Tibetan Buddhism in Western Perspective by Herbert V. GuentherReview by: Richard SherburneJournal of the American Oriental Society, Vol. 98, No. 4 (Oct. - Dec., 1978), pp. 576-577Published by: American Oriental SocietyStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/599817 .

Accessed: 13/06/2014 00:16

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

American Oriental Society is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal ofthe American Oriental Society.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 62.122.73.17 on Fri, 13 Jun 2014 00:16:53 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Journal of the American Oriental Society 98.4 (1978) Journal of the American Oriental Society 98.4 (1978)

toward her subject that makes her the ideal translator of

Leyla and Mejnin, Madame Huri goes on to describe Fuzfili's brand of mysticism, his understanding of the

mystic notion of love and its consequent influence on the

composition of the poem. This Note, however, is bereft of the type of information that one normally expects in a work such as this. Although the Master Text used in the

preparation of the translation is identified as the Killi-

yat Divan-Fuziili printed in Istanbul in 1308 A.H./1891 A.D. (p. 119), there are no details furnished on the state of this text or the attempts made to compare it with numerous variant texts or with collections containing the

Leyld and Mejnun poem (see, M. Cunbur, Fuzuli Hak- kinda bir Bibliografya Denemesi, Istanbul, 1956, pp. 50-

58). Furthermore, the Note lacks any statement on the translator's attitude toward the texts and her method of translation. One cannot help wondering, for example, what her position was with respect to Onan's critical edi- tion of the poem (see above) which she says she used as a reference text (p. 119), or why the prose conclusion to the introduction of the poem was omitted in the transla- tion (p. 122. Cf. Onan, pp. 1-2). Still more puzzling is the absence of any reference whatsoever to the fact that

exactly the same translation as appears in the volume under review was first published in 1959. The book, Fuzalt ve Leyla ve Mecnun (Ingilicze Terciimesi) was

printed by the Istanbul Maarif Basimevi on behalf of the Turkish National Commission of UNESCO in con- nection with the four hundredth anniversary of the death of Fuzfli. Its format is the same, with a dozen intro-

ductory chapters by prominent Turkish literary his- torians. The translator's Note, mentioned above, also

appeared in exactly the same form in this book. In evaluating the translation itself we cannot do better

than quote Professor Bombaci: "Sofi Huri's translation to which this essay is an introduction is extremely free and at times inexact by the standards of the scholar rather than the poet (p. 338)." This observation is fairly accurate, but in no way detracts from either the value or the beauty of Sofi Huri's gigantic effort. Her English retelling of Fuzlli's long poem may not be exact as far as words are concerned, but it is faithful in every other

respect. What is most pleasing about it is the success with which she has managed to recreate in simple English verse, which often follows the Turkish original even in

form, the spirit and atmosphere of Fuzuili's poetry. For this and her extraordinary industry and patience the translator has earned the gratitude of the English reading public which, thanks to the efforts of UNESCO, now has access to one of the best examples of Ottoman literary achievement.

J. STEWART-ROBINSON UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN

toward her subject that makes her the ideal translator of

Leyla and Mejnin, Madame Huri goes on to describe Fuzfili's brand of mysticism, his understanding of the

mystic notion of love and its consequent influence on the

composition of the poem. This Note, however, is bereft of the type of information that one normally expects in a work such as this. Although the Master Text used in the

preparation of the translation is identified as the Killi-

yat Divan-Fuziili printed in Istanbul in 1308 A.H./1891 A.D. (p. 119), there are no details furnished on the state of this text or the attempts made to compare it with numerous variant texts or with collections containing the

Leyld and Mejnun poem (see, M. Cunbur, Fuzuli Hak- kinda bir Bibliografya Denemesi, Istanbul, 1956, pp. 50-

