Loading translation...
See Tournier 2015, p. 180, as well as pp. 182, 192, and 197, on the coexistence of mundane benefits with the supreme goal in sūtras like Verses for Prasenajit.
In this catalog, dated to ca. 812
See Cohen 2006, p. 301 on Inscription 52 in Cave X and p. 331 on Inscription 90 in Cave XXII. For a translation of the Sanskrit, see Vinītā 2010, p. 217.
On this point, see Tournier 2015, p. 192. An e-text version of this sūtra can be found at Tathāgatabimbakārāpaṇasūtra. GRETIL edition input by Klaus Wille, based on the edition by Adelheid Mette, “Zwei kleine Fragmente aus Gilgit: I. Tathāgatabimbakārāpaṇasūtra (Gilgit-Ms. No. 18); II. Devatāsūtra un Alpadevatāsūtra (Gilgit-Ms. No. 13).” Studien zur Indologie und Iranistik 7 (1981), 133–51. Input July 31, 2020.
The existence of this manuscript only came to our attention at the editorial phase of this project. Therefore, we had insufficient time to integrate its evidence fully into our translation and notes. However, we have made a preliminary investigation of its readings and noted some of them in the annotations to the translation. We acknowledge Péter-Dániel Szántó, whose remarks on another text led us to become aware of the existence of this additional manuscript.
See Vinītā 2010, p. 258, Appendix II, for tables comparing the verses as they appear in the Potala manuscript, one of the Gilgit manuscripts, and the Tibetan, respectively. Her study does not take into account the Cambridge manuscript.
Unlike in the Tibetan, which separates the terms blo mchog and bde ba, their Sanskrit equivalents, agrabuddhe and sukha, are adjacent in the Sanskrit manuscripts from the Potala and Cambridge. Vinītā (2010, p. 212, nn. 2–3) emends both terms in the Potala MS such that agrabuddhe becomes agrabuddheḥ, the genitive (or ablative) singular form of agrabuddhi (feminine), and sukha becomes sukhaṃ, the accusative form one finds in the Gilgit and Cambridge manuscripts that preserves the verse. In the Gilgit manuscript (1581, 5–6) cited in Vinītā 2010 (p. 212, n. 2), she renders a genitive relationship between the terms, i.e., “the bliss of the ultimate understanding.” Ven. Gyalten Lekden (2019), in his translation, takes the terms to be related by a conjunction, i.e., “supreme awareness and bliss.” However, Silk (2013, p. 71), in examining Ven. Vinītā’s translation of this stanza, suggests that the line should read, “How do mortal beings obtain bliss in other [future] existences through making offerings to the supreme sagacious one...” This reading reflects what would be a locative sense of agrabuddha (m.) rather than a genitive of agrabuddhi (f.). Still, we have a further option, namely agrabuddhe as the vocative of agrabuddhi (f.). Tournier (2015, p. 191, n. 40) favors this reading, translating agrabuddhe as “supremely sagacious one” and citing the Gilgit manuscript that preserves this verse where it shows agryabuddhe as further support for doing so. The Cambridge MS also reads agrabuddhe, supporting both Silk and Tournier’s interpretations without emendation. It seems likely that the Tibetan translator(s) understood agrabuddhe as a vocative.
Preferring the variant in the Stok Palace Kangyur: mngon sum spyan. The Degé and the Pedurma (sans notes) show mngon sum spyad for aparokṣacakṣuḥ.
While the Degé and Stok have rgyal ba dag and rgyal ba rnams respectively, several other Kangyurs have mchod rten dag. See, for example, the Choné, Lhasa, Lithang, Narthang, and Yongle. Translating mchod rten instead of rgyal ba, the line would read, “How, by making offerings to stūpas, do people obtain the various rewards they desire in other lives?”
The Degé reads rnma smin ’dod pa sna tshogs ci thob pa while the Stok reads rnma smin ’dod pa rgya chen sna tshogs ’thob. Observing the ci in the Degé, the line has been translated as a question above, i.e., “How, by worshiping the victors, do people, in other lives, obtain the various rewards they desire? Listen, O King, to the answer to your question!” However, the Stok (as well as the Phukdrak and Gondhla) reflect the Sanskrit more closely with the inclusion of rgya chen for vipulaṃ, and they do not include ci. A translation that would reflect those versions would be, “By worshiping the victors accordingly, people, in other lives, obtain the abundant, various rewards they desire. Listen, O King, to the information you requested!”
Cohen (2006) provides a translation of the lines that echo this verse at Ajaṇṭā. See p. 301 on Inscription 52 in Cave X and p. 331 on Inscription 90 in Cave XXII. On the Ajaṇṭā inscriptions as they relate to verses of Verses for Prasenajit, see also Tournier 2015, pp. 184–85.
