ISAACSON - 2009 A Collection of Hevajrasaadhanas and Related Works

A collection of Hevajrasdhanas and
related works in Sanskrit

Harunaga Isaacson, Hamburg
For our knowledge and understanding of the history of Indian
tantric Buddhism, those works which survive in their original Indic
language, usually Sanskrit,1 are of the first importance. One of the
most urgent tasks in the study of this subject is to survey this material, much of which is still unpublished and even uncatalogued. This
is not to deny that translations (in the main Chinese or Tibetan) of
Indian tantric texts are also of great value (as is, for that matter,
* I am gratefully indebted to Prof. Kazuo Kano (Koyasan University),
Prof. Dr. Francesco Sferra (University of Naples LOrientale), Mr. Iain
Sinclair (Hamburg University) and Dr. Toru Tomabechi (sterreichische
Akademie der Wissenschaften, Wien) for reading drafts of this paper and
for making helpful comments and suggestions. For help in gaining access
to and acquiring copies and digital images of manuscripts used in this paper I would like to thank the Niederschsische Staats- und Universittsbibliothek, Gttingen; the library of the Royal Asiatic Society, London;
Cambridge University Library; Dr. Dominic Goodall; Prof. Kazuo Kano,
Dr. Isabelle Onians; and, last but not least, Prof. Dr. Albrecht Wezler and
the Nepal-German Manuscript Preservation Project.
In the following I shall often simply refer to Sanskrit (material,
manuscripts etc.); it should be understood that I do not intend to exclude
thereby texts that are partly or wholly written in some form of MiddleIndic. Similarly, although I occasionally use India(n) and Nepal(ese)
contrastingly, when it is not obvious that a contrast is intended Indian in
this paper should be understood as generally including all of South-Asia,
or rather the entire area in which Sanskritic culture was current in the tenth
to twelfth centuries of the common era.
1
Ernst Steinkellner, Duan Qing, Helmut Krasser (eds.), Sanskrit manuscripts in

China. Proceedings of a panel at the 2008 Beijing Seminar on Tibetan Studies,
October 13 to 17. Beijing 2009, pp. 89136.
90
Harunaga Isaacson
archaeological and other material evidence). It is indeed a wonderful thing that we have such translations, and they are of special
importance of course when no manuscript of the Indic original has
been discovered. Some of these translations have also come to lead a
separate life, as it were, and have been significant in their own right
for many generations of Buddhists outside of India proper; they
deserve study not only as evidence for Indian Buddhism but per se,
within their Tibetan, Chinese, or other, context. To put them to their
best use for the study of Buddhism in India, however, requires thorough familiarity with the Sanskrit material, and constant awareness
of and sensitivity to the problems inherent in working with translations which are by various hands and of varied quality. It is even
no exaggeration to say that a good part of the translated literature
can only be read with reasonably accurate, precise, understanding
by someone who is constantly aware of the possible phrasing of the
Sanskrit original that underlies what he or she reads.2 What is more,
in this area as well as in others within the larger field of Indian
Buddhist studies,3 it should be remembered that there is an appreci2
This is well-known to competent scholars working in various other
areas of Buddhist studies, but perhaps less so to many of those who have
written on tantric Buddhism, using primarily or exclusively Tibetan material. For an extreme case of a (poor) Tibetan translation that in many
places only can be understood or corrected by a consideration of what
Sanskrit reading (or what corruption of a Sanskrit reading) may lie behind
it, see Candrakrtis nyatsaptativtti, of which the commentary on the
first 14 kriks has been treated with admirable thoroughness by Felix
Erb (1997). For an illustration of the importance of taking into account
Sanskrit originals, when available, in dealing with Tibetan translations of
tantric material see Tomabechi 2000. Wedemeyer 2006 also oers a few
useful reflections on the problems of dealing with Tibetan translations of
Sanskrit Buddhist texts, and calls (on p. 153) for a reassessment of the
nature and stature of Tibetan translations, their qualities and limitations.
3
To mention but a few instances of non-tantric Buddhist literature that
seems to survive only in Sanskrit, in Abhidharma there is the case of the
Abhidharmapradpa and its commentary, which criticize the positions of
Vasubandhus Abhidharmakoabhya; and in the field of pram astra
the works of Jnarmitra, which are known to have been quite influential
A collection of Hevajrasdhanas
91
able number of works that survive in Sanskrit of which we do not

have any Tibetan (nor Chinese) translation at all.4 For this reason
too, a student of (the history of) Indian tantric Buddhism should
be equipped with a sound knowledge of Sanskrit, and must be able
and prepared to read extensively in unpublished material that is at
present available only in manuscripts. It may be added that it is clear
that such a student would benefit greatly from being able to take into
consideration also aiva tantric literature in Sanskrit. This literature
has quite evidently been an influence on Buddhist tantra, particularly in the later stages of the development of Vajrayna;5 and apart
from the question of the direction(s) of influence, it is clear that the
aiva Mantramrga and the Buddhist Mantranaya are closely related
and that they can shed mutual light on each other.6
(also on such non-Buddhist writers as his opponent Udayana), do not seem
to have been translated.
4
As we shall see, this is the case with many of the texts in the collection with which this article deals. To mention just a few other instances
out of many: the commentaries by Mahsukhavajrapda on the Caamahroaatantra (the only one that appears to be extant in any form on
this tantra) and by Kelikulia on the Hevajratantra (a unique work that
comments on the Hevajratantra from the standpoint of the rya school of
the Guhyasamjatantra) survive in palm-leaf manuscripts in Sanskrit but
do not seem to have been translated.
5
Already twenty years ago attention was drawn to some important evidence of direct textual borrowings from early aiva tantric literature in
tantras of the avara-cycle (Sanderson 1985, n. 106). This was expanded
on in more recent articles by the same scholar (Sanderson 1994 and especially 2002). A much more wide-ranging discussion of the relationship
between aiva and Buddhist forms of tantra may be found in Sanderson
2009.
6
I could not express the need for this widening of ones scholarly scope
in this and in other ways better than by quoting from a recent publication
of Sanderson: such breadth is in any case the royal road to success in
scholarship. For the critic will commonly find himself confronting
problems which only the cultivation of this breadth can equip him to recognize and solve. Most importantly, to master texts of this kind, written
within a highly complex and multiform world of religious practice and
92
Harunaga Isaacson
Of the materials extant in Sanskrit relevant to the Hevajra-cycle,

a unique manuscript written (to judge from the script) in Nepal, perhaps in the early fourteenth century,7 that has been preserved in the
Tibetan Autonomous Region, is particularly important for the study
of the various Indian traditions of the sdhana of this deity or his
consort Nairtmy. The 272 folios8 of this manuscript contain 45
works,9 mainly sdhanas, but also including some stotras and ritual
texts. A large proportion of the works seems not to have been translated into Tibetan. Some are known from other surviving Sanskrit
manuscripts, but for many this codex is probably the sole source that
we have.10
doctrine and written for persons engaged in it, the critic must work towards an ever more thorough understanding of that world; and this will
lead him from one area of the Tantric tradition to another and will also
require him, like the Tantric scholars before him, to have a grounding in
the domains that underly and inform the Tantric, such as those of Vaidika
observance and hermeneutics in the case of the aiva and Pcartrika
systems, and of Abhidharma and Vinaya in the case of Tantric Buddhism
(Sanderson 2002: 2).
7
The estimate of Diwakar Acharya, whom I thank for giving me his
experienced judgement of the script of the manuscript.
8
Not counting a covering leaf before f.1, with notes in Tibetan written on both sides. As Bandurski points out (1994: 76) there are two leaves numbered 136. The final folio is numbered 271; there presumably was
originally a 273rd folio, which would have been numbered 272, for the
scribes concluding colophon is not quite complete. It may have been lost,
or perhaps (since there may well have been no more than a few words on it)
Sktyyana did not trouble to photograph it.
9
The number 42 given in Isaacson 2002a: 461, (and repeated, for instance, in Kano 2005: 143 and Sanderson 2009: 237 n. 541), is an error for
which I alone am responsible.
10
Information on the existence or non-existence of a Tibetan translation of the works contained in the manuscript, and of other manuscripts
of those works, is given in tabular form in the Appendix to this paper. Of
sdhanas of Hevajra or Nairtmy that are extant in Sanskrit but not contained within this codex the most significant are Rhulaguptas Hevajrapraka (IASWR MBB I-39, including also an anonymous Sakiptahevajrapjvidhi; a modern apograph of this palm-leaf manuscript was
93
The manuscript was long in the possession of the or monastery;

it is there that it was seen and photographed by Rhula Sktyyana. Sktyyana also provided the first description of the manuscript and its contents.11 The precise location of the manuscript today
is not known to me; we may hope that the survey currently being
carried out by the Tibetan Academy of Social Sciences may eventually answer this question.12
The negatives that Sktyyana made in the course of his expeditions to Tibet are now preserved in the Bihar Research Society,
Patna. Copies of a number of these negatives, made in the sixties
and seventies, were brought to Germany and kept for some years in
the Seminar fr Indologie und Buddhismuskunde, Gttingen.13 They
were subsequently moved from there to the Niederschsische Staatsund Universittsbibliothek, Gttingen, where the reproductions of
the codex I am concerned with have the shelf-mark MS Xc 14/39.
A catalogue of the Gttingen collection by Frank Bandurski
was published in 1994. Bandurskis description of the contents of
owned by Gustav Roth) and an anonymous Dvibhujaherukasdhana that
has been published as Sdhanaml 245.
11
It will be clear from my description below that Sktyyanas description is inadequate in many respects, but this is not something for which one
should blame the Indian scholar. It must be remembered that Sktyyana
had made no particular study of tantric literature, and that he was faced
with a large number of manuscripts to be examined and photographed in
very little time and under what must have been often demanding conditions. Students of Indian Buddhism owe a great debt to Sktyyana for his
prodigious labours to discover and publish Sanskrit texts, and more than
sixty years after his expeditions many important manuscripts would not
be available to scholars at all were it not for the negatives he made. And in
making public his notes on the manuscripts he had examined, though no
doubt himself conscious that they were likely to contain many errors, he
performed a valuable service to generations of future scholars.
12
On the varied fortunes of Sanskrit manuscripts in Tibet in general,
and on the history of modern scholarship connected with them, see Steinkellner 2004, as well as the contributions to this volume.
13
Cf. Bandurski 1994: 1213.
94
Harunaga Isaacson
the manuscript is, however, as far as I can tell wholly dependent

on Sktyyanas. None of Sktyyanas errors of commission or
omission have been corrected, and some fresh mistakes have crept
in, apparently simply due to carelessness in copying the earlier list
of titles and authors names. Bandurski copies Sktyyanas list of
folios on which the individual works end without adding whether the
colophons are on the recto or verso of the leaf, information which
Sktyyana had omitted but which could easily have been supplied with access to the copies of the negatives.
Somewhat more useful is the contribution of the compilers of a
bibliography of Buddhist tantric texts in Sanskrit (BBK: 304309);
though they did not have access to the manuscript and had to rely
on Sktyyanas descriptions they have added some useful notes
and suggested possible correspondences with translations in the Tibetan canon. This publication does not seem to have been known to
Bandurski.
The only other account of the contents of the codex that I am
aware of was published in an article in Hindi, aiming at surveying
the literature related to the Hevajratantra. Its author, Ll, must have
examined (photographs of) the codex directly, and his description is
independent of Sktyyanas, and avoids several of the mistakes
(of omission and commission) of the earlier lists. Ll enumerates 39
texts, giving folio numbers of their beginnings and ends (but without specifying rectos or versos), and in most cases also providing
an authors name. No attempt has been made to identify Tibetan
translations.
A thorough discussion of even a few of the numerous points of
interest in these texts, and of their mutual relationships and the light
that they throw on the history of the yogintantra traditions, would
require much further study. Such work must wait for the future. The
most basic task of editing and publishing the texts preserved in this
codex has begun, and will be continued in the coming years.14
Editions of the two sdhanas by Ratnkaranti that are items 9 and
21 in the list of contents below have been published in Isaacson 2002a and
14
95
Among the works that we have access to through this manuscript,

