First I show my corrected translation of their sutta, which has direct hyper links taking you immediately to the precise location of the crime, with explanatory comments.
Then I quote their sutta passage with their wrong interpretation of vitakka and vicara of first jhāna.
MA 102 念: Two sorts of thinking (in first jhāna, and out)
MA 102 T 26.102 念 T i 589a11 MN 19
MA 1021 (divide thoughts into 2 groups, good and bad)
MA 1021.1 (bad: 3 counterparts of right resolve)
MA 1022.11 (simile of cowherd keeping cows in line with stick)
MA 1022.10 (V&V quality of thinking “bends” mind into habit)
MA 1023 (how to handle 3 types of good thoughts)
MA 1023.1.3 (first jhāna blocked by tired body)
MA 1024.1 (This is first jhana, replacing standard STED formula)
MA 1024.1.5 (Allow myself thoughts about Dharma)
MA 1023.11 (simile of cowherd sitting with peaceful thought of just, “cow”)
MA 1023.10 (reiteration: quality of V&V thinking “bends” mind into habit, this time good)
MA 1024.2 (Skip to STED Second Jhana because Dhamma Vitakka above is first jhana!)
MA 1025 (purified, imperturbable 4th jhana directed to realize nirvana)
MA 1026 (simile of deer hunter)
MA 1024.1.5 is describing first jhāna thoughts. It clearly is not "initial application and sustained application", or "directed awareness." It is linguistic, verbal mental talk, the thoughts of renunciation, good will, and non cruelty, as well as any other thoughts of Dharma in accordance with the Dharma (that's equivalent to frame 4 of satipaṭṭhāna).
In the standard four jhāna formula, they deliberately omit first jhāna to make it clear the immediately preceding section is talking about jhāna. The contrast between cow herd previously being tired, and then relaxed with body pacified (passaddhi pacification awakening factor) is indicating 7 awakening factors are met, and this is samādhi in four jhāna territory.
It's astounding that anyone translating Chinese suttas could think first jhāna vitakka and vicāra is anything other than verbal thinking, when MA 102 goes through the trouble to deliberately delete first jhāna standard formula, and add this section (to replace first jhāna formula they deleted) to give a definitive gloss of V&V:
MA 1024.1.5 (Allow myself thoughts about Dharma)
MA 102 is similar to Theravada's MN 125, where they deliberately omit first jhāna, and add an extra satipaṭṭhāna section with verbal thoughts to very clearly say that jhāna is satipaṭṭhāna, and just as one can think in satipaṭṭhāna with verbal thoughts, one thinks with verbal thoughts in first jhāna as well.
● MN 125 - 🔗🔊 28m, Danta-bhūmi🐘: Tamed-level: 🔗📝
Gradual training of monk using simile of training wild elephant. Highlights:
MN 1251 - (prince J. doesn’t think that teaching can lead to ekagga citta)
MN 1251.1 - (simile of well trained elephants)
MN 1251.2 - (simile of standing on mountain seeing clearly)
MN 1253.1.1 - (simile: new monk has 5kg desire ordains → elephant still desires pleasures of being wild in forest)
MN 1253.9.1 - (simile: 4sp satipaṭṭhāna nonstop,to subdue thoughts of household and delight in Dharma thoughts → elephant tied to post to keep it from returning to forest, and grow to like men and fortress)
MN 1253.10.1 - (simile: 4sp satipaṭṭhāna again without kama = first jhāna → elephant trained to like and follow commands for good war elephant)
MN 1253.10.2 - (note grass, water, firewood is simile for first jhāna from AN 7.67 )
MN 1253.11 - (skip 1st jhāna, go directly to 2nd jhāna, since the previous stage of satipaṭṭhāna was first jhāna!)
MN 1253.11.1 - (simile: monk developing 2nd through 4th jhāna → elephant tied up so it can’t move while training to be imperturbable to simulated weapons and battle stress)
MN 1255.1 - (simile: successful monk with imperturbable 4th jhāna withstands cold, heat, mosquitoes → elephant in live battle struck by spears, swords, arrows)
MA 102 BDK wrong translation of vitakka and vicara of first jhāna
I further had this thought: “If I intentionally keep on thinking my body
will lose strength and my mind will be troubled. Let me rather keep my
mind in check within, continuously dwelling in inner tranquility, unified,
having attained concentration, so that my mind will not be troubled.”
Thereafter I kept my mind in check within, continuously dwelling in
inner tranquility, unified, having attained concentration, and my mind was
no longer troubled.
