No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 41: | Line 41: | ||
help that they have given us. | help that they have given us. | ||
The appearance of translations | The appearance of translations of the ''Bodhicharyāvatāra'' made from | ||
the Sanskrit, side by side with others made from the Tibetan, calls into | the Sanskrit, side by side with others made from the Tibetan, calls into | ||
question with renewed force the desirability of translating what is itself a | question with renewed force the desirability of translating what is itself a | ||
| Line 60: | Line 60: | ||
Buddhological field are important and interesting. The brief but valuable | Buddhological field are important and interesting. The brief but valuable | ||
introductory material to the translation by Crosby and Skilton describes | introductory material to the translation by Crosby and Skilton describes | ||
the groundbreaking work | the groundbreaking work of Akira Saito on the textual history of the ''Bodhicharyāvatāra'', made possible by the discovery, in the caves of Dunhuang at the beginning of the twentieth century, of three manuscripts of | ||
a hitherto unknown Tibetan translation—a rendering that differs notably | a hitherto unknown Tibetan translation—a rendering that differs notably | ||
from the much longer version revised by Ngok Loden Sherab and | from the much longer version revised by Ngok Loden Sherab and | ||
Sumatiklrti and preserved in the Tengyur. To be sure, tradition records the | Sumatiklrti and preserved in the Tengyur. To be sure, tradition records the | ||
existence of several versions | existence of several versions of the ''Bodhicharyāvatāra'', attributing this fact | ||
to the peculiar circumstances in which the poem was first publicized. | to the peculiar circumstances in which the poem was first publicized. | ||
Shäntideva’s biography specifies that a text of one thousand shlokas in ten | Shäntideva’s biography specifies that a text of one thousand shlokas in ten | ||
| Line 70: | Line 70: | ||
of Kashmir recorded only seven hundred shlokas in nine chapters. Given | of Kashmir recorded only seven hundred shlokas in nine chapters. Given | ||
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 | Peltsek made the first translation of the ''Bodhicharyāvatāra'' using a man¬ | ||
uscript from Kashmir (perhaps descended from the work of the very | uscript from Kashmir (perhaps descended from the work of the very | ||
panditas mentioned by tradition) and given that the translation contained | panditas mentioned by tradition) and given that the translation contained | ||
| Line 80: | Line 80: | ||
original work (assuming that the Dun-huang translation is his) has sur¬ | original work (assuming that the Dun-huang translation is his) has sur¬ | ||
vived in the later revisions. But for our understanding of the translation | vived in the later revisions. But for our understanding of the translation | ||
of the | of the ''Bodhicharyāvatāra'' into Tibetan and of the history of its various | ||
recensions, it is improbable that the discoveries at Dun-huang will sim¬ | recensions, it is improbable that the discoveries at Dun-huang will sim¬ | ||
plify the picture. If anything, they are likely to reveal a scenario more com¬ | plify the picture. If anything, they are likely to reveal a scenario more com¬ | ||
plicated than tradition records. On the face of it, and despite the | plicated than tradition records. On the face of it, and despite the | ||
inconvenient fact that the length of the extant Sanskrit and Tibetan texts | inconvenient fact that the length of the extant Sanskrit and Tibetan texts | ||
of the | of the ''Bodhicharyāvatāra'' corresponds not at all with the figures quoted in | ||
the traditional records, it seems plausible nonetheless that the Sanskrit | the traditional records, it seems plausible nonetheless that the Sanskrit | ||
text and Loden Sherab’s revised translation correspond, by and large, to | text and Loden Sherab’s revised translation correspond, by and large, to | ||
the version authenticated by | the version authenticated by Shāntideva when he was consulted by the disgraced scholars of Nālandā. But according to Western scholarship, this | ||
is far from certain. There are reasons for thinking that, compared with the | is far from certain. There are reasons for thinking that, compared with the | ||
canonical text, the Dun-huang recension embodies a streamlined and | canonical text, the Dun-huang recension embodies a streamlined and | ||
more coherent version of the | more coherent version of the ''Bodhicharyāvatāra'' that could, for that rea¬ | ||
son, lay claim to being a more faithful reflection of Shäntideva’s original | son, lay claim to being a more faithful reflection of Shäntideva’s original | ||
work. Conversely, so the argument continues, the problems of the canon¬ | work. Conversely, so the argument continues, the problems of the canon¬ | ||
| Line 100: | Line 100: | ||
by the interpolation of material taken from the commentarial tradition. | by the interpolation of material taken from the commentarial tradition. | ||
