BUDDHACARITA 11.15: Being Of Objects vs Being Among Objects

−−⏑−¦−⏑⏑¦−⏑−−¦¦−−⏑−¦−⏑⏑¦−⏑−−   Upajāti (Bālā)

aiḍaś-ca rājā tri-divaṁ vigāhya nītvāpi devīṁ vaśam-urvaśīṁ tām |

−−⏑−¦−⏑⏑¦−⏑−−¦¦⏑−⏑−¦−⏑⏑¦−⏑−−

lobhād-ṣibhyaḥ kanakaṁ jihīrṣur-jagāma nāśaṁ viṣayeṣv-atptaḥ || 11.15

11.15

Again, King Purū-ravas, son of Iḍā, having penetrated triple heaven

And even brought into his thrall that goddess Dawn, Urvaśī,

Was still desirous, in his greed, of carrying off the Rishis' gold –

Unsatisfied, among all his possessions in sensory realms, 

he went to his end.

COMMENT:

The story of the love affair between Purūravas and Urvaśī is told in Kālidāsa's drama Vikramorvaśī, which means Urvaśī [Won] by Vikrama, or Dawn [Won] by Valour. So well-known is the story in India that EHJ evidently deemed it not to warrant a footnote. (EBC had included a short footnote referencing the story to Mahābh. I, 3147.)

Nanda refers to the story as follows in SN Canto 7 (where 'Moon-Armoured' Soma-varman is an epithet of Purū-ravas, as grandson of the moon).

naptā śaśāṅkasya yaśo-guṇāṅko budhasya sūnur-vibudha-prabhāvaḥ /

As grandson of the hare-marked moon,

as son of 'The Learned' Budha and the goddess Iḍā,

and as one marked by personal honour and virtue,

[Purū-ravas] had the special powers of the lunar and the very learned;

tathorvaśīm-apsarasaṃ vicintya rāja-rṣir-unmādam-agacchad-aiḍaḥ // SN7.38

But thinking of the apsaras Urvaśī, this royal seer also went mad.

hṛtāṃ ca saunandakinānuśocan prāptām-ivorvīṃ striyam-urvaśīṃ tām /

Again, when the avatar Saunandakin took away his 'Wide Dawn' Urvaśī,

the wife whom, like the wide earth, Soma-varman had made his own,

sad-vṛtta-varmā kila somavarmā babhrāma cittodbhava-bhinna-varmā // SN7.42

'Moon-Armoured' Soma-varman whose armour, 

so they say, had been virtuous conduct,

roamed about grieving, his armour pierced by mind-existent Love.

The Wikipedia entry on the Kālidāsa play suggests that in Kālidāsa's telling of the story the lovers eventually live happily ever after, whereas the above references in Saundarananda suggest otherwise.

In any event, today's verse carries on the theme of describing an ancient hero who despite having considerable success in consummating his desires (two out of three, in today's verse as in yesterday's verse, is not bad), was ultimately not satisfied.

Moreover, the 4^th pāda of today's verse invites me to carry on nit-picking about the use of atṛptaḥ with the locative plural.

EBC translates viṣayeṣv-atṛptaḥ as “being unsatisfied with pleasures,” EHJ as “unsatisfied with the objects of sense,” and PO as “while his craving for sense objects remained unappeased.”

But the bodhisattva's style of expression as I read, as also in yesterday's verse, is more indirect in describing the relationship between (a) the agent of satisfaction or dissatisfaction and (b) objects/desires surrounding him in the sensory realm. Again, the bodhisattva is not describing Purū-ravas as unsatisfied with viṣayaiḥ or with viṣayāṇām; he is describing Purū-ravas as unsatisfied in viṣayeṣu or among viṣayeṣu.

This may seem like small potatoes, but I think that Aśvaghoṣa was drawing our attention to just such a fine point by the particular phrasing of the 4^th pāda of BC11.13 which reads māndhātur-āsīd-viṣayeṣv-atṛptiḥ, 
lit. “For Māndhātṛ there was, in/among objects, dissatisfaction.”

The phrasing somehow suggests another possibility, e.g.:

“For a non-Māndhātṛ there can be, among objects, satisfaction.”

It somehow relates to Nanda's pointer in SN Canto 18 to the possibility of being present in the world (lokeṣu) without being of the world (na loka-dharmā).

kṣayaṃ gataṃ janma nirasta-janman saddharma-caryām-uṣito 'smi samyak /

Rebirth is over, O Refuter of Rebirth!

I am dwelling as one with observance of true dharma.

kṛtsnaṃ kṛtaṃ me kṛta-kārya kāryaṃ lokeṣu bhūto 'smi na loka-dharmā //18.10 

What was for me to do, O Doer of the Necessary! is totally done.

