྲིན་: KAḤ PH X Y ཏུ་རྟ་མགྲིན་; DUN དུ་རྟ་འགྲིན་; DUN ann., ཧ་ཡ་གྲྀ་བ་བཛྲ་ཀྲོ་དྷ་ཧཱུྃ་; hayagrīva vajrakrodha hūṃ.
103 ཆེ ་: DUN ཅེ་; DUN ann., མ་ཧ་པ་ལ་བཛྲ་ཀྲོ་དྷ་ཧཱུྃ་; mahābala vajrakrodha hūṃ. 104 དྲན་ཙམ་: KAḤ བྲན་རྩམ་; DUN དྲན་ ༼བ༽ཙམ་dran; prefixed ba inserted below line. There is no tsheg given after it, but ba tsam would also be a possibility: “by merely remembering...”. This would also be consistent with the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud reading of “dran ba tsam” (mTshams brag NGB vol. Chi, 1032.3). 105 ཏེ་: X Y སྟེ་; DUN ལ་; DUN ann., སྐུར་གྱུར་པ་ལས་; having become [[[buddha]]] body. 106 ཨཱོྃ་ཀརྨ་ཤྲཱི་: KAḤ ༀ་ཀརྨ་ཤྲཱི་; TSH PH ཨཱོྃ་ཀརྨ་ཤྲི་; X ཨཱོྃ་ཀརྨཱ་ཤྲཱི་; Y ཨཱོྃ་ཀརྨཱ་ཤྲི. See Cantwell and Mayer, Early Tibetan Documents on Phur pa from Dunhuang, 72, note 13, on the persistence of the usage of the long syllable, ōṃ.
107 ཀཱི་: TSH PH X Y ཀི་.
108 ཀཱི་: TSH PH X Y ཀི་.
109 ཙནྜ་: TSH PH ཙན་ཏ་; X ཙན་རྷ་; Y ཙན་དྷ་.
110 དུཥྚན་: TSH སྟན་stan; PH དུ་སྟན་.
111 TSH PH insert ད་ཧ་ན་ (perhaps an accidental repetition?).
112 ཀ་རྨ་ཨ་: KAḤ ཀ་རྨ་ༀ་; X ཀརྨཱ་ཨ་.
ཨཱོྃ་ཏྲཻ་ལོ་114 ཀྱ་བི་ཙ་ཡ་115 བཛྲ་ཀྲོ་ཏ་ཧཱུྃ་ (KAḤ65) ཕཊ༔
ཀྲོ་ཏི་ཤྭ་རཱི་116 ཧཱུྃ༔
ཨཱོྃ་ 117 ཡ་མནྟ་118 ཀ་བཛྲ་ཀྲོ་ཏ་ཧཱུྃ་ཕཊ༔
ཀྲོ་ཏི་ཤྭ་རཱི་119 ཧཱུྃ༔
ཨཱོྃ་ཧ་ཡ་གྲྀ་ཝ་120 བཛྲ་ཀྲོ་ཏ་ཧཱུྃ་ཕཊ༔
ཀྲོ་ཏི་ཤྭ་རཱི་121 ཧཱུྃ༔
ཨཱོྃ་མཧཱ་བ་122 ལ་བཛྲ་ཀྲོ་ཏ་ཧཱུྃ་ཕཊ༔
ཀྲོ་ཏི་ཤྭ་རཱི་123 ཧཱུྃ༔
ཨ་ཀུ་124 ཤ་ཛཿ125
པ་126 ཤ་ཧཱུྃ༔
སྥོཊ་127 བཾ༔
གྷཎྜེ་128 ཧོ༔129
____________
113 ཀ་: X Y གྷ་. 114 ཨཱོྃ་ཏྲཻ་ལོ་: KAḤ ༀ་ཏྲཻ་ལོ་; TSH PH X ཨཱོྃ་ཀྲེ་ལོག་; Y ༀ་ཀྲེ་ལོག་. 115 བི་ཙ་ཡ་: KAḤ བི་ཤྭ་; X བི་ཤ་; Y བྷི་ཤ་. 116 ཤྭ་རཱི་: TSH PH ཤོ་རི་; Y ཤྭ་རི་. 117 ཨཱོྃ་: KAḤ ༀ་. 118 མནྟ་: TSH PH X Y མན་ཏ་. 119 ཤྭ་རཱི་: TSH PH ཤོ་རི་; X Y ཤྭ་རི་. 120 ཧ་ཡ་གྲྀ་ཝ་: KAḤ ཧྱ་གྲྀ་ཝ་; TSH PH ཧ་ཡ་གྲྀ་བ་; X ཧ་ཡ་གྷྲི་བ་; Y ཧ་ཡ་གྷྲི་ཝ་. 121 ཤྭ་རཱི་: TSH PH ཤོ་རི་; X Y ཤྭ་རི་. 122 མཧཱ་བ་: TSH PH མཧཱ་པ་; X Y མ་ཧཱ་བ་. 123 ཤྭ་རཱི་: TSH PH ཤོ་རི་; X Y ཤྭ་རི་ . 124 ku: TSH PH གུ་; X Y འགུ་. 125 ཛཿ: KAḤ PH X Y ཛ༔. 126 པ་: KAḤ བཱ་. 127 སྥོཊ་: TSH PH སྤོ་ཏ་; X Y སྥོ་ཊ་. 128 གྷཎྜེ་: TSH PH གན་དེ་; X Y གཱན་དེ་.
129 ཨཱོྃ་ཀརྨ་ཤྲཱི་ཧེ་རུ་ཀ་ཀཱི་ལི་ཀཱི་ལ་ཡ་མཧཱ་ཙནྜ་སརྦ་དུཥྚན་ཏ་ཀ་ཧ་ན་ད་ཧ་པ་ཙ་ཧཱུྃ་ཕཊ༔ ཀ་རྨ་ཨ་མོ་ཀ་སི་ཏི་ཧཱུྃ་ཕཊ༔ ཨཱོྃ་ཏྲཻ་ལོ་ཀྱ་བི་ཙ་ཡ་བཛྲ་ཀྲོ་ཏ་ཧཱུྃ་ཕཊ༔ ཀྲོ་ཏི་ཤྭ་རཱི་ཧཱུྃ༔ ཨཱོྃ་ཡ་མནྟ་ཀ་བཛྲ་ཀྲོ་ཏ་ཧཱུྃ་ཕཊ༔ ཀྲོ་ཏི་ཤྭ་རཱི་ཧཱུྃ༔ ཨཱོྃ་ཧ་ཡ་གྲྀ་ཝ་བཛྲ་ཀྲོ་ ཏ་ཧཱུྃ་ཕཊ༔ ཀྲོ་ཏི་ཤྭ་རཱི་ཧཱུྃ༔ ཨཱོྃ་མཧཱ་བ་ལ་བཛྲ་ཀྲོ་ཏ་ཧཱུྃ་ཕཊ༔ ཀྲོ་ཏི་ཤྭ་རཱི་ཧཱུྃ༔ ཨ་ཀུ་ཤ་ཛཿ པ་ཤ་ཧཱུྃ༔ སྥོཊ་བཾ༔ གྷཎྜེ་ཧོ༔: DUN omits.
“oṃ karma śrī heruka kīli kīlaya mahācaṇḍa sarvaduṣṭāntaka hana daha paca hūṃ phaṭ. karma amoghasiddhi hūṃ phaṭ. oṃ trailokyavijaya vajra krodha hūṃ phaṭ. krodhiśvarī hūṃ. oṃ yamāntaka vajra krodha hūṃ phaṭ. krodhiśvarī hūṃ. oṃ hayagrīva vajra krodha hūṃ phaṭ.
krodhiśvarī hūṃ. oṃ mahābala vajra krodha hūṃ phaṭ. krodhiśvarī hūṃ. aṅkuśa jaḥ pāśa hūṃ sphota vaṃ ghanta hoḥ” གཟུངས་130 དང་གཉིས་སུ་131 མེད་པས་མཆོད་པ་བྱས་ལ༔
[They are] non-dual with their dhāraṇīs (KAḤ non-dual with the [[[phurpa]]] form); making offerings,
དེ་ལ་132 འཁོར་རྒྱས་པར་དམིགས་པ་ནི༔133 [you] meditate on them and their extended retinue.134
____________
130 གཟུངས་: KAḤ X Y གཟུགས་. Note that the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud agrees with gzugs, mTshams brag NGB vol. Chi, 1032.3. It is not certain which is the earlier reading, but the agreement of TSH/PH with DUN would suggest that in relation to this point in our text, gzungs was likely to have been the archetypal reading. In the long commentary, in contrast, all KD versions give, gzugs, but it appears nonetheless to be in error, since the gloss clearly indicates that gzungs is the correct reading: “you meditate that the male and female deities are indivisible like a seedling and a shadow”, མྱུ་གུ་དང་གྲིབ་ མའི་ཚུལ་དུ་ཡུམ་ཡང་ཡབ་དང་གཉིས་སུ་མེད་པར་བསྒོམ་པར་བྱའོ་, with minor variants, KAḤ99, TSH392,
PH256,3, X705, Y738. This seems to be a shorthand for two common examples: the unity of a seed and seedling, or a person and their shadow.
131 གཉིས་སུ་: TSH X Y གཉིསུ་.
132 མེད་པས་མཆོད་པ་བྱས་ལ༔ དེ་ལ་: DUN མྱེད་པ། །མཆོད་པ་ཡང་.
133 པ་ནི་: DUN པ་འོ་.
134 Note that the sense of the '’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud’s version (mTshams brag NGB Volume Chi, 1032.3–4) is slightly different in these two lines, giving འཁོད་པ་དང་ for མཆོད་པ་བྱས་ལ་, thus, “established in non-duality...”. MT also give རྒྱས་ བཏབ་ for རྒྱས་, suggesting that the retinue is sealed, rather than that the retinue is extensive, but this may be a scribal error. mTshams brag’s text for the two lines is: གཟུགས་དང་གཉིས་སུ་ མེད་པར་འཁོད་པ་དང༌། འཁོར་བ་རྒྱས་བཏབ་པར་དམིགས་ཏེ་ (D: འཁོར་རྒྱས་ for འཁོར་བ་རྒྱས་བཏབ་).
ཕྱི་ནང་གི་མཆོད་པ་ཅི་འབྱོར་135 ཕུལ་ཏེ༔136
Offering whatever outer and inner offerings have been collected, དམ་ཚིག་རྗེས་སུ་བསྐུལ་ནས༔137
having enjoined [the deities] to follow [the] samaya,
གཉིས་ (Y704) སུ་མེད་པར་138 རྒྱན་རྫོགས་པར་མཛད་པ་ནི༔
perfecting the adornments in non-duality (DUN [this] embellishment of non-duality perfected),139
(DUN3r) ལོངས་སྤྱོད་རྫོགས་ (PH242,3) པའི་སྐུར་བྱིན་གྱིས་བརླབས་140 པའོ༔
is the consecration as the sambhogakāya.
____________
135 DUN inserts པ་.
136 ཏེ་: TSH PH X Y སྟེ་; DUN ann., ཕྱྀ་ནང་གྀ་མཆོད་པ་འྀ་ལྷ་མོ་དང་ལྕགས་ཀྱུ་ལ་སྩོགས་པ་སྒོ་བཞྀ་ཀུན་;
the outer and inner offering goddesses with the iron hook etc., [at] all four doors.
137 DUN ann., མཆོད་པ་རྣམ་ལྔ་དང་བདུད་རྩྀ་ལྔ་; the five offerings and the five amṛṭas.
138 པར་: DUN པ་འྀ་.
139 The KAḤ TSH PH X Y reading most probably implies that having enjoined the deities, they are perfected in adorning primordial wisdom without duality. The Dunhuang reading might suggest a different sense. The idea of ornamentation or embellishment is often linked to offerings, and taking the line in this sense would seem to fit with the Dunhuang commentator’s note above on the appropriate samaya offerings. The same slight ambiguity is found in the Myang ’das’s parallel verse (D vol. Zha 56r), which nonetheless shares KAḤ TSH PH X Y’s med par, rather than Dunhuang’s genitive. Either understanding would fit with the notion of a sambhogakāya consecration. In the first case, the emphasis would be on the visualised forms and their ultimate nature; in the second, on the visualisation of the offerings embellishing the deities. The long commentary (KAḤ102; TSH394–395; PH258,1; X707; Y740–741) links perfecting the adornments in non-duality to the non-dual bodhicitta of the union of the male and female deities, and the dissolution and re-arising of the maṇḍala.
140 བྱིན་གྱིས་བརླབས་: TSH PH བྱིན་གྱིས་བརླབ་; DUN བྱིན་ཀྱྀས་བརླབས་.
141དེ་ནས་142 སྲས་ཕུར ་བུ་143 ཁྲོ་བོར་བསྐྱེད་ལ༔144
Then, the Son Phurbu is generated as the wrathful deity (DUN From this,
[it] is born as the Son [which is] the essence of Phurbu),145
146ལྟེ་བ་ཡན་ཆད་147 མཐིང་ནག་ལ༔
dark blue above the waist, upon [which]
དབུ་རལ་པ་148 ཁམ་པ་ཟུར་གསུམ་པའི་ཐབས་ (X670) སུ་འགྲེང་བ༔149
[his] reddish-brown locks of hair are standing up in a (pointed) triangular fashion.
བྲང་གིས་འགྲོ་བ་ཆེན་པོ་དང༔
Great serpent[s] and
____________
141 DUN ann., བསྒྲུབ་པ་པོས་བཅོལ་པ་འྀ་ལས་འདྀ་གྲུབ་བར་མཛོད་ཅྀག་པར་བསྒོ་; The practitioner commands that [they] should act to accomplish the action which is entrusted [to them]. (This would not appear to be a very appropriate comment here. It has most likely been misplaced, and is intended to fit with the words on the previous page, beginning, དམ་ཚིག་ རྗེས་སུ་བསྐུལ་ནས་).
142 དེ་ནས་: DUN དེ་ལས་.
143 བུ་: TSH PH omit.
144 ཁྲོ་བོར་བསྐྱེད་ལ༔: TSH PH ཁྲོ་བོར་བསྐྱེད་ནས་; DUN འྀ་ངོ་བོར་སྐྱེས་པ་ནྀ་; DUN ann., ཧེ་རུ་ཀ་འྀ་
ཐུགས་ཀ་འྀ་ཧཱུྃང་ལས་; from hūṃ at the heart of the heruka.
145 Note also that the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud’s version (mTshams brag NGB vol. Chi, 1032.5) agrees more closely with the KD reading of this line: དེ་ལ་སྲས་ཕུར་པ་ ཁྲོ་བོར་བསྐྱེད་པ་ནི་; on this basis, the Son Phurpa is generated as the wrathful deity. 146 Note that the description given here (and in the parallel passages in the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud, the Myang ’das and in the Phur pa bcu gnyis) is similar to that found in Guhyasamāja commentaries, such as the Piṇḍikṛtasādhana and the Piṇḍikṛtasādhanopāyikāvṛttiratnāvalī (see Cantwell and Mayer, Early Tibetan Documents on Phur pa from Dunhuang, Appendix to Ch. 8, 162–163; also.
147 ཡན་ཆད་: DUN མན་ཆད་ (clearly, in error).
148 རལ་པ་: DUN omits (presumably, in error; both the versions of this line in the Myang ’das and in the Phur pa bcu gnyis give ral pa in place of dbu, while the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud’s version, mTshams brag NGB vol. Chi, 1032.5, gives dbu skra).
149 ཟུར་གསུམ་པའི་ཐབས་སུ་འགྲེང་བ་: KAḤ ཟུར་གསུམ་པའི་ཐབས་སུ་འགྲེད་པ་; TSH PH ཟུར་གསུམ་པའི་
ཐབས་སུ་འབྲེང་བ་; DUN གྱེན་དུ་འགྲེང་བ་འ་.
ཐོད་རློན་གྱིས་བཅིངས་ཤིང་150 བཞགས་པ༔151
fresh skulls coil around and beautify [him].
སྤྱན་གསུམ་སྡང་མིག་བསྒྲད་དེ༔152
[His] three eyes are staring, in an angry expression, ཕྱག་གཡོན་པའི་ཕུར་བུ་153 ལ་གཟིགས་པ༔
looking at the phurbu in [his] left hand, མཆེ་བ་གཙིགས་པ༔
baring [his] fangs;
རབ་ཏུ་རྔམ་154 པ༔155
thoroughly awe-inspiring,
དུར་ཁྲོད་156 མེ་དཔུང་གི་ནང་ན་157 ལྟེ་བ་མན་ཆད་ལྕགས་ཀྱི་ཕུར་པ་ཟུར་གསུམ་པ༔ [he is] within a mass [of] cremation fl ames. Below the waist [is] an iron phurpa with three edges,
____________
150 གྱིས་བཅིངས་ཤིང་: TSH PH གྱིས་བཅིང་ཅིང་; X Y གྱི་བཅིངས་ཤིང་ .
151 བཞགས་པ་: KAḤ TSH PH X Y བཞུགས་པ་; DUN བཞགས་པའ་ (here, the DUN reading is more appropriate, and has been followed also in the translation. bzhags: Bod rgya tshig mdzod chen mo (2434), (rnying) gzhags pa’am gzhabs pa’ang zer/ brgyan pa’am mdzes pa/. The ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud (mTshams brag NGB vol. Chi, 1032.6) gives bzhad. The words are not cited exactly in the long commentary, so its help is limited. However, it speaks of ཐོད་རློན་གྱི་ཞགས་པ་, KAḤ103, TSH395, PH259,1, X708, Y741. A noose or lasso is not very apt here; possibly, zhags pa may have been a corruption of bzhags pa.
152 སྡང་མིག་བསྒྲད་དེ་: KAḤ སྡང་དམིགས་བསྒྲད་པ་; TSH PH གདང་མིག་བསྒྲད་སྟེ་; DUN སྡང་དམྱྀག་དུ་ དགྲད་དེ་.
154 རྔམ་: X Y རྔཾས་.
155 རབ་ཏུ་རྔམ་པ་: DUN omits.
156 DUN inserts ཀྱྀ་.
157 DUN inserts །.
ཨེའི་158 ནང་དུ་སུམ་ཆ་159 ཙམ་ནུབ་ (KAḤ66) པ་ལ༔160
as much as a third [of which] is sinking down into the “e”.161 ཕྱག་བཞི་པ་སྟེ༔162
[Having] four arms,
གཡས་163 ཀྱི་དང་པོ་ན་164 སྟ་རེ་165 ཁ་ཡར་བསྟན་ཏེ་ལྟག་166 པས་རྡེག་པ་ལྟར་བྱས་པ༔167
in the first (DUN upper) right [hand], [he] exhibits an axe facing upwards, as if to strike with the back [of the axe];168
____________
158 ཨེའི་: TSH PH ཨེ་ཡི་.
159 ཆ་: DUN ཅ་.
160 ནུབ་པ་ལ་: KAḤ ནུབ་ལ་; TSH PH X Y ནུབ་པ་; DUN ann., ཆོས་ཉྀ་ད་ཡུམ་གྱྀ་མཁའྀ་རང་བཞྀན་ཏེ་ ཡུམ་ལྟ་བུར་གྱུར་པ་ནྀ་དགོས་པ་འྀ་ཡེ་ཤེས་ཏེ་རྣམ་པར་མྱྀ་རྟོག་པ་འྀ་ཆོས་ཉྀད་ལ་བྱ་; The elemental state is the very nature of the yum’s space, coming to resemble the yum; this is the necessary primordial wisdom, within the non-discursive elemental state (‘Space’ is a euphemism for the female deities’ private parts or their wombs. Here, the comment would seem to refer to the unification of primordial wisdom with the elemental state, expressed by the male phurpa inserted within the female e ritual stand.).
161 Sinking down into the e: the sense here is slightly uncertain. Nub pa usually has the meaning of declining/setting, which could suggest here the image of the bottom third not being visible. E would indicate the phur khung, the triangular shaped ritual stand or container in which the phurpa is inserted so as to stand upright. It is symbolically equated with the female genitals and the chos ’byung (source of dharmas). We have སུམ་ཆ་ནུབ་ནས་ in the Myang ’das parallel lines. At this point, the long commentary does not help since it comments only on the symbolism.
162 DUN omits ༔.
163 གཡས་: KAḤ གཡོན་ (surely in error).
164 ཀྱི་དང་པོ་ན་: DUN པ་འྀ་གོང་མ་.
165 སྟ་རེ་: TSH རྟ་གྲི་; PH སྟ་གྲི་; X སྟྭ་རེ་ (presumably, TSH's rta gri should be sta gri, as PH).
166 བསྟན་ཏེ་ལྟག་: KAḤ བསྟན་ཏེ་སྟག་; TSH PH བསྟན་སྟེ་སྟག་; Y བསྟེན་ཏེ་སྟག་ (ltag is surely intended, even though it is not given in KD here. It is given in the long commentary in KAḤ104; X709; Y742. TSH396 and PH258,2 still give stag.) 167 རྡེག་པ་ལྟར་བྱས་པ་: KAḤ བརྡེག་པ་ལྟར་བྱས་པ་; TSH PH རྡེག་ལྟར་བྱས་ལ་; Y རྡེག་པ་ལྟར་བྱས་;
DUN རྡེག་པར་བྱ་སྟེ་.
འོག་མ་169 རྡོ་རྗེ་རི་རབ་ཀྱིས་170 (TSH356) གནོན་པའི་ཐབས་སུ་འཛིན་པ༔171
the lower [hand] grasps the vajra mount meru, 172 in the manner of suppressing.
____________
168 The sense is not completely clear here, but seems to imply that the sharp side of the axe is facing upwards so that he is threatening with the blunt back side of the axe. The long commentary suggests the back of the phurpa (KAḤ104; TSH396; PH258,2; X709;
Y742, ཕུར་པའི་ཕྱིར་རོ་)— probably, phur pa is a scribal error in this case—while the visualisation section elaborates: held aloft in the manner of striking (TSH PH holding up) the vajra back (KAḤ144: རྡོ་རྗེའི་ལྟག་པ་བརྡེག་པའི་ཐབས་སུ་ཕྱར་; TSH436, PH271,3 give སྟག་པ་ བཏེག་པའི་; X750, Y784: སྟག་པ་རྡེག་པའི་). Lopon P. Ogyan Tanzin comments that the back of the axe has a half-vajra. Note that TSH PH's bteg here is not supported in their version of the long commentary, TSH396, PH258,2.
169 DUN inserts ལ་.
170 ཀྱིས་: TSH གྱིས་.
171 DUN ann., ཕུར་དེས་མནན་པས་སུས་ཀྱང་མྱྀ་ཕྱྀན་བ་འྀ་དོན་; This means [that] by suppressing with this phurpa, whoever [is the object, they will] not [be able to] leave. 172 Perhaps, here, mount meru vajra would be a more appropriate translation. The long commentary (TSH396; PH258,2; KAḤ104; X709; Y742–743) glosses this as indicating a crossed vajra, its four aspects corresponding to the shape of Meru. The visualisation section (KAḤ144; TSH436; PH271,3; X751, Y784) also mentions a crossed vajra, but without so clearly specifying how it relates to Mt. Meru.
(DUN3v) གཡོན་དང་པོ་ན་ཁ་ཏྭཾ་ག་173 དཀྲོལ་ཅིང་174 བདུད་ཀྱི་ཁམས་འཇིགས་175 པ༔176
In the first left [hand, he] shakes/rattles177 a (DUN+vajra) khaṭvāṅga, destroying/frightening the (DUN+three) realms of māras;
____________
173 ན་ཁ་ཏྭཾ་ག་: TSH PH ན་ཁ་ཏྲཾ་ཁ་; X ན་ཁཊྭཾ་ཁ་; Y ན་ཁྚྭཾ་ཁ་; DUN རྡོ་རྗེ་ཁ་ཏྭང་ཀ་.
174 དཀྲོལ་ཅིང་: X Y བཀྲོལ་ཅིང་; DUN དཀྲོལ་ཞྀང་.
175 ཁམས་འཇིགས: DUN ཁམ་སུམ་འཇྀག་ (probably, ’jig is intended, although Lopon P. Ogyan Tanzin suggests it may be short for ’jigs pa byed pa, since to frighten is more appropriate in the context of shaking the trident rather than striking with it. However, we also find ’jigs in the line below, where ’jig is more appropriate, so perhaps we have the same non-standard spelling in both instances. The long commentary, KAḤ104; TSH396; PH258,2; X709; Y743, also gives the spelling, ’jigs.).
176 DUN ann., མྱྀ་མགོ་ལ་སྀལ་སྙན་བྱས་པ་; playing cymbals with? the human head[s]. (The beginning of this comment is written close to the word dkrol and presumably elaborates on it: it can mean playing/ringing/resounding a musical instrument such as a bell or cymbals. It is also possible that the verb dkrol in the text may carry the sense of letting loose, releasing, perhaps suggesting the releasing/liberation of beings. The main meaning of dkrol here, however, is most probably to rattle, resound, reverberate or to make music. The long commentary [KAḤ104; TSH396; PH258,2; X709; Y743] and visualisation
section [KAḤ144; TSH436; PH271,3; X751, Y784) give ’khrol, found also in the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud [[[mTshams brag]] NGB vol. Chi, 1033.2], as well as all editions of the Myang ’das. The sense of resound, ring or jingle is the primary meaning of ’khrol, although it can also be a form of ’grol. For further reflection on DUN’s annotation, see Cantwell and Mayer, Early Tibetan Documents on Phur pa from Dunhuang, 98, note 48.
