@I
##APPENDIX II 
THE GILGIT TEXT OF THE## vajracchedikA
##BY N. P. CHAKRAVARTI##
@II
##Blank##
@175
##INTRODUCTION 
While examining the collection of manuscripts discov-
ered in 1931 in a stupa mound in the mountainous region
three miles to the north of Gilgit, which is now preserved
in the National Archives of India, New Delhi, as a tempo-
rary measure, I came across seven folios of a manuscript
of## vajracchedikA. ##The manuscript is written
on birch bark and bears the folio numbers 5 and 7 to 12
on the obverse. Pages 1 to 4 and 6 are now missing. Dr.
Nalinaksha Dutt has noticed this manuscript as consisting 
of 12 leaves{1 Gilgit mss., Vol. I, p. 47.} but on inquiry he wrote to me saying that
he did not remember if all the 12 leaves were actually there.
I could not find the missing leaves even after a careful
search; obviously they were missing all the time.
Folio 5 is 36.5 mm in length and 5.5 mm in width
and bears 7 lines of writing; while folios 6-12 are of the 
same width, the length is 37 mm and they bear 6 lines of 
writing on each side with the exception of the reverse of 
leaf 12 where the manuscript ends, which has only three
lines. Considering the portion which is missing, it would
appear that the first five leaves had 7 lines of writing on 
each side and the rest 6 lines each. The writing on all
the folios is in the same hand and the difference in the 
number of lines in the subsequent pages for which a fresh 
birch bark appears to have been used, seems to be due to 
the fact that a thicker pen was used. 
@176
The bundle of which 27 leaves are now preserved, ori-
ginally contained texts of at least four manuscripts,## vaj-
racchedikA, bhaiSajyaguru, ##an unidentified text
and## vasudhArA. ##The folios 24-27 are missing but it is 
clear that## bhaiSajyaguru ##which began on folio 13 must
have ended on folio 24. The third text ended on folio 34
but there is no colophon indicating the name of the work. 
Folio 35 begins with the tale of## sucIndra ##in## vasudhArA { 1 ##C. BENDALI, Catalogue of Buddhist Sanscrit Manuscripts in Cambridge,
Cambridge 1883, Mss. Add. 1335 and Add. 1400.##}
Max Mueller was the first to edit the text of## vaj-
racchedikA ##from the manuscript received from
Japan{2 Anecdota Oxoniensia, Aryan Series, I, 1. Translated by the same scholar 
in Sacred Books of the East, vol. 49, Pt. II, pp. 109-144, in French by C. DE
HARLEZ in Journal Asiatique, 1891, s. 8, T. XVIII, pp. 440 ff. and in German
by MAX WALLESER,## prajJAparamitA, ##Die Vollkommenheit der Erkenntnis,
nach indischen, tibetischen and chinesischen Quellen usw., Goettingen 1914,
pp. 140-158.}. F. E. Pargiter has edited a fragmentary text
of the work discovered by the late Sir Aurel Stein during his
first expedition to Chinese Turkestan during 1900-1901,
from the ruins of a small dwelling place at Dandan Uliq{3 A. F. RUDOLF HOERNLE, Manuscript Remains of Buddhist Literature 
found in Eastern Turkestan, Oxford 1916, pp. 176 ff.}.
This manuscript is written on country paper and is badly
decayed. Its language is indifferent sanscrit. Sten Ko-
now has also edited an old Khotanese version of the same 
work brought back also by Stein{4 HOERNLE, 1. c., pp. 214 ff.}.
Folio 5 of the present ms. begins with## ta: bhagavAn Aha,
##corresponding to p. 29, 1. 5 and ends with## sarva saMjJA
varjayitvA, ##corresponding to p. 32, 1. 1 of Max Mueller’s
edition. Folio 7 begins with## (pa)rimANena ##in p. 3, 1.2 of the 
same edition. Though incomplete, the text is edited here
@177
for several reasons. It is decidedly the earliest manuscript
known so far of the work. Moreover, if compared to the 
mss. examined by Max Mueller, the present mss. is 
remarkably free from errors and is much shorter, 
avoiding unnecessary repetitions. The few mistakes
which occur are mainly orthographical or are due
to oversight, e. g.## dvAtRMzatA ##for## dvAtri- (5 ##a,## 1.2), 
bhUta ##for## bhUtah- (7 ##a,## 1.3), paMcazatyAm ##for## paMca-,
duhitRnAM ##for## duhitrinAM- (7 ##b##, 1.3), asastAd ##for## asato-
(7 ##b,## 1.4) kuzali ##for## kuzalair- (10 ##a,## 1. 4) cevaM ##for## cai-
vaM- (10 ##b,## 1.1). anusvAra ##has been omitted in## samAmllo-
kAn – (11 ##a,## 1. 4) ##and## –kheyAmllokAn-(12 ##a,## 1.5). ##All
such omissions and errors have been corrected in the foot
notes in the text. As regards orthography consonants 
are not doubled following A# repha, ##the rare exceptions 
being## rddipaMkarasya- ##(7 a, 1.6) and## varttamAnAyAM-
##(7 b, 1.1). Sattva has been invariably spelt as## satva.
