Jayarava's New Thesis on Heart Sutra: Sanskrit Version Deliberate Forgery by Tang Chinese

Forum for discussion of East Asian Buddhism. Questions specific to one school are best posted in the appropriate sub-forum.
User avatar
Grigoris
Former staff member
Posts: 21938
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 9:27 pm
Location: Greece

Re: Jayarava's New Thesis on Heart Sutra: Sanskrit Version Deliberate Forgery by Tang Chinese

Post by Grigoris »

Jayarava wrote: Wed Nov 14, 2018 12:25 pmIt's all about context. You wanted to know why I considered the four criteria to be religious. And I pointed out that you think they are too. Which does prove my point.
I am really not interested in playing this childish game.
In conclusion, then, the Heart Sutra is not what we were told it is, but it is exactly what we wish it to be.
A moot point. EVERYTHING is exactly what we wish it to be.
However, it does contain an accurate depiction of what we often call the farther shore, the cessation of sensory experience and cognitive experience that results in the radical reorganisation of our psyche away from self-centredness.
Sorry, but I missed this bit, I got too bogged down in all the denial and criticism.
So as a religious Buddhist I am forbidden from critiquing other Buddhists?
I never said anything of the like. More straw men.
If you genuinely found my opinion "boring and irrelevant" you would not bother to reply and you would not need to be so cranky about it. But you do reply. It's quite clear that what I write bothers you. And this could be a good thing, if you can just bring some awareness and kindness to your reactivity.
I don't know if you noticed, but my initial statements were not responses to any of your claims. As a matter of fact I asked people, as a moderator, to not engage in personal attacks against you.

Like I have said repeatedly: Your views on the Heart Sutra are completely irrelevant to me.
"My religion is not deceiving myself."
Jetsun Milarepa 1052-1135 CE

"Butchers, prostitutes, those guilty of the five most heinous crimes, outcasts, the underprivileged: all are utterly the substance of existence and nothing other than total bliss."
The Supreme Source - The Kunjed Gyalpo
The Fundamental Tantra of Dzogchen Semde
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Jayarava's New Thesis on Heart Sutra: Sanskrit Version Deliberate Forgery by Tang Chinese

Post by Malcolm »

Jayarava wrote: Wed Nov 14, 2018 11:34 am
Also it is now unequivocally true that the Sanskrit Heart Sutra is a translation from the Chinese.
No, it is not unequivocally true at all.


And I would personally welcome any of all of these. I'm not wedded to any particular outcome. I am simply trying to piece together all the evidence.
Which means your assertion above is unequivocally speculative.
Last edited by Malcolm on Wed Nov 14, 2018 4:33 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Jayarava's New Thesis on Heart Sutra: Sanskrit Version Deliberate Forgery by Tang Chinese

Post by Malcolm »

Jayarava wrote: Wed Nov 14, 2018 4:31 pm
Malcolm wrote: Wed Nov 14, 2018 4:15 pm Which means your assertion above is unequivocally speculative.
Deleted ad hom remark
The main thing you fail to explain, in fact, is how all these highly skilled Indian Panditas were unable to detect that the text before them was spurious, great paṇḍitas such as Śṛī Siṃhaprabha, his disciple, Vimalamitra, and so on. If one is to take your contention seriously, one has to assume that between whatever date you assign in the mid-7th century for the composition of this text in China, it needed to make its way back to India, where it was enthusiastically received as authentic by the Vajrayāna community in India no later than the mid 8th century, and from there transmitted to Tibet. One must assume their Sanskrit and expertise in their own literature was superior to yours.
Jayarava
Posts: 59
Joined: Mon Jan 11, 2010 10:31 pm
Contact:

Re: Jayarava's New Thesis on Heart Sutra: Sanskrit Version Deliberate Forgery by Tang Chinese

Post by Jayarava »

Malcolm wrote: Wed Nov 14, 2018 4:33 pm The main thing you fail to explain, in fact, is how all these highly skilled Indian Panditas were unable to detect that the text before them was spurious, great paṇḍitas such as Śṛī Siṃhaprabha, his disciple, Vimalamitra, and so on. If one is to take your contention seriously, one has to assume that between whatever date you assign in the mid-7th century for the composition of this text in China, it needed to make its way back to India, where it was enthusiastically received as authentic by the Vajrayāna community in India no later than the mid 8th century, and from there transmitted to Tibet. One must assume their Sanskrit and expertise in their own literature was superior to yours.
You are right this is weird. And I cannot explain it. And I am happy to stipulate that many people with better skills and more intelligence have preceded me in this field. I am an unlikely person to be in this role.

