༄༅། །་་ང་པ།

The Rice Seedling

Śālistamba
 འཕགས་པ་་་ང་པ་ས་་བ་ག་པ་ན་ ་མ།
’phags pa sA lu’i ljang pa zhes bya ba theg pa chen po’i mdo

The Noble Mahāyāna Sūtra “The Rice Seedling”

Āryaśālistambanāmamahāyānasūtra

· Toh 210 ·
Degé Kangyur, vol. 62 (mdo sde, tsha), folios 116.a–123.b

ᴛʀᴀɴsʟᴀᴛᴇᴅ ɪɴᴛᴏ ᴛɪʙᴇᴛᴀɴ ʙʏ

· Yeshé Dé [?] ·
 Translated by the Dharmasāgara Translation Group
under the patronage and supervision of 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha

First published 2018

Current version v 1.18.15 (2024)

Generated by 84000 Reading Room v2.26.1

84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha is a global non-profit initiative to translate all the
Buddha’s words into modern languages, and to make them available to everyone.

This work is provided under the protection of a Creative Commons CC BY-NC-ND (Attribution - Non-
commercial - No-derivatives) 3.0 copyright. It may be copied or printed for fair use, but only with full
attribution, and not for commercial advantage or personal compensation. For full details, see the Creative
Commons license.
This print version was generated at 8.52pm on Thursday, 28th November 2024 from the online
version of the text available on that date. If some time has elapsed since then, this version may
have been superseded, as most of 84000’s published translations undergo significant updates
from time to time. For the latest online version, with bilingual display, interactive glossary
entries and notes, and a variety of further download options, please see
https://84000.co/translation/toh210.
co. TABLE OF CONTENTS
ti. Title
im. Imprint
co. Contents
s. Summary
ac. Acknowledgements
i. Introduction
tr. The Translation
1. The Rice Seedling
n. Notes
b. Bibliography
· Tibetan Sources
· Sanskrit and Western Sources
g. Glossary
s. SUMMARY
s.1 In this sūtra, at the request of venerable Śāriputra, the bodhisattva
mahāsattva Maitreya elucidates a very brief teaching on dependent arising
that the Buddha had given earlier that day while gazing at a rice seedling.
The text discusses outer and inner causation and its conditions, describes in
detail the twelvefold cycle by which inner dependent arising gives rise to
successive lives, and explains how understanding the very nature of that
process can lead to freedom from it.
ac. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
ac.1 This text was translated from the Tibetan, with comparison to Sanskrit
editions, introduced, and edited by the Dharmasāgara Translation Group:
Raktrul Ngawang Kunga Rinpoche, Rebecca Hufen, Jason Sanche, Arne
Schelling and Sonam Spitz.
The translation was completed under the patronage and supervision of
84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha.
i. INTRODUCTION
i.1 The Rice Seedling (Śālistamba1) is one of the most important sūtras on the topic
of dependent arising. In this sūtra Śāriputra approaches Maitreya and
requests him to explain the meaning of the following statement of the
Buddha, which he had made earlier that same day while gazing at a rice
seedling: “Whoever sees dependent arising sees the Dharma. Whoever sees
the Dharma sees the Buddha.” What follows is an explanation of dependent
arising through the twelve links, the eightfold path of the noble ones, and
their relation to outer and inner causes and conditions. Crucially, it is by
understanding the very nature of dependent arising that one can be free
from it and attain enlightenment.
i.2 We are not aware of any extant complete Sanskrit text of The Rice Seedling.
However, it is quoted extensively in surviving Sanskrit treatises like
Yaśomitra’s Abhidharmakośavyākhyā, Candrakīrti’s Prasannapadā,
Prajñākaramati’s Bodhicaryāvatārapañjikā, Śāntideva’s Śikṣasamuccaya, and also
a critical non-Buddhist treatise, the Bhāmatī by Vācaspatimiśra. Mainly based
on these, several Sanskrit reconstructions have been carried out which are
claimed to include about ninety percent of The Rice Seedling. The first
reconstructed edition was prepared by Louis de La Vallée Poussin (1913).
Without having access to this, N. Ayaswami Sastri (1950) produced another
reconstruction. Another one was produced by V.V. Gokhale (1961). Finally, a
thorough comparative study and new reconstructed edition was carried out
by N. Ross Reat (1993), taking into account Sanskrit, Tibetan, Pāli, and
Chinese sources; Reat also provides a complete English translation. This
work also illustrates the many parallel and similar passages in Pāli suttas.
i.3 There are three Indian commentaries on The Rice Seedling which have been
preserved in Tibetan and Mongolian translations, namely the
Śālistamba[ka]ṭīkā by Kamalaśīla, as well as the Śālistamba[ka]mahāyanasūtraṭīkā
and Śālistambakakārikā, both attributed to Nāgarjuna. These works have been
thoroughly studied and translated by Jeffrey D. Schoening (1995). He also
 gives a chronological account of both partial and complete Western
language translations of The Rice Seedling, the first being a translation from
the Chinese into Italian in 1908; and he mentions a Japanese translation from
the Chinese of Taishō 709.
i.4 Most of the information given in this introduction can be found in more
detail in the sources mentioned above, especially Reat and Schoening. Being
of such significance, The Rice Seedling has also been discussed in the context
of multiple other studies, the details of which would go beyond the scope of
this brief introduction.
i.5 There are four Chinese translations (Taishō 709–712), the first and earliest
having been carried out during the Eastern Jin Dynasty (317–420 ᴄᴇ). A very
similar sūtra (Taishō 708) had already been translated by Chih-ch’ien in the
Wu Dynasty (222–280 ᴄᴇ). As Martin (2014, p. 283) has noted, the Testament of
Wa / Ba (dba’ / sba bzhed) mentions that a Chinese version was translated into
Tibetan before the completion of the first monastery of Tibet, Samye, toward
the end of the eighth century. The Tibetan translation is also mentioned in
the Denkarma (ldan dkar ma) catalogue compiled by Kawa Paltseg et al.,
probably in the year 812. The colophons in two of the oldest surviving
Tibetan manuscripts identified so far (the Dunhuang manuscripts PT 551 and
PT 552), credit Yeshé Dé, a famous Tibetan translator of the eighth to ninth
centuries, as the translator. This information is absent in the later editions.
i.6 There are considerable differences and variant readings across the many
versions, editions, and translations of this sūtra that are not recorded in
detail here. Variant readings as well as references to the commentaries are
only given for passages that were crucial for essential decisions made with
regard to the translation. Thus this translation does not aim to improve on
the studies mentioned above. Readers who are interested in academic and
philological research on the available textual sources may refer to them.
What is intended here is a translation that is mainly based on the Tibetan
version in the Degé Kangyur collection and the Pedurma (dpe bsdur ma)
comparative edition of the Kangyur, with reference to available Sanskrit
materials, particularly Reat’s edition.
The Noble Mahāyāna Sūtra
The Rice Seedling
1. The Translation
[F.116.a]

