Loading translation...
In the Pāli sources he is named Subha Todeyyaputta, “Subha, son of Todeyya.” His full name in the extant Sanskrit version of the sūtra is Śuka Taudeyaputra (śuko māṇavas taudeyaputro “The brahmin youth Śuka, son of Taudeya”). The Tibetan version has bram ze’i khye’u shu ka (equivalent to Sanskrit śuko māṇava) throughout but mentions that he is the son of the brahmin Taudeya (bram ze to’u de ya) at the end of the sūtra.
In many presentations, “mixed” actions (i.e., partially good and partially bad actions) and “neutral” (Skt. avyākṛta) actions complement the pair of opposites of good and bad actions, but the Karmavibhaṅga does not contain an explicit discussion of these categories.
For a canonical account of the relationship between karma, the different rebirth destinies, and Buddhist cosmology, see, for example Bruno Galasek-Hul and Lama Kunga Thartse Rinpoche, trans., The Limits of Life, Toh 307 (84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha, 2021). See also Dharmachakra Translation Committee, trans., The Application of Mindfulness of the Sacred Dharma, Toh 287 (84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha, 2021), which provides an extensive magisterial overview of the workings of moral causation in all the realms of existence.
Although the Karmavibhaṅga does not make use of technical terms such as retributive, outflowing, and predominating results, as the Abhidharmakośa does (see AKK 87a,b; La Vallée Poussin/Pruden 1988–90, p. 672), the three categories of “outflowing result” (niṣyandaphala), “retributive result” (vipāka), and “predominating result” (adhipattiphala) are tacitly employed by way of example. At 1.145-1.154, the predominating and outflowing results are illustrated, while in most of the paragraphs up to 1.132 the retributive result is illustrated. The retributive result is produced when a virtuous or nonvirtuous action is accumulated (upacita), i.e., carried out repeatedly and with intent, i.e., full awareness, and results in rebirth in a state of suffering in one of the lower rebirth destinations; the outflowing result is produced when the person who has performed the action is—due to other karmic forces—reborn as a human being, and it results in an experience equivalent to the action; finally, the predominating result is produced through intensively and/or repeatedly engaging in the ten virtuous actions or the ten nonvirtuous actions and results in a suitable or unsuitable environment.
See Gombrich 2009, pp. 13, 127–28, and, specifically, 123: “Among the five khandha, the fourth group, volitions, includes cetanā, intention. This the Buddha declared to be what constitutes karma and therefore lends an action its ethical quality, whether good or bad.”
AN III, 415,7–8: Cetanāhaṃ bhikkhave kammaṃ vadāmi; cetayitvā kammaṃ karoti kāyena vācāya manasā. Readers who are interested in more specialized descriptions and a more comprehensive treatment of the topic of karma and rebirth in ancient India and in Buddhism may consult the H-Buddhism Buddhist Studies Bibliography project on Zotero (filter tag “karma”), accessed April 9, 2020. In particular, two excellent in-depth studies are recommended: Halbfass 2000 (in German) and Timme Kragh 2006.
In the extensive appendix to his edition of the Karmavibhaṅga, Kudo (2004, pp. 229–323) catalogs and comments on the known parallels of the cited texts and stories in the order of their appearance.
For an excellent, exhaustive overview of the extant versions of the Karmavibhaṅga, see Maggi 1995, pp. 19–20.
For photographs of the reliefs of the hidden base of the Borobudur accompanied by English translations from the Sanskrit of individual paragraphs of the Karmavibhaṅga, see Ānandajoti Bhikkhu, “Karma-vibhanga, Deeds and their Results,” Photo Dharma, last accessed July 24, 2020.
See, e.g., pw, s.v. “vibhaṅga”; BHSD, s.v. “vibhaṅga”: (1) “classification”; (2) “explanation, commentary.” For the word vibhaṅga as part of titles of Indic Buddhist works, see the introduction to Bruno Galasek-Hul and Lama Kunga Thartse Rinpoche, trans., Transformation of Karma, Toh 339 (84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha, 2021), i.5–i.6. Sylvain Lévi in his 1932 edition of the Sanskrit text translated the title as La grande classification des actes (Mahākarmavibhaṅga, The Great Classification of Acts).
Lévi has identified this appendix, which was included in the manuscript bundle of MS[A], as constituting a commentary on the Karmavibhaṅga and appositely labeled it Karmavibhaṅga-upadeśa. Lévi 1932, pp. 2, 167.
Vasubandhu’s Abhidharmakośabhāṣya refers to a work titled Mahākarmavibhāgasūtra, but it is doubtful that this sūtra is identical with the Karmavibhaṅga as we have it. See Abhidh-k-bh(P) 281,11 ad AKK V.6. The context of this passage in the Abhidh-k-bh is a discussion of different early Buddhist schools’ views on the removal of latent dispositions (Skt. anuśayas) through the realization of the four noble truths. No such passage, concerning neither the wording nor the doctrinal content, can be identified in the Karmavibhaṅga.
Looking at the first pages of several Kangyur editions, we find the following variations from the transliteration of the Sanskrit title in the Kangyurs of the Tshalpa group, karma bi b+hang ga (= karmavibhaṅga). The London manuscript Kangyur; Stok Palace manuscript Kangyur; and Shey Palace manuscript Kangyurs reads karmA bi b+hang ka (= karmavibhaṅga), and the Phukdrak manuscript Kangyur reads karma bi b+ha ga (= karmavibhāga). Complicating matters further, the Phukdrak manuscript Kangyur contains two versions of the las rnam par ’byed pa, both seemingly containing the same text, of which the second, F404 (vol. 97 [mdo sde, na], folios 333.b–356.a) has the transliterated Sanskrit title kar ma b+ha ba ka (= karma-bhavaka or karma-bhāvaka, “[the sūtra that explains] existence through actions”). One may want to readily dismiss this last variant of the title as a mere scribal error or the result of ignorance of the Sanskrit language. However, the Shelkar Kangyur records as the Tibetan title of the related sūtra Toh 339 (see Bruno Galasek-Hul and Lama Kunga Thartse Rinpoche, trans., Transformation of Karma, 2021) las kyis rnam par ’gyur ba zhes bya ba’i chos kyi gzhung (“The Dharma Scripture called Transformation through Karma”). It is, of course, possible that the latter is a scribal error (in Tibetan prints and manuscripts the case markers -kyis and -kyi are frequently mixed up), but both variant titles point to the central theme of the Karmavibhaṅga-group of texts: the coming to be or the transformation of existence through actions.
For instance, the Degé version of the Karmavibhaṅga translated here differs from the extant Sanskrit versions of the Karmavibhaṅga—MS[A] and MS[B], respectively (Kudo 2004). These, although sufficiently different themselves, rather correspond with the version called S1 by Mauro Maggi (Maggi 1995, p. 19) and with Kudo’s “Tib–3” which is the same as the Tibetan version of the Berlin manuscript Kangyur studied by Walter Simon (1970) as well as the extensive Dunhuang fragment Pelliot tibétain 944 (see n.31 for the latter).
See also Bruno Galasek-Hul and Lama Kunga Thartse Rinpoche, trans., Transformation of Karma (84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha, 2021), i.2.
See Kudo 2004, p. xi: “However, we have no evidence for deciding whether or not this text is a sūtra.” See also p. ix, where Kudo summarizes the works on the Karmavibhaṅga done by other scholars. Namikawa Takayoshi, for example, by comparing the citations in the Karmavibhaṅga from the Cakravartisūtra with other parallel texts, supposes that the Karmavibhaṅga belonged to the canon of the Sāṃmatīya school of Buddhism. Given Namikawa’s hypothesis that the Cakravartisūtra belonged to the Abhidharma Piṭaka of a school that also possessed the Karmavibhaṅga, one might even further speculate that the Karmavibhaṅga, too, originally belonged to the Abhidharma Piṭaka of the Sāṃmatīya school. We have not been able to independently verify this hypothesis but rely solely on the excellent scholarship of these Japanese scholars. See also n.19.
See Kudo 2004, p. ix and pp. 262–63, n. 37. This sūtra is titled differently in MS[A] and MS[B]: Cakravartisūtra and Cakravartisūtravibhaṅga, respectively, and only MS[A] has the addition of Abhidharma before the text’s title. (We have normalized the Sanskrit spellings of the texts’ titles, following Lévi, and left out variants; for a transcription of the original spellings in the manuscripts, see Kudo 2004, pp. 262–63). For an obscure remark in the Karmavibhaṅga-upadeśa that “other schools” classified the Karmavibhaṅga as belonging to an otherwise unknown collection called Abhidharmasaṁyukta, see Lévi 1932, p. 12 (“un passage obscur qui semble indiquer que le Karmavibhaṅga était classé par d’autres écoles dans les Abhidharmasaṁyuktas, genre de division dont nous ne savons rien non plus”) and p. 167 (gotrāntarīyāṇāṃ Abhidharmasaṁyukteṣu).
This is indicated by the phrase uddeśaḥ Karmavibhaṅgasya dharmaparyāyasya, “[Now follows] the exposition/ exemplification of the Dharma-discourse Karmavibhaṅga (Lévi 1932, p. 32). Cf. also Kudo 2004, p. 34 for MS[A] and p. 35 for MS[B].
Yet, the Karmavibhaṅga certainly does not exhibit the level of formality and scholasticism that one finds, for example, in Vasubandhu’s Abhidharmakośabhāṣya. On the other hand, MS[B] contains not only the title Karmavibhaṅgasūtra but also the expression “Dharma discourse” (dharmaparyāya), omitted by MS[A], which usually designates a sūtra-style way of teaching. See Lévi 1932, p. 32; Kudo 2004, p. 35.
Lozang Jamspal and Kaia Fischer, trans., The Hundred Deeds, Toh 340 (84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha, 2020).
The manuscript that Sylvain Lévi examined and on which he based his edition has, according to the colophon, been dated between 1410 and 1411
For details on the name, see Lévi 1932, p. 21, n. 3, where he suggests as the common origin to both variants of the name the Ardhamāgadhī Sua and furthermore references Śuka, son of Vyāsa, of the Mahābhārata.
Maggi (1995, pp. 19–20) lists altogether six Chinese translations, which is correct. The information given in Lokesh Chandra is thus incomplete; see Lokesh Chandra 2010, pp. 27–28. We were unable to assess for this translation how the Chinese translations relate to the Tibetan or the Sanskrit versions of the Karmavibhaṅga.
According to Maggi 1995, p. 20, n. 2, a manuscript fragment of this Chinese translation was discovered at Dunhuang. It would perhaps be worthwhile to compare this Chinese Dunhuang fragment with Pelliot tibétain 944, the Tibetan fragment of the las rnam par ’byed pa found at Dunhuang.
See Lewis R. Lancaster, The Korean Buddhist Canon: A Descriptive Catalogue, accessed November 4, 2019, K 805. This catalog furthermore states that Taishō 78, 79, and 81 are the Chinese equivalents of Toh 339, las kyi rnam par ’gyur ba zhes bya ba chos kyi gzhung (Bruno Galasek-Hul and Lama Kunga Thartse Rinpoche, trans., Transformation of Karma, 2021). A comparison of these Chinese works with the Tibetan translation Toh 339, as well as the Central Asian fragment in the Hoernle collection (reproduced in Lévi 1932, pp. 235–36) is so far lacking.
Lévi 1932, pp. 243–57; reprinted in a separate publication in Lévi 1933, pp. 84–107, with a French translation.
The third version of the text, not included in the Degé Kangyur, is represented by the Tibetan translation H343 in the Lhasa Kangyur (despite the misleading entries in the dkar chag), S287 in the Stok Palace manuscript Kangyur, B346 in the Berlin manuscript Kangyur, and N784 in the Narthang’s supplementary (kha skong) volume, as well as by a Dunhuang version (PT944). For details of its content, see Simon 1970. 84000 hopes to add an English translation to this collection in future.
For detailed information on Drakpa Shedrup, see s.v. at The Treasury of Lives, accessed September 12, 2022. This short work by Drakpa Shedrup is strictly speaking not a commentary as it merely summarizes the sūtra’s main points in a concise way (don bsdus) and largely follows the structure of Toh 339. The second part of Drakpa Shedrup’s text contains a concise summary of the tshe’i mtha’i mdo (Āyuḥparyanta, Toh 307). He first gives a summary of the different karmic categories, which is then followed by a short explication of the categories and the specific actions that lead to their respective result. While Drakpa Shedrup’s commentary does not add any new information that is not available from the sūtras themselves, it stands out for its conciseness and very clear language.
D: bram ze’i bu; H bram ze’i khye’u. The Tibetan bram ze’i bu corresponds to the Sanskrit māṇavaka (see Kudo 2004, pp. 8 and 26; Mvy [Sakaki 3846]). Bhikkhu Bodhi translates the Pāli māṇava as “student” (see Bhikkhu Ñāṇamoli and Bhikkhu Bodhi 2009, p. 1053).
According to the Tibetan (las rnam par ’byed pa bstan gyis). The Sanskrit reads Karmavibhaṅgaṃ te Māṇavaka dharmaparyāyaṃ deśayiṣyāmi (“Son, I will teach you the discourse on Dharma [called] The Exposition of Karma”). (Lévi 1932, p. 29; Kudo 2004, p. 27: MS[B] only, MS[A] omits.)
The terms translated here are well-known Buddhist terms in the context of the teachings on karma, and our translation follows the Sanskrit and Bhikkhu Bodhi’s translation of the Pāli Cūḷakammavibhaṅgasutta (see Bhikkhu Ñāṇamoli and Bhikkhu Bodhi 2009, pp. 1053–54). Here the Tibetan seems to be literally saying “[beings] exist as their own actions” or “[beings] become their own actions” (sems can rnams bdag gi las las su gyur ba). The terms given in the Tibetan translation do not follow the standard translation equivalents given in Mvy (Sakaki 2313): las bdag gyir byed pa for karmasvakaḥ.
The Tibetan text deviates from the standard translation of karmayoniḥ, las kyi skye gnas pa (see Mvy [Sakaki 2315]). Also, the order in which the terms are presented differs from the Sanskrit editions, where karmadāyāda (see n.45) stands before karmayoni (Lévi 1932, p. 30; Kudo 2004, pp. 26 and 27).
Again, the Tibetan differs from the standard terminology of Mvy (Sakaki 2314), which gives las kyi bgo skal la spyod pa for karmadāyādaḥ.
Here, the expression “they take action as their refuge” means that action is the basis for beings’ destiny in the sense that actions determine who one is or who one will become. The Sanskrit reads karmapratiśaraṇa (Lévi 1932, p. 30; Kudo 2004, p. 26, MS[A]; p. 27, MS[B], has a lacuna here). See Mvy (Sakaki 2316): karmapratisaraṇam = las brten par bya ba. According to Edgerton, this is a bahuvṛhi compound (BHSD, s.v. “pratisaraṇa”). The entire phrase is well known from the Pāli Canon (MN III, 203,4–6): Kammassakā, māṇava, sattā kammadāyādā kammayonī kammabandhū kammapaṭisaraṇā. Kammaṃ satte vibhajati yad idaṃ hīnappaṇītatāyāti. See Bhikkhu Ñāṇamoli and Bhikkhu Bodhi 2009, p. 1053: “Student, beings are owners of their actions, heirs of their actions; they originate from their actions, are bound to their actions, have their actions as their refuge. It is action that distinguishes beings as inferior and superior.”
The Sanskrit text first gives a list of all the categories that are to be analyzed and presented in detail in the main body of the text; see Lévi 1932, pp. 30–32. This list is absent in the Tibetan translation.
The Sanskrit additionally reads “welcoming the death of an enemy” (amitramaraṇābhinandanaṃ) here.
This very likely refers to the practice of abortion (Sanskrit garbhaśātana). However, we have opted for a more literal translation of the Tibetan.
Our translation of this sentence largely follows the Sanskrit. The commentarial gloss on the Sanskrit reads as follows: “The children [lit. sons] and grandchildren of the originator of this sacrifice, as well as other people, hoping for a [positive, i.e., desired] result [of the ritual action of sacrifice] or filled with fear [i.e., of potential negative consequences of not performing the sacrifice], [will] kill many beings as they continue [this initial sacrifice]” (tasya yajñapravartakasya putrāḥ pautrāś cānye ca janāḥ phalārthino bhayabhītāś cānuvṛttiṃ kurvāṇāḥ sattvān nirghātayanti, Lévi 1932, p. 32; see Kudo 2004, pp. 36 and 37, with slightly different reading in MS[B] without, however, altering the meaning). The sense of repetition and thus establishing an act as a custom or tradition (anuvṛttiṃ √kṛ) is borne out by the illustrative story that follows.
Following the reading of D: sgos kyis (see Jäschke 1972, s.vv. “sgos” and “phyir”). Y and K read dgos kyis?
According to the Sanskrit, all editions of which read yuddhadarśanaṃ (Lévi 1932, p. 33; Kudo 2004, pp. 40 and 41). Tibetan reads dmag (“army” or “host”), the expected translation equivalent of which, according to Mvy, is the Sanskrit senā, etc.
C reads mang por dog pa. If dog pa could be read as synonymous with nyam nga (“fear, despair; harm”), C should be read and the Degé reading corrected: “[Seeing] a sacrificial ground such as this is like a battle, seeing the fear and despair in the many beings, humans and horses, and so forth [that are going to be killed].”
Lévi translates, “and furthermore congratulating the men engaged in battle on their equipment” (et aussi les félicitations à propos des armes, adressées à des gens en train de se batter; Lévi 1932, p. 112).
The Sanskrit editions (Lévi 1932, p. 33; Kudo 2004, pp. 40 and 41) contain an additional passage that mentions ten evil consequences (“disadvantages”) of killing living beings (without listing them) and refer to the Nandikasūtra for the full list; for the complete passage in a surviving Skt. witness of a version of the Nandikasūtra, the Āryanandikaparipṛcchāsūtra, see Vinīta 2010, pp. 109–11.
Translated according to Lévi’s conjecture of the Tibetan, which makes good sense; see Lévi 1932, p. 34, n. 2: dmag la sogs par sngar smos pa thams cad bzlog pa ste (“and having rejected/done the opposite of all that was said above regarding armies and so forth”). However, his conjecture (smon pa to smos pa) seems not to be backed by any edition of the Kangyur that we have consulted, i.e., Narthang (in Lévi 1932, p. 185), K, D, and the critical apparatus of the Comparative Edition.
The Tibetan here, and throughout, has only two terms, mchod rten and gtsug lag khang, where the Sanskrit specifies three objects: stūpa, caitya, and vihāra. According to Mvy (Sakaki 6999, 7000), the Tibetan mchod rten should be used to translate both the Sanskrit stūpa and caitya. The Sanskrit word caitya can refer to a stūpa, but also to a shrine, a sacred place, or any sacred object. Thus, in addition to the place where the Buddha Śākyamuni attained awakening (the bodhimaṇḍa) and other sacred sites associated with the life of the Buddha, it can also designate non-Buddhist shrines or sacred sites (see Drewes 2007, p. 103).