And in the spirit of such Formkritik, academic erudition will no doubt | And in the spirit of such Formkritik, academic erudition will no doubt | ||
conclude that the story of | conclude that the story of Shāntideva’s disembodied voice, the limited | ||
capacity of recall displayed by the scholars of Kashmir compared with the | capacity of recall displayed by the scholars of Kashmir compared with the | ||
naturally superior performance of the panditas of the “central land” of | naturally superior performance of the panditas of the “central land” of | ||
| Line 125: | Line 125: | ||
sources in archaeology, paleography, and penetrating textual criticism, is | sources in archaeology, paleography, and penetrating textual criticism, is | ||
best equipped to answer; and the results of such research will be primarily | best equipped to answer; and the results of such research will be primarily | ||
of interest, as we have said, to students | of interest, as we have said, to students of religious and cultural history. By | ||
contrast, the needs and expectations of practicing Buddhists, who approach the | contrast, the needs and expectations of practicing Buddhists, who approach the ''Bodhicharyāvatāra'' primarily as a manual for living, are of a | ||
quite different order. | quite different order. | ||
The findings of academic study with regard to the textual history of | The findings of academic study with regard to the textual history of | ||
the | the ''Bodhicharyāvatāra'', and the question whether the Tibetan text we | ||
now have corresponds in all respects to Shantideva’s autographed copy | now have corresponds in all respects to Shantideva’s autographed copy | ||
are obviously of considerable interest. But for the Buddhist practitioner | are obviously of considerable interest. But for the Buddhist practitioner | ||
they are of secondary importance. From a traditional point of view, the | they are of secondary importance. From a traditional point of view, the | ||
authenticity of the | authenticity of the ''Bodhicharyāvatāra'' depends not just on the historical | ||
identity of its author, but also, and perhaps even more importantly, on | identity of its author, but also, and perhaps even more importantly, on | ||
the generations of practitioners who, by their experience and realization | the generations of practitioners who, by their experience and realization | ||
have attested to the truth and effectiveness of | have attested to the truth and effectiveness of Shāntideva’s teaching. For | ||
the Buddhist, the contribution to a tradition made by the lineage of its | the Buddhist, the contribution to a tradition made by the lineage of its | ||
accomplished practitioners is just as crucial as that of its source. It is gen¬ | accomplished practitioners is just as crucial as that of its source. It is gen¬ | ||
erally thought that the text of the | erally thought that the text of the ''Bodhicharyāvatāra'' is accompanied by | ||
an oral transmission that began with its author3 and has been passed | an oral transmission that began with its author3 and has been passed | ||
down for nearly fifteen centuries. It was bequeathed by the Indian | down for nearly fifteen centuries. It was bequeathed by the Indian | ||
panditas to the Tibetan translators, and they in turn transmitted it to | panditas to the Tibetan translators, and they in turn transmitted it to | ||
successive generations of meditators and scholars. The Sanskrit transmis¬ | successive generations of meditators and scholars. The Sanskrit transmis¬ | ||
sion of the | sion of the ''Bodhicharyāvatāra'', presumably existing between Shantideva’s | ||
time and that of | time and that of Sumatikīrti, who collaborated with Ngok Loden Sherab, | ||
was interrupted and lost in the calamities that engulfed Indian Buddhism | was interrupted and lost in the calamities that engulfed Indian Buddhism | ||
in the twelfth century. By consequence, the oral transmission and ex¬ | in the twelfth century. By consequence, the oral transmission and ex¬ | ||
| Line 152: | Line 152: | ||
obvious reasons cannot be resurrected from the Sanskrit relics. | obvious reasons cannot be resurrected from the Sanskrit relics. | ||
The difference in meaning between a translation made from the | The difference in meaning between a translation made from the Sanskrit and a translation made from the Tibetan may not, in point of fact, be | ||
very great. Nevertheless we would argue that for those who are interested | very great. Nevertheless we would argue that for those who are interested | ||
in practicing the Bodhisattva path, the Tibetan translation of the | in practicing the Bodhisattva path, the Tibetan translation of the ''Bodhicharyāvatāra'' occupies a position of greater significance than a modern | ||
rendering, be it never so scholarly and accurate, of a Sanskrit manuscript | rendering, be it never so scholarly and accurate, of a Sanskrit manuscript | ||
that by chance escaped the destruction of the Buddhist libraries in India. | that by chance escaped the destruction of the Buddhist libraries in India. | ||
