SACRED TOPOLOGY OF THE BUDDHIST UNIVERSE

Monograph Series, vol. 57

Sacred Topology of Early Ireland and Ancient India

Religious Paradigm Shift

edited by

Maxim Fomin Séamus Mac Mathúna Victoria Vertogradova

S ACRED T OPOLOGY OF THE B UDDHIST U NIVERSE : T HE B UDDHAK úETRA C ONCEPT IN THE M AH ĀSĀðGHIKA -

L OKOTTARAV ĀDIN T RADITION D AR I. Z HUTAYEV

Institute of Oriental Studies, Moscow

To J. K.

1. Preliminary Remarks

The subject of the sacred topology of the Buddhist universe is truly enormous and cannot be covered in so short a paper, even if we were to run very cursorily over its most salient points. 1

For one thing, every school of Indian Buddhism (both early and Mah āyāna) had its own sacred topology, or rather set of sacred topologies, functioning on many levels. First of all, the various topological systems, both within a single school and across schools, differed in the spatial scope and dimensionality of their objects. There existed the sacred topology of this Earth and equivalent cosmological objects, called cakravàlas (Pàli cakkavà×a), with Mt. Meru (or Sumeru; Sineru in P āli) in the centre and the traditional “continents” (dvīpa, Pàli dãpa) surrounding it. Hereinafter I will call this cosmological unit (the cakrav āla, the Earth and its counterparts existing all over the Universe) a “world” and any combinations of such units “world- systems” or the like. There also existed the sacred topology of Jambudv īpa, the continent which is the locus of human civilisation as we know it and which is usually identified with the historical Indian subcontinent, with its complex network of pilgrimage sites (t īrtha), “power-places” (p īñha), pure and impure topoi, etc. There were also, as

1 Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit (BHS) texts are cited using the system of abbreviations given in (Edgerton 1953 (I): xxvi-xxvii), unless otherwise indicated; the

Sarvàstivàdin Mahàparinirvàõasåtra, abbreviated as MPS, is cited by paragraph from (Waldschmidt 1950-1951). For Pāli primary sources, standard Pali Text Society editions have been used (PED ix-xv; for the most common references, cf. Abbreviations , pp. v-vii supra), with the exception of ñãkà references, cited from Chaññha Saïgàyana CD-ROM (1999), an electronic version of the Burmese Chaññhasaïgàyana edition of the Tipiñaka. Translations are mine, unless otherwise stated. I wish to thank Prof. V. Vertogradova for numerous suggestions and criticisms, as well as Mr. Min Bahadur Shakya, Director, Nagarjuna Institute of Exact Methods (Chakupat, Lalitpur, Nepal), for a valuable discussion of Mahàyàna canonical sources concerning “our” buddhakùetra, Sah ā-lokadhātu.

Sacred Topology of the Buddhist Universe

we shall see in some detail, sacred topologies that dealt with more macroscopic objects.

This network of sacred topologies of cosmological objects of varying sizes was complemented by a system that could be called vertical, although probably not strictly vertical in a geometrical sense. That is the system of planes of existence, of which, e. g., the Therav āda tradition enumerates thirty-one (Nyanatiloka 1980 s.vv. loka, deva; Story 1972), from the gods of the Ar ūpa-loka (formless realms) to the denizens of hells ( niraya or naraka), such as the lowest of them all, the Av īci. Although this system (shared in one or another form by all schools of Buddhism) is to some extent based on the moral qualifications and spiritual nature of the inhabitants of its various components and not primarily on geography, cosmology or topology, there is a definite spatial and sacred topological aspect to many of those “realms” and their relative situation with regard to one another.

There were also huge differences in the theoretical level of discourse: elaborate Abhidharmic discussions, such as the celebrated third chapter of Vasubandhu’s Abhidharmako÷a, called the Lokanirde÷a, ‘Description of the World’, vs. more or less popular expositions, with such utopian visions as the larger and smaller Sukhàvatãvyåhas or such didactic literature for the laity as late mediaeval Tibetan and Mongolian “visits to hell.”

Last but not least, there also exists the very complex problematic of the relations between Buddhist and Brahminical place- lore, mundane and otherworldly, e. g., the respective roles in these traditions of such holy topoi of India as the Ganges and Benares or the roles and identities of the lokapàlas, the guardians of the cardinal and intermediate points of the world.

As can be seen, the field is vast. 2 The subject of the present paper is one small aspect of it: the theory of buddhakùetras (lit.,

‘Buddha-fields’). The concept of the Buddha-field, with its complex repercussions in “theology,” cult, sacred literature and art, is usually, but incorrectly, thought of as a specifically Mah āyāna concept. Its detailed scholarly study was pioneered in the 1930s by Teresina Rowell (Rowell 1934-1937). The model of the universe implied by the theory of buddhakùetras may be called spatial/soteriological, or spatial and soteriological at the same time. It presents a purely spatial, three- dimensional, model of the Universe as consisting of an infinite multitude of completely equivalent cosmological units. The criteria for singling out such units, however, are purely soteriological: a

2 For a general introduction to the field, see the monograph by Kloetzli (1983).

Dar I. Zhutayev 155

buddhak ùetra is the sphere, or field, of the activities of a single Buddha. It is the locus where one and only one (this is of importance to the model) Buddha may arise at a given time.

Again, the theme of buddhakùetras is vast and multifaceted. Suffice it to say that one of the largest Buddhist denominations in Japan and China – Amidaism, or Pure Land Buddhism, which is focused on the Western “paradise” (actually, the buddhakùetra) of the Buddha Amit ābha, – relies on the buddhakùetra theory as the foundation of its worldview and soteriology. The huge (400+ pages) Mah āyāna sūtra, the Karuõàpuõóarãka (Yamada 1968) is largely devoted to the theme of buddhakùetras. This important BHS text has been very insufficiently investigated and I intend to make its study a high priority in my further research into Buddhist sacred topology. The Therav ādin exegetical and scholastic tradition also has its own theory of Buddha-fields (P 3 āli buddhakkhetta) that it tries to retroactively apply in interpreting P āli canonical texts, which, unlike the canonical texts of some other Buddhist denominations, do not seem to make any

use of this concept. 4 In the present paper, I would like to address the subject of

buddhakùetras by attempting a comprehensive analysis (including a new English translation and extensive commentary) of what is, to all appearances, the earliest text expounding the Buddha-field theory: a passage (Mv I.121.6-126.15) forming the bulk of the sixth chapter (

bhåmi) 5 of the Da÷abhåmika section of the Mahàvastu (Mv), a vast

3 Exposed systematically in Buddhaghosa’s Visuddhimagga (Vism 414). Three progressively larger fields, or spheres, of a Buddha’s influence are singled out: the

