Christian encounter with other faiths frequently brought with it the need for interpretation and translation. Evangelization might require the translation of Christian terms and doctrinal concepts into other languages, while engagement with indigenous religious traditions often saw the process reversed. Both were complex and dynamic processes, involving multiple agents and presenting specific challenges. The interest here lies in the examination of how Catholic missionaries active in Burma (Myanmar) over a period from the early eighteenth to the late nineteenth centuries met the challenges presented firstly by a complex and evolving linguistic environment and secondly by the missionaries’ desire to study Theravāda Buddhism and its texts. The extent to which their translations of Buddhist terms may have been shaped by the needs of Christian apologetic will also be considered.

From the late seventeenth century, Christian missionaries in south-east Asia came into contact with societies in which Theravāda Buddhism had developed as the major religious tradition.Footnote ¹ They were therefore some of the first Europeans to have an opportunity to study Buddhism in this form. One area of encounter was the Vicariate of Ava and Pegu, created in 1721 and corresponding to the two major political units within the area of modern Burma. The Vicariate was entrusted initially to priests of the Italian order of the Regular Clerics of St Paul (Barnabites), two of whom arrived in the following year. There were, however, Catholic communities already established in Ava (Upper Burma). These were mainly the descendants of Portuguese and Indian Christians taken captive at Syriam in 1613, and subsequently dispersed through Upper Burma, where they formed distinct communities.Footnote ² At the time of the arrival of the Barnabites, there were two Catholic priests in Burma, one at Syriam ministering to the needs of the foreign merchant community and the other at Ava. They had been sent by the bishop of Meliapor and were either Goanese or natives of western India. Both, according to Paul Bigandet writing in the 1880s, made only infrequent visits to the dispersed Christian communities. These priests remained in Burma until at least the start of the nineteenth century and possibly into its second decade.Footnote ³ Throughout the period of their mission, the Barnabites catered in some degree to the pastoral needs of these Christian communities.Footnote ⁴

By the 1820s the difficulties faced in Burma, such as the disruption caused by war and the insalubrious climate of certain areas, coupled with the adverse effects of the French occupation of the Italian states, led the Barnabites to petition the Sacra Congregatio de Propaganda Fide to have the mission removed from their care. As a result, secular priests appointed by the Propaganda provided the mission personnel from 1829 until 1840, at which time the Society of the Oblats of the Blessed Virgin Mary of Turin took charge. However, by the 1850s, this society was, like the Barnabites before them, finding it increasingly difficult to service the mission. In 1855 a formal move was made to have the mission entrusted to the Société des Missions Étrangères de Paris (SMEP), which took control in 1856.Footnote ⁵

In Burma, Theravāda Buddhism, expressed particularly through the role of the Sangha (the community of Buddhist monks and nuns), had become an integral part of the social, political and religious environment. This ensured that it could not be simply dismissed as decadent and superstitious idolatry by Christians and missionaries as was the case with, for example, Mahāyāna Buddhism in late eighteenth- and nineteenth-century Korea.Footnote ⁶ Missionaries seeking to evangelize effectively in Burma had therefore to engage with Theravāda Buddhist texts and practitioners in order to understand its doctrines and role within society. It was necessary, too, for them to meet the challenges presented by the linguistic diversity of Burma. Both aspects are illuminated through the publications of two missionaries active within Burma. These missionaries are Vincentius Sangermano (fl. 1783–1806), a Barnabite, and Paul Ambrose Bigandet (fl. 1856–94), the vicar apostolic of the SMEP mission. Both translated Buddhist texts and wrote on the subject of Burmese Buddhism, while Bigandet also completed a history of the Burmese mission in English that provides valuable information on the linguistic context and the missionaries’ reactions to it.Footnote ⁷

