Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1Xii THE SMALLER SUKHAVATi-VvOnA. the Sacred Books of the East as better, purer, and more beautiful than they arc, could never enter into the head of a scholar, and has never proved even a temptation to the translators of the Sacred Books of the East. THE SMALLER SUKHAVAT!-VY0HA. The translation of the Smaller Sukhavati-vyuha has been published by me before in my Selected Essays, vol. ii, p. 348, where a fuller account may be found of the discovery of Sanskrit MSS. in Japan, and of the way by which they travelled from India to China, and from China to Japan. I have made a few corrections in my translation, and have added some notes and omitted others. THE VAC^RAA-A'/ZEDHvA. In order to make this collection of Mahayana works more complete and useful to students in Japan I have added a translation of the Va^ra/'X-Z/cdika. which is much studied in Japan, and the Sanskrit text of which was published by me in an editio princeps — in the Anecdota Oxoniensia, 18S1. The Va^ra^/r//edika, or the Diamond-cutter, is one of the most widely read and most highly valued metaphysical treatises in Buddhist literature. In Japan the Va^raH7/rdika and the Pra^i,v7iiparamita-hr/daya are read chiefly by the followers of the Shin-gon sect, founded by K6-B6, the great disciple of the famous Hiouen-thsang, in 816 A. D. The temples of this sect in Japan amount to 12,943. Written originally in Sanskrit, it has been translated into Chinese, Tibetan, Mongol, and Mandshu. Its full title is Vaj^raX'/7/edik^ I'r.-i^w.'i-paramit.'i, i.e. the Diamond-cutter, the perfection of wisdom, or, as it has .sometimes been rendered, ' the INTRODUCTION. XIU
2Transcendent Wisdom. Mr. Bunyiu Nanjio in his Catalogue of the Tripi/aka, p. i, has shown that it forms the ninth section of the Mahapra^«a-paramit4-sutra, and that it agrees with the Tibetan translation of the text in 300 jlokas. An account of the Tibetan translation was given as far back as 1836 by Csoma Korosi in his Analysis of the Sherchiu, the second division of the Kanjur, published in the Asiatic Researches, vol. xx, p. 393 seq. Our text is there described as the Diamond-cutter or the Sutra of wonderful effects, in which vSakya in a colloquial manner instructs Subhuti, one of his principal disciples, in the true meaning of the Pra^;7a-paramita. The Tibetans, we are told, pay great respect to this Sutra, and copies of it are found in consequence in great abundance ^. The first Chinese translation- is ascribed to Kumara^iva of the latter Tsin dynasty (a. D. 384-417). An English translation of this Chinese translation was published by the Rev. S. Beal in the Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, 1864-5. There are several more Chinese translations, one by Bodhiru/^i (a. D. 509), one by Paramartha (a. d. 562), one by Hiouen-thsang (a. D. 648), one by I-tsing (a. D. 703), one by Dharmagupta of the Sui dynasty (a. d. 589-618). The text and German translation of the Tibetan translation were published in 1837 by M. Schmidt in the Memoires de FAcademie de St. Petersbourg, tom. iv, p. 186. The Mongolian translation was presented by the Baron Schiling de Canstadt to the Library of the Institut de France. The Mandshu translation is in the possession of M. de Harlez, who with the help of the Tibetan, Mandshu, and Chinese versions has published a valuable French translation of the Sanskrit text of the Va^aHV/edika in the Journal Asiatique, 1892.
3XIV THE VAGUAX'^TT/EDTKA. At first sight it may seem as if this metaphysical treatise hardly deserved the world-wide reputation which it has attained. Translated literally into English it must often strike the Western reader as sheer nonsense, and hollow repetition. Nor can anything be said in defence of the form or style adopted in this treatise by the Buddhist philosophers who wished to convince their hearers of the truth of their philosoph}'. This philosophy, or, at least, its underlying doctrine, is not unknown to us in the history of Western philosophy. It is simply the denial of the reality of the phenomenal world. Considering how firmly a belief in phenomenal objects is established in the ordinary mind, it might well have seemed that such a belief could not be eradicated except by determined repetition. But that the theory had been fully reasoned out before it was stated in this practical, but by no means attractive form, may be gathered from the technical terminology which pei^vades our treatise. There arc two words, in particular, which are of great importance for a right apprehension of its teaching, dharma and SAmgnk. Dharma, in the ordinary Buddhist phraseology, may be correctly rendered by law. Thus the whole teaching of Buddha is called the Good Law, Saddharma. But in our treatise dharma is generally used in a different sense. It means form (ei5os), and likewise what is possessed of form, what is therefore different from other things, what is individual, in fact, what we mean by a thing or an object. This meaning has escaped most of the translators, both Eastern and Western, but if we were always to translate dharma by law, it seems to me that the whole drift of our treatise would become unintelligible. What our treatise wishes to teach is that all objects, differing one from the other by their dharmas. are illusive, or, as we should say, phenomenal and subjective, that they are in fact of our own making, the products of our own mind. When we say that something is large or small, sweet or bitter, these dharmas or qualities are subjective, and cannot be further defined. What is large to me, may be small to another. A mile may seem short or long, according to the state of our muscles, and no one can determine the point where
