Sweet Dew

I'm still pondering over this one. The notions of 'rain and dew' are recurring narrative elements in early Chinese texts. 'Dew' is associated with life, fertility and growth. Whilst the Laozi has subject to a wide range of interpretations typically philosophic or political, the clear associations with the balance nature, of the effects the skies (heaven) upon the soil (earth) are clearly outlined. Man is seen as a microcosm with the parts of the body sharing correspondences with the primary and secondary forces of nature. (Huai-nan-tzu ch. 7).  In the practice of neiye, the ruler (the volitional mind) harmonies earth (lower dantian, yin forces) with heaven (upper dantian, yang forces) then the sublimated procreative forces gather as the 'golden dew' that restores physical and emotional well-being. This is embracing the dao, a state of mind in which names are abandonned and the limitations upon the personal existence vanish, as expressed in imagery given in Chap 32 of the Laozi, of the valley stream merging in the ocean. The creation of 'dew' is the essnetial experience of wholeness.

The occurance of such Cultural References in the Daoxing is by no meand an indicator of the presence of 'daoist ideas' or 'influences'. The use of such of such terms implies that these were familiar to the scribe who was paraphrasing within his own personal lexis those ideas presented to him. It does not imply either that the translator was familiar with the technicalities behind the origins of such terms, they are simply what they are, cultural references. Mythologically, the gods (神) led by the Jade Emperor (玉皇) are sustained by the peaches of immortality, but this is not consistent with amrta being a liquid.

Working on an interesting phrase 滅神入禪 T08n0224_p0465a10

滅神入禪. This is constructed in an unusual way which does not immediately yield a clear meaning. The wording of the Dàoxíng would suggest: ‘extinguishes those dhyānas that enters into (the realms of the) spirits’. In the corresponding passage in the Sanskrit (Vaidya 1960, p.211) we find ‘..na dīrghāyuṣkeṣu deveṣūpapadyate..’ which has been translated by Conze (1974, p.250) as: ‘..does not get reborn among the long-lived Gods’. The expression 長壽天 (Southill & Hodous p.284) for this class of devas is a clearer linguistic correspondence but does not enter the Chinese Buddhist lexis until its usage by Buddhayaśas in the 長阿含經 (T) his translation of the Dīrghâgama; during 5th century CE.

As elsewhere in this text, 入 denotes entrance into a destination, in the sense of future rebirth and arguably corresponds to the Sanskrit bhavati, 'to become, to happen, to come o be'. The implication is not a physical act of translocating from one side of a passageway to another but the change of state that results from such a movement. The choice of the term 神 for dīrgha-ayuṣka deva (Conze 1967, p.200) is an unusual one as the general practice within the Daoxing is to associate the term with one of two ideas: 1)  non-heavenly non-corpreal beings, typically yaksas (eg 鬼神, 火神) or, 2) the possesion of some magical ability as if possessed by a devata or the Buddha (eg 威神). Perhaps the inclusion was to  provide a closer cultural association with the immortal deities of Chinese mythology rather any Indo-European devata. Interestingly, the word 滅 is not a clear equivalence of the sanskrit ‘na’ which would the Chinese 不. The implication necessarily lies in the sense of bringing existing practices to an an end rather than merely not to engage in them from the outset. Whilst a single phrase such as this provides no conclusive proof, one possible explanation for the occurance of such a unique phrase is provide a cultural reference to longevity practices found in the alchemical practices in mystical Daoism.

Half-way through

I expected to have finished Chap 22 before the end of the evening. But, I had a DIY job to do which took up most of the evening. But still, well over half-way through it now. The biggest factor which results in the slowing down of the correction process is ambiguity. Whilst there's a lot of Later Han dynast usage in the T224, there is still an awful lot of simplification. Some parts, I guess, were prone to be more hurridly written down that other so a word or two here is omitted. To resolve the flow, its necessary to read and re-read a passage, looking for patterns and structure. Once identifies its possible to move forwards. The last one was 'entering into hell, beasts and pretas'. What is clearly alluded to are the lower three realms of the Kamadhatu, which are destiinies, hence these are entered into. Like the dharma-gate earlier on. These lead to entrance into buddhaksetra, typically envisioned as a divine palace. Am encloure, urban and civilised, with clear borders. The lower realms, on the other hand, are more like open untamed wastelands.  

Modern scholarship does not necessarily yield new results

Textual studies unlike research into the physical world or even the social sciences does always present new evidence or even provide a framework in which to develop our understanding. At the moment I'm making extensive use of Karashima's 2010 glossary of terms from Lokaksema's Daoxing Banruo Jing. Invaluable a contribution as this remarkable text is, it still draws heavily upon the works of Edward Conze for explanation of terminolgy, works which themselves are quite well established and whose flaws in the interpretation of doctrine are outdated and on numerous occasions mis-placed. I'm revisting the phrase  '甘露法門' in:

T08n0224_p0464c25
天下人.菩薩學如是.為學甘露法門.佛語須

I would translate this as the 'amṛta of the dharma gate'. Here's the reasoning:

1) the aim of the Buddha's method is release from birth, old age, sickness and death
2) amṛta is the Buddhist variant of the death-defying nutriment of the Vedic Soma, Olympian Ambrosia or the Golden Apples of the Aesirs, a core theme in Indo-European Religion.