177 The meaning of dkrol here is not entirely unambiguous: see above note. It could be that a double meaning is intended.
འོག་མ་ན་178 ཕུར་པ་ཟུར་གསུམ་པ་179 འདེབས་པའི་ཐབས་སུ་བཟོས་180 ཤིང་ངན་སོང་གསུམ་
འཇིགས་181 པ༔
the lower [hand holds] a three-sided phurpa, fashioned in the manner of striking, and destroying the three lower realms,
སྟོབས་དང་མཐུ་དཔུང་ལ་སོགས་པ་182 ཁྲོ་བོ་ཐམས་ཅད་183 འདུས་པ་བས་ཀྱང་ལྷག་པར་ཆེ་བ་ཅིག་ 184 འོག་ (Y705) ཏུ་185 ཕྱུང་སྟེ༔186 sending out below a mass of inherent powers and potent strength etc., even greater than a whole assembly [of] wrathful deities, so རྟག་པ་ཆེན་པོར་བཞུགས་པ་བརྟན་187 པ་འདི་ནི༔188
this firm establishment (DUN teaching on/display) [of the phurpa] in great permanence
སྤྲུལ་པའི་སྐུར་བྱིན་གྱིས་བརླབས་189 པའོ༔
is the consecration as the nirmāṇakāya.
____________
178 ན་: Y omits; DUN ལ་.
179 X Y insert ༔.
180 བཟོས་: DUN གཟྀགས་. Note that the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud, mTshams brag NGB vol. Chi, 1033.2, reads gzas, which gives a rather clearer meaning: readying/aiming (it) as though as to strike.
181 འཇིགས་: DUN འཇྀག་ (again, ’jig is presumably intended) . 182 སོགས་པ་: X Y སྩོགས་པ་; DUN སྩོགས་པ་འ།. 183 ཐམས་ཅད་: DUN ཐམས་ཆད་. 184 ཅིག་: KAḤ ཞིག་; DUN གཅྀག་. 185 ཏུ་: DUN དུ་. 186 སྟེ་: TSH PH ཏེ་. 187 བཞུགས་པ་བརྟན་: X Y བཞུགས་པར་བརྟན་; DUN བསྟན་. 188 DUN omits །. 189 གྱིས་བརླབས་: TSH PH གྱིས་བརླབ་; DUN ཀྱྀས་བརླབས་.
དེ་ནས་190 རིགས་ལྔར་བྱིན་གྱིས་བརླབ་191 པར་བྱའོ༔192
Then, [it] should be consecrated as the five [[[buddha]]] families. དེའི་193 སྐུ་གསུང་ཐུགས་194 སུ་ (PH243,3) བྱིན་གྱིས་བརླབ་195 (X671) པར་བྱ་སྟེ༔196 Since it must be consecrated as [[[buddha]]] body, speech [and] mind, སྤྱི་གཙུག་ཏུ་ཨཱོྃ༔197
[the syllable] ōṃ is meditated on at the crown of the head, རྐེད་198 པར་ཧྲིཿ199
hri at the waist,
____________
190 ནས་: DUN ལ་.
191 གྱིས་བརླབ་: X Y གྱིས་བརླབས་; DUN ཀྱྀས་བརླབ་.
192 བྱའོ་: DUN བྱ་སྟེ། །འབྲུ་ལྔ་གནས་ལྔར་བྱྀན་ཀྱྀས་བརླབས་པ་འོ།; the five seeds at the five places are consecrated (it is not clear if this additional line has been omitted in error in KD, or whether the DUN copyist mistook an annotation for main text).
193 དེའི་: DUN དེ་ནས་.
194 གསུང་ཐུགས་: Y གསུཾ་.
195 གྱིས་བརླབ་: X གྱིས་བརླབས་ (Y has an abbreviation of the whole phrase which gives a final sa); DUN ཀྱྀས་བརླབ་.
196 DUN ann., རྀགས་ལྔ་དང་སྐུ་གསུང་ཐུགས་གཉྀ་གས་བྱྀན་ཀྱྀས་བརླབས་ན་ཡང་བཟང་གང་ཡང་རུང་བ་གཅྀག་
བྱས་ན་ཡང་རུང༌།; [It is] fine whether the five families and the [[[buddha]]] body, speech [and] mind consecrations [are] both performed, or either one is [also] suitable (note, Bod rgya tshig mdzod chen mo [978]: gnyi ga = gnyis ka, archaic).
197 tu ཨཱོྃ་: KAḤ ཏུ་ཨོྃ་; DUN དུ་ཨཱོ་ (most probably, ཨཱོྃ་ is intended). DUN ann., ཨཱོྃ་དཀར་པོ་ལྟེ་ བར་བསམ་; meditate on a white ōṃ at the centre/navel (possibly, the words lte ba and ’phral ba [= dpral ba, forehead] below have been transposed [see Cantwell and Mayer, Early Tibetan Documents on Phur pa from Dunhuang, 99 note 54, and 100, notes 59, 60].)
198 རྐེད་: TSH PH སྐྱེད་ . 199 ཧྲིཿ: KAḤ X Y ཧྲཱིཿ; TSH PH ཧྲི༔; DUN ཧྲྀ།.
རྩེ་མོར་ཕཊ་200 བསམ་མོ༔201
[and] phaṭ at the point [of the phurpa].202
དེའི་འོག་ཏུ་203 ཐུགས་204 ཡེ་ཤེས་རྩེ་གཅིག་205 པར་བྱིན་གྱིས་བརླབས་ཅིང་206
207Following this, [the phurpa] is consecrated in the single-pointed heart primordial wisdom
____________
200 ཕཊ་: DUN ཕཏ་.
201 DUN ann., ཨཱཾ་དམར་པོ་ལྕེ་ཧུང་སྔོན་པོ་སྙྀང་ག་སྭ་སེར་པོ་འཕྲལ་བར་ཧ་ལྗང་ཀུ་རྐད་ (sic. = རྐང་ or རྐེད་?) པར་བསམ་; meditate on a red āṃ [at the] tongue, blue hung [at the] heart, yellow swa [at the] forehead, [and] a green ha at the foot/waist (note, ’phral ba: archaic for dpral ba, forehead, Bod rgya tshig mdzod chen mo: 1792. It is possible that lte ba, navel, has been transposed with ’phral ba here; see page 73, note 197 above. The long commentary and visualisation section give slightly different lists. For the body, speech and mind consecration, the long commentary gives a white oṃ at the crown of its head; a red hriḥ at the waist; and a dark blue phaṭ at the point. For the above consecration as the five families/primordial wisdoms, the long commentary and visualisation section both list the five places as the crown of its head; the waist; the waist boundary; the point; and the sides [of the blade]. However, the long commentary gives the five syllables as, oṃ āḥ hūṃ svā hā, while the visualisation section specifies a white oṃ at the crown of its head; a red hriḥ at the waist; a yellow svā at the waist boundary; a dark blue hūṃ at the point; and a green hūṃ at the sides [of the blade], KAḤ105–106, 144–145; TSH397–398, 436–437;
PH259,2–258,3, PH272,1; X710–711, 751–752; Y744–745, 785. Perhaps the green hūṃ is an error for a green hā, which might seem more appropriate here, especially given that there is already hūṃ at the point?).
202 We have a parallel to this in the Sa skya Phur chen, where the kīlas of the five families are generated, and consecrated as buddha body, speech and mind, with oṃ meditated on at the crown, hrīḥ at the waist, and phaṭ at the tip (24r.2–3).
203 ཏུ་: DUN དུ་.
204 DUN inserts ཀྱྀ་.
205 གཅིག་: TSH PH ཅིག་.
206 གྱིས་བརླབས་ཅིང་: KAḤ TSH PH གྱིས་བརླབ་ཅིང་; X Y གྱིས་བརླབས་ཤིང་; DUN ཀྱྀས་བརླབས་ཏེ།;
DUN ann., དཔལ་ཆེན་པོ་འྀ་ཐུགས་༼ཡེ་ཤེས་?༽ རྣམ་པར་མྱྀ་རྟོག་པ་འྀ་ཡེ་ཤེས་; the Great Glorious [One]’s heart, non-discursive primordial wisdom.
[{Here, KAḤ, TSH, PH, X and Y omit a passage found in DUN, which is included since the omission clearly constitutes a shared scribal error:208}
།ཟུར་གསུམ་དུ་ (DUN4r) །ཕཊ་གསུམ།209
At the three edges [of the blade?] three [[[Wikipedia:syllable|syllable]]] phaṭs,
____________
207 This line, and the text below omitted in KAḤ, TSH, PH, X and Y, concerning the three hūṃs and three phaṭs, has a parallel in the ’Bum nag (Boord 196), which simply quotes “the tantra”. But it may be that the gSang rgyud is intended, since this is quoted a little above. Interestingly, in this case the positioning of the hūṃs and phaṭs is the reverse of that in DUN here. The bDud ’joms bKa’ ma edition of the ’Bum nag gives: སྲས་མཆོག་འདི་ ཡང་སྐུ་གསུང་ཐུགས་ཡེ་ཤེས་རྩེ་གཅིག་ཏུ་བྱིན་གྱིས་བརླབས་ཏེ། དབལ་གྱི་ཟུར་གསུམ་ཧཱུྃ་གསུམ། ལོགས་གསུམ་དུ་ཕཊ་ གསུམ། རྩེ་མོ་ལ་ཨ་དཀར་པོ་ཞིག་བསམ་སྟེ། རྒྱུད་ལས། ལོགས་ལ་ཕཊ་གསུམ་བཞག་པ་ཡིན། །ཟུར་གསུམ་ཧཱུྃ་གསུམ་
གཞག་པ་ཡིན། །ཞེས་སོ།། The ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud parallel text, as well as the Myang ’das parallel passage in its Chapter 9 and the parallel lines in the Phur pa bcu gnyis’s Chapter 11 agree with the positioning in DUN here, and differ from the ’Bum nag. This would also appear to be the case with the differently worded tshig rkang on the subject in the Dur khrod khu byug rol pa’i rgyud. It gives: ཧཱུྃ་གསུམ་དང་ནི་ཕཊ་གསུམ་གྱིས། །ངོས་ གསུམ་དང་ནི་ཟུར་གསུམ་ལ། (mTshams brag NGB Volume Ba: 277). The long commentary and visualisation section also confirm the placement of syllables given in DUN (KAḤ106, 145; TSH398, 437; PH258,3, PH272,1; X711, 752; Y745, 785).
208 The passage is found in the parallel section of the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud (mTshams brag NGB Volume Chi, Chapter 10, 1034), and for further parallels, see note above. At first sight it may not seem certain that it was not added in DUN, since the KAḤ TSH PH X Y version remains coherent without it. However, since lines within the passage are referred to in the short commentary (KAḤ81; TSH 372; PH248,3; X686; Y720), and the meditation is discussed both in the long commentary (KAḤ106; TSH 398; PH258,3; X711; Y745) and in the visualisation section (KAḤ145; TSH437; PH272,1; X751–752; Y785), this surely implies that the passage has been omitted in error at this point in the hypearchetype of these versions. Moreover, there is a further omission some lines below— and in that case, the omitted passage is required. Thus, the weight of evidence points to scribal lapse in this section of the KD archetype of the text. 209 DUN ann. (written beneath phaṭ and gsum respectively), གསུང་ཐུགས་; [[[buddha]]] speech mind.
།ངོས་གསུམ་དུ་ཧཱུྃ་གསུམ་གཞག་གོ།210
[and] at the three sides three hūṃs are placed.
།དེ་ནས་སྐུ་རྟས་པ་211 དང༌།212
Then, the [[[buddha]]] body is augmented213 and, རྀགས་སོ་སོ་འྀ་ཁྲོ་བོ་ཐམས་ཆད་ཀྱྀས་བྱྀན་ཀྱྀས་བརླབ་ཅྀང་
[the phurpa] should be consecrated by all the wrathful deities of the various families,
{Here, the passage omitted in KAḤ, TSH, PH, X and Y concludes}]
དབང་བསྐུར་བར་བྱ་སྟེ༔
and empowered [by them].
____________
210 DUN ann., ཧཱུྃ་གསུམ་ལས་འདས་པར་འོང་པའ་; from the three hūṃs [it] will come to transcendence
211 rtas pa may indicate brtas pa, perfective of brta ba, a reading which Lopon P. Ogyan Tanzin suggests would be appropriate here. Alternatively, it is possible that rtas here may be an error for brtag, the reading which is found in the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud (mTshams brag NGB Volume Chi, 1034.2). However, in this case, another possibility is bltas or ltas, found in the short commentary (KAḤ81; TSH372; PH248,3; X686; Y720), which could mean simply that the phurbu is perceived as the buddha body. Moreover, the long commentary seems to explain the word in this sense, although in that case, the readings are not so consistent (KAḤ106 gives brtas; TSH398 and PH258,3, confirm ltas; X712 and Y745 inappropriately give bstan). However, the gloss fits best with the reading, ltas: you should meditate for a long time as though it is actually appearing like this (ཡུན་རིང་དུ་མངོན་སུམ་དང་འདྲ་བར་བསམས་ལ་བྱའོ་).
212 DUN ann., གོང་དུ་གཞལ་མྱེད་ཁང་ [ཕུབ་(/ཕྲབ)] པ་འྀ་ནང་ན་བཞུགས་པ་འྀ་ཁྲོ་བོ་ཡབ་ཡུམ་བཅུ་པོ་;
above, the ten yab yum wrathful deities abide within the protective covering (uncertain) [of] the Immeasurable Palace (phub is slightly uncertain, although it would make more sense than phrab, if we take phub pa (from ’bubs pa) as indicating the protective covering of the Celestial Palace. Just possibly here, phrab = khrab, armour/shield?). 213 See note 211 above on a possible scribal error, in which case, the meaning would be, is perceived or is examined.
ཁྲོ་བོའི་དཀྱིལ་འཁོར་དེ་དག་ཉིད་ཕྱོགས་བཅུར་འཕྲོས་ཏེ༔
The maṇḍalas of these same wrathful deities are emanated in the ten directions, and
སླར་འདུས་པ་ལས༔214
having once again merged together,
ཧཱུྃ་ཧཱུྃ་དང་ཕཊ་ཕཊ་ཀྱི་215 སྒྲ་འབྱིན་ཅིང༔
the sounds of hūṃ hūṃ and phaṭ phaṭ are emitted.
དེ་ཉིད་ལ་བསྟིམ་ཏེ༔216
These [[[Wikipedia:syllables|syllables]]] are dissolved into it [DUN: these are dissolved into the buddha form],
དབང་དང་བྱིན་རླབས་217 ཐམས་ཅད་ཀྱིས་བསྟིམ་218 པར་ (KAḤ67) བྱའོ༔219
so that [they] should be dissolved [into the phurpa] with all the powers and consecrations.220
____________
214 པ་ལས་: DUN ནས་; DUN omits །.
215 ཕཊ་ཕཊ་ཀྱི་: KAḤ TSH ཕཊ༔ ཕཊ༔ ཀྱི་; PH ༔ཕཊ༔ ཕཊ༔ ཀྱི་; Y ཕཊ་ཕཊ་ཀྱིས་; DUN ཕཏ་ཕཊ་ཀྱི་
216 ཉིད་ལ་བསྟིམ་ཏེ་: KAḤ X Y ལ་བསྟིམ་སྟེ་; DUN ཉིད་སྐུ་ལ་བསྟྀམས་ཏེ་; DUN omits །.
217 རླབས་: TSH PH X བརླབས་.
218 ཐམས་ཅད་ཀྱིས་བསྟིམ་: TSH PH ཐམས་ཅད་ཀྱི་བསྟིམ་; DUN ཐམས་ཆད་ཀྱྀས་བཅྀན་.
219 DUN ann., (placed under སྐུ་ལ་བསྟིམས་) ཁྲོ་བོ་མང་པོ་ཕུར་པ་ལ་; (placed under བཅིན་པར་བྱ་)
ཐྀམ་བ་འྀ་དོན་; this means that many wrathful ones are dissolving into the phurpa.
220 KAḤ, TSH, PH, X and Y are clear, but DUN bcIn, possibly = ’byin, or phyin? It is also possible that the reading bcing, found in the mTshams brag and gTing skyes editions of the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud (mTshams brag NGB vol. Chi, 1034.4), was intended. This could be translated, “[the phurpa] should be bound up with all the powers and consecrations”. The sDe dge edition gives, tshim, “[the phurpa] should be satiated with...”). In any case, the annotation attached to these words in DUN makes it clear that the sense is dissolving, thus agreeing with the KD reading.
དེ་ནས་འགྲོ་བའི་དོན་ལ་གཤེགས་ན་221 ཕྱོགས་བཅུའི་བདེ་བར་གཤེགས་པ་ཐམས་ཅད་222 སྟོང་
གྲོགས་223 མཛད་པར་224 སྔོན་ཞལ་གྱིས་བཞེས་པ་ལགས་པས༔
Then, coming for the benefit of beings, all the sugatas of the ten directions, since formerly [they] verily promised to act as allies,
225སྟོང་གྲོགས་226 མཛད་ཅིང་སྐུ་227 ལ་འཇུག་གོ༔228
acting as [DUN this phurpa’s] allies, [they] enter into this [[[buddha]]] form.
བདག་ཉིད་ཀྱང་བདག་ཉིད་ཆེན་པོ་ཡིན་པས༔229
since even you yourself are the great lord,
ཕུར་པ་ཡང་བདག་ཉིད་ཆེན་པོར་དབང་བསྐུར་230 བྱིན་གྱིས་བརླབ་231 (DUN 4v) པའི་ཕྱིར༔
so, in order to empower and consecrate the phurpa also as the great lord,
____________
221 DUN inserts ། .
222 ཐམས་ཅད་: DUN ཐམས་ཆད་ཀྱྀས་ཀྱང༌།; DUN ann., སྤྲུལ་པ་འྀ་ཁྲོ་བོ་འབྱུང་བ་ཉྀད་བསྒྲུབ་པ་པོས་བསམ་
བ་ཐམས་ཆད་སྒྲུབ་པ་འྀ་ཕྱྀར་གཤེགས་པ་ལ་འགྲོ་བ་འྀ་དོན་ཅེས་བྱ་འོ་; coming in order for the practitioner to accomplish all wishes, this very arising of the emanated wrathful ones is said to be [for] the benefit of beings.
223 སྟོང་གྲོགས་: X Y སྟོངས་གྲོགས་ (X/Y have presumably corrected the text here and in the case below; stongs grogs is found in the mTshams brag edition of the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud, mTshams brag NGB vol. Chi, 1034.5, although not in sDe dge or gTing skyes, which agree with stong grogs).
224 པར་: DUN ཅིང་.
225 DUN inserts དེ་འྀ་.
226 སྟོང་གྲོགས་: X Y སྟོངས་གྲོགས་.
227 སྐུ་: KAḤ བསྐུ་; DUN དེ་འྀ་སྐུ་.
228 གོ་: DUN པ་དང་; DUN ann., (placed under དེ་འི་སྟོང་གྲོགས་) ཕུར་པ་འྀ་ཁྲོ་བོ་; (placed under འཇུག་པ་དང་) ཐྀམ་བའ་; Phurpa wrathful deities... dissolve.
229 པས་: DUN བས་; DUN ann., (placed under ཉིད་ཀྱང་) སྔགས་མཁན་; (placed under ཡིན་བས་) དཔལ་ཆེན་པོའྀ་; the mantra practitioner... the great glorious heruka. 230 DUN inserts ཞྀང༌།.
231 གྱིས་བརླབ་: KAḤ X Y གྱིས་བརླབས་; DUN ཀྱྀས་བརླབ་.
ལག་མཐིལ་གཡས་པར་མ་232 ལས་ཉི་མའི་233 དཀྱིལ་ (TSH357) འཁོར་དུ་གྱུར་པའི་སྟེང་དུ་
meditate that [the syllable] ma [is] in the palm [of] the right hand, transforming into a sun maṇḍala, and above,
[{Here, KAḤ, TSH, PH, X and Y omit a passage found in DUN (possibly due to eyeskip from steng du), which is included, since its omission clearly represents a shared scribal error:234}
ཧཱུྃ།235
is hūṃ.
།གཡོན་པ་འྀ་ལག་པར་ཏ་ལས་ཟླ་བ་འྀ་དཀྱྀལ་འཁོར་དུ་གྱུར་པ་འྀ་སྟེང་དུ་ཨ་བསམས་ལ།236
[and the syllable] ta [is] in the left hand, transforming into a moon maṇḍala, with [the syllable] a above, and །གུང་མོ་ལ་ཨཱོྃ།237
at the middle finger [is the syllable] ōṃ,
____________
232 མ་: Y མཿ.
233 ཉི་མའི་: DUN ཉྀ་འྀ་. 234 The passage is found in the parallel section of the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud (mTshams brag NGB vol. Chi, Chapter 10, 1034–1035). It is also needed in that the line mentioning the right hand and sun maṇḍala needs to be followed by the left hand and moon maṇḍala. Unlike the omitted passage above, none of the lines are cited in the following short commentary, but the lines are discussed in the long commentary (KAḤ108–109, TSH400–401, PH260,1, X714, Y747–748). Moreover, since the passage is necessary in this context, and it follows closely after the previous omitted passage, which must have been omitted in error (see page 75, note 208 above), the evidence would seem conclusive that the omission represents scribal lapse in this section of the KD archetype of the text.
235 DUN ann., འདྀ་མན་ཆད་ནྀ་ཏྀང་ངེ་འཛྀན་གྱྀས་བྱྀན་ཀྱྀས་བརླབ་པར་འཆད་; (placed under གྱུར་པ་... ཧཱུྃ་, presumably applying to the sun maṇḍala) བྱང་ཆུབ་ཀྱྀ་སེམས་རྡོ་རྗེ་འྀ་དོན་; From this point, [this] is explained as consecrating through samādhi... [this] means the bodhicitta vajra.
236 DUN ann., (placed under ཏ་ལས་ཟླ་བ་འི་) ནྀ་ཤེས་རབ་ཀྱྀ་རང་བཞྀན་; (placed under ཨ་བསམས་ ལ་) ཀུན་དུ་བཟང་མོ་འྀ་དོན་; for [the syllable ta], wisdom’s natural expression... [this] means Samantabhadrī.
237 DUN ann., ཨཱོྃ་སྟེ་འབུ་ཏ་འྀ་རྀགས་; ōṃ is the buddha family.
།མཐེ་བོ་ལ་ཧཱུྃ།238
at the thumb, hūṃ,
།འཛུབ་མོ་ལ་ཏྲཾ།239
at the forefinger, traṃ,
།སྲྀན་ལག་ལ་ཧྲྀ།240
at the ring finger, hrī,
།མཐེའུ་ཆུང་ལ་ [ཨ་(/ཡ་)]།241
at the little finger, a;
།འདྀ་རྣམས་ཟླ་བ་འྀ་དཀྱྀལ་འཁོར་གྱྀ་སྟེང་དུ་
above moon maṇḍala[s],242 these {Here, the passage omitted in KAḤ, TSH, PH, X and Y concludes}] བཞག་སྟེ༔
are established,
____________
238 DUN ann., རྡོ་རྗེ་འྀ་རྀགས་; the vajra family.
239 DUN ann., རྀན་པོ་ཅེ་འྀ་རྀགས་; the jewel family.
240 DUN ann., པད་མ་འྀ་རྀགས་; the lotus family.
241 The parallel text in the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud (mTshams brag NGB vol. Chi, 1035.1) gives, ha (D Volume Wa, 350v.7: hā). But the letter a (āḥ in XY) is confirmed in the long commentary (KAḤ109, TSH400, PH260,1, X714, Y747). However, rather inconsistently, the following visualisation notes give ha (haḥ in Y), except for KAḤ, which gives ā (KAḤ150, TSH442, PH373,3, X758, Y791). DUN ann., ལས་ཀྱྀ་རྀགས་; the action family.
242 It is uncertain whether the plural is implied (in which case, each syllable would have its own disc). This would seem quite likely from the rather expanded version of the parallel text in the Phur pa bcu gnyis (mTshams brag Volume Dza, 905), or other sources, such as Mag gsar 2003: 169.
243ཨཱོྃ་ (Y706) སུ་ར་སྟྭཾ༔244
and reciting, “ōṃ suras tvaṃ”,
ཞེས་བརྗོད་པས་245 ཐལ་མོ་མཉམ་པར་246 སྦྱར་རོ༔247
the palms [of the two hands] are joined together.
ཨཱོྃ་248 བཛྲ་ཨ་ཛ་ལི་249 ཧཱུྃ༔
Reciting, “oṃ vajra añjali hūṃ”,
ཞེས་250 པས་སོར་མོ་ཅུང་ཟད་བསྣོལ་ལོ༔
the fingers are intertwined a little.
ཨཱོྃ་251 བཛྲ་བན་དྷ་252 ཧཱུྃ༔ (X672) ཞེས་བརྗོད་པས༔253
Reciting, “oṃ vajra bandha hūṃ”,
སོར་མོ་རྒྱབ་དུ་254 བསྣོལ་ཏེ་བསྡམ་མོ༔255
[the hands are] bound [together], intertwining the fingers [back to] back.
____________
243 Note that in the case of the mantras rendered into approximate Sanskrit equivalents here and below, some combine Tibetan words and also unknown sounds with the Sanskrit; hence a ‘correct’ Sanskrit rendering is not really possible.