A, D: tshe ’phrog bdud (literally, perhaps, “life-stealing demon”). This seems to be a gloss of the variations in Y, K, J, and N: ye ’grog and C: ye ’brog. According to Rolf A. Stein (see McKeown 2010, pp. 21, 34, 267, and specifically, 61–62), ye ’brog/ye ’drog/yen ’brog (the latter seemingly a phonetically influenced variant spelling) is Chinese vocabulary for ’dre gdon, a kind of evil spirit, demon, or demonic force that causes premature death and misery. (For the translations “contagious disease,” “injury inflicted on the soul,” and “harm done to the mind,” see Jäschke [1972, s.v. “ye ’brog”], who gives Milarepa’s songs and oral explanation as his sources.) The Sanskrit reads akālamṛtyur, “premature death” (Lévi 1932, p. 34; Kudo 2004, pp. 42 and 43). Thus it seems likely that the explanatory gloss tshe ’phrog bdud refers to more or less specific demonic forces (the ’dre) traditionally believed to steal the life force and cause sudden accidents and untimely death.
Reading Y and K: de ni thal mo dang khu tshur gyis mi rteg pa dang; D and other versions omit mi.
This translation follows Lévi (1932, p. 37: “donner des remèdes et aussi des aliments digestibles”) and the Sanskrit parijīrṇabhojanaṃ. The Tibetan kha zas zhu nas stobs pa (literally “Having digested food, [they regain their] strength”) is not clear.
The core meaning of the Sanskrit term varṇa (Tibetan kha dog) is “color.” In a particular sense (from as early as the Ṛgveda), it can mean the color of skin or complexion, thus the derived meanings of “species,” “class of people,” and “caste” (Mayrhofer 1976, p. 154, s.v. “várṇaḥ”). It seems that it can also refer to the general appearance or figure of a person, and it is this latter sense that is probably intended here. Lévi interprets the Sanskrit durvarṇa (Kudo 2004, p. 52) as “disgracieux” (Lévi 1932, p. 115). The following paragraph makes it clear that the Tibetan mdzes (“beautiful,” for suvarṇa) refers to a general physical feature or appearance. See also Lévi 1932, p. 37, n. 2, where he refers to plate 21 of Borobudur’s hidden base, which is inscribed with virūpa and shows representations of people with deformations.
According to Mvy (Sakaki 1964), the translation equivalent of the Tibetan ’tshig pa should be the Sanskrit pradāsa. Lévi prints the variant pradāśaḥ (Lévi 1932, pp. 37–38 and n. 2), but MS[A] has paridādya, which according to Kudo should be read as paridāgha (Kudo 2004, p. 52, n. 5). Edgerton prefers the reading paridāgha over pradāsa (see BHSD, s.v. “pradāsa”). Other Abhidharma lists of the upakleśas read pradāśa/pradāsa (see, e.g., Abhidh-k-bh 57,4 [= AKK II.27b] and 313,12 [= AKK V.50a]). Pradāśa (and its variants pradāsa/paridāgha) is a Buddhist Sanskrit word. Perhaps its etymological meaning, as reflected in the Tibetan translation ’tshig pa, is “burnt” or “smolder(ing),” which may hint at an underlying feeling of suppressed or concealed anger. Kenjiu Kasawara’s translation of the Dharmasaṃgraha has “contentiousness” for pradāśa (see Müller and Wenzel 1885, no. 69: Sanskrit p. 14 [pradāśa]; English translation p. 50). Someone whose anger is “smoldering” beneath the surface may consequently be more quarrelsome, i.e., more easily given to animosity, malice, and spite. The word “contentiousness,” however, does not seem to hit the appropriate linguistic register.
Tibetan rdo thal (“limestone,” “chalk,” or “ashes”). Sanskrit reads stūpacaityagṛheṣu ca sudhādānaṃ, which may suggest chalk or lime (sudhā). Lévi (1932, p. 115) translated, “donner du plâtre pour les stūpas, les maisons à caitya.” This sentence may refer to the practice of whitewashing a stūpa, a ceremony that can still be witnessed today in the Kathmandu valley at the stūpas of Svayambhūnāth and Bodhanāth.
Tibetan mthu chung ba, Sanskrit alpeśākhya, Pāli appesakkha (ttaṃ). See Bhikkhu Bodhi’s translation “uninfluential” (Bhikkhu Ñāṇamoli and Bhikkhu Bodhi 2009, p. 1056). The Buddhist Sanskrit alpeśākhya (Pāli appesakkha) (see CPD, s.v. “appesakkha”; BHSD, s.v. “alpeśākhya”) originally means “unrespected, insignificant, of little esteem.” The scholarly consensus is that the Middle Indic form of the term is derived from an original Sanskrit form alpa-/mahā-yaśas-ka. Two forms are attested in the early Buddhist Sanskrit texts: alpa-/mahāśakya and alpe-/maheśākhya. The occurrence of either term can serve as an indicator of a text’s affiliation with the Sarvāstivādin or the Mūlasarvāstivādin school. The form alpa-/mahāśakya is surmised by Edgerton to have originated as a folk-etymological alteration of alpe-/maheśākhya (see BHSD, s.v. “mahāśakya”). The traditional analysis of the term, however, is alpa-īśa-ākhya (maheśākhya being an analogous formation), literally perhaps “named after an insignificant chief or master, of low origin” (Apte, s.v. “alpa-”). This meaning is reflected in the standardized Tibetan translation given in Mvy (Sakaki 6412): dbang chung bar grags pa.
Sanskrit dharmahīne, Tibetan chos ngan pa. The Tibetan expression is usually translated as “inferior doctrines.” Here, the Sanskrit equivalent seems rather to imply that something or someone outside of Dharma is referred to (see pw, s.vv, “a-dharma,” “dharma-hīna”).
The Sanskrit (Kudo 2004, p. 56) reads parasya yaśovarṇṇaśabdaślokaśravanena [sic] tuṣṭiḥ (“being gratified when hearing about others’ glory, praise, renown, and good reputation”). The Tibetan gzhan gyi grags dang sgra dang tshig su bcad pa snyan pa thos na seems not to have translated Sanskrit varṇa (“praise, renown, glory”; Tibetan brjod pa) here, while in later paragraphs we find the list extended by brjod pa (“praise”). See 1.165 (grags pa dang brjod pa dang sgra dang tshigs su bcad pa), 1.172 (brjod pa dang / sgra dang tshigs su bcad pa), and 1.173 (grags pa dang / brjod pa dang / sgra dang tshigs su bcad pa). This variation in translating a stock phrase supports the assumption that the extant text of the Karmavibhaṅga is a text that grew over time, i.e., passages and paragraphs were added on at different times. Nonetheless, grags pa can translate both the Sanskrit yaśas and varṇa, which indeed share the same sense (“praise, renown, glory”) in Sanskrit.
We have supplied the word “commemoration” here to form an intelligible English sentence. The Tibetan reads, “Erecting a stūpa of/for the Bhagavān” (bcom ldan ’das kyi mchod rten … brtsigs pa). The Sanskrit expresses a causative sense (-kārāpaṇa, “causing to be built”): “commissioning the building of shrines and stūpas [in commemoration] of the Bhagavān” (bhagavānaś caityastūpakārāpaṇaṃ).
According to the Tibetan reading of D. Neither the Tibetan (dge ba’i rtsa ba thams cad kyis mthu chen por sems bskyed pa ste) nor the corresponding Sanskrit (sarvamaheśākhyakuśalamūlaṃ bodhicittotpādanaṃ; Kudo 2004, p. 56—we have normalized Kudo’s transcription of the Sanskrit manuscript MS[A]) are clear. The Tibetan has only sems bskyed pa (cittotpāda), instead of byang chub kyi sems bskyed pa for bodhicittotpādana, and the syntax is parallel to the immediately preceding sentence (i.e., mthu chen po + la-don followed by sems bskyed pa). The Tibetan of D here seems to have preserved the better reading. The Sanskrit bodhicittotpādana does not make much sense in this context, and we think that bodhi- is a later addition. Lévi (1932, p. 39) edited the Sanskrit to read sarvamaheśākhyakuśalamūle bodhicittotpādanaṃ (Lévi’s copy seems to have read sarvamaheśākhyakuśalamūle instead of -mūlaṃ) and translated as “produire la Pensée de toutes les Racines-de-bien qui font les grands personnages” (to produce the thought [of awakening] from all the roots of good which make (the) great persons). However, Lévi (1932, p. 39, n. 4) refers to bas-relief 43 of the hidden base of the Borobudur, which bears the inscription maheśākhya (“distinguished, exalted, eminent, powerful”) and portrays a life of luxury. For a similar idea, see verse 18, chapter 31 of the Prajñāpāramitāratnaguṇasaṃcayagāthā (Yuyama 1976, p. 128: tatu vardhate kuśala–mūla mahānubhāvo candro v’ an-abhru prabha-maṇḍala śukla-pakṣo, and the Tibetan translation of it in the Dunhuang recension: de-las dge-ba’i rtsa-ba mthu-chen ’phel ’gyur-te/ /sprin med zla ba yar ngo’i ’od kyi dkyil ’khor bzhin (Yuyama 1976, p. 190) (“From that his wholesome root grows into something of great might; As the moon, in the absence of cloud, is a circle of radiant light in the bright half of the lunar month”; translation Conze 1975, p. 70). Z reads dge ba’i rtsa ba chung ngu rgyun mi gcod pa dang / dge ba’i rtsa ba chen po yang dag par ’dzin du ’jug pa’o (“Not interrupting the continuous accumulation of lesser (or small? chung ngu) roots of merit; causing [someone] to take up/engage in the [accumulation of the] greater roots of merit”). It is not clear to us, however, what the lesser and greater roots of merit would be. See the extant Central Asian Sanskrit fragment from Eastern Turkestan (the Śukasūtra; Lévi 1932, pp. 235–36): [mahā-]śakyāt kuśalamūlād vicchandanam alpaśakyānāṁ pudgalānāṁ paribhavaḥ (“discouraging [vicchandana; for this Buddhist Sanskrit word, see Wogihara 1971, p. 37 and Mvy (Sakaki 6527): vicchandyati] [someone] from [accumulating] powerful roots of merit; having contempt for persons with little power”). In any case, the passage seems to point to the idea of dedicating one’s accumulated merit to the attainment of worldly happiness, wealth, and greatness with which comes worldly power and authority.
Tibetan rim gro is generally translated as “respect” or “honor.” Here, however, the meaning “to serve” or “to attend on” can be confirmed by the corresponding Sanskrit (a-)pratyupaṣṭhānaṃ in MS[A] (Kudo 2004, p. 58), used here in its meaning as found in the Pāli suttas: paccupaṭṭhāna (“tending to”). See PED, s.v.; BHSD, s.v. “pratyupasthāna (2).”
This sūtra has not been identified. A similar passage, however, can be found in the Pāli Aṅguttara Nikāya of the Sutta Piṭaka (AN III, 244–45). See Kudo 2004, p. 240, n. 10; Lévi 1932, p. 40, n. 3.
According to the Tibetan, which uses grong (“village”) in the first sentence and rigs (= Sanskrit kula) in the following sentences. The Sanskrit (Lévi 1932, p. 40; Kudo 2004, p. 60) reads kula (“family, household, house community”). In Old and Classical Sanskrit, the term refers to all the people with whom one shares meals (German Speisegemeinschaft), which in traditional societies may exceed the modern, so-called (nuclear) family; thus we have opted for “community.”
The Tibetan ma byin par len pa (Sanskrit adattādāna) literally means “taking what was not given.”
The Sanskrit has only tadabhyanumodanam, “taking pleasure in stealing” (Kudo 2004, p. 60). An alternative translation of the Tibetan may be “taking pleasure in stolen goods” (ma byin par blangs pas dga’ ba).
The Tibetan reads shes rab chung ba. The Tibetan translation equivalent of the Sanskrit duṣprajña prescribed by the Mvy is shes rab ’chal ba “misconception, wrong understanding” (see Mvy [Sakaki 2470]).
According to the Sanskrit, which adds paṇḍitān (Kudo 2004, pp. 64 and 65, MS[A] and MS[B], respectively; Lévi 1932, p. 41).
The Sanskrit reads, “What is Dharma/right? Practicing which Dharma promotes happiness?” (Lévi 1932, p. 41: ko dharmaḥ kiṃ dharmaṃ kurvataḥ śreyaskaram iti; Kudo 2004, pp. 64 and 65).
This translates the variant reading sten in Y, J, K, and N. D has bston, which seems to be corroborated by the Sanskrit (both MS[A] and MS[B]; Kudo 2004, pp. 64 and 65, respectively) sevati (“to stay/remain with someone”; “to associate with someone”).
This is a free translation of the Tibetan ’jungs pa’i sems yod pas, corresponding to the Sanskrit abhiniveśa in the extant Sanskrit editions.
According to the Tibetan (yongs su ’dri phod pa). The Sanskrit term paripṛcchakajātīyaḥ “inclined to inquire/ a questioner” occurs in the Aṣṭasāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā, published on the website Bibliotheca Polyglotta by the University of Oslo, accessed December 6, 2019. See also Gareth Sparham, trans., The Perfection of Wisdom in Eighteen Thousand Lines (84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha, 2022).
According to the Sanskrit of MS[B] (Kudo 2004, p. 69): dharmabhāṇakānāṃ vaiśāradyaṃ varṇṇayati. MS[A] (Kudo 2004, p. 68) reads varddhaya{ṃ}ti, which according to Kudo (2004, p. 68, n. 10) is a scribal error for varṇṇayanti. The Tibetan chos smra ba rnams la mi ’jigs pa nye bar sgrub pa dang does seems to be a standard translation of the Sanskrit; nye bar sgrub suggests some form of the Sanskrit upa + √hṛ (see Mvy [Sakaki 6395]: upasaṃhāra).
Sanskrit sahita literally means “connected, sensible, coherent, reasonable” (see BHSD, s.v. “sahita”: “of speech, connected, coherent, sensible”), which seems to be the sense chosen by the Tibetan translators. The Sanskrit could also be interpreted as “one applauds/acclaims those who speak what is beneficial/good [for others] (sa-hita), and one avoids those who speak what is unbeneficial/not good (a-hita) [for others]” (sahitabhāṣiṇāṃ sādhukāraṃ dadāti | ahitabhāṣiṇaḥ pariharati according to the emended Sanskrit version in Kudo 2004, p. 69, MS[B]). Lévi (1932, p. 44, n. 6) records saṁhitabhāṣitānām; according to Kudo’s new transliteration of MS[A], however, the part up to hita- is illegible in the manuscript (Kudo 2004, p. 68).
For “ink,” reading N, U, and H snag tsha instead of D snag tsa. D reads glegs bam dang snag tsa dang smyug gu la sogs pa’i sbyin pa byed pa, which faithfully (except that it has glegs bam, translating pustaka, first) renders the Sanskrit masīpustakalekhanīpradādāni dadāti (according to Lévi 1932, p. 44; MS[A] and MS[B] [Kudo 2004, pp. 68 and 69], give the same reading), “making gifts of ink, books (or leaves of birch bark?), and reed pens.” For the loanwords masi and pustaka, see Falk 1993, pp. 241 and 305–6 (pustaka [“skin”] perhaps meant tree bark).
For identification of the Nandikasūtra (Toh 334), see Kudo 2004, p. 230, n. 3; p. 233, n. 6; and p. 240, n. 13. For an English translation of the Tibetan version of the Nandikasūtra, see The Sūtra of Nandika (Toh 334). For an edition and English translation of the extant Skt. witness, the Āryanandikaparipṛcchāsūtra, see Vinīta 2010, pp. 97–114.
MS[A] instead mentions forty faults of drinking alcohol (catvārīṃśad ādīnavāḥ madyadoṣāḥ; Kudo 2004, p. 70). The Tibetan follows MS[B].
According to the Sanskrit akuśalapakṣeṇa (Lévi 1932, p. 44; Kudo 2004, pp. 70 and 71: MS[A] akuśalapakṣena; MS[B] akuśalapathe). The Tibetan reads dge ba’i phyogs su, which corresponds to kuśalapakṣeṇa (or -pakṣe?), instead of akuśalapakṣeṇa in the Sanskrit. This refers to the section below which starts with the sentence, “Regarding the loss of mindfulness induced by drinking beer made from fermented barley and other intoxicating liquors…”
According to the Tibetan, which omits the Sanskrit akriyādṛṣṭiḥ (Lévi 1932, p. 44; Kudo 2004, pp. 70 and 71: MS[B] furthermore adds asatkriyāvādaḥ).
According to the Sanskrit matsarivādaḥ (“one who speaks with hostility”). The Tibetan reads ser sna che ba, which one might literally translate as “(having) strong jealousy” or “great with regard to jealousy,” although that does not fit the context of the hell realms here. Edgerton’s definition in BSHD, s.v. “matsarin,” does not seem to apply here: “(Skt. id., Pali maccharin), in deśanā-°riṇaś ca Mv i.90.3, of backsliding would-be Bodhisattvas, prob. resentful of religious instruction.”
This well-established “Buddhist Hybrid English” term translates Tibetan (dud ’gro’i) skye gnas su, which renders Sanskrit (tiryag-)yoni, “mode/realm of existence” (German Daseinsform; see pw, s.v. “yoni”). As an alternative, one may perhaps translate this as “rebirth as an animal” or “rebirth in the animal kingdom.”
Sanskrit akalpikapradānam, Tibetan tshul dang mi ’dra (the translation equivalent of the antonym tshul dang ’dra ba according to Mvy (Sakaki 7073) is Sanskrit sārūpya): a gift that would not be appropriate with respect to the status and/or vows of its recipient.
According to the Sanskrit avahasana, which means to make fun of someone by either laughing about/ridiculing or mocking a person’s ailment, condition, or disability. The Tibetan here reads phyas byed pa “to reproach, blame.”
A collection of canonical texts with the purpose of presenting the Buddha’s teachings in a precise, systematic, and definitive way, using highly technical and impersonal descriptions and language. There are two traditional definitions of the word abhi-dharma depending on the sense of the prefix abhi-: (1) [teachings] pertaining to (abhi-) the Dharma, and (2) higher or superior (abhi-) Dharma. The second definition may point toward the fact that the mature Abhidharma is a body of Buddhist doctrine as well as a body of literature, not a mere reformulation and systematization of the Buddhist sūtras (see also the definition given in Abhidh-k-bh(P), 2, where Vasubandhu seems to employ both definitions in order to distinguish an ultimate and a conventional meaning of the word abhidharma). The word piṭaka means “basket” but is used in its derived or transferred sense “collection of canonical scriptures.” The piṭakas are usually Vinaya, Sūtra, and Abhidharma.
A class of devas belonging to the Pure Abodes (Śuddhāvāsa) in the world of form (rūpadhātu).
In early Buddhism one who teaches the Dharma and Vinaya to novices and new monks and who can replace the preceptor (Skt. upādhyāya) if one loses one’s preceptor.
See “teacher.”
Any volitional act, whether of body, speech, or mind.
See “monastic renunciation.”
The act of “going forth from household life into homelessness,” i.e., becoming a (mendicant) Buddhist monk.
The so-called lower ordination to become a novice in the ordained Buddhist saṅgha; during the novitiate, aspirants observe ten precepts (for Theravādins and others) or thirty-six precepts (for Mūlasarvāstivādins) for a certain time before becoming fully ordained (Skt. upasampadā).
The Sanskrit pravrajyā literally means “going forth,” with the sense of leaving the life of a householder and embracing the life of a renunciant. When the term is applied more technically, it refers to the act of becoming a male novice (śrāmaṇera; dge tshul) or female novice (śrāmaṇerikā; dge tshul ma), this being a first stage leading to full ordination.
The son of Bimbisāra, the ruler of Magadha at the time of the Buddha, he committed patricide, usurped his father’s throne, and entered into a conspiracy with Devadatta to take over the saṅgha. He later repented and became a lay disciple of the Buddha.
