Articles by alphabetic order
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z
 Ā Ī Ñ Ś Ū Ö Ō
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0


A Possible Sanskrit Parallel to the Pali Uruvelasutta

From Chinese Buddhist Encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search



I) Sūtra:

a) Āgama:
1. Fragments of an Ekottarikāgama Manuscript in Gāndhārī
Chanida Jantrasrisalai, Timothy Lenz, Lin Qian, Richard Salomon 1
2. Fragments of the Itivṛttaka
Mitsuyo Demoto 123
3. A Folio of a Parallel to the Śalyasūtra or Sunakkhattasutta
Jens-Uwe Hartmann, Klaus Wille 151
4. A Possible Sanskrit Parallel to the Pali Uruvelasutta
Peter Skilling, Saerji, Prapod Assavavirulhakarn 159 b) Mahāyāna:
5. Fragments of a Gāndhārī Version of the Bhadrakalpikasūtra
Stefan Baums, Andrew Glass, Kazunobu Matsuda 183

6. The Bodhisattvapiṭakasūtra in Gāndhārī
Stefan Baums, Jens Braarvig, Timothy J. Lenz, Fredrik Liland,
Kazunobu Matsuda, Richard Salomon 267

7. The Final Folio of a Version of the Larger Sukhāvatīvyūhasūtra and Fragments of a Text Possibly Related to the Tathāgatabimbaparivarta
Paul Harrison, Jens-Uwe Hartmann, Kazunobu Matsuda 283

8. Fragments of the Ratnaketuparivarta
Chanwit Tudkeao 295

9. A Gāndhārī Fragment of the Sarvapuṇyasamuccayasamādhisūtra
Paul Harrison, Timothy Lenz, Lin Qian, Richard Salomon 311

II) Vinaya:

10. More Folios of the Prātimokṣa-Vibhaṅga of the Mahāsāṃghika-Lokottaravādins in Early Western Gupta Script

Masanori Shōno 321


III) Miscellaneous:

11. A Kuṣāṇa Brāhmī Fragment of a Commentary on aśubhabhāvanā and the Formation of the Foetus
Jens W. Borgland, Jens Braarvig

12. Āryaśūra’s Jātakamālā and Another Story Collection 329
Jens-Uwe Hartmann, Kazunobu Matsuda
1
3. A New Fragment of the Jyotiṣkāvadāna 333
Stefan Baums

14. Two Mahādeva Fragments 345
Jonathan A. Silk

15. Another Fragment of Mātṛceṭa’s Prasādapratibhodbhava 351
Jens-Uwe Hartmann

16. Stories about Saṅgha and His Pupil 359
Paul Harrison, Jens-Uwe Hartmann

17. Thirty-two Fragments Written by Bamiyan Kharoṣṭhī Scribe 7 361
Richard Salomon 367

18. Protective Verses for Travellers: a Fragment of the Diśāsauvastikagāthās Related to the Scriptures of the Mahāsāṃghika-Lokottaravādins
Vincent Tournier 407


BIBLIOGRAPHY 439



Description of a fragment: recto and verso, abbreviated r and v, if a fragment is identified A and B, if the beginning cannot be decided
a, b, c, d, etc., for several fragments of one number, e. g., 2378/1/17a, in the uf (unlocalized fragments) sections, e. g. 2378/uf2/1a
Symbols:

( ) restorations in a gap
[ ] damaged akṣara(s)
‹ › omission of (part of) an akṣara without gap in the manuscript
‹‹ ›› interlinear insertion
{ } superfluous (part of an) akṣara
+ one destroyed akṣara

~‹number›+ approximate number of lost akṣaras, e. g. ~60+
.. one illegible akṣara
. illegible part of an akṣara
... indefinite number of lost akṣaras
– – filler mark (used when the surface of the manuscript cannot be written upon)
/// beginning or end of a fragment when broken

  • virāma

’ avagraha, not added in transliteration, but added without brackets in reconstruction (note, however, ’pi and pi)
 ḫ upadhmānīya
 ẖ jihvāmūlīya
❁ double circle with rosette
◯ string hole
◎ concentric circles
 ◊ gap representing punctuation
 | daṇḍa
! punctuation mark in early manuscripts (most of the marks lack the two ornamental dots)
" punctuation mark in early manuscripts
 ◦ punctuation mark
 • punctuation mark
Tibetan transliteration: ṅ, ñ, ź, ś, g-yog
Chinese transcription: Pinyin with tonal diacritics
Note: For the conventions employed for editing Chinese and Tibetan texts see vol. III, p. xxiii- xxiv.
xv
 

 
ABBREVIATIONS

-a – aṭṭhakathā (commentary).

AAWG – Abhandlungen der Akademie der Wissenschaften in Göttingen, philologisch-historische Klasse
Abhidh-k-bh(P) – P. Pradhan (1975), ed., Abhidharmakośabhāṣyam of Vasubandhu, rev. 2nd ed. by A. Haldar (TSWS, 8), Patna.
Abhidh-k-vy – Unrai Wogihara (1932–1936), ed., Sphuṭārthā Abhidharmakośavyākhyā by Yaśomitra, Tokyo.
Abhidharmadīpa – Padmanabh S. Jaini (1977), ed., Abhidharmadīpa with Vibhāṣaprabhāvṛtti, Patna.
Abhis – see AbhisDh.

AbhisDh – Karashima, Seishi (2012), Die Abhisamācārikā Dharmāḥ: Verhaltensregeln für buddhistische Mönche der Mahāsāṃghika-Lokottaravādins, 3 vols. (Bibliotheca Philologica et Philosophica Buddhica, XIII.1–3), Tokyo.
Af – Fujita Kōtatsu (1992–96), ed., The Larger Sukhāvatīvyūha: Romanized Text of the Sanskrit Manuscripts from Nepal, Tokyo.
AF = additional fragment.

AMgD – Ratnachandraji, Shri (1923–38), An illustrated Ardha-Magadhi Dictionary, 5 vols., Agra [Reprint: Tokyo 1977].
Amk – Mahesh Pant (2000), ed., Jātarūpa’s commentary on the Amarakoṣa, 2 vols., Delhi.
AN – Aṅguttara-nikāya. R. Morris/E. Hardy (1885–1900), ed., Aṅguttara-Nikāya (PTS), London [Part I, 2nd edition, Richard Morris, ed., A. K. Warder, rev., Oxford, 1961].

ARIRIAB – Annual Report of the International Research Institute for Advanced Buddhology.
AV(Ś) – Vishva Bandhu (1960–1964), ed., Atharvaveda (Śaunaka) with the Pada-pāṭha and Sāyaṇācārya’s Commentary, Hoshiarpur.
AVPariś – G. M. Bolling and J. von Negelein (1909–10), ed., The Pariśiṣṭas of the Atharvaveda. Volume 1: Text and Critical Apparatus, in 2 Parts, Leipzig.
Avś – J. S. Speyer (1906–09), ed., Avadānaśataka (BB 3), St. Petersburg.
BAI – Bulletin of the Asia Institute.

BB – Bibliotheca Buddhica, St. Petersburg, 1902ff.
BBDD – Paul Harrison and Jens-Uwe Hartmann (2014), ed., From Birch Bark to Digital Data: Recent Advances in Buddhist Manuscript Research. Papers Presented at the Conference Indic Buddhist Manuscripts: The State of the Field, Stanford, June 15-19 2009 (ÖAW, Denkschriften, 460), Wien.
Bcap – de La Vallée Poussin, L., ed., (1901–14), Bodhicaryāvatārapañjikā, Bibliotheca Indica vol. 150, Calcutta.
BEFEO – Bulletin de l’École française d’Extrême-Orient.
BEI – Bulletin d’études indiennes.
BhīVin(Mā-L) – Gustav Roth (1970), ed., Bhikṣuṇī-Vinaya, including Bhikṣuṇī-Prakīrṇaka and a summary of the Bhikṣu-Prakīrṇaka of the Ᾱrya-Mahāsāṃghika-Lokottaravādin (TSWS 12), Patna.

xvii

Bhk – Bhadrakalpikasūtra.

BHS – Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit.

BHSD – Franklin Edgerton (1953), Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit Grammar and Dictionary, vol. 2: Dictionary, New Haven.
BHSG – Franklin Edgerton (1953), Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit Grammar and Dictionary, vol. 1: Grammar, New Haven.
BLSF I – Seishi Karashima and Klaus Wille (2006), ed., Buddhist Manuscripts from Central Asia: The British Library Sanskrit Fragments, Vol. I, Tokyo.
BLSF II – Seishi Karashima and Klaus Wille (2009), ed., Buddhist Manuscripts from Centra Asia: The British Library Sanskrit Fragments, Vol. II.1–2, Tokyo.
BLSF III – Seishi Karashima, Jundo Nagashima and Klaus Wille (2015), ed., Buddhist Manuscripts from Centra Asia: The British Library Sanskrit Fragments, Vol. III.1–2, Tokyo.

BMSC I – Jens Braarvig et. al. (2000), ed., Buddhist Manuscripts in the Schøyen Collection, Vol. I (Manuscripts in the Schøyen Collection, 1.1), Oslo.
BMSC II – Jens Braarvig et. al. (2002), ed., Buddhist Manuscripts, Vol. II (Manuscripts in the Schøyen Collection, 3), Oslo.
BMSC III – Jens Braarvig et. al. (2006), ed., Buddhist Manuscripts, Vol. III (Manuscripts in the Schøyen Collection), Oslo.
BṛSaṃ – Ramakrishna Bhat (1981), ed., Varāhamihira’s Bṛhat Saṃhitā with English Translation, Exhaustive Notes and Literary Comments, 2 vols., Delhi.
BSOAS – Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies.

Bspṭ – Bodhisattvapiṭakasūtra.

BSR – Buddhist Studies Review.

BST – Buddhist Sanskrit Texts.

bv. – bahuvrīhi compound. CAJ – Central Asiatic Journal.

CBETA – Chinese Buddhist Electronic Text Association

CDIAL – Turner, Ralph Lilley, A Comparative Dictionary of the Indo-Aryan Languages, London 1968 / Vol. 2: Indexes Compiled by Dorothy Rivers Turner, London 1969 / Vol. 3: Phonetic Analysis by R. L. Turner and D. R. Turner, London 1971 / Addenda et Corrigenda, ed. J. C. Wright, London 1985.
ChS – Chaṭṭhasaṅgīti Piṭaka.

ChS – Chaṭṭhasaṅgāyana edition (of canonical, postcanonical and non-canonical Pāli texts, publ. by the Buddha Sasana Council, Rangoon, since 1956).
CKI – Andrew Glass and Stefan Baums (ongoing), Corpus of Gāndhārī Inscriptions. http:// gandhari.org/a_inscriptions.php.
CPD – Dines Andersen, Helmer Smith, Hans Hendriksen et al. (1924–), A Critical Pali Dictionary, begun by V. Trenckner, Copenhagen.
CPO – Collection in Private Ownership.

CPS – E. Waldschmidt (1952–60), ed., Das Catuṣpariṣatsūtra: eine kanonische Lehrschrift über die Begründung der buddhistischen Gemeinde (ADAW 1952.2, 1956.1, and 1960.1), Berlin.

D – Derge blockprint version of Tibetan canon.
Dbh – Ryūkō Kondō (1936), ed., Daśabhūmīśvaro nāma Mahāyānasūtraṃ, Tokyo [Reprint: Kyoto 1983].
Dh – Dharmarakṣa.

Dharmaskandha – Siglinde Dietz (1984), ed., Fragmente des Dharmaskandha. Ein AbhidharmaText in Sanskrit aus Gilgit, Göttingen.
Dhp-GK – Dharmapada manuscript from Khotan (“Gāndhārī Dharmapada”; Brough 1962) Dhp-P – Pali Dhammapada (von Hinüber and Norman 1995).
DhVin – The Vinaya of the Dharmaguptakas, T. 1428 Sìfěnlǘ, tr. Buddhayaśas and Zhú Fóniàn , 412 C.E.
DN – Dīgha-nikāya.

DP – Margaret Cone (2001), A Dictionary of Pāli (PTS), Oxford.
DPPN − G.P. Malalasekera, Dictionary of Pali Proper Names, 2 vols., 21960 (11937–38), (PTS).
EĀ – Ekottarikāgama.

EĀ(Trip) – Chandrabhal Tripathi (1995), ed., Ekottarāgama-Fragmente der Gilgit-Handschrift (Studien zur Indologie und Iranistik, Monographie 2), Reinbek.
EB – The Eastern Buddhist.
G – Gāndhārī.

GD – Gāndhārī Dictionary, i.e., Stefan Baums and Andrew Glass (ongoing), A Dictionary of Gāndhārī, http://gandhari.org/dictionary/.
Geiger – Geiger, Wilhelm (1916), Pāli: Literatur und Sprache, Strassburg.
HBK – Hokke Bunka Kenkyū.

HG – Hayashidera Genshu Collection.

HI – Hirayama Ikuo Collection.

IA – Indian Antiquary.

IBK – Indogaku Bukkyōgaku Kenkyū [Journal of Indian and Buddhist Studies], Tokyo.

IIJ – Indo-Iranian Journal.

IndTib – Indica et Tibetica.

ItivC – The Chinese version of the Itivuttaka, Běnshìjīng (T. 17, no. 765, pp. 662b–699b) ItivP – E. Windisch (1889), ed., Itivuttaka (PTS), London.
JA – Journal asiatique.

JAOS – Journal of the American Oriental Society.

JIABS – Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies.

JICABS – Journal of the International College for Advanced Buddhist Studies (then: Journal of the International College for Postgraduate Studies).
JIP – Journal of Indian Philosophy.

JOS – Journal of Oriental Studies.
JPTS – Journal of the Pali Text Society. JRAS – Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society. kdh. – karmadhāraya compound.
Ku – Kumārajīva.

Lokaprajñapti – Kazunobu Matsuda (1982), “Bonbun danpen Loka-prajñapti ni tsuite” 梵文断片 Loka-prajñapti について (“Sanskrit Fragments of the Loka-prajñapti”), Bukkyōgaku 14: 1–21.

Lv – S. Lefmann (1902–08), ed., Lalita Vistara, Halle.

MĀ – Madhyamāgama.

MaVin – Mahāsāṃghika-Vinaya.

Mbh – Vishnu S. Sukthankar et al. (1933–41), ed., The Mahābhārata, Poona.

MIA – Middle Indo-Aryan.

Mmī – Shūyo Takubo (1972), ed., Ārya-Mahā-Māyūrī Vidyā-Rājñī, Tokyo.

Mmk – see Mañjuśrīmūlakalpa.

MN – Majjhima-nikāya; V. Trenckner and Robert Chalmers (1888–99), ed., Majjhima-Nikāya, London (PTS).

Mppś – Mahāprajñāpāramitāśāstra, T. 1509 ,Dàzhìdùlún, see also Lamotte 1949–1980.

MS – Martin Schøyen Collection.

MśVin – The Vinaya of the Mahīśāsakas, T. 1421 .$4, tr. (Zhú

Dàoshēng (Buddhajīva) et al., 424 C.E.

MūVinVibh(Ch.) – The Chinese translation of the Vinayavibhaṅga of the Bhikṣuprātimokṣa of the Mūlasarvāstivādins, T. 1442 *3, tr. 'Yìjìng, around 710 C.E.
MūVinVibh(Tib.) – The Tibetan translation of the Vinayavibhaṅga of the Bhikṣuprātimokṣa of the Mūlasarvāstivādins, ’Dul ba rnam par ’byed pa, tr. Jinamitra and Klu’i rgyal mtshan.

Mv – É. Senart (1882–1897), ed., Le Mahâvastu (Collection d’ouvrages orientaux; Seconde série), Paris.
Mv(J) – The Mahāvastu: Translated from the Buddhist Sanskrit by J. J. Jones, 3 vols. (Sacred Books of the Buddhists, vols. 16, 18, 19), 11949–1956; 21973–1978, 31987, London.

Mvy – R. Sakaki (1926), ed., Mahāvyutpatti, 2 vols., Kyōto.

MW – Monier Monier-Williams (1899), Sanskrit-English Dictionary, Oxford.

NPED – Cone, Margaret, A Dictionary of Pāli, Part I: a–kh, Oxford: The Pali Text Society 2001; Part II: g–n, Bristol: The Pali Text Society 2010.
ÖAW – Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften.

P – Pali.

Pkt – Prakrit.

PIOL – Publications de l’Institut Orientaliste de Louvain.

Poṣ(Hu) – Hu-von Hinüber, Haiyan (1994), Das Poṣadhavastu: Vorschriften für die buddhistische Beichtfeier im Vinaya der Mūlasarvāstivādins (Studien zur Indologie und Iranistik, Monographie 13), Reinbek.

PrMoSū(Mā-L) – N. Tatia (1976), ed., The Prātimokṣasūtram of the Lokottaravādimahāsāṅghika School, Patna.
PrMoSū(Mū/LCh) – Lokesh Chandra (1960), “Unpublished Gilgit Fragments of the Prātimokṣasūtra,” Wiener Zeitschrift für die Kunde Süd- und Ostasiens 4: 1–11.
PrMoSū(Sa. v.Si) – Georg von Simson (1986–2000), ed., Prātimokṣasūtra der Sarvāstivādins. Nach Vorarbeiten von Else Lüders und Herbert Härtel herausgegeben, Teil I: Wiedergabe bisher nicht publizierten Handschriften in Transkription; Teil II: Kritische Textausgabe, Übersetzung, Wortindex sowie Nachträge zu Teil I (ST 11, AAWG 155, 238), Göttingen.

PTS – Pali Text Society.

PTSD – T. W. Rhys Davids and William Stede (1921–25), The Pali Text Society’s Pali-English Dictionary, London.
Pudgalasūtra – Gudrun Melzer (2010), ed., Ein Abschnitt aus dem Dīrghāgama, Teil 2, Dissertation München: 309–343.
PV – Petavatthu, in J. P. Minayeff (1888), ed., Vimānavatthu and Petavatthu (PTS), London.

PW – Petersburg-Wörterbuch: Otto Böhtlingk and Rudolf Roth (1855–75), Sanskrit-Wörterbuch, 7 vols., St. Petersburg.
Ram – P. C. Divanji (1960–75), ed., The Vālmīki-Rāmāyaṇa. Critical Edition, 7 vols., Baroda.
Rkp(Ch1) – Taishō, XIII, No. 397, "#&Dà fāngděng dàjí jīng1+, translated by Dharmakṣema -!2 (385–433 C.E.).
Rkp(Ch2) – Taishō, XIII, No. 402, 10&Bǎoxīng tuóluóní jīng, translated by Prabhākaramitra in 631 C.E.
Rkp(K) – Y. Kurumiya (1978), ed., Ratnaketuparivarta: Sanskrit Text, Kyoto.

Rkp(Sa/2) – Saerji, “More Fragments of the Ratnaketuparivarta (2),” ARIRIAB 14: 35–57.
Rkp(Tib). – Y. Kurumiya (1979), ed., ’Dus pa chen po rin po che tog gi gzuṅs: ’Dus pa chen po dkon mchog dbal źes bya ba’i gzuṅs: being the Tibetan Translation of the Ratnaketuparivarta, Kyoto.

RV – Barend A. van Nooten & Gary B. Holland (1994), ed., Rig Veda – A metrically restored Text with Introduction and Notes, Cambridge Mass..
Sadd – Helmer Smith (1928–66), ed., Saddanīti: La grammaire Palie d’Aggavaṃsa, 6 vols., Lund.
Śārd (M) – Sanjitkumar Mukhopadhyaya (1954), ed., The Śārdūlakarṇāvadāna, Santiniketan.

