On Translating "Buddha"

Theravada is given many meanings: doctrine of elders, way of the elders, school of elders and so on. Hence there is a great need to find the exact meaning of Theravada, which is one of the major traditions of Buddhism This paper attempts to find the meaning of theravāda in the words attributed to Bhagava Buddho in the Sutta and Vinaya Pitakas. The extensive quotes in the paper need to be read to understand it.

2013

The aims of the current research are as follows: first, review the challenges of rendering Buddhist texts into Chinese and English through the study of the passage “the dharma of emancipation of the exhaustible and inexhaustible”, as articulated in the Vimalakīrti Nirdeśa Sūtra; and second, discuss the scholarly argument by which these Chinese and English translations could have originated from different Sanskrit or Tibetan editions. This study tabulates the three full classical Chinese translations and five English editions, among which are included in the Chinese renditions the works of Zhi Qian (the third century A.D.), Kumārajīva (the fifth century A.D.), and Xuan Zang (the seventh century A.D.); and the English versions translated by Luk, Watson, McRae, Lamotte/Boin, and Thurman between the 1970s and the 2000s. The former three English translations were mainly based on Kumārajīva’s edition and the latter two on the Tibetan copy, illustrating a three-tier translation hierarchy in which the Chinese translations represent the first-tier, being directly translated from the Sanskrit original(s); the English renditions represent the second-tier, stemming from either Kumārajīva’s or the Tibetan edition; and with the third-tier represented by Boin’s translation of Lamotte’s French copy into English. By comparing their chaptering, chapter titles, transliteration of Buddhist terminology, translation of the passage, punctuation, linguistic expressions, and missing parts in each edition, this analysis unveils the intra- and inter-differences between the Chinese and English renditions. Prior research results suggest that it is difficult to evaluate the credibility and validity of the translations because of the uncertainties related to the origin of the text. They have also addressed the fact that the translation discrepancies in Buddhist terminology in English might create a risk of misinterpretation of Buddhist Two Sanskrit Issues p. 3 teachings. Conclusively, this research first substantiates recent discussion on directly using Sanskrit terminology, instead of the English terms, in modern English Buddhist publications; and second agrees that the renditions probably came from different Sanskrit or Tibetan originals. Importantly, it equally values the academic contributions of individual Chinese and English renditions and translators; thus proposing cross-reference among various renditions as a means to inspire researchers with insight from different translations.

Buddha or the Buddha is the founder of Buddhism. He founded Buddhism after the experience commonly known as enlightenment. This paper demonstrates that all these terms are confusing and lead to multiple interpretations. The confusion is avoided in this paper by adopting the terms Historical Buddha and Enlightenment While Meditating; there is no word that corresponds to Buddhism in the Tipitaka, The paper begins to identify the life of Historical Buddha from his Enlightenment While Meditating using as source the Sutta and Vinaya Pitakas of the Tipitaka.

The proto-history and history of the Avataṃsaka sūtra and its related texts is notoriously complex. We have very little knowledge about the cultural and intellectual milieu in which the “complete” Avataṃsaka, currently available only in two Chinese and one Tibetan translation, was compiled. Equally obscure is the cultural environment, or environments, in which its related texts were composed.The earliest available version of the Avataṃsaka is the Chinese translation produced in the Eastern Jìn by Buddhabhadra, then Śikṣānanada's translation in Táng China, and the latest is the Tibetan translation. The Buddhist intellectual environment of the earlier Eastern Jìn translation was the opposite of that of the Táng, there was essentially no preceding Chinese Buddhist scholarly establishment through which to interpret the scripture. In addition, the background of the chief member of the translation team, Buddhabhadra, suggests that he was familiar with certain practices related to the Avataṃsaka back in Central Asia or Northern India. The investigation of historical Buddhist environment in China around the time of the early translation of the “complete” Avataṃsaka, and the doctrinal and practical concerns of the members of translation team and the Chinese Buddhist clergy of the time will be the main focus of the current section. A preliminary study of the history of the Avataṃsaka translation in Eastern Jìn was addressed in Shigeo Kamata’s History of Chinese Buddhism. However, the fragmentary approach of the study the author employed, investigating individual biographies of each particular team member, conceals the dynamic of their collaboration, and also distances the translation activity from the Chinese Buddhist environment of the time. In the current work, heavily relying on the Chinese Buddhist traditional historical records and Shigeo Kamata’s investigation, we shall try to draw an integral picture of the events within Chinese Buddhism in the late 4th and early 5th century which led to the formation of exceptional translation team, and the significant impact it had on the Chinese Buddhism of the time. Understanding of the Chinese Buddhist environment of the time and the spiritual background of the chief members of the translation team might shed light at the process by means of which a particular interpretation was arrived at, which is of great importance for interpretation of some difficult passages in the text.