A wealthy merchant in the town of Śrāvastī, famous for his generosity to the poor, who became a patron of the Buddha Śākyamuni. He bought Prince Jeta’s Grove (Skt. Jetavana), to be the Buddha’s first monastery, a place where the monks could stay during the monsoon.
One of twenty or twenty-four so-called secondary mental defilements/afflictions (Sanskrit upakleśa; Tibetan nye ba’i nyon mongs; a subcategory of mental states [Sanskrit caitasika/caitta] in Buddhist psychology [Abhidharma]).
The fourth of the four stages on the path to arhatship (Sanskrit āryapudgala) according to the Hīnayāna.
Describes an attitude of excessive pride or hubris.
See “śramaṇa.”
The Sanskrit literally means “one who strives” and refers to a Hindu, Jain, or Buddhist ascetic. Many different folk etymologies of the term exist (see Karashima 2016). In early Indic Buddhist texts, śramaṇa/samaṇa is often paired, i.e., compounded, with brāhmaṇa (see for example 1.25: dge sbyong ngam bram ze). Due to a reference in Patañjali’s commentary on Pāṇini’s grammar, śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas are believed to have been two hostile groups in ancient India (see, e.g., Laddu 1991, p. 719). Others, however, have argued on the basis of evidence from the Pāli canon that the compound samaṇa-brāhmaṇa was used as a fixed expression that did not always refer to (actual) brahmins and śramaṇas as specific groups (see Bronkhorst, “A Note on Śramaṇas and Brāhmaṇas”).
A type of nonhuman being whose precise status is subject to different views, but is included as one of the six classes of beings in the sixfold classification of realms of rebirth. In the Buddhist context, asuras are powerful beings said to be dominated by envy, ambition, and hostility. They are also known in the pre-Buddhist and pre-Vedic mythologies of India and Iran, and feature prominently in Vedic and post-Vedic Brahmanical mythology, as well as in the Buddhist tradition. In these traditions, asuras are often described as being engaged in interminable conflict with the devas (gods).
A popular genre of Buddhist literature; the Sanskrit has been translated as “heroic action” by Léon Feer. With regard to structure, avadānas are similar to the jātakas, with the difference that the protagonist of an avadāna usually is not the Buddha (with the exception of Kṣemendra’s Bodhisattvāvadānamālā). They often present moral tales or illustrations of the law of karma.
One of one of twenty or twenty-four so-called secondary mental defilements/afflictions.
The lowest and worst of the major hot hells according Buddhist cosmology.
From a wealthy brahmin family, Bakula is said to have become a monk at the age of eighty and lived to be one hundred and sixty. He is also said to have had two families because as a baby he was swallowed by a large fish, and the family who discovered him alive in the fish’s stomach also claimed him as their child. He is regarded as the Buddha’s foremost pupil in terms of health and longevity. It is also said that he could remember many previous lifetimes and was a pupil of the previous buddhas Padmottara, Vipaśyin, and Kāśyapa. In this text, he is said to be the son of the king Dharmayaśas. However, according to Pāli sources, Bakula was the son of a householder of Kosambī; see DPPN, s.v. “Bakula.”
Four (supernatural) qualities or powers of the mind that help to gain the fruit of the path. They are aspiration (Skt. chanda; Tib. ’dun pa), effort (Skt. vīrya; Tib. brtson ’grus), concentration (lit. “thought, attitude”: Skt. citta; Tibetan bsam pa), and analysis (Skt. mīmāṃsā; Tib. dpyod pa).
The fourth highest class of gods of the Pure Abodes (Śuddhāvāsa) in the world of form (rūpadhātu); non-returners and those who have mastered the fourth dhyāna are reborn in the Pure Abodes.
Also known as Benares, one of the oldest cities of northeast India on the banks of the Ganges, in modern-day Uttar Pradesh. It was once the capital of the ancient kingdom of Kāśi, and in the Buddha’s time it had been absorbed into the kingdom of Kośala. It was an important religious center, as well as a major city, even during the time of the Buddha. The name may derive from being where the Varuna and Assi rivers flow into the Ganges. It was on the outskirts of Vārāṇasī that the Buddha first taught the Dharma, in the location known as Deer Park (Mṛgadāva). For numerous episodes set in Vārāṇasī, including its kings, see \1\2The Hundred Deeds, Toh 340.
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”).
A class of gods in the world of form (rūpadhātu).
A class of gods in the world of form (rūpadhātu).
A class of gods in the world of form (rūpadhātu).
The lowest class of gods in the world of form (rūpadhātu).
A member of the highest of the four castes in Indian society, which is closely associated with religious vocations.
In The Exposition of Karma, when not part of a name (e.g., bram ze to’u de ya; bram ze char ’bebs), this term may designate a Buddhist practitioner (especially when mentioned together with śramaṇas) and/or a person worthy of respect and a high social status (i.e., belonging to the brahmin class) independent of their religious affiliation.
A member of the highest of the four castes in Indian society, which is closely associated with religious vocations.
In The Exposition of Karma, when not part of a name (e.g., bram ze to’u de ya; bram ze char ’bebs), this term may designate a Buddhist practitioner (especially when mentioned together with śramaṇas) and/or a person worthy of respect and a high social status (i.e., belonging to the brahmin class) independent of their religious affiliation.
No extant Sanskrit text of this sūtra has as yet been identified (see Kudo 2004, p. 263, n. 37).
A class of gods in the world of form (rūpadhātu).
Refers to the imperturbable self-confidence and certainty, based on first-hand experience, first-hand knowledge, expert skill, and maturity, of buddhas, bodhisattvas, or arhats in four areas: (1) the confidence of being perfectly enlightened as to all dharmas, (2) the confidence of knowledge that all impurities are destroyed for oneself, (3) the confidence of having described precisely and correctly the obstructive conditions (to religious life), and (4) the confidence of the correctness of the way toward liberation. While this reflects the meaning of the Sanskrit and the Pāli term, the Tibetan interpretation of this term is “fearlessness.”
One of the three mental “poisons” (Skt. triviṣa) and one of six fundamental afflictions (Tib. rtsa nyon; Skt. mūlakleśa).
See “confusion.”
One of the eleven virtuous mental factors (Tib. sems byung dge ba; Skt. kuśalacaitta), a subgroup of the mental states or factors associated with the mind (Skt. caitasika, caitta), according to the Abhidharma. According to Vasubandhu (in his Pañcaskandhaka), ngo tsha (“scruples, conscience”) is different from khrel or khrel yod (“embarrassment” or “shame”; here “decorum”) in that it is independent of others’ judgment of one’s behavior, and solely internal in that it contradicts one’s internalized values and one’s inner moral compass. See “decorum.”
Mental contaminants or “outflows” that negatively influence interaction with the external world; they are (1) the contaminant of sensuality (kāmāśrava), (2) the contaminant of existence (bhavāśrava), (3) the contaminant of ignorance (avidyāśrava), and (4) the contaminant of views (dṛṣṭyāśrava).
The timespan in which a world system or universe evolves and dissolves again according to Buddhist cosmology; a complete cosmic cycle.
One of the ten nonvirtuous actions.
One of the three mental “poisons” (Skt. triviṣa) and one of six fundamental afflictions (Tib. rtsa nyon; Skt. mūlakleśa).
See “desire.”
One of the eleven virtuous mental factors (Tib. sems byung dge ba; Skt. kuśalacaitta), a subgroup of the mental states or factors associated with the mind (Skt. caitasika, caitta), according to the Abhidharma. According to Vasubandhu (in his Pañcaskandhaka), khrel or khrel yod (usually rendered “embarrassment” or “shame”) is different from ngo tsha (“conscience”) in that it is dependent on others’ judgment of one’s behavior and not solely internal. See “conscience.”
The third highest class of gods of the Pure Abodes (Śuddhāvāsa) in the world of form (rūpadhātu); non-returners and those who have mastered the fourth dhyāna are reborn in the Pure Abodes.
One of the three mental “poisons” (Skt. triviṣa) and one of six fundamental afflictions (Tib. rtsa nyon; Skt. mūlakleśa).
See “confusion.”
One of the three mental “poisons” (Skt. triviṣa) and one of six fundamental afflictions (Tib. rtsa nyon; Skt. mūlakleśa).
See “desire.”
In the most general sense the devas—the term is cognate with the English divine—are a class of celestial beings who frequently appear in Buddhist texts, often at the head of the assemblies of nonhuman beings who attend and celebrate the teachings of the Buddha Śākyamuni and other buddhas and bodhisattvas. In Buddhist cosmology the devas occupy the highest of the five or six “destinies” (gati) of saṃsāra among which beings take rebirth. The devas reside in the devalokas, “heavens” that traditionally number between twenty-six and twenty-eight and are divided between the desire realm (kāmadhātu), form realm (rūpadhātu), and formless realm (ārūpyadhātu). A being attains rebirth among the devas either through meritorious deeds (in the desire realm) or the attainment of subtle meditative states (in the form and formless realms). While rebirth among the devas is considered favorable, it is ultimately a transitory state from which beings will fall when the conditions that lead to rebirth there are exhausted. Thus, rebirth in the god realms is regarded as a diversion from the spiritual path.
The historical Buddha’s cousin and the brother of Ānanda, he became notorious through his schemes to become the Buddha’s successor, which the Buddha vehemently declined, and through his splitting of the saṅgha (saṅgha-bheda).
Devas belonging to the realm of the four guardian kings at the base of Mount Meru, each the guardian of his direction: Vaiśravaṇa in the north, Dhṛtarāṣṭra in the east, Virūpākṣa in the west, and Virūḍhaka in the south.
las rnam ’byed (Karmavibhaṅga). Toh 338, Degé Kangyur vol. 72 (mdo sde, sa), folios 277.a–298.b.
las rnam par ’byed 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. 808–59.
las rnam par ’byed pa. S287, Stok Palace Kangyur vol. 86 (mdo sde, ci), folios 358.a–385.a.
Pelliot tibétain 944. Bibliothèque nationale de France, Paris. Accessed through The International Dunhuang Project: The Silk Road Online.
rgya cher rol pa (Lalitavistara). Toh 95, Degé Kangyur vol. 46 (mdo sde, kha), folios 1.b–216.b. English translation in Dharmachakra Translation Committee 2013.
ched du brjod pa’i tshoms (Udānavarga). Toh 326, Degé Kangyur vol. 71 (mdo sde, sa), folios 209.a–253.a.
tshe ’pho ba ji ltar ’gyur ba zhus pa (Āyuṣpattiyathākāraparipṛcchā). Toh 308, Degé Kangyur vol. 72 (mdo sde, sa), folios 145.b–155.a. English translation in Tillemans 2019.
tshe’i mtha’ (Āyuḥparyanta). Toh 307, Degé Kangyur vol. 72 (mdo sde, sa), folios 139.a–145.b. English translation in Galasek-Hul and Lama Kunga Thartse Rinpoche 2021b.
dam pa’i chos dran pa nye bar gzhag pa (Saddharmasmṛtyupasthāna). Toh 287, Degé Kangyur vols. 68 (mdo sde ya), folios 82.a–318.a; vol. 69 (mdo sde, ra), folios 1.b.–307.b; vol. 70 (mdo sde, la), folios 1.b–312.a; vol. 71 (mdo sde, sha), folios 1.b–229.b. English translation in Dharmachakra Translation Committee 2021.
byams pas zhus pa (Maitreyaparipṛcchā). Toh 85, Degé Kangyur vol. 44 (dkon brtsegs, cha), folios 104.b–116.b. English translation in Liljenberg 2016.
las kyi rnam par ’gyur ba (Karmavibhaṅga). Toh 339, Degé Kangyur vol. 72 (mdo sde, sa), folios 289.b–310.a. English translation in Galasek-Hul and Lama Kunga Thartse Rinpoche 2021a.
las brgya tham pa (Karmaśataka). Toh 340, Degé Kangyur vols. 73–73 (mdo sde, ha–a), folios 1.b (ha)–128.b (a). English translation in Jamspal and Fischer 2020.
sher phyin khri brgyad stong pa (Aṣṭādaśasāhasrikāprajñāpāramitā). Toh 10, Degé Kangyur vol. 29–31 (shes phyin, khri brgyad, ka–ga), folios 1.a (ka)–206.a (ga). English translation in Sparham 2022.
Vasubandhu. chos mngon pa’i mdzod kyi tshig le’ur byas pa (Abhidharmakośakārikā). Toh 4089, Degé Tengyur vol. 140 (mngon pa, ku), folios 1.b–25.a.
Vasubandhu. chos mngon pa’i mdzod kyi bshad pa (Abhidharmakośabhāṣya). Toh 4090, Degé Tengyur vol. 140–41 (mngon pa, ku–khu), folios 26.b (ku)–258.a (khu).
Choné Lama Drakpa Shedrup (co ne bla ma grags pa bshad sgrub). las rnam par ’byed pa’i mdo sogs dang tshe mtha’i don bsdus nas bkod pa. In gsung ’bum/ grags pa bshad sgrub, 9:298–316. Beijing: krung go’i bod rig pa dpe skrun khang, 2009. BDRC MW1PD90129.
Jamgön Kongtrül Lodrö Thayé (’jam mgon kong sprul blo gros mtha’ yas). man ngag lta ba’i phreng ba’i tshig don gyi ’grel zin mdor bsdus pa zab don pad tshal ’byed pa’i nyi ’od [Light of the Sun]. In gdams ngag rin po che’i mdzod [The Treasury of Spiritual Instructions], vol. 1, folios 1.a–28.b. Delhi: Shechen Publications 1999. BDRC W23605.
Patrul Orgyan Jigme Chökyi Wangpo (dpal sprul o rgyan ’jigs med chos kyi dbang po). rdzogs pa chen po klong chen snying tig gi sngon ’gro’i khrid yig kun bzang bla ma’i zhal lung. In dpal sprul bka’ ’bum, vol. 5, pp. 1–565 (F.1.a–282.a). Reproduction of Lhasa xylographs. Gangtok: Kazi, Sonam T. (Ngagyur Nyingmay Sungrab series), 1970–71. BDRC W5832.
Anguttara-Nikaya of the Sutta-Pitaka: Part III, Pancakanipata, Chakkanipata. GRETIL edition input by the Dhammakaya Foundation, 1989–96, based on the edition by E. Hardy: The Anguttara-Nikāya. Vol. 3, Pañcaka-Nipata and Chakka-Nipāta. London: Pali Text Society, 1976. Version September 4, 2014.
Bernhard, Franz, ed. Udānavarga. 2 vol. Sanskrittexte Aus den Turfanfunden 10. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1965.
Digha-Nikaya of the Sutta-Pitaka. GRETIL edition input by the Dhammakaya Foundation, 1989–96, based on the edition by T.W. Rhys Davids and J.E. Carpenter, London: Pali Text Society, 1903. Versions September 26, 2014 and October 2, 2014.
Hinüber, Oskar von, and Kenneth Roy Norman, eds. Dhammapada. Oxford: Pali Text Society, 1995.
Kudo, Noriyuki. The Karmavibhaṅga: Transliterations and Annotations of the Original Sanskrit Manuscripts from Nepal. Bibliotheca Philologica et Philosophica Buddhica 7. Tokyo: The International Research Institute for Advanced Buddhology, Soka University, 2004.
Majjhima-Nikaya of the Sutta-Pitaka. GRETIL edition input by the Dhammakaya Foundation, 1989–96. Suttantas 1–76 based on Vol. I, ed. by V. Trenckner, London: Pali Text Society 1888; Vol. II, Majjhima-Nikaya, Suttantas 77–106, ed. by R. Chalmers, London: Pali Text Society, 1896; Suttantas 107–152, based on Vol. III, ed. by R. Chalmers, London: Pali Text Society 1899. Version November 6, 2014.
Matsumura, Hisashi. “Ayuḥparyantasūtra: Das Sūtra von der Lebensdauer in den verschiedenen Welten: Text in Sanskrit und Tibetisch, nach der Gilgit-Handschrift herausgegeben.” In Sanskrit‑Texte aus dem buddhistischen Kanon: Neuentdeckungen und Neueditionen, edited by Fumio Enomoto, Jens-Uwe Hartmann, and Hisashi Matsumura, 1:69–100. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1989.
Pradhan, Prahlad, and Aruna Haldar. Abhidharmakośabhāṣyam of Vasubandhu. Tibetan Sanskrit Works Series 8. Patna: K. P. Jayaswal Research Institute, 1975.
Samyutta-Nikaya of the Sutta-Pitaka. GRETIL edition input by the Dhammakaya Foundation, Thailand, 1989-1996, based on the edition by L. Feer: The Saṃyutta-Nikâya of the Sutta-Piṭaka. Vols. 1–6. London: Henry Frowde, 1884–1904. Version September 4, 2014.
Appleton, Naomi. “The Fourth Decade of the Avadānaśataka.” Asian Literature and Translation 2, no. 5 (2014): 1–35.
Apte, Vaman Shivaram. The Practical Sanskrit–English Dictionary. Poona: Shiralkar, 1890. Electronic version at Cologne Digital Sanskrit Dictionaries. Last modified July 30, 2019.
Bareau, André. The Buddhist Schools of the Small Vehicle. Translated by Sara Boin-Webb. Edited by Andrew Skilton. Honolulu: University of Hawai‘i Press, 2013.
Beer, Robert. The Handbook of Tibetan Buddhist Symbols. Boston: Shambhala, 2003.
Bhikkhu Ñāṇamoli, and Bhikkhu Bodhi, trans. and ed. The Middle Length Discourses of the Buddha: A Translation of the Majjhima Nikāya. Fourth Edition. Boston: Wisdom Publications, 2009.
Böhtlingk, Otto von. Nachträge zum Sanskrit-Wörterbuch in kürzerer Fassung von Otto Böhtlingk. 7 vols. Edited by Richard Smith. Leipzig: O. Harrassowitz, 1928. Electronic version at Cologne Digital Sanskrit Dictionaries. Last accessed October 1, 2018.
Braarvig, Jens, ed. “Mahāvyutpatti with sGra sbyor bam po gñis pa.” Bibliotheca Polyglotta, University of Oslo. Accessed September 7, 2022.
Bronkhorst, Johannes. “A Note on Śramaṇas and Brāhmaṇas.” In Festschrift in Honor of Boris Oguibénine, edited by Guillaume Ducoeur, Victoria Grace, and Nataliya Yanchevskaya. Cambridge, MA: Department of Sanskrit and Indian Studies, Harvard University, forthcoming. Available online at Academia.edu. Accessed April 27, 2020.
Buswell, Robert E., Jr., and Donald S. Lopez, Jr. The Princeton Dictionary of Buddhism. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2014.
Ch’en, Kenneth K. S. Buddhism in China: A Historical Survey. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1964.
Conze, Edward, trans. The Perfection of Wisdom in Eight Thousand Lines and Its Verse Summary. Bolinas, CA: Four Seasons Foundation, 1975.
Cousins, Lance S. “Good or Skilful? Kusala in Canon and Commentary.” Journal of Buddhist Ethics 3 (1996): 136–64.
Dharmachakra Translation Committee, trans. (2013). The Play in Full (Lalitavistara, Toh 95). 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha, 2013.
Dharmachakra Translation Committee, trans. (2021). The Application of Mindfulness of the Sacred Dharma (Saddharmasmṛtyupasthāna, Toh 287). 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha, 2021.
