**2. Date and Place of Compilation of the** *D. ak¯ arn ¯ . ava*

S´astr ¯ ¯ı and Chaudhuri presented pioneering studies of the date and place of compilation of the *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava*. <sup>14</sup> The *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava* includes a number of verses in Apabhram. ´sa (or a form of Eastern Prakrit rather than Apabhram. ´sa according to Tagare15), which had many Bengali words and expressions such as *tumi* (for *tvam*), as found by S´astr ¯ ¯ı and Chaudhuri. Chaudhuri also said that they were based on the East Bengal dialect,<sup>16</sup> and he concluded that the Apabhram. ´sa text in the *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava* was composed in Bengal. Chaudhuri also said that the Apabhram. ´sa language in the *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava* was in a "moribund form", and thus was never earlier than the *Dohako´sa ¯* s (by which he means no earlier than the 12th century). The Nepalese-German Manuscript Preservation Project (NGMPP) A138/9 can be considered as the oldest among the extant Sanskrit manuscripts of the *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava*. Although its date of production is not reported in the colophon, from the letters used in it, S´astr ¯ ¯ı speculated its date of production to be the 12th century, and Chaudhuri hypothesized it to be in the 13th century. As S´astr ¯ ¯ı pointed out, some pages contain marginal notes (mostly transcriptions of chapter titles and mantras in the text) in the Dbu med script or running Tibetan hand. Chaudhuri speculated that this manuscript might have been a Sanskrit document that the translators had used while translating the *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava* into Tibetan. It is difficult to decide only with the short marginal notes whether the translators (officially Jaysena and Dharma yon tan) really used this manuscript. However, it is almost certain that this manuscript was not the principal Sanskrit document used for the translation because, as shown in the critical apparatuses in Chapter 5, some differences can be found between this manuscript and the Tibetan translation (although most of them are minor ones).

<sup>14</sup> (S´astr ¯ ¯ı 1915, pp. 165–66; Chaudhuri 1935, pp. 16–20).

<sup>15</sup> (Tagare 1948, p. 20).

<sup>16</sup> For the use of Bengali words and expressions, " . . . it contains a number of songs in vernacular. What that vernacular is, it is difficult to say, but I venture to throw out a suggestion that many of them are in Bengali." (S´astr ¯ ¯ı 1915, p. 166) and " . . . there we have specially many Bengali words and expressions, e.g., tumi, la¯ı, chay, yemanta, kaj, p ¯ ai, p ¯ uv, ke, juvanisayala, mantasayala, etc., ¯ . . . The language of the present work seems to be based on East Bengali dialect. The pronunciation of some of the letters belongs rather to East Bengal than to West Bengal, e.g., the pronunciation of d. a as ra, and consequently, the pronunciation of ra as d. a, are found particularly in East Bengal dialect . . . The deaspiration of some aspirated words and consequently the aspiration of deaspirated words show East Bengal tendency . . . " (Chaudhuri 1935, p. 19).

As Maeda pointed out, the names of some Buddhist scriptures are mentioned in Section 4 of Chapter 50 in the *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava*. They are the *Samaja ¯* (= *Gudyasamajatantra ¯* ), *Sam. varottara* (= *Sarvakalpasamuccaya*),<sup>17</sup> *Sam. vara* (= *Sarvabuddhasamayoga ¯* ), *Vajrad. aka ¯* , *Abhyudaya* (= *Herukabhyudaya ¯* ), *Tattvasam. graha*, *Vajrabhairava*, *Sam. put. a* (= *Samput. odbhava*), and *Laghusam. vara* (= *Cakrasam. vara*).<sup>18</sup> Among these, the *Vajrad. aka ¯* , *Herukabhyudaya ¯* , and *Samput. odbhava* are the latest tantras. (Among the three, the *Herukabhyudaya ¯* is probably the earliest.) They were composed from perhaps the late 9th to the 10th century CE, sometime between when the *Cakrasam. vara* (around the 9th century CE) was composed and when Bhavabhadra (or Bhavabhat. t.a), Advayavajra, Gayadhara, and Ratn ¯ akara´s ¯ anti flourished (around ¯ the end of the 10th century to the 11th century CE).<sup>19</sup> In fact, the *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava* includes various teachings that were originally derived from the scriptures mentioned above and that were more developed than the original teaching in them.<sup>20</sup>

The passage in Section 4 of Chapter 50 of the *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava* examined in the previous paragraph does not mention the *Kalacakratantra ¯* (hereafter *Kalacakra ¯* ). The period of the compilation of the *Kalacakra ¯* can be dated to the early 11th century

<sup>17</sup> Szánt<sup>ó</sup> points out that the term *Sam. varottara* or *Sa´ m. varottara* is a designation for the *Sarvakalpasamuccaya* (Szántó and Griffiths 2015, p. 368).

<sup>18</sup> (Maeda 1988, pp. 70–71). I present the unpublished text of my edition (*D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava*, 50.4.51c–53): *karma tes.u ca vijñeyam. samaje sa ¯ m. varottare // sam. vare vajrad. ake c ¯ abhyudaye tattvasa ¯ m. grahe / vajrabhairave sam. put. e anyes. a¯m. ca yathavidhi // eva ¯ m. trilaks. abhidh ¯ an¯ ad¯ ak¯ r. s. t. am. laghusam. varam / akar¯ adik ¯ s. akar¯ anta ¯ m. pat. ales.u yathakramam // ¯* ("The ritual regarding those [fifty letters] is to be recognized in the *Samaja ¯* , *Sam. varottara*, *Sam. vara*, *Vajrad. aka ¯* , *Abhyudaya*, *Tattvasam. graha*, *Vajrabhairava*, and, among others, *Sam. put. a* in accordance with the prescription. In the same way, the *Laghusam. vara*, [which was] extracted from the *Abhidhana ¯* of three hundred thousand stanzas, is [connected with the fifty letters] from the letter *a* to the letter *ks. a* in [its] chapters in order"). The *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava* also mentions the *Khasamatantra* (50.4.54d).

<sup>19</sup> The *Herukabhyudaya ¯* was translated into Tibetan by Advayavajra. The *Herukabhyudaya ¯* contains a passage that is more archaic than the *Cakrasam. vara* (Sanderson 2009, pp. 213–14; Szántó 2012a, p. 37). However, it is very likely that the compilation of the whole text of the *Herukabhyudaya ¯* postdates the *Cakrasam. vara*: The *Herukabhyudaya ¯* teaches the fundamental mantra of Vajravar¯ ah¯ ¯ı, which cannot be found in the earlier texts of the Sam. vara tradition. The *Vajrad. aka ¯* and the *Sam. put. a* were translated by Gayadhara. Ratn ¯ akara´s ¯ anti mentions the ¯ *Vajrad. aka ¯* and the *Sam. put. a* in his *Muktaval ¯ ¯ı* (Skt ed. (Tripathi and Negi 2001, p. 18, l.8–p. 19, l.9)), a commentary on the *Hevajratantra*. For a recent analysis of the date of Advayavajra, see (Isaacson and Sferra 2014, p. 71). Bhavabhadra (*bha ba bha dra*), who has been said to be identical to Bhavabhat. t.a, the author of the commentaries of the *Catus.p¯ıt.ha* and *Cakrasam. vara*, wrote an extensive *Vivr. ti* commentary on the *Vajrad. aka ¯* (D 1415). Whether they might be the same person or not, it is certain that Bhavabhadra is not after Gayadhara (the first half of the 11th century) ¯ because Bhavabhadra's *Vivr. ti* commentary on the *Vajrad. aka ¯* was translated into Tibetan by Gayadhara. ¯ Isaacson and Sferra analyzed Bhavabhat. t.a (identical to Bhavabhadra) to have flourished "around 1000 CE" (Isaacson and Sferra 2015b, p. 477), and Szántó, in the "first half of the 10th cent" (Szántó 2015, p. 320). According to Szántó, the *Samput. odbhava* is quoted by Durjayacandra, who might have been active around 1000 CE (Szántó, pp. 402–3). See also Sugiki (2007, pp. 14–19) for the chronology of the scriptures belonging to the Sam. vara tradition.

