Translation Question

The Watercooler
1

Greetings,

This a question to @cdpatton or anyone else who reads, writes and, more importantly, translates Chinese.

The following excerpt is a description of the nine sattāvāsa taken from near the end of Taishō 52, the 佛説大生義經, a parallel to DN 15, the Mahānidāna Sutta:

「復次，阿難！當知識所住處有其七種，非識住處有其二種。七識住處者：所謂若有色有眾生，種種身種種想；是為第一識所住處。若有色有眾生，種種身一想，所謂：『初禪天』；此為第二識所住處。若有色有眾生，一身種種想，所謂：『二禪天』；是為第三識所住處。若有色有眾生，一身一想，所謂：『三禪天』；是為第四識所住處。若無色無眾生，彼一切處 離諸色想，都一虛空，所謂：『空無邊處天』；是為第五識所住處。若無色無眾生，彼一切處離於空想，都惟一識，所謂：『識無邊處天』；是為第六識所住處。若無色無眾生，彼一切處離識無邊，都無所有，所謂：『無所有處天』；是為第七識所住處。阿難！二種非識住處者：所謂若有色有眾生，即『無想天』；是為第一非識住處。若無色無眾生，於彼一切離無所有處，非有想非無想，即『非想非非想處天』；是為第二非識住處。」

Everything else is relatively straightforward; I’m asking specifically about the phrases in bold: “若有色有” and “若無色無”. They really don’t make any intelligible sense to me. Here is the corresponding Pāli:

Satta kho, ānanda, viññāṇaṭṭhitiyo, dve āyatanāni. Katamā satta? Santānanda, sattā nānattakāyā nānattasaññino, seyyathāpi manussā, ekacce ca devā, ekacce ca vinipātikā. Ayaṁ paṭhamā viññāṇaṭṭhiti. Santānanda, sattā nānattakāyā ekattasaññino, seyyathāpi devā brahmakāyikā paṭhamābhinibbattā. Ayaṁ dutiyā viññāṇaṭṭhiti. Santānanda, sattā ekattakāyā nānattasaññino, seyyathāpi devā ābhassarā. Ayaṁ tatiyā viññāṇaṭṭhiti. Santānanda, sattā ekattakāyā ekattasaññino, seyyathāpi devā subhakiṇhā. Ayaṁ catutthī viññāṇaṭṭhiti. Santānanda, sattā sabbaso rūpasaññānaṁ samatikkamā paṭighasaññānaṁ atthaṅgamā nānattasaññānaṁ amanasikārā ‘ananto ākāso’ti ākāsānañcāyatanūpagā. Ayaṁ pañcamī viññāṇaṭṭhiti. Santānanda, sattā sabbaso ākāsānañcāyatanaṁ samatikkamma ‘anantaṁ viññāṇan’ti viññāṇañcāyatanūpagā. Ayaṁ chaṭṭhī viññāṇaṭṭhiti. Santānanda, sattā sabbaso viññāṇañcāyatanaṁ samatikkamma ‘natthi kiñcī’ti ākiñcaññāyatanūpagā. Ayaṁ sattamī viññāṇaṭṭhiti. Asaññasattāyatanaṁ nevasaññānāsaññāyatanameva dutiyaṁ.

which basically just says, “There are, Ānanda, beings (who)…” That is, there is no reference to materiality or immateriality.

(Just for reference, though, some of the other parallels do note whether the beings on the level in question are form or formless beings.)

Any suggestions would be most welcome.

2 Likes
2

I guess the most straightforward way to read it is as: “There are forms and sentient beings …” and “There are no forms and no sentient beings …” I guess the formless realm is a lonely place in this particular conception of it.

The first expression 有色有眾生 might be read as “there are sentient beings with form …” but it doesn’t make much sense to read 無色無眾生 as “there are no sentient beings without form …”

2 Likes
3

Yes, that was my first (and, then, my second) thought too. :weary_face:

2 Likes
4

The same passage appears in the Madhyamigama 97 (中阿含經97)

「有七識住及二處。云何七識住？有色眾生若干身、若干想，謂人及欲天，是謂第一識住。復次，阿難！有色眾生若干身、一想，謂梵天初生不夭壽，是謂第二識住。復次，阿難！有色眾生一身、若干想，謂晃昱天，是謂第三識住。復次，阿難！有色眾生一身、一想，謂遍淨天，是謂第四識住。復次，阿難！有無色眾生度一切色想，滅有對想，不念若干想，無量空處，是空處成就遊，謂無量空處天，是謂第五識住。復次，阿難！有無色眾生度一切無量空處，無量識處，是識處成就遊，謂無量識處天，是謂第六識住。復次，阿難！有無色眾生度一切無量識處，無所有處，是無所有處成就遊，謂無所有處天，是謂第七識住。」
SuttaCentral

the first four of the “seven viññāṇa-ṭṭhiti” involve sentient beings with physical bodies.
the last three of the “seven viññāṇa-ṭṭhiti” represent immaterial formless sentient beings .

2 Likes
5

Indeed.

The question, though, is why T 14 would say 無色無眾生 (formless non-beings) for 無色眾生 (formless beings).

6

「若無色無眾生」
obviously this is not the correct way to write it.

The first “無” should be changed to “有”, and become “若有色無眾生”

「色無眾生」means “formless sentient beings”

7

That would be a typo for 無色眾生. 無 modifies the noun that follows it. 色無眾生 would mean “form is no sentient being” (which actually occurs in T397).

I think if one were to amend the text to read like the other passages, they would change it to either 無色眾生 or 無色有眾生. I don’t personally see a good case for treating it as a typo, given that it’s consistent and the shift happens when moving from the form realm to the formless realm. Is it poorly written? Perhaps. It probably is intended to mean formless sentient beings.

Still, I’m a little intrigued by the subjective image of a realm where there are no forms and no sentient beings. Perhaps it describes the experience of a being born there, rather than an objective description of the heaven. It’s a lonely place to be.

2 Likes
8

And, see? Herein lies my dilemma. Personally, I, too, am intrigued and would like to explore that path. And, yes, the shift is just too perfect—and, furthermore, too consistent—to be so easily chalked up to just a copyists error: no, Shihu did this, and not thoughtlessly. However, when you have to produce a translation that is supportable and justifiable you have to make executive decisions, so to speak.

I’ll probably just translate “formless sentient beings” and leave an open-ended footnote.

FYI: In addition to MĀ 97, there’s another parallel: An Shigao’s T 14, which, for reasons I won’t go into, I maintain was (one of) Shihu’s source(s). The corresponding strings there read “有色，為令從是” and “有不色，為令從是,” so we have that as an additional witness possessing a qualification following the identification of form or formlessness.