The Sūtra on the Residence of Mañjuśrī

’jam dpal gnas pa’i mdo
 
The Sūtra on the Residence of Mañjuśrī
 
mañjuśrīvihārasūtra
 
’phags pa ’jam dpal gnas pa zhes bya ba theg pa chen po’i mdo
 
The Mahāyāna sūtra called “The Sūtra on the Residence of Mañjuśrī”
 
āryamañjuśrīvihāra-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra
 
Toh. 196, Dergé mdo sde, tsa 266b1-271b2 (vol. 61)
 
University of Calgary Buddhist Studies

Summary
 
The sūtra is introduced with the Buddha residing in Rājagṛha on Vulture Peak Mountain together with a great monastic assembly of 500 monks and a multitude of bodhisattvas. After the Buddha preaches, Mañjuśrī walks through the monastic quarters of the area and he then sees Śāriputra engaged in meditation among the residences of the 500 monks. The sūtra then consists of a dialogue between Mañjuśrī and Śāriputra regarding the nature of meditation and related topics. A dialogue then develops between Mañjuśrī and the 500 monks. Mañjuśrī corrects the monks’ misunderstanding and instructs them on the ‘non-increase and non-decrease’ (anūnatvāpūrṇatva) of the realm of sentient beings and the realm of reality (dharmadhātu), an instruction that indicates the non-conceptual, immutable, and indestructible nature of awakening. The power of Mañjuśrī’s teaching is explained and reiterated by the Buddha, with the sūtra concluding by the Buddha predicting the future Buddhahood of the 500 monks and others in the audience.

Acknowledgements
 
Translation by the University of Calgary Buddhist Studies team. This sūtra was introduced and translated by Dr. James B. Apple with assistance from Dr. Shinobu Arai Apple.


 
Introduction
 
The Mañjuśrīvihārasūtra (Tib. ’jam dpal gnas pa’i mdo) is preserved in Chinese, Tibetan, and Mongolian versions. There are two Chinese versions, the 文殊師利巡行經 Wén shū shī lì xún xíng jīng translated by Bodhiruci (Taishō 470, 1 juan, ca. 508-535 c.e.) and the 文殊尸利行經 Wén shū shī lì xíng jīng translated by Jñānagupta in 586 c.e. (Taishō 471).1 The Tibetan version is preserved in Dunhuang Manuscripts and twenty Kanjur editions. A recently published critical edition of the Tibetan version of this sūtra identifies two extant Dunhuang Tibetan manuscripts and three fragments and utilizes seventeen available Kanjur and protoKanjur editions (Apple 2014). The Dunhuang manuscripts contain an early Tibetan edition that was translated before the implementation of codified rules and principles for translating Buddhist texts issued by the Tibetan emperor Khri lde srong btsan

(r. 800-815 c.e.) (Kapstein 2013). Still, the Dunhuang manuscripts and the vulgate Kanjurs contain the same recension of the sūtra with differences in terminology and idioms of expression. The Chinese versions, for the most part, match the Tibetan version but have several differences in terminology or portions missing from the Tibetan. We have indicated a number of these differences in the notes. Along these lines, we have also divided the text into numbered paragraphs and verses for reference and editing purposes. The Mañjuśrīvihārasūtra is listed in two early ninth century Tibetan catalogs of the Lhan kar ma catalog (§195; Herrmann-Pfandt 2008:104) and the Dkar chag ’phang thang ma (Rdo

2003:16) as the ’Phags pa ’jam dpal gnas pa in one hundred and forty ślokas (shu log brgya bzhi bcu). The late thirteenth century catalog of the Tibetan Bka’ gdam pa master Dar ma rgyal mtshan (1227-1305), commonly known as Bcom ldan ral gri, lists the sūtra as ’Phags pa ’jam dpal gnas pa (Schaeffer and van der Kuijp 2009:131). A listing of texts appended to the History of Buddhism in India and Its Spread to Tibet by Bu ston Rin chen grub (1290-1364) also lists the work as the ’Phags pa ’jam dpal gnas pa (Nishioka 1980:74, §279) in one hundred and forty ślokas, but also adds that it was translated by Ye shes sde. Among vulgate Kanjurs that have a colophon, the translators listed are the

Indian upādhyāya Surendrabodhi and the Translator (lo tsā ba) [in charge of] Great Revision (zhu chen) Venerable (ban de) Ye shes sde. The Mañjuśrīvihārasūtra enjoyed some popularity in eighth and ninth century Tibet, a fact attested to by its inclusion among the 104 titles of Buddhist scriptures found in Mahāvyutpatti §1329 (hereafter, Mvy) and the number of extant Tibetan Dunhuang fragments. The sūtra was cited as the ’Jam dpal gnas pa’i mdo in several early Tibetan treatises from Dunhuang, including IOL Tib J 705, a Dunhuang fragment of the Rnal ’byor chen por bsgom pa’i don attributed to Spug Ye shes dbyangs (771-850 c.e). Tabo fragments of this Tibetan treatise preserve three citations

of the sūtra (Otokawa 1999, p. 130, 147, 151). The Mañjuśrīvihārasūtra was also cited two times by Vimalamitra (8th century) in his commentary on non-conceptual meditation, the Sakṛtpraveśikanirvikalpa-bhāvanārtha (Cig car ’jug pa rnam par mi rtog pa’i bsgom don) (D, fol. 8v-5, 12a7-12b1). The sūtra is also sporadically cited in later Tibetan commentaries (e.g. Gyamtso 2008:139-141) and briefly analyzed by Pad dkar bzang po (16th century) in his overview of each sūtra preserved among Tibetan Kanjurs (2006:264-266). The Mañjuśrīvihārasūtra is a discourse which plays on the word vihāra, which can mean, according to Edgerton (1953:505), either a (1) dwelling place, (2) condition of existence, or (3) walking about. The Chinese translators understood the title of the term in the sense of (3), with

