In reading the 14 volumes of Chinese Master Hsuan Hua’s commentary on the Lotus Sutra I’ve identified a number of places where his translation differs – mostly minor points – from other English translations of Kumārajīva’s fifth century Chinese translation. (See here, here, and here.)

For the final example, consider this description of monks who tormented Never-Despising Bodhisattva from Hsuan Hua’s commentary on Chapter 20:

SUTRA

After that Buddha passed into nirvāṇa,
When his Dharma was about to perish,
There was a Bodhisattva
Known as Never Slighting.
At that time the fourfold assembly
Was attached to the Dharma. …

COMMENTARY

The fourfold assembly at that time was attached to the Dharma. Even the Dharma has to be relinquished, how much more so that which is not the Dharma? If you don’t understand the Dharma, you must strive to understand it. Once you understand it, you have to let go of it. You can’t cling to it. At that time, because the Buddhadharma was about to perish, the bhikṣus, bhikṣunīs, upāsakās, and upāsikās were all attached to the superficial aspects of the Dharma. They focused their efforts on the trivial aspects of the Dharma and clung to them rigidly. Not only did they fail to understand the Dharma, they were attached to it. Attached to the Dharma, they gave rise to overbearing pride.

This idea that you shouldn’t cling to the boat that carries you across the water after you reach the other shore is a common reframe in Hsuan Hua’s commentary. But other English translation offer a different picture.

Senchu Murano’s translation says:

Some time after the extinction of that Buddha,
His teachings had almost died out.
At that time there lived a Bodhisattva Called Never-Despising.
The four kinds of devotees at that time Were attached to views.

The Modern Rissho Kosei-kai translation offers:

The four groups of that era
Were attached to their own views of the teachings.

Gene Reeves has:

At that time the four groups
Were attached to self-centered views of things.

The BDK Tripiṭaka translation says:

At that time the fourfold assembly
Was becoming attached
To its own interpretation of the Dharma.

Leon Hurvitz’s translation, considered by many to be the most academically thorough, is the least clear on the point:

At the time, the fourfold multitudes
Were reckoning in terms of dharma.

Hsuan Hua spent many years in China printing sutras in Chinese and distributing them as part of his practice. Given the ways in which his English translation of Kumārajīva differs from other English translators, I’m left to wonder whether he was working from a different copy of Kumārajīva’s work.  The volume that contains the English translation of the sutra also contains the Chinese version from which it was translated.

While there’s a clear difference between Hsuan Hua’s translation describing the monks who tormented Never-Despising Bodhisattva, other differences reveal examples of where Senchu Murano, whose  translation I use in my daily practice, differed from the majority of English translators.

Consider this part of Chapter 23, The Previous Life of Medicine-King Bodhisattva. Hsuan Hua’s English translation has:

SUTRA

“Having spoken this verse, Bodhisattva All Beings Delight to See said to the Buddha, ‘World Honored One! World Honored One! You are still in the world!”

COMMENTARY

Having spoken this verse, Bodhisattva All Beings Delight to See said to the Buddha Pure Bright Virtue Resembling the Sun and Moon, “World Honored One! World Honored One! You are still in the world!” This Bodhisattva exclaimed “World Honored One” twice because the Buddha hadn’t yet entered parinirvāņa, so he could meet the Buddha for a second time in his new life.

That repetition is not present in Senchu Murano’s translation:

“Having sung this gāthā, Gladly-Seen-By-All-Beings Bodhisattva said to the Buddha, ‘World-Honored One! You do not change, do you?’

On the other hand, Leon Hurvitz’s translation agrees that “World Honored One” is repeated:

“At that time the bodhisattva Seen with Joy by All Living Beings, having proclaimed this gāthā, addressed the buddha, saying, ‘World-Honored One, World-Honored One, you are still in the world!’

In fact, Murano’s is the only translation that does not include the title World Honored One twice in the verse. But those repetitions are unlike Hsuan Hua and Hurvitz. For Example, Reeves has:

“Having recited this verse, Seen with Joy by All the Living Bodhisattva said to that buddha: ‘World-Honored One, is the World-Honored One still alive in the world?’

Or the BDK Tripiṭaka’s:

“Thereupon Bodhisattva Sarvarūpasamdarśana, having spoken this verse, addressed the Buddha, saying: O Bhagavat! The Bhagavat is yet in this world!

The Modern Rissho Kosei-kai translation offers:

Then the Bodhisattva Delight to Behold for All Living Beings, having uttered these verses, said to that buddha, ‘World-Honored One, just as before, you are still the world-honored one in this world.’