“field of his birth” ( jàtikkhetta), the “field of his authority” (àõàkhetta) and the “field of his range” ( visayakkhetta). Whereas the latter of these is “infinite, immeasurable” ( anantam aparimàõaü; all terms here as translated by I. B. Horner in Conze 1964: 115), the first two have definite spatial boundaries. The Visuddhimagga exposition is quite often utilised in the commentarial literature, where it is either repeated verbatim (e.g. Sp I.159-160, PsA I.367-368; cf. also AA 4 III.135) or a free paraphrase of it is given (AA II.9, MA IV.114). The only canonical occurrence of the word that I have been able to locate is in an

extremely late text, the Apadàna (Ap II.429). In this passage, the “field of the Buddha” is likened to a well-cultivated field (bhaddaka khetta) bearing abundant fruit. Also, the Milindapa¤ha, not considered canonical by the majority of Theravàdin traditions, makes a passing reference (Miln 176) to a “supreme gift, unexcelled in this buddhakkhetta” ( imasmiü buddhakkhette asadisaü paramadànaü), obviously using the word in the sense of a cosmological unit. 5

The entire chapter is found at Mv I.121.1-127.12. Its very short initial (Mv I.121.1-5) and final (Mv I.126.16-127.12) portions, forming an integral part of the “ten stages of the Bodhisattva” exposition, have no relation to the buddhakùetra

Sacred Topology of the Buddhist Universe

compendium of religious materials in BHS belonging to the Early Buddhist school of the

6 Mah āsāïghika-Lokottaravādin- Madhyade śikas.

Besides its early date, archaic nature and non- Mah āyāna provenance, this passage provides a comprehensive religious model that, although probably not a direct ancestor of the future Mah āyāna and Theravāda elaborations, is very instructive for interpreting the latter and their development (it also shows some paths not taken in the future development of the Buddha-field concept). As a first step towards approaching that model, my goal has been to place the text embodying it and its various component parts, macrostructural and microstructural, in as many contexts as I could: religious, historical-literary and, as far as I was able, cultural.

2. The Topological Model as Embodied in the Text

a doctrinal exposition inserted into what is basically an extended biography of the Buddha Śākyamuni, is the earliest Buddhist text devoted to the “ten stages of the Bodhisattva” – the ten stages of the adept’s spiritual growth toward Buddhahood. There is an extensive literature, both canonical and non- canonical, devoted to this doctrine in the Mah āyāna tradition, the standard Mah āyānist scripture expounding it being the Mahāyāna Da÷abhåmika-såtra (Da÷abhåmã÷vara) (Vaidya 1967; transl. Honda 1968). In the Mv, we have this teaching in its earliest form, relying heavily in the construction of the new doctrine (and the text embodying it) on standard “H īnayānist” doctrines and textual materials, similar to those found in the P āli canon. It should be noted that the heavy indebtedness of such an innovative (in more senses than one) work to the “conservative Buddhist” or even “common Buddhist” heritage is much more apparent from minute textual analysis than immediately. The present paper (and especially the notes to the translation) bears abundant witness to this phenomenon as exemplified

The 7 Da÷abhåmika section of the Mv,

theory and the passage framed by them is apparently totally unconnected with the rest of the chapter. Yet, the semantic and other links between various segments of the Mahàvastu as a whole and the Da÷abhåmika specifically are far from trivial and require serious further investigation. I omit these two passages from my translation in the Appendix and from any discussion in the paper. 6

The last component of the school’s name as traditionally used in scholarly literature ( madhyade÷ika) represents a folk etymology and only occurs in very late Mahàvastu MSS. All other sources, including early MSS. of Lokottaravādin literature, use some combination of the stems madhya- ‘middle’ and udde śika- ‘reciter’ (

7 Mv I.63.16-193.12. English translation in Jones 1953-1956 (I): 53-151. madhyodde÷ika, madhyudde÷ika, etc.) instead (Roth 1985, de Jong 1985).

Dar I. Zhutayev 157

by the buddhakùetra passage. The Da÷abhåmika from the Mv is cast in the form of a dialogue between two of the Buddha’s disciples, K ātyāyana and Kāśyapa, during the First Buddhist Council at Ràjagçha following the Buddha’s Parinirvàõa. Mah ākātyāyana, the convener of the Council, carefully questions Mah ākāśyapa, the carrier in memory of the ten stages exposition, about its every detail; Mah ākāśyapa answers. In terms of the textual structure, a single question-answer exchange (the question being frequently, but not always, in prose, the answer in verse) is the minimal compositional unit, and a linear sequence of such units, each of them setting forth a single topic or subject, essentially constitutes the whole text of the Da÷abhåmika.

The Buddha-field text consists of five such question-answer pairs. In the first of them (a question + 3 ÷lokas), K āśyapa states that there exist such phenomena as the buddhakùetra and the upakùetra (a supplementary or subordinate field) and specifies their size.

The minimal constitutive unit in this particular model of the Universe is the “world-system” ( lokadhàtu; Pàli id.), a cosmological formation consisting of a very large number of individual worlds (

cakravàla). 8 The problem of lokadhàtus and the teachings of different Buddhist schools regarding their various types and the relative sizes of

the latter is quite complex. At the very least, we have separate, and somewhat differing, “theories” of lokadhàtus in the Theravàdin, Sarvàstivàdin, Mahàsàïghika and Mahàyàna traditions. Also, some uses of the various members of such classifications are rigorously terminological, while some are not, depending on the genre and functions of the text.

The term used in our passage is the nominalised adjective trisahasra . It is equivalent 9 to trisàhasramahàsàhasra-lokadhàtu (lit. ‘three-thousand great-thousand world-system’), a term common in the

Mv itself and in other BHS, particularly 10 Mahàyàna, texts. One can agree with Luis Gómez (1996: 331) that the more widely accepted

meaning of the term is that of a system of “one thousand times one thousand times one thousand” cakravàlas, i. e., consisting of a billion worlds. However, he goes on to quote several other, rather divergent,

8 R. Kloetzli collectively calls the various lokadhàtu-based models the “sàhasra- cosmology” or “cosmology of thousands” (Kloetzli 1983: 51).