<sup>20</sup> I have clarified this in several publications. See especially (Sugiki 2007, p. 17, chaps 2, 4, 5, and 7; Sugiki 2018a, 2018b). This monograph also deals with some examples.

according to Newman, Wallace, and Sferra.<sup>21</sup> However, there are also passages that suggest a possibility that the extant version of the *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava* was completed after the appearance of the *Kalacakra ¯* .

As discussed in detail in Chapters 4.1.4, 4.2.2, 4.2.3, 4.3.1, and 4.3.2 in this monograph, the *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava* 15, Vajrapa¯n. i's *Laghutantrat. ¯ıka¯*, and the *Kalacakra ¯* , as well as Pun. d. ar¯ıka's *Vimalaprabha¯*, include similar lists of females born of various castes (or d. akin ¯ ¯ıs of lineages), animals living on the ground and in water, sky-going creatures such as birds, and kinswomen. The *Laghutantrat. ¯ıka¯* is a commentary on the *Cakrasam. vara*, composed partially based on the Kalacakra's system. The compilation ¯ of the *Laghutantrat. ¯ıka¯* is datable to around the end of the 10th or the beginning of the 11th century, when the *Kalacakra ¯* assumed its earliest form or was still a work in progress. The *Vimalaprabha¯*, a commentary on the *Kalacakra ¯* , was composed in the first half of the 11th century: it may be contemporaneous with or is slightly later than the *Kalacakra ¯* . 22

Comparison of these four texts shows the following: (1) The lists in the *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava* are more extensive than the lists in the *Laghutantrat. ¯ıka¯*, the *Kalacakra ¯* , and the *Vimalaprabha¯*. For example, the list of thirty-six ground-going animals in the *Laghutantrat. ¯ıka¯* and the *Kalacakra ¯* with the *Vimalaprabha¯* commentary are divided and expanded into the two separate lists of thirty-six animals living on the ground and thirty-six water creatures in the *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava*; <sup>23</sup> (2) A confusion or peculiar logic can be found in some of the lists of creatures in the *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava*. For example, *bila¯d. ¯ı*, which seems a deliberate recasting of *bid. al¯ ¯ı* ("female cat"), appears in the list of sky-going creatures such as birds in the *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava*, whereas a "(female) cat" (spelled as *vid. ala ¯* or *bid. al¯ ¯ı*) is included in the list of ground-going animals in the *Laghutantrat. ¯ıka¯*, the *Kalacakra ¯* , and the *Vimalaprabha¯*; <sup>24</sup> (3) Some deities' names in the lists in the *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava* are more similar to those in the lists in the *Laghutantrat. ¯ıka¯* and Pun. d. ar¯ıka's interpretation of those deities' names in his *Vimalaprabha¯* than to those in the lists in the *Kalacakra ¯* ; <sup>25</sup> (4) Some of the names of the human castes and animals assume their Middle-Indic forms in the *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava*. For example, Sau ´ n. d. in¯ı in the *Kalacakra ¯* and the *Vimalaprabha¯* is Kalyapalin ¯ ¯ı in the *Laghutantrat. ¯ıka¯* and is Kallaval¯ ¯ı (a Prakrit form of Kalyapal¯ ¯ı) in the *D. ak¯ arn ¯ . ava* for the "wine-selling woman".<sup>26</sup>

<sup>21</sup> (Newman 1998, p. 343; Wallace 2001, pp. 3–4; Sferra 2015, p. 341). However, they investigated the date from slightly different viewpoints.

<sup>22</sup> For the chronology of the *Laghutantrat. ¯ıka¯* and the *Vimalaprabha¯*, see particularly (Cicuzza 2001, p. 13; Isaacson and Sferra 2014, p. 97, footnote 18; Sferra 2015, p. 343; Isaacson and Sferra 2015b, p. 477).

<sup>23</sup> For details, see Chapters 4.2.3 and 4.3.2 in this monograph.

<sup>24</sup> For details, see Chapter 4.2.2 in this monograph. See also the *D. ak¯ arn ¯ . ava* 15.128a and its footnote.

<sup>25</sup> For details, see particularly Chapters 4.2.2 and 4.3.2 in this monograph.

<sup>26</sup> For Saun ´ . d. in¯ı–Kalyapalin ¯ ¯ı–Kallaval¯ ¯ı, see the *D. ak¯ arn ¯ . ava* 15.89b and its footnote.

The four results of the comparison mentioned above show the possibility that the lists in the *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava* were developed after the lists found in the *Laghutantrat. ¯ıka¯* and the *Kalacakra ¯* . It is also worth noting that in Section 7 of Chapter 50 in the *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava*, the Lord, who provides the discourse of an aspect of the passage of time, is named "Kalacakra" ("Wheel of Time"). ¯ <sup>27</sup> However, the third result of comparison mentioned above also shows a possibility that the lists in the *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava* and the *Kalacakra ¯* were separately and independently evolved from the list in the *Laghutantrat. ¯ıka¯* (or the list in some lost text that is similar to the list in the *Laghutantrat. ¯ıka¯*.) If this is the case, it is obscure which of the lists in the *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava* and the *Kalacakra ¯* were developed earlier.

Isaacson and Sferra state that the *Sam. varodayatantra* (hereafter *Sam. varodaya*) was probably composed in Nepal after the compilation of the *Kalacakra ¯* in India.<sup>28</sup> The *Sam. varodaya*, as well as the *Kalacakra ¯* , is not mentioned in the passage in Section 4 of Chapter 50 in the *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava* examined earlier. However, this does not mean that the *Sam. varodaya* was not in existence at the time when the *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava* was compiled. As I argued in my earlier publication, the discourses of the death signs introduced in the *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava* are very likely to be extended or developed versions of the discourses of the same topic found in the *Sam. varodaya*. The teachings of the chakras (*cakra*) and inner channels (*na¯d. ¯ı*) in the *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava* are more detailed and appear to be more developed than the teaching of the same topic in the *Sam. varodaya*. <sup>29</sup> It seems that the *Sam. varodaya* also antedates the *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava*, or at least, it can be stated that the *Sam. varodaya* includes discourses that were composed prior to the parallel or similar discourses found in the *D. ak¯ arn ¯ . ava*. 30

<sup>27</sup> *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava* 50.7.61ab [my unpublished edition]): *ity aha bhagav ¯ an k ¯ alacakr ¯ akhya ¯ m.* (for *-khyas*) *tu tathagata ¯ h.* / ("Thus taught the Blessed One, a Tathagata called K ¯ alacakra."). The system of the wheel of time ¯ in the *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava* is different from that of the *Kalacakra ¯* . The former system is more in line with the systems traditional in the Sam. vara literature. For details, see (Sugiki 2007, chaps 4, 5 and 7).

