The essentially pure nature of mind is obscured and afflicted by various psychological defilements, which destroy the mind’s peace and composure and lead to unwholesome deeds of body, speech, and mind, acting as causes for continued existence in saṃsāra. Included among them are the primary afflictions of desire (rāga), anger (dveṣa), and ignorance (avidyā). It is said that there are eighty-four thousand of these negative mental qualities, for which the eighty-four thousand categories of the Buddha’s teachings serve as the antidote.
Kleśa is also commonly translated as “negative emotions,” “disturbing emotions,” and so on. The Pāli kilesa, Middle Indic kileśa, and Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit kleśa all primarily mean “stain” or “defilement.” The translation “affliction” is a secondary development that derives from the more general (non-Buddhist) classical understanding of √kliś (“to harm,“ “to afflict”). Both meanings are noted by Buddhist commentators.
Lit. “Not Disturbed” or “Immovable One.” The buddha in the eastern realm of Abhirati. A well-known buddha in Mahāyāna, regarded in the higher tantras as the head of one of the five buddha families, the vajra family in the east.
The buddha of the western buddhafield of Sukhāvatī, where fortunate beings are reborn to make further progress toward spiritual maturity. Amitābha made his great vows to create such a realm when he was a bodhisattva called Dharmākara. In the Pure Land Buddhist tradition, popular in East Asia, aspiring to be reborn in his buddha realm is the main emphasis; in other Mahāyāna traditions, too, it is a widespread practice. For a detailed description of the realm, see The Display of the Pure Land of Sukhāvatī, Toh 115. In some tantras that make reference to the five families he is the tathāgata associated with the lotus family.
Amitābha, “Infinite Light,” is also known in many Indian Buddhist works as Amitāyus, “Infinite Life.” In both East Asian and Tibetan Buddhist traditions he is often conflated with another buddha named “Infinite Life,” Aparimitāyus, or “Infinite Life and Wisdom,”Aparimitāyurjñāna, the shorter version of whose name has also been back-translated from Tibetan into Sanskrit as Amitāyus but who presides over a realm in the zenith. For details on the relation between these buddhas and their names, see The Aparimitāyurjñāna Sūtra (1) Toh 674, i.9.
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”).
Also rendered in this sūtra as “wheel.”
A state of involuntary existence conditioned by afflicted mental states and the imprint of past actions, characterized by suffering in a cycle of life, death, and rebirth. On its reversal, the contrasting state of nirvāṇa is attained, free from suffering and the processes of rebirth.
A class of powerful nonhuman female beings who play a variety of roles in Indic literature in general and Buddhist literature specifically. Essentially synonymous with yoginīs, ḍākinīs are liminal and often dangerous beings who can be propitiated to acquire both mundane and transcendent spiritual accomplishments. In the higher Buddhist tantras, ḍākinīs are often considered embodiments of awakening and feature prominently in tantric maṇḍalas.
Māra, literally “death” or “maker of death,” is the name of the deva who tried to prevent the Buddha from achieving awakening, the name given to the class of beings he leads, and also an impersonal term for the destructive forces that keep beings imprisoned in saṃsāra:
(1) As a deva, Māra is said to be the principal deity in the Heaven of Making Use of Others’ Emanations (paranirmitavaśavartin), the highest paradise in the desire realm. He famously attempted to prevent the Buddha’s awakening under the Bodhi tree—see The Play in Full (Toh 95), 21.1—and later sought many times to thwart the Buddha’s activity. In the sūtras, he often also creates obstacles to the progress of śrāvakas and bodhisattvas. (2) The devas ruled over by Māra are collectively called mārakāyika or mārakāyikadevatā, the “deities of Māra’s family or class.” In general, these māras too do not wish any being to escape from saṃsāra, but can also change their ways and even end up developing faith in the Buddha, as exemplified by Sārthavāha; see The Play in Full (Toh 95), 21.14 and 21.43. (3) The term māra can also be understood as personifying four defects that prevent awakening, called (i) the divine māra (devaputramāra), which is the distraction of pleasures; (ii) the māra of Death (mṛtyumāra), which is having one’s life interrupted; (iii) the māra of the aggregates (skandhamāra), which is identifying with the five aggregates; and (iv) the māra of the afflictions (kleśamāra), which is being under the sway of the negative emotions of desire, hatred, and ignorance.
Also rendered in this sūtra as “maṇḍala.”
Drokmi Śākya Yeshé, the great eleventh century translator from Lhatsé in Western Tsang.
A state of deep concentration in which the mind is absorbed in its object to such a degree that conceptual thought is suspended. It is sometimes interpreted as settling (āhita) the mind in equanimity (sama).
The Sanskrit term śrāvaka, and the Tibetan nyan thos, both derived from the verb “to hear,” are usually defined as “those who hear the teaching from the Buddha and make it heard to others.” Primarily this refers to those disciples of the Buddha who aspire to attain the state of an arhat seeking their own liberation and nirvāṇa. They are the practitioners of the first turning of the wheel of the Dharma on the four noble truths, who realize the suffering inherent in saṃsāra and focus on understanding that there is no independent self. By conquering afflicted mental states (kleśa), they liberate themselves, attaining first the stage of stream enterers at the path of seeing, followed by the stage of once-returners who will be reborn only one more time, and then the stage of non-returners who will no longer be reborn into the desire realm. The final goal is to become an arhat. These four stages are also known as the “four results of spiritual practice.”
A formula of words or syllables that are recited aloud or mentally in order to bring about a magical or soteriological effect or result. The term has been interpretively etymologized to mean “that which protects (trā) the mind (man)”.
