by Andy Rotman
349Helmut Eimer (1983) has critically edited from the Tibetan the Pravrajyāvastu portion of the Mūlasarvāstivāda-vinaya, which contains versions of the Nāgakumāra-avadāna (1983: 247.17–260.22, 302.1–306.25) and the Saṅgharakṣita-avadāna (1983: 260.23–301.27). Ware (1938) has edited and translated into English the first part of the Nāgakumāra-avadāna, from both Tibetan and Chinese.
350See Dutt’s comments at the bottom of MSV iv, 46. According to Vogel and Wille (GM-Saṅgh 248), “Owing to a mistake by its compiler, the Divyāvadāna also gives the final portion of the tale of the present relative to the Nāgakumārāvadāna, which is hardly comprehensible by itself . . .” In fact, at the end of that story, as Cowell and Neil (Divy 346n8) observe, “all the mss. add here 23 (for 24?),” indicating some discrepancy in ordering.
351Following the Tibetan (Eimer 1983: ii, 259.8–12), de nas rgya mtsho chen po’i klu de dag bram ze dang khyim bdag gi cha lugs kyis mngon du lhags pa dang| des de dag la chos ston to| de dag gis de las chos thos nas dge slong glo bur du ’ongs pa dang| ’gro bar chas pa rnams la yo byad thams cad kyis bstabs pa dang| drug sde dag gis smras pa| dga’ bo nye dga’ . . .
For a full translation of the frame story that precedes the story of Saṅgharakṣita, see Ware 1938: 65–67. For a translation of the opening passage of this story in the Divyāvadāna, see Divy 707–8. With the help of a translation from the Tibetan by Léon Feer, Cowell and Neil (Divy 707) try to make sense of the manuscripts that “are all alike sadly corrupt.”
352Divy 329.1, mahallena. The term mahalla (or mahallaka) often refers to one who has renounced late in life and has little scholastic training (Ray 1994: 207n18; Durt 1980). In this case, the referent is a nāga who has taken the form of an old monk in order to teach other nāgas who have taken the form of brahmans and householders. Vogel and Wille (GM-Saṅgh 267) translate the term as “senior.” Also possible is “old man.”
353Divy 329.1, khustikayā. The term is obscure. Elsewhere in the Divyāvadāna, it means “bald,” in reference to someone’s head (Divy 426.28), and “worn out,” in reference to clothes (Divy 173.3). Here, explains Edgerton (BHSD, s.v. khusta), it describes “a religious text, in a deprecatory sense, app. poor, unsatisfactory, perh. lit. old, worn-out, stale, out-of-date.” One could also take it to mean “defective,” “imperfect,” or “abridged.” Cowell and Neil (Divy 707n3) wonder, “Is it not an equivalent for the Pāli khuddaka in the Khuddaka-nikāya?” Vogel and Wille (GM-Saṅgh 267) translate it adverbially as “poorly.”
354Divy 329.3, yuktamuktapratibhānāḥ. Cowell and Neil (Divy 707) offer this translation: “having minds fixed and liberated.” Lojda (2009: 90n40) suggests “gifted with suitable and uninhibited courage (in speech).” The Tibetan (Eimer 1983: ii, 259.15–16) reads rigs pa dang grol ba’i spobs ma can, which Ware (1938: 65) translates as “are only bold for what is proper and pertaining to salvation.” Versions of this expression occur in a variety of sources; for more, see Hiraoka 2007: ii, 24n2.
355Following Cowell and Neil’s query (Divy 329n4) and Hiraoka (HA 16; HD 36), read adhyeṣayati. Divy 329.3, adhyeṣayasi.
356Divy 329.18, nirmitaḥ. In Buddhist art, to quote J. Ph. Vogel (1926: 37), “the nāga is sometimes [shown] as a mere animal, sometimes as a human creature, but generally human and animal properties are strangely blended.” Nāgas straddle the realms of human and serpent and at times can appear as one, the other, or both.
