⏑−⏑−¦−⏑⏑¦−⏑−⏑−¦¦⏑−⏑−¦−⏑⏑¦−⏑−⏑− Vaṁśastha
dhruvaṁ
sa jānan mama dharma-vallabho manaḥ priyerṣyā-kalahaṁ
muhur-mithaḥ |
⏑−⏑−¦−⏑⏑¦−⏑−⏑−¦¦⏑−⏑−¦−⏑⏑¦−⏑−⏑−
sukhaṁ
vibhīr-mām-apahāya rosaṇāṁ mahendra-loke 'psaraso jighkṣati
|| 8.64
8.64
Evidently,
as dharma's beloved, he left me suddenly and in secret,
Knowing
that my mind would be violently jealous
where
he, my own darling, was concerned.
Having
so easily and fearlessly deserted me in my anger,
He
is wishing to obtain heavenly nymphs in the world of Great Indra!
COMMENT:
Judaism,
Christianity, Islaam, Buddhism... all religions, so people say, come
down to the same thing. Maybe so, but today's verse, as I read it,
contains below the surface a reminder not to include the
Buddha-dharma along with the -isms in that list.
Ostensibly
today's verse concerns a wife's jealousy: Yaśodharā, in jumping to
a wrong conclusion, is at least being open and honest about her own
jealousy. She is portraying herself and dharma as jealous rivals for her
husband's love.
Below
the surface, however, today's verse is the fourth in a series of four
verses that have stimulated us to clarify what the Buddha-dharma is
NOT.
The
point as I take it is that, unlike the jealous God of Judaism,
Christianity, and Islaam, the Buddha-dharma has no beloved ones, no
favourites, no chosen people. So that when Yaśodharā speaks of her
husband being a dharma-vallabhaḥ, a favourite of the dharma, the
dharma she is talking about cannot be the Buddha-dharma.
EBC missed and obscured this point when he translated dharma-vallabhaḥ as “this fond lover of religion.”
EHJ responded to EBC's mistake by noting: The exact significance of the first line is not clear
to me. Vallabha can only mean 'beloved of,' not 'fond of.' Therefore
dharma-vallabha is 'the favourite of dharma,' and so 'distinguished
for it.'
EHJ
consequently translated: “Being distinguished for dharma, he
must have held my mind to be secretly and repeatedly given to
jealousy and quarrelling.”
In
each of the three professors' translations, muhur mithaḥ is thus taken
as describing Yaśodharā's mind (EHJ: my mind to be
secretly (mithaḥ) and repeatedly (muhur) given to...).
But I have taken muhur mithaḥ as describing the prince's exit,
suddenly (muhur) and in secret (mithaḥ) . In that case, the two elements at the end of
the 2nd
pāda and the two elements at the beginning of the 3rd
pāda form a series of four elements describing the prince's
desertion of his wife as
1.
muhur (momentary),
2.
mithaḥ (secret),
3.
sukham (easy),
4.
vibhīḥ (fearless).
When
four elements are thus presented in a series, I usually seek to
understand them in four phases; but momentariness, for a start,
generally belongs to the third phase (where subject meets object in
the moment of the present) and so that approach initially looks
unpromising here.
On
further reflection, and re-reading the end of BC Canto 5, it is true
that
1.
the desire to leave is described as suddenly springing up in the
prince's mind;
2.
the escape was secret in the sense of not observed by others;
3.
the action of leaving
flowed with spontaneous ease; and
4.
prince and horse together exhibited fearlessness.
Whether
this interpretation is valid or not, I can say with confidence that
(a)
it fills the word vibhīḥ (fearless) with more meaning;
(b)
it has helped me (when commiting today's verse to short-term memory)
to remember the four elements in their original sequence.
In
any event, the exact significance EHJ refers to in his note,
as I see that significance, is this: By describing her husband as
'the favourite of dharma,' Yaśodharā was expressing the implicit
view that the dharma can have favourites, and Aśvaghoṣa is
inviting us to see exactly that this is just the wrong view of an
emotional woman.
Does
this have anything to do with American exceptionalism, the bubble of
US supremacy, the New Great Game, the decline through 2013 of the
price of gold, and the accumulation of physical gold by the central
banks and citizens of Russia and China? I suspect it does, in some
way that I do not yet clearly understand.
