Introduction

The Kāraṇḍyavyūha Sūtra is a Mahāyāna Sūtra that exalts the virtues and powers of the great Bodhisattva Avalokiteśvara, and is especially important for the introduction of the Oṃ maṇi padme hūṃ mantra in the tradition of this school of Buddhist religion. The Kāraṇḍyavyūha Sūtra is a Mahāyāna Sūtra that had come into existence near about the end of the 4th century or the beginning of the 5th century AD. It is known for its fine exposition of the Bodhisattva Avalokiteśvara as “the supreme Buddhist Īsvara (divine lord) or the great cosmic puruṣa” (Cosmic person / being), whose splendor is even greater than that of any other Bodhisattva or Buddha. A distinctive feature of Avalokiteśvara in this sūtra is its creative power, as was said to be the ancestor of various celestial bodies and the main deities. In the sūtra, states: “The sun and moon are said to be born from the Bodhisattva's eyes, Maheśvara from his brow, Brahmā from his shoulders, Nārāyaṇa from his heart, Sarasvatī from his teeth, the winds from his mouth, the earth from his feet and the sky from his stomach.”

The Sūtra introduces the Buddhist mantra, Oṃ Maṇi Padme Hūm, which states that it can lead to liberation (mokṣa) and ultimately to Buddhahood. Alexander Studholme sees in this famous mantra a declarative quest, possibly “I in the Jewel Lotus,” where the Jewel Lotus is a reference to birth in the lotus of jewels in the Buddhist paradise of Sūkhāvatī of Buddha Amitābha. The mantra is the true heart of Avalokiteśvara (the supreme Buddha of Compassion) and can mark the beginning of Awakening.

Alexander Studholme writes:

“Oṃ Maṇi Padme Hūm, then, is either the paramahṛdaya, or ‘innermost heart’, of Avalokiteśvara... It is also... a mahāvidyā, a mantra capable of bringing about the ‘great knowledge’ of enlightenment itself...”^[1]

The Avalokiteśvara himself is connected in the versified version of sūtra with the first Buddha, the Ādi-Buddha, who is ‘svayambhū’ (self-existent, not born from anything or anyone). Studholme writes:

“Avalokiteśvara himself, the verse sūtra adds, is an emanation of the Ādibuddha, or’primordial Buddha’, a term that is explicitly said to be synonymous with Svayambhū and Ādinātha, ‘primordial lord’.”^[2]

According to a Tibetan legendary tradition, the text of Kāraṇḍyavyūha Sūtra arrived in a casket from the sky unto the roof of the palace of the 28th king of Tibet, Lha Thothori Nyantsen who died in 650 C.E., in southern Tibet. This coincides with one version of dating of the Kāraṇḍyavyūha Sūtra, somewhere in the 4th or perhaps early 5th century, however it seems more likely that the sūtra has originated in Kashmir, due to closeness to characteristics to Kasmiri tantric traditions of the time and to Avataṃśaka Sūtra earlier associated with the Central Asian regions.

The Kāraṇḍyavyūha is an early Mantrayāna Sūtra that is the source of the mantra Oṃ Maṇi Padme Hūṃ. The Sūtra is thus of particular importance, as this mantra now holds a central role in the Tibetan Buddhist tradition, especially throughout the lay population. This Sūtra also records Avalokiteśvara’s transformation into the principal figure of the Buddhist pantheon, greater than all other Buddhas, let alone Bodhisattvas. In this Sūtra, Avalokiteśvara is a resident of Sukhāvatī and acts as a messenger and gift bearer for Amitābha, even though he is also described as superior to all Buddhas and therefore paradoxically has both a subservient and dominant status.

The Sūtra in India and its Translations

The Kāraṇḍyavyūha probably dates to end of the 4th century or beginning of the fifth century CE. In terms of where it was composed, the text indicates familiarity with the cesspits of Vārāṇasī, and assumes the reader’s knowledge of Candradvīpa, the southern part of Bengal where the Ganges Delta is situated. In the Tibetan version, the merchants who wish to sail to Laṅka ask whether the winds are blowing toward the land of the Greeks. This appears to locate their port of departure on the northwest coast of India. In terms of time, the text is located within a culture where the Mahābhārata and the Purāṇas had a dominant place in Indian culture, particularly the Skandha Pūraṇa, probably during the Gupta period of the third to fifth century.

The earliest surviving manuscript is comprised of fragmentary pages from two manuscripts discovered within a Gilgit stūpa in the 1940s. It was written in a hybrid of Middle Indic and Sanskrit, now called Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit, which was frequently used in Sūtras. Adhelheid Mette, who has published these fragments, suggests that it was composed in the fourth or fifth century; the script in which it is written had fallen out of use by the early seventh century, and the fragments show variations between the two manuscripts that are the result of the texts having gone through generations of copying. Other existing Sanskrit manuscripts date from a century or more lately than the ninth century Tibetan translation.

According to Lokesh Chandra, in 270 CE Dharmarakṣa of Dunhuang translated the Kāraṇḍyavyūha into Chinese. Then, between 435 and 443 CE, Gunabhadra translated it into Chinese again. However, this is a case of misidentification. The Sūtra they translated was the Ratnakaraṇḍavyūha. The Kāraṇḍyavyūha itself was not translated into Chinese until 983 CE, considerably later than the Tibetan translation; the translator was T’ien Hsitsai.

The Sūtra also exists in a later, longer and more polished form, entirely in verse and incorporating passages from such texts as Śantideva’s Bodhisattvacaryāvatāra, which has great importance within Nepalese Buddhism. Dating to the fifteenth century, it is one of the last Sanskrit Buddhist Sūtras. It has not been translated into Tibetan.