As a scholar-priest within the Nichiren Shu, Murano is highly regarded for the clarity of his translations and for his alignment with the traditional Japanese understanding of the text. To reach that  clarity appears to have led to differences between Murano’s  translation and other English translators.

Next: Where Chinese Master Hsuan Hua and Nichiren Would Disagree

Reading Chinese Master Hsuan Hua’s 14-volume commentary of the Lotus Sutra, I’ve discovered another interesting twist in the interpretation of Kumārajīva’s Chinese translation of the Lotus Sutra. This comes in Volume 11 of Hsuan Hua’s commentary during the discussion of the practice of Bodhisattva Never Slighting in Chapter 20.

This bhikșu Never Slighting not only read and recited sūtras, but he also walked the Bodhisattva Path and made obeisance, to the extent that as soon as he saw members of the fourfold assembly from afar, he would deliberately approach them, bow, and praise them, saying, “I dare not slight you, for you shall all become Buddhas.” Bodhisattva practice like this isn’t easy to do. Could any of you do it? He bowed to both monastics and laypeople. He cultivated what others couldn’t cultivate.

When I read this I immediately recognized a discrepancy with Senchu Murano’s translation, which says:

“He did not read or recite sūtras. He only bowed to the four kinds of devotees. When he saw them in the distance, he went to them on purpose, bowed to them, and praised them, saying, ‘I do not despise you because you can become Buddhas.’ “

Never-Despising Bodhisattva’s lack of sutra reading  is often  emphasized in Nichiren Buddhism when discussing this chapter.  For Hsuan Hua, however, the full Bodhisattva practice is an essential element of his Five Schools Buddhism. It is, therefore, essential that “Never Slighting not only read and recited sūtras, but he also walked the Bodhisattva Path.”
I checked the other English translations I have of Kumārajīva’s Chinese translation of the Lotus Sutra.

The BDK English Tripitaka Series offers:

“Furthermore, this monk did not concentrate himself on reciting the sutras but only paid homage such that, even when he saw the fourfold assembly from afar, he would go up to them, praise, and pay homage to them, saying:

I dare not belittle you, because you will all become buddhas.

Burton Watson’s 2009 Soka Gakkai translation offers:

“This monk did not devote his time to reading or reciting the scriptures, but simply went about bowing to people. And if he hap-pened to see any of the four kinds of believers far off in the distance, he would purposely go to where they were, bow to them and speak words of praise, saying, ‘I would never dare disparage you, because you are all certain to attain Buddhahood!’

Rissho Kosei-Kai’s The Threefold Lotus Sutra, A Modern Translation for Contemporary Readers offers:

“That monk did not apply himself to reading and reciting the sutras. Instead, he merely practiced bowing respectfully to people. Even when he saw one of the four groups in the distance, he would make a point of going up to them in order to bow respectfully and praise them, saying, ‘I could never find you unworthy of respect. All of you will become buddhas.’ “

Rissho Kosei-Kai’s 1975 edition offers:

And that bhikshu did not devote himself to reading and reciting the sutras but only to paying respect, so that when he saw afar off [a member of the] four groups, he would specially go and pay respect to them, commending them, saying: ‘I dare not slight you, because you are all to become buddhas.’

After using Hsuan Hua’s translation of the Lotus Sutra as part of my daily practice earlier this year, I wrote about discrepancies I had noticed. (See this post.) I did not notice the discrepancy in Chapter 20 at that time, but I did note a significant change in Chapter 4 when the rich man dons work clothes and visits with his poor son.  Murano and all other English translators of Kumārajīva’s Chinese translation say the rich man looked “fearful” or “frightening.” Hsuan Hua’s translation, instead, had him “frightened.”  In my post, I described this as an error in translation. It was later, when reading Hsuan Hua’s commentary, that I realized that this was not an error, per se, but a difference in interpretation. (See this post.)

In the case of Never-Despising Bodhisattva’s practice, the difference can again be seen as a difference of interpretation. But on this particular point Hsuan Hua has one supporter among the English translators.

While Leon Hurvitz’s 2009 translation had the rich man in Chapter 4 “frightful in appearance,” on the topic of Never-Despising Bodhisattva’s practice Hurvitz agrees with Hsuan Hua:

So this bhikşu did not simply read and recite the scriptural canon, but rather did obeisance, too, to the point that, when he saw the fourfold multitude from afar, he would make a special point of going to them, doing obeisance, and uttering praise, saying, ‘I dare not hold you all in contempt, since you are all to become buddhas!’