I am present in the world without being of the world.

In other words, the bodhisattva in the present series of verses is ostensibly discussing whether or not there can be satisfaction with desires/objects, and he is citing historical examples of unenlightened men who were not satisfied with desires/objects, attained and unattained.

But what the bodhisattva is actually expressing might be a more subtle and profound perception, which is that all of us who are in the world are inevitably living among many desires in the realm of the senses.

And in this situation, in attaining and failing to attain those many and various desires/objects, we who are unenlightened are sometimes satisfied with desires/objects but are generally dissatisfied with desires/objects.

But the hope remains that, even in this very situation of living in the world among many desires in the realm of the senses, we might be able, even while living among desires/objects, to find satisfaction – for example, by really understanding the four noble truths and, equally, by devotedly following the noble eightfold path.

If, in contrast, we seek to put the blame on desires and sensual objects and look forward to a day when those external enemies will all be defeated, our situation in following that approach might be fairly hopeless.

In an attempt to allow some such inkling to be conveyed by today's verse, the one Sanskrit word viṣayeṣu which EBC translated with two English words (“with pleasures”) and EHJ translated with five English words (“with the objects of sense”), I have translated with no less than seven English words (“among all his possessions in sensory realms”) – which might be some kind of record for lack of pithiness.

In light of all of the above, the title of the present Canto is interesting. Kāma-vigarhaṇaḥ means Blaming/Condemning Desires. But the main gist of the Canto is the question (repeated in every verse from BC11.22 through BC11.33) 

kāmeṣu kasyātmavato ratiḥ syāt...?, 

lit. “For what man in possession of himself would there be enjoyment of desires [which are like....]?”

So implicit in the bodhisattva's oft-repeated question is not the blaming or condemning of desires; implicit in the bodhisattva's question is rather the blaming or condemning of not being in possession of oneself.

Desires out there are not to blame for this lack of satisfaction in here. The fault is rather in faults in here.

Why then did Aśvgahoṣa choose the title  kāma-vigarhaṇaḥ,  Blaming / Condemning Desires?

One possible answer is that Aśvgahoṣa did not choose the title, but some later editor did. This conjecture is supported by EBC's texts, which do not have a title, and by the Chinese translation which has an altogether different title, viz 答瓶沙 (Reply to King Bim[bi]sā[ra]).

佛所行讃答瓶沙王品第十一 

The Poem 'What the Buddha Did', Chapter 11, Reply to King Bimbisāra.

Another possible answer, and one which I somehow favour, is that Aśvaghoṣa deliberately chose an ironic title, so as to encourage us to engage our grey matter and think accurately about the relation between an agent of satisfaction or dissatisfaction, and desires.

Having written the above comment yesterday and, having had my grey matter thus stimulated, slept on it and sat, the image came to me this morning of a mountain among clouds, birds, rain, snow, sunshine et cetera. Which is to say that an agent of dissatisfaction among desires/objects is inevitably dissatisfied. But an agent of satisfaction among desires/objects might be like a mountain just sitting there, jubilant, among clouds, birds, rain, wind, snow, sunshine et cetera. This mountain, moreover, might be the stronghold of a tiger. And in its secret forests and foothills there may be places where dragons find water.

VOCABULARY

aiḍaḥ (nom. sg.): m. 'containing anything that refreshes or strengthens'; descended from Iḍā; N. of purūravas RV. x , 95 , 18

iḍā: f. refreshing draught , refreshment , animation , recreation , comfort , vital spirit ; the goddess iḍā or iḷā (daughter of manu or of man thinking on and worshipping the gods ; she is the wife of budha and mother of purū-ravas ; in another aspect she is called maitrāvaruṇi as daughter of mitra-varuṇa , two gods who were objects of the highest and most spiritual devotion)

ca: and

rājā (nom. sg.): m. king

tri-divam (acc. sg.): n. the 3rd or most sacred heaven , heaven (in general)

vigāhya = abs. vi- √ gāh: to plunge or dive into , bathe in , enter , penetrate , pervade , betake one's self into (acc. or loc.)

nītvā = abs. nī: lead, guide ; to bring into any state or condition (with acc. e.g. with vaśam , to bring into subjection , subdue)

api: even, though

devīm (acc. sg.): f. goddess

vaśam (acc. sg.): m. will ; authority , power , control , dominion

urvaśīm (acc. sg.): f. " widely extending " , N. of the dawn (personified as an apsaras or heavenly nymph who became the wife of purū-ravas)

tām (acc. sg. f.): her

lobhāt (abl. sg.): m. impatience , eager desire for or longing after ; covetousness , cupidity , avarice