9 See Appendix, notes 34, 81.

10 Connected in some way with the Pàli tisahassã mahàsahassã lokadhàtu (e.g. AN I.227), although the BHS term (esp. as used in the Mv) cannot be categorically

stated to be synonymous with the Pàli one.

Sacred Topology of the Buddhist Universe

interpretations from various sources, some of them multiplying the number of worlds in such a lokadhàtu to truly astronomical proportions. Franklin Edgerton (1953 (II) s.v. tri-sàhasra- mahàsàhasra) correctly pointing out the vagueness of the meaning of mahàsàhasra in BHS, does not give any precise numerical equivalent of trisàhasra °.

However that may be, the size of a single buddhakùetra is given in our text as 61 trisahasras (

ekaùaùñiü trisahasràõi). 11 An upakùetra is said to contain “four times that [number]” ( ato caturguõaü) of

worlds, i. e., 61 × 4 = 244 trisàhasramahàsàhasra-lokadhàtus. It has been previously stated (Edgerton 1953 (I) s.v. upakùetra; Jones 1949-1956: 95, n. 4) that there are no other occurrences of upakùetra in the BHS corpus. The concept of upakùetras certainly received no development in later and more “mature” expositions of the Buddha-field theory. However, the word itself is attested as a technical term in the sacred topology of Buddhist Tantrism. Of course, its signification and functions in the Vajrayàna literature are vastly different. Yet, I would like to point out a fascinating passage in the Hevajratantra (I.7.10-18; Farrow & Menon 1992: 75-78; Tripathi & Negi 2001: 69-71), describing the “meeting-places” ( melàpakasthàna) between the adept and yoginãs. Whether by accident or not, that passage brings together many of the motifs that we meet with in studying the buddhakùetra concept in the context of the Ten Stages. Among the topoi enumerated there are pãñhas, upapãñhas, kùetras, upakùetras and eight further types of sacred topological objects. Collectively, “they are the twelve bhåmis” (età dvàda÷abhåmayaþ) and the Lord ( nàtha) is called “the Lord of the Ten Stages” ( 12 da÷abhåmã÷vara) because of these and no others ( ebhir anyair na kathyate). Having absolutely no expertise in the field of Buddhist Tantrism, I can make no further comment on this very remarkable collocation.

11 Such a number of lokadhàtus, though somewhat unusual from the point of view of Buddhist sacred numerology, seems, nevertheless, to have been firmly rooted in

the Mahàsàïghika-Lokottaravàdin tradition; see Appendix, note 81, citing an example where this number of trisàhasramahàsàhasra-lokadhàtus appears in the context of the Buddha’s first sermon and acts as a synonym for “[our] buddhakùetra” or “[his] buddhakùetra.” 12

The commentaries ( Kçùõàcàrya’s Yogaratnamàlà and Ratnàkara÷ànti’s Muktàvalã) expressly identify the “Ten Stages” referred to with those of the Mahàyàna Da÷abhåmikasåtra/Da÷abhåmã÷vara: the (Pra)mudità, the Vimalà, etc. (Farrow & Menon 1992: 76; Tripathi & Negi 2001: 70).

Dar I. Zhutayev 159

In the second textual segment (question + 2 stanzas in the rathoddhatà metre), it is ascertained that Buddhas arise (‘appear’, BHS utpadyanti ) only in some ( keùucid eva) Buddha-fields and that many

koñi-nayutas (= 10 18 ) of kùetras are “empty of the most excellent of men” ( ÷ånyakàni puruùapravarehi). The reason given for this is the

following: “For rare is the bearer of the noble marks, / One of intelligence attained through a long time…” ( durlabho hi varalakùaõadhàrã / dãrghakàlasamudàgatabuddhã…).

The third question-answer dyad (the question + 5 ÷lokas) deals with the question of why two Buddhas do not arise in a single buddhakùetra. Mah ākāśyapa introduces the notion of the “task of a Buddha” (

buddhakarman) 13 and the practically synonymous term buddhadharma (used in both sg. and pl.). J. J. Jones translates the

latter term as “conditions of Buddhahood” and simply “Buddhahood” (1949-1956 (I): 96); yet the context and other considerations 14 suggest

an interpretation along the lines of “duties of the Buddha,” with the word dharma used here very similarly to its Brahminical meaning (“duties of a householder,” “duties of a king” – and here “duties of a Buddha”). It is the “very nature of the Buddhas” ( buddhàna dharmatà) to completely fulfil ( paripåreti) these tasks, or duties. If a single “all- seeing one” ( cakùumant) were incapable (asamartha) of fulfilling these duties, then two “noble-minded Tath āgatas” (mahatmànau… tathàgatau) would arise in a single Buddha-field. However, the idea of such an incapability ( asamarthasadbhàva) is to be rejected (‘(people) reject it’, BHS varjayanti), therefore two Buddhas are never “co- located”.

The notion that two Buddhas cannot arise simultaneously (P āli apubbaü acarimaü) in a single well-determined cosmological segment is attested in the P āli canon (AN I.28; MN III.65) and may considerably predate the buddhakùetra theory. The cosmological term used in such P āli contexts is usually “world-system” (lokadhàtu). The Milindapa¤ha (Miln 236-239), in discussing this tenet, gives some much less benign reasons for two Buddhas not arising at the same time than does the Mv, and actually compares the putative case of two Tath āgatas simultaneously existing in a single cosmological entity to two people trying to climb into a boat ( nàvà) intended for one

As translated by J. J. Jones (1949-1956 (I): 96). I would suggest the alternate translations “deeds, work, actions of a Buddha,” “duties of a Buddha” and the like. See Appendix, note 38, for lexical and doctrinal parallels in Theravàdin and (

14 Måla-)Sarvàstivàdin literature. See Appendix, note 40.

Sacred Topology of the Buddhist Universe

( ekapurisasandhàraõã). The fourth, and central, segment of the passage (question + 29 ÷lokas) contains a partial description of the Universe structured according to the buddhakùetra model. It is extremely formulaic and has a high degree of text predictability. The description is given in answer to K ātyāyana’s question: what other buddhakùetras (i.e. in addition to our own Buddha-field, called Sah ā) are there “at this present time” ( samprati), where Buddhas now (etarhi) are teaching Dharma?

