Purification in Indian Buddhism

FRANCESCO SFERRA

THE CONCEPT OF PURIFICATION IN SOME TEXTS OF LATEINDIAN BUDDHISM �

I

It is well-known that in Vajray�ana texts the spiritual path is oftendescribed in terms of the progressive purification (vi�suddhi; Tib.: rnamdag) of the body and the psyche. This study is a contribution to theanalysis of the concept of “spiritual purification” in the light of (A)printed and translated texts, such as theHevajratantraand the N�arop�a’sParam�arthasam. graha, and (B) some selected passages from works editedbut not translated or only partially translated. These works include theAmr. takan. ik�a by Ravi�sr�ıj~n�ana, theVimalaprabh�a by Pun.d.ar�ıka, and theLaghuk�alacakratantra. This study also considers (C) some unpublishedtexts, such as theAbhay�akarapaddhatiby Abhay�akaragupta and theMukt�aval�ı by Ratn�akara�s�anti, which are preserved in manuscript form.

Some passages, which focus mainly on the description of initiatoryand liturgic ceremonies, insist on the elimination (or, if we prefer, onthe transformation) of impurity, which is considered an obstacle. Fromthis point of view, the concept of purification implies the disappearanceof a maculation (mala) (the definition of which must be gone intomore fully) and the attainment of an ontologically preexistent stateof purity. This state is usually described in positive terms: SupremePleasure, Adamantine Being,tathat�a, and so forth. Notwithstandingthis, there are also definitions, at first sight perplexing, which arousethe suspicion that speaking of purification in terms of elimination ofsomething actually reflects a partial and limited point of view, even ifthis is necessary to some extent. Some texts, for example, in referring tothe ultimate reality in its pureness, speak of Great Hate, Great Aversion,Great Envy, and so on.1 As we shall see, this type of implosion, which“negative” energies undergo in order to reveal themselves in their truenature, is linked to the manifestation of a particular kind of knowledge(j ~n�ana), sometimes called Great Knowledge (mah�aj~n�ana) or Buddha’sKnowledge (buddhaj~n�ana), which is not the product of particular rites

Journal of Indian Philosophy27: 83–103, 1999.c 1999 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Printed in the Netherlands.

PDF-OP, CP, DISK Victory PIPS: 193882 HUMNKAPindi9910.tex; 23/03/1999; 15:58; v.6; p.1

84 FRANCESCO SFERRA

that the adept or the practitioner has to perform.2 This knowledgeconstitutes the purifying elementpar excellenceand represents, in thefinal analysis, the very nature of reality, transfigured and shining. It isnot by chance that, according to some texts, the last phase of yoga,in which the transformation of the physical and psychical elements oftheyogin into pure elements actually occurs is, indeed, nothing but theattainment of a body of gnosis (j ~n�anadeha).3

Therefore, it is necessary to have a direct vision of reality withoutthe conceptual projection of an “I” and a “mine”, and to permit thevarious realities to offer themselves to knowledge according to their truenature. The specific nature of this knowledge, which transcends senseorgans and which is said to pertain to the Omniscient One (sarvaj~na),also explains why sometimes, in connection with the subject matter,one finds philosophical considerations on the cause-effect relationship(this relationship, among other things, is required to justify the passagefrom impurity to purity) in which it is possible to recognize an echoof the debate between Buddhist logicians and the exponents of othertraditions.

II

The theme of “purification” (vi�suddhi) is particularly significant, as itreflects the difficulties and elusiveness that sometimes characterize thesapiential language.

This theme has a particularly important role in the texts of Vajray�ana,which is evident not only from the fact that we findvi�suddhipat.alas –that is, “chapters on purification” – in well-known tantras, for instance,theHevajra (I.ix), the Can. d. amah�aros.an. a (XV), and theBuddhakap�ala(XIII), but also from the frequent occurrence, in the examined texts, ofterms such asvi�suddhi, �suddhi, �sodhana, pari�sodhana, �suci, vyavad�anaandadhiv�asana.

First of all, it can be noted that such words – of whichvi�suddhiand�suddhiare certainly the most used – appear in the Vajray�ana literaturesubstantially in two different contexts: one ritual and one speculative.4

Furthermore, within these ambits, it is possible to single out variousshades of meaning in the use of these words, which we shall now tryto illustrate briefly.

In relation to rituals that have to be performed before the drawing oftheman. d. ala and during the initiation ceremony, the term “purification”is generally used in a very limited sense, as signifying “elimination”.In such cases it is necessary to remove the impurities present in the

indi9910.tex; 23/03/1999; 15:58; v.6; p.2

THE CONCEPT OF PURIFICATION 85

body and the psyche of the practitioner, in the initiation substances, andin the platform on which the rite is to be performed, so that it can beexecuted in the proper way. The purification can occur through concreteactions, such as cleaning the land, fasting or bathing, or through themuttering of specific mantras5 or the imposition (ny�asa) of particularsyllables on parts of the body,6 which the Tantras describe in detailand usually with a certain clarity.7

Through mantras and by means of aspersions (seka), purificationis also performed during initiation. Initiation itself is often explainedas a process of purification,8 so that, sometimes, the wordvi�suddha(lit. ‘pure’) is commented on simply withabhis. ikta, viz., ‘initiated’.9

In the K�alacakra cycle, for instance, the seven inferior initiations andthe four superior ones are progressively linked to the purification ofspecific aspects of reality.10 At other times – as has been noted by D.Snellgrove - the termvi�suddhi, mostly used in the instrumental case,means that something makes itself known through one of its aspects orthat it is represented by another thing. When in theHevajratantra, forexample, we read that the initiation of the master is purified throughthe smile, we should understand that this initiation is symbolized bythe smile.11

Various symbolic relationships, which often connect seemingly incon-gruous levels of reality, are settled in the texts. Hence, specific aspectsof the religious path, deities, colours, dispositions of character, emo-tive reactions, parts of the human body, etc. are mutually related. Infact, in the texts there is not complete agreement about these vari-ous symbolisms. For instance, the thirty-seven facets of awakening(bodhip�aks. ikadharma) are often considered to be manifested throughthe various parts of theman. d. ala, even if the four doors of the lattermay correspond to the foursmr. tyupasth�anas,12 to the four truths,13 orto further aspects of the spiritual path,14 according to the different tradi-tions. However, in some texts, thebodhip�aks. ikadharmas are connectedwith the female deities, Locan�a and so on. The latter are purified, viz.,symbolized, through thebodhip�aks. ikadharmas.15

The second context in whichvi�suddhiappears, and on which weshall dwell a little, is the one which deals with the crucial theme of theessential nature of things, not merely as aiming at theoretical definitions,but also as a starting point of the practice that leads to awakening. Inthis second context we see that the term “purification” is used in twodifferent ways. On the one hand it indicates “pureness”, Buddha’s natureitself, the ever shining and pure condition that is always present in allthings. This pureness represents one of the foundations on which the

indi9910.tex; 23/03/1999; 15:58; v.6; p.3

86 FRANCESCO SFERRA

practice and the doctrine of Buddhist Tantras is based16 and which canbe exemplified by the formulasvi�suddhis tathat�a17 and tathat�atmik�a�suddhih. .

18 On the other hand, the term indicates “purification” andtherefore a process or a means:yay�a sarvabh�av�a nirdos. �a bhavanti s�avi�suddhih. .

19

This ambivalence of terms denoting purification justifies a questionconcerning its true meaning. In other words, we must try to answer thequestion posed by authors such as Kr.s.n. �ac�arya and Ratn�akara�s�anti: if athing is pure by its own nature, why and in what sense is it purified?20

Or, in other words, if a thing is pure, why is its pureness not evidentin itself? In effect, the statement that things possess a pure natureis contradicted by common experience. And we might agree withAbhay�akaragupta, when he states that “pureness is [certainly manifestin] a pure reality, but it is not realitytout court, because, if it were,there would be the illogical consequence that, as there are realitieseverywhere and in every place, there should be pureness everywhereand in every place”,21 but we can see that this is not the case, at leastit does not seem to be.

Concerning this doubt it is possible to note within the Buddhistschools a progressive development – even though some elements remainconstant – of the concept of purity/purification, a kind of redefinition ofthe concept over the time. Since this redefinition appears to be strictlylinked to a shifting of accent in the way of defining the relationshipbetween mind (citta) and maculation (mala), we consider it useful toexplore this last point further.