There's no short version of this story, so if you will indulge me, let me relate how I got into this line of research after some years of being focussed on early Buddhism.

I was independently reading and publishing research on Pāḷi texts for some years when a colleague of mine audited the intro to Sanskrit class at Cambridge University and suggested I do the same. So in 2009 I started the course, but my health packed up and I had to drop out after two terms. In 2012, I asked if I could do it again and they said yes. This time I completed two years of intensive Sanskrit study. I was drilled very rigorously in how to parse a Sanskrit sentence by Vincenzo Vergiani (for which I am very grateful!)

The first text I thought to read outside class was the Heart Sutra. I had been chanting it in English regularly for many years and I had even learned and chanted it in Sanskrit every day for 4 months on my ordination retreat, in 2005. It is the most popular Mahāyāna text and there are at least 60 published translations. So I figured that I could hardly go wrong.

But I was surprised to find that I could not parse the first long sentence (it has three clauses) according to the rigour I had learned from Vincenzo. And I could not see the logic of Conze's translation. Of course I assumed that it was my error. Perhaps Sanskrit was very much more difficult that Pali or I had not absorbed sufficient experience of real-life Sanskrit to read independently? I kept worrying at it, and managed to translate most of the rest of the text (or so I thought). I worked on other texts for a while.

At the time I was studying, Vincenzo was running a major project to catalogue and photograph Sanskrit manuscripts in the Cambridge University Library. I knew that four of Conze's sources for his edition were included in the collection, so I got permission to look at them. I spent a couple of weeks transcribing the manuscripts - from Lantsa, Modern Nepalese (2), and 13th C Nepalese Hooked Script. And I tracked down most of Conze's other sources and transcribed them - including the famous Hōryūji Manuscript. I had to learn about 7 or 8 different Indian scripts on top of Devanāgarī and Japanese Siddham which I already knew. My transcriptions and other primary resources are online along with other primary research material.

I worked through the manuscripts and I noticed something that suddenly made sense of it. Conze had pañcaskandhās in the nominative plural, leaving vyavalokayati sma as an intransitive verb which he translated as "looks down". This did not make sense. But In some of the manuscripts the word was pañcaskandhāṃṣ in the accusative plural. A simple matter of a missing anusvara. The verb was, in fact, transitive and pañcaskandhāṃṣ was the object. When I looked into it I discovered that vyava√lok means "examine". So now instead of an unparsable mess, I had Avalokiteśvara examining the five skandhas and seeing that they lacked svabhāva.

I worked through all of the Chinese texts, and even through the canonical Tibetan, with help from Jan Nattier and Jonathan Silk who kindly responded to my unsolicited emails.

I wrote it all up. I had several Sanskrit experts read and critique it. And it was published in 2015 after getting through peer review where three more experts did their best to find fault (it was quite a difficult process on this occasion).

A complex of grammatical simple but vitally important errors have been present in the Sanskrit Heart Sutra since Conze edited it 1948. Note that these are errors introduced by Conze. He revised his text in 1967 and did not notice that it did not make sense. In between 1948 and 2015 some of the greatest scholars of Sanskrit and/or Mahāyana Buddhism examined, studied, and importantly translated the text without noticing that it did not make sense (including Jan Nattier!). It would not surprise me in the least if people continued to pretend to translate Conze's text without noticing or fixing the error.

I had no thoughts even then of continuing to criticise the text, but I found another major error which I partially corrected in print earlier this year and will complete early next year. I then began to look more closely at Nattier's work once more, closely reading her article and all of the footnotes. I started take the Heart Sutra text apart word by word. Although I did not read it until a couple of years later, in 2014 Matthew Orsborn (writing as Huifeng) had already published some examples of ancient mistranslation in the Chinese Heart Sutra and this turned out to be decisive in understanding what the text is talking about.

So when you ask, "how could those ancient experts not see that something was amiss?" I can only shrug and say I don't know. I only know that it happens all the time and no one notices. And frankly, the implications of this are absolutely staggering .

At a minimum there are currently no trustworthy English translations of the Heart Sutra in existence. Translations from Chinese are slightly more reliable, but are still problematic (because of Matthew's work). The whole enterprise of commentary on the text is called into question and this goes right back to Kuījī and Woncheuk (something Lusthaus fails to notice).