Drewes, David. “Revisiting the Phrase ‘sa pṛthivīpradeśaś caityabhūto bhavet’ and the Mahāyāna Cult of the Book.” Indo-Iranian Journal 50 (2007): 101–43.
Edgerton, Franklin. Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit Grammar and Dictionary. Vol. 2, Dictionary. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1953. Electronic version at Cologne Digital Sanskrit Dictionaries. Last modified July 30, 2019.
Falk, Harry. Schrift im alten Indien: Ein Forschungsbericht mit Anmerkungen. Tübingen: Gunter Narr, 1993.
Feer, Léon. Fragments Extraits du Kandjour. Annales du Musée Guimet 5. Paris: E. Leroux, 1883.
Galasek-Hul, Bruno, and Lama Kunga Thartse Rinpoche, trans. (2021a). Transformation of Karma (Karmavibhaṅga, Toh 339). 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha, 2021.
Galasek-Hul, Bruno, and Lama Kunga Thartse Rinpoche, trans. (2021b). The Limits of Life (Āyuḥparyanta, Toh 307). 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha, 2021.
Gombrich, Richard. What the Buddha Thought. London: Equinox, 2009.
Guenther, Herbert V., trans. The Jewel Ornament of Liberation. Boston: Shambhala, 1986.
Hahn, Michael, ed. Haribhaṭṭa in Nepal: Ten Legends from His Jātakamālā and the Anonymous Śākyasiṃhajātaka. Studia Philologica Buddhica 22. Tokyo: International Institute for Buddhist Studies, 2007.
Halbfass, Wilhelm. Karma und Wiedergeburt im indischen Denken. Kreuzlingen: Diederichs, 2000.
Hoernle, A. F. Rudolf. Manuscript Remains of Buddhist Literature Found in Eastern Turkestan: Facsimiles with Transcripts, Translations and Notes. Vol. 1. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1916.
Jacobi, Hermann, and Walter Ruben, eds. Triṃśikāvijñapti des Vasubandhu mit Bhāṣya des Ācārya Sthiramati. Stuttgart: Kohlmammer, 1932.
Jäschke, H. A. A Tibetan–English Dictionary. London: Routledge & Kegan, 1972.
Jamspal, Dr. Lozang, and Kaia Fischer, trans. The Hundred Deeds (Karmaśataka, Toh 340). 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha, 2020.
Karashima, Seishi. “Indian Folk Etymologies and Their Reflections in Chinese Translations—brāhmaṇa, śramaṇa and Vaiśramaṇa.” Annual Report of The International Research Institute for Advanced Buddhology at Soka University 19 (March 2016): 101–23.
Khenpo Könchok Gyaltsen and Trinlay Chödron, trans. The Jewel Ornament of Liberation: The Wish-Fulfilling Gem of the Noble Teachings. Ithaca, NY: Snow Lion, 1998.
Klaus, Konrad. Das Maitrakanyakāvadāna (Divyāvadāna 38): Sanskrittext und deutsche Übersetzung. Bonn: Indica et tibetica, 1983.
Laddu, S. D. “Śramaṇa vis-à-vis Brāhmaṇa in Early History.” Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 72/73, no. 1/4 (1991): 719–36.
La Vallée Poussin, Louis de, and Leo M. Pruden, trans. Abhidharmakośabhāṣyam of Vasubandhu. 4 vols. Berkeley: Asian Humanities Press, 1988–90.
Lévi, Sylvain (1932). Mahakarmavibhaṅga (La grande classification des actes) et Karmavibhangopadeśa (Discussion sur le Mahā Karmavibhanga). Paris: Librarie Ernest Leroux, 1932.
Lévi, Sylvain (1933). Fragments de textes koutchéens: Udānavarga, Udānastotra, Udānālaṁkāra et Karmavibhaṅga. Cahiers de la Société asiatique 1.2. Paris: Imprimerie nationale, 1933.
Liljenberg, Karen, trans. The Question of Maitreya (1) (Maitreyaparipṛcchā, Toh 85). 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha, 2016.
Lokesh Chandra. Buddhism: Aesthetics, Time and Quintessence. Śata-piṭaka Series 628. New Delhi: International Academy of Indian Culture, 2010.
Maggi, Mauro. The Khotanese Karmavibhaṅga. Serie Orientale Roma 74. Rome: Istituto italiano per il Medio ed Estremo Oriente, 1995.
Malalasekera, G. P. Dictionary of Pāli Proper Names. 2 vols. London: John Murray, 1937–38.
Martin, Dan. “Tibetan Vocabulary.” Christian Steinert’s Tibetan–English Dictionary. Version April 14, 2003.
Master, Alfred. “Indo-Aryan and Dravidian.” Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 11, no. 2 (1944): 297–307.
Mayrhofer, Manfred. Kurzgefasstes etymologisches Wörterbuch des Altindischen. Vol. 3. Heidelberg: C. Winter, 1976.
McDermott, James P. “The Kathāvatthu Kamma Debates.” Journal of the American Oriental Society 95, no. 3 (Jul–Sep 1975): 424–33.
McKeown, Arthur P., trans. and ed. Rolf Stein’s Tibetica Antiqua: With Additional Materials. Brill’s Tibetan Studies Library 24. Leiden: Brill, 2010.
Meulenbeld, G. J., trans. The Mādhavanidāna and Its Chief Commentary, Chapters 1–10. Orientalia Rheno-Traiectina 19. Leiden: Brill, 1974.
Monier-Williams, Monier. A Sanskrit-English dictionary: Etymologically and philologically arranged with special reference to Cognate indo-european languages. Oxford, The Clarendon Press, 1899. Electronic version at Cologne Digital Sanskrit Dictionaries, version 2.0.738. Last modified July 30, 2019.
Müller, F. Max, and H. Wenzel, eds. The Dharma-Samgraha: An Ancient Collection of Buddhist Technical Terms. Prepared for publication by Kenjiu Kasawara. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1885.
Negi, J. S. Tibetan–Sanskrit Dictionary (bod skad dang legs sbyar gyi tshig mdzod chen mo). 16 vols. Sarnath: Central Institute of Higher Tibetan Studies, 1993–2005.
Norman, K. R., trans. The Group of Discourses (Sutta-Nipāta). 2nd ed. Oxford: Pali Text Society, 2001. First published 1992.
Patkar, M. M. “Studies in Sanskrit Lexicography: 1 Geographical Data in Sanskrit Lexicons.” Bulletin of the Deccan College Post-Graduate and Research Institute 14, no. 4 (March 1953): 249–305.
Patrul Rinpoche, tr. Padmakara Translation Group. The Words of My Perfect Teacher. First Edition, London: HarperCollins, 1994. Second Edition, Walnut Creek: Sage-Altamira, 1998. Reprinted, New Haven: Yale University Press, 2010.
Proença, Giuliano, trans. The Sūtra of Nandika (Nandikasūtra, Toh 334). 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha, 2024.
Rhys Davids, T. W., and William Stede. The Pali Text Society’s Pali–English Dictionary. London: Pali Text Society, 1921–25.
Rosenberg, Friedrich. “Deux fragments sogdien-bouddhiques du Ts’ien-fo-tong de Touen-houang (Mission S. d’Oldenburg 1914–1915). II. Fragment d’un Sūtra. 1.” Bulletin de l’Académie des Sciences de Russie, 6th ser., vol. 14 (1920): 399–420.
Samuel, Geoffrey. Civilized Shamans: Buddhism in Tibetan Societies. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1993.
Sieg, Emil. “Die Kutschischen Karmavibhaṅga-Texte der Bibliothèque Nationale in Paris.” Zeitschrift für vergleichende Sprachforschung auf dem Gebiete der Indogermanischen Sprachen 65, no 1/2 (1938): 1–54.
Simon, Walter. “A Note on the Tibetan Version of the Karmavibhaṅga Preserved in the MS Kanjur of the British Museum.” Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 33, no. 1 (1970): 161–66.
Sparham, Gareth, trans. The Perfection of Wisdom in Eighteen Thousand Lines (Aṣṭādaśasāhasrikāprajñāpāramitā, Toh 10). 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha, 2022.
Tillemans, Tom, trans. Questions Regarding Death and Transmigration (Āyuṣpattiyathākāraparipṛcchā, Toh 308). 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha, 2019.
Timme Kragh, Ulrich. Early Buddhist Theories of Action and Result: A Study of Karmaphalasaṃbhandha; Candrakīrti’s Prasannapadā, Verses 17.1–20. Wiener Studien zur Tibetologie und Buddhismuskunde 64. Vienna: Arbeitskreis für Tibetische und Buddhistische Studien Universität Wien, 2006.
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: 97–141. Beijing: China Tibetology Publishing House; Vienna: Austrian Academy of Sciences Press, 2010.
Wogihara, Unrai, ed. Bodhisattvabhūmi: A Statement of Whole Course of the Bodhisattva (Being Fifteenth Section of Yogācārabhūmi). Tokyo: Sankibo Buddhist Bookstore, 1971. First published 1930.
Wilkens, Jens. “Die altuigurische Daśakarmapathāvadānamālā und die buddhistische Literatur Zentralasiens.” Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies 38 (2015): 245–70.
Yuyama, Akira, ed. Prajñā-pāramitā-ratna-guṇa-saṃcaya-gāthā (Sanskrit recension A). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1976.
AKK Abhidharmakośakārikā of Vasubandhu, as included in the commentary (bhāṣya), the Abhidh-k-bh(P)
AN Anguttara-Nikaya of the Sutta-Pitaka
Abhidh-k-bh Abhidharmakośabhāṣyam of Vasubandhu in Abhidh-k-bh(P)
Abhidh-k-bh(P) Pradhan and Haldar, eds., Abhidharmakośabhāṣyam
Apte Apte, The Practical Sanskrit–English Dictionary
BHSD Edgerton, Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit Dictionary
DN Digha-Nikaya of the Sutta-Pitaka
DPPN Malalasekera, Dictionary of Pāli Proper Names
Dhp von Hinüber and Norman, eds., Dhammapada
MN Majjhima Nikāya
MS[A] Kudo, The Karmavibhaṅga, manuscript MS[A] edition in Kudo 2004
MS[B] Kudo, The Karmavibhaṅga, manuscript MS[B] edition in Kudo 2004
MS[C] Kudo, The Karmavibhaṅga, manuscript MS[C] edition in Kudo 2004
MW Monier-Williams, A Sanskrit-English Dictionary
Mvy “Mahāvyutpatti with sGra sbyor bam po gnyis pa” (Braarvig, ed.)
Negi Negi, Tibetan–Sanskrit Dictionary
PED Rhys Davids and Stede, Pali–English Dictionary
SN Saṃyutta Nikāya
Uv Bernhard, ed., Udānavarga
pw Otto von Böhtlingk, Sanskrit-Wörterbuch in kürzerer Fassung
C Choné printed Kangyur
D Degé (par phud) printed Kangyur
H Lhasa (lha sa/zhol) printed Kangyur
J Lithang (li thang/’jang sa tham) printed Kangyur
K Peking printed Kangyur (Kangxi)
N Narthang printed Kangyur
S Stok Palace manuscript Kangyur
U Urga printed Kangyur
Y Yongle printed Kangyur
Z Shey Palace manuscript Kangyur (Ladakh)
Apart from S and Z, all variant readings are cited from the comparative table of variant readings (bsdur mchan) of the Comparative Edition of the Kangyur
In The Exposition of Karma, the Buddha presents to the brahmin youth Śuka Taudeyaputra a discourse on the workings of karma. This is enlivened by many examples drawn from the rich heritage of Buddhist narrative literature, providing a detailed analysis of how deeds lead to specific consequences in the future. For the Buddhist, this treatise answers many questions pertaining to moral causation, examining specific life situations and their underlying karmic causes and emphasizing the key role that intention plays in the Buddhist ethic of responsibility.
This sūtra was translated into English from the Tibetan and the Sanskrit by Bruno Galasek-Hul with Lama Kunga Thartse Rinpoche (Evam Choden Buddhist Center, Kensington, Berkeley, California) as the consulting Lama.
The translation was completed under the patronage and supervision of 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha.
We gratefully acknowledge the generous sponsorship of Late Ng Ah Chon, Late Lee Tiang Chuan, Lee Cheng Watt and family, Late Lee Cheng Boon and family, Lee Boon Tee and family, Lee Pheck Tiang and family, Lee Pheck Choo and family, Lee Siang Choo and family. Their support has helped make the work on this translation possible.
The Exposition of Karma (Karmavibhaṅga) opens in Prince Jeta’s grove, where the Buddha announces to the brahmin youth Śuka Taudeyaputra that he will deliver this exposition on karma. The ensuing teaching provides a detailed analysis of the complex workings of karma. This is enlivened by many examples drawn from the rich store of Buddhist narrative literature, especially the Buddha’s past-life stories. It begins with a section in which the Buddha poses and answers a series of questions about how conspicuous differences in life circumstances such as longevity, happiness, illness, and appearance have been determined by past deeds. A second section follows, in which questions relating to specific causes for rebirth in various worlds are answered. A third section contains a series of miscellaneous questions and answers that examine the specific outcomes of deeds when certain factors are either present or absent in their performance. Two final sections focus more broadly on virtuous and nonvirtuous deeds and their respective positive and negative consequences. In each of these contexts, the relationship between actions and their results is illustrated by examples and morality tales from Buddhist narrative literature.
The central theme of the Karmavibhaṅga is the concept of cause and effect, the complex system of positive and negative results that, in Indian religious thought, are attributed to karma (“action”) itself. In the Buddhist context, the term karma designates both morally good (kuśala) and bad (akuśala) actions of body, speech, and mind. Once committed, all such deeds “ripen” (vipāka) into their corresponding pleasant and unpleasant (or neutral) results, called “karmic fruition” (karma-phala). From this standpoint, the entire universe and everything in it is the result of individuals’ actions. According to the Karmavibhaṅga, certain unpleasant features of one’s environment are the direct outcome of the ten nonvirtuous courses of action. The botanical or agricultural metaphor employed in the Buddhist description of the karmic process of the individual is perhaps noteworthy: through the ripening of karma one reaps or harvests the fruits of one’s actions. Although the historical Buddha was not the first teacher in ancient India to teach the concept of karmic cause and effect, it has been argued that he advanced and redefined the existing notions of karmically relevant actions as consisting primarily in mental intention (Skt. cetanā; Tib. sems pa). This is summarized in the frequently cited passage from the Aṅguttara Nikāya of the Pāli canon: “By action I mean intention, monks. Having formed a (moral) intention, one carries out an action with body, speech, or mind.”
The Karmavibhaṅga is rich in references to sūtras and citations from Buddhist literature. Its longest illustrative story is a version of the popular narrative from the Maitrakanyakāvadāna (Divyāvadāna no. 38) of the voyage of the sea merchant’s son Maitrakanyaka (called Maitrāyajña in the Karmavibhaṅga), who undertakes a sea voyage to make his fortune, disregarding his mother’s pleas for him to remain on shore and instead physically mistreating her. Because of his disobedience and abuse, he is shipwrecked on the shores of a foreign country and ends up suffering the torments of his personal hell. Another popular story is that of the sthavira Mahāmaudgalyāyana, who is refused alms by a family and subsequently reveals to a stranger their karmic relationship. Both stories are widely known among Tibetan Buddhists from orally transmitted anecdotes of Tibetan lamas. However, many of the other stories and text titles referenced in the Karmavibhaṅga are either completely unknown to us or differ from their better-known versions and other extant texts that bear identical or similar titles.
Lokesh Chandra, writing about the Javanese Buddhist monument the Borobudur, notes the wide-ranging influence of the Karmavibhaṅga: “It was a popular text from the island of Java to the sands of Central Asia and as far as the sprawling land of China, that is, wherever the doctrine of Buddha held sway.”
A further measure of the work’s widespread popularity is the diverse range of languages in which we find extant versions or fragments of the work: Sanskrit, Pāli, Khotanese, Kuchean, Sogdian, and Chinese. Indeed, it was translated into Chinese five times over eight centuries. Thus, in a variety of cultural contexts, the work served as an important source for the central Buddhist doctrine that humans are responsible for the consequences of their actions.
The design of the Borobudur on the island of Java in Indonesia is thought to include pictorial representations drawn from the Karmavibhaṅga. According to Lokesh Chandra, the monument is a physical model of the Buddhist path to awakening in terms of the four sambhāras or accumulations of merit (puṇya), wisdom (jñāna), tranquility (śamatha), and special insight (vidarśanā) according to the Lalitavistara, while skillfully integrating and harmonizing other textual traditions. The lowest or most basic level of religious merit (puṇya), which must be accomplished before one can ascend to the higher levels of the path, is represented by Borobudur’s so-called hidden base, which features reliefs depicting stories from the Karmavibhaṅga that illustrate the law of karma.
The exact original title of Toh 338 cannot be established beyond a doubt. Sylvain Lévi, the first to edit and translate the text, referred to it as the Mahākarmavibhaṅga (MKV). However, the adjective mahā- (“great”) only occurs in the title given to one of the two surviving nearly complete manuscripts (called MS[A] by Kudo Noriyuki), and only in an appendix to the text. The second of the two nearly complete manuscripts (called MS[B] in Kudo’s edition) bears the title Karmavibhaṅgasūtraṃ. There are similar variants in the Tibetan translations of the text preserved in the different Kangyur collections.
For the sake of simplicity, we here follow Kudo and use the title Karmavibhaṅga instead of Mahākarmavibhaṅga or Karmavibhaṅgasūtra to refer to the text translated here (Toh 338), with the caveat that different versions of this text with either the same or a different title are extant. The Karmavibhaṅga belongs to a group of texts which has been labeled the Karmavibhaṅga- or Śukasūtra class.
Although one manuscript (MS[B]) contains the word sūtra in its title, there is insufficient evidence from the extant Sanskrit manuscripts to determine whether the Karmavibhaṅga actually belonged to the scriptural category of sūtra or not. As indicated by the example of the Cakravartisūtra—a text the Karmavibhaṅga quotes four times—texts that were designated as sūtras may nevertheless have belonged to the Abhidharma Piṭaka of one of the early Buddhist schools. Indeed, from the point of view of style, the actual “sūtra-portion” of the Sanskrit version as edited by Lévi seemingly ends after presenting a mere list of eighty karmic categories. Subsequently, something more akin to a commentary on those categories is inserted, bracketed by the list and the title (Karmavibhaṅgasūtraṃ samāptam; given in the colophon of MS[B]) that formally marks the end of the text. But there is no “classical” sūtra ending such as a statement that the assembled audience was delighted and rejoiced in the Blessed One’s words. Indeed, the Karmavibhaṅga’s diction is rather characteristic of a treatise or commentary (Sanskrit śāstra): the different actions and their karmic results are presented in the form of a (hypothetical) dialogue in which replies are given to questions about the expected outcomes of specific types of action. This seamless inclusion of what reads like a commentary as well as the diction of the sūtra, which appears to be more in line with a commentarial treatise, is unusual for the sūtra genre. Equally unusual is the absence of a formulaic, sūtra-typical closure in the Sanskrit version of both MS[A] and MS[B].
The Tibetan tradition on the other hand regarded the Karmavibhaṅga as belonging to the sūtra category (mdo sde), and the Tibetan version possesses the characteristic sūtra frame. All the editions of the Tibetan Kangyur available through the website Resources for Kanjur and Tanjur Studies classify it under the sūtra category. The Degé Kangyur contains the Karmavibhaṅga in a subsection called Collection of Sūtras Belonging to the Hīnayāna (theg dman gyi mdo mang), in the vicinity of such celebrated Buddhist classics as the Udānavarga and the Karmaśataka.
