The Aṣṭasāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra (Sanskrit: अष्टसाहस्रिका प्रज्ञापारमिता सूत्र, Burmese Sanskrit: အၐ္ဋသာဟသြိကာ ပြဇ္ညာပါရမိတာ သူတြ; English: The Perfection of Wisdom in Eight Thousand [Lines]) is a Mahāyāna Buddhist sūtra in the category of Prajñāpāramitā sūtra literature. The sūtra's manuscript witnesses date to at least the second half of the first century, making it among the oldest Buddhist manuscripts in existence. The sūtra forms the basis for the expansion and development of the Prajñāpāramitā sūtra literature. In terms of its influence in the development of Buddhist philosophical thought, P.L. Vaidya writes that "all Buddhist writers from Nāgārjuna, Āryadeva, Maitreyanātha, Asaṅga, Vasubandhu, Dignāga, down to Haribhadra concentrated their energies in interpreting Aṣṭasāhasrikā only," making it of great significance in the development of Madhyāmaka and Yogācāra thought.
The sūtra deals with a number of topics, but is primarily concerned with the conduct of a bodhisattva, the realisation and attainment of the Perfection of Wisdom as one of the Six Perfections, the realisation of thusness (tathātā), the attainment of irreversibility on the path to buddhahood (avaivartika), non-conceptualisation and abandonment of views, as well as the worldly and spiritual benefit of worshipping the sūtra.
Title The Sanskrit title for the sūtra, Aṣṭasāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtram, literally translates as "The Perfection of Wisdom in Eight Thousand Sūtra." The "Eight Thousand," Edward Conze indicates, refers roughly to ślokas, which have a count of thirty two syllables. Regarding this, Conze writes, "The Cambridge manuscript Add 866 of A.D. 1008 gives the actual number of slokas after each chapter, and added together they are exactly 8,411." This title is likely late in origin, as Seishi Karashima writes regarding the text from which Lokakṣema (fl. 147–189) was translating, the text was probably originally just entitled Prajñāpāramitā or Mahāprajñāpāramitā. But when different versions began circulating, the additional titles, such as references to length, were added in order to differentiate them. The name of Lokakṣema's translation thus became Dàohéng Bānruòbōluómì Jīng, "The Way of Practice Perfection of Wisdom Sūtra," with the extra element "Dàohéng" taken from the name of the first chapter.
The sūtra is among the most well-established in the Mahāyāna tradition and "was the first philosophical text to be translated from the Mahāyāna literature into Chinese." It was translated seven times into Chinese, five times into Tibetan, and eight times into Mongolian. Its titles in the languages of these various countries include:
Chinese: T224 (Trans. Lokakṣema, 179 CE ) T225 (Trans. Zhī Qīan & Kāng Sēnghùi, 223-229 CE) T226 (Trans. Dharmarakṣa, 386 CE) T227 (Trans. Kumārajīva, 408 CE) Assembly 4 of T220 fasc. 538–555 (Trans. Xuánzàng, 660 CE) Assembly 5 of T220 fasc. 556–565 (Trans. Xuánzàng, 660 CE) — Both of Xuánzàng's translations are equivalent to the Aṣṭasāhasrikā with the exception of his exclusion of the Sadāprarudita story. T228 (Trans. Dānapāla, 1004 CE) This term refers to the Sanskrit source text, rather than the Chinese translations which are prevalent in Japanese Buddhist usage. (Trans. Ye-shes-sde, 9th C.)
History
Indian Developments
Traditional Theories of Formation While it is held by some in the Mahāyāna tradition that the Buddha taught the Aṣṭasāhasrikā, and the other Mahāyāna sūtras during his lifetime, some legends exist regarding its appearance in the world after the Buddha's parinirvāṇa. One such legend is that Mañjuśrī Bodhisattva came to the house of King Candragupta (321–297 BCE), preached, and left the Aṣṭasāhasrikā there. Another, related by Haribhadra (8th C), is that while the Śrāvakayāna teachings were entrusted and preserved by Ānanda, the Mahāyāna sūtras, and in particular the "Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra," were entrusted to Vajradhāra residing in the Aḍakavatī Heaven. Finally, the legend which has the most currency in East Asia, is that Nāgārjuna was gifted the sūtra from the king of the nāgas after seeing Nāgārjuna's resolve to obtain the Mahāyāna sūtras of the Buddha that were missing on earth.
It is clear that Indian monastics did not see the development of the Prajñāpāramitā literature in the first millennium as an outgrowth from the Aṣṭasāhasrikā, an early opinion, but Dignāga (c. 480–540 CE), suggests "we assert that this Eight Thousand is a condensed version [of the Perfection of Wisdom] text, not short of any of the topics. It proclaims the very same topics that the longer sūtras] have proclaimed." Later, Haribhadra suggests that the Buddha "demonstrated the [Śatasāhasrikā] to bring benefit to those beings who are devoted to words and delight in extensively worked-out rendition, demonstrated the [Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā], through gathering all the topics together, out of affection for those beings who delight in middle-sized [renditions] and understand from selective elaboration, and taught the [Aṣṭasāhasrikā], through condensing its topics, to produce benefit for beings who are captured by headings and delight in brief explanation." Haribhadra, however, uses the topics of the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā, which were the basis of the Abhisamayālaṅkāra of Asaṅga (4th C) on which his commentary relies, in order to explain the Aṣṭasāhasrikā.
Chinese monastics in general also held that the translations corresponding to the Aṣṭasāhasrikā were redacted from the medium sūtras (e.g. translations of the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā)—despite the fact that large portions of the shorter versions of the sūtra are absent from the larger texts. For instance, Dao’an (312-385 CE) theorised that Indian monks redacted the Dàohéng translation from the longer sūtras, but also that the longer sūtras could be used as commentaries on the Dàohéng. Similarly, Zhi Daolin (314-366 CE) suggested that monks had redacted the Xiăopĭn translation from the medium sūtra.