The good news is that when you correct all the mistakes the text makes a great deal more sense and provides a fascinating way into a style of practice that was once very important though it has long since disappeared, i.e. anupalambghayoga, "the yoga of nonapprehension".
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Jayarava's New Thesis on Heart Sutra: Sanskrit Version Deliberate Forgery by Tang Chinese

Post by Malcolm »

Jayarava wrote: Wed Nov 14, 2018 5:53 pm So now instead of an unparsable mess, I had Avalokiteśvara examining the five skandhas and seeing that they lacked svabhāva.
This is all very clear in every Tibetan translation, and has been since Vairocana translated Ṣ́̄ṛī Siṃha's commentary, the earliest Indian commentary we possess on the Heart Sūtra, on behalf of Trisong De'utsan. One thing you should be aware of is that Indian exegesis of this Sūtra begins with Indian exponents of the Great Perfection tradition. In any case, within the Tibetan translation, it is very clear how this passage that confused you is to be understood:

ཡང་དེའི་ཚེ་བྱང་ཆུབ་སེམས་དཔའ་སེམས་དཔའ་ཆེན་པོ་འཕགས་བ་སྤྱན་རས་གཟིགས་དབང་ཕྱུག་ཤེས་རབ་ཀྱི་ཕ་རོལ་ཏུ་ཕྱིན་པ་ཟབ་མོ་སྤྱོད་པ་ཉིད་ལ་རྣམ་པར་ལྟ་ཞིང༌། ཕུང་པོ་ལྔ་པོ་དེ་དག་ལ་ཡང་རང་བཞིན་གྱིས་སྟོང་པར་རྣམ་པར་བལྟའོ་ཞེས་པ

"Also, at that time, the bodhisattva mahāsattva Āryāvalokiteśvara was practicing the profound Perfection of Wisdom, he looked (rnam par lta, vyavalokayata) and saw (rnam par bltas pa, vyavalokita) those five aggregates were also empty by nature."

Śṝi Siṃha's commentary interprets the lines you found vexing as follows: དེ་ལྟ་བུའི་དོན་རང་གི་ཁོང་དུ་ཆུད་དེ་སྤྱོད་པའོ། །དེས་ན་དེ་ཉིད་ལ་ཡང་དང་ཡང་དུ་དམིགས་པ་མེད་པར་ལྟ་བ་སྟེ། ལྟ་བའི་དོན་རང་ནི་ཕུང་པོ་དེ་ཉིད་དེ: "The meaning of that is that after he understood, he practiced. Then, he looked again and again without perceiving [anything]. The object he looked at was his own five aggregates themselves."

So when you ask, "how could those ancient experts not see that something was amiss?" I can only shrug and say I don't know. I only know that it happens all the time and no one notices. And frankly, the implications of this are absolutely staggering .
Well, I think, as in all text critical speculation, the only thing you can rightly claim is the following:

1) Sanskrit editions edited by Conze were marred with his own misunderstanding.

2) We have no Indian commentary in our possession that is earlier than 750, nor is there any mention of the text prior to 750 in the Indian sources that we have.

3) By the beginning of the 8th century, the text was considered valid by Indian Panditas.

4) Wonchuk claims to have seen an earlier, flawed Chinese translation, no longer extant, based on his possession or access to a no-longer exant Sanskrit manuscript.

5) Tradition claims that Xuantsang received the text in China and chanted it on is way to India (this is the real basis for Nattier's skepticism of the text.)

6) There are some grammatical oddities in the text which you and others suspect point to a Chinese origin.

7) From a text critical perspective, this is late Indian text. If I were to venture a guess, I would disagree the Chinese origin theory and point out that it is a Vajrayāna period text that originated within a Vajrayāna milieu. Vajrayāna tantras are filled with bad Sanskrit.