##For indicating punctuation a common mark is a comma laid 
lengthwise like the figure of 1. Another is a dot followed
by a comma to indicate a full stop (5 a,1.5). In order
to indicate the end, a circle with a dot in the middle flanked
by two strokes on either side is used. The mss. ends with##
vajracchedikA samAptA ##and there is no colophon at the 
end indicating the name of the copyist, the place where it
was copied or the purpose for which it was prepared.
The writing is of the upright variety of the Gupta script
as in the mss. of the## BhaiSajyaguru, ##a page of which has 
been illustrated in Dutt’s edition of the work.{1 Gilgit mss. Vol. I.}.
The date of these manuscripts has been placed by earlier
scholars in the 5th, 6th or, even in the 7th century. But
@178
on examining the script carefully we find that it is analogous
to that used in the Bower mss. II and III and Weber
mss. I and III. Initial## A ##follows the Weber ms. III, the
initial i is represented by three dots and the initial e is 
written in the same way as in the Weber mss. I. In ka
the vertical bar is straight but the horizontal bar is bent.
Ja is cursive as in Weber mss. III and ma and ya follow
closely the Bower ms. III, the latter with a loop in the 
left. Ra is of the same variety as in Bower mss. II and
the marks used for punctuation are also similar. Dr. Hoernle
in his intensive study of the Bower manuscript has shown 
that its parts I-III, IV, V-VII and VI were written by 
four different scribes, three of whom were contemporaries, 
the writer of part VI being a little later. According 
to him the date of the Bower mss. has to be placed, on 
palaeographic grounds, in the second half of the 4th cen-
tury- rather nearer the beginning than the end of the 
period, i. e. approximately in the third quarter of the 4th 
century A. D.{1 Indian Antiquary, Vols. XLII, XLIII, 1913-14, Supplement.}
From the similarity of the script of the Gilgit mss. of##
vajracchedikA ##with that of Bower mss. on the whole 
and the resemblance of a few letters with the Weber mss.
I and II, the Gilgit mss. may have to be placed early in the 
5th century A. D., rather than in the 6th century as has
been held hitherto. On comparison with the script of the 
Kasia Plate, Pargiter placed the## VajracchedikA ##manuscript 
edited by him at the end of the 5th or the beginning of 
the 6th century A.D. But the script of that manuscript
is more developed than that of the Gilgit manuscript which
has therefore to be placed at an earlier date. 
@179
Hoernle also holds that the Bower ms. was written by 
Indians settled in Kuchar. But so far as the Gilgit mss. 
are concerned there is no doubt that they were written
by the scribes settled in the Gilgit region, perhaps Buddhist
monks from Kashmir.
But this does not mean that all the mss. in the Gilgit
collection were written in the same period. The script
used in some is early and in others it is definitely of a much
later date, spread over a century if not longer. 
Apart from the palaeographical evidence there is also
some internal evidence to show that the manuscripts recov-
ered from Gilgit were not written at the same time. Names
of at least three rulers appear in the colophons of the various
mss. Dutt notices the name of only one## zAhi ##ruler mention-
ed in a colophon of one of the manuscripts. His full name 
with titles was## zrIdeva zAhi surendra vikramAditya nanda{1 ##DUTT, 1. c., p. 32 of the text.}.
He along with## zamidevi-trailokyadevi bhaTTArikA, ##prob-
ably his wife, and one Vihali were the chief donors of the 
manuscripts. Dutt connects his colophon with the mss.
B of## bhaiSajyaguru ##edited by him. I examined the mss.