244 ཨཱོྃ་སུ་ར་སྟྭཾ་: KAḤ ཨོྃ་སུ་ར་སྟྭཾ་; TSH PH ཨཱོྃ་སུ་ར་སྟོཾ་; DUN སུ་ར་ཏ་སྟྭཾ་.
245 པས་: DUN ལ།.
246 པར་: DUN བར་.
247 KAḤ X Y omit རོ་.
248 ཨཱོྃ་: KAḤ ཨོྃ་.
249 ཨ་ཛ་ལི་: X ཨ་ཛཱ་ལི་; DUN ཨ་འཛའ་ལྀ་.
250 DUN inserts བརྗོད་.
251 ཨཱོྃ་: KAḤ ཨོྃ་.
252 བན་དྷ་: KAḤ བནདཾ་; X Y བྷནྷ་; DUN བྷན་དྷ་.
253 KAḤ X Y omit ༔.
254 དུ་: KAḤ X Y ཏུ་.
255 བསྡམ་མོ་: X བསྡཾས་མོ་ DUN བསྡམ་.
དེ་ནས་256 ས་མ་ཡ་སྟྭཾ༔257
Then by reciting, “samayas tvaṃ”,
ཞེས་བརྗོད་པས་258 ཕུར་པ་བླངས་ཏེ་ཆང་ (PH244,1) པའི་259 ནང་དུ་བཅུག་ལ༔260
taking the phurpa, putting [it] within the [closed] fist, ལག་པའི་རྟིང་པ་ཕྱེ་ནས༔261
[you] separate the stem[s]262 of the hand[s],
མཐེ་བོང་263 གཉིས་སྲིན་ལག་ (DUN5r) དང་མཐེའུ་264 ཆུང་གི་བར་དུ་བཅུག་ལ༔265
putting [it]266 between the two thumbs, the ring finger[s] and the little finger[s], and
____________
256 DUN omits དེ་ནས་.
257 སྟྭཾ་: TSH PH སྟོཾ་; DUN ann., དམ་ཚྀག་སྐོངས་པ་ཞེས་བྱ་; [this] is called, restoring the samaya .
258 པས་: DUN ལ།.
259 ཆང་པའི་: KAḤ ཆད་པའི་; TSH PH DUN ཆང་བའི་ (chang ba’i, given in both TSH/PH and DUN, may have been the earlier reading but presumably, chang ba = ’changs pa [Das]/changs pa [[[Bod rgya tshig mdzod chen mo]]]. Like X/Y here, the parallel text in the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud, mTshams brag NGB vol. Chi, 1035.3, gives chang pa’i.)
260 ལ་: DUN ནས་.
261 རྟིང་པ་ཕྱེ་ནས་: KAḤ གཏིང་པ་ཕྱེས་ནས་; DUN རྟིང་ཕྱེ་ནས་, DUN omits །.
262 Generally, rting pa would indicate the heel of the foot: in the case of the hands, it presumably means the base or stem of the hands, just above the wrists.
263 མཐེ་བོང་: X Y ཐེ་བོང་; DUN མཐེ་བོ་.
264 མཐེའུ་: TSH PH མཐེ་; X Y ཐེའུ་.
265 ལ་: DUN ནས་.
266 The parallel verse in the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud (mTshams brag NGB vol. Chi, 1035.3) and in the Myang ’das adds in phur pa (“bar du phur pa”), making it clear that it is the phurpa being referred to here.
མཐེ་བོང་གིས་ཀྱང་267 ཅུང་ཟད་བསྐུལ་ལ་དྲངས་སོ༔268
the thumbs also induce and guide (DUN move and straighten269) [it] a little.
ཨཱོྃ་270 བཛྲ་ཨ་བེ་271 ཤ་ཡ་ཨ༔272 ཞེས་བརྗོད་པས༔
Reciting, “oṃ vajra āveśaya a”,
____________
267 མཐེ་བོང་གིས་ཀྱང་: TSH མཐེ་བོང་གྱིས་ཀྱང་; X Y ཐེ་བོང་གིས་ཀྱང་; DUN མཐེ་བོས་.
268 བསྐུལ་ལ་དྲངས་སོ༔: TSH PH བསྐུལ་ལ་དྲང་ངོ་; DUN བསྒུལ་ཞིང་དྲུད་དོ་ (the parallel text in the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud, mTshams brag NGB vol. Chi, 1035.4, gives bsgul zhing dril lo, and the Myang ’das gives bsgul la phur pa ’dril. It is quite likely that KAḤ TSH PH X Y are in error with bskul; bsgul makes better sense here.).
269 See above note: the translation of the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud and Myang ’das versions would be roll.
270 ཨཱོྃ་: KAḤ ཨོྃ་.
271 བེ་: X Y ཝེ་.
272 ཡ་ཨ་: X Y ཡ་ཨཱ་; DUN ཨ་ཨ་ (one would expect that ya, but it is worth noting that the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud, mTshams brag NGB vol. Chi, 1035.4, shares DUN's reading of a.
ཕྱོགས་བཅུའི་དེ་བཞིན་གཤེགས་པ་ཡབ་ཡུམ་273 སྲས་དང་བཅས་པ་ཐམས་ཅད་274 ཞེ་ (KAḤ68)
སྡང་རྗེས་སུ་དྲན་པའི་275 སྐུ་ཉུངས་276 འབྲུ་ཙམ་277 བར་མཚམས་278 མེད་པར་ཕུར་པ་279 ལ་བསྡུ་ཞིང་ 280 བསྟིམ་མོ༔281
all the male and female tathāgatas (DUN sugatas) of the ten directions (DUN+and the three times), together with [their] sons, mindful [of] hatred, [their buddha] bodies the size of mustard seed[s], gather without [leaving any] gaps,282 and dissolve into the phurpa.
____________
273 བཅུའི་དེ་བཞིན་གཤེགས་པ་ཡབ་ཡུམ་: KAḤ བཅུའི་དེ་བཞིན་གཤེགས་པས་ཡུམ་; DUN བཅུ་དུས་གསུམ་གྱྀ་ བདེ་བར་གཤེགས་པ་ (note that the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud, mTshams brag NGB vol. Chi, 1035.4, gives dus gsum gyi bde bar gshegs pa, but also gives yab yum).
274 ཐམས་ཅད:་ TSH PH X Y ཐམས་ཅད༔; DUN ཐམས་ཆད་.
275 པའི་: DUN བ་འྀ་.
276 ཉུངས་: TSH PH ཉུང་; DUN ཡུངས་.
277 TSH PH insert ༔.
278 མཚམས་: TSH PH X Y འཚམས་.
279 TSH PH omit ཕུར་པ་, presumably in error (phur pa is also found in the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud, mTshams brag NGB vol. Chi, 1035.5).
280 ཞིང་: TSH PH ཅིང་.
281 DUN ann., (placed under ཞེ་སྡང་) ཁྲོ་བོ་ལ་བྱ་; (starts under ཡུངས་འབྲུ་ ...) སྔགས་མཁན་བདག་ ཉྀད་ཀྱང་ཡུངས་འབྲུ་ཙམ་བར་མཚམས་མྱེད་པ་མང་པོར་བསྟྀམ་; acting as wrathful deities... also the mantra practitioner oneself dissolves into many [[[forms]]] like mustard seed[s], without [leaving any] gaps. (It is also possible that the comment intends to suggest rather that the buddhas are also dissolving into oneself, although this is not spelt out.)
282 The sense is clarified in the short commentary’s summary: སྐུ་ཉུངས་འབྲུ་ཙམ་གྲངས་མེད་པ་ ཕུར་པ་ལ་བསྡུ་བ་, “limitless [[[buddha]]] forms the size of mustard seeds are absorbed into the phurpa” (KAḤ81, minor variants in other versions).
དེ་ནས་283 སྐུ་གསུང་ཐུགས་ཀྱི་284 བདག་པོ་285 ཉིད་དུ་286 བྱིན་གྱིས་བརླབ་ཅིང་287 དབང་བསྐུར་ཏེ༔288
Then, consecrating and empowering [it] (DUN+in perfecting [it]) as the essential (DUN+great) lord of [[[buddha]]] body, speech [and] mind, and སོར་མོ་རྒྱབ་དུ་289 བསྣོལ་ཏེ༔290
intertwining the fingers [back] to back, གུང་མོ་གཉིས་གཤིབས་ཏེ་291 བསྒྲེང་བའི་བར་དུ་292 ཕུར་པ་བཟུང་293 ལ༔
(you) hold the phurpa between the two middle fingers [which are] positioned upright, and ཨཱོྃ་294 བཛྲ་ས་ཏྭ་ར་ཙ་295 ཧཱུྃ་ཞེས་བཟླས་སོ༔296
recite, “oṃ vajrasattva rāja hūṃ”. དེ་ནས་སོར་མོ་ཕུག་སུག་པོར་བྱས་ཏེ༔297
Then, making the fingers into “phug sug po”/ “pug pug po”298
____________
283 DUN omits དེ་ནས་.
284 ཀྱི་: X ཀྱིས་.
285 DUN inserts ཆེན་པོ་ (found also in the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud, mTshams brag NGB vol. Chi, 1035.6).
286 DUN inserts རྫོགས་པར་ (found also in the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud, mTshams brag NGB vol. Chi, 1035.6).
287 གྱིས་བརླབ་ཅིང་: X Y གྱིས་བརླབས་ཤིང་; DUN ཀྱྀས་བརླབ་ཅིང་.
288 ཏེ་: DUN བར་བྱ་སྟེ་ (found also in the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud, mTshams brag NGB vol. Chi, 1035.6).
289 དུ་: KAḤ X Y ཏུ་.
290 ཏེ་: TSH PH སྟེ་; DUN ལ་; DUN ann., འདྀ་ཡན་ཆད་སྔགས་དང་ཕྱག་རྒྱས་བྱྀན་ཀྱྀས་བརླབ་པ་སྟོན་; up to this point, consecrating with mantra[s] and mudrā[s] is demonstrated.
291 ཏེ་: TSH PH སྟེ་.
292 བའི་བར་དུ་: Y བར་དུ་དུ་.
293 བཟུང་: DUN གཟུང་.
294 ཨཱོྃ་: KAḤ ཨོྃ་.
295 ས་ཏྭ་ར་ཙ་: KAḤ པ་ཏ་ར་ཙ་; TSH PH སྭ་ཏྭ་ར་ཙ་; X པཱ་ཏཱ་ར་ཙ་; Y སཱ་ཏཱ་ར་ཙ་; DUN ས་ཏྭ་ར་ཛཱ་.
296 DUN omits སོ་; DUN ann., ཐུགས་རྡོ་རྗེ་རྀགས་ཀྱྀས་; the mind/heart vajra family.
297 ཕུག་སུག་པོར་བྱས་ཏེ་: TSH PH ཕུག་སུག་སོར་བྱ་སྟེ་; X ཕུག་སུག་པོར་བྱ་ཏེ་; Y ཕུག་པུག་པོར་བྱ་སྟེ་;
DUN [པུག་པུག་(/པྲག་པྲག་)] པོར་བྱས་ལ་.
299ལག་པའི་རྟིང་པས་ཕུར་ (Y707) བུ་300 བཟུང་ལ༔
(KAḤ+and then) holding the phurpa with the base301 of the hand[s], ཨཱོྃ་བུར་302 བུ་བ་ཕཊ༔ ཅེས་303 བརྗོད་དོ༔304
(you) recite, “oṃ bhūr bhuvaḥ phaṭ”.
____________
298 The text in all versions would seem corrupt. DUN might intend: prag prag po, but this does not help. The ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud (mTshams brag NGB vol. Chi, 1035.7) gives pug pug por (also in D and T). The Myang ’das’s Chapter 9 gives the reading of phug phug po. The three groups of rNying rgyud editions of the Myang ’das agree on phug (R has pug and N bug for the second phug), although D has a marginal note giving an alternative reading, sug sug. Although phug phug po is not clear, it might suggest making a hollow or “making the fingers [as though they are?] piercing”.
In a parallel line in the Phur pa bcu gnyis’s Chapter 11, D gives the reading, thug por for pug pug por (against TRK’s phug por and M’s sug por). This would make sense (touching), but it would seem highly unlikely that this was an earlier reading from which all our instances of phug/pug/sug derive! It is more likely that thug was an editorial attempt to make sense of a rather obscure word in this context. In dbu med sources, we are quite likely to find confusion between pa and sa, but far less likely for confusions of either of these letters with tha. In the Dur khrod khu byug rol pa’i rgyud’s parallel passage, which is a very differently phrased presentation of the material (although unmistakable in that, for instance, the mantras are in the same sequence), the description at this point would seem to suggest that the two hands are made into a lotus shape, with the fingers of each hand touching each other (།ལག་གཉིས་སོར་མོ་རྩེ་སྤྲད་དེ། །པདྨ་ལྟ་བུར་བྱས་པ་ཡི། [[[mTshams brag]] edition, Vol. Ba: 277]). It is perhaps just possible that pug/phug might be for spug, a jewel, which would seem to fit, but a problem would still remain with the following pug po/sug so!
299 KAḤ inserts དེ་ནས་.
301 See page 82, note 262 above on rting pa.
302 ཨཱོྃ་བུར་: KAḤ ཨོྃ་ཕུར་; TSH PH X Y ཨཱོྃ་ཕུར་.
303 ༔ ཅེས་: TSH PH X Y ༔ ཞེས་; DUN ཅེས་.
304 DUN ann., གསུང་པད་མ་འྀ་རྀགས་ཀྱྀས་; the speech lotus family.
དེ་ནས་སོར་མོ་རྒྱབ་དུ་305 བསྣོལ་ཏེ༔306
Then intertwining the fingers [back] to back,
མཐེ་བོང་ (X673) གཤིབས་307 པའི་ (DUN5v) ཆང་པའི་308 བར་དུ་309 བཅུག་ལ༔310
[you] put [it]311 between the closed hands, with the thumbs lined up and, ཨཱོྃ་312 ཧ་ན་ཧ་ན་ཏིབ་ཏ་ཙཀྲ་313 ཧཱུྃ་ (TSH358) ཕཊ༔ ཅེས་314 བརྗོད་ནས་དྲིལ་ཏེ༔315
reciting, “oṃ hana hana dīptacakra hūṃ phaṭ”,316 [it] is rolled, and བདག་ཉིད་ཆེན་པོ་ཐམས་ཅད་གཉིས་སུ་མེད་པའི་317 སྦྱོར་བ་མཛད་པའི་གཟི་བྱིན་ཐམས་ཅད་ཕུར་ པའི་སྐུ་ལ་ཞུགས་པས༔318
all the majestic powers created [by] all the great lords in non-dual union enter into the [[[buddha]]] body of the phurpa.
____________
305 དུ་: KAḤ X Y ཏུ་.
306 DUN omits །.
307 མཐེ་བོང་གཤིབས་: KAḤ མཐེ་བོང་གཉིས་གཤིབས་; TSH PH མཐེ་བོང་གཤིགས་; X ཐེ་འོང་གཤིབས་; Y
ཐེ་བོང་གཤིབས་; DUN མཐེ་བོ་གཤྀབས་.
308 see page 82, note 259 above.
309 པའི་བར་དུ་: TSH PH གི་བར་དུ་; DUN པར་.
310 ལ་: DUN ནས་.
311 the 'Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud (mTshams brag NGB vol. Chi, 1036.1) parallel passage makes this explicit: ཕུར་པ་བཅུག་.
312 ཨཱོྃ་: KAḤ ཨོྃ་.
313 ཏིབ་ཏ་ཙཀྲ་: KAḤ ཏིཔྟ་ཙཀྲ་; DUN ཏིབ་ཏ་ཙ་ཀྲ་.
314 ༔ ཅེས་: TSH PH X Y ༔ ཞེས་; DUN ཅེས་.
315 དྲིལ་ཏེ་: KAḤ དྲལ་ཏོ་; TSH PH དྲིལ་སྟེ་; X འདྲིལ་ཏེ་.
316 This mantra has its parallel to that in the Guhyasamāja's Chapter 14 (oṃ tshin da tshin da ha na ha na da ha da ha dīpta badzra tsakra hūṃ phaṭ): eg. in the mTshams brag NGB edition, vol. Tsha 862.6; see also the Dunhuang version, IOL Tib J 438: 55r.1 (ōṃ tshin da tshIn da/ [nga(/da?)] [...] ha na ha na dIb btātsa kra hūṃ phaṭ).
317 པའི་: TSH PH པར་.
318 པས་: DUN nas; DUN ann., ལག་པ་གཡས་པ་ཐབས་ཏེ་རྀགས་ལྔ་གཡོན་ཤེས་རབ་སྟེ་ཡུམ་ལྔ་ཐབས་དང་ ཤེས་རབ་ཀྱྀ་བདག་ཉྀད་ཀུན་སྦྱོང་༼བ་?༽འྀ་བྱང་ཆུབ་ཀྱྀ་སེམས་; the right hand being means, the five families, the left being wisdom, the five consorts, [this demonstrates] the purifying bodhicitta [of] all the [[[Wikipedia:male|male]] and female] lords of means and wisdom.
སྟོང་ཁམས་གང་བར་319 མེ་སྟག་འཕྲོ་ཞིང་320 དམིགས་པ་ཐམས་ཅད་321 ངེས་ (PH345,1) པར་ གྲུབ་322 པའི་བྱིན་323 དང་324 དབང་ཆེན་པོ་དང་ལྡན་པར་གྱུར་ཏེ༔325 Sparks of fire radiate, filling the thousand-fold realms, and [the phurpa] becomes fully consecrated and empowered really to accomplish all objects.
མདུན་གྱི་ནམཁའ་ཨེ་ཡི་326 གདན་ལ་བཞུགས་པར་བསམས་327 ནས༔
Having meditated on [the phurpa deity] abiding (DUN requested to abide) upon the throne of the (+DUN triangular) “e”328 (DUN+in) the space in front,
ཉུངས་དཀར་གྱི་329 རྒྱལ་པོས་བརྡེག་ཅིང༔330
striking with the king of white mustard seeds,
གུ་གུལ་སྦྱར་མས་བདུག་པས༔331
fumigating with compounded bdellium incense,332
____________
319 བར་: TSH PH བ་.
320 ཞིང་: TSH PH ཅིང་.
321 ཐམས་ཅད་: DUN ཐམས་ཆད་.
322 གྲུབ་: DUN འགྲུབ་.
323 བྱིན་: KAḤ བྱིན་རླབས་.
324 DUN inserts །.
325 པར་གྱུར་ཏེ ་: DUN བར་འགྱུར་སྟེ་; DUN ann., (placed under འཕྲོ་ཞིང་) ཁྲོ་བོ་འྀ་; of wrathful deities.
326 ནམཁའ་ཨེ་ཡི་: KAḤ X Y མཁའ་ཨེའི་; DUN ནམ་མཁའ་ལ་ཨེ་གྲུ་གསུམ་གྱྀ་ (note that the long commentary gives nam mkha’ la (KAḤ111; TSH403; PH261,2; X717; Y750). 327 བསམས་: TSH PH བསམ་; Y བསཾ་; DUN གསོལ་ (the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud, mTshams brag NGB vol. Chi, 1036.4, shares the reading gsol). 328 The triangular e, symbolic of the female organ, the source of dharmas (Tib. chos ’byung), is represented in ritual practice as the container/stand in which the phurpa is inserted (see also above, page 69, note 161).
329 ཉུངས་དཀར་གྱི་: KAḤ ཉུངས་ཀར་གྱིས་; DUN ཡུངས་ཀར་གྀ་.
330 བརྡེག་ཅིང་: KAḤ བསྡིག་ཅིང་; KAḤ TSH PH omit ༔.
331 མས་བདུག་པས་: TSH PH བས་བདུག་པས་; DUN མས་བདུགས་ལ་; DUN ann., འཕྲྀན་ལས་བསྐུལ་ བའ་; enjoining action.
(KAḤ69) ཕྱི་ནང་གི་333 མཆོད་པ་ཐམས་ཅད་334 དབུལ་བར་བྱའོ༔335
all the outer [and] inner offerings should be offered.
དེ་ནས་ཡིད་ལ་བརྣག་336 པའི་འཕྲིན་337 ལས་བཅོལ་ཏེ༔338
Then, entrusting the actions which have been mentally focused upon, འདི་ནི་བྱིན་བརླབས་339 ཕུན་སུམ་ཚོགས་པའོ༔
this [completes] the perfection [of] consecrations. བཟླས་བརྗོད་ཕུན་སུམ་ཚོགས་པ་ནི༔340 The perfection of [[[mantra]]] recitation:
(DUN6r) བདག་ཉིད་ལས་ཀྱི་341 ཏིང་ངེ་འཛིན་དུ་ཞུགས་ཏེ༔
Onself entering into the (DUN+deity) samādhi for the ritual action,
____________ 332 Tibetan gu gul,
equivalent to Sanskrit guggula, is used in wrathful rites to expel evil spirits. Generally, it seems that bdellium is used for it, an aromatic gum resin similar to myrrh (Commiphora myrrha), from the Commiphora wightii or Mukul myrrh (Commiphora mukul) tree, or from the Abyssinian myrrh (Commiphora habessinica, Amyris Agallocha) tree.
333 གི་: KAḤ omits.
334 ཐམས་ཅད་: DUN ཐམས་ཆད་.
335 DUN ann., (linked to ཕྱི་) མཆོད་པ་ལྔ་; (linked to ནང་) སྨན་ལྔ་; the five offerings... the five medicinal cordials.
336 བརྣག་: TSH PH གནག་ (surely in error); X བརྣགས་; Y རྒག་, corrected to བརྣགས་.
337 འཕྲིན་: KAḤ X Y ཕྲིན་.
338 ཏེ་: TSH PH སྟེ་; DUN ཏེ་, omitting །; DUN ann., ལས་འདྀ་ལྟ་བུ་གྲུབ་པར་མཛོད་ཅྀག་ཅེས་; say, “accomplish action[s] like this!”.
339 བྱིན་བརླབས་: KAḤ Y བྱིན་རླབས་; DUN བྱིན་ཀྱྀས་བརླབས་པ་.
340 DUN ann., གྲངས་ཀྱྀ་བསྙེན་པ་དང་དུས་ཀྱྀ་བསྙེན་པ་དང་མཚན་མ་འྀ་བསྙེན་པ་འ་; (this concerns) the Approach [[[mantra]]] enumeration, the Approach time period and the Approach signs. 341 DUN inserts ལྷ་འྀ་. The ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud parallel text, mTshams brag NGB vol. Chi, 1037.3, gives བདག་ཉིད་ལས་ནི་ལྷར་བསྒོམས་ལ་ for this line;
perhaps lha’i has been omitted in error in KD. This would seem to be confirmed by the citation of བདག་ཉིད་ལྷའི་ཏིང་ངེ་འཛིན་ in the appropriate context in the following sections: KAḤ82, 112; TSH373, 403–404; PH249,3, 260,3 ; X687, 717; Y720, 751.
སྙིང་ཁར་342 ཉི་མའི་དཀྱིལ་འཁོར་343 ལ་ཧཱུྃ་མཐིང་ནག་ཅིག་བསམ་མོ༔344 one visualises a dark blue hūṃ upon a sun maṇḍala at the heart.
ཨཱོྃ་345 བཛྲ་ཀི་ལི་ཀི་ལ་ཡ་མ་ར་ན་346 ཆེ་གེ་མོ་ཞིག་མ་347 ར་ཡ་ཕཊ༔ (Y708) ཅེས་348 བརྗོད་ པས༔349
by reciting “oṃ vajra kīli kīlaya maraṇa che ge mo zhig māraya phaṭ”,350 ཕུར་པ་351 ཁྲོ་བོ་ཅི་འདྲ་བ་མང་པོ་བསམ་གྱིས་མི་ཁྱབ་ (X674) པ་352 དེ་ལས་བྱུང་སྟེ༔
many inconceivable [numbers of emanations] (DUN one [[[emanation]]]) resembling the phurpa wrathful deity arise from this, and
____________
342 སྙིང་ཁར་: DUN སྙྀང་ཀར་.
343 དཀྱིལ་འཁོར་: X Y དལ་.
344 ཅིག་བསམ་མོ་: KAḤ གཅིག་བསམ་མོ་; DUN ཅྀག་བཞག་ལ་.
345 ཨཱོྃ་: KAḤ ཨོྃ་.
346 ཀི་ལི་ཀི་ལ་ཡ་མ་ར་ན་: KAḤ ཀཱི་ལི་ཀཱི་ལ་ཡ་མ་ར་ན་; TSH PH ཀི་ལི་ཀི་ལ་ཡ་མ་ར་ན་ཡ་; DUN ཀྀ་ལ་ཡ་ (note that although all the KD versions include ma ra na here, not given in DUN, yet they all omit it in the citation of this mantra in the short commentary following (KAḤ82, TSH373; PH249,3; X687; Y720), and also in the long commentary (KAḤ113, TSH404; PH260,3; X718; Y752) and the visualisation section (KAḤ147, TSH439; PH261,2; X754; Y787). However, it is given in the invocation manual (KAḤ191; TSH477; PH Volume Nya 8,3; X798; Y834). Lopon P. Ogyan Tanzin comments that he thinks the addition of maraṇa most likely in error, since a single mantra should not give both maraṇa and māraya.
347 མ་: KAḤ མཱ་.
348 ཕཊ༔ ཅེས་: DUN ཕཏ་ཅེས་.
