Bless us with your sparkling love 💖 let us know any mistakes and typos

[sujato]

Thanks for letting us know what we can improve!

When it comes to legacy translations—i.e. translations that we have inherited from elsewhere—corrections will be limited to obvious typos and mistakes. While we try to source the best quality work we can, it’s not our job to edit or correct other peoples’ translations.

• We do not make any changes to the original language texts in Pali, Sanskrit, etc. The only exception is occasional details of punctuation, markup, and the like, but not the actual text itself.
• For website bugs, best open a new thread, as they can sometimes be a bit complex to figure out.

[sabbamitta]

Thank you Bhante! You made it to revise the old thread before it reached 500 replies and was closed by the system!

I am wondering if you have not noticed this one, or if you just didn’t mention it?

Anyway, lots for me to revise now in my own translation!

[Adutiya]

@sujato

the adjectival form nāparo occurs once in the Sutta Nipata; i’ll return to this below.

Not from a sutta, but, well, a typo.

[sabbamitta]

In SN22.90 where Ananda relates the talk of SN12.15 to Channa, some terms have been changed; mainly, the word “notion” has been replaced by “thought”. Perhaps the same changes should be applied to SN12.15 too?

---

“In the Eastern Monastery, the stilt longhouse of Migāra’s mother” has generally become “in the Eastern Monastery, in the stilt longhouse of Migāra’s mother”, but not everywhere.

• In AN2.32-41 the change has been made once, but the monastery is mentioned several times.
• In AN6.43:1.2 and MN26:3.2 it says “let’s go to the Eastern Monastery, the stilt longhouse of Migāra’s mother”, so perhaps the “to” should be repeated here.

[sujato]

@sabbamitta

I am wondering if you have not noticed this one , or if you just didn’t mention it?

No, it seems I overlooked it, thanks.

SN7.2:3.5: “Bhavantaṁ kho gotamaṁ sarājikā parisā evaṁ jānāti:
“The king and his retinue believe that Mister Gotama is
SN7.2:3.6: ‘arahaṁ samaṇo gotamo’ti.
a perfected one.

This is not quite a mistake, it’s bho in the first line and ascetic in the second. The sentence is a slightly tricky one: the first Bhavantaṁ kho gotamaṁ is in the rare accusative of relation (also used in the phrase " a good reputation concerning Master Gotama has spread …". Bodhi omits it, as it doesn’t really affect the sense. Anyway I’ve rephrased it.

SN7.13:2.1: “Tuṇhībhūto bhavaṁ tiṭṭhaṁ,
“Silent stands the Master,

Here use “good sir”.

@Adutiya

@sujato

the adjectival form nāparo occurs once in the Sutta Nipata; i’ll return to this below.

Not from a sutta, but, well, a typo.

You know, I was looking at this for ages trying to figure out what the mistake was. My old guitar teacher, Barry Weeks, always used to write lower-case “i” and I picked up the habit from him.

Unfortunately, my forum posts are not carefully proofread and tend to have some typos, I’m afraid!

@sabbamitta

In SN22.90 where Ananda relates the talk of SN12.15 to Channa, some terms have been changed; mainly, the word “notion” has been replaced by “thought”. Perhaps the same changes should be applied to SN12.15 too?

And … I’ve changed it again:

the concept of non-existence regarding the world does not occur

@sabbamitta

“In the Eastern Monastery, the stilt longhouse of Migāra’s mother” has generally become “in the Eastern Monastery, in the stilt longhouse of Migāra’s mother”, but not everywhere.

Actually this is unidiomatic, the smaller location should be first. We usually say, “I was living in a house in the country”, rarely, “I was living in the country, in a house”.

• to the stilt longhouse of Migāra’s mother in the Eastern Monastery
• in the stilt longhouse of Migāra’s mother in the Eastern Monastery

[sabbamitta]

In AN4.6, in the sentence “they understand the meaning and the text”, text has been changed to “teaching”; except for segment 2.4, where there is still a “text” left.

We also find “the meaning and the text” for atthamaññāya dhammamaññāya in AN4.186:4.9.

---

Generally, in the sequence of the external sense fields, we find “ideas” as the last element; except for DN22, where there are “sights, sounds, smells, tastes, touches, and thoughts” in segments 18.28 and 18.31.

---

Normally, “individual” renders purisapuggala. But in DN28 (segments 8ff) it stands for plain puggala.