Bodhiruci translating the title as Mañjuśrī’s “going around” (巡行) and Jñānagupta translating the near synonymous Mañjuśrī’s “wandering” (行) (Meisig and Meisig 2012:207). This connotation refers to the opening scene, in which Mañjuśrī wanders about the monastic residences. The Tibetan translation gnas pa may imply the sense of (1) or (2). We cannot be sure of the exact connotation of vihāra without a Sanskrit manuscript of the sūtra, but the context throughout the sūtra implies that the “dwelling place” of Mañjuśrī is not a “place.” The dwelling place that Mañjuśrī explains to Śāriputra and the 500 monks is the realm of reality (dharmadhātu), which is beyond time, unlocalized,

immovable, and is not able to be apprehended by conceptual thought. Awakening in this sūtra is characterized as the nonconceptual awareness of the infinite realm of reality. In the first seven sections of the sūtra, Mañjuśrī critiques the presuppositions of Śāriputra’s conceptual understanding of the practice of concentration (§2), the past, present, and future (§2, §4), full comprehension (§7), and the “place” of an Arhat (§7). Although difficult to verify, the presuppositions of Śāriputra may well represent the mainstream Buddhist understandings of a person following the Abhidharma of the Sarvāstivādin ordination lineage, particularly Śāriputra’s advocacy of the practice of standing firm in the past, present, and future. According to Pad dkar bzang po (2006:265), the concise meaning of this part of the sūtra is that Śāriputra is taught, as a response to Mañjuśrī’s questions, the emptiness which by nature is free from the conceptual fabrication of anything. The second half (§8-§15) of the sūtra consists of a dialogue that

develops between Mañjuśrī and the five hundred monks in the audience. The five hundred monks are initially disturbed by and reject Mañjuśrī’s teaching and move away from him, but the monks then return upon Mañjuśrī’s further instruction to Śāriputra. Mañjuśrī’s additional instruction to Śāriputra is the cause for four hundred of the monks’ minds to be liberated from the pollutions. However, one hundred monks fall into a deep hell realm due to being greatly disturbed by Mañjuśrī’s instruction. Śāriputra then questions Mañjuśrī’s motives and mode of teaching. The Buddha then comes to the defense of Mañjuśrī and explains the great karmic benefit for these monks of hearing the profound Dharma, even if they doubt it. The Buddha predicts that the monks will be reborn in Tuṣita heaven after going to hell and that they will then become Arhat disciples under the future Buddha Maitreya. Tibetan scholars like Si tu paṇ chen chos kyi ’byung gnas (17001774) will cite this episode as an example of the power of the profound Dharma to bring great positive effects, even for those who have doubt and do not follow the instruction (1995:132-133). After Śāriputra praises Mañjuśrī on his eloquence of explaining the Dharma, Mañjuśrī then instructs the audience on the “non-increase and non-decrease” (anūnatvāpūrṇatva) of the realm of sentient beings and the realm of reality (dharmadhātu). The topic of “non-increase and non-decrease” is an important theme in a number of Mahāyāna sūtras such as the Saptaśatikāprajñāpāramitā, Suvikrāntavikrāmiparipṛcchāprajñāpāramitā, Sarvapuṇyasamuccayasamādhisūtra (D, 106b7-107a5; Shiu 2006:124), sūtras of the Mahāratnakuṭa class (Chang p. 64, 101, 177), and even the Heart Sūtra (Lopez 1988:82-83). The

Anūnatvāpūrṇatvanirdeśa-parivarta, a discourse which bears the name of this topic and is preserved only in Chinese, connects this topic with the teaching of the tathāgatagarbha (Shiu 2006). The Mañjuśrīvihārasūtra, however, equates the non-increasing and non-decreasing true nature (tathatā) with the realm of reality and realm of sentient beings. The “non-increase and non-decrease” (anūnatvāpūrṇatva) of the realm of sentient beings and the realm of reality (dharmadhātu) is explained in the Suvikrāntavikrāmipari-pṛcchāprajñāpāramitā (Conze 1973: 12-14; Hikata 1958:14-15), where both realms lack any intrinsic essence (asatva), are infinite

(ananta), and are designated through conventional expressions (saṃketena vyavahārapadaṃ gacchati). The Buddha explains to Suvikrāntavikrāmi that “non-increase and non-decrease” is a synonym of the vision of how things are in a non-conceptual manner (Conze 1973:13; Hikata 1958:15.25-26). The Mañjuśrīvihārasūtra concurs with this understanding where in paragraph §12 the text reads, “that which is unhindered in any way is awakening. Awakening is liberation. Liberation is non-conceptual. The non-conceptual is unfabricated and immutable. The unfabricated and immutable is completely passed beyond suffering.” The prajñāpāramitā literature also influenced the authorial community of the Mañjuśrīvihārasūtra as there are several themes found in the Mañjuśrīvihārasūtra that are derived from earlier prajñāpāramitā discourses. Paragraph §7 of the Mañjuśrīvihārasūtra mentions that Arhats are “constituted by the unconditioned,” a phrase found throughout the prajñāpāramitā literature, and particularly well-known from the Vajracchedikā-prajñāpāramitā (Harrison 2006:145,§7). At the conclusion of the Mañjuśrīvihārasūtra, the Buddha predicts that the audience will achieve complete Buddhahood “in the ‘Starlike Aeon” (bskal pa skar ma lta bu zhes bya ba na ≈ tārakopame kalpe), a prediction that is also give in a number of prajñāpāramitā discourses (Skilling 2012:119, 121, 125). We also note that a parallel to the episode of the monks falling into hell in paragraph §10 is found in the Bodhisattvacaryānirdeśa (Braarvig 1994).
Copyright © 2016 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha – All Rights Reserved.

The Translation

The Noble Mahāyāna Sūtra called “The Residence of Mañjuśrī”

Homage to all buddhas and bodhisattvas!