1.1 Homage to all buddhas and bodhisattvas!

1.2 Thus did I hear at one time. The Bhagavān was residing on Vulture Peak
mountain in Rājagṛha with a large saṅgha of 1,250 bhikṣus and with a great
many bodhisattva mahāsattvas. At that time, venerable Śāriputra went to the
place frequented by the bodhisattva mahāsattva Maitreya and, after they had
exchanged courtesies upon meeting each other, they both sat down on a flat
rock.
1.3 Venerable Śāriputra then said to the bodhisattva mahāsattva Maitreya,
“Maitreya, here today, the Bhagavān, gazing at a rice seedling, spoke this
aphorism2 to the bhikṣus: ‘Bhikṣus, whoever sees dependent arising sees the
Dharma.3 Whoever sees the Dharma sees the Buddha.’ Having said this, the
Bhagavān fell silent. Maitreya, what is the meaning of this aphorism spoken
by the Sugata?4 What is dependent arising? What is the Dharma? What is the
Buddha? How does one see the Dharma by seeing dependent arising? How
does one see the Buddha by seeing the Dharma?”
1.4 The bodhisattva mahāsattva Maitreya then replied to the venerable
Śāradvatīputra,5 “Venerable Śāriputra, you want to know what dependent
arising is in the statement made by the Bhagavān, the Lord of Dharma, the
Omniscient One: ‘Bhikṣus, whoever sees dependent arising sees the
Dharma. Whoever sees the Dharma sees the Buddha’? Well, the phrase
dependent arising means that something arises because something else
already exists; something is born because something else was already born.6
That is to say, ignorance causes formations. Formations [F.116.b] cause
consciousness. Consciousness causes name and form. Name and form cause
the six sense sources. The six sense sources cause contact. Contact causes
sensation. Sensation causes craving. Craving causes appropriation.
 Appropriation causes becoming. Becoming causes birth. And birth causes
aging and death, sorrow, lamentation, suffering, despair, and anxiety. Thus
does this entire great heap of suffering arise.
1.5 “When ignorance ceases, formations cease. When formations cease,
consciousness ceases. When consciousness ceases, name and form cease.
When name and form cease, the six sense sources cease. When the six sense
sources cease, contact ceases. When contact ceases, sensation ceases. When
sensation ceases, craving ceases. When craving ceases, appropriation ceases.
When appropriation ceases, becoming ceases. When becoming ceases, birth
ceases. And when birth ceases, aging and death, sorrow, lamentation,
suffering, despair, and anxiety cease. Thus does this entire great heap of
suffering cease. This is what the Bhagavān has called dependent arising.
1.6 “What is the Dharma? The Dharma is the eightfold path of the noble ones:
right view, right intention, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right
effort, right mindfulness, and right concentration. This eightfold path of the
noble ones, combined with the attainment of its results and nirvāṇa, is what
the Bhagavān has called the Dharma.
1.7 “Who is the Bhagavān Buddha? A buddha, so-called because of
comprehending all dharmas,7 is endowed with the wisdom eye of the noble
ones and the body [F.117.a] of Dharma,8 and thus perceives the dharmas 9 of
those still in training and those beyond training.
1.8 “How does one see dependent arising? On this point the Bhagavān said,
‘One who sees dependent arising as constant,10 without life force, devoid of
life force, true, unmistaken, unborn, not arisen, uncreated, uncompounded,
unobstructed, imperceptible, tranquil,11 fearless, incontrovertible,
12
inexhaustible, and by nature never stilled, and who likewise sees the
Dharma to also be constant, without life force, devoid of life force, true,
unmistaken, unborn, not arisen, uncreated, uncompounded, unobstructed,
imperceptible, tranquil, fearless, incontrovertible, inexhaustible, and never
stilled, clearly understands the Dharma of the nobles ones, and by thus
acquiring such right knowledge, sees the Buddha, the body of the
unsurpassable Dharma.’13
1.9 “Why is it called dependent arising? It is called dependent arising because it
is causal and conditional, not non-causal and non-conditional. In this
connection, the Bhagavān concisely taught the characteristics of dependent
arising as follows: ‘Results come from their own specific conditions. Whether
tathāgatas appear or not, this true nature of things 14 will remain. It is the true
nature; the constancy of Dharma;15 the immutability of Dharma,16 consistent
with dependent arising, suchness, unmistaken suchness, unchanging
suchness, actuality, and truth; unmistaken; and unerring.’
1.10 “Moreover, dependent arising emerges from two principles. [F.117.b] From
what two principles? From a causal relation and a conditional relation.
Furthermore, it should be understood as twofold: outer and inner.

1.11 “What is the causal relation in outer dependent arising? It is as follows. From
a seed comes a sprout, from a sprout a leaf, from a leaf a stem, from a stem a
pedicel, from a pedicel a pistil, from a pistil a flower, and from a flower comes
a fruit. If there is no seed, the sprout cannot arise and so on, until finally,
without the flower, the fruit cannot arise. If there is a seed, the sprout will
form and so on, until finally, if there is a flower, then the fruit will form.
1.12 “In that process, the seed does not think, ‘I form the sprout.’ Nor does the
sprout think, ‘I am formed by the seed.’ Likewise, the flower does not think,
‘I form the fruit.’ Nor does the fruit think, ‘I am formed by the flower.’ Yet, if
there is a seed, the sprout will take form and arise, and so on, until finally,
likewise, if there is a flower, the fruit will take form and arise. Thus is the
causal relation in outer dependent arising to be seen.

1.13 “So how is the conditional relation in outer dependent arising to be seen? As
due to the coming together of six elements. As due to the coming together of
what six elements? Namely, conditional dependent arising is to be seen as
due to the coming together of the elements of earth, water, fire, wind, space,
and season.17 The earth element functions as the support for the seed. The
water element moistens the seed. The fire element ripens the seed. The wind
element opens the seed. The space element performs the function of not
obstructing the seed. And season transforms the seed. Without these
conditions a sprout cannot form from a seed. [F.118.a] But when the outer
element of earth is not deficient, and likewise water, fire, wind, space, and
season are not deficient, then from the coming together of all these factors, a
sprout forms as the seed is ceasing.
1.14 “The earth element does not think, ‘I support the seed.’ Nor does the
water element think, ‘I moisten the seed.’ Nor does the fire element think, ‘I
ripen the seed.’ Nor does the wind element think, ‘I open the seed.’ Nor does
the space element think, ‘I make sure the seed is not obstructed.’ Nor does
the season think, ‘I transform the seed.’ Nor does the seed think, ‘I form the
sprout.’ Nor does the sprout think, ‘I am formed by these conditions.’ Yet
when these conditions are present and the seed is ceasing, the sprout forms.
Likewise, when finally there is a flower, the fruit forms.
1.15 “The sprout is not created by itself, not created by another, not created by
both, not created by Īśvara, not transformed by time,18 not derived from
prakṛti, and not born without any cause. Nevertheless, through the coming
together of the elements of earth, water, fire, wind, space, and season, the
sprout forms as the seed is ceasing.
 “Thus is the conditional relation in outer dependent arising to be seen.

1.16 “Here, outer dependent arising is to be seen in terms of five aspects. What
five aspects? As not permanent, as not discontinuous, as not involving
transmigration, as the production of a large result from a small cause, and as
a continuity of similar type.
1.17 “How is it not permanent? It is not permanent because the sprout and the
seed are different. The sprout is not the seed. [F.118.b] The sprout does not
come from the seed after it has ceased, nor does it come from the seed while
it has not yet ceased.19 Rather, the sprout is born precisely as the seed
ceases.
1.18 “How is it not discontinuous? It is not discontinuous because a sprout is
not born from a seed that has already ceased, nor from a seed that has not
yet ceased. Rather, like the beam of a scale tilting from up to down, a sprout
is born precisely when the seed has ceased.
1.19 “How does it not involve transmigration? It does not involve
transmigration because the sprout and the seed are different; that which is
the sprout is not the seed.
1.20 “How does it entail the producing of a large result from a small cause? A
large fruit is produced from the planting of a small seed. Therefore, it entails
the producing of a large result from a small cause.
1.21 “Lastly, fruit is produced precisely according to the type of seed planted.
Therefore, it involves a continuity of similar type.
“Thus is outer dependent arising to be seen in terms of five aspects.