carefully and found that it was the gift of the devout lay
worshipper## vasaMta ##and his associates while the page
where the name of the ruler appears, forms the obverse of an 
unnumbered leaf and may have belonged to a different ma-
nuscript. The scribe of the king’s manuscript was## Arya
##Sthirabuddhi and the collaborator Narendradatta who may
be identical with the## mahabhANaka ##Narendradatta, the 
scribe of the## ajitasenavyAkaraNa ##edited by Dutt. I came 
across the name of a second ruler of the same dynasty in 
the colophon of another unnumbered page. He is styled
@180
as## paToladeva zAhi vajrAditya nandin. ##No further infor-
mation of the ruler is given in the ms. and it can not be
ascertained whether he was a predecessor or successor of## 
surendra vikramAditya. ##The name of another## paTola-
deva ##is, however, known from an unpublished inscription
from Gilgit, an impression of which was sent to me in 1942
by the British Political Agent in Gilgit. The inscription 
is incised on a rock near Hunza and records the foundation 
of a city called Makarapura by one## makarasiGgha, ##a chief
in the district of## haNesarA ##(Hunza) and the great Lord
of the elephants## (mahAgajapati) ##of the P. M. P.## paToladeva
zAhi zrideva surendrAtityanandideva. ##The inscription
describes him as being born in the lineage of Bhagadatta, 
obviously the same as the son of Naraka mentioned in the##
mahAbhArata. ##It is interesting to note that the same line-
age is claimed by## bhAskaravarman, ##the ruler of## prAgiyotiSa
##(Assam) and the contemporary of King## harSa ##of Kanauj
in the 7th century A. D. There is nothing to show any
connection between these two ruling families, one of which
ruled in the extreme north and the other in the eastern
part of India. It seems that both the dynasties, the## Adi-
tyas of Gilgit and the Varmans of Assam, traced their descent
from the same source with the same object in view viz. to 
establish a claim for their## kSatriya ##origin.
This inscription is dated in the 13th day of the bright
half of the month## pauSa ##of the year 47. Unfortunately 
there is no indication to show whether this year has to be 
referred to any particular era, or denotes only the regnal
year. We know that the Laukika era was in use also in the 
northern parts of Kashmir and if the year has to be referred
to that era, in which the century was omitted, the exact
date can not be verified from the details given in the epi-
@181
graph. If it is a regnal year, which seems unlikely,## paTola-
deva ##must have been quite advanced in age when this record
was engraved. But here the palaeographical evidence is of
some use to us. The script used in the record may be called
proto## zAradA ##as it shows many earlier forms. According
to Buehler, epigraphic## zAradA ##dates from the end of the 8th
to the beginning of the 9th century though as a literary 
script it may have been much older. The script is earlier
than that used in the image inscriptions of Brahmor and
Chatrahi{1 VOGEL, Antiquities of Chamba State, Pt. I (Arch. Surv. Ind., New Im-
perial Series, Vol. XXXVI), Pl. X.} and may therefore have to be placed at a period
not later than the 7th century, perhaps even earlier. This##
paToladeva ##seems to be identical with## zAhi zAhAnuzAhi
paToladeva ##mentioned in a fragmentary manuscript of##
mahAmAyUrI ##recovered by M. S. Kaul in 1938 from## stUpa
##B. which gives further information about his family{2 M. S. KAREL, Report on the Gilgit Excavation in 1938, p. 11.}. The 
script of this manuscript is decidedly much later than that
of the## vajracchedikA ##and the Vinaya texts of the Gilgit
collection.
Now who were these## zAhi ##rulers ? Dutt seems to take
it for granted that they belonged to the family of the HindU#
zAhiya ##dyanasty of## udabhANDapura ##(Ohind). But this is 
not definitely so. LalliyA# sAhi, ##the founder of this 
dynasty, was a contemporary of## zaGkaradeva ##of Kashmir
(883-902 A. D.) and would therefore be too late in date.
Moreover, the region were this inscription and the manu-
scripts have been found is in Darada territory and would
be outside the kingdom of the## zAhis ##of Ohind.## KalhaNa
##mentions the names of several DaradA# zAhis ##who seem to
have taken prominent parts in Kashmir politics in the 11th 
@182
and 12th centuries but he does not mention any earlier
rulers of Darada by name. According to Tibetan sources
the Gilgit region was known as## bruza ##whose rulers seem to
have some connection with the kings of## udyAna ##(Swat).
According to the same source the kings of## bruza ##had the
title devaputra (gnam sras) and the manuscripts of Bstan##
‘byun actually give the name of one of the kings of## bruza
##as Sad-Zver. This title, however, is not found either in 
the inscription or in the manuscripts from Gilgit nor can 
the ruler mentioned in the Tibetan manuscript be identified
yet. Probably he was a later king when Gilgit had formed 
a closer political relation with Tibet, through matrimonial 
and other alliances.
[The segn * indicates the beginning of a line in the manuscript.]