<sup>28</sup> (Isaacson and Sferra 2015a, p. 315).

<sup>29</sup> For details of the comparison between these discourses found in the *Sam. varodaya*, the *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava*, and other tantras belonging to the Buddhist Yogin¯ıtantra traditions, see (Sugiki 2007, pp. 17–18, 110–13, 257–82, 316–59). Among them, see particularly (Sugiki 2007, pp. 317–21) for the textual relationship between the *Sam. varodaya*, the *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava*, and the *Var¯ ah¯ ¯ıkalpa*, where I showed that the text of one of the teachings of the death signs was very likely transmitted directly from the *Sam. varodaya* to the *D. ak¯ arn ¯ . ava* and from both of them to the *Var¯ ah¯ ¯ıkalpa*.

<sup>30</sup> Although it is not strong evidence, the following may support the possibility that the *Sam. varodaya* postdates the *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava*: The *Sam. varodaya* was translated into Tibetan (D 373/P 20) by Gzhan la phan pa mtha' yas (Indian) and Rgyus ban de smon lam grags (Tibetan). Their translation was finalized by Gzhon nu dpal (late 14th–15th century), who used Vanaratna's (mid-14th to mid-15th century) Sanskrit manuscript of this scripture. Ratnaraks. ita, who composed the *Padmin¯ı* commentary on the *Sam. varodaya*, was active around 1200 CE. After the downfall of Vikrama´s¯ıla in the beginning of the 13th century, Ratnaraks. ita came to Nepal (Lewis 1996, p. 156). It is not certain when Gzhan la phan pa mtha' yas and Rgyus ban de smon lam grags, who were the two translators of the *Sam. varodaya*, were active. However, it is very likely that Ratnaraks. ita flourished after Padmavajra and Jayasena, who were a commentator and a translator of the *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava*, respectively. As discussed below in this monograph, Padmavajra and Jayasena most likely flourished in the 12th century.

Anupamaraks. ita (late 10th to early 11th century according to Sferra)'s commentary on the *Namasa ¯ m. g¯ıti*, entitled the *Amr. tabindupratyaloka ¯* , <sup>31</sup> A´svaghos. a's commentary on the *Mahak¯ alatantra ¯* , entitled the *Rudrakalpamaha´sma´s ¯ ana ¯* (the date of compilation of which is relatively late),<sup>32</sup> and Indrabhuti's ¯ *Vr. tti* commentary on the *Cakrasam. vara* (which is one of the latest commentaries on the *Cakrasam. vara*) <sup>33</sup> mention the *Mkha' 'gro rgya mtsho*, *D. a ki rgya mtsho'i rgyud ¯* , *Rdo rje mkha' 'gro rgya mtsho*, and *Badzra da ki rgya mtsho ¯* , the Sanskrit of which may be *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava*, *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. avatantra*, and *Vajrad. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava* (the last two), respectively, and quote passages from them. However, in the extant version of the *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava*, I cannot find passages that are evidently comparable to those that the three authors quoted under the name of the *Mkha' 'gro*

<sup>31</sup> \**Aryamañju´sr ¯ ¯ınamasa ¯ m. g¯ıti-amr. tabindupratyalokav ¯ r. tti* (*'Phags pa 'jam dpal gyi mtshan yang dag par brjod pa'i 'grel pa bdud rtsi'i thigs pa sgron ma gsal ba zhes bya ba*), D 1396. The translators are *bod kyi lo tsa ba ¯* ("Tibetan translator") Dharmak¯ırti (who is different from the famous logician Dharmak¯ırti around the 7th century), Sugata´sr¯ı, and Rdo rje rgyal mtshan, who was active in the 13th century CE. For the date of Anupamaraks. ita, see (Sferra 2000, p. 48, footnote 101; Sferra 2015, p. 344). In his *Amr. tabindupratyaloka ¯* , Anupamaraks. ita mentions the *Kalacakra ¯* and quotes passages from it several times. He is also the author of the *S. ad. angayoga ˙* of the *Kalacakra ¯* system, whose text and translation were published by Sferra (Sferra 2000).

<sup>32</sup> \**Sr´ ¯ımahak¯ alatantrarudrakalpamah ¯ a´sma´s ¯ anan ¯ ama ¯ t. ¯ıka¯* (*Dpal nag po chen po'i rgyud drag po'i brtag pa dur khrod chen po zhes bya ba'i 'grel pa*), D 1753. Translators' names are not informed in its colophon. The author is Tantric A´svaghos. a, a person different from the famous Buddhist poet A´svaghos. a in the ancient India.

<sup>33</sup> The *Dpal 'khor lo sdom pa'i rgyud kyi rgyal po bde mchog bsdus pa zhes bya ba'i rnam par bshad pa*, whose Sanskrit is transcribed (or insufficiently back-translated) as *shri tsa kra sa mba ra ta ntra ra dza su ka ra ha ¯ sa mu tstsha* [?] *na ma b ¯ r. tti*, D 1413. The Sanskrit title is perhaps *Sam. varasamuccaya*, *Sukhavarasamuccaya*, or equivalent. The names of the translators are not informed in its colophon. Gray (Gray 2007, pp. 23–24) speculated that the author of this commentary, Indrabhuti, had been active around the 10th ¯ century, using Taran ¯ atha's history of Buddhism. However, there are multiple authors who are named ¯ Indrabhuti. I consider the date of this "Indrabh ¯ uti" to not be as old as Gray speculated. I have a ¯ plan to discuss the contents of Indrabhuti's ¯ *Vr. tti* in detail in the future. Here, in this monograph, I note some remarks for considering its date: (1) Indrabhuti's ¯ *Vr. tti* mentions the names of several scriptures of the Sam. vara tradition composed around the 10th century, such as the *Abhidhanottaratantra ¯* , *Yogin¯ısam. caratantra ¯* , and *Vajrad. aka ¯* , and quotes passages from them, and most of those passages can certainly be found in the extant versions of those Tantras; (2) Some "Indrabhuti" of the Sa ¯ m. vara tradition is mentioned in Kr. s.n. a's *Sam. varavyakhy ¯ a¯* (D 1460, 6r3: i ndra bhu ti'i gzhung nyid dang/ ¯ . . . ). However, it is not certain whether this "Indrabhuti," whom K ¯ r. s.n. a mentioned, is identical to the author of the *Vivr. ti*; (3) In his *S´uramanojñ ¯ a¯* commentary on the *Cakrasam. vara* (D 1405), Bhavyak¯ırti mentions Indrabhuti and quotes his teachings five times (D 1405, 5v7–6r2, 8v1–v3, 10r4, 14r7, and ¯ 14v1–v2). His *S´uramanojñ ¯ a¯* was translated into Tibetan by Dharma´sr¯ıbhadra and Rin chen bzang po (active between the mid-10th and the mid-11th centuries). However, Indrabhuti's ¯ *Vr. tti* does not contain passages that are evidently equivalent to the passages Bhavyak¯ırti quoted as Indrabhuti's ¯ teachings. (Contradictory ideas can also be found between them.) Some "Indrabhuti" of the Sa ¯ m. vara tradition might have been in existence at the time when Bhavyak¯ırti flourished. However, this does not necessarily mean that the extant version of Indrabhuti's ¯ *Vr. tti* was also in existence in that age; (4) Indrabhuti's ¯ *Vr. tti* has the idea of the four classes of tantras, namely, *bya ba* (\**kriya¯*), *spyod pa* (\**carya¯*), *rnal 'byor* (\**yoga*), and *rnal 'byor bla na med pa* (whose Sanskrit is generally \**yoganiruttara*) (D 1413, 6r and 38r). This is identical to the fourfold classification of tantras that gradually became general in Tibet in and after the 12th century (Dalton 2005, pp. 158–59).