Avalokiteśvara

Avalokiteśvara is noticeable by his absence in early Sūtra s where Mañjuśrī figures prominently. In the Sukhāvatīvyūha or The Display of the Pure Land of Sukhāvatī, which describes the realm of Amitāyus, the buddha who later became known by the name Amitābha, Avalokiteśvara has yet to appear. He makes his first prominent appearance in the longer Sukhāvatīvyūha in which he stands beside Amitāyus as one of his two principal Bodhisattva attendants. The other Bodhisattva was Mahāsthāmaprāpta, and in a number of subsequent Sūtra s they are included as a pair in the introductory description of the assembly of those who are listening to the teaching. In one of the Kāraṇḍyavyūha’s internal contradictions, both Mahāsthāmaprāpta and Avalokiteśvara are listed as being in the audience awaiting Avalokiteśvara’s appearance.

Each Bodhisattva later had a chapter dedicated to him in the White Lotus Sūtra, but while Avalokiteśvara reached pre-eminence over all Buddhas in the Kāraṇḍyavyūha, Mahāsthāmaprāpta declined in importance. In the Tibetan tradition, even in the Sukhāvatīvyūha, he has become conflated with Vajrapāṇi. At the time of the composition of the Kāraṇḍyavyūha, Vajrapāṇi, who in earlier Buddhism was a powerful yakṣa, appears as one of the gathered Bodhisattvas, which is indicative of Sūtra s that contain mantras. However, this is a recent development, as one of Avalokiteśvara’s qualities given in the Sūtra is that he terrifies Vajrapāṇi! Vajrapāṇi would soon join Mañjuśrī and Avalokiteśvara to form the principal trinity of Bodhisattvas in the early Tantra tradition.

The Kāraṇḍyavyūha does not mention Avalokiteśvara’s abode in this world on the Potalaka Mountain, which was a later feature that first appeared in South Indian Buddhism. The origin of the popular four-armed version of Avalokiteśvara appears within the Sūtra as the goddess who is the embodiment of the six-syllable mantra, referred to throughout as a vidyā (which is a feminine noun) or often as the queen of mahāvidyās. Many forms of Avalokiteśvara appeared in India, such as the thousand armed Avalokiteśvara included in fasting practice, and in the eleventh century there appeared the higher Tantra form named Jinasāgara, a red, four-armed Avalokiteśvara in union with a consort. This practice was introduced into Tibet in the beginning of the twelfth century.

Eventually Avalokiteśvara practices spread throughout the Buddhist world. There are still ancient Avalokiteśvara statues even in Śrī Laṅka, though the figure is identified as Śiva in Tamil areas and as Maitreya in Buddhist temples. Avalokiteśvara was prominent in China for centuries before the Kāraṇḍyavyūha was translated into Chinese. In particular Avalokiteśvara became a dominant figure in Chinese Buddhism as Kuan Yin (or Guanyin in Pinyin), transforming into a female Bodhisattva, a process described by Chun-Fang Yu in Kuan-yin: The Chinese Transformation of Avalokiteśvara, as the result of focusing on his incarnation as the Princess Miao-chan.

The Kāraṇḍyavyūha in Tibetan Buddhism

The Pillar Testament (Tib. bka’ chems ka khol ma) from the eleventh or twelfth century states that the Kāraṇḍyavyūha was one of the texts that descended from the sky in a casket onto the palace roof of the fifth-century ruler of the Yarlung Valley, Lhathothori Nyentsen (Tib. lha tho tho ri gnyan btsan), and that during the reign of his descendant Songtsen Gampo (Tib. srong btsan sgam po), who became the king of most of the Tibetan plateau and introduced Buddhism to Tibet, it was translated by Thonmi Sambhota, the inventor of the Tibetan alphabet. In the thirteenth century Nelpa Paṇḍita, rejecting this legend, stated that the casket was brought by a paṇḍita on his way to China. However, he only records the maṇi mantra as being within the casket, which happens to be called a za ma tog or “a solid and precious casket” (rinchen za ma tog) and not a reed basket. Nevertheless, this is probably why this Sūtra became associated with the legend.

The earliest and only translation of the Sūtra appears to be the one presently in the canon. All of the versions of the Kangyur except one have a colophon ascribing the translation of the Kāraṇḍyavyūha to Yeshe De and the Indian Paṇḍitas Dānaśīla and Jinamitra, who collaborated with each other on the majority of their translations. The Narthang Kangyur (Tib. snar thang bka’’gyur) is alone in attributing the translation to Śākyaprabha and Ratnarakṣita.

Nanam Yeshe De (Tib. sna nam ye shes sde) was a Tibetan who became the principal translator in the translation program set up under the royal auspices of King Trisong Detsen (Tib. khri srong lde btsan) (r. 742–798 CE). The translation work took place in a building dedicated to the translation program. It was situated within the circular compound of Samye (Tib. bsam yas) Monastery. Yeshé Dé’s name is in the colophon of no less than 347 texts in the Kangyur and Tengyur, three of which are his own original works in Tibetan. Jinamitra was invited to Tibet during the reign of Trisong Detsen, and 234 texts name him as Yeshe De’s co-translator. Dānaśīla, also known as Mālava, was invited to Tibet from Kashmir during the reign of Ralpachen (Tib. ral pa can) (r. 815–838 CE) and was involved with the translation of around 165 texts. He was also the author of seven texts, five of which he helped translate. He was still active in Tibet during the reign of King Langdarma (Tib. glang dar ma) (r. 838–841 CE).

Jinamitra and Dānaśīla were also two of the four or five Indian paṇḍitas who played principal roles in the completion of the Mahāvyuttpati, the Sanskrit-Tibetan concordance that was intended to regulate the translation of Sanskrit texts into Tibetan. Work on this dictionary began during the reigns of Trisong Detsen and Senaleg (sad na legs) (r. 800–815 CE), but it was completed in the reign of Ralpachen (ral pa can). The catalog for the Tangtong Denkar Palace (pho brang thang stong ldan dkar) collection, which was compiled in 824 CE, lists the Kāraṇḍyavyūha.