III

It is well-known that Buddhist tradition conceives mind (citta) as beingnaturally pure and shining (prabh�asvara; P�al.i: pabhassara) but darkenedby adventitious maculations.22 In answer to the above question, we couldsay that the process of purification is necessary due to the existenceof these adventitious maculations, which is precisely what prevents usfrom perceiving pureness.

The fact that thecitta is sometimes not mentioned, and we find itstated that it is the various realities (bh�ava) that are naturally pure andshining and that maculations veil the latter only temporarily,23 doesnot substantially contradict the preeminence of mind, because worldlyrealities are, in any event, perceived by the mind: it is the mind, in acertain sense, that brings them into existence, allows them to appearand to be the object of knowledge. There is an ancient expression that

indi9910.tex; 23/03/1999; 15:58; v.6; p.4


recurs in these texts, which leaves no doubt on the matter:vis.ay�a�scittavit.hapit�ah. , “objects are creations of mind”.24

The importance given to the mind as a foundation both of cognitiveprocess and spiritual progression is stressed in the texts of ancientBuddhism and has constituted an element of continuity in the Buddhisttradition until the present day; this subject has been dealt with repeat-edly in a little but very famous work, theCittavi�suddhiprakaran.a by�Aryadeva, who must not be confused with the celebrated M�adhyamikateacher. A clear Yog�ac�ara trend emerges in this little work, whichwas probably written at the end of the seventh century CE. It is nocoincidence that in one of the first verses the initial stanzas of theDhammapadaare summarized: “Thedharmasare preceded by mind,which is the most important and the most rapid of them. Indeed, it isbecause of mind that one speaks and acts”.25

It is worth noting that purification depends on mind. To use alanguage acceptable to all Buddhist schools, it is in the mind that thetransition betweenvedan�a (‘sensation’) andtr.s.n. �a (‘craving desire’)occurs. These are the crucial factors of theprat�ıtyasamutp�ada, the“dependent origination” (P�al.i: pat. iccasamupp�ada), the factors on whichit is necessary to act in order to interrupt the circle of transmigration andsorrow and to give birth to the transcendent dependent origination, thelokottaraprat�ıtyasamutp�ada, which begins with faith.26 In other words,attachment, aversion and ignorance become manifest in the mind aftervedan�a, sensation (pleasant, unpleasant, and neutral). They arise ina conditioned sequence that can however be interrupted. Mind is thevery place in which this sequence can be broken. As Abhay�akaraguptastates in his unpublished commentary on theBuddhakap�alatantra:“the [various] maculations, that is, attachment and so on, are void inthemselves [: : : ] their purification [is possible and] depends on thepurification of the mind. The mind, in its turn, in shining by its ownnature”.27

In theSekodde�sa, the only chapter of theM�ulak�alacakratantrathathas reached us and one of the most important works of the K�alacakra, wefind a statement of great import that, at first sight, appears to contradictour initial premise: “Maculation is not adventitious in mind”.28

The explanation that theSekodde�sa itself and its commentaries29 offerconcerning this is very interesting for our discourse: (1) If maculationwere adventitious it would follow that it could characterize the mind ofa person, even that of a saint; maculations could manifest or disappearat will. (2) If maculation preceded the mind, and had existed from timeimmemorial, it would be causeless. Instead, it is a creation of mind

indi9910.tex; 23/03/1999; 15:58; v.6; p.5

88 FRANCESCO SFERRA

(cittavit.hapita). (3) If, on the other hand, maculation were causeless,i.e., if it were born without the mind, it would lack causal efficiency,and would be unable to achieve results, like a flower in the sky. (4) Ifmaculation were connatural with the mind, it would follow that mindand maculations would have the same destiny: either maculations wouldbe indestructible or mind would vanish with them. But these last twohypotheses are unacceptable.

The conclusion is that impurity appears with the mind. Therefore, itdoes not precede the mind, does not follow the mind, and is not bornindependently of the mind.30 This concept, which seemingly breakswith the preceding tradition, is actually only the more systematicand audacious expression of an idea already found in previous orcoeval texts of the Buddhist tradition. Let us consider, for instance, theAcinty�advayakramopade�sa where we read that mind is the support fordefects and virtues,31 or theAmr. takan. ik�a, the Gun. abharan. �ı, and theVimalaprabh�a, which, in similar words, affirm that M�ara, evil personified,is nothing but our own mind when it is affected by maculations.32 Inother terms, maculations or impurities, like everything else, do notpossess an independent reality, they are “void in themselves”. Theycould not exist if there were no mind. The adventitious nature ofattachment, and so forth, exists in relation to the mind. After all, it isthe mind that becomes attached, hateful and darkened. And, in the sameway that impurities do not exist in themselves, there are no objects orrealities that are in themselves impure or pure. It is by purifying themind that the objects with which it comes into contact also becomepure.33 Reversing the initial assumption, we can say that the process ofpurification is necessary due to the existence of the mind. However, thisis not completely true, and does not fully answer the question we posed.Far from being a radical break with ancient Buddhist doctrines, it israther a change of perspective to which both the thought of N�ag�arjuna,and that of the school of Asa_nga and Vasubandhu must have contributedin many respects.

First of all, it should be noted that both purity and impurity areconceived as non-subsistent from an absolute point of view. Ifsam. s�araandnirv�an. a do not appear as separate realities but, in a certain sense,depend on our own mind, it is precisely in the mind that the concepts ofpurity and impurity also exist.34 Indrabh�uti clearly states that “the ideaof pure and impure is only an idea and nothing more. This idea pertainsto common usage. The mutual dependence of these two concepts –like the opposite shores of a sea – implies that if pureness did actually

indi9910.tex; 23/03/1999; 15:58; v.6; p.6


exist, there would be some form of impurity; if – on the other hand –there were no pureness, impurity would not exist either”.35

We would like to point out that these reflections are not aimed atproviding a basis for theories on moral relativism, even if it is sometimespossible to interpret the texts in this light. What they seem to say –which will become clearer later – is that “true” pureness essentiallydepends on a factor that is within the mind, to such an extent that ittranscends conceptual constructs (vikalpa) and also the mind’s capacityto create them. In this regard, we cannot gloss over what is preciselystated in thePraj~nop�ayavini�scayasiddhi, that is, that both maculationandsam. s�ara are the mind endowed with conceptual constructs, whereasnirv�an. a is the mind devoid of these.36

From this point of view, it might be said that true pureness of mindconsists in transcending the sphere of conceptual constructs, beginningwith the very concepts of “pure” and “impure”, and, above all, thoseconnected with the idea of an “I” and a “mine”.37

In any event, texts do not fail to specify that transcending conceptualconstructs does not mean attaining a state of insentience.38 On thecontrary, the state reached by the mind is essentially knowledge. “Justas the impurity of blister copper is destroyed by virtue of the unionwith the elixir, but its essential nature is not dissolved and remainspure, so the maculation of mind is destroyed by virtue of the unionwith voidness, but the true nature of [mind], that is, knowledge, is notdestroyed and remains pure”.39

Knowledge is not only the result of the process of purification.Sometimes it is described – more or less implicitly – as an activefactor, a factor that determines this process.40 “Buddhahood – we readin the Vasantatilak�a – cannot be obtained by men through the absenceof conceptual constructs, nor through conceptual constructs. It can occuronly through the knowledge of pure realities”,41 that is, the knowledgeof the actual nature of aggregates, etc.42

In this respect, ritual baths or practices of external purification aremeaningless.43 Realities are not impure in themselves, but only to theextent that their true nature is not known.