349 DUN omits །.
350 ཆེ་གེ་མོ་ཞིག་: so and so, i.e. you slot the relevant personal name[s] in here. See note 346 above on the question of the inclusion of maraṇa.
351 ཕུར་པ་: DUN ཕུར་པ་འྀ་.
352 མང་པོ་བསམ་གྱིས་མི་ཁྱབ་པ་: TSH མང་པོ་བསམ་གྱི་མི་ཁྱབ་པ་; DUN ཅྀག་ (the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud parallel text, mTshams brag NGB vol. Chi, 1037.4, agrees with cig)
ཕྱོགས་བཅུ་ཐམས་ཅད་ཀྱི་353 དོན་བྱས་ནས༔354
having brought benefit (DUN+for sentient beings) [throughout] all the ten directions,
ཕུར་པ་ལ་བསྟིམ་མོ༔355
[they] are dissolved into phurpa.356
འདི་འདྲ་བ་འབུམ་འམ་སུམ་འབུམ་357 མན་ཆད་དམ༔358
Like this, [you recite]359 one hundred thousand or three hundred thousand as a lesser number (KAḤ X Y at least one hundred thousand or three hundred thousand) or བདུན་འབུམ་མམ༔360 ས་ཡ་ཡན་ཆད་361 བྱས་ཏེ༔362
seven hundred thousand or one million363 as a greater number (KAḤ X Y up to seven hundred thousand or one million),364 and
____________ 353 ཅད་ཀྱི་: DUN ཆད་སེམས
་ཅན་གྱྀ་ (the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud parallel text, mTshams brag NGB vol. Chi, 1037.4, also gives sems can; and so too does the long commentary KAḤ112; TSH404; PH260,3; X718; Y751).
354 KAḤ X Y omit ༔.
355 DUN ann., ཕུར་པ་འཱི་ཐུགས་ཀ་ནས་ཀྱང་བདག་ལ་བསྟྀམ་མོ་; from the heart of [the] phurpa, [he/they] also dissolve[s] into oneself.
356 There is some uncertainty here whether it is referring to the visualised phurpa deity or the ritual phurpa. It would seem most likely that both are intended; the visualisation section in this recitation context gives an elaboration suggesting a dual meditation focus on oneself as the deity, and the phurpa deity outside (KAḤ146–147; TSH438–439; PH272,2; X754–755; Y787).
357 འམ་སུམ་འབུམ་: KAḤ X Y མམ་སུམ་འབུམ་; TSH འམ་གསུམ་འབུམ་; PH འམ་གསུམ་འམ་; DUN འམ་སུམ་འབུམ་.
358 མན་ཆད་དམ་: KAḤ X Y ཡན་ཆད་དམ་; DUN འམ་; TSH PH omit ༔.
359 ‘'recite’ is explicit in the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud (mTshams brag NGB vol. Chi, 1037.5): bzlas ba is added following sa ya yan chad below.
360 མམ་: DUN འམ་; TSH PH omit; TSH PH X Y omit ༔.
361 ཡན་ཆད་: KAḤ མན་ཆད་; X Y མན་ཆད་དུ་.
362 ཏེ་: TSH PH སྟེ་.
བསྙེན་པ་གཏོང་བར་འདོད་ན༔365
when [you] want to finish the approach [practice], ཕུར་པ་ཉིད་སྙིང་གའི་366 ཧཱུྃ་ལ་བསྟིམ་མོ༔367
(DUN+also) Dissolve phurpa [him]self 368 (DUN phurpa [him]self is absorbed) into the hūṃ in the heart.
དེ་ནི་369 བཟླས་བརྗོད་ཕུན་སུམ་ཚོགས་པའོ༔
This is the perfection [of mantra] recitation.
____________
363 Generally, sa ya is one million and bye ba represents ten million, so I have followed that here, although some Tibetan sources give bye ba as one million and sa ya as ten million, so it is not certain in this case. See Charles Bell, Manual of Colloquial Tibetan (Kathmandu: Ratna Pustak Bhanda, 1978) [first edition 1905], 70. In Dudjom Rinpoche’s Vajrakīlaya commentary, Collected Writings vol. Da: 162, there is a citation on the correct count of mantras, which only seems coherent if the number, bye ba, is understood as one million, since the Ritual Action mantras should number one tenth of the Approach mantras.
364 It is clear that either TSH PH or KAḤ X Y has transposed yan chad and man chad. At first sight, KAḤ X Y's reading would seem clearer. However, although DUN does not give both yan chad and man chad, its version gives yan chad in the same position as TSH PH's yan chad, which would seem to increase the chances that an earlier version of KD gave yan chad in this place. KAḤ X Y may have corrected an apparently less clear reading. In any case, since KAḤ, TSH, PH and X/Y must share a hypearchetype and we cannot ascertain whether TSH PH on the one hand, or KAḤ and X/Y (which probably share their own hypearchetype) on the other hand, preserve the earlier reading in this case, so uncertainty remains.
365 DUN omits །.
366 སྙིང་གའི་: X Y སྙིང་ཁའི་; DUN ཀྱང་སྙྀང་ཀ་.
367 བསྟིམ་མོ་: DUN བསྡུས་ཏེ་.
368 Again, there is some uncertainty here whether it is referring to the visualised phurpa deity or the ritual phurpa. The long commentary would seem to suggest that both are implied: Saying, Phurpa [him]self, the phurpa itself is also meditated on as a wrathful deity (ཕུར་པ་ཉིད་ཀྱང་ཞེས་བྱ་བ་ནི༔ ཕུར་པ་ཁྲོ་བོར་བསྒོམ་པ་ཉིད་ཀྱང་ངོ༔, KAḤ113; TSH404–405;
PH261,3; X718–719; Y752).
369 དེ་ནི་: KAḤ དེ་ནས་; DUN འདྀ་ནི་.
370འཕྲིན་371 ལས་ཕུན་སུམ་ (TSH359) ཚོགས་པ་ནི༔
The perfection [of] ritual actions: ཐོག་མ་ཉིད་དུ་བརྟགས་པའི་ས་རྙེད་ནས༔372
Having found the site which has been examined at the very outset, (DUN6v) བསྐྲད་པ་དང་མཚམས་བཅད་373 པ་ལ་ (PH244,2) སྩོགས་པ་374 བྱས་ནས༔375
performing the expelling and demarcating the boundaries [of the practice area] etc.,
སྐད་ཅིག་མའི་ཏིང་ངེ་འཛིན་གྱིས་ཁྲོ་བོའི་སྡང་མིག་376 དང༔377
through an instantaneous samādhi, the obstacles are expelled by the wrathful deity angry stare,
____________
370 DUN here has some deleted lines, where the scribe must have begun the section on the perfection of the place in error, and then realised the mistake.
371 འཕྲིན་: KAḤ Y ཕྲིན་.
372 DUN ann., (starts below ཐོག་མ་) འདེབས་པ་འྀ་དུས་དང་; (starts under བརྟགས་) གནས་ཕུན་སུམ་ ཚོགས་པའ་; the perfection [of] the time for striking and... [of] the place (the commentator is referring to the two phun sum tshogs pa which follow after the ritual action section). 373 མཚམས་བཅད་: TSH PH X འཚམས་བཅད་; DUN མཚམས་གཅད་.
374 སྩོགས་པ་: KAḤ བརྩམ་པར་; TSH PH སོགས་པ་.
375 ནས་: DUN ཏེ་; DUN ann., (starts below བསྐྲད་པ་) ཕར་; (starts below མཚམས་) ཚུར་མྱྀ་ ཚུགས་པར་བྱ་བ་འྀ་ཕྱྀར་; [expelling] out... so that nothing harmful [comes] back in (i.e. through the boundaries).
376 གྱིས་ཁྲོ་བོའི་སྡང་མིག་: TSH PH གྱི་ཁྲོ་བོ་སྡང་མིག་; DUN གྱྀས་ཁྲོ་བོ་འྀ་སྡང་དམྱྀག་
377 DUN ann., དམྱྀག་གཡས་པར་མ་ལས་ཉྀ་མ་འྀ་དཀྱྀལ་འཁོར་དུ་གྱུར་པ་འྀ་དབུས་སུ་ཁྲོ་བོ་མང་པོ་འཕྲོ་བ་དང་
གཡོན་པར་ཏ་ལས་ཟླ་བ་འྀ་དཀྱྀལ་འཁོར་དུ་གྱུར་པ་ལ་ཁྲོ་བོ་མང་པོ་འཕྲོ་བ་ནྀ་སྡག་༼ང་༽མྱྀག་ཅེས་བྱ་འོ་; at the right eye, from [the syllable] ma comes a sun maṇḍala, in the middle of [which] many wrathful ones emanate, and at the left eye, from [the syllable] ta comes a moon maṇḍala, on [which] many wrathful ones emanate; this is called, “the angry stare” (a similar meditation is given in the long commentary, where fire is said to come from the sun maṇḍala at the right eye; water from the moon maṇḍala at the left eye, while a wind maṇḍala arises at the nostrils so that everything is burnt, cleansed, and the remains scattered, KAḤ114;
TSH405–406; PH262,1; X720; Y753).
མཚོན་ཆའི་ཆར་དང༔378
a downpour of weapons
རྡོ་རྗེ་གནོད་ (KAḤ70) སྦྱིན་ལ་སྩོགས་པས་379 བགེགས་380 བསྐྲད་ནས༔381
and [the] Vajra Yakṣa382 etc. and,
ཕུར་པ་383 ཁྲོ་བོ་བཅུར་བྱིན་གྱིས་བརླབས་ཏེ༔384
the (DUN+ten) phurpa[s] are consecrated as the ten wrathful deities;
ཕྱོགས་བཅུར་བཏབ་པས་385 ཅི་ཙམ་འདོད་པ་386 ཚུན་ཆད་387 མཚམས་གཅད་388 དོ༔
through planting [them] at the ten directions, the boundaries are demarcated as far as [you] want.
____________ 378 DUN omits །
379 སྩོགས་པས་: KAḤ སོགས་པའི་; TSH PH སོགས་པས་
380 DUN inserts རྣམས་
381 ནས་: DUN ལ་
382 The long commentary clarifies that here one should meditate on Vajrapāṇi (རྡོ་རྗེ་ གནོད་སྦྱིན་ནི་ཕྱག་༼/ལག་༽ན་རྡོ་རྗེར་བསྒོམ་མོ་, with minor variants, KAḤ115; TSH406; PH262,1; X720; Y754). Lopon P. Ogyan Tanzin adds that Vajrapāṇi is commonly called, [the] Vajra Yakṣa, since he is the leader of the yakṣa class and tames them. 383 DUN inserts བཅུ་, a reading shared by the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud (mTshams brag NGB vol. Chi, 1038.3), and the sense is clear, although it is not spelt out either by the long commentary (KAḤ115; TSH406; PH262,1; X720; Y754).
384 གྱིས་བརླབས་ཏེ་: TSH PH གྱིས་བརླབ་སྟེ་: DUN ཀྱྀས་བརླབས་ཏེ་; DUN ann., སུམ་བརྒྱ་པ་ལས་འབྱུང་ བ་དང་མཐུན་; in accordance with [the description] deriving from the Three Hundred (Verses). I am uncertain which text of three hundred verses is being referred to here, but the tradition of marking out the boundaries for ritual practice through the planting of phurbus in the ten directions is ubiquitous in Tibetan practice, not only in Phurpa rites.
385 པས་: DUN ནས་.
386 པ་: TSH PH པའི་.
387 Note that the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud parallel (M. Vol. Chi: 1038.3) gives bsrung bar for tshun chad here, “...established and protected just as desired”.
388 མཚམས་གཅད་: KAḤ Y མཚམས་བཅད་; TSH PH འཚམས་གཅད་; X འཚམས་བཅད་.
དང་པོ་389 རིགས་ལྔའི་390 ལྷ་མཉེས་པར་བྱས་ཏེ༔391
First, [you] honour the deities of the five [[[buddha]]] families, and དེ་ནས་ལས་ཀྱི་ལྷ་མཉེས་པར་བྱས་ནས༔392
then [you] honour the ritual action deities, after which,
393ཏིང་ངེ་འཛིན་གོང་ནས་འབྱུང་394 བ་དང༔
(DUN+then) arising from the earlier samādhi,
____________
389 པོ་: DUN པོར་.
390 ལྔའི་: Y omits.
391 ཏེ་: TSH PH སྟེ་; DUN ann., ཁྲོ་བོ་གོང་དུ་རྒྱ་མདུད་ལ་བསམས་པའ་; meditating on the wrathful deitie[s] at the upper knot.
392 ནས་: DUN ལ་; DUN ann., ཁུངས་པོ་ཉྀད་ནྀ་ཁྲོ་བོ་འོ་; [in their] essential origin (uncertain reading), [they are] wrathful deities.
393 DUN inserts དེ་ནས་.
394 འབྱུང་: X ་བྱུང་.
བསྙེན་པ་རྣམས་ཚར་ནས་395 གནས་ཆེན་པོ་དུར་ཁྲོད་དུ་396 དཀྱིལ་འཁོར་ནག་པོ་397 གྲུ་གསུམ་པ་རྩེ་
མོ་398 ལྷོ་ཕྱོགས་སུ་ (Y709) བསྟན་ཏེ༔399
having finished (DUN completed) the approach [practice]s, (DUN+within) a black triangular maṇḍala in a charnel ground “sacred site”,400 the point facing towards the southern direction,
____________
395 ཚར་ནས་: TSH PH X
Y ཚར་ནས༔; DUN ཚང་ནས་.
396 པོ་དུར་ཁྲོད་དུ་: DUN por. Note that the addition of དུར་ཁྲོད་དུ་, not given in the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud parallel, M. vol. Chi: 1038, suggests a possible intrusion of an annotation into the main text in KD.
397 ནག་པོ་: DUN omits (so too does the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud parallel, M. vol. Chi: 1038).
398 པ་རྩེ་མོ་: Y omits; DUN ལ། རྩེ་མོ་.
399 DUN ann., (starts below བསྙེན་པ་) རྣམ་གསུམ་གང་ཡང་རུང་བའ་; (given under, གནས་ཆེན་) དུར་ ཁྲོད་དུ་; the three aspects [of the practice], whichever may be appropriate... in a charnel ground. There are a number of possibilities for rnam gsum mentioned here, since there are many sets of three. It is possible that it refers to the three aspects of the mantra recitation practice recognised by the later tradition:
(1) total clarity;
(3) mindfulness (of) total purity. (རྣམ་པ་གསལ་བ། ང་རྒྱལ་བརྟན་པ། རྣམ་དག་དྲན་པའོ།, see e.g. Dudjom vol. Da:
113ff). However, we need to be cautious in equating later categorisations with those given in this text, especially when the term, rnam gsum could be applied to many sets of three. Other possibilities would be the three maṇḍalas of body, speech and mind; or the ‘three clarities’ (གསལ་བ་རྣམ་པ་གསུམ་), which have a special sense in the context of ritual meditations for striking a liṅga in the Phur pa tradition. These three clarities are referred to in the short commentary section following (KAḤ83, TSH373–374, PH250,1, X688, Y721), but they would not seem altogether applicable precisely in our context of the general Approach meditations here. Perhaps the set of the དགོངས་པ་གསུམ་, mentioned also at the same point in the short commentary, would fit more appropriately. The content of the first is a little uncertain, since we have three different readings: becoming confident (in the deity); entering samādhi; or realising emptiness (TSH sdeng, PH gdeng; KAḤ ting; XY stong; du gyur pa). The second is clarity in the mind (yid la gsal ba); and the third is recitation with the mouth (TSH PH XY khar bzlas pa; KAḤ zhar bzlas pa).
400 གནས་ཆེན་: here the term presumably indicates a charnel ground of human remains, as in the major sites associated with Heruka’s subjugation of Rudra and the parts of Rudra’s corpse.
ཞིང་ཆེན་གྱི་ཐལ་བ་དང༔
[place] ashes of [[[Wikipedia:cremation|cremated]]] human flesh,
(X675) སྐེ་ཚེ་དང༔401
black mustard seeds,
ལན་ཚ་402 དང༔403
salt,
ཞིང་ཆེན་གྱི་རཀྟ་དང༔404
with rakta from human corpses;
སྲུབ་མའི་405 ལོ་མ་དང༔406
leaves of anemony,407
____________
401 DUN ann., ཚ་བས་དྲག་; fierce with heat.
402 ལན་ཚ་: X ལན་ཚྭ་; Y ལེན་ཚྭ་.
403 DUN ann., གཞན་འཇྀལ་; expelling elsewhere.
404 རཀྟ་དང་: TSH PH X Y རཀྟས་; DUN རག་ཏ་དང་.
405 སྲུབ་མའི་: KAḤ X Y སྲུབ་མོའི་; TSH PH སྲུབ་པའི་; DUN སྲུབ་མ་འྀ་ (although srub in DUN is somewhat uncertain. The only appropriate meaning would seem to arise from srub ma, if it is to be equated with srub ka (see note 407 below). The Bod rgya tshig mdzod chen mo Volume 3: 2984, gives as rtsa srub ma as a variant of srub ka. This also fits with the reading of srub ma in the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud (mTshams brag NGB Volume Chi, 1038.5), although the sDe dge edition (vol. Wa, 352r.2) gives an indistinct reading, perhaps of srun rma. The long commentary and the invocation manual confirm srub ma’i lo ma, although TSH PH have an error in the invocation manual, giving sug pa’i lo ma (KAḤ117, 162; TSH408, 456; PH vol. Ja262,2, vol. Nya1,2; X722, 770; Y756, 803).
406 DUN ann., གདུག་པས་; poisonous.
407 see note 405 above; Tibetan Medical Paintings gives srub ka as anemony (Plate 27: 71, 72; Plate 33:18). This would seem the most likely identification, especially since at least some varieties are poisonous (M. Lippmann-Pawlowski, transl. by O. Konstandt, The most beautiful Alpine Flowers (Innsbruck,Tyrol: Pinguin-Verlag), no. 2, 9, 12, 21.
(DUN7r) ཁྲེ་དང༔408
foxtail millet,409
ཇུ་ཙེའི་410 ཕུབ་མ་དང༔
stems of horsetails411 and གྲོག་མཁར་གྱི་ས་དང༔
earth from an ant-hill,
____________
408 DUN omits །; DUN ann., (given under, ཁྲེ་དང་ཅུ་) ཡང་བས་; with lightness. 409 Lopon P. Ogyan Tanzin comments that the word, khre, is not used for the regular cultivated millet, which would be mon chag. It is rather a small grain which may grow in the wild, not as rounded or as good to eat as millet. Dan Martin’s Tibetan Vocabulary (2007) gives Panicum italicum for khre, citing Helen Johnson, “Grains in Mediaeval India”, JAOS 61 (1941) 169 (no. 10). Foxtail millet is the common name for Panicum italicum.
410 ཇུ་ཙེའི་: DUN ཅུ་ཙེའི་; TSH PH ཞུ་ཙེའི་ (presumably, chu mtshe is intended. The parallel passage in the 'Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud, mTshams brag NGB vol. Chi, 1038.6, gives, ju tshe; gTing skyes gives dzu tshe, 532.1.)
411 It seems that there is a mistaken suggested identification for chu mtshe (see note above) in Cantwell and Mayer, Early Tibetan Documents on Phur pa from Dunhuang, 111, notes 129 and 130. According to Toni Huber (personal communication: 27/07/2017), although many lists of Tibetan materia medica classify chu mtshe as one of the types of mtshe (Ephedra), it instead corresponds to the superficially similar but completely unrelated genus Equisetum (family Equisetaceae), better known in English as ‘horsetails’. Nonetheless, in so far as Tibetan tradition may see chu mtshe as a variety of mtshe, it may share the connotations of the mtshe shrub in ritual practice, where it is frequently used in wrathful tantric rites. One puzzle about the identification of chu mtshe as horsetails, however, is that phub ma would usually mean the husk or chaff, which would not seem entirely appropriate for this plant. But it is possible that that phub ma is a mistaken reading, despite the agreement of all versions, since all versions of the invocation manual specify lo ma, leaves, rather than phub ma (KAḤ162, TSH456; PH Volume Nya1,2; X770; Y803), as does the long commentary (KAḤ117, TSH408, PH262,2, X722, Y756).
བོང་བུའི་བདུད་རྩི་ལ་412 སྦྲུས་ཏེ༔413
mixed with “donkey juice”.414
ཞིང་ཆེན་གྱི་415 ཐལ་བ་མ་རྙེད་416 ན་417 ཏིལ་ནག་418 པོ་ལ་419 གཞི་བླངས་ཏེ༔420
If [you] cannot obtain human cremation ashes, take black sesame [as] the basis,
____________
412 ལ་: DUN ལས་.
413 ཏེ་: TSH PH སྟེ་; DUN ann., བུ་རམ་; molasses.
414 also bong bu can mean insect, but this is unlikely here. In any case, this phrase is quite likely to indicate a specific substance for which bong bu’i bdud rtsi is a metaphoric term. The DUN annotation suggests molasses and this is supported by the long commentary, which gives a syrup of molasses (བུ་རམ་གྱི་འདེ་གུ་ [ལྡེ་གུ་ intended, given in PH], with minor variants, KAḤ117, TSH408, PH262,2, X722, Y756). In understanding the term used, Lopon P. Ogyan Tanzin suggests that donkey urine may be intended— after all, a liquid is needed here, and this also is supported by the long commentary, which which adds that it indicates the substance for urine (དྲི་ཆུའི་རྒྱུའོ་).
Note also that in Chapter 6 of the Phurpa root tantra in the KD collection, we find bdud rtsi twice linked with bong bu in the context of the anointing of the fire pit, and for the substances needed for the destructive burnt offerings ritual. Both instances mention also camel bdud rtsi, and the second occasion speaks additionally of the crow, although it may be intended respectively to link juice; flesh and blood; and feathers, to the three animals (བོང་བུ་རྔ་མོ་བྱ་རོག་གི༔ བདུད་རྩི་ ཤ་ཁྲག་སྤུ་དང་སྒྲོ༔, KAḤ vol. 3: 325; see also sGang steng-a NGB vol. Ya: 302r). In any case, it seems likely to indicate the animal’s urine, and that is surely the case for anointing the fire pit (རྔ་མོང་བོང་བུའི་བདུད་རྩི་བྱུག།, KAḤ vol. 3: 324; sGang steng-a NGB vol. Ya: 301v, with minor variants).
415 གྱི་: TSH PH གྱིས་; Y omits.
416 རྙེད་: TSH བསྙེད་.
417 DUN inserts ། . 418 ནག་: X ནན་.
419 ལ་: DUN ལས་.
420 ཏེ་: TSH PH སྟེ་.
གཟུགས་སམ་རི་མོ་བྲིས་ཏེ༔421
(DUN+is also alright for making) either in [forming] the effigy or making the drawing.
མདོག་སྨུག་དུ་བྱ༔422
[you] should make it (KAḤ X Y+dark) maroon in colour.
ཞིང་གི་423 ཤུན་པ་ལ་སྩོགས་424 པ་ལ་བྱས་ལ་425 ཞིང་གི་རཀྟས༔426
Make it upon a [piece of] corpse skin (DUN bark)427 etc., ཧཱུྃ་ཆེ་གེ་མོ་ཞིག་མ་ར་ན་ཕཊ༔428 ཅེས་བྲིས་ཏེ་429 སྙིང་གར་གླན་ལ༔430
writing, “hūṃ che ge mo zhig431 maraṇa/māraya phaṭ” with corpse rakta, fixing it at the heart,432
____________
421 སམ་རི་མོ་བྲིས་ཏེ་: Y སཾ་རི་མོ་ལ་བྲིས་ཏེ་; DUN བྱས་ཀྱང་རུང༌། རྀ་མོར་བྲྀས་ལ་.
422 སྨུག་དུ་བྱ་: KAḤ X Y སྨུག་ནག་ཏུ་བྱ་; DUN སྨུག་དུ་བྱས་ཏེ་ (note that the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud version agrees with KAḤ X Y’s smug nag, and so does the long commentary, KAḤ117, TSH408, PH262,2, X722, Y756) and the invocation manual (KAḤ162, TSH456; PH vol. Nya2,2; X770; Y803).
423 ཞིང་གི་: DUN omits (perhaps ཞིང་གི་ is an accidental repetition here? It is not given in the parallel passage in the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud, and the DUN reading may seem preferable, see below note 427).
424 སྩོགས་: KAḤ TSH PH སོགས་.
425 བྱས་ལ་: DUN omits .
426 རཀྟས་: TSH རཀྟ་; DUN རག་ཏས་; DUN ann., (begins under ལ་སྩོགས་པ་) གྲོ་བ་འམ་ཤྀང་ཤུན་ ལྟ་བུ་ལ་; like white birch or wood bark.
427 shun pa is not the most usual term in speaking of human skin (pags pa); bark may seem preferable here.
428 མ་ར་ན་ཕཊ་: KAḤ མཱ་ར་ཡ་ཕཊ་; DUN ཕཏ་.
429 ཏེ་: TSH PH སྟེ་; DUN ནས།.
430 གར་གླན་ལ་: KAḤ གར་བླན་ལ་; TSH PH ཁར་བླན་ལ་; X Y ཁར་གླན་ལ་; DUN ཀར་ཀླན་ཏེ་.
431 see 90 note 350 above.