There is at least one instance in the Kāraṇḍyavyūha where the translation does not accord with the Mahāvyuttpati. In describing the twenty peaks of the mountain that is the belief in the existence of an individual self in relation to the skandhas (“aggregates”), the peaks are described as samudgata, which the Mahāvyuttpati translates as “high” (Tib. mtho ba). In the Kāraṇḍyavyūha, however, it is translated as “arisen” (Tib. byung ba). Unless the translators changed their minds, this would appear to identify the translation as having taken place before the Mahāvyuttpati was completed. Therefore we can say that the translation was certainly made during the decade between 815 and 824 CE, and presumably in the earlier part of that decade, around 820 CE or earlier. Neither Yeshe De nor Jinamitra are specified to have lived beyond the end of Ralpachen’s reign in 824 CE. Yeshe De’s remains are said to be interred within a stūpa on Hepori Hill next to Samye Monastery, where he worked on so many translations.

A later translation or revision of the Tibetan version was never made. However, the Kāraṇḍyavyūha served as the basis for the eleventh-century Maṇi Kabum (A Hundred Thousand Teachings on the Maṇi Mantra; Tib. ma Ni bka”bum), which was attributed to Songtsen Gampo, although the extracts from the Sūtra that it includes are clearly derived from the early ninth-century translation. The Maṇi Kabum was a highly influential work in propagating the practice of Avalokiteśvara, known in Tibetan as Chenrezi (spyan ras gzigs), the repetition of the maṇi mantra, and the identification of Songtsen Gampo as an emanation of Avalokiteśvara, and has had a much greater impact on Tibetan culture that the Sūtra upon which it is based.

Translation of the Title

The title of the Sūtra is somewhat ambiguous. A karaṇḍa is usually a basket made of reeds. The karaṇḍa is frequently portrayed in the background of portraits of Indian siddhas as a large pot-bellied basket with a lid, containing collections of scriptures. These siddhas are also portrayed making the hand gesture representing the basket, the karaṇḍamudrā (“basket gesture”). There is even a layperson’s hairstyle named karaṇḍamakuṭa (“basket crest”), where the hair is arranged on top of the head in the shape of a tall, rounded basket with a lid.

Another word for basket is Piṭaka, which forms the basis of the most common metaphor for the Buddha’s teachings, “the three baskets” or Tripiṭaka, which contain the Vinaya, Sūtra, and the Abhidharma or its predecessor the Mātṛkā. However, there are many instances in Tibetan literature where za ma tog, the translation of karaṇḍa, means something more solid and smaller than a pot-bellied reed basket, as in the precious casket (Tib. rin chen za ma tog) in the legend of the Kāraṇḍyavyūha’s appearance to King Lhathothori. The name of the earlier Ratnakaraṇḍa Sūtra could at first seem to mean “precious casket,” but the contents of the Sūtra validate the Tibetan translation as The Basket of the (Three) Jewels (dkon mchog gi za ma tog). There are also instances in the Sanskrit where the word karaṇḍa is apparently used for something more solid than a reed basket. There is a dhāraṇī in the Tantra section of the Kangyur that has in its title the phrase dhātukaraṇḍa (Tib. ring bsrel gyi za ma tog), which means “the casket of relics,” or “reliquary.”

The Kāraṇḍyavyūha is spelled with a long initial an in all existing Sanskrit manuscripts, while every Tibetan edition has a short initial vowel. The long vowel is more likely to be lost than added, as errors generally replace the uncommon with the common. The enhanced vowel is used in Sanskrit to denote affiliation, origin, and ancestry. In the case of kāraṇḍa, the word usually means “ducks”; they live among the river reeds that are used to make baskets. Here kāraṇḍa may be signifying that this Sūtra has its origin in the basket that contains the description of Avalokiteśvara’s qualities. A basket or casket is normally spelled without the long vowel: karaṇḍa. There are also titles in the Tengyur that contain the word Ratnakaraṇḍa (without the long vowel) where it means “a casket that is made of a precious material,” even though that meaning is not necessarily evident in Tibetan because of the syntax of the titles in question.

Therefore, after hesitating between “basket” and “casket” and wishing there was one word for both (or at least a word for a lidded, pot-bellied reed basket), we chose “basket” as the better translation, primarily because of the way karaṇḍa is used in the Sūtra itself. This term occurs only within the description of the Avīci hell. The Vaidya edition has Visphurad Ratnakaraṇḍavat, which means “raging (flame) like a precious casket,” but this appears to be a corruption, with the Cambridge manuscript having visphurantaṃ karaṇḍavat, and the Tibetan not having the equivalent of ratna (‘precious’). If karaṇḍa is being used here to describe the shape of the flame, then it is referring to the distinctive shape of the reed basket, wider at its middle. This shape is still associated with za ma tog in contemporary Tibetan, and it is also compared with the shape of an egg.

Vyūha has a wide range of meanings, but is based on the idea of things being set out or displayed, and was therefore translated into Tibetan as bkod pa. The word can also mean “description” or “explanation” and even “chapter.” The Sūtra is therefore a display from a basket, or the presentation of its contents.

The later Nepalese version of the Sūtra has a longer title, Guṇakāraṇḍavyūha, which could be translated as A Display from the Basket of Qualities, the “qualities” being those of Avalokiteśvara. Both versions of the Sūtra are dedicated primarily to a description of Avalokiteśvara’s qualities, which are stated to be greater than that of any Buddha. The use of vyūha in the title is also evocative of the earlier Gaṇḍavyūha, which forms the last chapter of the Avataṃśaka, where gaṇḍa means “supreme” or “best.” The influence of the contents of that chapter is also discernable in this Sūtra.

Oṃ Maṇi Padme Hūṃ

The Kāraṇḍyavyūha’s principal content is the introduction of the oṃ maṇi padme hūṃ mantra and the descriptions of its inconceivable benefits. These are also the most quoted sections of the Sūtra. However, it contains no instructions on the qualities and benefits of each syllable, of the kind that subsequently became widespread in Tibetan Buddhism. It also gives no explanation of the meaning of the mantra as a whole, a meaning that has been understood in various ways. Donald Lopez has given an account of various interpretations of the mantra in the West in his Prisoners of Shangri-la.