ṛṣibhyaḥ (abl. pl.): m. seers

kanakam (acc. sg.): n. gold

jihīrṣuḥ (nom. sg.): mfn. (fr. desid. of hṛ) wishing to carry off or rob or appropriate

jagāma = 3^rd pers. sg. perf. gam: to go

nāśam (acc. sg.): ) m. the being lost , loss , disappearance , destruction , annihilation , ruin , death

viṣayeṣu (loc. pl.): m. realm (pl. = lands , possessions), objects, sensual pleasures, ends to be gained

atṛptaḥ (nom. sg. m.): mfn. unsatisfied

罣羅轉輪王 遊於忉利天
取天女爲后 賦歛仙人金
仙人忿如咒 國滅而命終

BUDDHACARITA 11.14: Nahuṣa's Many Desires vs a Bodhisattva's Overriding Desire

−−⏑−¦−⏑⏑¦−⏑−−¦¦⏑−⏑−¦−⏑⏑¦−⏑−−   Upajāti (Vāṇī)

bhuktvāpi rājyaṁ divi devatānāṁ śatakratau vtra-bhayāt-pranaṣṭe |

−−⏑−¦−⏑⏑¦−⏑−−¦¦−−⏑−¦−⏑⏑¦−⏑−−

darpān-mahārṣīn-api vāhayitvā kāmeṣv-atpto nahuṣaḥ papāta || 11.14

11.14

Even having enjoyed kingship over the gods in heaven

(After Indra, through fear of Vṛta, had fled),

And even, out of pride, having caused the Mahā-rishis to carry him,

Nahuṣa, unsatisfied among desires, fell down.

COMMENT:

Like viṣayeṣu in yesterday's verse, kāmeṣu in today's verse is locative plural, and so kāmeṣv-atṛptaḥ literally describes Nahuṣa as “unsatisfied in desires” or “insatiable in his desires.”

EBC and EHJ, however, seem to have translated the 4^th pāda of today's verse as if it read kāmair-atṛptaḥ or kāmayor-atṛptaḥ (with kāma in the instrumental or genitive plural). Thus:  

Nahuṣa fell, unsatisfied with pleasures (EBC)

Yet Nahuṣa fell, being still unsatisfied with the passions (EHJ)

In case I was missing something, I checked tṛpta in the dictionary, and sure enough the definition is:

tṛpta: mfn. satiated , satisfied with (gen. instr. , or in comp.).

So the translations of EBC and EHJ are not strictly literal in the sense that they went with “satisfied with” even though the case of kāmeṣu is neither genitive nor instrumental, but locative.

Kāmeṣu literally means not “with desires” but “in desires” or “among desires.”

This flags up something I noticed during the process of translating Shobogenzo – that often the strictly literal translation is the one that carries the true meaning, and that when we stray from the literal translation it is often due to not having understood it.

PO seems to have veered even further away from a literal translation in the conviction that the bodhisattva in these verses was mainly discussing craving for sensual pleasures.

Yet Nahuṣa fell, while his craving for pleasures remained unappeased (PO).

PO notes that Nahuṣa was elected to replace Indra when he hid himself after killing Vritra [see BC8.13]; but he was not satisfied with this and craved for Indra's wife. As a result he was cursed to become a snake on earth, regaining his original form only after seeing the Pandavas.

That Nahuṣa craved for Indra's wife may have been part of PO's basis for translating kāmeṣv-atṛptaḥ as “while his craving for pleasures remained unappeased.”

But if we understand kāmeṣv-atṛptaḥ literally, as describing Nahuṣa as unsatisfied in his desires, i.e. unsatisfied in the circumstances of having many desires, then today's verse serves as another illustration of the principle that having multiple desires does not lead to satisfaction. 

Nahuṣa fulfilled his desire to take Indra's place in the political hierarchy. He fulfilled whatever arrogant desire was fulfilled by causing maharishis to bear him up on their shoulders on a pallanquin (referenced by EBC to Mahābh. V, 532). He desired Indra's wife, but did not win her. So why in the end did he fall dissatisfied? 

It might come back to how one sees the ultimate cause of dissatisfaction, or suffering. According to one school of thought, the original cause of suffering is desire, and especially sexual desire, and above all sexual desire that is associated with craving for pleasures (as opposed for example to sexual desire that is associated with the urge to reproduce, pleasures being only an unintended side effect).  Therefore, because desire causes suffering, the Buddha taught the cessation of desire. And in so doing, he was (a) in line with the religious thinking and practice that preceded him, in which ascetic self-denial was valued, and (b) in line with religous thinking and practice that followed him, when Christian teachers saw sexual desire as being implicated with original sin. 

But here in this Canto that whole desire-averse train of thought seems to me to be falsified by Aśvaghoṣa having described the bodhisattva as mumukṣayā, having the desire to be set free.

