Prajnaparamita
Prajñāpāramitā means "the Perfection of Wisdom" or "Transcendental Knowledge" in Mahāyāna Buddhism. Prajñāpāramitā refers to a perfected way of seeing the nature of reality, as well as to a particular body of Mahāyāna scriptures, known as the Prajñāpāramitā sutras, which includes such texts as the Heart Sutra and Diamond Sutra.
The word Prajñāpāramitā combines the Sanskrit words prajñā "wisdom" with pāramitā, "excellence," "perfection," "noble character quality," or "that which has gone beyond," "gone to the other side," "transcending." Prajñāpāramitā is a central concept in Mahāyāna Buddhism and is generally associated with ideas such as emptiness, 'lack of svabhāva', the illusory nature of things, how all phenomena are characterized by "non-arising" and the Madhyamaka thought of Nāgārjuna. Its practice and understanding are taken to be indispensable elements of the Bodhisattva path.
According to Edward Conze, the Prajñāpāramitā Sūtras are "a collection of about forty texts... composed somewhere on the Indian subcontinent between approximately 100 BC and AD 600." Some Prajnāpāramitā sūtras are thought to be among the earliest Mahāyāna sūtras.
History
Earliest texts
Western scholars have traditionally considered the earliest sūtra in the Prajñāpāramitā class to be the Aṣṭasāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra or "Perfection of Wisdom in 8,000 Lines", which was probably put in writing in the 1st century BCE. This chronology is based on the views of Edward Conze, who largely considered dates of translation into other languages. This text also has a corresponding version in verse format, called the , which some believe to be slightly older because it is not written in standard literary Sanskrit. However, these findings rely on late-dating Indian texts, in which verses and mantras are often kept in more archaic forms.According to Edward Conze, the PP literature developed in nine stages: An urtext similar to the first two chapters of the Sanskrit Ratnagunasaṃcaya Gāthā; Chapters 3 to 28 of the Ratnagunasaṃcaya are composed, along with the prose of the Aṣṭasāhasrikā. This base text was further expanded with material from the Abhidharma, and concessions to the "Buddhism of Faith". This process led to further expansion into larger PP sūtras as well as contraction into the shorter sūtras. This expanded corpus formed the basis for the Indian PP Commentaries, Tantric PP works and Chinese Chan texts. Jan Nattier also defends the view that the Aṣṭasāhasrikā developed as various layers were added over time. However, Matthew Orsborn has recently argued, based on the chiastic structures of the text that the entire sūtra may have been composed as a single whole.
A number of scholars have proposed that the Mahāyāna Prajñāpāramitā teachings were first developed by the Caitika subsect of the Mahāsāṃghikas. They believe that the Aṣṭasāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra originated amongst the southern Mahāsāṃghika schools of the Āndhra region, along the Kṛṣṇa River. These Mahāsāṃghikas had two famous monasteries near Amarāvati Stupa and Dhānyakataka, which gave their names to the Pūrvaśaila and Aparaśaila schools. Each of these schools had a copy of the Aṣṭasāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra in Prakrit. Guang Xing also assesses the view of the Buddha given in the Aṣṭasāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra as being that of the Mahāsāṃghikas. Edward Conze estimates that this sūtra originated around 100 BCE.
In 2012, Harry Falk and Seishi Karashima published a damaged and partial Kharoṣṭhī manuscript of the Aṣṭasāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā. It is very similar to the first Chinese translation of the Aṣṭasāhasrikā by Lokakṣema whose source text is assumed to be in the Gāndhārī language; Lokakṣema's translation is also the first extant translation of the Prajñāpāramitā genre into a non-Indic language. Comparison with the standard Sanskrit text shows that it is also likely to be a translation from Gāndhāri as it expands on many phrases and provides glosses for words that are not present in the Gāndhārī. This points to the text being composed in Gāndhārī, the language of Gandhara. The "Split" manuscript is evidently a copy of an earlier text, though Falk and Karashima do not give an estimate on how old the original may be.
In contrast to western scholarship, Japanese scholars have traditionally considered the Diamond Sūtra to be from a very early date in the development of Prajñāpāramitā literature. The usual reason for this relative chronology which places the Vajracchedikā earlier is not its date of translation, but rather a comparison of the contents and themes. Some western scholars also believe that the Aṣṭasāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra was adapted from the earlier Vajracchedikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra.
