This is another in a series of weekly blog posts comparing and contrasting the Sanskrit and Chinese Lotus Sutra translations.

---

In Chapter 19, The Merits of the Teacher of the Dharma, we are told that those “who keep, read, recite, expound or copy this Sūtra of the Lotus Flower of the Wonderful Dharma, will be able to obtain eight hundred merits of the eye, twelve hundred merits of the ear, eight hundred merits of the nose, twelve hundred merits of the tongue, eight hundred merits of the body, and twelve hundred merits of the mind.” That’s how Senchu Murano renders in English Kumārajīva’s Chinese text. H. Kern’s English translation of an 11th century Nepalese Sanskrit document is essentially identical, other than the fact that Kern numbers it Chapter 18, The Advantages of a Religious Preacher.

To show how close the two are, I put the gāthās for the eight hundred merits of the nose side by side. Here’s a PDF showing the results.

Below are the handful of verses where I felt the meaning diverged enough to note.

Murano	Kern
Anyone who keeps This Sūtra of the Lotus Flower of the Wonderful Dharma Will be able to know by smell Whether the gods are walking, sitting, playing or performing wonders.	28. The wise man who keeps this exalted Sūtra recognizes, by the power of a good-smelling organ, a woman standing, sitting, or lying; he discovers wanton sport and magic power.
He will be able to know by smell Whether an unborn child is a boy or a girl, Or a child of ambiguous sex, Or the embryo of a nonhuman being.	34. He infers from the odor, whether the child that women, languid from pregnancy, bear in the womb be a boy or a girl.
He will be able to know by smell Whether a woman is an expectant mother, Or whether she will give an easy birth To a happy child or not.	35. He can discern if a woman is big with a dead child; he discerns if she is subject to throes, and, further, if a woman, the pains being removed, shall be delivered of a healthy boy.
He will be able to know by smell What a man or a woman is thinking of, Or whether he or she is greedy, ignorant or angry, Or whether he or she is doing good.	36. He guesses the various designs of men, he smells (so to say) an air of design; he finds out the odor of passionate, wicked, hypocritical, or quiet persons.
He will be able to know by smell Whether a heavenly palace Adorned with jeweled flowers Is superior, mean or inferior.	40. By the power of his organ of smell he, without leaving his stand on earth, perceives how and whose are the aerial cars, of lofty, low, and middling size, and other brilliant forms shooting (through the firmament).

Murano’s addition of “Or a child of ambiguous sex, Or the embryo of a nonhuman being” compared to Kern’s verse 34 prompted a check of  the other English translations of Kumārajīva’s Chinese Lotus Sutra. All agree.

The BDK English Tripiṭaka translation offers:

They can smell and discriminate exactly
The scent of a pregnant woman
And determine whether the embryo
Will be male or female,
Without sex organs, or nonhuman.

The 1975 Rissho Kōsei-kai translation offers:

If there be a woman with child,
Who discerns not yet its sex,
Male, female, organless, or inhuman,
He, by smell, can discern it.

Leon Hurvitz, who used both Kumārajīva’s Chinese translation and a Sanskrit compilation of the Lotus Sutra, offers:

If there are pregnant women,
And it is not yet known whether theirs will be boy or girl,
Or defective or monstrous,
By smelling their scents he can know in each case.

This chapter exemplifies the uniformity of the Lotus Sutra message despite inconsequential differences.

Next: Expiating Sins

This is another in a series of weekly blog posts comparing and contrasting the Sanskrit and Chinese Lotus Sutra translations.

---

As I move through the Lotus Sutra, comparing Senchu Murano’s English translation of Kumārajīva’s Chinese Lotus Sutra with H. Kern’s English translation of an 11th century Nepalese Sanskrit document, I am coming to enjoy the places where Murano attempted to bring clarity to the sutra.

In many cases these are simple parenthetical insertions into the text. As an example, take the events of Chapter 17, The Variety of Merits, or as Kern has it, Chapter 16, Of Piety. After the Buddha declares the merits obtained by learning of the duration of the Tathāgata’s lifetime, mandārava-flowers and mahā-mandārava-flowers rain on the assembly.