357Previously the group of six monks criticized the nāga-cum-old-man for using a faulty version of the Gradual Sayings. Now the Buddha explains that his version of the Gradual Sayings was indeed the right one. Once again, the group of six monks show themselves to be deficient with regard to the dharma, if not defiant.
358Read kathayati. Divy 329.21, “reflected” (saṃlakṣayati).
359Divy 330.1–2, anāpattayas(mss., anāpattis) tanmukhikayā nirgatā bhavanti. This is obscure. Edgerton (BHSD, s.vv. anāpatti, tanmukhikayā) suggests reading anāpattis with the manuscript and taking the instrumental tanmukhikayā adverbially as “for this reason” or “by that means.” One might then emend bhavanti to bhavati and interpret as “The absence of an offense disappears by that reason.” Or even, “His innocence disappears as soon as he opens his mouth.” Cowell and Neil (Divy 708) suggest, “Through this consideration, they (ṣaḍvargikas [i.e., group of six monks]?) go forth innocent.” The Tibetan (Eimer 1983: ii, 260.21–22; cf. 99b4; 100b2) reads de’i ngor mgron du bos pa la ni ltung ba med do, which Ware (1938: 67) translates as “In this connection, for a guest there is no sin.” Vogel and Wille (GM-Saṅgh 268) translate the same as “For him who has been invited to an entertainment in his presence there is no wrong.” The most difficult problem here is making sense of tanmukhikayā. Instead of reading the term as an adverb, I follow the Tibetan—and Vogel and Wille’s understanding of it—and take de’i ngor to mean “in his presence.” Likewise, I take mgron du bos paas an interpretive gloss of the suffix -ika, in the sense of “being invited to an event.” Hence, I translate the term as “[monks] invited into his presence [for a teaching of the dharma].” One might then emend tanmukhikayāto the more standard tanmukhikā, recognizing the former as a scribal error—a kind of reflex addition in response to the preceding anāpattayas. Then again, it may simply be a Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit form. My sense of the overall meaning here is that a person who teaches without being requested to do so commits an offense but monks attending such a teaching remain innocent. My thanks to Johannes Schneider for his help with this passage.
360Hiraoka (HA 16; HD36) suggests omitting this sentence. “Otherwise,” he explains, “the wife would become pregnant twice in a row without any delivery” (HD 36).
361Divy 330.12–13, kim asmākaṃ kāśadhānād vā kuśadhānād vā paścācchramaṇā bhavanti. The meaning of dhāna here is unclear. Perhaps, “are attending disciples born to us from kāśa grass or kuśa grass?” Cowell and Neil (Divy 330n3) suggest that “probably the word is really the Pāli thāna [= Skt. sthāna; Eng., place] in both places.” Based on the Tibetan (99b8; 100b6), which reads rtsva ka sha’i byings sam| ku sha’i byings nas, Hiraoka (HA 16; HD36) suggests kāśadhātor vā kuśadhātor. As Hiraoka (HD 36) explains, “the word in question is byings (a secondary form of dbyings) which is supposed to correspond to Skt. dhātu. Dhātu fits fine in the context because it means ‘element/substance,’ although in form the word is not close to the readings of the manuscripts.” Vogel and Wille (GM-Saṅgh 268) offer this translation of the Tibetan: “Why does it happen that a mendicant walking behind me stems from the Kāśa-grass region or the Kuśa-grass region [i.e., from Yama’s realm].” Another possibility is that it should be understood in the sense of adhāna or “placing.” That is, “Do you think that attending disciples are produced just by placing kāśagrass or placing kuśa grass before us?” This might explain Amy Langenberg’s (2013: 265) translation of the sentence: “do you think our monastic attendants come from spreading kāśa grass or kuśa grass?” Also possible is that the word in question is connected to vidhāna, which occurs in the following sentence (Divy 330.14). Regardless, the point of this sentence seems to be that brahmanical offerings are not enough; they may fuel a fire but they are not a replacement for the offering of a disciple. Disciples, as it were, don’t simply grow on trees. For more on kāśa and kuśa grass, which appear together frequently, see Gonda 1985: 29–51, 133–34.