At a minimum there are currently no trustworthy English translations of the Heart Sutra in existence. Translations from Chinese are slightly more reliable, but are still problematic (because of Matthew's work). The whole enterprise of commentary on the text is called into question and this goes right back to Kuījī and Woncheuk (something Lusthaus fails to notice).
Of course there are. The ones from Tibetan are just fine.
The good news is that when you correct all the mistakes the text makes a great deal more sense and provides a fascinating way into a style of practice that was once very important though it has long since disappeared, i.e. anupalambghayoga, "the yoga of nonapprehension".
Not so, this kind of yoga still exists in Tibetan Buddhism. As you can see, it is mentioned in the commentarial passage I provided above.
A complex of grammatical simple but vitally important errors have been present in the Sanskrit Heart Sutra since Conze edited it 1948. Note that these are errors introduced by Conze. He revised his text in 1967 and did not notice that it did not make sense. In between 1948 and 2015 some of the greatest scholars of Sanskrit and/or Mahāyana Buddhism examined, studied, and importantly translated the text without noticing that it did not make sense (including Jan Nattier!). It would not surprise me in the least if people continued to pretend to translate Conze's text without noticing or fixing the error.
The only flaw here is that even you agree the Sanskrit text the Indians had before them was not Conze's critical edition.
Norwegian
Posts: 2632
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2011 7:36 pm

Re: Jayarava's New Thesis on Heart Sutra: Sanskrit Version Deliberate Forgery by Tang Chinese

Post by Norwegian »

Malcolm wrote: Wed Nov 14, 2018 6:57 pm This is all very clear in every Tibetan translation, and has been since Vairocana translated Ṣ́̄ṛī Siṃha's commentary, the earliest Indian commentary we possess on the Heart Sūtra, on behalf of Trisong De'utsan. One thing you should be aware of is that Indian exegesis of this Sūtra begins with Indian exponents of the Great Perfection tradition.
Hi Malcolm,

I was wondering if you could recommend some good translations/books available of the Heart Sutra, translated from the Tibetan, preferably including Sri Simha's commentary, and Vimalamitra's commentary - along with other Indian commentaries, but also Tibetan commentaries (preferably by Dzogchen masters), if possible.

So far I've only come across Lopez's "The Heart Sutra Explained: Indian and Tibetan Commentaries" from 1987, which seems to fit what I want. Not sure if this is a good book or not though.
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Jayarava's New Thesis on Heart Sutra: Sanskrit Version Deliberate Forgery by Tang Chinese

Post by Malcolm »

Norwegian wrote: Wed Nov 14, 2018 8:23 pm
Malcolm wrote: Wed Nov 14, 2018 6:57 pm This is all very clear in every Tibetan translation, and has been since Vairocana translated Ṣ́̄ṛī Siṃha's commentary, the earliest Indian commentary we possess on the Heart Sūtra, on behalf of Trisong De'utsan. One thing you should be aware of is that Indian exegesis of this Sūtra begins with Indian exponents of the Great Perfection tradition.
Hi Malcolm,

I was wondering if you could recommend some good translations/books available of the Heart Sutra, translated from the Tibetan, preferably including Sri Simha's commentary, and Vimalamitra's commentary - along with other Indian commentaries, but also Tibetan commentaries (preferably by Dzogchen masters), if possible.

So far I've only come across Lopez's "The Heart Sutra Explained: Indian and Tibetan Commentaries" from 1987, which seems to fit what I want. Not sure if this is a good book or not though.
Lopez is a very good translator. One of the best, actually.
Norwegian
Posts: 2632
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2011 7:36 pm

Re: Jayarava's New Thesis on Heart Sutra: Sanskrit Version Deliberate Forgery by Tang Chinese

Post by Norwegian »

Malcolm wrote: Wed Nov 14, 2018 8:31 pm
Norwegian wrote: Wed Nov 14, 2018 8:23 pm
Malcolm wrote: Wed Nov 14, 2018 6:57 pm This is all very clear in every Tibetan translation, and has been since Vairocana translated Ṣ́̄ṛī Siṃha's commentary, the earliest Indian commentary we possess on the Heart Sūtra, on behalf of Trisong De'utsan. One thing you should be aware of is that Indian exegesis of this Sūtra begins with Indian exponents of the Great Perfection tradition.
Hi Malcolm,

I was wondering if you could recommend some good translations/books available of the Heart Sutra, translated from the Tibetan, preferably including Sri Simha's commentary, and Vimalamitra's commentary - along with other Indian commentaries, but also Tibetan commentaries (preferably by Dzogchen masters), if possible.

