所 as "belonging"? 慢 as "notion"?

In Ven Anālayo’s translation of SA 103, he renders this sentence:[quote]「我於五受陰觀察非我、非我所,而非阿羅漢者,我於我慢、我欲、我使,未斷、未知、未離、未吐。」[/quote]loosely like this, I might have the wrong repetition selected for cut-and-paste:[quote]‘I examine these five aggregates of clinging as not self and not belonging to the self, yet I am not an arahant, with the influxes being eradicated. I have not yet abandoned the ‘I am’ conceit, the desire [related to the notion] ‘I am’, and the underlying tendency towards ‘I am’, have not yet [fully] understood it, not yet become sepa­rated from it, not yet vomited it out.’”[/quote]Most of this makes sense, but a few things are confusing:

This[quote]我於我慢[/quote]seems to be rendered as [quote]I have not yet abandoned the ‘I am’ conceit,[/quote]which is quite loose seeming to me, as a translation, but I am a novice.

Also this construction here:[quote]我於五受陰觀察非我、非我所,
‘I examine these five aggregates of clinging as not self and not belonging to the self, [/quote]Is this a “normal” usage of 所?

1 Like

@Coemgenu

我所 means mine .

My translations :

When I examine the five aggregates
of clinging , as not self and not mine ,
And since I am not an arahant yet ,
therefore my conceit, Sensuous desire , negatives , have not abandoned , not fully comprehended ,
not detached , not purified .

1 Like

[quote=“James2997, post:2, topic:5261”]
therefore my conceit
[/quote]Is this supposed to render this directly? [quote]我於我慢[/quote]I am having a little bit of trouble with the structure here. I understand how we get from 慢 to “conceit”, that makes sense, but the use of 於 is a bit puzzling when it is surrounded by the two “I’s” (我於我), this is a Chinese structure that seems very “Chinese”, if you will forgive my truism. Sometimes one can read āgamas by intuiting from their word order and from patterns common in Indo-European languages (which these documents are translated from), but sometimes Chinese grammar is far too mysterious to me. I am working on a larger post on 法身 in Early Buddhist Texts that has some translation and research work, and boy am I learning how much I have more to learn.

What do you think of this structure: 我於我慢, and more importantly, how does it connect to the previous clause if it starts the way it does, as in, where is the “implicit 如” in “而非阿羅漢者,我於我慢”

Thanks . 谢谢 。

@” 。

谢谢.

1 Like

sorry I am not doing so well with using a mouse/ keypad today argh-- it is the second time I’ve accidentally posted something today. Third time lucky.

What I wanted to say is that 我 is “I”, the subject of the sentence. 於 means “with regards to” here- it’s a bit like modern Chinese “對於” (regarding) or “關於” (in relation to). 我慢 is the conceit of self-the “I am” conceit. The second 我 and 慢should be joined like this and read as a two-character compound, a single noun, asmi-māna. So you could read the clause, “I, with regard to the “I am” conceit…have not known it, left it behind, vomited it out.” but I wouldn’t write it like that because it would be weird. Ven. Analayo has just rearranged the words so it’s not weird, that’s all.

Because it is a technical buddhist text, 慢 (conceit) and 我慢 (“I am” conceit) are not 100% interchangeable. From the context in the sutta, it is clear that it is “inflows” (to use an Analayism) that are being discussed.

我所 is an abbreviation for 我所有的, “that which I own”. Unless I am wrong, 所 is being used as a marker of grammatical passivity here- owned by me. I wouldn’t worry too much about its literal meaning (“by me”)- every time you see 我所, just read as if it were 我所有的 (“owned by me”).

Can you read modern Chinese? Here is an example for 我所:
佛學常見辭彙
【我所】 我所有的簡稱。有我見的人,對於身外之物都認為我所有,叫做我所。

3 Likes