362Following Divy 2.25, 24.16, etc., add atyayāt. Divy 330.18 (omitted).
363Vaidya (Divy-V 205.6) omits Divy 331.6.
364Divy 332.2, bhayabhairava-. The Pāli equivalent is well known, as the Bhayabherava Sutta appears in the Majjhima-nikāya(i, 16–24). Ñāṇamoli and Bodhi (1995: 102) likewise translate the compound as “fear and dread.”
365Following Divy 5.11–12 and Hiraoka (HA 16; HD 36), read sāmudraṃ yānapātram. Divy 332.8, samudrayānapātram (mss., samudraṃ).
366Divy 333.3, nāgabhavanam. Here bhavanam seems to refer not to a building or a palace but t
o a domain—i.e., the world of nāgas. I translate accordingly throughout the story.
367Divy 333.8, vinipatitaśarīrāḥ. Cf. DS 414n363.
368The text (Divy 333.12) simply says, “he said” (sa kathayati). What follows in the story, however, makes it clear that the speaker is a fourth nāga—the very same being who had appeared, like a phantom, as an old monk at the beginning of the story. Cf. Burnouf 2010: 313n165, 1844: 317n3. And as the Buddha previously attested, he knows the Gradual Sayings well. In the Tibetan (102b2; 104a1), the fourth nāga is also the one who encourages the three young nāgas to study in the first place.
369Divy 333.14–15, uddeśaṃ gṛhnāti. Vaidya (Divy-V 206.20) emends to gṛhṇāti. Vogel and Wille (GM-Saṅgh 271) translate this expression here and in what follows as “gave an exposition.”
370Divy 333.17–18, dantakāṣṭhaṃ visarjaya. For more on dental sticks, see Ch’en 1945–47: 291n186.
371Divy 333.18, bhagavato maṇḍalakam āmārjaya. As Handurukande (1982: 146n11) remarks, “a maṇḍalaka is a circular spot marked out and ceremonially prepared for a sacred rite.” For more on this passage and the perfumed chambers, see Strong 1977: 400–404.
372Here the text (Divy 333.20) uses the pronoun “he” (sa), which I’m assuming refers to the fourth nāga.
373Divy 334.16, śiloccayo ’śecanakā darśanena buddhaś ca bhagavatāṃ vara. Hiraoka (HA 16; HD 36), following Speyer (1902: 342–43), reads śiloccayaḥ darśanenāsecanakā buddhaś ca jagatāṃ varaḥ.
374Read kutrāryasaṃgharakṣitaḥ. The Tibetan (103b1; 104b3) concurs. Divy 334.20, “Where is that Saṅgharakṣita?” (kutrāyaṃ saṃgharakṣitaḥ).
375Divy 335.2, udgataṃ (mss., udgata) mañcapīṭha-. Cf. Schopen 2006: 502 for the way that this translation conforms “to what has been found at a number of actual monasteries in India” and how these benches allow for monastics to engage with the beauty of their surroundings.
376Cf. GM-Saṅgh 254/43r2; 255/43v1; 256/43v10, yāvat teṣāṃ bhojanakālo jātaḥ gaṇḍir ākoṭitā.
377Divy 335.14, yathāgatya. GM-Saṅgh 254/43r2, yathāgantryā. The idea here is that they entered according to seniority, which is also their seating order, and that they sat down in that order as they arrived. See also GM-Saṅgh 274n9.
378Divy 335.15, ayomudgarāḥ (mss., ayomudgalāḥ) prādurbhātāḥ. GM-Saṅgh 254/43r3, teṣāṃ svāni śāstrāṇy [read pātrāṇy] ayomudgarāṇi prādurbhūtāni.