1.22 “Similarly, inner dependent arising also arises from two principles. From
what two principles? From a causal relation and a conditional relation.
1.23 “What, then, is the causal relation in inner dependent arising? It starts
with ignorance causing formations and so on, until finally, birth causes
aging and death. If ignorance does not arise, then formations do not
manifest and so on, until finally, if birth does not arise, then aging and death
do not manifest. Likewise, from the existence of ignorance, formations occur
and so on, until finally, from the existence of birth, comes aging and death.
1.24 “Ignorance does not think, ‘I produce formations.’ Nor do formations
think, ‘We are produced by ignorance,’ and so on. Finally, birth does not
think, ‘I produce aging and death.’ Nor do aging and death think, ‘I am
produced by birth.’ Nevertheless, [F.119.a] formations take form and arise
through the existence of ignorance and so on, until finally aging and death
take form and arise through the existence of birth.
“Thus is the causal relation in inner dependent arising to be seen.
1.25 “How is the conditional relation in inner dependent arising to be seen? As
due to the coming together of six elements. As due to the coming together of
what six elements? Namely, the conditional relation in inner dependent
arising is to be seen as due to the coming together of the elements of earth,
water, fire, wind, space, and consciousness.
1.26 “Here, what is the earth element in inner dependent arising? That which
assembles to form the solidity of the body is called the earth element. That
which provides cohesion in the body is called the water element. That which
digests whatever the body eats, drinks, chews, and tastes is called the fire
element. That which performs the function of the body’s inhalation and
exhalation is called the wind element. That which allows the body to have
hollow spaces inside is called the space element. That which produces the
sprouts 20 of name and form like reeds in a sheaf—the combination of the five
collections of consciousness, together with the defiled mental
consciousness —is called the consciousness element. Without these
conditions the body cannot be born. But when the inner earth element is not
deficient, and likewise the elements of water, fire, wind, space, and
consciousness are not deficient, then from the coming together of all these
factors, the body forms.
1.27 “In this process, the earth element does not think, ‘I provide the solidity of
the body by assembling.’ Nor does the water element think, ‘I provide
cohesion for the body.’ Nor does the fire element think, ‘I digest whatever
the body eats, drinks, chews, or tastes.’ [F.119.b] Nor does the wind element
think, ‘I perform the function of the body’s inhalation and exhalation.’ Nor
does the space element think, ‘I create hollow spaces inside the body.’ Nor
does the element of consciousness think, ‘I produce the name and form of
the body.’ Nor does the body think, ‘I am produced by these conditions.’ Yet,
when these conditions are present, the body is born.
1.28 “The earth element is not a self, not a being, not a life force, not a creature,
not a human, not a person, not female, not male, not neuter, not me, not
mine, and not anybody else’s.
“Similarly, the water element, the fire element, the wind element, the space
element, and the consciousness element are also not a self, not a being, not a
life force, not a creature, not a human, not a person, not female, not male, not
neuter, not me, not mine, and not anybody else’s.

1.29 “Here, what is ignorance? That which perceives these same six elements to be
unitary, whole, permanent, constant, eternal, pleasurable, a self, a being, a
life force, a creature, a soul,21 a man, an individual, a human, a person, me,
and mine, along with the many other such variations of misapprehension, is
called ignorance. The presence of such ignorance brings desire, aversion, and
delusion toward objects. Such desire, aversion, and delusion toward objects
 are the formations caused by ignorance. [F.120.a] That which distinguishes
between individual objects is consciousness. The four aggregates for
appropriation that emerge in conjunction with consciousness, [along with
the aggregate of material form], are name and form.22 The faculties based on
name and form are the six sense sources. The conjunction of the three factors 23
is contact. The experience of contact is sensation. Attachment to sensation is
craving. The intensification of craving is appropriation. Action that comes from
appropriation and causes rebirth is becoming. The emergence of the
aggregates from such a cause is birth. The maturation of the aggregates after
birth is aging. The perishing of the decrepit aggregates is death. The inner
torment of the deluded, attached, dying person is sorrow. The utterance that
comes from sorrow is lamentation. The experience of discomfort associated
with the collection of the five consciousnesses is suffering. The mental
suffering accompanied by attention24 is despair. Moreover, any other subtle
defilements of this kind are called anxiety.
1.30 “They are called ignorance in the sense of obscuring, formations in the sense
of forming, consciousness in the sense of knowing, name and form in the sense
of mutual support,25 the six sense sources in the sense of entryways,26 contact
in the sense of contact, sensation in the sense of experience, craving in the
sense of thirst, appropriation in the sense of appropriating, becoming in the
sense of giving birth to repeated becoming, birth in the sense of the
emergence of the aggregates, aging in the sense of the maturation of the
aggregates, death in the sense of perishing, sorrow in the sense of grieving,
lamentation in the sense of wailing, suffering in the sense of bodily torment,
despair in the sense of mental torment, and anxiety in the sense of subtle
defilement.27
“Furthermore, not knowing reality, in the sense of not apprehending it
and misapprehending it, is ignorance.
1.31 “If such an ignorance is present, three types of formations develop: those
that lead to meritorious states, those that lead to unmeritorious states, and
those that lead to immovable states. This is what is meant by ‘ignorance is
the condition for formations.’ [F.120.b]
1.32 “From formations that lead to meritorious states comes consciousness that
leads to meritorious states. From formations that lead to unmeritorious states
comes consciousness that leads to unmeritorious states. And from
formations that lead to immovable states comes consciousness that leads to
immovable states. This is what is meant by ‘formations are the conditions for
consciousness.’
1.33 “The four immaterial aggregates —consciousness and those that arise
together with it—as well as any form, is what is meant by ‘consciousness is
the condition for name and form.’
1.34 “Due to the development of name and form, the performance of actions
through the entryways of the six sense sources occurs. This is what is meant
by ‘name and form are the conditions for the six sense sources.’
1.35 “From the six sense sources arise the six collections of contact. This is
what is meant by ‘the six sense sources are the condition for contact.’
1.36 “Sensations occur precisely according to the type of contact that occurs.
This is what is meant by ‘contact is the condition for sensation.’
1.37 “Relishing those different kinds of sensations, taking delight in them,
clinging to them, and having that clinging remain is what is meant by
‘sensation is the condition for craving.’
1.38 “From relishing, taking delight, clinging, and having that clinging remain
comes an unwillingness to let go, with the repeated wish: ‘May I never part
from these dear and delightful forms!’28 This is what is meant by ‘craving is
the condition for appropriation.’
1.39 “Such wishing gives rise to rebirth-producing actions by means of body,
speech, and mind. This is what is meant by ‘appropriation is the condition
for becoming.’
1.40 “The formation of the five 29 aggregates born from such actions is what is
meant by ‘becoming is the condition for birth.’
1.41 “The maturation of the development of the aggregates formed from birth,
and their disintegration, is what is meant by ‘birth is the condition for aging
and death.’