Alexander Studholme, in his The Origins of Oṃ maṇi padme hūṃ, describes how the Sūtra was composed within the context of familiarity with, and under the influence of, Purāṇic literature, in particular the Skandapurāṇa. In this Sūtra, Avalokiteśvara has taken on various attributes and characteristics of Śiva, to the extent that one passage could be misread as describing Avalokiteśvara to be the creator of the universe. Even so, he is still being described as the creator of its deities, including Śiva and Viṣṇu. In particular, Avalokiteśvara’s mantra is evidence of the influence of Śiva’s fivesyllable mantra, oṃ namaḥ śivāya (“Oṃ—Homage to Śiva!”), which is found in the Skandapurāṇa together with a description of the benefits of its recitation.

In classical Sanskrit grammar, padme would be the locative case, which has led to the interpretation of oṃ maṇi padme hūṃ as “jewel in the lotus.” However, mantras are typically given in the vocative or dative case, usually with the name of a deity being invoked. Padme is in fact the vocative for padma, this being Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit. In classical Sanskrit, the eending vocative form is only used for feminine nouns. P.C. Verhagen has translated one of the few native Tibetan texts to be found in the Tengyur, a grammar text that uses this very mantra to explain the e-ending vocative form for masculine nouns. This vocative form of masculine nouns is a characteristic of the Magadhi, or north eastern Middle Indic, dialect. However, this form appears to have been much more widespread, extending as far as Sanskrit loan words in the Tocharian language of Central Asia. Maṇi padma is therefore a compound and is a name for Avalokiteśvara meaning “Jewel Lotus.”

Difficulties Inherent in the Sūtra

The Sūtra itself is rarely read in Tibet, other than in the annual ritual chanting of the Kangyur, and as mentioned above it has been eclipsed by the eleventh-century Maṇi Kabum. There is no evidence of it having had any significant impact on religious life in Tibet in the preceding centuries. In spite of the eventual importance of the oṃ maṇi padme hūṃ mantra, the Sūtra is still primarily known only through select quotations. One reason for this is that very little of the teaching and meditation practice of the Maṇi Kabum is to be found in the Sūtra.

Another reason is the difficulty involved in reading the Sūtra due to its structure of narratives within narratives. After a buddha is initially introduced, he is subsequently only referred to as “Bhagavat,” and it is easy for readers to lose track of which level of the narrative they are reading. Although the speakers’ names were not repeated in the original, we have added them in here for clarity. We have not marked these insertions with square brackets, again for the sake of readability.

Another problem with the Sūtra is that although it is a compilation of narratives, the Sūtra does not always use its source material in a skilful manner. The Sanskrit original itself does not compare well with the clarity and style of writing found in other Sūtras. There are abrupt transitions, inconsistency in the use of pronouns, and the contents of one part of the narrative appear to be in contradiction with those of another. For example, the Buddha tells the tale of the merchants being rescued from the land of the rākṣasīs in the first person, but there are sporadic lapses into what must have been the original third person of the narrative. The asura king Bali’s account of his downfall likewise transitions from a first-to a third-person account. In common with many other Mahāyāna Sūtras but perhaps more frequently than most of them, the Kāraṇḍyavyūha refers to itself within its own narrative as a Sūtra that is being taught, requested, or longed for, but appears to describe itself as being comprised of verses, almost as if the Kāraṇḍyavyūha is a different Sūtra that is simply being referred to in this Sūtra.

The Sūtra assumes that the reader is familiar with the Mahābhārata and the Rāmāyaṇa, the two great epics of Indian literature, and the story of Viṣṇu’s avatar as a dwarf deceiving Bali, the lord of the asuras. Tibetan readers, however, would be unfamiliar with personages referred to in passing in the text, such as Śukra, who is both the deity of the planet Venus and counselor for the king of the asuras. Viṣṇu is usually referred to as Nārāyaṇa in the Sūtra, but in the passage where he rescues the Pāṇḍavas and other kṣatriyas of Mahābhārata fame, he is referred to as Daśarathaputra (‘son of Daśaratha’), which is actually the name of Rāma, another of Viṣṇu’s avatars. This may be because the story of the dwarf avatar also appears in the Rāmāyaṇa when it is told to Rāma, that is, Daśarathaputra.

The Sūtra also includes a variation of a well-known jātaka tale in which the Buddha as a horse saves merchants from the island of the rākṣasīs, which has been retold with variations many times in Buddhist literature. Here it is retold with Avalokiteśvara as the horse and the Buddha as the head merchant who is being rescued. However, this too implies an unexplained internal contradiction;the Sūtra had earlier narrated how Avalokiteśvara, in the form of a handsome man, had converted all the rākṣasīs from their cannibalistic ways to become devotees of Buddhism.

The Translation into English

My goal was to make the more comprehensible, accurate and consistent version of Sūtra obtained in the Tibetan translation. Dr. Buddhadev Bhattacharya prepared a critical bilingual (Sanskrit-Tibetan) edition of the text last year and published it in an international publisher. He took help from Tibetan sources. He edited this text of 6 Tibetan manuscripts and 5 Sanskrit manuscripts preserved in the Asiatic Society, Kolkata. The Dege edition and the critical edition of Kangyur were therefore my main sources. Sanskrit manuscripts do not necessarily reflect the original form of a text, even if they are in the original language, because they have their accumulation of omissions and additions that have occurred over the centuries to when a Tibetan or Chinese translation has been made. It has not yet been a critical edition of all the Sanskrit manuscripts available, but I have consulted three Sanskrit editions, the most important being a palm leaf manuscript from the Cambridge University Library, which was written at the beginning of the second millennium ahead development of the Devanāgarī script. It is notable for being closer to the Tibetan. Easier but less representative of the original text modification access are Sāmaśrami 1872 and 1962 Vaidya edition which is strictly based on Sāmaśrami. Sāmaśrami is available in the online Sanskrit texts project of the Theosophical Network and the Vaidya is openly available on the Internet. To complete the translation of some difficult passages, l also refer to the fragments of the Gilgit manuscript, although they were not easily accessible. The English translation of Silfung Chens into English from the Chinese was interesting in its correspondence with these editions.

However, as noted above, there were a number of points on which to rely on Sanskrit to complete missing elements, words, members of a list and sometimes complete sentences, although it is possible that some of them were added later to improve the flow and clarity sometimes embarrassing narrative of Sūtra. When the Tibetan translation was modified in favor of Sanskrit, the annotations indicate that this is the case.

An important goal was readability, so the syntax does not necessarily reflect that of the Tibetan or Sanskrit versions. For instance, an active construction may be used instead of a passive construction found in the original. First and third person inconsistencies have been resolved and, as noted above, the names are repeated when, in the opposite case, the reader can lose track of who is speaking and to whom the text refers. Fortunately, this will make reading the Sūtra in English less demanding than trying to do it in Tibetan or Sanskrit.

Summary of the Text

Buddha Śākyamuni is at Jetavana Monastery with many disciples. Lights shine upon the monastery and miraculously transform it. The Bodhisattva Sarvanīvaraṇaviṣkambhin asks the Buddha where the lights came from. The Buddha explains that they came from Avalokiteśvara, who had just visited the Avīci hell and the city of the pretas, and then describes those visits.

Then Buddha Śākyamuni recounts being a merchant at the time of Buddha Vipaśyin and how he heard him describe how various deities, including Śiva and Viṣṇu, were created from Avalokiteśvara’s body.

Buddha Śākyamuni then recounts being Bodhisattva Dānaśūra at the time of Buddha Śikhin and how light rays shone from Buddha Śikhin. In response to questioning by Bodhisattva Ratnapāṇi, Śikhin says that the lights and other omens are a sign of the approach of Avalokiteśvara, who then arrives from Sukhāvatī with an offering of lotuses from Buddha Amitābha.

After Avalokiteśvara’s departure, Śikhin describes to Ratnapāṇi how Avalokiteśvara’s accumulation of merit is inconceivable by using a series of analogies. Then he describes how Avalokiteśvara teaches this very Sūtra to the asuras in the form of an asura.

Buddha Śākyamuni then states that he was a rishi (ṛṣi) at the time of Buddha Viśvabhū. Before repeating what Viśvabhū taught, Śākyamuni relates how Avalokiteśvara taught upside-down beings in the realm of gold and fourlegged beings in the land of silver. There then follows a long description of Avalokiteśvara’s visit to the asuras in the land of iron. Avalokiteśvara teaches the asuras the inconceivable merit that comes from making offerings to a buddha. Bali, the king of the asuras, tells Avalokiteśvara that he had in the past made an offering to the wrong recipient. He had imprisoned all the kṣatriyas, but Viṣṇu secretly freed them and came to him in the form of a dwarf asking for two steps of land. Bali offered him three, but Viṣṇu took on his divine form and covered the whole world in two steps. He then banished Bali to the underworld where he now dwells for having failed to fulfil his promise.

Avalokiteśvara then describes to him the suffering in hells that awaits those who have not made offerings to the Buddha. Avalokiteśvara then radiates light rays to where Viśvabhū and his pupils are residing in Jetavana Monastery. Bodhisattva Gaganagañja asks Viśvabhū where the lights came from. Viśvabhū states that the lights are a sign that Avalokiteśvara is coming. However, Avalokiteśvara first goes to a land of darkness to teach the yakṣas and rākṣasas about the merit that comes from this Sūtra.

Avalokiteśvara then goes to the Śuddhāvāsa realms, where in the form of a Brahmin he begs from a poor deva. The deva goes into his empty palace to give him whatever he has, but finds it full of jewels and food that he then offers to the Brahmin. Avalokiteśvara in the form of the Brahmin tells the deva that he is a Bodhisattva from Jetavana Monastery.

Avalokiteśvara then descends to Siṃhala, the land of the rākṣasīs, in the form of a handsome man. He agrees to be their husband if they follow his instructions, which they do, giving up killing. Avalokiteśvara then travels to Vārāṇasī, where in the form of a bee he buzzes the prayer of homage to the Three Jewels to the insects in a large cesspit, liberating them.

Avalokiteśvara then goes to Magadhā, where starving beings have been eating each other for twenty years, and he causes a rain of food to fall. One of the people, a man who is hundreds of thousands of years old, realizes that only Avalokiteśvara could have caused this miracle, and tells the others of the benefits of making offerings to him. Avalokiteśvara then goes to Buddha Viśvabhū. Bodhisattva Gaganagañja meets him, Viśvabhū teaches the six perfections, and the audience disperses. This is the end of part one.

Part two begins with Sarvanīvaraṇaviṣkambhin asking for teachings from Buddha Śākyamuni, who lists the samādhis that Avalokiteśvara has.

Then Buddha Śākyamuni recounts being a head merchant who became stranded on Siṃhala Island with other merchants. Each of them goes to live with an rākṣasī. One night, a talking lamp warns the head merchant that the women are all rākṣasīs. As proof, the lamp directs him to an iron fortress where other merchants are being kept prisoner and then eaten. Then the lamp tells him of Bālāha, a miraculous horse on which the merchants can escape. As they flee upon the horse, all the other merchants look back, fall off the horse, and are eaten by the rākṣasīs, while the head merchant reaches home safely. Buddha Śākyamuni states that Avalokiteśvara was the horse.

Buddha Śākyamuni then begins a description of two pores on Avalokiteśvara’s body and their inhabitants.

Sarvanīvaraṇaviṣkambhin, to the Buddha’s approval, describes the benefits that come from this Sūtra. Buddha Śākyamuni describes another pore and explains to Sarvanīvaraṇaviṣkambhin that the pores are immaterial and cannot be seen even by Buddhas.

Buddha Śākyamuni describes two more pores, saying that those who remember Avalokiteśvara’s name, meaning the six-syllable mahāvidyā, will be reborn in them, but that no one, not even the Buddhas, and know this mantra.