The first 12 ÷lokas are built according to the pattern: “In the region of the world X, there is the buddhakùetra called Y. In it, there is the Buddha named Z.” Five buddhakùetras (with their respective Buddhas) are placed in the eastern quarter of the world ( purastime di÷o bhàge); three in the southern (dakùiõasmiü di÷o bhàge); one in the western quarter ( pa÷cimasmiü di÷o bhàge); one in the northern quarter ( uttarasmiü di÷o bhàge); one in the nadir of the world (heùñimasmiü di÷o bhàge); and one in the zenith of the world (upariùñà di÷o bhàge). Jones, I think erroneously, takes the names of the buddhakùetras for ordinary adjectives, epithets of the respective Buddha-fields, and translates: “a well-laid-out, a healthy, a resplendent Buddha-field, etc.,” whereas the correct translation would be “the Buddha-field [called] Sunirmita, Kçtàgada, Vibhåùita, etc.” This is borne out by similar passages in Mah āyāna texts, e. g. in the Karuõàpuõóarãka.

There follows an extremely poetical passage – poetical, here, in the sense of the usual microstructural elements of oral literature, such as formulas, formulaic expressions and slightly varying refrains, building up the exposition and creating a meditative, magical atmosphere in the text. It is also distinctively Mah āsāïghika, forcefully stressing the infinity of the Universe, the infinity of the number of Buddhas and establishing the central narrative of the Mah āsāïghika- Lokottarav ādin tradition – the biography/narrative of the Buddha Śākyamuni – as a cosmic, ontological principle, holding the Universe together. So, over and above that ( ataþ paraü), there are numerous thousands of Buddha-fields. The number of thousands of Buddha- fields is limitless. The number of empty Buddha-fields is limitless. The number of thousands of world-systems is limitless. Then, with the refrain pårvà koñã na praj¤àyate (lit. ‘the point farthest back, the beginning is not known,’ i.e., one does not know where to begin counting), the text enumerates 25 key episodes of the story of the Buddha Śākyamuni (this story is the central subject-matter of the Mv as a whole). Here this narrative is transformed into the life of a

Dar I. Zhutayev 161

buddha,

a generic Buddha, any and every Buddha, whose number is infinite and whose careers and teachings are completely identical all over the Universe on the synchronous plane and throughout time along the temporal axis. So, the number of Buddhas of the past is limitless

and, at any given moment of time, the number is limitless of those: 15

1. who are vowing [to reach] Enlightenment ( praõidhentàna bodhàya);

2. who are [acquiring] the property of not lingering ( avaivartikadharmàõàü);

3. who have reached the Stage of Consecration ( abhiùekabhåmipràptànàü);

4. who are dwelling in Tuùitas (tuùiteùu vasantànàü);

5. who are descending from Tuùitas (tuùitebhya÷ cyavantànàü);

6. who are lying in [their] mothers’ wombs ( màtu kukùau ÷ayantànàü);

7. who are standing in [their] mothers’ wombs ( sthitànàü màtuþ kukùau tu);

8. of the heroes being born ( jàyamànànàü vãràõàü);

9. of the world-protectors [that have been] born ( jàtànàü lokanàthànàü);

10. who are being taken up on the hip ( aïkeùu gçhyamàõànàü);

11. who are taking the [seven] strides ( pàdàni vikramantànàü);

12. who are laughing the great laugh ( mahàhàsaü hasantànàü);

13. who are surveying the regions of the world ( di÷àü vilokayantànàü);

14. who are being carried in [people’s] arms ( aïkena dhàriyantànàü);

15. who are being lifted up by Gandharvas (= gods; upanãyamànànàü gandharvaiþ);

16. who are going forth from the cities ( purebhyo niùkramantànàü);

17. who are approaching the root of the Bodhi [tree] ( bodhimålam upentànàü);

18. who are achieving the knowledge of a Tathàgata (pràpnuvantànàü tathàgataj¤ànaü);

19. who are setting in motion the Wheel of Dharma ( dharmacakraü pravartentànàü);

20. who are saving koñis of beings (satvakoñã vinentànàü);

21. who are roaring the lion’s roar ( siühanàdaü nadantànàü);

22. who are abandoning the life-forces ( àyuþsaüskàraü utsçjantànàü);

23. of the heroes passing away into Nirvàõa (nirvàyantànàü vãràõàü);

24. who are lying, having attained Nirvàõa (nirvçtànàü ÷ayantànàü);

25. of the heroes being burned [on their funeral pyres] ( dhyàpiyantànàü vãràõàü).

The line M v I.124.15 yathà saüsàracakrasya pårvà koñã na

This list diverges significantly from Jones’ translation (Jones 1949-1956 (I): 98- 99), both stylistically and in the treatment of several individual expressions. I hope I have made a more satisfactory reconstruction of the sequence of events in this particular manifestation of the generic Buddha-story. For comments on particular episodes, as well as explanations of all cases where I diverge substantially from Jones (and/or Senart), see Appendix, notes 67-86.

Sacred Topology of the Buddhist Universe

praj¤àyate… “As the starting-point of the wheel of Saüsàra is not to

be discerned…” gives us a hint of the probable origin of the formulaic refrains on which this text-segment is built 16 and perhaps even of the

structural prototype of the latter. According to (PED s.v. ko ñi ), the Pāli expressions roughly corresponding to the formulas used, namely pubba/purima-koñi, pubbà/purimà ko ° “starting-point” (or: “past”) and pacchimakoñi, pacchimà ko ° “end-point,” “end-limit” (or: “future”), both frequently juxtaposed with pa¤¤àyati (= praj¤àyate in our text), “are used only of saüsàra.” While this statement may be too sweeping (cf., e. g., AN V.113 purimà… koñi na pa¤¤àyati avijjàya “…of avijjà, ignorance”, V.116 purimà… koñi na pa¤¤àyati bhavataõhàya “…of craving for existence”), their extremely close association both with the concept of Saüsàra and with the lexeme saüsàra is evident. The same, although less categorically, can be said of the BHS koñi when it is

modified by 17 pårva, antara, apara, aparànta. In the Pāli tradition, this (in my opinion, quite archaic) nexus finds one of its most striking

manifestations in the phrase anamataggàyaü… saüsàro pubb¨koñi na pa¤¤àyati avijjànãvaraõànaü

sattànaü taõhàsaüyojanànaü sandhàvataü saüsàrataü; as rendered by Bhikkhu Bodhi, “…this saüsàra is without discoverable beginning. A first point is not discerned of beings roaming and wandering on hindered by ignorance

and fettered by craving” (Bodhi 2005: 37, 38 et al.). 18 In turn, this elaborate cliché serves as the principal building- block for a whole series of P