432 X/Y’s glan seems clearest, and would seem to indicate fixing or sewing the writing to the effigy's heart. This spelling is given in the invocation manual, apart from TSH and PH which give slan (KAḤ162, TSH456, PH vol. Nya2,2; X770, Y803). The parallel passage in the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud, the mTshams brag edition (NGB
དཀྱིལ་འཁོར་གྱི་སྟེང་དུ་གན་རྐྱལ་433 དུ་བཞག་ལ༔434
[the effigy is] placed on [its] back above the maṇḍala,
མགོ་435 ལྷོ་ (TSH360) ཕྱོགས་སུ་436 བསྟན༔437
[with] the head facing towards the southern direction,438
གདོན་དེ་ཉིད་བཀུག་པ་ (PH245,2) ནི་མངག་439 གཞུག་གམ༔440
and [you] summon this actual evil being. For this, [it is] permissable to employ the messengers or (KAḤ TSH PH and [it is] permissable to employ the pith instruction on piercing this actual evil being or; X/Y and [it is] permissable to employ the messengers for piercing this actual evil being or),
____________
vol. Chi, 1039.1) also gives, glan, while sDe dge (vol. Wa 352r.3) gives blan? and gTing skyes (vol. Sha 532.3) gives rlan. DUN's klan probably indicates the same word. The verb, blan, however, might suggest a sense of luring or summoning; the Bod rgya tshig mdzod chen mo notes an archaic meaning: ཚུར་འགུགས་པ་དང༌། ནང་དུ་ཕྱོགས་པ། ཁ་དྲངས་པ། (1916). Yet this is less likely here because the ritual summoning will be done below.
433 རྐྱལ་: KAḤ རྒྱལ་; TSH PH སྐྱལ་.
434 DUN omits །.
435 X Y insert བོ་.
436 མགོ་ལྷོ་ཕྱོགས་སུ་: KAḤ མ་མགོ་ལྷོ་ཕྱོགས་སུ་; DUN ལྷོ་ཕྱོགས་སུ་མགོ་.
437 བསྟན་: DUN བསྟན་ཏེ་; omits ། .
438 Lopon P. Ogyan Tanzin comments that the head is placed towards the south because this is Yama’s direction. It is always considered inauspicious to face the south, so for instance, one avoids building a house where the front faces south. The long commentary confirms this interpretation— the direction is for the suppressing of Yama (གཤིན་རྗེ་གནོན་པའི་ཆེད་དོ་, KAḤ116, TSH407, PH262,2, X722, Y755).
439 བཀུག་པ་ནི་མངག་: KAḤ TSH PH དབུག་པའི་མན་ངག་; X དབུག་པའི་མངག་; Y དབུགས་པའི་མངག་ (here, the KAḤ TSH PH reading of man ngag seems inappropriate, and although the KAḤ TSH PH X reading of dbug pa’i could fit, the sense of summoring would seem much more appropriate in this context).
440 KAḤ X Y omit ༔; DUN ann., (begins under བཀུག་པ་, but presumably referring to, མངག་གཞུག་) མ་མོ་འམ་འཕྲ་མེན་མ་; mamo[s] or ’phra men ma.
ཁྲོ་བོ་སུམ་བྷ་ནིའི་441 སྦྱོར་ (KAḤ71) བ་442 ཡང་རུང༔
wrathful deities, applying the sumbhani [[[mantra]]], or གསང་བའི་ཐུགས་ཀ་འམ༔443
Either at the secret [[[buddha]]] heart444 or རང་གི་སྙིང་གར་445 ཟླ་བའི་དཀྱིལ་འཁོར་ལས༔446
your own heart, from (DUN upon) a moon maṇḍala, ཛ་447 འདི་འདྲ་བ་དམར་པོ་གཅིག་བཞག་448 ལ༔
a red (syllable) resembling a dza449 is established and
____________
441 བོ་སུམ་བྷ་ནིའི་: KAḤ བོ་གསུམ་བ་ནིའི་; TSH PH བོ་སུམ་པ་ནིའི་; X Y མོ་སུམ་པའི་ནིའི་; DUN བོ་སུམ་ བྷ་ན་འྀ་.
442 བ་: KAḤ X Y omit .
443 ཀ་འམ་: KAḤ X Y ཀའམ་; DUN འམ་རུང་.
444 The heart of the tantric deity, as visualised in this tantric system. The long commentary suggests that this line indicates, on the secret heart lotus (གསང་བའི་ཐུགས་ཀར་ གསང་བའི་སྙིང་ག་པདྨ་ལ་བྱའོ་, KAḤ118, TSH408, PH263,2, X723, Y757, with minor variants), possibly indicating the heart cakra with its eight facets, which is sometimes likened to an eight-petalled lotus. However, Lopon P. Ogyan Tanzin suggests that the gloss of a lotus at the heart is more likely simply to indicate the lotus seat of the heart jñānasattva deity. The long commentary glosses the next line relating to your own heart as indicating the heart of the jñānasattva deity in one’s heart (KAḤ118, TSH408–409, PH263,2, X723, Y757).
445 སྙིང་གར་: TSH PH X Y སྙིང་ཁར་; DUN སྙྀང་ཀར་.
446 དཀྱིལ་འཁོར་ལས་: X དལ་ལས་; Y དལས་ (presumably, abbreviation for དལ་ལས་); DUN དཀྱིལ་འཁོར་ལ་.
447 ཛ་: TSH PH X Y ཛྭ་; DUN ཛའ་.
448 དམར་པོ་གཅིག་བཞག་: KAḤ དམར་པོ་ཞིག་བཞག་; TSH PH དམར་པོ་ཅིག་བཞག་; DUN གཅྀག་ གཞག་.
449 The syllable dza is used in indicating summoning, although the syllable dzwa might indicate, dzwa la (=Skt. jvala, Tib. ’bar ba, blazing), which would fit with the red colour. However, this is not so appropriate here and not given in DUN or KAḤ). The long commentary does not altogether clarify either the correct reading for the syllable or for the colour. TSH409, PH263,2, X723 and Y757 give dzdza twice, surely the earlier reading in these cases (KAḤ118 corrects it to dzaḥ), although they give dza on the third occasion
ཛཿཧཱུྃ་བཾ་ཧོ༔450 བཛྲ་ཨ་འགུ་451 ཤ་ཆེ་གེ་མོ་452 ཧཱུྃ་ཛཿཞེས་བརྗོད་པས༔453
by reciting (DUN having recited), “jaḥ hūṃ baṃ hoḥ vajra aṅkuśa che ge mo hūṃ jaḥ”,454
ཁྲོ་མོ་455 ལྕགས་ཀྱུ་ཅན་ (DUN7v) གྲངས་མེད་པ་རྒྱུད་456 མར་བྱུང་ནས༔457
innumerable wrathful female deities (DUN goddesses) with iron hooks arise in a continuous stream, after (DUN through) which,
བགེགས་ཀྱི་སྙིང་ག་458 ནས་བཟུང་སྟེ་ (Y710) དེར་འོང་པ་459 དང༔ the obstacles are seized by [their] hearts and come here.
____________
(KAḤ118 consistently gives dzaḥ). In any case, it would seem that the summoning syllable dza is intended here. The colour discrepancy is between the red given in all versions here, and white (dkar po) given in all versions of the long commentary. Symbolically, white would seem more appropriate in this context, yet we cannot necessarily assume that this archaic text will conform to standard symbolism. The parallel line in the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud reads, ཛ་ཛ་༼D ཛཿ༽། འདི་འདྲ་བ་དཀར་༼D དམར༽་པོ་གཅིག་ (mTshams brag vol. Chi, 1039.2; sDe dge variants in brackets).
450 ཛཿཧཱུྃ་བཾ་ཧོ༔: TSH ཛཿཧཱུྃ་བཾ་ཧོཿ; DUN ཛ་ཧཱུྃ་བཾ་ཧོ་.
451 ཨ་འགུ་: KAḤ ཨཾ་གུ་; X Y ཨ་གུ་.
452 DUN inserts ཞྀག་, almost certainly in error, part of a deletion of the following three syllables (པྲ་བེ་ཤ་) in DUN, representing an eyeskip to ཆེ་གེ་མོ་ཞིག་ below, which the scribe noticed and rectified.
453 པས་: DUN ནས་.
454 Again, see 90 note 350 above.
455 ཁྲོ་མོ་: DUN ལྷ་མོ་.
456 རྒྱུད་: KAḤ བརྒྱུད་.
457 ནས་: DUN བས་.
458 ག་: X Y ཁ་; DUN omits.
459 འོང་པ་: KAḤ X Y འོང་བ་; DUN འོངས་པ་.
ཛཿཧཱུྃ་བཾ་ཧོ༔460 (X676) ཆེ་གེ་མོ་461 པྲ་བེ་ཤ་ཧཱུྃ༔462 ཞེས་ཅི་རན་ཅིག་463 བརྗོད་ནས༔464
This is the time to say, “jaḥ hūṃ vaṃ hoḥ465 che ge mo praveśa hūṃ”,466 [and] having recited [this] once,
གཟུགས་སམ་རི་མོ་ལ་ཕབ་སྟེ༔467
[they] fall down into the effigy or the drawing.
ཛཿཧཱུྃ་བཾ་ཧོ་468 ཞེས་བརྗོད་པས༔469
By saying (DUN having said), “jaḥ hūṃ vaṃ hoḥ”,
ལྕགས་ཀྱུ་དང་470 ཞགས་པ་དང་ལྕགས་སྒྲོག་གི་ཕྱག་རྒྱ་རྣམས་ཀྱིས་དྲངས་ཤིང་བཅིངས་པ་471 དང472
with the mudrās of the iron-hook, lasso and iron chains, [you] draw [them] in, tie [them] up and
____________
460 ཛཿཧཱུྃ་བཾ་ཧོ༔: TSH ཛཿཧཱུྃ་བཾ་ཧོཿ; DUN ཛ་ཧཱུྃ་བཾ་ཧོ་.
461 DUN inserts ཞྀག་.
462 པྲ་བེ་ཤ་ཧཱུྃ་: KAḤ པྲ་ཝེ་ཤ་ཕཊ་; X པྲ་བེ་ཤ་ཡ་ཧཱུྃ་; Y པྲ་ཝེ་ཤ་ཡ་ཧཱུྃ་.
463 ཅི་རན་ཅིག་: KAḤ omits; TSH PH X Y བརྗོད་ནས་ཅི་རན་ཅིག་; DUN ཅི་རན་ཞྀག་.
464 DUN ann., (placed under པྲ་བེ་ཤ་) ཕེབས་པ་འྀ་དོན་; [this] means, come.
465 The ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud version inserts badzra here.
466 Again, see 90 note 350 above.
467 DUN omits །.
468 ཛཿཧཱུྃ་བཾ་ཧོ་: KAḤ PH ཛཿཧཱུྃ་བཾ་ཧོ༔; TSH ཛཿཧཱུྃ་བཾ་ཧོཿ་ཛཿ; DUN ཛ་ཧཱུྃ་བཾ་ཧོ་.
469 པས་: DUN ནས་.
470 དང་: KAḤ X Y omit.
471 ཕྱག་རྒྱ་རྣམས་ཀྱིས་དྲངས་ཤིང་བཅིངས་པ་: TSH PH ཕྱག་རྒྱ་རྣམས་ཀྱི་དྲང་ཞིང་བཅིང་པ་; X Y ཕྱག་རྒྱ་ རྣམས་ཀྱི་དྲངས་ཤིང་བཅིངས་པ་; DUN ཕྱག་རྒྱས་བཅྀངས་པ་.
472 DUN ann., (begins at under ལྕགས་ཀྱུ་) བགེགས་ཀྱྀ་སྙྀང་ག་ནས་; around the heart of the obstacles.
བསྡམས་ནས་473 དེའི་བསམ་པ་474 མ་འཁྲུགས་475 པར་དག་དང་དབང་དུ་476 བྱས་477 ནས༔478
bind [them], after which, without agitating their mind[s], [you] purify and bring them under control (X/Y [you] bring them under your control;
DUN [you] make them joyful).479
ཨེའི་ནང་དུ་ཕུར་པའི་480 རྩེ་མོའི་འོག་ཏུ་481 སོང་བར་བསམ་ནས༔482
Meditate that [they] come beneath the point of the phurpa, within the “e”.483
དེ་ནས་ཕུར་པ་484 བླངས་ཏེ༔485
Then, taking the phurpa,
____________
473 བསྡམས་ནས་: DUN བསྡམ་བ་དང་.
475 འཁྲུགས་: TSH PH འཁྲུག་. 476 དག་དང་དབང་དུ་: X Y བདག་དང་དབང་དུ་; DUN དགའ་བར་ (but note that the final ’a is uncertain, and dag may be intended).
477 Here, the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud gives, དེའི་སེམས་འཁྲུགས་པར་བྱས་... (mTshams brag vol. Chi, 1039.5).
478 ནས་: KAḤ ལ་; DUN ann., (placed under བསྡམ་) ཟ་; (placed under སེམས་) དྲྀལ་བུས་;
(placed under བར་བྱས་ནས།) རྨོངས་པར་བྱས་པ་ལ་བྱ་; eat... with the bell... make [them] befuddled (the annotation, za, seems rather inappropriate, although the ringing of the bell, representing the action of the fourth goddess, would seem appropriate at this point, and her action is generally glossed as making the evil forces delirious.
479 But the uncertainty in DUN's reading (see note 476 above) may mean that dag (purify) is intended, and dag may have been in the archetype. Lopon P. Ogyan Tanzin comments, however, that the XY reading would seem clearest in this context, since purification should be performed later, not at this point. The long commentary agrees with DUN, and all versions give dga’ bar byas (KAḤ118, TSH409, PH263,2, X724, Y757).
480 ཕུར་པའི་: DUN omits.
481 ཏུ་: DUN དུ་.
482 བར་བསམ་ནས་: KAḤ X བར་བསམས་ནས་; TSH PH པར་བསམ་ནས་; DUN བར་བསམ་.
483 Presumably here, e = the phur khung, the triangular stand/container for the effigy mentioned above.
484 ཕུར་པ་: DUN ཕུར་བུ་. 485 ཏེ་: DUN བ་ཏེ་; DUN omits །.
486ལས་ཀྱི་ལྷའི་ཏིང་ངེ་འཛིན་487 དང་བཅས་པས་488 དྲག་ཏུ་489 ཅུང་ཞིག་490 བསྐུལ་ནས༔491
along with the samādhi (DUN essence [[[mantras]]]) of the ritual action deities, strongly enjoin [them] for a while, after which ཐལ་མོ་སྦྱར་ཐབས་ཀྱིས་གསོར་492 ཏེ༔
brandish [the phurpa] in the manner of joining the hands together, and
493རྡོ་རྗེ་སྡེར་མོའི་སྔགས་བཟླས་ཅིང༔494
recite the mantra of Vajra Claw.
ཏིང་ངེ་495 འཛིན་གསལ་བར་མ་ཁུག་496 བར་དུ་གྲིལ་497 ནས༔498
Until clear samādhi has been invoked, roll [the phurpa],
ཁུགས་499 པ་དང༔500
invoking (DUN+samādhi),
____________
486 Y gives a symbol in the text and inserts the next lines at the bottom of the page. 487 ཏིང་ངེ་འཛིན་: TSH ཏིངེ་འཛིན་; DUN སྙྀང་པོ་ (note here that all versions of the long commentary. agree with DUN's snying po, KAḤ118, TSH409, PH263,2, X724, Y758).
488 TSH PH insert ༔.
489 ཏུ་: DUN du.
490 ཞིག་: Y ཞི་; DUN ཟད་ཅྀག་.
491 ནས་: DUN ལ་; DUN ann., (begins under པོ་དང་བཅས་) ཕུར་པ་ཉྀད་ཀྱྀ་སྙྀང་པོ་བཛྲ་ཀྀ་ལ་ཡ་བམ་རྡོ་
རྗེ་སྡེར་མོར་བྱ་; do the heart essence of the phurpa itself, vajra kIlaya bam, Vajra Claw (the import of this comment is not quite clear: Vajra Claw’s mantra is given in the text below). 492 ཀྱིས་གསོར་: TSH PH ཀྱི་གསོར་; X Y ཀྱི་བསོར་ (the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud gives gsol, ‘make supplication’, for gsor, ‘brandish’, M Vol. Chi: 1039.6; D vol. Wa: 352r.7 agrees with gsol; T Vol. Sha: 532.7 seems to be in error, giving skya sor). 493 Y’s insertion ends here.
494 ཅིང་: KAḤ X Y ཤིང་; DUN ལ་.
495 ཏིང་ངེ་: TSH ཏིངེ་.
496 ཁུག་: DUN ཁུགས་ཀྱྀ་.
497 གྲིལ་: KAḤ དྲིལ་; X Y འདྲིལ་; DUN །དྲྀལ་ (dril was probably the earlier reading, but clearly, gril, roll, is intended).
498 KAḤ TSH PH omit ༔ .
499 ཁུགས་: KAḤ X Y ཁུག་; DUN ཏྀང་ངེ་འཛྀན་ཁུགས་.
500 X Y omit ༔.
གདན་གྱི་501 སྟེང་དུ་རྩེ་མོ་ནས་གང་ཙམ་གྱིས་502 (DUN8r) མ་རེག་པར་ (KAḤ72) གཟས་503 ལ༔
with the tip [of the phurpa] above [the effigy’s] throne (DUN vital parts), made ready (to strike but) not quite touching [it],
ཁྲོ་བོའི་རྐེད་པ་504 ནས་ལག་པ་གཡོན་པས་ (TSH361) བཟུང་ལ༔505 [you] grasp the waist (DUN neck) of the wrathful deity with the left hand,
རྡོ་རྗེ་ཐོ་ (PH244,3) བའམ་སྟ་རེའི་ལྟག་506 པས་བརྡེག་ཅིང་507 རྡོ་རྗེ་508 སྡེར་མོའི་སྔགས་ལན་
གསུམ་འམ་509 བདུན་ནམ་510 ཉི་ཤུ་རྩ་གཅིག་511 བཟླས་ཤིང་གདབ་512 སྟེ༔
and beat with the vajra hammer or the back513 part of the axe. Reciting the mantra of Vajra Claw three, seven or (DUN up to) twenty-one times, [you] stab and
____________
501 གདན་གྱི་: DUN གནད་ཀྱྀ་.
502 གྱིས་: X Y གྱི་.
503 གཟས་: KAḤ TSH PH བཟས་.
504 རྐེད་པ་: PH སྐེད་པ་; DUN སྐེ་.
505 ལ་: Y ནས་; DUN སྟེ་; DUN omits །.
506 སྟ་རེའི་ལྟག་: KAḤ X Y སྟྭ་རེའི་ལྟག་; TSH PH རྟ་གྲིའི་སྟག་.
507 བརྡེག་ཅིང་: Y བརྡེགསཅིང་; DUN བརྡེག་ཅིང༌།.
508 རྡོ་རྗེ་: KAḤ X Y omit.
509 འམ་: KAḤ omits; X Y མཾ་.
510 ནམ་: DUN ནས་.
511 DUN inserts གྀ་བར་དུ་.
512 ཤིང་གདབ་: TSH PH ཅིང་གདབ་; DUN ཤྀང་བཏབ་.
513 ལྟག་པས་ (TSH PH’s reading of stag pas is presumably in error): Lopon P. Ogyan Tanzin comments that either implement can be used but here you do not want to cut the effigy, so you either use the hammer, or the back side of the axe, which is not sharp and may have a half-vajra (see also page 70, note 168 above, where we have the blunt side of the axe referred to).
སེང་ལྡེང་514 གི་ཕུར་པ་སོར་515 བརྒྱད་པ་ཅིག་སྙིང་གར་516 གདབ༔
[then] stab an eight inch long (DUN eight facetted/octagonal)517 Khadira (Acacia catechu) wood phurpa into [the effigy’s] heart.
གཅིག་དཔྲལ་518 བར་གདབ༔519
Stab one [[[phurpa]]] into the forehead.
བཞི་དཔུང་མགོ་520 གཉིས་དང༔521
With] four [more], stab into the upper part of the two shoulders and
(X677) བརླའི་522 ནང་ལོགས་གཉིས་སུ་གདབ༔
into the two sides of the inner thighs.
གཅིག་ལྟེ་བའི་ཁུང་དུ་523 གདབ་པོ༔524
Stab one in the navel too.
རྡོ་རྗེ་སྡེར་མོའི་སྔགས་ལ༔525
For Vajra Claw’s mantra:526
____________
514 ལྡེང་: KAḤ སྡེང་.
515 སོར: DUN ཟུར་.
516 ཅིག་སྙིང་གར་: KAḤ ཞིག་སྙིང་གར་; TSH PH ཅིག་གི་སྙིང་ཁར་; X Y ༡་སྙིང་ཁར་; DUN ཅྀག་སྙྀང་ཀར་
517 The ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud reading agrees with KAḤ TSH X Y (mTshams brag vol. Chi, 1040.2). This is also consistent with the description of the ‘perfection of form’ given above in this text (and elsewhere).
518 དཔྲལ་: X པྲལ་; DUN འཕྲལ་ (as page 74 note 201 above, འཕྲལ་བ་: archaic for དཔྲལ་བ་, forehead).
519 DUN ann., ཚེ་ཉམས་པར་བྱ་བ་འྀ་ཕྱྀར་; to make the life-span deteriorate.
520 མགོ་: DUN འགོ་.
521 KAḤ X Y omit ༔; DUN ann., འགུལ་མྱྀ་ནུས་པར་བྱ་བ་འྀ་ཕྱིར་; to immobilise [it].
522 བརླའི་: X བླའི་.
523 གཅིག་ལྟེ་བའི་ཁུང་དུ་: TSH PH གཅིག་ལྟེ་བའི་ཁུང་དུ་ཡང་; DUN ལྟེ་བ་ཁུང་དུ་གཅྀག་.
524 གདབ་པོ་: Y གདབོ་; DUN གདབ་བོ་; DUN ann., ལུས་ཀྱྀ་རྟེན་མྱེད་པར་བྱ་བ་འྀ་ཕྱིར་; to destroy the body's physical support.
525 ལ་: DUN ནྀ་; X Y omit ༔.
526 On this mantra, see Cantwell and Mayer, Early Tibetan Documents on Phur pa from Dunhuang, 84–85. It is a variant of a mantra found in the Guhyasamāja's Chapter
527 (Y711) ན་མ་ས་མན་ཏ་ཀ་ཡ་ཝཀ་ཙིཏྟ་528 བཛྲ་ནན༔
ཨཱོྃ་529 གྷ་གྷ་གྷ་ཏ་ཡ་སརྦ་དུཥྚན་530 ཆེ་གེ་མོ་531 ཞིག་ཕཊ༔532
ཀི་ལི་ཀི་ལ་ཡ་533 སརྦ་པ་ཕཾ་534 ཕཊ༔
ཧཱུྃ་ཧཱུྃ་535 བཛྲ་ཀི་536 ལ་ཡ་བཛྲ་དྷ་རོད་537 ཨད་ཉ་པ་ཡ་ཏི་ཀ་ཡ་ཝཀ་ཙིཏྟ་538 བཛྲ་ཀི་539 ལ་ཡ་ཧཱུྃ་ཕཊ༔
ཞེས་དྲག་ཏུ་བརྗོད་དོ༔540
“namaḥ samantakāyavākcittavajra nan oṃ gha gha ghātaya sarvaduṣṭān che ge mo zhig phaṭ kīli kīlaya sarvapāpān phaṭ
hūṃ hūṃ vajrakīla vajradhara ājñāpayati kāyavākcittavajra kīlaya hūṃ phaṭ” Recite this loudly.
____________
14, and is widely used in early tantric sources for the action of stabbing in the sgrol ba ritual.
527 The version of this mantra given in the mTshams brag edition of the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud is: ན་མ་སྶ་༼ DT: ས་༽ མན་ཏ་ཀཱ་ཡ་ཝཀ་ཙིཏྟ་བཛྲ་ནན། ཨོྃ་གྷ་གྷ་གྷཱ་ཏ་ཡ་ཆེ་ གེ་མོ་ཕཊ། ས་རྦ་དུ་ཥྚན་ཀཱི་ལི་ཀཱི་ལ་ཡ་སརྦ་པཱ་པཾ་ཕཊ་སྭཱཧཱ། ༼ D omits: སྭཱཧཱ་༽ ཧཱུྃ་ཧཱུྃ་ཧཱུྃ་བཛྲ་ཀཱི་ལ་ཡ། བཛྲ་དྷ་ ར་ཨཱཛྙཱ་པ་ཡ་ཏཱི་ཀཱ་ཡ་ཝཀ་ཙིཏྟ་བཛྲ་ཀཱི་ལ་ཡ་ཧཱུྃ་ཕཊ། (1040.3–4).
528 མན་ཏ་ཀ་ཡ་ཝཀ་ཙིཏྟ་: KAḤ མནྟ་ཀཱ་ཡ་ཝཀ་ཙིཏྟ་; TSH PH མན་ཏ་ཀ་ཡ་ཝ་ཀ་ཙིཏྟ་; X Y མན་ཏ་ཀཱ་ཡ་ ཝཀྐ་ཙིཏྟ་; DUN མན་ཏ་ཀ་ཡ་བག་ཙྀ་ཏ་.
529 ཨཱོྃ་: KAḤ ཨོྃ་.
530 སརྦ་དུཥྚན་: TSH PH སརྦ་དུ་སྟན་; DUN ས་རྦ་དུ་ཤྚན་.
531 Again, p.90 note 350 above.
532 ཕཊ་: DUN ཕཊ་ཕཊ་.