## *rgya mtsho* or equivalent mentioned above.<sup>34</sup> It seems that the authors did not consult

In his *Rudrakalpamaha´sma´s ¯ ana ¯* , A´svaghos. a quotes two passages from the *Mkha' 'gro rgya mtsho*: *de yang Mkha' 'gro rgya mtsho las gsungs pa/ /sngags ni lha yi sa bon te/ /lha yi bdag nyid rdzogs pa nyid/ /dkyil 'khor rab gnas bdag nyid do/ /de ltar bsnyen pa rdzogs nas ni// /sbyor ka chen po rdzogs par 'gyur/ /bsnyen pa'i yan lag ma tshang bar/ /las la sbyor bar byed pa ni/ /dam tshig nyams shing 'jig rten 'phya// zhes 'byung/* (D 1753, 199r1–r2: "It is also taught in the *Mkha' 'gro rgya mtsho* as follows: 'Mantras are seeds of deities, completed as the selves of deities. [They are also] selves of establishing a man. d. ala. Having achieved the practice for approaching [deities] (*bsnyen*) in that manner, he accomplishes the great yoga. If one performs a ritual without performing all of the limbs of the approaching practice, he is transgressive of the pledge and is condemned by people.'"), and *de yang Mkha' 'gro rgya mtsho las/ /dam tshig ldan pas dngos grub ni/ /thams cad 'grub par dpa' bos gsungs/ /dam tshig mi ldan thams cad ni/ /dngos grub kun la bdud kyis ni// /las rnams bar du gcod par 'gyur/ /de nas dam tshig thams cad ni/ /'bad pa mang pos spyad par bya// zhes gsungs so*//(D 1753, 213v6–v7: "It is also taught in the *Mkha' 'gro rgya mtsho* as follows: 'The hero stated that one who observes the pledge fulfills all accomplishments (*dngos grub*). If anyone does not observe the pledge, concerning all accomplishments, [his] performances will be obstructed by Mara. Therefore, one should perform the whole pledge with many efforts.'"). ¯

In his *Vivr. ti* commentary, Indrabhuti quotes five passages from a scripture or scriptures entitled ¯ *Mkha' 'gro rgya mtsho*, *D. a ki rgya mtsho'i rgyud ¯* , *Rdo rje mkha' 'gro rgya mtsho*, and *Badzra da ki rgya mtsho ¯* . All available texts are verses in Tibetan, and they are hard to translate exactly. Therefore, I present summaries of the passages instead of a translation of the whole passages below:

*de nyid Mkha' 'gro rgya mtsho las/ /gsang ba sgra don 'brel ba'i tshul/ /dkyil 'khor 'khor lo nges 'byung rigs/ /bsdus dang so so dam tshig gi/ /spyod yul lus sems bde bar rol// /thog ma bar dang mthar dge ba/ /de nyid gsang rim sku gsum mchog/ /srid gsum las ni rnam dag pa'i/ /ye shes rnyed dka' yang dag gnas// /kun sbyor shes rab dang ldan pas/ /rlung la rnam rgyal ting 'dzin gnas/ /phyag rgya bzhi la sna tshogs thabs/ /sbyor ba'i cho ga bstan pa ni// /rdo rje rnal 'byor ma la ni/ /'dzin pa'i don du bskul zhing gdams/ zhes gsungs pa'i don to//*(D 1413, 18r7–v2: This passage includes the teaching of the Four Seals (phyag rgya bzhi la sna tshogs thabs, "there are various means of the Four Seals"). Indrabhuti quoted this to explain that the practices ¯ of offering, fire-oblation, and vow-observance are effective when they are connected with the Four Seals.). The passages including the terms "Four Seals" (some inflected forms of *caturmudra¯*) found in the extant version of the *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava* are as follows: *dharmakarmasamaya tu mah ¯ amudr ¯ asvabh ¯ avakam / ¯ caturmudrabhidh ¯ anatv ¯ ac caturak ¯ s. arakalpanam // ¯* ("The Great Seal is the intrinsic nature of the Dharma, Action, and Pledge [Seals]. [He should understand] the conceptualization of the four letters (*ma ha n¯ a¯ sa¯*) because of the name of the Four Seals.": 29.16 [my unpublished edition]) and *caturmudraprayogena ¯ nava navaikaikasya tu / karmadharmasamayas tu mahamudr ¯ a caturthak ¯ am // ¯* ("In [terms of] the practice of the Four Seals, every [Seal] is inclusive of nine [classes] (therefore, thirty-six classes in total). [The Four Seals are] the Action, Dharma, and Pledge [Seals] and the Great Seal, the fourth.": 34.2 [my unpublished edition]). I cannot regard these as being equivalent to the passages that Inrabhuti quoted. ¯ *de ltar yang D. a ki rgya mtsho'i rgyud las/ /dril sbyangs bum pa mtshan nyid ldan/ /a ga ru sogs spos kyis ¯ bdug/ /legs sbyangs a li k ¯ a li yis/ /dar dbyang mgul chings shing los brgyan// /dag byed rin chen 'bru sman ¯*

<sup>34</sup> No Sanskrit manuscripts of those commentaries are extant. Only Tibetan translations of them are available, and all the passages in question are verses. As is well known, verses translated into Tibetan are often difficult to read. This may make it difficult to find equivalent passages in the extant version of the Sanskrit *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava.* However, as examined below, some of the passages in question are evidently different from the passages that contain similar terms present in the extant version of the *D. ak¯ arn ¯ . ava*. In his *Amr. tabindupratyaloka ¯* , Anupamaraks. ita quotes a passage from the *Mkha' 'gro rgya mtsho* as follows: *de yang Mkha' 'gro rgya mtsho las/ /a li k ¯ a li ma gtogs par/ /gal te rdo rje'i chos 'dod pa/ /'dis ni 'bras ¯ bu ma yin te/ /phub ma rdung dang byed dang mtshungs// zhes gsungs so*//(D 1396, 107v5: "This is also taught in the *Mkha' 'gro rgya mtsho* as follows: 'If one desires the adamantine teaching without the vowels and consonants, due to that, there is no fruit; [it is] like beating chaffs.'"). A similar passage can be found in the *Yogin¯ısam. caratantra ¯* (abbreviated to *Yogin¯ısam. cara ¯* ): *alik ¯ alivinirmukta ¯ h. dharmo 'yam. yadi manyate / vr. tha pari´sramas tasya naiva tatphalam ¯ apnuy ¯ at // ¯* ("If this teaching is learnt without the vowels and consonants, [it is] in vein, in futility for him; he can never attain its fruit.": *Yogin¯ısam. cara ¯* , Skt ed. (Pandey 1998), 16.5).