āli suttas, 19 primarily for the 20 texts making up the Anamatagga-saüyutta of the Saüyutta-nikàya (SN

II.178-93). The Anamatagga collection 20 seems to have been highly prominent in early Theravāda as a quite distinct and authoritative

religious text. It is quoted as an authority in the Abhidhamma (Kvu 29) and, in the Ceylonese chronicles (Mvs XII.31, Dpv VIII.6), we have the thera Rakkhita preach, or teach (Mvs katheti, Dpv deseti), it while

See also Appendix, note 68. 17 See Edgerton 1953 (II) s.vv.

18 apar The etymology and precise meaning of ānta-koñi, pūrva-koñi. anamatagga (approx.: “whose end(s) are unthinkable;” BHS anavar āgra, Tib. thog ma dang tha ma med pa; cf. AMg.

aõavadagga/aõavayagga) are extremely doubtful; for a recent discussion of these, see (Cone 2001 s.v.

19 SN III.149-152 (two consecutive texts), V.225-227 (one text), V.440-441 (one anamatagga). text; a variation on the cliché is used: … na pa¤¤àyati sattipahàrànam

asipahàrànam parasupahàrànam “…is not discerned of blows with spears, blows with swords, blows with axes”). 20

Called the Anamatagga- dhammadesanā at DhA II.32 and the Anamatagga- pariyāya at DhA II.268.

Dar I. Zhutayev 163

standing in the sky (Mvs nabhe ñhito, Dpv vehàsaü abbhugantvàna), thereby converting tens of thousands of people to Buddhism.

Although the Mv passage under scrutiny bears little superficial resemblance to the Pāli Anamatagga beyond the virtual identity of their refrains, the deeper semantic and structural parallels between the two texts are rather striking.

The Anamatagga consists of twenty short suttas (or text- segments, if treated as an integral whole), each of them containing the above-mentioned cliché in its opening and closing portions. Each sutta emphasises the limitlessness of Saüs āra and the lack of any bounds to the suffering of the beings (satta) subject to it through a simile, many of the latter exemplifying the great (to be more precise, infinite) number (or amount, or age, or extent, or the like) of some component of the Universe. Thus, in the Tiõakaññha-sutta (SN II.178) and the Pathavã-sutta (SN II.179), the similes illustrate the infinite number of a person’s ancestors: mother ( màtà), mother’s mother (tassà… màtu… màtà), etc., and father (pità), father’s father (tassa… pitu… pità), etc., respectively. The simile in the Sàsapa-sutta (SN II.182) exemplifies the infinite length of a kappa; that in the Gaïgà-sutta (II.183-184), the infinite number of kappas elapsed.

Similarly, the Mv passage can be divided into a comparable number of segments: 16 ÷lokas containing the formulaic refrains, or, from another point of view, 31 portions of the text (a ÷loka or a pàda long) ending in one of those refrains. Each of these structural units consists of the expressions pårvà/aparà/antarà + koñã na praj¤àyate and the designation of the persons (or cosmological entities) whose number is infinite. Furthermore, what the Anamatagga-saüyutta refers to as being limitless in number, as that of which “the limit is not to be discerned,” is primarily unenlightened beings ( satta) subject to transmigration. In Mv, the persons thus characterised are essentially Buddhas in the various stages of their spiritual careers, virtually =

enlightened 21 beings, bodhi-sattva. Such deliberate shifts in the meaning and functions of traditional materials are not unknown both in

the Buddhist and in the wider early Indian tradition. It is virtually doubtless that the Mah āsāïghika-Lokottaravādins had an * Anavaràgra-saüyukta (or *-paryàya) of their own, probably

21 In fact, episodes No. 1 to 17 (from praõidhent āna bodhāya to bodhimūlam upent ānāü) from the above list belong to the career of a Bodhisattva sensu stricto.

On the other hand, the Daśabhūmika says that, beginning with the eighth stage (Episodes No. 3-25 refer to this period in their career), Bodhisattvas “should be regarded as Samyaksa übuddhas” (samyaksaübuddh ā iti draùñavyā, Mv I.105.16).

Sacred Topology of the Buddhist Universe

as part of their * Saüyuktàgama. Of course, it is impossible to tell to what extent it served as a model, or prototype, for this 16-÷loka passage. However, there is a minor indication that the latter might have deliberately drawn on a text not dissimilar to the P āli saüyutta. The first siloka of the verses summing up the first of the two vaggas into which the Anamatagga is divided ends in iti vuttam mahesinà “thus has been said by the Great Seer” (SN II.185). The identical words (BHS iti uktaü maharùiõeti) conclude the whole buddhakùetra text (Mv I.126.15). And, although the Mv as a whole abounds in formulaic markers of this general type, this exact expression, as far as I was able

to ascertain, occurs in this place and in this place only. 22 The final question-answer pair (question + 3 stanzas in the àryà

(?) metre) 23 deals with the problem: if there is such a number of Tath āgatas and if one Buddha leads an infinite number of beings to Nirv āõa, then will they not in a relatively short time lead all living beings to Nirv āõa? Will not the world then become absolutely and entirely empty, devoid of any living beings? The answer is that no matter how many worlds and world-systems there are or may ever be, the number of unenlightened beings (pçthagjana) to be taught and saved by a Buddha is still greater.

This portion of the text is extremely corrupt and probably cannot be satisfactorily understood in principle based on Senart’s sources (late Nepalese MSS.) alone. Nevertheless, it does contain a trope that seems to me to be vaguely Anamatagga-like: the countless number of beings ( satva) in need of instruction by the Buddha is emphasised via a grand simile involving a hypothetical situation.