The works of both Bigandet and Sangermano demonstrate the challenges presented by the complex linguistic environment in Burma, and the manner in which these were met. Bigandet's studies of Buddhism, in particular, also illustrate how the fact of being a missionary and elements extrinsic to the mission could influence both the motives for studying Buddhism and the translation and interpretation of Buddhist terms. Although Bigandet sought to follow scholarly practice and looked disparagingly on argument based upon erroneous statements, as a missionary he was, like Sangermano, studying Buddhism in order to refute it.Footnote ⁸ Bigandet considered engagement with Buddhist texts as the most effective way to undermine and attack this ‘false creed’. This process might involve the use of scholarly conventions and produce scholarly insights, but ultimately its purpose was to reveal Buddhism as empty and unreal error, so that ‘it vanishes away as a phantom and an illusion’.Footnote ⁹ Moreover, within Bigandet's analysis of Buddhism lies an implicit defence of Christianity in Europe. His first published account of Buddhism was in French, while his translation of a Burmese life of the Buddha was completed in English; the second expanded edition was then translated into French by a third party. Evidently, Bigandet was looking to convince a European rather than a Burmese audience.

The complex linguistic environment encountered by missionaries within Burma is made clear in Bigandet's history of the mission. The ‘Portuguese’ priests already resident in the country were accused of showing no interest in learning Burmese or in the evangelization of the wider population. They spoke and preached in Portuguese, or as Bigandet had it, a patois with some ‘affinity’ to the language, and had made this ‘the distinctive characteristic of Christians’.Footnote ¹⁰ These shortcomings were not shared by the Barnabites. Sigismund Calchi, in the six years between his arrival in 1722 and his death, composed a ‘small dictionary for facilitating to his Brethren . . . the study of the Burmese language’.Footnote ¹¹ Giovani Percoto (fl. 1761–76) used the time spent on the voyage from Italy to learn Portuguese. He subsequently compiled a Latin-Burmese-Portuguese dictionary, representing the fulfilment of an ambition held by the fathers since the beginning of the mission.Footnote ¹² In addition to Burmese, it was necessary to learn at least one of the two Karen dialects, depending on the area to be evangelized.Footnote ¹³ Those missionaries who wished to study Buddhism through its texts, required knowledge of Pali if they were to work directly with the Tipiṭaka, the ‘Pali Canon’. However, only the Barnabite Joseph D'Amato, who served from 1783 until his death in 1832, was said to know the language well; other missionaries relied on the borrowed expertise of Buddhist monks.Footnote ¹⁴ The nineteenth century brought further linguistic challenges. A command of English became necessary in response firstly to the establishment of the American Baptist Mission in the 1810s and secondly (beginning with the annexation of Arakan and Tenesserim in 1826) to the extension of British power in Burma. The secular priest, Francis Bartelli, carried on a dispute with the Baptists during the 1830s, while the Oblat bishop, Faustino Ceretti, learnt English sufficiently well to keep up a written controversy with them, although he was never able to speak Burmese.Footnote ¹⁵ From the 1840s, the need for missionaries to cater to the spiritual needs of Catholic troops stationed in British garrisons and the introduction of English into the curricula of the mission schools made a command of the language a necessity.Footnote ¹⁶ Bishop Ceretti attempted to found a school for boys at Monhla in the mid-1840s, which taught Burmese, Latin and Italian, but this had failed within months.Footnote ¹⁷ This was probably a reflection of the increasing appeal of English as the language of the principal regional and colonizing power. Fr D'Cruz, a native Burmese priest, had studied English in Calcutta, while Bigandet's clear ability in English is likely to have been a factor in his appointment as vicar apostolic.Footnote ¹⁸ Changes brought about by further British expansion added to the linguistic mix: by the 1870s it was necessary to speak Tamil in order to minister to congregations in Rangoon and Moulmain.Footnote ¹⁹ The murder at Moulmain in 1886 of the SMEP priest Louis Biet was therefore a significant loss, since he was ‘well acquainted with the English, Burmese and Tamil languages which are necessary, to act as a Priest at that station’.Footnote ²⁰ Finally, as Catholic priests, both Europeans and the Portuguese speakers would have known Latin. Aside from being the language of the liturgy, other aspects of the utility of Latin are perhaps easily overlooked. It still retained its importance as a lingua franca. In 1795 Sangermano provided the British envoy to the Burmese Court with a Latin translation of the ‘most remarkable passages’ from a Burmese translation of the Indian Manu Shastra (Laws of Manu).Footnote ²¹ It is possible, too, that Latin facilitated the acquisition of other languages, since its teaching in the seminaries provided Catholic missionaries with the experience of, and a potential model for, language learning even before they entered a mission area, as well as ensuring that they were to some degree already bilingual.