58). Furthermore, the Note lacks any statement on the translator's attitude toward the texts and her method of translation. One cannot help wondering, for example, what her position was with respect to Onan's critical edi- tion of the poem (see above) which she says she used as a reference text (p. 119), or why the prose conclusion to the introduction of the poem was omitted in the transla- tion (p. 122. Cf. Onan, pp. 1-2). Still more puzzling is the absence of any reference whatsoever to the fact that

exactly the same translation as appears in the volume under review was first published in 1959. The book, Fuzalt ve Leyla ve Mecnun (Ingilicze Terciimesi) was

printed by the Istanbul Maarif Basimevi on behalf of the Turkish National Commission of UNESCO in con- nection with the four hundredth anniversary of the death of Fuzfli. Its format is the same, with a dozen intro-

ductory chapters by prominent Turkish literary his- torians. The translator's Note, mentioned above, also

appeared in exactly the same form in this book. In evaluating the translation itself we cannot do better

than quote Professor Bombaci: "Sofi Huri's translation to which this essay is an introduction is extremely free and at times inexact by the standards of the scholar rather than the poet (p. 338)." This observation is fairly accurate, but in no way detracts from either the value or the beauty of Sofi Huri's gigantic effort. Her English retelling of Fuzlli's long poem may not be exact as far as words are concerned, but it is faithful in every other

respect. What is most pleasing about it is the success with which she has managed to recreate in simple English verse, which often follows the Turkish original even in

form, the spirit and atmosphere of Fuzuili's poetry. For this and her extraordinary industry and patience the translator has earned the gratitude of the English reading public which, thanks to the efforts of UNESCO, now has access to one of the best examples of Ottoman literary achievement.

J. STEWART-ROBINSON UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN

Tibetan Buddhism in Western Perspective. By HERBERT V. GUENTHER. Pp. xi + 261. Emeryville: DHARMA PUBLISHING. 1977. Paperbound, $4.95.

This challenging collection of eleven articles by the

ever-youthful (kumarabhiita) Professor Guenther is a series of reflective studies published between 1950 and

1975, four of which appeared in JAOS, three in History of Religions, and the remainder in less known foreign journals.

The chapters reflect the title of the collection in that

they present a distinctively Tibetan (and not merely Indian) Buddhist tradition, and they reflect the author's ceaseless endeavors to refine Western appreciation of the

mysterious East. These chapters have a certain con-

tinuity of development that should be observed by the reader. After the initial translation of the Gandavyuha excerpts-nmarvelously done but regretfully omitting the "Resolves" of Samantabhadra so dear to Tibetans-the

chapters fall roughly into two main divisions: the specu- lative theory of liberation and its basis (2-7), and the more

practical aspects of realizing a spiritual career (8-11). The discussion of the Madhyamika basis of Tantrism in

Chapter 2 is clear and provocative, and Chapter 3 "Levels of Understanding" is one of the best presentations of the Five Fold Path of Mahayana that I have seen. The short texts of Padma-dkar-po are quite illuminating on the definition and inter-relationship of the various types and

degrees of knowledge-insight with the traditionally structured Path. Guenther's use of new English equiv- alents in place of traditional renditions is refreshing-e.g., "mentation" for "mind" (semslcitta), "unique kind of whole" for "concentration" (ting-'dzinlsamddhi), etc.

Chapter 4 "Background of Buddhist Tantrism" also reveals the richness of the Tibetan contribution to Buddhist thought through quotations from Padma-dkar-

po, accompanied by the author's valuable observations on

compassion (snying-rjelkaruina) and awareness (shes-rabl prajrid), contrasting the frequent misconception of their

dynamic coextension. The analysis of the stages of

spiritual joy (pp. 106-8) shows a delicate facet of the sexual symbolism of Tantra. Chapters 5 and 6, "Tibetan

Perspective" and "Aspects of Tibetan Religious Thought", explore short texts by Kun-mkhyen 'Jigs-med gling-pa; these are perhaps the most abstruse of the essays, and

require prior knowledge of the subject. But one is

grateful to Guenther for his exposition of Tibetan authors who might otherwise remain unknown to the general Buddhist scholar and student. In these chapters, Guen- ther's undisguised bias toward the Rnying-ma-pa as

being the only Tibetan tradition to stress metaphysics and psychology (pp. 140-171) puts the reader on his

guard, but is excused, perhaps, by his long and excellent

Tibetan Buddhism in Western Perspective. By HERBERT V. GUENTHER. Pp. xi + 261. Emeryville: DHARMA PUBLISHING. 1977. Paperbound, $4.95.