1.42 “Thus, this twelvefold dependent arising 30—which comes from several
different causes and from several different conditions, is neither permanent
nor impermanent, [F.121.a] is neither compounded nor uncompounded, is
not without any cause or condition, is not an experiencer,31 and is not
something 32 exhaustible, something destructible, or something that ceases —
has proceeded from time immemorial, without interruption, like the flow of a
river.
1.43 “This twelvefold dependent arising —which comes from several different
causes and from several different conditions, is neither permanent nor
impermanent, is neither compounded nor uncompounded, is not without
any cause or condition, is not an experiencer, and is not something 33
exhaustible, something destructible, or something that ceases —has indeed
proceeded from time immemorial, without interruption, like the flow of a
river. Nevertheless, there are four links that serve as the cause for
assembling this twelvefold dependent arising. What four links? Namely,
ignorance, craving, karma, and consciousness.
1.44 “Consciousness functions as a cause by having the nature of a seed.
Karma functions as a cause by having the nature of a field. Ignorance and
craving function as causes by having the nature of afflictions.
1.45 “Karma and afflictions cause the seed of consciousness to grow. Here,
karma functions as the field for the seed of consciousness. Craving moistens
the seed of consciousness. Ignorance sows the seed of consciousness.
Without these conditions, the seed of consciousness does not develop.
1.46 “In this process, karma does not think, ‘I function as the field for the seed
of consciousness.’ Nor does craving think, ‘I moisten the seed of
consciousness.’ Nor does ignorance think, ‘I sow the seed of consciousness.’
Nor does the seed of consciousness think, ‘I am produced by these
conditions.’ Yet when the seed of consciousness grows, planted in the field
of karma, moistened by the water of craving, and strewn with the manure of
ignorance, [F.121.b] the sprout of name and form manifests within whichever
mother’s womb one will take rebirth through.
1.47 “And this sprout of name and form is not created by itself, not created by
another, not created by both, not created by Īśvara, not transformed by time,
not derived from prakṛti, not dependent on a single factor, and not born
without any cause. Nonetheless, from the combination of the union of the
parents, the period of ovulation, and other conditions, the seed of
consciousness, filled with appetite,34 produces the sprout of name and form
within whichever mother’s womb one will take rebirth through. For
although things 35 are devoid of owner, devoid of ownership, ungraspable,
space-like, and their nature is the mark of illusion, there is no deficiency of
requisite causes and conditions.
1.48 “For instance, the eye consciousness arises by way of five principles. What
five principles? Namely, the eye consciousness arises based on the eye on
which it depends, form, light, space, and the appropriate attention. Here, the
eye functions as the basis for the eye consciousness. Form functions as the
object of perception for the eye consciousness. Light functions as visibility.
Space functions by not obstructing. Appropriate attention functions as
mental reflection. Without these conditions, the eye consciousness cannot
arise. But when the inner sense source, the eye, is not deficient, and likewise,
when form, light, space, and appropriate attention are not deficient, then
from the coming together of all these factors, the eye consciousness arises.
1.49 “The eye does not think, ‘I serve as the basis for the eye consciousness.’
Nor does form think, ‘I serve as the object of perception for the eye
consciousness.’ Nor does light think, ‘I function as the visibility for the eye
consciousness.’ Nor does space think, ‘I do not obstruct the eye
consciousness.’ Nor does appropriate attention think, [F.122.a] ‘I provide
mental reflection for the eye consciousness.’ Nor does the eye consciousness
think, ‘I am produced by these conditions.’ Yet, the eye consciousness is
born from the presence of these conditions. Similarly, a corresponding
analysis should be applied to the rest of the faculties.
1.50 “Here, there is nothing 36 whatsoever that transmigrates from this existence
to the next. And yet, because there is no deficiency of requisite causes and
conditions, the result of karma nonetheless manifests. It is like the
appearance of the reflection of a face on the surface of a well-polished mirror.
The face has not shifted onto the surface of the mirror, but because there is
no deficiency of requisite causes and conditions, the face nonetheless
appears there.
1.51 “Similarly, there is nobody at all who transmigrates from here after death
and is born elsewhere. And yet, because there is no deficiency of requisite
causes and conditions, the result of karma nonetheless manifests. It is like
how the orb of the moon travels at a distance of forty-two thousand yojanas
above earth, and yet its reflection nonetheless appears in small vessels filled
with water. It is not that the moon moves from its position and enters the
small vessels filled with water. Yet, because there is no deficiency of
requisite causes and conditions, the orb of the moon nonetheless appears
there.
1.52 “Likewise, that there is nobody at all who transmigrates from here after
death and is born elsewhere, and yet, because there is no deficiency of
requisite causes and conditions, the result of karma nonetheless manifests, is
like how a fire ignites from the assemblage of its requisite causes and
conditions, and not when deficient of its requisite causes and conditions.
1.53 “In the same way, although things 37 are devoid of owner, devoid of
ownership, ungraspable, space-like, and their nature is the mark of illusion,
because there is no deficiency of requisite causes and conditions, the seed of
consciousness born of karma and afflictions will nonetheless produce the
sprout of name and form within whichever mother’s womb one will take
rebirth through.
“Thus is the conditional relation in inner dependent arising to be seen.

1.54 “Here, inner dependent arising is to be seen in terms of five aspects. What
five aspects? [F.122.b] As not permanent, as not discontinuous, as not
involving transmigration, as the production of a large result from a small
cause, and as a continuity of similar type.
1.55 “How is it not permanent? It is not permanent because the final
aggregates at death are one thing and those at birth are another; that is, the
final aggregates at death are not the ones at birth. And yet, only when the
final aggregates at death cease do the aggregates at birth arise.
1.56 “How is it not discontinuous? It is not discontinuous because the
aggregates at birth do not arise from the final aggregates at death either
when they have already ceased, or when they have not yet ceased. Like the
beam of a scale tilting from up to down, the aggregates at birth arise
precisely when the final aggregates at death have ceased.
1.57 “How does it not involve transmigration? It does not involve
transmigration because beings from different classes of existence bring
about their rebirth in a common form of birth.
1.58 “How does it entail the production of a large result from a small cause?
The ripening of a large result is experienced from having performed a minor
action. Thus, it entails the production of a large result from a small cause.
“It involves a continuity of similar type because the ripening of an action
is experienced precisely according to the action performed.

1.59 “Venerable Śāriputra, whoever sees with perfect wisdom this dependent
arising, perfectly taught by the Bhagavān, as it actually is —as always and
forever38 without life force, devoid of life force, true, unmistaken, unborn, not
arisen, uncreated, uncompounded, unobstructed, imperceptible, tranquil,
fearless, incontrovertible, inexhaustible, and by nature never stilled—
whoever fully and truly sees it as unreal, vain, hollow, unsubstantial, as a
sickness, [F.123.a] a boil, a thorn, as miserable, impermanent, painful, empty,
and self-less, such a person does not reflect on the past thinking, ‘Did I exist
in the past, or not? What was I in the past? How was I in the past?’ Nor does
such a person reflect on the future thinking, ‘Will I exist in the future, or not?
What will I be in the future? How will I be in the future?’ Nor does such a
person reflect on the present thinking, ‘What is this? How is this? Being
what, what will we become? Where does this being 39 come from? Where will
it go when transmigrating from here at death?’
1.60 “Whichever dogmas mendicants and brahmins hold throughout the
world, whether they involve belief in a self, belief in a being, belief in a life
force, belief in a person, or belief in ceremonies and festivities,40 such
dogmas, prone to agitation and dullness,41 are all abandoned at that time.
Fully understood as false, these dogmas are severed at the root and wither
like the head of a palm tree,42 never to arise or cease in the future.
1.61 “Venerable Śāriputra, whoever is endowed with such acceptance of the
Dharma and thus perfectly understands dependent arising is prophesied for
unexcelled, perfect, and complete awakening by the Tathāgata, the Arhat,
the perfectly and completely awakened one, the one with perfect knowledge
and conduct, the Sugata, the knower of the world, the incomparable
charioteer of those who need taming, the teacher of gods and humans, the
Bhagavān, the Buddha, in this way: ‘Such a person will become a perfect and
complete buddha!’ ”

1.62 After the bodhisattva mahāsattva Maitreya had thus spoken, venerable
Śāriputra, together with the world of gods, humans, asuras, and gandharvas,
[F.123.b] rejoiced and praised what the bodhisattva mahāsattva Maitreya had
taught.
1.63 This concludes the noble Mahāyāna sūtra, “The Rice Seedling.”
n. NOTES
n.1 Edgerton, Gokale, Reat, and Sastri all record the spelling of stamba (seedling)
in the title śālistamba, rather than the more common stambha. Monier-Williams
lists stamba as “prob. a phonetic variation of stambha.” Among the versions of
the Tibetan translation consulted, all read stambha with the exception of
Peking Yongle and Peking Kangxi, which read stamba. The Tibetan
translations of the three Indian commentaries read stamba.

n.2 The term translated here is sūtra (Tibetan mdo). In Indian literature a sūtra
generally refers to the statement of a short rule or universal truth, e.g. an
axiom, dictum, formula, or thread. A collection of such statements can also be
called a sūtra. While, generally speaking, Buddhist sūtras present a complete
speech of the Buddha including introductory and concluding statements,
here we have a complete teaching of the Buddha in very few words but still
resembling the general usage of the term.

n.3 Owing to the multivalence of the term dharma / chos and the play between
these different senses witnessed in this text, we have chosen to leave it
untranslated as dharma / Dharma in certain passages. Where we do render it
into English, explanatory notes are provided.