379Following GM-Saṅgh 254/43r5, read tair asmābhiḥ. Divy 335.24, taiḥ asmākam.
380Divy 335.25, pratyekanarakeṣu. The meaning of this expression is unclear. In the Divyāvadāna, the term seems to mean “personal hell”—a hell realm of particular design for particular individuals. According to Edgerton’s extensive note (BHSD), this hell realm “seems clearly to be a place of less severe punishment than a (mahā–, or regular) [hell realm].” The Mahāvyutpatti (4944) explains this as nyi tshe ba’i, perhaps in the sense of “epheremal.” Accordingly, Burnouf (2010: 315; cf. 1844: 320) takes it to mean “a hell that changes each day.” According to a nineteenth-century Tibetan commentator (Kon-sprul Blo-gros-mtha’-yas 1995: 114), “on each of the four sides of each of the eight [hot] hells are the four neighboring hells [pratyekanaraka]: [1] Pit of Live Embers [kukūla], [2] Swamp of Filth [kuṇapa], [3] Road of Razor Blades [kṣuramārga], [Forest with] Leaves Like Swords [asipattravana], Forest of Iron Spikes [ayaḥśālmalīvana], and [4] River Without Ford [nadīvaitaraṇī].”
381Following GM-Saṅgh 254/43r6 and Hiraoka (HA 16; HD 37), add bhadanta. Divy 335.27 (omitted).
382Following Divy 335.6–8 and Hiraoka (HA 16; HD 37), read yāvat paśyati śobhanāṃ śayanāsanaprajñaptiṃ kṛtāṃ praṇītaṃ cāhāraṃ upahṛtam. Divy 336.8–9, yāvat paśyati śobhanāṃ śayanāsanaprajñaptiṃ kṛtvā (sic mss. but cf. supra) praṇītaṃ cāhāraṃ samanvāhṛtya. For more on samanvāharati and its technical meanings, see Edgerton (BHSD) and DS 408n304.
383Divy 336.10, tena dṛṣṭādīnavena bhuktam. Cf. GM-Saṅgh 255/43r10–v1, sa kathaya(t)i saṃghamdhye eva bhokṣyāmīti| te kathayanti bhadan[t]a saṃ(gharakṣita) mārgaparikhinnas tvaṃ idānīm eva bhuṃkṣva ādīnavo ’tra bhaviṣyatīti.
384Divy 336.19, nābhiśraddadhāsyanti. Cf. Divy 335.21 and 337.15–16, nābhiśraddadhāsyasi.
385Divy 336.23, anāryaparigṛhītaiḥ. Hiraoka (HA 16; HD 37), following GM-Saṅgh 255/43v4, the Tibetan (105a8; 106b3), and the Chinese, reads mātsarya-. That is, “stinginess.”
386Following Divy 336.2 and 338.5, read śramaṇāḥ kāśyapīyāḥ. Divy 337.5, “brahman followers of the Buddha Kāśyapa” (brāhmaṇāḥ kāśyapīyāḥ). GM-Saṅgh 255/43v6 reads śramaṇāḥ śākyaputrīyā iti—perhaps a scribal error based on GM-Saṅgh 256/44r8—which the editors (GM-Saṅgh 255n9) suggest emending to śramaṇāḥ kāśyapīyā iti, the reading preserved in the corresponding Tibetan (Eimer 1983: ii, 275.17) and at GM-Saṅgh 254/43r7. GM-Saṅgh 256/44r6 likewise reads śramaṇāḥ śākyaputrīyā iti, and again the editors (GM-Saṅgh 256n11) suggest emending to śramaṇāḥ kāśyapīyā iti, which corresponds with the Tibetan (Eimer 1983: ii, 278.6). See too GM-Saṅgh 274n15 and 276n34. Worthy of note here is that the disciples of the Buddha Kaśyapa are not said to be brahmans. Furthermore, I follow Edgerton (BHSD) and take kāśyapīya here to mean “followers or disciples of the Buddha Kāśyapa” and not “members of the Kāśyapīya sect.” My thanks to Peter Skilling (personal communication) for his help with this passage.