A good deal of excellent scholarly work has been done on the Karmavibhaṅga and its related texts. In what follows we collate and summarize some general information about the extant versions of the Karmavibhaṅga and the existing scholarship.
The Sanskrit text of the Karmavibhaṅga was first edited and published together with a French translation by Sylvain Lévi (1932). Lévi used handwritten copies of the original manuscripts. His edition and translation of the text remains the most comprehensive study, bringing together in one place most of the extant versions and fragments of this important text. Kudo Noriyuki (2004) has published a transliteration of the original manuscripts together with extensive annotations on the quotations of the Karmavibhaṅga.
As is the case with so many sūtras, we have little concrete information about the origin, the circumstances, or the age of the text of the Karmavibhaṅga. Perhaps one of the oldest canonical versions of a more detailed discussion of the Buddhist formulation of the doctrine of karmic cause and effect—if one accepts that parts of the Pāli canon are among the oldest representatives of Indian Buddhism, that is—can be found in two texts (Pāli sutta) of the Majjhima Nikāya of the Pāli canon: the Cūḷakammavibhaṅgasutta (MN 135) and the Mahākammavibhaṅgasutta (MN 136). The phraseology and the “cast of characters” of the Cūḷakammavibhaṅgasutta, which contains altogether fourteen karmic categories that partly overlap with those of the Karmavibhaṅga, bear some resemblance to the Karmavibhaṅga. The Pāli version of the brahmin youth’s name, Śuka, is Subha.
According to Lokesh Chandra, the Karmavibhaṅga was popular in China. Different recensions of the text were translated into Chinese altogether six times—some of them probably from versions transmitted via Central Asia, where the text was equally well known. The earliest translation dates to the third century
Taishō 78: Doutiao jing 兜調經 (*Taudeyasūtra?), the earliest translation, was prepared under the Western Jin, 265–316
Taishō 26: Yingwu jing 鸚鵡經 (Śukasūtra), the 170th sūtra of the Madhyamāgama, was translated 397–98
Taishō 79: Yingwu jing 鸚鵡經 (Śukasūtra), translated 435–43
Taishō 80: Fo wei Shoujia zhangzhe shuo yebao chabie jing 佛爲首迦長者說業報差別經, translated 582
Taishō 81: Fenbie shan e baoying jing 分別善惡報應經, translated 984
Taishō 755: Jingyi youpose suowen jing 淨意優婆塞所問經, translated 982–1017
Of these, Taishō 80 is given as the Chinese translation equivalent of the Tibetan text translated here, the las rnam par ’byed pa (Toh 338).
We can infer from the large number of surviving fragments of versions of the Karmavibhaṅgasūtra from the Buddhist centers of the Central Asian oasis towns along the ancient Silk Road that this text and its cognate versions must also have been very popular among Central Asian Buddhists. We know of an old Khotanese version, a Central Asian fragment in Sanskrit, several fragments of a Kuchean version, and a Sogdian version.
Apart from the Sanskrit and the Central Asian recensions of the Karmavibhaṅga, three different Tibetan versions are preserved in different Kangyurs. While the Kangyurs of the Tshalpa (tshal pa) line mainly contain the versions of the text as preserved in Toh 338 and Toh 339, the Kangyurs belonging to the Thempangma (them spangs ma) line contain the Toh 339 version and, instead of the Toh 338 version, another version of the text. The mixed-lineage Lhasa Kangyur includes all three.
A text bearing the title las rnam par ’byed pa zhes bya ba (Karmavibhaṅganāma) in the Tengyur (Toh 3959) is an independent work attributed to the authorship of Atiśa Dīpaṅkaraśrījñāna (982–1054) and has no direct or explicit relation to the Karmavibhaṅga or the Tibetan versions. Apart from the Nepalese Sanskrit commentary contained in Lévi’s 1932 edition of the Karmavibhaṅga, we are aware of only one (combined) commentary on the las rnam par ’byed pa (Toh 338) and the (here so called) las rnam par ’gyur ba’i mdo (Toh 339) by Choné Lama Drakpa Shedrup (co ne bla ma grags pa bshad sgrub, 1675–1748). No canonical commentary on the Karmavibhaṅga is known to us.
None of the other known versions is an exact match of Toh 338. In other words, we do not possess, and do not know whether there ever existed, a complete Indic source text of the las rnam par ’byed pa. The relationships of the different Tibetan versions of the Karmavibhaṅga as well as their relationships to the other extent versions in other languages await further research.
We have based our English translation on the Tibetan text (Toh 338) of the Degé Kangyur as well as the Comparative Edition (dpe bsdur ma) and prioritized the diction and register of the Tibetan translation. However, we have also perused the Sanskrit editions made by Lévi and Kudo in parallel with the Tibetan text and have chosen to translate the corresponding Sanskrit passage instead of the Tibetan in cases where the Tibetan translation was ambiguous or unintelligible. Our preferences are recorded in the notes.
Homage to all the buddhas and bodhisattvas!
Thus did I hear at one time. The Bhagavān was staying in Śrāvastī, in Prince Jeta’s grove, Anāthapiṇḍada’s Park.
There the Bhagavān addressed the brahmin youth Śuka thus: “Son, I will teach you The Exposition of Karma. Listen carefully and remember it well, and I will teach!”
“Please do so, Bhagavān!”
The brahmin youth Śuka having thus assented, the Bhagavān said to him, “Son, I say that beings are owners of their own actions, they originate from their actions, they are heirs of their actions, and they take action as their refuge. In this way, son, beings are divided into high, middle, and low in terms of their actions.
“In this regard, there are, for instance, the actions that lead to a short life.
“What kind of action leads to a short life? Killing, rejoicing in killing, celebrating killing, instigating the death of an enemy, praising the death of an enemy, causing death in the womb, praising the causing of death in the womb, and preparing the sacrificial ground where buffalo, cows, pigs, birds, and so on are to be killed. The children and grandchildren of the originator of this sacrifice, as well as other people hoping for a positive result or acting out of fear, will kill many beings as they continue to carry out this initial sacrifice.
“For example, in a certain city in Kāśmīr, a certain mendicant who was an arhat was sitting at the door of a house. On a road leading straight to this house, a miserably mooing cow was being led along on a lead. The mendicant, having seen the cow, exclaimed, ‘Alas! What a misery!’
“The people then asked the mendicant, ‘Ācārya, why did you say, “Alas! What a misery”?’
“He replied, ‘Although I usually do not speak to those without faith, in this particular case I will speak.’ Then he said, ‘That cow being led along there, mooing, was in a former existence a rich merchant. He had prepared a piece of land for the yearly sacrifice and killed a great many cows there. When the time of his death drew near, he called his sons and said to them, “Sons, if you love me, you will also execute this yearly cattle sacrifice after I am dead!” So instructed, the sons agreed and said, “We will.” Then this man died and, because he had killed out of confusion, was reborn as a cow in his own house. After having been reborn there again and again, and having been killed time and again, this is now the sixth time he is being led to the sacrificial ground.’
“The mendicant then said to the cow with pity, ‘You yourself have prepared this very sacrificial ground. You yourself have performed this very sacrifice and killed many cows. Your mooing is to no avail! What is it good for?’ So it was said.
“Seeing the preparation of a sacrificial ground such as this is like witnessing a battle during which many beings such as humans and horses are killed, or like being thrilled about the accoutrements of war.
“As the Buddha has said in the Kālikasūtra:
“ ‘Ānanda, resorting to killing and having grown accustomed to it and practiced it often becomes the cause for rebirth in the hells, in the animal realm, or as a ghost.’
“When killing is done few times and on a small scale, it leads to having a short lifespan.
“What kind of action leads to a long life? Abstaining from killing; speaking praise of abstaining from killing and encouraging others to do so; freeing people and cattle, pigs, birds, and so forth that are to be killed; giving protection to those stricken with fear; arousing thoughts of kindness toward those who are without protection; arousing thoughts of love toward those who are sick, children, and the elderly; giving food to and arousing thoughts of love toward those who are in need; and rejecting all those things referred to above concerning war and so forth, and instead practicing virtue such as renovating and restoring stūpas and monasteries that have fallen into disrepair.
“It is said in that same sūtra:
- “ ‘For he who restores what has fallen into ruin,
- Untimely death will not occur.’
“This kind of action leads to a long life.
“What kind of action leads to having many illnesses? Anger and hitting someone with the fist or the palm of the hand; enjoying hitting somebody with the fist or the palm of the hand; speaking praise of the merit of hitting someone with the fist or the palm of the hand and encouraging it; causing one’s parents mental or physical distress; causing monks who possess moral discipline mental distress; feeling glad when one’s enemies are stricken by illness; feeling unhappy when one’s enemies recover from an illness; and not giving medicine and giving indigestible foods—this kind of action leads to having many illnesses.
“What kind of action leads to having few illnesses? Not hitting someone with the palm of the hand or with the fist; encouraging others to abstain from hitting with the palm of the hand or the fist and praising the merits of abstaining from hitting; rejoicing in not hitting; serving one’s ill parents, householders, and monks, regardless of whether they are senior or junior monks; caring for the sick; not feeling happy or glad when one’s enemies fall ill; rejoicing in their recovery; and giving medicine and digestible food—this kind of action leads to having few illnesses.
“What kind of action leads to having an ugly appearance? Anger, enmity, resentment, spite, speaking ill of one’s parents, speaking ill of householders and of senior or junior monks, soiling stūpas and monasteries and the site of a stūpa, extinguishing offering lamps at stūpas and images, deriding ugly people, and having little sense of cleanliness—this kind of action leads to ugliness.
“What kind of action leads to beauty? The opposites of anger, enmity, resentment, and spite; donating clothing; plastering stūpas and monasteries with white lime; donating beautiful bowls; making an offering of incense, scented ointment, cloth, and ornaments; praising one’s parents; praising noble ones and those who possess moral discipline; cleaning and sweeping the court around a stūpa, a monastery, and one’s house; not deriding ugly people; not deriding others in general, whether old or young; and being very cleanly—this kind of action leads to beauty.
“What kind of action leads to having little power? Avarice; envy; being unhappy about others’ successes; being unhappy when others are praised; despising one’s parents; despising noble ones and those who possess moral discipline; despising the sick, the old, and the young; praising what is vile, what is lacking Dharma, and the roots of nonvirtue; and turning away from the mind of awakening—this kind of action leads to having little power.
“What kind of action leads to being powerful? Not being avaricious; not being envious; rejoicing in others’ successes; not rejoicing in others’ failures; rejoicing in hearing about others’ glory, renown, and good reputation; being happy when others are praised; building stūpas and monasteries in commemoration of the Bhagavān; turning away from what is vile, from what is lacking Dharma, and from the roots of demerit; encouraging others to engage in the roots of merit that lead to distinction; aspiring to reach awakening; and aspiring to attain distinction through the dedication of all roots of merit—this kind of action leads to being powerful.
“What kind of action leads to being born into a low social status? Vanity; conceit; not honoring one’s father and mother, śramaṇas, and brāhmaṇas; not respecting the head of a family; not attending to one’s parents; not attending to noble ones, to those who possess moral discipline, and to others occupying a position of authority, such as one’s preceptor and one’s teacher; and despising people of low class—this kind of action leads to being born into a low social status.
“What kind of action leads to being born into a family of high social status? Having little vanity; having no conceit; honoring one’s father and mother, śramaṇas, and brāhmaṇas; honoring the head of the family; attending to one’s parents; attending to noble ones, to those who possess moral discipline, and to others occupying a position of authority, such one’s preceptor and teacher; and not despising people of low class.
“For example, the Buddha has said in a sūtra:
“ ‘Monks, you should know that a community that is approached by monks who possess moral discipline, are celibate, and possess the quality of virtue can expect five benefits. What are the five? It develops faith in the ones possessing moral discipline who have approached them. Furthermore, monks, at that time, that community enters the path leading to rebirth in heaven. And what is more, monks, the moment the community greets and welcomes those approaching who possess moral discipline, the community has already entered the path leading to rebirth in heaven.’
“This kind of action leads to being reborn in a family of high social status.
“What kind of action leads to poverty? Stealing; encouraging others to commit theft; speaking praise of stealing; taking pleasure in stealing and in having stolen; depriving one’s parents of their livelihood; depriving noble ones and those who possess moral discipline of their livelihood and stealing the livelihood of monks, children, the elderly, the poor, and the sick; rejoicing when others fail to gain wealth; preventing others from gaining wealth; and rejoicing in a bad harvest—this kind of action leads to poverty.
“What kind of action leads to wealth? Abstaining from stealing; rejoicing when someone abstains from taking what was not freely given to them by others; providing one’s parents with a livelihood; providing noble ones and those who possess moral discipline with a livelihood; offering sustenance to the sick, children, the elderly, the poor, and others; rejoicing in the gain of others; and rejoicing in a good harvest.
“In the same sūtra it is said:
“ ‘What is more, monks, when the merit-collecting communities make offerings to those approaching them who possesses moral discipline they enter the path leading to prosperity.’
“This kind of action leads to great wealth.
“What kind of action leads to low intelligence? Here, one does not ask the learned śramaṇas or brāhmaṇas or others, ‘What is the Dharma? What is not the Dharma? What, when done by me, is conducive to happiness?’ One associates with people who lack intelligence and abandons wise people. One teaches what is not the true Dharma, and even though one knows that a reciter of the Buddhist scriptures has spoken well, due to one’s being opinionated one does not say ‘well done!’ But when a reciter has spoken what does not correspond with the Dharma, one says ‘well done!’ One praises wrong views and criticizes right views. One denigrates writers and reciters of manuscripts and deprives them of their livelihood. This kind of action leads to low intelligence.
“What kind of action leads to great intelligence? Here, one has a disposition that dares to inquire and asks the learned śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas questions; one completely shuns those lacking wisdom; one extols the true Dharma and elucidates it; one criticizes what is not the true Dharma; and one praises the confidence of the Dharma reciters and says ‘well done!’ One acclaims those who speak coherently and steers clear of those who speak what is unacceptable; one praises right view and criticizes wrong view; one makes offerings of paper, ink, and reed pens; and, as explained in the Nandikasūtra, one does not drink alcohol. The thirty-five faults of drinking alcohol that are taught in that sūtra will be discussed later in the section on the nonvirtuous actions. This kind of action leads to great intelligence.
“What kind of action leads to rebirth as a hell being? Carrying out gravely negative actions of body, speech, and mind with intensely angry thoughts; entertaining the wrong view of annihilation, the wrong view of eternalism, and the wrong view of nihilism; speaking with hostility; ingratitude; performing the evil actions that bring immediate retribution; and flinging false accusations at noble ones and those who possess moral discipline—this kind of action leads to rebirth in the hell realms.
“What kind of action leads to rebirth in the animal realm? Carrying out moderately bad actions with body, speech, and mind and the varied actions stemming from desire, hatred, and confusion; presenting improper gifts to one’s parents or Buddhist monks; ridiculing beings who are reborn in the animal realm; and making the aspiration to be reborn there as, for example, when someone practices the ox vow or the dog vow, thinking, ‘May I be reborn like that!’
“As an example, one may here relate the Heroic Past Deeds of the Bodhisattva from the Siṃhajātaka, or the story of the brahmin Varṣākāra’s rebirth as a monkey.
“The brahmin Varṣākāra saw the sthavira Mahākāśyapa on Vulture Peak, flying in the sky above the city of Rājagṛha. Because of his close association with Devadatta and Prince Ajātaśatru, he harbored hostile thoughts in his mind and made this insulting comment: ‘This monk flies through the air from mountain peak to mountain peak just as a monkey swings from tree to tree.’
“When the brahmin Varṣākāra, his mind filled with hatred, had made this insulting comment, the Buddha was asked, ‘Venerable Bhagavān, what will be the karmic result of this?’
“The Bhagavān replied, ‘By the karmic ripening of these abusive words, the brahmin Varṣākāra will be reborn as a monkey during five hundred future lives.’
“Varṣākāra then became frightened and developed faith in the Buddha. He asked the Bhagavān at the time of his parinirvāṇa, ‘Where will this deed become exhausted?’
“The Bhagavān said, ‘During these five hundred lives you will be reborn in Rājagṛha in the Jambu continent, the Rose-Apple continent, which derives its name from the fruits called jambu that are the size of large earthen pots and delicious like the pure honey of bees. From there, leaving this incarnation, you will reach heaven.’
“To give another example, having been reborn among lions by virtue of a thought of hatred, the Bhagavān spoke the following stanza in reference to this topic:
- “ ‘Long is the night for the one who lies awake;
- Long is a yojana for the one who is exhausted.
- Saṃsāra is long for the foolish,
- Even if they are acquainted with the holy Dharma.’
“This kind of action leads to rebirth in the animal realm.
“What kind of action leads to rebirth in the realm of ghosts? Here, someone adopts a negative course of conduct of body, speech, and mind with a mind full of anger and hatred or craving; pursues a wrong way of making a living due to improper desire; dies while being angry, hungry, or thirsty; or dies while having thoughts of attachment to material things.
“An illustration [818] from the Śatavarga-āgama Karmavibhaṅgasūtra:
“ ‘The Bhagavān said to Ānanda, “Ānanda, either an action done by a person in a previous lifetime resurfaces and becomes present, or it becomes the force that leads to wrong views at the time of death.” ’
“This kind of action leads to rebirth in the realm of ghosts.
“What kind of action leads to rebirth in the realm of the asuras? Someone’s committing only small or minor misdeeds with body, speech, and mind; pride; arrogance; the pride of identification with a self; the pride of inferiority; dedicating the roots of virtue of one’s positive actions to rebirth in the world of the asuras; and following an immoral course of conduct yet in an intelligent manner that springs from refined desire—this kind of action leads to rebirth in the realm of the asuras.
“What kind of action leads to rebirth as a human? Here, one cultivates the ten virtuous courses of action. What are the ten? One abandons the ten nonvirtuous actions: the three physical actions of killing, stealing, and sexual misconduct; the four verbal actions of lying, slander, harsh speech, and idle talk; and, furthermore, the three mental actions of covetousness, malice, and wrong views. This kind of action leads to rebirth as a human.
“What kind of action leads to rebirth as a deva belonging to the realm of sensuous desire? Here, someone practices well, and brings to perfection, the ten virtuous courses of action—this kind of action leads to rebirth as a deva belonging to the realm of sensuous desire.
“What kind of action leads to rebirth as a deva belonging to the realm of form? Someone practices well the ten virtuous courses of action, accomplishes them, and brings them to perfection to an especially superior degree—this kind of action leads to rebirth as a deva belonging to the realm of form.
“What kind of action leads to rebirth as a deva belonging to the formless realm? One enters the four attainments of the formless states and, having entirely and completely transcended all notions of form, and the notion of materiality having vanished, through disengaging the mind from the notion of distinctness, thinking, ‘Space is infinite,’ one has perfected the sphere of infinity of space and abides in it. Having entirely and completely transcended the sphere of infinity of space, thinking, ‘Consciousness is infinite,’ one has perfected the sphere of infinity of consciousness and abides in it. Having entirely and completely transcended the sphere of infinity of consciousness, thinking, ‘Nothing at all exists,’ one has perfected the sphere of nothingness and abides in it. Having entirely and completely transcended the sphere of nothingness, one has perfected the sphere of neither perception nor nonperception and abides in it. This kind of action leads to rebirth as a deva belonging to the formless realm.