Śārd (StP) – Tensho Miyazaki et al. (2015), “The Śārdulakarṇāvadāna from Central Asia”, in Buddhist Manuscripts from Central Asia: The St. Petersburg Sanskrit Fragments, ed. S. Karashima and Margarita I. Vorobyova-Desyatovskaya, Tokyo: 1–84.
SaVin – The Vinaya of the Sarvāstivādins, T. 1435 ), tr. Kumārajīva, Puṇyatrāta and Dharmaruci, 404 C.E.
SbÖAW – Sitzungsberichte der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, philosophischhistorische Klasse.
SBV – Raniero Gnoli (1977–78), ed., The Gilgit Manuscript of the Saṅghabhedavastu, Being the 17th and Last Section of the Vinaya of the Mūlasarvāstivādin. 2 vols. (SOR IL), Roma.

SHT – Ernst Waldschmidt et al. (1965–2012), ed., Sanskrithandschriften aus den Turfan-Funden (Verzeichnis der orientalischen Handschriften in Deutschland, X), Wiesbaden/Stuttgart. [Teil 1 (1965): unter Mitarbeit von W. Clawiter und L. Holzmann hrsg. von E. Waldschmidt; Teil 2 (1968): im Verein mit W. Clawiter und L. Sander-Holzmann hrsg. von E. Waldschmidt; Teil 3 (1971): unter Mitarbeit von W. Clawiter und L. Sander-Holzmann hrsg. von E. Waldschmidt; Teil 4 (1980) und 5 (1985): bearbeitet von L. Sander und E. Waldschmidt; Teil 6 (1989), 7

(1995), 8 (2000), 9 (2004): hrsg. von H. Bechert, beschrieben von K. Wille; 10 (2008); 11 (2012): beschrieben von K. Wille.
Śikṣ, – Cecil Bendall, ed., (1902), Çikshāsamuccaya: A Compendium of Buddhistic Teaching, Compiled by Śāntideva, BB 1, St. Petersburg.
Skt – Sanskrit.

SN – L. Feer (1884–98), ed., Saṃyutta-Nikāya (PTS), London [vol. 6, Indexes, by C. A. F. Rhys Davids, 1904].
SOR – Serie Orientale Roma.
SPSS – Sarvapuṇyasamuccayasamādhisūtra.

SRAA – Silk Road Art and Archaeology.
Śrīgh – Singh Sanghasen (1983), ed., A Study of the Sphuṭārthā Śrīghanācārasaṃgraha-ṭīkā, Patna.
SSSūtrasamuccaya.

StII – Studien zur Indologie und Iranistik.
SWTF – Sanskrit-Wörterbuch der buddhistischen Texte aus den Turfan-Funden, begonnen von E. Waldschmidt, ed. H. Bechert, K. Röhrborn, J.-U. Hartmann, bearb. G. von Simson, M. Schmidt, J.-U. Hartmann, S. Dietz, Jin-il Chung, A. Bock-Raming, M. Straube, K. Wille, Göttingen 1973ff.
SyR – Syāmaraṭṭha Tripiṭaka.

T. – %/&Taishō shinshū daizōkyō, ed. J. Takakusu and K. Watanabe, 100 vols., Tokyo, 1924–1934.
T – Tibetan.
Th – Theragāthā.

Tib – Tibetan.
Tōhoku – Ui Hakuju, Suzuki Munetada, Kanakura Yensho & Tada Tokan (1934), ed., A Complete Catalogue of the Tibetan Buddhist Canons (Bkaḥ-ḥgyur and Bstan-ḥgyur), Sendai.
TP – T’oung Pao.

TP – D. T. Suzuki (1955–1961), ed., The Tibetan Tripiṭaka, 168 vols., Kyoto. tp – tatpuruṣa compound.
TSWS – Tibetan Sanskrit Works Series.
uf – “unlocalized fragments” (i.e., minor fragments) in the Martin Schøyen Collection.
Uv – Franz Bernhard (1965–1968), ed., Udānavarga, 2 vols., Göttingen.

Vin – H. Oldenberg (1879–1883), ed., Vinayapiṭaka, 5 vols. (PTS), London.
Vinayasūtra – The Digital Data of Preliminary Transliteration of the Vinayasutra, The Institute for Comprehensive Studies of Buddhism, Taisho University: http://www.tais.ac.jp/related/labo/ sobutsu/sobutsu_book/data/vinayasutra_trlt.pdf.

VinSū(re-ed) – The Institute for Comprehensive Studies of Buddhism, Taisho University, ed., A Preliminary Romanized Version of the Vinayasutra, 2001 [1].

VinVibh(R) – Valentina Rosen (1959), ed., Der Vinayavibhaṅga zum Bhikṣuprātimokṣa der Sarvāstivādins, Sanskritfragmente nebst einer Analyse der chinesischen Übersetzung (Sanskrittexte aus den Turfanfunden 2), Berlin.

VOHD – Verzeichnis der orientalischen Handschriften in Deutschland.
WZKS – Wiener Zeitschrift für die Kunde Südasiens.

YBh – Vidhushekhara Bhattacharya (1957), ed., The Yogācārabhūmi of Ācārya Asaṅga, Calcutta.
ZDMG – Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft.
 

A Possible Sanskrit Parallel to the Pali Uruvelasutta*

Peter Skilling, Saerji and Prapod Assavavirulhakarn

I. Description of the Schøyen fragments
I.1 Transliteration
I.2 Tentative restoration
II. Parallels
II.1. The Pali Uruvela-sutta
II.1.1. Pali text
II.1.2. Translation
II.2. Śamathadeva’s Tibetan citation
II.2.1. Tibetan text
II.2.2. Translation
II.3. Chinese Saṃyuktāgamas
II.3.1. Chinese texts
III. A note on Brahma’s verses III.1. Udānavarga (verses 1–3)
III.2. Mūlasarvāstivādin Vinaya (verses 1–3)
III.2.1. Bhaiṣajyavastu
III.2.2. Vinayavibhaṅga (1)
III.2.3. Vinayavibhaṅga (2)
III.3. Prātimokṣa of the Dharmaguptaka school (verses 1–3)
III.4. Mahāvastu parallel to verse [1]
III.5. Parallel to verse [1] in an unidentified Mahāyāna sūtra fragment from Central Asia
III.6. Citations of the verses in technical literature
III.7. Remarks on the verses
IV. The Perfection of Wisdom and the *Urubilvā-sūtra IV.1. Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā V. Comparison of the versions VI. Notes on terminology
VI.1. The vocabulary of hierarchy: gaurava, pratīśa, sabhayavaśavartin
VI.2. Terminology of respect
VI.3. Terminology of spiritual accomplishment
VII. Conclusion: the *Urubilvā-sūtra and the Urubilvā cycle

  • We are grateful to Prof. Jens Braarvig for giving us the opportunity to study and publish this folio from the Schøyen Collection, and to Martin Schøyen for preserving the fragments and making them freely accessible to scholars. We thank the Khyentse Foundation for the support that has made our research possible, and we deeply appreciate Dzongsar Khyentse Rinpoché’s continued interest in the legacies of the Buddhist textual heritage. Unless otherwise noted, all translations are our own. They are provisional.

I. Description of the Schøyen fragments of the Uruvela-sutta

Three birch-bark fragments preserved among the Buddhist manuscripts in the Schøyen Collection appear to belong to a single incomplete folio. The largest fragment is MS 2381/241, the left-hand side of the folio; since the top and bottom are preserved, we can estimate the width of the folio, and know that the folio has eight lines on each side. MS 2381/186 only preserves the top/bottom portion, and five lines are preserved. MS 2382/uf18/2d is the smallest fragment, containing only two or three lines of text. A page number may be seen on the upper left margin of Schøyen 2381/241; unfortunately the figure is damaged. It appears to read ..71 as the last two digits of a possibly three-digit number. Whatever the case, this suggests that the folio belonged to a relatively long manuscript. A study of the contents allows us to assign Schøyen 2381/186 to the right portion of the folio, and Schøyen 2382/uf18/2d to the middle portion (see below and facsimile). The script is the so-called “Gilgit/Bamiyan Type I” as described by L. Sander, “Paleographical Analysis,” in BMSC I: 298–300.

I.1 Transliteration

MS 2381/241, 2382/uf18/2d, 2381/186; folio ..71 recto

1 brāhmaṇena vā devena vā mā .e + + + + + + + + + + + ///

2 samāpadyeyuḥ evam api kila [bh]. + + + + + + + + /// /// + + + + + .. .. .. + ///

3 ya paryāpaṃnā aparimuktā eva [s]. [t]k. .. + + + + + /// /// .ā || ya .. [b]uddho hy abhijñā .. ///

4 paśamagāminaṃ : ye pi dīrghāyuṣo devā va .. + + + /// /// + + .. thā mṛ + + + + + /// /// + + + + + + + + + .. .. [v]. y. .. + ///

5 va‹‹ḥ›› samayaṃ urubilvāyāṃ viharāmi nadyā neraṃjanāyās tī /// /// + + + .. + + + + + /// /// + + + + + + .. .. bh. kṣava eka[s]ya .. .. ///

6 – – vastya vihāraḥ kaṃ nu khalv ahaṃ anyaṃ śramaṇaṃ vā brā .. /// /// + [t]y. vihareyaṃ .. sya me bhikṣava etad a .. ///

7 – – satkṛtya gurukṛtyopaniḥśṛtya vihareyaṃ || .. + /// /// .. sya na khalu punar ahaṃ taṃ samanupa[śy]. ///

8 sadevamānuṣāsurāyāṃ ātmanaḥ śīla[s].ṃ .ṃ + /// /// tya gurukṛtyopaniśṛtya vihareyaṃ + + /// verso

1 maṇaṃ vā brāhmaṇaṃ vā satkṛtya gurukṛtyopaniśṛ + + + + /// /// .. punar ayaṃ mayā dha .. gaṃ[bh]īro nip[u] + + ///

2 – – – yaṃ nāhaṃ dharmam eva satkṛtya gurukṛtyopani + /// /// .[ā]gatasya idam evaṃrūpaṃ cetasā cetaḥ .. ///

3 .. – – tad bhagavaṃn evam etad sugata : dharmam eva bha[g]. + /// /// + + [n]iḥśṛtya viharatu [•] ye pi te bhūva .. ///

4 – – – – dharmam eva satkṛtvā gurukṛtvā upaniḥśṛtya /// /// + + .. vaṃ bhavi[ṣya]ṃ[ty a]nāgate dhvani tathāga + ///

5 tya vihariṣyaṃti • bhagavān apy etarhi tathāgato rhāṃ [s]. .. /// /// + tkṛtvā guru .. + + + /// /// + + + + + + + + + + [k]. tvā u .. + + ///

6 m ājñāya mahābrahmāṇaś ca yāvatāṃ vi[d]i .. .. + + + + /// /// .. gham apy adrākṣī dha .m. .. ///

7 sam aṃtarīkṣe sthito yena tathāgata .. + + + + + + + /// /// ye ca b[u]d[dh]ā anāgatā[ḥ] .. /// 8 tvā vihareyur viharaṃti ca • a .. + + + + + + + + + ///


I.2 Tentative restoration (beginning from the fifth line)

(ekaṃ bhikṣa)r5vaḥ samayaṃ urubilvāyāṃ viharāmi nadyā neraṃjanāyās tī(re … ’cirābhisaṃbuddho …) bh(i)kṣava ekasya (…)r6vastya vihāraḥ kaṃ nu khalv ahaṃ anyaṃ śramaṇaṃ vā brā(hmaṇaṃ vā satkṛtya gurukṛtyopaniḥśṛ)ty(a) vihareyaṃ (ta)sya me bhikṣava etad a(bhūt …) r7 satkṛtya gurukṛtyopaniḥśṛtya vihareyaṃ || (…)sya na khalu punar ahaṃ taṃ samanupaśy(āmi … sadevake loke samārake sabrahmake saśramaṇabrāhmaṇikāyāṃ prajāyāṃ) r8 sadevamānuṣāsurāyāṃ ātmanaḥ śīlas(a)ṃ(pa)ṃ(nataraṃ samādhisaṃpannataraṃ prajñāsaṃpannataraṃ vimuktisaṃpannataraṃ vimuktijñānadarśanasaṃpannataraṃ … satkṛ)tya gurukṛtyopani‹ḥ›śṛtya vihareyaṃ (… śra)v1maṇaṃ vā brāhmaṇaṃ vā satkṛtya gurukṛtyopani-śṛ(tya vihareyaṃ …) punar ayaṃ mayā dha(rmo) gaṃbhīro nipu(ṇo …)v2yaṃ nāhaṃ dharmam eva satkṛtya gurukṛtyopani(ḥśṛtya vihareyaṃ … tath)āgatasya idam evaṃrūpaṃ cetasā cetaḥ(parivitarkam ājñāya … evam e)v3tad bhagavaṃn evam etad sugata | dharmam eva bhag(avān … satkṛtya gurukṛtyopa)niḥśṛtya viharatu | ye ’pi te ’bhūva(nn atīte ’dhvani tathāgatā arhantaḥ samyaksaṃbuddhās teṣām api bhagavanto) v4 dharmam eva satkṛtvā gurukṛtvā upaniḥśṛtya (…)vaṃ bhaviṣyaṃty anāgate ’dhvani tathāga(tā arhantaḥ samyaksaṃbuddhās teṣām api bhagavanto dharmam eva satkṛtya gurukṛtyopaniḥśṛ)v5tya vihariṣyaṃti | bhagavān apy etarhi tathāgato ’rhāṃ s(amyaksaṃbuddhas tasya api bhagavān dharmam eva sa)tkṛtvā guru(kṛtvā upaniḥśṛtya viharatu … satkṛtvā guru)k(ṛ)tvā u(paniḥśṛtya viharatu …)v6m ājñāya mahābrahmāṇaś ca yāvatāṃ vidi(tvā …)gham apy adrākṣī dha(r)m(a… vaihāya)v7sam aṃtarīkṣe sthito yena tathāgata(s tenāñjaliṃ praṇamya tathāgataṃ gāthayādhyabhāṣata …) ye ca buddhā anāgatāḥ (…)v8tvā vihareyur viharaṃti ca | a(…)


II. Parallels


The main part of the three fragments appears to represent a Sanskrit parallel to the Pali Uruvelasutta; to a short sūtra cited by Śamathadeva in his Essential Commentary on Vasubandhu’s Abhidharmakośa (Abhidharmakośa-upāyikā-ṭīkā); and to two Chinese translations, one in each of the two Chinese Saṃyuktāgamas. It appears that the sūtra proper starts from the fifth line of the recto (samayaṃ urubilvāyāṃ viharāmi); we have been unable so far to identify the first four lines. The fragments do not preserve any title; for convenience we will call the text studied here the *Urubilvā-sūtra.


II.1. The Pali Uruvela-sutta


The Pali Uruvela-sutta is included in the Uruvela-vagga, the third vagga of the Catukka-nipāta of the Aṅguttara-nikāya. Here it opens the vagga, which is so named because this and the following sutta are associated with the town of Uruvelā. The sutta may be named “The first Uruvela-sutta” on the basis of the uddāna at the end of the vagga. The sutta is placed in the Catukka-vagga because it refers to four khandha, that is, sīla, samādhi, paññā, and vimutti (see below).

II.1.1. Pali text ekaṃ samayaṃ bhagavā sāvatthiyaṃ viharati jetavane anāthapiṇḍikassa ārāme. Tatra kho bhagavā bhikkhū āmantesi bhikkhavo ti. Bhadante ti te bhikkhū bhagavato paccasossuṃ. Bhagavā etad avoca ekaṃ samayaṃ bhikkhave Uruvelāyaṃ viharāmi najjā Nerañjarāya tīre Ajapālanigrodhe pathamābhisambuddho tassa mayhaṃ bhikkhave rahogatassa paṭisallīnassa evaṃ cetaso parivitakko udapādi dukkhaṃ kho agāravo viharati appatisso kannu kho aham samaṇaṃ vā brāhmaṇaṃ vā sakkatvā garuṃ katvā upanissāya vihareyyan ti

Tassa mayhaṃ bhikkhave etad ahosi aparipūrassa kho me sīlakkhandhassa pāripūriyā aññaṃ samaṇaṃ vā brāhmaṇaṃ vā sakkatvā garuṃ katvā upanissāya vihareyyaṃ na kho panāham passāmi sadevake loke samārake sabrahmake sassamaṇabrāhmaṇiyā pajāya sadevamanussāya aññaṃ samaṇaṃ vā brāhmaṇaṃ vā attanā sīlasampannataram yam ahaṃ sakkatvā garuṃ katvā upanissāya vihāreyyaṃ aparipūrassa kho me … samādhikkhandhassa … paññākkhandhassa … vimuttikkhandhassa pāripuriyā aññaṃ samaṇaṃ vā brāhmaṇaṃ vā sakkatvā garuṃ katvā upanissāya vihareyyaṃ na kho panāham passāmi sadevake loke samārake sabrahmake sassamaṇabrāhmaṇiyā pajāya sadevamanussāya aññaṃ samaṇaṃ vā brāhmaṇaṃ vā attanā vimuttisampannataram yam ahaṃ sakkatvā garuṃ katvā upanissāya vihāreyyan [ ] ti tassa mayhaṃ bhikkhave etad ahosi yannūnāhaṃ yo pāyaṃ dhammo mayā abhisambuddho

tam eva dhammaṃ sakkatvā garuṃ katvā upanissāya vihareyyan ti.

atha kho bhikkhave Brahmā Sahampati mama cetasā cetoparivitakkam aññāya seyyathāpi nāma balavā puriso sammiñjitaṃ vā bāhaṃ pasāreyya pasāritaṃ vā bāhaṃ sammiñjeyya evam eva Brahmaloke antarahito mama purato pāturahosi.

atha kho bhikkhave Brahmā Sahampati ekaṃsam uttarāsaṅgam karitvā dakkhiṇajānumaṇ-

ḍalaṃ paṭhaviyaṃ nihantvā yenāhaṃ tenañjalim paṇāmetvā maṃ etad avoca.

evam etaṃ Bhagavā evam etaṃ Sugata ye pi te bhante ahesuṃ atītam addhānaṃ arahanto sammāsambuddhā te pi bhagavanto dhammaṃ yeva sakkatvā garuṃ katvā upanissāya vihariṃsu ye pi te bhante bhavissanti anāgatam addhānam arahanto sammāsambuddhā te pi bhagavanto dhammaṃ yeva sakkatvā garuṃ katvā upanissāya viharissanti bhagavā pi bhante etarahi arahaṃ sammāsambuddho dhammaṃ yeva sakkatvā garuṃ katvā upanissāya viharatū ti idam avoca Brahmā Sahampati idam vatvā athāparam etad avoca ye ca atītā sambuddhā ye ca buddhā anāgatā yo cetarahi sambuddho bahunnaṃ sokanāsano [1] sabbe saddhammagaruno vihariṃsu vihāti ca athā pi viharissanti esā buddhāna dhammatā [2] tasmā hi attakāmena mahattam abhikaṅkhatā saddhammo garukātabbo saraṃ buddhāna sāsanan ti | [3] idam avoca bhikkhave Brahmā Sahampati idaṃ vatvā maṃ abhivādetvā padakkhiṇaṃ katvā

tatthevantaradhāyi | idha khvāhaṃ bhikkhave brahmuno ajjhesanaṃ viditvā attano ca paṭirūpaṃ yopāyaṃ dhammo mayā abhisambuddho tam eva dhammaṃ sakkatvā garuṃ katvā upanissāya vihāsiṃ yato ca kho bhikkhave saṅgho pi mahattena samannāgato atha me saṅghe pi gāravo ti.