For this line, the Tibetan translation reflects the reading that is preserved in the Cambridge MS, rogaśokabhayaduḥkhavimuktaṃ, over the one found in the Potala MS, which has sarvarogabhayaśokavimuktaṃ (“free of all disease, fear, and sorrow”). The Gilgit MS does not contain this verse.
chos dang rjes ’thun [preferring the Narthang var. mthun] chos la sgrub pa could be rendered as “one conforms with the Dharma and accomplishes the Dharma.” However, the line reflects the Sanskrit dharmānudharma, and on this compound, Edgerton (p. 27) points us to the Pali Text Society’s Pali English Dictionary (p. 36), which states that dhammānudhamma is “to be judged as a redupl. cpd. [reduplicative compound] after the manner of cpds. [compounds] mentioned under anu iv. & meaning ‘the Law in all its parts, the dhamma and what belongs to it, the Law in its fullness.’ ” The Gondhla manuscript (284.b.6), where we find eleven syllables instead of nine, captures this sense more fully: chos dang rjes su mthun ba’i chos la sgrub pa dang.
This line varies across versions, particularly in terms of the seventh syllable. E.g., the Degé reads lus sems nad dang mya ngan byed spangs te; the Stok has lus sems nad dang mya ngan rgud spangs te; the Phukdrak MS reads lus sems nad dang mya ngan rab spangs; and the Gondhla has lus sems nad myed mya ngan myed spangs te. For comparison, the Potala MS has śokāgnirogojjhitasarvadehā (“the whole body freed from the fire of anguish and disease”), whereas the Cambridge MS has rāgāgniśokājjhitacittadehā (“the body and mind free from sorrow and the fire of passion”). The Gilgit MS appears to split the difference with śokāgnirogojjhitacittadehāḥ (“the body and mind free from disease and the fire of sorrow”).
gser dngul spa ba’i glegs mos g.yogs pa yi. The Potala MS reads suvarṇarūpyojjvala paṭṭabaddhaṃ, while the Cambridge MS has paṭṭabandhaṃ. It may be that the term spa ba in this line is doing double duty as a way to evoke the sense of both ujjvala (“blazing up,” “luminous”) and baddhaṃ or bandhaṃ (“bound”) in paṭṭabaddhaṃ or bandhaṃ. The terms paṭṭabaddha and paṭṭabandha refer to a binding or crowning of the head with a turban, an Indian symbol of royalty. The line could be meant to suggest that sheets or strips of gold and silver come together to cover the stūpa in a turban-like fashion.
The Degé reads tshig btsan while the Phukdrak MS reads phyug btsun. Vinītā (2010: p. 225, n. 1) emends tshig btsan to tshig btsun, which makes sense for the Skt. ādeyavākyāḥ (“speech that is agreeable”). Above, we attempt a middling position between “agreeable” or “noble” (btsun) speech and “forceful” or “authoritative” (btsan) speech with the use of “compelling.”
rgyan rnams sna tshogs ’thob. While the Tibetan here does not specify that people will obtain bodily adornments, the Sanskrit includes ˚āṅgāḥ, i.e., “limbs” adorned with various ornaments.
de dag do shal rgyan phreng nor bu dang / gdu bu dag dang dpung rgyan mchog rnams kyis. Skt. MS hārārdhahāraiḥ kaṭakaiḥ saharṣaiḥ keyūravaryaiś ca vibhūṣitāṅgāḥ. See Vinītā (2010, p. 224, n. f) for a comparison to KaṭhA (p. 33, 30.12) where we find hārārdhahāraiḥ kaṭakair anekaiḥ keyūrataḍaṅkavidhair upetāḥ. It is unclear exactly how many types of ornamentation are being understood in the Tibetan. Vinītā (2010, p. 227), following the Potala manuscript, translates four, i.e., necklaces of various strings (hārārdhahāra), bracelets (kaṭaka), necklaces (saharṣa), and excellent armlets (keyūravarya). In the Tibetan, it seems to be a question of how do shal, rgyan phreng, and nor bu function together. We take do shal rgyan phreng to translate hārārdhahāra and nor bu for saharṣa. As Vinītā (2010, p. 227, n. a) notes, we do not find saharṣa but rather harṣa for “necklace” in Edgerton, and in that definition, which includes the Tibetan mgul gdub, we see a citation of the series “harṣa-kaṭaka-keyūra- (etc.) [LV] 295.4.” The precise distinction between the types of necklaces is unclear, but it could be that do shal rgyan phreng refers to multiple, longer strands of pearls (or the like), which are clasped together at each collarbone, while nor bu could refer to shorter pieces like chokers or collar-style necklaces.
Cow dung is considered sacred in Indian culture and is thought to possess many beneficial qualities. It is used as a base covering for interior floors in village buildings and as a covering for walls and, in this case, a sacred object such as a stūpa.