[sujato]

@sabbamitta

“sights, sounds, smells, tastes, touches, and thoughts” in segments 18.28 and 18.31.

Also “compelling thoughts” at SN 35.231:9.1

Thanks!

[Snowbird]

Sutta Differ | ReadingFaithfully

Between sn3.21 and an4.85 there is inconsistency with fragrance vs. perfume (see link above).

Do you want things like this pointed out? If you look at that one there is also a variation between “some person” and “someone”.

[sujato]

@Snowbird

Between sn3.21 and an4.85 there is inconsistency with fragrance vs. perfume (see link above).

@Snowbird

Do you want things like this pointed out?

Oh absolutely, yes.

@Snowbird

If you look at that one there is also a variation between “some person” and “someone”.

Right, yes. Use “a person” throughout for ekacco puggalo (with allowance for context).

[Snowbird]

@sujato

Use “a person” throughout

I notice that you write these like git commit summaries. Unless, are you actually asking us to make the change?

There is also this between MN10 and DN22:

[sabbamitta]

Dibbehi or dibbāni etc. is inconsistently translated as “heavenly” or “divine”.

---

Jaccandho puriso is sometimes “a man born blind”, sometimes “a man blind from birth”. In MN75 we find even both forms.

---

DN33:2.2.53: Yo so, āvuso, bhikkhu satthari agāravo viharati appatisso, dhamme agāravo viharati appatisso, saṅghe agāravo viharati appatisso, sikkhāya na paripūrakārī, so saṅghe vivādaṁ janeti. Yo hoti vivādo bahujanāhitāya bahujanāsukhāya anatthāya ahitāya dukkhāya devamanussānaṁ.
They create a dispute in the Saṅgha, which is for the detriment and suffering of the people, against the people, for the harm, detriment, and suffering of gods and humans.

Here, the Pali phrase lacks bahuno janassa, so “against the people” should be removed.

---

The translation for āsevita seems to vary between “developed” and “cultivated”. Also, there seems to be a confusion between āsevita, bhāvita (mostly “developed”), and bahulīkata (sometimes “practiced”, sometimes “made much”).

Compare for example AN1.622:1.1-2 with AN1.624:1-2, where it says each time “cultivated” in English, but the Pali has one time āsevita, one time bahulīkata.

---

The “gods who control what is imagined by others”, as other gods too, have mostly become lowercase; except some “gods who control what is Imagined (capital “I”) by others” in AN3.80:4.2, AN8.45:6.8, and AN10.29:2.2.

---

Moghapurisa has generally become a “futile man”, but there are still some “silly men”: AN10.93:15.4, AN10.94, DN24, MN66, AN3.137:2.1, AN6.49, SN47.3, SN47.12, SN16.6, SN16.13, AN8.63, AN5.167, MN48, MN70, DN28, and DN25.

---

The word gaṇācariya is mostly translated as one who “teaches a community”; only in MN35 it is a “tutor of a community”.

---

AN2.52:1.1: “Dveme, bhikkhave, puggalā loke uppajjamānā uppajjanti bahujanahitāya bahujanasukhāya, bahuno janassa atthāya hitāya sukhāya devamanussānaṁ.
“These two, mendicants, arise in the world for the welfare and happiness of the people, for the people, for the benefit, welfare, and happiness of gods and humans.

Somehow, the “people” (puggalā) have vanished from the English.

---

Thag4.4:1.2: mārapakkhe avassute;
You’re on Māra’s side, you ooze!

Avassuta has generally been changed to “festering”, but here we have “ooze”.

[sujato]

@Snowbird

Unless, are you actually asking us to make the change?

Ha, no, just my way of talking.

I’ve made that change.

@sabbamitta

Dibbehi or dibbāni etc. is inconsistently translated as “heavenly” or “divine”.

Over time I have come to adopt “divine” for brahma where possible, so use “heavenly”.

@sabbamitta

Jaccandho puriso is sometimes “a man born blind”, sometimes “a man blind from birth”. In MN75 we find even both forms.

blind from birth.

@sabbamitta

Here, the Pali phrase lacks bahuno janassa, so “against the people” should be removed.

right, thanks.

@sabbamitta

The translation for āsevita seems to vary between “developed” and “cultivated”. Also, there seems to be a confusion between āsevita, bhāvita (mostly “developed”), and bahulīkata (sometimes “practiced”, sometimes “made much”).