II.1.2. Translation


Once the Fortunate One was staying in Sāvatthī at Anāthapiṇḍika’s Pleasance in Jeta’s Grove. The Fortunate One addressed the monks: O monks. Sir, the monks replied.

The Fortunate One said:

Once, monks, when I was dwelling at Uruvelā on the bank of the river Nerañjarā at the foot of the goatherd’s banyan tree just after I had realized awakening, when I was alone and withdrawn in contemplation, this thought came to me: He who has no respect and has no reverence dwells in suffering. Now, what samaṇa or brāhmaṇa can I honour and respect and dwell in dependence upon?

I then reflected:

I could honour and respect and dwell in dependence upon another samaṇa or brāhmana in order to fulfill the aggregate of virtue which is not yet fulfilled in myself. But in the world with its deities, its māras, its brahmās, in this human world with its samaṇas and brāhmaṇas, its deities and men, I do not see any other samaṇa or brāhmaṇa who is more perfect in virtue than myself, whom I might honour and respect and dwell in dependence upon. I could honour and respect and dwell in dependence upon another samaṇa or brāhmaṇa in order to fulfill the aggregate of concentration … the aggregate of wisdom … the aggregate of liberation which is not yet fulfilled in myself. But in the world with its deities, its māras, its brahmās, in this human world with its samaṇas and brāhmaṇas, its deities and men, I do not see any other samaṇa or brāhmaṇa who is more perfect in liberation than myself, whom I might honour and respect and dwell in dependence upon.

Then I reflected:

Let me then honour and respect and dwell in dependence upon this very Dhamma to which I have fully awakened. Therupon, Brahmā Sahampati, knowing my thoughts with his mind, disappeared from the Brahma world and reappeared before me, just as [easily] as a muscular man might stretch out his folded arm or fold in his stretched out arm. Brahmā Sahampati arranged his upper robe over one shoulder, knelt with his right knee placed on the ground, raised his hands, palms together, towards me, and said to me:

So it is, Fortunate One. So it is, Sugata. Those who in the past were arahants, truly and fully awakened Buddhas, those Fortunate Ones honoured and respected and dwelt in dependence upon the Dhamma. Those, sir, who in the future will be arahants, truly and fully awakened Buddhas, those Fortunate Ones as well will honour and respect and dwell in dependence upon the Dhamma. The Fortunate One is at present an arahant, a truly and fully awakened Buddha: let him honour and respect and dwell in dependence upon the Dhamma.

Thus spoke Brahmā Sahampati. Having said this, he spoke further:

The Sambuddhas of the past, the Buddhas of the future.

And the Sambuddha of the present, destroyer of sorrow for many:

All dwelled, dwell, and will dwell with respect for the Saddhamma.

This is a natural law for Buddhas.

Therefore, one who seeks the self, who aspires to greatness

Should pay respect to the Saddhamma, recollecting the teachings of the Buddhas.

Thus, monks, spoke Brahmā Sahampati. Having said this, he paid homage to me, circumambulated me, keeping me to his right, and disappeared right there. Here indeed, O monks, having understood Brahmā’s request, realizing that it was appropriate for myself, I dwelt honouring and respecting and dwelling in dependence upon exactly the Dhamma that I had realized. And when, O monks, the monastic order attained the state of greatness, then for me there was respect for the order as well.


II.2. Śamathadeva’s Tibetan citation


We know nothing about the life of Śamathadeva except that he was a bhikṣu born in Nepal (Bal po). His only known work is an important commentary on Vasubandhu’s Abhidharmakośa, preserved in the Tibetan Tanjur: the Abhidharmakośa-upāyikā-ṭīkā. The Upāyikā-ṭīkā was translated by the Indian upādhyāya Jayaśrī and a Tibetan bhikṣu from Khams (eastern Tibet), Shes rab ’od zer, in the “Cool Pavilion” in the north of the *Jarame vihāra, in the centre of the great Kashmiri city “Matchless” (kha che’i groṅ khyer chen po dpe med kyi dbus dza ra me’i gtsug lag khaṅ gi byaṅ phyogs kyi bsil khaṅ). The location of the *Jarame vihāra and the exact date of the translation are unknown; the work might have been translated in the second half of the eleventh century. Śamathadeva cites the complete sūtra with reference to Vasubandhu’s citation of the first of the three verses of the sūtra in the concluding section of the Abhidharmakośabhāṣya, the Pudgalaviniścaya. He gives the abbreviated nidāna “at Śrāvastī” (gleṅ gźi ni mñan du yod pa na’o = śrāvastyāṃ nidānaṃ). The progression of thought is similar to that of the Pali, and the Fortunate One relates the story in the first person. Śamathadeva does not identify the source of his citation.


II.2.1. Tibetan text gleṅ gźi ni mñan du yod pa na’o || de nas bcom ldan ’das kyis dge sloṅ rnams la bos te | dge sloṅ dag dus gcig gi tshe ṅa mṅon par rdzogs par saṅs rgyas nas riṅ por ma lon pa na chu bo nai rañdza na’i ’gram byaṅ chub kyi śiṅ druṅ na gcig pu dben pa naṅ du yaṅ dag ’jog la bźugs pa na | ’di lta bu’i sems la sems kyi yoṅs su rtogs pa skyes te | gus pa med pa ni sdug bsṅal ba ste | bdag po med ciṅ ’jigs par dbaṅ sgyur ba med pa ni don chen po las yoṅs su ñams par ’gyur ro || gus pa daṅ bcas pa ni bde ba ste | bdag po daṅ bcas śiṅ ’jigs pa dbaṅ sgyur ba daṅ bcas pa ni don chen po yoṅs su rdzogs par ’gyur te | gaṅ bdag las tshul khrims phun sum tshogs pa khyad par du ’phags pa’am tiṅ ṅe ’dzin phun sum tshogs pa khyad par du ’phags pa’am | śes rab phun sum tshogs pa khyad par du ’phags pa’am | rnam par grol ba phun sum tshogs pa khyad par du ’phags pa’am | rnam par grol ba’i ye śes mthoṅ ba phun sum tshogs pa khyad par du ’phags pa lha daṅ bcas pa daṅ bdud daṅ bcas pa daṅ tshaṅs pa daṅ bcas pa daṅ dge sbyoṅ daṅ bram ze’i skye dgu’i lha daṅ mi’i ’jig rten na ’ga’ źig yod na bkur stir bya ba daṅ | bla mar bya ba daṅ | rjed par bya ba daṅ | mchod par bya ba bdag gis bkur stir byas | bla mar byas | rjed par byas | mchod par byas te yoṅs su bsten ciṅ gnas par bya’o źes dgoṅs so || yaṅ ’di sñam du | gaṅ yaṅ bkur stir bya ba daṅ | bla mar bya ba daṅ | rjed par bya ba daṅ | mchod par bya ba dag bdag gis bkur stir byas | bla mar byas | rjed par byas | mchod par byas te yoṅs su bsten ciṅ gnas par bya ba gaṅ bdag las tshul khrims phun sum tshogs pa khyad par du ’phags pa’am | tiṅ ṅe ’dzin phun sum tshogs pa khyad par du ’phags pa’am | śes rab phun sum tshogs pa khyad par du ’phags pa’am | rnam par grol ba phun sum tshogs pa khyad par du ’phags pa’am | rnam par grol ba’i ye śes mthoṅ ba phun sum tshogs pa khyad par du ’phags pa lha daṅ bcas pa daṅ | bdud daṅ bcas pa daṅ | tshaṅs pa daṅ bcas pa daṅ | dge sbyoṅ daṅ bram ze’i skye dgu’i lha daṅ mi’i ’jig rten na ’ga’ yaṅ med de | gźan du na ṅas raṅ ñid kyis chos mṅon par mkhyen nas mṅon par rdzogs par saṅs rgyas te gaṅ yaṅ bdag gis chos la bkur stir bya ba daṅ | bla mar bya ba daṅ | rjed par bya ba daṅ | mchod par bya ba dag | bdag gis bkur stir byas | bla mar byas | rjed par byas | mchod par byas nas bsten ciṅ lan maṅ du gnas par bya’o źes dgoṅs so || de nas tshaṅs pa stoṅ gi bdag po’i sems kyis ṅa’i thugs rnam par śes nas skyes bu stobs daṅ ldan pa’i lag pa brkyaṅ ba las bskum pa’am bskums pa las brkyaṅ ba tsam gyis tshaṅs pa’i ’jig rten na mi snaṅ bar gyur te ṅa’i mdun du ’dug nas ’di skad ces smras so || bcom ldan ’das de de bźin no || bde bar gśegs pa de de bźin te | gus pa med pa ni sdug bsṅal ba ste | bdag po med ciṅ ’jigs par dbaṅ sgyur ba med pa ni don chen po las yoṅs su ñams par ’gyur ro || gus pa daṅ bcas pa ni bde ba ste bdag po daṅ bcas śiṅ ’jigs par dbaṅ sgyur ba daṅ bcas pa’i don chen po yoṅs su rdzogs par ’gyur te | gaṅ yaṅ bcom ldan ’das kyis bkur stir bya ba daṅ | bla mar bya ba daṅ | rjed par bya ba daṅ | mchod par bya ba dag bcom ldan ’das kyis bkur stir byas | bla mar byas | rjed par byas | mchod par byas te yoṅs su bsten ciṅ lan maṅ du gnas par bya ba bcom ldan ’das las tshul khrims phun sum tshogs pa khyad par du ’phags pa’am | tiṅ ṅe ’dzin phun sum tshogs pa khyad par du ’phags pa’am | śes rab phun sum tshogs pa khyad par du ’phags pa’am | rnam par grol ba phun sum tshogs pa khyad par du ’phags pa’am | rnam par grol ba’i ye śes mthoṅ ba phun sum tshogs pa khyad par du ’phags pa lha daṅ bcas pa daṅ bdud daṅ bcas pa daṅ tshaṅs pa daṅ bcas pa daṅ dge sbyoṅ daṅ bram ze’i skye dgu’i lha daṅ mi’i ’jig rten na ’ga’ yaṅ med do || gźan du na bcom ldan ’das raṅ ñid kyis chos mṅon par mkhyen nas mṅon par rdzogs par saṅs rgyas te | gaṅ yaṅ bcom ldan ’das kyis chos la bkur stir bya ba daṅ | bla mar bya ba daṅ | rjed par bya ba daṅ | mchod par bya ba dag gis bcom ldan ’das kyis chos la bkur stir mdzad ciṅ bla mar bya ba daṅ | rjed par bya ba daṅ | mchod par mdzad nas brten ciṅ lan maṅ du gnas par mdzod cig | btsun pa de ci’i phyir źe na | gaṅ yaṅ ’das pa’i dus na byuṅ bar gyur pa’i saṅs rgyas bcom ldan ’das de bźin gśegs pa dgra bcom pa yaṅ dag par rdzogs pa’i saṅs rgyas de dag kyaṅ chos ñid la bkur stir bya ba daṅ | bla mar bya ba daṅ | rjed par bya ba daṅ | mchod par bya ba dag gis chos ñid la bkur stir byas | bla mar byas | rjed bar byas | mchod par byas nas ñe bar bsten ciṅ bźugs so || gaṅ yaṅ ma ’oṅs pa’i dus na ’byuṅ bar ’gyur ba’i saṅs rgyas bcom ldan ’das de bźin gśegs pa dgra bcom pa yaṅ dag par rdzogs pa’i saṅs rgyas de dag kyaṅ chos ñid la bkur stir bya ba daṅ | bla mar bya ba daṅ | rjed par bya ba daṅ | mchod par bya ba dag gis bkur stir mdzad pa daṅ | bla mar mdzad pa daṅ | rjed par mdzad pa daṅ | mchod par mdzad ciṅ bsten ciṅ gnas par ’gyur ro || da ltar byuṅ ba’i dus kyi bcom ldan ’das de bźin gśegs pa dgra bcom pa yaṅ dag par rdzogs pa’i saṅs rgyas kyaṅ chos ñid la bkur stir bya ba daṅ | bla mar bya ba daṅ | rjed par bya ba daṅ | mchod par bya ba dag gis bkur stir mdzad ciṅ bla mar mdzad pa daṅ | rjed par mdzad pa daṅ | mchod par mdzad nas bsten ciṅ lan maṅ du bźugs par mdzod cig | gaṅ yaṅ ’das pa’i rdzogs saṅs rgyas || gaṅ yaṅ ma byon saṅs rgyas daṅ || mya ṅan maṅ po ’jig byed pa’i || gaṅ yaṅ da ltar rdzogs saṅs rgyas || [1] de dag thams cad dam chos la || bkur stir mdzad ciṅ ñe bar bźugs || gźan yaṅ gnas par ’gyur ba ste || ’di ni rdzogs saṅs chos ñid yin || [2] de phyir ’dod khams ’di na ni || che ba’i bdag ñid ’dod pa rnams || saṅs rgyas bstan pa rjes dran nas || dam pa’i chos la bkur sti bya || [3] de nas tshaṅs pa stoṅ gi bdag po mṅon par dga’ źiṅ rjes su yi raṅs nas de ṅa’i źabs la spyi bos phyag byas nas mi snaṅ bar gyur to źes gsuṅs so ||


II.2.2. Translation


The nidāna at Śrāvastī. Then the Fortunate One addressed the monks:

O monks, on one occasion, not long after I realized full awakening, when I was staying on the bank of the River Nerañjanā, beneath the Bodhi tree, alone and withdrawn in contemplation, this thought came to me: To be without respect is suffering. To be without reverence and without deference, one fails in the great aim. To have respect is happiness. To have reverence, to have deference, one succeeds in the great aim. If in this world of ascetics and brahmans populated by gods and humans, with its gods, with its māras, with its brahmās, there existed anyone who is endowed with superior ethics, is endowed with superior concentration, is endowed with superior wisdom, is endowed with superior liberation, is endowed with superior insight and vision of liberation, and should be respected, revered, honoured, and venerated, I should dwell resorting to [such a person], respecting, revering, honouring, venerating – so I reflected. I thought further, There is no one in this world of ascetics and brahmans populated by gods and humans, with its gods, with its māras, with its brahmās, who is endowed with superior ethics, who is endowed with superior concentration, who is endowed with superior wisdom, who is endowed with superior liberation, who is endowed with superior insight and vision of liberation, who should be respected, revered, honoured, and venerated, whom I should dwell resorting to, respecting, revering, honouring, and venerating. On the contrary, I should respect, revere, honour, and venerate the Dharma that I have myself directly realized and thereby become fully awakened.

Then Brahmā Sahampati, reading my thoughts with his mind, just as swiftly as a muscular man might fold his extended arm, or stretch out his folded arm, disappeared from the Brahmā world, and seated in front of me said this: Fortunate One, it is so! Sugata, it is so! To be without respect is suffering. To be without reverence and without deference, one fails in the great aim. To have respect is happiness. To have reverence, to have deference, one succeeds in the great aim. In this world of ascetics and brahmans populated by gods and humans, with its gods, with its māras, with its brahmās, there is no one who is endowed with superior ethics, who is endowed with superior concentration, who is endowed with superior wisdom, who is endowed with superior liberation, who is endowed with superior insight and vision of liberation, and should be respected, revered, honoured, and venerated, whom the Fortunate One might dwell resorting to, respecting, revering, honouring, and venerating.

The Fortunate One should respect, revere, honour, and venerate the Dharma and should dwell regularly resorting to [the Dharma]. Why, sir, is that? In the past, the Buddhas, the Fortunate Ones, the Tathāgatas, the arhats, the truly and fully enlightened ones dwelled resorting to, and respected … the very Dharma. In the future, the Buddhas, the Fortunate Ones, the Tathāgatas, the arhats, the truly and fully enlightened ones will dwell resorting to, and respect … the very Dharma. In the present time, the Fortunate One, the Tathāgata, the arhat, the truly and fully enlightened one should dwell regularly resorting to, and respect … the very Dharma.

The Sambuddhas of the past, the Buddhas of the future, the Sambuddha of the present, who destroys much suffering: [1]

All of them respected and relied on the Saddharma

And will dwell doing so: this is the natural law for Sambuddhas. [2]

Therefore, here in this sensual realm, those who seek greatness

Recollecting the teaching of the Buddhas, should pay respect to the Dharma. [3]

Then Brahmā Sahampati, elated and satisfied, paid homage at my feet with his head, and vanished.

II.3. Chinese Saṃyuktāgamas


The progression of the narrative and thought in the two Chinese versions is basically the same as the texts studied so far. They both open with common formula evaṃ mayā śrutaṃ. The prologue is related in the third person: The Fortunate One was staying at Urubilvā on the banks of the Nerañjarā river, just after his awakening. In both cases, he is seated beneath the Bodhi tree as in the Tibetan version, against the Ajapāla fig tree of the Pali version. Neither Chinese version describes the audience or addresses the monks—the narrative is presented as an episode in the life of the Buddha.

II.3.1. Chinese texts

1) Sūtra 1188 (T. 99, pp. 321c18–322a27) 2) Sūtra 101 (T. 100, pp. 410a3–410b10)
7uL¼ 7uL¼
ƒA@欝èܽ³-™Öf‰ª¢Î 9A.»ƒ%ŸÏÒqDu b°iov{¦:;J¦(> 6+xâiod²:c‡¥:c°:

J
(>6iŒ8Ç@:c°:;

J:(>6²ºQ ƒA6ÔÆÓÙ½³e™f_ª¢Î 9A.»ƒ%ŸÏGq=Du b!¦°"…®dWŸkY‘ ¿¦cxÅ׏>«0,²E|7ui –{ã­|IRŸk°Ëx¯Ñ®† cÞºQŒ²E|7uiàR8Ç
Á:Ê ä’Ml‹Ül „ %…dLcVQKt¤Ã ´—´—hO)L°[}ZRT
ËSa=@ Dub %¬| || % y|%y|ä%y|’%yMl‹Ü l %¬:1Ý|:K\ô— ´—hOdLiL±ÐjS#daTˁ °·æ¹›Od%¬ ä’M l‹Ül %¬:dLK\ô
—´—hOvLS#
Dub¦:Ê ä’Ml‹ Ül „%…dLcKVQt
¤Ã´—´—hO)L°[}
ZRTËSa=@iŠ:/g)L>ß9
ÛAmiL±da°[}ZRTË Sa=@c'iB ¶*7UÕ¨/ß4 d/g°[}ZRTËSa=@ʱU %7UÕ¨/ß4d/g°[}ZRT
ËSa=@ DubLcßgLÕ±ÐjT ˁ°µ"Ÿ}B's ¶*ÊA zŽÐjS#Tˁ°Ÿ}£g.U •6ÊA4 ÐjS#£gTˁ°1 Ÿ}"L4±7¶*.U•6ÊAÐ jS#Tˁ°Ÿ}dg
»ƒ?‹%y&’ $h%Ÿ"b7 ^C؜’ N@dAnÈ
P©p 7u%Ÿ 7u©š Ír °iwv{¾?²ºQ
W¸¦:Ê ä’Ml‹Ül „
%d%ŸcKVQt¤Ã´—
´—hO)%Ÿ°[}ZRTË Sa=@iŠ:/g7U>‚9¨/ßo u7UcՁ°[}ZRTËSa=@i c'iB ¶*Ê7UÕ¨/ß4d/g °[}ZRTËSa=@Ê.U7U Õ¨/ß4±d/g°[}ZRTËS a=@%Ÿ4±da/g°[}ZRT
ËSa=@ »ƒ’& $Àh%Ÿ6ÔÆÓÙ½³e ™f_ª¢Î=Dubæ¹%¬| | |ä|’Ml‹Ül 1Ý|:
LK\ô—´—hOiL±S#
§›O:…Li 湶*.U•6 ÊAŽzÐjS#dgTˁ°1Ÿ} "L4±Ñ%AcÕDÐjS#T ˁ°Ÿ}dgƒ’& Du bL±<˜N`XAcƒ’& á 7H^2؜U?Ac3AP%Ÿ ¸
7cbµ7cb
ƒ’ $ ¾éP
¶*¨/ß.UÊA
•6A%Ÿ…ˆ–1Ä
 °gS/g=@
7u°iuoÊAg
ƒ’ $¼Ac¾åžÑžÉ~A
QFN• F¾éP
¶*•6Ê7U.U% A uÊ/߅ˆ¡ zSgv€ ÐjdgS#@£u%ÊAg us“ŸdiÕ5Ÿ}°ag ]±ÌbAc‘Ÿ}T˦g
»ƒ’$çÈ%Ÿ”1ўDÚ=*


III. A note on Brahma’s verses

In all versions studied here, Brahmā Sahampati utters three verses at the end to recapitulate and confirm the message of the sūtra. The Schøyen fragment preserves only part of a sentence stating that [[[Brahmā]]] stood in the air, performed an añjali towards the Tathāgata, and spoke to the Tathāgata in verse, with a fragment of verse [1b]:

(vaihāya)sam aṃtarīkṣe sthito yena tathāgata(s tenāñjaliṃ praṇamya tathāgataṃ gāthayādhyabhāṣata)

... ye ca buddhā anāgatāḥ ... tvā vihareyur viharaṃti ca a ...

