[Buddha-l] Lankavatara

[Joel Tatelman]

Rahula,

This is hardly certain, but the language of the translation you quote  
(in particular "Rahat" for "Arhat") reminds me of the idiom of Samuel  
Beal. He translated a lot of Buddhist texts from Chinese in the  
latter part of the 19th century and Indian publishers continue to  
reprint his works.

Hope this at least gives you some direction to search.

Me, I'd trust Suzuki first...

Regards,

Joel Tatelman.


On 10-Nov-07, at 9:47 PM, Ngawang Dorje wrote:

> Hi,
>
>   Is there any other translations of the Lankavatara Sutra?
>
>   Suzuki's is available here:
>   http://lirs.ru/do/lanka_eng/lanka-nondiacritical.htm
>
>   I am interested in a passage in Chapter 3. I found this passage,  
> but the translator is unknown.
>
>   At this time Mahâmati Bodhisatwa addressed Buddha and said,  
> “According to the assertion of the Great Teacher, if a male or  
> female disciple should commit either of the unpardonable sins, he  
> or she, nevertheless, shall not be cast into hell. World-honoured  
> One! how can this be, that such a disciple shall escape though  
> guilty of such sins ?“ To whom Buddha replied, ‘Mahâmati! attend,  
> and weigh my words well!
>
>  What are these live unpardonable sins of which you speak? They are  
> these, to slay father or mother, to wound a Rahat, to offend (i.e.  
> to place a stumbling- block in the way of) the members of the  
> sangha (church), to draw the blood from the body of a Buddha.  
> Mahâmati! say, then, how a man committing these sins can be  
> guiltless? In this way—is not Love (Tanha) which covets pleasure  
> more and more, and so produces ‘birth’—is not this the mother  
> (mâtâ) of all? And is not ‘ignorance’ (avidyâ) the father(pitâ) of  
> all? To destroy these two, then, is to slay father and mother. And  
> again, to cut off and destroy those ten ‘kieshas’ (Ch. shi) which  
> like the rat, or the secret poison, work invisibly, and to get rid  
> of all the consequences of these faults (i.e. to destroy all  
> material associations), this is to wound a Rahat. And so to cause  
> offence and overthrow a church or assembly, what is this but to  
> separate entirely the connection of the live skandhas? (“live  
> aggregates,” which is
>  the same word as that used above for the “Church”). And again, to  
> draw the blood of a Buddha, what is this but to wound and get rid  
> of the sevenfold body by thethree methods of escape. . . . Thus it  
> is, Mahâmati, the holy male or female disciple may slay father and  
> mother, wound a Rahat, overthrow the assembly, draw the blood of  
> Buddha, and yet escape the punishment of the lowest hell (avichi).”  
> And in order to explain and enforce this more fully, the World- 
> honoured One added the following stanzas:
>
>     “Lust,” or carnal desire, this is the Mother,
>     “Ignorance,” this is the Father,
>     The highest point of knowledge, this is Buddha,
>     All the “Kleshas,” these are the Rahats,
>     The five Skandhas, these are the Priests,
>     To commit the five unpardonable sins
>     Is to destroy these five
>      And yet not suffer the pains of hell.”
>
>   I have compared this passage with Suzuki's. While the central  
> idea is the same, they are not the same. Can someone clarify? Which  
> is more accurate?
>
> Thanks,
>   Rahula
>
>  __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
> _______________________________________________
> buddha-l mailing list
> buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com
> http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/listinfo/buddha-l