This challenging collection of eleven articles by the

ever-youthful (kumarabhiita) Professor Guenther is a series of reflective studies published between 1950 and

1975, four of which appeared in JAOS, three in History of Religions, and the remainder in less known foreign journals.

The chapters reflect the title of the collection in that

they present a distinctively Tibetan (and not merely Indian) Buddhist tradition, and they reflect the author's ceaseless endeavors to refine Western appreciation of the

mysterious East. These chapters have a certain con-

tinuity of development that should be observed by the reader. After the initial translation of the Gandavyuha excerpts-nmarvelously done but regretfully omitting the "Resolves" of Samantabhadra so dear to Tibetans-the

chapters fall roughly into two main divisions: the specu- lative theory of liberation and its basis (2-7), and the more

practical aspects of realizing a spiritual career (8-11). The discussion of the Madhyamika basis of Tantrism in

Chapter 2 is clear and provocative, and Chapter 3 "Levels of Understanding" is one of the best presentations of the Five Fold Path of Mahayana that I have seen. The short texts of Padma-dkar-po are quite illuminating on the definition and inter-relationship of the various types and

degrees of knowledge-insight with the traditionally structured Path. Guenther's use of new English equiv- alents in place of traditional renditions is refreshing-e.g., "mentation" for "mind" (semslcitta), "unique kind of whole" for "concentration" (ting-'dzinlsamddhi), etc.

Chapter 4 "Background of Buddhist Tantrism" also reveals the richness of the Tibetan contribution to Buddhist thought through quotations from Padma-dkar-

po, accompanied by the author's valuable observations on

compassion (snying-rjelkaruina) and awareness (shes-rabl prajrid), contrasting the frequent misconception of their

dynamic coextension. The analysis of the stages of

spiritual joy (pp. 106-8) shows a delicate facet of the sexual symbolism of Tantra. Chapters 5 and 6, "Tibetan

Perspective" and "Aspects of Tibetan Religious Thought", explore short texts by Kun-mkhyen 'Jigs-med gling-pa; these are perhaps the most abstruse of the essays, and

require prior knowledge of the subject. But one is

grateful to Guenther for his exposition of Tibetan authors who might otherwise remain unknown to the general Buddhist scholar and student. In these chapters, Guen- ther's undisguised bias toward the Rnying-ma-pa as

being the only Tibetan tradition to stress metaphysics and psychology (pp. 140-171) puts the reader on his

guard, but is excused, perhaps, by his long and excellent

576 576

This content downloaded from 62.122.73.17 on Fri, 13 Jun 2014 00:16:53 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Reviews of Books Reviews of Books

association with Tarthang Tulku and lamas of this school.

Chapter 7 "Mentalism and Beyond" discusses a philosoph- ical dispute between the Rnying-ma-pa and Bka'-bryud- pa over metaphysical interpretations of Madhyamika.

Chapters 8 and 10 on the relationship of Guru and

disciple in the spiritual process are solid etymological excursions on basic terms (bla-ma/guru, chosldharma, sangs-rgyaslbuddha, etc.), and should be helpfully cor- rective for beginning students of Buddhism and its

languages. The author's most creative thought, it seems to me, is

in Chapters 9 and 11: "Tantra and Revelation" and

"Experience of Being Through Psychological Purifica- tion". The constant theme of all the chapters is the

organic unity of Tibetan Buddhist religious experience, which strives toward that integrity which the West loses so easily in its separated disciplines of epistemology, ontology, and psychology.