The three verses occur as a set in several places in (Mūla-)Sarvāstivādin literature, as well in several combinations elsewhere. In all cases the nidāna is different from that studied above.



III.1. Udānavarga (verses 1–3)


The three verses are included in the Tathāgatavarga of the great compendium of verse, the Udānavarga (XXI 11–13). ye cābhyatītāḥ sambuddhā ye ca buddhā hy anāgatāḥ | yaś cāpy etarhi sambuddho bahūnāṃ śokanāśakaḥ || sarve saddharmaguravo vyāhārṣu viharanti ca | athāpi vihariṣyanti eṣā buddheṣu dharmatā || tasmād ihātmakāmena māhātmyam abhikāṅkṣatā | saddharmo gurukartavyaḥ smaratā buddhaśāsanam || In his Udānavargavivaraṇa, Prajñāvarman gives the following nidāna:

khyim bdag bzaṅ sbyin bcom ldan ’das la chos ñan ciṅ ’dug pa na | ko sa la’i rgyal po gsal rgyal bcom ldan ’das kyi spyan sṅar ’oṅs te | mdun bsu ba ma byas pas de ’khrugs par gyur to || des chos ñan pa’i phyir gsol ba btab pa las ji tsam na tshigs su bcad pa gsum po ’di gsuṅs so || The Gṛhapati Sudatta was sitting, listening to the Dharma from the Fortunate One. Prasenajit, King of Kosala, came into the presence of the Fortunate One. When no one made him welcome, he was perturbed. When he requested to hear the Dharma, [the Fortunate One] spoke these three stanzas. The three verses are included in the Chinese translation of the Udānavarga (T. 212, '$

Chūyàojīng, translated by Zhú Fóniàn). The text states that the verses are from the Saṃyuktāgama, placing the delivery of the sūtra at Śrāvastī in the Jetavana in the pleasure garden of Anāthapiṇdada, as in the Pali Uruvela-sutta. The substance is similar, but the Dharma is expanded to include a list from four smṛtyupasthāna to ārya-aṣṭāṅgamārga. The narrative is concise, and does not mention Urubilvā or Brahmā’s intervention.


III.2. Mūlasarvāstivādin Vinaya (verses 1–3)


The set of three verses occurs three times in the Tibetan translation of the Mūlasarvāstivādin Vinaya, once in the Bhaiṣajyavastu and twice in the Vinayavibhaṅga. As far as we know, no Sanskrit fragments of the relevant passages are preserved or have been identified. The three verses also occur in Yijing’s Chinese translation of the Mūlasarvāstivādin Vinaya[[[vibhaṅga]]] and Bhaiṣajyavastu. The narratives are similar to those of the Tibetan translations.


III.2.1. Bhaiṣajyavastu


The narrative takes place at Rājagṛha. The Nāgarājas Grog mkhar (Valmīka) and Ri bo (Girika) saw Śreṇya Bimbisāra, King of Magadha, from afar, and then said to the Fortunate One: How is it: should one pay homage first to the Saddharma, or to the king? O Nāga kings, one should pay homage to the Saddharma: the Buddhas, the Fortunate Ones, respect the Saddharma, and the arhats as well venerate the Saddharma. Then, on this occasion the Fortunate One recited these verses.


III.2.2. Vinayavibhaṅga (1)


The setting is the Kalandaka residence (Kalandakanivāsa) in the bamboo grove at Rājagṛha (rgyal po’i khab na ’od ma’i tshal ka lan da ka’i gnas). The basic story is the same as that of the Bhaiṣajyavastu, but the Nāgarājas are Ri bo (Giri) and Yig ’ong (Valgu).


III.2.3. Vinayavibhaṅga (2)


The setting is the Jetavana at Śrāvastī, in the pleasure garden of Anāthapiṇḍada. The basic story is the same as in the Bhaiṣajyavastu, but Nāgarājas are dGa’ bo (Nanda) and Nye dga’ (Upananda), while the king is Prasenajit, King of Kosala.


III.3. Prātimokṣa of the Dharmaguptaka school (verses 1–3)


The Chinese translation of the Prātimokṣa of the Dharmaguptaka School includes the three verses near the end (T. 1429, Sìfēnlǜ bǐqīu Jièběn, translated by Buddhayaśas), but combines the first two verses into one verse (six stanzas); the fifth stanza is slightly different, to reflect the context: it states that one should respect śīla, that is, dharma. While other Prātimokṣas – for example those of the Sarvāstivādins, Mūlasarvāstivādins, and Lo kottaravādin Mahāsāṃghikas – have verses at the end, none of those available for consultation has any verses that correspond to “Brahmā’s verses.”


III.4. Mahāvastu parallel to verse [1]


A close parallel to verse [1] occurs in the Mahāvastu in connection with the meeting with Upako Ājīvaka, in the section which Senart called “de la Bodhi au Ṛishipatana,” with a single line which bears a resemblance to v. 2d. ye cābhyatītā saṃbuddhā ye ca buddhā anāgatā | ye caitarahiṃ saṃbuddhā bahūnāṃ śokanāśakā | dharmaṃ deśenti satvānāṃ buddhānaṃ eṣā dharmatā || Although only one verse is a close parallel, and it is addressed to Upaka en route to Vārāṇasī, it is interesting that it is somewhat connected with the awakening cycle.


III.5. Parallel to verse [1] in an unidentified Mahāyāna sūtra fragment from Central Asia A condensation of verse [1], which collapses the first stanza into a single line, occurs in an unidentified Mahāyāna sūtra fragment in “nordturkestanische Brāhmī, Type a” from the “Handschriften-Höhle” at Šorcuq, recovered on the third German Turfan expedition. It is spoken by Brahmā Sabhāvati in a quite different context, and is connected with Prajñāpāramitā: prajñāpāramitā śrutvā uttīrṇa bhavasāgarā ye [c-ābhya]tītā saṃbuddhā bahūnaṃ śokanāśanā.


III.6. Citations of the verses in technical literature


Vasubandhu cites verse [1] in a discussion of the capacity of a continuum called “Buddha” to give rise to unmistaken knowledge by simply adverting. It is this citation of verse [1] that is the occasion for Śamathadeva to cite the sūtra studied here. Another śāstrakāra who resorts to the verses is Bhavya, who cites two verses in his Madhyamakahṛdayatarkajvālā to prove that many Buddhas can appear in many worlds, against the dogma that only one Buddha appears in one world.

III.7. Remarks on the verses

In sum, the verses are either spoken by Brahmā Sahampati (*Urubilvā-sūtra, Uruvela-sutta, Gārava-sutta, Śamathadeva) or by the Buddha (Vinayavibhaṅga, Bhaiṣajyavastu, Mahāvastu). The texts are instructive examples of how verses are put to different purposes in Buddhist literature. In the Uruvela/Urubilvā cycle of texts, Brahmā Sahampati recites the verses to epitomize the message of the sūtra: Buddhas of the past, future, and present all revere the Dharma. This idea is retained in the Mahāvastu but in a different context: and here it is spoken by the Buddha to Upaka, “the passer-by.” In the Dharmaguptaka Prātimokṣa, the verse is adapted to fit the context: it is not the Dharma, but the Prātimokṣa that is emphasized. And in the “nāga narratives” of the Mūlasarvāstivādin Vinaya, the stanzas are used to illustrate the necessity of paying homage to the Dharma before saluting a ruler, a king, thus applying the verse to political/hierarchical ends. Bhavya cites the verses to demonstrate that many Buddhas can arise in many universes. The question of multiple Buddhas in the present is brought up by Buddhaghosa in the Manorathapūraṇī (PTS III, 26.3):

ye ca atītā sambuddhā ye ca buddhā anāgatā yo cetarahi sambuddho bahunnaṃ sokanāsano sabbe saddhammagaruno vihariṃsu vihāti ca athā pi viharissanti esā buddhāna dhammatā

vihaṃsu viharanti cā ti ettha yo vadeyya viharantī ti vacanato paccuppanne pi bahū buddhā ti so bhagavā pi bhante etarahi arahaṃ sammāsambuddho ti iminā vacanena paṭibāhitabbo.

na me ācariyo atthi sadiso me na vijjati sadevakasmiṃ lokasmiṃ n’atthi me paṭipuggalo ti

ādīhi c’assa suttehi aññesaṃ buddhānaṃ abhāvo dīpetabbo.

The Sambuddhas of the past, the Buddhas of the future.

And the Sambuddha of the present, destroyers of sorrow for many:

All dwelled, dwell, and will dwell with respect for the Saddhamma:

This is a natural Law for Buddhas.

If someone [takes up this verse, and] says, “[the expression] ‘they dwelled and dwell’ (viharanti, 3rd pers. pl.) [shows that] according to the word [of the Buddha] there are many buddhas in the present as well,” [then] this should be countered by means of this statement, [by saying,] “The Fortunate One , good sir, [is mentioned in the singular] here as, “at present, the arhat, the truly and fully awakened one.” The non-existence of other buddhas [at present] should be explained by citing other suttas, such as,

I do not have any teacher, there is no one like me: in the world with its devas, I have no counterpart.

For the Mahāvastu to refer to Buddhas of the present in the plural – ye caitarahiṃ saṃbuddhā bahūnāṃ śokanāśakā, dharmaṃ deśenti – is to be expected, since the Mahāsāṃghika school accepted the existence of many Buddhas at the same time in different universes, as did some other schools, as well as Mahāyāna thought in general. For the (Mūla-)Sarvāstivādins, it does not seem doctrinally appropriate, and the Udānavarga stanzas as they stand are ambiguous, with yaś cāpy etarhi sambuddho bahūnāṃ śokanāśakaḥ followed by sarve saddharmaguravo vyāhārṣu viharanti ca. But redaction need not necessarily be doctrinally correct; Siamese liturgical texts, for example, include verses like paccuppannā ca ye buddhā and chants on the “Buddhas of the ten directions.”


IV. The Perfection of Wisdom and the *Urubilvā-sūtra


The event of the *Urubilvā-sūtra seems to have been well known, and its vocabulary was assimilated into other texts. Some passages in the Prajñāpāramitā sūtras evoke the primary concept: that the Buddha himself, or Buddhas in general, pay homage to the Dharma, with the predictable hermeneutic turn that the Dharma means the Perfection of Wisdom. In some cases, such as in the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā, the Fortunate One, addressing Śakra, refers directly to the event with the same vocabulary, and identifies the Dharma explicitly with Prajñāpāramitā.


IV.1. Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā


imam api cārthavaśaṃ saṃpaśyamānasya mamānuttarāṃ samyaksaṃbodhim abhisaṃbuddhasyaitad abhūt; kan nv ahaṃ dharmam upaniśritya vihareyaṃ satkuryāṃ gurukuryāṃ mānayeyaṃ pūjayeyam iti. so ’haṃ kauśika yadā nādrākṣaṃ sadevake loke sabrahmake samārake saśramaṇabrāhmaṇikāyāṃ prajāyāṃ sadevamānuṣāsurāyāṃ sadṛśam. tasya me sadṛśam asamanupaśyamānasya etad abhūt; yan nūnam ahaṃ ya eva mayā dharmābhisaṃbuddhas tam eva dharmaṃ satkuryāṃ gurukuryāṃ mānayeyaṃ pūjayeyam iti, dharmam eva copaniśrāya vihareyam iti. ayam eva kauśika saddharmo yeyaṃ prajñāpāramitā. aham eva kauśika imāṃ prajñāpāramitāṃ satkaromi gurukaromi mānayāmi pūjayāmi satkṛtya gurukṛtya mānayitvā pūjayitvā upaniśrāya ca viharāmi.

It was when I saw just this fact, that upon having awakened to unsurpassed true and complete awakening, I wondered, “Upon what Dharma should I dwell in dependence, [what Dharma] should I respect, should I revere, should I honour, should I worship?” And when, Kauśika, I did not see anyone equal to me in the world with its gods, with its Brahmās, with its Māras, among its people with śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas, with its gods, humans, and titans, I realized, “there is the Dharma to which I have awakened: it is just this Dharma that I should respect, that I should revere, that I should honour, that I should worship. I should dwell in dependence on that very Dharma. This very Saddharma, Kauśika, is the Perfection of Wisdom. Kauśika, I indeed respect, revere, honour, and worship the Perfection of Wisdom. Respecting, revering, honouring, and worshipping [it], I dwell in dependence [on the Perfection of Wisdom].


V. Comparison of the versions


No other fragments apart from 2381/186, 2381/241 and 2382/uf18/2d have been so far identified in the Schøyen collection, and it is impossible to suggest the nature of the collection to which the fragments might have belonged – whether to a Saṃyuktāgama, an Ekottarikāgama, or to some other collection. There do not seem to be any citations of the prose part of the sūtra in known scholastic literature, although, as seen above, the verses are well known, and the possibility remains that our fragment belongs to a citation in a scholastic text, although this strikes us as unlikely.

The Schøyen fragments are clearly not identical to any of the complete versions of the *Urubilvā-sūtra. It describes the Dharma as dharmo gaṃbhīro nipuṇo; although the other versions do not do this, the phrase evokes a famous description of the Dharma in the sūtras that describe the Buddha’s realization, such as the Saṅghabhedavastu, the Catuṣpariṣat-sūtra, and the Pali Ariyapariyesana-sutta (Majjhimanikāya, no. 26). Thus it is a natural connection. The sequence of some parts seems different. In the other versions, the verses follow the prose, and come at the end. In the Schøyen fragments, it seems as if the prose follows the verses.

The Theravādin tradition transmits a second version of the text known as Gārava-sutta, which is the second sutta in the first Vagga of the Brahma-saṃyutta of the Sagātha-vagga of the Saṃyutta-nikāya. This text takes its name from the uddāna at the end of the Vagga. It is includeed in the Brahma-saṃyutta because, as in the Uruvela-sutta, at the end of the sutta Brahmā Sahampati descends from his heaven, confirms and applauds the Buddha’s thought, and pronounces three verses.

The two Pali versions are not quite identical. The Gārava-sutta opens with “once I have heard” (evaṃ me sutaṃ): the Fortunate One was staying at Uruvelā on the banks of the Nerañjarā river under the Ajapāla fig tree, just after his awakening. As seen above, the Uruvela-sutta does not begin with evaṃ me sutaṃ. It opens by stating that the Fortunate One was staying at Sāvatthī in the Jetavana in the pleasure garden of Anāthapiṇdika; he then addressed the monks, and related the events that had occurred after his awakening. That is, the significant difference between the two suttas is that in the Gārava-sutta the narrator –

the presumed Ānanda at the First Communal Recitation – relates the events, referring to the Buddha in the third person, but in the Uruvela-sutta the Fortunate One relates the events to the assembled monks himself, in the first person. This places the Uruvela-sutta among the “autobiographical discourses” in which the Buddha relates episodes of his own life and career, specifically among the relatively small number of texts that take place just after the awakening. Pali sources use the phrase paṭhamābhisambuddha for Buddha’s recent achievement of awakening. This is the usual form in Pali, for example at the beginning of the post-awakening cycle in Vinaya Mahāvagga I or in the openings of suttas 1–4 in the Bodhivagga of the Udāna. Śamathadeva has mṅon par rdzogs par saṅs rgyas nas riṅ por ma lon pa na = acirābhisambuddha, agreeing with the Sanskrit of the Catuṣpariṣatsūtra and the Saṅghabhedavastu. Both Chinese Saṃyuktāgamas have chéngfó wèijǐu, suggesting an underlying Sanskrit acirābhisambuddha. In addition, Chinese also has ( chūchéng zhèngjué, indicating prathamābhisambuddha. In the Schøyen fragments, the expression in question is not available.

In both Pali versions, the Buddha is sitting under the Ajapāla fig tree. Śamathadeva has instead Bodhi tree (byaṅ chub kyi śing druṅ = bodhimūle),55 as in the two Chinese Saṃyuktāgamas. Unfortunately, the Schøyen fragment is broken at the corresponding place. Another major difference is that the Gārava-sutta ends with the verses spoken by Brahmā Sahampati, while the Uruvela-sutta goes on to state that Brahmā then paid homage and vanished, after which the Fortunate One reflected further on the need for respect to the saṃgha, the community of monks, when it grew to size. The latter statement is not found in the Tibetan or Chinese versions.

The Schøyen fragment is addressed to the monks and is related in the first person; it thus agrees with the Uruvela-sutta and Śamathadeva. We therefore place it as a parallel to the Uruvelasutta rather than the Gārava-sutta.

As seen above, the Uruvela-sutta is placed in the Catukka-vagga because it refers to four khandha, that is, sīla, samādhi, paññā, and vimutti. This is a less common enumeration of what are normally five khandha, ending with vimuttiñāṇadassana. The other versions of the sūtra, including the Pali Gārava-sutta, give all five attainments, but describe them differently: – Śamathadeva gives five tshul khrims phun sum tshogs pa, etc., which should translate a form of sampad, while one Chinese Saṃyuktāgama also gives an equivalent of sampad (jǜzú). As in Pali, Sanskrit Buddhist texts regularly have skandha here, and the forms with sam-pad seem unusual, although there are instances with sampanna, as for example in the Dhvajāgra-mahāsūtra.

In the prose, Śamathadeva and the Uruvela-sutta refer to the Sambuddhas of the three times rather than Tathāgata. The variation between “Tathāgata” and “Sambuddha” as a subject is common in different recensions of Āgama materials, although it has not been adequately analysed.


VI. Notes on terminology


There are three aspects of terminology that we propose to discuss here. First is a vocabulary of hierarchy, with a string of three terms which is prominent in the *Urubilvā-sūtra and a few other texts, but otherwise rare. Second is a terminology of respect, seen in a sequence of verbs which are near synomyms. Third is a terminology of spiritual accomplishment, which combines with the first in particular in many of the texts.