n.4 The Sanskrit reads bhagavatā (Reat 1993, p. 27).

n.5 A common name variant of Śāriputra. However, the Sanskrit (Reat, p. 28) and
the Stok Palace version of the Tibetan (F.282b.6) both read Śāriputra.

n.6 This entire sentence is missing from the available Sanskrit materials and the
Chinese translation (Reat, pp. 28–29).

n.7 “All dharmas” here has the sense of “all phenomena.” We leave the term
untranslated here and throughout this passage to help convey the chain of
associations communicated in the Sanskrit and Tibetan source texts through
 these uses of the multivalent term dharma / chos. See the following note, and
note 12 for more on this multivalence.

n.8 “Body of Dharma” here renders chos kyi sku. This section of the sūtra is not
attested in the available Sanskrit material, so the available Sanskrit editions
have actually been reconstructed from the Tibetan translation. Louis de La
Vallée Poussin (1913, p. 72) and Sastri (1950, p. 3) reconstruct chos kyi sku here
with dharmakāya, but we prefer—with Reat (p. 30)—the term dharmaśarīra
because it is attested as a possible underlying Sanskrit term for the Tibetan
chos kyi sku in the next paragraph (cf. Reat, p. 32 n5). Kamalaśīla interprets the
term as the pristine wisdom, or suchness, that serves as a basis for the
dharmas (i.e., awakened qualities) of a buddha. He states: “ ‘body of Dharma’
demonstrates the cause: that which serves as the cause of the dharmas (i.e.,
awakened qualities) of a buddha is pristine wisdom or pristine suchness —
the body which is the body of Dharma” (Schoening, vol. 2, p. 473). Reat (ibid.)
translates this term as “Dharma-body,” whereas Schoening (vol. 1, p. 237)
renders it as “the body consisting of dharma(s).” As indicated by these
different interpretations, the semantic range of the term dharmaśarīra (chos kyi
sku) can include the interlinked notions of the “corpus” of the Buddha’s
“teachings” or “doctrine” (Dharma), the “collection” of undefiled “qualities”
(dharmas) that make a buddha a buddha, the physical body of the Buddha as
an “embodiment” of “ultimate reality” (Dharma) and attendant “awakened
qualities,” and, by extension, as Kamalaśīla’s interpretation suggests, the
ethereal “body” of pristine wisdom that characterizes the Buddha’s
awakening experience. The mutual implications of dharma as “doctrine,”
“qualities,” and “reality” (and “phenomena” in general) is an important
facet of the term’s multivalence in Buddhist literary sources. For more on the
shifting semantic range of the terms dharma, dharmaśarīra, and dharmakāya, see
Paul Harrison (1992). We have partially followed Reat in rendering this term
with the slightly ambiguous “body of Dharma,” with the hope of not overly
constraining the broad semantic range of the term and its possible
commentarial interpretations.

n.9 Dharmas (chos rnams) here seems to have the dual sense of “trainings” on the
path and their associated “attainments” or “qualities” of attainment. Reat (p.
31) interprets dharmas here to mean only “rules, practices,” but this would
not apply to “those beyond training.”

n.10 We opted to interpret this passage according to Kamalaśīla’s commentary:

“It is constant because it has been taught as a dharma that is thus unborn in
all times. This shows that since the three times too are ultimately of one taste,
it is unchanging (Śālistamba[ka]ṭīkā, p. 395: dus thams cad du ’di ltar skye ba med
 pa’i chos gsungs pa dang ldan pas na rtag pa’o/ /’dis ni dus gsum yang don dam par ro
gcig pas ’gyur ba med par bstan to/).” However, the Sanskrit versions also allow
another interpretation by which “permanent / always / constant”
(satatasamitam) qualifies “without life force” (ajīvam / nirjīvam), thus meaning,
“always without life force.” This is also supported by the Śālistambaṭīkā
ascribed to Nāgarjuna (p. 805). Reat (pp. 32–33) translates this passage with
“always and ever devoid of soul,” and he translates from the Chinese
(Taishō 709) with “eternal, continuously arising without soul.” Note also the
very similar passage at 1.59.

n.11 The Sanskrit (Reat, p. 32) has śiva, “glorious,” “auspicious,” “propitious,”
suggesting that the Tibetan zhi ba might have been a transliteration of the
Sanskrit. However, Kamalaśīla (Schoening, vol. 2, pp. 479–480) interprets it to
mean “tranquil,” “peaceful.”

n.12 In Tibetan “by nature” could also refer to all aspects listed above; however,
in Sanskrit, and according to Kamalaśīla (Schoening, vol. 2, pp. 481–482), it
only modifies “never stilled” (avyupaśamasvabhāva).

n.13 The available Sanskrit (Reat, p. 32) for this passage reads: anuttaradharma-
śarīraṃ buddhaṃ paśyati| āryadharmābhisamaye samyag-jñānād upanayenaiva|.
The corresponding section in the Tibetan Degé and other versions recorded
in the Pedurma comparative edition read: ’phags pa’i chos mngon par rtogs te/
yang dag pa’i ye shes dang ldan pas bla na med pa’i chos kyi skur sangs rgyas mthong
ngo gsungs so/. The Stok Palace version of the Tibetan differs from the Degé
and all other versions recorded in the Pedurma comparative edition; it also
more closely reflects the Sanskrit. The Stok Palace (F.284a.4-5) reads: yang dag
pa’i ye shes thob pas/ ’phags pa’i chos mngon par rtogs pas bla na med pa’i chos kyi
skur sangs rgyas mthong ngo gsungs so/ (“By attaining right knowledge and
thereby realizing the Dharma of the noble ones, he sees the Buddha, the
body of the unsurpassable Dharma”). The Tibetan thob pa, “to attain,” is a
conceivable rendering of the Sanskrit upanaya, which Reat renders as
“exertion.” Kamalaśīla (Schoening, vol. 2, pp. 483–484) interprets this phrase
to mean, “Whoever sees dependent arising in this manner sees the Dharma
of accomplishment and the Dharma of fruition, because ultimately
everything is the same taste, and because the Buddha Bhagavān too is the
nature of the body of the ultimate Dharma which was thus taught. Therefore,
it is taught that whoever sees the Dharma thus taught sees the Buddha…
Whoever comprehends dependent arising thus taught realizes the Dharma
of the noble ones; this means ‘comprehending the Dharma of the ultimate
meaning.’ Whoever comprehends the Dharma of the ultimate meaning is
endowed with perfect wisdom. Whoever is endowed with perfect wisdom
 abides in the wisdom of equanimity and thus does not perceive any
difference between dependent arising, the Dharma, and the Buddha.” The
Śālistamba[ka]-ṭīkā attributed to Nāgārjuna (Schoening, vol. 2, p. 393) interprets
the phrase as: “ ‘Unsurpassable’ means that that there is no special dharma
whatsoever that is superior to this, hence it is ‘unsurpassable.’ ‘Body of
Dharma’ means the Dharma-body itself. … ‘Buddha’ is so-called because of
comprehending dharma(s). Thus, one who sees dependent arising sees the
nature of one who awakens to the unexcelled Dharma, beyond further
training.” Akin to the reconstruction presented above in note 7, this phrase
on its own carries the semantic range of the Buddha as an embodiment of the
unsurpassable nature of “reality” (Dharma), the unsurpassable “doctrine”
(Dharma) that teaches it, and the unsurpassable “qualities” of awakening
(dharmas) incumbent upon becoming an awakened one (Buddha). Reat (p.
32) translates the phrase as “he sees the unsurpassable Dharma-body, the
Buddha, by exertion based on right knowledge in clear understanding of the
noble Dharma.” Schoening (vol. 1, p. 241) translates the final section as, “sees
the Buddha, the body consisting of unsurpassable dharma(s).” In
interpreting “unsurpassable” to modify “dharma,” and not the whole phrase
“body of dharma,” we attempt to follow the interpretations of the
commentaries and Schoening. We also leave “dharma” untranslated here in
an attempt to capture something of the multiple entendre of the term. See
Harrison (1992) for observations about possibly earlier, non-metaphysical
senses of dharmakāya and the associated term dharmaśarīra in Mahāyāna
literature.