(Folio 5 a)## ta: bhagavAn Aha | yAvat subhUte trisAhasra-
mahAsAhasre lokadhAtau pRthivIraja: kazcit tad bahu |
Aha | bahu bhagavan tat pRthivIraja: arajas tathAga-
tena bhASitas{1 ##Rd.## bhASitaM.} tenocyate pRthivI *{2 ##The segn * indicates the beginning of a line in the manuscript.##} raja iti | yo py
asau lokadhAtur adhAtuM sa tathAgatena bhASitas
tenocyate lokadhAtur iti | bhagavAn Aha | tat kiM
manyase subhUte dvAtRMzatA{3 ##Rd.## dvAtriM.} mahApuruSalakSaNais
tathAgato draSTavya: * Aha | no bhagavaMs tat kasya
hetor yAni tAni dvAtriMzan mahApuruSalakSaNAni ta-
thAgatena bhASitAny alakSaNAni tenocyate dvAtriMzan
mahApuruSalakSaNAnItI | bhagavAn Aha | yaz ca kha
* lu puna: subhUte strI vA puruSo va gaGgAna-
dIvAlukopamAn AtmabhAvAn parityajyed yaz ceto
dharmaparyAyAd antazaz catuSpAdikAm api gAthAm
udgRhya parebhyo dezayed ayam e*va tato nidA-
@183
naM bahupuNyaM prasavetAprameyam asaMkhye-
yam | atha khalvAyuSmAM subhUtir dharmaprave-
genAzruNi prAmuMcat so ‘zruNi prAmRjya bhaga-
vantam etad avocat A*zcaryaM bhagavan paramA-
zcaryaM sugata | yAvad ayaM dharmaparyAyas ta-
thAgatena bhASito yato me bhagavaM jJAnam utpan-
naM na me jAtvayaM dharmaparyAya: zrutapUrva:
parameNa * te bhagavann AzcaryeNa samanvAgatA
bhaviSyanti ya iha sUtre bhASyamAne bhUtasaMjJAm
utpAdayiSyanti | yA caiSA bhagavan bhUtasaMjJA sai-
vAbhUtasaMjJA tasmAt tathAgato bhASate
##(Folio 5 b)## bhUtasaMjJAbhUtasaMjJeti | na me bhagavann- 
AzcaryaM yad aham imaM dharmaparyAyaM bhaSya-
mANam avakalpayAmy adhimucya | ye te bhagavan
satvA imaM dharmaparyAyam udgrahISyanti | yAvat
paryavApsya * nti te paramAzcaryasamanvAgatA bha-
viSyanti | api khalu bhagavan na teSAm AtmasaMjJA
pravartsyate na satvasaMjJA na jIvasaMjJA na pud-
galasaMjJA | tatkasya heto: sarvasaMjJA pagatA hi
* buddhA bhagavanta: bhagavAn Aha | evam etat
subhUte paramAzcaryasamanvAgatAs te bhaviSyanti
ya imaM dharmaparyAyaM zrutvA nottrasiSyanti na
saMtrAsiSyanti | na saMtrasamApatsya * nte | tat-
kasya heto: paramapA ramiteyaM subhUte tathA-
gatena bhASitA | yAM ca tathAgata: paramapAra-
mitAM bhASate | tAm aparimANA buddha bhaga-
vanto bhASante | tenocyate pa * ramapAramiteti | api 
tu khalu puna: subhUte yA tathAgatasya kSAntipA-
ramitA saivApAramitA | tatkasya heto: yadA subhUte 
kalirAjAGga{1 ##MAX MULLER’S edition reads## kaliMgarAjAMga. ##He quotes Eitel
(Handbook of Chinese Buddhism, pp. 49 and 55) as giving the alternative read-
ing of## kAlirAja ##but the correct reading seems to be## kalirAja ##as found in the Gilgit
ms. See Max Muller’s ed., p. 31, n. 2.##} pratyaNgamAMsAnyacchaitsIt nAsI * n me 
@184
ta-asmin samaye AtmasaMjJA vA satvasaMjJA vA
jIvasaMjJA vA pudgalasaMjJA vA | vyApAdasaMjJA
vApi me tasmin samaye bhaviSyad abhijnAnAmy
ahaM subhUte atItedhbani paMca jAtiza * tAni yo
‘haM kSAntivAdi RSir abhUvaMs tatrApi me nAtma-
saMjJAbhUn na satvasaMjJA na jIvasaMjJA na pud-
galasaMjJA | tasmAt tarhi subhUte bodhisattvena 
mahAsattvena sarvasaMjJA varjayitvA{1 ##MAX, MULLER##, vivarjayitvA ##which is grammatically wrong.}
(Folio 6 missing; 7a )## [pa]rimANena | sarve te satvA sam-
