1 – 4 of 4
Anonymous David Chapman said...

There's a weird, interesting parallel in Tibetan with regard to Bodhisattva/Bodhisatva. The Tibetan translation is pronounced "chang chub sem pa", but is spelled either byang chub sems pa or byang chub sems dpa. (Actually it is spelled lots of other ways as well, because Tibetan spelling is a nightmare and Tibetan scribes are often poorly educated, but those are regarded as legitimate and others aren't.)

pa "thingy" is a reasonable translation of sattva "being". dpa is "hero, warrior", and translates satva. (Both are pronounced "pa" -- the d is silent.)

The interesting thing is that the dpa spelling is widely preferred; an "enlightened mind thingy" is less attractive to Tibetans than an "enlightened mind warrior". On this basis, some Tibetans insist that Bodhisatva, not Bodhisattva, is the correct Sanskrit spelling.

Geoffrey Samuel's most recent book has some interesting speculation about the possible origin of Buddhism as an offshoot of military training. That could explain the abundance of military metaphors in Buddhist scriptures. Probably it doesn't explain the -satva spelling; but it may explain why that (mis)spelling is resonant.

Saturday, May 08, 2010

Blogger Jayarava said...

Hi David,

Yes that is interesting.

Do you mean "The Origins of Yoga and Tantra"? I found that book facinating - especially his suggestions of the two cultures in the Buddha's day. However Samuels is not the first to suggest a martial Buddhism - this was done many years ago by a martial artist known as Terry Dukes or Nagaboshi Tomio in a book called Bodhisattva Warriors.

With respect to both men I think this deeply unlikely - there really is no hint whatsoever of a military origin in the early texts - the Buddha and his followers were pacifists of the highest order.

However it is true that the Buddhists borrowed terminology from many spheres of life including royalty, military, trading, and agricultural. They did borrow spiritual exercises and, later, iconography as well, which muddies the water a little. It is possible that borrowing from more militant sects gave the Tantras a more aggressive cast, but let's not confuse militant with military.

I suppose if you accept the stories of the Buddha's early training then it is not such a leap to think of a military influence on the early Sangha (Sariputta was called Dhammasenapati 'general of the Dhamma' after all!). But there is every reason not to take them as historical fact, but as later hagiographical elaboration meant to show the universality of the Buddha (i.e. they are part of the process of deifying him).

Thanks for your comment. It reminds me of the Tibetan etymology of arahant! Some of their etymologies are quite whimsical don't you think?

Best Wishes
Jayarava

Saturday, May 08, 2010

Blogger NellaLou said...

This series is really fascinating. The breadth of your knowledge rather astounds me. And encourages as well.
Thank you.

Wednesday, May 12, 2010

Blogger Jayarava said...

Hi NellaLou

I've been doing a lot of this kind of research for a book I'm planning. For me it's fun. Er, and no, I don't get out much. ;-)

Jayarava

Wednesday, May 12, 2010

You can use some HTML tags, such as <b>, <i>, <a>

Comment moderation has been enabled. All comments must be approved by the blog author.

You will be asked to sign in after submitting your comment.
OpenID LiveJournal WordPress TypePad AOL
Please prove you're not a robot