attention should be drawn in particular to that described as no. 18
below. In a way it is out of place here, for it is the only text that
is not directly connected with the practice of Hevajra or his consort Nairtmy. But if it was included through error, that error is
one for which we may be thankful, for what it in fact is is a brief
sdhanopyik of Heruka according to the Sarvabuddhasamyogatantra (also known as Sarvabuddhasamyogakinjlaavaratantra or avaratantra), written by the celebrated Yogatantra15 authority nandagarbha (see no. 18, p.112, below). This may well be
the most significant work of the Sarvabuddhasamyoga literature
that has survived in Sanskrit.
My purpose here is simply to give an improved and more detailed
description of the contents of the manuscript. This description is
an advance on the earlier ones in several respects: it adds no less
than fourteen titles which were overlooked by Sktyyana and are
therefore absent in the descriptions that are based on his, while six
works were overlooked by Ll;16 a number of corrections have been
made with regard to the titles and the names of authors;17 I have been
able to confirm or disconfirm some earlier proposals of identifications of Tibetan translations and have identified Tibetan translations
of several more works (it is likely, however, that more remains to be
2002b.
15
No doubt nandagarbha would have reckoned the Sarvabuddhasamyogatantra as a Yogatantra, not as a Yogintantra or Yoganiruttaratantra,
just as appears to be the case for other early authors such as Vilsavajra
and ryadeva. It may be remarked in passing that the term Mahyogatantra with which ryadeva in the Carymelpakapradpa refers to the
Sarvabuddhasamyogatantra (CaMePra p. 466) is one which he appears
to use as interchangeable with Yogatantra, not to designate a separate class
of scripture.
16
Sktyyana et al. below refers to the lists given in Sktyyana
1935, BBK, and Bandurski 1994.
17
There is sometimes a certain arbitrariness in the choice between different possible names of works or of their authors.
96
Harunaga Isaacson
done in this area); the beginnings and ends of each text have been
quoted; and a number of additional notes have been added and passages quoted. It should however be remembered that my description
and transcriptions are out of necessity based solely on my perusal
of a microfilm of a copy of Sktyyanas negatives. Though with
persistence most of the manuscript can be deciphered from this microfilm, there still are some substantial portions which remain illegible. It is to be hoped that the manuscript still survives, and if it, or
a microfilm made directly from it, were available, it would no doubt
be possible to correct some of my readings. I do not think however
that any new texts would be added to the list; even on those folios
which are almost completely illegible in the microfilm it is at least
possible to say that there seems to be no colophon.
The additional notes and quotations are selective; I have merely
mentioned some points noticed during my reading of the texts that
seem to shed some light on the author and his relationship with other
works (and hence on problems of chronology). I have not recorded
here all of the many quotations (mostly from the Hevajratantra) that
are found in the texts of the codex, but have mentioned some that
seem unusual.
In the passages quoted from the manuscript I have preserved
without standardization the scribes orthography in such matters as
gemination or degemination of consonants before or after semi-vowels. Syllables or parts of syllables the reading of which is particularly
uncertain are placed within parentheses. Additions and cancellations
are indicated by placing the former within plus-signs (++) and the
latter within angled brackets (). The symbol is used to represent
any of the small decorative motifs used in the colophons; these range
from a simple circle to moderately elaborate flower designs.
It will be seen from the quotations that the manuscript is, to use
an old catch-phrase of cataloguers, not very correct. I have suggested emendations (chiefly of a very obvious sort) in a number of cases,
placing the proposed reading in parentheses after the corrupt words
and using the stock phrase sic for; in other places I have added a
question-mark after a corruption that is less easily repaired.
97
1 Hevajrasdhanopyik by Saroruhapda (as the authors name

is given in the colophon of the work in this manuscript) or
Saroruhavajra(pda), as he is perhaps more commonly referred
to. Rather surprisingly, this work is omitted from Lls list, although it is included in those of Sktyyana et al., and although
Sktyyanas description was known to and referred to by Ll
(1999: 36).
Begins: o namo bhagavate rhevajrya || rhevajra namasktya nairtmy cpi bhaktita| tatsdhanavidhi vakye
vajrcryaprasdata || (f. 1v1). Ends: sdhanopyik ktv
rhevajrasya durlabh| yan mayoprjjita ubha18 puya
tena loko stu vajradhk|| || rhevajrasya sdhanopyik sampt (sic for sampt)|| ktir cryasaroruhapdnm iti|| ||
(f.8r45).
This sdhana is an important one in the history of the Hevajracycle, and it is a logical choice on the part of the compiler of the
collection to put it at the head. Note that in the compilation of
the Tibetan canon the same decision has been made; in both the
Peking and Derge editions of the bstan gyur this is placed first
among the sdhanas associated with the Hevajratantra.
No other complete Sanskrit manuscript of the text is available to
me, but I have identified one leaf of another palm-leaf manuscript
among the incomplete materials now bundled together as Kaiser
Library MS 139 [= NGMPP C 14/6] under the title Vajrayoginsdhanaml. A considerable number of Sanskrit manuscripts
survive of a commentary on this sdhana by one Suratapda
or Suratavajra.19 An edition of Saroruhapdas important work
18
It is not quite clear whether the word ubha has been cancelled (as it
should be) or not.
19
One palm-leaf manuscript was seen and photographed by Sktyyana in or monastery; copies of his negatives are now preserved in the
Niederschsische Staats- und Universittsbibliothek, Gttingen, shelved as
Xc 14/38 (see Bandurski 1994: 75, describing the text after Sktyyana
as Hevajraippaa von Saroruhavajra). For lists of several other manuscripts, mainly recent and on paper, see BBK: 295296 (Hevajraippa)
98
Harunaga Isaacson
has recently been published in Dh 36, apparently based solely

on a copy owned by hkursen Neg of a Nepalese MS titled
Sdhanasagraha. The text-quality of the edition is unfortunately not good; we must hope that a new edition, making use
also of this or codex, will be prepared.
Tibetan translation: Thoku 1218, tani 2347.
2 Hevajrkhya by Advayavajra. Sktyyana et al. give the title
of the work as Hevajrkhyayuganaddha, and Ll as Hevajrkhye
yuganaddhakrama, but here yuganaddha is (part of) the name
of the last section of the text. Sktyyana seems to have mistakenly taken this text to be the Yuganaddhapraka that has
been published in the Advayavajrasagraha.20
Begins: o nama rhevajrya|| evakrasamsna caturnandaja vibhum| dimadhyntanirmmuktan tam vande vajradhria || (f. 8r56).21 Ends: varatoynadtre vindhykorasraprik(?)| jto smi mthure kule (sic contra metrum, for
kle?) so ha [f.22v] maitreyasajaka|| iti rhevajrkhye yuganaddhakrama|| 35|| ktiyam (sic for ktir iyam) advayavajrapdnm|| (f.22r722v1). After this there is an insertion mark
and a two-line marginal addition can be found which is largely
illegible to me; the parts that I can read are consistent with the
and 299 (Vajrapradp); Moriguchi 1989, 146 (613 Hevajratantraippa

and 616 Hevajrasdhanaippa). As far as I have been able to determine,
all manuscripts that are listed as Hevajra(tantra)ippa (by Saroruhavajra) are in fact of this ippa on Saroruhas sdhana, not of Saroruhas
commentary on the Hevajratantra, the Padmin (Thoku 1181, tani
2311). To my knowledge no manuscript of that commentary survives.
20
Sktyyanas assertion (1935: 38 n. 2), repeated/copied by Bandurski, that a Tibetan translation exists, is based on this wrong identification.
21
This opening verse is almost identical with that of Garbhapdas
Herukasdhana (no. 14 below). See p. 110 below. Note that tani 2398
(*Dvibhujahevajrasdhana, no author given) apparently starts with the
same verse.
99
transcription given in Sktyyana 1935: 38 n. 2.22

There are the following intermediate colophons: iti rhevajrkhye kyaviveka prathama (sic for prathama) pariccheda
sampta|| 53|| || (f.15v12); iti rhevajrkhye vgviveko dvitya pariccheda|| || (f.17v6); iti rhevajrkhye cittavivekas
ttya pariccheda|| (2)7|| (f.19r12); iti hevajrkhye sarvvauddhikrama caturtha pariccheda|| 43|| (f.20v67).
The author, famous as a siddha, is credited with the authorship
of many works, some of which have been published in Sanskrit
under the collective name Advayavajrasagraha. In Tibetan
historiographical/hagiographical literature (and therefore also
in modern secondary literature) he is often called Maitrpa or
Maitrgupta. In texts written in and surviving in Sanskrit, his
other name is more commonly given as Maitreya; the final verse
of this text (quoted above) has this form, and in the commentary
by Rmapla (supposed to have been this masters principal pupil) on Advayavajras Sekanirdea (also known as Sekaniraya)
the author is called Maitreyantha.23 If the attribution to Advayavajra is genuine, and the final verses are not interpolated, we have
in them a rather rare scrap of autobiographical information.
As the titles of the chapters of the work indicate, we find in it a
structure of five stages of practice that is rare, though not unique,
in the Hevajra-system. The influence of the rya school of
Guhyasamja is evident here. The set of five kramas taught here
22
Sktyyanas transcription runs thus: yasya prasdakiraai sphurittmatattvaratnaprabh pariku (sic?) prahatndhakra | yasya (sic)
anvilada svavilsam uccai tasmai (sic) nama ktir iya gurubhskarasya. Sktyyanas assertion that this verse was inserted by Vajrapi, the translator (of the Yuganaddhapraka, with which Sktyyana
wrongly identified this work), is as far as I can see without basis.
23
After the initial verses, Rmaplas commentary commences ihya
mahpaitvadhtar manmaitreyantha kriycaryyogayogottarayoganiruttaratantrev anuttaraguru (SeNiPa f.1v3). A critical edition
and annotated English translation of Rmaplas commentary is under
preparation by Francesco Sferra and the present author.
100
Harunaga Isaacson
does not however agree precisely with any of the slightly dierent structures that are commonly taught in the rya school.24
I have not been able to identify a Tibetan translation of this
work. It is dierent from Thoku 1243 = tani 2372 (*Hevajranma-sdhana by Avadht-pa gis med rdo rje); the only other
Hevajrasdhana attributed to Advayavajra in the Thoku and
tani catalogues corresponds to no. 7 below.
3 Hevajratattvavika by Divkaracandra.
Begins: nama rhevajrya|| sahajnandaikarasyana() vraviuddhacitta | samayacakrdigamanena buddhaviuddhadeha (?)25| varaguhyarkamalamadhyamaalacakrantha
amala vande guruvar (sic for guruvara) sad iras natena|| (f.22v12). Ends: pacamudr kul khyt anenaiva lakayet| bhedena lakayed dhtu svasvabjena codayet| codan
gamiyat (sic for gamiyanti) sarvvasiddhipradyik (sic for
sarvasiddhipradyik) | sandhybha (sic for sandhybha) vadanti te hevajrea yath codit|| || iti hevajratatvavike homavidhigaacakrabhojananirddea aama sampta||
|| ktir cryadivkaracandrapdnam iti (f.47r57). There
are the following intermediate colophons: iti hevajratatvavike
abhisamayasdhana utpattikramanirdea prathama || ||
(f.27v3); iti hevajratatvavike savttivivtti-avatrasamayarakadvayasiddhinirddeo nma dvitya || || (f. 28v6); iti
hevajratatvavike adhytmasamvaraabhedanibandhanirdeas ttya|| || (f.29v45); iti tatvavike evammay(sth)naguhyasamvarabhedanirdea caturtha|| || (f.35r56); iti rhevajratatvavike abhiekanirddea paama|| || (f.38v6); iti
vajratatvavike (sic for hevajratattvavike) cchommpaala
24
For a very brief discussion of the dierences on this point within the
rya school see the remarks in Tomabechi 1996: xiixiv. A fuller discussion is given in the same authors as yet unpublished doctoral dissertation
(Tomabechi 2006: 2736).
25
The text of both the first two pdas is metrically bad, and I see no way
to improve the metre without heavy and very speculative emendation.
101
ahama || || (f. 42r3); iti hevajratatvavike carybhvansandhydhihnasandhybhso nma (sic for bh nma?)
saptama (f.43v45).
Divkaracandra is the author of no less than six texts in this
collection. None of them appears to have been translated into
Tibetan; however a rherukabhtanmamaalopyik attributed to one in moi byu gnas zla bai abs (*Divkaracandrapda) and included among the works related to Hevajra
in the Tanjur may be by the same author. He is evidently later
than Ratnkaranti, to whom he refers (see p.102 below); if the
ntabhadra whom he mentions as his teacher (see p.109 below)
should happen to be identical with ntibhadra (we may have
a scribal error here in our MS), who according to the Deb ther
son po (Blue Book, or, as it is more commonly referred to in
secondary literature, Blue Annals)26 studied with Ratnkaranti
and later, in Nepal, taught Sanskrit to the Tibetans Brog-mi and
sTag lo gon nu brtson grus (Deb ther son po 185; Roerich
1949: 205),27 Divkaracandra might be assigned to the second
half of the eleventh century.28 It is somewhat uncertain whether
he should be identified with Devkaracandra (an odd sounding name, which it is extremely tempting to see as a corruption
of Divkaracandra), which according to Tibetan sources such as
the Deb ther son po and Trantha was another name of sTo
id ti dzin (*nyatsamdhi, conceivably the nyasamdhivajra who wrote no. 32 below), one of the four principal disciples
It is likely, as van der Kuijp has shown (van der Kuijp 2006), that the
Deb ther son po was compiled by disciples of Gos Lo ts ba working
under his supervision, and that it was not completed before his death.
27
For a discussion of the figure ntibhadra see Lo Bue 1997: 639642;
Lo Bue concludes that the various references to a ntibhadra, sometimes
referred to as hailing from Rjagha and sometimes as a Newar scholar, all
may refer to one individual, born in India but later living in the Kathmandu
Valley.
28
See also the discussion of the date of Devkaracandra in Sakuma
2006, in which ca. A.D. 10301130 is arrived at.
26
102
Harunaga Isaacson
of Advayavajra/Maitrpa (see on this Devkaracandra especially Deb ther son po 344347, Roerich 1949: 392394; Tatz
1987: 710; Lo Bue 1997: 637638; Sakuma 2006). The Deb ther
son po gives details of other teachers of this Devkaracandra
(reported as having been born in Nepal and having studied first
in India and later in Nepal), but no ntabhadra or ntibhadra is
mentioned as one of these, nor has any such connection between
Devkaracandra and ntibhadra/ntabhadra been reported,
to my knowledge, in any other source.
Tibetan translation: none identified.
4 Jnapradpbhidhna Hevajrasdhana by Divkaracandra.
Begins: nama rhevajrya|| brahm brahmasastha sapura[f.47v]parikara kramyate yasya ndai (sic for pdai)
eo eoragea caraabharaatorv (sic for caraabharanatorv?) kathacid bibhartti| hastai (sic for hastair) hastydibhagrahaagurutarair bhti satpadmava (sic for satpadmavat) khe tadvat sat tava va| pradisatu (sic for pradiatu)
vihasan heruka sanmasoggra (?) (f.47r747v2). Ends: ktv
jnapradpa jinahdayahda sdhana herukasya prdurbhta viuddha kualam (sic for lam) aghahara yan
mayotpattibhja| tena klen vihya vrajatu gajagad (sic for
jagad) ida heru+ka+tva mahyo bhysa sa ca st (sic
for sarvast?) sakalaguanidhir heruko ha ca (gra)ghram
iti|| samptam ida jnapradpbhidhna rhevajra[f.61v]
sdhana|| || ktir iya mahpaitcryadivkaracandrapdn|| || (f.61r661v1).
The author refers to Ratnkaranti as authority for the practice that he teaches: rratnkarantipdmata (sic29) vakye
sphua (sic for sphua) sdhanam (f.47v3).
A straightforward emendation to pdamata leaves the pda (rdlavikrita metre) a syllable too short.
29
103
5 Cihnaviuddhi by Divkaracandra. Sktyyana misread the