I did witness the inflation and bursting of the bubble of “Japan as Number One” during the 1980s and early 1990s, during which time I heard my own Zen teacher say, in a lecture in English, “I believe that Master Dogen is the most excellent Zen master in the history of Japan. Therefore I believe that Master Dogen is the most excellent Zen master in the history of the world.”
I did witness the inflation and bursting of the bubble of “Japan as Number One” during the 1980s and early 1990s, during which time I heard my own Zen teacher say, in a lecture in English, “I believe that Master Dogen is the most excellent Zen master in the history of Japan. Therefore I believe that Master Dogen is the most excellent Zen master in the history of the world.”
Dogen
himself asserted that the Buddha-dharma is sitting and sitting is the
Buddha-dharma. If this is Dogen's conclusion, for those of us who
consider ourselves to be Dogen's dharma-descendants, it might be a
good starting point. So what, in the end, is the Buddha-dharma? I
don't know. But yesterday's verse seems, below the surface, to say it
is nothing sacred. And today's verse seems to say it is nothing partial.
So
anybody who thinks that the Buddha-dharma is especially partial to,
say, America, or Tibet, or Japan might, in Aśvaghoṣa's book as I
read it, be deluding themselves – and in so deluding themselves
creating the conditions for the inflation and subsequent inevitable bursting of
the kind of bubble of arrogance against which Dogen warned in the 2nd
section of his instructions for sitting, Fukan-zazengi.
However, if there is a thousandth or a hundredth of a gap, heaven and earth are far apart, and if a trace of disagreement arises, we lose the mind in confusion. Even if, proud of our understanding and richly endowed with enlightenment, we obtain special states of insight, attain the truth, clarify the mind, manifest a zeal that pierces the sky, and ramble through those remote spheres that are entered with the head; we have almost completely lost the vigorous path of getting the body out.
God bless America? God save us all from the delusion of American exceptionalism, more like.
VOCABULARY
dhruvam:
ind. firmly , constantly , certainly , surely
sa
(nom. sg. m.): he
jānan
= nom. sg. m. pres. part jñā: to know
mama
(gen. sg.): my
dharma-vallabhaḥ
(nom. sg. m.): dharma's favourite
vallabha:
mfn. beloved above all , desired , dear to (gen. loc. , or comp.) ;
a favourite , friend , lover , husband
vallabhā:
f. a beloved female , wife , mistress
manaḥ
(acc. sg.); n. mind
priyerṣyā-kalaham
(acc. sg. n.): having strife due to being jealous about my husband
priya:
m. a lover , husband
īrṣyā:
f. envy or impatience of another's success; spite, malice ; jealousy
kalaha:
m. strife , contention , quarrel , fight ; the sheath of a sword; a
road, way; deceit ; violence without murderous weapons , abuse ,
beating , kicking
priye [EBC] (loc. sg.):
m. a lover , husband
api : even
ākalaham [EBC:
quarrelling]
muhur:
ind. suddenly , at once , in a moment ; for a moment, for a while ;
at every moment , constantly , incessantly
mithaḥ:
ind. together , together with (instr.) , mutually , reciprocally ,
alternately , to or from or with each other ; privately , in secret ;
by contest or dispute
sukham:
ind. easily , comfortably , pleasantly , joyfully , willingly
vibhīḥ
(nom. sg. m.): mfn. fearless
bhī:
f. fear , apprehension , fright , alarm , dread
mām
(acc. sg. f.): me
apahāya
= abs. apa- √ hā: to run away from (abl.) or off
rosaṇām
(acc. sg. f.): mfn. angry , wrathful , passionate , enraged
mahendra-loke
(loc. sg.): in the world of great Indra
apsarasaḥ
(acc. pl.): f. apsarases, celestial nymphs
jighṛkṣati
= loc. sg. m. desid. pres. par. grah: to seize, take ; " to take
by the hand in the marriage ceremony " , marry ; to take
possession of , gain over , captivate
或見我嫉惡 更求無嫉者
或當嫌薄我 更求淨天女
或當嫌薄我 更求淨天女
No comments:
Post a Comment