§1 Thus have I heard at one time. The Bhagavān was staying at Rājagṛha, on Gṛdhrakūṭa Mountain, together with a large community of exactly 500 monks and a great multitude of bodhisattvas. Then, the Bhagavān, after emerging in the late afternoon from secluded meditation,2 surrounded and honored by a great assembly, preached the Dharma. §2 Subsequently, the youthful Mañjuśrī was walking about, going from residence to residence among all 500 monks. When he went to the residence where the Sthavira Śāriputra was, Mañjuśrī saw him sitting in solitude and concentrating in the correct practice of solitary meditation.3 When he saw him, he said the following words to the Sthavira Śāriputra:

“Venerable Śāriputra, are you concentrating?” Śāriputra replied, “Mañjuśrī, it is so.” Mañjuśrī said, “Venerable Śāriputra, are you concentrating in order to abandon defilements that have already been abandoned? Or are you concentrating in order to abandon ones that have not yet been abandoned? Venerable Śāriputra, are you concentrating while dwelling on the past? Are you concentrating while dwelling on the future? Or are you concentrating while dwelling on the present?4 Venerable Śāriputra, are you concentrating while dwelling on bodily form? Are you concentrating while dwelling on feeling, recognition, volitional forces, or consciousness? Venerable Śāriputra, are you

concentrating while dwelling on the eye? Or are you concentrating while dwelling on the nose, ear, tongue, body, or mind? Venerable Śāriputra, [D267a1] are you concentrating while dwelling on visible form? Or are you concentrating while dwelling on sound, smell, taste, touch, or other phenomena? Venerable Śāriputra, are you concentrating while dwelling on the desire realm? Or are you concentrating while dwelling on the form realm, or the formless realm? Venerable Śāriputra, are you concentrating while dwelling on the internal? Or are you concentrating while residing on the external? Or are you concentrating while dwelling on the internal and external? Venerable Śāriputra, are you concentrating while dwelling on the body? Or are you concentrating while dwelling on the mind?”


§3 Śāriputra replied, “Mañjuśrī, I am concentrating to abide in bliss for this life5 and to stand firm in non-forgetfulness.”6 Mañjuśrī said, “Venerable Śāriputra, what are these dharmas which abide in bliss for this life? Do they abide in bliss not for this life? Are these dharmas of nonforgetfulness perceived?” Śāriputra replied, “Mañjuśrī, I truly do not see or perceive any dharmas which abide in bliss for this life, or abide in bliss not for this life. However, Mañjuśrī, I rely and stand firm on that which the Tathāgata taught to śrāvakas as the teaching of disengagement.”7 Mañjuśrī replied, “Venerable Śāriputra, what is it that the Tathāgata taught to śrāvakas as the teaching of disengagement? Venerable Śāriputra, what is that on which you rely
 
and stand firm?” Śāriputra replied, “Mañjuśrī, for this, a monk relies and stands firm on the past, relies and stands firm on the future, relies and stands firm on the present.8 In brief, as mentioned before,9 one should understand that he relies and stands firm [on the categories of dharmas] all the way up to the mind. Mañjuśrī, the Tathāgata taught these dharmas to śrāvakas as disengaged and I [D 267b] rely and stand firm on these dharmas.”
 
§4 Mañjuśrī said, “Venerable Śāriputra, why do you say, “I rely and stand firm on the past, rely and stand firm on the future, rely on what presently occurs, stand firm on the isolated, and in brief, as mentioned before, rely on and stand firm in the isolated [on the categories of dharmas] all the way up to the mind.” Venerable Śāriputra, it is like this: The true nature10 of the past does not exist. The true nature of the future does not exist. The true nature of the present does not exist. In this way, if these dharmas do not exist, then how can the Sthavira Śāriputra say, “I rely and stand firm on the past, rely and stand firm on the future, and rely and stand firm on the present”? Dharmas

that do not exist do not have a standing place. Further, Venerable Śāriputra, the true nature11 of the past and the true nature of the future and the present is not anything. It is not by anything. It is not of anything. It does even not stand in anything. The standing place of that non-standing place cannot be apprehended. Further, Venerable Śāriputra, those who speak of stability proclaiming “the true nature12 of the past, the future, and the present” deprecate the Tathāgata. Why is this? True nature is immovable and without vain imaginings. In this way the true nature is uncorrupted. In this way the true nature is 13empty, without signs, wishless.14 Further, Venerable Śāriputra, the true nature of the past cannot be apprehended. The true nature of the future cannot be apprehended. The true nature of the present cannot be apprehended, and, in brief, the true nature of [everything] up to mind cannot be apprehended. However, Venerable Śāriputra, aside from the true nature, no other dharma capable of being explained or taught can be apprehended.
 
§5 Śāriputra said [D268a], “Mañjuśrī, does the Tathāgata teach Dharma residing in the true nature?” Mañjuśrī said, “Venerable Śāriputra, if a true nature does not exist, then how can the Tathāgata reside in the true nature and teach Dharma? Venerable Śāriputra, if even the Dharma does not exist, then how can the Tathāgata reside in the true nature and teach Dharma? If even the Tathāgata does not exist, then how can the Tathāgata reside in the true nature and teach Dharma? All things do not exist and cannot be

apprehended. Even the Tathāgata does not exist and cannot be apprehended. When his Dharma is taught, it is like this; it has no distinction between either apprehending or not apprehending. The Tathāgata is not distinguished by the expressible or the inexpressible. Why is this? Venerable Śāriputra, accordingly, the Tathāgata is completely cut off from expressions, is without designation, and cannot be conceived.” §6 Śāriputra said, “Mañjuśrī, who will become a recipient for a Dharma teaching like this?” Mañjuśrī said, “Venerable Śāriputra, one who will not be disturbed in the conditioned realm and who does not desire complete nirvāṇa will be a recipient for a Dharma teaching like this. One who does not perceive dharmas which have passed and does not fully comprehend dharmas which have passed, who does not perceive dharmas which arise in the past, present, or future and does not fully comprehend, nor perceive dharmas which arise in the past, present, or future, that one, will be a recipient for a Dharma teaching like this. One who neither perceives nor appropriates defilement and purification will be a recipient for a Dharma teaching like this. One who does not pursue either self or non-self, and who does not pursue acquiring and relinquishing is a recipient for a [D268b] Dharma teaching such as this. That one will fully comprehend the meaning of this explanation.”
 
