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

As with last week’s chapter, there is no substantive difference between Senchu Murano’s English translations of Kumārajīva’s Chapter 20, Never-Despising Bodhisattva, and H. Kern’s English translation of Chapter 19, Sadāparibhūta from an 11th century Nepalese Sanskrit document

For example, Murano has:

When he was about to pass away, he heard [from a voice] in the sky the twenty thousand billion gāthās of the Sūtra of the Lotus Flower of the Wonderful Dharma, which had been expounded by the Powerful-Voice-King Buddha. Having kept all these gāthās, he was able to have his eyes, ears, nose, tongue, body and mind purified as previously stated. Having his six sense-organs purified, he was able to prolong his life for two hundred billion nayuta more years.

Kern has:

Under those circumstances, Mahāsthāmaprāpta, the Bodhisattva Mahāsattva Sadāparibhūta happened to hear this Dharmaparyāya of the Lotus of the True Law when the end of his life was impending, and the moment of dying drawing near. It was the Lord Bhīṣhmagargitasvararāja, the Tathāgata, &c., who expounded this Dharmaparyāya in twenty times twenty hundred thousand myriads of koṭis of stanzas, which the Bodhisattva Mahāsattva Sadāparibhūta heard from a voice in the sky, when the time of his death was near at hand. On hearing that voice from the sky, without there appearing a person speaking, he grasped this Dharmaparyāya and obtained the perfections already mentioned: the perfection of sight, hearing, smell, taste, body, and mind. With the attainment of these perfections he at the same time made a vow to prolong his life for twenty hundred thousand myriads of koṭis of years, and promulgated this Dharmaparyāya of the Lotus of the True Law.

Vowing to attain a long life after purification and receiving it as a consequence of his purification is an interesting point to consider.

What’s of more interest to me is a difference between the prose section of the chapter and the gāthās that is in both Kumārajīva’s Chinese text and Kern’s Sanskrit.

Murano offers this about those who abused Never-Despising Bodhisattva:

“Great-Power-Obtainer! The four kinds of devotees: the bhikṣus, bhikṣunīs, upāsakās, and upāsikās at that time failed to meet the Buddha, hear the Dharma, and see the Saṃgha for twenty thousand million kalpas because they abused me with anger. They suffered much in the Avici Hell for one thousand kalpas. Having expiated their sin in this way, they met [me, who was] Never-Despising Bodhisattva again, and were led into the Way to Anuttara-samyak-saṃbodhi.

In Kern’s telling:

As to the hundreds of monks, nuns, male and female lay devotees, Mahāsthāmaprāpta, to whom under that Lord the Bodhisattva Mahāsattva Sadāparibhūta promulgated this Dharmaparyāya by saying: I do not contemn you; you all observe the course of duty of Bodhisattvas; you are to become Tathāgatas, &c., and in whom awoke a feeling of malignity towards that Bodhisattva, they in twenty hundred thousand myriads of koṭis of Æons never saw a Tathāgata, nor heard the call of the law, nor the call of the assembly, and for ten thousand Æons they suffered terrible pain in the great hell Avīci. Thereafter released from the ban, they by the instrumentality of that Bodhisattva Mahāsattva were all brought to full ripeness for supreme, perfect enlightenment.

This distinction of “expiating” sins as opposed to the vague “release from a ban” is present in the other English translations of Kumārajīva’s Chinese. The Modern Risshō Kōsei-kai translation has “When their recompense was complete…”, and Burton Watson has “After they finished paying for their offenses…”.

More important, however, is a switch in the focus of this expiation in the gāthās.

In telling the story of how Never-Despising Bodhisattva earned his name in the gāthās, Murano has:

Never-Despising Bodhisattva
Went to them,
And said,
“I do not despise you
Because you will practice the Way
And become Buddhas.”

When they heard this,
They spoke ill of him and abused him.
But Never-Despising Bodhisattva
Endured all this.

Thus he expiated his sin.
When he was about to pass away,
He heard this sūtra,
And had his six sense-organs purified.

This is absent entirely from Kern:

3. Other monks and nuns who did not believe but in what they saw, he would approach (and say): I never am to contemn you, for you observe the course leading to supreme enlightenment.

4. It was his wont always to utter those words, which brought him but abuse and taunts from their part. At the time when his death was impending he heard this Sūtra.

This “expiation” of Never-Despising’s sins is consistent among the translations of Kumārajīva.

The BDK English Tripiṭaka translation has:

As he neared the time of his death,
When he had expiated his past errors,
He was able to hear this sutra,
And his six sense faculties became pure.

Gene Reeves offers:

When he had been cleansed of his sins
And his life was coming to an end,
He heard this sutra
And his six faculties were purified.

Interestingly, Murano explicitly rejects this interpretation of the gāthās in a footnote following the line “Thus he expiated his sin.”

The expiation of sin is referred to in connection with those who abused the Bodhisattva, not with the Bodhisattva, on p. 294.

One assumes Murano blames Kumārajīva for this misinterpretation. Nichiren disagreed. See Expiating His Past Errors

Next: Differing Views of Supernatural Scenes

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’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