title as Cittaviuddhi, which is repeated by Bandurski and in
BBK. The title is given correctly by Ll.
Begins: o nama rhevajrya|| jnapradpe devn cihnaviuddhir (sic, unmetrically, for cihnauddhir?) udht |
yathtatva krameaiva nairuktavidhin may || (f. 61v12).
Ends: iti cihnaviuddhi || vidhya saccihnaviuddhim agr
devga (sic for devgan) paramrtharp| puya
samudbhtam atva uddha yan me jagat tena jino stu ghram
iti|| sampteya cihnaviuddhir iti|| ktir iyam mahpaitcryardivkaracandrapdnm iti|| || (f.62v56).
A brief text giving viuddhis of the signs, that is the emblems
held by the deities of the maala. Divkaracandra frequently
employs the techniques of nirukti to support his viuddhis, which
are not by any means all standard ones.
6 Balividhi by Divkaracandra.
Begins: o nama rhevajrya|| natv rheruka mrddhn
jinahdahdaya (sic for jinahddhdaya?) vibhum|| vakye vighnopantyartham balim irthasiddhada|| (sic for siddhidam) (f.62v67). Ends: ktv balividhin divya hevajre yac chubham may| bhysu (sic for bhtt tena?) jagat sarva st
rherukaprabhur iti|| || sampto ya rhevajrasya balividhi
(sic for balividhir) vykhytantrnusrata[f.65r]|| ktir iya
mahpaitcryardivkaracandrapdnm|| (f.64v765r1).
7 rhevajraviuddhinidhisdhana by Avadhtipda/Advayavajra.
See BBK: 300.
Begins: nama rhevajrya|| oaa+bhuja+m asya hja gaurydiveitam| pdkrntacatumra (sic for pdkrntacaturmra) nairtmyliakandhara || caturvviatinetrhya atrddhamuamlina| pacamudrdharan nlan
104
Harunaga Isaacson
natv tatsdhana brve (sic for bruve) || (f. 65r12). Ends:

rmaddherukasdhana suviada rratnadevy kte sgopgam ida viuddhinidhir ity khysama(gr)kta| ktv
puyam uprjita khalu may yat tena dukha vin|| ye trailokyagat jan laghu mahmudrpada yntu te|| ktir iya
mahpaitvadhtarmadadvayavajrapdn || granthapramam asya saptatydhika triata|| rhevajraviuddhinidhisdhana samptam|| || (f.80v35).
Note that the final verse quoted above states that the work was
composed for one Ratnadev. She may be the Rin chen lha mo
mentioned (as a consort yogin) in Tranthas account of Advayavajras circle (cf. Templeman 1983: 13), and in the Deb ther
son po as teaching at Nlanda (Deb ther son po 639, Roerich
1953: 729730).
8 Hevajrbhisamayatilaka by kyarakita. See BBK: 302.
Begins: o nama rhevajrya|| bhsvadvivravindopariayitaavorasthamrtaamadhye ntyan nla savidyo dadhad
aanisarojanmabhe karbhym | amudro muaml
ktaviktamukha (sic for mukhas) tryakaka pigakea
(sic for keas) trailokykepavras tava haratu tamo vivavajrbjamauli || (f. 80v57). Ends: abhisamayatilakam etat
ktv yad uprjita may kuala | rhevajravibhti tena
bhajat (sic for bhajatu?30) satvara loka || rhevajrbhisamayatilakam ida sampta (sic for samptam) ktir
iya vykhytmahpaitasthavirakyarakitapdn ||
(f.107v24).
One of the longest sdhanas in the collection, partly because
kyarakita discusses a number of points in unusual detail, with
references to a variety of dierent opinions. Unfortunately he
does not as a rule name the authorities he refers to, using instead
This seems the only straightforward way to keep the line from being
unmetrical. Reading bhajatu the verse is in correct ry metre.
30
105
phrases such as iti kvacid vykhytam, ity api mata dyate,

iti kvacit, iti kecit, iti kecid gurava and the like. Exceptions
are a reference to saroruhakrama (f.85v6, i.e. the teachings of
Saroruhapda, in the Hevajrasdhanopyik that is the first text
in our collection), to Lypdbhisamaya (f.85v7, presumably
the influentual Herukbhisamaya), to a ntipdamatnugatadvibhujahevajrasdhana (f.85v7, perhaps Sdhanaml 245), to
the Viuddhinidhi (f.85v7, item 7 above), to Saroruhasdhana
(f.90v5, probably item 1 above), and to Vajragarbha (f.92r2,31
perhaps the author of the ashasrik, the Klacakra school
commentary on the Hevajratantra). There is also a reference to
the Sapuatilakatantra (aya ca sapuatilakatantrotthita
f.93r2), and an liklijpa is taught that is said to be klacakrakramea (f.91v3).
According to the Tibetan author Trantha, possibly relying on
information from his Indian guru Buddhagupta, kyarakita
was born in Ceylon and originally was a Theravda monk
(Saindhava rvaka, Willson 1986: 202), but later studied
Mahyna and tantric Buddhism in Arakan in Burma (Willson
1986: 202 and 403 n. 98). From his position in the lineage that
Trantha gives for the Trtantra, Willson (1986: 175) places
him at the end of the thirteenth century, about which I can only
say that such a relatively late date is quite consonant with the
fact that a fully developed range of tantric teachings, including
the Klacakra, is known to him and has influenced the Hevajrapractice that he teaches.
9 Bhramaharasdhana by Ratnkaranti. See BBK: 300. Wrongly identified, probably simply because of confusion with the following sdhana, by Sktyyana et al. as a Hevajrasdhana
by Anagavajra (so that two such works, with identical name
Reading rvajragarbhea deita for the manuscripts r vajragarbhe
deita.
31
106
Harunaga Isaacson
and title are listed in succession). Ll gives the title correctly but
does not mention the authors name.
Begins: nama rhevajrya|| padabharaamitorov vegavikiptasindhu (sic for padabharanamito) pralayaghanasamnair
nanair muktinda (sic for muktandam) | bhujavanapavanstaprasthavatva gi (sic for gir) bhavatu bhayahara s (sic for vas) tava herukasya|| (f.107v45). Ends:
guru+gua+dhananmna (sic for guruguadhanadhmna)
sdhana herukasya bhramaharam abhidhya spaam ananasya| kualam idam avpta jan (sic for yan) may janmabhja (sic for janmabhj) niravadhihitahetus tena vajr jina
syt (sic for sym32) || bhramaharasdhana samptam || ||
(f.114r23).
One other palm-leaf manuscript of this sdhana is known to me:
it is one which was discovered by Sktyyana in Tibet but by
some route has now come into the collection of the Niederschsische Staats- und Universittsbibliothek, Gttingen (Cod. ms.
sanscr. 257, cf. Bandurski 1994: 113114, Ehlers 1995: 220221).
There also seem to be several paper manuscripts containing the
work. Most of these fall into two groups: those of a collection
that styles itself the Kalparjamahtantra (cf. Dh vol. 7 (1989)
2628), and those of a collection, partly overlapping with the
former, named Jvlval vajramltantra (cf. BBK: 493, Dh
vol. 7 (1989) 1516). A critical edition based on the two palmleaf manuscripts and one paper one has recently been published
(Isaacson 2002b).
sym is the reading of the other palm-leaf manuscript of the Bhramahara (Niederschsische Staats- und Universittsbibliothek, Gttingen,
Cod. MS. Sanscr. 257 f.5r1). Though it is somewhat uncommon to dedicate the merit arising from the composition to ones own Buddhahood
(rather than that of all beings), compare the concluding verse of Ratnkarantis Mahmysdhana (Sdhanaml 239): bruvataiva mahmysdhana yan mayrjitam| kuala tena buddha sy va vivrthasdhane||
32
107
10 Hevajrasdhana by Anagavajra. Begins: o nama rhevajrya|| rmaddhekravajra paramasukhapada nirvvikalpaikarpa puyajnodita| sthiracalasakaleabhvasvabhva | sarvvnandair vibuddha paramuitamala kincakrantha tan natv sarvabhvai sphuaviada pada (sic
for sphuaviadapada33) sdhanan tasya vakye|| (f.114r34).
Ends: ktv herukasdhana yan maysdita ubham| tenstu
nikhilo loka sarvvajajnapraga|| ktir iya yogina rmadanagavajrasya|| (f.123v12).
It is noteworthy that the author identifies himself in one of the
concluding verses as the new (i.e. later) Anagavajra, indicating his awareness of an earlier authority with the same name:
ntannagavajrea acintyajnalbhina (corrected from
acint yajnlbhina, sic for acintyajnalbhin) | del
likhita samyak rutv na tv abhimnata|| (f.123r7).34
Tibetan translation: Thoku 1264, tani 2420.35
11 Bhavauddhihdyatilaka by Kokadatta (see the opening verse);
the colophon gives the authors name as Karubalavajra.
Begins: nama rhevajrya || praatanikhilavidycakrapdravindo guruvaraparicarylabdhasabodhimrgga | nihitasakalamna svasmto (sic for svasmtau) kokkadatto (sic
for kokadatto) likhati bhavaviuddhy sdhana herukasya ||
(f. 123v23). Ends: hevajrasdhana samyak vidvadbhi (sic
for vidvadbhi) paripiitam| lekhakn hitrthya sanavatyadhikaatatrayam| bhavauddhihdyatilakkhya sdhana
The orthography viada for viada is however so common in early
manuscripts that, though etymologically unjustified, it should perhaps be
retained.
34
It should be noted that the anonymous compiler of the Subhitasagraha refers to the author of the Prajopyavinicayasiddhi as ntannagavajra (ed. Bendall Part 1: 379 and Part 2: 47).
35
BBK could not oer a certain identification of a Tibetan translation,
because there are two Hevajrasdhanas attributed to Anagavajra in the
Tibetan canon (the other being Thoku 1249, tani 2378).
33
108
Harunaga Isaacson
sampta || ktir iyam cryarkarubabalavajrasya || ||

