"Saantideva's "Sik.saasamuccaya

Martin Delhey mdelhey at YAHOO.COM
Sat Dec 30 21:47:59 UTC 2000

> Richard B Mahoney wrote:

> I'm working on "Saantideva's "Sik.saasamuccaya and
> "Sik.saasamuccayakaarikaa and having trouble translating a passage in
> the body of the "SS which introduces the first "sloka of the
> "SSK. This passage follows a section in praise of the advantages of a
> fortunate birth (k.sa.na).
> If possible, I'd like one or two of you to have a go at this passage
> so I can compare your translation with my own and that of Bendall and
> Rouse.
> Here is the passage in question. It appears reasonably
> self-contained. I am transliterating from the Devanaagarii without
> separating the words.
> || tadeva.mvidha.m samaagamamaasaadya sa.mv.rtiparamaarthata.h
> suviditasa.msaaradu.skhasyopa"samanasukhaabhilaa.si.no
> buddhagotraanubhaavaattu yasya mahaasatvasyaiva.m
> pratyavek.sotpadyate ||
> For those of you with a copy to hand, this passage is from p.~2
> lns.~8--9 of:
>  Bendall, C., trans., ``"Sik.saasamuccaya, a compendium of Buddhistic
>  teaching compiled by "Saantideva chiefly from earlier Mahaayaana
>  Suutras'', Bibliotheca Buddhica (St. Petersburg: Commissionaires de
>  l'Academie Imperiale des Sciences, 1897--1902)
> The only translation I have to hand seems -- although I may well be
> wrong -- to be problematic, i.e., pp.~2--3 of:
>  Bendall, C. & Rouse, W. H. D. eds., ``"Sik.saa Samuccaya: A
>  Compendium of Buddhist Doctrine'' (Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1971)

I think you are right in stating that  Bendall's and Rouse's translation
of the passage you cited is somewhat problematic.
Instead of proposing  a translation of the Sanskrit text, for the time
being, I would like to communicate my own  view of the overall structure of
the passage to you.
To my mind it is impossible to interpret it as a whole sentence, because no
main clause can be detected. But the problems can be solved,
if we admit, that the sentence does not end here, but not before l. 14.
While the first verse ( yadaa mama ...) still belongs to the relative
insofar as it gives the contents of the
bodhisattva's thought (or 'prayavek.saa'), the main clause begins with
tenaatmana.h in l. 12 and ends with matir d.r.dhaa at he end of the second
verse. tena in l. 12  (in my view, Bendall and Rouse have completely
misunderstood its function) correlates with yasya in the passage you quoted
and yasya as well as tena refer to the Bodhisattva. At least such an
understanding would make sense to me. Obviously ´Saantideva has neatly
arranged this sentence by incorporating two verses in it. For people
out there who do not have the edition at hand, I will give the text of the
rest of the sentence below.

         yadaa mama pare.saa.m ca bhaya.m du.skha.m ca na priya.m
         tadaatmana.h ko vi´se.so yat ta.m rak.saami netaram iti
tenaatmana.h sattvadhaato´s ca
        du.skhaanta.m kartukaamena sukhaanta.m gantum icchataa
        'sraddhaamuula.m d.r.dhiik.rtya bodhau kaaryaa matir d.r.dhaa

Best regards,
Martin Delhey

Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

More information about the INDOLOGY mailing list