The first chapter in the book published in English as “The Monk and the Philosopher” is titled From Scientific Research to Spiritual Quest. Last night I happened to pick up the book from my shelf and browsed it before going to sleep. Shortly thereafter, in the dialogue between Matthieu Ricard and his father Jean-Francois Revel, I found the following lines which seem very pertinent to today's verse. Father and son are discussing the son's decision, having completed a doctoral thesis and worked as a research scientist at the presitigious Institut Pasteur, to go and mix his mind instead with a Tibetan teacher who was living in the 1960s and 1970s in exile in northern India.

J.F. – But didn't the two things seem compatible to you?

M. – There's no fundamental incompatibility between science and the spiritual life; it's simply that one had become much more important to me than the other. In practice, you can't stay sitting in between two chairs, or sew with a two-pointed needle. I didn't want to divide my time between two things any longer. I wanted to spend all of it doing what seemed the most essential.... So I didn't feel any need to dedicate the same efforts to science and share out my life between them. I felt like a bird in a cage and had only one idea – to be free.

Since I for my sins was drawn not to Nepal but to Japan, the challenge as it was presented to me, or at least as I understood it, was to manifest that freedom in how one physically sits – in what is misleadingly called one's sitting posture.

And focusing on this matter of physical sitting posture brought me to the teaching of FM Alexander. This teaching, ironically, turns out to be, in FM's words, the most mental thing there is. 

So when this morning, having prepared the above comment in the middle of a sleepless night, I sat and asked myself afresh, “If not desire, what does the Buddha's teaching teach us to stop?”, the words of Marjory Barlow come back to me, “The wrong inner patterns are the doing that has to be stopped.”

On reflection, then, it occurs to me that “wrong inner patterns” or “patterns” might not be a bad translation of the Sanskrit saṁskārāḥ, or “formations,” which are the second of the twelve links in the teaching of pratītya-samutpāda, Springing Up by going back.

What, then, is behind those wrong inner patterns? Following the twelvefold links back, one arrives at avidyā, ignorance. In Alexandrian terms, we might say that behind the wrong inner patterns is faulty sensory appreciation, and at the same time end-gaining desires.

I don't know though. When I read Matthieu Ricard's words, he seems to be somebody who has got it all worked out already, whereas what I seem to be doing here is showing my workings, as one who hasn't solved the problem yet, as a trainee with much to do. 

My tentative conclusion, any way up, is that desire itself is never to be condemned, because to have desire is to be alive. So the bodhisattva's condemning of desires cannot be the condemning of desire itself. The bodhisattva might be condemning that multiplicity of desires that manifests a person's ignorance. But such desires are not only sexual desires, and are not necessarily associated with, in PO's words, craving for pleasures. 

VOCABULARY

bhuktvā = abs. bhuj: to enjoy, consume

api: even, though

rājyam (acc. sg.): n. kingship, kingdom

divi (loc. sg.): f. heaven

devatānām (gen. pl.): f. godhead , divinity (abstr. & concr.)

śatakratau = loc. sg. śata-kratu: m. 'having hundred-fold insight or power or a hundred counsels &c'; name of Indra (a hundred aśva-medhas elevating the sacrificer to the rank of indra)

kratu: m. plan ; power, ability ; a sacrificial rite or ceremony , sacrifice (as the aśva-medha sacrifice)

vṛtra-bhayāt (abl. sg.): through fear of Vṛtra

vṛtra: m. N. of the Vedic personification of an imaginary malignant influence or demon of darkness and drought (supposed to take possession of the clouds , causing them to obstruct the clearness of the sky and keep back the waters ; indra is represented as battling with this evil influence in the pent up clouds poetically pictured as mountains or castles which are shattered by his thunderbolt and made to open their receptacles)

pranaṣṭe (loc. sg. m.): mfn. lost , disappeared , vanished , ceased , gone , perished , destroyed , annihilated

pra- √naś: to be lost , disappear , vanish ; to flee , escape

darpāt (abl. sg.): m. pride , arrogance , haughtiness , insolence , conceit

mahārṣīn (acc. pl. m.): great seers

api: even

vāhayitvā = causative abs. vaḥ: to cause to bear or carry or convey or draw (with two acc.), drive (a chariot) , guide or ride (a horse) , propel (a boat) , go or travel by any vehicle ; to take in , deceive

kāmeṣu (loc. pl.): m. desires, pleasures

atṛptaḥ (nom. sg. m.): mfn. unsatisfied , insatiable , eager

nahuṣaḥ (nom. sg.): m. name of an ancient king (son of āyu or āyus [cf. RV. i.31 , 11] and father of yayāti ; he took possession of indra's throne but was afterwards deposed and changed into a serpent)

papāta = 3^rd pers. sg. perf. pat: to fall, fall down

農沙修苦行 王三十三天
縱欲心高慢 仙人挽歩車
縁斯放逸行 即墮蟒蛇中

BUDDHACARITA 11.13: Vaulting Personal Ambitions vs a Bodhisattva's Desire for Release (And a Buddha's Self-Possession of Small Desire)