533 ཀི་ལི་ཀི་ལ་ཡ་: KAḤ ཀཱི་ལི་ཀཱི་ལ་ཡ་; DUN ཀྀ་ལ་ཡ་ཀྀ་ལ་ཡ་.
534 སརྦ་པ་ཕཾ་: KAḤ X Y སརྦ་པ་; TSH PH སརྦ་པཱ་ཕཾ་; DUN ས་རྦ་པ་པམ་.
535 ཧཱུྃ་ཧཱུྃ་: DUN ཧཱུྃ་ཧཱུྃ་ཧཱུྃ་.
536 ཀི་: KAḤ ཀཱི་.
537 དྷ་རོད་: KAḤ ད་རོ་; TSH PH ད་རོད་; X Y དྷ་རོ་.
538 ཏི་ཀ་ཡ་ཝཀ་ཙིཏྟ་: KAḤ ཝཱཀ་ཙིཏྟ་; TSH PH ཏི་ཀ་ཡ་ཝ་ཀ་ཙིཏྟ་; X Y ཏི་ཀ་ཡ་ཝཀྐ་ཙིཏྟ་; DUN ཏི་ཀ་ ཡ་བག་ཙྀད་ཏ་.
539 ཀི་: KAḤ kī.
540 ཞེས་དྲག་ཏུ་བརྗོད་དོ་: TSH ཞེས་དྲག་ཏུ་བརྗོད་; DUN ཅེས་དྲག་དུ་བརྗོད་དོ་.
(DUN8v) ཕུར་པ་541 དེ་དག་བཏབ་ཟིན་ནས༔542
Having completed the stabbing [in of] these phurpas,
དེའི་སྟེང་དུ་ལས་ཀྱི་ལྷའི་ཕྱག་རྒྱ་དང༔543
above them, with the mudrās of the ritual action deities,544 and 545སྔགས་ཀྱིས་མནན་ཏེ༔546
with the mantra (KAḤ TSH PH X Y+of the crossed vajra),547 [you]
suppress [the evil spirits]
____________
541 པ་: DUN བུ་.
542 DUN omits །.
543 DUN omits །; DUN ann., (placed under ལྷ་འི་) རྡོ་རྗེ་རྒྱ་གྲམ་གྱྀ་; of the crossed vajra. 544 Note that here the mTshams brag and gTing skyes editions of the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud (mTshams brag vol. Chi, 1040.4–5) omit, lha’i, thus, “mudrās and mantras of the ritual actions”, although this is quite possibly a shared error of MT, since D (Vol. Wa D352v.3) includes lha’i.
545 KAḤ TSH PH X Y insert རྡོ་རྗེ་རྒྱ་གྲམ་གྱི་ (it is quite possible that here an annotation has intruded into the main text in KD; it is not given in the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud, mTshams brag vol. Chi, 1040.5). 546 ཀྱིས་མནན་ཏེ་: TSH PH ཀྱི་གནན་སྟེ་; X Y ཀྱི་མནན་ཏེ་.
547 In DUN, the crossed vajra is an annotation associated with a mudrā, which makes good sense. The gesture of placing the vajra on top of those to be suppressed, and then again placing it at right angles to the first placement, creating a crossed vajra, is common in suppression rites. KAḤ TSH PH X Y's crossed vajra mantra is surely less likely. Moreover, the preliminary section refers in this context to the vajra cross mudrā (KAḤ61, TSH348, PH240,3, X665, Y699); and so too does the recitation included in the invocation manual (KAḤ196, TSH482, PH vol. Nya10,2, X803, Y839).
ལག་པ་གཉིས་548 བསྣོལ་ཏེ་549 མཐེ་བོང་དང་མཐེའུ་ཆུང་550 ངོས་སྦྱར་ཏེ་བརྐྱང་551 ལ༔ intertwining (DUN+the fingers [of]) the two hands, the thumbs and the little fingers (DUN the two thumbs) are placed together and extended, གཞན་552 དྲང་པོར་བསྲང༔553
(DUN+the backs of) the other [fingers] are straightened out.
དེའི་སྔགས་ལ༔ ཨཱོྃ་ཀརྨ་བཛྲ་554 ཀྲོ་ཏ་555 ཧཱུྃ་ཕཊ༔556
The mantra for this [is]: “oṃ karma vajra krodha hūṃ phaṭ
(DUN+svāhā)”.
ལན་ཉི་557 ཤུ་རྩ་གཅིག་བཟླས་ཏེ༔558
Reciting [it] twenty-one times,
གཡོན་559 ཕྱོགས་ནས་བསྐོར་ཏེ༔560
[you] rotate in an anticlockwise (DUN clockwise) direction and
____________
548 DUN inserts སོར་མོ་ (this reading is shared with the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud, mTshams brag vol. Chi, 1040.5).
549 ཏེ་: DUN ལ་.
550 མཐེ་བོང་དང་མཐེའུ་ཆུང་: X Y ཐེ་བོང་དང་ཐེའུ་ཆུང་; DUN མཐེ་བོ་གཉྀས་ (here the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud, mTshams brag vol. Chi, 1040.5, agrees with the KAḤ TSH PH X Y reading).
551 ཏེ་བརྐྱང་: KAḤ X Y ཏེ་བརྐྱངས་; TSH PH སྟེ་བརྐྱང་; DUN ཅྀང་བརྐྱང་.
552 DUN inserts རྒྱབ་ (a reading shared with the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud, mTshams brag vol. Chi, 1040.5).
553 བསྲང་: X Y བསྲངས་.
554 ཨཱོྃ་ཀརྨ་བཛྲ་: KAḤ ཨོྃ་བཛྲ་ཀརྨ་; X Y ཨཱོྃ་བཛྲ་ཀརྨ་; DUN ཨཱོྃ་ཀར་མ་བཛྲ་.
555 ཀྲོ་ཏ་: DUN ཀྲོ་དྷ་.
556 DUN inserts སྭ་ཧ་ (the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud, mTshams brag vol. Chi, 1040.6, also gives svāhā) .
557 ཉི་: X ཉེ་.
558 ཏེ་: TSH PH སྟེ་; DUN omits །.
559 གཡོན་: DUN གཡས་ (a reading shared with the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud, mTshams brag vol. Chi, 1040.6).
560 ཏེ་: TSH PH སྟེ་; DUN ལ་.
ཀི་561 ལ་ཡའི་མགོ་ལ་ལན་བདུན་ (KAḤ73) གཏུག་གོ༔562
touch seven (DUN three) times to Kilaya’s head.563
དེ་ནས་ཕུར་པ་སླར་564 མི་དབྱུང་ཞིང་སུས་565 ཀྱང་མི་ཕྱིན་པ་དང༔566
Then, without taking out the phurpa[s] again, [you] meditate that no-one whatsoever can leave,
ལྷག་པར་ཡང་ཟུག་567 ཅིང་ཐལ་ཕྱིན་པར་བསམ་ (PH245,3) མོ༔
[for the phurpas] are entirely planted [into] and transfix [them].
(TSH362) དེ་ནས་དམ་ཚིག་གི་ཕྱག་རྒྱ་བསྟན་ཏེ༔568
Then, displaying the samaya mudrā,
____________
561 ཀི་: KAḤ ཀཱི་.
562 བདུན་གཏུག་གོ་: TSH བདུན་གདུག་གོ་; PH བདུན་གདུགོ་; DUN གསུམ་གཏུག་གོ་ (the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud, mTshams brag vol. Chi, 1040.6, agrees with DUN‘s gsum) 563 The meaning here is not entirely clear: this may be referring to the mudrā of rotating the phurpa around one’s head, but perhaps the Kilaya here refers to the ritual phurpas, and the mudrā is touching above them.
564 ཕུར་པ་སླར་: KAḤ X Y ས་སླར་; DUN སླར་ཕུར་པ་.
565 དབྱུང་ཞིང་སུས་: KAḤ དཔུང་ཞིང་ལུས་; TSH PH དབུར་ཅིང་ལུས་; X Y དཔུང་ཅིང་ལུས་ (lus is surely incorrect here, and it is not clear what dpung or dbur could mean. The ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud, mTshams brag vol. Chi, 1040.7, gives དབྱུང་ཞིང་། སུས་).
566 པ་དང་: DUN པར་; DUN omits །.
567 ལྷག་པར་ཡང་ཟུག་: KAḤ PH X ལྟག་པར་ཟུག་; Y ལྟག་པར་ཟུང་; TSH སྟག་པར་ཟུག་ (the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud, mTshams brag vol. Chi, 1040.7, agrees with ལྷག་པར་ཡང་ ཟུག་, which seems more coherent here).
568 ཏེ་: DUN པ་སྟེ་.
སོར་མོ་569 རྒྱབ་དུ་སྣོལ་སྟེ་བཅང་ (X678) ནས་570 གུང་མོ་གཉིས་571 སྦྱར་ཏེ༔572
holding [the phurpa between?] the fingers intertwined back [to back], joining the two middle fingers (DUN having joined the backs [of] the two middle fingers) [together]
རྩེ་སྤྲོད་སྦྲེང་573 ལ་574 རྣོན་པོར་བྱས་ལ༔575
[you] raise up the tip[s] which are touching each other, and pointing them (DUN the fingers),576
ཕུར་པའི་གླད་དུ་གནན༔577
[you] press down on the top of the phurpa.578
____________
569 DUN inserts རྣམས་.
570 རྒྱབ་དུ་བསྣོལ་ཏེ་བཅང་ནས་: KAḤ རྒྱབ་ཏུ་བསྣོལ་ཏེ༔ བརྐྱང་ནས་; TSH རྒྱབ་དུ་སྣོལ་སྟེ་བཅང་ནས་; PH རྒྱབ་དུ་བསྣོལ་སྟེ་བཅང་ནས་; X བརྒྱབ་ཏུ་བསྣོལ་ཏེ༔ བཅངས་ནས་; Y རྒྱབ་ཏུ་བསྣོལ་ཏེ༔ བཅངས་ནས་; DUN རྒྱབ་ དུ་བསྣོལ་ཏེ་བཅངས་ལ།.
571 DUN inserts རྒྱབ་ (here, the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud, mTshams brag vol. Chi, 1041.1, agrees with the KAḤ TSH PH X Y reading).
572 ཏེ་: DUN ནས་; DUN omits །.
573 སྤྲོད་སྦྲེང་: KAḤ སྤྲོད་སྦྲེངས་; DUN མོ་བསྒྲེང་.
574 DUN inserts སོར་མོ་.
575 ལ་: DUN ཏེ་; DUN omits །.
576 This is uncertain: literally, making them sharp/sharpening them. 577 གནན་: KAḤ X Y མནན་.
578 The exact movement is not very clear here. The ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud version (mTshams brag vol. Chi, 1041.1–2) gives slad du for glad du (gTing skyes omits this, but the reading is shared by sDe dge), which may suggest, “[you] afterwards press down [with?] the phurpa.” Unfortunately, the discussion in the long commentary at this point deals only with the symbolic purpose (the continuity of the samaya relationship) and the invocation manual only supplies an accompanying recitation (KAḤ119–120, 197, TSH410, 482, PH vol. Ja262,3, Volume Nya9,3, X725, 803, Y759, 839–840).
ཕུར་པའི་ལྷ་དང་བགེགས་ཆེ་གེ་མོ་ (DUN9r) ཁྱོད་དམ་ཚིག་འདི་ལས་ (Y712) མ་འདའ་
ཤིག་579 པར་བསྒོ༔580
Phurpa deities and obstacles of whatever name, [I] command you not to transgress this samaya!
སྔགས་འདི་ལན་བདུན་བཟླས་སོ༔
This mantra is recited seven times:
ཨཱོྃ་581 བཛྲ་ས་ཏྭ་582 ས་མ་ཡ་ཧཱུྃ་ཕཊ༔ ཞེས་583 བརྗོད་དོ༔584
“oṃ vajra sattva samaya hūṃ phaṭ”
འདི་ནི་སེམས་མ་དམ་ཚིག་གི་སྔགས་དང་ཕྱག་རྒྱ་སྟེ༔585
This being the female [[[bodhi]]]sattva[’s] samaya mantra and mudrās,
བསྒོ་བ་ཐམས་ཅད་586 ཉན་པར་བསམ༔
meditate that [they] obey all the commands.
དེ་ནས་སོར་མོ་རྣམས་587 ནང་དུ་བསྣོལ་ཏེ༔588
Then, intertwining the (KAḤ TSH PH X Y two) fingers inwards,589
579 ཤིག་: KAḤ ཞིག་; DUN inserts །.
580 DUN inserts ཞྀང་, omits །.
581 ཨཱོྃ་: KAḤ TSH PH ཨོྃ་.
582 ས་ཏྭ་: TSH PH སྭ་ཏོ་: DUN སད་ཏྭ་.
583 ཞེས་: DUN ཅེས་.
584 དོ་: KAḤ X Y omit.
585 DUN omits །.
586 ཐམས་ཅད་: DUN ཐམས་ཆད་.
587 རྣམས་: KAḤ TSH PH X Y གཉིས་ (the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud, mTshams brag vol. Chi, 1041.3, agrees with the DUN reading, while the KAḤ TSH PH X Y reading seems unclear—it is not specifying which two fingers). 588 ཏེ་: DUN ལ་; KAḤ TSH PH omit ༔.
589 a little uncertain: might mean, intertwining [the phurpa?] within/between the fingers.
ཐེ་བོང་590 དང་མཐེའུ་591 ཆུང་གཉིས་592 ངོས་593 སྦྱར་ཏེ་སྦྲེང༔594
the thumbs and the two little fingers are placed together, raised up,
ཁུ་ཚུར་གཉིས་595 མི་བཅང་པར་596 སོར་མོ་རྣམས་597 ཕྱིར་བཀྱེད་598 དེ༔599
without clenching the two fists, the (KAḤ TSH PH X Y two) fingers are
bent back outside,
ཕུར་པའི་སྟེང་དུ་གནན་600 ཅིང་སྔགས་འདི་བརྗོད་དོ༔601
pressing down above the phurpa, and this mantra is recited:
____________
590 ཐེ་བོང་: DUN མཐེ་བོ་.
591 མཐེའུ་: TSH PH ཐེབ་; X Y ཐེའུ་; DUN མཐེ་འུ་.
592 KAḤ TSH PH X Y insert པོ་.
593 ངོས་: DUN ངོར་.
594 ཏེ་སྦྲེང་: KAḤ ཏེ་སྦྲེངས་; TSH PH སྟེ་སྦྲེང་, omitting ༔; DUN ལ་བསྒྲེང་.
595 DUN omits གཉིས་.
596 བཅང་པར་: KAḤ X Y བཅངས་པར་; DUN བཅང་བར་.
597 རྣམས་: KAḤ TSH PH X Y གཉིས་ (again, the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud, mTshams brag vol. Chi, 1041.4, agrees with the DUN reading, while the KAḤ TSH PH X Y reading seems unclear—it is not specifying which two fingers).
598 བཀྱེད་: KAḤ TSH PH X Y བསྐྱེད་.
599 DUN omits །.
600 གནན་: KAḤ X Y མནན་.
601 དོ་: KAḤ X Y omit.
602ཨཱོྃ་603 བཛྲ་ཀྲོ་ཏ་604 ཧ་ན་ཧ་ན་605 ད་ཧ་ད་ཧ་606 པ་ཙ་པ་ཙ་607 བནྡྷ་བནྡྷ་608 ཚིནྡྷ་ཚིནྡྷ་609 རྦ་ན་ཡ་རྦ་ ན་ཡ་610 ཧཱུྃ་ཧཱུྃ་ཕཊ་ཕཊ༔611
“oṃ vajra krodha hana hana daha daha paca paca bandha bandha chindha chindharbnaya rbnaya hūṃ hūṃ phaṭ phaṭ”
ཅེས་ཉི་612 ཤུ་རྩ་གཅིག་བཟླས་སོ༔
Recite this twenty-one times.
སྟོབས་པོ་ཆེའི་613 སྔགས་དང་614 ཕྱག་རྒྱ་སྟེ༔
[This] being the mantra and mudrā of Most Powerful,615 so
____________
602 This mantra is given as follows in the mTshams brag edition of the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud: །ཨོྃ་བཛྲ་ཀྲོ་དྷ། ཧ་ན་ཧ་ན། ད་ཧ་ད་ཧ། པ་ཙ་པ་ཙ། ཚིན་དྷ་ཚིན་དྷ། རྦ་ན་རྦ་ན་ཧཱུྃ་ཧཱུྃ་ ཕཊ་ཕཊ། (1041.4–5).
603 ཨཱོྃ་: KAḤ TSH PH ཨོྃ་.
604 ཀྲོ་ཏ་: DUN ཀྲོ་དྷ་; TSH PH insert ༔.
605 DUN omits ཧ་ན་; TSH PH insert ༔.
606 ད་ཧ་ད་ཧ་: DUN ད་དྷ་; TSH PH insert ༔.
607 པ་ཙ་པ་ཙ་: DUN པ་ཙ་; TSH PH X Y insert ༔.
608 བནྡྷ་བནྡྷ་: TSH PH བན་དྷ་བན་དྷ་; X བྷནྡྷ་བྷནྡྷ་; Y བྷན་དྷ་བྷནྷ་; DUN omits; TSH PH insert ༔.
609 ཚིནྡྷ་ཚིནྡྷ་: TSH PH ཚིན་ཏ་ཚིན་ཏ་; Y ཚིན་དྷ་ཚིནྷ་; DUN ཚྀན་དྷ་ཚྀན་དྷ་; TSH PH insert ༔.
610 རྦ་ན་ཡ་རྦ་ན་ཡ་: TSH PH རྦ་ན་ཡ་; DUN རྦ་ན་རྦ་ན་; TSH PH insert ༔.
611 ཧཱུྃ་ཧཱུྃ་ཕཊ་ཕཊ་: DUN ཧཱུྃ་ཕཊ་; DUN omits །; DUN ann., ཕུར་པ་འྀ་ཁྲོ་བོ་ཉྀད་ཀྱྀ་ཕྱག་རྒྱ་དང་སྔགས་;
the mudrā[s] and mantra[s] of the phurpa wrathful deitie[s them]selves (in relation to this comment, it is perhaps worth noting that the first five out of the six repeated elements in this mantra, starting with hana hana, correspond to elements in the mantras of five of the classic set of the khro bcu, as presented in the Vajrakīlaya tradition, and in this text, given in full in the invocation manual, KAḤ164–165; TSH457–458; PH vol. Nya1,3–2,3;
X771–772; Y805–806.) .
612 ཉི་: X ཉེ་.
613 པོ་ཆེའི་: TSH PH པོ་ཆེ་ཡི་; DUN ཆེ་བ་འྀ་.
614 དང་: KAḤ X Y omit.
615 = the wrathful deity, Mahābala (stobs po che or stobs chen) .
གོང་དུ་བཀའ་ཉན་པས་616 བདག་གི་ (KAḤ74) དབང་དུ་གྱུར་ནས༔617
through attending to the above commands, [they] are brought under one’s own control,
ཅི་བསྒོ་618 བ་ཐམས་ཅད་619 བྲན་བཞིན་དུ་620 བྱེད་པར་འགྱུར་རོ༔
so whatever all the commands [may be, they] carry them out like (DUN+one’s own) servants.
(DUN9v) དེ་ནས་ཉུངས་དཀར་621 གྱི་རྒྱལ་པོས་བརྡེག་ཅིང༔622
Then, beating [[[obstacles]]?] with the king of white mustard seeds and གུ་གུལ་སྦྱར་མས་བདུག་623 ལ་བཞག་624 གོ༔
fumigating with compounded bdellium incense,625 [they?] are left there. དེ་ནས་ལག་ (X679) པ་གཉིས་སྦྱར་ལ༔626 (PH246,1)
Then, the two hands are joined (DUN+back [to back]), མཐེའུ་627 ཆུང་གཉིས་གཅིག་628 ལ་གཅིག་འཁྱུད་ལ༔629
the two little fingers630 wrap round each other, and
____________
616 པས་: DUN པ་ལས་.
617 DUN omits །.
618 བསྒོ་: TSH སྒོ་.
619 ཅད་: DUN ཆད་བདག་གི་ (bdag gi is given in the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud, mTshams brag vol. Chi, 1041.6).
620 དུ་: DUN ལས་.
621 ཉུངས་དཀར་: KAḤ ཉུངས་ཀར་; DUN ཡུངས་ཀར་.
622 DUN omits །.
623 མས་བདུག་: KAḤ X Y བས་བདུག་; DUN མས་བདུགས་.
624 བཞག་: DUN གཞག་.
625 See page 88–89, note 332 above.
626 སྦྱར་ལ་: DUN རྒྱབ་སྦྱར་; DUN omits ། (the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud includes rgyab, mTshams brag vol. Chi, 1041.7).
627 མཐེའུ་: TSH PH མཐེ་; X Y ཐེའུ་; DUN མཐེ་འུ་.
628 གཅིག་: TSH PH ཅིག་; Y ༡.
629 གཅིག་འཁྱུད་ལ་: X ཅིག་འཁྱུད་ལ་; Y ༡འཁྱུད་ལ་; DUN གཅིག་མཁྱུད་; KAḤ TSH PH omit ༔.
འཛུབ་631 མོ་གཉིས་ཁ་འགྲམ་གཡས་ (TSH 363) གཡོན་དུ་སྦྲེང་632 སྟེ་633 ཡིད་དགུ་634 བར་ བྱ༔635
the two forefingers nearby are raised upright at the right [and] left and made to mentally bend down,636
ལྷག་མ་རྣམས་ནང་དུ་བཅིངས་637 ལ༔638
while the remaining [fingers] are trapped within, and འཛུབ་639 (Y713) མོ་གཉིས་མཆེ་བར་བསམས་ལ༔640
[you] meditate on the two forefingers as the canine teeth (TSH meditate on opening out/separating the two forefingers).641
____________
630 the mTshams brag and gTing skyes editions of the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud (mTshams brag vol. Chi, 1041.7) add mthe bong in front of mthe’u chung, producing a meaning of, “ the thumbs and little fingers”, but this may be an error since it is not shared by sDe dge (vol. Wa, 353r.2).
631 འཛུབ་: KAḤ X Y མཛུབ་.
632 སྦྲེང་: DUN བསྒྲེང་.
633 སྟེ་: X ཏེ་; TSH PH X Y insert ༔.
634 དགུ་: KAḤ བསྒུ་.
635 TSH PH X Y omit ༔.
636 Note that the mTshams brag and gTing skyes editions of the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud reading, ཡིད་མགུ་བར་བྱས་ (mTshams brag vol. Chi, 1042.1), gives a rather different sense here, “creates mental rejoicing”, but sDe dge (vol. Wa, 353r.3) shares དགུ་ བར་.
637 བཅིངས་: DUN བཅངས་.
638 DUN omits །.
639 འཛུབ་: KAḤ X Y མཛུབ་.
640 མཆེ་བར་བསམས་ལ་: TSH PH ཕྱེ་བ་བསམ་ལ་; DUN མཆེ་བར་བསམས་ཏེ་.
641 Here, the TSH PH reading might seem more coherent at first sight, although all other versions, including the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud versions, agree with the reading, mche ba (teeth), and this reading is confirmed also in the preliminary section (KAḤ61, X665, Y699), although TSH (348) and PH (240,3) give the spelling che ba, most likely a simple scribal error. All versions of the invocation manual, moreover, refer to the vajra teeth, or Vajra Teeth, mudrā (rdo rje mche ba'i phyag rgya, KAḤ197, TSH482, PH volume Nya9,3, X804, Y840). Furthermore, the presentation in the long
རྐང་པ་གཡོན་པ་642 བགེགས་ཀྱི་སྙིང་གར་མནན་643 ལ༔
The left foot presses down on the heart of the obstacles; སྔགས་འདི་ལན་བདུན་བཟླས་སོ༔
recite this mantra seven times:
ཨཱོྃ་644 བཛྲ་ཡཀྵ་645 ཀྲོ་ཏ་ཁ་ཁ་646 ཧ་ཧ་ཧཱུྃ་ཧཱུྃ་ཕཊ༔647 ཅེས་བརྗོད་དོ༔
“oṃ vajra yakṣa krodha kha kha ha ha hūṃ hūṃ phaṭ”
དེ་ནས་རྡོ་རྗེ་བེ་ཅོན་གྱི་སྔགས་དང་ཕྱག་རྒྱ་བྱ་648 སྟེ༔
Then, that which is called the mudrā and mantra (DUN mantra and mudrā) of Vajra Club,649
____________
commentary (KAḤ120, TSH410, PH263,3, X725, Y759) seems to imply that Vajra Teeth should be a deity name, since we have the mudrās and mantras of a number of deities listed. Perhaps this deity was lost sight of by the tradition, so that TSH PH attempted to correct a puzzling reading (but produced a different wording from that in their version of the preliminary text). The Phur pa bcu gnyis passage also has mche ba/bas, but its lines otherwise rather diverge from the text here, and do not help to clarify our meaning. They rather illustrate the creative re-embedding of textual material across different sources. Based on the sDe dge edition, the lines would translate, “Clenching the fists, the forefingers raised upright, [they] should bend down to the two [fingers?] nearby. [This] is considered to be killing with teeth/fangs. The left foot presses down on the heart...” །ཁུ་ཚུར་ བཅངས་༼བཅིངས་༽ཏེ་༼སྟེ་༽མཛུབ་མོ་༼སོ་སོར་༽བསྒྲེང༌།༼བསྒྲེངས་༽ །ཁ་འགྲམ་གཉིས་སུ་དགུ་པོར་
བྱ།༼བསྒྲེང༌།བསྒྲེངས་༽ །མཆེ་བས་༼བ་༽གསོད་པ་ཡིན་པར་བརྟག།༼བརྡེག་༽ །རྐང་པ་གཡོན་པ་སྙིང་གར་༼ཁར་
༽མནན།༼བཞག།གཞག་༽, sDe dge vol. Pa, 225v, variants given in other versions in brackets).
