________________
Samdhinirmocanestra VIII. 7
443
rather seems to be a syntactically simplified ad sensum translation of (S) under stood in the sense of CS 3] or, more likely, (S 4]: To say that vijnana has an object that is manifested by cognition only is, of course, equivalent to saying that the object of vijana is manifested by cognition only. An addi tional stimulus for this sytactical transformation will become manifest in $13.
412
Lambert Schmithausen After summing up the result of this investigation (17), I shall, moreover, try to evaluate the readings in terms of intrinsic probability (59 1888.).
12. The Chinese translations of Bodhiruci (Bo), Paramartha (Pa), Dharmagupta [Dh) and Hsüantsang (H) (for Buddhasanta see $5) run as follows":
[Bo] (EN) ARUS [Pa] R ite [Dh]
SOPRA
TERMO 121 I confess that I am unable to draw any useful information from [Bo] which remains obscure to me.
12. 2 [Pa): "I (have) declare(d) that there is only mind/cognition - jhana)", [that] this object which appears as some thing) visible is mani fested by mind/cognition (vijfapti?)." This translation is not quite literal, but the fact that the sentence is split up into two statements points to [A]. For some reason, Paramartha would seem to have reversed the order, i.e. placed vijnanam first and combined it with matra) while at the same time
-matra in the second part of his translation which would have to represent the subject (alambana) and the first predicate (vijnapti matraprabha vita) of (A)
12.3 [Dh): "The object (alambana) of concentrated mind is manifested by cognition only (vijnaptimatraprabhavita); I (have) declare(d) that it is mind (vijnana)."
This version unambiguously supports [A], understanding it precisely in the same way as suggested in $8.
12 4 [H): "I (have) declare(d) that the object (alambana) of mind (vijnana) is manifested by cognition only (vijnaptimatraprabhavita)."
This rendering coincides neither with [A] nor with (S), but as it takes the sentence as one predication it is hardly explicable on the basis of (A) but
18. Mahāyānasamgrahabhāsya ad MSg II. 702 Bh,
Bh, (1) dgors pa ies par 'grel Bh.
Вhph
Bhd pa'i mdo las kyanit/ (1) MORE! (1)-- Ornam par ses pa ni
P . dmigs pa ruam par rig
# R pa sam gyis rab tu phye ba car no tes das bsad
RE) do) tes gsuris pa des na (2n) dmigs pa rnam par
182c 16f.: rig pa sam gyis rab (2a)
(2a) ** (2a) tu phye ba can de ni
W 19 . Wiko (2b) rnam par rig pa
(2) ma. (26) isam nid de
AMI ||(20) (2) don gyis stor pa
(26) C UF (20) tes bye ba'i tha (2c) . (2) Rio tshig go!
L(2d) # 1 (3a) rnam par ses pe (3a)
(3a) tes nas blad do ses
(3b)
1820 14f.: bya bali (3bwa*.
(3a/b) 180 J(3b) rnam par ses pa (30) L.(30)
A R smos pa desni (3a) PUT (3) tint ie dzin gyi (3)
(30)WH O spyod yul gyi mnam R . W ALA
par ses pa bstan toll ( 51 ) 13.1, In (2a) all the Chinese versions (Bb.) seem to support (A). Dharma
4
10) (Bo): T vol. 16, 674 c 24; (PA): T vol. 31, 118 b 27 f.; (Dh]: ib. 285 b 221.[H): ib.
138 b 8: vol. 16, 698 b 2; vol. 30, 724 6. Cp. Sasaki, 31. 41) It should be noted that this part of Paramartha's rendering of our sentence coincides with
his rendering of cittametram idam in the Dalabhomikastra quotation in the beginning of
MS II. 7. Ain) Op . 43a. 12) Cp the Tibetan rendering of Hsian-tsang's version in the translation of Ydents'e' (Ven.
tshig's) commentary on the Samdh (Tj thi 117 6 61.): ......es de par ses pidigs i rom far rig pa sam las smak bar blad poli Myir roll.
11
3;
3) Bh: Tj sms-tsam li 171 b1; Bh: T vol. 31, 338 € 22-25; Bhs: ib. 285 b 29
Bhreib, 182 c 14 Cp. Iwata, 78.; Norawa, 2017