🤔 ādibhava/ādibhūta?

One of the aims of those of us behind the Indo-Tibetan Lexical Resource (ITLR) [https://www.itlr.net and then go to “Viewer (Beta Version)”] is to constantly maximize the accuracy and reliability of the entries. Ideally the entry must be attested in classical Indic (mainly Sanskrit) sources where it is actually used in specific contexts and not simply listed in lexicographic sources without any context. But often we struggle when we encounter Tibetan translation of certain Indic word or name for which we have no idea what could have been the word or name in Sanskrit. Does anyone happen to know what would be the Sanskrit name for “Ye-srid-pa” (found in the Tibetan translation of Śāntarakṣita’s Madhyamakālaṃkāravṛti and Kamalaśīla’s Madhyamakālaṃkārapañjikā)? Contextually, the view of “Ye-srid-pa” should be a Śaiva view. Ichigo 1985 offers no suggestion. I am clueless!  One FB friend (Sabera Sherpa) suggests ādhibhava. The word as such is attested but we need a source which confirms our required context. We also find Ādibhavānī and she is supposed to be “the Śakti of Parama-puruṣa” (MW, s.v.). If the consort of Paramapuruṣa (i.e. Īśvara) is called Ādibhavānī, could Paramapuruṣa be referred to as Ādibhava somewhere? If this were the case, indeed Sabera Sherpa’s suggestion would seem plausible. But I cannot find any source that confirms this speculation. Or what about ādibhūta (“primordial element”)? If someone comes up with a convincing Sanskrit source that would fit the above context of the Madhyamakālaṃkāravṛti and Madhyamakālaṃkārapañjikā), we would gratefully put it in the Indo-Tibetan Lexical Resource (ITLR) and offer due credit for the contribution.

⚠️ trisvabhāva

The situation of trisvabhāva is a bit tricky. I was told (by Schmithausen) that the term trisvabhāva does not occur (or perhaps hardly occurs) by itself but only as a part of a larger compound. Should we consider such words “ghost words”? In order to avoid risk using unattested words, one may perhaps avoid using trisvabhāva and instead use “three svabhāvas.”

👻 Bāhyānumeyavāda?

Are Bāhyānumeyavāda and Bāhyapratyakṣavāda Ghost Words?

🤔 Mahāpūrṇa?

So long as we have no independent sources (in Sanskrit) that confirm the occurrence of the Indian or Indic term for rdzogs pa chen po (or rdzogs chen), any explanation, speculation, or reconstruction of the Sanskrit word of it is bound to be doubtful. One possibility is that there was no Indian/Indic word for rdzogs chen (as opponents of rDzogs-chen would maintain). The rDzogs-chen proponents have suggested words such as mahāsaṃdhi. These seem hardly plausible. Also the idea that it could have been mahāsamādhi sounds equally unconvincing. Rong-zom-pa, without insisting that there was a Sanskrit word behind the Tibetan word, explained rdzogs pa chen po as rdzogs rim chen po. The existence of Sanskrit words for rdzogs rim or rdzogs pa’i rim pa is not an issue. Sanskritists would tell us that it is either utpannakrama or niṣpannakrama. But perhaps words such as *mahotpannakrama are not attested. Or are they? Although I know that it is not going to bring us any further, I would like to speculate further. (a) The word mahāsamāpta is attested as the name of a high number but the word *mahāsamāpti does not seem to be attested. Actually I would like to think that *mahāsamāpti would be the closest word to rdzogs pa chen po that we can think of. Take particularly note samāpti (sam+āpti), which is said to mean “complete acquisition (as of knowledge or learning),” “accomplishment, completion, perfection, conclusion, solution (of the body).” Or perhaps mahāsamāti (i.e. mahā+asamāti)?

In the mean time, I realize that the Saddharmapuṇḍarīkasūtra (Skt. p. 5.5; Tib. Y, p. 6.17) does incidentally contain the name rDzogs chen or rDzogs chen po (Ejima 1998: p. 224) and the Sanskrit is given as Mahāpūrṇa. Unfortunately, it is not the name of teaching or teaching system but rather “n. of a garuḍa prince: SP 5.5” (BHSD). I have already created an entry for Mahāpūrṇa in the Indo-Tibetan Lexical Resource (https://www.itlr.net) but is not yet published.