§7 Śāriputra said, “Mañjuśrī, in this regard, what is full comprehension?” Mañjuśrī said, “Venerable Śāriputra, if there were to be something that was knowledge of the meaning of this exposition, then ask ‘In this regard, what is full comprehension?’” Śāriputra said, “Mañjuśrī, this profound Dharma teaching is rarely directly perceived. This is rarely fully apprehended. Mañjuśrī, when even Arhats and those in training are discouraged with respect to this place,15 how much more so are childish ordinary beings?”16 Mañjuśrī said, “Venerable Śāriputra, Arhats do not have a place. Why is this? With respect to this, there would be an Arhat at a place where there is not even an Arhat. Arhats

are distinguished by being unlocalized. Arhats are distinguished by not perceiving. Arhats are distinguished by fully cutting off utterances and nonutterances. Why is this? Accordingly, as Arhats have thoroughly cut off utterances and nonutterances they are free from designation. Arhats are free from the distinctions of places. They are distinguished by the unconditioned.17 They are without engagement. Distinguished by the unconditioned, since Arhats are without a place in the unconditioned, what would be the place of Arhats? Arhats are not distinguished by name and form. Childish ordinary beings conceptualize name and form. Name and form are understood by Arhats as non-conceptual and without imaginings. Therefore, Arhats are not distinguished by name and form. Even childish beings are not perceived. The qualities of childish beings, Arhat, and Arhat qualities are also not perceived. They are not conceptualized at the time of not being perceived. They are not pursued in any way. [D269a] Without being pursued, they are unelaborated and peaceful: one does not accept that they exist; nor does one accept that they do not exist; one does not accept that they are on the one hand existent, and thus exist, and are also non-existent, and thus do not exist; nor does one accept that they are neither existent nor nonexistent. When one does not accept this, there is not an observed object. By being free from all observed objects, one is without thought, and free from thought, one is called “he who abides in the quality of a recluse by way of being unlocalized.””18

hereupon, when this teaching was explained by the youthful Mañjuśrī, the five hundred monks of the retinue got up from their seats saying, “We do not see the youthful Mañjuśrī. We do not hear the youthful Mañjuśrī. The place that the youthful Mañjuśrī dwells on should be abandoned. Why is that? As the youthful Mañjuśrī has directly indicated that the thoroughly afflicted and the completely purified have a single characteristic, he has said something improper. Thinking, “How can we practice purely the disciplinary doctrine that is well-spoken by the Bhagavān?,” they departed.
 
§9 Then the Sthavira Śāriputra said the following to the youthful Mañjuśrī, “Mañjuśrī, do you not teach the Dharma so that sentient beings may understand all things?” Mañjuśrī replied, “Venerable Śāriputra, that is so.” Śāriputra said, “These five hundred monks have arisen from their seats and, having expressed contempt as well as spoken unpleasant things, have departed.” Mañjuśrī said, “Sthavira Śāriputra, Because these five hundred monks have said, ‘We do not see the youthful Mañjuśrī. We do not hear the youthful Mañjuśrī. The youthful Mañjuśrī has abandoned the place on which we dwell on,’ it is well-done, it is good. Śāriputra, [D269b] the words of these monks are well spoken. Why is that? Accordingly, the youthful Mañjuśrī does not exist and cannot be apprehended. That which does not exist and cannot be apprehended is not able to be seen and not able to be heard. The place where the youthful Mañjuśrī dwells

should be abandoned. Why is that? Since the youthful Mañjuśrī does not exist and cannot be apprehended, the place where he dwells also does not exist and cannot be apprehended. That which does not exist and cannot be apprehended should not be relied upon.”
 
§10 Thereupon, these five hundred monks heard this teaching by the youthful Mañjuśrī, and having returned back to their place, said the following words to the youthful Mañjuśrī, “Mañjuśrī, how is it that we do not understand your teaching?” Mañjuśrī replied, “Monks this is good, this is good. In such a way are the activities of the Teacher’s śrāvakas.20 Monks, regarding this, there is nothing to fully comprehend [and] there is nothing to understand. Why is this? 21Accordingly, this realm of reality itself resides in a manner which is unlocalized. That which is the realm of reality is not a realm. That which does not exist and cannot be apprehended is also immovable and without birth and death. That which is immovable and without birth and death is not to be fully comprehened. It is not to be understood. One who is without the vain imaginings of full comprehension and understanding is called “a śrāvaka of the Teacher.” He is called “one who has attained the supreme,” a “leader,” “one worthy of offerings.” When he explained this teaching, among the five hundred monks, the minds of four hundred monks, no longer clinging, were liberated from the pollutions. One hundred monks in body and mind fell into the great hell (mahānaraka) Raurava due to their thoughts being greatly disturbed.22
 
§11 Then the Venerable Śāriputra said the following words to the youthful Mañjuśrī, “Mañjuśrī, [D270a] I am shocked that one hundred monks have all gone to waste because you didn't teach a Dharma which protects sentient beings.23” Thereupon the Bhagavān spoke the following words to the Venerable Śāriputra, “Śāriputra, do not speak such words. Why is this? Śāriputra, these one hundred monks, after a moment of touching the great hell Raurava, will together take rebirth among the gods of Tuṣita heaven.24 Śāriputra, if these monks had not heard this Dharmadiscourse, they would without doubt traverse as hell-beings, and having exhausted their actions25, take rebirth as humans. Since they have relied upon this Dharma-discourse, they will experience very little of the karmic results of experiencing hell as a sentient being for an aeon. Śāriputra, therefore, these one hundred monks will be included among the initial śrāvakas of the Tathāgata Maitreya and become Arhats who have exhausted their pollutions. Śāriputra, in this way, when this Dharma-discourse is heard by those who have doubt, it is the most excellent, but this does not occur through attainment on the four levels of concentration, nor through the four immeasurables, nor through meditating on the four attainments of formlessness. Why is this? Without hearing this Dharma-discourse one will not be completely liberated from cyclic existence, nor will one be liberated from birth, ageing, sickness, death, sorrow, lamentation, suffering, sadness, and agitation.”
 
§12 Thereupon, the Venerable Śāriputra said the following words to the youthful Mañjuśrī, “Mañjuśrī, the way that you have fully matured sentient beings through your eloquent explanation of this Dharma-discourse is amazing.” Mañjuśrī replied, “Venerable Śāriputra, true nature does not diminish, nor does it increase. The realm of reality also does not diminish [D270b], nor does it increase. The realm of sentient beings does not diminish, nor does it increase. It is not defiled, nor is it pure.26 Why is this? Accordingly, these do not exist and cannot be apprehended. They are nothing at all as they amount to nothing more than mere conventions. They are not due to anything whatsoever. They do not abide anywhere at all and

are unlocalized. Venerable Śāriputra, that which is unhindered in this way is awakening. Awakening is liberation. Liberation is non-conceptual. The non-conceptual is unfabricated and immutable. The unfabricated and immutable is completely passed beyond suffering (parinirvāṇa).
 