−−⏑−¦−⏑⏑¦−⏑−−¦¦−−⏑−¦−⏑⏑¦−⏑−−   Upajāti (Indravajrā)

devena vṣṭe 'pi hiraṇya-varṣe dvīpān-samagrāṁś-caturo 'pi jitvā |

−−⏑−¦−⏑⏑¦−⏑−−¦¦−−⏑−¦−⏑⏑¦−⏑−−

śakrasya cārdhāsanam-apy-avāpya māndhātur-āsīd-viṣayeṣv-atptiḥ || 11.13

11.13

Even as heaven rained down upon him golden rain

After he had conquered all four continents

And obtained half of Mighty Indra's throne,

There was for Māndhātṛ in outer realms only dissatisfaction.

COMMENT:

In today's verse as I read it the bodhisattva has still got in his sights miscellaneous desires, and not only sensual pleasures.

The task of us who sit, I venture to submit, is to be clear about desires and about desire. Our task is not, as scholars often seem to think, not being themselves on the inside of this practice, simply to negate sensuality. 

The complicating factor in today's verse is that in the 4th pāda viṣaya is used in the plural (viṣayeṣu), and when viṣaya is used in the plural it sometimes means, as defined by the MW dictionary, “sensual enjoyments, sensuality.”

The three professors translated the 4th pāda as follows:

Māndhātṛ was still unsatisfied with worldly objects (EBC);

Māndhātṛ's longing for the objects of sense remained unappeased (EHJ); 

Mandhatri's craving for sense objects remained unappeased (PO).

These translations, which are less literal than mine is, all seem to follow from the understanding that the bodhisattva is condemning pursuit of pleasurable objects, so that kāmāḥ means pleasures, and viṣayāḥ means sensual objects. But I think the bodhisattva's condemnation of desires in this canto is wider than that, more subtle than that, and more profound than that.

The first meaning of viṣaya given in the dictionary is sphere (of influence or activity). Hence viṣaya means sphere of influence of the senses, and hence the objects of the senses, and hence in the plural it sometimes means sensuality itself. But before those meanings to do with the senses and sensuality, viṣaya is given in the dictionary as meaning dominion, kingdom, territory, i.e. a sphere of political and economic influence.

And so what the bodhisattva has got in his sights in today's verse, as I read it, is not sexual desire, not longing for the objects of sense (as per EHJ), and not craving for sense objects (as per PO). The bodhisattva as I hear him is rather giving the example from history of a man whose personal ambition in the outer realms (viṣaya) of religion, economics, and politics, did not lead him in the end to experience satisfaction.

Māndhātṛ appears in several places in Saundarananda and Buddhacarita (SN11.43; BC1.10; BC10.31; and BC11.13), as noted here.

In three of these four verses (SN11.43; BC10.31; and BC11.13), Māndhātṛ is cited as an example of conspicuous success in the outside world, and in two of the four verses  (SN11.43; BC11.13) he exemplifies the impermanent and unsatisfactory nature of such conspicuous success.

The true contrast implied by today's verse, then, as I read it, is not between (a) longing and craving for sense objects and (b) the absence of any such longing and craving. The true contrast is between (a) pursuit of multiple big desires – personal ambitions – which are able to be consummated out there in external realms, and (b) the desire which the bodhisattva is pursuing for liberation.

This desire leads the bodhisattva to realize, in his own practice and experience of the backward step of turning one's light around, what liberation really means. And on that basis, he teaches four noble truths and a noble eightfold path, as recorded by Aśvaghoṣa in SN Canto 3, and SN Canto 16.

Several years after translating those cantos, I feel as if they have been acting on me like a very deep-acting remedy. As if I swallowed a pill which, though very powerful, makes its influence felt not in weeks or months but rather in years. So for example only now I am struck by how mutually reinforcing the four noble truths and the noble eightfold path are, as Aśvaghoṣa records them. The noble eightfold path is the fourth of the four noble truths – so that the four noble truths culminate in the noble eightfold path. And right insight into the four noble truths is the starting point of the eightfold path – so that the noble eightfold path points back to the four noble truths.

There again, several years ago when I translated SN Canto 3, I thought light of Aśvaghoṣa's reference to “the statement of twelvefold linkage” (dvādaśa-niyata-vikalpam; SN3.13), seeing it only as a teaching of causality at the second phase. I failed to see how deeply implicated are the twelve links – as part of the teaching of pratītya-samutpāda (Springing Up, by going back) – in the truth of cessation, and in the truth of a path to be practised in the direction of cessation.