AMzena bodhiM dhArayiSyanti | tatkasya heto: na
hi zakyaM subhUte ayaM dharmaparyAyo hInA-
dhimuktikai: satvai: zrotuM | nAtmadRSTikairna
satvajIvapu*dgaladRSTikai: zakyaM zrotum udgra-
hItuM vA | yAvat paryavAptuM vA nedaM sthAnAnI
vidyate | api tu khalu puna: subhUte yatra pRthi-
vIpradeze idaM sUtraM prakAzayiSyate | pUjanIya: 
sa * pRthivIpradezo bhaviSyati | sa devamAnuSAsu-
rasya lokasya vandanIya: pradakSiNIkaraNIyaz cai-
tyabhUta{2. ##Rd.## bhUta:} sa pRthivIpradezo bhaviSyati | ye te su-
bhUte kulaputrA * vA kuladuhitaro vA | imAn evaM-
rUpAn sUtrAntAn udgrahISyanti yAvat paryavApsyanti
te paribhUtA bhaviSyanti suparibhUtA: yAni ca te-
SAM pUrvajanmikAny azubhAni ka * rmANy apAya saM-
vartanIyAni dRSTa eva dharme paribhUtatayA kSapa-
yiSyanti buddhabodhiM cAnuprApsyanti | abhijAnAmy
ahaM subhUte atIte’ dhvany asaMkhyeyai: kalpair
asaMkhyeya * tarair ddipaMkarasya tathAgatasyA-
@185
rhata: samyaksaMbuddhasya pareNa caturazItibud-
dhakoTiniyutazatasahasrANy abhUvan yAni mayA ArA-
gitAni ArAgyA ca na virAgitAni 
(##Folio 7b##) yacca mayA subhUte te buddhA bhagavanta
ArAgya na virAgitA yacca varime kAle pazcimAyAM 
paMcAzatyAM{1 ##Rd.## paMca.} varttamAnAyam imAM sUtrAntAn ud-
grahISyanti | yAvat paryavApsyanti | asya subhU*te
puNyaskandhasyAsau pUrvaka: puNyaskandha: zata-
mIm api kalAn{2 ##Rd.## kalAM} nopaiti sahasratamIm api | zatasa-
hasratamIm api saMkhyAm api kalAm api gaNanAm 
apy upamAm apy upa * nizAm api na kSamate |
sacet subhUte teSAM kulaputrAnAM kuladuhitrInAM{3 ##Rd.## duhitRNAM.}
puNyaskandhaM bhASeyaM yAvantas te satvA ku-
laputrA: kuladuhitaraz ca tasmin samaye puNya
* skandhaM pratigrahISyanti | unmAdaM satvA anu-
prApnuyuz cittavikSepaM vA gaccheyu: api tu kha-
lu puna: subhUte acintyo yaM dharmaparyAya: 
asyAcintya eva vipAka: * Aha | kathaM bhagavan 
bodhisattvayAnasaMprasthitena sthAtavyaM kathaM
pratipattavyaM kathaM cittaM pragrahItavyaM |
bhagavAn Aha | iha subhUte bodhisatvayAnasaM
prasthitenaivam cittam utpA * dayita vyaM sar-
vasattvA mayA anupadhizeSe nirvANadhAtau pari-
nirvApayitavyA: evaM ca satvAn parinirvApya na
kazcit satva: parinirvApito bhavati | tatkasya heto: 
sace-
(##Folio 8 A#) t subhUte bodhisattvasya sattvasaMjJA pra-
varteta | jIvasaMjJA pudgalasaMjJA vA na sa bo-
@186
dhisatva iti vaktavya: tatkasya heto: nAsti subhUte
sa dharmo yo bodhisatvayAnasaMprasthito nAma |
tat kiM manya*se subhUte asti sa kazcid dharmo
yas tathAgatena dIpaMkarasya tathAgatasya antikAd
anuttarAM samyaksambodhim abhisambuddha: Aha 
nAsti sa bhagavan kazcid dharmo yas tathAgatena
dIpaMkara*sya tathAgatasyAntikAd anuttarAM sam-
yaksambodhim abhisambuddha: Aha | tasmAd ahaM
dIpaMkareNa tathAgatena vyAkRto bhaviSyasi tvaM 
mAnavAnAgate’dhvani zAkyamunir nAma tathA*gato
‘rhan samyaksambuddhas tatkasya hetos tathA gata
iti subhUte tathatAyA etad adhivacanaM ya: kazcit
subhUte evaM vadet tathAgatenAnuttarA samyak-
sambodhir abhisambuddheti*nAsti subhUte sa kazcid
dharmo yas tathAgatenAnuttarA samyaksaMbodhir
abhisambuddha: ya: subhUte tathAgatena dharmo
`bhisaMbuddhas tatra na satyaM na mRSa:{1 ##Rd.## mRSA^.} tasmAt
tathAgato bhASate | sarva*dharmA buddhadharmA iti 