Hurvitz’s translation is unique in that he attempted to translate both Kumārajīva’s Chinese translation and the existing Sanscrit translations. Is that why he disagrees with all the other English translators? There’s no footnote at this point in his translation to explain his reasoning. In any event, the support of Hsuan Hua’s interpretation is thought provoking. This journey has been very rewarding.

In Chapter 14, Peaceful Practices, Bodhisattvas seeking to expound the Lotus Sūtra in the evil world after the Buddha’s extinction are warned:

He should not approach or make friends with anyone of the five kinds of eunuchs.

At least that’s how Senchu Murano puts it.

Burton Watson’s translation for Soka Gakkai states:

Nor should he go near the five types of unmanly men or have any close dealings with them.

Watson offers a footnote for “unmanly,” saying, “Men who are impotent or suffer from other types of sexual disabilities.”

Leon Hurvitz, in his Scripture of the Lotus Blossom of the Fine Dharma, offers a lengthy footnote on this point:

The Skt. simply says paṇḍaka, “impotent” ; the Ch. specifies the number five, without identifying them. They are as follows: (a) jātipaṇḍaka, a male congenitally devoid of sexual impulses or feelings; (b) pakṣapaṇḍaka, a male potent only part of the time, lit. half of every month ; (c) āsaklaprādurbhāvī paṇḍaka, a male who becomes impotent through premature ejaculation; (d) īrṣyāpaṇḍaka, one who can become sexually aroused only by seeing others having intercourse; (e) āpatpaṇḍaka, a male who has lost his potency through illness or accident. The source for this is Mahāvyutpatti §§8769-73. The canonical source is the vinaya (monastic code). The reason for the concern is that the saṃgha did not want anyone joining the order as an escape. It barred from membership married men who did not have their wives’ permission, fathers who did not have the permission of their adult children, debtors reneging on their debts, deserters from military service, fugitives from justice, persons in arrears in taxes, novices who did not have the permission of both parents (when the parents were alive), homosexuals, hermaphrodites, and men who, for whatever reason, were sexually not quite normal.

This idea that homosexuals were excluded from joining the Buddhist order has always puzzled me. It is certainly not the case in Nichiren Shu. Ryusho Jeffus Shonin, one of the first American priests I became acquainted with after leaving Soka Gakkai in 2015, was a gay man. Several current American priests are members of the  LGBTQ community.

Nichiren Shu clearly has no problem with homosexuals. In fact, the guidelines for International Propagation Points ( i.e.  American temples) state:

The International Propagation Point must have an official Nichiren Shu enshrined Gohonzon altar and have an open propagation policy towards any person regardless of race, gender or sexual orientation or any class protected by law.

Kakusai Fukyoshi Guideline, International Section, Missionary Department, Head Office of Nichiren Shu, Revised April 1, 2023

This all comes up because of my reading of Chinese Master Hsuan Hua’s 14-volume commentary on the Lotus Sutra. In responding to “Furthermore, they should not approach the five kinds of unmanly men or become close friends with them,” Hsuan Hua comments:

There are five kinds of unmanly men. If they are unmanly, does that mean they are women? No, they aren’t women either. There are five kinds of people who are neither male nor female. You can’t call them men because they can’t conduct themselves as men do. And you can’t call them women either, because they cannot do the things that women do. These are the five kinds of unmanly men. They have never been called “unwomanly women” before, but now I’m giving them the name “five kinds of unwomanly women” as well.

What kinds of beings are neither male nor female? They are of no procreative use in the world. They cannot help women bear children, nor can they bear children themselves. In that sense, they don’t help the world much.

The five kinds of unmanly men are:

1. Unmanly from birth. When such people are born, they have neither male nor female organs, so they are essentially neither male nor female. They can fulfill neither the man’s role of fathering children nor the woman’s role of bearing children. They are born into the world unable to fulfill these functions. You should know the cause and effect involved in becoming like that. It comes from having intimate relations with the same gender or with both genders.

2. Unmanly through castration. In some societies, people born with male organs have been castrated. Either men or women could lose the functionality of their sexual organs through disease.

3. Unmanly through jealousy. When these people see a man, they become jealous and “transform into” a man. The change takes place only in their minds, however, and they are incapable of functioning as a man. Or they might see a woman, become jealous of her, and “turn into” a woman. But they are incapable of functioning as a woman would. Such people assume their sexual identity mentally as a result of jealousy.