A few cautions may be appropriate for new readers of Guenther's works. While there can be no doubt that his is a singular gift for the understanding of Buddhist thought and the rendering of it in English, considerable patience is occasionally required when a translated term expresses more a definition than a single word. For example, Guenther's translation of sems-can/sattva (usually "sen- tient being", "creature") is somewhat cumbersome as "individual engaged in metaperceptual ends" (p. 227), or the dismaying passage on p. 40:

This feature of losing the first first-order causal char- acteristic and gaining the second first-order causal characteristic may be termed a second-order causal characteristic. Since this process is assumed to be

reversible, mind may be said to possess also the second second-order causal characteristic of losing the second first-order causal characteristic and regaining the first first-order causal characteristic ....

While the book is nearly always consistent in giving Tibetan/Sanskrit equivalents for G's new translations, the omissions at moments of doubt can be disconcerting. In general, however, the insights to be gained from this work far outweigh its irritants.

RICHARD SHERBURNE

SEATTLE UNIVERSITY

Die aus dem Chinesischen iibersetzten Tibetischen Ver- sionen des Suvarnaprabhdsasuitra: Philologische und linguistische Beitrdge zur klassifizierenden Charakteri- sierung iibersetzter Texte. By CLAUS OETKE. Alt- und Neu-Indische Studien herausgegeben vom Seminar fur Kultur und Geschichte Indiens an der Universi-

association with Tarthang Tulku and lamas of this school.

Chapter 7 "Mentalism and Beyond" discusses a philosoph- ical dispute between the Rnying-ma-pa and Bka'-bryud- pa over metaphysical interpretations of Madhyamika.

Chapters 8 and 10 on the relationship of Guru and

disciple in the spiritual process are solid etymological excursions on basic terms (bla-ma/guru, chosldharma, sangs-rgyaslbuddha, etc.), and should be helpfully cor- rective for beginning students of Buddhism and its

languages. The author's most creative thought, it seems to me, is

in Chapters 9 and 11: "Tantra and Revelation" and

"Experience of Being Through Psychological Purifica- tion". The constant theme of all the chapters is the

organic unity of Tibetan Buddhist religious experience, which strives toward that integrity which the West loses so easily in its separated disciplines of epistemology, ontology, and psychology.

A few cautions may be appropriate for new readers of Guenther's works. While there can be no doubt that his is a singular gift for the understanding of Buddhist thought and the rendering of it in English, considerable patience is occasionally required when a translated term expresses more a definition than a single word. For example, Guenther's translation of sems-can/sattva (usually "sen- tient being", "creature") is somewhat cumbersome as "individual engaged in metaperceptual ends" (p. 227), or the dismaying passage on p. 40:

This feature of losing the first first-order causal char- acteristic and gaining the second first-order causal characteristic may be termed a second-order causal characteristic. Since this process is assumed to be

reversible, mind may be said to possess also the second second-order causal characteristic of losing the second first-order causal characteristic and regaining the first first-order causal characteristic ....

While the book is nearly always consistent in giving Tibetan/Sanskrit equivalents for G's new translations, the omissions at moments of doubt can be disconcerting. In general, however, the insights to be gained from this work far outweigh its irritants.

RICHARD SHERBURNE

SEATTLE UNIVERSITY

Die aus dem Chinesischen iibersetzten Tibetischen Ver- sionen des Suvarnaprabhdsasuitra: Philologische und linguistische Beitrdge zur klassifizierenden Charakteri- sierung iibersetzter Texte. By CLAUS OETKE. Alt- und Neu-Indische Studien herausgegeben vom Seminar fur Kultur und Geschichte Indiens an der Universi-

tiat Hamburg, 18. Wiesbaden: FRANZ STEINER

Verlag. 1977.