3. Conclusion

In conclusion, I would like to point out certain mechanisms and factors that seem to have contributed significantly to shaping the Mahàsàïgika buddhakùetra text in the form we have it, yet are not immediately apparent and have to be uncovered by special, often intertextual, analysis. They belong to what I may call the “archaeology” of the text. Most of this material has been spelled out in great detail in the notes to the Appendix.

The centrepiece of the buddhakùetra passage, the 29-÷loka

22 But see Appendix, note 94. 23 At least, they can be scanned as àryàs. On the other hand, Senart refers to them

as ÷lokas (1882-1897 (I): 473) and, strange as it may seem, such scansion of the stanzas as reconstituted by the editor is also not impossible. In any case, the MS. text is extremely corrupt.

Dar I. Zhutayev 165

description of the world according to the Buddha-field model, differs strikingly in style and structure from the surrounding text. Its highly formulaic style, the heavy reliance on refrains and repetitions, its intense use of alliteration (something which is left beyond the scope of this paper) and other similar features are hardly paralleled by anything in the entire Da÷abhåmika; they also seem to suggest that the original

functions of this piece were ritual, “liturgical” and/or even magical. 24

A manuscript reading in its last stanza, which was emended by Senart, but which I propose to restore, 25 gives us the tentative name for the

ritual in which such a text could have been used: ÷àstupåjà, “the Worship of the Teachers.”

The particular arrangement of the Buddha-story (the “meta- text” or “text-generating mechanism” 26 dominating the entire Mv) found in the second half of this “ påjà” seems to presuppose, or can be even said to be dictated by, something that is, on the face of it, not present in the text at all: the Buddhist “theory” of earthquakes. A comparatively early form of the latter can be found in the famed eight- member màtikà in the Pàli Mahàparinibbànasutta (DN II.107-109) and its counterparts belonging to other Early Buddhist schools; the parallel Sarvàstivàdin passage (MPS 17.3-22), although using somewhat different language, enumerates the identical eight causes of great earthquakes. The last six of these are the key events of the Buddha-story, from the descent into the mother’s womb to the Parinirvàõa (= episodes 5, 8-9, 18, 19, 22, 23-24 in our text). The Theravàdin tradition, both canonical and exegetical, then utilises the earthquake “theory” to define and structure its sacred universe, the suttas (DN II.12-15, MN III.118-124), the commentaries, as well as Buddhaghosa in his Visuddhimagga, going to great lengths to state exactly in how many worlds the earth shakes on such occasions. The extent of the first type of the Theravàdin buddhakkhetta, the “field of [a Buddha’s] birth” ( jàtikkhetta), is defined precisely with reference to these earthquakes.

As can be seen from my notes, the Mahàsàïghika- Lokottaravàdins greatly enlarge the list of events accompanied by great earthquakes, extending it to very many episodes in the above list. My searches in the Mv have admittedly not been exhaustive; furthermore, the earthquakes are mentioned in texts of varying genres,

Literature of the type we may call magical was rather prominent in the Mahàsàïghika tradition; see, e.g., Zhutayev 1999: 71-72. 25 See Appendix, note 86. 26 See Appendix, note 71.

Sacred Topology of the Buddhist Universe

in prose and in verse, with reference to different Buddhas and Bodhisattvas. Still, I believe that the role played by the “great earthquake” concept in the constitution of our text (and the buddhakùetra theory) cannot be denied.

Underlying the seemingly unremarkable names of twelve Buddhas 27 currently teaching in different Buddha-fields all over the Universe is a concept of paramount importance, not only to Buddhist, but to Ancient Indian culture as a whole: the concept of the Mahàpuruùa, the Great Man. Judging by the parallels adduced in my notes, these names refer not so much to the standardised “marks” ( 28 lakùaõa) or “secondary signs” (anuvya¤jana) of the Great Man as to

the much wider field of names/epithets of the Buddhas, especially those extolling their bodily perfections, names that, already in the Mv, were well on their way to becoming microtexts.

Finally, the names of the buddhakùetras themselves (“Well- Fashioned,” “Made Free from Disease,” “Free from Thorns/Difficulties,” “Having [Indra’s] Tree as Its Banner,” etc.) seem, collectively, to refer us to the ideal of a site that is well-constructed, (ritually) purified and made comfortable in every way. Another, more discursive, expression of this ideal (or concept) can be found in the prologue to the Da÷abhåmika (Mv I.75.1-76.4), with Kà÷yapa presiding over the Arhats who prepare the venue for the First Buddhist Council.

All of these points require serious further investigation, as the whole field (pun intended!) of buddhakùetras requires serious further investigation.

References

Bagchi, S., ed., 2003-2004, Mahāvastu Avadāna, 3 vols, Darbhanga: The Mithila Institute of Sanskrit Learning. Baruah, B., 2000, Buddhist Sects and Sectarianism, New Delhi: Sarup & Sons. Basak, R., ed., 1963-1968, Mah āvastu Avadāna, 3 vols., Calcutta: Sanskrit College (Bengali trans.). Bechert, H., ed., 1985, Zur Schulzugehörigkeit von Werken der Hīnayāna-Literatur, 1. Teil, Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.

27 Judging by Edgerton’s dictionary (1953 (II)), which substantially contains the BHS onomasticon, the great majority of these names do not occur anywhere else in

the BHS corpus, particularly as the names of Buddhas. 28 See Appendix, note 35.

Dar I. Zhutayev 167

Bodhi, Bhikkhu, ed., 2005, In the Buddha’s Words: An Anthology of Discourses from the P āli Canon, Somerville: Wisdom Publications.

Burnouf, E., trans., 1852, Le Lotus de la Bonne Loi, traduit du sanscrit, accompagné d’un commentaire et de vingt et un mémoires relatifs au Buddhisme , Paris: à l’Imprimerie nationale (Bibliothèque orientale 9).

Chaññha Saïgàyana CD-ROM, [1999], Version 3.0, Igatpuri: Vipassana Research Instutute. Cone, M., 2001,

A Dictionary of Pāli: Part I (A-Kh), Oxford: PTS. Conze, E., ed., 1964, Buddhist Texts through the Ages, New York: Harper & Row. Dayal, H., 1932, The Bodhisattva Doctrine in Buddhist Sanskrit Literature , London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Tr bner & Co.

de Jong, J.W., 1985, ‘ Madhyadeśika, Madhyoddeśika and Madhy’- uddeśika’, in: Bechert, H., ed., 1985, 138-143. Dutt, N., 1978, Buddhist Sects in India, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass. Edgerton, F., 1953, Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit Grammar and

Dictionary , 2 vols, New Haven: Yale University Press. Farrow, G. W. & Menon, I., transl., eds., 1992, The Concealed Essence of the Hevajra Tantra: With the Commentary Yogaratnamàlà, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.