(f.140r46).
Refers to the Cakrasavara (f.126v3), to the kin vajrapajaratantra (hevajravykhytantravajrapajarnusrata f.125r2,
hevajra vykhy tantra vajra paja ra sagraha maala prastve f.136r1), to a Padmkurapda (padmkurapdoktita
f.125r2),36 and to Saroruha (saroruhopadec ca f.125r2), though
in the last case the reading saroruhopadec ca has been altered
by a later hand to sadguropadec ca.
12 Tattvapradp sdhanopyik, author not given. The lists by
Sktyyana et al. omit this work; Ll has however noted it correctly.
Begins: o nama rhevajrya|| natv rheruka vra (sic for
vra) nairtmysahavigraham | tasya sdhana sakepa
nisandhim (sic for nisandhim) abhidhyate|| (f.140r6). Ends:
kte++ puyam mayoptta saradindusamujjvala (sic for
aradindusamujjvalam) | tena sdhako stu sadvajrasattva (sic
for sadvajrasattvas?37) tvarita bham (sic for bham) iti|| ||
tatvapradp nma sdhanopyik sampt|| || (f.152r34).
Quotes Pikramasdhana 105ab (f.144v5, the only testimonium for this line that I have seen in sources preserved in Sanskrit). Contains some details which other sdhanas in the collection do not specify, such as the mantra used to purify the water
for washing the mouth (o padme padmki padmasubhage
phu 3 f.141r12).
36
A Padmkura (pad mai myu gu) is mentioned in the Blue Book (Deb
ther son po 924, Roerich 1953: 1041) as receiving a lineage from Saroruhavajra. A brief summary of (a) Padmkuras teaching is given in the
Nnsiddhopadea (ed. in Dh vol. 18: 15), and a verse purporting to give
Padmkuras mahmudropadea is found also in a paper manuscript
filmed as NGMPP E 1484/7 (Guhyavakravilsinsdhana), f.19v23.
37
The metre is however defective, so there probably is a deeper corruption.
109

13 Ncakrbhisambodhi sdhanopyik by Divkaracandra. The
title is given by Sktyyana et al. as Paramagambhrottnakrama, evidently as a result of misreading the colophon.
Begins: nama rhevajrya|| natv hekravajra paramasukhamaya nistaragasvarpa ncakrntarastha gaganam iva para vypinan nirnnimittam| satsampaddhetubhta
vyapagatavigati buddhyagamya pranta bhvbhvavyatta sakalajinatanu sasphuradbuddhabimbam|| (f.152r46).
Ends: ncakrbhisabodhi sdhanopyikm par| ktodbhta (sic for ktvodbhta) ubha jan (sic for yan) me jagat
tenstu heruka || || samptya (sic for sampteya) ncakrbhisambodhi nma sdhanopyik| rherukatantrnigat
paramagambhrotpannakramasvarp|| ktir iya paitardivkaracandrasyeti|| || (f.156v46).
In the penultimate verse the author refers to himself as Divkarbja, and gives his teachers name as ntabhadra: rntabhadracarabunidher analpam dya samyag upadeajala
viuddha| utpannapakagataherukamtcakravara pravarati jagtsu (sic for jagatsu) divkarbja|| (f.156v34).
14 Herukasdhana by Bodhigarbha or Garbhapda. The authors
name is given in the latter form in the colophon and by Sktyyana et al. colophon. This is slightly odd we are accustomed to
finding names with garbha as the second member of a compound,
such as nandagarbha. However Garbhapda is also given as
the name of the author of Sdhanaml 142 (Kalpoktamarcisdhana). The bya chub si po of the colophon of the Tibetan
translation suggests the name Bodhigarbha; if this is correct the
final verse (quoted below) would contain the authors name embedded in a not uncommon fashion. Perhaps we should therefore
probably understand the Garbhapda of the colophon of the Sanskrit manuscript as an abbreviation of Bodhigarbhapda.
110
Harunaga Isaacson
Begins: nama r vajrakya || evakre samsna caturnandaja vibhuja | dimadhyntanirmmukta ta name

vajradhria || (f. 156v6).38 Ends: ktv herukas+dhana+
sphuatara hevajratantrodita tadbhkramasagata padamita puyam maysdita | teneakudidoavisaravymohasukhay (sic for vypohasukhay) satv++
santu sukhaikanimnamanasa rbodhigarbbhtmak|| ryabhokta rherukasdhana samptam (sic for samptam)
iti|| || ktir iyam cryagarbbhappdnm (sic for cryagarbhapdnm or cryabodhigarbhapdnm)|| (f.160r57).
The second verse contains a reference to a Caryvajra as a teacher
or respected senior: gurubuddhn namasktya dharmma sagha ca bhaktita|| caryvajrnyavddh ca vakye hevajrasdhana|| (f.156v67).
15 Sahajadvibhujahevajrasdhana by Alalavajra.
Begins: nama rhevajrya|| svacitta sarvada sarva guru
he[f.160v]vajravajria| praamya yogincakra sahaja kicid ucyate|| (f.160r7160v1). Ends: iti sahajam acintyaikndam
(sic for acintynandam?) dyan tanustha gagananagarakalpa maala vivam etat| bhavaamasamarpi prasphua nisvabhva pradadatu bhavabhj sarvvasampattiheto || iti sahajadvibhujahevajrasdhana sampta || ktir
iyam cryarmadalalavajrapdn|| || (f.164r23).
The author refers to a Nandipda as having given him permission
(j) to write the work, which probably means that he was Alalavajras teacher (nandipdjay svalpa likhita[f. 164r]ta
(sic for likhita) siddhisdhanam f.163v7164r1). A Nandipda
is also mentioned by Vryarmitra in his Marmakalik, apparently as his teachers teacher (MaKa f.3r12, ed. p. 3).
An Alalavajra is mentioned in the gurupramparya of a work
Note that Advayavajras Hevajrkhya (no. 2 above) starts with an almost identical verse (see p.98 above).
38
111
called Marmopadea following ombheruka and preceding

Garbharpda (Royal Asiatic Society, London, MS Hodgson 35
f.76r10; on this guru-lineage see Isaacson 2008). The same name
is given as the author of a rhevajrabalikrama (Thoku 1298).
I have not identified a Tibetan translation. Thoku 1235, a *Hevajradvibhujasdhana by *Vajrlala, is a dierent work.
16 Hevajrapjvidhi, author not given. Not listed by Sktyyana
et al., but included in the list of Ll.
Begins: nama rhevajrya|| rhevajrapjane tu rhevajrayogavn mantr rheruko ha vratrayam uccryya pratye
yathvasaram v ktasanmrjjandike bhbhge hastan datv
(f. 164r35). Ends: prvvoktakramea kanydhidika datv
visarjjan yam iti|| rhevajrabharakasya pj+vi+dhi satha
mpta|| || (f.169r67).
17 Tarpaavidhi. No author given in the colophon, but the vilsena
in the opening verse (quoted below) is probably a self-reference.
The author may have therefore been called Vilsavajra (a not
uncommon name), but it is also possible that vilsa is an abbreviation of something else, e.g. Sahajavilsa (who is credited with
the authorship of no. 42 below). Not listed by Sktyyana et
al., but included in Lls list.
Begins: nama rhevajrya|| praamya heruka vra prajopytmaka vibhu| saghyate vilsena tarppartha
kiyat pada || (f. 169r7). Ends: likhita tarppaa uddha
nncryamatodbhava | sacintya tena tatvaj kantum
arhanti pait| dharadhara yatnena tarppaavidhir mmay
kta | nncryaktmnya d v na tv abhimnata ||
tarppaavidhi sampta|| || (f.170r56).
112
Harunaga Isaacson
18 Vajrajvloday sdhanopayik39 by nandagarbha.

Begins: nama rhevajrya || rheruka namasktya durddntadamaka vibhum| sdhanopayik vakye vajrajvlodaym imm || (f. 170r67). Ends: vajrajvloday ktv yan
mayopacita ubha nandagarbhavidygras tena lokas tu (sic
for loko stu) vajradhg iti|| ryasarvvabuddhasamgatantroddhta (sic for samyogatantroddht) bhagavata rherukabharakasya sdhanopayik sampt|| || ktir iyam crya
nandagarbhapdnm iti|| || (f.186r35).
The colophon thus informs us that this sdhanopayik is supposed to be based on the Sarvabuddhasamyogatantra (a.k.a.
Sarvabuddhasamyogakinjlasavaratantra). The text itself
explicitly indicates such a connection too, for after the opening verse (quoted above) the prose instructions commence with
the words tatrcrya sarvabuddhasamyogatantravidhnena
rherukamaale labdhasamaydiko yo[f.170v]g (f.170r7
170v1). Indeed it is clear that the work is not in fact directly related to the Hevajra-cycle, despite its inclusion here and the nama
rhevajrya which the scribe has prefixed to it. Its repertory of
mantras and mudrs, its structure, and the iconography of the
maala described set it clearly apart. Instead it is a sdhana of
Heruka related to the older cycle of the Sarvabuddhasamyoga;
it is, as far as I know, by far the most detailed work of that cycle
that now survives complete in its original language,40 rich in
39
It is not necessary to emend this form, found twice in the MS, to the
more normal sdhanopyik; cf. BHSD s.v. upayika.
40
Aside from this work of nandagarbha, there are a few other texts
surviving in Sanskrit which are significant sources for Sarvabuddhasamyoga material. Two small sdhanas which have been published in the
Sdhanaml, SM 241 (Sakepato Herukasdhana, author unknown)
and SM 242 (rherukasdhana by one Kalyagarbha, a name I have
not encountered elsewhere) are based on/related to the Sarvabuddhasamyogatantra. These two short works seem also not to have been translated into Tibetan. There are quotations from the Sarvabuddhasamyogatantra in quite a few works which survive in Sanskrit. And portions of the
tantra have also been borrowed, sometimes apparently with some revision,
113
quotations from the root tantra (Thoku 366, tani 8). Though
it remains unpublished so far, it has been drawn on extensively
in Sanderson 2009, in particular in the section titled The Sarvabuddhasamyogakinjlaavara: Heruka and his Yogins,
Kplika iconography, the Gaamaala, and the beginning of
aiva-Buddhist intertextuality (pp. 145156), with extensive extracts quoted in Sanskrit (from our codex) in the footnotes and
summarized in English in the main text.
The author is most probably the same nandagarbha who is more
famous as an authority on the Tattvasagraha. His initiationmanual based on the Tattvasagraha is preserved in incomplete
form in a palm-leaf manuscript (NAK 3360 = NGMPP A 48/7)
dated Savat 179 (AD 1059), and has been published by a group
of Japanese scholars (Mikky Seiten Kenkykai 198687). The
phrase nandagarbhavidygra (embedding the authors name)
in the final verse cited above is also found in the verse that concludes the Sarvavajrodaya: nandagarbhavidygra sarvasattvaikabndhava| aesas tena lokstu (sic MS for loko stu; lokas tu Mikky Seiten Kenkykai) mahvajradharo vibhu (MS
cit. f.65v4, Mikky Seiten Kenkykai 1987: 223(84)).
Among the numerous works listed in the catalogues of the Peking
and Derge bstan gyur that are attributed to an nandagarbha or
Kun dga si po I have found none that might be a translation
of this text. The existence of a translation of a k by nandagarbha on the Sarvabuddhasamyogatantra (Thoku 1667) confirms, however, his connection with this cycle of teachings.
19 Dveavajrasdhana by Bhadrapda. Sktyyana et al. report
it as Hevajrasdhana by Mahadapda (the name has been misread); Ll gives the name of the text and author correctly.
Begins: nama rhevajrya|| rmaddheruka ntha sukhaphalasakula nisvabhvasvabhva (sic for nisvabhvasvain other tantras that survive in Sanskrit, such as the Sampuatantra and the
Vajrakatantra.
114
Harunaga Isaacson
bhva) nta khasama para sarvvaga nybhinna