Concerning this, it is useful to specify that the object of criticismis not thought as a useful and indispensable faculty, but the tendencyof thought to consider various realities as independent and substantial.Sometimes, it is simply stated that impurity derives from subject-objectdichotomy. Every conception, indeed, every judgment or expectation isbasically rooted in this dichotomy. “ ‘O Blessed One – asked Vajragarbha– what are the impure things?’ Blessed One answered: Form, and

indi9910.tex; 23/03/1999; 15:58; v.6; p.7

90 FRANCESCO SFERRA

so forth. ‘Why?’ [replied Vajragarbha]. Due to the existence of theperceivable and the perceptive. ‘What are the perceivable realities andthe perceptives?’ asked Vajragarbha. Form is perceived by eyes, soundby ear, smell by nose, taste by tongue, objects by touch, and pleasureetc. by mind.”44

In the light of these arguments, we believe that we can define puri-ty/purification essentially as a noetic experience: pureness is knowledgebecause, on the one hand, it permits direct penetration through veils ofignorance and the perception of things as they are, that is, “pure” oradamantine realities; and, on the other hand, because it is only with themanifestation of knowledge that maculation vanishes. As a passage oftheCittavi�suddhiprakaran.a reminds us, it is knowledge that completelyuproots nescience and sins: “Attachment, aversion, ignorance, envy andcraving desire (tr.s.n. �a) are generally held to be at the root of [all] sins;these cannot be purified by means of a ritual bath (sn�ana). Here [in thisworld], for a being [sins] derive from the erroneous idea (graha) of an‘I’ and a ‘mine’. In its turn, this idea stems from nescience (avidy�a)and nescience is known as ‘error’ (bhr�anti). Just as the [erroneous]perception of a conch as silver vanishes when the conch is recognized,so [nescience] is utterly uprooted (nirm�ulam avas�ıdati) through therealization of insubstantiality (nair�atmya). Just as the perception of arope as a snake vanishes as soon as the rope is recognized and canno longer be mistaken for a snake, so, through adamantine knowl-edge (vajraj~n�ana),45 here, in this life, the idea of a [substantial andindependent] being (sattva) no longer arises.”46

As we have seen, maculation has a paradoxical ontological status.It requires mind to exist and vanishes when knowledge appears in themind; knowledge that could not appear if maculation did not exist.Maculation – we could say – is in the service of the mind, in the sameway that – to use the language of alchemy with which many Buddhistand non-Buddhist writers were acquainted – the impurity of blistercopper is the element on which the elixir acts to change it into gold. IntheAmr. takan. ik�a it is clearly stated that “[Ma~nju�sr�ı] is pure because allaggregates, elements, bases and so forth, are no longer obstructed byobstacles by virtue of the fire of Great Attachment”,47 that is, attachmentin its transfigured aspect, in the service, as it were, of awakening.48

The paradox lies in the fact that maculation veils the mind and theessential nature of all things, but, at the same time, constitutes thebasic element through which the shining nature of the latter manifests,to such an extent that one might say that impurity and pureness aresubstantially rooted in the same reality.49

indi9910.tex; 23/03/1999; 15:58; v.6; p.8


IV

To sum up, we have said that pureness is the original (or adamantine)nature of things, and that its manifestation corresponds to the moreor less gradual revelation of knowledge and to the disappearance ofthekle�sas, i.e., impurities, beginning with attachment. The gradualnesswith which all this occurs and the employment of several means, whichrange from the observance of specific rules of conduct to the celebrationof liturgic ceremonies and the practice of yogic techniques, authorizesus to speak of a process of purification. Thus,vi�suddhican signify botha state of purity and a gradual process of purification, which consistsessentially in a progressively less self-centred way of knowing things.

We have previously outlined some essential characteristics of knowl-edge that is able to purify: it can be considered a factor within themind, to such an extent that it transcends conceptual constructs and thefaculty of creating concepts. Far from being a state of insentience, itconsists in the consciousness that alldharmas are devoid of their ownself.50

Tantric scriptures do not systematically treat nor present univocalor unequivocal statements on this subject. In the last part of this paperwe shall briefly examine some other characteristics of this knowledge,in order to stimulate reflection.

One of the most interesting and original statements we find inBuddhist tantric works concerns the more or less explicit definition ofthe Buddha’s knowledge in terms of “pleasure” or “happiness” (sukha).“The knowledge of all the Tath�agatas [: : : ] is called Great Pleasure(mah�asukha)”.51 In the texts there are many references to this cognitiveexperience, which we could compare to aesthetic rapture, to a kind ofpleasure that precedes the subject-object dichotomy, which has nothingto do with attachment and which transcends ordinary pleasure.

Regarding this, we find another statement of considerable import:Great (or Supreme) Pleasure derives from the pure nature of objects:“The Supreme Pleasure – we read in theHevajratantra–, which isdirectly experienced within ourselves (svasam. vedya), comes from thepure nature (�suddhabh�ava) of sense-objects”.52

Two things should be noted here: the reference to the “pure nature”of sense-objects and the use of the adjectivesvasam. vedya.

Concerning the “pure nature” of objects, it suffices to say that itmeans the reality of objects devoid of conceptual superimpositions.To know an object in its pureness does not simply mean knowing itsinsubstantiality (nair�atmya), but grasping it immediately, without the

indi9910.tex; 23/03/1999; 15:58; v.6; p.9

92 FRANCESCO SFERRA

mediation of mental constructs. In the light of this, the above-mentionedpassage from theHevajratantracan be considered a modern and succinctversion of the memorable words of theUd�ana (I, 10): “ ‘May BlessedOne teach me the Noble Doctrine!: : : so that I might receive benefitand felicity for a long time!’. ‘Then,: : : you should train yourself [inthe following way]: in what you see there must be only what [you]have seen, in what you hear only what [you] have heard: : : ’ ”. 53

The modality through which this kind of knowledge operates showsthat it is, to some extent, linked to direct perception (pratyaks.a). Fromthis viewpoint, the experience of purification, of non-dual knowledgethat manifests before the subject-object dichotomy – i.e., at every givenmoment in the perceptive process before the manifestation of conceptualconstructs (which divide the subject from the object) – can be defined asa return to the moment of direct perception. References topratyaks.a doin fact abound in the texts of late Indian Buddhism, particularly in theK�alacakra. “Direct perception – we read in theLaghuk�alacakratantra– is like a star in the sky [: : : ], reasoning is like a corpse”.54

Thus, to know the pure nature of objects does not only mean “toknow the pureness” of their nature, but also “to know” their nature “ina pure way”.

The termsvasam. vedyamerits deeper examination. First of all, it hasa wide field of application; in fact, it occurs in several contexts andcircumstances in the examined texts.55

Svasam. vedyais not merely pleasure (due to internal or externalcauses).56 It is also Great Knowledge, which is sometimes referred toas Tath�agata’s (or Tath�agatas’) knowledge, and identified with GreatPleasure.57 “This knowledge – we read in theHevajratantra–, whichgoes beyond the realm of words, is directly knowable inside us. Itcorresponds to theadhis. t.h�anakramaand is identified with the OmniscientOne’s knowledge”.58 “This knowledge, which is free from notions ofSelf and Other and is similar to the ether, immaculate and void, thevery essence of existence and non-existence, supreme, and the fusion ofwisdom and means, of passion and absence of passion, arises from directpersonal experience”.59 Lastly, purification itself – logically enough –is svasam. vedya: “only purification that is [a reality] directly perceivablewithin us is able to set us free, and no other means”.60

Sometimes, the termsvasam. vedya means simply ‘verifiablethrough one’s own experience’ and can be considered a synonym ofpraty�atmavedya, viz., ‘personally realizable’. However, in the above-mentioned stanzas and, often, in the texts examined here, this term isused with a more pregnant meaning. In reference to Great Pleasure

indi9910.tex; 23/03/1999; 15:58; v.6; p.10


and Great Knowledge (which, as we have seen, are like two sides ofa coin), it is employed to stress that we are speaking of unconditionedrealities, that is, realities that can be fully known and perceived onlythrough a specific cognitive act, a direct and personal experience that– as is clearly stated in some texts – even transcends the mediation ofthe senses.

In several parts of theJ~n�anasiddhiand of theParam�aks.araj~n�anasiddhi– a section of theVimalaprabh�a –, there is strong criticism of the ideathat Great Pleasure and Great Knowledge may depend on certainconditions: on female and male organs, and on knowable realities(aggregates, and so forth) and sense organs, respectively. Tath�agata’sknowledge, indeed, is completely independent of the activity of thesenses61 and Great Pleasure has nothing to do with ordinary pleasure.62

The Hevajratantrarecognizes that Great Knowledge (mah�aj~n�ana),since it pervades everything, also exists in the body (dehastha);63

notwithstanding this, the text states that this knowledge does not arisefrom the body64 and – as is clearly stated in theS. at.s�ahasrik�a – doesnot disappear when the body decays.65

Therefore, ‘self-perceivable knowledge’, viz., ‘knowledge directlyexperienced within ourselves’ (svasam. vedyam. j ~n�anam), can be termedapriori knowledge, in the sense that it exists independently of knowablerealities and transcends the activity of the senses, the means of knowl-edge. In any case, knowledge being independent of knowable realitiesand sense organs does not imply a state of insentience. Sometimes,the adjectivesvasam. vedyais used precisely to underline the fact thatthe knowledge of the Buddha is not absence of thought.66 However,this adjective is also used to emphasize that this kind of knowledgeis the presupposition for ordinary communication and ordinary knowl-edge. Pun.d.ar�ıka clearly states that if this shining (i.e., self-conscious)knowledge did not exist, it would be impossible to teach the doctrineaccording to the inclinations of beings, and to know alldharmas.67