Gómez, L. O., transl., intr., 1996, The Land of Bliss: The Paradise of the Buddha of Measureless Light: Sanskrit and Chinese Versions of the Sukhàvatãvyåha Sutras, Honolulu & Kyoto: The University of Hawai’i Press & Higashi Honganji Shinshå Ōtani-Ha.

Gethin, R., transl., 2008, Sayings of the Buddha: A Selection of Suttas from the Pàli Nikàyas, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Honda, M., 1968, ‘Annotated Translation of the Da÷abhåmika-

såtra’, in: Sinor, D., ed., Studies in South, East, and Central Asia. Presented as a Memorial Volume to Prof. Raghu Vīra, New Delhi: International Academy of Indian Culture, 115-276.

Jones, J. J., trans., 1949-1956, The Mah āvastu, 3 vols, London. Kloetzli, R., 1983, Buddhist Cosmology: From Single World

System to Pure Land: Science and Theology in the Images of Motion and Light , Delhi-Varanasi-Patna: Motilal Banarsidass.

Mäll, L., 2005, Studies in the Aùñasàhasrikà Praj¤àpàramità and Other Essays , Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass (1 st Indian ed.).

Nyanatiloka, 1980, Buddhist Dictionary: Manual of Buddhist Terms and Doctrines , Kandy: Buddhist Publication Society. Oldenberg, H., 1988, The Religion of the Veda, transl. by S. B. Shrotri, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass (repr. 1993). Rhys Davids, T. W. & C. A. F., transl., 1899-1921, Dialogues of the Buddha, 3 pts, London: Oxford University Press.

Sacred Topology of the Buddhist Universe

Roth, G., 1985, ‘The Readings Madh’- uddeśika, Madhyoddeśika and Madhyadeśika in the Scriptures of the Ārya-Mahāsāüghika- Lokottaravādins including Notes on daśa-baddhena and pañca-baddhena

ga õena’, in: Bechert, H., ed., 1985, 127-137. Rowell, T., 1934-1937, ‘The Background and Early Use of the Buddha-K ùetra Concept’, in: Eastern Buddhist (OS) 6 (1), 199-246; 6 (4), 379-431; 7 (2), 132-176.

Senart, É., 1875, Essai sur la légende du Buddha, son charactŠre et ses origines , Paris: à l’Imprimerie nationale. Senart, É., ed., 1882-1897, Le Mahƒvastu: Texte sanscrit publi‚ pour la premiŠre fois et accompagn‚ d’introductions et d’un commentaire,

3 vols, Paris: à l’Imprimerie nationale. Stcherbatsky, Th., 1923, The Central Conception of Buddhism and the Meaning of the Word “Dharma” , London: Royal Asiatic Society. Story, F., 1972, Gods and the Universe in Buddhist Perspective: Essays on Buddhist Cosmology and Related Subjects , Kandy: Buddhist Publication Society (The Wheel Publication No. 180/181; 2 nd repr. 1983).

Strong, J. S., 1994, The Legend and Cult of Upagupta: Sanskrit Buddhism in North India and Southeast Asia , Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass. Tripathi, R. S. & Negi, T. S., eds., 2001, Hevajratantram with Muktàvalã Pa¤jikà of Mahàpaõóitàcàrya Ratnàkara÷ànti, Sarnath: Central Institute of Higher Tibetan Studies (Bibliotheca Indo-Tibetica Series 48).

Vaidya, P. L., ed., 1967, Da÷abhåmikasåtra, Darbhanga: The Mithila Institute of Sanskrit Learning (Buddhist Sanskrit Texts 7). Waldschmidt, E., 1950-1951, Das Mahàparinirvàõasåtra: Text in Sanskrit und Tibetisch, verglichen mit dem Pàli nebst einer übersetzung der chinesischen Entsprechung im Vinaya der Målasarvàstivàdins, auf Grund von Turfan-Handschriften herausgegeben und bearbeitet , Band 1-

3, Berlin: Akademie-Verlag. Wayman, A., 1997, ‘ øàkyamuni, Founder of Buddhism’, in: id., Untying the Knots in Buddhism: Selected Essays , Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 3-36.

Yamada, Isshi, ed. 1968, Karuõàpuõóarãka, 2 vols, London: School of Oriental and African Studies. Yuyama, Akira, 2001, The Mahàvastu-Avadàna in Old Palm-Leaf and Paper Manuscripts , 2 vols, Tokyo: The Centre for East Asian Cultural Studies for UNESCO.

Zhutayev, D. I., 1999, ‘Indian Roots of the Buddhanàma-såtra Literature: Towards a History of the Form’, in: Ivanov, Vyach. Vs., ed., Ancient Cultures of East and South Asia (in Russian), Moscow: MSU Publishers, 54-76.

Zhutayev, D. I., 2004, ‘Reflections on the Structure of the Early Buddhist Doctrinal Text’, in: Vertogradova, V. V., ed., India & Tibet: Text and around the Text (in Russian), Moscow: Oriental Publishers, 99-134.

Dar I. Zhutayev 169

Appendix: ŚRĪ-MAHĀVASTU-AVADĀNA

Da śabhūmika, Chapter 6 (Mv I.121.6-126.15): Text, New English Translation, Notes

The present paper is to a very large extent a close textual reading of the buddhakùetra passage from Mv. The standard English translation of the latter is that by J. J. Jones (1949-1956); the relevant passage is translated at (Jones 1949-1956 (I): 95-99). Although a serious achievement for its time, that translation is now out of date, mostly due to objective reasons: the complete unavailability to the scholars of the time of any other Mah āsāïghika texts in Indic languages, as well as the general paucity of sources from which a translator could draw parallels to (frequently obscure and/or corrupt) Mv passages. Also, the methodology adopted by Jones in his translation seems to me to some extent arbitrary:

he often sacrificed accuracy and faithfulness of the form of the text to personal considerations of stylistic smoothness and “legibility.” In view of this, I have attempted a new translation of the buddhakùetra text, accompanied by extensive notes.

