Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [Pali] Translation of this sentence?

Expand Messages
  • Kumara Bhikkhu
    I believe you would have seen PTS s translation. So, why do you ask? Do you suspect it wrong? ... [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    Message 1 of 11 , Aug 7 12:06 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      I believe you would have seen PTS's translation. So, why do you ask? Do you suspect it wrong?

      Sister Dipa wrote thus at 01:40 AM 07-08-12:
      >Can anyone translate this sentence? It comes from Cullavagga V PTS Vol II pg 108.
      >
      > tena kho pana samayena bhikkhū sarabhaññe kukkuccāyanti.
      >
      >with friendliness,
      >Sister Dipa
      >
      >
      >
      >------------------------------------
      >
      >- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
      >Paa.li-Parisaa - The Pali Collective
      >[Homepage] http://www.tipitaka.net
      >[Pali Document Framework] http://www.tipitaka.net/forge/pdf/
      >[Files] http://www.geocities.com/paligroup/
      >[Send Message] pali@yahoogroups.com
      >Yahoo! Groups members can set their delivery options to daily digest or web only.Yahoo! Groups Links
      >
      >
      >

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Kumara Bhikkhu
      That s what I thought you wanted to know about. Intoning refers to varying of tone. As for singing, beside varying in tone, it also entails varying the length
      Message 2 of 11 , Aug 7 8:47 PM
      • 0 Attachment
        That's what I thought you wanted to know about.

        Intoning refers to varying of tone. As for singing, beside varying in tone, it also entails varying the length of sound. You may have heard some people chanting
        Namo tassaaaaa...
        The 2nd syllable in the 2nd word is supposed to be short: sa. Dragging it deliberately would constitute "singing".

        kb

        Samaneri Dipa wrote thus at 11:38 PM 07-08-12:
        >Does anyone know the difference between chanting with intonation and
        >singing?
        >That is the part that I find confusing. How to know what is intonation and
        >what
        >constitutes singing.
        >
        >with friendliness,
        >Sister Dipa


        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Nina van Gorkom
        Dear Sister Dipa, ... N: The singing is trying to make it sound attractive and we have to consider the different cittas that motivate correct recitation or
        Message 3 of 11 , Aug 8 7:36 AM
        • 0 Attachment
          Dear Sister Dipa,
          Op 7-aug-2012, om 17:38 heeft Samaneri Dipa het volgende geschreven:

          > Does anyone know the difference between chanting with intonation and
          > singing?
          > That is the part that I find confusing. How to know what is
          > intonation and
          > what
          > constitutes singing.
          -------
          N: The singing is trying to make it sound attractive and we have to
          consider the different cittas that motivate correct recitation or
          such kind of singing. The latter kind may be motivated by cittas
          rooted in lobha, attachment and this is not suitable. I think this is
          the point of the rule.
          ------
          Nina.



          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • Dieter Moeller
          Dear Nina (and Sister Dipa) , you wrote: N: The singing is trying to make it sound attractive and we have to consider the different cittas that motivate
          Message 4 of 11 , Aug 8 10:42 AM
          • 0 Attachment
            Dear Nina (and Sister Dipa) ,

            you wrote:

            N: The singing is trying to make it sound attractive and we have to consider the different cittas that motivate correct recitation or
            such kind of singing. The latter kind may be motivated by cittas rooted in lobha, attachment and this is not suitable. I think this is
            the point of the rule.


            D: I think you mention the main point : trying to make the sound attractive would be counter-productive (kama tanha), i.e. form over substance. The whole purpose of chanting was to memorize and recall the teaching , which - after some generations - served as the base for the written canon.
            It seems to me that intonation and a kind of singing mixed lateron , becoming more a ritual for certain events .
            The meditative aspect of sound is - as far as I know - neglected in Theravada.


            with Metta Dieter

            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • Sister Dipa
            Dear Samaneri Dipa, some time ago I did research on Burmese music with a German friend, who has now become a (lady) professor for Ethnology of Music at the
            Message 5 of 11 , Aug 8 10:46 AM
            • 0 Attachment
              Dear Samaneri Dipa,

              some time ago I did research on Burmese music with a German friend, who has now become a (lady) professor for Ethnology of Music at the University of Halle/Germany.

