Shi Huifeng's An Annotated English Translation of Kumārajīva’s Xiaŏpĭn Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra [8000 lines]

Discuss and learn about the traditional Mahayana scriptures, without assuming that any one school ‘owns’ the only correct interpretation.
Post Reply
User avatar
Posts: 120
Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2015 1:39 am
Location: Sacramento, CA

Shi Huifeng's An Annotated English Translation of Kumārajīva’s Xiaŏpĭn Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra [8000 lines]

Post by Javierfv1212 » Wed Aug 22, 2018 6:49 pm ... S%C5%ABtra

There hasn't been a translation of the Asta- since Conze as far as I know, and Conze translated the Sanskrit, which is known to be much later recension than the Kumarajiva. This is definitely an important publication.
It is quite impossible to find the Buddha anywhere other than in one's own mind.

Amid those who are self-constrained, the Stable One would not posit as categorically true or false
anything seen, heard, or sensed, clung to and considered truth by others.
Since they have already seen this dart to which people cling and adhere,
saying “I know, I see, it is just so,”
the Tathāgatas cling to nothing.
-Kalaka sutta

User avatar
Posts: 264
Joined: Fri Oct 08, 2010 6:13 pm

Re: Shi Huifeng's An Annotated English Translation of Kumārajīva’s Xiaŏpĭn Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra [8000 lines]

Post by WuMing » Wed Aug 22, 2018 8:48 pm

Our translation of the Xiăopĭn here is only of fascicle 1 and a small portion at the start of fascicle 2, out of 10 fascicles for the entire sūtra. ...
an important translation, indeed! Thank you to Huifeng!
... A full English language translation of the entirety of the Xiaŏpĭn would naturally be ideal, but due to space consideration I feel that a separate and detailed version of chapters 1 and 2 (by the Sanskrit divisions) would be of most value, and hence the range of the text selected for translation here.
I hope that we'll be able to read the full translation some day in the future.

A quote from the translation:
Subhūti knew the thought conceived in Śāriputra’s mind, and said to Śāriputra: “What do you think: Where does the Tathāgata abide?”
Śāriputra said: “The Tathāgata does not abide anywhere. The non-abiding mind is known as the Tathāgata. The Tathāgata does not abide in the conditioned nature, nor does he abide in the unconditioned nature.”

[Subhūti said:] “O Śāriputra! Bodhisattva mahāsattvas should also abide in this way, as the Tathāgata abides, neither abiding nor not abiding in any dharma.”
Now, observing with the eye of the Buddha, both the Buddha and ordinary beings are in the same liberated state. There is neither this nor that: there is only non-duality and identity.
- 空海 Kūkai in Unjigi 吽字義 The Meaning of the Letter Hūṃ
- Kūkai on the Philosophy of Language by Takagi Shingen and Dreitlein Eijō
Śrī Singha said to Padmasambhava:
Since buddhas and sentient beings are inseparable and the same, it is necessary to respect all sentient beings as being on the same level with the buddhas. Can you?
- translated by Malcolm N. Smith

Sentient Light
Posts: 243
Joined: Thu Sep 15, 2016 8:40 pm
Location: Pacifica, California

Re: Shi Huifeng's An Annotated English Translation of Kumārajīva’s Xiaŏpĭn Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra [8000 lines]

Post by Sentient Light » Thu Aug 23, 2018 2:31 pm

Thanks so much for sharing! This is huge.
While the Sanskrit “citta” has been uniformly rendered into some term for
“mind”, it is worth noting that in Prakrits such as Gāndhārī or Pāli, “citta” could also derive
from Sanskrit “citra”, i.e. “variegated” or “manifold”, used to refer to taints of the mind, the
afflictions (see PED 256f, “Citta & Citra”; SN iii 151). Thus, rather than the Sanskrit “mind
which is non-mind”, from a Prakrit source it could potentially be “mind (citta) which is
non-variegated (acitra)”, a deliberate play on the ambiguity between the two term.
This is really interesting. I think, given the nature of the literary arts, if a potential pun/play-on-words or even simply anaphora (repetition of vowel sounds) can be spotted that kaleidoscopes the meaning of the words into separate layers, I'm inclined to believe that's far more likely. Even in oral literature (or especially in oral literature), this is quite likely.

It's a shame that without seeing a Gandhari original, we might never know. But a repetitive poetic structure, with a similar meter, comparing two different terms that have acoustically similar properties yet conceptually distinctive imagery sounds like something that would be incorporated into a recited text.
:buddha1: Nam mô A di đà Phật :buddha1:
:bow: Nam mô Quan Thế Âm Bồ tát :bow:
:bow: Nam mô Đại Thế Chi Bồ Tát :bow:

:buddha1: Nam mô Bổn sư Thích ca mâu ni Phật :buddha1:
:bow: Nam mô Di lặc Bồ tát :bow:
:bow: Nam mô Địa tạng vương Bồ tát :bow:

Post Reply

Return to “Sūtra Studies”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Matt J and 9 guests