*Rdo rje mkha' 'gro rgya mtsho las/ /gsang sngags rnams kyi 'byung gnas ni/ /de nyid lhag gnas sku gsungs thugs/ /rnam shes las ni nyer 'byung bas/ /sgra las rkyen sbyar rgyu las bstan// /yi ge khong 'byung brjod pa las/ /ming tshig rab 'byed snying po nyid/ /bzlas pa tha mal dag byed pas/ /bsod nams 'byung gnas stobs mchog 'gyur// zhes gsungs pa'i don to//*(D 1413, 43r1–r3: This teaches the origin of mantras: The letters constituting mantras are produced from the mind. This is quoted to explain the significance of the 7th chapter of the *Cakrasam. vara*, whose topic is the encoding of the vowels that constitute the fundamental mantra of Heruka.).

*de nyid kyi don la/ Badzra da ki rgya mtsho las/ /'khor lo sdom pa'i rnal 'byor pas/ /mtshan dang dpe byad ldan ¯ pa yi/ /zhal la zhen pa spong ba dang/ /dngos po gang dang gang la yang// /dus gsum shes par bya ba'i phyir/ /he ru ka ni bde chen gyi/ /'khor lo'i gtso bo de nyid bong bu'i zhal du bsgyur la bsgrub// /'dis ni las dang dngos grub kun/ /thogs pa med par 'grub pa 'gyur/ /thugs kyi 'khor lo mkha' lding gdong/ /gsung gi rma bya sku seng ge// /mi phyed lha mo sha ba dang/ /ma he stag dang 'ug pa'i gdong/ /sgo ba snga ma nyid yin no/ /da ki ma ni ¯ bong bu'i zhal// /la ma seng ge glang po che/ /phrag rgod dum skyas r ¯ u pi ni/ /sa gsum dbang phyug gter longs ¯ spyod/ /grub pa kun du bskyur ba'o// zhes pa'i don gyis bstan to//*(D 1413, 60v5–v7: This is quoted from the *Badzra da ki rgya mtsho ¯* to explain the yoga of the donkey-formed (*gardabhak¯ arayoga ¯* ) in the 14th chapter of the *Cakrasam. vara*. It teaches this: Heruka is visualized having the face of a donkey (*bong bu*); the deities on the Mind Circle (*thugs kyi 'khor lo*), the face of Garud. a (*lding gdong*); the deities of the Speech Circle (*gsung gi*), the face of a peacock (*rma bya*); the deities on the Body Circle (*sku*), the face of a lion (*seng ge*); Heruka's female consort, the faces of a deer (*sha ba*), buffalo (*ma he*), tiger (*stag*), and owl (*'ug*); the four gatekeepers (*sgo ba*), the faces of animals in accordance with their names; and the four d. akin ¯ ¯ıs (D. akin ¯ ¯ı, Lam¯ a, Kha ¯ n. d. aroha, and R ¯ upi ¯ n. ¯ı), the faces of a donkey (*bong bu*), a lion (*seng ge*), an elephant (*glang po che*), and a ravine vulture (*phrag rgod*), respectively.). The yoga of the donkey-formed is a characteristic practice that is taught in the several scriptures belonging to the Sam. vara tradition. The extant version of the *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava* also teaches it in Section 2, Chapter 50. However, evidently, that chapter does not include the passage which Indrabhuti quoted, from what he called the ¯ *Badzra da ki ¯ rgya mtsho*. The discourse of the yoga of the donkey-formed found in Section 2, Chapter 50 in the extant version of the *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava* is as follows: *atha mahaka ¯ nk˙ alasya lak ¯ s. an. am. vaks.yate maya / gardabh ¯ ak¯ arayog ¯ atm¯ a¯ manovegam. nivartayet // ´sikhasth ¯ ane subh ¯ avit ¯ a parvate samadh ¯ atuk ¯ a / adhomukh ¯ a¯* †*manalatain tu ¯* † *tad. it sarvatra gamin ¯ ¯ı // tasya madhye mahav¯ ¯ıram. bhavayed gardabh ¯ ak¯ r. tim / man. d. alam. sarvasam. pur¯ n. am. cintayet tu mahamaham // tasya madhye mah ¯ av¯ ¯ırah. mahaka ¯ nk˙ alayogata ¯ h. / manthyamanthanayog ¯ atm¯ a tantubhir ¯ nabhimadhyata ¯ h. // hakar¯ ak¯ arar ¯ up¯ as tu ekatantu ¯ s.u mastakat / kap ¯ alamadhye tu vi´sr ¯ ant ¯ a darpa ¯ n. ak¯ aracetas ¯ a // ¯ kala´sam¯ r. tadhar¯ abhir gartamadhye sravanty api / layabhog ¯ adibh ¯ ave ¯ s.u cittasya gatim adi´set // tadgarte gardabho ¯ yogah. saptajanma ca pa´syati / mat¯ r. bhut¯ as tray ¯ ak¯ ar¯ a¯h. pitr. bhut¯ as trayas tath ¯ a // sarvadh ¯ atu ¯ m. sasaptam. tu pa´syate yogabhavan ¯ a / mah ¯ aka ¯ nk˙ alasa ¯ m. bhuta ¯ m. sukhamayah. sarvadhatubhi ¯ h. // tatrastham. dr. ´syate rupi l ¯ am¯ adi ¯ bhavitena tu / gardabh ¯ ak¯ ara sarv ¯ as tu rudhiravaktr ¯ as tri´s ¯ ulak ¯ a¯h. // gatayu ¯ s. am. ca vijñana ¯ m. d¯ırghayu ¯ s. am. ca pa´syati / hastyadip ¯ urvaka ¯ m. rupa ¯ m. sa v¯ırah. svatma pa´syati // ¯* (Skt ed. [my unpublished edition], 50.2.1–10: "Now, I will explain the characteristic of Mahaka ¯ nk˙ ala. [A practitioner,] devoting himself to the yoga ¯ of the donkey-formed, can stop a rush of thought. [The channel of] the balanced bodily constituents is well meditated on the seat [located] at the top of a mountain (viz, at the top of the head). [It] faces downwards, appears to be the stalk of a lotus, and runs to all [regions in one's body] as [spreading] streaks of lightning. In the middle of that [top of the head], one should visualize a great hero in the form of a donkey. One should meditate on [his] man. d. ala, which is completely furnished with all [appropriate qualities] and is greatly effective. The great hero in the middle of that [man. d. ala] is based on the yoga of Mahaka ¯ nk˙ ala. [The practitioner] devotes himself to the yogic union of ¯ churner and the churnable by means of the threads (viz., channels) in the middle of [his] navel region. [Awakening minds,] assuming the shape of the letter *ha*, [flow down] from [his] head appearing like