subhUte sarve te adharmAs tenocyate sarvadharmA
iti | tadyathApi nAma subhUte puruSo bhaved upe-
takAyo mahAkAya: subhUtir Aha | yo
(##Folio 8 b##) ‘sau tathAgatena puruSo bhASita upetakAyo 
mahAkAya: akAya: sa bhagavaMs tathAgatena bhA-
Sitas tenocyate upetakAyo mahAkAya: bhagavAn
Aha | evaM etad subhUte * yo bodhisatva evaM 
vadet ahaM satvAn parinirvApayiSyAmIti | na sa bo-
dhisatva iti vaktavya: tatkasya heto: asti subhUte
sa kazcid dharmo yo bodhisatvo nAma | Aha | no hI-
daM bha*gavan bhagavAn AhA | tasmAt tathAgato
bhASate ni:sattvA: sarvadharmA: nirjIvA niSpud-
@187
galA: ya: subhUte bodhisatva evaM vaded ahaM
kSetravyUhAn niSpadayiSyamIti | so ’pi tathaiva *
vaktavya: tat kasya heto: kSetravyUhA iti su-
bhUte avyUhAs te tathAgatena bhASitas tenocyate kSe-
travyUha iti | ya: subhUte boodhisatvo nirAtmano
dharmA nirA*tmano dharmA ity adhimucyate sa
tathAgatenArhatA samyaksaMbuddhena bodhisatvo bo-
dhisatva{1 ##Rd.## mahAsatva ##as in M. M.##} ity AkhyAtas tat kiM manyase subhUte
saMvidyate tathAgatasya mAMsacakSu: Aha | evam
etad bha*gavan saMvidyate tathAgatasya mAMsa-
cakSu: bhagavAn Aha | tat kiM manyase subhUte
saMvidyate tathAgatasya divyaM cakSu: prajJAcak-
Sur dharmacakSur buddhacakSu: Ahaivam etad bha-
gavan saMvidyate ta-
(##Folio 9 A#) thAgatasya divyaM cakSu: prajJAcakSur dhar-
macakSur buddhacakSu: | bhagavAn Aha tat kiM
manyase subhUte yavantyo gaMgAnadyAM vAlukAs
tAvantya gaMgAnAdyo bhaveyus tAsu yA vAlukAs
tAvanta eva lo * kadhAtavo bhaveyu: kazcid bahavas
te lokadhAtavo bhaveyU: bhagavAn Aha | yAvanta:
subhUte teSu lokadhAtuSu satvAs teSAm ahaM nA-
nAbhAvAM cittadhArAM jA nIyAs tat kasya heto*z
cittadhArA cittadhArA iti subhUte adhArAs tAs tathA-
gatena bhAsitAs tenocyate cittadhArA iti | tat kasya
heto: atItaM subhUte * cittaM nopalabyate | anAga-
taM cittaM nopalabhyate | pratyuypannaM nopala-
bhyate | tat kiM manyase subhute ya imaM trisA-
hasramahAsAhasraM lokadhAtuM saptaratnaparipUr-
NaM kRtvA dAnan dadyAd api nu sa kulaputro vA
kuladu hitA vA tato nidAnam bahu puNyam prasa-
@188
veta | aha bahu bhagavan bahu sugata | bhagavAn 
Aha | evam etat subhUte evam etad bahu sa kulapu-
tro vA kuladuhitA vA tato nidAnaM * bahu puNyam
prasaveta | sacet subhUte puNyaskandho ‘bhaviSyan
na tathAgato ’bhASiSyat puNyaskandha: puNyaskandha
iti tat kiM manyase subhUte rUpakAyapariniSpattyA
tathAgato dra-
(##Folio 9 b##) STavya: Aha | no bhagavan na rUpakAyapari-
niSpattyA tathAgato draSTavya: tat kasya heto: rU-
pakAyapariniSpattI rUpakAyapariniSpattir ity aparini-
Spattir eSA tathA * gatena bhASitA tenocyate rUpakA-
yapariniSpattir iti | bhagavAn Aha tat kiM manyase 
subhUte lakSaNasampadA tathAgato draSTavya: Aha | 
no bhavan na lakSaNasampadA tathAgato * draSTa-
vya: tat kasya heto: yaiSA lakSaNasampat tathAga-
tena bhASitA alakSaNasampad eSA tathAgatena bhA-
SitA tenocyate lakSaNasampad iti | bhagavAn Aha |
tat kiM ma*nyase subhUte api nu tathAgatasyai-
vam bhavati na mayA dharmo dezita iti | ya: su-
bhUte evaM vadet tathAgatena dharmo dezita iti |
abhyAcakSIta mAM sa subhUte asatA{1 ##Rd.## asatod.} d u*dgRhitena |