nairtmgarbhasthita| mrtti caturnanda (?) nir vagatigato (sic for nirvagatigata) virahitakalua uddha
dveamuita vande kinntha kaplkulaprabhum
(f.186r57). Ends: spakta bhvakasukhahetave yatnt tan
may kramam nandatu yoginnaydhimukt sukhena bhadranmn iti|| || || || dveavajrasdhana sampta|| ktir
iya siddhcryyarmadbhadrapdnm iti|| || (f.197r23).
The author names himself near the beginning of the sdhana
as Bhadrapda, great-great-grandson of Saroruhapda, and informs us that he was requested (to write the work) by one Kodl: abhisamayaspakaraahetor may saroruhapdanaptsutaputrea bhadranmn kodlydhyeitena (f. 186v23).
In a corrupt line of verse he refers to a Rhulapda, either as
his guru or as his gurus guru: gopita yatnd rhulapdasya
pdagurogur (?) (f. 197r1).41 There is a reference to a
Dharmapda as his teacher or authority for the two sannhas
(i.e. kavacas): sannhadvaya (sic for sannhadvaya) vakye
dharmapdaprasdata (f.196v56).
20 rhevajratantroktabalividhi, author not named. Not included in
the lists of Sktyyana et al., nor in that of Ll.
Begins: nama rhevajrya|| natv heruka vra nairtmybhinnasapua | tadmn(y) (sic for tadmnyd?) bali
vakye carypdakramgata (sic for carypdakramgatam)
(f.197r34). Ends: o mur iti gha vdayitv visarjjayet||
rhevajratantroktabalividhi sampta|| || (f.199v12).
It is no doubt Rhulagupta, the author of the Hevajrapraka, who
is referred to. In several respects the present sdhana shows striking correspondences with the latter work. For instance, the remedy taught on f.
196v in case the practitioner has a morbid aiction of the wind-humour
because of the power of his meditative practice (bhvanakty vtaghto
yad) is found elsewhere only, to my knowledge, in the Hevajrapraka (f.
33r33v).
41
115
Note the reference to a Carypda in the opening verse quoted

above.
21 Hevajrasahajasadyoga by Ratnkaranti. Reported as Hevajrasdhana by Sahajavajra in Sktyyanas list (135), and as
Hevajrasdhana by Jnavajra in Bandurskis list (apparently
confusing with Sktyyanas 139, no. 31 below).
Begins: nama rhevajrya || hevajrasaniyanda parama
praipatya yogincakra syd utpannakapake yathbhisamayas tath vakye|| (f.199v23). Ends: hevajrd atigahand avikalam uddhtya sahajasadyoga| yad upacita mama kuala
bhavate[f.201r]na (sic for bhavatu) jagat tena vajradhara|| ktir
iyam paitarratnkarantipdnm iti|| sahajasadyogahevajrasya sdhana sampta|| || (f.200v7201r1).
One other manuscript of this work is known to me: Royal Asiatic
Society, London, MS Hodgson 35 (a palm-leaf Sammelhandschrift copied by the celebrated fifteenth-century Indian teacher
Vanaratna; see Isaacson 2008). An annotated critical edition of
the Sanskrit text of this brief but important sdhana, based on
these two codices, has been published (Isaacson 2002a).
22 Bhyapjvidhisagraha by vatavajra. Bandurski wrongly
lists the author as Samdhivajra; this is probably caused by confusion with Sktyyanas 140, no. 32 below. Begins: nama
rhevajrya| praamya ntha hevajra sarvvadharmmaikavigraha | saghyate yathmnya bhya+pj+vidhir
may (f. 201r12). Ends: bhyapjvidhi smtyai sagraht
yan mayrjjita (sic for mayrjitam) puya tenstu loko ya
satpjbhjana para|| || bhyapjvidhisagraha sampta|| || ktir iya vatavajrasya|| (f.202r24).
The opening verse is nearly identical with that of the Sakiptahevajrapjvidhi (MS IASWR MBB I-39, reading sarvadhar-
116
Harunaga Isaacson
maikasavaram instead of sarvadharmaikavigraham), and

there are some other close parallels between what none the less
are two distinct works.
The name of vatavajra is also associated with a collection
of small manuals on Cakraavara ritual published by Finot
(1934).
23 Abhisamayakrama, no author listed. Begins: nama rhevajrya | roiynavinirggatahevajratantraratnasybhisamaya (sic
for samaya) kathyate|| (f.202r4). Ends: cal jvalit nbhv
(Hevajratantra I.i.31a) iti mahmudray lyante|| abhisamayakrama sampta|| || (f.204v12).
A small work on the ns and cakras.
24 Catuaidaabheda, author unknown. No Tibetan marginal
title. Not included in the lists by Sktyyana et al., nor in that
of Ll. Rather a memorandum, in bad Sanskrit and covering less
than two lines, than a composition, although there is a Tibetan
translation. The text runs in its entirety thus (I have made no
corrections): catuaidaasya lakaa (sic for lakaam)
divrddhena prasakhy pacasahasra 540|| eva sakhy
gaitena ahortrea aatdhika (sic) ekaviatisahasra
ca yathsakhyena gaitv jtavya ghai ekena pra 360|
catuaidaasya bheda sampta|| (f.204v24).
25 Sahajasiddhi by ombheruka. Not included in the lists by Sktyyana et al., but included in Lls list.
Begins: nama rhevajrya|| sahajasiddhi pravakymi satvnugrahahetun| homaygatapott dikarmmikavarjjita (sic
for dikarmikavarjitm)|| (f.204v4). Ends: anyatra sthitn etn
117
prabhukti (sic!)42 rombherukapdakty sahajasiddhau

samayatatvanirddeas ttya sampta|| (f.206v5).
This work has been edited twice: by Malati J. Shendge (in Indo-Iranian Journal 10 (1967)) and in the Guhydi-AasiddhiSagraha. Our codex is evidently independent of the manuscripts
used in these editions, and allows considerable improvement
of the text. Thus, to give an example, in 1.2b, where the other
manuscripts apparently read ntyasiddhir ucyate, for which the
Sarnath edition conjectures nityasasiddhir ucyate,43 the or
codex has what is probably the correct reading; statya siddhir
ucyate (f.204v5).
26 aagasdhana by Durjayacandra. Not included in the lists by
Sktyyana et al., nor in that of Ll.
Begins: o nama rhevajrya|| mymaalavarttivriaabhttulyadevpater hevajrasya vimokavastutathatvaktrghridornnirmitai | mrosthalaramyaragabhuvanai (sic;
insertion mark after mro (or mrau?) satvrthaktyotsave
baddhvamambarapratinidher (?) avyj jagat tavam ||
(f.206v67). Ends: sadgurudinakarabodhitadevtantrravindavndeu| durjjayacandramadhulih ptv sdhyena (sic, unmetrically, for sdhana) madhdgra| rkarubalasdhanaracanramajanitam atra yat puyam| tad bhavatd bhavasgaraynottaraaikanaur jagatm || samptam ida vajrcryadurjayacandroddhta aagasdhanam iti|| (f.211r23).
These concluding verses and colophon are followed by a corrupt
verse in lin metre: ity asmbhir yoginnmacakra cakra
crddhtya yat spi (?) puyan tad vive durjjayopeta42
The text as edited ends anyatra sthito na prabhu aktasamanvita
ceti.
This is to be rejected i.a. because it is clear that the author is explaining the words sahaja and siddhi separately in the two first pdas of the
verse.
43
118
Harunaga Isaacson
candrapratyajtm sta (?) bodhir vidheyt|| (f.211r34). This

verse, with a clear reference to Durjayacandra, is not found in
the Tibetan translation of the aagasdhana. It is followed
in turn, before the start of the next work, by the following note:
nyat nimitta apraihita kyavedancittadharmmanasmti
(sic for kyavedancittadharmnusmti) (f.211r4).
The third verse states this sdhana to be according to the tradition of ombpda, i.e. ombheruka: ajnapaalndhnm
idam ajanam uddhare| ombpdakramyta rhevajrasya
sdhana|| (f.207r1).
This work is considered of particular importance in the Sa skya
pa lam bras tradition of Hevajra practice (cf. e.g. Davidson 1992:
111 and 116).
27 Vajrakasdhana by Atulacandra. Not included in the lists by
Sktyyana et al., nor noticed by Ll.
Begins: nama r hevajrya|| ea charddati oita jalanidhe
ea gata skaro dhbhagam upgata kitibhta cr
bhavantha ve (sic for vai?) kokampam akrt (sic, unmetrical) padayugkepd vibhor yasya tan natv rkarubalasya
katicit pj pravakymy aha|| (f.211r57).
Ends: iti racansakalita aabhddhalan (sic, unmetrically,
for aabhddhavala?) tu yac chubha tena| atula (sic, unmetrically, for atul?) mahsukhapada labhant (sic, unmetrically, for labhat) loko vin kaa|| uddhty na vivekena kin tu satvrthakrat| raddhay krttita cetat rddhe
satve na daa|| vajrakasdhana sampta|| ktir iyam
mahkavikalyacandrasnor atulacandrasya|| (f. 214r67).
Although the title as given in the colophon might suggest that this
might not be a sdhana of Hevajra, a perusal of the text shows
that the Vajraka here is, in fact, Hevajra, and the opening of
the work (the first verse after the magala-verse quoted above)
refers to the intended practitioner as rmaddhevajratantre smin
119
yo bhiikto vicakaa (f.211r7).

This work seems closely related to (indebted to?) the rmadyamrisdhana of a rmagalasena/Magalasena, published
as Sdhanaml 273. Thus the pre-penultimate verse, quoted
above, is very similar to the final verse of the rmadyamrisdhana, and there are several other verses that are identical or
nearly identical, and, as far as can presently be determined, not
shared with any other sdhana.
Atulacandra, the son of Kalyacandra (and grandson, according
to the information given at the end of no. 28 below, of Mikya),
is not known to me except from his two sdhanas (this one and
the following work) preserved in this codex.
28 Yathlabdhasdhana by Atulacandra. Not included in the lists
by Sktyyana et al., but Ll gives the name of the text, though
without the name of the author.
Begins: atha tatraiva k[f.214v]gre gurubuddhapjdipurasara | dvibhujakarubala bhvitavya kin tu gaurydau (sic
for gaurydayo) kinya ptrakarttdhar|| (f. 214r7214v1).
Ends: rohitagirinikrnta sthna vai ptimnam iti tatrajavallabhacandrt rmn mikya iti jta hevajratantrabhakta
rmn kalyacandra iti nmn tanayas tasya kplus tasyhannabdanohy (?) atula|| vajrakjay spaa sdhana
likhita may iy smararthyya md pratipattaye|| rhevajratantrasya yathlabdha sdhana sampta|| (f.
216r35).
The prose passage quoted above that precedes the concluding
verse evidently gives us some information on the family lineage
of the author. Unfortunately some corruptions render it partly obscure. Apart from the authors father Kalyacandra (mentioned
also in the colophon of no. 27 above), it names his grandfather,
said to have been a hevajratantrabhakta, as Mikya (Mikyacandra?), and probably his great-grandfather as Vallabhacandra,
120
Harunaga Isaacson
born in Ptimna (?) near (?) the Rohitagiri.