Examining the language and phrases used in both the Aṣṭasāhasrikā and the Vajracchedikā, Gregory Schopen also sees the Vajracchedikā as being earlier than the Aṣṭasāhasrikā. This view is taken in part by examining parallels between the two works, in which the Aṣṭasāhasrikā seems to represent the later or more developed position. According to Schopen, these works also show a shift in emphasis from an oral tradition to a written tradition.
Larger PP sutras
The Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā prajñāpāramitā ''Sūtra is one of the largest PP sutras, comprising three volumes of the Tibetan Kangyur. It was also one of the most important and popular PP sutras in India, seeing as how there are numerous Indian commentaries on this text, including commentaries by Vimuktisena, Haribhadra, Smṛtijñānakīrti, and Ratnakarashanti. The sutra also survives in the original Sanskrit, which was found in Gilgit. It also exists in four Chinese translations.According to Nattier, the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā is basically the Aṣṭasāhasrikā base text which has been "sliced" up and filled with other material, increasing the length of the text considerably. This process of expansion continued, culminating in the massive Śatasāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra, the largest of the PP sutras.
According to Joseph Walser, there is evidence that the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra and the Śatasāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra have a connection with the Dharmaguptaka sect, while the Aṣṭasāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra does not.
Other PP texts were also composed which were much shorter and had a more independent structure from the Aṣṭasāhasrikā. Regarding the shorter PP texts, Conze writes, "two of these, the Diamond Sūtra and the Heart Sūtra are in a class by themselves and deservedly renowned throughout the world of Northern Buddhism. Both have been translated into many languages and have often been commented upon.". Jan Nattier argues the Heart Sutra to be an apocryphal text composed in China from extracts of the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā'' and other texts c. 7th century. Red Pine, however, does not support Nattiers argument and believes the Heart Sutra to be of Indian origin.
Esoteric Prajñāpāramitā texts
During the later phase of Indian Buddhism, Tāntric Prajñāpāramitā texts were produced from the 8th century up to the 11th century CE. These later esoteric Prajñāpāramitā sutras are generally short texts which contain mantras and/or dhāraṇīs and also reference esoteric Buddhist ideas. They often promote simple practices based on recitation which lead to the accumulation of merit and help one reach awakening.Esoteric Prajñāpāramitā sutras include texts such as the Adhyardhaśatikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra, the famous Heart Sutra, the Ekaślokikā prajñāpāramitā, Svalpākṣarā Prajñāpāramitā, Kauśikā ''Prajñāpāramitā, Saptaślokikā Prajñāpāramitā, the *Prajñāpāramitānāmāṣṭaśataka and the Candragarbha Prajñāpāramitā. Some of these sources, like the Svalpākṣarā, claim that simply reciting the dharanis found in the sutras are as beneficial as advanced esoteric Buddhist practices. These scriptures may have been recited in esoteric rituals and two of them remain in widespread use today: Prajñāpāramitāhṛdaya and the Adhyardhaśatikā .''
Prajñāpāramitā in Central Asia
By the middle of the 3rd century CE, it appears that some Prajñāpāramitā texts were known in Central Asia, as reported by the Chinese monk Zhu Zixing, who brought back a manuscript of the Prajñāpāramitā of 25,000 lines:China
In China, there was extensive translation of many Prajñāpāramitā texts beginning in the second century CE. The main translators include: Lokakṣema, Zhī Qīan, Dharmarakṣa, Mokṣala, Kumārajīva, Xuánzàng, Făxián and Dānapāla. These translations were very influential in the development of East Asian Mādhyamaka and on Chinese Buddhism.Xuanzang was a Chinese scholar who traveled to India and returned to China with three copies of the Mahāprajñāpāramitā Sūtra which he had secured from his extensive travels. Xuanzang, with a team of disciple translators, commenced translating the voluminous work in 660 CE using the three versions to ensure the integrity of the source documentation. Xuanzang was being encouraged by a number of the disciple translators to render an abridged version. After a suite of dreams quickened his decision, Xuanzang determined to render an unabridged, complete volume, faithful to the original of 600 fascicles.
An important PP text in East Asian Buddhism is the Dazhidulun, a massive commentary on the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā translated by Kumārajīva. There are also later commentaries from Zen Buddhists on the Heart and Diamond sutra and Kūkai's commentary is the first-known Tantric commentary.