So far I've only come across Lopez's "The Heart Sutra Explained: Indian and Tibetan Commentaries" from 1987, which seems to fit what I want. Not sure if this is a good book or not though.
Lopez is a very good translator. One of the best, actually.
Excellent! Thanks.
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Jayarava's New Thesis on Heart Sutra: Sanskrit Version Deliberate Forgery by Tang Chinese

Post by Malcolm »

Norwegian wrote: Wed Nov 14, 2018 8:35 pm
Malcolm wrote: Wed Nov 14, 2018 8:31 pm
Norwegian wrote: Wed Nov 14, 2018 8:23 pm
Hi Malcolm,

I was wondering if you could recommend some good translations/books available of the Heart Sutra, translated from the Tibetan, preferably including Sri Simha's commentary, and Vimalamitra's commentary - along with other Indian commentaries, but also Tibetan commentaries (preferably by Dzogchen masters), if possible.

So far I've only come across Lopez's "The Heart Sutra Explained: Indian and Tibetan Commentaries" from 1987, which seems to fit what I want. Not sure if this is a good book or not though.
Lopez is a very good translator. One of the best, actually.
Excellent! Thanks.

However, I did not see the early commentaries listed as being translated.
Norwegian
Posts: 2632
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2011 7:36 pm

Re: Jayarava's New Thesis on Heart Sutra: Sanskrit Version Deliberate Forgery by Tang Chinese

Post by Norwegian »

Malcolm wrote: Wed Nov 14, 2018 9:14 pm
Norwegian wrote: Wed Nov 14, 2018 8:35 pm
Malcolm wrote: Wed Nov 14, 2018 8:31 pm

Lopez is a very good translator. One of the best, actually.
Excellent! Thanks.

However, I did not see the early commentaries listed as being translated.
Yes I noticed this now as I was checking some sample pages here and there. It looks more like Lopez himself using bits and pieces from various commentators in his own commentary. While I am sure this can be interesting, it wasn't entirely what I wanted (the sutra translated from the Tibetan plus Indian/Tibetan commentaries in full).
User avatar
Javierfv1212
Posts: 309
Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2015 1:39 am
Location: South Florida

Re: Jayarava's New Thesis on Heart Sutra: Sanskrit Version Deliberate Forgery by Tang Chinese

Post by Javierfv1212 »

His more recent "Elaborations on Emptiness: Uses of the Heart Sutra" is what you want. According to David Loy in his review,

Elaborations on Emptiness provides a complete translation of these commentaries (plus one more), all of them written in India between the eighth and twelfth centuries (except for the last, from Tibet). His own commentaries on these commentaries do not involve detailed doctrinal comparison; instead, he is concerned with showing the very different ways the Heart Sutra has been used. The odd-numbered chapters contain his wide-ranging reflections, the even-numbered ones the commentaries (by Vimalamitra, Atisa, Kamalasila, Srisimha, Jnanamitra, Prasastrasena, Mahajana, and Vajrapani).
http://ccbs.ntu.edu.tw/FULLTEXT/JR-MISC/101778.htm
It is quite impossible to find the Buddha anywhere other than in one's own mind.
A person who is ignorant of this may seek externally,
but how is it possible to find oneself through seeking anywhere other than in oneself?
Someone who seeks their own nature externally is like a fool who, giving a performance in the middle of a crowd, forgets who he is and then seeks everywhere else to find himself.
— Padmasambhava

Visit my site: https://sites.google.com/view/abhayajana/
Norwegian
Posts: 2632
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2011 7:36 pm

Re: Jayarava's New Thesis on Heart Sutra: Sanskrit Version Deliberate Forgery by Tang Chinese

Post by Norwegian »

Javierfv1212 wrote: Thu Nov 15, 2018 1:16 am His more recent "Elaborations on Emptiness: Uses of the Heart Sutra" is what you want. According to David Loy in his review,

Elaborations on Emptiness provides a complete translation of these commentaries (plus one more), all of them written in India between the eighth and twelfth centuries (except for the last, from Tibet). His own commentaries on these commentaries do not involve detailed doctrinal comparison; instead, he is concerned with showing the very different ways the Heart Sutra has been used. The odd-numbered chapters contain his wide-ranging reflections, the even-numbered ones the commentaries (by Vimalamitra, Atisa, Kamalasila, Srisimha, Jnanamitra, Prasastrasena, Mahajana, and Vajrapani).
http://ccbs.ntu.edu.tw/FULLTEXT/JR-MISC/101778.htm
That does indeed look like what I want. Thank you.
PeterC
Posts: 5192
Joined: Tue May 20, 2014 12:38 pm

Re: Jayarava's New Thesis on Heart Sutra: Sanskrit Version Deliberate Forgery by Tang Chinese

Post by PeterC »

Jayarava wrote: Wed Nov 14, 2018 11:34 am
My conjecture is just that, a conjecture.
We could stop the conversation there, I guess. You seem to infer a lot about what Tang translators and scholars knew and thought, their motivations and so forth. Have you spoken to any Chinese scholars about this? They have access to a lot more documentation than you do.