*dri/ /snying po chu bo 'bab pas brgyan/ /rigs lnga'i dbu rgyan me tog gi/ /cod pan dpyang mdzes pas brgyan// /shin tu sra mkhregs rdo rje'i bdag/ /dril bu don yod rgyal po sbyin/ /bkra shis brjod pa ha ha zhes/ /rab sgrogs ming gi dbang bskur bas// /sgrub pa dung dang gan. d. ¯ı dang/ /sgra snyan rnga bo che brdung zhing/ /lha rnams phrin las myur bskul 'grub/ /gsang sngags tshig gi sgras snyan brjod// /rig pa'i cho ga legs sbyin pa/ /dkyil 'khor mdun du dbang bskur ro// zhes gsungs pa'i don to//*(D 1413, 33r3–r6: This includes an explanation of the meanings and effects of making sounds by uttering voices and playing instruments during the initiation ritual: By those sounds, gods are invoked to do their beneficial actions. Indrabhuti quoted ¯ this to explain why the instruments such as drum are played.).

the extant version of the *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava*. There are two possibilities. (1) At the time when Anupamaraks. ita was active, there were early versions of the *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava*, which were partially different from its extant version, or there were other scriptures that the authors such as Anupamaraks. ita called *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava*, and the authors used them. (*D. aka ¯* is a general term, and *arn. ava* is a word often used in the title of a scripture, whether the scripture is existential or imaginary.) The titles of *Rdo rje mkha' 'gro rgya mtsho* and *Badzra da ki rgya mtsho ¯* (\**Vajrad. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava*), which Indrabhuti mention, sound strange. ¯ In the extant version of the *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava*, no passage can be found where it apparently calls itself *Vajrad. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava*. (2) It is also possible that the titles the authors mentioned do not designate the *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava*; the Sanskrit word for the Tibetan *mkha' 'gro* and *d. a¯ ki* may be *d. akin ¯ ¯ı*. However, scriptures entitled *D. akinyar ¯ n. ava*, or equivalent, are not known to us. Naropa's ¯ *Cakrasam. varavikurvan. a* includes an origin myth that explains how the scripture entitled \**D. akin ¯ ¯ıjalasa ¯ m. varar¯ n. avatantra* (*Mkha' 'gro ma dra ba sdom pa*

single threads (viz, channels). [The currents] rest in the middle of the skull by means of the mirror-like consciousness. Assuming the appearance of streams of immortal nectar [poured out] from a pot, they flow in the middle of a hollow [viz, channel in his head]. He should meditate that [this awakening] mind undergoes states such as absorption and enjoyment. [If he performs] the yoga of a donkey in that hollow, he sees the seven-time born. The appearances of mother-borns are three; likewise, the father-borns are three. He sees all constituent (*dhatu ¯* ) including the seven [if this] practice of yoga [is performed]. [They are] produced from Mahaka ¯ nk˙ ala; [He] is made of pleasure with all constituents. ¯ The corporeal [ones], Lam¯ a and so on, are seen residing there by means of meditation. [They are] all in ¯ the form of a donkey, [have] bloody mouths, and [have] tridents. He sees [and distinguishes between] a consciousness of one who is dying and [a consciousness of] one who lives long. He, a hero, sees himself [having] the form [that is] according to [the bodily constituents] starting with an elephant."). A discourse that is somewhat similar to Indrabhuti's quotation from the ¯ *Badzra da ki rgya mtsho ¯* can be found in Alakakala´sa's *Upade´sanus ¯ ari ¯ n. ¯ı* commentary on the *Yogin¯ısam. cara ¯* (Skt ed. (Pandey 1998), 16.14 (p. 145, l. 7–l. 12)). Alakakala´sa (if he is identical to Alam. kakala´sa of the *Vajramal¯ atantra ¯* 's tradition) flourished in the 12th century according to Kittay (Kittay 2020, p. 6).

*yang lha'i rnal 'byor dang sbyor ba ni/ Mkha' 'gro rgya mtsho las/ /dpal ldan dpa' bo he ru ka/ /de yi yan lag 'khor lor gnas/ /rnal 'byor ma ni sa gsum spyod/ /a lham. she srab thabs bdag nyid// /lha yi rnal 'byor snying ga ste/ /gong ma ga bur si hla las/ /ro rkyang rtsa dang dhu t ¯ ¯ır/ /srog rtsol bcas ba'i sbyar ba'o// /bsam gtan gnas pas mngon byang chub/ /sa bon rdo rje lnga bdag nyid/ /she pa dag nyed sku rdzogs bya/ /lte ba sprul bar pa dma la// /a li k ¯ a li nges par sbyar/ /a wa dh ¯ u t ¯ ¯ır sems dpa' che/ /'bar 'dzag bdud rtsi thig le ni/ /mdzod spu'i gnas las nges par gzhug// /dpa' bo nus pha bzlog gyur bas/ /zhal gyi thig pa bya chags 'bar/ /tsa n. d. a l¯ı yis bsregs de nas/ /bde ba 'bar ba me las ni// /bsreg bya phung po 'byung bdud rtsi/ /drag 'bar thig le bcu drug gi/ /phred pa ye she rgya mtsho che/ /'od 'phro kun nas lus kyi sgo// /mgal me'i 'khor lo ltar 'khor gyur/ /dbang phug dpa' bo dpyod rgyas pas/ /zhal bzhi de nyid phyag rgya che/ /thig les mnyam gnas dga' ba che// /lhan cig skyes pa mtshan nyid bral/ /skad cig sku gsung thugs ye she/ /rdo rje snying po rtsa pa dma/ /'dab gnas yi ge dkar dmar gsal// /'byung po'i pho nya rtags dga' bzhi/ /gnas 'dul dpal ldan 'khor los sgyur/ /dpa' bo rnal 'byor gnyis med bde/ /phyi rol 'khrul 'khor las rlung dgug// /kha n. d. a ro lhas skul byed yin/ /yul dang dbang bo mngon zhen pa/ /ye shes ro mnyam rang gi lus/ /kun 'dar 'khor lo kun dbus skyes// /dus dang chu bo'i 'khor lo ni/ /gsang ba rnal 'byor lus gnas yin// zhes gsang ba bde ba chen po'i de kho na nyid bstan pa'o*//(D 1413, 89v1–v6: This passage mentions aspects of the subtle yoga centered on the elements of the subtle body, such as the inner channels (*rtsa*), the inner fire or Can. d. al¯ ¯ı (*tsa n. d. a l¯ı*), and the immortality nectar (*bdud rtsi*) that flows down from the burnt chakra in the head. Indrabhuti quoted this to explain the deity yoga ( ¯ *lha'i rnal 'byor*), which a practitioner performs in a fire-oblation ritual.). Indeed, the *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava* includes many discourses that teach forms of the subtle yoga. However, I cannot find the passage that is evidently equivalent to the passage mentioned above.