VI.1. The vocabulary of hierarchy: gaurava, pratīśa, sabhayavaśavartin


A string of absolutives satkṛtya(-tvā) gurukṛtya(-tvā) upaniḥśṛtya(-tvā) occurs with forms of vi- √har several times in the Schøyen fragment. The parallel texts have in addition a string of adverbial phrases (sa/-a)gaurava, (sa/-a)pratīśa, (-a)sabhayavaśavartin, which is not available in the Schøyen fragment. This terminology links the *Urubilvā-sūtra to several other texts, which might be called a cycle on the importance of respect. Here we may cite the exemplary jātaka of the partridge, which inculcates an ideology of respect and hierarchy within the monastic order. This story is known in Pali versions, both in the Vinaya Cullavagga and the Jātaka-aṭṭhakathā, and in the Gilgit Śāyanāsanavastu. These texts, as do several suttas in the Pali Aṅguttara-nikāya, use some of the same strings of phrases. There include, especially:

Pali Sanskrit Śayanāsanavastu Tibetan


Śayanāsanavastu Śamathadeva

sagārava agārava sagaurava agaurava bkur sti daṅ bcas bkur sti med gus pa daṅ bcas pa gus pa med pa

sapatissa apatissa sapratīśā apratīśā źe sa daṅ bcas źe sa med bdag po daṅ bcas bdag po med

sabhāgavutti asabhāgavutti sabhayavaśavartin abhayavaśavartin ’jigs pa’i dbaṅ du ’gro ba daṅ bcas pa

’jigs pa’i dbaṅ du mi ’gro ba ’jigs pa dbaṅ sgyur ba daṅ bcas pa

’jigs par dbaṅ sgyur ba med pa


An important source for the Pali items is the Tittirajātaka, which occurs in the Cullavagga of the Vinaya and in the Jātaka; its parallel in the Sanskrit Śayanāsana-vastu also uses the terms (see above). The Pali Jātaka version uses the phrases agāravā appatissā/sagāravā sappatissā with forms of vi- √har several times. The third member of our group is used in both the Vinaya and the Jātaka in both the negative – Vinaya 161.21, Jātaka 218.14, 218, 20, agāravā appatissā asabhāgavuttino – and with sa- – Vinaya 162.7, 14, Jātaka 219.15, sagāravā sappatissā sabhāgavuttino. The Index of the Jātaka records the terms for the Tittira-jātaka and nowhere else.

The first two terms do not pose any real problem: gaurava occurs alone in various contexts, and (sa/a)-gaurava and (sa/a)-pratīśa occur together regularly in a number of sources. In Pali (sa/ a)-gāravo (sa/a)-ppaṭissavo are often used together. The inclusion of (sa/a)-bhayavaśavartin/ (a)sabhāgavutti as a third and final term seems rare, and the compound rarely if ever stands alone. Its use appears to be limited to the texts noted here, and it seems to have been retired from active use quite early.

It is this third term that is difficult: how to understand and reconcile the Sanskrit sa/abhayavaśavartin and the Pali sabhāgavutti? Unfortunately, the term does not seem to be attested in any other Prakrit or Sanskrit forms, so our investigation is restricted to Sanskrit and Pali sources and Tibetan and Chinese translations. If the terms were in vernacular usage in early northern India, we have no other evidence at present. Therefore the examination of the textual context is important.

It is not difficult to see a connection between Pali sabhāgavutti and Sanskrit sabhayavaśavartin, but at present we cannot explain the evolution of the two forms.

As seen above, sabhayavaśavartin occurs in the Gilgit Śayanāsanavastu; a similar narrative structure and content is found in the Chinese Saṃyuktāgama, sūtra no. 1242 (T. 99, pp. 340c3–20), which was translated by Guṇabhadra in the first half of the fifth century. It has a phrase “awe (deference, fear), following another’s authority” ("&wèishèn suítāzìzaì), which points to Sanskrit sabhayavaśavartin. There is no Pali counterpart to compare. The Pali seems to make sense: commenting on Aṅguttara-nikāya III 14.23, Buddhaghosa says asabhāgavuttiko ti asabhāgata visasisāya jīvitavuttiyā samannāgato (Manorathapūraṇī [PTS] III 228, 2). CPD, I 499, defines asabhāga as “not being in community with others, unsociable,” and refers to the Aṅguttara-nikāya passage just quoted. For asabhāgavutti, it cites Vinaya I 84, 6, in which the sāmaṇeras dwell agāravā appatissā asabhāgavuttino towards the bhikkhus, and asabhāgavuttika, “not living in mutual courtesy,” from the Cullavagga and Aṅguttara-nikāya passages referred to above.

Is the Pali then the “correct” form, the oldest form, which somehow became corrupted and obscured in the process of Sanskritisation? Or is the Pali a rationalization of an early Prakrit form, a predecessor of both the Pali and the Sanskrit forms? It is possible to explain Pali vutti becoming vartin, or also vṛtti. As for bhāga – can there have been changes in the consonant, g > j > y, or y > j > g?

The Gilgit Ekottarikāgama uses the three terms in the definition of the “community that does not have a superior and the community that does have a superior” (anagravat-parṣat and agravatī parṣat; the Pali parallel, Aṅguttara-nikāya II 70–71 does not use the terms. The Abhidharmakośa uses the phrases to define ahrī: ahrīr agurutā, which the Bhāṣya explains as follows: guṇeṣu guṇavatsu cāgauravatā apratīśatā abhayam avaśavartitā [read abhayavaśavartitā] āhrīkyaṃ gauravapratidvandvo dharmaḥ.


VI.2. Terminology of respect


As seen above, the Schøyen fragment only preserves a string of phrases, which occurs several times: satkṛtya(-tvā) gurukṛtya(-tvā) upaniḥśṛtya(-tvā) with forms of vi-√har. In addition to the string gaurava pratīśa sabhayavaśavartin, which we have already discussed, the Pali Uruvelasutta has the phrase sakkatvā garuṃ katvā upanissāya + vi-√har as parallel to the Schøyen fragment. Śamathadeva has bkur stir byas | bla mar byas | rjed par byas | mchod par byas te yoṅs su bsten ciṅ gnas par bya ba. This represents a longer sequence, probably with four terms: satkṛtya gurukṛtya mānayitvā pūjayitvā upaniśrāya ca + vi-√har. The Chinese Saṃyuktāgama (T. 99, sūtra no. 1188), !# % gōngjìng zōngzh ng fèngshì g ngyǎng yībǐérzhù, also points to the same four terms. The Buddha’s reflections on respect at Urubilvā may be further amplified by reference to a sutta in the Puggala-vagga of the Tikanipāta of the Aṅguttara-nikāya. Here the Buddha defines three types of persons (puggala): one who is not to be resorted to or sought out, one who is to be resorted to and sought out, and one who is to be resorted to and sought out by paying respect and homage. The first individual is inferior in virtue, concentration, and wisdom. The second individual is one’s equal in virtue, concentration, and wisdom. The third individual is a person who is one’s better in all three qualities: to such a person one should resort. Why?

iti aparipūraṃ vā sīlakkhandhaṃ paripūressāmi paripūraṃ vā sīlakkhandhaṃ tattha tattha paññāya anuggahessāmi, aparipūraṃ vā samādhikkhandhaṃ paripūressāmi paripūraṃ vā samādhikkhandhaṃ tattha tattha paññāya anuggahessāmi, aparipūraṃ vā paññākkhandhaṃ paripūressāmi paripūraṃ vā paññākkhandhaṃ tattha tattha paññāya anuggahessāmi, ...

Because I will fulfill the aggregate of virtue which is not yet fulfilled, and I will utilize the aggregate of virtue wisely, as occasion demands; I will fulfill the aggregate of concentration which is not yet fulfilled, and I will utilize the fulfilled aggregate of concentration wisely as occasion demands; I will fulfill the aggregate of wisdom which is not yet fulfilled, and I will utilize the aggregate of wisdom wisely, as occasion demands; ... The importance of these ideas is seen in their import into the Perfection of Wisdom thought. The Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā has the same four terms: aham eva kauśika imāṃ prajñāpāramitāṃ satkaromi gurukaromi mānayāmi pūjayāmi satkṛtya gurukṛtya mānayitvā pūjayitvā upaniśrāya ca viharāmi. kau śi ka de ltar ṅa ñid kyaṅ śes rab kyi pha rol du phyin pa ’di la rim gror byed | bkur stir byed | bsti staṅ du byed | mchod par byed de | de ltar rim gro daṅ | bkur sti daṅ | bsti staṅ daṅ | mchod pa byas śiṅ rnam par spyod na | A study of the terms for respect and worship in Buddhist texts is a desideratum, but it is beyond the scope of this essay.


VI.3. Terminology of spiritual accomplishment


Pali and Sanskrit texts present an interdependent sequence of spiritual development that leads to achievement of nirvana, starting with respect. There is some variation in the terms, but the general structure of the development is the same. The Śayanāsanavastu states that respect for fellows in the holy life (sabrahmacārin) leads to fulfillment of the āsamudācārika dharma;72 this leads to fulfillment of the śaikṣadharma, which in turn leads to fulfillment of the aggregates of virtue, concentration, wisdom, liberation, and knowledge and vision of liberation – it is then possible for a monk to realize nirvana without attachment. The Fortunate One concludes: Therefore, O monks, you should train thus: we should dwell with respect, with reverence, with deference towards fellows in the holy life, senior, middling, and new.

[Śayanāsanavastu, Sanskrit from Gilgit]

tasmāt tarhi bhikṣavaḥ sagauravā viharata sapratīśāḥ sabhayavaśavartinaḥ sabrahmacāriṣu sthavireṣu madhyeṣu navakeṣu. tat kasya hetoḥ. sa tāvad bhikṣavo bhikṣur agauravo viharann apratīśaḥ abhayavaśavartī sthavireṣu madhyeṣu navakeṣu āsamudācārikān dharmān paripūrayiṣyati nedaṃ sthānaṃ vidyate; āsamudācārikān dharmān aparipūrya śaikṣān dharmān paripūrayiṣyati nedaṃ sthānaṃ vidyate; śaikṣān dharmān aparipūrya śīlaskandhaṃ samādhiskandhaṃ prajñāskandhaṃ vimuktiskandhaṃ vimuktijñānadarśanaskandhaṃ paripūrayiṣyati nedaṃ sthānaṃ vidyate; vimuktijñānadarśanaskandhaṃ aparipūryānupādāya parinirvāsyati nedaṃ sthānaṃ vidyate. sa tāvad bhikṣavo bhikṣuḥ sagauravo viharan sapratīśaḥ sabhayavaśavartī brahmacāriṣu sthavireṣu madhyeṣu navakeṣu āsamudācārikān dharmān paripūrayiṣyati sthānaṃ etad vidyate; āsamudācārikān dharmān paripūrya śaikṣān dharmān paripūrayiṣyati sthānaṃ etad vidyate; śaikṣān dharmān paripūrya śīlaskandhaṃ samādhiskandhaṃ prajñāskandhaṃ vimuktiskandhaṃ vimuktijñānadarśanaskandhaṃ paripūrayiṣyati sthānaṃ etad vidyate; vimuktijñānadarśanaskandhaṃ paripūryānupādāya parinirvāsyati sthānaṃ etad vidyate; tasmāt tarhi bhikṣava evaṃ śikṣitavyam: yat sagauravā vihariṣyāmaḥ sapratīśāḥ sabhayavaśavartinaḥ sabrahmacāriṣu sthavireṣu madhyeṣu navakeṣu; ity evaṃ vo bhikṣavaḥ śikṣitavyam.


[Śayanāsanavastu, Tibetan translation]


Gnas lam gyi gźi, D 1, ’dul ba, ga, 192a7–b7 = P 1030, ’dul ba, ṅe, 183b7–184a7 dge sloṅ dag de lta bas na tshaṅs pa mtshuṅs par spyod pa’i gnas brtan daṅ | bar ma daṅ | gsar bu rnams la bkur sti daṅ bcas | źe sa daṅ bcas | ’jigs pa’i dbaṅ du ’gro ba daṅ bcas pas gnas par bya’o | dge sloṅ dag de ci’i phyir źe na | re źig dge sloṅ de gnas brtan daṅ | bar ma daṅ | gsar bu rnams la bkur sti med | źe sa med ciṅ ’jigs pa’i dbaṅ du mi ’gro bas gnas na kun du spyod pa’i chos yoṅs su rgyas par ’gyur ba’i gnas ’di med do || kun du spyod pa’i chos yoṅs su ma rgyas par slob pa’i chos rnams yoṅs su rgyas par ’gyur ba’i gnas ’di med do || slob pa’i chos rnams yoṅs su ma rgyas par tshul khrims kyi phuṅ po daṅ | tiṅ ṅe ’dzin gyi phuṅ po daṅ | śes rab kyi phuṅ po daṅ | rnam par grol ba’i phuṅ po daṅ | rnam par grol ba’i ye śes mthoṅ ba’i phuṅ po yoṅs su rgyas par ’gyur ba’i gnas ’di med do || rnam par grol ba’i ye śes mthoṅ ba’i phuṅ po yoṅs su ma rgyas par len pa med par yoṅs su mya ṅan las ’da’ bar ’gyur ba’i gnas ’di med do || dge sloṅ dag re źig dge sloṅ de tshaṅs pa mtshuṅs par spyod pa’i gnas brtan daṅ | bar ma daṅ | gsar bu rnams la bkur sti daṅ bcas | źe sa daṅ bcas | ’jigs pa’i dbaṅ du ’gro ba daṅ bcas pas gnas na kun du spyod pa’i chos yoṅs su rgyas bar ’gyur ba’i gnas ’di yod do || kun du spyod pa’i chos yoṅs su rgyas na slob pa’i chos rnams yoṅs su rgyas bar ’gyur ba’i gnas ’di yod do || slob pa’i chos rnams yoṅs su rgyas na tshul khrims kyi phuṅ po daṅ | tiṅ ṅe ’dzin gyi phuṅ po daṅ | śes rab kyi phuṅ po daṅ | rnam par grol ba’i phuṅ po daṅ | rnam par grol ba’i ye śes mthoṅ ba’i phuṅ po yoṅs su rgyas par ’gyur ba’i gnas ’di yod do || rnam par grol ba’i ye śes mthoṅ ba’i phuṅ po yoṅs su rgyas na len pa med par yoṅs su mya ṅan las ’das par ’gyur ba’i gnas ’di yod do || dge sloṅ dag de lta bas na ’di ltar bslab par bya ste | gnas brtan daṅ | bar ma daṅ | gsar bu rnams la bkur sti daṅ bcas | źe sa daṅ bcas | ’jigs pa’i dbaṅ du ’gro ba daṅ bcas pas gnas par bya ste | dge sloṅ dag khyed kyis de lta bu la bslab par bya’o ||


VII. Conclusion: the *Urubilvā-sūtra and the Urubilvā cycle

The *Urubilvā-sūtra belongs to the cycle of texts in which the Buddha as teacher recalls and relates events that took place in the vicinity of Urubilvā or, in Pali, Uruvelā. The cycle includes events before the awakening, the awakening itself, and events after the awakening. Our sūtra belongs to the last cycle, the events in the vicinity of the bodhi-tree in the several weeks after the awakening, before the newly awakened one set out for Vārāṇasī to begin his teaching career. Primary sources for these events include the Vinayas (Pali Mahāvagga, Sanskrit Mūlasarvāstivāda Saṅghabhedavastu, etc.) and sūtras of the several schools (for example, Catuṣpariṣat-sūtra); the chronologies of his movements do not always agree, and later texts extend the cycle with further events. These details need not concern us here. What does concern us here is this: that the story studied in this paper differs from the well-known account of Brahmā Sahampati’s intervention after the Awakening related in the various Vinayas. That story, of the awakened one’s hesitation to teach his newly found Dharma, and of how Brahmā convinces him to do so, is well known as the brahmādhyeṣana, “Brahmā’s entreaty [to the Buddha to teach].” Embedded references to the event are part of modern Thai liturgy. In contrast, although Brahma’s ratification in our text of the Fortunate One’s decision to take the Dharma as his resort belongs to the same textual and metaphysical genre, it is not included in any of the Vinaya narratives.