§13 Thereupon, the Bhagavān spoke the following words to the Sthavira Śāriputra, “Śāriputra, the youthful Mañjuśrī has taught correctly. True nature does not diminish, nor does it increase. The realm of reality also does not diminish, nor does it increase. The realm of sentient beings does not diminish, nor does it increase. It is not defiled, nor is it pure. 27Why is this? Accordingly, these do not exist and cannot be apprehended. They are nothing at all as they amount to nothing more than mere conventions. They are not due to anything whatsoever. They do not abide anywhere at all and are unlocalized.
 
§14 28Then the Bhagavān at that time uttered these verses:
 
[1] 29Dharmas which are said to arise In the past, present, or future Do not objectively exist but are mere conventions. They do not have the characteristics of being one or many.
 
 
[2] That which is conceptualized without characteristics Will itself become a characteristic. That without characteristics is non-conceptual, Conceptuality is not a characteristic either.
  
[3] That which is conceptualized as conditioned30 And that which is conceptualized as nirvāṇa Both are explained by the wise As the activity of Māra.
 
 
[4] All of the aggregates, sensory media, and elements Are formulated by name. The names and the unproduced31 Are both of a single characteristic. [D271a]
 
 
[5] That which is properly conceptualized Is itself not proper. The wise do not conceptualize even a little bit. Their sphere of activity is actually empty. [6] Those who conceptualize waver about, Those who do not conceptualize are unwavering. Concepts produce wavering, Being without concepts is nirvāṇa.


 
[7] Those who understand this nature Are known as “those who have wisdom.” On that account they have attained cessation.32 That is non-conceptual wisdom.
 
 
[8] With wisdom is wisdom proclaimed. Even the proclamations of wisdom are vain. Those who have forbearance in wisdom like this Are known as “those who have wisdom.”
 
[9] The endurance by which one endures a holy Dharma of this sort Is the supreme endurance, Superior to the generosity By which one would fill the trichilocosms with jewels.
 
 
[10] Practicing for myriads of aeons Giving, morality, forbearance, Diligent effort, and concentration Is not equal to this sūtra.
 
 
[11] This Dharma and this vehicle Are taught by the perfectly complete Buddha. When relying on this sūtra All will become Tathāgatas.
 
§15 When this Dharma-discourse had been explained, one hundred thousand33 living beings purified the dustless and spotless Dharma-eye with regard to dharmas. The minds of five hundred monks, no longer clinging, were liberated from the pollutions.34 Eighty thousand devaputras who belong to the sphere of form generated the mind for unexcelled, true and complete awakening. The Bhagavān predicted that they will all realize unexcelled, true, and complete awakening in the aeon called “like a star” and that all of them will bear the same name: “Tathāgata, Arhat, perfectly complete Buddha, Flower.”35 The Bhagavān having said this, the youthful Mañjuśrī, Venerable Śāriputra, and the world with its gods, humans, demigods and gandharvas [D271b] rejoiced and praised what had been proclaimed by the Bhagavān.
 
This concludes the Noble Mahāyāna sūtra called the “Abode of Mañjuśrī.”
 
Translated and edited by the Indian master Surendrabodhi and the great editor translator Venerable Ye-shes-sde.
Copyright © 2016 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha – All Rights Reserved.

 
Bibliography and Abbreviations
 
Chinese Sources
 
T Taishō shinshū daizōkyō 大正新脩大藏經. Edited by Takakusu Junjirō 高楠順次郎, Watanabe Kaigyoku 渡辺海旭, and Ono Gemmyō 小野玄妙. 100 vols. Tokyo: Taishō shinshū daizōkyō kanko kai, 1924-34. Rpt. 1962. Wén shū shī lì xún xíng jīng 文殊師利巡行經 (T. 470) translated by Bodhiruci, 1 juan, ca. 508535 c.e.. Wén shū shī lì xíng jīng 文殊尸利行經 (T. 471) translated by Jñānagupta in 586 c.e.
 
Tibetan Kanjur Editions
 
Ba ’phags pa ’jam dpal gnas pa zhes bya ba theg pa chen po’i mdo. Basgo Manuscript Kanjur, 053 mDo, Tsa 277a4-384a5. Digital scans from Resources for Kanjur & Tibetan Studies (http://www.istb.univie.ac.at/kanjur/xml3/xml/).
 
C ’phags pa ’jam dpal gnas pa zhes bya ba theg pa chen po’i mdo. Cone (Co ne) Printed Kanjur, mdo sde, tsa 328a1-333b7 (vol. 41). TBRC W1PD96685. 108 vols. [co ne rdzong]: [co ne dgon], 1926. http://tbrc.org/link?RID=W1PD96685
 
D ’phags pa ’jam dpal gnas pa zhes bya ba theg pa chen po’i mdo. Derge (Sde dge) Printed Kanjur ,mdo sde, tsa 266b1-271b2 (vol. 61). chos kyi 'byung gnas. bka’ ’gyur (sde dge par phud). TBRC W22084. 103 vols. delhi: delhi karmapae chodhey gyalwae sungrab partun khang, 1976-1979. http://tbrc.org/link?RID=W22084
 
F ’phags pa ’jam dpal gnas pa zhes bya ba theg pa chen po’i mdo. Phug brag Manuscript Kanjur, mdo sde, sa 194b8-202a5 (vol. 82). Digital scans from Resources for Kanjur & Tibetan Studies (http://www.istb.univie.ac.at/kanjur/xml3/xml/).
 
Go ’phags pa ’jam dpal gnas pa zhes. Gondhla Collection Proto-Kanjur, Ka 15a6-19a6 (vol. 16). Digital scans from Resources for Kanjur & Tibetan Studies (http://www.istb.univie.ac.at/kanjur/xml3/xml/).
 
He ’phags pa ’jam dpal gnas pa zhes bya ba theg pa chen po’i mdo. Hemis Manuscript Kanjur, mdo, Tsa 310a6-317a8. Digital scans from Resources for Kanjur & Tibetan Studies (http://www.istb.univie.ac.at/kanjur/xml3/xml/).
 
J ’phags pa ’jam dpal gnas pa zhes bya ba theg pa chen po’i mdo. Lithang Printed Kanjur, mdo sde, tsa 298b3-304a3 (vol. 56); readings from variants preserved in dpe bsdur ma.
 
Copyright © 2016 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha – All Rights Reserved.