642 པ་: DUN པས་.
643 གར་མནན་: TSH PH ཁར་གནན་; X ཁར་མནན་; DUN ཀར་མནན་.
644 ཨཱོྃ་: KAḤ TSH ཨོྃ་.
645 ཡཀྵ་: TSH PH X Y ཡག་ཀྵ་.
646 ཁ་: Y ཁཱ་.
647 ཡཀྵ་ཀྲོ་ཏ་ཁ་ཁ་ཧ་ཧ་ཧཱུྃ་ཧཱུྃ་ཕཊ་: DUN ཡ་ཀྴ་ཀྲོ་དྷ་ཁ་ཁ་ཁ་ཧ་ཧ་ཧ་ཧཱུྃ་ཧཱུྃ་ཧཱུྃ་ཕཊ་ཕཊ་ཕཊ་ (here, apart from minor spelling variants and the repetition of phaṭ, the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud, mTshams brag vol. Chi, 1042.2, agrees with KAḤ TSH PH X Y’s reading).
648 སྔགས་དང་ཕྱག་རྒྱ་བྱ་: TSH PH X Y ཕྱག་རྒྱ་དང་སྔགས་བྱ་; DUN སྔགས་དང་ཕྱག་རྒྱ་.
ལག་པ་གཉིས་སོར་མོ་ལུ་གུ་རྒྱུད་དུ་སྦྲེལ་650 ལ༔
connecting (DUN intertwining) the fingers [of] the two hands as an interlocking chain,651
མཐེ་བོང་གཡས་652 གཡོན་པའི་སྟེང་དུ་མནན༔653
press (DUN place) down the right upon the left thumb.
འཛུབ་654 མོ་གཉིས་ངོས་ (DUN10r) སྦྱར་ཏེ་སྦྲེང་ལ༔655
Placing together the two forefingers, and raising [them] up,
སྡང་མིག་དུ་བསྒྲད་དེ་བརྡེག་པའི་656 སྔགས་657 ལན་བདུན་ནམ་658 ཉི་ཤུ་659 རྩ་གཅིག་གམ་660 བརྒྱ་རྩ་
བརྒྱད་661 བཟླས་སོ༔
[you] stare with an angry look, and recite the mantra for striking seven, twenty-one or one hundred and eight times:
____________ 649 this might simply mean, “of the vajra club”, but as noted above, note 641, we seem to have a list of the mudrās and mantras of a series of deities, and the long commentary mentions also the deity’s consort, Uccuṣma (རྡོ་རྗེ་བེ་ཅོན་ཨུ་ཙུསྨ་ཀྲོ་ཏའི་སྔགས་དང་ཕྱག་རྒྱ་བསྟན༔,
KAḤ120, TSH411, PH263,3, X725, Y759, with minor variants), who is also referred to in the invocation manual (KAḤ192, TSH478, PH vol. Nya 9,1; X799, Y835).
650 སྦྲེལ་: DUN བསྣོལ་.
651 śṛṅkhalamudrā.
652 མཐེ་བོང་གཡས་: TSH PH X ཐེ་བོང་གཡས་; Y ཐེ་བང་གཡས་; DUN མཐེ་བོ་གཡས་པ་; X Y insert ༔
653 མནན་: TSH PH གནན་; DUN བཞག.
654 འཛུབ་: KAḤ X Y མཛུབ་.
655 ངོས་སྦྱར་ཏེ་སྦྲེང་ལ་: KAḤ ངོས་སྦྱར་ཏེ་སྦྲེངས་ལ་; TSH PH ངོས་སྦྱར་སྟེ་སྦྲེང་ལ་; Y དངོས་སྦྱར་ཏེ་སྦྲེང་ལ་;
DUN ངོས་སྦྱར་ཏེ། བསྒྲེང་ནས་; DUN omits ། after ནས་.
656 མིག་དུ་བསྒྲད་དེ་བརྡེག་པའི་: KAḤ X Y མིག་ཏུ་བསྒྲད་དེ་བརྡེག་པའི་; TSH PH མིག་དུ་བསྒྲད་སྟེ་བརྡེག་ པའི་; DUN དམྱྀག་དུ་དགྲད་ནས་རྡེག་ཅྀང་ (for dgrad, Bod rgya tshig mdzod chen mo gives [snying] bgrad).
657 DUN inserts འདྀ་.
658 བདུན་ནམ་: DUN omits (here, the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud, mTshams brag vol. Chi, 1042.3, agrees with KAḤ TSH PH X Y).
659 ཉི་ཤུ་: X ཉེུ་; Y ཉིུ་.
660 TSH PH X Y insert ༔.
661 DUN inserts དུ་.
662ཨཱོྃ་663 བཛྲ་ཀྲོ་ཏ་664 མ་ཧཱ་པ་665 ལ་666 ཧ་ན་ཧ་ན༔ ད་ཧ་ད་ཧ༔ པ་ཙ་པ་ཙ༔ བི་ཏན་667 ས་ཡ༔668
ཛ་ཏི་ལཾ༔ བི་ད་ར༔669 ཨུ་670 ཙུས་སྨ་671 ཀྲོ་ཏ་672 ཧཱུྃ་ཕཊ༔ ཅེས་བརྗོད་ (KAḤ75) དོ༔673
“oṃ vajra krodha mahābala hana hana daha daha paca paca
vidhvaṃsaya jaṭilāmbhodhara ucchuṣmakrodha hūṃ phaṭ”
དེ་ནས་ཉུངས་དཀར་གྱིས་674 བརྡེག་ཅིང ་༔
Then, pelting with (DUN+the king of) white mustard seeds,
གུ་གུལ་སྦྱར་ (X680) མས་བདུག་ཅིང ་༔675
fumigating with compounded bdellium incense,676
____________
662 The version of the mantra in the mTshams brag edition of the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa'i rgyud‘s parallel text (1042.4; sDe dge variants in brackets) is: །ཨོྃ་བཛྲ་ཀྲོ་དྷ་མ་ཧཱ་བ་ ལ་ཧ་ན་ད་ཧ་བ་ཙ་བིད་ཏན་༼ D པ་ཙ་བིདྷྭན་༽ས་མ་ཡ་ཛ་ཏི་ལཾ་བོ་ད་ར་ཨུ་ཙུས་མ་༼ D ཙྪུཥྨ་༽ཀྲོ་དྷ་ཧཱུྃ་ཕཊ།.
663 ཨཱོྃ་: KAḤ ཨོྃ་.
664 ཏ་: DUN དྷ་.
665 ཧཱ་པ་: KAḤ X Y ཧཱ་བ་; TSH DUN ཧ་པ་.
666 TSH PH insert ༔.
667 ཏན་: TSH PH དན་.
668 ཧ་ན་ཧ་ན༔ ད་ཧ་ད་ཧ༔ པ་ཙ་པ་ཙ༔ བི་ཏན་ས་ཡ་: DUN ཧ་ན་ད་ཧ་པ་ཙ་བྀ་ཏྭན་ས་ཡ་.
669 ཏི་ལཾ༔ བི་ད་ར་: KAḤ ཏི་ལ༔ བི་ཏ་ལ་; DUN ཏྀ་ལ་ལམ་བྷོ་དྷ་ར་.
670 TSH has ཨུས་, but deletion of the letter ས་ is indicated.
671 ཙུས་སྨ་: KAḤ ཙུཥྨ་; TSH PH Y ཙུས་སྨྲ་.
672 ཏ་: DUN དྷ་.
673 This mantra is given in the Mahābala-nāma-mahāyānasūtra, of which there are many copies in the Dunhuang materials. In one, it is given as follows: om bajra gro dhā ma ha ba la / ha na da ha pa ca / bi dhan sa ya / ji ti la / lam po da ra / u cu smra kro dha hūṃ phaṭ sva hā (Bischoff 1956: 26).
674 ཉུངས་དཀར་གྱིས་: KAḤ ཉུངས་ཀར་གྱིས་; X ཉུང་དཀར་གྱི་; Y ཉུངས་ཀར་གྱི་; DUN ཡུངས་ཀར་གྱྀ་རྒྱལ་ པོས་ (here, the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud, mTshams brag vol. Chi, 1042.5, agrees with DUN's reading).
675 བདུག་ཅིང་: DUN བདུགས་ལ་; DUN omits །.
676 Again, see page 88–89, note 332 above.
ལས་འདི་ཤིན་ཏུ་བརྟན་ཅིང་གྲུབ་677 པར་འགྱུར་བར་ལས་བཅོལ་678 ལོ༔
really reinforcing the action, [you] entrust the ritual actions, thus bringing accomplishment (DUN+at once).
ཅུང་ཟད་བྱིན་ཆུང་བ་679 འདྲ་ན༔680
If [it seems only to have] a little, like a lesser majestic power, རྡོ་རྗེ་བརྗིད་གནོན་བསམ་གཏན་གྱིས་གནན་681 པར་བྱ་སྟེ༔ [you] should press down with the vajra overpowering contemplation.
ཁྲོ་བོ་རྣམས་ཀྱི་སྤྱི་བོ་ནས་682 བསྡུས་པའི་སྟེང་དུ༔683 (PH247,1)
From the crown of the heads of the wrathful deities, [[[arising]]] above the assembly (DUN From [a] dark blue hūṃ/hūṃs [which] is/are concentrated within the crown of the heads of the wrathful deities), ཧཱུྃ་ (Y714) མཐིང་ནག་ལས་684 རྡོ་རྗེ་རྒྱ་གྲམ་ལྗང་གུ་685 མེ་ལྕེའི་འཕྲེང་686 བས་བསྐོར་བའོ༔687
[there is a] dark blue hūṃ, out of which [a] green crossed vajra [arises], encircled by a garland of tongues of fire,
____________
677 ཏུ་བརྟན་ཅིང་གྲུབ་: KAḤ ཏུ་བརྟེན་ཅིང་འགྲུབ་; Y ཏུ་བརྟེན་ཅིང་གྲུབ་; DUN དུ་བརྟན་ཞྀང་གྲུབ་.
678 འགྱུར་བར་ལས་བཅོལ་: KAḤ འགྱུར་པ་ལས་བཙལ་; DUN གྱུར་ཅྀག་པར་བཅོལ་.
679 བ་: PH པ་.
680 DUN omits །; DUN ann., བརྣག་པ་འྀ་ཆོ་གའ་; [during] the ritual of mental focusing. 681 བསམ་གཏན་གྱིས་གནན་: KAḤ ནམ་བསམ་གཏན་གྱིས་མནན་; TSH བསམ་ཏན་གྱིས་གནན་; X Y ལཾ་
བསཾ་གཏན་གྱི་མནན་; DUN གྱྀ་བསམ་རྟན་གྱིས་གནན་.
682 བོ་ནས་: Y བོས་ནས་; DUN བོ་.
683 སྟེང་དུ་: DUN ནང་དུ་; DUN omits །.
684 DUN inserts །.
685 རྒྱ་གྲམ་ལྗང་གུ་: TSH PH རྒྱ་རམ་ལྗང་ཁུ་; Y རྒྱ་གྲཾ་ལྗང་ཀུ་; DUN ལྗང་ཀུ་རྒྱ་གྲམ་.
686 ལྕེའི་འཕྲེང་: KAḤ X Y ལྕེའི་ཕྲེང་; DUN རལྕེ་འཕྲེང་.
687 བསྐོར་བའོ་: KAḤ བསྐྲོད་པའོ་; DUN བསྐོར་པ་འྀ་; DUN omits །.
རྒྱ་གྲམ་གྱི་དཀྱིལ་འཁོར་688 ཡི་གེ་སུ་སེར་པོ་གསེར་བཙོ་689 མའི་ཁ་690 མདོག་འདྲ་བ་ཞིག་691 འདུག་
པར་བསམས་ (TSH364) ལ༔692
[and on] the [[[vajra]]] cross maṇḍala (DUN at [its] centre), there is one syllable su, [its] colour like refined gold, [and] meditating on [this] (DUN from [this]),
ཨཱོྃ་ 693 བཛྲ་ (DUN10v) སུ་མེ་རུ་ཧཱུྃ་694 ས་མ་ཡ་སྟྭཾ༔695 ཞེས་696 བརྗོད་པས༔697
recite, “oṃ vajra sumeru hūṃ samayas tvaṃ”, through which གསེར་གྱི་རི་རབ་དཔག་ཚད་བྱེ་བའི་ཁྱོན་ཙམ་ཅིག་ཏུ་གྱུར༔698
it immediately becomes a golden [DUN+square] Mt. Meru measuring as much as ten million699 leagues.
དེའི་སྟེང་དུ་700 བཅོམ་ལྡན་འདས་དོན་ཡོད་གྲུབ་པ་སྐུ་མདོག་ལྗང་ཀུ་701 དབུ་གསུམ་ཕྱག་དྲུག་པ༔702
Above this [arises] the Victorious One, Amoghasiddhi, [his] body green [in] colour, [with] three heads [and] six arms,
____________
688 རྒྱ་གྲམ་གྱི་དཀྱིལ་འཁོར་: TSH X Y རྒྱ་གྲཾ་གྱི་དཀྱིལ་འཁོར་; DUN དཀྱྀལ་དུ།.
689 སེར་པོ་གསེར་བཙོ་: TSH X སེར་པོ་གསེར་གཙོ་; DUN གསེར་གྱྀ་བཙོ་ (but གྱྀ་ seems to have been deleted).
690 ཁ་: DUN omits.
691 ཞིག་: TSH PH ཅིག་; X Y ༡.
692 པར་བསམས་ལ་: Y པར་བསཾ་ལ་; DUN པ་ལས་.
693 ཨཱོྃ་: KAḤ ཨོྃ་.
694 སུ་མེ་རུ་ཧཱུྃ་: Y སུ་མེ་རུ་; DUN སུ་མྱེ་ཏུཾ་ཧཱུྃ་.
695 སྟྭཾ་: TSH PH སྟོཾ་.
696 ཞེས་: KAḤ ཅེས་.
697 པས་: DUN ནས་; KAḤ omits ༔.
698 བྱེ་བའི་ཁྱོན་ཙམ་ཅིག་ཏུ་གྱུར་: KAḤ བྱེ་བའི་ཁྱོན་ཙམ་ཞིག་ཏུ་གྱུར་; TSH བྱེད་བའི་ཁྱོན་ཙམ་ཅིག་ཏུ་གྱུར་;
DUN བྱེ་བ་གྲུ་བཞྀ་པ་གཅྀག་འདུག་པ་ལས་.
699 See page 91–92, note 363 on this number.
700 དེའི་སྟེང་དུ་: DUN omits.
701 ཀུ་: KAḤ གུ་; TSH PH ཁུ་; DUN ཀུ།.
702 DUN omits །.
ཕྱག་703 གཡས་ཀྱི་དང་པོ་ན་འཁོར་ལོ་འབར་བ་རབ་ཏུ་འཕྱར་ཏེ་704 བསྣམས་པ༔705
In the first right hand, [he] holds aloft a brightly blazing wheel.706 གཡོན་ཀྱི་དང་པོ་ན་རྡོ་རྗེ་རྒྱ་གྲམ་707 ཐུགས་ཀར་བརྟན་པ༔708
In the first left [hand], a crossed vajra is held firm (KAḤ TSH PH [he] exhibits a crossed vajra) at the heart.
འཁོར་དཔག་ཏུ་709 མེད་པ་དང་བཅས་པའི་ཕོ་བྲང་710 བཏབ་པར་བསམ་པས༔711
Meditate that [he is] striking the palace along with the immeasurable retinue, so that,712
____________
703 ཕྱག་: DUN omits.
704 ན་འཁོར་ལོ་འབར་བ་རབ་ཏུ་འཕྱར་ཏེ་: TSH PH ན་འཁོར་ལོ་འབར་བ་རབ་ཏུ་འཕྱར་སྟེ་; DUN ལ་ཕྱར་ཏེ་.
705 པ་: DUN omits.
706 The ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud gives, གཡས་ཀྱི་དང་པོ་ན་འཁོར་ལོ་འབར་བ་ཕྱར་ཏེ་ བསྣམས་, “in the first right [hand he] holds aloft a blazing wheel” (mTshams brag vol. Chi, 1043.2; the sDe dge edition shares this reading; gTing skyes omits ’khor lo, most probably in error). It is likely that IOL Tib J 331.III has a scribal omission here.
707 རྒྱ་གྲམ་: TSH PH རྒྱ་རམ་.
708 བརྟན་པ་: KAḤ TSH PH བསྟན་པ་; DUN བརྟན་པ་འ་.The mTshams brag and gTing skyes editions of the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud give, bstan, mTshams brag vol. Chi, 1043.2. The sDe dge edition, however, has brten, vol. Wa, 353v.1, which perhaps increases the likelihood of brtan as an earlier reading.
709 ཏུ་: DUN དུ་.
710 པ་དང་བཅས་པའི་ཕོ་བྲང་་: DUN པ་འྀ་ཕོང་བྲང་.
711 པར་བསམ་པས་: KAḤ X པར་བསམས་པས་; DUN པ་འ།.
712 The long commentary clarifies that the palace here refers to the top of Mt. Meru, and the retinue refers to the encircling wrathful deities within a conflagration (འཁོར་དཔག་ཏུ་ མེད་པ་ཞེས་བྱ་བ་ནི༔ ཁྲོ་བོས་མེ་དཔུང་གི་ནང་ན་བར་མཚམས་མེད་པར་གཏམས་པའོ༔ འཁོར་གྱི་ཁྲོ་བོས་བསྐོར་བའོ༔ ཕོ་
བྲང་བཏབ་པ་ནི་རི་རབ་ཀྱི་སྟེང་ངོ༔, KAḤ121, TSH412, PH264,1, X724, Y761, with minor variants). The invocation manual further specifies that one generates the palace of Amoghasiddhi with the golden Mt. Meru (གསེར་གྱི་རི་རབ་དོན་ཡོད་གྲུབ་པའི་ཕོ་བྲང་དང་བཅས་པ་བསྐྱེད་
ལ༔, KAḤ202, TSH486, PH Volume Nya 11,2; X808, Y845, with minor variants), and this is again referred to in the following recitation of aspirations (KAḤ204, TSH488, PH Volume Nya 11,3; X811, Y847), so it would seem that the sense here is that it is
ཁྲོ་བོ་རྣམས་ཀྱང་ཤིན་ཏུ་713 གཟིར་ཞིང་714 མི་གཡོ་བ་དང༔
even the wrathful deities are really pinned down and immobilised, and ལས་ (KAḤ76) མ་གྲུབ་ན་བསྐལ་པའི་མཐའ་ཐུག་དུ་མནན་715 པར་བསམ༔716
meditate that [they] will be kept down (DUN remain)717 until the end of the aeon for as long as the actions have not been accomplished.
འཕྲིན་718 ལས་ (X681) ཀྱང་དེ་བཞིན་དུ་བཅོལ་ཏེ་བཞག་719 གོ༔
The actions are likewise also entrusted and established in this way.
ཡོ་བྱད་ཐམས་ཅད་ཀྱང་720 ནག་པོར་བཤམ་མོ༔721
[You should] prepare also all the requisite articles in black.
གཏོར་མ་722 ནག་པོར་བཤམ་མོ༔723
(KAḤ TSH PH+Also) A torma is laid out, black,
____________
Amoghasiddhi’s own palace of deities which are to be held in place to continue the suppression.
713 ཏུ་: DUN དུ་.
714 ཞིང་: TSH PH ཅིང་.
715 བསྐལ་པའི་མཐའ་ཐུག་དུ་མནན་: KAḤ བསྐལ་པའི་མཐའ་ཐུག་ཏུ་མནན་; X Y སྐལ་པའི་མཐའ་ཐུག་ཏུ་ མནན་; DUN པ་མཐའྀ་བར་དུ་གནས་.
716 བསམ་: X Y བསཾས་.
717 The ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud agrees with the reading, mnan rather than gnas here (mTshams brag vol. Chi, 1043.3).
718 འཕྲིན་: KAḤ ཕྲིན་.
719 ཏེ་བཞག་: TSH PH སྟེ་བཞག་; DUN ཏེ་གཞག་.
720 ཅད་ཀྱང་: DUN ཆད་.
721 བཤམ་མོ་: TSH བཤམོ་; X Y བཤཾས་སོ་; DUN བཤམ་.
722 མ་: KAḤ མའང་; TSH PH མ་ཡང་.
723 པོར་བཤམ་མོ་: KAḤ པོ་བཤམ་མོ་; X Y པོར་བཤཾས་སོ་; TSH པོར་བཤམོ་.
གཏོར་མ་ནག་པོར་བཤམ་པ་724ཆ་གཅིག༔725
The torma laid out, black, is a single portion,726
དམ་ཚིག་ཅན་འཁོར་དང་བཅས་པ་དང༔
dedicating [it/them] to those bearing samaya along with [their] retinues and
འཇིག་རྟེན་པ་ཐམས་ཅད་727 ལ་བསྔོ་ཞིང་728 (DUN11r) ལས་བཅོལ་ལོ༔729
all worldly deities, the actions are entrusted [to them].
དྲག་ (Y715) པོའི་གཏོར་མ་ཆ་གཅིག་ནི་730 གདོན་དེ་ཉིད་731 བཀུག་སྟེ་ཟར་གཞུག་གོ༔732
For the destructive torma portion, [you] summon the actual evil beings and [you] let [them] eat [it].
འཕྲིན་733 ལས་འདིའི་ (PH246,2) དུས་སུ༔734
At the time of these ritual actions,
____________
724 པོར་བཤམ་པ་: KAḤ པོ་བཤམ་པ་; X Y པོར་བཤཾས་པ་.
725 པོར་བཤམ་མོ༔ གཏོར་མ་ནག་པོར་བཤམ་པ་ཆ་གཅིག: DUN པོ་ཆ་གཅྀག་བཤམས་ཏེ་ (The chances are that cha gcig was in the archetype. KAḤ TSH PH X Y may have some element of repetition in their version, although it is possible that DUN had an eyeskip error.)
726 DUN ann., གཏོར་མ་འདྀ་དུག་དུ་བྱྀན་ཀྱྀས་བརླབ་ཅྀང་བླང་བ་དང་གཏོར་མ་འྀ་འོད་དུ་འ༼ཕྲོ?༽ས་པས་མཚོན་
ཆ་འྀ་ཆར་དུ་གྱུར་པས་ཕོག་པར་བསྒོམ་; meditate that this torma is consecrated as poison and taken up, and through the light of the torma radiating, it transforms into a rain of weapons falling down.
727 པ་ཐམས་ཅད་: DUN ཐམས་ཆད་.
728 ཞིང་: TSH PH ཅིང་.
729 བཅོལ་ལོ་: TSH བཅོལོ་.
730 ནི་: DUN omits.
731 KAḤ inserts དུ་.
732 གཞུག་གོ་: TSH གཞུགོ་ .
733 འཕྲིན་: KAḤ ཕྲིན་.
734 འདིའི་དུས་སུ་: TSH འདི་ཡི་དུསུ་; PH X Y འདི་ཡི་དུས་སུ་; DUN omits ། .
འཕྲ་735 མེན་མ་དང༔736
the magical hybrid deities,737
གནོད་སྦྱིན་མ་དང༔738
the yakṣiṇīs and
སྲིན་མོ་739 རྣམས་740 སྤྱན་དྲངས་ཤིང་741 ལས་བཅོལ་ལོ༔742
(DUN+also) the rākṣasīs (TSH PH X Y sisters) are invited, (DUN+the torma is offered) and the actions are entrusted.
ཛཿ743 ཧཱུྃ་བཾ་ཧོ༔744 ཨེ་ཧྱ་745 ཧི་བྷ་ག་ཝན༔746 བིདྱ་ར་ཙ་ཡ༔ ཀྵི་ཛྭ་ཛྭ་747 བྷྱོ་བྷྱོ༔ རུ་ལུ་རུ་ལུ་ཧཱུྃ༔
By reciting, “jaḥ hūṃ vaṃ hoḥ ehi bhagavan ?vidyārājaya kṣi jaḥ jaḥ bhyo bhyo rulu rulu hūṃ”,
____________
735 འཕྲ་: KAḤ TSH PH Y ཕྲ་.
736 DUN omits །.
737 Animal-headed emanations; a set of twenty accompany the ten Wrathful Deities in the Vajrakīlaya maṇḍala.
738 DUN omits །.
739 སྲིན་མོ་: TSH PH X Y སྲིང་མོ་. Here, both KAḤ and the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud agrees with the more likely reading, srin mo, mTshams brag vol. Chi, 1043.6, found also in the long commentary (KAḤ123, TSH414, PH264,2, X729, Y763), although sring mo, meaning sisters, is sometimes used of supportive female deities. 740 DUN inserts ཀྱང་.
741 དྲངས་ཤིང་: TSH PH དྲངས་ཅིང་; DUN དྲང་ཞྀང་གཏོར་མ་དབུལ།. the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud includes gtor ma dbul, mTshams brag vol. Chi, 1043.6, and its inclusion is perhaps most likely.
