[Buddha-l] Dharmapala

[Artur Karp]

2010/7/18 L.S. Cousins <selwyn at ntlworld.com>:
>
>
> Artur Karp wrote:
>
>> Yes, it's obvious that the author of the Mhv has scanty material at
>>
>> his disposal. He, however, manages very well to convey the idea that
>> royal violence, even of most extreme form, can be atoned for by
>> donating to the Sangha. Which, in its turn, is an important factor
>> legitimizing royal power.
>>
> I am not sure that you can introduce the Christian concept of atonement
> here. If the author has an idea of this kind, it will be that the kings
> must eventually suffer the unpleasant consequences of their bad deeds.
> And of course the pleasant consequences of their good deeds.
>

You are right, of course. There are several other verbs that could
perhaps better express the meaning I had in mind. Would 'expiate' be
better?

Although - Geiger uses the term 'atonement' in precisely the same context.

In Mhv. XXXIII:

"During three years did Lajja Tissa use the brotherhood slightingly
and neglect them, with the thought: 'They did not decide according to
age.' When, afterwards, he was reconciled with the brotherhood, the
king built, in atonement, spending three hundred thousand (pieces of
money), three stone terraces for offerings of flowers to the Great
Cetiya [...]".

XXXIII, 21

Pacchā saṅghaṃ khamāpetvā daṇḍakammatthamissaro
Tīṇi satasahassāni datvāna urucetiye.

In the Pali-English Dictionary 'daṇḍakamma' is translated as
'punishment by beating, penalty, penance, atonement'. 'Khamāpeti' as
'to pacify, to ask one's pardon, to apologize'. Geiger says: "When
[...] he was reconciled with the brotherhood". But - what I see here
is that the Sangha is angry (bowls upside down?), it has to be
pacified and so the king (sort of) punishes/penalizes himself by
offering three hundred thousand.

I'd be grateful for your translation.


Regards,


Artur K.