K2 ’phags pa ’jam dpal gnas pa zhes bya ba theg pa chen po’i mdo. Kangxi “Dragon” Manuscript Kanjur. Facsimile reprint preserved in National Palace Museum, Taiwan, volume Tsu, No. 865, 286/427a4-291/535a6). See Chou 2011.
 
L ’phags pa ’jam dpal gnas pa zhes bya ba theg pa chen po’i mdo. London Manuscript Kanjur, mdo sde, ta 367b2-374a5 (vol. 39).
 
N ’phags pa ’jam dpal gnas pa zhes bya ba theg pa chen po’i mdo. Narthang (Snar thang) Printed Kanjur, mdo sde, ba 427a7-435b1 (vol. 61); readings from variants preserved in dpe bsdur ma.
 
Ne ’phags pa ’jam dpal gnas pa zhes bya ba theg pa chen po’i mdo. Bathang Manuscript Kanjur, vol. 10 (13b3-18a7). Digital scans from Resources for Kanjur & Tibetan Studies (http://www.istb.univie.ac.at/kanjur/xml3/xml/).
 
dpe bsdur ma ’phags pa ’jam dpal gnas pa zhes bya ba theg pa chen po’i mdo, Volume deb re gcig pa, mdo sde tsa, pp. 725-737 in Comparative Edition of the Kangyur, krung go’i bod rig pa zhib ’jug ste gnas kyi bka’ bstan dpe sdur khang (The Tibetan Tripitaka Collation Bureau of the China Tibetology Research Center). 108 volumes. Beijing: krung go’i bod rig pa dpe skrun khang (China Tibetology Publishing House), 2006-2009.
 
Q ’phags pa ’jam dpal gnas pa zhes bya ba theg pa chen po’i mdo. Peking Qianlong Printed Kanjur, mdo sna tshogs, mu 275a6-280a2 (vol. 34, p.238).
 
S ’phags pa ’jam dpal gnas pa zhes bya ba theg pa chen po’i mdo. Stog Palace Manuscript Kanjur mdo sde, ta 394a5-401a4 (vol. 60). bka’ ’gyur stog pho brang bris ma. TBRC W22083. 109 vols. leh: smanrtsis shesrig dpemzod, 1975-1980. http://tbrc.org/link?RID=W22083
 
Ta ’phags pa ’jam dpal gnas pa zhes bya ba theg pa chen po’i mdo. Tabo Manuscript, Ki 46-49. Digital scans from Resources for Kanjur & Tibetan Studies (http://www.istb.univie.ac.at/kanjur/xml3/xml/).
 
Ta2 Tabo Mauscript, Ka 37. Digital scans from Resources for Kanjur & Tibetan Studies (http://www.istb.univie.ac.at/kanjur/xml3/xml/).
 
V ’phags pa ’jam dpal gnas pa zhes bya ba theg pa chen po’i mdo.Ulanbatar Manuscript Kanjur, mdo sde, ta 370a3-377a3 (vol. 62).
 
Y ’phags pa ’jam dpal gnas pa zhes bya ba theg pa chen po’i mdo.Yongle Printed Kanjur, readings from variants preserved in dpe dur ma.
 
Z ’phags pa ’jam dpal gnas pa zhes bya ba theg pa chen po’i mdo. Shey Palace Manuscript Kanjur, mdo, ta 443b2-451a4 (vol. 56). Digital scans from Resources for Kanjur & Tibetan Studies (http://www.istb.univie.ac.at/kanjur/xml3/xml/).
Copyright © 2016 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha – All Rights Reserved.

References

Anālayo, Bhikkhu. 2009. “Qualities of a True Recluse (Samaṇa) –According to the Samaṇamaṇḍikā-sutta and its Madhyama-āgama Parallel,” Journal of the Centre for Buddhist Studies, Sri Lanka, vol. 7 pp. 153–184. Apple, James B. 2013. A Stairway taken by the Lucid: Tsong kha pa’s Study of Noble Beings. New Delhi: Aditya Prakashan. Apple, James B. 2014. “Fragments and Phylogeny of the Tibetan Version of the Mañjuśrīvihārasūtra: A Case Study in the Genealogy of Tibetan Kanjurs.” Annual Report of The International Research Institute for Advanced Buddhology (ARIRIAB) at Soka University for the Academic Year 2013. Tokyo: The International Research Institute for Advanced Buddhology, Soka University, Vol. XVII, pp. 293-335. Bareau, André, Sara Boin-Webb, and Andrew Skilton. 2013. The Buddhist Schools of the Small Vehicle. Honolulu : University of Hawai’i Press. Braarvig, Jens. 1993. Akṣayamatinirdeśa. I: Edition of Exant Manuscripts with an Index. II: The Tradition of Imperishability in Buddhist Thought. Oslo. Braarvig, Jens. 1994. “The Practice of the Bodhisattvas: Negative Dialectics and Provocative Arguments. Edition of the Tibetan text of the Bodhisattvacaryānirdeśa with a Translation and Introduction.” Acta Orientalia 55: 113-160. Chang, Garma C. C. 1983. A Treasury of Mahāyāna Sūtras: Selections from the Mahāratnakūta Sūtra. University Park: The Pennsylvania State University Press. Chou, Kungshin. 2011. “Preface” in Tibetan Scripture-Index to 龍藏經,金字法寶 (“The Tibetan Dragon Sutras, Golden Ink Dharma Treasure”), 108 volumes. Taiwan, 國立故宮博物院 (National Palace Museum), 龍岡印刷股份有限公司 Long-Kuang Digital Culture Co.,Ltd. Conze, Edward. 1962. Buddhist thought in India. London: Allen & Unwin. Conze, Edward. 1973. The Short Prajñāpāramitā Texts. London: Luzac & Co. Ltd. Conze, Edward. 1975. The Large Sutra on Perfect wisdom: With the Divisions of the Abhisamayālaṅkāra. Berkeley: University of California Press. Deleanu, Florin. 2000. “A Preliminary Study on Meditation and the Beginnings of Mahāyāna Buddhism.” Annual Report of The International Research Institute for Advanced Buddhology (ARIRIAB) at Soka University for the Academic Year 1999. Tokyo: The International Research Institute for Advanced Buddhology, Soka University, pp. 65-113. Edgerton, Franklin. 1953 (1970 reprint). Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit Grammar and Dictionary. 2 vol. Motilal Banarsidass: Delhi. Gyamtso, Yeshe. 2008. A Garland of Jewels: The Eight Great Bodhisattvas. Woodstock, N.Y.: KTD Publications. Copyright © 2016 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha – All Rights Reserved.