4. Unmanly through physical transformation. Such people can make the change by themselves without having to see a male or female like the previous category. For instance, at noon the person has the functions of a man, but at one o’clock he changes into a woman. He doesn’t need to see other men and women to bring about this change. Then, at two or three or five o’clock, he regains the functions of a man. This is called “being a man but not a man” or “being a woman but not a woman.” How does this happen to people? It comes about because of the past practice of homosexuality – men with men and women with women. Or if men or women masturbate, then in the future they will have this retribution of being neither male nor female. You can’t say they are men, because they do not have functioning male organs. You can’t say they are women either, because they don’t have functioning female organs. They “change” into women or men, yet they cannot function as men or as women.

5. Unmanly through switching back and forth. For example, for half a month they function as men, and then for the other half of the month they function as women. In the previous category, the person can function as a man for one or two days and then as a woman for one or two days. It doesn’t take half a month for the change to occur. But in this case, the person’s male organ functions for half a month and does not function for the other half. This is the retribution of being neither male nor female.

The Buddhadharma explains everything in the world. The five kinds of unmanly men are not permitted to leave home. The Buddha did not accept such people into the monastic order. Their behavior is extremely detrimental. Their minds are filled with impure thoughts and debased ideas. People who violate themselves that is, who masturbate, will become these five kinds of unmanly men or unwomanly women, who are neither male nor female. You might say the lack of properly functioning male or female organs is a case of “freedom from the conception of gender.” However, that would be a misinterpretation of the term. These individuals lack the proper male or female organs. This can be considered an unfortunate and undesirable condition. Therefore, people should behave themselves and follow the rules of proper conduct. Those who transgress the rules will undergo the future retribution of not having normal physiological functions. As the result of committing many offenses, people may be born with deficiencies in the six sense faculties.

Bodhisattvas do not become close friends with such people. Bodhisattvas practicing the Bodhisattva Path do not seek to draw near to people who are among the five kinds of unmanly men or unwomanly women. They do not become best friends with them.

On the concept of “freedom from the conception of gender” a footnote is offered:

The term “freedom from the conception of gender” refers to a state of nonduality attained through cultivation, in which one transcends attachment to concepts of “male” and “female.”

Chinese Master Hsuan Hua’s “five schools” Buddhism has a strong monastic element. I do not know if homosexuals are welcomed into his monastic order, but I see that as an internal matter of his school. The more important question for me is whether his school prohibits or otherwise discourages homosexuals from participating in programs for the laity.

The Buddhist Text Translation Society, which was founded by Hsuan Hua and is the publisher of his commentary on the Lotus Sutra, invites questions. So I asked:

Do the organizations founded by Venerable Master Hsuan Hua discourage homosexuals from participating in programs and activities?

I included the above quote from volume nine of the Lotus Sutra commentary. The response I received:

Hello Mr Hughes

Thank you for your question!

We welcome anyone who sincerely wishes to learn the Buddha’s teachings to participate in our Dharma activities and to visit our monasteries.

We rejoice in your study and practice of the Lotus Sutra, and wish you well in your cultivation journey too.

Sincerely
Buddhist Text Translation Society

The Buddhist Text Translation Society publishes a bilingual (Chinese-English) book entitled, “Basic Code of Conduct for the Laity,” which is based on Hsuan Hua’s instructions.

The book does not mention homosexuality or “unmanly men.” Instead, it focuses on Right Knowledge and Right View, which comes from upholding the Five Precepts.

It is fundamentally important for those who practice the Buddhadharma to have proper knowledge and proper views. What does having proper knowledge and proper views mean? Having this means you are a true Buddhist disciple. The first requirement of a Buddhist disciple is to develop a good character, and that means upholding the five precepts of not killing, not stealing, not engaging in sexual misconduct, not lying, and not consuming intoxicants. This is the most fundamental requirement to be a Buddhist disciple. If we wish to resolutely practice the Buddhadharma, we must diligently cultivate precepts, samadhi, and wisdom and eradicate our greed, hatred, and delusion. Greed, hatred, and delusion are the three poisons! These three poisons have taken control over us from immeasurable kalpas ago, making us inverted, insatiated with greed and causing us to have a huge temper, constantly harboring hatred.

Is homosexuality “sexual misconduct”? I don’t believe so and I would hope that the organizations founded by Chinese Master Hsuan Hua would agree.