Faced with this linguistic complexity, the Barnabites began creating the tools necessary to undertake both pastorate and mission. The dictionaries of Sigismundi Calchi and Giovani Percoto have already been noted. Paolo Nerini (fl. 1743–56), who worked extensively among the Karen populations, produced grammars of Burmese and Karen (‘Burman and Pegu languages’), as well as catechisms, dictionaries and prayer books.Footnote ²² Sections of the Bible were translated into Burmese by Percoto. These were a translation and abridgement of Genesis; the books of Tobit and Daniel, and the epistles of St Paul. The abridgement and the other two Old Testament books were put into verse under the supervision of Joseph D'Amato. In view of D'Amato's ability in Pali, this may have been a conscious mimicking of Buddhist practice since the second part of the Tipiṭaka, the Sutta Piṭaka, presents parts of the Buddha's teaching as poetry.Footnote ²³ Melchior Carpani was sent to Rome in 1764 to seek the approval for these and other Burmese works composed by Percoto and to have them printed at the Propaganda press. The result of this expedition is unclear, but twenty years later Caejetan Montegazza returned to Italy in the company of two Burmans, one of whom was a former Buddhist monk. They assisted Montegazza with the printing in Rome of an alphabet in Burmese characters, a small prayer book and a catechism with the Latin translation.Footnote ²⁴ As a result, a press was established in Burma, which published Percoto's dictionary. Much later, in the 1850s, the Oblats founded a press at Moulmain, but it lacked both English and Burmese type. The former could be obtained from Calcutta, but for the latter the Oblats were at the ‘mercy of the Baptist press’ and this remained the case until a SMEP priest was sent to Paris and returned with the matrices and puncheons necessary ‘for casting Burmese type in any quantity that might be required’.Footnote ²⁵

As noted above, those missionaries wishing to understand Buddhism through its canonical texts had to master Pali to some degree. The Barnabites compiled an Italian-Burmese-Pali dictionary, but they remained – as did their successors – heavily reliant upon the linguistic expertise of Buddhist monks: directly for instruction in the language or assistance in translation, and indirectly through monks’ vernacular commentaries and glosses on the Tipiṭaka and other Pali texts or explanations of Buddhism, such as the ‘Compendium of Burmese Religion’ presented to Percoto by the sayadaw (personal instructor) of King Naungdawgyi in 1763. Percoto appears to have been the first Barnabite to have had the opportunity to engage seriously with Buddhism. He may have requested the composition of the ‘Compendium’, in response to which he wrote Treatise of Christian Religion: A Dialogue between a Christian and a Theravadin Monk. Both works were incorporated in a vita published in 1781.Footnote ²⁶ Percoto was said to have translated the ‘sacred books’ into Italian, but it is unclear whether this was directly from the Pali or via Burmese translations, or indeed what assistance he received in making them.Footnote ²⁷ The sayadaw’s ‘Compendium’ was later incorporated by Sangermano in his History of the Burmese Empire (written in Italian), together with his own description of Buddhist cosmology. Both were utilized by Dr Francis Buchanan, an East India Company surgeon, in an article published in 1799.Footnote ²⁸ From Sangermano's explanation of the time that had elapsed since the death of the Buddha, it would appear that the History as a whole was completed in or after 1809, following his return to Italy.Footnote ²⁹ Although Sangermano prepared the work for publication, this was not finally achieved until 1833 – fourteen years after his death in 1819 – and then in an English translation. The editor of what proved to be the first of three editions was the future Cardinal Wiseman.