Taking the variant sred pa for Degé srid pa. The Degé has srid pa’i skyon rnams, i.e., “the flaws of existence.” However, sred pa occurs widely over srid pa. See, for example, the Phukdrak, Gondhla, and Stok Palace manuscripts. Therefore, based on the prevalence of sred pa, it seems likely that the Tibetan translators understood this phrase in the sense of tṛṣṇārajasā vimuktā, i.e., “free from the flaws of craving,” which occurs in both the Cambridge and Gilgit manuscripts, rather than kṛṣṇārajasā vimuktā, which, based on the Potala Sanskrit manuscript, Vinītā translates as “free from the black impurity.” See Vinītā 2010, pp. 240, n. 4, and 241, n. b.
Tentative translation of mchod rten sku gzugs khang. The term mchod rten sku gzugs might be from caityabimba, i.e., the dome of the stūpa, or from stūpabimba, which Monier-Williams defines as maṇḍala. In context, however, it seems likely to refer to shrines or the walls within them.
brtsegs par ’gyur (“to become layered” with something). Above, the sense is that just as one would paint a stūpa with coats of paint, the person who does so will become coated (or laminated) with the Sugata’s qualities; more simply, one will come to possess them.
The Tibetan here is dpyid ka’i dus, i.e. “springtime,” while the Sanskrit is grīṣmakāla, i.e., “summertime,” or more specifically the hot, dry season during which a windy day can blow the dust everywhere. Grīṣma typically occurs in the months of April and May according to the Gregorian calendar.
The Degé and Phukdrak MS read ro mchog kun thob mi rdzi stobs dang ldan; the Stok has mi rje’i stobs; and the Gondhla reads myi’i stobs. It is unclear how the elements of this line relate to one another. It could be that one will experience all supreme tastes and they will have a level of strength that cannot be dominated. On the other hand, perhaps it is that one will have an indominable might as a result of which one obtains all supreme tastes.
cha byad yid ’ong sna tshogs legs par brgyan. While the Potala manuscript has svalaṃkṛtāś citramanojñaghoṣāḥ for this line, the Gilgit Buddhist Manuscript 1 reads svalaṃkṛtāś citramanojñaveṣāḥ, which more closely aligns with the use of cha byad (Skt. veṣa), i.e. “garments,” in the Tibetan. The Cambridge MS appears to read varṇṇāḥ (“coverings”).
The Degé reads shin tu rgyas; however, there is an interesting variation in the Phukdrak MS, which reads sangs rgyas ’gyur, i.e., “they will become a buddha.” See Tournier 2015, pp. 193–94, on how, at some point in its history, Verses for Prasenajit might have been “updated” to align with the bodhisattva ideal.
’dod chags chags med zhe sdang sdang (Phukdrak: skye) mi (Stok: med) ’gyur / gti mug rmongs med lta ngan chags mi ’gyur. Skt. na rāgaraktā na ca doṣaduṣṭā / na mohamūḍhā na kudṛṣṭisaktāḥ. Vinītā (2010, p. 239) translates the Sanskrit as follows: “Not impassioned by desire, nor defiled by hatred, nor bewildered by ignorance, nor engaged in wrong doctrines.” In this stanza, the Tibetan chags serves as a translation for the terms rakta and sakta, both of which convey a sense of becoming excited by and/or engaged in something.
Taking the Choné and Narthang variants byas over byams in the Degé and the Stok, which aligns with the Sanskrit puṇyakṛtā.
Understanding dpe med mchod rten as “a stūpa of the Incomparable One,” rather than “an incomparable stūpa,” based on the Potala and Gilgit MSS, which read nivedyānupamasya caitye. The Cambridge MS reads here sugatasya caitye (“a stūpa of the Sugata”).
In the Degé (203.b.5) block print, it looks like it could read either mar me dngar ba ’bul or mar me dang rab ’bul. The Pedurma (581) shows mar me dang rab ’bul but the Stok Palace manuscript has mar me dngar ba ’bul. Vinītā emends what she takes to be dang rab in the Degé to dra ba (Skt. jāla). Considering how many variants reflect the Old Tibetan term dngar ba, it seems more likely, however, that the text should read mar me dngar ba ’bul, i.e., an offering of butter lamps that are “arranged” or “made into rows” (dngar ba).
mdzod rab rgyas. The Potala has susamṛddhakoṣā; the Gilgit has susamṛddhakośo; the Cambridge has susamṛddhakośā. Vinītā (2010, p. 238, n. 4) emends koṣā to kośā and translates the phrase as “perfect flower-buds” (p. 239). Rather than understand kośa (or koṣa) in the sense of “treasury” or “storehouse,” common English translations for the Tibetan mdzod, one should understand it in this context to refer to “the sheath or integument of a plant,” which is here the bud of the blue lotus. On this definition, see Monier-Williams, p. 314.