742 ལོ་: DUN ཏེ་; DUN ann., (placed under གཏོར་མ་དབུལ།) དམ་ཚྀག་ཅན་རྣམས་; those bearing samaya
743 ཛཿ: DUN ཛ་.
744 ཧོ་: KAḤ TSH PH ཧོཿ.
745 ཧྱ་: KAḤ ཧྱེ་; Y ཧ་; TSH PH ཧ་ཧ་.
746 ཝན་: KAḤ ཝཱན་; DUN བྷན་; DUN omits །.
747 བིདྱ་ར་ཙ་ཡ༔ ཀྵི་ཛྭ་ཛྭ་: TSH PH བི་ཏ་ར་ཙ་ཡཱ་༔ ཀྵི་ཛྫ་ཛྫ་; X Y བི་ཏ་ར་ཙ་ཡ་༔ ཀྵི་ཛ་ཛ་; DUN བྷྀ་དྷ་ཡ་ ཀྴྀ་ཛཱ།.
ཞེས་ལན་གསུམ་བརྗོད་པས༔748 སྤྱན་དྲང་ངོ་༔749
three times, [they] are invited.
ཨཱོྃ་བཛྲ་པྲ་ཏི་ཛ་ཧོཿ750 ཞེས་བརྗོད་751 པས་གཏོར་མ་དབུལ་ལོ༔752
The torma is offered by reciting, “oṃ vajra pratīccha hoḥ”.
ཨཱོྃ་ས་753 མ་ཡ་ཨ་མྲྀ་ཏ་ཨརྒཾ་754 པྲ་ཏི་ཛ་ཧོ་755 ཧཱུྃ་སྭཱ་ཧཱ༔756
“oṃ samaya amṛtārghaṃ pratīccha hoḥ hūṃ svāhā”
ཞེས་ལན་གསུམ་757 བཟླས་ཏེ་758 (TSH365) ཨ་མྲྀ་ཏ་ཕུལ་ལ་759 ཅི་འདོད་པའི་ལས་བཅོལ༔760
Reciting [this] three (DUN seven) times, the elixir is offered (TSH left behind) and whatever actions [you] desire are entrusted [to them].
འདི་ནི་འཕྲིན་761 ལས་ཕུན་སུམ་ཚོགས་པའོ༔
This is the perfection [of] ritual action.
དུས་ཕུན་སུམ་ཚོགས་པ་ནི༔
The perfection [of] the timing:
____________
748 DUN omits ། .
749 དྲང་ངོ་: KAḤ དྲངས་; TSH དྲངོ་; PH དྲངས་ངོ་; X Y དྲངས་སོ་.
750 ཨཱོྃ་བཛྲ་པྲ་ཏི་ཛ་ཧོཿ: KAḤ ཨོྃ་བཛྲ་པྲ་ཏི་ཛ་ཧོ་; X Y ཨཱོྃ་བཛྲ་པྲ་ཏི་ཛ་ཧོ་; DUN ཨཱོ་པྲ་ཏྀད་ཛ་.
751 བརྗོད་: DUN omits.
752 དབུལ་ལོ་: KAḤ འབུལ་; TSH དབུལོ་.
753 ཨཱོྃ་ས་: KAḤ ཨོྃ་ས་; TSH PH ཨོྃ་སྭ་.
754 མྲྀ་ཏ་ཨརྒཾ་: KAḤ མྲྀཏ་ཨརྒྷཾ་; DUN མྲྀ་ཏ་ཨ་རྒཾ་.
755 པྲ་ཏི་ཛ་ཧོ་: DUN པྲ་ཏྀད་ཙ་.
756 སྭཱ་ཧཱ་: DUN སྭ་ཧ་.
757 གསུམ་: DUN བདུན་ (the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud version does not specify the number, mTshams brag vol. Chi, 1044.1).
758 ཏེ་: TSH PH སྟེ་.
759 ཨ་མྲྀ་ཏ་ཕུལ་ལ་: TSH ཨམྲྀ་ཏ་ཤུལ་ལ་; PH ཨ་མྲྀ་ཏ་ཤུལ་ལ་; DUN ཨར་མྲྀ་ཏ་ཕུལ་ནས་.
760 བཅོལ་: Y བཅལ་ལོ་; DUN བཅོལ་ལོ་.
761 འཕྲིན་: KAḤ Y ཕྲིན་.
ཚེས་བཅུ་བདུན་ མན་ཆད་མར་762 གྱི་ངོ་དང༔
from the seventeenth day, [during] the waning moon (KAḤ up to the seventeenth day, [during] the waxing moon; X Y up to the seventeenth day, [during] the waning moon),
ཉིན་ (KAḤ77) མཚན་གྱི་763 གུང་དང༔764
[at] midday [or] midnight and,
(X682) གཟའ་དང་སྦྱར༔765 (DUN11v)
[at times of] planetary conjunction[s],
བསྙེན་766 པ་ཚར་767 བ་དང༔768
[when] the Approach [practice] is finished (DUN completed) and, རྟགས་བྱུང་བ་769 ལ་སྩོགས་པ་770 འདི་ནི༔771
the signs [of success] have arisen etc.,
____________
762 མན་ཆད་མར་: KAḤ ཡན་ཆད་ཡར་; X Y ཡན་ཆད་མར་ . Note that KAḤ similarly gives ཡར་གྱི་ ངོ་ in the visualisation section, KAḤ127, although inconsistently gives མར་གྱི་ངོ་in the long commentary, KAḤ124, and the full phrase, མན་ཆད་མར་གྱི་ངོ་ in the invocation manual, KAḤ161.
763 གྱི་: TSH ཀྱི་.
764 DUN ann., ཡར་གྱྀ་ངོ་ལས་མྱྀ་དགེ་བ་དང་དྲག་ཤུལ་བྱ་བར་མྱྀ་ཤྀས།; [at the time of] the waxing moon, it is inauspicious to perform non-virtuous actions and ritual actions [of] destruction.
765 སྦྱར་: DUN སྦྱར་བ་དང་; DUN ann., དམྱྀག་དམར་ལ་བྱ་; perform [it] on Mars [day] (i.e. Tuesday).
766 བསྙེན་: X བསྙན་.
767 ཚར་: DUN ཚང་.
768 DUN ann., རྣམ་གསུམ་གང་ཡང་རུང་བ་དང་; the three aspects [of the Approach practice], whichever may be appropriate, and (see above, page 96, note 399, discussing an earlier annotation relating to the three aspects).
769 བ་: TSH PH X Y པ་.
770 སྩོགས་པ་: KAḤ TSH PH སོགས་པ་; X Y སྩོགས་; DUN སྩོགས་སྟེ་.
771 DUN omits །; DUN ann., ཕུར་བུ་འགུལ་བའ་... རྨྱྀ་ལྟས་བཟང་པོ་; the phurbu shaking... good dreams [and] omens.
BuddhistRoad Paper 7.2. Cantwell, “The Action Phurpa (’phrin las phur pa)”
དུས་ཕུན་སུམ་ཚོགས་པའོ༔
this is the perfection [of] the timing.
གནས་ཕུན་སུམ་ཚོགས་པ་ནི༔772
The perfection [of] the place:
གནས་ཆེན་པོ་དང༔773
a ‘sacred place’ and ཤིང་རྐང་གཅིག་པ་774 དང༔775
གནོད་776 ངེས་པ་སྟེ༔777
[a place where] it is really dangerous (KAḤ it is really malevolent; DUN driving out is certain);
འདི་ནི་གནས་ཕུན་ (Y716) སུམ་ཚོགས་པའོ༔
this is the perfection [of] the place.
___________
_ 772 DUN omits །.
773 DUN ann., དུར་ཁྲོད་; charnel ground. The same clarification is given in the short commentary following (KAḤ84, TSH375, PH255,1, X689, Y722), and also in the long commentary (KAḤ125, TSH415, PH265,1, X730, Y764) although there it adds Mahādeva’s residence (Lopon P. Ogyan Tanzin elaborates that this indicates a Śiva sacred site, such as the twenty-four sacred places).
774 པ་: KAḤ X Y omit.
775 DUN ann., འདྀ་ལ་འབྱུང་པོ་གནས་པས་; since elementals reside here.
776 གནོད་: KAḤ གདོན; DUN གདོན་པར་ (here, given that KAḤ shares DUN's gdon, it seems at least possible that the archetype of this text had gdon or gdon par, and DUN’s comment seems to fit with its reading, but both the long commentary and the invocation manual give gnod in all versions (KAḤ125, 161; TSH415, 455; PH265,1, vol. Nya2,1; X730, 769; Y764, 802), although TSH/PH give gnas in the invocation manual’s main text, corrected to gnod in TSH, and gnos in PH. Moreover, the parallel text in the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud, mTshams brag NGB vol. Chi, 1031.3, and also in Mag gsar Kun bzang stobs ldan dbang pa 2003: 164, reads, gnod par.)
777 སྟེ་: TSH ཏེ་; DUN ann., གང་ལ་བྱ་བ་དེ་ཉྀད་ལ་བྱ་; [this] is to be done for whosoever is the [rite's] actual object.
BuddhistRoad Paper 7.2. Cantwell, “The Action Phurpa (’phrin las phur pa)”
བདག་ཉིད་ཕུན་སུམ་ཚོགས་པ་ནི༔
The perfection [of] yourself [i.e. the practitioner]:
བྱང་ཆུབ་ལ་གཞོལ་བ་དང་༔778
absorbed in [the practice for] enlightenment,
མང་དུ་ཐོས་པ་དང་༔779
[having] heard many [teachings],780
ལས་ཀྱི་བྱེ་བྲག་781 ལ་མཁས་པ་དང་༔782
skilled in the diverse ritual actions,
ལྷ་ཉེ་བར་གྱུར་པ་དང་༔783
familiarised (with the) deity/deities,
མི་ཕྱེད་པའི་དད་པ་ཐོབ་པ་དང་༔784
having attained unshakable faith and
____________
778 བ་དང་: DUN ཞྀང་; DUN omits །.
779 DUN ann., བྱང་ཆུབ་ཀྱྀ་སེམས་ལ་དགའ་བ་; delighting in bodhicitta.
780 The implication of མང་དུ་ཐོས་པ་ is one who is learned; a literal translation seemed appropriate here, since it brings out the emphasis on absorbing heard knowledge rather than more modern notions of book learning.
781 ཀྱི་བྱེ་བྲག་: DUN omits . 782 DUN ann., རྫུབ་རྫུབ་པོ་མ་ཡྀན་བ་ལས་ལ་མཁས་པའ་; [genuinely] skilled in ritual actions without being a charlatan.
783 DUN ann., རྟག་དུ་ལྷ་སྒོམ་བ་; continually meditating [on] the deity/deities.
784 DUN ann., གཞན་གྱྀས་དབེན་བྱར་མྱྀ་ཚུགས་པའ་; [one’s] solitude is undisturbed by others.
དྲག་785 ཅིང་ལྡོག་པ་མེད་པའི་སེམས་དང་786 (PH247,2) ལྡན་པ་787 དང་༔788
endowed with a mind which is strong and not relapsing,
ཕྲག་789 དོག་ཆུང་བ་790 དང་༔791
with minimal (DUN without) jealousies and འབྲས་བུ་གཞན་ལ་792 རེ་བ་མེད་པ་དང་༔793
hopes for any other result, and
དམ་ཚིག་མ་ཉམས་པ་འདི་794 ནི་795 བདག་ཉིད་ཕུན་སུམ་ཚོགས་པའོ༔796
with the samayas undegenerated; this (DUN these) [constitutes] the perfection [of] yourself.
____________
785 The parallel text in Mag gsar Kun bzang stobs ldan dbang pa (2003: 164) reads, rtag, which may seem a little more appropriate. The meaning would be, “a constant mind which does not relapse”. However, the root tantra source for Mag gsar, ie. the ’Phrin las phun sum tshogs pa’i rgyud, mTshams brag NGB vol. Chi, 1030.5, agrees with KAḤ TSH PH X Y and DUN. Yet another reading is given in all editions of the invocation manual: dran, mindful (KAḤ161, TSH454, PH Volume Nya2,1; X768, Y802), which would fit, but it is not given in the long commentary (KAḤ126, TSH416, PH264,3, X731, Y765).
786 DUN inserts །.
787 པ་: DUN བ་.
788 DUN ann., (placed under དྲག་ཅིང་) བརྩོན་འགྲུས་... (placed under ལྡན་བ་དང་) བརྩོན་བ་;
[with] energetic application... persevering.
789 ཕྲག་: DUN འཕྲག་.
790 ཆུང་བ་: DUN omits (the long commentary gives ཕྲག་དོག་མེད་པ་, KAḤ126, TSH416,
PH264,3, X731, Y765).
791 DUN ann., མ་གྲུབ་ན་; if not accomplished.
792 ལ་: KAḤ X Y ན་.
793 DUN ann., གྲགས་པ་ཐོབ་དུ་རེ་བ་མྱེད་; without hoping to attain fame.
794 DUN inserts རྣམས་.
795 X Y insert ༔.
796 DUN ann., (placed under མ་ཉམས་) རྩ་བ་དང་ཡན་ལག་གྀ་; of root and branch (i.e. root and branch samayas).
བྱིན་བརླབས་797 ཕུན་སུམ་798 ཚོགས་པ་ཕུར་པའི་བསྒྲུབ་799 ཐབས༔
This is the phurpa sādhana for the perfection [of] consecrations,
སློབ་དཔོན་བྱེ་མ་ལ་མུ་ཏྲས་800 མཛད་པ༔801
composed by Master Vimalamitra.
སྩྱོགས་སྩྱོ༔802
The End. (TSH/PH +[May it bring] Virtues!) (TSH+Proof-read.)
____________
797 བརླབས་: KAḤ Y རླབས་.
798 སུམ་: X omits.
799 ཕུར་པའི་བསྒྲུབ་: KAḤ ཕུར་བུའི་སྒྲུབ་; X Y ཕུར་བུའི་བསྒྲུབ་.
800 བྱེ་མ་ལ་མུ་ཏྲས་: KAḤ བི་མ་ལ་མི་ཏྲས་.
801 བྱིན་བརླབས་ཕུན་སུམ་ཚོགས་པ་ཕུར་པའི་བསྒྲུབ་ཐབས༔ སློབ་དཔོན་བྱེ་མ་ལ་མུ་ཏྲས་མཛད་པ༔: DUN
omits; KAḤ X Y omit ༔.
802 སྩྱོགས་སྩྱོ་: TSH སྩྱོགས་སྩྱོ༔ དགེའོ༔ ༔ ཞུས་; PH སྩྱོགས་སྩྱོ༔ དགེའོ༔; X Y སྩོགས་སྩོག་; DUN རྫོགས་སྩྷོ།། །།.
Abbreviations
ann. annotation
IOL Tib J Tibetan Dunhuang Manuscripts preserved at the British Library in London (formerly in the India Office Library (IOL))
KD bKa’ brgyad bde gshegs ’dus pa
NGB rNying ma rgyud ’bum
DUN Dunhuang manuscript IOL Tib J 331.III
KD Versions
KAḤ Kaḥ thog 13 volumes
TSH mTshams brag 13 volumes.
PH Phur sgrub dgon pa 10 volumes.
X Unknown 8 volumes dbu med.
Y Unknown 9 volumes dbu med.
NGB Editions
D sDe dge.
G-a sGang steng A.
GR dGra med rtse.
G-b sGang steng B.
M mTshams brag.
T gTing skyes.
R Rig ’dzin tshe dbang nor bu.
K Kathmandu.
Resources
Note: The TBRC reference numbers in square brackets refer to the electronic texts made available in the Tibetan text section of the Buddhist Digital Resource Center (BDRC), Cambridge, MA, USA (http://www.tbrc.org).
Bell, Charles. Manual of Colloquial Tibetan. Kathmandu: Ratna Pustak Bhandar, 1978 [first edition 1905].
Bod rgya tshig mdzod chen mo (Tibetan–Tibetan and Chinese Dictionary). Chengdu: Mi rigs dpe skrun khang, 1985.
Duff, Tony. The Illuminator Tibetan–English Dictionary. Kathmandu: Padma Karpo Translation Committee, 2000–2006.
EAP, The Endangered Archives Programme at the British Library, https://eap.bl.uk/.
IDP, The International Dunhuang Project at the British Library, http://idp.bl.uk/.
Martin, Dan. Tibetan Vocabulary. August 29, 2007 version (begun in Bloomington, Indiana, on April 10, 1987).
Tibetan Medical Paintings: Illustrations to the Blue Beryl Treatise of Sangye Gyamtso, 1653–1705. Edited by Yuri Parfionovitch, Gyurme Dorje, and Fernand Meyer. London: Serindia Publications, 1992.
Primary Sources
’Bum nag, The: rdo rje phur pa’i bshad ’bum slob dpon rnam gsum gyi dgongs pa slob dpon chen po padmas mkhar chen bza’ la gdams pa/ phur ’grel ’bum nag ces gzhan las khyad par ’phags pa’i thugs kyi ti la ka. In the Dudjom bKa’ ma: Rñin ma Bka’ ma rgyas pa compiled by Bdud-’Joms ’Jigs-bral-ye-śes-rdo-rje. The Expanded Version of the Nyingma Kama Collection Teachings Passed in an Unbroken Lineage, 58 volumes. Kalimpong: Dupjung Lama, 1982–1987 [TBRC W19229], vol. Tha, 215–557.
Dudjom Rinpoche, Jikdrel Yeshe Dorje. The Collected Writings and Revelations of H. H. bDud-’joms Rin-po-che ’Jigs bral ye shes rdo rje, bDud ’joms ’jigs bral ye shes rdo rje’i gsung ’bum, 25 volumes. Kalimpong: Dupjung Lama, 1979–1985 [TBRC W20869]. Specific works referred to:
i. bde gshegs sgrub pa bka’ brgyad kyi phrin las snying po dpal chen thugs kyi thig le, vol. Ca: 89–129.
ii. dpal rdo rje phur bu bdud ’joms gnam lcags spu gri’i stod smad kyi phrin las la nye bar mkho ba bcas kyi rnam bzhag rmongs pa’i mig ’byed gnad kyi gser thur, vol. Da: 19–69.
iii. dpal rdo rje phur bu bdud ’joms gnam lcags spu gri’i stod las byang chub sgrub pa’i man ngag gsal bar byas pa dngos grub rgya mtsho’i dga’ ston, vol. Da: 71–177.
Grags pa rgyal mtshan (Sa skya rje btsun grags pa rgyal mtshan). Works on rDo rje Phur pa Found in The Complete Works of Grags pa rgyal mtshan, in the Sa skya bka’ ’bum, compiled by bSod nams rgya mtsho, The Complete Works of the Great Masters of the Sa skya Sect of the Tibetan Buddhism, vol. 4. Tokyo: The Toyo Bunko, 1968. In particular, rDo rje phur pa’i mngon par rtogs pa, vol. Nya: 355r–367v (=1r–13v in the separate pagination of this group of texts, found on pages 175–182 in the Western style bound book). [BDRC provide a Dehra Dun Sakya Centre printing, reproduced from the sDe dge edition in 15 vols, 1992–1993; TBRC W22271.]
Mag gsar Kun bzang stobs ldan dbang pa. Phur pa’i rnam bshad he ru ka dpal bzhad pa’i zhal lung (bcom ldan ’das dpal chen rdo rje gzhon nu’i ’phrin las kyi rnam par bshad pa he ru ka dpal bzhad pa’i zhal lung). Beijing: Mi rigs dpe skrun khang, sNgags mang zhib ’jug khang (Ngak Mang Institute), 2003.
Myang ral nyi ma ’od zer. bKa’ brgyad bde gshegs ’dus pa’i chos skor [KD, Eightfold Buddha Word, Embodying the Sugatas], six versions:
i. The Kaḥ thog bka’ brgyad bde gshegs ’dus pa’i chos skor in 13 vols (KAḤ). Gangtok, Sikkim: Sonam Topgay Kazi, Kaḥ thog rdo rje dgan gyi par khang, 1978 [TBRC W1KG12075].
ii. The Kyirong lama bka’ brgyad bde gshegs ’dus pa’i chos skor in 4 vols. Dalhousie: Damchoe Sangpo, 1977–1978 [TBRC W1KG9588].
iii. The Phurdrup Gonpa [phur sgrub dgon pa] bka’ brgyad manuscript in 10 vols (PH). British Library, Endangered Archives Programme, EAP310/3/1, https://eap.bl.uk/collection/EAP310-3-1.
iv. The mTshams brag bka’ brgyad bde gshegs ’dus pa’i chos skor in 13 vols (TSH). Paro: Lama Ngodrup, Kyichu Temple, reproduced from the complete mtshams-brag manuscript, 1979–1980 [TBRC W22247].
v. bka’ brgyad bde gshegs ’dus pa of unknown provenance in 8 vols (X) [TBRC W2PD17479].
vi. bka’ brgyad bde gshegs ’dus pa of unknown provenance in 9 vols (Y) [TBRC W2PD20239].
rNying ma rgyud ’bum (NGB, Ancient Tantra Collection), versions specifically cited in this publication:
sDe dge [D]: The sDe dge edition. Twenty-six vols, Ka–Ra, plus dkar chag, Volume A, sDe dge par khang chen mo.
Kathmandu [K]: Manuscript edition of the rNying ma’i rgyud ’bum from the Khumbu region, held by The National Archives, Kathmandu. Microfilm is available through the Nepal Research Centre of the Nepalese–German Manuscript Cataloguing Project. The short title is rÑiṅ ma rgyud ’bum, Ms no.22, running no.17, reel AT12/3–AT13/1.
mTshams brag [M]: The mtshams brag Manuscript of the Rñiṅ ma rgyud ’bum (rgyud 'bum/ mtshams brag dgon pa), forty-six volumes. Thimphu: National Library, Royal Government of Bhutan, 1982. [TBRC W21521].
Rig ’dzin Tshe dbang nor bu [R]: The Rig ’dzin Tshe dbang nor bu edition of the rNying ma’i rgyud ’bum. Twenty-nine vols are held at the British Library, under the classification, “RNYING MA'I RGYUD 'BUM MSS”, with the pressmark, OR15217. Vol. Ka is held at the Bodleian Library Oxford at the shelfmark, MS. Tib.a.24(R).
gTing skyes [T]: Rñiṅ ma rgyud ’bum Reproduced from the MS preserved at Gtiṅ-skyes Dgon-pa-byaṅ Monastery in Tibet, under the direction of Dingo Khyentse Rimpoche. Thimbu, 1973 [TBRC W21518].
Sa skya Phur chen: dPal rdo rje gzhon nu sgrub pa’i thabs bklags pas don grub, by Sa skya pa bSod nams rgyal mtshan (1312–1375). Rajpur: dPal sa skya’'i chos tshogs, (Tibetan date given: 992). Two different electronic editions of the Sa skya Phur chen are available. One is included in vol. 18 of the dpal chen kī la ya’i chos skor phyogs bsgrigs [khreng tu’u: si khron zhing chen mi rigs zhib ’jug su’o, bod kyi shes rig zhib ’jug khang, 2002 [W24051], 137ff, and one included in the rGyud sde kun btus, vol. 16. This itself has two available versions: Delhi: Lungtok & Gyaltsan, 1971–1972 [W21295], 427–505 and; Kathmandu: Sachen International, 2004 [W27883], 479–568. Both are apparently based on the sDe dge blocks, although the Sachen International version is an entirely remade computer input version edition rather than a photographic reproduction. Tibetan Dunhuang manuscript IOL Tib J 331 (images available online from the IDP, http://idp.bl.uk/database/oo_loader.a4d?pm=IOL Tib J 331).
Secondary Sources
Boord, Martin J. A Bolt of Lightning from the Blue: The Vast Commentary of Vajrakīla that Clearly Defines the Essential Points. Annotated translations, including Phur ’grel ’bum nag as transmitted to Ye-shes mtsho-rgyal. Berlin: edition khordong, 2002.
Cantwell, Cathy. Dudjom Rinpoche’s Vajrakīlaya Works: A Study in Authoring, Compiling and Editing Texts in the Tibetan Revelatory Tradition. Sheffield: Equinox, 2020 (see https://www.equinoxpub.com/home/dudjom-rinpoches/).
Cantwell, Cathy and Robert Mayer. The Kīlaya Nirvāṇa Tantra and the Vajra Wrath Tantra: Two Texts from the Ancient Tantra Collection. Vienna: Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften Verlag, 2007.
Cantwell, Cathy and Robert Mayer. Early Tibetan Documents on Phur pa from Dunhuang. Vienna: Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften Verlag, 2008. Cantwell, Cathy and Robert Mayer. A Noble Noose of Methods, the Lotus Garland Synopsis: A Mahāyoga Tantra and its Commentary. Vienna: Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften Verlag, 2012.
Doney, Lewis. The Zangs gling ma: The First Padamasambhava Biography. Two Exemplars of the earliest attested Recension. Andiast: International Institute for Tibetan and Buddhist Studies, 2014.
Esler, Dylan. “The Phurpa Root Tantra of Myang ral’s bKa’ brgyad bDe gshegs ’dus pa (KD) Corpus: A Thematic Overview and Philological Analysis,” BuddhistRoad Paper 7.1 (2020).
Yeshe Tsogyal. The Lotus-Born: The Life Story of Padmasambhava, revealed by Nyang Ral Nyima Öser. Translated from Tibetan by Erik Pema Kunsang. Boston, London: Shambhala, 1993.
