A Glossary of Kumārajīva's Translation Of The Lotus Sutra 妙法蓮華經詞典 Seishi Karashima 辛嶋靜志 Digital version: Digital Archives Section, Library and Information Center of Dharma Drum Buddhist College 法鼓佛教學院 圖書資訊館 數位典藏組 TEI Source: http://buddhistinformatics.ddbc.edu.tw/glossaries This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License 本著作係採用 創用 CC Attribution-ShareAlike 授權條款 授權 . Dharma Drum Buddhist College 法鼓佛教學院 http://www.ddbc.edu.tw Taipei 2013-06-13 1 Preface The present work is a glossary of Kumārajīva’s translation of the Lotus Sutra, Miàofǎliánhuājīng 妙 法蓮華經 (Taishō, vol. 9, No.262; translated in 406 C.E.). Three other glossaries are also appended here, covering namely (I) words found in certain parts of Kumārajīva’s translation of the Lotus Sutra, which were originally translated by others and later (presumably in the 6th century) added to his translation; (II) the Sàtánfēntuólìjīng 薩曇芬陀利經 (Taishō, vol. 9, No.265; translated in the Xijin Period [265-316 C.E.]), which is an older but partial translation of the Lotus Sutra; and (III) the Tiānpǐn Miàofǎliánhuājīng 添品妙法蓮華經 (Taishō, vol. 9, No.264; translated in 601 C.E.) which is a revision of Kumārajīva’s translation. This present volume, then, together with my previous work, A Glossary of Dharmarakṣa’s Translation of the Lotus Sutra, completes a set of glossaries of the extant Chinese translations of the Saddharmapuṇḍarīkasūtra, or the Lotus Sutra. In compiling this volume, I have followed the same principle as used in my previous work, that is, focusing on mediaeval vernacular words and usages, semantic peculiarities, Buddhist technical terms, transliterations, which has resulted in the selection of roughly 2200 words and about two hundred dhāraṇīs from the above-stated texts. In principle, ordinary words which occur (with the same meanings as) in Chinese classics, are excluded, except for those which are difficult or interesting. Each entry word is compared with parallels found in Dharmarakṣa’s translation of the Lotus Sutra and the Kern-Nanjio Edition of the Saddharmapuṇḍarīkasūtra. I have paid a great deal of attention to the readings of Sanskrit manuscripts and fragments discovered in Central Asia, as Kumārajīva’s translation shows a great similarity to these (cf. Karashima 1992: 252f.), and hence, in many cases, the parallels, found there, are also listed in this volume. Throughout the process of compiling this volume, I have freely consulted old Chinese commentaries on Kumārajīva’s translation of the Lotus Sutra and modern translations of the same text in English, French, German, Chinese, and Japanese. Among them, I am especially indebted to Leon Hurvitz’s meticulous translation, Scripture of the Lotus Blossom of the Fine Dharma, translated from the Chinese of Kumārajīva, New York, 1976 (Columbia University Press). When I could not find any better English expressions than those given in these English translations and other reference works, which was frequently the case, I simply and implicitly borrowed them. However, I could not agree with the interpretation of these modern translators in many instances, and except for a Chinese one, they were somehow influenced by the traditional Japanese(!) interpretation and seemed not to have paid much attention to the results of recent research on Mediaeval Chinese. The modern Chinese translation mentioned above, for its part, is rather careless and incorrect. Hereunder, I cite some instances to demonstrate the difference between the interpretation of others and that of mine. Hurvitz translates “是菩薩住何三昧，而能如是在所變現，度脱衆生？ ”(56b13f.) as follows: “In which samādhi does this bodhisattva dwell, that in this way, wherever he may be, he can make magical demonstra-tions and rescue living beings?”(p. 309). However, the phrase “在” + “所” + verb means “at will, as one likes”(see p. 353 in this volume), and “在所變 現” should be translated as “(in this way, he can) carry out magical transformations as he likes”. In another example, he translates “長表” in “大目犍連 ………… 諸佛滅後 起七寶塔 長 表金刹 華香伎樂 而以供養 諸佛塔廟”(22a1f.) and “表刹” in “以舍利起塔 七寶而莊 嚴 表刹甚高廣 漸小至梵天”(46a7f.) as “making long displays (of golden chattras)”(p. 128) and “displaying a chatra”(p. 254), respectively. However, “表”, in these contexts, does not mean 2 “displays” but “a banner” or “a flag” (see pp. 22 and 32 in this volume). Also Hurvitz translates “導師見捨 觀我心故 初不勸進 説有實利”(18c8f.) as “The Teacher made a show of indifference, for he knew our thoughts. He never urged us on by telling us that we should gain a real advantage” (p. 97). However, the word “見” here means neither “shows” nor functions as a particle, forming a phrase with a passive meaning, but rather is employed as a particle, indicating an action, performed by one person towards another. This usage is very common in Mediaeval Chinese texts (cf. p. 131 in this volume). All the citations from the Chinese texts are punctuated afresh and provided with various kinds of marks such as exclamation marks, question marks, quotation marks and so on, following, in principle, the system of marking which is commonly used in China. In quite a few cases, I have implicitly presented my own interpretation which is, at times, significantly different from that of others, using these marks. For example, Hurvitz translates “然我等不解方便隨宜所説。