Taking the Phukdrak, Gondhla, and Stok variants seng ge’i over the Degé gser gyi, which is in line with the Skt. siṃhāsanāni.
A monk mentioned as being present at the dialogue.
Poor, needy, deprived of, or a beggar.
In Buddhist literature, this is an epithet applied to buddhas, most often to Śākyamuni. The Sanskrit term generally means “possessing fortune,” but in specifically Buddhist contexts it implies that a buddha is in possession of six auspicious qualities (bhaga) associated with complete awakening. The Tibetan term—where bcom is said to refer to “subduing” the four māras, ldan to “possessing” the great qualities of buddhahood, and ’das to “going beyond” saṃsāra and nirvāṇa—possibly reflects the commentarial tradition where the Sanskrit bhagavat is interpreted, in addition, as “one who destroys the four māras.” This is achieved either by reading bhagavat as bhagnavat (“one who broke”), or by tracing the word bhaga to the root √bhañj (“to break”).
The central pillar is an essential element of the domed stūpa with a significant ritual importance.
In this text, a realm where one is happy for an eon.
This refers to the four forms of discernment or special knowledge that pertain to meaning, phenomena, definitions, and eloquence.
A crown or turban that dons the head of the king and symbolizes royalty.
The five aspects of the clarity of melodious speech are as follows: it is intelligible and brings full comprehension, is worthy to listen to and without unpleasant intonations, has depth and resonance, is generous and pleasant to hear, and is unruffled.
These comprise (1) the eye of flesh, (2) the eye of divine clairvoyance, (3) the eye of wisdom, (4) the eye of Dharma, and (5) the eye of the buddhas.
A chowrie, a fly whisk, or a yak-tail fan.
Literally “those who have been fully extinguished.” In Sanskrit, the term nirvāṇa literally means “extinguishment” and the Tibetan mya ngan las ’das pa literally means “gone beyond sorrow.” As a general term, it refers to the cessation of all suffering, afflicted mental states (kleśa), and causal processes (karma) that lead to rebirth and suffering in cyclic existence, as well as to the state in which all such rebirth and suffering has permanently ceased.
A park in Śrāvastī, the capital of the ancient kingdom of Kośala in northern India. It was owned by Prince Jeta, and the wealthy merchant Anāthapiṇḍada, wishing to offer it to the Buddha, bought it from him by covering the entire property with gold coins. It was to become the place where the monks could be housed during the monsoon season, thus creating the first Buddhist monastery. It is therefore the setting for many of the Buddha's discourses.
An ancient kingdom, northwest of Magadha, abutting Kāśi, whose capital was Śrāvastī. During the Buddha’s time it was ruled by Prasenajit. It presently corresponds to an area within Uttar Pradesh.
Usually an epithet for Indra or Śakra, the chief of the gods who dwells in the Heaven of the Thirty-Three.
In a general sense, samādhi can describe a number of different meditative states. In the Mahāyāna literature, in particular in the Prajñāpāramitā sūtras, we find extensive lists of different samādhis, numbering over one hundred.
In a more restricted sense, and when understood as a mental state, samādhi is defined as the one-pointedness of the mind (cittaikāgratā), the ability to remain on the same object over long periods of time. The Drajor Bamponyipa (sgra sbyor bam po gnyis pa) commentary on the Mahāvyutpatti explains the term samādhi as referring to the instrument through which mind and mental states “get collected,” i.e., it is by the force of samādhi that the continuum of mind and mental states becomes collected on a single point of reference without getting distracted.
A name commonly associated with the Hindu god Viṣṇu and often used in Buddhist texts as an example of someone with superhuman strength.
A garland of pearls or necklaces (according to some, made of 108 or 64 strings).
An outcast or someone born into a low caste.
A king of Kośala and disciple-patron of the Buddha.
A common epithet of the Buddha.
A container of relics, such as a stūpa.
Used in this text as an epithet of the Buddha, seemingly. It means one who possesses supreme intelligence.
The tiered parasol, spire, or shaft atop a stūpa.
One of the thirty-two marks of a great person (mahāpuruṣa)
Whitewash or lime plaster.
An epithet for the Buddha.
gsal rgyal gyi tshigs su bcad pa (Prasenajidgāthā). Toh 322, Degé Kangyur vol. 72 (mdo sde, sa), folios 201.a–204.a.
gsal rgyal gyi tshigs su bcad pa. bka’ ’gyur (dpe bsdur ma) [Comparative Edition of the Kangyur], krung go’i bod rig pa zhib ’jug ste gnas kyi bka’ bstan dpe sdur khang (The Tibetan Tripitaka Collation Bureau of the China Tibetology Research Center). 108 volumes. Beijing: krung go’i bod rig pa dpe skrun khang (China Tibetology Publishing House), 2006–9, vol. 72, pp. 575–83.
gsal rgyal gyi tshigs su bcad pa. Stok Palace Kangyur vol. 79 (mdo sde, sa), folios 149.b–153.b.
gsal rgyal gyi tshigs su bcad pa. Phukdrak Kangyur vol. 87 (mdo sde, ke), folios 210.b–215.a.
gsal/gsang rgyal gyis tshigs su bcad pa. Gondhla Collection vol. 25 (dri med mdo), folios 84.a–86.b.