tat kasya hetor dharmadezanA dharmadezaneti su-
bhUte nAsti sa kazcid dharmo yo dharmadezanA nA-
mopalabhyate | AhAsti bhagavan kecit satvA bhavi-
Syanty anAgatedhvani ya imA*n evaMrUpAn dhar-
mAn bhASamAnAM cchrutvAbhizraddadhAsyanti | bha-
gavAn Aha | na te subhUte satvA nAsatvA tat kasya 
heto: sarvasatvA iti subhUte asatvAs te tathAga-
tena bhASitAs teno-
(##Folio 10 A#) cyate sarvasatvA iti | tat kiM manyase su-
@189
bhUte api na asti sa kazcid dharmo yas tathAgatenA-
nuttara samyaksambodhir abhisambuddha: Aha | nAsti
sa bhagavan kazcid dharmo yas tathAgate * nAnut-
tarAsamyaksambodhir abhisambuddha: bhagavAn Aha
| evam etat subhUte evam etat aNur api tatra dhar-
mo na saMvidyate nopalabhyate tenocyate ’nuttarA
samyaksambodhir ity a*pi tu khalu puna: subhUte 
sama: sa dharmo na tatra kiMcid viSamas tenocyate 
‘nuttarA samyaksambodhir iti | nirjIvatvena ni:satvat-
vena niSpudgalatvena samA sAnuttara samyaksambo-
* dhi: sarvai: kuzalai: dharmair abhisaMbudhyate
| kuzalA dharmA: kuzalA dharmA iti subhUte adhar-
mAz caiva te tathAgatena bhASitAs tenocyate kuzalA
dharmA iti | yaz ca kha*lu puna: subhUte yAvan-
tas trisAhasramahAsahasre lokadhAtau sumerava: par-
vatarAjAs tAvato rAzIn saptAnAM ratnAnAm abhisaM-
haRtya dAnaM dadyAd yaz caiva prajJApAramitA*yA
antazaz catuSpAdikAm api gAthAm udgRhya parebhyo
dezayed asya subhUte puNyaskandhasyAsau pUrvaka: 
puNyaskandha: zatatamIm api kalAnnopaiti | yavad
upani-
(##Folio 10 b##) zam api na kSamate | tat kiM manyase subhUte
api nu tathAgatasyaivam bhavati | mayA satvA mo-
citA iti | na khalu puna: subhUte cevaM{1 ##Rd.## caivaM.} draSTa-
vyaM tat kasya heto: na sa kazcit sa*tvo yas tathA-
gatena mocita: yadi puna: subhUte kazcit satvo ‘bha-
viSyad yas tathAgatena mocita: sa eva tasyAtmagrA-
* ho bhaviSyat satvagrAho jIvagrAha: pudgalagrAha:
AtamgrAha iti subhUte agrAha eSa tathAgatena bhA-
Sita: sa ca bAlapRthagjanair udgRhIta: bAlapRthag-
@190
janA iti subhUte ajanA eva te tathAgatena * bhASitAs
tenocyante bAlapRthagjanA iti | tat kiM manyase su-
bhUte lakSNasampadA tathAgato draSTavya: Ahai vaM 
bhagavallakSaNasampadA{1 ##Rd.## bhagavannala- |} tathAgato draSTavya: bha-
gavAn Aha sacet subhUte lakSaNasampadA tathAgato
draSTavyo bhaviSyad rAjApi cakravartI tathAgato bha-
viSyad Aha | yathAham bhagavato bhASitasyArtham
AjA*nAmi na lakSaNasampadA tathAgato draSTavya: 
atha khalu bhagavaMstasyAM velAyAm imA gAthA
abhASata | ye mAM rUpeNa adrAkSur ye mAM ghoSeNa
anvayu: | mithyA-
(##Folio 11A#) prahANaprasRtA na mAM drakSyanti te janA: | dra-
STavyo dharmato buddho dharmakAyas tathAgata: | dhar-
mato cAsya vijJeyA na sa zakyaM vijAnitum || tat kiM 
manyase subhUte lakSaNasampadA tathA * gatenAnut-
tarA samyaksambodhir abhisambuddha: na khalu
puna: subhUte evaM draSTavyaM na subhUte lakSaNa-
sampadA tathAgatenAnuttarA samyaksambodhir abhi-
sambuddha: | yat khalu pu * na: subhUte syad evam
bodhisatvayAnasaMprasthitai: kasyacid dharmasya vi-
nAza: prajJapta ucchedo vA na khalu puna: subhUte 
evaM draSTavyaM | na bodhisatvayAnasaMprasthitai: 
ka * syacid dharmasya vinAza: prajJapto nocche-
da: yaz ca khalu puna: subhUte kulaputro vA
