No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 66: | Line 66: | ||
that the colophon to the Tibetan text we now possess tells us that Kawa | that the colophon to the Tibetan text we now possess tells us that Kawa | ||
Peltsek made the first translation of the ''Bodhicharyāvatāra'' using a manuscript from Kashmir (perhaps descended from the work of the very paṇḍitas mentioned by tradition) and given that the translation contained | Peltsek made the first translation of the ''Bodhicharyāvatāra'' using a manuscript from Kashmir (perhaps descended from the work of the very paṇḍitas mentioned by tradition) and given that the translation contained | ||
in the Dun-huang manuscripts is indeed a text of nine chapters, the evidence, though not conclusive, tantalizingly suggests that the recension found at Dun-huang is in fact the long-lost translation of Kawa Peltsek.<ref>For more details, see Kretschmar (Vol. 1, pp. 13-18), who is categorically in favor of Kawa Peltsek's authorship of the Dun-huang translation and who notes Saito's belief that there were two and perhaps three different Sanskrit versions of the ''Bodhicharyāvatāra in existence during the period when the text was translated into Tibetan. See www.kunpal.com/bcaicomm.pdf</ref> When this text is fully edited and published, a comparison of it with the | in the Dun-huang manuscripts is indeed a text of nine chapters, the evidence, though not conclusive, tantalizingly suggests that the recension found at Dun-huang is in fact the long-lost translation of Kawa Peltsek.<ref>For more details, see Kretschmar (Vol. 1, pp. 13-18), who is categorically in favor of Kawa Peltsek's authorship of the Dun-huang translation and who notes Saito's belief that there were two and perhaps three different Sanskrit versions of the ''Bodhicharyāvatāra'' in existence during the period when the text was translated into Tibetan. See www.kunpal.com/bcaicomm.pdf</ref> When this text is fully edited and published, a comparison of it with the | ||
canonical version will allow us to appreciate how much of Kawa Peltsek's | canonical version will allow us to appreciate how much of Kawa Peltsek's | ||
original work (assuming that the Dun-huang translation is his) has survived in the later revisions. But for our understanding of the translation of the ''Bodhicharyāvatāra'' into Tibetan and of the history of its various | original work (assuming that the Dun-huang translation is his) has survived in the later revisions. But for our understanding of the translation of the ''Bodhicharyāvatāra'' into Tibetan and of the history of its various | ||
Revision as of 20:41, 30 October 2023
See Padmakara The Way of the Boddhisattva p.i-xxi
This page will include a discussion on methodological issues related to the translation of the Bodhicaryāvatāra into modern languages. In this discussion, we will identify key points that are particularly relevant for translators of Indian Buddhist treatises.
The titles listed in the bibliography below are useful sources to develop this page. Even if their main focus appears to be on different subject, they have been selected because they include valuable information on the topic of this page.