Phangthangma (dkar chag ’phang thang ma). Beijing: mi rigs dpe skrun khang, 2003.
Denkarma (pho brang stod thang ldan dkar gyi chos ’gyur ro cog gi dkar chag). Toh 4364, Degé Tengyur vol. 206 (sna tshogs, jo), folios 294.b–310.a.
Prasenajitparipṛcchā. Cambridge University Library MS Os.131.3–4.
Prasenajitparipṛcchāsūtra. Vinītā, Bhikṣuṇī, ed. and trans. A Unique Collection of Twenty Sūtras in a Sanskrit Manuscript from the Potala. Sanskrit Texts from the Tibetan Autonomous Region 7/1, Vol. 1. Beijing: China Tibetology Publishing House; Vienna: Austrian Academy of Sciences Press, 2010, pp. 207–58.
84000. The Avalokinī Sūtra (Avalokinīsūtra, Toh 195). Translated by the Dharmachakra Translation Committee. Online publication. 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha, 2023.
84000. Describing the Benefits of Producing Representations of the Thus-Gone One (Tathāgatapratibimbapratiṣṭhānuśaṃsasaṃvarṇana, Toh 320). Translated by the Alexander Csoma de Kőrös Translation Group. Online publication. 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha, 2021.
84000. “Stūpa.” Online Knowledge Base. 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha, 2023. Last updated May 2024.
84000. The White Lotus of the Good Dharma (Saddharmapuṇḍarīka, Toh 113). Translated by Peter ALan Roberts. Online publication. 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha, 2022.
Beer, Robert. The Encyclopedia of Tibetan Symbols and Motifs. Boston: Shambhala, 1999.
Cohen, Richard S. “Ajanta’s Inscriptions.” In Ajanta: History and Development, Volume Two Arguments about Ajanta, 2: 273–339. Ajanta: History and Development. Leiden: Brill, 2006.
Edgerton, Franklin. Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit Grammar and Dictionary (Volume II: Dictionary). New Haven: Yale University Press, 1953.
Gyalten Lekden. “The Verses of Prasenajit.” The Union of Teaching and Accomplishment Publishing Group (blog), 2019.
Herrmann-Pfandt, Adelheid. Die lHan kar ma: ein früher Katalog der ins Tibetische übersetzten buddhistischen Texte. Wien: Verlag der österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 2008.
Monier-Williams, Sir Monier. A Sanskṛit-English dictionary: etymologically and philologically arranged with special reference to Greek, Latin, Gothic, German, Anglo-Saxon, and other cognate Indo-European languages. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1888.
Silk, Jonathan A. Review of Buddhist Sūtras in Sanskrit from the Potala, by Bhikṣuṇī Vinītā. Indo-Iranian Journal 56 (2013): 61–87.
Tournier, Vincent. “Stairway to Heaven and the Path to Buddhahood: Donors and Their Aspirations in Fifth- and Sixth-Century Ajanta.” In Cristina Pecchia and Vincent Eltschinger, eds. Mārga, Paths to Liberation in South Asian Buddhist Traditions, Vol. I. Papers from an International Symposium Held at the Austrian Academy of Sciences, Vienna, December 17–18, 2015. Vienna: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 2015, pp. 177–248.
In Verses for Prasenajit, the Buddha proclaims the benefits of constructing, beautifying, maintaining, and worshiping the stūpas and images of awakened beings who have passed away.
This text was translated by Elizabeth Angowski, who also wrote the introduction and annotated the translation.
The translation was completed under the patronage and supervision of 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha. David Fiordalis edited the introduction, translation, and annotations, and supplied additional information by consulting the Sanskrit manuscript held at the Cambridge University Library. Dawn Collins copyedited the text. Sameer Dhingra was in charge of the digital publication process.
Verses for Prasenajit is a text that belongs to the General Sūtra section of the Kangyur. Its title refers to King Prasenajit, who is said to have ruled over the country of Kośala during the time of the Buddha. At the outset of the text, King Prasenajit asks the Buddha Śākyamuni, in verse, how it is that people can secure happiness in future lifetimes by making offerings to awakened beings after they have passed away. The Buddha responds in verse on the benefits of constructing, beautifying, maintaining, and worshiping at the stūpas and images of such beings. Near the end of the sūtra, the Buddha also devotes three stanzas to the benefits of donating to the saṅgha, noting that those who give bedding as well as fine food and drink to renunciants will one day enjoy such finery in kind.