n.14 “Things” here renders dharma / chos. Note the associations the source text is
making in this and the next passage between dharma / chos as “phenomena,”
“reality,” and “doctrine.”

n.15 The sense of “Dharma” here seems to be both “doctrine” and “reality,” i.e.,
the “doctrine” as “law” (Dharma), which describes the “true nature”
(dharmatā) of “reality” (Dharma). According to Kamalaśīla (Schoening, vol. 2,
p. 487), the phrase functions as a synonym for “true nature” (dharmatā, chos
nyid). We leave it untranslated here so as not to constrain this double
entendre.

n.16 The available Sanskrit (Reat, p. 33) reads niyāmatā. Edgerton describes this
term, as rendered into Tibetan with the phrase chos mi ’gyur ba nyid, as “the
doctrine’s being unchangeably the same.” Kamalaśīla (Schoening, vol. 2, p.
487) has the Tibetan nges par ’gyur ba, and interprets it as, “purely immutable,
meaning, one should know that things are dependent on certain specific
 causes.” Once again, “Dharma” here seems to refer both to the nature of
reality and to the doctrine that describes this reality.

n.17 Although the Tibetan dus is most often rendered with the general term
“time,” the Sanskrit ṛtu suggests a specific time span. Also compare with
Kamalaśīla’s Śālistamba[ka]ṭīkā, (p. 405): “As for ‘season,’ the division by
specific momentary conditions of the earth, etc., is considered a specific
aspect of time (dus kyang sa la sogs pa’i gnas skabs kyi bye brag gis rab tu phye ba
nyid dus kyi bye brag tu dgongs pa’o//).”

n.18 Here, “time” as an agent is rejected, not change in time. (cf. Reat, p. 39 n4).

n.19 The sentence, “The sprout…has not ceased,” is not found in the known
Sanskrit sources. Reat thus assumes it might be displaced from the similar
sentence in the next paragraph (Reat, p. 40 n2).

n.20 myu gu. This term is missing from the available Sanskrit materials (Reat, p. 47
n16).

n.21 The Tibetan gso ba, literally “nourishment,” but here translated as “soul,” is
not found in the Sanskrit sources (Reat, p. 50). Also compare with Schoening
(vol. 1, p. 296 n2). Generally, however, the list of items in the Tibetan
translation featuring gso ba appears in several Sanskrit Buddhist texts. Sastri
(p. 9 n45) refers to such an occurrence in Prajñākaramati’s Bodhicaryāvatāra-
pañjikā (where it is, however, marked as a quote from a Prajnāpāramitā text)
and inserts poṣa based on that. De La Vallée Poussin (p. 79) also inserts poṣa,
but does not reference a source. Edgerton, under his entry for poṣa (which he
defines as, “person, individuality, soul, spirit”), mentions gso ba as a common
Tibetan rendering. He surmises that the Tibetan translation comes from the
notion that the Sanskrit poṣa derives from puṣ, “to thrive, nourish,” when it
more likely derives from puruṣa.

In all the Śālistamba sources that are not from the Kangyur, i.e.
n.22 Śikṣāsamuccaya, Bodhicaryāvatārapañjikā and Bhāmatī (cf. Reat, pp. 49–50), the
passage on name and form is more explicit; in all of these sources an
additional passage clarifies that “name and form” includes all five
aggregates: the four immaterial aggregates that emerge together with
consciousness are subsumed under “name,” while physical form is
subsumed under the aggregate of “form.” This point is also clarified later in
the sūtra.

n.23 The “three factors” here, in which “factor” renders chos (dharma), are object,
sense faculty, and consciousness (Reat, p. 52 n19).
n.24 The Tibetan here, yid la byed pa dang ldan pa, reflects a rendering of the
Sanskrit phrase manasikārayukta, partially attested in the Śikṣāsamuccaya and
Mahāyānasūtrasaṁgraha as manasikārasaṁprayukta (Reat, p. 52 n32).

n.25 Sanskrit sources read anyo anyopastambhana, here appearing in the Tibetan
translation as rten pa / brten pa.

n.26 The Sanskrit āyadvāra (Reat, p. 53) here includes the āya part of āyatana, and is
defined by Edgerton as “cause or means (lit. door) of arrival or origin.” The
Tibetan skye ba’i sgo gives the sense of “door of arising.”

n.27 The Sanskrit reads upakleśa here (Reat, p. 53), whereas the Tibetan reads nyon
mongs (kleśa). However, since nye ba’i nyon mongs (upakleśa) appears in the
previous discussion of “anxiety,” we have opted for the Sanskrit.

n.28 Ngo bo here in the Tibetan phrase sdug pa’i ngo bo dang/ bde ba’i ngo bo is a
conceivable rendering of rūpa, “form” (Negi, vol. 3, p. 977), in the
corresponding Sanskrit phrase priyarūpaśātarūpa (Reat, p. 55).

n.29 Khu is missing “five” here; this is reflected in the Sanskrit (Reat, pp. 54–55).

n.30 The Sanskrit resources depict this phrase in the masculine singular
nominitive dvādaśāṅgaḥ pratītyasamutpādo; all the qualifyiers in the passage
follow suit.

n.31 This is following Reat (p. 57), with vedayitā (masculine singular nominitive of
vedayitṛ), and Kamalaśīla’s commentary (Schoening, vol. 2, p. 509), with
myong ba po.

n.32 “Something” here (and in the following two instances) renders chos (dharma).

n.33 “Something” here, again (and in the following two instances), renders chos
(dharma).

n.34 Although the Tibetan here has the rather ambiguous myong ba dang ldan pa,
the available Sanskrit reads āsvāda-anuviddhaṁ (Reat, p. 60).

n.35 “Things” here renders chos rnams (dharma).

n.36 “Thing” here in “nothing” renders chos (dharma).

n.37 “Thing” here renders chos (dharma).

n.38 Kamalaśīla’s commentary (Schoening, vol. 2, p. 517) interprets the Tibetan

phrase rtag par rgyun du not to modify the adjacent srog med pa, as suggested
 by the available Sanskrit and Tibetan, but as the “constant and
uninterrupted” quality of dependent arising itself.

n.39 The singular number here is according to the Sanskrit and Tibetan of the
Stok Palace version; the Degé and other versions recorded in the Pedurma
comparative edition all read plural ’di dag.

n.40 This renders dge mtshan dang bkra shis (kautukamaṇgala). Reat (p. 72) translates
this as, “rites and rituals”; Schoening (vol. 1, p. 329) translates it as, “festive
and salutary.” Monier-Williams understands the term kautukamaṇgala not as a
dvandva compound, but as “an auspicious ceremony (esp. the ceremony with
the marriage-thread preceding a marriage).” Kamalaśīla (Schoening, vol. 2, p.
520) presents only the phrase dge mtshan dang ldan pa, “endowed with kautuku
(‘interest or curiosity’),” which he interprets as follows: “This refers to things
like riddles, tales, legends, song, dance and the like that bring one
enjoyment, because one becomes infatuated.”

n.41 The passage, “prone to agitation or dullness,” is missing in the available

Sanskrit sources and has been reconstructed from the Tibetan by de La
Vallée Poussin and Sastri as vā unmiñjitanimiñjitāni, and unmiñjitāni
nimiñjitāni ca, respectively (Reat, p. 72). However, Kamalaśīla seems to have
had a version similar to the Tibetan, since he states in his Śālistamba[ka]ṭīkā (p.
422): “ ‘Agitation or dullness’ means the mind is either distracted or
withdrawn. These are features of dogma.” (lhag par g.yo ba dang bral bar g.yo ba
zhes bya ba ni/ sems rgyas pa dang zhum par gyur pa ste/ de dag ni lta bar song ba’i
bye brag go/).

n.42 Unlike other trees, the palm tree does not produce cambium—the layer that
closes a wound and protects the trunk from rotting. As a result a palm tree
dies when its head is cut off.
b. BIBLIOGRAPHY
· Tibetan Sources ·

’phags pa sā lu’i ljang pa zhes bya ba theg pa chen po’i mdo. Toh 210, Degé
Kangyur, vol. 62 (mdo sde, tsha), folios 116a–123b.

