The difficult thing, itâs hard to find any other German word but âSchĂŒlerâ for almost all of them.
The German âStudentâ for example is not just any student, but a university studentâcan a brahmin teacher be considered a university? Probably not. Etc., etc. This will still cost me a couple of grey hairs âŠ
So! After some degree of hair-greying, Iâm now making them:
antevÄsÄ« = âpupilâ = âZöglingâ, or âInternatszöglingâ in SN35.151
sissa = âacolyteâ = ? (not yet translated; perhaps Adept, for in German, that is not a master, but someone who has been initiated, but is still under tutorship, which fits the description: âtherefore he addressed his acolytes, brahmins who had mastered the hymnsâ)
sÄvaka = âdiscipleâ = âSchĂŒlerâ
MN122:23.2: Tasseva kho panÄnanda, satthu sÄvako tassa satthu vivekamanubrĆ«hayamÄno
Itâs when the pupil of a teacher, emulating their teacherâs fostering of seclusion,
Here it should be âdiscipleâ, not âpupilâ.
SNp2.8:2.1: TadaáčáčhikatvÄna nisamma dhÄ«ro,
Heeding well, a wise pupil SNp2.8:2.2: DhammÄnudhammaáč paáčipajjamÄno;
practicing in line with that teaching SNp2.8:2.3: Viññƫ vibhÄvÄ« nipuáčo ca hoti,
grows intelligent, discerning, and subtle SNp2.8:2.4: Yo tÄdisaáč bhajati appamatto.
through diligently sticking close to such a person.
I canât find out where you found the âpupilâ here ⊠??
Tassa na vivekajapÄ«tisukhÄnusÄri viññÄáčaáč hoti na (MN138:16.3)
Since the viveka⊠is an adjective and based on hoti and hoti na I figure that:
in case 1. such viññÄáčaáč exists/is arisen and
in case 2. such viññÄáčaáč does not exist.
Thou I am not sure why the negative ânaâ is used two times in that verse, both before the adjective and after âhotiâ.
Actually after more careful observation, the second na might be applied to the following word in following line - in which case I will have to doubt what I wrote above: if the first na inverts the adjective then viññÄáčaáč is said to exist in both cases, if it inverts hoti then there is no such viññÄáčaáč in second case.
Life is more important that translation terminology! For things like this, it doesnât matter too much, but if we can articulate the diversity of the original text, why not?
Itâs more of a loose rendering, before I gave pupil a specific rendering.
Looking again, dhÄ«ra is one of the hardest words to translate, because it represents two roots, one giving senses like âstaunch, loyal, steadfast, firmâ, the other, âwise, insightful, cleverâ. Each of the two themselves have a range of meanings. And the Pali often does not allow them to be distinguished. So we can either:
try to sort out the different casesâdoomed to fail and also loses the felt connection between senses
use a vague rendering like âwise oneâ that captures neither and is ambiguous
Iâm trying out âattentiveâ. This has the sense of âpaying attentionâ, i.e. it captures the cognitive side, as well as one who âis paying attentionâ i.e. looks after the well being of others, âan attentive friendâ.
Iâll see how this sits for a while!
sorry, my mistake.
Yes, thatâs correct. Thereâs only one na per clause.
Itâs possible, but thatâs not really how reading difficulty works. People like learning new words. Itâs enjoyable. You just need to make sure that the difficult words are used appropriatelyâwhich in this case means that we are translating terms that are not used often, and in contexts that make it clear what they mean.
Reading difficulty is more strongly correlated with sentence length and syntax. And yes, excessive use of unusual terminology also diminishes readability.
I do now, thanks for that, I learned a word today! But since this word isnât in our translations, it is, dare I say, wait for it ⊠a straw man. ducks
True, not in yours, but in Bhante Bodhiâs. In the list of torture devices.
I expected that.
My opinions about reading difficulty are based on personal experience working with non-native English speakers and young people. And in those cases, while learning new (useful) vocabulary may well be a personal goal, thatâs not why they are reading the suttas. There are already plenty of essential new words that have to be mastered for reading the suttas so these extra ones are just more friction. And for me as a teacher of monks who will preach in English I have to then tell them, âYes, this is a real English word but we almost never use it and if you use it people may not know what it means.â
I just mentioned it to point out that it isnât a universal good. However itâs probably a case where a different translation project is called for, and thatâs what suttafriends.org kind of is.
The titles of Jatakas do sometimes contain âa past life storyâ, sometimes they donât. I am wondering if this is an oversight, as the Pali always has the component jÄtaka.
Also, I am wondering whether the number of the Jataka should not appear somewhere in the translation. The Pali has it in the title line, but I would tend to put it into the line of the collection, i.e. âStories of past lives 1â, in analogy to for example âLong Discourses 1â.
SN22.3:4.2: RĆ«padhÄturÄgavinibandhañca pana viññÄáčaáč âokasÄrÄ«âti vuccati.
One whose consciousness is shackled by greed for the form element is called a migrant going from shelter to shelter.
In this segment, rĆ«padhÄturÄgavinibandha has become âshackled by greed for the form elementâ. Parallel constructions in other segments of this sutta have instead
vedanÄdhÄturÄgavinibandha = attached to greed for the feeling element
It mentioned that what he obtains as Buddha was He has many sons, many thousands of sons who are valiant and heroic, crushing the armies of his enemies.
I noticed that that the sentence was copied from what he obtain as a king. The bottom passage mentioned that he has even more sons following his word.
Thank you for pointing things out. Thereâs always a chance that you find a real oversight.
If in this case you look at the Pali, which is included in your screenshot, you can see that the two sentences are identical, except for the word parosahassaáč (more than thousand) versus anekasahassaáč (many thousand).
Wow thank you for the clarification on the two pali word difference. It made a lot sense why the English translation is written in that way.
I was confused for the part that as a Buddha why he had many sons that that crush his enemies. What I later realize. Enemies need not be living beings but maybe unwholesome action.
And if you arenât aware, you can also turn on the click-to-look-up under the view settings. That will give you the (sometimes rough) meaning of the Pali words.
Bhante,
doesnât the word âDivinityâ convey a sense of "the state or quality of being divine. " as if it is a non living thing? Where in most cases Pali canon emphasize their beings in contrast to them being non being.
Thanks for noting it, it is an striking turn of phrase! Clearly here âsonsâ (puttÄ) are his spiritual followers. So maybe that means that we today are still out there crushing his enemies!
Sorry, Iâm not exactly sure what youâre asking? But in Pali, I am using âdivinityâ for brahmÄ, which can have all the meanings as you quoted.
When using the word âCreatorâ instead of brahmÄ - it immediately gives a sense of a powerful living being with feelings,thoughts etc.
When you call brahmÄ as âUltimate Realityâ it denotes an abstract non living entity. In the same vain Divinity emphasizes non living - divine state than a creator God to me.