The meaning being that amṛta becomes allegorical, it is the 'stuff' that allows the pursuer to enter the gate which is the 'method' (dharma) that leads to living beings to escape from samsara.

Conze(1974,p.249) gives something extremely unwiedly, '..the door of the deathless element..' It is possible to see the reasoning behind this, but dhatu, in connection to a door would imply a door onto a 'somewhere' and not a 'classification'. Conze (1967, p.69) gives the Sanskrit as: amṛta-dhātu-dvāra. I would translate this as lit: the 'gate to the world of deathlessness'. One thing is for certain, although the passages have much in common interms of general structure, changes in the use of specific terms had resulted in a shift in meaning.

One last word, Conze (1968. p.69) along with Karashima (2010. p.179) give the Tibetan for this phrase as:
bdud-rtsi'i dbyings-kyi sgo. This offers a slightly different meaning, one I am curious enough to want to see the whole passage. Here were have amṛta = bdud-rtsi'i, in an adjectival forms (ie post-fix 'i) and sgo = door. dbyings-kyi, due to the kyi I believe to be be accusative (?) and dbyings which means 'space'. So the overall phrase, I would render as 'the amrta that is the door to space'.

Chapter 22 Training

Completed my synopsis for Chapter 21 and have started to revise Chapter 22 which I can see is really old too! I can't for a moment imagine how some of these rough translations got included. Mind you, at the time I had dozens of files all over the place. You know what that means, I probably deleted them!

As we approach lunchtime I've reviewed/re-written about 15% of this chapter. There are some areas which were quite unintelligible but now I've put that right. As always, I take a peek at Conze's translation from the Sanskrit. The shift in flow corresponds to his Chap. 25 also entitled 'Training'. Just like the preceeding chapter, there are clear areas of ammendments to the sanksrit text from which he worked. Also, he becomes burdened again with the term 'bhutakoti', translated by Lokaksema as '本無', 'basically has no'. Taking this to signify an 'ultimate reality' is not sound as such a meaning is not consistent with the narrative itself.

Well, I'll drink my tea and resume in a about 30mins....

Daoxing,chaps. 20/21

I was aware that a few of the chapter of my earlier translation of the Daoxing were, lets say, a little shaky. In fact I'd lost track of what they were, that is, until this week. I've been working on writing up a brief synopsis of each chapter, the core ideas discussed, what happens and so on. This week I got up to Chapter 20, Sakrodevanmindra and Chapter 21, Pride. Urgh! Looking at some of the mis-translation there I must have put these together half-dazed at 3 in the morning! It was a few years ago when I tackled these however, and I must admit that since then my understanding of the purport of the text has expanded considerably. I can see why I got to a particulular point at those times however decided to simply move on. One of the issues concerned is perhaps the original team member that worked on the text. Historical accounts explain how a number of translators worked with Lokaksema to produce the Daoxing but, of course, there's no account of who translated what. This can only be guessed at on the basis of changes in translation style. Anyway, I think that the current version is fine and I hope to complete the synopsis tomorrow.

Allegory & Myth

One of the topics arising around the mytheme/narratime of Mara is whether Mara is a allegorical or mythic in function.  Before going further with this discussion it needs to be established that a Buddhist sutra in comparison to a novel, play or film is not a piece of popular fiction, perhaps even crafted according to widely recognised literary structures, but a piece of sacred writing. Consequently then, the motives and circumstances for both the creation and consumption of such works differ enormously. A novel may communicate and explore ideas, but the sacred text is aimed engendering a relgious experience.
Although these distinction exists, the development of modern art, in all cultures is ultimately derived from the expression of sacred and religious ideas. The question is then, are the creators of such works simply recording the ideas of their times or creating pieces of literature with narrative structures more in keeping with modern writers in which personae embody necessary roeke in order to facilitate the development of narrative content?
The development of Buddhist sutras is not restricted to a single period of time, even within Indian history. The earliest text are simple annecdotes, with subsequent works becoming increadingly elaorated descriptive with the final works such as the Mahayana sutra becoming embellished with length litanies and repetitions. Non the less, through all of these texts there are common personae, which integrate in a single overarching metanarrative. Unlike the Mahabharata and other epic texts such as the Illiiad and Odessy and Sagas , these works are not considered to be parts of an ongoing saga,  but snapshots in time. For the creators of these text, the connectively between them was not significant.