Kern offers:

No sooner had the Lord given this exposition determining the duration and periods of the law, than there fell from the upper sky a great rain of Mandārava and great Mandārava flowers that covered and overwhelmed all the hundred thousand myriads of koṭis of Buddhas who were seated on their thrones at the foot of the jewel trees in hundred thousands of myriads of koṭis of worlds.

Murano’s version clarifies:

When the Buddha said that these Bodhisattva-mahāsattva had obtained the great benefits of the Dharma, [the gods] in heaven rained mandārava-flowers and mahā-mandārava-flowers on the many hundreds of thousands of billions of Buddhas sitting on the lion-like seats under the jeweled trees.

None of the other translators of Kumārajīva Chinese Lotus Sutra felt a need to clarify who was raining these flowers on the congregation. They don’t even specify that they are falling from heaven. The flowers just fell from the sky.

Later in the same paragraph Murano has “[The gods]” raining thousands of heavenly garments. No one else feels a need to say who is dropping this stuff, although all agree that “heavenly garments” are falling.

Kern has “Double pieces of fine heavenly cloth fell down by hundreds and thousands from the upper sky.”

On the other side of this discussion is an example of a little censorship for modern modesty sake. The questionable content appears in Kern’s Chapter 17, Indication of the Meritoriousness of Joyful Acceptance where we are told of the benefits to be received when one invites another to hear the Lotus Sutra.

And, Agita, if someone, a young man of good family or a young lady, says to another person: Come, friend, and hear the Dharmaparyāya of the Lotus of the True Law, and if that other person owing to that exhortation is persuaded to listen, were it but a single moment, then the former will by virtue of that root of goodness, consisting in that exhortation, obtain the advantage of a connection with Bodhisattvas who have acquired Dhārāṇi. He will become the reverse of dull, will get keen faculties, and have wisdom; in the course of a hundred thousand existences he will never have a fetid mouth, nor an offensive one; he will have no diseases of the tongue, nor of the mouth; he will have no black teeth, no unequal, no yellow, no ill ranged, no broken teeth, no teeth fallen out; his lips will not be pendulous, not turned inward, not gaping, not mutilated, not loathsome; his nose will not be flat, nor wry; his face will not be long, nor wry, nor unpleasant. On the contrary, Agita, his tongue, teeth, and lips will be delicate and well shaped; his nose long; his face perfectly round; the eyebrows well-shaped; the forehead well-formed. He will receive a very complete organ of manhood.

Murano renders the same section in Chapter 18, The Merits of a Person Who Rejoices at Hearing This Sutra, in this way:

“Ajita! Anyone who[, while he is staying outside the place of the expounding of the Dharma,] says to another person, ‘Let us go and hear the sūtra called the Lotus Flower of the Wonderful Dharma which is being expounded [in that place],’ and cause him to hear it even for a moment, in his next life by his merit , will be able to live with the Bodhisattvas who obtain dharanis. He will be clever and wise. He will not be dumb throughout thousands of millions of his future existences. His breath will not be foul. He will have no disease of the tongue or the mouth. His teeth will not be defiled, black, yellow, few, fallen out, uneven or crooked. His lips will not be pendulous, shrunk, chapped, cracked, broken, distorted, thick, large, yellow-black or loathsome. His nose will not be flat or awry. His face will not be black, long, distorted or displeasing. His lips, tongue and teeth will be well-shaped; his nose, long, high and straight. His face will be full; his eyebrows, thick and long; and his forehead, broad and even. In a word, he will have all the good features of a man.

The BDK English Tripiṭaka translation has:

They will thus have a perfect human countenance.

Burton Watson offers:

[H]e will be endowed with all the features proper to a human being.

Gene Reeves offers:

They will have all the features proper to a human being.

Risshō Kōsei-kai’s 1975 translation has:

His sign of manhood will be perfect.