初聞佛法， 遇便信受，思惟：‘取證’ ”(10c9f.) as: “However, since we did not understand that the preaching had been based on expedient devices and accorded with what was appropriate to the particular circumstances, when we first heard the Buddha’s dharma, directly we had encountered it we believed it, accepted it, had thoughts about it, and based conclusions on it.”(p. 49). I would have, however, translated the last part of this sentence as “(we) thought (wrongly) that we had realised (enlightenment)”. This interpretation of mine is shown by the use of quotation marks. In another example, he translates “世尊諸子等 聞佛入涅槃 各各懷悲惱： ‘佛滅一何速！’ ”(5a14f.) as “When the sons of the World-Honored One heard that the Buddha was entering nirvāṇa, each harbored grief and anguish, [saying]: ‘Why must the Buddha’s extinction be so swift?’ ”(p. 19). However, “一何” does not mean “Why” but “How (fast the Buddha enters extinction)!”, hence my use of an exclamation mark instead. Now, I feel the need to write a separate article, dealing with misinterpretations found in old commentaries and these modern translations, since there are still many such instances which I could not point out in this volume. One such example concerns the title of the eleventh chapter of the Lotus Sutra, i.e. 見寶塔品 which was formerly interpreted and translated as “Apparition of the Jeweled Stūpa”(Hurvitz p.183) or the like, which I feel is grammatically incorrect. I assume that the title means “Showing of the Jewelled Stūpa”, in which “見” has the same meaning as “現 ”(“shows, displays”). This volume is, therefore, by no means a mechanically compiled index, but rather embodies my interpretation of the Lotus Sutra. Considering that this scripture is one of the most influential books in the religious history of the East and presumably has been the most studied Buddhist text up to now, I must admit that this volume, with many defects and omissions, is far from perfect. If I had two or three more years to spend on it, perhaps it would be made more precise and brought nearer to perfection. However, I must confess that I have no more energy or interest in continuing this work, and I am also aware of dozens of other texts, useful in the area, still waiting to be studied, and while working on this volume, I have already started compiling glossaries of older Chinese translations of the Aṣṭasāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā and the Larger Sukhavatīvyūha. I hope that I shall, sometime in the future, after having made philological studies of Central Asian manuscripts of the Saddharmapuṇḍarīkasūtra and the oldest Tibetan translation of this sutra known to us, discovered in Khotan, together with other earlier Chinese Buddhist translations, return to the study of this very important Chinese translation of the Lotus Sutra, which is seemingly easy but, in fact, difficult to read with absolute precision. 3 The present work is the result of two and half years of effort on my part, warm encouragement from scholars whom I admire, invaluable help from my friends, and great patience from my family during that time. Since the publication of the Glossary of Dharmarakṣa’s translation of the Lotus Sutra, as far as I know, six reviews on it have appeared, all encouraging me to continue compiling glossaries of Chinese Buddhist translations. In this respect, I should like to offer my sincere gratitude to the reviewers, namely, Prof. T. H. Barrett (Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, Series 3, 10[2000]), Prof. Margarita I. Vorobyova-Desyatovskaya (Manuscripta Orientalia 5/2[1999]), Dr. Imre Hamar(Acta Orientalia 52[1999]), Prof. Helwig Schmidt-Glintzer (Orientalistische Literaturzeitung 95[2000]), Mr. Xú Wénkān (Ōuyà Xuékān 1[1999]), and Dr. Bart Dessein (Asiatische Studien LII/3 [1998]), though I learnt nothing new from the last review which demonstrates the reviewer’s insufficient knowledge of Sinology. I also wish to express my gratitude to all readers of my previous works, who have responded by encouraging me or pointing out misprints and other errors. It is sad that I cannot hear Prof. Yoshitaka IRIYA’s opinion on the present volume, though it was very fortunate for me that I could take part in the reading circle, led by this great Sinologist, held once a month at his home, near the top of Mt. Hiei in Kyoto, from 1995 until his death in 1998. He often told me that the Lotus Sutra in the Iwanami Library Edition, contained many mistakes as to punctuation and interpretation, though he, himself, had helped the editors by pointing out mistakes.