In the appendix of Basic Code of Conduct for the Laity includes a description of the Dharma Realm Buddhist Association, which was founded by Hsuan Hua in the United States in 1959. That description concludes with this declaration:

All monasteries and organizations under DRBA are open to everyone; there is no discrimination between self and others, nationalities, and religions. Everyone, regardless of nationality or religious background, keen in the pursuit of humaneness, righteousness, morality, ultimate truth, understanding the mind and seeing the inherent nature, is welcome to practice and study together.

Tomorrow: Hsuan Hua’s Maxims for Buddhist Disciples

Chinese Master Hsuan Hua’s commentary on the Lotus Sutra includes an outline of the Lotus Sutra created by Ouyi Zhixu (1599-1655 CE). As I make my way through the 14 volumes I’ve been copying each chapter’s outline.

The outline has some interesting details that I had not noticed in my 100-plus readings of the Lotus Sutra. For example, back in March I pointed out that in Chapter 1 the outline explains that Maitreya is describing Bodhisattvas practicing the six pāramitās in sequence and then out of sequence as he tells Mañjuśrī  what he sees in the eighteen thousand worlds in the east illuminated by the light of the Buddha.

In Ouyi Zhixu’s outline for Chapter 14 he makes a very important distinction that I’ve only found in one other English translation of Kumārajīva’s Chinese translation of the Lotus Sutra – Senchu Murano’s translation.

Back in February 2023, when I was Comparing H. Kern’s translation of the Lotus Sutra to Senchu Murano’s, I discovered that Murano’s translation stood alone on a key point at the opening of Chapter 14, Peaceful Practices. (See this post.)

Murano begins the chapter:

Thereupon Mañjuśrī Bodhisattva-mahāsattva, the Son of the King of the Dharma, said to the Buddha:

“World-Honored One! These Bodhisattvas are extraordinarily rare. They made a great vow to protect, keep, read, recite and expound this Sūtra of the Lotus Flower of the Wonderful Dharma in the evil world after your extinction because they are following you respectfully. World-Honored One! How should an [ordinary] Bodhisattva-mahāsattvas expound this sūtra in the evil world after [your extinction]?”

In comparing Murano to Kern, I found Kern said Mañjuśrī was not asking about “ordinary” bodhisattvas, but asking specifically how  the extraordinarily bodhisattvas of the previous chapter should propagate the sutra in the evil age after the Buddha’s extinction. In fact, every one of the English translations I had of the Lotus Sutra agreed with Kern. The closest anyone got to Murano was Leon Hurvitz’s translation, which incorporates both Kumārajīva’s Chinese and a 19th century compilation Sanskrit document. He offered:

At that time, Mañjuśrī the dharma prince, the bodhisattva-mahāsattva, addressed the Buddha, saying, “O World-Honored One! Very rarely do there exist such bodhisattvas as these, who out of respectful obedience to the Buddha utter a great vow to keep and hold, to read and recite this Scripture of the Dharma Blossom in the latter evil age! O World-Honored One! How can a bodhisattva-mahāsattva preach this scripture in the latter evil age?”

Hurvitz is the only translator other than Murano who doesn’t specify that Mañjuśrī  is referring to the Bodhisattvas of the previous chapter.

Learning this was very discouraging to me. I have always enjoyed the chapter as a teaching for “ordinary” Bodhisattvas in this evil world.

But then I read Ouyi Zhixu’s outline for Chapter 14:

• D5. “Practices of Peace and Joy” Chapter
  • El. Question
    • F1. Praising the Bodhisattvas of profound practice, discussed in the previous chapter, who are able to propagate the sūtra in accord with the Dharma
    • F2. Asking how Bodhisattvas who are starting to practice can propagate the sūtra in the troubled age

Hsuan Hua Lotus Sutra Commentary, v15, p245

Interestingly, the Lotus Sutra translation that accompanies Chinese Master Hsuan Hua’s commentary on the Lotus Sutra doesn’t make this distinction and instead follows the other English translations.

At that time the Dharma Prince Bodhisattva Mahāsattva Mañjuśrī said to the Buddha, “World Honored One, all these Bodhisattvas are extremely rare. Reverently complying with the instructions of the Buddha, they have made great vows to protect, uphold, read, and teach this Dharma Flower Sutra in the future troubled age. World Honored One, how should these Bodhisattvas Mahāsattvas teach this sūtra in the future troubled age?”

I’m enjoying Ouyi Zhixu agreement with Murano, but I’m wondering why Ouyi Zhixu stands apart from the other translators.