We might say that, in the process of purification, this kind of knowl-edge assumes the leading role that in the teachings of Therav�ada Bud-dhism is ascribed tosati, i.e.,smr. ti, mindfulness or awareness, the “onesole way that leads to the purification of beings”.68 Of course, also in thetexts of the Vajray�ana we find references to the foursmr. tyupasth�anas,the standpoints of mindfulness, but – as far as we know – they aremostly occasional references in often extremely summarized listings ofthe thirty-sevenbodhip�aks. ikadharmas;69 whereas we also find workspartially or entirely dedicated to describing the characteristics of thisnon-dual knowledge.

indi9910.tex; 23/03/1999; 15:58; v.6; p.11

94 FRANCESCO SFERRA

V

In all the phases of Tantric practice, both in the generation processand the completion process, one tries to stimulate and strengthen inthe practitioner an awareness of his adamantine nature, insubstantial-ity (nair�atmya) and pureness.70 Concerning this, let us consider therecitation of mantras, such asom. �s�unyat�aj~n�anavajrasvabh�av�atmako’ham71 or svabh�ava�suddh�ah. sarvadharm�ah. svabh�ava�suddho ’ham72

and the practice of identifying with the chosen deity through techniquesof visualization and according to the master’s teachings.73 Throughthe sixfold yoga, in particular, the adept attains the vision of everyaspect of reality in its pure form. He acquires a new way of “seeing”and “perceiving” the entire reality. It is seen by theyogin as the puremanifestation of divine energies that, according to the Buddhist pointof view, can be divided – for didactic purposes – into the six familiesof the Bodhisattvas. Each of the elements of which the world is com-posed is ruled by one of the Bodhisattvas or one of their partners: form(r �upa) is purified by Vairocana, notion (sam. j ~n�a) by Amit�abha, and soon.74 In the following table we can see the correspondence betweenthe thirty-six deities of the Buddhistpantheonand the various realities,according to the K�alacakra teachings.75

1) Vajrasattva skandha 2) Visvamata dhatuHeruka (Aks.obhya) vij~nana Vajradhatvısvarı �akasaAmoghasiddhi sam. skara Tarin. ı (Tara) vayuRatnesa (Ratnasambhava) vedana Pan.d.ara tejasKamaladhara (Amitabha) sam. j~na Mamakı toyaSamayajina (Vairocana) rupa Locana pr.thvı

3) Samantabhadra indriya 4) �Sabdavajra vis.ayaVajrapan. i �srotra Dharmadhatuvajra dharmadhatuKhagarbha ghran.a Sparsavajra sparsaKs.itigarbha caks.us Rasavajra rasaLokesvara jihva Rupavajra rupaSarvanivaran.avis.kambhin kaya Gandhavajra gandha

5) �Sumbharaja karmendriya 6) Raudraks. ı kriyaUs.n. ıs.acakravartin upastha Atinıla �sukracyutiVighnantaka vac Ativırya vit.sravaPadmantaka pan. i Jambhı gatiPraj~nantaka pada Maminı �adanaYamantaka payu Stambhinı �alapa

indi9910.tex; 23/03/1999; 15:58; v.6; p.12


Thus, through the sixfold yoga the yogin directly perceives andbecomes aware of the general interrelationship between all the planesof reality; an interrelationship that also extends through the microcosmand the different levels of the path of spiritual advancement.

The development of such awareness is accompanied by pureintention (�subh�a�saya), viz., the intention to do good. As theCittavi�suddhiprakaran.a states, on the basis ofVinaya texts, an actionperformed with a pure intention, even if wrong, entails positive ratherthan negative consequences.76 It is a condition for gaining spiritualmerits and, in the final analysis, for obtaining an increase in faith inthe master’s teachings, and in knowledge. It is a “virtuous” circle ofwhich there are other examples in Buddhist doctrine.

The manifestation of knowledge/awareness is not completely inde-pendent of the intention to do good, of thebodhicitta vow, of thepractice of the fourbrahmavih�aras and of the yoga. Great Knowl-edge accompanies and, in a certain sense, presupposes all these things.Thus we can say that the development of wisdom goes hand in handwith the development of moral sensibility and concentration. They areinterdependent factors that nourish each other.

ABBREVIATIONS

AAKU Acinty�advayakramopade�saAK Amr. takan. ik�a (N�amasam. g�ıtit.ippan. �ı)AKU Amr. takan. ikoddyotaAP AbhayapaddhatiCIHTS Central Institute of Higher Tibetan StudiesCMT Can. d. amah�aros.an. atantraCVP Cittavi�suddhiprakaran. aDh�ıh. Dh�ıh. . Journal of Rare Buddhist TextsHT HevajratantraJS J~n�anasiddhiLKC Laghuk�alacakratantraM �A Mukt�aval�ı (Hevajratantrapa~njik�a)NAK National Archives of Nepal, KathmanduNGMPP Nepal German Manuscript Preservation ProjectNS N�amasam. g�ıtiPAJS Param�aks.araj~n�anasiddhiSN Sam. yutta Nik�ayaS.S S. at.s�ahasrik�a (Hevajratantrapin. d. �arthat.�ık�a)SU Sekodde�saVP Vimalaprabh�aYRM Yogaratnam�al�a (Hevajratantrapa~njik�a)

indi9910.tex; 23/03/1999; 15:58; v.6; p.13

96 FRANCESCO SFERRA

NOTES

� The author expresses his profound feeling of gratitude to the authorities of theK.P. Jayaswal Research Institute and the Bihar Research Society of Patna (India)for kindly having made available their valuable source materials through the goodoffices of Dr. Gustav Roth and Prof. Raffaele Torella. For the same reason, he wouldalso like to express his deep gratitude to the authorities of the National Archives ofNepal and the Kaiser Library of Kathmandu, of the Royal Asiatic Society (London)and of the Istituto Italiano per l’Africa e l’Oriente (Rome).1 Cf. NS V, 3 and ff; SU, 161-169; CVP, 4a.2 It is definedman. d. alacakrakarmaj~n�anamudr�akalpan�arahitam. praj~n�ap�aramit�aj~n�anam.vikalpaj�alarahitam (S.S, MS 3-693, fol. 13r2�3).3 Cf. Guhyasam�ajaprad�ıpoddyotana(comm. onGuhyasam�ajatantra XVIII, 154, ed.,p. 119), LKC IV, 119.4 However, it should be noted that it is not always possible to clearly differentiatethese contexts.5 For example,om. �sodhane�sodhane�sodhaya sarv�ap�ay�an sarvasattvebhyo hum. , om.sarvavit. sarv�avaran. �ani vi�sodhaya hana hum. phat., etc. (Sarvadurgatipari�sodhanatantra,ed., pp. 126, 128).6 See, for instance, VP, ed., vol. II, p. 32 and ff. For a general description, seeTucci 19693: 99 ff.7 This argument is not shrouded in mystery and is generally devoid of the complexliturgy of the mantroddh�ara, which is particularly important in Hindu Tantras.Obviously, much information can be drawn from commentaries. In the LTT. byVajrap�an. i – a commentary on the first ten and a half stanzas of theCakrasam. varatantra– we find the description of thebali�sodhanamantra, which has to be used to purifythe substances that have to be offered to spirits (om. vajrakrodhe�svari sarvadravy�an. ivi�sodhaya h�um. phat., MS, fol. 37v. C. Cicuzza kindly gave me the opportunityto study this text from his forthcoming edition and translation). We could alsoquote the SUT. , which describes the mantras that are employed in the K�alacakrafor the purification of pots (kala�sa) and disciples (�sis.ya) (ed., p. 10; Gnoli-Orofino1994: 159–61; cf. also VP, ed., vol. II, pp. 36–7), and the VP (comm. on LKC III,87; ed., vol. II, pp. 84–5), which explains the mantra (outlined in the verse) thatthe master uses in the preliminaries of initiation in order to make the Krodhar�ajaenter into the disciple (previously cleansed and anointed with perfumed oils) andeliminate the M�aras (cf. LKC III, 88) from him. See also Hopkins 1985: 106–7, 439–40.8 J. Hopkins (1985: 69) writes: “The first seven initiations establish potenciesin practitioners’ mental continuums for purifying impure appearances and impureconceptions. Impure appearances are appearances, to the mental consciousness,of ordinary phenomena such as a body made of flesh, blood, and bone; impureconceptions are conceptions of oneself, based on ordinary appearance, to be ordinary.During the stage of generation, practitioners develop clear appearance of themselvesas the deity, or ideal being, K�alacakra together with a consort and other deities.When such meditation is successful, all ordinary appearances of bodies made offlesh, blood, and bone and houses made of wood and so forth vanish from the mentalconsciousness (not the sense consciousnesses) such that all that appears is divine[: : : ].” See also pp. 13–22, 71, 108–9, 120–27.9 Cf. VP, ed., vol. II, pp. 100, lines 24–5;Gun. abharan. �ı (MS, fol. 8v1�2). For sometraditional etymologies of the termabhis.eka, see Hopkins 1985: 66–7, 484, note89. In the SUT. (ed., pp. 2–3) we read:sicyate k�ay�adikam. nirmalam. nir �avaran. am.kriyate ’neneti sekah. “It is seka because through it the body etc. is sprinkled(sicyate), that is, it is made pure, without obstacles (nir �avaran. a)”. See also HT II.iii,12cd.

