AN 4.83:1.5 should be split in two, as its counterpart is at AN 4.83:2.5 and AN 4.83:2.6
The comment to MN 81:14.1 has the error “which which”. The second “which” should be something like “include” or “feature”.
3 Likes
“Mendicants, these two misrepresent the Realized One.
AN2.22 and 23
Should this say ways to misrepresent the Realised One?
1 Like
Snp 1.10:7.2
«the teaching brings happiness»
The «the» should be capitalized like SN 10.12:3.2.
AN 4.45:8.2
«has completed the spiritual journey, and gone to the end of the world.»
SN 2.26:7.2
«has completed the spiritual journey and gone to the end of the world.»
AN 4.45 has a comma after «journey», but SN 2.26 doesn’t.
AN 4.21:5.1
«entrie spectrum»
Should be «entire»
SN 6.2:8.1
«All Buddhas in the past,»
AN 4.21:9.1
«All Buddhas, whether in the past,»
I think the Pali was the same.
SN 8.5:5.2
«as do not hurt yourself»
Snp 3.3:5.2
«that do not hurt yourself»
SN 8.5:8.3
«for making an end of suffering:»
Snp 3.3:8.3
«for the attainment of vision,»
I think these segments in SN 8.5 and Snp 3.3 should match.
DN 28:2.3
«Suppose there were a king’s frontier citadel»
AN 10.95, DN 16, SN 35.245, and SN 47.12
«Suppose there was a king’s frontier citadel»
DN 28 is the only one that uses «were».
DN 28:2.4, AN 10.95:10.5, SN 35.245:8.2
«astute, competent, and clever»
SN 47.12:6.4, AN 5.134:2.5, AN 5.136:1.7, AN 5.136:2.10, AN 7.67:7.1, AN 7.67:19.1, DN 5:13.9, DN 16:1.17.4
«astute, competent, and intelligent»
DN 14:3.8.5, MN 26:22.5, MN 26:23.5, MN 84:2.4, MN 85:46.5, MN 85:47.5, SN 35.238:10.2, SN 35.238:10.3, SN 44.1:3.4
«astute, competent, clever»
AN 5.50:3.4, AN 5.50:4.4, DN 17:1.18.2, DN 23:2.6, DN 23:3.7, MN 129:41.2
«astute, competent, intelligent»
«intelligent» vs «clever» in these.
DN 5:14.5
«He was astute and clever»
The Pali has «paṇḍito viyatto medhāvī» so maybe it should have «competent» after «astute».
DN 4 has three «astute and clever», but there the Pali didn’t include «viyatto».
Just included this in case «clever» should change to «intelligent» in those DN 4 segments.
DN 28:2.6
«They’d think,»
SN 47.12:6.6
«He thinks,»
Maybe these should be the same.
AN 5.30:1.9
«meaningful and well-phrased. And he reveals a spiritual practice»
AN 6.42:1.8
«meaningful and well-phrased; and he explains a spiritual practice»
Bit different after «well-phrased».
AN 5.30:1.11, AN 6.42:1.9
«they took many fresh and cooked foods»
AN 8.86:2.1
«they took abundant fresh and cooked foods»
AN 5.30:2.4, AN 6.42:2.4
«They’ve brought many fresh and cooked foods»
AN 8.86:2.5
«They’ve brought abundant fresh and cooked foods»
«many» vs «abundant»
AN 6.42:7.3
«they will immerse it, or if it is immersed»
AN 8.86:10.3
«they will immerse it; or if it is immersed»
Comma vs semicolon
AN 6.42:9.3
«They come down to villages, towns, and capital cities and make their home there.»
AN 8.86:12.3
«They come down to villages, towns and capital cities and make their homes there.»
AN 6.42 has a comma after «towns» which AN 8.86 doesn’t. And AN 6.42 uses «home» while AN 8.86 uses «homes».
3 Likes
The title on this translation is “Kolitasuttaṁ # The Discourse about Kolita” when it should be “Mahāmoggallānasutta # With Mahāmoggallāna”
1 Like
There are many variants on sutta titles around, depending on the various manuscripts. In this case, both titles have the same meaning: Kolita is another name for Mahāmoggallāna.
3 Likes
Trivial, but AN6.12 has the English title “Warm-hearted (2nd)” (the one used by Sujato’s translation) but appears as “Conducive to amiability” (Ṭhānissaro Bhikkhu’s title) only when listed as a parallel to other texts.
(From AN6.11 parallels screen, but identical in DN33, etc.)
1 Like
SN 1.20:25.1
«judgement»
The rest of the suttas use «judgment».
SN 1.20:25.1 note
«judgements»
This should probably be «judgments» since that’s used in the suttas.
«(sn7.20:3.3]())» no hyperlink, I think something went wrong here. And that and the English words after that uses italics, and «na vimāna» and «na ca māna» doesn’t have italics which I think they should. The last part, «per Bodhi, Connected Discourses, note 38.», uses italics like it should, I think.
«(DN 1:1.4.1, MN 18).| For»
I think there’s usually a space before the «|»
«māna_»
I don’t know if the underscore should be removed.
