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

[Sheer Dukkha] translators...Re: [SGI] Re: I know why this group is fading...

Expand Messages
  • djgropp
    Udana, an early Buddhist text, describes Shakyamuni s awakening to the truth of dependent origination as follows: Hence, that being, this comes to be; through
    Message 1 of 45 , May 1, 2011
      Udana, an early Buddhist text, describes Shakyamuni's awakening to the truth of dependent origination as follows: "Hence, that being, this comes to be; through the arising of that, this arises. That is to say, through the condition that is ignorance, (there are generated) the formations; through the condition that is the formations, consciousness; through the condition that is consciousness, name-and-form; through the condition that is name-and-form, the six bases; through the condition that is the six bases, contact; through the condition that is contact, sensation; through the condition that is sensation,
      craving; through the condition that is craving, grasping; through the condition that is
      grasping, becoming; through the condition that is becoming, birth; through the condition that is birth, old age and dying, grief, lamentation, dukkha [suffering], dejection and despair are generated. So is there the origination of this mass that is sheer dukkha."* The
      same text also explains that Shakyamuni understood this chain of causation in terms of the cessation of suffering.

      * The Udana, Peter Masefield, trans. (Oxford: Pali Text Society, 1997), p. 1. A similar account is also found in The Book of the Discipline: Vinaya-Pitaka, vol. 4, I. B. Horner,
      trans. (Oxford: Pali Text Society, 2000), pp. 1–3.





      --- In SokaGakkaiUnofficial@yahoogroups.com, "wkallander" <wkallander@...> wrote:
      >
      > --- In SokaGakkaiUnofficial@yahoogroups.com, jodine richards <jodiner@> wrote:
      > > YOu dont find specifically the word dukkha in the gosho..so , would you say that the translators of the gosho didnt use the word dukkha if it did mean more than the word "suffering..."" If dukkha was really as broad as you said...How in the world were the translators lacked study for using only the term suffering in the gosho instead of dukkha...there they also used so many Japanese term..why they didnt use dukkha too, if it would broaden and if it was really that important??
      >
      > Perhaps they are human and their understanding of the original changes and matures with time.
      >
      > From what I have heard, there was a significant effort in translating the text to preserve meaning as close as possible, but there are significant corrections from the older 7 volumes (Major Writings) version of the Gosho to the new two-volume (WND) version.
      >
      > > Becoz dukkha is a provisional term from provisional teachings...
      >
      > No, that's precisely the point, it isn't. Without a suitable analog in English, the original word is simply the best choice if you want to preserve semantic meaning.
      >
    • djgropp
      I don t know anyone who s never heard of Buddha. Dukkha, or the four noble truths, is another matter; not too important in my thinking.
      Message 45 of 45 , May 3, 2011
        I don't know anyone who's never heard of Buddha. Dukkha, or the four noble truths, is another matter; not too important in my thinking.




        --- In SokaGakkaiUnofficial@yahoogroups.com, "wkallander" <wkallander@...> wrote:
        >
        > >>Four noble truth belongs to the category of teachings that the buddha referred as the 40 yrs hence were the provisional teachings before he proceeded with the manifold Lotus sutra..and now in the essential practice ...even the theoretical lotus cant help people in their dukkha............<<
        >
        > Hmm, let me get this straight... Your assertion is that, not only is Dukkha (one of the Three Dharma Seals [or Four, depending]) a "provisional" teaching, but you think the Four Noble Truths are ALSO? Seriously? You're pulling my leg. I mean, no frigging way! (It is not April first, yesterday was May first.) I hope I am just misunderstanding you and that is not what you intended to convey.
        >
        > I mean, by that reasoning, what's next,? Claiming that the word "Buddha" is a provisional term and that the only acceptable term is "Enlightened One" or some similarly poor substitution?
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.