29 Dvibhujahevajrasdhana, no author given. Bandurski gives the
author as Sahajavajra (confusion with no. 21 above, Sktyyanas 135). Sktyyana and Bandurski give the title as simply Hevajrasdhana; Ll more accurately as Dvibhujahevajrasdhanam.
Begins: nama rhevajrya || jagadarttiamopya (sic for
jagadrtiamopya) praamydarato guru| dvibhujarherukasyeda vakyate sdhanam may|| (f. 216r56).
Ends: tata punar api pj ktv praidhnni devatyogena visarjya v (?) yathyosukha (sic for yathsukha or
yathyoga sukha) vihared iti| dvibhujahevajrasya sdhana
sampta|| || (f.218v45).
30 Hevajrapjvidhi, no author given. Lacking an initial obeisance;
perhaps partly for this reason overlooked in the lists of Sktyyana et al., but included in that of Ll.
Begins: o trailokykepa hu hu hu pha svh |
(f. 218v56). Ends: o kto va sarvvasattvrtha siddhi (sic
for sarvasattvrtha siddhir) datt yathnug | gacchadhva
buddhaviaya punargamanya ca|| hevajrapjvidhi (sic for
vidhi) sampta|| (f.219v5).
31 Sahajasadbjacintmai Hevajrasdhana by Jnavajra. Bandurski gives the author as vatavajra (confusion with no. 22
above, Sktyyanas 136?).
Begins: o nama rhevajrya|| praamyamukha vra
sahajnandasundaram | kajmtasaka pralaygnisavamaprabha|| (f.219v6). Ends: smtyartha sdhanan tasya
iy pratipatyarthaye (sic for pratipattaye)|| likhita sadgu-
121
ror jtu nnye gualin (?)|| sahajasadbjacintmair nma hevajrasdhana samptam|| ktir iyam cryajnavajrapdnm iti|| || (f.224r56).
32 Hevajraguasragdharstuti by nyasamdhivajra. Sktyyana gives the authors name as Samdhivajra, Bandurski lists
no author. Ll names the author correctly.
Begins: nama rhevajrya || svargge svarggeamantr samamativibhavo pi klamatvn na notu ptle pannagendro na
hi bahurasano vaktum a (sic for a) stutin te| martye martya
sudh san guam abhigaditu sa kamo na kamo la vakye
han te tathpi stutim ativikal bhakti[f.224v]yuktiprayuktam
(sic for prayukta)|| (f.224r6224v1). Ends: ktv ntha stutin
te sakalakalimalaklanaikakamn t yan me puya prasta harahasanahasa kundacandruubhra | bhyt
tenu nthas tribhavabhavajano heruka rnivsa samyaksatvrthakr guruguadhana mahdharmmarja || sampteya bhagavata rhevajrasya guasragdhar nma stuti|
ktir iyam mahpaitarnyasamdhivajrapdnm iti|| +
rsragdharstotra|| || + (f.228r13).
The name nyasamdhivajra recalls the sTo id ti dzin
(*nyatsamdhi?) to whom are attributed six works in the Tibetan canon. According to Tibetan historians of Buddhism he
was one of the four principal students of Advayavajra/Maitreya
(the author of nos. 2 and 41 in our collection).44
33 rp stuti, no author mentioned.
Begins: o nama rhevajrya|| nairtmyliakaha kahinakarayugasparasajtamto (sic for mno?) ntyan klayntar ggagananivasano mtbhi (sic for mtbhir) veito ya|
Note that this sTo id ti dzin is said to be identical with Devkaracandra; cf. p.101 above.
44
122
Harunaga Isaacson
dkchrotraghrajihvt++45 subhanubhtau (?) yasya vajrdidevy sampat tasya divy (sic for tasytidivy?) tribhavajananut tihatt s bhavatsu (f.228r45). Ends: no bhvo na ca bhvarparahito na kola (sic for naiko na?) naiko vibhu nta (sic
for nta) sarvagato nabhastala[f.230r]nibha satsampadm
spadana (sic for spada) nirlepo vikti prapacarahita
pratytmavedyaparo dharmtm pradadtu va samasukha
rheruko nuttaram || rhekravajrabhagavata rp stuti
sampt (sic for sampt)|| (f.229v7230r2).
34 Hevajrabharakacakraviikstotra by Saroruha.
Begins: o nama rhevajrya|| sarvabhvasvabhvgram
(sic for gram) ryam satvtmani (sic for sarvtmani) sthitam|
prajopyadvaya (sic for prajopydvaya) vra hevajra
praammy aha || (f. 230r2). Ends: stutv sadevatcakra
hevajra kinprabhum| yan mayoprjita ubha tena loko
stu tatvavit || rhevajrabharakasya cakraviikstotra
sampta|| || ktir iya siddhcryasaroruhapdnm iti|| ||
(f.231r12).
The number of twenty (verses) is correct, not counting the final
verse dedicating the merit.
This stotra, or rather a question as to the correct reading in its
sixth verse and the implications thereof, was the subject of a polemical exchange between the Tibetan scholars or chen Kun
dga bza po (13821456) and Jigs med grags pa (13751451)
which has been discussed in an article by van der Kuijp (1987).
It is to be noted that or-chen Kun dga bza po refers to an
Indian manuscript (van der Kuijp 1987: 174) as supporting the
reading so (nlam); it is prima facie probable that our codex,
which belonged to or monastery and indeed contains this reading (f.230r5), was the manuscript to which the Sa skya pa scholar
There is an insertion mark by the first hand, but no insertion in the
margin.
45
123
referred.
A critical edition of the Sanskrit text by Dr. Luo Hong, based
on our codex and another manuscript, of which copies are held
in the library of the China Tibetology Research Center, is forthcoming in Tantric Studies.
Tibetan translation: Thoku 1225, tani 2354 (erroneously
tani 1225 in van der Kuijp 1987: 177 n. 9). Edited in van der
Kuijp 1987: 175176.
35 A stotra (with no indication of a title in the colophon) to Hevajra
by Kaha.
Begins: o nama rhevajrya || sarvvath sarvvasatvn
sarvvpyaviodhaka| sarvvadharmvabuddha ca vajraka
namo stu te|| (f.231r23). Ends: daotkaamahbhmam (sic
for darotkaa) antrasragdmabhita | bhakama
mahmnsa rheruka nammy aha || ktir iya (sic for
iya) siddhcryakahnapdnm (sic for kahapdnm) iti|
(f.231v23).
This stotra was evidently a popular one; it is incorporated in the
Tattvapradp (no. 12 above), the Sahajasadbjacintmai (no.
31 above, only part of the stotra), and the Gaacakravidhi (no.
45 below).
36 Ncakrasvarparhevajrayogincakrastuti, author not given.
Begins: nama ryogingaebhya|| pha (sic for phe) polralkhye pramuditabhuvi saddnauddhisvabhve tihant
yottamge nakhadaanavah nikbhedyanm| darajnarp tribhavapariat vtasakalpado vajrarpasvabhvm anupasukhadn tm namasymi mrddhn|| (f.231v35).
Ends: rhevajrakrampta sahajasukhakar (sic for kara)
yogincakram agra ncakrasvarpa ivasam asamasama niprapaca kharpam| stutv yan me prasta kualam
aghahara (sic for aghahara) pracandruubhra bhyt
124
Harunaga Isaacson
tenu loka paramasukhamayo yogincakrarpa|| sampteyam paramasahajagambhrotpanna+paka+gatancakrasvarparhevajrayogincakrastutir iti|| || (f.235v13).

37 Nairtmyrp stuti, author not given. Not included in the
lists of Sktyyana et al., but noted by Ll. Ll gives the title
as Nairtmystuti; but the colophon has ante correctionem the
expression stuti, and an insertion mark after suggests
(though no insertion is found) the possibility that rp stuti
was intended, as in no. 33 above.
Begins: o nama rnairtmyai|| klecched (sic for kleacchedya) kartt sarucam ahinibhm bibhrat savyado
bhvbhvntakrddh (sic for rtha?) paribhtam asj
mrahny+na+do(?)| cakrai citrai catubhir (sic for caturbhir) bhga+h+dayagaloadeeu (sic for bhagahdaya)
yukt nairtmy vo dadtc chamasukham asama sarvvad
raudrarp (sic for rp) || (f. 235v35). Ends: vmasth
lalanhvay jalavah prajsik (sic for prajik)
nyat savyasth rasanhvaygajavah kruyabhvtmik|
madhyasth tv avadhtik madavah ybhinnarpdvay s
ntrayarpi bhagavat nairtmik ptu va|| sam[f.236v]
pteya nairtmyy bhagavaty + + (sic for rp?)
stuti|| || (f.236r6236v1).
38 Nairtmystuti, author not named. Not included in the lists of
Sktyyana et al., but noted by Ll.
Begins: namo stu nairtmy trailokyanthe+the+var| vividhagatisattvajnmbusantarppa+busantarppan (sic for
satarpa or satarpai) | (f. 236v1). Ends: satvasasra uddharaakaruevar (sic for sattvasasroddharaa) |
aavaraketramadhyasthitayogin || o namo stu aragatapacadaayogin|| nairtmystuti sampt|| || (f.236v45).
125

39 Amtaprabh Sdhanopyik attributed to ombheruka.46 Not
included in the lists of Sktyyana et al.; included by Ll, but
without giving a name to the author.
Begins: o nama rnairtmyyai || ombherukapdair
ddevcakrasya bhvan kathit (sic for kathit) | sapiya
sakalatattva hevajrd yogintantrt || (f. 236v56). Ends:
vyghrsna cared yog vividhaphaidharair vibhito ya (sic
for varair bhito ya) kamvn| rgah sambhogahantre
(?)47 vividhamadhuyate (sic for yute) kakagehkhyanmni ||
teneda sdhanendra parahitarucin guhyaprajgasaga
(sic for saga?) lokasyrthya kta (?)48 kamantu jinasut
bhita yan mayeda || amtaprabh nma sdhanopyik
hevajrasya nairtmysdhana sampta|| || (f.239v2240r1).
Edited as Sdhanaml 228.
40 Nairtmysdhana, author not named.
Begins: o nama rnairtmyyai || devm praamya nairtmy mahmaitrkpparm | tatsdhanavidhim vakye
sarvvasatvrthasiddhaye|| (f.240r12). Ends: o akro mukha
sarvvadharmmm dyanutpannatvt o h pha svh||
vidhya sdhana devy nairtmyy uprjita| puya yad
atra tenu jagat sambodhim pnuyt || nairtmysdhana
sampta|| || (f.245v46)
I use the expression attributed to rather than by because internal
evidence suggests that it is probable that we have in this text an anonymous authors setting down of what he had learned to be ombherukas
teaching, rather than a composition by (a) ombheruka himself. For one
thing, the wording of the first verse, quoted immediately below, suggests
this. For further discussion see Isaacson forthcoming.
47
The edition reads bha sabhogayute, which is unmetrical.
48
The last line contains several metrical faults. The readings of the edition dier considerably.
46
126
Harunaga Isaacson