Verses for Prasenajit primarily highlights the mundane rewards a person can expect to receive as a result of venerating the stūpas and images of awakened beings. Prominent examples include great physical beauty and strength, political power, esteem, and abundant resources, like elegant garments and ornate, comfortable homes. In fact, reading Verses for Prasenajit, one is struck by just how many of the benefits of stūpa and image worship relate to physical attractiveness and corporeal ease. Although several lines do speak to the attainment of virtue or liberation, most pertain to material gains.
This is not to say that Verses for Prasenajit advocates a focus on securing beauty and comfort above all else, however. Rather, it seems to underscore the idea that stūpa and image worship can benefit everyone, regardless of an individual’s current situation or ultimate goals. We see this idea conveyed especially in stanzas that treat the attainment of mundane rewards and progress along the spiritual path as outcomes of the same act of veneration. For example, if people put on a crown (or bind a turban) at a stūpa, they will obtain fortune and liberation. Similarly, someone who sweeps up around a stūpa can expect to become beautiful and free from the flaws of craving. In short, deeds that result in auspicious rebirths might simultaneously lead one farther down the path to awakening. Or, as Vincent Tournier puts it, worldly boons can serve as “markers of one’s progress toward Awakening.”
As its stanzas progress, Verses for Prasenajit casts a wide net over its imagined audience. Although the Buddha is ostensibly addressing Prasenajit, a king who might be inclined to sponsor the wholesale construction of a stūpa, his words conjure up a world in which many people, not just wealthy monarchs, interact with sacred sites and images. Certain people might not be able to fund a stūpa’s construction entirely, but perhaps they could support the construction of the spire, for example. Still others might not have the resources to offer things like bells and parasols, but they could help keep a stūpa and its grounds clean. At one point, the Buddha tells Prasenajit that those who offer “whatever special offerings they have and can afford…will attain unsurpassable awakening,” encapsulating the idea that stūpa veneration can be realized in many ways by people of various inclinations and means.
Verses for Prasenajit lacks a colophon, and thus the translator remains unknown. The inclusion of the text’s title in the Denkarma (ldan dkar ma) and Phangthangma (’phang thang ma) catalogs of Tibetan translations of the imperial era, however, suggests that it was translated sometime during the late eighth or early ninth century.
Thematically, Verses for Prasenajit is of a piece with sūtras like The Avalokinī Sūtra (Toh 195), Describing the Benefits of Producing Representations of the Thus-Gone One (Toh 320), The Verses on Circumambulating Shrines (Toh 321), and The Sūtra on Commissioning Images to Be Made of the Tathāgata (Tathāgatabimbakārāpaṇasūtra), a fragment of which is preserved among the Gilgit manuscripts.
In terms of historical significance, recent evidence suggests that a version of Verses for Prasenajit was a source for donative inscriptions at Ajaṇṭā, the complex of Buddhist vihāras and cave monuments constructed in central India from the second century
- “Those who produce an image of the Victor here,
- They will possess beauty, charm, and good qualities.
- Their senses restrained, brilliant as the sun,
- They will become beautiful for all the world to behold.”
Together with Āryaśūra’s Jātakamālā, then, Verses for Prasenajit seems to be one of only two known works that serve as a source for the Ajaṇṭā inscriptions.
Non-Tibetan sources for Verses for Prasenajit include two Sanskrit fragments from Gilgit and two complete Sanskrit manuscripts, one housed in the Potala and the other held at the Cambridge University Library. The Potala manuscript, which bears the title Prasenajitparipṛcchāsūtra (The Sūtra of Prasenajit’s Question) rather than Prasenajidgāthā (Verses for Prasenajit), has been edited and collated with the Gilgit fragments by Bhikṣuṇī Vinītā (Vinita Tseng) within A Unique Collection of Twenty Sūtras in a Sanskrit Manuscript from the Potala (2010). Ven. Vinītā notes that the collection as a whole lacks a colophon, perhaps because only the first forty-four leaves are preserved, and she states that there is insufficient evidence to date it, save to say that because it quotes The Sūtra on the Descent into Laṅkā (Laṅkāvatārasūtra, Toh 107), the collection appears to be later than that text. However, Jonathan Silk, in a review of Ven. Vinītā’s work, speculates that the manuscript could be from the thirteenth century.
