[Buddha-l] A vocabulary question for Stephen and Lance(oranyoneelse) 1

[Dan Lusthaus]

(I originally attempted to post this a few days ago, but it never came
through the pipe -- perhaps it was too long. So I am breaking it up into
smaller messages. DL)

Stephen,

Ok, let's sort some of this out.

> > I also neglected to mention that Xuanzang, in this passage, consistently
> > uses 慧 hui
> > for prajñā instead of the more common 智 zhi (or zhihui).
> I am completely mystified by this !   Are you saying that 智 zhi  is more
> commonly used by Xuanzang for prajñā or by other translators ?  Have a
quick
> look through Yokoyama's Index to the YBS and you'll see that Xuanzang
almost
> always uses 慧 hui for prajñā and 智 zhi for jñāna.

As long as we are on the topic of imprecise equivalents for terms such as
prajñā, jñāna, etc., let's at least acknowledge that this is not a modern
invention. 智 zhi was used by Chinese translators for both prajñā and jñāna
(Hirakawa's Index documents many cases of this for Paramartha, e.g.) as well
a number of other terms (buddhi, etc.). Similarly the Tibetan shes pa is
also ambiguous, used to render jñatā. jñāna; prajānāti; prajñā; parijānāti
(= prajānāti); prajānanatā; vijñāta; vijānāti; anvagacchati; medhā;
pratyavagama; pratipatti; yang dag shes pa = saṃtīrita; khyāyati; vijñāna.
jñāna/vijñāna. buddhi -- according to the Hopkins dictionary.

The key word in your statement is "almost" ("Xuanzang almost always uses").
If you check the Hirakawa Index, v.1, pp.244f, he documents that for prajñā
manasī Xuanzang uses 意地...智. As was recently discussed on another list, in
response to an inquiry you raised, the Yokoyama Index is substandard for
many reasons, the most important being its incompleteness (primarily for
failing to include a massive amount of available Sanskrit portions of YBh)
and unreliability (it mis-identifies equivalents, ignores others, etc.). One
would get the impression from looking at Yokoyama that indeed Xuanzang
consistently and invariably differentiated zhi from hui as jñāna and prajñā,
respectively. One would also quickly get the impression that the vast
majority of the Chinese terms have no Skt exemplars on which to rely, but
only Tibetan. That's false. One might also note that the most common Tibetan
 equivalent in Yokoyama for phrases using zhi is shes pa (for zhi), and only
occasionally ye shes (another term for jñāna). But numerous others occur as
well.

It is true that *in general* Xuanzang does tend to differentiate zhi from
hui, but not with ironclad consistency. The compound zhihui, for instance,
is found in Yokoyama (in part) as follows:

智慧 jñāna SHES PA
智慧 prajñā SHES RAB
智慧 prajñāna SHES RAB
智慧  BLO GROS
智慧  SHES RAB
智慧  SHES PA

(note: blo gros suggests mati, another "equivalent" for prajñā; shes rab
primarily renders prajñā, but can also be used for jñāna)

In short, Yokoyama is useful for quick suggestions, but *absence* of an
equivalent, or its failure to mention something is not a proof of
nonexistence.

(continued in next message)