41 Nairtmysdhana by Ratnkaranti.49
Begins: nama rnairtmyai || iha bhvandhikto mantr
prtar eva svahdi candramaale nairtmybja kiraamlina d v (f.245v6). Ends: eva dine dine kuryd iti||
nairtmyy sdhana sampta|| ktir iyam mahpaitaratnkarantipdnm|| (f.249r7).
This sdhana has probably been extracted, not by the author but
by some other hand, from Ratnkarantis commentary on the
Hevajratantra, the Muktval, on paala I.viii.50 My main reason for suggesting that this is so (rather than that Ratnkaranti
may have composed the sdhana as an independent work and
then incorporated it into the commentary) is the fact that the
sdhana lacks both an opening magala-verse and a concluding
verse dedicating the puya arising from composing the text.51
Such omissions would be unique among the works attributed to
Ratnkaranti.
42 Nairtmysdhana by Sahajavilsa. Not included in the lists of
Sktyyana et al., but noticed by Ll.
Begins: o namo bhagatyai (sic for bhagavatyai) ryanairtmyyai || prathama tvat sarvvasatvrthabhyuddharaalakaa (sic for sarvasattvbhyuddharaalaka karu,
as in the text as edited?) vibhvya sabhybhyantara nyat
sktktv (f.249r7249v1). Ends: o svh|| mantrajpa||
The Tibetan translation gives the sdhana the name *Pauikanirdea.
Like the concluding verse in the translation (see footnote below) this title
may have been added to the text by the translators (whose names are not
known). Ll does not mention an authors name for this text.
50
Cf. Mu pp. 8186.
51
The Tibetan translation has added a concluding verse but not an opening one.
49
127
nairtmysdhana samptam || ktir iya sahajavilsasya ||

(f.249v4).
A *rherukasdhana by *Sahajavilsa (Thoku 1265, tani
2421) is perhaps a work of the same author.
Edited as Sdhanaml 231.
Tibetan translations: Thoku 3595, tani 4417; Thoku 3393,
tani 4214; Thoku 3640, tani 4462.
43 Tattvvaloka Nairtmysdhana by Divkaracandra.
Begins: namo bhagavatyai hevajrapriyatamyai|| devy nirjjitabhinnakajjalaruc nairtmyy (sic for nairtmyay) yat svaya
ukla padmam ida kare vinihita vme vilapnoparo (?) |
pra prat (sic for prayatt?) tavbhilaita raktena raktodaran nlvttiravartisampuam (?) iva prodbhsi candrrkkayo || (f. 249v46). Ends: ktv nairtmiky jinajanakatano sdhana suprasanna yat sajta viuddha kualam
aghahara janmabhjo mamtra| tyaktv do samastt (sic
for don samastn) bhavatu jagad idan tena nairtmik drt
(sic for drk) tenbhinn bhaveya vimalaguagaa satvrthakr (sic for sarvasattvrthakr?)|| samptam i||dan tattvvalokbhidhnakramanairtmysdhana|| || ktir iya
mahpaitadivkaracandrasyeti|| || (f.260r25).
44 Nairtmypraka by Avadhtdvayavajra. Not included in the
lists of Sktyyana et al., who wrongly take no. 43 to continue
till what is in fact the end of 44, nor in the list of Ll, though
the latter gives the correct folio number (albeit, as is his practice, without indication of whether the recto or the verso side is
meant) for the end of the text.
Begins: o nama rnairtmyyai|| parihtaparikalpa dharmmakya yam hur nirupamasukhamtra crusabhogakyam | bhuvanahitavidhnd yasya nirmakya bhavatu sa bhagavn va reyase vajrasatva|| (f.260r56). Ends:
128
Harunaga Isaacson
abhisamayavistarite (?) yad pta kualam anena samastaloka (?)52|| kuliadharapadapratihittm hatabhuvanatrayadukhadaurmanasya || nairtmypraka sampta || ktir
iya rmatpaitcryyvadhtdvayavajrapdnm iti ||
(f.264v45).
45 Gaacakravidhi, author not given. I prefer this as the title (cf.
the opening verse), rather than Balicakravidhi, which is what we
find in the concluding verse and colophon (and hence in the descriptions by Sktyyana et al., as well as that by Ll). The
work does teach the bali-ritual as well, as is also announced in
the opening verse, but the expression balicakra is not known to
me from other sources surviving in Sanskrit. It is possible that
its occurrence twice at the end of the text is due to scribal error
under influence of the fact that the concluding section deals with
bali.
Begins: o nama rnairtmikyai|| natv rheruka vra
mahsukhasvarpiam| gaacakravidhi (sic for vidhi) vakye
bali hevajrasagata|| (f.264v6). Ends: balicakravidhi ktv
yan maysdita ubha | tenstu nikhiloko (sic for nikhilo
loko) mahsukhamaya sad || balicakravidhi sampta || ||
(f.271v45).
After this last work there is a concluding scribal colophon, in
poor Sanskrit, from which we learn that the manuscript is a religious gift of and was written by a Bhiku Mitrarja. The last few
words must have been on a final folio which has been lost or was
The first pda of this verse in Pupitgr metre is unmetrical, and
the second lacks two syllables. A conjecture such as bhavet samastaloka
would repair the metre in the second pda and supply an appropriate verb;
for the problem in the first pda I see no obvious solution, nor does the
Tibetan translation, which loosely renders the sense of the verse, suggests
a conjecture.
52
129
not photographed. I transcribe this final colophon, without emendation, thus: rhevajrasya sdhana sasrodadhitraam |
mittrarbhikulekhi (sic) phavyagradhiy puna || ramate
harnnia yasya citta hevajrasdhane | sarvve kikarat
ynti tasya puyamahtmana || ye dharm hetuprabha(bh
a.c.)v hetun ten tathgata (sic) hy avadat te ca yo nirodha
evavd mahramaa | deyadharmmo ya pravaramahynayyina bhikumittrarja (sic) yad atra puyan tad bhavatv
cryyopdhyyamtpitprvvagama sakalasattvarer anuttara (here the folio ends).
Appendix
The following table shows for each work the folio and line on which
it begins, whether we have the name of the author, whether other
manuscripts are known to exist,53 whether it is included in the descriptions of Sktyyana et al., whether it is included in Lls description, and whether a Tibetan translation has been identified.
Number
Folio
Author
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
1v1
8r5
22v1
47r7
61v1
62v6
65r1
80v5
107v4
114r3
123v2
140r6
152r4
Other MS(S) Sk t yyana
Ll
Tibetan
A check is placed in this column even if the other manuscript(s) are

incomplete.
53
130
Harunaga Isaacson
Number
Folio
Author
Other MS(S) Sk t yyana
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
156v6
160r7
164r3
169r7
170r6
186r5
197r2
199v2
201r1
202r4
204v2
204v4
206v6
211r5
214r7
216r5
218v5
219v6
224r6
228r4
230r2
231r2
231v3
235v3
236v1
236v5
240r1
245v6
249r7
249v4
260r5
264v6
Tibetan
Ll
Primary sources referred to

CaMePra
Carymelpakapradpa by ryadeva. Christian K. Wedemeyer

(ed.): ryadevas Lamp that Integrates the Practices (Carymelpakapradpa): The Gradual Path of Vajrayna Buddhism,
According to the Esoteric Community Noble Tradition. Edited
131
and translated with an introduction. New York: The American

Institute of Buddhist Studies/Columbia Universitys Center for
Buddhist Studies/Tibet House US, 2007. Treasure of the Buddhist Sciences Series.
Deb ther son po
Deb ther son po attributed to Gos Lo-ts-ba Gon nu
dpal. Lokesh Chandra (ed.): The blue annals: completed in A.D.
1478 by Hgos-Lotsawa Gzhon-nu dpal. New Delhi: International Academy of Indian Culture, 1974. ata-piaka series vol. 212.
[Cf. Roerich 1949, 1953.]
BhraHa
Bhramaharanma Hevajrasdhana by Ratnkaranti. Edited

in Isaacson 2002b.
MaKa
Marmakalik, a pajik by Vryarmitra on the Tattvajnasasiddhi of nyasamdhipda. Janardan Shastri Pandey

(ed.): Tattvajnasasiddhi of nyasamdhipda with Marmakalikpajik of Vryarmitra. Sarnath: Central Institute of
Higher Tibetan Studies, 2000. Rare Buddhist Texts Series 23.
Mu
Muktval, a pajik by Ratnkaranti on the Hevajratantra.

Ram Shankar Tripathi and Thakur Sain Negi (eds.): Hevajratantram with Muktval Pajik of Mahpaitcrya Ratnkaranti. Sarnath, Varanasi: Central Institute of Higher Tibetan Studies 2001. Bibliotheca Indo-Tibetica Series 48.
SM
Sdhanaml. Ed. Benoytosh Bhattacharya. Vol. 1 Baroda:

Oriental Institute, 1925. Gaekwads Oriental Series 26. Vol. 2
Baroda: Oriental Institute, 1928. Gaekwads Oriental Series 41.
SeNiPa
Sekanirdeapajik by Rmapla, on the Sekanirdea of Advayavajra. References are to Cambridge University Library MS
Or. 149.
HePra
Hevajrapraka by Rhulagupta. Palm-leaf manuscript photographed IASWR MBB I-39; NGMPP X 1504/1.
HeTa
Hevajratantra. Edited by David L. Snellgrove: The Hevajra

Tantra. A Critical Study. Part 2: Sanskrit and Tibetan Texts.
London: Oxford University Press, 1959.
132
Harunaga Isaacson
Secondary literature referred to

Bandurski, Frank
1994
bersicht ber die Gttinger Sammlungen der von Rhula

Sktyyana in Tibet aufgefundenen buddhistischen SanskritTexte (Funde buddhistischer Sanskrit-Handschriften, III). In:
Untersuchungen zur buddhistischen Literatur. Bearbeitet von
Frank Bandurski, Bhikkhu Psdika, Michael Schmidt, Bangwei Wang. Gttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1994. SanskritWrterbuch der buddhistischen Texte aus den Turfan-Funden,
Beiheft 5. pp. 9126.
BBK see Tsukamoto, K. and Y. Matsunaga and H. Isoda

Davidson, Ronald M.
1992
Preliminary studies on Hevajras Abhisamaya and the Lam-bras

Tshogs bshad. In: Steven D. Goodman and Ronald M. Davidson
(eds.): Tibetan Buddhism: Reason and Revelation. Albany, New
York: 1992. SUNY Series in Buddhist Studies. pp. 106132,
with notes on pp. 176184.
Edgerton, Franklin
BHSD
Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit Grammar and Dictionary. Volume II:

Dictionary. New Haven 1953.
Ehlers, Gerhard
1995
Indische Handschriften Teil 12. Die Sammlung der Niederschsischen Staats- und Universittsbibliothek Gttingen.
Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz. Verzeichnis der orientalischen
Handschriften in Deutschland II.12.
Erb, Felix
1997
nyatsaptativtti: Candrakrtis Kommentar zu den Siebzig

Versen ber die Leerheit des Ngrjuna (Kriks 114). Stuttgart: Franz Steiner. Tibetan and Indo-Tibetan Studies 6.
Finot, Louis,
1934
Manuscrits Sanskrits de sdhanas retrouvs en Chine. In: Journal Asiatique 225 (1934) 185.
Isaacson, Harunaga
2002a
Ratnkarantis Hevajrasahajasadyoga (Studies in Ratnkarantis tantric works I). In: Raaele Torella (ed.): Le Parole e i
Marmi: studi in onore di Raniero Gnoli nel suo 70 compleanno.
133
Roma: Istituto Italiano per lAfrica e lOriente 2001 [appeared

2002]. Serie Orientale Roma XCII. pp.457487.
2002b
Ratnkarantis Bhramaharanma Hevajrasdhana: Critical

Edition (Studies in Ratnkarantis tantric works III). In: Journal of the International College for Advanced Buddhist Studies
vol. 5 (2002) 151(80)176(55).
2008
Himalayan Encounter: The Teaching Lineage of the Marmopadea (Studies in the Vanaratna Codex 1). In: Manuscript Cultures 1 (Autumn/Winter 2008) 26.
forthc.
The Hevajra works of the lineage of ombheruka.
van der Kuijp, Leonard W.J.