“What kind of action is performed but not accumulated? Having carried out an action, one feels shame, remorse, and deprecation, and one confesses and openly admits one’s faults; one parts with it and vows not to do it again in the future. This kind of action is performed but not accumulated.
“What kind of action is accumulated but not carried out? An action that is to be completed with the body and concerning which one says with a defiled mind, ‘I will do this,’ but then does not actually follow through—this kind of action is accumulated but not carried out.
“What kind of action is both carried out and accumulated? Having carried out an action, one does not feel shame; one does not remedy it, regret it, deprecate it, confess it, admit it, renounce it, or give it up; and one does not vow to not do it again in the future—action like this is both carried out and accumulated.
“What kind of action is neither carried out nor accumulated? An action that one has intentionally carried out or made someone else carry out in a dream—action like this is neither carried out nor accumulated.
“What kind of action leads to being reborn in hell and passing away from there only after having completely exhausted the lifespan of the hell? In this regard, one has carried out actions that lead to rebirth as a hell being, and these actions are accumulated, but having carried out these actions, one feels neither shame nor remorse, and one neither deprecates nor confesses and admits the actions done. One does not vow not to do them again in the future but instead rejoices and is satisfied like, for instance, Devadatta, Kokālika, and so forth. Action like this leads to being reborn in hell and passing away from there only after having completely exhausted the lifespan of the hell.
“What kind of action leads to being reborn in hell and passing away from there after only half the lifespan of the hell is exhausted? In this regard, someone has carried out actions that lead to becoming a hell being but feels shame and remorse and deprecates, confesses, admits, rejects, and gives up those actions and vows not to do them again in the future. In this way does this kind of action lead to being reborn in hell and passing away from there after only half the lifespan of the hell is exhausted.
“What kind of action leads to passing away from hell immediately upon being born there? In this regard, one has carried out actions that lead to rebirth as a hell being, and these actions are accumulated; but, having done these actions, one feels shame, remorse, and deprecation, confesses and admits those actions, and gives them up. By making the promise, ‘From now on I will not do it again!’ one will pass away from that state immediately upon being reborn there.
“For example, when King Ajātaśatru heard that he would go to the Avīci hell for carrying out the evil actions that bring immediate retribution—namely, murdering his father, splitting the monastic saṅgha, releasing the wild elephant Dhanapāla, and hurling a boulder onto the Tathāgata to kill him—he became distraught and developed faith in the Bhagavān. He confessed his sins and, as is related in the Śrāmaṇyaphalasūtra, restored his roots of virtue. When he was about to die, he prayed, ‘From the core of my being I take refuge in the Buddha. I have carried out intolerable actions, for which I feel remorse and which I confess; by promising not to do such actions ever again, they will diminish and eventually be completely erased.’ Then he went silent.
“This kind of action leads to passing away from hell immediately upon being born there.
“What kind of action leads to a predetermined rebirth? As for that, a person carries out an action, and, by dedicating the action in a certain way—‘May I be reborn as such a one!’—that person will be reborn as that one. For example, in the Śyāmākajātaka, the Bhagavān relates accordingly how one is reborn through the power of a strong aspiration. This kind of action leads to a predetermined rebirth.
“What kind of action leads to an unpredetermined rebirth? As for that, a person carries out an action but does not dedicate it by specifying ‘May I be reborn as such and such!’ This kind of action leads to an unpredetermined rebirth.
“What kind of action leads to the ripening of a karmic result in a foreign country? In this regard, there will be ripening of a pleasant or painful karmic result in a foreign country either in this very life or in the next.
“For example, the Bhagavān has told the following story:
“ ‘Monks, once upon a time, when the lifespan of humans of the Jambu continent was indefinite, like that of the king Māndhātar, there lived in a certain city a sea merchant’s son named Maitrāyajña. Surrounded by five hundred friends, he went to an orchard, where his friends said to him, “In this city, merchants like your father were sailors traveling to foreign lands like, for instance, the Golden Island to see other continents and accumulate riches. We, yourself included, should set sail and accumulate riches, too.”
“ ‘Maitrāyajña replied, “So be it!” and when darkness fell, he went home to his mother and said, “Mother, I will go to the Golden Island.”
“ ‘His mother replied, “Son, there is already such immeasurable wealth in this house. Don’t go!”
“ ‘Maitrāyajña, after hearing his mother’s words, which persuaded him not to go, immediately went back to the orchard. The friends said, “In this matter, you need to entreat your mother even more.”
“ ‘Having heard their words, he said, “So be it!” and again went to his mother to ask. But she clasped his feet, and so, again, he stayed. Immediately upon having asked her for a third time, he went back to the orchard.
“ ‘His friends said to him, “This is impossible! We must go!” And Maitrāyajña went once again to his mother and said, “I will go to a foreign land!” The mother then gathered all their possessions, clasped one of his feet, and made him stay once again.
“ ‘Therefore, once more the boy went to the orchard, and his friends said, “It is your fault that we, too, still have not left. We will now leave on the thirteenth day!”
“ ‘Then Maitrāyajña, without his mother’s knowledge, drew out their abundant merchandise and put it on the street. His mother, standing in the doorway, clasped his feet again and said, “Son, don’t go!” but Maitrāyajña, in his anger, stepped on his mother’s head, left, and went to the shore of the sea.
“ ‘There he instructed his friends, “When we are going to set sail, it is uncertain whether we will live or die. Therefore, we should all maintain the eight precepts!” And they, heeding Maitrāyajña’s words, promised to maintain the precepts.
“ ‘Thus, they set sail, and when they had gone far into the center of the ocean, they were caught by a mighty storm, and their ship capsized. All the others died, but Maitrāyajña had seized a large copper vessel whose mouth could be closed with a piece of fabric, and eventually he reached the end of the ocean. He then continued to wander until he came to a city with a golden city wall and an orchard and a lotus pond that was pervaded by a pleasant fragrance. He saw flower petals scattered everywhere and many wreaths made from silk ribbons that had been put up as ornaments. From inside this city, four goddesses appeared and, taking him by the hand, led him inside. Then, after he amused himself with them for many years, many hundreds of years, many thousands of years, and many hundreds of thousands of years, the goddesses ordered him, “Son of noble family, since you are a stranger in this land, you should not go outside. However, if you happen to leave sometime, head north!”
“ ‘On another occasion, Maitrāyajña left the city and continued wandering until he arrived at a city with a silver city wall and an orchard and a lotus pond that was pervaded by a pleasant fragrance. He saw flower petals scattered everywhere and many wreaths made from silk ribbons that had been put up as ornaments. From inside the city, eight goddesses appeared. Like before, after he had amused himself with them, at some other time he left.
“ ‘After wandering and wandering, he arrived at a city with a lapis lazuli city wall. Just as before, he saw flower petals scattered everywhere and many wreaths made from silk ribbons hung up as ornaments. From inside the city, sixteen goddesses appeared, and they, too, took him by the hand and led him inside, and with them, too, he amused himself for many hundreds of thousands of years.
“ ‘At a later time he left, and after wandering and wandering, he arrived at a city with a rock-crystal city wall, and he saw everything like before—from the scattered flower petals to the wreaths made from silk ribbons. From inside this city, thirty-two goddesses appeared, and they, too, took him by the hand and led him inside. As before, after he had amused himself with them, they ordered him, “Son of noble family, since you are a stranger in this land, you should not leave this city. However, if you have to go, head north!”
“ ‘Immediately afterward, he left the house, faced north, and walked and walked. Eventually, he came to a thicket of thorns and saw a city with a black iron city wall. He approached, and as soon as he stepped inside, the city’s gates slammed shut. Looking up the city walls, he saw them rising higher, and he could hear a dreadful sound coming from beyond them. “What kind of place is this?” he thought, and he became terrified when he saw a man whose head was cut by a wheel made of sword blades that was rotating above his head.
“ ‘ “Hey, you! What is this?” he asked, and that hell being replied, “This is a personal hell.”
“ ‘Maitrāyajña asked, “What sins have you committed?”
“ ‘The man told his story: “In the Jambu continent there is a city called Mahākośalī. There I used to live, and I, too, happened to be a son of a sea merchant. Surrounded by five hundred friends, I went to the city’s large orchard.
“ ‘ “There my friends said, ‘Your father is the head of the sea merchants’ guild. And following his lead, they, our fathers, traveled to foreign lands and procured vast riches. They saw the Golden Island, the island of Sri Lanka, and many other islands. We, too, with you as our leader, will travel to foreign countries.’ So they pledged.
“ ‘ “Then I went home and said to my mother, ‘I will go aboard a ship and voyage the ocean to go to foreign countries!’
“ ‘ “My mother replied, ‘Son, your father, too, has gone aboard a ship, and having gone to many foreign countries, he died. Son, you are all I have left! Our house is filled with riches. Don’t go!’
“ ‘ “I, too, promised my mother that I would not go. In this way, mother clasped my feet three or four times, bidding me to stay, and I stayed. But at another time, I went to the orchard and my friends said, ‘We will go anyway.’
“ ‘ “ ‘Well, we should go then!’ I said, and by making this promise, we departed.
“ ‘ “My mother clasped my feet at the door and said, ‘It is not right to leave me behind!’ But I stepped on my mother’s head and went off with my five hundred friends to the shore of the sea.
“ ‘ “After we took up the eight precepts, we set sail. We were well on our way to the Golden Island when a strong gale caught us and capsized the ship, killing all the friends. As for myself, after many days I reached the end of the ocean. I started to wander, and after continuously walking I eventually arrived at a city with a golden city wall and an orchard and a lotus pond that was pervaded by a pleasant fragrance. I saw flower petals scattered everywhere and many wreaths made from silk ribbons that had been put up as ornaments.
“ ‘ “From inside that city, four goddesses appeared, thirty-two goddesses appeared, and so on as before, until I saw a city enclosed by an iron wall and went inside. As soon as I stepped inside, the gates slammed shut. There, too, I saw a man with a wheel made of swords rotating above his head. And there and then the wheel was transferred to where I was standing nearby, onto my own head. Due to the ripening of the karmic fruit of my action of having desisted from leaving home by obeying my mother’s words four times and taking up the eight precepts, I enjoyed a personal heaven in four cities. Due to the ripening of the karmic fruit of my action of stepping on my mother’s head when setting out, a wheel made of sword blades is now rotating above and lacerating my head.”
“ ‘Upon hearing this, Maitrāyajña thought, “I, too, have in the past carried out an action that is very similar to that one. I can see that the ripening of the karmic fruits of my own action is immanent!”
“ ‘The hell being asked Maitrāyajña, “Where do you come from?”
“ ‘And Maitrāyajña told his story: “In the Jambu continent there is a city called Tāmalipta. I am from there. I, too, have done all those actions.”
“ ‘ “It is true then!” said the hell being. “I heard a voice coming from the sky that said, ‘The karmic fruit of your action is exhausted. One will come whose name is Maitrāyajña, the son of a sea merchant, who has committed an action similar to yours.’ ”
“ ‘Maitrāyajña asked, “What kind of food do you eat here?”
“ ‘ “I eat the flesh, pus, and blood flowing from my own shredded head.” Then this man died there. Maitrāyajña, terrified and distraught, made this aspiration for the sake of his mother:
“ ‘With an earnest intention, he bowed down in reverence to his imagined parents and made another aspiration: “Wherever I am reborn, I will honor my parents! I will remain here in this individual hell for the sake of those who will be reborn here. To those in the world who are engaged in proper conduct and those who are liberated, I bow in reverence. I pray that they will protect me.” And he stayed there as a being of this individual hell and made a further aspiration for the sake of his parents:
“ ‘Due to this utterance, the wheel remained in the air above, rotating but without touching his head. And also, because his mother perpetually made this aspiration, “If there is any benefit to be derived from the merit that I have accumulated through my practice of generosity, ethics, and being a faithful wife, may the fruit of this merit lead to the happiness of my son, whatever and wherever he may be,” he was at peace.
“ ‘And having stayed there in this personal hell, he passed away before even sixty years had passed.’
“Accordingly, for example, King Ajātaśatru passed away without having entirely completed his lifespan in hell. But since the karmic fruit of actions do not dissipate, he sometimes suffered from excruciating headaches.
“Then, when the right time had come, the Bhagavān addressed the monks: ‘Monks, you may think that the sea merchant’s son named Maitrāyajña was just somebody else at that time. But this is not how you should see it. I myself was at that time the sea merchant’s son named Maitrāyajña. Therefore, monks, have faith in my words! You should cultivate reverence for the Bhagavān! You should cultivate reverence for the Dharma and the Saṅgha! You should also revere your parents, your preceptor, and your teacher! Know this, monks: Those who travel to a foreign land can experience both pleasure and pain, just like Maitrāyajña, who after traveling to a foreign country experienced a personal heaven and a personal hell in a single lifetime. In this way, action that leads to the experience of pleasure and pain in a foreign country will ripen accordingly in a foreign country.’
“Hence, the Bhagavān has furthermore said the following: ‘Whether something is done for me or for your parents, your preceptor, or your teacher, there is no difference, and the karmic result is the same, experienced either in this lifetime or the next. How, then, is the karmic result the same in this very life?’
“For example, once in Śrāvastī some poor person saw the Bhagavān, together with the Saṅgha of hearers, begging for alms. And because at that moment he developed reverence in his mind, he accumulated an immense stock of merit, and since this also created the action that led him to become a king, that reverence by itself became the seed for his liberation. When this came to the Bhagavān’s attention, he uttered the following verses:
“And:
“Then, at the moment of his death, he was reborn as a god.
“Another example is that of the pratyekabuddha Tagaraśikhin. During a famine, a poor man had offered some broth, and because of that he was anointed king in this city on that same day. Later he became a pratyekabuddha. Furthermore, it is said in the sūtras that the karmic fruit of a mind full of devotion similar to that of the pratyekabuddha whose name is Tagaraśikhin will ripen in this very lifetime.
“When he honored his parent, Maitrāyajña, the son of the sea merchant, experienced an individual heaven in four great cities because he had listened to his mother’s words and complied with them four times. Since it had become the seed for his liberation, the ripening of the karmic fruit took place in this life.
“Will one go to hell through expressing anger toward the Bhagavān and one’s parents? An example here is Devadatta, who, after he had become angry with the Bhagavān, fell into the Avīci hell immediately upon his death. Or there is the prince Utraka in the city of Rauruka in the land of Sindhu, who killed his father and consequently fell into the hell realms. Thus, one will go to the hell realms through expressing anger toward the Bhagavān or one’s parents.
“Now, is there a difference with regard to the Buddha and one’s parents, or are they not different? Concerning the Bhagavān, generating devotion toward him, who during many hundreds of thousands of cosmic ages has accumulated a stock of merit generated by his roots of virtue, who taught the Dharma to those lacking a path, and who bestows awakening upon us, the karmic fruit is immeasurable. To parents the path to liberation is unknown. Furthermore, one need not always obey the words of one’s parents. Why not? Because there are some who hold false views and who say to their child, ‘Child, bring us to an uninhabited place—you will benefit from this and be happy!’ or ‘Abandon us in a chasm! Commit us to the flames!’ When they say such things, this ought not to be done. Why not? Because through murdering one’s parents one will certainly go to the hell realms. Therefore, the Bhagavān has said not to accept those who have killed their parents into the novitiate and that such people should not be accepted for full ordination, and for this reason such people should be shunned.
In The Exposition of Karma, the Buddha presents to the brahmin youth Śuka Taudeyaputra a discourse on the workings of karma. This is enlivened by many examples drawn from the rich heritage of Buddhist narrative literature, providing a detailed analysis of how deeds lead to specific consequences in the future. For the Buddhist, this treatise answers many questions pertaining to moral causation, examining specific life situations and their underlying karmic causes and emphasizing the key role that intention plays in the Buddhist ethic of responsibility.
This sūtra was translated into English from the Tibetan and the Sanskrit by Bruno Galasek-Hul with Lama Kunga Thartse Rinpoche (Evam Choden Buddhist Center, Kensington, Berkeley, California) as the consulting Lama.
The translation was completed under the patronage and supervision of 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha.
We gratefully acknowledge the generous sponsorship of Late Ng Ah Chon, Late Lee Tiang Chuan, Lee Cheng Watt and family, Late Lee Cheng Boon and family, Lee Boon Tee and family, Lee Pheck Tiang and family, Lee Pheck Choo and family, Lee Siang Choo and family. Their support has helped make the work on this translation possible.
The Exposition of Karma (Karmavibhaṅga) opens in Prince Jeta’s grove, where the Buddha announces to the brahmin youth Śuka Taudeyaputra that he will deliver this exposition on karma. The ensuing teaching provides a detailed analysis of the complex workings of karma. This is enlivened by many examples drawn from the rich store of Buddhist narrative literature, especially the Buddha’s past-life stories. It begins with a section in which the Buddha poses and answers a series of questions about how conspicuous differences in life circumstances such as longevity, happiness, illness, and appearance have been determined by past deeds. A second section follows, in which questions relating to specific causes for rebirth in various worlds are answered. A third section contains a series of miscellaneous questions and answers that examine the specific outcomes of deeds when certain factors are either present or absent in their performance. Two final sections focus more broadly on virtuous and nonvirtuous deeds and their respective positive and negative consequences. In each of these contexts, the relationship between actions and their results is illustrated by examples and morality tales from Buddhist narrative literature.
The central theme of the Karmavibhaṅga is the concept of cause and effect, the complex system of positive and negative results that, in Indian religious thought, are attributed to karma (“action”) itself. In the Buddhist context, the term karma designates both morally good (kuśala) and bad (akuśala) actions of body, speech, and mind. Once committed, all such deeds “ripen” (vipāka) into their corresponding pleasant and unpleasant (or neutral) results, called “karmic fruition” (karma-phala). From this standpoint, the entire universe and everything in it is the result of individuals’ actions. According to the Karmavibhaṅga, certain unpleasant features of one’s environment are the direct outcome of the ten nonvirtuous courses of action. The botanical or agricultural metaphor employed in the Buddhist description of the karmic process of the individual is perhaps noteworthy: through the ripening of karma one reaps or harvests the fruits of one’s actions. Although the historical Buddha was not the first teacher in ancient India to teach the concept of karmic cause and effect, it has been argued that he advanced and redefined the existing notions of karmically relevant actions as consisting primarily in mental intention (Skt. cetanā; Tib. sems pa). This is summarized in the frequently cited passage from the Aṅguttara Nikāya of the Pāli canon: “By action I mean intention, monks. Having formed a (moral) intention, one carries out an action with body, speech, or mind.”
The Karmavibhaṅga is rich in references to sūtras and citations from Buddhist literature. Its longest illustrative story is a version of the popular narrative from the Maitrakanyakāvadāna (Divyāvadāna no. 38) of the voyage of the sea merchant’s son Maitrakanyaka (called Maitrāyajña in the Karmavibhaṅga), who undertakes a sea voyage to make his fortune, disregarding his mother’s pleas for him to remain on shore and instead physically mistreating her. Because of his disobedience and abuse, he is shipwrecked on the shores of a foreign country and ends up suffering the torments of his personal hell. Another popular story is that of the sthavira Mahāmaudgalyāyana, who is refused alms by a family and subsequently reveals to a stranger their karmic relationship. Both stories are widely known among Tibetan Buddhists from orally transmitted anecdotes of Tibetan lamas. However, many of the other stories and text titles referenced in the Karmavibhaṅga are either completely unknown to us or differ from their better-known versions and other extant texts that bear identical or similar titles.