In addition to the ‘Compendium’, Sangermano relied on ‘abstracts of all that is worthy of notice in the three Kiam [Piṭaka, ‘baskets’], called Vini, Padimot, and Sottan’, that is to say, the Vinaya Piṭaka and the Sutta Piṭaka, which form two parts of the Tipiṭaka, and the Pāṭimokka Sutta, which lists the rules governing the behaviour of individual monks and nuns.Footnote ³⁰ He had translated nearly the whole of these books with the help of a former monk called Ubà ‘who was one of the most learned of that order in the vicinity of Narbeck, where for several years our seminary was situated’.Footnote ³¹ Additionally, Sangermano translated the ‘Chamoazà’ (kammavācā), a Pali ‘book of ordination’ for the admission of candidates to the Sangha. He considered that its ceremonies resembled those of the ordination of deacons and priests within the Catholic Church and so the book ‘may, therefore, be considered as their Pontifical’.Footnote ³² He may also have read the Jātaka stories which relate episodes in Gotama Buddha's former lifetimes. In addition to these textual sources, Sangermano relied on his own observations and debates with monks.Footnote ³³

Before he was appointed vicar apostolic in 1856, Bigandet served from 1841 in the Malacca mission. He spoke Malay ‘very well’ (fort bien), and his first published work on Buddhism shows that he could at least read Burmese from early in his missionary career.Footnote ³⁴ This 1843 article on Buddhism was based, in part, on a translation of a Burmese life of the Buddha, the fifteenth-century Malālaṅkāvaratthu (The Collection [of Stories that is] like an Ornament of Garlands), popular in nineteenth-century Burma.Footnote ³⁵ This translation was subsequently published in Rangoon in 1858 with extensive annotations and appendices. An enlarged second edition appeared through the American Mission Press at Rangoon in 1866. The enlargement was accounted for by Bigandet's incorporation of portions of another Burmese bio- graphy, the Tathāgata-udāna (The Praise of the Lord). A third edition appeared in 1880 and a fourth in 1914; an edition was published as late as 1979.Footnote ³⁶ Curiously, the second edition appeared as a French translation in 1878; the translation was not by Bigandet but by a French naval officer.Footnote ³⁷ In addition to the life, Bigandet had read parts of the Tipiṭaka, the Pāṭimokka Sutta and ‘most’ of the Jātaka, some of which he describes as ‘really beautiful, interesting, and well composed pieces of literature’.Footnote ³⁸ Like Sangermano, he also relied on personal observations and discussions with both monks and laity.Footnote ³⁹

The engagement with Buddhist texts by the missionaries leads on to the second area of interest: the manner in which the motives underlying the process were shaped by factors beyond the mission and how these influenced the activities of both missionaries as translators and interpreters of Buddhism. This will be examined through their treatment of two key terms. The first is Buddha, where the interest lies in how this was translated (if at all), and whether any distinction was made between the state of the bodhisatta – an individual embarked on the path to enlightenment – and buddha – one who has entered into nibbāna. The translation and interpretation of nibbāna itself, with its connotations within Buddhism of both bliss and extinction, will be the second term considered. The interest lies not in testing the accuracy of the translations per se, but rather in examining what is revealed concerning the influence of a particular mindset or agenda upon the process of translation and interpretation and its influence on the categorization of Buddhism as a religion. As observed above, in Bigandet's case, both translation and categorization seem to have been influenced by a desire to establish the superiority of Christianity over against positive views of Buddhism that were emerging within contemporary Europe.Footnote ⁴⁰

In his consideration of Buddhism's ultimate goal, nibbāna, Sangermano's conclusion was negative. His understanding of ‘the Niban’ was of ‘a perfectly incorporeal and spiritual state of being, [which] deserves the name of annihilation rather than of existence’.Footnote ⁴¹ The Pali term for enlightenment has connotations of both bliss and extinction and Sangermano's conclusion that Buddhism was a nihilistic faith was an early instance of a Christian missionary emphasizing extinction over bliss when discussing nibbāna.Footnote ⁴² Nevertheless, Sangermano, through his translation of whichever Burmese or Pali word for the Buddha he encountered in the sayadaw’s ‘Compendium’ as ‘G/god’ (as it appears in the English translation), located Buddhism as, in some sense, a theistic system.Footnote ⁴³ If he was translating from a Burmese text, it is likely that the term employed there was Phra, which was used by Burmese Christians in the nineteenth century to refer to the Christian God.Footnote ⁴⁴ However, it is clear that what is being described is not a supreme being. Rather, through his use of ‘G/god’ Sangermano is reflecting in his translation the apotheosis of the Buddha found within Theravāda: for Sangermano, Gotama was a ‘mere man’ who obtained ‘the privilege of divinity’ at the age of thirty-five.Footnote ⁴⁵