indi9910.tex; 23/03/1999; 15:58; v.6; p.14


10 During the seven initiations we have a gradual purification of families, elements,aggregates, etc. See SU, 12–14, LKC III, 99 and VP (ed., vol. II, p. 95). On thebasis of a wider subdivision, the initiations purify body, word, mind and knowledge.See SU, 10–11, 15–17. See also SUT. (Gnoli-Orofino 1994: 178–182, 185–6, 193);Hopkins 1985: 72–4, 109–118.

A similar concept can be found in theRatn�aval�ıpa~njik�a by Kum�aracandra – acommentary on theKr.s.n. ayam�aritantra – where we read (ed., pp. 100–2) that thek�ayavajra is purified through the initiation of the master, thev�agvajra through theinitiation of the secret parts, and thecittavajra through the initiation of the knowledgeof wisdom.

It is also worth mentioning that we occasionally find a more specific use of theterm “purification” in the texts. Sometimes the past-participle of the root�sudh orvi�sudh– the primary meaning of which is ‘pure’, ‘purified’, and so forth – is used tomean ‘furnished with’, ‘perfected by’, as the glosses sometimes confirm. S�adhuputra�Sr�ıdhar�ananda, for instance, while explaining stanzas six and seven of theSekodde�sa(see below), comments on the word�suddhamprecisely withsamanvitam(SUT. ippan. �ı,ed., p. 120, line 12. See also Gnoli-Orofino 1994: 142, note 1).

evam. s.at.kot. ibhih. �suddham. vajrayogai�s caturvidhaih. j catuh. sambodhibhih.skandhadh�atv�ayatanas.at.kulaih. jj pat.alaih. pa~ncabhih. �suddham. lokadh�atv�adikairmataih. j saty�abhy�am �adibuddham. sy�at k�alacakr�abhidh�anakamjj (SU, 6–7).

“Thus, purified by the six points, by the fourvajrayogas, by the perfect com-prehensions, by the aggregates, elements, bases, and [respective] six families, andalso purified by five chapters, the first concerning the structure of the world, andby the two truths, we have�Adibuddha, known as K�alacakra”. See also SU, 170–172.11 Cf. HT II.iii, 11a. “As for ‘clarification’ by a smile, a gaze etc., the Sanskrit termmeans literally ‘purification’ (vi�suddhi), but in Buddhist tantric usage it comes tomean to ‘represent’ or ‘symbolize’. The meanings come together when it is said forinstance that the Five Buddhas ‘purify’ the Five Evils, but it can equally well be saidthat they ‘purify’ the Five Wisdoms, which they effectively symbolize” (Snellgrove1987, vol. I: 253). With an analogous meaning the termvi�suddhiis used, for example,in the J~n�anodayatantra(ed. p. 5) and in the S.S (MS 128, fols. 54v–55r).12 evam vedan�asmr. tyupasth�anavi�suddhy�a daks. in. adv�aram. evam. dharmam�anusmr. tyupas-th�anavi�suddhy�a pa�scimadv�aram. j evam. citt�anusmr. tyupasth�anam uttaradv�aram. [: : : ](Hevajrat. ippan. a, MS, fol. 6v4�5). Cf. also Dhargyey 1985: 57.13 atha bhagavaty�aha j [: : : ] p�urvoktaman. d. al�an�am. [cf. CMT, chap. II] tu vi�suddhim.me vada prabhojj atha bhagav�an �aha j ath�atah. sam. pravaks.y�ami [�vaks. �ami: MSS4-342 and 1-220]vi�suddhim. sarva�sodhanamj tatra [tatra: deestin MSS 3-661 and1-220] catura�sram. caturbrahmavih�ar�ı j caturdv�aram. catuh. satyamj catustoran. am.caturdhy�anam j as. t.astambh�a �ary�as. t. �a _ngo m�argah. j ekaput.am. cittaik�agrat�a [: : : ](CMT, chap. XV, MS 3-661, fol. 32v7�8, [this MS has a lacuna after the compoundsarva�sodhanam]; MS 4-342, fols. 57r3-57v2; MS 1-220, fol. 18r5�7).14 catuh. smr. tyupasth�anavi�suddhy�a p�urvvadv�aram. j catuh. samyakprah�an. a [�pram�an. a�:MS]vi�suddhy�a daks. in. adv�aram [daks. in. e dv�ar�am. : MS] j catuh. r.ddhip�adavi�suddhy�apa�scimadv�aram. j pa~ncendriyavi�suddhy�a uttaradv�aram. j dhy�anacatus. t.ayavi�suddhy�acatustoran. am. j (Hevajras�adhana, MS, fol. 66r3�4). See also theAbhisamayama~njar�ı,Dh�ıh. (13) 130–1.15 See VP, ed., vol. II, pp. 129–30. See alsoKalpar�ajatantra (MS, fols. 43v9–44v1), Vasantatilak�a, chap. VII, ed., pp. 51 ff,Yogin�ısam. c�aratantra, MS, fols. 2r6–2v4.16 See Snellgrove 1987: 125.17 sarves. �am. khalu vast�un�am. vi�suddhis tathat�a smr. t�a (I.ix, 1ab). See also

