QUAESTIONES MONGOLORUM DISPUTATAE

Executive Editor: B. Oyunbilig

No.10

International Association for the Study of Mongolian Cultures

Tokyo September 15. 2014

A Heart-Sutra Fragment from Dunhuang*

[ Budapest ] Kpolns Olivr
The Heart-sutra is a well-known sutra that has several Mongolian versions. There is a
little xylograph fragment from Turfan1 and there are some manuscript folios from Olan
Sm-e2 and Xarbuxiyn balgas,3 which are from the 15-16th centuries. The first full
version is in the printed Kanjur (1717-1720).4 From the 18th century there are other
editions, in five, four and in two languages. Some manuscript versions can also be found in
different collections.5
Recently, several publications have focused on Mongol fragments from Dunhuang, 6
based on the findings of Chinese archaeologists between 1988 and 1995.7 In 2011 Otgon
identified the text 464:588 as a Heart-sutra fragment. It was written on the backside of a
Tangut xylograph. The ductus is typical pre-classical Mongolian. It can be transcribed as

I would like to express my sincere gratitude to Nathalie Monnet and Romain Lefebvre for giving me
opportunity to work on this fragment. My research was supported by the Campus Hungary fellowship.
1
Die Monglica der Berliner Turfansammlung, M. Taube, D. Cerensodnom (eds.), Brepols, 1996, pp.
106ff.
2
Walther Heissig, Die mongolischen Handschriften-Reste aus Olon sume, Innere Mongolei (16.-17.
Jhdt.), Harrassowitz, 1976, pp. 271ff.
3
Elisabetta Chiodo, The Mongolian Manuscripts on Birch Bark from Xarbuxyn Balgas in the Collection
of the Mongolian Academy of Sciences (Part 2), Harrasowitz. 2009, pp. 56ff.
4
Tom. 12. 44r-45v. Its title at the beginning: ilaju tegs ngcigsen eke bilig-n cinadu kijaar-a krgsen
jirken, and at the end of the text: ilaju tegs ngcigsen eke bilig baramid-n jirken.
5
Elisabetta Chiodo, The Mongolian Manuscripts on Birch Bark from Xarbuxyn Balgas in the Collection
of the Mongolian Academy of Sciences (Part 2), Harrasowitz. 2009, p. 57.
6
Volker Rybatzki, New Buddhist Mongolica from Dunhuang, The Early Mongols, Studies in Honor of
Igor de Rachewiltz, Indiana University, 2008, pp. 139-148. ,
,,2010.Peng Jinzhang, Les fouilles archologiques de secteur nord de Mogao, Ars
Asiatiques 67, 2012, pp. 107-119.
7
All these findings were published in , (1-3), ,,
2000-2004.
8
The facsimile of the text was published in , (3), ,
, 2004. Table LXIII.

1. -n cinadu qijaar-a krgsen

2. -e mrgmi bi
3. eyin kemen sonususan minu
4. nigen ca-tur ilaju [tegs]
5. ngcigsen rajagri[q-a balasu]n-u1
In 1908, almost one hundred year before the above-mentioned Heart-sutra fragment was
found and later identified by Otgon, the French orientalist Paul Pelliot (1878-1945) found
a huge number of old manuscripts and xylographs in Dunhuang. Most of them came from
the treasure room of Cave 17 and a few from different caves. Some fragments, mainly in
Tangut language, came from Cave 464 (in Pelliots records it is Cave no. 181). These
Tangut fragments are now kept in the National Library of France and their cataloguing
started in 2013. At the beginning of 2014 Romain Lefebvre, who works with this Tangut
collection, drew my attention to several Mongolian words on the backside of one of the
Tangut xylographs. Its transcription is as follows:
1. isninggbo [='i snying po]
2. mongolcilaba[su ilaju t]egs n[gc]igsen
3. eke bilig-n cinadu qijaar-a
4. krgsen- jirken kemeki ..
5. ilaju tegs ngcigsen eke bilig
Fortunately, the fragment contains the title of the text ilaju tegs ngcigsen eke bilig-n
cinadu qijaar-a krgsen- jirken - the Heart-sutra.2 The first word of the fragment,
isningo, is the end of the Tibetan title of this sutra (bcom ldan 'das ma shes rab kyi pha rol
tu phyin pa'i snying po). The ductus and the number of lines are the same as in the
Heart-sutra fragment Otgon identified. If we reassemble these two fragments and compare
the text thus gained with the Heart-sutra from the Kanjur, we find that they are the same,
almost word for word:
1

The transcription of the text was published in the following works: D. Tumurtogoo, Mongolian
Monuments in Uighur-Mongolian Script (XIII-XVI centuries) Institute of Linguistics, Academia Sinica,
2006. P. 266. Volker Rybatzki op. cit. pp. 145-156. , op. cit. p. 262.
2
There has been recurring debate concerning the meaning of this title. Jirken means essence/heart (not
(not only heart), bilig-n cinadu qijaar-a krgsen means perfection of wisdom and ilaju tegs
ngcigsen eke (which is the translation of the Sanskrit term bhagavati, what is the feminine variant of
bhagavant; bhagavant = ilaju tegs ngcigsen and bhagavati = ilaju tegs ngcigsen eke) is an epithet of
Buddha with feminine suffix, because the perfection of wisdom comes to be mother (eke) of all the
buddhas. So, we can understand this title as The Mother-buddha, the Essence/Heart of Perfect Wisdom.
About this issue see: Donald S. Lopez, Jr. Elaborations on Emptiness, Uses of the Heart-sutra, Princeton
University Press, 1996, pp. 141-142.