              She was writing a book on the songs in worship of the Burmese Nats.
              Your question came up in the course of our discussion, and I learned something new:
              In Western theory of music there is NO clear cut DIVIDING LINE between music (singing a song) and recitation of sacred Latin texts in church.
              The old European church music (Gregorian church music?)is very similar to recitation, in so far as it has an even and measured tone, and almost no melodic embelishments.
              In medieval European church music the music was not noted in the same way used today. The had a script called "neume", to note down church music, which only indicated whether the voice was rising or falling (?).

              Butin the musical theory of ancient India (and probably of South East Asia) there is a DEFINITE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SINGING AND RECITATION.
              In recitation there are no accompanying musical instruments, there should be no melodic embellishments of the voice, or very little. There is no intentional contrast of attractive voices like a male singer and a female singing together or in a kind of dialogue.
              RECITATION HAS A SORT OF BASIC TUNE, which many differ from monastery to monastery, but it should be uniform and sober. IT IS THE SAME TUNE FOR ALL THE TEXTS that are being recited in that monastery.

              Young monks or young nuns (or Buddhist associations of lay people) practise reciting the Paritta, or the Paatimokkha in unison, to give a harmonious group recitation, but they do not intentionally use the contrast of high and low voices, to create variegated music as is done in Western choir singing. The text is the important item, not the melodious sound.
              It requires some practise to be able to recite in harmony with a large group.
              I must say that I have heard Buddhist recitation by Sri Lanka monks, who sound like music. And these reciters are popular and famous. But I regard this as a variation not recommended by Lord Buddha. India also has a large variety of recittaion styles and some of them are very ornate.

              Please remember that the schriptures were learned by heart, reciitng them. In a monastic establishment with young monks or nuns who are studying, you will hear soft voices reciting the texts alound, while reading them. They are not singing, it is soft and melodious, but very uniform.

              With Metta,

              Sister Akincana (Saama.nerii)

              P.S. I would have preferred to write my answer directly in the blog, so that everyone in the group can read it. But I do not know how to do this, as I joined the group only recently. So please share with the others whatever you want from this E-mail.

              --- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, Samaneri Dipa <dipaeightprecepter@...> wrote:
              >
              > Does anyone know the difference between chanting with intonation and
              > singing?
              > That is the part that I find confusing. How to know what is intonation and
              > what
              > constitutes singing.
              >
              > with friendliness,
              > Sister Dipa
              >
              >
              > 760-369-0460
              > http://www.mahapajapati.com
              > Audio Talks http://groups.google.com/group/discourses-of-the-buddha
              > http://groups.google.com/group/mahapajapati-monastery?hl=en
              >
              > Ten Topics recommended for discussion by the Buddha AN 10.69
              > sīla= precepts
              > samādhi= settled, still mind
              > pañña= wisdom
              > vimutti= freedom
              > vimuttiñāṇadassana= knowing and seeing freedom
              > appicha= wanting little
              > santuá¹­á¹­hi= contentment
              > viriya= energetic striving (one who has not yet laid down the burden of
              > dukkha)
              > paviveka= solitude
              > asaṃsagga= avoiding socializing (solitude)
              >
              >
              > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              >
            • Bryan Levman
              Dear Ven.Dipa, Sylvain Levi discusses the difference between  intonation and singing in M. Sylvain Lévi, La Récitation Primitive des Textes Bouddhiques ,
              Message 6 of 11 , Aug 8 11:38 AM
              • 0 Attachment
                Dear Ven.Dipa,

                Sylvain Levi discusses the difference between  intonation and singing in


                M. Sylvain Lévi, "La Récitation Primitive des Textes Bouddhiques", Journal Asiatique, Mai-Juin 1915. (1915): 401-47.

                Amongst other things he quotes a passage from the Vinaya (Culla Vagga, V, 3, 1; PTS edition: Vin 2, 108): bhikkhū āyatakena gītassarena dhammaṃ gāyanti."The monks sang the dhamma with drawn out song". The Buddha listsed five disadvantages to this:
                (in Horner's edition of the Vinaya, volume 5, 146):

                "He is pleased with himself in regard to that sound, and others are pleased in regard to that sound, and hoeusepeople look down upon, and while he is himself strivng after accuracy in the sound there is an interruption in his concentration and people coming after fall into the way of (wrong) views."

                 attanāpi tasmiṃ sare sārajjati, parepi tasmiṃ sare sārajjanti, gahapatikāpi ujjhāyanti, sarakuttimpi nikāmayamānassa samādhissa bhaṅgo hoti, pacchimā janatā diṭṭhānugatiṃ āpajjati.