Harrison, Paul M. 1990. The Samādhi of direct encounter with the Buddhas of the present: an annotated English translation of the Tibetan version of the Pratyutpanna-Buddhasaṃmukhāvasthita-samādhi-sūtra with several appendices relating to the history of the text. Tokyo: International Institute for Buddhist Studies. Harrison, Paul. 2006. “Vajracchedikā Prajñāpāramitā: A New English Translation of the Sanskrit Text Based on Two Manuscripts from Greater Gandhāra,” in Jens Braarvig, Paul Harrison, Jens–Uwe Hartmann, Kazunobu Matsuda & Lore Sander, eds., Buddhist Manuscripts in the Schøyen Collection. Hermes: Oslo, pp. 133-59. Herrmann-Pfandt, Adelheid. 2008. Die Lhan kar ma: ein früher Katalog der ins Tibetische übersetzten buddhistischen Texte. Wien: Verlag der österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. Hikata, Ryusho. 1958. Suvikrantāvikrāmi- paripṛcchā-prajñāpāramitā-sūtra. Edited with an introductory essay by Ryusho Hikata. Fukuoka: Kyushu University. Jaini, Padmanabh. 1992. “Smṛti in the Abhidharma Literature and the Development of Buddhist Accounts of Memory of the Past.” In Janet Gyatso, In the Mirror of Memory Reflections on Mindfulness and Remembrance in Indian and Tibetan Buddhism. Albany: State University of New York Press, pp. 47-59 Kapstein, Matthew, translator. 2013. “An Imperial Decree on Translation.” In Schaeffer, Kurtis R., Matthew Kapstein, and Gray Tuttle. Sources of Tibetan Tradition. New York: Columbia University Press, pp. 72-76. Lamotte, Étienne. 1944. Le Traité de la Grande Vertu de Sagesse de Nàgàrjuna. Volume 3 (pp.1119-1733), Louvain: Institut Orientaliste Louvain-la-Neuve. Lopez, Donald S. 1988. The Heart Sūtra Explained: Indian and Tibetan Commentaries. Albany, N.Y.: State University of New York Press. Meisig, Konrad, and Marion Meisig. 2012. A Buddhist Chinese Glossary BuddhistischChinesisches Glossar. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz. Nakamura, H, 1980, Indian Buddhism: A Survey with Bibliographical Notes, Kufs Publication, Tokyo, Japan. Nishioka, Soshū. 1980. “ ‘Putun bukkyōshi’ Mokurokubusakuin 1/Index to the Catalogue Section of Bu-ston’s ‘History of Buddhism’ 1.” Tōkyō daigaku bungakubu Bunka-kōryūkenkyū-shisetsu Kenkyū Kiyō 4: 61-92. Otokawa, Bun’ei. 1999. “New Fragments of the rNal ’byor chen por bsgom pa’i don from Tabo. In Scherrer-Schaub, Cristina Anna, and Ernst Steinkellner. 1999. Tabo studies II: Manuscsripts, Texts, Inscriptions, and the Arts. Roma: Istituto italiano per l'Africa e l'Oriente, pp. 99-162. Pad dkar bzang po. 2006. Edited by Mi nyag mgon po. Mdo sde spyi'i rnam bzhag. Pe cin: mi rigs dpe skrun khang. Rdo, R., editor. 2003. Dkar chag ’phang thang ma / sgra sbyor bam po gnyis pa. Pe cin: Mi rigs dpe skrun khang. Copyright © 2016 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha – All Rights Reserved.

Regamey, Constantin. 1938. Reprint 1990. Philosophy in the Samādhirājasūtra: Three Chapters from the Samādhirājasūtra. Delhi: M. Banarsidass Schaeffer, Kurtis R., and Leonard W. J. van der Kuijp. 2009. An Early Tibetan Survey of Buddhist literature: The Bstan pa rgyas pa rgyan gyi nyi ’od of Bcom Idan ral gri. Cambridge, Mass: Dept. of Sanskrit and Indian Studies, Harvard University. Shiu, Chung Hung Henry. 2006. The Nonduality of Nonconceptual Wisdom and Conceptual Cognition: A Study of the Tathāgatagarbha Teaching in the Anūnatvāpūrṇatvanirdeśaparivarta. Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada. Si-tu Paṇ-chen Chos-kyi-ʼbyuṅ-gnas, Sherab Dorje, and Raṅ-byuṅ-rdo-rje. 1995. Mahāmudrā Teachings of the Supreme Siddhas: The Eighth Situpa Tenpa’i Nyinchay on the Third Gyalwa Karmapa Rangjung Dorje’s “Aspiration Prayer of Mahāmudrā of Definitive Meaning.” Ithaca, N.Y.: Snow Lion Publications. Skilling, Peter. 2012. “Notes on the Bhadrakalpika-sūtra (III): Beyond the Fortunate Aeon.” Annual Report of The International Research Institute for Advanced Buddhology (ARIRIAB) at Soka University for the Academic Year 2011. Tokyo: The International Research Institute for Advanced Buddhology, Soka University, pp. 117-126. Vimalamitra (Dri med bshes gnyen). Sakṛtpraveśikanirvikalpabhāvanārtha (Cig car 'jug pa rnam par mi rtog pa'i bsgom don). Tôh. no. 3910. Dergé Tanjur, vol. KI, folios 6v.1-13v.4. Tr. by Dharmatāśīla and Ye shes sde.