kuladuhitA vA gaMgAnadIvAlukosamA:{2 ##Rd. kA -samAMlloka.} lokadhAtUn
saptaratnapratipUrNAG  kRtvA tathAb * gatebhyo ‘rhad-
bhya: samyaksambuddhebyo dAnaM dadyAd yaz ca
bodhisattvo nirAtmakeSu dharmeSu kSAntiM pratila-
bheta | ayam eva tato bahutaram puNyaM prasaveta
@191
| na khalu puna: subhUte bodhi*satvena puNyaskan-
dha: parigrahItavya: Aha | puNyaskandho bhagavan
parigrahItavya: bhagavAn Aha | parigrahItavya: su-
bhUte nodgrahItavya: tenocyate parigrahI [tavya:]
(##Folio 11b##) api tu khalu puna: subhUte ya: kazcid evaM 
vadet tathAgato gacchati vAgacchati vA | tiSThati vA
niSIdati vA zayyAM vA kalpayati | na me sa bhASita-
syArtham AjAnAti | tat kasya [heto:] tathAgata iti
subhUte na kutazcid Agato na kvacid gata: teno-
cyate tathAgato ’rhan samyaksmbuddha: iti | yaz ca
khalu puna: subhU te kulaputro vA kuladuhitA vA
yAvantas trisAhasrama [hA] * sAhasre lokadhAtau pRthi-
vIrajAMsi tavato lokadhAtuM maSiM kuryAt tad ya-
thApi nAma paramAnusaMcaya: tat kiM manyase
subhUte bahu sa paramAnusaMzayo bhavet Ahai * vam
etad bhagavAn bahu sa paramAnusaMcayo bhavet
tat kasya heto: saced bhagavAn saMcayo ’bhavi-
Syan na bhagavAn avakSyat paramAnusaMcaya iti |
tat kasya heto: yo ‘sauparamA * nusaMcayo bhASi-
ta: asaMcaya sa bhagavatA bhASitas tenocyate para-
mAnusaMcaya iti | yaz ca tathAgato bhASati trisAha-
sramahAsAhasro lokadhAtur iti | adhAtu: sa tathA-
*gatena bhASitas tenocyate trisAhasramahAsAhasro lo-
kadhAtur iti | tat kasya heto: saced bhagavAn dhAtur
abhavisyat sa eva bhagavan piNDagrAho ‘bhaviSyad
yaz caiva tathAgatena pi-
(##Folio 12 A#) NDagraho bhASita: agrAha: sa tathAgatena 
bhASitas tenocyate piNDagrAha iti | bhagavAn Aha |
piNDagrAhaz caivAvyavahAro ’nabhilApya: subhUte
sa dharma: sa bAla pRthagjanair udgRhIta: tat ka-
sya heto: ya: kazcit subhUte evaM vaded Atma-
dRStis tathAgatena bhASitA satvadRSTir jIvadRSTi: pud-
@192
galadRSTi: api nu subhUte sa samyag vadan vadet
* Aha | no bhagavaMs tat kasya heto: yA sA bha-
gavann AtmadRSTis tathAgatena bhASitA adRSTi: sA
tathAgatena bhASitA tenocyate AtmadRSTir iti | bha-
gavAn Aha * evaM subhUte bodhisatvyAnasaMpra-
sthitena sarvadharmA jJAtavyA adhimoktavyAs tathA
cAdhimoktavyA yathA na dharmasaMjJApi pratyupati-
SThet tat kasya heto: dharmasaMjJA * dharmasaMjJeti
subhUte asaMjJaiSA tathAgatena bhASitA tenocyate 
dharmasaMjJeti | yaz ca khalu puna: subhUte bodhi-
satvo mahAsatva: aprameyAsaMkhyeyA{1 ##Rd.## kyeyAmloka.} lokadhatUn
saptaratnapa*ripUrNAG kRtvA dAnan dadyAd yaz ca
kulaputro vA kuladuhitA vA ita: prajJapAramitAyA
antazaz catuSpAdikAm api gAthAm udgRhya vAcayed
dezayed paryavApnuyAd a
(##Folio 12 b##) yam eva tato bahutaraM puNyaM prasavetA-
prameyam asaMkhyeyaM | kathaM ca samprakAzayet
yathA na prakAzayet tenocyate samprakAzaye{2 ##Rd.## -zayed.} iti |
tArakA timiraM dIpo mA*yA vazyAya budbuda: su-
pinaM vidyud abhraM ca evaM draSTavya{3 ##Rd.## draSTavyaM.} saMskR-
tam || idam avocad bhagavAn AttamanA sthavirasub-
bhUtis te ca bhikSubhikSuNyupAsakopAsikA: sade-
vamAnuSAsu*ragandharvaz ca loko bhagavato bhA-
Sitam abhyanandan ||##O##|| vajracchedikA prajJApA-
ramitA samAptA ||##O##||