While the Modern Risshō Kōsei-kai translation, ever concerned with gender equity, has:

They will possess all the most perfect physical features of a human being.

Leon Hurvitz, who used both Kumārajīva’s Chinese translation and a Sanskrit compilation of the Lotus Sutra, stays the closest to Kern:

[H]is male member perfect.

Next: The Uniform Scent of the Lotus Sutra

This is another in a series of weekly blog posts comparing and contrasting the Sanskrit and Chinese Lotus Sutra translations.

---

Interesting differences emerge when comparing H. Kern’s Chapter 16, Of Piety, and the English translations of Chapter 17, The Variety of Merits, from Kumārajīva’s Chinese Lotus Sutra.

Senchu Murano offers this:

“Ajita! The good men or women who hear of my longevity of which I told you, and understand it by firm faith, will be able to see that I am expounding the Dharma on Mt. Gṛdhrakūṭa, surrounded by great Bodhisattvas and Śrāvakas. They also will be able to see that the ground of this Sahā-World is made of lapis lazuli, that the ground is even, that the eight roads are marked off by ropes of Jambunada gold, that the jeweled trees are standing in lines, and that the magnificent buildings are made of treasures. They also will be able to see that the Bodhisattvas are living in those buildings. They will be able to see all this because, know this, they have already understood [my longevity] by firm faith.”

Kern, on the other hand, sets up this understanding as a test. Those who see all of this pass the test.

And, Agita, as a test whether that young man or young lady of good family who hears this exposition of the duration of the Tathāgata’s life most decidedly believes in it may be deemed the following. They will behold me teaching the law here on the Gṛdhrakūṭa, surrounded by a host of Bodhisattvas, attended by a host of Bodhisattvas, in the center of the congregation of disciples. They will behold here my Buddha-field in the Sahā-world, consisting of lapis lazuli and forming a level plain; forming a checkered board of eight compartments with gold threads; set off with jewel trees. They will behold the towers that the Bodhisattvas use as their abodes. By this test, Agita, one may know if a young man or young lady of good family has a most decided belief.

Immediately following this Murano has:

Furthermore, the good men or women who do not speak ill of this sūtra but rejoice at hearing it after my extinction, should be considered, know this, to have already understood my longevity by firm faith. It is needless to say this of those who [not only rejoice at hearing this sūtra but also] read, recite and keep it. They also should be considered to be carrying me on their heads.

Kern has a comparable sentence:

Moreover, Agita, I declare that a young man of good family who, after the complete extinction of the Tathāgata, shall not reject, but joyfully accept this Dharmaparyāya when hearing it, that such a young man of good family also is earnest in his belief; far more one who keeps it in memory or reads it.

But then he adds this detail:

He who after collecting this Dharmaparyāya into a volume carries it on his shoulder carries the Tathāgata on his shoulder.

All of the other English translations of Kumārajīva’s Chinese Lotus Sutra agree with Murano and lack Kern’s details. (See the earlier post, Shouldering the Buddha.)

Finally, Kern’s penchant for superfluous detail clouds his story. In this example, Murano’s translation from Kumārajīva contains more words than Kern but is more concise.

Murano offers:

Ajita! They need not build a stupa or a monastery in my honor, or make the four kinds of offerings’ to the Saṃgha because those who keep, read and recite this sūtra should be considered to have already built a stupa or a monastery or made offerings to the Saṃgha. They should be considered to have already erected a stupa of the seven treasures tall enough to reach the Heaven of Brahman, the upper part of the stupa being the smaller. They should be considered to have already equipped the stupa with streamers, canopies and jeweled bells, and enshrined my śarīras therein. They also should be considered to have already offered flowers, incense, necklaces, incense powder, incense applicable to the skin, incense to burn, drums, music, reed pipes, flutes, harps, various kinds of dances, and songs of praise sung with wonderful voices [to the stupa ] continuously for many thousands of billions of kalpas.