There are some straightforward ways to refute my conjecture...
But why? The burden of proof is on you.

I'm not saying that texts should not be studied critically and these questions not asked. Of course they should. But you're declaring victory (no pun intended) way too early on this one.
Antiochus
Posts: 15
Joined: Mon May 30, 2016 8:12 am

Re: Jayarava's New Thesis on Heart Sutra: Sanskrit Version Deliberate Forgery by Tang Chinese

Post by Antiochus »

Jayarava wrote: Wed Nov 14, 2018 11:34 am
Also it is now unequivocally true that the Sanskrit Heart Sutra is a translation from the Chinese. Unfortunately my most recent peer-reviewed article is not quite in print - but it is all finished and signed off on. I will happily send copies to anyone who is interested as soon as possible. The abstract reads:
The phrase tryadhvavyavastithāḥ sarvabuddhāḥ “all the buddhas that appear in the three times” in the Sanskrit Heart Sutra is a hapax legomenon in Buddhist Sanskrit, but it is similar to the common Chinese idiom 三世諸佛 “buddhas of the three times”. In every case where this Chinese phrase is used in a Prajñāpāramitā text, other than the Heart Sutra, the corresponding extant Sanskrit texts have atītānāgatapratyutpannā buddhāḥ “past, future, and present buddhas” instead. Additionally, where one translator has used the phrase 三世諸佛 another frequently prefers 過去未來現在諸佛 “buddhas of the past, future, and present”, suggesting that their source texts also had this form with the three different times spelt out. The phrase tryadhvavyavastithāḥ sarvabuddhāḥ is unambiguously a Chinese idiom translated into Sanskrit in ignorance of Sanskrit Prajñāpāramitā conventions. This proves that the Heart Sutra was composed in Chinese.
I believe that when we look at the culture of 7th Century Chinese Buddhism an alternative narrative emerges. It is partly inspired by more solidly historical events a few decades later connected with the Empress Wu Zetian. We know that Empress Wu had Buddhist monks compose a sutra commentary that predicted her rise to the throne; and we know that the translator Bodhiruci inserted something similar into a sutra translation. Buddhism in Changan was highly politicised. Buddhist monasteries were extremely wealthy and influential in the politics of the day. Buddhist monks and Wu Zetian formed an alliance against the opposing factions of the aristocracy and the Confucianist bureaucracy. Wu's involvement in palace intrigues overlaps with the story of the Heart Sutra, but I cannot see any direct link between them. Still it gives us a flavour of the times.
Jayarava,

It is quite a surprise to see you back again in this forum. That is an interesting update on your scholarship. I pondered your excerpted abstract above and was struggling to locate where I might have see it before besides the Heart Sutra, and realized the phrase "tryadhvavyavastithāḥ sarvabuddhāḥ" reminded me of a couple obscure Chinese Tantric sutras I once came across. I do not know if others have pointed it out before, but "tryadhvavyavastithāḥ sarvabuddhāḥ" corresponds fairly closely to the early portion of the Kharandamudra Dharani (http://tripitaka.cbeta.org/T19n1022A_001):

na maḥ stryi dhvi ka nāṃ sa rva ta thā ga ta nāṃ

Which I believe in both meaning and form corresponds well to the 三世諸佛 Chinese idiom you wrote about. The thing is, the Kharandamudra Dharani is dated no later than the 740's AD, when Amohgavajra likely brought that text back to China from his sojourn to South India/Sri Lanka. Very likely composed by the early 700's AD. Additionally, that mantric phrase "Namahs Tryiadhvikanam Sarvatathagatnam" can also be found in two, more obscure early Chinese tantras:

曼殊室利童子菩薩五字瑜伽法 (translated also by Amoghavajra, so likely originally composed in early 700's AD as well)
"na  maḥ  stryi  dhvi  kā  nāṃ ta  thā  ga  tā  nāṃ  hrīḥ  sa  rva bu  ddhā  na  vi  lā  pya  ra  śmye"
http://tripitaka.cbeta.org/T20n1176_001