1987
Ngor-chen kun-dga bzang-po on the Posture of Hevajra: a Note

on the Relationship between Text, Iconography and Spiritual
Praxis. In: Investigating Indian Art. Proceedings of a Symposium on the Development of Early Buddhist and Hindu Iconography held at the Museum of Indian Art Berlin in May 1986.
Ed. Marianne Yaldiz and Wibke Lobo. Berlin: Museum fr
Indische Kunst, 1987. Verentlichungen des Museums fr Indische Kunst vol 8. pp. 173177.
2006
On the Composition and Printings of the Deb ther sngon po by

Gos lo ts ba gzhon nu dpal (13921481). In: Journal of the International Association of Tibetan Studies 2 (August 2006) 146.
Ll, Banrs
1999
Bauddhatantra vmaya k paricaya (Hevajratantra). In: Dh

28 (1998) 2542.
Lo Bue, Erberto F.
1997
The role of Newar scholars in transmitting the Indian Buddhist heritage to Tibet (c. 750c. 1200). In: Samten Karmay and
Philippe Sagart (eds.): Les habitants du Toit du monde: tudes
recueillies en hommage Alexander W. Macdonald. Nanterre:
Socit dethnologie, 1997. Recherches sur la Haute Asie 12. pp.
629658.
Mikky Seiten Kenkykai (eds.):54

198687 Vajradhtumahmaalopyik-Sarvavajrodaya Bonbun tekisuto to wayaku [Vajradhtumahmaalopyik-Sarvavajrodaya
54
sity.
This is a collective of students of tantric Buddhism at Taish Univer-
134
Harunaga Isaacson
Sanskrit text and Japanese translation]. In: Taish Daigaku

Sg Bukky Kenkyj Nenp 8 (1986) 257(24)224(57) and 9
(1987) 294(13)222(85).
Moriguchi, Mitutoshi
1989
Catalogue of the Buddhist Tantric Manuscripts in the National Archives of Nepal and Kesar Library. Tokyo: Sankibou
Busshorin.
Roerich, George N. (trsl.)

1949, 1953 The Blue Annals. Calcutta 1949 (Part 1); 1953 (Part 2). Asiatic Society Monograph Series 7.
Sakuma, Ruriko
2006
A Historical Background of the Trailokyavaakarabhugma

Lokevara Sdhana in the Sdhanaml. In: Nagoya Studies in
Indian Culture and Buddhism: Sabh 25 (2006) 113.
Sanderson, Alexis
1985
Purity and power among the Brahmans of Kashmir. In: The

category of the Person. Anthropology, philosophy, history. Edited by Michael Carrithers, Steven Collins, Steven Lukes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985. pp. 190216.
1995
Vajrayna: Origin and Function. In: Buddhism into the Year

2000. Bangkok/Los Angeles: Dhammakaya Foundation, 1994.
pp. 87102.
2002
History through Textual Criticism in the study of aivism, the

Pacartra and the Buddhist Yogintantras. In: Franois Grimal
(ed.): Les sources et le temps. Sources and Time. A colloquium.
Pondicherry 1113 January 1997. Publications du dpartement
dindologie 91. Pondicherry: Institut franais de Pondichry/
Ecole franaise dExtrme-Orient, 2001 [appeared 2002]. pp.
147.
2009
The aiva Age The Rise and Dominance of aivism During

the Early Medieval Period . In: Shingo Einoo (ed.): Genesis
and Development of Tantrism. Tokyo: Institute of Oriental Culture, University of Tokyo, 2009. pp. 41349.
Sktyyana, Rhula
1935
Sanskrit Palm-leaf MSS. in Tibet. In: Journal of the Bihar and

Orissa Research Society 21.1 (1935) 2143.
135
Steinkellner, Ernst
2004
A Tale of Leaves: On Sanskrit Manuscripts in Tibet, their Past,

and their Future. Amsterdam: Royal Netherlands Academy of
Arts and Sciences. [Eleventh Gonda lecture, held on 21 November 2003 on the premises of the Royal Netherlands Academy of
Arts and Sciences.]
Tatz, Mark
1987
The Life of the Siddha-Philosopher Maitrgupta. In: Journal of

the American Oriental Society 107.4 (1987) 695711.
Templeman, David (trsl.)

1983
Tranthas bka. babs. bdun. ldan: The Seven Instruction Lineages by Jo.Nang. Trantha. Dharamsala: Library of Tibetan
Works & Archives.
Tomabechi, Toru
1996
Introductory remarks. In: Zhongxin Jiang and Toru Tomabechi

(eds.): The Pacakramaippa of Munirbhadra. Introduction
and Romanized Sanskrit Text. Bern etc. 1996 (Schweizer Asiatische Studien/Etudes asiatiques suisses vol. 23). pp. xixxvii.
2000
Notes on Robert Thurmans translation of the Pacakrama. In:

Journal of Indian Philosophy 28 (2000) 531548.
2006
tude du Pacakrama: Introduction et traduction annote.

Thse prsente la Facult des lettres de lUniversit de Lausanne pour lobtention le grade du docteur s lettres. Lausanne.
[Unpublished doctoral thesis.]
Tsukamoto, K. and Y. Matsunaga and H. Isoda (eds.)

BBK
Bongo Butten no Kenky IV, Mikky Kyten Hen / A Descriptive

Bibliography of the Sanskrit Buddhist Literature, Vol. IV: The
Buddhist Tantra. Kyoto 1989.
Wedemeyer, Christian K.
2006
Tantalising Traces of the Labours of the Lotswas: Alternative

Translations of Sanskrit Sources in the Writings of rJe Tsong
kha pa. In: Ronald M. Davidson and Christian K. Wedemeyer
(eds.): Tibetan Buddhist Literature and Praxis: Studies in its
Formative Period, 9001400. PIATS 2003: Tibetan Studies:
Proceedings of the Tenth Seminar of the International Association for Tibetan Studies, Oxford, 2003. Leiden/Boston: Brill. pp.
149182.
136
Harunaga Isaacson
Willson, Martin
1986
In Praise of Tara: Songs to the Saviouress. London: Wisdom

Publications.
Sanskrit manuscripts in China

Proceedings of a panel at the 2008 Beijing
Seminar on Tibetan Studies
October 13 to 17
Edited by
Ernst Steinkellner
in cooperation with
Duan Qing, Helmut Krasser
China Tibetology Publishing House

Beijing 2009
Contents
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
DUAN Qing
A fragment of the Bhadrakalpastra in Buddhist Sanskrit
from Xinjiang . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
FAN Muyou
Some grammatical notes on the Advayasamatvijayamahkalparj . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
Pascale HUGON
Phya pa Chos kyi seng ges synoptic table of the Pramavinicaya . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
Harunaga ISAACSON
A collection of Hevajrasdhanas and related works in
Sanskrit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
Matthew T. KAPSTEIN
Preliminary remarks on the Grub mtha chen mo of Bya
Chad kha ba Ye shes rdo rje . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137
Shoryu KATSURA
Rediscovering Dignga through Jinendrabuddhi . . . . . . . . . 153
Helmut KRASSER
Original text and (re)translation a critical evaluation. . . . . . 167
LI Xuezhu
Candrakrti on dharmanairtmya as held by both Mahyna
and Hnayna based on Madhyamakvatra Chapter 1 . . . . 179
Contents

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183
LUO Hong
A preliminary report on a newly identified Sanskrit manuscript of the Vinayastra from Tibet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195
LUO Zhao
The cataloguing of Sanskrit manuscripts preserved in the
TAR: A complicated process that has lasted more than
twenty years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225
. . . . . . . . 235
SAERJI
Sanskrit manuscript of the Svapndhyya preserved in Tibet . . . 241
SFERRA
The Manuscripta Buddhica project Alphabetical list of
Sanskrit manuscripts and photographs of Sanskrit manuscripts in Giuseppe Tuccis collection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 259
Ernst STEINKELLNER
Strategies for modes of management and scholarly treatment of the Sanskrit manuscripts in the TAR . . . . . . . . . . . 279
. . . . 293
Tsewang Gyurme
Protecting the Sanskrit palm-leaf manuscripts in the Tibetan Autonomous Region A summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 303
YE Shaoyong
A preliminary survey of Sanskrit manuscripts of Madhyamaka texts preserved in the Tibet Autonomous Region . . . . . . 307

ISAACSON - 2009 A Collection of Hevajrasaadhanas and Related Works

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

ISAACSON - 2009 A Collection of Hevajrasaadhanas and Related Works

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

A collection of Hevajrasdhanas and

related works in Sanskrit

Ernst Steinkellner, Duan Qing, Helmut Krasser (eds.), Sanskrit manuscripts in

able number of works that survive in Sanskrit of which we do not

Of the materials extant in Sanskrit relevant to the Hevajra-cycle,

The manuscript was long in the possession of the or monastery;

the manuscript is, however, as far as I can tell wholly dependent

Among the works that we have access to through this manuscript,

1 Hevajrasdhanopyik by Saroruhapda (as the authors name

has recently been published in Dh 36, apparently based solely

and 299 (Vajrapradp); Moriguchi 1989, 146 (613 Hevajratantraippa

transcription given in Sktyyana 1935: 38 n. 2.22

5 Cihnaviuddhi by Divkaracandra. Sktyyana misread the

natv tatsdhana brve (sic for bruve) || (f. 65r12). Ends:

phrases such as iti kvacid vykhytam, ity api mata dyate,

sampta || ktir iyam cryarkarubabalavajrasya || ||

Tibetan translation: none identified.

Begins: nama r vajrakya || evakre samsna caturnandaja vibhuja | dimadhyntanirmmukta ta name

called Marmopadea following ombheruka and preceding

18 Vajrajvloday sdhanopayik39 by nandagarbha.

bhva) nta khasama para sarvvaga nybhinna

Note the reference to a Carypda in the opening verse quoted

maikasavaram instead of sarvadharmaikavigraham), and

prabhukti (sic!)42 rombherukapdakty sahajasiddhau

The text as edited ends anyatra sthito na prabhu aktasamanvita

candrapratyajtm sta (?) bodhir vidheyt|| (f.211r34). This

yo bhiikto vicakaa (f.211r7).

born in Ptimna (?) near (?) the Rohitagiri.

tenu loka paramasukhamayo yogincakrarpa|| sampteyam paramasahajagambhrotpanna+paka+gatancakrasvarparhevajrayogincakrastutir iti|| || (f.235v13).

Tibetan translation: none identified.

Tibetan translation: none identified.

nairtmysdhana samptam || ktir iya sahajavilsasya ||

Other MS(S) Sk t yyana

A check is placed in this column even if the other manuscript(s) are

Other MS(S) Sk t yyana

Primary sources referred to

Carymelpakapradpa by ryadeva. Christian K. Wedemeyer

and translated with an introduction. New York: The American

Bhramaharanma Hevajrasdhana by Ratnkaranti. Edited

Marmakalik, a pajik by Vryarmitra on the Tattvajnasasiddhi of nyasamdhipda. Janardan Shastri Pandey

Muktval, a pajik by Ratnkaranti on the Hevajratantra.

Sdhanaml. Ed. Benoytosh Bhattacharya. Vol. 1 Baroda:

Hevajratantra. Edited by David L. Snellgrove: The Hevajra

Secondary literature referred to

bersicht ber die Gttinger Sammlungen der von Rhula

BBK see Tsukamoto, K. and Y. Matsunaga and H. Isoda

Preliminary studies on Hevajras Abhisamaya and the Lam-bras

Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit Grammar and Dictionary. Volume II:

nyatsaptativtti: Candrakrtis Kommentar zu den Siebzig

Roma: Istituto Italiano per lAfrica e lOriente 2001 [appeared

Ratnkarantis Bhramaharanma Hevajrasdhana: Critical

The Hevajra works of the lineage of ombheruka.

van der Kuijp, Leonard W.J.

Ngor-chen kun-dga bzang-po on the Posture of Hevajra: a Note

On the Composition and Printings of the Deb ther sngon po by

Bauddhatantra vmaya k paricaya (Hevajratantra). In: Dh

Mikky Seiten Kenkykai (eds.):54

This is a collective of students of tantric Buddhism at Taish Univer-

Sanskrit text and Japanese translation]. In: Taish Daigaku

Roerich, George N. (trsl.)

A Historical Background of the Trailokyavaakarabhugma

Purity and power among the Brahmans of Kashmir. In: The

Vajrayna: Origin and Function. In: Buddhism into the Year