−⏑−−¦⏑−−−¦¦−⏑−−¦⏑−⏑−
jālinā
svastikāṅkena cakra-madhyena pāṇinā |
−⏑−⏑¦⏑−−−¦¦⏑−−⏑¦⏑−⏑−
āmamarśa
kumāras-taṁ babhāṣe ca vayasyavat || 6.54
6.54
Using a hand whose fingers formed a gapless web,
a
mark of well-being,
A hand with a wheel in its middle,
The prince stroked him
And spoke to him like a friend equal in
years:
COMMENT:
When I
start sitting in lotus first thing in the morning my mouth is closed
but (contrary to Dogen's instructions) my upper and lower teeth generally don't touch and neither do the sides of my
fingers remain in contact with their neighbours. But later on as I
get better energized, it does not seem like any trouble at all to
keep upper and lower teeth in light contact with each other, or to
keep the sides of the fingers in contact with each other -- so that if there are any gaps between the fingers, they are only small ones. When I am up to it, I find it a useful
challenge, as alluded to a couple of days ago, to consciously keep
the fingers together while at the same time thinking of knuckles
releasing apart from each other. The former drawing together of
fingers can consciously be done with muscular effort (as for example
when making a tight fist in karate) but the latter release apart of
knuckles is an undoing which not even the Buddha could do – though
the Buddha might have thought it (but not in the view of my teacher
Gudo Nishijima who opined that any kind of thinking during
sitting-Zen was to be avoided).
Any way
up, it is in this light that I understand the 1st
pāda of today's verse – on the basis of my own practice and
experience, and on the basis of reason. I take the description of the
fingers remaining in contact as the auspicious sign itself, the mark
of sv-asti-ka (lit. well-being). Similarly in the 2nd
pāda I take the cakra (lit. wheel or circle) in the middle to mean
the middle of the hand as an energy centre, which, as I know from
Alexander experience, the middle of the hand certainly can be.
If we
descend into irrational religious belief, then we can easily
interpret the elements of the first two pādas in terms of the
“stigmata” of the kind which excite the minds of irrational
religious Christians, one such stigmata being the swastika motif.
On the
surface, it is true, Aśvaghoṣa does seem to be describing the
prince in such motif-bearing terms. Hence:
With his hand whose fingers were
united with a membrane and which was marked with the auspicious
svastika, and with its middle part curved, the prince stroked him
and addressed him like a friend: (EBC)
With
his webbbed hand, which was marked with svastikas and bore the wheel
sign on the palm, the prince stroked Kanthaka and spoke to him as if
he were his comrade of like age:-- (EHJ)
With
his webbed hand, swastika-marked, having the wheel-mark on its palm,
the prince stroked the horse soothingly, and he spoke to him like a
friend: (PO)
But I
would like to go out of my way to avoid any kind of fantastical
interpretation which takes the svastika and cakra to be extraneous symbols. I would like to make this effort not in
the spirit of seeking a middle way between rationality and
irrationality, but rather in the spirit of affirming the rational and
eschewing the irrational, the religious, the superstitious.
Finally,
in the compound vayasya-vat, vayas originally means “age” and so
vayasya is literally “one of the same age” -- a contemporary, and
by extension a friend. Vayasya-vat, then, is most simply and
elegantly translated as “like a friend.” At first glimpse, EHJ's
“as if he were his comrade of like age” looks inelegant and
pedantic. But on further reflection there may be wisdom in EHJ's
rigorous approach.
Last
night on the Radio 4 obituary programme Last Word I heard about a
spiritual teacher named Sonia Moriceau whose own original teacher of
mindfulness meditation called himself John Garrie Roshi. The title
“Roshi” is a Japanese word meaning “old teacher” or “old
master” and so somebody who gives himself this title sounds like
a Japanese Zen master. John Garrie Roshi also wore a black gown,
again like a Japanese Zen master. But to express the Buddhist
practise of mindfulness which he taught he favoured the Pali word
sati (= Sanskrit smṛti), like a Theravada monk who was versed in
the Pali Suttas.