In his 1843 article, although willing to acknowledge the moral worth of Buddhism, Bigandet likewise firmly associates the ‘abyss’ of nibbāna with annihilation of self.Footnote ⁴⁶ This remains the case with the 1858 translation, despite his willingness to employ other terms, such as ‘perfection’ and ‘quiescence’.Footnote ⁴⁷ However, unlike Sangermano, he does not ascribe any aspect of the divine to Gotama as Buddha; in 1843 he uses the word Phra – by which he means a buddha – to describe Gotama, clearly stating that he was a mere mortal and not a creator god. Consequently, Buddhism can only be an imperfect religion as it is, in Bigandet's own metaphor, like a statue without head or legs.Footnote ⁴⁸ In fact, Bigandet at this stage seemed reluctant to describe Buddhism as a religion at all. In the article as a whole, it was described as such just once and then only indirectly.Footnote ⁴⁹ Otherwise it is referred to as a ‘system’ or a ‘philosophy’. In his extensive annotation to the 1858 translation of the Burmese biography, Bigandet's treatment of Buddhism became more nuanced. He now frequently referred to it as a religion or a creed; however, Buddhism still remained imperfect. Moreover, Bigandet developed a theory (first mooted in his 1843 article) of a natural belief held by all humanity in a supreme being, that has been unnaturally suppressed and obscured by Buddhist atheism.Footnote ⁵⁰ His use of terms also captured the nature of the Buddha's path to enlightenment in a way that was lacking in both his article and Sangermano's account. He was careful now to distinguish between Gotama as bodhisatta, for which he used either Phra or Phralaong, and Gotama as Buddha. Hence concerning the enlightenment he wrote: ‘During all the while, Phra or Budha [sic] (let us call him now by that name) remained under that tree.’Footnote ⁵¹ While both more nuanced and accurate than Sangermano's description of the Buddha's enlightenment and changing nature, Bigandet's use of these terms, as well as Gaudama, the family name of the Buddha, served to reinforce his conviction that the founder of Buddhism, despite his high moral integrity and acquisition of supernatural powers, was still ‘a mere man’.Footnote ⁵²

In conclusion, when considering the relationship between Christianity and translation, the Burmese mission is of interest in two respects. Firstly, it demonstrates the linguistic diversity that missionaries might face and the methods they employed to meet its challenges. In Burma, this diversity was both complex and dynamic. Portuguese was a mark of self-definition for the earliest Christian communities and therefore a necessary pastoral tool for at least the Barnabites. As the nineteenth century progressed English and Tamil were added as pastoral languages, while English became additionally a language of interdenominational debate, education and mediation. Finally, if evangelization was to be undertaken throughout Burma, knowledge of the Karen dialects was a necessity. The challenges were met in several ways. Dictionaries, grammars, and translations were created; missionaries applied themselves to language study, receiving instruction from catechists or monks; and the physical means to publish texts in Burmese, Italian and English were obtained or borrowed.

Secondly, the mission in Burma brought the possibility of examining Buddhism through its own texts. With this came an opportunity for translation to play a role within Christian apologetic. In their engagement with Buddhist texts, the Catholic missionaries were reliant on the skills of the traditional experts, the monks of the Sangha, either indirectly through monks’ vernacular translations and glosses, or directly through instruction in Pali and assistance when translating the Tipiṭaka. Clearly missionary translators did not act alone, whether they were translating Christian texts into one of the vernaculars, or Buddhist texts from Burmese or Pali. They were subject also to linguistic and conceptual influences from existing literary conventions. D'Amato's use of poetry may have been a conscious imitation of practice within the Sutta Piṭaka, while it has been noted that Bigandet's incorporation of sections from a second Burmese biography in his 1866 edition mirrors established practice among Burmese commentators.Footnote ⁵³

