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

Re: translating or not

Expand Messages
  • Flavio Costa
    So to substitute God for Deva is a little like exchanging apples for oranges. However, to help the lay reader, I suppose it is a good idea to have such words
    Message 1 of 3 , Apr 2, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      "So to substitute God for Deva is a little like exchanging apples for
      oranges. However, to help the lay reader, I suppose it is a good idea to
      have such words that are left untranslated introduced by a footnote or entry
      in a glossary."

      Hi,

      this is the position I prefer, too. From getting acquainted with some pali
      words readers may improve their understanding of the Dhamma. Still, we
      should find proper translations if they exist.

      "Yes. I always translate "bhikkhu." Do you need the word "Buddhist"?"

      I did't made myself clear enough. In suttas I use only "monk", I specify
      it more only when speaking to others without a context, so there is no way
      for them to misunderstand it for something else.

      "So, maybe "monk" is not the best translation for bhikkhu here [DN2], but
      "mendicant" or some other word?"

      I see this passage in another way. The Buddha is saying about the
      benefits of sama~n~naphala, an so it's stated: "When he has thus gone forth,
      he lives restrained by the rules of the monastic code (patimokkha), seeing
      danger in the slightest faults. Consummate in his virtue, he guards the
      doors of his senses, is possessed of mindfulness and alertness, and is
      content." An that's all he says about him. This contentness is a clear and
      direct consequence of his going forth and living as a samana.

      The next section starts: "And how is a monk consummate in virtue?". Here
      I do not see that "a monk" refers to the samana of the previous section. To
      me, a bhikkhu is a specific kind of samana. Samana is anyone who dedicates
      his/her life to the spiritual (ascetic) practice, and this includes, but is
      not limited to monks. From this excerpt I do not conclude whether
      "patimokkha" implies that he has ordained of not, but if the sutta doesn't
      talk about just one person, it doesn't matter.

      Regards,

      Flavio Costa
    • nina van gorkom
      ... Nina: I think so. I have some texts on paatimokkha: There are two kinds of Paatimokkha: the Ovaada-paatimokkha and the aa.naa-paatimokkha. The
      Message 2 of 3 , Apr 2, 2003
      • 0 Attachment
        op 02-04-2003 09:48 schreef Rene Salm op rsalm@...:

        >
        > The paatimokkha is briefly mentioned in par. 42. (“He adopts and trains
        > himself in the paatimokkha.”) Are we
        > to assume that this implies ordination and involvement of the sangha? Or
        > does bhikkhu here just mean
        Nina: I think so. I have some texts on paatimokkha:
        There are two kinds of Paatimokkha: the Ovaada-paatimokkha and the
        aa.naa-paatimokkha. The Ovaada-paatimokkha, the exhortation to the
        Paatimokkha, is an important principle of teaching or instruction. The
        aa.naa-paatimokkha are the rules of the Vinaya which are an important
        foundation to be applied by the monks in their conduct.
        We read in the Suma"ngalavilaasinii, the Co to the Mahaapadaana Sutta,
        Dialogues of the Buddha II, no. XIV):
        <The word ³paatimokkhe²(according to the paatimokkha) means, it liberates
        completely, that is, the highest síla; it guards in a supreme way, namely,
        it guards happy states; it liberates from danger, the danger of an unhappy
        destination. Or it guards happy states and liberates from unhappy states.
        Therefore, this síla is called paatimokkha.>

        Paati means to guard or protect, and mokkheti means to liberate.
        Nina.
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.