Lokesh Chandra, writing about the Javanese Buddhist monument the Borobudur, notes the wide-ranging influence of the Karmavibhaṅga: “It was a popular text from the island of Java to the sands of Central Asia and as far as the sprawling land of China, that is, wherever the doctrine of Buddha held sway.”
A further measure of the work’s widespread popularity is the diverse range of languages in which we find extant versions or fragments of the work: Sanskrit, Pāli, Khotanese, Kuchean, Sogdian, and Chinese. Indeed, it was translated into Chinese five times over eight centuries. Thus, in a variety of cultural contexts, the work served as an important source for the central Buddhist doctrine that humans are responsible for the consequences of their actions.
The design of the Borobudur on the island of Java in Indonesia is thought to include pictorial representations drawn from the Karmavibhaṅga. According to Lokesh Chandra, the monument is a physical model of the Buddhist path to awakening in terms of the four sambhāras or accumulations of merit (puṇya), wisdom (jñāna), tranquility (śamatha), and special insight (vidarśanā) according to the Lalitavistara, while skillfully integrating and harmonizing other textual traditions. The lowest or most basic level of religious merit (puṇya), which must be accomplished before one can ascend to the higher levels of the path, is represented by Borobudur’s so-called hidden base, which features reliefs depicting stories from the Karmavibhaṅga that illustrate the law of karma.
The exact original title of Toh 338 cannot be established beyond a doubt. Sylvain Lévi, the first to edit and translate the text, referred to it as the Mahākarmavibhaṅga (MKV). However, the adjective mahā- (“great”) only occurs in the title given to one of the two surviving nearly complete manuscripts (called MS[A] by Kudo Noriyuki), and only in an appendix to the text. The second of the two nearly complete manuscripts (called MS[B] in Kudo’s edition) bears the title Karmavibhaṅgasūtraṃ. There are similar variants in the Tibetan translations of the text preserved in the different Kangyur collections.
For the sake of simplicity, we here follow Kudo and use the title Karmavibhaṅga instead of Mahākarmavibhaṅga or Karmavibhaṅgasūtra to refer to the text translated here (Toh 338), with the caveat that different versions of this text with either the same or a different title are extant. The Karmavibhaṅga belongs to a group of texts which has been labeled the Karmavibhaṅga- or Śukasūtra class.
Although one manuscript (MS[B]) contains the word sūtra in its title, there is insufficient evidence from the extant Sanskrit manuscripts to determine whether the Karmavibhaṅga actually belonged to the scriptural category of sūtra or not. As indicated by the example of the Cakravartisūtra—a text the Karmavibhaṅga quotes four times—texts that were designated as sūtras may nevertheless have belonged to the Abhidharma Piṭaka of one of the early Buddhist schools. Indeed, from the point of view of style, the actual “sūtra-portion” of the Sanskrit version as edited by Lévi seemingly ends after presenting a mere list of eighty karmic categories. Subsequently, something more akin to a commentary on those categories is inserted, bracketed by the list and the title (Karmavibhaṅgasūtraṃ samāptam; given in the colophon of MS[B]) that formally marks the end of the text. But there is no “classical” sūtra ending such as a statement that the assembled audience was delighted and rejoiced in the Blessed One’s words. Indeed, the Karmavibhaṅga’s diction is rather characteristic of a treatise or commentary (Sanskrit śāstra): the different actions and their karmic results are presented in the form of a (hypothetical) dialogue in which replies are given to questions about the expected outcomes of specific types of action. This seamless inclusion of what reads like a commentary as well as the diction of the sūtra, which appears to be more in line with a commentarial treatise, is unusual for the sūtra genre. Equally unusual is the absence of a formulaic, sūtra-typical closure in the Sanskrit version of both MS[A] and MS[B].
The Tibetan tradition on the other hand regarded the Karmavibhaṅga as belonging to the sūtra category (mdo sde), and the Tibetan version possesses the characteristic sūtra frame. All the editions of the Tibetan Kangyur available through the website Resources for Kanjur and Tanjur Studies classify it under the sūtra category. The Degé Kangyur contains the Karmavibhaṅga in a subsection called Collection of Sūtras Belonging to the Hīnayāna (theg dman gyi mdo mang), in the vicinity of such celebrated Buddhist classics as the Udānavarga and the Karmaśataka.
A good deal of excellent scholarly work has been done on the Karmavibhaṅga and its related texts. In what follows we collate and summarize some general information about the extant versions of the Karmavibhaṅga and the existing scholarship.
The Sanskrit text of the Karmavibhaṅga was first edited and published together with a French translation by Sylvain Lévi (1932). Lévi used handwritten copies of the original manuscripts. His edition and translation of the text remains the most comprehensive study, bringing together in one place most of the extant versions and fragments of this important text. Kudo Noriyuki (2004) has published a transliteration of the original manuscripts together with extensive annotations on the quotations of the Karmavibhaṅga.
As is the case with so many sūtras, we have little concrete information about the origin, the circumstances, or the age of the text of the Karmavibhaṅga. Perhaps one of the oldest canonical versions of a more detailed discussion of the Buddhist formulation of the doctrine of karmic cause and effect—if one accepts that parts of the Pāli canon are among the oldest representatives of Indian Buddhism, that is—can be found in two texts (Pāli sutta) of the Majjhima Nikāya of the Pāli canon: the Cūḷakammavibhaṅgasutta (MN 135) and the Mahākammavibhaṅgasutta (MN 136). The phraseology and the “cast of characters” of the Cūḷakammavibhaṅgasutta, which contains altogether fourteen karmic categories that partly overlap with those of the Karmavibhaṅga, bear some resemblance to the Karmavibhaṅga. The Pāli version of the brahmin youth’s name, Śuka, is Subha.
According to Lokesh Chandra, the Karmavibhaṅga was popular in China. Different recensions of the text were translated into Chinese altogether six times—some of them probably from versions transmitted via Central Asia, where the text was equally well known. The earliest translation dates to the third century
Taishō 78: Doutiao jing 兜調經 (*Taudeyasūtra?), the earliest translation, was prepared under the Western Jin, 265–316
Taishō 26: Yingwu jing 鸚鵡經 (Śukasūtra), the 170th sūtra of the Madhyamāgama, was translated 397–98
Taishō 79: Yingwu jing 鸚鵡經 (Śukasūtra), translated 435–43
Taishō 80: Fo wei Shoujia zhangzhe shuo yebao chabie jing 佛爲首迦長者說業報差別經, translated 582
Taishō 81: Fenbie shan e baoying jing 分別善惡報應經, translated 984
Taishō 755: Jingyi youpose suowen jing 淨意優婆塞所問經, translated 982–1017
Of these, Taishō 80 is given as the Chinese translation equivalent of the Tibetan text translated here, the las rnam par ’byed pa (Toh 338).
We can infer from the large number of surviving fragments of versions of the Karmavibhaṅgasūtra from the Buddhist centers of the Central Asian oasis towns along the ancient Silk Road that this text and its cognate versions must also have been very popular among Central Asian Buddhists. We know of an old Khotanese version, a Central Asian fragment in Sanskrit, several fragments of a Kuchean version, and a Sogdian version.
Apart from the Sanskrit and the Central Asian recensions of the Karmavibhaṅga, three different Tibetan versions are preserved in different Kangyurs. While the Kangyurs of the Tshalpa (tshal pa) line mainly contain the versions of the text as preserved in Toh 338 and Toh 339, the Kangyurs belonging to the Thempangma (them spangs ma) line contain the Toh 339 version and, instead of the Toh 338 version, another version of the text. The mixed-lineage Lhasa Kangyur includes all three.
A text bearing the title las rnam par ’byed pa zhes bya ba (Karmavibhaṅganāma) in the Tengyur (Toh 3959) is an independent work attributed to the authorship of Atiśa Dīpaṅkaraśrījñāna (982–1054) and has no direct or explicit relation to the Karmavibhaṅga or the Tibetan versions. Apart from the Nepalese Sanskrit commentary contained in Lévi’s 1932 edition of the Karmavibhaṅga, we are aware of only one (combined) commentary on the las rnam par ’byed pa (Toh 338) and the (here so called) las rnam par ’gyur ba’i mdo (Toh 339) by Choné Lama Drakpa Shedrup (co ne bla ma grags pa bshad sgrub, 1675–1748). No canonical commentary on the Karmavibhaṅga is known to us.
None of the other known versions is an exact match of Toh 338. In other words, we do not possess, and do not know whether there ever existed, a complete Indic source text of the las rnam par ’byed pa. The relationships of the different Tibetan versions of the Karmavibhaṅga as well as their relationships to the other extent versions in other languages await further research.
We have based our English translation on the Tibetan text (Toh 338) of the Degé Kangyur as well as the Comparative Edition (dpe bsdur ma) and prioritized the diction and register of the Tibetan translation. However, we have also perused the Sanskrit editions made by Lévi and Kudo in parallel with the Tibetan text and have chosen to translate the corresponding Sanskrit passage instead of the Tibetan in cases where the Tibetan translation was ambiguous or unintelligible. Our preferences are recorded in the notes.
Homage to all the buddhas and bodhisattvas!
Thus did I hear at one time. The Bhagavān was staying in Śrāvastī, in Prince Jeta’s grove, Anāthapiṇḍada’s Park.
There the Bhagavān addressed the brahmin youth Śuka thus: “Son, I will teach you The Exposition of Karma. Listen carefully and remember it well, and I will teach!”
“Please do so, Bhagavān!”
The brahmin youth Śuka having thus assented, the Bhagavān said to him, “Son, I say that beings are owners of their own actions, they originate from their actions, they are heirs of their actions, and they take action as their refuge. In this way, son, beings are divided into high, middle, and low in terms of their actions.
“In this regard, there are, for instance, the actions that lead to a short life.
“What kind of action leads to a short life? Killing, rejoicing in killing, celebrating killing, instigating the death of an enemy, praising the death of an enemy, causing death in the womb, praising the causing of death in the womb, and preparing the sacrificial ground where buffalo, cows, pigs, birds, and so on are to be killed. The children and grandchildren of the originator of this sacrifice, as well as other people hoping for a positive result or acting out of fear, will kill many beings as they continue to carry out this initial sacrifice.
“For example, in a certain city in Kāśmīr, a certain mendicant who was an arhat was sitting at the door of a house. On a road leading straight to this house, a miserably mooing cow was being led along on a lead. The mendicant, having seen the cow, exclaimed, ‘Alas! What a misery!’
“The people then asked the mendicant, ‘Ācārya, why did you say, “Alas! What a misery”?’
“He replied, ‘Although I usually do not speak to those without faith, in this particular case I will speak.’ Then he said, ‘That cow being led along there, mooing, was in a former existence a rich merchant. He had prepared a piece of land for the yearly sacrifice and killed a great many cows there. When the time of his death drew near, he called his sons and said to them, “Sons, if you love me, you will also execute this yearly cattle sacrifice after I am dead!” So instructed, the sons agreed and said, “We will.” Then this man died and, because he had killed out of confusion, was reborn as a cow in his own house. After having been reborn there again and again, and having been killed time and again, this is now the sixth time he is being led to the sacrificial ground.’
“The mendicant then said to the cow with pity, ‘You yourself have prepared this very sacrificial ground. You yourself have performed this very sacrifice and killed many cows. Your mooing is to no avail! What is it good for?’ So it was said.
“Seeing the preparation of a sacrificial ground such as this is like witnessing a battle during which many beings such as humans and horses are killed, or like being thrilled about the accoutrements of war.
“As the Buddha has said in the Kālikasūtra:
“ ‘Ānanda, resorting to killing and having grown accustomed to it and practiced it often becomes the cause for rebirth in the hells, in the animal realm, or as a ghost.’
“When killing is done few times and on a small scale, it leads to having a short lifespan.
“What kind of action leads to a long life? Abstaining from killing; speaking praise of abstaining from killing and encouraging others to do so; freeing people and cattle, pigs, birds, and so forth that are to be killed; giving protection to those stricken with fear; arousing thoughts of kindness toward those who are without protection; arousing thoughts of love toward those who are sick, children, and the elderly; giving food to and arousing thoughts of love toward those who are in need; and rejecting all those things referred to above concerning war and so forth, and instead practicing virtue such as renovating and restoring stūpas and monasteries that have fallen into disrepair.
“It is said in that same sūtra:
- “ ‘For he who restores what has fallen into ruin,
- Untimely death will not occur.’
“This kind of action leads to a long life.
“What kind of action leads to having many illnesses? Anger and hitting someone with the fist or the palm of the hand; enjoying hitting somebody with the fist or the palm of the hand; speaking praise of the merit of hitting someone with the fist or the palm of the hand and encouraging it; causing one’s parents mental or physical distress; causing monks who possess moral discipline mental distress; feeling glad when one’s enemies are stricken by illness; feeling unhappy when one’s enemies recover from an illness; and not giving medicine and giving indigestible foods—this kind of action leads to having many illnesses.
“What kind of action leads to having few illnesses? Not hitting someone with the palm of the hand or with the fist; encouraging others to abstain from hitting with the palm of the hand or the fist and praising the merits of abstaining from hitting; rejoicing in not hitting; serving one’s ill parents, householders, and monks, regardless of whether they are senior or junior monks; caring for the sick; not feeling happy or glad when one’s enemies fall ill; rejoicing in their recovery; and giving medicine and digestible food—this kind of action leads to having few illnesses.
“What kind of action leads to having an ugly appearance? Anger, enmity, resentment, spite, speaking ill of one’s parents, speaking ill of householders and of senior or junior monks, soiling stūpas and monasteries and the site of a stūpa, extinguishing offering lamps at stūpas and images, deriding ugly people, and having little sense of cleanliness—this kind of action leads to ugliness.
“What kind of action leads to beauty? The opposites of anger, enmity, resentment, and spite; donating clothing; plastering stūpas and monasteries with white lime; donating beautiful bowls; making an offering of incense, scented ointment, cloth, and ornaments; praising one’s parents; praising noble ones and those who possess moral discipline; cleaning and sweeping the court around a stūpa, a monastery, and one’s house; not deriding ugly people; not deriding others in general, whether old or young; and being very cleanly—this kind of action leads to beauty.
“What kind of action leads to having little power? Avarice; envy; being unhappy about others’ successes; being unhappy when others are praised; despising one’s parents; despising noble ones and those who possess moral discipline; despising the sick, the old, and the young; praising what is vile, what is lacking Dharma, and the roots of nonvirtue; and turning away from the mind of awakening—this kind of action leads to having little power.
“What kind of action leads to being powerful? Not being avaricious; not being envious; rejoicing in others’ successes; not rejoicing in others’ failures; rejoicing in hearing about others’ glory, renown, and good reputation; being happy when others are praised; building stūpas and monasteries in commemoration of the Bhagavān; turning away from what is vile, from what is lacking Dharma, and from the roots of demerit; encouraging others to engage in the roots of merit that lead to distinction; aspiring to reach awakening; and aspiring to attain distinction through the dedication of all roots of merit—this kind of action leads to being powerful.
“What kind of action leads to being born into a low social status? Vanity; conceit; not honoring one’s father and mother, śramaṇas, and brāhmaṇas; not respecting the head of a family; not attending to one’s parents; not attending to noble ones, to those who possess moral discipline, and to others occupying a position of authority, such as one’s preceptor and one’s teacher; and despising people of low class—this kind of action leads to being born into a low social status.
“What kind of action leads to being born into a family of high social status? Having little vanity; having no conceit; honoring one’s father and mother, śramaṇas, and brāhmaṇas; honoring the head of the family; attending to one’s parents; attending to noble ones, to those who possess moral discipline, and to others occupying a position of authority, such one’s preceptor and teacher; and not despising people of low class.
“For example, the Buddha has said in a sūtra:
“ ‘Monks, you should know that a community that is approached by monks who possess moral discipline, are celibate, and possess the quality of virtue can expect five benefits. What are the five? It develops faith in the ones possessing moral discipline who have approached them. Furthermore, monks, at that time, that community enters the path leading to rebirth in heaven. And what is more, monks, the moment the community greets and welcomes those approaching who possess moral discipline, the community has already entered the path leading to rebirth in heaven.’
“This kind of action leads to being reborn in a family of high social status.
“What kind of action leads to poverty? Stealing; encouraging others to commit theft; speaking praise of stealing; taking pleasure in stealing and in having stolen; depriving one’s parents of their livelihood; depriving noble ones and those who possess moral discipline of their livelihood and stealing the livelihood of monks, children, the elderly, the poor, and the sick; rejoicing when others fail to gain wealth; preventing others from gaining wealth; and rejoicing in a bad harvest—this kind of action leads to poverty.
“What kind of action leads to wealth? Abstaining from stealing; rejoicing when someone abstains from taking what was not freely given to them by others; providing one’s parents with a livelihood; providing noble ones and those who possess moral discipline with a livelihood; offering sustenance to the sick, children, the elderly, the poor, and others; rejoicing in the gain of others; and rejoicing in a good harvest.
“In the same sūtra it is said:
“ ‘What is more, monks, when the merit-collecting communities make offerings to those approaching them who possesses moral discipline they enter the path leading to prosperity.’
“This kind of action leads to great wealth.
“What kind of action leads to low intelligence? Here, one does not ask the learned śramaṇas or brāhmaṇas or others, ‘What is the Dharma? What is not the Dharma? What, when done by me, is conducive to happiness?’ One associates with people who lack intelligence and abandons wise people. One teaches what is not the true Dharma, and even though one knows that a reciter of the Buddhist scriptures has spoken well, due to one’s being opinionated one does not say ‘well done!’ But when a reciter has spoken what does not correspond with the Dharma, one says ‘well done!’ One praises wrong views and criticizes right views. One denigrates writers and reciters of manuscripts and deprives them of their livelihood. This kind of action leads to low intelligence.
“What kind of action leads to great intelligence? Here, one has a disposition that dares to inquire and asks the learned śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas questions; one completely shuns those lacking wisdom; one extols the true Dharma and elucidates it; one criticizes what is not the true Dharma; and one praises the confidence of the Dharma reciters and says ‘well done!’ One acclaims those who speak coherently and steers clear of those who speak what is unacceptable; one praises right view and criticizes wrong view; one makes offerings of paper, ink, and reed pens; and, as explained in the Nandikasūtra, one does not drink alcohol. The thirty-five faults of drinking alcohol that are taught in that sūtra will be discussed later in the section on the nonvirtuous actions. This kind of action leads to great intelligence.
“What kind of action leads to rebirth as a hell being? Carrying out gravely negative actions of body, speech, and mind with intensely angry thoughts; entertaining the wrong view of annihilation, the wrong view of eternalism, and the wrong view of nihilism; speaking with hostility; ingratitude; performing the evil actions that bring immediate retribution; and flinging false accusations at noble ones and those who possess moral discipline—this kind of action leads to rebirth in the hell realms.
“What kind of action leads to rebirth in the animal realm? Carrying out moderately bad actions with body, speech, and mind and the varied actions stemming from desire, hatred, and confusion; presenting improper gifts to one’s parents or Buddhist monks; ridiculing beings who are reborn in the animal realm; and making the aspiration to be reborn there as, for example, when someone practices the ox vow or the dog vow, thinking, ‘May I be reborn like that!’
“As an example, one may here relate the Heroic Past Deeds of the Bodhisattva from the Siṃhajātaka, or the story of the brahmin Varṣākāra’s rebirth as a monkey.