indi9910.tex; 23/03/1999; 15:58; v.6; p.15

98 FRANCESCO SFERRA

�Sr�ımah�asam. varodayatantrar�aja IV, 18d (ed. Tsuda, p. 81), AK (comm. on NSVIII, 22), ed., p. 69, and AKU, ed., p. 176 (where this verse of the HT is quoted).18 YRM (ed., p. 130), M�A (MS, fol. 67v1�2), comm. on HT I.ix, 3a.19 YRM (ed., p. 130); cf. M�A (MS, fol. 67r3).20 Cf. YRM (ed., p. 130) and M�A, comm. on HT I.ix, 2 (MS, fol. 67r5�6).21 vi�suddham. tatvam. vi�suddhih. j na tu tatvam�atram. vi�suddhih. j tatvasya sarva-tra sarvad�a ca bh�av�at j sarves. �am. sarvad�a ca vi�suddhiprasa_ng�at (AP, MS, fol.23v2�3).22 Cf. Dharmak�ırti’s Pram�an. av�arttika I, 210. In the JS (chapter XV, ed., p. 140)we read: [sarvatath�agat�a �ahuh. –] prakr. ti<pra>bh�asvaram idam. kulaputra cittam.candraman. d. alavat j candraman. d. alam. prakr. tiprabh�asvaram. tadvad j~n�anam j yath�akram�ac candraman. d. alam. samp�urn. am. bhavati, tadvat prakr. tiprabh�asvaram. cit-taratnam api parip�urn. am. bhavati j yath�a candraman. d. alam �agantukakal�abhih.s�uryaman. d. alara�smyapagam�at kram�at p�urn. am. dr. �syate, tadvat prakr. tipari�suddham.cittaratnam api sarvakle�samalakala_nk�apagamakram�at parip�urn. abuddhagun. am. dr. �syateiti .23 s.ad. indriyam. pa~ncaskandham. s.ad. �ayatanam. pa~ncabh�utam j svabh�avena vi�suddhamapy aj~n�anakle�sair �avr. tam jj (HT I.ix, 2). Beings are already enlightened, theirenlightenment is obscured by adventitious maculations (HT II.iv, 70–71). Cf. alsoHT II.iv, 77.24 Cf. AP (MS, fol. 10r3). On the termvit.hapita, which lit. means ‘based on’, seeEdgerton 1970, vol. II: 486.25 manah. p�urva _ngam�a dharm�a manah. �sres. t.h�a manojav�ah. j manas�a hi prasannenabh�as.ate v�a karoti v�a jj (st. 10). Cf.Dhammapada, I, 1–2. In the CMT (VII, 13cd–14ab) we read:manah. p�urvagamam. sarvam. p�apapun. yam idam. matam. jj manasah.kalpan�ak�aram. gatisth�an�adibheditam. j (trans. George 1974: 79–80). See also JS IX,6–9; Dhargyey 1985: 53.26 Cf. SN XII.iii, 23.27 mal�a r�ag�adayah. �s�unyat�asvabh�av�a [: : : ] nairmalyam. cais. �am. cittanairmaly�at jcittam. ca prakr. tinirmalam. (AP, MS, fol. 10r3�4).28 n�agantuko mala�s citte, st. 129a.29 SU, 129b–131, SUT. (ed., p. 65; Gnoli-Orofino 1994: 341–2), SUT. ippan. �ı (ed.,p. 139), SUPa~njik�a (ed., pp. 290–1).30 Cf. SU, 132–133 and SUT. (ed., pp. 65–6, Gnoli-Orofino 1994: 342–43).31 dos. �an. �am. ca gun. �an�am. ca cittam �adh�aram ucyate(st. 33cd).32 In the AK (ed., p. 2) and in theGun. abharan. �ı (MS, fol. 17r5) Ravi�sr�ıj~n�ana quotesa stanza in which it is stated that M�ara is the mind itself:m�arah. svacittam. na paro’sti m�arah. [: : : ]. In the VP (ed., vol. I, p. 23, lines 11–2) we read:m�aro n�amasattv�an�am. sam. s�aracittam. v�asan�amalah. , buddhatvam. n�ama sam. s�arav�asan�arahitam.cittam.33 In the AP (MS, fol. 10r4�5) we read: r �ag�adir ev�antaram. vis.am. j taduktam. bhagavat�a “r �agadves.a�s ca moha�s ca ete loke trayo vis. �a” iti j te cacittasyaiv�agantusvabh�av�ah. j tata�s cittam eva m�ud. haraktam. dvis. t.am. c�antaram. vis.am.pun. yaj~n�anasambh�araj�ıvitavigh�at�at j tac cittava�s�ad vis.ayasvar�upam api vis.am jyad�a tu cittam. �s�unyat�akarun. �abhinnasvabh�avam. nairmaly�an nirvis.am. ni�scitam. tad�avis.ayasvar�upam api malarahitam. .34 In the CMT (VIII, 29–30ab) we read:na p�apam. vidyate ki~ncid na pun. yam. ki~ncidasti hi j lok�an�am. cittaraks. �ayai p�apapun. yavyavasthitih. jj cittam�atram. yatah. sarvam.ks.an. am�atra~n ca tatsthitih. j (trans. George 1974: 84).35

�sucitvam asti cet ki~ncid a�sucitvam. bhavis.yati j �sucyabh�av�ad a�sucitvam. sarvath�anopalabhyatejj �apeks. ikatvam anyonyam. p�ar�ap�arakavad yath�a j laukik�ı kalpanaivais. �a�sucya�sucy�adikalpan�a jj (JS X, 9–10).

indi9910.tex; 23/03/1999; 15:58; v.6; p.16


36 r �ag�adidurv�aramal�avaliptam. cittam. hi sam. s�aram uv�aca vajr�ı jj prabh�asvaram.kalpanay�a vimuktam. prah�ın. ar�ag�adimalapralepamj gr�ahyam. na ca gr�ahakamagrasattvas[agrasattvam. : ed.] tad eva nirv�an. avaram. jag�ada jj “Vajra-Holder saidthat transmigration is the mind stained by maculation, i.e., by attachment, and soon, which is difficult to eliminate. [Furthermore,] the Primeval Being said thatthis same mind, which is shining, devoid of conceptual constructs, free from thoseimpurities and stains that are attachment and so forth, and without the perceivableand the perceptor, isnirv�an. a” (Praj~nop�ayavini�scayasiddhiIV, 22cd–23). See also thefollowing verse:kalpan�amalaj�alena cittaratnam. mal�ıkr. tam “The jewel that is mindis stained by the net of maculations that are conceptual constructs” (AAKU, 10cd).Cf. also CVP, 25.37 Cf. CVP, 66 (see below, note 46).38 Cf. JS V, 7ab; PAJS (Gnoli 1997: 35–6).39 t�amrasya kalim�a yadvad rasayogena na�syati j na tasya sattvat�a na�syen nir-malatvena y�a sthit�a jj tadvac cittamalah. �s�unyat�ayogena prana�syati j na tasya j~n�anat�ana�syen nirmalatvena y�a sthit�a jj (SU, 132–133). In the AAKU (st. 11) we read:mal�apagaman�ad buddham[bauddham. ?] advayam. j~n�anam ucyate.40 Cf., for instance, CVP, 51 andDharmadh�atustava, 18–23 (quoted in SUT. , ed.,p. 66, Gnoli-Orofino 1994: 342–3).41 nirvikalp�an na buddhatvam. savikalp�ac ca no tath�a j suvi�suddhaparij~n�an�ad bhavedeva man�ıs. in. �am jj (I, 12).42 In the commentary we read:skandh�adeh. svabh�avaparij~n�an�at tad bhavati(ed.,p. 11).43 Cf. SN VII.i, 9 (for an interesting analysis of this passage, see Bhattacharya 1973:116–18), CVP, 60–64.44 he bhagav�an ke te ’vi�suddh�ah. j bhagav�an �aha j r �up�adayah. jj kasm�at jjgr�ahyagr�ahakabh�av�at jj vajragarbha �aha j ke te gr�ahyagr�ahak�a�s ceti jj bhagav�an�aha j caks.us. �a gr.hyate r�upam. �sabdah. karn. ena �sr�uyate j gandham. n�asikay�a vettijihvay�a sv�adanam. vidhuh. jj k�ayena spr. �syate vastu manah. sukh�adim �apnute j (HTI.ix, 5–8ab).45 Cf. JS I, 37, 47.46 r �ago dves.a�s ca moha�s ca�ırs.y�a tr.s.n. �a ca sarvad�a j p�ap�an�am. m�ulam �akhy�atam. nais. �am.sn�anena�sodhanamjj �atm�atm�ıyagrah�ad ete sambhavant�ıha janminah. j avidy�ahetukah.so ’pi s�avidy�a bhr�antir is.yate jj raupyabuddhir yath�a �suktau �suktidr.s. t.au nivartatejnair�atmyadar�san�at s�api nirm�ulam avas�ıdati jj sarpabuddhir yath�a rajjau rajjudr.s. t.aunivartatej sarpabuddhih. punas tatra naiva sy�ad iha janmanijj sattvabuddhis tath�atr�apivajraj~n�an�an nivartatej (stt. 65–69ab).47 mah�ar�ag�analena sakalaskandhadh�atv�ayatan�ad�ın�am. nir �avaran. �ıkaran. �at �suddh�atm�a(comm. on NS VI, 5).48 The same concept –mutatis mutandis– is common to Hinduism and can be foundin classical texts of traditional Hindudar�sanas. Let us consider just one example: theconcept ofpurus. �artha in the S�am. khya. On this subject, see interesting considerationsby C. Pensa in G. Gnoli (ed.)Mircea Eliade e le religioni asiatiche, Serie OrientaleRoma (64), IsMEO, Roma 1989, pp. 133 ff.49 Cf. Tucci 19693: 23.50 In the PAJS (VP, ed., vol. III, p. 77) we read:iha t�ath�agatam. j~n�anam.sarvadharm�an. �am. nih. svabh�avat�avabodhanam. n�ama, na sarv�abh�avalaks.an. am.sus.uptacittam.51 sarvat�ath�agatam. j~n�anam. [: : : ] mah�asukham iti smr. tam (JS VII, 3a, d).52 vis.aya�suddhabh�avatv�at svasam. vedyam. param. sukhamjj (HT I.ix, 3cd).53 The full passage is: [: : : ] desetu me bhante bhagav�a dhammam. jj desetu sugatodhammam. jj yam. mama assa d�ıgharattam. hit�aya sukh�ay�a ’ti jj tasm�at iha te B�ahiya