Kern offers:

Such a young man or young lady of good family, Agita, need make no Stūpas for me, nor monasteries; need not give to the congregation of monks medicaments for the worship of my relics Stūpas of seven precious substances reaching up to the Brahma-world in height, and with a circumference in proportion, with the umbrellas thereto belonging, with triumphal streamers, with tinkling bells and baskets; has shown manifold marks of respect to those Stūpas of relics with diverse celestial and earthly flowers, incense, perfumed garlands, ointments, powder, cloth, umbrellas, banners, flags, triumphal streamers, by various sweet, pleasant, clear-sounding tymbals and drums, by the tune, noise, sounds of musical instruments and castanets, by songs, nautch and dancing of different kinds, of many, innumerable kinds; has done those acts of worship during many, innumerable thousands of koṭis of Æons.

Next: A Very Complete Organ of Manhood

This is another in a series of weekly blog posts comparing and contrasting the Sanskrit and Chinese Lotus Sutra translations.

---

If there is anything notable in comparing H. Kern’s Chapter 15, Duration of the Life of the Tathāgata, and the English translations of Kumārajīva’s Chapter 16, The Duration of the Life of the Tathāgata, it is their similarity.

Still, I’m disappointed in Kern’s translation of the Parable of the Skillful Physician and His Sick Children when compared to Senchu Murano’s translation of Kumārajīva’s Chinese Lotus Sutra.

Murano offers this:

“The sons who had not lost their right minds saw that this good medicine had a good color and smell, took it at once, and were cured completely. But the sons who had already lost their right minds did not consent to take the medicine given to them, although they rejoiced at seeing their father come home and asked him to cure them, because they were so perverted that they did not believe that this medicine having a good color and smell had a good taste.

In the past, I’ve made a big deal about how this is an excellent definition of faith. In fact, this was the motivation behind my yearlong 800 Years of Faith Project. We can observe that something looks nice and, without taking the medicine, we can determine that it smells nice. But only with faith can we accept that the medicine will taste good before we actually take the medicine.

Kern’s translation completely negates this interpretation:

Those amongst the children of the physician that have right notions, after seeing the color of the remedy, after smelling the smell and tasting the flavor, quickly take it, and in consequence of it are soon totally delivered from their disease. But the sons who have perverted notions cheerfully greet their father and say: Hail, dear father, that thou art come back in safety and welfare; do heal us. So they speak, but they do not take the remedy offered, and that because, owing to the perverseness of their notions, that remedy does not please them, in color, smell, nor taste.

But it was when comparing the other English translations of Kumārajīva’s Chinese Lotus Sutra that I found my interpretation of the parable was a product of Murano’s intervention.

In the other English translations of Kumārajīva’s Chinese Lotus Sutra, those children who are deranged can’t believe that the medicine, having a fine color and smell, is good for them. Nothing is said about taste.

The Modern Risshō Kōsei-kai translation offers:

The others, who have lost their senses, are also delighted to see their fathers return and ask him to cure them. But they are unwilling to take the medicine he offers them. Why is this? The poison’s effect have reached deeper inside them and made them lose their senses. Therefore, although the medicine is fine in color and smell, they do not think it is good.

The BDK English Tripiṭaka translation offers:

The remaining children, those who are delirious, seeing their father coming to them, rejoice and ask him to seek a cure for their illness. Although he offers them the medicine, they will not take it. Why is this? The poison has so deeply penetrated them that they have become delirious. They do not think that the medicine with good color and aroma is good.

This is another demonstration of the value of Senchu Murano’s Insight and the clarity that insight brings.

Next: Piety and Merits

This is another in a series of weekly blog posts comparing and contrasting the Sanskrit and Chinese Lotus Sutra translations.

---

In considering Chapter 11, Beholding the Stūpa of Treasures – or as H. Kern titles the chapter, Apparition of a Stūpa – I noticed an interesting difference among the nine easy and six difficult acts.

Murano has:

It is not difficult
To grasp the sky,
And wander about with it
From place to place.

It is difficult
To copy and keep this sūtra
Or cause others to copy it
After my extinction.

Kern, on the other hand, says:

22. To throw down the totality of ether-element after compressing it in one fist, and to leave it behind after having thrown it away, is not difficult.

