On the Russian Translation of Kumarajiva's Chinese Version of the Lotus Sutra

Abstract

This paper deals with the pioneer Russian translation of the Lotus Sutra which was made from Kumarajiva's Chinese Version by a historian of the Japanese Buddhist thought, Dr. A. N. Ignatovich (“Ladomir” Publishing, Moscow, 1998; ISBN 5-86218-259-4).As there may be a large-scale cultural distance between Buddhist idioms and linguistic instrumentalities for them of a “non-Buddhistical” foreign language, it may sometimes result in some changes of proper meanings. So my paper is aimed to answer the question: Are there any changes in the meanings of certain Chinese Buddhist words of the Lotus Sutra concerning their Russian variants as appear in the aforementioned translation?Looking at semantic, contextual and etymological analysis of both original Buddhist words (namely_??__??__??__??__??__??__??__??_kuon-jitsujo-daion-kyoshu, _??__??_ hoben, _??__??_katsugo) and the Russian words adopted in the translation as their equivalents, I argue that the latter ones (vechno okazyvayush'iy blagodeyaniya Vladyka Ucheniya {i. e. “Eternally giving benevolences Lord of the Teaching”}, ulovka {i. e. “trick”} and nadezhda {i. e. “hope”} respectively) evidently invite changes in the original meanings of the terms, making some important. messages of the Sutra rather obscure. Therefore, proposing as the translations of the above terms Bespredel'no Davno Istinno Prebyvshiy Buddoi Velikoblagodatnyi Uchitel' {“Really Been Buddha Since Infinite Past Greatly Benevolent Teacher”}, vrachuyush'ee sredstvo {“remedying means”} and zhazhda-zov [k Ucheniyu] {“thirst-appeal [for Dharma] ”} respectively instead, I thus conclude that the translation concerned, being a great contribution to initiate close acquaintance with the world of the Lotus Sutra in Russian, still leaves with itself some doctrinal and philological problems to be solved in the future.