[?]−⏑−¦−⏑⏑¦−⏑−−¦¦[?]−⏑−¦−⏑⏑¦−⏑−−
Upajāti
*
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * |
⏑−⏑−¦−⏑⏑¦−⏑−−¦¦[?]−⏑−¦−⏑⏑¦−⏑−−
jagad-vimokṣāya
guru-prasūtau * * * * * * * * * * * || 1.27
COMMENT:
EHJ
in a footnote records that his translation of the 3rd pāda
(“as though, being in a state of disorder, it had obtained a
ruler”) follows the Chinese translation (猶如荒難國 忽得賢明主).
On the authority of the Chinese translation, EHJ revised the Tibetan
translation, amending thar paḥi to
thar-phyir. The result, EHJ conjectured,
was equivalent to jagad-vimokṣāya
guru-prasūtau (“the guru being born for the liberation of
the world”).
As
regards the philosophical content of today's verse, the gist would
seem to be that the Buddha was born for the liberation of the world,
and someone was not happy about this.
EHJ
supposed, judging from the Tibetan, that the unhappy one was
Kāma-deva, the disembodied god of love mentioned several times in
Saundarananda. The Chinese translator went with 魔天王,
the “Celestial King of Demons,” i.e. Māra, also mentioned in
Saundarananda. The Chinese character 魔
is
pronounced “Ma” (as in Māra), and at the same time it means
“demon” or “devil.”
Whichever
pesky being it was that Aśvaghoṣa referred to in the 4th
pāda, his intention might have been to emphasize that the Buddha's
primary purpose was the practical and mundane one of liberating
living beings in the world.
If
the unhappy party in today's verse is understood to be Māra, then
the point might be that the Buddha was nothing like one of those
red-necked American Christians who is obsessed with the Devil and
his evil works, or like one of those superstitious black Africans who is afraid of witchcraft. Eventually the Buddha, sitting as still as the
king of mountains, causes Māra to quake. But causing Māra to quake
and crumble was not the Buddha's original purpose; it was rather, one
could argue, an indirect side effect of what the Buddha was born to
do, which was to liberate individual living beings in the world (jagad-vimokṣāya).
If
the unhappy party in today's verse is understood to be Kāma-deva,
then the point might be, similarly, to draw a contrast between, on
the one side, the practical and mundane nature of the Buddha's
primary task and on the other side the idealistic agenda of the
disembodied King of Romance.
On
the train yesterday I was seated next to a 27-year old drug addict
travelling back from Paris to see his mother in Normandy. He
mentioned something about the pain of his parents' divorce and his
estrangement from his father. Presumably this was part of the pain
which he hoped to blot out with alcohol and vallium. My advice to him
was to face up and take his pain like a man. It seemed to me that he
was exhibiting an almost total failure to inhabit his own body. He
didn't have enough tone in his neck even to hold his own head up. A
loyal subject of Kāma-deva, if ever there was one. After I advized
him to man up and take ownership of his pain, he withdrew his invitation to get his
mother to give me a lift home in her car, and stopped talking to me,
which was fine with me on both counts. His talk was disordered, and I
in any case like to pedal my own bike.
Sitting
this morning I am aware of many jobs, large and small, that are
inviting me to do them. An enormous amount of scything and weeding.
Pumping waste water out of the sceptic tank. Dealing with the
aftermath of the big tree that fell down last time I was here, which means chopping the sawn pieces of the trunk into firewood, and making a
bonfire from the smaller branches and twigs. I can't do all these jobs all at
once but am looking forward to doing them, one by one, at my own
pace, interspersed with ample sitting practice, and practising Alexander work in the context of lying down on my back and investigating the action of (and thinking preparatory to) moving a leg.
This
sense of not being able to do everything at once informs and is
informed by both yesterday's and today's verse. Jagad-vimokṣāya
is
in the dative case; it expresses a purpose or a direction. If the
Buddha's end was to liberate all living beings in the world, he never
achieved his end and nor will he ever achieve his end. But for him
the directions were clear (diśaḥ
praseduḥ). Not even the Buddha
could accomplish all jobs at once. But he knew the direction he
wanted to work in. This might be the best that any of us can hope for
– at least those of us who are not in the sway of Kāma-deva, the
King of Romance.
Finally,
referring back to akāle' pi in BC1.24, on the train yesterday
I listened to a podcast from the archives of BBC Radio 4's Desert
Island Discs, featuring the singer and artist (in the true sense)
Tony Bennett. In passing Tony Bennett mentioned Zen, in the sense of the kind
of transcendent ability in piano playing manifested by the likes of
Art Tatum. But he said something else, in relation to jazz, that
struck me as very much related to the meaning of
akāle' pi, “even out
of season,” in BC1.24, and to what Aśvaghoṣa has been describing
in the way of spontaneity. Tony Bennett said that he liked being
accompanied by jazz musicians because of the possibility of something
unexpected and spontaneous happening. So perhaps we can say that
blossoms being caused to fall
akāle' pi, “even out of season,”
expresses something neither more nor less miraculous than a jazz band
being caused to start swinging. If you can access the Desert IslandDiscs archive, I recommend the interview with Tony
Bennett.
Tibetan
Text:
|
rgud par gyur la mgon ni ñe bar thob nas bźin |
|
’jig rten dag kyaṅ mchog tu rab źi thob gyur la |
| ’jig rten rnams kyi thar pa’i bla ma rab bltams tshe |
| ’jig rten rnams kyi thar pa’i bla ma rab bltams tshe |
|
’dod pa’i lha ñid kho na dga’ ba med par gyur |
EHJ's
translation (from the Tibetan/Chinese):
27.
When the Guru was born for the salvation of all creatures, the world
became exceeding peaceful, as though, being in a state of disorder,
it had obtained a ruler. Kāmadeva alone did not rejoice.
Chinese
Text:
一切諸世間 悉得安隱樂
猶如荒難國 忽得賢明主
猶如荒難國 忽得賢明主
菩薩所以生 爲濟世衆苦
唯彼魔天王 震動大憂惱
唯彼魔天王 震動大憂惱
[震動大憂惱=獨憂而不悦
[三
]
S.
Beal's translation (from the Chinese):
the
whole world of sentient creatures enjoyed peace and universal
tranquillity.
35. Just as when a country visited by desolation, suddenly obtains an
enlightened ruler, so when Bodhisattva was born, he came to remove
the sorrows of all living things. Mâra,
the heavenly monarch, alone was grieved and rejoiced not.
C.
Willemen's translation (from the Chinese):
33.
All the worldly beings were safe and happy, just as when a country in
upheaval suddenly has obtained a wise and able ruler. 34. The
Bodhisattva was born to save the world from suffering. Only the
celestial king Māra was full of sorrow and did not rejoice.
No comments:
Post a Comment