大聖妙吉祥菩薩祕密八字陀羅尼修行曼荼羅次第儀軌法 (translated by....a team composing of 義雲法金剛 and 菩提仙? No idea who they were, scholarship is none existent on this text. Colophon on the bottom ostensibly dates this to the 820's AD. Originally composed in late 700's AD? )
"na  maḥ  stryi  dhvi  kā  naṃ  tathā  ga  ta  nāṃ  oṃ  va  jrāṃ  gi"
http://tripitaka.cbeta.org/ko/T20n1184_001

In any case, you wrote the phrase "tryadhvavyavastithāḥ sarvabuddhāḥ" in the Heart Sutra is a hapax legomenon in Buddhist Sanskrit. With the above three examples, how would you reconcile between them? Do those Tantric mantras represent the same kind of meaning and bizarre/terrible Sanskrit you saw in the Heart Sutra as well? Do they invalidate or support your thesis of the hapax legomenon?

If you have already came across those mantric phrases and wrote about them in your recent academic essay, pardon me. If not, I (and I'm sure many on this forum) look forward to your thoughts.

Any Sanskritists, please feel free to comment as well.
User avatar
ratna
Posts: 475
Joined: Sun Oct 03, 2010 2:32 pm

Re: Jayarava's New Thesis on Heart Sutra: Sanskrit Version Deliberate Forgery by Tang Chinese

Post by ratna »

I'm not a Sanskritist, and these are not Prajñāpāramitā texts, but I'd like to point out that sarvatriyadhvagatāḥ jināḥ or similar is quite common in the Gaṇḍavyūha, including a few instances in the Bhadracarī. It seems to me that it's not the case that only atītānāgatapratyutpannāḥ buddhāḥ is idiomatic Buddhist Sanskrit.

R
Last edited by ratna on Tue Nov 27, 2018 1:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
DewachenVagabond
Posts: 464
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2017 7:30 pm
Location: Dewachen

Re: Jayarava's New Thesis on Heart Sutra: Sanskrit Version Deliberate Forgery by Tang Chinese

Post by DewachenVagabond »

Antiochus wrote: Tue Nov 27, 2018 11:50 am
Jayarava wrote: Wed Nov 14, 2018 11:34 am
Also it is now unequivocally true that the Sanskrit Heart Sutra is a translation from the Chinese. Unfortunately my most recent peer-reviewed article is not quite in print - but it is all finished and signed off on. I will happily send copies to anyone who is interested as soon as possible. The abstract reads:
The phrase tryadhvavyavastithāḥ sarvabuddhāḥ “all the buddhas that appear in the three times” in the Sanskrit Heart Sutra is a hapax legomenon in Buddhist Sanskrit, but it is similar to the common Chinese idiom 三世諸佛 “buddhas of the three times”. In every case where this Chinese phrase is used in a Prajñāpāramitā text, other than the Heart Sutra, the corresponding extant Sanskrit texts have atītānāgatapratyutpannā buddhāḥ “past, future, and present buddhas” instead. Additionally, where one translator has used the phrase 三世諸佛 another frequently prefers 過去未來現在諸佛 “buddhas of the past, future, and present”, suggesting that their source texts also had this form with the three different times spelt out. The phrase tryadhvavyavastithāḥ sarvabuddhāḥ is unambiguously a Chinese idiom translated into Sanskrit in ignorance of Sanskrit Prajñāpāramitā conventions. This proves that the Heart Sutra was composed in Chinese.
I believe that when we look at the culture of 7th Century Chinese Buddhism an alternative narrative emerges. It is partly inspired by more solidly historical events a few decades later connected with the Empress Wu Zetian. We know that Empress Wu had Buddhist monks compose a sutra commentary that predicted her rise to the throne; and we know that the translator Bodhiruci inserted something similar into a sutra translation. Buddhism in Changan was highly politicised. Buddhist monasteries were extremely wealthy and influential in the politics of the day. Buddhist monks and Wu Zetian formed an alliance against the opposing factions of the aristocracy and the Confucianist bureaucracy. Wu's involvement in palace intrigues overlaps with the story of the Heart Sutra, but I cannot see any direct link between them. Still it gives us a flavour of the times.
Jayarava,