When I
sit first thing in the morning, with negative thoughts, bleary eyes,
slack jaw, and limp fingers, do I sit like a Japanese Zen master?
Not if I can help it. If I wanted to sit like a Japanese Zen master,
I would just bring the teeth and fingers together at once, assuming
the correct posture. But as a matter of fact I generally don't make that kind of effort these days. At least not as much as I used to. These
days I prefer primarily just to notice – or if I am in particularly bad
shape, I might form the intention to do a bow (ranging from a barely
perceptible tilt from the hips to a deeper bow with hands joined that
stretches the back), say No, think the words “head forward and up,
back to lengthen and widen, knees forwards and away,” and allow the
movement. This kind of noticing, I dare say, might be like
Buddhist practice of mindfulness.
The
point, to spell it out, is that the prince did not speak to his horse
like a friend. To the prince the horse was a friend, and to
the horse the prince was
a friend. The prince spoke to the horse like they were equal,
because they weren't equal: in reality the human was senior to the
horse – either senior in terms of being older in years, or senior
because of being a human being, or both.
Was
Aśva-ghoṣa, the Horse-Whisperer, mindful of such niceties in
describing the relation between the human prince Gautama and his
excellent horse Kanthaka? You can bet your bottom dollar he was.
In
conclusion, at the risk of (or, let's be honest, with a view to)
offending a certain breed of radical animal rights activist, I
venture to submit that Aśvaghoṣa might have had the idea that, in the
final analysis, a human being is higher than a horse. Why? For one
thing human beings can sit in full lotus, whereas horses can't. And
for a Zen patriarch such as Aśvaghoṣa was, just sitting in full
lotus was the highest thing.
VOCABULARY
jālinā
(inst. sg. m.): mfn. having a net ; retiform ; having a window
svastikāṅkena (inst. sg. m.): mfn. marked with the svastika cross
svastikāṅkena (inst. sg. m.): mfn. marked with the svastika cross
svastika:
m. a kind of bard (who utters words of welcome or eulogy) ; any
lucky or auspicious object , (esp.) a kind of mystical cross or mark
made on persons and things to denote good luck ; the majority of
scholars regard it as a solar symbol ; that is , as representing a
curtailed form of the wheel of the Solar viṣṇu , consisting of
four spokes crossing each other at right angles with short fragments
of the periphery of the circle at the end of each spoke turning round
in one direction to denote the course of the Sun ; accord. to the
late Sir A. Cunningham it has no connexion with sun-worship , but
its shape represents a monogram or interlacing of the letters of the
auspicious words su astí [svasti] in the aśoka characters
aṅka:
m. a hook, a curve ; a numerical figure , cipher , a figure or mark
branded on an animal , &c
cakra-madhyena
(inst. sg. m.): having a wheel / cakra in the middle
cakra:
n. a wheel, circle
pāṇinā
(inst. sg.): m. (said to be fr. √ paṇ, to honour, praise) the
hand
āmamarśa
= 3rd
pers. sg. perf. ā- √ mṛś: to touch; to consider, reflect upon
; to rub off , wipe away , remove
kumāraḥ
(nom. sg.): m. the prince
tam
(acc. sg. m.): him
babhāṣe
= 3rd
pers. sg. perf. bhāṣ: to speak , talk , say , tell
ca:
and
vayasyavat:
ind. like a friend
vayasya: mfn. being of the same age; m. a contemporary , associate , companion , friend
vayasya: mfn. being of the same age; m. a contemporary , associate , companion , friend
-vat:
an affix added to words to imply likeness or resemblance , and
generally translatable by " as " , " like " (e.g.
brāhmaṇa-vat , like a Brahman )
輪掌網鞔手 順摩白馬頂
1 comment:
My dog of 20 years was my friend. He submitted to me more than I submitted to him. Though he had no full lotus form he did sit and lie down a lot. Maybe he had sitting mind.
Post a Comment