BIBLIOGRAPHY

Allon, Mark (2001), with a contribution by Andrew Glass, Three Gāndhārī Ekottarikāgama-Type Sūtras: British Library Kharoṣṭhī Fragments 12 and 14 (Gandhāran Buddhist Texts, 2), Seattle.
— (2009), “A Gāndhārī Version of the Story of the Merchants Tapussa and Bhallika,” BAI 23: 9– 19.
Allon, Mark, and Richard Salomon (2000), “Kharoṣṭhī fragments of a Gāndhārī version of the Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra,” BMSC I: 243–273.
— (2010), “New Evidence for Mahāyāna in Early Gandhāra,” EB 41: 1–22.
Allon, Mark, Richard Salomon, Geraldine Jacobsen, and Ugo Zoppi (2006), “Radiocarbon Dating of Kharoṣṭhī Fragments from the Schøyen and Senior Manuscript Collections,” BMSC III: 279–291.
Amano, Kyoko (2009), Maitrāyaṇī Saṁhitā I–II: Übersetzung der Prosapartien mit Kommentar zur Lexik und Syntax der ӓlteren vedischen Prosa (Münchner Forschungen zur historischen Sprachwissenschaft, 9), Bremen.
Anālayo, Bhikkhu (2011), A Comparative Study of the Majjhima-nikāya, Taipei (Dharma Drum Buddhist College Research Series 3, II).
Aruṇanibhāguṇākara et al., ed., (1980), Syāmaraṭṭhassa Tepiṭakaṃ, Suttantapiṭake Aṅguttaranikāyassa dutiyo bhāgo, Catukkanipāta, revised by a supervisory editorial board of Theras (ganthādhikārattherehi) at Mahamakuṭa, Bangkok: Mahamakutarājavidyālaya, Siamese Buddhist Era 2523 [CE 1980].
Asano, Morinobu (1995), “Sūtrasamuccaya to Śikṣāsamuccaya—inyō-kyōten yori mita eikyōkankei [The Sūtrasamuccaya and the Śikṣāsamuccaya],” Bukkyōgaku 37: 56–74.
Ashikaga, Atsuuji (1965), Sukhāvatīvyūha, Kyoto.
Bailey, H. W. (1946), “Gāndhārī,” BSOAS 11: 764–797.
Bakker, Hans (2007), “Monuments to the Dead in Ancient North India,” IIJ 50: 11–47.
Balk, Michael (1984), Prajñāvarman’s Udānavargavivaraṇa, Transliteration of Its Tibetan Version, I, Indica et Tibetica, Bonn.
–– (1988), Untersuchungen zum Udānavarga, unter Berücksichtigung mittelindischer Parallelen und eines tibetischen Kommentars, Bonn. Reprint as: IndTib 53 (2011), Marburg.
Bareau, André (1959), “Constellations et divinités protectrices des marchands dans le bouddhisme ancien,” JA 247: 303–309.
–– (1963), Recherches sur la Biographie du Buddha dans les Sūtrapiṭaka et les Vinayapiṭaka anciens: de la quête de l’éveil à la conversion de Śāriputra et Maudgalyāyana, Paris (Publications de l’École française d’Extrême-Orient volume LIII).
Baums, Stefan (2002), “Jyotiṣkāvadāna,” BMSC II: 287–302.
–– (2006), “Bemerkungen zum Ordinalzahlsystem der Gāndhārī,” Jaina-Itihāsa-Ratna: Festschrift für Gustav Roth zum 90. Geburtstag, ed. Ute Hüsken, Petra Kieffer-Pülz and Anne Peters (IndTib, 47), Marburg: 33–44.
–– (2009), A Gāndhārī Commentary on Early Buddhist Verses: British Library Kharoṣṭhī Fragments 7, 9, 13, and 18, PhD dissertation, Department of Asian Languages and Literature, University of Washington, Seattle.
–– (2012), “Struggling with the Spheres: Interpretations of the Formless Attainments in the Buddhist Borderlands,” paper read at 222th annual meeting of the American Oriental Society, Boston, March 16, 2012.
Baums, Stefan, Andrew Glass (2002a), A Dictionary of Gāndhārī. https://gandhari.org/dictionary.
–– (2002b), Catalog of Gāndhārī Texts. https://gandhari.org/catalog.
Beal, Samuel (1884), Si-yu-ki. Buddhist Records of the Western World, 2 vols., London.
Bechert, Heinz (1980), “Allgemeine Bemerkungen zum Thema ‘Die Sprache der ӓltesten buddhistischen Überlieferung’,” Die Sprache der ӓltesten buddhistischen Überlieferung / The Language of the Earliest Buddhist Tradition (Symposien zur Buddhismusforschung, II), ed. H. Bechert, Göttingen.
–– (1988), “Alte Veḍhas” im Pāli-Kanon: Die metrische Struktur der buddhistischen Bekenntnisformel, Nachrichten der Akademie der Wissenschaften in Göttingen, Phil.-hist. Kl., Jg. 1988, Nr. 4.
Bernhard, Franz (1965–8), Udānavarga, 2 vols (AAWG, 54 / Sanskrittexte aus den Turfanfunden, X), Göttingen.
Bhandarkar, R. G. (1929), Collected Works of Sir R. G. Bhandarkar, Vol. IV, ed. Narayan Bapuji Utgikar (Government Oriental Series, Class B, No. 4), Poona.
Bhattacharya, Vidhushekhara (1957), The Yogācārabhūmi of Ācārya Asaṅga, Calcutta.
Bisschop, Peter (2006), Early Śaivism and the Skandapurāṇa: Sects and Centres, Groningen.
Bisschop, Peter, and Arlo Griffiths (2007), “The Practice Involving the Ucchuṣmas (Atharvavedapariśiṣṭa 36),” StII 24: 1–46.
Bodhi, Bhikkhu, tr., (2000) The Connected Discourses of the Buddha: A New Translation of the Saṃyutta Nikāya, vol. I, Boston.
–– (2012), The Numerical Discourses of the Buddha, A Translation of the Aṅguttara Nikāya, Boston.
Boucher, Daniel (2005), Review of Allon (2001), IIJ 48: 289–95.
–– (2006), “Dharmarakṣa and the transmission of Buddhism to China,” Asia Major 19: 13–37.
Boyer, A. M., E. J. Rapson, and E. Senart (1927), Kharoṣṭhī Inscriptions Discovered by Sir Aurel Stein in Chinese Turkestan, part II, Oxford.
Boyer, A. M., E. J. Rapson, E. Senart (1920–9), Kharoṣṭhī Inscriptions Discovered by Sir Aurel Stein in Chinese Turkestan, 3 pts. (pt. 3 by E. J. Rapson and P. S. Noble), Oxford.
Braarvig, J. (1985), “Dhāraṇī and Pratibhāna: Memory and Eloquence of the Bodhisattvas,” JIABS 8(1): 17–29.
— (1993), The Akṣayamatinirdeśasūtra, vols. I–II, Oslo.
Braarvig, Jens, and Ulrich Pagel (2006), “Fragments of the Bodhisattvapiṭakasūtra,” BMSC III: 11–88.
Braarvig, Jens, Fredrik Liland et al. (forthcoming), The Lhasa MS of the Bodhisatvapiṭaka.
Brough, John (1954), “The Language of the Buddhist Sanskrit Texts,” BSOAS 16, 2: 351–375.
— (1962), The Gāndhārī Dharmapada (London Oriental Series, 7), London.
— (1977), “The Arapacana syllabary in the old Lalita-vistara,” BSOAS 40: 85–95.
Bühler, G. (1883), “On the Relationship between the Andhras and the Western Kshatrapas,” Indian Antiquary 12: 372–374.
Burrow, T. (1937), The Language of the Kharoṣṭhi Documents from Chinese Turkestan, Cambridge.
Callieri, Pierfrancesco (1997), Seals and Sealings from the North-West of the Indian Subcontinent and Afghanistan (4th Century BC-11th Century AD): Local, Indian, Sasanian, GraecoPersian, Sogdian, Roman (Istituto Universitario Orientale, Dissertationes, 1), Naples.
Canevascini, G. (1993), The Khotanese Saṃghāṭasūtra, Wiesbaden.
Chen Jinhua (2004), “The Indian Buddhist missionary Dharmakṣema (385–433): A new dating of his arrival in Guzang and of his translations,” T’oung Pao 90.4–5: 215–263.
Chung Jin-il (2006), “More Fragments of Karmavācanā Texts,” BMSC III: 177–187.
Coblin, W. South (1994), A Compendium of Phonetics in Northwest Chinese, Berkeley (Journal of Chinese Linguistics, Monograph Series, Number 7).
Conze, Edward (1962), The Gilgit Manuscript of the Aṣṭādaśasāhasrikāprajñāpāramitā, Chapters 55 to 70 Corresponding to the 5th Abhisamaya (SOR, 26), Rome.
Cowell, E. B., and R. A. Neil (1886), The Divyâvadâna, a Collection of Early Buddhist Legends Now First Edited from the Nepalese Sanskrit MSS. in Cambridge and Paris, Cambridge (repr. 1970, Amsterdam).
Casparis, Johannes G. de (1958), “Short Inscriptions from Tjaṇḍi Plaosan Lor,” Berita Dinas Purbakala – Bulletin of the Archaeological Service of the Republic of Indonesia 4: 3–36.
Demiéville, Paul (1924), “Les versions chinoises du Milindapañha,” BEFEO 24: 1–258.
Demiéville, P. (1953), “Les sources chinoises,” L’Inde Classique: Manuel de études indiennes,Tome II, ed. L. Renou & J. Filliozat, Paris.
Demiéville, P, H. Durt and A. Seidel (1978), Répertoire du canon bouddhique sino-japonais:
édition de Taishō (Taishō Shinshū Daizōkyō), Tokyo/Paris.
Demoto, Mitsuyo (2006), “Fragments of the Avadānaśataka,” BMSC III, Oslo: 207–244.
Dharma Publishing Staff (1986), The Fortunate Aeon: How the Thousand Buddhas Become Enlightened. Berkeley.
Dietz, Siglinde (2002), “Fragments of the *Andhasūtra, of the Sūtra on the Three Moral Defects of Devadatta, and of the Kavikumārāvadāna,” BMSC II: 25–36.
Duan Qing (2009), “A fragment of the Bhadrakalpasūtra in Buddhist Sanskrit from Xinjiang,” Sanskrit Manuscripts in China: Proceedings of a Panel at the 2008 Beijing Seminar on Tibetan Studies: October 13 to 17, ed. Ernst Steinkellner, Beijing: 15–39.
–– (2010), “d:f>7ˆ:J@1.rT?wh r c” Fànyǔ «Xiánjié jīng» cánjuàn – jiānshù «Xián jié jīng» zài gǔdài Yútián de chuánb jí Zhú Fǎhù de yì jīng fēnggé. Xīyù lìshǐ yǔyán yánjiū jíkān 3: 201–232.
–– (2013a), “: Bhadrakalpikasūtra” Xiánjié jīng: Bhadrakalpikasūtra.