By comparison, the Cambridge manuscript has so far received less scholarly attention since the time of its acquisition. Like the Potala manuscript, however, it is also a collection of texts of which two are complete in the extant fragment: this text, which bears the title The Question of Prasenajit (Prasenajitparipṛcchā), and also a complete version of The Verses on Circumambulation (Pradakṣiṇāgāthā). For a further discussion of the latter, see the translation of Toh 321. The Potala’s Sanskrit manuscript version of the text includes thirty-three stanzas, whereas the Cambridge manuscript version has thirty-five. The latter includes all of those stanzas found in the former and has them in almost the same order, albeit with some variations of terminology and phrasing, plus two additional stanzas. One of these additional stanzas is also found in one of the Gilgit manuscripts, but neither of them seems to be in the Tibetan translation. The Tibetan version, by contrast, has a total of fifty-nine stanzas. The Tibetan further differs from the Potala and Cambridge Sanskrit manuscripts in that it exhibits a greater variation in the sequencing of the stanzas it has in common with those manuscripts. Therefore, it seems likely that the basis for the Tibetan translation stemmed from a different version of the work.
Ven. Vinītā’s A Unique Collection contains the first and only edition and English translation of a Sanskrit version of the text. In tandem with her edition and translation of the Potala manuscript, she includes a transcription and edition of the Gilgit fragments and of the Tibetan translation based on five witnesses, including the Degé, Gondhla, Peking, and Stok Palace versions. Ven. Gyalten Lekden published an online English translation of the Tibetan in 2019. Otherwise, no other complete translations of Verses for Prasenajit have been published in any European language.
This translation is based primarily on the Degé Kangyur, the Comparative Edition (dpe bsdur ma), and the Stok Palace Kangyur. Other Kangyurs were also consulted, as were Ven. Vinītā’s Sanskrit and Tibetan editions as well as the Sanskrit manuscript held at the Cambridge University Library. The most significant findings from this comparative work are cited in the notes.
Homage to the Three Jewels.
Then, after the king, radiant with joy, circumambulated the sage and the saṅgha and bowed down his head at the feet of the Lord of Sages, he departed the Jeta Grove.
“Verses for Prasenajit” is complete.
In Verses for Prasenajit, the Buddha proclaims the benefits of constructing, beautifying, maintaining, and worshiping the stūpas and images of awakened beings who have passed away.
This text was translated by Elizabeth Angowski, who also wrote the introduction and annotated the translation.
The translation was completed under the patronage and supervision of 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha. David Fiordalis edited the introduction, translation, and annotations, and supplied additional information by consulting the Sanskrit manuscript held at the Cambridge University Library. Dawn Collins copyedited the text. Sameer Dhingra was in charge of the digital publication process.
Verses for Prasenajit is a text that belongs to the General Sūtra section of the Kangyur. Its title refers to King Prasenajit, who is said to have ruled over the country of Kośala during the time of the Buddha. At the outset of the text, King Prasenajit asks the Buddha Śākyamuni, in verse, how it is that people can secure happiness in future lifetimes by making offerings to awakened beings after they have passed away. The Buddha responds in verse on the benefits of constructing, beautifying, maintaining, and worshiping at the stūpas and images of such beings. Near the end of the sūtra, the Buddha also devotes three stanzas to the benefits of donating to the saṅgha, noting that those who give bedding as well as fine food and drink to renunciants will one day enjoy such finery in kind.
Verses for Prasenajit primarily highlights the mundane rewards a person can expect to receive as a result of venerating the stūpas and images of awakened beings. Prominent examples include great physical beauty and strength, political power, esteem, and abundant resources, like elegant garments and ornate, comfortable homes. In fact, reading Verses for Prasenajit, one is struck by just how many of the benefits of stūpa and image worship relate to physical attractiveness and corporeal ease. Although several lines do speak to the attainment of virtue or liberation, most pertain to material gains.
This is not to say that Verses for Prasenajit advocates a focus on securing beauty and comfort above all else, however. Rather, it seems to underscore the idea that stūpa and image worship can benefit everyone, regardless of an individual’s current situation or ultimate goals. We see this idea conveyed especially in stanzas that treat the attainment of mundane rewards and progress along the spiritual path as outcomes of the same act of veneration. For example, if people put on a crown (or bind a turban) at a stūpa, they will obtain fortune and liberation. Similarly, someone who sweeps up around a stūpa can expect to become beautiful and free from the flaws of craving. In short, deeds that result in auspicious rebirths might simultaneously lead one farther down the path to awakening. Or, as Vincent Tournier puts it, worldly boons can serve as “markers of one’s progress toward Awakening.”
As its stanzas progress, Verses for Prasenajit casts a wide net over its imagined audience. Although the Buddha is ostensibly addressing Prasenajit, a king who might be inclined to sponsor the wholesale construction of a stūpa, his words conjure up a world in which many people, not just wealthy monarchs, interact with sacred sites and images. Certain people might not be able to fund a stūpa’s construction entirely, but perhaps they could support the construction of the spire, for example. Still others might not have the resources to offer things like bells and parasols, but they could help keep a stūpa and its grounds clean. At one point, the Buddha tells Prasenajit that those who offer “whatever special offerings they have and can afford…will attain unsurpassable awakening,” encapsulating the idea that stūpa veneration can be realized in many ways by people of various inclinations and means.