’phags pa sā lu’i ljang pa zhes bya ba theg pa chen po’i mdo. Stok 191, Stok Palace
Kangyur (stog pho brang bris ma), vol. 72 (mdo sde, zha), folios 282r–292r.
Leh: sman rtsis shes rig dpe mdzod, 1975–1980.

’phags pa sā lu’i ljang pa zhes bya ba theg pa chen po’i mdo. bka’ ’gyur (dpe bsdur
ma) [Pedurma 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), 2006–2009, vol. 62, pp. 314–335.

Kamalaśīla. ’phags pa sā lu’i ljang pa rgya cher ’grel pa (Śālistamba[ka]ṭīkā). bstan

’gyur (dpe bsdur ma) [Comparative Edition of the Tengyur], 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). 120
volumes. Beijing: krung go’i bod rig pa dpe skrun khang (China
Tibetology Publishing House), 1994–2008, vol. 67, pp. 380–426.

Nāgārjuna. ’phags pa sā lu’i ljang pa zhes bya ba theg pa chen po’i mdo’i rgya cher
bshad pa. (Śālistambakaṭīkā). bstan ’gyur (dpe bsdur ma) [Comparative
Edition of the Tengyur], 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). 120 volumes. Beijing: krung go’i bod
rig pa dpe skrun khang (China Tibetology Publishing House), 1994–2008,
vol. 65, pp. 783–881.

____ ’phags pa sā lu ljang pa’i tshig le’ur byas pa (Śālistambakakārikā). Ibid. pp. 774–
782.
 · Sanskrit and Western Sources ·

de la Vallée Poussin, Louis. Théorie des douze causes: Bouddhisme, études et

matériaux. Gand: Van Goethem, 1913.

Gokhale, Vasudev. “Madhyamaka-śālistamba-sūtram”, in Mahāyāna-sūtra-

saṁgraha, ed. by Paraśurāma Lakṣmaṇa Vaidya, Vol. 1. Darbhanga: Mithila
Institute of Post-graduate Studies and Research in Sanskrit Learning, 1961,
107–116.

Harrison, Paul. “Is the Dharma-kāya the Real ‘Phantom Body’ of the
Buddha?” in Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies 1992,
vol. 15.1: 44–94.

Martin, Dan. Tibskrit Philology: A Bio-Bibliographical Resource Work. Edited by

Alexander Cherniak. Tibskrit Philology: April 21, 2014.

Reat, N. Ross. The Śālistamba Sūtra: Tibetan Original, Sanskrit Reconstruction,

English Translation, Critical Notes. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Publishers
Private Limited, 1993.

Sastri, N. Ayaswami. Ārya-śālistamba-sūtra: With Tibetan Versions, Notes and

Introduction. Adyar, Madras: Adyar Library, 1950.

Schoening, Jeffrey D. The Śālistamba Sūtra and its Indian Commentaries. 2

volumes. Wien: Arbeitskreis für Tibetische und Buddhistische Studien
Universität Wien, 1995.
g. GLOSSARY

· Types of attestation for names and terms of the corresponding ·

source language

AS Attested in source text

This term is attested in a manuscript used as a source for this translation.

AO Attested in other text

This term is attested in other manuscripts with a parallel or similar context.

AD Attested in dictionary
This term is attested in dictionaries matching Tibetan to the corresponding
language.

AA Approximate attestation
The attestation of this name is approximate. It is based on other names
where the relationship between the Tibetan and source language is attested
in dictionaries or other manuscripts.

RP Reconstruction from Tibetan phonetic rendering

This term is a reconstruction based on the Tibetan phonetic rendering of the
term.

RS Reconstruction from Tibetan semantic rendering

This term is a reconstruction based on the semantics of the Tibetan
translation.

SU Source unspecified
This term has been supplied from an unspecified source, which most often
is a widely trusted dictionary.

g.1 aggregates for appropriation

nye bar len pa’i phung po

་བར་ན་པ་ང་།
upādānaskandha
 Said of the aggregates individually, but more commonly in terms of all five as
a collective, because they are “the basis of clinging to existence” (Edgerton).

g.2 aging and death

rga shi

་།
jarāmaraṇa

g.3 appropriation
len pa · nye bar len pa

ན་པ། · ་བར་ན་པ།
upādāna
Definition from the 84000 Glossary of Terms:
This term, although commonly translated as “appropriation,” also means
“grasping” or “clinging,” but it has a particular meaning as the ninth of the
twelve links of dependent origination, situated between craving (tṛṣṇā, sred
pa) and becoming or existence (bhava, srid pa). In some texts, four types of
appropriation (upādāna) are listed: that of desire (rāga), view (dṛṣṭi), rules and
observances as paramount (śīlavrataparāmarśa), and belief in a self (ātmavāda).

g.4 asura
lha ma yin

་མ་ན།
asura
Definition from the 84000 Glossary of Terms:
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).

g.5 becoming
srid pa

ད་པ།
bhava
g.6 being
skyes bu

ས་།
puruṣa

g.7 bhikṣu
dge slong

ད་ང་།
bhikṣu
Definition from the 84000 Glossary of Terms:
The term bhikṣu, often translated as “monk,” refers to the highest among the
eight types of prātimokṣa vows that make one part of the Buddhist assembly.
The Sanskrit term literally means “beggar” or “mendicant,” referring to the
fact that Buddhist monks and nuns —like other ascetics of the time —
subsisted on alms (bhikṣā) begged from the laity.

In the Tibetan tradition, which follows the Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinaya, a monk

follows 253 rules as part of his moral discipline. A nun (bhikṣuṇī; dge slong ma)
follows 364 rules. A novice monk (śrāmaṇera; dge tshul) or nun (śrāmaṇerikā; dge
tshul ma) follows thirty-six rules of moral discipline (although in other vinaya
traditions novices typically follow only ten).

g.8 birth
skye ba

་བ།
jāti

g.9 body of Dharma

chos kyi sku

ས་་།
dharmaśarīra
See n.8.

g.10 collection
tshogs

གས།
—
 In the context of the psychophysical constituents, refers to the combination
of individual sense-consciousnesses related to the five senses, and that of
the mind, making five or six constituents depending on the context (and in
some texts more) that collectively constitute “consciousness.”

g.11 consciousness
rnam par shes pa

མ་པར་ས་པ།
vijñāna

g.12 contact
reg pa

ག་པ།
sparśa

g.13 craving
sred pa

ད་པ།
tṛṣṇā
Definition from the 84000 Glossary of Terms:
Eighth of the twelve links of dependent origination. Craving is often listed
as threefold: craving for the desirable, craving for existence, and craving for
nonexistence.

g.14 dependent arising

rten cing ’brel bar ’byung ba

ན་ང་འལ་བར་འང་བ།
pratītyasamutpāda
The central Buddhist doctrine that teaches how things are empty of self-
nature and thus lack independent existence, yet exist provisionally insofar
as they are created through the interaction of various causal factors.

g.15 Dharma
chos

ས།
dharma
 This term has multiple interrelated meanings. In this text, the primary
meanings are as follows: (1) the doctrine taught by the Buddha (Dharma); (2)
the ultimate reality underlying and expressed through the Buddha’s
teaching (Dharma); (3) the trainings that the Buddha’s teaching stipulates
(dharmas); (4) the various awakened qualities or attainments acquired
through practicing and realizing the Buddha’s teaching (dharmas); (5)
qualities or aspects more generally, i.e., phenomena or phenomenal
attributes (dharmas); and (6) mental objects (dharmas).