                There are obviously two or more different traditions because in the Mūlasarvāstivādin Vinaya the Buddha permits the monks to "faire intonations de cantilène en récitant la Loi des livres sacrés" and cantilena is a melodic line of some kind.

                Levi goes into all the different Sanskrit, Pali, Chinese and Tibetan Vinayas, so you may wish to read it and learn about the history of chanting vs. singing,


                Metta, Bryan








                ________________________________
                From: Sister Dipa <dipaeightprecepter@...>
                To: Pali@yahoogroups.com
                Sent: Wednesday, August 8, 2012 1:46:07 PM
                Subject: [Pali] Re: Translation of this sentence?


                 

                Dear Samaneri Dipa,

                some time ago I did research on Burmese music with a German friend, who has now become a (lady) professor for Ethnology of Music at the University of Halle/Germany.

                She was writing a book on the songs in worship of the Burmese Nats.
                Your question came up in the course of our discussion, and I learned something new:
                In Western theory of music there is NO clear cut DIVIDING LINE between music (singing a song) and recitation of sacred Latin texts in church.
                The old European church music (Gregorian church music?)is very similar to recitation, in so far as it has an even and measured tone, and almost no melodic embelishments.
                In medieval European church music the music was not noted in the same way used today. The had a script called "neume", to note down church music, which only indicated whether the voice was rising or falling (?).

                Butin the musical theory of ancient India (and probably of South East Asia) there is a DEFINITE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SINGING AND RECITATION.
                In recitation there are no accompanying musical instruments, there should be no melodic embellishments of the voice, or very little. There is no intentional contrast of attractive voices like a male singer and a female singing together or in a kind of dialogue.
                RECITATION HAS A SORT OF BASIC TUNE, which many differ from monastery to monastery, but it should be uniform and sober. IT IS THE SAME TUNE FOR ALL THE TEXTS that are being recited in that monastery.

                Young monks or young nuns (or Buddhist associations of lay people) practise reciting the Paritta, or the Paatimokkha in unison, to give a harmonious group recitation, but they do not intentionally use the contrast of high and low voices, to create variegated music as is done in Western choir singing. The text is the important item, not the melodious sound.
                It requires some practise to be able to recite in harmony with a large group.
                I must say that I have heard Buddhist recitation by Sri Lanka monks, who sound like music. And these reciters are popular and famous. But I regard this as a variation not recommended by Lord Buddha. India also has a large variety of recittaion styles and some of them are very ornate.

                Please remember that the schriptures were learned by heart, reciitng them. In a monastic establishment with young monks or nuns who are studying, you will hear soft voices reciting the texts alound, while reading them. They are not singing, it is soft and melodious, but very uniform.

                With Metta,

                Sister Akincana (Saama.nerii)

                P.S. I would have preferred to write my answer directly in the blog, so that everyone in the group can read it. But I do not know how to do this, as I joined the group only recently. So please share with the others whatever you want from this E-mail.

                --- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, Samaneri Dipa <dipaeightprecepter@...> wrote:
                >
                > Does anyone know the difference between chanting with intonation and
                > singing?
                > That is the part that I find confusing. How to know what is intonation and
                > what
                > constitutes singing.
                >
                > with friendliness,
                > Sister Dipa
                >
                >
                > 760-369-0460
                > http://www.mahapajapati.com
                > Audio Talks http://groups.google.com/group/discourses-of-the-buddha
                > http://groups.google.com/group/mahapajapati-monastery?hl=en
                >
                > Ten Topics recommended for discussion by the Buddha AN 10.69
                > sīla= precepts
                > samādhi= settled, still mind
                > pañña= wisdom
                > vimutti= freedom
                > vimuttiñāṇadassana= knowing and seeing freedom
                > appicha= wanting little
                > santuṭṭhi= contentment
                > viriya= energetic striving (one who has not yet laid down the burden of
                > dukkha)
                > paviveka= solitude
                > asaṃsagga= avoiding socializing (solitude)
                >
                >
                > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                >




                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.