NOTES 1 This version is mentioned by Nakamura, Indian Buddhism, A Survey with Bibliographical Notes (1980:167), but misspelled as Mañjuśrīvikārasūtra. 2 Tib. phyem red kyi dus kyi tshe nang du yang dag 'jog las bzhengs nas is, as noted by Harrison (1990:8n8), related to the Pāli sāyaṇhasamayaṃ paṭisallāṇā vuṭṭhito and Sanskrit sāyāhṇa(kāla)samaye pratisaṃlayanād vyutthāya, “emerging towards evening from solitary meditation.” 3 Note that Śāriputra is practicing meditative seclusion (nang du yang dag bzhag pa ≈ pratisaṃlīna [pratiaṃlayana] in the Vimalakīrtinirdésa (Chapter 3, §2, §3) when he is confronted by Vimalakīrti. 4 The following questions from “…bodily form?” to “..the formless realm” are missing in the Chinese (T470). 5 tshe ’di la bde bar gnas par bya refers to blissful meditative practices achieved in this life as a result of advanced progress on the path in mainstream forms of Buddhism. The phrase occurs throughout the Śrāvakabhūmi (D 25a5, 70b2, 74b5, 74b6, 152a2) and is most likely synonymous with mthong ba’i chos la bde bar gnas pa ≈ dṛṣtadharmasukhavihāra “abiding in bliss in the present life,” a term applied to certain types of Arhats (see Apple 2013). 6 brjed pa med par gnas pa ≈ *asaṃpramoṣavihāra. A type of samādhi in the Mahāvyutpatti §526. Non-forgetfulness (brjed pa med pa) is one of the three qualities of mindfulness (dran pa ≈ smṛti) including familiarization (’dris pa’i dngos po) and non-distraction (mi g.yeng ba). See, for example, Jaini (1992: 47-59) on asaṃpramoṣa in Abhidharma literature. Copyright © 2016 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha – All Rights Reserved.

7 The Chinese (T470, 510b5) translates “teaching freedom from desire” for “teaching of isolation” throughout the sūtra. 8 The fundamental thesis of the Sarvāstivādin school is that the past (atīta), present, and future (anāgata) really and substantially exist (Bareau 2013:177ff). 9 de bzhin du sbyar te ≈ peyālam, Mahāvyupatti 5435, Edgerton 1953:354a, “et cetera…, in short…, in brief…a résumé of a preceding series of stanzas.” 10 The Chinese (T470, 510b13) reads tathāgata rather than tathatā 11 The Chinese (T470, 510b17) reads tathāgata rather than tathatā 12 The Chinese (T470, 510b19) reads tathāgata rather than tathatā 13 The Chinese (T470, 510b21) states “true nature is irreversible, true nature has no aspect.” 14 Emptiness (stong pa nyid), signlessness (mtshan ma med pa), and wishlessness (smon pa med pa) are known as the “three doors to deliverance” (triṇivimokṣamukhāni) or the “three concentrations” (trayaḥ samādhyaḥ) and as a set appear in both mainstream Buddhist sūtras and Mahāyāna sūtras. See Conze (1962:59-69), Lamotte (1944:1213-15), and Deleanu (2000:7478). 15 Note that CGoJMQY reads phyogs and all other editions read sa phyogs. See Apple 2014:307, note 171. 16 I have based the translation on the Dunhuang (IOL Tib J 149, fol. 6a) as all the later vulgate Kanjurs, including D (268b2), add mi slob pa rnams kyang “even those not in training” (aśaikṣa). However, arhats are synonymous with aśaikṣas and so this phrase seems to be an addition to the text. 17 ’dus ma byas kyis rab tu phye ba ≈ asaṃskṛtaprabhāvita. This phrase occurs throughout a number of Perfection of Wisdom discourses and several other sūtras (Apple 2014). See, for example, the Vajracchedikā Prajñāpāramitā §7 (Harrison 2006:145). 18 dge sbyong gi chos ≈ śramaṇadharma (samaṇadhamma). See Anālayo 2009 for this concept in early Buddhist sources. The Them-spang-ma (LSVZ) and Tabo (Ta) manuscripts read dge slong for dge sbyong, a frequent wrong reading in Tibetan Kanjurs. The Chinese (T470, 511a03) has “abiding in the quality of a śrāvaka.” 19 The Chinese (T470, 511a04-a10) begins this paragraph with “At that time, after Mañjuśrī completed this teaching, the five hundred monks stood up from their seats and left saying, “We do not view Mañjuśrī’s body, we do not listen for Mañjuśrī’s name. Wherever Mañjuśrī is and abides, then we should abandon there. Why? Mañjuśrī is different from our “brahma-carya.” Thus, we should abandon him.” 20 The Chinese (T470, 511a29-b01) for this sentence reads, “You, all monks, who are disciples of the Tathagata, those who are śravakas, should train as follows.” 21 The Chinese (T470, 511b01-b02) for the following two sentences has “Because this realm of reality is itself ‘dharmatā’ – the way things are, the realm of reality has, as such, no thought or no retrogress.” 22 A parallel episode is found in the Bodhisattvacaryanirdeśa (see Braarvig 1994:136). 23 The Dunhuang (IOL Tib J 149) reads ’khyims ≈ pariveṣin “to circle about” rather than chud zos te ngo mthar byas. 24 The Chinese (T470, 511b17) adds “…because these monks were able to listen to this Dharma.” 25 The Chinese (T470, 511b18) adds “for one kalpa.” 26 The Chinese (T470, 511b29-c01) is missing “It is not defiled, nor is it pure” Copyright © 2016 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha – All Rights Reserved.

27 The Chinese (T470, 511c08) is missing the following four sentences. 28 The Chinese (T470, 511c08) reads, “At that time, the World Honored One, in order to reveal this meaning, again, uttered these verses:” 29 The Chinese (T470, 511c09-c29) has the same number of verses but there are differences in style, terminology, and idioms of expression that we have not noted. 30 I have based the translation on the Dunhuang (IOL Tib J 149) which reads ’dus byas la ni gang rtog dang” against all vulgate Kanjurs which read ’dus ma byas la gang rtog dang. This reading matches an early Tibetan commentary attributed to Spug Ye shes dbyangs (771-850 c.e.) which preserves the reading ’dus byas la ni gang rtog dang (Otokawa 1999:151). The vulgate Kanjur reading does not fit the context as the unconditioned (’dus ma byas) and nirvāṇa (mya ngan ’das) are quite often synonyms. 31 I have based the translation on the Dunhuang (IOL Tib J 149) and other vulgate Kanjurs (GoLNeQTa) which read ming dang skye med gang yin pa against Derge which reads ming dang skye mched gang yin pa. 32 Note that all editions read zad pa except for Derge which reads zag pa. See Apple 2014:315, note 400. 33 The Chinese (T470, 512a01) reads “ten thousand.” 34 The Chinese (T470, 512a03) reads “Five hundred monks generated the mind for unexcelled, true, and complete awakening.” 35 The Chinese (T470, 512a05) reads “Dharma-Flower.”