There are few works devoted to the study of Tibetan

literary activity which can claim to break new ground. The present work which developed out of a doctoral thesis submitted to the University of Hamburg in the Federal Republic of Germany, is certainly one of thein. There can be no doubt that it will have a significant impact on anyone who has to deal with the problem of translation, theoretically or practically, and it is for its

penetrating analysis that it deserves full praise. The author has selected the Suvarnaprabhasasuitra

(also known as the Suvarna-prabhisottamasiitra) for a detailed study because it is one of several Sutras which have been translated into Tibetan from Chinese sources and which also by way of content is one of the more

interesting Sfitras. Apart from Central Asian fragments, three Chinese versions by Dharmaksema, Pao-kuei, and

I-tsing, respectively, have been preserved, while two others ascribed to Paramartha and Yasogupta have been lost, which is all the more deplorable because Para- martha was a philosopher in his own right. The second reason for selecting this Sfitra was the fact that critical editions of the Sanskrit text as well as the canonical Tibetan versions by the late Johannes Nobel are readily available.

On the basis of a careful analysis of the material the author is able to show that with a single exception, referred to as Tib. V, the Tibetan translations from Chi- nese sources took these Chinese versions as their starting- point and hence are translations from secondary sources, that is, they are translations from translations (p. 135).

The major and most significant part of this study is the investigation of the problem of adequacy and faith- fulness of a translation. The thesis, well substantiated by modern linguistic methods and a sharpened perceptivity derived from these methods, is that a translation can only be considered a translation when the content presented in a language A is, for all practical purposes, identical with the one presented in (that is, translated into) language B. To achieve this end it is often necessary in the process of translating to 'paraphrase' a term as well as to be constantly aware of 'implicitness' and 'explic- itness' because it is an incontestible fact that no ready- made correspondences between the various elements in the language from which a translation starts and those in the language into which a given text or subject matter is being translated, are available (p. 198). The conse- quence is that translation and interpretation are in- separable, above all because language is not reducible to the words in it which then are assumed to be autono- mous, having a 'meaning-in-themselves' which a trans-

tiat Hamburg, 18. Wiesbaden: FRANZ STEINER

Verlag. 1977.

There are few works devoted to the study of Tibetan

literary activity which can claim to break new ground. The present work which developed out of a doctoral thesis submitted to the University of Hamburg in the Federal Republic of Germany, is certainly one of thein. There can be no doubt that it will have a significant impact on anyone who has to deal with the problem of translation, theoretically or practically, and it is for its

penetrating analysis that it deserves full praise. The author has selected the Suvarnaprabhasasuitra

(also known as the Suvarna-prabhisottamasiitra) for a detailed study because it is one of several Sutras which have been translated into Tibetan from Chinese sources and which also by way of content is one of the more

interesting Sfitras. Apart from Central Asian fragments, three Chinese versions by Dharmaksema, Pao-kuei, and

I-tsing, respectively, have been preserved, while two others ascribed to Paramartha and Yasogupta have been lost, which is all the more deplorable because Para- martha was a philosopher in his own right. The second reason for selecting this Sfitra was the fact that critical editions of the Sanskrit text as well as the canonical Tibetan versions by the late Johannes Nobel are readily available.

On the basis of a careful analysis of the material the author is able to show that with a single exception, referred to as Tib. V, the Tibetan translations from Chi- nese sources took these Chinese versions as their starting- point and hence are translations from secondary sources, that is, they are translations from translations (p. 135).

The major and most significant part of this study is the investigation of the problem of adequacy and faith- fulness of a translation. The thesis, well substantiated by modern linguistic methods and a sharpened perceptivity derived from these methods, is that a translation can only be considered a translation when the content presented in a language A is, for all practical purposes, identical with the one presented in (that is, translated into) language B. To achieve this end it is often necessary in the process of translating to 'paraphrase' a term as well as to be constantly aware of 'implicitness' and 'explic- itness' because it is an incontestible fact that no ready- made correspondences between the various elements in the language from which a translation starts and those in the language into which a given text or subject matter is being translated, are available (p. 198). The conse- quence is that translation and interpretation are in- separable, above all because language is not reducible to the words in it which then are assumed to be autono- mous, having a 'meaning-in-themselves' which a trans-

577 577

This content downloaded from 62.122.73.17 on Fri, 13 Jun 2014 00:16:53 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions