Mahāyāna — Northern Canon · Kangyur — General Sūtras

Toh 674The Noble Mahāyāna Sūtra of Aparimitāyurjñāna

Pāli / Sanskrit:Aparimitāyurjñānasūtra

📖9,168 words · ~37 min read

Summary

Summary The Buddha, while at the Jetavana in Śrāvastī, tells Mañjuśrī of a buddha realm far above the world, in which lives the Buddha Aparimitāyurjñāna. He states that those who recite, write, hear, and so on, the praise of this buddha, or make offerings to this text, will have numerous benefits, including a long life and a good rebirth. As vast numbers of buddhas recite it, the mantra, or dhāraṇī , of this buddha is repeated numerous times. This is the best known of the two versions of this sūtra in the Kangyur.

Save your scripture progress

Create a free account to save scriptures, track progress, and continue your daily learning path.

Create account →

Full translation (English)

Summary

The Buddha, while at the Jetavana in Śrāvastī, tells Mañjuśrī of a buddha
realm far above the world, in which lives the Buddha Aparimitāyurjñāna. He
states that those who recite, write, hear, and so on, the praise of this buddha,
or make offerings to this text, will have numerous benefits, including a long
life and a good rebirth. As vast numbers of buddhas recite it, the mantra, or
dhāraṇī, of this buddha is
repeated numerous times. This is the best known of the two versions of this
sūtra in the Kangyur.

Acknowledgements

The sūtra was translated from Tibetan and Sanskrit by Peter Alan Roberts.
Tulku Yeshi of the Sakya Monastery, Seattle, was the consulting lama who
reviewed the translation. The project manager and editor was Emily Bower. The
proofreader was Ben Gleason. The introduction was compiled by the 84000
Editorial Team, and incorporates material by Peter Alan Roberts.

The translation was completed under the patronage and supervision of
84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha.

Introduction

Overview

The Aparimitāyurjñāna Sūtra is among
the many canonical works in which a particular buddha in another buddhafield
is invoked along with the benefits of recalling his name and reciting his
dhāraṇī. Associated as
it is with longevity, this is one of the most widely read texts in the
Kangyur, and Aparimitāyurjñāna (“Immeasurable Longevity and Wisdom”’) is
one of the most frequently portrayed and well-known buddhas in the pantheon
of Tibetan Buddhism.

The sūtra is commonly referred to as the Tsédo (tshe mdo, “Sūtra of
Longevity”) or Tsézung (tshe gzungs, “Dhāraṇī of Longevity”), and
contains a dhāraṇī that is repeated in the text twenty-nine times. It is
included in many Tibetan liturgical compilations, and its recitation,
usually with a specified number of repetitions, is often advised to people
in poor health or facing other difficulties, or is commissioned on their
behalf in monasteries.

Although its title identifies it as a sūtra, it is placed in all
Kangyurs with the Action Tantras (bya
ba’i rgyud, kriyātantra). In common with many other works classified as
Action Tantras, there is nevertheless little in the text to identify it as a
tantra. The inclusion of a long, repeated dhāraṇī in Sanskrit is presumably
one criterion for this classification, although there are many other
canonical works with a similar structure that are placed with the sūtras.
Other criteria may have been its classification and line of transmission in
India, before it was taken to Tibet, or the fact that it has also formed the
basis for a wide range of tantra practices, particularly among the higher
levels of tantra, in the form of sādhanas of Aparimitāyus.

The text has also survived in a large number of Sanskrit manuscripts
(mostly later Nepalese ones); in two Chinese translations; and in a
different—perhaps earlier—Tibetan translation, represented by most of the
very numerous manuscripts found in the caves of Dunhuang, where a Khotanese
manuscript (probably the oldest surviving version) was also found.

All Kangyurs include two major versions of the sūtra, similar in
most respects but differing mainly in the presence or absence of one phrase
in the repeated dhāraṇī. The background of the existence of these two
versions is discussed below. The version translated here is the best known
and most widely used of the two, and seems to represent Sanskrit source
texts brought to Tibet in the later translation period. Even this version,
however, is found in two near-duplicate copies in the Degé and other
Kangyurs, with one word in the dhāraṇī consistently differing between the
copies.

The other major version, The Aparimitāyurjñāna
Sūtra (2), Toh 675, appears to be derived from the same
translation, but the dhāraṇī it contains is the shorter one, matching those
found in the Chinese translations, the Dunhuang manuscript in Khotanese, and
the earlier Tibetan translation represented by the majority of the very
numerous Dunhuang manuscripts in Tibetan.

This sūtra is one of the set known as the “ten royal
sūtras,” thought to be so called either because they represent distillations
of the most profound scriptures, or because according to traditional
histories they were recommended to King Trisong Detsen for his daily
practice by Guru Padmasambhava. As a result of practicing them, the king is
said to have extended his life by thirteen years.

In a similar vein, the fact that so many manuscript copies of this
text have been found in the Dunhuang caves is due to their production by
scribes there having been commissioned on behalf of Trisong Detsen’s
grandson, Ralpachen (who reigned in the early ninth century), in order to
ensure for the king the longevity that the text itself promises.

Aparimitāyus, Amitāyus, and Amitābha

The name of the buddha who is the subject of this sūtra has three
forms, of different lengths. The shortest version of his name is
Aparimitāyus. The medium-length version is Aparimitāyurjñāna (“Immeasurable
Longevity and Wisdom”), and figures in the title of the sūtra. The longest
form of the name, also in the sūtra, is
Aparimitāyurjñānasuviniścitatejorāja (“The Blazing King Who Is
Completely Certain of Immeasurable Longevity and Wisdom”).

The shortest name, Aparimitāyus, is translated into Tibetan as
Tsepamé (tshe dpag med or, in full,
tshe dpag tu med pa). Tsepamé,
however, is also the Tibetan translation of Amitāyus, an alternative form of
the name of the Buddha Amitābha found in many scriptures. These two buddhas,
who seem to have been originally quite distinct, are often identified with
each other—not only in Tibetan Buddhism but also in the Chinese and Japanese
traditions —and the overlap of their names in
Tibetan is therefore not the only factor at work. But partly as a result of
back-translation from Tibetan into Sanskrit, Aparimitāyurjñāna has become
commonly known as Amitāyus, a name which makes him difficult to distinguish
from the Amitāyus who is Amitābha.

Other than by their names, a further means of distinguishing between
these two buddhas is by their buddhafields. In this sūtra, the Buddha
Śākyamuni clearly introduces Aparimitāyurjñāna as dwelling in the realm
named Aparimitaguṇasaṃcaya (“Accumulation of Immeasurable Qualities”),
which is situated in an upward direction from this world, i.e. toward the
zenith. Tibetan authors who commented on the problem, even if they used the
short form Tsepamé (Amitāyus), nevertheless took pains to distinguish
between the two buddhas. On the one hand was “Amitāyus of the zenith”
(steng phyogs kyi tshe dpag med)
and “Amitāyus of Akaniṣṭha” (’og min gyi tshe
dpag med, in the tantras), both likely to be references to
Aparimitāyurjñāna. On the other was “Amitāyus of Sukhāvatī” (bde ba can gyi tshe dpag med), also
sometimes known as “Amitāyus of the Drum of Immortality” (’chi med rnga sgra’i tshe dpag med,
Dundubhisvara-Amitāyus), both of whom can be identified with Amitābha.

Aparimitāyurjñāna is therefore presented here as quite distinct
from the Amitāyus or Amitābha who resides in the realm of Sukhāvatī in the
western direction. However, perhaps adding to the confusion, even the text
of this present sūtra includes rebirth in Sukhāvatī among the results that
will be obtained by those who write the sūtra down and recite it. This can
presumably be explained by the fact that Sukhāvatī, described in several
Kangyur sūtras and
in many prayers, was the realm in which Mahāyāna Buddhists predominantly and
almost generically prayed to be reborn.

Of the few other mentions specifically of Aparimitāyurjñāna in the
canonical texts, one appears to be in The Root Manual
of the Rites of Mañjuśrī (Mañjuśrīmūlakalpa, Toh 543), in which the Buddha Śākyamuni
tells of a buddha with the names Aparimitāyurjñānarāja and
Amitāyurjñānaviniścayarājendra, who has taught the king of vidyās that
consists of a single letter. His pure realm is called Amitavyūhavatī, or
simply Amitāyus. He is also mentioned as one of nine
tathāgatas from buddhafields in the eastern direction present in the
assembly.

Another, perhaps more significant, mention comes in the Sarvadurgatipariśodhanatantra (Toh 483
and 485). One of the
many secondary maṇḍalas described in that influential Yogatantra work,
widely used in funerary rites, is that of a tathāgata whose full name is
given as Aparimitāyuḥpuṇyajñānasambhāratejorāja, but who is referred to
as Amitāyus in the several commentaries. He is invoked to protect from
untimely death, and his mantra, oṁ puṇye puṇye
mahā-puṇye aparimitāyuḥ-puṇye jñāna-sambhāropacite svāhā, bears
a striking resemblance to the central section of the repeated dhāraṇī of the
present text, as well as to the dhāraṇī of
The Essence
of Aparimitāyus
(tshe dpag
med kyi snying po, Toh 673a). Its possible
relationship to the present text is discussed further in

below, and in the introduction to Toh 675
at i.29–31.

The only other mention in the Kangyur of the tathāgata known as
Aparimitāyurjñāna is, misleadingly, in the title of the text that follows
the two versions of this sūtra in the Tantra section. Often confused with
the present text, it is The Dhāraṇī “The Essence of
Immeasurable Longevity and Wisdom” (Toh 676, Aparimitāyurjñānahṛdaya-nāma-dhāraṇī), but that work proves to be concerned solely
with the “other” Amitāyus (or Aparimitāyus) to be identified with Amitābha,
in Sukhāvatī. It shares no content with The
Aparimitāyurjñāna Sūtra, has an entirely different dhāraṇī,
and—despite the title—the name Aparimitāyurjñāna does not appear within the
text itself. However, the fact that it has that title, and its placement in
most Kangyurs just after The Aparimitāyurjñāna
Sūtra, indicate that these two buddhas were already identified
with each other by the time of the compilation of the Kangyurs—as indeed
they are in the Buddhist traditions of East Asia.

In some later practice texts, both Amitābha and Amitāyus take the
role of the dharmakāya
deity of the lotus family, while in others Amitāyus may be specified as
representing any of the three kāyas. Iconographically, Amitābha is often portrayed in
nirmāṇakāya and
Amitāyus in saṃbhogakāya
form. In the present sūtra, however, there is no indication that
Aparimitāyus is in saṃbhogakāya or any other specified form. In fact, there is
no description of him at all—except perhaps that the appellation tejorāja, “blazing king,” might
be taken to refer to his “fire-like” red appearance. His usual portrayal as
red in color, wearing the saṃbhogakāya costume, and holding a vase of amṛta, the nectar of
immortality, comes from the later tantra practices that have their origin in
this sūtra.

Chinese and Sanskrit Versions

Two translations of this text into Chinese were made, one by
Facheng (Taishō 936) in the early ninth century, and the other by Fatian
(Taishō 937) in the late tenth century. Both Chinese translations contain
the “two oṁ” dhāraṇī, and
are therefore closer to the Khotanese, the other Tibetan version (2) of the
text (Toh 675), and the Dunhuang manuscripts than they are to the Nepalese
Sanskrit manuscripts and to the present version (1) in Tibetan.

There are many surviving manuscripts of the text in Sanskrit, but
none that can be reliably dated much before the early ninth century, the
period when it was first translated into Chinese, and probably into Tibetan
for the first time (see below). Most of the Sanskrit manuscripts are
Nepalese and are dated considerably later.

The oldest known Indic version of the text may be one from east
Turkestan in what came to be called “Khotanese,” the old Iranian dialect of
that region during the later period of the time when Buddhism was prevalent
there. It is written in the Upright Gupta script, and probably dates to the
seventh or eighth century. The manuscript was discovered in the Mogao caves
in Dunhuang by Sir Aurel Stein in 1907, and in 1912 Ernst Leumann made a
short comparison of the Sanskrit of this sūtra’s opening sentences with a
few fragments of the Khotanese text. In 1916, two Sanskrit editions saw the
light independently. One, by Sten Konow, compared an edition of a Nepalese
Sanskrit version with a complete edition of the Khotanese manuscript, along
with the first English translation. The other, by Max Walleser, was based on
a Nepalese manuscript and included a German translation. Walleser’s German
translation has been translated into English by Richard K. Payne in his
paper on this sūtra. Jonathan Silk has made an English translation from
Walleser’s edition of the Sanskrit, and attests
in his unpublished paper, “The Most Important Buddhist Scripture? The Aparimitāyurjñāna and Medieval Buddhism,” to
the relatively large number of extant Sanskrit manuscripts—well over one
hundred—either in isolation or compilations, indicating how popular this
sūtra was in Buddhist practice.

The Nepalese Sanskrit manuscripts are all of the “three oṁ” version of the text, and
therefore correspond more closely to the present version (1), Toh 674. The
Khotanese, on the other hand, contains the “two oṁ” version of the dhāranī throughout, and is
thus closer to version (2) in Tibetan, Toh 675, to the many Dunhuang
manuscripts in Tibetan, and to the two Chinese translations.

The Tibetan Versions of the Sūtra in the Kangyur,

Their Differences, and Their Translation

There are two different but closely related versions of The Aparimitāyurjñāna Sūtra in most Kangyurs. We
have called them The Aparimitāyurjñāna Sūtra
(1) and (2), and in keeping with the tradition established by editors of all
Kangyurs we have translated and published them separately, despite their
similarity. They are found consecutively in the Tantra Collection, and
according to Situ Panchen’s original catalog of the Degé Kangyur they are
placed with the Action (Kriyā) Tantras in the subdivision that corresponds
to the principal deity (rigs kyi gtso
bo) of the Padma (lotus) family. Their Degé recensions are
cataloged as Toh 674 and Toh 675,
respectively.

Before discussing the complex differences between The Aparimitāyurjñāna Sūtra (1) and (2), it
should be mentioned here that The Aparimitāyurjñāna
Sūtra (1) itself also exists in two slightly different forms,
the difference being a minor one in the dhāraṇī that is less significant
than the differences between versions (1) and (2). In those Kangyurs that,
like the Degé, have a separate compendium of dhāraṇīs (gzungs ’dus, dhāraṇī) section, a second version of (1) appears there; in
the Degé it is Toh 849, and is essentially a duplicate of the first (Toh
674), except that the dhāraṇī differs in one word. In the middle part of the
repeated dhāraṇī, where the Toh 674 version has aparimitāyurpuṇya-jñāna, the Toh 849 version reads aparimitapuṇye aparimitapuṇya-jñāna. This
latter reading is also found in the versions in the compendium of dhāraṇīs
in several Tshalpa Kangyurs; is the only version to be found in some other Kangyurs,
notably those of the Themphangma group; and corresponds to the version in the Druptap
Küntü, which will be mentioned in more detail below. Readers of this
translation will see the version of the dhāraṇī corresponding to the version
(Toh 674 or Toh 849) that they have selected.

To return to our discussion of the more significant differences
between the two major variants, versions (1) and (2), the principal
distinction lies again mainly in the repeated dhāraṇī, but in this case is a
marked difference in its length and composition. In the present version,
The Aparimitāyurjñāna Sūtra (1), Toh 674
and 849, the middle part of the dhāraṇī comprises a phrase beginning
“oṁ puṇye puṇye …” that is not
present in the other version, The Aparimitāyurjñāna
Sūtra (2), Toh 675, although the rest of the dhāraṇī is almost
the same. It is on that basis that the catalog of the Degé Kangyur
distinguishes the two texts by calling this one (Toh 674 and 849) the “three
oṁ” version (because
the repeated dhāraṇī also contains two other phrases beginning with oṁ), while the other one (Toh 675) it calls
the “two oṁ, no puṇye” version. In some other catalogs, e.g. the
index to the Narthang Kangyur, the two texts are called respectively the
“large and small Tsédo.”

Another intriguing hint that the Kangyur provides us with regard to
these two versions of the text is that the part of the dhāraṇī “present” in
this version (1), Toh 674, but “missing” in version (2), Toh 675, is
included in all Kangyurs, almost identically but on its own, as the dhāraṇī
that forms the very short content of another text in this group,
The Essence
of Aparimitāyus
, Toh 673a. There is no explanation in
the various Kangyur catalogs for its presence, but the term “essence”
(hṛdaya, snying po, sometimes rendered “heart mantra”) in its title
identifies it as a mantra used in at least one tradition of the practice of
Aparimitāyus. The only other mention of this mantra in the Kangyur appears
to be in the Sarvadurgatipariśodhana,
known best in Tibetan by its shortened title sbyong
rgyud (the “Purification Tantra”), a tantra of the Yoga class,
in which this same mantra is given as the “essence vidyā-mantra” (hṛdayavidyā, snying po’i rig pa) of the tathāgata
Aparimitāyuḥpuṇyajñānasambhāratejorāja, the principal figure in a
secondary maṇḍala. What is confirmed by this mantra’s mention in the
tantra, as well as its presence as Toh 673a, is at the very least that it is
a potentially independent stand-alone mantra phrase, making it easier to
understand that it might have been either added or removed at some stage in
the evolving transmission of the dhāraṇī in the sūtra. Its use in arguments
and counter-arguments in favor of the authenticity of each of the two
versions of the sūtra is discussed in the introduction to Toh 675 at i.29–31.

The translation published here, the “three oṁ” version, represents the form of the text
most widely recited and reproduced in modern compilations. That the “two
oṁ” version, The Aparimitāyurjñāna Sūtra (2), Toh 675, is also
preserved in all Kangyurs as a separate text is an implicit recognition that
both are authentic. The controversies that have nevertheless sometimes
arisen about that question are discussed below and in the introduction to
Toh 675, i.20-32.

Apart from the composition of the dhāraṇī, there are some other
relatively minor differences in wording between Toh 674 and 675, as recorded
in the notes. Among these differences, the most significant are as
follows:

The name tshe dpag tu med
pa (Aparimitāyus), which occurs a number of times here
in Toh 674, is given its longer form in Toh 675 1.4, 1.6, and 1.8: tshe dang ye shes dpag tu
med pa (Aparimitāyurjñāna).

The Tibetan rendering of the longest form of the name
Aparimitāyurjñānasuviniścitatejorāja is tshe dang ye shes dpag tu med pa shin tu rnam
par nges pa’i gzi brjid kyi rgyal po in Toh 674, while
in Toh 675 it is tshe dang ye shes dpag
tu med pa shin tu rnam par gdon mi za ba’i rgyal
po.

The name of Aparimitāyurjñāna’s realm here in Toh 674 isyon tan dpag tu med pa sogspa

(Aparimitaguṇasaṃcaya, “Accumulation of Immeasurable Qualities”),
but in Toh 675 the first mention of it is just yon tan dpag tu med pa
(Aparimitaguṇa, “Immeasurable Qualities”).

Its second mention in Toh 675, however, not only gives it
in full, as in Toh 674, but also prefixes it with the words bde ba can (Sukhāvatī), somewhat
confusingly identifying this realm with that of the “other” Amitāyus
who is Amitābha, and perhaps confirming that the conflation of these
two buddhas (see above) occurred at an early date in Tibet.

In the three paragraphs in which comparisons using
analogies are made of the amounts of merit to be obtained
through—here in Toh 674—reciting the sūtra (

, and

), Toh 675 seems to refer insteadto merit obtained through the tathāgata Aparimitāyurjñāna himselfrather than through reciting the text.

Finally, Toh 674 has a curious concluding line that is not
present in Toh 675: in addition to the beings in the world being
overjoyed and rejoicing at the Buddha’s words, the Buddha himself is
said to be pleased or delighted (dgyes pa). This appears to be the result
of the Sanskrit āttamanās being translated twice, as descriptive for
both the world and the Buddha. In Toh 675 (at 1.71) the ending is identical to standard endings.

There are no translators’ colophons to either version of the text,
in any of the different Kangyurs. Nor are there colophons for the many
reproductions of the text in other Tibetan compilations—with the exception
of the version in the Druptap Küntü, mentioned below. Outside the texts
themselves, this absence of information about the translators is confirmed
in most of the Kangyur inventories and catalogs (including the catalog of
the Degé Kangyur, which explicitly states that the translators are
unknown)—but with two exceptions.

These two exceptions are the catalog (dkar chag) of the Narthang Kangyur (regarding both
versions) and the lineage record of transmissions received by Minling
Terchen Gyurme Dorje (regarding this version, Toh 674, only). Both attribute
the translation to the Indian paṇḍita Puṇyasambhava and the Tibetan
translator Patsap Nyima Drak, who were active in the late eleventh and early
twelfth centuries. This same attribution is made in the colophon of the
sūtra as reproduced in the Druptap Küntü (sgrub
thabs kun btus), a collection of sādhanas of the Sakya
tradition compiled by Jamyang Loter Wangpo (1847–1914). Now, these two translators are widely agreed to be the
translators of the text that follows immediately after the two versions of
The Aparimitāyurjñāna Sūtra in the
Kangyur, The Dhāraṇī “Essence of Immeasurable Longevity
and Wisdom” (Toh 676), which (as mentioned in

above) is not closely related to The Aparimitāyurjñāna Sūtra despite its title,
and one possibility is that this attribution of The
Aparimitāyurjñāna Sūtra to those translators might have been an
error brought about by the proximity of the texts and their confusingly
similar titles.

In particular, the catalog of the Narthang Kangyur alone would seem
to be an inadequate source of information here. The Narthang Kangyur was
produced in the early 1730s, and reproduces versions of this group of texts,
the equivalents of Toh 674 through Toh 676, without colophons for either version of
the sūtra. It is only in its catalog that the attribution to these two
translators appears to be made. A look at the page in the catalog concerned
reinforces suspicions of an erroneous attribution, as the carving of the
catalog’s woodblocks seems to have run into
problems for this entry, which coincides with a folio break. Indeed, the
catalog not only appears to attribute both versions of The Aparimitāyurjñāna Sūtra to these translators, but also
omits naming these (or any) translators for the following text, The Dhāraṇī “Essence of Aparimitāyurjñāna” (Toh
676), which all the other Kangyur catalogs agree in attributing to them.

On the other hand, the evidence provided by Minling Terchen’s
lineage record carries considerably more weight. As well as naming the same
two translators mentioned above, it details the several different sequences
of lineage holders through whom the text of the “three oṁ version” (i.e. Toh 674)
came to Tibet, mostly including the sequence: Jetari; one or more of the
masters known as Vajrāsana(pati); and Bari Lotsāwa Rinchen Drak (1040–1111),
the second holder of the Sakya Throne. Abhayākaragupta (d. 1125, who may
have been one of the Vajrāsana title holders) is also mentioned in one of
these sequences. Abhayākaragupta and Bari Lotsāwa are both associated
with the transmission to Tibet of many Action Tantra practices, including
several collections entitled The One Hundred
Sādhanas. These were held and transmitted notably by the Sakya
tradition, and if this text was among the many works brought to Tibet by
this lineage and translated in the process, that would help explain how the
attribution to the two translators was preserved outside the transmission of
Kangyurs as such. It would also help explain why this text was classified as
an Action Tantra, in common with all the other works in those
collections.

Curiously, however, the attribution of this translation to
Puṇyasambhava and Patsap Nyima Drak is complicated by several mentions in
the commentaries of other translations. Writing in the early fifteenth
century, Kunga Lekrin mentions a translation—apparently of this text—by
Yarlung Lotsāwa Drakpa Gyaltsen, who lived in the late thirteenth and early
fourteenth centuries, and a later fourteenth century one by the Jonangpa
scholars Kunpang Chödrak Palzang, Sabzang Mati Paṇchen, and Jonang Lotsāwa
Lodrö Pal, all three contemporaries and important disciples of Dolpopa. In the early seventeenth century, Amé Zhap Ngawang Kunga
Sonam mentions the same names, and his contemporary Tāranātha
brings up the latter two, as well as mentioning Patsap, in his discussion of
the translation of the verbs used in their translation of

.
These translations appear no longer to exist, but confirmation would require
further research. The balance of the existing evidence, nevertheless, favors
the idea that this version of The Aparimitāyurjñāna
Sūtra was indeed translated and introduced to Tibet by
Puṇyasambhava and Patsap Nyima Drak in the late eleventh or early twelfth
century.

We also know with little doubt (as discussed more fully in the
introduction to The Aparimitāyurjñāna Sūtra
(2), Toh 675) that at least one version of the sūtra was translated during
the early translation period. Both the early ninth century Denkarma (ldan dkar ma) and Phangthangma (phang thang ma) inventories of translated
texts mention, respectively, texts entitled The Dhāraṇī
of Aparimitāyus (tshe dpag tu med pa’i
gzungs, 110 ślokas in length) and Aparimitāyus (tshe dpag tu med
pa, 120 ślokas), both probably referring to a version of this text; in
both inventories it is placed in the category “miscellaneous long and short
dhāraṇīs” (gzungs che phra sna
tshogs). Material
evidence, too, of the existence of translations in the early period is
provided by the very large number of manuscript copies of the sūtra, in
Tibetan, found among the Dunhuang manuscripts, a large group of which can be
dated to between 830 and 850, most having apparently been made on the
orders of King Ralpachen (r. 815–41)—presumably to create the meritorious
results that the text itself describes.

All the Dunhuang manuscripts that we have been able to examine
contain the “two oṁ”
version of the dhāraṇī. This fact, combined with the evidence from Minling Terchen, makes it
very likely that the present version of the text, the “three oṁ” version, is the
translation dating from the later translation period, while Toh 675, the
“two oṁ” version, is more
closely related to the one originally made in the early translation period.

An additional confirmation of this hypothesis can be found in
commentarial works by later Sakya scholars, Kunga Lekrin (a disciple of
Ngorchen Kunga Zangpo) in the fifteenth century, and Amnyé Zhab Ngawang
Kunga Sönam in the seventeenth century. Both authors discuss the various
theories raised to account for the existence of the two versions, and go on
to confirm the validity only of the later translation, The Aparimitāyurjñāna Sūtra (1), Toh 674 (represented here).
Following a leading statement attributed by Ngorchen Kunga Zangpo to his
teachers, these authors are scathingly critical of the “two oṁ” version, The Aparimitāyurjñāna Sūtra (2), Toh 675, and of
the “earlier translators” responsible for it, whom they accuse of
deliberately omitting part of the dhāraṇī to express dissatisfaction with
their stipend. Such comments have to be seen in the context of the mutual
lack of trust between proponents of the “late” versus the “early”
translation traditions regarding authenticity and lineage (which concerned
principally the tantras rather than any of the other canonical genres).

Among other reasons they cite to justify this unusually harsh
judgment, (for more detail, see introduction to The
Aparimitāyurjñāna Sūtra (2), Toh 675), Ngawang Kunga Sönam
writes that Ngorchen Kunga Zangpo mentioned seeing three Sanskrit
manuscripts of the sūtra, all of which were the “three oṁ” version. While there is
little doubt that this “three oṁ” version of the text is indeed authentic to its source,
Ngorchen’s claim that it is the only authentic version is
explicitly refuted and dismissed by Tāranātha, who reports seeing, on a
visit to Narthang, several Sanskrit manuscripts of the sūtra, of which one
was clearly the “two oṁ”
version. The veracity of Tāranātha’s report can be indirectly confirmed by
Sten Konow’s 1916 comparison of two versions, one in Sanskrit based on
Nepalese manuscripts and one a Khotanese manuscript (probably centuries
earlier) found in the Dunhuang caves by Sir Aurel Stein. The Nepalese
Sanskrit has the “three oṁ” version of the dhāraṇī while the Khotanese has the “two
oṁ” version. Ngorchen and his successors were also presumably unaware
that in both of the two Chinese translations, too, the dhāraṇī is the “two
oṁ” version.

Apart from Tāranātha’s, we have not been able to find writings of
the period defending the “two oṁ” version from the disparagement of the authors mentioned,
other than notes by catalog compilers to the effect that “both versions are
authentic.” However, Amé Zhab’s writing on the subject in favor of the
“three oṁ” version does
present some of the arguments used, in order to refute them—somewhat
unconvincingly. More details are to be found in the introduction to The Aparimitāyurjñāna Sūtra (2), Toh 675, at i.21 et seq.

Both versions, therefore, can be considered authentic; and although
the compilers and editors of the many Kangyurs do not seem to have noted
their reasons, there must have been enough consensus on this point—despite
all the controversies—for both to have been preserved in all Kangyurs.

The story of these two different versions may seem already complex
enough, but there is more to be explored. Apart from the differences in the
dhāraṇī, the other differences between the two versions in the Kangyurs (the
principal ones listed above at

and
others in the notes) are relatively so minor that these two translations
seem most unlikely to have been made independently, even allowing for the
possibility that the Sanskrit texts they were made from were very similar.
The most obvious explanation might be that the later translation was based
on the earlier, adapting it to conform to a slightly different Sanskrit
original. However, an examination of the wording and terminology of the
Dunhuang manuscripts—which predate Puṇyasambhava and Patsap Nyima Drak by
several centuries—shows that they almost certainly represent a Tibetan
translation different from the “two oṁ” version (Toh 675) that has survived in the
Kangyur. It is therefore tempting to conjecture
that the “two oṁ” version
in the Kangyur could in fact be a back-adaptation of the later translation,
edited to conform to the alternative “two oṁ” dhāraṇī of the earlier translation but not
otherwise reflecting that earlier translation fully. This hypothesis is
supported by the fact that a few significant elements of the later “three
oṁ” version that are
not present in the “two oṁ” Dunhuang manuscripts are present in the “two oṁ” version in the Kangyur.
These elements are discussed more fully in the introduction to Toh 675, at
i.15 et seq.

The Sūtra in Buddhist Practice

As mentioned above, recitation of the Tsédo a specified number of times has historically been—and is
still nowadays—prescribed as a practice to people in poor health or facing
other difficulties, and to practitioners more generally in order to ensure
longevity, and so on. Recitation by the monks or nuns in a monastery is also
commissioned for the same reasons. According to the Padma Kathang, the eighth century Tibetan king, Trisong Detsen,
was advised to recite this text daily (along with the other works known as the “ten
royal sūtras”), as a result of which the king’s life is said to have been
prolonged by thirteen years beyond the limit predicted by astrological
reckoning.

The sūtra itself particularly emphasizes the beneficial effects of
writing it out or causing it to be written out, and there is ample evidence
that this recommendation was taken seriously in the form of the very large
number of commissioned copies, mostly in Tibetan and Chinese and dating to
the eighth and ninth centuries, found in the Dunhuang caves by Stein and
Pelliot in the early years of the twentieth century. Many of them appear to
have been commissioned in the name of the Tibetan king Ralpachen, who
reigned in the early ninth century and was the grandson of Trisong Detsen.
Among the bundles acquired by the two explorers for the British and French
governments, there are over a thousand copies of the sūtra now in the
British Library in London, and a similar number in the Bibliothèque
Nationale in Paris. Some five hundred further copies remain in libraries in
China, many have found their way to Japan, and there are some two hundred in
St. Petersburg.

In the context of tantric practice, the Tibetan canonical literature
contains a number of sādhanas of Aparimitāyurjñāna, particularly among the
higher levels of tantra. One example is the liturgy composed by the
tenth-century Jetāri, one of the principal teachers of Vikramaśīla
Monastery, which was known for its promulgation of higher tantras. That
practice was introduced into Tibet by Bari Lotsawa Rinchen Drak (mentioned
above), and thereby became a part of the Sakya tradition.

There are also five Aparimitāyurjñāna texts in the Tengyur that
were composed by Siddharājñī, a female guru active in India in the beginning
of the twelfth century, from whom Rechungpa, pupil of the famous Milarepa,
received transmissions that Marpa had not been able to bring back to Tibet.
At least three if not all of these Siddharājñī texts were translated into
Tibetan by Varacandra, another of Rechungpa’s teachers, together with
the Tibetan Lenchung Darma Tsultrim (glan chung
dar ma tshul khrims), about whom little is known other than
this translation work with Varacandra. Rechungpa introduced the practice
into Tibet, where it spread from his own lineage, the Rechung Kagyü or
Rechung Nyengyü, to other Kagyü traditions. These tantric Aparimitāyurjñāna
practices are based upon the five-family system of the higher tantras, and
they involve an elaborate visualization of oneself as a red
Aparimitāyurjñāna, wearing the saṃbhogakāya costume and holding a vase of amṛta, with an entourage of
deities within a palace, and the visualization of channels within the body.
As Aparimitāyurjñāna is auspicious for long life, his empowerment is given
as a long life blessing.

Within the indigenous Tibetan literature, a very large number of
Aparimitāyurjñāna sādhanas have been created over the centuries within all
the lineages and schools. The Nyingma tradition of rediscovered treasure
texts (gter ma), too, has
produced many Aparimitāyurjñāna revelations, from Nyangral Nyima Ozer
(nyang ral nyi ma ’od zer,
1136–1204) onward. The importance that Aparimitāyurjñāna assumed in tantric
practice may be one of the reasons why this Aparimitāyurjñānasūtra was classified in most Kangyurs as a
tantra rather than as a sūtra.

We are delighted to have translated and published this version of
The Sūtra of Aparimitāyurjñāna, a popular
and widely used text, for the benefit of readers everywhere.

The Translation

The Noble Mahāyāna

Sūtra of Aparimitāyurjñāna

Homage to all the buddhas and bodhisattvas.

Thus did I hear at one time. The Bhagavān was staying in Śrāvastī,
in the Jetavana, Anāthapiṇḍada’s Park, with a great saṅgha of bhikṣus
comprised of 1,250 bhikṣus, and with a great number of bodhisattva
mahāsattvas.

Then the Bhagavān said to Mañjuśrī Kumārabhūta, “Mañjuśrī, in the
upward direction there is a universe named Aparimitaguṇasaṃcaya. There, the
tathāgata, arhat, perfectly awakened buddha
Aparimitāyurjñānasuviniścitatejorāja resides and remains,
sustaining and extending life to its very limit, teaching the Dharma to beings.

“Listen, Mañjuśrī Kumārabhūta, the lives of humans in this
Jambudvīpa are short; their lifespan is no more than a hundred years, and
most of them are seen to have premature deaths. Mañjuśrī, those beings who
will write out or cause to be written out this Dharma discourse called
‘Uttering the Praise of the Qualities of the Tathāgata Aparimitāyus,’ and even those who hear or recite its title
only, up to those who write a copy, keep it at home, and offer flowers,
perfume, incense, and garlands to it,
will, when their lifespan is ending, still be able to live to a hundred
years.

“Mañjuśrī, the lifespan of beings who hear the one hundred and eight names of the tathāgata
Aparimitāyurjñānasuviniścitatejorāja will be lengthened. Those beings
whose lifespan is coming to an end, who keep those names, will also have their
lifespan lengthened.

“Therefore, Mañjuśrī, the noble sons or noble daughters who wish to
have long lives, and who hear, write, or cause to be written the one
hundred and eight names of the tathāgata Aparimitāyus, will obtain these
qualities and benefits.

oṁnamo bhagavate aparimitāyurjñāna-suviniścita-tejorājāya tathāgatāyaarhate samyaksaṃbuddhāya | tadyathā | oṁ puṇye puṇyemahāpuṇyeaparimitāyurpuṇya-jñāna

aparimitapuṇye
aparimitapuṇya-jñāna-
saṃbhāropacite | oṁ sarva-saṃskāra-pariśuddha-dharmate
gagana-samudgate svabhāva-viśuddhe mahānaya-parivāre svāhā |

“Mañjuśrī, those who write or cause to be written these one hundred
and eight names of the tathāgata, who make a text of them, keep it at home,
and recite it, when their lifespan is coming to an end they will still be
able to live to a hundred years. When they pass away from this world, they
will be reborn in the buddha realm of the tathāgata Aparimitāyus named
Aparimitaguṇasaṃcaya.”

oṁ namo bhagavate aparimitāyurjñāna-suviniścita-tejorājāya
tathāgatāya arhate samyaksaṃbuddhāya | tadyathā | oṁ puṇye puṇye
mahāpuṇye aparimitāyurpuṇya-jñāna-saṃbhāropacite | oṁ
sarva-saṃskāra-pariśuddha-dharmate gagana-samudgate svabhāva-viśuddhe
mahānaya-parivāre svāhā |
oṁ namo bhagavate
aparimitāyurjñāna-suviniścita-tejorājāya tathāgatāya arhate
samyaksaṃbuddhāya | tadyathā | oṁ puṇye puṇye mahāpuṇye
aparimitapuṇye aparimitapuṇya-jñāna-saṃbhāropacite | oṁ
sarva-saṃskāra-pariśuddha-dharmate gagana-samudgate svabhāva-viśuddhe
mahānaya-parivāre svāhā |

Then at that time nine hundred ninety million buddhas, with a single
intention and a single voice, uttered this Aparimitāyurjñāna Sūtra.

Then at that time eight hundred forty million buddhas, with a single
intention and a single voice, uttered this Aparimitāyurjñāna Sūtra.

Then at that time seven hundred seventy million buddhas, with a
single intention and a single voice, uttered this Aparimitāyurjñāna Sūtra.

Then at that time six hundred fifty million buddhas, with a single
intention and a single voice, uttered this Aparimitāyurjñāna Sūtra.

Then at that time five hundred fifty million buddhas, with a single
intention and a single voice, uttered this Aparimitāyurjñāna Sūtra.

Then at that time four hundred fifty million buddhas,
with a single intention and a single voice, uttered this Aparimitāyurjñāna Sūtra.

