MAHĀPIṬAKA
Newsletter New Series No. 25

January 1, 2020

EDITORIAL COMMITTEE of
the ENGLISH TRANSLATIONof the CHINESE TRIPIṬAKA
Bukkyō Dendō Kyōkai(Society for the Promotion of Buddhism)

Editor: Kenneth K. Tanaka

Table of Contents

Publishing Schedule
Published in 2019.................................................................................................. 1
Forthcoming titles ................................................................................................. 1
Review:
The Brahmā’s Net Sutra(Translated by A. Charles Muller and Kenneth K. Tanaka)
By Eric Goodell .................................................................................................... 2
The Canonical Book of The Buddha’s Lengthy Discourses(Translated by Shohei Ichimura)
By ENOMOTO Fumio ............................................................................................ 4
Report:My PhD Defense at Leiden University, the Netherlands
By YONEZAWA Yoshiyasu ................................................................................... 6
Committee Members ........................................................................................................ 7

Publishing Schedule
Published in 2019:

THE FAYUAN ZHULIN (THE JADE GARDEN OF DHARMA FOREST)(法苑珠林 Hō-on-jurin, Taishō 2122)

Volume I (Fasc. 1–7) and II (Fasc. 8–12)
Translated by Koichi Shinohara

Forthcoming titles:

THE FAYUAN ZHULIN (THE JADE GARDEN OF DHARMA FOREST)(法苑珠林 Hō-on-jurin, Taishō 2122)

Volume III (Fasc. 13–20)
Translated by Koichi Shinohara

Volume IV–VI (Fasc. 21–40)
Translated by Harumi Hirano Ziegler

THE MADHYAMA ĀGAMA (MIDDLE-LENGTH DISCOURSES)(中阿含經 Chū-agonkyō, Taishō 26)

Volume II–IV
Translated by 關則富, 朱倍賢, 釋法曜, Marcus Bingenheimer, and 釋純因
Edited by Bhikkhu Anālayo and Roderick S. Bucknell

TREATISE ON THE TEN GROUNDS(十住毘婆沙論 Jūjū-bibasha-ron, Taishō 1521)
Translated by Dharmamitra

THE MAHAYANA SUTRA OF PREVIOUS LIVES AND CONTEMPLATION
OF THE MIND-GROUND(大乘本生心地觀經 Daijō-honjō-shinji-kangyō, Taishō 159)
Translated by Rolf W. Giebel

1Review:

The Brahmā’s Net Sutra(Translated by A. Charles Muller and Kenneth K. Tanaka)

Eric Goodell
Buddhist Studies, Fo guang University
The Mahāyāna Brahmā’s Net Sutra (Fanwang jing 梵網經, Taishō no. 1484) has played an importantrole for East Asian Buddhists for many centuries. Since the time of Saichō in the ninth century, thebodhisattva precepts found in this text have been used for the ordination of Japanese Buddhist priests.
The text is also used in China for the bodhisattva ordination portion of the triple ordination. Serious
practitioners, lay and clerical, continue to find inspiration in this text. The present translation, by Charles
Muller and Kenneth Tanaka, is the first complete translation of this text in a Western language, a worthy
contribution to the BDK translation project, and an important milestone in this text’s history.
Although the bodhisattva precepts are by far the best known and most commented upon portionof this text, they comprise only the second half of the text. The first half describes forty stages on the
Mahāyāna path to buddhahood. As the sutra opens, Śākyamuni Buddha is in a state of meditative
concentration. Vairocana Buddha then explains that Śākyamuni is one of his ten trillion transformation
bodies. This occurs in the context of the lotus platform store world, thus sharing in the Avataṃsaka or
Huayan cosmology. Then, in response to Śākyamuni’s question about how people in the future cancomplete the ten grounds and attain buddhahood, the forty stages are taught, the last of which are theten grounds.
The original Chinese text in this section is terse, enigmatic, and difficult. Further, the descriptionsof the forty stages do not lend themselves to easy comparisons with stages of the bodhisattva pathdescribed in other Mahāyāna texts. To overcome these difficulties, the translators have made full use of
a commentary by the Korean monk Daehyeon 太賢 (Taishō no. 1815) which provides many helpful
explanations.
The second part of the text contains the bodhisattva precepts. Vairocana Buddha is also the source
for these precepts, but in our present world, Śākyamuni Buddha is the one who recites them. After his
enlightenment, while sitting under the bodhi tree, his “first act was to establish the Prātimokṣa” (p. 42).
There is a slight omission here: this should read, “establish the bodhisattva Prātimokṣa” (Fanwang jing,p. 1004a24). This differs from the śrāvaka vinaya for monks and nuns, which was gradually compiled
as monks and nuns committed various misdeeds.
One noteworthy feature is that the same set of precepts applies to both monastic and lay Buddhists.
Many of the precepts are suited for both groups. This is true for the first grave precept, against intentional
killing, as well as the other nine grave precepts. However, among the forty-eight minor precepts, a few
are obviously for clergy, such the precept against accepting personal invitations (minor precept no. 27).
2