In spite of such manifest stupidity, however, something caused me long ago to intuit the importance of the teaching of small desire, or wanting little, which is contained in the final chapter of Shobogenzo. Something in that chapter, especially all the memorable metaphors, inspired me to want to get to the bottom of what was behind it all, partly by finding and studying, if I could, the original source in Sanskrit. 

And so now I begin to see what I didn't clearly see in the following verses when I first translated them, which is the proper connection between the noble eightfold path and the truth of alpecchatā, the state of wanting little, or small desire:

triskandham-etaṃ pravigāhya mārgaṃ praspaṣṭam-aṣṭāṅgam-ahāryam-āryam /

Giving oneself to this path with its three divisions and eight branches

-- this straightforward, irremovable, noble path --

duḥkhasya hetūn prajahāti doṣān prāpnoti cātyanta-śivaṃ padaṃ tat // 16.37 

One abandons the faults, which are the causes of suffering,

and comes to that step which is total well-being.

asyopacāre dhṛtir-ārjavaṃ ca hrīr-apramādaḥ praviviktatā ca /

Attendant on it are constancy and straightness; 
modesty, attentiveness, and reclusiveness;

alpecchatā tuṣṭir-asaṃgatā ca loka-pravṛttāv-aratiḥ kṣamā ca // 16.38 //

Wanting little, contentment, and freedom from forming attachments;

no fondness for worldly activity, and forbearance.

Thus, desire (in the form of desire for release, or desire for liberation – mumukṣā) was instrumental in the bodhisattva's process; and desire (in the form of self-possession of small desire – alpecchatā ) was described by the Buddha as a virtue attendant on the ultimate step. 

The final reflection that today's verse thus stimulated in me, when I sat this morning having slept on it, was the example of Ānanda as a paragon of a bodhisattva's desire for liberation, to the exclusion of personal ambitions and miscellaneous other desires.

This emerges very clearly from the Mahāparinibbānasuttaṁ (DN 16), which records Ānanda, after his decades of serving the Buddha as the Buddha's personal attendant, fretting that the Buddha is going to die while he, Ānanda, is still “a trainee with much to do” (sekho sakaraṇīyo).

VOCABULARY

devena (inst. sg.): m. heaven

vṛṣṭe (loc. sg.): mfn. rained ; fallen or dropped as rain

api: even, though

hiraṇya-varṣe (loc. sg.): a golden shower, golden rain

dvīpān (acc. pl. m.): mn. an island , peninsula , sandbank ; a division of the terrestrial world (either 7 [jambu , plakṣa or go-medaka , śālmalī , kuśa , krauñca , śāka and puṣkara MBh. vi , 604 &c Hariv. Pur. &c ] or 4 [bhadrā*śva , ketu-māla , jambu-dvīpa and uttarāḥ kuravaḥ)

samagrān (acc. pl. m.): mfn. all , entire , whole , complete , each , every

caturaḥ: four

api: even, though

jitvā = abs. ji: to conquer

śakrasya (gen. sg.): m. 'The Mighty' ; Indra

ca: and

ārdhāsanam (acc. sg. n.): a half of the seat

api: even

avāpya = abs. avāp: to obtain

māndhātur (gen.. sg.) m. N. of a king

āsīt = 3^rd pers. sg. imperfect as: to be

viṣayeṣu (loc. pl.): m. sphere (of influence or activity) , dominion , kingdom , territory; objects, sensual objects, ends to be gained, sensory realms

atṛptiḥ (nom. sg.):  f. unsatisfied condition , insatiability

曼陀轉輪王 普天雨黄金
王領四天下 復希忉利天
帝釋分半座 欲圖致命終 

BUDDHACARITA 11.12: Insatiable Desires vs Constant Desire

⏑−⏑−¦−⏑⏑¦−⏑−−¦¦−−⏑−¦−⏑⏑¦−⏑−−   Upajāti (Ārdrā)

samudra-vastrām-api gām-avāpya pāraṁ jigīṣanti mahārṇavasya |

−−⏑−¦−⏑⏑¦−⏑−−¦¦⏑−⏑−¦−⏑⏑¦−⏑−−

lokasya kāmair-na vitptir-asti patadbhir-ambhobhir-ivārṇavasya || 11.12

11.12

Even having taken possession of the sea-girt earth,

Men desire to conquer what lies beyond the great ocean.

The world is no more sated by desires

Than the ocean is sated by waters descending into it.

COMMENT:

In today's verse the bodhisattva gives the first example of what he means by desires (kāmaḥ).