DN 1:1.21.2 note
«Mil 5.3.7:6.1sācakkaṁ»
No space between «Mil 5.3.7:6.1» and «sācakkaṁ».
2 Likes
Yes, a typo. In Bilara, we type links with the pattern [sutta_ID](), but in (_sn7.20:3.3]() the first opening bracket is a round one instead of a square one. Thanks for finding!
2 Likes
suttaplex blurb for milindapañha (super-blurbs:mil): “known as in Pali as Milinda”
an6.28:3.5 extra space before comma in their porch ,
snp5.5:3.4 comment: same thing in glosses _jātipaccaya_ ,
(@sabbamitta already found above another funky space comma thingy in MN91 yay!)
2 Likes
AN6.28:6.3: ‘chayime, bhikkhu, samayā manobhāvanīyassa bhikkhuno dassanāya upasaṅkamituṁ.
‘Mendicants, there are six occasions for going to see an esteemed mendicant.
Bhikkhu is singular, not plural. So the address should be “mendicant” or “monk”, not mendicants".
In MN96, seyyaṁsa is mostly translated “better”, but in segment 8.2 it is “ever truer”.
I think the abbreviations in MN96, segments 8.5–8.8 should be understood differently. This is how they are:
People who are very beautiful, or not very beautiful, who are very wealthy, or not very wealthy,
But if you look at the first instance, an eminent family, the two options are not about an eminent or not eminent family, but in both cases the family is eminent, and the difference lies in the behavior. So I think in the case of beauty and wealth this should be the same. Perhaps like this:
People who are very beautiful kill living creatures … refrain from killing living creatures … People who are very wealthy kill living creatures … refrain from killing living creatures
The term anabhijjhālu hoti, abyāpannacitto hoti, sammādiṭṭhi hoti is translated “they’re contented, kind-hearted, and have right view” in MN136, “they’re content, kind-hearted, with right view” in AN4.236, and “they’re not covetous or malicious, and they have right view” in MN96.
The phrase adhammacārī visamacārī is “unprincipled and immoral” in MN42 and “unprincipled and unjust” in MN97; except for segments 16.5 and 25.5, where “immoral” (and “moral” respectively) is used.
Segment MN97:24.3 has the abbreviated text “king …”. If the pattern of the previous instances would be followed, this text should instead be in segment 24.1, Taṁ kiṁ maññasi, dhanañjāni ….
MN143:3.1: Atha kho āyasmā sāriputto nivāsetvā pattacīvaramādāya āyasmatā ānandena pacchāsamaṇena yena anāthapiṇḍikassa gahapatissa nivesanaṁ tenupasaṅkami; upasaṅkamitvā paññatte āsane nisīdi. Nisajja kho āyasmā sāriputto anāthapiṇḍikaṁ gahapatiṁ etadavoca:
Then Venerable Sāriputta robed up in the morning and, taking his bowl and robe, went with Venerable Ānanda as his second monk to Anāthapiṇḍika’s home. He sat down on the seat spread out, and said to Anāthapiṇḍika,
The Pali doesn’t have “in the morning” (pubbaṇhasamayaṁ).
3 Likes
In the sutta and on the suttaplex card SN 41.2 is called «Isidatta (1st)» but SN 41.3 is called «With Isidatta (2nd)».
Guessing SN 41.2 should also use «With».
SN 41.2:3.2
«He said to the senior venerable,»
SN 41.3:4.2
«He said to the venerable senior,»
SN 41.2:4.3
«Then the senior venerable said to Venerable Isidatta,»
SN 41.3:8.3
«Then the venerable senior said to Venerable Isidatta,»
These should probably use either «the senior venerable» or «the venerable senior». Maybe some other places should also change.
2 Likes
Thag16.8:3.1: “Cirassaṁ vata me mahito mahesī,
“Oh, at long last a renowned great seer,
Is “at long last” an idiomatic English expression, or should it simply be “at last”?
Yes, it’s an idiom.
1 Like
AN3.106:1.2: na me te, bhikkhave, samaṇā vā brāhmaṇā vā samaṇesu vā samaṇasammatā brāhmaṇesu vā brāhmaṇasammatā, na ca pana te āyasmanto sāmaññatthaṁ vā brahmaññatthaṁ vā diṭṭheva dhamme sayaṁ abhiññā sacchikatvā upasampajja viharanti.
I don’t deem them as true ascetics and brahmins. Those venerables don’t realize the goal of life as an ascetic or brahmin, and don’t live having realized it with their own insight.
The translation for diṭṭheva dhamme is lacking: “… and don’t live having realized it with their own insight in this very life.” Again in segment 1.4.
Again in MN95:14.3 and 14.6.
In Ja37:1.3 it’s “in this life”.
The phrase anāsavaṁ cetovimuttiṁ paññāvimuttiṁ diṭṭheva dhamme sayaṁ abhiññā sacchikatvā upasampajja viharati is sometimes translated in full, “realize the undefiled freedom of heart and freedom by wisdom in this very life, and live having realized it with their own insight due to the ending of defilements”, and sometimes it’s abbreviated (perhaps on purpose?), “lives having realized the ending of defilements”.
It’s possible there are still more that I missed.
1 Like