indi9910.tex; 23/03/1999; 15:58; v.6; p.17

100 FRANCESCO SFERRA

evam. sikkhitabbam. jj dit.t.he dit.t.hamattam. bhavissatijj sute sutamattam. bhavissatijj mute mutamattam. bhavissatijj vi~n~n�ate vi~n~n�atamattam. bhavissat�ıti || eva~n hi teB�ahiya sikkhitabbam. jj yato kho te B�ahiya dit.t.he dit.t.hamattam. bhavissati jj sutesutamattam. bhavissati jj mute mutamattam. bhavissati jj vi~n~n�ate vi~n~n�atamattam.bhavissatijj <tato tvam. B�ahiya na tena, yato tvam. B�ahiya na tena> jj tato tvam.B�ahiya na tatthajj yato tvam. B�ahiya nev’ atthajj tato tvam. B�ahiya nev’ idha nahuram. na ubhayamantarenajj es’ ev’ anto dukkhass�a ’ti jj (Ud�ana, BodhivaggaI, 10; Cf. Ud�anam, ed. by P. Steinthal, Pali Text Society, London, 1885, p. 8).A very similar passage can be found in the SN (XXXV.xcv, 12–13, ed., vol. IV,p. 73).54 pratyaks.am. [: : : ] ud. ur iva gagane[: : : ] anum�anam. mr. takatanur iva(LKC IV,232 cd). Cf also JS IV, 30cd:sarvam. pratyaks.ato vetti sarvaj~nas tena kathyate.55 Cf., for instance, HT I.viii, 25, 44–45, JS, I, 90.56 Cf. SahajasiddhiIII, 8, PAJS (ed., VP, vol. III, p. 63, line 2).57 JS VII, 3b.58 svasam. vedyam idam. j~n�anam. v�akpath�at�ıtagocaram j adhis. t.h�anakramo hy es.ah.sarvaj~naj~n�anatanmayah. jj (HT I.viii, 49).59 svasam. vedy�ad bhaved j~n�anam. svaparavittivarjitamj khasamam. virajam. �s�unyam.bh�av�abh�av�atmakam. param j praj~nop�ayavyatimi�sram. r �ag�ar�agavimi�sritam jj (HT I.x,7).60 svasam. vedy�atmik�a �suddhir n�anya�suddhy�a vimucyatej (HT I.ix, 3ab). Cf. alsoSahajasiddhiIII, 3cd.61 athendriyadv�arikam. svasam. vedyam. tad�a nis.kalam. sarvagam. sarvavy�api na bhavati,sarv�avaran. �at j tasm�at t�ath�agatam. j~n�anam. svasam. vedyam. sarvadharmasvabh�avaj~nam.nirvikalpam anindriyam iti(PAJS, ed., VP, vol. III, p. 77, lines 30–2; see also Gnoli1997: 37). Cf. also JS III, 10.62 Cf. JS VII; PAJS, ed., VP, vol. III, pp. 78–9.63 Cf. HT I.i, 12a.64 Cf. HT I.i, 12b.65 In the S.S we read:yadi buddhaj~n�anam. dehajam. bhavati j �adh�ar�adheyasambandhenayath�a pus.pajam. gandham. tadabh�ave vina�syati yath�a pus.p�abh�ave gandh�abh�avo, nacaivam. j ato dehe b�ahye ca vy�apitv�ad b�ahyastham. dehastham ity ucyatej deh�abh�avena tasy�abh�avo yasm�at tasm�an na dehaja[HT I.i, 12] iti niyamah. j tath�a �aha –�ak�a�sasya yath�a bha_ngo n�asti kumbhasya bha_ngatah. j j~n�anasya ca tath�a n�asti bha_ngodehasya bha_ngatah. jj (MS 3-693, fol. 13v5�9). Cf. JS II, 38–40.66 Cf. PAJS, ed., VP, vol. III, pp. 76–7.67 prakr. tiprabh�asvaram. n�ama yadi svasam. vedyam. t�ath�agatam. j~n�anam. na bhavati,tad�a sattv�a�sayava�s�at tath�agatasya dharmade�san�a na sy�at j sarvadharm�a aprabodh�ah. ,asam. vedyatv�at j (PAJS, ed., VP, vol. III, p. 77, lines 28–30).68 In the SN (XLVII.III.ii, 8 and v, 3) we read: “Then, as the Exalted One meditatedin solitude, there arose in his mind this train of thought: This is the one sole waythat leads to the purification of beings, to the utter passing beyond sorrow and grief,to the destruction of woe and lamentation, to the winning of the Method, to therealizing of Nibbana, to wit: the four stations of mindfulness.” (trans. Woodward1930: 147; cf. also p. 162; ed., vol. V, pp. 167, 184).69 The smr. tyupasth�anas (P�al.i: satipat.t.h�ana; ‘foundations of awareness’) are men-tioned for instance in the LKC V, 238c (VP, ed., vol. III, p. 148). Concerning thethirty-sevenbodhip�aks. ikadharmas, see also theYogin�ısam. c�aratantrat.�ık�a, MS, fols.16v–32r. See also above, note 15.70 J. Hopkins (1985: 70) writes: “Through developing, in the stage of generation,clear appearance of pure body and pure mind, ordinary appearances are stopped forthe mental consciousness. [: : : ] Thus, successful meditators have a conception ofthemselves as ideal beings, not inherently existent but merely designated in depen-

indi9910.tex; 23/03/1999; 15:58; v.6; p.18


dence upon pure mind and body. For deity yoga to succeed, two prime factors areneeded: clear appearance of a divine body and pride in being that deity. With successin visualizing the deity, both mind and body appear to be pure; hence, the sense ofself that the meditator has in dependence upon purely appearing mind and body isof a pure self, a divine self.”71 Cf. Hopkins 1985: 107.72 Catuh. p�ıt.hamah�atantrar�aja, Parap�ıt.ha, III pat.ala, MS, fols. 22r1, 26v3. The samemantra recurs in other texts, such as theAbhisamayama~njar�ı (ed. in Dh�ıh. 13, p. 128)and the VP (comm. on LKC III, 35, ed., vol. II, p. 32). See also Dawa-Samdup19872: 87, 122.73 See, for instance, CVP, 17, 29, 76–78, 80cd–81, 118, 129.74 In K�alacakra texts we have six families (see, for instance, SU, 161–172; LKC V,101–107). Vajrasattva is the head of the sixth family, which purifies thej~n�anaskandha,the j~n�anadh�atu, the manas, and so on. On this theme, see also NS III, 1–2 and AK(with AKU); Guhyasam�ajaprad�ıpoddyotana(ed., p. 17); PAJS (VP, ed., vol. III, pp.71–3); Tucci 19693: 67.75 See also Gnoli-Orofino 1994: 79. The differences between this table and the onesthat we find in other K�alacakra texts has been analysed by Orofino (1996: 138–139).76 Cf. CVP, 11–16;Majjhima Nik�aya (vol. I, p. 371); Vinayapit.aka (vol. I, p. 83).

REFERENCES

TEXTS

Abhay�akaragupta,Abhayapaddhati(Buddhakap�alatantrat.�ık�a), NAK, MS 5–21, NGMPP,Mf. A 48/2.

Buddhakap�alatantra (Dpal sangs rgyas thod pa), The Tibetan Tripit.aka, PekingEdition, Otani University, Kyoto, ed. by Daisetz T. Suzuki, 1955–1961, vol. III,# 63, pp. 52–63.

Can. d. amah�aros.an. atantra, NAK, MS 3-661 NGMPP, Mf. A 138/8; NAK, MS 4-342,Mf. A 140/7; NAK, MS 1-220, NGMPP, Mf. A 141/7. For the first eight chapters,see also George 1974.

Catuh. p�ıt.hamah�atantrar�aja, NAK, MS 5-37, NGMPP, Mf. A 138/10,Deuter-�Aryadeva,Cittavi�suddhiprakaran. a, Sanskrit and Tibetan Text, ed. by P.B.

Patel, with a Foreward by V. Bhattacharya, in Visva-Bharati Research Studies (8),Santiniketan Press, Santiniketan 1949.

Deutero-Candrak�ırti, Guhyasam�ajatantraprad�ıpoddyotanat.�ık�as.at.kot.�ıvy�akhy�a, ed. byC. Chakravarti, Kashi Prasad Jayaswal Research Institute, Patna 1984.