Some precepts are clearly for lay Buddhists, such as the one prohibiting people from making personal
invitations to a specific monk or nun (minor precept no. 28).
The precepts also regulate the relationship between Buddhism and the government. For example,
in minor precept 1, a Buddhist who becomes a king must be respectful to Buddhist clergy. Minor precept
17 prevents clergy from using their political connections to generate material gains or fame. Minor
precept 47 prevents Buddhists who work for the government from making laws that restrict Buddhists,such as prohibiting renunciation, the printing of texts, or the building of stupas.
Another noteworthy feature is the Chinese concept of filial piety (xiaoshun 孝順), a term
which occurs fifteen times in the precept portion of the text. First, the text states directly that bodhisattva
precepts are synonymous with filial piety (p. 42). Also, the first three grave precepts call for bodhisattvas
to be filial, rather than killing, stealing, or carrying out sexual misconduct. Similar ideas are found inother precepts. The translators use several different terms to translate the Chinese term “xiaoshun”: piety,filial piety, pious obedience, reverence, and complaisance. This is instructive in two ways. First, the useof “reverence” reflects content from early commentaries. Interested readers may refer to Muller’s
detailed discussion of Daehyeon’s twofold interpretation of filial piety1). Second, by using several
different terms, including the technical term “filial piety,” the translators strike a good balance between
the demands of literal and free translation methodologies.
Considering the text as a whole, it is clear that the translators have made every effort to fully
understand the text, by referring to commentaries and modern scholarship. Their English text is readable
and reliable, and will serve anyone wishing to understand the bodhisattva precepts or the bodhisattva
path.
1) A. Charles Muller, ed. and trans., Exposition of the Sutra of Brahma’s Net (Paju, Korea: Jogye Order of Korean Buddhism,2012), pp. 44–48.

3

Review:

The Canonical Book of the Buddha’s Lengthy Discourses(Translated by Shohei Ichimura)