387Following Divy 336.5–10. Divy 337.7, “and so on as before” (purvavat yāvat).
388Divy 337.21–22, ayam api eko ’smākaṃ dakṣiṇāṃ śodhayiṣyati. The meaning of the verb śodhayiṣyati is unclear, and hence this sentence is open to different interpretations. Burnouf (2010: 317; cf. 1844: 322) translates it as follows: “he will be sufficient on his own to attract alms for us.” Vogel and Wille (GM-Saṅgh 277) offer this translation for the nearly identical corresponding passage from the Gilgit manuscripts: “(For) he alone will get an expiatory gift for us” (ayam eko ’asmākaṃ dakṣiṇāṃ śodhayiṣyatīti | GM-Saṅgh 256/44r3). Paul Harrison (personal communication) understands it to mean “All on his own he will purify the offerings given to us.” The virtuous monk, in other words, will generate merit for the donor as only a worthy recipient can do; as such, the monks will get more offerings.
389Divy 337.22, anisaṅgena. Cowell and Neil (Divy 337n8) query aniṣaṅgena. GM-Saṅgh 256/44r3 reads anuṣaṅgenga, which is better still. The Tibetan (106b8; 107b4) reads de’i zhar gyis.
390Following Hiraoka (HA 16; HD 37), read dattaḥ. Divy 337.25, dagdhaḥ (mss., dagdhaṃ).
391Following Hiraoka (HA 16; HD 37), read taṭṭvākārān. Divy 338.8, “benches” (khaṭvākārān). Likewise, GM-Saṅgh 256/44r7 reads khaṭvākārān, but Vogel and Wille (GM-Saṅgh 256n11) emend to taṭṭvākārān. Cf. Edgerton (BHSD, s.vv. khaṭu, taṭṭu). See also Divy 343.1–5, which explains the logic of this reading.
392Following GM-Saṅgh 256/44r7, the Tibetan (106b5; 108a2), and Hiraoka (HA 16–17; HD 37), add madhye cchinnāṃs tantunā dhāryamāṇāṃ gacchantaḥ. A similar expression also occurs at Divy 342.11–12. Divy 338.9 (omitted).
393Following Speyer (1902: 343) and Hiraoka (HA 17; HD 37), read sa śukladharmaḥ. Divy 338.17, saśukladharmaḥ. GM-Saṅgh 257/44r9 reads saśukaḥ. Vogel and Wille (GM-Saṅgh 257n13) emend this to saśukladharmaḥ, explicitly following the reading in the Divyāvadāna contra Speyer (GM-Saṅgh 278n52). They translate the term as “well-conducted” (GM-Saṅgh 278).
394GM-Saṅgh 257/44r9–4r10 reads tatraiko ṛṣir janapadacārikāṃ gataḥ tasya santikā kuṭikā ayuṣmate saṃgharakṣitāya dattā, which Vogel and Wille (GM-Saṅgh 279) translate as “Thereupon (the) one seer went to the countryside (and) gave his own hut to the reverend Saṃgharakṣita.”
395Following GM-Saṅgh 257/44r10, read bhavantaḥ. Divy 338.25, bhadanta.
396Following GM-Saṅgh
257/44r10, the Tibetan (107a2; 180a7), and Hiraoka (HA 17; HD 37), read śucyupacārā ete. Vogel and Wille (GM-Saṅgh 279) offer this translation: “Sirs, these mendicants of Śākyaputra perform holy actions.” Divy 338.25, sucy api mārjanty ete (ex conj.; ms. A, śucyam api vārāpyete; ms. B, śucyam api cārapyate; ms. C, śucyam api cārāpyete; ms. D, śunyam api cārāpyete). Perhaps, “cleanse what is already clean.” This is Cowell and Neil’s conjecture (Divy 338n6), for as they note, “the mss. are all corrupt.”