*rgya mtsho'i rgyud*, which contains the words of \**d. akin ¯ ¯ı* and \**arn. ava*) was produced. It is a tantra comprising 100,000 *pada ¯* s extracted from the root tantra (*Khasama*) of 100,000 verses. However, the *D. akin ¯ ¯ıjasa ¯ m. varar¯ n. avatantra* is probably an imaginary tantra.<sup>35</sup>

The *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava* and Padmavajra's *Bohita¯* were translated into Tibetan by Jayasena and Dharma yon tan (also scribed as Chos kyi yon tan) in Kathmandu (*yam bu*) in Nepal (*bal yul*), which is described as "great [and best] place of accomplishment (or of the accomplished ones)" (*grub pa'i gnas* [*mchog*] *chen po*), according to the colophons of Tibetan translations of these texts.<sup>36</sup> Kathmandu was already an important site of Buddhist Tantrism. Jayasena seems to have been a disciple of Padmavajra, because in the opening verses of his *Ratnapadmaraganidhi ¯* , Jayasena bows to "a host of teachers starting with Saroruha" (*mtsho skyes la sogs bla ma'i tshogs*), who taught him how to visualize D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava (viz., a form of Heruka expounded in the *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava*) ("the sequence of clear realization, an instruction from the teacher, of Glorious D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava," *dpal ldan mkha' 'gro rgya mtsho yi/ /bla ma'i man ngag mngon rtogs rim*).<sup>37</sup> As mentioned earlier, Saroruha is another name of Padmavajra. Jayasena was a specialist in the *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava*. He composed several manuals to visualize the Heruka man. d. ala (viz., the *Ratnapadmaraganidhi ¯* ), the *bali* or crop offering (D 1518), *abhis. eka* or initiation (D

<sup>35</sup> *Cakrasam. varavikurvan. a*, P 4628, 125v8–126r4.

<sup>36</sup> *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava*, D 264v1–v2 (*dpal bal yul grub pa'i gnas mchog chen po yu tung lhun gyis grub pa'i gtsug lag khang chen por rgya gar gyi pa n. d. i ta chen po rdo rje slob dpon rtog ge ba rnams kyi gtsug gi nor bu dus deng sang 'gran zla med pa snying rje chen pos thugs brlan pa'i ngang tshul can phyogs sna tshogs nas 'dus pa'i skye 'gro rnams la chos dang zang zing gi char gyis tshim par mdzad pa dpal rdo rje phag mo'i zhabs kyi chu skyes kyi rdul la reg pa sha kya'i sras po rgyal ba'i sde'i zhal snga nas dang/ bod kyi lo tswa ba sh ¯ a kya'i dge slong ¯ dha rma yon tan gyis mnyan cing bsgyur ba'o//*; "[The *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava*] was translated by Dharma yon tan, a Tibetan translator and a Buddhist monk, while he listened to the words of Jayasena in [his] presence, a great Indian scholar (\**pan. d. ita*), an adamantine teacher (\**vajrac¯ arya ¯* ), the highest (the crest jewel) among sophists, and nowadays unrivalled, whose mind is moistened with great compassion by nature, [who] satisfies living beings gathered from all directions with the shower of *dharma* and material wealth, [who] touches the dust of a lotus at the feet of the venerable Vajravar¯ ah¯ ¯ı, [and who is] the Buddha's son, at Yu tung, the great monastery of spontaneous accomplishment in the Venerable Nepal, the great and best place of accomplishment.") and *Bohita¯*, D 318r5 (*dpal bal yul grub pa'i gnas chen po yam bu'i grong khyer gyi dbus yu tung lhun gyis grub pa'i gtsug lag khang du rgya gar gyi pa n. d. i ta rdo rje slob dpon chen po rtog ge ba'i gtsug gi nor bu dus deng sang 'gran zla med pa snying rje chen pos thugs brlan pa'i ngang tshul can phyogs sna tshogs nas 'dus pa'i skye 'gro rnams la chos dang zang zing gi char gyis tshim par mdzad pa sha kya'i sras po rgyal ba'i sde'i zhal snga nas dang/ bod kyi lo tswa ba sh ¯ a kya seng ge'i dge slong chos ¯ kyi yon tan gyis bsgyur ba'o//*; "[The *Bohita¯*] was translated by Chos kyi yon tan, a Tibetan translator and a Buddhist monk, in the presence of Jayasena, an Indian scholar (\**pan. d. ita*), a great adamantine teacher (\**vajrac¯ arya ¯* ), the highest (the crest jewel) among sophists, and nowadays unrivalled, whose mind is moistened with great compassion by nature, [who] satisfies living beings gathered from all directions with the shower of *dharma* and material wealth, [and who is] the Buddha's son, at Yu tung, the monastery of spontaneous accomplishment in the middle of the city of Kathmandu in the Venerable Nepal, the great place of accomplishment."). The word Kathmandu (*yam bu*) does not appear in the colophon of the *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava*, but it should be understood as being implied because the description of the place of translation in the *D. ak¯ arn ¯ . ava* is almost identical to that in the *Bohita¯*.

<sup>37</sup> Jayasena's *Ratnapadmaraganidhi ¯* , D 1516, 1v4.

1521), and *homa* or fire oblation (viz., the Suryak ¯ anta, D 1522, which is also examined ¯ below) based on the *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava*. According to the *Deb ther sngon po* ("Blue Annals"), a Tibetan historiography compiled in the 15th century, Jayasena (*dza ya se na*, also called *dam pa khang gsar ba*) flourished in Nepal and Tibet.<sup>38</sup> Including incomplete and fragmentary documents, more than 20 Sanskrit manuscripts of the *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava* in Newar scripts are surviving. In Nepal, several scriptures and ritual texts, such as the *Var¯ ah¯ ¯ıkalpa*, the *Yogin¯ıjala ¯* , and Jayasena's and Ratnasena's ritual manuals, were composed partially or largely based on the *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava*. <sup>39</sup> These suggest that the *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava* or its tradition flourished in Nepal, particularly the Kathmandu valley, to a certain degree.

The *Deb ther sngon po* indicates that Jayasena, who had translated the *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava* and the *Bohita¯* with Dharma yon tan, came to Tibet and taught Rje btsun (or the Venerable) Grags pa rgyal mtshan.<sup>40</sup> The Venerable Grags pa rgyal mtshan is the name of the third of the five Sakya patriarchs (1147–1216). Additionally, using the Sakya sources, Gardner states that Jayasena and Dharma yon tan were alive in the 12th century.<sup>41</sup> There is a problem of to what degree the Tibetan sources are reliable regarding the date of Indian and Nepali Buddhist teachers. However, the analysis that Jayasena was in the 12th century, which was conducted by the use of Tibetan historiography, is not inconsistent with what the Indian and Nepali sources suggest, regarding the *terminus post quem*. In his *Ratnapadmaraganidhi ¯* , Jayasena mentions Prajñarak ¯ s. ita of the Sam. vara tradition, whose lifetime was, according to Sakurai, around the middle of the 11th century.<sup>42</sup> The date when Jayasena was active is no earlier than the date when Prajñarak ¯ s. ita flourished. Different sources suggest that

<sup>38</sup> *Deb ther sngon po*, vol. 7, 16b7–17r3 and (Roerich [1949] 2007, p. 388). See also footnote 40 in this monograph.

<sup>39</sup> For details, see footnote 29 and below in this monograph.