In the ancient Indian triad of dharma, artha, and kāma, each element could be defined in any number of ways, but dharma, wealth and pleasure seems to be the generally accepted English rendering – or religious merit, wealth and pleasure, if we follow MW in translating dharma into English.

Thus, since King Bimbisāra discusses dharma, wealth and pleasure in the previous canto, there is something to be said for translating kāmaḥ as pleasures in the present canto. EBC went down this route (mankind are never satiated with pleasures) as did PO (Men are not sated by gaining pleasures). EHJ, as in yesterday's verse, stuck with the passions (There is no satiety for man with the passions).

But in today's verse as I read it the bodhisattva is clearly not talking about pleasures or about sensual enjoyments or even about “the passions” in general. He is talking about the tendency which we human beings have to desire more and more, as exemplified by empire-builders who can never control enough of what lies out there (even if they have not yet eliminated the faults in here).

The more I reflect on what the bodhisattva is saying in this Canto about kāmaḥ, desires, in the plural, the more I see the key to understanding the bodhisattva's mind as in the word mumukṣayā in BC11.7. Mumukṣayā means “with the desire for release,” this desire for release being in the singular.

A man of small desire, the Buddha is said to have said on the night before he died, already has nirvāṇa. Small desire in Sanskrit is alpecchu or alpeccha which means small desire, or wanting little (alpa = small, little; icchu / iccha = wishing, wanting, desiring). In SN16.38, the  Buddha speaks of alpecchatā (lit. "the state of wanting little"). So obviously in these compounds the word alpa is important, expressing the opposite of greed or thirsting. But also important, when we compare the old Buddha's affirmation of small desire with the bodhisattva's present condemning of desires, might be the point that the bodhisattva is condemning pursuit of desires in the plural, whereas the Buddha affirmed moderate desire in the singular.

VOCABULARY

samudra-vastrām (acc. sg. f.): mfn. sea-clothed , seagirt (the earth)

api: even, though

gām (acc. sg.): f. the earth (as milk-cow of kings) ; (hence) the number " nine "

avāpya = abs. avāp: to reach , attain , obtain , gain , get

pāram (acc. sg.): n. (rarely m.) the further bank or shore or boundary , any bank or shore , the opposite side

jigīṣanti = 3^rd pers. pl. desiderative ji: to win or acquire (by conquest or in gambling) , conquer (in battle)

mahārṇavasya (gen. sg.): the great ocean

arṇava: mfn. agitated , foaming , restless ; m. the foaming sea

lokasya (gen. sg.): m. the world, mankind

kāmaiḥ (inst. pl.): m. desires, pleasures

na: not

vitṛptiḥ (nom. sg.): f. satisfaction ; satiety

vi- √ tṛp: to be satisfied , become satiated with (loc.)

asti: there is

patadbhiḥ = inst. pl. n. pres. part. pat: to fall, descend

ambhobhiḥ (inst. pl.): n. water

iva: like, as

arṇavasya (gen. sg.): m. the foaming sea

王領四海内 猶外更希求
愛欲如大海 終無止足時 

BUDDHACARITA 11.11: Bad Luck and Trouble

⏑−⏑−¦−⏑⏑¦−⏑−−¦¦−−⏑−¦−⏑⏑¦−⏑−−   Upajāti (Kīrti)

jagaty-an-artho na samo 'sti kāmair-mohāc-ca teṣv-eva janaḥ prasaktaḥ |

−−⏑−¦−⏑⏑¦−⏑−−¦¦−−⏑−¦−⏑⏑¦−⏑−−

tattvaṁ viditvaivam-an-artha-bhīruḥ prājñaḥ svayaṁ ko 'bhilaṣed-an-artham || 11.11

11.11

There is nothing in the world as troublesome as desires,

And yet it is to them that people, out of ignorance, are attached.

Knowing the truth to be so, what trouble-wary man of wisdom

Would wilfully covet trouble?

COMMENT:

The word an-artha appears three times in today's verse, so it behoves us to understand what Aśvaghoṣa intended by it.

It was translated by EBC as calamity (once) and evil (twice), by EHJ as calamity (three times), and by PO as evil (three times).

Here are some Sanskrit compounds beginning with an-artha, taken from the MW dictonary.

an-artha-kara: mfn. doing what is useless or worthless; unprofitable; producing evil or misfortune

an-artha-kāma: mfn. wishing evil to (gen.), Bcar.

an-artha-tva: n. uselessness

an-artha-darśin: mfn. minding useless or worthless things

an-artha-nāśin: m. " Evil-destroyer," Śiva.

an-artha-buddhi: mfn. having a worthless intellect

an-artha-bhāva: mfn. having a bad nature , malicious

an-artha-bhīru: mfn. afraid of evil

an-artha-lupta: mfn. freed from all that is worthless

an-arthaka: mfn. useless , vain , worthless ; meaningless, nonsensical.