g.16 factor
chos

ས།
dharma
See “dharma.”

g.17 formation
’du byed

འ་ད།
saṁskāra

g.18 gandharva
dri za

་ཟ།
gandharva
Definition from the 84000 Glossary of Terms:
A class of generally benevolent nonhuman beings who inhabit the skies,
sometimes said to inhabit fantastic cities in the clouds, and more specifically
to dwell on the eastern slopes of Mount Meru, where they are ruled by the
Great King Dhṛtarāṣṭra. They are most renowned as celestial musicians who
serve the gods. In the Abhidharma, the term is also used to refer to the
mental body assumed by sentient beings during the intermediate state
between death and rebirth. Gandharvas are said to live on fragrances
(gandha) in the desire realm, hence the Tibetan translation dri za, meaning
“scent eater.”

g.19 ignorance
ma rig pa

མ་ག་པ།
avidyā
g.20 Īśvara
dbang phyug

དབང་ག
īśvara
Literally “lord,” this term is an epithet for the god Śiva, but functions more
generally in Buddhist texts as a generalized “supreme being” to whom the
creation of the universe is attributed.

g.21 Maitreya
byams pa

མས་པ།
maitreya
Definition from the 84000 Glossary of Terms:
The bodhisattva Maitreya is an important figure in many Buddhist traditions,
where he is unanimously regarded as the buddha of the future era. He is
said to currently reside in the heaven of Tuṣita, as Śākyamuni’s regent,
where he awaits the proper time to take his final rebirth and become the fifth
buddha in the Fortunate Eon, reestablishing the Dharma in this world after
the teachings of the current buddha have disappeared. Within the Mahāyāna
sūtras, Maitreya is elevated to the same status as other central bodhisattvas
such as Mañjuśrī and Avalokiteśvara, and his name appears frequently in
sūtras, either as the Buddha’s interlocutor or as a teacher of the Dharma.
Maitreya literally means “Loving One.” He is also known as Ajita, meaning
“Invincible.”

For more information on Maitreya, see, for example, the introduction to

Maitreya’s Setting Out (Toh 198).

g.22 name and form

ming dang gzugs

ང་དང་གགས།
nāmarūpa

g.23 neuter
ma ning

མ་ང་།
napuṃsakam
 The Tibetan term ma ning is broader than any existing English term and
refers not only to those whose sexual characteristics are not clearly defined
as male or female (intersexual), but also to those who do not have any proper
gender organs, those who may have both, and those who are neuter,
infertile, or who simply have physical or non-physical characteristics of a ma
ning.

g.24 person
gang zag

གང་ཟག
pudgala

g.25 prakṛti
rang bzhin

རང་བན།
prakṛti
“According to Sāṁkhya, the prime substance, from which the material
universe evolves, as opposed to puruṣa, pure consciousness.” (Reat, 39 n5).

g.26 Rājagṛha
rgyal po’i khab

ལ་ ་ཁབ།
rājagṛha
Definition from the 84000 Glossary of Terms:
The ancient capital of Magadha prior to its relocation to Pāṭaliputra during
the Mauryan dynasty, Rājagṛha is one of the most important locations in
Buddhist history. The literature tells us that the Buddha and his saṅgha
spent a considerable amount of time in residence in and around Rājagṛha—
in nearby places, such as the Vulture Peak Mountain (Gṛdhrakūṭaparvata), a
major site of the Mahāyāna sūtras, and the Bamboo Grove (Veṇuvana)—
enjoying the patronage of King Bimbisāra and then of his son King
Ajātaśatru. Rājagṛha is also remembered as the location where the first
Buddhist monastic council was held after the Buddha Śākyamuni passed
into parinirvāṇa. Now known as Rajgir and located in the modern Indian
state of Bihar.

g.27 Śāriputra
shA ri’i bu

་་།
 śāriputra
Along with Maudgalyāyana, Śāriputra was one of the two main disciples of
the Buddha. Known as a great arhat, he requested some important teachings
such as the Prajnāpāramitā sūtras, and is particularly famous for his
discriminating insight (prajñā).

g.28 sensation
tshor ba

ར་བ།
vedanā

g.29 sense source

skye mched

་མད།
āyatana
The six “inner” sense organs (eyes, ears, nose, tongue, tactile sense, and
mind), and their respective six “outer” objects of forms, sounds, smells,
flavors, tactile objects, and mental objects, are sometimes called collectively
the “six sense sources” (q.v.), but are also sometimes taken as two separate
groups, making twelve.

g.30 six sense sources

skye mched drug

་མད་ག
ṣadāyatana
The six sense organs of eyes, ears, nose, tongue, tactile sense, and mind,
together with their respective objects of forms, sounds, smells, flavors, tactile
objects, and mental objects. See also “sense source.”

g.31 sugata
bde bar gshegs pa

བ་བར་གགས་པ།
sugata
Definition from the 84000 Glossary of Terms:
One of the standard epithets of the buddhas. A recurrent explanation offers
three different meanings for su- that are meant to show the special qualities
of “accomplishment of one’s own purpose” (svārthasampad) for a complete
buddha. Thus, the Sugata is “well” gone, as in the expression su-rūpa
 (“having a good form”); he is gone “in a way that he shall not come back,” as
in the expression su-naṣṭa-jvara (“a fever that has utterly gone”); and he has
gone “without any remainder” as in the expression su-pūrṇa-ghaṭa (“a pot
that is completely full”). According to Buddhaghoṣa, the term means that the
way the Buddha went (Skt. gata) is good (Skt. su) and where he went (Skt.
gata) is good (Skt. su).

g.32 tathāgata
de bzhin gshegs pa

་བན་གགས་པ།
tathāgata
Definition from the 84000 Glossary of Terms:
A frequently used synonym for buddha. According to different explanations,
it can be read as tathā-gata, literally meaning “one who has thus gone,” or as
tathā-āgata, “one who has thus come.” Gata, though literally meaning “gone,”
is a past passive participle used to describe a state or condition of existence.
Tatha(tā), often rendered as “suchness” or “thusness,” is the quality or
condition of things as they really are, which cannot be conveyed in
conceptual, dualistic terms. Therefore, this epithet is interpreted in different
ways, but in general it implies one who has departed in the wake of the
buddhas of the past, or one who has manifested the supreme awakening
dependent on the reality that does not abide in the two extremes of existence
and quiescence. It is also often used as a specific epithet of the Buddha
Śākyamuni.

g.33 that which leads to immovable states

mi g.yo bar nye bar ’gro ba

་ག་བར་་བར་འོ་བ།
āneñjyopaga · aneñjopaga · aniñjyopaga · āniñjyopaga
Of formations and modes of consciousness that lead to rebirth in the form
and formless realms.

g.34 that which leads to meritorious states

bsod nams su nye bar ’gro ba

བད་ནམས་་་བར་འོ་བ།
puṇyopaga
Of formations and modes of consciousness that lead to rebirth in pleasant
states within the desire realm.
g.35 that which leads to unmeritorious states
bsod nams ma yin par nye bar ’gro ba

བད་ནམས་མ་ན་པར་་བར་འོ་བ།
apuṇyopaga
Of formations and modes of consciousness that lead to rebirth in the three
lower realms of animals, hungry ghosts, and hell beings.

g.36 things
chos

ས།
dharma
See “dharma.”

g.37 Vulture Peak Mountain

bya rgod phung po’i ri

་ད་ང་ ་།
gṛdhrakūṭa
A mountain situated in the vicinity of Rājagṛha where the Prajnāpāramitā
sūtras were taught and which continues to be a sacred pilgrimage site for
Buddhists to this day.

g.38 yojana
dpag tshad

དཔག་ཚད།
yojana
A measure of distance, often translated with “league.” The exact value is
disputed and varies in different sources from 1 to 40km.