“The brahmin Varṣākāra saw the sthavira Mahākāśyapa on Vulture Peak, flying in the sky above the city of Rājagṛha. Because of his close association with Devadatta and Prince Ajātaśatru, he harbored hostile thoughts in his mind and made this insulting comment: ‘This monk flies through the air from mountain peak to mountain peak just as a monkey swings from tree to tree.’
“When the brahmin Varṣākāra, his mind filled with hatred, had made this insulting comment, the Buddha was asked, ‘Venerable Bhagavān, what will be the karmic result of this?’
“The Bhagavān replied, ‘By the karmic ripening of these abusive words, the brahmin Varṣākāra will be reborn as a monkey during five hundred future lives.’
“Varṣākāra then became frightened and developed faith in the Buddha. He asked the Bhagavān at the time of his parinirvāṇa, ‘Where will this deed become exhausted?’
“The Bhagavān said, ‘During these five hundred lives you will be reborn in Rājagṛha in the Jambu continent, the Rose-Apple continent, which derives its name from the fruits called jambu that are the size of large earthen pots and delicious like the pure honey of bees. From there, leaving this incarnation, you will reach heaven.’
“To give another example, having been reborn among lions by virtue of a thought of hatred, the Bhagavān spoke the following stanza in reference to this topic:
- “ ‘Long is the night for the one who lies awake;
- Long is a yojana for the one who is exhausted.
- Saṃsāra is long for the foolish,
- Even if they are acquainted with the holy Dharma.’
“This kind of action leads to rebirth in the animal realm.
“What kind of action leads to rebirth in the realm of ghosts? Here, someone adopts a negative course of conduct of body, speech, and mind with a mind full of anger and hatred or craving; pursues a wrong way of making a living due to improper desire; dies while being angry, hungry, or thirsty; or dies while having thoughts of attachment to material things.
“An illustration [818] from the Śatavarga-āgama Karmavibhaṅgasūtra:
“ ‘The Bhagavān said to Ānanda, “Ānanda, either an action done by a person in a previous lifetime resurfaces and becomes present, or it becomes the force that leads to wrong views at the time of death.” ’
“This kind of action leads to rebirth in the realm of ghosts.
“What kind of action leads to rebirth in the realm of the asuras? Someone’s committing only small or minor misdeeds with body, speech, and mind; pride; arrogance; the pride of identification with a self; the pride of inferiority; dedicating the roots of virtue of one’s positive actions to rebirth in the world of the asuras; and following an immoral course of conduct yet in an intelligent manner that springs from refined desire—this kind of action leads to rebirth in the realm of the asuras.
“What kind of action leads to rebirth as a human? Here, one cultivates the ten virtuous courses of action. What are the ten? One abandons the ten nonvirtuous actions: the three physical actions of killing, stealing, and sexual misconduct; the four verbal actions of lying, slander, harsh speech, and idle talk; and, furthermore, the three mental actions of covetousness, malice, and wrong views. This kind of action leads to rebirth as a human.
“What kind of action leads to rebirth as a deva belonging to the realm of sensuous desire? Here, someone practices well, and brings to perfection, the ten virtuous courses of action—this kind of action leads to rebirth as a deva belonging to the realm of sensuous desire.
“What kind of action leads to rebirth as a deva belonging to the realm of form? Someone practices well the ten virtuous courses of action, accomplishes them, and brings them to perfection to an especially superior degree—this kind of action leads to rebirth as a deva belonging to the realm of form.
“What kind of action leads to rebirth as a deva belonging to the formless realm? One enters the four attainments of the formless states and, having entirely and completely transcended all notions of form, and the notion of materiality having vanished, through disengaging the mind from the notion of distinctness, thinking, ‘Space is infinite,’ one has perfected the sphere of infinity of space and abides in it. Having entirely and completely transcended the sphere of infinity of space, thinking, ‘Consciousness is infinite,’ one has perfected the sphere of infinity of consciousness and abides in it. Having entirely and completely transcended the sphere of infinity of consciousness, thinking, ‘Nothing at all exists,’ one has perfected the sphere of nothingness and abides in it. Having entirely and completely transcended the sphere of nothingness, one has perfected the sphere of neither perception nor nonperception and abides in it. This kind of action leads to rebirth as a deva belonging to the formless realm.
“What kind of action is performed but not accumulated? Having carried out an action, one feels shame, remorse, and deprecation, and one confesses and openly admits one’s faults; one parts with it and vows not to do it again in the future. This kind of action is performed but not accumulated.
“What kind of action is accumulated but not carried out? An action that is to be completed with the body and concerning which one says with a defiled mind, ‘I will do this,’ but then does not actually follow through—this kind of action is accumulated but not carried out.
“What kind of action is both carried out and accumulated? Having carried out an action, one does not feel shame; one does not remedy it, regret it, deprecate it, confess it, admit it, renounce it, or give it up; and one does not vow to not do it again in the future—action like this is both carried out and accumulated.
“What kind of action is neither carried out nor accumulated? An action that one has intentionally carried out or made someone else carry out in a dream—action like this is neither carried out nor accumulated.
“What kind of action leads to being reborn in hell and passing away from there only after having completely exhausted the lifespan of the hell? In this regard, one has carried out actions that lead to rebirth as a hell being, and these actions are accumulated, but having carried out these actions, one feels neither shame nor remorse, and one neither deprecates nor confesses and admits the actions done. One does not vow not to do them again in the future but instead rejoices and is satisfied like, for instance, Devadatta, Kokālika, and so forth. Action like this leads to being reborn in hell and passing away from there only after having completely exhausted the lifespan of the hell.
“What kind of action leads to being reborn in hell and passing away from there after only half the lifespan of the hell is exhausted? In this regard, someone has carried out actions that lead to becoming a hell being but feels shame and remorse and deprecates, confesses, admits, rejects, and gives up those actions and vows not to do them again in the future. In this way does this kind of action lead to being reborn in hell and passing away from there after only half the lifespan of the hell is exhausted.
“What kind of action leads to passing away from hell immediately upon being born there? In this regard, one has carried out actions that lead to rebirth as a hell being, and these actions are accumulated; but, having done these actions, one feels shame, remorse, and deprecation, confesses and admits those actions, and gives them up. By making the promise, ‘From now on I will not do it again!’ one will pass away from that state immediately upon being reborn there.
“For example, when King Ajātaśatru heard that he would go to the Avīci hell for carrying out the evil actions that bring immediate retribution—namely, murdering his father, splitting the monastic saṅgha, releasing the wild elephant Dhanapāla, and hurling a boulder onto the Tathāgata to kill him—he became distraught and developed faith in the Bhagavān. He confessed his sins and, as is related in the Śrāmaṇyaphalasūtra, restored his roots of virtue. When he was about to die, he prayed, ‘From the core of my being I take refuge in the Buddha. I have carried out intolerable actions, for which I feel remorse and which I confess; by promising not to do such actions ever again, they will diminish and eventually be completely erased.’ Then he went silent.
“This kind of action leads to passing away from hell immediately upon being born there.
“What kind of action leads to a predetermined rebirth? As for that, a person carries out an action, and, by dedicating the action in a certain way—‘May I be reborn as such a one!’—that person will be reborn as that one. For example, in the Śyāmākajātaka, the Bhagavān relates accordingly how one is reborn through the power of a strong aspiration. This kind of action leads to a predetermined rebirth.
“What kind of action leads to an unpredetermined rebirth? As for that, a person carries out an action but does not dedicate it by specifying ‘May I be reborn as such and such!’ This kind of action leads to an unpredetermined rebirth.
“What kind of action leads to the ripening of a karmic result in a foreign country? In this regard, there will be ripening of a pleasant or painful karmic result in a foreign country either in this very life or in the next.
“For example, the Bhagavān has told the following story:
“ ‘Monks, once upon a time, when the lifespan of humans of the Jambu continent was indefinite, like that of the king Māndhātar, there lived in a certain city a sea merchant’s son named Maitrāyajña. Surrounded by five hundred friends, he went to an orchard, where his friends said to him, “In this city, merchants like your father were sailors traveling to foreign lands like, for instance, the Golden Island to see other continents and accumulate riches. We, yourself included, should set sail and accumulate riches, too.”
“ ‘Maitrāyajña replied, “So be it!” and when darkness fell, he went home to his mother and said, “Mother, I will go to the Golden Island.”
“ ‘His mother replied, “Son, there is already such immeasurable wealth in this house. Don’t go!”
“ ‘Maitrāyajña, after hearing his mother’s words, which persuaded him not to go, immediately went back to the orchard. The friends said, “In this matter, you need to entreat your mother even more.”
“ ‘Having heard their words, he said, “So be it!” and again went to his mother to ask. But she clasped his feet, and so, again, he stayed. Immediately upon having asked her for a third time, he went back to the orchard.
“ ‘His friends said to him, “This is impossible! We must go!” And Maitrāyajña went once again to his mother and said, “I will go to a foreign land!” The mother then gathered all their possessions, clasped one of his feet, and made him stay once again.
“ ‘Therefore, once more the boy went to the orchard, and his friends said, “It is your fault that we, too, still have not left. We will now leave on the thirteenth day!”
“ ‘Then Maitrāyajña, without his mother’s knowledge, drew out their abundant merchandise and put it on the street. His mother, standing in the doorway, clasped his feet again and said, “Son, don’t go!” but Maitrāyajña, in his anger, stepped on his mother’s head, left, and went to the shore of the sea.
“ ‘There he instructed his friends, “When we are going to set sail, it is uncertain whether we will live or die. Therefore, we should all maintain the eight precepts!” And they, heeding Maitrāyajña’s words, promised to maintain the precepts.
“ ‘Thus, they set sail, and when they had gone far into the center of the ocean, they were caught by a mighty storm, and their ship capsized. All the others died, but Maitrāyajña had seized a large copper vessel whose mouth could be closed with a piece of fabric, and eventually he reached the end of the ocean. He then continued to wander until he came to a city with a golden city wall and an orchard and a lotus pond that was pervaded by a pleasant fragrance. He saw flower petals scattered everywhere and many wreaths made from silk ribbons that had been put up as ornaments. From inside this city, four goddesses appeared and, taking him by the hand, led him inside. Then, after he amused himself with them for many years, many hundreds of years, many thousands of years, and many hundreds of thousands of years, the goddesses ordered him, “Son of noble family, since you are a stranger in this land, you should not go outside. However, if you happen to leave sometime, head north!”
“ ‘On another occasion, Maitrāyajña left the city and continued wandering until he arrived at a city with a silver city wall and an orchard and a lotus pond that was pervaded by a pleasant fragrance. He saw flower petals scattered everywhere and many wreaths made from silk ribbons that had been put up as ornaments. From inside the city, eight goddesses appeared. Like before, after he had amused himself with them, at some other time he left.
“ ‘After wandering and wandering, he arrived at a city with a lapis lazuli city wall. Just as before, he saw flower petals scattered everywhere and many wreaths made from silk ribbons hung up as ornaments. From inside the city, sixteen goddesses appeared, and they, too, took him by the hand and led him inside, and with them, too, he amused himself for many hundreds of thousands of years.
“ ‘At a later time he left, and after wandering and wandering, he arrived at a city with a rock-crystal city wall, and he saw everything like before—from the scattered flower petals to the wreaths made from silk ribbons. From inside this city, thirty-two goddesses appeared, and they, too, took him by the hand and led him inside. As before, after he had amused himself with them, they ordered him, “Son of noble family, since you are a stranger in this land, you should not leave this city. However, if you have to go, head north!”
“ ‘Immediately afterward, he left the house, faced north, and walked and walked. Eventually, he came to a thicket of thorns and saw a city with a black iron city wall. He approached, and as soon as he stepped inside, the city’s gates slammed shut. Looking up the city walls, he saw them rising higher, and he could hear a dreadful sound coming from beyond them. “What kind of place is this?” he thought, and he became terrified when he saw a man whose head was cut by a wheel made of sword blades that was rotating above his head.
“ ‘ “Hey, you! What is this?” he asked, and that hell being replied, “This is a personal hell.”
“ ‘Maitrāyajña asked, “What sins have you committed?”
“ ‘The man told his story: “In the Jambu continent there is a city called Mahākośalī. There I used to live, and I, too, happened to be a son of a sea merchant. Surrounded by five hundred friends, I went to the city’s large orchard.
“ ‘ “There my friends said, ‘Your father is the head of the sea merchants’ guild. And following his lead, they, our fathers, traveled to foreign lands and procured vast riches. They saw the Golden Island, the island of Sri Lanka, and many other islands. We, too, with you as our leader, will travel to foreign countries.’ So they pledged.
“ ‘ “Then I went home and said to my mother, ‘I will go aboard a ship and voyage the ocean to go to foreign countries!’
“ ‘ “My mother replied, ‘Son, your father, too, has gone aboard a ship, and having gone to many foreign countries, he died. Son, you are all I have left! Our house is filled with riches. Don’t go!’
“ ‘ “I, too, promised my mother that I would not go. In this way, mother clasped my feet three or four times, bidding me to stay, and I stayed. But at another time, I went to the orchard and my friends said, ‘We will go anyway.’
“ ‘ “ ‘Well, we should go then!’ I said, and by making this promise, we departed.
“ ‘ “My mother clasped my feet at the door and said, ‘It is not right to leave me behind!’ But I stepped on my mother’s head and went off with my five hundred friends to the shore of the sea.
“ ‘ “After we took up the eight precepts, we set sail. We were well on our way to the Golden Island when a strong gale caught us and capsized the ship, killing all the friends. As for myself, after many days I reached the end of the ocean. I started to wander, and after continuously walking I eventually arrived at a city with a golden city wall and an orchard and a lotus pond that was pervaded by a pleasant fragrance. I saw flower petals scattered everywhere and many wreaths made from silk ribbons that had been put up as ornaments.
“ ‘ “From inside that city, four goddesses appeared, thirty-two goddesses appeared, and so on as before, until I saw a city enclosed by an iron wall and went inside. As soon as I stepped inside, the gates slammed shut. There, too, I saw a man with a wheel made of swords rotating above his head. And there and then the wheel was transferred to where I was standing nearby, onto my own head. Due to the ripening of the karmic fruit of my action of having desisted from leaving home by obeying my mother’s words four times and taking up the eight precepts, I enjoyed a personal heaven in four cities. Due to the ripening of the karmic fruit of my action of stepping on my mother’s head when setting out, a wheel made of sword blades is now rotating above and lacerating my head.”
“ ‘Upon hearing this, Maitrāyajña thought, “I, too, have in the past carried out an action that is very similar to that one. I can see that the ripening of the karmic fruits of my own action is immanent!”
“ ‘The hell being asked Maitrāyajña, “Where do you come from?”
“ ‘And Maitrāyajña told his story: “In the Jambu continent there is a city called Tāmalipta. I am from there. I, too, have done all those actions.”
“ ‘ “It is true then!” said the hell being. “I heard a voice coming from the sky that said, ‘The karmic fruit of your action is exhausted. One will come whose name is Maitrāyajña, the son of a sea merchant, who has committed an action similar to yours.’ ”
“ ‘Maitrāyajña asked, “What kind of food do you eat here?”
“ ‘ “I eat the flesh, pus, and blood flowing from my own shredded head.” Then this man died there. Maitrāyajña, terrified and distraught, made this aspiration for the sake of his mother:
“ ‘With an earnest intention, he bowed down in reverence to his imagined parents and made another aspiration: “Wherever I am reborn, I will honor my parents! I will remain here in this individual hell for the sake of those who will be reborn here. To those in the world who are engaged in proper conduct and those who are liberated, I bow in reverence. I pray that they will protect me.” And he stayed there as a being of this individual hell and made a further aspiration for the sake of his parents:
“ ‘Due to this utterance, the wheel remained in the air above, rotating but without touching his head. And also, because his mother perpetually made this aspiration, “If there is any benefit to be derived from the merit that I have accumulated through my practice of generosity, ethics, and being a faithful wife, may the fruit of this merit lead to the happiness of my son, whatever and wherever he may be,” he was at peace.
“ ‘And having stayed there in this personal hell, he passed away before even sixty years had passed.’
“Accordingly, for example, King Ajātaśatru passed away without having entirely completed his lifespan in hell. But since the karmic fruit of actions do not dissipate, he sometimes suffered from excruciating headaches.
“Then, when the right time had come, the Bhagavān addressed the monks: ‘Monks, you may think that the sea merchant’s son named Maitrāyajña was just somebody else at that time. But this is not how you should see it. I myself was at that time the sea merchant’s son named Maitrāyajña. Therefore, monks, have faith in my words! You should cultivate reverence for the Bhagavān! You should cultivate reverence for the Dharma and the Saṅgha! You should also revere your parents, your preceptor, and your teacher! Know this, monks: Those who travel to a foreign land can experience both pleasure and pain, just like Maitrāyajña, who after traveling to a foreign country experienced a personal heaven and a personal hell in a single lifetime. In this way, action that leads to the experience of pleasure and pain in a foreign country will ripen accordingly in a foreign country.’
“Hence, the Bhagavān has furthermore said the following: ‘Whether something is done for me or for your parents, your preceptor, or your teacher, there is no difference, and the karmic result is the same, experienced either in this lifetime or the next. How, then, is the karmic result the same in this very life?’
“For example, once in Śrāvastī some poor person saw the Bhagavān, together with the Saṅgha of hearers, begging for alms. And because at that moment he developed reverence in his mind, he accumulated an immense stock of merit, and since this also created the action that led him to become a king, that reverence by itself became the seed for his liberation. When this came to the Bhagavān’s attention, he uttered the following verses:
“And:
“Then, at the moment of his death, he was reborn as a god.
“Another example is that of the pratyekabuddha Tagaraśikhin. During a famine, a poor man had offered some broth, and because of that he was anointed king in this city on that same day. Later he became a pratyekabuddha. Furthermore, it is said in the sūtras that the karmic fruit of a mind full of devotion similar to that of the pratyekabuddha whose name is Tagaraśikhin will ripen in this very lifetime.
“When he honored his parent, Maitrāyajña, the son of the sea merchant, experienced an individual heaven in four great cities because he had listened to his mother’s words and complied with them four times. Since it had become the seed for his liberation, the ripening of the karmic fruit took place in this life.
“Will one go to hell through expressing anger toward the Bhagavān and one’s parents? An example here is Devadatta, who, after he had become angry with the Bhagavān, fell into the Avīci hell immediately upon his death. Or there is the prince Utraka in the city of Rauruka in the land of Sindhu, who killed his father and consequently fell into the hell realms. Thus, one will go to the hell realms through expressing anger toward the Bhagavān or one’s parents.
“Now, is there a difference with regard to the Buddha and one’s parents, or are they not different? Concerning the Bhagavān, generating devotion toward him, who during many hundreds of thousands of cosmic ages has accumulated a stock of merit generated by his roots of virtue, who taught the Dharma to those lacking a path, and who bestows awakening upon us, the karmic fruit is immeasurable. To parents the path to liberation is unknown. Furthermore, one need not always obey the words of one’s parents. Why not? Because there are some who hold false views and who say to their child, ‘Child, bring us to an uninhabited place—you will benefit from this and be happy!’ or ‘Abandon us in a chasm! Commit us to the flames!’ When they say such things, this ought not to be done. Why not? Because through murdering one’s parents one will certainly go to the hell realms. Therefore, the Bhagavān has said not to accept those who have killed their parents into the novitiate and that such people should not be accepted for full ordination, and for this reason such people should be shunned.