The source text as printed, transcribed diplomatically. Where the source language uses a non-Latin script that reaches us only through a Victorian romanisation, this layer is labelled transliteration, because that is what we hold.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1Xii THE SMALLER SUKHAVATi-VvOnA. the Sacred Books of the East as better, purer, and more beautiful than they arc, could never enter into the head of a scholar, and has never proved even a temptation to the translators of the Sacred Books of the East. THE SMALLER SUKHAVAT!-VY0HA. The translation of the Smaller Sukhavati-vyuha has been published by me before in my Selected Essays, vol. ii, p. 348, where a fuller account may be found of the discovery of Sanskrit MSS. in Japan, and of the way by which they travelled from India to China, and from China to Japan. I have made a few corrections in my translation, and have added some notes and omitted others. THE VAC^RAA-A'/ZEDHvA. In order to make this collection of Mahayana works more complete and useful to students in Japan I have added a translation of the Va^ra/'X-Z/cdika. which is much studied in Japan, and the Sanskrit text of which was published by me in an editio princeps — in the Anecdota Oxoniensia, 18S1. The Va^ra^/r//edika, or the Diamond-cutter, is one of the most widely read and most highly valued metaphysical treatises in Buddhist literature. In Japan the Va^raH7/rdika and the Pra^i,v7iiparamita-hr/daya are read chiefly by the followers of the Shin-gon sect, founded by K6-B6, the great disciple of the famous Hiouen-thsang, in 816 A. D. The temples of this sect in Japan amount to 12,943. Written originally in Sanskrit, it has been translated into Chinese, Tibetan, Mongol, and Mandshu. Its full title is Vaj^raX'/7/edik^ I'r.-i^w.'i-paramit.'i, i.e. the Diamond-cutter, the perfection of wisdom, or, as it has .sometimes been rendered, ' the INTRODUCTION. XIU
2Transcendent Wisdom. Mr. Bunyiu Nanjio in his Catalogue of the Tripi/aka, p. i, has shown that it forms the ninth section of the Mahapra^«a-paramit4-sutra, and that it agrees with the Tibetan translation of the text in 300 jlokas. An account of the Tibetan translation was given as far back as 1836 by Csoma Korosi in his Analysis of the Sherchiu, the second division of the Kanjur, published in the Asiatic Researches, vol. xx, p. 393 seq. Our text is there described as the Diamond-cutter or the Sutra of wonderful effects, in which vSakya in a colloquial manner instructs Subhuti, one of his principal disciples, in the true meaning of the Pra^;7a-paramita. The Tibetans, we are told, pay great respect to this Sutra, and copies of it are found in consequence in great abundance ^. The first Chinese translation- is ascribed to Kumara^iva of the latter Tsin dynasty (a. D. 384-417). An English translation of this Chinese translation was published by the Rev. S. Beal in the Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, 1864-5. There are several more Chinese translations, one by Bodhiru/^i (a. D. 509), one by Paramartha (a. d. 562), one by Hiouen-thsang (a. D. 648), one by I-tsing (a. D. 703), one by Dharmagupta of the Sui dynasty (a. d. 589-618). The text and German translation of the Tibetan translation were published in 1837 by M. Schmidt in the Memoires de FAcademie de St. Petersbourg, tom. iv, p. 186. The Mongolian translation was presented by the Baron Schiling de Canstadt to the Library of the Institut de France. The Mandshu translation is in the possession of M. de Harlez, who with the help of the Tibetan, Mandshu, and Chinese versions has published a valuable French translation of the Sanskrit text of the Va^aHV/edika in the Journal Asiatique, 1892.
3XIV THE VAGUAX'^TT/EDTKA. At first sight it may seem as if this metaphysical treatise hardly deserved the world-wide reputation which it has attained. Translated literally into English it must often strike the Western reader as sheer nonsense, and hollow repetition. Nor can anything be said in defence of the form or style adopted in this treatise by the Buddhist philosophers who wished to convince their hearers of the truth of their philosoph}'. This philosophy, or, at least, its underlying doctrine, is not unknown to us in the history of Western philosophy. It is simply the denial of the reality of the phenomenal world. Considering how firmly a belief in phenomenal objects is established in the ordinary mind, it might well have seemed that such a belief could not be eradicated except by determined repetition. But that the theory had been fully reasoned out before it was stated in this practical, but by no means attractive form, may be gathered from the technical terminology which pei^vades our treatise. There arc two words, in particular, which are of great importance for a right apprehension of its teaching, dharma and SAmgnk. Dharma, in the ordinary Buddhist phraseology, may be correctly rendered by law. Thus the whole teaching of Buddha is called the Good Law, Saddharma. But in our treatise dharma is generally used in a different sense. It means form (ei5os), and likewise what is possessed of form, what is therefore different from other things, what is individual, in fact, what we mean by a thing or an object. This meaning has escaped most of the translators, both Eastern and Western, but if we were always to translate dharma by law, it seems to me that the whole drift of our treatise would become unintelligible. What our treatise wishes to teach is that all objects, differing one from the other by their dharmas. are illusive, or, as we should say, phenomenal and subjective, that they are in fact of our own making, the products of our own mind. When we say that something is large or small, sweet or bitter, these dharmas or qualities are subjective, and cannot be further defined. What is large to me, may be small to another. A mile may seem short or long, according to the state of our muscles, and no one can determine the point where
The source text as printed, transcribed diplomatically. Where the source language uses a non-Latin script that reaches us only through a Victorian romanisation, this layer is labelled transliteration, because that is what we hold.
No commentary for this page.