[If] a thought without sensual desire arose in me, I further [allowed]
thoughts to arise that were inclined toward the Dharma and in accordance
with the Dharma. [If] a thought without ill-will, . . . [or] a thought without
cruelty arose, I further [allowed] thoughts to arise that were inclined
toward the Dharma and in accordance with the Dharma. Why was that?
[Because] I did not see that countless evil and unwholesome states would
arise because of [such thoughts].
It is just as in the last month of autumn, when the entire harvest has
been collected, a cowherd boy sets the cows free in the uncultivated fields
and is mindful of them, thinking, “My cows are there in the herd.” Why
is that? Because the cowherd boy does not see that he would be scolded,
beaten, or imprisoned for any trespassing. For this reason he is mindful
of them thus, “My cows are there in the herd.”
In the same way, [if] a thought without sensual desire arose in me, I
further [allowed] thoughts to arise that were inclined to the Dharma and
in accordance with the Dharma. [If] a thought without ill-will, . . . [or] a
thought without cruelty arose, I further [allowed] thoughts to arise that
were inclined to the Dharma and in accordance with the Dharma. Why
was that? [Because] I did not see that countless evil and unwholesome
states would arise because of [such thoughts].
Monks, in accordance with what one intends, in accordance with what
one thinks, the mind takes delight in that. If a monk often thinks thoughts
without sensual desire and abandons thoughts of sensual desire, then
because of often thinking thoughts without sensual desire his mind takes
delight in them.
(this is pīti, sukha, joy of first jhāna Dharma thoughts, which they call "thoughts", not "directed awareness")
If a monk often thinks thoughts without ill-will, . . . [or] thoughts
without cruelty, and abandons thoughts of ill-will, . . . [or] thoughts of
cruelty, then because of often thinking thoughts without ill-will, . . . [or]
thoughts without cruelty his mind takes delight in them.266
(second jhana happening here, first jhana formula omitted and replaced with thoughts of Dharma above)
With the calming of [directed] awareness and [sustained] contemplation,
with inner stillness and mental unification, he dwells having attained the
second absorption, which is without [directed] awareness and [sustained]
contemplation and with rapture and happiness born of concentration.
Forum discussion
https://www.reddit.com/r/theravada/comments/11yhd6l/comment/jd7zsae/?context=3
unsolicitedbuddhism wrote:
This blog post won't be informative to anyone who wants to know the reason for said translations, requiring a lot of homework for the readers to find out why frankk believes the translators to be wrong and to find out why translators of the Chinese agamas landed on their translation choices. For context, the Introduction section of the BDK MA Vol. II translation gives a brief justification:
BDK explanation of V&V:
The first exception concerns the paired Chinese terms jue and guan. These denote the first two factors of the first meditative absorption (Pāli jhāna) and correspond to the paired Pāli terms vitakka and vicāra. In Volume I jue and guan are translated as “initial and sustained application of the mind,” because that (or something similar) is how the corresponding Pāli terms are sometimes rendered. In Volumes II to IV, however, the terms jué and guān in the same context are translated as “[directed] awareness and [sustained] contemplation.” We believe this phrase succeeds in capturing the meanings of the two terms as they are used elsewhere in the Chinese Madhyama-āgama. This change was made with full recognition that there is sometimes a tension between the twin aims of producing a faithful rendering of the Chinese text and taking due account of the underlying Indic text.
The issue arises when one is producing an English translation of a Chinese translation of an Indic original (on such issues see Roderick S. Bucknell, “Taking Account of the Indic Source-text,” in Konrad Meisig ed., Translating Buddhist Chinese, Problems and Prospects [Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2010], pp. 45–52). In recognition of the challenges presented by such a process, the editors have followed the principle that within the framework of overall cooperation, each takes special care of, and responsibility for, one of these two dimensions of the translation process. Thus, Roderick S. Bucknell has given special attention to the accuracy of the English translation in reflecting the Chinese source-text, whereas Bhikkhu Anālayo has emphasized discerning the underlying Indic original, as well as providing relevant comparative annotation. It is hoped that as a result of such collaboration, the translation presented here does justice both to the Chinese text as we now have it and to its no-longer-extant Indic forerunner.
frankk response:
Even taking that into account,
If we go by indic sanskrit source, analayo is still wrong.
vitarka and vicāra, look at it's use in other religious sanskrit text, still means thinking and pondering in a samādhi context.
And my point still stands, MA 102 (that sutta is all about first jhāna!) is giving a more authorative gloss of V&V in first jhana, that overrides whatever Rod Bucknell thinks the chinese translators were saying.
The chinese for V&V is tricky enough to translate, but the [directed] and [sustained] comments are wrong, obviously trying to make a connection to Analayos wrong translation from the earlier volumes.
No comments:
Post a Comment