Verses for Prasenajit lacks a colophon, and thus the translator remains unknown. The inclusion of the text’s title in the Denkarma (ldan dkar ma) and Phangthangma (’phang thang ma) catalogs of Tibetan translations of the imperial era, however, suggests that it was translated sometime during the late eighth or early ninth century.
Thematically, Verses for Prasenajit is of a piece with sūtras like The Avalokinī Sūtra (Toh 195), Describing the Benefits of Producing Representations of the Thus-Gone One (Toh 320), The Verses on Circumambulating Shrines (Toh 321), and The Sūtra on Commissioning Images to Be Made of the Tathāgata (Tathāgatabimbakārāpaṇasūtra), a fragment of which is preserved among the Gilgit manuscripts.
In terms of historical significance, recent evidence suggests that a version of Verses for Prasenajit was a source for donative inscriptions at Ajaṇṭā, the complex of Buddhist vihāras and cave monuments constructed in central India from the second century
- “Those who produce an image of the Victor here,
- They will possess beauty, charm, and good qualities.
- Their senses restrained, brilliant as the sun,
- They will become beautiful for all the world to behold.”
Together with Āryaśūra’s Jātakamālā, then, Verses for Prasenajit seems to be one of only two known works that serve as a source for the Ajaṇṭā inscriptions.
Non-Tibetan sources for Verses for Prasenajit include two Sanskrit fragments from Gilgit and two complete Sanskrit manuscripts, one housed in the Potala and the other held at the Cambridge University Library. The Potala manuscript, which bears the title Prasenajitparipṛcchāsūtra (The Sūtra of Prasenajit’s Question) rather than Prasenajidgāthā (Verses for Prasenajit), has been edited and collated with the Gilgit fragments by Bhikṣuṇī Vinītā (Vinita Tseng) within A Unique Collection of Twenty Sūtras in a Sanskrit Manuscript from the Potala (2010). Ven. Vinītā notes that the collection as a whole lacks a colophon, perhaps because only the first forty-four leaves are preserved, and she states that there is insufficient evidence to date it, save to say that because it quotes The Sūtra on the Descent into Laṅkā (Laṅkāvatārasūtra, Toh 107), the collection appears to be later than that text. However, Jonathan Silk, in a review of Ven. Vinītā’s work, speculates that the manuscript could be from the thirteenth century.
By comparison, the Cambridge manuscript has so far received less scholarly attention since the time of its acquisition. Like the Potala manuscript, however, it is also a collection of texts of which two are complete in the extant fragment: this text, which bears the title The Question of Prasenajit (Prasenajitparipṛcchā), and also a complete version of The Verses on Circumambulation (Pradakṣiṇāgāthā). For a further discussion of the latter, see the translation of Toh 321. The Potala’s Sanskrit manuscript version of the text includes thirty-three stanzas, whereas the Cambridge manuscript version has thirty-five. The latter includes all of those stanzas found in the former and has them in almost the same order, albeit with some variations of terminology and phrasing, plus two additional stanzas. One of these additional stanzas is also found in one of the Gilgit manuscripts, but neither of them seems to be in the Tibetan translation. The Tibetan version, by contrast, has a total of fifty-nine stanzas. The Tibetan further differs from the Potala and Cambridge Sanskrit manuscripts in that it exhibits a greater variation in the sequencing of the stanzas it has in common with those manuscripts. Therefore, it seems likely that the basis for the Tibetan translation stemmed from a different version of the work.
Ven. Vinītā’s A Unique Collection contains the first and only edition and English translation of a Sanskrit version of the text. In tandem with her edition and translation of the Potala manuscript, she includes a transcription and edition of the Gilgit fragments and of the Tibetan translation based on five witnesses, including the Degé, Gondhla, Peking, and Stok Palace versions. Ven. Gyalten Lekden published an online English translation of the Tibetan in 2019. Otherwise, no other complete translations of Verses for Prasenajit have been published in any European language.
This translation is based primarily on the Degé Kangyur, the Comparative Edition (dpe bsdur ma), and the Stok Palace Kangyur. Other Kangyurs were also consulted, as were Ven. Vinītā’s Sanskrit and Tibetan editions as well as the Sanskrit manuscript held at the Cambridge University Library. The most significant findings from this comparative work are cited in the notes.
Homage to the Three Jewels.
Then, after the king, radiant with joy, circumambulated the sage and the saṅgha and bowed down his head at the feet of the Lord of Sages, he departed the Jeta Grove.
“Verses for Prasenajit” is complete.