Contemporary Theories on Formation Contemporary scholarship holds that the shorter Prajñāpāramitā sūtras, using the Aṣṭasāhasrikā as the base, were redacted and expanded in the formation of the longer sūtras. As Jan Nattier characterises,the evolution of the Aṣṭasāhasrikā-Prajñāpāramitā into the Pañcaviṃsati-sāhasrikā through what we might call the “club sandwich” style of textual formation: with the exception of the final chapters (30-32 in the Sanskrit version) of the Aṣṭa-, which have no counterpart in the Sanskrit Pañca- and apparently circulated separately before being incorporated into the Aṣṭa- ... the [Pañca-] consists of the Aṣṭa- being “sliced” like a loaf of bread and then layered with “fillings” introduced from other sources. Very little of the text of the Aṣṭa- has been altered in the process, and only rarely does a crumb of the “bread” seem to have dropped out. The Pañca- is not simply related to the Aṣṭa-; it is the Aṣṭa-, with the addition of a number of layers of new material.Similarly, Edward Conze suggested a nine-stage model of expansion. (1) A base urtext of the Ratnagunasaṃcaya Gāthā, starting with the first two chapters. (2) Chapters 3 to 28 of the Ratnagunasaṃcaya were added, which were then put into prose as the Aṣṭasāhasrikā. To this were gradually added (3) material from the Abhidharma, (4) concessions to the "Buddhism of Faith" (referring to Pure Land references in the sūtra), and then (5) the expansion into the larger sūtras, their (6) contraction into the shorter sūtras (i.e. Diamond Sūtra, Heart Sūtra, down to the Prajñāpāramitā in One Letter), which all in turn set the basis for the (7) Yogācārin commentaries and (8) Tantras and (9) Chan.
Based on a similar understanding, most scholars of the Prajñāpāramitā have suggested that there is a base urtext from which the rest of the Aṣṭasāhasrikā expanded. Similar to Conze in regards to the Ratnagunasaṃcaya, scholars who hold that the first chapter of the prose sūtra is the urtext include Kōun Kajiyoshi, Yinshun, and Lambert Schmithausen. Ryūshō Hikata argued that the sūtra was composed in two phases from Chapter 1 to 25, but that material from Chapter 26 to 32 and references to Akṣobhya were later developments. P.L. Vaidya is alone in suggesting that the urtext is "Dharmodgata's sermon to Sadāprarudita" at Chapter 31.
Matthew Orsborn presents a dissenting opinion to the urtext theories, holding that the presence of chiastic structures may point "to the entire sūtra being composed as a single and unified whole as it presently stands (more or less)," with additional materials being added around these chiastically arranged materials.
Commentarial Tradition The primary subject of Prajñāpāramitā commentary has been the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā version. This includes the commentaries attributed to Nāgārjuna, Dignāga, and Asaṅga's Abhisamayālaṅkāra. Using the Abhisamayālaṅkāra as a basis, however, Haribhadra composed a commentary on the Aṣṭasāhasrikā, the Abhisamayālaṅkārāloka, or the "Light for the Ornament of Clear Realisation." While, owing to it being based on a commentary on a different text, the structure suggested to be present by Haribhadra does not fit perfectly, the structure as he understands it is as follows:
The Three Knowledges Knowledge of all Aspects Chapter 1 Knowledge of all Paths Chapters 2-7 All-Knowledge Chapter 8 The Four Practices Full Awakening to All Aspects Chapters 9-19 Culmination Realisation Chapters 20-28 Serial Realisation Chapter 29 Instant Realisation Chapter 29 The Dharma Body Full Awakening to the Dharma Body Chapters 30-32
Manuscripts and Editions
The following is a chronological survey of prominent manuscript witnesses and editions of the Sanskrit Aṣṭasāhasrikā text: second half of the first century — Kharoṣṭhī manuscript from the Split Collection. This is in the Gāndhārī language and was composed in Gandhāra. c. 200 CE — Fragments in late Kuṣāṇa Brāhmī from the Schøyen collection. This manuscript is in Sanskrit but was probably also composed in Gandhāra. 985 CE — Cambridge MS Add. 1464. Composed in Bengal (see illustration) c. 1000 CE — Cambridge MS Add. 1163. Composed in Nepal. 1008 CE — Cambridge MS Add. 866. Composed in Nepal. 1015 CE — Cambridge MS Add. 1643. Composed in Kathmandu, Nepal. 1264 CE — Cambridge MS Add. 1465. Composed in Nepal. Three other Cambridge manuscripts exist. The Nepalese-German Manuscript Cataloguing Project lists 97 Aṣṭasāhasrikā manuscripts in archives.
The following editions have been made of the Sanskrit text:
1888 — ed. Rajendra Lal Mitra. This edition is in Devanāgarī and was prepared using: a Bengali transcript of a 19th-century Nepalese original a Nepalese manuscript provided by Brian Houghton Hodgson dating to 1061 a Nālandā manuscript from the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain dating to 12th century a Nālandā manuscript from the Asiatic Society of Bengal dating to 1097 Two manuscripts from Nepal, which Mitra judged to be older than the previous manuscript a 12th-century manuscript of Nepalese origin 1932-5 — ed. Unrai Wogihara. This edition corrects many of Mitra's errata, and also features the running commentary of Haribhadra using manuscripts of the Abhisamayālaṅkārāloka loaned from Sylvain Lévi and the Calcutta Library. 1960 — ed. Paraśurāma Lakṣmaṇa Vaidya. This edition is based on Wogihara and Mitra, and attempts to correct perceived errors in sandhi.
Translations into Western Languages