It is quite a surprise to see you back again in this forum. That is an interesting update on your scholarship. I pondered your excerpted abstract above and was struggling to locate where I might have see it before besides the Heart Sutra, and realized the phrase "tryadhvavyavastithāḥ sarvabuddhāḥ" reminded me of a couple obscure Chinese Tantric sutras I once came across. I do not know if others have pointed it out before, but "tryadhvavyavastithāḥ sarvabuddhāḥ" corresponds fairly closely to the early portion of the Kharandamudra Dharani (http://tripitaka.cbeta.org/T19n1022A_001):

na maḥ stryi dhvi ka nāṃ sa rva ta thā ga ta nāṃ

Which I believe in both meaning and form corresponds well to the 三世諸佛 Chinese idiom you wrote about. The thing is, the Kharandamudra Dharani is dated no later than the 740's AD, when Amohgavajra likely brought that text back to China from his sojourn to South India/Sri Lanka. Very likely composed by the early 700's AD. Additionally, that mantric phrase "Namahs Tryiadhvikanam Sarvatathagatnam" can also be found in two, more obscure early Chinese tantras:

曼殊室利童子菩薩五字瑜伽法 (translated also by Amoghavajra, so likely originally composed in early 700's AD as well)
"na  maḥ  stryi  dhvi  kā  nāṃ ta  thā  ga  tā  nāṃ  hrīḥ  sa  rva bu  ddhā  na  vi  lā  pya  ra  śmye"
http://tripitaka.cbeta.org/T20n1176_001

大聖妙吉祥菩薩祕密八字陀羅尼修行曼荼羅次第儀軌法 (translated by....a team composing of 義雲法金剛 and 菩提仙? No idea who they were, scholarship is none existent on this text. Colophon on the bottom ostensibly dates this to the 820's AD. Originally composed in late 700's AD? )
"na  maḥ  stryi  dhvi  kā  naṃ  tathā  ga  ta  nāṃ  oṃ  va  jrāṃ  gi"
http://tripitaka.cbeta.org/ko/T20n1184_001

In any case, you wrote the phrase "tryadhvavyavastithāḥ sarvabuddhāḥ" in the Heart Sutra is a hapax legomenon in Buddhist Sanskrit. With the above three examples, how would you reconcile between them? Do those Tantric mantras represent the same kind of meaning and bizarre/terrible Sanskrit you saw in the Heart Sutra as well? Do they invalidate or support your thesis of the hapax legomenon?

If you have already came across those mantric phrases and wrote about them in your recent academic essay, pardon me. If not, I (and I'm sure many on this forum) look forward to your thoughts.

Any Sanskritists, please feel free to comment as well.
This may lend credence to Malcolm's suggestion that the Heart Sutra could be a Vajrayana period text. While it is possible that the Heart Sutra along with these tantras you mention are of Chinese origin, the burden of proof would be on those seeking to prove such a claim. This is very interesting, thanks for contributing.
:bow: :buddha1: :bow: :anjali: :meditate:
User avatar
ratna
Posts: 475
Joined: Sun Oct 03, 2010 2:32 pm

Re: Jayarava's New Thesis on Heart Sutra: Sanskrit Version Deliberate Forgery by Tang Chinese

Post by ratna »

SonamTashi wrote: Tue Nov 27, 2018 1:04 pm
Antiochus wrote: Tue Nov 27, 2018 11:50 am
This may lend credence to Malcolm's suggestion that the Heart Sutra could be a Vajrayana period text. While it is possible that the Heart Sutra along with these tantras you mention are of Chinese origin, the burden of proof would be on those seeking to prove such a claim. This is very interesting, thanks for contributing.
I'll also add this snippet from the nidāna of the Sarvatathāgatatattvasaṅgraha, translated into Chinese in 753: ...śāśvatastryadhvasamayavyavasthitaḥ sarvakāyavākcittavajrastathāgataḥ...
Antiochus
Posts: 15
Joined: Mon May 30, 2016 8:12 am

Re: Jayarava's New Thesis on Heart Sutra: Sanskrit Version Deliberate Forgery by Tang Chinese

Post by Antiochus »

I'll also add this snippet from the nidāna of the Sarvatathāgatatattvasaṅgraha, translated into Chinese in 753: ...śāśvatastryadhvasamayavyavasthitaḥ sarvakāyavākcittavajrastathāgataḥ..
Wow, that is even more direct and explicit of an example than what I was able to find. I'll be really interested to see if Jayarava have addressed this in his upcoming article. Hopefully he can return back to this thread and respond.
Post Reply

Return to “East Asian Buddhism”