Ajahn Brahmali's translation Bhikkhu Vibhaṅga

I have uploaded two more files of Ajahn Brahmali’s latest english translation of Saṅghādisesā 3 and 4 of the Bhikkhu Vibhaṅga.


This is brilliant because it is so contemporary and relevant. The Buddha-Dhamma is certainly ‘timeless’. People behaved back then in the same ways as people behave today.

For me, this has always been the beauty of reading about the Buddha’s social interactions in the suttas. His (secular, democratic, straightforward & impartial) mode of communication is timeless & contemporary today (unlike texts from other religions).



Thanks so much, Ayya. I know how much work it takes to get these prepared.

1 Like

@Sujato - I have a question re the markup. The headings at the top are marked as <span class="add">. But how about all the other chapter names like “Origin story”, “Final Ruling”, “Definitions”, etc.?

Personally I’d prefer no add tags on headings. All headings are, in fact, added, so it is superfluous. Having said which, there are three sane strategies:

  1. No headings have add tags
  2. All headings have add tags
  3. Headings have add tags only in cases where they are not found in the Pali text.

The last one would seem to be the most informative. But in fact it’s only really giving you information about choices made by the editors of the Mahasangiti edition, which you can easily check anyway. So anyway, like i said my preference is for no add tags on headings.

There are add tags in the h1-headings in the pali texts too, that is why I also added it in the English. Should those be removed?

Really? Sure, remove them. But where are they? I can’t see them.


Oh, okay. Ugly!

And I just checked, and these are not found in the Mahasangiti edition after all, we must have added them at some point. But it would be better to follow the method we use more often elsewhere, just have the rule number in the h1. In fact the previous line already says sanghadidesa, so that is superfluous. So:

<h1>1. Sukkavissaṭṭhisikkhāpada</h1>

Thanks. And another question: How about the <div class="sutta">? For instance in the English PJ1 but also in other places. These parts get indented and Ajahn @Brahmali asks if this is necessary. Should I remove these?

This is marks places that are sutta parallels. But our parallel data should (in principle) just duplicate it. So I would suggest check this, and where possible, keep the info just in the parallels files.

It is unlikely, but possible, that material is “sutta-like” but doesn’t have any parallels. I don’t think we will have any such cases, but if we do, we will have to see how to deal with it.

A final note, hopefully unnecessary, is that if the “sutta” class is retained it should be renamed so as not to clash with the 'sutta" ID. But anyway, better to get rid of them.

1 Like

Also brings me to yet another issue. In the English, the introduction to PJ is added to PJ1. In the Pali it is not. So I will add it to the Pali also and change it in the parallels file accordingly, unless you disagree.

? What’s up with that? I am sure we fixed this ages ago. Has it reverted, or is my mind showing signs of early onset Alzheimer’s? No, wait, don’t answer that.

But anyway, yes, please make the changes.

1 Like

Will do. Does the story of Sudinna have any known parallels in the suttas (not other vinayas)? It is not mentioned in the parallels list but it is fairly similar to the story of Ratthapala.

Yes, it is a partial parallel for Ratthapala.

Anything else or just MN 82?
mn 82 has a whole list here:
My guess is at least Avs 90 but I’m unsure about the Chinese and Tibetan ones.

Veranjakanda has a sectional parallel with AN 8.11.

Apart from that, i don’t there are any more.

However there is an issue with Pj1: the text is incomplete, and the final segment the translation is repeated.

There is another issue. It seems Brahmali has used the “sutta” tag to mean “parallel”, as we find a passage here where one part of the text parallels another part of the same text, and both are marked with “sutta”. Maybe mark these in the parallels? There’s only one such case in Pj 1.

I think it should probably be a resembling parallel for all of them.

OK. I’ve added the parallels. Have a look at:

But how about:

AN 5.103 and AN 3.50 as resembling parallels?

Great, thanks so much.

Okay, why not?

But did you want me to check these? I only checked Pj 1.