! Zhōngguó Guójiā Túshūguǎn cáng Xīyù wénshū: Fànwén, Qūlúwén juàn (d[A+2Z[ox9 Fànwén bèiyèjīng yǔ Fójiào wénxiàn xìliè cóngshū, 3), ed. Duàn Qíng and Zhāng Zhìqīng,Shànghǎi: 225–231.
–– (2013b), Yútián fójiào gǔjuǎn. Shànghǎi.
Dutt, N. (1947), Gilgit Manuscripts, vol. 3.1, Srinagar.
–– (1959), Gilgit Manuscripts, vol. 4, Calcutta.
Dutt, Nalinaksha, with D. M. Bhattacharya and Shivnath Sharma (1939), Gilgit Manuscripts, vol. 1, Srinagar (repr. 1984, Delhi).
Eckel, Malcolm David, (2009) Bhāviveka and His Buddhist Opponents: Chapters 4 and 5 of the Verses on the Heart of the Middle Way (Madhyamakahrdaya-karikah) with the Commentary Entitled the Flame of Reason (Tarkajvala), Cambridge (Harvard Oriental Series, 70).
Edgerton, Franklin (1946), “Meter, phonology, and orthography in Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit,” JAOS 66: 197–206.
Einoo Shingo (2005), “Ritual Calendar. Change in the Conceptions of Time and Space,” JA 293: 99–124.
Emmerick, Ronald E. (1992), A Guide to the Literature of Khotan. Second edition (Studia philologica Buddhica, Occasional Paper Series, III), Tokyo.
Enomoto Fumio " (1993), “Basharon no bonbun shahon danpen” Pg…d[8 a\m [A manuscript fragment of the Vibhāṣā in Sanskrit], IBK 42/1: 495–490 (sic).
–– (1996), “A Sanskrit Fragment from the Vibhāṣā Discovered in Eastern Turkestan.” SanskritTexte aus dem buddhistischen Kanon: Neuentdeckungen und Neueditionen III (SWTF, Beiheft 6), Göttingen: 133–143.
Falk, Harry (1999/2000), “The Pātagaṇḍigūḍem copper-plate grants of the Ikṣvāku king Ehavala Cāntamūla,” SRAA 6: 275–283.
Feer, Léon, (1888, 1973), The Saṃyutta-nikâya of the Sutta-Piṭaka, Part I. Sagâtha-vagga, PTS, London.
Foucaux, Philippe-Édouard (1884), Le Lalitavistara. L’histoire traditionnelle de la vie du Buddha Çakyamuni, Paris [Reprint: 1988].
Foucher, Alfred (1942), La vieille route de l’Inde de Bactres à Taxila (Mémoires de la Délégation archéologique française en Afghanistan I), vol. 1, Paris.
Fukita, T. (2009), “The Sanskrit Fragments Or.15009 in the Hoernle Collection,” BLSF II: 298– 330.
Fussman, Gérard (1985), “Nouvelles inscriptions śaka III,” BEFEO 74: 35–42.
–– (1989), “Gāndhārī écrite, gāndhārī parlée,” Dialectes dans les littératures indo-aryennes (Publications de l’Institut de Civilisation Indienne, sér. in-80, fasc. 55), ed. Colette Caillat, Paris: 433–501.
–– (1994), “Upāya-kauśalya: L’implantation du bouddhisme au Gandhāra,” Bouddhisme et cultures locales: Quelques cas de réciproques adaptations, ed. Fumimasa Fukui and Gérard Fussman, Paris: 17–51.
Glass, Andrew (2000), A Preliminary Study of Kharoṣṭhī Manuscript Paleography, MA Thesis, Seattle: University of Washington (http://andrewglass.org/ma.php).
–– (2004), “Kharoṣṭhī manuscripts: A window on Gandhāran Buddhism.” Nagoya Studies in Indian Culture and Buddhism: Saṃbhāṣā 24: 129–152.
–– (2007), Four Gāndhārī Saṃyuktāgama Sūtras: Senior Kharoṣṭhī Fragment 5 (Gandhāran Buddhist Texts, 4), Seattle.
–– (2009), “Bha,” BAI 23: 79–86.
Gnoli, Raniero, ed., (1977), The Gilgit Manuscript of the Saṅghabhedavastu, being the 17th and Last Section of the Vinaya of the Mūlasarvāstivādin, Part I, Rome.
Godard, A[ndré] & Y[eva], J[oseph] Hackin (1928), Les antiquités bouddhiques de Bāmiyān, Paris & Bruxelles.
Gómez, Luis (1996), The Land of Bliss: the Paradise of the Buddha of Measureless Light: Sanskrit and Chinese Versions of the Sukhāvatīvyūha Sutras, Honolulu.
Grenet, Franz (1994), “Bāmiyān and the Mihr Yašt,” BAI 7: 87–94.
Grey, Leslie (1994), A Concordance of Buddhist Birth Stories, Second Revised and Enlarged Edition, PTS, Oxford.
Grünendahl, Reinhold (1993), “Zu den beiden Gandhamādana-Episoden des Āraṇyakaparvan,” StII 18: 103–138.
Harrison, Paul (1982), “Sanskrit Fragments of a Lokottaravādin Tradition,” Indological and Buddhist Studies, Volume in Honour of Professor J. W. de Jong on his Sixtieth Birthday, ed. L. A. Hercus et al., Canberra: 211–234.
–– (1997), “The Ekottarikāgama Translations of An Shigao,” Bauddhavidyāsudhākaraḥ: Studies in Honour of Heinz Bechert on the Occasion of His 65th Birthday, ed. Petra Kieffer-Pülz and Jens-Uwe Hartmann (IndTib, 30), Swisttal-Odendorf: 261–284.
–– (2003), “Mediums and Messages: Reflections on the Production of Mahāyāna Sūtras,” EB 35, No. 2: 115–151.
–– (2007), “A Fragment of the *Saṃbādhāvakāśasūtra from a Newly Identified Ekottarikāgama Manuscript in the Schøyen Collection,” ARIRIAB 10: 201-211.
–– (2008), “Fragments of Ekottarikāgama (and Ekottarikāgama-style) Manuscripts in the Schøyen Collection: A Preliminary Survey,” unpublished paper presented at XVth Congress of the International Association for Buddhist Studies, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia, June 27, 2008.
Harrison, Paul (forthcoming), “On Authors and Authorities: Reflections on Sūtra and Śāstra in Mahāyāna Buddhism,” unpublished paper delivered in Tokyo on May 19, 2006, at the 51st Symposium of the ICES (Tōhō gakkai).
Harrison, Paul, Jens-Uwe Hartmann (2006), “Ajātaśatrukaukṛtyavinodanāsūtra,” BMSC I: 167– 216.
–– (2014), ed., From Birch Bark to Digital Data: Recent Advances in Buddhist Manuscript Research. Papers Presented at the Conference Indic Buddhist Manuscripts: The State of the Field, Stanford, June 15–19 2009 (ÖAW, Denkschriften, 460), Wien.
Hartmann, Jens-Uwe (2002) “More Fragments of the Caṅgīsūtra,” BMSC II: 1–16.
–– (2002), “Āryaśūra’s Jātakamālā,” BMSC II: 318–319.
–– (2002), “Buddhastotras of Mātṛceṭa”, BMSC II: 304–311.
–– (2004), “Contents and Structure of the Dīrghāgama of the (Mūla-)Sarvāstivādins,” ARIRIAB 7: 119–137.
–– (2013),“The Foolish Cat and the Clever Mouse: Another Parable from an Unknown Story Collection,” Evo ṣuyadi: Essays in Honor of Richard Salomon’s 65th Birthday, ed. Carol Altman Bromberg, Timothy J. Lenz, Jason Neelis, BAI 23: 105–109.
–– (2015), “The Parable of a Man and His Two Ladies: A Fragment of an Unknown Story Collection,” Neilu Ouya Lishiyuyan Lunji, Xu Wenkan Xiansheng Guxi Jinian (Collected Papers on the Languages and Civilisations of Inner Asia, Festschrift on the Occasion of Prof. Xu Wenkan’s Seventieth Birthday), ed. Xu Quansheng & Liu Zhen (Ouya Lishi Wenhua Wenku = Library of Eurasian History and Culture), Lanzhou: 189–199.
Hartmann, Jens-Uwe, Chanwit Tudkeao (2009), “Three Sanskrit Fragments of the Ratnaketuparivarta,” BLSF II: 589–596, Plates 249, 273.
Hartmann, Jens-Uwe, Klaus Wille (1997), “Die nordturkistanischen Sanskrit-Handschriften der Sammlung Pelliot (Funde buddhistischer Sanskrit-Handschriften, IV),” Untersuchungen zur buddhistischen Literatur II, Gustav Roth zum 80. Geburtstag gewidmet, ed. H. Bechert, S.
Bretfeld und P. Kieffer-Pülz (SWTF, Beiheft 8), Göttingen: 131–182.
–– (2014), “A Version of the Śikhālakasūtra/Siṅgālovādasutta,” in BMSC III: 1–6.
–– (2014) “The Manuscript of the Dirghagama and the Private Collection in Virginia,” BBDD: 137–155.
Heirman, Ann (2000), “On Some Fragments of the Bhikṣuṇīprātimokṣa of the Sarvāstivādins,” Buddhist Studies Review 17.1: 3–16.
Hermann-Pfandt, Adelheid (2008), Die Lhan kar ma. Ein früher Katalog der ins Tibetische übersetzten buddhistischen Texte. Kritische Neuausgabe mit Einleitung und Materialen, Wien.
Hertel, Johannes (1915), The Panchatantra. A Collection of Ancient Hindu Tales in its oldest Recension, the Kashmirian, Entitled Tantrakhyayika, Cambridge, Mass.
Hinüber, Oskar von (1968), Studien zur Kasussyntax des Pāli, besonders des Vinaya-Piṭaka. (Münchener Studien zur Sprachwissenschaft, Beihefte, neue Folge, 2), München.
–– (1980), “Remarks on the Problems of Textual Criticism in Editing Anonymous Sanskrit Literature,” Proceedings of the First Symposium of Nepali and German Sanskritists 1978, Kathmandu: 28–40.
 –– (1985), “Die Bestimmung der Schulzugehörigkeit buddhistischer Texte nach sprachlichen Kriterien,” Zur Schulzugehörigkeit von Werken der Hīnayāna-Literatur (Symposien zur Buddhismusforschung, III,1), ed. Heinz Bechert (AAWG, 149), Göttingen: 57–75.
–– (1989), “Brāhmī inscriptions on the history and culture of the upper Indus valley,” Antiquities of Northern Pakistan. Reports and Studies Vol. 1, Rock Inscriptions in the Indus Valley, ed. Karl Jettmar, Mainz: 41–71.
–– (2001), Das ältere Mittelindisch im Überblick, 2., erweiterte Aufl. (Sitzungsberichte der ÖAW, 467), Wien.
–– (2003), Beiträge zur Erklärung der Senavarma-Inschrift (Akademie der Wissenschaften und der Literatur Mainz, Abhandlungen der Geistes- und sozialwissenschaftlichen Klasse, 2003 Nr. 1), Stuttgart.
–– (2004), Die Palola Ṣāhis. Ihre Steinschriften, Inschriften auf Bronzen, Handschriftenkolophone und Schutzzauber. Materialien zur Geschichte von Gilgit und Chilas (Antiquities of Northern Pakistan: Reports and Studies, Vol. 5), Mainz.
–– (2009), “Verwischte Spuren. Der Gebrauch buddhistischer Texte nach dem Zeugnis von Literatur, Inschriften und Dokumenten,” Sakrale Texte. Hermeneutik und Lebenspraxis in den Schriftkulturen, ed. Wolfgang Reinhard, München: 153–173 and 325–334.
–– (2010), Review of McComas Taylor, The Fall of the Indigo Jackal, Albany: State University of New York Press, IIJ 53: 48–49.
–– (2014), “The Gilgit Manuscripts: An Ancient Buddhist Library in Modern Research,” BBDD: 79–135.
Hinüber, Oskar von, K. R. Norman (1995), Dhammapada, Oxford.
Hirakawa, Akira (1995), Nihyakugojikkai no kenkyū 二百五十戒の研究 [A study on the Two
Hundred Fifty Rules] IV, Tokyo.
Hiraoka Satoshi 平岡聡 (2007), †€ *,nƒ& '&(
4‚ [[[Budda]] ga nazo toku sanze no monogatari: Divya-avadāna zenyaku], Tōkyō.
Hitch, D. (1984), “Kharoṣṭhī Influences on the Saka Brāhmī Scripts,” Middle Iranian Studies: Proceedings of the International Symposium Organized by the Katholieke Universiteit Leuven from the 17th to the 20th of May 1982 (Orientalia Lovaniensia, Analecta, 16), ed. Wojciech Skalmowski and Alois van Tongerloo, Leuven: 187–202.
Hoernle, A.F. Rudolf (1893–1912), The Bower Manuscript, Calcutta.
Hokazono, Koichi N}U) (1994), Raritavisutara no kenkyū / "#&"uv, vol.
1, Tokyo.
Hopkins, E.W. (1915), Epic Mythology, Straßburg.
Hori, Shin’ichirō (2002), “Notes on the Unidentified Sanskrit Fragments in the Ōtani Collection at Ryūkoku University Library,” JICABS 6: 132–126.
Hosoda Noriaki yq6^ (1989), “Bonbun ‘Zōagongyō’ butsu shosetsuhon gedō sōō /d[ ŽDz0X„FN‰tV (Sanskrit Fragments from the Parivrājakasaṃyukta of the Saṃyuktāgama) (I),” Indo tetsugaku to Bukkyō: Fujita Kōtatsu Hakushi kanreki kinen ronshū /
%GQ 0Z“?qRŠ=L‹_W… (Indian Philosophy and Buddhism: Essays in
Honour of Professor Kotatsu Fujita on his Sixtieth Birthday), Kyōto: 185–206.
Huber, É. (1908), Açvaghoṣa: Sûtrâlaṃkâra traduit en français sur la version chinoise de Kumârajîva, Paris.
Hultzsch, Eugen (1925), Inscriptions of Aśoka, New Edition (Corpus Inscriptionum Indicarum I), Oxford.
Jong, Jan W. de (1997–98), “Recent Japanese studies on the Lalitavistara,” Indologica Taurinensia 23–24: 247–55.
Karashima Seishi (2000), “A Fragment of the Prātimokṣa-Vibhaṅga of the MahāsāṃghikaLokottaravādins,” BMSC I: 233–241.
–– (2002), “Two More Folios of the Prātimokṣa-Vibhaṅga of the Mahāsāṃghika-Lokottaravādins,” BMSC II: 215–228.
–– (2006a), “Four Sanskrit Fragments of the Ratnaketuparivarta in the Stein Collection,” BLSF I: 176–189, Plate 102–103.
–– (2006b), “The Prātimokṣa-Vibhaṅga of the Mahāsāṃghika-Lokottaravādins in Early Western Gupta Script,” in BMSC III: 161–176.
–– (2008), “Fragments of a Manuscript of the Prātimokṣasūtra of the Mahāsāṃghika-(Lokottara)vādins (1),” ARIRIAB 11: 71–90.
— (2009), “The Sanskrit Fragments Or.15010 in the Hoernle Collection,” BLSF II: 335–550.
–– (2012), unter Mitwirkung von Oskar von Hinüber, Die Abhisamācārikā Dharmāḥ: Verhaltensregeln für buddhistische Mönche der Mahāsāṃghika-Lokottaravādins, herausgegeben, mit der chinesischen Parallelversion verglichen, 3 vols., Tokyo (Bibliotheca philologica et philosophica buddhica XIII).
–– (2013), “Manuscript Fragments of the Prātimokṣasūtra of the Mahāsāṃghika(-Lokottaravādin)s (2),” ARIRIAB 16: 47–90.
–– (2014), “The Language of the Abhisamācarikā Dharmāḥ – The Oldest Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit Text,” ARIRIAB 17: 77–88.
Kaul Shastri, M. S. (1939), “Report on the Gilgit Excavation in 1938,” The Quarterly Journal of the Mythic Society 30: 1–12 and 15 plates.
Kern, Hendrik (1891), The Jātaka-Mālā or Bodhisattvāvadāna-Mālā by Ārya-Śūra (Harvard Oriental Series, 1), Boston.
Kimura, Takayasu (1986), Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā II–III, Tokyo.
–– (1992), Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā V, Tokyo.
Kimura, Takayasu, Nobuo Ōtsuka, Hideaki Kimura, Hisao Takahashi (2004), “Bonbun kōtei ‘Chikōmyōshōgon-kyō’ – Sarvabuddhaviṣayāvatārajñānālokālaṃkāra nāma mahāyānasūtra”, Kūkai no shisō to bunka [*A Felicitation Volume Presented to Prof. Kichō Onozuka on his seventieth birthday], Tōkyō: 1(596)–89(508).
Klimburg-Salter, Deborah (1981), “Vaisravana in North-West India,” Madhu. Recent Researches in Indian Archaeology and Art History. Shri M. N. Deshpande Festschrift, ed. M.S. Nagaraja Rao, Delhi: 253–262.
–– (1989), The Kingdom of Bāmiyān. Buddhist Art and Culture of the Hindu Kush, Naples & Rome.
–– (2010), “Corridors of Communication across Afghanistan – 7th to 10th centuries,” in Paysages du centre de l’Afghanistan: Paysages naturels, paysages culturels, Paris: 173–199.
Konow, Sten (1929), Saka Versions of the Bhadrakalpikāsūtra (Avhandlinger utgitt av Det Norske VidenskapsAkademi i Oslo, II: Hist.filos. Klasse, No. 1), Oslo.
Kritzer, Robert (2009), “Life in the Womb: Conception and Gestation in Buddhist Scripture and Classical Indian Medical Literature.” In Jane Marie Law and Vanessa R. Sasson, ed., Imagining the Fetus the Unborn in Myth, Religion, and Culture, London.
–– (2014), Garbhāvakrāntisūtra, The Sūtra on Entry into the Womb (Studia Philologica Buddhica, Monograph Series 31), Tokyo.
Kurumiya, Y. (1978), Ratnaketuparivarta: Sanskrit Text, Kyoto.
— (1979), ’Dus pa chen po rin po che tog gi gzungs: ’Dus pa chen po dkon mchog dbal zes bya ba’i gzungs: being the Tibetan translation of the Ratnaketuparivarta. Kyoto.
Kuwayama Shoshin (2006), “Chinese Records on Bamiyan – Translation and Commentary,” East and West 55: 139–161.
Kuznetsov, B. I. (1966), Rgyal rabs gsal bai me long: the clear mirror of royal genealogies, Leiden.
La Vallée Poussin, L. de (1908), “MSS. Cecil Bendall: 2 Fragments en écriture Gupta du Nord,” JRAS: 45–53.
Lalou, Marcelle (1953), “Contribution à la bibliographie du Kanǰur et du Tanǰur – Les textes bouddhiques au temps du roi Khri-sroṅ-lde-bcan,” JA 241: 313–353.
Lamotte, Étienne (1949–1980), Le traité de la grande vertu de sagesse de Nāgārjuna (Mahāprajñāpāramitāśāstra), tome i–v, (Bibliothèque du Muséon, 18) Louvain-la-Neuve.
–– (1958), Histoire du bouddhisme indien des origines à l’ère Śaka (PIOL, 14), Louvain-la-Neuve.
–– (1967), “Un sūtra composite de l'Ekottarāgama,” BSOAS 30: 105–116.
–– (1988), History of Indian Buddhism: From the Origins to the Śaka Era (PIOL, 36), transl. S. Webb-Boin, Louvain-Paris.
Lenz, Timothy (2003), A New Version of the Gāndhārī Dharmapada and a Collection of Previousbirth Stories: British Library Kharoṣṭhī Fragments 16 + 25 (Gandhāran Buddhist Texts, 3), Seattle.
–– (2010), Gandhāran Avadānas: British Library Kharoṣṭhī Fragments 1–3 and 21 and Supplementary Fragments A–C (Gandhāran Buddhist Texts, 6), Seattle.
Lévi, Sylvain (1915a), “Le catalogue géographique des yakṣa dans la Mahāmāyūrī,” JA 5: 19–138.
–– (1915b), “Sur la récitation primitive des textes bouddhiques,” JA 5: 401–447.
Li Can (2015), “A preliminary report on some new sources of the Bhadrakalpika-sūtra (1),” ARIRIAB 18: 235–251.
Li Rongxi (1996), The Great Tang Dynasty Record of the Western Regions, Berkeley.
Lin, Yueh-Mei (2010), A Study of the Anthology Za Ahan Jing (T101), Centred on its Linguistic Features, Translation Style, Authorship and School Affiliation, Saarbrücken.
Lü Chêng (1963), “Agama (1),” Encyclopedia of Buddhism, ed. G. P. Malalasekera, [[[Wikipedia:Colombo|Colombo]]]:
1.241a–244b.
Lüders, Heinrich (1904), “Die Jātakas und die Epik,” ZDMG 58: 687–714.
— (1926), Bruchstücke der Kalpanāmaṇḍitikā des Kumāralāta, Leipzig (repr. in Monographien zur Indischen Archäologie, Kunst und Philologie, vol. 1, Berlin 1979).
Mair, Victor (1986), “An Asian Story of the Oedipus Type.” Asian Folklore Studies 45/1: 19–32.
–– (1994), The Columbia Anthology of Traditional Chinese Literature, New York.
Malalasekera, G. P. (1937–38), Dictionary of Pāli Proper Names, 2 vols. London.
Marino, Joseph (2015), “Cats with flaming tails: the simile of the fortified city in Pāli and Gāndhārī sūtra literature,” JIABS 38: 73–105.
Matsuda Kazunobu (1996), Two Sanskrit Manuscripts of the Daśabhūmikasūtra preserved at the National Archives, Kathmandu (Bibliotheca Codicum Asiaticorum 10), Tokyo.
— (2000), “New Sanskrit Fragments of the Saddharmapuṇḍarīkasūtra in the Schøyen Collection, Norway,” The Journal of Oriental Studies 10: 103.
— (2003), “Sukoien Korekushon no Jūhi Shahonrui ni tsuite %'$!%p s8a‘ [On the Leather Manuscripts in the Schøyen Collection],” 54th Congress of the Japanese Association of Indian and Buddhist Studies, September 6, 2003 (unpublished).
— (2009), “Buddhist manuscripts from the Bāmiyān valley, Afghanistan.” Preliminary Report on the Conservation of the Bamiyan Birch Bark Buddhist Manuscripts, ed. Kazuya Yamauchi, Tokyo: Japan Center for International Cooperation in Conservation, National Research Institute for Cultural Properties (Recent cultural heritage issues in Afghanistan, preliminary report series, 5), 7–9.
–– (2010), “On the importance of the Buddhist manuscripts in the Schøyen Collection.” Traces of Gandhāran Buddhism: An Exhibition of Ancient Buddhist Manuscripts in the Schøyen Collection, ed. Jens Braarvig and Fredrik Liland, Oslo: xxviii–xxix.
–– (2014), “Japanese collections of Buddhist manuscript fragments from the same region as the Schøyen Collection.” BBDD: 165–169.
Matsuda Yuko (2000), “A stanza in the Vaiśālī Plague Story,” Zinbun 35: 13–37. Matsumoto, B. (1927), Buttenhihyōron (仏典批評論), Tokyo.
Matsumura, H. (1993), “Marginalia to the Sanskrit Fragments,” Central Asiatic Journal 37: 127–
129.
Mayeda, Egaku 前田惠學 (1964), 原始仏教聖典成立史の研究 Genshi bukkyō seiten seiritsushi no kenkyū [A History of the Formation of Original Buddhist Texts], Tokyo.
Mejor, Marek (1991) Vasubandhu’s Abhidharmakośa and the Commentaries Preserved in the Tanjur, Stuttgart.
Melzer, Gudrun (2010), Ein Abschnitt aus dem Dīrghāgama. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Munich.
Melzer, Gudrun (2014), “A Palaeographic Study of a Buddhist Manuscript from the Gilgit Region,” Manuscript Cultures: Mapping the Field, ed. Jörg B. Quenzer, Dmitry Bondarev, JanUlrich Sobisch (Studies in Manuscript Cultures, 1), Berlin etc.: 227–272.
Mette, Adelheid (1981), “Zwei kleine Fragmente aus Gilgit,” StII 7: 133–151.
Milizia, Paola (2011), “On the Origin of the Middle Indic Future Suffix -hi-,” JAOS 131.1: 25–37.
Moore, Justin Hartley (1907), “Metrical analysis of the Pāli Iti-vuttaka: a collection of discourses of Buddha,” JAOS 28.2: 317–330.
Morris, Richard (1888, 1976), Aṅguttara Nikāya, Part II. Catukka Nipāta, PTS, London.
Müller, F. W. K. (1908), “Uigurica,” Abhandlungen der Königlich Preußischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, philosophisch-historische Klasse 1908, Berlin.
–– (1931), “Uigurica IV,” herausgegeben von A. von Gabain, Sitzungsberichte der Preußischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, philosophisch-historische Klasse 1931, Berlin: 675–727.
Nakamura, Z. (1975), “Hōshō Daranikyō Dankan,” HBK 1: 14–37.
–– (2000), Gotama Buddha: A Biography Based on the Most Reliable Texts, vol. I, translated by Gaynor Sekimori, Tokyo.
Nakatani, Hideaki (1986), “Un fragment xylographique de l’Upāli-sūtra conservé au Musée Guimet,” BEI 4: 305–319.
Nattier, Jan (1991), Once Upon a Future Time: Studies in a Buddhist Prophecy of Decline (Nanzan Studies in Asian Religions), Berkeley CA.
Naudou, Jean (1968), Les bouddhistes kaśmīriens au moyen age, Paris (Annales du Musée Guimet, Bibliothèque d’Études, Tome LXVIII).