The fragment form Dunhuang

From the Kanjur

mongolcilabasu ilaju tegs ngcigsen

mongolcilabasu ilaju tegs ngcigsen

eke bilig-n cinadu qijaar-a

eke bilig-n cinadu kijaar-a

krgsen- jirken kemeki ..

krgsen jirken buyu ..

ilaju tegs ngcigsen eke bilig

ilaju tegs ngcigsen eke bilig

-n cinadu qijaar-a krgsen

baramid-tur

-e mrgmi bi

mrgmi

eyin kemen sonususan minu

eyin kemen sonususan minu

nigen ca-tur ilaju tegs

nigen ca-tur ilaju tegs

ngcigsen rajagriq-a balasun-u

ngcigsen ranjakirq-a balasun-u

The newly reassembled fragment from Dunhuang consists of only a few words, but its
terminology raises questions. In the era of the Yuan dynasty the Sanskrit terminology was
usually not translated into Mongolian. 1 For example, in the pre-classical Mongolian
monuments the phrase bilig baramid can be found twice.2 What is more, the phrase
bilig-n cinadu qijaar-a krgsen appears only in this Heart-sutra fragment. Ilaju tegs
ngcigsen, the epithet of Buddha, persists only in this fragment and in An Exercise Book
from Turfan.3 The other term that seizes our attention is mongolcilabasu. In the Yuan
period mostly the expression mongol-un kele-ber was used for the same meaning, and
scholars supposed that mongolcilabasu appeared in the 15-16th century.4 For example, in
translations of the Manjusri-nama-samgiti the term mongolcilabasu can only be found in
Ayusi Gshi's translation from the second half of the 16th century. The earliest translation
(form the beginning of the 14th century) and the later ones also used the phrase
mongol-un kele-ber.5
The main problem with trying to determine the date of a text on the basis of the
terminology it uses is that the pre-classical Mongolian corpus is not broad enough, and it is

Srkzi Alice, Mongolian Buddhist Terminology over the Ages, Altaica et Tibetica. Anniversary Volume
dedicated to Stanislaw Godzinki on his Seventieth Birthday. Agata Bareja-Starzynska et all (eds.),
Warszawa 2010, pp. 215-223.
2
Colophon of the Praise of Tara (D. Tumurtogoo, op. cit. 208) and Colophon of the Fragment from a
Book of Buddhist Teachings (D. Tumurtogoo, op. cit. 210).
3
D. Tumurtogoo, op. cit. 162.
4
Walther Heissig, op. cit. 361.
5
Mongolian Translations of Manjusri-nama-samgiti, complied by Alexey G. Sazykin, Kyoto University,
2006. P. 36.

possible that some Yuan texts will appear that contain the term mongolcilabasu. The
problem with trying to determine the date of any text on the basis of its terminology, on
the other hand, is that many times the terminology is not consequent. For example, in this
fragment a Sanskrit word (Rajagriqa) was used instead of its Mongolian translation
(qaan-u balasun, qaan-u qarsi, qaan-u ordon etc.), but in the other the original the
Sanskrit phrases were translated into Mongolian (ilaju tegs ngcigsen eke and bilig-n
cinadu qijaar-a krgsen). Another example of inconsequent usage of terminology might
be the Heart-sutra from the Kanjur, which has two titles, one at the beginning of the text:
ilaju tegs ngcigsen eke bilig-n cinadu kijaar-a krgsen jirken, and the other at the
end: ilaju tegs ngcigsen eke bilig baramid-n jirken.
The Tangut text on the other side of the manuscript has not been identified yet, but it is
not the Heart-sutra. There seems to be no connection between the two texts; the backside
of the Tangut xylograph was simply reused. In Dunhuang countless examples can be found
for using the empty side of an old piece of paper.1 The Tangut language was used around
the end of the Yuan dynasty, and when the Tangut texts were not read any longer, the
pieces of paper on which they were written were reused. Thus, this text cannot be seen as
an evidence for the connection between Tangut and Mongolian literacy. After the collapse
of the Yuan Dynasty, Dunhuang remained under Mongolian control for several years.
Being at the border area between the Ming and Mongol territories, Dunhuang lost its glory
and declined. 2 Taking all these circumstances into account, this Heart-sutra was
presumably written (copied?) in the second half of the 14th century or during the first
years of the 15th century.
As only a few words remained from this Heart-sutra, it is very difficult to say anything
about its relations to later texts. If we focus only on the title, the Kanjur version seems
similar, and the first sentences are almost the same word for word (except one term), but
this is not enough to prove the close relation of these texts. There is no common part in
this Heart-sutra and the xylograph fragment from Turfan, so their relationship remains an
unsolved question.
In the future, the study of the Tangut text and further examination of the terminology
used in the Heart-sutra on the other side can give more information about the text and the
circumstances in which it was written. There is more than 80 years difference between the
finding dates of these two fragments which are now reassembled. It is possible that new

1
2

Volker Rybatzki, op. cit. 145.

Rong Xinjiang, Eighteen Lectures on Dunhuang, Brill, 2013, pp. 48-49.

fragments of this Heart-sutra will appear from the depths of the sand or from a library.

The reassembled Heart-sutra fragments

Left side: Paul Pelliot's findings from 1908
Right side: Chinese excavations unearthed between 1988 and 1995