After Buddha Śākyamuni describes more benefits that come from the mantra, Sarvanīvaraṇaviṣkambhin declares his intention to obtain it.

Buddha Śākyamuni recounts his own fruitless search for it until, after meeting trillions of Buddhas, he finally met Buddha Ratnottama who directed him to Buddha Padmottama. Padmottama describes the incalculable benefits that come from saying the mantra once and then describes his own long fruitless search for the mantra until he came to Buddha Amitābha, who instructed Avalokiteśvara to give the mantra to Padmottama. Avalokiteśvara does so through a Maṇḍala made of precious stones and gives the instructions on how to make the Maṇḍala.

Buddha Śākyamuni follows this narrative with a description of how incalculable the benefits are from even one syllable of the mantra.

He then tells Sarvanīvaraṇaviṣkambhin that he can only obtain it from an unnamed dharmabhāṇaka who has lost his monastic vows and lives in Vārāṇasī. Sarvanīvaraṇaviṣkambhin goes to him in a huge procession of people and offerings. The dharmabhāṇaka describes the benefits of the mantra and, at the urging of Avalokiteśvara, who appears in the sky, gives the mantra to Sarvanīvaraṇaviṣkambhin, who returns to Buddha Śākyamuni. Seventy million Buddhas recite the mantra of the goddess known as both Cundi and Cundā. Buddha Śākyamuni then describes five more of Avalokiteśvara’s pores.

Buddha Śākyamuni then describes the oceans that come from Avalokiteśvara’s big toe, and says there are no more pores but those ten. Then omens of Avalokiteśvara’s arrival appear. He leaves Sukhāvatī and comes to Buddha Śākyamuni and offers him lotuses from Buddha Amitābha.

Buddha Śākyamuni then directs Maheśvara and Umādevī to receive the prophecies of their future buddhahood from Avalokiteśvara. Buddha Śākyamuni then gives a teaching on the incalculability of Avalokiteśvara’s merit and listing the samādhis he has. Then Buddha Śākyamuni recounts when he was with Buddha Krakucchanda and saw Samantabhadra and Avalokiteśvara both practicing various samādhis. Krakucchanda declares that not even the Buddhas have Avalokiteśvara’s samādhis.

Buddha Śākyamuni then describes the benefits that come from this Sūtra, and Avalokiteśvara departs. Then Ānanda requests teachings on monastic conduct. Buddha Śākyamuni prophesizes how there will be monks who do not maintain their conduct in the future and who should be expelled. He describes the tortures in hell and other rebirths that await laypeople who misuse the property of the Saṅgha. Ānanda departs and the Sūtra concludes.

Historical Background of the Study:

In one of most popular Buddhist literary tradition of Nepal, the words of the Buddha are preserved in Nava Dharmaparyāya or nine excellences of truths, also called nine Vaipulya Sūtras. But Mahāvuitatti enumerated twenty eight Dharma-Paryāya. Nine Vaipulya Sūtras are generally described as follows:

1. Aṣṭasāhasrikā-prajñā-pāramitā-sūtra
2. Saddharma-puṇdarīka-sūtra
3. Lalitavistara-sūtra
4. Laṇkāvatāra-sūtra / Saddharma-Laṇkāvatāra-sūtra
5. Suvarṇa-prabhāsa-sūtra
6. Kāraṇḍyavyūha-sūtra / Gaṇḍavyūha-sūtra
7. Tathāgataguhyka-sūtra / Tathāgataguṇa-jñāna-sūtra
8. Samādhirāja-sūtra
9. Daśabhūmīśvara-sūtra.

It is also further to be noted that these Mahāyāna Sūtras represent Bodhisattavapiṭaka, or the canon (Āgam) of Mahāyāna Buddhist tradition. Another important point is that the Bodhisattvayāna developed independent process of spiritual practice. From this point of view the Bodhisattvayāna holds two facts in practice (1) the method of pāramitā and (2) the method of mantra. These are called respectively pāramitānaya and mantranaya. Both these practices are supported by the literary sources of Bodhisattvayāna which have been classified from different angles in different manners.

The Mahāyāna Sūtras are also classified into several categories like 1. Prajñāpāramitāsūtra propounding Sūnyatā to be ultimate reality 2. Avataṃśateka Sūtra (consisting of different vyūhas, like Gaṇḍavyūha, Kāraṇḍyavyūha etc.) As mentioned above the two spiritual practices of Bodhisattvas are dealt with in different Sūtras of Mahāyāna. The text under study namely Kāraṇḍyavyūha Sūtra is a significant Sūtra because it aims at uniting these two facets of these spiritual practices of Mahāyāna Buddhism. Kāraṇḍyavyūha Sūtra, the text under study is recent published which is not been studied yet, belongs to the Vyūha categories of Buddhist Mahāyāna Sūtras. From these literary sources it is also confirmed that altruist a Bodhisattva, by the practice of Pāramitā, attends higher merits of benevolence, moral conduct, tolerance, vigour, meditative excellence and wisdom creditable to engage for rendering welfare service to those who suffer.

Major Objective of the Study:

The major Objectives of the Study are:

1. To analyze the historical status, language and linguistic status, religious and philosophical status and tantric tradition of Buddhism in the Kāraṇḍyavyūha Sūtra.

2. To understand the importance of the text and principle characteristics of the text.

3. To make a critical analysis of Buddh's teachings in this particular text.

4. To see how the concept of Avalokiteśvara and Budda is explained in the Kāraṇḍyavyūha Sūtra.

5. To investigate the importance of Kāraṇḍyavyūha Sūtra in Tibetan Buddhism.

6. To compare two divisions of Buddhism Theravāda and Mahāyāna.

7. To study the significance of Oṃ Maṇi Padme Hūṃ in Tibetan Buddhist culture.

8. To explore the Ancient Indian Literary heritage.

9. To highlight the hidden treasure of Kāraṇḍyavyūha Sūtra.

10. To present the data, chronologically for easy understanding of scholars.

Importance of the Study:

The importance of this study are following:

1. English translation of the Kāraṇḍyavyūha Sūtra is very important to understand the subject matter of Kāraṇḍyavyūha Sūtra. This translation is intended for people who are interested in Buddhism but are not Buddhist scholars.