Neelis, Jason (2006), “La Vieille Route Reconsidered: Alternative Paths for Early Transmission of Buddhism Beyond the Borderlands of South Asia,” BAI 16: 143–164.
–– (2011), Early Buddhist Transmission and Trade Networks: Mobility and Exchange within and beyond the Northwestern Borderlands of South Asia (Dynamics in the History of Religion, Volume 2), Leiden.
Nolot, Edith (1991), Règles de discipline des nonnes bouddhistes. Le Bhikṣuṇīvinaya de l’école Mahāsāṃghika-Lokottaravādin, traduction annotée, commentaire, collation du manuscrit (Collège de France, Publications de l’Institut de civilisation indienne, fasc. 60), Paris.
Norman, K. R. (1983), Pāli Literature, Including the Canonical Literature in Prakrit and Sanskrit of All the Hīnayāna Schools of Buddhism (A History of Indian Literature, vol. 7, 2), Wiesbaden.
–– (1997), The Words of the Doctrine (Dhammapada) (PTS Translation Series, 46), Oxford.
Nyanaponika Thera and Bhikkhu Bodhi (1999), Numerical Discourses of the Buddha: An Anthology of Suttas from the Aṅguttara Nikāya (Sacred Literature Series), Walnut Creek, CA.
Oberlies, Thomas (2001), Pāli: A Grammar of the Language of the Theravāda Tipiṭaka, with a Concordance to Pischel's Grammatik der Prakrit-Sprachen (Indian Philology and South Asian Studies, 3), Berlin/New York.
–– (2003), A Grammar of Epic Sanskrit (Indian Philology and South Asian Studies, 5), Berlin/New York.
Pagel, Ulrich (1995), The Bodhisattvapiṭaka: Its Doctrines, Practices and their Position in Mahāyāna Literature, Tring.
–– (2007), Mapping the Path: Vajrapadas in Mahāyāna Literature, Tokyo.
Panglung, Jampa Losang (1981), Die Erzählstoffe des Mūlasarvāstivāda-Vinaya: analysiert auf Grund der tibetischen Übersetzung, Tokyo (Studia Philologica Buddhica Monograph series 3).
Parpola, Asko (1978), “Dravidian V- versus Indo-Aryan hV-,” Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 48–49: 243–59.
–– (1981), “On the Primary Meaning and Etymology of the Sacred Syllable Ōm,” Proceedings of the Nordic South Asia Conference Held in Helsinki, June 10–12, 1980 (Studia Orientalia, 50), ed. Asko Parpola, Helsinki, 195–213.
Pasadika, Bhikkhu, ed. (1989), Nāgārjuna’s Sūtrasamuccaya: A Critical Edition of the Mdo kun las btus pa, Copenhagen.
Pauly, Bernard (1959), “Fragments sanskrits de Haute Asie (Mission Pelliot),” JA 247: 203–249.
Pischel, Richard (1904), “Bruchstücke des Sanskritkanons der Buddhisten aus Idykutšari, Chinesisch-Turkestān,” Sitzungsberichte der Königlich Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften 1904.1: 807–827.
Pradhan, Prahlad (1975), Abhidharmakośabhāṣyam of Vasubandhu (Tibetan Sanskrit Works Series 8), Patna.
Prebish, Charles S. (1975), Buddhist Monastic Discipline: The Sanskrit Prātimokṣa Sūtras of the Mahāsāṃghikas and Mūlasarvāstivādins, University Park and London.
Radloff, W[ilhelm], & A[lexander] von Staël-Holstein (1910), Ṭišastvustik. Ein in türkischer Sprache bearbeitetes buddhistisches Sūtra, BB 12, St.-Petersburg.
Raghu Vira and Lokesh Chandra (1959), Gilgit Buddhist Manuscripts: Facsimile edition (Śatapiṭakam: Indo-Asian literatures, vol. 10, pt. 9), New Delhi (repr. 1995, Gilgit Buddhist Manuscripts: Revised and enlarged compact facsimile edition, Delhi).
Rapson, E.J. (1908), Catalogue of the Coins of the Andhra Dynasty, the Western Kṣatrapas, the Traikūṭaka Dynasty, and the “BodhiDynasty, London.
Renou, Louis, & Jean Filliozat (1953), L’Inde classique, manuel des études indiennes, vol. 2, Paris.
Rhys Davids, Caroline, tr., (1917, 1973) assisted by Sūriyagoḍa Sumangala Thera, The Book of the Kindred Sayings (Saṃyutta-nikāya) or Grouped Suttas, Part I. Kindred Sayings with Verses (Sagāthā-vagga), PTS, London.
Roth, Gustav (1980), “Particular Features of the Language of the Ārya-Mahāsāṃghika-Lokottaravādins and their Importance for Early Buddhist Tradition,” Die Sprache der ӓltesten buddhistischen Überlieferung (Symposien zur Buddhismusforschung, II) (AAWG 117), ed. Heinz Bechert, Göttingen: 78–135 (= H. Bechert and P. Kieffer-Pülz (ed.), Indian Studies (Selected Papers) (Bibliotheca Indo Buddhica, 32), Delhi 1986, 289–350).
Rotman, Andy (2008), Divine Stories: Divyāvadāna, Part 1, Boston.
Rowland, Benjamin (1938), “Buddha and the Sun God,” Zalmoxis – Revue des Études Religieuses 1: 69–84.
Saerji (2008), “A New Fragment of the Ratnaketuparivarta,” ARIRIAB 11: 95–103.
— (2010), “More Fragments of the Ratnaketuparivarta (1),” ARIRIAB 13: 111–120.
— (2011), “More Fragments of the Ratnaketuparivarta (2),” ARIRIAB 14: 35–57.
Sakaki, Ryōzaburō e/* (1916), Hon’yaku Mahāvyutpatti: Bon-Zō-Kan-Wa yon’yaku taikō /
’‡B|Od~lEH‡Sb, Kyōto.
Sakamoto-Goto, Junko (1991), “Mittelindische Absolutivbildung auf -tvā/*-tvāna(m) und verwandte Probleme der Lautentwicklung,” Middle Indo-Aryan and Jaina Studies (Panels of the VIIth World Sanskrit Conference, Vol. VI and VII), ed. C. Caillat, Leiden: 10–21.
–– (1993), “Zu mittelindischen Verben aus medialen Kausativa,” Jain Studies in Honour of Jozef Deleu, ed. R. Smet and K. Watanabe, Tokyo: 261–314.
–– (2011), “The Nakṣatra System in the Vedic Calendar,” IBK 59, 3: 1075–1083.
Salomon, Richard (1981), “A Linguistic Analysis of the Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad,” WZKS 25: 91–105.
–– (1998), “Kharoṣṭhī Manuscript Fragments in the Pelliot Collection, Bibliothèque Nationale de France,” BEI 16: 123–60.
–– (1999), Ancient Buddhist Scrolls from Gandhāra: The British Library Kharoṣṭhī Fragments, Seattle / London.
–– (2000), A Gāndhārī Version of the Rhinoceros Sūtra: British Library Kharoṣṭhī Fragment 5B (Gandhāran Buddhist Texts, 1), Seattle.
–– (2001), “‘Gāndhārī Hybrid Sanskrit’: New Sources for the Study of the Sanskritization of Buddhist Literature,” IIJ 44: 241–252.
–– (2002a), “A Fragment of a Collection of Buddhist Legends, with a Reference to King Huviṣka as a Follower of the Mahāyāna: Schøyen Fragment 2378/9,” BMSC II: 255–267.
–– (2002b), “Gāndhārī and the Other Indo-Aryan Languages in the Light of Newly-discovered Kharoṣṭhī Manuscripts,” Indo-Iranian Languages and Peoples (Proceedings of the British Academy 116), ed. N. Sims-Williams, Oxford: 119–134.
–– (2003a), “The Senior Manuscripts: Another Collection of Gandhāran Buddhist Scrolls,” JAOS 123: 83–92.
–– (2003b), “Three Kharoṣṭhī Reliquary Inscriptions in the Institute of Silk Road Studies,” SRAA 9: 39–69.
–– (2008), Two Gāndhārī Manuscripts of the Songs of Lake Anavatapta (Anavatapta-gāthā): British Library Kharoṣṭhī Fragment 1 and Senior Scroll 14 (Gandhāran Buddhist Texts 5), Seattle.
–– (2009) “Why Did the Gandhāran Buddhists Bury their Manuscripts?” Buddhist Manuscript Cultures: Knowledge, Ritual and Art, ed. Steven C. Berkwitz, Juliane Schober and Claudia Brown, London: 19–34.
–– (2011), “An Unwieldy Canon: Observations on Some Distinctive Features of Canon Formation in Buddhism,” Kanonisierung und Kanonbildung in der asiatischen Religionsgeschichte, ed. Max Deeg, Oliver Freiberger and Christoph Kleine (Sitzungsberichte der ÖAW, 820 / Beiträge zur Kultur- und Geistesgeschichte Asiens 72), Wien: 161–207.
–– (2012), Review of Klaus Wille, Sanskrithandschriften aus den Turfanfunden, Teil 10, JAOS 132: 506–508.
Salomon, Richard, Gregory Schopen (1984), “The Indravarman (Avaca) Casket Inscription Reconsidered: Further Evidence for Canonical Passages in Buddhist Inscriptions,” JIABS 7: 107– 123.
Salomon, Richard, Stefan Baums (2007), “Sanskrit Ikṣvāku, Pali Okkāka, and Gāndhārī Iṣmaho,” JPTS 29: 201–27.
Samtani, N.H. (1971), The Arthaviniścaya-sūtra and its Commentary (Nibandhana) (written by Bhikṣu Vīryaśrīdatta of Śrī-Nālandavihāra), (TSWS 13), Patna.
Sander, Lore (1968), Paläographisches zu den Sanskrithandschriften der Berliner Turfansammlung (VOHD, Supplementband 8), Wiesbaden.
–– (2000), “A brief paleographical analysis of the Brāhmī manuscripts in volume I,” BMSC I: 285–300.
Sander, Lore, Ernst Waldschmidt (1980), Sanskrithandschriften aus den Turfanfunden IV (VOHD, 10.4), Wiesbaden.
Scherrer-Schaub, Cristina A. (1999), “Towards a Methodology for the Study of Old Tibetan Manuscripts: Dunhuang and Tabo,” Tabo Studies II: Manuscripts, Texts, Inscriptions, and the Arts, ed. C.A. Scherrer-Schaub and E. Steinkellner, Rome: 3–36.
— (2000–01), “Histoires de serpents. Cantiques et Enchantements,” Annuaire de l’École Pratique des Hautes Études – Section des sciences religieuses, année 2000–2001: 195–202.
Schiefner, F. Anton von (1906), Tibetan tales, derived from Indian sources, translated from the Tibetan of the Kahgyur, London.
Schlingloff, Dieter (1955), Buddhistische Stotras aus ostturkistanischen Sanskrittexten (Deutsche Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin, Institut für Orientforschung, Veröffentlichung, Nr. 22 / Sanskrittexte aus den Turfanfunden, 1), Berlin.
Schmithausen, Lambert et al. (2002), “Fragments of and Early Commentary,” BMSC II: 249–254.
Schneider, Ulrich (1960), “Das Zahlwort im Mahāvastu,” Zeitschrift für vergleichende Sprachforschung auf dem Gebiet der Indogermanischen Sprachen 76, 3–4: 249–272 (now in Opera Minora, ed. Marion Meisig, Wiesbaden, 2002: 47–64).
Schopen, Gregory (1997), Bones, Stones, and Buddhist Monks. Collected Papers on the Archaeology, Epigraphy, and Texts of Monastic Buddhism in India. Honolulu.
Schopen, Gregory (2000), “Hierarchy and Housing in a Buddhist Monastic Code: A Translation of the Sanskrit Text of the Śayanāsanavastu of the Mūlasarvāstivāda-vinaya – Part One [from the Sanskrit],” Buddhist Literature, vol. 2: 92–196.
–– (2004a), “If You Can’t Remember, How to Make It Up: Some Monastic Rules for Redacting Canonical Texts,” Buddhist Monks and Business Matters: Still More Papers on Monastic Buddhism in India (Studies in the Buddhist Traditions), Honolulu: 395–407 (originally published [1997], Bauddhavidyāsudhākaraḥ: Studies in Honour of Heinz Bechert on the Occasion of His 65th Birthday, ed. Petra Kieffer-Pülz and Jens-Uwe Hartmann [IndTib 30], Swisttal-Odendorf: 571–582).
–– (2004b), “On Buddhist Monks and Dreadful Deities: Some Monastic Devices for Updating the Dharma,” Gedenkschrift J.W. de Jong, ed. H.W. Bodewitz and M. Hara, Tokyo: 161–184.
–– (2010), “On Incompetent Monks and Able Urbane Nuns in a Buddhist Monastic Code,” Journal of Indian Philosophy 38: 107–131.
Seidenstücker, Karl (1922), Itivuttaka, das Buch der Herrnworte, eine kanonische Schrift des Pāli– Buddhismus, in erstmaliger deutscher Übersetzung aus dem Urtext, Leipzig.
Senart, É. (1897) Le Mahāvastu, Tome troisième, Paris.
Śeṭha, Haragovindadāsa Trikamacanda [हरगो&व'ददास &+कमच/द 0ठ] (1928), पाइअ-स5-मह6णवो [Pāia-sadda-mahaṇṇavo], कलक9ा [Kalakattā].
Seyfort Ruegg, David (1964), “Sur le rapport entre le bouddhisme et le ‘substrat religieux’ indien et tibétain,” JA 252: 77–95.
— (2004), “Aspects of the Investigation of the (Earlier) Indian Mahāyāna,” JIABS 27: 3–62.
— (2008), The Symbiosis of Buddhism with Brahmanism/Hinduism in South Asia and of Buddhism with “Local Cults” in Tibet and the Himalayan Region, Wien.
Shackleton Bailey, D. R. (1951), The Śatapañcāśatka of Mātṛceṭa, Cambridge UK.
Shastri, Swami Dwarikadas (1973), Abhidharmakośa & Bhāṣya of Ācārya Vasubandhu, with Sphuṭārthā Commentary of Ācārya Yaśomitra, Part IV (Bauddha Bharati Series no. 9), Varanasi.
Shinohara Koichi (2010), “Taking a meal at a lay supporter’s residence. The evolution of the practice in Chinese Vinaya commentaries,” Buddhist Monasticism in East Asia. Places of Practice, ed. J. A. Benn, London: 18–42.
Silk, Jonathan A. (2008a), Riven by Lust: Incest and Schism in Indian Buddhist Legend and Historiography, Honolulu.
— (2008b), “The Story of Dharmaruci: In the Divyāvadāna and Kṣemendra’s Bodhisattvāvadānakalpalatā,” IIJ 51: 137–185.
–– (2008c), “Putative Persian Perversities: Buddhist Condemnations of Zoroastrian Close-Kin Marriage in Context,” BSOAS 71/3: 433–464.
Sims-Williams, Nicholas (2000), “A Bactrian Buddhist Document,” BMSC I: 275–277.
–– (2007), Bactrian Documents from Northern Afghanistan. II: Letters and Buddhist Texts, London.
–– (2010), “Two Late Bactrian Documents,” Coins, Art and Chronology II, ed. Michael Alram et al., Wien: 203–211.
Sircar, D. C. (1966), Indian Epigraphical Glossary. Delhi.
Skilling, Peter (1992a), “The Rakṣā Literature of the Śrāvakayāna,” JPTS 16: 109–182.
–– (1992b) [Review of Dharma Publishing Staff 1986], Journal of the Siam Society 80: 140–142.
–– (1994–97), Mahāsūtras: Great Discourses of the Buddha, 2 vols., Oxford.
–– (1996a), “The Sambuddhe Verses and Later Theravādin Buddhology,” Journal of the Pali Text Society 22: 151–183.
–– (1996b), “An Arapacana syllabary in the Bhadrakalpika-sutra,” JAOS 116: 522–523.
–– (2002), “Ārādhanā Tham: ‘Invitation to Teach the Dhamma’,” Manusya: Journal of Humanities (Bangkok), Special Issue No 4: 84–92.
–– (2003), “On the Agnihotramukhā Yajñāḥ Verses,” Jainism and Early Buddhism: Essays in Honor of Padmanabh S. Jaini, ed. Olle Qvarnström, Fremont: 637–667.
–– (2008), Past Lives of the Buddha. Wat Si Chum – Art, Architecture and Inscriptions, Bangkok.
–– (2010), “Notes on the Bhadrakalpika-sūtra,” ARIRIAB 13: 195–229.
–– (2011), “Notes on the Bhadrakalpika-sūtra (II): Beyond the Fortunate Aeon: What comes next?,” ARIRIAB 14: 59–72.
–– (2012), “Notes on the Bhadrakalpika-sūtra (III): Beyond the Fortunate Aeon,” ARIRIAB 15: 117–126.
Skilling, Peter, and Harrison Paul (2005), “What’s in a Name? Sarvāstivādin Interpretations of the Epithets ‘Buddha’ and ‘Bhagavat,’” in Buddhism and Jainism, Essays in Honour of Dr. Hojun Nagasaki on his Seventieth Birthday, 700–675 [131–156], Kyoto.
Skilling, Peter, and Saerji (2014), “How the Buddhas of the Fortunate Aeon first aspired to Awakening: The pūrva-praṇidhānas of Buddhas 1–250,” ARIRIAB 17: 245–291.
Skilton, Andrew (2002), “Samādhirājasūtra,” BMSC II: 97–177.
Skjærvø, Prods Oktor (2002), Khotanese Manuscripts from Chinese Turkestan in the British Library: A Complete Catalogue with Texts and Translations (Corpus inscriptionum Iranicarum, Part II: Inscriptions of the Seleucid and Parthian Periods and of Eastern Iran and Central Asia, Vol. V: Saka, Texts, VI), London.
Sørensen, Per K. (1994), Tibetan Buddhist Historiography. The Mirror Illuminating the Royal Genealogies. An Annotated Translation of the XIVth Century Tibetan Chronicle: rGyal rabs gsal-ba’i me-long, Wiesbaden.
Speijer, J. S. (1886), Sanskrit Syntax, Leyden.
Strauch, Ingo (2010), “More Missing Pieces of Early Pure Land Buddhism: New Evidence for Akṣobhya and Abhirati in an Early Mahayana Sutra from Gandhāra,” EB 41: 23–66.
Takasaki, Jikido (1974), “Bosatsuzōkyō ni tsuite,” IBK 22: 578–86.
Tauscher, H. (2008), Catalogue of the Gondhla Proto-Kanjur (Wiener Studien zur Tibetologie und Buddhismuskunde, 72): Wien.
Thomas, F. W. (1916), “Ratnadhvaja, in the Mahāsaṃnipāta Sūtra,” Manuscript Remains of Buddhist Literature found in Eastern Turkestan, vol. 1, ed. A. F. Rudolf Hoernle, Oxford.
Tokuno Kyoko (1994), “Byways in Chinese Buddhism: The Book of Trapusa and Indigenous Scriptures,” Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.
Tournier, Vincent (2012a), “La formation du Mahāvastu et la mise en place des conceptions relatives à la carrière du bodhisattva,” Thèse de doctorat (Ph.D. dissertation), École Pratique des Hautes Études, Paris.
–– (2012b), “The Mahāvastu and the Vinayapiṭaka of the Mahāsāṃghika-Lokottaravādins,” ARIRIAB 15: 87–104.
Tripathi, Chandrabhal (1962), Fünfundzwanzig Sūtras des Nidānasaṃyukta (Deutsche Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin, Institut für Orientforschung, Veröffentlichung 56 / Sanskrittexte aus den Turfanfunden 8), Berlin.
–– (1995), Ekottarāgama-Fragmente der Gilgit-Handschrift (StII, Monographie, 2), Reinbek.
Tudkeao, Chanwit (2009), Versionen des Ratnaketuparivarta: Studien über die Überlieferung des Ratnaketuparivarta und eine kritische Ausgabe der Sanskrit-Fragmente, Dissertation submitted to Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität, München, available as microfiche.
— (2015), “Three Fragments of the Ratnaketuparivarta,” BLSF III.2: 587–591.
Turner, R. L. (1966), A Comparative Dictionary of the Indo-Aryan Languages, London.
Ui, Hakuju, Munetada Suzuki, Yenshō Kanakura and Tōkan Tada (1934), A Complete Catalogue of the Tibetan Buddhist Canons (Bkaḥ-ḥgyur and bstan-ḥgyur). Sendai.
Vaidya, P. L. (1960a), Aṣṭasāhasrikāprajñāpāramitā with Haribhadra’s Commentary Called Āloka (BST 4), Darbhanga.
–– (1960b), Gaṇḍavyūhasūtra (BST 5), Darbhanga.
–– (1960c), Saddharmapuṇḍarīkasūtram (BST 6), Darbhanga.
–– (1961a), Samādhirājasūtra, (BST 2), Darbhanga.
–– (1961b), Mahāyāna-sūtra-saṃgraha, Part 1 (BST 17), Darbhanga.
–– (1963), Saddharmalaṅkāvatārasūtra (BST 3), Darbhanga.
–– (1964), Mahāyāna-sūtra-saṃgraha, Part 2 (BST 18), Darbhanga.
Vajracharya, Vijay Raj, ed., (2006), Āryapañcaviṁśatisāhasrikāprajñāpāramitā, vol. II: Chapters 2–4 (Bibliotheca Indo-Tibetica Series 64), Sarnath.
Waldschmidt, Ernst (1971), Sanskrithandschriften aus den Turfanfunden, Teil 3, Die Katalognummern 802–1014 (VOHD 10.3), Wiesbaden.
–– (1980), “Central Asian Sūtra Fragments and their Relation to the Chinese Āgamas,” Die Sprache der ältesten buddhistischen Überlieferung / The Language of the Earliest Buddhist Tradition (Symposien zur Buddhismusforschung, 2), ed. Heinz Bechert (AAWG 117), Göttingen: 136–174.
Waldschmidt, Ernst, with Walter Clawiter and Lore Holzmann (1965), Sanskrithandschriften aus den Turfanfunden I (VOHD 10.1), Wiesbaden.
–– (1968), Sanskrithandschriften aus den Turfanfunden II (VOHD 10.2), Wiesbaden.
Warder, A[nthony] K. (1967), Pāli Metre: A Contribution to the History of Indian Literature. London.
Warren, Henry Clarke (1950), revised by Dharmananda Kosambi, Visuddhimagga of Buddhaghosâcariya (Harvard Oriental Series, 41), Cambridge MA.
Watanabe Kaikyoku (1907), “A Chinese Text Corresponding to Part of the Bower Manuscript,” JRAS 39, 2: 261–266.
Watanabe, Kaigyoku kŒi] (1907a), “<;53a-{ Nanboku ryōden no Honji–kyō,” j IYK Jōdo kyōhō no. 746–7 [Reprint in M`4 Kogetsu zenshū (1933) vol. 1: 423–444].
Watanabe, Kaigyoku (1907b), “A Chinese collection of Itivuttakas,” JPTS 1907: 44–49.
Weller, Friedrich (1928), Tausend Buddhanamen des Bhadrakalpa. Leipzig.
Wessels-Mevissen, Corinna (2001), The Gods of the Directions in Ancient India. Origin and Early Development in Art and Literature (until c. 1000 A.D.), Berlin.
Wille, Klaus (1997), “Zwei kleine Fragmente aus dem Bhikṣuṇīprātimokṣasūtra,” Untersuchungen zur buddhistischen Literatur II (SWTF, Beiheft 8), ed. Heinz Bechert et al., Göttingen: 307– 314.
–– (2005), “Some recently identified Sanskrit fragments from the Stein and Hoernle collections in the British Library, London (1),” ARIRIAB 8: 47–79.
–– (2006), “Some recently identified Sanskrit fragments from the Stein and Hoernle collections in the British Library, London (2),” BLSF I: 27–64.
–– (2009), “The Sanskrit Fragments Or.15004 in the Hoernle Collection,” BLSF II: 73–104.
–– (2015), “The Sanskrit Fragments Or.15007 in the Hoernle Collection,” BLSF III.1: 13–198.
Wilson, Liz (1996), Charming Cadavers. Horrific figurations of the feminine Indian Buddhist hagiography, Chicago.
Winternitz, M. (1920), Geschichte der indischen Litteratur, Band 2: Die buddhistische Litteratur und die heiligen Texte der Jainas, Leipzig.
Wogihara, Unrai (1936, 1989) Spuṭārthā Abhidharmakośavyākhyā by Yaśomitra, Tokyo.
Woodward, F. L., tr. (1936, 1973), The Book of the Gradual Sayings (Anguttara-Nikāya) or MoreNumbered Suttas, vol. 5 (PTS Translation Series, 27), London.
–– tr., (1985), The minor anthologies of the Pali canon, Part II (PTS, Sacred Books of the Buddhists, 8), London.
Yakup, Abdurishid (2006), Dišastvustik: Eine altuigurische Bearbeitung einer Legende aus dem Catuṣpariṣat-sūtra, Wiesbaden.
Yamazaki, M. and Ousaka, Y. (2003), Index of the Jātaka, PTS, Oxford.
Yáng, Fù-xué (2005), “
” [Huígú wén fójiào pìyù gùshì jí qí tèsè—yǐ huígú wén ‘Zhéchì wáng de gùshì’ wéilì, Buddhist Avadāna Stories in Uighur and their Character, as Exemplified by the Uighur Story of King Caṣṭana], Cv Tǔlǔfān xué yánjiū 2005.1-2: 90–106.
Yuyama Akira (2001), The Mahāvastu-Avadāna in Old Palm-Leaf and Paper Manuscripts, 2 vols., Tokyo.





Source