23. But to copy a Sūtra like this in the period after my extinction, that is difficult.

At the time I thought it interesting to consider the “ether-element” and “the sky” in context of the five elements of physical existence:

1. Earth
2. Water
3. Fire
4. Wind
5. Void (Ether)

But the quibble over sky vs. ether was a rabbit hole I thought I would step around after my brief glance inside.

Then I got to Chapter 15, The Appearance of the Bodhisattvas from Underground, or as Kern has it, Chapter 14, Issuing of Bodhisattvas from the Gaps of the Earth.

Where were these great bodhisattvas before they sprung up through the earth and filled the skies?

Murano says at the start and later in gāthās:

They had lived in the sky below this Sahā-World.

But Kern says:

who had been staying in the element of ether underneath this great earth, close to this Sahā world.

Later in gāthās, Kern says:

40. They dwell in the domain of ether, in the lower portion of the field, those heroes who, unwearied, are striving day and night to attain superior knowledge.

Now it seemed I needed to explore that rabbit hole and the difference between ether and the sky.

Back in Chapter 11, the other English translations of Kumārajīva’s Chinese Lotus Sutra agreed with Murano on the difficult task. For example, the Modern Risshō Kōsei-kai translation offers:

If someone
Could grab hold of the sky
And, carrying it, travel about,
That would not be difficult.

Gene Reeves offered:

If someone
Took the sky in his hand
And wandered around with it,
That would not be difficult.

But even in that chapter there was a hint of dissent. Leon Hurvitz, who used both Kumārajīva’s Chinese translation and a Sanskrit compilation of the Lotus Sutra, offered:

If there should be a man
Who, holding open space in his hand,
Were to walk about with it,
Even that would not be difficult.

I was happy to leave that rabbit hole unexplored in Chapter 11, but Murano’s placement of the bodhisattvas in the “sky below this Sahā-World” was not supported by the other translators of Kumārajīva.

The 1975 Risshō Kōsei-kai translation has the bodhisattvas “dwelling in [infinite] space below this sahā-world.” A footnote for “[infinite] space” offered this:

Sanskrit ākāśa (space, ether) is often used as a synonym for śūnyatā (void).

Burton Watson has the bodhisattvas “dwelling in the world of empty space underneath the sahā world.”

None of the translators of Kumārajīva’s Chinese Lotus Sutra has the bodhisattvas dwelling in the sky.

In one of the side tunnels of this rabbit hole I found a nugget of information that offered one possible reason why Murano chose the word sky.

In Japanese, the five elements of physical existence are called godai.

Hisao Inagaki’s “A Dictionary of Japanese Buddhist Terms” (1989) explains godai in these terms:

Godai ‘The five great (elements)’; also godaishu ‘the five great seeds’; the five elements which constitute things in the world: (1) chidai, the earth element; (2) suidai , the water element; (3) kadai, the fire element; (4) fūdai, the wind element; and (5) kūdai, the space element.

The 1965 Japanese English Buddhist Dictionary (Daitō Shuppansha publisher) offers this definition of godai:

Godai pañca mahābhūtāni. The five elements. I. The five elements which are believed to be the components of all forms of matter: the earth-element (pṛthivī-dhātu), water-element (ap-dhātu), fire-element (tejo-dhātu), wind-element (vāyu-dhātu), and air-element (ākāśa-dhātu).

The Princeton Dictionary of Buddhism includes “sky” among the synonyms for ākāśa: “space” or “spatiality”; “sky,” and “ether.” In addition, there are several online resources that define “ākāśa-dhātu” as the element of “sky or space.” See here and here and here.  So Murano’s choice of “sky” rather than the empty space other translators used is defensible.

Personally, I’m disappointed that the home of these bodhisattvas is a void beneath this world. I enjoyed the idea that these bodhisattvas were in the sky. I’ve never been to Australia, but I imagined these great bodhisattvas in the sky would be quite a spectacle.

Next: The Color, Smell and Taste of the Dharma