2. This study helps to fill up the gaps of complete study of Vaipulya Sūtra.

3. In Tibetan Buddhism, in particular, the Kāraṇḍyavyūha Sūtra is one of the most significant text, because it is the source from which the syllable “Oṃ Maṇipadme Hūṃ” is derived. This study helps in understanding the significance and benefits of six-syllabled mantra Oṃ Maṇipadme Hūṃ.

4. Śrāvakayāna or Hīnayāna and Bodhisattvayāna or Mahāyāna both religious schools claim that the Kāraṇḍyayūha Sūtra is their own text. The present study is important to solve the problem.

5. This study helps in understanding the language and linguistic status of Kāraṇḍyavyūha Sūtra.

6. This study is important to know the importance of the text, principle characteristics of the text and Buddha's teachings in this particular text.

7. This study helps in understanding the concept of Avalokiteśvara and Ādibuddha.

Review of Literature:

The text was translated into Tibetan by the 8th century A.D. when the eminent Lo cha ba, Tibetan translator Ye shes sde rendered it into Tibetan. Prior to that the book was translated into Chinese in different names since 3rd century A.D. to the 4th century A.D.

The Kāraṇḍya-vyūha is devoted mainly to the glorification of the Buddhas, the Buddha-kṣetṛas and Bodhisatvas. In the matter of religious practice these sūtras give more emphasis on the Mantra method and the cult of devotion and have formed the basis for the formation of certain independent Buddhist schools in China, Korea and Japan. On the basic of text different school of thought has been developed in these country.

Kāraṇḍya-vyūha has two versions, the earlier one is in prose and the later in verses. The glorification of the Bodhisattva Avalokitaśvara, belief in the Ādi-Buddha as God and creator in the style of Pūraṇas and the glorification of the protecting and benedictory prayer formula ‘Oṃ Maṇi Padme Hūṃ’ are some of the significant contents of Kāraṇḍya-vyūha-sūtra. Careful analysis of these contents will be undoubtedly very helpful for having a clear view of the historical evolution of many new religious trends in Mahāyāna Buddhism.

Sanskrit (Verse only) text of Kāraṇḍavyūha Sūtra was edited by Satyavrata Samasami Bhattacharyya, and was published from Shrerampur press, West Bengal with Bengali translation in Shakbada 1794 (1872). He made arbitrary sections of his edition in two parts. The first part of the book has enumeration of 16 prakaraṇs and the second part has 13 prakaraṇs according to his distribution of the text matter. He has based his classification on subject matter as understood by contents of book. Manuscripts in prose, which he followed, are distributed in three Nirvyūhas. KVS has thirteen chapters as printed by Shrerampur Missionary Press. But the Sanskrit manuscripts, belonging to the Asiatic Society do not agree in toto. That it shows that several versions of the KVS were prevailed. Sanskrit (Prose only) text of Kāraṇḍavyūha Sūtra was edited by Lokesh Chandra and was published from Aditya Prakashan, Delhi, 1990. Now complete (Prose and Verse both) text has come in bi-lingual (Sanskrit-Tibetan) critical edition by Buddhadev Bhattacharya from Kaveri Books, Delhi, 2016.

Major Research Gaps:

Review of literature identified the following gaps

1. There are nine vaipulya sūtra in the area of Buddhist Studies. Already previous eight were analysed in many ways. But, the rest one, ninth is not cared properly.

2. Only one Chinese or Tibetan translation is available. No English Translation be seen till date.

3. Philosophical importance of Kāraṇḍyavyūha Sūtra in Buddhist religion is to be revisited, so that the lying vacuum may fill up the urge of the intellectuals to.

4. Kāraṇḍyavyūha Sūtra is one of the most important Mahāyānist Sanskrit text, it has been studied by many scholars, but is not deeply analysed, such as its date, status of its language, religious status of the text and historical background.

5. We find explanation of the roles of the Avalokiteśvara Bodhisattva in detail, which is a concept that had a variety of interpretations from various scholars, but is not yet properly investigated.

6. We find the remarkable development of the idea of the Ādibuddha which is one of the core doctrines of both Mahāyāna and Vajrayāna Buddhism.

The issue of the concept of the Ādibuddha has caused many controversies among scholars old as well as modern. But none of these scholars ever thoroughly analysed.

7. The Kāraṇḍyavyūha Sūtra's principle content is the introduction of the Oṃ Maṇi Padme Hūṃ mantra. The Oṃ Maṇi Padme Hūṃ mantra has been discussed by several scholars, but is not cared properly.

8. There have been many different definition and meaning of Bodhisattva assigned by different scholars, but is not deeply analysed.

9. Bodhisattva definition, concept and the relation to bhakti and then bodhisattva path are not yet properly investigated.

10. The concept of Buddhas in Mahāyāna Buddhism has been discussed by several scholars who based their various analyses on several Sanskrit texts. However, none of these prominent scholars ever investigated the Kāraṇḍ which is one of the most important Mahāyānist Sanskrit text because in it we can see the further development of the concept of Buddhas.

Major Research Question of the Study:

By following the Indian heritage, I was impelled by 1. What is the Language Status in Kāraṇḍya-vyūha-sūtra ?