As a rule, translators probably ought to stick together, sympathizing with each other in the knowledge that translation is a losing game. But in translating the 1^st pāda as “There is no evil equal to pleasures,” PO runs the risk, despite his translation being perfectly literal, not so much of losing something as of adding something on, in the direction of Puritanism. Likewise but less so (since he doesn't mention “evil”) is EBC with “There is no calamity in the world like pleasures.” EHJ, whose translation is ever prone to be encrusted with Christian barnacles, goes on this occasion with “There is no calamity in the world equal to the passions.”

It is difficult or impossible for a translator not to influence the sense of the original out of his or her own bias. My own bias comes primarily from what I have been taught about desire by a Zen teacher and by an Alexander teacher who was the niece of the man said to have "rediscovered the secret of Zen for our time." 

The former, Gudo Nishijima, emphasized, as an antithesis to the thesis that enlightenment is the elimination of desire, that life is desire and that in general, as blokes who practise Zazen, we should have what we desire. In general, if there was anything that my old Zen teacher wanted, and he especially liked books, he went right out and bought it.

The latter, Marjory Barlow, demonstrated to me with unrivalled clarity, and in clinical detail, just how troublesome desires can be. Marjory demonstrated this, as I describe here, in the context of implanting in my mind, while I was lying on her teaching table, the desire to gain the end of moving a leg. This was a stimulus to the whole gamut of wrongness in me, going all the way back to ignorance. And the way to counter all this wrongness was a twofold method, or means-whereby. First I learned totally to give up my desire to move the leg – and in that giving up, to give up a whole load of associated desires, like the desire to be right, the desire to please my teacher, the desire to get on with it because time was ticking by, et cetera, et cetera. Secondly, I learned to think in such a way that when I decided to go ahead and consummate the desire to move my leg, this desire to go ahead and gain the end would continue to be outgunned by desire for release (mumukṣayā; BC11.7). This desire for release was expressed in the words along the lines of “I wish to allow my neck to release, to allow the head to forward and up, to allow the back to lengthen and widen, while allowing the legs out away from the back.”

I could refer to other teachers too, like Master Kodo Sawaki, who I never met but who was so famously frank about his own desire, even into his old age, to find a wife. And on the Alexander side Nelly Ben-Or demonstrated with unrivalled clarity, in the context of chair work, the tangible power of what Marjory called thinking. Thinking. Wishing. But wishing that won't take No for an answer. Desiring. Desiring release. 

So the point as I see it, in conclusion, is not that desires or pleasures are inherently evil or calamitous. But an end-gaining desire – a desire to gain an end regardless of whether the means are good or bad – is implicated with ignorance. It is implicated with what Alexander called out worst evil, which is fixing. So a bodhisattva's job is to see to it that such end-gaining desires are outgunned by a stronger desire, which is the desire for release.

That may be one way to understand the enigmatic word bhāvana – as expressing the nurturing or developing of the desire for release.

Yes, my translation and commentary probably are just a manifestation of my own Zen/Alexander bias. But it wasn't me, it was the bodhisattva himself, who expressed, in the instrumental case, his own desire for release – mumukṣayā.

VOCABULARY

jagati (loc. sg.): the world

an-arthaḥ (nom. sg.): m. reverse, misfortune ; disappointing occurrence , evil

na: not

samaḥ (nom. sg. m.): mfn. same, equal, like (instr.)

asti: there is

kāmaiḥ (inst. pl.): m. desires, pleasures

mohāt (abl. sg.): ignorance, delusion

ca: and

teṣu (loc. pl. m.): to them

eva: (emphatic)

janaḥ (nom. sg.): m. people

prasaktaḥ (nom. sg. m.): mfn. attached , cleaving or adhering or devoted to , fixed or intent upon , engaged in , occupied with (loc. or comp.)

tattvam (acc. sg.): n. that-ness, the truth, reality

viditvā = abs. vid: to know, understand

evam: ind. thus, in this way

an-artha-bhīruḥ (nom. sg. m.): mfn. afraid of evil

prājñaḥ (nom. sg.): m. a wise man

svayam: ind. by himself, voluntarily, of his own accord

kaḥ (nom. sg. m.): who?

abhilaṣet = 3^rd pers. sg. optative abhi- √ laṣ: to desire or wish for (acc.) , covet , crave

an-artham (acc. sg.): m. reverse, misfortune ; disappointing occurrence , evil

世間諸非義 莫過五欲境
衆生愚貪故 樂著而不覺
智者畏五欲 不墮於非義