This need to translate Buddhist texts created an extra dimension within an already complex wordscape, and one in which non-linguistic influences played their part. The process of translation was neither linear nor neutral. Sangermano's use of ‘G/god’ to describe Gotama Buddha may well be a reflection of the apotheosis of the Buddha apparent within Theravāda. Consequently, his understanding of Buddhism as expressed through his use of language may be seen to have been more sensitive when considering the nature of buddhahood than Bigandet's. Similarly, although Bigandet is more nuanced and accurate than Sangermano in his distinction between Gotama as bodhisatta and Gotama as Buddha, his view of the divine precludes him from ascribing any aspect of divinity to the Buddha. Bigandet's use of Burmese and Pali terms when discussing the progress of Gotama towards and into nibbāna may reflect an adherence to his own aims (to allow the sources to speak for themselves) and developing academic conventions. However, their use is underpinned by an interpretation based not on a scholarly desire to comprehend and explain but on Bigandet's role as a Christian apologist wishing to attack and refute.Footnote ⁵⁴ His employment and interpretation of particular terms is designed to express his belief in the humanity of Gotama; any evidence to the contrary could be dismissed as an indication of a departure through superstition and ignorance from the ‘true’ Buddhism contained within the Tipiṭaka.Footnote ⁵⁵ Despite the moral worth and supernatural abilities Gotama had acquired through his reincarnations as a bodhisatta, and indeed perhaps because of the means of their acquisition, he would never be more than human. Buddhism for Bigandet would always remain an imperfect religion stifling a natural human instinct to believe in a supreme deity.

Similarly, both Sangermano and Bigandet identified nibbāna with annihilation. Even though Bigandet used other terms for nibbāna in his translation of the Burmese life (possibly here the scholar was vying with the missionary), he still maintained that it leads only to annihilation. Both Sangermano and Bigandet matched Buddhism against a particular model of what constituted a religion and found it to be wanting. For Bigandet in particular the use of ‘annihilation’ – in common with Protestant missionaries in Ceylon – to translate nibbāna and the glossing of Buddhist terms in a way that clearly identified the Buddha as human marked Buddhism out as an incomplete religion that was closer to a system or philosophy.Footnote ⁵⁶ However, although Bigandet was seeking ultimately to refute Buddhism, his efforts were not in this case intended for a Burmese audience. Through his English and French publications, Bigandet sought to answer those Europeans who saw in Buddhism either the originator religion of Christianity or, because of its perceived rationalism and morality despite its apparent atheism, a superior alternative to theistic religion.Footnote ⁵⁷

The published works of these two Catholic missionaries demonstrate the linguistic challenges faced by missionaries within Burma. These were complex and dynamic and they were overcome through the acquisition of languages, the borrowing of the expertise of others, and the creation of practical tools, such as grammars, dictionaries and presses. These were all necessary not only to translate the Christian message, but to engage with the established religious tradition. Additionally, the manner in which both Bigandet and Sangermano engaged with Theravāda Buddhism shows the complexity and breadth of the context in which translations occurred. The works of both undertook complex linguistic journeys: from Burmese or Pali to Italian and then English in the case of Sangermano, and in Bigandet's from Burmese or Pali to (probably) French, English and then back into French. Secondly, the process of translation was not neutral, but subject to a form of ‘mother-tongue interference’. In particular, Bigandet's translations show both the influence of Christian theology and soteriology, as well as his desire to advance the cause of Christianity within a wider debate. Bigandet did not acquire knowledge through translations simply to dispute more effectively with Burmese monks and laity. He sought too, by publishing in French and English, to prove to Europeans that Buddhism was both an unnatural and imperfect religion. Implicit in Bigandet's interpretation of Burmese Buddhism is a defence of Christianity in Europe. By translating and interpreting texts from other religions, missionaries hoped to further Christianity's expansion, but some might also find in their translations a means to reinforce Christianity against challenges from elsewhere.