<sup>40</sup> *Deb ther sngon po*, vol. 7, 16b7–17r3 and (Roerich [1949] 2007, p. 388). For the "[Jayasena] taught Rje btsun (or the Venerable) Grags pa rgyal mtshan," the text is *rje btsun grags pa rgyal mtshan gyis kyang bstan pa*, whose literal translation is "[Jayasena] was also taught by Rje btsun Grags pa rgyal mtshan." I have corrected this after having considered the context. The name "Jayasena" (or Khang gsar pa) can be found in some parts of the *Deb ther sngon po*. However, this is the only part that clearly describes the life of Jayasena in connection with the *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava*. There might have been multiple Jayasenas or multiple transmissions of Jayasena's hagiography.

<sup>41</sup> (Gardner 2010).

<sup>42</sup> Jayasena's *Ratnapadmaraganidhi ¯* , D 1516, 3v1–v4 and 4v3, in which Jayasena says that one should understand how to meditate on the divine natures of the Aggregates, Elements, and Sensorial Bases (*phung po dang khams dang skye mched rnams*) (3v1–v4) and how to make offering by means of the sixteen goddesses of oblation (*mchod pa'i lha mo bcu drug rnams*) (4v3) in line with what Prajñarak ¯ s. ita (*shes rab bsrungs*) taught, respectively. Jayasena seems to indicate Prajñarak ¯ s. ita's *Cakrasam. varabhisamayapañjik ¯ a¯* or *-t. ¯ıka¯*, Skt ed. (Sakurai 2005), 2 (p. 88, l. 7–p. 89, l. 17) and 4 (p. 90, l. 27–p. 91, l. 12), respectively, which is a commentary on Luy¯ ¯ıpada's ¯ *Cakrasam. varabhisamaya ¯* . For the date of Prajñarak ¯ s. ita, see (Sakurai 2004, p. 815). For the problem regarding the title name of his commentary on the *Cakrasam. varabhisamaya ¯* , see (Sakurai 2005, p. 85).

Jayasena made his contributions after Abhayakaragupta, who was active between ¯ the late 11th and the early 12th centuries and who, to the best of my knowledge, did not explicitly mention the *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava* in his works (although some similar ideas can be found in his *Amn ¯ ayamañjar ¯ ¯ı* and the *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava*43). Jayasena's *Suryak ¯ anta ¯* (D 1522), an elaborate *homa* manual, comprises two sections: the external and the internal *homa*. <sup>44</sup> Its internal *homa* section is based on the discourse on the forms of fire pits in Chapter 24 of the *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava*. <sup>45</sup> Its external *homa* section is largely similar to that of the *Jyotirmañjar¯ı*, which is an elaborate *homa* manual composed by Abhayakaragupta. ¯ <sup>46</sup> Abhayakaragupta composed the discourse on the forms of fire ¯ pits in the external *homa* section of his *Jyotirmañjar¯ı*, particularly relying on the chapter of the external *homa* ritual (Chapter 48) in the *Vajrad. aka ¯* . <sup>47</sup> It seems that Jayasena used Abhayakaragupta's ¯ *Jyotirmañjar¯ı* because the *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava* did not include a discourse that expounded ways to prepare and perform the external *homa* ritual in detail.

From the sources investigated above, I put forward the following hypothesis: The *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava* was developed sometime between the late 10th and the mid-12th centuries, and the basic texts of its extant version were probably completed around the early 12th century, after the *Kalacakra ¯* (whole text) and the *Sam. varodaya* (whole text or some early form) appeared and before Padmavajra composed his *Bohita¯*. The text preserved in the oldest Sanskrit manuscript of the *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava* (NGMPP A138/9), which is undated, may be relatively near to the original text(s) of the extant version of the *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava*. Jayasena composed his *Ratnapadmaraganidhi ¯* and other texts around the mid-to-late 12th century. Padmavajra, the author of the *Bohita¯*, is a teacher of Jayasena. The compilation of the *Bohita¯* can be dated around the early-to-mid-12th century, no later than the age when Jayasena translated it into Tibetan. Among the

<sup>43</sup> For example, in his *Amn ¯ ayamañjar ¯ ¯ı*, Abhayakaragupta quotes a passage from the ¯ *D. akin ¯ ¯ıvajrapañjaratantra* and interprets the passage to say that the *Samaja ¯* (*Guhyasamajatantra ¯* ), as well as the *Tattvasam. graha* (*Sarvatathagatatattvasa ¯ m. grahasutra ¯* ), etc., belong to the Yogatantra scriptural class ( . . . *tatra yogatantram ity anena tatvasam. grahadika ¯ m. samaj¯ adika ¯ m. cabhihita ¯ m.* : Skt ms. p. 632, l. 2–p. 634, l. 1 = Tib. D 1198, 109r1–r4). The *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava* also includes a passage that connects the *Samaja ¯* (*Guhyasamajatantra ¯* ) with the *Yogatantra* scriptural class (Skt ed. (my unpublished edition), 50.1.11: *anyani yogatantr ¯ a¯n. i samaj¯ adi mah ¯ arthakam ¯* ). For another example, see Chapter 4.5 in this monograph.

<sup>44</sup> In the *Suryak ¯ anta ¯* (D 1522), the section on the external *homa* is found in 68r3–76v5, with the section on the internal *homa* in 76v6–77r4.

<sup>45</sup> Sugiki (2016a, pp. 186–88, 199–200) presented a draft Sanskrit edition and analysis of this discourse.

<sup>46</sup> *Jyotirmañjar¯ı*, Skt ed. (Okuyama 1983, 1986), 2, 2.1.

<sup>47</sup> (Sugiki 2008, pp. 134–35) and (Sugiki 2010b, p. 60). The discourse on the forms of fire pits in Chapter 48 of the *Vajrad. aka ¯* constitutes the basic part or bone framework of Abhayakaragupta's discourse on ¯ the forms of fire pits. Using several other tantras, Abhayakaragupta added various ideas to (or put ¯ flesh on) that bone framework so as to make that discourse more universal. (Abhayakaragupta is ¯ also known as the author of the *Amn ¯ ayamañjar ¯ ¯ı*, an extensive commentary on the *Samput. odbhava*. The *Samput. odbhava* also has a chapter that explains the forms of fire pits. However, the discourse on the forms of fire pits in the *Vajrad. aka ¯* is more similar to the discourse on the same topic in the *Jyotirmañjar¯ı*.)

available textual sources, Padmavajra's *Bohita¯* was perhaps the first to quote the passages that are evidently from the extant version of the *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava*. Currently, there is no firm evidence for showing the existence of the extant version of the *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava* before the age when Padmavajra was active. However, this does not rule out the possibility of its existence in the earlier age: Some version of the *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava*, which is partially or entirely different from its extant version, might have been present by the early 11th century, as Anupamaraks. ita (late 10th to early 11th century) quoted a passage (which cannot be found in the extant version of the *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava*) from a scripture that he called "*Mkha' 'gro rgya mtsho*". The extant version of the *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava* contains both discourses whose sources are most likely from Bengal and Nepal in a relatively late period (namely, the Bengali words and expressions found in the Apabhram. ´sa verses and some discourses probably derived from the *Sam. varodaya*, respectively). It is difficult to decide whether the entire body of the extant version of the *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava* was finally completed in Bengal or Nepal. However, it seems certain that Nepal was a very important place for the extant version of the *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava*. It appears to have flourished in the Kathmandu valley to a certain degree, and was transmitted from Kathmandu to Tibet.