D: Degé Kangyur, facsimile edition of the 1733 redaction of si tu chos kyi ’byung gnas, Delhi, 1978. Numbers from Tōhoku (Toh.) catalogue (Tokyo, 1934).
K: Peking Kangyur, original wood-block print prepared in 1684/1692 under the Kangxi emperor. Rare text collection at Harvard-Yenching Library.
dpal gsang ba thams cad gcod pa’i rgyud kyi rgyal po (Śrīguhyasarvacchindatantrarāja) (C). Choné Kangyur, vol. 4 (rgyud ’bum, nga), folios 4b.5–13b.3.
dpal gsang ba thams cad gcod pa’i rgyud kyi rgyal po (Śrīguhyasarvacchindatantrarāja) (D). Toh 384, Degé Kangyur, vol. 79 (rgyud ’bum, ga), folios 187a.2–195b.7.
dpal gsang ba thams cad gcod pa’i rgyud kyi rgyal po (Śrīguhyasarvacchindatantrarāja) (K). PTT. 29, Peking Kangxi Kangyur, vol. 4 (rgyud ’bum, nga), folios 4a.8–13a.3.
dpal gsang ba thams cad gcod pa’i rgyud kyi rgyal po (Śrīguhyasarvacchindatantrarāja) (S). Stok Palace (stog pho brang bris ma) Kangyur, vol. 93 (rgyud ’bum, kha), folios 450a.4–461a.4.
dpal gsang ba thams cad gcod pa’i rgyud kyi rgyal po (Śrīguhyasarvacchindatantrarāja) (U). Urga Kangyur, vol. 80 (rgyud ’bum, ga), folios 187a.2–195b.7.
dpal gsang ba thams cad gcod pa’i rgyud kyi rgyal po (Śrīguhyasarvacchindatantrarāja) (J and Y). 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. 79, pp. 538–60.
Butön (bu ston rin chen grub). chos ’byung [“History of the Dharma”] bde bar gshegs pa’i bstan pa’i gsal byed chos kyi ’byung gnas gsung rab rin po che’i mdzod. In gsung ’bum / rin chen grub, vol. 24 (ya), pp. 619–1042. Lhasa: zhol par khang, 2000. (BDRC W1934)
Gö Lotsāwa Zhönupal (’gos lo tsā ba gzhon nu dpal). deb ther sngon po. New Delhi: International Academy of Indian Culture, 1974. Translated by George Roerich, with help from Gendun Chöphel, as The Blue Annals. Calcutta: Royal Asiatic Society of Bengal, 1949. Reprinted Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Publishers, 1988.
Longchenpa (klong chen rab ’byams pa dri med ’od zer). dpal gsang ba de kho na nyid nges ’grel phyogs bcu mun gsel. In rnying ma bka’ ma rgyas pa, vol 26. Kalimpong: Dupjung Lama, 1982–87.
Dalton, Jacob. “A Crisis of Doxography: How Tibetans Organized Tantra during the 8th-12th Centuries.” In Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies 28.1 (2005): 115–81.
Davidson, Ronald (2005). Tibetan Renaissance: Tantric Buddhism in the Rebirth of Tibetan Culture. New York: Columbia University Press.
Davidson, Ronald (2002). Indian Esoteric Buddhism: A Social History of the Tantric Movement. New York: Columbia University Press.
Davidson, Ronald (2000). “Gsar ma Apocrypha: The Creation of Orthodoxy, Gray Texts, and the New Revelation.” In The Many Canons of Tibetan Buddhism, edited by Helmut Eimer and David Germano, 202–24. Leiden: Brill.
Gibson, Todd. “Inner Asian Contributions to the Vajrayāna.” Indo-Iranian Journal 40 (1997): 37–57.
Gray, David. The Cakrasamvara Tantra: A Study and Annotated Translation. New York: American Institute of Buddhist Studies at Columbia University in New York, 2007.
Harrison, Paul, and Helmut Eimer. “Kanjur and Tanjur Sigla: A Proposal for Standardisation.” Transmission of the Tibetan Canon, edited by Helmut Eimer, xi–xiv. Vienna: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1997.
Isaacsson, Harunaga. “Tantric Buddhism in India (from c. A.D. 800 to c. A.D. 1200).” In Buddhismus in Geschichte und Gegenwart. Band II. Hamburg, 23–49. Internal publication of Hamburg University, 1998.
Sanderson, Alexis (2001). “History through Textual Criticism in the study of Śaivism, the Pañcarātra and the Buddhist Yoginītantras.” In Les Sources et le temps. Sources and Time: A Colloquium, Pondicherry, 11-13 January 1997, edited by François Grimal, 1-47. Publications du département d’Indologie 91. Pondicherry: Institut Français de Pondichéry, École Française d’Extrême-Orient.
Sanderson, Alexis (1995a). “Vajrayāna: Origin and Function.” In Buddhism into the Year 2000. International Conference Proceedings. Bangkok and Los Angeles: Dhammakāya Foundation, 1995a.
Sanderson, Alexis (1995b). “Pious Plagiarism: Evidence of the Dependence of the Buddhist Yoginītantras on Śaiva Scriptural Sources.” Unpublished lecture given in Leiden, April 11, 1995.
Snellgrove, David (1988). “Categories of Buddhist Tantras.” In Orientalia Iosephi Tucci Memoriae Dicata. Edited by R. Gnoli and L. Lanciotti, 1353–84. Serie Orientale Roma 56.3. Rome : Istituto Italiano per il Medio ed Estremo Orient.
Snellgrove, David (1987). Indo-Tibetan Buddhism. London: Serindia Publications, 1987.
Snellgrove, David (1959). Hevajra Tantra. London: Oxford University Press, 1959.