Guhy�adi-As. t.asiddhisa_ngraha, Sanskrit and Tibetan text, Rare Buddhist Text Series(1), ed. by S. Rinpoche and V.V. Dwivedi, CIHTS, Sarnath, Varanasi 1987.

Guhyasam�ajatantra, The Guhyasam�aja Tantra. A New Critical Edition, by Y. Mat-sunaga, Toho Shuppan, inc., Osaka 1978.

Hevajras�adhana, MS preserved on negative at the K.P. Jayaswal Research Institute,Patna.

Hevajratantra, see Snellgrove 1959.Hevajrat. ippan. a, MS preserved on negative at the K.P. Jayaswal Research Institute,

Patna.J~n�anodayatantram, ed. by S. Rinpoche and V. Dwivedi, Rare Buddhist Text Series

(2), CIHTS, Sarnath, 1988.Kalpar�ajatantra, MS not catalogued, preserved at the IsIAO Library, Rome.K�an.ha (alias Kr.s.n.�ac�arya),Yogaratnam�al�a, see Snellgrove 1959, vol. II: 103–59, and

Farrow-Menon 1992.

indi9910.tex; 23/03/1999; 15:58; v.6; p.19

102 FRANCESCO SFERRA

Kr.s.n.�ac�arya, Vasantatilak�a of Cary�avrat�ı �Sr�ıkr.s.n. �ac�arya with Commentary:Rahasyad�ıpik�a by Vanaratna, ed. by S. Rinpoche and V. Dwivedi, Rare Bud-dhist Text Series (7), CIHTS, Sarnath 1990.

Kr.s.n. ayam�aritantram. With Ratn�aval�ıpa~njik�a of Kum�aracandra, ed. by S. Rinpocheand V. Dwivedi, Rare Buddhist Text Series (9), CIHTS, Sarnath, 1992.

N�arop�a, Sekodde�sat.�ık�a of Nad. ap�ada (N�arop�a), The Sanskrit Text edited for the firsttime with an introduction in Englishby M. Carelli, Gaekwad’s Oriental Series(90), Baroda 1941. See also Gnoli-Orofino 1994.

Pun.d.ar�ıka, Vimalaprabh�at.�ık�a of Kalkin �Sr�ıpun. d. ar�ıka on �Sr�ılaghuk�alacakratantrar�aja by�Sr�ıma~nju�sr�ıya�sas, vol. I, Critically Edited & Annotated with Notes by J. Upadhyaya,Bibliotheca Indo-Tibetica Series (11), CIHTS, Sarnath 1986; vols. II–III, CriticallyEdited & Annotated with Notes by V.V. Dwivedi and S.S. Bahulkar, Rare BuddhistText Series (12–13), CIHTS, Sarnath 1994. See also Newman 1987.

Ratn�akara�s�anti, Mukt�aval�ı, NAK, MS 4–19, NGMPP, Mf. A 994/6.Ravi�sr�ıj~n�ana, �Aryama~nju�sr�ın�amasam. g�ıti with Amr. takan. ik�a-t. ippan. �ı by Bhiks.u

Ravi�sr�ıj~n�ana and Amr. takan. ikoddyota-nibandha of Vibh�uticandra, ed. by B. Lal,Bibliotheca Indo-Tibetica (30), CIHTS, Sarnath 1994.

Ravi�sr�ıj~n�ana,Gun. abharan. �ı, Royal Asiatic Society, London, Hodgson Sanskrit Col-lection, MS 68.

S�adhuputra�Sr�ıdhar�ananda,Sekodde�sat. ippan. �ı, “La Sekodde�sat.ippan.�ı di S�adhuputra�Sr�ıdhar�ananda. Il testo sanscrito”, ed. by R. Gnoli,Rivista degli Studi Orientali(70) 115–46.

Sarvadurgatipari�sodhanatantra, Sanskrit and Tibetan Texts with Introduction, EnglishTranslation and Notes by T. Skorupski, Delhi 1983.

Sekodde�sa, A Critical Edition of the Tibetan Translation, by G. Orofino. With anAppendix by R. Gnoli, “On the Sanskrit Text”, Serie Orientale Roma (72), IsMEO,Roma 1994.

Sekodde�sapa~njik�a, The Results of a joint study on the Buddhist Tantric Texts, TaishoUniversity, Annual of the Institute for Comprehensive Studies of Buddhism, 16(1994) 289–354.

Vajragarbha,S. at.s�ahasrik�a (Hevajratantrapin. d. �arthat.�ık�a), NAK, MS 3-693, NGMPP,Mf. A 1267/6; Kaiser Library, MS 128, NGMPP, Mf. C 14/6.

Vajrap�an. i, Laghutantrat.�ık�a, NAK, MS 3-715, NGMPP, Mf. A 47/20.Yogin�ısam. c�aratantra, NAK, MS 4-20, NGMPP, Mf. 48/5.Yogin�ısam. c�aratantrat.�ık�a, NAK, MS 3-683, NGMPP, Mf. A 1279/2.

STUDIES

Bhattacharya, K. (1973)L’ �Atman-Brahman dans le bouddhisme ancien, Publicationsde l’�Ecole Franc¸aise d’Extreme-Orient (90), Paris.

Dawa-Samdup, K. (19872) �Sr�ı-Cakra�sam. vara-Tantra. A Buddhist Tantra, with aPreface by Dr. Lokesh Chandra, Aditya Prakashan, New Delhi [Calcutta 19191].

Dhargyey, G.L.N. (1985),A Commentary on the K�alacakratantra, translated by G.J.Kelsang, Dharamsala: Library of Tibetan Works & Archives, New Delhi.

Edgerton, F.E. (19702) Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit Grammar and Dictionary, 2 vols.,Motilal Banarsidass, Delhi [New Haven, 19531].

Farrow, G.W. and Menon, I. (1992)The Concealed Essence of the Hevajra Tantra.With the Commentary Yogaratnam�al�a. Edited and Translated into English, MotilalBanarsidass, Delhi.

George, Ch. S. (1974)The Can. d. amah�aros.an. a Tantra, Chapters I–VIII. A CriticalEdition and English Translation, American Oriental Series (56), American OrientalSociety, New Haven (Conn.).

indi9910.tex; 23/03/1999; 15:58; v.6; p.20


Gnoli, R. (1997) La realizzazione della conoscenza del Supremo immoto(Param�aks.araj~n�anasiddhi), Supplemento N�1 alla Rivista degli Studi Orientali(70), Roma.

Gnoli, R. and Orofino, G. (1994)N�arop�a, Iniziazione (K�alacakra),a cura di, Adelphi,Biblioteca Orientale (1), Milano.

Guenther, H.V. (1956) “The Concept of Mind in Buddhist Tantrism”,Oriental Studies,Hong Kong (3) 261–77.

Gyatso, T. and Hopkins, J. (1985)The Kalachakra Tantra. Rite of Initiation for theStage of Generation, Wisdom Publications, London.

Newman, J.R. (1987)The outer Wheel of Time: Vajray�ana Buddhist Cosmology inthe K�alacakra tantra, Ann Arbor, University Microfilms International (Universityof Wisconsin, Madison, Ph. D. Thesis).

Orofino, G. (1996) “On theS. ad. a _ngayogaand the Realisation of the Ultimate Gnosisin the K�alacakratantra",East and West(46) 127–143.

Pensa, C. (1969) “Interdipendenza di purificazione, conoscenza e potere nello yogain rapporto alla continuit�a della tradizione indiana”,Annali dell’Istituto Orientaledi Napoli, Nuova Serie(19) 1–43.

Snellgrove, D.L. (1959)The Hevajra Tantra, A Critical Study. Part I, Introductionand Translation, Part II, Sanskrit and Tibetan Texts, London Oriental Series (6),London.

Snellgrove, D.L. (1987)Indo-Tibetan Buddhism. Indian Buddhists & their TibetanSuccessors, 2 vols., Shambhala, Boston.

Tsuda, S. (1974)The Sam. varodaya-Tantra, Selected Chapters, The Hokuseido Press,Tokyo.

Tucci, G. (19693) Teoria e pratica del man. d. ala, Ubaldini, Roma [Milano 19491,London 19612].

Woodward, F.L. (1930)The Book of the Kindred Sayings (sam. yutta-nik�aya) or groupedsuttas, Pali Text Society, Translation Series (16), part V, London.

RomeItaly

indi9910.tex; 23/03/1999; 15:58; v.6; p.21

Documents

Purification in Indian Buddhism