Like Jones, I have worked from the only existing critical edition of Mv (Senart 1882-1897). More recent Indian editions, such as those by R. Basak (1963-1968) or S. Bagchi (2003-2004), are simple reprints of Senart’s text, unfortunately, omitting his apparatus criticus. Undoubtedly

a great feat of the nineteenth-century philology, Senart’s edition is now outdated almost to the point of being unusable per se, without having constant recourse to the manuscript readings rejected by the editor and provided in the footnotes. It is also based on extremely late Nepalese manuscripts. In the recent decades, new and much earlier manuscripts have been discovered, primarily those published in facsimile by Yuyama (2001), which was, unfortunately, inaccessible to me. Before a new critical edition of the text appears, taking into account these manuscripts and other specimens of the Mah āsāïghika-Lokottaravādin textual tradition that have surfaced during the last half-century, any translations from (and studies of) Mv, including the present one, must of necessity be of a provisional nature.

Since the notes contain very frequent references to Franklin Edgerton’s BHS dictionary (Edgerton 1953 (II)) and to the first volume of Jones’ translation of Mv (Jones 1949-1956 (I)), these two sources are hereafter cited in the following way, referring to their entries and/or page numbers: (Edg. s.v.); Jones (96); (J.: 96).

Sacred Topology of the Buddhist Universe

BHS Text:

evam ukte àyuùmàn mahàkà÷yapaþ àyuùmantaü 29 mahàkàtyàyanam uvàca || kùetram iti 30 ||

tataþ sthaviraþ kàtyàyanaþ mahàkà÷yapam athàbravãt | ÷ruyatàü lokanàthànàü kùetraü tatvàrthani÷ritaü ||

upakùetraü ca vakùyàmi teùàü paramavàdinàü | tàni ni÷amya vàkyàni ÷àsanaü ca naravara ||

ekaùaùñiü trisahasràõi buddhakùetraü parãkùitaü | ato caturguõaü j¤eyam upakùetraü tathàvidhaü ||

evam ukte àyuùmàü mahàkà÷yapaþ àyuùmantaü mahàkàtyàyanam uvàca || kiü punar bho jinaputra sarveùu buddhakùetreùu utpadyanti samyaksaübuddhà utàho keùucid eva

utpadyanti || evam ukte àyuùmàn mahàkàtyayana 31 àyuùmantaü mahàkà÷yapaü gàthàbhir adhyabhàùe ||

kiücid eva bhavati apari÷ånyaü kùetram apratimaråpadharehi | kùetrakoñinayutàni 32 bahåni ÷ånyakàni puruùapravarehi ||

29 âyuùmant (Pāli āyasmant), lit. “long-lived one,” “old.” “Respectful appellation of a bhikkhu of some standing” (PED s.v. āyasmant). A close semantic counterpart of

sthavira (Pāli thera), “elder.” Cf. immediately below: tataþ sthaviraþ kātyāyanaþ… 30 kùetram iti. Both Senart (1882-1897 (I): 470-471) and Jones (95, n. 3) explain this passage by textual corruption. While “quelque trouble dans la tradition” (Senart) is obviously observable here, this “slip,” whether it originated in oral or in written transmission, is highly symptomatic and revealing of the way the text was structured from the perspective of the (oral) performer (Zhutayev 2004: 133). 31

Sic! Probably, a misprint. 32 Koñi (Pāli id., Tib. bye ba) = Eng. “crore,” ten million. A nayuta (Mvy 8000) or

niyuta (Mvy 7702, 7828, 8056; Pāli nahuta, Tib. usually khrag khrig) is the name of a high number, generally = 100,000,000,000. Thus, a koñi of nayutas = 10 18 .

Dar I. Zhutayev 171

Translation:

Thus said, the venerable Mah ākāśyapa said to the venerable Mah ākātyāyana: “Kùetra?”

Then the elder K ātyāyana said to Mahākāśyapa thus: “Let it be heard [what] the kùetra of the world-protectors [is],

based on the truth.

33 upakùetra of those supreme teachers.

I shall also speak about the

Pay heed to these words and the teaching, O best of men.

It is established that a buddhakùetra [encompasses] sixty-one

three-thousand [world-systems]; 34

Likewise, it is to be known that an upakùetra is four times that [number]”.

Thus said, the venerable Mah ākāśyapa said to the venerable Mah ākātyāyana: “What do you say, O son of the Conqueror: do

Samyaksaübuddhas arise in all buddhakùetras, or do they arise in some only?” Thus said, the venerable Mah ākātyāyana addressed the venerable Mah ākāśyapa with the [following] gàthàs:

“Only a certain kùetra is not empty Of those endowed with unsurpassable form; Many koñi-nayutas of kùetras Are empty of the most excellent of men.

33 paramav ādināü, lit. “supreme proclaimers (of the Doctrine),” “supreme speakers.”

34 ekaùaùñiü trisahasràõi. Trisahasr¨/ °srã “(consisting of) three thousand” is a regular equivalent in verse of the fuller cliché‚ trisàhasra-mahàsàhasra(-

lokadhàtu). The word lokadhātu “seems to be always lacking” with trisahasra (Edg. s.v.).

Sacred Topology of the Buddhist Universe

durlabho hi varalakùaõadhàrã 35 dãrghakàlasamudàgatabuddhã |

sarvadharmaku÷alo atitejaþ sarvasatvasukhatàdharasatvo iti ||

evam ukte àyuùmàn mahàkà÷yapa àyuùmantaü mahàkàtyàyanam uvàca || khalu bho jinaputra ko hetuþ kaþ pratyayaþ 36 yaü ekasmiü

kùetre dvau samyaksaübuddhau nopapadyanti iti || evam ukte àyuùmàn mahàkàtyàyana àyuùmantaü mahàkà÷yapaü gàthàbhir adhyabhàùate ||

yat kàryaü naranàgena buddhakarma suduþkaraü | tat sarvaü paripåreti eùà buddhàna dharmatà ||

35 varalakùaõadh ārī. The “marks” figuring so prominently in our text are the thirty- two “characteristic marks” ( lakùaõa , Pāli lakkhaõa, Tib. mtshan), a standardised list