Generally it should be:

• bhaveti = develop
• asevati = cultivate
• bahulikaroti = make much of

But it does vary somewhat in context. But let me know if you find any more, I’ve fixed this one.

---

Thanks Sabbamitta, I’ve fixed these.

[sabbamitta]

Sahassa loka is sometimes “the entire galaxie”, sometimes simply a “galaxy”, sometimes a “thousandfold galaxy”, sometimes “a thousand worlds”. Sometimes, a dasasahassī lokadhātu is also a “galaxie”, namely, when it comes to shaking it.

Perhaps these are, partly poetic, variations according to context?

---

SN22.80:9.13: Evametassa kevalassa dukkhakkhandhassa samudayo assā’ti.
That is how this entire mass of suffering originates.

Add single closing quote here.

---

AN9.6:10.5: ‘imaṁ kho me gāmanigamaṁ sevato akusalā dhammā abhivaḍḍhanti, kusalā dhammā parihāyantī’ti, evarūpo gāmanigamo na sevitabbo.
‘When I frequent this market town, unskillful qualities grow, and skillful qualities decline.’ You should not frequent that kind of village or town.

In this sutta, gāmanigama is mostly translated as “market town”, but sometimes as “village or town”—and we find even both versions in the same segment.

---

The gods “replete with glory” have become those “of universal beauty”, but in MN1 there are still a number of “those replete with glory” left. Also, in MN41 and 42 (elsewhere?) there are gods “of limited glory” and “of limitless glory”, which then also should become “beauty”.

[faujidoc1]

Note to section 1.4 in MN10

The primary focus is on one’s own body, the other’s body, although that can be brought in also.

?? not the other’s body

[sujato]

@sabbamitta

Sahassa loka is sometimes “the entire galaxie”, sometimes simply a “galaxy”, sometimes a “thousandfold galaxy”, sometimes “a thousand worlds”. Sometimes, a dasasahassī lokadhātu is also a “galaxie”, namely, when it comes to shaking it.

Perhaps these are, partly poetic, variations according to context?

Be more consistent, use thousandfold galaxy ten-thousandfold galaxy, etc. If the number is already implied it can be omitted.

Note that AN 3.80 is apparently unique, in that it use dvisahassī and tisahassī to mean, not “twice a thousand” and “thrice a thousand”, but “a thousand squared” and “a thousand cubed”.

@sabbamitta

Add single closing quote here.

Thanks.

@sabbamitta

In this sutta, gāmanigama is mostly translated as “market town”, but sometimes as “village or town”—and we find even both versions in the same segment.

In MN 81 this phrase refers to a single place, which is further described and bustling and prosperous, so it must mean “market town”. However the expected sense of “village or town” is sometimes made explicit when the compound is resolved. Previously I had preferred the sense “market town”, but I have changed it to “village or town” except where “market town” is implied by context.

@sabbamitta

The gods “replete with glory” have become those “of universal beauty”

Thanks, fixed.

@faujidoc1

?? not the other’s body

Right yes.

[Dogen]

This time it’s for Ajahn @Brahmali on Bhikkhu Pātimokkha:

Expulsion 3. Laying False Claim to Superhuman Attainments
Pārājika 4. Uttarimanussadhamma

Should be expulsion 4?

The same error is found in Bhikkhuni Pātimokkha

[sabbamitta]

AN3.30:1.1: “Tayome, bhikkhave, puggalā santo saṁvijjamānā lokasmiṁ.
“These three are found in the world.

Should be “these three people”; and again in segment 3.12.

[Vimala]

When looking up MA10, I noticed a couple of mistakes in how the text is represented.

First of all the Suttaplex card only mentions “Chinese” and not the source:

Then in the file itself under “info” it gives the wrong information:

[Snowbird]

It looks like in DN1 you use “refrain” and in MN27 you use “avoid”

DN1

Uccāsayanamahāsayanā paṭivirato samaṇo gotamo ….
‘He refrains from high and luxurious beds.’

MN27

They avoid high and luxurious beds.
uccāsayanamahāsayanā paṭivirato hoti,

[sujato]

@Vimala

When looking up MA10, I noticed a couple of mistakes in how the text is represented.

Venerable, can I ask you to make a Github issue on this and tag Hongda?

@sabbamitta

Should be “these three people”

Thanks.

@Snowbird

It looks like in DN1 you use “refrain” and in MN27 you use “avoid”

Yes, this is another experiment, I tried using “avoid” but got pulled back into the gravity well of “refrain from”. Use “refrain from”.