2. What is Buddhist Sanskrit Vyūha Literature?

3. What is the meaning of Kāraṇḍya-vyūha?

4. How much Śrāvakayāna or Mahāyāna elements are in Kāraṇḍya-vyūhasūtra ?

5. What is the background of the Kāraṇḍya-vyūha-sūtra ?

6. What is the concept of Bodhisattva in Kāraṇḍya-vyūha-sūtra ?

7. How far Śrāvakayāna or Mahāyāna philosophy are in this text?

8. What is the Tantrik tradition lied in Kāraṇḍyavyūha ?

9. What are the status and qualities of the Bodhisattva Avalokitaśvara in Kāraṇḍyavyūha?

10. What is the concept of Ādibuddha in Kāraṇḍya-vyūha-sūtra?

11. What is the meaning of Oṃ Maṇi Padme Hūṃ?

12. What is the importance of Six-syllabled Mantra Oṃ Maṇi Padme Hūṃ in Kāraṇḍyavyūha Sūtra?

13. What is the concept of Bodhisattva path in Kāraṇḍyavyūha Sūtra?

14. How much Purāṇic Influence are in Kāraṇḍyavyūha Sūtra?

15. What is the importance of Kāraṇḍya-vyūha-sūtra in Tibetan Buddhism?

16. What is the difference between Mahāyāna Buddhism and Hīnayāna Buddhism?

17. What is the concept of pāramitā in Kāraṇḍya-vyūha-sūtra ?

18. How is Kāraṇḍyavyūha Sūtra significant and relevant to contemporary education?

Methodology:

The critical and analytical method has been followed in this research project. The study was conducted at macro and micro level. Here the text was translated from Sanskrit into English. The critical analysis of each word of the text is made to understand the linguistic peculiarity of the Buddhist Sanskrit language of this particular text. The analytical method was used to better understand their religious and philosophical status in Buddhism. The libraries, institutions and places where the Buddhist philosophy was restored or cultivated were also visited for study purposes.

Outline of the Thesis

Introduction

The Introduction gives a bird’s eye view about the whole thesis. It includes the important and peculiar features of the thesis. It introduces the methodology of the thesis. The descriptions also include: Introduction to Kāraṇḍyavyūha Sūtra, The Kāraṇḍyavyūha in Tibetan Buddhism, The Sūtra in India and its Translations, Avalokiteśvara, Translation of the Title, Oṃ Maṇi Padme Hūṃ, Ārya Avalokiteśvara and the Six Syllable Mantra, Avalokiteśvara's Miraculous Birth in the Pure Land of Padmāvatī, Avalokiteśvara's Mission, Manifestation of Six Buddhas in the Six Realms, Manifestation of the Thousand-Armed Thousand-Eye Avalokiteśvara and the Six-Syllable Mantra, Avalokiteśvara into this World, The Teachings of the Six-Syllable Mantra by Śākyamuni Buddha, The Benefits of the Six-Syllable Mantra, Difficulties Inherent in the Sūtra, The Translation into English, Summary of the Text, Outline of the Sūtra, Historical Background of the Study, Major objective of the Study, Importance of the Study, Major Research Gaps, Methodology etc.

Chapter-I: English Translation of Kāraṇḍyavyūha-sūtra

The first Chapter presents English Translation of Kāraṇḍyavyūha-sūtra from Sanskrit text.

Chapter-II: Buddhist Sanskrit Language in Kāraṇḍyavyūhasūtra

The second chapter discusses about the language status of Kāraṇḍyavyūha sūtra. The descriptions also include: Introduction to Buddhist Sanskrit Literature, A Link between Gāthā Sanskrit and Pure Sanskrit, Mixed Sanskrit and Pure Sanskrit, Some Observations about the Buddhist Sanskrit, Some Features of Mixed Sanskrit, Specimens of the Gāthā Sanskrit, Etymology of Gāthā, The Gāthā Dialect, Gāthās in the Buddhavacana, Growth of Buddhist Sanskrit (5th century B. C. to 1st century A. D.) etc.

Chapter-III: Buddhist Philosophy in Kāraṇḍyavyūha-sūtra

The third chapter deals elaborately the religious and philosophical importance of the Kāraṇḍyavyūha-sūtra. The descriptions also include: Introduction to Buddhist Philosophy, Classification of Mahāyāna Sūtras, Avalokiteśvara Bodhisattva in Kāraṇḍyavyūha, Importance of Mantra,Concept of the Pāramitās in Buddhism,Baudha-dharma, Hīnayāna (Theravāda) Buddhism, Mahāyāna Buddhism, Differences between Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna Buddhism, Bodhisattva in Five Nikāyas, Boddhisattva Ideal in Pāli Canon, Perspective on Bodhisattva and Śrāvaka etc.

Chapter-IV: Six-syllabled Mantra Oṃ Maṇi Padme Hūṃ

The forth chapter deals the Significance and benefits of Six-Syllabled Mantra Oṃ Maṇi Padme Hūm. The descriptions also include: Historical Importance of Mantra in Tibet, Significance of the Mantra, Importance of Number Six in Buddhism, Oṃ Maṅi Padme Hūṃ Mantra, The Teachings of the Six-Syllable Mantra by Śākyamuni Buddha, The Benefits of the Six Syllable Mantra etc.

Conclusion

It concludes the thesis with peculiar finds.

Possible Limitation of the Study:

One important work like, Kāraṇḍyavyūha Sūtra may not be minutely observed and analysed through a single work like this. So, this work always bears limitations.This work is delimited within–received data from primary and secondary sources, this research method, researcher and time. The change of any one may bring separate result.

Footnotes and references:

[back to top]

[1]:

Alexander Studholme, The Origins of Oṃ Maṇipadme Hūṃ: A Study of the Kāraṇḍyavyūha Sūtra, State University of New York Press., Albany, 2002, p. 108.

[2]:

Ibid.,, p. 108.

Other Mahayana Concepts:

[back to top]

Discover the significance of concepts within the article: ‘Introduction’. Further sources in the context of Mahayana might help you critically compare this page with similair documents:

Mandala, Buddhism, Buddhahood, Tibetan Buddhism, Buddhist philosophy, Adi Buddha, Mahabharata, Varanasi, Sukhavati, Mahayanasutra, Avici Hell, Chinese translation, Buddha Shakyamuni, Tibetan translation, Mahayana Buddhism, Bodhisattva path, Translations into Chinese, Translation into Chinese, Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit, Buddha Amitabha, Bodhisattva Avalokiteshvara, Sanskrit manuscript, Sutra Teaching, Tantric tradition.