Then at that time three hundred sixty million buddhas, with a single intention and a singlevoice, uttered this AparimitāyurjñānaSūtra.

Then at that time two hundred fifty million buddhas, with a single
intention and a single voice, uttered this Aparimitāyurjñāna Sūtra.

Then at that time tens of millions of buddhas, as many as there are
grains of sand in ten Ganges Rivers, with a single intention and a single
voice, uttered this Aparimitāyurjñāna
Sūtra.

Whoever writes or causes to be written this Aparimitāyurjñāna Sūtra, when their lifespan
is coming to an end, will still be able to live to a hundred years and their
lifespan will be lengthened.

Whoever writes or causes to be written this Aparimitāyurjñāna Sūtra will never be born among hell beings,
in the womb of an animal, or in Yama’s realm. They will never have an
unfortunate rebirth. Wherever they are reborn, in each rebirth they will
remember their previous lifetimes.

Whoever writes or causes to be written this Aparimitāyurjñāna Sūtra will cause the whole collection of
eighty-four thousand Dharma teachings to be written.

Whoever writes or causes to be written this Aparimitāyurjñāna Sūtra will cause the practice and the
continuation of the whole collection of eighty-four thousand Dharma
teachings.

oṁ
namo bhagavate aparimitāyurjñāna-suviniścita-tejorājāya tathāgatāya
arhate samyaksaṃbuddhāya | tadyathā | oṁ puṇye puṇye mahāpuṇye
aparimitapuṇye aparimitapuṇya-jñāna-saṃbhāropacite | oṁ
sarva-saṃskāra-pariśuddha-dharmate gagana-samudgate svabhāva-viśuddhe
mahānaya-parivāre svāhā |

Whoever writes or causes to be written this Aparimitāyurjñāna Sūtra will be purified even of having
committed the five karmas that have immediate result at death.

Whoever writes or causes to be written this Aparimitāyurjñāna Sūtra will be purified of their accumulation
of bad karma, even if it is the size of Mount Sumeru.

Whoever writes or causes to be written this Aparimitāyurjñāna Sūtra will be invulnerable to any harm that
Māra, Māra’s gods, yakṣas, or rākṣasas may look to inflict.

When whoever writes or causes to be written this Aparimitāyurjñāna Sūtra dies, nine hundred
ninety million buddhas will give them prophecies in person, and a
thousand buddhas will extend their hands to them. They will go from buddha
realm to buddha realm. Have no doubt, hesitation, or uncertainty about
this.

oṁ namo bhagavate aparimitāyurjñāna-suviniścita-tejorājāya
tathāgatāya arhate samyaksaṃbuddhāya | tadyathā | oṁ puṇye
puṇye mahāpuṇye aparimitāyurpuṇya-jñāna-saṃbhāropacite | oṁ
sarva-saṃskāra-pariśuddha-dharmate gagana-samudgate svabhāva-viśuddhe
mahānaya-parivāre svāhā |
oṁ namo bhagavate
aparimitāyurjñāna-suviniścita-tejorājāya tathāgatāya arhate
samyaksaṃbuddhāya | tadyathā | oṁ puṇye puṇye mahāpuṇye
aparimitapuṇye aparimitapuṇya-jñāna-saṃbhāropacite | oṁ
sarva-saṃskāra-pariśuddha-dharmate gagana-samudgate svabhāva-viśuddhe
mahānaya-parivāre svāhā |

Whoever writes or causes to be written this Aparimitāyurjñāna Sūtra will be followed by
the four Mahārājas, who will guard, protect, and hide them.

Whoever writes or causes to be written this Aparimitāyurjñāna Sūtra will be reborn in the
world of Sukhāvatī, the buddha realm of the tathāgata Amitābha.

Wherever this precious sūtra is written or caused to be
written, that place will
be a stūpa and worthy of
veneration. Those birds and animals born in the animal realm who happen to
hear this Aparimitāyurjñāna Sūtra will all
become perfectly awakened in the highest, most complete awakening.

Whoever writes or causes to be written this Aparimitāyurjñāna Sūtra

will never be reborn in a female
state.

Whoever makes a gift of even a single kārṣāpaṇa coin with regard to this
Dharma discourse, the Aparimitāyurjñāna
Sūtra, will have made a gift of the whole trichiliocosm filled
with the seven jewels.

Whoever makes an offering to this Dharma discourse will have made
an offering to the entirety of the good Dharma.

As a comparison, it is possible to calculate the extent of the
accumulation of merit that comes from making offerings of the seven jewels
to the tathāgatas Vipaśyin, Śikhin, Viśvabhu, Krakucchanda, Kanakamuni, Kāśyapa,
Śākyamuni, and so on, but it is impossible to calculate the extent of the
accumulation of merit that comes from the Aparimitāyurjñāna Sūtra.

As a comparison, it is possible to calculate the extent of the
accumulation of merit that comes from making a gift of a heap of jewels as
high as Sumeru, the king of mountains, but it is impossible to
calculate the extent of the accumulation of merit that comes from the Aparimitāyurjñāna Sūtra.

As a comparison, it is possible to count each drop that makes up
all the water in the four great oceans, but it is impossible to calculate
the extent of the accumulation of merit that comes from the Aparimitāyurjñāna Sūtra.

Whoever writes or causes to be written, honors, and makes offerings to this
Aparimitāyurjñāna Sūtra will have paid
homage and made offerings to all tathāgatas in all the buddha realms in the
ten directions.

The Buddha has risen high through the power of
generosity,

The lion among men has realized the power of generosity,