ENOMOTO Fumio
Professor Emeritus, Osaka University
The work under review, consisting of three volumes, is, as is shown in the title, a full English translationof the Chang-a-han-jing. It constitutes the initial scripture in the first volume of the Taisho canon. Eachvolume of this BDK publication contains “Translator’s Introduction,” English translation, “Notes,”“Bibliography,” and “Index.” Concerning the Chinese Chang-a-han-jing, the translation of the first ten(1–10) scrolls are included in the first volume of the BDK translation series, the next ten (11–20) scrolls
are in the second volume, and the final ten (21–30) scrolls are in the third volume.
The Chang-a-han-jing (in which many important sutras, e.g., the You-xing-jing with episodes justbefore and after the Buddha’s Parinirvāṇa, etc., are included) is considered to have belonged to theDharmaguptaka, one of the early Buddhist schools. Although no reference is made in the “Translator’sIntroduction,” there has been quite a progress made in the research of this school as manuscripts of theoriginal texts written in Indo-Aryan languages belonging to this school have been discovered one after
another. In this respect, the publication is timely and truly meaningful.
However, there are a number of problems in this work. It would suffice to point out thefollowing four issues.
First, it lists the following reference in the ‘Primary Sources’ of the “Bibliography”:
Dīrgha Āgama (Pāli: Dīgha Nikāya); Chang ahan jing (Canonical Collection of Lengthy
Discourses) (T. 1), in twenty-two fascicles. Translated by Buddhayaśas and Zhu Fonian. English
translation in T. W. and C. A. F. Rhys Davids, The Dialogues of the Buddha, 3 vols.
However, this description is misleading, since The Dialogues of the Buddha is not an English translationof the Dīrgha-Āgama but that of the Dīgha-Nikāya in Pali. (NB. Although the translator lists it in two
words, namely Dīrgha Āgama and Dīgha Nikāya, the titles are expressed by one word as in the original
texts.)
Second, the following significant references on this text are not listed in the ‘Secondary Sources’of the “Bibliography.”1) Ishikawa Kaijō 石川海淨 tr. Mizuno Kōgen 水野弘元 rev. 1969. Kokuyaku issaikyō Agon-bu
7 『國譯一切經』「阿含部」7. Tokyo: Daitō shuppansha 大東出版社.
2) Okayama Hajime 丘山新 et al. tr. 1995–2005. Gendaigo-yaku Agon kyōten. 『現代語訳「阿含経典」』 6 vols. Tokyo: Hirakawa shuppansha 平河出版社.
3) Saigusa Mitsuyoshi 三枝充悳 et al. tr. 1993–1994. Jō-agon-kyō. 『長阿含経』 2 vols. Tokyo:Daizō shuppan 大蔵出版.
44) Karashima Seishi 辛嶋静志. 1994. Jō-agon-kyō no gengo no kenkyū: Onshago bunseki ochūshin toshie『『長阿含経』の原語の研究 : 音写語分析を中心として』. Tokyo: Hirakawa
shuppansha.
5) Bareau, A. 1966. “L’origine du Dīrgha-Āgama traduit en chinois par Buddhayaśas,” in: Ba
Shin et al. (eds.) Essays Offered to G.H.Luce (75th Birthday), Vol.1, Ascona, 49–58.
Third, the description about the Translation policy in “Translator’s Introduction” is somewhat
problematic. It runs as follows:“First, since the original Sanskrit text is no longer extant, I relied almost exclusively on the Pāli
Dīgha Nikāya and its English translation, ... it is extremely difficult to identify from Chinesetransliteration what a given proper name or proper noun might be in the Sanskrit original. ... This
English version of the Chang ahan jing may thus appear to be more like a translation made fromthe Pāli Nikāya than a directly rendered English version vis-à-vis the Chinese original.” (p. xxv)
Mizuno’s supplementary explanation (Ishikawa 1969, 504) and Karashima 1994 listed above, however,reveal that the original text of the Chinese Chang-a-han-jing was not in Sanskrit, the Old Indo-Aryan
language, but in Gāndhārī, one of the Middle Indo-Aryan languages. Consequently, I cannot agree withthe translator’s view, [as noted above] “it is extremely difficult to identify from Chinese transliteration
what a given proper name or proper noun might be in the Sanskrit original.” It turns out that the reality
was the opposite of the translator’s view, since it was the Chinese transliteration that identified andclarified what the original terms were.”
Fourth, there are several incorrect translations, which could have been avoided if the translator
had consulted Okayama 1995–2005 mentioned above. For instance, p. 3, 15–19 in the Preface and p. 7,
22–25 in Sutra 1 are the case in point. Concerning the latter part, although it corresponds to Ishikawa’s
Japanese translation (Ishikawa 1969, 29), Okayama 1995 (vol. 1, 106–7 and the note 22 on p. 388)
reveals that it is a wrong translation. Incidentally, this can be ascertained from the corresponding partsof the Dīgha-Nikāya (Pali Text Society edition vol. 2, pp. 8, 12–9, 7). As a result, we found someexamples of idiosyncratic translation, which correspond neither to Pali text nor to the Chinese original
and also go against the description in the “Translator’s Introduction” quoted above.
Although there are several problems in this work, it is indeed true that this constitutes the firstfull English translation of the Chinese Chang-a-han-jing transmitted by the Dharmaguptaka school. It
is significant that the English-speaking readers throughout the world now have access to the contents ofthis voluminous early Buddhist scripture. For the scholars, moreover, the locations of the Taisho canon(page and column numbers) printed in the margin make it easier to compare the English translation withthe original Chinese text.