The accidents of history have determined that the textual and commentarial transmission of the | The accidents of history have determined that the textual and commentarial transmission of the ''Bodhicharyāvatāra'' stretching back to Shāntideva—the human connection, so to speak—lies in the Tibetan and not in the Sanskrit. Where there are discrepancies between the two renderings, | ||
the Sanskrit. Where there are discrepancies between the two renderings, | |||
therefore, it by no means follows that a version translated from the Sanskrit | therefore, it by no means follows that a version translated from the Sanskrit | ||
is automatically to be preferred. | is automatically to be preferred. | ||
| Line 175: | Line 172: | ||
the original text as a stage on which to display itself. As Dr. Johnson | the original text as a stage on which to display itself. As Dr. Johnson | ||
observed, “A translator is to be like his author; it is not his business to excel | observed, “A translator is to be like his author; it is not his business to excel | ||
him.” Accurate inelegance, in other words, is preferable to elegant | him.” Accurate inelegance, in other words, is preferable to elegant invention. The point is well made, and yet there is something unsatisfactory in | ||
setting literal accuracy against elegance of style in such uncompromising | setting literal accuracy against elegance of style in such uncompromising | ||
opposition. For it is obvious that the character and effectiveness of any | opposition. For it is obvious that the character and effectiveness of any | ||
| Line 188: | Line 184: | ||
own time and place on encountering the text in the original tongue. No | own time and place on encountering the text in the original tongue. No | ||
doubt this is a high and probably unattainable goal; but it is one worth | doubt this is a high and probably unattainable goal; but it is one worth | ||
striving for. In any case, it is the task | striving for. In any case, it is the task of the translator not simply to provide | ||
word-for-word cribs—classroom tools devised to help students puzzle | word-for-word cribs—classroom tools devised to help students puzzle | ||
their way through the original. The goal, surely, is to produce versions that | their way through the original. The goal, surely, is to produce versions that | ||
| Line 207: | Line 203: | ||
question.6 Aesthetic standards vary from culture to culture and from lan¬ | question.6 Aesthetic standards vary from culture to culture and from lan¬ | ||
guage to language, and it is far from clear that we are in a position to judge | guage to language, and it is far from clear that we are in a position to judge | ||
what the speakers of the source language find, or found, pleasing. We | what the speakers of the source language find, or found, pleasing. We ourselves have heard a Tibetan teacher enthusiastically praising the grace of | ||
Patsap’s translation of the ''Madhyamakāvatāra''; and it is recorded that | |||
Patsap’s translation of the | Tsongkhapa was moved to tears by the beauty of the ''Pramāṇavārttika''. | ||
Tsongkhapa was moved to tears by the beauty of the | |||
This represents a considerable challenge for the translator, for it is surely | This represents a considerable challenge for the translator, for it is surely | ||
insufficient to render texts that, however difficult they may be, are consid¬ | insufficient to render texts that, however difficult they may be, are consid¬ | ||
| Line 216: | Line 211: | ||
sometimes so opaque and turgid as to be unreadable. | sometimes so opaque and turgid as to be unreadable. | ||
The translation | The translation of the ''Bodhicharyāvatāra'' into verse, or rather rhythmic prose, is an attempt to come to terms with this difficulty. The result is | ||
a kind of blank verse (sometimes very blank) that can rarely claim the status of poetry and might best be described as a literary experiment. Its purpose is to provide a vehicle that, by being not altogether unpleasant, might | |||
a kind of blank verse (sometimes very blank) that can rarely claim the | contribute positively to the expression and propagation of Shāntideva's | ||
contribute positively to the expression and propagation of | |||
teaching. | teaching. | ||
| Line 228: | Line 220: | ||
times meaning for meaning”), by which he meant that translation should | times meaning for meaning”), by which he meant that translation should | ||
be literal where possible, free and interpretative where necessary, and at all | be literal where possible, free and interpretative where necessary, and at all | ||
times accurate. In translating the | times accurate. In translating the ''Bodhicharyāvatāra'', it is perhaps not | ||
possible, or even desirable, to achieve the equivalent of Luther’s declared | possible, or even desirable, to achieve the equivalent of Luther’s declared | ||
intention in his translation of the Old Testament: “to make Moses sound | intention in his translation of the Old Testament: “to make Moses sound | ||
Revision as of 20:14, 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.