5

Report:My PhD Defense at Leiden University, the Netherlands
YONEZAWA Yoshiyasu
Associate Professor, Taisho University
Member, Editorial Committee of the BDK English Tripitaka Translation Project
I was able to obtain the PhD degree from Leiden University under the supervision of Prof. Dr. J.A. Silkand Prof. Dr. Vincent Eltschinger. Leiden University is one of the oldest universities in the Netherlands.
The PhD ceremony was held at the academic building on 24th October, 2019. What follows is a briefreport on my PhD defense.
Immediately after the submission of a dissertation to the supervisor, the Doctorate Committee isorganized, from which the supervisor and the co-supervisor are excluded. The final version of the thesis
is, then, completed after incorporating the suggestions and corrections from the Committee members.
After the approval of the thesis by the Doctorate committee, I made an appointment for the PhD
defense with the Beadle office at the Academiegebouw (Academy building). Although the defense isquite ceremonial in appearance, it is called “defense” because of the academic confrontation often
exhibited between the candidate and the opposition committee. The opposition committee is comprisedof Rector Magnifcus as the chair, Doctorate committee members, etc. Moreover, it is required that the
majority of the committee members be appointed from among the faculty of Leiden University and thatat least one male and one female member be included.
At the defense, the PhD candidate must be accompanied by two assistants (paranimphs). MalePhD candidates and assistants are required to wear a tailcoat with a black waistcoat, white bow tie andblack socks. Female PhD candidates and paranymphs must dress in appropriate attire for the ceremony.
Furthermore, the candidate must use the following forms of address: hooggeschatte promotor for
supervisor, hooggeleerde opponens for the professors on the committee. The ceremony follows a fixed
protocol: 45 minutes of discussions that ends with the Beadle’s (M.C. of the ceremony) announcement‘hora est!’ (It’s time). Then, the committee withdraws from the room for deliberation. When thecommittee comes back to the room, the diploma is given to the candidate and the eulogy is given by thepromotor. There are set formulae for these elements.
My thesis entitled, “A Textual Study of the *Lakṣaṇaṭīkā” can be downloaded from theRepository of Leiden University: http://hdl.handle.net/1887/79823 .

6

Committee Members
Editorial Committee, Tokyo:
Kenneth K. Tanaka (Chairperson), Professor Emeritus, Musashino University
ICHISHIMA Shōshin, Professor Emeritus, Taisho University
ISHIGAMI Zennō, Professor Emeritus, Taisho University
KATSURA Shōryū, Professor Emeritus, Hiroshima University
MAYEDA Sengaku, Professor Emeritus, The University of Tokyo
MINOWA Kenryō, The University of TokyoSAITŌ Akira, International College for Postgraduate Buddhist Studies
SHIMODA Masahiro, The University of TokyoWATANABE Shōgo, Toyo University
YONEZAWA Yoshiyasu, Taisho University
Publication Committee, Berkeley:
A. Charles Muller (Chairperson), Musashino University
Carl W. Bielefeldt, Professor Emeritus, Stanford University
Marianne Dresser, BDK America
Hudaya Kandahjaya, BDK America
Brian Kensho Nagata, BDK America
Robert H. Sharf, University of California, BerkeleyMAHĀPIṬAKA
Newsletter New Series No.25
EDITORIAL COMMITTEE of
the ENGLISH TRANSLATION of the CHINESE TRIPIṬAKA
c/o Bukkyō Dendō Kyōkai (Society for the Promotion of Buddhism)
4-3-14 Shiba, Minato-ku, Tokyo 108-0014, JAPAN
Tel: +81-3-3455-5851
Fax: +81-3-3798-2758
E-Mail:bdk@bdk.or.jp
URL: http://www.bdk.or.jp

7